Tuesday 23rd of September 2014

insulting truck drivers...

 

pell lies...

Pell replied: “I was aware of a report in the newspapers and of course through my eventual meetings at groups of survivors and victims that was brought home to me very clear, and there were groups such as Broken Rites that were very active.

“Well, with some of those groups I took what they said with a grain of salt. But nonetheless there was evidence something needed to be done to deal with the suffering.”

He also said while he was aware of evidence given by witness Paul Hersbach to the commission on Monday – who told of horrific abuse suffered by his father, his uncle and himself at the hands of Father Victor Rubeo – he had not read his witness statement.

“Did you view his evidence, Cardinal?” Hersbach’s lawyer, Sean Cash, asked.

“No I didn’t. I have a job here in Rome,” Pell replied, to gasps and sniggers from the public gallery.

Cash also challenged Pell on comments he made to counsel assisting, Gail Furness, where he compared sex abuse within the church to a truck driver picking up a female passenger and molesting her while on the job.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate for the leadership of that company to be held responsible,” Pell said.

But Cash challenged that a church was not a trucking company.

“This was an organisation of the highest integrity, one which you would expect would conduct itself in keeping with the teachings of Jesus Christ, that’s right?” Cash said.

Royal commission chair, Justice Peter McClellan, also questioned Pell on the comments.

“When a priest, through the act of the parish or in any other way, gains access to a child who comes to the church with a parents … that is quite different to the relationship between the truck driver and the casual passenger, isn’t it?” McClellan said.

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/21/george-pell-tells-inquiry-he-took-claims-from-victims-groups-with-a-grain-of-salt

 

One should be aware that Pell tells lies — AND HE KNOWS IT. This can be proven and has been proven. But pell is either a wriggling psychopath or an imbecile — unless he is a bit of both... To make a statement in relation to "truck drivers" is abhorrently criminal and insensitive towards victims, as he would know that his organisation, the Catholic Church, under the Canon Law, can and will hide secrets from the state — including the knowledge (and protection thereof) of the pedophile priests in its midst. 

 

driving a truck through his defence...

 

Cardinal George Pell has strongly defended the so-called Melbourne Response as Australia's first comprehensive redress scheme for victims of clerical sexual abuse at the royal commission.

Appearing at the commission via video link from the Vatican in Rome on Thursday night, Cardinal Pell likened the Catholic Church's responsibility for child abuse to that of a ''trucking company''. If a driver sexually assaulted a passenger they picked up along the way, he said, ''I don't think it appropriate for the … leadership of that company be held responsible.''

Cardinal Pell, who established the Melbourne Response when he was Archbishop of the Melbourne Archdiocese in 1996, denied suggestions that any of its three arms - the Independent Commissioner, compensation panel and counselling arm Carelink - had stopped operating independently of the other.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/pell-compares-priests-to-truckers-as-victims-given-apologies-20140821-3e3mk.html#ixzz3B53OEHNF

WHAT A LOT OF CODSWALLOP... And this man has been the spiritual guide to our own Lying Tony...

 

truckies are pissed off with pell....

The Australian Trucking Association has joined child sexual abuse victims and their advocates in expressing outrage at comments made by Cardinal George Pell while giving evidence before a royal commission on Thursday night.

While facing questions from the royal commission into institutional responses to child sex abuse, Pell said the Catholic Church was no more responsible for child abuse carried out by church figures than a trucking company would be if they employed a driver who molested women.

“If the truck driver picks up some lady and then molests her, I don’t think it’s appropriate, because it is contrary to the policy, for the ownership, the leadership of that company to be held responsible,” Cardinal Pell told the commission via video link from Rome on Thursday.

His comments left chair of the Australian Trucking Association, Noelene Watson, fuming.

“There are more than 170,000 professional truck drivers in Australia,” she said.

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/22/truckers-outraged-by-cardinal-george-pells-sex-abuse-comparison

pell is driving on empty, on a rocky road & with a flat tyre...

Rome has been good to Cardinal Pell. Soft folds of skin fall to his chin. He looks a little older, more comfortable and a very long way away. Hopes of a glimpse of St Peter’s were dashed. He sat in front of the plainest possible curtain for his two-and-a-half-hour grilling by the royal commission.

Surely it was one of his life’s mistakes to compare the church to a trucking company? It opened the cardinal to scorn on all sides. Did he have in mind truckies interfering with hitchhikers? Yes. Did the church have no more integrity than a trucking company?

“The church is not always of the highest integrity,” he said with regret. “It existed for 2,000 years and there is a long history of sin and crime within the church, and one of the functions of the leadership of the church is to control and eradicate this.”

He was against sin and crime; for victims; and full of apologies. He began his testimony from Rome with an apology. He recalled the apology he gave when he became the Archbishop of Melbourne. He apologised once more to Chrissie and Anthony Foster, the parents of the two little girls raped by Father Kevin O’Donnell. He so regretted things were not better between them and the church.

Years ago he offered the Fosters a little money and warned them any attempt to sue the church would be “strenuously” defended. The cardinal faced more questions about this word than anything else in his interrogation. He explained: “We did not encourage people across the board to seek compensation through the courts.”

read more: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/22/pell-opting-for-moral-low-road-comparing-church-to-trucking

speaking in tongues ....

speaking in tongues ....

Yes Gus,

Anyone seeking to understand the ruinous decline of the Catholic Church needs only to listen to the venal platitudes uttered by its spokesperson, the sociopath Cardinal George Pell.

Pell’s odious suggestion that victims of child sex abuse perpetrated by the trusted servants of his church are akin to hapless hitchhikers who fall victim to psychopathic truck drivers surely says everything about the real value system that drives the institution & the value it places on its congregation.

By their works ye shall know them.’

 

insulating our homes...

 

See Gus comment at the end of this article...

 

Alan Austin was requested to present a sworn statement of evidence to the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program (HIP). In the third part of his submission he explores how the scheme actuallysaved lives.

Pink batts Royal Commission submission: Part Three

Read Part One

Read Part Two

The Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program (HIP) is expected to release its final report next week. However, several vital aspects of the program were not examined by the Commissioner in the public hearings earlier this year.

So what chance a fair overall assessment? Will the Commissioner examine all relevant evidence in private and report on the program’s significant successes? Or will he concentrate only on the alleged failures, which were the sole focus of the public hearings?

Alan Austin was requested by the Commission to present a sworn statement of evidence following his research into the global impact of stimulus packages published here at Independent Australia and elsewhere. This is part three of his submission, edited only for format.

Part One outlined the overall success of the Rudd government’s fiscal response to the global financial crisis (GFC) in 2009-10.

Part Two examined the need for great speed in implementing the stimulus packages.

Lives saved by the program’s rapid implementation

The four deaths which occurred installing insulation in the latter stage of the rapidly expanding 2009 home insulation program were tragic indeed. They certainly warranted the focus, the nationwide mourning and the subsequent inquiries into direct and indirect causes.

But what is the quantum of deaths which would have occurred had starting the HIP been delayed by another month, or another three or six months – or had it not proceeded at all?

Deaths averted include suicide and homicide related to unemployment or bankruptcy, coronary and cerebral injury due to anxiety, industrial deaths due to corner-cutting, deaths due to drug and alcohol abuse exacerbated by the crisis and stress-related traffic fatalities.

study in the September 2013 British Medical Journal (BMJ) investigated in detail the impact of the 2008 global economic crisis on suicides in 54 countries in Europe and the Americas.

Using data from the World Health Organization’s mortality database and elsewhere, the study used design time trend analysis to compare the actual number of suicides in 2009 with the number that would have been expected based on trends before the crisis, that is, from 2000 to 2007. [17]

The study found thousands of suicides were linked directly to the global financial crisis (GFC), with the highest numbers of people killing themselves in countries where job losses were heaviest:

“We found a clear rise in suicide after the 2008 global economic crisis; there were about 4,900 excess suicides in the year 2009 alone compared with those expected based on previous trends (2000-07).”

The researchers attributed this to soaring dole queues and bankruptcies, repossessions of houses, cars and other purchases and the attendant personal and social problems. They estimated 34 million people worldwide lost their jobs during the crisis.

Key findings were that suicides among all-age men were between 4.2% and 6.4% higher in 2009 than expected if past trends had continued. They found for women, no change in Europe and an increase in the Americas of 2.3%, smaller than that among men.

Mortality data for Australia are found in the one file at the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) at document 3303.0. Refer table 1.2 Underlying causes of death (Australia). [18] For the following analysis, women will be excluded for now.

The number of suicides among men in Australia in 2008 was 1,784. Refer Intentional self-harm (X60-X84), line 1824. Assume Australia’s situation is similar to that of Europe and the Americas, an increase over this level of 4.2% – taking the lower limit – is an extra 75 fatalities. An increase over this level of 6.4% – the upper limit – is an extra 114 fatalities.

Taking the lower number, to this can be added the increased number of homicides arising from the stresses which give rise to increased suicides. According to the ABS, there were 137 male homicide victims in Australia in 2008. Refer Assaults (X85-Y09), line 1850.

Assuming the stress would lead to an equivalent small rise in homicides as in suicides, applying the lower limit of the BMJ findings, a 4.2% increase is another 6 victims per year.

Adding road trauma, there were 1,121 male fatalities in 2008. Refer transport accidents (V01-V99), line 1554. A similar 4.2% increment in traffic fatalities – continuing to assume a similar stress factor – would add another 47 lives lost.

Then adding drug and alcohol related deaths, there were 321 male fatalities in 2008. Refer Mental and behavioural disorders due to psychoactive substance use (F10-F19) at line 494. A 4.2% increment in drug and alcohol fatalities adds another 13 lives lost.

Now add fatalities from hypertensive heart disease. There were 630 male fatalities in 2008. Refer Hypertensive diseases (I10-I15) at line 722. A similar 4.2% increment in these deaths would add another 26 lives lost.

Now add gastrointestinal disease fatalities – ulcers and dyspepsia – there  were 261 fatalities in 2008. Refer Diseases of oesophagus, stomach and duodenum (K20-K31) line 882. A similar 4.2% increment adds another 11 lives lost.

The total for just these six categories of  male lives lost is 178. This excludes increases in fatalities from industrial accidents or other diseases due to stress and anxiety, such as those affecting the cerebrovascular or nervous systems. It does not include women impacted in the same way as men.

These are all likely to be substantial. It is reasonable, therefore, to estimate that a conservative cumulative total would be more than 200 fatalities. That is an annual figure, which would repeat for each year the recession continued and unemployment worsened.

How long the recession would have continued in Australia had it been allowed to get a grip is impossible to know for certain. But the experience of similar economies is instructive.

The World Bank [19] and tradingeconomics.com [20] show, respectively, annualand quarterly negative GDP growth for most of the world’s economies. Of the 34 advanced OECD economies – those most equivalent to Australia’s – from 2008 onwards, only two avoided more than two consecutive quarters of negative gross domestic product (GDP) growth – the accepted definition of recession in Australia.

These were Australia and Poland – the two countries which allocated the highest percentage of GDP in direct investment spending, as shown in figure 3.3, at page 6, above [in Part two of this IA series].

Only four OECD countries avoided a full year of negative GDP growth: Australia, Israel, South Korea and Poland.

Ten experienced one negative year: Austria, Canada, Chile, Germany, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Slovak Republic, Switzerland and Turkey.

Twelve experienced two negative years: Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Netherlands, Finland, France, Hungary, Iceland, Slovenia, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the USA.

Six experienced three negative years: Denmark, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg and Spain. Portugal experienced four negative years and Greece five.

It is reasonable to propose that had Australia’s economy followed the trajectory of Norway, the preventable deaths would have been in the order of 200+. Had Australia followed Iceland and Finland, the deaths would have been in the order of 400+. Had Australia followed Luxembourg, the deaths would have been in the order of 600+.

All four of those economies were ranked higher on the IAREM table than Australia in 2007. In fact all four were in the top five economies. Refer chart A, page 2, above [in Part one of this IA series].

All four of those governments took stimulus action, but at a lower level and less rapidly.

It is possible to determine which OECD countries implemented the specific stimulus response advocated by Australia’s then Opposition in 2008-09 and make a reasonable estimate of the length of the recession and the number of hundreds of deaths which would then have eventuated. That is beyond the scope of this statement, however.

So what were the actual outcomes for men in 2009 over 2008 on those six variables?

  1. Suicides in Australia fell 8.6% from 1,784 in 2008 to 1,631 in 2009.
  2. Homicides rose 8.8% from 137 to 149.
  3. Traffic fatalities fell 3.2% from 1,121 to 1085.
  4. Drug and alcohol related fatalities fell 13.7% from 321 to 277.
  5. Hypertensive heart disease deaths fell 0.48% from 630 to 627.
  6. Gastrointestinal disease deaths fell 0.77% from 261 to 259.

The rate of population increase was 1.82% from December 2008 to December 2009.

It is not possible to quantify precisely the specific number of deaths averted by the HIP. But it is reasonable to claim that Australia’s stimulus program overall – of which the HIP was a vital part – served to avoid preventable deaths in the hundreds.

It seems strange that some inquiries [into the HIP by coroners, the Auditor-General and the Senate] found that the four deaths related directly to the HIP might have been prevented had the scheme started later by some months or years without noting that any delay would almost certainly have incurred far greater mortality.

read more: http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/hip-royal-commission-submission-part-3-hundreds-of-lives-saved,6817

 

Now, what is this insulation scheme Royal Commission doing in this line of article about priests who commit the crime of sexual abuse?...

TWO FOLDS: 

—  The amount of suicides due to abuse has been far more than that of deaths by the Insulation scheme. 

— The Insulation scheme Royal Commission has been deliberately set up by the Abbott Regime to "prove" that the scheme was a disaster, while overall the scheme was VERY SUCCESSFUL in providing employment during the GFC. As well the scheme helped many household REDUCE THEIR CONSUMPTION of electricity by up to 30 per cent.

The scheme is often not accounted for in the general reduction of consumption (see: we consume less electricity...). What should be investigated is the abuse of the scheme by shonky operators and Mumbai call centres. 

 

why do monks wear robes?...

 

 

The old joke is: why do monks wear robes?

because they can run faster with a lifted robe than if they'd been wearing trousers at their ankles, while chasing nuns who run away by lifting their habit...

But seriously, some people (here a certain Father Richard Umbers) write sacred crap to hide the crime of priests sexually molesting young people:


This is diplomatic sensitivity par excellence that must remain strictly secret. If a penitent thought that his conscience was subject to NSA monitoring, let alone that his confidences were able to be leaked by a "Father Julian Assange" or "Monsignor Edward Snowden," the sacrament would only be frequented by children and the lonely. This is why there is a basic agreement in the Catholic tradition that the priest must never speak of confessional sins, not even to the sinner himself, if he is no longer in confession. St. Thomas Aquinas even went so far as to say that if a priest were to divulge what is said in confession he would not only be committing sacrilege, he would also be lying since what is confessed to God cannot be said to be known by the priest as a man. As the prophet Isaiah foretold: "The entire vision will be to you like the words of a sealed book, which when they give it to the one who is literate, saying, 'Please read this', he will say, 'I cannot, for it is sealed'" (Isaiah 29:11).

don't read more: http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2014/08/27/4075554.htm

--------------------------

"The question that cannot be answered"... yes, Dr Who chases the soul of the wicked but "silence will fall"...

The question remains that, when priests tell of their bad deed to other priests or a bishop under the umbrella of "confession", the confessor becomes a co-conspirator in the bad deed should it be a deed with strong ramification against the social order. I know there is a certain "religious caveat" placed on confession to prevent such association but nonetheless, in reality, morally, the bad deed also belongs to the confessor once he knows about it. The purpose of confession is to share the weight of transgression and be absolved from it, but the fact remains that the bad deed has been performed and hidden from public view... 

The one item which obviously is missing from the Ten Commandments is the eleventh : "thou shall not have sexual relations with small kids" — though this concept features somewhat as a sin, in the godly dedication of celibate priests.

The confessor, in knowledge of a priest who commits sexual crimes against children, has thus to carry a very heavy burden by the knowledge of such crimes — or has HE (no women allowed as priests in the Catholic church, possibly for this sexual reason) Alzheimer's?. 

No-one in their right mind would think that such crimes would not have an effect on young victims for the rest of their lives. Silence here is not golden, but a latent participation in the life-long victimisation of such people. 

Only the exposed truth can end the process of victimisation, with proper civil punishment, because let's face it, once "forgiven" by his peer, the offending priests will offend again and again. The role of saying nothing only becomes part of the reinforcement that such crimes are not punishable in this temporal world. Often, when the knowledge of such crime has a chance to emerge in the public arena, the offending priests are sent to work in other parishes, where they continue to offend.

One has to also look at the possibility that bishops and priests gathering the knowledge of priests performing sexual crimes against minors also acquire this knowledge outside confession. In this case, many churchmen have chosen to still hide behind religious gobbledygook secrecy. 

So, to what purpose are they doing so? One has to look at the dwindling numbers of personnel. There are less and less people committing themselves to become priests — except in poor countries where it's an alternative to poverty, as they collect cash from the poor who are "in search of salvation". Salvation and cash often go hand in hand.

In a modern society with such "apparent" loose morals and easy access to "debauchery" — by this I mean there is a visible culture of understanding our sexual nature in a freer and more knowledgeable context — it would be very hard for anyone to be ignorant of such exposure and not be stirred by it. Committing to celibacy in the Catholic Church would be quite tortuously torturing in such an environment. It can be assumed thus, that the commitment to god in the priesthood invites a certain proportion of crackpots, since the premise of religious beliefs in themselves are a bit crack-potty when faced with diligent or scientific scrutiny.

Unless I am mistaken, the risks of being found out, should one be bent, have increased as the "inspections" have been strenghtened by the "moral public", which expects better from the moral guardians.

In the far distant past, I would suggest that priests did the sex crimes (and more — including war), but got away with it because the social tenets were not as astute and not media-focused as they are these days — since the only media then was the words of the bible... 

In fact sexual misconduct by priests was quite "liberal" in such times...

Back in the Middle-Ages (before and after) one has to know that "... lusty priests seduce the women who confess to them; noblemen keep mistresses; monks and nuns engage in secret liaisons while peasant couples copulate behind the hedgerows" (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/497)... See joke at top...

It is also known that some cardinals (bishops, etc) had "boys" for sex (as well as concubines) — the "boys" being well looked after. They often were groomed for becoming the next "high priests", keeping the fucking of boys tradition alive. Of course, the boys in those days had the inconvenient other choices of going on a battlefield with a great chance of being gloriously shot, maimed or killed... or stay poor and ignorant while toiling on a farm. Thus being sexually abused by the cardinal was like having a promotion.

The glittering life in the full-on pomposity of the church with gold chalices and embroided robes at the high echelons plus sex with boys, would have attracted more homosexuals or bisexuals to the priesthood... Heterosexuals would have joined the monks to have shenanigans with the nuns, as recorded in history...

One must know that in bourgeois/noble families of these times, some males were pre-designated to become priests, some were pre-designated to become lawyers, others were to follow on the family-privileged footsteps including climbing the ranks of the nobility... This was mostly designed for such families to control the workings of the nation, below the rank of king.

 Democracy has demolished all this — except, are people like Anthony Abbott trying hard to reset the ancient non-democratic values of kingdoms?... And are priests part of his grand plan? ... Though nowadays the moral imperative is to uphold the sin value of sexual crime... Thank you Julia.

Meanwhile, despite the secret of confession, in my humble opinions, offending priests and confessors should be kicked in the balls... That might make them come out of their hole. Compensation of course has to be paid to victims and offending priests have to go to prison. But the church seems to prefer to stay on the side of its priests, while hypocritically claiming to be on the side of victims... Bugger that !

So back to the beginning of the diatribe at top... The seal has to be broken without breaking it if one must... There are many ways to do this, including the odd anonymous letter and/or encouraging victims to go to the police. Unfortunately, all too often, it has been church business to give victims the "option" of going to the police or being well looked after... 


We know what this means... Pigs fly.