|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xHas anyone ever claimed every single Catholic is a paedophile? Yes scroll up and find out for yourself. This whole debate didn't just start out of nowhere, and pretty much started by the view of some who believe Christianity should be wiped out, and the reasons for that pretty much because the whole idea is bullshit, and also because of certain priests who have committed crimes and therefore if they do that then the church should be closed down. It also seems normal to many these days to believe the words of a man claiming he got molested by George Pell, however at the same time it's evil for anyone to think George Pell didn't actually do it. None of us know 100% if he is guilty or not and at the end of the day it comes down to each and everyone's personal opinion. Personally the evidence given on Pell is weak as fuck in my opinion especially the claim that the molesting occurred straight after mass which is pretty fucking laughable considering the amount of people around at that time. But anyways that's another matter my point is everyone's got an opinion and no one knows who's right or wrong 100%. Anyways I'm not saying you're one who wants Christianity banned, but that is what others claimed in this thread, hense why mouflonrouge is coming out defending the religion, and not necessarily someone who is guilty of a crime. Because he was found guilty in a court of law. Saying he didn't do it and not believing the victims makes it even harder for the victims to speak out. It's hard enough to speak out about being abused without being attacked for doing so. If the victims are being shamed for speaking out, less victims are going to speak out and more pedo's are going to get away with their crimes. So what, were you only born yesterday? You do realise there is thousands of cases around the world where people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit. The evidence wasn't that strong at all and basically the jury had to make a decision. Also the decision has been appealed so it isn't completely finished even though Pell has been sentenced. Honestly I wouldn't have a go at you thinking he is guilty as you're entitled to go with your instincts but so are those who believe he is innocent. That's all I'm saying and I don't think you can disagree with that surely. There are rare instances where innocent people are locked up. However in this case, the jury had little doubt about Pell's guilt. If one of the jury was somehow biased, they'd have to somehow convince the rest of the jury to side with them. And how did they base this judgment? On what evidence? Where is the smoking gun. They took the testimony of 1 person and another who is no longer alive and who also admitted to their Mother that he lied and that Cardinal Pell did not sexually assault him. Yes, this is all true. When Pell was given an opportunity to take the stand, he declined. This is what a pious man would do. They would embrace their cross. Jesus also declined to speak in his defence in front of Pontius. For his fate was already sealed. That is absolute bullshit that you've made up and incredibly disrespectful to the victims. The more you've been posting, the more odious you make yourself look. I didn't make this up at all. This was all revealed in various testimonies but was dismissed. Provide a source then. You will not like the source! But it is a source that provides the other side. https://www.catholic.org/news/national/story.php?id=79557In addition, it was also reported in The Age in 2017 and also in a book about Pell written by Journalist Louise Milligan. One more thing. The Vatican has its own legal and judicial system under its own canonical Laws. Cardinal Pell has to face the accusations of wrong doingf from the Holy Sea as well. But it is likely he will be found innocent. They will only look at the evidence and the evidence alone and there doesn't seem to be any. https://theconversation.com/the-catholic-church-is-investigating-george-pells-case-what-does-that-mean-113187 The only sources you provided are from a church website and a canon law lecturer. "Before his death, the deceased man reportedly told his mother at least twice that he had not been a victim of sexual abuse". This hasn't been reported anywhere else to this is nearly certainly complete bullshit. That wasn't reported by any mainstream media organisations. I bet they used the word 'reportedly' to cover their asses. Yes that's right. They are the only source not carrying a pitched fork. Everyone else is so polarized they are not thinking straight. The secular warlords have hijacked this case and want their scalp of a Cardinal at all cost. that is what is going on. This trial isn't a fair trial and it never was going to be. We will be hearing about it for years to become, because this IS NOT JUSTICE or due process. You literally picked a biased source and them claimed that every other souce is biased. lol ok. No I didn't. I picked the only alternative sources to the vigilantes. There are other sources too, but you won't like them either. And it was reported in The Age, SMH by Louise Milligan. It's also in her book. So not just the Catholic Source. It's in the book: The Rise and Fall of Cardinal George Pell by Louise Milligan. https://twitter.com/Milliganreports I don't have the book so I can't read it but the book came to the conclusion that he was guilty. Did she? So let's get this straight! Louise Milligan came to the conclusion that Cardinal Pell was guilty. I find it very doubtful Louise Milligan is stupid enough to come to any such conclusions all by herself. Not even the mainstream media will commit to saying Cardinal Pell is guilty. They only say, "was found guilty" or its reported that but they won't come out and say he is guilty. No siree, they do have a much higher IQ than that. I've been reading reviews of the book. The book certainly shows that Pell has a history of abusing kids and covering it up. https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/explosive-book-back-on-the-shelves-after-george-pell-verdict-20190226-p510bi.htmlhttps://books.google.com.au/books/about/Cardinal.html?id=2d2rAQAACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y No it doesn't! It doesn't show anything of the sort. The book is about The Melbourne Project, not about Pell abusing children. Yes it is which is why the book wasn't on sale in Victoria until the trial was over. She did not claim Pell abused any child. "In the book, Milligan pieced together decades of disturbing activities and cover-ups by Pell.
"I wanted people to know what I have known about George Pell," said Milligan on Tuesday.
"We have been waiting for the justice system to run its course. Nothing can undo what has been done but some justice has prevailed." "
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xHas anyone ever claimed every single Catholic is a paedophile? Yes scroll up and find out for yourself. This whole debate didn't just start out of nowhere, and pretty much started by the view of some who believe Christianity should be wiped out, and the reasons for that pretty much because the whole idea is bullshit, and also because of certain priests who have committed crimes and therefore if they do that then the church should be closed down. It also seems normal to many these days to believe the words of a man claiming he got molested by George Pell, however at the same time it's evil for anyone to think George Pell didn't actually do it. None of us know 100% if he is guilty or not and at the end of the day it comes down to each and everyone's personal opinion. Personally the evidence given on Pell is weak as fuck in my opinion especially the claim that the molesting occurred straight after mass which is pretty fucking laughable considering the amount of people around at that time. But anyways that's another matter my point is everyone's got an opinion and no one knows who's right or wrong 100%. Anyways I'm not saying you're one who wants Christianity banned, but that is what others claimed in this thread, hense why mouflonrouge is coming out defending the religion, and not necessarily someone who is guilty of a crime. Because he was found guilty in a court of law. Saying he didn't do it and not believing the victims makes it even harder for the victims to speak out. It's hard enough to speak out about being abused without being attacked for doing so. If the victims are being shamed for speaking out, less victims are going to speak out and more pedo's are going to get away with their crimes. So what, were you only born yesterday? You do realise there is thousands of cases around the world where people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit. The evidence wasn't that strong at all and basically the jury had to make a decision. Also the decision has been appealed so it isn't completely finished even though Pell has been sentenced. Honestly I wouldn't have a go at you thinking he is guilty as you're entitled to go with your instincts but so are those who believe he is innocent. That's all I'm saying and I don't think you can disagree with that surely. There are rare instances where innocent people are locked up. However in this case, the jury had little doubt about Pell's guilt. If one of the jury was somehow biased, they'd have to somehow convince the rest of the jury to side with them. And how did they base this judgment? On what evidence? Where is the smoking gun. They took the testimony of 1 person and another who is no longer alive and who also admitted to their Mother that he lied and that Cardinal Pell did not sexually assault him. Yes, this is all true. When Pell was given an opportunity to take the stand, he declined. This is what a pious man would do. They would embrace their cross. Jesus also declined to speak in his defence in front of Pontius. For his fate was already sealed. That is absolute bullshit that you've made up and incredibly disrespectful to the victims. The more you've been posting, the more odious you make yourself look. I didn't make this up at all. This was all revealed in various testimonies but was dismissed. Provide a source then. You will not like the source! But it is a source that provides the other side. https://www.catholic.org/news/national/story.php?id=79557In addition, it was also reported in The Age in 2017 and also in a book about Pell written by Journalist Louise Milligan. One more thing. The Vatican has its own legal and judicial system under its own canonical Laws. Cardinal Pell has to face the accusations of wrong doingf from the Holy Sea as well. But it is likely he will be found innocent. They will only look at the evidence and the evidence alone and there doesn't seem to be any. https://theconversation.com/the-catholic-church-is-investigating-george-pells-case-what-does-that-mean-113187 The only sources you provided are from a church website and a canon law lecturer. "Before his death, the deceased man reportedly told his mother at least twice that he had not been a victim of sexual abuse". This hasn't been reported anywhere else to this is nearly certainly complete bullshit. That wasn't reported by any mainstream media organisations. I bet they used the word 'reportedly' to cover their asses. Yes that's right. They are the only source not carrying a pitched fork. Everyone else is so polarized they are not thinking straight. The secular warlords have hijacked this case and want their scalp of a Cardinal at all cost. that is what is going on. This trial isn't a fair trial and it never was going to be. We will be hearing about it for years to become, because this IS NOT JUSTICE or due process. You literally picked a biased source and them claimed that every other souce is biased. lol ok. No I didn't. I picked the only alternative sources to the vigilantes. There are other sources too, but you won't like them either. And it was reported in The Age, SMH by Louise Milligan. It's also in her book. So not just the Catholic Source. It's in the book: The Rise and Fall of Cardinal George Pell by Louise Milligan. https://twitter.com/Milliganreports I don't have the book so I can't read it but the book came to the conclusion that he was guilty. Did she? So let's get this straight! Louise Milligan came to the conclusion that Cardinal Pell was guilty. I find it very doubtful Louise Milligan is stupid enough to come to any such conclusions all by herself. Not even the mainstream media will commit to saying Cardinal Pell is guilty. They only say, "was found guilty" or its reported that but they won't come out and say he is guilty. No siree, they do have a much higher IQ than that. Turns out he did do that but you're being very disingenuous by not including all of the details. "One of the accusers was drunk and upset, the court heard, and made allegations about abuse by Cardinal Pell, now 76, happening at a pool in country Victoria. However, the woman’s son himself failed to tell the group of his own alleged abuse, only making a police statement later, and instead “laughed”, the court heard. “It wasn’t a council of war about what to do … was it?” Mr Richter asked. The mother replied: “No.” Later, the sister of an alleged victim told how her brother drunkenly confided in her about alleged abuse by the Cardinal. “He said it was a bishop when he was in the choir … and he said it was ‘—-ing George Pell’.”
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/explosive-book-back-on-the-shelves-after-george-pell-verdict-20190226-p510bi.html
These were not even in court so again, you are throwing around unproven dirt. If there was any proof of this, it would have gotten to court but the accusations turtned out to be false or were withdrawn. I am talking about one of the Choir Boys who as it turns out admitted to Mum that Pell did not commit any abuse. The kid died of a heroin overdose. So did this kid. It is very easy to mix them up.
|
|
|
|
|
mouflonrouge
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]Has anyone ever claimed every single Catholic is a paedophile? Yes scroll up and find out for yourself. This whole debate didn't just start out of nowhere, and pretty much started by the view of some who believe Christianity should be wiped out, and the reasons for that pretty much because the whole idea is bullshit, and also because of certain priests who have committed crimes and therefore if they do that then the church should be closed down. It also seems normal to many these days to believe the words of a man claiming he got molested by George Pell, however at the same time it's evil for anyone to think George Pell didn't actually do it. None of us know 100% if he is guilty or not and at the end of the day it comes down to each and everyone's personal opinion. Personally the evidence given on Pell is weak as fuck in my opinion especially the claim that the molesting occurred straight after mass which is pretty fucking laughable considering the amount of people around at that time. But anyways that's another matter my point is everyone's got an opinion and no one knows who's right or wrong 100%. Anyways I'm not saying you're one who wants Christianity banned, but that is what others claimed in this thread, hense why mouflonrouge is coming out defending the religion, and not necessarily someone who is guilty of a crime. Because he was found guilty in a court of law. Saying he didn't do it and not believing the victims makes it even harder for the victims to speak out. It's hard enough to speak out about being abused without being attacked for doing so. If the victims are being shamed for speaking out, less victims are going to speak out and more pedo's are going to get away with their crimes. So what, were you only born yesterday? You do realise there is thousands of cases around the world where people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit. The evidence wasn't that strong at all and basically the jury had to make a decision. Also the decision has been appealed so it isn't completely finished even though Pell has been sentenced. Honestly I wouldn't have a go at you thinking he is guilty as you're entitled to go with your instincts but so are those who believe he is innocent. That's all I'm saying and I don't think you can disagree with that surely. There are rare instances where innocent people are locked up. However in this case, the jury had little doubt about Pell's guilt. If one of the jury was somehow biased, they'd have to somehow convince the rest of the jury to side with them. And how did they base this judgment? On what evidence? Where is the smoking gun. They took the testimony of 1 person and another who is no longer alive and who also admitted to their Mother that he lied and that Cardinal Pell did not sexually assault him. Yes, this is all true. When Pell was given an opportunity to take the stand, he declined. This is what a pious man would do. They would embrace their cross. Jesus also declined to speak in his defence in front of Pontius. For his fate was already sealed. That is absolute bullshit that you've made up and incredibly disrespectful to the victims. The more you've been posting, the more odious you make yourself look. I didn't make this up at all. This was all revealed in various testimonies but was dismissed. Provide a source then. You will not like the source! But it is a source that provides the other side. https://www.catholic.org/news/national/story.php?id=79557In addition, it was also reported in The Age in 2017 and also in a book about Pell written by Journalist Louise Milligan. One more thing. The Vatican has its own legal and judicial system under its own canonical Laws. Cardinal Pell has to face the accusations of wrong doingf from the Holy Sea as well. But it is likely he will be found innocent. They will only look at the evidence and the evidence alone and there doesn't seem to be any. https://theconversation.com/the-catholic-church-is-investigating-george-pells-case-what-does-that-mean-113187 The only sources you provided are from a church website and a canon law lecturer. "Before his death, the deceased man reportedly told his mother at least twice that he had not been a victim of sexual abuse". This hasn't been reported anywhere else to this is nearly certainly complete bullshit. That wasn't reported by any mainstream media organisations. I bet they used the word 'reportedly' to cover their asses. Yes that's right. They are the only source not carrying a pitched fork. Everyone else is so polarized they are not thinking straight. The secular warlords have hijacked this case and want their scalp of a Cardinal at all cost. that is what is going on. This trial isn't a fair trial and it never was going to be. We will be hearing about it for years to become, because this IS NOT JUSTICE or due process. You literally picked a biased source and them claimed that every other souce is biased. lol ok. No I didn't. I picked the only alternative sources to the vigilantes. There are other sources too, but you won't like them either. And it was reported in The Age, SMH by Louise Milligan. It's also in her book. So not just the Catholic Source. It's in the book: The Rise and Fall of Cardinal George Pell by Louise Milligan. https://twitter.com/Milliganreports I don't have the book so I can't read it but the book came to the conclusion that he was guilty. Did she? So let's get this straight! Louise Milligan came to the conclusion that Cardinal Pell was guilty. I find it very doubtful Louise Milligan is stupid enough to come to any such conclusions all by herself. Not even the mainstream media will commit to saying Cardinal Pell is guilty. They only say, "was found guilty" or its reported that but they won't come out and say he is guilty. No siree, they do have a much higher IQ than that. I've been reading reviews of the book. The book certainly shows that Pell has a history of abusing kids and covering it up. https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/explosive-book-back-on-the-shelves-after-george-pell-verdict-20190226-p510bi.htmlhttps://books.google.com.au/books/about/Cardinal.html?id=2d2rAQAACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y No it doesn't! It doesn't show anything of the sort. The book is about The Melbourne Project, not about Pell abusing children. Yes it is which is why the book wasn't on sale in Victoria until the trial was over. She did not claim Pell abused any child.
"I wanted people to know what I have known about George Pell," said Milligan on Tuesday.
"We have been waiting for the justice system to run its course. Nothing can undo what has been done but some justice has prevailed." "
What's this? This is no accusation that Pell abused children. This is only an accusation of a cover up.
|
|
|
|
|
mouflonrouge
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xHas anyone ever claimed every single Catholic is a paedophile? Yes scroll up and find out for yourself. This whole debate didn't just start out of nowhere, and pretty much started by the view of some who believe Christianity should be wiped out, and the reasons for that pretty much because the whole idea is bullshit, and also because of certain priests who have committed crimes and therefore if they do that then the church should be closed down. It also seems normal to many these days to believe the words of a man claiming he got molested by George Pell, however at the same time it's evil for anyone to think George Pell didn't actually do it. None of us know 100% if he is guilty or not and at the end of the day it comes down to each and everyone's personal opinion. Personally the evidence given on Pell is weak as fuck in my opinion especially the claim that the molesting occurred straight after mass which is pretty fucking laughable considering the amount of people around at that time. But anyways that's another matter my point is everyone's got an opinion and no one knows who's right or wrong 100%. Anyways I'm not saying you're one who wants Christianity banned, but that is what others claimed in this thread, hense why mouflonrouge is coming out defending the religion, and not necessarily someone who is guilty of a crime. Because he was found guilty in a court of law. Saying he didn't do it and not believing the victims makes it even harder for the victims to speak out. It's hard enough to speak out about being abused without being attacked for doing so. If the victims are being shamed for speaking out, less victims are going to speak out and more pedo's are going to get away with their crimes. So what, were you only born yesterday? You do realise there is thousands of cases around the world where people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit. The evidence wasn't that strong at all and basically the jury had to make a decision. Also the decision has been appealed so it isn't completely finished even though Pell has been sentenced. Honestly I wouldn't have a go at you thinking he is guilty as you're entitled to go with your instincts but so are those who believe he is innocent. That's all I'm saying and I don't think you can disagree with that surely. There are rare instances where innocent people are locked up. However in this case, the jury had little doubt about Pell's guilt. If one of the jury was somehow biased, they'd have to somehow convince the rest of the jury to side with them. And how did they base this judgment? On what evidence? Where is the smoking gun. They took the testimony of 1 person and another who is no longer alive and who also admitted to their Mother that he lied and that Cardinal Pell did not sexually assault him. Yes, this is all true. When Pell was given an opportunity to take the stand, he declined. This is what a pious man would do. They would embrace their cross. Jesus also declined to speak in his defence in front of Pontius. For his fate was already sealed. That is absolute bullshit that you've made up and incredibly disrespectful to the victims. The more you've been posting, the more odious you make yourself look. I didn't make this up at all. This was all revealed in various testimonies but was dismissed. Provide a source then. You will not like the source! But it is a source that provides the other side. https://www.catholic.org/news/national/story.php?id=79557In addition, it was also reported in The Age in 2017 and also in a book about Pell written by Journalist Louise Milligan. One more thing. The Vatican has its own legal and judicial system under its own canonical Laws. Cardinal Pell has to face the accusations of wrong doingf from the Holy Sea as well. But it is likely he will be found innocent. They will only look at the evidence and the evidence alone and there doesn't seem to be any. https://theconversation.com/the-catholic-church-is-investigating-george-pells-case-what-does-that-mean-113187 The only sources you provided are from a church website and a canon law lecturer. "Before his death, the deceased man reportedly told his mother at least twice that he had not been a victim of sexual abuse". This hasn't been reported anywhere else to this is nearly certainly complete bullshit. That wasn't reported by any mainstream media organisations. I bet they used the word 'reportedly' to cover their asses. Yes that's right. They are the only source not carrying a pitched fork. Everyone else is so polarized they are not thinking straight. The secular warlords have hijacked this case and want their scalp of a Cardinal at all cost. that is what is going on. This trial isn't a fair trial and it never was going to be. We will be hearing about it for years to become, because this IS NOT JUSTICE or due process. You literally picked a biased source and them claimed that every other souce is biased. lol ok. No I didn't. I picked the only alternative sources to the vigilantes. There are other sources too, but you won't like them either. And it was reported in The Age, SMH by Louise Milligan. It's also in her book. So not just the Catholic Source. It's in the book: The Rise and Fall of Cardinal George Pell by Louise Milligan. https://twitter.com/Milliganreports I don't have the book so I can't read it but the book came to the conclusion that he was guilty. Did she? So let's get this straight! Louise Milligan came to the conclusion that Cardinal Pell was guilty. I find it very doubtful Louise Milligan is stupid enough to come to any such conclusions all by herself. Not even the mainstream media will commit to saying Cardinal Pell is guilty. They only say, "was found guilty" or its reported that but they won't come out and say he is guilty. No siree, they do have a much higher IQ than that. Turns out he did do that but you're being very disingenuous by not including all of the details. "One of the accusers was drunk and upset, the court heard, and made allegations about abuse by Cardinal Pell, now 76, happening at a pool in country Victoria. However, the woman’s son himself failed to tell the group of his own alleged abuse, only making a police statement later, and instead “laughed”, the court heard. “It wasn’t a council of war about what to do … was it?” Mr Richter asked. The mother replied: “No.” Later, the sister of an alleged victim told how her brother drunkenly confided in her about alleged abuse by the Cardinal. “He said it was a bishop when he was in the choir … and he said it was ‘—-ing George Pell’.”
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/explosive-book-back-on-the-shelves-after-george-pell-verdict-20190226-p510bi.html
These were not even in court so again, you are throwing around unproven dirt. If there was any proof of this, it would have gotten to court but the accusations turtned out to be false or were withdrawn. I am talking about one of the Choir Boys who as it turns out admitted to Mum that Pell did not commit any abuse. The kid died of a heroin overdose. So did this kid. It is very easy to mix them up. Actually no, we are talking about the kid referred to as 1 of the victims, not something that was thrown out instantly. In any case, it doesn't change the fact that the evidence is flakey at best, and Pell could win his appeal.
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]+x[quote]Has anyone ever claimed every single Catholic is a paedophile? Yes scroll up and find out for yourself. This whole debate didn't just start out of nowhere, and pretty much started by the view of some who believe Christianity should be wiped out, and the reasons for that pretty much because the whole idea is bullshit, and also because of certain priests who have committed crimes and therefore if they do that then the church should be closed down. It also seems normal to many these days to believe the words of a man claiming he got molested by George Pell, however at the same time it's evil for anyone to think George Pell didn't actually do it. None of us know 100% if he is guilty or not and at the end of the day it comes down to each and everyone's personal opinion. Personally the evidence given on Pell is weak as fuck in my opinion especially the claim that the molesting occurred straight after mass which is pretty fucking laughable considering the amount of people around at that time. But anyways that's another matter my point is everyone's got an opinion and no one knows who's right or wrong 100%. Anyways I'm not saying you're one who wants Christianity banned, but that is what others claimed in this thread, hense why mouflonrouge is coming out defending the religion, and not necessarily someone who is guilty of a crime. Because he was found guilty in a court of law. Saying he didn't do it and not believing the victims makes it even harder for the victims to speak out. It's hard enough to speak out about being abused without being attacked for doing so. If the victims are being shamed for speaking out, less victims are going to speak out and more pedo's are going to get away with their crimes. So what, were you only born yesterday? You do realise there is thousands of cases around the world where people have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit. The evidence wasn't that strong at all and basically the jury had to make a decision. Also the decision has been appealed so it isn't completely finished even though Pell has been sentenced. Honestly I wouldn't have a go at you thinking he is guilty as you're entitled to go with your instincts but so are those who believe he is innocent. That's all I'm saying and I don't think you can disagree with that surely. There are rare instances where innocent people are locked up. However in this case, the jury had little doubt about Pell's guilt. If one of the jury was somehow biased, they'd have to somehow convince the rest of the jury to side with them. And how did they base this judgment? On what evidence? Where is the smoking gun. They took the testimony of 1 person and another who is no longer alive and who also admitted to their Mother that he lied and that Cardinal Pell did not sexually assault him. Yes, this is all true. When Pell was given an opportunity to take the stand, he declined. This is what a pious man would do. They would embrace their cross. Jesus also declined to speak in his defence in front of Pontius. For his fate was already sealed. That is absolute bullshit that you've made up and incredibly disrespectful to the victims. The more you've been posting, the more odious you make yourself look. I didn't make this up at all. This was all revealed in various testimonies but was dismissed. Provide a source then. You will not like the source! But it is a source that provides the other side. https://www.catholic.org/news/national/story.php?id=79557In addition, it was also reported in The Age in 2017 and also in a book about Pell written by Journalist Louise Milligan. One more thing. The Vatican has its own legal and judicial system under its own canonical Laws. Cardinal Pell has to face the accusations of wrong doingf from the Holy Sea as well. But it is likely he will be found innocent. They will only look at the evidence and the evidence alone and there doesn't seem to be any. https://theconversation.com/the-catholic-church-is-investigating-george-pells-case-what-does-that-mean-113187 The only sources you provided are from a church website and a canon law lecturer. "Before his death, the deceased man reportedly told his mother at least twice that he had not been a victim of sexual abuse". This hasn't been reported anywhere else to this is nearly certainly complete bullshit. That wasn't reported by any mainstream media organisations. I bet they used the word 'reportedly' to cover their asses. Yes that's right. They are the only source not carrying a pitched fork. Everyone else is so polarized they are not thinking straight. The secular warlords have hijacked this case and want their scalp of a Cardinal at all cost. that is what is going on. This trial isn't a fair trial and it never was going to be. We will be hearing about it for years to become, because this IS NOT JUSTICE or due process. You literally picked a biased source and them claimed that every other souce is biased. lol ok. No I didn't. I picked the only alternative sources to the vigilantes. There are other sources too, but you won't like them either. And it was reported in The Age, SMH by Louise Milligan. It's also in her book. So not just the Catholic Source. It's in the book: The Rise and Fall of Cardinal George Pell by Louise Milligan. https://twitter.com/Milliganreports I don't have the book so I can't read it but the book came to the conclusion that he was guilty. Did she? So let's get this straight! Louise Milligan came to the conclusion that Cardinal Pell was guilty. I find it very doubtful Louise Milligan is stupid enough to come to any such conclusions all by herself. Not even the mainstream media will commit to saying Cardinal Pell is guilty. They only say, "was found guilty" or its reported that but they won't come out and say he is guilty. No siree, they do have a much higher IQ than that. I've been reading reviews of the book. The book certainly shows that Pell has a history of abusing kids and covering it up. https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/explosive-book-back-on-the-shelves-after-george-pell-verdict-20190226-p510bi.htmlhttps://books.google.com.au/books/about/Cardinal.html?id=2d2rAQAACAAJ&source=kp_book_description&redir_esc=y No it doesn't! It doesn't show anything of the sort. The book is about The Melbourne Project, not about Pell abusing children. Yes it is which is why the book wasn't on sale in Victoria until the trial was over. She did not claim Pell abused any child.
"I wanted people to know what I have known about George Pell," said Milligan on Tuesday.
"We have been waiting for the justice system to run its course. Nothing can undo what has been done but some justice has prevailed." "
[/quote]What's this? This is no accusation that Pell abused children. This is only an accusation of a cover up. Decades of disturbing activity certainly implies he did especially with the follow up quote ; "We have been waiting for the justice system to run its course. Nothing can undo what has been done but some justice has prevailed." Also covering up abuse is just as bad as committing the abuse imo. This quote also doesn't do Pell any favours. "Ms Adler said she was proud to have commissioned and published the book, and said Milligan was "a courageous reporter whose integrity, respect for the judicial process and meticulous research contributed to our understanding of the tragedy of institutional child abuse". https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/explosive-book-back-on-the-shelves-after-george-pell-verdict-20190226-p510bi.html
|
|
|
|
|
robstazzz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.4K,
Visits: 0
|
I'll agree with you sub007 on the covering up being just as bad as being the abuser.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI'll agree with you sub007 on the covering up being just as bad as being the abuser. That's what I don't understand about Aikhme. At least you have the decency to acknowledge shit things have happened in the past and they can't be excused. Ol' mate just sits there obliviously and goes 'nope, didn't happen.'
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
sub007
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI'll agree with you sub007 on the covering up being just as bad as being the abuser. That's what I don't understand about Aikhme. At least you have the decency to acknowledge shit things have happened in the past and they can't be excused. Ol' mate just sits there obliviously and goes 'nope, didn't happen.' Because Aikhme is either a delusional idiot or a sad troll who has nothing better to do with his life.
|
|
|
|
|
robstazzz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xI'll agree with you sub007 on the covering up being just as bad as being the abuser. That's what I don't understand about Aikhme. At least you have the decency to acknowledge shit things have happened in the past and they can't be excused. Ol' mate just sits there obliviously and goes 'nope, didn't happen.' Yeh but I don't think he says no covering up or molesting has happened, what he argues is that not every single case against a priest is true. Just as much as there have been disgusting priests who have done wrong, equally there's been disgusting people who make up lies, so if there is a flaw in someone's story it's okay to question it without being labeled a paedophile synthesizer. Otherwise if we believe every single person coming out saying they got molested, then we are basically stereotyping every single priest as a child molester. As for me personally on the latest George Pell case I honestly find the victims claims hard to believe only based on the evidence he's given, and I don't think I should be criticised on having this opinion, especially with the court matter not fully delt with as of yet considering the appeal. It's the same thing with celebrities who have been convicted of rape. I'm sure many have raped woman and even gotten away with it, but this doesn't mean every single claim is true, in fact there are more lies told on ratio on this matter and again it would be wrong to look down on all celebrities as evil rapists because of the actions of the few who have been rightfully convicted.
|
|
|
|