Who Grieves For Our Lord His Most Blessed Mother?

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Much attention has been focused lately on the shooting death of a seventeen-year old young man, Trayvon Martin, in Sanford, Florida, by a "community watch coordinator" named George Zimmerman, who began to follow Martin on February 26, 2012, after placing a call to 911 to report what he believed to be suspicious behavior by the youth. What has made the case, which is fraught with conflicting accounts, ripe for exploitation by such professional race-baiters as Alfred Charles Sharpton, Jr., and Jesse Louis Jackson and Barack Hussein Obama is that Trayvon Martin was black and George Zimmerman is a white man of Peruvian and German ancestry who lists himself as a "Hispanic" on his voter registration card.

A dispassionate search for the facts of this case has become very difficult as a result of the involvement of the race-baiters, who have ignored the record of crime (eight burglaries, nine thefts and one shooting) with the boundaries of The Retreat in Twin Lakes ion Sanford, Florida, where Zimmerman lived. Although Zimmerman's legal culpability in this matter may have been decided in the court of public opinion by the race-baiters, it should be noted, without justifying for a single moment any use of firearms without just cause, that the precise facts concerning the shooting are not yet known.

What is known, however, is that media conglomerates such as the National Bogusbroadcsting Company television network (NBC-TV) altered a recording of Zimmerman's 911 call to make it appear as though that he had initially identified Martin as a black man when the unedited recording reveals that he spoke of the youth's race only when asked by the 911 dispatcher for a description of the man who had aroused his suspicions.

Such is not a dispassionate search for truth but an effort to manipulate the news in favor of "gun control" when the problem we are facing is a breakdown of civilization itself as exemplified every day by the daily slaughter of nearly 4,000 children by surgical means and countless thousands more by abortifacient pills and devices. And even that daily carnage is but the consequence of a world built upon the fabric of lies associated with Protestantism's revolution against the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man's return to Him through the Catholic Church and the subsequent rise of the various naturalistic philosophies and ideologies of Judeo-Masonry that do violence against the true God of Divine Revelation and His Sacred Deposit of Faith every day. Social order must break down over the course of time when Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is not recognized as the King of men and their nations as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through His Catholic Church. What's the big deal about distorting the facts about a crime that can be exploited along racial lines to advance an ideological agenda of conflict and white guilt when the truths of God Himself are distorted and when blasphemous attacks upon Him and His Most Blessed Mother and His Holy Church are considered signs of "freedom" in a "free" and "civilized" nation?

It is this irresponsible for anyone to draw conclusions about the facts in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman. Too much is yet unknown, and I am not going to waste my time in Holy Week answering e-mails from people who have their own special theories about the case. If George Zimmerman provoked the confrontation by following him even after he had been instructed by the 911 dispatcher to await the arrival of the police because he mistook his role of a citizen volunteer for that a a duly authorized police officer, then this will come out in due course and he will face appropriate charges in a court-of-law. 

The only reason that a commentary is being offered on this site now is to attempt to provide a bit of perspective on a matter that has become needlessly politicized along racial lines when those who are doing the politicizing come from a long tradition of seeking to protect blacks who have committed crimes against blacks and/or who have invented stories or incited or exacerbated riots for their own purposes.

To wit, black Muslin leaders, eager to flex their political muscle in the City of New York, staged a confrontation on April 14, 1972, by placing a false call to the New York City Police Department to respond to an emergency. Those black Muslim leaders wanted to ambush whichever police officer entered the mosque. Officer Philip Cardillo was killed at point blank range. Fearing that a riot would ensue if he confronted the racialist bullies, then Mayor John Vliet Lindsay was involved in a cover-up to prevent any questioning of the sixteen eyewitnesses, who were in all likelihood accomplices, to the Officer Cardillo's execution:

The 1972 slaying of a city cop inside a Harlem mosque moved quickly from political hot potato to police cold case, with no convictions or answers for the slain officer's family.

A new NYPD investigation, launched more than two years ago, only opened old wounds - and left Officer Phillip Cardillo's son now demanding a federal probe in the racially charged shooting.

Todd Cardillo was assured in a letter last week from Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly that his father's fatal shooting remains an active investigation.

But the cop's son has doubts.

"This letter, it's just a list of what they want to check off to say they did it," said Cardillo, who was barely a year old when his father died. "It reads like the whole thing is not going anywhere."

The son wants a Department of Justice investigation, while lawyers who have been involved in the case for decades say the answers could lie in long forgotten FBI files.

"What the police department needs," says former prosecutor James Harmon, "is for the FBI to open their books 100%."

Officer Cardillo was fatally wounded April 14, 1972, after answering a phony 911 call of a cop in trouble inside the Nation of Islam Mosque No. 7 on W. 116th St. He died on April 20.

"We got suckered into it," recalls Cardillo's partner, Vito Navarra. "My partner lost his life and no one made good on it."

Sixteen witnesses were identified in the mosque's basement - but all were quickly let go as Mayor John Lindsay, Rep. Charles Rangel and then-Police Commissioner Patrick Murphy feared a race riot.

Cardillo's unsolved murder became one of the NYPD's darkest chapters. His family felt out of the loop; Todd Cardillo was shielded for years from what his family considered the NYPD's callous treatment of his father.

So he wasn't overly optimistic in 2006 when Kelly - who guarded the mortally wounded Cardillo's hospital room as a young cop - reopened the investigation.

Cardillo credits the new probe to a scathing book, "Circle of Six," written by retired case Detective Randy Jurgensen and another NYPD detective, Robert Cea.

The original case broke every rule of police work, Jurgensen argued, as frightened politicians and top police brass bowed to pressure from mosque leader Louis Farrakhan.

No crime scene was ever established and no one determined who made the fake call. The only suspect ever arrested walked after one trial ended with a hung jury and a second with an acquittal.

Jurgensen said his digging revealed the FBI spoke with Louis 17X Dupree in Manhattan's 24th Precinct after the shooting - information the feds denied they even had when the suspect went to trial.

The FBI, years later, provided redacted documents indicating they had informants attached to the mosque, Jurgensen said. Missing in the paperwork were their names, along with details of possible FBI surveillance at the mosque.

FBI sources counter that they surrendered everything. The FBI also checked its files and told the NYPD that Dupree was never an informant or source for them.

Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne, without going into detail, said the FBI did make a good faith effort. Prosecutor Harmon disagreed.

"The documents are incomplete," Harmon said. "There are additional records that have not been turned over. What has been turned over has been redacted." (Nation of Islam mosque killing of NYPD cop still a mystery, 37 years.)

 

One will notice the involvement in this case of United States Representative Charles Bernard Rangel (D-New York), a pro-abort Catholic is also a Freemason, maintaining his "good standing" in the conciliar structures all the while without a peep of protest from any "archbishop" of New York (Terence Cooke, John O'Connor, Edward Egan, Timothy Dolan). One will also note the involvement of "minister" Louis Farrakhan.

John Lindsay caved to pressure in 1972.

So did New York City Mayor David N. Dinkins as in Crown Heights section of Williamsburg, Brooklyn, burned followed the accidental death of a seven year-old black boy named Gavin Cato by a Hasidic Jew named Yosef Lifish on August 19, 1991. As had been the case in Harlem nineteen years before, the police were given orders to stand by as crowds of angry blacks rioted and shouted "Death to the Jews." Passions were so inflamed that a Hasidic student named Yankel Rosenbaum was stabbed to death in "retaliation" for the accidental death of Cavin Cato. One of those inciting the riots was none other than the infamous not-so-reverend Alton Sharpton, just four years removed from his infamous Tawana Brawley hoax. This is why there was a great deal of resentment in the Talmudic community when Sharpton was invited to speak two months ago at an event commemorating the twentieth anniversary of the riots:

An East End synagogue has reignited bitterness over the 1991 Crown Heights race riots by inviting the Rev. Al Sharpton to a symposium marking the 20th anniversary of the bloody confrontations.

"It's just an absolute disgrace," said Norman Rosenbaum, whose brother Yankel was killed at the height of the mayhem. "His vile rhetoric incited the rioting."

What revived the nightmare was Sharpton's invitation to appear on a panel on the "State of Black-Jewish Relations: Twenty Years after Crown Heights."

The riots were touched off when 7-year-old Gavin Cato was struck and killed by a car in the motorcade of a Hasidic leader.

Yankel Rosenbaum, an Australian-born Hasidic scholar who had nothing to do with the motorcade, was stabbed to death in the violence that followed.

Sharpton was criticized at the time for saying, in a eulogy for Gavin, that he wasn't killed by a car accident but by "the social accident of apartheid." He led 400 protesters, chanting "No justice, no peace" despite pleas by then-Mayor David Dinkins for calm.

Norman Rosenbaum said the title of the forum falsely implies the four nights of rioting were due to "ongoing problems between the Jewish community and the African-American community."

"It was just wanton criminal attacks," he said. "This is Crown Heights revisionist history," he said of the forum, scheduled for Sunday night.

He said Sharpton "did absolutely nothing then to improve black-Jewish relations -- and nothing since."

Community leader Isaac Abraham, who was invited to the forum, accused The Hampton Synagogue's Rabbi Marc Schneier of trying to gain attention by including Sharpton.

"To get some publicity for your phony West Hampton ethnic bullcrap, you invite the biggest race hustler who played a large part in those four nights of the pogrom," he wrote Schneier.

Yosef Lifish, the driver of the car that killed Cato, was cleared of charges and left for Israel. Sharpton flew to Tel Aviv later in 1991 in an attempt to slap Lifish with a civil suit.

When a passer-by at Israel's Ben Gurion Airport recognized Sharpton, she shouted, "Go to hell!"

"I am in hell already," Sharpton replied. "I am in Israel." (Fury over Sharpton speaking at Crown Heights riot.)

 

Could you imagine what would happen if Patrick Joseph Buchanan made the comment about Israel that was uttered by Sharpton? Certain professional victimologists would have skewered him alive for being an anti-Semite of the first order, which he is not.

David N. Dinkins and his police commissioner, Lee Brown, ordered the police to stand down.

Sharpton, of course, was the man who helped to engineer the infamous Tawana Brawley hoax twenty-five years ago, a hoax that ruined the career and wrecked the marriage of New York State Police Trooper Stephen Pagones:

Among the earliest and clearest voices to condemn Trent Lott's benighted remarks last month were those of conservatives and Republicans, who were repelled by his nostalgia for segregation and quick to call for his ouster. When will liberals and Democrats show the same maturity and forcefully repudiate the noxious racial lout in their own tent, New York demagogue Al Sharpton?

And when will the media, which aggressively mined Lott's racial history and prominently reported the results, show a similar interest in digging into Sharpton's record -- a record far more shameful and egregious than anything Lott has to answer for.

This is a subject of more than idle interest. Al Sharpton says he is running for president. He has no hope of landing the White House, the Democratic nomination, or more than a handful of convention delegates, but that won't stop him from getting plenty of ink and air time. And maybe it shouldn't; presidential campaigns have often been enlivened and even enlightened by candidates who had no more chance of winning the presidency than they did of winning the Preakness.

But it is impossible to imagine, say, David Duke running for president as a Republican and not being shunned by every leading figure in the party. Impossible to imagine his campaign appearances being covered in news accounts that made no mention of his history in the Ku Klux Klan and his links to neo-Nazis. Impossible to imagine that he would be treated as just another candidate, albeit one with a "controversial" past. No one would roll over for Duke. Why are they rolling over for Sharpton?

After all, Sharpton's résumé is at least as vile as Duke's.

1987: Sharpton spreads the incendiary Tawana Brawley hoax, insisting heatedly that a 15-year-old black girl was abducted, raped, and smeared with feces by a group of white men. He singles out Steve Pagones, a young prosecutor. Pagones is wholly innocent -- the crime never occurred -- but Sharpton taunts him: "If we're lying, sue us, so we can . . . prove you did it." Pagones does sue, and eventually wins a $345,000 verdict for defamation. To this day, Sharpton refuses to recant his unspeakable slander or to apologize for his role in the odious affair.

1991: A Hasidic Jewish driver in Brooklyn's Crown Heights section accidentally kills Gavin Cato, a 7-year-old black child, and antisemitic riots erupt. Sharpton races to pour gasoline on the fire. At Gavin's funeral he rails against the "diamond merchants" -- code for Jews -- with "the blood of innocent babies" on their hands. He mobilizes hundreds of demonstrators to march through the Jewish neighborhood, chanting, "No justice, no peace." A rabbinical student, Yankel Rosenbaum, is surrounded by a mob shouting "Kill the Jews!" and stabbed to death.

1995: When the United House of Prayer, a large black landlord in Harlem, raises the rent on Freddy's Fashion Mart, Freddy's white Jewish owner is forced to raise the rent on his subtenant, a black-owned music store. A landlord-tenant dispute ensues; Sharpton uses it to incite racial hatred. "We will not stand by," he warns malignantly, "and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business." Sharpton's National Action Network sets up picket lines; customers going into Freddy's are spat on and cursed as "traitors" and "Uncle Toms." Some protesters shout, "Burn down the Jew store!" and simulate striking a match. "We're going to see that this cracker suffers," says Sharpton's colleague Morris Powell. On Dec. 8, one of the protesters bursts into Freddy's, shoots four employees point-blank, then sets the store on fire. Seven employees die in the inferno.

If Sharpton were a white skinhead, he would be a political leper, spurned everywhere but the fringe. But far from being spurned, he is shown much deference. Democrats embrace him. Politicians court him. And journalists report on his comings and goings while politely sidestepping his career as a hatemongering racial hustler.

When Sharpton came to Boston to promote his campaign last week, for example, the news coverage was uniformly upbeat. The Boston Herald noted the "joyous singing and thunderous applause" that greeted the "civil rights leader," whose "energetic visit left many enthusiastic about his presidential bid." The Globe announced the arrival of "the colorful and controversial 48-year-old community activist" with a story listing the places and times of his public appearances. The only allusion to his ugly record was a vague quote from a local minister: "He obviously has a lot of history and controversy to overcome." That was quickly countered by Sharpton's own self-description as a man known "for my fights against racial profiling and discrimination."

Well, that isn't what Steve Pagones or the family of Yankel Rosenbaum or the loved ones of those who were burned alive at Freddy's Fashion Mart know him for. As they can testify, Sharpton is a vicious liar and a dangerous bigot. As a matter of moral hygiene, his party and the press should be able to say so, too. (Al Sharpton: The Democrat's David Duke;  see also Michelle Malkin, Where was Bozo the VP today?)

The professional race-baiters always want to politicize events for their own self-aggrandizing purposes.

What has been lost in the tragic shooting death of Travyon Martin is the simple fact that a world that is not under the direction of the Catholic Faith, a world today that suffers from a paucity of Sanctifying and Actual Graces because of the sacramental barrenness of the conciliar liturgical rites, must devolve into barbarism, a world of tribalism, if you will, where all semblance of even Judeo-Masonic decency on a level of pure naturalism must give way to the abyss of lawless self-indulgence and craven "self-expression."

Parents in a world informed by the Catholic Faith and vivified by the supernatural helps she makes present in the world by the administration of the sacraments would not permit their children to dress or to speak like hoodlums. Catholics know that it is aberrant to dress and to speak as a "gangster" as though this is some kind of "civil right" in the name of "free expression" or "individuality."

Parents in a world informed by the Catholic Faith and vivified by the supernatural helps that Holy Mother Church makes present in the world by the administration of the sacraments would not permit their children to listen to "rock" "music" or to dress immodestly or watch television at all, no less to partake of this catechist of the devil on a daily basis and they would instruct their children to avoid any and all patronage of motion pictures or other kinds of "entertainment" that are enticements to sin thus offensive to God and ruinous to their own immortal souls.

Parents in a world informed by the Catholic Faith and vivified by the supernatural helps that Holy Mother Church makes present in the world by the administration of the sacraments would not permit their children to associate with those they known to be bad influences upon their immortal souls.

Mind you, Travyon Martin may have been a fine young man. His death may have been wholly unwarranted and unprovoked. George Zimmerman may have tried to act the part of a police officer when he is not one. Zimmerman may have been looking for trouble when none was to be had in this case or he may, given the history of crime in his community, have been fully justified by seeking to follow Martin after he had been instructed not to do so. Patrick Joseph Buchanan has offered a very fine commentary on the simple facts of crime in the United States of America, stressing that one would be foolish not to recognize this reality (see Buchanan: It's All About Race Now). 

Indeed, Jesse Louis Jackson, who is race-baiting on the killing of Travyon Martin with particular abandon right now, once said:

“There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps... then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.” (Quote by Jesse Jackson: "There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life. . . .")

Double standards abound in a world where people identify themselves by their race rather than by their common relationship as members of the Catholic Church. Double standards abound.

How were the wanton killers during the "South Central Riots" from April 29, 1992, to May 4, 1992, in Los Angeles, California, defended by some in the "mainstream media"? "Black rage," that's how, the same kind of defense that was actually used by attorneys William Kunstler, who gained fame defending the Chicago Seven, and Ron Kuby as they represented Long Island Rail Road shooter Colin Ferguson from March 20, 1994 to December 10, 1994 until he fired them, insisting that he, Ferguson, was not crazy and that he was not guilty of killing six people and wounding nineteen people on a Long Island Rail Road train as it pulled into the Merillon Avenue Station in Garden City Park, New York, on Tuesday, December 7, 1993. Interestingly, Ferguson rejected the "black rage" defense that Kunstler and Kuby tried to use to defend him. Such an ideologically-based defense was a twist of the "Twinkie defense" that has become part of our popular culture even though the psychiatrist, Dr. Martin Blinder, who evaluated the man who killed San Francisco, California, Mayor George Moscone and City Councilman Harvey Milk, Dan White, said that "twinkies" and other junk food were signs of Dan White's depressed state but not had caused him to plot to kill Moscone and Milk.

Playing the "blame game" for ideological reasons, however, is nothing new even in the recent history of the United States of America.

Remember Montgomery County, Maryland, Sheriff Charles Moose? Sure, most of you must remember this pathetic figure who milked his time in front of microphones during the Beltway Sniper shooting spree that took place between October 2, 2002, and October 24, 2002. He believed that that "profile" developed by "experts" in criminal psychology would lead to the arrest of a suspect who was suffering from what was termed "the angry white male syndrome." John Allen Muhammad and his young accomplice, Lee Malvo, were able to pass through police checkpoints ten times in the three weeks of the shooting spree as agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and state and local police agencies were looking for such a suspect who fit this fanciful description. Columnist Michele Malkin commented on this in March of 2003 when Chief Moose, still the Sheriff of Montgomery County, was violating his department's ethics by hawking a book to publishers about a crime he investigated while still employed in law enforcement:

Moose's highly sought after wisdom is, of course, derived from his gross bungling of last fall's sniper attacks by accused killers John Muhammad and Lee Malvo. But never mind his Keystone Cop hunt for the wrong vehicle while the snipers' Chevy Caprice (spotted by several witnesses and stopped at least 10 times for license plate checks during the shooting spree) got away. Pay no heed to his oversight of nonsensical road blocks, botched hotline operations, and the deadly politically correct assumption that the snipers were crazed white militants in a non-existent white box truck.

Yes, despite these fatal missteps, gushing and gullible audiences outside Maryland are warmly welcoming Chief Moose as a spotless role model. A local ethics investigation into his side efforts to capitalize on the brutal slayings, such as the for-profit crisis management and conflict resolution consulting firm he formed with his wife just six weeks after the "Beltway" sniper saga ended, will likely do little to slow the jet-setting Moose's pace. (Don't Ask Chief Moose; for a review of the "profile" that the "experts" had devised during the midst of the Beltway Sniper shooting spree, see Coloring the Sniper News.)

 

People died because of what Miss Malkin termed "the deadly politically correct assumption" that Chief Charles Moose, who was permitted to resign his position rather than face departmental sanctions for his efforts to capitalize on the shooting spree, made as he relied upon the crackpot criminal psychologists who would never admit that a black Muslim should never be considered as a suspect in the shootings. What did this matter to Chief Moose? Not much. He had his own ideological agenda to pursue and bank account to start padding with dollars from book sales and speaking engagements. No circumspection there.

Yes, double standards abound. As will be noted in an article for posting on Spy Wednesday, April 4, 2012, the Attorney General Justice of the United States of America, Eric Holder, believes that the reverse discrimination program known as "affirmative action" has only just begun to "remedy" perceived injustices of the past. The professional victimologists are racialists of the first order, committed to persecuting those who they

All right. All well and good.

My point is this: Travyon Martin was part of a culture that accepted a style of dress that would indeed arouse suspicions as a matter of routine in a world informed by the Catholic Faith as the only people who used to wear "hoods" on a regular basis, absent inclement weather, of course, were the executioners of yore, men who wore both hoods and masks to conceal their identities.

Ghouls are also portrayed with hoods, which is why it is no injustice at all to note that the phenomenon of "hoodies" is just another example of how much influence the adversary has in our world today. Many people not only accept but celebrate ghoulish, ghetto behavior as natural and good when it is nothing other than a manifestation of social degradation of the first order.

One of the supreme ironies in cases such as Travyon Martin's is the extent to which so much "soul-searching," such as that by President Barack Hussein Obama, is "recommended" to us by the very cultural elites who are responsible for promoting and protecting the daily slaughter of the innocent preborn by chemical and surgical means.

Who grieves for the fifty-three million innocent babies killed by surgical abortion alone in the United States of America since 1967?

Not Barack Hussein Obama.

Not Alfred Charles Sharpton, Jr.

Not even the man who wrote these words in a newsletter of the The National Not-So-Right-Life Committee that was published in January of 1977:

 

 

The question of "life" is The Question of the 20th century. Race and poverty are dimensions of the life question, but discussions about abortion have brought the issue into focus in a much sharper way. How we will respect and understand the nature of life itself is the over-riding moral issue, not of the Black race, but of the human race.

The question of abortion confronts me in several different ways. First, although I do not profess to be a biologist, I have studied biology and know something about life from the point of view of the natural sciences. Second, I am a minister of the Gospel and therefore, feel that abortion has a religious and moral dimension that I must consider.

Third, I was born out of wedlock (and against the advice that my mother received from her doctor) and therefore abortion is a personal issue for me. From my perspective, human life is the highest good, the summum bonum . Human life itself is the highest human good and God is the supreme good because He is the giver of life. That is my philosophy. Everything I do proceeds from that religious and philosophical premise.

Life is the highest good and therefore you fight for life, using means consistent with that end. Life is the highest human good not on its own naturalistic merits, but because life is supernatural, a gift from God. Therefore, life is the highest human good because life is sacred. Biologically speaking, thousands of male sperms are ejaculated into the female reproductive tract during sexual intercourse, but only once in a while do the egg and sperm bring about fertilization. Some call that connection accidental, but I choose to call it providential. It takes three to make a baby: a man, a woman and the Holy Spirit.

I believe in family planning. I do not believe that families ought to have children, as some people did where I was growing up, by the dozens. I believe in methods of contraception -- prophylactics, pills, rhythm, etc. I believe in sex education. We ought to teach' it in the home, the school, the church, and on the television. I think that if people are properly educated sexually they will appreciate the act and know its ultimate function, purpose and significance.

In the abortion debate one of the crucial questions is when does life begin. Anything growing is living. Therefore human life begins when the sperm and egg join and drop into the fallopian tube and the pulsation of life take place. From that point, life may be described differently (as an egg, embryo, fetus, baby, child, teenager, adult), but the essence is the same. The name has changed but the game remains the same.

Human beings cannot give or create life by themselves, it is really a gift from God. Therefore, one does not have the right to take away (through abortion) that which he does not have the ability to give.

Some argue, suppose the woman does not. want to have the baby. They say the very fact that she does not want the baby means that the psychological damage to the child is reason enough to abort the baby'. I disagree. The solution to that problem is not to kill the innocent baby, but to deal with her values and her attitude toward life that have allowed her not to want the baby. Deal with the attitude that would allow her to take away that which she cannot give.

Some women argue that the man does not have the baby and will not be responsible for the baby after it is born, therefore it is all right to kill the baby. Again the logic is off. The premise is that the man is irresponsible.

If that is the problem, then deal with making him responsible. Deal with what you are dealing with, not with the weak, innocent and unprotected baby. The essence of Jesus' message dealt with this very problem -- the problem of the inner attitude and motivation of a person. "If in your heart . . ." was his central message. The actual abortion (effect) is merely the logical conclusion of a prior attitude (cause) that one has toward life itself. Deal with the cause not merely the effect when abortion is the issue.

Some of the most dangerous arguments for abortion stem from popular judgments about life's ultimate meaning, but the logical conclusion of their position is never pursued. Some people may, unconsciously, operate their lives as if pleasure is life's highest good, and pain and suffering man's greatest enemy. That position, if followed to its logical conclusion, means that that which prohibits pleasure should be done away with by whatever means are necessary. By the same rationale, whatever means are necessary should be used to prevent suffering and pain. My position is not to negate pleasure nor elevate suffering, but merely to argue against their being elevated to an ultimate end of life. Because if they are so elevated, anything, including murder and genocide, can be carried out in their name.

Often people who analyze and operate In the public sphere (some sociologists, doctors, politicians, etc.) are especially prone to argue in these ways. Sociologists argue for - population control on the basis of a shortage of housing, food, space, etc. I raise two issues at this point: (1) It is strange that they choose to start talking about population control at the same time that Black people in America and people of color around the world are demanding their rightful place as human citizens and their rightful share of the material wealth in the world. (2) People of color are for the most part powerless with regard to decisions made about population control. Given the history of people of color in the modern world we have no reason to assume that whites are going to look out for our best interests.

Politicians argue for abortion largely because they do not want to spend the necessary money to feed, clothe and educate more people. Here arguments for in-convenience and economic savings take precedence over arguments for human value and human life. I read recently where a politician from New York was justifying abortion because they had prevented 10,000 welfare babies from being born and saved the state $15 million. In my mind serious moral questions arise when politicians are willing to pay welfare mothers between $300 to $1000 to have an abortion, but will not pay $30 for a hot school lunch program to the already born children of these same mothers.

I think the economic objections are not valid today because we are confronted with a whole new economic problem. The basic and historic economic problem has been the inability to feed everyone in the world even If the will were there to do so. They could not produce enough to do the job even if they wanted to. An agrarian and disconnected world did not possess the ability to solve the basic economic problem. That was tragic, but hardly morally reprehensible. Today. however, we do not have the same economic problem. Our world is basically urban, industrial, interconnected, and technological so that we now, generally speaking, have the ability to feed the peoples of the world but lack the political and economic will to do so. That would require basic shifts of economic and political power in the world and. we are not willing to pay that price -- the price of justice. The problem now is not the ability to produce but the ability to distribute justly.

Psychiatrists, social workers and doctors often argue for abortion on the basis that the child will grow up mentally and emotionally scared. But who of us is complete? If incompleteness were the criteria for taking life we would all be dead. If you can justify abortion on the basis of emotional incompleteness then your logic could also lead you to killing for other forms of incompleteness -- blindness, crippleness, old age.(How we respect life is the over-riding moral issue:Right to Life News, January 1977)

The author of that quote is a man who changed his position for political expediency back in 1984. He is a man who remains one of the chief race-baiters today. His name is Jesse Louis Jackson. One can look at the following articles on various sites for more statements that Jackson made during his "pro-life" days before he got the "inoculation" provided by the virus of presidential ambitions and the larger national stage that came with his increased status (Jackson's Reversal on Abortion and “I am somebody”, from a once Pro-Life Jesse Jackson.")

No, very few people, relatively speaking, grieve for the innocent preborn who are victims of the anti-Incarnational lies of Modernity and who have not been protected by Modernism's "reconciliation" with those lives.

Fewer still, more importantly, grieve for how their sins and those of the whole world caused Our Divine Redeemer, Christ the King, and His Most Blessed Mother to suffer for us during this week of weeks in which our salvation was wrought for us by the shedding of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross as His Blessed Mother suffered in perfect compassion with Him as the Queen of Martyrs atop the dung heap known as Golgotha.

The attention of so many people in the United States of America this week is on "march madness" of college basketball or the opening of the major league baseball season on, of all days, Maundy Thursday, April 5, 2012. Eighteen of the major league baseball's thirty teams will have games on Good Friday, April 6, 2012.

Three of the nine games between those eighteen teams will take place during the time of the Tre Ore and the Mass of the Presanctified (one of those games, of course, involves the incarnation of all evil in the world, the New York Yankees, playing the Tampa Bay Rays in St. Petersburg, Florida). This is just one of the reasons that, as explained in my upcoming revised and much expanded look back at the history of the New York Mets, I am glad that I quite going to baseball games for good on July 16, 2002, and, despite a few weak-kneed moments in the past two years, have stayed away ever since. No more. No more. What was once a diversion has become a "religion" in its own perverse manner with "rituals" and "traditions" that must supersede the events of our Redemption that are commemorated during the Paschal Triduum. None of the cheering multitudes at these "all important" games will be grieving for Our Divine Redeemer or His Most Blessed Mother.

Millions upon millions of others in the United States of America and elsewhere in the world will just go about their business (going to work or shopping or simply frolicking) as they do on any other day. They will not grieve for how their sins and the sins of us all caused the fearful suffering imposed upon Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the very Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity made Man by the power of God the Holy Ghost in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother. And they will not meditate upon how even thought of coming into contact in His Sacred Humanity, with our sins, the very antitheses of His Sacred Divinity, caused Our Lord such mental anguish during His Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane:

And now, my brethren, what was it He had to bear, when He thus opened upon His soul the torrent of this predestinated pain? Alas! He had to bear what is well known to us, what is familiar to us, but what to Him was woe unutterable. He had to bear that which is so easy a thing to us, so natural, so welcome, that we cannot conceive of it as of a great endurance, but which to Him had the scent and the poison of death—He had, my dear brethren, to bear the weight of sin; He had to bear your sins; He had to bear the sins of the whole world. Sin is an easy thing to us; we think little of it; we do not understand how the Creator can think much of it; we cannot bring our imagination to believe that it deserves retribution, and, when even in this world punishments follow upon it, we explain them away or turn our minds from them. But consider what sin is in itself; it is rebellion against God; it is a traitor's act who aims at the overthrow and death of His sovereign; it is that, if I may use a strong expression, which, could the Divine Governor of the world cease to be, would be sufficient to bring it about. Sin is the mortal enemy of the All-holy, so that He and it cannot be together; and as the All-holy drives it from His presence into the outer darkness, so, if God could be less than God, it is sin that would have power to make Him less. And here observe, my brethren, that when once Almighty Love, by taking flesh, entered this created system, and submitted Himself to its laws, then forthwith this {336} antagonist of good and truth, taking advantage of the opportunity, flew at that flesh which He had taken, and fixed on it, and was its death. The envy of the Pharisees, the treachery of Judas, and the madness of the people, were but the instrument or the expression of the enmity which sin felt towards Eternal Purity as soon as, in infinite mercy towards men, He put Himself within its reach. Sin could not touch His Divine Majesty; but it could assail Him in that way in which He allowed Himself to be assailed, that is, through the medium of His humanity. And in the issue, in the death of God incarnate, you are but taught, my brethren, what sin is in itself, and what it was which then was falling, in its hour and in its strength, upon His human nature, when He allowed that nature to be so filled with horror and dismay at the very anticipation.

There, then, in that most awful hour, knelt the Saviour of the world, putting off the defences of His divinity, dismissing His reluctant Angels, who in myriads were ready at His call, and opening His arms, baring His breast, sinless as He was, to the assault of His foe,—of a foe whose breath was a pestilence, and whose embrace was an agony. There He knelt, motionless and still, while the vile and horrible fiend clad His spirit in a robe steeped in all that is hateful and heinous in human crime, which clung close round His heart, and filled His conscience, and found its way into every sense and pore of His mind, and spread over Him a moral leprosy, till He almost felt Himself to be that which He never could {337} be, and which His foe would fain have made Him. Oh, the horror, when He looked, and did not know Himself, and felt as a foul and loathsome sinner, from His vivid perception of that mass of corruption which poured over His head and ran down even to the skirts of His garments! Oh, the distraction, when He found His eyes, and hands, and feet, and lips, and heart, as if the members of the Evil One, and not of God! Are these the hands of the Immaculate Lamb of God, once innocent, but now red with ten thousand barbarous deeds of blood? are these His lips, not uttering prayer, and praise, and holy blessings, but as if defiled with oaths, and blasphemies, and doctrines of devils? or His eyes, profaned as they are by all the evil visions and idolatrous fascinations for which men have abandoned their adorable Creator? And His ears, they ring with sounds of revelry and of strife; and His heart is frozen with avarice, and cruelty, and unbelief; and His very memory is laden with every sin which has been committed since the fall, in all regions of the earth, with the pride of the old giants, and the lusts of the five cities, and the obduracy of Egypt, and the ambition of Babel, and the unthankfulness and scorn of Israel. Oh, who does not know the misery of a haunting thought which comes again and again, in spite of rejection, to annoy, if it cannot seduce? or of some odious and sickening imagination, in no sense one's own, but forced upon the mind from without? or of evil knowledge, gained with or without a man's fault, but which he would give a great price to be rid of at once and for ever? And adversaries such as {338} these gather around Thee, Blessed Lord, in millions now; they come in troops more numerous than the locust or the palmer-worm, or the plagues of hail, and flies, and frogs, which were sent against Pharaoh. Of the living and of the dead and of the as yet unborn, of the lost and of the saved, of Thy people and of strangers, of sinners and of saints, all sins are there. Thy dearest are there, Thy saints and Thy chosen are upon Thee; Thy three Apostles, Peter, James, and John; but not as comforters, but as accusers, like the friends of Job, "sprinkling dust towards heaven," and heaping curses on Thy head. All are there but one; one only is not there, one only; for she who had no part in sin, she only could console Thee, and therefore she is not nigh. She will be near Thee on the Cross, she is separated from Thee in the garden. She has been Thy companion and Thy confidant through Thy life, she interchanged with Thee the pure thoughts and holy meditations of thirty years; but her virgin ear may not take in, nor may her immaculate heart conceive, what now is in vision before Thee. None was equal to the weight but God; sometimes before Thy saints Thou hast brought the image of a single sin, as it appears in the light of Thy countenance, or of venial sins, not mortal; and they have told us that the sight did all but kill them, nay, would have killed them, had it not been instantly withdrawn. The Mother of God, for all her sanctity, nay by reason of it, could not have borne even one brood of that innumerable progeny of Satan which now compasses Thee about. It is the long history of a world, and God {339} alone can bear the load of it. Hopes blighted, vows broken, lights quenched, warnings scorned, opportunities lost; the innocent betrayed, the young hardened, the penitent relapsing, the just overcome, the aged failing; the sophistry of misbelief, the wilfulness of passion, the obduracy of pride, the tyranny of habit, the canker of remorse, the wasting fever of care, the anguish of shame, the pining of disappointment, the sickness of despair; such cruel, such pitiable spectacles, such heartrending, revolting, detestable, maddening scenes; nay, the haggard faces, the convulsed lips, the flushed cheek, the dark brow of the willing slaves of evil, they are all before Him now; they are upon Him and in Him. They are with Him instead of that ineffable peace which has inhabited His soul since the moment of His conception. They are upon Him, they are all but His own; He cries to His Father as if He were the criminal, not the victim; His agony takes the form of guilt and compunction. He is doing penance, He is making confession, He is exercising contrition, with a reality and a virtue infinitely greater than that of all saints and penitents together; for He is the One Victim for us all, the sole Satisfaction, the real Penitent, all but the real sinner. (John Henry Cardinal Newman, Discourse on the Mental Sufferings of Our Lord During His Passion.)

Do we grieve over how our own sins caused Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in His Agony on the Garden of Gethsemane? We must, especially during this week and most especially during night of Maundy Thursday in the hours preceding the stroke of Midnight on Good Friday. While we have played our own nefarious parts in causing Our Lord such anguish of soul more often than we would like to admit even to ourselves, the merciful Redeemer permits us this opportunity every year to grieve again and again for our sins and how they caused Him and His Most Blessed Mother to suffer such unspeakable horrors. This is part of His great, ineffable love for us, His frequently unfaithful and altogether far too tepid creatures during Holy Week as we give thanks unto Him for obeying the will of His Co-Equal and Co-Eternal Father to pay back with His own blood the debt that we owed to Him in His Infinity as God.

Although we are not one whit better than others, it is nevertheless not unjust to point out that the very people who are crying "injustice" in the case of Travyon Martin even though there is an active police investigation into the matter, which may turn out to be the case of a tragic mistake on the part of George Zimmerman, are themselves perpetrators of grave injustices against God and man by means of their open, unapologetic promotion and protection of one vile sin after another under cover of the civil law and all throughout what passes for popular culture in a land of barbarism. These self-righteous self-promoters and race-baiters thus show themselves to be bereft of any understanding of how they are contributing to the rise of violence in the world as to do violence against God is to incite men to act in ways that give rise to suspicion and fear as men are not united by the bond of one common Faith and thus do not see each other the Divine Impress and act and dress and speak with the decorum of of redeemed creatures.

We must grow in love more and more with God as He has revealed Himself through His true Church, especially during this Holy Week. We will come to hate our sins the more. We will seek to do voluntary penances for our sins and those of the whole world. We will be more attentive to the needs of the members of the Church Suffering in Purgatory. We will have more apostolic zeal for the salvation of souls, seeking to distribute Green Scapulars to those whom God's Holy Providence places in our paths each day. We will live for the Faith, not for the passing things of this world.

We must blaze paths for Christ the King as His consecrated slaves through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, never fearing the onslaughts of the figures of Antichrist that walk amongst us as long as we pray the Holy Rosary every day as well as to wear and to fulfill the conditions associated with the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us!

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Francis of Paola, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints