2015-12-25: The Last Christmas?

[Hervé]

What was in their mind when uttering:

"Our/Your last/final Christmas."

POPE FRANCIS: "OUR LAST CHRISTMAS"

On December 25, 2015, Pope Francis told crowds in St Peter's Square that "This may be our last Christmas."

"The current chaotic state of the world marks the beginning of the end times, and this time next year the world is likely to be unrecognisable." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Sq52zaUOWg)

During a Mass at the Casa Santa Maria earlier in the month, he said, "While the world starves, burns and descends further into chaos, we should realise that this year's Christmas celebrations for those who choose to celebrate it may be their last." (http://www.disclose.tv/news/wait_wha...umanity/125881)


Then there is this rumor:

QUEEN ELIZABETH: "YOUR FINAL CHRISTMAS"

Queen’s 2015 Christmas Message: “Enjoy Your Final Christmas”

"The Queen dropped a bombshell on December 24, while filming her annual Christmas Message for the BBC, hinting at deep personal regrets over the murder of Princess Diana, a BBC insider claims.

Clearly troubled, the Queen said, “She knew too much.” The Queen asked her subjects to understand that the Royal Family simply did what was necessary to ensure their own survival.

Senior BBC production staff and palace advisors scrambled to cancel the take, but not before the Queen expressed dark fears that this will be the last Christmas on earth because malevolent forces, much stronger than her own, are stalking across Europe, gaining ground every day.

“I hope you enjoy your final Christmas,” she said bitterly, before BBC staff, under strict orders from palace advisors, cancelled the take and sent junior staff on an early lunch.

Later in the day the Christmas message was re-done, the second take proving less troubling to the establishment. (http://beforeitsnews.com/terrorism/2...s-2456776.html -Friday, December 25, 2015; http://yournewswire.com/queens-2015-...nal-christmas/)

[xion]

Just to sum it all up in one word: Bull****

edit:

one question, why is the word s h i t censored?
Its a word as any other and its not an offensive word.
You look at s h i t everyday few times a day.

[Carmody]

that word and others like it are censored so Avalon does not begin the 'long, creeping, ego driven blanked out slide....' of turning into Reddit or God like Productions.

[Hervé]

Thanks for expressing your opinion, xion, at least you have one... now, does that opinion have any leg to stand on or was it issued from a squatting position?

[betoobig]

I knew the Pope said so, but i had no idea Queen Elisabeth said the same.... I bet they are both right. This has been their las Xmas.
Much love

[Jean-Marie]

Very interesting Herve! Viking pointed out in his thread this morning that the Mayan calendar might be off by 3.5 years because of the change in the number of days in our calendar. His thread suggested that the true end of the Mayan calendar could be this May/June time frame in 2016.

[lucidity]

Posted by Hervé (here)
What was in their mind when uttering:

"Our/Your last/final Christmas."

POPE FRANCIS: "OUR LAST CHRISTMAS"

On December 25, 2015, Pope Francis told crowds in St Peter's Square that "This may be our last Christmas."

"The current chaotic state of the world marks the beginning of the end times, and this time next year the world is likely to be unrecognisable." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Sq52zaUOWg)

During a Mass at the Casa Santa Maria earlier in the month, he said, "While the world starves, burns and descends further into chaos, we should realise that this year's Christmas celebrations for those who choose to celebrate it may be their last." (http://www.disclose.tv/news/wait_wha...umanity/125881)


Then there is this rumor:

QUEEN ELIZABETH: "YOUR FINAL CHRISTMAS"

Queen’s 2015 Christmas Message: “Enjoy Your Final Christmas”

"The Queen dropped a bombshell on December 24, while filming her annual Christmas Message for the BBC, hinting at deep personal regrets over the murder of Princess Diana, a BBC insider claims.

Clearly troubled, the Queen said, “She knew too much.” The Queen asked her subjects to understand that the Royal Family simply did what was necessary to ensure their own survival.

Senior BBC production staff and palace advisors scrambled to cancel the take, but not before the Queen expressed dark fears that this will be the last Christmas on earth because malevolent forces, much stronger than her own, are stalking across Europe, gaining ground every day.

“I hope you enjoy your final Christmas,” she said bitterly, before BBC staff, under strict orders from palace advisors, cancelled the take and sent junior staff on an early lunch.

Later in the day the Christmas message was re-done, the second take proving less troubling to the establishment. (http://beforeitsnews.com/terrorism/2...s-2456776.html -Friday, December 25, 2015; http://yournewswire.com/queens-2015-...nal-christmas/)

Herve,

It's not even remotely credible.

You offer two items of evidence.

(1) Queen Lizzie
(a) There is NO evidence to support this silly rumour that the queen was confessing to the
murder of Diana because "she knew too much". There is NO video of her saying that.
(b) There is no video clip that shows the queen saying "Final Christmas".

(2) Pope Francis
(a) Every xmas, some of the attendees will fail to make it to the next xmas. That happens every year.
Is the pope ill ? Is *he* not expecting to make it to the next xmas. Is this why he's saying "our last xmas" ?
(b) It's possible that the Pope believes this flim-flam about the end-times.
The fact that the Pope has been suckered in by this "The End of the World is Nigh" bullsh1t doesn't mean it's true.
The Pope is just an old geezer, he's as susceptible to scams and disaster porn as the next man.
The Pope is not god, he's just a fallible old bloke.

But if your belief in this "There will be no xmas in 2016" nonsense is devote,
then i offer you some attractive odds.
I'll offer you 10 to 1 that Xmas turns up, bang on cue, 25th December 2016.
Put 100 or 1000 dollars into escrow with me and i'll put 10 times your stake in.
Do we have a deal ?

There will be no WW3 in 2016.
There will be no Mayan Calendar event on 3rd of June 2016
There will be no spiritual ascension in 2016 (maybe for individuals, yes, but not for humanity as a whole)

The big news in 2016, hopefully, is that people will begin to realise that the alien agenda is hostile.

be happy

lucidity

[xion]

Posted by Hervé (here)
Thanks for expressing your opinion, xion, at least you have one... now, does that opinion have any leg to stand on or was it issued from a squatting position?

Do you really need more explanation from both those links you gave especially from Queen of England?
Pope said many things, but to hold that what he said like a gospel is idiotic.
Its like saying we're gonna forget Jesus from the next year and expect 2 bil people will say, ok sure, np.

And that rumor from old bat of England, like she is some kind of religious vertical and like what she says actually matters. Come on

[Hervé]

Well, will it be still named "Christmas" or will it regain its original denomination of "Saturnalia" or any other of the pagan festivals celebrating the Northern Hemisphere's Winter Solstice?

At the start of the OP there is this:

What was in their mind when uttering:

"Our/Your last/final Christmas."

Indeed, they may both have been thinking of not making it to the end of 2016?

... or else there is a serious psyop being "leaked."?

[Hervé]

Posted by Hervé (here)
[...]

"The current chaotic state of the world marks the beginning of the end times, and this time next year the world is likely to be unrecognisable." (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Sq52zaUOWg)

[...]

... because this one has been in preparation for a very long time:

"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other.

Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion… We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil.

Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view.

This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time."

Pike letter to Giuseppe Mazzini

[ghostrider]

Read beteen the lines - the two most powerful people on earth , make the same statments at the start of a new year... they are obviously planning something big ... the speculation door is open - its all bunk, it has a piece of truth , its more fearmongering , aliens make official contact, the world kicks off ww3, or nothing happens, in any case it could be the world will be so chaotic it won't feel like celebrating ...

[Hervé]

I moved the discussion on "Whose Agenda Is It?" started between viking and lucidity to this off shoot thread: Is The Alien Agenda Hostile Or Not? [Split from "2015-12-25: The Last Christmas"]

[RunningDeer]

Point One:

Grocery shopping. They’re banking on our innate creative abilities to build a better place for themselves. How? Mind games designed to entrain the masses and secure their energetic food bank by instilling fear of the unknown, war, destruction and entrapment of consent for them to control, oops, I..I mean take care of us poor little peons.

Oops, again…for the long sentence. Full disclosure, I’m missing the GripReaper. Sending out a wave just in case.

The bills are just coming in from this past Christmas and here they’re already programming the next one. People are wising up so they’ve got to go long and big with the non-stop BS. From one tiny perspective (emphasis on ‘tiny’), it’s good that people are asleep. They don’t contribute to the world creation that the trickers are try to have us mold for them.

Second point:

From the link you provided this is the next paragraph. My emphasis on "Unless the path to peace is recognized.":

“Unless the path to peace is recognised, we must weep for those innocent victims who grow by the day, and ask God for forgiveness. As Jesus and God weeps, I do too“ ( via rollingstone.com ).

[araucaria]

Regardless of the likelihood that we are dealing with a hoax regarding the queen of England – and whether that hoax is pure disinfo out of a blogger’s head or something containing a modicum of truth – there is a very real issue behind this. I am no legal expert, but I shall share my thoughts anyway. This is a matter too serious for the legal experts only.

We are talking about the crisis period when the frail human element begins to peel away from the power machine that is the monarchy, in this case when the little old lady is no longer fully in control. The head of state not being allowed to say what she means and mean what she says is like hearing Obama tell us what he is told to say about UFOs (as he did). Whether or not this actually happened as described, it certainly might have or might in the future. What this scenario suggests is a power struggle behind the throne: clearly no one is waiting in their starting-blocks for a vacancy to occur before making a move to claim the throne – nothing new there. If the queen were still as powerful as they say, then she could be putting her foot down and saying, paraphrasing Pontius Pilate, what I have said I have said; the speech goes out. So you have to ask who is so powerful that they can pull the queen’s speech in this way.

The meme of seamless continuity “the king is dead long live the king” is a myth; there are inevitably troubled times when even the most loyal subject will not know how his abstract loyalty to the monarchy translates in concrete terms to loyalty to this or that individual. This is important because if you follow the wrong person, that can turn into treason against the crown. What has changed in modern times is that the Windsors have established a monopoly on the crown; this means that the alternatives never extend beyond another family member, and anything else brings the threat of a constitutional crisis. However, in a constitutional monarchy, there is still a potential for divided loyalties inasmuch as loyalty to the crown can come into conflict with loyalty to We the people/the State/the Nation, whatever you want to call it – much as Americans are discovering that loyalty to the president/administration does not necessarily match loyalty to the Constitution.

In other words, there are two types of treason: against the Crown, and against the People. There is a third type, when the Crown and the People are at odds. The fact, established by legal precedent, is that the Crown can commit treason against the People, but the People can not commit treason against the Crown. Charles I was tried and executed in 1649 for waging civil war on his people; his “divine right of kings” was brushed aside in the process – that process being “due process”: in the courts, not the Court. This fact has gradually been eroded by a constitutional monarchy outwardly behaving itself, at least until now.

Bringing these considerations to the present situation, the two factions involved in this probable hoax seem to correspond to the divide in public opinion between having Charles succeed his mother or skipping a generation to the elder Spencer boy. The Queen’s apology would have come from listening too much to her grandson’s faction, while the backtracking would have been carried out by the incumbent Philip, presumably backing Charles. That would be a pretty obvious move, for it is one thing to be the presumed culprits; it is totally another to have the monarch herself accusing them on public record. People complain that the Crown courts are the instrument of the monarchy; if so, then no Crown court is going to overturn a guilty verdict reached by the Queen herself giving a whole new meaning to turning “Queen’s evidence”, which means “evidence given for the Crown by an accomplice in a crime against the other people charged with that crime” (Penguin English Dictionary). On the other hand, such a court case is never going to happen, simply because whoever the crown courts belong to at a given time will find it in their interest to hush the matter up.

The last time a matter of huge importance never went to court was of course the abdication of Edward VIII in 1936. As a Nazi, he was in full conflict with the elected government of the day, for whom the Nazi regime was still a World War I enemy failing to comply with armistice terms regarding reparations and disarmament, as well as a World War II enemy in the making. In other words, here was a case of treason by the monarch that should legally have been handled through the courts, of course with the inevitable constitutional crisis that would have ensued. Normally speaking, if your company is guilty of malpractices, you cannot paper over the situation by appointing your idiot brother CEO in your place. Understandably, a constitutional crisis was maybe an unaffordable luxury at a time when Hitler was breathing down one’s neck. Perhaps having a weak George VI with his handler Churchill in charge was the best stopgap solution. But keeping it all in the family did not stop there. The war was barely over when the Nazi Philip Battenberg was already consorting with the next in line, Elizabeth. I see him as Britain’s one-man Project Paperclip (although he would not be alone): with him, the Nazis had lost the war, but not really.

I tend to think that the Queen’s complicity in what followed was less willing than is generally considered among the alternative media. Constitutionally, she is not supposed to be in charge of anything. The gray area lies in how she is not being in charge: who exactly is in charge. The issue has become less relevant with successive increasingly obedient governments. Hence, one can be a loyal subject, loyal to the queen, but nonetheless disloyal by accepting the treason coming from her own entourage. This is the choice between the two types of treason that government has made: for the Crown, against the People. This leads to the ultimate absurdity whereby accepting the status quo makes We the people complicit with treason against We the people.

This brings us back to the original issue of Diana’s death. Murder investigations lead to suspecting Philip and the secret services. Diana’s own letters point to her ex-husband Charles. This purported statement by the queen alleges what amounts to treason against the Crown on Diana’s part. I doubt if summary execution is allowed by the country’s unwritten constitution; certainly it is a major breach of Human Rights. Even a traitor to the nation is entitled to due process and a fair trial. Of course, that could never be allowed to happen because “the people’s princess”’s defence would have been an indictment of Crown treason against We the people, and public opinion would have made sure that no whitewash was possible. Twenty years on, extreme prejudice by secret services, aka terrorism/the war on terror, has pretty much taken over from legal government in many parts of the world. Hence the Diana murder is something of a blueprint for what followed, which is why it is still of the utmost relevance to this day for the truth to come out.

This has to happen, because the incestuous monarchy has painted itself into a corner. Charles may or may not provide a brief ten- to twenty-year extension of the status quo after his mother, but the fact remains that Diana’s sons are the future of the monarchy. Their popularity also stems from their relative closeness to the people, which is in itself anti-traditional monarchy. Hence, the traditional pernicious in-breeding version is dying out regardless of what comes next. This situation is very similar to what we find in the Catholic Church. As I explained elsewhere, https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1027465 the very idea of a Jesuit Pope is an oxymoron. Francis is not an antipope in the traditional sense of an impostor alternative to the real pope: on the contrary, he has turned the “real” pope (Benedict) into an antipope. Since the prophecies of Malachi foresaw him as being the end of the papal line, this is maybe how it is playing out. And maybe a son of Diana can only play a similar role with respect to the monarchy. Look at it this way: for him to carry on with business as usual, he would either have to buy in to the story of a tragic car accident although surely having access to much more intelligence than the man in the street, or he would have to accept that Diana was murdered for reasons of state, in which case every minute of his reign would be implicit confirmation of his condemnation of his mother’s treason.

[Daughter of Time]

Chiming in a bit late here. I'm not on PA much these days but I've been wanting to reply to the OP.

While I don't believe at all that we'll stop celebrating Christmas (those of us who do celebrate it), privately, in our own homes, I do see the possibility of Christmas being forcibly removed from public celebrations if the Islamisation of the planet continues to gain momentum and eventually exert more control. I do hope this will not happen! There is much I could say about this but then the post would become political and derail from the topic, kind of.....

My mother is a native of Italy and now that she's older, she feels great nostalgia for her country. Since she's retired and spends most of her time at home, she subscribes to Italian Television channels, straight from Italy. She bitterly complains to me on a regular basis that Islam is taking Italy over, and this is the country that houses the Vatican!!!

Muslim residents of Italy have insisted on many changes they do not want their muslim children to be subjected to in school, namely:

- the removal of the crucifix in the classroom - I think this is a good thing, actually

- the removal of the Lord's prayer which used to be recited every morning

- the removal of the Christmas trees in schools

all of the above have been complied with!!!

Italians, for the most part, are beyond appalled!!!

I really have to bite my fingers to stop them from typing how I feel about it all.

In Canada, I do not see Christmas trees in office buildings any more, nor in libraries, nor in my own apartment building which used to exhibit a beautiful, tall Christmas tree every year. Now we get a poinsettia!!!

Need I say more...

And before I am accused of derailing this thread, I will stop.

[Hervé]

Thanks, Daughter of Time, for that insight into Italy's "awakening"...

I remember that debate, when still in Toronto, about Christmas trees in Government buildings... due to the complaints of the devotees of yet another faith...

[Tangri]

Just a reminder;

Most of the Christmas avoider company owners are not Muslim. Please pay attention to other population part, to find out how this Phenomenon started.

PS: there is another holiday around in those days.

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by Tangri (here)
...

PS: there is another holiday around in those days.

Saturnalia? ... if you want to go waaay back.

[Hervé]

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)

Posted by Tangri (here)
...
PS: there is another holiday around in those days.

Saturnalia? ... if you want to go waaay back.

Yep! See post # 9

[DeDukshyn]

Posted by Hervé (here)

Posted by DeDukshyn (here)

Posted by Tangri (here)
...
PS: there is another holiday around in those days.

Saturnalia? ... if you want to go waaay back.

Yep! See post # 9

Thanks, I missed that. Exactly what I was thinking.