Archive for February, 2008

Rampolla Protégé, Benedict XV was Friendly to Zionism

February 28, 2008

According to the account given below, Monsignor Pacelli (later Pius XII) facilitated a meeting between the British Zionist, Mark Sykes, and Pope Benedict XV (Giacomo della Chiesa) which led to a following meeting between the Judaic Zionist, Nahum Sokolov and Benedict XV on the topic of the Zionist project. It seems that Benedict XV was friendly to the Zionist idea. This will not come as a surprise to those who are aware that Benedict XV was a protégé of Cardinal Rampolla who is suspected to have been a member of the masonic, Ordo Templi Orientis organization. For background, read Craig Heimbichner’s book, Blood on the Altar:

http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Altar-History-Dangerous-Society/dp/0970378432

Hat tip to Cathcon for the following:

From the Book, Two Studies in Virtue by Christopher Sykes, about the travels and work of his father Mark Sykes:

As soon as he had arrived in Rome, [Zionist, Mark] Sykes sought an interview with a Vatican official who was of the same rank and influence as himself, someone not a cardinal who had the Pope’s ear. He found his man in Monsignor Pacelli, Assistant Under-Secretary for Foreign Aflairs. ‘I spoke to the Monsignor,’ recorded Sykes, ‘of the immense difficulties which surrounded the question of Jerusalem, the Arab Nationalist movement, the Moslem Holy Places, Zionism, and the conflicting interests of the Latins and Greeks, beside the aspirations of the various powers. … Although he did not say as much, the Monsignor, by certain turns of speech, let it be easy to see that the idea of British patronage of the Holy Places was not distasteful to Vatican policy. The French I could see did not strike him as ideal in any way. I also prepared the way for Zionism by explaining what the purpose and ideals of the Zionists were, and suggested that he should see M. Sokolov when the latter came to Rome. Of course one could not expect the Vatican to be enthusiastic about this movement, but he was most interested and expressed a wish to see Sokolov when he should come to Rome.’

Sykes then obtained a brief private audience of the Pope. This was of a formal kind and nothing was said of Zionism. The next day Sykes left for Egypt.

Sokolov arrived in Rome about three weeks later, and on the 10th May, after conferring with Monsignor Pacelli, he was received by Benedict XV. It was as though Herzl’s audience was being annulled. ‘Have I correctly understood Zionism?’ asked the Pope when the opening formalities were over. ‘What a reversal of history! Nineteen centuries ago Rome destroyed Jerusalem, and now, desiring to rebuild it, you take the path to Rome!’

In his reply Sokolov recalled the fate of the Empire and compared it to that of the Jewish nation: one had vanished, the other was reclaiming its land.

‘Yes, yes,’ agreed Benedict with enthusiasm, ‘this was providential. God willed it.’

The Pope then asked Sokolov to explain the Zionist project in detail. Sokolov answered as follows: ‘Our programme is twofold. It aims first to create in Palestine a spiritual and cultural centre for Jewry, and secondly to establish a national home for oppressed Jews. Our desire is to build up in that country a great centre where Jews will be able to develop their culture freely, to educate their children in the spirit of their ideals, and to devote all their energies to making their National Home a model of Jewish civilisation and morality.’

The Pope was deeply impressed. ‘That is a wonderful idea,’ he said. Then he wanted to know whether this plan had been contrived with a view to preventing persecutions. Sokolov answered in the rhetorical terms which came naturally to him. He referred to the right of the Jews ‘to a place in the sun—in our land.’

‘ We look forward,’ he said, ‘to the rebirth of historical Judaism, to the spiritual and material revival of the homeland that personifies our national genius and our Biblical tradition in its purest sense. We claim the right of Freedom which cannot be denied to any people.’

‘But is there enough space,’ asked the Pope, ‘in Palestine, to carry out your plan?’

To this question which was to be asked so often not only then but in the course of the next thirty years, and on which so much depended, Sokolov returned a skilfully evasive reply. ‘There is the possibility of reaching our goal,’ he said, ‘but first we must prepare the ground.’ The conversation turned to the small number of Jewish colonists in Palestine at that time, only twelve thousand; and to the different days ahead when British influence would introduce civilised rule in place of Turkish domination. ‘Great Britain,’ the Pope interjected, ‘is the greatest and most experienced colonising power in the world.’ Then they discussed Zionist intentions regarding the Holy Places, before the Pope returned to the original question, which he posed afresh: ‘Are many Jews likely to settle in Palestine?’

Sokolov again replied with a skilful and grandiloquent evasion. ‘The best – and those who have suffered most,’ he said, and then led the conversation away from that subject to the great agricultural work of the pioneers, and from there to a dis­cussion of the Jews in Eastern Europe.

The last words of Benedict at this audience were spoken in answer to Sokolov’s request for moral support, and were to be long remembered by Zionists. He said: ‘Si, si, io credo che noi saremo buoni vicini’ – ‘Yes, I believe that we shall be good neighbours.’

Shortly after this Sokolov returned to Paris.

http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/2008/02/pius-xii-assist.html

Rampolla Protégé, Benedict XV was Friendly to Zionism

February 28, 2008

According to the account given below, Monsignor Pacelli (later Pius XII) facilitated a meeting between the British Zionist, Mark Sykes, and Pope Benedict XV (Giacomo della Chiesa) which led to a following meeting between the Judaic Zionist, Nahum Sokolov and Benedict XV on the topic of the Zionist project. It seems that Benedict XV was friendly to the Zionist idea. This will not come as a surprise to those who are aware that Benedict XV was a protégé of Cardinal Rampolla who is suspected to have been a member of the masonic, Ordo Templi Orientis organization. For background, read Craig Heimbichner’s book, Blood on the Altar:

http://www.amazon.com/Blood-Altar-History-Dangerous-Society/dp/0970378432

Hat tip to Cathcon for the following:

From the Book, Two Studies in Virtue by Christopher Sykes, about the travels and work of his father Mark Sykes:

As soon as he had arrived in Rome, [Zionist, Mark] Sykes sought an interview with a Vatican official who was of the same rank and influence as himself, someone not a cardinal who had the Pope’s ear. He found his man in Monsignor Pacelli, Assistant Under-Secretary for Foreign Aflairs. ‘I spoke to the Monsignor,’ recorded Sykes, ‘of the immense difficulties which surrounded the question of Jerusalem, the Arab Nationalist movement, the Moslem Holy Places, Zionism, and the conflicting interests of the Latins and Greeks, beside the aspirations of the various powers. … Although he did not say as much, the Monsignor, by certain turns of speech, let it be easy to see that the idea of British patronage of the Holy Places was not distasteful to Vatican policy. The French I could see did not strike him as ideal in any way. I also prepared the way for Zionism by explaining what the purpose and ideals of the Zionists were, and suggested that he should see M. Sokolov when the latter came to Rome. Of course one could not expect the Vatican to be enthusiastic about this movement, but he was most interested and expressed a wish to see Sokolov when he should come to Rome.’

Sykes then obtained a brief private audience of the Pope. This was of a formal kind and nothing was said of Zionism. The next day Sykes left for Egypt.

Sokolov arrived in Rome about three weeks later, and on the 10th May, after conferring with Monsignor Pacelli, he was received by Benedict XV. It was as though Herzl’s audience was being annulled. ‘Have I correctly understood Zionism?’ asked the Pope when the opening formalities were over. ‘What a reversal of history! Nineteen centuries ago Rome destroyed Jerusalem, and now, desiring to rebuild it, you take the path to Rome!’

In his reply Sokolov recalled the fate of the Empire and compared it to that of the Jewish nation: one had vanished, the other was reclaiming its land.

‘Yes, yes,’ agreed Benedict with enthusiasm, ‘this was providential. God willed it.’

The Pope then asked Sokolov to explain the Zionist project in detail. Sokolov answered as follows: ‘Our programme is twofold. It aims first to create in Palestine a spiritual and cultural centre for Jewry, and secondly to establish a national home for oppressed Jews. Our desire is to build up in that country a great centre where Jews will be able to develop their culture freely, to educate their children in the spirit of their ideals, and to devote all their energies to making their National Home a model of Jewish civilisation and morality.’

The Pope was deeply impressed. ‘That is a wonderful idea,’ he said. Then he wanted to know whether this plan had been contrived with a view to preventing persecutions. Sokolov answered in the rhetorical terms which came naturally to him. He referred to the right of the Jews ‘to a place in the sun—in our land.’

‘ We look forward,’ he said, ‘to the rebirth of historical Judaism, to the spiritual and material revival of the homeland that personifies our national genius and our Biblical tradition in its purest sense. We claim the right of Freedom which cannot be denied to any people.’

‘But is there enough space,’ asked the Pope, ‘in Palestine, to carry out your plan?’

To this question which was to be asked so often not only then but in the course of the next thirty years, and on which so much depended, Sokolov returned a skilfully evasive reply. ‘There is the possibility of reaching our goal,’ he said, ‘but first we must prepare the ground.’ The conversation turned to the small number of Jewish colonists in Palestine at that time, only twelve thousand; and to the different days ahead when British influence would introduce civilised rule in place of Turkish domination. ‘Great Britain,’ the Pope interjected, ‘is the greatest and most experienced colonising power in the world.’ Then they discussed Zionist intentions regarding the Holy Places, before the Pope returned to the original question, which he posed afresh: ‘Are many Jews likely to settle in Palestine?’

Sokolov again replied with a skilful and grandiloquent evasion. ‘The best – and those who have suffered most,’ he said, and then led the conversation away from that subject to the great agricultural work of the pioneers, and from there to a dis­cussion of the Jews in Eastern Europe.

The last words of Benedict at this audience were spoken in answer to Sokolov’s request for moral support, and were to be long remembered by Zionists. He said: ‘Si, si, io credo che noi saremo buoni vicini’ – ‘Yes, I believe that we shall be good neighbours.’

Shortly after this Sokolov returned to Paris.

http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/2008/02/pius-xii-assist.html

Scenes from the 2008 Democratic Inquisition

February 28, 2008

And the verdict is handed down by the Inquisitor Generalis, Abe Torquemada Foxman:

“He was very clear,” said Abraham Foxman, the ADL’s national director, describing the response of [Illinois Senator Barack Obama] who was asked in a debate Tuesday about the public praise he received over the weekend from the Nation of Islam leader.

“He distanced himself and condemned it and rejected it,” Foxman said. “What more do we want? On that issue we should move on.”

http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/news/article/2008022720080227obamafarrakhandebate.html

Indeed, Obama was very clear, and Hillary as well. When have you ever heard either of these characters speak so clearly on any issue?

Now you know how to succeed in “U.S.” politics.

Utterly shameful.

Scenes from the 2008 Democratic Inquisition

February 28, 2008

And the verdict is handed down by the Inquisitor Generalis, Abe Torquemada Foxman:

“He was very clear,” said Abraham Foxman, the ADL’s national director, describing the response of [Illinois Senator Barack Obama] who was asked in a debate Tuesday about the public praise he received over the weekend from the Nation of Islam leader.

“He distanced himself and condemned it and rejected it,” Foxman said. “What more do we want? On that issue we should move on.”

http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/news/article/2008022720080227obamafarrakhandebate.html

Indeed, Obama was very clear, and Hillary as well. When have you ever heard either of these characters speak so clearly on any issue?

Now you know how to succeed in “U.S.” politics.

Utterly shameful.

Scenes from the 2008 Democratic Inquisition

February 28, 2008

And the verdict is handed down by the Inquisitor Generalis, Abe Torquemada Foxman:

“He was very clear,” said Abraham Foxman, the ADL’s national director, describing the response of [Illinois Senator Barack Obama] who was asked in a debate Tuesday about the public praise he received over the weekend from the Nation of Islam leader.

“He distanced himself and condemned it and rejected it,” Foxman said. “What more do we want? On that issue we should move on.”

http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/news/article/2008022720080227obamafarrakhandebate.html

Indeed, Obama was very clear, and Hillary as well. When have you ever heard either of these characters speak so clearly on any issue?

Now you know how to succeed in “U.S.” politics.

Utterly shameful.

Cardinal Kasper Publicly Appeals to Jules Isaac

February 28, 2008

Walter Kasper speaking on Radio Vatikan, February 7, 2008, publicly states that he agrees with the “teaching of contempt” thesis of Jules Isaac whose seething contempt for Christianity saturates his strange books and whose zeal for altering Christian teachings and tradition is still unmatched.

Speaking of Benedict’s Latin prayer for the Jews, Kasper says:

“If the prayer speaks of the ‘conversion’ of the Jews, this does not mean we are embarking on a ‘mission’. As a matter of fact, the pope is quoting St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. In chapter 11, St. Paul tells us that we hope that when the fullness of the Gentiles shall come into the Church all Israel also shall be saved. It is an eschatological hope. This does not mean we are embarking on a mission: we must give witness to our faith, this is clear. But, I want to say this: in the past, such a language was often fraught with contempt, as Jules Isaac, a well-know Jew, rightly said. But, today, there is respect in the diversity which exists between us. Now there is respect and no longer contempt. (Cardinal Kasper, speaking on Radio Vatikan, February 7, 2008)

http://www.dici.org/actualite_read.php?id=1164&loc=us

For those seeking to understand the mind of Vatican prelates in this area, I strongly recommend the reading of Jules Isaac’s, Jesus and Israel and/or Judaism and the Vatican,
by Vicomte Leon De Poncis which quotes Jules Isaac’s writings extensively. Therein you will come to understand the foundation of Judeo-Christian dialogue laid by Jules Isaac when he wrote Jesus and Israel in 1946 and immediately began organizing conferences between rabbis and priests sympathetic to his cause dedicated to changing Christian teaching and tradition to his specification.

Those who warn that there is a danger that a “precedent may be set” of organizations hostile to the faith bringing about changes in matters of Catholic faith are either woefully ignorant of the past, have no memory, or are intentionally misleading people.

Cardinal Kasper Publicly Appeals to Jules Isaac

February 28, 2008

Walter Kasper speaking on Radio Vatikan, February 7, 2008, publicly states that he agrees with the “teaching of contempt” thesis of Jules Isaac whose seething contempt for Christianity saturates his strange books and whose zeal for altering Christian teachings and tradition is still unmatched.

Speaking of Benedict’s Latin prayer for the Jews, Kasper says:

“If the prayer speaks of the ‘conversion’ of the Jews, this does not mean we are embarking on a ‘mission’. As a matter of fact, the pope is quoting St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. In chapter 11, St. Paul tells us that we hope that when the fullness of the Gentiles shall come into the Church all Israel also shall be saved. It is an eschatological hope. This does not mean we are embarking on a mission: we must give witness to our faith, this is clear. But, I want to say this: in the past, such a language was often fraught with contempt, as Jules Isaac, a well-know Jew, rightly said. But, today, there is respect in the diversity which exists between us. Now there is respect and no longer contempt. (Cardinal Kasper, speaking on Radio Vatikan, February 7, 2008)

http://www.dici.org/actualite_read.php?id=1164&loc=us

For those seeking to understand the mind of Vatican prelates in this area, I strongly recommend the reading of Jules Isaac’s, Jesus and Israel and/or Judaism and the Vatican,
by Vicomte Leon De Poncis which quotes Jules Isaac’s writings extensively. Therein you will come to understand the foundation of Judeo-Christian dialogue laid by Jules Isaac when he wrote Jesus and Israel in 1946 and immediately began organizing conferences between rabbis and priests sympathetic to his cause dedicated to changing Christian teaching and tradition to his specification.

Those who warn that there is a danger that a “precedent may be set” of organizations hostile to the faith bringing about changes in matters of Catholic faith are either woefully ignorant of the past, have no memory, or are intentionally misleading people.

Skull and Bones Buckley: Dead

February 28, 2008

Buckley’s Skull and Bones “conservatism” won’t be buried with him, unfortunately. Naturally, the scoundrel is missed by his kosher-conservative ideological offspring:

William F. Buckley, RIP

William F. Buckley is Dead: RIP

William F. Buckley Jr. dies at 82

WASHINGTON (CNN) — National Review founder and conservative commentator William F. Buckley Jr. was found dead Wednesday in the study of his Stamford, Connecticut, home, officials at the magazine said. He was 82.

“Buckley died while at work,” said Kathryn Jean Lopez, editor of the National Review Online, in a written statement. “If he had been given a choice on how to depart this world, I suspect that would have been exactly it. At home, still devoted to the war of ideas.”

Buckley’s assistant, Linda Bridges, said he had suffered from emphysema for a few years, but the exact cause of death is unknown. She said Buckley was found dead by his cook at 10 a.m. Wednesday.

“Even though he had been ailing, this took us completely by surprise,” said Bridges, who worked with Buckley for nearly 40 years.

“He was a great hero of American conservatism — a brilliant and exciting writer and public performer,” she added. “And he was somebody I was very proud and glad to call a friend.”

Buckley’s writings are widely credited for supporting the growth of the U.S. conservative movement in the latter half of the 20th century.

Full article:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/27/buckley.obit/?iref=mpstoryview

Also see:

CIA/Skull-and-Bonesman Wm. F Buckley Jr. Obituary

William F. Buckley, Jr.: Pied Piper for the Establishment

Fleshing Out Skull & Bones: Investigations into America’s Most Powerful Secret Society

Skull and Bones Buckley: Dead

February 28, 2008

Buckley’s Skull and Bones “conservatism” won’t be buried with him, unfortunately. Naturally, the scoundrel is missed by his kosher-conservative ideological offspring:

William F. Buckley, RIP

William F. Buckley is Dead: RIP

William F. Buckley Jr. dies at 82

WASHINGTON (CNN) — National Review founder and conservative commentator William F. Buckley Jr. was found dead Wednesday in the study of his Stamford, Connecticut, home, officials at the magazine said. He was 82.

“Buckley died while at work,” said Kathryn Jean Lopez, editor of the National Review Online, in a written statement. “If he had been given a choice on how to depart this world, I suspect that would have been exactly it. At home, still devoted to the war of ideas.”

Buckley’s assistant, Linda Bridges, said he had suffered from emphysema for a few years, but the exact cause of death is unknown. She said Buckley was found dead by his cook at 10 a.m. Wednesday.

“Even though he had been ailing, this took us completely by surprise,” said Bridges, who worked with Buckley for nearly 40 years.

“He was a great hero of American conservatism — a brilliant and exciting writer and public performer,” she added. “And he was somebody I was very proud and glad to call a friend.”

Buckley’s writings are widely credited for supporting the growth of the U.S. conservative movement in the latter half of the 20th century.

Full article:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/27/buckley.obit/?iref=mpstoryview

Also see:

CIA/Skull-and-Bonesman Wm. F Buckley Jr. Obituary

William F. Buckley, Jr.: Pied Piper for the Establishment

Fleshing Out Skull & Bones: Investigations into America’s Most Powerful Secret Society

A Revelation from Star Trek’s "Mr. Spock," Leonard Nimoy

February 27, 2008

It was an alien symbol after all.

Nimoy’s photos explore femininity of divinity

May 20, 2004 -Associated Press

… In 2002, [Leonard Nimoy] published “Shekhina,” a book of about 40 photographs that explore his interest in the feminine aspects of Jewish divinity. Many of the images are on display this month at the R. Michelson Galleries in Northampton.

“At the heart of it all is the fact that I was trying to really completely enter into the world of the feminine,” says Nimoy, 73. “I didn’t want to do misty, cloudy figures. I didn’t want to shroud her. I wanted to make her flesh and blood, and I wanted to make her definitively female.”

It’s an idea that was planted with Nimoy when he was about 8, although he didn’t fully realize it until a few years ago. During a segment of high holiday services at his Orthodox synagogue in Boston, members of the congregation stood before the assembly to deliver a special blessing. Standing with his brother, father and grandfather, Nimoy was told not to look at the men as they chanted the prayer.

But he took a peek, and saw the men swaying with their arms outstretched and their hands splayed in the manner he would later use as the Vulcan greeting in his “Star Trek” role. The hand symbol represents the first letter of a Hebrew word for God [shin, Shaddai].

“These gentlemen are up there in a fervent, singsong, swaying presentation,” Nimoy said. “It was like a revivalist meeting. The entire congregation had their eyes covered. But I was entranced by it.”

For decades, Nimoy didn’t know why the congregation was not supposed to look as the blessing was being given. A few years ago, he finally asked the rabbi at Temple Israel of Hollywood, the reform synagogue he now attends.

“There’s a legend that the Shekhina — the feminine aspect of God — comes in to bless the congregation,” Nimoy said. “But the light from the Shekhina could be overwhelming and you could not survive it, so you shouldn’t look. I was taken by that when I heard the explanation.” …

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4953845/

Any Trekkie staring at this letter in Leonard’s photographs experiences a shock of recognition. It is the same shape made by Mr. Spock’s hand when offering his benediction, “Live long and prosper.” Indeed, a common thread runs through Leonard’s portrayal of Spock and his images of Shekhina. Not a particularly observant Jew, Leonard is nonetheless fascinated by spiritual themes. In Shekhina, he quotes the twentieth century Jesuit priest/scientist, Teillhard de Chardin: “We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience.”

http://www.aguidetochanginglanes.com/blog/post/giving_back_when_youve_been_blessed_to_live_long_and_prosper/