Thursday, December 8, 2016

Curious

In another of his impromptu homilies our new Pope has lowered the level of discussion to the sewer by referring to those who criticize presumably his actions or other subjects as practitioners of a particularly degraded form of perversion, one known to be common among homosexuals.  I will refrain from the sordid specifics since everyone by now has heard about it.

The more interesting aspect of this incident of infantilism on the part of of Pope Francis is not his vulgarity, unbecoming as it is to any man of the Church but most especially to the Vicar of Christ, but how it fits in with what is now an organized propaganda effort to censor the internet.  Those of us on the internet who discuss difficult subjects or taboo subjects knew that it was only a matter of time before steps would be taken to shut down opposing views on the net.  The only surprise was how long it took for them to get around to the task.

It began years ago but it rapidly gained steam once it became clear that world events started getting obviously, outrageously known by the Great Unwashed as creations of the Money Power to further enrich themselves, destroy the Middle Class and gain total control of every organ of power and opinion on earth.  This program picked up steam when it became clear to many that Ukraine, for example, was not a fight for "freedom" from a domineering Russia but was in fact a brilliantly-orchestrated coup by the USA and its other good friends.  As the oligarchial actions became more blatant the less the media was believed.  Elite outrage reached apoplectic proportions when their Syria murder plans were thwarted by Syria's Assad requesting Russia to help put down the attack on its people and its government.  This so unhinged the powers-that-be that the demonization of Vladimir Putin went into hysterical overdrive with a joint effort of the media and the governments of the world who were in thrall to that same Money Power.

On top of that the Elite became totally unglued when Donald Trump was elected.  Clearly the Empire needed to strike back.  And they have.

As if by magic a new "issue" came to the forefront, the issue of "fake news".  As is usual in these cases when an idea is being pushed a coordinated advertising campaign begins at once.  The opening salvos came from the Clinton Campaign which suggested - with no proof whatsoever - that the Russians were behind her loss to Trump.  Quickly picking up steam the establishment mouthpieces followed suit, especially the Washington Post which dutifully came up with a List of "fake news" sites which must be dealt with.  All of the internet toadies like Google, YouTube, facebook, etc. have all rolled out plans to counter "fake news", so that the only fake news that will be allowed will be the government/media fake news (of which there is never any shortage).  It goes without saying that Congress, and the Courts, will go along with this censoring effort.

In fact the Senate has already stepped in.  The other day the Senate unanimously passed a law, the laughingly called "Antisemitism Awareness Act" that brings legal penalties to any college student who criticizes the State of Israel.  Any pointing out of the brutality the Israelis mete out to the hapless Christians and innocent Muslims in the Holy Land will, if the bill is signed by Obama, be considered criminal carrying real penalties.  That it will soon be applied to every American and not just college kids is a foregone conclusion.  This site often points out the suffering of Christians at the hands of the Israeli occupiers.  If Google hasn't already begun to censor this blog in their search engine it will most likely be shut down or emasculated by government decree at some point.  And so will many others.

It is a classic scenario:  identify a problem, plaster it all over the newspapers of the world, make movies and documentaries about it, bring in the experts on the talking heads tv shows, enact legislation.  It rarely fails.

So the attack on "fake news" intensifies, which brings us to the curious case of Pope Francis and his recent disgusting accusations against those who air the dirty laundry of the Modernists in the Church. One way or the other he is also part of the anti- "fake news" propaganda effort with these recent remarks, which leads one to believe that he is doing the work of the same forces trying to shut down dissent. If true it does not surprise me.  We need only to look at the characters who surround and advise him to see the hand of powerful men.

It is possible to interpret the Pope's words as a mere reflection on what he reads every day in the papers though that explanation, however attractive it may be to some, is doubtful.  It is hard to shake the belief that he knows perfectly well what he is doing and is in line with those New World Order types who want revolution in every sphere of life.  Is Francis a tool or is he a willing participant?  I'm afraid my money is on the latter explanation.

As childish and indeed revolting as the Pope's latest remarks are the real interest for me is what they portend, which is that the leader of the Roman Catholic Church has become the mere plaything of the powerful.  It has happened in the Church's past, alas, but I doubt it has ever sunk to such low depths.  As tragic as it was for some Renaissance Pope to be a slave to the money-lenders of their day it is unlikely that they would have even contemplated speaking such crudities as those that trip so easily from the tongue of Francis.  They had some standards, even in their corruption.

I will not dwell on the latest Francis insults; they don't rise to the level of serious discussion.  As cheap and insulting as they are they pale in comparison to his actions, which are far more devastating. And they pale in comparison to the reflection that he may be aligned somehow with some of the more unsavory of the human creatures who skulk around the halls of power.  If such suspicions are correct then we must continue to pray (and punch) that we will soon be rid of such a disastrous papacy.  We pray for the Pope that he may come to his senses and become a glorious Pope; and we punch away through our soon-to-be-dwindling outlets of discussion so that he may become aware of the real situation in the Church, a Church that is now on life support.

Today, December 8th, is a good day for us to ask Mother to intercede for us with Father, that he may ease our punishment, at least a little.


Wednesday, December 7, 2016

Pay attention, Mr Putin: Europe deserves destruction, according to writer Gideon Rachman


Certain types of men, always in a mood for revenge and revolution, as Russia once learned a hundred years ago to its cost in lives and treasure, must have been reading Hilaire Belloc very carefully.  "The Faith is Europe and Europe is the Faith", so goes Belloc's famous statement and warning.  Noting that, Tribal billionaires like George Soros have been busy facilitating the shoving into Europe of hordes of people, some legitimately trying to escape the horrors of the wars inflicted on their country (by the co-religionists of Mr Soros using their Washington, London and Paris poodles) and some coming for more nefarious reasons.

A decidedly arrogant writer for the Financial Times Gideon Rachman tells Europeans to "get used to it".  http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/01/12/financial-times-mass-immigration-is-here-to-stay-we-should-learn-to-accept-it/

How nice.  Very sweet of them to tell us to "get used to it", that these things are "unstoppable".  The Gideon Rachmans of this world certainly aren't arrogance-challenged.

Is the destruction of Europe being centrally planned?  Of course it is.  And the reason for this is as simple as possible: the revenge against and elimination of Catholicism in the Europe where it built civilization.

Why do I think Vladimir Putin should pay attention to this?  Two reasons come to mind.  First - and contrary to the hilarious meme being promoted worldwide by Christendom's enemies that Russia wants to subjugate other nations again like in the old Commie days - his actions tell this writer clearly that he is concerned about the destruction of Europe as Europe.  Russians consider themselves Europeans after all.

Secondly, Mr Putin is seemingly being far too benign to the destroyers of Europe.  I say "seemingly" because certain recent actions taken by the Russian Federation give the impression that they are unconcerned that they are shooting themselves in the foot.  Russia's coming to the aid of dying Syria is admirable, as is the restraint they have shown over the orchestrated coup in Ukraine, as is, indeed, the restraint shown after the unbalanced dictator in Turkey shot down a Russian plane over Syrian airspace.  All this shows a herculean prudence which has brought them much goodwill..  But that will all be undone unless Russia begins to get serious about the real forces allayed against it.

I am not of necessarily implying that Russia is the savior of the world but I do note that the Blessed Virgin Mary has made it quite clear that a great good will one day come out of that country.  We would be foolish to ignore what she says, as we lap up the anti-Russian propaganda being shoved in our faces by the forces of chaos.

Mr Rachman fantasizes often about the "new world order" he wishes upon the world.  I can well imagine the type Rachman has in mind.

Take note, Mr Putin.


When Propaganda Becomes Farce

As an old movie director I really enjoy watching how "the usual suspects" try to bamboozle the public using what they believe to be cinematic tools.  That's my problem: I can smell fakery a mile away.

So come to see the merry masquers known to the Propaganda Machine as "The White Helmets"

Lights....camera.... action !

 
   

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/white-helmets-rescue-crisis-actor-mannequin-challenge-fakery/ri17843

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2016/11/how-white-helmets-videos-are-made.html

Since the USA has been caught here red-handed, I guess it must be some of that "fake news" we keep hearing about.

Saturday, December 3, 2016

James Larson examines the Dubia



"What has been missed in almost all of the critiques of Amoris Laetitia is that it is indeed constituted as a direct attack on the concept of Charity and Sanctifying Grace."

Paul confronts Peter by Rubens


[Editor: Another view of the Dubia Incident, from our friend, Mr James Larson.]


What Really Is At Stake?
The Letter of Four Cardinals to Pope Francis Concerning Amoris Laetitia
by James Larson

On November 14, 2016, four Cardinals (Walter Branmuller, Raymond Burke, Carlo Caffara, and Joachim Meisner) released a letter which they sent to Pope Francis on September 19, along with five “Dubia” (“doubts” or “questions”) in reference to the teaching of the Pope’s Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia, and requesting that these dubia be answered and clarified by the Pope himself.
The letter went unanswered, and thus these Cardinals decided to publish both the letter and Dubia, along with a Foreword, and also an Explanatory Note which further elaborated on the five dubia, to the general public. This composite of documents they titled Seeking Clarity. A Plea to Untie the Knots in “Amoris Laetitia”.
The four Cardinals introduce their analysis and explanation of the five dubiawith the following words:
“Let’s get to what is concretely at stake”.
It is my contention that, while the dubia and the analysis presented by the four Cardinals are indeed perceptive and true as far as they go, they do not at all reach to the true depths of “what is concretely at stake”.
Let us first look at these five dubia:
The first dubium deals directly with the issue of those married persons who have obtained a civil divorce and are now living in sin with a second partner. It asks “whether, following the affirmations of ‘Amoris Laetitia’ (nn. 300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the Sacrament of Penance and thus to admit to Holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person ‘more uxorio’ (in a marital way) without fulfilling the condition provided for by ‘Familiaris Consortio’, n. 84 and subsequently reaffirmed by ‘Reconciliatio et Paenitentia’ n. 34 and ‘Sacramentum Caritatis’ n. 29. Can the expression ‘in certain cases’ found in note 351 (n. 305) of the exhortation ‘Amoris Laetitia’ be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live ‘more uxorio’?
Dubia two, three, four, and five, on the other hand “are about fundamental issues regarding the moral life”
The second asks whether, after the teaching of Amoris Laetitia, there are still “absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?”
The third asks whether, after Amoris Laetitia, it is still true “that a person who habitually lives in contradiction to a commandment of God’s law, as for instance the one that prohibits adultery, finds him or herself in an objective situation of grave habitual sin?”
The fourth asks whether, after Amoris Laetitia, the Church still needs to regard as valid the teaching “according to which ‘circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice”?
And the fifth dubium asks whether, after Amoris Laetitia, the Church’s teaching still “excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and that emphasizes that conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object?”
All of these questions are being asked, of course, simply because Amoris Laetitia does indeed appear to contradict the perennial teachings of the Church (and of Holy Scripture) in regard to these issues. As the Explanatory Note of the four Cardinals puts it (very mildly, I think), “the interpretation of the document also implies different, contrasting approaches to the Christian way of life”.
But it is much more than a “way of life” that is at stake here. It is, rather, the entire structure of our understanding of Christian Revelation – of Who God is, and of who man is – which is being denied by Amoris Laetitia. And if this be true, then the entire brunt of the Cardinals’ letter to the Pope, which consists of requests for clarification in regard to these dubia, noble and courageous as it certainly is, is an exercise in futility. The fact is that, in the minds and hearts of such men as Jorge Bergoglio and Joseph Ratzinger, the entire philosophical and theological structure of the faith has necessarily undergone a radical alteration which necessitates this contrasting approach to the Christian way of life. In other words, there can be no clarification because Pope Francis fully believes he must do what he is doing. From his perspective, the dubia of these four Cardinals is equivalent to the death cries of theological dinosaurs destined for evolutionary extinction. They therefore must be ignored.

Read the whole article here.

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Sycophants on Parade

Vincent Nichols in clerical garb

Could someone please put a gun in his hand?
Beady-eyed Kevin Farrell
Donald Wuerl sporting his brand new dentures
Playground bully or prelate.  You pick.
Pinto puts a whammy on four bad guys.....and the Church
Is that you, Holy Spirit?


This is almost comical.  The Catholic Church has become a parody of a classic giant corporation where the head of the company surrounds himself with fawning yes-men and sends to janitor duty those who question some of his decisions.

I have heard scoffing from some who refuse to believe such a thing. But isn't this exactly where the Church is now?

Some would say the Church has always been that way, that those surrounding the Pope would be no more than toadies doing the bidding of the Big Man.  Some Orthodox believe that, I know. But was it true?

There have always been sycophants, courtiers, cliques, flatterers buzzing around men in high places. Even in the Church.  Great Popes dreaded these types, for they knew that blind slavishness was a very bad idea and they would fight it whenever it reared its ugly head.  The effect of these hangers-on was muted when a great Pope was in charge.  These saintly pontiffs would keep such men in check and make efforts to see that their influence was minimal.  For them it was an ordeal but a job that had to be done.  Great monarchs also had these problems, the greatest of them doing yeoman work to keep the lap dogs under control.

But in 2016 AD we have a somewhat new problem.  Old but new.  Now we have a Pope who is - how shall I say it? - a bit bizarre.  A living, breathing teenager in an 80 year old body.  A martinet who decries discipline in the Church but who is in fact the very worst kind of disciplinarian, the kind that refuses to listen to counsel or reconsider his views.  An egotist who, like John Paul II, craves the limelight, the cheering crowds and the approval of the mass media.  A child who has just been given the biggest toy train in the world and is having  a grand time playing with it.

And as of this moment a man who has not yet realized his awesome responsibility: to transmit the Faith whole and entire to those under his care.  Those under his care include every human being upon earth.  One can see in his face a disinterest in what he has inherited.  My first clue that there was something askew in his mind was that incident early in his papacy when he was walking down a hallway with his entourage and spotted a young altar boy with his hands together as if in prayer.   In a show of ignorant heartlessness he visibly yanked the boy's hands apart.

That incident spoke volumes about what would be coming.

And coming it has.  I will not bore my well-read readers by recounting the scandals this man has caused.  We are all getting sick and tired of them.  What I will do is express my astonishment at the sorry collection of mediocrities, sycophants, dullards, idiots and poofs who have all circled their wagons around this awful Pope.

What a Rogue's Gallery of shameless episcopal reptiles, whose collective intelligence hardly reaches the level of The Three Stooges.  If they had any intelligence, let alone self-respect, they might come to the realization that the Pope is uttering dangerous nonsense on many subjects (not all, of course, but many) and would take him aside and try to show him the realities.  But most of his lackeys are, frankly, worse than him when it comes to the salvation of souls which is the chief effort of the one, true Church.

Yes, these men need to be insulted even though some of them are too obtuse even to understand they are being insulted.  We don't insult the cloth they wear; we insult the men who disgrace that cloth.  It is because I respect the cloth that I call out those who bring bring shame upon it. This approach is, I know, not encouraged by many good people in the Church.  For these good people respect, understandably, should be the order of the day no matter how cretinous some of them are. But as good as that approach is, which I do not for a moment condemn, how respectful can one be to some of these wreckers of the Church?  Is not a bit of tar and feathers, at least the keyboard kind (for now), appropriate in dealing with some Churchmen who are deliberately and with malice aforethought trying to deform the Church into something worse than Protestantism or Judaism, a Protestantism that tinkers with dogma or a Judaism that rejects our Lord outright?  Is that not in fact what some of these characters are engaging in?  And worse. Some of these prelates are openly supporting sodomy.  Sodomy.  Has the import of that really sunk in to our skulls? Moreover, some of them are condoning adultery.  Where are we?  Are we in The Twilight Zone?

I am very willing to entertain arguments about the rightness or wrongness this approach if anyone cares to comment.  I like to keep my head by encouraging commenters who disagree with some of the ravings on this internet stop.  One learns by an exchange of ideas.

This blog is called The Eye Witness not only in honor of Hilaire Belloc and G.K. Chesterton but as an actual eye witness of crucial events.  An eye witness watches oily traitors like Kasper or truckling incompetents like Cupich or buffoons like Dolan paying court to a dictator and reports on them.  It is truly a rotten job to have to do.  We take no pleasure in writing about these monstrous people. And while other internet sites and blogs do it better than here this writer would feel somehow unclean by not openly stating that the Church is crumbling before our very eyes.

If there is any good at all in the snivelling idiocies coming from the mouths of these men it is a reminder that - especially to this writer whose allotted time on earth is coming to an end soon - it is time for reflection on why it is that our sins have brought this upon our heads.  War is a punishment for sin so it has been said.  And so is the infliction of bad clerics.

And Advent, among other things, is a good time to reflect.

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Again, the "babies being stabbed in their incubators" bull is being trotted out again

Every time the usual forces of chaos want to gin up propaganda, be it against the Kaiser, Saddam Hussein or now Bashar Assad, we have to endure another round of the "babies being killed by those evil bad guys".  Tears and videos abound.  [Funny that those behind all these stories of supposed atrocities against children usually see nothing wrong with abortion.]

So here we go again:



Syria is making gains in eliminating the head-chopping US/Israel proxies in their land and so, in panic, they have to trot out stuff like this.   And so many will fall for this....again.

From Consortium News:


"Late in the day, on Nov. 15, one week after the U.S. elections, the lame-duck Congress convened in special session with normal rules suspended so the House could pass House Resolution 5732, the “Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act” calling for intensifying the already harsh sanctions on Syria, assessing the imposition of a “no fly zone” inside Syria (to prevent the Syrian government from flying) and escalating efforts to press criminal charges against Syrian officials.

HR5732 claims to promote a negotiated settlement in Syria but, as analyzed by Friends Committee for National Legislation, it imposes preconditions which would actually make a peace agreement more difficult.

The West Front of the U.S. Capitol
The West Front of the U.S. Capitol
There was 40 minutes of “debate” with six representatives (Ed Royce, R-California; Eliot Engel, D-New York; Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Florida; Dan Kildee, D-Michigan; Chris Smith, R-New Jersey; and Carlos Curbelo, R-Florida) all speaking in favor of the resolution. There were few other representatives present, but the House Foreign Affairs Committee stated that the resolution was passed “unanimously” without mentioning these special conditions.
According to Wikipedia, “Suspension of the rules is a procedure generally used to quickly pass non-controversial bills in the United States House of Representatives … such as naming Post Offices…” In this case, however, the resolution could lead to a wider war in the Middle East and potentially World War III with nuclear-armed Russia.

Most strikingly, the resolution calls for evaluating and developing plans for the United States to impose a “no fly zone” inside Syria, a sovereign nation, an act of war that also would violate international law as an act of aggression. It also could put the U.S. military in the position of shooting down Russian aircraft.

To call this proposal “non-controversial” is absurd, although it may say a great deal about the “group think” of the U.S. Congress that an act of war would be so casually considered. Clearly, this resolution should have been debated under normal rules with a reasonable amount of Congressional presence and debate.

The motivation for bypassing normal rules and rushing the bill through without meaningful debate was articulated by the bill’s sponsor, Democrat Eliot Engel: “We cannot delay action on Syria any further. … If we don’t get this legislation across the finish line in the next few weeks, we are back to square one.”

The current urgency may be related to the election results since President-elect Donald Trump has spoken out against “regime change” foreign policy. As much as neoconservatives and their liberal-interventionist allies are critical of President Obama for not doing more in Syria, these Congressional hawks are even more concerned about the prospect of a President who might move toward peace and away from war."

Read the whole article.                              

Monday, November 28, 2016

"Western laws now clash with the moral nature of man"

An interview with Patriarch Kirill.

         


Wouldn't be nice to hear a Pope of Rome talk like this once in awhile?


Wake me when this is over

His Immense Eminence, Cardinal Lou Costello, is really a shining star in the Church firmament.

The Church's Clown Prince is again making a complete ass out of himself and demeaning the honor of the Church...again.




I know I am living through an awful recurring nightmare.  If I am wrong, please God, escort him out the door and out of our lives.

[h/t Dymphna's Road]