By Anna Von Reitz
Stories of dead brothers and sisters are pouring in from across America, and through all these stories runs one totally amazing, gobsmacker, unbelievable thread.
All these families were simply told about the "stillborn fraternal twin" --- none of them, not one, reports that they ever actually saw the baby.
No Mother or Father actually held their dead baby in their arms and no siblings gazed on the tiny face.
Priests, nuns, doctors, nurses, or hospital staffers simply told them about this tragic outcome, they believed, they paid the extra expenses, some held funerals with little caskets, but the caskets were all sealed. Every single one.
Nobody out of thousands of families ever actually saw the dead baby. Apparently, this whole practice peaked in the 1930's and tapered off gradually. The most recent cases we've found are in the very early 1970's.
So I am hearing from the Grandsons and Granddaughters, Siblings who are now middle-aged to elderly, and a few Mothers and Fathers who are still grieving, still concerned, still left wondering.
The emotional anguish is still in their words and voices. They suffered a terrible loss, yet when they look back they can't even prove that it happened.
Many people know where their lost babies were purportedly buried, at least in terms of a marker or a cemetery plot. But in all cases of traditional burial, the little casket was sealed. Again, nobody ever actually saw the baby.
Same thing with cremations. The casket was sealed. Nobody saw the baby.
In a few cases where there have been small communities and intergenerational funeral home businesses, family members have been able to go back to the morticians who handled the burial and inquire about their records related to the baby's funeral, only to find that the records have disappeared from the otherwise complete record of everyone who has been buried in the last seventy years.
Same thing at the hospitals. There's no record of a baby being born and no record of a baby dying. None at all.
Come to that, if you go to the hospital and inquire about the live baby and records of the live birth, they don't have those, either.
It's as if these families had a nightmare or a group hallucination. There's no evidence of these lost babies at all, except in a few cases, we've found a Death Certificate from the Coroner's Office, and sometimes blurbs in the local newspapers, "A son, Gregory Matthew, stillborn....".
In all cases, when we track it down, and can track it down, the newspaper announcement was either paid for by the family as a memorial or included in the "Births and Deaths" page along with all the other funerals.
But a funeral, as we've seen, doesn't prove the existence of a dead baby, and uniformly, when we get a chance to interview Mothers, they do not remember a second baby as part of the labor.
As anyone who has actually had twins can verify, you normally feel both and they are two separate labors and events, very definite and palpable.
That isn't what happened with all these missing stillborn babies. The Mothers experienced no separate labor--- weren't even aware that they had a second baby, but then, they didn't see the placenta, either.
They had to be told about the stillborn fraternal twin afterward.
"Everything happened so fast...." is what we hear again and again and again.
So, what's going on here?
Was there a baby at all, or was this just a cruel con to scam some extra bucks worth of death services, burial and funeral costs?
It was certainly a money laundering and taxation-based peonage racket targeting the survivor. The "death" was used as a premise to create an intestate joint infant decedent estate "administered" by the Bar Association Members -- we know that. For sure.
We know that the Roman Catholic Church and the British Monarch split the take 60/40 on Protestants and the Church got 100% on Catholics. For sure.
But nobody ever saw the baby and nobody ever saw any emergency baptism or Last Rites being performed, and those two facts taken together make up the most startling and macabre thread of evidence I've ever seen.
How could all these stillbirths occur and all these charges for hospital services and religious services be added on the bill -- when nobody saw the baby and nobody from the family was ever present when the services were performed?
The whole prospect that something like this could happen, is mammothly improbable, even implausible -- but there it is. Nobody saw the baby. Nobody saw the emergency baptism. Nobody saw the Last Rites.
One other thing that runs absolutely true in the recounts from the Mothers is that yes, they were pumped for money----and many Mothers report that they were somehow made to feel guilty, as if they hadn't done their best by the child, or that they were being punished for lust, or didn't eat right, or didn't pray enough.
It all leaves us unable to prove, except by possible forensic evidence obtained by exhumation, that a baby ever existed.
An underground facility in the vicinity of an old "home" for unwed mothers in Ireland was excavated in 2017 and found to contain the corpses of 800 babies and young children:
The Catholic-run home ran from 1925 to 1961.
Many questions remain. Who were all these children? Who were their families? What did they die of? Most were dated to the 1950's? Why was that decade prone to such mammoth losses? Are there hundreds more buried on the property somewhere from the 1920s, 30's and 40's? Why weren't they given a proper Irish burial?
Even the use of charnel houses, which is still a tradition in some areas of Europe, requires burial for a number of years before the bones can be removed to the community charnel house-- if that is what the French nuns were attempting to do in Ireland.
If that was what was going on, there would be a steady accumulation of bones from the earlier decades and many of the 1950s burials would still be in place as burials, awaiting their final exhumation and journey to the charnel house. Instead, most of the skeletons are from the 1950's, the decade immediately before the facility closed.
This incident at least gives some substance to the claim that thousands of stillbirths and deaths actually occurred.
This story and the whole surrounding "stillborn fraternal twin" story that so many families have heard also impetus and credibility to the work undertaken by Kevin Annett addressing similar concerns at Residential Schools in Canada.
To sum up the possibilities:
(1) No actual baby ever existed and what got buried or incinerated was the placenta described as a "human creature" by Pope Boniface VIII, and more recently as a "stillborn fraternal twin"; (2) a stillborn baby was born, but nobody from the family ever saw it or witnessed its baptism or Last Rites in 100% of the cases, and in all cases with burials or cremations reported, the caskets were sealed; (3) --- and this is the really tough one: a healthy baby was born, but was then stolen.
Why?
Again, more questions than answers.
(1) Sale of the baby to adoptive parents willing to pay big bucks for one that met their requirements; the colluding hospital staff would simply sit back until they saw a good candidate, snatch the baby, transfer them to the buyer and be done. Even in the 1920s babies sold for five times the yearly wages of a working man, so illegal adoption rings have always been very lucrative.
(2) From what we've learned from Witnesses and house searches and forensic evidence obtained from a wide variety of locations provided by Witnesses, ritual human sacrifice, especially of babies, has always been a big part of the Babylonian Cult and has survived into the present day.
The religion's use of sex as a sacrament meant there was always a great surplus of babies in the days prior to birth control, so they were sacrificed, traditionally by throwing them into a fiery furnace like stovewood.
But where to get babies to sacrifice in the 1950's?
Sadly, similar to the situation with orphanages and residential schools, it would be too easy for the hospital staff to simply lie, tell the parents the baby was stillborn, and sell the child.
There are first hand eye-witness accounts that ten Native children left a Residential School in Canada in the company of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip. Those children never returned to school and were never heard from again by their friends and family.
Has the disappearance of ten children become so commonplace that it doesn't deserve investigation, especially when photographs, eye-witness accounts, and school records confirm the facts?
This is just one example, indicating that yes, this ancient evil of child sacrifice appears to be continuing and in the highest levels of government, too.
If those Native children came to any good end, why wouldn't Buckingham Palace be trumpeting the news and proving that they were treated kindly and went on to live good lives?
The noisome Brits recorded what the Queen ate for breakfast every day of her life. So how could they not "note down" ten children added to the royal entourage?
We are left with the repugnant assumption that the former Queen and her Consort went to a Catholic Residential School in Canada and picked out ten Native children the same way that we might go down to the dock and choose ten lobsters.
These dark issues remain unaddressed by the governments and those responsible to society to provide answers. And whether they like it or not, and no matter how far-fetched it seems, a pattern is emerging.
The Perps in a combined illegal adoption and Cult Supplier ring would have been a mixture of Cult Members who knew the truth, and greedy collaborators who thought the babies were going into adoptive homes.
No doubt there would be an even fatter "honorarium gift" made available to the suppliers of the Cult, so it would be easy to maintain the illusion that adoptive parents were paying the freight and both operations could be going on at the same time.
We have seen many instances where one lucrative illegal activity was paired with one that was much, much worse, so as to draw in collaborators who thought they were engaged in a different scheme.
It would not surprise us to find an illegal adoption ring supplying a child sacrifice cult.
(3) The babies were being shunted into government-sponsored scientific experiments.
This seems far-fetched until you start seeing numerous variations of "cabbage patch postcards" and pictures of certain sideshow exhibits featuring babies in incubators at places like the New Jersey Boardwalk and World Fairs from the 1890's to the 1940s.
Did anyone ever tell you that babies come from cabbage patches? I heard it growing up, as it was running in a competition with the stork story.
The cabbage patch postcards show dozens of babies being grown like row crops, often with a cabbage plant used as their seat and a big cabbage leaf being used like a cap on their heads. There's something incredibly creepy about these black and white and color tinted photographic postcards and the thought does arise that we were being shown early cloning programs.
The same aura surrounds the traveling incubator shows billed as science and industry exhibits. The photos show dozens of old-fashioned incubators and dozens of babies that are being cared for by women who appear to be nurses. Again, where are all these babies coming from? Where are their parents?
What happened to them after the shows closed down?
Were the Perps giving us a "soft disclosure" of cloning or gene splicing or....?
These images are surreal, inexplicable, and weird.
And they record large numbers of unattended babies in odd scientific environments.
Superficially, the babies appear healthy, and there is nothing overtly threatening in these photos, but everyone I show these postcards and photos reacts the same way: something macabre is lurking just out of sight.
We keep coming back to the Office of the Roman Pontiff, its odd triple-tiered crown, the three crossed keys representing enslavement of mind, body, and soul --- supposedly to "Christ", the Anointed One, who may have been anointed as a priest of Baal, if we are to believe the Gospels in the context of their times.
Is there anything in the New Testament suggesting that Yehoshua would condone enslaving anyone for any reason?
Or was the whole Mary-Magdalene-was-a-(possibly temple) prostitute, just another Big Lie embroidered onto the whole cloth by the likes of Saint Jerome? Jerome included books and letters written as homages by Paul of Ephesus as part of the Biblical Canon, as if they had been written by Saint Paul himself. They still haven't been removed.
Thanks to these writings being added to the Bible as the writings of "Paul", we have a distorted image of Saint Paul as a mean-spirited misanthrope fixated on blaming women for the downfall of Mankind, a brow-beating misogynist after Jerome's own heart and serving the purposes of the Roman Patriarchs, but a thousand miles away from the actual Saint who wrote with great insight and from the heart about the nature of love and forgiveness.
Is it really so unlikely that the transformation of Yehoshua to Jesus to Christ was anything but the advent of the familiar slavemaster caste system, practiced by and approved of by the Roman Patriarchs?
The system certainly left the Jew-boy at the bottom of the heap of the social caste system, and all but forgotten as he was substituted for by the Roman Jesus and Babylonian Christ, both.
We have proof that Constantine didn't actually convert to Christianity. His Triumphal Arch constructed years after his purported conversion features Dacian priests wearing their traditional hats and costumes. His correspondence shows that he was still actively promoting an Imperial Roman Ancestor Cult years afterward, too.
Was Constantine simply a Big Liar? Did he convert to the Church or did the Church convert to him? A startling 26 Roman Emperors came from Romania which also gave its name to Rome. Why aren't we taught this fact in school? Why do we know virtually nothing about the Dacian religion and priesthood?
Most importantly, did it involve child sacrifice?
----------------------------
To support this work look for the Donate button on this website.
