The face of occupation

Palestinian Child Bleeds to Death while Israeli Police & Civilians Watch, Shouting Insults”

“Die, you son of a whore!! Die!!” shouted Israeli men at a seriously wounded Palestinian child, who was left to die while police stood around him doing nothing. One of the officers repeatedly pushed the boy down with his foot,
whenever he tried to sit up.

Such lovely people the settlers on stolen palestinian
land….and most are “religious”

Sadly,Israel has degenerated into  terrible racist state.

The comments from Jews are so vile one hopes you can’t
read them

http://usuncut.com/world/israeli-police-shoot-13-year-old-ahmad-elmahania/

9 Comments »

  1. 1
    mushafta Says:

    Another day of horror in Israel/Palestine conflict.

    But Ted has taught here on this blog one thing- critical thinking; connecting dots right to our own home.

    It’s election time in Canada.
    An excellent article today in the National Post about individual donations to Canadian political parties…..

    It may help to understand why party leaders are very loathe to condemn and neutralize such Canadian companies as Bombardier for selling instruments of death . We need to seriously examine our own conscience on the issue of the global war culture.

    000

    To the Liberals: $190,000

    To the Conservatives: $100,000

    The influential clan behind Quebec’s Power Corp. of Canada has donated $290,000 over the past decade, slightly favouring the Liberals. The total includes donations from patriarch Paul Desmarais, who died in 2013, wife Jacqueline, sons Paul Jr. and André, who now jointly lead the company, along with daughters Louise and Sophie as well as several grandchildren.

    Laurent Beaudoin and the Bombardier family – $213,000

    To the Liberals: $132,000

    To the Conservatives: $81,000

    The Quebec family that controls Bombardier Inc. has donated more than $200,000, with the largest share going to the Liberals. Donors include chairman emeritus Laurent Beaudoin, wife Claire Bombardier Beaudoin, son Pierre, who stepped down as CEO this year, along with other relatives who make up the controlling shareholders of Bombardier.

    The Aspers – $165,700

    To the Liberals: $80,000

    To the Conservatives: $77,000

    To the Green Party: $6,200

    To the NDP: $2,500

    Winnipeg’s powerful Asper family has donated more than $130,000: Most was split between the Liberals and the Conservatives, although members of the family have also donated to the Green Party and the NDP. They include all three children of CanWest Global Communications Corp. founder Izzy Asper: daughter Gail, sons Leonard and David, along with their wives.

    The Khosrowshahi family – $143,000

    To the Liberals: $90,000

    To the Conservatives: $53,000

    The B.C. family that founded Future Shop Ltd. has donated $143,000; patriarch Hassan Khosrowshahi also sits on the board of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives and is a director of the Bank of Canada. The donations also come from his wife, Nezhat, and children Behzad and Golnar.

    Bernard and Jacques Lamarre – $99,800

    To the Liberals: $70,000

    To the Conservatives: $24,000

    To the Bloc Québécois: $5,800

    The brothers who presided over engineering firm SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. have donated more than $68,000 in the past decade, with almost twice as much going to the Liberals as to the Conservatives. The donations include those from Jacques Lamarre’s wife, Céline Robitaille Lamarre.

    Eliott Lifson – $77,600

    To the Liberals: $43,000

    To the Conservatives: $27,000

    To the Bloc Québécois: $4,100

    To the NDP: $3,500

    Mr. Lifson is the president of the Canadian Apparel Federation, a lobby group, and the vice-president of the Board of Trade of Metropolitan Montreal. Along with his wife, Carol, the couple has donated more than $77,00 to the Conservatives, Liberals, Bloc Québécois and the NDP.

    Leonard Gustafson – $59,000

    To the Conservatives: $59,000

    The former Saskatchewan senator was appointed to the Privy Council by Stephen Harper in 2008. Along with his wife and children, the family has been one of the Conservative Party’s most generous donors.

    Donald K. Johnson – $59,000

    To the Conservatives: $38,000

    To the Liberals: $21,000

    The former president of Burns Fry Ltd., which was acquired by Bank of Montreal, has long argued for the federal government to make it easier for Corporate Canada to give to charity. He has donated $59,000 , including $38,000 to the Conservatives and about $21,000 to the Liberals.

    Paul Hill – $51,400

    To the Conservatives: $28,000

    To the Liberals: $23,000

    To the NDP: $400

    Mr. Hill is CEO of Saskatchewan’s Hill Companies, whose business interests include real estate, insurance and broadcasting. Along with his wife Carol, the couple have donated more than $50,000 to federal parties, favouring the Conservatives.

    Richard Renaud – $42,000

    To the Liberals: $25,000

    To the Conservatives: $17,000

    The Montreal businessman, philanthropist and founder of the Roasters Foundation donated more than $42,000, of which $25,000 went to the Liberals and the rest went to the Conservatives.

    Follow Tamsin McMahon on Twitter: @tamsinrm

    PrintLicense this article

  2. 2

    If you’ve been following the news from Israel, you might have the impression that “violence” is killing a lot of people. As in this headline: “Palestinian Killed As Violence Continues.” Or this first paragraph: “Violence and bloodshed radiating outward from flash points in Jerusalem and the West Bank appear to be shifting gears and expanding, with Gaza increasingly drawn in.”

    Read further, and you might also get a sense of who, according to Western media, is perpetrating “violence.” As in: “Two Palestinian Teenagers Shot by Israeli Police,” according to one headline. Or: “Israeli Retaliatory Strike in Gaza Kills Woman and Child, Palestinians Say,” according to another.

    Such was the media’s way of describing two weeks of Palestinian assaults that began when Hamas killed a Jewish couple as they were driving with their four children in the northern West Bank. Two days later, a Palestinian teenager stabbed two Israelis to death in Jerusalem’s Old City, and also slashed a woman and a 2-year-old boy. Hours later, another knife-wielding Palestinian was shot and killed by Israeli police after he slashed a 15-year-old Israeli boy in the chest and back.

    Other Palestinian attacks include the stabbing of two elderly Israeli men and an assault with a vegetable peeler on a 14-year-old. On Sunday, an Arab-Israeli man ran over a 19-year-old female soldier at a bus stop, then got out of his car, stabbed her, and attacked two men and a 14-year-old girl. Several attacks have been carried out by women, including a failed suicide bombing.

    Regarding the causes of this Palestinian blood fetish, Western news organizations have resorted to familiar tropes. Palestinians have despaired at the results of the peace process—never mind that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas just declared the Oslo Accords null and void. Israeli politicians want to allow Jews to pray atop the Temple Mount—never mind that Benjamin Netanyahu denies it and has barred Israeli politicians from visiting the site. There’s always the hoary “cycle of violence” formula that holds nobody and everybody accountable at one and the same time.

    Left out of most of these stories is some sense of what Palestinian leaders have to say. As in these nuggets from a speech Mr. Abbas gave last month: “Al Aqsa Mosque is ours. They [Jews] have no right to defile it with their filthy feet.” And: “We bless every drop of blood spilled for Jerusalem, which is clean and pure blood, blood spilled for Allah.”

    Then there is the goading of the Muslim clergy. “Brothers, this is why we recall today what Allah did to the Jews,” one Gaza imam said Friday in a recorded address, translated by the invaluable Middle East Media Research Institute, or MEMRI. “Today, we realize why the Jews build walls. They do not do this to stop missiles but to prevent the slitting of their throats.” Then, brandishing a six-inch knife, he added: “My brother in the West Bank: Stab!”

    Imagine if a white minister in, say, South Carolina preached this way about African-Americans, knife and all: Would the news media be supine in reporting it? Would we get “both sides” journalism of the kind that is pro forma when it comes to Israelis and Palestinians, with lengthy pieces explaining—and implicitly justifying—the minister’s sundry grievances, his sense that his country has been stolen from him?

    And would this be supplemented by the usual fake math of moral opprobrium, which is the stock-in-trade of reporters covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? In the Middle East version, a higher Palestinian death toll suggests greater Israeli culpability. (Perhaps Israeli paramedics should stop treating stabbing victims to help even the score.) In a U.S. version, should the higher incidence of black-on-white crime be cited to “balance” stories about white supremacists?
    Didn’t think so.

    Treatises have been written about the media’s mind-set when it comes to telling the story of Israel. We’ll leave that aside for now. The significant question is why so many Palestinians have been seized by their present blood lust—by a communal psychosis in which plunging knives into the necks of Jewish women, children, soldiers and civilians is seen as a religious and patriotic duty, a moral fulfillment. Despair at the state of the peace process, or the economy? Please. It’s time to stop furnishing Palestinians with the excuses they barely bother making for themselves.

    Above all, it’s time to give hatred its due. We understand its explanatory power when it comes to American slavery, or the Holocaust. We understand it especially when it is the hatred of the powerful against the weak. Yet we fail to see it when the hatred disturbs comforting fictions about all people being basically good, or wanting the same things for their children, or being capable of empathy.
    Today in Israel, Palestinians are in the midst of a campaign to knife Jews to death, one at a time. This is psychotic. It is evil. To call it anything less is to serve as an apologist, and an accomplice.

  3. 3

    The above was from:

    The Wall Street Journal Oct. 12, 2015 7:34 p.m. ET 480 COMMENTS
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/palestine-the-psychotic-stage-1444692875?mod=djemMER

    Palestine: The Psychotic Stage
    The truth about why Palestinians have been seized by their present blood lust
    By BRET STEPHENS

  4. 4
    mushafta Says:

    “Today in Israel, Palestinians are in the midst of a campaign to knife Jews to death, one at a time. This is psychotic. It is evil. To call it anything less is to serve as an apologist, and an accomplice.”

    Francesco!

    When did the Wall Street Journal replace the Christian Bible? What is the message you’re trying to get across here?

    Denunciation of western media is not what I am at all interested in. I’m looking for the truth. I don’t see much of it in this article from the Wall Street Journal.

    Neither Ted nor anyone else is promoting violence towards the Jews by these Palestinian kids. But where does this violence ever end?

    It is less than two weeks since Frances visited the United States. In my view, the greatest pope ever, left Americans and congressmen and women in particular with images he wanted them to reflect and dialogue on.

    In the 60s, behind monastic walls I listened attentively to one of the greatest American spiritual writers of our day. This man was held as an antidote to the war in Vietnam. And yes, a mirror to the conscience of Americans committing violence be they warmongers or abortionists.

    His name was Thomas Merton. Thomas Merton- whose letters to Catherine Doherty were published by Madonna House a few years ago.

    Our beloved Pope Francis dropped another name for reflection- Dorothy Day.
    Day denounced war over and over and committed her entire life to protesting against the use of arms.
    Yes, I know she did have an abortion and later regretted it. And for that matter it seems clear that Merton had a late inning affair. But these are the names Francis dropped. He’s not looking for purists anymore! He’s promoting inclusion and social justice.

    Hope Francis is sending out a message to the universal church. Is saying that the Catholic Church is not to be obsessed with pelvic moral theology. He wants an all inclusive church. He wants a new economic global system. He wants an end to violence.

    Above all, Pope Francis is wanting renewal – in much the same way that Catherine Doherty espoused.

    So you see Francesco, this Wall Street bible you have your hands on, just does not come near the antidote for violence this article suggests.

    Merton saw the good in all religions. He died an untimely death just as he was on the verge of reaching out to all religions for common ground in seeking God.

    Always my hero- Merton the contemplative monk with a gifted tongue. A man with a chequered past in possession of quill and ink that helped form the conscience of Americans.

    The answer to this Wall Street story is not more violence. It is the words of Jesus. Forgive.

    But we are also called to action- in the very same way that he and Dorothy Day were called to protest.

    Islamic Palestinians have seen enough of war. Likewise the Jews of Israel.
    We have all seen enough.

    But this Wall Street publication does not belong as any kind of solution to this problem.

    Francis used ordinary symbolic yet real names like Day and Merton alongside Christian scripture- “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

  5. 5

    When did the Wall Street Journal replace the Christian Bible? What is the message you’re trying to get across here?

    Denunciation of western media is not what I am at all interested in. I’m looking for the truth. I don’t see much of it in this article from the Wall Street Journal.

    Ted, you missed the point completely. Of course you should be interested in the truth. The point is you don’t have it, and the public do not get the truth. They get ONLY one side, and you too present ONE side ONLY.

    If a person got their news about the middle east from this blog only, they’d be completely and utterly misdirected. You give the impression that Israel is the bully on the block, oppressing these innocent and helpless Palestinians.

    There is a larger picture, and very few get that larger picture.

    Neither Ted nor anyone else is promoting violence towards the Jews by these Palestinian kids. But where does this violence ever end?

    Of course, I wasn’t suggesting that you are promoting violence against Jews. But when you take a good look at what is happening in Palestine, you begin to see that the problem is not Israel. The problem is radical Islam. But very few are willing to call it for what it is. You think the solution is for Israel to make the peace sign and wave it. Israel has a right to defend itself; it has no choice but to do so. But that does not get reported, so an anti-Israel ideology spreads, and you help perpetuate this false narrative.

    It is less than two weeks since Frances visited the United States. In my view, the greatest pope ever, left Americans and congressmen and women in particular with images he wanted them to reflect and dialogue on.

    Dream on. They’ve forgotten it all. Democrats have convinced themselves that he’s the “Democrat’s Pope”. After all, the “People’s Pope” is Latin is Papa Democratis. In their minds, they don’t have to change; only Republicans do. And by what criterion do you determine that he’s the greatest pope ever? Are you actually familiar with every Pope in the history of the Church? Why would he be greater than Pope Gregory the Great? You might think he’s the greatest pope ever because in your mind, you are great, and you love Pope Francis because you think he thinks like you. That’s a bit delusional, if you don’t mind me saying.

    In the 60s, behind monastic walls I listened attentively to one of the greatest American spiritual writers of our day. This man was held as an antidote to the war in Vietnam.

    Oh, please. Merton was a good man, but please! One of the greatest? Of all the great spiritual writers of the 20th century, you name Merton? He’s a light weight compared to …I’ll name one: Caryll Houselander. Okay, I’ll name another: Garrigou-Lagrange. Okay, another: Monsignor Ronald Knox. One more, you ask? Father Romano Guardini. Or how about Mother Teresa.

    Our beloved Pope Francis dropped another name for reflection- Dorothy Day.
    Day denounced war over and over and committed her entire life to protesting against the use of arms.

    It’s easy to protest the use of arms in America, the land of the free, a freedom won by people willing to go to war against the Nazi war machine. Even Romero said that taking up arms can be justified. Pacifism is an indefensible position.

    Yes, I know she did have an abortion and later regretted it. And for that matter it seems clear that Merton had a late inning affair. But these are the names Francis dropped. He’s not looking for purists anymore! He’s promoting inclusion and social justice.

    No one ever looked for purists. Have you forgotten St. Augustine? The history of the saints is filled with stories of people who had tarnished pasts, but who became great saints. “Not looking for purists anymore”? You are delusional.

    And if he’s promoting inclusion and social justice, why did he strip a gay priest of his faculties? Why did he fire him just before the Synod? Again, that action should have falsified your narrative. But it did not. You simply ignore it and pretend your narrative remains untouched. You do not understand who Pope Francis is. You think he’s a Catholic New Times guy. He’s not. He’s no liberal. He was persecuted in his own religious order for his conservatism.

    Pope Francis is sending out a message to the universal church. Is saying that the Catholic Church is not to be obsessed with pelvic moral theology.

    That’s you, interpreting Francis with Ted Schmidt lenses. That’s all. He never said anything like that. Not even close. He used the word “obsession” in his first interview, but the context was something else entirely. But you and others like you latch onto that word and re-locate it into another context, and you’ve got your narrative.

    He wants an all inclusive church.

    What does that mean? The Church is already all inclusive, that’s what the word ‘Catholic’ means (kataholike: universal, all nations). No one is excluded, but there are conditions: repentance. The first words out of Christ’s mouth.

    Notice how much Francis talks about the Devil?

    He wants a new economic global system. He wants an end to violence.

    Benedict wanted a new economic global system as well. You forgot that, didn’t you? And all popes want an end to violence.

    BTW, what is that new economic global system? More regulation? Or more economic freedom?

    So you see Francesco, this Wall Street bible you have your hands on, just does not come near the antidote for violence this article suggests.

    It’s not a bible, Ted, just an article that illustrates clearly the problem with the one sided narrative of media coverage. However, what is that antidote for violence? I know what it is: it is Christ; it is conversion; it is repentance. What did you think the antidote is? What does Pope Francis say it is? Christ. He’s the antidote. Not socialism, not pacifism. Christ is the antidote.

    Merton saw the good in all religions.

    So did Vatican II; so did Cardinal Danielou; so did Von Balthasar, so did DeLubac, so did countless other great Catholic theologians and teachers in the 20th century. What’s your point?

    He died an untimely death just as he was on the verge of reaching out to all religions for common ground in seeking God.

    What silly nonsense! You live in your imagination.

    The answer to this Wall Street story is not more violence. It is the words of Jesus. Forgive.

    He wasn’t advocating more violence. He was providing the full picture. But you are right, forgiveness is the answer. The problem is that Muslims think forgiveness is a way to dishonor the victim. They don’t believe in forgiveness. I have taught Muslims for years, and they have openly said that forgiveness is a disgrace and a dishonoring of the victims. There are real repercussions for not believing that Jesus is the Son of God. We forgive because we know through faith that we have been forgiven, and that we will not be saved if we refuse to forgive–it’s in the Our Father. You see, you don’t understand Islam. You look at Islam with rose colored glasses.

    Islamic Palestinians have seen enough of war.

    They have initiated enough war.

    But this Wall Street publication does not belong as any kind of solution to this problem.

    It did not propose a solution. It was not about that. It was about shattering the false narrative. Palestine has the solution. They only need to want to implement it. But they don’t. They want to destroy Israel. End of story.

  6. 6
    mushafta Says:

    You have so many axes to grind Francesco! Not sure if you’re a paid Conservative employee or just a Llosa lay Catholic living in another age.

    You utter more nonsense than anything imaginable! You’re certainly not a big fan of Pope Francis! You’re just waiting for the return of another fuddle duddle Benedict.

    Deal with reality Francesco! Francis held up Merton and Day- not those other unknowns.

    If you cannot connect the dots to his intentions in promoting these names.. You’re totally out it!

    Stop condemning Ted! He’s rightly sticking up for the little guys, not the giant!

    Had Ted written of more moral platitudes few of us would be as informed as to what is going on.

    I need to remind you that Ted Schmidt is an award winning journalist and a prophetic activist.

    He’s also made trips to Israel and Palestine and has seen first hand what goes on there. The average Canadian doesn’t give a rip!

    So lay off Ted! He’s a great guy!

    Go back to your Donald Trump school of ideology and right wing theology and re-arm for your next visit!

  7. 7

    You have so many axes to grind Francesco! Not sure if you’re a paid Conservative employee or just a Llosa lay Catholic living in another age.

    That is such an interesting reply. I have no axes to grind. I’m not an axe grinder. That again is your “reading into me” something that is not there. It is either because you cannot see my face and hear my tone of voice–which is always a problem with electronic communication– and thus misinterpret my words, or you are just too prejudiced to think straight.

    But I have no axe to grind. I just like objectivity. Reality is far more complex than your neat narratives.

    You utter more nonsense than anything imaginable!

    I think you know deep down that that is not quite true. I just challenge your assumptions, and I don’t think you take too kindly to that.

    You’re certainly not a big fan of Pope Francis! You’re just waiting for the return of another fuddle duddle Benedict.

    This is very interesting. What you are doing here is something that cognitive psychologists are very familiar with. Because I point out to you certain things that falsify your narrative about Pope Francis, instead of revising that narrative, or dispensing with it, you decide to hang onto it, and then you proceed to label me as some sort of ole fashioned angry conservative. That’s the easy way. But it is dishonest.

    Let me be truthful. When Benedict was Pope, it was the radical conservatives who were misusing him and his words in order to push their agenda, which included rejecting all modern Church music, and reviving Gregorian chant, Latin in the Mass, etc. Benedict never said that Church music must be Gregorian chant, nor many of their other claims. If they were challenged, we got labelled “Liberal”. You see, it’s easy to label someone. A label is nothing more than a designation of a constructed narrative. The problem is reality is always far more complex than a simple narrative would suggest, but people are lazy minded, and so instead of looking into the matter, instead of entertaining the possibility that the opponent might be right, instead of engaging in the difficult work of going back to the drawing board and trying to make sense out of a complex reality, just label the person. He’s an infidel, or he’s just a liberal.

    The problem is, I am not a Liberal–as you well know. But neither am I a conservative, and they well know. But you’ve done the same thing. You’ve labelled me a fuddle duddle devotee of Benedict, someone dreaming for a return to a Medieval time period. That’s just your intellectual laziness. You don’t want to re-examine the media narrative regarding Francis. You ignore data that falsifies it. So you stick with what you want to believe. It’s classic psychology: self-deception. Lots has been written about this.

    It’s just too bad that you are not comfortable with uncertainty. You need everything to be packaged into neat dualistic packages of left/right, conservative/liberal, oppressor/oppressed, either/or (not both), etc. It does make life much easier, but it is intellectually dishonest. Reality is far more complex. It does not always fit into our models.

    Deal with reality Francesco! Francis held up Merton and Day- not those other unknowns.

    I love Dorothy Day, but if those others are unknown to you, that says a lot about you.

    If you cannot connect the dots to his intentions in promoting these names.. You’re totally out it!

    There are no dots to connect. He’s in the United States, and those two were Americans. that’s why he brought them up. If he was in France, he would not have mentioned them.

    Stop condemning Ted! He’s rightly sticking up for the little guys, not the giant!

    Again, Ted, that’s psychology. It’s an archetype you are living. The one who stands up to the bully, and if there is no bully on the block, then you will make one up, construct one, so that you can play your archetypal role of “Hero”. That’s all there is to it, Ted. You are living an archetype. You are so desperate to be the hero, the rescuer, that you see an oppressor where there really is none, just as conservative see evil everywhere–they need to see evil, otherwise they cannot fit into their archetypal role, and they feel lost, they feel useless, so they see an enemy where there is none.

    I need to remind you that Ted Schmidt is an award winning journalist and a prophetic activist.

    Why do you have to remind me of that, Ted? Is it because your self-esteem is under attack? First of all, you were not a journalist, you were a high school teacher. You wrote articles of pretty much the same quality as the articles here, for a Newspaper that was only about a step up from a high school newspaper, whose readership was limited to left wing Catholics who had a tendency to reduce Catholicism to social justice matters, and OECTA typically awards those who operate our of the same dissenting/liberal mentality. So calling yourself an award winning journalist is rather dishonest and pretentious. If you were a journalist for a living and were awarded by the CAJ or got the Pulitzer prize, then you could call yourself an award winning journalist. But an OECTA award? Oh, please.

    He’s also made trips to Israel and Palestine and has seen first hand what goes on there.

    You only saw what your limited purview was able to take in, and when we see things that confirm our hypotheses, those things stand out. it’s called Confirmation Bias. I visited many cities over the world in the last two years. although I had spent two weeks or more in each one, there is a vast universe that I did not see. You can only take in so much. To really know a place, you have to live there to really know what goes on. Otherwise, it’s just confirmation bias.

    So lay off Ted! He’s a great guy!

    I don’t deny it. He’s just not a careful thinker.

    Go back to your Donald Trump school of ideology and right wing theology and re-arm for your next visit!

    More labels. I can’t stand Donald Trump, btw.

  8. 8
    mushafta Says:

    “To be honest with you….”
    You do surprise me Francesco for a brilliant man like yourself with such auspicious learning teaching in such an elite faculty (I can assume) to be using such a well worn phrase.

    Just when would you not be honest with me? That’s a red flag for me. I would only assume that everything you tell me is honest, so why do you need to point that out?

    Hello me to remind you Francesco, I am not Ted. Ted is the author of this blog. Are you that forgetful or is it paranoia that you choose to call me Ted? Try Mushafta.

    The fact that Ted continues to allow you to put your stuff here on this board, testifies to his high degree of tolerance that he has for a characters like you. We’re it me, you would’ve been long gone!

    You were never familiar with the new Catholic times? It just happened to be one of the finest Catholic publications ever produced on this continent. Not familiar with Mary Joe Leddy? Or did you cast her off the same way you jolted Sister Joan?

    The New Catholic Times was a big hit in this country and carried real Catholic news, much of it that upset the hierarchy which made it authentic. Catholic newsprint by and large in Canada is good kindling for your woodstove. All papers are owned by the archdioceses so you’ll never see them print anything contrary to their owner.

    Wow! You claim Muslims cannot forgive? Are you real?
    You taught many eh? Too bad you didn’t take the time to learn something from them!

    Your purpose here is only to disturb. But Ted is far too tolerant!

  9. 9

    If you or Ted were to ban me from this blog, there would be no one else to comment. Furthermore, that would belie his claim to tolerance. We ought to tolerate all points of view, except of course those that are intolerable–such as the orthodox Catholic perspective.

    Of course I am familiar with the Catholic New Times. That’s what I was referring to. Best on the continent? That’s why I believe you are Ted. Only Ted would say something so silly. Mary Joe Leddy….sigh! double sigh! Was never impressed. In fact, I think I would have more respect for Sr. Joan. I heard Sr. Joan wrote a good book on getting old and dying. I recant my words about her.

    If the CNT was a big hit, why did it fold? It upset the hierarchy because it was such a stupid paper with poor quality articles that commit every inductive fallacy in the book. Looking back, what the hierarchy can learn from this is not to worry about dissenting newspapers that have an “axe to grind”; they die out soon enough. It was always the same old, same old, and papers like that don’t survive. People get tired of the same old, with the same old fallacies, same old poor reasoning, same old writers living out of an ancient archetype (i.e.., the “hero” Ted), same old narrative of poor that are oppressed, the rich oppressors. Granted there are rich oppressors, but there are the rich who are not oppressors, and there are poor victims, and there are people who are poor because they are the victims of their own bad choices. But that makes things more complicated, and we don’t want that now do we?

    The idea of a Catholic newspaper saying things contrary to the magisterium is a bit odd, wouldn’t you say? I purchase a Catholic newspaper to uplift me, to stimulate my mind, to inspire me to read and pray and do works of mercy, etc. Why would a Catholic newspaper publish articles criticizing the magisterium? That’s like a school news letter publishing an article criticizing the decisions of the principal or the school board. Who would want to attend the school when its own employees are speaking against one another? The idea is to serve the faith, not stand back and arrogantly criticize those in office. Imagine a hospital journal publishing articles critical of the CEO. It just does not make sense. And that was the CNT. A bunch of bellyachers who can’t stand authority and who diss those who have a different theology, a Catholic theology. Which says a lot…it says the CNT has a different theology, since it sees the magisterium as the enemy. The luxury of being able to call your paper Catholic, so as to have access to Catholic parishes and Catholic bookstores and Catholic schools, and the luxury of writing anti-Catholic articles. Wonderful. Too good to be true. Anyways, the people got tired of it and eventually caught on, that these people are not really the official voice of the Church, not official teachers of the Church, and so they don’t enjoy the charism of office. It was a bunch of like-minded folk who had their own agenda. When you depart from the faith of the Church, except in a few particular social justice matters, you forfeit your right to call yourself ‘Catholic’. I suspect OECTAs days are numbered, unless the younger generation has a different mentality, which they might–there are signs.

    My purpose to disturb? Yes, disturb the bully. I’m a hero. I got that from Ted.


RSS Feed for this entry

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: