This infographic provides a comparison of the policy positions of Gubernatorial Candidates Republican Ron DeSantis and Socialist Andrew Gillum.
Infographic provided by Ron DeSantis for Governor campaign.
EDITORS NOTE: The modified featured image is by Alex Perez on Unsplash.
Michael D. Benge a former POW in North Vietnam tells Jamie Glazov a horrifying untold story – and unveils the POWs left behind.
RELATED ARTICLES:
Cuban War Crimes in Vietnam by Elise Cooper
My Visit to Cuba — An American in Havana
My name is Michael D. Benge. While serving as a civilian Economic Development Officer in the Central Highlands of South Viet Nam, I was captured by the North Vietnamese during the Tet Offensive on January 28, 1968. I was held in numerous camps in South Viet Nam, Cambodia, Laos and North Viet Nam. I was a POW for over five years, and spent 27 months in solitary confinement, one year in a “black box,” and one year in a cage in Cambodia. I served for almost 11 years in Viet Nam. I was released during Operation Homecoming in 1973. I am a Board Member of the National Alliance of Families for the Return of America’s Missing Servicemen. And, I am a POW/MIA activist; that is, I am one who is actively seeking the truth regarding the fate of our Prisoners of War and Missing in Action.
I was not tortured by the Cubans, nor was I part of the “Cuban Program.” There were 19 American POWs that I know of who were tortured by the Cubans in Hanoi during the Vietnam War. These brave men include Colonel Jack Bomar and Captain Ray Vohden, who will testify, and also Commander Al Carpenter, who is with us today. They named their torturers “Fidel,” “Chico” and “Pancho.” The torture took place in a POW camp called the Zoo, and the Vietnamese camp commander was a man they called the “Lump.” He was called that because of the presence of a rather large fatty tumor in the middle of his forehead.
No, I was not tortured by Cubans in Vietnam, but I was interrogated by the “Lump,” and a person who appeared to be a Latino and who spoke a few words of Spanish to the “Lump” during my interrogation in the early part of 1970. Upon my return to the US, I was shown a picture taken in Cuba of the “Lump,” who was with an American antiwar group. Yes, it was the same person who had interrogated me in 1970. I was told by a Congressional Investigator that he was the man who was in charge of funneling Soviet KGB money to American antiwar groups and activists, such as Jane Fonda. After researching my paper, this made more sense, for who would be better suited to liaison with the Cubans. This was my first piece of the puzzle.
I decided to research the “Cuban Program” after repeated claims by the Administration, Senators John McCain and John Kerry, Ambassador Pete Peterson, and members of the Department of Defense (DOD) that the Vietnamese Government was “cooperating fully” in resolving the POW/MIA issue. This is far from the truth.
If the Vietnamese communists were fully cooperating as purported, they would have told us the true fate of the 173 US servicemen who were last known to be alive and in the hands of the North Vietnamese communists. They would have helped us resolve the fate of over 600 American servicemen who were lost in Laos, of which over 80% were lost in areas under the total control of the North Vietnamese. If the Vietnamese were fully cooperating, we would not be here today, for they would have revealed the names of the Cubans “Fidel,” “Chico” and “Pancho,” who were responsible for the torture of 19 American POWs; beating one so severely that it resulted in his death.
Upon their return to the US, the POWs in the “Cuban Program” were told by our government not to tell of their torture by the Cubans, but they resisted, as they had in the “Cuban Program, and some broke the silence. Regardless, the “Cuban Program” was swept under the rug by the US Government.
Thus, I chose to research the “Cuba Program” — one segment of the POW/MIA issue–to prove my point that the Vietnamese communists were not fully cooperating as purported. I first produced a draft paper in 1996 for presentation at the annual meeting of the National Alliance of Families.
Commander Chip Beck, who at that time was with the Department of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO), became interested in my research, and tried to find out what DPMO knew. He was basically told by DPMO to back off. Congressman Bob Dornan also became interested. He held hearings, and requested that DPMO provide them with their analysis of the Cuban Program. A compilation was presented, and Mr. Robert Destatte from DPMO testified as to his and DPMO’s analysis. Commander Beck also testified; after which, he was told by DPMO that his services were no longer needed.
With the release of DPMO’s compilation and analysis, and the declassification of additional documents related to Cuba’s involvement in Vietnam, I reassessed this information. In the DPMO compilation, there were memoranda stating that the CIA had identified Cuban military attaches Eduardo Morjon Esteves and Luis Perez Jaen with backgrounds that seemed to correspond with information on “Fidel” and “Chico” provided by returned POWs. Reportedly, Esteves served under diplomatic cover as a brigadier general at the United Nations in New York during 1977-78. Documents indicate that the FBI and DIA were “tasked” to ID these people; however, neither the CIA, the DIA, nor the FBI could produce a decent picture for identification by the returned POWs. It makes one wonder as to their level of effort.
Nonetheless, just from my reading the documents in the DPMO compilation, I found the profile of a man that that seemed to match almost perfectly the POWs’ description of the Cuban called “Chico.” However, this profile also partially fit the POWs’ characterization of “Fidel.” The profile was that of Major Fernando Vecino Alegret.
On August 22, 1999, the Miami Herald published an article on the “Cuban Program” based partially on my report. However, the reporter got it wrong and said that I believed Raul Valdes Vivo, the DGI agent attached to COSVN (ref. my submitted report), might be “Fidel.” Independent of my report, a Cuban exile in the Miami area identified Fernando Vecino Alegret as “Fidel,” based on information emanating from contacts within the exile community and Cuba. He also produced a picture of Alegret that was subsequently identified by Col. Hubbard, who said he was 99% sure he was “Fidel.” Alegret is now Cuba’s Minister of Education, and Fidel Castro has issued a denial that Alegret was ever in Vietnam. However, DIA documentation in DPMO’s compilation proves otherwise.
In Mr. Destatte’s testimony, he claims he “was never responsible for any investigations or analysis related to the “Cuban Program.” “Responsible” is the key word here that Mr. Destatte parses.
The Administration and the Department of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO) has mastered the art of obfuscation. I grew up on a farm in the West, and I used to try to catch greased pigs at the county fair, and I can assure you that trying to pin down DPMO to truthful facts is sometimes much more difficult than trying to catch a greased pig.
Mr. Chuck Trowbridge of DPMO is also implicated as participating in the investigation and analysis; however, it has never been revealed who was in fact in charge. One would hope that someone at DPMO is in charge.
Mr. Destatte testified to DPMO’s conclusions and that the “Cuban Program” was nothing more than a program “to provide instruction in basic English to PAVN [North Vietnamese Army] personnel working with American prisoners.”
I have taught English to Vietnamese, and have been tortured by the Vietnamese, and I can tell the difference between the two. One might conclude from Mr. Destatte’s testimony that neither he nor Mr. Trowbridge know the difference. I can also read English and understand what I read. One might also conclude that they may have a problem here too. Perhaps they should have taken basic English instruction from the Cubans.
Mr. Destatte also had the audacity to testify that the Vietnamese high-command was unaware that the Cubans were torturing American POWs, and it was stopped once they found out. However, it is crystal clear from the POW debriefings, as well as the Air Force Intelligence Analysis, that the “Cuban Program” was sanctioned by the Vietnamese. This then leads one to ask, “How did Mr. Destatte reach his conclusion?”
Mr. Destatte reached his conclusion by asking North Vietnamese communist Colonel Pham Teo, who told Destatte he was in South Viet Nam in 1967-68 and knew nothing of the “Cuban Program.” However, he had heard rumors that it was an English language instruction program that had “gone awry.” Mr. Destatte testified that the Vietnamese explanation “is…fully consistent with what we know about the conduct of the Cubans in question.”
Evidently, Destatte chose to believe a Vietnamese communist colonel over American POWs who had been brutally tortured in the “Cuban Program” and had clearly stated in their debriefings that the Vietnamese were well aware of and participated in their torture. Destatte choses to believe a member of a draconian regime, which had systematically murdered 70-80,000 political prisoners after they took over power in Vietnam in 1975, and who had broken every agreement ever made with the US and South Vietnamese governments.
What bewilders me, as it should you, is that Destatte’s superiors at DPMO had the audacity to let him testify before Congress to this foolishness. This exemplifies the quality of DPMO’s investigation and analysis of the “Cuban Program.”
I am neither a trained investigator nor an analyst, but I do know how to research. And I have concluded that at best, DPMO’s investigation and analysis of the “Cuban Program” was not up to professional standards, and DPMO’s conclusions are shameful! However, they did a great job of obfuscating the issue.
Since the “Cuban Program” was sanctioned by the Vietnamese, what then was the diving force behind it?” According to POW debriefings, supported by CIA and other reports, the “Cuba Program” was part of a Hanoi medical university’s “psychological study.” It was conducted to obtain full compliance from the American POWs, and to force them to make propaganda statements against the American government and the war in Vietnam. The real reason for the termination of the “Cuban Program” was so “Fidel,” “Chico” and “Pancho” could return to Cuba as planned in time to prepare a presentation for the October 18-21, 1968, Communist Internationale Second Symposium Against Yankee Genocide In Vietnam. This symposium in Cuba was a continuum of the Bertrand Russell War Crimes Tribunal kangaroo court and dog-and-pony show held in Denmark the previous year.
My paper is based partially on what DPMO gave to Congressman Dornan’s Committee, as well as on documents obtained from the DIA and the CIA through the Freedom of Information Act, and it is thoroughly referenced. I would like to submit a copy of it and the referenced material to the Committee at this time for the record.
However, I have just scratched the surface, but I found enough documents to indicate that there should be a plethora of others related to the Cuban involvement in Vietnam if they are ever declassified as 2 US Presidents have decreed. I also recommend that this matter be thoroughly investigated by professional investigators, not DPMO analysts.
Besides evidence contrary to DPMO’s stated position on the “Cuban Program,” the documents I examined reveal:
the possibility that a number of American POWs from the Vietnam War had been held in Los Maristas, a secret Cuban prison run by Castro’s G-2 intelligence service. The Cuban who claims to have seen them later escaped and made it to the United States, and was reportedly debriefed by the FBI;
a Cuban Official had offered the State Department to ransom some American POWs from Vietnam, but there was no follow up;
that Cubans, along with Russians, guarded a number of American POWs in Laos;
the Cubans photographed a number of American POWs in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia;
that besides the “Cuban Program,” the Cubans were very heavily involved in Vietnam. They had several thousand “engineers” in Vietnam constructing, repairing and guarding the Ho Chi Minh Trail where a large number of Americans disappeared;
the possibility that American POWs were “treated” in Cuban hospitals in Hanoi;
the Cubans had a permanent DGI agent assigned to the COSVN headquarters in Cambodia, the North Vietnamese command center directing the war in South Vietnam. This is a fact not found in the history books on the Vietnam War. He was assigned there on the insistence of Rauol Castro, the head of Cuba’s military and the brother of the real Fidel. This fact belies Mr. Destatte’s testimony that “the Soviet and Cuban governments did not successfully dictate policies or actions to the North Vietnamese government;”
two unrelated documents telling of American POWs being taken from Vietnam to Cuba;
the Cubans were also actively engaged in subversive activities, infiltrating a number of communist youth into the US, and were funneling KGB money through Vietnamese communist agents to antiwar groups and individuals in the US;
as recent as 1996, the Vietnamese trained Cuban Special Forces to undertake limited attacks in the USA
Instead of hiring analysts at DPMO, DOD should hire some good professional investigators, such as former FBI or police investigators, and some people who know how to do systematic research. However, everytime DPMO gets good ones, it seems to find a way to get rid of them.
My paper raises more questions than it answers, but only history will prove me right or wrong; however, I think I am on the right track. Only through full disclosure by the US government agencies, which were gathering information on the depth of Cuban involvement in the Vietnam war and with American POWs, will we know the truth.
As you can see from my document, the Cubans were heavily involved in the Vietnam War. They were in charge of building and maintaining a good portion of the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Recently, I was invited as a representative of the National Alliance of Families to a briefing at DPMO by its head, Bob Jones. Among things he discussed was his proposal for DPMO to sponsor a meeting between the US, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos to discuss American Servicemen lost along the Ho Chi Minh Trail. I suggested to Mr. Jones that he should also invite Cuba to the conference, for they were heavily involved. He told me that I was ridiculous, for the Cubans weren’t involved in Vietnam. I recommended to him that he read both the material presented to Congress on the Cuban Program and Raul Valdes Vivo’s book.
I was brought up with old fashion values. My mother taught me at a young age that no matter how hard you search for the truth, you won’t find it unless you want to.
We are not seeking revenge. We will leave that issue to the courts. We are also not seeking to get someone fired, we leave that up to you to judge. We are only seeking an honest accounting for the POW/MIAs. We, like every American should, only seek honest answers from our government and its representatives, and competent investigations as to the fate of the POW/MIAs so that their families might find closure to their long suffering grief.
Ignorance? Arrogance? Disinterest? Lack of caring? Incompetence? Obfuscation? I rest my case.
Respectfully Submitted
Michael D. Benge
2300 Pimmit Dr., #604-W
Falls Church, VA 22043
EDITORS NOTE: Please support The Glazov Gang because we are a fan-generated show and need your help to keep going. Make a contribution or set up a monthly pledge.
“We know what Islam is and we know what lessons Islam is going to teach all of us,” former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick declared reassuringly on May 31, 2015, at Crystal City, Virginia’s Hyatt Regency Hotel. McCarrick’s comments before an Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) interfaith conference recall how this now disgraced Catholic clergyman led for many years the Catholic Church’s often horribly misguided dealings with Islam.
McCarrick offered dubious adulation for his ISNA hosts. “I have been privileged to know ISNA for 20 years and to see the growth and development of this extraordinary instrument of understanding, instrument of cooperation, and instrument of beauty.” Yet federal courts judged this Muslim Brotherhood (MB)-derived organization as an unindicted co-conspirator in 2007 in American history’s largest terrorism financing trial, given ISNA’s links to the MB terrorist organization Hamas.
McCarrick specifically praised ISNA leaders such as Mohamed Magid, Sayyid Syeed, Muzammil Siddiqi, and Azhar Azeez as “so much a part of America and the ummah is growing.” Their radical backgrounds notwithstanding, McCarrick stated that “here it is thoroughly American, here it is thoroughly patriotic,” and that ISNA fulfilled a national need for an “important, clear patriotic American voice from the Muslim community.” “ISNA is very important to me, because it is very important to my country, your country, our country,” he stated, yet ISNA’s latest 2018 conference featured a rogue’s gallery of anti-Western, anti-Israel speakers.
At the 2015 conference McCarrick expressed a questionable certainty that atrocities by jihadist groups like the Islamic State distorted Islamic doctrine. ISNA must be a “strong, and a clear, and a courageous voice” and declare for Muslims that “that’s not really us, that’s not what the Quran says, that’s not what the Prophet, peace be upon him, is teaching,” he stated. As is ubiquitous for Islam apologists, he distorted Quran 5:32 to claim that “these are the quotations that we need to underline, because these are the quotations which define ISNA today. Not the misquotations, not the bad translations.”
By contrast, McCarrick noted how he has talked around the world about a 2005 fatwa from ISNA’s Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) against terrorism, notwithstanding FCNA’s radical ties. This fatwa “was one of the high moments in the life of American Muslims” and was “such a courageous thing” that showed the “ummah in America standing firmly, standing together and saying, this is what we believe and it is true Islam.” Meanwhile, the
other things are fake. When you go to kill innocent people, that’s not true Islam; when you go to destroy things that are beautiful, that’s not true Islam. The true Islam for me…is what you are living and you are preaching and you are giving to the American society.
McCarrick worried that this fatwa “has really never received the publicity it deserves.” Yet analysts such as Judea Pearl have noted the loopholes in this weak document that could allow for jihadist killings, including the murder of his son Daniel Pearl in Pakistan. As Jihad Watch’s Robert Spencer has noted, phrases such as “civilians” and “innocent lives” in the fatwa “are in fact hotly debated terms in the Islamic world.”
Nonetheless, McCarrick before ISNA remained unshaken that “who you are and what you believe are very beautiful things.” He lauded past “great Muslim leaders who fearlessly and graciously and wisely defended their people, defended ISNA” against “Islamophobia.” He hoped that young American Muslims would “take their definition of Islam from ISNA, and not from ISIS,” as ISNA had the “true vision of your community, the true vision of your religion.”
McCarrick’s 2015 ISNA appearance was merely one manifestation of this fixture at Islam-pandering activities in Washington, DC, and beyond. He was a prominent ally of Georgetown University’s Saudi-funded Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU). There he associated with ACMCU Islam-apologists including Professor John Esposito and Jordan Denari Duffner. Along with the ACMCU, he promoted the Islamophile propaganda films of Unity Productions Foundation, including The Sultan and the Saint.
McCarrick was also involved in the 2016 Marrakesh Declaration. He described this as a “truly a great document” for its religious freedom appeal on the basis of the seventh-century Medina Charter from Islam’s founding period. Yet more critical observers such as the Iraqi-American analyst Nibraz Kazimi have dissected the multiple problems with McCarrick’s reliance upon this historically questionable charter as a source of Islamic tolerance.
Beyond the Marrakesh Declaration, McCarrick has affiliated with multiple initiatives led by the Mauritanian-born Sheikh Abdullah bin Bayyah, such as the 2018 Alliance of Virtue. Bin Bayyah’s multiple radical pronouncements in favor of jihadists fighting Israel or American troops in Iraq belie recurring efforts to present him as a Muslim “moderate.” Yet McCarrick in 2016 praised Bin Bayyah as the “prophet of light and the prophet of reason” with the “correct understanding of Islam,” while others in America want to “canonize an Islamophobia.”
McCarrick accordingly epitomized the benign outlook on Islam embraced by Pope Francis’ papacy to the concern of so many. McCarrick himself praised Pope Francis during a panel at the 2015 Reviving the Islamic Spirit conference in Toronto, Canada, an annual event that has a long history of radicalism. As a counter to “stupid Islamophobia,” McCarrick recommended that Muslims “listen to Pope Francis and feel better about yourselves.” With the scandals of McCarrick and others embroiling Pope Francis, it is questionable just who is listening to the Catholic Church now.
RELATED ARTICLE: Rome Failed on McCarrick – and Needs to Change
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch. The featured image of former Cardinal McCarrick is from Church Militant.
The anti-American, anti-Semitic activist jihada, Linda Sarsour, was a scheduled speaker at the annual convention of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), in Houston, Texas. Last year, she called for jihad against President Trump and this year, she warns her “sisters and brothers” to avoid the trap of “humanizing” the Jews.
Born and raised in a shame-honor culture by “Palestinian” parents who made hijra to Brooklyn, New York, her messages, unsurprisingly, are directed against America and Israel. Regarding the former, her words, “it is not our job to assimilate,” received applause from the audience. Regarding the latter, she insists that only extermination will suffice. Her diatribe was designed to shame the attendees into vigorously supporting the Palestinian cause for the total destruction and Islamic replacement of Israel. Any dialogue is discredited as an indication of weakness and perfidy towards Allah. Islamic ideology specifies that holy war is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Muslim Mission and their obligation to convert everybody to Islam by either persuasion or force. Sarsour’s purpose and rhetoric, intolerance and death, are as old as Islam itself.
To be adequately alerted to Sarsour’s fanatical beliefs, we must familiarize ourselves with an important aspect of her culture’s vocabulary and modus operandi. Just as the Inuit (Eskimo) people have more than 50 words for snow because that is how they live, so the Muslims have a variety of words for lying because that is how they live. Briefly, they include:
To the devout tyrannical Islamic belief system, where the majority of their people is kept illiterate and underdeveloped in terror- or trauma-bonding, Israel’s accomplishments and prosperity during the same 70 years (since Israel’s statehood, 1948) are seen as an affront, an ever-present reminder of Islam’s deficiency. They are humiliated for not being self-sufficient, of relying on booty for wealth and on others, including the despised Israel, for funds, utilities, water, and jobs. In their shame-honor social order, they project the fault on others and feign ownership of what is not theirs. This is a people that took their “Arabic” numerals from the Hindu numerical system, cryptography from Egypt, and their coveted arches from Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks and Romans. Ignorance and envy have led to self-deception and the desire to deceive the rest of the world, like the dying Pharaoh who resented others the joy of living.
The invention of the term, “Islamophobia,” is a potential game-changer. Developed by the Muslim Brotherhood developed “Islamophobia” in the early 1900s to hide their misdeeds and to ensure that the world – the host government, protective forces, academia and media – would never articulate their atrocities out of fear of humiliation, so that the Islamists could seize control without having to reveal their true nature. We have nevertheless come to understand much about their modus operandi, due to extensive research and reporting by psychoanalyst and counter-terrorism expert, Nancy Hartevelt Kobrin. The jihadi’s accusations against others are an effort to separate themselves (splitting their persona) from their criminality, and to project onto others the terrors they acquired from their childhood.
Dalia Mogahed, a speaker at the same event, accepted no Islamic responsibility for 9/11, and blamed Americans for the excessive attacks on Muslims, yet FBI statistics show that of the 1,584 religious hate crimes registered in 2016, 54.4 percent were motivated by anti-Jewish bias. The Religion of Peace website (on 9/11/18) lists 16 suicide blasts, 860 people killed and 804 injured in 162 attacks in 27 countries during August, 2018, were committed by Muslims, and 33,825 (9/16/18) deadly terrorist attacks were committed by Muslims worldwide since 9/11/01.
Sarsour plumbed the depths of envious loathing when she admonished her co-religionists to not “humanize” Jews, ironically using a term that perfectly defines the differences between Judaism and Islam. It was Jews, some two thousand years before Islam was invented, who brought humanity to the world through monotheism when the rest of humankind lived in lawlessness and chaos. It is expressed in Hillel’s expression of the ethic of reciprocity or “Golden Rule,” “That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah: the rest is the explanation; go and learn.” This is embodied today, through the Israeli IDF medics and the civilian social workers who rush to volunteer in earthquake zones, at terrorist attack sites, and in the aftermath of natural disasters like tsunamis and floods. It is seen as Israel brings her unparalleled expertise in water technology to arid countries, helping Africans grow their own food, start schools for their children, and become self-sustaining. And it is seen as Israel’s Basic Law: Human dignity and Liberty, which guarantee, among others, the right of all to basic dignity. These are the people that Sarsour consider dehumanized, imitating the Nazis in the 1930s.
The current situation necessitates an honest comparison between Islam and Judaism.
Where Judaism is empowered by moral purpose, the dignity of man and the sanctity of free will, Islam is driven by fear, vengeance, greed, and conquest, enforced by prayers issued five times daily, and dedication to an oppressive god. Within Islam, a man may decapitate the apostate, homosexual and intellectual; flog and imprison the woman who is raped; stone his wife for accusations of adultery; sell his young daughter into marriage with a sexual predator; and take up to four underage girls into the modernized, legalized slave harem, renamed “marriage.” Under Islam, girls may be deprived of schooling and hospitalization, and such funding, along with what is earmarked for research and laboratories, is more likely used to build mosques and support terrorism.
Nearly 40% of the Islamic world, mostly women of the hundreds of millions of illiterates of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation), can neither read nor write. Under Islam, the female is so cruelly undervalued that her offspring become the severely emotionally disturbed jihadi terrorists. These Palestinian children are exploited and trained to be fighters and suicide bombers and a recent study revealed that more teenagers are eager to take on terror attacks for suicidal greatness and glory. Sarsour’s use of “humanity” may be explained as a trait that was never permitted to emerge. It may be defined as “projection,” a defense mechanism, whereby the hostile traits of the speaker are attributed to another. It allows the accuser to project (transfer) the responsibility for her people’s faults and misdeeds on the other. It permits the Muslim to be cleared of the guilt, the toxic chaos, the blood, guts, explosives, and suicides that keep the jihadi in his (or her) maternal attachment.
This is the culture that Linda “we will not assimilate” Sarsour would impose upon America.
Of all the attributions noted by Sarsour, choosing “humanity/humanizing” is a textbook case because she knows, at least psychologically, that the Jews and Israelis are particularly motivated by moral purpose, so she paints them as the reverse. But she is a product of her upbringing and history, and honor-bound to carry forth the mindset of lies, abuse, torture and extermination for which Islam is known. There is not a modicum of evidence to show any difference between Islam’s horrific past and Islam today.
Sarsour may be ignored, but the applause she received must alert us to vigilance.
Contributions to this post by Kevin O’Neil.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is by Melany Rochester on Unsplash.
On Friday, Judge Brett Kavanaugh denied an unproven accusation that he and a friend sexually assaulted a woman in high school. As the Senate decides how to react to the accuser’s claims, Planned Parenthood is jumping on the bandwagon to claim that Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination process should be halted.
The replies to these Tweets lay out the case that Planned Parenthood is simply being a left-wing attack dog. More importantly, however, is their absolute hypocrisy when it comes to treatment of women who are sexually assaulted.
2ndVote readers are familiar with Live Action’s excellent work uncovering Planned Parenthood’s widespread protection of sex abusers. Are you also aware of the time a Mobile, Alabama Planned Parenthood center gave two abortions to a 14-year old girl in four months, but concluded that she wasn’t being sexually assaulted? The center also did not report the girl’s condition to the state, in violation of health care reporting laws.
The girl had two children prior to those abortions, as well. LifeSiteNews has more:
That official said that a LifeSiteNews summary of the situation was “true,” but it “would be much better” if LifeSiteNews framed its coverage favorably. It was subsequently clarified with this official that “essentially, your department was satisfied [Planned Parenthood] had acted in good faith, and not intentionally hid this information” from child protective services.”
This official also told LifeSiteNews that Planned Parenthood had previously investigated the 14-year old’s circumstances, and determined she was not being abused. However, the spokesperson LifeSiteNews spoke with on Monday said that there are no state requirements for what questions Planned Parenthood asked of the 14-year old to determine her four pregnancies were not due to abuse.
Got that? The state health department believed Planned Parenthood “accidentally” broke state law, so it gave them a slap on the wrist. No wonder Planned Parenthood’s national spokespersons believe they can continue to flout sex abuse, baby sales, and other laws with impunity. And no wonder Planned Parenthood believes it can claim to #BelieveWomen about sexual assault despite its own poor record on that front.
The only thing Planned Parenthood will listen to is money. 2ndVote shoppers should tell corporate backers of America’s largest abortion company to stop funding sex abuse cover-ups and slaughter of the unborn.
Adobe
Aetna
Allstate
American Express
Amgen
AutoZone
Avon
Bank of America
Bath & Body Works
Ben & Jerry’s
Blue Cross Blue Shield
Boeing
BP
Charles Schwab
Clorox
Craigslist
Converse
Deutsche Bank
Diageo
Dockers
Energizer
Expedia
ExxonMobil
Fannie Mae
Freddie Mac
Frito Lay
General Electric
Groupon
Intuit
Jiffy Lube
JPMorgan Chase
Johnson & Johnson
Kaiser Permanente
Kraft Heinz
Levi Strauss
Liberty Mutual
March of Dimes
Microsoft
Mondelez International
Monsanto
Morgan Stanley
Nike
Oracle
Patagonia
PayPal
PepsiCo
Pfizer
Progressive Insurance
Prudential
Qualcomm
Starbucks
Shell
Susan G. Komen
Unilever
United Airlines
United Way
US Bank
Verizon
Wells Fargo
WD-40 Company
3M
7 For All Mankind
Abbott Laboratories
Accenture
Adobe
ADP
Advanced Micro Device
Aetna
Alamo
Albertsons
Alcoa
Allstate
American Airlines
American Express
American Greetings
American Petroleum Institute
Ameriprise Financial
AmerisourceBergen
Amgen
Anheuser-Busch
Ann Taylor
AOL
Apostrophe
AT&T
Avon
AXA
Banana Republic
Bank of America
Belk
Ben & Jerry’s
Best Buy
Black & Decker
Boeing
BP
Bridgestone
Bristol-Myers Squibb
Calvin Klein
Campbell’s Soup
Cargill
Carmax
Caribou Coffee
Central Pacific Financial
CenturyLink
Cigna
Cisco
Citibank
Choice Hotels
Clorox
COACH
Comcast
Comerica Bank
Commerce Bank
Conagra
ConocoPhillips
Costco
Converse
Corning Inc.
CoverGirl
CVS
Dana Farber Cancer Institute
Del Monte Foods
Dell
Delta Express
Deutsche Bank
Diageo
DiGiorno
DIRECTV
Dockers
Dollar General
Dollar Shave Club
Dow Chemical
DowDuPont
eBay
Energizer
Enterprise Holdings
Ernst & Young
eToys.com
Expedia
Express Scripts Inc.
Fannie Mae
FedEx
Fifth Third Bank
Ford
Freddie Mac
Friendly’s
Frito-Lay
Fry’s Food Stores
Gap
GEICO
General Electric
General Mills
General Motors
Goldman Sachs
Google
Groupon
H-E-B
H&R Block
Hallmark Cards
Harris Teeter
Hasbro
HBO
HCA Holdings
Health Net
Hellmann’s Mayonnaise
Hershey Company
Hewlett-Packard
Hillshire Brands Company
Home Depot
Honda
Hunt’s
Hurleys
IBM
Intel
Intuit
Jack in the Box
JanSport
Jell-O
Jenn-Air
Jet.com
Jiffy Lube
John-Deere
John Hancock Financial
Johnson & Johnson
JPMorgan Chase
Junior Achievement
Kellogg’s
Kenmore
Kentucky Fried Chicken
Kimberly-Cark
Kipling
KitchenAid
Kmart
Kohl’s
KPMG
Kraft-Heinz
Kroger
L.L. Bean
Lands’ End
Lee
Levi Strauss
Liberty Mutual
Lincoln Financial Group
LOFT
MAPCO
Mars Inc.
Marshalls
Mary Kay
MassMutual
MasterCard
Maytag
Mcdonalds
Merck & Co.
MGM Resorts International
Mircrosoft
Mondelez International
Monsanto
Morgan Stanley
Motorola
National Car Rental
National Basketball Association
National Football League
Nautica
NBC Universal
NCAA
Nestle
New Balance
New York Life
Newell Brands
Old Navy
Oracle
Pacific Life
PayPal
PepsiCo
PetSmart
Pfizer
PINK
Pizza Hut
PNC Bank
Prudential Financial and Insurance
Procter & Gamble
Progressive Insurance
Publix
Qdoba Mexican Grill
Quaker Oats
Qualcomm
Quality Inn
QuickBooks
Ralph Lauren
Ralphs
REI
Rite Aid
Safeway
Sam’s Club
Schnucks
Sears
Seattle’s Best Coffee
Shell Oil
Shelter Insurance
The Sherwin Williams Company
Sprint
Starbucks
State Farm
Subaru
Subway
SunTrust
Susan G. Komen
T-Mobile
T.J. Maxx
Taco Bell
Tazo Tea
Teavana
Texas Instruments
The North Face
The Travelers Companies
Tiffany & Co
Timberland
Time Warner
Toro
Toys R Us
Tractor Supply Company
Turbo Tax
Unilever
UnitedHealth Group
US Bank
USAA
Vanity Fair
Vans
Verizon
Victoria’s Secret
Walmart
Walgreens
Wawa
Wells Fargo
Western Union
Whataburger
Whirlpool Corporation
White Castle
Wrangler
Yelp
Youtube
Xerox
Zales
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is from Shutterstock.
Stop me if you’ve heard this one: an annual media event is dropping viewers like flies because going full-tilt liberal is bad for business.
First it was the Grammys, then the Oscars, then the Super Bowl. On Monday, as the politics soured, the Emmys hit record-low viewership.
The show reached virtually identical audiences of 11.4 million each of the last two years, the Nielsen company said.
The decline to 10.21 million continues a troubling trend for televised awards shows. The Oscars audience this year was down 19 percent from 2017 and the Grammys were down 23 percent.
Diminishing interest in television is partly to blame for these numbers, but the fact is that the American people are tired of elites telling us what to do and what to think. Tens of millions of conservatives are tired of seeing their values ignored, mocked, and/or even lied about — and they are leaving the self-absorbed “elites” to pat themselves on the backs.
For some of what was said, check out this Entertainment Weekly article which has the laughable headline of “Emmys hit political hot topics but rarely boiled over”.
Perhaps most offensive was Thandie Newton’s decision to a) deny her belief in God, b) thank a female God, and then c) immediately thereafter swear.
We can’t imagine why Americans are skipping this classy show…
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is by Shutterstock.
Google is one of America’s largest companies. It prides itself on having liberal values — values so left-wing that the company ranks a 1 in all of 2ndVote’s categories.
One of Google’s so-called “values” is environmental protection. It cares about the environment so much that it supports raising taxes through carbon taxes and the Paris climate deal.
It also is engaging in sketchy “Big Brother” behavior in the U.S. Europe…even as it lets China censor the truth about smog in the Communist nation.
First, via The Washington Times, what’s going on in the U.S. and Europe:
Google’s Street View cars — the global cruisers that collect data for the making of more accurate maps — now have a new mission, and it’s one that’s sure to make the Green groups cheer. The tech company’s bolstering its fleet with updated pollution-recording devices from the San Francisco company, Aclima, to patrol streets in Europe and in the United States, and monitor fluctuating levels of air quality.
And from The Intercept, the deal in China:
Sources familiar with Dragonfly said the search platform also appeared to have been tailored to replace weather and air pollution data with information provided directly by an unnamed source in Beijing. The Chinese government has a record of manipulating details about pollution in the country’s cities. One Google source said the company had built a system, integrated as part of Dragonfly, that was “essentially hardcoded to force their [Chinese-provided] data.” The source raised concerns that the Dragonfly search system would be providing false pollution data that downplayed the amount of toxins in the air.
In other words, Google is real dedicated to saving the environment when it doesn’t involve actually stopping the world’s worst polluter. It is real dedicated to stopping global warming or climate change or whatever it’s called now — as long as it doesn’t involve standing up to one of the world’s most heinous dictatorships.
Then again, Google’s “Big Brother” approach to environmentalism is pretty much in line with China’s view of individual liberty. Perhaps that’s why Google is neutering itself to partner with China.
“Because Mazie Hirono has a difficult time with the Biden Rule and the Democrats’ unprecedented obstruction, they now want to ruin the life of Brett Kavanaugh? Is this guy not entitled to defend himself?” —Dan Bongino
RELATED VIDEOS:
Venezuela’s Dictator Dines With Salt Bae While His People Starve
“The Week’s” Matthew Walther Wants To Disarm Police Officers
Gun control advocates often use some version of the phrase “if it saves one life” in order to justify their ineffective proposals. This week, the anti-gun editorial page of the Chicago Sun-Times offered a different take. Fearful that the Right-to-Carry was getting too much good publicity in the wake of an Illinois concealed carry permit holder’s heroic actions, the Sun-Times editorial board felt it necessary to lecture its readers, “One brave rescue of a Cicero cop doesn’t justify concealed guns.”
According to a news report from the Sun-Times, on September 13, Cicero Police Officer Luis Duarte and his partner were attempting to pull over a vehicle when the driver sped off. Officer Duarte and his partner gave chase and were able to immobilize the suspect’s car. Trapped, the driver retrieved a gun and fired at the officers, striking Officer Duarte four times.
As the officers and the suspect exchanged gunfire, a nearby motorist, and Right-to-Carry permit holder, exited his vehicle and came to the aid of the officers, firing at the gunman. The gunman was struck during the exchange and was later taken to the hospital in serious condition.
Following the incident, Cicero Police Superintendent Jerry Chlada praised the armed citizen, noting, “We were lucky enough to have a citizen on the street there who’s a concealed-carry holder, and he also engaged in gunfire.” Cicero town President Larry Dominick offered similar appreciation for the carry permit holder, stating, “He got out and started helping the police, which is something I’ve got to be proud of.” Illinois became a Right-to-Carry state in 2013, making it one of the more recent states to adopt a shall-issue permitting regime, and the last to adopt a system by which a citizen can be licensed to carry a gun for self-defense.
All of this commendation for the selfless act of an armed hero proved too much for the Sun-Times. Lamenting the support the incident might provide for the Right-to-Carry, the paper huffed, “Hang your argument on a single anecdote, and you can defend almost anything.” Going further, the editors argued that “one brave deed does not justify bad public policy.”
First, Right-to-Carry is not bad public policy. Right-to-Carry permit holders have proven themselves to be exceptionally law-abiding. Repeated examinations of Right-to-Carry permit holder revocation data in large states like Florida and Texas has shown that concealed carry permit holders are among the most law abiding demographic in the country.
Second, instances of private individuals using firearms to defend themselves and others go well beyond the anecdotes that make the press. In his most recent analysis of the data on defensive gun uses, Florida State University Criminologist Gary Kleck determined that Americans use firearms for self-defense about 1 million times per year. Some of the Sun-Times’ ignorance on this matter might stem from the Center for Disease Control’s failure to report this information to the public.
To be sure, gun rights supporters enjoy individual stories of armed citizens confronting criminals – and there is no shortage of them. The Armed Citizen column, and before that Guns & Bandits, has been a staple of The American Rifleman since 1932. In 1996, NRA-ILA published a special compilation booklet of armed citizen stories where ordinary Americans had directly assisted law enforcement officers in their fight against crime.
The Sun-Times’s denigration of the Right-to-Carry and denial of defensive gun uses is nothing out of the ordinary. It’s the way they dismissed gun owners that is interesting.
Decades of anti-gun messaging has told the American public that if a gun control measure “saves just one life” any infringement on the rights of law-abiding gun owners is justified.
For example, in early 2013, President Barack Obama implored Congress to enact gun control by stating, “If there’s even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if even one life we can save, we have an obligation to try it.” Vice-President Joe Biden reiterated the president’s sentiment, noting, “As the president said, if your actions result in only saving one life, they’re worth taking.”
A pair of older, Chicago-related examples occurred in the 1990s. In 1994, the Cook County Board of Commissioners passed a ban on commonly-owned semi-automatic firearms. Upon passage, Commissioner John P. Daley told the Sun-Times, “If this legislation saves one life, so be it.” In 1998, Mayor Richard M. Daley touted the Windy City’s frivolous lawsuit against the gun industry and other gun control measures in an op-ed for the Sun-Times. Demanding action, the mercurial mayor wrote, “One life lost is one too many.”
Coupled with the messaging of their anti-gun allies, the Sun-Times appears intent on creating a can’t-lose scenario for gun control. This holds that if even one life may be saved by a particular gun control measure, it must be adopted. However, if a measure permitting access to firearms for self-defense may save one life, it is not adequate justification to condone such freedom. Gun rights supporters should give this latest evolution in gun control rhetoric the same consideration as its traditional iteration: none.
While I believe Judge Kavanaugh is being attacked in error or for political reasons do Judge Kavanaugh’s detractors believe a possible unproven act by a seventeen year old whether drunk or sober should be punished for the rest of his life even though he has led an exemplary life over 35 years since the alleged incident? I don’t believe this is the American way.
It is almost impossible to overstate the damage done to America’s moral compass by taking the charges leveled against Judge Brett Kavanaugh seriously.
It undermines foundational moral principles of any decent society.
Those who claim the charges against Judge Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford are important and worth investigating, and that they ultimately, if believed, invalidate his candidacy for the U.S. Supreme Court are stating that:
a) What a middle-aged adult did in high school is all we need to know to evaluate an individual’s character — even when his entire adult life has been impeccable.
b) No matter how good and moral a life one has led for 10, 20, 30, 40 or even 50 years, it is nullified by a sin committed as teenager.
No decent — or rational — society has ever believed such nihilistic nonsense.
RELATED ARTICLE: The Reckless Coverage of Kavanaugh Allegations Is Why Americans Don’t Trust the Media
EDITORS NOTE: Dennis Prager’s article and the featured image were originally posted on Townhall.com.
If Ford should have an FBI Investigation, why didn’t Kopechne? Democrats are selective and hypocritical in their “Quest for Justice.”
“The FBI didn’t investigate [the incident at Chappaquiddick]; the Democrats weren’t asking for an FBI investigation-probably because they were afraid of what they’d found out about how Mary Jo Kopechne really died. This is total hypocrisy what they’re doing.” — LtCol Oliver North, NRA President.
Fox News reports that Booker, “who urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to first let the FBI conduct an investigation after California professor Christine Blasey Ford accused the high court nominee of sexual assault over 35 years ago, once wrote an article detailing an instance where he groped a female friend.”
Senator Booker’s article, which was titled: “So much for stealing second,” appeared in The Stanford Daily on Wednesday, February 19, 1992:
New Year’s Eve 1984 I will never forget. I was 15. As the ball dropped, I leaned over to hug a friend and she met me instead with an overwhelming kiss.
As we fumbled upon the bed, I remember debating my next “move” as if it were a chess game. With the “Top Gun” slogan ringing in my head, I slowly reached for her breast. After having my hand pushed away once, I reached my “mark.”
Our groping ended soon and while no “relationship” ensued, a friendship did. You see, the next week in school she told me that she was drunk that night and didn’t really know what she was doing.
RELATED ARTICLE: Cory Booker Wrote An Op-Ed In 1992 Where He Literally Admits To Groping A Woman
Project Veritas just released its latest undercover video, “Unmasking the Deep State.” This first video focuses on a State Department employee who is both a poster child for the Deep State and a perfect example of why the federal bureaucracy needs serious reform. Providentially, there is new legislation being considered in Congress that would do just that: the Merit Act (H.R. 559).
The Merit Act would greatly streamline the process for firing employees who are poor performers, insubordinate, or otherwise engaged in misconduct. Since the election of President Trump, the bureaucracy, including numerous holdovers from the Obama administration, has been engaged in an unprecedented level of obstruction, leaks, and sabotage. These bad actors call it “resistance.” FBI and Department of Justice misconduct in the Trump-Russia probe and the Clinton email scandal is only the most visible component.
This is nothing new. President Bush faced similar resistance from the bureaucracy, and going as far back as 1986, the Reagan administration had to contend with a State Department relentlessly working to derail his foreign policy. In the intervening period, we have been treated to stories of almost incomprehensible incompetence and corruption in the federal bureaucracy.
Recall, for example, the case of John Beale, the EPA’s “climate expert,” who continued to collect a salary for 18 months after he retired and scammed the government for 13 years. He collected a salary higher than legal limits; took unearned bonuses; awarded himself a handicapped parking pass though he wasn’t handicapped; and was absent for months at a time, falsely claiming to be a CIA agent working other assignments. Then-president Obama appointed Beale’s wife, Nancy Kete, to the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. The pair own houses in Arlington, Va. and Cape Cod. Beale was sentenced to 32 months and fined – a rare conviction, though the EPA waited three years before charging him. Beale is paying off his fine over time, using his government retirement annuity, which he still receives.
There is so much more. What about the horrors we discovered at the Veterans Administration? Or how about the 100 federal employees watching porn at work, some for as long as six hours per day? Many complained they were bored and didn’t have enough work. No mention of punishment. They were probably all just told to go back to work.
The Veritas video presents a portrait of a State Department bureaucrat committed to “resistance.” The employee caught on tape, one Stuart Karaffa, says, “Resist everything…every level, f‑‑‑ s‑‑‑ up.”
Karaffa is a self-identified member of Democratic Socialists of America, and uses work time to draft DSA-related political emails, a violation of the Hatch Act. What about getting caught? He says, “I don’t have anything to lose. It’s impossible to fire federal employees…”
He’s right. A century-long litany of successive legislation has created what amounts to a civil service industry, with public employee unions leading the charge. According to the Government Accountability Office, it takes on average from 170 to 370 days to fire a poor-performing employee, with unions intensively litigating on his behalf. The employee can appeal the decision, dragging the whole thing on for years. Most federal managers just give up. A recent study found that only about 0.5 percent of federal employees are terminated for cause.
But President Obama made matters worse, politicizing the hiring process under a 2010 executive order that circumvented many federal hiring rules. This made it easier for him to seed the bureaucracy with his people. We are witnessing the results. It’s called the Deep State.
Well, if the Merit Act passes, things could change, and it could not happen soon enough. The legislation shortens the appeals process and reduces the burden of proof required to fire a bad employee. The Merit Act passed out of committee in July and enjoys 58 congressional sponsors. A companion bill (S. 3200) has been proposed in the Senate.
President Trump needs to hear from us on this bill, and he needs to push it. He has already taken action to curb federal union work time abuse and faces firsthand every day the rampant problems embedded in the bureaucracy.
We have been treated to two years of in-your-face government behaving badly, but it didn’t start then. We have a rare opportunity to fix a major problem that has been festering for decades. Only now, when Congress is controlled by the GOP, and we have a president who is willing to do the heavy lifting on controversial issues, do we have a chance. We cannot afford to squander it.
EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in American Thinker. The featured edited image is by Unsplash/rawpixel@rawpixel.
Fr. Timothy V. Vaverek: If the Vatican previously investigated abuse, those results must be shared; if Rome didn’t investigate, we need to know why not.
Representatives of the American bishops have now met with Pope Francis to discuss the much-needed investigation of the McCarrick Affair. This is understandable since any process involving the ex-cardinal and other prelates requires papal permission. It’s one thing to ask the pope’s support for an investigation, however, and quite another to trust Vatican officials to run it, given what we now know.
Because we now know – from former Metuchen Bishop P.G. Bootkoski and from Cardinal Leonardo Sandri – that the Vatican Secretariat of State received credible allegations against McCarrick over a decade ago. Yet the Vatican did not deprive him of access to seminarians and priests. Therefore, an investigation focused on McCarrick and the American bishops risks ignoring the pivotal role of higher-ranking officials in Rome.
Bootkoski recently acknowledged that in December 2005 he informed then U.S. nuncio, Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo, of three complaints against McCarrick. The accusations involved inappropriate physical contact with a priest as well as sexually touching seminarians. Two of these allegations resulted in financial settlements.
An October 2006 letter has come to light in which Sandri, who worked directly under the Cardinal Secretary of State, referred to “serious matters” involving seminarians at Seton Hall, which had been reported to Montalvo by Fr. Boniface Ramsey in 2000. Ramsey has repeatedly claimed he informed the nuncio of allegations that McCarrick harassed seminarians and shared a bed with them at his beach house.
The Secretariat of State, therefore, received credible allegations in 2000 and 2005 that McCarrick harassed and “groomed” priests and seminarians, sexually exploiting the latter. If Rome investigated, they should now share the results and save us the trouble of repeating their work. If they didn’t investigate, they need to account for their failure to protect seminarians and priests.
Even if Rome did investigate, another crucial question arises: were dioceses notified of the allegations and the possibility their seminarians and priests had been exploited? That would include any diocese that used seminaries frequented by McCarrick, especially the seminaries where he resided after 2005. Minors might have been at risk since incoming college seminarians can be under 18.
The Penitent Saint Jerome by Lorenzo Lotto, c. 1514 [National Museum of Art, Bucharest]
Cardinal Wuerl insists that neither he nor the Archdiocese of Washington knew of the allegations. This would mean Rome said nothing. To confirm Rome’s silence, Catholics and journalists should ask Cardinal Dolan whether he or the Archdiocese of New York were notified.
Note that Bootkoski’s statement and Sandri’s letter were not written to support the recent testimony of Archbishop Viganò. In fact, he accused both of cover-ups. Unlike Viganò, their testimonies to Rome’s knowledge of the allegations were not meant to suggest Vatican complicity in the McCarrick Affair.
Whatever the original intention, however, Sandri’s letter now constitutes documentary evidence that Ramsey spoke to Montalvo in 2000. The letter also implies that the Secretariat of State deemed those concerns credible no later than 2006.
Furthermore, Bootkoski’s statement proves that allegations were judged credible since payments were made based on them. Unfortunately, his statement provides only a summary of the memo he sent to the nuncio in 2005, which was presumably forwarded to the Secretariat of State.
The reason offered for presenting a summary is that “the claimants have not given the diocese permission” to publish the detailed allegations. Perhaps the diocese or journalists could ask the claimants to allow the memo to be published, redacting any portions the claimants wished to keep confidential. That way, the public could see documentary evidence of Bootkoski’s report to the Vatican.
Unless Sandri had been protecting McCarrick, he would have promptly notified the Secretary of State, Cardinal Angelo Sodano, of the allegations forwarded by the nuncio from Ramsey and Bootkoski. By the time Sandri wrote the 2006 letter, he would have informed the new Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone.
We don’t have evidence that the allegations in 2000 or 2005 reached St. John Paul II, Benedict XVI, or – prior to recent revelations – Francis. Yet if the popes were not informed, Vatican officials obviously cannot be now relied on to oversee the upcoming investigation.
The Secretariat’s failure to investigate the matter or to report the allegations to affected dioceses as part of an investigation would demonstrate a reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of priests and seminarians, including minors.
A bishop exploiting seminarians and priests for his own gratification is an outrage that cries to heaven. How could the Secretariat of State have turned away? And did no other Vatican offices receive reports? Were there legitimate reasons an investigation was not initiated or proved inconclusive? After decades of abuse scandals, how could officials not have recognized the gravity of the accusations? Or were some officials willing to tolerate these monstrous evils?
Answers and accountability are vital for Catholics everywhere, not only in America. In Chile, cries of Catholics were repeatedly ignored or denounced by Rome. Eventually, Chile’s bishops offered to resign, but no Vatican officials followed their example. That scenario must not be repeated.
These circumstances make it impossible for the Vatican to act as a credible guarantor of the forthcoming review of the McCarrick Affair. The pope’s approval and cooperation are necessary, but since American bishops and Vatican officials are under scrutiny now, the investigative process must be independent of both. For the investigation to be effective the pope will need to cooperate by freeing Church officials from the Pontifical Secret and directing them to answer legitimate questions from investigators.
The review should be transparent and overseen by a board comprised of laity, religious, deacons, priests, and bishops. That way the entire Church would be represented in assessing and remedying the problems. That should involve exonerating the innocent, punishing the guilty, repairing the harm, and changing administrative structures and policies. A board like this could become a model for dealing with other failures by bishops and the Vatican.
Fr. Timothy V. Vaverek, STD has been a priest of the Diocese of Austin since 1985 and is currently the administrator of St. Mary’s in the city of West. His studies were in Dogmatics with a focus on Ecclesiology, Apostolic Ministry, Newman, and Ecumenism.
EDITORS NOTE: © 2018 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. The featured image is by Unsplash?Nacho Arteaga@nachoarteaga.
Nothing reveals the disparities between the “haves” and the “have nots” like a climate conference.
As I drove from Jerry Brown’s San Francisco global warming summit to view CFACT’s billboard campaign revealing the folly of California’s new 100% renewable / zero CO2 energy law, I saw something shocking. From the elevated highway above Oakland, I saw that I was passing over one of the Bay Area’s many homeless camps. I got off the highway to say hello. There I met Gerry Damiano, an extraordinary man, and a clearer thinker than the Governor Jerry in my rear view.
Watch the video of our conversation:
“I think he’s (Brown’s) living in the past,” he said, “Los Angeles has over 60,000 on the streets… They’re killing our jobs… I think he needs to change priorities. We pay for it in extra taxes on our fuel, we pay for it on the price we pay for power of any kind, and we get no benefit.”
At CFACT we’ve seen this time and again.
At UN COP 16 in Cancun, Mexico, CFACT bused delegates from their air conditioned luxury hotels and meeting rooms to the nearby neighborhood of La Libertad where people live without electricity.
At UN Rio+20 CFACT allied with with activists from the “favelas,” (squatter villages) that line the mountains surrounding Rio de Janeiro‘s luxurious Copacabana and Ipanema beaches where the VIPs were staying, to reveal the nightmare expensive energy means for the poor.
The climate elite shuttle about in private jets and limousines, like 18th century French nobles in gilded carriages, ignoring the high costs and low (if any) benefits of their “solutions.” They are self-absorbed and blissfully disconnected from the realities impacting real people’s lives.
Here are some realities facing California:
When electricity prices drive manufacturers out of state, will California’s ruling class take it in stride, or demand the rest of us share their self-inflicted pain?
Left-wing climate policy strangles economies and hits the poor hardest.
California is leading the way. Backward.
EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is from CFACT.
TRANSCRIPT
Church Militant has been working on an in-depth investigation for the past few weeks on some nefarious goings on in the diocese of Buffalo, New York, including perhaps what appears to be a homicide aimed at covering up information about to be released by a whistleblower priest regarding the well-established clerical homosexual network in the diocese.
Before we begin, there are some disturbing crime scene photos in this report so some of you may wish to turn away at that point.
Now, some background.
The diocese has a sordid history going back to at least the mid-1990s under the reign of Bp. Henry Mansell and even further — to a homosexual assault by a priest on 6-year-old Anthony Ravarini whom Church Militant interviewed last month.
Anthony Ravarini: While me and Tommy were running around just being kids, and then this gentleman came out from the building, which is known as Fr. Dennis Riter, and he walked up to me and Tommy and asked us if we wanted ice cream — chocolate, I’ll never forget it. Tommy said, “No” so he went back in the car and me, I said, “Yes.” So we approached the building, we went inside and he took me in his office and he nonchalantly came around and he was standing right in front of me and he dropped his trousers and he made me perform oral sex on him until he **** in my mouth and all over my face — it was in my hair. It was really disgusting.
The priest who is accused of committing the foul deed — Fr. Dennis Riter — is still in circulation in the diocese, currently serving as pastor of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton in Dunkirk after having been reinstated just this past July following two new additional charges of sexual assault — these against two altar boys.
For a second and third time, the diocese claims there was no credible evidence to substantiate any of the accusations — just like they dismissed the accusation of 6-year-old Anthony, where Riter made the fantastic assertion that the genetic matter on Anthony’s face, hair and shirt was his own — at 6 years old — suggesting that Anthony had wandered into a rectory bathroom and had done this to himself.
That homosexual assault happened in 1992, and the diocese went to great lengths to deny it happened despite the presence of two witnesses who saw the immediate aftermath just moments later.
One of those witnesses was a Polish seminarian stationed at the parish who Church Militant also interviewed last month, Wes Walawender.
Wes eventually went to a local priest, Fr. Joseph Moreno, who was Wes’ spiritual director and, together, the two composed a letter to the bishop, Edward Head, and Auxiliary B. Edward Grosz detailing the disgusting facts of what he had seen — along with Anthony’s father.
The letter, which was hand-delivered to the two bishops, was written on Fr. Moreno’s computer — again that was in 1992.
Wes never heard anything from either bishop about the letter he had submitted and was eventually railroaded out of the Buffalo seminary. Father Joe, as a result, became increasingly cognizant of a clerical homosexual network in the diocese and began keeping informal records at first which also detailed financial corruption — but nearly all of it connecting back to the homosexual clique.
All of this has been confirmed by Church Militant with both family members as well as confidantes of Fr. Joe’s.
In 1995, Bp. Henry Mansell was made ordinary of Buffalo and during his eight years as ordinary, a gay seminarian pipeline from mostly Colombia was established following the pattern of Cdl. Joseph Bernardin in Chicago and then-Abp. Theodore McCarrick in Newark, New Jersey.
Church Militant interviewed some of the Colombian seminarians — not all who were homosexual — and they confirmed for us that it was indeed a major recruiting effort by Msgr. Joseph Gatto, vice-rector of Buffalo’s Christ the King Seminary under Henry Mansell.
All of this was becoming well known among local clergy — including Fr. Joe Moreno — who confidantes tell Church Militant now stepped up his efforts to document these issues and keep records.
Things reached a head in 2012 when, after years of documenting and detailing the homosexual clerical network in his diocese, Fr. Moreno was found dead in the rectory of his parish, St. Lawrence in Buffalo, on a Saturday afternoon — Oct. 13, 2012.
Immediately, questions arose when his death was almost immediately ruled a suicide.
Close associates, as well as family, simply do not believe it was a suicide, especially given a series of facts that would seem to rule that out.
For example, first, Church Militant has learned that Fr. Moreno was ready to blow the whistle and go public, both to the local media and Church officials, on everything he had learned over the years. He told his sister, Susan, that very thing on the Tuesday before he was discovered dead.
He repeated that to a close associate on Friday before he was found dead on Saturday. Church Militant has confirmed that Fr. Moreno faxed a multi-page document to the local newspaper, The Buffalo News, on Friday night.
The document itself has not turned up, but the record of the electronic transmission has.
Additionally, Father had made an appointment to travel to Washington, D.C. the following Wednesday, and according to associates, to the papal nunciature and meet with officials there and hand over a copy of his dossier exposing the homosexual network in Buffalo.
He had also spoken with his sister, who routinely made dinner for him, that dinner on Sunday night would have to be wrapped up at a specific time because he had a very important meeting.
Church Militant has spoken directly with the person he was scheduled to meet, and that person has confirmed that Fr. Moreno had told them he was going to hand over a very important file to them — again scheduled for Sunday — a meeting he obviously never made.
As events progressed, Fr. Moreno made what may prove to have been a fatal mistake, he got into a heated argument with senior chancery personnel and threatened — out loud — to expose everything he was meeting with them about.
That was Friday morning before he was found dead on Saturday afternoon. Father Joseph Moreno was found dead in his chair in the living room of his rectory with a gunshot wound to the left side of the back of his head.
There are immediately problems with this account. First, Fr. Moreno had bad nerve damage to his left hand and it was difficult for him to hold things. Secondly, he was right-handed. Third, his personal handgun went missing two weeks earlier, according to parish staff, so a big question arises: Where did the supposed suicide or homicide gun come from?
A very damaging fact against the suicide determination is that a second autopsy — arranged by his sister — discovered not just one bullet hole, but a second hole that had been sutured — reminiscent of mafia assassinations.
Another issue is the manner in which the supposed suicide would have actually occurred. According to officials, Fr. Moreno picked up the gun with his left hand and then reached around with his right hand and pulled the trigger.
So what remains unexplained is how Fr. Moreno could have shot himself without getting any blood spatter on his hands or in the room. Also, how was Fr. Moreno positioned so comfortably in his chair with both arms by his sides with no blood splatter of gunpowder residue on his hands.
His sister spoke with the local ABC affiliate about the irregularities.
Susan Moreno: “There’s no picture of the gun in his hands — his hands are closed. There’s no blood splatter, blood misting on his arms, on the gun, on the wall where supposedly he did this at.”
At the crime scene, the fax machine with the phone number of the local newspaper stored in its memory was not there — the fax machine he had used less than 24 hours earlier.
Susan Moreno: His desk drawer was broken into. His file cabinet is missing, his current files are missing, his fax machine is missing. He did fax something to The Buffalo News the day of his death and I think it’s relevant to get that four-page fax because Joey was going to expose something. What it was, I’m not quite sure, but he was going to spill the beans on something and someone wanted him to be shut up and they did.
Unsatisfied with the original autopsy and its finding, Susan spent a small fortune having his body exhumed and a second autopsy performed in 2015.
The medical examiner who performed the second autopsy, Dr. Cyril H. Wecht, said this: “After examining the evidence, I am not able to tell you definitively that this was a homicide, but I do believe serious questions have been raised.”
When news broke in October 2012 that Moreno had been found dead, the Buffalo diocese pushed the suicide narrative, offering no explanation as to why. No suicide note had ever been brought forward and Fr. Joe had made definitive plans for the following few days.
Bishop Malone, who was new to the diocese a few months earlier said he had met with Moreno the week before and the priest was reportedly upset that he was being transferred out of his parish. An article appeared shortly after that with anonymous priests claiming Moreno was a troubled individual with a checkered past, further trying to shore up the theory that he killed himself.
Malone is the same bishop who lied about the number of priests accused of abuse in his diocese, initially claiming there were only 42, when the actual number is 106.
Charlie Specht at WBKW in Buffalo has been doing a series of investigative reports exposing Malone’s cover-up of multiple predator priests — his latest showing that Malone deliberately underreported the true number of homosexual abusers in his diocese by less than half.
Stay tuned to Church Militant as we dig more deeply into this disturbing report of what appears to be cover-up of a hit job against a whistleblower priest, a priest who was set to expose the homosexual network in the Buffalo diocese and was silenced before he ever had the chance.