March 26, 2012

Western Roman Law

For many of us, the rabbit hole is deep, and it twists and turns and gets ever more complicated.

It is time then, for a simple explanation.

Frank O'Collins does exactly that.

Here is Part 1, but for Parts 2, 3, and 4 I'd like you to scoot over to our pal The Escapee to complete your basic education. Many thanks for the find, my friend. I have listened to several TalkShoes given by Frank. They usually arrive in my CR inbox courtesy of another blog stalwart, TSL. (EDIT: I hope you will forgive me TSL. I just spotted that you sent me the links to Franks videos on Friday. The email went to my spam folder for some reason).

It is good to put a face to the name, at last.

Regular readers will hear a lot of the stuff that I talk about here.

Things like:

The Papal Bulls- Unum Sanctum of 1302, Romanus Pontifex of 1455, Aeterni Regis of 1481, Convocation of 1537.

Cestui Que Vie of 1666 (although not a Bull it is hugely important and if read and understood, it would show you how they have entrapped and enslaved us all. Until we say different, of course).

In these Bulls you will discover that you are chattel. You are a thing. You are an animal. You are an imbecile. You are a child. You are incompetent. You are a slave.

Not very nice to learn, but learn it you must. Once you understand how they view you, you can fight back. Frank offers invaluable tips on how to do just that.

You now have two choices:

1. Study, and do something about all this (Few will do this)


2. Stick your fingers in your ears and go back to sleep (Most will do this)

As Frank says, repeatedly, all of this is in plain sight. It is accessible. All of it.

Except, that is, those original Papal Bulls. We can never see the originals because they are written on the skin of a child. (Christianity: isn't it just lovely?). The Bulls are buried deep in the vaults at the Vatican and they will almost certainly never see the light of day. These...people are monstrous. These old Bulls control your life absolutely. The end game is of course, the eternal battle for your soul. I intend to hang onto mine. What about you?

I can write on this subject for days on end, but it is more important that you see it, hear it, and understand it for yourselves.

Do your self a favour: watch all four videos.



Anonymous said...

Bulls Baals.
Oh for fucks sake that is just sick.
And this does not go on any more?
Maybe Icke is onto something after all.

Harry J said...

I look forward to watching the videos CR. One observation though. Please don't confuse the Catholic church with Christianity. Read the words of Jesus in the Gospels and you'll find no sanction for the use of the skin of a child for writing purposes. In fact the spirit of those words are the diametric opposite.

coz said...

Nice simple presentation. You'd have to know something about Frank O'Collins and his UCADIA project, I think it's some kind of utopian thing, and whether you find his vision of utopia credible. I don't know much about it.

Coupla things struck me as wrong. The use of CE (instead of AD) tends to mean the person is not a christian, non-christians are perfectly free to use this anti-christian jargon if they choose. In part 3 he states that the first trust was between God and the Vatican, I got some doubts about that, why not in Eden?
He also states that St Francis never existed, that it's a myth. I don't find that terribly credible, there's too much autobiographical material.

Still, it's a simple presentation which is easy to follow and I found it helpful. I'd have to know more about Frankie's utopia to form a full opinion and I'm not sure I got the time.

Nice day outside here, hope it's the same for yous.

coz said...

PS. That bit where he talks about 'testaments', I have seen the bible described as a Last Will and Testament. Not that I regard God as dead, but it has some merit. It's to do with who inherits the Kingdom, the story of the bible. There is an inheritance story line there.

Anonymous said...

No problem, Captain :-)

As I said to you, it's a good introductory piece, isn't it?

Challenging stuff yet easy to follow.

Working on the first choice all the time...



Anonymous said...

@ coz

"He also states that St Francis never existed, that it's a myth. I don't find that terribly credible, there's too much autobiographical material."

He says "...the whole history of the Franciscans, including Francis, is, unfortunately, a huge myth." (Emphasis mine.)

As I see it Frank is not so much saying that Saint Francis and the Franciscans are a myth - quite the opposite, in fact - but that what we have been told about Saint Francis and the Franciscans is a myth.

What you will find when reading the Ucadia sites is that they are full of what could be termed "alternative" history, in that they present information about people, places, events and organisations that may be completely different from, and in many cases at odds with, the "official" history of those same things presented by the system.

In last week's Ucadia Talkshoe call Frank was asked about Saint Francis and said the following:

"The story of Francis that I believe that makes it most important is this: Francis is, as we are told, the founder of the Franciscans. The Franciscans' headquarters has always been Venice. The Franciscans became the monopoly of navigators from the late 13 Century right up until the 16th Century, no ship out of Europe could sail without a Franciscan navigator. They were not permitted to sail without a Franciscan navigator. This is historic fact. So the Franciscans were heavily involved in the control of trade even though they were a religious order, and so were intimately connected to the power of Venice.

"Now, if you read the story that we outline of Francis, the animals that he loved actually were us, considering that they consider us animals or feo, cattle, (from feo-udal) or human, as good animals (from the Persian or Khazar language). And, in fact, the story of Francis emulating Christ is a deliberate and conscious curse of Christianity by the non-Christian Venetian Magyar founders of this system and Giovanni Moriconi or Morosini, as was his real name, was a member of the elite family of Venice, and whilst I have no doubt that he found an aesthetic calling and I have no doubt that he was able to convince the ruling elite that the only way to maintain power was to deny a life of pleasure and orgy and to live with some aesthetic value in the founding of the Franciscans, the remainder of the story I believe is not true."

My transcript, there may be errors especially in punctuation as I am essentially guessing the sentence structure from the audio and Frank does talk rather quickly at times :-D

Ucadia's outline of Francis is here:

I acknowledge that one should not blindly accept whatever someone puts on a website, but similarly one should also not blindly accept what the establishment says (and imparts to the next generation through the public fool system), especially when it changes things constantly and is operating under a controlling agenda that dates back a long time.



coz said...

oh ok, so he's linking the Franciscans to Venice (important Maritime power of its day) and therefore to Maritime Law. I'll have a look at your link tomorrow, it's getting on for bedtime here.

Francis and his order got assimilated into the borg, no doubt about that, the autobiographical and biographical will tell you that, but that's what the borg does. Doesn't make it a 'win' for them, despite their convictions. Ex Catholics go off in very strange directions. Never having been one, but known a great many, I kinda understand that.

Harry J said...

O'Collins' curious and bizarre claims about Lucifer being the 'Lord God' made me look at him a little closer.

Firstly, Lucifer is the word used for 'morning star' in the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible. As such it is incorrectly used in the KJV where the Hebrew translation (as is the case in other Bibles) should be 'morning star'. It is not either a name or a title as such.

The issue of the plurality of the word 'Elohim' in the Bible is dealt with here.

There really is far too much written about 'Ucadia' to investigate it thoroughly but O'Collins' incorrect notions about Lucifer are enough to suspect there's more going on here than meets the 'eye'. Indeed at first glance it seems remarkably similar to many other attempts at spiritual 'unity' or 'oneness. As a rule of thumb any 'system' that equates the God of the Bible (or at the very least the New Testament) with Allah is seriously astray.

coz said...

Yeah, I would agree, had a bit of a look around his legion of sites and seems he's a syncretist druid or something like that. Identifies with the old pagan celtic cultures type of thing. The [i]lucifer is Jesus' brother/twin[/i] storyline seems the latest twist in the narrative being put out by the occultists, I also read some 'doom' sites from time to time and they've been pushing that storyline a lot lately. I'm very ecumenical about my sources, but not about my faith.

Doesn't mean this video series isn't worth watching though. There's always something of value, just take what you need and leave the rest.

Anonymous said...

Hey Cpt. Ranty!
This comment is a bit offtopic but i was not able to find a place to make a general comment on your blog elsewhere. Sorry for that.
First of all, thank you for your interesting blog. I am always in for some "random rant", which clearly is not random at a closer look.
My question: are you in any kind related to or in knowledge of the blogger "Captain Frantic"?
I have lost contact to him and he does not seem to work on his blog anymore since years. But exactly at that time your blog seems to have started, so... is that just a coincidence? :-)
Thank you and sorry for being off topic here.

Captain Ranty said...


Although I don't believe in coincidence any more, I think this is one.

I am not, nor have I ever been, Captain Frantic.

Sorry I can't help with his current whereabouts.


Chris said...

Dear C.R.,

thank you very much for the quick response!
A really interesting coincidence indeed (and maybe none at all).

You might catch why i think so if you visit "" and read some of his blogentries (maybe without focussing on his last entries as they mainly are illustrating his reasons for quitting his blogging-activities).

The interests, kind of humour and intentions of both "Captains" seem to walk quite alongside.

Uniting the efforts of you both (at the "Captain`s Table" e.g.) would possibly result in quite a mindblowing blast of brilliance.

Anyway, he might reappear some day, i wont stop looking for him.
I really appreciated his entertaining and sharp approach to topics that matter, and his understanding of being a social acting individual.

I understand that comment moderation is enabled.
As i do not want to disturb the discussion about your very interesting "Ucadia"-blogentry and as i just wanted to inform you about my motivation to search the Captain (the other one), i would not mind and totally agree if you would not publish this comment.

Blog Ahoy!

Yours sincerely, Chris.