[rerevisionist]

You're very welcome, Sorensen. And I'm pleased we now have someone from Spain. Good.

[enjneer]

Even though, for the past ten years or so, I have been an avid conspiracy researcher and generally used to having "big ideas" torn down, I never once suspected that nukes could be faked.

I first heard the theory that nukes were a hoax from a strange conspiracy book called Vatican Assassins by Eric Jon Phelps. The main gist of the book is that the Jesuit brotherhood controls the entire world. The book is, at times, illuminating and well-researched, but, just as often, infuriatingly vague, obviously religiously motivated and even downright racist (e.g., Phelps believes that whites are inherently superior to blacks; born-again Christians superior to, well, everyone).

While traversing the great, well-laid out arc of his book, one occasionally is thrown a giant curve ball concept. These concepts are delivered by Phelps fully-formed—as if you should already know quite a bit about it. He quickly drops—almost in passing—the bombshell that Jesuit priests coordinated the laying of bombs all around Nagasaki and Hiroshima—perhaps nuclear, perhaps not—and triggered the bombs (coordinated with firebombings). The Jesuits then coordinated the resulting PR campaign of nuclear weaponry as global threat.

Phelps was open to the possibility (though skeptical) that nukes existed. His main issue is that an air explosion was not possible and did not happen in Japan in 1945.

After reading this, I eagerly researched, and I was able to stumble upon a few, scattered articles that expanded upon this to include the whole nuclear industry—whether weapons or energy. I found back up articles stating that the damage to Hiroshima and Nagasaki were, in fact, firebombings.

Since then, I find myself at about the same place as I am with the Moon landings: suspicious, aware that I'm not being told the whole truth, but unconvinced of an outright hoax. I have found little on this forum to change that. I see where the skepticism comes from, and have seen some intriguing points… but nothing that elevates this from the level of a hunch. Which is fine—that's where I am too !

I'm elated that there's a forum now! I'll keep checking in, hoping for some proof either way!

[rerevisionist]

Hello, enjneer, and welcome.

The explosives-on-the-ground idea seems a redundant hypothesis, since given that firebombing easily destroyed Japanese towns, there's be no need for them, quite apart from the difficulty of planting the things in wartime.

We already have a piece on Roman Catholics, Do Catholic Conspirators Rule the World? [Alternative to the ZOG idea]
http://www.big-lies.org/nuke-lies/www.nukelies.com/forum/do-catholics-or-ZOG-rule-the-world.html

We seem to have collectively decided it's unlikely, because (these are collected together; there's more material on the link)---

*Catholicism and the wonders of their saints and popes would be taught in all schools and colleges
*Sufferings of Catholics would be compulsory teaching for all schoolkids.
*Catholics would get huge sums of public money for made-up past suffering.
*Businesses and the media would be controlled by Catholics. Film and TV programmes would constantly mention Catholics, Rome etc
*All criticism of Catholics would be frowned on - there would be legal action, covert police action, protests and riots etc
*The history of the Orthodox Church in Russia would be widely known
*Shady outfits - 'Mafia' etc - would all be attributed to e.g. Jews or some other group
*Catholics would have their own special passports, special legislation, huge numbers of their own little groups
*Anything Catholics wanted would be widely promoted
*All modern history would be written from a Catholic viewpoint
*Catholics where a minority would carry out military operations and be given money for it and hardly anyone would comment

You can condemn and ridicule the Catholic Church
You can condemn and ridicule the Jesuit Order
You can condemn and ridicule the Knights of Columbus
You can condemn and ridicule the Salvation Army
You CANNOT by Law in Canada condemn or ridicule the Jewish Crime Syndicate and their sick culture of lies and deceptions.

(1) There would be school vouchers across the board, so that parents could send their kids to Catholic school if they wanted. As it stands, many Catholic schools are CLOSING, because parents just cannot afford to send their kids there and pay the tuition, while also paying the mandatory property / school tax for public school.
(2) Abortion would be illegal. And this would be a REALITY, in every state, and it wouldn't be something that is just talked about by mainly ONE political party, the Republicans. And any politician, of any party, who DARED to even criticize a right-to-life, anti-abortion position or school vouchers, would lose the next election. This is exactly what happens when any Congressman or Senator criticizes Israel.
(3) There would be no talk in the media of pedophile priests. And anyone who DID, would have to profusely apologize. Talking about pedophile priests would be regarded as the same as talking about Jewish ritual murder. As it stands, not only do the media talk about it A LOT, but late night comedians repeatedly make jokes about pedophile priests. If Catholics were the most powerful, we might expect something like these comedians making jokes about the holocaust on late night TV, to the uproarious laughter of the audience.
(4) The Pope would NOT be kowtowing to the Jews on things like the holocaust, and there would be NO changes in the theological position of the Catholic Church, like there was with Vatican II, in which Jews were no longer to be regarded as killers of Christ.
(5) The Catholic Church would print up its own currency, completely independent of the currencies of America, the Euro, etc. Imagine it being called the "Catholica." Americans would have a greater trust in it than in the US dollar, controlled by the Federal Reserve, and everyone would be demanding to be paid in the "Catholica"
(6) Europe would NOT be a basically secular continent. All of the Catholic churches in Europe would NOT be merely tourist attractions, but would be JAMMED packed with active congregations, every Sunday, and Holiday
(7) In America, there would be NO dispute over the public display of Christmas and even Easter decorations. There would be NO competition with public displays of menorahs for Hanakhah.

[enjneer]

Hello, enjneer, and welcome.

The explosives-on-the-ground idea seems a redundant hypothesis, since given that firebombing easily destroyed Japanese towns, there's be no need for them, quite apart from the difficulty of planting the things in wartime.

Yeah. I hear ya. I think some people stick to claims of explosives on the ground if a) they do believe nukes are possible, just not as aerial bombs at the time and/or b) so there could be one giant explosion. Personally, I find this hard to swallow.

We already have a piece on Roman Catholics, Do Catholic Conspirators Rule the World? [Alternative to the ZOG idea]
http://www.big-lies.org/nuke-lies/www.nukelies.com/forum/do-catholics-or-ZOG-rule-world.html

Dang, you guys sure get around, eh? LOL. I think this site has the capability to become a super-aggregate site (like infowars or rense)! I'll be sure to check out that section.

We seem to have collectively decided it's unlikely, because (these are collected together; there's more material on the link)---

Ha! Sounds so odd when you replace Zionist conspiracy facts with another religion! Really cool way to force perspective on the issue, rerevsionist! I hear ya loud and clear, and, overall, I tend to agree. But there are some reasons to hold on to at least some of the Jesuit/Catholic angles…

I won't get into it here in detail, since you have a thread on this subject already. I'll just say the following: The conspiracy that Phelps, and others who place the Catholics at the highest levels of international conspiracy, relies on a huge difference between outward Catholicism and the "Black" Catholics, like the Jesuits, that are supposedly running the show. Such researchers would say, to almost all your points, that the Jesuits and "Black Pope" are not interested in protecting many of the outward teachings of the Papacy; that they in fact could be Satanists, Kabbalists, or what have you; that they are perfectly happy to have "the Jews" out front as scapegoats, while they machinate invisibly in the background; that everyone makes a big deal out of how the Zionists won their own state illegally, but so did the Catholics!

Now, it seems highly possible that the Jesuits are simply Zionists/Kabbalists too. Which would make Catholicism nowadays a huge continuation of the overall Jewish Zionist conspiracy.

I am not advocating any of these views. The Catholic thing was brought up solely because of Phelps's book—which is how I came to first ponder nuclear hoaxes. While some of Phelps's arguments are persuasive, he is obviously blinded by his fervent fundamentalist Christian beliefs. In his view, Zionist Jews and Israel are persecuted, underdog heroes—which is laughable—destined to fulfill prophecy through Armageddon, God's chosen, etc.

Personally, I tend to think if there is truly one group ruling the world, that group is probably completely unknown to us—as would be their "religion," if they have one—which I'm sure they do. With utter control of all media/institutions, it's easy enough to keep the focus on the wrong group. So, hand the keys to the outer kingdom to the court Jews, the weapons to the Americans, the religious battles to the Catholics, and sit back and watch us all blame each other.

Having said that, sometimes Zionist control seems inescapable. Sometimes Vatican power seems undeniable, But sometimes the Vatican seems more like what everyone thinks it is: ailing and dying.

I'm undecided, yet open.

[voerioc]

Remembering about this, I came across nuclear revisionism this way. I was searching informations to see if there was people who didn't believe in atoms. Then, I fell on a site saying that atomic bombs didn't exist.

It was this one (about the date, you find "Copyright ANDRES MAURO 2007", at the bottom of the site) : http://www.showdalua.com/bomba1509.html

He had videos on youtube too (moongatemoongate, 13 nov. 2007) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hElGxfiz ... er&list=UL

Not long after that, I read more about this on the flat Earth society forum (haven't been convinced that Earth is flat) :

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/foru ... ic=11293.0 (first message March 07, 2007)

I was then convinced that atomic bombs don't exist.

Then I found videos from Nukelies (4 nov. 2008) and rerevisionist (30 sept. 2009).

[rerevisionist]

@enjneer - we discussed this a long time ago (Apr 2011) Should we talk about Jews at all ? If so, how ?
should-we-talk-about-jews-2-of-2.html

And decided more or less that the quality of the information is the relevant thing.

[enjneer]

@enjneer - we discussed this a long time ago (Apr 2011) Should we talk about Jews at all ? If so, how ?
should-we-talk-about-jews-1-of-2.html

And decided more or less that the quality of the information is the relevant thing.

Sorry, rerevisionist, that's noob behavior on my part. It's already a large forum and I missed that thread! I'm still in fact-finding mode. I'll look around a bit more before each post.

And I can certainly agree that it's the info/facts that count. Phelps's book is a great example of material that has pointed me in new directions and taught me—even though I find much of what he says personally disagreeable and fantastic. Just have to use heavy duty truth-filters upon detecting a bias or prejudice!

[NUKELIES]

@enjneer Any mention of Eric Jon Phelps is bound to raise red flags on this site. The whole Vatican conspiracy thing does seem implausible, especially in the United States and United Kingdom.

However, I have not closed the door on the possibility that The Catholic Church does still wield much more power than most conspiracy theorists give it credit for. And as far as your comment on Jews holding the keys to the kingdom, I do believe that that is probable. I have long considered Jews to be gatekeepers. But the question is: To What? Who is behind the gates?

I think the Vatican was co-opted from within by the Masons in the 19th century. Vatican II is no longer the Catholic Church. So even if the Vatican is still a significant center of power, that doesn't mean that it is not subservient to Zion. But what is Zion? Is it really just the Jews? I accept that Jews in general are Zionists, but so are Freemasons and globalists. And all of our countries' leaders - which the possible exception of the leaders of Indonesia or maybe a few other insignificant countries - are globalists, therefore Zionists.

They want to rebuild the Temple of Solomon. Why? To reinstate the physical manifestation and abode of the Holy of Holies - which the Catholic and Muslim 'religions' appear to have collectively negated and ignored for their own purposes.

All of the worldly chaos that is being instigated by the Zionists at present is the Chaos before the Order. They believe the world fell into darkness, and they are bringing back the Light, borne in the Arc of the Covenant. The Jews are apparently the workers bringing about the change, but anyone who believes in the necessity of the re-establishment of Zion is an agent of the transformation.

So maybe a new conspiracy theory could be "Maybe it's the Catholics and the Jews and the Masons and the Globalists." But saying so is bound to alienate conspiracy theorists who refuse to shift focus away from one group, and accept that their own people may be in on the conspiracy.

[enjneer]

@enjneer Any mention of Eric Jon Phelps is bound to raise red flags on this site. The whole Vatican conspiracy thing does seem implausible, especially in the United States and United Kingdom.

Oh yeah, I hear ya. Remember, he was only brought up 'cos that's where I first heard of questioning the Hiroshima bomb events. Overall, the guy is, at the least, blinded by his beliefs. At worst, evil.

However, I have not closed the door on the possibility that The Catholic Church does still wield much more power than most conspiracy theorists give it credit for.

Agreed. You've got a church with its own country, embassies, bank; people working for it everywhere in the world; been meddling at the highest levels of power for centuries. It'd be ludicrous to think that it's not involved deeply in worldwide dominance. But, totally runnin the show, as Phelps would have us believe? Too simple. Too obvious.

And as far as your comment on Jews holding the keys to the kingdom, I do believe that that is probable. I have long considered Jews to be gatekeepers. But the question is: To What? Who is behind the gates?

Exactly. This is how I feel. I think Zionist Jews have been placed in obvious positions of power for a reason. The true controllers are, if they're smart (and we can assume they're pretty damned smart) invisible.

So even if the Vatican is still a significant center of power, that doesn't mean that it is not subservient to Zion. But what is Zion? Is it really just the Jews? … And all of our countries' leaders … are globalists, therefore Zionists.

Elegantly put.

They want to rebuild the Temple of Solomon. Why? To reinstate the physical manifestation and abode of the Holy of Holies - which the Catholic and Muslim 'religions' appear to have collectively negated and ignored for their own purposes.

Not quite following you there… Negated and ignored what, the plans to rebuild the Temple?

anyone who believes in the necessity of the re-establishment of Zion is an agent of the transformation.

Agreed again!

So maybe a new conspiracy theory could be "Maybe it's the Catholics and the Jews and the Masons and the Globalists." But saying so is bound to alienate conspiracy theorists who refuse to shift focus away from one group, and accept that their own people may be in on the conspiracy.

Yeah. I think it's useful to identify groups (ethnic/religious/societal) because it's obvious groups are created or organised around certain goals or principles that allow them to specialise in certain areas of global dominance. However, it's a trap to colour all people of any group with the same brush—we might miss crucial facts!

Sometimes I just assume that, at the very top, it's a mixed group of elites all sorts of races—like a council of tribes. Sometimes I think it makes more sense that it would be one ethnic/religious group. I doubt we'll find out… But I'll keep on trying!

[NUKELIES]

They want to rebuild the Temple of Solomon. Why? To reinstate the physical manifestation and abode of the Holy of Holies - which the Catholic and Muslim 'religions' appear to have collectively negated and ignored for their own purposes.

Not quite following you there… Negated and ignored what, the plans to rebuild the Temple?

yinyang.gif (41.89 KiB) Viewed 232 times

Check out my movie The Sacred Hermaphrodite: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEILbSV_jbE

Jews and Hindus more or less openly worship sexual union. The Star of David is a succinct symbol of Sacred Union -sexual intercourse. The lingam-yoni is a verisimilar idol of sexual union. The Catholic Church and Islam have more veiled diagrams of sex as their insignias / logos. The cross is perhaps inverted sex, but it is still a symbol of sexual union. The Star and Crescent is a perhaps more veiled representation of sex - due possibly to the hyperpuritanical nature of Islam - but the star is male, the crescent female. Even the Buddha has an ithyphallic bump on his head - which is a stupa - which is a phallus. The Taoist yin-yang is also the same fairly obvious depiction of divine male and female energy dancing in sexual union.

What exactly the Holy of Holies contains is debated, and cannot be proven due to the former limitation on access to it, and its current (supposed?) nonexistence. But there is conjecture as well as scriptural references to its sexual contents. Following is a revealing article and references taken from this website: http://markdzima.com/2011/03/23/judaism ... of-holies/

Sex in the Holy of Holies?
Posted on March 23, 2011 by markzima
[I mentioned this topic in a comment to h8red42's youTube video This just in "GOD HAD A WIFE!", and stated that I had considered doing a video on it. h8red42 (a username that signifies being anti-hatred, by the way) asked me to do the video, and so I pushed it to the front of my to-do list.]

In the Babylonian Talmud, Rabbi Qattina (alt. spelling Qetina) is quoted as having said:

“When the Israelites came up for the pilgrim festival, they [the priests] removed the curtain [the curtain between the Holy and the Holy of Holies in the Temple] and showed the cherubim, whose bodies were twisted with one another, and they said to them, ‘See how much you are loved before the Omnipresent, the way a man and woman love one another.” [1]

A few paragraphs later in the Talmud, Rabbi Simeon (alt spelling Shimeon) ben Laqish is quoted as having said:

“When the gentiles entered the sanctuary, they saw the cherubim embracing one another. They brought them out to the marketplace and said, ‘These Israelites, whose blessing is a true blessing, and whose curse is a true curse, are engaged in such matters as these.’ From that moment on they despised them: ‘All that honored her despised her because they have seen her nakedness.’ (Lamentations 1:8).” [1]

Rafael Patai favors identifying this incident as the looting of the Temple in 170 B.C.E. by Antiochus Epiphanes. [2]


From inquiries that I made a few years ago on an Orthodox Jewish forum I received indirect confirmation that these cherubim are regarded by Orthodox Judaism as being depicted in sexual union. I’d like to hear directly from a rabbi about it, and about the theology relating to these cherubim. Rafael Patai [3] and Marvin H. Pope [4] both regard the cherubim as being in sexual union.

I searched without success, even though I had the aid of a university librarian, for an academic paper written on this topic. If anyone knows of anything relevant written by academicians or rabbis I’ll appreciate being told about it.

~
REFERENCES (in progress):

1. Pp. 104-105. The Talmud of Babylonia. Volume V.B. Bavli Yoma. Bavli-Tractate, Yoma, Chapter 5. Folios 47A-62A. I.3. (Publisher info will be added soon.) Notes in brackets are influenced by

So what this all boils down to is that all of the five major world religions, and probably all of the world's primitive religions - the Asmat people of New Guinea, for example, who throw their phallic bisj poles into a sacred grove of trees representing the feminine - all of these religions worship Divine Sexual Union.

The globalists have constructed a new religion - Gaia worship - which might become - in one form or another - the religion of the New Age of Aquarius. Guess what they worship in their temples? Sacred Sexual Union. Maurice Strong was in charge of a project to construct an ecumenical temple complex somewhere in Zion National Park or thereabouts, the focal point of which was to be a temple containing a representation of the sexual act.

Sometimes I just assume that, at the very top, it's a mixed group of elites all sorts of races—like a council of tribes.

I don't think so. That's too loaded a cultural reference to the current multicultural state of the formerly rich countries - US/UK/France. And it is likely influenced by the Samuel D. Jackson / Ewan McGregor / Yoda Council in Star Wars.

Sometimes I think it makes more sense that it would be one ethnic/religious group. I doubt we'll find out… But I'll keep on trying!

Ethnic or religious or reptilian - something binds them. I suspect they are powerful sorcerers skilled in the Art of Dialectics.

Taken from the Wikipedia page on the Holy of Holies:

Third Temple
Jewish tradition teaches that when the Third Temple is built, the actual Holy of Holies will be restored. Traditional Judaism regards the location where the inner sanctuary was originally located, on the Temple Mount in Mount Moriah, as retaining some or all of its original sanctity for use in a future Third Temple. The exact location of the Holy of Holies is a subject of dispute.
and
Christian traditions
Certain branches of Christianity, including the Eastern Orthodox Church,[citation needed] and the Ethiopian Orthodox Church continue to have a tradition of a Holy of Holies which they regard as a most sacred site.

yin_yang.jpeg (4.81 KiB) Viewed 260 times

lingam_yoni.JPG (21.78 KiB) Viewed 260 times

Star and Crescent.gif (5.77 KiB) Viewed 260 times

Cross.jpeg (1.51 KiB) Viewed 260 times

Star_of_David.png (3 KiB) Viewed 260 times

buddha phallus bump head.jpeg (11.28 KiB) Viewed 260 times

Asmat bisj pole.JPG (8.81 KiB) Viewed 260 times

[rerevisionist]

Don't forget the ancient Egyptians - the Victorians defaced some of their wall paintings, presumably in horror. The ankh is supposed (by some?) to be a sexual representation. So is the Freemasons' symbol of square and compasses. I'm sceptical - how can anyone be sure, unless there's some convincing evidence? And images can be completely stylised and secret - if the Latin alphabet died out, who could tell what the squiggles SEX meant? Who without evidence could guess whether a Mercedes Benz logo or coca-cola symbol meant sexual things?

I wonder if anyone has written on the question of how to infer who wielded power, when much of the evidence is missing?

[NUKELIES]

The ankh is supposed (by some?) to be a sexual representation. So is the Freemasons' symbol of square and compasses.

Excellent point - the ankh is Sun penetrating Earth - the horizontal arms are the horizon, and the Square and Compass is a cryptic Seal of Solomon.