J. Grant Swank, Jr.

Sarah Palin’s deity is the God of the Bible. Her personal Savior is Jesus Christ. Her holy writ is the infallible, inerrant Bible. Her hope for eternity is heaven as described in the Word of God. Her hope for the present is God’s will activated in her dedication.

Barack Hussein Obama’s deity is the god of the Koran—Allah. His personal savior is Allah, though he professes to be a Protestant via his membership in the theologically liberal United Church of Christ (Congregational / UCC). That would make him out to be a witness to Jesus Christ; of course, that is bogus, including his testimony that at an altar at Chicago’s Trinity UCC he discovered Christ. If it was Christ, it is not the Christ of the New Testament.

Obama’s so-called holy writ is the abominable Koran. His hope for eternity is unknown; but if he becomes a suicide bomber for Allah, he will be guaranteed pronto a score of virgins for everlasting. His hope for the present seems to be his reliance upon Islam’s Koran furthered by his clandestine support of Islam World Rule via czars and a shadow government given to overthrowing our Republic.

In January 2009, Marxist Muslim’s Obama seemed to be riding high on mob hysteriacs seating him proudly in the Oval Office. Recall he told the world, “I won.” Countless devotees showed up at his inauguration. He was applauded throughout Congressional halls as the new messiah promising “hope” and “change.”

Not yet a year later, he has not produced productive “change” for America; therefore, there is no grassroots “hope” in the Pied Piper who led millions into his lying machine.

Today he is below par in polls. He has not accomplished anything worthwhile, per Saturday Night Live spoofs, for example.

Today he is on the verge of submerging America into the trenches due to his pro-Islamic policies installed by crooks and Muslim cronies surrounding him 24 / 7.

He stalls on Fort Hood investigations. He enforces the warmist religion by bowing down to Al Gore clones at global global warming sessions.

He cheers on 9/11 civil investigations, providing Allah disciples privileges not deserving self-confessed Muslim murderers.

Obama is being unsealed moment by moment so that even the young mob hysteriacs are starting to get the cruel message instigated by the chief betrayer set loose in America. In short order he has plotted to ruin our health care system, dump us into the devil’s debt and bankrupt our Christian heritage by uplifting Muslims and atheists on the same honorary level as biblical believers.

This cancer sore Obama is the most dangerous occurrence ever in all the Republic’s history for it promises us our doom.

Then comes along Sarah Palin. What does she hold out for the populace?

She speaks of common sense politics, a Christian heritage history continuance, reliance upon the God of Scripture, actual hope in prayer and the Holy Spirit’s guidance in one’s personal faith life.

She comes from a biblical base regarding worship gatherings. It is not theological liberalism as touted in the United Church of Christ, Episcopal Church, Anglican Church, United Church of Canada, Unitarianism, Evangelical (a misnomer) Lutheran Church of America and other anti-Christ labels.

She worships with Christians who seek to live out the Bible, confess to following Christ as personal Redeemer, pray daily, conduct family devotions, believe in miracles, repent of their sins and then yearn to go forth in holiness.

Palin is the antithesis to Obama. Palin represents a biblical way of life. Obama represents a satanic cult.

America is now faced with the choice of Palin or
Obama. Of course, in weeks and months to come, someone else may log in to sideline Palin. But at the moment, it is Palin versus Obama.

To say that America is at a crucial fork in the road is to speak in understatement.

Read PALIN’S PENTECOSTAL FAITH: LIBERALS WILL POUNCE at http://zenithmax.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/palin%E2%80%99s-pentecostal-faith-liberals-will-pounce/

‘All I got was lies and deceit, I was bullied and threatened’

Church admits it ’stole childhoods of hundreds’

30 years of church and State cover-up of child sex abuse

Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern (left) with Minister of State for Children and Youth Affairs Barry Andrews speaking at Government Buildings following the publication of the Commission of Investigation Report into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin.
Photograph: Brenda Fitzsimons

PAUL CULLEN

CHILD SEXUAL abuse was covered up by the Dublin archdiocese and other church authorities for almost 30 years, according to the report of the commission of investigation.

State authorities facilitated this cover-up by not fulfilling their responsibilities to ensure that the law was applied equally to all, and by allowing church institutions to be beyond the law, it says.

The welfare of children was disregarded for many years, when the focus was on the avoidance of scandal and the preservation of the good name, status and assets of the church and its priests.

“The abuse of children in Dublin was a scandal. The failure of the archdiocesan authorities to penalise the perpetrators is also a scandal,” it notes.

The report says it is abundantly clear that child sexual abuse by clerics was widespread throughout the 30-year period it examined. It says there was no doubt the reason for covering up information was to ensure as few people as possible knew of priests’ problems.

“There was little or no concern for the welfare of the abused child or for the welfare of other children who might come into contact with the priest. Complainants were often met with denial, arrogance and cover-up and with incompetence and incomprehension in some areas. Suspicions were rarely acted on.”

The report, published yesterday by Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern, notes it found no evidence of a paedophile ring among priests in the Dublin archdiocese but adds there were some “worrying connections”.

It details a number of “inappropriate” contacts between the Garda and the archdiocese and says some senior members of the Garda clearly regarded priests as being “outside their remit”. In some cases, gardaí reported complaints to the archdiocese instead of investigating them.

Garda investigations into complaints ranged from comprehensive to cursory, it says. A section on the investigation of abuse claims against one, unnamed priest describes as shocking the “connivance” of gardaí in stifling one complaint and failing to investigate another.

The report says all four archbishops in the period – McQuaid, Ryan, McNamara and Connell – handled complaints badly.

“Not one of them reported his knowledge of child sexual abuse to the gardaí throughout the 1960s, 1970s or 1980s. It was not until November 1995 that Archbishop Connell allowed the names of 17 priests about whom the archdiocese had received complaints to be given to the gardaí.”

This figure was not complete; at the time, there was knowledge within the archdiocese of at least 28 priests about whom complaints had been made.

According to the report, Archbishop McQuaid failed to apply canon law fully, Archbishop Ryan failed to investigate complaints properly, Archbishop McNamara restored priestly faculties to a confessed child abuser and Archbishop Connell, while stunned by the extent of abuse, was slow to recognise the seriousness of the situation.

The report emphatically rejects claims that the church was surprised by or on “a learning curve” in relation to revelations of sexual abuse. Such claims “ring hollow” when it was clear that cases were being dealt with in the 1950s and 1960s. The taking out of insurance in 1987 was an act proving knowledge of child sexual abuse as a potential major cost and was inconsistent with the view that officials were on a learning curve, the report states.

The report hails a “courageous” few priests who brought complaints to the attention of their superiors but says “the vast majority chose to turn a blind eye”. Church authorities failed to implement most of their own canon law rules on dealing with abuse and for many years offenders were neither prosecuted nor made accountable within the church.

The report summarises the attitude of the archdiocese to abuse with the expressions “don’t ask, don’t tell” and “gain his knowledge, tell him nothing”. People who complained were told as little as possible and there was an obsessive concern with secrecy and the avoidance of scandal, which resulted in a failure by successive archbishops and bishops to report claims to the Garda before 1996.

The report says that while priests were directly responsible for their actions, their superiors were responsible for ensuring they were not protected by their status and did not get special treatment.

Criticising the “extraordinary delay” in introducing child protection legislation, it says the primary responsibility for the area must rest with the State.

The report, covering 1975 to 2004, comes in two parts. Part 1 examines the handling of sexual abuse complaints in the archdiocese, while Part 2 details the cases of 46 individual priests against whom allegations were made.

The commission received information about 172 named priests and 11 unnamed priests, of which 102 fell within its remit. The levels of alleged abuse varied greatly – one priest admitted to sexually abusing more than 100 children, while another said he had abused on a fortnightly basis over 25 years. The complaints against the 46 priests involved over 320 children, most of them boys.

The commission says it is satisfied that effective procedures for dealing with clerical sexual abuse are now in place and all complaints made to the church authorities are reported to the Garda.

However, it says procedures are heavily dependent on the commitment and effectiveness of the archbishop and the director of the child protection service.

“The current archbishop and director are clearly committed and effective but institutional structures need to be sufficiently embedded to ensure that they survive uncommitted or ineffective personnel.”

The commission was appointed in 2006 and is chaired by Circuit Court Judge Yvonne Murphy.

It has cost €3.6 million up to last April, not including third-party costs.

Bishops lied and covered up

The report shows that what lies at the heart of the Catholic Church in Ireland is a profound and widespread corruption, perpetrated by liars, child sex abusers and those at the very top who covered up their crimes, writes MARY RAFTERY

THERE IS one searing, indelible image to be found in the pages of the Dublin diocesan report on clerical child abuse. It is of Fr Noel Reynolds, who admitted sexually abusing dozens of children, towering over a small girl as he brutally inserts an object into her vagina and then her back passage.

That object is his crucifix.

The report details how this man was left as parish priest of Glendalough (and in charge of the local primary school) for almost three years after parents had complained about him to former archbishop of Dublin Desmond Connell during the 1990s.

In 1997, he was finally moved and appointed as chaplain to the National Rehabilitation Hospital in Dún Laoghaire.

The report helpfully informs us that there were 94 children aged 18 or under as inpatients here. The hospital authorities were told nothing of Reynolds’s past or of suspicions that he was a child abuser.

This kind of callous disregard for the safety of children is found over and over again in the report. Bishops lied, cheated and covered up, almost as a matter of course, in a display of relentless cynicism spanning decades. Children were blithely sacrificed to protect priests, the institution and its assets. It is, consequently, difficult to avoid the conclusion that what lies at the heart of the Catholic Church (at least in Ireland) is a profound and widespread corruption.

The Dublin report divides the bulk of its analysis into chapters devoted to individual priest abusers. But reading through the stomach-churning details of their crimes, another parallel reality appears.

Behind almost each one of these paedophiles was at least one bishop (often more) who knew of the abuse, but failed to protect children.

Some of them, Pontius Pilate-like, washed their hands, merely reporting it up the line. Others actively protected the criminals in their midst by destroying files and withholding information. Their handling of complaints is variously described as “particularly bad”, “disastrous” and “catastrophic”.

Dermot Ryan stands out as the most callous of the Dublin archbishops. He failed properly to investigate complaints against at least six of the worst offending priests.

Kevin MacNamara was little better, but his tenure was considerably briefer, limiting some of the damage he did.

John Charles McQuaid is severely criticised in one case, but it was not within the commission’s remit to examine his reign in any significant detail. His response to the pornographic photos of two children taken by one of his priests is a damning indictment of the impact of priestly celibacy. He viewed the criminal act as an expression of “wonderment” by the priest at the nature of the female body.

And what of Desmond Connell, perhaps the most reviled of them all? A complex picture emerges of a man unsuited to the task facing him, attempting to deal with the enormous scale of abuse in the archdiocese, and ultimately failing. While he did, for instance, engage with the civil authorities, unlike his predecessors, he, nonetheless, continued to maintain secrecy over much of what the diocese knew of their child-abusing priests.

As for the many Dublin auxiliary bishops, two stand out as being particularly awful. There is arguably enough evidence in this report to send bishops James Kavanagh (now deceased) and Donal O’Mahony (retired) to prison for failing to report crimes. Or at least, there would be if there existed such an offence. Incredibly, there is none.

We certainly used to have one; called misprision of felony, it was conveniently dropped from the statute books in 1998 when the felony laws changed. The effect was that no priest, bishop, or indeed lay person, could be charged with failing to report criminal activity of which they were aware.

What a sigh of relief the bishops of Ireland must have breathed.

The report describes Bishop O’Mahony’s involvement in the cases of 13 priests from its sample of 46 under investigation. It mentions that he was aware of allegations against several more. His cover-up over his 21 years in office was extensive.

Bishop Kavanagh directly attempted to pervert the course of justice by seeking to influence one Garda investigation and by convincing a family to drop a complaint against another priest. He appears at various stages in a number of other cases, always failing to act to protect children.

Bishop Donal Murray of Limerick is also indicted as having handled a number of complaints badly. He will have very serious questions to answer over the coming days.

Recently retired bishop of Ossory Laurence Forristal equally stands condemned, which is all the more egregious as he was in charge of the archdiocese’s efforts during the 1990s to respond to the crisis and draw up child protection guidelines.

Bishops James Moriarty of Kildare and Leighlin, retired Bishop Brendan Comiskey and Auxiliary Bishop of Dublin Eamon Walsh also all knew of complaints of abuse at various stages.

A week before the broadcast in 2002 of RTÉ television’s Prime Time Cardinal Secrets (which led to the establishment of the Dublin commission), Cardinal Connell engaged in a pre-emptive strike. He had refused to appear on the programme. He chose instead to circulate each of his 200 parishes with a letter read out at every Mass that Sunday. In it, he apologised for the failures of the past, but blamed them on a lack of understanding within the church of paedophilia.

The commission is categorical in its refusal to accept this plea of ignorance as an excuse. It refers bluntly to the inconsistency between such claims and the decision in 1986 to take out an insurance policy to protect church assets from abuse victims.

At that time, we are told that the archdiocese knew of allegations of child sex abuse against 20 of its priests.

The report further notes the documented history of the church’s detailed awareness of paedophilia as both crime and sin spanning the past 2,000 years. The first reference dates from AD 153.

Finally, the report refers to the fact that archbishop Ryan displayed as early as 1981 a complete understanding of both the recidivist nature of paedophilia and of the devastating damage it caused to child victims.

There had been a consistent denial from church authorities that anyone knew anything about either of these key factors until very recently.

Perhaps most damning of all is the report’s findings as to the general body of priests in Dublin. While it gives credit to a small few who courageously pursued complaints, it adds that “the vast majority simply chose to turn a blind eye”.

What emerges most clearly from the report is that priests, bishops, archbishops and cardinals had the greatest difficulty in telling right from wrong, and crucially that their determination of what constituted wrongdoing was vastly different from that of the population at large.

This fact is worthy of reflection on the part of all those who remain connected to the church through its continuing and often central involvement in the provision of services such as education and health throughout the country.

In 2003, ex-governor of Oklahoma Frank Keating drew parallels between the behaviour of some US Catholic bishops and the Cosa Nostra. It drew a storm of protest, and he resigned from his position as chairman of the church-appointed oversight committee on child abuse.

However, it is not too far-fetched a comparison to the Irish church in the light of the three investigations into its behaviour we have had to date.

The organised, premeditated pattern of secrecy and concealment of crime is worthy of the world’s most notorious criminal fraternity.

Mary Raftery is a freelance journalist who, with reporter Mick Peelo, produced and directed the documentary Cardinal Secrets

Vatican and nuncio ignored letters on abuse

PATSY McGARRY and PADDY AGNEW in Rome

LETTERS SENT to the Vatican and the papal nuncio in Ireland seeking information on clerical sex abuse cases were ignored, the Dublin diocesan report disclosed yesterday.

In September 2006, the commission wrote to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith seeking information on reports of clerical child sex abuse sent to it by the Dublin archdiocese over a 30-year period. It also sought information on the document Crimen Solicitationis, which deals with clerical sex abuse.

The congregation did not reply.

Instead, it contacted the Department of Foreign Affairs stating that the commission had not gone through appropriate diplomatic channels. As a body independent of government, the commission said it did not consider it appropriate to use diplomatic channels.

In February 2007, the commission wrote to the papal nuncio in Dublin asking that he forward all documents relevant to it and which had not been or were not produced by the Archbishop of Dublin, Diarmuid Martin. It also requested that he confirm if he had no such documents.

The papal nuncio did not reply.

Earlier this year the commission again wrote to the papal nuncio enclosing extracts from its draft report which referred to him and his office, as it was required to do. Again, there was no reply.

At his press conference Dr Martin said he regretted these letters were not answered. “I believe letters should be answered,” he said. “There were other channels the commission could have used, but it didn’t use them. I’m not too sure why that was.”

There were “various ways in which communications between states take place. I regret that this happened in this way”, he said.

Vatican spokesman Fr Federico Lombardi said yesterday that any outside requests made to the governance of the Holy See, as in the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, would pass through diplomatic channels – in this case the Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin and the Irish Embassy to the Holy See in Rome. “If you are looking for official documents from the Vatican, then you have to go through the normal diplomatic channels,” he insisted.

Vatican observers told The Irish Times that the same “diplomatic” reasoning would apply to lack of a reply from the nuncio in Dublin who, as the Vatican’s ambassador in Ireland, cannot respond directly to a request from an albeit independent Irish body.

On the Dublin report, Fr Lombardi said “that is for the local bishop. In the case of Dublin, we have an excellent archbishop and he knows what has to be said”.

It also emerged in the report that the 1996 framework document on child protection, prepared by the Irish bishops, was not accepted by the Vatican. The congregation felt it was “contrary to canonical discipline. In particular ‘mandatory reporting’ gives rise to serious reservations of both a moral and canonical nature”.

Church ‘routinely covered up’ child sexual abuse for 30 years

CARL O’BRIEN and PATSY McGARRY

FOUR SUCCESSIVE archbishops of Dublin responded to clerical child sexual abuse over a 30-year period in their diocese with “denial, arrogance and cover-up”.

This is one of the main conclusions of the report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin.

The three-year inquiry, led by Judge Yvonne Murphy, found the “structures and rules” of the Catholic Church facilitated the cover-up.

“The State authorities facilitated the cover up by not fulfilling their responsibilities to ensure that the law was applied equally to all and allowing the Church institutions to be beyond the reach of the normal law enforcement processes,” the report also found.

Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern, who published the report yesterday, said it documented “a scandal on an astonishing scale”.

The report also found current child protection laws did not provide adequate powers to health authorities to protect the welfare of children who are abused, or in danger of abuse, by people with privileged access to children.

The report, which took three years to complete, said the archdiocese had an “obsessive concern with secrecy and the avoidance of scandal” and had “little or no concern for the welfare of the abused child”.

The commission investigated the handling of allegations made against a sample out of 46 priests out of 102 against whom complaints were made between 1975 and 2004.

Among its other main findings were:

All archbishops and many of the auxiliary bishops in Dublin handled child sexual abuse complaints badly. None of the four archbishops reported their knowledge of abuse to gardaí “throughout the 1960s, 1970s or 1980s”.

Church authorities used the concept of “mental reservation”, which allows senior clergy to mislead people without being guilty, in the church’s eyes, of lying.

Senior members of the gardaí regarded priests as outside their remit, with some members reporting complaints to the archdiocese instead of investigating them.

It said there were some courageous priests who brought complaints to the attention of their superiors. But in general there was a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

The report concluded that it is the responsibility of the State to ensure that no similar institutional immunity was ever allowed to occur again.

Speaking at a press conference, Mr Ahern warned: “A collar will protect no criminal”.

Responding to the report yesterday, Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin said “no words of apology would ever be sufficient” and offered “to each and every survivor, my apology, my sorrow and my shame for what happened to them”.

Catholic Primate Cardinal Seán Brady also said he was deeply ashamed and saddened by the findings.

The report is likely to place pressure on a number of senior clergy. Asked if individuals named in the report should step down, Dr Martin said: “I have always expressed the position that every bishop should evaluate their ministry in terms of commitments they make in reality to the protection of children.”

Last night Cardinal Desmond Connell, who is criticised in the report for not promptly handing over information to gardaí, expressed “bitter regret that failures on my part contributed to the suffering of victims in any form.”

Bishop of Limerick Donal Murray, a former auxiliary bishop in the Dublin diocese and who is strongly criticised in the report, said he regretted his actions but did not intend to resign.

Responding to the report’s severe criticism of gardaí, Garda Commissioner Fachtna Murphy said the report made for “difficult and disturbing reading”, in particular the failure of State authorities to protect victims.

The Government said it apologised “without reservation or equivocation” for failures by State agencies in dealing with the issue of clerical child abuse in the Dublin archdiocese.

Abuse victims said they felt vindicated by the report but expressed dismay that it took so long to expose wrongdoing, while campaign group One in Four called for the prosecution of those who covered up abuse.

“This report is a shocking indictment on the Catholic Church in Dublin. Its publication, if not acted upon, will have been a wasted opportunity to raise standards of child protection in this country,” said Andrew Madden, a victim of Fr Ivan Payne.

Bishop argues against extending abuse inquiry

Archbishop Diarmuid Martin at a press conference yesterday following the publication of the Dublin Archdiocese Commission of Investigation Report. Photograph: Bryan O’Brien/The Irish Times

IRISH TIMES REPORTERS

Auxiliary Bishop of Dublin Eamonn Walsh today said he did not believe the Murphy inquiry into child abuse should be extended to the rest of the State.

The report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Archdiocese of Dublin, the result of a three-year inquiry led by Judge Yvonne Murphy, was published yesterday. It found the “structures and rules” of the Catholic Church facilitated the cover-up of clerical child sex abuse and was critical of Bishop Walsh.

Dr Walsh, who was priests secretary under former archbishops Kevin McNamara and Desmond Connell, said it was his view the Dublin inquiry was a sample, with the pattern the same shown as in the previous Ferns inquiry.

“I would much prefer that we implemented the recommendations and put in place civil and legislative structures to live up to what we have found, but we could spend the next 15 years going around the country when we’d be far better using our time, energy and money in consolidating our church-protection services, our school-protection services and all of the legislation that will enable it.”

Speaking on Morning Ireland , Dr  Walsh said the culture of “don’t ask, don’t tell” and fear of scandal having primacy over the rights of children within the Catholic Church was “dead and gone . . . and if it is not, that person should be”.

He said one of the biggest faults of the church structure was there was not proper communication. “Everybody was in their own little cocoon, and if they had some information . . . they kept it to themselves. As a result there was information but no co-ordination. Now that is very, very different.”

“When I was secretary, and it states it very clearly in the report, my role was that. . . of simply receiving messages, passing them on, but I wouldn’t be at the decision-making table, wouldn’t be privy to what was going on.”

He denied senior clergy involved in the abuse cover-up would now be left in place.

“Anyone . . . found not up to the job of protecting children then that person should go, and it’s up to each individual to examine their conscience and reflect very clearly, and discuss it with their own people, because each diocese is a unit, and if the people feel their bishop or senior person is not able to protect children properly, then that person should not be in the job.”

He said it was “most regrettable” the Vatican did not respond to requests from the Murphy inquiry for documentation relating to the handling to child abuse allegations. “I wouldn’t attempt to defend it, it’s from another era, it’s from the diplomatic corps era.”

When it was pointed out this rebuff took place in 2006 and 2007, the bishop said the Vatican “mentality” had changed.

Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny has said that all bishops named as being part of a cover-up should resign. He said people who were in positions if authority and knew what was going on should no longer continue in the position.

uma gracinha. -n

Pronto. Agora a maluca da Winehouse quer lançar uma “barbie” dela mesma. Acho que ela esqueceu que bonecas nao são fumáveis.

Ainda bem que a marca Barbie mudou o slogan “Tudo o que você sempre quis ser”,sinto que nao daria muito certo com essa aí. Anyway,já pensaram numa versão blues/soul daquela música “Barbie Girl” (sim,aquela que a Kelly Key fez uma versão horrível em portugues)? Talvez ficasse legal…

J. Grant Swank, Jr.

Islam is no peace religion, though many in the world thought it to be for they had not known anything about Islam till recently.

Islam has a ‘holy writ.’ It is called the Koran. Most of the world has not read one word from it. Posted is a footnote directing the reader to the entire Koran. Read some of it, please.

It is not holy writ. The Koran has no Savior, no mercy, no divine grace, no hope of a holy heaven, no peace of soul for the truly repentant, no Good Samaritan parable, no Love Chapter such as I  Corinthians 13 and no Psalm 23, the Good Shepherd’s psalm.

Please read parts of the Koran to know its obvious dark side.

Further, Islam is the only world religion that demands all non-devotees be slain. It really is not a world religion; it is a cult, laden with violence.

Those not committed to Allah are to be annihilated. Those Muslims who do not participate in the annihilating the infidels are themselves to be slain.

That means that only Muslims stand in the last day. That is why zealots work night and day to further Islam World Rule. That is to be the last chapter prior to Islam’s Messiah returning on Earth to reign.

Islam’s god is Allah. Allah promises those males who commit to suicide killings scores of virgins upon their last breath. There is nothing in the Koran promised females who commit suicide for the cause.

Islamic mothers who are totally surrendered to Allah pray that their children will end their lives in suicide bombings. They pray for this. They boast to neighbors of their offspring committing suicide to rid the planet of infidels.

Islamic organizations present themselves as humanitarian. That is part of the Muslim lie. Muslims are directed by Allah to lie, that being a virtue, in order to hoodwink non-Muslims.

Take for instance Barack Husein Obama. He lies. He lies again and again. That is regarded by his Muslim cohorts as laudable for it fools Americans into thinking he is an honorable leader. Evidence shows himself to be just the opposite. Obama is a Marxist Muslim.

Imams can use their positions to teach violence, particularly in a democracy such as America. They hold sessions with their devotees in order to refine the destructive process of leveling the Republic.

Mosques can be used as shelters for sleeping cells where Muslim recruits are sharpened in the battle. If the signal is given in America, for instance, for these sleeper cells to come alive in attacking the populace, the neighborly Muslims will turn into warriors.

Allah teaches his children how to play friendly to those unsuspects around them. Friendliness is a ploy for Allah’s sake.

Footnote:

KORAN at http://jgrantswankjr.blogspot.com/2009/02/koran_1380.html

My understanding from sources close to the subject is that Jason (former conservative CofC preacher) has trouble with his spiritual identity after his time spent with these fundamentalist Church of Christ men.

Unfortunately, this is not an exclusive result for exposure to men like this – just go over and take a look at the website for ex-church of Christ folks – click this link – you’ll see plenty of people who have been damaged in similar ways to Jason – some to the point of renouncing belief in God altogether.

I’ve realized that there are some pretty big errors in their teaching – mostly dealing with the bonds they put on others and themselves. And even their arguments for “speak where the Bible speaks, silent where the Bible is silent” (is that a creed?) are inconsistent when you put them under the microscope.

The impression I get from watching these men is that they get their biggest joy from putting other people in their place. After interacting with Shawn Paden over at www.topix.com and here, I’m beginning to wonder if it is possible for these men to be able to show grace and mercy – or even to admit that they are wrong about something – not even doctrinally, but personally.

Well, that’s enough for now. I don’t have a beef with all Churches of Christ – just these sorts who claim that if you aren’t in the church where they assemble, or if you aren’t in a church that teaches exactly what they teach, then you aren’t in the Lord’s Church.

Commission finds Church covered up child sex abuse

The four archbishops of Dublin during the period covered by today¿s report into the handling of allegations of clerical child sex abuse in the Archdiocese of Dublin. Clockwise (from top left) John Charles McQuaid, Dermot Ryan, Kevin McNamara and Des

PATSY MCGARRY, Religious Affairs Correspondent

The Commission of Investigation into Dublin’s Catholic Archdiocese has concluded that there is “no doubt” that clerical child sexual abuse was covered up by the archdiocese and other Church authorities.

The commission’s report covers the period between January 1st 1975 and April 30th 2004. It said there cover-ups took place over much of this period.

In its report, published this afternoon, it has also found that “the structures and rules of the Catholic Church facilitated that cover-up.”

It also found that “the State authorities facilitated the cover-up by not fulfilling their responsibilities to ensure that the law was applied equally to all and allowing the Church institutions to be beyond the reach of the normal law enforcement processes.”

Over the period within its remit “the welfare of children, which should have been the first priority, was not even a factor to be considered in the early stages,” it said.

“Instead the focus was on the avoidance of scandal and the preservation of the good name, status and assets of the institution and of what the institution regarded as its most important members – the priests,” it said.

In making its main findings, the report it concluded that “it is the responsibility of the State to ensure that no similar institutional immunity is ever allowed to occur again. This can be ensured only if all institutions are open to scrutiny and not accorded an exempted status by any organs of the State.”

The Dublin Archdiocese Commission of Investigation was set up on March 28th, 2006. It completed its report on July 21st last when it was presented to the Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern.

Since then it has been sent twice to the High Court as there were concerns that publication of its contents in full might prejudice current proceedings against two men who face allegations of abuse and which it had investigated.

Following edits to the report, made by Mr Justice Paul Gilligan, the report was finally cleared for publication last Thursday.

The commission investigated allegations made against a sample of 46 priests, out of a total of 102 relevant to the period, and against whom 320 complaints had been made.

Where individual Archbishops of Dublin were concerned it found that Archbishop John Charles McQuaid – who held office from 1940 to 1972 – did not apply canon law where such allegations were concerned, though he was familiar with its requirements.

His dealings with Fr Edmondus in 1960 “were aimed at the avoidance of scandal and showed no concern for the welfare of children.”

Archbishop Dermot Ryan – who held office from 1972 to 1984 – “failed to properly investigate complaints” against any of the six priests dealt with by the Commission from his period in office. “He also ignored the advice given by a psychiatrist in the case of another priest (Fr Henry Moore) that he had placed in a parish setting.” It found that Fr Moore was subsequently convicted of a serious assault on a young teenager while working as a parish curate.

Archbishop Ryan also seemed to have adopted “a deliberate policy” to ensure that knowledge of problems involving accused priests “was as restricted as possible.” This resulted “in a disastrous lack of co-ordination in responding to problems.”

Archbishop Kevin McNamara – who held office from 1984 to 1987 – restored to ministry a priest, Fr Bill Carney, despite his having pleaded guilty to charges of child sex abuse in 1983 and despite suspicions about him where “numerous” other children were concerned. Fr Carney has since been laicized.

Archbishop McNamara also appointed Fr Ivan Payne, also since laicized, as Vice-Officialis of the Marriage Tribunal in Dublin even though Archbishop Ryan had previously refused to do so.

It was Archbishop McNamara who was first to take out insurance against possible claims for child abuse. He did so in March 1987 and all Catholic dioceses on the island of Ireland followed suit, excepting one.

Cardinal Desmond Connell, who held office as Archbishop from 1988 to April 2004, “was slow to recognise the seriousness of the situation” on assuming office. He was “over-reliant” on the advice of other people. While “clearly appalled by the abuse” it took him some time “to realize that it could not be dealt with by keeping it secret and protecting priests from normal civil processes.”

He showed “little understanding of the overall plight of victims” some of whom found him “remote and aloof” and some “sympathetic and kind.” However, and “on the other hand he did take an active interest in their civil litigation against the Archdiocese and personally approved the defences which were filed by the Archdiocese.”

Liability for injury and damage “was never admitted.” His strategies in civil cases, “while legally acceptable, often added to the hurt and grief of complainants.”

Where auxiliary bishops of Dublin over the period were concerned, the commission found that those who “dealt particularly badly with complaints” were Bishop Dermot O’Mahony (retired) and Bishop James Kavanagh (deceased). It found  Bishop Donal Murray (currently Bishop of Limerick ) “also dealt badly with a number of complaints.”

Bishop Murray’s failure to reinvestigate earlier suspicions against Fr Thomas Naughton “was inexcusable.”

It also said the recently retired Bishop of Ossory, Dr Laurence Forristal, “was the only bishop to unequivocally admit in evidence to the commision that he may not have handled matters satisfactorily.”

It found that “there was a disturbing failure to accept responsibility on the part of the bishops who gave evidence. There was a tendency to blame the Archbishop and/or the chancellor” of the archdiocese.

Where the priests of the Dublin archdiocese were concerned, the commission found that “a few were courageous and brought complaints to the attention of their superiors.” However, it concluded that “the vast majority simply chose to turn a blind eye.”

The commission found that “there were a number of inappropriate contacts between the gardaí and the Archdiocese.”  It cited the example of  Garda Commissioner Costigan who handed over the case of Fr Edmondus to Archbishop McQuaid for investigation in 1960 This was “totally inappropriate”, it said.

“The relationship between some senior gardaí and some priests and bishops was also inappropriate,” it said. “A number of very senior members of the gardaí, including the Commissioner in 1960, clearly regarded priests as outside their remit. There are some examples of gardaí actually reporting complaints to the Archdiocese instead of investigating them.”

The report added, however, that “it is fortunate that some junior members of the force did not take the same view.” The commission was “impressed” with those gardaí involved in the prosecution of Fr Carney in the early 1980s. It “was not impressed” by the 20-year delay in reaching a decision to bring charges against a priest referred to only as Fr X.

Where the health authorities were concerned, it found they had “a very minor role in dealing with child sexual abuse by non family members.” It expressed concern that legislation covering the role of the HSE “is inadequate even for that limited role.”

Yet another insane Christian for the imaginary tyrant in da sky aka gawd aka Jebu$

By Bubba, who is a patriot and friends of mine, this is off his blog, suggest yall visit it

http://whatbubbaknows.net/blog1.php/2009/01/06/jihad-comes-to-raleigh-jan-6-2009

‘Some’ will say that my title “Jihad Comes to Raleigh” is unfair; that Palestinian-Americans are not terrorist just because they object to the occupation of their homeland by Zionist Israel and the bombing and killing of Palestinians by the IDF.

Nothing new about that. The only thing different about this pro-terror demonstration was that they were not un-opposed.

I sat in my truck on the other side of the street and waited till they held up the first sign. I immediately got out and posted up a few signs of my own, picked my spot of sidewalk and began my opposition. After about 40 minutes I was joined by two Marines and an Army soldier that happened by.

I offered them the use of a set of six foot American flags that I just happened to have in the truck. They accepted and picked out their spots on the sidewalk.

I beg to differ, I disagree and I object to and am offended by the profound ignorance of ’some’.

Yesterday, January 5, a demonstration took place on Hillsborough Street in Raleigh, North Carolina. Approximately 300 (my guess) anti-Israel, pro-Hamas protesters lined the sidewalk. They carried signs condemning Israel and the USA while expressing support and solidarity with Hamas (terrorists).

The JWBs (Jihadi-Wanna-Be’s) were not amused. They became indignant and insulting almost immediately. Even though my fellow patriots and I stood silently we were the targets of multiple hand signals and shouted insults.

Not a problem. That just let me know that my time was not wasted.

After a while we were joined by more real Americans – Sandra, Kathy and Tina. They just happened to bring flags and signs too. So for three hours the 300 JWBs were opposed by 7 patriots.

Kathy’s shirt was most appropriate.

Note the presence of F.I.S.T. Their “red star” logo was dispersed throughout the JWBs lineup. FIST is a band of communist-wanna-be punks that manage to show up and support any anti-American cause. Also present were at least one of the Veterans For Peace, once again proving their denied association with terrorists and communists.

It’s time to go to work now, unlike moonbats, welfare liberals, terrorists and communists – some of us have jobs. I’ll add more info later.

I’ll tell you about the JWBs that crossed the street to correct our politically incorrect attitudes.

UPDATE: January 7, 2009
After a couple of hours the Marines and Soldier that stood with us had to leave. It wasn’t long after that I noticed a guy talking to Sandra. Since
there were alot of people walking by and stopping to talk, I didnt pay much attention to this one.

I realized he was one of the JWBs when the volume kept increasing and the body language demonstrated agitation and aggression. Sandra and Kathy were standing firm, not backing down. I interupted his jihad speech from stage right and backed him into the street.

Immediately, two more JWB males sprinted across the street to get in my face. I have to admit I do not remember what they were yelling, I wasn’t in
the listening mode. As I advanced on the 3 they backed further into the street till we were blocking traffic.

I challenged them to throw their shoes at me, dared them to do it. That seemed to bewilder them and one of them actually made a move to remove a shoe. That would have been perfect.

A swarm of police stopped the fun and forced all to return to our respective sidewalks. Taunts and hand signals were offered – from both sides.

The JWBs kept at least one chant going for the entire 3 hours, most of the time multiple chants. You know, the usual hippy-moonbat style chant -
1-2-3-4 blah, blah, blah, something that rhymes with four.

But their favorites seem to be the ones not in English – especially “Allah Akbar”. I thought of several responses to that one, but the promises my wife extracted from me before I left home prevented me from using them.

There were many reporters there with big TV cameras. Of course, NBC-11 and (?)moonbat channel 17 managed to cover the entire event in detail without a single frame of video showing the American side of the street. Not like they didnt know we were there. They sat up their massive tripods in front of us to film the JWBs.

I mentioned above that we had several American flags. It should be noted that the JWBs had only Palestinian flags.

OK, not fair. They did send someone to Walmart after a hour and half, who came back with a hand full of little American flags that were passed down the jihad line.

They then waved them at us defiantly.
Dont ask me, I dont know.

By the way, this event was discovered via DurhamSpark blog.

If you follow this link, note the “About Me” section which reads, in part, as follows:
“My political philosophy is anti-revisionist Marxist-Leninist communism … “

He forgot to add that he also supports and rallies to any cause or organization that is anti-America, anti-Freedom, anti-Military or anti-Capitalist. I.E., your typical socialist, liberal, moonbat traitor.

Dont forget to have a look at the list of communist affiliates in the Links section.

I mentioned F.I.S.T. Here’s their report of Monday’s events: Raleigh Demo Against Attacks on Gaza

If you go there, take note of the photo shrine to Che G. ‘the serial murderer’.

And again, Dont forget to have a look at the list of communist affiliates in the Links section.

‘He washed his hands in the altar bowl after abusing girl’

The report of the Dublin Diocese Inquiry does not name the majority of abusers. However, some of the most notorious have faced the courts for their crimes or have died:

• Fr Bill Carney

ONE of the most heinous sex offenders, Carney took a keen interest in visiting children at their homes, and even expressed an interest in fostering children of his own.

In 1983 he pleaded guilty to indecently assaulting two boys and was given the probation act.

After a church inquiry, Carney was admitted to hospital for treatment for alcohol addiction.

He later moved to Clogher Road, where further complaints were lodged against him but he refused to co-operate with diocesan superiors. Carney also took boys for swimming practice, sometimes with Fr Frank Maguire, a member of the Columban Missionary Order, who in 1983 had been appointed by the archdiocese to a north Dublin parish.

• Fr James McNamee

THE late Fr McNamee was a long-time abuser who would invite children to his private swimming pool in the grounds of his parish house in Crumlin.

He is suspected of having abused more than 20 children in various parishes before he was assigned to a convent in Delgany, Co Wicklow.

But the nuns were not informed of Fr McNamee’s past and he continued to have access to children.

• Fr Donal Gallagher

A PRIEST belonging to the Vincentian Order, Fr Gallagher was found to have sexually abused girls while hearing their confessions.

A schoolgirl complained that Fr Gallagher put his hands inside her clothes to molest her.

Afterwards, he washed his hands in an altar bowl which he kept in his confessional box and wiped his hands with a towel.

Despite complaints going back to the 1970s, Fr Gallagher continued to hold positions where he could abuse children.

Although his superior suspected him of improper behaviour, he stayed in ministry and was appointed to St Peter’s parish in Phibsboro and as chaplain to St Mary’s School for the Deaf.

In 1993, a social worker reported him to the gardai and the Vincentians referred him to the archdiocese for the first time. A garda investigation did not lead to Fr Gallagher’s prosecution and he died in 1994.

• Fr Noel Reynolds

TEN years ago, Fr Reynolds admitted to the gardai that he had abused more than 100 children in eight different parishes in the Dublin Archdiocese, including Glendalough in Co Wicklow.

Ordained by Archbishop John Charles McQuaid, Fr Reynolds was given access to children from 1967 through appointments as secretary of the Diocesan Commission on Religious Instructions in Vocational Schools, and later as a Diocesan Inspector of Primary Schools.

Serious allegations of abuse carried out by him date back to 1995 when he was parish priest at Glendalough, and parents complained to the Archbishop’s House that they had serious concerns about his behaviour towards their children.

The parents became increasingly angry with the Church’s failure to react to the allegations and threatened to go public unless something was done.

Cardinal Desmond Connell moved Fr Reynolds to Dun Laoghaire as chaplain to the National Rehabilitation Centre, which accommodated six long-stay children and a number of teenagers.

The archdiocese failed to make the hospital aware of complaints against Fr Reynolds; and when it discovered this from the RTE ‘Prime Time’ documentary, ‘Cardinal Secrets’, Cardinal Connell was forced to apologise to the hospital for not informing them of previous complaints. Fr Reynolds died in 2002.

• Fr Ivan Payne

FR PAYNE was fond of calling his victims his ‘little angels’.

Born in August 1943, Ivan Payne is a former priest of the diocese of Dublin and a convicted child molester.

Payne became a household name in 2002 when it was disclosed that Cardinal Connell had given him a loan to pay compensation to a victim, Andrew Madden.

Payne was convicted at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court on January 26, 1998, of 14 sample charges of sexually abusing eight boys aged between 11 and 14 between 1968 and 1987.

The abuse took place while the victims were patients in Our Lady’s Hospital for Sick Children, Crumlin, in 1991 while Payne was hospital chaplain. He also abused altar boys in Cabra and served four and a half years in jail, but was released in October 2002 and was last known to be living in Wales.

• Fr Frank McCarthy

AFTER luring a boy to his Wicklow parish house, Fr McCarthy regularly received the boy for weekend visits.

Over several years Fr McCarthy made a habit of sexually abusing the boy.

McCarthy’s priest friend, Fr Carney, would stay with McCarthy some weekends.

Archbishops put church honour before children

The paedophile priest Brendan Smyth is led from the Four Courts in Dublin after being sentenced to 12 years in July 1997

Independent.ie

Archbishops’ cover-up of child sex abuse revealed

Desire to protect Church meant crimes not reported: Dublin Diocese Inquiry

THE four Catholic archbishops of Dublin who preceded Dr Diarmuid Martin, were aware of complaints against priests for sexually abusing children — a practice that went on for over 35 years.

But the most senior figures in the Irish hierarchy did not report these crimes to the gardai because of an obsessive culture of secrecy and a desire to preserve the power and aura of the Church and to avoid giving scandal to their congregations.

The report of the Commission set up to investigate how the Dublin Archdiocese dealt with sex abuse scandals from 1975 to 2004 will find that there was little or no concern for the welfare of the abused children or other children who might come into contact with deviant and even paedophile priests.

While the Commission will find that there was no evidence of a paedophile ring operating among priests in the Dublin Archdiocese, there were distressing connections between more than 40 priests serving in parishes and religious orders in the diocese.

Some boys who were abused by one priest were later passed on to their friends and abused again. In another case, the notorious sex abuser Fr Sean Fortune, who committed suicide, gave the key of a holiday cottage to another priest who abused a girl there.

The Commission, which has trawled through thousands of files over more than nine years, will find that the powerful bishops of Dublin were more concerned with the power and pomp of their Church than they were with the children in their care.

Some of those who complained were met with denial, arrogance and even cover-up, the shocking report will reveal. The report will say that not one of the four archbishops who presided over the Dublin diocese from the 1960s revealed their knowledge of widespread sexual abuse by the clergy to the gardai until late 1995.

The Commission will find that while Cardinal Desmond Connell was shocked at the extent of child sexual abuse among the Dublin diocesan clergy and religious orders, he was slow to recognise the seriousness of the situation, took bad counsel from legal and medical advisers and failed to realise that clerical sex abusers could not be dealt with in secret.

It also says that while he was kind and sympathetic to some of those who complained to him, he appeared not to comprehend the suffering of victims. The Commission will also report that Archbishop Connell’s strategies, while legally acceptable, added to the trauma and grief of abused children.

The Commission is expected to be scathing in its criticism of the bishops, who, it says, were all highly educated men who should have known that criminal acts should have been reported to the gardai as a matter of course.

In one of its most damning findings, the Commission will say that the Archdiocese of Dublin was aware from 1987 of the seriousness of allegations against its priests and that it took out specific insurance against sexual misconduct by the clergy.

The Commission is also expected to express its deep concern that in some cases professionals, such as psychiatrists and counsellors, who were asked to deal with clerical sex abusers, were not given the full facts of the priest’s history of abuse. As a result, priests were sometimes allowed back into parishes unsupervised.

Despite the trenchant criticism of the Catholic Church in Dublin since the era of Archbishop John Charles McQuaid, the Commission, which was headed by High Court judge Yvonne Murphy, will thank the current Archbishop of Dublin, Dr Diarmuid Martin, and his legal team, who gave unrestricted access to its files.

The report is also expected to be critical of the State and some gardai for not intervening much earlier to challenge the authority and power of the Church. It will say that while some members of the force investigated sex-abusing clergy, others in the Garda Siochana seem to have regarded the clergy as being above the law.

The report was presented to Justice Minister Dermot Ahern but has since been modified because a number of those named in the original document are still facing prosecution. It is believed that a copy of the report, which has since been edited for legal reasons, will be presented to the Cabinet on Tuesday and is expected to be published in full later in the week.