I've heard conflicting reports as to who shot the plane down -- Syria accidentally, France or Israel.

Rotten Israeli %X@#^*!  https://www.rt.com/news/438690-russia-israel-il20-blame/

 18 September 2018
The Late Hit on Judge Kavanaugh
Tuesday - September 18, 2018 at 12:55 am


Votes: 5.00 Stars!
Share Pat's Columns!
By Patrick J. Buchanan
Upon the memory and truthfulness of Christine Blasey Ford hangs the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, his reputation and possibly his career on the nation’s second-highest court.
And much more. If Kavanaugh is voted down or forced to withdraw, the Republican Party and conservative movement could lose their last best hope for recapturing the high court for constitutionalism.
No new nominee could be vetted and approved in six weeks. And the November election could bring in a Democratic Senate, an insuperable obstacle to the elevation of a new strict constructionist like Kavanaugh.
The stakes are thus historic and huge.
And what is professor Ford’s case against Judge Kavanaugh?
When she was 15 in the summer of ’82, she went to a beer party with four boys in Montgomery County, Maryland, in a home where the parents were away.
She says she was dragged into a bedroom by Brett Kavanaugh, a 17-year-old at Georgetown Prep, who jumped her, groped her, tried to tear off her clothes and cupped her mouth with his hand to stop her screams.
Only when Kavanaugh’s friend Mark Judge, laughing “maniacally,” piled on and they all tumbled off the bed, did she escape and lock herself in a bathroom as the “stumbling drunks” went downstairs. She fled the house and told no one of the alleged rape attempt.
Not until 30 years later in 2012 did Ford, now a clinical psychologist in California, relate, in a couples therapy session with her husband, what happened. She says she named Kavanaugh as her assailant, but the therapist’s notes of the session make no mention of Kavanaugh.
During the assault, says Ford, she was traumatized. “I thought he might inadvertently kill me.”
Here the story grows vague. She does not remember who drove her to the party. She does not say how much she drank. She does not remember whose house it was. She does not recall who, if anyone, drove her home. She does not recall what day it was.
She did not tell her parents, Ford says, as she did not want them to know she had been drinking. She did not tell any friend or family member of this traumatic event that has so adversely affected her life.
Said Kavanaugh in response, “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”
Mark Judge says it never happened.

Given the seriousness of the charges, Ford must be heard out. But she also needs to be cross-examined and have her story and character probed as Kavanaugh’s has been by FBI investigators as an attorney for the Ken Starr impeachment investigation of Bill Clinton, a White House aide to George Bush, a U.S. appellate judge and a Supreme Court nominee.
During the many investigations of Kavanaugh’s background, nothing was unearthed to suggest something like this was in character.
Some 65 women who grew up in the Chevy Chase and Bethesda area and knew Kavanaugh in his high school days have come out and spoken highly of his treatment of girls and women.
Moreover, the way in which all of this arose, at five minutes to midnight in the long confirmation process, suggests that this is political hardball, if not dirt ball.
When Ford, a Democrat, sent a letter detailing her accusations against Kavanaugh to her California congresswoman, Anna Eshoo, Ford insisted that her name not be revealed as the accuser.
She seemingly sought to damage or destroy the judge’s career behind a cloak of anonymity. Eshoo sent the letter on to Sen. Diane Feinstein, who held it for two months.
Excising Ford’s name, Feinstein then sent it to the FBI, who sent it to the White House, who sent it on to the Senate to be included in the background material on the judge.
Thus, Ford’s explosive charge, along with her name, did not surface until this weekend.
What is being done here stinks. It is a transparently late hit, a kill shot to assassinate a nominee who, before the weekend, was all but certain to be confirmed and whose elevation to the Supreme Court is a result of victories in free elections by President Trump and the Republican Party.
Palpable here is the desperation of the left to derail Kavanaugh, lest his elevation to the high court imperil their agenda and the social revolution that the Warren Court and its progeny have been able to impose upon the nation.
If Kavanaugh is elevated, the judicial dictatorship of decades past, going back to the salad days of Earl Warren, William Brennan, Hugo Black and “Wild Bill” Douglas, will have reached its end. A new era will have begun.
That is what is at stake.
The Republican Senate should continue with its calendar to confirm Kavanaugh before Oct. 1, while giving Ford some way to be heard, and then Kavanaugh the right to refute. Then let the senators decide.

Share Pat's Columns!

http://buchanan.org/blog/the-late-hit-on-judge-kavanaugh-130100

There’s the two ways Bellarmine believes a pope loses his office for manifest heresy: he either publicly separates himself from the Church, or he is determined to be a heretic by the Church, and legally declared to be separated from it.  

Right here is the problem.  If the Pope isn't separated from his office until a judgment by the Church that he has committed the crime of heresy, then the Church would be passing judgment on a sitting Pope.

So what exactly is the force of said declaration?

It's nothing more than a RECOGNITION by the Church that this has ALREADY HAPPENED.

Does this recognition require some kind of "legal" form?  Without the Pope, what kind of "legal" status can a declaration from the headless Church even have?  So this phrase you employ that the Pope would be "legally declared to be separated from [the Church]" is nonsense.

This recognition, by virtue of the infallibility of the Ecclesia Credens, would give the certainty of faith regarding this fact.  Until it reaches that point, however, there's room for "widespread doubt" ... that eventually requires resolution one way or another.

So this recognition by the Church does not ontologically effect deposition, but constitutes merely a recognition regarding the truth of it.  THAT is precisely why St. Robert Bellarmine states that it is the FACT ITSELF which effects the deposition.  But this position of S&S twists it into a variant on --- the declaration causes the fact which causes the deposition, so ultimately the declaration causes the deposition.

Bush Jr obviously wasn't going to put his Father in jail.  Obama and the Clintons are part of the same team as Daddy Bush.  Trump, in theory, isn't part of this team so that's why he's the first to pursue this justice. 

Can't you move and bring your mother and father with you?  I would pray and explore this possibility.

That's a good idea. Unless the parents are in a nursing home. However, if they have their own home, then living with them would be the most practical solution. It may be unpleasant to live with one's parents, but not as unpleasant as living in one's car in New York during the winter.