Casting Ruins

No-one sitting in the Tavern claimed to be aware of any psychics who have Cast the Runes to see 1000 years into the future. I am supposing that most of those psychics are too busy answering the phone at $4.99 a minute (shared with the phone companies) to nutty people - mostly women who scan the ads  at the back of women's magazines -  who want to know what their dead grandmother is thinking or whether their luck will turn this year and they snare a sugar-daddy.

So it has been up to the saner and more disciplined to peer into the future on the basis of the past. That is the best and most proven way of foretelling, in my experience. Long periods of human  societal development are notorious for surprises. Nevertheless certain themes reassert themselves from time to time, be they in the grand global scheme of things or in the more particular aspects of recessive genetic influences on our behaviours 

Such was the chatter in the US Room yesterday when a military chap sat and did a little peering into his tankard.

A Lt. Col. - which is a modest Rank and one able to see perhaps a little further into the Big Picture than the average trooper or escapee from Hilary's Village - was giving his view of a quite pressing matter. The Muslim Problem. It was apposite, frankly, as there is just one Anglophile country - Jim Zumwalt's  own - that has far exceeded the others in appointing a pro-Muslim leader intent on bringing about ancient prophesies. 

He made his view clear via what he had learned from someone even further up the Rank pole and presumably could see much further.

Lieutenant Colonel James Zumwalt is a retired Marine infantry officer who served in the Vietnam war, the 1989 intervention into Panama and Desert Storm. He is an internationally acclaimed best-selling author, speaker and business executive, he also currently heads a security consulting firm named after his father—Admiral Zumwalt & Consultants, Inc. I was quite pleased to  pull a pint of our finest Ale for him. Poor bugger had only had the USA's gnat's pee before.

He writes extensively on foreign policy and defense issues, having written hundreds of articles for various newspapers and magazines, including USA Today, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Washington Times, The LA Times, The Chicago Tribune, The San Diego Union, Parade magazine and others. His articles have covered issues of major importance, oftentimes providing readers with unique perspectives that have never appeared elsewhere. This has resulted, on several occasions, in his work being cited by members of Congress and entered into the US Congressional Record.

So, he cast the runes and foretold ruin.

Islam: What Lies Ahead for the Next Thousand Years?

Retired U.S. Army Major General Jerry Curry gleaned tremendous insights into the Muslim mindset through his military experiences, both as a junior and senior officer. These insights, ignored by our current president, need to be understood by the next one.

 http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/islam-what-lies-ahead-for-the-next-thousand-years/

As a junior officer, Curry developed friendships with his Arab military counterparts from among the allied nations. His friendship with one officer in particular prompted him to query why Arabs, repeatedly whipped by Israel in Middle East wars, continued to initiate them against their heavily out-numbered neighbor.

Acknowledging a poor winning record, the young Arab officer proudly stated, “But have you noticed that with each loss we get better?”

Actually, I had not noticed and frankly doubt that they have. But heck, I am only a Tavern-Keeper.

He then added a comment causing Curry to realize little hope exists for future change in the Arab mindset. 

“Sometime in the next thousand years,” the Arab said, “we will win.”

Such has been the Muslim mindset for 1,400 years since Islam’s founding, and so shall it remain. 

Why should we expect, after seventy generations of Muslim-on-Muslim and Muslim-on-non-Muslim violence that the religion’s ideology would differ today or, for that matter, any time within the next thousand years?

Another insight Curry shared occurred in the first Gulf War’s aftermath. A celebration was held as U.S. forces quickly and decisively defeated Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi army, assisted by the armies of our Arab allies. After the handshaking and hugging ended, Curry reported, a senior Arab general got serious. He wanted to set the record straight for the senior American generals present.

Having fought together and won, “you feel that makes us brothers,” he said. “But that is not the way it is in my world.”

The Arab general then explained an undeniable truth about the Muslim/non-Muslim relationship, warning:

“There will be no tomorrow for us jointly. No matter how much you have helped my country and you came and helped us when we desperately needed your help and no matter how friendly you feel toward us, we are still Muslims and you are still Christians. That means that in our eyes, we can never be brothers. I’m sorry, but to us, you will always be Infidels!”

Left unsaid by the Arab general but understood by those familiar with the Quran’s mandate is the fate to which infidels are thusly condemned: conversion to Islam or death.

This was not an Islamic extremist sharing his version of the Muslim world – this was an ally and “moderate” Muslim sharing true Islam’s version of it.

Recent opinion polls among Muslims in the West about our values reveal it is getting harder to distinguish the Islamist from the so-called peaceful “moderate majority.” The latter may well be a misnomer.

It is this mindset that should bring home to us the reality of the redacted (and still-kept-secret) 28 pages of the 9/11 Commission’s report detailing “moderate” Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the attacks that day.

We seem to turn a blind eye to this reality, even when heard directly from the mouth of Muslims who (we seek to rationalize) really are moderate, such as Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Yet he says of our efforts seeking to distinguish moderates from extremists:

“These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it.”

This reality aligns with Curry’s insights.

The cold reality deeply embedded in the Muslim mindset about non-Muslims is this:

Islam is Islam. The only difference between an Islamic extremist and a moderate is, while the former seeks to kill us now, the latter seeks to do it later. But Islam’s universal goal remains unchanged – a world free of non-Muslims, a global caliphate ruled by sharia.

And how do “moderate” Muslims seek to establish the caliphate over non-Muslim states?

This is to be done via “hijrah” or “stealth jihad by immigration.” We see it happening today in Europe as Muslim refugees flood democratic states, fully intending to colonize them. As they do so, they establish Muslim enclaves – rejecting assimilation so as to remain pure of Islamic thought, and creating “no-go zones” — building mosques adorned with minarets therein.

Don’t believe no-go zones exist? Ask the 60 Minutes film crew recently attacked in one in Sweden.

Non-Muslims welcome these mosques as centers of worship .....

Here I must interject that the vast majority of people in western countries do NOT welcome mosques. Our political 'Representatives' however who think they are our Leaders instead of our servants, do welcome them. Both the mosques and they need to go.

....but fail to understand their purpose goes beyond that. As Erdogan proclaimed in a 1997 speech quoting the Turkish poet Ziya Gokalp:

“The minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our barracks and the faithful our army.”

Erdogan’s word choice was not for drama, but for accuracy. The poet’s words were a specific reference to Prophet Muhammad’s first project in Medina – building a mosque serving as more than just a place of worship. It served also as a military base from which to launch wars against non-believers.

While well-known today that such mosques serve the very same purpose, we accept the religious function but ignore the military one. As such, these become breeding grounds of hatred toward non-Muslims, feeding yet another thousand-year cycle during which Muslim violence supposedly will bring the rest of the world to heel.

The Muslim mindset equates mosque-building in foreign lands to conquered territory. Non-Muslim tolerance of this gives Muslims expanded influence in foreign lands while ignoring Muslim marginalization of other religions within their own lands. 

Muslims view Western tolerance of Muslim intolerance as a tool for facilitating their effort for a global caliphate.

Non-Muslims preferring to turn a blind eye to the threat posed by Islam’s juggernaut need reflect upon Lebanon. It was once Christian-dominated  [sic] and considered the “Paris of the Middle East.” Lebanese [Christian and very human] tolerance opened the door to an influx of Palestinian refugees who, in coalition with a radical majority, now control the country.

Democracies are in store for a rocky road in the millennium ahead.

The sixteenth century Italian scientist Galileo Galilei noted, “All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.”

Tragically, while we have discovered the truth about Islam, we still fail to understand it.

We can only hope for one of those surprises that history throws like a pebble into the seer's bowl of water. It may come from an unexpected direction and even seem to stand no chance at all in affecting the course of history. Just as Christianity appeared.

That caused such a sea-change in the seer's bowl that the entire course of Human history was indeed changed, and for the better.

Then, of course, Islam arose in direct opposition to every specific of Christianity, complete with an opposing 'God'. It was almost as if someone had created Islam for that purpose.

Almost?

Drink deep. Look deeply.

Pax.

Answering Prayers

Late news below (at the end)

People have been praying since time before time, but these days it is a dangerous and expensive business, but only for Christians. The 'Authorities' in Oz seem to be taking their instructions from Saudi Arabia, via all points leftward.

It strikes me that the impost of fines for praying in the street is a new way of collecting taxes and I know just the sort of folk who could lead our Government out of debt.

Ah, but, these are the wrong prayers: or is that the right ones? They can block the streets with impunity. The cops just stand guard so that no-one interferes.


But if you are a little old lady and want to stand in peace and say a Rosary, they will give you an on-the-spot fine of $750.  Just think how much the gummunt could collect from this lot. I can see at least $50,000 worth there, enough to pay a garbage man for a year.

But the little old lady is in the frame instead. Matthew Biddle was in to tell.

FINED FOR PRAYING THE ROSARY

EIGHT Canberra Catholics, including a priest of the Archdiocese, received an official police warning on April 15 for allegedly breaching the exclusion zone around the ACT Health Centre in Civic.

The group, which has held weekly pro-life prayer vigils outside the facility for more than 17 years, was gathered outside PJ O’Reilly’s Irish Pub on West Row when police asked them to move elsewhere.

 http://cgcatholic.org.au/catholic-voice/blog/fined-praying-rosary/

Seventy-five-year-old Kerry Mellor decided not to move from the location, and was consequently fined $750.

The Health (Patient Privacy) Amendment Act 2015 Bill, introduced in the ACT Legislative Assembly by Greens Minister Shane Rattenbury and passed on October 29, established the exclusion zones, which came into effect on March 22.

The Bill prohibits behaviour that attempts to stop a person from entering the building, as well as “a protest, by any means… in relation to the provision of abortions” in the facility.

Mr Mellor, who has been attending the prayer vigils for the past 12 years, told Catholic Voice he was convinced the police had made a mistake.

“We do not believe that we are protesting,” he said. “We are praying, which is directed exclusively to almighty God and his Blessed Mother. It’s not a protest, it’s a petition that God will act to change the hearts and minds of people.

So, a seventy five year old lady is a huge threat to public order and must be fined $750. The muslims can block the entire street and nary a cent is raised.

Victoria has followed suit. The ACT now Victoria. Tasmania has a lot to answer for being the first Godless mob off the block and off their blocks.

Marcus L'Estrange was fuming, nursing his pint. He has been there.

The Bubble Zone 

(around abortuaries)

At the beginning of 2015, the Victorian ALP Government rightly removed the Coalition's "move on" laws from the statute book. Rightly so, as the laws were intended really to prevent unions protesting. The laws were seen as an unfair restriction on free speech, with Attorney General, Martin Pakula, proclaiming that: 

"Victoria doesn't need Bjelke-Petersen-style laws designed to silence dissent and outlaw peaceful protests." 

He was not the only one to think and say that.

At year's end, a total back flip by Victorian Labor with its MPs denied a free vote and totally under the thumb of Emily's List. Why not a conscience vote? After all the issue, like 2008, was about abortion on demand and not about a mother’s health.

Emily's List is of course, the Feminazi inroad to subvert rational politics.  Wimmin, you see, look after and speak for all women, whether they like it or not.

The Orwellian entitled bill, The Public Health (Safe Access) Amendment Bill, creates 150-meter zones around facilities that provide abortions on demand (abortions for non-medical reasons), making it unlawful to engage in acts within the zones that may 'cause anxiety' or distress to mothers and others entering or leaving the premises. It came into effect in May. 

The Victorian Parliament has made offers of charity (e.g. finance), criminal acts and voted effectively to try and end the ability of pro-lifers to offer help to mothers entering / leaving abortuaries. 

Proponents of the bill presented false charges against The Helpers of God's Precious Infants (a group that prays and offers help outside abortuaries), claiming they harass and intimidate women. 

In reality The Helpers pray for the mothers and babies, while one or two experienced life advocates offer help to the mothers entering the premises, speaking quietly and compassionately to interested mothers. 

The principal venue in Melbourne where the alleged harassment is supposed to happen is the Fertility Control Clinic (FCC) in Wellington Parade, East Melbourne. The Helpers have been there for 23 years. Since 1972 over 300,000 young Australians, or 20 plus per day, have had their lives cruelly terminated at this abortuary alone. Clearly a massacre of stunning proportions. 

Over the years, I have been there many times, and have never witnessed any harassment or intimidation. If such behaviour occurred (and the people making the charges allege it has been the norm for over 23 years), there would have been many court convictions. 

In fact there have been none. Repeat none.

Not only this, the clinic has refused many suggestions to install CCTV equipment to capture any activity. But no, they haven't. Why not? Simply put, there is no adverse activity to capture.

We have learnt that there is a 'Safe Street' camera on the light pole on the opposite, MCG side, of the road from the FCC and these images are available to the Victoria Police. Last year The Helpers were denounced in the media by the Lord Mayor, Robert Doyle. He said that we were "vile" and "gaming the system", insinuating that we would only behave ourselves when Council Officers came down to check on us. Seems he could have checked his camera and shown our claimed misbehaviour to the news. Why didn't he?

In the parliamentary debates, The Helpers were maligned, being accused of behaviour they never indulge in, and without any evidence being produced to support the charges.

Comment from the police is that our actions over the past two decades have been carried out lawfully when it was acknowledged that the disputes between the abortion business and The Helpers has bubbled on for many years without requiring Police intervention. So we know that this new law has come about because those who support and profit from abortion have not been able to find us guilty and now need to move the gold posts. 

This legislation was based on a heap of lies and driven by the profitable Fertility Control Clinic. Abortion kills preborn babies in a very cruel and painful way. The UN Rights of the Child states, "The child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth." Why are many MPs, the abortuaries and the bulk of the media opposed to the UN Rights of the Child? 

The FCC abortuary case in The Supreme Court last year against The Melbourne City Council for alleged failure to 'deal with us', failed spectactually. The Judge virtually found it was a case of 'no case to answer’.

A old man too has been fingered by the police. With that nice lady from the Sex Party turning her back on justice, kindness and care.

Police have questioned an elderly man who flouted new laws aimed at stopping protesters from harassing women outside abortion clinics.

Not that he was harrassing women you understand.  Fiona doesn't look harrassed to me.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/women-avoid-prolife-protesters-for-the-first-time-in-decades-20160502-gok1gl.html 

The man was spoken to by two police officers after reports he was praying outside the Fertility Control Clinic in East Melbourne about 4pm.

Meanwhile the women continue to go to the abortion places, the Abortuaries, and continue to suffer, but now without a final kind person whith whom to talk. They will suffer for a very long time. Stacy Massey told us in clear and emotional terms.

CNN: Special report features hundreds of women who regret their abortions

To coincide with the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade earlier this year, CNN asked its readers two questions: 

Have you had an abortion? 

How do you feel about it now?

CNN had a whopping 539 iReports filed in response. 

 http://liveactionnews.org/cnn-special-report-features-hundreds-of-women-who-regret-their-abortions/

Hundreds of stories poured in, as women shared their choices, their reasons, their grief, and rarely, their satisfaction. One thing was made abundantly clear by CNN’s efforts: women regret their abortions. And they need to talk about them.

Women named their stories out of a deep sense of heartache:

Until we meet again

Soul-deep ache

Self-medicating did not heal my pain

What I had destroyed was not just tissue

Abortion is a forever punishment for women

I never got over it

Broken.

 The pain of abortion stays with women for a lifetime. 

If only women would read such stories – hundreds of them – before making a choice for abortion. If only women did not have to look back in pain, regretting an unchangeable choice.

If only, instead, they could look ahead to a bright future without death because they know the facts, know the heartache, and know the grief without having to experience them first hand.

These are the stories we must share. These are the stories we must shout from the rooftops. These are the stories that tell the truth. As one woman titled her article, “Because abortion affects everything!”

Friends drive each other to the clinic and then never speak about it again. This ‘surgery’ literally changes a person’s life forever… and we are suddenly mute! …

My name is Stacy Massey and I am the President and Founding Partner of Abortion Recovery InterNational (ARIN), an international association of peer, professional and pastoral counselors helping families work through the emotional, psychological and spiritual pain of abortion.

We receive over 100 requests PER DAY from individuals and families looking for after abortion help. Over 250,000 hurting people have contacted us just in the last 5 years.

One simple, quick and legal abortion can impact 40-50 people in a lifetime.  Abortion effects everyone! …

The death of my own two children to abortion prompted me to “do something” to help others.  Abortion trauma does not discriminate. It doesn’t matter how much money you make, where you live, the color of your skin or which gender you claim. The pain of abortion is everywhere.

 A mother’s child – dead or alive – is never far from her thoughts. 

Over and over, in CNN’s iReports, women expressed pain that only a mother could understand. Some shared horrific stories of forced abortions; others shared their long journeys to forgiveness; many told of grief that has never left them. Tricia wrote:

"Abortion is sold as a woman’s right. A solution to unwanted pregnancy. A quick procedure that once over, never has to be thought about again. I chose abortion at 18 years old. Now, 37 years later, I certainly have not forgotten. 

We are told that a woman has the right to control her own body as if abortion is a means of control. Once chosen, abortion creates its own affects. The physical, emotional, and psychological effects are beyond our control. Abortion does what it is designed to do….Kill and destroy; abrubtly halt an ongoing process… the process of LIFE. No woman is ever freed by abortion. …

Abortion is NOT for women it is AGAINST us."

No statement could be more true.

I need to pull a few pints. 

Our prayers ARE answered but not in ways some like. 

Grace, served in the Tavern and supplied by Himself, the Great Supplier of Everything, is what we mortals who have Free Will need.  It is the answer He gives. He is not going to point a Big Finger from the sky and 'make everything right' let alone kick legislators off their seats and break policemen's pencils.  He gives us the Grace of strength to bear witness, to stand and pray for the babies and the mothers and all those involved who 'know not what they do'.

So, drink. If you feel the need to Pray then go to your nearest 'Forbidden Zone' and pray in defiance.

It is Tuesday. That is where I was today. Outside the abortuary in Hobart.

Oh, and if you come across a mob of Muslims in the street, wailing and prostrating, give them something to wail about. Kick an arse or two.

Late news.

A politician in Victoria stood up in Parliament today.... Rachel Carling-Jenkins.

Today at Question Time, I asked why this elderly man was moved on by police for quietly praying, when the statements made in parliament were clear that quiet prayer, holding a prayer book or reading the Bible were not seen as committing an offence. The question has been taken on notice for the Minister for Police, from whom I will receive a detailed response, and I also hope to receive a copy of Victoria Police’s operational guidelines on this law, along with an assurance that they match the intent of the bill as conveyed previously within parliament.

Good woman. 

Pax

The Strategic Response.

Things happen regularly for which we develop a strategic response. A 'Coping Strategy'.  Some take a little thought and planning before we can turn them into an effective habit which 'flows'.  After all, time is money for many. Let me tell you of one.

In the Tavern behind the bar in the P&B is a telephone. People call in, often to talk to someone having a pint. They are easy to deal with - simply call the chap over and hand over the phone. Then I get on with serving Ale. I can be quite busy serving my customers.

But occasionally I get a dreaded Telemarketer.  Four people awaiting their pints; me pulling carefully and topping them nicely with the foamy part; and this interruption. Should I be rude? Should I be attentive in a warm and Christian manner? Or should I have fun?

Heck, even grisly old Knights like to have fun and I don't have a Court Jester handy any more.

To show me how it can be done, a customer took the phone from my hand yesterday evening and answered for me. 

Messing with Telemarketers: That's Going To Cost You...

*ring*

Me: Hello?

Them: Hello sir, I am calling from *(A Market Research Company)*. Would you be willing to take a short study with us?

Me: Hold on a mo....

I handed the phone over.... 

He: Absolutely! We here at Tavern Consulting are always ready to provide opinion based data to our clients!

Them: Um... Ok? Anyway, the survey just takes about 5 minutes and when finished you are entered into a drawing to win a 3 day vacation to Cancun.

He: That will not be needed. Our usual remuneration per our standard service agreement is all that is required. However please be aware that our lowest billable period is one hour and this call will be billed for an hour of service even if only five minutes is used.

Them: No sir, this will only take five minutes not an hour.

He: I understand, however your firm will still be billed the minimum hour as per our services agreements. That comes to $225. How would you like to take care of this today? Do you have billing set up with us already? If so I just need the corporate code for your company.

Them: I don't have that... This only enters you for a trip sir.

He: Ok, that's alright sir. We can set this up on a company credit card for a small fee. Your new total will be $257.98, sir. Go ahead and give me the credit card number sir.

Them: What credit card?! We aren't paying $257 for this!

He: Oh, you are absolutely right sir! I am so sorry! We are talking after 6pm  so you are correct that we are in "premium time". That is correspondingly higher. You total will be $517.54. Thank you for reminding me!

Them: What?! No... No... We can call you after 6pm. The law says we can call until 9pm.

He: Tavern Consulting prides itself on meeting our customers needs 24 hours a day sir, but between 6pm and 6am is premium time. I am ready for that credit card number now sir.

Them: Look, I just have the calls routed to me. I didn't call you, a computer did.

He: Oh, I see.

Them: Yeah, so can we just get to the survey?

He: Yes, of course sir, but I will have to add our auto-dialer fee to the charges. It's due to our consultants time being so valuable that we do this to keep them from having their time wasted. With that fee your new total is $759.99. What are the first four digits of the card you would like us to use, please?

Them: Hold on for my supervisor please.

He: Ok.

He asked for a top-up. This might be in for the long haul. On the other hand..... 

*5 minutes later*

Supervisor: Hello sir, I understand their is a problem?

He: None at all. Your total charges for one hour of premium time consulting with auto-dialer charge and supervisor level respondent fee with credit card processing is $1163.67. Will this be on a MasterCard, Visa, or American Express today?

Supervisor: For what?!

He: Consulting on your survey of course. What method of payment will you be using today?

*click*

Me: Hahahahahah.

I recommend you trying it next time someone calls with a 'survey' or trying to sell you something.

Personally I like to let them say who they are and announce m'self as 'North Thames, Coal and Coke', and try to sell them a few tons of nutty slack.  But the lesson above has got to be worth a try. Just needs a fee list next to the phone as an aide.

Of course one can go to the extent that the infamous Tom Mabe did.  You can look him up yourselves. Suffice to say, you have to be a fine actor to do it right. There are folk who have tried to copy but don't quite pull it off.

Meanwhile here's some ideas. The 'wanting the product' hook can be fun, and when others are 'in on it' you can give them a go too.

Of course, the poor sap trying to sell you something gets his time wasted, which is a bit of a concern to conscience. But not a worry at all when they are trying to cheat you. The Scammers deserve no mercy. Listen to this young woman, who can come and drink in the Tavern anytime, as she experly wraps a scammer around her finger.

Now, if she did come in to the Tavern I might just have to have a few words with her about her bad language and taking God's name in vain. I might even have to put her over my knee.  Instant penance improves the palate.

OK, You have some new ideas. Maybe you can share your own here too.

Pax

Hating Christians

All Religions are NOT the same, despite claims that they are. For example there is only one religion that preaches that we must love our enemies. Christianity. And by the Lord Harry, to use a military phrase, there is a target-rich environment out there to love, for Christians seem to have enemies all over the shop. All other religions either do not give a damn or preach death and destruction to their enemies. Some even go out of their way to make enemies to hate.  Christians top their lists.

And I am not refering to localised areas like the middle east where Christians are being eradicated with extreme violence by Muslims with barely a western political voice being raised in protest, let alone any attempt being made to stop it. 

No, I am thinking more of the marxist-dominated media and polity in the Anglophile countries. True, there are few political voices specifically denigrating Christians out loud as a matter of  National Policy apart say from perhaps that gross chap Obama who seems to praise Muslims and condemn Christians with every other speech. But the rest of the Prime Ministers and Premiers, Presidents and Pissants fall over forwards to present their backsides to the Muslims, abjuring us to 'accept' them, invite them in,  take them in, fund their Mosques and protect their sensibilities from  the rational 'Islamophobia' of western peoples that arises from Islamic behaviour. 

It is happening in the broad and in the particular, and two chaps stood in the bars, one is the US room and one in the Oz room to point out instances. First up was David Limbaugh. 

Demonizing Christianity as a Global Menace

Can you believe anyone even organizes a "white privilege" conference these days — seven years into Barack Obama's presidency? Well, you'd better believe it, and you should also know that at least one of the speakers at this conference is militantly Christophobic. 

http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/david-limbaugh/demonizing-christianity-global-menace 

The 17th annual White Privilege Conference was held in Philadelphia from April 15 to 17. Blake Neff of The Daily Caller attended the conference and reported that "activist and author Paul Kivel" actually claimed that "almost every dysfunction in society, from racism and sexism to global warming and a weak economy, is united by the ideology of 'Christian hegemony.'"

Kivel drivel.

Kivel speaks drivel, as David demonstrates. 

What's the problem, you ask? Well, in the United States, according to Kivel, between 7,000 and 10,000 predominantly white Christian men run the major institutions and "colonize our mind" with Christianity's core ideas, which leads to most of the world's problems.

Kivel identified three particularly severe problems in the modern world that are caused or worsened by Christianity. First are wars in the Middle East, which he says are a result of Christianity's effort to spread Western ideas and influence.

The Bible does direct Christians to spread the "good news" to the ends of the earth (Matthew 28:18-20). But Christianity started in the Middle East and spread outward from there. By A.D. 100, the Christian church had been established in regions throughout the Mediterranean, largely because of the Apostle Paul's missionary journeys (Acts 16-20) and the evangelism of Peter, John and others.

The Middle East has switched hands countless times throughout history — Romans, Byzantines, Persians, Seljuk Turks, Mongols, Ottomans, British, French, Italians and others.

Perhaps Kivel had in mind America's wars with Iraq in the past quarter-century and our effort to plant self-rule in the region. 

Though the wisdom of our nation-building effort can certainly be debated, our involvement is hardly the reason for the age-old conflicts in the Middle East, which, in all likelihood, will continue as long as the world does.

The second problem Kivel attributed to Christianity is the economic destruction it has caused because, wrote Neff, "it provides that God-like 'invisible hand' that supposedly drives market forces within a flawed capitalist system."

Hmmmm. Nowhere else have I seen the 'invisible hand' of the Market, described as God-like. Still, straw men are the favourite men for leftists, especially the 'Patriarchal' straw one. 

It is tragic that the left has successfully rewritten history to demonize capitalism as the source of poverty rather than the great engine of unprecedented prosperity it has been for the United States, the Western world and beyond.

Kivel identified the third problem as Christianity's conflict with "global warming," wrote Neff, "because under Christianity mankind has dominion over the Earth, rather than requiring that humans treat the Earth itself as 'sacred.'" Interestingly, Kivel is lexiconically challenged, as he failed to use the proper terminology for this vexing menace — "climate change."

Hmmmm again. I have not seen even Christian churches speak out against the great AGW con. To the contrary. Another deception. 

The Bible gives man dominion over all other living things (Genesis 1:28), but it does not sanction man's abuse of the environment or other creatures. The Bible does not exhort mankind to deify "Mother Earth" as radical environmentalists do. But it does promote prudent stewardship, from the parable of the talents (Matthew 25:14-30) to God's commanding that the fields and vineyards be sown and harvested for six years but left fallow in the seventh year to replenish the soil's nutrients (Exodus 23:10-11 and Leviticus 25:1-7).

Christianity, argued Kivel, also orients us to distinguish between good and evil, which forces us to adopt a "with us or against us" mentality. "There's nothing inherently good or bad about the weather or about people," Kivel insisted.

Here we have to count the lies and attribute them. The Prince of Lies seems a likely candidate for Kivel's drivel. 

I'll concede that though the weather can be a destructive force, it is not capable of good or evil. But yes, the Bible definitely distinguishes between good and evil, and it is quite clear that all men are fallen.

Next, Kivel made the irrational leap that to distinguish between good and evil leads to condemnation of various things as worthy of destruction. From my perspective, however, 

it is not Christians but leftists such as Kivel who are most intolerant toward people and ideas of other religions or secularists.

Finally, Kivel castigated Christianity's "hierarchical" views that place "God over people, men over women, parents over children, (and) white people over people of color," which, in his view, inevitably leads to systems that justify or glorify oppression.

The Bible does — big surprise — place God (the Creator) over man (the creature), and it places parents over their children for the purpose of raising them through their formative years — an idea no doubt shocking to such leftists. 

But it does not teach that there are differences in human dignity; all people (male and female) are created in God's image (Genesis 1:27), which is intrinsically irrespective of race. 

It is rich for Kivel to argue that the Bible glorifies racial oppression when Christians were the leaders in the anti-slavery movement.

Before you dismiss all this as the thinking of a fringe leftist, please consider that it is a logical extension of "progressive" thinking that liberals, especially in the universities and the media, engage in every day. Indeed, it would be intellectually dishonest to deny that leftist race- and gender-baiting, as well as capitalism-bashing, permeate our university curricula throughout the United States. Everything involves identity categories — race, gender, income and the rest. Ironically, the left's obsession over race, gender and the like tends to diminish, rather than promote, human dignity and individuality.

Despite the skewed thinking and propaganda of leftists such as Kivel, Christianity, as abundant evidence demonstrates, has been a force of good in this world and continues to be.

It was Andy Bolt's turn next. He is almost a lone voice trying to determine the difference between truth and lies, clarity and obfusction in a long running and nasty sore that inhabits the Oz political and Social marshland. The Child Abuse Bogyman.

Kivel has big balls. He prefers the Big Lie and goes after every Christian for all the ills of the world. In Oz, the left is after just one, and then spreads the calumny to all the others by association. And it isn't the plethora of 'christians' that they have in the USA, with shades from lily white to the black-hearted businessmen pastors who rook millions from the sentimentally gullible. In Oz we have Catholics and 'other ranks'. In the military there are the 'Catholics' and  the O.Ds, the 'other denominations'.  The Catholics are the Officers.

Andy was almost alone in following objectively the saga of Cardinal Pell, who many will know was the main Catholic Churchman to tackle the scandal of abuse by priests.  Other news reporters took and continue to take a biased and condemnatory stance, even to the point of presenting only one side of the story and tailoring the facts to fit their agenda.

He is particularly incenced by the attitudes of the leftist media which includes our National Broadcaster, the ABC. Not just he this time but Gerard Henderson too. 

Do not trust what Marr and the ABC just said about Pell

I have said it before: 

CARDINAL George Pell is the victim of one of the most vicious witch hunts to disgrace this country. 

It is shameful. Disgusting. Frightening.

The latest appalling example?  Not surprisingly, it’s from David Marr and the ABC.

 http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/do_not_trust_what_marr_and_the_abc_just_said_about_pell/

Gerard Henderson explains: 

Gerard Henderson

""At issue was the question as to whether Cardinal George Pell – when an auxiliary bishop in Melbourne in the late 1980s/early 1990s – had been deceived by the Catholic Education Office (CEO) in Melbourne with respect to the pedophile priest Peter Searson."" 

Pell had given evidence that the Catholic Education Office, which knew of Searson’s history of offending, had kept much of that information from him when he was the auxilliary Bishop in Melbourne. 

He said his boss, Archbishop Frank Little, had also kept information from him while shielding Searson. Little and the Catholic Education Office, incidentally, were hostile to Pell as a conservative.

Note that. Even within the Catholic Church there are 'political' divisions which mirror the secular sphere. Golly, I wonder how that came about !! 

On April 27, four former members of the Catholic Education Office gave evidence - Monsignor Thomas Michael Doyle, Peter Charles Annett, Allan David Dooley and Catherine Agnes Briant.

Henderson continues: 

""It is not surprising that all four did not agree that they had deliberately withheld information about Searson’s sexual crimes from (then) Bishop Pell. This led to the following excited report by David Marr in The Guardian Australia:""

Now four retired executives of the Catholic Education Office have come to the royal commission to describe their shock, surprise, disappointment and anger at Pell’s evidence… 

All four men and women said the same thing: there was no conspiracy to deceive Pell, no understanding to keep the lid on the Searson scandal, and no reason to soft-pedal the ongoing crisis in Doveton. They wanted Searson gone but Pell was no help.

Introducing the ABC PM program on Wednesday, presenter Mark Colvin made the following comment:

Mark Colvin: At the child sexual abuse royal commission, several witnesses have contradicted George Pell’s evidence that he wasn’t briefed on the behaviour of a paedophile priest in the late 1980s and early ‘90s.

Last month, Cardinal Pell testified that he’d been deceived by officials of Melbourne’s Catholic Education Office. He alleged they wanted to cover up concerns about Father Peter Searson. One witness today said the Cardinal was wrong. Another said he was angered by the evidence of Australia’s most senior Catholic…

The reporting by both Mr Marr and Mr Colvin was completely misleading. 

Moreover, neither reported that not one of the four witnesses said that they had informed George Pell at the time about Searson’s crimes with respect to children. 

- Monsignor Doyle said that he “did not remember ever having a discussion or attending any briefings of Bishop Pell concerning Father Searson when he [Pell] was a Regional Bishop” in Melbourne.

- Mr Dooley said he never raised Searson’s sexual offending with (then) Bishop Pell.

- Mr Annett said that he never raised any matter concerning Searson or the Catholic Education Office with (then) Bishop Pell.

- Ms Briant said that she had never met George Pell or attended any meetings at which he was present. Moreover, Ms Briant said that, when employed by the CEO, she was not aware of any allegations of child sexual abuse with respect to Searson in the Doveton parish. 

The most telling part of the proceedings – ignored by David Marr, Mark Colvin and other journalists who reported the proceedings – was the following exchange between Sam Duggan [Pell’s barrister] and Monsignor Doyle (who acknowledged that he and George Pell disagreed on some issues of theology). 

MR DUGGAN: Monsignor, my name is Duggan and I represent Cardinal Pell. Monsignor, as I understand your evidence, your view, from about the mid-1980s, was that Searson should be removed from his parish; is that right?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: Yes, certainly.

MR DUGGAN: And in fact, both you and other personnel at the Catholic Education Office had recommended to the Archbishop [Frank Little] decisive action to remove him?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: Yes.

Colvin, ignoring the evidence.

MR DUGGAN: And notwithstanding those recommendations, for more than a decade nothing was done by Archbishop Little to either remove him or suspend him; is that right?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: That’s correct.

MR DUGGAN: Can I suggest to you that the main problem was that the power to remove resided with one man – do you accept that?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: I accept that, yes.

MR DUGGAN: And unfortunately, it wasn’t you because you would have removed him; is that right?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: That’s correct.

MR DUGGAN: Now, you were still the director of the education office in 1996 when Archbishop Pell took over [from Frank Little]?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: That’s correct.

MR DUGGAN: And you would have been aware that, in the first months of him taking that office, he appointed the Independent Commissioner?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: That’s correct.

MR DUGGAN: And one of the roles of the Independent Commissioner was to investigate complaints of sexual abuse by priests?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: That’s correct.

MR DUGGAN: And one of the first priests to be referred to the Independent Commissioner was Searson, wasn’t he?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: I would think so, but I couldn’t say that definitely, that I knew that.

MR DUGGAN: Well, do you recall this: Archbishop Pell took over in mid-1996 and by March 1997 Searson had been suspended?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: That’s correct. That’s right.

MR DUGGAN: That was the sort of decisive action, wasn’t it, that you had been waiting a decade to occur?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: That’s right.

MR DUGGAN: So you must have been both pleased and relieved not only for yourself but, more importantly, for the people of Holy Family Doveton, that that action had been taken by Archbishop Pell; is that right?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: Mmm, yes.

MR DUGGAN: Now, had Archbishop Pell been the Archbishop of Melbourne in the mid 1980s and you recommended to him, as you did Archbishop Little, that Searson be removed, based on those events, would you agree that Searson would likely have been removed a decade earlier?

MONSIGNOR DOYLE: Yes.

MR DUGGAN: I have no further questions, thank you. 

Now, you would think that any reasonable reporter would draw attention the all of that, for simply transparency's sake. But not the ABC. Not the lefties who are out to destroy the Catholic Cardinal.  Ignore the evidence and paint him as an abuser. 

Omar wrote it better!

Neither Justice Peter McClellan nor Counsel Assisting Gail Furness SC queried Monsignor Doyle’s testimony…

None of this evidence was covered by David Marr in The Guardian Australia or Mark Colvin on PM or by other journalists who reported the proceedings. 

This suggests that George Pell is a target of so many journalists not because of what he did or did not do – but.. 

because he is a conservative Catholic of traditional belief.

I apologise to Henderson for lifting so much of his post, but what he reveals is important and the media misreporting needs maximum exposure.

You see, once the ABC is part of a Leftist witch hunt to destroy someone it is almost impossible to get the other side of story through to its massive audience. 

Injustice is done and is almost impossible to remedy, given the size, overwhelming bias and groupthink of the ABC.

Not to mention the massive budget coerced from the taxpayer.

This old Tavern Keeper has had his share of enemies over a long life. I say, 'Father forgive them'  even though I know for a fact that many knew exactly what they were doing. But by crikey it is hard to be forgiving of ones enemies; nevertheless we much start with that intent and work toward it as best we can if we are ever to be Saints.

And, of course, defend ourselves and our reputations.

For a Catholic (and for other Christians too) it is worth asking.... If you were arrested and charged with being a Catholic, would there be enough evidence to convict you?

Try to answer that soon, because it looks as though it will not be long before you are arrested. 'Tis better to be hanged as a Saint than a sinner. The genocide of Christians in the middle east is not likely to be confined to that wasteland.

Pax.