Meeting On The Fatima Bridge: Catholics and Non Catholics-- Commentary By Simon Miles
"It is necessary to examine this topic without treating it as so holy that it cannot be questioned, nor so marginal that it doesn't matter."
The Fatima events are a very strange business. There is a certain critical perspective which has rarely been brought to analysing the topic because of the unusual position it occupies: for those within the Catholic Church, the events are part of the furniture and treated with, at the very least, a holy respect. Outside the Catholic Church, no one is particularly invested or interested and it all seems like some weird culty thing that happened that doesn't really matter. I think both positions miss something crucial. It is necessary to examine this topic without treating it as so holy that it cannot be questioned, nor so marginal that it doesn't matter. Let's plunge right in. The place to begin is the so-called assassination attempt on John Paul II on May 13 1981, the Feast Day of Our Lady of Fatima. You can try this at home: google as many photos of the event as you like, and try to find a single spot of blood in the Popemobile. The pope was struck four times by bullets and was said to have suffered significant blood loss. He was wearing a white cassock. So before you look at the photos, just have a think about it. Should there be some blood? Or no blood at all? Now that you've thought about it, check out the photos. And the winner is: no blood. Not a drop. Read about it, and all the accounts have blood sloshing around the in the PopeMobile, blood everywhere, so much blood. But look at those photos. Not a drop. I understand how tough this is to swallow, but the assassination was a fake event. They wouldn't get away with it now because there would be way too many pictures. Later, in 2000, they released a fake version of the third secret, tying it to the 'miraculous' events of the fake assassination. There is some very deep deception at play here in the highest levels of the Catholic Church. And now we are seeing the end-game. If Malachi Martin was correct, that the real third secret was about the satanic corruption of the last pope, then one can perhaps begin to understand the motivation for the Church to suppress this secret and replace it with another. Which is what happened. If I am correct. Or if my eyes do not deceive me when I see not a single drop of blood in the Popemobile. So now we are seeing the final phase of this deception playing out. With the last pope now making a play to activate that final secret. We have lies within lies within lies. Something happened at Fatima in 1917. It was not nothing, as the secular world might think. But neither was it the holy thing that the Catholic church wants to think. And whatever it was, it has been hijacked as part of a diabolical plot at the highest levels, a spiritual deception. And here we are, 2022, and the final act it seems about to play out.
—Simon Miles, (submitted as comment, on this thread.)
Imagine my surprise waking up to see my comment elevated to its own post! Thank you Celia. A couple of brief comments:
- I take on board the comments about lack of blood being consistent with handgun wounds. OK, but my point was that all of the accounts of the day in print make a big play of how much blood was lost, and how much blood there was in the Popemobile. If those accounts are scientifically inaccurate, then it is those writers which need to have this pointed out to them. Personally, it surprises me that a person dressed in all white could take four bullets and not show any blood. But who knows.
- The main issue for me is not so much whether or not the assassination was faked, but the fact that most certainly the events were then tied in with the Fatima prophecies. Perhaps it was just a co-incidence that it took place on the Feast Day. Perhaps also, who knows, the bullet which nearly nicked his aorta was really deflected at the last moment by the hand of Our Lady of Fatima, as the Pope claimed. As a non-catholic, I find this explanation untenable, but I don't want to insult anyone's beliefs. But there is no question that this event was then presented to the world by the Vatican as connected to the Fatima apparitions. Now, there is a long dishonourable history of shamans and other religious leaders throughout history using apparent fulfilment of prophecy to extract certain behaviours from their flock, including some famous examples.
- I take Malachi Martin to be a truth-teller. I listened to those Art Bell interviews when they first came out. I take Malachi Martin's comments on the Third Secret to be very interesting and I'm inclined to believe what he says. But if he is correct, then the Vatican's release of the Third Secret in 2000 was certainly a false move. These are difficult points to make. I understand we are dealing with sensitive matters. But something stinks about all this.
- When Joh XXIII read the Third Secret, the blood was said to have drained from his face. Yet, there is nothing in the so-called Secret released in 2000 that would cause anyone to react in such a way.
- There is so much more strangeness to this event, which has escaped scrutiny. I suggest the reason is as I intimated in the comment yesterday. Within the Catholic Church there is a reluctance to subject this to what must seem like impious speculation. Outside the Catholic Church, people just snigger about all this. Sorry, but it's true. The usual approach is simply to dismiss what happened in 1917 as some kind of fraud, but quite clearly that is not the case. The Times of London sent their own correspondent, who was amongst the crowd of over 70,000 who watched the sun put on a very strange display in the sky, spinning and gyrating wildly. Something happened that day at the very limit of normal reality.
-All of this is germane to what is reported to be happening on March 25. Clearly there is some kind of long term strategy at play here. Clearly there is some kind of deception, even if it turns out the speculation about the fake assassination is unfounded. But even then: the Church claims that they took the magic bullet which was deflected by the Hand of Our Lady of Fatima, and welded it into the crown of her statue. Except that there are close-up photos of the bullet and it is in perfectly pristine condition, and clearly was not ever fired from a gun. So there is a little white lie here about the bullet. Does it not strike the listened as somewhat weird anyway to weld the bullet into her crown? But that's going off topic.
- So the main point I want to make is the use and abuse of prophecy as a tool for control of the masses, and the very strange manner in which the Church has co-opted the Third Secret and assimilated it to the events in St Peter's Square on May 13 1981, and the release of the false secret in 2000. Something stinks here. And yet, to return to my theme, this entire topic falls between the cracks of, one the one hand, the Church faithful understandable reluctant to question these events as they seem to have the stamp of the Pope's authority, and on the other hand, those outside the Church to take all of this seriously and not simply write it all off as some kind of tooth-fairy style delusion. I mean no offence, and hope I have not made any, but I do think this whole topic could do with some hard analysis.
Anything that takes your eyes off Jesus as the way, the truth and the life is a distraction Satan uses. The Bible says even satan can appear as an angel of light.