OnePeterFive

Rebuilding Catholic Culture. Restoring Catholic Tradition

• TRADITIONIS CUSTODES

Hidden Origins of Traditionis Custodes: Grillo and Francis’s Self-Abrogation

 Lee Fratantuono, PhDNovember 9, 20210 Comments

• 24Shares

The Forgotten Francis Decrees

On the twenty-second of February, 2020. The Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter.

Quo magis.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

Cum sanctissima.

Documents of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, released with the approval of the Supreme Pontiff Francis, approval that had been granted in an audience of 5 December, 2019.

These spring decrees are not nearly as well-known as such papal mandates as Traditionis Custodesfrom the summer of 2021. In fact, they might well merit to be called the Forgotten Decrees of Francis.

Quo magis provides a selection of optional texts of seven new Prefaces for inclusion in the 1962 Missale Romanum: for the Angels; the Baptist; the Martyrs; All Saints and Patrons; the Most Holy Sacrament; the Dedication of a Church; Nuptial Masses. Cum sanctissima offers rubrical supplements to the Missal (and Breviary) that permit the celebration of saints added to the Martyrologium Romanum since 1962. The rubrics include details on which texts to use for these newer saints, and explicitly reference a supplement that will be published to include Mass and Office propers for a selection of such potential celebrations. Once again, all is optional. An interesting “correction” of the 1962 rubrics is included: during Lent and Passiontide, there is freedom to celebrate saints whose observances were hitherto severely constrained. Again, maximum freedom is allowed by the optional status of all the new rubrics.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

These two decrees are presented with explicit reference to the vision outlined by Benedict XVI in Summorum Pontificum from 2007. They respond exactly to Benedict’s vision of possible enrichment of the corpus of Prefaces, and of the possibility of celebrating post-1962 saints using the classical Roman Rite.

It is not the purpose of my article to comment on the import and content of these decrees (see Kwasniewski’s analysis here). Those who wish to avail themselves of the provisions are free to do to; those who wish to ignore them are also afforded the same courtesy: all the changes offered in both documents are facultative and non-obligatory; the only area in which one is bound not to do something is with respect to the specific provision that certain III Class feasts cannot be supplanted by new celebrations (a calendar list is provided).

My point is to focus on how these two Francis-approved, 2020 documents are essentially now lost to oblivion. Though not, significantly, before they engendered a fair amount of controversy.

Both documents generated a storm of opposition. The opposition was not from “fixed in amber” 1962 devotees who object to any change to that Missal. No, the optional nature of the decrees silenced any such protest, one might think. If one was worried about possible changes to the 1962 books, this was a relieving dyad of documents: one could, after all, simply ignore them both as one wished.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

The opposition was from the progressive liturgical establishment, whose headquarters is at San Anselmo in Rome. The progressive liturgical establishment did not ignore these documents. Not remotely.

Quo magis and Cum sanctissima enraged progressive liturgists. Both decrees confirmed that the classical Roman Rite was part of the rich liturgical tradition of the West. Both decrees emphasized and highlighted how the classical Roman Rite was a living liturgy, not some museum piece fixed forever in 1962.

Both decrees came also on the heels of Francis’ granting of permission for certain locales to use the pre-1956 Ordo Hebodamadae Sanctae. Not only was Francis granting faculties to the sons of Lefebvre: he was also breaching the 1962 wall back before the drumbeat of 1950s era precursors  to the Pauline Novus Ordo, and he was now codifying how the classical liturgy could live on with new sanctoral propers as if organic development (as opposed to inorganic rupture) had actually happened in the 1960s and 1970s.

Noted San Anselmo liturgist Andrea Grillo quickly started a petition essentially aimed at ending the use of the classical rite (published at Munera and again at Pray Tell). Liturgical luminaries in both Europe and North America signed the document. Quo magis and Cum sanctissima inspired a determined campaign by liturgists of more left-leaning tendencies to end once and for all the Age of Benedict, an age they had always held in contempt and for which their pens were filled not with the ink of sycophantic calls for  “obedience,” but with the veritable poison of derision, of criticism of the man who had incurred their collective ire as long ago as 1968. Despite frequent assertions that not many people wanted or even cared in the least about the classical liturgy, Grillo and his colleagues never missed a  chance to call for the abrogation of Summorum Pontificum.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

Traditionis Custodes was the granting of Grillo’s petition.

The promised supplement for the Missal and Breviary that would provide texts for certain newer saints is perhaps never now to see the light of day. What point would there be in producing such a text? Traditionis Custodes makes it clear that in Francis’ vision, there is no stable future for the classical liturgy. Every Roman is expected to move sooner or later to the “unique expression of the Roman Rite” (the fate of the liturgies approved for the Anglican ordinariates is unclear in the imprecisely worded, logically inconsistent language of the motu proprio). There is no need for the supplement to the classical Missal that was promised in the late winter of 2020, since in the midsummer of 2021 that Missal was given its death warrant. Indeed Quo magis and Cum sanctissimaare decrees of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a congregation that does not need even to have competence in matters concerning the classical liturgy as of July, 2021.

For we have moved from February 2020 and decrees that clearly provide for an announced future provision for the use of the 1962 liturgy, to July 2021 and the envisaged end of the use of the 1962 books, an end that will be presided over by other curial dicasteries. Already as of this writing, the prefect of one of those dicasteries has put in print the falsehood that Paul VI “abrogated” the classical liturgy – a falsehood that not even Annibale Bugnini, the de facto patron saint of progressive liturgy would try to assert.

The hyper-über-papal media maximalists of the Francis pontificate did not produce blog entries and essays in celebration of Quo magis and Cum sanctissima. There were no articles reminding us of the obligation of unquestioned obedience to every new airplane presser statement, let alone official decree approved by Francis. The same mouthpieces of the pontifical oracle who revel in celebrating such glories of the Bergoglian reign as the Pachamama embarrassment were less enchanted with Francis’ approval of two decrees that were entirely consistent with the trajectory of liturgical decisions for the past two pontificates.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

Rather, there was the aforementioned tantrum (and tantrum it was) of the progressive liturgical establishment, a diverse lot united in certain core tenets, chief among them the curious doctrine that Benedict XVI was no liturgist and thus could not be trusted to speak on liturgy, while Francis is no liturgist and yet can be trusted to be the very vox Dei when it comes to any pronouncement on the liturgy.

Except, that is, when Francis approved these two decrees that Grillo and friends did not like.

Suddenly papal decrees could be not only ignored, but also protested against with vigor. The protests in this case yielded the bitter fruit of the summer of 2021. In the roster of post-Vatican II popes, there is apparently a hierarchy: Paul VI and Francis are entirely to be trusted on liturgy, and John Paul II and especially Benedict XVI less so. Francis is the new Paul, and history has been reset as it were to 7 August, 1978.

Except, again, when it comes to the two lost, forsaken, abandoned and ignored decrees of Francis that remind one of John XXIIII’s Veterum Sapientia when it comes to the question of forgetting an ecclesiastical document almost before the ink is dry: Quo magis and Cum sanctissima. Who would have thought that the effort to bring the 1962 “up to date” to accommodate new saints and blessed would be opposed so stridently not by devotees of the “Amber Missal of 1962,” but by progressives who would, one might think, applaud Francis’ desire to update, as it were, the 1962 liturgical books.Advertisement – Continue Reading Below

Traditionis Custodes, I would argue, was not so much the bad fruit of questionably and selectively interpreted episcopal polls and questionnaires (much less of petulant behavior by traditionalists) as of Francis’ own approval of the enrichment of the body of Prefaces and modernization of the sanctoral of the classical Missal. The decrees of February, 2020, triggered the nuclear option of July, 2021.

In a recent defense of Traditionis Custodes as an alleged “Gift” to the church, Blaise Cupich highlighted the fact that the 1962 Missal does not celebrate more recently canonized saints. Copies of Cum Sanctissima were not, it would seem, sent to Chicago.

Who knows if some future publisher of missals for the classical liturgy will include the Prefaces of Quo magis or the rubrics of Cum sanctissima. Perhaps editors are waiting for the announced supplement that may prove to take longer to produce than the supplement to the Pauline Breviary that has taken already more than half a century to release. What matter when Quo–Cum are the forgotten Francis decrees, consigned to liturgical limbo.

Consistency has never been a hallmark of this pontificate, and so there is little surprise that Francis overturned not only his predecessor, but also himself.

Lee Fratantuono, PhD

Dr. Lee Fratantuono finished degrees in Classics at Holy Cross, Boston College, and Fordham. He has authored over a dozen books and some sixty articles on Greek and Latin literature and Roman history, including commentaries on books of Virgil, Ovid, and Tacitus, and monographs on Lucretius and Lucan.

THE CATHOLIC MONITOR

SEARCH

If Biden’s War on America with the Lawless Mandates & the apparently Planned Michigan Oil Pipeline Shut Down that is “Essential to the Lifeblood of the Midwest” are not Stopped, are Thomas Jefferson & Sen. Cruz right about the “Option” of Seceding from a Tyrannical Biden Regime?

November 10, 2021

 

Biden declares war on the 80M unvaccinated Americans – Daily Mail

Yesterday, the Natural News website said the “Biden regime shutting off fuel, energy supplies… [is a] act… of war against We the People“:

Jason Hayes, the director of environmental policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, blasted the Biden administration for its energy policies, telling Fox News that their work on Line 5 is “just one more example of being divorced from reality.”

Hayes presented a dire picture of what shutting Line 5 could mean if people are unable to get natural gas or the electricity it provides as the nation heads into winter.

“I hope it doesn’t end like this, but where I see it going is unfortunately the same thing that happened in February in Texas: People freezing in their homes,” he said.

Pipeline is “essential to the lifeblood of the Midwest”

The deliberate shutting down of this pipeline is an act of war against We the People, as the Biden regime transforms America’s heartland into an active theater of war which will soon face widespread food scarcity, energy scarcity and inevitable civil unrest.

As the UK Daily Mail explains:

The Biden Administration is considering shutting down a Michigan oil pipeline despite warnings from Republican lawmakers who believe the move would result in fuel price shocks throughout the Midwest.

The administration is exploring the possibility of terminating the Line 5 pipeline — which links Superior, Wisconsin, with Sarnia, Ontario — and gathering data to determine if shutting down the line will cause a surge in fuel pricing, according to published reports.

In a letter dated Thursday, 13 Congress members — led by Ohio Rep. Bob Latta — urged the president to keep the oil line in operation, saying: ‘Line 5 is essential to the lifeblood of the Midwest.’ [https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-11-09-biden-regime-shutting-off-fuel-energy-supplies-as-part-of-wartime-embargo-against-we-the-people-famine-collapse.html]

Moreover, the website stated that seceding from a tyrannical Biden regime is an “option” as “Sen. Cruz isn’t calling for secession at this point, but he’s clarifying that it may be the last remaining option if Democrats continue to wage actual warfare against America in their quest to destroy this nation”:

With alarm bells going off over Biden’s deliberate destruction of America’s economy, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is now voicing what millions of Americans are already thinking: At some point, the remaining “free states” have to cut ties with Washington D.C. and form their own new nation, just to survive the planned civilization suicide being pursued by the demon-possessed Democrats.

In a recent speech at Texas A&M University, Sen. Cruz stated:

If the Democrats end the filibuster, if they fundamentally destroy the country… if they pack the Supreme Court, if they make DC a state, if they federalize elections, if they massively expand voter fraud, there may come a point where it’s hopeless…

We’re not there yet, and if there comes a point where it’s hopeless, then I think we take NASA, we take the military, we take the oil.

Importantly, Sen. Cruz isn’t calling for secession at this point, but he’s clarifying that it may be the last remaining option if Democrats continue to wage actual warfare against America in their quest to destroy this nation.[https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-11-09-biden-regime-shutting-off-fuel-energy-supplies-as-part-of-wartime-embargo-against-we-the-people-famine-collapse.html]

Is the Biden federal government a lawless regime? 

The non veni pacem website makes a good case that it is:

What does a dictatorship look like, and how does it differ from this?

A tyrant cares not about the Judiciary; he is above the courts. A tyrant cares not about the Legislative Branch; he makes his own laws.

If this isn’t tyrannical, what does tyranny look like?Imagine if Trump had done this. [https://nonvenipacem.com/2021/11/09/what-does-a-dictatorship-look-like-and-how-does-it-differ-from-this/]

Did Thomas Jefferson agree with Sen. Cruz on the secession “option” in the case of a tyrannical federal government like the Biden regime?

Walter E. Williams who is a John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics, George Mason University, apparently quoting “The Papers of Thomas Jefferson” wrote:

“Thomas Jefferson said, Whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force.” [https://www.amazon.com/Nullification-Resist-Federal-Tyranny-Century/dp/1596981490 and https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/jefferson%E2%80%99s-draft%5D

Historian Tom Woods explains in his book “Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century” that secession is a lawful “constitutional tool the Founders envisioned”:

Unconstitutional laws are pouring out of Washington…but we can stop them.

Just ask Thomas Jefferson. There is a “rightful remedy” to federal power grabs–it’s called Nullification.

In Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century, historian and New York Times bestselling author Thomas E. Woods, Jr. explains not only why nullification is the constitutional tool the Founders envisioned, but how it works–and has already been employed in cases ranging from upholding the First Amendment to knocking down slave laws before the Civil War. In Nullification, Woods shows: 

* How the states were meant to be checks against federal tyranny–and how a growing roster of governors and state attorneys general are recognizing they need to become that again
* Why the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution reinforces the rights of states to nullify unconstitutional laws
* Why it was left to the states to uphold the simple principle that an unconstitutional law is no law at all
* Why, without nullification, ordinary Americans will continue to suffer the oppression of unjust, unconstitutional laws
* PLUS thorough documentation of how the Founding Fathers believed nullification could be applied

Nullification is not just a book–it could become a movement to restore the proper constitutional limits of the federal government. Powerful, provocative, and timely, Nullification is sure to stir debate and become a constitutional handbook for all liberty-loving Americans.[https://www.amazon.com/Nullification-Resist-Federal-Tyranny-Century/dp/1596981490]

Pray an Our Father now for reparation for the sins committed because of Francis’s Amoris Laetitia. 

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost – Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.

Francis Notes:

– Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church in such a situation:

“[T]he Pope… WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See.”
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said “the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church.”
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]

– “If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html

– “Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?”: http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html

 –  LifeSiteNews, “Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers,” December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows “sexually active adulterous couples facing ‘complex circumstances’ to ‘access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'”

–  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

“The AAS statement… establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense.”

– On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

“Francis’ heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents.”

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.

Election Notes: 

– Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: “212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted…Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden” [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]

– Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times “Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003”: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html– Tucker Carlson’s Conservatism Inc. Biden Steal Betrayal is explained by “One of the Greatest Columns ever Written” according to Rush: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/tucker-carlsons-conservatism-inc-biden.html?m=1 – A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020: 
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1 What is needed right now to save America from those who would destroy our God given rights is to pray at home or in church and if called to even go to outdoor prayer rallies in every town and city across the United States for God to pour out His grace on our country to save us from those who would use a Reichstag Fire-like incident to destroy our civil liberties. [Is the DC Capitol Incident Comparable to the Nazi Reichstag Fire Incident where the German People Lost their Civil Liberties?: http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/is-dc-capital-incident-comparable-to.html?m=1 and Epoch Times Show Crossroads on Capitol Incident: “Anitfa ‘Agent Provocateurs‘”: 
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1] 
Pray an Our Father now for the grace to know God’s Will and to do it. Pray an Our Father now for America. Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.SHARE

Clergy Sexual Abuse Almost Wiped Out November 10, 2021 Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the latest report on clergy sexual abuse: The 2020 Annual Report on clergy sexual abuse has just been released. It is published by the National Review Board for the Protection of Children and Youth Protection of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. The data were collected by StoneBridge Business Partners. During the period July 1, 2019 – June 30, 2020, there were 22 current allegations involving minors. Given that there are approximately 50,000 members of the clergy (49,926), and the number of substantiated charges are 6, this means that 99.9% of the clergy did not have a substantiated accusation made against him in the last year we have data. This is nothing new. From 2010 to 2020, the average number of substantiated charges made against the Catholic clergy stands at 5.9. In short, this problem has almost been wiped out in the Catholic Church. There is no other institution in society where adults regularly interact with minors that can match this record. But don’t expect state attorneys general to launch a probe of the sexual abuse of minors in any of them, especially the public schools, where it is sorely needed. What has changed is a reduction in the percent of abuse committed by homosexuals. Typically, 8 in 10 cases of abuse involve male-on-male sex, the victims being postpubescent boys. The latest data show that this figure has dropped to 6 in 10. The decrease makes sense: the seminaries have done a much better job screening for candidates who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies. We continue to deplore the failure of the media to cite data which contradict the false narrative that the scandal is ongoing. That is a lie. As I demonstrate in my new book, The Truth about Clergy Sexual Abuse: Clarifying the Facts and the Causes, the sexual abuse scandal effectively ended decades ago. The book also addresses the two major parties to the scandal: enabling bishops and homosexuals priests, and why they did what they did. The book is available from Amazon and Ignatius.com

Remembering Globalism 

and the Virus

By Victor Davis Hanson

Historian’s Corner

October 27, 2021

“Chinese investment in the United States helps support jobs across our country. We partner to address global challenges, whether it’s promoting nuclear security, combating piracy off the Horn of Africa, encouraging development and reconciliation in Afghanistan, and helping to end the Ebola epidemic in West Africa.  …So, greater prosperity and greater security—that’s what American and Chinese cooperation can deliver. That’s why I want to say again, the United States welcomes the rise of a China that is peaceful, stable, prosperous, and a responsible player in global affairs. … For the first time, the U.S. and China will also formally partner to promote global development. Building on our efforts against Ebola, we’ll work to strengthen global health security.” (Barack Obama, 2015)

Again, as the panic over COVID-19 raged in early 2020, the American media further began blasting as “racist” any further reference to the virus as “the Wuhan virus” or “Chinese Virus,” in the eponymous fashion of past epidemics such as “German measles,” or “Spanish flu.” In February, the New York Times and CNN freely referred to the Wuhan or China virus; by April such references were taboo. Oddly, the more lethal the virus proved, the more careful the media was not to stigmatize China as its originator—even as the media realized that something originating under murky circumstances in China had the ability to disrupt even lives in once secure tony zip codes such as Palo Alto and the Upper West Side.

As disposable gloves and masks, and hand sanitizer, disappeared from American shelves, frenzy finally rose over globalization itself, which, it turned out, now seemed to be synonymous with a sudden ominous “Chinazation.” In other words, the long-ago indifference or ignorance of the American public about the outsourcing of the vast majority of their key medical supplies and pharmaceuticals to Chinese factories and producers suddenly magnified the panic surrounding the virus.

The snap awakening from years of slumber was analogous to the American disbelief and anger on December 8, 1941, that somehow Imperial Japan had developed the Zero fighter, superior to all its American counterparts, and an aircraft carrier fleet far better than that of the American Pacific fleet, without prior concern by America.

Most analysts estimated that about 80 percent of the ingredients used in essential U.S. pharmaceuticals were produced in China, as were an equal percentage of face masks and disposable gloves. The last penicillin plant in the U.S., for example, closed in 2004. What was even more worrisome was that U.S. authorities themselves seemed to have no idea what percentage of key drugs such as antibiotics were Chinese produced, only that it was large and apparently seen in both countries as an American liability.

One communist party organ, Xinhua, for example, at the height of the crisis, warned that if an angry China interrupted its supply chain of drugs and medical supplies to the United States, then America might be overwhelmed and plunge into “the mighty sea of coronavirus.”

China quickly began to limit exports of key medical supplies, including those produced by foreign companies with contracts to send production to their countries of origin. In especially ironic fashion, given the birth and spread of the virus on Chinese soil and due to Chinese dissimulation and laxity, China at first was the recipient of medical aid. Yet shortly as the virus spread from its shores, Beijing became a donor and eventually an especially hard-bargain exporter, jacking up the prices of masks, gloves, and other key medical supplies to ameliorate the infection it had spawned—many of them not just overpriced but defective.

Suddenly, expert opinion about Sino-American relations turned on a dime. In the pre-coronavirus era, the idea of keeping industries inside the U.S., especially those dismissed as drudgery work or non-value-added manufacturing—such as producing simple, N-95 face-masks—was dismissed as low tech know-nothingism at best, and Trump’s Neanderthal protectionism and nationalism at worst.

In the age of the coronavirus, however, the same experts now lectured about the need to preserve “strategic industries” and “national assets” in times of emergencies. The about-face was not so much a recalibration in the heat of panic, as an unknowing return to common sense, and a realization of the limits of globalization.

If a virus, which either leaked from a high-security virology lab outside Wuhan or, according to Chinese communist officials, supposedly brewed from exotic dead animals hanging on hooks in the Wuhan meat market, could reach Pacific Heights or Woodside, California more quickly than to rural regions of China, such international, “the world is flat” leveling seemed not so reassuring. Just because a nation’s airports greet millions of arrivals with gleaming terminals and high-speed rail did not mean that beneath the glitter there were not veritable Petri dishes incubating a new virus that could reach all the way to Alaska or Iceland in hours—without warning from the Chinese communist government.

As mentioned earlier, during the pandemic the reputations of transnational organizations and conglomerates took a beating, not just because there was plenty of pre-virus suspicion of their agendas, but because they performed as dismally in a crisis. The United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO) were slow to respond. When they initially did, they sent out not just false information, but also data supplied by the Chinese government known to be inaccurate but useful for political purposes. American citizens began to grasp that their medical fates were not entirely in the hands of their own elected officials.

WHO’s Director-General, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, assured the world that there was little threat from the Chinese virus. Director Tedros was not a doctor—a first, but likely the last instance for WHO. He had no international health management experience. His chief recommendation was that he was non-Western and had come to the UN post from his government sinecure as a health minister in Ethiopia, itself likely predicated on his past service in the Tigray People’s Liberation Front.

Tedros’s résumé may help explain why the UN mouthpiece so easily assured the world that the virus was not transmissible between humans (“Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus [2019-nCoV] identified in #Wuhan, #China”). Tedros was not through. He also falsely assured the world that the virus was largely already contained by China, and that the all-important January 31 American travel ban stopping direct flights into the U.S. from China (a heavy contributor both to WHO and to Ethiopia) was not just unnecessary but would also “have the effect of increasing fear and stigma, with little public health benefit.”

In the years 2018 and 2019, the United States—perhaps the nation most hurt by WHO’s initial obeisance to Chinese wishes to suppress the truth about the virus’s infectiousness—contributed almost $900 million to the WHO budget. That sum was one-fifth of the organization’s $4.4 billion budget over those two years.

America was by far the single greatest national contributor. But an even more unfortunate American investment of at least $600,000, in a cost-to-benefit sense, was an indirect contribution to the Wuhan Level 4 virology lab itself, the likely ground zero of the plague. Ironically, the grant was in part due to the past recommendations of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and later the leader of the Trump Administration’s White House Coronavirus Task Force. The National Institutes of Health had approved two multiyear grants of some $3.4 million to the EcoHeatlh Alliance that had partnered with several organizations, including many in China and in particular the Wuhan virology lab. To this day, Fauci denies his role in sending cash to gain-of-function viral engineering at the Wuhan lab and seems oblivious when he withers in denial under oath before the U.S. Congress or is refuted by members of his own medical community.

Before the epidemic, it was assumed that no one would question the loyalties of several foreign and native-born scientists and engineers at work at U.S. universities and research centers who were either dual citizens, resident aliens, or enjoyed shared appointments at Chinese universities, often undisclosed to their American employers. To do so, would earn one the slur of racist, xenophobe, or McCarthyite.

Yet throughout the spring of 2020, several high-profile researchers were arrested on charges of either engaging in espionage for China, or theft of U.S. patented technologies, or violating U.S. national security laws, or improperly transferring American classified research to Chinese sources. The list of American universities and organizations who employed scientists stealthily working for the Chinese government or held undisclosed joint appointments with China or were secretly funded by China while enjoying U.S. grants, was diverse. The group included the nation’s top universities and public and private research entities such as Harvard University, the Cleveland Clinic, and NASA.

In general, the virus reminded American citizens that the diminution of nationality was either deleterious to their freedoms as citizens, or in fact was deeply resented by citizens and under populist counterattack. For example, the European Union was born on the promise that it could invent a new pan- “European” citizen who would transcend his German or Hungarian language, the customs of his native Greece, and the constitution of the Netherlands where he was born and would no longer be confined by the use of clumsy francs, or fences along the Italian northern border, or passport controls at the Brussels airport.

But in its initial weeks of crisis, the virus did what even the financial crisis of 2008, the massive waves of illegal immigration into Europe from Asia and Africa, and the departure of the United Kingdom from the EU could not: it exposed the truth that the keystone of EU ideology—a borderless continent, in which Europeanism trumped petty and idiosyncratic national identities—is a still a pipe dream. In fact, intra-European borders quickly slammed and remained shut. The much-heralded Schengen Area Agreement that had abolished most all passport control and border checkpoints among 25 European countries for all practical purposes disappeared in a few days—a postmodern pact previously often contrasted with the supposedly paranoid and premodern U.S. border wall with Mexico. Even prior to the coronavirus, the British philosopher Robert Scruton had argued that many had given up on the EU idea of ecumenical transnational identity, especially in Britain, as well as Southern and Eastern Europe—and for logical reasons.

What was to be the fate of once undocumented migrants who sought an enlightened European refuge from the horrors of Africa and the Middle East? The paranoid logic of Camus’s La Peste (1947) took over. Interned in Turkey and Greece, they were now quarantined and rendered mere suspect illegal aliens that should go home to North Africa.

Did German banks step up to relax repayment schedules to their near bankrupt Mediterranean brothers, hit the hardest by the virus? In the euphemistic language of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the notion of issuing “corona bonds” was not “the view of all EU countries.” Translated that meant EU brother nations with cash and fewer dead were certainly not going to loan money to EU brother nations without it, but with more dead. Or more likely what Germany alone said should happen, would happen.

Were medical supplies such as ventilators and masks common EU property, the humanitarian version of the common Euro that reflected pan-European brotherhood? Again, hardly. The ancient creed of every nation for itself supplanted the European Convention on Human Rights—at least until the EU eventually sought to create a common depository of medical supplies.

As the viral panic spread, Germany soon stopped all export shipments of key medical supplies. It sealed its borders. The virus should remind Europe that if a war ever came, any EU-abiding country that shared its arsenal and headed for the front would suffer the fate of the virtuous citizens who died first from the plague in the chronicles of Thucydides and Procopius.

Yet another odd illustration of the culture and values of the blinkered deep state again was offered during the winter and spring of 2020 during the Democratic presidential primaries and subsequent coronavirus lockdown. Multibillionaire but inept candidate and former New York City mayor, Michael Bloomberg—despite in the past sending billions of investment dollars to China to help jump start Chinese communist affiliated start-up companies—was apparently convinced at the time to enter the race to save the party from both socialist Bernie Sanders and the supposedly fading candidacy of a seemingly stalled campaign of Joe Biden.

Even before investing $1 billion in his brief failed bid, and proving completely inept on the debate stage, Bloomberg had in the past offered a number of inane ideas about relative worth in contemporary America. Addressing an elite group at the Oxford Union in Britain in 2016, Bloomberg contrasted the supposed technocracy and skill sets of the information age and its purveyors with preindustrial rote tasks like farming whose simplicity made them now passé, “It’s a process. You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, you add water,” Bloomberg lectured, “and up comes the corn. You could learn that”—as he pointed to his Oxford audience as if any of these elite students could produce food without much effort or experience or even dig a useful hole.

Again, just a few years following Bloomberg’s condescending putdown, nearly the entire U.S. population was locked down in their own homes—entirely reliant on farmers and frackers to keep working amid the epidemic. Only their skill and courage ensured that food and fuel were plentiful for an urbanized and suburbanized country at a time when investors and media moguls like Bloomberg—heavily invested in Chinse-American joint ventures—were for a time rendered superfluous.

Remembering Globalism 

and the Virus

By Victor Davis Hanson

Historian’s Corner

October 27, 2021

“Chinese investment in the United States helps support jobs across our country. We partner to address global challenges, whether it’s promoting nuclear security, combating piracy off the Horn of Africa, encouraging development and reconciliation in Afghanistan, and helping to end the Ebola epidemic in West Africa.  …So, greater prosperity and greater security—that’s what American and Chinese cooperation can deliver. That’s why I want to say again, the United States welcomes the rise of a China that is peaceful, stable, prosperous, and a responsible player in global affairs. … For the first time, the U.S. and China will also formally partner to promote global development. Building on our efforts against Ebola, we’ll work to strengthen global health security.” (Barack Obama, 2015)

Again, as the panic over COVID-19 raged in early 2020, the American media further began blasting as “racist” any further reference to the virus as “the Wuhan virus” or “Chinese Virus,” in the eponymous fashion of past epidemics such as “German measles,” or “Spanish flu.” In February, the New York Times and CNN freely referred to the Wuhan or China virus; by April such references were taboo. Oddly, the more lethal the virus proved, the more careful the media was not to stigmatize China as its originator—even as the media realized that something originating under murky circumstances in China had the ability to disrupt even lives in once secure tony zip codes such as Palo Alto and the Upper West Side.

As disposable gloves and masks, and hand sanitizer, disappeared from American shelves, frenzy finally rose over globalization itself, which, it turned out, now seemed to be synonymous with a sudden ominous “Chinazation.” In other words, the long-ago indifference or ignorance of the American public about the outsourcing of the vast majority of their key medical supplies and pharmaceuticals to Chinese factories and producers suddenly magnified the panic surrounding the virus.

The snap awakening from years of slumber was analogous to the American disbelief and anger on December 8, 1941, that somehow Imperial Japan had developed the Zero fighter, superior to all its American counterparts, and an aircraft carrier fleet far better than that of the American Pacific fleet, without prior concern by America.

Most analysts estimated that about 80 percent of the ingredients used in essential U.S. pharmaceuticals were produced in China, as were an equal percentage of face masks and disposable gloves. The last penicillin plant in the U.S., for example, closed in 2004. What was even more worrisome was that U.S. authorities themselves seemed to have no idea what percentage of key drugs such as antibiotics were Chinese produced, only that it was large and apparently seen in both countries as an American liability.

One communist party organ, Xinhua, for example, at the height of the crisis, warned that if an angry China interrupted its supply chain of drugs and medical supplies to the United States, then America might be overwhelmed and plunge into “the mighty sea of coronavirus.”

China quickly began to limit exports of key medical supplies, including those produced by foreign companies with contracts to send production to their countries of origin. In especially ironic fashion, given the birth and spread of the virus on Chinese soil and due to Chinese dissimulation and laxity, China at first was the recipient of medical aid. Yet shortly as the virus spread from its shores, Beijing became a donor and eventually an especially hard-bargain exporter, jacking up the prices of masks, gloves, and other key medical supplies to ameliorate the infection it had spawned—many of them not just overpriced but defective.

Suddenly, expert opinion about Sino-American relations turned on a dime. In the pre-coronavirus era, the idea of keeping industries inside the U.S., especially those dismissed as drudgery work or non-value-added manufacturing—such as producing simple, N-95 face-masks—was dismissed as low tech know-nothingism at best, and Trump’s Neanderthal protectionism and nationalism at worst.

In the age of the coronavirus, however, the same experts now lectured about the need to preserve “strategic industries” and “national assets” in times of emergencies. The about-face was not so much a recalibration in the heat of panic, as an unknowing return to common sense, and a realization of the limits of globalization.

If a virus, which either leaked from a high-security virology lab outside Wuhan or, according to Chinese communist officials, supposedly brewed from exotic dead animals hanging on hooks in the Wuhan meat market, could reach Pacific Heights or Woodside, California more quickly than to rural regions of China, such international, “the world is flat” leveling seemed not so reassuring. Just because a nation’s airports greet millions of arrivals with gleaming terminals and high-speed rail did not mean that beneath the glitter there were not veritable Petri dishes incubating a new virus that could reach all the way to Alaska or Iceland in hours—without warning from the Chinese communist government.

As mentioned earlier, during the pandemic the reputations of transnational organizations and conglomerates took a beating, not just because there was plenty of pre-virus suspicion of their agendas, but because they performed as dismally in a crisis. The United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO) were slow to respond. When they initially did, they sent out not just false information, but also data supplied by the Chinese government known to be inaccurate but useful for political purposes. American citizens began to grasp that their medical fates were not entirely in the hands of their own elected officials.

WHO’s Director-General, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, assured the world that there was little threat from the Chinese virus. Director Tedros was not a doctor—a first, but likely the last instance for WHO. He had no international health management experience. His chief recommendation was that he was non-Western and had come to the UN post from his government sinecure as a health minister in Ethiopia, itself likely predicated on his past service in the Tigray People’s Liberation Front.

Tedros’s résumé may help explain why the UN mouthpiece so easily assured the world that the virus was not transmissible between humans (“Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus [2019-nCoV] identified in #Wuhan, #China”). Tedros was not through. He also falsely assured the world that the virus was largely already contained by China, and that the all-important January 31 American travel ban stopping direct flights into the U.S. from China (a heavy contributor both to WHO and to Ethiopia) was not just unnecessary but would also “have the effect of increasing fear and stigma, with little public health benefit.”

In the years 2018 and 2019, the United States—perhaps the nation most hurt by WHO’s initial obeisance to Chinese wishes to suppress the truth about the virus’s infectiousness—contributed almost $900 million to the WHO budget. That sum was one-fifth of the organization’s $4.4 billion budget over those two years.

America was by far the single greatest national contributor. But an even more unfortunate American investment of at least $600,000, in a cost-to-benefit sense, was an indirect contribution to the Wuhan Level 4 virology lab itself, the likely ground zero of the plague. Ironically, the grant was in part due to the past recommendations of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and later the leader of the Trump Administration’s White House Coronavirus Task Force. The National Institutes of Health had approved two multiyear grants of some $3.4 million to the EcoHeatlh Alliance that had partnered with several organizations, including many in China and in particular the Wuhan virology lab. To this day, Fauci denies his role in sending cash to gain-of-function viral engineering at the Wuhan lab and seems oblivious when he withers in denial under oath before the U.S. Congress or is refuted by members of his own medical community.

Before the epidemic, it was assumed that no one would question the loyalties of several foreign and native-born scientists and engineers at work at U.S. universities and research centers who were either dual citizens, resident aliens, or enjoyed shared appointments at Chinese universities, often undisclosed to their American employers. To do so, would earn one the slur of racist, xenophobe, or McCarthyite.

Yet throughout the spring of 2020, several high-profile researchers were arrested on charges of either engaging in espionage for China, or theft of U.S. patented technologies, or violating U.S. national security laws, or improperly transferring American classified research to Chinese sources. The list of American universities and organizations who employed scientists stealthily working for the Chinese government or held undisclosed joint appointments with China or were secretly funded by China while enjoying U.S. grants, was diverse. The group included the nation’s top universities and public and private research entities such as Harvard University, the Cleveland Clinic, and NASA.

In general, the virus reminded American citizens that the diminution of nationality was either deleterious to their freedoms as citizens, or in fact was deeply resented by citizens and under populist counterattack. For example, the European Union was born on the promise that it could invent a new pan- “European” citizen who would transcend his German or Hungarian language, the customs of his native Greece, and the constitution of the Netherlands where he was born and would no longer be confined by the use of clumsy francs, or fences along the Italian northern border, or passport controls at the Brussels airport.

But in its initial weeks of crisis, the virus did what even the financial crisis of 2008, the massive waves of illegal immigration into Europe from Asia and Africa, and the departure of the United Kingdom from the EU could not: it exposed the truth that the keystone of EU ideology—a borderless continent, in which Europeanism trumped petty and idiosyncratic national identities—is a still a pipe dream. In fact, intra-European borders quickly slammed and remained shut. The much-heralded Schengen Area Agreement that had abolished most all passport control and border checkpoints among 25 European countries for all practical purposes disappeared in a few days—a postmodern pact previously often contrasted with the supposedly paranoid and premodern U.S. border wall with Mexico. Even prior to the coronavirus, the British philosopher Robert Scruton had argued that many had given up on the EU idea of ecumenical transnational identity, especially in Britain, as well as Southern and Eastern Europe—and for logical reasons.

What was to be the fate of once undocumented migrants who sought an enlightened European refuge from the horrors of Africa and the Middle East? The paranoid logic of Camus’s La Peste (1947) took over. Interned in Turkey and Greece, they were now quarantined and rendered mere suspect illegal aliens that should go home to North Africa.

Did German banks step up to relax repayment schedules to their near bankrupt Mediterranean brothers, hit the hardest by the virus? In the euphemistic language of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the notion of issuing “corona bonds” was not “the view of all EU countries.” Translated that meant EU brother nations with cash and fewer dead were certainly not going to loan money to EU brother nations without it, but with more dead. Or more likely what Germany alone said should happen, would happen.

Were medical supplies such as ventilators and masks common EU property, the humanitarian version of the common Euro that reflected pan-European brotherhood? Again, hardly. The ancient creed of every nation for itself supplanted the European Convention on Human Rights—at least until the EU eventually sought to create a common depository of medical supplies.

As the viral panic spread, Germany soon stopped all export shipments of key medical supplies. It sealed its borders. The virus should remind Europe that if a war ever came, any EU-abiding country that shared its arsenal and headed for the front would suffer the fate of the virtuous citizens who died first from the plague in the chronicles of Thucydides and Procopius.

Yet another odd illustration of the culture and values of the blinkered deep state again was offered during the winter and spring of 2020 during the Democratic presidential primaries and subsequent coronavirus lockdown. Multibillionaire but inept candidate and former New York City mayor, Michael Bloomberg—despite in the past sending billions of investment dollars to China to help jump start Chinese communist affiliated start-up companies—was apparently convinced at the time to enter the race to save the party from both socialist Bernie Sanders and the supposedly fading candidacy of a seemingly stalled campaign of Joe Biden.

Even before investing $1 billion in his brief failed bid, and proving completely inept on the debate stage, Bloomberg had in the past offered a number of inane ideas about relative worth in contemporary America. Addressing an elite group at the Oxford Union in Britain in 2016, Bloomberg contrasted the supposed technocracy and skill sets of the information age and its purveyors with preindustrial rote tasks like farming whose simplicity made them now passé, “It’s a process. You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, you add water,” Bloomberg lectured, “and up comes the corn. You could learn that”—as he pointed to his Oxford audience as if any of these elite students could produce food without much effort or experience or even dig a useful hole.

Again, just a few years following Bloomberg’s condescending putdown, nearly the entire U.S. population was locked down in their own homes—entirely reliant on farmers and frackers to keep working amid the epidemic. Only their skill and courage ensured that food and fuel were plentiful for an urbanized and suburbanized country at a time when investors and media moguls like Bloomberg—heavily invested in Chinse-American joint ventures—were for a time rendered superfluous.

New post on Roma Locuta Est

Why the Bishops won’t directly address the Eucharist Scandalby Edward J. BarrNovember 9, 2021 (Edward J. Barr) – We now have learned from a preliminary document that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops will decline to directly confront the scandalous attack on the Eucharist by pro-abortion Catholic politicians. This is not surprising.  The bishops have ignored this topic for decades; having a Catholic president in the White House wasn’t enough to change their tactics.  To understand the real reason why the USCCB will avoid addressing the issue, let us consider what would happen if they did ever issue even a minor “pastoral correction” to wayward Catholics who hold power in Caesar’s government.  Below is a fictitious account of the ramifications of directly confronting the issue.“The United States Conference on Catholic Bishops (USCCB) is reeling from a series of punitive measures taken by the US Government over the “clarification on reception of the Eucharist” message to the faithful that was issued earlier this week.  The document sought to provide clear guidance on assisting individual Catholics in determining whether they should present themselves for Holy Communion.  The USCCB stressed that the promulgated instructions were not directed toward any specific individuals or group of individuals; rather, to inform all the faithful of the perennial teaching of Christ and His Church, in order that only those worthy of reception of our Lord would receive Him.  Despite this denial, the reaction of the federal government indicates that Catholic politicians saw the document as directly aimed at them.  They fired back quickly.The document highlighted the Catholic doctrine that the Eucharist is the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus Christ.  It noted that St. Paul spoke specifically on this reality in 1st Corinthians. “Whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying.” (I Cor. 11:27-30) Papal documents such as Humane Vitae and Ecclesia de Eucharist were also cited in support of the instruction.  While Church scholars noted nothing in the document was new, there was concern over the inclusion of a footnote from a June 2004 document written by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI when he was a Cardinal.  The memorandum, titled, “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion,” was never implemented by American bishops, though it was given to disgraced former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick.  The retaliation by the Biden Administration was swift.  Some pro-abortion Catholic politicians called the quotations of scripture “hate speech.” The administration indicated it would issue new guidelines for participation in federal grants that included adherence to new “equality act” standards on marriage, transgenderism, and euthanasia.  In effect, in order to maintain any federal grant, the Church would have to repudiate its traditional teaching on the sacredness of marriage as between a man and woman, the creation by God of “man and woman,” and the sanctity of human life and the dignity of the human person.  Losing the grant money would be catastrophic to the institutional Catholic Church.  It has been reported that the Church receives hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants each year.  Many go toward immigration, one area where the Church agrees with the Biden Administration.  The Manhattan Institute has estimated that Catholic Charities received up to 65% of its funds from the federal government.  The strong action by the Administration was fully supported by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.  One Church official lamented that “we either become the Church of the poor or no Church at all.”Insiders at the USCCB said they had hoped to “thread the needle” by addressing an important issue in a pastoral way.  The document was relatively brief.  It stated that presenting oneself for Holy Communion should be a conscious decision.  That the faithful should consider if they are “in full communion with the Catholic Church.” It also mentioned that “abortion and euthanasia” are grave sins and that there is a clear obligation to oppose them.  Evidently, this language was too close to home for many Democratic politicians who profess to be Catholic yet oppose the Church on matters of inherent evil.  The insider noted that, “if the Church doesn’t capitulate, there will be massive layoffs of administrative staff at the USCCB and a lessening of pay and perks for senior prelates.  Lavish residences will have to be sold. Travel will be drastically curtained. It will be a new world.  The Church will have to go back to the early days when all they could do is preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments.”  The alarm aggressively roared to life.  He slowly became aware of the high-pitched beeping.  Squinting and frowning at the same time, he reached over and instinctively slapped the alarm button.  Slowly sitting up on the edge of the bed, he wiped the sweat from his brow with both hands. Shaking them vigorously, he watched droplets of sweat fly across the room.  Then he perked up. He sighed happily when he smelled the freshly brewed coffee.  His eyes opened wide.  The coffee was on his nightstand.  A beautiful silver service with his date of ordination engraved on the tray.  “Ah, it was only a nightmare.”  He took a sip of coffee and smiled. On the bureau he could see his zucchetto and biretta.  His vestments were hanging in the closet.  Everything was in order. “Thank God,” whispered the Cardinal to himself. “Nothing has changed.”Edward J Barr is a catechist, an attorney, an intelligence officer, and a Marine. He earned a Master of Theology degree from the Augustine Institute. Mr. Barr is a contributing writer for the Roma Locuta Est blog (www.RomaLocutaEst.com)Edward J. Barr | November 9, 2021 at 9:16 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: https://wp.me/p7YMML-72j

78% Login/Register

Categories Spirituality & Faith

 Sports & Fitness

 Travel

 Vlogging

Policies

•  Community Guidelines
•  Terms & Conditions
•  Privacy Policy
•  Cookie Policy
•  Contact Us

Support

•  Knowledge Base
•  Service Status

© 2017-2021 Bit Chute Limited

DAUNTING COMPILATION OF ATHLETES COLLAPSING AND DYING FROM THE COVID VAX – WHAT’S GOING ON?

• WATCH

Play03:5605:00MuteSettingsPIPAirPlayEnter fullscreenPlay8226  78  0First published at 04:47 UTC on November 8th, 2021.

XANDREWX

One of the United States Minor Outlying Islands

 13672 subscribers Subscribe 

The Ignoble Lie

By: Victor Davis Hanson

The Epoch Times

October 28, 2021

In a controversial passage in Plato’s “Republic,” Socrates introduced the idea of the “noble lie” (“gennaios pseudos”).

A majestic fiction, he says, could sometimes serve society by persuading uninformed citizens of something good for them.

Ever since, many prevaricators have used the excuse that they lied for the common good.

Take Dr. Anthony Fauci, our point man on the COVID-19 epidemic.

Fauci misled the country about mask-wearing during the pandemic by claiming they were of little use. But he argued that he lied so the public would not make a run on masks, deplete the supply, and thus rob medical professionals of protective equipment.

Fauci also told “noble” lies about the likely percentage of the public needing to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity. He kept raising the bar—from 60 percent to 70 percent to 75 percent to 80 percent, to 85 percent.

Apparently, Fauci feared a lower figure, even if accurate, might lull people into complacency about getting inoculated.

Fauci also lied about his own role in routing U.S. aid money to subsidize gain-of-function viral research at the Wuhan virology lab—the likely birthplace of COVID-19.

Either Fauci was hiding his own culpability, or he believed the American people might not be able to fully accept that some of their own health officials were promoting the sort of research that was partially responsible for more than 700,000 American deaths.

Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas has serially lied about the number of undocumented immigrants who have crossed into the United States. He falsely claimed mounted agents were whipping migrants. He fibbed about the purported lack of federal data of apprehensions, detentions, and deportations. His assertion that the border is secure was a joke.

Apparently, Mayorkas believes the public would go ballistic or his own administration would be roundly despised, if he told the bitter truth about the border: by intent, the Biden administration has apparently deliberately left it wide open.

And it will likely allow 2 million undocumented immigrants into the country in the current fiscal year.

Lots of other unelected federal officials lied over the past five years by claiming or implying that harming the Trump administration was in the public interest.

Former FBI directors Andrew McCabe and James Comey likely misled the nation. McCabe admittedly lied that he did not leak FBI information to the media.

James Comey lied under oath on multiple occasions in congressional cross-examinations, and claimed he did not know or could not remember basic facts about his own role in promoting the Russian collusion hoax.

Apparently, Comey and McCabe believed that by being less than truthful, they might better emasculate Donald Trump. And that result would be beneficial to America.

Our former intelligence leaders may have been the most brazen liars. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper lied to Congress about the NSA surveillance program, though he denied it.

When caught in the untruth, Clapper reverted to the noble lie that he gave the least untruthful answer, apparently on the pretense that he did not wish to damage the reputation of an important intelligence agency.

Ditto John Brennan, the former head of the CIA. On two occasions he lied under oath about the agency’s monitoring of Senate staffers’ computers and the deaths of civilians caused by U.S. drone assassination missions along the Afghanistan border.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley lied for days about the details of an accidental drone strike that killed innocent women and children in Afghanistan.

Either Milley is now lying when he says he warned Joe Biden about the disasters to come in Afghanistan or Biden is lying when he denies hearing any such advice.

Many of the details of Milley’s conversations with authors Bob Woodward and Robert Costa as reported in their recent muckraking book were abjectly denied by Milley.

The list of such lies could be vastly expanded.

IRS functionary Lois Lerner never told the whole untruth about weaponizing the IRS.

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch spun an implausible yarn that she accidentally bumped into Bill Clinton on a tarmac in Phoenix and never discussed the then-current FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton.

Special counsel Robert Mueller told a whopper under oath, claiming to know almost nothing about the Steele dossier and the misadventures of Fusion GPS. Both were the two catalysts that prompted his entire investigation of “collusion” in the first place.

In some of these cases, when caught and exposed, the liars will hedge by claiming temporary amnesia.

But sometimes they admit they lied but suggest they did so for higher purposes like national security.

In truth, in most cases there was nothing noble at all in their lying. They simply spread untruths to protect their own endangered careers by masking their own wrongdoing or fobbing it onto others.

In other words, “noble lies” are rarely spun for anyone’s interests other than those of the liars themselves.

___________________________________________________

Archbishop Viganò’s Statement on the Biden Visit to the Vatican

STATEMENT

of Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò

on the occasion of the visit of Joe Biden to the Vatican

On the occasion of the October 29 visit to the Vatican, the press agencies have spread the news that Joe Biden reported the content of the meeting and said that Francis called him “a good Catholic,” inviting him to “continue to receive Communion.” It is disconcerting that, to date, no clarifying comment has come from the Vatican Press Office. This leaves us to presume that Joe Biden’s words correspond to the truth and that Bergoglio actually spoke them.

Even if what Biden said corresponds perfectly to the intemperate quips of Jorge Mario Bergoglio – who called a notorious radical abortion activist a “great Italian” – it is evident that such statements represent an unheard of scandal, since they fail to condemn the positions of a political personality who supports abortion, disavow the immutable position of the Magisterium of the Church, and resound as a blatant invitation to commit sacrilege, profaning the Most Holy Eucharist by receiving it in the state of public and manifest sin.

Every Catholic knows that the killing of a defenseless creature in the mother’s womb is a horrendous crime; and that the most serious scandal is given to the faithful not only by Joe Biden as a convinced supporter of abortion, but also by Bergoglio himself, who is recognized as holding the authority of Supreme Pastor of the Church. His work of demolition knows no respite before the astonished silence of the Cardinals and Bishops. The very rare exceptions of Pastors who truly have at heart the souls entrusted to them – the example of His Eminence Cardinal Burke stands out among others – are seen with hostility by the majority of their brother Bishops and by the Vatican, in a disturbing subversion of the mission of the Church of Christ, which today has been reduced to climate change, inclusive capitalism, and mass vaccination. Bergoglio was recently recognized as “moral guide” by the Council for Inclusive Capitalism led by Lynn Forester de Rothschild, and he appointed Jeffrey David Sachs as a member of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences. Sachs is the president of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network of the United Nations, a supporter of reducing the global population and of the fight against climate change – this has nothing to do with the mission of the Papacy and ought to lead the Prelates of the Church to seriously ask themselves about Bergoglio’s mental and moral suitability for the role he holds.

I exhort the faithful, on the Feast instituted by Pius XI in honor of the social Kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, to beseech the Divine Majesty, asking that among the many societies afflicted by the present crisis, the Church of Christ may be the first in which Jesus Christ, who today has been replaced by the idols of globalist ideology, returns to reign.

+ Carlo Maria Viganò, Archbishop

Sunday 31 October 2021

Domini Nostri Jesu Christi Regis

3. https://www.agensir.it/quotidiano/2021/10/25/papa-francesco-nomina-jeffrey-david-sachs-membro-ordinario-della-pontificia-accademia-delle-scienze-sociali/

How Can Vaccine Mandates Be Legal?Part 1         We first must look at the meaning of the word mandate. Webster’s modern dictionary states an official order to do something. It also states that one of the meanings is: the power to act that voters give to their elected leaders. In the case of the ‘vaccine’, the latter is more important than the former. Webster’s 1828 dictionary gives the meaning as: A command; an order, precept or injunction. From these definitions, it sounds like if the government decrees something that we are required to follow that command almost no matter what. The problem with that mindset is that is the mindset of a dictator. Stalin, Castro, Chavez, and that ilk.          Americans have forgotten that we are a constitutional republic and a constitutional republic is a nation ruled by laws, not mandates. During World War II Germany did medical experiments on Jews, homosexuals, the mentally retarded, and many others. These ‘experiments’ were done without their consent and many times were never informed of what the ‘experiment’ was. Many of the ‘experiments’ were very painful and were done without pain medication. Injecting chemicals into the eyes while the patient was still awake, exposing them to anthrax and the list goes on and on.I would hope that by the time we got to a quarter of the way through the twenty-first century we would have reached a point where we no longer experimented on humans. But that does not seem to be the case. In all the research I’ve done on the COVID 19 ‘vaccine’ I have learned that all the animals utilized in the testing died but not from the ‘vaccine’ but from covid when it was introduced to them, According to Dr. Lee Merritt,What happened is all animals died… but they didn’t die of the “vaccine”. What they died from what used to be called “immune enhancement” and now they call it “antibody-dependent enhancement” (ADE).Here’s what happens:They make the RNA and you get the “vaccine” and you do fine. Now, you challenge the animal with the virus that you are supposed to be immunizing against.So when they challenged those cats with SARS [a.k.a. SARS-CoV-1, is a coronavirus species], instead of killing the virus or weakening it, the immune response that they built into your system when out and codded the virus, so the virus came into the cat’s body like a Trojan Horse, unseen by the cat’s own immune system, and then it replicated without checking and killed the cat with overwhelming sepsis and cardiac failure. And that [also] happened in ferrets, that happened every time they tried this.Let me just point out. We have never made it through an animal study successfully for this type of virus.We have never done this in humans before… We don’t really have a track record of success.¹ I don’t know about you but I don’t want this ‘vaccine’. Studies do show that most of the hospitalized patients with covid have been fully vaccinated. Not much of a vaccine if you ask me but this is what the Biden administration is telling us that he is mandating that we get the ‘vaccine’ or our travel may be restricted, our ability to attend certain public events like the ones where they are shouting “Let’s Go Brandon”, we may not be able to fly, travel on a train, and he’s even thinking about restricting our ability to travel from state to state without the ‘vaccine’. If you’ve ever studied history study 1930s Germany and you’ll see an eery resemblance to what the Democrats are doing in America.Now, with this information, we have to look at the laws of America. The first law we can look at is the Constitution and our Bill of Rights.  Democrats think that they are a Bill of Suggestions but our basic rights were instilled in that document. Our 1^st Amendment carries a large portion of the rights that the Biden Administration simply ignores. It states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.² Part of our freedom of religion is not having to take a ‘vaccine’ that is made partly of aborted baby cells which most if not all vaccines contain. This has created a ‘market’ for aborted babies. Follow the money. Journalist David Daleiden obtained video evidence of Planned Parenthood selling aborted baby parts which is illegal but Kamala Harris, California’s Attorney General at the time, charged David with 9 felonies but ignored the provable illegal actions of Planned Parenthood.One of the most disturbing aspects of the 1^st Amendment that is being breached and ignored by our government is that of free speech. The government is supposed to see to it that these rights are not hindered in any way but the Big Tech corporations violate our free speech rights daily and the federal government does nothing. Some say they are private companies and can do what they want but they have public stockholders and the federal government has asked them to not allow certain articles that discuss the truth about COVID 19’s origins, preventive medicines, treatments, and other things that oppose the government’s position, Hunter’s laptop, Hillary’s emails, Biden’s dealing with Ukrain and the list goes on. When they comply with the requests of the government that makes them an agent of the government which in turn makes their actions illegal. If someone wants to publish information concerning their citizen’s rights to NOT abide by the mandate they are de-platformed, banned, and not allowed to express the rights our Constitution is supposed to guarantee. These are actions of dictators not of a constitutional republic. Even when people peacefully assemble to protest the forced mandates the government, specifically in blue states, will use the police to harass the protestors and arrest them for exercising their constitutional right to peacefully assemble. Police say two people were arrested during a “disturbance” outside Rhode Island Gov. Dan McKee’s home, where protesters were rallying against the state’s vaccine mandate for health care workers.The two people arrested Friday night were charged with disorderly conduct, obstruction and resisting arrest, Rhode Island State Police said. Police did not provide further details about the disturbance or the reason for the arrests.McKee announced in August that all health care workers would be required to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. ³Keep in mind that the survival rate for this ‘plannedemic’ is 99.98%. There is no logical reason to force anyone to get this proven dangerous ‘vaccine’. There must be other reasons that we would probably shoot them for if we knew what they really wanted to accomplish.
Foot Notes1.    https://varjager.wordpress.com/2021/01/30/dr-lee-merritt-in-animal-studies-after-being-injected-with-mrna-technology-all-animals-died-upon-reinfection/2.   https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment3.https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/2-arrested-during-vaccine-mandate-protest-outside-16521497.php
©Roger Anghis