David Messier Writes

Home
Page Title

A sampling of letters, articles and essays by David Messier

- - - -
 
Items below:
 
 
 
 
The Belgian monarchy on trial in national pedophile scandal
March 13, 2004
 
Pedophiles in high places want to silence procurers of children in Belgium’s “Trial of the Century”
March 24, 2004
 
Feds fear perpetrator of Oklahoma City bombing will spill the beans
June 9, 2004
 
Bloated, useless UNO should be reformed from the bottom up
October 2, 2004
 
On which side of the Belgian pedophile scandal is the Belgian Catholic Church?
September 25, 2005
 

 
 
 
Tea Money

And now, from the folks who brought you Yadana . . .  democracy in Burma?
 
 
----------------
 
 
 
Maybe they will blow it up, after all.
 
Make fun of Moses with a cartoon in a newspaper and some people might object.  

Make fun of Jesus Christ with a cartoon in a newspaper and some people might be offended.

Make fun of the Buddha with a cartoon in a newspaper and you're asking for it. A lot of people will object. And there will be hell to pay.
 
Make fun of the prophet Muhammad with a cartoon in a newspaper and you're really asking for it.
 
And when you get what you asked for, you'll have only yourself to blame.
 
Why pretend otherwise?
 
 
 
--------
 
 
Remember Suez?
 
It just happened again!
 
In 1956, the British and the French, upset by Egypt's nationization of the Suez Canal, persuaded Israel to join them in an attack on Egypt to recover it. And so began the 1956 war.
 
The Soviets were annoyed, called the American president at the time, Eisenhower, and asked him to order the British and French out. And so he did and that was the end of that. Egypt lost nothing.
 
Earlier this year, 2013, the Americans, Brits and French were about to do a number on Syria, like their number on Libya a couple of years back, when the Russians called the Americans and told them that would not be a good idea. The Americans listened and called the whole thing off. The Brits did the same. The French were left alone to do it but decided to forget it.  
 
 
 
-------------------
 
 

Wars of Religion, the Crusades . . .
 
Libya under attack!
 
What do France, England and the U. S. want in Libya?
 
Oil!
 
And a bit of war   -   a chance to shoot their missiles and do some aerial bombing. 
 
Memories of the Suez Crisis? This time, there is no USSR to press the U.S. to stop England and France.
 
 
---------------------
 
 
Who blew up the plane over Lockerbee?
 
Remember Lockebee?
 
Wasn't the bomb in the suitcase of a DEA agent? Wasn't it sent as unaccompanied baggage to Germany from a third country, to be placed on any flight to the U. S.?
 
 
-------------
 

 
Recalling 9/11
 
What brought down the Twin Towers? Two planes that crashed into the tops of the buildings? Or cheating contractors and lousy construction?
 
The U. S. knew all along where bin Laden was.
 
Someone somewhere decided it was time to betray him.
 
Why do it now? Why not wait until autumn 2012, just before U. S. presidential elections?
 
Why not do it in July 2001, before 9/11?
 
Wasn't the U. S. Navy monitoring cell phone communications in Pakistan? More than likely, it had been eavesdropping on bin Laden for some time.
 
The press claimed the "operation" was directed by the Oval Office.
 
How did it happen? There are many different versions.
 
One story is that U. S. Navy Seals, flown in from off-shore, got bin Laden. There were reports of a long, 45-minute floor-to-floor, room-by-room battle.
 
According to the latest reports, however, the White House was only watching the show and it was all over in less than a minute.  
 
Was the U. S. commander in Afghanistan involved? There's no mention of it by the press. Was the CIA station chief in Pakistan involved? Did he give bin Laden away to the U. S. Navy?
 
We might read one day that it wasn't bin Laden after all. It was his double.
 
The World Trade Towers had long been a target of terrorism. So the attacks on 9/11 did not really surprise many people. Actually, it looked like another stunt. Everyone, including the terrorists, was surprised when the two towers crumbled.
 
And the attack on the Pentagon had not been anticipated. 
 
 
 
-------------
 
 
 
What happened on United Airlines 93?
 
Who was to have been the 20th man on 9/11?
 
In some ways, the show-trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, a French citizen of Moroccan origin, in the U. S. in 2005 and 2006 recalled the McVey and Nichols cases.
 
Moussaoui was to be tried as a co-conspirator of 19 Islamic jihadists who hi-jacked four commercial airliners and crashed them into the World Trade Center in New York City, the Pentagon in Washington, D. C., and a farm field in western Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001.
 
Moussaoui was arrested before the event. The prosecution contended that Moussaoui was to have been the fifth man of the hi-jacking team on a fourth plane that crashed, short of its intended target, which remains unknown, in a Pennsylvania farm field on 9/11. Prosecutors contended that the fourth plane was to have crashed into the Pentagon or White House but because it was one man short after Moussaoui's arrest the hi-jacking team was unable to carry out its mission properly. Air Force jets were scrambled to intercept the flight when the hi-jackers, to foil passengers who were trying to overpower them, deliberately crashed the plane into the farm field.
 
9/11 left a lot of red faces in the civil service. Throughout the trial it was clear that Washington administration officials, themselves often accused by the public and the press of (criminal) negligence (and even suspected of complicity) in 9/11, meant to scapegoat Moussaoui.
 
But after years of claiming innocence, Moussaoui pleaded guilty in court.
 
The prosecution then tried to persuade the jury to condemn Moussaoui to death by making repeated emotional references to the sufferings of the innocent victims of 9/11. But several jurors correctly maintained that it remained unclear to what extent, if any, Moussaoui was actually involved in the 9/11 plot.
 
The judge sentenced Moussaoui to life in a maximum security federal prison.
 
Moussaoui withdrew his guilty plea and asked for a new trial.
 
After the trial, in May 2006, Osama bin Laden, leader of the army of jihadists to which Moussaoui belonged, denied that Moussaoui was involved in the 9/11 hi-jackings. Bin Laden said what many believed   -   that Moussaoui was pressured by trial officials into claiming that he was with the 9/11 hi-jackers.
 
According to bin Laden’s army, the twentieth hi-jacker was a Saudi Arabian, Turki bin Fheid al-Muteiri, also known as Fawaz al-Nashmi. Al-Muteiri could not join the other hi-jackers on 9/11. Al-Muteiri was killed in a gun battle with Saudi soldiers in Saudi Arabia in 2004.
 
All that can be really said about Moussaoui is that it appears that he was one of numerous jihadists sent by bin Laden to the United States but it is unknown what bin Laden meant for him to do.

 

 
--------------
 
 
What purpose Guantanamo?
 
How is the prison in Guantanamo different from Abu Ghraib?
 
During WW2, the British lodged captured high German officers and scientists in country mansions. They were well-treated. They were treated with respect and dignity. They lived as they
wanted. They got together.  
 
And the British listened in to their conversations and sometimes picked up something.
 
Why not do the same with captured Arab terrorists?
 
Put them together in a resort, take good care of them, let them do as they like and listen in on their conversations.
 
There is a better chance of picking up something that way than through deprivation and torture.
 
 

 
----------------------
 
 
June 9, 2004
 
The Waco Raid and Oklahoma City Bombing
 

Why the Feds really want Nichols Dead

 

 

The American government committed a serious mistake in executing Timothy McVeigh.

 

It could make another mistake by executing McVeigh’s partner, Terry Nichols.

 

McVeigh and Nichols admitted blowing up a federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995. They said they had sought revenge for the federal government’s massacre of at least 86 persons, including young children, at the home of the Branch Dravidian sect, a religious cult, in Waco, Texas in 1993.

 

There was much controversy surrounding the raid in WacoFederal agents burned down an entire building and killed almost all of its occupants. They insisted that they were compelled to launch a desperate raid to prevent the systematic murder of young children by the leaders of the cult. But there were claims that federal agents were trigger-happy and saw the raid as an opportunity for a turkey shoot.

  

Some years ago, the CBS weekly news program, “60 minutes”, aired a documentary that examined the possibility that a federal agent assisted McVeigh and Nichols in preparing the Oklahoma City bomb. The program included interviews with witnesses who recalled a third man, identified as an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), who helped McVeigh and Nichols procure numerous components of the bomb.

 

Politicians and the press demanded the death of McVeigh. He was executed in 2001. They are now demanding the death of Nichols.

 

Seldom in the press today is there any reference to the motive behind the Oklahoma City bombing. Case chronologies begin conspicuously in 1995.

 

Given the facts of the matter, what is anyone to conclude about the demands for the executions of McVeigh and Nichols and the general lack of background details in the press? Policiticans and the press appear to be determined to cover up evidence, which McVeigh could have revealed in time, that would implicate another person or persons    -   possibly federal agents    -   in the Oklahoma City bombing.

 

McVeigh, now dead, will probably never implicate anyoneBut Nichols, alive, might do so in time. One day, he might reveal crucial evidence to a new generation of politicians and journalists about the complicity of the federal government in the Oklahoma City bombing and, possibly, also its hasty execution of McVeigh.

 

Sentenced to Life in Prison

 

An Oklahoma state court jury could not reach a decision on the death penalty. Thus, on June 11, 2004, the presiding judge sentenced Terry Nichols to 160 consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole.

 

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

 

 

TWA-800

 

Washington administration officials will go to great lengths to cover up.  

 

On July 19, 1996, the US Navy destroyed a commercial passenger airliner, TWA-800, shooting it down with a missile launched from a naval base on Long Island Sound.

 

There were dozens of witnesses to the missile attack.

 

All 230 persons on board the plane were killed.

 

The adminsitration ordered the FBI to investigate the shoot-down and to claim that a technical malfunction onboard caused the the plane to blow up.   

 

The plane’s manufacturer, Boeing, was unfairly blamed for the disaster.

 

The reason or reasons that the navy or the Clinton administration had for downing the flight remain unclear.

 

Was it a case of of a mad naval admiral on Long Island?

 

Was the navy trying to blackmail Clinton into restoring its “yacht club”   -  recommissioning many old ships   -   as Ronald Reagan had done?

 

Was Clinton trying to extort money from TWA   -   and other airlines? Or was he insane?

 

Clinton and his defense secretary, Cohen, remain the main suspects in the downing of the plane and attempts to cover it up.

 

Or was somebody on board the plane who Clinton wanted to get rid of?

 

A young model had a reservation on the flight but she did not show up. She was brutally murdered in Canada shortly afterward and her killer was never apprehended.

 

Was she another Monica Lewinsky? Was she the target of the missile attack on the plane? Was she warned not to take the flight and then killed to keep that from becoming public? Or was her murder a deliberate attempt to mislead the public? 

 

Try to find out about the murder of this model! There is almost nothing about it on the Internet. 

 

The cover-up included bribing the media and aviation experts. One British and American TV series, for instance, Seconds From Disaster. pretended in one episode that the plane blew up due to a technical malfunction.

 

A travel writer, Christine Negroni, was paid to claim the same thing. The press is paid to tout her. Incredibly, Negroni is still used today to cover up the facts of aviation disasters. (At present, Negroni is writing about the Malaysian airliner MH370 that disappeared several hours after take-off from Malaysia. The plane was flying unsafe cargo to China. If this cargo caused the plane's disappearance, it is likely that Negroni has been paid to try to cover it up in her book about it.)

 

For years, the families of passengers killed in the attack on TWA-800 have tried to obtain justice and compensation. If Clinton's wife becomes president in 2017, their efforts will be further thwarted.

 

 

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

 

March 13, 2004

 

Pedophile Scandal in Belgium

 

The Belgian Monarchy on Trial

 

It is not the notorious pedophile, Marc Dutroux, dubbed “The Monster of Charleroi”, who is on trial in Belgium’s “Trial of the Century”. It is the Belgian monarchy.

 

Dutroux, an ex-prostitute and pedophile, is on trial for the kidnapping and murder of several children and youths in the southern French-speaking region of Belgium, particularly around the city of Charleroix, where he lived, in the mid-1990s.

 

Essentially, Dutroux kidnapped and sold young women and children to pimps and pedophiles. He held them captive in underground dungeons until he had lined up customers. The total number of children kidnapped, procured or murdered by Dutroux might never be known or made public.

 

The trial, which began last week, had been delayed for eight years, since Dutroux’s arrest in 1996. The widespread misconduct of officials in the case became a national scandal and caused an outrage that the country had not witnessed since the end of the Second World War.

 

Many government officials of all grades and at all levels   -   policemen, prosecutors, judges and cabinet ministers   -   were implicated in the scandal.

 

Officials tried to deny misconduct. To deflect public criticism of the government, the Prime Minister commissioned a group of academics to study sexual abuse of children. A parliamentary commission investigated the alleged complicity or other misconduct by officials. So-called “non-governmental organizations” (“NGOs") were set up, including one with the assistance of an American “NGO” and the American Embassy in Brussels, to help find and recover kidnapped and missing children.

 

But the scandal grew and spread. The parliamentary commission was a sham   -   it absolved all government officials of any complicity or wrongdoing. The Prime Minister’s commission was a spy-ring to find and procure children to pedophiles. The newly created government offices and “NGOs” were meant only to give the illusion of correcting a lamentable situation and turned out to be fronts for pedophiles, traffickers and procurers. The American embassy in Brussels looked like the shady accomplice of local sexual deviants and corrupt and complicit government officials.

 

The prosecutor in the case, initially acclaimed a hero, was soon the object of angry protests for dragging his feet in similar kidnapping and murder cases.

 

A detective and the son of a prosecutor were implicated in a car-theft ring with Dutroux.

 

Dutroux overpowered his police guards and escaped, forcing two cabinet ministers and the national police chief to resign. The government was severely shaken and eventually forced to resign en mass. Its successor, the first liberal government in Belgium in 70 years, was even more complicit in the crimes of pedophiles, kidnappers, traffickers and procurers: it pleaded incompetence and offered the run-around; it covered for pedophiles and procurers.

 

More recently, Dutroux’s prison guards were caught passing his letters to a 15-year-old girl.

 

Presently, “NGOs” are trying to set up a regional pedophile and kidnapping ring with police services in Europe.

 

It is a miracle that the trial is being held at all or that Dutroux is alive to testify.

 

On trial with Dutroux are his first wife and two associates, including a businessman who funded electoral campaigns in Belgium, Michel Nihoul.

 

Dutroux has long been the focus of the media. He appears to be at the center of the trial. But Dutroux maintains that he was just one small part of a large pedophile ring that included high society figures. In fact, Nihoul should offer more revealing testimony than Dutroux. Nihoul bought children from Dutroux and procured them to prominent aristocrats, industrialists and judicial officials who tortured and murdered them at parties. Nihoul can expose the highest Belgian officials and businessmen. Nihoul, by his testimony, can bring down the Belgian government. He can bring down the Belgian monarchy.

 

The last King of the Belgians, Baudouin, was a quiet person. He seldom caused a stir. Not so his younger brother and successor, the present king, Albert II. A notorious playboy prince, he was an unpopular figure. Upon Baudouin’s sudden and unexpected death in 1993, the pubic, horrified by the prospect that Albert would become king, demanded that his son be proclaimed king instead.

 

Bauduoin often expressed concern for the welfare of children. Not so his younger brother, Albert. In recent years, the present king was alleged to have participated in orgies in the 1960s and 1970s in which children were procured and sexually assaulted. According to the accounts of a judge in Luxembourg that were published by the French publisher Flammarion a couple of years ago, Nihoul procured children at a party attended by high officials and a member of the royal family, thought to have been Albert, then a prince, in a castle in Belgium where they were tortured and slaughtered in ritual ceremonies in the late 1980s.

 

If recent revelations have reaffirmed public opinion that the present king is unworthy of the crown, it has also caused the public to suspect that the entire royal family, who knew all about this evil behavior, is unfit to reside in the royal palace.

 

Alas, the trial is expected to follow a well-prepared script. The prosecutors and judges   -   and the lawyers   -   have been warned not to let Dutroux and Nihoul reveal details of the pedophile rings to which they procured children. Dutroux and Nihoul have probably agreed to a deal   -   life sentences to be reduced later when no one is looking   -   in exchange for silence about their clients.

 

copyright, David Messier

 

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

March 24, 2004

 

Pedophiles in High Places Seek to Silence Procurers of Children, Dutroux and Nihoul

 

Belgium’s “Trial of the Century” Exposes International Pedophile and Prostitution Rings

 

International Military Guard Must Be Posted

  

Pedophiles in high places want to silence Belgian’s two most notorious criminals, Marc Dutroux and Michel Nihoul.

 

The procurers of children are at the center of Belgium’s “Trial of the Century”.

 

Since the trial began in the southern city of Charleroi three weeks ago, government officials have tried to dismiss Dutroux’s claim that he and Nihoul procured women and children to organized pedophile and prostitution rings throughout Europe.

 

Once again, last week, the Belgian government displayed its reluctance to conduct the trial.

 

Keys to handcuffs were discovered in Dutroux’s jail cell.

 

It appears that high officials are trying to induce Dutroux to escape from prison and disappear.   

 

Dutroux escaped before. Six years ago, in 1998, he overpowered two police guards, stole a gun from one of them, commandeered a car, and drove off. He was caught in the Ardennes, car stuck in mud, three hours later.

 

The spectacular escape, which Dutroux seemed to have pulled off with surprising ease, caused an outrage and forced the resignation of the national police chief, Willy De Ridder, the Minister of Interior, Johan Vande Lanotte, and the Minister of Justice, Stefaan De Clerck.

 

The discovery of the keys, which was the latest of several recent lapses in prison security around Dutroux, triggered another outrage and demands for the resignations of the federal police chief, Herman Fransen, the Minister of Interior, Patrick Dewael, Minister of Justice, Laurette Onkelink, and Vande Lanotte, who rejoined the government.

 

Nihoul, a businessman who funded electoral campaigns and procured children to prominent Belgians in high places, was free on bail until the trial began. Now back in prison for the duration of the trial, it appears that he and Dutroux might never have a chance to reveal all.

 

Crucial witnesses have a way of disappearing or turning up dead in Belgium.

 

Since the Belgian authorities are incapable of guaranteeing that the trial will proceed, with all witnesses present, an international military guard should be posted.

 

copyright, David Messier

 
-----------------------
 
October 2, 2004
 
 
What to do about the United Nations Organization
 

Start Reform from the Bottom Up,

Not from the Top Down

Reform at the United Nations has long been needed   -  but not at the top.


For many years to come, the UN Security Council will remain as it is today, and as it has since its creation decades ago, with five permanent members - the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France - the leaders of the victorious Allies in World War Two, who have steered the world clear of a third world war and a nuclear holocaust for the past 59 years.

 

It is far too early to consider giving the former Axis powers, Germany and Japan, permanent status on the Security Council. They may be the world's greatest economic powers but they are not military powers. Furthermore, Germany is still Europe's "bad boy" and Japan is still "on probation".

 

Giving Third World countries, like India and Brazil, permanent status on the Security Council would defeat the purpose of permanent status. India might have a nuclear arsenal, but it is clearly not in the same league as the permanent members of the Security Council.

 

Several mistakes involving the UN in recent years might have given some politicians in Southeast Asia the false impression that permanent status on the UN Security Council is for sale.

The first mistake was the UN's reelection of Kofi Annan to a second term as UN secretary general. Annan did not merit the post to begin with and many felt that it should have gone to a better and more capable person.
 

The second mistake was the awarding of the Nobel Prize, wholly undeserved, to Kofi Annan and the UN. It was actually a bribe, made by the American president, George W. Bush, to ensure that he had Annan's support in the future. 

 

The third mistake was Bush's decision to release long held-up payment of the country’s dues to the UN. Annan had often opposed and embarrassed Bush, so there was no real reason to give the UN money.

 

Furthermore, most of the funds from the United States to the UN go to support thousands of parasitic anti-Americans overseas, phony projects, and criminal activities, like the international traffic in women and children.

 

A fourth mistake was the glorification of the UN high commissioner for human rights. This official and his staff are seldom serious about their role or their work and accomplish little if anything. Until last year, the commissioner had come to be regarded, especially in the Third World, as some sort of a divinity and rivaled the UN secretary general and US president for attention in the media.

 

If there is to be reform, the UN should begin by cutting some 80 percent of its staff and reducing its payroll by dismissing thousands of employees, closing hundreds of offices, and suspending many commissions worldwide that serve no real purpose and do nothing.

 

copyright, David Messier

 

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

 

September 25, 2005

 

The Belgian Pedophile Scandal and the Catholic Church in Belgium

 

China and the Vatican

 

Who should   -   or shouldn’t   -   be the Vatican's Envoy?

 

The Archbishop of Belgian, Gottfried Cardinal Danneels, age 72, went to China in late March. He said he was on a mission to restore ties between the Vatican and China, which Chinese communists severed after taking over China in 1949. The Vatican broke off relations with China in 1951 and established and maintained ties with Taiwan.

 

At the time of Danneels' trip to China, the late pope, John Paul II, was on his deathbed and Danneels thought that there was a chance that he might succeed him.

 

The Vatican tried to restore ties with the Catholic Church in China earlier, in 1990. Negotiations failed, essentially because the Chinese government took exception to the Vatican's insistence that only Rome could appoint bishops in China. There was also the underlying issue of the Vatican's recognition of Taiwan, which the Chinese government considers a province of China.

 

Earlier this month, the new pontiff, Pope Benedict XVI, invited four Catholic bishops from China, including two whose appointments by the Vatican had been approved by the Chinese government, to attend a the current Synod of Bishops at the Vatican, which begins on October 2 and runs to October 23.

 

In response, the Chinese government replied that the bishops were too old to travel to Rome.

 

The Chinese government did not allow two Chinese bishops to attend a 1998 Synod of Asian Bishops, to which they were invited by Pope John Paul II.

 

Pope John Paul II, who came from Poland, hated communism. Some have wondered if the Vatican, under a new pontiff, would forsake Taiwan in an effort to restore relations with China. The Vatican invited also the bishops of Taiwan and Hong Kong to the October Synod.

 

It is not clear if Cardinal Danneels decided on his own to go to China or if he discussed his trip beforehand with the dieing pope’s advisors. In any case, he met church and government officials in China

 

Belgium is renowned as one of the world's leading producers of beer and the center of trade in rough diamonds. Until the recent collapse of the European Union's efforts to form an United Europe, the EU's capital, Brussels, which is also the capital of Belgium, was widely regarded as the unofficial capital of Europe.

 

But Belgium has also become infamous for its recent legalization of same-sex marriages and a decade of pedophile scandals that exposed many officials, brought down a government and implicated the royal family. 

 

Danneels has toed a convenient social and political line in regard to homosexuality by not condemning it outright and sometimes even excusing or defending it.

 

At the height of Belgium’s pedophile scandal in 1997, Danneels was publicly accused of ignoring the plight of the victims of pedophiles. In response, Danneels set up a telephone hot-line to accept complaints against pedophiles directly from the public.

 

But Danneels ignored many, if not all, the complaints to him. Indeed, there is no indication that he ever considered them.

 

In the following year, 1998, a criminal count in Belgium declared that the Belgian Catholic Church had failed to protect the victims of a pedophile priest. Testifying in court, Danneels denied knowing anything about the matter. It was the first time that a cardinal appeared before a secular court in Belgium. The court ordered Danneels to pay damages to the 12-year-old victim.

 

The pedophile case appears to have marked the most crucial moment of Danneels’ career. In fact, the court case was merely the tip of the iceberg.

 

When Danneels accompanied a group of Belgian bishops to the Vatican in 2003, the pope lamented over the poor health of the church in Belgian.

 

Among the many complaints that Danneels ignored were complaints about the kidnappings, murders and disappearances of Asian children in Belgium.

 

Thus, Danneels appears not have been the right envoy to China for the Vatican. To some, Danneels’ mission to China must have read like typical Belgian black humor.

 

Before he was elected pontiff earlier this year, Pope Benedict XVI, as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger of Germany, was the late Pope John Paul's closest aide. He was concerned most with maintaining unity, order and discipline within the ranks of the clergy throughout the world. His sternness earned him the  reputation as "The Enforcer" among the clergy.

 

To maintain order within the clergy, however, Cardinal Ratzinger felt he had to forego investigating and disciplining priests accused of homosexuality and pedophilia. As a result, however, the Vatican was widely accused of ignoring rampant homosexuality and pedophilia within the clergy. 

 

John Paul II and Benedict XVI were sued in Texas courts for obstructing the prosecution of local pedophile priests. At the Vatican's request, the U. S. government asked the courts to dismiss the lawsuits because the pope, as a head of state, enjoys immunity from prosecution.

 

Thus, it might have appeared to Danneels that he was free to ignore complaints against homosexuals and pedophiles or requests from victims and victims' families for assistance from the church.

 

Earlier this month, the Vatican forbade homosexuals from joining the clergy. The Vatican also launched an inquiry into the conduct of American Catholic priests alleged to be pedophiles. This might signal a change in the attitude and conduct of the Vatican toward homosexuality and pedophilia.

  

The Vatican's envoys to the Catholic Church and government in China, as well as the Catholic Churches and governments of other countries in Asia, should have impeccable records. They should be firmly opposed to homosexuality and pedophilia. 

 

Until Danneels and the Catholic Church in Belgium have demonstrated that they are wholly opposed to homosexuality and pedophilia and have shown some compassion for the victims of pedophiles, including Asiatic victims and their relatives in Belgium and Asia, the Vatican should consider carefully the consequences of sending them abroad as envoys.

 

copyright, David Messier 

 

 

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

 

 

Full name:
Email address:
Comment:
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Some Historical Notes

 

Kings of the Belgians, House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha

 

French armies conquored Belgium   -  the Austrian Netherlands   -   and took it from Austria and annexed it to France in 1795. Belgium remained under French adminsitration until 1813.

 

Following the defeat of the Emporer Napolean Bonaparte by the British and Prussians at the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, the Congress of Vienna gave Belgium back to an independent Netherlands.

 

French-speaking Catholic Belgians and middle-class burgers in Belgium who were opposed to the Dutch King, William of Orange, declared independence from the mostly Protestant Netherlands in 1830. William invaded Belgium but the British and the French forced him to withdraw. For stratregic pruposes, Belgium kept the port of Antwerp.

 

Baron Surlet de Chokler, Regent, February 17, 1831 - July 21, 1831 

 

Under pressure from the British, the Belgian Congress elected Leopold of the House Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, a German prince who was the uncle of Britain's Queen Victoria, as Belgium's first king

 

1. Leopold I, crowned July 21, 1831 (Belgian national holiday); died, December 10, 1865  


2. Leopold II, elder son of Leopold I; crowned, December 17, 1865; died, December 17, 1909  

 

3. Albert I, nephew of Leopold II; crowned, December 23, 1909; died, February 17, 1934

 

4. Leopold III, elder son of Albert I; crowned, February 23, 1934; abdicated July 16, 1951 

 

German troops invaded Belgium on May 1, 1940. The Belgian government fled and went into exile. Leopold surrendered unconditionally to the Germans on May 28, 1940.

 

Leopold remained in Belgium theroughout the German occupation. Retreating German forces took him back to Germany with them on June 7, 1944.

 

After the liberation of Belgium by the Allies, in early September 1944, Leopold's younger brother, Prince Karol (Charles), became regent during Leopold's absence.

 

Prince Karol, Regent, September 20, 1944 - July 20, 1950  

 

The Allies reached Leopold in Austria, where the Germans had taken him, on May 7, 1945.

 

The Belgian public considered Leopold a collaborator of the Germans. Thus, he could not return to Belgium; he moved to Switizerland in October 1944.  

 

Following a national referendum on July 20, 1950, in which 58% of the Belgian public voted for the return of Leopold to Belgium, Leopold returned from Switzerland, on July 22, 1950. 

 

On August 1, 1950, following violent protests, Leopold suggested a transfer of royal powers to his eldest son, Baudoin, who thus became Prince Royal on August 11, 1950. 

 

Realizing that it would be impossible to reconcile the Belgian public, Leopold abdicated one year later, on July 16, 1951. 

 

5. Baudoin I , elder son of Leopold III; Prince Royal, August 11, 1950 - July 16, 1951; crowned, July 17, 1951; died, July 31, 1993

 

When Bauduoin refused to give royal assent to a bill that would liberalise abortion laws that had been approved by the Belgian parliament, the government declared, on April 4, 1990, that he was unable to reign. The government, assuming the role of head of state, signed the bill into law and on the following day, April 5, 1990, restored Baudouin.

 

Following the death of Baudouin, many Belgians expressed a dislike for Baudouin's younger brother, Albert, known as a playboy who spent much or most of his time outside of Belgium. Many Flemish-speaking Belgians complained that his wife did not speak Flemish. Most Belgians preferred by-passing Albert and giving the throne to his son.    

 

6. Albert II, second son of Leopold III; crowned, August 9, 1993  

 

 

For more on the allegations of the sexual molestation of children against the King of the Belgians, start here: 
 
B. B. C.
Tuesday, 18 September, 2001, 10:24 GMT 11:24 UK
 
 
Oddly, this article is referred to (by a link) on the King's wikipedia website in defense against the publication of evidence collected by a judge in Belgium.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Vatican Stays the Course on China

 

In early May 2006, bishops of China's official state-controlled Roman Catholic Church ordained bishops without the required consent of the Pope, Benedict XVI.

 

In immediate response, the Vatican excommunicated the Chinese bishops who were ordained and the bishops who performed the ordinations. In all, some 30 Chinese bishops were involved in the unapproved ordinations.

 

Excommunication is the Church's highest and most severe punishment. An excommunicated Roman Catholic cannot receive Holy Communion and other sacrament.

 

Vatican bars homosexuals from joining the clergy

 

In late November 2005, the Vatican announced that Pope Benedict XVI approved a Vatican statement, drafted in August 2005, banning homosexuals, as well as supporters of homosexuality, from entering the priesthood.

 

However, the ban did not match the hope and expectations of most of the world. The ban did not apply to homosexuals who have refrained from homosexual relations within the past three years. 

 

The Vatican and pedophiles

 

The Vatican has stood its ground against the totalitarian Communist Chinese state. The Vatican has ruled against allowing homosexuals into the Roman Catholic clergy.

 

It is not enough to speak out against pedophilia. The Church must act against it. The Vatican must act against pedophilia by defrocking priests who are or have been pedophiles. The Vatican must also act against bishops who aid and abet pedophile priests or who obstruct judicial procedures against pedophile priests.

 

It appears unlikely, however, that the Vatican will act against pedophiles in the clergy, or against clergymen who have conspired with pedophiles or pedophile rings, any time soon.

 

For other comments, see: http://messierdavid.tripod.com/relevantnewsitemsandcomments/

See also:

 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Apr05/Berkowitz0421.htm

 

 

Pope's first attack against pedophilia

 

On October 28, 2006, Pope Benedict XVI issued his first statement against sexual abuse, essentially meaning pedophilia, since his election as pope in early 2005.

 

The pope warned a group of Irish bishops visiting the Vatican against "sexual abuse". The Irish church has been greatly reduced by repeated wide-spread pedophile scandals in the past two decades.  

 

Shortly before he was elected, Pope Benedict, then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, railed against against "filth" in the clergy. 

 

But there is more to sexual abuse than pedophile priests. Many priests and nuns are complicit in the kidnapping and trafficking of children and in the exploitation of children by pedophile and prostitution rings. Indeed, it's a very old story. In the past decade, bishops of various countries, particularly Belgium, have ignored complaints from the public about the mistreatment of children by the clergy. The Vatican has a long history of shielding pedophiles and their accomplices in the clergy. The pope has yet to acknowledge the misconduct of bishops and cardinals for protecting pedophiles in the clergy.

 

Pope Benedict XVI must denounce clergymen who are complicit in the abuse of children. He must denounce bishops, like those in Belgium, who have for years ignored complaints from the public. But it is not enough to denounce. Words must be backed up by action   -   visible action with real consequences.

 

Note (04/19/11):

 

The current pope was a notorous homosexual in his university days. 

 

Old habits die hard.

 

Today this odd fact about the pope seems to rate only a short footnate in biographical accounts. 

 

The pope's occasional statements admitting abuse of children by pedophile clergymen are political, made only because they have to be. His remarks do not necessarily indicate that he and other clergymen will always respond if pressed to do so.

 

Remember the last Archbishop of Belgium, Gottfried Cardinal Danneels? He played deaf and dumb for so many years to demands that he act against pedophile rings in the Belgian clergy. A police raid on his house shortly after his retiremnt netted all sorts of odd things, like pornography, etc., etc. He was arrested and taken away. 

 

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lyQg-YOxKQ&feature=related

 

Why not a police raid on the pope's private quarters?