The Media Crucifixion of Cardinal Pell.
It is clear from all the evidence that Cardinal Pell of
Australia could not have committed the child molestation he has been imprisoned
for. So why has he been convicted and put in prison? There are perhaps two
reasons for this: one, he is the most prominent Catholic in an extremely
anti-Catholic country; and two, he refused LGBT activists Holy Communion at the
altar rail. From that moment onwards the Australian media went for him in a big
way.
There was in place a witch hunt for evidence. Detective Chris
Reed pursued Pell for years long before anyone accused the Cardinal of
anything; he was accused of "zeroing in" on Pell, adverts were taken
out in the press for people to come forward who had been molested by Pell. Some
did come forward; however most were dismissed as not credible. However, two
choir boys claimed that Pell molested them after Mass. The media and
"celebrity" world went ballistic; journalists went on a feeding
frenzy. They've always claimed that Catholic and biblical teaching are hateful;
now they have a chance to discredit it all, and that's what it's all about,
undermining Catholic moral teachings, nothing else. Of course ultra anti-Catholic
bigot Tim Minchin, who could not write a song about Pope Benedict without
adding more expletives than other lyrics - "Pope song" a hate
inducing piece of anti-Catholic garbage if ever I heard one. Minchin wrote
another song, a lullaby to Pell to get him imprisoned. Oh, Satan is very
clever.
So let's look at what happened 2002. Cardinal Pell refused
Holy Communion to "Gay and lesbian
Catholic" activists at the altar rail; the activists were making a
point of protest during Mass by wearing the Rainbow Sash. Therefore they
were trying to force the Church to
accept something that is wrong and against the teachings of Sacred Scripture
and of the Church, and forcing the Church's hand. From then on of course the
media, the LGBT brigade and their supporters were out to get him.
The accusations are that Cardinal Pell sexually abused two
choir boys after Mass while he was fully vested, in a busy sacristy where
people go in and out after Mass all the time,
the MC, the altar servers, the sacristan and other visitors who visit
the sacristy after Mass etc. etc. The "molested" choir boys then
returned to practise with the choir, through doors that were always kept
locked. Not only that but one of the boys has since died but before he died he
told his mother that he was not molested! So the Cardinal is being convicted on
the evidence of one uncorroborated story. This is not justice as we know it.
This is also the second trial for the same offence; the first
one, the jury came out in favour of Pell's innocence, 10 to 2. However, that
was not good enough for the Australian media and vicious LGBT community and the
Australian legal system. So a retrial was enacted and this time with a new jury
they all got the verdict they wanted. Remember also that elements in the
liberal Catholic hierarchy were happy too. Cardinal Pell was orthodox and they
wanted him as much as the Australian media.
So what chance does a Catholic leader have these days if he
preaches with true charity and love and tries to save the souls of the poor
misguided LGBT sufferers?
And there you have it, the media is so powerful, so full
of LGBT activists and their supporters they can subvert justice, the
government, and brainwash the population. If you say anything on sexuality that
is in step with Christianity, you've had it.
Who needs our prayers the most, Cardinal Pell, The jury, the detective Chris Reed, Tim Minchin or the Australian legal system?
ReplyDeleteYou don't really believe 10 voted to acquit, then 12, on the same evidence unanimously voted to convict on all charges? This 10 to acquit is only found on websites vehemently supportive of George Pell. It's not reported in the mainstream media. It's made up. ItsI FAKE NEWS!
ReplyDeleteI suggest you read the Guardian not known for being favourable towards the Catholic Church, they report the verdict of the first trial earlier in 2018 went 10- 2 in Pell's favour.
DeletePut a link in to back up your claim!
DeleteAs it's a criminal offence, in Victoria, to report disclose that sort of information, why hasn't a criminal investigation happened?
I await your link to the Guardian article.
Here's the article!
ReplyDeleteDoesn't back up your claim.
In fact it refutes your claim.
"It has been rumoured that the jurors in the mistrial were split 10-to-two in favour of Pell. Is this right?
This is an unverified rumour with no credible source."
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/02/cardinal-george-pells-conviction-the-questions-that-remain?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Tweet
From the Australian
ReplyDelete"The guilty verdict was delivered in December by a unanimous jury, in a properly constituted court, after an earlier jury was dismissed on September 20 because it split 10-2 in Pell’s favour. Hence the second trial, in which many people, whether they like or loathe Pell and all he stands for, believe went badly wrong."
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/nation/george-pell-the-george-pell-saga-has-a-long-way-to-go-yet/news-story/28119a929c7218ed3c2e7cc740e64325
Just Google "10 to 2 Jury verdict in favour of Pell" and you'll get loads of articles saying this by Catholic and secular media outlets - I rest my case!
You claimed the Guardian. That was untrue. None of Rupert Murdoch's media empire is reputable or mainstream.
ReplyDeleteAs the Guardian, which you claimed as your source said:
"This is an unverified rumour with no credible source."
Try being truthful for a change.
"Try being truthful for a change" interesting comment - I can only say what is being said by the main stream media on this again. please see the below report when you google "The Guardian 10 to 2 jury verdict on Cardinal Pell" try it. Thank you for your interest in this lets hope Cardinal Pell innocence will be proved and he will be released.
ReplyDeleteCardinal George Pell's conviction: the questions that ... - The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/.../cardinal-george-pells-conviction-the-questions-that-rem...
1 Mar 2019 - George Pell's trials on child sexual assault charges have received ... rumoured that the jurors in the mistrial were split 10-to-two in favour of Pell.
You've visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 08/04/19
You claim that the Guardian reported the claim when what they did was refuted a rumour which they said was "an unverified rumour with no credible source." You have yet to link to a mainstream media source which supports this unverified rumour which has no credible source. Don't link to the Rupert Murdoch media empire which prides itself as not being mainstream media and which frequently attacks mainstream media.
ReplyDeleteI've already shown you were not being truthful.
I have presented you with the evidence and the link if you don't want to believe what's staring you in the face then I can't help you. However here is the link and evidence for the last time. Please read what comes up when you google this. We think its you who are not truthful or in denial.
ReplyDeleteCardinal George Pell's conviction: the questions that ... - The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/.../cardinal-george-pells-conviction-the-questions-that-rem...
1 Mar 2019 - George Pell's trials on child sexual assault charges have received ... rumoured that the jurors in the mistrial were split 10-to-two in favour of Pell.
You've visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 08/04/19
Yes its clear that the Guardian and other secular sources are admitting that the first trial went in Pell favour. Some say rumoured but your quotes are honest and above board. Keep up the good work.
ReplyDelete