Former Israeli Defense Minister: Israel’s ideology of ‘Jewish supremacy’ resembles Nazi race theory

Jonathan Ofir | Mondoweiss

Former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon says the “ideology of ‘Jewish supremacy’” has become dominant in Israel, and it “is reminiscent of the Nazi race theory.”

In the late 1980s, Israeli philosopher Yeshayahu Leibowitz made the controversial warning that the 1967 occupation risked turning Israelis into “Judeo-Nazis.”

Leibowitz recently found a surprising supporter for this opinion –  Former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon.

On Friday, Ya’alon tweeted that “Yeshayahu Leibowitz was right, and I was wrong”. This was no benign reference – it referred directly to the late professor Leibowitz’s “warnings… concerning the process of bestialization towards us becoming ‘Judeo-Nazis’…”. Ya’alon says that the “ideology of ‘Jewish supremacy’” has become “dominant in the government of Israel”, and that it “is reminiscent of the Nazi race theory”. 

This was said in relation to Ya’alon’s participation in a ceremony to commemorate International Holocaust Remembrance Day on January 27. In his tweet, he repeatedly mocks the commonly held reluctance to compare anything that Israeli Jews do today to what the Nazis did during World War II.

Read more

Israel wants to implement the death penalty for Palestinian prisoners. Here's what you need to know

Comment: I guess the Zio-Nazis feel they haven't genocided enough Palestinians so they need to leverage the killing machine that bit further... What can you expect from a surfeit of psychopaths?

 

------- 

Qassam Muaddi | Mondoweiss

 

Israel is advancing a dangerous bill to impose the death penalty on Palestinian prisoners. Right-wing leaders want to go even further and use the bill to give Israeli forces the authority to carry out extrajudicial killings.

Israel is one step closer to passing a law that would allow Israeli courts to sentence Palestinian prisoners to death. On Monday, the Israeli Knesset passed the bill in a first reading with a majority of 39 votes in favor against 16 in opposition. The bill was presented as "exceptional" law, under a special status that allows it to be passed only with the majority of votes cast, and not the majority of the Knesset members, which is why absentees and abstentions were not counted. It still needs to pass two more readings before entering into force.

The law applies to individuals who are convicted for acts that led to the death of Israelis, if the acts were motivated by "racism or hostility towards the public" and "committed with the objective of harming the state of Israel or the rebirth of the Jewish people," making it applicable exclusively to Palestinians. It was introduced by Knesset member Limor Son Har-Melech from the ultra-nationalist "Jewish Power" party with a strong support base by Israeli settlers in the occupied West Bank, like Har-Melech herself.

The party is led by Itamar Ben-Gvir, a key ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government coalition. The death penalty for Palestinian prisoners has been a main political demand of Ben-Gvir, who has been behind the worsening of detention conditions of Palestinian prisoners in recent years.

Israel does have the death penalty in its law, but has only been considered applicable in rare situations of grave crimes, like genocide, and was applied once in 1962 against former Nazi officer Adolf Eichmann. The new law introduces three new stipulations which indicate the intention is to use the death penalty on Palestinians.

First, the bill's wording allows the death penalty on individuals convicted of killing Israelis on "nationalistic or racist" grounds. This limits its application to non-Israelis and employs the euphamism of "nationalistic" crimes which is commonly used to describe Palestinian attacks against Israelis.

Second, since it applies to Palestinians in the occupied territory, it gives Israeli military courts, who are the ones who issue penal sentences against Palestinians under occupation the power to put Palestinians to death.

Third, it allows the death sentence to be given with a simple majority of judges, and not by consensus.

Even still, Ben-Gvir continues to push to loosen the law's application even more to give Israeli forces the authority to execute Palestinians in the field.

 

Read more

Porton Down's Ideological Cloud

Johnny Vedmore

The Toxic Secret Experiments on Millions of British People

Porton Down is the HQ for Britain’s chemical & biological weapons programs, & it has a hundred-year history of maiming & murdering innocents. The experiments which the Ministry of Defence has conducted on the British were akin to those committed in the death camps of Nazi Germany. Now, as the Fourth Industrial Revolution begins to take hold, we should all consider the state’s past actions and demand a different, more positive future. 

I’m going to tell you a lot of information that you should already know. However, as soon as anyone begins researching the subject of this investigation—Porton Down’s chemical and biological weapons programs—they soon realise that so much of the information has been carefully managed by entities in the employ of the UK Ministry of Defence. Porton Down scientists were directly responsible for the premeditated murder of UK citizens.

Porton Down is the epicentre of an agenda of mass human experimentation with toxic materials. Their scientists have been responsible for causing miscarriages, premature deaths, birth defects, and ill health of almost every description. The organisation has ignored chemical weapons conventions, worked on offensive chemical weapons in secret, and has launched widespread chemical attacks on the British people from aircraft, automobiles, and ships.

The Ministry of Defence publicised a mission at one point: to see if they could spray the entire country with toxic chemicals in just a few hours.

This out-of-control facility has never been truly reigned in or held to account for their past actions, with the survivors of their blatant human experimentation left to die in secret, with no support, no compensation for their injuries, and no acknowledgement of the injuries they suffered.

The history of Porton Down is truly shocking. In this article, I will explore the events the facility would rather you not know about, rather than issues like Anthrax Island, and some other, more stage-managed attempts to change their reputation through gimmicky trickery and positive photo ops.

This is the story of how the UK’s chemical and biological weapons organisation, Porton Down, organised the systematic, repeated, and long-term poisoning of tens of millions of British people with a toxic carcinogen with terrifying and wide-reaching health implications.

Read more

German Police Arrest Author Over Posts Criticizing Netanyahu

Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net

A high-profile arrest in Germany has triggered outrage over what many see as part of an alarming encroachment on free expression.

Jürgen Todenhöfer, the author and former member of parliament, was taken into custody in Munich after publishing social media posts that likened Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s treatment of Palestinians to Nazi crimes during World War II.

Police reportedly searched his apartment and seized all electronic devices following weeks of surveillance.

The 84-year-old, once a prominent figure in the center-Right Christian Democratic Union before founding his own Justice Party in 2020, revealed on X that he had been detained, citing the message that led to his arrest: “Mister Netanyahu, does your conscience never actually protest when you do to Palestinians the same thing that the cursed Nazis did to the Jews?”

Authorities have yet to comment publicly, but the incident falls under Germany’s strict anti-incitement laws, which forbid statements perceived as diminishing the Holocaust.

Todenhöfer has never been shy about challenging Germany’s foreign policy.

His books on conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria earned him a reputation as a persistent voice against militarism. […]

This is not his first confrontation with law enforcement. Todenhöfer said police had previously investigated him after he accused former Chancellor Olaf Scholz of treason for allegedly permitting the destruction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

Read more

After "Greater Israel," Netanyahu calls for a "Super-Sparta" and "finishing the job in Gaza"

Thierry Meyssan|Voltairenet.org

Benyamin Netanyahu’s drift from avowed conservatism to Nazism is increasingly evident. After claiming the "historical and spiritual" mission of achieving a "Greater Israel," that is, conquering the territories of its seven neighbors, he has just called for transforming Israel into a "super-Sparta," that is, militarizing the state and ceasing all trade with its allies. If words have any meaning, he constantly makes us understand that his references are the fascists Vladimir Jabotinsky and Leo Strauss. From one drift to another, he engaged in a shameless act of lying before the United Nations General Assembly, attributing dark thoughts to his adversaries and claiming the right to continue massacring.

ast week, I warned our readers, particularly Israeli ones, against Benjamin Netanyahu’s rapid drift toward fascistism—and perhaps Naziism, in Ben-Gurion’s words about Vladimir Jabotinsky. [1] I had indeed noted the Prime Minister’s public conversion to the doctrine of "Greater Israel." Let us recall that this expression is not intended to justify the annexation of the entire Palestinian territories to the State of Israel, but also eastern Egypt, parts of Jordan and Saudi Arabia, all of Lebanon, most of Syria, and part of Iraq, to ​​the point of reforming the ancient Assyrian empire "from the Nile to the Euphrates."

This announcement, made exclusively in Hebrew, that is, for the sole use of his fellow Israelis, drew strong criticism from all Arab leaders, even reaching the United Nations Security Council on September 23. Foreign Minister Ahmed Attaf declared that "the Israeli occupation compromises any prospect of creating an independent and sovereign Palestinian state, not only on the ground but also in people’s minds." Fueled by the myth of "Greater Israel," the Israeli government seeks to redefine the region’s borders and extend its hegemony in defiance of international law and the norms governing peaceful coexistence between states; a statement echoed by the Russian Permanent Representative.

Read more 

Four Years after Odessa Pogrom – Neo-Nazism still rampages in Ukraine

Matfey Shaheen
The Duran

Fascist elements that caused Odessa massacre still prevalent in the nation

On May 9th, Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and some other states celebrated Victory Day, a monument to the destruction of Nazism by the people of the USSR together with those in Europe.

Victory Day is a day to celebrate the annihilation of Nazism from the face of Europa. We look towards the bright future, but we cannot forget our past, lest we repeat it. In Ukraine, however, for the past four years, we have seen the dark clouds of neo-Nazism overcast.

It has been four years, and a little over one week, since tragic events occurred in an Odessa Trade Union building, claiming the lives of around 48 people in an arson assault by official numbers, though by some sources, the number of those killed during the Odessa clashes, may indeed be as high as 397.

Keeping with the theme of remembering the past, but looking to the future, in this article, we will call to memory the anniversary of the Odessa massacre and the events that occurred, and also to prove with examples, that the Neo-Nazi elements which caused it, are still prevalent throughout Ukraine.

Read more

Traces of Nazism in Israel?

Uri Avnery
ICH

"PLEASE DON'T write about Ya'ir Golan!" a friend begged me, “Anything a leftist like you writes will only harm him!"

So I abstained for some weeks. But I can't keep quiet any longer.

General Ya'ir Golan, the deputy Chief of Staff of the Israeli army, made a speech on Holocaust Memorial Day. Wearing his uniform, he read a prepared, well-considered text that triggered an uproar which has not yet died down.

Dozens of articles have been published in its wake, some condemning him, some lauding him. Seems that nobody could stay indifferent.

The main sentence was: "If there is something that frightens me about the memories of the Holocaust, it is the knowledge of the awful processes which happened in Europe in general, and in Germany in particular, 70, 80, 90 years ago, and finding traces of them here in our midst, today, in 2016."

All hell broke loose. What!!! Traces of Nazism in Israel? A resemblance between what the Nazis did to us with what we are doing to the Palestinians?

90 years ago was 1926, one of the last years of the German republic. 80 years ago was 1936, three years after the Nazis came to power. 70 years ago was 1946, on the morrow of Hitler's suicide and the end of the Nazi Reich.

I FEEL compelled to write about the general's speech after all, because I was there.

Read more

Declassified CIA docs: U.S. has been supporting Ukrainian neo-Nazis for over 60 years

Wayne Madsen
Intrepid Report

The recent declassification of over 3,800 documents by the Central Intelligence Agency provides detailed proof that since 1953 the CIA operated two major programs intent on not only destabilizing Ukraine but Nazifying it with followers of the World War II Ukrainian Nazi leader Stepan Bandera.

The CIA programs spanned some four decades. Starting as a paramilitary operation that provided funding and equipment for such anti-Soviet Ukrainian resistance groups as the Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council (UHVR); its affiliates, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), all Nazi Banderists. The CIA also provided support to a relatively anti-Bandera faction of the UHVR, the ZP-UHVR, a foreign-based virtual branch of the CIA and British MI-6 intelligence services. The early CIA operation to destabilize Ukraine, using exile Ukrainian agents in the West who were infiltrated into Soviet Ukraine, was codenamed Project AERODYNAMIC.

A formerly TOP SECRET CIA document dated July 13, 1953, provides a description of AERODYNAMIC: "The purpose of Project AERODYNAMIC is to provide for the exploitation and expansion of the anti-Soviet Ukrainian resistance for cold war and hot war purposes. Such groups as the Ukrainian Supreme Council of Liberation (UHVR) and its Ukrainian Insurgent Army (OUN), the Foreign Representation of the Ukrainian Supreme Council of Liberation (ZPUHVR) in Western Europe and the United States, and other organizations such as the OUN/B will be utilized." The CIA admitted in a 1970 formerly SECRET document that it had been in contact with the ZPUHVR since 1950.

The OUN-B was the Bandera faction of the OUN and its neo-Nazi sympathizers are today found embedded in the Ukrainian national government in Kiev and in regional and municipal governments throughout the country.  

Read more

Hitlers 1933 deal with the Zionists - Haavara Transfer Agreement w Edwin Black

PublicEnquiry

Hitler the Ultra Zionist!

Gilad Atzmon

In a bizarre effort to paper over the historical truth regarding Hitler and the Haavara Agreement, Professor Rainer Schulze of Essex University wrote an article totally lacking intellectual integrity.  Schulze’s piece in the Independent, ‘Hitler and Zionism: Why the Haavara Agreement does not mean the Nazis were Zionists’, demonstrates that fear of Zionists and their extensive power extends beyond the Labour party. It is deeply entrenched within the British psyche and institutionally embedded in academia. 

Schulze article leads him to the conclusion that: “any claim that Nazis and Zionists ever shared a common goal is not only cynical and disingenuous, but a distortion of clearly established historical fact.” The German/British professor’s failure to apply elementary academic analytical skills to the issue results in faulty scholarship.

Schulze accepts that the Havaara Agreement provided that “Jewish emigrants from Germany had to hand over their possessions before they departed, and the proceeds from the sale of such possessions were used by a company specifically set up for this purpose in Tel Aviv to purchase German goods for sale in Palestine.”

But Schulze continues, “The Haavara Agreement does not mean the Nazis were ever Zionists. Instead, it is testament to the fact that Nazi policy towards the Jews was not clear-cut from the beginning, but evolved greatly over the years.” Schulze clearly doesn’t understand what Zionism was and who the Zionists were at the time of the Agreement.   

Schulze defines Zionism as; “a movement based on the right of self-determination.”  This definition of Zionism is profoundly anachronistic and it is wrong.

Read more
 

New Year's in Cologne: Sexual crime and the radicalizing of European society

Harrison Koehli
Sott.net

By now we've all heard what happened in Cologne, Germany, on New Year's Eve. A group of 1000 refugees allegedly caused mayhem in the city's main square, drinking heavily, launching firecrackers into the crowd, robbing people, and sexually assaulting over 100 women. According to Cologne police, over 200 cases of sexual assault have been registered. A climate of fear is the result, along with a backlash against authorities, from local police to Germany's leadership. It's "sexual terrorism" at its worst, proof that Germany's experiment in multiculturalism, and their open-arms policy to refugees from the Middle East and North Africa, have been utter failures. The coverage and reactions are unequivocal. But is this narrative justified? Hardly. We don't even have a clear idea of exactly what happened in Cologne that night. The fact that all media outlets are in agreement - in a country where the media is controlled by the CIA - indicates the 'operational' and contrived nature of the coverage, and perhaps even the event itself.

So far, available video from the scene shows a large crowd of young people (mostly men) on the square, some obviously drinking, and several of them launching firecrackers into the sky and some into the crowd. Basically, a large group, or several smaller groups, of teens and twenty-somethings acting like teens and twenty-somethings do in most of the Western world: irresponsibly and "just having a bit of fun". What the videos don't show, but what certainly also occurred, was a series of sexual assaults on women in the area by an unknown number of these young men. Victims report being forced through groups of young men - of Middle Eastern or North African appearance - where they were repeatedly groped at, some robbed, and at least one or two reportedly raped. 

Police have identified 32 suspects, 18 or 19 of whom are recent asylum seekers. Another report says the breakdown of suspects is as follows: nine Algerians, eight Moroccans, five Iranians, four Syrians, three Germans, one Iraqi, one Serb, and one American.

It's hard to get an idea of the actual number of people involved just by looking at suspects: some are probably innocent, and some could very likely remain unidentified. But from the reports I have read and watched, it sounds like the men involved in these attacks were part of a much smaller group, perhaps 30-40 men, as one of the victims described. (If any of our readers have reports saying otherwise, please let us know in the comments.) This makes sense. The mainstream reporting doesn't.

Think about it. Reading the mainstream reporting, we would be forgiven for thinking that all 1000 men in the square participated in the assaults, because that's what the MSM is saying. But how was this determined? How are we to imagine every single male in this crowd collectively assaulting 100-200 women? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any of the women reported this. Much more plausible is that a smaller number of perverts (say, 2 or 3 dozen) each assaulted multiple women in the manner the witnesses describe.

Regardless of the number of perps, the assaults seem to have involved some degree of advance planning, especially given that similar attacks occurred in Finland, Sweden, Switzerland and Austria, which have led the German Justice Minister to suspect the multiple assaults were coordinated. At the very least, it appears that social media was used to plan the gathering in the city square, but there's no indication that the call was put out to rob and sexually assault women. If that happened, it happened using a different means, perhaps among a smaller, more select group.

Since the attacks, rival groups have demonstrated for and against refugees. "Unknown assailants" have carried out attacks on random refugees. Merkel's party has proposed tougher laws on asylum seekers, with some politicians calling for deportations. 

Read more

Windsor Knot: Confirmation of UK Royal Treason with Nazis

Chris Floyd
Empire Burlesque

While we're all going back in time to talk about bigwigs who supported and/or collaborated with the Nazis, let's take a look at this smoking gun that recently appeared in the London Review of Books: documentary proof of the former King of England's treason with the Nazis, supplying them with top-secret info from high-level war strategy meetings. (Of course, I suppose the Mufti of Jerusalem talked the Duke of Windsor into this treachery; as we all know, thanks to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Mufti had magical powers that could make even a good guy like Hitler do bad things.)

This was a letter to the editor in the 8 October issue of the LRB:

The Duke of Windsor's War

The Duke of Windsor appears also to have been a traitor (Letters, 10 September and Letters, 24 September). At the outbreak of war in 1939, he was made a major-general attached to the British Military Mission in France. In that capacity he would have attended Allied War Council meetings. It became known after the war that he had made a visit to The Hague in January 1940 (the Netherlands was still neutral then) and paid a visit to the German Embassy there. The following extract is from the German Foreign Policy Documents 1918-45, Series D, Vol. VIII, No. 621. These can be found online.

    124/122669
    Minister Zech to State Secretary Weizsäcker
    SECRET
    THE HAGUE, February 19, 1940.
    DEAR WEIZSÄCKER: The Duke of W., about whom I wrote to you in my letter of the 27th of last month, has said that the Allied War Council devoted an exhaustive discussion at its last meeting to the situation that would arise if Germany invaded Belgium. Reference was made throughout to a German invasion plan said to have been found in an airplane that made a forced landing in Belgium. On the military side, it was held that the best plan would be to make the main resistance effort in the line behind the Belgian-French border, even at the risk that Belgium should be occupied by us. The political authorities are said to have at first opposed this plan: after the humiliation suffered in Poland, it would be impossible to surrender Belgium and the Netherlands also to the Germans. In the end, however, the political authorities became more yielding.
    Heil Hitler!
    Zech
Andrew Richardson
Bournemouth

"Accidental" Giant Navy Swastika Building Was No Accident

Remember...?

Daily Kos
September 28th 2007

"We knew what it [the building complex] was going to look like"
 - Architect John Mock

The story of the US Navy's giant swastika-shaped barracks, built in the late 1960's and located at the Naval Amphibious Base Coronado, just South of San Diego, has been all over the news. Rightly so - it's the biggest government subsidized swastika display on Earth.

Below is a YouTube presentation - a simple silent slide show of clips taken of views, through Google Earth, that zoom in, from space, on the giant NAB swastika complex.

The US media has now deigned to make this story into a major media spectacle. But, media depictions you may have heard in the last 24 hours, on the origin of the giant swastika-barracks which houses Navy SEALS, will probably all amount to evasion, distortions, or even lies.

Here's the media whitewash:

After Google Earth made the Navy's giant government-subsidized swastika building complex, located at the Coronado Naval Amphibious Base near San Diego, visible to anyone on Earth, the resultant publicity, outcry, and mounting political pressure has led the US Navy to budget $600,000 to change the swastika shape of the barracks: to unmake the swastika, which according to the US Navy was the result of an embarrassing planning oversight.

CNN below, repeats the United States Navy's claim that the NAB Swastika complex was accidental. But, that claim has been disproved, as detailed further in this post, by researcher Avrahaum Segol.

Here's CNN's story:

Read more

The Truthseeker: NATO's 'Gladio' army in Ukraine

Comment: Well worth the reminder ...

Nazi-Supporting Royal Compares Putin to Hitler

Glenn Miller Claims He Was an FBI Informant

Comment: Yet another FBI informant...See:  Inside the Terror Factory

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


CounterPunch

Glenn Miller, the former North Carolina Ku Klux Klan leader, arrested in the Kansas City Jewish Community Center shootings that killed three people on Sunday, has been identified previously as an FBI informant. The FBI is known to have infiltrated the Klan time and time again since the civil rights days, during a period when J. Edgar Hoover had set his sights on flushing out supposed commies and ending the career of Martin Luther King. Miller testified for the government in a major trial where the Feds sought to convict leaders of the Far Right. In his book, A White Man Speaks Out, he claims to have been an FBI informant.

Miller is a former Vietnam vet who was a member of the American Nazi Party before turning to the North Carolina Klan. He was in the Klan caravan involved in the Greensboro massacre in 1979, where the Klan opened fire on civil rights marchers. He then formed the White Patriot Party, claiming by 1985 to have a membership of 2500 and offices in six southern states. He ran for governor of North Carolina in 1984 and got 5,000 votes.

A year later he made a try for North Carolina senator John East’s senate seat. The rally where he announced his senate campaign turned into a small arms training session. Miller was a big fan of camouflage clothing and supposedly recruited Marines at Fort Le Jeune. His group sponsored telephone messages, including one of a faked black man supposedly being lynched. He supported South Africa’s apartheid government, attacked Jerry Falwell as “Judas Goat.” And along with other far right outfits by the late 1980s, the White Patriot Party phone messages was linking the farm depression to the international Jewish bankers. The main platform of his party, Miller said, was southern independence.

Read more

Sex, Lies and Society Part III

"Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law"

The pioneering academic sex study centres under scrutiny includes The Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality [IASHS] (thereafter called the “Sex Institute”) which offers extensive training and advanced degrees and directed by Penthouse Forum Board member and Kinsey co-author, Dr. Wardell Pomeroy, and Hustler Magazine contributors, Drs. Ted Mcllvena and Erwin Haberlae. The accreditation curricula includes a wide variety of Kinsey inspired material such as The Sex Institute’s degree programme which incorporates: “ ‘advanced graduate’ studies such as: ‘erotic sensate and massage therapy,’ and focuses most of its scholarly training on student viewing, using, even making, ‘erotic’ films….And the “training in the design and implementation of ‘sex education curricula’ for all ages.”

 
So, we have Dr. Pomeroy, co-author and a Kinsey Institute principle, who recommended incest as beneficial to the juvenile to adult readers of Penthouse, Chic, and other pornographic magazines and for whom a belief in “positive incest” allows him to still teach child sexuality.

Furthermore:

These now-accredited Sex Institute experts commonly testify for sex offenders and for businesses which specialize in the production of obscenity and pornography. ‘Experts’ from the American sexual Establishment regularly testify in courts and provide their expertise to legislatures and other public agencies.  For example, in 1980, Wardell Pomeroy testified for a pornographer in Happy Day v. Kentucky, a court case in which Pomeroy admitted under oath to seeking funds from the sex industry to produce his own child pornography. 1

This may go a little way in explaining the present chaos in the European and especially US courts in cases of child abuse and custody cases. One particular form of sexual education in the San Francisco “Sex Institute” and in other universities comes under the formal sounding “Sexual Attitude Restructuring” (SAR) as promulgated by Pomeroy himself and which is achieving a shift in pedagogical attitude and teaching. It incorporates specific images of a both hard and soft-core nature that: “scars the viewer's brain as it short circuits his and her conscience.” This is particularly interesting in light of ponerological aspects of psychopathy that inflict a progressive cognitive dissonance that effectively cuts off the conscience and ability to empathise. The entrainment of SAR is said to erode “emotional refinements by using high resonance images that “psychopharmacologically and neurochemically mold, coarsen and reform viewer's brains, minds and memories.” In effect, it channels sexual energy to a strictly mechanical and animalistic perception of sexuality and in Pomeroy’s words: “The SAR is designed to ‘desensitize,’ that is to disinhibit, all viewers. 2 

This has a particular resonance with the CIA led mind programming operations under the generic term of MK-ULTRA in the 1950s and 60s. Kinsey himself was indirectly associated with some of the main proponents of such mind experimentation. One can’t help but wonder if these are offshoots of that same secret research which became purposely mainstreamed into academia.

Even before Kinsey left his intensive study of wasps and launched into the field of sexuality, he was an ardent New Biologist or Eugenicist who “recommended that a portion of the ‘lower classes’ be sterilized to foster a more robust gene pool.” 3  It becomes more worrisome when eugenics appears so frequently as a prominent principle behind Kinsey’s drive to collect “data” as it does with so many of the academic and intelligentsia of his day. It also becomes somewhat tame in comparison to the company he kept, the mutual friends and acquaintances of which included Dr. Herrmann Muller, a co-worker at IU for several years who had done research at the “Sex Institute” in Berlin, primarily as it was not legal in the United States. It was also at a time when the German, Darwinian Eugenics programs had full Academic approval since before the 1920s, as a definite precursor to Hitler’s Nazi Germany.

In 1943, fellow eugenicist and infamous “scientist” Dr. E. Ewen Cameron became a fellow Rockefeller grantee. In 1973 as president of the American Psychiatric Association, Dr. Cameron was a covert CIA “mind-control” researcher who conducted human experiments outside the borders of the United States, at McGill University in Canada, for CIA director Allen Dulles. Satanist Aleister Crowley, American Nazi George Sylvester Viereck, French paedophile Rene Guyon and occultist film maker Kenneth Anger. The latter director has said:

Kinsey was obsessed with obtaining the Great Beast's (Crowley's) day-to-day sex diaries... To obtain grant monies and maintain the support of the university, Kinsey needed the excuse of research to validate his twenty-four-hours-a-day obsession with sex. However, Prok’s (Kinsey’s nickname) battle cry of ‘Do your best and let other people react as they will’ seemed a variation on Crowley's ‘Do what thou wilt’ maxim. (i.e. "Do what thou wilt is the whole of the law"). 4

Granted, we have no way of knowing the truth of Anger’s claims but the historical saga does not end there. With eugenics, Nazism, fascism and sex-magic topping the Kinsey bill, this already heady brew may account for the suspicions which eventually surrounded the so called father of the “sexual revolution” that contributed to an equally dubious counter-culture. It is far too much of a coincidence to have so many friends and acquaintances involved which advocated a mix that could be summarised as Nazi influenced Satanism.

Kinsey’s personal life, as well as his professional life, clearly exhibited an obsessive curiosity with the mechanics of sex. When you mix a sexual obsessive with the above mentioned friends and acquaintances then it becomes clear that Kinsey’s influence could have contributed to the sexual ponerization of society more than any other single individual. But as we know – no-one acts in isolation. It is true - while shunning overly moralistic principles that favour a black and white simplicity - society is indeed degenerating in our confused and distracted visions of sex.  It is interesting that Kinsey’s research conveniently excluded incest and physical abuse/battery yet focused entirely on the more salacious aspects of deviancy giving them undue credence and effectively normalizing them to the point that all now is acceptable, where normalcy is so often pathological and relationships and communicating is just one new party game of buying and selling.

The Kinsey sex studies reported that: “95 percent of American males had violated sex laws seriously enough to put them in jail, 85 percent had experienced premarital sex, 69 percent had used prostitutes, 45 percent were adulterers, as high as 37 percent had experienced orgasm in a homosexual act, and that 17 percent had had sex with an animal.” As the late journalist Jim Keith mentioned: “In these post-Kinsey days this information is not that shocking, in fact it is almost believable, but in 1948 it fell upon the public like a bombshell.”5

Persons such as Kinsey and his sponsors may have exacerbated and played on the lowest instincts in man and brought them to the surface to play an active part in the erosion of social moderation and for a lassaire-faire mentality to reign. This “bombshell” had consequences, the effects of which are still promoted and justified today. Many of these ex-Kinseyian staff and sexologists are now within the court system pronouncing judgements on who they deem fit and proper to look after children in custody cases.

We see the same play-offs between the Christian-right and the liberal left, the former seeing him as a child molesting monster and the latter as a great pioneer and deliverer from the last throes of Victorian values and sexual Puritanism. In reality, neither is correct. He was very likely used for his talents, his failings and his well placed sexual deviancy to act as one of many key influences in another spoke in the wheel of a Rockefeller-led social engineering programme.

Though it would seem that the most vociferous critics of Kinsey are predominantly right wing, “apple-pie” conservatives, they do have considerable justification for their outrage. Admittedly frothing at the mouth with Christian indignation, it would be extremely foolish to write off their criticisms as mere “judgement day” invective. While it could, at a stretch, be said that Kinsey did provide partially valuable data regarding the sexual mores of Middle America and that he was genuinely interested in such “research” it is highly likely that he used this as a convenient method by which he could satisfy his paedophilic fantasies.

Many sexologists and academics dislike having their beloved godfather of sex toppled from his mantle, but when the evidence is carefully pondered, Kinsey’s own sexual demons become the driving force in his research which may have been fully exploited by those who provided his funding. When one puts the Rockefeller foundation in the driving seat it leaves a decidedly uncomfortable feeling that Kinsey’s detractors are onto something, yet they are shackled by accusations of fundamentalism and the parochial middle-American family values that so often slip into overprotection.

According to biographer James H. Jones, he was “among the most influential Americans of the twentieth century.” If so, then you can be sure he was used for a specific purpose precisely because of those hidden demons. Dr. Kinsey, in 1948, publicly advocated adults engaging in sexual relations with children, making the “scientific” finding that they “derived definite pleasure” from sexual use by adults. Kinsey wrote those children’s screams of pain, their striking and struggling to get away from their “partner” were all supporting evidence of the child subject’s pleasure from sexual contact with an adult “trained observer.” Dr. Reisman, wrote that “While it is clearly established that these above children’s responses were obtained by adult male child sex offenders, the Kinsey group accepts child offender/evidence re: the child victims.”

Knowing that the nature of the sexual predator in our midst is highly adaptive, manipulative and very, very clever, it is not without good reason that this is exactly the kind of niche post that such individuals seek out. Their molestations can then proceed undetected through a variety of ingenious covers. Perhaps Kinsey had his own mandated stamp of approval that allowed him to do as he pleased. A handwritten Kinsey Institute reply reads: “not an offender unless legally charged,” as Kinsey himself had stated, that “one is not a criminal unless one is caught.” Kinsey said in 1940, that “at no time did he allow the question of morality to determine what was scientifically acceptable.”

It seems he was true to his word.


Notes


1  Chapter 7, pp 172-174 (Reisman, 2003)
2 (Chapter 7, pp 172-174 Reisman, 2003) See also pp. 174-175 and the following extract: “In December 1982, George Leonard reported his Sexual Attitude Restructuring (SAR) experience in Esquire magazine. [Esquire: The End of Sex, p. 24]   Noting at least 60,000 people trained in colleges and university by the SAR beginning in the early 1980s, Leonard expects his experience is typical: The sensory overload culminated on Saturday night in a multi-media event called the F—korama ... in the darkness ... images of human beings - and some-times even animals — engaging in every conceivable sexual act, accompanied by wails, squeals, moans, shouts, and the first movement of the Tchaikovsky Violin Concerto.  Some seventeen simultaneous moving pictures ... Over a period of several hours, there came a moment when the four images on the wall were of a gay male couple, a straight couple, a lesbian couple, and a bestial group.  The subjects were nude,..I felt myself becoming disoriented ... was she kissing a man or a woman?  I struggled to force the acts I was watching into their proper boxes ... and now I couldn't remember which was which.  Wasn't I supposed to make these discriminations?  I searched for clues.  There were none.  I began to feel uncomfortable.  Soon I realized that to avoid vertigo and nausea I would have to give up the attempt to discriminate and simply surrender to the experience ... The differences for which lives have been ruined, were not only trivial, but invisible.  By the end ... Nothing was shocking....But nothing was sacred either.  But as I drove home, I began to get a slightly uneasy feeling.  It was almost as if I had been conned ... by my own conditioned response of taking the most liberated position ... whatever my deeper feelings.... love had not been mentioned a single time during the entire weekend.”
3  ‘Sex Experiments of Alfred Kinsey.’ By Jim Keith
4 p.50. Mass Control: Engineering Human Consciousness by Jim Keith.

5 Ibid. p.49 Keith.

• Sex, Lies and Society Part I
• Sex, Lies and Society Part II
• Sex, Lies and Society Part IV
• Sex, Lies and Society Part IX (2006)
• Sex, Lies and Society Part V
• Sex, Lies and Society Part VI
• Sex, Lies and Society Part VII
• Sex, Lies and Society Part VIII

In the Name of the Father Part I

“Standards of conduct appropriate to civil society or the workings of a

democracy cannot be purely and simply applied to the Church.”

- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

The High Priests of Paedophilia?

 According to the first comprehensive national study of the prevalence of sexual abuse by priests within the Catholic Church, some 4 percent of U.S. priests ministering from 1950 to 2002 were accused of sex abuse with a minor. It was further discovered that over 95 percent of the dioceses and 60 percent of the religious communities were affected. 1 Though rigorous and wide ranging, this study cannot ascertain the full extent of sexual abuse within the Church.

Released in Washington on February 27, 2002, the John Jay study was commissioned by the U.S. bishops’ National Review Board, which released its own report at the same news conference on the causes of the clergy sex abuse crisis that has continued to rock the church for the past four years. The review board named by the bishops and composed of prominent lay people, is monitoring compliance with the U.S. bishops’ policies to prevent clergy sex abuse. The study concentrated on providing suitable statistics about the nature and scope of the crisis. The findings were shocking.

Over 4,392 clergymen - most of whom were priests - were accused of abusing 10,667 people. Sex-abuse related costs totalled $573 million, with $219 million covered by insurance companies. With child sex abuse more prevalent among diocesan clergy, of the total clergy accused, 929 were religious priests. The Church authorities’ response to persistent claims of abuse was to hush up claims and send the accused clergy for medical evaluation and treatment. While no action was taken against 10 percent of priests accused, only 6 percent of the allegations saw priests reprimanded. After this “tap on the hand” they were promptly returned to ministry. From other studies and reports it is clear that this secret preferential treatment had been taking place for many decades.

According to the study, 81 percent were males, ranging from 11 to 14, being over half of the total victims in this age group. Most of the victims were post-pubescent adolescents with a small percentage pre-puberty, though the study mentioned that 22 percent of the victims were under 10 years old. Homosexual child molestation seems to be more prevalent within the Church than the higher statistical evidence of young girls being abused in society as a whole. The abuse itself was multiple and extreme. Commensurate with the cunning of the sexual predator, the family social contacts presented the most frequent context for abuse whereby priests used the trust of families to gain access to children. Tragically up to 7 percent of these children had a prior history of abuse and were thus easily targeted again by those in which they had placed their trust – the professed messengers and mediators of God.

Though comprehensive enough, this belies the fact that it can only include those who chose to reveal these crimes. As the authors stated, the data from the 1990s had not been recorded as well as the natural time lag of victims not reporting their abuse, priests still to this day being protected and many of the victims unable to have the courage to come forward. They also admit that the financial costs are likely to be far higher: “14 percent of the dioceses and religious communities did not provide financial data and the total did not include settlements made after 2002, such as the $85 million agreed to by the Boston Archdiocese.” The study was based on detailed questionnaires returned by 195 of the 202 dioceses, Eastern eparchies and other ecclesial territories tied to the United States. This 97 percent compliance was “an extraordinarily high response rate,” said the study. Regarding action by civil authorities, the study said that: “3 percent of all priests against whom allegations were made were convicted and about 2 percent received prison sentences.” This alone should give us pause for thought regarding the Churches professed “tough stance” on there in-house child molesters.

While news of the abuse was beginning to seep out, Pope John Paul II was doggedly holding onto power and the belief held by many that he was a symbol of freedom and compassion around the world. Looking at the facts of his tenure this belief proves to have little connection to reality.

The Vatican acts as lawmaker, prosecutor and judge, which is tied irrevocably to its own survival. It guards this survival jealously. Human rights are an anathema to such a corporation. It requires far too many adjustments and reforms that, if implemented would eventually bring the whole business crashing down. This is probably why the European Council’s Declaration of Human Rights has yet to be signed by the Vatican. Wojtyla decided it would be a good thing to preach about human rights and the due process of the law while ensuring that such a process was frozen within his own dominion. 

Similarly, it is easy to place the Virgin Mary on a Gold encrusted pedestal while ignoring the rights of women around the world. Condemning birth control and refusing the ordination of women is a classic contradiction and symbolic of Catholicism in its entirety. Pope John Paul moulded and shaped the episcopate discarding some of the more congenial and inclusive wording of the Vatican councils in favour of total obedience. He was big on re-Romanization and a return to “traditional values.” The net result of these values is unending fear, misery and suffering born from those divorced from reality and compassion while theologically claiming the reverse.

Wojtyla’s papacy, like his predecessors in the 11th and 16th centuries, served to add to the schizophrenia of the Vatican still further, creating more of an obstacle to the prospect of hope, freedom and diversity among Christian churches. A serious lack of new priests taking up their posts is symptomatic of millions worldwide who have become tired of the corruption and hypocrisy of the Catholic Church. The scandal of abuse on its own is enough to understand why.


 “God’s Rottweiler”


Now, with the embodiment of contradictions that Karol Wojtyla represented, we go to the hand-picked Pope Benedict XVI a.k.a. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, affectionately known as “the enforcer,” “the panzer cardinal” and “God’s Rottweiler.” The quality of compassion that merited these nick-names was seen when he attempted to add his own brand of healing for Christians and Muslims.

Rather than providing inspiration towards reconciliation, which it so desperately needs, the Pope effectively sowed the most objectionable propaganda of hatred, consciously and purposefully. The Guardian reported that “The Vatican last night said Pope Benedict XVI had not intended to offend when he quoted a 14th-century Christian emperor as saying the Prophet Muhammad had introduced only ‘evil and inhuman’ ideas into the world.” 2 It is precisely because Ratzinger knew of the delicacy of the issue that he chose such an inflammatory passage to quote. Knowing that he represents the religious arm of the “War on Terror” sideshow, he could not however, be as brazen as Bush in his loathing of Islam, so he did it under the pretence of faith and reason.

Joseph Ratzinger’s neo-conservatism is sourced from a colourful past which included a brief membership of the Hitler Youth movement and wartime service with a German army, anti-aircraft unit. His Nazi youth history and his insistence “that it was impossible to resist” the regime at the time, is not the primary reason for the scepticism that he embodies the milk of human kindness. His vocal declarations of compassion have distinct overtones of that same fascism that so swept him off his youthful feet decades before.3 He is a Pope that George Bush can do business with and no doubt has been given a suitably tailored script to steer the faithful. He will be able to hark back to the past by guiding the masses into choppier waters, with a highly predictable set of fascist reaffirmations.
 Perhaps it was this same spirit of “resistance” that led the UK Observer to report in April 24, 2005 about the upstanding qualities of the new Pope and how he was busy “obstructing” the sex abuse inquiry by ordering bishops to keep the allegations secret. Ratzinger certainly led by example on this issue and sent a letter to his staff to conduct investigations - in secret. By doing that, the clergy knew that they could keep the evidence secret for 10 years and by that time the children would be adults. The priests would then be free to make merry with the Communion wine and reminisce about the good old days.

The order was made in a confidential letter, obtained by The Observer, which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001. The lacklustre inquiry was finally lumbering into action after the growing revelations of enormous systematic and institutional sexual abuse was beginning to breach the boat. Ratzinger was tasked with keeping the doors firmly closed:

[...] The letter is referred to in documents relating to a lawsuit filed earlier this year against a church in Texas and Ratzinger on behalf of two alleged abuse victims. By sending the letter, lawyers acting for the alleged victims claim the cardinal conspired to obstruct justice.


Daniel Shea, the lawyer for the two alleged victims who discovered the letter, said: ‘It speaks for itself. You have to ask: why do you not start the clock ticking until the kid turns 18? It's an obstruction of justice.’


Father John Beal, professor of canon law at the Catholic University of America, gave an oral deposition under oath on 8 April, 2004 in which he admitted to Shea that the letter extended the church's jurisdiction and control over sexual assault crimes.


The Ratzinger letter was co-signed by Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone who gave an interview two years ago in which he hinted at the church’s opposition to allowing outside agencies to investigate abuse claims. 4

These zipped mouths outside the public domain makes you wonder what secret documents are still locked away in the Vatican vaults marked “for the Pope’s eyes only.” Nothing like openness and honesty on behalf of God’s representatives.
 In the 1990s the child abuse scandal began to affect cracks in their secrecy. Whether by conscious intent or by a natural excess, an August 2003 report from The Observer obtained an “explosive” document which revealed just how corrupted the Church had become. The 40-year-old confidential document, which lawyers called a “blueprint for deception and concealment” came from the secret Vatican archive and clearly showed the seal of Pope John XXIII. The letter was sent to every bishop in the world. “The instructions outlined a policy of “strictest” secrecy in dealing with allegations of sexual abuse. In other words, it was a cover-up of monumental proportions. Members of the church were being asked to lie and if they did not do so, they would be threatened with excommunication:

[...] They also call for the victim to take an oath of secrecy at the time of making a complaint to Church officials. It states that the instructions are to ‘be diligently stored in the secret archives of the Curia [Vatican] as strictly confidential. Nor is it to be published nor added to with any commentaries.’


The document, which has been confirmed as genuine by the Roman Catholic Church in England and Wales, is called ‘Crimine solicitationies,’ which translates as 'instruction on proceeding in cases of solicitation'.


It focuses on sexual abuse initiated as part of the confessional relationship between a priest and a member of his congregation. But the instructions also cover what it calls the ‘worst crime’, described as an obscene act perpetrated by a cleric with ' youths of either sex or with brute animals (bestiality)’.


Bishops are instructed to pursue these cases 'in the most secretive way... restrained by a perpetual silence... and everyone... is to observe the strictest secret which is commonly regarded as a secret of the Holy Office... under the penalty of excommunication’


Texan lawyer Daniel Shea…said: ‘these instructions went out to every bishop around the globe and would certainly have applied in Britain. It proves there was an international conspiracy by the Church to hush up sexual abuse issues. It is a devious attempt to conceal criminal conduct and is a blueprint for deception and concealment’


British lawyer Richard Scorer, who acts for children abused by Catholic priests in the UK, echoes this view and has described the document as 'explosive'.


He said: 'We always suspected that the Catholic Church systematically covered up abuse and tried to silence victims. This document appears to prove it. Threatening excommunication to anybody who speaks out shows the lengths the most senior figures in the Vatican were prepared to go to prevent the information getting out to the public domain.’


Scorer pointed out that as the documents dates back to 1962 it rides roughshod over the Catholic Church's claim that the issue of sexual abuse was a modern phenomenon. [...] 5

With an effective impunity mandated directly from the Pope, the crimes were allowed to flourish unabated to the present day. The fact that special attention was given to condemning bestiality: “with 'youths of either sex or with brute animals (bestiality)” suggests that their in-house investigations involved a great variety of chronic abuse previously unimagined. As well as protecting the perceived sanctity and authority of the Church, it may have also served as a double layer of protection that would ensure investigations stayed within the upper echelons of the cardinals’ clique, thus making them null and void.

In the city of Seattle; Washington State, U.S., Rev. James McGreal became the subject of four lawsuits which shed light on the number of victims the archdiocese allowed the priest to abuse. The Church was forced to pay out over $7.87 million to the victims. McGreal, who served in at least 10 parishes and two hospitals in the archdiocese between 1948 and 1988, was considered an extremely dangerous sexual predator. Although around 20 men sued the Church, filed court records say that McGreal admitted to his therapist that he molested “hundreds of victims.” 6
 The former priest who was removed from the ministry in 1988 is now 80 years old, residing in a Missouri home for “troubled Priests,” the fees of which are being paid for by the Church. So, if you're a practicing Catholic or a part-time sinner and you give the odd donation to your local Church, directly or indirectly, you are funding the protection and no doubt, suitably comfortable lodgings of priestly paedophiles. In Boston, Massachusetts four priests brought before the courts indicated the true scale of the problem.

The defrocked priest John Geoghan was “one of the worst serial molesters in the recent history of the Catholic Church in America. For three decades, Geoghan preyed on young boys in a half-dozen parishes in the Boston area while church leaders looked the other way. Despite his disturbing pattern of abusive behaviour, Geoghan was transferred from parish to parish for years before the church finally defrocked him in 1998.”7 A Child rape charge and many civil claims were pending before Geoghan was strangled to death in 2002, although he was meant to be in “protective custody.” Allegations have surfaced that prison guards were complicit in his murder. The fact that the man who killed him was serving a life term for killing a gay man only increases the likelihood of complicity regarding his death.

The late Rev. Joseph E. Birmingham “allegedly befriended and then abused at least 50 boys over a 29-year career as a priest in the Boston Archdiocese, even as archdiocesan officials ignored numerous complaints against him.” 8 The Rev. Paul R. Shanley “ran a ‘street ministry’ in Boston in the 1960s and ‘70s, taking advantage of youths who came to him for guidance. Finally, the Rev. Ronald H. Paquin “is the only Boston-area priest who has admitted guilt in a criminal molestation case, and is serving 12 to 15 years in prison for rape. He also has acknowledged molesting several boys during his ministry at parishes in Haverhill and Meth.” 9

His “eminence” Bernard Cardinal Law resigned as Archbishop of Boston on December 13, 2002, whereupon Pope John Paul II appointed Cardinal Law to several authoritative positions in Rome and the Vatican City, just to show how well he understood the concerns of the abused. It is this Cardinal that proved to be the catalyst of further investigations into the abuse taking place due to his unwillingness to seek justice on behalf of the victims. Over 50 priests signed a letter declaring no confidence in Law and asking him to resign - something that had never before happened in the history of the Church in America. The Archdiocese was forced to close 65 parishes before Cardinal Law stepped down from service.

A recent Grand Jury in Philadelphia came to some damning indictments regarding the “immoral cover-up” in the Philadelphia Diocese, leading to “excoriation” of prominent priests. In September of 2005 the Grand Jury concluded that Church officials allowed hundreds of sexual assaults against children to go unpunished and protected the priests who committed the crimes. Cardinals Anthony J. Bevilacqua and John Krol were accused of widespread corruption which included: “‘burying’ abuse reports, ignoring warnings about abusive priests, and shuttling offenders from parish to parish, where some found new victims”:

Sexually abusive priests were left quietly in place or ‘recycled’ to unsuspecting new parishes - vastly expanding the number of children who were abused,’ the grand jury concluded.”


The hierarchy ‘excused and enabled the abuse’ for decades, the grand jury said in a 418-page report, while demonstrating "utter indifference to the suffering of the victims.’”


The grand jurors, who spent three years investigating, concluded that Krol and Bevilacqua were more concerned with protecting the reputation and legal and financial interests of the archdiocese than the children entrusted to its care:


“In its callous, calculating manner, the archdiocese’s ‘handling’ of the abuse scandal was at least as immoral as the abuse itself," the grand jury stated in its report.


Yet the panel recommended no criminal charges, saying it was thwarted by the statute of limitations and a church hierarchy that keep silent about the abuses until it was too late for prosecutors to make a case.


The archdiocese angrily denounced the grand jury report as “incredibly biased and anti-Catholic.”


In a blistering 70-page response, the church officials and lawyers called it "a vile, mean-spirited diatribe.” 10

The actions of the Philadelphia archdiocese do mirror a similar mandated intent to stymie investigations of abuse claims across the north western states of the US. These “orders” are indeed as “immoral” as the abuse itself, yet forms part of Vatican tradition. As the District Attorney Lynne M. Abraham pointed out in a rebuttal of the Church’s denial, it contained: “all too familiar denials, deceptions and evasions” that she said had characterized the church's handling of the abuse crisis. The Philadelphia Inquirer further reported:

“The truth, as horrifying as it is, is now out in the open. We believe it will help survivors heal.”


The grand jury report was startling in its expression of sheer outrage and striking for the depth of detail of the abuses.


"What we have found were not acts of God, but of men who acted in His name and defiled it," the grand jury said.


The grand jury concluded that at least 63 priests - and probably many more - abused hundreds of victims over the past several decades. […] …the grand jury found that many victims were abused for years and that many priests abused multiple victims, sometimes preying on members of the same family.

According to the report, victims of the abuse included  an 11-year-old girl who was repeatedly raped by a priest who took her for an abortion when she became pregnant; a fifth grader who was molested by a priest inside a confessional; A teenage girl who was groped by a priest while she lay immobilized in traction in a hospital room; a priest who abused boys playing the roles of Jesus and other biblical characters in a parish Passion play by making them disrobe, don loincloths, and whip each other until they had cuts, bruises and welts; another who falsely told a 12-year-old boy his mother knew of the assaults and consented to the rape of her son; a priest who offered money to boys in exchange for sadomasochistic acts of bondage and wrote a letter asking a boy to make him his “slave.” The latter priest is still in the ministry. 

If we were in any doubt as to the culpability of the Church hierarchy, Cardinal Bevilacqua “allowed known abusers to remain in ministry after receiving warnings about them…In three cases, the priests abused again after finding more victims in their new assignments,…” and most astonishingly, “church officials did not call police to report assaults against children, even in cases in which priests admitted the attacks.” When the Cardinal was asked by the grand jury as to why the Church had not informed the police: 

“‘Bevilacqua told the grand jury that the law did not require them to.’”

‘That answer is unacceptable,” the grand jury said. ‘It reflects a willingness to allow such crimes to continue, as well as an utter indifference to the suffering of the victims.’”

The grand jury also observed that as recently as 2002, Bevilacqua and his representatives knowingly understated the extent of sexual abuse within the church.

[…] There was evidence of rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, statutory sexual assault, indecent assault, endangering the welfare of children, and corruption of minors.
But in all cases, the panel said, the abuse happened years, if not decades, ago, and the statute of limitations on any crimes had expired.

The panel said it had considered charging the archdiocese with endangering the welfare of children, corruption of minors, victim/witness intimidation, hindering apprehension, and obstruction of justice. But again, it said, the statute of limitations on any crimes had expired. 
So the panel was left with what it described as ‘a travesty of justice, a multitude of crimes for which no one can be held criminally accountable.’” 11

It seems by August of 2006 the Philadelphia archdiocese was still failing to take adequate steps to address the problems of sexual abuse in their parishes. Keep quiet and “suffer the little children unto thee.” That is exactly how the Church intends it to be. It appears that God isn’t listening.

Since the grand jury investigation and the discovery that archdiocesan files contained accusations against 169 priests the archdiocese only posted on its Web site the names of 57 priests whom it acknowledges as abusers. What is still more disturbing is why the archdiocese chose to believe that there was not enough evidence to take action against the abusers. According to Sorensen and McCartney the former prosecuting lawyers:

“It is troubling - and telling - that the church has not revealed the names of many accused priests or explained why it has evidently kept them in ministry,…” 12 Moreover the Philadelphia Inquirer also reported that the archdiocese had “failed to lend full public backing to a set of legislative proposals that would lift the statute of limitations on all future sex abuse and expand the definition of who must report abuse to authorities.”

The Pennsylvania Catholic Conference is “quietly opposing the bills.”  




Notes
 
1  The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States   A Research  study Conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
2 ‘Muslim anger builds over Pope's speech’ Agencies, Guardian Unlimited, September 15, 2006.

3‘Papal hopeful is a former Hitler Youth’ The Sunday Times, April 17, 2005. “‘Resistance was truly impossible,” Georg Ratzinger said. [his brother] “Before we were conscripted, one of our teachers said we should fight and become heroic Nazis and another told us not to worry as only one soldier in a thousand was killed. But neither of us ever used a rifle against the enemy.” “Some locals in Traunstein, like Elizabeth Lohner, 84, whose brother-in-law was sent to Dachau as a conscientious objector, dismiss such suggestions. “It was possible to resist, and those people set an example for others,” she said. “The Ratzingers were young and had made a different choice.”
4 ‘Pope ‘obstructed’ sex abuse inquiry’ - Confidential letter reveals Ratzinger ordered bishops to keep allegations secret – by Jamie Doward, The Observer, April 24, 2005.
5 ‘Vatican told bishops to cover up sex abuse’ - Expulsion threat in secret documents – by Antony Barnett, The Observer, August 17, 2003. See original 1962 Vatican document at wwwtheguardian.co.uk.
6 ‘Washington: Church Settles Abuse Suits’ The New York Times, September 12, 2003.
7 The Boston Globe Spotlight Investigation: Abuse in the Catholic Church – ‘The Geoghan Case.’
8 Ibid. ‘The Birmingham Case.’
9 Ibid. ‘The Shanley Case.’
10 ‘Grand jury harshly criticizes Archdiocese for hiding clergy sexual abuse’ The Philadelphia Inquirer, Sep. 21, 2005.
11 ‘An 'Immoral' Cover-up’ By Nancy Phillips and David O'Reilly, The Philidelphia Inquirer, September 22, 2005.
12 ‘Letter: Church failing on sex abuse’ Two former prosecutors told Cardinal Rigali that children remain at risk because steps have been inadequate. By David O'Reilly, The Philidelphia Inquirer, August 6, 2006.