Saturday, December 18, 2010

Conrad Black and Benedict XVI are of the same feather. Conrad Black speaks for and glorifies up Benedict XVI’s papacy

Conrad Black is of the same category as Maddox and hopefully he will return to jail to rot and pay for his crimes instead of living in his mansions while his victims who have lost millions through his fraud are suffering. Now he glorifies Benedict XVI in his recent article “Conrad Black: Catholics persevere, despite the perverts and the press”. (Below is the full article) Black’s article is full of lies and errors and we point all them out (eventually as it is time consuming) but we highlight them now -in bold. One of the comments says it all:
Black is a lying liar who has out done himself with this apologetic for pedophiles. Take, for example, this whopper: "Benedict ... has been decisive and effective and unsung in combating child abuse in the Church for 30 years and had largely eliminated it before it was fanned into a conflagration this year." Abundant evidence of Ratzinger covering-up abuse contradicts that lie, but what does Black, who prefers to destroy evidence, care about facts? And just like all good Catholic apologists he blames the messengers for the crimes they expose.

Conrad Black gave up his Canadian citizenship so that he can become a “Sir Black” in England. Black is no longer a Canadian citizen and therefore he has no business speaking in Canadian soil and writing for a Canadian newspaper. When he was convicted of his crimes of fraud in Chicago and sentenced to jail, he wanted to go back to Canada to seek asylum at his mansion in Toronto saying that his wife needed the weather for her health (full of lies). Anyway, there is no need to rehash the history of fraud of Conrad Black. Below are articles about who Conrad Black is. Google can show all the crimes he has committed and how his lawyers got him out of jail on "legal technicalities" -- just like Cardinals and Bishops keep pedophile priests out of courts and jail because of "legal technicalities". The Canada National Post - which is owned by the Opus Dei is giving him a platform – to deceive Canadians and Catholics.

Conrad Black should read our weblogs to be educated of the crimes of Benedict XVI; but then he has sold his soul to the Devil and all those millions he has defrauded other people are the same crime as the Vatican trillion dollar Bank that is a a safe-haven for the ill-gotten wealth of corrupt dictators.

Compare the CRIMES and their VICTIMS in America

Victims - Attackers - Responsible Leaders

Pearl Harbor - 3,000 victims - 170 planes - Admiral Yamamoto

WTC & 9/11 attacks - 5,000 victims - 19 Muslims - Osama bin Laden

USA Priest Pedophilia - 12,000 victims - 6,000 priests - John Paul II & Benedict XVI & Opus Dei, the new Vatican Trinity

Conrad Black should read our weblogs to be educated of the crimes of Benedict XVI; but then he has sold his soul to the Devil and all those millions he has defrauded other people are the same crime as the Vatican trillion dollar Bank that is a a safe-haven for the ill-gotten wealth of corrupt dictators.

The John Paul II Millstone

John Paul II Pedophile Priests Army h ttp://


Conrad Black: Catholics persevere, despite the perverts and the press

December 18, 2010

As the year comes to an end, it is hard now to remember the hysteria generated by the tawdry and often appalling scandal of clerical abuse of young men in the Roman Catholic Church, between February and July. The New York Times appeared to be offering free visits to New York with city tours of all boroughs, capped by five-course dinners in five-star restaurants for anyone who could recall an indiscreet clerical hand on the knee from decades before.

I repeat that it is a grievous problem, and there were many disgusting and shameful incidents. But this does not alter or diminish the fidelity, dedication and self-discipline of the 99% of Roman Catholic religious personnel who have served through living memory, throughout the world, with unblemished devotion; nor blight the education and care they gave to an approximately equal percentage of the scores of millions of children confided to them.

All bad news for the Roman Catholic Church brings that Church’s enemies swarming out like hornets whose nest has just been squirted with a garden hose. These include the litigators, the editorial mudslingers, the deep, thick, serried ranks of militant skepticism, to whom Rome is a Satanic bumble bee that infests the brave, aging secular world of utilitarian progress and the methodical human march toward a plenitude of knowledge. Earlier this year, they thought they saw the end, at last, of Rome’s ghastly, tenebrous, saturnine magisterium that defies all laws of nature and reason by not simply crashing to the ground as the endlessly proclaimed laws of rational aerodynamics require. They were, as always, mistaken.

The long-promised ecclesiastical fall of Rome was to be celebrated, like a spectacular crash at the great Farnborough Air Show, by the fiasco of Pope Benedict’s madly insouciant visit to Godless Britain to beatify the already Venerable Doctor John Henry Cardinal Newman in September. The allegedly dogmatic Pope supposedly combined all the dislikes of the British caricaturist, commentator and pub bore: Germanic, authoritarian, sophistical, pompous, superstitious and curial. In the first half of 2010, the Pope was reviled as complicit in the crimes of hiding the molestations, and even as an ex-Nazi and a ruthless dogmatist.

And yet in Britain, Benedict was seen as intellectually courageous, the quietly spoken wise man.

He was apologetic for the Church’s failings, solicitous of its victims, indomitable in the championship of Christian faith and reverently admiring of Newman, a quintessential Englishman and one of the intellectual giants and greatest English prose stylists of the 19th century. The Pope did not put a Prada-clad foot wrong. Leftist pundits who had predicted huge outpourings of hostility were completely silenced, as the Pope came and went in an ambiance of reciprocated good will in which all, including Queen Elizabeth, the Prime Minister and the Archbishop of Canterbury joined.

Benedict was finally recognized as a Nazi resister whose cousin was liquidated because of a mental defect, and who deserted the German Army; and as a great scholar devoted to the reconciliation of faith and reason, who has been decisive and effective and unsung in combating child abuse in the Church for 30 years and had largely eliminated it before it was fanned into a conflagration this year. (It was like Edward VII’s visit to Paris in 1903, when he arrived to shouts of “perfidious Albion” and left a week later to choruses of “Long live the King!”) Benedict appealed to the strong British appreciation of the underdog, the undemonstrative man of principle.

By July, much attention had already turned to the more imminent catastrophe presented by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and breathless predictions of Rome’s collapse gave way to secular requiems for the world’s shrimp-fishing industry and any recreational future for the Gulf and Atlantic coasts of the United States. Of course, this too was a serious problem, but it too was addressed and has subsided. We have not been well-served in the last year by the media’s frequent addiction to the apocalyptic. Such alarm is rarely justified, and it passed quickly in this case too.

As the year ends, Pope Benedict’s qualities are again demonstrated by the pope’s refusal to tolerate the ordination of bishops by China’s puppet Catholic Patriotic Association, the People’s Republic’s enactment of Napoleon’s famous dictum that “The people must have their religion and the state must control it.” China antedates the Roman Catholic Church, but Communist China does not, and this usurpation, like all its precedents in Church history, will be a complete failure.

The Church’s enemies forgot that it does not have adherents because of its personnel, but as an ark of faith. The atheists, though often articulate and courageous and knowledgeable, and heavy-laden with the ammunition provided by the fatuity and hypocrisy of much Christian history, can never deal with the insuperable evidence of spiritual forces, miracles and any ecclesiastical concept of grace. Nor can they surmount the challenge of man’s inability to grasp the infinite, the absence of an end and beginning of space or time. In these vast areas, notions of the supernatural and the deity will always circulate, no matter how great dissent may be.

No one, and certainly not a rag-tag of sacerdotal perverts, will displace Rome from its 2,000 year primacy in this sphere. In both sacred and profane matters, the world and its institutions are racked by the consequences of human failings, but they have what life and its primary modes of organization must have to go on. This is the trite but salutary lesson of 2010, and isn’t a bad Christmas message.

National Post

This article is adapted from a longer essay that appears on National Review Online.


The Jury did not buy your lies and distortions and no one is buying it here either. Do you seriously think for a minute that head of any organization, religious or secular, would have survived when that person is directly as well indirectly responsible for the cover up of sexual abuse of children and nuns such dimensions as we have witnessed? Oh yes nuns as well that the news media fails to make much not of. The current and the previous Pope were informed several times by the victims that as much as 40% of Nuns are raped and or sexually abused by Priests and Bishops. Neither of the two Popes have done anything because the press has been silent. What did the Pope do with the Bishops who covered up the sexual abuse – he promoted them, after all they were following his orders to put the interest of the church over that of children. You and others like Fr. Tim, Charles, are a disgrace for making excuses for the pope and likes of Bishop Lahey who was caught with kiddy porn. Pope thinks and says this is all petty gossip and you seem to endorse that sentiment … let me tell Black these are crimes against humanity and for people like you there is special place in hell and I do not doubt you will get there and will have the opportunity to sit in the lap of the Pope. Nothing in the Prison has prepared you for what is coming son.


Black is a lying liar who has out done himself with this apologetic for pedophiles. Take, for example, this whopper: "Benedict ... has been decisive and effective and unsung in combating child abuse in the Church for 30 years and had largely eliminated it before it was fanned into a conflagration this year." Abundant evidence of Ratzinger covering-up abuse contradicts that lie, but what does Black, who prefers to destroy evidence, care about facts? And just like all good Catholic apologists he blames the messengers for the crimes they expose.


When Jesus saw the Sweet Business deal between the Priests, Bankers and Merchants in The Temple at Jerusalem, he freaked out and for the 1st time in his Ministry, became a violent terrorist in overturning the Banker's money, both the secular currencies from the various parts of the world, and the Temple currency with which to buy the "Kosher" Merchant's merchandise at twice the price it was available off Temple property.

And said to them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but you have made it a den of thieves.
And he taught daily in the temple. But the chief priests and the scribes and the chief of the people sought to destroy him,
And could not find what they might do: for all the people were very attentive to hear him.
Luke 19

Jesus was condemned as a criminal in a middle of the night trial while the City slept, and was executed according to the Law for that action.

In the 2000 years since then, the Bankers and Merchants, with the misguided or asleep religious leadership, up until the financial meltdown/economic Pearl Harbour-tsunami in the Fall of 2008, regained control of the Temple in getting an irreligious Society psyched up year after year to buy each other presents for His Birthday but leaving him out of it. Talk about miracles.

Its nice that you are so capable of loving the church in spite of the rapists and the church officials who work so tirelessly to keep it under wraps.


Conrad Black wants to return to Canada

Hollinger Inc., the Toronto-based newspaper company he once controlled, is still after him and others for more than $700-million. Hollinger filed for creditor protection three years ago and most of its assets have been sold off. It is suing Lord Black and others, alleging they stripped the company of its newspapers in the 1990s and moved them to a subsidiary in Chicago called Hollinger International Inc., which Lord Black also once controlled.

“The litigation process has been progressing, and will continue to progress,” said William Aziz, chief restructuring officer for Hollinger Inc. He added the company has a “litigation trustee” who is “trying to recover from Black et al in respect of the damages they have caused to Hollinger Inc. and its stakeholders.”

Lord Black has vigorously denied the allegations and filed counterclaims.

Then there is the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which sued Lord Black in 2004, three years before his criminal trial. The SEC alleges Lord Black and other former company executives filed “materially false and misleading” public documents because they did not disclose millions of dollars of private payments to executives by Hollinger International, some of them without approval from the company's board of directors.

Finally, Lord Black is now up against the U.S. Internal Revenue Service. In January, the IRS sent a stack of “Notice of Deficiency” statements to Lord Black in his Florida prison cell. Each notice provided a long list of alleged unpaid taxes, signed with a cheery, “Thank you for your co-operation.”

In total, the IRS is demanding about $70-million in taxes and penalties on $116-million in income Lord Black earned between 1998 and 2003 from Hollinger International. Much of the money relates to taxable benefits, such as use of a New York apartment and company jet, that Lord Black allegedly failed to report. Two other former Hollinger executives – David Radler and Peter Atkinson – received similar notices.

Lord Black and the others are fighting the notices in court, claiming they were not citizens or residents of the United States and did not have to pay tax in that country.

U.S. appeals court denies Conrad Black full hearing

December 17, 2010

Conrad Black leaves the Dirksen Federal Building following a hearing detailing the terms of his bail July 23, 2010 in Chicago, Illinois.
Photograph by: Scott Olson/Getty Images, Scott Olson/Getty Images

A U.S. federal appeals court has denied Conrad Black's appeal of his convictions for fraud and obstruction of justice, raising the possibility the former media baron will return to prison.

His lawyer, however, vowed to take the battle to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a Chicago courtroom Friday, the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit struck down Lord Black's request for a rehearing of his case.

In October, that same panel unanimously threw out two of Lord Black's fraud convictions, but held fast to one count of fraud and one count of obstruction of justice.

Black's lawyer, Miguel Estrada, filed a petition with the Seventh Circuit in mid-November, asking that all 16 appeal court judges review the convictions because the judges did not properly apply a law that contributed to his conviction.

On Friday, the court was brief in its denial, only saying that the request to have the case heard again "en banc," or by the whole court, would not be granted.
A Chicago jury convicted Lord Black, the 66-year-old former Hollinger International chief executive, of fraud and obstruction in 2007.

He served 28 months of a 78-month prison sentence at the Coleman Federal Correctional Facility in Florida before his release on a $2-million bail in July pending the outcome on the appeal of his fraud counts.

The top court sent the case back to the U.S. appeals court, setting up Friday's ruling. Black is to be re-sentenced on the remaining convictions in January.

The denial of appeal came on the heels of a Supreme Court of Canada hearing on Thursday, during which a group of former Hollinger International executives asked to block half a dozen libel lawsuits filed by Black from being heard in Ontario. The suits are based on a 2004 report by Richard Breeden, a former chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and a number of other Hollinger International directors who accused him of running a "corporate kleptocracy."

The coincidental timing made him the first person to have cases heard in the high courts of both Canada and the U.S. within one year.

Breeden and a handful of former Hollinger International directors will ask Canada's Supreme Court on March 22 to transfer the defamation suits — filed against them by Black in 2005 — to the United States.

Courts are now debating whether a lawsuit should be pursued where the wrongdoing is alleged to have taken place or where the plaintiff lives.

Conrad Black and his wife, Barbara AmielIf who squanders millions of dollars Black has defrauded from others.

Conrad's Heart of Darkness
The decline and fall of Conrad Black.

By Christopher Hitchens

Posted Monday, July 16, 2007, at 12:32 PM ET

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning."

Conrad Black and his wife, Barbara AmielIf should be gloating at the collapse and disgrace of Lord Black of Crossharbour, the absurd title with which Conrad Black invested himself on being raised to the British peerage, that someone should be me. In the mid-1980s he boasted to a reporter that he was going to buy the London Spectator in order to fire me as its Washington correspondent. When I heard the news, I thought: Here we go again, another newspaper tycoon gone clean off his trolley with megalomania. Next thing we know, he'll have to build himself a revolving room, like Lord Northcliffe of the Daily Mail, or announce that he's a poached egg and demand a large piece of toast to lie down on, or build an opera house in which his untalented girlfriend can sing.

In fact, shortly afterward, he did buy the Spectator, and I had to find another market for my anti-Reagan feuilletons. But Black persisted in hampering my scrabble for work. When I was hired as Washington editor for a now-defunct London Sunday paper, he rang up the management to warn them that I was a dangerous and wicked person and to advise them strongly to get rid of me. I did think of suing for defamation at this stage, but I decided that the whole thing was too interesting. The feud began to be a "thing" in the gossip columns. I privately put Conrad Black (as he still then was) on my evil-eye list. This Don't F*** With Hitch curse actually works—look at what happened to Saddam Hussein—but Black declined to mend his ways (to the contrary, he even put Henry Kissinger on his well-remunerated board of advisers), and now look what's happened. I remember running into a very conservative gentleman in the corridors of the American Enterprise Institute a year or so ago who had taken a look at the evidence and said, "Conrad's gone too far. This time he's going to jail."

Revenge is sour, of course. Black beat some of the rap, especially the most serious charge, and has essentially been convicted of fraud and obstruction of justice. There was, no doubt, an element of class war in the minds of the Chicago jurors as they heard about the astonishing "Barbarians at the Gate" expenditures on parties, jets, and all the rest of it. And it seems that I was right all along—at least about the part where Citizen Kane built an opera house for his girlfriend.

Lady Black, the former glamour-puss Barbara Amiel, turns out to be one of these women who are insatiable. Insatiable in the Imelda Marcos way, I mean. Never mind the mammoth tab for her birthday dinner in New York, where it's at least arguable that business was discussed. Never mind the extra wings that had to be built onto her homes just to accommodate the ball gowns and shoes. What about the time she was on a Concorde that stubbornly remained on the tarmac at London airport? Irked at the delay, she telephoned the chairman of British Airways, Lord King, to demand action and—failing to get crisp service from him—announced that she would never fly the airline again. This, in turn, meant the acquisition by Hollinger Securities of a private jet for her. And this, in turn, meant the installation of an extra lavatory on the aforesaid private jet, at a cost of $250,000, so that Lady Black wouldn't have to be inconvenienced by the crew members coming down the fuselage to use the existing one.

It's that last touch that promotes her into the ranks once described by the novelist Joyce Cary: the people who utter what he called "tumbrel remarks." A tumbrel remark, as you may have guessed, is the sort of observation made by the uncontrollably rich that is likely to unleash class warfare. Marie Antoinette's advice on cake is the original. Barbara Bush, on the upgraded accommodations for Katrina refugees in the Houston Astrodome, is a good recent example. Lady Diana Cooper, when approached by a ragged man who said he hadn't eaten for three days, upbraided him roundly and said: "But my dear man, you must try. If necessary, you must force yourself." You get the picture? "You are good enough to fly me, but not good enough to use my loo" is well up in this class. On another celebrated occasion, wishing to consult one of two women who worked for her husband and had similar names, she had one of them summoned to her home and, on discovering that she'd made a mistake, trilled peevishly: "No, you're the wrong one. I want the other one." I want, I want … By the way, this is almost exactly what happens when Lord Copper, tyrannical proprietor of the Daily Beast in Evelyn Waugh's Fleet Street masterpiece Scoop, disastrously hires William Boot instead of John Boot.

By all accounts, the great real-life tycoon was the merest putty in this dragon lady's hands; a factor that—for me, at any rate—paradoxically weighs in his favor. He would have been happy enough writing his history books (the one on FDR is by all reports pretty good) and convincing himself that he was advising and influencing those in power. But always the incessant demands, always the cry for newer and better baubles. Who cares about the shareholders when there is a lovely woman's whim to be gratified? Bourgeois values be damned! Alas, there are classy ways of doing this kind of thing and tacky ways, and Lord and Lady Black ended up looking vulgar. Like Tom and Daisy in Gatsby, they were "careless people" who regarded others according to whether they could be useful or not, and now it's closing time in a playground that may not have been all that much fun even while it lasted.

Postscript: I am writing this from the San Francisco Bay Area, where all summer a local politician named Ed Jew has been in trouble over his filing of an allegedly bogus claim of residency. The headlines on the case invariably give his full name (he is of Asian descent), as in last Saturday's "City Attorney Toughens Case Against Ed Jew." But the headlines about Conrad Black have very often said "Black Convicted." Is this discrimination on a subtle level? Or should Mr. Jew be glad that he has such a short first name?


Post a Comment

<< Home

Hit Counter
Hit Counter
free counters
Free counters
web hosting