Keep up the Rataplan! How the Left Smears the Right

NW stock photo

The cover article for the 28NOV11 edition of NW (Newsweek) was titled, “My life as a(n) (undercover) white supremacist”.  But the events in the article occurred between 1991 and 1993?  Yes.  And the cover photograph of a burning cross silhouetting a bald head – has nothing to do with either the article nor anyone mentioned in it?  Yes.

But the Left has got to keep the guilt-by-association-right-wing-extremist drumbeat going because (1) the Democrat in the White House isn’t polling well, (2) there hasn’t been any “right-wing-extremist” activity to smear the Right with lately, and (3) there will be some act perpetrated by someone in the near future, and Liberals will be able to point their finger of recent memory and say, “See, I told ya so.”

The featured FBI mole, John Matthews, spent all of 2 ½ years “palling around” with a man named Tom Posey and other “gun-toting” white men.  Posey was ultimately convicted of – brace yourself – buying and selling night vision goggles!  Eight pages of a feature story promoted by a concocted cover photo and no less than 22 uses of terms like “extremists”, “racist”, and “white separatist”, and all they report was a goggles bust!

Oh well!  Throw in a few mentions of Timothy McVeigh and that other well known, well connected, long-time Right Wing Extremist, Jared Loughner.  Although Loughner was a high school pot head who had no knowledge of or affiliation with any political organ, Left or Right, he is pictured prominently in the article beside the mug shot of McVeigh.  Loughner, you see,  “shared a distrust of the government” with McVeigh.

Conclusion:  Lefties love government; anyone who “distrusts” government must be mentally unstable, a right wing extremist.  Does this include the 88% of Americans who currently find disfavor with Congress?

Among the extremist, anti-government acts Matthews perpetrated with Posey were to (1) travel around the country with Posey in a pick-up truck, (2) attend dance parties “with the KKK”, (3) sell weapons at truck stops, and (4) “sit in church pews with would-be abortion clinic bombers”.

Conclusion:  Churches are full of would-be abortion clinic bombers, and, if you really wanna be a right wing extremist, boy, you better be at that dance party tonight, or else!  We gotta do our Yankee-doodle duty and keep those white-separatist women happy, by gawd!

NW grasps for authority and legitimacy by referencing the Black Separatist poverty-pimp smear mongers, the SPLC, which makes its living through distortion, guilt by association and hyperbole (see Sheriff Richard Mack v. SPLC).  Their claim that anti-government extremist groups have increased 7 fold since Obama took office is supported by referencing the 88 year old (white) man who shot at the Holocaust Memorial, a (white) “Christian” group who was arrested for “plotting”, four (white) retirees arrested in Georgia for “allegedly plotting”, and of course, that “Army reject” Jared Loughner.

Conclusion:  Loughner is a right wing extremist because he tried to join the Army.  Oh, yeah, and he’s white.

Keeping us all safe from these bad white people, of course, is not only the FBI, but another Magic Negro!  The NW article explains that Matthews’ sugar daddy, Agent Donald Jarrett, was not just an “African-American”, no.  Jarrett is described in the article as a “well-built” black “who wore nice suits” and “kept his hair closely cropped”.  Get that Ladies?  Well dressed, tall, dark and handsome!  Da black man to da rescue, and we have yet another Magic Negro brought to you by NW!

Is there "half white"?

Conclusion: Without blacks at the SPLC keeping us informed, and without blacks in the FBI to watch over us and keep us safe, why, hell, we’d just shoot each other and blow ourselves up!  Damn, how’d we ever get this far by keeping the black man down?  Beats me, but “gun-toting” white men are not afraid of mythical right wing extremists, urban white women who read NW are.  “Gun-toting” white men are not impressed with the likes of Agent Jarrett, urban white women and girls are.  Why did this story run, anyway?

NW weaves a tangled web attempting to condemn what it calls “anti-government” sentiment.  Ironically, even the mole, Matthews is described as disheartened upon his return from Vietnam to an ungrateful country.  He watched some of his friends suffer the effects of Agent Orange and now, supposedly, he does as well.  He had anti-government sentiments and was first attracted to a private militia involved in the Nicaraguan conflict in 1985.  After the war ended the politics changed, and the Federal support, the National Security Council and the CIA, were nowhere to be found when the indictments started to fly.  But to have anti-government sentiments is unreasonable?

Jesse Trentadue, a Salt Lake City attorney, tried for 15 years to prove his brother was “killed in a botched FBI interrogation” in Oklahoma City shortly after McVeigh’s bombing.  (Matthews met Trentadue after an internet search led him to FBI documents Trentadue had posted online mentioning Matthews’ name.)  Eventually, Trentadue and his family were awarded $1 million after DOJ found that the FBI and the Bureau of Prisons “had lied in court and ignored and misplaced evidence”.  Fifteen years.  So, why do these people “hate” the government?

And finally, Ruby Ridge is dredged up again.  The FBI Special Operations Group with a sharpshooter, shot and killed one of Randy Weaver’s sons, one of his dogs, and his wife through the head as she stood in the doorway of their home holding her baby daughter.  Weaver and a family friend were also wounded in the siege.  The NW article describes the day thusly:  “The disastrous standoff between federal agents and right wing extremists” ended “when an FBI sniper killed the wife of Randy Weaver as she held her baby daughter”.

Actually, the siege end over a week later after negotiations lead by Bo Gritz.  The Weaver’s lived by themselves, on a hill, in a cabin with no electricity or running water.  They had to die.

Randy Weaver (AP)

The FBI agents were there to do a job.  These are men who spend 90% of their time in training.  A sniper has been trained all his adult life to kill people.  A sniper doesn’t have a lot of moral hang-ups.  Randy Weaver had been approached by undercover agent Kenneth Fadeley who asked if he could find a sawed-off shotgun for him.  For $300, Weaver later sold the undercover agent two shotguns which the agent may or may not have shortened himself.  The FBI agents did not care that Randy Weaver’s family was white.  They did not care that they were Christians.  They did not care if the innocent family members were Americans.

Neither does the Left.  They just want more government.  In the end, they don’t fear us because we express anti-government sentiments; they fear us because we are white.

They need to keep up the drumbeat overlaid with obscure association (Loughner = McVeigh because he tried to join the Army and he shot some people – and he’s white); hyperbole (Posey is a dangerous extremist who got busted selling . . . goggles); and repetition (a November, 2011, article about 20 year old incidents).  The shapers of public opinion know very well that irrational fear is maintained by repetition and darkness.  What could threaten their illusion of power more than to know that their enemy is white?

Obama’s New Nationalism is Old Prgressivism: What is Nationalism?

A few notes on Nationalism as presented in Welf Herfurth’s A life in the Political Wilderness.

Photo by Hildr Jorgensen. Finis Mundi Press

I would no more let Barack Obama define Nationalism for me than I would consent to his defining of America.

Two popular commentators promptly chided President Obama on his “New Nationalism” speech in Osawatomie, Kansas.  One talk show host expressed his fear that Obama is channeling the worst socialist instincts of President Roosevelt the First who (among others) railroaded Americans into accepting the Federal Reserve.  The other Siren of the Right retorted by defining a “free society” as “a collection of individuals pursuing their own self interest”.  He later amended his definition by adding that individuals “act according to what is best” in their view “for the ‘community’”. . .  and they should be free to do so . . . in a “free society” . . . (paraphrasing Adam Smith . . .)  Neither attempted to define Nationalism.

These two Megaphones have earned the respect and admiration of millions.  They are popular and they accept a priori the tenents and values set forth in the founding documents of Liberal democracies.  They accept that the system is flawed, but that the flaws are “of man” not due to a faulty system or to their adherence to it.  Thus they will ultimately act in such a way as to preserve the system over their own best interest.  They will act in the name of Liberalism and freedom and not because they sought to improve the lives of their fellow member of their community, their Nation.

They buy into the System.  They participate in regular elections, but they know votes can be manipulated and that voter fraud is rampant.  They elect politicians to administer their government knowing that politicians are the least trustworthy people in the country.  They obey jury duty knowing that Justice in America is for sale: if you’re rich, you can get away with murder, and if you’re poor, you’re screwed.

They believe in the “Constitution”.  They believe that if they can preserve this the best possible constitution, then all will be well in the Land.  Such Literalists also too readily conclude that all of the consequences of the Written Word must be good, too.  They are compelled, then, to populate, conduct, and prosecute to the letter of the Law, all the Liberal institutions and Departments that are on the books – fund them and populate the bureaucracy – and all the new ones that are to come down the pike now that we Conservatives and “Liberals” alike agree that the purpose of Government is, well, people must be taken care of, don’t you know?!  It’s only humane!  Then, there won’t be any workers but those working for the government.

Today, the dedicated, truly studious Tea Partiers are beginning to realize that it’s OK to question the underlying assumptions of our Nation.  “What is the nature of a Nation?”, and “Is it OK for someone to act completely in their self-interest if we think it does harm to our “way of life” in the end, that is, harm to “our Nation”?  The majority make the rules in a Liberal democracy, after all.  Right?

Only the rare second tier or occasional third tier commentator will admit the existence of the White Elephant in America: that a Nation is defined by language, borders and culture, and not by a multicultural mix of aliens who have simply filled out an application and stated an oath.  What America and so many Western democracies have evolved into is not an “organic community” which has sprung up naturally as described by National Anarchist Welf Herfurth (see below): “a community in which members feel a sense of belonging; a community which does not contain elements that are radically different from it”.  This post-modern concept of citizen is globalist in nature and points to the most common tenant uniting Nationalist worldwide:  Anti-globalism.

Herfurth is likewise wary of the Populist view of political parties and trade unions as benefiting open debate in democracy; or that diffuse, separation of powers is a good structural component in government; or the sanctity of the secret ballot, popularly known as the “right to vote”, first because there is no such “right” and secondly because political parties who only use their offices and their campaigns to fractionalize our Nation should be merged or banned, and third because diffuse power is diffuse responsibility.  Politicians would have us bickering amongst ourselves over power, money and food while our defining institutions are under assault and the People of our Nation are daily threatened with genocide.  This is not the time to trust commissars and diplomats with Our future.

A Nation is a homogenous racial group of genetically linked people who speak the same language and live in the same place in such a way as to preserve their culture and its institutions.  American Nationalism is defined by its European (racial and cultural) heritage.  Such definitions and distinctions, while actual are considered extreme and might frighten the lukewarm devotee of Logic and Reason.  Nationalism is certainly not politically progressive and the popularizing of its common goal threatens the central tenant of globalism, Diversity.

Today, most cultural commentators freely assign the term “citizen” in the West to any living, breathing adult with a green card, student visa or PDF facsimile of a birth certificate.  Is that what makes a citizen of a Nation?  Does a British passport make an Indian man British?  Australians today are defined by a piece of paper that states that they are and not by ethnicity, culture or race.  To simply be born within the U.S. borders makes one entitled to the same status as someone whose ancestors fought in the Revolution or the War of Secession?  If so, and if we are a Nation, exactly what are we a Nation of?

*                      *                      *                      *                      *

Nationalism:

Nationalism is a powerful force, and it is a ripe pomegranate for the co-opting.  It has been successfully saddled up and ridden into battles as long as there have been battle cries.  Nationalism can produce succor for the victors with a pinch sacrificing only a portion of the juicy cells within, or, if consumed in a flash, quench the revolutionary’s vacuum.  Nationalism is a powerful force, and it is ripe for the co-opting.

Welf (pronounced “Velf”) Herfurth (A Life in the Political Wilderness, 2011, Finis Mundi Press.) does a very good job of expressing what he thinks.  German by decent and currently living and working in Australia, Herfurth, described as a Nationalist and activist, combines a passion for precision of expression in his writing and an efficient use of resources in his political thinking.  His life has been one of a wanderer, though he calls it traveling, and it is demonstrated in his writing, but once comfortable with his style, it becomes evident that Herfurth has been pondering these ideas for a long time.

Culture is the root of Nationalism.  It is culture that transforms the soil, a place and a time, into the unique expression of the people who work the land and make it come to life.  Race is inextricably linked to specific cultures, and though they may be equal in the eyes of Justice, races are not the same.  The diversity of humanity exhibited by our race and demonstrated by our cultures is a thing worthy of celebration, and efforts to preserve it should be encouraged.  Nationalism is the political expression of these differences.

Herfurth defines Nationalism in one sense by describing what our movement is trying to achieve: “an overcoming of the alienation the members of the white race, the peoples of the West, feel towards one another, brought about by the neo-liberal ideology, which substitutes the satisfactions of consumerism for racial and national belonging.”  Life in a liberal democracy smothers racial identity and its consequent cohesiveness.  Free to pursue unlimited material acquisitions, we do.  Consequently, we have become attached to and motivated by the immediate acquisition of wealth at the cost of abandoning not only our racial conscience but any responsibilities we once had toward the well being of our racial Brothers and Sisters.

One way to understand nationalism is to state what it is not.  Firstly, it is not Liberalism.  Liberalism asserts that all men are equal purely by virtue of their being adult persons.  “An ideology which gives an unskilled, illiterate Mexican immigrant to the United States the same value as a literate, skilled American proletarian or bourgeois is the antithesis of nationalism,” Herfurth notes.  He distinguishes democracy – one man 0ne vote – from Liberal democracy.  While democracy would allow all citizens to vote (Jews in Israel, for example), a liberal democracy would allow all adults to vote (Palestinians as well as non-Jewish Arabs).  As such, democracy is compatible with Nationalism, but Liberalism is not.

Another way to understand Nationalism is by observing what passes for nationalism of the day.  These are mostly self-proclaimed nationalists who focus, perhaps obsessively, on race, ethnic and cultural, or “heritage”, issues while ignoring, and generally not being very adept at, politics:  The modern “Nazi” movement, the KKK, Stormfront and some intellectuals.  Herfurth uses the expression “Nutzi” to describe “skin-heads” who dress up as WWII Germans but are neither German nor do they have more than a fleeting understanding of the NSDAP or German history outside of the Third Reich.  They are mostly politically ignorant, historically ignorant and accomplish little more than portray a negative image to and provide a willing face for critics of German heritage and history.  They are too often the face of Nationalism, but they are only one dimensionally so.  (See below.)

Secondly, Herfurth identifies contemporary Nationalist ideological objectors who “don’t like the way things are going” but capitulate to the constitutional order.  They are the “far Right Populists” who “have faith in liberal constitutions and electoral procedures”.  These are the same Liberal democratic institutions which, generations ago, traditional Americans extended to immigrants who did not look like them or share their cultural heritage.  These are the same Liberal democratic rights and privileges now demanded by the indignant as entitlements.

What good does it do you when someone from outside of your Nation can come into your Nation and be granted rights, be able to vote, to run for office and administer your government, teach your children and work in the police department – what good does it do you and your Nation-hood to extend equality to a non-equal?  Is “equality” universal beyond the homogeneity of my Nation?  Is individually valid beyond the confines of my culture, i.e., my race?  To trust such an alien to an equal vote and equal voice and equal power to my own in my own Nation is to ask a lot.  It fact, it should not be my right to extend this power.

Why are white American conservatives zealous about preserving the Liberal institutions of citizenship and voting “rights” for people who want to exterminate them?  Why would they allow the candidacy of people who have a separatist group’s interests as a stated priority?  What good is the separation of powers if you relinquish that power to a body that works to undermine your business and compromise your family and property?

One can also characterize Nationalism by identifying common traits.  For example, most nationalists feel that the “liberal media in the West is not so liberal”.  There are some topics which are criminal to discuss such as the numbers of deaths in German prison camps during WWII and the causes of death.  In some countries, Nationalist organizations are outlawed.

Another trait shared by most nationalists is their goal of creating a homogenous, separatist Nation State.  This would presumably be modeled after others throughout history.  The Japanese, for example, are a people who love their culture the way that it is.  They show this respect by preserving citizenship for Japanese people only.

Citizenship and nationality are not merely racial.  The State of Israel is a Nation based upon being Jewish and consists of people from various racial backgrounds.  If not Jewish, like Palestinians in the Occupied Territory, then citizenship and its privileges are not extended.  Citizenship in Muslim countries is defined first by being a good, practicing Muslim.

“Having one’s own country” is a common tenant of Nationalism.  The Nationalist’s goal of establishing a New Nation State begs Herfurth to move from defining who Nationalists are to looking at what they want to do.  Thus, he asks, “What is a State and how will the Nationalist actualize its roles?”

With references to de Benoist and Carl Schmitt, The State is succinctly defined as requiring (1) the People, (2) the State (political decision makers), and (3) the Law (bureaucrats responsible for day to day running of the state).  The one dimensional nature of Nutzi (or KKK or some Populist intellectual) Nationalism is their exclusive focus on “das Volk”, or the folk.  Marginalized by their overt behavior, this type of Nationalist will never know a mass-based movement and will never know political power in a Liberal democracy.  No longer trusting traditional institutions, most of the membership and leadership lead sequestered lives ignoring an all-powerful media.  They are consequently poor political tacticians, are consistently negatively portrayed and falsely maligned.

Which sounds a bit like the average American who is more concerned about the interests of his “friends” (professional sports fans, followers of a particular music scene or television show) than he is worried about the latest political campaign or the growth in regulations and power of a government bureaucracy, or the growth of the bureaucracy itself – Wait – who’s being accused of the crime of pursuit of self-interest?

A Siren of the Right recently defined American-style “free society” as indelibly influenced by the Wealth of Nations.  Still fearing to use his ethnic wings for the journey, he too remains a one dimensional Nationalist idealizing a place dominated by a “collection of individuals” . . . . “pursuing their own self-interest: Everybody looking out for themselves!”

The Populist commentator just cannot take the next obvious step and admit that such an ideal form can (and does!) exist, but only if the occupants of the State (politicians) as well as the career bureaucrats in the Law each exhibit what Herfurth calls a “’nation bearing’ quality”.  This is demonstrated by thinking and acting for your Nation first.  In a culturally homogenous group, this is the pinnacle of democracy where in-group interests are identical with the pursuit of self-interest, and “votes” are not needed, other than an occasional plebiscite.  Homogeneity negates a need for campaigns because political decisions are based on what’s best for your people-community-Nation and not what’s best for your next campaign.  The separation of powers becomes superfluous at best and a smokescreen at worst as diffuse power leads to no one taking responsibility.  There is no need for separation of powers when there are no competing interests in government.  Given a Nation of homogenous People who have found leaders with a nation-bearing quality, the interests of the People, the State and the Law are the same.

With this in mind, Herfurth’s analysis of Socialism bears note.  Historically, socialism drove its way into practical politics by offering laborer’s a piece of the pie by breaking down the barriers between labor and capitalists.  Unfortunately, the ideal goal of equality is as fanciful and corrupt under Socialism as it is under Communism and Democracy.  Today, the globalists’ blending in of multiculturalism (open immigration) only exacerbates the corruption and inequality required to enforce “equality”, redistribution of wealth, etc.  In the end, and hopefully it will come, Herfurth concludes that, given the systems we are aware of, Socialism in our new nations will be far superior to either Communism or Democracy: a Socialist state where the efforts of the state are the same as the efforts and goals of the People: from Whites, to Whites, for Whites.

Thus some Nationalists question adherence to Liberal democracy and suggest that this is poison and not the path to political self-actualization.  In Liberal Western democracies, political parties act in and are controlled by narrow self-interests, not National interests.  Likewise, trade unions, business groups and social organizations cater to narrow economic and class interests.  Individuals who pull themselves up by their own bootstraps are glorified more than people cooperating in groups to benefit their communities.  Thus, a Liberal democratic institution that enshrines individualism is anti-Nationalist, claims Herfurth.

The secret ballot Herfurth characterizes as “a method of fractionalizing the nation” into “competing selfish individuals through anonymous polling for parties which represent selfish economic and class interests”.  The secret ballot forces one to think as an individual and not as a member of a community.  If citizenship is defined by some separatist Nation State before you sign up, then why do you need a secret ballot after you join?  They may rightly ask, “What is it that you need to keep from us now that you are a part of us?”

Herfurth finally characterizes Nationalism by examining methods employed by successful nationalist groups.  During the last century, the fascists in South America and the Germans and Italians of WWII enlisted large militaries in the proliferation and enforcement of their ideology.  Today, Hamas and Hezbollah lack the strategy of military take-over, but engage in many of the same tactics of a mass-based organization.  Their actions at first were extra-parliamentary.

They began by “building a following in the community” by working through community based organizations and engaging in community activism and electioneering.  They become a political voice for people who feel disenfranchised by the System.  They establish visible, charitable organizations creating an economic self-interest in the community.  They work within communities to solve problems first hand.  Eventually, they “consume parliament with a mass-based democratic movement”.

Welf Herfurth has a practical knowledge of what works and what does not in the pursuit of Nationalists interests.  He has reached out to seemingly disparate political groups and demonstrated that they have more in common than they thought because he lives and thinks at a basic, theoretical level.  His clear vision of a healthy, safe future cuts through parochial rhetoric of narrow group interests.  On his path he has refined and defined himself and his political laws.  If your principles are not sound, then you can only build a house of cards or a straw man.  Herfurth has contributed a sound dissertation on the New Nationalist Man, and his future is on solid footing.

Penn State Pedophilia Conspiracy: Just the Tip of the Upside Down Ice Cream Cone

"The Sandusky Blitz" featured two scoops of banana flavored ice cream with the pointy end of a cone sticking up. Available on campus in the Food Science Building creamery, Penn State University for the past 15 years, “everybody” on campus knew about it and thought it was OK to abuse kids.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From FBI statistics: 

• 50% of all rapes in the U.S. involve girls under 18. 
• 15% of all rapes in the U.S. involve boys under the age of 15. 
• 8% of rapes in the U.S. are committed by “teachers”.

Revelations of new victims of predatory homosexual priests emanate from Catholic Dioceses around the world weekly, and now Syracuse and College Basketball…

You think you know about the pedophile conspiracy at Penn State.  You think you know about institutional child molestation at The Citadel.  You think you know about predatory homosexual Preachers and Catholic Priests.  I’m asking you to ask yourself why you know about these events.  That is, why does pedophilia seem to be increasingly pervasive, and why do you accept minimizing cases of sex with children as just another “sex abuse” scandal and not an atrocity for which the perpetrators should be castrated and sequestered for life.

Who Elected Me Spokesperson?

I want to tell you something you don’t know.  I want to tell you about Michael Powel.  (See Michael Powel v. The Archdiocese of St. Louis).  Michael Powel had to digitally evacuate himself since he was 12 years old.  Do you know what that means?  That means that his anal sphincter did not work anymore, and he had to dig his feces out with his finger every day. 

Michael and I attended the same high school, Chaminade College Preparatory for Young Men, in St. Louis.  When I saw on the news one night in 2002 a report about his case, I was compelled to call S.N.A.P. because one of the perpetrators mentioned in the Powel case, Brother John Wolfe, had molested me as well those many years ago.  I had not spoken with anyone about my abuse since it occurred some 28 years prior to that date.  I have now been a member of the Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests.

I was not subjected to the kind of abuse Michael suffered, but I will tell you this about sexual predators.  My abuser was a single male, a “Brother” of Mary (The Society of Mary, as in the Virgin Mary, known as “The Marianists”), like a monk, but not a priest.  He was a counselor at a private boy’s school.  He was a coach of a boy’s sports team.  He lived in a room at the end of a hall of a dormitory for high school boys.  He was a counselor at a Summer Camp for grade school aged boys which used the same dormitory in the summer.  He was so close to my family that when I finally told my father of my abuse, guess who Dad suggested I go talk to about this?  That’s right, Bro. John Wolfe, S.M.

Michael’s case was primarily one of conspiracy.  His case was filed against the Diocese because of repeated stonewalling and their failure to extradite his main perpetrator, Father William Christenson, S.M.  Fr. Bill had been “called” to do mission work in India in the 1970’s, and he was still living there when the Vatican defrocked him this past year because of his continued sexual abuse in his Seminary and with the poor orphan children he was “working” with. 

The conspiracy widens.  We who were there, in the dorms during those years, we know of other sexual abuses.  We took the matters to Fr. Robert Osborne, the school President.  He was instrumental in removing Bro. John Wolfe from dorm duties and ultimately from campus.  It was to Osborne that Ed Felker and Tim Nolan took the case of the serial rape of X. X. by fellow classmate Roland Sosa.  It was Osborne who oversaw the granting of Holy Orders and the sending of Fr. Bill Christenson to India.  It is Osborne who still denies all of the above and publically disparages Michael Powel, even after Powel has posthumously been vindicated by the recent actions of the Vatican.  This is what I’m getting at by calling these pedophilia rings “conspiracies”. 

I was still living and working in St. Louis at the time, and I was subject to the scorn and derision of the “Friends of Father Bill” who had been supporting his “mission” work for 25+ years.  One “Friend”, Charlie Maas, was actually a classmate of Michael Powel who had become an attorney and was working with Fr. Bill up until the time he was defrocked.  I cannot comment of Charlie’s status at this time.  Other “Friends of Father Bill” remained in denial and regularly attacked me in their posted and written comments about public statements I made pleading with Church and Marianist leaders to simply tell the truth.  I have not heard from any of these gentlemen since Fr. Bill was defrocked, and I do not know if they are still in denial.

One priest with whom I have sought counseling summed up The Catholic Church’s catastrophic mishandling of this matter by stating that The Catholic Church has failed to deal with its own shame, and that’s the business they are supposed to be in.

No Shame Where Tolerance of Deviancy is Strictly Enforced

The cases of institutional predatory pedophilia are being more openly discussed today, which is a safe way to admit that we cannot comment on an increase in the frequency of the acts with any degree of verisimilitude.  Such data does not exist.  Things that “are not talked about” cannot be statistically surveyed or spoken about with any accuracy.  Charlatans abound who attempt to do so and will try to sell their latest theory, book or need to be tenured.  They can be found abundantly in law, social work, psychology and social pseudo-science departments globally.  They can be found in the Citadels of Political Correctness, University Campus’, where tolerance for homosexuality is enforced with zealous efficiency.

In an environment where tolerance for deviancy is strictly enforced, where infractions like reporting a crime could cost you your ability to make a living (See The Shadow University by A. C. Kors and Harvey Silvergate), institutional pedophilia can flourish.  And it did.  As it did, apparently, at Syracuse, and at the Citadel, and in the Catholic Church, and likely in many other institutions where, in the cases of institutional homosexual pedophilia, men were in positions of seemingly ultimate authority and a steady stream of young boys were “part of the job.”  The Catholic Church offers Priests who many Catholic children view as the embodiment of God.  Worldwide, adults and kids obsess with collegiate and professional sports, and the perception of “Coach” is held in similar esteem as that of “Priest”.

I want to examine here the nature of institutional conspiracy.  The histories of various “scandals” are evident if incomplete.  The profile of the predatory homosexual pedophile has been documented as has been the profile of the candidate for abuse and the signs and symptoms of the victims of sexual abuse.  Common traits of institutional abuse are only beginning to emerge.

Gay:  From Happy to Queer

Since the selling of the conspiracy of the Federal Reserve to the American people, alliances between private interests and Government Officials have used the distraction of a Third Party Authority by utilizing academics.  The burgeoning “science” of economics was elevated to “expert” status during the twenty years surrounding the turn of the last century.  In the early 1900’s there were no Economics Departments at Universities, but the events, articles, editorials, other propaganda and the ultimate founding of The Fed enabled the rise of the economics advisor to a veritable Cabinet level position in U.S. and world politics.  (See Origins of The Federal Reserve by Murray Rothbard, available at mises.org)

Today it is commonplace to assign authority figure status to an appropriately credentialed or degreed person for support or representation for a stance or assertion.  Often the editor’s or producer’s implication is that this person represents an entire body of professional or expert thought thereby legitimizing or making more palatable the assertion.

After the Supreme Court decided to hear what came to be known as Roe v. Wade in 1972, The American Medical Association (AMA) released an official statement questioning life beginning at conception and voiced its support of legalized abortion.  This release was trumpeted on television and in print media and referred to repeatedly for the following 18 months of heated national debate.  It was not widely reported that the seven members of the AMA Board had acted alone.  It was not part of every mention of the report that the membership of the AMA (mostly Christian) had not been consulted on the matter and that the Board (mostly non-Christian) did not speak for the overwhelming majority of American Physicians who later formed one of the first pro-life organizations, Physicians for Life.

At the same time, another U.S. institution was under attack from the “outside”.  The American Psychiatric Association (APA) is the organization that determines for the professional community (among other things) what is normal and what is abnormal. Their Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is a handbook widely used by clinicians to assist in diagnosing and classifying mental, emotional, and sexual disorders. The first edition of the DSM, published in 1952, listed homosexuality as a mental disorder, a severe form of psychopathology and “maladjustment”.

By 1968, the gay community had a few organizations in place in the U.S., and one of their first targets was the APA. Over the next few years, protestors interrupted APA conferences, shouting at the speakers and taking control of meetings.  After three years of disrupted conventions, the APA agreed to let gay activists be involved in the decision-making process, even though the activists were not professionals in psychiatry or psychology.  (For more on the pertinent background of integral gay activists, see:

http://gaylife.about.com/od/stonewall/a/stonewallhistory_4.htm)

Finally in 1973, the APA Board of Trustees agreed to redefine mental illness in a way that accommodated homosexuality.  Previously, disorders had been determined by deviations from an objective norm, but this redefinition said that the norm should be more subjective, that people should not be considered disordered if they “do not experience distress over their condition” and if they “show no major impairment in social functioning”.  With this redefinition, homosexuality was removed as a disorder from the DSM-III.

[I am not an artist, but insert cartoon here:  Two very similar panels of an adult man buggering a partially disrobed small boy with a shocked and confused look on his face.  The first panel, titled “before APA’s decision”, depicts a worried look on the face of the molester with the caption, “Oh no!  I’m a maladjusted sociopath!”  The second panel, titled “after APA’s decision”, he is smiling, and with his eyes closed he is saying to his victim:  “Yes, boy, this is normal!  Maybe now I can get a job at Penn State!”  Get the picture?]

Former Principal Investigator for the U.S. Department of Justice, Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Judith Reisman, has written extensively on the links between exposure to deviant sex and subsequent crimes involving deviant sexuality.   “Deviant” I will carefully define as that which is outside the realm of private, heterosexual experiences between consenting adults, and “exposure” would include audio, visual, video or interpersonal sexual experiences of a deviant nature.  If the “defining” here “offends” you, then you are likely on my snip list.  Sexual deviancy may be common, it may be pervasive, it may be Politically Incorrect to condemn it, but it is not normal.

The decision by the APA board was not based on data and clinical reasoning nor did it represent the professional opinions of the practitioners the APA represents.  Surveys show that a majority of mental health professionals believes that homosexuality is not normal.  In 1977, for example, a poll was sent to psychiatrists in the U.S.  69% of those responding said they considered homosexuality to be the result of psychological maladaption.  Were they simply parroting what they had been taught?  Are we to discredit their views as being a product of suppressed homophobia?

Pandora was released and society changed.  Sexual mores in the Catholic Church changed; sexual mores in the Seminary’s changed.  Sexual mores changed in Federal Government hiring as more overt homosexuals entered Government Service.  Sexual mores in the private workplace changed as more overt homosexuals joined elementary and secondary teaching staffs, the profession with the highest percentage of abusers (8%, FBI crime statistics).  Depiction of sexual mores changed with increasing numbers of positive role model appearances by overt homosexuals on television shows and in movies. 

At first this intruder into our standards of normal sexual conduct was just a funny character on a sitcom, but they were acceptable.  Then they become more serious partners in the workplace, and they were tolerated.  Then they started taking their clothes off and marching in the St. Patrick’s Day Parade, and making out?! – Hell, they were copulating in public, wearing Gay Pride T-shirts and shouting, “We’re here!  We’re queer, and we’re in your face!” or singing, “If you’re happy and you know it, shake your tush!”

The Press, Broadway and Hollywood kicked their promotion of the gay lifestyle into high gear particularly by hiring homosexual writers.

Penn State Ice Cream, Anyone?

Q:        How has Penn State had such suck-cess at producing great Linebackers? 

A:        They start by lathering young boys up in the shower and fondling their genitals!           The best defense is to be offensive!

We all know the great Joe Paterno.  Yes, indeed!  JoPa! – Head Football Coach, a big man! – was informed nearly ten years ago (2002) of Sandusky’s pedophilia in Penn State facilities.  He may well have known of Sandusky’s activity before, but since this was an “official” claim, he “reported this to his boss”, Tim Curley.  But everyone East of the Mississippi knows that there is no one in the State of Pennsylvania above JoPa.  Except  perhaps the Governor and former Attorney General, Tom Corbett.

Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett headed up the investigation and grand jury beginning in 2009.  Distinct from every other case involving pedophilia, Corbett let Sandusky remain a predator for three years despite two eyewitnesses and a mother of a victim to whom Sandusky admitted molesting her child.  But, then, this was JoPa’s football team, and Corbett was running for Governor in 2009…  Penn State trustees donated over $200,000 to his campaign.  No time for a full blitz on the Sandusky case.  And then came the approval for a 3 million dollar State grant to Sandusky’s foundation, Second Mile…

Kathleen Kane is now running for Attorney General of Pennsylvania.  She has specialized in cases of sexual abuse for 12 years.  She asserts that “in any case where authorities know of an alleged sexual predator believed to have committed a crime, the first obligation is to make an arrest.”  (Emphasis added.  From investigative reporter Buss Bissinger, Newsweek, 28NOV11.)

They did nothing more to interfere with the Penn State pedophilia ring.  Instead, they promoted the whistle blower, Mike McQueary, to Assistant Coach, and he also did nothing more for the next ten years to prevent Sandusky from having sex with more and more children.  Would they have done more than “report to their boss” if Sandusky had been killing the children?  Would they have done more if the pedophile had been beating the children?  What is it going to take for this type of crime to rise above the level of failing to stop at a stop sign?  For Paterno, McQueary, and likely hundreds if not thousands of other Penn State Alumni, affiliates and employees over the past 15 years, it appears that whatever Sandusky (and others?) were doing at Penn State did not rise to the level of a crime as it apparently does in the minds and memories of the victims.

Graham Spanier – School President (lifelong academic – background is sociology and family counseling – sociology and family counseling – where they rationalize deviancy and teach tolerance and understanding of homosexual lifestyles.)

Gerald “Jerry” Sandusky – former Defensive Coordinator continues to earn his 50K annual pension, thank you good taxpayers of Pennsylvania!  Picture this man, Good ‘0le Jerry!  Look at his picture – Look at it!  And imagine him performing oral sex on your 13 year old son – on over 20 occasions – when he was 60 years old.  This is the case that lead Attorney General Corbett to commence an investigation – But not an arrest!  Not good ‘ole Jer!  Heck, he was a “volunteer” coach at the local Clinton County high school where he seduced that young victim.  On another occasion, Sandusky was caught in the weight room with the young boy.  One of the High School Coaches found him lying on the floor with the boy, fondling him.  Good ‘ole Jer-buddy!  He promptly jumped up, seemed surprised, and announced that they were practicing “wrestling moves”.  But none of this warranted an arrest?

I invite you to imagine again:  Imagine what this boy’s intimate life is going to be like.  Every time he touches a woman, he will know that it was a man who kissed him first.  Every time he touches a woman intimately, he will think of the man who touched him as his first sexual experience.  Every time he makes love to a woman – what?  You think he’ll just forget?  This is what we mean when we say rape is a scar for life.  And, in case you did not know, “sodomy” is not limited to penetration.

Tim Curley – Athletic Director  - saw no crime in Sandusky’s abuse, but he loves Butternut Pecan ice cream!

Gary Schultz – Vice President  of Penn State and Senior VP for Finance and Business which gave him oversight of university police (Whisper this:  that means he threatened them with losing their jobs – or worse – if they took this matter any further) is charged with perjury and failing to report adults sodomizing young children.  Two campus Police Officers were present when, in 1998, that victim’s mother confronted Sandusky and he admitted to fondling the boy’s genitals.  The two officers remained silent.

Mike McQueary – Receivers Coach –  when a graduate assistant to Coach Paterno in 2002, told Head Coach Paterno of an incident he personally witnessed of Sandusky buggering a young boy in Penn State locker room shower.  Did he do anything at the time to stop the buggering, or did he just walk away from Sandusky and the lathered lad?  Did he do anything for the victim Sandusky was having sex with right in front of him?  No.  What would he have done if he had seen his son in the shower with Sandusky?

Through Peter Alexander of NBC Nightly News, McQueary (Queer – y?) sent and email to former teammates:  “I did the right thing…you guys know me…the truth is not out there fully…I didn’t just turn and run…I made sure it stopped…I had to make quick tough decisions…”

            Quick decisions?  Tough decisions?  I guess so.  Quick decisions – kinda like an NCAA receiver?  Maybe a little jig to the right, then go far left…  Quick decisions …  After his formal hiring, after being promoted to an Assistant Coach’s position and salary (likely in excess of 50K annually), and after nearly ten years of earning that salary, AFTER TEN YEARS, this big courageous man “made sure it stopped”.  What do you supposed lead McQueary to finally “do the right thing” – after he got the job, after he got promoted and after ten years of earning that salary at the expense of the people of the State of Pennsylvania, now we hear about in 2011…  Quick, tough decisions for big, tough guy.

And then there’s Jim Calhoun, Penn State Janitor, who in 2000 witnessed Sandusky having sex with a young boy in a campus locker room shower.  Sound familiar?  Are we seeing a pattern?  Guess who he “reported” the incident to?

Picture credits:  The Sandusky Blitz – no credit, from rushlimbaugh.com; Sandusky – AP; Curley – Pat Smith/Getty Images; Schultz – ibid; Spanier – AP/Puskar; McQueary – Chris Gardner/Getty Images;

Institutional cover-ups and obfuscation at The Citadel and the Catholic Church, as well as some of my references:

http://www.zimbio.com/Joe+Paterno/articles/6lHaGLj6Esf/Happy+Valley+Knew+Sandusky

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoSXoL0wXjc

http://www.npr.org/2011/11/08/142111804/penn-state-abuse-scandal-a-guide-and-timeline

http://deadspin.com/5857440/alleged-victims-mother-jerry-sandusky-admitted-it-to-my-face-13-years-ago

http://www.zimbio.com/Joe+Paterno/articles/6lHaGLj6Esf/Happy+Valley+Knew+Sandusky

From SNAP regarding the Bishop Finn case in KC: Statement by Peter Isely of Milwaukee, national board member of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (414-429-7259, peterisely@yahoo.com)

So the problem in KC is a pervasive and on-going cultural and structural problem of secrecy and self-preservation being valued over openness and kids’ safety. It’s not one ‘bad apple.’ It’s a dangerous, corrupt barrel. That was the case and remains the case.

We’re also disappointed because Finn has now done here what bishops have almost always done – make any promises, payment or plea deal to avoid having to face tough questions in open court about their disgraceful and irresponsible deception

Catholics, citizens and children need and deserve the truth. The truth surfaces in court. That’s what bishops work overtime to avoid. And that’s what Finn has achieved here – he’s taken the cheap, easy, convenient way out, avoiding real scrutiny and concealing damaging misdeeds.

We hope Jackson County officials don’t wimp out. We hope they understand that jail time, or the threat of it, is the best way to deter well-educated white collar criminals who have hidden crimes for years or decades.

Historically, bishops have always been given special treatment in situations like these and are treated with kid gloves are far as punishment is concerned. Historically, these bishops have gone on to put more children at risk after “successfully” completing “diversion.” So we’re disappointed that a chance to send a strong message about kids safety and expose wrong doing and deter cover ups is being squandered.

From Barb Dorris (SNAP Director, concerning recent case in KC):  While this could be considered by some to be a good start, we’re disappointed. We believe others on the church payroll also concealed crimes, misled parishioners and endangered kids. They too should face consequences.

No one should get complacent now. It’s still important for every single person who knows anything about clergy sex crimes and cover ups in Kansas City to call police and prosecutors, especially in Jackson County.

We are grateful to every person who shared information with the grand jury. At the same time, however, we believe there are still dozens of other current and former church employees who could and should step forward with their information about clergy sex crimes and cover ups.

SNAP: The parallels between recent sex abuse cases are disturbing   Statement by Barbara Dorris, Outreach Director of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAPdorris@gmail.com, 314-503-0003) The parallels that can be drawn between the scandal at the Citadel and the situation at Penn State are disturbing.At both institutions, a man in a position of authority and influence used his status to approach, groom, and ultimately molest young boys. At both institutions, reports were made to the predator’s superiors that something wrong was happening. And at both institutions, these superiors failed to act. Through their efforts to protect the name and reputations of their respective institutions, officials at PSU and the Citadel allowed more children to be victimized. What is most disturbing about these scandals, however, is that they are not new or unheard of. Rather, these are a recent reiteration of the same type of cover-up that has plagued other organizations that held their reputations above the safety of children; institutions like the Boy Scouts of America, the Church of Latter Day Saints, and to a much greater extent, the Catholic Church. What is different about PSU and the Citadel, however, is that the outside reaction – from parents, alumni, community members, and the media – has been visceral. These people have rightly been outraged, and heads have rolled because of their public outcry. Yet we see no such outcry with the church. On the contrary, people have jumped to defend the priests that have been accused of molesting young boys and girls, and moved quickly to attempt to discredit those who came forward, citing misnomers as “this abuse occurred so long ago, get over it,” “you’re in it for the money, “and “if you were actually abused, what took you so long to come forward?” The issue with this type of reaction is not only that it is mean-spirited, but it deters others who may have seen or suspected clergy abuse from coming forward, and it deters the type of public outrage that have shamed PSU and the Citadel, and therefore, the repercussions that come with it. So we applaud the reaction from community members and share in their outrage at the officials at the Citadel. Through their inaction, they allowed this predator to change hunting grounds – moving from the university to a local high school – and avoid responsibility, in the same way that the Catholic church has done for so long. We hope that a full investigation is launched in order to determine who knew what, and when exactly they knew it, and we urge that this investigation be undertaken by outside authorities. We also call on Citadel President John Rosa to do real outreach, and do everything within his power to beg others who may have been victimized or seen these crimes occur to come forward, get help, start healing, and tell their story. (SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, is the world’s oldest and largest support group for clergy abuse victims. Founded in 1988, we now have more than 10,000 members. Despite the word “priest” in our title, we have members who were molested by religious figures of all denominations, including nuns, rabbis, bishops, and Protestant ministers. Our website is SNAPnetwork.org)    Contact David Clohessy (314-566-9790 cell, SNAPclohessy@aol.com), Barbara Blaine (312-399-4747, SNAPblaine@gmail.com), Barbara Dorris (314-862-7688 home, 314-503-0003 cell, SNAPdorris@gmail.com)

Another SNAP press release detailing Catholic obfuscation:

SNAP is upset at the Clay County prosecutor for what it calls his “naïve, sweetheart” deal with KC Bishop Robert Finn, which was announced yesterday. The arrangement holds none of the other “complicit church officials responsible,” relies on Finn’s voluntarily sharing of information, and does little to deter future deceit and wrongdoing by the diocese, SNAP says.

The group will urge Jackson County prosecutor Jean Peters Baker to insist on a trial or a jail sentence for Finn. This is the best way, SNAP says, to expose the diocesan cover up and deter future cover ups.

According to the new civil lawsuit, in May, the girl’s mom and dad repeatedly saw Fr. Ratigan using his cell phone under the dinner table and assumed he was texting. They did not realize “that Fr. Ratigan was taking pornographic pictures of their daughter.” Like other KC Catholics, this family had been deceived by church officials, having only been told that Fr. Ratigan was sick.

These alleged crimes took place years after diocesan staff got their first warning about Fr. Ratigan in 2006, the suit says. They also happened five months after church officials knew of hundreds of inappropriate and sexually suggesting photos of young girls on Fr. Ratigan’s computer, after Fr. Ratigan’s suicide note (in which he apologized for the harm he had done to girls and their families), and after Bishop Robert Finn sent Father Ratigan to stay at a priests’ home in Independence, where he still had access to kids, computers and his ‘smart phone’ with internet capability. (Finn has claimed he told the two other clerics living about Ratigan’s sexual problems. Those two clerics, however, deny this.)

Ratigan was ordained in 2004 and worked at two KC parishes (St. Thomas More & St. Patrick’s), one St. Joseph (St. Mary’s) and one in Easton (St. Joseph’s). He also spent time at several schools (including St. Thomas More School, Bishop LeBlond High School, and St. Patrick’s School and Early Childhood Center) and took kids on mission trips to Guatemala.

The suit is being filed today in Clay County. The girl and her family are represented by KC attorney Rebecca Randles. The defendants are Fr. Ratigan, Bishop Finn, and the KC-St. Joseph diocese.

Later in same post:  While this could be considered by some to be a good start, we’re disappointed. We believe others on the church payroll also concealed crimes, misled parishioners and endangered kids. They too should face consequences.

No one should get complacent now. It’s still important for every single person who knows anything about clergy sex crimes and cover ups in Kansas City to call police and prosecutors, especiall in Jackson County.

We are grateful to every person who shared information with the grand jury. At the same time, however, we believe there are still dozens of other current and former church employees who could and should step forward with their information about clergy sex crimes and cover ups.

http://gaylife.about.com/od/stonewall/a/stonewallhistory_4.htm

After the Stonewall riots in 1969, many LGBT people—even those that did not witness the rebellion—were inspired to contribute to the cause. Gay rights had entered the national spotlight. LGBT people began organizing, protesting and mobilizing. On July 4, 1969, a year after the Stonewall riots, the Mattachine Society along with Frank Kameny, Craig Rodwell, Randy Wicker, Barbara Gittings, Kay Lahusen and many others, picketed in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia in what was called the Annual Reminder. The protest was quiet and organized to the dismay of Craig Rodwell who felt Frank Kameny and Mattachine’s methods of calm protest were not enough.

Rodwell returned to New York City and organized Christopher Street Liberation Day. The march, held on June 28, 1970, was the first gay pride march in the U.S., covering 51 blocks from Christopher Street to Central Park. Today, LGBT pride parades are held annually in multiple cities and countries throughout the world. The month of June is widely co

And about the New Age:  http://www.evergreeninternational.org/Normalization-Homosexuality-background.htm