CrossPost at “Ann Barnhardt Heckles Bishop”

I have been asked to contribute to a new, temporary website that will be covering the Synod to Destroy the Family in Rome.  My first piece is posted there now.  It is titled “Ann Barnhardt Heckles Bishop”.

A teaser excerpt:

Still glaring at me, the bishop then launched into the first of his two defenses of the September 8th catastrophic Motu Proprio. First, he complained about the “stack of paperwork” backlogged on his desk from all of the annulment requests he had to deal with.

I interrupted him with, “Yeah, that’s just awful – almost as bad as being nailed to a cross….”

Thus ended the episcopal bitch-fest about the unbearable existential burden of backlogged paperwork.

It gets even better from there.

It’s Official: A Dead Canadian Protestant Country Singer Is More Catholic Than the Pope

Hank Snow!

My religion’s not old-fashioned
But it’s real genuine
Two and two make four today
As it did in my Lord’s time
Modern days don’t make a difference
You can’t alter truth in time
My religion’s not old-fashioned,
But it’s real genuine

There is but one real religion
That redeems the sinners’ soul
It’s as timeless as the ages
And it never will grow old

My Lord gave the key to Thomas*
I’m the Way, the Truth, the Life
And the Way has never changed
Since He spoke the word that night.

My religion’s not old-fashioned
But it’s real genuine
Two and two make four today
As it did in my Lord’s time
Modern days don’t make a difference
You can’t alter truth in time
My religion’s not old-fashioned,
But it’s real genuine

Some are prone to take the Bible
And dilute the words of Christ
They admit He came here one time
But will never make it twice

Be not temped by those scoffers
He said such men would arise
There is darkness in their teaching
But there’s light through Jesus Christ

(*The reference in the lyric to Thomas and the key is not the Petrine Keys, but rather the words of Our Lord to St. Thomas in John 14:6.  Thanks to those who sent in lyric corrections!)

After Pausing and Taking Several Deep Cleansing Breaths, My Nutty Remains Spittle-Flicked

I have been told repeatedly that my particular vocation seems to be opening up discussion about deeply unpleasant things and being the first to broach topics.  Once someone has said something publicly, it is easier for other people to begin to discuss it too, apparently.  In this I am happy to help.  I hope this somewhat meandering piece helps.

I have received many emails from thoughtful people citing Canon Law which, if I am reading it correctly, indicates that despite the extensive, forceful body of law addressing the corruption of a Papal Election, no matter what is done or how the law is broken, the law is not enforceable. Ironically, the reasoning given is that it is only in this way that integrity of succession can be guaranteed.

Now, many people at this point will say that since I have been screaming like a banshee since the Obama usurpation in ARSH 2008 about the Rule of Law and electoral integrity, that this is going to be a mere case of “Ann has her little hammer, so everything to her looks like a nail.”  If you say so.  But I continue to be amazed at the parallel tracks that we have seen with regards to the Obama regime and the Bergoglio regime.  The sheer number of datapoints that map across almost perfectly are impossible to ignore.  And now we have election fraud and possible coercion.

So, my questions are these:

If there is extensive law written that covers election fraud, but it is impossible to enforce, or if a sufficient number of people agree that So-and-So is the President or Pope despite the law, how does that not utterly, completely destroy the entire notion of the Rule of Law itself?  As I have said for years with regards to Obama, if you can’t enforce Article II Section 1 Clause 5 of the Constitution, what can you enforce? Can you enforce the border? Can you enforce citizenship? Equal protection? Search and seizure? Right to bear arms? Can you enforce the law against treason? Theft? Murder? Trafficking in body parts? Religious persecution?

If you can’t enforce the clear law protecting the Church against a cabal of Marxist-Sodomite infiltrators determined to destroy the Church from the inside by fixing a papal election years in advance, and who are now openly, publicly admitting it, to say nothing of the evidence that is now re-emerging that the previous Pope may have been coerced into resigning by using the SWIFT system to totally shut down the Vatican’s ability to use money – evidence which I admit I initially wrongly disregarded as being too tangential – if these laws do not apply to this situation, what possible situation could they apply to?

I really want to drill this point home.  If having the Church and the See of Peter usurped by the Enemies of Christ is NOT sufficient to warrant corrective action and enforcement of Canon Law with regards to not only papal election integrity, but also with regards to heresy, then logically, there is absolutely no circumstance that would warrant any sort of resistance to the schemes of Satan and his minions on earth with regards to the Papacy.  None.

The same with the U.S.  If having your government usurped and overthrown by an Indonesian National with a Kenyan musloid Marxist biological father and an Indonesian musloid Marxist adoptive father who, along with his Communist handlers, has openly declared his intention to destroy the country from the inside-out for decades, if the eligibility laws do not apply to this situation, then what possible, possible situation could they apply to?

The answer is: none.  As I have said from the beginning of this long, strange trip, once you nullify the Rule of Law itself, you’re done.  We see this in the U.S. wherein oligarchs and their favored associates commit capital crimes, crimes warranting execution, on a daily basis, and NOTHING is done to stop them, much less punish them.

We are now seeing this in the Church.  The September 8th Motu Proprio has, by utterly abrogating the Rule of Law with regards to the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony by inverting the presumption to be that every marriage is, in fact, invalid and thus null, law which is the Word of Jesus Christ Himself, “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder“, opened the door to an interstitial anarchy, which will then be seized by the Marxist-Sodomites to impose, by pure thuggery, the ratification of adultery and sodomy.  Because remember, as we have discussed previously, anarchy is ALWAYS temporary.  The biggest psycho thug mafia uses the engineered anarchy to become the new totalitarian regime.  This is why the Peronist-Fascist Bergoglio immediately made his battle cry, “Hagan lio!” Make a mess!  Raise hell!  They NEED that period of anarchy in order to take total power.

So, I have received quite a lot of feedback that it is wrong of me to even bring up the question or possibility that Bergoglio is an Antipope or that the See of Peter is vacant, or that Ratzinger may still be the true pope.  And by the way, I have no idea what the answer is. But I do know that the question is a legitimate one. By the way, most of these emails are extremely charitable and are saturated with genuine concern for me personally.  I hear you, and I am grateful.  Having said that, let me work through the logic of where I am coming from.

Question: Has there ever been an Antipope in the history of the Church?
Answer: Yes.

Question: Did the Church survive these Anti-papacies?
Answer: Obviously, yes.

Question: If there have been Antipopes previously, why is it impossible that there could be an Antipope today?
Answer: It is not impossible.

Question: Did any of the previous Antipopes do anything even remotely close to the damage that Bergoglio is doing?
Answer: No.

Question: Does the ascendancy of an Antipope constitute the “gates of hell prevailing” against the Church?
Answer: Obviously not. The Church has survived previous Antipopes. Therefore, it is not contrary to the words of Our Lord to concede that an Antipapcy is extant or even merely possible.

Question: Has there ever been a situation in the Church where more than one man could be argued to be the Pope?
Answer: Yes.  (See same set of corollary Q’s and A’s above….)

Question:  Has there ever been a period of “unnatural” sedevacantism in the Church, meaning something other than the interstitial period between the death of one pope and the timely election of the next?
Answer:  Yes.  (See same set of corollary Q’s and A’s above….)

Question:  Has anything even remotely close to the damage being done by the Bergoglio cabal been seen in the history of the Church, namely the de facto abrogation of a sacrament (matrimony)?
Answer:  No. This is unprecedented in its enormity and gravity.

Given this, I believe that it is not just appropriate, but MORALLY INCUMBENT upon us to ASK QUESTIONS about what exactly is going on with the papacy.  The Church is clearly under the greatest attack it has ever weathered.  The war was declared 50 years ago.  The bad guys have been wildly successful, and this is now the final push for their near-total victory.  Remember, the Church Militant could be reduced to, as one person put it to me, “one old woman hiding in a cave praying the rosary on her fingers”. To think that it is inappropriate or even sinful for the Good Guys to take any steps to not just resist, but even to try to determine the tactical situation – to ask, “who, exactly is in command, and what side is he on?” is simply wrong.

At this point, at long last, after all of this, we owe it to Our Blessed Lord and Savior and to all of the souls that He died for (first and foremost ourselves) who are being put in massively amplified danger of eternal damnation by Bergoglio and his cabal to ask the question, “Who is Bergoglio?” and “Is Bergoglio the Pope?”

Breaking Blockbuster: Prima Facie Evidence that Francis is, in fact, Antipope

I just had a conversation with someone a few hours ago about how incredibly dark these days are, and how A.) we should implore our Blessed Lord to arise from His slumber on the fantail of the boat and save us from these heretical/apostate jackals and B.) how Our Lord will surely give His Remnant Church a “trail of breadcrumbs” so that we can know where we need to be and where His Church is so that we can stay close to Him.

And… it’s happening.

Here’s the deal.  In order for a pope to be validly elected, there can be NO vote canvassing or .  It is an automatic excommunicable offense. This law was reinforced MIGHTILY in ARSH 1996 by none other than Pope St. John Paul II.  Here is the text from Universi Dominici Gregis:

The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons. If this were in fact done, even under oath, I decree that such a commitment shall be null and void and that no one shall be bound to observe it; and I hereby impose the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae upon those who violate this prohibition. It is not my intention however to forbid, during the period in which the See is vacant, the exchange of views concerning the election.
I likewise forbid the Cardinals before the election to enter into any stipulations, committing themselves of common accord to a certain course of action should one of them be elevated to the Pontificate. These promises too, should any in fact be made, even under oath, I also declare null and void.
With the same insistence shown by my Predecessors, I earnestly exhort the Cardinal electors not to allow themselves to be guided, in choosing the Pope, by friendship or aversion, or to be influenced by favour or personal relationships towards anyone, or to be constrained by the interference of persons in authority or by pressure groups, by the suggestions of the mass media, or by force, fear or the pursuit of popularity. Rather, having before their eyes solely the glory of God and the good of the Church, and having prayed for divine assistance, they shall give their vote to the person, even outside the College of Cardinals, who in their judgment is most suited to govern the universal Church in a fruitful and beneficial way.

So, all of the Cardinals who canvassed, and, presuming he was aware of it and consented to it, the man that they were canvassing for, would all be automatically excommunicated PRIOR TO THE CONCLAVE EVEN BEGINNING.

So what is the blockbuster news? Sodomite and pedophile lover Cardinal Danneels of Belgium has just stated ON VIDEO at a launch event for his fully-authorized biography that he openly admits to being a member of a “mafiaclub” – HIS WORD – formed to act against Pope Benedict XVI, that specifically canvassed and organized Bergoglio’s election. This is being reported in the English language sphere by the excellent and reliable journalist Edward Pentin.

Further, in this AUTHORIZED BIOGRAPHY, Danneels, who can only be described as an enthusiastic supporter of horrific sexual perversion and the slaughter of pre-born children, admits that the election of Bergoglio was organized YEARS in advance by the so-called “San Gallo Mafiaclub” for the express purpose of pushing through a hyper-radical and utterly heretical “reform” agenda centered around the ratification of perverted sex acts.

Citation from an Italian newspaper here.  You can run it through googletranslate. has all manner of reportage on the truly despicable Danneels.  You can start here, in which there is an audio recording of Danneels telling a boy to keep his mouth shut about being raped by a bishop – who also happened to be the boy’s uncle.  Yeah. This Danneels is a real piece of shit.

Bergoglio has also HANDPICKED Danneels to be the NUMBER TWO MAN at the upcoming Synod on the Family, which is expected to drive the Church into schism.

And it all stands to reason.  As we have discussed here over the last 2.5 years, Bergoglio is a thug, and the Church is pretty much completely infiltrated with people who DON’T ACTUALLY BELIEVE ANY OF IT.  So, why would a power and earthly glory-hungry thug like Bergoglio, or a bunch of filthy, child-raping fags WHO DON’T ACTUALLY BELIEVE IN ANY OF IT be even the tiniest bit affected by the Law of the Church?  It’s a PUNCHLINE to them.  Why would we think that these people are internally constrained in any way for fear of a paradigm in which they DO NOT BELIEVE???

This effeminate, pollyanna worldview can no longer be defended.  It’s just stupid. This has been prophesied by none other than THE MOTHER OF GOD, and frankly, how could one NOT want for this nightmare to be somehow thwarted? Is normalcy bias so strong that the systematic destruction of western civilization and the Church has to be not just ACCEPTED, but defended as NOMINAL?

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Mary, Mother of the Church, pray for us.

Christ, have mercy on us.




Something for the Catholic Wonks: Ottaviani, Not Paul VI, Probably Wrote the Good Bits of Humanae Vitae

This is for the wonks.  I heard this recently and it desperately needs to be written up academically, which is NOT my vocation.  But I can call it out, I reckon.

The deal is this: Paul VI originally capitulated to the Pontifical Commission on Birth Control and wrote Humanae Vitae as *PRO* contraception.  When the draft came to CDF, Ottaviani “intervened” again, and re-wrote the key parts.  They are easy for scholars to pick out of the text because they are Thomistic, and Montini was, of course, NOT A THOMIST, to put it mildly.

This, of course, explains completely why everyone was “shocked” that Paul VI maintained the consistent teaching of the Church – because he was known to be on the side of the infiltrators, and had probably told them privately that he intended to ratify birth control.

And it explains completely why Paul VI Montini not only failed to enforce his own Encyclical, but beyond that why he actually cracked down on efforts by faithful bishops and cardinals who attempted to defend MONTINI’S OWN DOCUMENT against open dissent by clergy in the months and years after.

It wasn’t really “his”.  The admirable passages in Humanae Vitae, including the condemnation of contraception that we have for so long cited as the “one good aspect” of the Montini pontificate, weren’t Montini’s, and he didn’t believe any of it himself.

It was, once again, Cardinal Ottaviani.  The same Cardinal Ottaviani who shredded the Novus Ordo Mass in the now-famous Ottaviani Intervention.

Pray for us.

Pray for us.

This. Explains. Much.

Academics, and you know who you are, PLEASE get this written up and into the academic record before Francis “canonizes” That Man (TM). It won’t stop the farce, but at least the objection and protest will have been lodged.

Soft target opening.  You have to see it and respond FAST. But I can’t.  I’m just an old cleaning woman.

“I love you. I miss you. Come visit every day.”

The Eucharist is God saying perpetually to every human being on earth, whether they like it or not, “I love you. I miss you. Come visit every day.”

So no matter what happens to you, Someone loves you, Someone misses you, and Someone wishes you would come visit Him every day. Which is a pretty wonderful thing, no?

Too bad almost nobody today knows or cares.

"Eucharist in Fruit Wreath" by Jan Davidsz. de Heem (ARSH 1606–1683/1684)

“Eucharist in Fruit Wreath” by Jan Davidsz. de Heem (ARSH 1606–1683/1684)

Repost By Request: They Don’t Actually Believe Any Of That “Bullshit”

(One of the reasons this piece is so prescient is the opening quote – the degenerate Cardinals made it very, very clear and without the least hint of shame that their intention is to change the praxis of the Church so that it is in diametrical opposition to the teaching of the Church, the truth, and Our Lord Himself. Satan knows that the Church is protected by the Holy Ghost and cannot formally teach error in matters of faith or morals or change dogma. Thus, satan’s strategy, being carried out by his minions (let us pray that their service to satan is UNWITTING), is to end-run and avoid completely the whole question of attempting to formally change anything, but merely to change by threats, bribes and general bullying, the PRAXIS.

If satan is trying to get as many people as possible to receive the Eucharist in mortal sin, dontcha think that MAYBE receiving the Eucharist unworthily is EXTREMELY EXTREMELY BAD? And maybe we should all be taking this just a TOUCH more seriously ourselves?

Originally penned and posted May 7, ARSH 2014. I have added a couple of sentences.)


“In truth, the most salient fact of contemporary Catholic life in the West is the way it is pervaded by the pattern of saying things and then acting as if something else were true.”
-Michael Brendan Dougherty

(I’m learning, slowly. Everything below that is sarcasm or the voice of a liar, heretic or apostate is in GREEN.)

Indeed. This sentence, penned earlier this week* by a secular columnist almost sums up what pretty much everyone is too cowardly to say. In fact, it is the base premise underlying the derivative statement above that is the real 800 pound gorilla sitting squarely in the middle of the room. And, since it is my job to state with all of the bluntness, clarity and precision I can muster the objective truths that no one else will say, I’ll say it. I’ll answer the question: Why do Catholics today, including and most especially clergy and religious going all the way to the TOP, say one thing and then act as if something else were true?

Because they apparently don’t actually believe any of it.

Now, you can squirm and call me uncharitable all you like, but deep down you know just as well as I do that if you were able to corner the vast majority of these people at a cocktail party where they would open up to you honestly, OF COURSE they don’t believe in the Divinity of Christ. OF COURSE they don’t believe in the concept of sin, much less Original Sin, and certainly not in any sort of judgment by a personal deity, much less the ridiculous fictions of hell or damnation. OF COURSE they don’t believe in the Mass as The Holy and August Sacrifice of Calvary Made Present, and CERTAINLY not in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. I mean, come on, this is all a bunch of medieval bullshit that a bunch superstitious neanderthals used to oppress and control each other up until we “sang a newchurch into being” in 1965 after Saint Second Vatican Council incarnated in the hearts of men on October 11, 1962, and then ascended on December 8, 1965, thus liberating modern man from nineteen centuries of monumentally embarrassing and oppressive crackpot voodoo bullshit.

It doesn’t matter what the Mass was like before, and it doesn’t matter what the Fathers and Saints taught before, because MANKIND ITSELF was different, and not just different but INFERIOR. Thus everything “old” is just a bunch of bullshit, and everything “new” is good, and thus the Church must also be new, and thus different. None of that ridiculous old bullshit can possibly speak to the new, superior modern man, who, being liberated from nineteen centuries of bullshit, can now “encounter” Christ and “dialogue” with “him” as an equal. Anyone who takes any interest at all in any of that archaic nonsense must then, by definition, be of sub-standard intelligence at best, and TOTALLY UNCOOL at worst. You don’t want to be UNCOOL, do you? You don’t want to be THROWN OUT OF SEMINARY, do you? You don’t want to be disdained and sneered at and mocked behind your back by your professors, superiors and peers, do you? You don’t want to be exiled to some *gasp* RURAL parish, do you? You don’t want to be demoted from being Chief Justice of the Vatican Supreme Court to a purely ceremonial position as the Patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, do you? You don’t want people to think that you ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT BULLSHIT, right?

Modern man, having moved beyond and having been liberated from the bullshit, can now act as his own arbiter of truth, conceptualizing the notions of good and evil within himself, and truth, goodness and beauty are now negotiable and dynamic. Modern man need not rely upon or even be informed by strict, rigid, antiquated, superstitious teaching (the bullshit), but now, in his superiority, can confidently rely on how things make him FEEL, and thus liberate himself and others from the bullshit, and thus stop obsessing over minutiae and trivia, and start worrying about the things that really matter: giving the state the power to redistribute wealth and incur incalculable debt so that unlimited amounts of free shit can be “given” to “poor people”, thus eliminating material inequality which is the root of social evil, and, of course, climate change. And also maintaining the cash flow from the church tax in Germany.

The concepts of “mercy” and “charity” must be redefined as “PERMISSIVENESS born from INDIFFERENCE” according to the new order – the exact opposite of their antiquated and oppressive pre-St. Vatican II bullshit meanings.

Ladies and gentlemen, in the eyes of these people there is today only one sin, and that sin is actually believing what the Catholic Church teaches. It embarrasses them. It embarrasses them to the point of rage.

Over Passiontide I came across several pieces on the web speculating as to the motives behind Judas Iscariot’s betrayal of Our Lord. One surmised that Judas loved Our Lord so much that he wanted to force the hand of the Romans and Jews and bring about the installation of Christ as an earthly king. Another postulated mere greed as the core motive. No, no, no. We are told in John 6 exactly why Judas betrayed Our Lord.

Judas was EMBARRASSED by Our Blessed Lord. And there is nothing in this world that stokes and fans the flames of hatred as quickly and violently as EMBARRASSMENT.

John 6. The Eucharistic Discourse. Let me recount the events briefly. This moment is the “height” of Jesus’ earthly ministry in terms of popularity. He has drawn a crowd of five thousand men (verse 10), which means that when women and children were counted there were even more than that. Anyway, at minimum five thousand people have spontaneously gathered around Him. This is impressive to say the least. Judas and the other Apostles are STOKED and are seriously starting to think about Jesus somehow being made king and expelling the Romans, and all of the perks that go along with being a member of the inner circle of a KING. Then Jesus performs the Miracle of the Extremely Miraculous Breaking the Laws of Physics By Multiplying Matter Totally, Completely Miraculously Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes. OH. MY. GOSH. Serious momentum building now. This is so cool. He’s gonna be king and we’re gonna be PRINCES. And then…

You must eat My Flesh and drink My Blood.” Over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

And all the people start saying, “What in the WORLD is He talking about?”

Hearing and seeing the thousands and thousands of people pretty much freaking out at His words, and, you know, being God Incarnate and omniscient and all, He then repeats it with more clarity and force. “For My Flesh is meat indeed: and My Blood is drink indeed. He that eateth My Flesh, and drinketh My Blood, abideth in Me, and I in him.” In fact, the verb He uses switches from “to eat” to the verb “to gnaw or to chew”. 

At this point the entire crowd, who just a few minutes prior were totally on board with the program, and would have been the vectors of a likely movement to put Jesus on the Throne of David, almost to the man get up and leave. “C-ya. We OUT. Y’all cray-cray. As in dangerously mentally ill. We can’t deal with this circus. We have lives to lead.”

And why did they leave? Because Our Blessed Lord just told them about His Real Presence in the Eucharist – that bread and wine would be transubstantiated such that their substance would actually become the substance of God that we could physically eat and thus take into our own bodies – because that is how much He loves us.

The other eleven Apostles are CONFUSED to be sure (aren’t we all), but they know who Jesus is, and their faith, despite their near-total confusion, keeps them from abandoning Him. Jesus walks over to them, and instead of saying, “Aw, shucks, I was just talking symbolically,” as the protestant heresy would have Him do, He gets up in their faces and forces them to make an Act of Faith right then and there: “Then Jesus said to the twelve: Will you also go away?

At this point Peter makes one of the greatest Acts of Faith in all of human history, up there with the Fiat of the Blessed Virgin at the Annunciation and the near-sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham: “And Simon Peter answered Him: Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have known, that Thou art the Christ, the Son of God.”

Backing up to verse 65, we see Judas who was so utterly EMBARRASSED by Our Lord’s revelation to mankind of the Holy Eucharist, and the near-instantaneous loss of the power base that Judas, just a few short minutes before, envisioned elevating him to a princely throne with all of the wealth and power and popularity-by-association that would come with it, that he is enraged, and is already plotting to betray Jesus. “But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning, who they were that did not believe, and who he was, that would betray Him.”

Please note that the metric here is not UNDERSTANDING, but BELIEF. No one to this day understands the mechanisms of transubstantiation. Got that? It is a mystery how the substance of one thing can be changed into the substance not just of something else, but of God Himself, whilst the accidents (the appearance, taste, etc.) remain.

Absolutely. No. Clue.


It requires faith. Hence, verse 64: “It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you, are spirit and life.

Judas Iscariot did not believe in the Holy Eucharist and was thus EMBARRASSED by and ASHAMED of It, which is to say, Our Lord. This embarrassment and shame was instantly converted into anger and hatred of Our Lord.

Ahem. Cough-cough. Is anyone else experiencing a weird deja vu kind of vibe right about now?

Now, bringing it full circle, tell me who you would assign the following quote to: Judas Iscariot or the average modern Catholic?

“How in the hell do you expect us to get anyone to join and support us if you keep talking about this bullshit? This superstitious crap might have flown back in the day, but crazy bullshit like that only drives people away now. You either need to drop that talk all together, or walk it back and tone it way the hell down into some meaningless, non-offensive symbolism or shared community meal meme, or something. Bottom line, you are embarrassing us with this bullshit. STOP EMBARRASSING US.”
And so, ladies and gentlemen, the next time you see or hear something that fits the pattern of “saying things and then acting as if something else were true”, ask yourself if the following simple, glaringly obvious base premise wouldn’t explain absolutely EVERYTHING we are seeing unfold before us in these dark days:

They. Don’t. Actually. Believe. Any. Of. It.

He didn't believe any of that bullshit either....

He didn’t believe any of that bullshit either….

A Letter From Another Good Man Calling It Quits on the Former USA and the Army

(Just over the transom… Emphases mine.)

Dear Ann,

In response to your post “There Must Be A Reckoning” I can only say that I am also one of those who have failed to do justice. I have kept hoping that someone somewhere would notice what was going on and put a stop to it. I have also had the despairing thought of “what can I do about it? I am just one man.”
I spoke with my new Battalion commander this weekend on the subject of arming soldiers who may come under attack by Muslim fanatics. I cited 4th generation warfare theory and he agreed that there are no particular theaters of war any longer. He was at least willing to look into the idea of soldiers defending themselves. The past three officers I have questioned about this have always put their careers before the lives of their men. They have made the calculation that it is more likely that a soldier will fire a round into the floor, ceiling, himself, or another by accident than a Fanatic or terrorist will attack and kill their soldiers and the former situation would be detrimental to their career while the latter would not because in the latter case they were ‘just following orders’ or ‘did all that they could.’
I explained my position thusly: We have a right to defend ourselves recognized and protected by the second amendment, I know that we also swear to obey the orders of our officers, but I am now being put in the position of having to enforce orders that are unconstitutional. I was told by a Sergeant Major that I MUST report any soldier that breaks the law and carries a weapon onto a federal facility. But how can I demand that my soldiers NOT defend themselves against an armed enemy? If I am being forced to choose between prosecuting my soldiers or going to prison for NOT forcing them to give up arms, then I choose not to serve any longer, and I don’t want to do that, because I love the Army, but I will leave if I have to.
In any case, this LT. Colonel is no more fit to command than they, because his entire motivation is pleasing his superiors and accomplishing his mission. That is all fine and good, but does not require any philosophical thought or a time horizon of more than about a year.

I cannot and will not re-enlist (the whole ‘gun’ issue is just the tip of the iceberg). No matter what they dangle in front of me. The US government has effectively become a satanic organization and the best course of action for me is to cease all support for it. I wish I was brave or smart enough to think of something I could do to undermine this monstrosity, but I am a weak and feeble sinner. I hope that simply withdrawing my support for the system, taking the beam from my own eye and obliging them to come to me will be enough.
On a lighter note, A few months back I hinted that I may not re-enlist and stated to my former commander that my morale was low. She seemed surprised and said: “We’re all in trouble if Sergeant X isn’t re-enlisting!”
I smiled along with the chuckles and thought: You don’t know the half of it!