Heads of states were assassinated by the Jesuits, when they attempt to suppress the influence and meddling of the Jesuits in their national affairs. Of heads of states that are known to have been assassinated by Jesuits we mention for example: William of Orange, Kings Henry III and Henry IV of France, Czars Alexander I and Alexander II of Russia, President Abraham Lincoln and John F. Kennedy, and Mexican President Benito Pablo Juarez.
Abraham Lincoln was fully aware of the evil nature of the Jesuits. He stated, “… it is not against the Americans of the South, alone, I am fighting. It is more against the Pope of Rome, his perfidious Jesuits and their blind and blood-thirsty slaves that we have to defend ourselves.”
Source: Fifty Years in the Church of Rome, by Charles Chiniquy. p. 496
“It would seem that the Jesuits had had it in mind, from the beginning of the war [the American Civil War of 1861-1865], to find an occasion for the taking off [i.e., the assassination] of Mr. [Abraham] Lincoln.”
Source: Thomas M. Harris (U.S. Army Brigadier General; Author of the book Rome’s Responsibility for the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln)
“The favorite policy of the Jesuits [is] that of assassination.”
Source: U.S. Army Brigadier General Thomas M. Harris; “Rome’s Responsibility for the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln”; 1897; Page 19)
“It is of faith that the Pope has the right of deposing heretical and rebel kings. Monarchs so deposed by the Pope are converted into notorious tyrants, and may be killed by the first who can reach them.
“If the public cause cannot meet with its defense in the death of a tyrant, it is lawful for the first who arrives, to assassinate him.”
[Defensio Didei, Jesuit Suarez, Book VI. C 4, Nos. 13, 14]
[Donald] Freed remembers what apparently passes for polite conversation when men such as [William] Colby and [Ray] Cline get together. “It was quite bizarre” Freed said, “for the subject they chose was, ‘When is it acceptable to assassinate a head of state?’ Colby presented what he said was a theological and philosophically sound approach. “The Catholic Church,” he said, “had long since wrestled with this question and had,” to Colby’s mind, emerged with a sound concept: “It is acceptable,” he said, “to assassinate a tyrant.” [Donald Freed is a friend of the author, Mark Lane. He organized a conference at USC for the U.S. intelligence community and its critics to meet. In the panel were Lane, Ellsberg and John Gerassi, all critics. On the other side were William Colby, former DCI (Director of Central Intelligence from September 1973 to January 1976), David Atlee Phillips, and Ray Cline, former deputy DCI’s.]
[Plausible Denial, Mark Lane, 1991, p. 85]
President John F. Kennedy was another victim of appalling Jesuit wickedness. Once he outwardly distanced himself from the Papal agenda and stood for more liberal ideals and human rights, he was considered, by their standards, a traitor to the Vatican and a “tyrant” worthy of death.
This is an excerpt from “Vatican Assassins” by Eric Jon Phelps:
Knowing that President Kennedy was not going to escalate the Vietnam War, the Intelligence Community began to prepare for his assassination. . . . Cardinal Spellman [Francis Spellman, Archbishop of New York from 1939-1967], through FDR, had arranged the release of “Lucky” Luciano . . . Now the Cardinal needed a favor. If refused, Spellman could use the entire intelligence community which he had helped to organize, to eliminate any mob boss. If agreed to, new gambling centers would open up, Atlantic City in particular. Clearly, if the President [JFK] was removed, everybody would acquire more power and wealth, the intelligence community would become more absolute, and the Cardinal would be even more respected by his peers in Rome.
Later, in 1964, for the first time in history, the Pope of Rome set foot in Fourteenth Amendment America. Cardinal Spellman had performed well and was rewarded by a visit from his Master, fellow Cold Warrior and Vatican Ratline handler, Cardinal Montini, who was now Pope Paul VI. There is yet another reason for the removal of President Kennedy. He wanted to arm Israel. Loftus writes:
“In September 1962 Kennedy decided to supply Israel with defensive ground-to-air missiles capable of stopping aircraft, but not the Egyptian offensive missiles. It was the first arms sale by the U.S. Government to Israel…. Kennedy promised the Israelis that as soon as the 1964 election was over, he would break the CIA ‘into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds’…. With Kennedy’s assassination in November 1963, the Israelis lost the best friend they had in the White House since Truman departed.” Source: The Secret War Against The Jews, John Loftus, 1994]
And why did the Vatican’s Jesuits not want any arms sales to Israel at this time? Why did the Jesuit-controlled President Johnson turn his back as the Egyptian army moved up through the Sinai desert to prepare its assault on Israel in 1967? Because the attack upon Israel had to be provoked. That attack was provoked by the Jesuits’ International Intelligence Community through Egypt falsely perceiving the weakness of the Israeli army and the supposed abandonment of Israel by the American Empire. The six-day war, engineered by Knight of Malta James Angleton, had one primary purpose: the taking of Jerusalem along with the Temple Mount. The apparent lack of military hardware on the part of Israel provoked the planned attack by Egypt. Therefore, Israel launched a preemptive strike and, in six days, the holy city was in the hands of Rome’s Zionist government.
Had Kennedy armed Israel, the Egyptians would never have been emboldened to maneuver for war. With no provoked war, there would have been no Israeli attack. With no Israeli attack, Jerusalem would never have been taken by the Zionists, controlled by the Jesuits’ Mossad. With Jerusalem in Arab hands, the Zionists could never rebuild Solomon’s Temple—unbeknown to them—for the Jesuits’ “infallible” Pope,
“Who opposeth and exalted himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so he is God sitteth in the temple of God [Solomon’s rebuilt temple], showing himself that he is God.”
-[II Thes 2:4]
It is safe to say that the Jesuit General, using the Pope with his most powerful Cardinal, [assassinated President Kennedy].
One might assume that this emotive painting would hang somewhere in Dallas, Texas or perhaps in the Smithsonian. And one would be wrong on both counts. This painting of President John F. Kennedy’s gruesome assassination, by Mark Balma, hangs in the Vatican Cathedral of St. Paul. The painting is entitled “Pietà” after Michelangelo’s famous sculpture of Mary holding the body of the crucified Christ, which is also located at the Vatican. Isn’t this a macabre way to “celebrate” the life of perhaps America’s most beloved President? or is this rather an homage to the Jesuit agenda, serving as a stern warning/reminder to those willing to cross them?