Recently, from what I see in the latest news in The Unhived Mind forum, the Jesuit order feels a certain vague sense of superficiality in the global information, probably a collateral effect of these nine years of exposition of Jews and Americans as true “masterminds” of 911. It is my precise duty to welcome their preoccupations.
When the collaborationists of the Italian Fascist authorities in Slovenia told that "they hadn't alternative" except the "collaboration" with the aggressors, they didn't express a totally wrong concept. But if the "Bolshevism" could be blamed of the use of the occupation in order to realize the "Communist cleaning" of Slovenia, this kind of blame values at the same time for the "pious collaborationists" of Grazioli.
When bishop (and criminal of war) Gregorij Rožman consigned that personal memorial for Mussolini in the hands of the Fascist Italian governor of Ljubljana, was collaborating with the aggressor or trying to deceive him? The supporters of the second version affirm that the memorial was written by Grazioli. They are right, because in “Belogardizem”, it is the same former partisan Saje to present both texts. Rožman presented a personal version, then corrected by Grazioli. The correct version was then signed by the bishop. In this way the original "I express full loyalty” was changed in the more oppressive and unconditioned “Accept also, Duce, our devotion and collaboration without condition". But the bishop agreed with the material facts with the version of Grazioli, as he signed the "personal memorial" accepted it in a collaboration without condition.
Did Grazioli aimed his personal Berretta gun at the temple of the bishop, in order to get the signature under the “manipulated” version of the “personal memorial”? Of course not. The mine is an allegorical image to explain how any kind of oppressive request would have immediately putted on fire the entire Roman Catholic priesthood of Slovenia. After monsignor Gabrovšek did all those efforts in that national emergency political meeting on the 3rd April 1941, in order to avoid in the most absolute way any kind of military, civil and even passive form of resistance against the Nazi-Fascist troops which were going to invade Yugoslavia, it would have meant the total, complete schizophrenic contradiction! Of course it was not the psychiatric medical text the greatest preoccupation in the mind of the Roman Catholic priests in that moment, but the serious risk to see their plan of religious cleaning exposed by the contradictions.
For this reason we can conclude that it was not the bishop to make a favor to the high commissar, but the opposite. In presenting that "I express full loyalty” instead of the final “devotion and collaboration without condition”, the bishop was preoccupied to not appear as the true spiritual author of the definitive official text. As the church of Rome needed to build a “saint alliance” with Fascist Italy against the common enemy, in order to have its “peasant war” and its brave “ecumenical common holy front”, with which to make a religious clean sweep of the Slovenian society, she had to avoid any kind of possible enmity between the priesthood and the occupants because the priority was the ideological imprisonment - in the Communist cul-de-sac – of that part of Slovenia to be cleaned. But at the same time she needed to present herself as “constrained”, by the “necessity” of the war against the “common enemy”, to the “submission” under the authority of the Italian occupant. In other words to not appear like the mastermind and/or the beneficiary, but like a secondary-role actor. The synthesis of such different necessities is at the ground of that double text.
If the bishop was preoccupied to not appear too much involved in the saint alliance with the Italian occupant, the task to brainwash the faithfuls with the necessity of an unconditioned devotion and collaboration was assigned to the rest of the Romanist clergy. Two entire chapters of the book “Belogardizem”, the first entitled “The path of the bishop and of the priesthood into the betrayal”, and second entitled “The guilty of the printed words”, from page 54 to page 75, are dedicated to the hammering brainwash of the Roman Catholic church press for the “devotion and obedience without condition”. The solemn mass in the cathedral of Ljubljana for the victorious end of the aggression against Yugoslavia, held personally by bishop Gregorij Rožman on 22nd May 1941, is well known. Worth to be mentioned, in conclusion of this "journey beyond superficiality", are the words of Jesuit Jakob Žibert, in two articles of the Jesuit periodical "Messenger of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus" of May and June 1941. There he praised the High Comissar Emilio Grazioli as a man "who demonstrated the virtues of a statesman and for this reason he gained the special benevolence of the Slovenes" and described that 3rd May, when the letters of submission were consigned in the hands of the "statesman" Grazioli, as a day when "an happy news surprised us ... under the protection of the powerful Italy we could remain trustful to the faith of our fathers and to develop indisturbed ourselves as a nation".
Only just you scratch the surface of the Hell, the face of Wladimir Ledochowsky appears enlightened by the flames.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
"I'll tell you honestly what I think of the MVAC. I'm not Slovenian, but also watch the Slovenes and their struggle: MVAC helps us Italians very much ... but among the Slovenes it creates such hatred that in fifty years you will not be able to overcome it. "
(As I have no time, no resources, no money, no support at disposition, it is clear that what I wrote is affected by many errors and uncorrectness. I am not a prostitute lay journalist of this dirty Vatican 'tollerant' regime called 'democracy'. I have not the 51% of the Bank of America supporting my writings. I don't control the Casinò of Ostenda and neither Citroen and Peugeot as the General Superior did at least in 1958. So corrections and additions could appear in the future)