Comment on Canada Day and Judicial Murder (Not connected) by irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert   
Btw, I have a strong sense and value of the Judeo-Christian moral and biblical ethics! Perhaps this is one of the reasons I/we have moved to Utah? I do value the Mormon Judeo-Christian Ethics, Family, etc. But, I see the attack on classic Judeo-Christian sexual ethics even here! And having more than one wife, "ain't" really part of this either! ;) That is just an Old Testament practical hold-over. But none the less, it is today a "sexual" issue also! WE can never separate from our sexual self, but it MUST be placed within GOD's domain! Make no mistake, sexual sin is real with GOD! But today sex outside of God is rampant! (See, Heb. 13: 4 / Rev. 22: 14-15) *I will stop, I know this subject is NOT popular! In my life as a Anglican, priest-presbyter rector, chaplain, etc. I have seen sexual questions and problems almost daily!
          Comment on Canada Day and Judicial Murder (Not connected) by irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert   
Yes, I somewhat agree, Catholicism has had its place in the visible church, but the Roman Papacy has quite simply hated much biblical reform! I could be wrong, but I sense "Roman" Catholicism has seen its day to some real degree? And it is more however, the sexual revolution, now with gay unions & marriage just about everywhere, is a real sign of apostasy, in both culture and in the visible church. We all know that within the papacy that great elephant in the room of the Roman gay lobby is alive and well! But, it quite exits in the whole of the western culture especially now, and has basically become accepted. Yes, we are seeing an almost complete cultural and ethical change today! One in which - in my opinion - we will simply not survive, at least as our past Western & Judeo-Christian Culture!
          Masonic Mass Murder on the Somme 101 Years Ago   
Masonic Mass Murder on the Somme 101 Years Ago
 “Testament of Youth,” poignantly dramatizes lives shattered by Judeo Masonic First World War.
On July 1,1916, General Douglas Haig, a Freemason, began the Battle of the Somme which by November resulted in the death of one million white, "Christian"British patriots in their prime. Fathers, sons, husbands, brothers, lovers. War is a ruse by which the globalist satanic elite kills patriots under the guise of national duty.  
“When we started to fire, we just had to load and reload. They went down in their hundreds. We didn’t have to aim, we just fired into them. ” German machine gunner.
from July 12, 2015
by Henry Makow Ph.D.

About 10 million soldiers died in battle on both sides in World War One, one of the costliest wars in history.  The needless slaughter in trench warfare is usually portrayed by the Masonic-controlled media and education system as an unintended consequence. 

In fact, these wars are orchestrated by the Illuminati Jewish bankers and their Masonic minions to kill Christians in order to degrade Western civilization in advance of the Satanic NWO now clearly manifesting itself. (See, World War One- First Christian HolocaustRitual human sacrifice to their god Moloch may also be a factor.

All wars are designed to enrich and empower the bankers while destroying and demoralizing humanity. Warmongering “patriotism” is a ruse. The sooner gullible non-Satanists stop falling on a sword, the better.
I’m going to focus on the Battle of the Somme, one of the biggest battles of the first world war. My information is based on John Laffin’s British Butchers and Bunglers of World War One, (1988, p. 63ff.) 

(left, Douglas Haig, Elgin Lodge #91)

Both General Douglas Haig, Commander in Chief, Western Front,  and his principal co-planner Sir Henry Rawlinson were Freemasons. The Somme offensive (“The Big Push”) was intended to end the stalemate and win the war. The Allies had 700,000 men, a 7-1 numerical superiority. Haig and Rawlinson anticipated losing 500,000 men. 

The plan was simple: to bomb the Germans for five days and nights then walk to the enemy trench and kill the remaining soldiers or capture those who surrendered. 

However, after 5 days of bombing, the German trenches and their defences were barely scratched. The English neglected to reconnoitre or observe this from the air.  The Germans just had to shoot their machine guns, reload and shoot again. The same type of attack continued from the 1st of July until November 1916. Over a million men died; 58,000 on the first day.

On July 1 1916, 11 British divisions attacked on a 13-mile front. By 7.30 am the six German divisions finished breakfast, wiped their faces with their napkins, and carried their machine guns from comfortable deep cellars. They began spraying the attackers who were advancing in neat rows, “to maintain order.” 

A German machine gunner wrote, “We were surprised to see them walking, we had never seen that before. The officers went in front. One was carrying a walking stick…When we started to fire, we just had to load and reload. They went down in their hundreds. We didn’t have to aim, we just fired into them. “

A German officer reported his impression of the attack. “Whole sections appeared to fall. All along the line, Englishmen could be seen throwing their arms into the air and collapsing, never to move again. Badly wounded rolled about in agony, while badly wounded crawled into shell-holes for shelter. “

John Laffin: “Of the 110,000 men who attacked, 60,000 were killed or wounded on this one day. About 20,000 lay dead between the lines. Haig and Rawlinson were directly responsible for the assumption bombardment would cut barbed wire and render the Germans vulnerable.  The Germans lost an estimated 8000 men on July 1. 2000 were taken prisoner.” (64) 

A hospital station dealt with 10,000 casualties in the first 48 hours. A surgeon wrote:  ”Streams of ambulances a mile long waited to be unloaded. The whole area of the camp, a field of six acres, was completely covered with stretchers placed side-by-side, each with its suffering or dying man. We surgeons were hard at it in the operating theatre, a good hut holding four tables. Occasionally we made a brief look around to select from the thousands of patients those few we had time to save. It was terrible. (73) 

Haig’s chronicler Colonel Boraston wrote that the attack, “bore out the conclusions of the British High Command, and amply justified the tactical methods employed.” (No doubt these men were all Freemasons.) 

Laffin writes: “This is an outrageous statement. It is more accurate to call 1 July 1916, as H. L’Etang does, ‘probably the greatest disaster to British arms since Hastings….Certainly never before nor since has such wanton pointless carnage been seen…’ (70)

Laffin bemoans the  complete “absence of cleverness” in the military strategy. He emphasizes that, “high casualties were a basic rule of the game and simply had to be accepted.” (76)

Who knows how the world would be different if the cream of that generation of Christians had not been trampled into the mud of France in 1915-18?

There is simply no explanation for sending wave after wave of men to their slaughter other than that this was the deliberate goal. Any sane general would have stopped the attack as soon as it became apparent that the strategy was a failure. 

Western society is controlled by a satanic cult whose goal is to degrade and exploit humanity.
It’s time we stopped we being complicit in our own destruction. 

          ¡Salvad el ladino!   
La RAE promueve la creación de la primera academia del judeoespañol y busca el acuerdo entre diversos estudiosos e instituciones para saldar una deuda histórica con los sefardís
          When Religion Invades my Classroom... I Cry FOUL!   
Long time no Update! School has eaten my soul!

Here’s an e-mail I just had to send to my professor informing him I have requested a transfer out of his classroom (Because he’s stone freaking crazy!!!!)

COPY & PASTE -------------------->

I am sorry, but I must respectfully and categorically disagree with your responses to certain discussions this week, specifically, two statements that you made both to me and (NAME REMOVED) in discussion two. Now first, let me quantify my credentials for objection. I spent many years in Religious studies and hold certifications in both Business and Situational Ethics. I also spent many years teaching Ethics in a corporate environment. You have made statements to both me and (NAME REMOVED) that I absolutely object to. Please, let me point out clearly my disagreements with commentary to specific points in your responses:

It may be a profitable exrecise [sic] for students to compare the Code of Hammurabi with the Biblical code or the Laws of Moses as found in the Books of Leviticus chapters 18 through 20, Exodus chapters 21 and 22, and Deuteronomy chapter 19.

Now this statement is good, it is made as a historical reference. Pointing out framework that appears in both texts has historical context. Using both Hammurabi’s code and biblical examples of Hammurabi’s code being repeated thousands of years later in the Torah (Old Testament) and should have ended here as a sidebar. However you continued:

This exercise may help to enlighten someone to the idea that the the [sic] Hapiru People (Hebrews) were Semitic people who arose in the Mesopotamian River Valley between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers in Southern Iraq.  Thus, in the place where Abraham was born and lived, and where Hammurabi ruled with his Code of Laws, the God who appeared to Abraham long before he got to Palestine or Canaan, may have been the same God of Eternity who was teaching not only Abraham or Moses but also Hammurabi.

In any case, even if you do not imbibe this knowledge, you will not be able to deny the fact that Scripture in Genesis 2: 8-14 names the Euphrates River of Iraq as one of the boundaries of the Garden of Eden ( Gen. 2: 14).  Thus, Iraq was a part of the Garden of Eden

This ethically crossed the line from Historical to personal theological ideology and was presented as fact and not opinion. Where is your citation of historical corroboration that Yahweh (The Christian-Judeo God) spoke to Hammurabi? There is none, therefore, this is a personal belief and belongs in a theological class discussion and not a historical one. The same applies to the assertion that Genesis (or any Old or New Testament claims) can be historically proven true from other historical texts, which it cannot, such as your belief of the supposed location of the Garden of Eden. However much we believe or do not believe in the validity of the Bible as the Word it cannot be presented as supportive historical evidence. The Bible is a religious text, but even Christian apologists readily confirm and concede that no contemporary historians such as Titus Flavius Josephus (37 – c. 100) ever made mention of the events chronicled in the Bible. The one point that was purported to be in Josephus’ texts (“Testimonium Flavium”, Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities) was confirmed to be an interpolation of the historian Eusebius, who used Josephus' works extensively as a source for his own "Historia Ecclesiastica." In layman's terms he added supportive evidence into the Antiquities documents for the Catholic Church who routinely edited and forged documents and the interpolation in the Antiquities was admitted to be a forgery in the Twentieth Century by numerous religious scholars such as Louis Feldman and Zvi Baras.

This argument of my disagreement with your statement is simply a matter of belief without evidence, because there is no historical evidence. Faith is, by definition, belief without evidence.

Now onto your statement to me:

“You made an excellent list of comparative scriptures, which demonstrates a connection between Hammurabi's Code and the Laws of God that were also being articulated to other people in other places like Kung-Ftz-zu (Confucius).”

Again, instead of being presented as your opinion, you have presented this as fact by use of the words “…Laws of God that were also being articulated…” Not, “may have” or “in my opinion also”, but “WERE also”. You are a figure of authority in a classroom and you are making statements without citation and therefore are not generally challenged to provide historical corroboration that God did indeed speak to or influenced Confucius. You state personal belief as fact with impunity and I find that ethically irresponsible. I respect your beliefs, I share many. Nevertheless, I cannot condone statements like this outside a theological arena. Because you are a respected authority figure in this classroom and people will take your statements as fact because you have authority and are the Instructor and therefore, will not be asked to source your claims for historical corroboration.

This is a HISTORY class and all statements made must be cited and evidenced with historical support and accuracy. I would not make this disagreement if this were a theological class. I do have to make them ethically because this is a history class.

Now, I have said my piece and I should also inform you respectfully that I have requested my Academic Advisor for a transfer from this class to the same class with a new instructor. I cannot in good conscience continue when I fear you and I will fundamentally disagree on what is and is not ethical when it comes to personal ideology presented as historical evidence. I have a 4.0 GPA and I will not risk my grades when I feel there will be more severe conflict of opinion as this course progresses. I cannot be sure that my dissenting opinion will not reflect in my grades if your beliefs are “fact” to you and not so, necessarily, to me. I apologize if this offends you, but it is a genuine fear I have and cannot academically risk. I also chose to respond to you privately as to not affect your position of authority in the classroom.

Thank you for your time and understanding in this matter and I wish you please consider my words in the vein intended, an academic logical argument of opposition, and I hope you have a successful class.


Dana Armstrong

<——————— End Paste
Can you believe that boat load of crazy? I also filed a formal complaint with the school which may lead to disciplinary action on that professor. That is ridiculous. He has no business being a history teacher. I start the class all over again tomorrow with a new instructor. Thank goodness. Please keep fingers crossed that this one isn't looney tunes!

See? This is where all my fun time goes, SCHOOL and writing god damn letters like this one! O_o

          Response to a Jewish Nazi – Only a Zionist would be interested in proving that Jackie Walker is not Jewish   
When you live in or support a state, in this case the State of Israel which is based on racial supremacy, it is important to know who is and who is not a member of the master race.  Religion is there to define who is a member of the herrenvolk or the untermenschen, that is all.  
Jackie Walker
It is not surprising that in Israel, you can’t convert to Judaism unless you are a White European. The Jerusalem Post reported (1.4.16) ‘Palestinian Requests To Convert To Judaism Rejected Automatically':
To initiate an officially recognized conversion to Judaism in Israel, foreigners need to apply to the special cases panel of the Conversion Authority.

The threshold requirements” to be considered by the special cases panel, Rabbi Yitzhak Peretz, director of the Israeli government’s Conversion Authority, said,are that applicants be sincere and that they are not foreign workers; infiltrators; Palestinian or illegally in the country.” In 2014, he added, the special cases committee received 400 applications. “Half of the applicants were accepted, the rest were rejected as foreign workers, infiltrators, illegal stayers and Palestinians.”
The eugenecist origins of the Israeli state

I am not an expert on Jewish religious law but I do know that nowhere in the Talmud or the Torah is there any mention of the fact that Palestinians cannot convert to Judaism.  Nor is there any mention of ‘infiltrators’ or foreign workers or illegal immigrants.  These are political categories.  In other words, in a state based on race you cannot have the lower races or the Untermenschen joining the master race (herren volk).  This is perfectly understandable because in Israel being a Jew confers privileges that non-Jews do not have and therefore you cannot have people changing their race in order to get a house or an extra grant.

The Zionists, as part of their false ‘anti-Semitism’ campaign in the Labour Party have been targeting Jackie Walker.  You can read the details in my article The lynching of Jackie Walker and Jonathan Rosenhead’s Jackie Walker: a suspense mystery.  Being Black Jackie is and was an ideal target for these racists.  The only problem was that she was Jewish.  Hence we have the spectacle of these Zionists, in the best traditions of the Nazis, investigating Jackie’s ancestry in order to ‘prove’ that she isn’t Jewish.
Tony Greenstein

What is Jewish identity? A response to the general garbage written by Jewish racial purists and in particular to this blog by ‘Jew Know’

Jackie Walker speaking to the LRC meeting in Brighton September 2016
Recently there has been a(nother) spate of attacks of the ‘Jackie not a Jew’ type. Most have been downright racist, some hilarious, all show an obsessive concern for genealogy, an old trope of racists, in their attempt to police something which is in fact too complex to be policed; Jewish identity.

This most recent contribution by ‘Jew Know’ made me think (probably because I was on holiday), not just about my identity, but of Jewish identity, of racism, ethno-nationalism, racial purity and of those who put themselves up as guardians of identity whether they are white, black, Jewish or any other.

First thing ‘Jew Know’ - learn something about cultures that are not your own, otherwise you are simply an ignorant Jew Know-little.

You cannot trace the ancestry of Caribbean people using records (alone). Slave records are limited (for obvious reasons). Parentage was often not attributed, or falsely attributed. Records were ‘manipulated’, for example, especially when women had ‘relations’ or were raped by white men (the description ‘white’ in this instance includes Jews in the context of the racialised, colour ordered Caribbean). In any case, in a society where even long term, committed relationships between white and black would/could not be officially endorsed/recognised another ‘father’ was often named on official documents.

Neither does ‘Jew Know’ take account of the particular oppressions experienced by Jewish refugees on the run from Christian persecution, for example the ‘Conversos’ (Jews who were forced, often on pain of death, to convert) and the other Jews of the Caribbean who were forced to compromise in so many other ways simply to survive, or those who chose to take on a more fluid, syncretic idea of what made them Jewish.
A typical example of the racism that Jackie Walker has to put up with

Yes, Jew Know appears pretty ignorant of the positioning of Jews in the Caribbean, the flow of Caribbean ethno-religious cultures, the conversion to Judaism undertaken by enslaved African women who wanted/were coerced into ‘marrying’ Jewish men. There is no comment on this – and for good reason, because Jew Know doesn’t have a clue, you know.

The binary outlook reflected in Jew Know’s blog betrays deep-seated ignorance of the many variations of Jewishness that have historically always been part of Jewish history. But according to Jew Know everything to do with Jewish identity has the simplicity of any authoritarian ideology; you are either Jewish or not. There is no scope for variation, no intersectionality, no understanding of the potential conflicts, complex histories inherent in being black and Jewish, Arab and Jewish, Asian and Jewish. No, In Jew Know’s kosher world there is no room for complexity, no Jewish diversity, just a nice, easy, genetic (or is it religious) monoculture where bright eyed Jewish mothers give birth to Jewish children and people have access to the easy going charms of the local Rabbi to sort things out when things get …. mucky for Jew Know cannot tolerate a world of self-determination -  no - a higher authority must always decree.

But as we all know – none of that’s true – Jews, like every other people, come in all sorts.

Jew Know expresses religious and ethnic definition of identity and leaves no room for those with no religious commitment but with the necessary ancestry, those who have been adopted, those ‘in care’, those orphaned and separated from the community. Jew Know does not admit the perspective of Reformed Jews, those who advocate that Jewish identity can be inherited from a father as well as mother – no.

Then tell me Jew Know, in your little, little world, what about the people of Jewish heritage born to people who have not practiced any religion, maybe for generations? Ok – strike them out!

And is acceptance of a Jewish state part of being Jewish? When and who decided that one? And are the very many non or anti-Zionist Jews ‘self-haters and not real Jews in your book too? I think I know your awnser.

I have nothing to prove to you Jew Know. You shame the Jewish heritage you claim.

To deny my Jewish heritage is racist, deeply racist and you are a racist. It is as unacceptable to deny my Jewish heritage, the political and historical struggles that brought my parents together as it would be to deny my African or Caribbean ancestry.  Your attitudes reflect the deep-seated and shameful racism entrenched in sections of the Jewish community.

It reflects a shameful intolerance, a lack of inclusivity, empathy, an essentialism that harvests a paucity of the soul. As with all ethno-nationalists these attitudes undermine the high-ground they seek to attain; complexity is the life-blood of creativity, the life-blood of a modern, tolerant society, the only path of progress for humanity. Want help with these ideas? I suggest you contact Mocha Jews and find out more

Jew Know in fact you appear to Know Little of the multi-faceted history of the Jewish people, a people that in the last 2,000 years engagedand yes, MIXED at times, and very often with the rest of the world, were an essential part of much of it. These Jewish people fought to be a part, not set apart, from the countries they inhabited. …. Hurrah!

And then, in true racial purity tradition you dig up what you claim are my genealogical records and publish what you again claim is my family tree (sordid aren’t you, it will be my underwear drawer next I presume). By the way, I have know nothing of some of the people you refer to as my ancestors – and truth is neither do you – though I can take you back on one side to the 15th century and the pogroms of the Spain and Portugal and on the other to an African griot.

My DNA (which I have a detailed analysis of and have had for sometime) is the business of me and my family – and my friends who have seen it. As for the rest ……

Youhave caused distress to many people, Jewish and non Jewish. Your intolerance and racism is an embarrassment, not just to Jews but to all good people everywhere. You have caused outrage, in particular to members of the black and Caribbean community in Britain.

Jew Know – I wouldn’t ask you to prove your Jewishness, I would however welcome you proving your humanity but truth is on that one, I won’t be holding my breath.   .
Jackie Walker

Background to Zionist Racism
From its very beginning Zionism was, in the words of Max Nordau, Theodor Herzl’s Deputy, a matter of race not religion.  Nordau, was a follower of Lombroso the social Darwinist criminologist.  Nordau claimed that ‘The Jews possess a greater enterprising spirit and abilities than the average European, to say nothing about all those Asians or Africans.’ [Max Nordau to this People, New York 1941, p.73] In an interview with La Libre Parole, Edouard Drumont’s anti-Semitic daily, in 1903 Nordau explained that that ‘(Zionism) is not a question of religion but exclusively of race and there is noone with whom I am in greater agreement on this position than M Drumont.’ (Desmond Steward, Herzl, p. 322)
According to Moses Hess, the first modern, political Zionist, in his novel Rome & Jerusalem:Race struggle is primary; class struggle is secondary.” [Moses Hess, Rome & Jerusalem,Philosophical Library, New York, 1958, p.10. Cologne May 1862].
Nor was this fascination with race confined to a few Zionist intellectuals.  A pillar of the Zionist leadership, Arthur Ruppin, known as the Father of Land Settlement in the Yishuv (Jewish community in Palestine) and a member of the Zionist Executive described how, in his diary of August 11, he had travelled to Jenna on August 16, 1933:
to meet Prof. Hans F.K. Günther, the founder of National-Socialist race theory. The conversation lasted two hours. Günther was most congenial… and agreed with me that the Jews are not inferior but different, and that the Jewish Question has to be solved justly. [Amos Morris-Reich, Arthur Ruppin’s Concept of Race, Journal of Israel studies, volume 11, number 3 p.1. citing CZA A107/954]
Eitan Bloom writes of how
The idea of segregation was central to Ruppin’s eugenic planning… in order to produce a culture of their own, the Jews had to live… separated from any other culture… the Jew needed to be segregated in a space that would enable him to be among his like; only such “kinship of race” would encourage him to be healthy and creative.’[Eitan Bloom, Arthur Ruppin and the Production of the Modern Hebrew Culture, Ph. D. thesis, Tel Aviv University, December 2008].
Hans Günther, a member of the Nazi party from 1929, was Himmler’s ideological mentor and ‘the highest scientific authority concerning racial theory.’ [Bloom, p.405-6.].
In May 1930 Gunther was appointed Professor to the Chair of Racial Anthropology at Jena University, after the intervention of Wilhelm Frick, the first National Socialist state minister and later Nazi Minister of the Interior. Gunther praised Zionism ‘for recognizing the genuine racial consciousness (Volkstum) of the Jews.’ [Bloom, op. cit. p.408].Ruppin saw in Günther’s writings ‘a treasure chest of material.’ [Bloom, p. 409, Arthur Ruppin, Briefe, Tagebucher, Erinnerungen, (ed.) Schlomo Krolik, Leo Baeck Instituts, Königstein: Leo Baeck Instituts & Jüdischer Verlag Athenau, 1985.p.422]
In Germany the Nazis divided society into Aryan and non-Aryan.  How did they define the Jew?  Simple they went back to 1870 to see if someone’s grandparents were practising Jews.  Were they baptized?  So the definition of race, which is supposed to be biological in fact rested on religious practice which is why in the case of the ‘mixed race’ Mischlinge, those who had one or two Jewish grandparents, if the parents or the persons themselves or their children were practising Jews then that determined their racial belonging.
 Eugenics, the ‘science’ of selective breeding which Hitler based his ‘euthenasia’ programme on and which was the precursor of the Holocaust, was integral to the foundation of the Israeli medical service under Dr Joseph Meir. [Ha'aretz, 11.6.04., Do Not Have Children if They Won't Be Healthy!'].   Indeed it was integral to social policy at the beginning of the Israeli state.  Hence why thousands of Yemenite and Arab Jewish children were kidnapped from their parents, reported to be dead and secretly given to European Ashkenazi parents to bring up.
In Israel Black Jews are at the bottom of the pile and many Zionists don’t accept that you can be Black and Jewish.  Much like Donald Trump refused to accept that Barak Obama was Black and American, hence the Birther movement demanded to see his birth certificate.  In Israel the Black Ethiopian Jews are the most discriminated against of all and large parts of the Orthodox Rabbinate refused to accept they were Jewish and insisted that the men undergo another circumcision.

The Black Hebrews were a sect that emigrated from the USA and although a community of them live in the Negev near Beer Sheeva now, many of them previously were deported from Israel because they were not considered Jews.  This is in essence what lies behind the attempts of pathetic little racists like jonny dravitz to ‘prove’ that Jackie Walker isn’t Jewish. 

That is where Jackie Walker comes in.  She was the Black Jewish anti-Zionist who the Jewish Labour Movement and other Zionists tried to use as the traditional symbol of the Black devil in the Labour Party, the archetypal anti-Semite.

Te Israeli Law of Return, which allows me to ‘return’ to Israel even though I’ve never lived there but prevents a Palestinian returning even if they were born there (they are classified as ‘infiltrators’) is based on virtually the same racial criteria as the definition of a Jew under the Nuremburg Laws, viz. whether someone’s parents or grandparents are Jewish.  Indeed under the 1970 Amendment it goes wider and classifies as Jewish for the purpose of Return a spouse of a Jew.  Since Jackie’s father is Jewish then she is Jewish for the purpose of the Law of Return but in Israel itself the Orthodox Rabbinate control all personal affairs and the definition is much stricter. You are only Jewish if your mother is Jewish and Reform Judaism isn’t recognized.
There is though something pathetic in the attempt of the Jewish Labour Movement under Jeremy Newmark and petty little Judeo-Nazis like Jonny Kravitz trying to ‘prove’ that Jackie isn’t Jewish.  Except that they don’t even have the courage or honesty to say that she is a cushi or shvartze
Tony Greenstein

          Comment on Black Hair, Sharp Scissors And The Totality Of White Power In South Africa by Javari Nama   
Jews control South Africa, not Gentile whites/Europeans. Jewish supremacy has the world enslaved. White supremacy is just a way of hiding the Jew. Yes whites are complicit via Judeo-Christianity but it's all a global ponzi scheme with the central banks, interest and debt. White play along because Jews keep printing fiat currency out of thin air and filling their pockets with it. They do the same thing with people of color as well. We call them sellouts and house negroes.
          The 95 Theses, Re-Worked   
Well, after all, it IS the 500th of my Lut'ran friends. 

So a staunch Catholic wit decided to mash Pius X's Syllabus of Errors into only 95 sentences.  See??  He's clearly ecumenical, no??

So.  Anathema sit those who hold these heresies (inter alia, see the link):

17. Even if there is a divine revelation, it is imperfect and subject to a continual process of human understanding that corresponds to the advancement of human reason

20. Science can make progress only if the practitioner adopts an agnostic or atheist outlook concerning the nature of the material universe.

21. Christianity can be reconciled with science and material progress only to the extent it de-emphasizes dogma and adopts a spirit of reconciliation and tolerance of opposing views.

31. Human nature consists in however one defines it.

32. Human “values” can be changed according to the desires of human beings.

33. Even if human beings have an intrinsic nature, it is not in any case endowed by God.

48. There is no such thing as natural law; it is not a feature of the world and has nothing to do with the constitution of the human person.

49. There is no such thing as absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exception.

50. There is no objective moral truth; moral truths are whatever society says they are.

51. Moral truths are nothing other than the values inculcated in us by society so that humans can cooperate with each other.

56. Every culture has value and should be judged by its own standards, and to pass moral judgment on another culture is nothing other than imposition.

57. Adult humans everywhere are free to do whatever they want as long as their actions do not infringe upon what others want to do.

58. The purpose of society is to encourage and to protect the “right” of its members to be whatever they choose to be, however they define that.

59. It is the function of society alone, through the agency of the state, to define what infringes on the freedom of others.

75. The state is fully competent to determine the curriculum for the education of the youth.

76. Education deals with ideas, and since ideas contradict each other, the purpose of education is to understand the intrinsic nature of ideas, which means that a “liberal” education is one that frees us from any objective claim to truth.

77. “Relevance” is the primary criterion for an educational curriculum.

81. The purpose of government is to protect individual rights, which in turn are what the state says and enforces.

82. A citizen has the right to do whatever he or she wills provided that no one is directly hurt by the action.

83. Every human being has a “right” not merely to pursue happiness, but to be happy, and that it is the function of the state to guarantee and bring this right to its completion.

84. Either the state or society may determine the nature of what constitutes a “family”.

95. The moral and ethical teachings of the Judeo-Christian tradition are one thing and public policy is another, and in instances of conflict between the two, religious groups ought to accommodate the will of the majority as expressed in public policy.

There ya go!

          What Israel and Her Fifth Columnists are Really About   

A piercing peek behind the massive wall of hasbara--Jew propaganda--that permeates every level of American society.
Israel’s global news penetration (via hasbara) and other disinformation strategies are routine. Diabolical, but routine.

The Zionist state’s various tricks and manipulations are legendary and ruthless. They function as a backdoor attack on intellectual liberty as well as open political discourse. They are anti-democratic.

Thus, even ‘freedom of expression’ in America is under constant Israeli pressure and surveillance. No stone goes unturned.

This is why Holocaust ‘education’ is ubiquitous and, when possible, mandatory. If the stories fail, inject guilt. It’s an unscrupulous strategy that is working.

Meanwhile, Zionist myths rain down endlessly via American TV and throughout American mass media. Deep Zionist victimology has penetrated even US public schools. Hasbara is strategic. It is unrelenting. Ironically, it represents the tribal interest of a foreign power. Do Americans live under soft occupation? It increasingly looks that way.

This explains why Jewish suffering, Jewish innocence, and Jewish victimology are now compulsory subjects in American life–from schools to children’s TV, to higher education and adult cinema. ‘Dominate the message’.

On the other hand, Israel’s commitment to segregation between Jews and gentiles is quietly steadfast. ”Unshakable’. This head-scratching phenomena has been obscured by the Fake News meme involving America’s ‘Judeo-Christian’ heritage. Yet it is an absolute ruse. No such heritage exists. These are Zionist-lead political movements and Zionist headlines. They tread on the thin, manufactured ice. They do not exist organically.

Christ’s teachings were in fact a break from Judaism. Christ said as much. Christianity is an Open Admissions theology that stresses universal ethics that are non-racial. On the other hand, Israel is tribal, racial and exclusionary. This wouldn’t be so repulsive if not for Israel’s vociferous (and insincere) support for ‘equality’ and its pious contempt for ‘white nationalism’.

Jewish racism is commanded by God. And Israel’s ethical basis is polluted by nepotism, ‘chosenness’ and racial favoritism under God. It is a collection of myths and yarns that drip with tribal supremacism.

It’s worth remembering also that Jews in Israel have a distinct word for their version of ‘Apartheid’. It is ‘Hafrada’, which means ‘separation’ in Hebrew. Ever heard of it? Of course not! Hasbara operatives and their cousins in US news media make sure of that.

Sadly, we Americans live under soft occupation.

Significantly, few non-Jews have ever heard of ‘hafrada’. But everyone has heard of ‘Apartheid’.
Gee. How come?

We can thank the legions of young Israeli activists (and their elders) for this deliberate omission and assorted side shows. Control speech. Control thought.

Make no mistake about it: Israel is a racial supremacist state. Segregation is a core Zionist value. Jewish exceptionalism is their paramount goal. America is a useful, but temporary, ally. This is the nature of the ‘special relationship.’
Found at this story, "How Israel Manages Its Message" in the COMMENTS section by a Mark Green.

"You American GOYIM are getting too damn uppity, maybe you need another of these to get your mind right?"
"We Americans are therefore paying to be propagandized by people working for a foreign government who often pretend to be our fellow citizens but are not. What is occurring is essentially an intelligence operation directed against the United States, something that the CIA would have run back in the 1970s and 1980s. That Israel can continue to reap huge amounts of aid and political cover from Washington while it is actively working to make sure that Americans are poorly informed about the Middle East reveals more than anything the corruption of our political class and media, both of which appear to be ready to sell out for thirty shekels to anyone with the cash in hand. Time to drain the swamp, indeed."

Philip Giraldi, June 27, 2017

          On Judaised Americans   
My last posts on the Greco-Roman wars against the Jews (here and here) made me wonder… Just compare how pre-Christian Europeans handled the Jewish problem with how, in modern America, the red carpet was rolled out for the Jews since the 19th century in line with the dominant Judeo-Christian, liberal ideology. As Tom Sunic explained […]
          Re: Debunking Christianity: Christians Don't Believe Their Own Bible, The Key Question Revealed.   

Don the Hapless Camper

"Did you read my response to the question "what is God?" The essence of God is being, Spirit (as opposed to physical and material), eternal, transcendent, etc. Note the "Spirit" part. Because God is not physical he is not visible. "

Neither you nor anyone else gets to define their particular "god" into existence.
It doesn't work that way.
And if your "god" is invisible and you are created in the image of that "god"....why aren't you invisible?

"He has appeared to some such as Moses and Gideon, but that was a theophany."

Allegedly and allegedly.
And there is only third hand hearsay for either allegation.

"The same is true of hearing God. Though some have heard a sound, the primary way God speaks is not by way of a sound hearable by physical ears."

Rather convenient, no?
You do understand that our minds are full of recordings of conversations and sermons, do you not?
That means you can't be sure that inner voice is "god".


< "How can you be certain you weren't hallucinating?" >

"One way is that God speaks to us a message that is coherent with what he says to others."

Now that is funny, Don.
The way you tell that the voice you hear is the voice of "god" is if what is said agrees with your unique raft of tribal cultural baggage?
Seriously, dude?
Surely you understand that even among the Abrahamic religions that baggage is going to be vastly different.

"That means one person who has heard God (or read what he has spoken in the past) will not find that God speaks in contradiction to what God has spoken to others."

I know what you mean. It just seems like ridiculous nonsense to me.
How can you be sure previous pronouncements were from your "god"? How could you possibly guard against confirmation bias and group realities reinforcement?

"Paul even says that "two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said." (1 Corinthians 14:29) That means what someone reports as a message given by God should be judged by others who have heard God speak. If there is a contradiction, the message should not be considered as from God."

IOW, those who agree with Paul and his group reality are to be regarded as factual manifestations?
And you don't have any trouble with your logic here, Don?

"The same is true of larger message of God spoken through prophets or apostles. If I hear something contrary to that message, then it is not from God."

Do you know what the penalty was for false prophecy, Don?
What you have is just the winners in the prophecy lottery collected and edited.

"For example, when Paul hears in a dream a man of Macedonia saying come to Macedonia and help us, Paul can credit that message as from God because it does not conflict with the message to go into all the world and preach the gospel."

Paging Christopher Walken's SNL "Trivial Psychic".

"In practice, however, a person learns to recognize the voice of God just as we learn to recognize the voice of someone close to us whom we hear speak regularly."

I'm calling BS on that one, dude.
Again, how can you tell this inner voice from confirmation bias and wish fulfillment?
I don't think you can.

When I was very young I thought I was hearing the voice of "god". Then I realized it was my father's voice repeating religious dogma.
I think you experience something similar.

"That is the reason Abraham accepted God's command to go and sacrifice Isaac. Abraham had many years of hearing God's voice. This particular message seemed contrary to what he knew of God, but the voice was the same. As it turned out, God had a purpose in commanding Abraham to sacrifice his son; it was both to make the point that human sacrifice was NOT God's will and that God would provide an acceptable sacrifice in a ram."

You believe that particular crock is not metaphorical, Don?
What kind of a monster would demand such a pantomime.

"Ask almost any person who has heard God speak, and you'll find that they know when God speaks and when they are substituting their own ideas for God's."

I have no doubt they think that. All of them-of every religious persuasion-even those that disagree with pretty much everything you believe, Don.
Why are those that hear your "god" special in that regard?

< "This "god" says different things to different people, not only among disparate religions but even to members of your own tribe." >

"I am not sure how you would know."

Simply by comparing what they report and noting the contradictions.
How many times in the last 1,300 years have the apocalypse been predicted by people who claim your "god" spoke to them?
Give me a number.
Remember in your reading the conflict between Paul and the Jerusalem church regarding what "god" said about following the jewish laws (including circumcision)? Your little test would not have helped at all in that case nor in many others.

"There is no doubt that many claim to hear God. But that does not make it so. "

Now we're getting somewhere......
How do you personally know which group you are in?
If they can be deceived in this manner, why can't you?

"Test it by the proven message that God has spoken. "

You don't have any "proven" messages. You only have allegations and Texas Marksman "prophecies"{.


Again, that "test" is an open invitation to indulge in confirmation bias and wish fulfillment delusions and little more.
Agreement with your particular tribe's cultural baggage is not an adequate test of veracity.

"Use that as your true north, and I don't think you'll find that the divergent messages pass the test."

That is babble, Don.
Most of the people on the planet don't accept your judeo/islamic/ christian writings as being from any "god" or even supernatural in origin.

You should ask better of yourself and for yourself if you're going to base your entire life on something so flimsy.

          The Mischief Of Pastors - Femi Aribisala   

By Femi Aribisala

Sacrifice is an ancient human expression of worshiping deities. It existed among Jews long before the giving of the Law. It was not instituted by God but by pagan man. However, according to Jesus, what is of man cannot be of God. (Matthew 21:25). Sacrifice has passed away. But what God prescribes does not pass away. (Matthew 24; 35).

As a matter of fact, God denies initiating the elaborate sacrificial system established by Moses: “Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel: Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat meat. For I did not speak to your fathers, or command them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices.’” (Jeremiah 7:21-22).

Law of Sacrifices

But why would Moses institute what God did not sanction? He did so for the same reason he established the protocols of divorce, which Jesus says is not of God: “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.” (Matthew 19:8).

Moses did not believe the Israelites could obey a divine ordinance that proscribed divorce. Therefore, he decided to limit the tendency to divorce by instituting a series of procedures that must be undertaken before divorces could be granted.

Similarly, Moses was convinced the Israelites would not accept the worship of God without sacrifices. They were familiar with the worship of pagan deities who were always approached through sacrifices. Therefore, Moses concluded the best he could do was to carefully circumscribe and limit the sacrificial practice.

According to the Law of Moses, sacrifices were no longer permissible under every green tree but only in the temple and at prescribed times. They could only be performed by Levites and for specific purposes. Only animals and not human beings could be sacrificed. By these limitations, it was expected that the Israelites would be easily differentiated from their idolatrous neighbours, and might eventually be weaned away from sacrificial rites altogether.

Den of Robbers

However, Moses’ regulation of sacrifices was soon subject to abuse. The priesthood passed a law stating that only Jewish money was acceptable for the procurement of animals used for temple sacrifices. Thereby, they set up their own exclusive foreign-exchange bureaus at the entrance of the temple where foreign money had to be exchanged for the so-called “sanctified” currency of Jerusalem for a lucrative fee.

They also controlled the market for the sacrificial animals used in the temple, including the oxen, sheep and doves, and sold them at exorbitant prices to pilgrims. In effect, the sacrificial system soon became very good commercial business for the priests, who literally made a killing out of it. This is why Jesus railed at them: “Is it not written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations?’ But you have made it ‘a den of robbers.’” (Mark 11:17).

Nevertheless, Moses’ regulation, and not the crucifixion of Jesus, as most Christians mistakenly believe, eventually led to the destruction of the sacrificial system. Moses stipulated that sacrifices could only be offered in the temple. (Deuteronomy 12:13-14). But in AD 70, the Romans attacked Jerusalem and completely destroyed the temple. With the temple gone, sacrifices could no longer be offered.

Divine providence also ensured that the temple could not be rebuilt and sacrifices resumed because two Islamic structures, the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock are now standing where the Jerusalem Temple used to be. Any attempt to damage these Islamic sites, or to rebuild Jewish structures on the Temple Mount, would presage a world war pitching Muslims against Judeo-Christians.

419 Pastors

You might have thought that with the destruction of the temple, the sacrificial system would be dead and buried. Indeed, animal sacrifices ceased among Jews. But the sacrificial system is so profitable that Christian pastors today have simply resurrected it under a different guise.

They now insist that in place of the animals and crops sacrificed in the past, Christians now need to sacrifice their money. This ignores Jesus’ commandment: “Go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” (Matthew 9:13). Thus, an ungodly sacrificial system destroyed by divine providence has been resurrected by covetous pastors, intent on extorting money from naïve and gullible Christians.

Jesus told a “rich young ruler” to go and sell all he has, give the proceeds to the poor and then come and follow him. Pastors now have a modern “new and improved” Christian version. They tell men to go and sell all they have, bring the proceeds to their churches and then come and follow them.

Jesus says: “If you love me, keep my commandments.” (John 14:15). But pastors have replaced this with: “If you love God, give him some money.” “If you love God, give him a tithe of your income.” But God is spirit, so how can we possibly give him carnal things? What is he to do with them?

God himself pours scorn on the entire crooked sacrificial system: “I have no need of a bull from your stall or of goats from your pens, for every animal of the forest is mine, and the cattle on a thousand hills. I know every bird in the mountains, and the creatures of the field are mine. If I were hungry I would not tell you, for the world is mine, and all that is in it. Do I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the blood of goats?” (Psalm 50:9-13).

David’s inspired understanding should be instructive. He says to God: “You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, you will not despise.” (Psalm 51:16-17).

Lovers of Money

So why do pastors still insist we give money to God? They do so because they are thieves and robbers. Jesus says money has nothing to do with God but with Caesar or, in today’s economy, with the government: “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” (Matthew 22:21). Under the law, God did not even accept money as tithe.

Nevertheless, pastors have found an ungodly way out of this cul-de-sac. Since money cannot be given to God, they insist it should be given to pastors who are said to be God’s chief representatives here on earth.

This is deceitful. Contrary to what Christians have been led to believe, the pastor, the bishop, or the priest is not God’s representatives here on earth. God does not take anything done to them as something done to him. He only takes those things we do for the poor, the widows and the orphans personally. (Proverbs 19:17).

Jesus says: “Inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.” (Matthew 25:40). Today’s pastor is not the “least” of the kingdom brothers of Jesus, but the most exalted. Therefore, when you give to your pastor you are not honouring God; you are honouring man.
          How Margaret Thatcher's Family Sheltered An Austrian Jew During the Holocaust    
I miss Maggie, Ronald Reagan and the good Pope (the current one is a socialist kook).

This is a magnificent story, do read the whole thing. 

Margaret Thatcher was indeed a Judeophile.

          Time for 'Jubilee' on criminal-justice debt   
Ten years ago today, as part of coverage from a conference on restorative justice, Grits published a blog post suggesting that modern policymakers embrace the biblical concept of "Jubilee" - the elimination of debts, not to mention the freeing of slaves and prisoners, mandated in the Old Testament once every 50 years. In the New Testament, Christ and His apostles embraced and promoted the concept.

Part of the bible verse which first introduced the Jubilee tradition is actually inscribed on the Liberty Bell in Philadelphia:
And he shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family (Leviticus 25.10, KJV)
Grits does not imagine any instance where a modern, 21st century government would embrace Isaiah's Jubilee dictate of "opening of the prison to them that are bound," even if it may be warranted for all but the most dangerous offenders. But the idea of debt forgiveness within the justice system is certainly a valid one, starting with criminal justice debt.

Unpaid tickets, fines, Driver Responsibility surcharges - these can linger for years and cause immense social and economic harm. For example, recently the Travis County Attorney made headlines by trying to collect old debt from thirty years ago. Is there really a strong argument that such debt shouldn't periodically be Jubilee'd away?

          The Dr. Julie Show ~ All Things Connected: Spirituality for the 21st Century with Matthew Fox   
GuestThe revolutionary Creation Spirituality movement based in ancient Judeo-Christian tradition, supported by leading-edge science, bearing witness for social, environmental, and gender justice, and voiced most powerfully for this generation by spiritual theologian Matthew Fox is flourishing in the creative and prophetic spirit of our times
          La Entomología Médica. Una mirada al pasado.2   

Una mirada al pasado

Historia de la Entomología Médica

C.E. Machado-Allison

La historia de la entomología médica puede ser relatada de modos muy distintos. El enfoque clásico ha sido el seguimiento formal de las referencias, directas o indirectas, de las observaciones y descubrimientos sobre el papel de los insectos y otros artrópodos en la transmisión de enfermedades, o en la generación de molestias físicas al hombre. Así, Herms (1934) en su clásico "Medical Entomology" cuya primera edición apareció en 1915, ubica en el Antiguo Testamento, versión King James, la primera referencia escrita sobre los insectos como un factor de perturbación para los seres humanos. Sin embargo, casi que con certeza, podemos asegurar que existe una historia no escrita, transmitida en forma oral, en muchas culturas. Obviamente nuestra visión no puede ser otra que la derivada de la tradición judeo-cristiana y la llamada cultura occidental.

En el "Papiro Ebers", unos 1500 años antes de Cristo, existe una descripción razonable de algo que parece ser paludismo y luego Hipócrates, aproximadamente 400 a.C. describe con lujo de detalles esta enfermedad. Entonces las fuentes son duales, por una parte los artrópodos per se, por la otra el conocimiento de las enfermedades cuya transmisión por parte de los insectos sería demostrada siglos después. Una evidencia de ese conocimiento, usualmente no registrado, fue consignado por el famoso explorador inglés Livingstone (1813-1873) quien relató que el Jefe Sebituane de los Makololo le señaló:

"Tu ganado ha sido picado por la mosca tsé-tsé y seguramente morirá".

Obviamente este jefe era poseedor de un conocimiento tradicional que apuntaba a la existencia de un elemento causal, no mágico, de la enfermedad del sueño y además que las moscas del género Glossina jugaban un importante papel en la misma. Es posible especular, en este y otros casos, que el conocimiento tradicional orientó las pesquisas posteriores.

En ese mismo contexto no son raras las referencias al uso de repelentes y otras formas de evitar la agresión de insectos hematófagos, mosquitos en particular. Por ejemplo Gumilla (1791) relata que hacia 1716 encuentra que los indígenas de las riberas del Orinoco utilizaban una pasta elaborada a partir de Bixa orellana (ajiote, onoto) como forma de protección, así como los indígenas de América del Norte empleaban el aceite de pescado como repelente y muy probablemente las vestimentas blancas y largas de los árabes hayan jugado un papel similar al de los mosquiteros en los oasis donde pululaban hordas de mosquitos (Machado-Allison, 1987).

Gumilla describe, quizás con exageración, la relación de los indígenas con los insectos vulnerantes:

"Lo mismo es dexar el golfo y entrar por el Orinoco, ó por cualquier otro rio de tierra caliente, para entrar en una fiera batalla con varias clases ó especies de mosquitos, que todos tiran a chupar la sangre, y algunos mucho mas. Durante el día, pueblan el ayre y se llena la cara, las manos y quanto hay al descubierto, de mosquitos grandes que llaman zancudos…a mas de estos, persiguen al hombre otros exercitos de mosquitos llamados jejenes…otros del tamaño de granos de pólvora fina, que llaman rodadores. Estas tres especies de mosquitos, a mas de la sangre que hurtan, dexan una comezón rabiosa. Pero la cuarta plaga…"

y sigue Gumilla describiendo un pequeño infierno tropical donde a los mosquitos, suma tábanos, niguas, garrapatas, moscas responsables por miasis o gusaneras e incluso describe a los "pitos" o chipos como son conocidos los triatominos en Venezuela.

Casi en el terreno de lo anecdótico tenemos algunas referencias adicionales sobre los insectos, enfermedades y molestias causadas. Núñéz de Cáceres en 1823 se refiere a las pulgas de Caracas entre otras situaciones desagradables de la ciudad. Humboldt en su famoso viaje a Venezuela (1799) toma muestras de pulgas y niguas que serán luego descritas en Europa. Una interesante recopilación de este período fue realizada por Tello (1968).

Existe otro enfoque, menos explorado, y el mismo se refiere al impacto que estas enfermedades han tenido sobre la historia universal. En un trabajo previo (Machado-Allison, 1987) recopilamos algunos eventos importantes, tanto que cambiaron el curso de la historia y donde los mosquitos jugaron un papel protagónico. Entre ellos vale la pena recordar la muerte de Alejandro Magno a causa del paludismo y la desintegración de su breve imperio, las consecuencias de la muerte de Cromwell en 1658 en plena revolución inglesa. No menos interesante es el proceso de independencia de Haití donde frente a la sublevación de los esclavos, Inglaterra decide aprovechar la situación y aumentar su presencia en el Caribe enviando a Whitloke con una tropa de aproximadamente 80.000 hombres. La fiebre amarilla los derrota y el proceso independentista avanza con Toussant L' Overture y cuando Napoleón decide reconquistar Haití envía al General Leclerc quien es derrotado por los mosquitos y la guerrilla al mando de Dessalines.

Otros ejemplos de la importancia de las enfermedades transmitidas por insectos han sido recogidas en los textos de historia. Apenas como ejemplo Perícles es una de las víctimas de la epidemia de peste de 429 a.C., así como Claudio en la del 269 d.C. La peste recorrió Asia y Europa varias veces determinando cambios históricos importantes. El imperio de Justiniano (527-565 d.C.) casi colapsa por la peste y se supone que Atila, en el año 452 después de conquistar Roma se retira debido a la malaria. San Beda, uno de los cronistas mas interesantes del medioevo, cita epidemias de peste en Inglaterra en los años 664,672, 678 y 683. Las cruzadas nacen después de una feroz epidemia en 1094 acompañada de una profunda desorganización social en Europa y concluyen con la muerte de Luis IX en Túnez debido a la malaria. El Decamerón es escrito durante la epidemia conocida como la "muerte negra" que recorrió Asia y Europa determinando la muerte de un tercio de la población entre 1347 y 1370. Algunos registros británicos indican que en algunas ciudades fallecieron dos de cada tres habitantes.

El tifus, transmitido por los piojos, es probablemente una vieja enfermedad que se hace muy evidente al aumentar la densidad de la población y el contacto físico entre las personas en condiciones de hacinamiento y pobreza. En 1528 el tifus barre con el ejército francés en Nápoles y en la guerra de 30 años, en particular hacia 1648, el tifus causa muchas más víctimas que las batallas. Napoleón es derrotado en Rusia en 1812 por una combinación de piojos, guerrillas y frío. Sus tropas traen de vuelta una epidemia de tifus que afecta buena parte de Europa hasta 1816. El tifus y la fiebre de las trincheras fueron importantes durante la primera guerra mundial (1914-1918) y sin duda la malaria fue un enemigo común de los japoneses y los aliados en Burma, el sudeste asiático, Filipinas y algunas islas del Pacífico durante la segunda (1938-1945).

No menos importante es la historia del Canal de Panamá y el nacimiento de esta nación, así como los resultados de la guerra hispano-americana que marca la independencia de Cuba. En ambos casos la fiebre amarilla y Aedes aegypti constituyen factores importantes en la geopolítica de la época. Lesseps con el apoyo financiero y político de Francia inicia las obras del canal de Panamá en 1880. Tras ocho años de trabajos y miles de muertos por fiebre amarilla, el proyecto es abandonado. Buneau-Varilla le vende la idea a los Estados Unidos. Luego Panamá se separa de Colombia y en 1905 Gorgas logra sanear el área y el proyecto concluye con éxito. El éxito de Gorgas tuvo como antecedente inmediato la secuencia de investigaciones que iniciadas por Carlos Finlay (1833-1915), culminan en la demostración fehaciente del papel de Aedes aegypti en la transmisión de la fiebre amarilla por el equipo formado por Reed, Lazear, Agramonte y Carroll en La Habana. La creación de la "Comisión para el Estudio de la Fiebre Amarilla" y el financiamiento de los Estados Unidos a la misma fue determinada por las epidemias registradas entre 1895 y 1900 que determinaron mas bajas entre los soldados españoles y norteamericanos que las balas (Machado-Allison, 1987).

Las enfermedades transmitidas por artrópodos fueron una de las grandes barreras a la expansión colonial europea en Africa y Asia. El elevado número de víctimas de la malaria, la enfermedad del sueño, filariasis, peste bubónica y otras enfermedades, motivó, particularmente en Inglaterra, el desarrollo de la medicina tropical. Este interés por el trópico se traduce en inversiones tanto en capital humano como en expediciones y estudios efectuados durante el período victoriano, animados a su vez por la revolución industrial. Esto determina que Africa, India y el sur de Asia fueran el escenario de los primeros descubrimientos importantes en el campo de la entomología médica. La revolución industrial llega tarde a la península ibérica donde entre la inquisición y otros factores bien estudiados, el desarrollo de la ciencia y la tecnología estuvo a la zaga de los restantes países de Europa.

Primero el desarrollo de un servicio de medicina colonial y luego la creación de escuelas de medicina tropical junto al financiamiento de viajes de exploración o comisiones para investigar ciertas enfermedades, fueron acciones políticas explícitas desde mediados del siglo XIX hasta la gradual disolución del Imperio Británico. De allí el importante papel que jugaron los investigadores ingleses, Manson, Ross, Christophers, Bruce, Leishman y otros, que la historia identifica como los padres de la entomología médica.

Es casi inexistente la información en el mundo occidental, entre Hipócrates y Mercurialis, sobre el papel de los insectos en la transmisión de las enfermedades. Entre las ideas mágicas y la teoría miasmática transcurre un prolongado lapso. La teoría miasmática toma cuerpo en los siglos XVII y XIX. La misma estuvo animada por una lógica muy razonable para aquellos tiempos: la incidencia de muchas enfermedades era elevada en sitios considerados como "insalubres", tal como áreas con abundantes descargas de aguas servidas, o zonas de periódica inundación. Se postulaba, en consecuencia, que algo producido en esas "miasmas" era conducido por el aire y de ese modo se adquirían las enfermedades. La teoría mismática es formalmente postulada en Grecia y deriva de las escuelas de Cos y Cnidos, de los cuales Hipócrates y Galeno son los principales exponentes. Al origen miasmático, los griegos sumaron la predisposición individual asociada a los hábitos personales y una tercera causa, que es el contagio (Le Rich & Milner, 1971). Es interesante observar que hasta los experimentos de Pasteur, es decir por más de 2.000 años, estas tres ideas dominaron la historia de la medicina.

El contagio, antigua hipótesis para cierto número de enfermedades, tiene su propia historia. Así como los griegos apuntaron hacia las infestaciones con piojos, la peste y algunas infecciones oculares, luego entre los árabes destaca Rhazes o Ráses (850-923) que incluye la viruela y otras enfermedades eruptivas. Mas elaboradas son las apreciaciones de Gui de Chauliac en Avignon sobre la peste y sus distintas manifestaciones (neumónica y bubónica) y Fracastorio de Verona a comienzos del siglo XVI, quien sostenía que cada enfermedad era causada por un agente distinto, concebido como un elemento químico y además planteaba tres formas de abordar el tratamiento: destrucción de esos factores o "gérmenes" mediante calor o frío; su eliminación del cuerpo humano y su neutralización empleando medicinas.

La obra de Fracastorio de acuerdo a Le Rich y Milner es realmente monumental en la comprensión de las enfermedades y es además un punto de partida muy importante en el desarrollo de la epidemiología. Las contribuciones de Fracastorio son complementadas por Sydenham (1624-1689) que es considerado como el padre de la epidemiología por sus agudas observaciones sobre disentería, gota, malaria, viruela, sarampión, sífilis y tuberculosis. Sin embargo aún con estos avances, siguió dominando la teoría miasmática hasta que Pasteur y los héroes de éste relato, los entomólogos demostraron el papel de diversos microorganismos en muchas enfermedades y sus formas de transmisión.

El centro neurálgico del judaísmo actual: La Logia B'NAÏ B'RITH:de la cual se sabe bien poco, solo judíos la integran. Del libro del mismo autor, sobre el Gobierno Mundial: La Judeo-masonería, son inseparables: Un discurso de Monseñor Jouin en December, 1930 [ingles]
          Ben Shapiro condena a las mujeres que celebran sus abortos   

(LifeNews/InfoCatólica) Ben Shapiro es un político conservador norteamericano conocido por sus respuestas rápidas, directas y lógicas a los argumentos de la izquierda política. Se ha convertido en uno de los oradores más populares de los campus universitarios, y es presentador del programa «The Ben Shapiro Show», el podcast conservador de Estados Unidos, que dirige el Daily Wire y es autor de varios libros. Se ha enfrentado a numerosas audiencias hostiles en los campus universitarios de todo el país.

El pasado jueves abogó a favor de la vida en la Convención Nacional de Derecho a la Vida en Milwaukee, Wisconsin, y dio rápidas respuestas a los principales argumentos pro-aborto.

«Atrás quedaron los días en que la izquierda solía hablar de abortos seguros, legales y pocos en cantidad», dijo Shapiro. Ahora, tratan el aborto como algo virtuoso y una muestra de fortaleza».

Sobre el «derecho» de asesinar a un bebe no nacido

Citó la campaña de «Shout Your Abortion» y un poema de Leyla Josephine acerca de su aborto como una adolescente en el que se lee en una sección de él: «Pero yo habría apoyado su derecho a elegir. ... habría muerto por él, justo como murió por el mío. Lo siento, pero llegaste en el momento equivocado. Yo no estoy avergonzada. Yo no estoy avergonzada. Yo no estoy avergonzada».

Él respondió: «Para la izquierda, ella es un heroína, una heroína por ejercer su derecho a asesinar a su hijo en su propio vientre».

Parados del lado equivocado

Shapiro exhortó a la gente a hablar con valentía en contra el aborto. Llamó a la destrucción legalizada de la vida humana «la mayor división moral que hemos visto desde la Segunda Guerra Mundial» y lamentablemente «demasiadas personas están paradas en el lado equivocado».

¿No es un ser humano?

Uno de los argumentos más comunes en favor del aborto es que «el bebé no nacido no es un humano. Algunas personas piensan en el feto como si fuese solo un pólipo o un apéndice del cuerpo de la mujer».

Biológicamente, sin embargo, el bebé no nacido es un ser humano desde el momento de la concepción. Shapiro señaló que a la izquierda política le gusta llamarse el partido de la ciencia y celebrar si un organismo de una sola célula es encontrado en Marte, pero se niegan a aceptar la ciencia cuando le dice que un niño en el útero es un ser humano vivo. Señaló por ejemplo que ya se puede escuchar el latido del corazón a partir de los 18 días de embarazo y desde el primer momento de la concepción un único e irrepetible ADN ya está presente.

Cuando los hechos biológicos no son suficientes

Pero a veces incluso los hechos biológicos no satisfacen a algunos defensores del aborto. Shapiro dijo que algunos argumentarán que si un bebé no nacido no puede sobrevivir sin la madre, no es una persona y no tiene derechos. En respuesta, Shapiro señaló que sus dos hijos, ambos menores de 4 años, dependen de él y su esposa; No podían sobrevivir por sí solos tampoco, y no por eso no tienen derechos.

Dijo que los argumentos de viabilidad, ya sea acerca de la capacidad de un niño para sobrevivir por sí mismo, la función cerebral o la racionalidad, no justifican el aborto porque cada uno también podría aplicarse a las personas fuera del útero.


Otro argumento que abordó es la responsabilidad. Algunos argumentan que las mujeres tienen abortos por un sentido de responsabilidad porque no pueden criar a un niño adecuadamente. Esto también es un mal argumento para asesinar a los bebés no nacidos, dijo Shapiro.

«Hay muchos niños con malos padres, y no creo que la solución sea matar a los niños», dijo. Más tarde, continuó, «... si quieres hablar de responsabilidad en el embarazo, la responsabilidad sería tener relaciones sexuales dentro del matrimonio».

¿Empoderar a la mujer?

Algunos argumentan que el aborto hace la vida mejor para las mujeres o que lo necesitan para tener éxito. Shapiro dijo que este argumento supuestamente trata de empoderar a las mujeres, pero realmente debería ser un insulto para ellas: «Es verdad que el embarazo implica trabajo duro, pero también es verdad que es una especide de “superpoder”, porque es algo que solo las mujeres pueden hacer».

«Pero en lugar de tratar el embarazo como un poder que solo poseen las mujeres, algo que debe celebrarse y apreciarse, nuestra sociedad pro-aborto dice que es algo que debe ser descartado», continuó.

Shapiro continuó su exposición a la multitud pro-vida a través de una variedad de argumentos sobre el aborto, y basó sus respuestas en la ciencia y la lógica sin recurrir a argumentos religiosos.

Dijo que los activistas del aborto están demasiado dispuestos a rechazar cualquier argumento basado en motivos religiosos. Sin embargo, también dijo que muchos avances científicos han surgido como resultado de las enseñanzas judeo-cristianas sobre el mundo.

Dios hará justicia a los bebes no nacidos

Dijo que el aborto es un «gran mal» en la sociedad actual y está vinculado al paganismo. Dijo también que cree que Dios hará justicia para los bebés no nacidos, e instó a los defensores pro-vida a seguir luchando por la justicia.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

          Comment on LCMS Launches Lutheran Center for Religious Liberty, Names First Director by Linda Blaha   
Thank heaven the LCMS is taking a stand! We are blessed by the Lord to live in a democratic republic where our voices can still be heard, thanks to the First Amendment. The West, having rejected the Judeo Christian worldview on which we were founded, is currently on a downward trajectory, having embraced secularism and post Christian, moral relativism, and the signs of decay are increasingly obvious. As individual, Christian citizens, it is our duty to speak out and make our voices heard. We must stand together or hang separately.
          from last week…
          La iglesia católica cómplice del genocidio franquista en la guerra civil

La iglesia católica cómplice del genocidio franquista en la guerra civil Kaos en la red



Desde el mismo momento en que se proclamó la República la iglesia católica adoptó una posición de franca hostilidad, aunque en los primeros momentos mantuviera una postura de no beligerancia. Postura que no era seguida por algunos jerarcas, como era el caso del cardenal Segura, y de otros clérigos que defendían incluso la resistencia armada. El rector del seminario de Comillas, Aniceto Castro Albarrán en su libro El derecho a la rebeldía (1934), pedía claramente la resistencia armada. Este mismo autor publicó en 1938 Guerra Santa, con prólogo del cardenal Gomá. Ante la presión del nuncio Tedeschini y el cardenal Vidal i Barraquer, Castro Albarrán fue obligado por el Vaticano a dimitir de su cargo como rector del seminario.
La supresión de los privilegios de los que gozaba la iglesia por parte de la República era algo que no podían admitir. Todo aquello que se legislara eliminando alguna de estas prebendas era elevado al término de persecución, para así justificar un artificial martirologio, del que tanto gusta la iglesia católica.
Desde el momento en que triunfó el Frente Popular, prácticamente desde todas la prensa de derechas –mucha de ella controlada por la iglesia o sectores católicos integristas- se pedía que hubiera un levantamiento militar que acabara, no solo con el Frente Popular, sino con la propia República. Fueron numerosos los eclesiásticos y católicos que alentaron y participaron en el levantamiento militar del 18 de julio. El canónigo Carlos Cardó lo dejó bien claro: « La extrema derecha y la plutocracia injertaron en el árbol del catolicismo sus preocupaciones políticas y sus egoísmos de clase […] Desde el principio se optó por la insurrección armada sin, no digo ya agotar, sino ni siquiera intentar los medios pacíficos prescritos tanto por la moral como las disposiciones positivas de la autoridad. Mejor dicho se sabotearon estos medios» (citado Raguer, 2010: 52)
« […], sacerdotes, religiosos y hasta algún obispo [Segura, Gomá, Irurita], desde el principio rechazaron la República, reprobaban los esfuerzos de los moderados por corregir desde la legalidad el anticlericalismo y adoptaron lo que en Francia se había llamado la “politique du pire”, o teoría de la catástrofe: cuanto peor, mejor, porque provocaría la guerra» (Raguer, 2013:247)
El respaldo de la iglesia a los sublevados fue inmediato, y no porque los militares la solicitaran, sino porque graciosamente se la brindaron las jerarquías eclesiásticas. No sólo se convirtió en su apoyo moral, sino que también colaboró de forma material con la aportación de dinero y joyas. La iglesia vio la sublevación como una bendición, de ahí que fuera desde ella de la que partió el término cruzada para denominarla.
Como coartada para justificar su implicación con la sublevación la iglesia apeló al supuesto anticlericalismo de la República. La República no creó el anticlericalismo, este ya se vio patente en otros momentos de la historia de España, como en el Bienio revolucionario o en la Semana Trágica. Como bien señala Jaume Botey: «La conciencia anticlerical fue a menudo fatalmente alimentada por la propia jerarquía, por sus abusos, por sus riquezas, por su sistemática oposición al progreso, por su vinculación a la dictadura» (Botey: 13)
Desde el primer momento la jerarquía eclesiástica se mostró beligerante con la República. En muchos de sus discursos no solo se lanzaban soflamas contra la República, incluso se pedía de forma clara que se produjera un levantamiento militar que acabara con el régimen que democráticamente había elegido el pueblo español. Los grandes jerarcas no podían consentir pasar de ser actores principales de la vida pública y política a ser meros espectadores de una nueva sociedad que les relegaba a un segundo plano.
Muchos fueron los jerarcas que con sus palabras y sus obras apoyaron sin remilgos a los sublevados. Más que lo que podamos decir nosotros es mejor cederles la palabra a ellos mismos, y que sea el lector el que obtenga sus propias conclusiones.
Uno de los obispos más reaccionarios fue el cardenal Gomá, que añoraba la España de los Reyes Católicos y de los Austrias, es decir la misma de la Inquisición y del concilio de Trento. Aunque algunos autores, como Miguel Ángel Dionisio quieren presentarle como moderado, sus posiciones siempre estuvieron con el sector más reaccionario del clero. De ahí que criticara duramente a sacerdotes republicanos como Gallegos Rocafull o Leocadio Lobo –ambos suspendidos a divinis -. Gomá que tras el exilio del rey manifestó «Ni me cabe en la cabeza la monstruosidad cometida», tras la toma de Toledo, exclamó lleno de júbilo: « ¡Toledo es nuestro! Éste mismo, en su pastoral El caso de España afirmaba que la guerra civil era una guerra religiosa. Esta pastoral fue contestada el 22 de diciembre de 1936 por el lekandari Aguirre (ferviente católico): « La guerra que se desenvuelve en la República española […] no es una guerra religiosa como ha querido hacerse ver, es una guerra de tipo económico y de tipo económico arcaico y de contenido social […] No es una guerra religiosa, ni es la doctrina cristiana la que puede invocarse […]Díganlo los sacerdotes asesinados por los facciosos y aquellos otros tantos beneméritos sacerdotes que han sido desterrados a lejanas tierras por el enorme terrible delito de amar al pueblo en que vieron su primera vez […] No nos encontramos ante una guerra religiosa […] han asesinado a numerosos sacerdotes y beneméritos religiosos por el mero hecho de ser amantes de su pueblo […] ¿Por qué el silencio de la jerarquía? (citado Boti: 464)
La respuesta del bondadoso Gomá es repugnante. En ella dudaba que los sacerdotes vascos asesinados lo fueran por el mero hecho de ser nacionalistas.
Cardenal Gomá en Badajoz
En un principio no se puede decir que los sublevados tuvieran una ideología común propia; les unían los intereses. La iglesia se encargó de que los distintos grupos que se habían alzado contra la República pudieran presentar una idea que les uniera. Esta nueva ideología proviene de la Instrucción Pastoral nº 6 de 6 de agosto de 1936, elaborada por los obispos vascos Olaechea y Múgica. Esta pastoral es el primer posicionamiento oficial de la jerarquía católica ante la guerra. Está principalmente dirigida a los católicos vascos, animándoles a que cesaran en su apoyo a la República: « […], una de las partes de hijos nuestros […] han hecho causa común con enemigos declarados, encarnizados de la Iglesia, han sumado sus fuerzas a las de ellos; han fundido su acción con la de ellos, y acometen ferozmente, con todo género de armas mortíferas a los enemigos de ellos, que sus  propios hermanos.
Dan la mano al comunismo en el campo de batalla, y esto en España y en este cristianísimo país vasco-navarro, es aberración que sólo se concibe en mentes obcecadas que han cerrado los ojos a la luz de la verdad que ha hablado por su oráculo en la tierra.». Aunque la firmaron Olaechea y Múgica, diversas fuentes apuntan a que el verdadero autor fue el cardenal Gomá, que la escribió a petición de los dos obispos vascos. Esta pastoral ampliamente difundida por los medios de comunicación franquista, sirvió para que se dividiera aún más la iglesia vasca.
Hubo más ilustres obispos que se significaron. El cardenal Segura, cuando triunfó la República en 1931, dijo: « Que la ira de Dios caiga sobre España, si la República persevera» El obispo de León pidió a los católicos que se unieran en la lucha contra el  «laicismo judío-masónico-soviético». El arzobispo de Zaragoza legitimaba la violencia franquista porque «No se hacía en servicio de la anarquía, sino en beneficio del orden, la patria y la religión». El ya mencionado Múgica, expuso claramente lo que la mayoría de la iglesia pensaba respecto a cuál era el régimen político adecuado: « Para España la mejor de las republicas siempre será peor que la peor monarquía.»
El cardenal Segura detenido para su expulsión de España
Aunque de forma oficial el Vaticano ordenó a los obispos españoles que acataran la República. La verdadera postura del papa Pío XI era muy distinta. En carta dictada al jesuita Enrique de Carvajal, daba órdenes totalmente contrarias: «Que los obispos no estén más tiempo callados, antes de modo claro […] enseñen y amonesten a los fieles a fin de que conozcan con precisión los males que amenazan a la iglesia o que la primen, y procuren impedirlos cuando sea posible, pasiva y activamente, por todos los medios lícitos.» (citado, Raguer, 1977: 34)
La Carta Conjunta del obispado español
Ante el sesgo que estaba tomando a nivel internacional la opinión de parte de los católicos, había que elaborar un documento que posicionara a estos claramente a favor de los sublevados.
El 10 de marzo de 1937, el cardenal Pacelli (futuro Pío XII), en nombre de Pío XI, daba luz verde al cardenal Gomá para que escribiera la carta colectiva. El 10 de mayo de 1937 en una entrevista entre Franco y Gomá, el primero le pidió que los obispos escribieran una carta colectiva, que tuviera repercusión mundial. Según el informe de Gomá al Vaticano, le dijo: Llegar a poner la verdad en su punto, haciendo a un mismo tiempo obra patriótica y de depuración histórica, que podría redundar en gran bien para causa católica de todo el mundo. (citado Rodríguez Aisa: 59) Si algo le faltaba al obispo para escribir la carta, este “empujón” de Franco acabó de decidirle.
El 1 de julio de 1937, 43 obispos residenciales y cinco vicarios capitulares firmaron un manifiesto conjunto en el que se apoyaba sin paliativos a aquellos que se habían alzado en contra de la República. Solamente dos cardenales no firmaron el documento; Mateo Múgica, obispo de Vitoria, y que no firmó por no encontrarse en España en esos momentos, y al arzobispo de Tarragona, Vidal i Barraquer, que pensaba que el escrito podría provocar represalias contra los católicos que se encontraban en la zona republicana, y por otro lado podría ser utilizado políticamente.
Según Alfonso Sánchez la carta tenía dos objetivos: avisar del peligro que suponían los comunistas, y dar prioridad a los motivos religiosos como soporte del levantamiento militar. Estos motivos quedan reflejados en las conclusiones del documento, en sus apartados primero y tercero:
Primero: Que la Iglesia a pesar de su espíritu de paz y de no haber querido la guerra no haber colaborado en ella no podría ser indiferente en la lucha; se los impedían su doctrina y su espíritu […]. Habría que saber a qué espíritu se referían, porque, a saber, el espíritu cristiano no combina muy bien con la violencia.
Tercero: Afirmamos que el levantamiento cívico militar ha tenido en el fondo de la conciencia popular un doble arraigo: el sentido patriótico, que ha visto en él la única manera de levantar a España y evitar su ruina definitiva; y el sentido religioso, que lo consideró como la fuerza que debía reducir a la impotencia a los enemigos de Dios, y como la garantía de la continuidad de su fe y de la práctica de su religión. Debe ser que los ilustres prelados debían de entender que arraigo popular significaba intervención de las fuerzas mercenarias; porque de haber tenido realmente este arraigo popular el golpe de estado no habría fracasado en la mayor parte de España. Lo del espíritu religioso también debe ser que lo dan como sobrentendido, ya que no fue hasta bien avanzada la guerra cuando los militares comenzaron a hablar de defensa de la religión. También hay que recordar que el término cruzada partió de la iglesia no de los sublevados.
Por si había alguna duda del lado al que apoyaba la iglesia, la conclusión carta decía: Hoy por hoy, no hay en España más esperanza para reconquistar la justicia y la paz y los bienes que de ellas se derivan, que el triunfo del movimiento nacional […]
En cuanto a los asesinatos perpetrados por los sublevados, la Carta aseguraba que nunca se habían cometido crímenes semejantes a los perpetrados por el Frente Popular, si acaso, algún exceso, que rápidamente justificaban: porque nadie se defiende con total serenidad de las locas acometidas de un enemigo sin entrañas. Tal ejercicio de cinismo da verdaderas ganas de vomitar.
La carta tuvo una enorme difusión por toda Europa y Estados Unidos debido a las múltiples ediciones que de ella hicieron los círculos católicos de varios países. El documento suponía un respaldo total y absoluto al levantamiento, que se produjo, según los obispos por la situación de anarquía contraria al bien común, a la justicia y al orden social. El orden social al que se referían era aquel que mantenía las grandes diferencias, y que permitía el control social y económico de unos pocos sobre la mayoría de la sociedad.
En la carta pueden leerse algunos párrafos que son el máximo exponente del cinismo que la iglesia ha sabido emplear como nadie durante siglos. Por ejemplo, cuando explica porque se produjo el alzamiento: se alzaron en armas para salvar los principios de religión y justicia cristianas que secularmente habían informado la vida de la nación. Pero quién la acuse de haber provocado esta guerra o de haber conspirado para ella, y aún de no haber hecho cuanto en su mano estuvo para evitarla, desconoce y falsea la realidad. Existen numerosas pruebas que demuestran lo contrario: alentó la sublevación y en algunos casos participó activamente en su preparación, y jamás hizo nada por evitarla, sino todo lo contrario.
En otra parte justifica porque la guerra es: a veces el remedio heroico, único, para centrar las cosas en el quicio de la justicia y volverlas al reino de la paz. Más adelante: bendice [la iglesia] los emblemas de la guerra, ha fundado las órdenes militares y ha organizado cruzadas contra los enemigos de la fe. En pocas palabras, se otorga a la sublevación el rango de cruzada contra los enemigos de la iglesia católica; es decir los republicanos.
Apoyo a la sublevación
Desde el primer momento la iglesia católica se posicionó en contra de la República y alentó, de formas más o menos directas, el derrocamiento de la misma. Mucho antes de la revolución de Asturias, algunos canónigos ya postulaban por una insurrección violenta para derrocar a la República. En el otoño de 1931, el sacerdote Antonio Pildain defendía la resistencia activa a mano armada. El canónigo Aniceto Castro Albarrán en su obra El derecho a la rebeldía (que tras el 18 de julio pasó a titularse El derecho al alzamiento) arremetía contra la política accidentalista de la CEDA y  parte de la jerarquía eclesiástica.
Ya no hay dudas acerca de la colaboración del clero en el golpe militar apoyando a los carlistas. Según Julián Casanova, en Navarra fueron los sacerdotes los que en múltiples ocasiones dirigieron los preparativos para la sublevación. Según el sacerdote Marino Ayerra, en una sastrería eclesiástica que dirigía Benito Santesteban en Pamplona, era visitada por numerosos clérigos en conspiración permanente y abierta contra la república laica. Por esta sastrería pasó el obispo de Zamora Manuel Arce Ochotorena, que le dijo a Santesteban: Bueno, si en lugar de sotanas me envías fusiles, ¡Mejor que mejor! Ya me entiendes (citado, Casanova, 2001: 54). Asimismo es casi seguro que el 19 de julio barcelonés se preparó en el palacio del obispo.
Muchos sacerdotes alentaron desde los púlpitos la sublevación, incluso fueron numerosos los que se incorporaron a la lucha, destacando en esta faceta los curas navarros: De hecho, algunos fueron los primeros en incorporarse a las columnas rebeldes e instaron a sus congregaciones a hacer lo mismo. Con las cartucheras sobre las sotanas y rifle en mano, lleno de entusiasmo partieron a matar rojos. Tantos los hicieron que los fieles se quedaron sin clérigos […], y las autoridades eclesiásticas solicitaron el regreso de algunos de ellos. (Preston: 258). Desde los púlpitos se pronunciaban discursos cargados de odio y violencia; como el que dio el canónigo de la catedral de Salamanca José Artero, en la catedral de Tarragona tras la toma de la ciudad por los sublevados, dejó clara su opinión sobre los catalanes cuando los llamó ¡Perros catalanes! ¡No sois dignos del sol que os alumbra!
Seminaristas recibiendo instrucción militar
El cardenal Pla i Deniel confesó en una carta al cardenal Gomá que había cedido a las autoridades todos los edificios que estos le habían solicitado, pero solicitaba que su nombre no apareciera en la lista de donantes ya que eso suponía el reconocimiento de su beligerancia.
El extremismo de algunos religiosos – en el que destacaron capuchinos y jesuitas- les llevó a anatemizar incluso lo que ellos consideraban actitudes condescendientes, como la de Gil Robles. El capuchino Gumersindo de Escalante escribió en Acción Española tras las elecciones de noviembre de 1933, un claro avisó a Gil Robles: No están los tiempos en el mundo, y sobre todo en España, para hacer el cuco. No; hay que dar la hora y dar el pecho; hay nada menos que coger, al vuelo, una coyuntura que no volverá a presentarse: la de restaurar la gran España de los Reyes Católicos y los Austrias […] Si este gran destino no se cumple, todos sabemos a quiénes tendremos que acusar […] El dolor, la angustia indecible de que todo puede quedarse en agua de borrajas, en medias tintas, en populismos mediocres, es una especie de lerrouxismo con Lliga Catalana y Concordato, nos dará aún a los menos aptos, voz airada para el anatema y hasta la injuria. Yo, si lo que no quiero fuese, ya sé a donde he de ir. Ya sé a que puertas llamar y a quién –sacando de amores, rabias. He de gritarle ¡En nombre de mi casta; en nombre del dios de Isabel y Felipe II, maldito seas! El aviso no tiene desperdicio: o Gil Robles preparaba el golpe de Estado, o sería un vil traidor. Mientras tanto el obispo Irurita no dudaba en gritar ¡Cristo necesita una espada!
Como señalaba Francisco Espinosa, la implicación de los curas en la represión no fue un hecho excepcional, por el contrario fue algo común en los territorios dominados por los sublevados.
Uno de los que mejor representa el cinismo con el que la iglesia justificaba los masivos asesinatos y violaciones de los más básicos derechos humanos, fue el jesuita Constantino Bayle, que en un panfleto titulado ¿Qué pasa en España?, mantenía que en el bando franquista no se había cometido ningún abuso de autoridad; a pesar de que lo que estaban haciendo los “rojos”. Según él, los asesinatos no eran sino el cumplimiento de las sentencias de los tribunales de justicia, asimismo justificaba que era lo deseable que nadie quedara impune para evitar que el pueblo se tomase la justicia por su mano y que las calles españolas se truequen en campos de venganza; esto era justo lo que estaba ocurriendo. Según este “devoto cristiano” solamente se mataba a criminales o a los dirigentes del salvaje movimiento comunista.
Existen numerosos testimonios de clérigos y católicos laicos que no hablan de cómo, desde los púlpitos se pedía el exterminio de los enemigos de la Patria y la fe cristiana. Así lo pedía el párroco de la iglesia de la Merced de Burgos: Habéis de ser con esas personas, todos hemos de ser, como el fuego y el agua…, no puede haber pactos de ninguna clase con ellos… no puede haber perdón para los criminales destructores de iglesias y asesinos de los sagrados sacerdotes y religiosos. Que su semilla sea borrada […] (citado, Casanova, 2001: 218). Lo mismo pensaba el cardenal Gomá que aconsejaba al Vaticano que no interviniera en ningún proceso de negociación para llegar a una paz negociada; había que exterminar al enemigo.
La posición de la jerarquía eclesiástica ante la represión
La actitud de la jerarquía eclesiástica ante la represión que se estaba efectuando de forma metódica en los territorios controlados por los sublevados, puede decirse que fue cualquier cosa menos cristiana. El 11 de agosto de 1936 el arzobispo de Zaragoza Rigoberto Domenech, justificaba la represión porque: no se hace en servicio de la anarquía, sino en beneficio del orden, la patria y la religión. Al obispo de Mallorca, Josep Miralles lo que le preocupaba es que los que iban a ser asesinados se hubieran puesto en “paz” con Dios: Sólo un diez por ciento de estos amados hijos nuestros han rehusado los santos sacramentos antes de ser fusilados por nuestros buenos oficiales; el que hubieran sido asesinados por defender la libertad y la justicia era lo de menos. Este mismo obispo fue acusado por el escritor católico francés Georges Bernanos, en A Diary of My Times, de dar el beneplácito  a las atrocidades cometidas por Arconovaldo Bonacorsi “conde Rossi”, que asesinó a más de 2.000 personas en Mallorca. Ejemplo de vileza fue el que dio el cardenal Gomá durante el Congreso Eucarístico celebrado en mayo de 1938 en Budapest: Paz sí, pero cuando no quede un adversario vivo. El 30 de enero de 1937 este cristiano cardenal había dejado claro que era lo que procedía hacer con los “rojos”: No puede haber en España sino guerra hasta el exterminio de ideas y procedimientos. Defensa contra la anarquía y el terrorismo bolchevique, ha dicho el Generalísimo. (citado Arbeloa: 82)
Salvo en Pamplona ningún obispo protestó por la salvaje represión  que se estaba llevando a cabo, la mayor parte de ella sin haberse incoado ningún proceso judicial. No solo eso, la iglesia colaboró en el ocultamiento de lo que estaba ocurriendo. El obispo de Ávila, Santos Moro Briz, envió una nota a sus párrocos en las que les daba instrucciones sobre lo que había que hacer respecto a los asesinados en las cunetas: Cuando se trate simplemente del caso (tan frecuente como lastimoso) de aparecer por sorpresa en el campo el cadáver de una persona, afecta al parecer a la revolución, pero sin que conste oficialmente ni sea notorio que ha sido condenado a muerte por la autoridad legítima, hágase anotar simplemente que “apareció su cadáver en el campo… y recibió sepultura eclesiástica; pero guardándose mucho los señores párrocos de sugerencia alguna que revele al autor o la causa de la muerte trágica. (citado Espinosa: 80) Con esta postura no son de extrañar las dificultades con las que se encuentran los investigadores a la hora de establecer con exactitud la lista de todos los asesinados por los franquistas durante la guerra.
Julián Casanova resume claramente la postura que mantuvo la jerarquía eclesiástica, y el clero en general respecto a los asesinatos masivos que estaban cometiendo los sublevados: Los obispos y la mayor parte del clero eran cómplices de ese terror “caliente” que no necesitaba de procedimiento ni garantías. Lo silenciaban, lo aprobaban y lo aplaudían públicamente. (Casanova, 2001: 109)
Una de las maneras de salvarse de la represión, si no la única, era contar con un aval que demostrase que era una “persona de bien”, y uno de los avales que más peso tenía era el que otorgaban los párrocos. En este sentido el arzobispo de Santiago, Tomás Muñiz de Pablos, es unas instrucciones redactadas el 31 de agosto de 1936 prohibía al clero dependiente de él avalar la religiosidad de todos aquellos que hubieran estado afiliados a sociedades marxistas, en su escrito mantenía que cuando las autoridades civiles o militares así lo requirieran entonces calificarían en conciencia, sin miramiento alguno, sin atender a consideraciones humanas de ninguna clase (ver Martínez: 250). La orden de Muñiz tuvo un amplio eco y respaldo en la mayor parte de los territorios dominados por los sublevados.
Cardenal Tomás Muñiz de Pablos
Como muchos sacerdotes desobedecieron sus órdenes, Muñiz volvió a la carga el 11 de noviembre de 1936, ordenando que dejasen de ir de acá para allá recomendando o pidiendo recomendaciones, informando sin que les pidan informes los que tienen derecho a pedírselos, o dándolos a veces con marcada parcialidad (citado Martínez: 253)
Aunque la mayoría de los obispos eran del mismo parecer que Muñiz, hubo algunas excepciones, como la del obispo de Burgos, Manuel Castro Alonso; en una circular de 10 de octubre de 1936 aconsejaba todo lo contrario que Muñiz y los doce obispos que le apoyaban. Para Castro lo más importante eran las consideraciones humanas; algo que debería de ser la norma común en todos aquellos que decían seguir la doctrina de Cristo.
El 8 de noviembre de 1936, se publicó un decreto que obligaba al alcalde, el comandante de la Guardia Civil, el párroco, y un padre de familia, a que emitieran informes sobre los maestros que había en sus poblaciones con el fin de realizar las depuraciones correspondientes. La iglesia aceptó de buena gana ser juez y parte en esta labor que eliminaría de los colegios españoles a todos aquellos maestros que no habían mostrado una religiosidad manifiesta, es decir que se habían inclinado hacia una educación laica y libre. No es casualidad que el profesorado fuera el colectivo de funcionarios que más sufrió las depuraciones.
Otro, que como Muñiz, alentaba a sus sacerdotes a colaborar con las autoridades franquistas en la represión, fue el obispo de Badajoz, José María Alcaraz; e su epístola Normas sobre certificados de conducta que no ofrecían ninguna duda a los sacerdotes, señalaba las dos consignas sobre las que basar los certificados: 1) No hacer divagaciones sobre la conducta religiosa de la persona sobre la que se elabora el informe; 2) No dar noticias atenuadas por una mal entendida benevolencia. Es decir olvidarse de la “caridad cristiana” y actuar como vulgares delatores. En su boletín, Alcaraz incorpora una circular firmada por José María Pemán (presidente de la Comisión de Cultura y Enseñanza) en relación a la depuración de maestros: Las personas consultadas [párrocos] deben saber la gravísima responsabilidad en que incurren ocultando determinados extremos […] Sería indigno que el heroísmo de nuestro soldados se correspondiese en retaguardia con la cobardía del [clero] (citado Martínez: 260)
Como se habrá observado en la mayoría de las normas dictadas por los jerarcas de la iglesia para la concesión de avales no cabían ni la piedad ni el perdón. Era más importante la venganza, de ahí que muchos sacerdotes cumplieran la labor de delatores de aquellas personas que ellos consideraban habían actuado en contra de los intereses de la iglesia.
Sería prolijo mencionar a todos aquellos miembros del clero que actuaron como delatores de sus propios vecinos, solamente destacaremos algunos casos que servirán de ejemplo de lo que fue algo usual en toda la España dominada por los franquistas.
En Euskadi muchos religiosos fueron los que delataron a sus propios compañeros que consideraban nacionalistas. Por ejemplo, el 22 de noviembre de 1937, varios escolapios presentaron una lista a las jerarquías eclesiásticas de sacerdotes nacionalistas, solicitando que se les repartiera por toda España alejándolos de Euskadi. O los carmelitas castellanos que pidieron apoderarse del convento de Santander por haber estado ocupado hasta julio de 1936 por los vascos separatistas. En Valderas (León), donde en los primeros días tras el levantamiento fueron asesinadas 120 personas; el cura con pistola al cinto, era el que señalaba los que debían ser ejecutados. El cura Isidro Lombaz Méndez era el encargado en Badajoz, de señalar a aquellos que debían ser llevados a la plaza de toros para ser vilmente asesinados.
Son muchos los sacerdotes encargados de elaborar las listas de los que debían ser ejecutados, por ejemplo; Antonio Ona –posteriormente nombrado obispo de Mondoñedo-; Santos Beriguistain, cura de Obarras (Navarra); el cura Fermín Izurdiaga, fundador de la revista Jerarquía: Revista negra de Falange; el párroco de Rociana (Huelva) que exigía más fusilamientos en su pueblo, aunque ya habían sido asesinadas 200 personas. Otros hacían gala de un marcado sadismo, como el jesuita Vendrell, párroco de la cárcel de Alicante, que a los que iban a ser fusilados en la madrugada les decía No tened miedo porque los moritos tienen buena puntería.
En Huelva, Sevilla, Badajoz, fueron numerosos los sacerdotes que participaban directamente en la elaboración de las listas de los que debían ser asesinados, o se negaban a auxiliar a personas que sí les habían prestado su ayuda en los tiempos pasados. También los hubo que participaron directamente en los saqueos y asesinatos. Un ejemplo es el testimonio de Miguel Arias Godoy en sus memorias refiriéndose a Manuel Vaquero, párroco de Tocina (Sevilla): Este sacerdote era el presidente de una junta compuesta por varios caciques del pueblo que tenían la misión de reunirse cuando les parecía para acordar entre ellos quienes serían las personas que había de detener y cuáles serían fusilados. Esta gentuza tenía su punto de reunión en la casa de Daniel Naranjo, donde hacían las listas de las personas, que eran entregadas al jefe de la cuadrilla de asesinos y éste criminal con su grupo terminaba este sucio y macabro trabajo. Esta junta de asesinos de la que era presidente el cura del pueblo, mató a mucha gente. Hacían su tarea a la sombra de una sotana y un crucifijo. (citado, Espinosa: 62-63)
No les bastaba con la colaboración, eran muchos que se regodeaban de la represión que llevaban a cabo los sublevados; como Juan de Dios Bazán, cura de Campana (Sevilla) que al pelotón que asesinó a más de cien vecinos les dio 500 pesetas como premio.
Otro insigne colaborador fue el sacerdote Juan Tusquets, que dirigió el Servicio Judeomasónico del Servicio de Información Militar, en donde se elaboraban listas de judíos y masones. Gracias a sus listas fueron detenidos más de 300 miembros de la Masonería, la mayoría de ellos posteriormente asesinados. El obispo de Lugo Rafael balanza y Navarro en una circular titulada Informe de conducta religiosa, animaba a sus párrocos a delatar a sus vecinos. Esto hizo el párroco de Seixalbo (Orense), Rafael R. Pato, que ante la petición de informes sobre veinte personas, dio informes negativos de 19, del otro no dijo nada porque no vivía en la localidad y no lo conocía. Recalcitrante colaborador fue el coadjutor de la parroquia de la Concepción de Huelva, Luis Calderón Tejero. Durante la República se dedicó pacientemente a elaborar un fichero de “rojos”, que posteriormente el Tribunal para la Represión de la Masonería y el Comunismo adoptó como “informes cualificados”. Otro tanto hizo Elías Rodríguez Marín, párroco de Salvochea, pueblo minero onubense; o el cura de Rociana, Eduardo Martínez Laorden que, cuando el pueblo fue tomado por los franquistas, se dirigió a los habitantes desde el balcón del ayuntamiento exhortándoles a la venganza: ustedes creerán que por mi calidad de sacerdote voy a decir palabras de perdón y arrepentimiento. Pues ¡No! ¡Guerra contra ellos hasta que no quede ni la última raíz! Fueron asesinadas 60 personas; en 1937 fueron asesinadas otras 17 personas a instancias del vengativo cura.
No fueron pocos los sacerdotes que no solamente colaboraron en el asesinato de miles de personas como delatores o elaboradores de las listas de los condenados; algunos participaron de forma directa en el asesinato perpetrado contra aquellos que se habían posicionado a favor de la República, o que simplemente no habían vivido su vida de acuerdo a las normas dictadas por la iglesia.
Ya que se ha silenciado el nombre de muchas de las víctimas de la terrible represión ejercida por el franquismo, al menos es justo que se conozca el nombre de algunos de estos verdugos con sotana y pistola al cinto.
Una de las funciones que tenía el párroco del penal de Ocaña era dar el tiro de gracia a los fusilados. También participaba activamente en las palizas que les propinaban a los reclusos. Entre 1939 y 1959 fueron asesinadas 1.300 personas en este lúgubre penal. Un preso de aquella época escribió unos versos dedicados al cura verdugo: La luna lo veía y se tapaba / por no fijar su mirada/ en el libro, en la cruz/ y en la Star ya descargada. / Más negro que la noche/ menos negro que su alma/ cura verdugo de Ocaña.
Un caso especialmente espeluznante es el de Juan Galán Bermejo, conocido como “el cura de Zafra”. Era el sacerdote de la 11ª Bandera del 2º Regimiento de la Legión. Con los legionarios entró en Badajoz participando directamente en la masacre que se realizó sobre las personas que se habían refugiado en el sótano de la catedral. Él mismo se jactaba de haber asesinado a un miliciano que encontró escondido en un confesionario. Ante Antonio Bahamonde –ayudante de Queipo de Llano- se jactó de este y otros asesinatos: Aquí donde usted lo ve, esta pistolita lleva quitados de en medio a más de cien marxistas, también confesó que en Zafra había señalado a toda la canalla marxista, que debía ser fusilada; eso a pesar de que en Zafra no había habido represión contra los elementos de derechas. En declaraciones al periodista Marcel Dany dejaba claro cuál era su táctica para vencer en la guerra: […] todos los procedimientos de exterminio de esas ratas son buenos, y Dios, en inmenso poder y sabiduría, los aplaudirá. A Galán se le atribuyen 750 asesinatos.
Juan Galán Bermejo “el cura de Zafra”
Un caso similar es el del sacerdote navarro, padre Vicente, también capellán de la Legión y del que el conservador inglés Peter Kemp –que luchó en la Legión- decía que era: el hombre más arrojado y sanguinario que vi jamás en España; según Kemp, en un combate, el padre Vicente gritaba: ¡No le dejes que se escape! ¡Dispara hombre, dispara! ¡Le cazaste! Mientras la víctima yacía en el suelo (citado Espinosa: 40-41)
El odio de estos curas asesinos hacia las mujeres pudiera tacharse de patológico. Veamos dos casos. Hermenegildo de Fustiñana, capuchino y capellán carlista, el 6 de agosto de 1936, junto a otros carlistas, sacó de la cárcel de Jaca a Pilar Vizcarra, que estaba embarazada y que una semana antes había visto como era asesinado su esposo; junto a Pilar fue sacada de la cárcel, Desideria Giménez, de dieciséis años. Las llevaron a campo abierto y las asesinaron vilmente. Fustiñana siempre iba con una escopeta y con una libreta en donde anotaba el nombre de todos los fusilados, y aquellos que se habían confesado antes de morir.
Otro ejemplo de este odio hacia el sexo opuesto lo protagonizó el cura de Sádaba (Zaragoza). Fue el directo causante del asesinato de la joven de 19 años Basilia Casaus, embarazada de gemelos. El médico de Sábada pidió que se demorara su ejecución ya que estaba embarazada y se esperaba diera a luz en apenas dos semanas; tanto la Guardia Civil como los miembros de Falange estuvieron de acuerdo en el aplazamiento. Pero el cura del pueblo, que era primo de la víctima, se negó en rotundo diciendo: Hay que fusilarla, muerto el animal, murta la rabia. Los deseos de este sicópata fueron atendidos.
Otra muestra de la actitud de la iglesia durante la guerra civil, fue la representación de la “caridad” cristiana de la que hizo gala en innumerables ocasiones. Lo único que importaba a la gran mayoría del clero español era que iban a ser asesinados recibieran confesión. Un ejemplo de la hipocresía que forma parte de la idiosincrasia de la iglesia católica de ayer y de hoy. Esta vergonzosa postura tiene su antecedente en uno de los padres de la iglesia, Agustín de Hipona: Es mayor mal que perezca un alma sin bautismo que el hecho de sean degollados innumerables hombres, aún inocentes.
Un rasgo de esta “extrema bondad del clero” nos lo muestra Eustaquio Illundain Esteban, obispo de Sevilla, que consiguió que Queipo suspendiera las ejecuciones en domingo y fiestas de guardar. El obispo pamplonica Marcelino Olaechea pronunció el 15 de noviembre de 1936 su homilía Ni una gota más de sangre de venganzaNo más sangre. No más sangre que la que quiere Dios que se vierta, intercesora en los campos de batalla, para salvar a nuestra Patria. No más sangre que la decretada por los Tribunales de Justicia, serena, largamente pensada, escrupulosamente discutida (citado Preston: 260). Se ve que el obispo no tenía mucha idea de cómo funcionaban los tribunales de justicia franquistas.
En muchos sacerdotes la satisfacción que sentían porque algunos de los que iban a ser asesinados recibieran antes confesión tenía mucho que ver con que este hecho era otra manera de “triunfar” sobre los vencidos. Serían asesinados, pero eso sí, en gracia de dios. Ministros de la muerte, generosos con la administración de los últimos sacramentos. Así eran los sacerdotes y religiosos. (Casanova, 2001: 128)
Parte de la iglesia, verdaderamente muy poco representativa, y algunos católicos, no apoyaron la sublevación manteniéndose fieles a la República. La mayoría lo pagó con la muerte o el exilio.
Sacerdotes asesinados
Los primeros sacerdotes asesinados por los sublevados fueron 16 sacerdotes guipuzcoanos (13 diocesanos y 3 religiosos) ejecutados entre el 8 y el 27 de octubre de 1936. El líder carlista Fal Conde, se quejó de que habían sido pocos, de ahí que la cuenta se hubiera incrementado en abril de 1937 a 47. De poco sirvieron las protestas que hicieron los sacerdotes vascos, residentes en Francia, José Miguel Barandiaran, Manuel Lemona, Ramón Laborda y Alberto Onaindia, entre otros. El pecado de estos sacerdotes eran sus inclinaciones nacionalistas. El que la mayoría del clero vasco no apoyara la sublevación era un duro golpe para Franco y para aquellos que equiparaban la sublevación con una cruzada. Esta afrenta nunca la perdonó Franco, de ahí la saña con que fueron perseguidos muchos sacerdotes vascos.
No solo se asesinaron sacerdotes en el País Vasco. El 8 de octubre de 1936 el párroco de Val de Xestoso (A Coruña), Andrés Ares Díaz, fue asesinado por negarse a dar a los sublevados el dinero recogido en la colecta para la fiesta de los Remedios. Fue acusado de pertenecer al Socorro Rojo. En Mallorca fue asesinado Jeroni Alomar Poquet, su delito pedir información sobre el paradero de su hermano Françesc, detenido por su militancia en Esquerra Republicana Balear. El obispo José Miralles justificó su fusilamiento calificándolo de “díscolo” e “izquierdista”. Martín Usero Torrente, fue asesinado en El Ferrol por no apoyar la sublevación. Antonio Bombín Hortelano, franciscano, colaborador del semanario Izquierda Republicana. Francisco González Fernández, cura y maestro de Mijas (Málaga), asesinado en enero de 1939; Matías Usero Torrente, sacerdote y teófista, asesinado el 20 de agosto de 1936 por haber apoyado a la República. Y muchos otros, que la limitación de espacio nos impide nombrar, pero que desde estas páginas quiero rendir un merecido recuerdo y homenaje.
Sobre los sacerdotes asesinados, fray Justo Pérez de Urbel – posteriormente nombrado abad mitrado del valle de los Caídos- dijo: Fueron sacerdotes que se valieron de su autoridad para engañar a sus feligreses, para llevarles a la muerte, para luchar en unión de los enemigos de la fe, traidores a su Patria y, lo que es peor todavía, traidores a su dios. (citado Casanova, 2001:142). Se desprende de sus palabras que bien fusilados estaban; quizás porque su dios no era el mismo que el de los sacerdotes asesinados, bastante más próximos a las doctrinas que impartió Jesús. El cardenal Gomá, muy en sintonía con su ideología y apoyo a los sublevados, eximió de cualquier responsabilidad sobre el asesinado de sacerdotes a Franco; en su informa al Vaticano decía que estos fusilamientos se habían producido por abuso de autoridad por parte de un subalterno. No pensaba lo mismo el obispo Múgica, que al protestar airadamente por la muerte de los sacerdotes vascos, se vio obligado a exiliarse –entre otros empujado por Gomá-. Otros sacerdotes que protestaron por los asesinatos masivos que estaban llevando a cabo las tropas franquistas, junto a falangistas y requetés, fueron amenazados con correr la misma suerte si no abandonaban sus protestas, fue el caso de los curas de Arcos de la Frontera o Carmona.
Otros sacerdotes corrieron “mejor suerte”, ya que, al menos, lograron salvar la vida. En Euskadi más de cien sacerdotes fueron encarcelados, entre ellos 38 sacerdotes guipuzcoanos detenidos en el seminario de Victoria, o 63 detenidos en el Carmelo de Begoña, etc. A estos habría que añadir los numerosos sacerdotes que se vieron obligados a exiliarse tras la toma del País Vasco por las tropas franquistas. En Santoña, 81 capellanes del Cuerpo de Capellanes de la Armada vasca fueron detenidos, a tres de ellos se les condenó a muerte, aunque posteriormente se les conmutó la pena. De estos sacerdotes castrenses merece especial atención el caso de Victoriano Gondra y Muruaga, conocido por los gudaris como “aita Patxi”. Condenado a trabajos forzados, se enteró que un comunista asturiano padre de cinco hijos había sido condenado a muerte. Gondra se ofreció a ser permutado por él. Los franquistas le dijeron que habían aceptado su oferta, e incluso le pusieron delante del pelotón de ejecución. Una vez ante sus ejecutores se le comunicó que debido a su petición el asturiano había sido indultado. Cuando regresó a su barracón se entero que Esteban Plágano, que así se llamaba el comunista asturiano, había sido fusilado al amanecer. ¿Cabe mayor crueldad?
Leocadio Lobo
Algunos, unos pocos, colaboraron activamente con la República, como Luis López Dóriga, propagandista del catolicismo social, fue diputado por el PRRS de 1931 a 1933; Jerónimo García Gallego, diputado republicano independiente de 1931 a 1933, defensor de la soberanía del pueblo y propagandista republicano en Francia; Juan García Morales (seudónimo de Hugo Moreno López), sacerdote, periodista y activo propagandista antifranquista; Leocadio Lobo, nombrado por la República, Jefe de la Sección técnica de las Confesiones y Congregaciones Religiosas, en 1937; realizó propaganda a favor de la Republica por varios países de Europa y en Estados Unidos. Prácticamente todos compartieron su suspensión a divinis por parte de la jerarquía eclesiástica, y el exilio tras finalizar la guerra de España.
Jesús Arnal
Los hubo incluso que participaron activamente junto a los milicianos en la defensa de la República. Fue el caso de Cándido Nogueras, secretario del Socorro Rojo en Broto (Huesca), fue encarcelado varios años y posteriormente desterrado; Vera Berástegui, Luis Donate, Santiago Alegre, Lázaro Baqueros, o Jesús Arnal, secretario personal de Durruti.
El hecho que no admite discusión alguna es la absoluta complicidad del clero con el terror militar y fascista (Tamayo: 104)
La iglesia a la que tanto le ha gustado, y le gusta, airear a sus mártires de la Guerra Civil, se ha olvidado de aquellos que, aunque formaban parte activa de la iglesia, fueron asesinados por ser coherentes con la doctrina cristiana, que se supone es la que defiende la iglesia católica; o defender el legítimo régimen republicano. Se podría decir que todo parecido entre ser cristiano y ser católico es pura coincidencia.
Resultado del reconocimiento de sus “mártires” se vio refrendado por las beatificaciones llevadas a cabo por Juan Pablo II, prolífico en beatificar a las supuestas víctimas de la República, que concluyo con una beatificación masiva de 498 “mártires” españoles el 28 de octubre de 2007. Entre los elevados al santoral había verdaderas bestias sanguinarias como el obispo de Cuenca, Cruz Laplana Laguna, o el salesiano José Blanco Salgado, que disparó contra los trabajadores desde el cuartel de la Guardia Civil sublevada en Morón de la Frontera (Sevilla). Como señala Botey: Las beatificaciones masivas de religiosos y sacerdotes fusilados durante la Guerra Civil en la zona republicana constituye objetivamente, una nueva humillación a los fusilados por los franquistas que durante más de setenta años han sido silenciados.
La iglesia debería pedir perdón por su implicación con el franquismo durante la Guerra Civil y los años de dictadura. Por su colaboracionismo, a veces de forma directa, en el asesinato de miles de personas; y también por todos los beneficios de los que ha disfrutado durante la dictadura franquista, sin importarles de quién provenían y como había accedido éste al poder.
Lejos de pedir ese perdón, la iglesia sigue manteniendo hoy en día que la República no fue democrática, que ejerció un “laicismo agresivo” o que su mayor característica fue una “feroz” persecución contra la iglesia católica. Estas sesgadas interpretaciones las podemos leer en el cardenal Rouco Varela, los profesores de Derecho Eclesiástico, Alberto de la Hera, Rafael Navarro Valls o Ángel López-Sicho –todos ellos miembros del Opus Dei o Acción Católica-. A todos estos preclaros embusteros se les puede leer en el suplemento de ABC, Alfa y Omega, editado por el arzobispado de Madrid. Otros que se suman a esta “cruzada” antirrepublicana son el cardenal Antonio Cañizares, o el arzobispo Fernando Sebastián. Cañizares, en un claro arrebato de enajenación mental, porque no tiene explicación posible, afirmó que la política de José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero era una repetición de la persecución religiosa de la Segunda República.
El cinismo de la actual jerarquía eclesiástica con respecto a los cientos de miles de asesinados por el franquismo, les lleva a firmar que en el otro bando hacían otro tanto. En ningún momento ha habido una condena de la iglesia católica de los asesinatos cometidos por los franquistas durante la Guerra Civil y los cuarenta años de dictadura.
En 1999 la Asociación de Teólogos y Teólogas Juan XXIII solicitaba a la jerarquía eclesiástica que pidieran perdón por su apoyo a la dictadura de Franco. La jerarquía hizo caso omiso; es más alguno, como Ramón Echaren (obispo emérito de Canarias) dijo que los que debían pedir perdón eran los izquierdistas de los años treinta por los sacerdotes asesinados. Otro ejemplo del reaccionarismo que sigue existiendo en el seno de la iglesia católica española, es que aún hoy se mantengan en centenares de iglesias placas conmemorativas de la victoria de Franco con las lista de los “mártires” fallecidos en el bando sublevado.
Habría que recordarles a todos estos “santos varones” las palabras del sacerdote Cándido Nogueras, en 1937:
            […] la iglesia ha empleado siempre su influencia en perseguir al pueblo, a cuyo servicio debía haber estado. Su misión estaba en conquistar los corazones de  los explotados.
            Si Jesucristo estuviera en el mundo formaría también en estas milicias populares, junto a los que tanto quiso. Sería un luchador más por la libertad.
  • Albeloa, Víctor Manuel (1986): Los obispos españoles y la guerra, en La Iglesia durante la guerra, Historia de la Guerra Civil H16, vol. 13, pp. 80-93
  • Alfonso Sánchez, José Manuel (2001): La Carta Colectiva del episcopado español (1 de julio de 1937), en Papeles Salmantinos de Educación, nº 0, pp.139-147
  • Botey Vallés, Jaume (2007): Memoria histórica, asesinato y beatificación, en El Viejo Topo, nº 238, pp. 9-17
  • Boti, Alfonso (2007): La iglesia vasca dividida. Cuestión religiosa y nacionalismo a la luz de la nueva documentación vaticana, en Historia Contemporánea, nº 35, pp. 451-489
  • Carta Colectiva del Episcopado Español al mundo entero con motivo de la guerra de España
  • Casanova, Julián (2001): La Iglesia de Franco, Madrid
  • Casanova, Julián (2006): Guerra Civil y religión, en El País, 14 de junio de 2006
  • Dionisio Miguel Ángel (2011): El cardenal Gomá y la Iglesia española en los años treinta, en Seminario de Investigación. Departamento de Historia Contemporánea de la UCM, 25 de enero de 2011
  • Espinosa Maestre, Francisco y García Márquez, José María (2014): Por la religión y la patria, Barcelona
  • García Bañales, Miguel (2013): Esos mitos de la Guerra Civil (III), en Astorga Redacción
  • Iglesia, fascismo y represión, en
  • Laboa, Juan María (1986): La iglesia vasca, en La Iglesia durante la guerra, Historia de la Guerra Civil H16, vol. 13, pp. 94-107
  • Liarte Alcaine, María Rosa (2009): La iglesia y la guerra civil española, en Revista de Claseshistoria, nº 46,
  • Magdalena González, Alfonso (2004): El cardenal Gomá y la Iglesia española durante la guerra civil, Tesis doctoral, Pamplona
  • Margenat Peralta, Josep M (1986): Política religiosa de la República, en La Iglesia y la guerra civil, en La Iglesia durante la guerra, Historia de la Guerra Civil H16, vol. 13, pp. 48-55
  • Martínez Sánchez, Santiago (2015): ¿Canes mudos? Los obispos españoles ante la represión franquista durante la Guerra Civil española, en Historia y Política, nº 33, pp. 241-273
  • Montero García, Feliciano, Moreno Cantano, Antonio C, y Tezanos Gandarillas, Marisa (coords.)(2014): Otra Iglesia. Clero disidente durante la Segunda República y la guerra civil, Gijón
  • Pastoral del Cardenal Segura
  • Preston, Paul (2011): El holocausto español, Barcelona
  • Raguer, Hilari (1977): La espada y la cruz. La Iglesia, 1936-1939, Barcelona
  • Raguer, Hilari (1986): Los católicos catalanes, en La Iglesia y la guerra civil, en La Iglesia durante la guerra, Historia de la Guerra Civil H16, vol. 13, 64-79
  • Raguer, Hilari (2010): La memoria histórica de la Iglesia española, en Pliegos de Yuste, nº 11-12, pp. 47-54
  • Raguer, Hilari (2012): La Iglesia, en Ángel Viñas (ed.) En el combate por la historia, Barcelona, pp. 447-460
  • Raguer, Hilari (2013): España ha dejado de ser católica. La iglesia y el alzamiento, en Francisco Sánchez Pérez (coord.) Los mitos del 18 de julio, Barcelona
  • Rodríguez Aisa, María Luisa (1986): La Carta del Episcopado, en La Iglesia y la guerra civil, en La Iglesia durante la guerra, Historia de la Guerra Civil H16, vol. 13, pp. 56-63
  • Rodríguez de Coro, Francisco (1984): El obispo Olaechea y su pastoral conjunta sobre el nacionalismo vasco, en Vasconia: Cuadernos de historia – geografía, nº 4, pp. 237-267
  • Tamayo, Juan José (2007): La jerarquía católica actual ante la experiencia política y religiosa de la II República y la Guerra Civil, en Pasado y Memoria, nº 6, pp. 95-117
  • Torrús, Alejandro (2013): El cura verdugo del penal de Ocaña, en Público, 24 de abril de 2013
  • Tuñón de Lara, Manuel y García Nieto, María Carmen (1983): Historia de España de editorial Labor, vol. IX. La guerra civil, Madrid
  • Tusell, Javier (1986): La Iglesia y la guerra civil, en La Iglesia durante la guerra, Historia de la Guerra Civil H16, vol. 13, pp. 6-47

          07/02 Links: State to sue terrorists’ families for compensation; The Antisemitism of the so-called Jewish Voice for Peace   
From Ian:

PMW: Abbas’ Fatah vows to rebuild terrorist monument in Jenin after Israel dismantled it
Palestinian Media Watch's recent exposure of the PA's new square in Jenin named after terrorist Khaled Nazzal who was responsible for the murders of 31 Israelis, among them 22 children, led to public protests by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and others. As a result, the mayor of Jenin briefly took down the monument in the square. However, only two days later, he changed his mind and put the monument up again. On Friday, the Israeli army entered Jenin and dismantled the terror-glorifying monument.
Now Abbas' Fatah Movement has pledged to restore it:
"It does not matter how many times the occupation removes the monument in memory of the Martyr - it is our obligation to rebuild it."
[Official Fatah Facebook page, June 30, 2017]

Fatah further announced that - as an act of solidarity with Jenin - a monument in honor of terrorist Nazzal has been placed by "young people" in Ramallah (See photo above). Fatah stressed that terrorist Nazzal "remains in our hearts, in our memory, in our squares, and in our streets":
Text on monument: "This is a monument in memory of Martyr (Shahid) Khaled Nazzal, which was established as a challenge to the occupation authorities
#The_Palestinian_people" [Official Fatah Facebook page, June 30, 2017]
Posted text: "An initiative of the young people in Ramallah; Khaled Nazzal remains in our hearts, in our memory, in our squares, and in our streets, and the monument will return to Jenin in order to serve as testimony to the period, to the history, and to a special kind of fighter"
[Official Fatah Facebook page, June 30, 2017]

Already a makeshift sign marked with the logo of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) has been set up in the square in Jenin where the monument stood, announcing the "Martyr Comrade Khaled Nazzal Square." Fatah posted a photo of it and its "inscription":
We Were Kicked Off Chicago's Dyke March For Not Being 'The Right Kind of Jew'
Anderson said she has been contemplating this very issue — and she is drawing upon the wisdom of one of America’s greatest LGBT equality leaders and icons, who also happened to be Jewish.
“Harvey Milk said, ‘Come out, come out, wherever you are,’” Anderson said. “I think for gay people, that has been the number one tool for changing hearts and minds. I think now is the time for progressive Jews to start doing that.”
Admittedly, it seems odd at best to think progressive Jews should “come out” in America. However, it is not about merely identifying ourselves but challenging stereotypes and expectations for how we must behave in our communities.
“People just have a very one-sided view of what it’s like to be Jewish in America and all the different views Jews can hold,” Anderson said. “I understand why people have been quiet. I have been quiet. But if we don’t speak, others dictate the conversation, and we get pushed out even more.”
Grauer is optimistic that, at the very least, the strong emotions surrounding the Chicago Dyke March will force an open discussion and, ideally, change.
“Hopefully, now that we have shared how we feel, how do we come together towards something better — whether it be a way we understand each other or the way we have relationships with Israel and Palestine and with people around these issues?" she said. "I would love to see us move towards something around those lines. It may be too soon for that to happen, but that’s where I would love to see this move. I think everyone — I would hope everyone — would, as well.”
For Grauer, it is “too soon to tell” if she would march in next year’s Dyke March. “I want to make sure that we’re marching together and accepting each other [and] our differences and recognizing that we’re here for a good reason together. If that’s the kind of Dyke March it turns into, that’s the kind of one, I’d be proud to walk in it.”
Anderson, on the other hand, was dubious she would join or, for that matter, feel secure at the next Dyke March. “I think I would feel physically unsafe if I came back with that same flag,” she said. “I think I would feel physically unsafe if I came back with anything short of a forehead tattoo that said ‘Israel is the worst thing that has ever existed’ — and I am not going to play that game. I should be able to be there as a Jew without passing a test.” (h/t Think of England)
Manifesto of an Outraged Queer
Laurie Grauer, one of the women forced to leave told the Windy City Times that the flag was “from my congregation which celebrates my queer Jewish identity, which I have done for over a decade marching in the Dyke March with the same flag.” She continued, “People asked me if I was a Zionist and I said ‘Yes, I do care about the state of Israel but I also believe in a two-state solution and an independent Palestine.”
It is unfortunate at best that members of the queer community are confusing the making of spaces threatening-free and comfortable with fascism, confusing political astuteness with tyranny. Who decides which individuals and groups are considered the “in groups” and the “out groups”? Who elected these organizers as the Thought Police?
No matter how the organizers attempt to frame the issues, this is anti-Jewish oppression plain and simple! Shame on them and those who supported their decision!

Jewish Home says PM nixed bill that would’ve made dividing Jerusalem ‘impossible’
The Jewish Home party said Sunday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vetoed a bill that would require a special two-thirds Knesset majority on any decision to divide Jerusalem under a future peace deal with the Palestinians.
The proposal was set to face a vote in a weekly meeting of the Ministerial Committee for Legislation early Sunday afternoon but the prime minister pulled the bill from the agenda at the last minute, the pro-settlement Jewish Home party said in a statement.
“We are sorry narrow political considerations outweigh the need to prevent the division of Jerusalem. We will continue pushing this bill, and will do all we can to advance it in the upcoming days,” the statement read. “Jerusalem will be united by actions, not words.”
The Likud party slammed Jewish Home’s announcement, saying the bill was proposed without seeking the cooperation of any coalition partners.
IsraellyCool: WATCH: Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Jody Williams’ Vicious Attack on Israel
Last week, the UN’s Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People sponsored a two-day anti-Israel hate-fest called: Ending the Occupation: The Path to Independence, Justice and Peace for Palestine. It was held to mark 50 years since Israel liberated the so-called occupied territories from Jordan, Egypt and Syria (my words, not theirs).
The speakers’ lineup is a who-who of anti-Israel scum and villainy. Friday’s keynote speech was delivered by Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Jody Williams. To say her speech was disgraceful is an understatement.
But hear for yourself – I compiled the “best” bits – and by best I mean worst. She blame us for the entire conflict and lack of peace; she does not mention palestinian terrorism even once, ridicules the notion that we have security concerns, claims we invent such concerns so we can subjugate the palestinian Arabs, completely rejects Israel’s narrative, promotes collective punishment against Israelis through measures like BDS, claims we are racist, justifies palestinians not giving diplomacy a chance, and calls for everyone to recognize the state of Palestine.What is it about so many Nobel Prize winners and their moral bankruptcy?

UNESCO experts: Hebron heritage request too focused on Muslim history
UNESCO experts warned the Palestinian Authority that it has overly focused on Hebron’s Muslim history, at the exclusion of the Judeo-Christian heritage, in its request that the West Bank's city's “Old Town” be inscribed on the "World Heritage in Danger" list.
The failure to make a full case for inscription as a heritage site combined with Israel’s decision to ban experts from visiting the city make it difficult to conclude if an emergency situation exists, the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) said in an 11-page report it submitted over the weekend.
The 21-member World Heritage Committee is expected to vote on the inscription of Hebron’s Old Town and the Tomb of the Patriarchs to the “State of Palestine” this Friday in Krakow, Poland during its annual meeting that began on Sunday.
The PA’s written proposal had focused on Hebron’s “Old Town” history from the Mamluk period of 1250 and onward. This includes the Tomb of the Patriarchs, whose Herodian structure houses both Jewish sanctuaries of worship and the Ibrahimi Mosque.
CAMERA: UNESCO and the Jewish Legacy in Hebron
Palestinian historical revisionism and attempts to negate Judaism's legacy in its homeland have been increasingly used as a political tactic by the Palestinian leadership and its Muslim allies. (See “The Battle Over Jerusalem and the Temple Mount”) What began as the absurd denial of Judaism's historical and religious ties to Jerusalem and the Temple Mount by Palestinian and Muslim leaders soon advanced to the enlistment of international bodies to pass resolutions eradicating the Jewish people's connections to their holy sites and repudiating Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem.
Buoyed by their successes at UNESCO, which passed several resolutions condemning Jewish visits to and policing of the Temple Mount while referring to Judaism's holiest site solely in Arabic terms, the Palestinian Authority (PA) is now using the same tactic to get the UN body to invalidate the Jewish legacy in Hebron, Judaism's second holiest site after the Temple Mount. Turning to UNESCO's World Heritage Center to declare the Old City of Hebron and the Cave of the Patriarchs a “Palestinian World Heritage Site” that is endangered by Israel, the PA sent a letter to the World Heritage Center Director Mechtild Rossler, alleging a long list of supposed Israeli violations, including the placement of security barriers near the Cave, and other Israeli security measures, as well as the purchase of property by Jewish residents of the city.
UNESCO, which is dominated by Muslim and Arab allies of the Palestinians, is voting on the matter at the 41st session of the World Heritage Committee, held on July 2-12, 2017 in Krakow, Poland.
It is noteworthy that while Hebron was in Muslim hands, Jews were often barred from their holy site and subject to pogroms by their Arab neighbors. But after coming under Israeli control in 1967, both Jews and Muslims share access to the shrine.
Those who seek to eradicate Jewish claims to their holiest sites bank on the credulity of those unfamiliar with Hebron's long history who willingly accept Palestinian and Muslim historical revisionism and fabrications.
How the Palestinian Authority’s ‘Social Safety Net’ Encourages Terrorism
The Palestinian Authority's decision to pay salaries to terrorists and their families has been excused by some analysts and media commentators as a form of social welfare. They overlook the PA's own stated reasons for the payments, as well as the role that they play in promoting anti-Jewish violence and a culture of hate.
In recent commentaries for The Hill and elsewhere, some have argued in favor of the Palestinian Authority's decision to pay salaries to terrorists and their families. But these payments violate both the terms and spirit of the Oslo accords under which the authority was created. Palestinian society and leadership promote terror by rewarding those who support and carry out terrorist attacks.
Commentators such as Palestinian-American journalist Daoud Kuttab have asserted that U.S. and Israeli efforts to force the PA to stop paying terrorists and their families constitute “collective punishment.” They maintain that the money “is not given to terrorists” and are not “a reward for acts of terror,” and instead constitute “a natural act of social support that is provided to all Palestinian families.” This is disingenuous, as a few important facts make clear.
The Palestinian Authority's own Ministry of Public Affairs, in a 2010 report, noted that 63 percent of those imprisoned and receiving payments were single. Yet, they still received the same basic salaries as those with families, according to Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), a non-profit organization that translates Arab media in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria), eastern Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Moreover, PMW noted, “Palestinian law explicitly refers to the payments of salaries (Rawatib), ”not “social welfare” payments as some claim. Indeed, the Palestinian Authority even treats the payments as salaries by withholding income tax on them.
State to sue terrorists’ families for compensation
Israel reportedly will soon launch a slew of lawsuits against the families of terrorists with the aim of recouping outlays on the associated costs of terror attacks.
Last month, prosecutors from the Jerusalem District Court filed the first such damages suit, in which they are seeking NIS 8 million ($2.3 million) from the widow and four children of Fadi al-Qunbar, the Haaretz daily reported Sunday.
Qunbar, a resident of East Jerusalem’s Jabel Mukaber neighborhood, killed four soldiers in January when he rammed his truck into a group of troops getting off a bus at a popular tourist site in the Armon Hanatziv neighborhood of the capital before being shot and killed by soldiers.
According to Haaretz, the state is seeking compensation from Qunbar’s family for the costs of the burial of the soldiers and the payments to the bereaved families, as well as for “the loss of earnings for the lost years, loss of pension and pension rights, shortening life expectancy” and “compensation for [the] pain and suffering that reflects the cruelty of the acts and the great suffering of all the murder victims.”
Fourth Palestinian suspect arrested over Israeli officer's murder
Police have arrested a fourth Palestinian suspect in the murder investigation of 23-year-old Border Policewoman St.- Sgt-Maj. Hadas Malka, who was stabbed to death by a terrorist while guarding the Old City’s Damascus Gate on June 17.
The arrest follows an intensive investigation initiated after three terrorists from the West Bank illegally entered Jerusalem and carried out two simultaneous coordinated attacks using an improvised automatic weapon and knives.
All three assailants, who also wounded two others by Zedekiah’s Cave some 100 meters from Damascus Gate during a shooting spree, were shot dead by responding officers.
On June 21, three suspects accused of aiding the assailants were arrested, including a 52-year-old man from Isawiya who transported the terrorists to the area, and the mother and father of one of the terrorists suspected of abetting their son.
Palestinian charged in 2009 West Bank murder of 2 policemen
Military prosecution on Sunday indicted a Palestinian suspected of involvement in the March 2009 murder of two Israeli policemen in the Jordan Valley.
Muhammad Radwan Daraghmeh of the northern West Bank village of Tubas has been in police custody since being arrested by Shin Bet security forces in April.
Authorities believe he took part in the killing of Yehezkel Ramzerker and David Rabinovich eight years ago, marking a major breakthrough in a case that has stymied investigators for the better part of a decade. Two other people suspected to have been involved are still at large.
Daraghmeh was arrested over the killings, and police found an improvised gun and bullet magazine in his home during searches of his home.
According to the indictment, Daraghmeh, 35, was part of a cell of three bandits who targeted West Bank residents. The strategy of the group was to stop on the side of the road with their vehicle, pretending to have car trouble. When one of them succeeded in flagging down a truck driving by, another would pull a gun on the driver and instruct him to proceed to an isolated area. There, the three would steal the car along with the contents inside and leave the driver stranded.
MKs expected to be allowed on Temple Mount this month
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will lift his ban on lawmakers visiting the Temple Mount for a trial period later this month, the State Attorney’s Office plans to tell the High Court of Justice.
According to the state’s planned response to a petition by MK Yehudah Glick (Likud) calling to overturn the ban on lawmakers visiting the Temple Mount, which went into effect in October 2015, they will be allowed back at the holy site for a five-day period beginning July 23.
During those five days, the government will assess whether the visits sparks violence or not. The assumption that they do was behind Netanyahu’s ban.
Glick said, “The decision to open the Temple Mount is right and appropriate. It’s too bad that we had to petition the High Court for it to be made."
Israel rearrests Palestinian lawmaker for promoting violence
Israeli security forces rearrested Palestinian lawmaker Khalida Jarrar early Sunday morning in Ramallah for allegedly promoting violence.
Jarrar, a senior member of the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine, was sentenced to a 15-month prison term in December 2015 after being convicted of inciting to violence, membership in an illegal organization—Israel considers the PFLP to be a terrorist group—participating in illegal protests, and violating a travel ban. She was released in June 2016.
“She was arrested following her involvement in promoting terror activities through the PFLP,” the IDF said in a statement on Sunday morning.
In addition to Jarrar, security forces arrested ten others, whom the IDF spokesperson alleged “were [also] participating in terror activities.”Palestine Liberation Organization leader Saeb Erekat slammed Israel for the arrests, saying they are “a part of a premeditated and continued campaign” against the Palestinian leadership and people.
Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said that the arrests “will not dissuade [the Palestinian people] from continuing the Jerusalem intifada and its valiant resistance.”
JCPA: Nasrallah Invites the Iranian Shi’ite Legion to the Next War with Israel
In a speech marking al-Quds [Jerusalem] Day, as established by Ayatollah Khomeini to identify with the Palestinian struggle on the last Friday of the month of Ramadan, Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah threatened that in the next war with Israel he would open the borders of Lebanon to tens of thousands of fighters from Yemen, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq.
In effect, Tehran received an open invitation to fight Israel with the “Shi’ite Legion” which was established under the command of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards’ Quds Force commander, Qassem Soleimani, who is now fighting in Iraq and Syria.
Nasrallah’s words put an end to the so-called “national” claim by Hizbullah that the national consensus in Lebanon is based on the holy triangle of people-resistance-army. This claim supposedly unites Lebanon and grants Hizbullah legitimacy for its existence as a military militia. Furthermore, Nasrallah demonstrates with his words and actions contempt for the basic component of the Lebanese state, that being its borders. First, he violated the border to send troops to war in Syria on the pretext of defending the Shi’ite holy sites in Damascus. Second, Nasrallah declared after the assassination of Samir Kuntar, a terrorist released by Israel, the expansion of the borders of the conflict with Israel from Nakura, on the Mediterranean coast in the west, to the Syrian Golan Heights in the east.
Now he is threatening to violate Lebanon’s border once again toward Israel in the south, and he is inviting foreign, non-Lebanese, forces to take part in the war with Israel.
Liberman: Israel ‘won’t ignore’ new Hezbollah weapon factories
Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman issued a stern warning to the Lebanese terror group Hezbollah and its Iranian patrons over the development of rocket manufacturing installations inside Lebanon.
“We are fully aware” of the rocket factories, Liberman told military correspondents in a briefing in Tel Aviv Sunday. “We know what needs to be done… We won’t ignore the establishment of Iranian weapons factories in Lebanon.”
Still, he cautioned against overstating the threat. Since the Second Lebanon War in 2006, Israel has pulled significantly ahead of Hezbollah, he said. “There’s no need for either hysteria or euphoria on this issue.”
Asked about the spike in spillover fire from Syrian battlefields hitting the Israeli side of the Golan Heights, Liberman said the Syrian army was trying to prevent further incidents.
PreOccupiedTerritory: Hezbollah Now Boasts Experience Destroying TWO Arab Countries (satire)
Analysts at Israel’s Ministry of Defense have been focusing on the Lebanese Shiite militia Hezbollah and the battle experience it has gained in Syria, and now note that the organization must be considered a more formidable foe than when Israel last fought a war with it in 2006: it has now had a hand in the wanton destruction of two Arab countries, as opposed to only Lebanon.
In a report prepared for Minister of Defense Avigdor Liberman in advance of a strategy session this week, the analysts warned not to underestimate Hezbollah’s sharpened ability to devastate Arab countries.
“We have already observed the organization’s capacity to bring mayhem, death, and ruin on vast swaths of Lebanon itself,” read the report’s abstract, in reference to the punishment Lebanon received when Hezbollah kidnapped several Israeli soldiers in 2005 and set off a war. “But the last five years in Syria have shown the depth and intensity of the movement’s dedication to bringing such destruction to other Arab countries.” Hezbollah, along with numerous other Shiite militia groups, have been fighting alongside Syrian regime forces against an assortment of rebel groups, and participated in some of the most destructive battles of the six-year-old conflict.
An analyst who contributed to the report outlined some of the thinking that governed its preparation. “Of course we are always considering Hezbollah’s military capabilities, especially its substantial arsenal of Iranian rockets,” began the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity under ministry rules. “But seldom before have we focused our attention on the specific aptitude the organization has displayed for destroying Arab countries. In addition to analyzing how that aptitude translates into direct threats to Israel’s population, our report considers how it might be possible to harness Hezbollah’s Arab-country-destroying moxie to Israel’s advantage.”
Ebrahim Bham – A Perfect Preacher for Palestine Expo
When Ismail Patel and his Friends of al-Aqsa group organise a conference on Palestine, one can be confident that the speakers will be suitable for the cause. Namely, hating Israel and loving Hamas. This is Mr Patel’s lifelong mission.
Sure enough, the prominent South African preacher Ebrahim Bham is on the bill for Mr Patel’s Palestine Expo, which will be held next weekend at the QE II Centre in Westminster.
Mr Bham’s preaching record shows that he is a perfect match for Mr Patel.
The Israeli People? Nazis!
In a sermon on Israel, Bham knows exactly where to turn. Tell people the Israelis are like the Nazis. First he quotes Goebbels:
“People tell me that Jews are human beings. Yes, I know they are human beings. Just as fleas are also animals. Just as fleas are also animals, they are also part of human beings like that.”
Those words, he then says, explain Israelis today:
Using that example, the psyche of the whole people seems to be to mete out the very same treatment to others the way was meted out toward them. And that seems to be the psyche. That they don’t regard Palestinians as human beings.
Note the slur on the entire Israeli people rather than a politician, a party, or the IDF.

Spanish courts force companies to suspend anti-Israel boycotts
The Spanish High Court of Justice in Madrid last week dealt the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement two legal blows, upholding a lower court's ruling against full boycotts of Israeli institutions, companies, and organizations or those involved in the so-called "occupation," calling such boycotts "discriminatory."
The court's rulings, which came on the heals of petitions by local Jewish communities aided by the New York-based Lawfare Project, pertain to the municipalities of Castrillon and Corvera in Asturias Province in northern Spain.
The latest success in court notwithstanding, the legal victories were only partial, as dozens of municipalities across Spain in the past year alone have declared their support for the BDS movement and have decided to fully adopt boycotts against companies with ties to Israel.
In October, the Jewish Telegraph Agency reported, a Spanish high court in the Asturias region declared a pro-BDS resolution endorsed by the Langreo City Council illegal and discriminatory.
The hypocrisy of the Middle East Studies Association
Two events over the last week illustrate just how hypocritical so many professors and university programs of Middle Eastern studies have become when it comes to politics and principle.
First, consider the Middle East Studies Association (MESA), the oldest and most prominent professional organization for professors whose field of study loosely correlates with the Middle East.
In response to President Donald Trump’s executive order temporarily freezing entry to the United States for citizens of Yemen, Sudan, Iran, Syria, Somalia, and Libya, MESA joined as a plaintiff in the lawsuit to overturn the executive order, which MESA president Beth Baron, a City University of New York (CUNY) professor, writes in MESA’s April 2017 newsletter is a “Muslim ban.” In response to the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision to issue a limited stay on lower court rulings against the Trump policy, MESA released a statement declaring, “We believe that the exclusions of people from six Muslim-majority countries is discriminatory and does damage to academic institutions in the United States. We continue to believe that the EO is at odds with fundamental principles upheld by MESA including the commitment to the free exchange of ideas.” So far, so good. But, if that’s the case, why then does MESA not oppose the Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israeli academics in which so many of its members engage? Indeed, as an institution, MESA has changed its bylaws to allow greater political activity and recently passed a “right to BDS resolution.” Baron’s program at CUNY passed a BDS resolution, as well, and Baron herself has pledged to boycott Israeli academics. In short, for all its lofty rhetoric about academic freedom and the right to travel, MESA seems to believe that such rights should be first passed through a political and perhaps religious litmus test: When it comes to the Middle East, Muslims and Arabs welcome, Jews and Israelis not.
Second, consider yesterday’s court decision allowing the US government to seize a Manhattan skyscraper owned by the Alavi Foundation to compensate victims of terrorism who won a court judgment against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Antisemitism of the so-called Jewish Voice for Peace
The time has come to state facts: Jewish Voice for Peace is not a “fringe” Jewish organization. JVP is not merely “anti-Zionist.” JVP is the vanguard of a movement of far-left antisemitism. The new JVP campaign “Deadly Exchange”?—?which alleges a moneyed Jewish conspiracy to kill innocent Americans?—?reveals how far JVP has fallen down the rabbit hole.
There was already plenty of evidence of JVP’s indulgence of antisemitism. The group has offered a conspicuous lack of condemnation when Palestinian terrorists murder Jewish civilians. The supposed “Jewish Voice for Peace” in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is typically silent in the wake of such attacks on Jews. When JVP does react to terrorist attacks on innocent Jews, the reactions seem nearly indifferent in contrast to JVP’s unrestrained outrage in any number of other instances. JVP has never extended solidarity to the half of the world’s Jewish population that lives in Israel, and yet it always stands ready to express their solidarity with non-Jews, even with Palestinian killers of Jews. JVP stands proudly in solidarity with the “Palestinian popular resistance,” Palestinian prisoners, and convicted PFLP supermarket bomber Rasmea Odeh. JVP has never offered such solidarity when Israeli Jews were the targets of murderous terrorists.
JVP is not in complete denial over the possibility of antisemitic anti-Zionism. At one point, JVP cut ties with Alison Weir, not exactly for being an antisemite, but for openly sharing her blood libel with white supremacists. And yet six months later JVP returned to sponsoring talks by Weir. In September 2016, JVP supported the cancelation of a talk by Miko Peled because of his antisemitic tweets. But within days JVP backtracked, claiming “we clearly made a mistake.”
Most notable about JVP, however, has been, as the ADL reported, that it “uses its Jewish identity to shield the anti-Israel movement from allegations of anti-Semitism and to provide the movement with a veneer of legitimacy.” Whenever anti-Zionist groups face allegations of antisemitism, JVP invariably races to defend them.
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown: Distortions and Outright Lies
Except that the rest of her article is full of distortions and outright lies.
In critiquing the 1917 Balfour Declaration that paved the way for a Jewish homeland, she writes:
In that tide of history, five million inhabitants were displaced – and the suffering of the Palestinians only got worse.
Where does this figure of five million come from? In 1948, the creation of the State of Israel witnessed the displacement of some approximately 750,000 Palestinians. A greater number of Jews from Arab countries subsequently arrived in Israel having been thrown out of their homes.
But that’s not the only exaggeration:
Propped up by its western allies, Israel ignores international laws and obligations and does what it wants. I think the country has been harmed more by its unwavering friends than by its unforgiving enemies. The US, UK and EU should have tempered Israel’s excesses which at times befit a rogue state.
Newsweek: Israel is Behind Al-Qaeda/Al-Nusra
Tom O’Connor, a repeat offender when it comes to blatantly distorting facts about Israel, is at it again, in the pages of Newsweek.
This time, O’Connor makes two claims that Israel is militarily behind the Al-Qaeda linked terror organization Al-Nusra Front.
Battling for Terrorists
O’Connor says:
Israeli helicopters attacked the Syrian military Saturday as it attempted to repel an offensive by the former Nusra Front, a hardline Sunni Muslim group…affiliated with Al Qaeda.
His source for this melodramatic statement? The Syrian Army.
Yes, you read that right.
Syria has been an enemy of Israel since its creation, and during that time has been a constant source of exactly these kind of dramatic and unrealistic accusations. For example, Syria made a similar claim in March, which Israel immediately dismissed.
MEMRI: "The Media Was the Jews' First Weapon against Islam"
UAE cleric Wassim Yousuf said that "media was the first weapon of the Jews in their efforts to make the Muslims doubt their faith" and that they continue to control the media, relying upon the "falsification of facts." "Look at the wickedness of the Jews," he said, speaking on Abu Dhabi TV on June 13.

Japanese central banker praises Hitler's economic policies
A Bank of Japan policymaker praised Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler's economic policies on Thursday, although he said they enabled the Nazi dictator to do "horrible" things to the world.
Yutaka Harada, a member of the board of Japan's central bank, said Western policymakers had helped bring Hitler to power by being slow to apply British economist John Maynard Keynes' proposals to fight the Great Depression. Hitler became German chancellor in 1933.
Speaking at a seminar on monetary policy in Tokyo, Harada said Hitler had taken "wonderful" fiscal and monetary stimulus steps, although these led to "something horrible for the world" as his strengthened grip on power led to the Holocaust and massive human casualties during World War II.
"Because Hitler had taken appropriate fiscal and monetary policy steps, tragedy resulted. What I'm saying is that someone should have taken appropriate fiscal and monetary policy steps before Hitler did," said Harada, an academic-turned Bank of Japan policymaker.
Czech leader under fire over pig farm at ex-Nazi camp
Anti-racism campaigners reacted with indignation Friday after Czech President Milos Zeman said he backed keeping open a pig farm on the site of a former Nazi camp for Roma people.
“These declarations are a grave offence for victims and survivors of the Holocaust and their families,” Miroslav Broz of the anti-racism association Konexe told AFP.
The pig farm was constructed during Communist rule in the early 1970s at Lety, a village south of Prague that was the site of a Nazi-era concentration camp where hundreds of people in the Roma and Sinti minorities were murdered in 1942 and 1943.
“I am against the liquidation of a company which is prospering, as that would be a loss for the national economy,” Zeman told Czech television on Thursday.
Teen arrested in vandalism of upstate NY Jewish camp
A local teenager has been arrested and charged with vandalizing a Jewish camp in upstate New York.
Camp Shomria in Liberty, New York, run by the Hashomer Hatzair movement, was broken into on June 12. The interior and exterior of several of the buildings was damaged and covered in anti-Semitic graffiti.
Christopher Santoro, 18, was arraigned on Wednesday in the Town of Fallsburg Justice Court on felony charges of third-degree burglary and fourth-degree criminal mischief as a hate crime. He will return to court on July 5, the Times Herald-Record reported.
Police found in their investigation that Santoro acted against the camp out of “a dislike for the religion of the owners and occupants of the camp.” The state police hate crimes unit has been involved in the investigation.
This 400-year-old Jewish library survived Hitler and the Inquisition
Livraria Ets Haim is the world’s oldest functioning Jewish library. As such, it is no stranger to the prospect of imminent destruction.
Founded in 1616 by Jews who fled Catholic persecution in Spain and Portugal, the three-room library is adjacent to Amsterdam’s majestic Portuguese Synagogue in the Dutch capital’s center.
The 30,000-volume collection mostly contains manuscripts written by people who fled the Inquisition on the Iberian Peninsula or their descendants. The oldest document is a copy of the Mishneh Torah, the code of Jewish religious law authored by Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon, or Maimonides, that dates to 1282. Ets Haim’s volume is pristine but for the scars left behind by an Inquisition censor, a Jew who had converted to Christianity and singed away entire passages of the book.
Ets Haim as a whole faced a similar fate — or worse — in 1940, when the Nazis invaded the Netherlands and had 75 percent of its Jews murdered. Yet the Nazis left the Portuguese Synagogue intact, and instead of burning the library’s collection, they shipped the books to Germany. The collection was discovered there, with light damage, after the war, and returned to Amsterdam.
But the Dutch Jewish community lacked the resources to preserve the collection. Library curators determined that the Ets Haim building would need to be renovated thoroughly to ensure the proper conditions, so in 1979 the books were sent to Israel.
All Dr. Ruth, all the Time
If you thought you were finally out of TV to binge, you are wrong in the best way.
Your favorite Haganah sniper-turned-international sex educator—that is, Dr. Ruth Westheimer—has a huge treasure trove of footage set to stream. Night Flight, a online video service focused on the crazy ’80s, will now be showing Dr. Ruth’s TV show library from the decade.
Dr. Ruth had several shows on and off in the 1980s on Lifetime, like Good Sex with Dr. Ruth Westheimer and What’s Up, Dr. Ruth? She did everything from traditional celebrity interviews (Gloria Steinem, Jerry Seinfeld, e.g.) to counseling for audience members about the birds and the bees (and in at least one clip, a pirate fetish); and what turns women on. Quite frankly, I find her shows to be absolutely riveting. Dr. Ruth didn’t just build her sexy empire on good advice about condoms; on these shows she’s engaging, and charming, and warm, and all the things you like about your Jewish grandmother combined with all the openness of the Internet in a pre-Internet age.
Take, for example, the following, in which Dr. Ruth talks with a very anxious Richard Lewis, and with Jerry Seinfeld about sex.
Canada 150: A short story of Canadian-Israeli friendship
Canada will officially celebrate its 150th anniversary on Saturday, marking 150 years since the confederation of Canada in 1867. For the last 69 years, Canada has proved itself to be a close friend and ally of Israel.
Today, Canada is home to 385,000 Jews, with the community's origins dating back 250 years, and the Maple Leaf nation has strong bilateral ties with Israel. 20,000 Canadian citizens currently live in Israel.
The Canada-Israel story commenced prior to the establishment of the Jewish state.
In 1947, Canada was one of eleven nations that made up the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. Established in May, the committee's September report supported the termination of the British mandate in Palestine and proposed the famous partition plan that would be adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 29 November 1947.
Canada, alongside 32 other countries, voted in favor of the partition proposal, Resolution 181, to gradually withdraw British forces from Mandatory Palestine and create independent Arab and Jewish states. Whereas the plan was joyfully welcomed by Jews in Palestine and around the world, Arab leaders immediately rejected the resolution.

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.
          Commentaires sur Marlène Schiappa ne veut plus de messe à la télé : notre pétition ! par Albatros   
"dont nous attendons qu'il soit respectueux de la libre expression religieuse dans l'espace public". Et voila !!! vous êtes tombés dans le piège de cette "femen"! Ainsi les islamistes pourront avoir "la libre expression" pour nous pourrir la vie et faire avancer leur secte avec une "libre" expression me-na-çante ! C'est ainsi que s'est répandu l'islam et c'est ainsi qu'il menace l'Occident !! NON ! La France est une terre judeo-chrétienne depuis des siècles sereine où régnait la paix, alors que maintenant les musulmans veulent nous asservir par la force et répandre leur secte anti-humaine, barbare allant contre l'évolution !Personne n'a le droit de défendre l'islam avant d'avoir lu le coran, les adiths, et l'histoire de la naissance et l'expansion de la mahométie !La grande majorité des musulmans d'ailleurs ne connait pas l'histoire de leur secte ! Juste un pêu le coran et surtout ce que raconte l'imam !!