BREAKING: Pope Beatifies Nun Who Gave Serious Prophecies On Coming Chastisement

Blessed Elena Aiello

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Today, September 14, 2011 the pope beatifies Sister Elena Aiello, a mystic and stigmatic, who reported visions of the Blessed Virgin Mary and prophecies concerning the coming Chastisement of God that will soon be poured out on the whole world. The prophecies she reported are closely related to the Third Secret of Fatima and concern many of the things reported on this blog.

In this act it would appear the pope is making a clear statement that the prophecies of Sister Elena are "worthy of belief" and the timing of this beatification is worthy of note as well.  It is the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, the fourth anniversary of the effective date for Summorum Pontificum, and the date on which a grand gesture was made on behalf of the Vatican to the SSPX, effectively reinforcing the pope's teaching that Vatican II was merely a "pastoral" council. 

The message of Sister Elena was one of repentance and parallels that of Fatima.  A fairly complete synopsis of her life story can be read here, while a fairly concise record of her prophecies, in relation to the prophecies of similar Church mystics, can be read here.

The Catholic Knight will provide some excerpts here....

On the state of world governments...
“Upon initiating the usual sufferings, about the hour of 1:00 p.m., Jesus appeared to me, covered with wounds and bleeding, saying to me: ‘Behold my child, see to what ends the sins of man have reduced me. The world has lowered itself in overflowing corruption. The governments of the people have risen like demons incarnated, and, while they speak of peace they prepare for war with the most devastating implements to destroy peoples and nations. Men have become ungrateful to My Sacred Heart, and abusing My Mercy, have transformed the earth into a scene of crime’.  - given on April 16, 1954

On the state of families and youth...
‘Numerous scandals are bringing souls to ruin particularly through the corruption of youth. Stirred up, and unrestrained in the enjoyment of the pleasures of the world, they have degraded their spirit in corruption and sin. The bad example of parents trains the family in scandal and infidelity, instead of virtue and prayer, which is almost dead on the lips of many. Stained and withered is the fountain of faith and sanctity the home’. - given on April 16, 1954

“The times are grievous. The whole world is in turmoil, because IT HAS BECOME WORSE THAN AT THE TIME OF THE DELUGE!”  “Everything is in suspense, like a thread; when this thread breaks, the justice of God will fall like a thunderbolt and will complete its terrible course of purification.” - given on December 8, 1956

On the state of the Church...
‘The Church is opposed, and the priests are despised because of the bad ones who give scandal. Help Me, by suffering, to repair for so many offenses, and thus save AT LEAST IN PART, humanity precipitated in a slough of corruption and death’.  - given on April 16, 1954

“My heart bleeds for Italy also, which will be safe only in part for the Pope! Oh!, what grief to see the representative of Christ on earth hated, persecuted, outraged!”  “He, who is the Spiritual Father of the people, the defender of the Faith and of truth, whose face, radiant with light, shines upon the world, is greatly hated.”  “He, who personifies Christ on earth, doing good for all, becomes thus outraged with impunity!”  “Many iniquitous and wicked leaders of the people, who live and drag along with them their people outside the laws of God, showing themselves in sheep’s’ clothing, while being rapacious wolves, have ruined society, stirring it up against God and His Church.”  “How can the world be saved, from the disaster that is about to crash down upon the misleading nations, if man does not repent of his errors and failings? The only salvation is a complete repentance and return to God, and a true devotion to my Immaculate Heart, particularly in the daily recitation of my Rosary.”  “Once there was the chastisement by water, but if there is not a returning to God, there will come the chastisement by fire, which will cover the streets of the world with blood.” - given on March 23, 1961

On the coming Chastisement of God...
“In so saying Our Lord God disappeared. Then the Madonna appeared to me. She was dressed in black, with seven swords piercing Her Immaculate Heart. Coming closer, with an expression of profound sorrow, and with tears on her cheeks, she spoke to me, saying: ‘Listen attentively, and reveal to all:  ‘My Heart is sad for so many sufferings in an impending world in ruin. The justice of Our Father is most offended. Men live in their obstinacy of sin. The wrath of God is near. Soon the world will be afflicted with great calamities, bloody revolutions, frightful hurricanes, and the overflowing of streams and the seas’.  ‘Cry out until the priests of God lend their ears to my voice, to advise men that the time is near at hand, and if men do not return to God with prayers and penances, the world will be overturned in a new and more terrible war. Arms most deadly will destroy peoples and nations! The dictators of the earth, specimens infernal, will demolish the churches and desecrate the Holy Eucharist, and will destroy things most dear. In this impious war, much will be destroyed of that which has been built by the hands of man’.  ‘CLOUDS WITH LIGHTNING FLASHES OF FIRE IN THE SKY AND A TEMPEST OF FIRE SHALL FALL UPON THE WORLD. THIS TERRIBLE SCOURGE, NEVER BEFORE SEEN IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY, WILL LAST SEVENTY HOURS. GODLESS PERSONS WILL BE CRUSHED AND WIPED OUT. MANY WILL BE LOST BECAUSE THEY REMAIN IN THEIR OBSTINACY OF SIN. THEN SHALL BE SEEN THE POWER OF LIGHT OVER THE POWER OF DARKNESS’.  ‘Be not silent, my daughter, because the hours of darkness, of abandonment, are near. ‘I am bending over the world, holding in suspension the justice of God. OTHERWISE THESE THINGS WOULD ALREADY HAVE NOW COME TO PASS. Prayers and penances are necessary because men MUST RETURN TO GOD and to My Immaculate Heart—the Mediatrix of men to God, and thus THE WORLD WILL BE AT LEAST IN PART SAVED’.  ‘Cry out these things to all, like the very echo of my voice. Let this be known to all, because it will help save many souls, and prevent much destruction in the Church and in the world’. - given on April 16, 1954

‘If men do not amend their ways, a terrifying scourge of fire will come down from Heaven upon all the nations of the world, and men will be punished according to the debts contracted with Divine justice. There will be frightful moments for all, because Heaven will be joined with the earth, and all the un-Godly people will be destroyed, SOME NATIONS WILL BE PURIFIED, WHILE OTHERS WILL DISAPPEAR ENTIRELY’.  You are to transmit these warnings to all, in order that the new generation will know that men had been warned in time to turn to God by doing penance, and thus could have avoided these punishments’.  But when will all this come about?’ I asked Our Lady.” ‘My daughter,’ answered the Blessed Mother, ‘the time is not far off. When men least expect it, the course of Divine Justice will be accomplished’. - given on April 8, 1955

Sister Elena Aiello asked Our Blessed Mother: “What will become of Italy? Will Rome be saved?” “The Madonna answered:” ‘In part, by the Pope! The Church will be in travail, but the forces of Hell cannot prevail! You must suffer for the Pope and Christ, and thus Christ will be safe on earth; and the Pope, with his redemptive word, will, in part, save the world.’  “The Madonna then came closer, and with a sad expression, showed me the flames of Hell. She said:” ‘Satan reigns and triumphs on earth! See how the souls are falling into Hell. See how high the flames are, and the souls who fall into them like flakes of snow look like transparent embers! How many sparks! How many cries of hate, and of despair! How much pain!’  ‘See how many priestly souls! Look at the sign of their consecration in their transparent hands! (In the palms of their hands the sign of the cross, in more vivid fire, could clearly be seen!) What torture, my daughter, in my maternal Heart! Great is my sorrow to see that men do not change! The justice of the Father requires reparation — otherwise many will be lost!’   “See how Russia will burn!” Before my eyes there extended an immense field covered with flames and smoke, in which souls were submerged as if in a sea of fire!  “And all this fire,” concluded the Madonna, “is not that which will fall from the hands of men, but will be hurled directly from the Angels (at the time of the great chastisement or “housecleaning” that will come upon the earth). Therefore I ask prayers, penance and sacrifice, so I may act as Mediatrix for my Son in order to save souls.” - given on April 7, 1950

The Madonna speaks: “The hour of the justice of God is close, and will be terrible!”  “Tremendous scourges are impending over the world, and various nations are struck by epidemics, famines, great earthquakes, terrific hurricanes, with overflowing rivers and seas, which bring ruin and death.”  “If the people do not recognize in these scourges (of nature) the warnings of Divine Mercy, and do not return to God with truly Christian living, ANOTHER TERRIBLE WAR WILL COME FROM THE EAST TO THE WEST. RUSSIA WITH HER SECRET ARMIES WILL BATTLE AMERICA; WILL OVERRUN EUROPE.  The river Rhine will be overflowing with corpses and blood. Italy, also, will be harassed by a great revolution, and the Pope will suffer terribly.”  “Spread the devotion to my Immaculate Heart, in order that many souls maybe conquered by my love and that many sinners may return to my Maternal Heart. Do not fear, for I will accompany with my maternal protection my faithful ones, and all those who accept my urgent warnings, and they — especially by the recitations of my Rosary — will be saved.”  “Satan goes furiously through this disordered world, and soon will show all his might. But, because of my Immaculate Heart, the triumph of Light will not delay in its triumph over the power of darkness, and the world, finally, will have tranquility and peace.”  - given on August 22, 1960

BREAKING: Oslo Terrorist is a Freemason

Anders Behring Breivik

DEVELOPING UPDATE (7-25-2011): Analysis of Breivik's manifesto reveals that Breivik denies a personal Christian faith, doubts the existence of God, and no longer prays. He does however consider himself a Darwinist, and asserts the primacy of Nordic Paganism alongside Europe's historic Judeo-Christian culture.read full story here
DEVELOPING UPDATE (7-26-2011): Breivik wrote on page 1307 of his online manifesto: “If you have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God then you are a religious Christian. Myself and many more like me do not necessarily have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and God. We do however believe in Christianity as a cultural, social, identity and moral platform. This makes us Christian.” What Breivik is describing here is something called "National Christianity" or "Christian Nationalism," meaning a belief in Christian identity in the same way one would adhere to a national, cultural or ethnic identity. It has nothing to do with practicing the religion of Christianity. By his own testimony here, Breivik is a "National Christian" or "Christian Nationalist" which by all definitions is the exact opposite of a "Christian Fundamentalist."

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The confessed Oslo Terrorist - Anders Behring Breivik - is currently depicted by the mainstream news as a "Christian Fundamentalist." While this may, or may not, be true (more probably not) some new information is currently surfacing about the man. This picture to the right depicts Breivik wearing the traditional Masonic apron of the Norwegian Order of Freemasons. You can read more about this Masonic order HERE.

Norwegian Masonic Apron
3rd Degree

It should be pointed out here that about 80% of the people in Norway are officially registered by the state run church as "Christian," and one cannot be removed from that listing unless one submits a formal request to the government in writing. So nobody here is contesting that Breivik was listed as a "Christian," as about 80% of the Norwegian population is officially listed as such. (This in no way reflects the number of Norwegians who actually practice their registered faith, which is considerably lower.) Furthermore, it should be noted that many branches of Freemasonry have a historical connection to mainstream liberal Protestantism. So from the perspective of a liberal Protestant Christian, Freemasonry is perfectly compatible with the Christian religion. The issue explored in this blog has nothing to do with how Mr. Breivik identifies himself religiously. The issue concerning this blogger is how the ignorant mainstream news media has maliciously applied the term "Christian Fundamentalist" to describe him, when in fact all the evidence points to the contrary. Breivik may have had some beliefs that could be loosely described as socially conservative, but his Christianity (particularly his dogmatic theology) would have to be quite liberal to be compatible with his membership in the Masonic Lodge.

Whatever comes out about this monster, one thing is certain. He is far more complex than a common "Christian Fundamentalist." As the average Christian Fundamentalist is usually anti-Masonic. Christian Fundamentalists are generally Protestants, and this is one issue Roman Catholics and Protestant Fundamentalists tend to agree on. Protestant Fundamentalists generally regard Freemasonry as occult and Pagan in nature, in essence very anti-Christian. The Catholic Church cites different reasons, but likewise forbids all it's members from becoming Freemasons under pain of excommunication. While the Catholic Church's position on this is firm, the Protestant Fundamentalist position is absolute and militant. They generally insist that "Christians cannot be Masons." Given the general position of Christian Fundamentalists on this issue, and given the fact that Breivik listed Freemasonry as an "interest" on his Facebook page up to the day of the massacre, it is virtually impossible for him to truly be a "Christian Fundamentalist." He is more likely a deranged lunatic who doesn't know enough about conservative Protestant Christianity to understand that his membership and interest in the Masonic Lodge contradicts everything "conservative Christianity" is supposed to stand for.

In fact, Breivik was baptized into the state-run liberal Protestant Church (Lutheran Church of Norway) which he says he did "by his own free will," but later became disillusioned with the way in which Liberal Protestantism has sacrificed much of it's historic Christian character. He once blogged... "Today's Protestant church is a joke. Priests in jeans who march for Palestine and churches that look like minimalist shopping centres. I am a supporter of an indirect collective conversion of the Protestant church back to the Catholic." Breivik (a political Zionist) obviously had little knowledge of Catholicism, for if he did, he would have known that one of the biggest Christian supporters of a Palestinian State is none other than the Catholic Church. In light of his membership in the Masonic Lodge however, Breivik could not be a Catholic, for that would require breaking membership with the Lodge prior to reception into the Catholic Church. More likely, Breivik was lamenting the loss of historic Christian culture in this above quote, which according to his manifesto he saw on par with historic Nordic Pagan culture. The parallels between Anders Breivik and Timothy McVeigh (Oklahoma City Terrorist) are starting to surface in the most startling way. According to Breivik's manifesto he was originally a Liberal Protestant, but later lost his Christian faith, doubted the existence of God, and praised the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin. McVeigh in comparison, was raised a Roman Catholic, but later lost his Christian faith, believed in an impersonal and naturalistic deity, declaring that his "only god is science."

A YouTube video posted by Breivik depicts himself as a Knight Templar and lone crusader against the failed multicultural experiment in Europe. (Note: "Knights Templar" are associated with Freemasons.) Muslims and Marxists are cited as the object of his contempt, but native Europeans are held responsible for their takeover of European society. (This may explain his rationale for the attack on youths of the liberal Norwegian Labor Party.) While some European and American conservatives might sympathize with his strong stand against multiculturalism, none would sympathize with the extreme he took it to. Having watched the video it reminded me of old Nazi propaganda. Though Breivik was apparently not a formal member of any Neo-Nazi groups, he was known to post messages on some of their Internet forum space.

In truth, two crimes have been committed here. The first is the unspeakable terrorism of Anders Breivik, and the second is the eager (and nearly gleeful) way in which the mainstream news media depicts him as a "Christian Fundamentalist." A similar event happened in the United States back in 1995 when Timothy McVeigh used a similar fertilizer bomb to destroy the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. It was up to that time, the worst terrorist event in U.S. history. In the days leading up to the capture of McVeigh the mainstream news media characterized him as a "right-wing Christian Fundamentalist." In the end, we discovered that McVeigh was an agnostic and had abandoned his belief in the Christian God long ago. In his own words, McVeigh's "only god is science."

What we see in these two events is very revealing. The mainstream news media obviously has an ax to grind against conservative Protestantism and traditional Catholicism. They have demonstrated a repeating pattern of seizing upon any opportunity to label a known terrorist as a "Christian Fundamentalist," when in fact the evidence consistently points in the opposite direction. If there was ever any doubt before, it should be dispelled now, the mainstream news media is ANTI-CHRISTIAN and CHRISTOPHOBIC in the most vial and bigoted way imaginable. They are desperately seeking to connect conservative Christians to acts of terrorism whenever possible. It amazes me that such seemingly professional people could be so ignorant and prejudiced.

The underlying message of the mainstream news media is that Fundamentalism (of any type) causes terrorism. This is a farce! What causes terrorism is the carcinogenic belief that the ends justify the means. From this mindset comes everything from war to genocide. It also spawns terrorism. Those who believe in it have subscribed to the notion that human beings are expendable to various "causes." After all is said and done, regardless of the ramblings of the lunatic behind it, that was the cause of the Oslo Massacre. That is what motivated Anders Breivik to commit his terrorist acts and kill so many innocent people. In his mind, and in his moral code, the ends justified the means, and the lives of his victims were simply a means to accomplish his end. Whatever "end" he desired is irrelevant. What brought about the bloodshed was his Machiavellian morality. Yes, it really is that simple.

Despite all the mystery surrounding this story right now, there is something we do know. Our Lord Jesus Christ instructed Pontius Pilate with the following words...

Jesus answered, "My kingship is not of this world; if my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed over to the Jews; but my kingship is not from the world." - John 18:36

There is no justification for this man's hideous act of terrorism. The fact that he did take matters to unprovoked physical violence demonstrates that he is NOT a servant of Christ. Our prayers go out to the victims in Norway, most especially to the parents and families of the murdered teens on Utoya island. May God comfort them in this horrible time of crisis.

The Cult of the Omnipotent State

ATHENA
Greek Goddess of Government & Democracy

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: The state is their God. Not so much in their words, but in their actions, they demonstrate their belief that there is no power higher than the state, and all morality is based entirely on state law, which of course can be changed to suit their fancy. Outside of state law there is no morality, and outside of the state there is no god greater than the state. All gods, most especially the Christian God, must be subject to the state. Of course these people are a little timid about enforcing their state-god upon the Muslims, but make no mistake about it, they believe Allah is subject to the state as well, and the same goes for any follower of Mohamed.

So who are these people? Are they the ancient Greeks or Romans? No. The ancient Greeks and Romans were more direct and honest about their intentions. They made no attempt to hide their state sponsored Paganism. Are they the modern Chinese Communists? Not exactly, though they have a lot in common with the Chi-coms, they are not the same people. So who are they?

These are the modern Left-wing Liberals driving the state and cultural entertainment industry in Europe, Canada, the American Left-Coast and New England. Their goddess is the state, and they put all their cares and dreams at her feet. Anyone who puts the government in the place of God is part of this cult. No temples have been built to honor the "cult of the omnipotent state" but there need not be any. Every temple imaginable already exists -- in Washington DC -- the Mecca of Democratic Imperialism. We could say that various idols have been erected in cities across America, to the cult of omnipotent government, but that would be a stretch, for art means different things to different people. No, modern worship of Athen's goddess is embodied more in actions and attitude, than in wood and stone.

We began to see the cult of the omnipotent state arise in New England and the Left Coast during the late 1960s through 1990s. These became the strongholds of modern Athenian worship. This of course was immediately adopted by Washington DC, which seized every opportunity to consolidate power and centralize bureaucracy. Washington DC however, was not the only place where the cult seized power. As I said, all of the West Coast states, along with New England became firmly entrenched in the cult, and now it is spreading into the Rust Belt states and even the Northern Midwestern states. The State of Florida has not escaped it's influence either. We have seen it's national imposition upon all the people of America through the United States Supreme Court with the issues of abortion, religion in public schools, and eminent domain. However, the states are now jumping on the cult's bandwagon concerning the issue of gay-marriage.

THE LIE...

State advocates of gay-marriage assure churches and synagogues that the creation of gay-marriage will have no effect whatsoever on the free exercise of religion. They promise that churches will continue to be allowed to not recognize gay-marriages and not be forced to perform them. They are also assured this will in no way have any effect on their private charitable institutions. THIS IS A LIE!!!! And SHAME ON YOU if you believe it! The evidence is plain for all the world to see. Catholic Charities have already been shut down in Massachusetts, California and Illinois over the gay-marriage issue. This is because these states were attempting to legally require Catholic adoption agencies to adopt children to gay couples, on the grounds that failure to comply amounted to discrimination and therefore a violation of state law. So you see, the cult of the omnipotent state requires that all bow the knee to Athena, including churches, synagogues and Catholic Charities. The next step is hate-crimes laws, wherein pastors will likely be prosecuted for preaching against the sin of homosexuality. Already, a bill has been passed in California, making it officially ILLEGAL to have a Bible on public school campuses. The cult of the omnipotent state marches on.

ISLAMOPHOBIA

Nowhere is the fear of Muslims more evident than among modern worshipers of Athena. Well, at least in America anyway. They're starting to get a little more courageous in Europe these days. American Athena worshipers do believe that Allah and Mohamed are subject to Athena, and they must submit to the state no matter how much state laws violate their religious beliefs. Muslims reading this should take note here. The cult of the omnipotent state makes no distinction between Allah and Jehovah, Mohamed and Jesus, Muslims and Christians. All are subject to Athena -- the omnipotent state -- who through democracy and kritocracy impose all forms of immorality upon the churches, mosques and synagogues. The only reason why the cult of the omnipotent state has not cracked down on mosques in America is because the established worshipers of Athena are still afraid of Muslims. As demonstrated in Europe however, their fear of Muslims will subside eventually, and when it does, Muslim institutions will be forced to recognize gay-marriage too.

American Muslims should fight back (non-violently of course), and there is only one way to do it. Start organizing ritual worship for Muslims schoolchildren in public schools. Tell the school boards and superintendents that if they don't allow prayer rugs and hijabs on campus, than they are violating your religion and your rights. Fight them in the courts, and demonstrate, demonstrate, DEMONSTRATE! We Christians will probably join you since we've been fighting them on this for decades. If you know any Muslim Americans, please make sure they read this article.

CHRISTOPHOBIA

The cult of the omnipotent state has always feared Christianity, perhaps more so than any other religion. But in their fear of Christianity, the worshipers of Athena have lost all fear of Christians. They've been persecuting us for decades you see. They have banned us from praying in public schools, and if the Muslims begin to demonstrate against the state to defend their religious rights, than I'm afraid we have no choice but to join them now, for what the Athenian worshipers are now doing to them, they've been doing to us for decades.

MODERN PAGANISM

The cult of the omnipotent state is nothing new. Variations of it were put forward in ancient Egypt, Babylon, Greece and Rome. The ancient Greek cult of Athena probably best represents modern Pagan Imperialism. This is because Athena was the Greek goddess of war, craftsmen and government. Democracy was born in ancient Athens -- named after the goddess Athena -- and America's founding fathers made sure to model our physical institutions of national government after the architecture of the ancient Greeks and Romans. In times past, America still had a strong Christian society, and so appeals to Greek Paganism in government were simply viewed as a harmless novelty. Indeed at one time they may have been, but today, the secular culture is such that the attitudes and actions of those running the government (both state and federal) are far more "Pagan" than America's Founding Fathers could have ever imagined. Ancient Paganism was far more obvious and honest about it's intentions, and worship of their deities often took on religious ceremonies as well as state laws. Modern Paganism is a different story. As the modern world is infested with notions of atheism and secular deism, the cult of the omnipotent state (Athena) is played out more in actions and laws exclusively, while physical representations of the deity are limited to subjective art.

Western Powers Are Behind Arab Revolutions

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Hindsight being 20/20, it would appear that as we've had time to reflect on the events to 2011 thus far, patterns are emerging, and the truth is beginning to come out. Our suspicions are being confirmed.

Western Liberals, particularly in the United States, have for the past three years (at least) been working behind the scenes to create these riotous revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East. Now when I say "Liberals" I'm including Neoconservatives in the United States as well. I'm talking about everyone from the far Left (George Soros and company) to the libertarian centrist (George Bush and friends). I am not talking about the truly right wing (paleoconservative) groups, which have been disenfranchised in the United States and Europe for decades.

Information emerging from Wikileaks is starting to confirm many of the suspicions we had, but were hesitant to voice, while the riots were beginning to unfold weeks ago. What we have here is an elaborate strategy that has been executed with precision to elicit a certain response in the Arab world. The manipulation began under the George W. Bush administration and is now continuing under the administration of Barack Obama. While the United States seems to be the principle agent, European powers are likewise in collaboration. This helps to explain the United States' seeming "standoffish" posture while the riot-revolutions unfold. The United States has been intimately involved, but this has been behind the scenes and under the table. Moving in too fast in a public way would tip the world off as to what is really going on.

In dealing with the Arab world the United States us using a threefold strategy to get what it wants. Here's how it works...

1. First, major corporations within the United States (and Europe) pitch business deals to Arab powers, promising money and prestige to any Arab leader that will cooperate.
2. Next, if the first step should fail, the CIA steps in and attempts to orchestrate a revolution from inside the nation, to change the regime and place people in power who will be more willing to make business deals with American (and European) companies. 
3. Lastly, if the second step should fail, a pretense for war is manufactured resulting in military action from American and NATO powers, again attempting to produce a regime change.

We saw this entire scenario unfold in Iraq and Afghanistan.  We've been watching it unfold in Iran for about a decade now, and the plan has met considerable resistance from there with multiple failures in Step Two, and preparation being made for Step Three.  In the last two months we have watched Step Two unfold all across the Arab world as more and more evidence continues to surface of deep American involvement.  Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Tunisia, Bahrain, Oman, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Syria; are all experiencing unrest.  So far the Saudis, Jordanians, Kuwaitis and Syrians have been able to pacify their people with financial aid to citizens and the promise of reform.  Saudi Arabia has been having increasing trouble in the south and is now moving troops into Bahrain for a direct confrontation with protesters.  Egypt's president, Hosni Mubarak was not so lucky, and became the first leader to be ousted in this recent clandestine Euro-American venture.   The fate of Libya's dictator Muammar Gaddafi remains uncertain, though it would appear he is winning at the moment. (You will notice the emerging Euro-American pretense for war starting to develop as the West mulls over a transition to Step Three above.)  If Gaddafi prevails we can probably expect the accusation of "war crimes" and "ethnic cleansing" against him to come out of Europe and the United States as they attempt to coax their people to support a military "solution." 

Of coarse the logical question for anyone to ask is "WHY?"  Why would the Western world do this?  What is the purpose?  What's the benefit?  You might be surprised to learn is not about oil.  There is plenty of oil all over the world, especially in North America.  No, its about something a little more nuanced called "peak oil."  What is "peak oil?"  Here's is the definition from Wikipedia...

(Wikipedia) - Peak oil is the point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction is reached, after which the rate of production enters terminal decline. This concept is based on the observed production rates of individual oil wells, and the combined production rate of a field of related oil wells. The aggregate production rate from an oil field over time usually grows exponentially until the rate peaks and then declines—sometimes rapidly—until the field is depleted. This concept is derived from the Hubbert curve, and has been shown to be applicable to the sum of a nation’s domestic production rate, and is similarly applied to the global rate of petroleum production. Peak oil is often confused with oil depletion; peak oil is the point of maximum production while depletion refers to a period of falling reserves and supply.

source

Now to translate this into common English here is what it means.  There is plenty of oil all over the earth.  In fact, there is considerable evidence mounting that oil isn't even a "fossil fuel" and that it's actually produced as a byproduct of geological forces deep inside the earth.  NASA believes that there is evidence of oil on other worlds with high volcanic activity, and so if that is the case, it can't be the result of decaying dinosaurs and plant life as previously thought.  All that aside nobody is talking about oil depletion here, as it would appear that oil may very well be a renewable source of perpetual energy provided by geological-volcanic activity deep beneath the earth's surface.  So if the modern science is right, the earth will never run out of oil.  It just takes time for the oil to bubble up high enough in the earth's crust for us to drill down and get it.  That being said we run into another problem.  It's not about how much oil exists, or will exist in the future.  It's about how much oil can be extracted at a time even if every country is using all of its resources to get at it.  When you reach the maximum extraction rate possible, and the amount of oil consumption surpasses that, you have reached "peak oil."  In other words, it's not about how much refined oil hits the market, but rather it's about how fast it's being consumed by the industrial world.  Once you hit "peak oil" fuel prices go up, way up, and that slows down economies and threatens economic growth.  Without economic growth a nation's political power and corporate hegemony begins to decline, and that spells bad news for the people in charge.

Ever since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991 a new bipolar conflict has emerged between the United States and Russia.  That conflict is over peak oil, and both the United States and Russia are trying to gain control of as much oil producing countries as possible to gain the upper hand when peak oil occurs.  It's expected to occur sometime within the next few decades, so each superpower it vying for as much control as possible.  The nation that has the most control over the most oil production suffers the least in a peak oil world economy.  The Soviet Union lists as it's oil "producers" most of the "stan" states (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan) along with Azerbaijan, Ukraine and Iran. Within these states exist vital pipelines and oil fields supplying the new Russian Federation. Recently, the United States attempted to cut a deal with the nation of Georgia, promising oil revenue from the West and military protection under NATO. This was considered a political "invasion" into the Russian sphere of influence and resulted in a Russian military counter-invasion of Georgia in 2008. Russia seized a northern province in Georgia that contained the coveted oil pipeline, and accused Georgia of "ethnic cleansing" to justify it. (This was a direct "thumb in the nose" to NATO allies which accused Serbia of the same thing in Kosovo to justify the NATO bombing of this Russian ally in the late 1990s.) It was a little case of what comes around goes around. 

Among America's allied oil producers are most South American nations and many nations within the Arab world. However, the United States has run into a problem lately.  The Arab world has been getting "uppity" in recent decades, namely since the creation of OPEC and the tight control of oil production which dictates fuel prices.  The United States took it's currency off the gold standard in 1971 and indirectly placed it on the "oil standard" in that oil is now traded in U.S. dollars.  Thus as a result, when the price of oil goes up the dollar is weaker, and when the price of oil goes down the dollar is stronger.

After the economic collapse of the United States and Europe in late 2008, the western economies were propped up artificially with various bailout "stimulus packages" created by Western governments.  The United States of course led the way with the largest stimulus package and the printing of U.S. dollars to pay for it.  With this massive injection of liquidity (money printing) of U.S. dollars into foreign markets, the price of food rapidly increased creating inflation.  These increased food prices destabilized various economies that trade in U.S. dollars, particularly the Arab nations.  Euro-American involvement in clandestine populace movements sponsored riots and revolutions in these nations.  The idea here was to force Arab leaders to start pumping more oil to stabilize the U.S. dollar and give the Western world an upper hand in the emerging peak oil economy.  Those leaders that don't comply face more protests, riots and revolutions to come.  It's a nasty little game we're playing to maintain our political influence, economic prowess and corporate hegemony.  We're doing it to keep the Russians from getting the upper hand and maintain our superpower status both domestically and internationally.

The problem here is this is how we're treating our supposed "allies" in the Arab world. Granted, they haven't been treating us too nicely in recent decades, but nevertheless, we need their support to prevent Russia from gaining a peak oil advantage.  Supporting and sponsoring riots and revolutions within the nations of your supposed "allies" is not very conducive to good relations.  We're effectively acting more like a bully than a friend.  The only way this pays off for the United States and Europe is if it's successful, and regime changes occur all throughout the Arab world, but even then it's risky business, because if those new regimes are taken over by radicals, we could be in a lot of trouble.  Furthermore, if these riot-revolutions are not successful, we have just effectively pissed off our "allies" who give us the upper hand in a peak oil economy. On thing is for sure, if Gaddafi survives the attempted coupe in his nation of Libya, he'll never sell another drop of oil to Europe again.  His oil will go to Russia instead.

The problem with Western Liberals (both Leftist Socialists and Centrist Libertarians) is that they both believe their economic models will work just fine in the Arab world since they have proved to work so swimmingly well in the Western world.  (Well, sort of.)  So the Centrist Libertarians (otherwise known as the Neoconservatives of George W. Bush and company) have pushed to recreate the Arab world in the Western world's image, assuming that this will result in greater oil trading partners over time.  While the Leftist Socialists (George Soros and company) also believe their models will work well in the Arab world and so they likewise work with the Centrist Libertarians to accomplish the same goal of regime change.  In the end however, their final objectives are considerably different.  The Centrist Libertarians (Neoconservatives) would like to create a world where the United States and Europe have the upper hand in a peak oil economy, while the Leftist Socialists envision a new order in which there is an "open society" whereby socialist nations trade oil on equal footing.  Both groups are terribly mistaken.

The Arab world isn't going to fall for the Neoconservative or Socialist vision.  The Arab world has it's own vision and that is Shariah law.  Now there are various degrees of this vision, and a lot of it depends on what part of the Arab world we're talking about, but the basic premise of the vision is shared throughout.  They envision Islamic Sharia, under Arab political prowess, with their own economic hegemony.  The United States and Russia can just be dammed as far as their concerned.  So long as their leaders continue to cooperate with both superpowers they will be vulnerable to uprisings.  Right now the Islamic religious leaders in the Arab world are using the subversion of the CIA to their advantage.  They know that once their leaders are overthrown there will be a period of vulnerability which they can use to seize power.  It's happened before (Iran in 1979), and it will likely happen again.  Both the United States and Russia are playing with fire here, but the United States is more deeply entangled, at least as far as we can tell for now.  It is likely the whole thing will blow up in our faces in the not-too-distant future.

Those of us familiar with Catholic prophecy concerning the Chastisement of God (which we are now in and will likely soon conclude) will result in the fall of Europe to Muslim and Marxist powers in an upheaval of anarchy.  This may very well be payback for Euro-American subversion in the Arab world.  We also know that Russia is involved in this somehow, and it would appear the United States is strangely silent, as if we are unable to do anything.  We know this results in the fall of the Vatican in Rome, the assassination of our pope, and the rise of a new pope in exile who will crown a new French king that will eventually reestablish the Holy Roman Empire.  We also know that nothing short of a direct intervention from God, a disaster of epic proportions and unrivaled in all of recorded history, will be the decisive blow to the powers of evil in this age.  Before that happens however, the Church in Europe will be decimated, and European Christians will face the threshold of extinction.  Exactly when and how this will all unfold is not known to us at this time, but with each passing month the emerging picture becomes a little more clear. 

The Weakness of Democracy

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: "It is the natural progression of all representative government to inch toward socialism and tyranny." Yes, you can quote me on that. Indeed there are short periods of time when things move too fast, and the people temporarily return to their traditional sensibilities, but this is only a setback. It doesn't last. In time the steady march toward socialism and tyranny will continue. This is the lesson of the last 100 years.

(Screwtape Proposes a Toast, 1959) - Hidden in the heart of this striving for Liberty there was also a deep hatred of personal freedom. That invaluable man Rousseau first revealed it. In his perfect democracy, you remember, only the state religion is permitted, slavery is restored, and the individual is told that he has really willed (though he didn’t know it) whatever the Government tells him to do. From that starting point, via Hegel (another indispensable propagandist on our side) we easily contrived both the Nazi and the Communist state….

Democracy is the word with which you must lead them by the nose…. [T]hey should never be allowed to give this word a clear and definable meaning. They won’t. It will never occur to them that democracy is properly the name of a political system, even a system of voting, and that this has only the most remote and tenuous connection with what you are trying to sell them. Nor of course must they ever be allowed to raise Aristotle’s question: whether “democratic behaviour” means the behaviour that democracies like or the behaviour that will preserve a democracy. For if they did, it could hardly fail to occur to them that these need not be the same.

You are to use the word purely as an incantation; if you like, purely for its selling power. It is a name they venerate. And of course it is connected with the political ideal that men should be equally treated. You then make a stealthy transition in their minds from this political ideal to a factual belief that all men are equal…. As a result you can use the word democracy to sanction in his thought the most degrading (and also the least enjoyable) of human feelings. You can get him to practise, not only without shame but with a positive glow of self-approval, conduct which, if undefended by the magic word, would be universally derided.

The feeling I mean is of course that which prompts a man to say I’m as good as you….

No man who says I’m as good as you believes it. He would not say it if he did. The St. Bernard never says it to the toy dog, nor the scholar to the dunce, nor the employable to the bum, nor the pretty woman to the plain. The claim to equality, outside the strictly political field, is made only by those who feel themselves to be in some way inferior. What it expresses is precisely the itching, smarting, writhing awareness of an inferiority which the patient refuses to accept.

And therefore resents. Yes, and therefore resents every kind of superiority in others; denigrates it; wishes its annihilation. Presently he suspects every mere difference of being a claim to superiority…. “They’ve no business to be different. It’s undemocratic.”

Now, this useful phenomenon is in itself by no means new. Under the name of Envy it has been known to humans for thousands of years. But hitherto they always regarded it as the most odious, and also the most comical, of vices. Those who were aware of feeling it felt it with shame; those who were not gave it no quarter in others. The delightful novelty of the present situation is that you can sanction it — make it respectable and even laudable — by the incantatory use of the word democratic.

Under the influence of this incantation those who are in any or every way inferior can labour more wholeheartedly and successfully than ever before to pull down everyone else to their own level. But that is not all. Under the same influence, those who come, or could come, nearer to a full humanity, actually draw back from fear of being undemocratic…. They might (horror of horrors!) become individuals….

Meanwhile, as a delightful by-product, the few (fewer every day) who will not be made Normal or Regular and Like Folks and Integrated increasingly become in reality the prigs and cranks which the rabble would in any case have believed them to be. For suspicion often creates what it expects…. As a result we now have an intelligentsia which, though very small, is very useful to the cause of Hell.

But that is a mere by-product. What I want to fix your attention on is the vast, overall movement towards the discrediting, and finally the elimination, of every kind of human excellence – moral, cultural, social, or intellectual. And is it not pretty to notice how “democracy” (in the incantatory sense) is now doing for us the work that was once done by the most ancient Dictatorships, and by the same methods?…

Once you have grasped the tendency, you can easily predict its future developments; especially as we ourselves will play our part in the developing. The basic principle of the new education is to be that dunces and idlers must not be made to feel inferior to intelligent and industrious pupils. That would be “undemocratic.” These differences between pupils – for they are obviously and nakedly individual differences – must be disguised. This can be done at various levels. At universities, examinations must be framed so that nearly all the students get good marks. Entrance examinations must be framed so that all, or nearly all, citizens can go to universities, whether they have any power (or wish) to profit by higher education or not. At schools, the children who are too stupid or lazy to learn languages and mathematics and elementary science can be set to doing things that children used to do in their spare time…. Whatever nonsense they are engaged in must have – I believe the English already use the phrase – “parity of esteem”…. Children who are fit to proceed to a higher class may be artificially kept back, because the others would get a trauma…by being left behind. The bright pupil thus remains democratically fettered to his own age group throughout his school career….

In a word, we may reasonably hope for the virtual abolition of education when I’m as good as you has fully had its way. All incentives to learn and all penalties for not learning will be prevented; who are they to overtop their fellows? And anyway the teachers – or should I say, nurses? – will be far too busy reassuring the dunces and patting them on the back to waste any time on real teaching. We shall no longer have to plan and toil to spread imperturbable conceit and incurable ignorance among men. The little vermin themselves will do it for us.

Of course, this would not follow unless all education became state education. But it will. That is part of the same movement. Penal taxes, designed for that purpose, are liquidating the Middle Class, the class who were prepared to save and spend and make sacrifices in order to have their children privately educated. The removal of this class, besides linking up with the abolition of education, is, fortunately, an inevitable effect of the spirit that says I’m as good as you. This was, after all, the social group which gave to the humans the overwhelming majority of their scientists, physicians, philosophers, theologians, poets, artists, composers, architects, jurists, and administrators. If ever there were a bunch of stalks that needed their tops knocked off, it was surely they. As an English politician remarked not long ago, “A democracy does not want great men.”

We, in Hell, would welcome the disappearance of democracy in the strict sense of that word, the political arrangement so called. Like all forms of government, it often works to our advantage, but on the whole less often than other forms. And what we must realize is that “democracy” in the diabolical sense (I’m as good as you, Being Like Folks, Togetherness) is the fittest instrument we could possibly have for extirpating political democracies from the face of the earth.

For “democracy” or the “democratic spirit” (diabolical sense) leads to a nation without great men, a nation mainly of subliterates, full of the cocksureness which flattery breeds on ignorance, and quick to snarl or whimper at the first sign of criticism. And that is what Hell wishes every democratic people to be. For when such a nation meets in conflict a nation where children have been made to work at school, where talent is placed in high posts, and where the ignorant mass are allowed no say at all in public affairs, only one result is possible….

It is our function to encourage the behaviour, the manners, the whole attitude of mind, which democracies naturally like and enjoy, because these are the very things which, if unchecked, will destroy democracy. You would almost wonder that even humans don’t see it themselves. Even if they don’t read Aristotle (that would be undemocratic) you would have thought the French Revolution would have taught them that the behaviour aristocrats naturally like is not the behaviour that preserves aristocracy. They might then have applied the same principle to all forms of government….

The overthrow of free peoples and the multiplication of slave states are for us a means (besides, of course, being fun); but the real end is the destruction of individuals. For only individuals can be saved or damned, can become sons of the Enemy or food for us. The ultimate value, for us, of any revolution, war, or famine lies in the individual anguish, treachery, hatred, rage, and despair which it may produce. I’m as good as you is a useful means for the destruction of democratic societies. But it has a far deeper value as an end in itself, as a state of mind which, necessarily excluding humility, charity, contentment, and all the pleasures of gratitude or admiration, turns a human being away from almost every road which might finally lead him to Heaven.

source

Pope Pius IX and the Confederacy

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: One of the most overlooked facts of the American Civil War Era is the sympathy the South gained from Europe's most influential monarch - the pope of Rome.

Pope Pius IX never actually signed any kind of alliance or 'statement of support' with the Confederate States of America, but to those who understand the nuance of papal protocol, what he did do was quite astonishing. He acknowledged President Jefferson Davis as the "Honorable President of the Confederate States of America."

From this we can glean three things about Pope Pius IX...

1. He called Jefferson Davis by the customary title "Honorable."
   
2. He acknowledged him as president of a nation.
   
3. In doing so, he (at least on a personal level) effectively recognized the Confederate States of America as a sovereign entity, separate from the United States of America.

News of this reached the North, and the Whitehouse was considerably irate about it, prompting a response from the Vatican that the pope's letter did not amount to an "official" recognition in the "formal sense."

The pope's letter to Jefferson Davis was accompanied by an autographed picture of the pope.

There are many possible reasons why this pontiff would be sympathetic to the CSA and her president, but the most likely one was that Pope Pius IX recognized in the traditional Christian culture of the South, a mindset opposed to the advance of liberal Modernism. You see it was Pius IX who composed the famous "Syllabus of Errors," which condemned the Modernist philosophies of liberalism, humanism, secularism and marxism. It is speculated that Pius IX saw in the Confederacy a political movement steeped in European Christian tradition, and therefore a potential ally against liberal modernism on the North American continent. Alas, the Confederacy was ultimately defeated, and President Davis was captured. As the 'Deconstruction' of the South commenced, and Davis awaited his trial, it is understandable why the pope would be sympathetic.

Pope Pius IX was a revered figure in the post war South. General Robert E. Lee kept a portrait of him in his house, and referred to him as the South's only true friend during her time of need. Both Davis and Lee were Episcopalians, as were many Southerners before the War, a denomination which had many things in common with Catholicism before the 20th century influence of Modernism of course. Davis was frequently visited by Southern Catholic nuns during his imprisonment, who delivered messages for him and prayed for his release. He eventually was released, having never stood trial, on the grounds that he committed no real crime. It is believed the majority of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court at that time acknowledged the right of secession.

Southern Americans of today should take comfort knowing that the old Confederacy did have a European friend, and it just happened to be one of the most respected men in the world - not only a head of state, but also the leader of the world's largest Christian religion. The day will come when Pope Pius IX will be canonized as a Saint. He has already been beatified, which puts him well on his way. When that day comes, Southerners will have a special bragging right, not enjoyed by many nations even today. They will not only be able to boast of his sympathies during and after the great War, but they will also have in their collective possession a relic of the man - a hand written letter and autographed photograph.

On The American Civil War:

The American Civil War cannot be cast in the simplistic terms of pro-slavery verses anti-slavery. Lincoln said the war had nothing to do with slavery, and General U.S. Grant said that if he thought the war was about freeing the slaves, he would turn in his sword and fight for the other side. Grant was also a slave owner before, during and after the war.

In contrast, General Robert E. Lee was an abolitionist. Many Southerners shared his views. President Jefferson Davis requested land owners to promise their slaves freedom in exchange for military service. The abolition movement was also growing in the South before the war. The 13th Amendment that legally freed the slaves, (not the Emancipation Proclamation), was actually ratified by many Southern states before many Northern states.

The historical fact is that the Civil War was a conflict between TWO slave nations - the USA and the CSA. Granted, the USA had already banned slavery in some states, but the same movement was growing in some CSA states as well. Historical revisionists have spent a little over 100 years trying to paint the Civil War as some idealistic holy crusade against the injustice of slavery. That image doesn't hold up to the historical facts. The Civil War was mainly about money and power - particularly taxes and investments. What the South did was no different than what America's Founding Fathers did during the American Revolution. Both were acts of rebellion and armed insurrection. Both attempted to establish free and independent nations. Both were dominated by slave economies. The only difference between them is this. In the American Revolution the rebels won. In the American Civil War they didn't.

Hitler's Pope

(Philadelphia Evening Bulletin) - ...Hitler's Pope has been criticized for its accuracy and dedication to objective history, and Mr. Cornwell admits that since its publication, his views have undergone revision.

"While I believe with many commentators that the pope might have done more to help the plight of the Jews, I now feel, 10 years after the publication of my book, that his scope for action was severely limited and I am prepared to state this," he said....

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Ten years after the bombshell book, hyper media criticism, and forty years after the communist propaganda first hit the American public, Pope Pius XII has finally been vindicated....

(ANSA) - Vatican City, September 17 - New research clears controversial wartime pope Pius XII from the accusation that he did not do enough to save Jews, Pope Benedict XVI said on Thursday.

It is the first time the pope has come out publicly to defend the record of his WWII predecessor, who is moving towards sainthood despite accusations of keeping silent about the Holocaust....

.... The pope thanked the Pave the Way Foundation, made up of Catholics and Jews, for uncovering the evidence in favour of Pius.

He voiced the hope that further studies can reinforce ''the historical truth, overcoming all remaining prejudice''. Benedict's statement on the new research - which has not yet been made public - follows last year's assertion by his No.2, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, that people ignore evidence disproving Pius was indulgent towards Hitler.

Pius was the victim of a ''black legend'', said Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State....

read full story here

-----------------

(CWNews.com) - The Vatican has confirmed the existence of a directive from Pope Pius XII, asking Catholic clergy and religious to shelter Jews from the Holocaust.

Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone (bio - news), the Vatican Secretary of State, acknowledged in short April 19 announcement that Pope Pius XII issued instructions for all religious institutions to open their doors to Jewish people. The catacombs of Rome were also made available for shelter....

read full story here

-----------------

(CNA).- A former high-ranking officer with the KGB claims that the Kremlin and the Russian intelligence agency in the 1960s were set on executing a smear campaign against the Catholic Church, and the main target was Pope Pius XII.

In a recent issue of the National Review Online, Lt. General Ion Mihai Pacepa, who eventually defected from the former Soviet bloc, recounts how the KGB and the Kremlin designed the deliberate campaign to portray the Pius XII “as a coldhearted Nazi sympathizer.”

“In February 1960, Nikita Khrushchev approved a super-secret plan for destroying the Vatican’s moral authority in Western Europe,” writes Pacepa. “Eugenio Pacelli, by then Pope Pius XII, was selected as the KGB’s main target, its incarnation of evil, because he had departed this world in 1958. ‘Dead men cannot defend themselves’ was the KGB’s latest slogan.”

The code name for this operation against Pope Pius XII was “Seat-12.”

read full story here

There was no "Hitler's Pope." The whole thing was a fabrication, a lie, invented by the Soviet KGB, in a plan called "Seat 12," devised for the sole purpose of undermining the moral authority of the Catholic Church over the western world. It was enthusiastically embraced by the enemies of the Catholic Church on both sides of the political spectrum. The Secular Left loved it! The Religious Right used it. (I even had a Jehovah's Witness at my door preach it to me.) Oh how eager so many where to believe the lie! Even some Catholics jumped on the bandwagon. The criticism from the Left-wing biased media was unending. We heard it from all the major television and cable networks. After Cornwell's 'Hitler's Pope' was published, literally dozens of knock off books followed. The television preachers, oh how many television preachers, included it in their sermons. Some Evangelical authors included it in their own books on apologetics and eschatology.  Millions upon millions of unsuspecting Evangelicals were subjected to this lie, many of whom still believe it, because they trust the television preacher who told them. (I can't even count the number of times I've been confronted about it by misinformed Evangelicals.) It was perhaps one of the greatest lies of our time - the whopper of the century!

We can learn a lot about those who enthusiastically embraced it, who went out of their way to spread it around, and took every opportunity to rub it in the face of any Catholic who would dare defend the Church on anything. Shall we call it "prejudice?" Perhaps "bigotry" might be a better word. So what are we to say of those Catholics who actually embraced it, using it as an excuse to rationalize their opposition to the Church on this issue or that? What shame! What scandal! What embarrassment! Shame on all those who engaged in this nonsense! Dishonor and disrepute upon those who eagerly embraced such a lie, that so seriously defamed the Church, without even questioning it!

So what are we to say of the mainstream news media? Do we see primetime retractions in their news broadcasts? Do we get so much as an inkling of regret for having slandered the Church for so many years? No. Not a peep out of them. How about the Secular Left-wingers out there? Any apologies? None. There is nothing but silence. What about the Religious Right-wingers? I'll give them credit. At least some have apologized.  A few (especially those who understand what it's like to be slandered) never believed it to begin with.  To them I give thanks. 

Don't get me wrong. I'm not holding a grudge here, and I wouldn't advise that any of us do. Rather, I would like to use this whole thing as an object lesson for Catholics, Protestants and non-religious people alike. Prejudice can just as well be defined as eagerly embracing bad news about somebody (or some people) without ever questioning the validity of the news itself, or even the credibility of the source who reported it.

The fabrication of "Hitler's Pope" is the epitome of this. The KGB introduced this lie to the western world in 1963 via a German author and playwright named Rolf Hochhuth. The play, entitled "The Deputy," was introduced as fiction. The pope in the play was never mentioned by name. The incriminating accusations against the pope were made by suggestion and insinuation. Hochhuth himself was raised in Nazi Germany and was a member of Hitler's Youth. While that itself is not incriminating, since service was compulsory, his refusal to talk about it, combined with his defense of those who deny the Holocaust, does tarnish his reputation a bit. It is not known if Hochhuth was directly hired by the KGB to write the play, or if the KGB simply used his material as an opportunity. Only two things are known as fact. The first is that the KGB was authorized by the Soviet Kremlin to smear the reputation of Pope Pius XII after his death in a plan named "Seat 12." The second, is that Rolf Hochhuth wrote the play that started the job. Beyond that we can surmise that Soviet involvement helped to promote the ideas of the play throughout Europe and North America, eventually coming to a climax in John Cornwell's 1999 bombshell book "Hitler's Pope." It can be reasonably assumed that Cornwell was simply operating on the momentum of the propaganda itself, and was probably not working for the KGB, since the Soviet Union fell almost a decade earlier. By this time the KGB's lies had taken on a life of their own, that outlived those who originally promoted them. Cornwell might be considered a victim of this by some, but the obvious distortions in the book causes 'The Catholic Knight' to question his culpability. It would seem to me that Cornwell may have been a victim of Soviet propaganda, but it was his own prejudice that caused him to write his book the way he did. Just to cite a small example of this, the cover of the book features a black and white photo that appears to show the image of Pope Pius XII being saluted by a Nazi officer. In fact, the photo is doctored. A comparison of the original photo with the book cover, reveals that the supposed Nazi officer is actually a civilian cab driver. Deception begins even before the book is opened, while the fables and inaccuracies written therein have been exposed and rebuffed by many historians. Cornwell is responsible for his own libel against Pius XII. Thankfully, for his sake, he is finally starting to admit his error.

Soon Pope Pius XII will be canonized as a saint, and when he is, all of this will be drudged up again for a public to see. This time, however, they'll be given the other side of the story, the whole story, and the world will see just how low the enemies of the Church will sink to slander the name of a good man in the hopes of tarnishing the Church's moral authority. A word to the wise for critics of the Catholic Church, especially those in the mainstream media. You've been played! You've been suckered! Nearly half a century ago a lie was concocted by communists on the other side of the world, and you bought it! They used you. You fell for it, and now it's come out that you unwittingly cooperated with communists to spread KGB propaganda. Are you feeling a little sheepish now? You should. If you don't, you should be worried about yourself. So the lesson is this. Next time you hear a supposed "fact" about the history of the Catholic Church, you might want to do a little research before you believe it. Maybe you ought to check the sources. Maybe you should allow a little skepticism to enter your mind, the next time somebody tells you a "scandalous" tale about the world's largest Christian organization.  It's just a little friendly advice.  Take it for what it's worth.

Britain Falls To Islam - Sharia Law Enacted - The Queen Must Be Mad!

(Times) - ISLAMIC law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.

The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

Rulings issued by a network of five sharia courts are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court....

read full story here

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: Behold the beginning of the end for Western civilization. Liberal Secular Humanism has finally reached it's logical conclusion. The fruit of Liberalism is Islam! 'The Catholic Knight,' along with many others, has been warning of this for three years now. As Liberals try to sterilize society of all Christian influence, as Secular governments continue to aid and abet them in this endeavor, and as churches compromise their morality to accommodate this trend; the final result is a spiritual vacuum in the collective society. Once that vacuum exists, the laws of nature take over.

Nature abhors a vacuum. That's a fundamental law of this universe. Wherever a vacuum exists, nature seeks to fill it as quickly as possible - with literally ANYTHING! The same holds true with human conscience and man's religious nature. When a society becomes devoid of religious conscience, human nature (which is very much a part of mother nature) seeks to fill it as quickly as possible - with literally anything. Thanks to liberal Secular Humanism, Europe has been devoid of it's historic Christian conscience for nearly half a century now. This is especially true in Great Britain, where the number of practicing Christians, who attend a church weekly, has now been reduced to a mere 10% of the British population. This Christian decline, spanning four decades, was accompanied by a dramatic increase in occult practices in the U.K..   It appeared that even in a religiously sterile environment, a good number of Brits still found a way to exercise their natural need for spirituality. Witchcraft (Wicca) and New Age occultism blossomed in England during the latter half of the 20th century. But that eventually gave way to a something much bigger and more organized - the rise of British Islam!

How could this happen!?!

With all civil remnants of Christianity having been neutered, and the churches of England having debased themselves with elements of Liberalism, the English population was ripe for the picking. Foreign immigrants from Africa and Asia were imported to the British Isles (as well as many other European nations) to shore up the population gap created by the Liberal exercises of abortion and artificial contraception. This was necessary to keep the country's social security system afloat. (In order for social security to work, you have to have an increasing population.) Since you can't force a liberal society to make babies, you've got to get your future taxpayers from somewhere, and immigrants from Africa and Asia were more than willing to fill the gap. Unfortunately, these immigrants also brought their religion with them - Islam.  Muslim immigrants to Britain reproduced at four to five times the rate of native British. So while the practice of British Christianity was shrinking, the practice of British Islam was expanding at an exponential rate. As Islam was introduced to a spiritually hungry British population, a growing number of native Brits began to convert, thus increasing the exponential growth of Islam in the British Isles to include home-grown "White Muslims" (as they were sometimes called). Currently, the number of practicing Muslims in the U.K. now exceeds the number of practicing Christians. Along with this demographic shift came a growing clamor for Sharia Law. That's because English Common Law, steeped in Christian morality and watered down by Secularism, is not good enough for the average Muslim. They demanded to be accommodated, and treated differently than the average Brit. They wanted their women to submit to Islamic laws, and their children to be raised and disciplined according to Islamic practices. A growing fear of social unrest (i.e. "Muslim Riots") has been driving the British government's quiet moves to pacify them. The institution of Sharia Law across the entire country, to those who want to submit to it, was not the first step toward this goal, and it certainly won't be the last.

The queen must be mad!!!

Yes, she is, but it's not just her. It's her Prime Minister and the entire British Parliament, as well as much of the political elites in the U.K..   Anyone who would surrender the sovereignty of one's national laws, to the religious institutions of a foreign culture, is perfectly insane, without a doubt. 

They're mad with Liberalism, to the point where they've gone beyond Secular Humanism, allowing it to be abandoned and replaced with Islamic Sharia Law. Yes, the queen could have stopped this from happening. Though mostly thought of as a figurehead monarchy, the queen still reserves some constitutional powers which can be exercised at her discretion. One would think that if the entire House of Lords and Commons had gone completely mad enough to allow this, the queen herself might have stepped in to save England from this catastrophic historical blunder. No. Instead, she quietly sat in her palace and did nothing - absolutely nothing. Sadly, the English monarchy has just proved it's worthlessness - again.

So now the birthplace of our culture, the cradle of English civilization, has given itself over to Islam - not just culturally, but legally too. Currently, submission to Sharia Law in the U.K. is voluntary, but as the Islamic population of Britain continues to explode at an exponential rate, and the influence of Christianity continues to subside, how long can we really expect it to remain voluntary? How long before Muslims gain control of the Parliament? How long before they gain control of the Prime Minister's office? How long before they gain control of the English crown itself!?! When they do, what can we expect? I think a quick look at other nations that use Sharia Law will give us the answer to that question.

Nature abhors a vacuum. Human nature demands a religious conscious - some form of spirituality. Liberals love Secular Humanism, because it gives license to their sexual liberation. But Secular Humanism seeks to purge human society from all influences of the Christian religion. History is now demonstrating to us that the fruit of Liberalism is Islam. That's because when Liberals get what they want, Secular Humanism wipes all remnants of Christianity from public view. When that happens a spiritual vacuum is created, and as we all know, nature abhors a vacuum. It seeks to fill it with anything it can find, and Islam is more than ready to rise to the occasion. So Liberals eventually find themselves forced to embrace Islam, partly because of politically correct nonsense, and partly because they fear what Muslims will do if they don't. It's a natural progression, just as natural as nature itself. The only thing standing between Liberals and Islam is a healthy and robust Christianity. Eliminate Christianity from the scene, and it won't be long before it's a public call to prayer five times a day, and our daughters are forced to cover their faces.

We know that other European nations are already going down the same path, but I'm interested in who's next in the English-speaking world. Will it be South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, or Canada!?! What about the United States? Thankfully, the U.S.A. has a steady flood of illegal aliens from Mexico streaming into the nation - most of them Catholic. These people may be illegal now, but many of their children will eventually be taxpayers, and that may help keep the social security system afloat without having to import Muslim immigrants from Africa and Asia.

Liberalism has it's price. With the rise of Sharia Law in the U.K., we've now seen what it is. The only question that remains is, are we ready to pay it?  Believe it or not, there is a way out of this, even for Britain.  We must return to our Catholic roots, and take ALL the sexual ethics of the Church seriously.  Only then can there be a Christian revival in Europe, and the Islamic threat can at least be contained for the short term, and hopefully overcome in the long term.  Outside of this, there is no other way.  

British Anti-Catholicism Rears It's Ugly Head Again

THE CATHOLIC KNIGHT: It's been 300 years for heaven's sake! Official policies like this have got to go!

(CNA).- Peter Phillips, the Queen of England’s eldest grandson, may have to give up his place in the line of succession for the throne because his fiancée is Roman Catholic.

This past week Buckingham Palace announced the engagement between Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly, a Canadian management consultant, but no mention of a date for their marriage was made.

Even more interesting, is the fact that Autumn Kelly is Catholic. Ms. Kelly’s Catholicism brings to the light of day the 1701 Act of Settlement which bars any member of the Royal family from becoming or marrying Catholics. If Mr. Phillips has to renounce his rights to inherit the throne, it would be an embarrassment to the royal family and to the government.

Catholics have repeatedly called for a repeal of the act but thus far attempts to change the law have failed. Under the act, Mr. Phillips will be required to renounce his right to the throne -- he is 10th in line at present-- or Ms. Kelly will have to formally renounce her Catholic faith...

read full story here

Here's a little history lesson on British Anti-Catholicism from Wikipedia.com...

Anti-Catholicism in England has its origins with the English Reformation under Henry VIII. The Act of Supremacy of 1534 declared the English crown to be 'the only supreme head on earth of the Church in England' in place of the Pope. Any act of allegiance to the latter was considered treason. It was under this act that saints Thomas More and John Fisher were executed.

Although the Act of Supremacy was repealed in 1554 by Henry's daughter, Queen Mary I, who was a staunch Roman Catholic, it was reenacted in 1559 under Elizabeth I.

Anyone who took public or church office was forced to take the Oath of Supremacy, and there were penalties for violating that oath. Attendance at Anglican services was also made obligatory. Those that refused were fined as recusants.

In the time of Elizabeth I, the persecution of the Protestants during the reign of her half-sister Queen Mary I was used as anti-Catholic propaganda in the hugely influential Foxe's Book of Martyrs. The Convocation of the English Church ordered in 1571 that copies of the "Book of Martyrs" should be kept for public inspection in all cathedrals and in the houses of church dignitaries. The book was also exposed in many parish churches alongside the Holy Bible. The passionate intensity of the style and the vivid and picturesque dialogues made it very popular among Puritan and Low Church families down to the nineteenth century. The fantastically partisan church history of the earlier portion of the book, with its grotesque stories of popes and monks contributed much to anti-Catholic prejudices in England as did the story of the sufferings of those Protestants burnt at the stake by Mary and the notorious Bishop Bonner.

In 1570, Pope Pius V sought to depose Elizabeth with the papal bull Regnans in Excelsis, which declared her a heretic and purported to release her Roman Catholic subjects from allegiance to her. This rendered Elizabeth's subjects who persisted in allegiance to the Roman Catholic Church politically suspect.

The failed invasion of England by the Spanish Armada has been cited as an attempt by Philip II of Spain to put into effect the Pope's decree, and to enforce a claim to the throne of England he held as a result of being the widower of Mary I of England.

Elizabeth's persecution of Roman Catholic Jesuit missionaries led to many executions at Tyburn. Those priests who suffered there are accounted martyrs by the Roman Catholic church; and, more recently, a convent has been established nearby to pray for their souls.

Later episodes that deepened anti-Catholicism in England include the Gunpowder Plot, in which Guy Fawkes and other Roman Catholic conspirators attempted to blow up the English Parliament while it was in session. The Great Fire of London in 1666 was blamed on the Roman Catholics and an inscription ascribing it to 'Popish frenzy' was engraved on the Monument to the Great Fire of London, which marked the location where the fire started (this inscription was only removed in 1831). Later, the "Popish Plot" involving Titus Oates further exacerbated Anglican-Roman Catholic relations.

The beliefs that underlie the sort of strong anti-Catholicism once seen in the United Kingdom were summarized by William Blackstone in his Commentaries on the Laws of England:

As to papists, what has been said of the Protestant dissenters would hold equally strong for a general toleration of them; provided their separation was founded only upon difference of opinion in religion, and their principles did not also extend to a subversion of the civil government. If once they could be brought to renounce the supremacy of the pope, they might quietly enjoy their seven sacraments, their purgatory, and auricular confession; their worship of relics and images; nay even their transubstantiation. But while they acknowledge a foreign power, superior to the sovereignty of the kingdom, they cannot complain if the laws of that kingdom will not treat them upon the footing of good subjects.

— Bl. Comm. IV, c.4 ss. iii.2, p. *54

The gravamen of this charge, then, is that Roman Catholics constitute an imperium in imperio, a sort of fifth column of persons who owe a greater allegiance to the Pope than they do to the civil government, a charge very similar to that repeatedly leveled against Jews. Accordingly, a large body of British laws, collectively known as the penal laws, imposed various civil disabilities and legal penalties on recusant Roman Catholics. These laws were gradually repealed over the course of the nineteenth century with laws such as the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829.

In spite of the Emancipation Act, however, anti-Catholic feeling continued throughout the nineteenth century, primarily as a response to the influx of Irish immigrants into England during the Great Famine.

Even now, however, a member of the British Royal Family automatically gives up any chance of succeeding to the throne if he or she joins the Roman Catholic Church or marries a Roman Catholic.

source

British Declaration in Support of Tridentine Mass

Appeal to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI.
[From the British Isles]

In 1971 many leading British and international figures, among whose number were Yehudi Menuhin, Agatha Christie, Vladimir Ashkenazy, Nancy Mitford, Graham Greene, Joan Sutherland, and Ralph Richardson, presented a petition to His Holiness Pope Paul VI asking for the survival of the traditional Roman Catholic Mass on the grounds that it would be a serious loss to western culture. The then Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Heenan himself appealed to Pope Paul for the continued celebration of the traditional Mass. The full text of this appeal in 1971 was:

"If some senseless decree were to order the total or partial destruction of basilicas or cathedrals, then obviously it would be the educated - whatever their personal beliefs - who would rise up in horror to oppose such a possibility. Now the fact is that basilicas and cathedrals were built so as to celebrate a rite which, until a few months ago, constituted a living tradition. We are referring to the Roman Catholic Mass. Yet, according to the latest information in Rome, there is a plan to obliterate that Mass by the end of the current year. One of the axioms of contemporary publicity, religious as well as secular, is that modern man in general, and intellectuals in particular, have become intolerant of all forms of tradition and are anxious to suppress them and put something else in their place. But, like many other affirmations of our publicity machines, this axiom is false. Today, as in times gone by, educated people are in the vanguard where recognition of the value of tradition in concerned, and are the first to raise the alarm when it is threatened. We are not at this moment considering the religious or spiritual experience of millions of individuals. The rite in question, in its magnificent Latin text, has also inspired a host of priceless achievements in the arts - not only mystical works, but works by poets, philosophers, musicians, architects, painters and sculptors in all countries and epochs.

Thus, it belongs to universal culture as well as to churchmen and formal Christians. In the materialistic and technocratic civilisation that is increasingly threatening the life of mind and spirit in its original creative expression - the word - it seems particularly inhuman to deprive man of word-forms in one of their most grandiose manifestations. The signatories of this appeal, which is entirely ecumenical and non-political, have been drawn from every branch of modern culture in Europe and elsewhere. They wish to call to the attention of the Holy See, the appalling responsibility it would incur in the history of the human spirit were it to refuse to allow the Traditional Mass to survive, even though this survival took place side by side with other liturgical reforms."

This appeal in 1971 came at a crucial time in the history of civilisation when the future of the traditional Latin “Tridentine” Mass was in jeopardy. Pope Paul VI graciously acknowledged this appeal and the traditional Mass was saved, at least in England and Wales. Since this momentous appeal in 1971 the traditional Latin Mass has prospered once again among the faithful worldwide and is now celebrated in almost every country in the world. Now, in 2007, there is great hope and expectation that this treasure of civilisation will be freed from its current restrictions. We, the signatories of this petition, wish to associate ourselves to the sentiments expressed in the petition of 1971 which, perhaps, are even more valid today, and appeal to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI in 2007 to allow the free celebration of the traditional Roman rite of Mass, the Mass of Ages, the Mass of Antiquity, on the altars of the Church.

Signed:

Rt. Hon. Michael Ancram, QC MP.
Miss Madeleine Beard, M.Litt. (Cantab).
Dr. Mary Berry CBE, Founder of the Schola Gregoriana in Cambridge.
James Bogle, TD, MA, ACIarb, Barrister, Chairman of the Catholic Union of Great Britain.
Count Neri Capponi, Judge of the Tuscan Ecclesiastical Matrimonial Court.
Fr. Antony F.M. Conlon, Chaplain to the Latin Mass Society.
Julian Chadwick, Chairman – The Latin Mass Society of England and Wales.
Rev. Fr. Ronald Creighton-Jobe, The Oratory, London.
Fra’ Fredrik Crichton-Stuart, Chairman CIEL UK.
Leo Darroch, Secretary – International Federation Una Voce.
Adrian Davies, Barrister.
R.P. Davis, B.Phil., M.A., D.Phil (Oxon), retired senior lecturer in Ancient History, Queen’s University of Belfast; translator/commentator on the Liber Pontificalis of the Roman Church.
John Eidinow, Bodley Fellow and Dean, Merton College, Oxford.
Jonathan Evans MEP, Vice Chairman Catholic Union of Great Britain.
Fra’ Matthew Festing, OBE, TD, DL. Grand Prior of England – Sovereign Order of the Knights of Malta.
The Right Honourable Lord Gill, Lord Justice Clerk of Scotland.
Dr. Sheridan Gilley, Emeritus Reader, University of Durham.
Dr. Christopher Gillibrand, MA (Oxon).
Rev. Dr. Laurence Paul Hemming, Heythrop College, University of London.
Stephen Hough, Concert Pianist and Composer.
Neville Kyrke-Smith, National Director, Aid to the Church in Need UK
Prince Rupert zu Loewenstein, President of the British Association of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta. KCSG.
James MacMillan, CBE, Composer and Conductor.
Anthony McCarthy, Research Fellow, Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics.
Mrs. Daphne McLeod, Chairman – Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice.
Anthony Ozimic, MA (bioethics).
Dr. Susan Frank Parsons, President, Society for the Study of Christian Ethics (UK) and Co-Founder of the Society of St. Catherine of Siena.
Dr. Catherine Pickstock, Lecturer in Philosophy and Religion; Fellow – Emmanuel College, Cambridge.
Dr. Thomas Pink, Reader in Philosophy and Director of Philosophical Studies, Kings College, London.
Piers Paul Read, Novelist and Playwright; Vice-President of the Catholic Writers’ Guild of England and Wales.
The Rev’d. Dr. Alcuin Reid, Liturgical Scholar and Author.
Nicholas Richardson, Warden of Greyfriars Hall, Oxford.
Prof. Jonathan Riley-Smith, retired Dixie Professor of Ecclesiastical History, Cambridge University.
Fr. John Saward, Lisieux Senior Research Fellow in Theology, Greyfriars, Oxford University.
Dr. Joseph Shaw. Tutorial Fellow in Philosophy, St. Benet’s Hall, Oxford University.
Damien Thompson, Editor-in-Chief, The Catholic Herald.