The Remnant and the Jihad Watch have been the target of an attack from uber-Leftist, Nazi hate groups affiliated to George Soros and his net of satanical warfare on God. The minions of Satan tried to bully Paypal into closing the accounts of the two organisations.
It is extremely concerning that the account of the Gateway Pundit was, in fact, closed before the storm that followed “inspired” PayPal to think again. Still, this kind of event tells you without any doubt the kind of tactics these bile-filled Hate Groups are ready to employ. Also not surprising is the tactic of fake “journalism” employed to do so, a tactic perfectly in line with the Fake News dominating our media environment.
ProPublica clearly is an organisation meant to suppress every opinion different from their own with whatever means, legal or illegal. This sort of intimidation should attract the attention of some smart prosecutor in the US and lead to the banning of the hate group and the arrest of the people responsible for its intimidation tactics.
And it came to pass the oh so shocking news from Ireland revealed themselves as one of the most hysterical pieces of anti-Catholic hysteria in the hysterical history of the hysterically Anti-Catholic, and utterly anti-historical, Washington Post.
The deaths apparently all, or reasonably all, accounted for. Most of them apparently certified at the time with regular death certificate. The records obviously public since inception. The percentages of child death mortality certainly not much different from what happened, in comparable situations, all over the West in those years. The use of the septic tank very possibly due to the fear of contagion, that is: to the desire to protect the health of the children. It now appears there might not have been any use of the septic tank, at all.
Boy, what an embarrassment. At the Washington Post they must fancy themselves half-stoned college student experimenting with their own little mini-rag.
This wasn’t only rabid anti-Catholicism. This was anti-Catholicism so virulent that it could not even wait to have a clearer target to shoot at.
Catherine Corless might have been brutally and shamelessly misrepresented, or she might have given some ground to misrepresent her. In both cases, when the person cited as source distances herself so clearly from the media outlet and accuses them of misrepresentation, a sound newspaper would start thinking whether heads should not roll, because here it appears as I write the fabrication has been on a scale that has nothing to do with journalism anymore.
I am old enough to remember my grand-aunts talk to me and my cousins of children mortality in no dubious terms. It was, in fact, the normality of the world they had grown in. To them, what was new was the great amount of children who survived in my time!
The journalists of the Washington Post have no basic historic knowledge, having spent their school and university years talking about women or gender issues instead of learning some history; therefore, they find it utterly natural to jump in excitement every time something is different than in their own little world.
Someone should have the nerve to tell them that no, there was no penicillin around in those times; and no Wi-fi, no smartphones; not even the Internet!
Now, this story here will die very fast. Unless, there is, the enemies of the Church seize the moment.
I talk, here, of all those prelates for whom the preconciliar Church is the enemy, and no effort must be spared to accuse, discredit, and vilify them. They could, methinks, start where the potheads of the Washington Post will have to stop, and start the usual pious exercise of self-flagellation that is, if you look at it, a very thinly disguised flaying of the pre-conciliar Church. They could stage all the media circus of the “apologies”, the “enquiries”, and the rest, at the end of which a clear message would stand: the pre-conciliar Church was rubbish and we are all wretched sinners anyway, so why single out adulterers and sofomites?
Yes, I am more scared of the enemies within than of those without.
It’s the V II in its latest version, released in March 2013, and called Bergoglio 1.0.
You all know it: the long queue to drink a glass or two at the holy water fount, with devout mothers, fathers and six months old children all there with their glasses – the men often with a very big one; particularly in Bavaria, where is now October Fest time again – drinking their litre-a-day of holy water. I have heard some particularly devout people will not drink anything else, and will not boil the water twice before they do.
The scene is, apparently, familiar to abc too, who now inform us holy water is highly dangerous, and can… can… can… kill a baby!!
You have been warned.
I slowly suspect if they aren't stupid and bigoted, they aren't allowed to become journalists.
The public hand in Miami works in a very strange way.
For 33 years, they seem not to have noticed that the Missionaries of Charity feed the poorest in their city, completely for free; probably because they did not ask the city for a penny for 33 years.
Suddenly, though, they notice the humble nuns and say: “hey, this must be a business! Where's the licence?”. Prompty, the poor nuns received a notice of violation, threatening them with criminal prosecution and other unpleasant consequences.
Please don't tell me this is an honest mistake. Whilst from the same link it appears a lawyer is now involved and the City of Miami will be forced to backpedal very soon, I smell the willed harassment of some politically motivated City officials against good nuns known not only for her charitable work, but their very conservative social views and staunch opposition to abortion.
Can you imagine some homosexual group doing the same activity (provided there are any in the first place) being slapped with the same notice? Nor can I…
Again, I trust this will be solved very soon. But I doubt the mentality which created this situation will be get rid of so easily…
I stumbled upon the comments of an old blog post of mine, and you can read there some interesting comments about the way Catholics react when the Church is attacked.
The comments start from Shane’s (he of Lux Occulta; see also the link on my blogroll) fear the Papal visit of 2010 could have become a disaster because of the rabid anti-Catholic activity it would unleash (and was already unleashing), with myself espousing the opinion the Church actually thrives on this kind of confrontation.
In my eyes, it is fair to say the events of 2010 seem to support my own view: the Pope was welcomed by huge and enthusiastic crowds, and it is not far from reality to say at least some of those who attended were there as a reaction to the rabid anti-Catholic messages invariably launched from several media outlets; first of all, as always, the Broadcasting Basket-cases Corporation.
As I also noticed in the comment section, a similar phenomenon had happened in Easter 2010, when unusually strong attacks to the Church had caused the churches of the realm to be so packed as I had never seen before (or have ever seen since).
What do we conclude from this? Is this just a “gesture” people do to “feel good”, or is there something more profound at play?
If you ask me, episodes like Easter 2010 and the Papal visit the same year show us a very clear pattern: many Catholics feel uneasy with their own relationship with the Church. They do not go to Mass and they know (at some level of consciousness, just there among the things one doesn’t want to think about; like, say, cancer…) it is wrong, though probably they can’t even remember the last priest who had the gut to tell them so. The way they react is to simply remove the problem and not think about it, but when a provocation comes which forces them to say to themselves on which side they stand, most of them have no doubt. They won’t become observant Catholic the next day for that, but they will show they don’t want the Church to be attacked.
I remember several other episodes of the kind; the Crucifix-controversy in Germany in 1994, and the similar confrontation in Italy in the last years. In both cases, the crucifix-party won, and in both cases the popular support went far beyond the churchgoers.
I can’t take out of my mind the simply infuriating thought the Church does not win many battles simply because the clergy does not have the gut to fight them; out of sheer cowardice, or underestimation of their own power, or simply because they side with the other side.
We will know in November the way the US Catholic have reacted to the HHS mandate controversy and, now, to the “Outing” of President Obama. It can certainly be more time is necessary, but if the English, German and Italian experience is any guidance, this will be another demonstration that many tepid, inattentive, or “peripheral” Catholics are ready to take a stand when they feel they can’t ignore the problem anymore.
I still think there is a huge cannon out there, just left unused.
The Daily Telegraph (you will remember, this is the newspaper which calls itself “conservative” but calls homosexuals and sodomites “gay” and puts obscene photos of homos kissing on their internet page, for every child to see) gives us just another example of how not to be a journalist.
As you can see in the link, there are several anti-Catholic messages in this article:
1) the reference to the Nazi-built stadium. Now, not even the “Telegraph”‘s most astonishingly leftist journalist would, I hope, suggest that all public buildings and structures erected by the Nazis (and an awful lot of them there were; if you ask me, mostly extremely beautiful; many survived the war) be destroyed because hey, “they were built by the Nazis”. If this is a logical statement (which it is), it follows that the Olympic Stadium is simply… the Olympic stadium and the fact that it was built by Hitler is, subsequently, neither here nor there. Clearly, though, the desire to put the Pope in contact with whatever smell of Nazism could be found was clearly irresistible.
2) The journalist is good enough to mention the fact that Pope Benedict’s membership of the Hitlerjugend was compulsory, but one wonders what relevance the Pope being drafted (that’s just what it was: you got drafted and you became a member of the Hitlerjugend, there was no other organisation where you could have landed) as millions of Germans of his age has to his travelling to Germany. Once again, the desire to put the Pope in contact with whatever smell of Nazism could be found was clearly irresistible.
3) Just in case you didn’t get the message, among the hundreds of articles about Pope Benedict the “Telegraph” could have linked to, what do our pink heroes choose? But of course! They choose an article with the following title: “Vatican: don’t mention the Pope’s Hitler Youth past”. Think of this, this is a historical papacy which gave us Summorum Pontificum; a visit to England is not many months old, which visit stunned the country for its success and the amount of public participation; also directly related to the British Isles, Anglicanorum Coetibus is another historical step with potentially vast long-term repercussions on the future of Anglicanism. But what do you think the “Daily Homograph” considers worthy of being “related” to the papal visit? Ah, the fact that the Vatican tries to influence journalists about the Pope’s past, of course! Once again, the desire to put the Pope in contact with whatever smell of Nazism could be found was clearly irresistible. , and here a dab of “oppressive and manipulative Vatican” is added for good measure.
4) Then there’s the matter of the Catholics “leaving the Church” in record numbers, which is clearly bollocks. What all these people do is very clearly not stop going to Mass – at least, not because they stop paying – but simply stop paying the “Kirchensteuer”, the infamous “church tax” in place in Germany and in a couple of other countries. This is a typical Protestant construct, a (voluntary but in the past, more or less socially expected) tithe paid directly from one’s wage which leaves the faithful with no control whatsoever as to how much he wants to give, and to whom. This is Castrism, not Christian charity. The result is that Germany has a clergy both extremely well off, and extremely tepidly Catholic. Why should they care? They can abandon themselves to every sort of circus and liberal tomfoolery and the money is there, guaranteed and aplenty….
The system of the “Kirchensteuer” is now clearly going down in flames, as it should. But this doesn’t mean that interest in Catholicism is diminishing, let alone that people are leaving the Church in record numbers. It just means that they are fed up with having to pay a “church tax”, which can only be good for the local church and might, who knows, force some of their priests to convert to Catholicism.
5) Dulcis in fundo, the entire article is, actually, wrong. The news here is that a big venue had been booked for the Papal visit, but this venue had to be abandoned because…. it is not big enough. This means that the attraction of the Pope is beyond the previsions, even considering that this is the travel of a German Pope to his own country.
What about, then, a headline like: “Success of Papal Visit forces change in venue”, or: “Crowds wanting to see Pope Benedict force use of Olympic Stadium”, or: “Papal visit: 40,000 places not enough for Berlin”. Note here that Berlin is historically Protestant and nowadays largely atheist, which makes the news even more noteworthy.
Well, it wasn’t to be. Something had to be found to smear the Holy Father with a dash of Nazism, and downplay the success his visit is very clearly heading to. You can’t tell your readers that this Pope awakens great sympathy even in uber-Liberal Germany so that a big stadium must be used, can you now? No, let us build the article on the “crisis of Catholicism” in Germany and let us paint the Pope with a broad Nazi brush. Let me see, what headline could we use? hmm, yes: “Pope’s Berlin Mass moved to Nazi Olympic Site” will do…
The “Daily Telegraph” is a nest of anti-Catholic hacks, in part motivated by the clear homosexuality to be found among their ranks. It is just that the newspaper being officially “conservative” doesn’t allow them to make an overt anti-Catholic and pro-homo propaganda, and more subtle messages must be sent.
Please don’t buy this rag.
Another example of daily madness in XXI Century England.
Father Hugh Mackenzie, of St. Mary Magdalen church in Willesden, London, has organised an Easter march every year these last 14 years.
But this year he is, apparently, not authorised to do so. The reasons would be:
1) that new red tape rules have come into effect;
2) that said rules require the local authorities to be “consulted” (instead of merely the police to be informed), and
3) that this has not happened in time for the local authority to “consult” about a 400 metre procession that has been happening these 14 years.
What we learn from this is very simple:
a) that a country drowning in debts and struggling to cut costs at every corner is still not immune from the most scandalous waste at local level.
b) that the self-serving community of leftist local administrators does so in the most leftist of ways: increasing both useless public expense and red tape oppression
c) that these people really, really want us to believe that there might be a safety issue in a 400 metres procession on Good Friday. This would put their mental sanity in doubt, if we didn’t know that this is pure bureaucratic thinking.
I cannot even imagine that, had the same situation arisen for a “minority” group (say: Muslims, or Hindus, let alone homos) the ruthless self-serving machine of Brent Council would have worked with the same self-serving ruthlessness.
I want to think that the chaps are simply trying to create useless, wasteful, economy-killing jobs for friends and family, which is their main (pre)occupation anyway. But I can’t avoid thinking that a certain smell of anti-Catholic – or even anti-Christian – behaviour is present here as by a precession so short, already effected for so long and with the police already informed one could certainly find a solution by merely switching his brains on.
More alarming is the situation when one considers the particular situation of Brent council. The Daily mail informs us that
in July last year the council appealed to the Muslim community to notify it of any Eid events so it could promote them free of charge.
But it did not do the same for other religious festivals.
Notwithstanding this, Brent council has nothing else to say than this unbelievably arrogant statement:
‘Brent Council was not contacted about the march until around a week ago.
‘There is a strict legal procedure we have to follow to issue a traffic order closing roads so people can march in the highway, which includes advertising and consultation, and this takes about five weeks.
‘We are very sorry to say there is now not enough time for us to legally facilitate this march.’
This, from people who until last year (and for all times, if you ask me) have been considered fully superfluous in such decisions, a notification to the police being considered fully sufficient.
Arrogant, self-serving, anti-Catholic asses.
I do hope that Fr Mackenzie will go on with his planned easter march and seek confrontation with the council.
We might see the one or other head falling here, following the example of that other hero asking his colleagues to have as many road works open for as long as possible, because the ensuing traffic jams would “increase traffic security for children”.
I truly hope that some heads will fall here, and not one minute too soon.