Novara Media on Ceuta

What REALLY Happened In Ceuta Migrant Breach
Novara Media | 3 Aug. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbkaq3dKbrM

Kim Iversen too:

Before Spain's Invasion, the GOP Gave Morocco $40 MILLION
Kim Iversen | 4 Aug. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTxh5w0atVc

On the morning of 21 August 1415, King John I of Portugal led his sons and their assembled forces in a surprise assault that would come to be known as the Conquest of Ceuta. ...

During the Union with Spain, which lasted from 1580 to 1640, Ceuta attracted many residents of Spanish origin and became the only city in the Portuguese Empire that sided with Spain when Portugal regained its independence in the Portuguese Restoration War of 1640. ...

On 1 January 1668, King Afonso VI of Portugal recognised the formal allegiance of Ceuta to Spain and ceded Ceuta to King Carlos II of Spain by the Treaty of Lisbon. The city was attacked by Moroccan forces under Moulay Ismail during the Siege of Ceuta (1694–1727).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceuta

What exactly Muslim power was there before the Portuguese? On and off, there had been Muslims powers including territories in Spain. Like long the Caliphate of Córdoba, in Spain.

Starting in 1084, the Almoravid Berbers ruled the region until 1147, when the Almohads conquered the land. Apart from Ibn Hud's rebellion in 1232, they ruled until the Tunisian Hafsids established control. The Hafsids' influence in the west rapidly waned, and Ceuta's inhabitants eventually expelled them in 1249. After this, a period of political instability persisted, under competing interests from the Marinids and Granada as well as autonomous rule under the native Banu al-Azafi. The Fez-based Marinid sultanate finally conquered the region in 1387, with assistance from Aragon.

So, 1387, Ceuta became strictly Moroccan, till ... 1415. 13 + 15 = 28 years./HGL

Note on Crusades

As a friend of mine on FB noted:

The Most Recent Crusade Began in Spain 90 Years Ago Today

He seems to have been off by a few days, this was 20 July and the rising started on the 17 July. Never mind, up to today, I was confusing Niceto Alcalá-Zamora (the president who went into exile) with José María Gil-Robles y Quiñones (who was leader of CEDA, which I thought was the party in government and hence that of the president who would have been its leader ...)

Have Crusades involved abusive events?

The First Crusade involved the sack of Jerusalem and on part of the popular Crusade sacking of Jews in the Rhineland. The one approved by Pope Pius XI involved Badajoz.

Do abuses like these make a Crusade unjust?

Usually not, since the provocation (like harrassing of pilgrims by Seljuks or Red Terror involving the killing of Calvo Sotelo and José Antonio Primo de Rivera) is more typical of the régime one crusades against than the abuse of the leaders of the Crusade.

After Badajoz, Franco told Yagüe off. Nothing more like that, or Franco would even ally with the Reds to get rid of the Rifans.

At the sack of Jerusalem, Geoffrey of Bouillon did what he could to stop it, and succeeded on the third day. He marked his distance from the acts by refusing to wear a crown (also in reference to Jesus wearing a crown of thorns, not to forget).

In the Rhineland, he wasn't there to try to stop anything, the leadership was different. Peter the Hermit took his distance from that popular Crusade bc of such events.

Meanwhile, the Seljuk rulers of Palestine had harrassed pilgrims for long, and Manuel Azaña seemed to have no interest in repressing the Red Terror, though it was nominally peacetime and it would have been easier for him to do so, in theory, than for Franco to keep an eye on how Mola or Yagüe were behaving.

Please note, the bloodiest acts under Franco's own direct command in Spain were in the Asturias, 1934, where he was not remotely anything like chief of state. Once the Spanish Crusade began, with him taking over after Sanjurjo, things under his command were among the cleanest in all of the Spanish war, left or right sympathies, wrong or right sides.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Mary Magdalene
22.VII.2026

Apud Massiliam, in Gallia, natalis sanctae Mariae Magdalenae, de qua Dominus ejecit septem daemonia, et quae ipsum Salvatorem a mortuis resurgentem prima videre meruit.

Les Sœurs de Belorado

Les souffrances des Soeurs Clarisses de Belorado fidèles à l´Église Catholique
Mont Carmel | 22 mai 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWjLn8YChck

Ce que Monseigneur Iceta fait avec les religieuses semblent vraiment comme les actes d'une entité en Apocalypse 18.

Les fidèles du diocèse de Burgos devraient la quitter./HGL

PS, je diffère des sœurs en tant qu'elles affirment que le Siège est encore vacant depuis 1958, le considérant comme rempli entre 1990 et 2022 et encore une fois depuis 2023, par les Papes Michel I et Michel II./HGL

Pocahontas and Tupac Amaru — Who Was Better Off, Whose People Was Better Off?

Pocahontas died after bearing a son, having been baptised Rebecca and married to a Rolfe.

Túpac Amaru died executed by Spaniards in Cusco, in 1572.

He had also been baptised, and catechised by Catholics.

So, given Catholicism is right, Túpac has a better chance of being in Heaven. The adress to Pachacámac in the last words need not be an apostasy, he could have considered he had worshipped God with some false gods and with false beliefs, and adressed Him as he had been used to doing. But if it was an apostasy, he is obviously less likely to be in Heaven than Rebecca Rolfe.

But what about their peoples?

Powhatan tribes exist, but the Powhatan language has left us 500 words. All Powhatan tribes alive today speak English. Six tribes are federally recognised, so outside Virginia too, and they have 400 Nansemond, 430 Pamunkey, 500 Rappahannock, 840 Chickahominy and 132 Eastern Chickahominy.

Túpac Amaru's subject spoke Quechua and Aymara, the languages still exist. Quechua Wáywash has 750 000 speakers. Quechua overall 7 200 000. Aymara has 1 700 000 speakers.

And here is more on the reasons for the successful conquest:

Something Was Very Wrong With The Inca Empire — DNA Just Proved It
Creature Decoder / Origin Decoder | 16 May 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziBSQXPnjQg

No, I'm not taking "Spanish guilt" and "English virtue" for a fact. The worst recent treatment of Quechuans was under Alberto Fujimori, whose parents were Buddhists./HGL

Will Someone Save Noelia?

Suicide isn't a human right./HGL

Case briefly explained in German:

25-Jährige soll HEUTE durch Euthanasie sterben
Katholische Antworten | 26 März 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gd1pQ2vycXQ

Update in Spanish:

Murir es obligación, no derecho

C'est quoi, Pronote ?

deretour : Obligatoire n'est pas gratuite · New blog on the kid : C'est quoi, Pronote ?

- Pronote : c'est un logiciel que l'établissement utilise pour gérer les absences des élèves et leurs résultats scolaires. Il permet aux parents de s'investir dans la scolarité de leur(s) enfant(s) en ayant accès à diverses informations : notes, absences, cahier de texte de la classe, devoirs à faire...8 okt. 2024

Collège PIERRE BERTONE le précise sur cette page:

Quelle est la différence entre Pronote, Educonnect et l'ENT ?
Par Manuel LE MESTR, publié le mardi 8 octobre 2024 23:03 - Mis à jour le mardi 8 octobre 2024 23:32
https://pierre-bertone.agora06.fr/vie-de-l-etablissement/actualites/quelle-est-la-difference-entre-pronote-educonnect-et-l-ent--8253.htm

Merveilleux. Quand dans Boule et Bill le garçon (Boule) trouve un moyen pour subtiliser une lettre de la prof à son père, par exemple en donnant à manger à son chien (Bill), c'est fini. La digestion des chiens s'en portera mieux sans doute, mais le bien-être des écoliers ne le fera pas.

Si vous vous en doutez, vous pouvez contacter Sanary sur Mer. La Guicharde.

Un certain temps, certains parents étaient les alliés de leurs enfants, même contre leur école. On a voulu finir ceci, on a donc introduit par exemle pronote, pour faire des parents les alliés de l'école, même contre leurs enfants.

Si le vrai problème était d'il y a environ 150 ans ?

Les lois Jules Ferry sont deux lois sur l'école primaire en France votées en 1881-1882 sous la Troisième République, qui rendent l'école gratuite (loi du 16 juin 1881), l'instruction primaire obligatoire et participent à laïciser l’enseignement public (loi du 28 mars 1882).
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lois_Jules_Ferry

2026 - 1881 = 145

Si on profitait des 5 ans qui restent pour garantir que cette saloperie n'ait pas 150 ans ? Bon, la gratuité de l'école n'est pas une faute, l'obligation par contre oui. Et encore le séquestre d'un adolescent à qui les matières d'école peuvent paraître ringardes, mais qui n'a pas le choix de les traiter comme d'autres choses ringardes, comme on peut douber le cinéma si un film paraît ringard, par exemple.

Mais, on a voulu créer un socle commun, comment d'autrement en avoir un ?

La France a eu un socle commun depuis Clovis, non ? Mitis depone colla, Sigamber, quod adorasti, combure, quod combussisti, adora. La sainte ampoule de Rheims veut dire que même le roi n'avait pas l'excemption du socle commun qu'était le Catholicisme.

Pendant la Révolution française, pas dans l'acte de la prise de la Bastille, ni pendant le régime du Club des Feuillants, mais en pas mal d'autres moments, on a fait les démarches pour détruire ce socle commun. On ne le remplace pas avec l'école.

En Espagne, on a vu des aggressions d'églises, comme en croyant la rumeur que la plus grande risque d'abus sexuels hors domicile serait l'église catholique (Saint-Jacques-Apôtre d'Albuñol, août 2025, un Marocain, par exemple).

Or, en Espagne, une statistique a été faite sur les abus et aggressions sexuelles, et si le premier endroit d'abus est le domicile, le second est l'église. Les professeurs sont 18 fois plus souvent coupables, les gens côtoyés à l'école en total 90 fois plus souvent coupables que les curés.

Ce qui nous porte à un autre côté de Pronote. Le jeune de 14 n'avait apparamment pas été victime de violence des parents. Certains le sont, à propos des mauvaises notes, et certaines filles le sont. Comment ne pas comprendre que ce genre d'application, cette collaboration intensifié entre parents d'élèves et l'école des mêmes élèves ne puisse pas être utilisé comme moyen de pression par un prof qui voudrait qu'une élève couche avec lui ?

Si en revanche l'école n'est pas obligatoire, ni le moyen indispensable pour se préparer cette tranche d'âge à un métier dans son futur adulte, les deux formes de situation, malaise d'élève, malaise de professeur par rapport à un élève, mais aussi abus sexuels, sont trés évitables. L'école devenant un contrat (pas forcément commercial, pas forcément non, non plus, dans le cas des écoles catholiques) entre le personnel et les parents d'un élève, finissable à chaque instant, même en plein sémestre, pas obligé d'avoir remplacé par celui avec un autre établissement, des deux côtés, on pourra finir avec des situations intenables, avant qu'elles ne débordent en des tragédies.

Une des raisons bidons pour ne pas faire ceci a été l'idée de bâtir un socle commun, entretemps, une autre encore pire a pu s'ajouter, le jeune de 14 ans au moment des faits, jeudi 28 septembre 2023, a pu réagir sur des tentatives de le "sortir de sa bulle" ...

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Rimbert de Brême
4.II.2026

Bremae commemoratio sancti Remberti, qui, sancti Anscharii discipulus, in ipsius locum, hac die, obitum magistri sui proxime subsequenti, olim Hamburgensis simul ac Bremensis Episcopus electus est.

Encore une raison à préferer Franco au Parti socialiste ouvrier espagnol

Droit à naître notifie:

Le Premier ministre socialiste Pedro Sanchez souhaite ficher les médecins qui refusent de pratiquer des avortements.

Face aux difficultés de trouver des avorteurs, le chef du gouvernement a décidé d’employer des méthodes staliniennes.

L’État espagnol impose désormais l’inscription des objecteurs de conscience dans un registre.

Le coordinateur général de l’Association nationale pour la défense du droit à l’objection de conscience (ANDOC), José Antonio Díez, s’est insurgé :

« Ces registres d’objecteurs de conscience qu’ils souhaitent créer sont des listes noires visant à exclure professionnellement les médecins souhaitant exercer leur droit à l’objection de conscience. »

Il ne fait pas de doute que le lobby de l’avortement pourrait bientôt réclamer des mesures similaires dans notre pays…

Je me souviens les régistres militaires avec les notes vlm = va (à) la Messe = pas de promotion.

Ma mère respectait Franco, parce que, sous lui, l'Espagne n'avait pas l'avortement (hormis des cas d'interruption médicale, sans tentative à part ça de tuer l'enfant à naître). C'est pour ça qu'elle m'a indiqué de ne pas me joindre à une société secrète quand j'avais 15. (L'offre portait probablement sur l'Ordre de DeMolay). J'ai obéi, je ne le regrette pas./HGL

Non, au Mexique, on n'a pas fait exprès de contaminer avec la variole

History of smallpox in Mexico n'existe pas en français. Il y a une version en anglais, ensuite anglais simplifié, une version en espagnol (comment non ?) et encore trois versions, koréen, chinois et l'arabe égyptien.

La version en anglais simplifié donne presque à croire que ça aurait pu être le cas. C'est pas juste la langue qui est simplifiée, l'article est simplifé aussi. Celle en anglais, non. La version espagnole donne davantage de questions que de réponses. La version anglaise par contre donne l'histoire assez probable. Il cite aussi Spanish and Nahuatl Views on Smallpox and Demographic Catastrophe in the Conquest of Mexico par Robert McCaa, de 1994.

En 1519—1520, on arrive avec la variole, au moins un cas. En 1520, il y a des épidémies régionales à Cozumel et à Veracruz, où le navire de Pánfilo de Narváez s'était arrêté. De mai à décembre 1520, la maladie se répand à Tepeaca et à Tlaxcala, et en automne 1520, elle y est à Tenochtitlán. Le seul leader indigène que nomme Cortés comme mourant de variole est Maxixcatzin, à l'époque déjà son allié. Pourtant, Cuitláhuac, successeur de Moctezuma II et prédécesseur de Cuauhtémoc y meurt aussi. Cette première vague de la variole coûte entre 5 et 8 millions de vies.

En 1545 c'est la variole ou le Cocoliztli, et en 1576, c'est (encore ?) le Cocoliztli. Ces épidémies coûtent en 1545 12—15 millions de vies et en 1576, 2 millions. Pour le Cocoliztli, on ne sait pas exactement ce qu'elle était. Certains pensent, la variole, certains sont en désaccord. Pour la variole à Tenochtitlán, un témoignage vingt ans plus tard et quelque (mieux chez McCaa que dans la wipipédie) donne ceci :

Contemporary Spanish texts reveal that their authors were familiar with smallpox and smallpox mortality. The fact that chroniclers described the epidemic of 1520 in considerable detail suggests unusual severity. Vázquez de Ayllón, Cortés and others compare the attack with epidemics in the islands, and never with Spain. Motolinía, in the Memoriales but not in the Historia, contrasts smallpox mortality with deaths from the siege of Tenochtitlán stating that for the former the principal victims were the poor and the children ("pobres y pequeños"), while in the latter it was the lords and the leaders ("señores y principales"). Most of the castellanos who accompanied Cortés did not say or write much about the conquest, but those who did so extensively commented on the devastation of the pestilence. , In a claim to the crown for compensation as a participant in the siege of Tenochtitlán, Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia testified in the early 1540s that:

The pestilence of measles and smallpox was so severe and cruel that more than one-fourth of the Indian people in all the land died—and this loss had the effect of hastening the end of the fighting because there died a great quantity of men and warriors and many lords and captains and valiant men against whom we would have had to fight and deal with as enemies, and miraculously Our Lord killed them and removed them from before us.

Les textes contemporains espagnols font paraître que leurs auteurs étaient familiers avec la variole et à la mortalité en variole. Le fait que les chroniqueurs de 1520 décrivent l'épidémie de 1520 en détail considérable suggère une sévérité inusitée. Vázquez de Ayllón, Cortés et d'autres comparent l'impact avec les épidémies des îles et jamais avec l'Esapgne. Motolinía, dans les Memoriales mais pas dans l'Historia, contraste la mortalité de variole avec les morts dans la siège de Tenochtitlán, et affirme que pour cell-là, les victimes principales étaient les pauvres et les enfants* ("pobres y pequeños"), tandis que dans celle-ci c'étaient les seigneurs et leaders ("señores y principales"). La plupart des castellanos qui suivaient Cortés dirent et écrirent peu de la conquête, mais ceux qui se démarquaient commentèrent extensivement de la dévastation par la pestilence. Quand Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia reclamait dans le début des années 1540' une compensation financière en tant que participant de la siège de Tenochtitlán, il témoignait :

La pestilence de rougeole et variole était tellement sévère et cruelle que plus qu'un quart des gens indiens de tout le pays moururent—et ceci avait l'effet de mettre fin aux battailles, car il y mourut grande quantité d'hommes et de guerroyers et beaucoup de seigneurs et capitaines et hommes vaillants contre lesquels nous aurions eu à nous battre et traiter comme d'ennemis, et miraculeusement Notre Seigneur les a tués et enlevé de devant nous.

Au moins Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia n'avait aucune idée que des Espagnols auraient fait exprès de contaminer les gens, pour lui c'était "une divine surprise" ... ici les wikipédiens font une remarque que je considère peu convaincante :

Although the native people of Mexico had no previous contact with smallpox, these Spanish texts showed that the Spanish population was familiar with the disease and the mortality that resulted from it.

"Bien que les indigènes du Méxique n'avaient aucun contact antérieur avec la variole, ces textes espagnols montrèrent que la population espagnole était familière avec la maladie et avec la mortalité résultante."

En fait, avec la maladie, oui. Mais hormis les gens qui avaient vu les ravages sur les Canaries, avec la mortalité non. Car, justement, les Espagnols avaient une immunité contre cette maladie assez endémique en Europe depuis un millennaire. Les Guanches** et les Indiens, non. D'où une mortalité incomparablement plus haute. Pour qu'un Espagnol puisse se dire "ça ne va pas nous nuire tellement, mais ça va les dévaster" il aurait dû avoir une expérience des Canaries et encore une certaine sophistication médicale. Pánfilo de Narváez était d'une cruauté, comme noté par Bartolomé de las Casas, mais il n'était pas des Canaries. Hernán Cortés n'avait pas vu les Canaries et en plus n'avait pas eu ce navire avec l'un cas de la variole.

On peut pas très bien imaginer, quand les Mandan en 1837 avaient une épidémie de variole, qu'un médecin états-unisien ou un missionaire se soit rendu chez eux. En juillet ils étaient 2000, en octobre il se comptaient en 23 ou 27 ou 138. On en sait peu.*** Pour les épidémies de la variole et du Cocolitzli, on a par contre des descriptions justement d'un Franciscain, Toribio de Benavente, dit Motolinia, après le premier mot qu'il apprit en nahuatl, désignant le habit déchiré, "quelqu'un d'affligé" ... et d'un médecin, le médic personnel du roi Philippe II, Francisco Hernández de Toledo.

Non, les Espagnols n'ont pas fait exprès de contaminer les Indiens avec la variole, et il semble que même les Mandans en 1837°, chez les États-unisiens, n'aient pas à se plaindre d'une telle perfidie non plus. Malchance, oui, insouciance, oui, mais pas une guerre biologique.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Veille de St. Laurent,
St. Jean-Baptiste Marie Vianney
9.VIII.2025

Vigilia sancti Laurentii Martyris. Sancti Joannis Baptistae-Mariae Vianney, Presbyteri et Confessoris, caelestis omnium parochorum Patroni; cujus dies natalis pridie Nonas mensis hujus recensetur.

* Ou peut-être plutôt les pauvres et les gens de petite station. **Sur les Canaries.

*** Autre article de la wikipédie anglophone absente de la wikipédie francophone :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1837_Great_Plains_smallpox_epidemic

Do Muslims Get Their Info on Franco from Harun Yahya?

Mehdi Hasan is More Likely to Miss What Some are Actually Saying · Do Muslims Get Their Info on Franco from Harun Yahya?

Do Muslims Get Their Info on Franco from Harun Yahya? · Sweden and FSSPX

I ask, because Mehdi Hasan pretended "Fascism by definition is violence" ...

Another of the Fascist oppressors who turned the 20th century into a lake of blood was Franco. He organised the "Falange" movement in Spain with the support of the Darwinist Fascists Hitler and Mussolini, and brought great suffering and oppression to the people of Spain. Franco dragged his people into civil war, turning brother against brother, father against son.

During the Spanish Civil War an average of 250 people a day were killed in Madrid, 150 in Barcelona, and 80 in Seville. Some executions were carried out by driving nails into peoples' heads. Pitiless massacres took place all over the country. In a little mountain village to the north of Madrid, for example, 31 villagers were arrested because they had not voted for Franco, and of these 13 were taken out of the village by lorry and killed by the side of the road. The Fascists entered a town with a population of 11,000 near Seville and killed more than 300 people. As a result of the violent events which went on in this way some 800,000 people were killed in the civil war, and 200,000 more executed by order of Franco. Millions were injured or crippled.

Harun Yahya: The Disasters Darwinism Brought To Humanity
Part 3: The Terrible Alliance Between Darwin and Fascism
https://www.harunyahya.info/en/books/the-disasters-darwinism-brought-to-humanity/chapter/part-3-the-terrible-alliance-between-darwin-and-fascism

This is somewhat parodic.

Another of the Fascist oppressors who turned the 20th century into a lake of blood was Franco.

Probably some ETA members would consider him as an oppressor, but they did some killing too, you know ...

He organised the "Falange" movement in Spain with the support of the Darwinist Fascists Hitler and Mussolini, and brought great suffering and oppression to the people of Spain.

The Falange was founded originally by José Antonio Primo de Rivera, and they were mainly acting like street fighters and social workers. It soon joined JONS (Juntas de Ofensiva Nacional-Sindicalista) by fusion into Falange Española de las JONS. At this point, Franco was not the least involved, and neither were his allies Hitler or Mussolini, in fact, while they may have admired parts of their programmes, and the courage of street fighters, they were hardly all Darwinists. Onésimo Redondo Ortega (one founder of JONS) was member of Asociación Católica de Propagandistas. Ramiro Ledesma, cofounder of JONS, was Agnostic, so probably Darwinist but not hardliner. José Antonio Primo de Rivera founder of the original Falange Española and leader of the joined Falange Española de las JONS was again a Catholic. After the reds assassinated him, he was succeeded by Manuel Hedilla ... who later opposed Franco. Part time as an Anarco-Syndicalist.

and brought great suffering and oppression to the people of Spain.

Opinions differ on this.

Franco dragged his people into civil war, turning brother against brother, father against son.

Or cousin against cousin? His own cousin was aviator on the Republican side. But seriously, no, he didn't. A civil war was already going on. Capitalism had been implemented in a clumsy manner, not meaning that a neat manner makes Capitalism flawless, Catholics opposing this (namely Carlists) had been sidestepped and oppressed even, so the reaction against Capitalism came in the form of pretty brutal Socialist movements, who sometimes engaged in fighting the Church rather than opposing bad employers. In 1934, Franco repressed them pretty cruelly in the Asturias, after they had committed cruelties and sacrileges of their own. This was not the Civil War, Franco was obeying Gil Robles, a democratically elected president at this point. The problem is, as many were not voting, this cruelty made for the next election going to the left, and the left encouraged the violent rabble.

I would say that the left dragged Spain into a Civil war. Right before Franco and two other men joined hands to rise, they had killed the Monarchist politician Calvo Sotelo, and right after it, they killed José Antonio Primo de Rivera.

Gil Robles just after the murder of Calvo Sotelo made a speech claiming that peace had become impossible. He fled to France and from then to Portugal. As his father had been a Carlist (Enrique died when José-María was ten) he was involved in persuading Carlists to join with Franco. The cruelty of repression in the Asturias is probably partly due to the fact that neither the Navarrese heartland of the Carlist country nor his native city Salamanca were involved in industrialism, he was disconnected from industrial workers. University people, small business men, farmers, yes, but not industrial workers. Arguably not the homeless either.

During the Spanish Civil War an average of 250 people a day were killed in Madrid, 150 in Barcelona, and 80 in Seville. Some executions were carried out by driving nails into peoples' heads. Pitiless massacres took place all over the country.

Harun misses that Madrid, Barcelona and much of the country was in the hands of Franco's enemies. Madrid only opened its gates to Franco on April 1st 1939, which is the official end of the Spanish Civil war. Barcelona wasn't taken by Franco's troops until 26th of January the same year. The bloodbaths in Barcelona were mainly committed with Communist perpetrators and Anarchist victims. Seville however was under Queipo de Llano, one of the generals on the Franco side, and this since July 1936, apparently. Spanish wiki says 3000 to 6000 of the left were killed there, battle, assassinations, formalised repression all counted in one.

In a little mountain village to the north of Madrid, for example, 31 villagers were arrested because they had not voted for Franco, and of these 13 were taken out of the village by lorry and killed by the side of the road.

The toll of victims is credible, alas. But "because they had not voted for Franco," is nonsense, Franco wasn't holding elections during the Civil War.

As a result of the violent events which went on in this way some 800,000 people were killed in the civil war, and 200,000 more executed by order of Franco.

That executions went on after the Civil war is alas true. 200,000 isn't the worst number I've seen, but also not the lowest. That kind of thing stopped in 1947, 8 years after the official end of the war. As to 800,000 during the war ... Republicans lost 110,000 troops, Franco's side 90,000, the total losses are probably close to 500,000, of which pretty many were killed by the Azaña side (if not by his own regular troops, by for instance militiamen).

Some want to say the murder of Calvo Sotelo was a revenge for the murder of Lieutenant José del Castillo Sáenz de Tejada, on the other hand he was murdered in revenge for the incidents at the funeral of Anastasio de los Reyes, who himself had been assassinated ...

Anastasio de los Reyes, 14th of April, (1), people killed during his funeral, 16th of April, (2), José del Castillo, 12th of July, (3), Calvo Sotelo, 13th of July, (4). I think the statement at the basis for Franco's rising "the Republic has ceased to function" was pretty correct. Therefore, the idea that Franco plunged his country into Civil war because he wanted to do sth for "survival of the fittest"(or as a personal power grab, because "hey, it's nice to be in power") is simply nonsense.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Severus of Vienne
8.VIII.2025

"La Russie n'est pas un pays colonisateur" ...

1427 à 1453, le Prince Inal le Grand devient le premier roi de toute la Tcherkessie. En bref, il donne indépendance à la Tcherkessie. Il était Orthodoxe, certains le comptent comme syncrétiste avec le Khabzéisme. Je ne sais pas s'il était davantage syncrétiste que les Nordiques, qui, tout en refusant de croire Odin et Thor des vrais dieux, depuis leur conversion, cultivèrent les histoires littéraires. Les Tcherkesses ou Adyguéens et Kabardiens étaient Chrétiens (sans de totalement abandonner tous le paganisme d'avant) depuis les temps environ un siècle ou deux après la conversion de leur pays voisin l'Arménie.

Le 17e Siècle, pas mal de Tcherkesses, mais loin de tous, deviennent des Musulmans par influence des Turcs et des Tatars de la Crimée. En 1708 ils se libèrent du Sultan, et ne retombent pas en dépendance.

En 1714, Pierre le Grand, ennemi de la Suède (avec pas mal de réussite, n'est-ce pas Riga ? n'est-ce pas Tallin ?) décide d'occuper les terres des Tcherkesses. Ce sera Catherine la Grande qui commence à réaliser ce plan. Il conduira à une réaction, on est devenus des Musulmans pour ne pas être en communion avec les Russes occupants. Et on a été tués pour ce fait.

Nettoyage ethnique des Circassiens
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nettoyage_ethnique_des_Circassiens

(Circassiens est à peu près un anglicisme pour Tcherkesses).

Dans le même temps que les États-Unis font leur expansion à la dépense des Amérindiens, la Russie fait la sienne vers la Sibérie. Côté cruautés, on compte en chaque théatre des deux côtés. Michel Strogoff par Jules Verne célèbre le point de vue des Russes. Pour les États-Unis, on a surtout célébré le point de vue des Indiens. William Cody aussi connu comme Buffalo Bill célèbre le point de vue de Sitting Bull, son ami et celui qui l'a converti au Catholicisme. Et vu que mon grand-père était un lecteur de l'autobiographie de William Cody (que je trouvais barbante comme enfant) et qu'il dit, tout en étant agnostique, à ma mère, en passant une église catholique, "voici la plus juste des religions" ... ma conversion catholique doit quelque chose à Sitting Bull, probablement. En 1999 une des nations colonisées par les Russes faisait une rébellion très sanglante. Elle fut reprimé d'une manière très sanglante. Ce que se passait entre Tchétchénie et Russie entre août 1999 et avril 2009 n'est pas l'honneur des uns ou des autres, les États-Unis en ont été libres.

Gayur-khan, roi de Simsim, aussi connu comme Khour II était Chrétien. Pour les Tchétchènes aussi, l'islamisation était une demarche de fausse résistance aux Russes. Là, par contre, il y avait une présence d'Islam déjà avant, déjà dans la famille de Khour II.

Présent, et probablement aussi Rivarol (à l'époque je préférais lire Présent, un quotidien, j'aimais beaucoup les articles religieux les samedi, et une "tantine" avec sa "sardine", désormais Présent n'est plus*) a décrit le conflit entre Russes et Tchétchènes comme explicable par la barbarie de ces derniers, en pleine sympathie avec la répression qui allait chasser les gens même aux chiottes. Ou peut-être cet article était Rivarol. Mais ce serait incohérent avec leur point de vue sur Gaza. Le tueur de Samuel Paty était Tchétchène. Samuel était certes pas pleinement à sa place, ça aurait été plus approprié d'avoir les enfants de cette famille musulmane dans une école musulmane ou descolarisés, mais le meurtre était quand même un meurtre. Cette nation est aujourd'hui bel et bien associée à Poutine. Je ne pense pas qu'ils auraient radicalement changé tous leurs mœurs les derniers 16 ans.

Quand Hitler fit l'Opération Barberousse, une de ses idées était de libérer diverses peuples de la domination russe. On a dit que cette libération tourna vite à domination brutale, mais ceci n'était pas dans ce cas le fait de ces nations. Dont les Ukrainiens et, les trouvant déjà en état libre, les Tchétchènes. Quand la Soviétique reprit, on avait "libéré les Tchétchènes des Nazis." Une rhétorique approximative, faisant l'amalgame entre le national-socialisme et chacun de ses alliés de circonstance. Et une rhétorique qu'on reprit en 2022, si je me souviens bien.

Parlant de colonialismes et des États-Unis, on vient de parler de Pinochet. Or, le Chili n'a pas perdu l'indépendance formel. Un passeport chiléen était encore un passeport chiléen. La Russie ou la Soviétique avait-elle fait un peu pareil ? Oui, on reduisait Azaña à presque une marionette (pas qu'il était innocent en tant qu'indépendant non plus) en soutenant Caballero et Negrín.** Comme on sait, l'Espagne a eu besoin de l'Allemagne de Hitler pour s'en libérer, ainsi que de l'Italie de Mussolini (en tant que Premier Ministre, pas encore la République de Salò). Staline, s'il avait vaincu, aurait pu prétendre qu'un passepart espagnol était encore un passeport espagnol, non ?

C'est vrai qu'à la fin de la Seconde Guerre Mondiale, si de Gaulle*** n'a pas vraiment libéré la France des Allemands, il a aidé considérablement à empêcher que la France soit occupée de la même manière qu'en 1945 l'Allemagne et l'Autriche. En 1949, l'Allemagne de l'Ouest est fondé, s'il y avait encore des troupes américains, anglais et français sur le sol, l'état avait sa souveraineté. En 1955 Autriche reprend la souveraineté, y compris la partie occupée par les Russes, en contrepartie de la neutralité. Mais entre 1949 et 1990, ou au moins 1989, l'Allemagne de l'Est était un état satellite de la Soviétique, avait une police secrète, le Stasi, sous commande de la police secrète soviétique. Dont à Dresde un certain Poutine. Si l'RDA n'a pas pu aider a "coloniser" l'RFA (avant d'être elle-même dissolue et assimilée par celle-ci), vu que l'RFA avait la Bavière et le Pays Rhénan, donc des Catholiques en masse, la Scandinavie, sur certains côtés (notamment l'école publique, monopoliste chez nous à l'époque, et je n'exclue pas la psychiatrie, même si c'est moins confirmé), a été infiltrée.

Je n'aimerais pas que la France devienne un pays infiltré par le poutinisme, juste par réaction anti-américaine. Pour ce qui est de la paix ou la guerre, ce n'est pas ma décision à prendre, mais pour ce qui est des sympathies, je trouve Vance mille fois plus sympa que Poutine, sauf envers Zelensky certaines minutes qui ont été médiatisées. Et peut-être encore.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Thomas d'Aquin
7.III.2025

In monasterio Fossae Novas, prope Tarracinam, in Campania, sancti Thomae Aquinatis, Confessoris et Ecclesiae Doctoris, ex Ordine Praedicatorum, nobilitate generis, vitae sanctitate et Theologiae scientia illustrissimi; quem Leo Papa Decimus tertius caelestem Scholarum omnium catholicarum Patronum declaravit.

* Si on reprenait les correspondances entre Tantine et Sardine dans un livre, ou une série de tels, je serais acheteur.

** Pour les nostalgiques de POUM, qui survivant en exile comme force anti-franquiste, ou des anarchistes, en Barcelone 3—6 mai 1937, c'est Negrín qui supprime POUM et l'anarchisme, pas Franco. Il n'arrivera qu'autour du nouvel an 1939 (du 23 déc. 1938 au 10 févr. 1939), ou plutôt, c'est Fidel Dávila Arrondo qui arrive.

*** Ou peut-être plutôt De Gaulle, si c'est un article flamand plutôt qu'une particule de noblesse française.

Ce n'était pas pour les actes d'idolatrie à Ceuta que Valencia fut inondée ?

Répliques Assorties : Contre certains Vatican-II-istes, pas pour les Vaudois · New blog on the kid : Ce n'était pas pour les actes d'idolatrie à Ceuta que Valencia fut inondée ?

Au moins pas pour celles de cette année.

The rector of the seminary venerated several Hindu idols --Spain
November 19, 2024
https://choosing-him.blogspot.com/2024/11/the-rector-of-seminary-venerated.html

Seminarians from the south of Spain met last weekend in Ceuta to promote fraternity, including seminarians of the Neocatechumenal Way. ... The so-called visit to the Hindu center was not for cultural purposes, but during their prayer time.

Des séminaristes du Sud de l'Espagne se sont rencontrés dernier weekend à Ceuta, pour promouvoir la fraternité, y compris des séminaristes du Chemin Néocatéchumenal. ... La prétendue visite au centre Hindou n'était pas pour des buts culturels, mais pendant leurs heures de prière.

Ceci, c'était après l'inondation, puisque "dernier weekend" ne peut pas reculer davantage qu'au 12, je venais de commenter déjà le sept, et ça encore après les inondations qui commençaient le 29 octobre. Donc avant cette visite des séminaristes.

Par contre, il y a eu un homologue déjà il y a sept ans. De la visite, donc :

Bishop apologizes for Hindu procession in Catholic church
LaCroix : August 31st, 2017 at 04:03 pm (Europe\Rome). Updated August 31st, 2017 at 04:38 pm (Europe\Rome)
https://international.la-croix.com/news/religion/bishop-apologizes-for-hindu-procession-in-catholic-church/5796

A Spanish bishop has issued a public apology after a priest in his diocese allowed local Hindus to conduct a procession in his church with an image of Ganesh, a Hindu deity with the head of an elephant.

The priest subsequently resigned as Vicar General of Cadiz y Ceuta Diocese.

Un évêque espagnol s'est excusé publiquement, après qu'un prêtre de son diocèse avait permis à des Hindous de l'endroit de faire une procession en son église avec une image de Ganesh, divinité hindoue à tête d'éléphant.

Le prêtre de la suite s'est résigné de la charge de vicaire général du diocèse Cadiz y Ceuta.

Ça, c'était en 2017, et c'était à Ceuta, le 27 août. 2620 jours avant l'inondation. Est-ce que Juan José Mateos Castro se trouvait à Valence cette année ? L'inondation eu lieu 63 jours après l'anniversaire du débacle en 2017.

Mais, si Juan José Mateos Castro et Rafael Zorzona Boy ne se trouvaient pas en Valence, alors je ne vois pas pourquoi la Valence souffrirait pour un acte commis à Ceuta .../HGL

PS, par contre, les séminaristes de Malaga ont été épargnés de cette culpabilité par absence due à la même dépression isolée à niveau élevé qui causa les inondations de Valence./HGL

It Might be Well if Antipope Bergoglio Said No to Desecrating the Valley of the Fallen

However, I cannot sign the petition, because it begins with "Dear Pope Francis" — something I absolutely do not believe he is.

For those who are interested, here is the petition that I did not sign:

CitizenGO : Pope Francis: say NO to the desecration of the Valley of the Fallen
https://www.citizengo.org/en-row/fr/13539-pope-francis--say-no-to-the-profanation-of-the-valley-of-the-fallen

Problems with the French Far Right, as a Christian Reactionary

I'm going to bring up a few different issues, so, I think I'll number them.

1) Obviously, the Left has its own sometimes graver issues:

PSOE introduced legislation to legalize abortion in 1983 through an amendment to Spain's penal code.[12] Abortion was finally made legal by Congress later that year by a vote of 186 - 50, but did not enter into legal effect until July 1985 as Coalición Popular (now Partido Popular) challenged the constitutionality of the law. The decriminalization of abortion was allowed for three reasons. The first was that it was ethical in the case of rape. The second was it could be a necessary to save the life of the mother. The third reason was that eugenic, allowing abortion in case of fetal malformation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic_eugenics

The honest assessment of Eugenics in Spain would be:

• Valleja Nájera (I'm not a fan) pleaded for some kind of "eugenics" basically in order to be up to date;
• he never tried enforced sterilisation, nor any other of the crimes one normally associates with eugenics, though he encouraged the crime of state enforced CPS as "eugenic" measure against the asocial behaviour of supporting the side that had lost the war, which normally wouldn't qualify as Eugenics, except Valleja Nájera labelled it so;
• real crimes of Eugenics were introduced in 1983 by the PSOE, see above mentioned third reason.

The wikipedians writing above article have basically stated that being encouraged to chose a husband or wife with some view of the health status, and being banned from aborting in a state that wants many children somehow morally equates to Nazi Germany (while it lasted) or Sweden (beginning under Per Albin and ending under Olof Palme) forcing certain people to have, for women, the fallopial tubes tied, like Wendell Holmes considered "fair enough" for Carrie Buck before either Per Albin or Adolph Hitler got involved, or possibly also for males.

That's like exonerating the Russian Revolution from state sponsored stealing, while pretending a very moderate taxation is stealing from the citizens.

One crime Valleja Nájera actually did encourage was making sure people with certain diagnoses never got opportunities to procreate, i e supervision to keep them outside contact with the opposite sex. It is absolutely not unknown on the side of the Left wing régimes, less bad than first allowing sex and then forcing someone to abort (as I know had happened to a woman with trisomy in Sweden, from her posts on Silverplanet) and even so it is still a crime.

1 Now the Spirit manifestly saith, that in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error, and doctrines of devils, 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy, and having their conscience seared, 3 Forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful, and by them that have known the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving: 5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

1 Tim, beginning of chapter 4.
https://drbo.org/chapter/61004.htm

It's obviously even less acceptable with people who theoretically could canonically marry, as things like the diagnoses schizophrenia, paranoia, bipolar etc are not per se impediments to marriage (being "in an episode" is an impediment for marrying then, if the "episode" actually amounts to not being capax sui — a big if). But even with people whose permanent condition involves basically permanent childhood (trisomy 21), it's still a gruesome thing. I am not a fan of Valleja Nájera. Even less of people trying to enforce such policies of his against my right to marry, if there are such ... but Valleja Nájera is not the single go to of every Franco friendly reactionary, as those wikipedians seem to like to think.

Thankfully for the Franco régime, he had pretty few parliamentarians to support propositions and could not get it through.

One problem is, some people who cannot say they support Hitler or the eugenics of Hitler, because that is illegal, will pervert supporting Franco into supporting Valleja Nájera. I think I recall one "Princesse Visigothe" or sth putting Valleja Nájera's proposals online.

2) Are French Reactionaries even moderately OK with the wikipedia?

What do you think of 'Putin proposes to replace Wikipedia with a 'reliable' Russian version'?
Sergey B.' answer
https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-of-Putin-proposes-to-replace-Wikipedia-with-a-reliable-Russian-version/answer/Sergey-B-30

NB Putin did indeed say about replacing wikipedia. It took me a while to find the full version of the transcript to understand the context in which it appeared. In was a meeting of the Russian language council, where among other things, certain Mr. Derevyanko, whoever he is, in his speech about general problems of school education mentioned that schoolchildren often use wikipedia as source.

...

To this speech Putin make a short comment that, yes, dictionaries are good thing and that wikipedia should be replaced with Big Russian Encyclopedia [...] students should have a reliable source that is as easy to access online as is wikipedia, so that this source (Big Russian Encyclopedia) would replace wikipedia as the main source of information when schoolchildren our searching for it.

Obviously, I am not against putting Encyclopedia Britannica or Academic American Encyclopedia online for free without subscription, and if Putin wants to do that with Big Russian Encyclopedia, go for it.

I am however against the idea that wikipedia is inherently less reliable than the more expensive encyclopedias.

I am afraid, after Putin's remark, school children who use wikipedia without excuses like "Big Russian Encyclopedia had no article on this one" or things like that could be punished or get lower grades, even if what they wrote was perfectly correct.

Now, there is a problem in the supposedly Conservative to Reactionary sphere here in France. Some people may not have noticed it, but since I identify as Reactionary myself, I cannot help getting the memo. It has more than once shown disdain for the wikipedia.

Marion Sigaut a few years ago pretended Wikipedia had mischaracterised her as "Historian / Essayist" because in reality, she is "Historian, period."*

She is certainly a Historian by formation, she as certainly expresses herself in what amounts to essays rather than statistic tables or compilations of sources and quotes from them.**

This is hardly the only time when French Nationalists have a problem with wiki, and agree with some on the Left on that.***

3) French far Right in the detestation for Stalinism supported the opposition in Russia.

Fair enough.

They then supported the more national part of the oppposition when it came to power (meaning Putin).

For 2000 AD, that's pretty tolerable.

But in the time since then, Russia has kind of taken over.

a) Russia is preferred over Ukraine. A land isn't its government, if it were, they'd need to hate France (given their view of the presidents since de Gaulle, and including him). That Zelenski is such and such a thing is highly irrelevant.

Here is a list of 2018 aborters, a selection of nine:

1 Bulgaria 380		4 Romania 359		7 Sweden 317
2 Georgia 375		5 Russia 353		8 France 291.1
3 Moldova 364		6 Hungary 327		9 Ukraine 247

If we go back to 2016 (when Putin had been in power for 17 years), 391. We are in each case talking of abortion ratio, so and so many abortions per 1000 live births. Given that they pretend to prefer fewer abortions rather than more, it's paradoxical to prefer Russia over Ukraine.°

Also, they pretend to prefer Christianity over Dechristianisation.°° In 2012, Russia had

47.4% Christianity

41% Russian Orthodoxy

6.4% Other Christian

38.2% No religion

Ukraine in 2018 had

87.3% Christianity

11.0% No religion

b) Orthodoxy without belief is seen as preferrable over Evangelicals who actually do believe. Russians lead, French Right Wing follows suit.

c) Creationism is OK for Intelligent Design Arguments, but less OK for Young Earth Creationism and generally Creation science, whether as Flood geology or as Baraminology. Russians lead, French Right Wing follows suit.

Let us compare with a Russian heritage French Right Wing journalist back in the day. Serge de Beketch.

Il se présente comme créationniste en affirmant qu'il ne « croi[t] pas à l'évolution », que « le monde n'est pas vieux de plus d'une dizaine de milliers d'années » et que « le Déluge, l'arche de Noé, la tour de Babel sont des faits historiques13 ».

Serge de Beketch
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serge_de_Beketch

Footnote 13 reads, but right now the link is inaccessible:

"Quartier%20Libre"%20(2001) Entretien avec le magazine "Quartier Libre" (2001)
https://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/index2.php?url=http://www.geocities.com/catholique_et_royaliste2002/arch1/sdbql.htm&title=Entretien%20avec%20le%20magazine%20#federation=archive.wikiwix.com&tab=url

That's exactly what Young Earth Creationism was like back in the day.°°°

Today, Cercle d'Ulfric blends Intelligent Design and some hints of Racism, but shies away from Creation Science. That's someone they prefer over me. The father of Beketch was obviously as a Foreign Legion better received than I am. People who have been civilians to 55 are not all that famous for becoming good soldiers, besides, I'm a colleague of Beketch, not of his father.

4) A certain Sixtus Henry is pretty important. I think he is very important in the kind of preference of Russia over Ukraine, or of ID over Young Earth I just mentioned. But first a detour. Carlos Hugo, Duke of Parma is born in 1930. His brother Prince Sixtus Henry of Bourbon-Parma in 1940. Primogeniture? Sure, Carlos Hugo would normally prevail. Let's however look at an interview with Sixtus Henry.

Entrevista a S.A.R. Don Sixto Enrique de Borbón
21 DICIEMBRE, 2020
https://carlismo.es/entrevista-a-s-a-r-don-sixto-enrique-de-borbon/

Let's take a look at his wars. Yes, unlike me, he was actually a real soldier, in and of itself an admirable thing.

En 1980, ya en París, usted fue acuchillado por un antiguo paracaidista. ¿Cuál fue el móvil del crimen?

Ya le he dicho que, además del carlismo, he sido muy activo en muchos escenarios internacionales en defensa de la cristiandad. Concretamente en Oriente Próximo. Y en aquella época estaba muy implicado en la guerra del Líbano. Creo que esa es la pista que hay que seguir.

...

¿Qué hizo exactamente en Angola y por qué fue?

Mi padre era Borbón Parma y Braganza, hijo del último duque reinante de Parma y de una infanta portuguesa de la rama miguelista, algo semejante al carlismo español. Siempre estuvimos por tanto ligados también al tradicionalismo portugués.

Mi padre, a diferencia de lo que le pasaba con Franco, tuvo buenas relaciones con Salazar. Hasta el punto de que, tras la expulsión de la Legión, me mandó a Lisboa, donde me entrevistaba regularmente con Salazar. Fue en ese periodo cuando, con mi primo Francisco Braganza Van Uden, combatí a las guerrillas en la guerra de Angola.

To resume in English:

• He was in Lebanon
• He was knifed in Paris in 1980 by a parachutist, which he considers related to previous
• He had earlier on been in Angola, having been better received by Salazar than by Franco, because he is a Miguelista heir as well as a Carlista heir, and Salazar was cooler about Miguelistas than Franco about Carlistas.

Spontaneously, for me these would be reasons to admire him. I'd have been on the Portuguese side in Angola, if I hadn't been born when it was over. Not because I hate black people, but because I hate ruthless murder. I recall a book title as "War in Angola" and I don't think it was War in Angola : The Final South African Phase by Helmoed-Römer Heitman, I think the author was a British officer and an observer.

He noted that the guerilleros would not just kill white Portuguese farmers, but if their black tenants or perhaps also servants refused to betray them, they would kill these too. In my 20's, I had a phase when I used Lumumba about like Swedes use "the Devil" as a cuss word.

Gemayel and Aoun are names that I cherish.

But let's also see two things on his attitude to his older brother and his nephew.

Yo quería reconquistar una romería carlista que comunistas y separatistas del entorno de mi hermano habían desnaturalizado. ... (on the brother Carlos Ugo's surroundings, about Montejurra 1976: the pilgrimage had on his view been hijacked and needed reconquest, from Commies and Separatists)
De un lado está el respeto a las leyes tradicionales. Ahí tiene la Pragmática de Matrimonios de Carlos III. Y toda la normativa sucesoria, a la que va vinculada la historia del carlismo. ... (on why the nephew having married a non-noble cannot inherit the throne)

The other day, day of St.Genevieve and birthday of Tolkien, I wrote a defense of Euskera batua, as a unified Basque language, against a Spanish politician of the name Ortega Smith.~ Without doubt, my Spanish is somewhat inadequate, I even made a mistake for which I apologised in a footnote. The problem is, when I posted it under a portrait of a Basque whom Sixtus Henry recalled from back then, he seems to have taken it as an insult to the deceased, he promptly eradicated my link. Dito for a comment involving an interview of the late Pope Michael I, on an Epiphany greeting.

It seems, to him, Euskera batua is still a symbol for the guys in ETA who were not satisfied with autonomy and linguistic equal rights (far off as that was under Franco), but full independence, and willing to blow people up to get it. To me, Euskera is a memory of the hospitalera of Irún. Today, in Álava, Biscay and Guipúzcoa, you are free to approach police or tax collectors or judges in either Spanish or Euskera. Precisely as a man in Helsinki (which we call Helsingfors) can approach authorities in either Finnish or Swedish. That's why ETA is basically dead.

ETA declared ceasefires in 1989, 1996, 1998 and 2006. On 5 September 2010, ETA declared a new ceasefire[30] that remained in force, and on 20 October 2011, ETA announced a "definitive cessation of its armed activity".[31] On 24 November 2012, it was reported that the group was ready to negotiate a "definitive end" to its operations and disband completely.[32] The group announced on 7 April 2017 that it had given up all its weapons and explosives.[33] On 2 May 2018, ETA made public a letter dated 16 April 2018 according to which it had "completely dissolved all its structures and ended its political initiative".[34]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETA_(separatist_group)

Something for Netanyahu and Herzog to ponder, I'd say.

Whatever the historic bad taste an Ortega Smith could associate with Euskera, recalling the days of ETA, and I was actually surprised ETA lasted so long, people who grew up learning it in school should not be scorned for that association, and even less for the linguistic, frankly, incompetence, lack of correct comparisons, of that man on that occasion. I had not attacked Ortega Smith's policies apart from that, so it was hardly an attack on him.

But while I think Sixtus Henry has mostly (less sure about Montejurra 1976!) chosen his wars with honour, being in a lot of wars leaves scars. When I defended Franco in high school, on the count of his being too harsh to already defeated opponents, I recalled that he had been in wars and had been scarred by them. Sixtus Henry has partly the same excuse. But it is not totally a recommendation.

As for the comment on Charles III ... first, it was an Enlightenment monarch. Second, he eliminated a younger brother, Lewis Anthony James of Bourbon and Farnese, from possible future succession, when he did not remain a clergyman (he had not taken the sacrement of orders on being named a bishop, so he was a titular~~ clergyman only), by imposing an impossibility to succession given that María Teresa of Vallabriga and Rozas, was not of a sovereign house. While this may reflect an older custom, it became law only in 1776, the same year as the American Revolution, by Charles III who put down the mutiny of Esquilache, who had expelled the Jesuits nine years earlier, who was pretty much the opposite of Carlist ideals.

The reason being, the marriage would be unequal. Now, if Charles Xavier, the nephew of Sixtus Henry, had been realistically hoping to be king of Spain one day, like Philip VI under John Charles or John Charles under Franco, yes, the marriage would have been unequal. However, Charles Xavier has basically had his claim dormant, not abandoned, but waiting if there should be any kind of occasion, without trying to provoke such. He has lived as an upper class citizen, not as a future sovereign. Is that in itself an obstacle? If not, marrying someone who is actually in that respect his equal would hardly be an obstacle either. In fact ...

BREVE BIOGRAFÍA DE DON CARLOS
https://carlosdeborbon.com/resumen-biografico-de-don-carlos-javier/

... here is how he sees it:

Desde que el 28 de septiembre de 2003 Don Carlos Hugo confirió el título de Duque de Madrid a su primogénito Don Carlos, éste ha venido interesándose y haciéndose presente de forma creciente en la vida social, cultural y política española, siempre abierto a dialogar con cualesquiera agentes sociales, económicos o del mundo académico, estando al servicio de España y los españoles, desde la responsabilidad que le marcan sus deberes irrenunciables como titular de los derechos dinásticos del Carlismo al Trono español.

He cannot renounce his duties, therefore he remains at the service of Spain and the Spaniards. Both uncle and nephew remind me of Aragorn. Sixtus Henry as the veteran of many wars. Charles Xavier, as the one standing back, not trying to get what is his, not trying to even remotely be an usurper from the men whom he'd consider as heirs of usurpers.

I stated, I like Carlism, and I like both versions, Partido Carlista, which would support Charles Xavier, and Comunión Tradicionalista, which is what Sixtus Henry is heading. They have been separate since Montejurra in 1976, the year my grandfather died.

It would be good if they reconciled before Sixtus Henry died. Especially as Sixtus Henry has no direct heir.

Nevertheless, the tensions have contributed to mistaken paths by the French Far Right. Insofar as Sixtus Henry has prevailed.

Note, he has lived in Russia, as well as Portugal, Near East and especially France. He can have contributed to undue degrees of pro-Russianism. He can have taken as re-Christianisation positions in the Patriarchate of Moscow that were really a continued defeatism against the pretendedly already dead Communism.

5) The late Pope Michael I was part time Seminarian in Winona, for the SSPX. He is so to speak a former disciple of Archbishop Lefebvre. But he holds the position of SSPX is culpable, insofar as it can be described as R'n'R = Recognise and Resist.

Meanwhile, the archbishop himself had a kind of horror for the kind of thing that David Allen Bawden did in 1989 and 1990, leading to his election on the day of Our Lady of Mount Carmel, July 16, 1990. A few days after I had ceased my military service. The Archbishop had once with some excitation, even indignation, cried out "far be it from us, to erect ourself to the papacy" ... it's a bit like the marriages of Lewis of Bourbon and Farnese and of Charles Xavier. David Allen Bawden had no impressive position in advance. Calling a papal election was not automatically arranging to be elected.

The 29th of June 1988, a few weeks after I was received into the Catholic Church, a little more than two years before the election of David Bawden who took the name Michael, Archbishop Lefebvre and his old friend Castro Mayer consecrated four new bishops in Écône. A major sponsor of that event was Sixtus Henry.

It is possible that in this way, his quirks, his minor errors, have been involved in holding the SSPX hostage. They have no Pope of their own, they usually do not very much respect the "Popes" that are rival to Popes Michael I and II,they refuse to admit these, ergo, they are in the risk zone of taking up errors from laymen just because they happen to be moderately wealthy and friendly to them.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
I Lord's Day After Epiphany
7.I.2024

Appendix, France and Russia in my Stats:

These stats have not yet been published, but I already have them for 3 different week periods and for 2 different 24 hour periods, within the weeks, since last ones published.

7 days		24 h
Russia 2 + 2 + 8 + 1 + 181 + 125 + 8 + 3 + 6 + 65 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 39 + 13 + 6 = 462 France 2 + 2 + 19 + 34 + 31 + 24 + 16 + 2 + 1 + 5 + 1 + 10 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 25 + 197 + 42 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 10 + 1 = 433		France 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 16 + 6 + 8 + 2 + 2 + 26 + 2 = 66 Russia 5 + 1 + 6 + 21 + 15 + 3 + 1 = 52
Russia 1 + 1 + 19 + 3 + 4 + 3 + 6 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 25 + 2 + 1 + 50 + 1 + 4 + 5 + 109 + 173 + 2 + 2 + 16 = 434 ; 62 per day France 2 + 1 + 10 + 4 + 8 + 4 + 8 + 14 + 5 + 5 + 6 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 4 + 12 + 3 + 20 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 3 + 71 + 9 + 12 + 114 + 49 + 4 + 14 + 1 + 5 + 18 = 421 ; 60 per day		Russia 3 + 16 + 14 + 7 + 3 + 1 + 4 = 48 France 3 + 9 + 9 + 1 + 1 + 22 + 2 = 47
Russia 9 + 14 + 3 + 4 + 59 + 17 + 5 + 27 + 8 + 1 + 1 + 18 + 3 + 158 + 80 + 1 + 1 = 409 => 58 per day France 27 + 1 + 5 + 29 + 5 + 2 + 1 + 3 + 3 + 17 + 4 + 1 + 8 + 25 + 55 + 115 + 2 = 303 => 43 per day

They are not just next to each other here, on each of these stats, they had no other country between them.

Appendix, French Nationalism and Russia:

Marine Le Pen : sa passion russe qu'elle veut faire oublier
Mediapart | 5 avr. 2022
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrLTUNCNAwY

2:32 — 3:06

elle a vanté l'action de vladimir poutine sur la chaîne pro russie à tv comme marie le pen vous avez certainement pour wenger poutine j'ai une certaine admiration c'est vrai parce que c'est un homme pour pas oublier quand même qui a récupéré un pays qui s'il a souffert de dizaines et de dizaines d'années de souffrances terribles il à redonner la fierté à son peuple il a redonné le moral à son peuple qui aujourd'hui je crois a encore et à raison le sentiment d'être un grand peuple et j'avoue que pour ça je vais admirer

Marion Maréchal Le Pen said that she admired Putin for giving back to his country and people their pride and hope, after the country was in shambles when he took power.

Well, I happen to love Germany (now especially the South, but earlier I did not discriminate against the North either). Imagine whom I was admiring for very similar motives in my earliest teens. I got over it and came to prefer Franco. But I still love the Autobahn and the Volkswagen Beetle.

Notes:

*Today the wikipedians have changed it to:

Activité principale	Écrivain Conférencière
Langue d’écriture	français
Genres	Histoire Roman historique Autobiographie Biographie

** When I do amateur history, I do all three. My academic disciplines were mainly Latin and Greek, and I didn't do a "phil. cand." which is basically Licentiate of Arts, hence "amateur" ... my statistics are often compiled from wikipedia articles, btw ...

*** I don't think it's a pure coincidence I got this question on quora, see my post with answer:

Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere : Why Rely on Wiki? (As it Is : the Free Encyclopedia)
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2024/01/why-rely-on-wiki-as-it-is-free.html

° As proximate reference giving more basic references, I refer to:

New blog on the kid: Russia and US - Abortions
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2021/04/russia-and-us-abortions.html

The abortion statistics from the US, before the Dobbs case, were for 2016, as said, 391 in Russia vs 158 in the US.

°° Reference immediately:

New blog on the kid: Ukraine vs Russia : More Christian, Fewer Abortions
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2023/03/ukraine-vs-russia-more-christian-fewer.html

°°° I also recall Marc Dem and François Brigneau with fondness. But that was before the Putin era. As for Young Earth Creationism, by now the leading proponents are not playing around with "10 000 years" but chosing between a Masoretic or a Septuagient chronology and keeping to it with some strictness. The Catholic Church has more or less indirectly proposed three chronologies : Syncellus on Nicaea II, 787 AD, St. Jerome via Historia scholastica into the liturgy of the Christmas Night, and Ussher or similarly Masoretic, by Trent Session IV endorsing the Vulgate.

~ EN LENGUA ROMANCE EN ANTIMODERNISM Y DE MIS CAMINACIONES : Para defender el euskera batua
https://enfrancaissurantimodernism.blogspot.com/2024/01/para-defender-el-euskera-batua.html

~~ The wikis differ. English wiki pretends he was ordained at age 8, which is impossible, that is probably due to an Anglican confusion between taking up a position and becoming a bishop. Spanish wiki pretends he was ordained on receiving his second bishopric in 1741, but the German one only says he received it.

Lepanto, by G. K. Chesterton

G.K. Chesterton's Lepanto
Catholic Family Podcast, 7 Oct. 2023
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_t85SUNwNM

Who Provided Refuge to Jews in Europe?

Here is a quote proposing Sweden was best:

By contrast, much of Protestant Europe heroically resisted. Tiny Denmark fought off the Third Reich to the utmost of its abilities, protecting its Jewish population by evacuating them to neutral Sweden and elsewhere. Finland successfully defended its independence in the face of both Soviet and German machinations. As for Sweden, home to Scandinavia’s largest Jewish population, few if any countries did more to oppose the Holocaust. Swedes provided sanctuary to over 7,000 Danish Jews and over tens of thousands of Hungarian Jews.

Remember When Fascism Was a Catholic Problem?
A historian’s perspective on religious dogma
Ben Freeland Jul 14, 2018 · 10 min read
https://medium.com/@benfreeland/remember-when-fascism-was-a-catholic-problem-ba3602d34437

As Hungarian Jews were mentioned, that refers to Raul Wallenberg.

However, when I bought a paperback about this hero, I noted that in Budapest, he and the Spanish diplomats were dividing the Jews between them : Ashkenazim to Sweden, Shephardim to Spain. It's years ago, but I have not forgotten.

As I don't recall the title of the book, here is a confirmation from elsewhere, via wiki, that Spain indeed did so. Franco's Spain.

During the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939), the synagogues were closed and post-war worship was kept in private homes. Jewish public life resumed in 1947 with the arrival of Jews from Europe and North Africa.

In the first years of the World War II, "Laws regulating their admittance were written and mostly ignored."[71] They were mainly from Western Europe, fleeing deportation to concentration camps from occupied France, but also Jews from Eastern Europe, especially Hungary. Trudi Alexy refers to the "absurdity" and "paradox of refugees fleeing the Nazis' Final Solution to seek asylum in a country where no Jews had been allowed to live openly as Jews for over four centuries." [72]

Throughout World War II, Spanish diplomats of the Franco government extended their protection to Eastern European Jews, especially in Hungary. Jews claiming Spanish ancestry were provided with Spanish documentation without being required to prove their case and either left for Spain or survived the war with the help of their new legal status in occupied countries.

Once the tide of war began to turn, and Count Francisco Gómez-Jordana Sousa succeeded Franco's brother-in-law Serrano Súñer as Spain's foreign minister, Spanish diplomacy became "more sympathetic to Jews", although Franco himself "never said anything" about this.[71] Around that same time, a contingent of Spanish doctors travelling in Poland were fully informed of the Nazi extermination plans by Governor-General Hans Frank, who was under the misimpression that they would share his views about the matter; when they came home, they passed the story to Admiral Luís Carrero Blanco, who told Franco.[73]

Diplomats discussed the possibility of Spain as a route to a containment camp for Jewish refugees near Casablanca but it came to naught due to lack of Free French and British support.[74] Nonetheless, control of the Spanish border with France relaxed somewhat at this time,[75] and thousands of Jews managed to cross into Spain (many by smugglers' routes). Almost all of them survived the war.[76] The American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee operated openly in Barcelona.[77]

Shortly afterwards, Spain began giving citizenship to Sephardic Jews in Greece, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania; many Ashkenazic Jews also managed to be included, as did some non-Jews. The Spanish head of mission in Budapest, Ángel Sanz Briz, saved thousands of Ashkenazim in Hungary by granting them Spanish citizenship, placing them in safe houses and teaching them minimal Spanish so they could pretend to be Sephardim, at least to someone who did not know Spanish. The Spanish diplomatic corps was performing a balancing act: Alexy conjectures that the number of Jews they took in was limited by how much German hostility they were willing to engender.[78]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Spain#Spanish_Civil_War_&_World_War_II

All footnotes from 71 to 78 are referring to:

Alexy, Trudi. The Mezuzah in the Madonna's Foot: Oral Histories Exploring Five Hundred Years in the Paradoxical Relationship of Spain and the Jews, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1993. ISBN 978-0-671-77816-3, hardcover; ISBN 978-0-06-060340-3, paperback reprint.

Back to Ben Freeland.

The only Scandinavian country to truly succumb to fascist rule was Norway. Tiny Estonia and Latvia — which, like Finland, found themselves caught in the middle between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany — were unable to muster much in the way of resistance to the Reich. Latvia was unique among majority Protestant countries for nearly annihilating its Jewish population. Meanwhile, over 75 per cent of Estonia’s small Jewish community succeeded in escaping to the USSR.

Could it have sth to do with fortunes of war, with how Latvia and how Estonia were placed in relation to German troops or near or far from Russian such?

Estonia was next to Finland's attackers, the Red Army. Latvia was next to German expansion East, troups trying to go to Moscow.

When it comes to Jews from either country, I have a special place in my heart for Latvia. There was a konversa who was still Jewish (of Israelite confession) while marrying whom I honour.

Even Germany itself, as much a Lutheran country as a Catholic one, has a paradoxically lower Jewish mortality rate than many of the countries it occupied before and during World War II. In his superb book, The Meaning of Hitler, German historian Sebastian Haffner argues that Adolf Hitler’s antisemitism was more typical of his native Austria and Central-Eastern Europe than of Germany proper, and that his anti-Jewish policies enjoyed less widespread support at home than they did in many of the occupied territories.

Nevertheless, votes for Hitler in 1933 were higher in Protestant parts, like 90 % or more in Berlin. Because they hated Jews? No, but because they loved Hitler's progressive manners and thought Antisemitism was a way to get votes in Bavaria (Austria was not involved) and that he didn't mean it seriously.

Also, Hitler openly announced Antisemitism in 1933, when getting to power, but didn't get started all that much with camps prior to the war, so the German Jews had plenty of time to get elsewhere.

Also, when the French film Rafle came, a news article (LeMonde, I think) stated that Laval (the guy who delivered Jews to German camps) had stated he was proud the Jews were going to get "if not the love, at least the habit of hard work" - in other words, many people who sent Jews to German camps had the impression they were sending them to a Lao Gai, not to a death camp proper.

And Laval was not a devout Catholic:

Laval was born 28 June 1883 at Châteldon, Puy-de-Dôme, in the northern part of Auvergne. His father worked in the village as a café proprietor, butcher and postman; he also owned a vineyard and horses. Laval was educated at the village school in Châteldon. At age 15, he was sent to a Paris lycée to study for his baccalauréat. Returning south to Lyon, he spent the next year reading for a degree in zoology.[3]

Laval joined the Socialists in 1903, when he was living in Saint-Étienne, 62 km southwest of Lyon. "I was never a very orthodox socialist", he said in 1945, "by which I mean that I was never much of a Marxist. My socialism was much more a socialism of the heart than a doctrinal socialism... I was much more interested in men, their jobs, their misfortunes and their conflicts than in the digressions of the great German pontiff."[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Laval

Austrofascists may have had a greater dislike of Jews than National Socialists, but Austrofascists being devout Catholics, did not so much about it. Also, they defined Jew confessionally, so the few restrictions (no Lao Gai camps!) were not bothering konversos.

Freeman again:

Catholicism’s fascism problem did not go away at the end of World War II. While it did bring an end to the Nazi puppet states of central and eastern Europe, the neutral dictatorships of Franco and Salazar persisted until the mid-1970s.

And Franco and Salazar did not discriminate against Jews, and both had provided shelter for Jews. Freeman seems to like to jump back and forth between "fascism" and partifipation in German camps for Jews. As if they were equivalent, when they were not.

Also, Italy had few Jews deported to German camps, thanks both to first hour Fascists who did not like the turn to Racism in 1938, at least not as applied under Salò Republic, and, not least, to the Catholic population.

Get the book The Assisi Underground: Assisi and the Nazi Occupation, by Alexander Ramati. - I did not know about the Mayor of Assisi:

The rescue of Jews who sought refuge in Assisi, beginning in the spring of 1943, was organized by Bishop Placido Nicolini, his brother Ruffino Niacci, and Father Aldo Brunacci. Only Father Brunacci is alive today and was on hand for the ceremony of thanks. But the entire population of the village collaborated in the rescue, including its fascist Mayor, Amaldo Fortini.

Jewish Telegraphic Agency : Honor Townspeople of Assisi Who Saved Jews During World War Ii
[internet version of a bulletin from March 16, 1982]
https://www.jta.org/1982/03/16/archive/honor-townspeople-of-assisi-who-saved-jews-during-world-war-ii

I had never called myself a Fascist prior to reading about Amaldo Fortini. I do not regret it, since it involved lately also reading about Aldo Finzi. Ben Freeman is simply oversimplifying things to demonise more than can be tied to demonic behaviour, like putting Jews (or anyone else) into Lao Gai type or worse camps.

And if Jews seeking refuge started in 1943, this is because prior to 1943, Jews had not been in any danger in Catholic and Fascist Italy. Except of course the few who wanted to marry non-Jews, like when converting to Christianity, having to get somewhere else to do that since back in 1938. As I already stated elsewhere, Italian Fascism was at its best before Carta della Razza ... except for guys like Amaldo Fortini, of course.

I wonder where Ben Freeman earned his degrees in history ...? Wait, I have a hunch, he only studied Social Sciences to become a Secondary Education teacher. Such incompetence being encouraged is of course a wider, if less acute, argument against widespread near compulsory secondary schooling than Columbine High Shooting.

Riverside High School : FREEMAN, BEN - SOCIAL SCIENCE
https://www.lcps.org/domain/4743

"down by the Riverside, I'll study war no more"

Perhaps that school should quit studying World War II, until they get competent, if it is the same Ben Freeman - I'll ask.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Bagnolet
St. Henry, Emperor
Sts. Joel and Ezra
13.VII.2019

PS: I also read this on Canada:

Even in Canada, support for authoritarian and fascist ideas reached its pinnacle in uber-Catholic Québec. This was thanks in no small part to the ultramontane views of influential cleric-historian Lionel-Adolphe Groulx and the explosive rhetoric of journalist-turned-fascist-agitator Adrien Arcand. Even former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, that paragon of secular Canadian liberalism, acknowledged in his memoirs that his early education in the 1940s at the Jesuit-run Collège Jean-de-Brébeuf in Montreal instilled him with a positive view of Mussolini and other European Catholic Fascists of the era.

So, liking Mussolini is supposed to have been a worse problem than sterilising, maiming, unmanning or unwomanning, hundreds if not thousands of people who happened to be the wrong ethnicity in Alberta and in British Columbia? Authoritarian is then worse than Totalitarian to that author. Not to me. To me, authoritarian is no big deal, sometimes good, but totalitarian is evil./HGL

PPS, that was Ben Freeman again. And, if you did not get it, sterilisation by force is part of what I count as totalitarian, and it did not happen in Italy from 1922 to 1937, and probably not even from 1938 to the end./HGL

PPPS, sorry, it is not "Raul Wallenberg" but "Raoul Wallenberg" - French spelling of first name./HGL

Une connaissance plus ou moins nazie vient d'envoyer un mail "sur l'eugénisme en Espagne"

Je viens de répondre, à tous les autres qui recevaient en même temps que moi, à peu près (un mail pas délivré à destinataire):

Quelle bonheur que Franco n'a pas adopté ces conneries!

Avais-je tort?

Même les racistes qui louent le racisme et qui cherchent du racisme en Espagne (Valleja Najera avait des telles idées, hélas) n'en trouvent que deux professeurs, et admettent que la race espagnole est célébrée pour sa mixité, quand à sa biologie!

Je crois avoir un peu avant trouvé une indication que Valleja Najera ait changé ses idées. Mais ces racistes n'ont pas trouvé exemple de lois raciales en Espagne Fasciste. En Suède Social-Démocrate il y en a eu. Entre 1935 (Régime Social-Démocrate de Per Albin Hansson) jusqu'à dans les années 1970' (abolition de ces lois par le régime de Olof Palme - ça c'était son bon côté). Les tsigans d'Espagne ont eu une meilleure décade 1960 que ceux de la Suède.

Au moins sur le plan des lois.

Et la Suède est en train de s'empirer, par des choses illégales ou que j'espère telles.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris V
St Jean l'Évangéliste
et Dimanche dans l'Octave de Noël
27-XII-2015

Obama's Take on History

1) In Answer to Mr. Obama's question from a long time ago, 2) Obama's Take on History

We already knew he had a collectivist view of schools.

At the National Prayer Breakfast, President Obama reminded attendees that violence rooted in religion isn’t exclusive to Islam, but has been carried out by Christians as well.

Obama said that even though religion is a source for good around the world, there will always be people willing to “hijack religion for their own murderous ends.”

“Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” Obama said. “In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

He summed up a certain ideology. Note he did not say - unless misquoted - that under Crusades and Inquisition [some] have committed terrible deeds, but that people committed, which will be taken as people who managed the affairs were each time or so committing terrible deeds. Is this true?

Before bringing up Crusades, what about asking whether they were agressive or retaliative wars?

As to Inquisition, the English one was the worst - and it was not in the name of Papacy, but in the name of the English Parliament, decision from 1401. It continued past the Reformation. Bloody Mary was not acting on behalf of either Pope or husband King Philip - but on behalf of that law. James I (as he was in England), who was not a Catholic, applied it in 1611 or 1612 against a Baptist who was burnt on the stake. At a time when Inquisition had no point any longer either as to Orthodoxy nor as to hope of retaining religious unity in England.

As to "slavery and Jim Crow", I think at least Jim Crow laws were from a XIXth C. already very secularised in the élite - in fact an élite the secularism of which he continues himself. Slavery was starting - under less bad initial premises - under Cromwell, notoriously an Anti-Catholic, notoriously one of the believers in Foxe's Book or Martyrs which attacks Inquisition and Catholicism over and over again.

And if you shift perspective from slaves exploited for labour to Amer-Indians treated worse than slaves, or Esquimeaux, take a look at Canada and at pretty secularised United Church of Canada. Catholics were off the really guilty decisions there.

As to continued slavery, it is ditinct from slave hunt and slave trade. Pope Gregory XVI condemned these latter, Pope Pius IX said there were some real cases for someone being slave - meaning apart from personal crime, or from voluntary self sale, the case when one is already a slave and is not being either mutilated or seduced to sin by one's master. That is why he supported Confederacy. It was, as you may know, no longer involved in slave trade.

And in Africa, slave hunt was being perpetrated by several small peoples against each other, so that at least sometimes the ones who were captured and partly sold to Europeans had been guilty of the crime of slave hunt first. Even if Kunta Kinte was not such a case, he was simply a victim of inter-African slave hunt.

As to the consecutive history of his family, some misadventures, as I recall, would under Spanish, i e under fully Catholic, rule have implied the master would have been legally forced to free the slave.

At least this was the theory of the Spanish legislation and barring episodes of secularism, it was even applied.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Bpi, Georges Pompidou
St Cyril of Alexandria
9-II-2015

Breitbart : Obama At National Prayer Breakfast: ’People Committed Terrible Deeds In The Name of Christ’
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/05/obama-at-national-prayer-breakfast-people-committed-terrible-deeds-in-the-name-of-christ/

A Comparison?

Es como si nosotros por cada atentado de la ETA hubiéramos matado vascos, y derribado hospitales y escuelas por efectos y daños colaterales porque allí, "viven terroristas".

My translation: It is as if, for each attentate by the ETA we had killed Basks and destroyed (?*) hospitals and school by collateral effects and damages, because there, there "live terrorists" - a Carlist summing up of what Israel is doing in Gaza.

Here is the article, for those knowing how to hablar y leer el castellano:

LEGITIMISTA DIGITAL : viernes, 18 de julio de 2014
TANQUES ISRAELÍES INVADEN GAZA MIENTRAS PROSIGUEN LOS BOMBARDEOS
http://www.legitimistadigital.com/2014/07/tanques-israelies-invaden-gaza-mientras.html

There is perhaps one difference. ETA considered Spanish police as invadors for patrolling in Euskadi (and perhaps still do). They do not consider Spaniards as invaders for living in Madrid.

And the Spaniards that live in Madrid are not invaders into Euskadi either. BUT : One can argue whether Israelis who when in Europe heard Israel had been founded and took advantage of that and meant no ill to Palestinians, hardly even knew they existed, only heard Zionist propaganda, can count as invaders. One cannot deny some in Hamas or perhaps even further out count them as such. And this, though uncharitable, is considerably less unrealistic than it would be to count Madrileños as invaders into Euskadi for living in Madrid. After all, there has not been a large Basque populace displaced or selfdisplaced from Madrid before the Spaniards came there, perhaps ever in all history, or if at all, it was so far back that it is forgotten and counted as a curiosity.

When European and American and Oriental non-Palestinian Jews came to Tell Aviv is not at all so far back. Romans and Iberians have mixed over centuries, no difference left. This is not the case for the three religious communities (or four, if you count Jewish Christians as separate from Palestinian Christians) in their present proportions in the area.

If you have a past that may look as that of a bandit, even if that is only to some people, it may be wise to try to look no more like a bandit than you need to.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre University Library
St Camillo de Lellis
18-VII-2014

* Knocked down, demolished, brought down, after checking.