George Pell Is Innocent (of these specific crimes) And must be freed upon appeal.

After ranting and raving a bit I think its time for a more fair and balanced assessment. So I had to go and find a more fair and balanced fellow than myself to make that assessment.

Bolt shows that Cardinal Pell cannot be judged to be guilty if the standard is “beyond reasonable doubt.” Bolt shows this very conclusively. So some of us might think he’s guilty and the young fellows memories are hopelessly confused. But reasonable people thinking in a cool-headed way about the matter, have some doubts about the situation. Bolt gives 10 reasons to doubt the matter. One has to suppose that the boy might have been abused by Pell and just confused the time and the date of the matter. But we have to judge the situation on what we have before us. What we have makes it clear that righteous anger against the church has bled into the jury’s decision.

Cardinal Pell certainly has been involved in covering up crimes in the church. This is a real Catholic disease this coverup. In some ways he may be the best of a bad bunch.  He’s tried to sort things out somewhat, and tried to cover up to some extent also. Thats the impression one gets at least. So perhaps the best outcome is that he is shamed a bit, gets a bit of jail time … but our system, if it is sound, must let him off on appeal. Because the standard is reasonable doubt. And its very reasonable to doubt this story.

Its not preposterous that there is yet one more child molester in the church. But we have to judge him on the story he’s been convicted on. And its a stupid story. The story is not true because it CANNOT be true.

Here are ten reasons Bolt gives that he thinks cast doubt on the story.  He understates the matter.  The ten reasons show that the incident did not happen as claimed.

  1. The dead boy, before he died, denied to his Mother that he had been abused by Pell. This must be coming straight from his mother. Do we really think a grieving Mother would lie about such a thing.  That should have been reasonable doubt right there.
  2. The other boy who is the originator of the allegations didn’t speak of it for many years.   This is simply not plausible given that Pell was on our television sets often during that time period.  I have a hypothesis that fits why the accuser would feel morally justified in concocting this story. Because I don’t think its a concoction. I think its a transmutation.
  3. The attack was “supposed to have happened straight after Mass.”  When Pell customarily joined the recessional going out of the church after mass.  That is to say it would have been odd for him to suddenly duck away for no good reason. People would have noticed such a thing.  Why engage in a high risk activity if your very absence would be noticed even prior to any hint of wrongdoing?
  4. The attack was said to have happened in a high traffic area.  Where there was the reasonable expectation of people walking in and out.
  5. In the story the boys were supposed to have slipped out of the choir, to break into the room, and then came back afterward.  Others who were there at the time remember no such thing.
  6. Pell was normally followed everywhere during and after by the Master Of Ceremonies.  This fellow was available to testify that there was no “slipping away” or disappearing act that occurred.  The fellow who made up this story didn’t even do a very good job of it.
  7. The accuser claimed that the door was open during this entire time.  Thought in the story to be about ten minutes.
  8. The accuser said Pell was wearing heavy vestments  and he “parted the robes” to somehow induce one of the boys to perform oral sex IN FRONT OF THE OTHER. But this turns out to be impossible. And Pell would have needed to get changed just to take a pee, let alone force himself on anyone.
  9. No-one there noticed anything suspicious the whole time. Even though the attack would have taken ten minutes according to the story.
  10. While there is some allegations floating around there isn’t any proven pattern of queer behaviour.  When allegations of this sort were made in the past they had a tendency to be proven wrong.  This is in stark contrast to the normal situation with queers in the church …. their behaviour is usually well-known. When they are finally hauled in, it is to answer a string of charges, with massive concordance between victims and witnesses.

The problem with the Church is not one of occasional sporadic abuse. So for example in 22 years at work I got in trouble for losing my temper twice. No-one was the least bit hurt on either occasion, and the second time I was fired. The Churches problem is not to do with sporadic loss of control of this nature. But instead the Churches problem is with mad sex addicted fags (and one or two heterosexual abusers) that EVERYONE knows about. And they get moved around all over the place allowing them to re-offend. But what is being alleged here is that George pulled out his dick out of a clear blue sky. Like me losing my temper. Even if he had such tendencies his clothes would tend to stop him long enough to pull himself together.

What Really Happened; My Hypothesis.

If you were abused by clergyman, and you believed George Pell played it down or covered it up, you would be fucking furious. You would feel completely justified in taking the crime that had happened to you, transferring it to a different place and a different person. Thats what I think has happened here. The crime has been transmuted to a different man and place. And perhaps with some understandable feeling of moral justification. The crime simply cannot be taken seriously AS ADVERTISED.

So George has faced this humiliation and will spend time in jail.  Perhaps this is karma for earlier being a coverup artist. But he must be let off on appeal. Because this story didn’t happen. This story is ridiculous.

There is just no doubt about this at all.  Whatever George has done on other occasions, good, bad or indifferent, he is not guilty of this specific crime on this specific occasion. He must be let loose.

40 thoughts on “George Pell Is Innocent (of these specific crimes) And must be freed upon appeal.

  1. The Church must end the celibacy requirements and get all homosexuals out of the clergy and administration. If you want to stop this abuse it has to be a homosexual free zone. In the clergy but not in the congregation. A lot of leftists now are giving us the boohoo about the mistreatment of kids but thats just the anti-Pell frenzy. If they were serious they would have to agree to get the queers out and bring the happily married men in. There would still be some exploitation of underaged girls but a newly cleansed church could easily weed that out.

    But this vilification of Catholics is getting way out of hand.


  2. Check out this fellow. Moves well. Aim is good. He hits so hard that if he starts off hitting a fellow on the gloves you see the sense of shock come through the palookas face. Go in about 11.30. Here is one of the few fellas to give Monster a good rumble. Was making mince meat of prior fighters.

    Just imagine if it were before the age of ubiquitous video. And your some Italian tough guy. You’d get into the ring with this fellow thinking “Ho ho … Skinny Asian kid …. what harm could he do?….” A few seconds later it feels like you are being stoned by a team of ancient Hebrews.

    Speaking of Hebrews you wait until I get married again. I’ll turn into the biggest sissy in the world. Turn off my latest blog. Not say a bad word about anyone.


  3. The most convincing evidence against Rolf I’ve seen is heresay from Derryn Hinch. It does make Rolf sound guilty but we ought not take it too seriously. Firstly no intelligence agency worth their salt would fail to email Derryn to stitch Rolf up, because Derryn can reliably be expected to blurt this sort of thing out. He’s completely incontinent in this space and has been for decades. Its a real phenomenon.

    Derryn has broken the law and interfered in court cases so often its beginning to look deeply suspicious. He has only faced fairly mild and measured punishments for doing such things. He could well be a life-long agent. In fact we would have to expect such a thing since he has only been punished just enough to play the martyr. Very dodgy and suspicious character Hinch is.

    But this heresay from Derryn Hinch does raise questions in ones mind, perhaps moreso then these very dubious court cases would tend to.


  4. I guess what it is, is its very hard for people to change gears. Even though these charges are obvious bullshit, so many times kids haver reported an abusive homosexual priest to their parents, to another clergyman, to their teachers and so forth … and they have been ignored or humiliated. 99 times out of 100 they are proven to be right. How many times have the kids come up to Pell himself and Pell has had this reaction? Quite a few, or so it seems, even though a lot of this was 30+ years ago.

    It may be hard to change gears, but we have to change gears now, because the story in this one case is clearly utter bullshit. It doesn’t even have a chance to be right. So I expect everyone to forgive Pell for some level of obtuseness and putting the Church before the congregation 30+ years ago, realise that he has been punished quite severely …… and is being punished right now, even as we speak … and we must do what we can to stick up for him. This is no good. He’s probably the highest ranked non-corrupt member of the Church. Because his boss the Pope is about as suspicious a character as can be imagined. We have been pretty lucky with our Popes up until now. This fellow Francis is no good.


  5. Very interesting tip by Joe Lewis on counterpunching. Mostly just the first two minutes. Now it is the case that occasionally you see a highly skilled counter-puncher, in say Thai boxing, that acts like a quick-draw gunslinger. The boxer in these cases sees the beginnings of the other fellows punch and sends off a shot of his own, beating his opponent to the draw. But here Joe is trying to teach his students to counterpunch ON FEELING GLOVE PRESSURE. To me this is a more realistic and down to earth thing to aim at. When you first start trying to box, you are seldom going to be so focused, and nothing allowing you to distract your steely gaze from the other fellow. Its hard to be like Naoya Inoue or David Tua and have such good eyes. When you get in the ring with someone much more skilful than yourself in boxing its amazing how you don’t seem to be able to see all the much. Confusion reigns. Plus even a great boxer ….. a lot of it comes down to how well he reacts when he’s dazed and confused. So I particularly like what Lewis is teaching here. Counter-punching on glove pressure. That automatic reaction is going to get you out of so much trouble. Automatically counterpunch on glove pressure and automatically move laterally …. no matter what almost but certainly if you’ve been hit. Later I’ll post some of these gunslinger type fighters that see the punch coming right from the start and beat the other guy to the draw. That would be the ultimate fight skill I would suppose.


  6. Israeli agent. On the morning of 9/11 he was racing about everywhere and it was all “Bin Laden Bin Laden Bin Laden.” Putting about the Professor Moriarty version of terrorism. The people who set up the wars in the middle east established this alternate reality but they got to pose as anti-war types.

    Check this faked up debate he has with Wolfowitz, as brought to us by Wikipedia:

    “At the first Deputies Committee meeting on terrorism, held in April 2001, Clarke strongly suggested that the U.S. put pressure on both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda by arming the Northern Alliance and other groups in Afghanistan. Simultaneously, he said that the US should target bin Laden and his leadership by restoring flights of the MQ-1 Predators.

    Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz responded, “Well, I just don’t understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man bin Laden.” Clarke replied that he was talking about bin Laden and his network because it posed “an immediate and serious threat to the United States.”

    According to Clarke, Wolfowitz turned to him and said, “You give bin Laden too much credit. He could not do all these things like the 1993 attack on New York, not without a state sponsor. Just because FBI and CIA have failed to find the linkages does not mean they don’t exist.”[15]”

    So here is the dialectic. Clarke is one of the Jews out-front gentiles and here he is gunning for the Professor Moriarty version of terrorism even harder than the Jews are themselves. He’s taking the heat for this ludicrous version of reality. Then Wolfowitz is pretending to go against him with the common sense observation that this would all be impossible without state sponsorship. Clarke gets to be the hero who was “right all along” and he gets to play the pacifist at the same time. Yet he’s pushing a totally idiotic version of reality. Whereas Wolfowitz gets to be the more sane-headed less extremist fellow vis a vis the Professor Moriarty version of reality.

    So Richard Clarke is no hero. He’s a traitor. What was most sickening about back then is that there was a formula going on where traitors in both parties were heaping great praise upon Richard Clarke as if he were a uniquely brilliant uber-Bureaucrat. For fucksakes its only fucking government work. There are no great heroes in this pencil-pushing game. But there it was, people on all sides praising Clarke, and that was simply about putting this Bin Laden bullshit out there.


  7. From elsewhere. We get this artificial separation of homos and pedophiles in the church. Actually the great majority of abuse is against minors who have reached puberty or are on the verge of doing so. Showing us that its mostly a gay sex addiction problem:

    GMBCATASTROPHE1 second ago

    It is that simple Militum Xpisti …… because the heterosexual abuse is also from people who are denied normal adult relations, and they can hide behind the bigger scandal. We think of homos as sissy-boys, but sexually its very easy for them to become sex addicts since the bad boy behaviour never needs to end with them. Homosexuals can go cruising around mens toilets, beaches at night, any number of easy sex hangouts. They procure sex like a rock star does. Thats a real problem to show restraint after that sort of addiction. Not all rock stars are sex addicts mind you. We don’t want to tar every rock star with that brush. I heard Donny Osmond never became a sex addict for example. But this pretence that this is not fundamentally a celibacy and homosexual problem ….. You are not being serious about caring for the kids if you want to keep these myths going.

    This celibacy decision happened before the Western Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox churches went through their Schism. The Orthodox guys didn’t condemn their colleagues for going down that route, but they issued grave concerns, all of them subsequently shown to be well-justified. One objection to what I am saying here is something like “You are not a Catholic? Who are you to be telling the Catholics about theology” But its not a theological idea. When they came to this decision the Orthodox guys didn’t have to issue some concerns on the basis of theological disputes. As a non-Catholic I can say things have gone too far and the children are more important than the practice of reserving jobs for alleged celibates. Fake celibates as often as not.

    I heard about this incident where this rainbow crowd of homos wanted to go get communion. I don’t even know exactly what that means. But anyway Cardinal Pell turned them down. The queers reckoned that this was kind of bizarre since out of the six clerics hosting the show, five of them (the exception Pell himself) were known to be gay.

    Now whether I am reluctant or not about this I have to admit that these queers were quite right. They should have been welcomed to the congregation, even if that means being hectored about changing or moderating their ways. But there is five guys there that should not be denying promotion to 5 other men who can do the job and be less hypocritical about it. To maintain a job for one is to deny a job to the others.


  8. Big fan of this fellow Archpriest Father Josiah Trenham. What is notable with this fellow and the medieval scholars he quotes is their marvellous capacity for logical argument. Here is a good natured and well-meaning critique of the Catholic church, as viewed by well-wishers who follow the Eastern Orthodox Church. I come at this from a similar perspective. I think the world would be a much better place if we had a healthier and less infiltrated Catholic Church.


  9. One of the many agents the Jews had in Washington. The insanity of his advice was straight Israeli policy. The Jew lives only to get the gentiles killing each-other. While this seems to be a ludicrous claim …. Just watch them. And if you watch them long enough you will see this pattern of behaviour.


    1. Everyone knows what must be done really. They don’t own up with it. I’m 53 and I have to look for a new job. So I’ll be sympathetic to some fag who is publicly shamed. But what I won’t shed a tear for is, a man who should face unemployment like me, so that a more worthy married man (with more bottled passions) can get a fucking promotion for a change. What is wrong with that?

      I have specific job weaknesses but I’m in many ways a better policy theorist than many now in the public service. I am EXCLUDED from the public service. So why do we get a big fucking case of the boo-hoos if a communist cannot work in the Pentagon in the 1950’s, and a homosexual ought not work in the Catholic Church in the 2020’s? What the fuck is this all about? If I …. .. If I, me an myself …… must not be allowed a job and I could do a BETTER job, then why should we demure from moving people on? When they cannot rightly DO the job?

      Fucking Andrew Jackson would not put up with this nonsense.


  10. If my theory is correct, then its time to invoke the spirit of the saviour of Christianity, and forgive all those who were involved with this mess …. And wipe the Australian slate clean. But the homosexuals in the Church, for the sake of their eternal souls, must be moved sideways into jobs where they do not face anything like the equivalent temptation. From elsewhere:


    Patto when you go through the evidence you find he’s not guilty of the specific charges to hand. The media witch-hunt has therefore had to concentrate on tangential matters. Its all about him being in coverup mode 30+ years ago. Or the entrapment activity by the great Richard Carleton, putting Pell on the spot. Pell may be guilty of many things but the specific charges to hand are completely wrong and ludicrous.

    The way that an accuser could seem to be telling the truth, with a story as impossible as this is he could be transmuting a real crime, to another place and man. He could be doing so on the supposed moral justification that Pell is a coverup artist. So his anger might propel him through the stress that is inherent in getting involved with the legal system. Whatever is the reason behind this foolishness, its not up to us to be putting up with a witch-hunt based around tangential matters. Pell ought to be released on appeal since the specific charges are completely idiotic.

    But What Would I know3 hours ago


    Normally you could never forgive an accuser for making such an heinous false accusation. But if its not an intelligence operation of some sort. And supposing my transmutation theory turned out to be true. Then in this one case there ought to be enough forgiveness to go around. The hurt and the humiliation would be so much, that the accuser could not be expected to be competent to have steered himself away from the catastrophe he was building.


  11. If Jason Wilson wants to know anything about MMT get him to ask me. They have two good economists in their camp. Keen and Hudson. The rest of them are monetary cranks and bait and switch merchants. Send Jason over here under a fake name to protect his career. And he can ask me anything he wants. I’ll be able to help him understand these charlatans forward and backwards.


    1. Its terrible when you see making mistakes like this. We used to have castles and drawbridges and you were a traitor to open the draw-bridge this way. If they want to have more Chinese ethnic people they have plenty of other countries that they could draw them from without getting them from one of the countries that pushes them around. But in any case the Philippines is genuinely over-crowded.

      Australia is not over crowded. Our policy and our banking is just so frightful that Malthusian realities apply. More people mean less wealth per head at the moment. We could change that with banking and policy reform. But ahead of such changes we should be stingy with immigration. But the Philippines really are overcrowded. They doubled their population in the 80’s and now many if not most families there have a strategy of exporting their lovely little daughters. They don’t really need these extra people and they don’t need them from any country that can push them around too much.


  12. More context that justice has not been served. Its way too extreme, the illogicality of the verdict. Its so extreme one assumes a psy-op of some sort. So hard to understand how the police, the jury and everyone else could have screwed up so badly.


  13. Agent Reason getting awarded for his work on false flag operations.

    Chris actually gives us a lot of detail confirming that it was a false flag attack. They evacuated the Seven news building in order to control the view of the pantomime. Chris tells the story, making a series of excuses why his man had monopoly camera access. Chris came back from six months leave the day before. Obviously preparing for this mock-up.

    Does anyone remember how they made a teenage Jew kid with an hyphenated name the hero of this fable? It WAS all a big joke Chris. You let the cat out of the bag a bit with that comment didn’t you? This idiocy is put out there so that our guys could go and bomb civilian targets in Syria. Targets chosen for them by Israel. Thats hardly something to joke about.


  14. Comic genius … the wet male … directed me to the recording below. This is just a masterpiece. This is a parody of Alex Jones. The only thing I’ve seen that comes close is the wet males parody OF ME!!!! Extremely funny in its own right, not as hilarious as this thrash of Alex ……. But what must be understood is that the wet male was ad libbing. He didn’t control the story. He was bouncing off the radio people and he STILL managed to come up with a work of genius that almost came close to the scripted performance below ……..


  15. Wet male. I know you reposted that masterpiece for me before. But the problem is inbred troglodytes tossed me off Twitter. After I told David Rockefeller to die and he was stone cold within 48 hours. I was developing a new standard methodology against the oligarchy and this was never going to hold up. So they threw me off but I lost that tape of your radio call-in. I would have killed Henry Kissinger and ended the foreign attack on Syria had they let me continue. So I need you to try and dig it up again.


  16. Intelligent … Funny. Never miss a chance to get a boxing lesson from Lamon Brewster. My favourite fight is the Ali-Foreman fight. Second after that is Hagler Hearns. I saw BOTH LIVE. Or with a few seconds delay.

    After these two its up for grabs, but the Brewster Klitschko fight is in the top ten. Incredibly exciting. Like a better and more proficient version of the Balboa/Drago rumble.

    Brewster was evading maybe four out of five of the Russians brutal punches. Which means he was absorbing one in five. So Brewster was fundamentally getting beaten up pretty badly. Every so often he would knock Wladimir around. But for the most part Brewster is getting beat up. But when Brewster gets his chance, he doesn’t merely WIN. He beat up the Russian. Not in some sort of nice and polite way. Brewster really beat up Klitschko. Hurt him.

    Never miss a lesson from Brewster:


  17. The second time Brewster fought the Russian wasn’t so exciting. Basically the Russian had his act together so well that Brewster couldn’t really penetrate his defence. In the end Brewsters team decided to throw the towel in. Because Brewster was getting too hurt and he couldn’t seem to do anything useful. It may be that Lamon could not see out of his left eye someways into the fight.


  18. This one not even a close call. One thing to wonder about is how the oligarchy manages to get people like John Howard to go along with these atrocities. One can only speculate but the oligarchy do seem to be pretty amazing talent scouts. I think they get these guys like Howard blackmailed and mentally in their grasp many years and decades ahead of time. The rest of us cannot imagine how this can be done. But compromising people must be what these slimy slimy types are good at.


  19. ABC’s mediawatch was not roped into the false flag. But clearly Rupert Murdoch WAS part of the false flag. Which is a fine reason to confiscate his local papers. Sell them to people who can run the paper debt-free.

    Stuart Littlemore. So sharp and on top of the whole thing. Of course he could never have suspected it was a false flag. But he completely slammed the Murdoch media for their wrong-doing here.


  20. Renewed respect for Malcolm Fraser. He’s been warning us a great deal about Israel and the US having outsized influence here. But he was unable to give us specifics to do with Israel exercising its power over us. So what is implied is that he might be informed on many of these false flags and yet not be capable of saying too much about them.


  21. “On 20 March 2015, Malcolm Fraser’s office announced that he had died in the early hours of the morning, noting that he had suffered a brief illness.[53][54] He was 84. An obituary noted that there had been “greater appreciation of the constructive and positive nature of his post-prime ministerial contribution” as his retirement years progressed.[29]”

    Not too long after that last interview. He’s looking pretty robust in that last interview. You’d have to wonder if the bigshots don’t kill off our elder statesmen who look like the scales are about to fall off their eyes. Here is another interview which would give the oligarchy reasons to make Malcolms mouth mute. Malcolm sent a copy of his book to Henry Kissinger. Ouch. Not the best thing to be doing.

    We need a sovereignty party. And we may even need a sovereign. We need to focus on every last aspect of sovereignty and on the need to increase it in 360 degrees fashion. You cannot go at this one issue at a time or you are bogged down in argumentation. You cannot go to Israel, the Americans, the banking system, international Jewry, the Chinese and so forth. You’ve just got to have every aspect of local sovereignty analysed and improved. Maybe we need a royal family of our own who is specifically tasked to take care of these matters. Its worth thinking about it anyway.


  22. I find Greg Sheridan to be very likeable. Of course he could not be more mainstream and I don’t think he goes against Ruperts direct wishes. He was very dubious about the false flag when they pretended to take out the long dead Osama Bin Laden. Of course he stated otherwise. But he actually came out with better arguments that it was all bullshit than any of the outright conspiracy theorists did. Plus I tend to like people who have a soft spot for GK Chesterton.


  23. This absolute honey has to be amongst the best Middle East analysts out there. Endorsed by the brilliant Nassim Taleb. And those lips are real too. I’ve seen her photo when she was little and she had those wonderful lips back then. She talks about being Syrian and all that. Naturally I claim her as being one of us.


  24. Just noticed something over the last few weeks. Jews telling the truth. Its come as a big surprise to me. Amazing. Its like one wing of Jews is trying to get us out of the trouble that the other Jews have been getting us into. Is this co-ordinated truth-telling? Maybe the word has gone out to pull back and repair the damage from over-playing their hand?

    Anyway don’t want to be mean-spirited about it. Bravo Professor Sachs. Thankyou.


  25. Bit of a festering sore this Martin Bryant story. Here we finally see Martin himself. And total proof of his innocence and on top of that proof that his lawyer is guilty. Certainly guilty enough for a death penalty if such a penalty were available. Martin is said to have an IQ of 66. He’s recovering or just recovered from 3rd degree burns. And we are expected to believe HE’S A GREAT ACTOR? He looks like an 11 year old boy being accused of something ridiculous. Thats because he has the approximate mental functioning of an 11 year old and he’s been accused of something ridiculous. Thats what it looks like because that is what it is.

    Convincing acting is difficult. Actors have higher average IQ’s than doctors. Not those crisis actors like in Sandy Hook. But actors good enough to be called “working actors.” So we are supposed to believe that when this deeply guilty lawyer is trying to get a false confession out of Martin that Martin is acting. This is not credible, we have further video evidence here that it was another false flag.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s