Tyrants Who Speak About “Freedom”

Jorge Mario Bergoglio fashions himself as a man who believes in “freedom.”

As a “street priest” who lived “on the margins” with “the poor,” Jorge Mario Bergoglio “liberated” himself from the “confines” of the sacristy and the “self-referential surety” found in late Monsignor Henry Denziger’s The Sources of Catholic Dogma.

As a son of the conciliar revolution, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is “liberated” from the shackles of the “Medieval formalism” of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition.

Indeed, Jorge Mario Bergoglio speaks constantly of the necessity of letting what he thinks is God the Holy Ghost move “freely” in the structures of his false church, unfettered by the “constraints” imposed upon Him by structural “inventions” of Pharisaical men.

Long before he was promoted to his current position as the universal public face of apostasy by his brother apostates on March 13, 2014, Jorge Mario Bergoglio showed himself to be completely “liberated” from everything to do with Catholic Faith, Worship and Morals.

%-align: justify;”>As the conciliar “archbishiop” of Buenos Aires, Argentina, from 1998 to the time of his promotion twelve months, thirteen days ago now, Bergoglio chafed under what he considered to be the “stifling” “rules” imposed upon by the curia under Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II and Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, with whom he has established a modus vivendi inside the walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River even though there is really no space between them on matters of theological substance.

In other words, Jorge Mario Bergoglio has been a rebel throughout the course of his masquerade as a priest, auxiliary “bishop,” “archbishop” (and member of the conciliar college of “cardinals”) and the sixth in the line of conciliar antipopes. He delights in his status as the rebel, fashioning himself as the “champion” of “compassion” and “mercy” who “loves” “the people” and wishes them to grow in what he thinks is a “freedom of the spirit.”

As is the case with all other rebels, however, including the Chief of Rebels, Lucifer himself, Jorge Mario Bergoglio are not very merciful with those who disagree with them. He continues to lord it over others in exactly the same manner as he believes his former superiors in the counterfeit church of conciiarism lorded it over him. He is, as has been noted on this site, the latest in  a long line of ecclesiastical tyrants.

One of the reasons, you see, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is no doubt delighted with the scandalously indecent “performance” of Suor Cristina on Italian television last week is that he believes her to she is the very personification of what a “liberated” woman of a religious community is supposed to be.

Remember, it was as the conciliar “cardinal archbishop” of Buenos Aires, Argentina, that Bergoglio sought to destroy a group of religious sisters who tried to maintain as much of the Catholic Faith in the conciliar structures as possible by corrupting their innocence and purity by mandating them to look at pornographic videos. This report, prefaced by an introduction written by a fully traditional Catholic priest in Argentina, was translated by Mr. Juan Carlos Araneta, It explains the connection between Bergoglio’s brutal treatment of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate as “Pope Francis” and similarly treatment that he had meted out to religious sisters when he was “Cardinal Bergoglio” in Buenos Aires:

Introduction:

“Msgr.” Bergoglio is a cold and authoritarian man, in the service of a part of a certain modernist ideology. Now he is a “pope.” A change in mentality perhaps, even if our degree of respect for him changes, given the loftiness of his office?

Let us look at the story of the excellent periodical “Página Católica”. During the times of his being “archbishop” of Buenos Aires he disbanded the holy Order of nuns that was founded in the 18th century by Mother Antula, María Antonia de Paz y Figueroa, the Congregation of the Daughters of the Divine Savior, that had various colleges and constructed a House of Exercises in Buenos Aires, a jewel of colonial architecture and a placed blessed with so much graces.

Now, coming from the “Holy See”, follows another act of despotism towards another Congregation, the Franciscans of the Immaculata with the same ferocity.

Reading the story demonstrates that there isn’t any line added because it is sufficient for any Catholic heart to understand and repudiate such a horrible spectacle of ecclesiastical tyranny against the Faith, to holy vocations, and good customs.

Lamentably, it is not possible to reproduce the interviews given to the nuns thrown out on the streets by “Msgr.” Bergoglio. But the can be found by opening the webpage of http://www.paginacatolica.blogspot.com.ar/2013/07/frailes-de-la-inmaculada-y-un-drama.html. [Droleskey note: This page no longer works. There is thus no need to write to me for the link to the video mentioned below as I do not know where it can be found now. Thank you.]

Cosme Beccar Varela

July 30, 2013

Friars of the Immaculate and a “porteño” drama

The nuns of the Holy House of Exercises, an analogous case with the Franciscans of the Immaculata?

Modernism demands that the poor pay for their own destruction.

Today the walls of the Holy House of Exercises breath in solitude.

Your preferred option has to be the poor,” the Neo-Modernists tell us who are abundantly governing the Church, every time there is a clamor to celebrate the true Catholic Mass.

Thus, they foment an ideological animosity between Traditionalism and Charity, on one hand and an erroneous and automatic identity between Progressive Neo-Modernism and true charity towards the needy.

In effect, as sound Catholic doctrine teaches, Charity firstly corrects the erring and showing them the pathway to salvation. Thus true love is yearns for the good of the beloved; the good which is ultimately nothing other than to merit everlasting life.

By this, those who long for the diffusion of the traditional doctrine and liturgy, are the first who have opted preferentially for the poor, by trying to provide them the Mass that has brought holiness upon millions of Catholics throughout the last 2,000 years; and even in the mere human order, it is a monument of good taste and the most exquisite of human arts; incomparably more splendid than that “witches’ sabbath” of the Neo-Modernists of the Novus Ordo that they have accustomed the universal church.

But those who proclaim themselves advanced in the solicitude of the poor, many times drop their mask without them knowing it.

We know that “pope” Francis has taken that name in order to demonstrate a life developed in poverty. Therefore we must suppose that the Friars of the Immaculata are truly poor.

Not withstanding, the decree signed in July 11 by which was intervened upon the Congregation by means of a Pontifical Commissary, that includes only three established conditions:

1. Designate Fr. Fidenzio Volpi, OFM Cap, Apostolic Commissar ad nuntum Santae Sedis of the Congregation, with all the applicable powers.

2. Dispose “that it corresponds upon the Institute of Franciscan Friars of the Immaculata, to reimburse all the expenditure incurred by the Commissary and the personnel that will be eventually designated, as honorary for their services.”

3. Besides what has been mentioned, the “Holy” Father Francis has disposed that everyone of the religious of the Congregation of the Friars of the Immaculata are obliged to celebrate the liturgy according to the “ordinary” form and that eventually, the use of the “extraordinary” form (Vetus Ordo) has to be explicitly authorized by the corresponding authorities, for every religious and/or community that asks for it.”

Thus, we see the knavishness as it manifests itself. Then, in the end, some poor monks will be bereft of the greatest of all treasures, the Traditional Liturgy of the Church. They have to pay for such a great price!

Those who might have doubts as to what this intervention can possibly mean should consider the following: the decree that we have analyzed can only have two dispositions: rob the Tridentine Mass and determine who will pay for the cost of such operation.

Go forth, standard bearers of the poor knowing that God will repay you abundantly and immediately for your great generosity!

The situation that has been raised has had a similarity with a dramatic case that occurred in Buenos Aires under the “archbishopric” of “Cardinal” Bergoglio. We have spoken for some time about this lamentable subject matter, but let us allow ourselves to return to it even if it be succinctly, then we can illustrate to ourselves about what to expect from the Institute of the Friars of the Immaculata.

Founded in the 18th century by Mother Antula and Maria Antonia de Paz y Figueroa, the Congregation of the Daughters of the Divine Savior has reached a degree of prosperity that, in our time, it has been possessor of various Catholic Colleges with thousands of students, one located in the exclusive Avenue of the Liberator in San Isidro, over all, of the terrain where they erected the Sanctuary of St. Cayetan in Liniers (a lot of money in alms) whose revenue was administered by the nuns.

At an opportune moment, “Cardinal” Bergoglio asked of the Mother Superior to transfer the property of the Sanctuary to the Archbishopric of Buenos Aires. Days later, after consulting her councilor Mother Hilda Ledesma responded to the Cardinal in the negative.

Having had a crystal ball maybe would have avoided the catastrophe of ceding to the disposal of the now “pope” Francis, in order to avoid the despoliation of all the goods and the near extinction of the order, as later accounted.

Because, in no time, he designated an apostolic visitor in the person of a Jesuit friend of Bergoglio: the current bishop Hugo Salaberry de Azul, in the province of Buenos Aires. The excuse: that close to 30 nuns lived in the Holy House of Exercises, some young women who in the majority are from Paraguay won for Christ by the zeal of one nun of that nationality, were there detained against their wills and isolated from society.

The isolation is concluded by the fact that these sisters were instructed in the same convent by professors designated as ad hoc, that which was made to avoid excessive contact with the world in which many nuns are used to nowadays.

A little later, in the first hours of the morning, when some nuns haven’t yet groomed themselves, an unfolding of unusual Curial functions informed them that the “Holy See,” with the signature of “Cardinal” Re, has designated as Apostolic Commissar on “Msgr.” Horacio Garcia, Pro Vicar General of the Archdiocese. The lettered “priest” that was supposed to accompany him excused himself for not being in agreement. In his place came “Fr.” Alejandro Russo, current Rector of the Cathedral of Buenos Aires (a favor in return for a favor?)

“Cardinal” Re reigned over the Congregation of the Religious and Institutes of Consecrated Life, who lived here and had one relative in the Archbishopric Curia. A man very close to Bergoglio, who was the one who earned for him the ring of the Fisherman is being flaunted by Francis and that he inherited from a secretary of Paul VI.

The end of this long story, that would give an argument by its vicissitudes to a drama that will be a sure best seller in book stores, ended with the Mother Superior confined to in Cordoba, the sisters returned to the world in such a manner that it can be said that the congregation ceased to exist, and the money and properties in the hands of the “Apostolic Commissariate” whose intervention is prolonged sine die.

An eminent example if how these Pharisees care for the poor, is the case of Mirna, a young Paraguayan woman who had been in the convent since 14 years of age and was bidden farewell by “Msgr.” Garcia who put her in the streets without informing her parents, and without even giving her a single cent to look after her needs.

We put on video all of her declarations and we invite our readers to reread an old post of this blog where she tells her story.

The drama of Mirna (video can be seen in the cited reference above).

At this point of the story our readers allow us to vent with a phrase that is quite irreverent: to those who want to cheat, are good for nothing losers. You who call yourselves progressive, not only do you put souls in grave danger, neither do you know how to look after the needs of the body.

According to the very victims, the Apostolic Commissary disposed that the nuns and novices find out their true vocation, with a method that we can call an immersion in the world: psychoanalysis and including exposure to eroticism. About this, it has already been written in this blog. Please see the video in the links (in the cited reference).  (Translated from the Spanish by Mr. Juan Carlos Araneta.)

Those of you who fall for Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s propaganda that he is “for the poor” are dupes. Dupes. Each and every single one of you.

Religious sisters should be immersed in the world and exposed to “eroticism”?

This is Catholic Charity?

This is serving the true God of Divine Revelation, the Most Holy Trinity.

This comports with the teaching of such illustrious saints as Saint Alpohonsus de Liguori and Saint John Mary Vianney and Saint Anthony Mary Claret?

For Jorge Mario Bergoglio, it is “Si, Si, Suor Cristina” and it is “No, No” to those who seek to sanctify from the world while hidden from it as they are immersed in the things of Heaven.

For “the poor”?

Revolutionaries always claim to care for the “poor” on “the margins” while showing their contempt for anyone who dares to dissent from their ostentatious, humble, pious displays of “concern” for the “poor.”

In the case of the Bergoglio, you see, the very man who chafed under the collar when given orders by the conciliar dicasteries in the Vatican goes to great length to give such orders to others.

If Jorge Mario Bergoglio is so concerned for the “lost sheep,” as some duped souls believe, then why doesn’t he try to convert his pro-abortion, pro-perversity Talmudic rabbi pal, Abraham Skoka, rather than mocking God and breaking the First Commandment by praying with him straight out of the blasphemous Talmud.

Some people are willfully blind in their abject refusal to see that act of apostasy such as this by itself casts oneself out of the pale of Holy Mother Church.

Antichrist will come in the name of “freedom.”

Antichrist will ooze with false charity for the “poor.”

Antichrist will seek to crush anyone and everyone who stands in his way.

Behold a figure of Antichrist, Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

Well, Jorge Mario Bergoglio will be meeting another figure of Antichrist, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro within a few hours of the posting of this article.

As has been noted on this site so many times in the past year now, the President of the United States of of America speaks about “freedom,” even “religious freedom,” while at the same time persecuting as many people who dare to disagree with him as he can.

Yes, Saul Alinsky’s school of radicals produces graduates such as Obama/Soetoro after training in the ways of rhetorically speaking as agents of change “for the poor” while imposing a brutal tyranny on those who disagree with their statist plans, those who expose them and their hypocrisy for what it is.

Remember, the former first-generation radicals of the 1960s such as William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton, who loved to flaunt social convention when they were opposing various authority figures, used the White House to punish enemies as they pushed their own statist program of abject evil. Slick Willie even had the temerity to lecture Americans on November 3, 1992, to “listen to your leaders” after he had spent forty-six years up to that point disobeying anyone other than the siren call of his own ego. The Obamas are simply the products of what they learned from the likes of the Clintons’ own contemporaries in his privileged “education” at Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School.

Obama/Soetoro’s wife, Michele Robinson Obama, showed tremendous chutzpah when waxing on about “free speech” whilst in Red China six days ago even though her husband’s administration seeks to muzzle dissenters by various means, including using the Internal Revenue Service to conduct audits upon those who hurt caesar’s feelings with words of truth criticism:

And that’s why it’s so important for information and ideas to flow freely over the Internet and through the media, because that’s how we discover the truth.  That’s how we learn what’s really happening in our communities and our country and our world.  And that’s how we decide which values and ideas we think are best –- by questioning and debating them vigorously, by listening to all sides of an argument, and by judging for ourselves.

And believe me, I know how this can be a messy and frustrating process.  My husband and I are on the receiving end of plenty of questioning and criticism from our media and our fellow citizens.  And it’s not always easy, but we wouldn’t trade it for anything in the world.  Because time and again, we have seen that countries are stronger and more prosperous when the voices of and opinions of all their citizens can be heard.

And as my husband has said, we respect the uniqueness of other cultures and societies, but when it comes to expressing yourself freely and worshipping as you choose and having open access to information, we believe those universal rights — they are universal rights that are the birthright of every person on this planet.  We believe that all people deserve the opportunity to fulfill their highest potential as I was able to do in the United States. (Remarks by the First Lady at Stanford Center at Peking University.)

Go tell that to Dr. Ben Carson, who found himself the subject of an Internal Revenue Service Audit last year after delivering an address, rife with rank Americanism, to the National Prayer Breakfast in the presence of the august caesar and his wife, who did not cotton to the neurosurgeon’s criticism of ObamaCare.

The neurosurgeon Dr. Carson was not the only one to be audited by the Internal Revenue Service. A cancer patient who was outspoken in his criticism of ObamaCare also herself the subject of such an audit, and Dinesh D’Souza, who produced a documentary in 2012 about Obama/Soetoro’s true agenda, is now facing prosecution by the Department of Justice for what is alleged to be an illegal campaign contribution. Yes, this is the same Department of Justice under Janet “See No Evil, Hear No Evil” Reno, a Catholic, I want to remind you, that knew nothing about the illegal campaign contributions made to the re-election campaign of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton in 1996:

Bill Elliot‘s heart-rending response to having his health insurance cancelled because of Obamacare tugged at America’s heart strings early this month.

His story may have also drawn the focus of the Internal Revenue Service.

Appearing on “The Kelly File” in early November, Elliot explained to host Megyn Kelly that he could not afford the new premiums in the federal exchange and did not want to “burden” his family with the cost, saying he’ll pay the fine for not having health insurance and “just let nature take its course.”

Kelly was unable to mask the devastation of that comment on her face.

Initially, Elliot’s story took a turn for the better when a health insurance broker helped him keep his existing insurance plan, at least until he learned that he’s being audited by the IRS.

According to a report in Front Page Magazine:

[Elliot] went on FOX News where his story was picked up by C. Steven Tucker, a health insurance broker who helped him keep his insurance.

 

Now suddenly Bill Elliot is being audited for 2009 with an interview only scheduled in April 2014. Assuming he lives that long. That might be a coincidence, but Tucker is being audited back to 2003.

 

Elliot was critical of President Obama in his appearance on Fox News. When asked to respond to the president’s quasi-apology for saying “if you like your current plan, you can keep it,” he said: “I believe that was more of an insult to me and other people who have been cancelled.”

That he finds himself being audited may be little more than a coincident, but it would not be the first time a critic of the president found himself up against the agency.

Dr. Ben Carson, the former surgeon who criticized Obama’s leadership and his health care plan at the National Prayer Breakfast in February told Fox News he was unfairly targeted by the IRS because of his comments.

And the scandal involving the IRS intentionally going after conservative groups remains fresh on the minds of many Americans, even though Attorney General Eric Holder has yet to interview a single group unfairly targeted. (Cancer patient critical of ObamaCare now facing IRS audit.)

He concluded, “We live in a Gestapo age.”

But before we get to that, let’s start at the beginning.

Last February, the National Prayer Breakfast invited the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital, Dr. Ben Carson, to speak.

The master of ceremonies said Carson was invited to speak for three reasons: 1. “He loves Jesus.” 2. “He has a compelling life story.” 3. “He is a distinguished man of science and healing.”

He added: “We hope he can help us sort some things out.”

Brother, Dr. Carson did just that, but probably not the way anyone anticipated — especially the president of the United States, who sat at the head table.

Dr. Carson that day delivered a stem-winder, a faith-based speech that, while not what I’d call a head-on partisan address, amounted to a principled rebuttal of President Barack Obama’s policies. It was, no doubt, an uncomfortable 27 minutes for the president.

Carson’s commentary was delivered in an affable style. A black man raised in abject poverty who become a learned man of science, he blistered the paint off how America is devolving into a state of intolerance, welfare, educational slavery and fiscal irresponsibility.

He started innocently enough, with a joke about a successful businessman who always struggled to find gifts for his mother on Mother’s Day.

Finally, he found a pair of exotic birds trained to talk and dance. He had them delivered.

He called to ask her how she liked the birds.

She said: “They was good.”

“Oh no, tell me you didn’t eat those birds,” he said. “They could talk and dance, and they cost $5,000 apiece.”

To which his mother replied: “Well, they should have said somethin’.”

That launched Carson into a string of observations on the principles of free speech.

In today’s America, the politically correct speech police are out in force, he said.

“PC is dangerous,” Dr. Carson told President Obama and the National Prayer Breakfast crowd that morning.

“Because, you see, one of the founding principles is freedom of thought and freedom of expression. And, it muffles people. It puts a muzzle on them. And at the same time keeps people from discussing important issues while the fabric of this society is being changed. And we cannot fall for that trick. And what we need to do is start talking about things. Talking about things that are important.”

At the conclusion of the speech, Carson became a national story. Liberal writers raised an eyebrow at what they perceived to be an ill-timed dressing-down of the president.

Conservatives, meanwhile, called his message refreshing, a message the country needed to hear.

No one can say whether the president really heard Dr. Carson’s message. But someone in government did, because in June, guess who visited Dr. Carson? The Internal Revenue Service. Carson had never been audited before his speech. Suddenly the tax agency was looking at his real estate holdings.

“I’ve been quite, I would say, astonished at the level of hostility that I have encountered,” Carson said.

“The IRS has investigated me. They said, ‘I want to look at your real estate holdings.’ There was nothing there. ‘Well, let’s expand to an entire [year], everything.’ There was nothing there. ‘Let’s do another year.’ Finally, after a few months, they went away. But they’ve come after my family, they’ve come after my friends, they’ve come after associates.”

And Dr. Carson isn’t the only conservative American under strangely timed IRS scrutiny.

Dr. Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, wrote a letter to the president accusing the IRS of unfairly targeting his nonprofit groups.

Christine O’Donnell, the former tea party U.S. Senate candidate from Delaware, says she was audited and that some of her personal tax information was breached.

Former Nevada GOP Chairwoman Sue Lowden ran against Harry Reid in 2010. She lost in the Republican primary — and then found herself visited by the IRS.

Even as I was in the process of writing this, a friend forwarded me an email from a man in North Carolina who says that he and his cousin hosted an event for Mitt Romney, and soon thereafter found themselves scrutinized by the IRS.

All of this is anecdotal, of course. But it is beginning to add up, and at a certain point, men and women of good will in both parties must wake up and pay attention to these red flags.

It’s either an unbelievable string of coincidences or our government is, in fact, using the color of law to silence political enemies.

Two things lead me to suspect the latter.

First, Dr. Carson’s story rings true. The timing is so direct, the cause to investigate so suspicious.

Second, in a recent interview with Fox News, President Obama was asked about the allegations that the IRS targeted tea party groups for scrutiny regarding their applications for tax-exempt status.

The investigation is ongoing. From what is known publicly, there is zero doubt that conservative groups were targeted. The only question is how far up the political ladder it went. To compound things, the Justice Department assigned to the case an investigator who just happens to be a big fan of the president. She’s a maxed-out political contributor to President Obama’s campaign.

That in itself is unwise and outrageous. But the point at hand is that the investigation is not complete.

Yet the president tells Fox News that there is not a “smidgen” of evidence of wrongdoing.

How can he know that, unless he has some unholy control over the probe? And how then does he explain his own IRS supervisor taking the Fifth before a congressional hearing?

If there is no “smidgen” of wrongdoing, no one would need to exercise their right against self-incrimination, correct?

It doesn’t add up.

The IRS, of course, isn’t saying a thing about all this.

Let us not forget that these IRS suspicions do not come out of nowhere.

The inspector general issued a report in May that said the IRS “used inappropriate criteria that identified for review Tea Party and other organizations applying for tax-exempt status.” Yet the president says there’s not a “smidgen” of evidence. And a few Democrats in Congress want an investigation of the inspector general, not the IRS. Can we get any more like the book “1984”?

Carson likens his treatment to the Gestapo. And it may be.

But one thing is for certain: Something’s going on.

And if you don’t want to be cooked and eaten, you better say somethin’.

(PS: Dr. Carson wasn’t invited back to the National Prayer Breakfast this year.) (Using the IRS for political oppression.)

Yes, Michele Robinson Obama, freedom can be a “messy” thing if it is used to criticsim your husband’s administration. Very messy.

As one who spent over thirty years teaching political science at the college level, I can attest that “political correctness” was in vogue long before the phrase become part of the popular lexicon in the 1980s. Indeed, it was identified on June 8, 1978, by Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn in his now-famous commencement address at Harvard University, “A World Split Apart”:

Without any censorship in the West, fashionable trends of thought and ideas are fastidiously separated from those that are not fashionable, and the latter, without ever being forbidden have little chance of finding their way into periodicals or books or being heard in colleges. Your scholars are free in the legal sense, but they are hemmed in by the idols of the prevailing fad. There is no open violence, as in the East; however, a selection dictated by fashion and the need to accommodate mass standards frequently prevents the most independent-minded persons from contributing to public life and gives rise to dangerous herd instincts that block dangerous herd development.

In America, I have received letters from highly intelligent persons – maybe a teacher in a faraway small college who could do much for the renewal and salvation of his country, but the country cannot hear him because the media will not provide him with a forum. This gives birth to strong mass prejudices, to a blindness which is perilous in our dynamic era. (Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, A World Split Apart. June 8, 1978.)

Without any censorship in the West, fashionable trends of thought and ideas are fastidiously separated from those that are not fashionable, and the latter, without ever being forbidden have little chance of finding their way into periodicals or books or being heard in colleges. Your scholars are free in the legal sense, but they are hemmed in by the idols of the prevailing fad. There is no open violence, as in the East; however, a selection dictated by fashion and the need to accommodate mass standards frequently prevents the most independent-minded persons from contributing to public life and gives rise to dangerous herd instincts that block dangerous herd development.

In America, I have received letters from highly intelligent persons – maybe a teacher in a faraway small college who could do much for the renewal and salvation of his country, but the country cannot hear him because the media will not provide him with a forum. This gives birth to strong mass prejudices, to a blindness which is perilous in our dynamic era. (Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, A World Split Apart. June 8, 1978.)

Freedom?

It is an illusion.

Just go ask sixteen year-old Thirin Short, who was assaulted by a “professor” of “feminist studies” at the University of California at Santa Barbara on March 4, 2014, because Miss Short was carrying a sign that displayed in graphic terms the reality of the surgical execution of a preborn baby:

A feminist studies professor at a California state university is facing criminal charges after a videotaped run-in with a teenage pro-life demonstrator in which she snatched an anti-abortion sign and appeared to get physical with the girl.

University of California at Santa Barbara Associate Professor Mireille Miller-Young was charged with one misdemeanor count each of theft, battery and vandalism in the March 4 incident, Santa Barbara County District Attorney Joyce Dudley announced Friday. The charges came days after 16-year-old Thrin Short and her parents met with prosecutors.

Thrin told authorities what she told FoxNews.com earlier this month: She, her older sister Joan, 21, and some other pro-life activists were holding signs and demonstrating in a free speech zone on the bucolic campus March 4 when Miller-Young, who also teaches courses on pornography, went berserk.

The sisters say they distributed nearly 1,000 informational pamphlets during the event, which was organized by the Riverside-based nonprofit Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust. Things took an unexpected turn when, according to Short, Miller-Young approached the demonstrators and a group of students who had gathered.

“Before she grabbed the sign, she was mocking me and talking over me in front of the students, saying that she was twice as old as me and had three degrees, so they should listen to her and not me,” Thrin Short wrote in an email to FoxNews.com. “Then she started the chant with the students about ‘tear down the sign.’ When that died out, she grabbed the sign.”

With a graphic anti-abortion sign in hand, Miller-Young, whose faculty web page says she specializes in black cultural studies and pornography, then allegedly walked through two campus buildings as Short, her sister and two UCSB students followed closely behind. Short captured much of the incident, which she charged was a “deliberate” provocation by Miller-Young, on a cellphone video later posted to YouTube while her sister called campus police. Miller-Young pushed Short at least three times, the student alleges, as she tried to stop an elevator door from closing as the educator stood inside with her sign, Short said.

“I explained how I had been trying to keep the elevator door open with my foot, because I thought the police would be there any second, and that’s when she pushed and grabbed me,” Short’s email continued. “She then got off the elevator and tried to pull me away from the elevator doors so the others could get away with the sign.”

Short said she suffered minor injuries during the melee — scratches on both wrists — and said campus police are now reviewing the video.

Miller-Young did not immediately respond to a call seeking comment. In the report filed by campus police, she claimed she had a “moral right” to act in the manner she did.

Thrin’s father, William Short, said he would have expected an academic to engage in thoughtful debate with someone she disagreed with.

“She was free to engage in a rational dialogue with them,” Short said after learning the professor had been charged. “Instead, she chose to bully them, steal and destroy their property, and hit and scratch my daughter. After doing so, she said she thought she was setting a good example for her students.

“I think the goal of this prosecution should be to set a good example for her students, one that will not only deter her from repeating this conduct, but will also deter those who approve of her actions from imitating her appalling behavior,” he added.

It was unclear if Miller-Young faces any punishment from the school.

“The university is aware of the incident and it is being reviewed by the appropriate offices,” UCSB spokesman George Foulsham wrote to FoxNews.com earlier this month. “It is university policy not to discuss personnel matters.” (University of California-Santa Barbara feminist professor charged in confrontation with pro-life teen.)

The very people who accuse those of us who oppose various moral evils, including the chemical and surgical assassination of the innocent preborn in the sanctuaries of their mothers’ wombs and the sin of Sodom, are filled with raging hatred towards those who dare to singe their sensitive consciences about the fact that the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and Natural Law apply to them, who are, like the rest of us, but contingent beings who did not create themselves and whose bodies are destined one day for the corruption of the grave until the General Resurrection of the living and the dead on the Last Day.

I know this from first-hand experience.

Remember, feminists at Morningside College in Sioux City, Iowa, wanted my signed contract canceled after I had been hired in June of 1992, furious after they had discovered that I had run for lieutenant governor of New York on the Right to Life Party line six years before. I was a veritable “non-person” in the eyes of many of my fellow faculty members during the 1992-1993 year that I taught at Morningside College. That is, my existence was not even acknowledged when I walked on the campus to go from building to building Liberals are not exactly known to be very tolerant except of their own. They tend to give you the complete freedom to agree with them.

This is why the meeting that between the reigning antipope and the reigning American caesar that may have taken place by the time you read this commentary will be nothing about an unfettered festival of esteem between two men who are sanctimonious in their “love” of the poor while persecuting those who hold to the “ways of the past.”

Our true popes have taught us that there can be no authentic freedom for the individual or for the state that is not founded in the Kingship of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as it must be exercised by the Catholic Church, which is why all of the novel language of the conciliar “popes” about “international solidarity” and “religious liberty” aids and abets the spread of objective evils and encourages armed hostilities within and among nations.

Pope Leo XIII put it this way in Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888:

9. What has been said of the liberty of individuals is no less applicable to them when considered as bound together in civil society. For, what reason and the natural law do for individuals. that human law promulgated for their good, does for the citizens of States. Of the laws enacted by men, some are concerned with what is good or bad by its very nature; and they command men to follow after what is right and to shun what is wrong, adding at the same time a suitable sanction. But such laws by no means derive their origin from civil society, because, just as civil society did not create human nature, so neither can it be said to be the author of the good which befits human nature, or of the evil which is contrary to it. Laws come before men live together in society, and have their origin in the natural, and consequently in the eternal, law. The precepts, therefore, of the natural law, contained bodily in the laws of men, have not merely the force of human law, but they possess that higher and more august sanction which belongs to the law of nature and the eternal law. And within the sphere of this kind of laws the duty of the civil legislator is, mainly, to keep the community in obedience by the adoption of a common discipline and by putting restraint upon refractory and viciously inclined men, so that, deterred from evil, they may turn to what is good, or at any rate may avoid causing trouble and disturbance to the State. Now, there are other enactments of the civil authority, which do not follow directly, but somewhat remotely, from the natural law, and decide many points which the law of nature treats only in a general and indefinite way. For instance, though nature commands all to contribute to the public peace and prosperity, whatever belongs to the manner, and circumstances, and conditions under which such service is to be rendered must be determined by the wisdom of men and not by nature herself. It is in the constitution of these particular rules of life, suggested by reason and prudence, and put forth by competent authority, that human law, properly so called, consists, binding all citizens to work together for the attainment of the common end proposed to the community, and forbidding them to depart from this end, and, in so far as human law is in conformity with the dictates of nature, leading to what is good, and deterring from evil.

10. From this it is manifest that the eternal law of God is the sole standard and rule of human liberty, not only in each individual man, but also in the community and civil society which men constitute when united. Therefore, the true liberty of human society does not consist in every man doing what he pleases, for this would simply end in turmoil and confusion, and bring on the overthrow of the State; but rather in this, that through the injunctions of the civil law all may more easily conform to the prescriptions of the eternal law. Likewise, the liberty of those who are in authority does not consist in the power to lay unreasonable and capricious commands upon their subjects, which would equally be criminal and would lead to the ruin of the commonwealth; but the binding force of human laws is in this, that they are to be regarded as applications of the eternal law, and incapable of sanctioning anything which is not contained in the eternal law, as in the principle of all law. Thus, St. Augustine most wisely says: “I think that you can see, at the same time, that there is nothing just and lawful in that temporal law, unless what men have gathered from this eternal law.”[5] If, then, by anyone in authority, something be sanctioned out of conformity with the principles of right reason, and consequently hurtful to the commonwealth, such an enactment can have no binding force of law, as being no rule of justice, but certain to lead men away from that good which is the very end of civil society.

11. Therefore, the nature of human liberty, however it be considered, whether in individuals or in society, whether in those who command or in those who obey, supposes the necessity of obedience to some supreme and eternal law, which is no other than the authority of God, commanding good and forbidding evil. And, so far from this most just authority of God over men diminishing, or even destroying their liberty, it protects and perfects it, for the real perfection of all creatures is found in the prosecution and attainment of their respective ends; but the supreme end to which human liberty must aspire is God.

12. These precepts of the truest and highest teaching, made known to us by the light of reason itself, the Church, instructed by the example and doctrine of her divine Author, has ever propagated and asserted; for she has ever made them the measure of her office and of her teaching to the Christian nations. As to morals, the laws of the Gospel not only immeasurably surpass the wisdom of the heathen, but are an invitation and an introduction to a state of holiness unknown to the ancients; and, bringing man nearer to God, they make him at once the possessor of a more perfect liberty. Thus, the powerful influence of the Church has ever been manifested in the custody and protection of the civil and political liberty of the people. The enumeration of its merits in this respect does not belong to our present purpose. It is sufficient to recall the fact that slavery, that old reproach of the heathen nations, was mainly abolished by the beneficent efforts of the Church. The impartiality of law and the true brotherhood of man were first asserted by Jesus Christ; and His apostles re-echoed His voice when they declared that in future there was to be neither Jew, nor Gentile, nor barbarian, nor Scythian, but all were brothers in Christ. So powerful, so conspicuous, in this respect is the influence of the Church that experience abundantly testifies how savage customs are no longer possible in any land where she has once set her foot; but that gentleness speedily takes the place of cruelty, and the light of truth quickly dispels the darkness of barbarism. Nor has the Church been less lavish in the benefits she has conferred on civilized nations in every age, either by resisting the tyranny of the wicked, or by protecting the innocent and helpless from injury, or, finally, by using her influence in the support of any form of government which commended itself to the citizens at home, because of its justice, or was feared by their enemies without, because of its power. (Pope Leo XIII, Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888.)

The conciliar revolutionaries have celebrated Modernity and its errors while they have deconstructed and misrepresented Our Lady’s Fatima Message. Yet it is that the darkness of these times will end when a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter consecrates collegially with all of the world’s bishops to Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart.

Every Rosary we pray helps to plant the seeds for an end to the current chastisement, which we well deserve for our our sins, and for the conversion of the souls of those who are steeped in the contagion of error and hatred that destroying what is left of the so-called “civilized” West.

Conscious of our need to make reparation for our own many sins that have worsened both the state of the Church Militant on earth and the world-at-large as we offer up whatever it is we suffer in this time of chastisement to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits, may the following words of Saint Alphonsus de Liguori on the Particular Judgment help us always to put Last Things first and never to get bogged down in the “trees” of various crises that have proliferated because of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolution and institutionalized by Judeo-Masonry:

Worldlings now regard as fools the saints, who led mortified and humble lives; but then they shall confess their own folly, and say: “We fools esteemed their life madness, and their end without honor. Behold how they they are numbered among the children of God, and their lot is among the saints”–Wis., v. 4, 5. In this world, the rich and the noble are called happy; but true happiness consists in a life of sanctity. Rejoice, ye souls who live in tribulation; “your sorrow shall be turned into joy”–John, xvi. 20. In the valley of Josaphat you shall be seated on thrones of glory.

But the reprobate, like goats destined for the slaughter, shall be placed on the left, to await their last condemnation “Judici tempus”, says Saint Chrysostom, “misericordiam non recipit”. On the day of judgment, there is no hope of mercy for poor sinners. “Magna”, says St. Augustine, “jam est poena peccati metum et memoriam divini perdidisse judicii”–serm. xx, de Temp. The greatest punishment of sin in those who live in enmity with God, is to lose the fear and remembrance of the divine judgment. Continue, continue. says the Apostle, to live obstinately in sin; but in proportion to your obstinacy, you shall have accumulated for the day of judgment a treasure of the wrath of God. “But according to thy hardness and impenitent heart, thou treasurest  up to thyself wrath against the day of wrath”–Rom., ii. 5.

Then sinners will not be able to hide themselves; but, with insufferable pain, they shall be compelled to appear in judgment. “To lie hid”, says St. Anselm, “will be impossible–to appear will be intolerable.” The devils will perform their office of accusers, and as St. Augustine says, will say to the Judge: “Most just God, declare him to be mine, who was unwilling to be yours”. The witnesses against the wicked shall be, first, their own conscience–”Their conscience bearing witness to them”–Rom., ii. 15; secondly, the very walls of the house in which they sinned shall cry out against them–”The stone shall cry out of the wall”–Hab., ii. 11; thirdly, the Judge himself will say–”I am the judge and the witness, saith the Lord:–Jer., xxix. 23. Hence, according to St. Augustine, “He who is now the witness of your life, shall be the judge of your cause”–lib. x. de Chrod., c. ii. To Christians particularly he will say: “Wo to thee Corazain, wo to thee Bethsaida; for if in Tyre and Sidon had been wrought the miracles that have been wrought in you, they had long ago done penance in sackcloth and ashes”–Matt., xi. 21. Christians, he will say, if the graces which I have bestowed upon you had been given to the Turks or to the Pagans, they would have done penance for their sins; but you have ceased to sin only with your death. He shall then manifest to all men their most hidden crimes. “I will discover thy shame to thy face”–Nahum., iii. 5. He will expose to view all their secret impurities, injustices, and cruelties. “I will set all thy abominations against thee”–Ezech., vii. 3. Each of the damned shall carry his sins written on his forehead.

What excuses can save the wicked on that day? Ah! they can offer no excuses. “All iniquity shall stop her mouth”–Ps., cvi. 42. Their very sins shall close the mouth of the reprobate, so that they will have not courage to excuse themselves. They shall pronounce their own condemnation. (Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, First Sunday In Advent: On The General Judgment.)

This applies to us!

Our Lady is our only hope now and for all eternity.

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint John Damascene, pray for us.

WASHINGTON – Dr. Ben Carson, the brain surgeon turned popular political analyst, told WND Obama administration officials are “acting like the Gestapo” with the Justice Department indictment of Dinesh D’Souza coupled with the Internal Revenue Service’s political targeting of the administration’s critics.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/02/ben-carson-obama-officials-acting-like-gestapo/#fCyW7IvtkUhQCCcb.99
WASHINGTON – Dr. Ben Carson, the brain surgeon turned popular political analyst, told WND Obama administration officials are “acting like the Gestapo” with the Justice Department indictment of Dinesh D’Souza coupled with the Internal Revenue Service’s political targeting of the administration’s critics.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/02/ben-carson-obama-officials-acting-like-gestapo/#fCyW7IvtkUhQCCcb.99

“I believe we are dealing with an extremely corrupt administration,” he said.

Dr. Carson himself became the subject of an IRS audit after criticizing Barack Obama’s policies at the annual National Prayer Breakfast in Washington last year.

“I’ve always been someone who has been very careful about my finances and the way I take care of my business,” said Dr. Carson. “I’ve never undergone this kind of scrutiny before, but then it comes after the prayer breakfast. They’re harassing my family. They’re harassing my colleagues. And they’re not finding anything – so that just makes them dig a little deeper.”

In a telephone interview today, Dr. Carson, who is talked about as a potential new brand of non-politician presidential candidate himself in 2016, said he was also disturbed by Obama’s comments in an interview with Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly before the Super Bowl game last week.

See the film that put D’Souza in the feds’ cross-hairs: “2016: Obama’s America.”

“What he said was that his administration was not guilty of any wrongdoing with regard to the IRS and he blamed Fox News for reporting it,” Dr. Carson said. “I don’t think he would be happy unless Fox News were shut down and there was no more criticism of his actions.”

Dr. Carson is the latest high-profile public figures to express deep concern about what they see as, in the indictment of author-scholar-filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza, the administration’s misuse of the criminal justice system for political payback.

D’Souza was one of Obama’s most visible critics in the 2012 election year when he released the extremely popular documentary “2016: Obama’s America.”

D’Souza was indicted by a federal grand jury on two felony counts for violating campaign finance laws. He was charged with making false statements to the Federal Election Commission and illegally contributing $15,000 to a Senate candidate. He could face up to seven years in prison.

Cleta Mitchell, an attorney specializing in campaign finance issues, told WND, “The decision to prosecute – or not prosecute – is always a matter of discretion. It was the prosecutor’s decision – indeed DOJ’s decision – not to prosecute widespread conduit contributions to the John Edwards campaign in 2008. Contrast that with this prosecution, which involved $15,000 (not $20,000 as claimed).”

Asked whether she believes the indictment was politically motivated, Mitchell said, “Do I think this is politically motivated? I think if a Republican appointee had done this, the press corps would be going ballistic. Just consider how outraged they were when Bush asked for and received resignations of all U.S. attorney appointees at the start of his second term, something that is customary. Imagine if his appointee had gone after a George Soros friend. Imagine the outrage.”

Brent Bozell, founder and president of Media Research Center, cited former President Bill Clinton and Obama’s own history of accepting highly questionable campaign donations.

“Let’s assume Dinesh D’Souza is guilty, and I mean 100 percent guilty. What is he guilty of? Circumventing FEC dictates by directing [$15,000] to a Senate candidate of his choice. Big deal,” Bozell told WND. “First, in a multi-million Senate campaign, this is a fraction of a fraction. It ‘buys’ a can of soda pop, and that’s about it. Second, and more importantly, compare this ‘crime’ with Bill Clinton, who raised millions of dollars from questionable at best, and illegal at worst, sources, including felons and Chinese Communist generals. Compare it to Barack Obama, who raised millions upon millions from who-knows-who-or-where to this day. Nothing ever came of their fundraising abuses, abuses one thousandfold larger than anything attributed to D’Souza. And yet he was arrested and forced to post a $500,000 bond. It is astonishing. Given all the other abuses of power swirling around this administration, so many of them finding their origins in the ‘Justice’ Department, do I see deliberate persecution against conservatives? I am not conspiratorial by nature, but I will say unequivocally, you better believe it.”

Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., called the D’Souza indictment “100 percent” political.

“Of course it is,” she said. “It is payback from the DOJ. Plus, it sends a signal to anyone else for 2016 who may be thinking of producing a movie. It is up to the candidate to return the money. This should have been found when the FEC filing occurred. I don’t know the details, but this could cost Dinesh literally millions in legal defense fees, plus destroying his name and making him toxic to conservatives and Republicans. These are the goals of the political destruction machine at the DOJ.”

Likewise, Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, told WND, “Yes, I think it is political. It fits a pattern of abuse of power. As someone else said, President Obama is the president Nixon wanted to be.”
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/02/ben-carson-obama-officials-acting-like-gestapo/#fCyW7IvtkUhQCCcb.99