ITCCS: Eyewitness to 1987 ritual say's “I Saw Joseph Ratzinger Murder Little Girl”

DrunkYogi

Remember this?

I'm happy to discuss any 'beefs' with Catholicism with the exception of one. I respectfully request that we leave out questions of pedophilia and Church cover-up of same. Why? Because there is no need for debate. It was and is heinous. In addition, it is covered in other threads. So, what are your thoughts on Catholicism?

You should, you wrote it? "So what are you thought's on Catholicism" WHAT! let's ignore the Child abuse.
"Because there is no need for debate" You can't just leave out Child Abuse and go forward with a debate on the Catholic Church. That's just insane. It would be incredibly self serving and bereft of intellectual honesty don't you think?

Sure I remember that. Thanks for reading the thread. I'm not sure what the relevance is. I thought that it was pretty clear that the request was in regards to that specific thread. This isn't that thread. Nor are the many, many other threads regarding Catholicism that I've participated in, many of which having a discussion of the pedophilia scandals.

Eric

Now, if you read that carefully, he didn't say that "pedophilia was normal", or that he thought "pedophilia was normal", he said that, for a time, society was acting like it was, and he was denouncing that fact. Was he right?

reply to post by adjensen


No! I can't ever remember a time when society was acting as if Pedophilia was normal. Can you?

In May 1974, the Campaign for Homosexual Equality suggested a basic age of consent of 16, but 12 "in cases where a defendant could prove the existence of meaningful consent". In September 1974, the Sexual Law Reform Society proposed lowering the age of consent to 14, with the requirement that below the age of 18 the burden of proof that consent for sexual activities between the parties existed would be the responsibility of the older participant. In 1976, the British political pressure group Liberty published a proposal advocating reducing the age of consent laws to 10 years of age, only when both individuals are younger than 14, with a close-in-age exemption of two years if one of the involved individuals is older than 14 but younger than 16. The report was signed by Harriet Harman, who later went on to become a prominent figure in government and deputy leader of the Labour Party.

A few groups don't represent a society, that's ridiculous. Here are more groups of people that don't represent society....

I love the smell of Petrol
I hate kids with rolling back packs
An episode of Spongebob Squarepants changed my life
I push the cross walk button numerous times because it’s fun.

blog.chron.com...

So no it kinda sounds like he's a bit thick!

reply to post by DrunkYogi


Again, set aside your biases, and read what the Pope said, not what it was spun to appear to be. He did not say that pedophilia was normal.

AliceBleachWhite
FYI:

EDIT: ATS Staff - Regardless the legitimacy or more appropriately the questionability of such with ITCCS, as prolific as Kevin D. Annett is in making these wild claims (and fooling ATS members into believing them as coming from real legal authority), I'm making formal request we have a separate forum for ITCCS (and similar organizations like Westboro) claims.

edit on 10/30/2013 by AliceBleachWhite because: (no reason given)

Sure, as long as it's Ad Hominem. But i doubt that somehow!

godlover25
reply to post by AliceBleachWhite

 

Thank you for dispelling lies with Truth,

God bless you for that,

on a funnier side note, I was reminded of those sensationalist "tabloids" in the supermarket checkouts of old, the "7 toed alien baby of Madonna comes out" or "big foot seen at local KFC", etc, I think these folks just figure if something sounds outrageous enough, then maybe enough people will pay a little money or donation to continue hearing about this things, so it's monetarily worth their time to keep the stories coming, even if it means publicly embarrasing themselves and being known as whack-a-doo's. Oh well,

Such is life, such is the human condition,

God bless

Oh stop! Please, my sides are splitting!

I saw Kevin Annett's original video on abuse of aboriginal children in residential schools and I found the story he told very credible and moving. Here it is:



Having said that I do wonder how seriously the International Court of Common Law even takes itself when they can hold a trial of a former Pope, convict him of murder and not put a transcript of the trial on their website.

If someone has a link to that transcript, I would like to read it. A transcript is necessary if the proceedings and the testimony given at the trial are to be given serious consideration and analysis.

Running a somewhat sensationalist website is not enough.

ipsedixit
I saw Kevin Annett's original video on abuse of aboriginal children in residential schools and I found the story he told very credible and moving. Here it is:

Having said that I do wonder how seriously the International Court of Common Law even takes itself when they can hold a trial of a former Pope, convict him of murder and not put a transcript of the trial on their website.

If someone has a link to that transcript, I would like to read it. A transcript is necessary if the proceedings and the testimony given at the trial are to be given serious consideration and analysis.

Running a somewhat sensationalist website is not enough.

The video is very disturbing! How people can sweep these matters under the carpet is even more disturbing. Isn't it strange that when anyone releases any information regarding anything illegal by Governments or Religious Institutions they are immediately smeared as nuts or loony or insane. When this actually happens it makes me look twice at the story because it's the same old tactics these people have been using for years. The tactics are in fact so similar that you would think that there was some sort of behind the scene collusion going on.

reply to post by DrunkYogi


I think that you're missing the point.

Those of us who are opposed to Kevin Annett are not denying that abuses of First Nations people didn't take place, or that those who did such things should not be held accountable. We're opposed to Kevin Annett because he is a crackpot who DETRACTS from those issues with his craziness. When someone lies, sensationalizes and abuses others in the name of some noble cause, they do a disservice to that cause, and that's what we're objecting to.

For an unbiased observer, if they were to come across this thread, see how crazy and unlikely the claims made in the OP are and rightly associate them with the ITCCS and subsequently learn about First Nations abuses and also see that they are associated with the ITCCS, don't you think that they would be inclined to dismiss those abuse claims?

Hmm. He was a member of the Hitler Youth, and despite his family being ardent non-Nazis, perhaps he was brainwashed to such an extent that he carried certain ideals with him into adulthood. It should be noted that once a WWII-era German boy reached a certain age, 14 I think, membership in the Hitler Youth was compulsory. I am not saying this as proof that he was a bad man, rather I am just pointing out that it is possible that he believed certain things, privately, things which stemmed directly from the techniques used on these young children by the Nazi regime.

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


Sure, it's definitely possible.

It's also possible that he's a Reptillian.
It's also possible that he's actually a Protestant who was trying to take down the RCC from the inside.
It's also possible that he never existed and was actually a cgi creation.

Since there is no evidence to support any of that or of your suppositions, it's specious and idle speculation.

Eric

reply to post by AliceBleachWhite


I agree with the idea of a separate forum dedicated to this subject. I keep wondering why Kevin hasn't been arrested for what even he himself has called 'treason'. There are a lot of questions here that need to be asked, but the people asking them (including myself) are under severe attack for asking them...

stopkevinannett.wordpress.com...

reply to post by ipsedixit


Might I suggest writing Kevin Annett at [email protected] to request the 'transcript'.

reply to post by DrunkYogi


Few people are sweeping this under the rug, so to speak, Kevin just makes it seem that way. And when he does that he invalidates the work of First Nations activists, researchers, Elders who on a daily basis work in humility and with integrity to help people where they live and in their hearts. Kevin is a showman....whose interests does that serve?

"So did you watch the video? Did you hear the eyewitness account's?

"I guess the Native Indians are just liars eh! Remember Annett was defrocked because of this. He was a Priest at the time. If he was still a Priest we would be encouraged to believe every word he say's.....now he's been defrocked (can't have a Priest blacken the Church eh!) he is supposed to be a monstrous a liar, a spinner of tales from the Devil himself. I mean just listen to yourself, wake up! "

Kevin used the testimonies of victims without their permission.... The Circle of Justice, which Kevin claims he formed was an organization working with IHRAAM, which Kevin also infiltrated... he got himself invited to the first ever legitimate Tribunal into these crimes. He then started a smear campaign between certain attendees and the infighting began. This tension he caused, plus the theft of videotaped and audiotaped testimonies got him thrown out of the 'Circle of Justice'.. Consider this carefully.... Kevin Annett has been part of nearly 20 grass-roots movements... when he joins them he highly publicises their work, does numerous interviews and raises their visibility. Then he creates division and when the people question him on his behavior he publicly smears them AND THEIR ORGANIZATION.... Now doesn't that sound like an agent provocateur?

And for the record, did you know that Kevin would not even submit to being asked questions in front of the BC United Church panel after 25 plus hours of ranting and raving at them? ...the same kind of behavior he exhibited while preaching from the pulpit. People wanted to hear some biblical teaching that could enrich their lives...not Kevin's political beliefs. He was a turn off for most people and a magnet for the activists who were desperate to elevate their cause...a really bad combination that came back to bite most of those activists in their 'reputations'. Even Dr. Jennifer Wade was not immune from being called a liar by him...yet he still uses her 'video testimony' as a personal reference of his credibility.... Incredible..lol.

"ITCCS isn't shy about making things up, and blowing its horn for everyday people to serve out citizen arrest warrants over imaginary crimes."

"One of these days some nutter that actually believes and takes stock in the ITCCS claims is going to get hurt."

David Compan (UK), Steve Finney & Amy Smart (CAN), Rhianne Baines(UK) are just the start...

reply to post by mysaskcan


Wrong thread -- the latest round of idiocy (including the claim that the APTN is a "Satanic organization") is over here:

Historic Breaking News: Canada, Vatican & Crown GUILTY of Genocide (18 pages in)