Quote:

Quote:
This is one thing that gets me where it hurts..This holier then thou people.

How dare these cardinal and catholic leader say anything against someone else. I guess we just swept the boys under the rug. They never harmed a child, did they!

Hi all,

I was born and raised Catholic. While I was taken my Catecism classes things were alright. I noticed that at the end of class, the priest would point out one boy or girl to help him. Finally, it was my turn. I am seventy years old, and the horror of what happened that day has never left my mind. I was told, of course, not to mention it to anyone because if I did, I could not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. When I got home,I immediately told my mother what had happened. Later, when my father came home, she told me to tell him. When I did, he went into a rage and gave me the worst beating I had ever had, (for lying about the priest) About five years ago, I called the Archdiocese of Fall River and told them about the incident and subsequent incidents that had occured until I finally pushed the priest back, punched him, and knocked him over the pew. They actually sent a women out to interview me from Fall River who had a meeting in Washington D.C. She stopped by on her way back to Massachusetts. After about two hours, she said that she had a solution. She gave me one of her business cards, told me that she would enter me into a physcho ward and that the Archdiocese of Fall River would pick up the tap as soon as I was cured. She opened the door and I told her to get out because the air was beginning to smell. However, with all the lives that they have ruined, (In the name of GOD) they still have the Gall to judge others. I LOVE GOD, and I believe in Jesus, but the Vatican is the biggest Mafia organization in the world because they commit the crimes that become a very slow and agonizing death for their victims. The Bible teaches LOVE, the churches (All denominations teach Hate, Greed, and Deception.

I mention all denominations because I wanted my children to learn about GOD and one day a church bus stopped by and offered to pick up my children and take them to church on Sunday. My ex wife and I agreed. Every so often, the bus minister would stop by and ask if he could take our daughter with him as he was picking up treats for the kids and wanted her to show him what kids liked. About a year went by and the bus minister was transferred to an undisclosed church in a different town. I finally found out from my daughter that he would pick up four or five girls, take them shopping and then he took them to his house where they all stripped down. The rest is obvious. Back home I drove cab. One of my female passengers took my cab one day and she was apparently upset. After asking her what was wrong, she finally told me. She was depressed, so she went to a Rabbi, even though she was not Jewish. She trusted him. After talking with him for awhile, she noticed that he was behind her soothing her shoulders. She said that before to long, he was doing much more.

They all seem to have the right to ruin people's lives, but when, they are about to be caught they are mysteriously whisked off to another city, town, or state to continue their depraved habit, however they seem to have the right to deny others their rights. If two men or two women truly have love in their hearts they will pass that love onto their children. It is true that they cannot produce children of their own, however they can adopt children that have no love and probably give them a better understanding of love then a lot of us could. I believe that everyone has the right to choose their own lifestyle as long as they have no malice in mind.

There is a passage in the Bible that mentions affections and kissing on the lips. Man and man. Woman and woman. I have never understood that. If you are a man and you try to kiss me on the lips, you will get a fat lip very quickly, as I won't do it. However I won't critisize those that do. I apologize for seamingly ranting on, but this is one subject that makes me sick. There are thousands of people just like me that will never get justice because the churches are just to big to fight.

GOD BLESS YOU

~Mike~

http://www.countryvalues65.com

Mali Islamists gain ground despite French fighting

Oumar Toure comforts his wife Nicole Obre Toure, a French citizen, as she prepares to leave the region where she has lived for 12 years, in Segou, central Mali, Monday, Jan. 14, 2013. As Islamist militants gained ground Monday morning, Toure decided to move from the village where she lives into Segou, the regional capital. Once there, however, she learned that the French government had ordered the immediate evacuation of French citizens from the area. Despite intensive aerial bombardments by French warplanes, Islamist insurgents grabbed more territory in Mali Monday and moved closer to the capital, French and Malian authorities said. (AP Photo/Harouna Traore)

BAMAKO, Mali (AP) — Despite a punishing aerial bombardment by French warplanes, al-Qaida-linked insurgents grabbed more territory in Mali on Monday, seizing a strategic military camp that brought them far closer to the government's seat of power.

Declaring France had "opened the gates of hell" with its assault, the rebels threatened retribution.

"France ... has fallen into a trap much more dangerous than Iraq, Afghanistan or Somalia," declared Omar Ould Hamaha, a leader of the Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa, one of the rebel groups controlling the north, speaking on French radio Europe 1.

French fighter jets have been pummeling the insurgents' desert stronghold in the north since Friday, determined to shatter the Islamist domination of a region many fear could become a launch pad for terrorist attacks on the West and a base for coordination with al-Qaida in Yemen, Somalia and Pakistan.

The Islamist fighters responded with a counter-offensive Monday, overrunning the garrison town of Diabaly, about 100 miles (160 kilometers) north of Segou, the administrative capital of central Mali, said French Defense MinisterJean-Yves Le Drian.

The French Embassy in Bamako immediately ordered the evacuation of the roughly 60 French nationals in the Segou region, said a French citizen who insisted on anonymity out of fear for her safety.

France expanded its aerial bombing campaign, launching airstrikes for the first time in central Mali to combat the new threat. But the intense assault, including raids by gunship helicopters and Mirage fighter jets, failed to halt the advance of the rebels, who were only 250 miles (400 kilometers) from the capital, Bamako, in the far south.

The rebels "took Diabaly after fierce fighting and resistance from the Malian army, that couldn't hold them back," said Le Drian, the French defense minister.

Mali's military is in disarray and has let many towns fall with barely a shot fired since the insurgency in the West African nation began almost a year ago. While the al-Qaida-linked extremists control the north, they had been blocked in the narrow central part of the landlocked nation.

They appear to have now done a flanking move, opening a second front in the broad southern section of the country, knifing in from the west on government forces.

In response to the insurgent advances, Mauritania, which lies to the northwest of Mali, put its military on high alert. To the south, the nation of Burkina Faso sent military reinforcements to its border and set up roadblocks. Even Algeria, which had earlier argued against a military intervention, was helping France by opening its air space to French Rafale jets.

Many of Mali's neighbors, who had been pushing for a military intervention to flush out the jihadists, had argued that airstrikes by sophisticated Western aircraft would be no match for the mixture of rebel groups occupying northern Mali.

Leaders of ECOWAS, the regional body representing the 15 nations in western Africa, stressed that the north of Mali is mostly desert, and that it would be easy to pick off the convoys of rebel vehicles from the air since there is almost no ground cover.

Monday's surprise rebel assault and the downing of a French combat helicopter by rebel fire last week have given many pause. Just hours before Diabaly fell, a commander at the military post in Niono, the town immediately to the south, laughed on the phone, and confidently asserted that the Islamists would never take Niono.

By afternoon, the commander, who could not be named because he was not authorized to speak publicly, sounded almost desperate. "We feel truly threatened," he said.

He said the rebels approached Diabaly from the east, infiltrating the rice-growing region of Alatona, which until recently was the site of a large, U.S.-funded Millennium Challenge Corporation project.

French aircraft bombed a rebel convoy 25 miles (40 kilometers)) from Diabaly late Sunday night, the commander said. "This morning we woke up and realized that the enemy was still there. They cut off the road to Diabaly. We are truly surprised — astonished," he said.

It was unclear what happened to the Malian troops based at the military camp in Diabaly. The commander said that since the Islamists seized the town, he had not been able to reach any of the officers at the base, raising fears that they were massacred.

A French squadron of about 150 troops and armored vehicles stationed in neighboring Ivory Coast was headed to Bamako to help with the offensive in Segou, said Col. Thierry Burkhard, a spokesman for the French military in Paris.

The troops were joining the 550 French forces already in Mali, said an African diplomat, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.

However, the French national being evacuated from Segou said the email she received from the French Embassy indicated that small groups of rebel fighters were already heading to Segou, a drive that normally takes two to three hours.

Mali's north, an area the size of France, was occupied by al-Qaida-linked rebels last April following a coup in the capital. For nearly as long, the international community has debated what to do, with most foreign powers backing a U.N. Security Council resolution in December that called for training the Malian armed forces before any military intervention was launched. Diplomats said no intervention could happen before September.

All that changed in a matter of hours last week, when French intelligence services spotted two rebel convoys heading south, one on the mostly east-west axis of Douentza to the garrison towns of Mopti and Sevare, and a second heading from a locality north of Diabaly toward Segou.

If either Segou or Mopti were to fall, many feared the Islamists could advance toward the capital.

French President Francois Hollande authorized the airstrikes, which began Friday, initially concentrated in the north. France has sent in Mirage jets stationed in Chad that can carry 550-pound (250-kilogram) bombs.

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Monday that the United States has "a responsibility to go after al-Qaida wherever they are," including Mali, adding that the U.S. is already providing intelligence-gathering assistance to the French in their assault on Islamist extremists.

Besides France and the U.S., 11 other nations have pledged troops or logistical support. Britain over the weekend authorized sending several C-17 transport planes to help France bring more troops.

"Not a half hour goes by when we don't see a French plane either taking off or landing," said Napo Bah, a hotel worker in Sevare, the central town that is a launch pad for the operation. "It's been a constant since last week, when they authorized the military operation."

__

AP writers Greg Keller and Jamey Keaten in Paris, and Lolita C. Baldor aboard a U.S. military aircraft, contributed to this report.

A look at what countries are contributing to Mali

Here's a look at what countries are providing to help Mali's battle against armed Islamic extremists who have occupied the north since March. West African nations authorized immediate deployment and France launched attacks last week after fighters pushed even further south, toward the capital, Bamako.

___

FRANCE

France's resources in what they call Operation Serval include:

—200 troops from Operation Epervier in Chad have been flown into Bamako. This includes some French Foreign Legionnaires. And a company of the 2nd marine infantry regiment based in Auvours, France was moved into Bamako on Saturday.

—Gazelle helicopter gunships from the 4th helicopter regiment of the special forces armed with HOT anti-tank missiles and 20mm cannons. The 4th regiment, based in Pau, France, has 12 of these helicopters.

— Four Mirage 2000D fighter jets, based in Chad, and supported by two C135 refueling tankers. In total, France has two Mirage F1 CR reconnaissance jets, six Mirage 2000D, 3 C135s, one C130, 1 Transall C160 stationed in Chad as part of its Operation Epervier.

—Four Rafale fighter jets were quickly moved Sunday from their base in Saint-Dizier France to Mali, where they began bombing operations on Sunday.

___

U.K.

—Two C-17 aircraft to carry foreign troops and military equipment to Mali. One C-17 is currently in France and the other is currently at RAF Brize-Norton in England.

—Britain is not offering any troops, but Mark Simmonds, the government minister for Africa, said British personnel also could be involved in training the Malian army.

— Britain's involvement in Mali is expected to last one week, according to the country's armed forces minister Andrew Robathan. The only military personnel there would be a Royal Air Force ground crew intended to service C-17 transport.

___

U.S.: U.S. officials have said they offered to send drones to Mali. France's foreign minister said that the U.S. is providing communications, intelligence and transport help.

___

GERMANY : German officials have ruled out sending any combat troops to support Mali, but French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said Germany will offer logistical, humanitarian and medical support.

___

EU: The European Union says it is speeding up its preparation for a troop training mission in Mali, which will now likely be launched in the second half of February or early March, but the EU is not planning any direct combat role.

___

ALGERIA: Algerian Foreign Ministry spokesman Amar Belani said on Monday that Algeria was closing the nearly 1,000-kilometer (600-mile) border with Mali. After months of expressing grave doubts over any intervention in Mali, regional powerhouse Algeria has backed the French attack. It has granted overflight rights to French jets heading to northern Mali.

___

BENIN: Will send 300 troops.

___

BELGIUM: Transport.

___

BURKINA FASO: Will send 500 troops to Mali and 500 others to control the northern border. Check points have also been set up in Burkina Faso on roads to it northern border with Mali.

___

CHAD: To send troops, but no specific number yet.

___

DENMARK: Transport.

___

MAURITANIA: Mauritanian armed forces were placed on high alert along the border with Mali. The president says the country would not take part in the fighting in northern Mali. The Mauritanian army had conducted raids in 2010 and 2011 against the bases of al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb in northern Mali.

___

NIGER: Will send 500 troops to Mali to help fight the Islamic extremists. Date for their departure not yet set.

___

NIGERIA: Will send 600 troops, according to an announcement Monday by French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius.

___

SENEGAL: Will send 500 troops to Mali to help with combat.

___

Obama, Netanyahu: Bad blood between key allies

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama heads into his second term weighed down by an American government snarled in partisan gridlock, but also by an unproductive relationship with the leader of Israel, the bedrock U.S. ally in the tumultuous Middle East.

And the puzzle that is the U.S.-Israeli relationship under Obamaand Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is only growing more complex.

"It's troubled. It's the greatest dysfunction between leaders that I've seen in my 40 years in watching and participating," said Aaron David Miller, a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center who served under six secretaries of state in both Republican and Democratic administrations. He was deeply involved in negotiations involving Israel, Jordan, Syria and the Palestinians.

"I don't think we are headed for a showdown," he said, "but the relationship will continue to be dysfunctional."

Even so, the United States routinely backs Israel when much of the world is deeply critical of the Jewish state. For example the U.S. was among the few nations opposing the Palestinians' successful bid for upgraded status at the United Nations and did not criticize Israel's bombardment of Gaza late last year in retaliation for rocket attacks from the tiny Palestinian enclave.

Still, an array of issues muddies the alliance.

Netanyahu likely will win re-election on Jan. 22, two days after Obama is sworn in for a second term.Netanyahu is a hardliner on making peace with the Palestinians, a goal that Obama said was foremost on his foreign policy agenda at the beginning of his first term. Beyond that, Netanyahu has been pressing Washington to adopt policy specifics that would trigger a military strike if Iran does not pull back on its nuclear program — widely believed to be aimed at building an atomic bomb. Iran claims its program is for generating electricity.

A further complication is Obama's nomination of former Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel as defense secretary.

Known as a maverick when he represented Nebraska in the Senate, Hagel is viewed by many in Washington and Israel as insufficiently supportive of the Jewish state. He has castigated what he called the "Jewish lobby" in the U.S., prompting some to label him anti-Semitic. While he voted for billions in aid for Israel, he has also called for engagement with its Hamas and Hezbollah enemies.

What's more, he opposed unilateral American sanctions on Iran's nuclear program, which the Netanyahu government believes is an existential threat to Israel.

Netanyahu's office refused comment on Hagel when contacted by The Associated Press in Jerusalem. But Reuven Rivlin, parliament speaker and member of Netanyahu's Likud party, told AP that Israelis are worried because of Hagel's "statements in the past, and his stance toward Israel."

But Ori Nir, a spokesman for Americans for Peace Now, a Jewish group that pushes for an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, said fears of Hagel are wrongheaded.

"Talk of anti-Semitism is unjust and over-the-top," Nir said.

Republican lawmakers' opposition to Hagel is the latest in the partisan battles that have snarled the U.S. government.

Disputes over the budget almost led to major tax increases for middle class taxpayers, which neither party wanted. Other fights are pending over spending cuts and the government's borrowing authority — both with potentially dire consequences for the economy. The newly elected Congress, with a Republican-led House of Representatives and a Democratic-led Senate, is similar to the previous one, which passed fewer laws than any Congress since the end of World War II.

While most of the partisan disputes have been on domestic issues, Republicans have continually accused Obama of not doing enough to support Netanyahu's government.

The bad blood between Obama and Netanyahu began early.

In their first public appearance together at the White House in 2009, Netanyahu pointedly rebuffed Obama's call for Israel to stop building Jewish housing on land the Palestinians want in a future state. Obama dropped the issue after it became obvious that it was a waste of political capital at home and that Netanyahu would not budge. Netanyahu's government has continued to announce plans for new settlements in the Palestinian West Bank.

During the presidential campaign, Netanyahu hosted Obama opponent Mitt Romney in Israel as if he were already a world leader. Netanyahu denied backing either candidate, but his words and actions clearly showed favoritism for Romney.

On Iran, Netanyahu called at the United Nations in September for the United States to draw a "red line" on Iran's nuclear program, beyond which Iran would face military action. Obama continues to insist there is time for diplomacy, but has said he would not countenance a nuclear-armed Iran.

"The more Netanyahu believes Obama is serious about preventing Iran from getting a bomb, the better they will manage their relations," said David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "If not, the issue of an Israeli first strike on Iran becomes more likely."

Miller, of the Woodrow Wilson Center, said Obama will be too consumed with battling Congress on the budget, gun control legislation and other issues to spend much time on disagreements with Netanyahu.

"Is he going to go after Israel-Palestinian peace talks or war with Iran given all his domestic challenges?" Miller asked. "He will go to extreme lengths to avoid war with Iran."

He said the two leaders are moving further apart on the Palestinian issue, but have found some consensus on Iran. "For the next six to eight months, I don't think the president is going to push on those issues."

But Nir, of Peace Now, says time is running out for a peace deal with the Palestinians and Israel could face another armed uprising like the one that bloodied the region in 2000.

"There's more and more an atmosphere among Palestinians that there is no political horizon," he said, "a feeling that diplomacy doesn't work."

___

India's army chief warns Pakistan of retaliation

Indian Border Security Force (BSF) soldiers and Pakistani Rangers, in black, takes part in a daily retreat ceremony at the Joint Check Post at Wagah near Amritsar, India, Jan. 13, 2013. Despite the worst bout of violence in years along the disputed Kashmir border, Pakistani and Indian officials have kept tension from spiraling out of control. It's an example of just how far the archenemies have come since relations were shattered by the 2008 Mumbai terror attack. (AP Photo/Sanjeev Syal)

A young Indian girl watches from inside a window of her home at Jhulass village the Line of Control (LOC), in Poonch, 250 kilometers (155 miles) northwest of Jammu, India, Monday, Jan. 14, 2013. India's army chief Gen. Bikram Singh on Monday accused Pakistan of planning the attack in which two Indian soldiers were killed in the disputed Kashmir region last week, and warned of possible retaliation. (AP Photo/Channi Anand)

NEW DELHI (AP) — India's army chief on Monday accusedPakistan of planning an attack in which two Indian soldiers were killed in the disputed Kashmir region last week, and warned of possible retaliation.

Gen. Bikram Singh's strong words are a clear message that India believes the Jan. 8 attack was a deliberate provocation and not an unintentional skirmish of the kind that often breaks out along the Line of Control, the de facto border between the two archrivals in the Himalayan territory.

Pakistan did not immediately respond to the comments, which are likely to raise tensions further.

The tit-for-tat fighting began Jan. 6 when Pakistan accused Indian troops of raiding an army post and killing a soldier. India denied attacking the post, and said its troops fired across the border in response to Pakistani shelling that destroyed a home on the Indian side.

On Jan. 8, India claimed Pakistani soldiers, taking advantage of heavy fog, crossed the border and killed two Indian soldiers and beheaded one of them.

Pakistan denies India's allegations and has suggested U.N. monitors in the region conduct an inquiry — a call that India rejected, saying it didn't want to internationalize the issue.

"The attack on Jan. 8 was premeditated, a pre-planned activity. Such an operation requires planning, detailed reconnaissance," Singh told reporters. He said India reserved the right to retaliate at a "time and place of its choice."

Singh urged his troops to be "aggressive and offensive in the face of provocation and fire" from Pakistan. He said the alleged beheading of the Indian soldier was "unacceptable and unpardonable" and accused Pakistan of violating the "ethics of warfare."

Tensions escalated further on Jan. 10 when Pakistan said Indian troops fired across the border and killed another one of its soldiers. The Pakistani army said the shooting was unprovoked, while the Indian military said its troops were responding to fire from across the frontier.

Both countries accused each other of violating a 2003 cease-fire and have summoned their envoys to lodge protests.

Singh spoke hours before Indian and Pakistani military commanders met to defuse tensions along the Line of Control.

The meeting between the local commanders of the two armies in the Poonch region of Indian-controlled Kashmir lasted about half an hour, said Col. R.K. Palta, an Indian army spokesman.

Brig. Bipin Bakshi, a senior Indian army officer, said India raised the issue of repeated cease-fire violations by Pakistani troops "and conveyed our strong protest regarding the barbaric act of the mutilation of our soldier."

Bakshi said Pakistani army officers refused to acknowledge that their troops initiated any violations of the cease-fire, staged any raids or killed any soldiers.

He said Pakistan accused the Indian army of violating the cease-fire and crossing the military line.

The cease-fire over Kashmir has largely held for about a decade, despite periodic firing across the de facto border that sometimes causes casualties.

The two countries have fought three major wars since Pakistan's birth after British colonial rule of India ended in August 1947. Two of the wars have been over Kashmir, which both countries claim in its entirety. The wars have left about one-third of Kashmir with Pakistan and the rest with India.