Hitler Was A Good Catholic

Posted: June 19, 2011 in Current Events

Vatican City, Rome

 Rome, The Vatican…the ‘Emerald City’, the ‘Holy Grail’, the ‘New Jerusalem’, the ‘Magic Kingdom’…what a glorious sight to behold! Some people get all choked up just mentioning the ‘holy’ capital of all faithful Catholics. And if you’ve been there as have I, you know why. Its decadent luxury and grandeur tells the mind that this is truly ‘God’s’ house! But looks can also be deceiving.

For centuries faithful Catholics have trusted that the Church that they are a part of is a ‘light to the world’, and a symbol of ‘good’ and true Christianity. But NOTHING could be further from the truth. Throughout history the Catholic Church has been anything but ‘good’, and if you want to know the truth, it has been downright evil more often than not.

Hitler & Pope Pius XII

Priests Heil Hitler

I’ll start by saying that if the Catholic Church’s record is a reflection of ‘good’, then Hitler was a ‘good’ catholic. Yes, that’s what I said…Hitler. Most people don’t know this but during the time that Hitler was planning the ‘final solution’, or the plan to exterminate the jewish people, he was a good friend of Pope Pius XII, and a good Catholic. In fact he received the popes blessing on himself and his regime on more than one occasion. But the Catholic Church is well aware of this alliance because in recent years the Church has made vague but formal apologies for the atrocities dealt out to the jewish people (six million killed) and other undesirable religious groups throughout history. Including but not limited to the Inquisition, which also brutally took the lives of tens of thousands of people or ‘heretics’, those that disagreed with the Church.

The Roman Catholic Inquisition was one of the greatest disasters ever to befall mankind. In the name of Jesus Christ, Catholic priests mounted an enormous effort to kill all “heretics” in Europe and Britain. Heretics is defined whichever way Rome wanted it defined; it ranged from people who disagreed with official policy, to Hermetic Philosophers [Black Magick Practitioners], to Jews, to Witches, and to the Protestant reformers.

As the Inquisition rolled along, another demonic spirit swept through the Church and the people carrying out the Inquisition. This spirit was a spirit of absolute, diabolical hatred of mankind, accompanied by a corresponding love of torture. If you look closely, you can see some wealthy people sitting on the other side of the plate glass window, looking at this poor man being tortured, as if they were watching an opera! Women as well as men were watching this poor man slowly die as he rotated on this very sharp point. The man is suspended with these many ropes so he can be rotated on that exceedingly sharp point sticking into his anus. The pain was incalculable and quickly unbearable. I have other pictures of women being suspended on this same type of sharp point, which is sticking into her vagina!

In the Inquisition, pain inflicted on sexual organs was very prevalent, another clear sign of the sexual obsession brought on by the perversions of celibacy. This type of sexual perversion has occurred in every ‘Mysteries’ Religion in history: the Babylonian Satanic Mysteries, Egyptian Mysteries, the Greek Mysteries, and the Mysteries of Imperial Rome. Celibate Catholic priests were just the latest to feel the scourge of sexual perversion brought on by celibacy. Catholic priests in recent years have come under attack for their sexual abuse of many parishioners under their ‘spiritual’ care, many of whom were only boys.

The National Review Board for the Protection of Children and Young People established by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has not had an easy time of determining the extent of the sexual abuse of minors within the American Roman Catholic Church. Not surprisingly, there has been considerable internal opposition. This resistance was so bad that long before its work was finished, its chairman, Frank Keating, was forced to resign after he compared the Church’s actions to the Cosa Nostra (the Mafia), which rather proved his point.

Unfortunately, however, these initial numbers are likely to be the only official accounting ever done by the Roman Catholic Church. As soon as the report was published, the UCCB acted swiftly to cut the National Review Board’s feet out from under it. For this was to be the preliminary report; the audits were to be completed and a larger report issued. Furthermore, the Board had planned further follow-up reports to follow the implementation of their proposals. That will not happen now. And so the Church has squandered its last, best chance of ever coming clean.

Certainly the fact that the report was reluctantly commissioned by the bishops who have been responsible for the crisis does not reflect well on its credibility. Nor does the fact that they only reason they ever did so was due to the constant and unrelenting pressure since the early 1990s by victims and advocacy groups, and later, the news media — not to mention the drain on their treasuries from huge settlements and dwindling contributions.

Many dioceses with much to hide did not want to co-operate. Religious orders, the report acknowleges, were even worse. The results are still missing from some groups, and the rest are spinning their denials and minimalizations as fast at their highly paid PR firms can turn. And as it’s all self-reported, there is no guarantee of any kind of completeness nor accuracy.

The focus was criticized as too narrow, being concerned solely with child sexual abuse. Other situations where clerics have sexually acted out with adult women and men, nuns and seminarians, have not been looked at; nor the effect on any offspring they may have sired in the process. For that matter, the personal cost to victims and their families remains uncounted. How many lives destroyed through alcohol, drugs, unsafe sex or violence have there been? How much abuse has been repeated by its victims? How many suicides and ruined families? How can the total cost ever be calculated?

There has been much complaining by victims, also, that only a handful were asked to testify, that there was too little time and too many restrictions. Many, too, point out that not all victims have yet come forward by any means. Indeed, even if there are no new cases, just the repressed memories alone of the still-unrecognized victims will guarantee that these numbers will only increase over the next twenty years.

And nothing has been said about multiple abusers and rings who swapped victims around like trading cards…

Nonetheless, A Report on the Crisis in the Catholic Church in the United States has generated a fog of figures, which cannot obscure the extent of this massive failure of institutional religion. It is indeed a crisis. Though this is a step forward, it is not the solution by any means, but a half-hearted admission that there is a problem.

Here are a few of the highlights:

US clerics (priests, deacons, bishops, etc.) accused of abuse from 1950-2002: 4,392. About 4% of the 109,694 serving during those 52 years.
Individuals making accusations: 10,667.
Victims’ ages: 5.8% under 7; 16% ages 8-10; 50.9% ages 11-14; 27.3% ages 15-17.
Victims’ gender: 81% male, 19% female
Duration of abuse: Among victims, 38.4% said all incidents occurred within one year; 21.8% said one to two years; 28%, two to four years; 11.8% longer.
Victims per priest: 55.7% with one alleged victim; 26.9% with two or three; 13.9% with four to nine; 3.5% with 10 or more (these 149 priests caused 27% of allegations).
Abuse locations: 40.9% at priest’s residence; 16.3% in church; 42.8% elsewhere.
Known cost to dioceses and religious orders: $572,507,094 (does not include the $85 million Boston settlement and other expenses after research was concluded). (Hartford Courant, 2/27/04)

It should be noted that 30% of all accusations included in these figures were not investigated as they were deemed unsubstantiated (10%) or because the accused priest was dead or inactive (20%). They do not include allegations that were “unfounded” or later recanted.

In any case, all these figures are widely suspected to be grossly underestimated. For example, the late Fr. Tom Economus, former President of the Linkup, a national survivors’ advocacy group, said back in the mid-90s that he knew of “1,400 insurance claims on the books and that the Church has paid out over $1 billion in liability with an estimated $500 million pending.”

He also said that over 800 priests had been removed from ministry and that there might be as many as 5,000 with allegations against them, which is not that far off. He often claimed that by far the most calls he received from all victims of any kind of clergy abuse were those from males who suffered abuse in their youth in the Catholic Church. Certainly the numbers, which show that the highest number of victims were 12 year old boys and that 80% of the abuse was homosexual in nature, validate that anecodotal evidence, too. In fact, while the numbers of young children and girls did not vary much, the report shows an astounding six-fold increase in the abuse of boys aged 11-17 between the 1950s and 70s. And the figures for males stayed high through the 1980s.

Could it be that once the exits were opened by Vatican II, the good priests who could, departed to marry, and the maladjusted ones who remained were left to their own devices?

In any case, Fr. Tom Doyle, a canon lawyer with more experience than any in these cases, has raised many questions over the validity and methodology of the study. He has said that he thought many cases were still hidden, pointing out the low numbers for the 1950s.

‘”It’s not over with,” Doyle said. “The heart of the matter is: Why was there this massive betrayal? Why did they move [abusers] around for years, when they knew what they were doing? Why have they continued to re-victimize the victims by stonewalling, and why they have never turned in any of these known pedophiles?” (Hartford Courant, 2/26/04)

The Bible is very clear on the transgressions of the Catholic Church and other reprehensible religions when it refers to them as “Babylon The Great”. And that is precisely why God judges Babylon the Great or Christendom in the Bible at Revelation 18 where it says:  “Get out of her, my people, if YOU do not want to share with her in her sins, and if YOU do not want to receive part of her plagues. For her sins have massed together clear up to heaven, and God has called her acts of injustice to mind.”  (Revelation 18:4,5)


Weiner Grabbing His 'Weiner' for the Girls

Anthony Weiner seems to have a problem…he likes to play with his weiner, and he even likes to show it to girls on Twitter (he tweets). Now I can understand when a guy gets a little horny, but this guys got a beautiful wife waiting at home, whom I’m sure would be willing to oblige his fetish for showing off his ‘Tiger Tang”. I personally think though, that he represents a pretty good cross section of politicians in Washington. I mean really…people in glass houses ‘shouldn’t throw rocks”. So don’t go getting all bent out of shape Washington…remember Clinton, Schwarzenegger, Kennedy, Brown, Pee Wee Herman? They all got caught…or at least people found out. Or is it better to have a secret affair than to get caught showing off your dipstick? You’re the judge. The Huff-Post had a few choice words to say about it…

A source tells the New York Daily News that Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) is considering resigning his post in congress. Over the past week, the Democratic lawmaker has resisted calls from both sides of the aisle to step down. Below, the original story that appeared in this post.

New photographs of a partially-nude Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) surfaced on Sunday in a report from TMZ.com.

The dispatch of pictures appear to have been taken by Weiner himself in what is said to be the House Members Gym. TMZ.com reports that it has confirmed the location of where the photos were taken by the lawmaker on his Blackberry and says that it has confirmed they were sent to at least one woman.

Weiner says he is seeking treatment but will not resign.

Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus is criticizing Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi for not moving more quickly.

He says Democratic leaders are “defending a guy who deserves no defense.”

Weiner’s plan leaves top Democrats wrestling with how best to end the furor over the seven-term congressman’s misdeeds that could hurt the party’s prospects in the 2012 elections.

Weiner’s announcement that he would request a leave from Congress came shortly after several Democratic Party leaders demanded he quit on Saturday. The Weiner spectacle, with raunchy online photos and messages, has been a huge embarrassment for Democrats who back in 2006 made GOP ethics misdeeds a part of their successful campaign to win control of the House.

A senior House Democrat has renewed her demand that Weiner “do the right thing” and resign from the House because of a sexting scandal on Sunday.

Republicans, who’ve been keeping a low profile, are now accusing Democrats of showing poor leadership in dealing with Weiner.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the party chairman, said during an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday that she and other Democratic leaders “have made clear that he needs to resign.”

“This sordid affair has become an unacceptable distraction for Representative Weiner, his family, his constituents and the House,” Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the party chairwoman, said in a written statement calling for the 46-year-old married lawmaker from New York City to step down.

The House Democratic leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, said Weiner “has the love of his family, the confidence of his constituents and the recognition that he needs help. I urge Congressman Weiner to seek that help without the pressures of being a member of Congress.”

Aides said later that Pelosi had been aware of Weiner’s plan to enter treatment when she issued her statement, and her call for a resignation had not changed because of it.

Weiner’s spokeswoman, Risa Heller, said in a statement that the congressman departed Saturday morning “to seek professional treatment to focus on becoming a better husband and healthier person. In light of that, he will request a short leave of absence from the House of Representatives so that he can get evaluated and map out a course of treatment to make himself well.”

The statement did not say where he would receive treatment, or what type was involved.

The developments occurred one day after Weiner acknowledged he had exchanged online messages with a 17-year-old girl in Delaware. He said nothing improper had passed between the two of them.

CNN reports that the family of the teen issued a statement on Sunday saying the interactions “were not salacious or in any manner inappropriate.”

Democrats said the concerted call for his resignation had been brewing for days, as senior party officials concluded the scandal was interfering with their effort to gain political momentum in advance of the 2012 elections.

Arnold Schwarzenegger is in the news again these days in a most negative and conspicuous way. After years of covering up the existence of a ‘love child’ who was the result of an extra-marital affair with his housekeeper of many years, Schwarzenegger finally came clean. But not without incident. You see, people still seem to think that politicians and celebrities should lead exemplary moral lives, and that they should keep their pants on at all times. And what continues to amaze me is the ridiculously naive and narrow-minded view people have of celebrities in general. It almost seems that people are shocked to hear that someone famous has done something illicit or in bad form…like they’re not human or something. And then to follow the act up with the speculation that this person will never work again…PALLLLLEASE! Politicians and actors all get their dirty laundry aired in the media. And the aftermath is (almost) always as the adage goes…”Even bad publicity is good publicity”. Or in other words, the more degenerate and scandalous the news story is…the more people enjoy it, or should I say ‘buy’ it. I guarantee you that Schwarzenegger will live through his ‘bad’ press despite being married to a Kennedy, and come out smelling like a rose. And Hollywood? Oh…they’ll probably give him a raise, because he’s created some buzz for them to work with. Thats just the way it is.

Below is CNN’s take on the story…read on:

By Michael Martinez, CNN Los Angeles
May 22, 2011

There is nothing ordinary about Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Champion bodybuilder. Blockbuster film actor. A married-in (for now) member of the Kennedy family. Recent governor of the most populous state of the most powerful nation on Earth. And an Austrian immigrant, to top it all off.

Now, the extraordinary man known for outsized achievements is perhaps at the biggest crossroads of his life following the revelation that he fathered a child with his family’s housekeeper of 20 years, analysts say.

‘Shoe leather’ leads to Schwarzenegger’s secret son

Everything seems on the line: his marriage, his acting career and his post-governorship ambition to become a sort of statesman.

Can the man known for superhuman accomplishments pull himself out of a self-made mess worthy of Hercules’ Twelve Labors?

“This is not a positive, extraordinary moment,” said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a senior fellow at the University of Southern California’s School of Policy, Planning and Development who has closely followed Schwarzenegger’s career, especially as governor.

“I believe from day one that what he would do with his post-governorship was model it after the post-presidency — ironically — of Bill Clinton,” who formed a foundation, promoted international causes, served as a diplomat and even negotiated the release of American journalists from North Korea, Jeffe said.

“But Schwarzenegger is radioactive right now,” Jeffe continued. “When Bill Clinton began, he was (several) years away from the Monica Lewinsky and the impeachment situation. So there’s been a bit of time between when he was able to reshape his image. I don’t see Arnold being able to put together that agenda at this time. Can you imagine him being now received by Elizabeth II, or anyone else for that matter?”

“I don’t think that’s going to work for a while,” Jeffe added.

When Schwarzenegger left the governor’s office last year because of term limits, his ratings were at a historic low, 22%, matching Democratic predecessor Gray Davis’ ratings just before a recall election ejected Davis from office, according to a Field Poll. That rating equaled the lowest ever given to a sitting governor in the more than 50 years that the Field Poll has been surveying the public.

Jeffe said Schwarzenegger’s woes grew from the state’s staggering deficit, despite his pledge to straighten out the finances.

Meanwhile Schwarzenegger, 63, has been forced to also place his movie comeback on hold.

Plans have also been halted to produce “The Governator,” a children’s comic book and TV show based on Schwarzenegger’s life. The title is a play on his successful “Terminator” films.

Hollywood media expert Michael Levine, a publicist who has represented 58 Oscar winners, called the Schwarzenegger love child revelation as “the most outrageous Hollywood scandal since the Woody Allen controversy in 1992,” when Allen, then in his mid-50s, declared he was having an affair with 21-year-old Soon-Yi Previn, the adopted daughter of his longtime partner, Mia Farrow. Allen and Previn married in 1997.

“He was a terrible governor. Not mediocre. Terrible,” Levine said. “Politics: dead. Over. Forget it.”

“Now, Hollywood, he can try over a period of time to redeem his career, but I think that’s going to be very difficult because he’s an action star and he’s aging, and generally Americans like their action stars younger,” Levine said.

Female filmgoers are now going to have trouble with Schwarzenegger, Levine added.

“I don’t think what’s happened to Arnold Schwarzenegger is a crowd pleaser to women,” he said.

Yet Levine acknowledged how unpredictable Hollywood can be.

“History hasn’t been kind to people who have underestimated Arnold Schwarzenegger,” he said. “Prophecy is dubious business.”

On the home front in Los Angeles, he and Maria Shriver, 55, have put their marriage of 25 years on ice and have separated.

They have four children together, and one of them has shown signs of distress by changing his last name to Shriver on his Twitter account.

Complicating his family relationships is the love child, a boy who’s now 13 and was born less than a week after Shriver gave birth to their youngest child, another son, Christopher.

“This is a man who reinvented himself so many times,” said Wendy Walsh, an author and psychology expert who holds a doctorate in the field. “I don’t think he will ever have back the family in the way he had them. If he comes out of the other side of this, and if he uses this crisis to grow, he will be a different person.”

His relationship with his children — now five, not four — will be challenging, Walsh said.

“The question is how trustful will they be and how forgiving they will be — for all five,” including the love child, Walsh said. “Now there is a kid who’s traumatized, the youngest one living in suburban Bakersfield (California), living away from his half-siblings.”

“For the rest of his life, he’s going to watch his half-siblings live in mansions,” she said.

Less secretive, better relationships, a more authentic self — these are some remedies that Schwarzenegger needs to pursue, Walsh said.

“He’s got a pile of money on his hands and a lot of time. What’s he going to do with it?” Walsh said. “And he basically needs to keep his pants zipped for a couple of decades. And then people will go and pay to see his movies.”

 Photographs acquired by Reuters and taken about an hour after the U.S. assault on Osama bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad in Pakistan show three dead men lying in pools of blood, but no weapons.

The photos, taken by a Pakistani security official who entered the compound after the early morning raid on Monday, show two men dressed in traditional Pakistani garb and one in a t-shirt, with blood streaming from their ears, noses and mouths.

The official, who wished to remain anonymous, sold the pictures to Reuters.

None of the men looked like bin Laden. President Barack Obama decided not to release photos of his body because it could have incited violence and used as an al Qaeda propaganda tool.

“I think that given the graphic nature of these photos, it would create some national security risk,” Obama told the CBS program “60 Minutes.”

Based on the time-stamps on the pictures, the earliest one was dated May 2, 2:30 a.m., approximately an hour after the completion of the raid in which bin Laden was killed.

Other photos, taken hours later at between 5:21 a.m. and 6:43 a.m. show the outside of the trash-strewn compound and the wreckage of the helicopter the United States abandoned. The tail assembly is unusual, and could indicate some kind of previously unknown stealth capability.

Reuters is confident of the authenticity of the purchased images because details in the photos appear to show a wrecked helicopter from the assault, matching details from photos taken independently on Monday.

U.S. forces lost a helicopter in the raid due to a mechanical problem and later destroyed it.

The pictures are also taken in sequence and are all the same size in pixels, indicating they have not been tampered with. The time and date in the photos as recorded in the digital file’s metadata match lighting conditions for the area as well as the time and date imprinted on the image itself.

The close-cropped pictures do not show any weapons on the dead men, but the photos are taken in medium close-up and often crop out the men’s hands and arms.

One photo shows a computer cable and what looks like a child’s plastic green and orange water pistol lying under the right shoulder of one of the dead men. A large pool of blood has formed under his head.

Fake photoshopped image composite of OBL and another man

A second shows another man with a streak of blood running from his nose across his right cheek and a large band of blood across his chest.

A third man, in a T-shirt, is on his back in a large pool of blood which appears to be from a head wound.

U.S. acknowledgment on Tuesday that bin Laden was unarmed when shot dead had raised accusations Washington had violated international law. The exact circumstances of his death remained unclear and could yet fuel controversy, especially in the Muslim world.

Pakistan faced national embarrassment, a leading Islamabad newspaper said, in explaining how the world’s most-wanted man was able to live for years in the military garrison town of Abbottabad, just north of the capital.

Pakistan blamed worldwide intelligence lapses for a failure to detect bin Laden, while Washington worked to establish whether its ally had sheltered the al Qaeda leader, which Islamabad vehemently denies.

Osama Bin Laden dead: Gruesome photo is hoax, but White House debates release of real ones – (Reuters)

The White House is debating whether or not it will release photos of Osama Bin Laden’s corpse. Officials say they have pictures of the Al Qaeda terror leader’s dead body, ABC News reported Monday and “there’s no doubt it’s him.”However, because they are disturbing images, the Obama administration is uncertain if it would be okay to make them public.

“It is really, really graphic,” an official told NBC News.
The White House is explaining the decision to not release any pictures:
The White House had been weighing the release of a photo, in part to offer proof that bin Laden was killed during a raid on his compound early Monday. However, officials had cautioned that the photo was gruesome and could prove inflammatory.
“It is important for us to make sure that very graphic photos of somebody who was shot in the head are not floating around as an incitement to additional violence or as a propaganda tool. That’s not who we are. We don’t trot out this stuff as trophies,” Obama told CBS News, according to White House spokesman Jay Carney.

Officials said Monday that DNA evidence shows the body is in fact Bin Laden’s, but suggest releasing a photo of his body may be necessary to quiet critics.

The Bush administration released gruesome photos of Saddam Hussein’s two sons, Qusay and Uday, in 2003 for similar reasons after they were killed in a raid of their Mosul hideout.

An image of a bloody Bin Laden was shown on Arab TV late Sunday, as well as the front page of the Daily Mail. However, that image has since been shown to be a hoax.

The gruesome photo claiming to be of Bin Laden (r.) is actually a composite of two other photos, including the unidentified man on the left.

It was likely made at least two years ago, when it was used with a story claiming Bin Laden had been killed in 2009, according to England’s The Guardian newspaper.

The gruesome image is constructed of at least two different photos, eagle-eyed Internet sleuths believe. One is of an unidentified man and the other a 1998 photo of Bin Laden.

The nose, mouth and beard were taken from the terror leader’s picture, while the bloodied head and eyes were from an unknown victim. – By Michael Sheridan – Daily News Staff Writer

Marilyn Davenport, an Orange County Republican Official, sent out a racist email with Obama’s head pasted onto a chimpanzee. But what was she trying to say? That our nations first black president is related to a monkey? Maybe she’s right because evolutionists do say that blacks are more closely related to primates than whites. But she makes no apology for doing it. I read a LA Times article today that says alot about her racist joke aimed at President Obama. Read the following by Christopher Goffard of the Los Angeles Times.

Some Orange County Republican leaders are denouncing an email distributed by a long-serving party committee member that portrays President Obama’s face superimposed on a chimpanzee, with the words: “Now you know why — No birth certificate!”

County GOP Chairman Scott Baugh has called for the resignation of Marilyn Davenport, an elected member of the party central committee who sent the email to some committee members and others last week. Baugh said he received it Friday afternoon and quickly responded with an email telling Davenport it was “dripping with racism and is in very poor taste.” He said the issue should be referred to the Orange County GOP’s ethics committee.

According to an email Baugh sent to committee members Saturday, Davenport described the Obama photo as a “joke” and wanted to know who had leaked the email to the OC Weekly’s R. Scott Moxley, who broke the story. She called the leak “cowardly” and wrote, “Anyone brave enough to come forward?”

Reached at her home in Fullerton on Saturday, Davenport declined to comment. In an email to central committee colleagues, however, she described the controversy as “much to do about nothing” and vowed that she would not resign.

“I’m sorry if my email offended anyone, I simply found it amusing regarding the character of Obama and all the questions surrounding his origin of birth,” she wrote. “In no way did I even consider the fact he’s half black when I sent out the email. In fact, the thought never entered my mind until one or two other people tried to make this about race. We all know a double standard applies regarding this president. I received plenty of emails about George Bush that I didn’t particularly like, yet there was no ‘cry’ in the media about them.”

If Davenport refuses to resign, she should be ousted, said Michael Schroeder, former chairman of the California Republican Party and an Orange County GOP activist. “I looked at it, and my jaw dropped,” Schroeder said.

Tim Whitacre, another long-serving committee member, came to Davenport’s defense, describing her as “a polite, gentle grandmother.” He said Baugh was using the issue as “political payback” because Davenport has been critical of Baugh’s leadership. He said Davenport sent him the Obama email last week, but it did not offend him because he regarded it as “a light-hearted stab over the birther question.”

“We send emails back and forth — motivational, fun, this and that,” Whitacre said. He described her email as a personal one, having no connection to GOP business, and he said there were no grounds for an ethics case.

I’ve been reading a lot of news stories lately on the web, but by far the most insightful and intelligent writing comes from a blog writer out of Columbus, Ohio that I’ll just call Jeff P. Jeff writes from the perspective of a social worker and counselor to those needing change in thier lives and takes his readers on a journey through politics, human interest stories and matters of national policy. But his primary focus is as a political writer. Concentrating on local political people, parties and trends, he also covers state and national politics from a native Ohioans perspective. Jeff is not one to mince words as he dissects, shreds and exposes right-wing conservative party members who have either gone astray or are destroying what most Americans consider the future of our country. He is dismayed by what he refers to as the “trickle down” conservatives, and is not without answers to our countries most pressing issues.

Jeff is truly a great American with a semi-optimistic view of the direction that our country is going. He has long-held the view that we must build our great nation from the bottom up, not the “trickle down”. He graduated from the Ohio State University, Summa-Cum-Laude and is currently active in writing his political blog at:  www.madrigalmaniac.com which he has been active writing for the past 6 years. He’s been listed on the Huffington Post, New York Times and many other news journals and blogs around the country.

We need more Americans like Jeff, and even though I don’t always agree with his political ideology, because I am a ‘righty’, he speaks his mind even when its not the popular thing to do. So my hats off to you Jeff P. Keep doing what you do best…expose the idiots that make democracy look bad…and don’t look back! HoooAhh.

A Cartel Victim

Everytime I hear about terrorism I think of 9/11 and the world trade centers crashing to the ground in ruins. And thats probably what most people think of, so I’m probably not alone with this image in my mind.But lately with all the news about the violence in Mexico between the drug cartels, and how now its bleeding into states like Texas, I’ve got something new to ponder. Could the cartel be considered terrorists given their disposition for violence against people and government? And then I read a story in the Dallas Morning News about this very thing, and I realized I’m not the only one to think it. Are they terrorists? And if they are, should the United States intervene as a measure of national security by making surgical airstrikes on cartel compounds…against an enemy that is now bringing its war to American soil? I don’t need to say much more than that because the Dallas Morning News says it all. Read on…

Published 7 April 2011 – Dallas Morning News

“Let’s call Mexico’s cartels what they are: terrorists”

U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Austin, gets it. When drug cartel thugs order mass kidnappings, explode bombs, murder scores of public officials, behead victims or hang them from overpasses, and post signs in border-area cities warning of more violence if they don’t get their way, that’s not mere drug trafficking. That’s terrorism.

Finally, someone in Washington is taking action in response to the unprecedented threat on America’s southern border. McCaul, chairman of a House Homeland Security subcommittee, has introduced a bill to add Mexico’s six dominant cartels to the State Department’s Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.

Cartel Beheadings

It’s time to take the gloves off and stop treating these cartels as Mexican versions of the neighborhood pusher. These gangs have murdered 35,000 people since 2006 — more than 10 times the number killed in the 9/11 attacks. That’s terrorism.

“The violence and its raw, often sadistic, brutality form an ever-present backdrop to daily life in Mexico. … I think many of us here have failed to grasp the profound impact of this narco-terrorism on the lives of Mexican citizens,” Ricardo Ainslie, a University of Texas professor and Mexico native, told McCaul’s subcommittee last week.

By labeling cartel members as the terrorists they are, American law enforcers gain significant extra powers, and penalties are boosted for anyone who directly aids and abets the criminals. Money launderers and gun smugglers, for example, could face life terms in prison and fines of up to $50,000 per violation.

There is good reason to exercise caution going forward. Congress must avoid “terrorism creep,” the temptation to label anyone who fights against American interests as a terrorist. Federal law identifies terrorism as deliberate efforts “to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.”

This is exactly what Mexico’s cartels are doing. But McCaul’s bill must not be used to label casual drug users as financiers of Mexican cartels, subject to terrorism prosecution simply for lighting up a joint.

The law would, however, serve notice to people on this side of the border who assist by transporting enormous sums of cash across the border or who purchase large quantities of assault weapons to fuel the cartels’ killing sprees that their actions are, under the law, equivalent to helping Osama bin Laden.

The world needs to see these killers for exactly who they are and prosecute them with no less vigor than we do Islamist fanatics who torture, dismember or behead their victims. McCaul’s bill marks a dramatic new step toward empowering law enforcers to make a real impact in Mexico. It deserves Congress’ careful consideration.

Opinion blog: Mexico ambassador says cartel leaders are businessmen, not terrorists
By Carl P. Leubsdorf –

Published 12 April 2011 – Dallas Morning News

Editor’s note: This item originally appeared on dallasnews.com’s Opinion blog.

I wanted so badly to include some other photos with this blog item. Our files are full of the most gruesome photos imaginable. There are dismembered corpses dumped on the sidewalk. There’s one of a mother and her child dead on the floor, their bodies bloodied and pockmarked by bullets. This one is the least offensive I could find while still making the point that Mexico’s drug cartels are terrorist organizations.

In a letter to the editor today, Mexico’s ambassador, Arturo Sarukhan , comes to the defense of these mass murdering, torturing, dismembering, bombing, beheading, kidnapping and drug-trafficking organizations, arguing that they are businessmen, not terrorists. Folks, we have a first here. You will not, until now, have seen any top Mexican official actually defending the cartels to this extent. But Sarukhan, taking issue with our editorial last week in defense of a bill before Congress to put Mexico’s six biggest cartels on the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, strongly disagrees.

Yes, they are very violent criminal organizations, he says. But “they pursue a single goal. They want to maximize their profits and do what most business do: hostile takeovers and pursue mergers and acquisitions.”

Again, in their defense, he says they have “no political motivation or agenda whatsoever beyond their attempt to defend their illegal business.”

So, when they kill dozens of mayors, police chiefs, soldiers, journalists, newspaper editors, businessmen, mothers, children, American visitors, immigrants, farmers, truck drivers, musicians, dancers, teachers, etc., etc., etc., we are to believe this is just business? Part of a new mergers-and-acquisitions strategy? And when they hang signs from overpasses, along with a body to punctuate their point, warning that this is their territory, not the government’s, there’s no political message there?

Perhaps the ambassador should read up a bit on these entrepreneurial business groups to see what they’re really up to. There’s any number of articles, in English or Spanish, describing their political motives. Here’s something I found from a 2009 piece by John P. Sullivan and Adam Elkus, two guys who know the difference between terrorists and businessmen:

Unlike Pablo Escobar’s Colombian reign of terror in the 1990s, the Mexican cartels are engaged in serious insurgent campaigns. Armed with military infantry weapons, their gunmen use complex small-unit tactics that differ from the usual “pray and spray” methods beloved by criminals. Cartels run training camps for assassins on the border. They attempt to agitate the populace against the Mexican military through political subversion. And they control towns and neighborhoods that the military tries to retake through force.
Mexico’s cartels are evolving distinct political aims. La Familia is exemplary in this regard. Using social services and infrastructure protection as levers in rural areas and small towns, they are building a social base. In urban areas, they are funding political patron-client relationships to extend their reach. Reinforced by corruption, propaganda, political marches and demonstrations, as well as social media such as “narcocorridos,” such activity helps to shape the future conflict.
This is no longer about drug policy. This is about fighting terrorists. And they are present right across the border in Mexico, and we need to call them what they are.