Jesuits! Jesuits! We're covered in Jesuits!

[Jerry Russell]

According to http://jesuitchurch.net/learn/the-society-of-jesus, the Jesuits define themselves as an order of ~19,000 celibate men who have gone through a rigorous initiation process and who have taken the following vows:

I, (name), make my profession, and I promise to Almighty God, in the presence of his Virgin Mother, the whole heavenly court, and all those here present and to you , Reverend Father (Provincial, Rector, etc.) representing the Superior General of the Society of Jesus and his successors and holding the place of God, perpetual poverty, chastity and obedience; and, in conformity with it, special care for the instruction of children, according to the manner of living contained in the apostolic letters of the Society of Jesus and its Constitutions.

I further promise a special obedience to the Sovereign Pontiff in regard to the missions according to the same apostolic letters and Constitutions.

Place (name), in the Church of (name), on the date of (date)

(Signatures of the one making vows and the one receiving them).
​

By this definition, Joe & Kenneth are not members of the Jesuit order per se, though they might view the order with some sympathy or affection.

Within these 19,000 Jesuits, I am imagining that some are crypto-progressives, while others are more dedicated to a traditional view; that is, they eagerly participate in the "conspiracy" to undermine democracy and make Washington a puppet to Rome.

 

[Richard Stanley]

Within these 19,000 Jesuits, I am imagining that some are crypto-progressives, while others are more dedicated to a traditional view; that is, they eagerly participate in the "conspiracy" to undermine democracy and make Washington a puppet to Rome.

I think so. The Freemasons appear to operate in the same general fashion, where there is a vaguely positive sounding agenda that everyone is working for. But, then each new initiate is profiled and groomed for roles that they are best equipped for. In some cases they are only assigned very benign tasks that are intended to bring credit to the respective organization. But others, having been determined to be properly compliant and skilled, are assigned tasks which cannot be acknowledged by the organization while in pursuit of the "greater good" so to speak.

As Saussy well articulated, the Freemasons and the Jesuits are mirror organizations that are both working covertly hand in glove for the same goal, while the superficial narrative has them being Protestant and Catholic cats and dogs. Cats and dogs can indeed get along.

 

[Richard Stanley]

What defines "a Jesuit" that makes her or him a conspirator in the framework of your theory? What is the shibboleth that separates those in the know from us dupes?

If someone is employed wittingly, or even sometimes unwittingly, in the group's core agenda. The agenda of which I assert is explicitly stated in the Book of Revelation, and elsewhere, as total global domination.

Likely many, or even most, literal Jesuits are devout and sincere Christians that believe they are in an ultimately spiritual pursuit for the Greater Good. Same for most Freemasons. But I say that the evidence, shorn of emotional baggage, is that the sponsors of both are craven in most every way imaginable. The Jesuits gained a bad reputation for their casuistry and their duplicitous resort to using any means to an end. As such, I see no reason to believe that the desired End, the creation of a global Platonic caste system will be benevolent for all humanity.

Ironically, they are cynically using ignorant whites to enslave themselves, and/or sacrifice themselves (as Zealots), to their trumptastic, oligarchic masters. These are the descendants of ignorant white serfs who were frightened by contrived religious wars into becoming migrants to a new promised land, where even they could become slave owners, masters of others. And their holy book said it was good. Damn those evil egalitarians had to ruin everything. Freedom is only for the "worthy". And as Bill Clinton knows, it all depends on who the worthy are.

This was why I asked you before your position on slavery, and still don't know your answer.

 

[Marcilla Smith]

Thank you for taking the time to educate me on the workings of the theory. Please excuse me that my silly girl brain is only able to make so much sense of y'all's remarks.

As I understand it, though, it seems the two of y'all have vastly different ideas about what defines "a Jesuit." If I understand Jerry correctly, he's saying one must be a priest of the Jesuit Order. And even then, there is a sub-conspiracy of progressive Jesuits which form a counter-conspiracy against the main Jesuit conspiracy.

Using Richard's definition of anyone who wittingly or unwittingly participates in the agenda of global domination, then it must be a majority of the people on earth who are involved, by definition of what it means to be wittingly or unwittingly involved in global domination.

I know at least enough to anticipate that how wrong I am will be pointed out shortly. Using either definition, I'm still left wondering what is the shibboleth that separates those in the know from the rest of us dupes.

In any event, does this mean that Richard would consider President Trump a Jesuit, while Jerry would not?

 

[Jerry Russell]

Maybe the source of confusion here is that we consider the Jesuit conspiracy as a subset or a cell of the entire conspiracy that is driving the agenda of global domination.

Since the conspiracy is generally secretive, there is no shibboleth that can be reliably used to identify the insiders. Although Rick thinks he can unmask the bad apples who come around to our website, by asking them their positions on key issues like slavery and pedophilia.

And as to Trump, there certainly seems to be reasonable basis to suspect he is an insider to the conspiracy. By my definition, he is not a Jesuit, but he did attend Fordham (Jesuit university) for two years.

 

[Richard Stanley]

One of the problems for anybody to identify such a shibboleth is that the PTB, or whatever other term to apply to them, is that they attempt control of both sides of any significant issue, so as to maximize political polariztion -- when desired. Therefore, most of the 'controlled' spend the vast majority of their time, energy, and animus misdirected onto their opposing counterparts. sometimes they even correctly identify players such as the Clintons or the Bushes, etc..

That said, I'll state that the real aim, and thus main shibboleth, in the closest biblical sense, is that of 'national' and personal sovereignty. Meaning that the globalist elites desire complete submission to The Authority, which is your God, aka Them.

As I have hinted previously, the Book of Revelation uses the term nations, as to the final state. However, we already have the United Nations, where the surrender of such sovereignty is inherent. The nation of the United States of America is a similar construct on a smaller scale where 13 states (now 50) haves surrendered their sovereignty to the larger entity. The second Civil War was fought to test this principle of sovereignty and according to Abraham Lincoln, God's desire was realized. Just before that, the first civil War, against the territory of Utah was fought and they surrendered their sovereignty, albeit the Romneys and others fled to Mexico to retain their polygamy institution.

This answer is coherent with my main thesis, wouldn't you agree?

Trump, certainly, is not a Jesuit, much less a Roman Catholic. But since it is clear that he is incapable of doing much of anything competently, except managing 6 bankruptcies and branding his name, he is a perfect functionarial stooge, sock puppet. He's not likely even a co-adjutant short coat (because he's not Catholic). Butt ox, imagine if the frat boys of Fordham have some drunken Spartan pics of him, of which he is mortified. His flesh has been mortified. Then, in my eyes this makes him a Virtual Jesuit (VJ).

 

[Jerry Russell]

imagine if the frat boys of Fordham have some drunken Spartan pics of him

At this point, I don't think anyone would even be surprised if such pics surfaced. And I thought you were satisfied that the "incompetent" aspect is a ruse.

 

[Richard Stanley]

And I thought you were satisfied that the "incompetent" aspect is a ruse.

It may be that he truly is a complete 'actor', or that he was selected for this trait.

The reports are that he seems to be highly ADHD (in addition to being psychopathic). He cannot read more than one page of text at a sitting, and he prefers text with bullet points. But, that page cannot have more than 9 bullet points, or he goes FOS (Full Orang-u-tan Shit).

 

[Marcilla Smith]

Wow! I was off even more than I anticipated. So it's actually Jerry who thinks President Trump is in on it (albeit as a non-Jesuit, Jesuit conspirator), while Richard thinks he is an unwitting "stooge."

So as to who are "the Jesuits" of "the Jesuit conspiracy," it seems Richard says they must be at least "Catholic," while Jerry says they must be one of the 19,000 priests of the order. Although Jerry also indicates that one can be an "insider to the Jesuit conspiracy" without being "a Jesuit."

Thank you for your patience. I'm sorry I'm having such difficulty forming the question properly. Should I keep trying, or just let it be?

 

[Richard Stanley]

My, look who is being casuistic. It's the Silly Martian, Agent Smith, and neoPaulina. They are all the same person indeed.

 

[Jerry Russell]

I'm sorry I'm having such difficulty forming the question properly.

Are you asking a question? Or are you deploying a series of rhetorical devices, to express your general skepticism that there is any conspiracy?

Or do you think there is a conspiracy, but that the Jesuits are innocent?

So it's actually Jerry who thinks President Trump is in on it (albeit as a non-Jesuit, Jesuit conspirator), while Richard thinks he is an unwitting "stooge."

I think we're both acknowledging that we are speculating about this, which is consistent with our view that there is no shibboleth that can always be used to make an absolutely reliable determination.

Jerry also indicates that one can be an "insider to the Jesuit conspiracy" without being "a Jesuit."

One could conceivably be an insider to the conspiracy as a whole, and thus have an understanding of the Jesuit role within it, without being a member of the Jesuit order. But that would not make such a person a Jesuit. The "Jesuit conspiracy" is the role of the Jesuit institution within the broader scheme. Our imaginary non-Jesuit insider would not be a direct participant in the specifically Jesuit operational aspect.

 

[Richard Stanley]

One could conceivably be an insider to the conspiracy as a whole, and thus have an understanding of the Jesuit role within it, without being a member of the Jesuit order. But that would not make such a person a Jesuit. The "Jesuit conspiracy" is the role of the Jesuit institution within the broader scheme. Our imaginary non-Jesuit insider would not be a direct participant in the specifically Jesuit operational aspect.

Yes, and one has to remember that not only the Jesuit order, but the very Church business corporation model exist for the benefit and profit for the elites created it and those who followed. Thus, any crony magnate who conforms to the underlying power agenda can theoretically be employed, wittingly or not.

The other day I watched a professoress from Georgetown University make a scathing critique of Trump. She is very likely being "on the level", as a good freemason would say. Not too hard to do. This is happening because it appears that the buffoonish Orange Beast from the Sea (Mar) looks like he might drown soon, as part of the script. Leaving choirboy Pence, the radical evangelical Catholic, in charge of the holy war.

 

[Marcilla Smith]

Are you asking a question? Or are you deploying a series of rhetorical devices, to express your general skepticism that there is any conspiracy?

You flatter me to think that I would have be in any position to do so. I am still trying to figure out the "who" in the theory's 5 w's.

Now that you mention it, though, is the theory necessarily conspiratorial? When you say something such as, "one could conceivably be an insider to the conspiracy... without being a member," it strikes me that the conspiracy may be a bit more nebulous than what I think of in other examples of conspiracy theories

It's the Silly Martian, Agent Smith, and neoPaulina.

Also a cryptoJoe of the cryptoJoe hivemind

 

[Jerry Russell]

When you say something such as, "one could conceivably be an insider to the conspiracy... without being a member,"

My complete statement was, "One could conceivably be an insider to the conspiracy as a whole, and thus have an understanding of the Jesuit role within it, without being a member of the Jesuit order." More specifically, I was imagining that such a person might be a high-level Freemason from Saudi Arabia, or a Kabbalist from Chabad Lubavitch, or a priestess in the OTO. None of those would be Jesuits by any definition, but they could be insiders to the conspiracy -- although I suspect that most members of all these organizations aren't "insiders".

it strikes me that the conspiracy may be a bit more nebulous than what I think of in other examples of conspiracy theories

This is an area where Rick and I have an ongoing discussion. I tend to see the whole thing as very nebulous and self-organizing, while he tends to think more in terms of a central, hereditary ruling committee which is ultimately lorded over by some hidden Black Pope with red hair.

Also a cryptoJoe of the cryptoJoe hivemind

Another ongoing debate. Are we important enough here at PF, that the central organizing committee has sent such as Joe Atwill, Agent Smith and Collectivist, all to confound us? Or have we attracted a nebulous, self-organized group of confused fellow travelers? I say it's the latter... even if Collectivist is working for some web brigade in the Kremlin basement, it's nothing against us personally. He just has a quota of so many hundred websites to hit up with anti-Semitic, pro-Trump propaganda....

 

[Richard Stanley]

This is an area where Rick and I have an ongoing discussion. I tend to see the whole thing as very nebulous and self-organizing, while he tends to think more in terms of a central, hereditary ruling committee which is ultimately lorded over by some hidden Black Pope with red hair.

I do take some exception to this though. I have elaborated a different model for some time, which I will briefly reiterate:

The central organizing concept of mine is the existence of a systemic, contiguous, agenda driven group of elites to gain (or possibly even regain, props to Plato et al.) world domination, for their benefit within the Platonic (aka Judeo-Christian) caste. Some of them, perhaps, delude themselves that the global caste system will be benevolent and dignified for all (as elaborated by Julius Evola, Nicholas DeVere, and others). Unfortunately, the historical record is the complete opposite, both in the Old World and the New World.

Here, it is my assertion that the group of 144,000 celibate, Hebrew master baiters are not really the masters, but just the baiters. And that the number 144K is merely symbolic. Their existence is somewhat ephemeral and their groups (known under various names) pop out of and back into the quantum foam as their masters deem expedient. To wit, the fake suppression of the celibate Templars, and the temporary (40 year) Disestablishment of the Jesuits. The latter used this Mosaic period to form the Bavarian Illuminati and to infiltrate such as the French Grand Orient Lodges, etc.. The Templars were merely merged into the Knights Hospitaler, which is now the Catholic order of the Knights of Malta (SMOM). These latter are also spread high into the American governmental elite polity.

As such, I DO NOT believe that the Black Pope, aka Papa Nero, is a supreme ruler, but rather that he is the corporate CEO of his limited operation. He answers to a cabal of elites. The question is just who comprises this ultimate cabal of elites? Is it like the Committee of 300, or is it the red-headed descendants of Ephraim and/or Esau.

Like paper money, the con system depends upon maintaining the confidence of the majority of people, even most who identify as secularists (who, importantly, are mostly still cultural Judeo-Christians).

There is, of course, yet another possible motivation to do all this, and that one is existential in nature. Yellowstone is generally due and Betsy DeVos cannot stop that grizzly. And thus all the historic hypocritical greed is just cynical enjoyment along the road to increasing the odds of survival of their gene pool.

 

[Jerry Russell]

I DO NOT believe that the Black Pope, aka Papa Nero, is a supreme ruler

I wasn't meaning to refer to the Superior General of the Jesuit Order, currently Arturo Sosa. He is presumably a limited executive, as Richard says. I meant, more broadly, that if there is some centralized "cabal of elites" -- then there is presumably some executive power associated with that cabal, vested in a commanding individual. Call him the Ultimate Black Pope, the Sith Lord, Master of the Universe, whatever. How could any cabal get anything accomplished, or maintain internal cohesiveness, without some single person vested with authority?

But, I'm not convinced that there is any such ultimate ruling cabal, or any such Master of the Universe. It might be that the overall situation is as chaotic as it generally seems to be. Perhaps the illusion of a central motivating design is the result a series of actions by brief coalitions that come into being for particular purposes, and then dissolve as the participants return to their respective groups.

 

[Richard Stanley]

Perhaps the illusion of a central motivating design is the result a series of actions by brief coalitions that come into being for particular purposes, and then dissolve as the participants return to their respective groups.

I think you're just trying to throw the Silly Martian an inside slider.

What about it all being meme driven? We have all been cucked, some directly and others indirectly, by a meme? The AT-ATs are being driven by a ME-ME.

 

[Jerry Russell]

What about it all being meme driven?

Somewhere over 80 generations of humans have been captive to the meme of the Judaic vs. Christian dialectic. Who is to say that the meme itself isn't more powerful than any living combination or coalition of humans? However, a meme is powerless without human beings to take it on as their own.

Another self-organizing aspect is that all elite managers, at the head of all these different entities, must realize at some point that they have strong common interests with other elites. In other words, treason to their own people is often highly profitable.

Furthermore, the elites generally enjoy excellent educations, and very possibly access to secret libraries. They might be much more likely to understand the difference between reality, and sectarian propaganda. Thus, elites would share a common ability to generate and exploit such propaganda for their own benefit.

 

[Richard Stanley]

I knew you would topple the ME-ME AT-AT straw argument. The meme is for the proles, created by the elites.

 

[Jerry Russell]

I knew you would topple the ME-ME AT-AT straw argument.

I didn't see anything toppling. Marcilla is going to be more confused than ever.