You are currently browsing the monthly archive for May 2006.

from darwinsmoustache: People like to pat the Dutch on the back for their open and inclusive society where, drug use, prostitution and open homosexuality is acceptable. This unblinking permissiveness though also allows groups like The Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) party to exist. This pro pedophilia group is looking to launch a political party on a platform of reducing the age of consent and making child pornography legal.

The party said it wanted to cut the legal age for sexual relations to 12 and eventually scrap the limit altogether.

“A ban just makes children curious,” Ad van den Berg, one of the party’s founders, told the Algemeen Dagblad (AD) newspaper.

“We want to make pedophilia the subject of discussion,” he said, adding that the subject had been a taboo since the 1996 Marc Dutroux child abuse scandal in neighboring Belgium. “We have been hushed up. The only way is through parliament.”

“their open and inclusive society where, drug use, prostitution and open homosexuality is acceptable.”

D’uh. So what else is new reagrding societies where the above dysfunctions get normalized, soon it follows that every other sexual dysfunction is normalized too, each by its groups of constituents, all justifying their character and mental disease using the same 1984 discourse framework.

The ugly mind of pro-homos and pro-prostitution people showing itself every time…

p.s. And did you notice the name of the party??? The Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD). Are these people’s minds diseased or what? This is what you get when you have a society of turds that goes out to clap at “Pride Parades” and other such named groups such as “The Human Rights Campaign,” and so many other similar disgusting propaganda names. Pride, human rights, charity, freedom and diversity – such perfect words for the most violent and diseased sexual minds in our world, don’t you think?

Oh, and I am sure these Dutch pedophiles criticize as “moral fascists” anyone who exposes them for the violent diseased scum that they are.

And look at this:

The party said private possession of child pornography should be allowed although it favors banning the trade of such materials. The broadcast of pornography should be allowed on daytime television, with only violent pornography limited to the late evening, according to the party.

So what kind of a society where people like this go about doing whatever they want and the rest just sticks their heads in the sand?

The image of the German people watching the trains going by with people branded with yellow stars comes to mind.

Advertisements

Esclaves sexuels, voleurs forcés ou encore punching-balls : une centaine d’enfants ont été exploités pendant des années dans plusieurs pays européens, révèle lundi la BBC sur son site internet. Ce vaste réseau a été démantelé ces derniers jours avec l’arrestation de 41 personnes de nationalité bulgare, point d’orgue d’une enquête menée depuis deux ans, sous la houlette de la police italienne de Trieste. Les cas de 75 autres personnes font encore l’objet d’une enquête.

Selon les autorités, les enfants victimes de ce réseau ont été exploités sexuellement et contraints de plonger dans la criminalité. La plupart d’entre eux, originaires de Bulgarie, ont été enlevés alors qu’ils n’avaient qu’entre huit et treize ans. Ces enfants ont ensuite été transportés vers plusieurs pays européens, dont la Grande-Bretagne et l’Allemagne.

Ils auraient été vendus par leurs parents déshérités.
Un contrat était même établi pour chaque victime entre les deux parties. En échange, les parents étaient assurés de percevoir un pourcentage sur les vols commis par leur progéniture. De son côté, le gang garantissait un minimum de 1.000 euros volés par jour et par enfant.

Première cibles des trafiquants : les jeunes victimes, épargnées par les poursuites judiciaires dans de nombreux pays. « Le groupe tirait profit du fait qu’un enfant de moins de 14 ans ne peut être arrêté en Italie », explique un carabinier italien. Les enfants, maintenus à l’état d’esclaves, menacés et battus, étaient entraînés aux méandres de la petite criminalité pour devenir des pickpockets qualifiés. L’argent, volé à l’arraché, était ensuite réinvesti dans le trafic de drogues.

Pour l’heure, les enquêteurs ont identifié une centaine d’enfants, mais il pourrait y en avoir davantage.


Why should people like this be allowed to live? So many honest people, children, dying of hunger, and crap like this is being kept alive.

Just kill them, and you send a nice message too – to all the others.

In case you didn’t know, this came up in a class today…

master (n.)
O.E. mægester “one having control or authority,” from L. magister “chief, head, director, teacher” (cf. O.Fr. maistre, Fr. maître, It. maestro, Ger. Meister), infl. in M.E. by O.Fr. maistre, from L. magister, contrastive adj. from magis (adv.) “more,” itself a comp. of magnus “great.”

In academic senses (from M.L. magister) it is attested from 1380s, originally a degree conveying authority to teach in the universities. The verb is attested from c.1225.

I love etymology. 🙂

wiki – The Oxford English Dictionary offers no etymology at all, but dates the word back to the 16th century:

“The first month after marriage, when there is nothing but tenderness and pleasure” (Samuel Johnson); originally having no reference to the period of a month, but comparing the mutual affection of newly-married persons to the changing moon which is no sooner full than it begins to wane; now, usually, the holiday spent together by a newly-married couple, before settling down at home.

One of the oldest citations in the Oxford English Dictionary indicates that, while today honeymoon has a positive meaning, the word was actually a sardonic reference to the inevitable waning of love like a phase of the moon. This, the first literary reference to the honeymoon was penned in 1552, in Richard Huloet’s Abecedarium Anglico Latinum. Huleot writes:

Hony mone, a terme proverbially applied to such as be newe maried, whiche wyll not fall out at the fyrste, but thone loveth the other at the beginnynge excedyngly, the likelyhode of theyr exceadynge love appearing to aswage, ye which time the vulgar people cal the hony mone.

Or, in modern English:

Honeymoon, a term proverbially applied to the newly-married, who will not fall out (quarrel) at first, but they love the other at the beginning exceedingly, the likelihood of their exceeding love appearing to assuage [any quarrels]; this time is commonly called the honeymoon.

ACE decided to go on a little faux morality melodrama here, regarding the accused Duke rapists (“Oh the injustice towards those darling, pure, innocent little boys). My point as to why he is such a hypocrite is in bold, in case it’s too much work to read through everything. Excerpt of Salon article followed by excerpt of ACE’s long post – that began by criticizing Salon’s blind defense of the woman accuser:

Salon:

By wearing sweatbands saying “innocent,” Duke’s women’s lacrosse team is displaying a pack mentality — and disrespecting women.

By Kevin Sweeney

Innocent.

That’s the word written on sweatbands the Duke University women’s lacrosse team will wear when they take the field Friday at the start of their sport’s premier event. (The women’s lacrosse Final Four, which determines the NCAA championship, takes place this weekend at Boston University’s Nickerson Field.) With the bands, the women are apparently suggesting that the Duke men’s lacrosse team, and the three members charged with sexual assault, are innocent.

I generally assume women tell the truth about rape. I’d say that 95% of rape charges are true (or pretty much true). But that leaves 5% of charges which are fraudulent, and that is not an insignificant percentage.


ACE:

But the left would invert its usual claim — “it’s better than 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted” — in rape cases, especially, of course, when it’s a minority woman accusing wealthy white male oppresors. Then, it becomes “It’s better that every one accused of rape be convicted, guilty or innocent, so as not to dissuade other women from coming forward to accuse other men of rape.”

The writer concludes his idiotic essay by suggesting that the womens’ lacrosse team display the word “Respect” on their wristbands, rather than “Innocent.” It could, you see, mean many different things to many different people.

Well, that sort of defeats the purpose of trying to send a message, doesn’t it?

Why not just have them wear writstbands that say “Bush lied, people died”?

I grow so tired of the left lecturing us that we must never render an opinion as a citizen on a case of political import, unless that opinion agrees with their own, in which case, have a lynching party. We heard this claim constantly when Bill Clinton was accused of his various crimes — we must not assume his guilt, we were told — as they nearly simultaneously proclaimed his complete innocence.

It’s one or the other, guys. One or the other.

I would like the sentence “We should not try this case in the media” barred from ever being spoken again. It’s an empty platitude; of course we all have opinions on cases as we hear them, and there’s nothing in the Constitution that demands we stay silent about those opinions.

Further, as a technical matter, you simply can’t be “convicted in the media.” You’re either convicted in a courtroom or not at all.

I would love to see the Salon column written about the exact same incident, with the exception that the races on the accuser and accused were reversed.

Posted by Clark at May 26,


I would love to see the Salon column written about the exact same incident, with the exception that the races on the accuser and accused were reversed.
It’s not exactly the same, but close: Kobe Bryant.
The MSM called the 19 year old girl who accused Kobe everything short of a slutty whore for months before the trial.

Posted by Sue Dohnim at May 26, 2006 01:06 PM


But the left would invert its usual claim — “it’s better than 100 guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted” — in rape cases, especially, of course, when it’s a minority woman accusing wealthy white male oppresors. Then, it becomes “It’s better that every one accused of rape be convicted, guilty or innocent, so as not to dissuade other women from coming forward to accuse other men of rape.”
================
Agree. However, this does not change the fact that the above is not the worst problem regarding rape in society. The worst problems are : rape is still happening at high rates; the majority of victims don’t even sue, much less make false accusations. Is there any outrage about it? No.
The same goes for child abuse. The majority of child abusers are never CHARGED. You can’t accuse someone wrongly if you don’t accuse anyone at all.

Posted by alessandra at May 26,


There is also the trivial little matter that they haven’t yet been proven guilty, and that makes them, well, innocent.
Posted by B Moe
================
The presumption of innocence does not apply outside a courtroom. OJ was pronounced not guilty in a court of law even though he is as guilty as sin. If her supporters what to call him guilty and their supporters what to call him innocent — so be it.
Posted by shawn
================
Tend to agree with shawn (a first!) with one difference. But first: the failure of a legal attempt to prove guilt does not prove at all someone is innocent. Lots of guilty people have walked free in a court process. I am talking in general, not saying that I think the accused are guilty in this case (I haven’t followed the details).

But the problem with jumping the gun to either guilt or innocence before examining admissable and inamissable evidence, although allowed and practiced outside (and not that rarely inside ) a court-room, can also be a show of tremendous bias or pre-conceived notions. It doesn’t mean pre-conceived notions and insights can’t ever be right, but it’s no guarantee either.

Posted by alessandra at May 26


However, this does not change the fact that the above is not the worst problem regarding rape in society. The worst problems are : rape is still happening at high rates; the majority of victims don’t even sue, much less make false accusations. Is there any outrage about it? No.

What is a problem for “society” is a statistical thing.
What is a problem in an actual case is different. There may be a problem with underreporting or undercharging rape in “society;” that says nothing at all about the immediate matter, which have flesh and blood human beings whose credibility and criminality are at issue.

And it’s a mistake to link the two, or try to vindicate the problems in rape “in society” by falsely convicting individual human beings in a specific case.
I don’t like these appeals to *general* problems when we’re discussing the specific fates of specific individuals.

Posted by ace at May 26, 2


I know almost nothing about this case. I don’t think that the female lacrosse players should wear those sweatbands, though. It’s like politicizing a non-political event, in this case a lacrosse match.

The whole thing stinks. I hate the way we deal with rape. You can see it clearly in this case; people aren’t making up their minds based on truth, but on wishful thinking. Circuses like this discourage actual rape victims from coming forward. Alessandra is right that most actual sexual violence never gets reported, and I don’t think that “teachable moments” like this are helping.

Posted by sandy burger at


What is a problem for “society” is a statistical thing.
============
I didn’t know rape victims were things.

And it’s a mistake to link the two,
They are linked however, so the mistake is not to see how they link or to misinterpret the link.

or try to vindicate the problems in rape “in society” by falsely convicting individual human beings in a specific case.

Agree. But stating how much indifferent and unjust society is towards a huge number of rape victims is not the same as falsely convicting these guys. It’s pointing to a hypocritical harmful mentality that is still quite prevalent in society.

I don’t like these appeals to *general* problems when we’re discussing the specific fates of specific individuals.

General problems that involve the rape of hundreds of thousands of individuals and their fates?

Posted by alessandra at May 26, 2006 01:40 PM


She’s the girl who cried wolf. Don’t take off your clothes and simulate sex in front of drunk college guys.

I know, I know–she didn’t “ask” for it.

But in this case, nobody forced her to be a stripper either. You can’t have it both ways and then become outraged when your word is questioned.

Posted by kevlarchick at May 26, 2006 01:43 PM


Tend to agree with shawn (a first!)

Guess I’m slipping, huh?

Posted by shawn at May 26


But stating how much indifferent and unjust society is towards a huge number of rape victims

Society is neither unjust nor indifferent to rape victims. Your beef was that the rapes weren’t reported. How do you blame society for that? If indifference is the problem, it’s apparently indifference on the part of the victims.

Posted by Roy at May 26, 2006 01:55 PM


There’s a great line in the lawyer’s closing arguments in “A Time to Kill” (it was in the movie also) after he described to the jury all the terrible things that were done to the little girl. He says, “Now imagine she was white.”
How true it is.
==============
The victim is struggling on another front. After insisting the nasty white boys didn’t use condoms, the DNA from her vagina and rectum has positively identified three individuals; her boyfriend and his two friends who drove her to the Lacrosse party.
Doh.

Posted by Jacko at May 26, 2006 01:57 PM


I didn’t know rape victims were things.
Come on, that’s not what Ace meant at all.

It’s pointing to a hypocritical harmful mentality that is still quite prevalent in society.

I agree with you. And, whether or not Ace makes it the priority you do, he hasn’t said anything which contradicts this, either. All he’s doing is insisting that these men get a fair trial based only on the facts of this specific case; society at large is an entirely separate issue.

As for the problem of sexual violence in general, I’m quite sure that false rape accusations don’t help matters any, and I’m sure you agree.

Posted by sandy burger at May


If indifference is the problem, it’s apparently indifference on the part of the victims.

I don’t buy it. Look, I know a few women who were raped, none of whom reported it, for a number of reasons. They certainly weren’t indifferent to having been raped, though.

Posted by sandy burger at May 26, 2006 02:08 PM


How do you blame society for that? If indifference is the problem, it’s apparently indifference on the part of the victims. Posted by Roy
=======
“In the past, the reason people didn’t report was that they feared nothing would be done, or that they wouldn’t be believed, or that it was too personal a crime,” said Jamie Zuieback, spokesperson for the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network in Washington, D.C.,

Where did these fears come from? From seeing that nothing was done or that victims were attacked in a variety of ways if they tried to speak out.

The only person on Earth that could be deemed “indifferent” to being raped is a person not being able to function as a human being, such as a concentration camp survivor or profound abuse survivor who’s psychological functioning was so ill, they could not consciously deal with more violence being done to them. More correctly it would be to term this total incapacity – not indifference.

Practically speaking, there is no such thing as “indifference” to being raped.

Posted by alessandra at


And, whether or not Ace makes it the priority you do, he hasn’t said anything which contradicts this, either. All he’s doing is insisting that these men get a fair trial based only on the facts of this specific case; society at large is an entirely separate issue.
=================
What I am pointing out is that for every such case, there are thousands of real rape cases that nobody gets outraged about, nor do they blog about the injustice of the un-reportedness. Nor the difficulty in prosecuting real rapists. It’s clear to me that what people get outraged about is part of the larger social problems with rape.

As for the problem of sexual violence in general, I’m quite sure that false rape accusations don’t help matters any, and I’m sure you agree.

I don’t think people who promote porn, stripping, and prostitution have much of a moral stand about how awful it is for a false accusation to happen, since all of these things profoundly create a culture of sexual exploitation and violence, and which includes violent and degrading sexual behavior.

Which is different than saying ” falsely convicting someone will vindicate the sexual violence in society.”

Posted by alessandra at


Alessandra,
It’s a bit cheap to suggest I meant something I have to imagine you know I didn’t.
What I meant, obviously, was that general statistical evidence about the underreportage or underprosecution of sex offenses has NO BEARING on specific cases. So I don’t see the point in bringing general statistical “evidence” up when discussing a specific case.

It is statistically true that young black men are greatly overrepresented in committing street-level crimes. Such evidence, however, does not speak to the guilt or innocence of a specific young black man charged with a mugging.

It’s so tedious to even discuss an issue with someone who argues in bad faith.
“So rape victims are things?”

Yeah, Alessandra, they’re things. They’re objects without sentience or humanity. That’s precisely what I meant, and I applaud you for seeing through my obfuscations.

Posted by ace at May 26, 2006 02:36 PM


I don’t think people who promote porn, stripping, and prostitution have much of a moral stand about how awful it is for a false accusation to happen, since all of these things profoundly create a culture of sexual exploitation and violence, and which includes violent and degrading sexual behavior.

Once again, Alessandra removes herself from the bounds of reasonable discussion.
Later on I think I’m going to watch a Kayla Kleavage video. Just doing my part to keep rape alive.

Posted by ace at


I don’t think people who promote porn, stripping, and prostitution have much of a moral stand about how awful it is for a false accusation to happen,

I’ve frequented a strip club or two in my time. Clearly, I have no moral standing to complain if someone decides to falsely accuse me of rape. Hell, I was pretty much asking for it.

Posted by The Warden


It’s still immoral to hire strippers. I’m glad the law will treat the fornicators as innocent, because that is the law of the land for the time being. But then abortion is legal, too. It doesn’t make an abortionist “innocent” of a grave moral sin, it only makes them innocent in the eyes of the law.

I don’t care if it is part of the ace of spades lifestyle or something. Lust is a sinful behavior. You shouldn’t try to put a political spin on it.

Ace, you spend all day trying to cut through BS like double-standards and the immorality that is destroying our nation’s moral fabric. You do a great job. But then every once an a while you totally drop the ball.

To totally flub up an otherwise consistent moral framework to leap to defend the “innocence” of a bunch of fornicating creeps makes it seem like you have a special soft-spot for men who pay money for the right to treat women like dirt. It’s a free country and all that… and even sex perverts have a right to a defense… but why fall all over yourself trying to candy coat what we know they did?
They probably don’t belong in jail, but they still are a bunch of dirtballs.

Posted by at May 26, 2006


The real question is how often false reporting of rape occurs in high profile cases, which I suspect is significantly higher than the false reporting rate for “normal” rape cases. I don’t think applying the mean rate to cases where the “victim” has substantial opportunity to gain is likely to be very accurate.

Posted by geoff


ACE: It’s a bit cheap to suggest I meant something I have to imagine you know I didn’t.
This is what I wrote:

I don’t think people who promote porn, stripping, and prostitution have much of a moral stand about how awful it is for a false accusation to happen, since all of these things profoundly create a culture of sexual exploitation and violence, and which includes violent and degrading sexual behavior.

AND

stating how much indifferent and unjust society is towards a huge number of rape victims is not the same as falsely convicting these guys. It’s pointing to a hypocritical harmful mentality that is still quite prevalent in society.

I don’t think there is anything cheap in the above, quite on the contrary.

Posted by alessandra at May 27, 2006 12:01 PM


Alessandra: “I don’t think people who promote porn, stripping, and prostitution have much of a moral stand about how awful it is for a false accusation to happen,”
============
The Warden : “I’ve frequented a strip club or two in my time. Clearly, I have no moral standing to complain if someone decides to falsely accuse me of rape. Hell, I was pretty much asking for it.”
============
If you think it’s just fine to exploit and degrade women as you please, your moral standing is the same as a false accuser who thinks it’s fine to accuse anyone as they please. On the same level…

And I guess it’s so comfortable to put one’s head in the sand about just how much degradation and violence there is in porn, prostitution, and stripping and then bring on the hyperventilated “oh my God, if they convict those poor little boys…”

Just a tad completely full of bs, but we can’t expect certain people to face it…

Posted by alessandra at May 27, 2006 12:14 PM


Alessandra: “I don’t think people who promote porn, stripping, and prostitution have much of a moral stand about how awful it is for a false accusation to happen, since all of these things profoundly create a culture of sexual exploitation and violence, and which includes violent and degrading sexual behavior. “
============
ACE: Later on I think I’m going to watch a Kayla Kleavage video. Just doing my part to keep rape alive.

============
This sure won’t bother so-called Christians on your blog. You know, it’s just the thing they think they are following Jesus in.
============

ACE: Once again, Alessandra removes herself from the bounds of reasonable discussion.
Dave in Texas:Boy I sure didn’t see that coming.

==============
Obviously, the above first criticism is nothing that so-called Christians can contribute to.


And on a final end-note, when so-called Christians everywhere -who are specially well-represented in Texas- aren’t lewd or violent, they behave so cowardly.

So I was looking to join a book-club and ran into an older woman who participates in one, so I asked her for information on it, because, I explained, I was interested in joining one (d’uh).

“You don’t want to join mine, there’s only old people in it,” she said with that “end-of-conversation-I-know-what-you-want” adamant tone of voice.

And I was like, “What??”

What nonsense!! Isn’t it irritating when people who don’t know you, and have no idea what you like or dislike, and don’t even bother to ask, simply assume so instantaneously and so stoopidly what you must want?

I had to answer politely, but I felt so much like saying, “You retard! As it happens, I love being around a whole bunch of different ages, from babies to old people, and as long as they are decent and intelligent, and not closeted pigs and other things, that’s what I care about. Thanks for thinking that I would be one of those morons that solely relates to people ranging from 2 years older to 2 years younger than myself.”

So I was talking to this married woman who is a liberal, but not the worse kind, she does get in touch with reality every now and then.

So she tells, “You don’t know what I went through when I was living in bla bla.”

“Tell me.”

“My best friend, I mean, the most best friend I had ever had, who was also married, she totally betrayed me. You know that kind of rare friend you can tell everything to, that really understands you? We used to talk so much. She totally betrayed me! It was so painful and crushing.”

So what pops into my mind? She slept with your husband. But I continue listening, empathic expression on my face. So she goes on, “You can’t believe what she did.”

“What?”

“We were both members of this gym, you see, and I found out, right before we moved from there to here, I found out she had slept around with the entire gym!! And she had always kept it a secret from me!! She had never told me anything!! I mean, I don’t care if she wants to sleep around, I don’t care if anyone wants to sleep with the entire gym, with the entire army, go for it, but she didn’t tell me!! And I felt like such a fool, for not knowing it, for thinking that she was my friend and would tell me things.”

And I felt like asking her, “Do you know that there is no way a human being can have a more diseased egotistical mind than yours? So you don’t care if she betrays her husband, trashes her marriage, her family, betrays everyone else she slept with that also supposedly had a commitment, treats everyone like shit, but it is a problem if she doesn’t tell you? You have a diseased mind.”

This is why liberals stink so much, they have such a diseased sense of entitlement, they have such a profoundly exaggerated opinion of their own importance, they always think they can destroy anything and anyone for their kicks.

As with the psychological profile of many criminals, liberals are too much trash to have an ounce of ethics or accountability. They are always glibly justifying to themselves their slimy, unethical, harassful, destructive, or violent attitudes and behaviors.

Related post: Excuses offered for covering up sexual harassment.

So I met this woman who is 10 years younger than myself, who’s married with lots of kids. She’s a bit overweight and has a mature voice. So I thought she was my age and she thought I was 10 years younger, or her age!!! (not that I look younger, but just because of the context that we met in I probably seemed that way to her)

IT IS a familiar and unnerving sensation: the false belief that you can hear your mobile phone ringing or vibrating.

Now the phenomenon is so widespread it has an official name: “ringxiety“.

People have grown emotionally dependent on their mobiles for feelings of self-worth, claim psychologists.

So when we “hear” an imaginary ring, or think vibrations on a bus are a call, it is the subconscious calculating how popular we are.

[…]

British psychologists say it is a sign the human brain is struggling to adapt to today’s demands.

Lancaster Centre for the Study of Media, Technology and Culture professor Michael Hulme said: “You want to feel you are being contacted.”

Article Date: 28 May 2006 – 9:00am (PDT)

Dr. Robert Haddad, Caritas Christi Head, allegedly hugged and kissed women inappropriately, leered at women and in some cases phoned their homes late at night. He was eventually given the choice of either resigning or being fired. He opted for the resignation, which included benefits, plus ten-months’ pay – a golden handshake of $830,000.

Dr. Hadded had previously been told off for sexual harassment and ordered to submit himself to sexual harassment sensitivity training. This did not happen as further allegations from women began to surface.

Which just goes to show that people who think they are free to behave as they please towards anything related to sex are slime.

According to Dr. Haddad, there was nothing inappropriate in his behaviour.

A clear example that the slimes of the world don’t exercise an awareness about themselves, including their diseased attitudes and behaviors. Like most liberals, they never hold themselves accountables for anything.

as they say, “De-nile is just not a river in Egypt…”

Haddad had been head of Caritas for two years, and had managed to turn finances round from a $12 million loss in 2004 to a $26 million profit in 2005. He did this after implementing a series of measures which included layoffs and budget cuts. Some say Caritas hospitals now suffer from serious staff turnover rates.

Victims of sexual abuse say the Boston Archdiocese’s managing of this case runs along extraordinary and painful parallels to the way the church had tried to cope with sexual abuse and harassment cases in the past – the whole thing is shrowded in secrecy, allegations rise and punishments are minimal.

Habbad, American born and of Lebanese descent, claims people misunderstood the hugs and kisses, which in his culture would have been received warmly. For an American born to say this is puzzling – he must be aware of what is and isn’t acceptable in America. Phoning women in their homes late at night – accepted warmly in other cultures? Four allegations followed by another ten – a cultural misunderstanding between 14 women and a man who was born in the same country?

It’s always the same excuse: the victims misunderstood everything, they imagined it, they’re crazy…

People who have been sexually abused by priests say that the initial decision to tell Habbad off rather than firing him is a classic case of the church trying to protect their own people.

In 2003 Cardinal Bernard Law resigned after severe criticism about the way he tried to protect priests amid accusations of sexual abuse. O’Malley was brought in to replace him. Many victims of sexual abuse by priests see the same pattern happening all over again.

Helen Drinan, a Caritas human resources executive, had urged the board to fire Haddad immediately after the four initial allegations. After he was just reprimanded and told to go on a course, she warned the board what would befall the organization when people found out that the church in Boston, once again, had opted to protect the powerful predator, rather than the powerless victim.

Which also goes to show that formal complaints by victims in a corrupt environment are ineffective. Unless they victims employ other aggressive and punitive tactics, the result will always be this profoundly unjust circus.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

%d bloggers like this: