Esto me intriga. La primera vez que quise orientar un telescopio en Bariloche me encontré con que las calles del centro, que parecen correr de norte a sur, en realidad están un poco rotadas hacia el sudoeste-noreste. ¿Cuánto? Entre 7 y 8 grados, como podemos ver en Google Earth (podemos hoy, cuando lo descubrí no existía Earth). No parece mucho, pero para la puesta en estación de un telescopio astronómico es bastante. Así que las calles no servían, y hay que usar una brújula para acomodar la montura aproximadamente hacia el norte. Así que me compré una brújula, y resultó que ¡la brújula sí apuntaba exactamente en dirección de las calles!
El fenómeno se llama declinación magnética: el campo magnético terrestre, que se origina en las profundidades del planeta, no está exactamente alineado con el eje de rotación. Para complicar las cosas esta declinación no es la misma en toda la superficie de la Tierra. Hoy en día podemos averiguar la declinación magnética usando esta calculadora del NOAA. Vemos que en Bariloche corresponde a la inclinación de las calles.
OK, me dije. Seguro que cuando trazaron las calles a principios del siglo XX usaron una brújula y les quedó así. ¿Quién lo habría hecho? ¿Carlos Wiederhold, el "fundador" no oficial de Bariloche? Parece que no. Hace poco leí una nota en el diario local El Cordillerano, donde se cuenta que un capitán del ejército, Mariano Fósbery, hizo construir en 1902 una comisaría, un juzgado de paz, un cuartel y trazó las calles originales. Fósbery era jefe del escuadrón de caballería estacionado en San Martín de los Andes, y fue enviado a la costa sur del Nahuel Huapi, donde desde 1895 venía estableciéndose una pequeña población alrededor de la primera casa y almacén construidos por Don Carlos. El 3 de mayo de ese año el Presidente Roca destinó 400 hectáreas para el pueblo de San Carlos, fecha que celebramos hoy en día como cumpleaños de Bariloche. ¿Puede haber sido el capitán Fósbery, en su celo militar, quien trazó las calles brújula en mano? Parecía una explicación lógica.
Finalmente descubrí que no era posible. El campo magnético de la Tierra va cambiando. Sabemos inclusive que a intervalos irregulares, cada tantas decenas de miles de años el campo se invierte. Y 100 años son suficientes para percibirlo. En el mismo NOAA puede consultarse la declinación magnética del pasado. Para la región del Nahuel Huapi, en el año 1902, se veía así. La línea resaltada en amarillo, que pasa cerca de Bariloche, es de 17 grados. ¡Mucho más que ahora! Así que me queda la duda del origen de los 8 grados de declinación de las calles. Hoy mismo la declinación en mi casa es de 6.6 grados, casi un grado menos que en el 2000 cuando noté el fenómeno.
¿En algún lado el norte verdadero coincidirá con el magnético? Claro que sí. La línea de cero grados de declinacón magnética cruza la Argentina en diagonal, desde Mendoza hasta el Golfo San Matías. Los afortunados astrónomos que viven sobre ella pueden usar sus brújulas para acomodar sus telescopios.
Este tramado de líneas se va moviendo lentamente hacia el oeste. Dentro de 50 años el cero estará sobre Bariloche. ¡Yupi!
“…El 21 de julio, Evita descendió de su avión en Orly, vestida de blanco, con un sombrero de paja del mismo color, sonriente y un poco pálida. A los pies de la escalerilla, el ministro de Relaciones Exteriores, Georges Bidault, le besó la mano y luego la saludaron el embajador argentino en París, Julio Victorica Roca, y varios embajadores latinoamericanos. Un cortejo de cuarenta coches la acompañó hasta el Hotel Ritz, donde un grupo de niños le presentó un ramo de flores y Bidault se despidió. Como símbolo de la importancia que el gobierno francés daba a su persona, puso a su disposición el auto que había pertenecido al general Charles de Gaulle, el mismo que usaba sir Winston Churchill en sus visitas oficiales a París. Además, durante la estadía la Argentina y Francia firmaron un tratado comercial por el cual este país recibiría un abultado crédito para la compra de trigo y carne. La ceremonia tuvo lugar en el Quai D’Orsay, y finalizada la misma, Bidault condecoró a Evita con la Legión de Honor. Al día siguiente de su llegada, Evita fue recibida por el presidente Vincent Auriol en el castillo de Rambouillet, donde le ofreció un almuerzo…” (Evita. Marysa Navarro)
VIDEO Evita llega a Francia Eva Perón arriba al aeropuerto de Orly y es recibida por el Canciller Georges Bidault. Duración 1 minuto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7NjQBNsCWc
VIDEO Evita en Francia. Eva Perón visita el castillo de Rambouillet, en Francia para almorzar con el presidente Vincent Autiol. Duración 3 minutos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSzwYgMeSuU
Hacendado, era dueño de un haras de caballos en Balcarce, ciudad donde presidió el comité local de la Unión Cívica Radical (UCR) y donde fue comisionado municipal.15
Durante el gobierno de Juan Domingo Perón, fue designado embajador especial para asistir al acto de asunción del presidente chileno Gabriel González Videla en 1946, y al año siguiente fue nombrado embajador en Francia, cargo que ejerció hasta 1949.1 En su período en París, acompañó la visita oficial de Eva Perón en 1947, y firmó con el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores Georges Bidault un convenio comercial y financiero.78
Posteriormente fue director del Banco Argentino de Comercio.1
VIDEO | 22 de Julio de 1947: Evita es recibida por Vicent Auriol, el presidente de Francia
Tuvo una agenda bastante apretada, con importantes reuniones para firmar acuerdos internacionales.
La “Gira del Arco Iris” de Evita por Europa y Sudamérica se realizó con el objetivo de fortalecer relaciones en el exterior, en un contexto de post Segunda Guerra Mundial. La primera dama fue enviada por Juan Domingo Perón para representar al gobierno peronista y al país. En primer lugar, llegó a España, donde se entrevistó con el general Francisco Franco y miles de españoles se rindieron a sus pies. Después se instaló en Italia, Portugal, Francia, Suiza, Mónaco, el Vaticano, Brasil y Uruguay.
El 22 de julio de 1947, la “abanderada de los humildes” llegó a Paris. Fue recibida por Georges Bidault, ministro de Exteriores francés. Además, la esperaba un grupo de mujeres y de niños que se mezclaban con las banderas de Argentina y de Francia. Las autoridades de la capital del país galo pusieron a disposición de Eva el automóvil del general Charles De Gaulle, un honor que hasta el momento sólo se había reservado para el primer ministro británico Winston Churchill. Con ese rodado, la oriunda de Los Toldos conoció la catedral de Notre Dame.
Evita ingresó a Notre Dame y se entrevistó con el monseñor Roncalli, quien en 1958 se convertiría en Papa y recibiría la denominación de Juan XXIII. Fuentes cercanas a la primera dama, sostienen que durante la entrevista que tuvieron, la joven argentina de 27 años le explicó la idea de realizar una fundación de ayuda social (la cual crearía al regresar al país) y recibió como respuesta: “Le recomiendo dos cosas: que prescinda por completo de todo papelerío burocrático, y que se consagre sin límites a su tarea”. Ambas las cumplió con excelencia.
Durante el tiempo en Francia, Evita estuvo hospedada en el Hotel Ritz. Tuvo una agenda bastante cargada de reuniones para firmar acuerdos internacionales. Uno de ellos fue con el presidente Vincent Auriol, con quien firmó un tratado que incluía el intercambio en particular de cuero, carne, cereales, aceites, y quebracho a cambio de acero, automóviles, diversos productos mecánicos, y en particular máquinas textiles, productos químicos.
“En su entrevista con el ministro de Relaciones Exteriores, Georges Bidault, uno de los principales dirigentes de la resistencia interior a la ocupación alemana, Evita le planteó que era muy desagradable que Francia, país amigo de la Argentina, tuviera una calle en París y una estación del Métropolitain que se llamara Obligado, por la batalla de la Vuelta de Obligado. Le recordó que la Escuadra naval anglofrancesa había logrado ganar la batalla, pero había pedido la guerra. Y le pidió que le cambiaran el nombre.
Dos días después, cuando se firmaban los acuerdos comerciales por los cuales la Argentina otorgaba a Francia un crédito para compras de cereales de 200 millones de dólares, el presidente Vincent Auriol le comunicó que en aras de la renovada amistad franco argentina serían cambiados los nombres de la estación del Métropolitain y de la calle”. De esta manera, la calle Vuelta de Obligado pasó a denominarse “d’Argentine”. Evita, una luz en la historia argentina que dejó su rastro en París.
Hacendado, era dueño de un haras de caballos en Balcarce, ciudad donde presidió el comité local de la Unión Cívica Radical (UCR) y donde fue comisionado municipal.15
Durante el gobierno de Juan Domingo Perón, fue designado embajador especial para asistir al acto de asunción del presidente chileno Gabriel González Videla en 1946, y al año siguiente fue nombrado embajador en Francia, cargo que ejerció hasta 1949.1 En su período en París, acompañó la visita oficial de Eva Perón en 1947, y firmó con el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores Georges Bidault un convenio comercial y financiero.78
Posteriormente fue director del Banco Argentino de Comercio.1
“…El 21 de julio, Evita descendió de su avión en Orly, vestida de blanco, con un sombrero de paja del mismo color, sonriente y un poco pálida. A los pies de la escalerilla, el ministro de Relaciones Exteriores, Georges Bidault, le besó la mano y luego la saludaron el embajador argentino en París, Julio Victorica Roca, y varios embajadores latinoamericanos. Un cortejo de cuarenta coches la acompañó hasta el Hotel Ritz, donde un grupo de niños le presentó un ramo de flores y Bidault se despidió. Como símbolo de la importancia que el gobierno francés daba a su persona, puso a su disposición el auto que había pertenecido al general Charles de Gaulle, el mismo que usaba sir Winston Churchill en sus visitas oficiales a París. Además, durante la estadía la Argentina y Francia firmaron un tratado comercial por el cual este país recibiría un abultado crédito para la compra de trigo y carne. La ceremonia tuvo lugar en el Quai D’Orsay, y finalizada la misma, Bidault condecoró a Evita con la Legión de Honor. Al día siguiente de su llegada, Evita fue recibida por el presidente Vincent Auriol en el castillo de Rambouillet, donde le ofreció un almuerzo…” (Evita. Marysa Navarro)
VIDEO Evita llega a Francia Eva Perón arriba al aeropuerto de Orly y es recibida por el Canciller Georges Bidault. Duración 1 minuto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7NjQBNsCWc
VIDEO Evita en Francia. Eva Perón visita el castillo de Rambouillet, en Francia para almorzar con el presidente Vincent Autiol. Duración 3 minutos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSzwYgMeSuU
Pocos textos han sido ocasión para que se derrame más tinta que Mateo 16:17-19:
Y Jesús le respondió: “¡Bienaventurado eres, Simón, hijo de Jonás! Porque esto no os lo ha revelado carne ni sangre, sino mi Padre que está en los cielos. Y te digo, tú eres Pedro, y sobre esta roca edificaré mi iglesia, y los poderes de la muerte no prevalecerán contra ella. Yo te daré las llaves del reino de los cielos, y todo lo que ates en la tierra quedará atado en los cielos, y todo lo que desatares en la tierra quedará desatado en los cielos”.
Para los católicos, este texto es claro. Los doce apóstoles estaban presentes, pero Jesús prometió dar a Peter solo las llaves del reino, simbolizando la autoridad de cristo—la autoridad del cielo—sobre el reino de los cielos en la Tierra, que es la Iglesia. Sin embargo, millones de protestantes creen que hay una distinción de significado en el texto griego entre las dos “rocas” que eliminaría a Pedro de la consideración de ser de la forma más roca.
"Tú eres petros y sobre esto Petra Construiré mi iglesia”. La primera roca, petros, se dice que se refiere a una pequeña e insignificante roca: Pedro. El segundo, Petra, se dice que significa una enorme roca: sería la confesión de fe de Jesús o de Pedro. El argumento concluye que Jesús construyó su iglesia no sobre San Pedro, sino sobre sí mismo o sobre la fe de Pedro.
A continuación se presentan siete razones, entre muchas otras que podríamos examinar, por las que Pedro es innegablemente la roca:
1. El evangelio de Mateo, tenemos evidencia bastante sólida, fue escrito originalmente en arameo. Santos. Papías e Ireneo nos lo dicen en el siglo II. Pero lo que es aún más importante —y más seguro— es que Jesús no habría pronunciado su discurso de Mateo 16 en griego. El griego era el idioma dominante del Imperio Romano en el siglo I, pero la mayoría de los judíos comunes con quienes Jesús habló no lo hablaban con fluidez. El arameo era su lengua hablada.
Además, tenemos evidencia bíblica—Juan 1:42—que también señala que Jesús usó el arameo al nombrar a Pedro: “[Andrés] trajo [a Pedro] a Jesús. Jesús lo miró y le dijo: '¿Entonces tú eres Simón, hijo de Juan? Te llamarás Cefas'” (que significa Pedro).
Su nombre Cefas es una forma inglesa del arameo Kefa, que significa simplemente "roca". No se habría encontrado ninguna “piedra pequeña” en la declaración original de Jesús a Pedro.
Incluso los eruditos protestantes más respetados estarán de acuerdo en este punto. El erudito bautista DA Carson, escribe, en Comentario bíblico del expositor,
El arameo subyacente es en este caso incuestionable; y muy probablemente kepha se usó en ambas cláusulas (“tú eres kepha” y “en esta kepha”), ya que la palabra se usó tanto para un nombre como para una “roca”. La Peshitta (escrita en siríaco, un idioma relacionado con un dialecto del arameo) no hace distinción entre las palabras de las dos cláusulas.
2. En griego koiné (el dialecto del griego utilizado por los autores del El Nuevo Testamento), petrosPetra son formas masculinas y femeninas de palabras con la misma raíz y la misma definición: Rock. Tampoco se encuentra ninguna “piedra pequeña” en el texto griego.
Entonces, ¿por qué Mateo usó estas dos palabras en el mismo versículo? Petra era una palabra común utilizada para “roca” en griego. Se usa quince veces para significar “roca”, “rocas” o “rocoso” en el Nuevo Testamento. Petros es un término griego antiguo que no se usaba comúnmente en griego koiné. De hecho, nunca se usó en el Nuevo Testamento, excepto en el nombre de Pedro después de que Jesús lo cambió de Simón a Pedro.
De ello se deduce que cuando Mateo estaba traduciendo, habría usado Petra para "roca". Sin embargo, al hacerlo, se habría topado con un problema. Petra es un sustantivo femenino. Habría sido impropio llamar a Peter Petra. Esto equivaldría a llamar a un hombre “Valerie” o “Priscilla” en inglés. Por eso, petros se usó en lugar de Petra por el nombre de Pedro.
3. Hay varias palabras que el autor inspirado podría haber usado para Rock or stone en griego. PetraLithos fueron los más comunes. Podrían usarse indistintamente. La connotación de “grande” o “pequeño” con cualquiera de ellos dependería del contexto. Las palabras simplemente significaban Rock or stone.
Craig S. Keener, otro erudito protestante, en la página 90 de El comentario de trasfondo bíblico del Nuevo Testamento del IVP, afirma: “En griego (aquí), ellos (refiriéndose a petros y petra) son términos afines que se usaban indistintamente en este período”. DA Carson señala que la distinción grande/pequeño existía en griego, pero sólo se encuentra en el griego antiguo (utilizado entre los siglos VIII y IV a. C.), e incluso allí se limita principalmente a la poesía. El Nuevo Testamento fue escrito en griego koiné (usado desde el siglo IV a.C. hasta el siglo V d.C.). Carson está de acuerdo con Keener y con los católicos en que no hay distinción en la definición entre petrosPetra.
Uno de los diccionarios griegos más respetados y referenciados entre los evangélicos es el de Gerhard Kittel. Diccionario teológico del Nuevo Testamento. En una declaración muy sincera sobre Mateo 16:18, el Dr. Oscar Cullman, editor colaborador de esta obra, escribe:
El juego de palabras obvio que se ha abierto camino en el texto griego. . . sugiere una identidad material entre petra y petros. . . ya que es imposible diferenciar estrictamente entre las dos palabras. . . . El propio Petros es esta petra, no sólo su fe o su confesión. . . . La idea de los reformadores de que se refiere a la fe de Pedro es bastante inconcebible. . . . Porque aquí no hay ninguna referencia a la fe de Pedro. Más bien, el paralelismo entre “tú eres Roca” y “sobre esta roca edificaré” muestra que la segunda roca sólo puede ser la misma que la primera. Es, pues, evidente que Jesús se refiere a Pedro, a quien ha puesto el nombre de Roca. . . . En este sentido, la exégesis católica romana es correcta y todos los intentos protestantes de evadir esta interpretación deben ser rechazados.
4. Si Mateo quisiera distinguir “rocas” en el texto, lo más probable es que hubiera usado Lithos. Como se indicó anteriormente, Lithos podría referirse a una roca grande, pero se usaba más comúnmente para indicar una piedra pequeña. Sin embargo, hay una tercera palabra que Mateo podría haber usado y que siempre significa piedra pequeña: psefos. Se usa dos veces en Apocalipsis 2:17 como “piedra pequeña” cuando Jesús dice: “Al que venciere, le daré del maná escondido, y le daré una piedra blanca, con un nombre nuevo escrito en la piedra”. que nadie conoce sino aquel que lo recibe”. Aquí tenemos una palabra griega que, a diferencia de LithosPetra, siempre tiene una connotación de “piedra pequeña” o “guijarro”.
5. Una línea de razonamiento más simple se aleja de los idiomas originales y examina el contexto inmediato del pasaje. Noten, nuestro Señor dice a Pedro en Mateo 16:17-19,
Y Jesús le respondió: “¡Bienaventurado eres, Simón, hijo de Jonás! Porque esto no os lo ha revelado carne ni sangre, sino mi Padre que está en los cielos. Y te digo, tú eres Pedro, y sobre esta roca edificaré mi iglesia, y los poderes de la muerte no prevalecerán contra ella. Yo te daré las llaves del reino de los cielos, y todo lo que ates en la tierra quedará atado en los cielos, y todo lo que desatares en la tierra quedará desatado en los cielos”.
Jesús usa el pronombre personal en segunda persona. siete veces en sólo tres versos. El contexto es claramente uno en el que Jesús comunica una autoridad única. a Pedro.
Además, se presenta a Jesús como el constructor de la Iglesia, no como el edificio. Él dice: "Edificaré mi iglesia". Jesús es “el hombre sabio que edificó su casa sobre la roca” (7:24) en el Evangelio de Mateo. Una vez más, simplemente no encaja en el contexto que Jesús edifique la Iglesia sobre sí mismo. Él lo está construyendo sobre Pedro.
6. Mucha gente pasa por alto el significado del cambio de nombre de Simón a Pedro. Cuando Dios reveló a algunos de su pueblo un llamado nuevo y radical en las Escrituras, a veces cambió sus nombres. En particular, lo encontramos en la llamada de los Patriarcas. Abram (“padre exaltado” en hebreo) fue cambiado por Abraham (“padre de las multitudes”), Jacob (“suplantador”) por Israel (“Aquel que prevalece con Dios”).
De hecho, hay aquí un paralelo interesante entre Abraham y Pedro. En Isaías 51:1-2, leemos,
Escúchenme, ustedes que buscan la liberación, ustedes que buscan al Señor; Mira la roca de la que fuiste tallado. . . . Mirad a Abraham vuestro padre.
Aquí Jesús hace de Pedro un verdadero “padre” sobre la familia de la fe, así como Dios hizo de Abraham nuestro verdadero “padre” en la fe (ver Romanos 4:1-18; Santiago 2:21). Por lo tanto, es apropiado que a los sucesores de Pedro se les llame “papa” o “papá”, como lo fue Abraham (ver Lucas 16:24).
7. Cuando entendemos que Cristo es el verdadero “hijo de David” que vino a restaurar el reino profético de David, entendemos que Cristo en Mateo 16, como el rey de Israel, estaba estableciendo un “primer ministro” entre sus ministros: los apóstoles. —en el reino. Isaías 22:15-22 nos da una idea del ministerio del “primer ministro” en el antiguo Israel:
Así dice el Señor Dios de los ejércitos: “Ven, ve a este mayordomo, a Sebna, mayordomo de la casa, y dile... . . he aquí que el Señor os arrojará violentamente. . . . Te expulsaré de tu cargo y serás derribado de tu puesto. En aquel día llamaré a mi siervo Eliaquim hijo de Hilcías, y lo vestiré con tu manto, y le ceñiré tu cinto, y entregaré tu autoridad en su mano; y será padre de los habitantes de Jerusalén y de la casa de Judá. Y pondré sobre su hombro la llave de la casa de David; él abrirá, y nadie cerrará; y él cerrará, y nadie abrirá.
En Apocalipsis 1:18, Jesús declara: “Yo tengo las llaves de la muerte y del Hades”. Luego cita este mismo texto de Isaías en Apocalipsis 3:7:
Y escribe al ángel de la iglesia en Filadelfia: “Las palabras del santo, del verdadero, que tiene la llave de David, que abre y nadie cierra, que cierra y nadie abre”.
Ningún cristiano negaría que Jesús es el rey que posee las llaves. ¿A quién le da las llaves? ¡Pedro!
Carlos IV de Borbón (Portici, Nápoles, 11 de noviembre de 1748 – Roma, 20 de enero de 1819) fue Rey de España desde el 14 de diciembre de 1788 hasta el 19 de marzo de 1808. Hijo y sucesor de Carlos III y de María Amalia de Sajonia.
Fernando VII de Borbón (San Lorenzo de El Escorial, 14 de octubre de 1784 - Madrid, 29 de septiembre de 1833), llamado el Deseado o el Rey Felón, fue rey de España entre marzo y mayo de 1808 y, tras la expulsión del rey intruso José Bonaparte, nuevamente desde diciembre de 1813 hasta su muerte, exceptuando un breve intervalo en 1823, en que fue destituido por el Consejo de Regencia.
Alfonso XII de Borbón, el Pacificador (Madrid, 28 de noviembre de 1857 – El Pardo, 25 de noviembre de 1885), fue rey de España entre 1874 y 1885; era hijo de la reina Isabel II de España y su marido, Francisco de Asís de Borbón. Nacido Alfonso Francisco Fernando Pío Juan de María de la Concepción Gregorio Pelayo de Borbón y Borbón. Reinó tras la Restauración borbónica, hasta su muerte prematura a los 27 años, víctima de la tuberculosis. Fue sucedido en el trono por su hijo póstumo, Alfonso XIII de España, cuya minoría estuvo encabezada por la regencia de su viuda, María Cristina de Austria.
Neda: - Killed on June 20, day before Prince William's BD - 'Neda' means 'divine message' ('angel' means 'messenger')
Following her heart-breaking death captured on video, Neda became the face of the protests raging at the time in Iran following the June 12 presidential election (starting on June 13).
Etymology: The first part, wer, translates as "man"... The second half, wulf, is the ancestor of modern English "wolf"; in some cases it also had the general meaning "beast."
His was an unnatural evolution (plastic surgeries, etc.). What about ours? Is human evolution natural? If not, has the Moon had a hand in it?
We can almost hear the whisper: 'Human evolution is a hoax':
August 15, 2008 St. Anthony of Padua birthday Bigfoot hoax...
..from December 14-16, 2008 with love. (See 'Whisper of the Fifth Sun' for more on this predicted quake.)
Bigfoot, giant foot, giants... Genesis 6, the Nephilim, heaven-earth interbreeding, i.e. human genetic manipulation ('guided evolution'):
Book of Genesis chapter 6: And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. [...] There were giants [Nephilim] in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
A monstrous Sin deemed irreversible, Earth had to be cleansed by a Great Flood.
Sin is the name of a Sumerian (and Minaean) god of the Moon... Still standing after the Flood as 'Noah'.
A forbidden 'lunar strain' of mankind... A 'Diana bloodline'.
Diana = Bigfoot = Nephilim = Noah
Argentina is both a moon...
'Argentina' means 'silver' traditionally represented by symbol for Moon
...and a Bigfoot:
Argentina is geographically Patagonia meaning 'land of the big feet'
...making headlines the day before Michael Jackson's death:
For all intents and purposes a missing person from June 18 until 24 (i.e. around Prince William's birthday), Governor Sanford spent five days 'crying in Argentina' with 'Maria'...
...in 'Evita' (1996), playing Maria Eva Duarte de Peron, First Lady of Argentina from 1946 to 1952, a Diana-like beloved female figure who died young at the age of 33 (Diana was 36 when she died).
She is essentially Lady Liberty standing gracefully with her torch in New York and Paris very near where Princess Diana was killed marked by a torch.
She is interchangeable with Columbia - the feminine personification of the United States. It was in the South Carolina state capital Columbia that Gov. Sanford revealed his Argentine affair... echoed by a train collision in the District of Columbia (Washington DC) on June 22:
Timeline: June 18-24: Gov. Sanford missing/crying in Argentina June 21: 'Impact' Part 1 on ABC; Prince William birthday June 22: DC Metro Red Line trains in collision June 23: US Moon probes (LRO/LCROSS) reach Moon June 24: Gov. Sanford reveals Argentine affair June 25: Death of Michael Jackson & Farahh Fawcett
'Metro' means 'meter' in Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, etc. The meter is historically defined as 1/10,000,000 of the distance between the North Pole and the equator through Paris, or in other words the Paris Meridian between the North Pole and the equator. The Paris Meridian is also the 'Rose Line' (an esoteric concept popularized by The Da Vinci Code) i.e. a 'Red Line'...
DC Metro Red Line = French/Columbian Rose Line
...traditionally implying the Blood Royal/Sangraal or the Marian/Columbian Bloodline of the Holy Grail.
In Bloodline of the Holy Grail Laurence Gardner writes of the House of Stuart, the royal bloodline to which Princess Diana and her children belong (pp. 344-5):
Pope Francis waves to the crowd from the Speakers Balcony at the US Capitol, September 24, 2015, in Washington, DC. Pool/Getty Images
If President Barack Obama had delivered the text of Pope Francis’s speech to Congress Thursday as a State of the Union address, he would have risked being denounced by Republicans as a socialist.
While most Republicans chose not to complain, and Democrats tried not to gloat, Francis’s speech to Congress was stunning in the breadth, depth, and conviction of its progressivism. That might not have been fully and immediately appreciated by everyone in the House chamber because the combination of Francis’s sotto voce delivery and his heavily accented English made it difficult, lawmakers said, to grasp everything he was saying.
But there was no mistaking his thrust. He made detailed arguments for openness to immigrants, addressing the human roots of climate change, closing the gap between the rich and the poor, and ending the death penalty — all of which invigorated the Democrats in the room.
“It was pretty progressive. He had a little right-to-life stuff in it,” Rep. James Clyburn, the third-ranking House Democrat, said as he cracked a smile thinking about how Republicans would receive the speech. “That’s enough for them.”
The pope isn’t going to change many hearts and minds in the badly divided Congress, lawmakers said, but the moment provided a brief respite from political warfare. Several presidential candidates, including Sens. Bernie Sanders, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz, as well as Ben Carson, attended.
Rubio, a Roman Catholic, said in a brief interview that Francis “struck the right tone.” Sanders, a self-described socialist, seemed to like the content even more.
“Pope Francis is clearly one of the important religious and moral leaders not only in the world today but in modern history,” he said in a statement released after the speech. “He forces us to address some of the major issues facing humanity: war, income and wealth inequality, poverty, unemployment, greed, the death penalty and other issues that too many prefer to ignore.”
Democrats were eager enough to present Congress as united that they joined a Republican-led standing ovation when Francis told lawmakers of “our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every state of its development.” Several of them said it was out of respect for the pope. But there was another good reason: It strengthened the perception that the whole speech — most of which they liked — carried unifying themes.
Unity was good for Democrats because the speech favored their policies
Francis was interrupted a few times by whoops from the Democratic side of the chamber — by Steve Cohen, a Jewish Memphis Democrat who got excited about Francis’s mention of the Golden Rule; by New York’s Nydia Velázquez when he called for an end to the death penalty; and by Philadelphia Rep. Chaka Fattah when he mentioned his upcoming visit to that city. The Republicans in the room were a bit more staid. Cruz often appeared unmoved during moments when Rubio, who was sitting nearby, applauded. That was the case when Francis asked whether the greater opportunities sought by past generations of immigrants are “not what we want for our own children?”
It was a home crowd. Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) had announced he would boycott the event over climate change, and there was a brief murmur when it became obvious that three conservative Catholic Supreme Court justices — Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas — had not shown up. But it seemed that everyone in attendance just wanted to catch a glimpse of Francis and hear what he had to say.
Big-name guests filed into the public galleries above the House chamber long before the pope’s arrival: Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Rep. Gabby Giffords, mega-donor Tom Steyer, and Carson. House members filled the seats in their chamber, followed by the Senate and four Supreme Court justices. At about a minute past 10 am, Francis strode down the center aisle of the House chamber, clad in his familiar white robe and skullcap.
Lawmakers, who had been admonished not to touch the pope, refrained from trying to shake his hand or pat his back. There was no rush to crowd him the way members of Congress try to get into pictures with the president during the annual State of the Union address. When he got to the end of the aisle, he quietly shook hands with Secretary of State John Kerry and then made his way to the rostrum.
Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the UN, pulled out a baby blue iPhone and began snapping pictures. Though she later took to Twitter to commemorate the moment, Power hadn’t posted any of her photos by midday.
For his part, Francis warmed up the audience by describing America as “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” He was slow to move into more politically charged territory but unimpeded when he did. There were 10 standing ovations after his initial greeting, and they were bipartisan.
Francis tackled tough issues at the heart of the US political debate and gently admonished lawmakers to build bridges
At times, Francis seemed to be speaking directly into the headlines and newscasts of the day.
Less than a week after Carson said that America shouldn’t elect a Muslim president, Francis warned that “a delicate balance is required to combat violence perpetrated in the name of a religion, an ideology or an economic system, while also safeguarding religious freedom, intellectual freedom and individual freedoms.”
As Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump promises to build a wall between Mexico and the US, and to prevent Syrian refugees from being admitted to America, Francis compared the current refugee crisis to the one that arose in World War II and said that “we the people of this continent are not fearful of foreigners, because most of us were once foreigners.” That drew a standing ovation. Rubio, who has shifted his emphasis on immigration reform over time, leaped to his feet.
And while Democrats continue to bask in this summer’s Supreme Court decision protecting same-sex marriage, the pope said he was concerned that “fundamental relationships are being called into question, as is the very basis of marriage and the family.” The issue that caused the biggest stir before the speech — climate change — factored prominently in Francis’s remarks. He spoke of the human roots of global warming and said, “I am convinced we can make a difference.”
But perhaps the most unexpected run in the speech was an admonishment as gentle as it was clear: Politics is about building bridges, not destroying them. Francis never mentioned the international nuclear nonproliferation deal with Iran by name or the gridlock in American politics, but he seemed to be speak to both matters.
“When countries which have been at odds resume the path of dialogue — a dialogue which may have been interrupted for the most legitimate of reasons — new opportunities open up for all,” he said. “A good political leader is one who, with the interests of all in mind, seizes the moment in a spirit of openness and pragmatism. A good political leader always opts to initiate processes rather than possessing spaces.”
Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Joe Pitts, speaking about the pope’s limited remarks on abortion and same-sex marriage, said he was displeased that Francis had been “unfortunately politically correct.”
For liberals, though, he was simply correct about politics.
Pope Francis waves to the crowd from the Speakers Balcony at the US Capitol, September 24, 2015, in Washington, DC. Pool/Getty Images
If President Barack Obama had delivered the text of Pope Francis’s speech to Congress Thursday as a State of the Union address, he would have risked being denounced by Republicans as a socialist.
While most Republicans chose not to complain, and Democrats tried not to gloat, Francis’s speech to Congress was stunning in the breadth, depth, and conviction of its progressivism. That might not have been fully and immediately appreciated by everyone in the House chamber because the combination of Francis’s sotto voce delivery and his heavily accented English made it difficult, lawmakers said, to grasp everything he was saying.
But there was no mistaking his thrust. He made detailed arguments for openness to immigrants, addressing the human roots of climate change, closing the gap between the rich and the poor, and ending the death penalty — all of which invigorated the Democrats in the room.
“It was pretty progressive. He had a little right-to-life stuff in it,” Rep. James Clyburn, the third-ranking House Democrat, said as he cracked a smile thinking about how Republicans would receive the speech. “That’s enough for them.”
The pope isn’t going to change many hearts and minds in the badly divided Congress, lawmakers said, but the moment provided a brief respite from political warfare. Several presidential candidates, including Sens. Bernie Sanders, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz, as well as Ben Carson, attended.
Rubio, a Roman Catholic, said in a brief interview that Francis “struck the right tone.” Sanders, a self-described socialist, seemed to like the content even more.
“Pope Francis is clearly one of the important religious and moral leaders not only in the world today but in modern history,” he said in a statement released after the speech. “He forces us to address some of the major issues facing humanity: war, income and wealth inequality, poverty, unemployment, greed, the death penalty and other issues that too many prefer to ignore.”
Democrats were eager enough to present Congress as united that they joined a Republican-led standing ovation when Francis told lawmakers of “our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every state of its development.” Several of them said it was out of respect for the pope. But there was another good reason: It strengthened the perception that the whole speech — most of which they liked — carried unifying themes.
Unity was good for Democrats because the speech favored their policies
Francis was interrupted a few times by whoops from the Democratic side of the chamber — by Steve Cohen, a Jewish Memphis Democrat who got excited about Francis’s mention of the Golden Rule; by New York’s Nydia Velázquez when he called for an end to the death penalty; and by Philadelphia Rep. Chaka Fattah when he mentioned his upcoming visit to that city. The Republicans in the room were a bit more staid. Cruz often appeared unmoved during moments when Rubio, who was sitting nearby, applauded. That was the case when Francis asked whether the greater opportunities sought by past generations of immigrants are “not what we want for our own children?”
It was a home crowd. Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) had announced he would boycott the event over climate change, and there was a brief murmur when it became obvious that three conservative Catholic Supreme Court justices — Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas — had not shown up. But it seemed that everyone in attendance just wanted to catch a glimpse of Francis and hear what he had to say.
Big-name guests filed into the public galleries above the House chamber long before the pope’s arrival: Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Rep. Gabby Giffords, mega-donor Tom Steyer, and Carson. House members filled the seats in their chamber, followed by the Senate and four Supreme Court justices. At about a minute past 10 am, Francis strode down the center aisle of the House chamber, clad in his familiar white robe and skullcap.
Lawmakers, who had been admonished not to touch the pope, refrained from trying to shake his hand or pat his back. There was no rush to crowd him the way members of Congress try to get into pictures with the president during the annual State of the Union address. When he got to the end of the aisle, he quietly shook hands with Secretary of State John Kerry and then made his way to the rostrum.
Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the UN, pulled out a baby blue iPhone and began snapping pictures. Though she later took to Twitter to commemorate the moment, Power hadn’t posted any of her photos by midday.
For his part, Francis warmed up the audience by describing America as “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” He was slow to move into more politically charged territory but unimpeded when he did. There were 10 standing ovations after his initial greeting, and they were bipartisan.
Francis tackled tough issues at the heart of the US political debate and gently admonished lawmakers to build bridges
At times, Francis seemed to be speaking directly into the headlines and newscasts of the day.
Less than a week after Carson said that America shouldn’t elect a Muslim president, Francis warned that “a delicate balance is required to combat violence perpetrated in the name of a religion, an ideology or an economic system, while also safeguarding religious freedom, intellectual freedom and individual freedoms.”
As Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump promises to build a wall between Mexico and the US, and to prevent Syrian refugees from being admitted to America, Francis compared the current refugee crisis to the one that arose in World War II and said that “we the people of this continent are not fearful of foreigners, because most of us were once foreigners.” That drew a standing ovation. Rubio, who has shifted his emphasis on immigration reform over time, leaped to his feet.
And while Democrats continue to bask in this summer’s Supreme Court decision protecting same-sex marriage, the pope said he was concerned that “fundamental relationships are being called into question, as is the very basis of marriage and the family.” The issue that caused the biggest stir before the speech — climate change — factored prominently in Francis’s remarks. He spoke of the human roots of global warming and said, “I am convinced we can make a difference.”
But perhaps the most unexpected run in the speech was an admonishment as gentle as it was clear: Politics is about building bridges, not destroying them. Francis never mentioned the international nuclear nonproliferation deal with Iran by name or the gridlock in American politics, but he seemed to be speak to both matters.
“When countries which have been at odds resume the path of dialogue — a dialogue which may have been interrupted for the most legitimate of reasons — new opportunities open up for all,” he said. “A good political leader is one who, with the interests of all in mind, seizes the moment in a spirit of openness and pragmatism. A good political leader always opts to initiate processes rather than possessing spaces.”
Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Joe Pitts, speaking about the pope’s limited remarks on abortion and same-sex marriage, said he was displeased that Francis had been “unfortunately politically correct.”
For liberals, though, he was simply correct about politics.
There has been a tremendous amount of internet buzz and speculation regarding the dates of 9/23 and 9/24/2015. Some Christian groups were predicting the rapture. Others were predicting a major ISIS terrorist attack. Still others were expecting an assassination attempt on either Obama or the Pope. WW III, asteroid strikes, and EMPs were among the other candidates. The UFO crowd expected the Pope to finally disclose contact with extra-terrestrials. It is now 9/26 and the theatrics expected on 9/23 have been underwhelming to say the least. Nevertheless there was some highly significant symbolism occurring on the 23rd/24th day of September and I want to expound upon it here.
First of all, the Roman Catholic Church has never been primarily about Jesus or elevating the level of human consciousness on Spaceship Earth. It has always been about power and control over the rabble through the use of symbolism and mythology rooted in ancient astro-theological Solar/Saturn/Sirius cults going back through Egypt and Babylon. I will provide a few examples of the connections between Roman Catholic symbols and their ancient predecessors.
The Pope is often seen wearing the “Mitre” which symbolizes the open mouth of a fish. Fish symbolism is everywhere in Christianity and it is not just because the disciples were fishermen and Jesus made them “fishers of men”. Christianity began at the end of the age of Aries (the Ram) and the beginning of the age of Pisces (the Fish). When Jesus talks about “the end of the age”, this refers to the procession of the equinox through the zodiac which indicates the astrological “age”. These ages last about 2160 years so we are currently transitioning from the end of the age of Pisces to the beginning of the age of Aquarius. The Roman Catholic Church is therefore predictably beginning to abandon the Jesus fish for some new arrangement of deities or a new “Good Shepherd” that will be used to goad the sheeple into their pens throughout the Age of Aquarius.
The fish hat was also worn prior to Christianity by the priests of Dagon. Dagon was a fish god and also a god of the harvest to the ancient Babylonians and Philistines. Cronus (to the Greeks) or Saturn (to Romans) was also a god of the harvest and we often see him with a scythe or sickle. Put them together and we have the fishes and the loaves. Dagon may also be related to Dogon and Sirius worship which had a special symbolism to Egyptians relating to the time of year when the Nile would flood. Sirius being in the constellation of Canis Major relates it to the Canine while the relation to Dogon or Dagon is probably how canines came to be called dogs. Dogon may also be related to the etymology of the Dragon. To this day we still call late summer, “The dog days of summer” thanks to Dogon or Dagon and Sirius’s signalling the waters of the Nile to flood.
Anyway… The Pope’s fish hat is related to Dagon or Dogon and astro-theological pre-Christian deities.
The fish hat is just one example of symbolism relating back to pre-Christian deities, but in the interests of time and space I’ll move on to symbolism more relevant to the Pope’s recent visit to D.C. on 9/23 and 9/24.
One of the most amazing and prominent architectural wonders of the Vatican is Saint Peter’s Basilica with its 448′ tall dome designed primarily by Bramante and Michelangelo. The basilica faces East to greet the rising sun and to its East is an elliptical plaza with an Egyptian Obelisk in the center. The Obelisk was transported from Egypt and re-erected in Rome around 37 AD.
Saint Peter’s Basilica and Plaza with Obelisk, Vatican, Rome
Saint Peter’s Basilica and Plaza with Obelisk, Vatican, Rome
Where else do we find the “male” obelisk inside the round “female” shape across from a very large dome? …Washington D.C.
Washington Monument due West of the Capitol dome
So whats this all about? Just some old men acting like little boys who think it’s funny to draw body parts on the etcha-sketch? The story goes back to Sun worship in Egypt. Osiris was the old chief Sun god whose brother Set kills him at the end of the day (sun-set). As the legend goes, Set dismembers the body of Osiris and scatters his parts around the world. Isis, the Queen and wife of Osiris finds all of the pieces of Osiris’s body except for one member… his “member” which was unfortunately swallowed by a fish. So Isis fashions a new “gold member” for Osiris bringing him back to life. They have the sex and Horus is conceived – a baby sun god. (we probably get “hours” of the day from “Horus”). Isis, the virgin mother and pre-Madonna, is frequently pictured nursing baby Horus, and in the Roman Catholic Church we often see the virgin Mary (Madonna) nursing the baby Sun/Son of God.
Isis nursing baby Horus and The Madonna holding baby Jesus
So it is no coincidence that the Pope’s schedule follows the itinerary of the tour of Madonna (who is a “Christianized” Isis) who performs this September just prior to the Pope at Washington D.C., Madison Square Garden, and Philadelphia – the city of Big Brotherly Love.
The Egyptian obelisk represents the phallus of Osiris and the ellipse or vesica pisces (belly of the fish) in this case represents… well it should be obvious… intercourse with Isis. The adjacent dome represents the womb or breast of Isis where a god is made and nursed. This is why the mosaic inside of the dome of St. Peter’s Basilica shows Jesus and the saints on their way to heaven at the top and also why the inside of the D.C. Capitol dome has a painting showing George Washington ascending to heaven which is titled “The Apotheosis of George Washington.” Apotheosis literally means to become a god.
Mosaic inside the dome of St. Peter’s Basilica. Saints and angels rise towards heaven.
“The Apotheosis of George Washington” painted inside the dome on the U.S. Capitol. The 72 inverted pentagrams may symbolize the 72 years it takes for 1 degree of procession of the equinox.
I have read that at certain times in history the Egyptians would conduct human sacrifices… usually of foreigners or slaves… and at these times they believed the God Osiris would enter the Obelisk and that the Pharoah who sat in an adjacent dome (womb of Isis) believed this would make him a god.
Okay, let’s get back to the Pope’s visit. This is the 266th Pope from the first – St. Peter. The Pope decided to arrive at Washington D.C. on 9/23 which happens to be the 266th day of the year. Why is that significant? On average, a woman is pregnant for 266 days before going into labor. In Genesis, it is said that labor pain is the first judgment God gave to mankind. The evening of 9/22 to the evening of 9/23 is 7/10 on the Jewish calendar which is the Day of Atonement. This was the day that God decided how he was going to judge a person for the rest of the year and on 7/11 he would issue that judgement. (Side note: SEPT-ember was originally the 7th month so 9/11 could be thought of as 7/11. And 9/11 in Roman numerals is IXXI which is a re-working of the sign of Saturn and was engraved in Jesuit rings for a time. Pope Francis is the first Jesuit Pope, so he is thus “Lord of the IXXI Rings” and therefore kind of like the eye of Sauron/Saturn between the twin towers… Oh and don’t forget tower 7… 7/11). This year, 9/23 also happened to be the fall equinox – which doesn’t mean much to modern man, but recall that the ancients (and modern secret societies) were all about the Sun worship. Fall equinox is thus symbolic of the time when the powers of darkness overcome the powers of the light. Thus, what is “birthed” on 9/24 is something wicked.
So on 9/23 the prez “basked in the glow” of the Pope. On 9/24 the Pope journeyed to the Capitol. At some point he was interrupted by an illegal immigrant child who managed to evade iron clad security (staged much?) waving a heart-wrenching letter describing how she didn’t want to be deported. The Pope stood in the Capitol, which is symbolically the womb of Isis where a god is conceived or where men become gods (the dome also happens to be currently in the middle of a remodel or “reformation”). The main theme of his visit and of his speech was that the Western world needs to welcome the foreign children (to be sacrificed to Osiris) newly delivered unto us. Of course, it is well known that some of these “migrant children” belong to the terrorist group named: ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria).
So there you have it. The pope’s visit and message is all about Isis and the birthing of the children of ISIS through labor pains of judgment in the fall as the Western borders fall. Anyone who’s been paying attention knows that it is a thinly veiled fact that the West created ISIS by giving weapons, training, and funds to moderate rebels (also known as Al-Qaeda) in order to topple the Assad regime in Syria and possibly to be the next big bogeyman that will force Westerners to continue giving up their civil liberties so that they may be lovingly integrated into the global community with a nice big hug from Big Brother. Isis is ISIS is made by the secret societies who revere Isis and are the hidden hand behind Western geopolitics.
Pope Francis, accompanied by members of Congress, waves to the crowd from the Speakers Balcony on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Sept. 24, 2015, after addressing a joint meeting of Congress inside. Doug Mills / The New York Times via AP, Pool))
Pope Francis addresses congress on 9/24/2015
Oh and in case anyone missed the irony / hypocrisy… here’s the walls that keep the poor migrant children out of the Pope’s obscenely wealthy little city-state:
Tema anterior
![59 - Curso de Relatividad General [Ecuaciones de Campo & Constante Cosmológica] - YouTube](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/HI3m80zLo24/maxresdefault.jpg)
.svg){kind=small}
Werewolf = man-beast = Bigfoot
