It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Shema
Invited to join in this instance means to be invited to make an application to be accepted as a member. Are you suggesting this never happens?
Originally posted by Skyfloating
Originally posted by Trafalgar1805
They are called "Angelos".
This is the very first time ever Ive heard the A's publicly referenced. Don't you think mentioning them is a little dangerous?
Originally posted by Logarock
By the way do you mind saying why you were approached as a teenager?
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
I love the life of quotes. I have seen this several dozen different ways, some to praise the Jesuits and others to condemn them. Most authors use the word "alleged" when attributing the quote to the Jesuits or one of their members -- St. Ignatius of Loyola, the found of the Society of Jesus (Jesuits) or St. Francis Xavier, first missionary to India who assisted Ignatius in the formation of the Jesuits.
"Give me the child, and I will mould the man."
"Give me the child for seven years,
and I will give you the man."
"Give me the child until he is
seven and I care not who has him thereafter."
"Give me the child till the age of seven
and I will show you the man."
There is a great documentary on the subject with an accompanying book: "7 Up: 'Give Me the Child Until He is Seven, and I Will Show You the Man'" by Michael Apted, Bennett L. Singer who have followed their subjects for nearly forty years with subsequent films and books.
Baltasar Gracian was a Spanish Jesuit scholar who lived from 1601 till 1658.
The French Revolution began in 1789. From all accounts the most influential Jesuit was Henri Gregoire, considered the most educated of the cures because he had traveled further from their small parish which gave him a broader knowledge of the world. An award-winning essayist, he helped draw up the civil constitution of the clergy, considered the single most important passage in his life. However there has never been any evidence to indicate the Jesuits were directly involved in the Revolution.
For more information, see:
A History of the French Revolution
by Henry Morse Stephens
books.google.com...,M1
Here are some Baltazar quotes...
www.wingo.com...
Originally posted by FreedomEntered
But there are many branches of the Illuminati.So I think its unfair to say the freemasons, or skulls and bones or any one group is responsible. I think its like a family of societies, that slowly go toward the plan. And its the case that these societies induct people into the families ways.
Originally posted by Shema
Are you Skyfloating's mouthpiece?
Originally posted by Shema
There are certain positions in life at the very top where you would never arrive on your own without the approval and support of the Freemason fraternity.
Originally posted by Trafalgar1805
Originally posted by Logarock
By the way do you mind saying why you were approached as a teenager?
It appears they know something about me that I don't. It seems I am in need of reminding. No, I wasn't a pop star.edit on 7-2-2013 by Trafalgar1805 because: (no reason given)edit on 7-2-2013 by Trafalgar1805 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Trafalgar1805
They approach you long before you are in a position to infuence events. They approached me in about 1985 when I was 15 or 16, and I refused to sign up to the Agenda. When I say sign, I literally mean sign a piece of paper. I have got nowhere in life because the buggers have watched and shadowed me all my life and I refuse to cooperate. One clause in the paper to sign was a homosexual clause to create a same-sex future society, and that was overwhelmingly 99.99% of the reason why I didn't sign.
Contrast my position with that of British Prime Minister David Cameron, who has gone against at least 50% of his own political party to support homosexual marriage. That is an insane move for any political career. He obviously thought homosexuals were in a stronger position to remove him from power than his own party. David Cameron most certainly signed the Agenda. Despite the fact that Cameron did what homosexuals want, they won't protect him when his party decides to get rid of him - Cameron has served his purpose and is of no further value to the same-sex Agenda.edit on 6-2-2013 by Trafalgar1805 because: (no reason given)edit on 6-2-2013 by Trafalgar1805 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Eurofile007
Originally posted by Trafalgar1805
They approach you long before you are in a position to infuence events. They approached me in about 1985 when I was 15 or 16, and I refused to sign up to the Agenda. When I say sign, I literally mean sign a piece of paper. I have got nowhere in life because the buggers have watched and shadowed me all my life and I refuse to cooperate. One clause in the paper to sign was a homosexual clause to create a same-sex future society, and that was overwhelmingly 99.99% of the reason why I didn't sign.
Contrast my position with that of British Prime Minister David Cameron, who has gone against at least 50% of his own political party to support homosexual marriage. That is an insane move for any political career. He obviously thought homosexuals were in a stronger position to remove him from power than his own party. David Cameron most certainly signed the Agenda. Despite the fact that Cameron did what homosexuals want, they won't protect him when his party decides to get rid of him - Cameron has served his purpose and is of no further value to the same-sex Agenda.edit on 6-2-2013 by Trafalgar1805 because: (no reason given)edit on 6-2-2013 by Trafalgar1805 because: (no reason given)
Why does the Illuminati want a same sex world? Why do they hate two genders? Isn't that the way of most species? Why do they hate masculinity and femininity?
Don't the Illuminati enjoy sex too?
Why would anyone join them if they backstab their own members like that?
Like as with the CIA, haven't they had a history of betraying their own, like when they framed Oswald (who worked for the CIA) for assassinating President Kennedy? If so, why would any CIA agent trust their own organization? Don't they know they could be framed or betrayed by their own network?
Kind of like how in movies, the bad guys shoot each other when they no longer need them so they can get a bigger share of the loot? That never made any sense, because if the leader in a gang of criminals shoots his own men after he doesn't need them anymore, why would the rest of the gang still be loyal to him since they know they will be disposed of as soon as they are not needed anymore? That's so implausible.