Several things

Yes the Church is a Monarchy. Stop apologising for it.

This was mostly during the election of Pope Francis but I was immensely frustrated with my fellow Catholics on religious blogs (mostly commenters) insisting on calling the abdication of Pope Benedict a retirement or some other suitably modern and republican sounding name. And some even going so far as to call the installation of Pope Francis an Inauguration. Which I guess we have no choice as no Pope since the council has dared be coronated. But it still annoys me and bogels my mind.

No I don't care how the world will react if we crown the Popes with the Tiara. No i do not care how 'out of date' it sounds. No I do not care if you accuse me of caeseropapism. Christ is a King. He is THE King, the Church is His body, and the Pope a most priestly, princely and holy regent who rules in His stead on Earth. You are subjects of a kingdom, not citizens of a republic, stop giving the liberals fuel to their most unholy fire by caving in on the monarchist aspects of our Faith because of some superstitious, modern and protestant fear of 'the alliance of throne and altar' as if it were unnatural. It isn't. Now give over.


If Britain leaves, the Republic must leave with it.

Anyone who is following British politics knows of the stupendous uproar over the Gay Marriage Bill, the Queen's speech neglecting the inclusion of a promise for an in/out referendum. The Tory party's internal revolt, UKIP's usurpation of traditionally held sectors of the demographic across the political spectrum, Labour making noise, and a radicalisation and increase in popularity of the English Defense League in the wake of the despicable murder of Drummer Lee Rigby.

Every day is a party in London it seems.

No matter which way you look at it, the in/out referendum is inevitable. If not by 2017, then at least before 2021. If Labour takes power they will do everything in their vicious little power to prevent a referendum, which is only going to stoke the fires of revolt still further. And we all know no one in Europe is truly interested in a 'reform' of the Gordian Knot that is the European Union. And even if they were, no one agrees on exactly what needs reforming and how far the reform needs to go and it will most likely ultimately end in even greater centralisation and bureaucracy anyway.

Now how it affects Ireland.

Britain is, if not the biggest, then certainly one of our biggest trade partners, and if suddenly they were to leave the union, all those lovely little trade restrictions on trading with partners outside the Union would suddenly apply to trading with Britain.

I'll just leave the knock-on affects that has with Ireland's economy to your imagination. Nevermind what will become of the North/South Border should is suddenly represent a Union land Border in Western Europe with a 'foreign power'.

Even putting aside my own euroscepticism and desire for secession from the Union that has done nothing but coerce us, keep us drunk and punish us as if we were Hitlerite criminals. Ireland would need to leave the Eurozone after Britain. It has to, the downside of remaining in the EU after a British exit far outweighs the positives on a brutal realpolitik viewpoint. The problem is of course debts. Europe would never let us go because of the debt. However if Britain leaves, and other countries start leaving (crucially, if Germany herself leaves) then the EU collapses in on itself rather peacefully and the debts dissipate.

This of course has wider implications for the world economy and bond market, which means America and China wouldn't look too fondly on the countries that 'killed Europe'

Well, too bad. We should not be ashamed of refusing to be a slave to prop up someone else's estates.


Meanwhile, in Dublin

Justice minister Shatter is a disgrace to statesmanhood and should be removed. Fine Gael is not winning any favors by backing him up on this Gardai tapes and penalty point scandals and his, oh-so-cunningly-veiled threats of using Gardai acquired information against political enemies. He is a disgrace to Irish politics and anything to do with the concept of law and justice. For that matter, get Fine Gael and that cancerous, unrepresentative ulcer that is the Labor party out of the Dail. Fine Fail failed in a great many aspects over the long period of their rule, but never did I imagine they could be the lesser of two beast. Fine Gael has broken every promise in their campaign,allowed Labor scandalous leeway in governance and pushing abortion like there's no tomorrow. I appeal to goodly and kindly TDs within the party to revolt against the leadership and reform the party before its too late to salvage Fine Gael's name, and before the Irish left capitalise on this rift in the government for the own, boundlessly unscrupulous ends.


Meanwhile, in the Carpathian Basin

Hungary continues to impress.

Readers may remember when I commented on Hungary's impressive, manful and out-and-out ballsy reform of its constitution, utilising the stunning popular mandate its nationalist government achieved, which kicked out all manner of European domination of its institutions, political, media or otherwise and removed the title of 'Republic' from the nation's official name. Monarchists such as I were immensely hopeful this means a friendlier regime to monarchist sympathisers if nothing else.

Meanwhile Europe and America called bloody murder.

You see, Hungary did all this while remaining within the European Union, dancing carefully about the laws of which it could not directly contravene and many many people accused the government of Hungary of being fascists (as always) and threatened to bring Hungary to court over its unlawful and unjust referendum and attention to the democratic will of its country. (Hehe, hypocrisy much?)

Indeed in the wake of the reform of Hungary, I heard news of popular protests and hints at the eventual capitulation of Hungary to reform again. Obviously because Europe believed they had reformed wrongly the first time around. Just like how Ireland voted wrong in two referendums. This union is shameful.

Several years later and I have not heard much of a peep, either because I am reading the wrong news, missed the memo of Hungary actually capitulated to Europe or because Europe had failed in all its bluster to threaten the Magyars.

Then I heard Hungary had banned GM crop corporations and burned many hectars worth of genetically modified crops.

Now, I am rather uneducated about GM crops myself. Having said that, as someone who has lived almost his whole life int he countryside, worked in a meat packing plant, and is well educated on the duplicity of 'mass-food' corporations. I always buy local foodstuffs whenever possible and encourage others to do likewise. As such I treat anyone 'genetically modifing the food I am about to consume with a great deal of suspicion. "Hello sir, I have messed about with the potato you are about to eat. It now has 99.9% less chance of giving you a disease and 45% more nutrition. Whats that? How can you be sure that what I have said is true and that it is the only alterations I have made to your food? Haha! Shut up and eat you peasant, I have scientists in my company. Do you want to disagree with my scientists? Didn't think so, now eat."

Other then that I am not aware of the moral, ethical and medical concerns of GM crops and would appreciate if some commenters could illuminate me. I do, however, appreciate a great many people are concerned to a great deal about GM crops, and there is always the slippery slope arguement. "First crops, then animals, then our children, then we have a Gattaca future and then after that, a Brave New World Future."

That said, what impresses me about Hungary's action is that it was Hungary's action. A government, in good faith, acting in the best interests of its people as far as it and its people were concerned. That is a rare thing indeed.


Its a long way to Damascus

WILL PEOPLE STOP POKING THE BLOODY BEAR!? Putin doesn't bluff! Russia doesn't bluff! I'd rather not see the levant go up in flames because the Israelis are foolhardy enough to bomb Russian citizens delivering weapons to the government forces in Syria. Not that I don't doubt Israel could hold its own in a defensive war with Russia, just... You don't want to meet the bloody mindedness of the Russians on the battlefield. You just don't.

Look, lets get one thing straight here: I do not support the opposition forces in Syria. Why? because they are not a single force, they are not all fighting for democracy and they are just as duplicitous, callous, untrustworthy and dangerous as the government. Or worse. They are a hodge-podge collection of independent factions, many of whom are radicalised Islamists, that are targeting minorities, particularly the ancient Christian sects in Syria. The political 'opposition government' that appeals to the west has no real influence or control over any of them. The governemnt meanwhile, is a cohesive force, with an established leadership and seeks to overall protect its civilians, minorities or otherwise, despite the brutality of the war causing many civilian deaths. And even on the issue of chemical weapons use, the only thing we can confirm is that the weapons were used and many conflicting reports that either the Government or the rebels used them. Or both, with different governments accepting one or the other side's accounts. On the sheer balance of evil, the government is the clearly more moral choice to back. Or, you know, you could back the side that has cannibals. You know, whatever.

That said however, we all know the 'Arab Spring' is not a spontaneous desire for democracy across the Arab world. Anyone who believes so is a political ignoramus. Having said that, the instigators of the revolutions that rocked the world obviously did not count on two things. The first which is genuinely surprising, is the resilience of the monarchies of the near east. "Whats that? You want reforms? Ok, I, the king of Jordan will give you reforms. Whats that? You want a republic? Sorry but you seem to have lost most of your support. You know, since I gave you reforms." The other is of course, radical Islam's domination of some of the new governments, most evidently in Egypt. Pray for the Coptics.

Wolves among us

This morning in the Sunday Independent I saw a sprawling front page spread detailing a brave Pro-Life activist's sting on two Labour TDs regarding their stance on abortion.

The anonymous pro-lifer masqueraded as a pro-choice supporter when confronting these two TDs and led the conversation towards the topic of abortion, asking the TDs about the impending vote on legislating on the X Case, (abortion available on psychological health grounds, such as suicide).

Now we all know how wondrously effective abortion on psychological health grounds has been in virtually every country it has been introduce. That is to say, not at all in terms of proving genuine psychological relief to the persons involved and how it totally avoids radical abuse of the law and further liberalization of abortion. But that is besides the point, the point here is we now have tapes of two Labour TDs admitting to an incremental approach to getting abortion on demand in Ireland, which has been successful in England (where abortion is still technically illegal but in all ways that actually matter its effectively abortion on demand because of the realities of the restrictions imposed by the Abortion Act).

The two TDs; Ms Anne Ferris and Aodhan O'Riordain, essentially admitted on tape that they are trying to use legislation on the X case as a wedge and a 'first step' from which they can go further on the issue. They reiterate it is within the Labour party's manifesto to legislate on the x case and they would not give up on it, they would pass it in order to comply with the European Court of Human Rights on the issue (who only want clarification on Ireland's current law for Doctors' sake and nothing more) but they will go further.

In fact the duplicity involved here is as sickening as it was foreseeable.

They intentionally pushed for the expert panel not for any genuine concerns, (and apparently hinted that they somehow knew the expert panel would push for more abortion liberalization), but to give cover to the 70+ Fine Gael TDs who oppose abortion strongly, thinking it would give them political cover to vote on a bill they would view as political suicide to vote yes to. From a real politik standpoint you can see the logic here, political cover is the holy grail of all politicians, but it is a trojan horse, as they revealed if they get into government next term they would continue pushing.

In fact Mr. O'Riordain went so far as to say if he was interviewed on a radio and someone asked him if he would push for more abortion he would say 'no of course not, it is what it is.' While fully admitted this would be a lie. Meanwhile Anne Ferris claimed that Labour leader an Tanaiste Eamon Gilmore had told an Taoiseach, Enda Kenny of the Fine Gael party to whip Fine Gael TDs into line on the x case, and whether or not this is true, Enda Kenny has indeed been trying to whip his party into line and faced strenuous resistance from his TDs. Aodhan even went so far as to all but call Fine Gael pro-life TDs country bumpkins, saying that if you are a rural TD then you are a good Catholic, who goes to mass and opposes abortion, said with disdain as he went on to say as he visited county Monaghan, he scratched his head, accused the people of the county of having latent homophobia and 'thought Irish society moved on.

I warned of wolves such as these getting into power when Fine Gael was looking for partners to form a government with and now we are witnessing the truth of the matter, TDs willing to sacrifice Irish babies on the altar of Baal for the sake of their ambitions and mad dreams at the expense of the damnation of Ireland.

The thing that gives me good heart is the bravery of some Fine Gael TDs and senators, some of whom have, against party wishes, visited pro life groups in America, openly opposed party whips as well as Brian Walsh, TD, who is the first to categorically state he would not be voting for abortion legislation on suicide grounds.

I can only vote more follow him.

Ireland has had its diplomatic reputation ruined, its ruling class reduced to muleing fools, its standing among nations shattered, its wealth robbed and its people taxed into literal bondage. Yet we are to believe we have more to lose if we do not compromise on our values?

Labour believes we are slaves and as good slaves we should do as we are commanded and obey, to make abortion legal and seal our damnation. Even though in doing so we will lose the last scrap of manfulness our nation can claim, the 21st century has not been kind to Ireland, nor will it ever be, if we do not stand strong now and hold to our souls we will not last the impending winter that will descend upon us all.

TDs, I back you in the name of God and Country, do not vote for this bill.

Slan go Phoile
Servant of the Chief

Dear Republicans, please keep your own mess to yourselves

Hello, you may know me as a stupid fool, and I am ok with that.

However today I have come to you with a request.

Please stop referring to republican leaders, be they presidents, premiers, communist, capitalists, freely elected or doubtfully elected, good, bad as kings, just because you do not like them. For they are not kings, you yourselves do not want them to be kings and they frequently wish to promote their images as being anything other then a king.

I know it may be a bit much to ask, a monarchist requesting those who subscribe to a group of ideologies predicated on rebellion against tyranny, real or supposed, and the manipulation of the popular masses with lies, deceit and propaganda, admittedly honestly or not, to consider our sensibilities. But I feel I must request that you cease and desist. Because you see, your leaders are not kings.

In fact they are presidents and premiers. They have always been presidents and premiers. That's all they have ever been.

Yet whenever a politician, who gets himself into power through means of whitewashed lies, broken promises, fooled populaces and handshakes made in smokey rooms with poor lighting and does something that falls out of popular favor, or runs roughshod over perceived ideals and necessary conduct of law or stately behavior, he is almost always, compared to a king, by means of condemnation.

Now I could be here all day and say in precise terms why, exactly such a president is incomparable to a king, even a poor king who acts in similar manners, but you don't care about that in the slightest. My words already have little value in your eyes anyway so why waste them.

No, I am here to ask you to stop, not because it is inaccurate, but because you are putting the blame on us Monarchist for messes that are fundamentally your fault. Indeed, I wish you to stop so that your own manhood and integrity do not come further into question, though I fear I am fifty years of republican domination of the world too late for that, nonetheless it must be stated.

Monarchists are willing to own up to every atrocity, every poor ruler in our long histories, every bad royal decision, every ounce of blood on our hands, every betrayal of world history that you believe to be our fault.

If you would but own up to yours. Your tyrants and dictators and scheming colleges of politicians and hotbeds of political intrigue and corruption are your own, every atrocity of the twentieth century past the first world war has been the result of revolution, every promise broken, every stupid mistake, every betrayal every ounce of blood is on your hands and those of your leaders.

But you will not because your not only hate history you also hate any besmirching of your systems that are slowly and assuredly crushing the soul and life out of entire civilizations and you refuse to accept the fact that your presidents are not acting like kings when they are tyrannically going against the values of your ideology. Far from that.

They are acting like presidents. And always have.

So please, own up to your own messes, if you can.

Yours sincerely
Servant of the Chief

Happy St.Patrick's Day

Happy St.Patrick's day to one and all, is féidir leat beo fada agus go leor leanaí a bheith acu!

But I have not been a happy man lately, too wired to the news, every time I seek to write about monarchical theory something happens on the news that enrages me to the point where I feel like writing about it instead, but withhold myself because I do not wish this to become a blog merely of rants on current affairs and end up getting nothing done.

But this once I shall share with you the various causes of my unhappiness in these times.

We have a Pope, a very humble man of which I am grateful, but rumblings and whispers of him setting out to destroy the good and beautiful liturgical reforms of Benedict in the name of 'humility' and, due to that, wreck our relations with the Orthodox when a reunion after nearly a millenia of division seems so close to hand, the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople will attend the installation mass for the first time since 1054, I pray the Franciscans His Holiness has put in charge of liturgy will do well. I love the man but I have my fears, I want reform but not of the Holy Mass.

Across the waters in Britain the Queen who is in ill health, may she receive a speedy recovery, pledged to sign a charter promoting equal rights and especially emphasizing the rights of homosexuals within the commonwealth. Now we can all argue about the motivations as to why she would do this, including speculate who in Britain's ossified government pushed this forward for her to sign but at the end of the day the pledge was nothing more the rubber-stamping the laws already in place in the commonwealth and in Britain in particular. Its a shame that the Sovereing of England has been reduced to such a puppet status, but then again Ireland can't really talk, our President is in the exact same position in terms of power and ability to wield it.

And of course the wars and rumors of wars, Syria, Korea, Algeria and other parts of Africa and the petty and shamelessly public bickering between diplomatic giants over these issues.

But of course, the majority of my Ire is always reserved for my own country. Our government is a den of snakes and liars and troglodytes. From the shameless pre-arranged propaganda campaign of the Salvia Halapanivar scandal by pro-abortion groups to try to strong arm Abortion legislation unto the Irish Population and the diplomatic shame-talking down to us by India who right now should be busy trying to clean its own house to save what's left of its face all the way to the political kowtowing and scraping at the feet of a foreign institution in Brussels and Strasbourg and holding out the foodbasket for crumbs from the tables of the Troika and IMF. Shame, shame on our institutions of power, shame on our politicians, shame upon our willingness to 'admit' we voted wrong with our referendums, the history of Ireland after joining the European Union is one of scandal, waste, cowardice and shame.

And even after all this and all the evidence and pressure, (and I am pleased, threats of excommunication) our TDs are still going to try to vote to enforce legislation on the X case and enforce party whips on TDs who are apprehensive of going against the people's will on this matter, and here in the north when finally, FINALLY the party's move to put an injunction on that horrible horrible abortion clinic, which seeks to exploit Northern Ireland's strict conditions for legal abortion for profit. Sinn Fein, the 'party of nationalists' who are 'opposed to Abortion' yet 'do not seek to limit a woman's choice' allied with the greens to prevent the move to limit abortions to only be carried out by the NHS when they meet the criteria.

I demand their heads on pikes! I demand their blood! Traitors and vipers, the ones who made me turn from republicanism in disgust and dismay continue to show their marxist colors by favoring the murder of children in favour of ideology, let history and God judge them as they are, for how they have acted shall now echo in terrifying halls of eternity.

People who read this blog regular know I am rarely this openly violent in my attitudes but this is violence worthy, this is anger worthy.

And even after all this, not even the simple joy of St.Patrick's day can lift my spirits just a tad.

Slan go phoile.

Habemus Papam!

Pope Francis I was not what I was expecting, I don't think anyone expected him.

I will take this opportunity to pray for His Holiness and swear my obedience to him.

The Silly Season and Democratization of the Church

As far as I am concerned, anyone within the Church who argues that it should become more 'democratic', especially with the election of the Pontiff and the Appointment of Bishops is, in my mind, a Heretic. Not just misguided individual but an actual heretic preaching heresy who must be brought to recant and reconciliation. Usually because the people who do think the Church needs democratization often preach it as if they were firebrand revolutionaries.

To go into exactly why I believe this, I cite the past 40 years of Church history and the absolute failure of both Catholic and Protestant communities in using 'Youth Movements' to try to stir young people to be enthused about the faith, only for such actions to flounder, imagine if the entire Catholic Church was that? Only trying to appeal to 'demogrpahics' for votes, dividing us into theological-political camps moreso then there already are such structures, even among groups that agree with eachother nominally, they Church is a Billion strong, this kind of thing is unavoidable. But if you want a more relevant reason why democratization is bad, I refer to you the 'Silly Season' which is the media frenzy leading up to the sedevacantic period and the Conclave.

Every pundit, every media outlet, every mover and shaker of this fast past, wired information age we live in is absolutely scrambling to try to convince people about 'who' the next Pope should be, what criteria should be used to select the Pope, and preaching doomsayings about the Church being destroyed if it doesn't get with the times. You know, what they've been telling the Church for the past century through every fad and era the rest of the world has gone through, forgotten and made fun of by now. Which is the fate this era is inevitably doomed to in its own time. Trying desperately to convince the people whose votes actually matter in the selection of the next pontiff, the college of Cardinals, God Himself, you know, those guys, that they should elect a Pontiff who meets their worldview. Or else.

The kooks, the conspiracy theories, the outright lies and vehemence, the Pope could not have done a better move to catch the media off-guard then to mention his abdication in such a surprising manner and thus expose their malicious natures and to emphasize my point. This is the reason why the Church must never be democratized. Ever. If for no other reason it should never be democratized so that monsters and sub-human filth such as these never have power within it. Ever.

Now don't get me wrong, the media is right that there is careerism, rivalries and backroom politics within the Church, some of which is downright, old school, Machiavellian shenanigans by some of the more unsavory clerics (and more then a view Modernist heretics) that loathed Pope Benedict XVI during his reign.



But this move, I think, on Benedict's part, will turn out to be absolute genius.

To give context to what I mean, consider what His Holiness worked towards during his Pontificate. Ecumenism and making trips around the world and trying to help the Church recover from the seemingly unending Clerical sex abuse scandal. (a scandal I am happy to report seems to be dying down in Ireland, to the point where new and seemingly unheard of accusations are being scrutinized more thoroughly for unscrupulous motives, and there are ALOT of these now) But he also made motions, some very visible and controversial, to reunite with the sedevacantist community, particularly the society of St. Pius X. There are rumours circulating about that one of the uses the Pope is finding for the recent abdication announcement was to use it, amongst other things, as a smokescreen to deal directly with the SSPX, obfuscating the Church's actions from the media and keeping the more politically minded wolves within the Church occupied with something else to keep them out of the way. Indeed apparently a new offer has been made but I haven't heard too many details. Whatever the case, Benedict's legacy won't be immediately obvious, but I am willing to bet money it has far, far, reaching consequences.

And, truth be told, Benedict is much too smart a man to simply leave the throne cold, as it were. No, he has appointed ALOT of Bishops and made ALOT of cardinals, 'Packing the College' as it were, with men he believes he can trust. Benedict is a nice man, immovable yes, but he doesn't quite have the ferocity that, as a young man, I hoped he would have had when he was made Pope, he may not have the aggression and strength of will needed to storm through the corruption and rot in the old halls of the Church and take this hate-filled new world by the horns and snap its neck. The next Pope, hopefully, will not be the mountain Benedict was, but might in fact be the Hurricane that I at the least, think we need. For that reason my money is on the papabili who are under 70, but you probably shouldn't put your money where I do, I've been wrong before.

Sides, trends are the media is demanding the next Pope be Black or Asian, as if anyone gave two rats asses about American Race Politics outside of America, but say they get what they want, Arinze, or thise other fellow I've heard about get the Office, or event he fellow from manilla, or the one from Sri Lanka become Pontiff. We'll see the media rejoice and produce headlines along the lines of "Crusty old religion of men finally gets over institutional racism, next up, Lesbian-priest marriage gay abortion yay!" Only to be devastated when these men turn out to be just as Orthodox as Benedict was, (hopefully more strident and aggressive about it to boot), it would be satisfying in the extreme to see these talking heads flounder trying to attack the Pope without seeming racist. Not that the media itself has ever stopped being racist, ever, but still.

At the end of the day, apparently the official line as to why His Holiness did not have a Papal coronation was, supposedly, because they didn't have time to organize one (I seriously doubt this is the reason but I won't object), especially since the conclave for his election was unusually short. This time, they have had a month's notice plus the conclave itself, they have no such excuse this time. I hope they have a Papal coronation, that would make mine, and every other monarchist thinker out there, time much easier. Or harder. depending on how outraged republicans the world over are at the Pope having a coronation. Man, it would be awesome to see him crowned with one of those tiaras.



With Regards to Prophecies
Right, I suppose I can't really avoid touching upon this.

In truth, with regards to the prophecies of St. Malachy and the infamous 'lists of Popes, I'll say only a few things. If it is real, (questionable), the list is certainly not a list of all Popes there will ever be, probably a list of Popes before a great chastisement or calamity, secondly, we're already screwed, because the only person who matches the criteria of 'Peter the Roman' is the current Cleric appointed to basically 'stand in' for the Pope and his powers during the conclave. His name is Peter, he is a Roman. Sleep well tonight.

The Prophecy of the coming of the Great Catholic Monarch: Remember when this did the rounds on Monarchist blogs? Its been getting more and more popular over the years and I for one am inclined to give a bit of credence to it, if for no other reason then a lot of Catholic Saints and Mystics have been spouting correlating aspects of the Prophecy or, if nothing else, parroting points. And I do mean a lot. Though I doubt that the next Pope will be the last Pope before the coming of the great chastisement that is to be succeeded by three days of supernatural darkness and the coming of a Great Roman Emperor of Frankish descent (keep an eye on those Capet branches), indeed, if certain prophetic deductions hold that Benedict is to be 'the last Pope of this age' then I say rejoice. Because that almost certainly means that the age of Daemonic sabotage (which is supposedly a century of daemonic infiltration of which we are only now seeing the consequences of) that Pope Leo forsaw and the age of Modernist Heresy is almost at an end. There is absolutely no downside to this other then Benedict himself will no longer be il Papa.

Abdication most Holy

So there I was coming home from a successful job interview ont he train, coffee in my hand, another one of my 'blood and thunder' novels that I shamelessly enjoy upon the table. I open up my phone and go to a news app that came with it, (I have always hated phones until I found I could check my emails and news sources on it, otherwise they can go to hell), and see the Pope has decided to abdicate.

I promptly spit up my coffee in shock, luckily no one was sitting across from me.

Yes two abdications at the start of 2013, not a good beginning in my book, and I certainly wasn't expecting to see another Papal conclave in my life so soon. But so it is.

I have to admit, I adored His Holiness and his dedication to tradition and orthodoxy and, most prominently, his steadfastness when dealing with those within the Church,t he Careerists and the outright heretics and I'd be lying if I didn't suspect dealing with these elements where part of the reason he decided to abdicate, breaking 600 years of Popes dying while in Office.

I will be looking forward to the doubtless tirade of questions, speculation and outright, tinfoil hat wearing, lunacy conspiracies surrounding the lead up to the Papal conclave. If anyone has any information on who might be considered 'papable' I'd be glad to hear it.

Slan go phoile.

Everyone is a Fascist Pig

Now I am not saying I am a Doommonger...

But I am a Doommonger.

Hope you all had a good and safe New Year's and I PROMISE that I will get back to good ol' Monarchical Theory sometime this year, but Ireland has been in the news alot recently and its kinda hard for me to outright ignore all the scandals.

The Savita Halappanavar fiasco, the crisis pregnancy center scandal, the Northern Irish Flag controversy and how it made an economic bust of the Christmas period for Belfast city...

Oh, and Ireland is set to have a spin on the President of the Council of the European Union.

Yippee.

(NOT the President of the European Council, they're not the same thing. Brief rundown for our non-Euro readers: Th Council of the European Union is effectively the upper house in the EU Legislature, equivalent to a Senate or House of Lords, the presidency of that position is what Ireland has inherited. The European Parliament is just that, the lower house. The European Council is a rather unique decision making body with no legislative power that nonetheless decides "the general political directions and priorities" of the European Union, a pseudo policy making body, THEN you have the European Commission, the Executive body of the union similar to the cabinet. All four bodies have their own presidents. If this sounds like an unnecessary amount of steps divorced from the national decision making authority then you are correct and it is intentional, the Union ceased to be a mere trading bloc a long time ago.)

In the midst of this crisis or that crisis, my own doom-mongering over the absolutely terrifying debt we owe both as Ireland the nation and collectively as a continent, I seem to have been proven consistently wrong (me and my more extremist eurosceptic compatriots). Which is laughable because kicking a lit dynamite down the road doesn't prove the alarmist wrong about the fact that it is, in fact, a lit dynamite and time is running out.

The Americans found that out rather starkly this New Year's with the threat of the fiscal cliff which they have now completely, and unequivocally solved... by kicking it down the road.

What does all this have to do with this post's title? Well it has to do with the reality of the situation. I talked with a few friends, one in particular who studied economics in secondary and has moved on to studying politics in tertiary, the European single currency and by extension the European Union as a whole cannot exist in its current state indefinitely and must either decentralize and risk turning into a loose confederation and the destruction of the single currency or centralize so completely as to effectively destroy the traditional nations of Europe as extant entities.

But of course reading this blog you know my opinions on these matters. But herein lies the looming cloak and dagger.

We know the European Union as an entity and its supporters would never, except perhaps with the threat of nuclear annihilation, ever give in and allow the Union to be dissolved so we are almost certainly be going down the centralization route as we have been for the past while.

But if we slip into realpolitik for a second, a question emerges: So what? This is a question painful to a patriot's ears when faced with this prospect. But in realpolitik this would stabilize currency and the security of the European state and probably lead to economic recovery if not prosperity and, as far as realpolitik is concerned, a good thing has happened.

Too bad it disregards the necessary totalitarianism involved.

Europe is too vast and too diverse to ever be a true unitary state, the only reason other huge federal states such as the USA and Mexico and Brazil can exist as they are is because most of those states share a common lineage and history in their foundation I'd hate to say it but those states where 'constructed' before they began to grow whereas most European identities and cultures were free range and grew naturally if violently, their colonial past makes their integration and acceptance of federal unionism slightly easier (even if the Americans would never admit it). If we look to other huge unitary states towards the east, namely Russia and China, we see the frightening totalitarianism of China to keep it all together and the rather authoritarian federalism of Russia (obviously Russia is the much more preferable country but hear me out) Both these unions have such a huge variety of cultures, languages, traditions and religions within them, even their dominant ethnicities have sub ethnicities and differences (evident with the Slavs in Russia and its constituent Republics), it is impossible to keep such diversity into nice, roughly even political voting groups with which to run a stable representative democracy, the system is simply too damn big (there's a monarchism article in that actually, I'll get to it some other time) and it'd be even worse with direct participatory democracy with having the votes of the sparser populated republics simply ignored outright by bigger neighbors, (and country folk and townsfolk ignored outright by city voters). In a centralized European Union, dissent would have to be quashed. Harshly.

We are seeing signs already with Cameron being FORCED by rebels within his party to push for more autonomy from the EU while still having a relationship and Europhilic hardliners playing hardball with the new fiscal deal, how in the hell would Countries such as Hungary which INFAMOUSLY threw off alot of European regulations and reformed its constitution in a most 'unEuropean' fashion fair in a United States of Europe? Pretty damn unfairly and I wouldn't be surprised if Europe 'economically sanctioned' Hungary into starvation to get it to capitulate to European oneness. "Silly Magyars, you aren't a country, you're a province." I am not sure it would get to the point of sanctioning outspoken eurosceptics but I would not be surprised if Nationalists the continent over would be labelled as 'Fascists' or some other politically loaded phrase and ostracized from society somehow for being 'reactionary' and 'anti-unionist'. Europhiles today even predict this and look forward to 'justifiably' calling their euroscpetic counterparts 'throwbacks', fully complicit in the creation of a 'politically unacceptable' underclass. I have no idea where it would go fromt here but I doubt it would lead to some kind of second renaisence or some other explosion of culture and beauty. Because if growing up in a postmodern world has thought me anything is that the modern world is an ugly thing that revels in its own horror, and its kind of hard to have an explosion of culture when you have spent decades destroying any semblance of such a thing by importing immigrants to plug holes in your demographics caused by very ill advised population, abortion and contraception laws, creating multiculturalism to try to stem the backlash at cultural invasion and THEN using said multiculturalism as a social engineering tool that has resulting in absolute disaster and nigh universal condemnation. All to try to create some kind of blank slate with which to build the 'great and noble European' culture which never existed in the first place. The European state will label its opponents as fascist and use fascism to silence them.

And we aren't alone in this. With regards to American politics, with apologies to my American readers, but I say a pox on both their houses for their parties and a further pox on both their houses for those parties' supporters. The American election cycle was bothersome and dominated everything and I saw a good deal of what I hated about America ruining what I love about America. I suppose I should leave it at that before I say something I can't take back. But my point is that some of the extremists in America, of both the right and left, are absolutely correct. America has become a corporate run nightmare state and is 4 out of 5 laws passed before becoming a UN recognized police state, the most recent law of which, asides from the infamous 'Drone assassin' law that allows the US Government to kill US citizens via assassination, it has also recently passed a law that allows for the indefinite military incarceration and detention of US citizens suspected of terrorism without trial. A law suspending Habeas Corpus effectively. The only law America is missing before reaching the magic 5 laws before being seen as UN recognized police state (based on Nazi Germany no less) is a law allowing for the term limit of the presidency or equivalent executive office to become indefinite.

But that is incredibly unlikely right? It'd never happen, why just last century America passed a Constitutional amendment PREVENTING a president from having no limit to the amount of terms he may serve, if a president were popular enough, effectively be tantamount to indefinite term limit, there would never be a law attempting to overrule such an amendment and it would be so unlikely to pass over thirty of the state legislatures it'd need to, why, no one would have the sheer brass ones needed to put it before congress.

Oh. Wait.

Next week: Monarchism, I swear.

The Hatred of Women

The Maternal death rate in the Republic of Ireland is 6 out of every 100,000 live births. We are among the lowest maternal deaths in the world, being edged out by Estonia at 3 per 100,000. Our next door Neighbour of Britain has 12 per 100,000.

Ireland kills women. Clearly.

Clearly we are murderous gogs and magogs whose backward, dark aged, neanderthals operating on theocratic dogma to enslave and destroy women through the most unholiest of weapons: childbirth.

Clearly we are every bit of the monsters the pro-abortion crowd calls us.

Even though we are not cynically using the tragic death of a talented young woman by septicemia to further our aggressive social engineering goals. Oh no, if we do that we wouldnt be monsters.

We'd be heroes. We'd be paragons of change. It doesn't matter that if abortion on demand where to be legalized the maternal death rate would almost certainly double. It doesn't matter that corrupted crisis pregnancy centers tell women not to inform their doctors that they had an abortion overseas and thus endanger them in future medical operations as their doctors are left ignorant of their full conditions. Why, it doesn't even matter, if women outright die from their abortions, so long as they can have them and less babies are brought into the world. Because that is freedom, we know what women's freedom is, we know what they want, of course we do, afterall we'd tell them what they want, we'd rail against any of them that espouse otherwise and silence their male allies as misogynistic, theocratic, would-be talibans. We'd know what a real woman wants, and those that don't want abortion further legalized, isn't really a woman, and it totally isn't objectifying for us to decide that. That totally wouldn't make us despicable, oppurtunistic, parasitic, misanthropes who would stoop so low to grasp upon the death of this woman with white knuckled fists and demand our agenda before we knew anything about the situation.

Before the inquiries investigate.

Before the Hospital releases a full statement regarding the matter and the doctors involved.

Before the president elect of India's Federation of Obsetetrics and Gyneacologist societies expressed his thoughts acting on the miscarrying baby would have caused Savita to die two days earlier.

Wait, no, that wouldnt matter, as the abortion would have been performed. Then the death of Savita wouldnt have mattered at all even if it did cause her to die earlier.

Fancy that.

I apologise for the poison in this post but the death of Savita and the controversy blown up around me has caused me some introspective pain, and especially in light of my last post had these doctors stated their reasons for refusing the abortion on grounds that Ireland was a Catholic Country, strictly legally, they would have been at fault. But I didn't know enough about the case, no one outside of the operating rooms and the hospital itself does, to give a firm opinion on the matter, legal or personal. So I am not directing this post at Savita's distraught family, or the doctors of Galway University Hospital. I am directing it at the Pro-Abortion, and that's what they really are in the end, savages who are using Savita as so much ammunition to push their despicable designs on Ireland and my previous warnings about the Labour party in the Republic have come to fruition, as they as using this to push their pro-abortion agenda and risking the death of the current coalition government to achieve it.

In the end, they don't really care about Savita, or women in general for that matter, they care about their own sick ideological goals above all else.

Red Handed

The Oireachtas has approved an independent review on the findings of the HSE over the scandal the previous weeks of crisis pregenancy centers giving women, who typically have gone abroad for abortions, highly illegal, unethical, unprofessional advice to hide the fact they had an abortion from their GPs because of the stigma of abortion in Irish society.

A couple of things and I hope you all can please forgive my own lapse of professionalism and eloquence but

FUCK those Crisis Pregnancy centers.

There, I can now keep my vitriol down to a simmer and get into the reasons why I just said what I said.

Now I am pro-life, almost ridiculously so. As such I will try to explain why, using my skills three years of legal education have thought me, that this independent review is both neccessary and correct, because I sure even some of my pro-life readers likely make exceptions for abortions in cases of rape and hence, will likely be appaled at my above outburst. So let me begin.

1) Firstly, the Irish Constitution makes allowances for abortion, on the advice of doctors who think it best, for the health and safety of the mother. Ireland's gynecological medical rating is literally one of the best if not the best in the world and our doctors are highly competent men and women who exercise deliberation, caution and professional medical practice. They do not usually think it in the best interests of the mother's health to have an abortion and with good reason, despite the general state of Irish healthcare, Ireland is literally the safest country in the world to have an abortion almost regardless of the woman's actual medical circumstances because of the quality of our medical professionals. Social abortions such as 'I am not ready/fit to raise this baby at my age/working situation' or 'I just do not want to have a baby' is unacceptable reasons for a termination. Why? Because the Irish constitution legally recognizes the right to life of the unborn, that the fetus is, essentially a person and thus, terminating it on grounds of social reasons is legally tantamount to killing a person for social reasons. It creates a cognitive dissonance within Irish Law. Whereas the health exception would be cases where having the child would greatly exacerbate a woman's medical condition to the point of life threatening. Quality of Life is not taken into account.

2) With regards to the above Law of the Irish constitution and the case of X, Y and Z vrs Ireland case before the European Court of Human Rights. Several facts need to be made clear. Firstly this court is not, in fact, and institution of the European Union of which Ireland is a member state of and is hence, subject to its directives. This gets confused as the EU has an ECHR which refers to the European Convention of Human Rights, which is something else. The rulings of the Court of Human Rights have no binding legal effect on European states, the worst that can come from deciding against the ruling of the court is likely political embarrassment or estrangement, which is unlikely to happen anyway since very few people take some of the more stringent rulings of this court seriously enough to enforce them in their own countries. Unless its ruling is strongly related to the ECHR, in which case the EU may take notice and force peoples' hands. This is why Britain could ignore the Court's ruling on giving prisoners the right to vote while in prison. Now, the case of X, Y and Z v Ireland invoked the ECHR, claiming Ireland's laws were contrary to several articles of the ECHR. The Court famously refuses to take a hardline stance either side of major social issues such as abortion and gay marriage, justifying that there is no majority opinion across the continent on which it can justify ruling one way or the other as evidence by previous abortion cases brought before it in the past. In the case, two of the women involved where struck down, as the court ruled that Irish doctor's refusal to perform abortions for them was not contrary to the specific articles they invoked of the ECHR, (they both effectively amounted to social reasons for abortion trying to justify it under right to privacy and another article) however in X's case was successful. But not for the reasons pro-abortion proponents in Ireland think it is. in X's particular case the woman had cancer, I believe it was in remission at the time, Doctors told her of her medical condition when she inquired about the abortion and told her that they would advise continuing the pregnancy. Everything was fine and legal up until the woman asked to see her medical information on which the doctors were basing their judgement as well as services in other countries that offer abortion, they refused to give it to her. THIS is what the X case was about. Under Irish law she DID in fact have a right to see her medical information, and the doctors withholding of it was wrong. (Granted, had they let her see the information their opinions and that of their colleagues would be no different and she could not force them to have an abortion if she disagreed with their opinions.) The X case was the court of Human Rights mandating that Ireland makes its own constitutional law clear, resulting in the thirteenth and fourteenth amendments, later included in the text of the eight amendment and amounted to essentially not refusing a citizen's freedom of movement from state to state (a right that existed in Irish law but was never condensed into a sentence as part of the constitution) as well as, and this is important; 'This subsection shall not limit freedom to obtain or make available, in the State, subject to such conditions as may be laid down by law, information relating to services lawfully available in another state.' Effectively meaning it WAS legal for a woman in Ireland to move to another state to procure an abortion.* But the case was never, EVER about making the Irish state legalize abortion. This is a farce, a straight up lie. It was about forcing Ireland to enforce the laws it already had in place not forcing it to radically altar its constitution to make further allowances for abortion. Also of note in the wake of the case there were several referendums attempting to remove the threat of suicide as justifying procurement of abortion. These failed. The logic was that there were women who feigned suicidal tendencies over pregnancy in order to get an abortion, they were defeated because removing this justification would, logically, would result in genuinely psychologically troubled women from procuring an abortion and result in higher suicide rates among women. Ireland often looks at the result of abortion laws effects in England when trying to get examples. Also technically abortion isn't exactly legal per se in England either as much as it is allowed. Its complicated but one scandal at a time since it will be relevant to a future abortion post regarding Northern Ireland.

*This is relevant to my final points so remember this.

3) Rape pregnancies happen. They are an extremely minor cause of pregnancy to the point where, in my own legal opinion, legalizing abortion on a wider scale because of it is ethically and legally unsound but at the end of the day they happen and the cause a great deal of trauma to the women involved. This is where Crisis pregnancy centers enter the scene. Legally speaking, yes, they are allowed to give women advice on where they can go to procure abortions safely, legally, and discreetly in foreign countries. In fact crisis pregnancy centers offer this advice to a wider array of pregnant women other then those who conceived through rape and/or incest, this is obvious and I won't be going into the ethics of the centers in general in this post. I will say, however, that the professional councilors, (or I hope they are professional councilors, in most cases at the very least), are not, ARE NOT, permitted to advise women to withhold important medical information to their GPs. I cannot stress this enough. Medical confidentiality is a serious thing in common law jurisdictions, Ireland is not an exception, while a doctor, as in the UK, may, in some circumstances, share your medical information with other trusted professional colleagues in his field for second opinions and discussion, they are not permitted to talk about your particular information to anyone else under penalty of prosecution and lawsuit against, potentially not only him or her but also the medical institutions they are affiliated with and could end up with their medical licence revoked even under the relatively light gavel the courts use regarding medical professionals, (remember that bit about doctors being revered in Ireland? yeah it makes the courts lenient with them, the same is done to fire fighters and police officers in order not to deter or dis-incentiveise 'rescuers'. The same is practiced in UK common Law. But in serious breaches of duty of care the law can come down like an meteor and leave just as large a blast radius). So, considering this, and indeed, considering that going abroad to procure a discreet abortion is legal, you informing your GP that you had an abortion is INCREDIBLY important information for a woman's future health. Without going into detail of the medical dangers or realities of abortion (otherwise this post's comments will get ideological REAL quick) at the end of the day, an abortion could at the very least, perforate a woman's womb, causing internal bleeding or perhaps difficulties in future pregnancies. (I have seen people by this point argue that if Abortion were legal in Ireland this wouldn't happen which is logically farcical since these abortions are usually procured legally in say, the UK, France, the Netherlands or Belgium where abortion is widespread, legal (sortof in the UK's case) and "professionally done". Lets leave it at that for now.) Now, the crisis pregnancy centers in question have advised these women, USING THE FEAR OF SOCIAL STIGMA OF HAVING AN ABORTION AS THEIR JUSTIFICATION, to not inform their GPs of the operation.

Ok, so see where I am going with this?

You really should by this point.

In truth, a woman who procures an abortion abroad should have maybe a close knit group of maybe 5-10 people at the most who knows she has procured it. It is impossible for me to presuppose on their situations, about who knows what about their circumstances and I am not going to address the existence of the abortion stigma in Ireland because it is the obvious result of living in a highly pro-life society (if nothing else). I could go to America, get a job and make many friends, admit I had testicular cancer and have become totally impotent as a result of the operation. I would then have a stigma attached to me. Stigmas. Happen. They are unfair and they may result in you not telling even your closest friends about your circumstances.

They are not an excuse not to tell your doctor about your previous medical operations, whose very existence could pose complications of future medical procedures. And do. Woman have died from not telling medical professionals handling their data that they had procured an abortion abroad.

Perhaps now you are beginning to see.

These councilors have broken their duty of care to these women. Some probably did it out of genuine concern for the woman's social status, even though they should have rightly known doctors cannot discuss their patient's circumstances. A darker side of me, the cynic of old, believes that at least some of these councilors may have had a malicious motive but I am tossing that to the ditch to maintain professionalism in this post. Their motive, unless it genuinely was malicious, matters not.

Their advice to the women to procure foreign abortions was legal, their advice to withold important medical information was not. Anyone who argues otherwise is wrong, they do not care for these womens' wellbeing. These women, under the law, should not have been advised to withhold such crucial medical information (keep in mind the women may not have entirely been aware of the particulars of the law when receiving this advice), these councilors where in the wrong and have endangered these women.

Whatever your stance on the issue, (and you do have one, so there is no point in me arguing my stance in attempts to convert you), you are wrong to think that a review and investigation into these centers was not warranted.

The Oireachtas is correct in calling for the review of these findings, but the HSE cannot be trusted to review these crisis pregnancy centers. You do not ask a banker to review his own corrupt holdings.