Odds and Ends...

The Bishop Williamson thing has been an eye-opener… Do we ever stop to look at any situation objectively anymore? Or is everything governed by a knee jerk reaction… I’d say the latter. I’ve been thinking a lot about the Jews. Specifically, the Wealthy Ruling Class as opposed to the everyday run-of-the-mill good citizen, good neighbor, expendable, religious, “superstitious” Jews—-not the atheist intellectuals like Ayn Rand who came and went with impunity throughout Europe in the first half of the last century, but--you know, the kind they kill in gas chambers or sacrifice on the altar of Zionism—-innocent girls in battle dress uniforms, modest young mothers separated from their frantic husbands and stripped naked for “de-lousing”-—the kind murdered by twisted little Austrian upstarts and then exploited by—who else? The Wealthy Ruling Class—who purchased England during the Battle of Waterloo and financed all the participants in World War II pretty much everything since.

The Wealthy Ruling Class—“The Jews”. “The Jews” who carefully and craftily confuse themselves with the poor martyrs of Auschwitz because it buys them complete carte blanche politically and socially---complete immunity from any sort of accountability for ANYTHING they wish to say or demand. “The Jews” who by virtue of their shared genes with the victims of the Third Reich are not even challenged when they dare attempt to dictate the policies of the Holy Catholic Church.

“The Jews” --and WHY “The Jews”? What have they done to deserve the title “Jew”? Nothing apart from despising their faith and exploiting those who believe, and if “Jew” became a liability they would cast it aside. But it is not a liability. It is a title which allows them a privileged position ironically shared only with their ancient nemesis, Islam. Islam, the carefully deferred to so-called “Religion of Peace.” Has anybody ever picked up a damned HISTORY BOOK?

John Paul II kissed the Koran. It appears that Benedict may allow the Jews to dictate who he chooses to be his Bishops.

Williamson is accused of Holocaust Denial. What exactly does that mean? Certainly not what it says. For all practical purposes, Holocaust Denial means whatever “The Jews” say it means. In this case, it apparently means that Williamson, a man who doesn’t keep up with politically correct sensitivities, suggested that there may be a disagreement amoung scholars regarding the exact number of Holocaust victims and how they died. For this, he is accused of “Holocaust Denial”, which has come to mean that the perpetrator denies that the Nazis killed Jews and that he obviously does so because he hates Jews and wants more of them to die, and that any deviation from what “The Jews” dictate will lead to Jewish deaths.

In other words, if I am an socially oblivious accuracy freak history scholar who truly believes that 5,749,211 Jews died in the Holocaust and that two thirds of that number were buried alive rather than being gassed, I had better not say so. If I do, I will be a Holocaust Denier.

Do Catholics actually believe anything that they profess? I read an opinion recently that “Jesus Christ would not have allowed a Holocaust Denier amoung his apostles.” Really? He allowed a Roman collaborator who had fiscally raped his people not only to be his apostle but to write his biography… Then there was that anti-semite, John… Try reading John’s gospel, without any preconceived notions and tell me what John thought of the Jews. Of course, we know what John meant--we know that John didn't hate the children of Israel but was referring to the Pharisees and Saduccees who called the shots in Our Lord's trial, but somehow we are unable to extend that courtesy to anyone else. We can’t even contemplate the Jewish people with any kind of objectivity. We jump on the bandwagon when anyone yells “Holocaust Denier”. Does any of us ever turn and reply, “Christ Denier”? If we believe what Jesus said, then the First Great Commandment deals with loving GOD. The Jewish people deny the divinity of our GOD. The Talmudic Jews blaspheme and revile Our Lord and Our lady in the most heinous fashion, and instead of taking them to task, we fall all over ourselves kissing up to them and backing up their demands of retribution upon anyone who questions the details of their horrible national tragedy, which ought to be a matter for history and academic debate as much as any other national tragedy. Does ANYONE else enjoy this kind of privilege? Well, of course they do. The Muhammedans do. Anyone else?

What is wrong with our priorities, as Christians, when we take more offense at a historical inquiry than we do at having our GOD reviled? Does anyone get upset about the Armenians? The Sioux? The Cherokee? All those poor Russians starved by Stalin? Do any of those people command automatic immunity for EVERYTHING? Well, of course not.

“The Jews” control all the money in the world, and the Muhammedans are blood-thirsty barbarians who think they will gain virgins in heaven for every non-muhammedan they murder. We are justly afraid of both. But we ought to fear God more.

Let’s at least understand why we give preference to these two ancient enemies. Let’s stop pretending that we are somehow morally superior for allowing them to control us. We aren’t. Quite the opposite. We are bad Catholics and we are cowards.



Speaking of Ruling Classes, the English and Americans certainly don’t fall far below the Jews in the hierarchy of evil. Her Majesty Elizabeth II is going to knight Teddy Kennedy. There’s a rare pair for you. Sir Teddy Kennedy. The worst element of Irish Catholic depravity, knighted by the Protestant pretender. Will they dine cheek by ample jowl before the ceremony? What in the hell will they talk about?

I despise myself for the sorrow I’ve wasted on that woman in regards to her ill-behaved offspring. How else could they have turned out? Teddy bloody Kennedy.

Restore Francis II to the Throne of England and let’s be done with it!


And on the subject of Royalty, albeit in a roundabout way, I’ve suffered more than minor irritation lately from young ladies? Women? Like that McCain girl for instance, who complain because men like them for what they consider to be the Wrong Reasons. Ah, the angst. How will I know if I’m supposed to marry someone? What if he only likes me for my looks? Blah blah blah blah blah, you spoiled stupid female children! It’s none of your business, you whiney little twits, WHY the boy likes you! How dare you question the particular little twist of your lip, or tilt of your nose or arch of your eyebrow which God Almighty put on your simpering little face which, for WHATEVER reason, inspired that silly little boy and may at some time so motivate him so that he will become a man in order to embrace you as his wife? And how dare you whine, when God sends you a man, because you don’t know if he’s “really the one”?

When my girls were little, “Fergie” appeared on some idiotic news show and bemoaned her disillusionment with her royal marriage. The contrast with the queens represented in Beowulf, which we had been studying, was breath-taking, nor did the Little Girls miss the point. “I thought it was going to be like a fairy tale,” whined Fergie, and “I didn’t know that the entire Royal Navy would be going with us on our honeymoon.”

“What the hell’s wrong with her?” stormed Stuart. “She married a PRINCE of ENGLAND! What the hell made her think she was going to have a private life? What an idiot!”

“Yeah!” said Seguin. “I’m only a seven-year-old American and I know better than that!”

Well, my girls, I hope you never forget it, nor that you yourselves are royalty, and daughters of the most-high King. Like the queens in Beowulf, you must marry for the greater glory of God, and conduct yourselves with humility, dignity and unselfishness, observing all the tenets of Chivalry. Therein lies your happiness, and therein lies your answer.

And I have dishes to wash and floors to mop.