Apple's first logo was an illustration of Newton's apple legend (the falling apple that supposedly gave him knowledge regarding Earth's supposed motion).  Newton was an Arian Cabalist (A gentile who practices Jєωιѕн magic and denies Jesus' divinity). What year did the falling apple story supposedly happen?

1666!

It's a safe bet the rainbow color is a reference to Newton's prism experiment (and possibly the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ who is currently Apple's Chief Executive).  What year is that said to have taken place?

1666!

How much was the first Apple computer sold for?

$666.66!

I'll go out on a limb and say the bite taken out is a reference to that infamous bite at the beginning of time inspired by ...

Satan.

The person who built that first Apple computer is a self-professed Freemason, and his partner Steve Jobs was of Semitic descent:  His father is (allegedly) a Muslim and from Syria and is currently the very rich Vice-President of a casino.  

Job's sister married a Jєω named Richard Appel.  

That rainbow Apple logo is from like, the late 90s... long before Tim Cook was CEO... who only is where he is, literally, because Steve Jobs died.

From Laughing Amigo:
It's a safe bet the rainbow color is a reference to Newton's prism experiment (and possibly the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ who is currently Apple's Chief Executive).  What year is that said to have taken place?

My response: Logos have a great impact on our understanding and reception of products, and can provide subliminal messages as well. I do not doubt that many may have diabolic influences (many logos have clear free masonic influences, for example).

Some of the details are incorrect, though. Tim Cook, Apple's current chief executive, joined Apple in 1998, when the company was in decline. The rainbow logo was used from 1977 to 1998. At that time of its introduction, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak were in control of the fledgling company. The rainbow had nothing to do with Tim Cook.

As a side note, Steve Wozniak claimed that the price was selected because he liked repeating numbers, that the cost of $666.66 was one-third markup of the $500 wholesale cost, and that he was unaware of the Satanic nature of the number. It may seem far-fetched, especially the supposed ignorance of the number's meaning, but that is what he has publicly claimed.

Apple has always been pioneering ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖism.

Laughing Amigo, if you compiled your content into an article, I think it would be well-received at The Vigilant Citizen.  At the very least, you could upload it to their forum.  The sites are certainly not Catholic, but many non-Catholics are awakening to the ʝʊdɛօ-Luciferian control of "syphilization," such as it is.

More on GOOGLE.  As we saw earlier, the LE at the end is EL when read backwards as in Hebrew, which means GOD.

Turns out an alternative spelling of Gog (an evil ruler who attacked Israel in the Book of Ezekiel, and the name of a nation that will fight under Satan's banner in the Book of Revelation) is Gug, pronounced Goog.

So if we read GOOGLE backwards as in Hebrew we get ELGOOG, EL-GOOG, EL-GUG, GOD-GOG which is ambiguously ominous.

Make of that what you will, not sure if it's intentional although I wouldn't put it past them.

666 followed by ע, meaning Eye of Providence.

Quote from: ManuelChavez

I do not doubt that many may have diabolic influences (many logos have clear free masonic influences, for example).

What about diabolical Jєωιѕн influences in logos?  What do you think about that possibility?  

Here's how Manuel recently defended blasphemous flattery that he once bestowed upon a Jєω.
 

OHCA quoting from a blog connected to ManuelChavez:
"As the elderly man stepped out of his vehicle, my heart raced. I could not believe that Jerry Goldsmith himself was just a few feet away.

"I tread nervously toward him. I had no idea what to say. I could have pleaded for his autograph, or told him I worshiped him as a god, or uttered a thousand other things about his career or the honor it was to be in his presence."

http://reelmusiconline.blogspot.com/2009/08/my-goldsmith-moment.html?m=1


ManuelChavez:
The comment about worshiping him as a God was a reference to what happened with the founder of another film music magazine. The audience I wrote for would have gotten the reference, since it was fairly well known by this small group of film music fans.

You have not all the facts, so you use your opinion and bias to fill the large gaps in your knowledge.


OHCA:
I don't doubt that your audience was blasphemous marxists/Jєωs.  But your "reference" is blasphemy--pure--simple--regardless of context--blasphemy!


ManuelChavez:
You mock what you don't understand.

You also do not want to hear the truth, for you have already made a determination on what transpired nearly 12 years ago.

My audience of film music fans were familiar with the other event i referenced, where the well-known magazine founder walked up to Goldsmith and said, "I worship you as a God." Goldsmith spent a minute or so berating the fan for his blasphemous outburst. It was a humorous event, and that story occurred to me before I met Goldsmith myself. I would not want to repeat such an idiotic and blasphemic mistake.

Context is important, as are facts. You simply choose to ignore them and wallow in ignorance and your unfounded, preconceived biases.

I'd like to add Chavez is a very, very Jєωιѕн name.  In fact the most famous Chavez is the Jєω Hugo Chavez who ruled communist Venezuela and was buddies with the Jєω Castro of Cuba and the Jєω Ahmadinejad of Iran.

Quote from: OHCA

Quote from: LaughingAmigo

Quote from: ManuelChavez

I do not doubt that many may have diabolic influences (many logos have clear free masonic influences, for example).

What about diabolical Jєωιѕн influences in logos?  What do you think about that possibility?  

Here's how Manuel recently defended blasphemous flattery that he once bestowed upon a Jєω.
 

OHCA quoting from a blog connected to ManuelChavez:
"As the elderly man stepped out of his vehicle, my heart raced. I could not believe that Jerry Goldsmith himself was just a few feet away.

"I tread nervously toward him. I had no idea what to say. I could have pleaded for his autograph, or told him I worshiped him as a god, or uttered a thousand other things about his career or the honor it was to be in his presence."

http://reelmusiconline.blogspot.com/2009/08/my-goldsmith-moment.html?m=1


ManuelChavez:
The comment about worshiping him as a God was a reference to what happened with the founder of another film music magazine. The audience I wrote for would have gotten the reference, since it was fairly well known by this small group of film music fans.

You have not all the facts, so you use your opinion and bias to fill the large gaps in your knowledge.


OHCA:
I don't doubt that your audience was blasphemous marxists/Jєωs.  But your "reference" is blasphemy--pure--simple--regardless of context--blasphemy!


ManuelChavez:
You mock what you don't understand.

You also do not want to hear the truth, for you have already made a determination on what transpired nearly 12 years ago.

My audience of film music fans were familiar with the other event i referenced, where the well-known magazine founder walked up to Goldsmith and said, "I worship you as a God." Goldsmith spent a minute or so berating the fan for his blasphemous outburst. It was a humorous event, and that story occurred to me before I met Goldsmith myself. I would not want to repeat such an idiotic and blasphemic mistake.

Context is important, as are facts. You simply choose to ignore them and wallow in ignorance and your unfounded, preconceived biases.

STOP THIS NONSENSE.

I know that blowing your cover makes you mad and that you urgently want this dismissed as "nonsense."  But this proves several things:  how intricately connected you are (or fancy yourself being) with the liberal/Jєω entertainment industry; how you gush over Jєωs in the industry; how you cheerily tongue-in-cheek toss blasphemy around and defend doing so.