Category: Uncategorized

The Washington Times reports: Eighty-one percent of sex crimes committed against children by Roman Catholic priests during the past 52 years were homosexual men preying on boys, according to a comprehensive study released yesterday on the church’s sex abuse crisis.

I always enjoyed the official lavender line that homosexual priests raping boys was an indication of pedophilia, not homosexuality. As if the two were mutually exclusive. And, of course, this bizarre distinction would mean that Greek homosexuality – such as it was – wasn’t homosexuality either. Not that I expect a great deal of intellectual consistency from the lavender left, but this was particularly egregious.

The number is particularly impressive considering that homosexuals make up a very small percentage of the greater population, and presumably a small minority of the priesthood as well. As much as we appreciate the Queer Party Friends – and we do – they are not a sizeable percentage of this blog’s readership. There’s no question that the homosexual cult of the beautiful youth causes leads many homosexuals into an inordinate interest in teens and children; it should surprise no one that they are inordinately likely to be abusers of children as well. And if one’s entire self-identification is constructed on a violation of a societal more, it is entirely predictable that one will be less inclined to respect other societal mores as well. More creep not inevitable, of course, but it is common. The analogy is not precise, but I expect that most murderers don’t get too worked up about breaking the speed limit either.

Matthew Gallagher, executive director for Dignity, a Catholic homosexual caucus, called the findings “discrimination in the name of God.” “Bishops are scapegoating gay priests and this is just a way for bishops to deflect tension from their inability to protect children in their care,” he said. “Bishops are not using modern thinking when they say a gay man is more prone to having sex than a straight man.”

Apparently modern thinking is as deviant as Mr. Gallagher, in this case deviating from what was previously known as basic reading comprehension and math. The bishops are actually saying that a gay man who enters the priesthood is more likely to sexually abuse children than a straight man. Based on the statistics I’ve read, about 14 times more likely. But if the percentage of gay priests is equal to the percentage of gay men in the broader population, this extensive survey suggests that they are approximately 198 times more likely to abuse children then a straight man.

WND reports: A lawmaker has introduced a bill that would require the government to use controversial satellite-tracking technology to monitor livestock from birth to slaughter. U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., wants the U.S. Department of Agriculture to immediately establish a nationwide livestock identification system. The company she has in mind for the project is Digital Angel Corporation, originally formed to produce implantable tracking systems for humans. “The safety of our food supply is critical to our families,” said McCollum, who introduced the legislation Wednesday. “This technology will allow the Department of Agriculture to track an incidence of ‘mad cow’ or other diseases in livestock like chronic wasting disease discovered in the United States within 48 hours. We are fortunate to have a pioneer in this important technology right in my home town of South Saint Paul, Minnesota.”

And, of course, how can the UN force everyone to get digitially implanted if the company that produces the technology goes under? Kind of ironic that it’s headquartered right in my hometown – I knew about Digitial Angel and had even read their prospectus, but somehow its location had escaped me.

This is one of the few times that I sincerely hope it’s just the usual attempt at a local pork deal.

From WND: When Saudi Arabia announced a new policy to allow tourists, it brought attention to the official Supreme Commission for Tourism’s website, which explicitly stated Jews were barred from applying for visas. But since WorldNetDaily published a story early this morning about the site’s contents, the reference to Jews has been eliminated, and the Saudi Embassy in Washington insists the Islamic kingdom does not bar anyone on the basis of religion or ethnicity.

Nail al-Jubier, chief information officer for the embassy, told WorldNetDaily he was “stunned” when he saw the Saudi tourism Web page listing “Jewish People” among those not permitted to enter the country.

Strange how Mr. al-Jubier seems to have experienced the same hallucination I did. Since the Internet is a static medium, something that is not there at one moment in time could not possibly have been there previously.

Now, it’s true that Saudi Arabia is technically at war with Israel, as is most of the Arab world. So, Saudi Arabia is quite justified in forbidding Israelis from entering or trading with the kingdom. Of course, by the same token, they don’t have much grounds for complaint should Israel decide to glaze the desert sands either. I don’t hate the Saudis, but I will confess to be mystified by a government that simultaneously lacks both nuclear weapons as well as the wisdom to find a way to make peace with an enemy that has them.

John McCaslin reports: All white men look alike, Rep. Corrine Brown, Florida Democrat, said Wednesday at a meeting where she called President Bush’s policy toward Haiti “racist.” Mrs. Brown’s outburst came during a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill between administration officials and members of Congress, the Associated Press reports.

She became angry and began yelling at Assistant Secretary of State Roger Noriega, the State Department’s top official for Latin America. The black congresswoman slammed as “racist” Mr. Bush’s approach to the crisis in Haiti — where rebels are on the verge of ousting socialist President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, who was installed in 1993 by the Clinton administration. She then denounced the Bush administration for sending “a bunch of white men” as representatives to the meeting — to the shock of Mr. Noriega, a man of Mexican ancestry. “As a Mexican-American, I deeply resent being called a racist and branded a white man,” Mr. Noriega responded, sources told AP.

To which Mrs. Brown replied: “You all look alike to me.”

I’m not sure which amuses me more, the fact that she actually said it, or the fact that the media and the general public has such a low opinion of Mrs. Brown and her ilk that she’ll get away with saying it. Then again, it’s entirely possible that she’s right – I have no idea what the president’s Haiti policy is, much less whether it is racist or not. In fact, I don’t even know what a reasonable Haiti policy would be.

Si blathers: The point is, people who readily believe calumnious stories with no evidence, simply because the stories fit their racial biases, are as racist as the anti-Semites they decry.

First, there was evidence of the media coverage, on WND and elsewhere. That’s not definitive proof, but a reasonable point with which to make commentary. If I were to fact-check everything on which I opine, I’d write one column a week, not make numerous daily blog posts. Second, it didn’t fit my racial bias – Saudi is not a race – but it certainly did fit what I know of the kingdom based on past information from a friend who has had extensive dealings with it.

Si then reveals his etymological ignorance: Perhaps his own brand of anti-semitism (since Arabs are, after all, Semites). Anti-semitism has nothing to do with the Semitic racial group per se. It is a word concocted by German Jew haters who were looking for a kinder, gentler expression more acceptable to the general German public than the traditional judenhassen.

You don’t have to hate Arabs to loathe the despicable governments that have ruled over them since the colonial era. Plenty of Arabs hate them too, especially since most of the modern Arab countries are colonial legacies that have little to no relationship with the tribal boundaries delineated over many centuries.

Clay Whittaker writes: Making good christian and conservative movies will do more than constantly railing against the many things we disagree with. Although I don’t completely agree with this: I agree we are not doing enough to support our own and possibly a wee bit too much tearing down of that which we disagree, but I believe their is a time and a place for both. In any case, sign me up as a mostly-hearted supporter of the Vox Day Theory.

I guess I’d like to think that whatever theory eventually gets named after me is a little more, shall we say, intellectually sophisticated. And it hardly orginated with me. But I appreciate the kind thought.

Here’s a non-WorldNetDaily link discussing the No Jews Allowed policy of my previous post. The Saudi explanation of a mistake is not credible, considering what I’ve heard of their policies requiring companies dealing with them to guarantee that none of their products contain any Israeli parts.

Saudi Arabia plans to set up a national council for tourism to promote the country in world markets. But on the Supreme Commission for Tourism’s website is a list of those who will not be allowed in the county.

* An Israeli passport holder or a passport that has an Israeli arrival/departure stamp.

* Those who don’t abide by the Saudi traditions concerning appearance and behaviors.

* Those under the influence of alcohol … .

* Jews

Here’s a thought. If Mel Gibson was truly a Jew hater – which is the original term for which the German Judenhassener substituted the less obvious term anti-semite – wouldn’t he, like the true anti-semites, ban Jews from his film? Also, he sure seems to have chosen a strange profession in which to avoid Jews.

Frank Gaffney writes on NRO: John Kerry wants a world in which the United Nations calls the shots and U.S. freedom of action, in the absence of the U.N.’s permission, is sharply circumscribed. Most Americans recognize that this would be a formula for disaster — a world in which the lowest-common-multilateral-denominator would routinely trump, and often jeopardize, our security interests.

President George W. Bush’s supporters believe that he rejects this Kerry-Clinton worldview. They look forward to a national election in which voters get to choose between his Reaganesque philosophy of peace through American strength and Kerry’s U.N. uber alles. So why would the Bush administration be pushing for the ratification of a treaty that will make a giant leap towards John Kerry’s world?

Occam’s Razor would suggest that this is because George Delano doesn’t actually reject this Kerry-Clinton worldview. You see, George Delano is a politician, and politicians have this habit of saying things that they do not, in fact, mean.

LOST creates the International Seabed Authority (ISA) — a supranational organization with unprecedented powers. These include the power to: regulate seven-tenths of the world’s surface area, levy international taxes, impose production quotas (for deep-sea mining, oil production, etc.), govern ocean research and exploration, and create a multinational court to render and enforce its judgments. Some even aspire to giving the U.N. some of our warships so it can have “blue hulls” — to go along with its “blue helmets” — to ensure that the ISA’s edicts are obeyed.

If he supports this treaty, the president will make it very clear that he has more interest in UN sovereignty than he does in defending the national interests of the United States. Once the UN tax arrives, global government will soon follow.

‘Passion’ Nails $26,556,573 on First Day. Audiences are rushing to see The Passion of the Christ at a record pace. The media frenzy and the religious fervor have contributed to the third biggest Wednesday bow ever

I rather doubt that independently producing a massively successful film without any help from the industry is going to harm Mel Gibson’s career in the least, regardless of what the New York Times might wish.

And it’s interesting to note the comments of various Hollywood gentlemen, presumably of Jewish extraction: Jeffrey Katzenberg and David Geffen, the principals of DreamWorks, have privately expressed anger over the film, said an executive close to the two men. The chairmen of two other major studios said they would avoid working with Mr. Gibson because of “The Passion of the Christ” and the star’s remarks surrounding its release. Neither of the chairmen would speak for attribution, but as one explained: “It doesn’t matter what I say. It’ll matter what I do. I will do something. I won’t hire him. I won’t support anything he’s part of. Personally that’s all I can do.”

I hope we learn who this particular chairman is. Once we find out, I think it will be interesting to see his reaction once Christians demonstrate that they’d prefer to demonstrate solidarity with Mr. Gibson than with this self-righteous, small-minded and officious prig. Sometimes it’s not hard to figure out why Jews often appear have so many enemies and so few friends. I have a feeling this man will be eating his words soon enough.

But as Rod Dreher of the Dallas Morning News points out, its rather strange that while it’s not okay to blacklist people working under the direct orders of Josef Stalin for the destruction of the United States, it’s perfectly okay to blacklist a Christian who takes his faith so seriously that he spends $25 million to give everyone the chance to witness an interpretation ofJesus Christ’s sacrifice.