JULY 15,
Group: Members
Posts: 317
Member No.: 1429
Joined: 30-April 10
 | Are the holy places really “protected” and “safe” in the Holy Land?
The SSPX lawyer K (Krah) states the following (see beginning of thread):
An Interview with "He who shall remain nameless"
By Robert J. Siscoe POSTED: 10/27/12
REMNANT COLUMNIST
“We have, currently, more Pilgrimages to the Holy Land than ever in the past. We had more in 2012 than in 2011, and more in 2011 than in 2010, and in 2010 we had more than ever since. That means, the holy places are open; they get protected. They are safe, and there is money invested. And the Catholic Church gets tax benefits by the Israeli government in that country….. And so I have absolutely no problem to say that I have a positive attitude towards the state of Israel.”
However, the following article states what is really happening there:
http://americanfreepress.net/?p=5183
Bethlehem in Danger July 24, 2012 AFP
• Holy Site deemed to be in danger from Israeli extremists
• Bethlehem city officials plead with UN for urgent help
By Peter Strahl
On June 29, 2012, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) declared Bethlehem’s Church of the Nativity and Pilgrimage Route to be a “cultural world heritage site in danger,” according to reports from Catholic websites, German news agency Kreuz.net and the Palestinian news agency Ma’an. Bethlehem, of course, is the birthplace of Jesus and is home to the oldest Christian communities on Earth.
The UN action has great meaning for the local population, who consider that the world should protect the holy site from the constant ravages wrought by extremist Jєωs and the Israeli Defense Forces.
Thirteen of 21 UNESCO member nations, including the Palestinian Autonomous Authority, voted in favor of the declaration. Israel and its vassals, including the United States, Germany and three other countries, voted against the measure, while two other members abstained.
UNESCO’s action was requested as “urgently necessary” by Bethlehem’s city officials, many Christian and Muslim organizations and thousands of inhabitants, including priests, professors, artists, students and workers. The petition, according to Kreuz.net, declares: “States, like the member-nations of UNESCO, could make a clear difference and invest in peace, by recognizing the state of Palestine within the 1967 borders and supporting our efforts for the preservation of our city of Bethlehem, by placing the city on the list of endangered cultural world heritage.”
According to the letter, “The old city of Bethlehem, with its churches, repeatedly has been a victim of Israeli military attacks—as in the year 1967 and again in 2001 and 2002.” In one of the 2001 attacks, Israeli soldiers fired rockets unprovoked into a children’s hospital, in an act of wanton destruction and murder.
The mainstream media in the United States refuses to cover these atrocities or the ongoing genocide committed by the Israeli occupation government and its Jєωιѕн citizens against Palestinians. In addition, most Christian charities fail to acknowledge the suffering of Christians and Muslims, with a few notable exceptions such as the Franciscan Custody of the Holy Land.
_________________________________________________________________
5. Krah | Posted: Oct 29 2012, 02:32 PM
| |
Newbie
Group: Members
Posts: 4
Member No.: 1522
Joined: 28-December 10
| As my interview has caused some discussions on IA (as well as on Cathinfo), please allow me to give a short review:
1) In 2010, the stalking campaign against me began. Now it might be clear that non of the accussations then made is true. Until now I didn´t receive any apology by one of the involved persons.
2) Instead, those who drove the campaign do continue to stalk, slur and slander. Example: On Cathinfo, my stalking community now try to use my Facebook "Likes" against me. Imagine, someone has plenty of books, a huge library, including classical literature, philosphy etc. Now you may find within this collection of books one or two that might be questionable. Some time later, even these few books are replaced. Nontheless, you start a campaign gainst the booklover, stating that these one or two books show his true nature, blending out all the other books, the big picture. Exactly this takes place now. Oh, what wackos!
3) More, Mr. "Hollingsworth" from Post Falls helds the opinion, that he has the right to defame with impunity. I don´t agree with him. That´s why I wrote him. And that´s why I consulted a lawyer-friend in NYC, who at the end of the day told me about the costs of a defamation file against the Mister from Idaho (whose address I know) and asked me, whether I really want to invest this amount. I didn´t want, because of the simple fact that a successful file against one of my stalkers would not stop the others.
4) I am once again impressed by the amount of "iudaeophobia" - thanks to Mr. McFarland for this great term - among my stalkers. Mr. McFarland is fully right, when stating:
| QUOTE | | If I were a little old Jєωιѕн lady, it wouldn't take much of this stuff to get me to send off a big fat check to the ADL. |
Look, organizations like the ADL have a certain purpose: attacking antisemite behaviour. I can hardly criticize them for doing their job. People like my stalkers are doing the job of those who want to blame the SSPX. They give a bad example.
Pope Pius XI. stated very clearly: "The Church has no share in anti-semitism." Neither has the SSPX, nor I. The German bourgeoisie´s gravest failure in history was to be bystanders when the nαzιs discriminated and later massmurdered their Jєωιѕн neighbors, colleagues, and friends. You won´t find any German of class who is standing aside when again losers try to compensate their inferiority complexes on cost of other people.
5) This leads to my final point, and another lawyer, Mr. Wansbutler.
| QUOTE | | This interview confirms, crystal clearly, that Max "He who shall remain nameless" represents the "moderate" "respectable" new face of the S.S.P.X |
What, Mr. Wansbutler, is so bad with being "moderate" and "respectable"? Look, the SSPX (and the whole Traditional Catholic movement) were badly treated after Vatican 2. Respect was refused, which was a grave unjust. Now, by solid work, by staying devote and pious, by charity, by the moderate and prudent leadership of the Superiors and by the example all those many faithful give, by their clean life, their work, their positive attitude - We are good people! - we reach the point in which society can´t resist the respect any longer. We see the fruits of staying loyal to faith and tradition, what includes prudence and moderation. And now you are coming and criticizing it?
There are people in our ranks who were attrackted not by the faith, but by the unjust situation of being outcast. This is why, in the words of Bishop Fellay, "we are attractive for weirdos, although we don´t want that." Outsiders love to be outcast. For them, the SSPX is not the arch of the faith, but the refugium in which they hope to be protected from real life. They want to be sect instead of church. They don´t see the unjust stage of being outcasted by the Vatican 2-authorities as a burden, but as a chance. They don´t want to overcome the crisis, as the crisis is somehow comfortable to them. That, Mr. Wansbutler, is why you and your fellows are so against being "respected"; isn´t it? And that´s the very reason for the current campaign against the SSPX, represented by its superiors, of which the campaign against me was a side tone.
That said, I hope the differences are clear. I am just a Catholic family father. I live my life, I take care on my family, I serve my country, fullfill the laws, pay taxes, and I don´t think that being respected and successful is somehow mad. I know most of us do it the same way. And thus I am quite relaxed about this campaign. Everyone knows what kind of people are behind it - the ones we don´t need, but who need our charity.
6. TELEPHORUS
And notice praise for the "purpose" of the ADL.
The ADL that supports child murder of fully term babies as a "right"
An absolutely satanic organization.
ADL Disappointed With Supreme Court Ruling On Partial Birth Abortion Act
Oh wait - it's being a "whackjob" to say that, isn't it? It's "antisemitic" to say these Jєωs defend child murder as a right!
7. Neelyann
| QUOTE (NWansbutterEsq @ Oct 29 2012, 02:32 PM) |
As for the threats of law suits, etc., I'd be interested to know what traditional moral theology says on the subject of Catholics using the civil courts against one another. It seems to me disproportionate to financially ruin a man and his family because you don't like what he wrote about you on the internet. It's not like I haven't had to put up with attacks on my person, posting under my real name as I do. A certain J. Christopher Pryor especially has called me a neo-nαzι and αnтι-ѕємιтє, but I wouldn't dream of suing him because I would feel to much guilt if I won and his family went broke as a result. If his writing really bothered me that much (which they don't -- I think most people write him off as a bit cracked), I would go down to Kansas City and confront him man-to-man about it. That seems to be the Catholic gentlemanly way to go about it. Not threaten him with financial ruin via the court system. |
Nobody would really care if this lawyer likes blasphemous pop stars, mini-skirts or Israel if he was not working at a high-profile position in the SSPX.
SSPX, devoted to restoration of all things in Christ.
The age issue is a diversion. The SSPX schools crack down on the very attitudes the German lawyer displays. These attitudes go directly against what we want for our children. We don't want a young guy with these attitudes representing the interests of the Society founded by Archbishop Lefebvre. |
Just a quick reply here as I am very busy today.
I do not know when the said 'likes' were posted on Facebook, or why. However, "He who shall remain nameless" is young and they could have been placed at anytime - ie. such as when he was younger just a bit younger. They are definitely not there now, I've checked. In addition, there could have been another reason why they are there - such as a friend sent them and they are a reminder from younger years... There are lots of reasons. They do not necessarily mean that he is a huge fan or immoral. Lots of trad Catholics (even from the hardliners and even amongst some of their priests) have listened to such music and watched such movies - some still do. I am not naming names and will not name names but I do know this for an absolute fact!
If you are not familiar with Facebook you will not have an understanding of these things, if you are you may grasp what I am saying a little better. For instance, I 'like' the Libertarian Party - however, I do not support most things from them. But in order to receive updates of news articles they might release, I have to 'like' them. I also 'like' a Jєωlery company started by a high school friend. I do not particulary 'like' much of the Jєωlery, nor do I 'like' some of the causes she supports through her site, but I do 'like' my friend. I also 'like' the FOX Network series '24'. Now that might make you think we have cable and are advid TV watchers, but we are not. We do not have cable or satellite and we get no channels without. But at the time that show was airing, we did have a very small black and white tv with a coat hanger for an antenna and we did use it to watch this one show (no children watching - only adults).
So, point is, don't be quick to jump to rash judgements. You won't suffer extra time in purgatory or even an eternity in Hell because you gave someone the benefit of the doubt, but you will mostly certainly suffer theses things if you don't and are wrong (even if you are right, you still stand the chance).
_________________________________________________________________
8. Telephorus
What you're basically doing NeelyAnn, is saying the person in question is not like a high profile person, old enough to be a US Senator, and to be the legal representative of the SSPX, but too dense or immature to understand the implications of having a figure like "madonna" or a smutty film like "9 1/2 weeks" on the front page of his Facebook. (with nothing Catholic in sight)
And then you compare it to the private behavior of young trads you know, young trads raised in an increasingly liberal environment where laxity becomes increasingly and obviously prevalent.
Essentially you're excusing someone at a very high level, who if he had even a modicuм of respect for the Catholic Faith would never dare put himself in a position to speak on behalf of Archbishop Lefebvre's society while showing public admiration for Anti-Christians actively opposed to the Catholic Faith.
You're awfully complacent in your little chapel in which you feel important.
So if these people, like Benedict XVI, say and do things that show they really don't care about the Catholic Faith or showing reverence to God, then you can look the other way. After all, "you know for a fact" there are sinful people around you, so this flagrantly public scandal by people in authority is something to brush over.
9. TELEPHORUS
Is that who you think I am comparing it to? Think again! |
I don't really care NeelyAnn.
What's obvious is you will make excuses for someone in a highly responsible, high profile, public position in the Trad movement and who coincidentally hangs out at Israeli training camps.
What would Archbishop Lefebvre say about that?
Archbishop Lefebvre who was prosecuted by LICRA?
Do you really care?
I think you don't.
I think you care about your little extended family / social pond, the trash heap owners and their orbiters who want to be big shots with the Big SG Fellay. Like Boss Hog in "The Dukes of Hazard" - while you imagine it's more like "The Waltons". It's all very Kentuckian. Trashy, you might almost say. As in a mountain of trash
10. Neelyann
No, Bern, what is dreadful is that Hollingsworth used that private message to try to discredit "He who shall remain nameless" in order to inflame everyones emotions against him. All the while knowing that his very good pal, Michael Hoffman, did the same - and he appearantly has no problem with that.
"He who shall remain nameless" is just as much a private citizen as Mr. Moore is and that should always be distinguished. This is a situation between two private individuals and has nothing to do with the SSPX. The fact that "He who shall remain nameless" has the SSPX as one of his clients has nothing to do with - a lawyer has lots of clients. As far as I know, "He who shall remain nameless" is not THE lawyer for the SSPX and the SSPX is not his employer - they are one of his clients. There is a big difference.
In addition, if someone makes an accusation against someone else, it is up to the accuser to prove the accusations. It is not up to the one being accused to prove anything.
By the way, you are dead wrong if you think you can come online and slander an individual by name and not be held accountable just because this is the 'internet'. You most definitely can be held accountable. Now if you are using an anonymous screen name, it is unlikely you will be held accoutnable - but not because it was legal but because no one knows who you are. However, when your identity is known that changes things.
_________________________________________________________________________
11. Telephorus
| QUOTE (Aquila @ Oct 29 2012, 04:47 PM) | | QUOTE | | I think you care about your little extended family / social pond, the trash heap owners and their orbiters who want to be big shots with the Big SG Fellay. |
And I think you are guilty of rash judgment. Do you even know NeelyAnn? Or her chapel? How can you accuse her of these things?
Why don't you stick to argument from principles, instead of resorting to ad hominems? |
You're far more concerned about me talking about pro-abortion anti-Catholic hags who write thick checks to the ADL than you are about the defense of Catholic Tradition.
And NeelyAnn is more concerned with defending Bishop Fellay outrageous behavior and her interests than she is with what the Archbishop would think. What possible reason could there be?
_____________________________________________________________________
12. Krah
Dear Mr. Wansbutler,
first of all, it is remarkable, that non of the attacks which are striked out in this current discussion has something to do with the original accusations, made in 2010.
Now I get attacked for somhow being "not Catholic enough", what in a very fundamental way thrives the question what being Catholic means. The Church answers it quite clear: You have to hold the faith, attending to the sacraments. Being Catholic is not about history, politics, not about style and fashion. It is about religion, about fundamental beliefs on God and our relation to Him. In the same way as it is wrong to exclude some dogmas from the integral faith - the haeresy - it is sinful and a thread against the faith to add something to the faith. I hope we agree on this.
Now, on all those stalking threads in the net I haven´t found yet just one accusation concerning one single dogma I would deny. Noone accuses me for not receiving the sacraments. But all those "truest Catholics" are absolutely sure that I am something like the devil himself. Isn´t that crazy? Obviously, they judge on completely different measures as the Church does.
But let us go into detail:
1)
| QUOTE | | I would go down to Kansas City and confront him man-to-man about it. That seems to be the Catholic gentlemanly way to go about it. |
2)
| QUOTE | | whereas to say, along with the pre-Vatican II magisterium that "[a] dress cannot be called decent which is cut deeper than two fingers breadth under the pit of the throat; which does not cover the arms at least to the elbows; and scarcely reaches a bit beyond the knees" is considered a "fanatic". Perhaps more seriously, your praise for feminism, which is considered normal today, and one such as I who, along with the pre-Vatican II Church believes a wife's place is in the home raising childen, is a "misogynist". Just a couple of examples, |
a) First impression: All your "examples" are connected with women. Are you married?
b) Second: "Pre-Vatican II-magisterium" does not tell anything about fashion. Once again, you add to the faith what not belong to. The Concile of Trent did even refuse the right of the Church to set rules on eating - that´s a dogma, and it is the "nearest" dogma concerning such "fashion rules". All we have about fashion are conclusions out of the dogma, which are always dependend to the time, the place, and the people which are affected. This in no ways is an absolution of some objectionable trends in fashion. It is just a call to take things as they are and not declaring secondary issues to be questions of faith.
3) What finally leads to the fundamental aspect:
| QUOTE | | The modern world is so thoroughly bad, and has totally rejected Christ, that I think the be "respectable" today is all to often a bad thing. Today, evil is good and good is evil. |
And here, my friend, we have the source of your critical position towards me, and we have - please take it into consideration and not just blame me for this objection - a clear haeresy from your side. You fully misunderstand one of the major dogmas of the Church, once again formulated by the Concile of Trent: on the original sin.
The Church teaches - infallible - that the human nature is good. But by the original sin it got wounded. This dogma was necessary, since Luther taught exactly what you state: That the original sin has fully destroyed all the good in the human nature. The discussion went on the use of pre-Christian art and philosophy in the Renaissance era. The Church was big in Renaissance, and it caused some moral troubles. Luther blamed the whole anchient (pre-Christian as well as not-yet-Christian) tradition for being - in your words - "thoroughly bad." He did it by overstating the effect of the original sin, for Luther it was a complete destruction of the good in the human nature, for the Church it is "just" a wound. What a difference! What great dogma! One of my favourite philosophers, Carl Schmitt, praises the Church for this dogma in his text "Roman Catholicism and political form". I´m with him. This dogma shows the brillance of our faith. Schmitt describes the Church as a "complexiooppositorum", what is worth to think about. And this is the key to understand and hence to reject such simplistic views as shown by you.
And now apply this dogma to our times. Yes, our era has lost grace. But this brings us back on the stage of nature. Nature is inherently good, but wounded by the original sin - dogma! That means, our era is not "thoroughly bad", but it is "good, but wounded" - quite similar as, for instance, the Roman Empire, which was by far more hostile against Christianity as our times are. And we have - very carefully - to distinguish. We have to check. There is no simplistic solution a la "everything is bad" - not even during the worst epoches of persecution the Church taught such nonsense concerning the Roman Empire. And by what measures we have to distinguish? By the dogma!
That´s Catholic!
13. Catholicom
Back to the matter at hand,
To determine exactly what is transpiring here, it would be greatly informative to know a few pertinent facts.
1) What are Mr. Siscoe's associations with the SSPX ?
2) What was his apparently urgent motivation for initiating this rehabilitative interview, and convincing Mr. Matt to publish it?
3) Does he have an association with J.Christopher Pryor and if so, what part, if any, did he play in it?
4) If all of these events and activities were so innocent and unremarkable, why then were Menzingen and MrKr..ah so aggressive in attempting to suppress all means of communication and discussion about them, at the time?
5) Why then, is it expedient to allow them to be explained in public media at this time, and why was it not possible to do this years ago and hence diffuse all that has followed the suppression and legal threats?
14. Nemmersdorf
| QUOTE (Columba @ Oct 29 2012, 06:50 PM) | | ...It is no wonder you were chosen to orchestrate the media campaign against him. You even insultingly insinuated that Bp. Williamson was disturbed or suffering from Parkinson’s Disease. Only within your minimalist conception of Catholicism can such behavior pass muster. |
In the Remnant interview, although German SSPX lawyer K briefly touches on the +Wiliamson case, and expands in great details quite unimportant matters, he is totally silent on his role of “helping” Bishop Williamson. I will mention just two events here:
1—12-13 January 2010
The first event is his attempt to force Bishop Williamson to give an interview to the German leftist magazine, Der Spiegel, by forcing their way inside St Georges House on the 12 and 13 January 2010.
The Bishop had already refused to receive the SSPX lawyer K and the two Spiegel journalists even before arriving in London – in other words, they were aware while still in Germany that Bishop Williamson had no intention of giving them an interview:
This is confirmed in the article written by Stephen Heiner who had visited the Bishop straight after:
“K insists on coming for the pre-interview “coaching session.” The Bishop expresses the discomfort he has with K’s proposal and expresses the desire to change the interview format to the same as last time: written questions. Such a situation would make any London visit of K and the journalists unnecessary. The Bishop says to K, “Do NOT come, because I will not speak”.”
See the whole story in the article from the True Restoration Press:
http://truerestoration.blogspot.co.uk/2010...real-story.html
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Der Spiegel: The Real Story
A totally distorted and anti-clerical article appears in the Spiegel shorly after the event.
2 – 4 July 2011
The second event is the strange behaviour displayed by the German SSPX lawyer K during the trial of Bishop Williamson in Regensburg (4 July 2011), where he was supposed to be a witness for the defence on 4 July 2011. He acted more like the prosecutor rather than a witness for the defence.
The lawyer ridiculed the Bishop in describing him as “colourful bird”, who has “no significant position of leadership”, an “eccentric”, “one who had a persistent problem with recognition of reality" and "monotonous regularity every two years, believes in the apocalypse."
See the German sources:
http://www.derwesten.de/nachrichten/ex-bis...id4839263.html) :Dapd report.
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/prozess-...mmern-1.1116124
these articles are mentioned on 2 English speaking forums:
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.co.uk/2011...williamson.html
also:
http://cathinfo-warning-pornography!/Ignis_Ardens/i...?showtopic=7525
________________________________________________________________
15. Catholicom
It seems better at this point to start to verify what was said in this interview. I will start with an easier subject.
| QUOTE | Maybe a word about… it is common to read things on the internet about the State of Israel. Let’s bring it back to history. In the middle ages, Christianity made several Crusades to the Holy Land for one reason: to get the holy places open so we would have access to them for Pilgrimages. We have, currently, more Pilgrimages to the Holy Land than ever in the past. We had more in 2012 than in 2011, and more in 2011 than in 2010, and in 2010 we had more than ever since. That means, the holy places are open; they get protected. They are safe, and there is money invested. And the Catholic Church gets tax benefits by the Israeli government in that country. I don’t know anybody who believes that, if this country was under Islamic rule, we would have nearly as many Pilgrims there, and free access. And even the Pilgrim groups from the SSPX Germany, that go from Jerusalem and Nazareth to Bethlehem, always stay in a hotel on the other side of the wall – the Israeli side. If you just see facts and reality, than we have to say it is hard to attack those authorities that provide open access to those holy places. This is what I say: just calm down and judge by facts. We have to see the facts as they are, and we have to see that there are plenty of people living there. They have police, everything is organized, and they do not harm the Christians there. And there is also a rising group of so-called Hebrew Catholics, who are converted Israeli Citizens. We have none of those in the Islamic countries. I only can warn all those Christians who are so opposite, or hostile against the Israeli State, what would happen if that State would disappear. We would have a lot of problems with our holy places. And what would happen to the Christians in that country if we had a change on the political landscape? And so I have absolutely no problem to say that I have a positive attitude towards the state of Israel. The world is not perfect. It never has been. There are wars always. There is a state of imperfection. And if we see this, if we see the reality, we can say it could be much worse. And this should lead us to a more distinguished position towards the political situation in the Holy Land.
|
There are many things here which are half true or entirely untrue.
"He who shall remain nameless" need not warn Christians about this criminal entity which is called Israel. Christians daily suffer great discrimination and hostility in this enclave.
They have from its inception down to this hour. They know, as they were among the first to be massacred, and driven from their homes.
The number of Christians in this country has steadily decreased until they are but a remnant of what were.
The Israelies control the access and tourist business of visits to the Holy Places.
What "He who shall remain nameless" imparts in this segment of his interview, is almost word for word the propaganda of the Israeli government to the west.
I would agree that individuals and most especially Catholics should calm down, research the matter with due diligence, and judge by the true facts.
You will come to a much different judgment than what "He who shall remain nameless" presents.
I will be surprised if Mr. Matt will print this false narrative of Christian life in this enclave. And shame on him if he does.
Christians live as second class citizens in the place ruled by Jєωιѕн supremacist ideology, which "He who shall remain nameless" fails to mention.
We can cover more later but for now we can sum this segment up charitably by concluding, facts not in evidence and failure to disclose, thus preventing me from having to use other more harsh terms for fasehoods.
Do your research!
______________________________________________________________
16. Bernadette
| QUOTE (NeelyAnn @ Oct 29 2012, 04:49 PM) |
By the way, you are dead wrong if you think you can come online and slander an individual by name and not be held accountable just because this is the 'internet'. You most definitely can be held accountable. Now if you are using an anonymous screen name, it is unlikely you will be held accoutnable - but not because it was legal but because no one knows who you are. However, when your identity is known that changes things. |
Are you trying out the Menzingen scare tactics on me? Don't even think about it lady...you have a lot nerve and I can tell you one thing, I'm keeping good track of just who is threatening who around here
17. Catholicom
Back to subject at hand, What is the purpose of this fluff interview, at this time?
Whose idea was it?
Is it simply another volume of Father Rostand's "against the rumors?
The more that it is subjected to scrutiny, the more apparent are the misdirection of facts and certain false statements which are present in it.
And also, a healthy effort to cast the resistance as unhinged and ignorant rabble and the obligatory insult of Bishop Williamson, as well.
So again I ask,
1) What are Mr. Siscoe's associations with the SSPX ?
2) What was his apparently urgent motivation for initiating this rehabilitative interview, and convincing Mr. Matt to publish it?
3) Does he have an association with J.Christopher Pryor and if so, what part, if any, did he play in it?
4) If all of these events and activities were so innocent and unremarkable, why then were Menzingen and MrKr..ah so aggressive in attempting to suppress all means of communication and discussion about them, at the time?
5) Why then, is it expedient to allow them to be explained in public media at this time, and why was it not possible to do this years ago and hence diffuse all that has followed the suppression and legal threats?
18. TELEPHORUS
The ADL and the people it represents are not silly, but pernicious and wicked subverters of Catholic Tradition. If the ADL exists to combat "antisemitism" - why does it defend full term abortions? It does not only condemn "antisemitism" in the SSPX, but also "anti-judaism" - but anti-Judaism is part of the Faith. The reality is - the ADL attacks The Social Reign of Our Lord. That we hear justifications for its wicked conduct is not surprising. "Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are" - this is the proverb to constantly bear in mind when discussing these public personalities. Who are these people, what do they want? It seems evident to me these neotrad infiltrators in SSPX circles want what Abe Foxman wants:
| QUOTE (ADL) | | The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urges the Vatican to ensure that a breakaway Catholic sect which teaches anti-Judaism will be required to accept the church's official positive teachings about Jєωs and Judaism before they are fully accepted back into the Roman Catholic Church. |
| QUOTE (Abe Foxman) | We are confident that Pope Benedict XVI will continue to require the Society of St. Pius X, which espouses anti-Semitic and anti-Jєωιѕн beliefs, to publicly accept the church's positive teachings about Jєωs and Judaism since the 1965 Second Vatican Council, before fully accepting them back into the Roman Catholic Church.
It would be unthinkable to allow a Catholic breakaway sect that includes a h0Ɩ0cαųst-denying bishop, Richard Williamson, to be reintegrated into the church while still being allowed to promote anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism - which they have been doing for years in their teachings and on their Web site.
We trust Pope Benedict's promise that he made to us during our meeting in 2007 that he would stand with us against all forms of anti-Semitism. |
These Zionist groups and those who defend them and associate themselves with Zionist causes are inimical to Catholic Tradition. The same way that a miniskirt is inimical to Catholic modesty. No authentic Catholic with even a modicuм of knowledge could possibly see things differently.
_________________________________________________________________
19. Catholicom
| QUOTE | | Look, organizations like the ADL have a certain purpose: attacking antisemitebehaviour. I can hardly criticize them for doing their job |
Here, as in the other segment, which I referred to earlier, "He who shall remain nameless" give a false and very incomplete description of the ADL, its purposes, and its activities.
This is a docuмented criminal organization which engages in espionage, extortion, and other forms of organized thuggery.
They are also heavily involved with the promotion of the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ agenda in schools.
They train government agencies to respond to the Jєωιѕн agenda and enforce profiling of Christians, anti-abortion activists, free speech advocates and others.
The History and record is extensive.
He cannot be unaware of this, and yet he portrays them as a benign entity. Not finding fault with a distinctly anti-Catholic criminal enterprise speaks for itself.
In not finding a discernable reason why Menzingen has allowed this interview, I am becoming inclined to surmise that it might be a psy-op of some sort. There is definitely more here than meets the eye.
This post has been edited by catholicam on Oct 30 2012, 04:25 PM
________________________________________________________________
20. Columba
| QUOTE (Anthony Benedict @ Oct 28 2012, 01:53 AM) | Siscoe: Another company name that is mentioned is Jaidhofer Foundation. Can you discuss this company?
Max Kr_ah: Yes, this is linked with the SSPX, and it is absolutely no secret. There is a family in Austria which wanted to donate to the SSPX, but did not want to donate directly. They wanted to establish a foundation that would support the SSPX. And in every foundation you need some trustees. It’s a kind of trust, and I am one of the trustees. I was chosen by the family who established the foundation, firstly because I am a Traditional Catholic attorney with links to the SSPX, and secondly because of my professional record. This foundation is supporting the SSPX and using the money which was donated by this family. As an example, it is supporting the new Seminary project in Virginia. It has nothing to do with individual donations people give to the SSPX. Everything we do is completely transparent. We are supervised both by the General House of the SSPX, and by the Austrian tax authority, because we are philanthropic, and that means we are tax free. We must always open our books to the public authorities. So we have two supervisors, so to say, and everything we do is completely transparent and clean. |
This ties together with the information from HMiS:
| QUOTE (HMiS @ Oct 30 2012, 02:58 PM) | | Still, one should appreciate his volunteership on other issues, like the vast Baroness von Gutmann (convert to Catholicism 19th century old Jєωιѕн banking family who donated the Austrian SSPX district priory) inheritance (castle, church and vast estate in Lower Austria). I am sure that the new VA mini-Cluny vast seminary planned by the SSPX can be financed from it. |
So according to Kr_ah, it is the von Gutmann family and not just the deceased, converted baroness behind the Menzingen properties, the $6 million Virginia seminary, and the Jaidhofer Foundation. HMiS, do you know whether the members of the von Gutmann family are, like the baroness, converted Catholics or do they remain Jєωιѕн? If they are Catholic, are they well-known as traditionist?
According to Kr_ah, one condition of the gift was his appointment as trustee of the Jaidhofer Foundation. If Kr_ah was appointed to serve as agent of the von Gutmanns, then they retain control of the foundation and would have great influence over the Society. Are the von Gutmann's behind the ouster of Bishop Williamson and the drive for a deal with the Vatican? We do not yet know the rest of the Jaidhoferconditions, however, Kr_ah said that the tax-free foundation's books must be kept available to public authorities. Does anyone have access to this information?
Why has +Fellay not cut professional ties with Kr_ah to avoid the bad publicity that continues to result from such an odd collaboration? Kr_ah has now disclosed that he, in effect, controls the very Menzingen properties inhabited by +Fellay, and much more.
|
21. Maurice PinayHere's the source of that inheritance, which should answer any questions as to what kind of strings would be attached.
| QUOTE | JULY 15, 1934
Baron Mortiz Von Guttman, Vienna Jєω, Coal King, Dies
Vienna, Jul. 13 (JTA) –
Baron Moritz von Guttmann, 62, Jєωιѕн coal king of Vienna and relative of the Viennese Rothschilds, died here today. He was the last Jєωιѕн member of the family. All the others married non-Jєωs.
http://archive.jta.org/article/1934/07/15/...-coal-king-dies |
This final piece of evidence which explains the SSPX Jaidhof corporation is here:
http://www.jaidhof.at/index.php?channel=113&content=1513
The Jaidhof property is ill gotten gains of the Rothschild-Gutmann empire.
Check please. ___________________________________________________22. Columba Dr. Kr_ah,
In the Remnant interview, you stated that you were chosen by the Jaidhofer Foundation donor family to serve as trustee of their non-profit SSPX support corporation. Fr. Florian Abrahamowicz has stated that you were you involved with an 80 million Euro inheritance recieved in Austria from Baroness von Gutmann. ( http://www.kreuz.net/article.15223.html )- Is the donor family, to which you referred, that of Baroness von Gutmann?
- If so, when were you chosen by the von Gutmann family and how long was that after the baroness died and after you had begun attending the SSPX mass?
- Were you professionally involved with the SSPX prior to the von Gutmanndesignation.
- How did the von Gutmann family learn of your connection with the SSPX?
- Presumbably, Baroness von Gutmann was an SSPX follower. Is that correct?
- Are the current von Gutmann heirs SSPX followers?
- What is the opinion of the von Gutmann heirs on Bishop Williamson and the drive for regularization with Rome?
- Have you or the Jaidhofer Foundation influenced the SSPX to distance itself from +Williamson or pursue regularization?
Bp. Williamson supporters have speculated that the SSPX is influenced in its change of direction by forces that Catholics have historically suspected of conspiracy against the Church. Chief among these suspects are the European Jєωιѕн banking families. The von Gutmann family has already been very generous to Catholic tradition and it might well be said that they have nothing further to prove. However, you, as the family-designated trustee, have an opportunity to dispel unfounded suspicion by answering the questions above.
You have avidly followed and posted on this thread about your interview. Many besides yourself have started reading these forums including, apparently, Fr. Rostand. If you cannot answer these questions, suspicion could increase as a result. I apologize if these questions sound inquisitional, however, I believe they are reasonable under the circuмstance and that providing answers would greatly dispel suspicion.
Admittedly, your answers will be closely examined and there are some who will never be convinced. Still, I encourage you to shed some light on this topic important to all SSPX followers. I am confident that everyone following these issues, regardless of which bishop they support, looks forward to your assurance that Menzingen is not influenced by the von Gutmann heirs in its religious decisions._________________________________________________________________23. Maurice PinayI should add that the Rothschild-Gutmann benefactors of the SSPX were tied to the "DeBeers" diamond empire by marriage.
Wilhelm von Gutmann's second wife Ida (nee: Wodianer) was the sister of Rose Ann Wodianer who married Jules Porges who raped South Africa of its diamonds and gold and spun into the 'DeBeers' empire.
The SSPX has been corrupted by some of the filthiest money in the history of usury and human and resource exploitation ever. http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/____________________________________________________________24. ColumbaHMiS,
Thank you for answering my question. Please do not personalize this issue. I made no disparagement against converts with Jєωιѕн ancestry. It is important not to do so but it also important not to go to far in the other direction so as to soften the resolve necessary for resisting Jєωιѕн conspiracy. Jesus' submission to the will of His Father was not a submission to the evil of Pharisetic conspiracy. I am assuming that we agree such conspiracy continues to exists. Certainly there are also many non-Jєωιѕн conspirators against the Church but they often work in cooperation with modern Pharisees.
Of course there have been many excellent Jєωιѕн branches grafted back on to the tree and indeed many whose background enabled them to become highly effective defenders of the Faith against cօռspιʀαcιҽs of the Jєωιѕн establishment. No decent Catholic would imagine denying Jєωιѕн converts participation in Church life or reception of the sacraments. However, if such converts become powerful and then appear to be pushing the Church to let down her guard against Jєωιѕн conspiracy, suspicions will arise. Any objective observer can see why this happens. There was significant involvement of Jєωs and converts in the suicidal disarmaments of Vatican II and there is a long history of Jєωs plotting with wayward converts to undermine the Church. Again, some of the most effective defenders against these plots, including the original Apostles, were themselves of Jєωιѕн extraction.
An obvious solution is for powerful converts to make efforts toward dispelling suspicion. Some the powerful with no Jєωιѕн ancestry also fall under suspicion, and rightly so. If suspicions held by the less-powerful are thoughtlessly dismissed as jealousy and paranoia, such feelings will only harden. Some may always harbor suspicions, but a measure of humility and understanding from the mighty is much appreciated by the little people. I posed questions to the von Gutmann-designated trustee Kr_ah that, if answered, would dispel suspicion. The inheritance, as I understand it, was not bequeathed directly to the SSPX but was placed in a foundation under what appears to be the effective control of Kr_ah. Two more questions occur:- Does Kr_ah have discression to shut off funding for SSPX projects?
- Who controls termination of trustees and future appointments?
If these and the previous questions cannot be answered, then suspicion might be justified. It is not outside the realm of possibility for the SSPX to be hijacked like the Council of Vatican II. Vigilance against such a recurrence is not necessarily sinful. Does it make sense for powerful converts to attempt to dispel suspicions? Do you find any of the questions to be unfair? | QUOTE (HMiS @ Oct 31 2012, 02:51 PM) | The Gutmann's were the gateway to Bohemian, Moravian, Austrian Silesian and South Polish steel (iron ore) industries for N.M. Rothschild & Co. Int.
Mind you, the Papal States also from 1859 had to do banking business with that most powerful global banking dynasty of trillionnaires. |
That is a very big reason why the papal states were lost. 25. TELEPHORUSMany wealthy Jєωs have converted so as to marry gentiles. It is a fact that crypto-Jєωs have been subversive in the Catholic Church. That is a fact of history. It's not to judge any one individual to say that Catholics have a right to be wary of such nominal Catholics. Ernest Cassel, one of the instigators of WWI converted to Catholicism, after all. Such conversion have to be looked in the context of the political actions such people take.
The pretense that support for Zionism (especially in its militaristic, domineering contemporary form - far worse than what Herzl contemplated) is compatible with Catholicism is a form of subversion. It absolutely subverts the Social Reign of Christ the King to support this idea that the Holy Land should be ruled by Jєωs who reject Our Lord.
This is just pure common sense.
| QUOTE | | "the Jєωs have not recognized our Lord; therefore we cannot recognize the Jєωιѕн people." The Pope declared that "we cannot prevent the Jєωs from going to Jerusalem, but we could never sanction it. If you come to Palestine and settle your people there, our churches and priests will be ready to baptize all of you." Now Pius wasn't especially malevolent towards the Jєωιѕн people, on the contrary. Many a church leader would not have even given Herzl the time of day. Pius was simply expressing what was the normative view of Jєωs throughout Christendom down the ages |
http://www.ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content...0861&ct=1082873
Many of these Jєωs insist that the SSPX accept the pro-Jєωιѕн conciliar and post-conciliar "teachings" of the conciliar, liberal, indifferentist, modernist "Church."
Getting rid of Bishop Williamson and calling the Jєωs "elder brothers" - and having a Zionist with a high profile role in SSPX business, is not being Faithful to Archbishop Lefebvre who chose Bishop Williamson to be a Bishop.
Anyone who has any independence of thought and foundational knowledge of these controversies can easily understand this. 26. WessexThe news that the ill-gotten gains of the Rothchild family are directing SSPX expansion is very unsettling indeed. Such projects are cursed before they start. We had been accustomed to hearing from its priests time after time about the perfidy of the userers' tribe but now this is no longer the Society's script.
And now in response to this discovery we have lame excuses of how a handful of Jєωs became Catholics out of convenience or belief as though this is enough to excuse whatever it takes to buy off the historic Christian endictment against them. 27. TELEPHORUS| QUOTE (deo-non-fortuna @ Oct 31 2012, 06:15 PM) | | Wessex, our Lord was also a Jєω. Should we steer clear of Catholicism just in case the whole thing is an evil тαℓмυdic plot? |
"Jesus was a Jєω" - the tired old standby of people who care much more about not offending Jєωs than they do about the Catholic Faith.
Our Lord wasn't the heir to a bankers fortune, nor was he a Zionist.
Our Lord is despised by the тαℓмυdists.
This of course, is a matter of complete indifference to men like Benedict XVI and other such judaizers and Zionists. They are totally indifferent to such blasphemy. And they are indifferent to the fact that
| QUOTE (Archbishop Lefebvre) | | these Jєωs know and say and believe that they are the successors of the Jєωs that killed Jesus Christ, and they continue to fight against Jesus Christ everywhere in the world. |
Yes, and some of them fight against Christ as nominal Christians. Such as the deceased modernist Cardinal Lustiger, who claimed he was still Jєωιѕн. 28. Maurice Pinay| QUOTE (deo-non-fortuna @ Oct 31 2012, 06:15 PM) | | Wessex, our Lord was also a Jєω. Should we steer clear of Catholicism just in case the whole thing is an evil тαℓмυdic plot? |
Rather, we should steer clear of the con-men who harp on the theme "Jesus was a Jєω" in hopes of convincing us of the preposterous notion that the descendants of 8th century Khazarian converts to anti-Christ тαℓмυdism benefit from some connection to Christ.
St. John The Baptist said to genuine genetic descendants of Judah: "Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of penance; and do not begin to say, We have Abraham for our father. For I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham."
Khazar тαℓмυdists are due no more respect for their race conceit than this. Let them bring forth fruits worthy of penance, and scrap their delusional claims to noble birth. | QUOTE (deo-non-fortuna @ Oct 31 2012, 08:19 PM) | ...and "Maurice" too.
When did you convert to Catholicism, "Maurice"? |
I will never convert to Fellayite Rothschild 'traditionalism' if that's what you're asking.
My family was challenging their bishop on the new catechesis and assisting at the Latin Mass at Fr. Gommar DePauw's chapel before the SSPX existed. From the Rothschild family archive:
| QUOTE | The steel heart of Czechoslovakia, as Frankova names it, was once owned by the Austrian Rothschilds, in partnership with the Gutmann brothers [Wilhelm and David] ... It is Salomon von Rothschild who, in 1844, bought the iron works, and founded the United Coal Mines of Vítkovice and Austro-Hungarian Blast Furnace Company ... Salomon’s English cousins helped fund the creation of De Beers in 1887.
http://www.rothschildarchive.org/ib/?doc=/...icles/vitkovice |
Here is the Guttman family from the above mentioned Rothschild partner, Wilhelm Gutmann to the present banker heir, GuntardGutmann.
Here is Max Kr*h with his client, the Rothschild-Gutmann heir, DeBeers relative and SSPX benefactor, GuntardGutman.
Here is Kr*h's unreserved establishment of his Zionist, philo-Judaic, Neo-Con bona fides:
http://mauricepinay.blogspot.com/2012/05/s...ys-zionist.html
There's a lot, lot more, but what else do you need to know?
Take precautions, people. Nothing good will come of this.
The Rothschild-Gutmann Money Behind the SSPX Kosher Imperative This post has been edited by MauricePinay on Nov 1 2012, 03:51 AM 29. Freshwater Just bringing this back to the "interview":
I am of the opinion that the “interview” came at a very curious time. I am of the opinion that this “interview” had to have the approval of Menzingen. I am also of the opinion that Mr. Siscoe asked some very poorly researched questions. I think that his homework was lacking.
For example, he asked Dr. Kr ah :
| QUOTE | | Siscoe: There is another company that is mentioned as well, Laetitia AG. Can you tell us about…”. |
Anyone who has done their homework, would know it was a lame question.
A far better question has been asked before, regarding the company that is nominated as Auditor for DelloSarto AG, and that company is Fidartis Revisions AG.
The background of the auditors for DelloSarto AG:
| QUOTE |
Company Auditors:
19-1-09 to 8-6-10 Grant Thornton auditing AG
8-6-10 till present: Fidartis Revisions AG
Interesting facts about Fidartis Revisions AG:
One of the company’s signature authority is a Mr. Peter Josef Müller
Some interesting facts regarding Mr. Peter Josef Müller :-
Director of Company: Laetitia AG since 29-5-09
Administration board signatory of Laetitia AG: Maximilian Kr ah (individual signatory)
Peter Josef Müller replaced Peter Hochstrasser on the Board of Fidartis Revisions AG on the 9-7-10 with him having Joint Signatory Authority. Furthermore, DelloSarto AG appointed Fidartis Revisions AG as auditors the month previous. |
I think that a far better question has been asked previously:
| QUOTE |
Can anyone see a potential issue here? There is an obvious red flag when an auditor has a close business relationship with a person who has a single signatory authority within the company that has appointed those auditors. Not suggesting anything inappropriate has occurred, except for the fact that this needs to be noted for any potential conflict of interests. |
Dr. Kr ah – are these potential “conflict-of-interest” issues, or are these “close-hand” relationship commonplace AND ethical? Was “Grant Thornton” auditors sacked for a reason, or was it better for the SSPX to have auditors that had closer business ties?
Moving on to the question of DelloSarto AG.
Here is the question posed:
| QUOTE | Siscoe: Let’s discuss some of the internet rumors. Can you tell us about the company, DelloSarto AG? What was your affiliation with that company, and the status of that company today?
Kr ah: Yes, the first thing to realize is that a corporation prevents liability. This is something that is widely known and is a common practice for the SSPX, especially in the US. DelloSarto was established to receive a large inheritance, which was expected to come but never did. So now we have a completely empty corporation that we will shut down. The rumors were complete nonsense….. |
Wow – I imagine that this has been a very expensive exercise, that is, setting up an “AG” company along with all its government requirements, having it audited for the past few years, and then shelving it. All for nothing! Incredible!
As an aside, here are the potential companies that can be formed in Switzerland:
See:
http://www.healyconsultants.com/company-in...-formation.html | QUOTE | Switzerland is one of the most politically and economically stable countries in the world. Switzerland is divided into 23 Cantons, each with its own tax system. There are two types of Swiss companies best suited to foreign investors: the AG (corporation or joint stock company) and a GmbH (limited liability company). The following information will help you determine whether company formation in Switzerland is the optimum corporate structure to fulfill your international objectives.
A Swiss GmbH requires a minimum of two shareholders, while an AG requires three. The minimum capital requirement for a GmbH is CHF20,000 Swiss francs (approximately US$21,000) and CHF100,000 (approximately US$105,000) for an AG company. One director must be resident in Switzerland.
|
Dr. Kr ah – was it based on your advice that DelloSarto was established as an “AG” company rather than the lesser “GmbH” type company?
You stated that its purpose was to receive a “large inheritance”. Could you please explain to us ignoramuses of the reasoning behind the establishment of the “AG” style company, and not another “Trust” or “GmbH” type company? Can you please explain the "lack of liability" in the Trust or "GmbH" structures, that justified an "AG" corporation?
Since DelloSarto AG is a public company, can you tell us who the shareholders/shareholding of the company are (which is not secret, but us plebs need to pay to find out)?
Another question asked by Mr. Siscoe about your MBA programme was poorly researched:
| QUOTE |
Siscoe: Another rumor is that the Society paid for your MBA program. Is there any truth to that?
Kr ah: Absolutely not! I paid on my own.
|
Maybe it was a very carefully worded question, because if Mr. Siscoe had done his homework he would have found that you listed your “Sponsor or employer” for the EMBA-Global programme as Jaidhofer Foundation.
As trustee for the Jaidhofer Foundation, I think that it is fair and reasonable that trustees get paid for the work that they do for the Trust.
So the correct question that Mr. Siscoe should have asked is “Dr. Kr ah, Another rumor is that the Jaidhofer Foundation paid for all or part your MBA program. Is there any truth to that?”
Dr. Kr ah – you call people who love and are concerned about the state of Society of St. Pius X (particularly since 2008/2009 - that must have been a very busy year for you!) “stalkers”. Well, welcome to politics. You wanted to be a politician, but most politicians accept that they are under public scrutiny and have a duty to be open to that scrutiny. You hold a lot of influence with regards to SSPX “management”, and potentially in regards to its direction – in let’s say – its “secular” interests.
Dr. Kr ah – I am of no significance within the SSPX, you are. I can remain anonymous, and it matters none because I have only ever asked about the SSPX business structures – based on published FACTS, which anyone can obtain. I have never questioned your beliefs, values, or associations, outside those SSPX related business structures. You are [now] well known within the Society. The Society has changed, whether we like that or not. That fact is undeniable. It is curious that many major changes happened in 2008/2009 and many of these things were done in secret (well – from the laity and many of the Priests at least). When there is a change in course, a logical thinker has to ask the question: “What’s happened, what’s different?”
Do you say that we shouldn’t be concerned about a perceived abnormality in the situation, or something that is perceived to be suspicious? Or should we just sit back and watch the world go by? Note: I am not blaming you, you have been given directions. In reality, it’s the “management” that should be answering the questions. But since you have been given the liberty (by management) to speak on these matters, I hope that you, out of charity, can answer the above “correct” questions so that concerns can be alleviated.
If these particular questions are ignored, then concerns will remain. And we don't want that do we? _____________________________________________________________________30. NemmersdorfMichael Hoffman
Interview with Zionist agent Maximilian Kr.ah
Thursday, November 01, 2012
http://revisionistreview.blogspot.co.uk/20...maximilian.html
Editor's Note: Bishop Fellay is the prelate who expelled Bishop Richard Williamson from the SSPX. Maximilian Kr.ah is the attorney who was assigned by Fellay to "defend" Bishop Williamson against prosecution in Germany for blaspheming the sacred relics of the religion of h0Ɩ0cαųstianity, which is illegal in the German state. In the course of "defending" Williamson Kr.ah actually attacked and insulted him in front of the German court.
Kr.ah is an associate of the murderous Israeli army and has attended an Israeli army training event as a "tourist" as well as a fund-raiser for Tel Aviv University. He assures the interviewer that this all very innocent on his part.
Kr.ah claims that Williamson was given Pressac's report on the alleged homicidal gas chambers to study "for a year" but he "failed" to do so. What actually transpired was that Bishop Williamson made contact with a revisionist researcher after a worldwide explosion of media venom was directed at him after he granted, on German soil, an interview with a Swedish television station. In the course of the interview he did not "deny the 'h0Ɩ0cαųst." He questioned the existence of homicidal gas chambers in Auschwitz-Birkenau.
As the media lynch mob grew in intensity, Bishop Williamson wanted to have access to the latest revisionist research on the subject of the gas chambers. The revisionist researcher he contacted in turn organized an international team of researchers and historians, led by an American editor (who I do not have permission to name), other youthful revisionist historians, as well as the eminent Dr. Arthur Butz and Dr. Robert Faurisson.
Bishop Williamson carefully studied the docuмents and texts these scholars kindly made available to him. These included large portions of the Pressac material, because Pressac, toward the end of his life, threw up his hands in frustration and disgust over trying to scientifically prove the existence of homicidal gas chambers. Yet Mr. Kr.ah is either too ignorant or too duplicitous to acknowledge Pressac's failure and instead invokes Pressac as a means of discrediting Williamson's skepticism toward the gas chamber dogma.
Why didn't Kr.ah and Fellay study the books of Faurisson, Butz, Samuel Crowell, Carlo Mattogno, Germar Rudolf and Fred Leuchter? Why was the burden of reading and study on Williamson alone? Why does the Catholic Church sanctify and unquestioningly uphold secular consensus history that has no bearing on the Faith of Jesus Christ? Indeed, some would say that Auschwitz has replaced Calvary as the central ontological event of western history. In Europe there are no laws against blaspheming Jesus Christ or denying His resurrection. Only the relics of h0Ɩ0cαųstianity are protected from scrutiny in Europe by the threat of criminal prosecution. h0Ɩ0cαųstianity is the de facto civil religion of Europe; the last truly believed religion in that otherwise largely agnostic continent.
In the interview Kr.ah claims that the Israeli Zionists are the defenders of Christian shrines in the Holy Land. Kr.ah makes no mention of the Israeli attacks on the Church of the Nativity during the Israeli h0Ɩ0cαųst in Jenin, during which the Church of the Nativity was shot up by Israeli soldiers and others churches bombed. He makes no mention of the large number of Palestinian Christians who have been driven out of Palestine or murdered by the Israelis. He makes no mention of the constant vandalism and assaults on Christian Churches by тαℓмυdic terrorists. He makes no mention of the fact that Christian missionary activity is banned in the Israeli state. Spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the land of Christ is forbidden by the Israelis, but Kr.ah praises them. He writes, "And there is also a rising group of so-called Hebrew Catholics, who are converted Israeli Citizens."
Really, Mr. Kr.ah? Who converted them and where were they converted? Where do they reside in the Israeli state and where is there home church in the Israeli state?
Has Mr. Kr.ah bothered to ask native Palestinian Christians who they would rather be ruled by -- fellow Palestinians or Israelis? The Palestinians have no voice in Kr.ah's obsequiously Zionist narrative.
In MaximillianKr.ah we have a very serious and committed Zionist agent operating inside the highest levels of the SSPX, by Bishop Fellay's mandate.
The interview with Mr. Kr.ah was published in The Remnant newspaper. The Remnant's senior adviser is Mr. Christopher Ferrara who has excoriated Bishop Williamson. It seems that Mr. Ferrara knows for a fact that large numbers of people were gassed to death in Auschwitz. He also knows for a fact that it was Arab terrorists from the caves of Afghanistan who brought down the World Trade Center, and Building Seven of the WTC. Using the publishing facilities of the Remnant, Mr. Ferrara has heaped abuse and contempt on Bishop Williamson for doubting execution gas chambers and believing that 9/11 was an inside job.
The Church of Jesus Christ is called to be counter-cultural; a pilgrim church in the midst of worldly people and their lies and hoaxes. Yet we observe in both the Vatican and the SSPX an imprimatur extended to establishment propaganda which is made holy and incuмbent upon Catholics to believe, on pain of expulsion. This is truly a perversion of everything for which Jesus Christ stood. The fact that Bishop Bernard Fellay has Zionist agent Kr.ah installed in the inner circle of the SSPX tells us all we need to know about Fellay and the current direction of his "traditional Catholic" SSPX. --Michael Hoffman www.revisionisthistory.org
This post has been edited by Nemmersdorf on Nov 1 2012, 11:32 PM e |
Topic: Ignis ardens forum discussion on Max Krah's Siscoe interview (Read 1298 times)