Today, Marcy, 13, 2020, is the 7th anniversary of the usurpation of the Papacy by Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the anti-pope.
And every Catholic has the right to say, what I just said. He also has the duty. But first, let me discuss the right.
Don’t fall for the lie pandered to the gullable, that the laity do not in this case have the right to judge who is and who is not the true pope.
In the case of Bergoglio, Canon Law actually refutes such a lie.
This is because, Pope Benedict XVI never resigned the papacy. He never resigned, because to renounce the papal office, in Canon Law, you have to renounce the munus of the Roman Pontiff. But Pope Benedict XVI only renounced the ministerium which had been entrusted to him by the Cardinals, the day he was elected as Roman Pontiff.
As I explained in my previous article for the 7th Anniversary, that means Pope Benedict XVI is still the pope.
But that also means that YOU, each of you, whomsoever you are, big or small, important or unknown, practicing or not practicing, clergy or lay, religious or consecrated, married or single, employed or unemployed, whether you attend the mass in the local language or in Latin, ALL of you have the right to say that Benedict XVI is still the pope.
I do not say this, on the basis of the fact that Benedict XVI did not renounce according to the norm of Canon 332 §2, but on the basis of Canon 41.
Canon 41 Saves the Church in the present hour
This is because, by renouncing the ministerium instead of the munus, Pope Benedict XVI posited an administrative act, not a juridical act.
In canon law, a juridical act is the act of someone with jurisdiction which makes a change in law or establishes a law or issues a sentence or penalty. Juridical acts are described in the Code of Canon Law in canons 125 ff..
But since Pope Benedict XVI renounced the ministry, which is not any sort of juridical act mentioned in the Code of Canon Law, and because his renunciation regards the ministry not the papal office, his act falls in the category of an administrative act. Administrative, means anything and all which regards ministry.
As an administrative act, then, each of us Catholics has the duty and right when receiving it, to judge if it be valid, and if so, to refuse it. This is enshrined in Canon 41 which reads:
Can. 41 – Exsecutor actus administrativi cui committitur merum exsecutionis ministerium, exsecutionem huius actus denegare non potest, nisi manifesto appareat eundem actum esse nullum aut alia ex gravi causa sustineri non posse aut condiciones in ipso actu administrativo appositas non esse adimpletas; si tamen actus administrativi exsecutio adiunctorum personae aut loci ratione videatur inopportuna, exsecutor exsecutionem intermittat; quibus in casibus statim certiorem faciat auctoritatem quae actum edidit.
Which in English means:
Canon 41 – The executor of an administrative act to whom there is committed the mere ministry of execution, cannot deny the execution of the act, UNLESS it appears from something manifest that the act itself is NULL or cannot be sustained on account of another grave cause or that the conditions laid forth in the administrative act itself have not be fulfilled; however, if the execution of the administrative act seems inopportune by reason of the persons or place adjoined, the executor may omit the execution; in which cases let him bring the matter to the attention of the one who issued the act.
As subjects of the Roman Pontiff, his decision to resign or not is a decision which we cannot judge according to its existence. We must accept that. But Canon 41 grants us the right and authority to judge whether a renunciation of ministry is an administrative act which is to be executed by us.
A renunciation of ministry is simply the decision of a superior to omit the fulfillment of his duties. It can occur because he is sick, wants to take a vacation, is busy with family matters, etc.. Normally, a Bishop does not issue a statement about such matters. But it does not change the nature of the act, whether he do so or not.
However, such a renunciation does not cause him to lose his office as our superior. Because the fulfillment of duties is one thing, the office of authority is another.
The act of Pope Benedict in renouncing ministerium instead of munus, is an act which is no where found in Canon Law. Therefore it is an actus nullus. That is, it is not a a canonical act. Therefore, each of us is obliged not to act on it. We are also obliged to bring to Pope Benedict’s attention that the act is null.
So the next time they tell you to shut up or stop judging, that you are a sedevacanists, etc. etc. etc., reply, no, I am merely using Canon 41 as is my right and duty, to respond to Pope Benedict XVI’s administrative act in a reasonable and just way.
Oh, and since Pope Benedict XVI still pope, then it follows necessarily that Bergoglio is an Anti-Pope. And you can declare the same thing, in virtue of the consequences of Canon 41.
Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He drafted the U.S. domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, that was approved unanimously by both Houses of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush.
TRANSCRIPT: Bioweapons Expert Dr Francis Boyle’s Interview On Coronavirus
In the exclusive interview, Dr. Boyle touches upon GreatGameIndia‘s exclusive report Coronavirus Bioweapon – where we reported in detail how Chinese Biowarfare agents working at the Canadian lab in Winnipeg were involved in the smuggling of Coronavirus to Wuhan’s lab from where it is believed to have been leaked.
In this bombshell interview (full transcript below), Boyle talks about:
How the Deep State deployed anthrax on US soil to whip up publicity about biological weapons and increase funding for bioweapons labs
Why the WHO and CDC are both criminal organizations which are complicit in the covert development of biological weapons
The “death science” industry and why the US government has spent over $100 billion developing self-replicating weapons
Details about the Pirbright Institute and its ties to bioweapons, depopulation, vaccines and coronavirus patents. (It’s partially funded by Bill & Melinda Gates)
Why all BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs in the world should be banned and shut down.
Full transcript
Geopolitics and Empire: Geopolitics & Empire is joined by Dr. Francis Boyle, who is international law professor at the University of Illinois. We’ll be discussing the Wuhan coronavirus and biological warfare. He’s served as counsel to numerous governments such as Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Palestinian authority. He’s represented numerous national international bodies in the areas of human rights, war crimes and genocide, nuclear policy, and biowarfare. He’s written numerous books, one of my favorites being “Destroying Libya and World Order”, which I assigned as mandatory reading material for my own students when I taught at the Monterrey Institute of Technology.
But most important for this interview, he’s written a book called “Biowarfare and Terrorism”, and drafted the US domestic implementing legislation for the biological weapons convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 that was approved unanimously by both houses of the US Congress and signed into law by President Bush. Thanks for joining us, Dr. Boyle.
Dr. Francis Boyle: Wow. Thank you so much for having me on and thanks for that kind introduction.
Geopolitics and Empire: Now let’s get to what’s been on the news recently. This coronavirus in Wuhan. There have been some reports recently, there’s a really interesting website called GreatGameIndia that has been reporting on this. They’ve been talking about China, which they say has been complying with biological weapons convention in recent years.GreatGameIndia@GreatGameIndia
But then there are some people in the US and experts that have been saying that in reality, China isn’t complying with the weapons convention. And I think neither, perhaps the US as well. I’m wondering if China is developing its own biosafety level four lab in Wuhan and elsewhere, as you know, as a type of deterrence. Is it a type of a biological arms race that we have going on?
You told me in an email that you suspect China was developing the coronavirus as a dual use of biowarfare weapons agent. Also, what do you make of reports that Chinese scientists have been stealing research and viruses, including the coronavirus from a Canadian bio lab this past December?
And as well, Chinese nationals have been charged with smuggling vials of biological research to China from the US with the aid of Charles Lieber who was the chair of Harvard’s chemistry department. And he also happens to be in 2011 a strategic scientist at Wuhan University. So, can you tell us what’s going on with this recent outbreak in Wuhan?
Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, that’s a lot of questions. I guess we can take them one at a time, but if you just do a very simple Google search on “Does China have a BSL-4 laboratory?”, Wuhan comes up right away. It’s at the top of the list. That’s all with the moment this type of thing happened I began to do that. So a BSL-4 is the most serious type. And basically BSL-4 labs, we have many of them here in the United States, are used to develop offensive biological warfare weapons with DNA genetic engineering.
So it does seem to me that the Wuhan BSL-4 is the source of the coronavirus. My guess is that they were researching SARS, and they weaponize it further by giving it a gain of function properties, which means it could be more lethal.
Indeed, the latest report now is it’s a 15% fatality rate, which is more than SARS at 83% infection rate. A typical gain of function travels in the air so it could reach out maybe six feet or more from someone emitting a sneeze or a cough. Likewise, this is a specially designated WHO research lab. The WHO was in on it and they knew full well what was going on there.
Yes. It’s also been reported that Chinese scientists stole coronavirus materials from the Canadian lab at Winnipeg. Winnipeg is Canada’s formal center for research, developing, testing, biological warfare weapons. It’s along the lines of Fort Detrick here in the United States of America. I have three degrees from Harvard. It would not surprise me if something was being stolen out of Harvard to turn over to China. I read that report. I don’t know what was in those vials one way or the other.
But the bottom line is I drafted the US domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention that was approved unanimously by both Houses in the United States Congress signed into law by President Bush Sr. that it appears the coronavirus that we’re dealing with here is an offensive biological warfare weapon that leaped out of Wuhan BSL-4. I’m not saying it was done deliberately. But there had been previous reports of problems with that lab and things leaking out of it. I’m afraid that is what we are dealing with today.GreatGameIndia@GreatGameIndia · Replying to @GreatGameIndia
Geopolitics and Empire: We’ll be talking about the Wuhan and the coronavirus and China, but can you give us kind of like a bigger context. I know you’ve, previously, in interviews said that since 9/11, you think that the US has spent $100 billion on biological warfare research. We know the Soviet Union, if I’m not mistaken, developed anthrax as a bioweapon. And you’ve also mentioned that UK, France, Israel and China are all involved in biological warfare weapons research.
And something interesting, I believe one or two years ago a Bulgarian journalist and the Russian government shared their concern of the discovery of a US bioweapons lab in the country of Georgia. You’ve commented how in Africa, US has set up bioweapons labs to work on Ebola, which I think is illegal under international law. But they were allowed somehow to put those in Africa. Can you give us like a bigger picture? What’s going on with these different countries and what’s the purpose of this research?
Dr. Francis Boyle:All these BSL-4 labs are by United States, Europe, Russia, China, Israel are all there to research, develop, test biological warfare agents. There’s really no legitimate scientific reason to have BSL-4 labs. That figure I gave $100 billion, that was about 2015 I believe. I had crunched the numbers and came up with that figure the United States since 9/11.
To give you an idea that’s as much in constant dollars as the US spent to develop the Manhattan Project and the atom bomb. So it’s clearly all weapons related. We have well over 13,000 alleged life science scientists involved in research developed testing biological weapons here in the United States. Actually this goes back it even precedes 9/11 2001.
I have another book, The Future of International Law and American Foreign Policy, tracing that all the way back to the Reagan administration under the influence of the neocons and they got very heavily involved in research development testing of biological weapons with DNA genetic engineers. It was because of that I issued my plea in 1985 in a Congressional briefing sponsored by the Council for Responsible Genetics, I’m a lawyer for them. They’re headquartered in Cambridge, Mass. All the MIT, Harvard people are involved in that, the principal ones. And then they asked me to draft the implementing legislation.
The implementing legislation that I drafted was originally designed to stop this type of work. “Death science work”, I call it, “by the United States government”. After 9/11, 2001, it just completely accelerated. My current figure, that last figure a 100 billion. I haven’t had a chance to re-crunch the numbers because I just started classes. But you have to add in about another 5 billion per year.
Basically, this is offensive biological weapons raised by the United States government and with its assistance in Canada and Britain. And so other States, the world have responded accordingly including Russia and China. They were going to set up a whole series of BSL-4 facilities as well. And you know Wuhan was the first. It backfired on them.
Geopolitics and Empire: Would you basically consider what happened and Wuhan and just boil it down to ineptitude or incompetence on the Chinese part?
Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, it’s criminality. It does appear they stole something there from Winnipeg. This activity that they engaged in clearly violates the Biological Weapons Convention. Research development of biological weapons these days is an international crime, the use of it would be. That was criminal.
I’m not saying they deliberately inflicted this on their own people, but it leaked out of there and all these BSL-4 facilities leak. Everyone knows that who studies this. So this was a catastrophe waiting to happen. Unfortunately, it happened. The Chinese government under Xi and his comrades there have been covering this up from the get-go. The first reported case was December 1, so they’d been sitting on this until they couldn’t anymore. And everything they’re telling you is a lie. It’s propaganda.
The WHO still refuses to declare a global health emergency. It said Tedros was over there shaking hands with Xi and smiling and yanking it up. The WHO was in on it. They’ve approved many of these BSL-4 labs., they know exactly what’s going on and that is a WHO research-approved laboratory. They know what’s going on too. You can’t really believe anything the WHO is telling you about this, either they’re up to their eyeballs in it, in my opinion.
Geopolitics and Empire: I’d probably agree with you that this outbreak in Wuhan was an accidental leak from the laboratory. But just your thoughts, it’s happening at quite an opportune time because namely we’re smack in the middle of a US-China new Cold War, which is currently characterized by economic warfare such as the trade war among other forms of hybrid and technological warfare. And it seems the Wuhan outbreak will likely hit the Chinese economy hard. The Chinese are flat out dismissing any idea that the US is involved in. Like I said, it’s probably they made the mistakes in the Wuhan lab. What are your thoughts of any seemingly, this would benefit the US…
Dr. Francis Boyle: When the outbreak occurred, of course I considered that alternative too. When you have an outbreak, you’re never quite sure who or what is behind it. It certainly isn’t bats, that’s ridiculous. They made the same argument on Ebola in West Africa. I demolished that online. You can check it out. So I kept competing theories about this.
But right now, when you originally contacted me, I said I wasn’t prepared to comment because I was weighing the evidence. I’m a law professor and a lawyer, I try to do the best I can to weigh the evidence. But right now, the Wuhan BSL-4 in my opinion is the most likely source, apply Occam’s razor, the simplest explanation. I’m not ruling out some type of sabotage. But right now, I believe that is the source here.
Geopolitics and Empire: And you mentioned WHO. I’d like to just get your thoughts on the WHO and the Big Pharma. There’s also some analysts who are downplaying this news media hype of the coronavirus. You’ve just said that it seems to be lethal, but if we go back a decade to the 2009 swine flu, which I believe didn’t have too many casualties, but I think profited greatly the pharmaceutical companies. If I recall that back in 2009, many countries purchased great stocks of the vaccines and they ended up not using anywhere from 50 to 80% of the vaccines that they purchased.
You’ve previously stated in an interview that the World Health Organization is a front for Big Pharma if I’m not mistaken. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also agrees and he says, you know, 50% of WHO funding comes from pharmaceutical companies. And that the CDC itself is also severely compromised. What are your thoughts on the WHO? The CDC?
Dr. Francis Boyle:Can’t trust anything the WHO says because they’re all bought and paid for by Big Pharma and when they work in cahoots with the CDC, which is the United States government, they work in cahoots with Fort Detrick, so you can’t trust any of it.
However, the swine flu and yes, I agree pharma made a lot of money, but that swine flu which I looked at it, it did seem to me to be a genetically modified biological warfare weapon. It was a chimera of three different types of genetic strains that someone put it together in a cocktail. Fortunately, it was not as lethal as all of us fear. So fine. But as I said, this figure I just gave to you was Saturday from Lancet, which is a medical publication, saying it’s a 15% fatality rate and an 83% infection rate. So it’s quite serious, I think, far more serious than the swine flu.
As for big pharma, sure they’re all trying to profit off this today as we speak. There was a big article yesterday in the Wall Street Journal, all big pharma trying to peddle whatever they can over there in China even if it’s worthless and won’t help. We do know, if you read the mainstream news media they say there isn’t a vaccine.
Well, there is, it’s by the Pirbright Institute in Britain that’s tied into their biological warfare program over there. They were behind the hoof and mouth disease outbreak over there that wiped out their cattle herd and it leaked out of there. So it’s clear they’re working on a hoof and mouth biological warfare weapon, but the vaccine is there. I have the patent for it here, I haven’t had a chance to read the patent it’s about 25 pages long and my classes just resume. So eventually, I get some free time and I’ll read the patent.
You can’t patent a vaccine with the United States patent office unless the science is there. So there is a vaccine. Everyone’s lying about that, no one’s pointing this out – there’s a vaccine but instead big pharma wants to make money and the researchers say, well, it’ll take three months and we’re racing forward, you know. Everyone’s gonna make a buck off of this, that’s for sure. But there is a vaccine, I have the patent here. It’s been patented by the United States government.
So obviously, I don’t know exactly how workable it is, but it’s a vaccine. I don’t know why it isn’t out there now? Why isn’t someone saying there is a vaccine? Perhaps political leaders have already been vaccinated for all I know, I really don’t know. But there is a vaccine, Pirbright is well known there in Britain and it’s tied into Fort Detrick and CDC is tied into Fort Detrick too. So they all know there’s a patented vaccine.
Geopolitics and Empire: And just to get your comment on, I mean, something to related to this, which was my next question. So I think, I’m not sure if it’s that same Institute that you just mentioned that has the patent. I read somewhere that the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation maybe funds or has some connection to that Institute that has the patent.
Dr. Francis Boyle: I think they do. The Bill & Melinda Gates information, they fund this type of DNA genetically engineered biological warfare work. That’s correct. So you can’t trust anything they’re telling you that somehow they’re out there trying to make the world a better place. I mean, we have Bill Gates publicly admitting that the world be a better place if there were a lot less people. So the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, they are wolves in sheep’s clothing and they are funding this type of stuff. Sure.
Geopolitics and Empire: And just your comment, there was also the report that I guess it was a consortium of companies which included the Gates foundation that back in just two or three months ago in October of 2019 they held a pandemic exercise simulating an outbreak. I mean, what are the chances specifically of a coronavirus and it was called events 201. People can find this online online and they gave a list of seven recommendations for governments and international organizations to take. I also find that kind of interesting how they had this simulation.
Dr. Francis Boyle: That’s correct. It raises that question, the origins of what happened here. But right now, I’m just looking at the evidence I have and applying Occam’s razor and we know that Wuhan BSL-4 was research developing, testing, SARS as a biological warfare agent. So it could have been, they gave it this DNA genetic engineering enhanced properties gain of function which we do here in the West, in the United States all the time. We have all sorts of research that is clearly a bio warfare research that has been approved by the National Institutes of Health, it’s a joke. They know full well they are proving all kinds of biological warfare research and it gets funded by the United States government.
Geopolitics and Empire: And you’ve also mentioned in the email to me that what happened in the biosafety lab level 4 in Wuhan calls into question the safety of all of these level 3and 4four labs around the world.
Dr. Francis Boyle:They’re complete unsafe. BSL-3 and BSL-4 lab are only designed for research development testing of offense of biological warfare agents. In my opinion, they serve no legitimate purpose at all. They should all be shut down, every one of them. Even assuming, they’re simply too dangerous. If you want, there’s an excellent documentary called Anthrax Wars by Nadler and Coen and I’m in there. Repeatedly at the end, I say with respect to these labs, three and four, this is a catastrophe waiting to happen. Well, I’m afraid the catastrophe is now happened. So there it is.
Geopolitics and Empire: Yeah, I was just watching that documentary before we connected and I recommend the listeners go check that out. Do you see, in the future, any countries, if we come to a conflict between US, EU, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Russia, I mean you name it. Do you see any of these countries actually utilizing these biological weapons? I mean, it’s illegal under international law but we know like in the past that international law isn’t followed. Do you think that there’s a real danger of this escalating?
Dr. Francis Boyle: For sure. That’s the only reason they develop these biological weapons to eventually be used, sure. I mean, it’s like the Manhattan project, we put all that money into developing an atom bomb and even though it was not needed to end world war II they still knew Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So, yes, I think that’s correct. And also these can be used covertly. Anytime you see an unexplained sudden outbreak of a disease like this anywhere in the world, both for human beings and or animals, I always suspect the bio warfare agent is at work. I monitor the situation like I did at Wuhan until I can reach a conclusion. Yes, they can be used as the eyes for the United States government, today they are fully prepared, armed, equipped, supplied to wage a biological warfare with anthrax.
These other more exotic things I don’t know, but they have the weapons, there are stockpiles. We have to understand if you read Seymour Martin Hersh’s book published about 1968, he won the Pulitzer prize, he had the whole offensive US biological warfare industry in there back before it was illegal and criminal. Basically after 9/11, 2001, that entire industry – offensive biological warfare industry has been reconstituted here in the United States with all these BSL-4 BSL-3 labs, well over 13,000, alleged scientists sort of like Dr. Mengele working on these things. Other countries have responded in kind like Russia, like China, France is involved, Britain’s involved. Sure.
Geopolitics and Empire: I just wanted to get your thoughts on, in the last few years there was the Russian double agent spy Sergei Skripal who had been allegedly poisoned with Novichok out in Britain and I thought it was funny. It just so happened where he was allegedly poisoned, he was right in Porton down the British bio weapons lab, I guess the world’s first bio weapons lab that was created in 1916. I mean, I don’t know if you have thoughts on that whole incident.
Dr. Francis Boyle: Yeah, I was right down the street from Porton Down, so applying Occam’s razor who you think might’ve been behind this and it was not a nerve agent. A nerve agent would have killed him immediately. This is Novichok. It was something else like DX or something like that. So fine. But, I would just say that I don’t think that was a coincidence, but, you know, there you go. There’s the, obviously there’s a lot of speculation on that.
Geopolitics and Empire: Something else that’s kind of interesting. You’ve written in bio warfare and terrorism in your book and there’s also Graeme Macqueen, I think your colleague who wrote the anthrax deception the case for domestic conspiracy…
Dr. Francis Boyle: Everything you said in there. That’s correct.
Geopolitics and Empire: I’m wondering also if this new war for biotechnological dominance, whatever you want to call it, if it can also be used kind of as a pretext for the centralization of political power and the initiation of wars like I guess it did in the 2003 Iraq war. I mean, is this another danger that we get these events like now this coronavirusand then governments will call for a centralization of greater power and taking away some of our civil liberties?
Dr. Francis Boyle: Sure. If you look at the October, 2001 anthrax attacks here in the United States, that was clearly by elements of the United States government that was behind that. That was a super weapons grade anthrax with a trillion spores per gram and it floated in the air solely a very sophisticated biological weapons lab like Fort Detrick could produce that. And they use that anthrax attack including on Congress to brand through the USA Patriot act which basically turned the United States to a police state which is what we have now. You have to understand the Pentagon, Fort Dietrich made the dugway proving ground still has a stockpile of that super weapons grade anthrax that we saw in October of 2001 that they can use the next time they want to do something like that to further develop the American police thing. Right.
Geopolitics and Empire: Is there anything else you feel important to mention regarding this Wuhan Coronavirusoutbreak or biological warfare or any other thoughts you’d like to leave us with?
Dr. Francis Boyle:Well, you just can’t believe anything the Chinese government, the WHO, the CDC are telling. They’re all lies because they know what’s going on here and so you’re going to have to figure it out as fast as you can. But in my opinion, as of this time and I’m fully prepared to consider further evidence on this, it does seem to me that this was a DNA genetically engineered biological warfare agent leaking out of Wuhan that has gain-of-function properties which can make it more lethal. I think they are probably doing something with SARS to make it a lot more lethal and more infectious. And so for that reason, you have to take extreme precautions and they’re now finally admitted anyone within six feet can be infected, whereas with SARS that was about two feet. Well, that’s gaining a function right there and that should be a tip off.
So, I guess you’re gonna have to protect yourself. Laurie Garrett had a pretty good essay in a foreign policy yesterday and she was over there covering the SARS and she has very good advice in there except that she took the SARS figure out two to three feet and said well, you gotta stay to two to three. I think you’ve got to stay at least six feet away because this is gained function. It can flow through the air and infect and it can get you in the eyes. Any orifice, the mouth, maybe the ears, we’re not sure at this point.
Geopolitics and Empire: I’m here on the border of China in Kazakhstan and I was just reading yesterday – today that they’re no longer allowing Chinese citizens into Kazakhstan without a medical paper, a medical check to get their visas to enter Kazakhstan
Dr. Francis Boyle: Those medical checks are worthless because this is just public relations by all the governments involved because there is a 14 day incubation period where people can still be infected. So someone could walk right through a medical inspection and passing a gate into your country and then they come down with the coronavirus. So that’s all public relations in my opinion by governments and they know it and they’re just sending people out there with temperatures and things like that. It’s not like SARS, this is more dangerous than SARS. As I said, I think that Wuhan lab, we know they had SARS in there that they were dealing with and I think they enhanced it at and I’m afraid that’s what we’re dealing with. But you know, I’m keeping an open mind as to what other sources that might have and I wasn’t prepared to say anything until that Wuhan lab is right there and it’s dealing with coronavirus. So again, apply Occam’s razor. It seems to me that’s the simplest explanation here.
Geopolitics and Empire: I guess my, one of my final question would be in the months ahead, apart of what you say staying six feet away from people. I’ve read taking high doses of vitamin C and other things like this can help you. But, if they come out as the situation develops and if it gets worse and they come out with a coronavirus vaccine, should people take it or not? What are your thoughts?
Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, what I would say is this. Right now, if you look at the article at the Wall Street Journal, big pharma is trying to sell all sorts of – they’re taking all their drugs off the shelf and say well let’s see if it works. Which is preposterous. Okay. The scientists are saying, well, we can get you a vaccine maybe two to three months but they’re not tested. So what we do know, however, is that Pirbright vaccine has been patented. So all I can assume is that that might work. But I don’t think I’d be taking any of these other vaccines. No, you have no idea what’s in there. You’ll be the Guinea pig for big pharma and everyone figures they’re gonna make a lot of money here. So I’ll keep my eye open on this and how it develop but I wouldn’t trust anything they’re trying to sell right now. They’re just pulling these things off the shelf.
If they do come up with something in two to three months, even that’s not going to be tested in accordance with normal scientific protocol. So it’s going to be a crap shoot. If it’s going to help you, indeed it might not help you because they’ll be using for this vaccines (these DNA genetic engineered vaccines) they’ll be using live coronavirus probably and sticking it in there and giving you some live coronavirus on the theory you’ll develop an immunity. That’s the way a lot of these vaccines worked out, that’s what happened with the Ebola vaccine that created the Ebola pandemic there in West Africa. They were testing out a vaccine on poor black Africans, as usual, and this vaccine had live Ebola in it so it gave them Ebola. So again, I’d be very careful even if they do come up with these vaccines two to three months from now, very careful. Why would you want to inject the live coronavirus in you?
Geopolitics and Empire: All right. I don’t believe you have a strong online presence. How can people best follow your work? I suppose to search for interviews as well as get your books.
Dr. Francis Boyle:Well, basically I’m blackballed and blacklisted off all the mainstream news media here on purpose. As far as I can figure out, the US government gave an order that I should not be interviewed by anyone, so I’m not. I guess you could just put my name in there under Google, Google alert, and some interviews might come up. What happened was, right after the anthrax attacks of 9/11 2001, I was giving a lecture out at Harvard m Alma Mater. I was running a panel on biological warfare for the council for responsible genetics and it was at Harvard Divinity School and as I was going in, there was a Fox camera crew there from Boston and I said it looks to me like this has come out of the US government lab. We know they do research and testing on anthrax. Then I said the same thing there at Harvard then I gave an interview to a radio station in Washington, D C then I gave an interview on that to the BBC. So the whole world saw it and at that point I was completely cut off and I’ve been cut off ever since. So you probably not going to hear too many interviews from me here. As for my book. Biowarfare & Terrorism, you can just get it at amazon.com. That picks up the story pretty much from 9/11 2001 and until it went to press and then there are interviews I’d given to an investigative reporter, Sherwood Ross and a big one I just sent you and you might want to put that on your web page. That was pretty comprehensive.
Geopolitics and Empire: Yeah, I read that as well and I’ll include the link in the description of this interview so people can go check that out. You’re not the only academic I know and have heard of others that similar things have happened and that’s just I guess the price we pay for telling the truth. Again, for listeners, if people wanted to have a broader context and deeper understanding of what’s happening today especially with biological warfare as well as us foreign policy and international affairs, I urge you to get Dr. Francis Boyle’s books and listen to his interviews as well as his colleagues book. Graeme Macqueen, The Anthrax Deception, The Case For Domestic Conspiracy. Thank you for being with us, Dr. Boyle.
Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, thank you and again, please understand these are my current opinions. I could change my opinion here based on more evidence. So I’m just looking at the evidence out there as I see it and you have to understand there is so much disinformation, lies and propaganda that it’s kind of very difficult to distinguish truth from fact. I’m doing the best job I can here.
— end interview —
GreatGameIndia Coronavirus Coverage
For latest updates on the outbreak check out our Coronavirus Coverage.We need your support to carry on our independent and investigative research based journalism on the external and internal threats facing India. Your contribution however small helps us keep afloat. Kindly consider donating to GreatGameIndia.
EXCLUSIVE: Coronavirus Bioweapon – How China Stole Coronavirus From Canada And Weaponized It
GreatGameIndia is a journal on Geopolitics and International Relations. Get to know the Geopolitical threats India is facing in our exclusive book India in Cognitive Dissonance. Past magazine issues can be accessed from the Archives section.
Read more on Chinese Biological and Chemical warfare activities against India in our exclusive History of Narco-Terrorism issue.
Send in your tips and submissions by filling out this form or write to us directly at the email provided. Join us on WhatsApp for more intel and updates.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on BIOWEAPONS 101
Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He drafted the U.S. domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, that was approved unanimously by both Houses of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush.
TRANSCRIPT: Bioweapons Expert Dr Francis Boyle’s Interview On Coronavirus
In the exclusive interview, Dr. Boyle touches upon GreatGameIndia‘s exclusive report Coronavirus Bioweapon – where we reported in detail how Chinese Biowarfare agents working at the Canadian lab in Winnipeg were involved in the smuggling of Coronavirus to Wuhan’s lab from where it is believed to have been leaked.
In this bombshell interview (full transcript below), Boyle talks about:
How the Deep State deployed anthrax on US soil to whip up publicity about biological weapons and increase funding for bioweapons labs
Why the WHO and CDC are both criminal organizations which are complicit in the covert development of biological weapons
The “death science” industry and why the US government has spent over $100 billion developing self-replicating weapons
Details about the Pirbright Institute and its ties to bioweapons, depopulation, vaccines and coronavirus patents. (It’s partially funded by Bill & Melinda Gates)
Why all BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs in the world should be banned and shut down.
Full transcript
Geopolitics and Empire: Geopolitics & Empire is joined by Dr. Francis Boyle, who is international law professor at the University of Illinois. We’ll be discussing the Wuhan coronavirus and biological warfare. He’s served as counsel to numerous governments such as Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Palestinian authority. He’s represented numerous national international bodies in the areas of human rights, war crimes and genocide, nuclear policy, and biowarfare. He’s written numerous books, one of my favorites being “Destroying Libya and World Order”, which I assigned as mandatory reading material for my own students when I taught at the Monterrey Institute of Technology.
But most important for this interview, he’s written a book called “Biowarfare and Terrorism”, and drafted the US domestic implementing legislation for the biological weapons convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 that was approved unanimously by both houses of the US Congress and signed into law by President Bush. Thanks for joining us, Dr. Boyle.
Dr. Francis Boyle: Wow. Thank you so much for having me on and thanks for that kind introduction.
Geopolitics and Empire: Now let’s get to what’s been on the news recently. This coronavirus in Wuhan. There have been some reports recently, there’s a really interesting website called GreatGameIndia that has been reporting on this. They’ve been talking about China, which they say has been complying with biological weapons convention in recent years.GreatGameIndia@GreatGameIndia
But then there are some people in the US and experts that have been saying that in reality, China isn’t complying with the weapons convention. And I think neither, perhaps the US as well. I’m wondering if China is developing its own biosafety level four lab in Wuhan and elsewhere, as you know, as a type of deterrence. Is it a type of a biological arms race that we have going on?
You told me in an email that you suspect China was developing the coronavirus as a dual use of biowarfare weapons agent. Also, what do you make of reports that Chinese scientists have been stealing research and viruses, including the coronavirus from a Canadian bio lab this past December?
And as well, Chinese nationals have been charged with smuggling vials of biological research to China from the US with the aid of Charles Lieber who was the chair of Harvard’s chemistry department. And he also happens to be in 2011 a strategic scientist at Wuhan University. So, can you tell us what’s going on with this recent outbreak in Wuhan?
Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, that’s a lot of questions. I guess we can take them one at a time, but if you just do a very simple Google search on “Does China have a BSL-4 laboratory?”, Wuhan comes up right away. It’s at the top of the list. That’s all with the moment this type of thing happened I began to do that. So a BSL-4 is the most serious type. And basically BSL-4 labs, we have many of them here in the United States, are used to develop offensive biological warfare weapons with DNA genetic engineering.
So it does seem to me that the Wuhan BSL-4 is the source of the coronavirus. My guess is that they were researching SARS, and they weaponize it further by giving it a gain of function properties, which means it could be more lethal.
Indeed, the latest report now is it’s a 15% fatality rate, which is more than SARS at 83% infection rate. A typical gain of function travels in the air so it could reach out maybe six feet or more from someone emitting a sneeze or a cough. Likewise, this is a specially designated WHO research lab. The WHO was in on it and they knew full well what was going on there.
Yes. It’s also been reported that Chinese scientists stole coronavirus materials from the Canadian lab at Winnipeg. Winnipeg is Canada’s formal center for research, developing, testing, biological warfare weapons. It’s along the lines of Fort Detrick here in the United States of America. I have three degrees from Harvard. It would not surprise me if something was being stolen out of Harvard to turn over to China. I read that report. I don’t know what was in those vials one way or the other.
But the bottom line is I drafted the US domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention that was approved unanimously by both Houses in the United States Congress signed into law by President Bush Sr. that it appears the coronavirus that we’re dealing with here is an offensive biological warfare weapon that leaped out of Wuhan BSL-4. I’m not saying it was done deliberately. But there had been previous reports of problems with that lab and things leaking out of it. I’m afraid that is what we are dealing with today.GreatGameIndia@GreatGameIndia · Replying to @GreatGameIndia
Geopolitics and Empire: We’ll be talking about the Wuhan and the coronavirus and China, but can you give us kind of like a bigger context. I know you’ve, previously, in interviews said that since 9/11, you think that the US has spent $100 billion on biological warfare research. We know the Soviet Union, if I’m not mistaken, developed anthrax as a bioweapon. And you’ve also mentioned that UK, France, Israel and China are all involved in biological warfare weapons research.
And something interesting, I believe one or two years ago a Bulgarian journalist and the Russian government shared their concern of the discovery of a US bioweapons lab in the country of Georgia. You’ve commented how in Africa, US has set up bioweapons labs to work on Ebola, which I think is illegal under international law. But they were allowed somehow to put those in Africa. Can you give us like a bigger picture? What’s going on with these different countries and what’s the purpose of this research?
Dr. Francis Boyle:All these BSL-4 labs are by United States, Europe, Russia, China, Israel are all there to research, develop, test biological warfare agents. There’s really no legitimate scientific reason to have BSL-4 labs. That figure I gave $100 billion, that was about 2015 I believe. I had crunched the numbers and came up with that figure the United States since 9/11.
To give you an idea that’s as much in constant dollars as the US spent to develop the Manhattan Project and the atom bomb. So it’s clearly all weapons related. We have well over 13,000 alleged life science scientists involved in research developed testing biological weapons here in the United States. Actually this goes back it even precedes 9/11 2001.
I have another book, The Future of International Law and American Foreign Policy, tracing that all the way back to the Reagan administration under the influence of the neocons and they got very heavily involved in research development testing of biological weapons with DNA genetic engineers. It was because of that I issued my plea in 1985 in a Congressional briefing sponsored by the Council for Responsible Genetics, I’m a lawyer for them. They’re headquartered in Cambridge, Mass. All the MIT, Harvard people are involved in that, the principal ones. And then they asked me to draft the implementing legislation.
The implementing legislation that I drafted was originally designed to stop this type of work. “Death science work”, I call it, “by the United States government”. After 9/11, 2001, it just completely accelerated. My current figure, that last figure a 100 billion. I haven’t had a chance to re-crunch the numbers because I just started classes. But you have to add in about another 5 billion per year.
Basically, this is offensive biological weapons raised by the United States government and with its assistance in Canada and Britain. And so other States, the world have responded accordingly including Russia and China. They were going to set up a whole series of BSL-4 facilities as well. And you know Wuhan was the first. It backfired on them.
Geopolitics and Empire: Would you basically consider what happened and Wuhan and just boil it down to ineptitude or incompetence on the Chinese part?
Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, it’s criminality. It does appear they stole something there from Winnipeg. This activity that they engaged in clearly violates the Biological Weapons Convention. Research development of biological weapons these days is an international crime, the use of it would be. That was criminal.
I’m not saying they deliberately inflicted this on their own people, but it leaked out of there and all these BSL-4 facilities leak. Everyone knows that who studies this. So this was a catastrophe waiting to happen. Unfortunately, it happened. The Chinese government under Xi and his comrades there have been covering this up from the get-go. The first reported case was December 1, so they’d been sitting on this until they couldn’t anymore. And everything they’re telling you is a lie. It’s propaganda.
The WHO still refuses to declare a global health emergency. It said Tedros was over there shaking hands with Xi and smiling and yanking it up. The WHO was in on it. They’ve approved many of these BSL-4 labs., they know exactly what’s going on and that is a WHO research-approved laboratory. They know what’s going on too. You can’t really believe anything the WHO is telling you about this, either they’re up to their eyeballs in it, in my opinion.
Geopolitics and Empire: I’d probably agree with you that this outbreak in Wuhan was an accidental leak from the laboratory. But just your thoughts, it’s happening at quite an opportune time because namely we’re smack in the middle of a US-China new Cold War, which is currently characterized by economic warfare such as the trade war among other forms of hybrid and technological warfare. And it seems the Wuhan outbreak will likely hit the Chinese economy hard. The Chinese are flat out dismissing any idea that the US is involved in. Like I said, it’s probably they made the mistakes in the Wuhan lab. What are your thoughts of any seemingly, this would benefit the US…
Dr. Francis Boyle: When the outbreak occurred, of course I considered that alternative too. When you have an outbreak, you’re never quite sure who or what is behind it. It certainly isn’t bats, that’s ridiculous. They made the same argument on Ebola in West Africa. I demolished that online. You can check it out. So I kept competing theories about this.
But right now, when you originally contacted me, I said I wasn’t prepared to comment because I was weighing the evidence. I’m a law professor and a lawyer, I try to do the best I can to weigh the evidence. But right now, the Wuhan BSL-4 in my opinion is the most likely source, apply Occam’s razor, the simplest explanation. I’m not ruling out some type of sabotage. But right now, I believe that is the source here.
Geopolitics and Empire: And you mentioned WHO. I’d like to just get your thoughts on the WHO and the Big Pharma. There’s also some analysts who are downplaying this news media hype of the coronavirus. You’ve just said that it seems to be lethal, but if we go back a decade to the 2009 swine flu, which I believe didn’t have too many casualties, but I think profited greatly the pharmaceutical companies. If I recall that back in 2009, many countries purchased great stocks of the vaccines and they ended up not using anywhere from 50 to 80% of the vaccines that they purchased.
You’ve previously stated in an interview that the World Health Organization is a front for Big Pharma if I’m not mistaken. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. also agrees and he says, you know, 50% of WHO funding comes from pharmaceutical companies. And that the CDC itself is also severely compromised. What are your thoughts on the WHO? The CDC?
Dr. Francis Boyle:Can’t trust anything the WHO says because they’re all bought and paid for by Big Pharma and when they work in cahoots with the CDC, which is the United States government, they work in cahoots with Fort Detrick, so you can’t trust any of it.
However, the swine flu and yes, I agree pharma made a lot of money, but that swine flu which I looked at it, it did seem to me to be a genetically modified biological warfare weapon. It was a chimera of three different types of genetic strains that someone put it together in a cocktail. Fortunately, it was not as lethal as all of us fear. So fine. But as I said, this figure I just gave to you was Saturday from Lancet, which is a medical publication, saying it’s a 15% fatality rate and an 83% infection rate. So it’s quite serious, I think, far more serious than the swine flu.
As for big pharma, sure they’re all trying to profit off this today as we speak. There was a big article yesterday in the Wall Street Journal, all big pharma trying to peddle whatever they can over there in China even if it’s worthless and won’t help. We do know, if you read the mainstream news media they say there isn’t a vaccine.
Well, there is, it’s by the Pirbright Institute in Britain that’s tied into their biological warfare program over there. They were behind the hoof and mouth disease outbreak over there that wiped out their cattle herd and it leaked out of there. So it’s clear they’re working on a hoof and mouth biological warfare weapon, but the vaccine is there. I have the patent for it here, I haven’t had a chance to read the patent it’s about 25 pages long and my classes just resume. So eventually, I get some free time and I’ll read the patent.
You can’t patent a vaccine with the United States patent office unless the science is there. So there is a vaccine. Everyone’s lying about that, no one’s pointing this out – there’s a vaccine but instead big pharma wants to make money and the researchers say, well, it’ll take three months and we’re racing forward, you know. Everyone’s gonna make a buck off of this, that’s for sure. But there is a vaccine, I have the patent here. It’s been patented by the United States government.
So obviously, I don’t know exactly how workable it is, but it’s a vaccine. I don’t know why it isn’t out there now? Why isn’t someone saying there is a vaccine? Perhaps political leaders have already been vaccinated for all I know, I really don’t know. But there is a vaccine, Pirbright is well known there in Britain and it’s tied into Fort Detrick and CDC is tied into Fort Detrick too. So they all know there’s a patented vaccine.
Geopolitics and Empire: And just to get your comment on, I mean, something to related to this, which was my next question. So I think, I’m not sure if it’s that same Institute that you just mentioned that has the patent. I read somewhere that the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation maybe funds or has some connection to that Institute that has the patent.
Dr. Francis Boyle: I think they do. The Bill & Melinda Gates information, they fund this type of DNA genetically engineered biological warfare work. That’s correct. So you can’t trust anything they’re telling you that somehow they’re out there trying to make the world a better place. I mean, we have Bill Gates publicly admitting that the world be a better place if there were a lot less people. So the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, they are wolves in sheep’s clothing and they are funding this type of stuff. Sure.
Geopolitics and Empire: And just your comment, there was also the report that I guess it was a consortium of companies which included the Gates foundation that back in just two or three months ago in October of 2019 they held a pandemic exercise simulating an outbreak. I mean, what are the chances specifically of a coronavirus and it was called events 201. People can find this online online and they gave a list of seven recommendations for governments and international organizations to take. I also find that kind of interesting how they had this simulation.
Dr. Francis Boyle: That’s correct. It raises that question, the origins of what happened here. But right now, I’m just looking at the evidence I have and applying Occam’s razor and we know that Wuhan BSL-4 was research developing, testing, SARS as a biological warfare agent. So it could have been, they gave it this DNA genetic engineering enhanced properties gain of function which we do here in the West, in the United States all the time. We have all sorts of research that is clearly a bio warfare research that has been approved by the National Institutes of Health, it’s a joke. They know full well they are proving all kinds of biological warfare research and it gets funded by the United States government.
Geopolitics and Empire: And you’ve also mentioned in the email to me that what happened in the biosafety lab level 4 in Wuhan calls into question the safety of all of these level 3and 4four labs around the world.
Dr. Francis Boyle:They’re complete unsafe. BSL-3 and BSL-4 lab are only designed for research development testing of offense of biological warfare agents. In my opinion, they serve no legitimate purpose at all. They should all be shut down, every one of them. Even assuming, they’re simply too dangerous. If you want, there’s an excellent documentary called Anthrax Wars by Nadler and Coen and I’m in there. Repeatedly at the end, I say with respect to these labs, three and four, this is a catastrophe waiting to happen. Well, I’m afraid the catastrophe is now happened. So there it is.
Geopolitics and Empire: Yeah, I was just watching that documentary before we connected and I recommend the listeners go check that out. Do you see, in the future, any countries, if we come to a conflict between US, EU, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Russia, I mean you name it. Do you see any of these countries actually utilizing these biological weapons? I mean, it’s illegal under international law but we know like in the past that international law isn’t followed. Do you think that there’s a real danger of this escalating?
Dr. Francis Boyle: For sure. That’s the only reason they develop these biological weapons to eventually be used, sure. I mean, it’s like the Manhattan project, we put all that money into developing an atom bomb and even though it was not needed to end world war II they still knew Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So, yes, I think that’s correct. And also these can be used covertly. Anytime you see an unexplained sudden outbreak of a disease like this anywhere in the world, both for human beings and or animals, I always suspect the bio warfare agent is at work. I monitor the situation like I did at Wuhan until I can reach a conclusion. Yes, they can be used as the eyes for the United States government, today they are fully prepared, armed, equipped, supplied to wage a biological warfare with anthrax.
These other more exotic things I don’t know, but they have the weapons, there are stockpiles. We have to understand if you read Seymour Martin Hersh’s book published about 1968, he won the Pulitzer prize, he had the whole offensive US biological warfare industry in there back before it was illegal and criminal. Basically after 9/11, 2001, that entire industry – offensive biological warfare industry has been reconstituted here in the United States with all these BSL-4 BSL-3 labs, well over 13,000, alleged scientists sort of like Dr. Mengele working on these things. Other countries have responded in kind like Russia, like China, France is involved, Britain’s involved. Sure.
Geopolitics and Empire: I just wanted to get your thoughts on, in the last few years there was the Russian double agent spy Sergei Skripal who had been allegedly poisoned with Novichok out in Britain and I thought it was funny. It just so happened where he was allegedly poisoned, he was right in Porton down the British bio weapons lab, I guess the world’s first bio weapons lab that was created in 1916. I mean, I don’t know if you have thoughts on that whole incident.
Dr. Francis Boyle: Yeah, I was right down the street from Porton Down, so applying Occam’s razor who you think might’ve been behind this and it was not a nerve agent. A nerve agent would have killed him immediately. This is Novichok. It was something else like DX or something like that. So fine. But, I would just say that I don’t think that was a coincidence, but, you know, there you go. There’s the, obviously there’s a lot of speculation on that.
Geopolitics and Empire: Something else that’s kind of interesting. You’ve written in bio warfare and terrorism in your book and there’s also Graeme Macqueen, I think your colleague who wrote the anthrax deception the case for domestic conspiracy…
Dr. Francis Boyle: Everything you said in there. That’s correct.
Geopolitics and Empire: I’m wondering also if this new war for biotechnological dominance, whatever you want to call it, if it can also be used kind of as a pretext for the centralization of political power and the initiation of wars like I guess it did in the 2003 Iraq war. I mean, is this another danger that we get these events like now this coronavirusand then governments will call for a centralization of greater power and taking away some of our civil liberties?
Dr. Francis Boyle: Sure. If you look at the October, 2001 anthrax attacks here in the United States, that was clearly by elements of the United States government that was behind that. That was a super weapons grade anthrax with a trillion spores per gram and it floated in the air solely a very sophisticated biological weapons lab like Fort Detrick could produce that. And they use that anthrax attack including on Congress to brand through the USA Patriot act which basically turned the United States to a police state which is what we have now. You have to understand the Pentagon, Fort Dietrich made the dugway proving ground still has a stockpile of that super weapons grade anthrax that we saw in October of 2001 that they can use the next time they want to do something like that to further develop the American police thing. Right.
Geopolitics and Empire: Is there anything else you feel important to mention regarding this Wuhan Coronavirusoutbreak or biological warfare or any other thoughts you’d like to leave us with?
Dr. Francis Boyle:Well, you just can’t believe anything the Chinese government, the WHO, the CDC are telling. They’re all lies because they know what’s going on here and so you’re going to have to figure it out as fast as you can. But in my opinion, as of this time and I’m fully prepared to consider further evidence on this, it does seem to me that this was a DNA genetically engineered biological warfare agent leaking out of Wuhan that has gain-of-function properties which can make it more lethal. I think they are probably doing something with SARS to make it a lot more lethal and more infectious. And so for that reason, you have to take extreme precautions and they’re now finally admitted anyone within six feet can be infected, whereas with SARS that was about two feet. Well, that’s gaining a function right there and that should be a tip off.
So, I guess you’re gonna have to protect yourself. Laurie Garrett had a pretty good essay in a foreign policy yesterday and she was over there covering the SARS and she has very good advice in there except that she took the SARS figure out two to three feet and said well, you gotta stay to two to three. I think you’ve got to stay at least six feet away because this is gained function. It can flow through the air and infect and it can get you in the eyes. Any orifice, the mouth, maybe the ears, we’re not sure at this point.
Geopolitics and Empire: I’m here on the border of China in Kazakhstan and I was just reading yesterday – today that they’re no longer allowing Chinese citizens into Kazakhstan without a medical paper, a medical check to get their visas to enter Kazakhstan
Dr. Francis Boyle: Those medical checks are worthless because this is just public relations by all the governments involved because there is a 14 day incubation period where people can still be infected. So someone could walk right through a medical inspection and passing a gate into your country and then they come down with the coronavirus. So that’s all public relations in my opinion by governments and they know it and they’re just sending people out there with temperatures and things like that. It’s not like SARS, this is more dangerous than SARS. As I said, I think that Wuhan lab, we know they had SARS in there that they were dealing with and I think they enhanced it at and I’m afraid that’s what we’re dealing with. But you know, I’m keeping an open mind as to what other sources that might have and I wasn’t prepared to say anything until that Wuhan lab is right there and it’s dealing with coronavirus. So again, apply Occam’s razor. It seems to me that’s the simplest explanation here.
Geopolitics and Empire: I guess my, one of my final question would be in the months ahead, apart of what you say staying six feet away from people. I’ve read taking high doses of vitamin C and other things like this can help you. But, if they come out as the situation develops and if it gets worse and they come out with a coronavirus vaccine, should people take it or not? What are your thoughts?
Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, what I would say is this. Right now, if you look at the article at the Wall Street Journal, big pharma is trying to sell all sorts of – they’re taking all their drugs off the shelf and say well let’s see if it works. Which is preposterous. Okay. The scientists are saying, well, we can get you a vaccine maybe two to three months but they’re not tested. So what we do know, however, is that Pirbright vaccine has been patented. So all I can assume is that that might work. But I don’t think I’d be taking any of these other vaccines. No, you have no idea what’s in there. You’ll be the Guinea pig for big pharma and everyone figures they’re gonna make a lot of money here. So I’ll keep my eye open on this and how it develop but I wouldn’t trust anything they’re trying to sell right now. They’re just pulling these things off the shelf.
If they do come up with something in two to three months, even that’s not going to be tested in accordance with normal scientific protocol. So it’s going to be a crap shoot. If it’s going to help you, indeed it might not help you because they’ll be using for this vaccines (these DNA genetic engineered vaccines) they’ll be using live coronavirus probably and sticking it in there and giving you some live coronavirus on the theory you’ll develop an immunity. That’s the way a lot of these vaccines worked out, that’s what happened with the Ebola vaccine that created the Ebola pandemic there in West Africa. They were testing out a vaccine on poor black Africans, as usual, and this vaccine had live Ebola in it so it gave them Ebola. So again, I’d be very careful even if they do come up with these vaccines two to three months from now, very careful. Why would you want to inject the live coronavirus in you?
Geopolitics and Empire: All right. I don’t believe you have a strong online presence. How can people best follow your work? I suppose to search for interviews as well as get your books.
Dr. Francis Boyle:Well, basically I’m blackballed and blacklisted off all the mainstream news media here on purpose. As far as I can figure out, the US government gave an order that I should not be interviewed by anyone, so I’m not. I guess you could just put my name in there under Google, Google alert, and some interviews might come up. What happened was, right after the anthrax attacks of 9/11 2001, I was giving a lecture out at Harvard m Alma Mater. I was running a panel on biological warfare for the council for responsible genetics and it was at Harvard Divinity School and as I was going in, there was a Fox camera crew there from Boston and I said it looks to me like this has come out of the US government lab. We know they do research and testing on anthrax. Then I said the same thing there at Harvard then I gave an interview to a radio station in Washington, D C then I gave an interview on that to the BBC. So the whole world saw it and at that point I was completely cut off and I’ve been cut off ever since. So you probably not going to hear too many interviews from me here. As for my book. Biowarfare & Terrorism, you can just get it at amazon.com. That picks up the story pretty much from 9/11 2001 and until it went to press and then there are interviews I’d given to an investigative reporter, Sherwood Ross and a big one I just sent you and you might want to put that on your web page. That was pretty comprehensive.
Geopolitics and Empire: Yeah, I read that as well and I’ll include the link in the description of this interview so people can go check that out. You’re not the only academic I know and have heard of others that similar things have happened and that’s just I guess the price we pay for telling the truth. Again, for listeners, if people wanted to have a broader context and deeper understanding of what’s happening today especially with biological warfare as well as us foreign policy and international affairs, I urge you to get Dr. Francis Boyle’s books and listen to his interviews as well as his colleagues book. Graeme Macqueen, The Anthrax Deception, The Case For Domestic Conspiracy. Thank you for being with us, Dr. Boyle.
Dr. Francis Boyle: Well, thank you and again, please understand these are my current opinions. I could change my opinion here based on more evidence. So I’m just looking at the evidence out there as I see it and you have to understand there is so much disinformation, lies and propaganda that it’s kind of very difficult to distinguish truth from fact. I’m doing the best job I can here.
Friday the 13th of March marks the 7th anniversary of the election of Cardinal Bergoglio as pope.
The evening I draft this article, March 12, marks the 7th anniversary of the start of the conclave which elected Cardinal Bergoglio to be pope.The number seven appears often in prophecies found in scripture. For example, there are the seven years of plenty, and seven years of famine foretold by Joseph (cf Genesis 41). I am not saying such a thing applies when we consider the now seven years of Pope Francis’s pontificate. However, it is curious on the eve of the 7th anniversary of his election, the first day of the 2013 conclave, that the Vicar of Rome ordered all Roman churches closed and all public masses prohibited (see here and here). I could not help but be struck by the seeming coincidence.
Then I remember the old saying from a prior career: ‘there is no such thing as a coincidence.’Many troubling things have happened over the course of this pontificate, too numerous to even recollect at times.
There was, of course, the pope’s exhortation, Amoris Laetitiawhich allowed communion for adulterers in some cases. Catholics, for a time, had hoped that Cardinal Burke and the other Dubia Cardinals would issue a seemingly ‘promised’ a public correction of Pope Francis. Even though the correction has not emerged, a number of brave Catholic scholars did publish an Open Letter which accused Pope Francis of the delict of heresy (see Prominent clergy, scholars accuse Pope Francis of heresy in open letter). Unfortunately, the bishops of the world to whom this letter was addressed did nothing, and have remained silent. {I DID NOT REMAIN SILENT, I DENOUNCED THE HERESY OF JORGE BERGOLIO – Rene Henry Gracida}
Then there was the Abu Dhabi statement signed by Pope Francis wherein it was affirmed that ‘the diversity of religions are willed by God‘ (see here). While there has been some push back against Francis on this statement by a few bishops {I DENOUNCED THE Abu Dhabi STATEMENT, Rene Henry Gracida} — most notably Bishop Athanasius Schneider, he continues to unabashedly advance the document.
There was also the horrific scenes of the Pachamama idol on the grounds of the Vatican this past October, and some claims that a form of the idol was placed on the high altar of St. Peter’s during mass — a veritable “abomination of desolation” (cf Matt 24:15) if true (see here). Now with the aforementioned ending of the daily and public sacrifice at St. Peter’s and throughout Italy, for the time being at least(!), one may recall the scriptural passage in Daniel 12 in which the prophet speaks of the time “when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away” (cf Daniel 12:11-13). And, strangely, it is a Roman Pontiff — Head of the Vatican City State — who bears sole and direct responsibility for this decision to end the ‘daily sacrifice’ in the temple, not some worldly prince.I am neither saying this is the time spoken of in Daniel nor am I saying this event is a type of it.
Still, given all that has happened over the last seven years of this unsettling pontificate and the coincidence of the timing to its rise, a Catholic might — perhaps — be forgiven for entertaining the passing thought that recent events are Heaven’s judgment brought down upon this pontificate on the 7th anniversary of both the conclave and Bergoglio’s election.
But as it is the 7th anniversary of the conclave and election of Pope Francis, I would like to take this occasion to reflect back on those days for a few moments as much controversy still surrounds them.
There are questions that some have (I know I do), such as:
1) The role of the St. Gallen mafia in campaigning for the election of Cardinal Bergoglio, and whether or not there were violations of the rules (Universi Dominici Gregis) governing papal conclaves.
2) Whether the United States under the Obama administration or other foreign parties played any role in influencing the election of Cardinal Bergoglio. An open letter published by the Remnant Newspaper first raised the question (see here). See also here and here.
3) There appear to have been one or more violations of UDG oaths, as many cardinals continued to talk to the press during the period of the General Congregations — and even by at least one non-voting cardinal while the conclave was underway (see 2013 Conclave: Was there a violation of Universi Dominici Gregis 12?).
4) The role of ex-cardinal Theodore McCarrick remains a puzzling one.Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor admitted that the role of third world cardinals was key to electing Bergoglio (see here). Due to his age, McCarrick would not be eligible to vote in the 2013 conclave.However, McCarrick was known as a potential ‘pope-maker’ who had strong influence with third world cardinals would could vote.Thus for any Cardinal hoping to become pope, McCarrick would be a natural and important ally to seek out for any Cardinal ‘ambitioning’ to become pope.These points are discussed in greater detail here.Did someone reach out to McCarrick to seek his support for Bergoglio’s candidacy?By McCarrick’s own unforced admission, he reported an “influential Italian gentleman” did ask him to “talk up Bergoglio” to other cardinals.This Italian made this request while visiting McCarrick at the North American College in Rome shortly before the start of the General Congregations (March 4, 2013).These congregations were a prelude to the conclave which began on March 12. This would place the visit sometime between March 1st and March 3rd.I’ve written about this enigmatic Italian here and here.Did the “influential Italian gentleman’s” request simply express his own wish for a Bergoglian papacy, or was he sent by or acting at the request of another? If the latter, who was it?Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor was the key cardinal who led the campaign for Bergoglio. Did he send the “influential Italian gentleman“?An examination of Murphy-O’Connor’s timeline of pre-conclave events indicates the campaign for Bergoglio didn’t take shape until days after the “Italian gentleman” visited McCarrick. That fact would seem to suggest that if the “Italian gentleman” was sent by somebody on Bergoglio’s behalf…it probably wasn’t Murphy-O’Connor.That is, unless Murphy-O’Connor did not fully and honestly recount his efforts on Bergoglio’s. There is at least one possible discrepancy in Murphy-O’Connor’s timeline. He states he had dinner with Bergoglio on March 3rd, while Gerard O’Connell’s book places that dinner on March 1st…the first day following the effective resignation of Benedict XVI (February 28). Furthermore, words attributed to him are quite similar to those used by the “Italian gentleman” in his visit with McCarrick (see here). There is also the possibility that he was the source of insider information received by Gerard O’Connell just before Bergoglio’s election (see 2013 Conclave: Was there a violation of Universi Dominici Gregis 12?).More details found here and here.Did Bergoglio have something to do with the “influential Italian gentleman” who visited McCarrick between March 1-3?Bergoglio had dinner with several Italian journalists — including “vaticanisti” — with whom he was a close friend, the night before Benedict XVI’s resignation date.One of these journalist now has a high level position in the Vatican (see here and here). Was he the “influential Italian gentleman”?Pure speculation, but if Bergoglio had sought support of an Italian journalist or some other layman to approach McCarrick for his support — because he could not do so directly, would that have been a fatal violation of UDG and or other canons in that this discussion may have occurred while Benedict XVI was still pope?Would such hypothetical involvement of a layman — at the direction of a cardinal, papabile or not — be a violation of the papal legislation governing papal elections, Universi Dominici Gregis (UDG), which explicitly prohibits “…all possible forms of interference, opposition and suggestion whereby secular authorities of whatever order and degree, or any individual or group, might attempt to exercise influence on the election of the Pope” (cf. UDG 80).If it was a violation…what would that mean to the validity of the election?
5) There have been reports that Cardinal Bergoglio as Archbishop of Buenos Aires allowed communion for adulterers at least in certain cases (see Amoris Laetitia: A history of doctrinal development or of doctrinal dissent?).If this were the case, it is impossible to believe Cardinal Bergoglio was unaware of Pope John Paul II’s teaching to the contrary on the question, as well as applicable canon law (915).Therefore, on the face of it, the Cardinal’s actions would appear to have been schismatic ones (see Canon 751, and Canon 752).Does Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio have any role in considering the question of Cardinal Bergoglio’s election? Granted, there are many fine arguments to suggest it would not (e.g., see Cum Ex Apostolatus and the loss of office 6, i-vi).
6) There is also the interesting question regarding the status of Cardinal Bergoglio’s Jesuit vows going into the conclave on March 12.The Jesuit vows include: “I also promise that I will never strive for or ambition any prelacy or dignity outside the Society; and I will to the best of my ability never consent to my electionunless I am forced to do so by obedience to him who can order me under penalty of sin.” (see here)Had these vows been dispensed prior to his entry into the conclave, and if not, would this have possibly invalidated the election?The hypothetical question being: while the election of Cardinal Bergoglio may have been valid, was his acceptance of that election invalid because he was not free — by vow — to accept it?The topic came to me from within the Jesuit order. Exploring it, I found — like the Jesuits whence the suggestion came to me — that other Jesuits friendly to Pope Francis seemed to implicitly, if not explicitly, acknowledge this might be a potential problem.My research looked into what scripture, St. Thomas Aquinas, and canon law might say that was relevant to the question (see Curiouser and Curiouser: Who Dispensed Jorge Bergoglio SJ from his vows? and A Discussion of Cardinal Bergoglio’s Jesuit Vows and the 2013 Conclave).
These are the questions that I have regarding the election of Cardinal Bergoglio — seven years ago, today. There are those who question Bergoglio’s validity based on the belief that Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation was, somehow, invalid. However, I reject these arguments for reasons I have stated before in detail on this blog (see Summa Contra the BiP Theory (Why Benedict XVI is NOT the pope).Things look bad. But they have looked so before in history (e.g., the Arian heresy, here) — though it’s hard to imagine a worse time than now.
Many questions about Pope Francis are swirling around: the validity of his election, the validity of his pontificate, and whether he may have lost his office due to heresy and or apostasy. One cannot help but think back to the prophecies of Our Lady of Fatima when thinking of events under this pontificate, e.g., communion for adulterers, Pachamama idols, ‘the diversity of religions is will by God’, etc. Cardinal Ciapi, who read the secret, once confided to another that ‘the great apostasy in the Church begins at the top.’Confusion certainly abounds.
However, it is not for us — as the laity — to determine or declare what are the definitive answers to these questions. By all outward form and procedure, Francis is pope. Ifhe is not pope, that determination must come from an (unlikely) imperfect council (e.g., here, here, and here), or what is more probable, a future pope. In the meantime, know your faith, keep it, and ‘always pray and never give up’ (cf Luke 18: 1) – especially in dark times, and do not worry – because it is the Lord who has promised the Church “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Victory is assured.
Steven O’Reilly is a graduate of the University of Dallas and the Georgia Institute of Technology. A former intelligence officer, he and his wife, Margaret, live near Atlanta with their family. He has written apologetic articles and is author of the recently published Book I of the Pia Fidelis trilogy, The Two Kingdoms. (Follow on twitter at @fidelispia for updates). He asks for your prayers for his intentions. He can be contacted at StevenOReilly@AOL.com (or follow on Twitter: @S_OReilly_USA)
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on HARD QUESTIONS ON THE SEVENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE CONCLAVE OF MARCH 2013 THE ANSWERS TO WHICH PROVE THAT JORGE BERGOLIO WAS NOT VALIDLY ELECTED TO FILL THE CHAIR OF PETER FOR A VARIETY OF VALID REASONS ALL OF WHICH HAVE BEEN REPEATEDLY PUBLISHED HERE ON ABYSSUM.COM ALMOST FROM THE MOMENT JORGE BERGOLIO WALKED OUT ON THE BALCONY OF SAINT PETER BASILICA AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE VOTING IN THE CONCLAVE IMPROPERLY DRESSED, SCOWLING, FLANKED BY TWO MEN SUSPECTED OF BEING ACTIVE HOMOSEXUALS
In the course of not even 24 hours, Angelo De Donatis, the acting Vicar of Rome, has gone from imposing an interdict upon all the faithful of the Eternal City from entering Churches and chapels, to pray the Rosary or adore the Most Blessed Sacrament, to removing the same, but only as much as regards Parish Churches of the City.
I sense from the Italian used, that Angelo De Donatis was forced to issue the decree closing all the Church by Jorge Mario Bergoglio. I say this, because, in his partial revocation of the terms of his first decree, he does not name Bergoglio, but seemingly identifies him with the words:
La Chiesa di Roma, in piena comunione con il suo Vescovo, Supremo Pastore della Chiesa Universale, è consapevole …
That is, he did NOT call him the Pope! Nor did he call him the Successor of Saint Peter!
In fact, he seems to be making a reference to the Declaratio of Pope Benedict XVI, of Feb. 11, 2013 — commonly called Pope Benedict’s renunciation — wherein the Holy Father calls the one to succeed him the Supreme Pontiff, but not the Successor of Saint Peter, nor the Roman Pontiff.
If my observation is correct, this represents a massive shift among the clergy of the Diocese of Rome. The hateful shutting of all the Churches may have made them realize that Bergoglio cannot be the true Pope, because he lacks entirely the charismatic gift or munus of the Petrine Office.
In the meantime, I predict further modifications of the decree, because the religious of the city, who do not run parishes depend upon the support of the faithful of the city, and will shortly demand that their own churches be opened again, especially since most of them are backed by international religious institutes with a lot of ecclesiastical, political and financial power.
If this be the case, then it will represent the first united push back by the Church of Rome against Bergoglio’s claim to power. And that will be truly a changing of the tide.
If the Corona panic has caused this, then we should thank God for it. In the mean time, let us remember all the deceased in these last months — from whatever cause — in particular those who have been denied a public funeral, in our prayers!
The Bergoglians are totally faithless and insane. They are also extremely cruel and ruthless. This is proven by the fact, that Father Angelo De Donatis, the Bergoglian in the Vicariate of Rome has just attempted to impose the canonical penalty of Interdict upon all the Faithful of the Eternal city, by ordering all the Churches and Chapels closed and forbidding the Faithful from entering them!
This appears to be a vindictive response to the heroic declaration of Father Franz Xaver Brandmayr who said he would not close his church nor deny the faithful to attend his private daily mass, unless they force him.
Needless to say, this is a complete betray of the Gospel, worthy of a Judas Iscariot. The few faithful who were still coming to Church to pray the rosary of adore the Most Blessed Sacrament are locked out! When will this madness end!
Here is My translation of the absurd decree! But first, the central part of the Italian Original (Source):
SI DISPONE
che il n. 1 del Decreto prot. 446/20 dell’8 marzo u.s. venga così modificato: 1. Sino a venerdì 3 aprile 2020 l’accesso alle chiese parrocchiali e non parrocchiali della Diocesi di Roma, aperte al pubblico (cf. cann. 1214 ss C.I.C.), e più in generale agli edifici di culto di qualunque genere aperti al pubblico, viene interdetto a tutti i fedeli. Rimangono accessibili solo gli oratori di comunità stabilmente costituite (religiose, monastiche, ecc.: cf. can. 1223 C.I.C.), limitatamente alle medesime collettività che abitualmente ne usufruiscono in quanto in loco residenti e conviventi, con interdizione all’accesso dei fedeli che non sono membri stabili delle predette comunità. I fedeli sono in conseguenza dispensati dall’obbligo di soddisfare al precetto festivo (cf. cann. 1246-1248 C.I.C.). Sarà cura dei sacerdoti responsabili dell’esercizio di culto nei singoli luoghi (Parroci, Rettori, Cappellani, ecc.) attivarsi per dar seguito a questa disposizione, innanzitutto con la chiusura delle aule di culto e con ogni altra iniziativa idonea allo scopo. Ricordiamo che questa disposizione è per il bene comune. Accogliamo le Parole di Gesù che ci dice «dove sono due o tre riuniti nel mio nome, io sono in mezzo a loro» (Mt. 18.20). In questo tempo, ancora di più, le nostre case sono Chiese domestiche.
Vi benedico, affidandovi tutti ancora una volta alla materna intercessione della Madonna del Divino Amore. Dato in Roma, dalla sede del Vicariato nel Palazzo Apostolico Lateranense, il giorno 12 marzo A. D. 2020. Prot. n. 468/20
12 marzo 2020
My English translation:
IT IS ORDERED
that the Decree issued in prot. 446/20 on March 8, is to be modified accordingly
1. Until Friday, April 3, 2020, access to the parrochial and non parrochial Churches of the Diocese of Rome, open to the public, and more generally all the buildings of worship of any kind open to the public, is interdicted to all the faithful. There remain accessible only the Oratories of stably constituted communities (religios, monastic, etc., cf. canon 1223), in a manner limited to the same communities which habitually use them inasmuch as they are residents in the place, with interdiction to approach to the faithful who are not stable members of the aforesaid communities.
The Faithful are, in consequence, dispensed from the obligation to satisfy Sunday obligation (cf. canons 1246-1248).
It will be the care of the priests responsible for the exercise of worship in each place (Pastors, Rectors, Chaplains etc.) to take action to observe this arrangement, above all by the closure of the places of worship and with every other suitable initiative to that purpose.
Let us remember that this arrangement is for the common good. Let us hear the words of Jesus who says: Where there are two or three united in My Name, I am there in their midst (Matthew 18:20). In this time, more than every, our homes are our Domestic churches.
I bless you, entrusting to you all once again to the Maternal Intercession of Our Lady of Divine Love.
Given at Rome, from the office of the Vicar in the Apostolic Palace of the Lateran, on the 12th of March 2020 A. D..
David C. Stolinsky, M.D., who is of the Jewish faith, lives in Los Angeles. He is retired after 25 years of medical school teaching at the University of California at San Francisco and the University of Southern California.
“Don’t be judgmental!” It is the First Commandment of modern life, and one hears it all the time. Yet the authoritative Oxford English Dictionary says that “judgmental” has been used as a pejorative — to mean overly moralistic and excessively critical — only since the 1960s. In the long history of morals, then, being “nonjudgmental” has been a cardinal virtue only for the blink of an eye. Yet in its brief career, nonjudgmentalism has taken a firm hold — one might say a stranglehold — on our moral sense. Does this new virtue serve us well?
In Littleton, Colorado, 15 crosses in a row commemorated without distinction 13 victims and two murderers, while the murderers’ faces saturated the media. The cover of Time showed two large photos of the murderers and 13 small photos of their victims. Giving equal sympathy to criminals and victims, while giving more fame to criminals, can have only one result: more criminals, and hence more victims. Elsewhere, residents displayed “We forgive you” signs to a multiple murderer. A minister declared it “our duty” to forgive Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing. We freely forgive those who hurt others, even if the victims do not forgive, or cannot forgive because they are dead, and even if the criminals do not repent. But though our tolerance is great, it has its limits — let someone express a moral judgment and we harshly condemn him.
Examples abound: A talk-show host declared Bach’s music superior to the obscene, death-centered music of “Antichrist Superstar” Marilyn Manson. A caller retorted, “Don’t be judgmental.” Another caller claimed that all cultures are equal. The host replied that cultures that practice slavery are morally inferior. The caller angrily accused him of being Eurocentric and judgmental, adding, “That’s just your opinion; who are we to judge other cultures?” That is, standards are relative to the group or individual — there are no standards applicable to all. We can scarcely distinguish the two murderers from the 13 they shot to death in the Colorado high school. Who says we’re judgmental?
We remove the Ten Commandments from schoolrooms, then wonder why kids become amoral egotists. We give kids no source of transcendent meaning, then are baffled when they seek it in cults, careers, or violence. We discard the rituals of religion and patriotism, then are bewildered when kids search for meaning in the rituals of Satanism or Nazism. We no longer teach kids to identify themselves as Christians and Americans, then are depressed when they seek identity in black trenchcoats, gang colors, tattoos, or body piercing. We teach kids self-esteem instead of self-control, then we’re perplexed when they develop a colossal feeling of entitlement. We make the churches inhospitable to males, then we’re disturbed when male aggression is not directed into useful channels. We give kids things instead of love, then are sad when they become unloving materialists. We try to be pals instead of parents, then are distressed to find that we are afraid of our own kids. We send kids to psychotherapists who teach that there are no “shoulds,” then we’re upset when kids agree. We dose our kids with antidepressants and stimulants, then are appalled if they turn to drugs whenever they experience problems. We prevent smoke from entering their lungs while allowing sewage to enter their eyes and ears, then are baffled when kids have healthy lungs but damaged souls. Judgmental? Not us.
We teach “death ed,” telling kids to picture themselves in coffins, then are mystified when they are fascinated with death. We leave kids to be raised by TV and video games, then are astonished when they lack social skills and are inhumane. We kick out the Boy Scouts and ROTC, then are alarmed when boys find role models in gangs. We no longer give boys images like those of the heroes in High Noon and To Kill a Mockingbird to show them how to become men, then we’re disappointed when they become sexual predators. We disdain courage and honor as too “macho,” then are aghast when boys do not think it cowardly and dishonorable to shoot unarmed people. We no longer observe Washington’s and Lincoln’s birthdays, then profess surprise when boys observe Hitler’s birthday. We no longer teach kids to be proud Americans, but we’re dismayed when they give the Nazi salute. We extol the virtues of ethnic pride, then are dumbfounded when white kids feel kinship with Nazis.
We flood kids with violent video games, violent dramas, and violent newscasts. We allow Web sites that teach Nazism or bomb-making or proclaim “Freedom for the few by the death of the many.” We sell kids music with titles like “Seventeen Dead,” “Carnival of Carnage,” and “Guts on the Ceiling.” And then we’re surprised that kids enjoy violence.
Just as unborn babies are dehumanized by calling them “fetuses,” newborn babies are dehumanized by calling them “neonates.” Princeton awarded a professorship to a man who teaches that parents should have the right to kill “neonates” up to one month old who are “imperfect.” Likewise, the chronically ill are dehumanized by calling them “terminal.” Dr. Kevorkian helped to kill over thirty “terminal” individuals, some with nonfatal diseases or no disease at all, but half of us approve. Moreover, we watched TV and saw American bombs falling on Yugoslavia. We nodded approvingly as Serb civilians were killed in an effort to stop Serb soldiers elsewhere from killing or expelling Kosovars. Once TV persuaded us that Serbs are subhumans, we complacently watched our bombs killing innocent civilians. We seem to think it’s fine to beat up a man’s family in order to force him stop committing crimes.
Many of us define almost-born babies as subhumans we may kill at our convenience. Half of us see the chronically ill as subhuman, so we approve doctors killing them instead of treating their pain or depression. Over half of us regard all Serbs, even women and children, as subhuman, so we approve bombing them to force Serb soldiers to stop oppressing Kosovars. We claim the right to define as subhuman any group that displeases us, and then to dispose of them. But defining people as subhuman is habit-forming.
Not long ago, in movie theaters around the world, audiences were thrilling to yet another telling of the endlessly intriguing story of the Titanic. Once again, the great ship was hitting the fateful iceberg and starting to take on water near her starboard bow. Fans of the oft-told tale will recall that the ship’s designer, aboard for the “unsinkable” liner’s maiden voyage, is said to have unrolled his blueprints to compare what he saw there to the reports from below. Where the hull had been breached, water was pouring in, past the inadequate bulkheads, rushing inexorably from one compartment to the next. Would the great ship go down? The designer looked up from his plans and said, “It’s a mathematical certainty.”
Our moral situation, as we steam blithely, nonjudgmentally ahead, strikes me as disturbingly similar. Once the God-given sanctity of all innocent human life is rejected, the main psychological and ethical barriers are breached, leaving only flimsy partitions. The damage spreads unstoppably from one compartment of humanity to the next. We start with early abortion, then go on to late-term abortion, then newborns, then one-month-olds, then older children. We start with euthanasia for the dying, then go on to the fatally ill, then the chronically ill, then the disabled, then the economically unproductive, then the depressed, then the annoying. The end result will be the total collapse of “You must not murder” and the sinking of civilization. It’s a psychological certainty.
But as we sink, we will take comfort in knowing that no one can accuse of us being judgmental.
There are two hotspots in the world for coronavirus infections: Wuhan, China (Hubei Province) and Italy. Both of these geographic areas were grappling with tuberculosis outbreaks prior to the eruption of the mutated COVID-19 coronavirus. Strangely, coronavirus appears to spread to the rest of the world from these hotspots via airplane travel. But the infection remains in those infected and may spread within a household, but not into the community. Other geographical outbreaks must be questioned as there are too many false positive tests to confirm COVID-19 coronavirus, which at this point in time may be nothing more than a passenger virus that accompanies tubercular infections.
The COVID-19 epidemic in Italy, which has that country in a lockdown, is worthy of investigation because of the politics and migration in that country.
In a prior report I cited the pre-coronavirus outbreak of tuberculosis in Wuhan China coupled with culling and incineration of herds of pigs infected with African swine flu that created aerosolized pig waste particles that infected humans with a Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Tuberculosis is largely a lung disease that kills 1.7 million humans annually. TB may be the origin of this deadly infection as normally coronavirus produces mild infections. Tuberculosis fills the lungs with fluid and the patient drowns in their own secretions. That is what is happening in Wuhan.The Vitamin D Cure, Re…Stafford, DianeBest Price: $2.05Buy New $2.99(as of 11:37 EST – Details)
Italy’s Prime minister Matteo Salvini claims migrants have brought on this TB plague to his country. News reports dating back to September of 2018 cite Salvini’s assertion that a TB “invasion without rules or controls” has swept through Italy, carried by indigent migrants seeking asylum in his country.
At the same time, denials that migrants are spreading coronavirus throughout Italy have been aired and political criticism has been launched against Prime Minister Salvini for not being humanitarian by blocking entry to Italy by migrants. Political opponents say: “Rescued migrants have been disembarking in Italy for many years; this has not led to any major outbreaks of disease among Italians.”
But now what is to explain the exceptionally high number of COVID-19 infections in Italy compared to other European countries? Maybe it IS TB and not COVID-19.
It is not necessarily newly arriving migrants that are carrying TB, masquerading as COVID-19 coronavirus, to Italy. TB can remain in a latent state in the human body for many years before it erupts into disease symptoms.
According to a 2017 report published in Clinical Infectious Diseases in 2017, the prevalence of tuberculosis of the lungs is 6.7 per 100,000 Italians, however the prevalence among migrants is 80 times greater!
According to Statista, Italy has drastically cut uncontrolled migration from a high of 181,436 in 2016 to just 11,471 in 2019. From 2014 through the first two months of 2020 some 659,380 migrants entered Italy. Reuters reports Italy is fining rescue ships sponsored by charities in an attempt to reduce and even expulse migrants who have no legal right to cross its borders. Despite efforts to reduce or totally block migration into Italy, an estimated 5.3 million foreigners legally reside inside its borders.
A study published in 2017 reveals 56.5% of the cases of TB in Italy were among 18-44 year-olds. Only 13.9% were age 65 and above. The young TB patients are the immigrants with latent TB. The TB cases among seniors likely are high-risk Italians who smoke, drink too much alcohol and are obese, in other words, high-risk for any infection. Only 11% of TB cases occurred among economically deprived individuals (Italians) while 46% of immigrants were financially deprived.
The industrialized world has some underlying overconfidence that it is immune from these infectious diseases, what with chlorinated water (eradicated cholera, typhoid and dysentery), fortified foods, and regulations like the Pure Food & Drug Act of 1906 in the U.S. But migration of indigent people allows a stealth mycobacterium to enter undetected, only to produce symptoms years later.
COVID-19 in U.S.: immigrant ports of entry
Back in the U.S., examination of the states that report the most cases of COVID-19 coronavirus correlate with the number of migrants crossing America’s southern border. California and Mexico having the largest number of COVID-19 coronavirus infections. Mexico is No. 1 foreign importer of TB to the U.S.
Examine the maps below. Italy locked down the northern half of its country first because of the high rate of COVID-19 infection. Northern Italy is the destination of most migrants to Italy.
The States in the U.S. with the highest number of COVID-19 are California, Texas, Arizona, Florida, the states where migrants cross the border. New York is another port of entry with reported cases of COVID-19. This is no coincidence. U.S. authorities may want to consider closing the southern border to the U.S. temporarily until the earth tilts back towards the sun in the Spring solstice and vitamin D levels improve among the masses. Political discourse in Italy over offering humanitarian aid to migrants from foreign lands needs to consider the health and economic consequences of such aid. At this point, both migrants and native Italians face economic disaster over allowing migrants to enter unabated in prior years.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on THERE IS A LINK BETWEEN A TUBERCULOSIS EPIDEMIC AND THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC
Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses which may cause illness in animals or humans. In humans, several coronaviruses are known to cause respiratory infections ranging from the common cold to more severe diseases such as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).
What they do not say, is how large a family of virus they are. But Wikipedia does, in the article on Coronaviridae:
The family Coronaviridae is organized in 2 sub-families, 5 genera, 23 sub-genera and about 40 species:[2]
Note, that each species can have variations, some more potent than others. But of these 40 species, and all their variations, only 3 rare forms were know to be lethal to man. Corona Virus 19 is just the one discovered in 2019.
Second Reason not to Panic
The infection rates are a lot lower than are being reported. There is no definitive test for corona virus being used in emergency room admissions at hospitals. Many patients may be suffering from other kinds of infections. This is because the symptoms of Corona virus infection are similar to many other pathogens. Thus, identifying someone as infected by symptoms is unscientific.
Third Reason not to Panic
The mortality rates being reported are statistically being misrepresented. They regard the rates of mortality of patients admitted to hospitals suffering from influenza like symptoms which are presumed to be Corona virus. Thus, the current rates being reported of 3.4% do not regard only the Corona virus. Also, death may not result from the virus but from other symptoms. A highly rigorous analysis of causes of death is needed, and this cannot be done daily, this requires months of statistical analysis and has to be conducted in highly controlled environments. None of that is happening.
Fourth Reason not to Panic
The mortality rates being reported are being used by the Media to cause panic by misinterpreting them. A mortality rate of 3.4% of those presumed to be infected and who are admitted to Hospitals for grave symptoms, means that 3.4% of only that population dies. It does not refer to the entire population. You cannot multiply 3.4% by the entire population of your city, province, or Nation to extrapolate anything.
Since most never go to hospital for influenza like symptoms, and most have good enough immune systems to resist corona virus, the actual mortality rate for the entire population of your country will be a tiny fraction. The Ministry of Health data published yesterday here in Italy confirms this. While the press has claimed hundreds of thousands are infected, the Ministry confirms only 10 thousand, and 848 deaths, but they say that of these deaths there can be no certitude that they were caused by the corona virus without a rigorous study.
Thus, in Italy, with 60.48 million people, only 1.65% of 1% of the entire population is actually infected. While, La Verità today, is reporting that the first case came to Italy from Munich, Bavaria, when an Italian visited the city in January about the time of the Acies Ordinata event in that city, on January 18, 2020. Thus, in 8 weeks, a minuscule number of infections and deaths. While in Italy in 2017, 25 thousand died of the influenza from November to March, at a rate of 5000 a month, or 1250 a week, which would in the same period of time be a mortality of 10,000 or 12.5 times more lethal than corona virus 19.
Fifth Reason not to Panic
This particular strain of corona virus, cannot survive summer heat. Already in Singapore, the number of infections has fallen dramatically. This means, in northern countries which have well heated homes and public spaces, the possibility of infection will be almost non existent. Italy is suffering higher rates than the rest of Europe because heating in private and public places is abysmal. Italians turn heat on for about 1 hour a day, or two at most. And most public buildings are not heated or only to about 60 degrees. So the true mortality rates in Italy will not occur in other nations.
Sixth reason not to panic
Nothing happens except God will it. Disease is a punishment for the sin of Adam and the sins of individuals. Confessing your sins and staying in God’s grace will give you real protection from an unprovided for death. And if God has sent this pathogen to punish sinners, then it makes sense to repent and stop being a sinner.
Seventh reason not to panic
Finally, if you want to put the Corona Virus scare into historical context, just read about the Spanish Fever of 1917 or the Black Death, to see that the corona virus is not a plague or a pandemic of any level of real threat. Nations, Churches, businesses and cities should not be shut down on its account. Corona virus is not going to cause any noticeably higher death rate. You won’t see your friends dropping off or more funerals than normal, as the national rates of death from other causes are 10 to 100 times higher, as can be seen from this report about mortality in Italy.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on HERE ARE SEVEN GOOD REASONS WHY YOU SHOULD NOT PANIC OVER THE THREAT OF THE CORONA VIRUS PANDEMIC
It is helpful for older teens to understand and admire the ideal of sexual integrity. Call them to greatness, while also setting down clear guidelines of what is and isn’t permitted in their opposite-sex friendships while they are under your care. We advise parents to initiate advanced conversations with both sons and daughters about how sexual desire is tricky to control, but absolutely manageable with time-tested strategies. Teens should also be taught about the dangers—and avoidability—of STDs, and encouraged to show compassion and empathy towards peers who don’t know how to live sexual integrity. Finally, let your teens know that you have great confidence in their ability to live out sexual integrity and practice true love and authentic friendship. But even if they make a mistake, they can always make amends, rectify, and start again.
Once in high school, many young people desire to start dating or having romantic relationships. It’s good for parents to offer teens a more advanced understanding of their bodies so they can navigate wisely. At this stage, talking about their sexuality can be especially awkward (for both of you!), so you might want to talk to them while doing another activity, like driving or going on a walk, so that you are not forced into continuous eye contact. You can start the discussion with respect, confidence, and goodwill by saying, “Hey, I know that you already know a lot about this stuff, but it’s important. And now that you are older, I want you to be better informed.”
Sexual Integrity. It is helpful for older teens to understand the concept of sexual integrity. Start with a question about integrity in general: “When I say that someone has integrity, what does that mean? . . . Yes, integrity is something an upright person has, a person who is honest, who isn’t two-faced, who doesn’t cheat. The person with integrity does the right thing even when no one is looking.” Then transition into the intimate topic: “Sexual integrity is about being upright and honest with your sexual powers. People with sexual integrity are serious about living the truth that sex says, ‘I give myself entirely to you for life.’ They do not use or manipulate another person by enjoying sexual pleasure without making that lifelong commitment, because that is two-faced. So they save that total gift of self for marriage, even if it’s difficult to wait.” Finally, expand the understanding of sexual integrity as not just a choice to abstain but a lifestyle of dignity: “Sexual integrity, then, is also about strength of character, and about wholeness, about living in the unity of mind and body. People with sexual integrity have practiced strengthening their moral muscles so they can direct their sexual energy toward that one, beautiful beloved in a lifelong bond of self-giving.”
Ground Rules for Dating. Although they desire freedom to make their own choices, teens need authority in their lives, too. Create clear guidelines and policies of what is and isn’t permitted in their opposite-sex friendship habits while they are under your care—preferably before romance enters the picture, so the rules are not perceived to be about their particular love interest. Some parents permit group dates only for the first couple of years of high school, allowing a bit more independence with each passing year. Other parents say, “Only dates to dances or big events, and only if your grades and extracurriculars are going well.” Others say, “Once you get a job and can pay for your dates, you can date.” Other options include no dating until after graduation, no exclusive (boyfriend/girlfriend) dating, and simply taking each situation as it comes. Whatever your preferences, communicate them to your teens so they have a clear understanding of what your expectations are on the matter. Remember to include, “If you don’t feel ready to date, that’s fine too.”
Here are some specific policies that our CanaVox families have found useful:
1) The Four-Hour Rule: A teen should be able to accomplish all the socializing he needs in four hours. Instead of these long “drop me off at 4 and pick me up at 11” hangouts, teens should figure out how to use their time wisely.
2) No Bedroom Hangouts: Your teen should plan dates for public settings, or within view of a chaperone or other people. Going over to a home with some responsible adults present is fine, but no bedrooms, unsupervised basements, etc.
3) Clear Communication about the Date Plan. Always have your teens tell you whom they will be with, what they will be doing, where they are going, and when they will be home. If a party or get-together is planned at someone’s house, call the hosting parent to verify that at least one adult will be present to supervise and that there will be no alcohol available to the teens. Make the effort to enforce a reasonable curfew. If your teen is running late, she should know to call home to alert you.
4) A pre-established SOS passcode for kids to text or call home for help if they are uncomfortable and need to be picked up right away, no questions asked. Reasonable conversations can follow the next day.
An Advanced Understanding of Their Bodies. If a teen begins to be romantically involved with someone, it is wise for the same-sex parent to have some more advanced conversations about how sexual desire is tricky to control. (If the same-sex parent is unavailable, the opposite-sex parent can definitely address these topics.) If your teen doesn’t become romantically involved with someone while in your home full-time, it is still worth having the following conversations before they move out.
Fathers: Help your son distinguish between intentional and unintentional arousal. Reassure him and also call him to greatness: “Look son, sexual desire is good and natural. And unintentional arousal is not bad. It’s a sign that your body is working as it should. Night-time emissions or unexpected erections are normal. But being a man means taking responsibility for your natural attraction so that it doesn’t impede true love by dominating you or leading you to abuse someone else. This happens when you intentionally seek to arouse, entertain, and gratify your sexual desire in the wrong context, outside of marriage. Sexual desire is like fire: great when properly directed, but hazardous when it isn’t.”
Give your teenage son strategies and practices to help him manage his sexual desire and exercise self-restraint in healthy ways. Here are a few time-tested tips that men have found useful:
1) “Regular strenuous exercise will help reduce some of your sexual energy.”
2) “Learn to avoid looking at women in ways that might provoke you. Substitute sexual thoughts for other interesting thoughts/topics so that you can redirect your attention to a better place.”
3) “When you are interacting with a young woman, think about your sister, your mother, or some other woman you respect and care for, and then think about how you would like that someone to be treated. You can also imagine your future wife. Or think about the many women who are abused and taken advantage of, and how you can be part of the solution. Real men protect women. Sexual self-restraint is a big part of that, and it all begins in the mind.”
4) “Be upfront with your girlfriend about your desire to avoid going too far. She will appreciate your honesty and probably feel respected. There is no shame, and much strength, in setting limits. There’s no need to be neurotic; have a good sense of humor about how difficult it is to keep sexual boundaries.”
5) “Avoid being alone together in dicey situations, like staying up late to watch a movie after her parents go to bed. Watch your time alone in the car; don’t park in an isolated area, because things can heat up very quickly. Be ready with some good ways to avoid these types of situations. Crack a joke, even—so it won’t be too awkward. But the best defense is a good offense: planning and clear communication.”
Mothers: Tell your daughter that biologically, young men are usually much more interested in sex than young women are. Emphasize that this is normal: “At this age, guys are almost a different creature. They are very prone to arousal, sometimes out of the blue.” Deliberate attempts to arouse a guy should be distinguished from unintentional arousal, which is not her fault at all. Let her know that this arousal often begins with what a guy sees, and it increases with certain kinds of touch. So, if she is deliberately enticing or stimulating a guy, this is a wrongful use of her sexual power.
You can draw attention to her female biology: “Do you notice that at certain times of the month you might be much more distracted by sexual thoughts? You see, our bodies are wired to reproduce, so the days of the month when we are fertile, we are much more susceptible to sexual and romantic thoughts. This means that you need to be even more careful to avoid tricky situations during those times of the month. Young men, however, are always fertile, so it is like that for them all the time. Can you imagine?! But that also means that we have great power as women to help guys stay in control of their bodies, by not arousing them with revealing clothing or inappropriate gestures or touches. While you are never to blame for someone else’s bad choices, neither do you want to manipulate guys just to get attention or try to control them.”
Encourage her to have good strategies for avoiding potentially steamy situations, and to imagine how she can show a good sense of humor when she has to say “no” to a boyfriend, so as to provide some levity in awkward moments: “Whoa, tiger, I don’t think that’s a good idea!” Tell her also that it’s well within her right to be firm and strong with pushy guys who want to cross a line: “Go where? I don’t think so. Please take me home.” The better guys out there will learn to esteem and admire her for her self-respect. Young women need to have a plan in place for how far they want to go physically, and to communicate it clearly, or they can tend to just follow a boyfriend’s lead: “Having good boundaries and self-restraint when you experience sexual desire is all part of the development of sexual strength and integrity, which will help you establish a great relationship with the right person. True love takes guts, courage, and virtue.” You can also remind her that her desires (and his) aren’t inherently bad: “Sexual tension in a serious dating relationship can be a good challenge. It can be a very healthy part of dating, because you learn to communicate your needs and grow in fortitude together. You strengthen your moral muscles by exercising restraint for one another’s good.”
Physical Touches That Arouse. We live in times when teens are surrounded by sexual excess. Therefore, you may choose to be more direct than your own parents were about some types of foreplay that your teen should avoid. Many teens will go right up to the boundary that is given to them, so go ahead and explain your views on things like passionate kissing, fondling, and masturbation. Even though teen rates of sexual intercourse are dropping, oral sex and “outercourse”—genital contact with clothes on (which can also lead to orgasm)—are on the rise. You can help your teen see these sexual practices for what they are: a cheap imitation of the real thing, which is true sexual love in marriage.
Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs). At this age especially, fear has its place when talking about sex. Teens should be aware of the dangers—and avoidability—of nonmarital sex and STDs. Identify the diseases by name—not just HIV and AIDS, but chlamydia, gonorrhea, genital warts, herpes, HPV, and other STDs. Let them know that there is an overblown confidence in the reliability of condoms to protect people from STDs (and pregnancy, too) and that their reproductive organs are delicate and vulnerable to infection. Show them pictures; give them statistics. Relate those statistics to their situation: “Did you know that means that at least twenty-five kids in your graduating class have ______ ?!” Mention that their long-term ability to have children can be affected by promiscuity. Some infections can even lead to cancer. Medical information can be a strong deterrent for teens. In the heat of the moment, fear of catching a disease can hold them back.
Don’t worry about the prudence of using fear tactics (so long as you aren’t only relying on fear tactics). They are used successfully in other educational campaigns such as those against drunk driving, smoking, and texting while driving. You can help teens have a healthy fear of sexually transmitted disease as part of your “waiting for sex” campaign at home.
Contraception. Although every family will have its own values and beliefs regarding contraception, generally CanaVox does not encourage its use among teens. We defer to parents’ best judgment on this topic and would simply encourage you to communicate to your kids that it’s not a taboo subject. Some parents provide an explanation along the following lines, elaborating where they see fit: “Have you heard about condoms, the pill, or other forms of contraception?” (Listen closely, and then clarify any misinformation.) “Yes, some people use contraception to reduce the risk of STDs and pregnancy. But you know what? These measures are not always effective, and they carry their own risks. There is a lot of emotional pain that cannot be prevented by contraception. No condom can protect your heart. That’s why waiting for marriage is the best option.”
Heartbreak. Explain some of the physiology of heartbreak, so that your teens know it is real: “When we engage in sexual experiences with a person who has not proven his or her loyalty and fidelity to us with the marriage vow, we can hurt ourselves and that person, risking heartache and even real depression. Hormones like oxytocin are secreted during sex; they create a bond that, when broken, results in a chemical deficit that hurts physiologically. It’s kind of like going through drug withdrawal. I mean, heartbreak without sex is bad enough. Heartbreak when you have a sexual bond can be devastating, especially to women.”
Alcohol. Explain that alcohol is often a precursor to bad sexual decisions: “If you both drink alcohol and allow yourselves to get sexually aroused, you virtually guarantee that you will make a decision you will regret later. That’s why people should never introduce alcohol into risky situations, no matter what their age.” Warn daughters especially of the increased risk of sexual assault when alcohol is involved: “A guy who seems great at first can end up taking advantage of you when you’ve had alcohol.”
Sexual Power Plays. You might brief your teens on some of the psychological games that people play with sex: “It’s not uncommon in dating relationships for one person to be more interested than the other person is. But instead of dealing with the disappointment and moving on in a healthy way, the person who is more infatuated will sometimes use her sex appeal to create or force a bond that is not really there, through enticement, attachment, and guilt. Sometimes it is the guy who does this, but often it is the girl. She lets loose her erotic power to attach a guy by seducing him, for instance, with nude photos over text. This is one of the ways that sex can complicate dating immensely and create painful messes that are difficult to get out of.”
Peer Dynamics. Help your teens navigate the discrepancies between what they are learning at home and what might be happening among their peers: “Through no fault of their own, many of your sexually active peers do not understand what they are communicating or the impact their choices will have on their current relationship and their ability to conduct future relationships with integrity. To the extent that you can, try to help your friends think through the risks of their decisions and consider better alternatives.” This will help your teen to properly position themselves vis-à-vis their peers—not as objects of peer pressure but as agents of change.
Show Good Faith and Optimism. Finally, let teens know that you have confidence in their ability to live out sexual integrity and practice true love and authentic friendship: “You can totally do this. But no matter what happens, if you make mistakes or go too far, remember that you can always make amends, rectify a situation, and start again. We all make mistakes. For every problem, there is a solution! If you need us, we are always here to help, no matter what.”
Waiting Becomes Beautiful. By instilling good habits and ideas from an early age and having honest conversations with your children as they grow, you will help them to appreciate the beauty of sex and to wait willingly for a once-in-a-lifetime partner to marry. The important thing is to talk to your kids! It doesn’t matter if you don’t feel knowledgeable or tactful enough. The parent-child relationship is a safe haven of love where these discussions are meant to happen.
So don’t wait until they hear about it from someone else. Take a deep breath and collect your thoughts. You can do this!
For hard copies of the booklet “Tips for Talking to Kids about Sex,” from which this article is excerpted, please email info@canavox.com. Other suggested readings about the natural law understanding of sexuality and marriage can be found at www.CanaVox.com.
CanaVox is an interfaith marriage and sexual-integrity movement founded by modern moms who haven’t forgotten timeless principles. Our monthly reading and discussion groups around the world inform discerning women and men with up-to-date research drawn from the social sciences, … READ MORE
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on SEX IS ONE OF THE DRIVING FORCES OF HUMAN NATURE AND PARENTS FAIL IN THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TO EDUCATE THEIR CHILDREN IF THEY FAIL TO TALK TO THEIR TEENAGE CHILDREN ABOUT SEX
ABYSSUS ABYSSUM INVOCAT / DEEP CALLS TO DEEP 
You must be logged in to post a comment.