vendredi 22 mars 2013

Answering itccs, first 34 minutes of evidence, five charges and no Catholic culprit so far

1) Communists and others have smeared Pius XII and Alojzije Stepinac ... ; 2) I do not favour Kevin D. Annett in these things ... ; 3) To Wilfred Fox Napier, reputedly Cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church ; 4) Answering itccs, first 34 minutes of evidence, five charges and no Catholic culprit so far ; 5) Watching exhibits 1 - 14 (first video ITCCS, continued) ; 6) Bishop Coudert has offered to pay for hospital ... ; 7) Was Catholic Church main culprit in Canada? ; 8) This is Not a Mortara Case

1, plan of genocide) Duncan Campbell-Scott: "we must accept that in the course of our work enormous numbers of children will in fact die from tuberculosis: this cannot be avoided" ... echoing Glencoe cynicism (also "courtesy" of clan Campbell), as far as my historic memories go.

2, contamination with disease) Government Medical Officers like Peter Brice of Ontario said Churchmen deliberately contaminated children with smallpox - which denomination ran most schools back then? Was he anticlerical?

1919 - medical inspection is abolished "under Church pressure" - which churches?

Can it be that medical personnel put the blame back on medical officers, and can it be they were right? [This was written before I had heard of Sheepshanks]

1920 - attendance at these schools is rendered obligatory. 1929 - legal guardianship over residential school children tranferred to the clergyman principal who ran the school

At this time Pius XI was getting out of difficulties with Mussolini, difficulties that had ridden Papacy and Italian Church since 1870!

3) 1928, 1933 - sexual sterilisation laws (certainly not condoned by Pius XI, see Casti Connubii, they were in turn followed by Sweden in 1935 [repealed in 1970's] and - Nazi - Germany in 1936, but not by Catholic Austria).

Sterilisation clinics were ran by United Church Missionaries, mainly.

I find it a safe bet that Catholic Québec had no sterilisation laws whatsoever and that no Amerindian child was sterilised in a Catholic school, at least not at first.

Look internationally at it: Lapps in Sweden (and possibly Norway too) were sterilised not for being Pagan, but for having a non-agricultural, non-bourgeois, nomadic - but not hunting and fishing and gathering based, rather herding - lifestyle. They were Lutherans since centuries back and so were their persecutors. Except insofar as these were more into Enlightenment thinking than their victims.

Spain and Portugal had no sterilisation campaigns. Austria had none as long as it remained free from Third Reich, i e up to 1938. In Spain sterilisation of mental patients was considered and rejected. The chief psychiatrist, Valleja Nájera, a culprit it seems when taking away children from reds immediately after the war - since these were considered war criminals - had seen cases of cataleptic schizophrenia which he considered due to castration. I suppose these castrations were committed early in the War, like the illdeeds perpetrated under Yagüe at Badajoz by Moroccan auxiliary troops. Franco ordered that illdeed to stop. Some think he ought to have foreseen it and ordered it earlier.

Canadian and Swedish and some states of US authorities were democratically elected and acted as badly as Hitler in 1936.

Salazar and Dollfuss had stopped normal elections with more than one party, and Franco come to power in 1939 without any election, but they were not acting the "gardener of other men's or women's fertility".

Reason? They were Catholic.

Pius XI, once again, had forbidden it in Casti Connubii.

In Mexico it seems Yaquis have been sterilised - by Porfirio Diaz, who was not a Catholic, but excommunicated. A freemason.

In Perú the Quechua speakers have been subjected to sterilisation - by Fujimoro, who was not a Catholic, but an immigrant from a Pagan nation, and an adherent of political correctness and enlightenment correctness and progress, but not of Catholicism.

2 again) Catholic priests sent children infected with smallpox back to their villages, documented in 1922. - Maybe the purpose was to not have smallpox kill the school off? Maybe they thought they would be treated at a separate place and therefore not contaminate the village? And maybe that was asking too much medical common knowledge of the natives.

Maybe the statistics of 50% mortality was a medium for all confessions, which percentage would have been very much lower in the Catholic schools, very much higher in the Protestant ones, and possibly worse among United Church of Canada than among Anglicans, though that may be wrong.

4) Theft of land charge - if theft, then committed by Crown. Churches profited from it, but took it from Crown, not from Aborigines.

It is also a question whether any nation has a right to keep land as collective ownership and not have agriculture anywhere or only on very limited gardens. (This does not mean it is to be considered of natural law to have Monsanto have its way ...)

The Indian ownership of land without agriculture may according to some parts of international law have been considered genocidal. Since lack of agriculture impedes a population to rise in numbers.

Since when?

Since Vitoria, one lawyer who theorised about why Spain had the right to conquer the Western Indias.

But he was partial, he was a countryman of the men who were subduing the Indians. Or so you might say.

Indeed, and the lawyers who defined genocide in 1945 or 1946 or up to 1948 were hardly on the bench of the accused at Nuremberg either. Nor their countrymen.

However, the Spanish Crown did not uniformly use this as an excuse of taking land away from Indians.

a) Encomiendas were theoretically collective property of the Indians, though under the overseeing of a white Spanish military man. An Encomiendero was not an owner. And Encomiendas were not insalubrious like the reservations were. That was the solution in Perú and Mexico, where agriculture already existed, but where according to the debate between Sepúlveda and Las Casas other reasons existed for disowning the previous sovereignty of Indian nations, namely idolatry with human sacrifice. Encomienderos could be cruel of indignation over that past or of greed, but they were not quite left to their baser instincts.

b) Franciscan Missions in California were not encomiendas, but Indian villages with agriculture and spiritual life overlooked by Franciscans.

c) Jesuit Reductions in Paraguay were also not encomiendas, but only Indians and Priests were allowed there. Apart from teaching Indians agriculture they raised the level of culture in other ways too, notably musical and liturgical. They were also improving medical standards (!)

So, Canada from 1820's on used Vitoria in a baser way than the Spaniards had done. But they did go by international law in doing so.

2 again) Sheepshanks, Anglican clergyman, murderer by intentional inoculation with smallpox, landgrabber. - Well, Pius XI in 1924 opened some approches to Russian Orthodox, but in 1928 he wrote Mortalium Animos in order to warn against panchristianism, false irenism, indifferentism, relativism ... can he have had men as Sheepshanks, or the United Church of Canada, or its German counterpart Evangelische Kirche (Prussian Union Church between Calvinists and Lutherans) with its at the time feeble for Arisches Christentum care of modernist Bible scholar Adolf von Harnack in mind?

Local police had no authority to investigate into Residential Schools even when deaths happened on them ... - Sounds very much like what happened in Austria after 1938. What Dollfuss and Schuschnigg (long live their memories!) had kept away, at a personal cost, and what Hitler's troops brought along in ... in that case it was handicapped, more precisely something like trisomies, and the residence after a few months had one hundred percent mortality and no investigation was conducted.

Since I brought up Austria, the Nazi expert of Gypsy Questions was actually, technically, an Austrian. Tobias Portzschy. He came from the East of Remnant Austria or German Austria, of what previously had been Hungary, and his city's main education facilities were - as much in Hungary and very little in Tyrol - Calvinist Protestant. He was a Nazi and as such in prison under Schuschnigg, for illegal agitation. After Anschluss he became the Gipsy Question expert and his ideals were pretty "West Coast Canadian", and at that pretty Protestant and progressive, if you get the hint.

At 0 hours, 26 minutes and 39 seconds, I have so far heard nothing about sterilisations in Québec. Grace à Dieu! Neither have I so far - but that may change - heard any charge against the Archbishops of Montréal of the Roman Catholic religion from the 1920's on to present.

Non quaranteening, non removal of children infected with tuberculosis - Thank you for making my point about the 1922 handwritten letter about Catholic priests removing small pox infected children from school, back to Indian villages. They were perhaps not unaware of possibility that the village might be ill prepared with medicla knowledge to handle the case, but they evidently wanted no small pox deaths on school grounds. That Roman Catholic priest you mentioned earlier was obviously not a Sheepshanks.

Ottawa despatched document destruction teams during the 1960's etc. (destruction of evidence) - "Dans la communauté, Wright fut officier de milice et juge de paix, il contribua financièrement à la construction de l'église anglicane de Hull et il était Maître d'une loge maçonnique." - The founder of Ottawa was not Catholic but freemason. (Acc. French wiki on Philemon Wright, who according to French wiki on Ottawa founded your capital - as masonic as Washington D.C.)

5) Death rates due to tuberculosis, disease and violence are forty times higher. This is often because many of the symptoms of the residential school induced dysfunction are passed on to the survivors' children and grandchildren in the form of unrelenting (or unrelating?) intergenerational trauma. - Sounds Jewish populations having passed through Auschwitz would suffer from things like that too. Except in their case they can dilute that by: a) mingling with non-Jews (unless they have very Ashkenazi noses), b) mingling with Jews from New York and Buenos Aires (René Goscinny never was in those ghastly places, but he resented it, as in 1945, on hearing a rumour of Hitler having escaped, he made a caricature of Adolf the painter - painting walls with colours with strong dissolvents, so he gets high on the gaz from the paint), c) mingling with Jews with dangerous but non-camp backgrounds (from the Red Army, from the being hidden by Catholics - and sometimes even Nazis - or from the Zionist groups in conflict with Arabs since before 1940 ...). But some seem to have been really mentally remodelled for the worse by the experience. The actress who made Lady Dracula or Countess Dracula was a camp survivor. She was gentle with children, but she very much enjoyed frightening ... thank God she did it in movies and not in camps of any sort!

In answer to your conclusion of 33 minutes, 39 seconds, sorry, but it is at least so far idiotic to put Catholic Church in Canada and even Vatican on level of culpability with Anglicans like Sheepshanks or Calvinists like West Coast of Canada (or Mr. Portzschy, the Protestant Nazi Gypsy expert), when the one real evidence of a particular case from Catholics in 1922 can be very well interpreted as an act intended to protect lives at the school, and when the Vatican was positively condemning the Sterilisation laws (and therefore also any clergy that sympathised with or perpetrated them by civil obedience). It is as if the King of Spain were to blame for the deeds of General Custer (notoriously non-Spanish) or of Jefferson Davies (not very loyal to the Spanish crown either).

Part of the ensuing may very well be in the end - I have not yet watched it - due to Catholics being scared and huddling behind a necessity to adapt when under non-Catholic régimes, a thing which held back lots of criticism in Germany too - and the Church was persecuted, especially in Poland.

And why did you not mention any lodge as possible culprit? You mentioned a secret commission at the very start, they owe probably more or at least as much to the lodges as to the Royal Family.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Bibliothèque Mouffetard

Appendix, Evidence sources:

video of evidence summary by court, more worthy to be called biassed (or even conniving) prosecution:

Pope Pius XI, Casti Connubii

The same, Mortalium Animos

And though this is not Canada but South America, here is evidence for Vatican taking the Native side:

Pope St Pius X, Lacrimabili Statu

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire