bernard Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 (edited) Don't know if you folks have ever heard of the white smoke coming out of the Sistine Chapel in 1958, 2 days before Pope John XXIII became Pope. This video series tries to make the case that there was some foul play going on, and that another guy was actually elected first. All the changes did seem to start right after that Conclave. I'm interested to hear what people around here think about this. Here is the conclusion/summary of the video series. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8wdrmFxSBQ[/media] Edited August 11, 2011 by bernard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peach_cube Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 No chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG45 Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I'll go with Brother Adam in saying "no chance". Though if white smoke *did* come out earlier, the oven could have malfunctioned. We saw something along those lines in Pope Benedict XVI's election, where the consistency was off on one set of ballots and the media was going "It looks kinda white, or is it black? I don't know! It's all grey!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 11, 2011 Author Share Posted August 11, 2011 Ha! It's always nice to see people put aside their differences. There was an earlier section where they explain the white smoke though. There have always been ambiguous signals but this one was consistent, and lasted for 4 or 5 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 11, 2011 Author Share Posted August 11, 2011 Her's the part about thee smoke http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQp00j4H3Kg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 off-topic posts being moved. play nice, people. i mean it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigi Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I belive it. I absolutely believe it. I believe every bit of it. Krushcev and his successors have controlled the whole thing - the election of John XXIII, the Kennedy assassination (as a result of Kennedy "winning" the Cuban missle crisis), the assassinations of Bobby Kennedy & Martin Luther King, Jackie Kennedy marrying Aristotle Onassis, Nixon's resignation, the Cardinals' World Series loss to Kansas City on the bad umpire call, the assassination of John Paul I so they could replace him with their Communist-puppet-who-looked-like-an-antiCommunist, forcing Bush 41 to accept Dan Quayle as his vice president, Clinton 'mysteriously' being introduced to Monica Lewinsky (and his subsequent impeachment trial), the election of Obama (and the covert destruction of his Kenyan birth certificate), forcing Obama to accept Hilary Clinton as his Secretary of State (she takes her orders [i]directly[/i] from the Kremlin), and the cancelling of "Everybody Loves Raymond." I also believe that monkeys might fly out of my tuchus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='Luigi' timestamp='1313124914' post='2286408'] I belive it. I absolutely believe it. I believe every bit of it. Krushcev and his successors have controlled the whole thing - the election of John XXIII, the Kennedy assassination (as a result of Kennedy "winning" the Cuban missle crisis), the assassinations of Bobby Kennedy & Martin Luther King, Jackie Kennedy marrying Aristotle Onassis, Nixon's resignation, the Cardinals' World Series loss to Kansas City on the bad umpire call, the assassination of John Paul I so they could replace him with their Communist-puppet-who-looked-like-an-antiCommunist, forcing Bush 41 to accept Dan Quayle as his vice president, Clinton 'mysteriously' being introduced to Monica Lewinsky (and his subsequent impeachment trial), the election of Obama (and the covert destruction of his Kenyan birth certificate), forcing Obama to accept Hilary Clinton as his Secretary of State (she takes her orders [i]directly[/i] from the Kremlin), and the cancelling of "Everybody Loves Raymond." I also believe that monkeys might fly out of my tuchus. [/quote] Do you believe... JFK RFK MLK John Lennon Gandhi and Reagan were all shot by deranged loners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peach_cube Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313102112' post='2286169'] Her's the part about thee smoke [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQp00j4H3Kg[/media] [/quote] Again, no chance. When Pius XII was elected the smoke was also confusing, so it must not quite as simple as this video leads others to believe. Yet, I do not see them questioning his election. Why is that? These people want Vatican II to be invalid, they will twist the facts to meet that agenda because the truth scares them. Besides asserting that the whole smoke issue is irrefutable evidence of Siri being elected (which of course is easily refuted), they give two other sources; Paul L. Williams and Malachi Martin. Now Paul L. Williams "evidence" is being presented as truth and ignores any ulterior motives that he might have, like perhaps selling books. He also asserts in the same book that is quoted as "truth" that Pius XII is in the Nazi's control, and acts as "Hitler's Pope." This of course has been refuted time and time again, which seems to make Mr. Williams a poor source. Malachi Martin, is left as the only "true source, " the same person who stated that Pius XI and John Paul I were murdered. Now Martin asserts that Siri was elected on 2 possible 3 ballots, and according to him neither of these was the 1958 conclave (which is contrary to how it presented in the video). He states that is was at the 1963 conclave and the October 1978 conclave. Weather or not you consider the statements of this one person to be true or not, you see that they do not support the idea that Cardinal Siri was elected at the 1958 conclave. Therefore we are left with no sources that actually support this conspiracy theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peach_cube Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Ugh. Excuse my horrific typos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG45 Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Peach Cube said it better than I (Got the name right this time!). If one has to question one confusing smoke, then one must question them all. Not just the one that happened with a man who convened the Second Vatican Council. As an aside, John XXIII was really a man of the people. He was born in a large and poor farming family; his mother upon seeing his Bishop's ring once is reputed to have remarked that she wouldn't ever kiss it because she gave birth to him. Though I must admit my favorite tale of him is that he answered his own letters from children...a little boy asked him if he should become a policeman or the Pope when he grew up. John XXIII replied along the lines of, 'both are noble professions called to sacrifice and any man can be Pope one day, just look at me.' And yes, I do believe all those men were shot by deranged loners. The most dangerous thing in the world, as any bodyguard will tell you, is a person willing to give his or her life for the target. One person, for better or worse, can change the face of history. Those are all examples for the worst, whereas I prefer to think of the "for better" category where the Son of God gave His life for the salvation of humanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard Posted August 12, 2011 Author Share Posted August 12, 2011 But this wasn't confusing smoke. It was an unambiguous 5 minute signal. We're not talking about a puff here and a puff there. And as far as John XXIII, as soon as he got in he called that council, saying he was spontaneously inspired, I'm starting to think that the Church might have been hijacked at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313186528' post='2286635'] And as far as John XXIII, as soon as he got in he called that council, saying he was spontaneously inspired, I'm starting to think that the Church might have been hijacked at this point. [/quote] So Jesus was wrong, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313152330' post='2286486'] Do you believe... JFK RFK MLK John Lennon Gandhi and Reagan were all shot by deranged loners. [/quote] Do you believe otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peach_cube Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 [quote name='bernard' timestamp='1313186528' post='2286635'] But this wasn't confusing smoke. It was an unambiguous 5 minute signal. We're not talking about a puff here and a puff there. And as far as John XXIII, as soon as he got in he called that council, saying he was spontaneously inspired, I'm starting to think that the Church might have been hijacked at this point. [/quote] Then you are a fool. There is no evidence, the two sources that are cited for your idea one of them (Martin) does not support it at all, and Williams has been shown false on other assertions in his book, therefore making his "insider" knowledge questionable at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts