Catholic Cuisine

http://catholiccuisine.blogspot.com/

I HAVE to share this wonderful blog site!  Such creativity!

A Turkey veggie platter

A Rosary cupcake chain for our Lady's Feast Day

Absolute totalitarianism through internet is ready

http://rt.com/news/assange-internet-control-totalitarian-943/

Assange to RT: Entire nations 

intercepted online, key turned 

to totalitarian rule

Published: 30 November, 2012, 11:34
Edited: 30 November, 2012, 13:51

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange says all the necessary physical infrastructure
 for absolute totalitarianism through the internet is ready. He told RT that the
 question now is whether the turnkey process that already started will go all the way.

RT: So you’ve written this book ‘Cypherpunks. Freedom and the Future of the
 Internet’ based on one of the programs that you’ve made for RT. In it, you say 
that the internet can enslave us. I don’t really get that, because the internet it’s 
a thing, it’s a soulless thing. Who are the actual enslavers behind it?

Julian Assange: The people who control the interception of the internet and,
 to some degree also, physically control the big data warehouses and the
 international fiber-optic lines. We all think of the internet as some kind of
Platonic Realm where we can throw out ideas and communications and web
pages and books and they exist somewhere out there. Actually, they exist on
 web servers in New York or Nairobi or Beijing, and information comes to us
 through satellite connections or through fiber-optic cables. 

So whoever physically controls this controls the realm of our ideas and communications.
 And whoever is able to sit on those communications channels, can intercept
entire nations, and that’s the new game in town, as far as state spying is
 concerned – intercepting entire nations, not individuals.

'intercepting entire nations, not individuals'

RT: This sounds like a futuristic scenario, but you are saying that the future
 is already here.

JA: The US National Security Agency has been doing this for some 20-30 years.
 But it has now spread to mid-size nations, even Gaddafi’s Libya was employing
 the EAGLE system, which is produced by French company AMESYS, pushed
 there in 2009, advertised in its international documentation as a nationwide
 interception system. 

So what’s happened over the last 10 years is the ever-decreasing cost of
intercepting each individual now to the degree where it is cheaper to intercept
 every individual rather that it is to pick particular people to spy upon.

'it is cheaper to intercept every individual 

rather that it is to pick particular

 people to spy upon'

RT: And what’s the alternative, the sort of utopian alternative 
that you would put forward?

JA: The utopian alternative is to try and gain independence for the internet,
for it to sort of declare independence versus the rest of the world. And that’s
 really quite important because if you think what is human civilization, what is
 it that makes it quintessentially human and civilized, it is our shared knowledge
 about how the world works, how we deal with each other, how we deal with
 the environment, which institutions are corrupt, which ones are good, what
 are the least dumb ways of doing things. And that intellectual knowledge is
 something that we are all putting on to the internet – and so if we can try
 and decouple that from the brute nature of states and their cronies, then
 I think we really have hope for a global civilization.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange talking to RT's Laura Smith at the embassy 
of Ecuador in London, UK (video still)

If, on the other hand, the mere security guards, you know, the people who
control the guns, are able to take control of our intellectual life, take control
 of all the ways in which we communicate to each other, then of course you
can see how dreadful the outcome will be. Because it won’t happen to just
one nation, it will happen to every nation at once. It is happening to every
nation at once as far as spying is concerned, because now every nation is
 merging its society with internet infrastructure.

RT: And in what way are we, as sort of naïve internet users, if you like
 (and I exclude you from that, obviously), kind of willingly collaborating
 with these collectors of personal data? You know, we all have a Facebook 
account, we all have telephones which can be tracked.

JA: Right. People think, well, yeah, I use Facebook, and maybe the FBI
 if they made a request, could come and get it, and everyone is much more
 aware of that because of Petraeus. But that’s not the problem. The problem
is that all the time nearly everything people do on the internet is permanently
recorded, every web search.

Do you know what you were thinking one year, two days, three months ago?
 No, you don’t know, but Google knows, it remembers.

'Google knows, it remembers'

The National Security Agency who intercepts the request if it flowed
 over the US border, it knows.

So by just communicating to our friends, by emailing each other,
 by updating Facebook profiles, we are informing on our friends.

'by updating Facebook profiles, we are informing

 on our friends'

And friends don’t inform on friends. You know, the Stasi had a 10 per cent
 penetration of East German society, with up to 1 in 10 people being informants
 at some time in their life.

Now in countries that have the highest internet penetration, like Iceland,
more than 80 per cent of people are on Facebook, informing about their friends.
 That information doesn’t [simply] go nowhere. It’s not kept in Iceland,
it’s sent back into the US where it IS accessed by US intelligence and where
 it is given out to any friends or cronies of US intelligence – hundreds of
national security letters every day publicly declared and being issued by
the US government. 

RT: So do we risk kind of entering a scenario where there are almost two
 castes of people: a safe minority who are very savvy about the workings 
of the internet and the things that you described, and just people who go online for kicks?

JA: We have this position where as we know knowledge is power,
 and there’s a mass transfer as a result of literally billions of interceptions
per day going from everyone, the average person, into the data vaults
of state spying agencies for the big countries, and their cronies – the
 corporations that help build them that infrastructure. Those groups are
already powerful, that’s why they are able to build this infrastructure to
intercept on everyone. So they are growing more powerful, concentrating
 the power in the hands of smaller and smaller groups of people at once,
 which isn’t necessarily bad, but it’s extremely dangerous once there is
 any sort of corruption occurring in the power. Because absolute power
corrupts, and when it becomes corrupt, it can affect a lot of people very quickly. 

Bill Binney, National Security Agency whistleblower, who was the research
 head of the National Security Agency’s Signals Intelligence Division,
describes this as a ‘turnkey totalitarianism’, that all the infrastructure
 has been built for absolute totalitarianism

'all the infrastructure has been built for 

absolute totalitarianism'

It’s just the matter of turning the key. And actually the key has already been
turned a little bit, and it is now affecting people who are targeted for US drone
strikes, organizations like WikiLeaks, national security reporters who are
 having their sources investigated. It is already partly turned, and the question
 is, will it go all the way?

RT: But has it been built really by corporations and kind of unwittingly 
subscribed to by people, in order to advertise products to make money,
 or has it been built deliberately by governments for the sole purpose of surveillance?

JA: It's both. I mean the surveillance infrastructure, the bulk surveillance
 infrastructure – there are hundreds of companies involved in that business.
They have secret international conferences, they have prospectuses that they
 give to intelligence agencies that we have obtained and published this
year together with Privacy International and the Bureau of Investigative
Journalism. Also, The Wall Street Journal has done some good work on
 this. They are building devices that they advertise to intercept entire

So it's a combined corporate/government amalgam. That's one of the problems,
one of the reasons it's so unaccountable is that it crosses boundaries.
Companies don't just sell to their home country, they sell to companies
overseas. There are shareholdings held in BVI, and the company might
be British-registered, like BIA, but actually a lot of research and
development is done in Sweden, etc. 

And then you also have Google and Facebook, who started up
 predominantly serving the public, but also have developed side projects
 to service the US intelligence complex. And individuals are constantly
 pushing their thoughts into Google as each thing that they want to
 research; it is pushed via emails, and on Facebook, through their
social relationships. That's an undreamt of spy database.

'That's an undreamt of spy database'

Facebook is completely undreamt of even by the worst spying nation,
 given the richness and sophistication of relationships expressed.

RT: And willingly contributed to.

JA: Well, no. But not with informed consent. People don't actually know.
 When on Facebook it says "share this to your friends," that's what it says.
 It doesn't say "share this to state agencies," it doesn't say "share this to
friends and cronies of state agencies."

RT: Who do you think has the organized power to stop these things that
 you are talking about?

JA: If there is political will, everything is possible. So if we get the political will,
then of course those agencies can be dismantled. Very aggressive legislation,
 policing can be pushed upon them. In some regions of the world, such as Latin
 America, perhaps that's a possibility. There is a certain democratic tendency,
 which Ecuador is part of that might do that. But in general I think the prognosis
 is very grim. And we really are at this moment where it can go one way or the other way.

To a degree, perhaps the best we can be sure, if we work, of achieving is that
 some of us are protected. It may only be a high-tech elite, hopefully expanded
a bit more – people who can produce tools and information for others that they
 can use to protect themselves. It is not necessary that all of society is covered,
all of society is protected. What's necessary is that the critical accountability
 components of society that stop it from going down the tubes entirely, that
those people are protected. Those include corruption investigators, journalists,
 activists, and political parties. These have got to be protected. If they are
 not protected, then it's all lost.

RT: Is there a way that I can protect myself without knowing all about computers?

JA: Well, a little bit. But the first thing to be aware of is how much you are
giving away. The first way to protect yourself is to go, "OK, I'll discuss that
in person, and not over Facebook chat," or, "OK, I will discuss this using
some forms of encrypted chat, like OTR, and not on a Facebook chat." You
 can go to torproject.org and download encrypted anonymizing software.
It is slower than normal, but for things like internet chat it's fine, because
 you are not downloading very much at once. So there are ways of doing this.

What is really necessary, however, for those to be properly developed,
there needs to be enough market demand. It's the same situation as soap
and washing your hands. Once upon a time, before the bacterial theory of
 disease, before we understood that out there invisibly was all this bacteria
that was trying to cause us harm – just like mass state surveillance is out
there invisible and trying to cause society a large harm.

'mass state surveillance is out there invisible

 and trying to cause society a large harm'

 – no one bothered to wash their hands. First process was discovery;
 second process, education; third process, a market demand is created
 as a result of education, which means that experts can start to manufacture
 soap, and then people can buy and use it.

So this is where we are at now, which is we've got to create education
 amongst people, so there can be a market demand, so that others can
be encouraged to produce easy-to-use cryptographic technology that is
capable of protecting not everyone, but a significant number of people from
 mass state spying. And if we are not able to protect a significant number
 of people from mass state spying, then the basic democratic and civilian
institutions that we are used to – not in the West, I am no glorifier of the
 West, but in all societies – are going to crumble away. They will crumble
 away, and they will do so all at once. And that's an extremely dangerous phenomenon.

It's not often where all the world goes down the tube all at once. Usually
 you have a few countries that are OK, and you can bootstrap civilization
 again from there.

RT: We just passed the second anniversary of Cablegate, and since
 then this war on whistleblowers and this state surveillance seems to 
have got worse. Do you think something as large as Cablegate could
 ever happen again and it would have a similar impact?

JA: Yes, yes. Hopefully next year.

RT: What sort of time next year?

JA: I won’t go into it, but hopefully earlier rather than later.

RT: Do you feel that when WikiLeaks is making these releases you’re
 having as large an impact as you’ve had before?

JA: Well, Cablegate was extraordinary. It was published over a period
of 12 months. It’s the most significant leak. Our previous leak, on the
 Iraq war, was also 400,000 documents, showing precisely how over
 100,000 people were killed. That was also very significant. But yes,
 no one has done anything as significant as that since, but yes, hopefully, that will continue. 

The successes of WikiLeaks shouldn’t be viewed merely as a demonstration
 of our organization’s virility or the virility of the activist community on the internet.
 They are also a function of this hoarding of information by these national
security [agencies]. The reason there was so much information to leak, the
reason it could be leaked all at once is because they had hoarded so much.
 Why had they hoarded so much? Well, to gain extra power through knowledge.
 They wanted their own knowledge internally to be easily accessible to their
 people, to be searchable, so as much power could be extracted from it as
 possible. WikiLeaks attempts to redress the imbalance of power.

'WikiLeaks attempts to redress the

 imbalance of power'

by taking what’s inside these very powerful institutions and giving them
 to the commons, people in general, so we can understand how the
world works and stop the takeover by these powerful institutions.
 But it’s a function of how much knowledge these powerful institutions have accumulated.

RT: You’ve obviously written this book while you’ve been here in the embassy.
 But is it affecting your ability to work, this being cooped up constantly?

JA: It’s affecting my ability to meet with other people in different countries
 and to proselytize and things like this. But we should keep it in perspective.
 There are others who have been in prison also in the past few years.
I know that it is a much more serious condition than the one I’m in, and
 I am fortunately able to give interviews and so on. So at least I have a voice.
 Prisoners rarely even have a voice. Why is that? Well, because the prison
system doesn’t want to permit them to complain about their conditions.

RT: And what are you going to do, Julian? You said that you won’t 
leave the Ecuadorian embassy until the US drops any charges and
 any investigation against you. Are you just going to stay here forever?

JA: Well, I hope that there is enough political pressure and that the
 US government sees that it is destroying any goodwill that remains towards
it as a result of its persecution and investigation of WikiLeaks and its associates.
 I think it really does have to drop the investigation. And you know,
over the past six months in particular you can see a sort of the arrow
 of history – and the US DoJ and Eric Holder are going to end up on the
 wrong side of history. I don’t know that they want that on their record. 

RT: I think there’ve been reports on the media that over the last day or
 so about your lung condition, but you’ve released a statement that it’s
 actually not the case at all. But has it shown you what would potentially 
happen if you did have a health scare? Do you think you would be able to get treatment?

JA: You know, my particular personal condition is not very interesting.
 Obviously, this circumstance in the embassy is difficult.
 And over a longer term, I suppose, it could be very difficult.
 But, you know, I’ve had worse problems.

© Autonomous Nonprofit Organization “TV-Novosti”, 2005 - 2011. All rights reserved.

Pithy Humor

SWATTING--THE NEW SCARE TACTIC

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/11/28/With-Celebs-In-Crosshairs-Instead-Of-Conservatives-L-A-Times-Gets-Serious-On-SWATing

by LEE STRANAHAN 1 Dec 2012 35POST A COMMENT

A few months ago, 85 members of Congress sent Attorney General Eric Holder a letter about the swatting of four conservative bloggers, but the story got little traction in the mainstream media. However, when former American Idol judge Simon Cowell and pop star Justin Bieber were swatted recently, the subject finally made the front page of the Los Angeles Times. 

As the Times reported: 

Count Bieber and Cowell as the latest high-profile victims of "swatting," a fast-growing phenomenon masterminded by anonymous mischief-makers who alert police to a bogus crime situation, prompting a tactical response — sometimes by SWAT officers — that involves a high-risk search for phantom assailants. Several officers have already been injured responding to such calls, and officials, including Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck, fear that it's only a matter of time before events turn deadly.

Conservative blogger Patrick Frey aka Patterico has been a vocal critic of the L.A. Times in the past but told his readers, “I spoke to reporter Chris Lee for the story a few weeks ago, and he pretty much gets it right:”

The article tells the harrowing story of how conservative bloggers were targeted:

When Los Angeles County Deputy Dist. Atty. Patrick Frey got swatted at his Rancho Palos Verdes home last July, he thought it might have been in retaliation for posts on his conservative-leaning Patterico's Pontifications blog.

In full view of his startled neighbors, Frey was led out in shackles by five armed deputies after a male caller told responders at the Lomita sheriff's station that the deputy district attorney had shot his wife. Outside were four police cruisers, a fire truck, an ambulance, a hazardous materials van and a chopper shining a spotlight over his property. Frey's wife was awakened and frisked by police on the front porch while two officers checked on the couple's 8- and 11-year-old children sleeping upstairs.

"I'm dealing with psychopaths who know where I live," Frey said. "Someone had it in for me so much, they committed an act they knew could get me killed." No arrests have been made in the case.

In June, another lawyer-blogger, Aaron Walker, was swatted at his home in Prince William County, Va. Two officers wielding M4 assault rifles showed up at Walker's town house and ordered him out. The attorney de-escalated the tension, however, by telling the patrolmen: "Let me guess, someone called and claimed I shot my wife."

Frey is glad the Times is covering the story and understands playing up the celebrity angle, but he told Breitbart News that the political swattings are more dangerous because they impact not just the First Amendment rights of the victims but have been used as an intimidation tactic in order to silence anyone thinking of writing about controversial subject. 

Aaron Walker told Breitbart News the issue affects all Americans:

The fact that this rash of SWATtings against myself, Mike Stack, Patrick “Patterico” Frey, and Erick Erickson all appear to be motivated by politics should make Americans of all parties be concerned.  This makes the issue not merely a matter of ordinary criminal law, but also of freedom of expression.  I am disappointed in the lack of interest from liberals, particularly democratic Congresspersons, in this very serious matter. 

Patterico’s blog post also points out how the law has not caught up with this crime trend:

California law on this is especially disappointing. Penal Code section 148.3(b) makes such false reports a felony if the person making the false report “knows or should know that the response to the report is likely to cause death or great bodily injury, and great bodily injury or death is sustained by any person as a result of the false report.” And if someone is actually badly hurt or killed, the maximum punishment is? A whopping 3 years in state prison. 

There’s a human cost to these remote control crimes that are done from a distance by cowards. As Red State’s Erick Erickson reminded Breitbart News:

People who hear these stories probably shrug them off as a prank, but it is no prank when you have small kids who want to know why police are pulling up with their hands on their guns. This has the real potential to harm innocent lives, which is why it is so serious.  It is also why they do it — a form of intimidation. They know where you live and can try to get you, your wife, and your kids hurt.

Persecution Alert !!

HTTP://AMERICANEEDSFATIMA.BLOGSPOT.COM/2012/11/CATHOLICS-MIGHT-LOSE-CHARITABLE-STATUS.HTML?UTM_SOURCE=FEEDBURNER&UTM_MEDIUM=FEED&UTM_CAMPAIGN=FEED%3A+AMERICANEEDSFATIMA+%28AMERICA+NEEDS+FATIMA%29

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2012

Catholics might lose charitable status for not offering communion to everyone

by Hilary White

LONDON, November 7, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Conservative Party MP has accused the government’s Charity Commission of attempting to suppress Christianity after the group denied charitable status to the Plymouth Brethren, a small denomination of conservative evangelicals. MP Charlie Elphicke has said that the Charity Commission has stepped outside its mandate telling the Brethren that their religion is “not necessarily for the public good”.

In a letter to the community, the Commission wrote of a tribunal decision that found “there is no presumption that religion generally, or at any more specific level, is for the public benefit, even in the case of Christianity or the Church of England”.

The Plymouth Brethren, of which there are about 16,000 adherents in Britain, have said they intend to pursue their dispute to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg if necessary. They have been embroiled in the dispute with the Commission for seven years since the Commission refused charitable status to one of the group’s churches in Devon. The group engages in street preaching, distributing bibles and visits hospital patients. These activities, said Garth Christie, an Elder in the group, more than qualifies them for charitable status under the “advancement of religion” clauses.

The matter became public when the Public Administration Select Committee discovered the letter as part of materials released as part of their investigation into the decision-making processes of the Commission.

The Charity Commission alleges that the group’s rule of only giving Holy Communion to full members means that their services are not open to all, a charge which the Brethren deny. The Brethren say that their public services are offered to everyone regardless of religious affiliation. If it is upheld, the rule could be extended to the Catholic Church which also officially restricts Communion reception to members.

The letter has promoted Elphicke, a member of the Select Committee, to call the Commission’s policies “anti-religion” and said that it is more evidence that it is a waste of public funds. Members of the Plymouth Brethren were giving evidence to the committee and Elphicke asked, if they thought the Commission was “actively trying to suppress religion in the UK, particularly the Christian religion”.

Christie responded, “I think we would share those concerns.” He agreed with Elphicke’s suggestion the Charity Commission’s decision could be seen as the “thin end of the wedge” with concern to other small religious groups.

Elphicke told the Brethren representatives, “I think they [the Commission] are committed to the suppression of religion and you are the little guys being picked on to start off a whole series of other churches who will follow you there.”

Bernard Jenkin, a Conservative MP and Vice Chairman of the Conservative Party said the Commission seems to be using the group as a test case to establish the meaning of the public benefit requirement in charity law.

“Picking a relatively vulnerable organisation and putting you through huge time and expense is a rotten way to decide what charity law means,” Jenkin said.

POSTED BY ROBERT RITCHIE AT  9:39 AM  

 

 theheavenlygaze.blogspot.com

Agenda 21---UN Plan for world domination

• IF YOU DO NOT KNOW 

  ABOUT 

  THIS YOU SHOULD —

  
  

  FOX NEWS:

  "Agenda 21" The UN's diabolical plan for 

  the world is explained on the "Glenn Beck Show"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=esJY2SK_4tE&NR=1

Whats REALLY going on with the 3rd Secret-pg 3

     Precious insights into God's predilection for the Immaculate Heart of Mary were given to Sister Lucia at Pontevedra, Spain in 1925 and again at Tuy, Spain in 1929.  On 10 December 1925 she was an 18 year old postulant in the convent of the Sisters of Saint Dorothy in Pontevedra.  That evening she had just returned to her cell after supper when she was visited by Our Lady and the Child Jesus.  She writes of herself in the third person:

     On December 10, 1925, the Most Holy Virgin appeared to her, and by Her side, elevated on a luminous cloud, was the Child Jesus.  The Most Holy Virgin rested Her hand on her shoulder, and as She did so, She showed her a heart encircled by thorns, which She was holding in Her other hand.  At the same time, the Child said: 'Have compassion on the Heart of your Most Holy Mother, covered with thorns, with which ungrateful men pierce It at every moment, and there is no one to make an act of reparation to remove them.'

     This image of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, first shown to Lucia on 10 December 1925 at Pontevedra, is the same as that which Jesus revealed to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque on 16 June 1675 at Paray-Le-Monial in France.  Jesus had explained to Margaret Mary that the flames depicted his burning love for souls and the thorns depicted his pain that his love was neither appreciated nor returned.  Consider the insight of John Paul II that "when Jesus on the Cross said: 'Woman, behold your son (John 19:26), in a new way he opened his Mother's Heart, the Immaculate Heart, and revealed to it the new dimensions and extent of the love to which she was called in the Holy Spirit by the power of the sacrifice of the Cross..."

Given that insight, does this vision of the Immaculate Heart of Mary not reveal that the hearts of Jesus and Mary beat as one in the predilection of the Father? Thus, while the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary certainly includes the assertion in the Vatican’s  The Message of Fatima that “The Heart open to God, purified by contemplation of God, is stronger than guns and weapons of every kind, “and that  “thanks to her Yes, God could become man in our world and remains so for all time.”  Its significance within the whole cloth of the first and second parts of the Secret of Fatima and the subsequent visions and messages given to Sister Lucia at Pontevedra and Tuy comprehends much more.

Mary told the seers at Fatima that God …punish [es] the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father…To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays…In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph.  The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world.

Given God’s predilection for her Immaculate Heart, one can conclude that the conversion of Russia will occur by the power of the Holy Spirit given to Russians in response to the requested consecration of Russia and the First Saturday devotions, both to her Immaculate Heart.  From such triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary a period of peace will be granted to the world.

     Our Lord, himself, explained this to Lucia as she stated in a hand-written letter to Father Goncalves on 18 May 1936.  As Adolph Hitler was then preparing Germany for an aggressive war and Joseph Stalin was fomenting civil war in Spain, Fr. Goncalves had written asking Lucia concerning the consecration of Russia.  She replied:

 Intimately I have spoken to Our Lord about the subject, and not too long ago I asked Him why He would not convert Russia without the Holy Father making that consecration?

[Jesus replies.]’Because I want My whole Church to acknowledge that consecration as a triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, so that it may extend its cult later on, and put the devotion to This Immaculate Heart beside the devotion to My Sacred Heart.’

 [Lucia then pleads with Jesus.] By my God, the Holy Father probably won’t believe me, unless You, Yourself move him with a special inspiration.

[Jesus.] ‘The Holy Father. Pray very much for the Holy Father.  He will do it, but it will be late.  Nevertheless the Immaculate Heart of Mary will save Russia.  It has been entrusted to Her.’ [Emphasis added]

     On 13 June 1929 both Jesus and Mary appeared to Lucia in the convent chapel at Tuy and told her that the time had come for her to communicate Heaven’s plan for peace revealed at Fatima to the Holy Father.  She did in at least two letters to Pope Pius XI through her spiritual director and through her bishop, but received no response.  Jesus, himself, confirmed both his vicar’s receipt of this plan for peace from Lucia, and His Holiness’ failure to comply, in an apparition to Lucia at the little seaside chapel in Rianjo where she was recuperation from a lingering illness in August 1931.  Lucia explains this in a letter to her Bishop written 29 August 1931:

     My confessor orders me to inform Your Excellency of what took place a little while ago between the Good Lord and myself:  as I was asking God for the conversion of Russia, Spain and Portugal, it seemed to me that His Divine Majesty said to me: ‘You console Me a great deal by asking Me for the conversion of those poor nations.  Ask it also of My Mother frequently, saying: Sweet Heart of Mary, be the salvation of Russia, Spain, Portugal Europe and the whole world.  At other times say: By your pure and Immaculate Conception, O Mary, obtain for me the conversion of Russia, Spain, Portugal, Europe and the entire world.

Make it known to my ministers that given they follow the example of the King of France in the delaying the execution of My request, that they will follow him into misfortune.  It will never be too late to have recourse to Jesus and Mary.[Emphasis added.]

      Lucia reiterated the consequences of His Holiness’ inaction in a letter to Fr. Goncalves written on 21 January 1935: “Regarding the matter of Russia, I think that it would please Our Lord very much if you worked to make the Holy Father comply with His wishes.  About three years ago our Lord was very displeased because His request had not been attended to and I made this fact known to the bishop in a letter.”  A year later, as part of the letter to Fr. Goncalves detailing the apparition at Tuy, Lucia repeats Jesus severe warning of August 1931:  “Later on, by means of an interior communication, Our Lord complainingly said to me: ‘They did not want to heed My request.  Like the King of France they will repent and do so, but it will be late.  Russia will already have spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church.  The Holy Father will have much to suffer!”

On the Feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, 17 June, and again on 28 August, 1689, St. Margaret Mary Alacoque wrote to Mother de Saumaise, her prioress at the Visitation Monestery of Paray-le-Monial, to have a message the saint had received from Jesus requesting that the King consecrate France to His most Sacred Heart, delivered to him.

  Margaret Mary expressed Heaven’s wish that Jesus’ Sacred Heart receive “the consecration and homage of the king and the entire court.  Moreover, this divine Heart wishes to become the protector and defender of his sacred person against all his enemies visible and invisible, to defend him against them, and assure his salvation by this means.” 

The saint added that Jesus had chosen that the Jesuits deliver this message to Louis XIV and spread this devotion to His Sacred Heart, specifically mentioning a Father de la Chaise because of his influence over Louis’ heart.  Historians surmise that Fr. De le Chaise either refused to deliver the message to Louis, or was not willing to advocate that the king comply, or that Louis XIV soul was not sufficiently humble to comprehend the greatness being offered.  It is certain that this initiative of Jesus’ Sacred Heart was not understood and Margaret Mary’s admonitions were of no avail.  There can be no doubt of the consequences of the refusal of kings Louis XIV through XVI to comply with Heaven’s will regarding the consecration of France and devotion to Jesus’ Sacred Heart.  One hundred years tot eh day after Margaret Mary penned her first letter to her prioress, the French peasants, led by atheist philosophers and Masonic anti-Church propagandists, overthrew the Catholic monarchy and proclaimed their new National Assembly to be the legitimate government of France.  The subsequent terror included the suppression and fanatical persecution of the Catholic Church, the French nobility and the execution of King Louis XVI on 21 January 1793.
While the French revolution could not have happened without the well-known injustices callously inflicted on those outside the privileged and elitist classes within the nobility and even within the church during the eighteenth century, one must consider how Catholic France fell to such moral, spiritual, material and social misery.  Although that question is beyond the scope of this talk, the texts of Heaven’s messages to both Saint Margaret Mary and to the seers of Fatima strongly suggest that in the century following the death of Louis XIV in 1701 France was “deprived of the increase of extraordinary graces and miraculous help of the Sacred Heart” and was unable to cope with the internal “frivolousness, deadly errors, cowardice and betrayals which soon brought about its ruin.”  The theological heresies, the Masonic Counter-Church and a “satanic hatred against God, against Christ and against His Church” were thus able to exploit the wide-spread misery to prepare the revolution.

     By a parity of reasoning the same inferences can be made regarding the disastrous consequences for the world and for the Church of the failure of the succession of Roman pontiffs from Pius XI to John Paul II to comply with Heaven’s request, although there are good reason to conclude that John Paul I would have complied, but for his sudden, tragic and mysterious death.  Albino Cardianl Luciani of Venice had visited Sister Lucia in Coimbra privately for several hours in 1977 just months before he became Pope John Paul I.  Lucia requested the private visit after Luciani had celebrated mass for the cloistered Carmelites, Cardinals having access to the seer without Vatican permission.  We don’t know if or how much of the third part of the Secret of Fatima Lucia revealed to the Cardinal, but in early 1978 the usually jovial prelate explained his apparent pensiveness and absorption to his brother and sister-in-law, Edoardo and Antonietta Luciani, by saying that “I was just thinking of what Sister Lucia told me at Coimbra…The Secret, it’s terrible.”  Luciani held Lucia in high esteem and it is probable that he would have acted on Heaven’s Plan for Peace, had he lived.

     Given that Jesus’ “ministers” have failed to “heed My request” proposed at Fatima in 1917 and made at Tuy in 1929, one could conclude that they also have been “deprived of the increase of extraordinary graces and miraculous help” from Heaven to prevent the “satanic hatred agains God, against Christ and against His Church” of its enemies, visible and invisible, within and without the Church , from influencing pivotal decisions and initiatives that have yielded tragic consequences for the Church and the world.

     Had Pius XI or Pius XII obeyed Heaven’s request for the consecration and First Saturday reparatory devotions communicated through Sister Lucia in 1929, the Queen of Heaven would have been graced to convert Russia and lead that nation to convert the world to Christ.  World War II would have been avoided and the world would have been blessed with a period of peace.  Instead Russia still spreads her errors throughout the world, souls are lost to occultism, atheism and sin of all kinds, and we live in a state of continuous war.  Further, a sad a disappointed Jesus had warned Lucia in 1931 that if his “ministers” were late in performing the consecration and leading the Church in the First Saturday reparatory devotions, they would suffer the same fate as the Kings of France.  It appears to many, including myself, that Jesus’ warning has been and will continue to be fulfilled in the persons of our pontiffs.  Had they obeyed would not God have blessed their sowing with super-abundant fruit and opposed the contrary efforts of all their enemies, visible and invisible, within and without the Church?
     In making Peter and his successors his vicars on earth Christ has irrevocably delegated to them his authority over all people, including those in schism or accepting heretical and even atheistic and pagan beliefs.  As Leo XIII explained in his encyclical of 25 May 1899, Annum Sacrum, the whole can be consecrated to the Sacred Heart of Jesus: “Indeed the empire of Jesus Christ does not extend to Catholic nations only…But the power of Christ extends also over all those who live outside the Christian faith; it is thus an unquestionable truth that the whole human race is under the power of Jesus Christ.”  With faith in Jesus our pontiffs could follow Peter and in obedience to Heaven’s request, pay out their nets for a catch.  As Peter’s nets were filled with fish then, today many souls would be saved, Russia would be converted and the world would be blessed with a period of peace.  But Satan’s hand is clearly revealed working against compliance through the complexities, betrayals and intrigues that have confronted our pontiffs through the last century and into the present.

     Pope Pius XI began his reign on 6 February 1922 by following the Ostpolitik begun by Benedict XV understandably seeking to cooperate with the Soviet Government to mitigate the Russian misery following the Great War and the Bolshevik revolution and to secure the safety of both Orthodox believers and the Roman Catholic Church in Russia.  In early 1930 the pontiff received but remained incredulous to Sister Lucia’s communications of Heaven’s request for the consecration and First Saturday devotions.  He believed that such a serious request, if from Heaven, would have been communicated directly to him.  Moreover, what was suggested “seemed to him contrary to his designs.  The direction of the Church was his business – he knew, better than anybody else, the road to follow!  But after 15 years of vainly trusting in Vatican diplomacy to accomplish these ends amid the communist terror, genocide, persecution of the Church and the torture and murder of thousands of priests and bishops, and imprisonment or death of millions of the faithful, his holiness published on 19 March 1937 an incisive encyclical against communism, Divini Redemptoris.  After detailing the methodical persecutions in Russia, Mexico and Spain as barbarous, intrinsically perverse and diabolical, the pontiff repeated several times that “communism directed by Moscow” accomplished these atrocities which “are the natural fruits of a system which is lacking all interior restraints.”  He concluded with an unambiguous order to the Church:  “Communism is intrinsically perverse, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever.”  The pontiff urged his Bishops that, following the teaching of Christ to his apostles, they must lead the fight against demonic Communism by fostering and intensifying “the spirit of prayer joined with Christian penance.” 

     But Satan works his mystery of iniquity against Jesus’ Church beyond organized communism.  His holiness had finally come to see the demonic behind other enemies of the Church in the systematic attempt to drive God from the hearts and minds of the Mexican people in the 1920’s.  In 1926 the Freemason Plutarco Calles became president.  He was fanatically anti-Catholic and determined to exterminate Catholicism by legislating and strictly enforcing the anti-Catholic provisions of the new Constitution of 1917, and adding others of his own.  In 1926, Calles regime launched a new offensive to bury the Church.  He wrote: Now there must be a psychological revolution.  We must penetrate and take hold of the minds of the children and the youth because they must belong to the revolution.  The Catholic schools were shut down, the congregations expelled, Christian trade unions forbidden numerous churches confiscated and profaned or destroyed.  Public school attendance became mandatory atheism was officially taught, and religious symbols such as medals, crucifixes, statues and pictures were forbidden even in private.  Catholic public figures were assassinated and girls leaving church were kidnapped, imprisoned, even raped.  The Archbishop of Baltimore complained that U.S. friendship has encouraged Calles to destroy the idea of God in the minds and hearts of millions of Mexicans.  On 28 May 1926 Calles received the Masonic medal of merit from the hands of the Great Commander of the Masonic Scottish rite in Mexico.  On 12 July 1926, International Masonry accepted responsibility for everything that was happening in Mexico, and prepared to mobilize all its forces for the methodic, integral application of the agreed upon program for this country.

     By 1927 hundreds of priests and laymen had been killed and 20,000 Cristeros combatants took up arms in defense of the faith.  Their number rose to 30,000 by the end of the year, and to 50,000 by 1929. Beginning with little, they armed themselves with captured weapons and horses.  The people supplied their material needs and the fight became a crusade!  In 1927 they defeated the government forces in several battles.  By November the US military attaché’ began to worry about the success of the “fanatics,” as 40% of them were now equipped with captured Mauser rifles.  The Cristiada was a succession of miracles.

     In 1928 Mexico’s rural population was sent to concentration camps where famine and epidemics decimated them.  Those who resisted were massacred.  Harvests and flocks were seized, grazing land burned, and villages destroyed by the thousands.  Despite this scorched earth policy the Cristeros stood fast like latter-day Maccabees.

     By 1929, Cristeros victories forced the government to abandon the rural war.  Three-fourths of inhabitable Mexico was in the hands of the Cristeros.  They had won military victory, and in the United States Herbert Hoover, who was not a Mason, was elected president!  Then the Cristeros learned that secret negotiations between the Mexican government and the Vatican had relulted in an accord.  On 21 June the Mexican episcopate signed a resolution of the conflict with the ruling power.  The accord provided for immediate, unconditional cease fire and the resumption of the public worship began the next day.  It restored the same situation that prevailed in 1926 with all the anti-Catholic laws then in effect, including the registration of priests!  In the text, the Cristeros were called fanatics directed by a few third-rate priests; their revolt was an error, imprudent, even a sin.  They must lay down their arms under pain of excommunication…
The commander in chief of the Cristeros, Jesus Degollado, addressed his troops in a voice breaking with sorrow:

His Holiness the Pope, by the intermediary of the most excellent Apostolic Nuncio, has decided, for reasons which are unknown to us but which, as Catholics, we accept, that public worship will be resumed tomorrow without the law being changed…This arrangement…has wrested from us that which is most noble and most holy on our flag, at the moment when the Church has declared that she will resign herself to what she has obtained…Consequently, the National Guard assumes responsibility for the conflict…As for ourselves as men, we have a satisfaction that no one can take from us; the National Guard does not disappear defeated by its enemies, but rather abandoned by the very ones who were to be the first to receive the fruit of our sacrifices and abnegation!  Ave, Christ!  Those who for You are going to humiliation, to exile, and, perhaps, to an inglorious death,…with the most fervent love salute You, and once more proclaim You as King of our country.

Six thousand Cristeros obeyed, and were immediately massacred.  In three years, they had lost 5,000 men in combat!  The Mexican episcopate decreed the excommunication of the Cristeros priests, but those 180 who had not been killed during the war had already been martyred…all was lost.

     The new president, the Masonic lawyer Fortes Gil, rejoiced.  At the summer solstice banquet he acknowledged his astonishment at the unconditional capitulation of a victorious army, and stated his intention to continue the fight: The fight did not begin yesterday.  The fight is eternal.  The fight began 20 centuries ago.

(Adapted from M. Olivier Lelibre,  The Cristeros, Catholic Soldiers of Christ)

    By 1935 Pius XI had earned by bitter experience that it was the same enemy of God and his Church that drove both the communists in Europe and the Freemasons in Mexico.  After Divini Redemptoris it was unthinkable for any in the Church to collaborate with communism or freemasonry in any undertaking whatsoever.

     Following the aging pontiff’s death his Secretary of State, Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli, was elected to succeed him on 2 March 1939, taking the name Pius XII.  Pope Pacelli had learned on the job the reality of communism.  But after Adolph Hitler led his Nazis to attack Russia on 22June 1941 the pontiff was required to temper his leadership against communism at least partly because the American President, freemason Franklin Delano Roosevelt, pressured him that Stalin was needed as an ally against Hitler.  On 3 Sept 1941 Roosevelt urged Pius XII that the Soviets had changed for the better:

The churches in Russia are open.  I believe there is a real possibility that Russia may, as a result of the present conflict, recognize freedom of religion in Russia, although, of course, without recognition of any official intervention on the part of any Church in education or political matters within Russia…I believe that this Russian dictatorship is less dangerous to the safety of other nations than is the German form of dictatorship.

     Because communism was founded on atheism and hatred for Christ, Pius knew it was an enemy of His Church with whom accord or coexistence was possible and after the war he strictly forbade any Vatican relations with it. Pius XII died of a lingering illness on 9 October 1958 and Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli was elected Pope John XXIII on 28 October. John XXIII immediately reversed the direction of Pius XII politically by enthusiastically embracing Ostpolitik, or dialoguing with the Communist eastern European countries, and theologically by introducing what he considered to be a vital aggorimento, or updating of the Church to adapt to modern times.

     On 17 August 1959 Pope John received an envelope containing the third part of the Secret of Fatima which he read several times both on his own and with the help of Portuguese translators.  Its contents were shared with the leaders of the Holy Office, the Secretariat of State, and a few others.  He said he preferred to leave to others the appraisal of it, writing only a personal note that was resealed it in the envelope with Lucia’s letter and kept on his writing table until his death.  In fact by withholding the long-awaited and eagerly anticipated third part of the Secret from the Church and the world Pope John had de facto judged it unworthy of publication.  The consequences of that papal decision are incalculable, but surely include a further loss “of extraordinary graces and miraculous help” so desperately needed to guide the Church in its conflict with those forces, visible and invisible, that are led by Satan’s cunning. 

     On 25 November 1961 the pontiff received birthday greetings from the Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev praising his recent expressions of hope for world peace “as well as to the solution of international problems thanks to frank negotiations.”  In joyful response Pope John privately expressed his belief that “Something is moving in the world. The Lord is using the humble instrument that I am to budge history.  Today we have had a sign of Divine Providence.”

     Pope John felt inspired to call for a new ecumenical council that he hoped would be the occasion for a new springtime, a “New Pentecost” in the Church, to which he, ardently desired that members of the Russian Orthodox Church attend.  To that end Cardinal Eugene Tisserant for the Vatican and Russian Orthodox Metropolitan Nikodim for the Soviet Union concluded the “Vatican-Moscow Agreement” or “Metz Pact” at Metz, France on 18 August 1962.  In consideration of the Soviets sending two Russian Orthodox observers to the council, the Vatican agreed tha the Second Vatican Council would abstain from any consideration of Communism and Russia.  “Ever since that time the Holy See considers itself as still bound by the engagements taken by John XXIII.  Communism is no longer ever mentioned by name in any pontifical document.”

    On 11 October 1962 Pope John opened his council with a joyful and upbeat address, but included an explicit rejection of warnings such as those of Sister Lucia: “We feel that We must disagree with these prophets of doom, who are always forecasting worse disasters, as though the end of the world were at hand.”  Tragically, the prophet to which he refers is not Sister Lucia to whom she appeared and spoke, but the “Woman clothed with the sun,” our August Queen of heaven and earth, of angels and men!

     On 11 April 1963 John XXIII signed Pacem in Terris, his internationalist encyclical on World Peace, in which “he officially recognized the ‘charter of the rights of man’ of the United Nations, and he extolled a world community, of liberty equality and fraternity” wherein ideal societies of the future would “constructed on the good will of all men.  And at the same time, the Pope practically lifted the prohibition of collaborating with the communists.”  Moreover, he wrote that such collaboration “may possibly provide the occasion or even the incentive for their conversion to the truth. “  Pope John here officially promoted collaboration with Communists, accepting them as reasonable men of natural moral integrity.  He might have said the same of Freemasonry. It appears that the pontiff here fails to fully grasp or appreciate the demonic spirit and the perverse nature of a totalitarian system such as communism, by whatever name it may call itself from time to time that demands the unconditional and uncompromising personal commitment of a de facto religion.  This is surely because of the diabolical disorientation of the mystery of iniquity.  That is why we must pray for our Pope as never before, or I believe errors will continue. 

One cannot logically separate a communist from the errors of communism by whatever name they may call themselves as if a communist or a freemason were merely an atheist with strong socialistic or intellectual convictions.  For a communist believes the ultimate good is the dictatorship of the proletariat, or other totalitarian regime, and all means that achieve that end are good. Morally-ethical categories are replaced by political expediency.  As Harry and Bonaro Overstreet reported in their seminal study of communism in 1958, the necessary lie, slander, intimidation of the masses, and the liquidation of oppositional groups and hostile classes must not only be obediently carried out, but conscientiously accepted as the right thing to do by party members.  In 1957 Margarita Aliger confessed during a conference of Soviet writers in Moscow that she had sometimes substituted “morally-ethical categories for political categories…[whereas] All the work of a Soviet writer is political work, and to accomplish it honorably is possible only when one follows firmly the party line and party discipline.”  Hence, moral integrity consists in total personal dedication to use all means, including deception, liquidation, imprisonment, violence and terror, to achieve the ultimate good.  A party member is forbidden to love his enemies and is obligated to define as enemies “all who are outside the ideological pale.” Cannot the same be said of the Freemason Calles in Mexico in the 1920’s? 

   

Whats REALLY going on with the 3rd Secret? pg.6

 In the late 1962 Pope Roncalli suffered a severe hemorrhage.  On 17 May 1963 he was confined to bed and on 3 June he died, setting the stage for a new conclave to choose his successor.  Giovanni Battista Montini was chosen and took the name of Paul VI.  From his coronation as Paul VI on 21 June 1963 Pope Paul eagerly pursued communications with Russian communists, receiving in private audiences both of the Russian Orthodox observers to the Second Vatican Council. 

     Pope Paul published his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam, on 6 August 1964, while Vatican II was still in session, “to demonstrate with increasing clarity how vital it is for the world, and how greatly desired by the Catholic Church, that the two should meet together, and get to know and love one another…Our task is to serve society.”  While Pope Paul clearly articulated the perverse nature of atheistic communism, but not Freemasonry; he held to his conviction that future dialogue may be possible.  If this was a consequence of diabolical disorientation do we all not share responsibility to pray for our Pope and because of our sins?  On 15 September 1964 Monsignor Agostino Casaroli signed an agreement for  Paul VI with the communist Hungarian government which stipulated that Bishops named by Rome would be sworn “to the people and the constitution” of the communist state, followed by similar modus Vivendi with Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, East Germany and Bulgaria.  On 30 January 1967 Pope Paul met privately in the Vatican with Soviet President Nicolas Podgorny accompanied by Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs, Andrei Gromyko.  By 1975 the pope and Gromyko had met privately several additional times.  Nevertheless:

     In the 1970’s the Bolshevist persecution against Catholics did not diminish at all.  One could read the following observations in the ‘Chronicles of the Catholic Church in Lithuania: ‘It seems to us that a dialogue with the Church is needed by the Soviet authority only so that the Vatican will keep silence about the persecution of Catholics in the USSR in hope of a betterment of the faithful’s  situation.  The dialogue is being used to deceive world public opinion that in the USSR freedom of religion is preserved.

The blood of thousands of Catholic Bishops, priests, nuns, brothers and millions of the faithful in communist totalitarian regimes were witnesses to this reality.

Thus it appears that the extraordinary graces promised by the Madonna at Fatima were as desperately needed by Jesus’ vicars in the 20^th Century as by the French monarchs in the 100 years leading to the godless revolution that dragged Louis XVI and countless others including bishops, priests and religious to the guillotine.

     On the eve of the closing of session two of the Second Vatican Council, 3 December 1963, Bishop de Proenca, Sigaud delivered to the Cardinal Secretary of State petitions to the pope by 200 Council Fathers for a special schema to address “errors of Marxism, Socialism and Communism” which were ignored.  In October 1964 Bishop Yu Pin, Rector of the Catholic University at Formosa, demanded minimally, on behalf of 70 Bishops, a solemn declaration on Communism, which was ignored.  On 9 October1965 Bishop de Proenca Sigaud and Bishop Marcel Lefebvre delivered the petition of 334 bishops to the council’s secretariat general “demanding condemnation of Communism” which was put aside!  “Everyone knew of the existence of that petition.”  It is fair to conclude that, per the Vatican-Moscow agreement at Metz, the issues of Communism and Russia were withheld from the consideration of the Council Fathers.

     Any inspiration of the Council Fathers by the Holy Spirit on the grave moral issues of the effects of Communist totalitarianism o the church and souls in communist regimes was thereby purposely foreclosed by those who expected a new springtime and a new Pentecost within the Church.  Can one be surprised that it did not happen?  That : “Instead the dark and frigid winter arrived.”

     It is probable that Ostpolitik and the Vatican-Moscow agreement, the fear of provoking a formal schism within the church, the fear of exasperating relations with the schismatic Orthodox churches and the Chinese Patriotic church were factors in John Paul II’s belief expressed on       1 August 1984 to Father Pierre Caillon, a retired professor of philosophy and an expert on the question of the papal consecration of Russia, that he could not consecrate Russia apart by itself alone, but that Heaven would be satisfied that he had done all that could be done in the practical circumstances.  One can only speculate what additional factors may have influenced the aging pontiff’s acquiescence to the publication of the Vatican’s The Message of Fatima on 26 June 2000 asserting that John Paul’s consecration of the world in 1984 had fully complied with the Virgin’s request for the consecration of Russia at Fatima in 1917.  But it is clear that the consequences of the acceptance of the Vatican’s The Message of Fatima by the Church to date have included the removal of the entrustment of the Conversion of Russia and World Peace to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by Heaven, from the mind and heart of the Church, thereby frustrating the implementation of Heaven’s plan for this final conflict with Satan and leaving the Church to human initiatives.

   This first talk will consider the accuracy of the claims in the Vatican’s The Message of Fatima that: (1) Sister Lucia has confirmed in a private letter that the 1984 consecration of the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary by Pope John Paul II completely fulfilled the Birgin’s request at Fatima that he with his bishops solemnly consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and that heaven had accepted that consecration; and (2) that the vision shown to the seers of a bishop dressed in white, like a pope, leading a procession of bishops, priests, religious and lay people through a ruined city, stepping over many corpses, up a hill to a cross where all are shot and killed by soldiers, is the complete 3^rd Part of the Fatima Secret.  It will argue from the historical record that since 1960 the Vatican’s Ostpolitik and diplomatic and social justice initiatives, like those proclaimed in Pacem in Terris, have failed to accomplish the conversion of Russia, to bring peace to the world, or any significant betterment in human behavior that would evidence the conversion of sinners’ hearts and minds to Christ; and that while significant blessings in the form of reductions of the tribulation of WWII and the Cold War have been obtained by the consecrations of the world to the Immaculate Heart by both Pius XII and John Paul II, “how much greater would they have been had the Madonna been heeded?”

   By all appearances the publication of the Message of Fatima in 2000 has succeeded in removing Mary’s 1917 requests at Fatima for the Consecration of Russia and the First Saturday reparatory devotions from the heart and mind of most of the Church.  That period has seen the 9-11 destruction of the world Trade Center towers in New York City, ongoing tension between the Koreas, wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Israel and Egypt, a real threat of nuclear war between Israel and Iran, and the ongoing genocide of Sudanese Catholics by Muslim militias, increasing military competition between the United States and Communist China and growing mutual mistrust between Russia and china and the West.  Part II will argue that it is ludicrous to maintain that the consecration of Russia has been done as asked by Heaven at Fatima, or that the Ostpolitik of the Vatican or any efforts by the United Nations have brought about peace.  Rather, the Church is in the endgame of its final conflict with Satan.  There is not time for business as usual by the church as if there were endless centuries to work for Christ.  Heaven has given the Holy Father and his Bishops specific orders at Fatima.  They are not optional.

    Part II will conclude by arguing that the 3^rd part of the Fatima Secret contains an explanation of the vision shown to the seers warning of dangers to the faith, apostasy within the Church beginning from the top, and unimaginably severe punishments from God that have been prophesied by the Blessed Mother at Fatima, Garabandal and Akita.  We in the Church must daily fast and pray to support Pope Benedict XVI as he prayerfully contemplates the promises and warnings of the three parts of the Message of Fatima within the prophetic context of Garabandal and Akita, and to defeat his enemies, visible and invisible, who work against him, within and without Christ’s Church!

Maranatha! Come, Lord Jesus!

END OF THE FIRST TALK