Events over the last eight or nine years at my old place of work, Providence College, as well as events that have recently broken out in a new rash of the disease, have caused me to try to understand what makes someone a sneak, and what that might have to do with mob politics—with losing yourself in a crowd.
At first glance it might appear that they have nothing to do with one another. Mobs march in the open while the petty little sneak works behind the scenes. One professorial sneak writes a scurrilous letter to the student newspaper to attack a colleague, but he hides behind a pseudonym. A different professorial sneak whispers backroom slander against a new hire, causing her to lose her job. A third professorial sneak coordinates efforts with an alumna, secretly, to try to get a colleague fired over the supposed offensiveness of the teachings of John Paul II. A fourth professorial sneak, caught doing it by the secretary, stuffs departmental mailboxes with slander. And it goes on, wearily now, year after year. Cowardice, backstabbing, hypocrisy, tale-bearing (plus tale-inventing and tale-twisting), secret dealing, all things underhand, indirect, two-faced, unmanly, and sly. Such is political life in academe. Mobs are not like that, are they?
Well, yes, they are. I find one key in Alberto Moravia’s novel, The Conformist (1951), set in Fascist Italy. Marcello is a boy, an only child, burdened with dreadful parents. He has a cold, unloving father, ever on the verge of madness, and a much younger mother who neglects her husband and son to pursue adulterous delights. Marcello kills lizards for the cruelty of it, and yet he longs for his mother to condemn him in sure terms and punish him, though he feels no remorse. She does not hear what he is saying. He kills a cat with his slingshot, thinking in the heat of the moment that it was the neighbor boy who would not join him in killing lizards; again there is no condemnation, no punishment, and no remorse. He is an extraordinarily pretty boy, too pretty for his own good, and his schoolmates ambush him one day on his way home, beat him up, and put a skirt over his head, calling him “Marcellina.” Still he longs to be one of them, to be accepted. What would impress them?
A revolver might. One day, a chauffeur, who noticed how the boys treated him, invites Marcello to get into his car. He promises to give him a revolver, like the one in his glove compartment, if he can earn it. The boy has no idea what the chauffeur is talking about, but he does want the revolver very much. He wants it in order to belong, to be normal, to disappear into normality. The man takes him up to his female employer’s empty villa on top of a mountain, pushes him into the bedroom, and throws him and the revolver onto the bed. He wants to rape him. But Marcello gets out of his grasp and snatches at the gun. The man—a defrocked priest—does feel pangs of remorse, and he cries out, “Shoot, Marcello . . . kill me . . . yes, kill me like a dog.”https://secureaddisplay.com/i/view/js/?Viewable=0&isMobile=0&AULU=31049420180502T2200289306460AB42454C400A8A16937CB3EB93D7&cb=1599063281584&ccvid=957649850&pvid=1948531670
Marcello fires a bullet into the man’s chest.
It is thus that Moravia’s account of the boyhood of Marcello ends. Now a grown man, Marcello has two principal motivations. They are bound together. One is somehow to expiate the crime that has shadowed him all his days and that has formed who he is. The other is to be normal, to feel what other people feel, to think what other people think, and to do what they do. Normal people sin and repent and take their punishment, but he cannot do that, not even when he goes to confession (for the first since he was eight years old) as a requirement for the conventional Catholic marriage that his wife wants. She wants it not because she is pious, but because it is what everybody does.
Marcello becomes the Conformist that is the novel’s title. He works for the Fascist government as a secret service agent—that is, as a sneak. One of his colleagues, an assassin ironically named Orlando (think of the bold, bright Roland of the chivalric songs), has the slogan “For Family and Fatherland” always on his lips, even as he takes his ease at a whorehouse. Marcello does not utter those slogans. He does not feel those feelings. He is a Fascist because that is what individuals do to be absorbed in a movement. He wants to flow with the great tide of history.
❧
Moravia was certainly no Catholic moralist, and I do not want to suggest that the sensitive plants in our midst—ever quick to take offense—are numb in the way that Marcello appears to be. But perhaps touchiness in one regard is numbness in another. They who feel every criticism as a slight upon their dignity very rarely know themselves, much less the hearts of other people. That is the vice of an individual. How does it become fascist?
Every man is laden with guilt. Apart from the grace of God, it is ineradicable from the human condition. Yet each man feels his guilt as his and his alone. I am the one who on such a day did such a thing to such a person. Shut your eyes, reader, and see the sin in your mind. The sin demands expiation. But imagine that you are cut off from the Church. I do not mean simply that you are not Catholic or Christian. I mean that you do not fully believe that Christ has paid the dreadful penalty for your sin, and so you remain unsettled, even if you try to put the sin out of your mind, or you excuse it as no great deal.
The guilt remains. It is an objective fact, with subjective effect. It is like a cancer, growing and gnawing at your vitals. You must expiate the guilt. How is this possible?
Man’s usual method is to cast the guilt upon others. Because he is bad, but he cannot bear knowing that he is bad, he must look upon other people as worse, and punish them for it. It does not matter then that in his attacks upon others he is doing things that he knows are shameful and treacherous. The need for expiation is transformed into a desire to punish a scapegoat, a subhuman creature on whose back he loads his own sins and guilt. In this way, man thinks, he may at last conform to a conventional standard of normality.
It does not work. The fix is temporary. Guilt returns. So, the conformist, as Moravia saw, must do more and more, ever restless unto death. The self-styled progressive of our time is a restless conformist of this sort. There must always be some next attack upon ordinary persons going about their daily business; always some next goat to be heaped with sin. And in these attacks he does not stand forth alone. He does not go up to his brother in person, and say, “Fellow, you are wrong here.” To do so would be to invite the counter, “And you, my friend, have done wrong here.”
The Fascist needs numbers and secrecy, as the mob works by numbers and anonymity. Theirs is nothing like the intimate secrecy and publicity of the confessional, when you and no other say to a priest, a fellow human being, “Father, I did this, and there was no excuse for it.” Theirs is not a true communion, wherein each person senses the unique goodness of the other, rejoicing in his health, and suffering when he suffers or goes wrong. We can tell it is not so by how quickly the member of the mob—the person with the soul of a Fascist—turns snarling upon any comrade who begins to think his own thoughts.
The particulars of what the Fascist wants are secondary to who and what the Fascist is. Those particulars are largely accidental. In one place, they may be what Mussolini wants. In another place, they may be what a cabal of college faculty want, what Chairman Mao wants, or what the leaders of Black Lives Matter want. Nor should we pretend that there is all justice in one instance and all wickedness in another. The muddle of human affairs rules it out, and in any case even if you are a scoundrel in a good cause, you are still a scoundrel. Or perhaps I should say a mediocrity, angry that anyone should dare to stand apart from you and see you as you are.
Anthony Esolen, a contributing editor at Crisis, is a professor and writer-in-residence at Magdalen College of the Liberal Arts. Dr Esolen has authored several books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Western Civilization (Regnery Press, 2008), Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child (ISI Books, 2010) and Reflections on the Christian Life (Sophia Institute Press, 2013).
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on The Fascist needs numbers and secrecy, as the mob works by numbers and anonymity. Theirs is nothing like the intimate secrecy and publicity of the confessional, when you and no other say to a priest, a fellow human being, “Father, I did this, and there was no excuse for it.” Theirs is not a true communion, wherein each person senses the unique goodness of the other, rejoicing in his health, and suffering when he suffers or goes wrong. We can tell it is not so by how quickly the member of the mob—the person with the soul of a Fascist—turns snarling upon any comrade who begins to think his own thoughts.
“Bernie Sanders Die-hard” Operative: “Mail-in Voter Fraud is Easy to Pull off, We’ve been doing it [“on a Grand Scale”] for Years [& “Decades”]”
“The tipster said sometimes postal employees are in on the scam.”
“’You have a postman who is a rabid anti-Trump guy and he’s working in Bedminster or some Republican stronghold … He can take those [filled-out] ballots, and knowing 95% are going to a Republican, he can just throw those in the garbage.’
“In some cases, mail carriers were members of his ‘work crew,’ and would sift ballots from the mail and hand them over to the operative.”
“In 2017, more than 500 mail-in ballots in New York City never arrived to the Board of Elections for races that November — leaving hundreds disenfranchised. They eventually were discovered in April 2018. ‘For some undetermined reason, some baskets of mail that were bound to the New York City Board of Elections were put off to the side at the Brooklyn processing facility,’ city elections boss Michael Ryan said at the time of discovery.” – New York Post
Why are the liberal media and Democrats pushing for mail-in ballots?
Law Enforcement Today revealed that there are two reasons according to “a report in the New York Post” which it summarized in its article titled “Whistleblower: Mail-in voter fraud is easy to pull off, we’ve been doing it for years”:
“It is a win-win for them if you think about it. If President Trump wins, the Democrats can claim he suppressed the vote.”
“If President Trump loses and questions the process, which he might if it is close, the Democrats can claim he’s ‘refusing to accept the will of the American people.’” [https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/whistleblower-warns-america-mail-in-voter-fraud-is-easy-to-pull-off-weve-been-doing-it-for-years-op-ed/]
The liberal media and the Democrats it seems are lying when they spread the propaganda that voter fraud with mail-in ballots is not possible according to a top “Bernie Sanders die-hard” Democratic operative who revealed to a investigative reporter in the New York Postthatthishas been happening“on a grand scale, for decades“:
A top Democratic operative says voter fraud, especially with mail-in ballots, is no myth. And he knows this because he’s been doing it, on a grand scale, for decades.
Mail-in ballots have become the latest flashpoint in the 2020 elections. While President Trump and the GOP warn of widespread manipulation of the absentee vote that will swell with COVID polling restrictions, many Democrats and their media allies have dismissed such concerns as unfounded.
But the political insider, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he fears prosecution, said fraud is more the rule than the exception. His dirty work has taken him through the weeds of municipal and federal elections in Paterson, Atlantic City, Camden, Newark, Hoboken and Hudson County and his fingerprints can be found in local legislative, mayoral and congressional races across the Garden State. Some of the biggest names and highest office holders in New Jersey have benefited from his tricks, according to campaign records The Post reviewed.
“An election that is swayed by 500 votes, 1,000 votes — it can make a difference,” the tipster said. “It could be enough to flip states.”
The whisteblower — whose identity, rap sheet and long history working as a consultant to various campaigns were confirmed by The Post — says he not only changed ballots himself over the years, but led teams of fraudsters and mentored at least 20 operatives in New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania — a critical 2020 swing state.
“There is no race in New Jersey — from city council to United States Senate — that we haven’t worked on,” the tipster said. “I worked on a fire commissioner’s race in Burlington County. The smaller the race, the easier it is to do.”
A Bernie Sanders die-hard with no horse in the presidential race, he said he felt compelled to come forward in the hope that states would act now to fix the glaring security problems present in mail-in ballots.
“This is a real thing,” he said. “And there is going to be a f–king war coming November 3rd over this stuff … If they knew how the sausage was made, they could fix it.”
Mail-in voting can be complicated — tough enough that 84,000 New Yorkers had their mailed votes thrown out in the June 23 Democratic presidential primary for incorrectly filling them out.
But for political pros, they’re a piece of cake. In New Jersey, for example, it begins with a blank mail-in ballot delivered to a registered voter in a large envelope. Inside the packet is a return envelope, a “certificate of mail in voter” which the voter must sign, and the ballot itself.
That’s when the election-rigger springs into action.
Phony ballots
The ballot has no specific security features — like a stamp or a watermark — so the insider said he would just make his own ballots.
“I just put [the ballot] through the copy machine and it comes out the same way,” the insider said.
But the return envelopes are “more secure than the ballot. You could never recreate the envelope,” he said. So they had to be collected from real voters.
He would have his operatives fan out, going house to house, convincing voters to let them mail completed ballots on their behalf as a public service. The fraudster and his minions would then take the sealed envelopes home and hold them over boiling water.
“You have to steam it to loosen the glue,” said the insider.
He then would remove the real ballot, place the counterfeit ballot inside the signed certificate, and reseal the envelope.
“Five minutes per ballot tops,” said the insider.
The insider said he took care not to stuff the fake ballots into just a few public mailboxes, but sprinkle them around town. That way he avoided the attention that foiled a sloppy voter-fraud operation in a Paterson, NJ, city council race this year, where 900 ballots were found in just three mailboxes.
“If they had spread them in all different mailboxes, nothing would have happened,” the insider said.
Inside jobs
The tipster said sometimes postal employees are in on the scam.
“You have a postman who is a rabid anti-Trump guy and he’s working in Bedminster or some Republican stronghold … He can take those [filled-out] ballots, and knowing 95% are going to a Republican, he can just throw those in the garbage.”
In some cases, mail carriers were members of his “work crew,” and would sift ballots from the mail and hand them over to the operative.
In 2017, more than 500 mail-in ballots in New York City never arrived to the Board of Elections for races that November — leaving hundreds disenfranchised. They eventually were discovered in April 2018. “For some undetermined reason, some baskets of mail that were bound to the New York City Board of Elections were put off to the side at the Brooklyn processing facility,” city elections boss Michael Ryan said at the time of discovery.
Nursing homes
Hitting up assisted-living facilities and “helping” the elderly fill out their absentee ballots was a gold mine of votes, the insider said.
“There are nursing homes where the nurse is actually a paid operative. And they go room by room by room to these old people who still want to feel like they’re relevant,” said the whistleblower. “[They] literally fill it out for them.”
The insider pointed to former Jersey City Mayor Gerald McCann, who was sued in 2007 after a razor-thin victory for a local school board seat for allegedly tricking “incompetent … and ill” residents of nursing homes into casting ballots for him. McCann denied it, though he did admit to assisting some nursing home residents with absentee ballot applications.
Voter impersonation
When all else failed, the insider would send operatives to vote live in polling stations, particularly in states like New Jersey and New York that do not require voter ID. Pennsylvania, also for the most part, does not.
The best targets were registered voters who routinely skip presidential or municipal elections — information which is publicly available.
“You fill out these index cards with that person’s name and district and you go around the city and say, ‘You’re going to be him, you’re going to be him,’” the insider said of how he dispatched his teams of dirty-tricksters.
At the polling place, the fake voter would sign in, “get on line and … vote,” the insider said. The impostors would simply recreate the signature that already appears in the voter roll as best they could. In the rare instance that a real voter had already signed in and cast a ballot, the impersonator would just chalk it up to an innocent mistake and bolt.
Bribing voters
The tipster said New Jersey homeless shelters offered a nearly inexhaustible pool of reliable — buyable — voters.
“They get to register where they live in and they go to the polls and vote,” he said, laughing at the roughly $174 per vote Mike Bloomberg spent to win his third mayoral term. He said he could have delivered the same result at a 70 percent discount — like when Frank “Pupie” Raia, a real estate developer and Hoboken nabob, was convicted last year on federal charges for paying low-income residents 50 bucks a pop to vote how he wanted during a 2013 municipal election.
Organizationally, the tipster said, his voter-fraud schemes in the Garden State and elsewhere resembled Mafia organizations, with a boss (usually the campaign manager) handing off the day-to-day managing of the mob soldiers to the underboss (him). The actual candidate was usually kept in the dark deliberately so they could maintain “plausible deniability.”
With mail-in ballots, partisans from both parties hash out and count ballots at the local board of elections — debating which ballots make the cut and which need to be thrown out because of irregularities.
The insider said any ballots offered up by him or his operation would come with a bent corner along the voter certificate — which contains the voter signature — so Democratic Board of Election counters would know the fix was in and not to object.
“It doesn’t stay bent, but you can tell it’s been bent,” the tipster said. “Until the [certificate] is approved, the ballot doesn’t matter. They don’t get to see the ballot unless they approve the [certificate.]”
“I invented bending corners,” the insider boasted, saying once the fixed ballots were mixed in with the normal ones, the bed was made. “Once a ballot is opened, it’s an anonymous ballot.”
While federal law warns of prison sentences of up to five years, busted voter frauds have seen far less punishment. While in 2018 a Texas woman was sentenced to five years, an Arizona man busted for voting twice in the mail was given just three years’ probation. A study by the conservative Heritage Foundation found more than 1,000 instances of documented voter fraud in the United States, almost all of which occurred over the last 20 years.
“There is nothing new about these techniques,” said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at Heritage who manages their election law reform initiative. “Everything he’s talking about is perfectly possible.“
The city Board of Elections declined to answer Post questions on ballot security. [https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/political-insider-explains-voter-fraud-with-mail-in-ballots/]
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate of Mary.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on AMERICA IS FACING, IN NOVEMBER 2020, THE END OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS AS WE HAVE KNOWN THEM. IT IS NOW ALMOST CERTAIN THAT Donald Trump WILL WIN THE POPULAR VOTE AT THE VOTING BOOTH AND THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTE, BUT IT IS ALMOST CERTAIN THAT JOSEPH BIDEN WILL WIN THE POPULAR VOTE WHEN THE MAIL-IN BALLOTS ARE COUNTED. THE CONTESTED ELECTION IS HEADED FOR THE COURTS AND, WORSE, FOR THE STREETS!!!!
Catholic Family News is happy to report that His Grace, Carlo Maria Viganò, has sent us a letter today replying to the important questions which CFNcontributor Stephen Kokx respectfully posed in his recent article, “Questions for Viganò: His Excellency is Right about Vatican II, But What Does He Think Catholics Should Do Now?” In his detailed reply, Archbishop Viganò demonstrates that he is a true shepherd who cares for the confused and abandoned sheep of our time. He provides clear and practical answers for the increasing number of Catholics whose eyes are being opened to the Conciliar Revolution. In his prior interventions, Archbishop Viganò has accurately diagnosed the cause of the current crisis and identified the ultimate cure for it — the casting aside of the Conciliar texts. In today’s letter, His Excellency advises what practical treatment members of the Church Militant can utilize to inoculate themselves against the deadly errors of the Conciliar and post-Conciliar period so that their faith can survive until that ultimate cure is administered by a future holy pope.
Refuting Sedevacantists
The archbishop begins by clearly refuting those who have mischaracterized his prior interventions as advocating that Catholics break with the Church or refuse to acknowledge the occupants of hierarchical offices (as do the Sedevacantists). He delineates the need both to refuse any admixture with the Modernist errors and to remain firmly within the Church: “While it is clear that no admixture is possible with those who propose adulterated doctrines of the conciliar ideological manifesto, it should be noted that the simple fact of being baptized and of being living members of the Church of Christ does not imply adherence to the conciliar team; this is true above all for the simple faithful and also for secular and regular clerics who, for various reasons, sincerely consider themselves Catholics and recognize the Hierarchy. “
His Excellency turns the question back on the Modernists of today, who try to claim that the defenders of Tradition, such as His Grace, have broken “full” communion with the Church. With respect to churchmen who “embrace the heterodox doctrines that have spread over these decades, with the awareness that these represent a rupture with the preceding Magisterium,” he reassures the faithful that it is “licit to doubt their real adherence to the Catholic Church, in which however they hold official roles that confer authority on them. It is an illicitly exercised authority, if its purpose is to force the faithful to accept the revolution imposed since the Council.” In a clear refutation of Sedevacantist claims, he urges the faithful: “[L]et us not give in to the temptation to abandon – albeit with justified indignation – the Catholic Church, on the pretext that it has been invaded by heretics and fornicators: it is they who must be expelled from the sacred enclosure, in a work of purification and penance….”
In explaining how he understands that members of what he calls the “conciliar sect” can remain in hierarchical offices, His Excellency explains that he accepts the theory of Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais that there are two entities coexisting in the Church. The Church of Christ coexists together with the “strange extravagant Church … like wheat with the tare, in the Roman Curia, in dioceses, in parishes.” We must acknowledge this sad state but we “cannot judge our pastors for their intentions, nor suppose that all of them are corrupt in faith and morals….”
He urges the same path as the one which Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre pointed out many decades ago, the path that is mockingly labeled by Sedevacantists as “Recognize and Resist”. Just as we must avoid the perverted “obeisance of the court” and blindly adhere to novelties, we must also avoid the rejection of authority advocated by the Sedevacantists. He explains: “We must not rebel, but oppose; we must not be pleased with the errors of our pastors, but pray for them and admonish them respectfully; we must not question their authority but the way in which they use it.”
Right and Duty to Avoid New Mass Parishes: It’s About More Than the Latin Mass
Yet, do Catholics have the right to separate themselves from their geographical parish if it does not offer the sacraments according to the traditional rites and sound Catholic education? He unambiguously affirms that “faithful laity have the right and the duty to find priests, communities and institutes that are faithful to the perennial Magisterium. And may they know how to accompany the laudable celebration of the liturgy in the Ancient Rite with adherence to sound doctrine and morals, without any subsidence on the front of the Council.” It is important that Archbishop Viganò declares this avoidance of New Mass parishes not only a right but also a duty. That means it is not just permissible to do so if one prefers a Latin Mass, but for those who understand what is at stake it constitutes an obligation, a duty. He also makes clear that what the faithful need to find is not simply a place in which they can attend the Traditional Mass. Their duty is to find a place that offers the Ancient Rite together with sound doctrine that does not sink into (“subsidence”) the Council.
His Grace underscores this inherent connection that must exist between the Mass and doctrine by the term he uses several times to refer to the Traditional Mass. He calls it simply the “Catholic Rite”. He eschews the ambiguous and inaccurate term “extraordinary form of the Roman Rite”. He makes clear that priests should offer the Catholic Rite not merely “to preserve the extraordinary form of the rite, but to testify to adherence to the depositum fidei that finds perfect correspondence only in the Ancient Rite.” The adverb “only” is extremely significant. The Old Mass is not merely an optional choice among two equal forms (new and old). It is the “only” one that perfectly corresponds to the Deposit of Faith (depositum fidei).
What Are Clerics To Do?
His Grace acknowledges the more complex situation of clerics. On one hand, clerics have less agility than the laity in seeking a place in the Church to remain Catholic because they must be subject to ecclesiastical superiors. Yet, they have greater freedom as they can at any time legitimately “celebrate the Mass and administer the Sacraments in the Tridentine Rite and … preach in conformity with sound doctrine.” (Again, note the connection between liturgy and doctrine.) His Grace makes clear that clerics must avoid both the mistake of abandoning the visible Church to set up their own church as well as the opposite error of simply conforming to the New Mass and novel doctrine to avoid persecution. Clerics must remain in the Church and remain faithful to the Catholic Rite and the true doctrine, even at the cost of persecution, which he acknowledges they will suffer as did the few faithful clerics in the time of the Arian heresy.
He makes clear that priests must celebrate only “the Tridentine Mass and preach sound doctrine,” but explains that truth cannot be preached if a priest never mentions the Council. He acknowledges that fulfilling these three duties (offering only the Catholic Rite, preaching the truth, and calling out the errors of the Council) may result in the priest being thrown out of his parish. But he reminds such persecuted priests: “No one can ever prevent you from renewing the Holy Sacrifice, even if it is on a makeshift altar in a cellar or an attic….” Priests must be willing to suffer such persecution for the Church. He urges faithful priests not to fear being called false names: “Let’s stop fearing that the fault of the schism lies with those who denounce it, and not, instead, with those who carry it out: the ones who are schismatics and heretics are those who wound and crucify the Mystical Body of Christ, not those who defend it by denouncing the executioners!”
What Are the Laity To Do?
As noted earlier, His Grace makes clear that the laity have a right and duty to receive the traditional sacraments and true doctrine. They must seek out ministers who will provide them and avoid ministers “contaminated by present errors.” Yet, he makes clear that the laity must do more than avail themselves of such good priests for their own spiritual benefit. They also have a “sacred task”. They must “comfort good priests and good bishops” and “[g]ive them hospitality, help them, console them in their trials.” Just as he put his finger so accurately on the Conciliar errors, His Grace also diagnoses a danger in Traditionalist communities that must be avoided, namely, the sowing of division. He calls on the laity to build communities “in which murmuring and division do not predominate, but rather fraternal charity in the bond of Faith.”
What About the Society of Saint Pius X?
Perhaps as a more concrete answer to the question about where are we to turn, Archbishop Viganò reveals for the first time his thoughts regarding the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) and its founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. He believes the SSPX “deserves recognition for not having allowed the flame of Tradition to be extinguished….” He reveals that he considers them to be “a healthy thorn in the side” of the Modernist hierarchy and credits them for shining a light on “the contradictions and errors of the conciliar sect.” He appears to condone the consecration of bishops without a written papal mandate in 1988 when he observes that these consecrations made it possible for the Society “to protect herself from the furious attack of the Innovators.” His Grace refers to the punishments inflicted upon the Archbishop and his Society (the alleged claim of his excommunication, for example) not as acts of justice but rather those of “persecution.” He believes that Archbishop Lefebvre’s critique of the Council is “more relevant than ever.” Rather than considering Lefebvre a “schismatic” or “excommunicate,” Archbishop Viganò calls him “an exemplary confessor of the Faith.”
Looking Forward with Hope to the Resurrection of the Church
Like Archbishop Lefebvre before him, Archbishop Viganò combines his clear-sighted diagnosis of the Conciliar disease with a true Catholic peace of soul that trusts firmly in God. After taking note that clerics and laity alike are beginning to see the Conciliar nightmare for what it is, he looks forward to a necessary “awakening” that is “almost a resurrection“. Just as “no son tolerates his mother being outraged by the servants, or his father being tyrannized by the administrators of his goods,” so to the Lord “offers us, in these painful situations, the possibility of being His allies in fighting this holy battle under His banner.” Rather than becoming discouraged by unjust persecution, His Grace reminds us of the consolation that “the King Who is victorious over error and death” will “permits us to share the honor of triumphal victory and the eternal reward that derives from it, after having endured and suffered with Him.” He exhorts us to practice the virtue of fortitude. We must not lose hope. His texts concludes with great confidence that God will rescue us from this crisis: “I am certain, with a certainty that comes to me from Faith, that the Lord will not fail to reward our fidelity … granting us holy priests, holy bishops, holy cardinals, and above all a holy Pope.”
Here follows the complete text of Archbishop Vigano’s letter which can also be downloaded as a PDF here.
*****
Archbishop Viganò’s Episcopal Coat of Arms
Dear Mr. Kokx,
I read with lively interest your article “Questions for Viganò: His Excellency is Right about Vatican II, But What Does He Think Catholic Should Do Now?” which was published by Catholic Family News on August 22 (here). I am happy to respond to your questions, which address matters that are very important for the faithful.
You ask: “What would ‘separating’ from the Conciliar Church look like in Archbishop Viganò’s opinion?” I respond to you with another question: “What does it mean to separate from the Catholic Church according to the supporters of the Council?” While it is clear that no admixture is possible with those who propose adulterated doctrines of the conciliar ideological manifesto, it should be noted that the simple fact of being baptized and of being living members of the Church of Christ does not imply adherence to the conciliar team; this is true above all for the simple faithful and also for secular and regular clerics who, for various reasons, sincerely consider themselves Catholics and recognize the Hierarchy.
Instead, what needs to be clarified is the position of those who, declaring themselves Catholic, embrace the heterodox doctrines that have spread over these decades, with the awareness that these represent a rupture with the preceding Magisterium. In this case it is licit to doubt their real adherence to the Catholic Church, in which however they hold official roles that confer authority on them. It is an illicitly exercised authority, if its purpose is to force the faithful to accept the revolution imposed since the Council.
Once this point has been clarified, it is evident that it is not the traditional faithful – that is, true Catholics, in the words of Saint Pius X – that must abandon the Church in which they have the full right to remain and from which it would be unfortunate to separate; but rather the Modernists who usurp the Catholic name, precisely because it is only the bureaucraticelement that permits them not to be considered on a par with any heretical sect. This claim of theirs serves in fact to prevent them from ending up among the hundreds of heretical movements that over the course of the centuries have believed to be able to reform the Church at their own pleasure, placing their pride ahead of humbly guarding the teaching of Our Lord. But just as it is not possible to claim citizenship in a homeland in which one does not know its language, law, faith and tradition; so it is impossible that those who do not share the faith, morals, liturgy, and discipline of the Catholic Church can arrogate to themselves the right to remain within her and even to ascend the levels of the hierarchy.
Therefore let us not give in to the temptation to abandon – albeit with justified indignation – the Catholic Church, on the pretext that it has been invaded by heretics and fornicators: it is they who must be expelled from the sacred enclosure, in a work of purification and penance that must begin with each one of us.
It is also evident that there are widespread cases in which the faithful encounter serious problems in frequenting their parish church, just as there are ever fewer churches where the Holy Mass is celebrated in the Catholic Rite. The horrors that have been rampant for decades in many our parishes and shrines make it impossible even to assist at a “Eucharist” without being disturbed and putting one’s faith at risk, just as it is very difficult to ensure a Catholic education, Sacraments being worthily celebrated, and solid spiritual guidance for oneself and one’s children. In these cases faithful laity have the right and the duty to find priests, communities, and institutes that are faithful to the perennial Magisterium. And may they know how to accompany the laudable celebration of the liturgy in the Ancient Rite with adherence to sound doctrine and morals, without any subsidence on the front of the Council.
The situation is certainly more complex for clerics, who depend hierarchically on their bishop or religious superior, but who at the same time have the right to remain Catholic and be able to celebrate according to the Catholic Rite. On the one hand laity have more freedom of movement in choosing the community to which they turn for Mass, the Sacraments, and religious instruction, but less autonomy because of the fact that they still have to depend on a priest; on the other hand, clerics have less freedom of movement, since they are incardinated in a diocese or order and are subject to ecclesiastical authority, but they have more autonomy because of the fact that they can legitimately decide to celebrate the Mass and administer the Sacraments in the Tridentine Rite and to preach in conformity with sound doctrine. The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum reaffirmed that faithful and priests have the inalienable right – which cannot be denied – to avail themselves of the liturgy that more perfectly expresses their Catholic Faith. But this right must be used today not only and not so much to preserve the extraordinary form of the rite, but to testify to adherence to the depositum fidei that finds perfect correspondence only in the Ancient Rite.
I daily receive heartfelt letters from priests and religious who are marginalized or transferred or ostracized because of their fidelity to the Church: the temptation to find an ubi consistam [a place to stand] far from the clamor of the Innovators is strong, but we ought to take an example from the persecutions that many saints have undergone, including Saint Athanasius, who offers us a model of how to behave in the face of widespread heresy and persecuting fury. As my venerable brother Bishop Athanasius Schneider has many times recalled, the Arianism that afflicted the Church at the time of the Holy Doctor of Alexandria in Egypt was so widespread among the bishops that it leaves one almost to believe that Catholic orthodoxy had completely disappeared. But it was thanks to the fidelity and heroic testimony of the few bishops who remained faithful that the Church knew how to get back up again. Without this testimony, Arianism would not have been defeated; without our testimony today, Modernism and the globalist apostasy of this pontificate will not be defeated.
It is therefore not a question of working from within the Church or outside it: the winemakers are called to work in the Lord’s Vineyard, and it is there that they must remain even at the cost of their lives; the pastors are called to pastor the Lord’s Flock, to keep the ravenous wolves at bay and to drive away the mercenaries who are not concerned with the salvation of the sheep and lambs.
This hidden and often silent work has been carried out by the Society of Saint Pius X, which deserves recognition for not having allowed the flame of Tradition to be extinguished at a moment in which celebrating the ancient Mass was considered subversive and a reason for excommunication. Its priests have been a healthy thorn in the side for a hierarchy that has seen in them an unacceptable point of comparison for the faithful, a constant reproach for the betrayal committed against the people of God, an inadmissible alternative to the new conciliar path. And if their fidelity made disobedience to the pope inevitable with the episcopal consecrations, thanks to them the Society was able to protect herself from the furious attack of the Innovators and by its very existence it allowed the possibility of the liberalization of the Ancient Rite, which until then was prohibited. Its presence also allowed the contradictions and errors of the conciliar sect to emerge, always winking at heretics and idolaters but implacably rigid and intolerant towards Catholic Truth.
I consider Archbishop Lefebvre an exemplary confessor of the Faith, and I think that by now it is obvious that his denunciation of the Council and the modernist apostasy is more relevant than ever. It should not be forgotten that the persecution to which Archbishop Lefebvre was subjected by the Holy See and the world episcopate served above all as a deterrent for Catholics who were refractory toward the conciliar revolution.
I also agree with the observation of His Excellency Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais about the co-presence of two entities in Rome: the Church of Christ has been occupied and eclipsed by the modernist conciliar structure, which has established itself in the same hierarchy and uses the authority of its ministers to prevail over the Spouse of Christ and our Mother.
The Church of Christ – which not only subsists in the Catholic Church, but is exclusively the Catholic Church – is only obscured and eclipsed by a strange extravagant Church established in Rome, according to the vision of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich. It coexists, like wheat with the tare, in the Roman Curia, in dioceses, in parishes. We cannot judge our pastors for their intentions, nor suppose that all of them are corrupt in faith and morals; on the contrary, we can hope that many of them, hitherto intimidated and silent, will understand, as confusion and apostasy continue to spread, the deception to which they have been subjected and will finally shake off their slumber. There are many laity who are raising their voice; others will necessarily follow, together with good priests, certainly present in every diocese. This awakening of the Church militant – I would dare to call it almost a resurrection– is necessary, urgent and inevitable: no son tolerates his mother being outraged by the servants, or his father being tyrannized by the administrators of his goods. The Lord offers us, in these painful situations, the possibility of being His allies in fighting this holy battle under His banner: the King Who is victorious over error and death permits us to share the honor of triumphal victory and the eternal reward that derives from it, after having endured and suffered with Him.
But in order to deserve the immortal glory of Heaven we are called to rediscover – in an emasculated age devoid of values such as honor, faithfulness to one’s word, and heroism – a fundamental aspect of the faith of every baptized person: the Christian life is a militia, and with the Sacrament of Confirmation we are called to be soldiers of Christ, under whose insignia we must fight. Of course, in most cases it is essentially a spiritual battle, but over the course of history we have seen how often, faced with the violation of the sovereign rights of God and the liberty of the Church, it was also necessary to take up arms: we are taught this by the strenuous resistance to repel the Islamic invasions in Lepanto and on the outskirts of Vienna, the persecution of the Cristeros in Mexico, of the Catholics in Spain, and even today by the cruel war against Christians throughout the world. Never as today can we understand the theological hatred coming from the enemies of God, inspired by Satan. The attack on everything that recalls the Cross of Christ – on Virtue, on the Good and the Beautiful, on purity – must spur us to get up, in a leap of pride, in order to claim our right not only not to be persecuted by our external enemies but also and above all to have strong and courageous pastors, holy and God-fearing, who will do exactly what their predecessors have done for centuries: preach the Gospel of Christ, convert individuals and nations, and expand the Kingdom of the living and true God throughout the world.
We are all called to make an act of Fortitude – a forgotten cardinal virtue, which not by chance in Greek recalls virile strength, ἀνδρεία – in knowing how to resist the Modernists: a resistance that is rooted in Charity and Truth, which are attributes of God.
If you only celebrate the Tridentine Mass and preach sound doctrine without ever mentioning the Council, what can they ever do to you? Throw you out of your churches, perhaps, and then what? No one can ever prevent you from renewing the Holy Sacrifice, even if it is on a makeshift altar in a cellar or an attic, as the refractory priests did during the French Revolution, or as happens still today in China. And if they try to distance you, resist: canon law serves to guarantee the government of the Church in the pursuit of its primary purposes, not to demolish it. Let’s stop fearing that the fault of the schism lies with those who denounce it, and not, instead, with those who carry it out: the ones who are schismatics and heretics are those who wound and crucify the Mystical Body of Christ, not those who defend it by denouncing the executioners!
The laity can expect their ministers to behave as such, preferring those who prove that they are not contaminated by present errors. If a Mass becomes an occasion of torture for the faithful, if they are forced to assist at sacrileges or to support heresies and ramblings unworthy of the House of the Lord, it is a thousand times preferable to go to a church where the priest celebrates the Holy Sacrifice worthily, in the rite given to us by Tradition, with preaching in conformity with sound doctrine. When parish priests and bishops realize that the Christian people demand the Bread of Faith, and not the stones and scorpions of the neo-church, they will lay aside their fears and comply with the legitimate requests of the faithful. The others, true mercenaries, will show themselves for what they are and will be able to gather around them only those who share their errors and perversions. They will be extinguished by themselves: the Lord dries up the swamp and makes the land on which brambles grow arid; he extinguishes vocations in corrupt seminaries and in convents rebellious to the Rule.
The lay faithful today have a sacred task: to comfort good priests and good bishops, gathering like sheep around their shepherds. Give them hospitality, help them, console them in their trials. Create community in which murmuring and division do not predominate, but rather fraternal charity in the bond of Faith. And since in the order established by God – κόσμος – subjects owe obedience to authority and cannot do otherwise than resist it when it abuses its power, no fault will be attributed to them for the infidelity of their leaders, on whom rests the very serious responsibility for the way in which they exercise the vicarious power which has been given to them. We must not rebel, but oppose; we must not be pleased with the errors of our pastors, but pray for them and admonish them respectfully; we must not question their authority but the way in which they use it.
I am certain, with a certainty that comes to me from Faith, that the Lord will not fail to reward our fidelity, after having punished us for the faults of the men of the Church, granting us holy priests, holy bishops, holy cardinals, and above all a holy Pope. But these saints will arise from our families, from our communities, from our churches: families, communities, and churches in which the grace of God must be cultivated with constant prayer, with the frequenting of Holy Mass and the Sacraments, with the offering of sacrifices and penances that the Communion of Saints permits us to offer to the Divine Majesty in order to expiate our sins and those of our brethren, including those who exercise authority. The laity have a fundamental role in this, guarding the Faith within their families, in such a way that our young people who are educated in love and in the fear of God may one day be responsible fathers and mothers, but also worthy ministers of the Lord, His heralds in the male and female religious orders, and His apostles in civil society.
The cure for rebellion is obedience. The cure for heresy is faithfulness to the teaching of Tradition. The cure for schism is filial devotion for the Sacred Pastors. The cure for apostasy is love for God and His Most Holy Mother. The cure for vice is the humble practice of virtue. The cure for the corruption of morals is to live constantly in the presence of God. But obedience cannot be perverted into stolid servility; respect for authority cannot be perverted into the obeisance of the court. And let’s not forget that if it is the duty of the laity to obey their Pastors, it is even a more grave duty of the Pastors to obey God, usque ad effusionem sanguinis.
With degrees from Yale University, the University of London, and the University of Pennsylvania, Mr. McCall is a member of the faculty of the University of Oklahoma College of Law. Mr. McCall became Editor-in-Chief of Catholic Family News in 2018. He is the author of numerous books and articles on law, politics, and Catholic Social Teaching and has made frequent speaking appearances at academic and Catholic conferences on these topics. He and his wife are the parents of six children.
It is not just conservatives at the recent Republican National Convention who wonder why the Democratic Party and its media appendages have not without qualification decried the looting, arson, violence, and occasional killing that have swept the nation’s cities.
Recently even left-wing CNN’s incendiary Don Lemon wondered out loud why Joe Biden and the Democratic powers have not at least tried to square the circle of deploring police overreach while at the same time going through the motions of condemning the utter lawlessness that often breaks out at dusk in Chicago, Portland, and Seattle, and now in smaller cities such as Kenosha, Wis. What Lemon praised in June, he now seems terrified about in August.
But for that matter, most retired generals and media anchors who assured us in June that there were only a “small” number of violent protesters have long grown silent after the occupation of Seattle and the Alamo siege of the police precinct in Portland.
This fight of voter backlash about crime has infected the entire Democratic elite — glued to volatile internal polls that do not lie — whether it is Nancy Pelosi’s demanding no debates, Michelle Obama’s obsessing with “Vote! Vote! And Vote!” or Hillary Clinton’s urging Biden to never “under any circumstances” concede the election that apparently she now believes he could well lose.
There are lots of answers (and none are mutually exclusive) that explain the silence about the violence.
Run Out the Clock?
There are fewer than 70 days left to Election Day. Joe Biden was told that it was still wise to sit on his once-sizable lead.
In other words, until recently, he planned to run out the clock in hopes that the late-August Trump resurgence would be too incremental to catch Biden before Election Day.
Or put more crudely, Biden figured that the dangers of going out on the campaign trail and conducting a real campaign — town halls, whistle-stop speeches, unscripted press conferences, no-holds-barred, one-on-one media interviews — and risking another Biden senior moment (or worse) far outweighed any downside of deliberately waging a virtual campaign as a virtual candidate.
For the past three months of nightly violence, Biden has proven correct that it would be blamed on the sitting president. Yet any time Biden does impromptu or unscripted riffs, he says things that sound either incoherent or offensive — or racist. And any time he stays in his basement and keeps mum, he cedes the media cycle to Trump, whose job description is to deal with the worst year in American history since 1941–42, given the plague, lockdown, recession, street violence and revolution, and general Trump derangement syndrome.
So it is a question of whether riots like those in Kenosha will continue until November and finally reach a tipping point where millions of swing voters believe that the silence of Biden and his Democratic Party fuel the protests, and thus force them to make the necessary adjustments on Election Day. Biden’s masters are now rethinking that very question: Can he stay mute? Will the riots subside? Are the polls to be trusted? Is it 1988 or 2016 redux? Can Trump still be blamed for the chaos? Will the military wing of the Democratic Party at least be more selective in its politicized violence?
Biden’s Socialist Straitjacket?
Or is the problem more fundamental? Is Biden so compromised by the politics of his own nomination that he cannot fault Antifa, BLM, and by association the left-wing, local blue-state district attorneys general, city councils, mayors, and governors who appease and encourage the urban war zones? If he did so, would he bleed support from among his new socialist coalition with Bernie Sanders and the squad?
That is, Biden was resurrected from his primary coma by wealthy Democrats terrified of a Sanders nomination, the utter failure of the Bloomberg antidote, and the mysterious lockstep departure from the race of all his earlier Democratic-primary rivals.
The subtext is that to win, he needs the radical vote, the identity-politics vote, and the Sanders vote to make up for the deplorables, clingers, and irredeemables of the key swing states who are never again going to vote Democratic. Antifa/BLM and their sympathizers are now Biden’s new socialist base.
America is both being held hostage by thugs in the street and in reaction blackmailed by the Democratic Party. The street brigades and their various enablers know that they represent a key constituency in the new socialist Democratic Party. And so they will riot and burn until Election Day in the belief, as narcissists, that they are winning converts, but also in their surety that Biden will be elected by the sheer chaos they spawn on Trump’s watch. Then mysteriously, as his part of the crooked bargain, President-elect Biden will begin pushing the AOC/Sanders agenda (Green New Deal, high taxes, Medicare for All, open borders, reparations, etc.), and — presto! — the violence will magically dissipate. So the thinking goes, as ol’ Joe from Scranton plays the uniter-in-chief.
For Biden to preempt and demand that the paramilitaries of the new Democratic Party stop the pyrotechnics and destruction now would signal to Antifa/BLM that he is welching on his unspoken agreement, or that in fact he would soon backslide after Election Day.
The result is that Joe sorta wants to defund the police, but sorta not entirely. He now wants the violence to sorta stop, because it now sorta helps Trump. And he sorta thinks that looting and arson are bad, but also sorta believes they are sorta justified by the death of George Floyd.
The Biden Echo Chamber?
It also may be that Biden and the hard Left have no idea how badly the violence is hurting their cause. They may ignore their own internal polls, even though such paid contractors are not hired to lie to their employers in confidential memos. They may not even believe Las Vegas bettors, whose loyalty is to moneymaking, not candidates, and whose betting spreads are radically changing in Trump’s favor.
They assume that arson and looting are aired only on Fox News and a few local affiliates and talk radio. The major networks, NPR, PBS, and the left-wing cable outlets such as CNN and MSNBC stick to the script; sanitize or ignore the fires, violence, and looting, and contextualize the rebellion as righteous, justified anger at the criminal police. The New York Times and Washington Post and most other newspapers and left-wing websites do the same.
Just as Hillary sincerely believed that she had to go to Georgia and Arizona on the eve of the 2016 election to win a landslide mandate, so Biden is still convinced by his progressive puppeteers that the violence is so discrediting those who sympathize with Nixonian “law and order” that it’s helping his cause.
Hillary, Robbie Mook, and John Podesta, remember, still believed in the Blue Wall hours or perhaps even days after it was rubble. A delusionary Hillary still claims that she believes in the Russian-collusion hoax, and that her own bought-and-paid-for Steele dossier was factual — because MSNBC and the New York Times tell her so.
The result seems to be that Biden may wish to change his mind about his virtual campaign and his silence on the violence, but only from expediency, not principle, and he cannot quite do so convincingly.
Looting Is Not Theft?
The last possible reason for the silence is the most dangerous of all: Looting is simply no longer a crime but a redistributive lark. Has Biden bought into the increasingly faddish left-wing view that looting is merely an overdue redistribution of someone else’s property, not theft of one’s own?
From Vicki Orsterweil’s crackpot book In Defense of Looting to the decisions of blue-state district attorneys not to prosecute most crimes of looting, the Left has created a cottage industry of redefining looting and vandalism as cries-from-the-heart social justice. Biden in his dotage either buys into these crackpot ideas or is savvy enough to realize he’s a figurehead, propped up to put a thin veneer on the state in a radical Jacobin nuthouse.
Watch Trump’s approval polls that are ever so insidiously rising. Even in the predominately left-wing orthodox surveys, they begin to near 46 percent. That suggests the rope-a-dope strategy is now inert and that Biden must leave the basement and play for a time the centrist role of a Hubert Humphrey or Bill Clinton, and he may even have a scripted Sister Souljah moment.
At some point, Biden and his handlers will finally conclude that Kenosha was not an outlier but a symptom and that, as the memory of George Floyd fades, and as the mobs of the nocturnal rioters erode, we are getting down to the proverbial Weatherman-like hardcore agitators. And that means the diminished but more venomous Antifa and BLMA remnants will try to up the ante and torch, loot, shoot, maim, and wreck all the way to the suburbs.
The result is that Biden will wage a half-campaign and issue serial half-lamentations about the violence, because he has become a half-candidate. Like his media and party enablers, he still has no real idea whether the violence helps or hurts him, whether it is good or bad for the country, or whether his left-wing base is a bit too much at times or dangerous. So, like all half-things, he splits the difference and ends up saying half of nothing.
Joe Biden just flubbed his Sister Souljah moment. Badly.
In May 1992, the notorious rapper was asked a question about black-on-white violence during that year’s deadly Los Angeles riots. Her response — “Why not kill a white person?” — caused a furor, and it caused Bill Clinton to seize the moment. Soon thereafter, while speaking to Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, Clinton denounced Sister Souljah. And that was all it took to reassure Middle America that he and his party were squarely on their side.
Yesterday in Pittsburgh, Joe Biden had a similar opportunity — at least on its surface. Biden hadn’t said so much as an unkind word about Black Lives Matter or its white-privileged partners in crime, antifa, since this year’s rioting began in late May with the death of George Floyd. He and his running mate, Kamala Harris, never specifically call out either “organization,” and nary a word was mentioned about any of it (outside the standard leftist pablum about “police brutality”) during the entire week of the Democrat confab.
Why? Biden doesn’t dare make a comment condemning BLM or antifa because their support is absolutely necessary for him to win in November. Even a gentle calling-out of these leftist thugs for their leading role in the arson, looting, and violence in our streets would’ve been welcome. Instead, Biden threatened that if we don’t elect him, his constituents will burn this country down: “Does anyone believe there will be less violence in America if Donald Trump is reelected?” Biden demanded to know. “Ask yourself: Do I look like a radical socialist with a soft spot for rioters? Really?” No, but that is exactly what his puppeteers look like.
Moreover, as the Wall Street Journal editorial board writes, “Mr. Biden assailed the excessive use of force by police, and then he turned to the ‘violence of extremists and opportunists — right-wing militias, white supremacists, vigilantes — who infiltrate protests carrying weapons of war.’” No one — no one — believes the police and the “right-wing militias”are to blame for the torching and pillaging of our nation’s cities. And yet that’s where Joe Biden went. Perhaps he thinks the cops are burning down their own precincts? Is it any wonder, then, that President Donald Trump on July 15 received the endorsement of the National Association of Police Organizations — a group that had twice endorsed the Obama-Biden ticket?
So much for ol’ Scranton Joe speaking truth to power. “Silence is violence,” as the BLM Marxists like to say.
To be clear, Biden finds himself in a hole of his own party’s making. The Democrats have long been the 98-pound weaklings in the law enforcement debate — which is why the antifa thugs and the BLM bullies feel free to continually kick sand in their faces. There’s no other way to say it: Democrat mayors, Democrat governors, and Democrat presidential candidates are soft on crime.
As columnist Charles Hurt points out, even Biden’s running mate, former prosecutor and California Attorney General Kamala Harris, “worked so hard to ingratiate herself with the increasingly unruly mob that she went on record a few weeks back raising money ‘to help post bail’ for those arrested during the riots — riots they now claim to oppose.”
The American people are finally getting sick of all this, and it’s showing up in the polls — which is why Biden’s handlers felt the urgency to act. As W. James Antle III reports, “The civil unrest unfolding in cities across the country is starting to rival the coronavirus as a source of voter concern. … A recent Pew poll found violent crime suddenly a top five issue, just a few points behind the coronavirus. CNN’s Don Lemon commented last week that the violence was hurting Democrats.”
Even more telling — and more welcome — is the plummeting support for Black Lives Matter. As Antle continues, “Marquette Law School found 61% to 38% backing in mid-June yet a 48% to 48% split in early August.”
Will this cause Biden and his party to part ways with BLM and its thuggish, money-grubbing tactics and its effort to infect our nation’s schools with its radical “antiracism” ideology? Don’t count on it.
Democrats need an angry and energized hard-left black vote to offset the inroads Donald Trump has made with more mainstream blacks.
Time was when the Democrats believed in the power of words over the violence of the street. But, as columnist Joy Pullmann points out, when the Left’s arguments became old, tired, stale, and unbelievable, “They started breaking things and attacking innocent civilian bystanders. When Rep. Maxine Waters encouraged mob violence against people for the crime of supporting Donald Trump, Joe Biden didn’t sternly warn her to stop. When the Democrat mayor of Washington, DC, didn’t provide enough police to keep historic monuments safe from fires and defacement, and elderly people and U.S. senators safe from mobs of politically motivated rioters, Joe Biden didn’t stand up and demand equal protection under the law for peaceful civilians to attend presidential speeches no matter their political beliefs.”
A decent, self-respecting media wouldn’t let Joe Biden get away with this hasty and desperate rebrand or his laughable effort to blame this orgy of leftist violence on Donald Trump. An honest Fourth Estate would call Biden out at every campaign stop between now and Election Day for his bald-face blame-shifting and his law and order me-tooism.
Of course, that’s wishful thinking.
Still, and try as they might, Joe Biden and his puppeteers can’t rewrite recent history. Nor can they cause the American people to un-see what they’ve been seeing on their smartphones and TV screens for the past three months: mayhem caused by Joe Biden voters in cities run by Joe Biden supporters.
On November 3, it’s Trump or the Mob. That’s the choice.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on JOE BIDEN’S SILENCE CONDONS THE VIOLENCE THAT IS RAGING THROUGHOUT THE DEMOCRAT CONTROLED CITIES AND STATES OF THE United States
On Wednesday, September 2, 2020, Pope Benedict XVI becomes the oldest man in the history of the Church to be Pope!
For on that day, he overtakes Pope Leo XIII.
In Italy, one does not toast to the health of someone with the phrase, Cheers! But by shouting out an ancient call, used by pilgrims on their way to and from the Holy Land, through the port of Brindisi, in Apulia, where they embarked for Greece or the Holy Land. Likwise, they do not say, Long live the Pope! but Evviva!
So, on Wednesday, September 2, 2020, the whole Catholic world needs to unite, and toast the Holy Father saying:
View this email in your browserNew Video Shows Baby Tinslee Moving Despite Cook Children’s Claims in State Supreme Court Plea
Cook Children’s Medical Center in Fort Worth asked the Supreme Court of Texas on August 20 for permission to remove Baby Tinslee Lewis’s ventilator against her mother’s will. The Second Court of Appeals issued a comprehensive ruling in July that argued the 10-Day Rule is likely unconstitutional, and that Tinslee’s mother, Trinity, will likely prevail on her claims against Cook Children’s Medical Center. Despite this, the hospital continues to seek court permission to remove Tinslee’s treatment over her mother’s objection. Cook Children’s admits Tinslee will die if the judges side with the hospital.
Cook Children’s has also asked the Supreme Court of Texas to expedite their request. The hospital filed a motion urging the court to take less time in deciding Tinslee’s fate than they would take in considering whether someone could recover monetary damages after a car accident.
“Why do they want to kill my baby so badly?” Trinity responded. “They are telling the judges that Tinslee cannot move or interact, which is not true. Just watch the video.This is a recent video of Tinslee,” she added.In December 2019, Cook Children’s argued in court, “She’s got less than five months to live.” Tinslee has now lived eight months (going on nine) after these dire assertions, celebrated her first birthday in February, and continues to grow.
Tinslee’s family is formally challenging the deadly Texas 10-Day Rule that the hospital is attempting to use to end Tinslee’s life. People from all over the world were shocked to find out about this uniquely evil state law that allows hospital committees to override a parent’s life or death health care decisions and remove wanted life-sustaining treatment.
For Tinslee to be a candidate for a different type of health care facility, she would require a tracheostomy. Commonly referred to as a trach, a tracheostomy is a routine procedure that is typically performed if someone will need mechanical ventilation support – i.e. breathing assistance – for longer than two weeks. Tinslee has been on a ventilator since August 2019. Court records reveal that nearly a year later, Cook Children’s continues to refuse to provide Tinslee a trach, indicating they will only acquiesce to her mother’s request if Tinslee is discharged to hospice and her mother agrees to a Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR) order.
In other words, the hospital will perform the procedure only if they can guarantee Tinslee will die, not if she is afforded care elsewhere.
In addition to Tinslee, your financial support has helped seven other patients facing the deadly 10-Day Rule in 2020 so far. You can help provide legal counsel and patient advocacy to families by giving a financial gift to our Family Assistance Fund.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on TEXAS HOSPITALS CONTINUE TO PUSH FORWARD THE KILLING OF COMATOSE PATIENTS AGAINST EFFORTS OF PARENTS TO SAVE THE LIVES OF THEIR CHILDREN
The Catholic faithful silently said a prayer of thanks for the words of Notre Dame’s famed former head coach Lou Holtz who told the nation the truth: that Joe Biden is a Catholic in name only.But my oh my, how the non-faithful scurried as they lined up to attack the coach and his honesty.
Even infamous dissident Jesuit James Martin joined in the nastiness!Their collective defense of the pro-abortion Biden reminded me of a childhood game called “Rock, paper, scissors.” In that game, paper covers rock. When discussing Catholic teaching on something as clear as the evil of abortion, Biden is the paper, and Catholic teaching is the rock that he attempts to cover—or push down—with his deceit and lies. That rock that Biden covered up is the truth of our faith spoken by many of us, by the coach, and most importantly by Jesus Christ Himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life.Biden’s 47-year record of support for abortion-murder gives him the mistaken idea that claiming to be Catholic is sufficient, even though he does all he can to advance the culture of death and cover up the truths of our faith.
Others who verbally decried the coach and did all they could to distance themselves from him—including Notre Dame’s president—are the scissors. These folks attempted to cut away at Holtz’s credibility, thus becoming complicit in Biden’s deceit.The distinctions are very clear. Sadly, they are not clear to those who play games of politics instead of witnessing to truth.So why is this important? In this case, as in so many others, simple comparisons help us define why certain actions and words are problematic.
We are living in a world where truth is nothing more to some than a personal opinion, so when we draw clear distinctions in simple ways, we can help bring clarity into the darkness.
The allusion to this game can work in other areas as well. For example, when we see the various reports of the vulnerable elderly who have died tragically in nursing homes or long-term care facilities because of the negligence of others. In this situation, the elderly are the vulnerable paper.
They are in isolation, and their care is often in the hands of caregivers, who act like scissors by shredding ethical healthcare practices. This happens because not-so-Catholic men like Governor Cuomo also act as scissors. Such hypocrites are leaders who are so busy avoiding responsibility for their decisions that truth is shredded and thousands of elderly men and women die.
Speaking truth as Coach Holtz did is laudable, while Cuomo’s actions and denials are both evil personified and deadly.In the battle we wage, striving always to defend the culture of life as we work to dismantle the culture of death, we know that public sentiment is often the worst enemy of all. Helping others see the facts with clarity and on purpose must be our goal. By clearing up false narratives, we are lighting the way to protect and preserve life.Abortion is a grave evil, but this truth is rejected and babies die.
Euthanasia in any of its forms—including the negligence in many states during the pandemic—is evil, but the truth is rarely acknowledged. In the aftermath, people die.Saving lives, affirming human dignity, and fighting for every innocent person’s right to live are the greatest goods for which we should fight every day.As Catholic pro-life people, we are called to strive always to be among those who crush evil with good. And we strive to expose the deceivers who grind the truth in the jaws of evil while denying that what they do is wrong.Never forget that, while not one of us is perfect, Jesus Christ is perfect, and His words to us in Matthew 16:24 are clear: “If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.”So let’s face it: Some Catholics are not.Judie Brown President American Life League
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on LOU HOLTZ, NOTRE DAME UNIVERSITY FAMOUS CATHOLIC FOOTBALL COACH, JUST CALLED A WINNING PLAY IN THE GAME OF LIFE
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on THE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, ABOUT Kamala Harris, CANDIDATE FOR THE VICE-PRESIDENCY OF THE United States OF AMERICA REVEALED TO US BY A BLACK AFRICAN-AMERICAN PASTOR OF A BLACK CHURCH IN THE United States
Covid-19 A Devil’s Choice is a literal timeline detailing the beginning of what is called the COVID-19 pandemic to our current state of affairs. It is written in a numbered format from 1 to 100. Following this is a doctor-driven discussion regarding the virus itself and the dangers it poses to society at large. For a deeper discussion into the book, what it means for all of us, along with actionable steps we can take to dispel fear and understand the larger context of what’s happening, I interviewed the author, John Schroeter, asking questions I hope will impart knowledge and expand the conversation. His detailed and thoughtful answers, as well as his rich perspective, will inform and educate in these times of great confusion. Get ready to connect the dots.
Maria: Your book details the sequence of events from what we know about the inception of the virus known as SARS-CoV2 to where we are today, on the precipice of a new world that can only be changed through our own consciousness. You follow up with a discussion with Jane M. Orient, M.D., part of her paper ‘A Perspective on SARS-CoV2, the Most Dangerous Virus in History.’ What do you hope readers will take away after reading your book?
John: Thank you so much, Maria. I sincerely hope the book will spark some latent curiosity, to encourage people to start asking questions about what’s really going on. I hope readers will be moved to start testing the prevailing narrative, and not simply accept the course of events without challenge. I hope they’ll do the math and discover that what’s being promulgated as authoritative “settled science” with respect to this virus and the measures taken to contain it are actually anything but. I do believe if more people did just this much, this whole thing would crumble like the house of cards built on sand that it actually is.
This is what I set out to do in this book: to take the claims to task, point by point. In fact, the inspiration for the “100 points” format was Martin Luther’s 95 Theses—points of contention that he nailed to the door in order to spur debate and dialog. That was his original intent. And it’s my intent to nail these 100 points to the virtual door of the world in order to stimulate thought, discussion, learning, and discovery about what is arguably the most consequential event in our history. Sadly, though, instead of discussion, it would also be an act of resistance, because the free exchange of ideas is being suppressed across this country in ways that look alarmingly like Stasi tactics. So I hope that readers will become emboldened as they come to understand what’s really behind this crisis.
Maria: Thank you for those thoughts. What would be one actionable step, big or small, that a person could take right now to change their consciousness from fear to empowerment?
John: At the end of the book, I detail 10 things people can do right now to empower themselves. But you’ve really nailed the problem on the head with the keyword fear. In fact, five of the 10 suggestions are concerned with fear. But it’s a complex fear. Besides what we understand to be an irrational fear of the virus, there are other forms of fear that can be just as debilitating. At the forefront is the fear that Martin Luther King described when he wrote, “Many people fear nothing more terribly than to take a position which stands out sharply and clearly from the prevailing opinion.”
We see just how true that is, for example, with the mass, sheep-like compliance to mask mandates. No one wants to be the outlier. No one wants to be ostracized. No one wants to stand apart from “prevailing opinion” and risk ridicule or scorn or be told they’re threatening lives with their selfishness. This is particularly insidious because, in the case of mask mandates, they are a very visible form of compliance that actually reinforces the fear, and hence the mass submission. It’s a feedback loop that continuously gains power. The only way to break that feedback loop is to take on the fear directly. And it’s going to take some doing for some people to venture this. It isn’t easy. In fact, it can be both costly and painful.
So it’s no wonder that large numbers have been cowed into keeping silent. Even those who smell a rat still largely keep their opinions to themselves. That’s tragic because one of our most cherished freedoms is the freedom of opinion—and the right to express it. It is our great equalizer. Lately, however, that freedom has been subdued by a very small number of people who have decided that their opinion is more equal than others. And they’ve managed to indoctrinate—or at least intimidate—a sufficient number of people who have tacitly accepted it. And those who have resisted have been censored.
Fear is a tremendously powerful emotion, and it is easily exploited to reinforce ignorance—which is also essential to advancing what I call the COVID agenda. Moreover, fear not only reduces resistance to authority, it actually quells dissent.But dissent lies at the very heart of a functioning democratic republic. Remove that element, and it is no longer a functioning democratic republic! This is not rocket science. So if you want a free society, now is the time to speak up. Let your dissenting voice be heard, fears be damned. Hopefully, my little book will equip and encourage even a small number of people to do just that—to exercise the power they actually possess to turn fear into action.
Maria: What is your personal take on the COVID situation as a whole? How do you think it connects to topics such as the global reset, mandated vaccinations, one-world government, division through politics and racism, track and trace, artificial intelligence (AI) and transhumanism?
John: That’s a handful, but those topics really do cover the waterfront. I think Occam’s razor is a good place to start. It is popularly translated as, “the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.” This is actually the opposite of conspiracy theory, which often stands in opposition to other explanations that are more likely.
So as you plumb the depths of this deep, seemingly bottomless COVID well, you don’t have to venture too deeply before the simplest explanation begins to emerge. And it’s the same principle that applies in civil court, where conclusions are based on a preponderance of the evidence. Under the preponderance standard, the burden of proof is met when there is a greater than 50% chance that the claim is true. In the case of COVID-19, we’re well past 50%.
So what is the evidence? Well, for starters, the alarmingly aggressive suppression of proper science in favor of propagating pseudoscience. Let’s list a few more:
the unprecedented quarantining of the healthy population;
epidemiological models crafted to predict Armageddon;
the enforcement of public policies that can only exacerbate and sustain the situation;
the blatant disregard for the deadly collateral damage that utterly swamps the effects of the virus—even according to the absurd worst-case models;
the massive financial incentives for falsifying diagnoses and death certificates;
the deliberate decimation of a world economy to contain a virus that is no more consequential than a bad seasonal flu;
the demonstrably fraudulent testing and reporting of results;
the unrelenting barrage of fear-inducing media to drive compliance and stifle resistance;
the wholesale censorship of dissenting voices.
You get the idea. I could go on….and I do in the book. I’m really only scratching the surface here. The inescapable conclusion is that NONE of these measures would be necessary if we were dealing with a true pandemic.
There would be no reason to manipulate and distort information and strong-arm compliance. Think about that! There would be no political or ideological divide. No rational person would be crying foul if this were the Black Death. And all-cause death numbers bear this out. So, the answer to your first question is that this is, by the overwhelming preponderance of evidence standard, a manufactured crisis motivated, promulgated, and sustained by powerful interests.
The second part of your question gets to why this has happened. Again, remarkably, there is no effort to conceal the answer. Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, recently published a book called “The Great Reset” that expounds on all of it. Additionally, WHO, CDC, GAVI, Fauci, Gates, and others have all declared unequivocally that the only path out of this crisis is through a needle—and a needle with strings attached: Their program of global vaccination is to be tied to such things as immunity passports. This is actually an ingenious approach to global population control, which is to include restricting the means to travel, work, socialize, go to school, buy and sell… It’s also a program that sets up convenient scapegoats: those who will not comply.
And that’s something we’re already witnessing. We recently saw Fauci, for example, bemoaning the possibility of anti-vaxxers who could “ruin everything.” This is an important point. Any study of totalitarian movements shows that their programs actually require scapegoats. That’s actually built into the specification. It’s very effective. So we need a heads-up about this. And how interesting is it that the personas and profiles that comprise these scapegoats also happen to have particular political and faith-based alignments! The myriad double standards being enforced now are truly astounding.
As to contact tracing, artificial intelligence (AI), and the rest, these are valuable and powerful tools that are already being horrendously abused—even while our health and governmental authorities are imploring us to trust them. Look, I am a technologist. I have significant patents in RFID and I architect complex AI systems. I work with people like George Gilder – one of the leading economic and technological thinkers of the past forty years who happens to be the author of nineteen books – and other prominent futurists to forecast the trajectories and convergences of technologies. I am well acquainted with the potential for its abuse and the fact that AI is far ahead of any legislative efforts to regulate or control it.
But that’s a topic for another day! Suffice it to say that tracing and AI are all being used by the architects of the COVID game plan. These people are very sophisticated and extremely well-funded; they occupy positions of power and influence, and consequently, should never be underestimated.
Maria: You wrote a sidebar detailing the suspension of global vaccination programs among third world countries by the WHO, GAVI, and the CDC due to COVID lockdown measures as being detrimental to the health of “more than a hundred million children to completely unnecessary death and misery at the hands of preventable diseases in order to slow the spread of a fairly innocuous cousin of the common cold.”
We know that GAVI was set up by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the organization’s biggest donor. GAVI is involved with government vaccination policies all around the world. We know that Bill Gates, a known eugenicist, has openly claimed his desire to reduce the world population and has cited vaccination as one of the quickest routes to doing so. We know about the lies and corruption at the CDC. We know that no vaccines undergo adequate safety testing and can cause injury and death.
Why, then, is the suspension of these global vaccination initiatives a bad thing? What do you believe to be the true motivation behind these organization’s policies and what are the questions you hope readers will ask?
John: This is the most important question of all, and I’m glad you asked it. For the sake of discussion, let’s set aside any misgivings about vaccines, just for the moment. In fact, let’s imagine that vaccines really are perfectly safe and effective. After all, this is what WHO, CDC, GAVI, and Gates have insisted, so let’s use this assumption as a vehicle for examining the scenario they’ve already set in motion.
Now, if I believe that vaccines are crucial to the health of the world—particularly vaccines that are intended to stem the tide of the multiple horrible infectious diseases that plague Third World countries—then I am going to fight for them, right? And they have. In fact, nothing could be more important to an organization that calls itself the World Health Organization. But then along comes the coronavirus—a virus that these very organizations actually know to be mostly innocuous for the vast majority of those who contract it, particularly children.
So what do they do? They halt all the vaccination programs for diseases they just told us could kill more than a hundred million people! And this, of course, calls into question what these global health agencies really believe about the purpose of vaccines!
This is important because it exposes two disturbing things about this agenda. First, the coronavirus presents a strategic, once-in-a-generation opportunity to create the conditions for a global vaccination program—and not just for children, but for adults. This is an opportunity to vaccinate every person on the planet – all 7-billion-plus of us. And we’re all expected to receive at least two shots. That’s the ultimate jackpot—and they have accomplished this over a virus that is no more deadly than the seasonal flu.
But what about the 100 million children they say could die as a direct consequence of the suspended vaccine programs, ostensibly designed to prevent “real” diseases? To hell with them. THIS is what they have actually called “a devil’s choice.” Those are their words.
This leads us to the second aspect of this agenda. These people believe they are in a position to make these kinds of decisions over all the citizens of the world. The hubris is astronomical. To my way of thinking, this is the very definition of psychopathy. And this is what I am exposing in this particular sidebar—the incredible “scorched Earth” lengths they are willing to go to in order to advance their globalist goals. This is not mere hyperbole or speculation—they’re actually on record with this; they’re quite transparent about it all. No conspiracy theory required!
That said, in my book I began to introduce many dangers associated with vaccines—and particularly the wholly unethical ways pharma companies are pursuing a coronavirus vaccine. I cover this in a chapter called “A Shot in the Dark,” and these will be greatly expanded upon in the forthcoming sequel to the book.
But again, the larger point I’m making here is simply to expose the unmitigated evil of the people who are orchestrating this massive campaign of fear and intimidation to advance their particular version of the future. As a professional futurist, I don’t much care for their version. If we want to create our preferred version of the future—one based on abundance and freedom and human flourishing—then we’re going to have to fight for it. And fight like hell.
So I ask readers, which version of the future do you want to live? And what are you willing to do—or even sacrifice—to help it prevail over the competing versions? That’s ultimately what this whole thing is about: we’re in an existential fight for the lives and freedoms of our children.
Maria: Your second sidebar entitled Epidemics & Identity Politics details Oregon’s Lincoln County Health and Human Services policy which stated that all residents must wear a mask indoors and outdoors where social distancing cannot be maintained with one caveat: the order exempts blacks due to unfounded concerns about racial profiling and harassment. How does an order which so blatantly disregards the health for which it was applied, and also contribute to the hate and divisiveness which has been steadily plaguing our country for the last several months?
John: This example really serves to illustrate the political nature of the pandemic response. Not only is it fundamentally unscientific, it actually runs in direct opposition to good policy. While blacks may be more vulnerable to the outcome of infection—many do suffer higher rates of hypertension, which has been identified as leading comorbidity—public policy must never discriminate, particularly to the detriment of a targeted population. This is clearly discriminatory. It shows that these health officials are not concerned at all with health, but rather the opportunity to exploit a crisis to practice social engineering. It strikes me as fundamentally racist, if not eugenic.
I have written in-depth on this topic in my other books, but suffice to say that identity politics is inherently divisive. But to exploit it as part of an official pandemic response is just unconscionable—the merits of the pandemic notwithstanding.
In my work and research, I am very interested in the possibility of stripping away all demographic labels to bring everything down to the level of the individual person, standing alone, a miracle of life created in the very image of God—whether or not the person even recognizes that amazing fact. I think we have to start there. Until we are able to transcend our respective embodiments to connect at the level of our basic humanity—and that calls for a whole lot of love—we will see continued, if not escalating, grief.
Maria: What would you say to those who beleive that refusal to wear a mask, social distance or stay locked in their homes are the reasons this virus is still hanging around and why we are continuing to lose our civil liberties?
John: This might surprise you, but I don’t say anything to them. And that is my advice to others. Every day we see in the news yet another story of some altercation over masks. There’s just no profit in that. It is important to realize that the general disposition on the pandemic can be divided roughly into three groups:
1) those who understand that the pandemic response has been appropriated and promulgated by motivated interests—and are committed to stopping it,
2) those who are not quite sure about what’s going on, but might actually be open to learn, and
3) those who have drunk the COVID Kool-Aid.
I don’t believe anything can be said or done with respect to the latter. A certain number of people are never going to give up this COVID path. My real interest is in #2. That’s where our energy should be focused. If we can win them over with critical thinking, sound science, and maybe a little enlightenment about the powers that be and a good dose of love, then we would see a very good outcome and a positive direction for the future of our constitutional republic. That really is what’s at stake. And that’s why groups such as the United Medical Freedom Super PAC are so vital.
Maria: Could you give an example of a personal experience where someone challenged a decision you made regarding masks, distancing, or lockdowns? How did you handle it? What was the outcome?
John: Whenever possible, I try not to engage in that two-dimensional space where everything is either left or right, black or white. It’s more interesting in engaging in the Z axis—a dimension where we can gain entirely new perspectives. So rather than arguing one point over another—and I say this having just written a book that argues 100 points!—I simply tell people that I am choosing my particular practice of going without a mask and resisting the lockdowns out of solidarity with the millions of innocent victims of this epic crime against humanity. And then I invite them to learn more.
Actually, many take me up on the invitation. And you know why? Because many simply haven’t thought very deeply about it. It’s amazing, but it is true. This is both a problem and an opportunity. I wrote A Devil’s Choice and the forthcoming sequel to help those conversations yield fruit. The information is important, but it can be better received if it can come from a perspective they’ve never considered—a perspective that can also serve to transcend the fear. We could all do with a bit of wisdom on that front.
Maria: You mentioned working on your next book. Could you tell us what it will be about?
John:A Devil’s Choice really lays for the foundation for understanding the true nature of the pandemic, what’s behind it, and the global response to it. For many, the pandemic has been an eye-opener. It certainly was for me as I researched it.
The organizing principle for my next book gets to the very heart of the virus crisis—and what’s driving both sides of the narrative: information, misinformation, and disinformation. Given the current media environment and high-octane politics behind the COVID agenda, it can be difficult to sort it all out. Disinformation is the most powerful weapon in the world today and we all need to learn how to recognize and neutralize it. The idea is to put things to the test, to equip, encourage, and enable people to sniff out and reject the propaganda in all its forms. But as evidenced by its phenomenal success, it is easier said than done. I hope the combination of the two books will help make this a little easier.
My next book will also take a deeper dive into the slippery slope of contact tracing, which is driven by COVID tests that are not only not fit for the purpose, they are easily manipulated, and are actually no more accurate than a coin toss. But boy, are they useful for ramping up numbers of so-called “cases.” Like epidemiological models that never say what they are not told to say, the RT-PCR tests being used to diagnose COVID cases also obeys their masters to yield only the desired results. When people come to understand how this whole system works—and how it will drive a surveillance state with contact tracing—they will be very disturbed by it.
I personally will never submit to a PCR test, especially if I exhibit no symptoms. People should also know that contact tracing is likewise fraught with the potential for statistically significant false positives. In other words, this whole thing is ripe for abuse, fraud, discrimination, reprisals, scammers, and more bad news.
Beyond this, my current book “A Devil’s Choice,” exposes the shocking depth of corruption in WHO-sponsored research that is driving public policy. Some of this “science” is so bad that even those who support the COVID agenda are embarrassed by it. And this includes the junk science being used to discredit a whole raft of treatments that are actually amassing remarkable numbers of complete recoveries. Not that this keeps the press and the pundits from running with it. After all, disinformation is their stock in trade.
Maria: Could you tell us more about your organization Dissenting Voices?
John: Dissenting Voices is an outgrowth of my organization, Abundant World Institute, a public benefit corporation. It became clear to me early on that the COVID agenda poses a serious threat to everything we believe and value, and so we’re here to put up a fight. Dissenting Voices was actually created in response to the pandemic, and specifically to answer the disturbing extent of censorship our many friends in this fight are experiencing.
Equally consequential, when dissenting voices are silenced, innovation itself is quashed. Worse, original ideas and the products of critical thinking are displaced by the kinds of deadly groupthink that ultimately yield dystopian dysfunction—in spite of an “apparent intent” of serving the public good, whether that intent is well-meaning but misguided, purposefully deceptive, or actually nefarious. So we’re building the Dissenting Voices platform because whenever, wherever freedom is diminished, so too is the hope of human flourishing—and the abundance of the good, the true, and the beautiful that attends it. The Devil’s Choice is an eBook; it is $2.99 and the proceeds benefit Dissenting Voices.
====================
Maria Ryan is a freelance content writer. She has contributed to a number of online publications on topics such as fitness, nutrition, food, lifestyle, and parenting. She is an avid reader and book reviewer and works to promote indie authors and their books. She runs the book review blog: bemisreviewsbooks.com.
John Schroeter is Executive Director at Abundant World Institute. Comprising a society of the world’s foremost technologists, futurists, and entrepreneurs, Abundant World Institute is a social enterprise dedicated to identifying and defining exponential solutions to global grand challenges in several areas of tremendous human consequence: energy, healthcare, education, and the environment. Schroeter is co-author of the award-winning book Moonshots–Creating a World of Abundance, with Naveen Jain and Sir Richard Branson, and editor of After Shock, a compendium of essays by the world’s foremost futurists observing the 50 year anniversary of Alvin and Heidi Toffler’s Future Shock. He is the publisher of the iconic Popular Electronics, Mechanix Illustrated, and Popular Astronomy magazines, hosted at TechnicaCuriosa.com.
New Video Shows Baby Tinslee Moving Despite Cook Children’s Claims in State Supreme Court Plea
R 
Judie Brown
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
You must be logged in to post a comment.