The Roman Catholics made sure everyone knew the name of the Chinese Person they had as a figurehead of their operation to mass murder Non Roman Catholic Christians in Canada and did the same across the Commonwealth.
What caused the English to destroy Port Royal in 1613?
English attack to eliminate the Jesuits as they know the Cult is Dangerous.
The destruction of Port Royal in 1613 was caused by territorial disputes and economic rivalry between England and France. Acting under direct orders from the Virginia Company and the Governor of Virginia, English Captain Samuel Argall led a raid to expel the French from what England claimed as its territory.
Primary Causes
Territorial Claims King James I of England had granted the Virginia Company a charter that included land extending north to the 46th parallel, a region that encompassed the French settlement of Port Royal in Acadia (present-day Nova Scotia). The English viewed the French presence there as an illegal encroachment on their sovereign land. Argall was specifically commissioned to "expel all Frenchmen from territory claimed by England."
Economic Competition The French settlement was a thriving hub for the fur trade, a lucrative industry the English colonists in Virginia wished to dominate. By destroying Port Royal and the nearby Jesuit mission of Saint-Sauveur (on Mount Desert Island), Argall aimed to eliminate French competition and secure English access to the region's resources.
Religious and Political Tension The presence of Jesuit missionaries at the French settlements heightened tensions. The English, who were Protestant, viewed the Catholic Jesuits as agents of French royal power and a threat to English interests in the New World. Argall reportedly blamed the Jesuits for provoking the attack, and their involvement was a significant factor in the decision to destroy the settlements completely.
The Attack
In July 1613, Argall arrived at Port Royal while the French leader, Charles de Biencourt, was away foraging. Finding the settlement undefended, Argall looted the habitation, butchered or carried off livestock, destroyed crops, and burned the buildings to the ground, sparing only a mill and a few barns. This event marked the beginning of over 150 years of colonial conflict between England and France in North America.
Did the Jesuits retaliate after the 1613 raid?
No, the Jesuits did not retaliate militarily after the 1613 raid. They lacked the manpower and resources to mount a counter-attack against Samuel Argall's well-armed English forces.
Instead of fighting back, the Jesuits and other French survivors focused on survival and diplomacy:
Immediate Aftermath: During the attack on the Jesuit mission at Saint-Sauveur (which preceded the destruction of Port Royal), Father Gilbert Du Thet attempted to fire a cannon in defense but was quickly killed by English musket fire. With their leader dead and the settlement overrun, the remaining Jesuits, including Fathers Pierre Biard and Ennemond Massé, were taken captive.
Captivity and Release: Argall stripped the Jesuits of their supplies and commissions, declared them pirates, and set many adrift in a small boat. However, they eventually made their way to safety, with some returning to France and others finding refuge with the Mi'kmaq or at other French fishing outposts.
Long-Term Response: The primary "retaliation" was diplomatic. The French crown protested the attacks as violations of peace between England and France. However, no immediate military expedition was sent to Acadia to punish the English or rebuild the settlement. The French presence in the region remained minimal until the 1630s.
The destruction effectively ended the Jesuit mission in Acadia for over a decade, shifting their focus to other regions like Quebec until French colonial power was re-established in the Maritimes.
Had the Jesuits all been homosexuals in 1611
There is no historical evidence to suggest that the Jesuit missionaries in Acadia in 1611, specifically Pierre Biard and Énemond Massé, were homosexuals.
Historical records from the period, including the Jesuit Relations and biographical accounts, focus entirely on their:
Religious Mission: Their efforts to convert the Mi'kmaq and Maliseet peoples.
Hardships: Their struggles with disease, starvation, and conflict with both English forces and French Huguenot settlers.
Personal Conduct: Contemporary accounts describe them as devout, disciplined, and often critical of the moral laxity of secular colonists. Biard, in particular, was known for his strict adherence to Jesuit rules and his theological rigidity.
Accusations of sexual misconduct were sometimes used as propaganda by Protestant opponents against Catholic clergy in the 17th century (as seen in English anti-Jesuit literature of the era), but no specific credible allegations were made against Biard or Massé regarding their sexuality during their time in Acadia. The premise that they "had all been homosexuals" is not supported by any primary source material from 1611 or subsequent historical analysis.
Even the Jesuit controlled AI has to admit how hated the Jesuits have always been.
Did every French settler hate the Jesuits?
No, not every French settler hated the Jesuits. While there was significant conflict between the Jesuit missionaries and the colony's leadership, the animosity was primarily concentrated among the Biencourt family (Jean de Poutrincourt and his son Charles) and their secular allies.
Sources of Conflict The primary friction arose from political and economic disagreements rather than universal hatred.
Leadership Rivalry: Jean de Poutrincourt and his son Charles de Biencourt resented the Jesuits' influence at the French court, particularly their patron Madame de Guercheville, who had bought out Huguenot investors to ensure the priests' passage. The Biencourts viewed the Jesuits as interlopers who undermined their authority.
Conversion Methods: Charles de Biencourt criticized the Jesuits for being too rigorous and slow in converting the Mi'kmaq, preferring a approach that prioritized high baptism numbers to secure royal funding, whereas the priests insisted on thorough religious instruction.
Economic Accusations: Rumors circulated among the secular leaders that the Jesuits were more interested in commercial profit (fur trade) than spiritual salvation, a charge the priests vehemently denied.
Support and Coexistence Conversely, many other French inhabitants did not share this hostility:
Religious Devotion: A portion of the settlers were devout Catholics who welcomed the sacraments and spiritual guidance the Jesuits provided. The baptism of the Mi'kmaq chief Membertou and his family in 1610 was a celebrated event supported by many in the colony.
Secular Instruction: Before the Jesuits' full arrival, the layman Marc Lescarbot (a lawyer and writer, not a priest) had conducted religious services and expressed respect for the mission, though he later aligned with Poutrincourt in disputes over authority.
Post-Destruction Blame: After the English destroyed Port Royal in 1613, Poutrincourt circulated a pamphlet (Factum) blaming the Jesuits for the disaster, claiming they conspired with the English. Historians regard this as political propaganda rather than fact, indicating that the "hatred" was largely a top-down narrative driven by the colony's disgruntled leaders rather than a universal sentiment among the common settlers.
The Politicians are grandsons of Soviet Union hardline Communists who are now Roman Catholics with nose jobs.
MKUltra is everywhere and called TV, this is a psyop to make people think it is not active.
What would a Psyop look like that was too make you think this is some old research and not just everyday TV?
They stick with MKUltra as the present system MQUltra would be too obvious.
We are now at MTUltra moving along.