Let us now examine more closely the full development of our eternal life in heaven, in order that we may better appreciate the value of that sanctifying grace which is its beginning. In particular let us compare it with what would have been our beatitude and our reward if we had been created in a purely natural state.
If we had been created in a state of pure nature, with a spiritual and immortal soul, but without the life of grace, even then our intellect would have been made for the knowledge of the True and our will for the love of the Good. Our end would have been to know God, the Sovereign Good, the author of our nature, and to love Him above all things. But we should have known Him only in the reflection of His goodness in creatures, in the same way as the greatest among the pagan philosophers knew Him, though our knowledge would have been more certain than theirs, and free from any admixture of error. God would have been for us the First Cause and the Supreme Intelligence that orders all the things of creation.
We should have loved Him as the author of our nature, with that love which a subject has for his superior. It would not have been a love of friendship, but rather a sentiment compounded of admiration, respect, and gratitude, yet lacking that happy and simple familiarity which rejoices the hearts of the children of God. We should have been God’s servants, but not His children.
This natural end is already a sublime destiny. It could never bring satiety, just as the eye never tires of contemplating the blue vault of heaven. Moreover, it is a spiritual end, and therefore, unlike material goods, can be possessed at once by all and by each, without possession on the part of one being prejudicial to possession on the part of another, and thus without causing jealousy or discord.
But this abstract and mediate knowledge of God would have left many obscurities in the human mind, especially as regards the mutual compatibility of the divine perfections. We should forever have remained at the stage of counting singly and enumerating these absolute perfections; we should forever have wondered how it was possible to reconcile the almighty goodness of God with His permission that evil should exist; an evil, too, which is sometimes so great as to disconcert the human mind. We should have asked ourselves, moreover, how His infinite mercy could be truly consistent with His infinite justice. Even though we enjoyed this natural beatitude, we should still be urged to say: “If only I could see this God, who is the source of all truth and goodness; if I could see Him as He sees Himself!”
What the most brilliant of human minds, what even the intelligence of the angels could never have discovered, divine Revelation has disclosed to us. Revelation tells us that our last end is essentially supernatural and that it consists in seeing God immediately, face to face, as He is: sicuti est.
(God) has predestinated (us) to be made conformable to the image of his Son; that he might be the firstborn among many brethren (Rom. viii. 29).
Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath prepared for them that love Him (I Cor. ii. 9).
We are destined to see God, not merely in the mirror of creatures, however perfect these may be, but to see Him immediately, without the intermediary of any creature, and even without the medium of any created idea; for no created idea, however perfect, could ever represent as He really is One who is Thought itself, infinite Truth, the eternally subsistent brightness of intelligence and the living flame of measureless Love.
We are destined to see all the divine perfections concentrated and intimately united in their common source: Deity. We are destined to see how the tenderest Mercy and the most inexorable Justice proceed from the one Love which is infinitely generous and infinitely holy; how this Love, even in its freest choice, is identically one with pure Wisdom, how there is nothing in the divine Love which is not wise, nothing in the divine Wisdom which is not synonymous with Love. We are destined to contemplate the eminent simplicity of God, His absolute purity and sanctity; to see the infinite fecundity of the divine nature in the procession of the Three Persons: to contemplate the eternal generation of the Word, the brightness of (the Father’s) glory and the figure of his substance (Heb. i. 3). to see the ineffable breathing of the Holy Spirit, the issue of the common Love of the Father and the Son, which unites them in the most complete outpouring of themselves. The Good tends naturally to diffuse itself, and the greater the Good the more abundant and intimate is its self-giving.
None can tell the joy and the love which this vision will produce in us, a love of God so pure and so strong that nothing will ever be able to destroy or in the slightest degree to diminish it.
In no way, therefore, can we express more clearly the preciousness of sanctifying grace, or of the true interior life, than by saying that it is a beginning of eternal life. Here on earth we know God only by faith, and, while we hope one day to possess Him, we are able, unfortunately, to lose Him by sin. But, apart from these two differences, it is fundamentally the same life, the same sanctifying grace, and the same charity, which is to last through all eternity.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on In no way can we express more clearly the preciousness of sanctifying grace, or of the true interior life, than by saying that it is a beginning of eternal life. Here on earth we know God only by faith, and, while we hope one day to possess Him, we are able, unfortunately, to lose Him by sin. But, apart from these two differences, it is fundamentally the same life, the same sanctifying grace, and the same charity, which is to last through all eternity.
Part I: The Dangers of Government Falsehoods: Background on Government Propaganda Machines
Introduction
The danger of government lies, and the implications of official deception of whole peoples and nations, could not be more relevant than it is today when our God given natural rights and our Constitutional freedoms are systematically being ground into the dust under the guise of protecting the “public health” from Covid-19.
In his 1928 classic Propaganda, Sigmund Freud’s nephew, Edward L. Bernays [1] explains approvingly of how governments, powerful corporations, and foundations are capable of manipulating and regimenting the public mind in all areas of life including war, politics, business, education, and medical science.
According to Professor Mark Crispin Miller,[2] who wrote a new introduction to the Bernays masterpiece in 2004:
“Bernays (1891-1995) pioneered the scientific techniques of shaping and manipulating public opinion, which is called ‘engineering of consent.’ During World War I, he was an integral part – along with Walter Lippmann – of the U.S. Committee on Public Information (CPI), a powerful propaganda machine that advertised and sold the war to the American people as one that would ‘Make the World Safe for Democracy.’ The marketing strategies for all future wars would be based on the CPI model.”[3]
The Existence of an Invisible Government
Writing in the 1920s, Bernays, an Austrian-American Jew, “the father of public relations,” gleefully acknowledged the reality of “invisible governors,” who rule the world and bring organization out of chaos to society:[4]
The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.
We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. …
Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet.
They govern us by their qualities of natural leadership. Their ability to supply needed ideas, and by their key position in the social structure. …[5]
Of course, the most important factor Bernays initially leaves out is MONEY. After all, today’s contenders for domination in the New World Order – like Bill Gates or George Soros or Mark Zuckerberg – would be just another Tom, Dick, or Harry without their billions.
Later, however, Bernays does admit that “the invisible government tends to be concentrated in the hands of the few because of the expense of manipulating the social machinery which controls the opinions and habits of the masses.”[6]
WWI Created New Propaganda Techniques
Bernays claims that:
It was, of course, the astounding success of propaganda during the war that opened the eyes of the intelligent few in all departments of life to the possibilities of regimenting the public mind. The American government and numerous patriotic agencies developed a technique which, to most persons accustomed to bidding for public acceptance, was new. They not only appealed to the individual by means of every approach – visual, graphic, and auditory – to support the national endeavor, but they also secured the cooperation of the key men in every group – persons whose mere word carried authority to hundreds or thousands or hundreds of thousands of followers. They thus automatically gained the support of fraternal, religious, commercial, patriotic, social, and local groups whose members took their opinions from their accustomed leaders and spokesmen, or from the periodical publications which they were accustomed to read and believe. At the same time, the manipulators of patriotic opinion made use of the mental clichés and the emotional habits of the public to produce mass reactions against the alleged atrocities, the terror, and the tyranny of the enemy. IT WAS ONLY NATURAL, AFTER THE WAR ENDED, THAT INTELLIGENT PERSONS SHOULD ASK THEMSELVES WHETHER IT WAS POSSIBLE TO APPLY A SIMILAR TECHNIQUE TO THE PROBLEMS OF PEACE (emphasis added).[7]
Interestingly, Bernays states that the new dictatorship is not limited to government matters but embraces dictators in all fields of life including that of fashion. For example, he notes that Paris fashion leaders set the mode of the short skirt [worn by bob-haired flappers] for which, twenty years ago, any woman would simply be arrested and thrown into jail by the New York City police, and the entire women’s clothing industry, capitalized at hundreds of millions of dollars, must be reorganized to conform to their dictum.[8]
In his chapter, “The Psychology of Public Relations,” Bernays asks, “If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it?”[9]
Within certain limits and up to a certain point, Bernays answers in the affirmative.
Citing the earlier studies of Wilfred Trotter and Gustave Le Bon on group psychology, which established that the “collective mind” differs from the “individual mind” or “consciousness,” Bernays affirms that “the group mind does not think in the strict sense of the word. In place of thoughts, it has impulses, habits, and emotions. In making up its mind, its first impulse is usually to follow the example of a trusted leader.”[10]
“But when the example of the leader is not at hand and the herd must think for itself, it does so by means of clichés, pat words, or images which stand for a whole group of ideas and experiences,” says Bernays.[11] “By playing upon an old cliché, or manipulating a new one, the propagandist can sometimes swing a whole mass of group emotions,” he says, adding that, “Usually, the individual mind will succumb to the will of the crowd.”[12]
Before Bernays moves on to explain how propaganda functions in specific departments of group activity including business, politics, education, social work, and the media, he states:
I have tried to explain the place of propaganda in modern American life and something of the methods by which it operates – to tell the why, the what, the who and the how of the invisible government which dictates our thoughts, directs our feelings, and controls our actions.
In 1928, the same year Bernays’ Propaganda was published, pacifist British MP, Arthur Ponsonby, issued his anti-propaganda classic Falsehood in War Time – Containing An Assortment of Lies Circulated Throughout The Nations During the Great War.[14]The modest-size book, available as a free PDF online, highlights major lies that were inflicted upon the hapless wartime civilian populations of the Allied Forces (Russia, France, Britain, and the United States) against the Central Powers (Germany, Austria-Hungary, Turkey, and Bulgaria) during the First World War.
Ponsonby acknowledges in his introduction that falsehood is a recognized and extremely useful weapon in warfare, and every country used it quite deliberately including the Allied Forces and the Central Powers 1) to deceive its own people, 2) to attract neutrals 3) and to mislead the enemy. [15]
According to Ponsonby:
The ignorant and innocent masses in each country are unaware at the time that they are being misled, and when it is all over, only here and there are the falsehoods discovered and exposed. As it is all past history, and the desired effect has been produced by the stories and statements, no one troubles to investigate the facts and establish the truth.[16]
Ponsonby, however, does take the trouble to enumerate a number of British, French, American, and other Allied and Central Powers official wartime falsehoods including a number of atrocity fabrications like:
The Belgian Baby Without Hands – That German soldiers were cutting off the hands of babies and children (and eating the parts), and impaling them on bayonets; and violating Belgium nuns, were popular themes of Allied propaganda.[17] When the reports were questioned by British members of Parliament, (and in the case of the violation of Catholic nuns investigated by the Vatican), no evidence was ever produced to support the charges against “the Huns.”
The Crucifixion of a Canadian (or an American or a young naked girl) sometimes on a barn door – These reports were backed up by fellow soldiers even though there were no eyewitnesses. In the case of the Canadian officer said to be crucified near the Belgium town of Ypres, U.S. Army Commander General Peyton C. March later denied the story. However, on April 12, 1919, the U.S. magazine, Nation, published a letter from Royal West Kent Private E. Loader, who declared he had witnessed the crucifixion of the Canadian soldier. The letter was subsequently repudiated by Captain E. N. Bennett who wrote to the Nation, informing its editors that there was no such private on the rolls of the Royal West Kents, and that the 2nd Battalion was in India during the entire war.[18]
The Corpse Factory – On April 16, 1917, the British Times reported that Germany was chemically treating the dead bodies of its soldiers (and enemy soldiers) to 1) distill glycerin for the manufacture of munitions, 2) to provide fat for lubricating oils 3) and was grinding human bones into powder for mixing with pigs’ food and making fertilizer.[19]
To make sure the lie gained world-wide traction, the Crown and Parliament, both of which were well aware that the propaganda reports were ludicrous and absolutely false, remained silent, even when informed that the “Corpse Factories” were, in fact, factories for the disposal of dead carcasses of horses and other animals found on the battlefield.[20]
It was not until December of 1925 that the truth of the matter was finally admitted by Sir Austen Chamberlain KG[21], the half-brother of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who put the final nail in the propaganda coffin when he bluntly stated, “there was never any foundation for it [the rumour].”[22]
The Sinking of the Lusitania
Ponsonby’s report on the tragic sinking of the RMS Lusitania, a British ocean liner on route from New York City to Liverpool, England on May7, 1915, is especially instructive since the event provided “the necessary lever at last to bring America into the war.”[23] Americans were told that a German U-boat had torpedoed a defenseless passenger ship flying the American flag and bearing only civilian passengers and an ordinary cargo.
Unfortunately, the “ordinary cargo,” consisted of thousands of cases of small arms ammunition, shrapnel shells, and brass percussion fuses weighing about 173 tons. The ship, which had been secretly financed by the British Admiralty and fitted for military service including gun mounts installed on her decks,[24] sank in a record 18 minutes killing 1,198 passengers and crew including 124 Americans.
Had the Lusitania only carried “ordinary cargo,” it is estimated that time and circumstances would have permitted many of these victims to have survived and reach the Irish shore at Kinsale, instead of being blown to bits by the second ammunition explosion.[25]
However, the British and American propaganda Lusitania campaign that followed ensured that all the blame fell upon Germany, and on April 6, 1917, the United States declared war on Germany.
The reader will note that when Progressivist U.S. Senator Robert “Fighting Bob” La Follette (1906-1925) stated that the Lusitania carried munitions, he was threatened with expulsion from the U.S. Senate. The threat was withdrawn when Mr. Dudley Field Malone, collector at the port of NYC, confirmed that the ship carried a large munition cargo consigned to the British Government, saying he would testify in favor of Senator La Follette.[26] However, the Wilson administration refused to permit the publication of the facts.[27]
U.S. Government Opens Propaganda Office
As noted earlier, the U.S. Committee on Public Information (CPI) patterned itself after the British Crewe House propaganda machine headed by Alfred C.W. Harmsworth, later Alfred Lord Northcliffe, a British journalist and legendary newspaper magnate.[28]
The CPI, also known as the Creel Committee, named after its chairman, journalist George Creel, was the United States Government’s first official Office of Wartime Propaganda Machine.
“The frenzy with which the whole propaganda was conducted in America surpassed anything we experienced here [Britain],” Ponsonby says.[29]
Some atrocity fabrications, like the Germans giving poisoned candy to children to eat and live hand-grenades to play with, were so outrageous that General John Pershing, General of the Armies, who served as Commander of the American Expeditionary Forces on the Western Front during the Great War, issued a cablegram that instructed the U.S. War Department to publicly disavow these stories which had no basis in fact.[30]
Similarly, Admiral William S. Sims, Commander of all U.S. Naval Forces in Europe, repudiated hideous U.S. news stories and movies promoted by the CPI against German submarine commanders. In a statement published by the New York Tribune in April 1923, Sims stated that “There exists no authentic report of cruelties ever having been committed by the commander or the crew of a German submarine. The Press reports about cruelties were only meant for propaganda purposes.”[31]
WWI War Ends, But Government Propaganda Machine Continues
Unfortunately, as Bernays points out, why should Government kill a good thing for itself?
And Ponsonby prophetically states, “… of course, we know that such clever propagandists are equally clever in dealing with us after the event as in dealing with the enemy at the time.”[32]
The CPI’s successor in WWII was the Office of War Information (OWI) promulgated by Executive Order 9182 under the Franklin D. Roosevelt Administration on June 13, 1942. The various propaganda departments of the OWI included the Foreign Information Service, Bureau of Intelligence, Psychological Warfare Branch, Book and Magazine Bureau, Extensive Surveys Division, Bureau of Public Inquiries, Bureau of Motion Pictures, and the Propaganda Intelligence Section, etc.[33]
The OWI was officially terminated on September 15, 1945, but was succeeded through the years till the present day by a litany of federal propaganda departments including the United States Information Service, the Office of Strategic Services, and the Central Intelligence Agency.[34]
Ponsonby’s final observations that:
War is fought in this fog of falsehood, a great deal of it undiscovered and accepted as truth. The fog arises from fear and is fed by panic (bold added). Any attempt to doubt or deny even the most fantastic story has to be condemned at once as unpatriotic, if not traitorous. This allows a free field for the rapid spread of lies.[35]
In wartime, failure to lie is negligence, the doubting of a lie a misdemeanor, the declaration of the truth a crime (bold added).[36]
In future wars we have now to look forward to a new and far more efficient instrument of propaganda – the Government control of broadcasting. Whereas, therefore, in the past we have used the word “broadcast” symbolically as meaning the efforts of the Press and individual reporters, in the future, we must use the word literally, since falsehood can now be circulated UNIVERSALLY, SCIENTIFICALLY, AND AUTHORITATIVELY (caps and bold added).[37]
There are some who object to war because of immorality, there are some who shrink from the arbitrament of arms because of its increased cruelty and barbarity; there are a growing number who protest this method, at the outset known to be unsuccessful, of attempting to settle international disputes because of its imbecility and futility. But there is not a living soul in any country who does not deeply resent having his passions roused, his indignation inflamed, his patriotism exploited, and his highest ideals desecrated by CONCEALMENT, SUBTERFUGE, FRAUD, FALSEHOOD, TRICKERY, AND DELIBERATE LYING ON THE PART OF THOSE IN WHOM HE IS TAUGHT TO REPOSE CONFIDENCE AND TO WHOM HE IS ENJOINED TO PAY RESPECT (caps and bold added).[38]
The Current Battle for Our Humanity
I don’t think the reader can find a better description of the current Government debacle surrounding the Coronavirus (Covid-19) “pandemic” than Ponsonby’s warning made almost 100 years ago.
The nature of the current war in America and the world, being orchestrated by the reigning Technological and Pharmaceutical Oligarchies of the so-called New World Order is much different than previous wars we have fought. And the implications of failing to defeat the enemy are much greater because we are fighting the ultimate battle for God, family, and nation.
Indeed, what is at stake is what it means to be HUMAN!
[2] Mark Crispin Miller is Professor of Media, Culture and Communication at New York University. See https://markcrispinmiller.com. The 2004 edition of Propaganda with Miller’s introduction, which this writer used, is available at Amazon.com. As Miller notes, “Propaganda mainly tells us that Bernays’ true métier [job or occupation] was to help giant players with their various sales and image problems.”
[3] Bernays, Propaganda, commentary by Miller on back cover
Much ink has been spilled over the topic of lockdowns and the coronavirus, and the past 19 months have been some of the strangest in recent history. This time has been extremely difficult for many, especially for those who have had their business shuttered by unjust and indefinite closures and restrictions. In addition, the continual bifurcation of opposing camps in society has led to unpleasant – and perhaps irrevocable – consequences in the lives of families and communities.
It is my opinion that the deadliest virus that has spread since the advent of lockdown-lunacy is the virus of Marxism. Marxism is not restricted to what we think of when we consider Communism. Communism is surely the logical outgrowth of Marxism, but Marxism can spread in ways COVID could only dream of. It is possible to live in a society that does not present itself as Communist, while at the same time living in a society that manifests as distinctly Marxist.
According to the now-deceased Soviet defector, Yuri Bezmenov, the four stages of a Marxist infiltration of society are as follows:
Demoralization
Destabilization
Crisis
Normalization
Demoralization is exactly what it sounds like; the intentional degradation of the moral framework of a society. This can be done in many ways, and almost always involves an initial blow to religious belief amongst a population.
Destabilization is a process wherein a Marxist movement puts the demoralized population off-balance when it is vulnerable due to a lack of moral cohesiveness.
Crisis is the phase of the Marxist takeover where a sufficiently off-kilter society is thrust into a state of panic due to its present weakness.
After the first three phases take place, the goal of normalization is the ultimate pursuit. If successful, the Marxists will seek to implement a different way of life as the “new normal.”
These tactics are nothing new, and they happen in cycles over time, with greater or lesser degrees of success depending on how a given society reacts to Marxist pressure. The intent of this piece is not to give an overly detailed account of the four phases of Marxist takeover, but a bit of background is helpful to understand the larger point I intend to transmit.
At all stages of Marxist infiltration, the act of dividing people against one another is a constant. Now I imagine the readers of this publication are a bit tired of liberals clamouring on about “division” in the Church and in society, as am I. However, there is a real division that is unhealthy for civil life, and it is seen in the most awful times in human history. When dangerous divisiveness reaches its climax, social life descends into a haze of “us versus them” where others are seen as mortal enemies for whatever reason is convenient. In the worst of times, this sort of thinking results in mass-murder and genocide, as it did in Rwanda in the early ‘90s.
Our situation is not as severe, but then again, all situations that eventually become so severe, were not so severe, until they were. I make no predictions about what might come, but I do know that the divisiveness as a result of Marxist disease that was released from the shores of Communist China, has created what seems like an irreparable rift in the realm of common life.
Those who have chosen to live as humans have always lived have become the mortal enemy of those who have come to embrace the virus with all their hearts, all their minds, and all their souls. In today’s political and sociological climate, you are seemingly either “with the virus” or “against the virus.” If you profess your love for the coronavirus, you will be embraced by a dystopian death-cult that has even more affection for rising PCR-cases than it does for righteous anger against rising sea-levels. If you are a COVID-heretic, you will find yourself at the mercy of an ad-hoc Inquisition that makes the idiotic stereotype peddled by the likes of Monty Python look like child’s play.
Whatever one may think about the virus, the thing itself is almost irrelevant. Now it might be that someone reading this has experienced suffering or the loss of a loved-one as a result of this particular contagion. I sympathize, as I would with any person who grieves due to suffering or the loss of anyone. But at the risk of sounding a bit callous, I will refrain from giving the virus more than its due. This is not because I reject the suffering that anyone has undertaken, but I believe the hyper-focus on a single issue has turned reasonable people into unreasonable people.
There are a million and one reasons why people have died since the fall of man, and there will continue to be a plethora of causes of death until the end of time. People are dying of cancer, of respiratory illnesses, of car-accidents, of heart-attacks, and everything else, and the coronavirus has not changed any of that. Personally, no matter what one may think about the severity of the virus, the more we consider its severity, and the more we try and figure out where it came from – or didn’t come from – then the more credence we give the thing that has ripped apart what little social fabric we had before this all began.
Another tenant of Marxist mania that is a constant at all times is a need to cause confusion through misinformation or disinformation. Think of the competing narratives about COVID, and how strongly they are all believed by so many. It is not possible that COVID is a plague and not a plague; the most contagious virus ever and not the most contagious virus ever; dangerous to children and not dangerous to children; etc.
Uncertainty spread amongst the masses is a sure way to cause continual friction against the competing groups that have been sufficiently divided. This is a Marxist’s dream.
So, what is the truth about the virus?
There are still a host of unanswered questions about COVID, and there are good reasons to believe a host of theories about the virus; and there is good evidence to suggest it is no-where near as serious as initially suggested. In fact, it would seem that the initial fearmongering about death-rate of coronavirus was based on what looks like fraudulent testimony. Czar Fauci seems to have conveniently misunderstood the placing of decimal points in fatality-rate analyses, and the terms “case” and “infection” became interchangeable; something that has had disastrous consequences for medical messaging. Historically, a “case” is someone who is sick enough with an “infection” to be treated by a medical professional due to severe symptoms. So, if one is a “case” they are also an “infection,” but one can be an “infection” without being a “case.”
Infections without symptoms are of little importance, as they do not normally spread illness. What a disaster it has been to parade case numbers (which are most often only infection numbers) as if they are a barometer of public health.
Who can forget the initial modeling out of the Imperial College London? The modeling that shut down the world was so wrong and unscientific that it is embarrassing that any person who can walk and chew gum simultaneously has ever believed it. It should be added that computer models are not magic, they cannot predict the future. All they can do is react to what the programmer has programmed them to react to. If the foundation of the modeling is off or biased, then the predictions will be as accurate – or probably less so – than a magic 8-ball.
The “lab theory” is more plausible with each day, even amongst the mainstream. There seems to be growing proof that what is called the “novel coronavirus” was in fact played around with as early as 2015 in China. Furthermore, it is now much more believable than a “conspiracy theory” to suggest that the original “super-spreader” event was the World Military Games, which took place in October 2019 in Wuhan, China.
You do not have to be an “expert” – oh how loathsome that word has become – to understand how quickly a contagion could jet around the entire world. With militaries from all over the planet flying in all directions and passing through numerous airports at the onset of the winter cold-flu season, it is reasonable to assume that COVID – whatever it is – would have been in every locale within a matter of days. Again, the World Military Games took place in October and the first lockdowns did not start until March of the following year.
Are we to believe that after six months, locking everyone in their homes had any positive effect on a virus that had enough time to spread to an arguably endemic level in most nations?
Now, taking all the aforementioned information into account – and this is barely the tip of the proverbial iceberg – we must call to mind one fundamental reality; China is a Communist nation with a government that has historically slaughtered its own citizens, and routinely arrests dissident political activists for disagreeing with the regime. If the Chinese government were a person, we would call that person a psychopath, a sociopath, or a mobster; should we believe the sociopath when he tells us something? Should we trust the information that we get from the psychopath? Should we take the mobster’s word at face value?
For all we know, we know nothing about anything that happens in China. Remember those videos of Chinese citizens collapsing in the streets from some strange illness, only to be quickly treated or removed by agents in HAZMAT suits? Do you think those were real? Do you think China tells us the truth? If you do, I believe I can direct you to a snake-oil salesmen, I promise he is an honest broker…
In addition, we are still waiting for definitive proof that the Sars-CoV-2 has been properly isolated in the way we would expect from a legitimate medical investigation. Those who cry “hoax” may not be as crazy as it seems. Even Archbishop Vigano mentioned the curious lack of isolation of the biological material needed for firm investigation of what do with the virus.
He questioned the production of the COVID vaccines themselves when he said: “And it needs to be explained how it is possible to create a vaccine, since — according to the statements of the US CDC (United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) — the virus has not yet been isolated.”
What antigen may be used, if the virus SARS-CoV-2 cannot be isolated and replicated?
And what reliability can the virus tests have, since the tests are calibrated to detect only on the generic “Coronavirus” in general?”
If we are to consider the word “hoax,” what comes to mind? Words like fraud, fake, planned, duped, and others seem appropriate. It is possible that a thing might exist, while at the same time the narrative around that thing might be a hoax.
It could be that the virus exists in some fashion, and that it was used for a “hoax” of epic proportions; namely the fraudulent utilization of a basic respiratory illness as a tool for Marxists to confuse the world into a continual panic that causes irreparable damage to society, thereby forcing the masses to rely more heavily on government.
We have not even scratched the surface on the vaccine, the massively dubious PCR rest, or the fact that public health agencies have admitted that someone who dies for any reason, including people who are shot in the head could count as a COVID death, as long as they test positive by the aforementioned faulty test.
By the way, traditional colds and flus can cause loss of taste and smell. So, it is entirely possible that if you lost your sense of smell – something seen as a sure fire sign of COVID – that you had a cold or a flu, like people have for virtually all of recorded history.
Oh, and the flu took a long-needed vacation last year, and it is possible to test positive for both flu and COVID at the same time. Now of course the “experts” want you to be doubly scared that you have flu and coronavirus, and they also want you to believe that your mask and hand sanitizer has stopped the flu in its tracks but has not stopped the dreaded coronavirus. You see, flu particles are very thoughtful, and they obey the moist cotton-rag you are required to wear over your mouth at work, but the COVID particles demonstrate no such decorum.
Remember, everything we know and do not know about the virus that may be or may not be, that may be serious or may not be serious, that might be novel or might not be novel, that might be from a lab or might not be from a lab… all hinges on the world trusting piece-meal intelligence that emanated from a government that cares nothing for truth or virtue and that operates on the diabolical principles of Karl Marx.
The only thing that is certain about COVID is that it – whatever it is or is not – has been used by China and other governments to spread the deadliest of viruses – Marxism.
Kennedy Hall is the author Terror of Demons: Reclaiming Traditional Catholic Masculinity (forthcoming from TAN) and Family Be Damned, a novel published by Our Lady of Victory Press. He is a writer Catholic Family News, LifeSiteNewsand is the host of the Conservative talk-radio show, The Kennedy Profession on the Crusade Channel. He is married with four children and lives in Ontario, Canada. You can find his work at kennedyhall.ca.
25Shares
25
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on Remember, everything we know and do not know about the virus that may be or may not be, that may be serious or may not be serious, that might be novel or might not be novel, that might be from a lab or might not be from a lab… all hinges on the world trusting piece-meal intelligence that emanated from a government that cares nothing for truth or virtue and that operates on the diabolical principles of Karl Marx.
Are Opus Dei & the Old Guard at War with Francis & the Gay Mafia?
Signorile in 2011 at the book launch party for Michael Musto‘s Fork on the Left, Knife in the Back [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelangelo_Signorile]
One of the top gay activist pioneers of “outing,” Michelangelo Signorile, is now fighting against Pillar’s gay priest outing because he says it may be “sending a message that this is what they are capable of doing” to the Francis Gay Mafia “reforms within the Catholic church and hobble Pope Francis”:
After reading a fair number of Catholic commentators on the story, and speaking with some observers and academics, I don’t believe Burrill was targeted… I think he was a pawn — and probably an easy target because he may have had so much out there regarding his activities — taken down by a group sending a message that this is what they are capable of doing.
And there are ways to “de-anonymize” the data and track it to a particular phone, which is what happened in this case if The Pillar’s claims are true.
While it’s not known how Burrill’s data was obtained from Grindr (assuming, again, that the Pillar’s report is truthful), app developers usually send location data to third parties through software development kits, or SDKs, which are tools that add functions to their apps or serve ads…
…[Grindr] does say in its own privacy policy that it shared users’ age, gender, and location with advertisers until April 2020. The Pillar said its data on Burrill is from 2018 to 2020.
All of this, however, requires sophisticated operators and, if data is being bought from third parties, lots of money. The Pillar — again, whose funders are unknown — hasn’t been transparent about where and how it got the data, whether it paid for it or was given the data by someone else who might have paid for it. The Catholic News Agency, where the two top Pillar editors previously worked, published a piece the day before the resignation, warning of surveillance by tracking via apps and claiming they were offered information by an individual, which they turned down.
While that may be true, Mike Lewis, who founded the Catholic news site Where Peter Is and regularly covers the entities involved, wondered if CNA and The Pillar were actually working together:
The Pillar story also leaves many unanswered questions. For example, both the Pillar and Catholic News Agency (which ran a cryptic article on Monday that indicated something like this would be happening) withheld the name of the agency that provided the data. The Pillar didn’t indicate who paid for the data set (note that their article said “obtained” rather than bought or purchased). For that matter, the Pillar has never disclosed their primary source(s) of funding. Did CNA and the Pillar work in tandem? Why did they target Msgr. Burrill, of all people?
Who is behind this well-funded operation?
Dawn Eden Goldstein, a Catholic theology professor, author and journalist, dug into the story quite a bit, and in a Twitter thread offers up three people who could be behind this kind of operation and helping to fund it:
Steve Bannon, who has joined ultra-conservatives in launching blistering attacks on Pope Francis (who’s defended migrants and has spoken against nationalism), and certainly is familiar with data harvesting.” [https://signorile.substack.com/p/right-wing-catholic-moralists-outed]
It seems doubtful that Bannon has that kind of money, but according to researcher Randy Engel the apparently Pillar connected Catholic News Agency is linked with the extremely wealthy Opus Dei.
Is it possible that Opus Dei has joined the Vatican Old Guard in their apparent war with Francis and the Gay Mafia?
Is Francis’s Secretary of State and top diplomat Cardinal Pietro Parolin under the control of Cardinal Angelo Sodano?
Sodano is the boss of the Vatican Old Guard diplomats and Parolin has been called his “longtime protegee.” (BishopAccountability.org, “Does Sodano Dominate Pope Francis? Or Does it just Seem So?”, March 29, 2015)
Are Sodano’s Old Guard and the Italian Mafia at war with Francis and the Vatican Gay Lobby, also, known as the Gay Mafia?
In 2019, a headline from the Catholic News Agency stated “Cardinal Becciu at center of financial investigation” which shows he is being thrown under the bus.
It appears that Becciu (who was made a bishop by Sodano) according to the CNA article is going to be the scapegoat for all the recently uncovered financial wrong doings in the Vatican and even the Parolin defeat of Cardinal George Pell’s Vatican financial reform and the Parolin sacking of Pell’s auditor.
It is possible that Becciu is solely responsible for all of the above, but in my opinion it is unlikely.
Did Parolin with the help of Sodano’s Old Guard and the Italian Mafia go to war with Cardinal Pell?
Everyone in the Vatican knows that Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Parolin and Cardinal Pellwere in a power struggle before Pell ended up in a Australian court and prison. Pell was suppose to reform the Vatican corruption including the Secretary of State’s finances and the Vatican diplomat’s finances. The power structure of the Vatican diplomats is called the “old guard.” Parolin is supposed to be a entrenched member of the “old guard in the Vatican.” Parolin according to the Catholic Herald in a “series of power struggles” ended the outside audit and Vatican financial reform “even before” Pell was forced to return to Australia on old sex-abuse allegations. (Catholic Herald, “How Cardinal Parolin won the Vatican civil war,” November 9, 2017)
In the Pell power struggle shady and suspicious actions were taken by a employee of Parolin (Archbishop Angelo Becciu) on former Auditor General Libero Milone. The Auditor suspecting that he was being spied on brought in a external contractor who “determined” his computer was “infected with file copying spyware” according to LifeSiteNews.com in its September 28, 2017 article “Former Vatican auditor accused of spying says ‘shady games’ going on in Rome.”
Moreover, Crux in the article Ex-Vatican auditor says he was forced out by old guard with ‘frame-job’reported Pell may have been punished for attempting a financial reform of the Vatican by the “old guard”:
“Milone told reporters that he had written Francis in July through a “secure channel,” saying he was the victim of a frame-job and that he’s “astonished” that it happened at the same time that Pell, who had been tapped by Francis in 2014 as his point man for financial reform, had exited the scene.”
“Milone implied it may not have been a coincidence that the abuse charges against Pell, which reportedly date back decades, had surfaced only within the last couple of years, at the same time his reform efforts were becoming increasingly controversial inside the Vatican.”[https://cruxnow.com/vatican/2017/09/24/ex-vatican-auditor-says-forced-old-guard-frame-job/]
The American Conservative’s Rod Dreher revealed that the Parolin and Sodano Old Guard struggle with Pell may have involve the Italian Mafia:
“When I was in Australia last month, I found myself in a conversation one evening with someone about all this. (I had a lot of Pell conversations, as you might imagine.) I shared with my interlocutor my suspicion that Pell was set up to take him off the Vatican Bank case. The man across the table said, ‘ That’s interesting. You may not know it, but the ‘Ndrangheta is quite well established in Australia, especially in Victoria. That’s where the cardinal was charged.”
‘Senior Calabrian Mafia investigator Nicola Gratteri, whose investigative zeal has forced him to live with police protection since 1989, has said the pope’s plans to reform Vatican structures, including the Vatican bank, the IOR, could prove a problem for the ’Ndrangheta, Italy’s most powerful Mafia.’
‘… For those with real economic power it is obvious this could be a huge disadvantage . . . Given that in the past we’ve had collusion at the highest level between church and Mafia, this exposes the pope.'”
“Months after this report, Cardinal George Pell was named by Francis to reform the IOR. In 2014, Pell said his team found nearly two billion euros hidden away in various Vatican accounts, off the balance sheets. In November 2015, with the Pope’s approval, Pell issued new guidelines for running all Vatican offices, to bring them up to international standards for financial transparency.”
“In April 2016, without consulting Pell, the Vatican Secretary of State suspends an external audit of Vatican finances. The National Catholic Register quotes an unnamed source as saying that officials are afraid of what the audit will find, and want to get rid of Pell. A year later, Pell was charged in Melbourne with sexual abuse. And that was the end of the Pell threat to the Vatican Bank insiders.”
“This mafia thing, it could all be a coincidence, and in any case, there are other factors in play in the persecution of George Pell, who was widely hated by Australian anti-clericalists. But it’s curious all the same. George Pell was the No. 1 enemy of the ‘Ndrangheta in the Vatican, and he showed early on in his tenure, when he uncovered all the hidden euros, that he meant business. Now George Pell sits in solitary confinement in a prison cell in Melbourne, convicted on pathetically shabby charges. The old guard in the Vatican won. The world is as it always was.”[https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/cardinal-pell-the-mafia/]
It appears that Parolin with the help of Sodano’s Old Guard and possibly the Italian Mafia may now be about to be involve with another power struggle with Francis and the Vatican Gay Lobby which some call the Gay Mafia.
Is the alliance of the Gay Lobby and the Old Guard that apparently were involved with the engineering of the election of Francis breaking up and at war?
The Old Guard Vatican diplomats whose top official is Sercetary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin was “attack[ed]” and “is being targeted” by the Vatican Bank (IOR) which is headed by the Francis appointed Gay Lobby Monsignor Battista Ricca according to Italian news outlet Ilmerraggero. (Ilmessaggero.it, “Vatican, IOR attacks the Secretariat of State: alleged financial irregularities,” October 2, 2019)
The Ilmessaggero article reported Parolin’s Secretariat of State offices were broken into by Vatican police with the apparent approval of Francis:
“[I]n the offices of the Secretariat of State… the Vatican judicial police officers broke in for a reconnaissance that led to the seizure of documents and computers.”
Gloria.tv revealed:
“The Italian daily Ilmessaggero.it has presented the Vatican’s recent financial scandal as a ‘clash of power’ between the Vatican Bank and the Secretary of State.” (Gloria.tv, “Vatican Scandal: Now the Accused Speaks,” October 6, 2019)
Moreover, Gloria.tv reported the Francis Vatican raid was a sneak attack:
“Secretary of State Piero Parolin, was unaware of the problems leading to the suspension of five high-placed collaborators in his own dicastery.”
“According to Corriere.it (October 3), Parolin was informed by Francis only a few hours before the raid in the Secretariat of State took place.” (Gloria.tv, “No Dialogue: Parolin Informed in Last Minute,” October 4, 2019)
Furthermore, Vatican expert Andrea Gagliarducci says the Francis Gay Lobby takeover of Parolin’s Old Guard Secretary of State is long planned including putting Gay Lobby Archbishop Edgar Pena Parra as the second in command behind Parolin at the Secretariat.
Parra is deeply connected to Francis’s closest collaborator pro-gay Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga and his alleged gay predator ex-auxiliary Bishop Juan Jose Pineda who was forced to resign.
In August, Gagliarducci reported the Francis Gay Lobby takeover of the Old Guard’s last strong hold at the Vatican:
“Pope Francis is setting up his team in the Secretariat of State. This new team will have no connection with the old guard.” (Mondayvatican.com, “Pope Francis, how the transition is taking place,” August 5, 2019)
Moreover, Gagliarducci says the “attack” on the Old Guard is “unprecedented” in the history of the Vatican:
[W]hy should an entity under the oversight, namely the Institute for Religious Works [the Vatican Bank], report on other bodies that oversee it… the Secretariat of State?”
“… Possible answer is that the green light came directly by the Pope to the prosecutor…”
“The attack to the Institution from within the Institution is unprecedented for the Holy See. It shows the extent of the internal struggle.” (Mondayvatican.com, “Pope Francis, what is happening in the Vatican?,” October 7, 2019)
If this is all true and Francis through the Gay Lobby stabbed the Old Guard in the back then get ready for Italian style, maybe Italian Mafia style, payback.
Look for a possible Pell-like attack on Francis and the Gay Lobby from Sodano’s Old Guard.
The reported firing of the Vatican police chief Domenico Giani by Francis may be part of the war.
It appears to be part of a war between Francis’s Vatican Gay Lobby against the Vatican Old Guard diplomats whose main figure head is Cardinal Pietro Parolin, but whose real head is Cardinal Angelo Sodano.
One question some are asking is has Parolin joined Team Francis or he is still loyal to Sodano?
Only time will tell.
The evidence I have found points to Giani being allied with Sodano’s Old Guard.
Sodano has run the Vatican since Pope John Paul II got sick and old, but Pope Benedict XVI sidelined him.
The evidence appears to show that Sodano’s Old Guard didn’t appreciate being sidelined and they as well as the Gay Lobby initiated Vatileaks and other unsavory maneuvers to get the pope to resign. The Old Guard in my opinion have pretty much controlled Francis up to now, but it looks like he now appears to think he has enough power to take them on.
If all this is correct, Francis better get his friend Latin American strongman Nicolas Maduro to send in the Colombian Marxist drug lords who are reportedly hiding in his country to fight Sodano and the Italian Mafia. If I am right, things are going to get interesting for Francis.
If this is true, it is a war between two equally unsavory outfits who in my opinion are both responsible for the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI, the Church financial scandals and the sex abuse scandals.
I pray for their expulsions from the Church which will hopefully lead to their conversion before their death.
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)
– 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.
Abortion-By-Hanger Deemed Safe September 30, 2021 Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on the 2021 Women’s March on Washington which will be held on Oct. 2nd. [Note: This news release contains graphic language.] According to the organizers of this year’s Women’s March on Washington, there is nothing dangerous, scary or harmful about a pregnant woman inserting a wire hanger into her vagina to kill her child. That’s why those who show up with a hanger, or hanger imagery, will get booted, even if their purpose is to protest abortion-law restrictions. On the website of this event, it lists items that should and should not be brought. Among the latter, it says: “Coat-hanger imagery: We do not want to accidentally reinforce the right wing talking points that self-managed abortions are dangerous, scary and harmful.” Liberals, they suggest, are fine with women using a hanger to abort their child. It’s a safe instrument. Thus have they made the case to shut down Planned Parenthood. We don’t need more abortion clinics—we need more coat hangers. Amazingly, the organizers of the march say that using a wire hanger to rip a child out of a woman’s body is sanitary, but not to wear a mask, or practice social distancing, at this outdoor event is unsanitary. Here’s their advice: “EVERYONE IS REQUIRED TO WEAR A MASK AND PRACTICE SOCIAL DISTANCING. WE WILL PROVIDE HAND SANITIZER STATIONS THROUGHOUT THE MARCH.” They have further instructed women who show up wearing a Handmaid’s costume that they can take a hike. Why? Even though these outfits are being worn by women to protest abortion restrictions, the organizers contend that they are used “primarily by white women across the country.” That sends a bad message to “Black women, undocumented women, incarcerated women, poor women and disabled women.” Pro-abortion activists have changed a lot. In 1969, four years before Roe v. Wade, 300,000 protesters marched in Washington demanding the legalization of abortion. According to the Los Angeles Times, “marchers wore coat hangers around their necks and held signs reading, ‘Never again.'” Now coat hangers are in vogue—only right wing loons object to pregnant woman using them to murder their child. But not everyone is convinced that hangers are safe. Dr. Jen Gunter is a Canadian-American gynecologist and pro-abortion activist. She has even written a radical manifesto, The Vagina Bible. But when it comes to abortion-by-hanger, she is not a fan. She describes what happens when a woman or girl “thrusts it [the coat hanger] blindly upwards into the vagina.” She may not know, Gunter says, that “to get into the uterus the coat hanger has to navigate the small opening in the cervix called the os.” The problem with that is the end of the hanger is “sharp not tapered so it can lacerate and perforate.” Let’s say the woman gets through this stage. “The uterine wall is soft and easily perforated,” and if this happens “there is a high risk of lacerating a uterine artery.” This, in turn, means that the woman could “easily bleed to death.” That’s not all. “The other dangers with uterine perforation is the bowel. If it is punctured, it will “most certainly kill her unless she gets appropriate medical care.” This means “major surgery to drain abscesses, remove necrotic bowel, and possibly even a colostomy. The uterus will also be infected and may be damaged beyond repair.” Even if the woman gets this far, “it is unlikely she will induce an abortion immediately.” She risks infection, and “bacteria from septic abortions often disseminates and each hour the condition remains untreated death takes a step closer.” If the organizers of the Women’s March on Washington are right, that would make Dr. Gunter is a right-wing misogynist nut. But if she is right, that would make them monsters.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on According to the organizers of this year’s Women’s March on Washington, there is nothing dangerous, scary or harmful about a pregnant woman inserting a wire hanger into her vagina to kill her child. That’s why those who show up with a hanger, or hanger imagery, will get booted, even if their purpose is to protest abortion-law restrictions.
“The Two [Vacinne] Camps of Enemies we Face: the truly Evil Psychopaths… & their Criminally Negligent ‘Useful Idiot’ Minions”
Today, Constitutional lawyer Scott Lively said “Humanity is in severe crisis globally and it is not accidental. Covid 19 is not the cause, but the method. The crisis is tyranny. Its goal is genocide”:The primary barrier to greater numbers of awakened populists is the unwillingness to believe the elites would deliberately kill millions of people. This is educated speculation on my part as one who has resisted the truth for that reason. The reality is too horrible to want to believe by anyone who desires to see the good in people. But if the Marxist elites can justify the slaughter unborn people by the millions, they can justify the slaughter of the born people in the millions, and have done so in the past – just not in America, or on a global scale . Evil is real and it’s face today is that of white-robed medical professional injecting healthy not-at-risk children with a dangerous “vaccine” and/or chemicals to “transition” them into sexual mutants. It is the face of sanctimonious political leaders issuing lockdown and vaccination diktats in direct contradiction to essential and unalienable human rights that undergird our civilization. It is the face of master-manipulator news and social media hacks and flaks driving public policy and public opinion to serve Marxist political ends. All of these enemies of the people are doing this without regard for the genocidal consequences – or worse, are knowingly complicit. These are the two camps of enemies we face: the truly evil psychopaths who know exactly what they’re doing, and their criminally negligent “useful idiot” minions. Malice is the common law principle that indicts both camps. In law malice is the wicked intention to do injury to another, or the reckless disregard for the consequences of an act which causes injury. The root is the French word “mal” which means “evil,” “bad,” or “wrong,” as in “malfeasance,” which should be the criminal charge brought against all of these co-conspirators. Malfeasance is the comprehensive term used in criminal and civil law to describe conduct that is wrongful or unlawful, especially by public officials or public employees. Modernly it is not often used as a separate cause of action but only a means of characterizing wrong conduct. A 1981 case in Pennsylvania (Com. v. Bellis), however, stated “Where…the common law offense [of malfeasance] proscribes conduct different from the conduct proscribed in the penal statute [in that case bribery and extortion], the accused may, upon sufficient evidence, be convicted of either or both offenses.” I’ve been retired from the practice of law for a long time, but as far as I can see there is no charge that could be brought against the public officials complicit in covid plandemic tyranny that quite fits as well as common law malfeasance. I would argue further that, legally speaking, there has never been a situation truly comparable in this country, and the closest comparison would seem to be the Nuremberg trials. That same perspective has inspired EU-based attorneys led by Dr Reiner Fuellmich to initiate legal proceedings there against the CDC, WHO and the Davos Group for crimes against humanity. To be clear, I expect that suit to fail. The elites will use their controlling power over the established political and legal institutions to thwart and neutralize this and other legal and political threats. I expect ALL the efforts of the people to demand their rights will be crushed with increasing brutality by the police state until there is no other option but violent revolution. (Australia is the current police-state test case.) The timing of the revolt is entirely a question of when the people realize there is no other means of escaping slavery. I hope I’m wrong… [ Scott Lively’s Mission Dispatch, September 29, 2021,Observations and Action on Current Events, History and Theology. Subscribe HERE]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)
– 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.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on “Humanity is in severe crisis globally and it is not accidental. Covid 19 is not the cause, but the method. The crisis is tyranny. Its goal is genocide”
1958—In a joint opinion of all nine justices in Cooper v. Aaron, the Supreme Court for the first time asserts the myth of judicial supremacy. The case concerns an application by Little Rock, Arkansas, school authorities to suspend for 2-1/2 years the operation of the school board’s court-approved desegregation program. After stating that “[w]hat has been said, in light of the facts developed, is enough to dispose of this case” (by denying the school board’s application), the Supreme Court nonetheless proceeds to purport to “recall some basic constitutional propositions which are settled doctrine.” Among these supposedly basic propositions are the false assertions that the Court’s 1803 ruling in Marbury v. Madison “declared the basic principle that the federal judiciary is supreme in the exposition of the law of the Constitution” and that “that principle has ever since been respected by this Court and the Country as a permanent and indispensable feature of our constitutional system.”
Properly understood, Marbury stands at most for the limited proposition that the courts, in exercising their judicial function, may review the constitutionality of statutes that they are asked to apply. As leading liberal scholar Laurence Tribe has acknowledged, Marbury in no way establishes that the federal judiciary in general—or the Supreme Court in particular—is supreme over the President and Congress in determining what the Constitution means: “presidents have never taken so wholly juricentric … a view of the constitutional universe—a view that certainly isn’t implied by the power of judicial review as recognized in Marbury v. Madison.”
Contrast Cooper’s brazen dictum with these words from Abraham Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address:
[T]he candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, . . . the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.
M. Edward Whelan III Distinguished Senior Fellow and
Antonin Scalia Chair in Constitutional Studies Ethics and Public Policy Center 1730 M Street N.W., Suite 910 Washington, D.C. 20036 202-682-1200 www.EPPC.org
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on [T]he candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, . . . the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.
Here is Texas’s introduction (some citations simplified or omitted):
The Court should deny the federal government’s motion for a preliminary injunction and dismiss this case. Article III does not permit courts to hear “a proceeding against the government in its sovereign capacity” when “the only judgment required is to settle the doubtful character of the legislation in question.”
Disregarding this jurisdictional defect, the federal government seeks extraordinary relief—an injunction against non-party private individuals and state judges—without even identifying a cause of action. Congress has created numerous specific causes of action for the Attorney General, but not one applies here. Congress has created causes of action for the Attorney General to enforce various constitutional rights and statutory abortion rights under the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act. But Congress has never created a cause of action to enforce a constitutional right to abortion. Instead, it has repeatedly refused to create a broader cause of action for the Attorney General.
The federal government asks the Court to dispense with the normal cause-of-action requirement based on unfounded fears that the Texas Heartbeat Act will otherwise “evade judicial review.” Nothing could be further from the truth. The constitutionality of the Texas Heartbeat Act can be reviewed in the same way that virtually all of state tort law is: State-court defendants raise constitutional defenses before neutral judges sworn to follow the U.S. Constitution and, if necessary, appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. See, e.g., New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964).
True, some abortion providers might prefer to be federal-court plaintiffs rather than state-court defendants, but that preference is not a constitutional right. It is also an issue that Congress has already considered. The Attorney General has statutory causes of action to enforce certain Fourteenth Amendment rights if he concludes that the affected individuals “are unable . . . to initiate and maintain appropriate legal proceedings.” But those causes of action are limited to equal protection rights. Congress’s detailed cause-of-action scheme precludes the Attorney General from bringing this suit to enforce a constitutional right to abortion.
The federal government also asks this Court to disregard the standard limitations on injunctive relief. Effectively conceding that an injunction against the State would be useless—because the State does not enforce the Heartbeat Act—the federal government seeks an injunction running against two groups of non-parties: (1) private individuals who might bring heartbeat suits and (2) state courts that might adjudicate those suits. Binding precedent forecloses both options.
The Court cannot decide that absent third parties are subject to an injunction without letting them be heard. And “an injunction against a state court would be a violation of the whole scheme of our government.” Ex parte Young (1908). As the Fifth Circuit recently held, “[i]t is absurd to contend . . . that the way to challenge an unfavorable state law is to sue state court judges, who are bound to follow not only state law but the U.S. Constitution and federal law.”
What is worse, the federal government asks the Court to overcome all of these hurdles in order to issues an ineffective injunction against a valid law. According to the federal government, abortion providers are “chilled” by the prospect of future liability in state court. But on these facts, a preliminary injunction would not “unchill” abortion providers. In light of the strong possibility that any preliminary injunction would eventually be stayed or reversed, allowing heartbeat suits in state court to proceed, abortion providers would still face the prospect of future liability. In this case—where the alleged irreparable harm flows from the mere prospect of future liability—a preliminary injunction would not help.
Finally, the Texas Heartbeat Act is constitutional. Even the federal government does not challenge the constitutionality of many provisions in the Heartbeat Act. No one disputes the constitutionality of requiring doctors to determine “whether the woman’s unborn child has a detectable fetal heartbeat. No one disputes the constitutionality of the provision governing attorney’s fees. The federal government’s challenge is limited to the provision authorizing private causes of action, but even that argument is limited to the statute’s pre-viability applications. The federal government raises no argument that Texas cannot authorize heartbeat suits for post-viability abortions. In any event, the Heartbeat Act cannot violate Supreme Court precedent because it incorporates the Court’s “undue burden” test as a defense.
In the end, the motion for a preliminary injunction “presents complex and novel antecedent procedural questions on which [the federal government has] not carried [its] burden.” Whole Woman’s Health v. Jackson (U.S. Sept. 1, 2021). As a result, the Court “cannot say” that the federal government has “met [its] burden to prevail [on] an injunction.”
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on The Court should deny the federal government’s motion for a preliminary injunction and dismiss this case. Article III does not permit courts to hear “a proceeding against the government in its sovereign capacity” when “the only judgment required is to settle the doubtful character of the legislation in question.”
While the reports made several significant findings supporting former President Trump’s complaints about the 2020 election, the corporate media ignored those aspects of the audit.
On Friday, the Arizona State Senate released the final reports on the results of the Maricopa County Forensic Election Audit. While the reports made several significant findings supporting former President Trump’s complaints about the 2020 election, the corporate media ignored those aspects of the audit to focus instead only on the results of the hand recount.
As broadly reported, the audit established “there were no substantial differences between the hand count of the ballots provided and the official canvass results for the County.” Maricopa County, which represents Arizona’s most populous county thanks to its county seat of Phoenix, had provided Biden a 45,000-vote advantage in the state, propelling Biden to a victory by 10,457 votes. So the media presented the recount as confirming Biden’s victory in the state.
Left unmentioned, however, were the numerous findings of problems with the election and, most significantly, evidence indicating tens of thousands of ballots were illegally cast or counted. A report entitled “Compliance with Election Laws and Procedures,” issued by Senate Audit Liaison Ken Bennett, highlighted several issues, of which two were particularly significant because of the number of votes involved.
First, Bennett excerpted the Arizona statutory provisions governing early ballots. Those provisions require early ballots to be accompanied by a signed affidavit in which the voter declares he is registered in the appropriate county and has not already voted. The statute further mandates that a voter “make and sign the affidavit,” and directs the early election board to check the voter’s affidavit.
Significantly, “if the affidavit is insufficient, the vote shall not be allowed.” The secretary of state’s Election Procedures Manual reinforces this point, stating: “If the early ballot affidavit is not signed, the County Recorder shall not count the ballot.”
In his report, Bennett noted that “while the Audit scope of work did not include comparing signatures with voter registration records for each voter, it did identify a number of missing signatures on ballot envelop affidavits, which to the extent the ballots in such envelopes were tallied, would violate the above statutes and procedures.”
Although Bennett did not elaborate on the issues related to affidavit signatures or the numbers of affected ballots, in a 99-page report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology engineer Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai detailed numerous anomalies.
First, Ayyadurai analyzed the early voting ballot return envelopes, on which voters were required to sign an affidavit within a signature block. That review revealed more than 17,000 duplicate images of the return envelopes. When the duplicates were eliminated from the review, Ayyadurai’s company, EchoMail, concluded that Maricopa County had recorded more than 6,545 early voting return envelopes than EchoMail determined existed. EchoMail also concluded that another approximately 500 of the envelopes’ affidavits were left blank.
Ayyadurai also highlighted several implausible statistics, such as that while there was a 52.6 percent increase from 2016 to 2020 in the number of early voting ballots, Maricopa County reported a decrease in signature mismatches of 59.7 percent. “This inverse relationship requires explanation,” the report noted, and then recommended a full audit of the signatures.
Bennett’s report on election law compliance highlighted several additional issues, but of particular note, in light of the audit report, was his reference to Arizona’s statutory requirements for individuals to be considered eligible voters, as delineated in Articles 1, 1.1, and 2 of the Arizona election code.
“The Audit identified numerous questions regarding possible ineligible voters,” Bennett noted, while adding that because “these determinations were made from comparisons between the County’s final voted information and private data sources,” the cooperation of Maricopa County and further investigation would be necessary to “determine whether ineligible persons actually were allowed to vote in the 2020 election.”
The referenced articles of the election code discuss voter registration requirements and the requirement for individuals to be registered to vote at their address of residence, although individuals moving within 29 days of the election remain properly registered to vote in the county in which they previously resided. However, students, members of the military, and others temporarily living at another address remain properly registered at their permanent home address.
Also of significance is the Arizona secretary of state’s Election Procedures Manual, which according to the audit provides that “ballot-by-mail must be mailed to voters by first-class, nonforwardable mail.”
These statutory provisions and procedures prove significant because the audit revealed that 15,035 mail-in votes in Maricopa County were from voters who had moved prior to the registration deadline, another 6,591 mail-in-votes came from voters who had moved out of Arizona prior to the registration deadline, and 1,718 mail-in votes came from voters who moved within Arizona but out of Maricopa prior to the registration deadline.
One of three scenarios seems possible here: First, the mail-in ballot was delivered to the old address and then provided to the named voter, who had only temporarily relocated. Such votes would be legal and entirely proper.
Second, the mail-in ballot was delivered to the old address and then provided to the named voter, who had permanently moved, but failed to timely update his registration record yet signed an affidavit attesting to a false address of residence. Such votes would be illegal.
Or third, the mail-in ballot was delivered to the old address, and then someone other than the named voter cast the vote. Such votes would be both illegal and fraudulent.
Neither Maricopa County nor the state of Arizona knows how many of these 23,000-plus votes fall within each of these three scenarios. And that’s a problem.
As I wrote when similar problems, albeit with more conclusive evidence, were unearthed in Georgia, “Elections are too tight and the populace too divided for ‘close enough for government work’ to cut it anymore. The American voting system must be reformed to ensure security, transparency, replicability, and election officials’ uniform compliance with state election law.”
Sixteen years ago, both Democrats and Republicans would have agreed on these goals, as the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform’s report “Building Confidence in U.S. Elections” confirms. That commission, co-chaired by Democrat Jimmy Carter and Republican James Baker III, spoke of “the administration of elections as a continuing challenge, which requires the highest priority of our citizens and our government.”
Unfortunately, rather than acknowledge the problems the Maricopa County audit revealed and rise to the challenge of ensuring they are not repeated, while also investigating areas of potential fraud and illegal voting, Democrats and some Republicans pretend the hand recount’s confirmation of the official vote tally ends the matter.
The corrupt press likewise pushes this narrative: The audit confirms Trump lost, and that is all there is to the matter.
But this isn’t about Trump, just as the 2005 report on building confidence in American elections wasn’t about Al Gore. This is about election integrity and our democracy because, as the commission wrote not even 20 years ago:
The vigor of American democracy rests on the vote of each citizen. Only when citizens can freely and privately exercise their right to vote and have their vote recorded correctly can they hold their leaders accountable. Democracy is endangered when people believe that their votes do not matter or are not counted correctly.
The Arizona audit ended nothing including, sadly, the view held by half of our country that their votes do not matter and are not counted correctly—and that many politicians and members of the press don’t care.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on ELECTION FRAUD IN ARIZONA VERIFIED BY AUDIT
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
You must be logged in to post a comment.