Cardinal Stepinac: A cold-blooded killer being fast-tracked to Roman Catholic “sainthood”

by Sparta on December 28, 2012

in Christianity, Croatia, Jasenovac, Nazism, Orthodox Christianity, Roman Catholic Church, Stella (Stavroula) Jatras

On YouTube:

Uploaded on Sep 11, 2009 by excatholics

Some of the pictures in this video are quite disturbing and shocking, therefore we wish to warn people before viewing this fascinating and yet very distressing clip.

Alexei Ilyich Osipov: Why Are We Orthodox?

(h/t: John Sanidopoulos)


In order to understand what one or another Christian Church is, it is enough, without even touching its doctrine, to look at its saints. The tree is known by its fruits, and any Church declares those people saints who embodied its ideal in their lives. A saint’s canonization therefore reflects that Church’s testimony not only about the Christian it is holding up as an example to follow, but it is also primarily the given Church’s testimony about its own self. You can more accurately judge the authenticity, or false sanctity, of the Church itself by its saints.

Now, first of all, I will pause at the comparison between the saints of the largest Christian Churches—the [Roman] Catholic and the Orthodox Churches.

One of the major pillars of Catholic sanctity is St. Francis of Assisi (thirteenth century). His spiritual self-awareness is sufficiently clearly revealed from the following facts. One day, St. Francis prayed very long (the subject of his prayer is extraordinarily telling) “about two mercies.” “The first is that I … could … experience all the sufferings that You, Sweetest Jesus, experienced in Your torturous passion. The second mercy … is that … I might feel … that boundless love with which You, the Son of God, burned.” As we see, St. Francis was not troubled by a feeling of his own sinfulness, as all saints are; clearly seen here is his open pretension to equality with Christ in His sufferings and His love! During this prayer, St. Francis “felt himself completely become Jesus,” and something happened to him that had never before happened in the history of the Church: painful, bleeding wounds (stigmata) appeared on him—the marks of “Jesus’ sufferings.”[i]

Here we must note that the nature of these stigmata is well known in psychiatry. Unceasing concentration of the attention on Christ’s sufferings on the cross extremely arouse a person’s nerves and psyche, and if practiced long enough, can evoke this phenomenon. There is nothing supernatural or miraculous here. In this “compassion” for Christ, there is not the true love about which the Lord spoke plainly: He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me (Jn. 14:21). To the contrary, the substitution of dreamy experiences of “compassion” for the struggle with one’s own sinful passions is one of the most serious mistakes in spiritual life, which has lead, and still leads, ascetics to self-conceit and pride—obvious prelest, often connected with outright psychological disturbance (see the “sermon” of St. Francis to the birds, the wolf, the turtle-doves, the snakes, the flowers, etc.; his reverence before the fire, the stones, the worms). It is no wonder therefore that St. Francis claimed to redeem the sins of other people through his imitation of Christ.

Also telling is the life’s goal that St. Francis set for himself: “I labored and want to labor … because this brings honor.”[ii] Isn’t this why he said openly at the end of his life, “I am not aware of any sin on my part that I have not redeemed through confession and repentance”?[iii] All this testifies to his ignorance of his own sins, his unworthiness before God—that is, to total spiritual catastrophe.

By contrast, we cite the moment before death from the life of St. Sisoes the Great (fifth century). “Surrounded at the moment of his death by the brothers, at that minute when he was as if conversing with unseen beings, the brothers’ asked him, ‘Father, tell us, with whom are you conversing?’ Sisoes answered, ‘They are angels who have come to take me, but I am praying them to leave me for a short time, in order to repent.’ At this the brothers, knowing that Sisoes was perfect in the virtues, protested, ‘You have no need to repent, father.’ Sisoes replied, ‘Truly, I do not know if I have even begun to repent.'”[iv] This deep knowledge of one’s own imperfection is the main distinguishing characteristic of all true saints.

Here are passages from the notes of Blessed Angela (thirteenth–fourteenth centuries).[v]

“The Holy Spirit,” she writes, says to her, “My daughter, My sweetness … I love you very much.” “I was with the apostles, and they saw Me with their physical eyes, but they did not feel Me as you do.” Then, Angela reveals about herself, “I see in the darkness the Holy Trinity, and it seems to me that I am standing and abiding in the center of the Trinity, which I see in the darkness.” She expressed her relationship to Jesus Christ, for example, in such words: “I could bring myself entirely into Jesus Christ.” Or, “From His sweetness, and from the sorrow of His departure, I shouted and wanted to die.” At this, she began to beat herself so badly that the nuns had to carry her out of the church.

One of the greatest Russian religious thinkers of the twentieth century, A. F. Losev, made a biting yet true assessment of Angela’s “revelations.” He writes, “The seductiveness and delusion of the flesh leads to the point where the Holy Spirit appears to Blessed Angela and whispers these amorous words: ‘My daughter, My sweetness, My daughter, My temple, My daughter, my delight, love Me, for I love you greatly, much more than you love Me.” The saint is in a sweet languor, and can’t contain herself from this love. Her beloved keeps appearing, enflaming her body, heart, and blood. The cross of Christ appears to her as a marriage bed… What could be more contrary to the Byzantine-Muscovite austere and chaste asceticism as these continual blasphemous statements: ‘My soul was received into the uncreated light and carried up,’ these passionate gazes at the Cross of Christ, at the wounds of Christ, and at different parts of His Body, this forced evoking of bloody spots on her own body, and so on, and so forth? Finally, Christ embraces Angela with His arm which was nailed to the Cross, and she, outside herself with languor, torment, and happiness, says, “Sometimes, from this close embrace, it seems to my soul that it goes into the side of Christ. And the joy that it obtains there, and the light, cannot be retold. They are so great that sometimes I could not stand on my feet, but lay there, unable to speak… and my limbs would go numb.”[vi]

Another outstanding feature of Catholic sanctity is Catherine of Sienna (fourteenth century), raised by Pope Paul VI to the highest rank of saint—”Doctor of the Church.” I will read a few notes about her taken from the Catholic book by Antonio Sicari, Portraits of Saints,[vii] published in Russian. These citations (emphasized by me) require no comment.

Catherine was about twenty years old. “She felt that a decisive turnaround should happen in her life, and she continued piously praying to her Lord Jesus, repeating that beautiful, tender formula, which became customary to her: “Unite with me by marriage in faith!

“One day Catherine had a vision: her divine Bridegroom, embracing her, drew her to Himself, but then took her heart out of her chest in order to give her another heart, more resembling His own.”

One day, they said that she died. “She herself later said that her heart was torn by the force of divine love, that she had gone through death, and ‘had seen the heavenly gates. But “Return, My child,” said the Lord to me, “You need to return… I will bring you to the princes and rulers of the Church.” “And the humble girl began to send her epistles throughout the whole world—long letters, which she dictated with amazing speed, often three or four at a time, and for various reasons, so that the secretaries could not keep up.”

“In Catherine’s letters the repeated and insistent use of the phrase, ‘I want’ particularly stands out.” “Some say that in an ecstatic state, she even addressed the insistent words ‘I want’ to Christ.”

From her correspondence with Pope Gregory XI, who she had convinced to return from Avignon to Rome: “I tell you from the name of Christ … I tell you, father, in Jesus Christ… Answer the call of the Holy Spirit which has addressed you.”

She writes to the ruler of Milan, “About the Pope, to whom she is entrusted (‘even if he were the devil in the flesh, I should not lift my head against him.’)”

“To the King of France she writes: ‘Do God’s will, and my will.'”

No less telling are the “revelations” given to the “Doctor of the Church,” Teresa of Avila (sixteenth century) also made known by Pope Paul VI. Before her death, she exclaims, “O my God, my Spouse, finally I shall see You!” This exceedingly strange exclamation is not accidental. It is the logical result of Teresa’s whole “spiritual” exercise, the essence of which is revealed in the following fact.

She was so caught up in her “revelations,” that she did not see the devil’s delusion even in such an outrageous vision as the one cited below. (The Valaam elder, Schema-Abbot John, assessed her spiritual state as follows: “Instead of deification [theosis], a passionate person will become a dreamer, like the Catholic Teresa.”[viii])

After his many appearances, “Christ” says to Teresa, “From this day forward, you shall be My spouse… From now on, I am not only your Creator and God, but also your Spouse[ix] “Lord, that I either suffer with You, or die for You!” prayed Teresa and fell down, writes D. Merezhovsky, “in exhaustion from these caresses…” (I cannot cite any more.) It is no wonder, therefore, when Teresa admits, “My Beloved calls my soul with such a penetrating whistle, that I cannot but hear it. This call acts upon the soul so that it is exhausted from desire.” It is no accident that the famous American psychologist William James assesses her mystical experience as follows: “The main idea of her religion seems to be an amatory flirtation—if one may say so without irreverence—between the devotee and the deity.”[x]

Yet another illustration of sanctity in Catholicism is Therese of Lisieux (“The Little Flower,” or “Of the Child Jesus”), who, in 1997, the centennial of her repose, was proclaimed a Doctor of the Church by the “infallible” decision of Pope John Paul II. Here are several quotes from the spiritual biography of Therese, who only lived to the age of twenty-two, which eloquently witness to her spiritual state (The Story of a Soul [Paris, 1996]).

“During a conversation before my tonsure, I gave a report of the activities I intend to undertake in Carmel. ‘I came to save souls, and first of all, to pray for priests.’” Not having saved herself yet, she came to save others!

She seemingly writes about her unworthiness, but then adds, ‘”I always harbor the bold hope that I will become a great saint.… I thought that I was born for glory, and sought a path to its accomplishment. And the Lord God … revealed to me that my glory would not be visible to the mortal gaze, and the essence of it consisted in the fact that I would become a great saint!” (See St. Macarius the Great, who was called by his co-ascetics “an earthly god,” who only prayed, “God cleanse me a sinner, for I have never done anything good in Thy sight.”) Later Theresa writes something even more frank: “In the heart of my Mother the Church I will be Love … then I will be everything … and through this my dream will come true!

This teaching of Therese’s about spiritual love is telling in the extreme. “This was the kiss of love. I felt beloved and said, ‘I love You and entrust myself to You forever.’ There was neither forgiveness, nor struggle, nor sacrifice; already, long ago, Jesus and little, poor Theresa looked at each other and understood everything.… This day brought not an exchange of views, but a mingling, when there are no longer two; and Theresa disappeared like a drop of water lost in the depths of the ocean.” There is no need to comment on this dreamy romance of a poor girl, who the Catholic Church has—alas! called its “Doctor.”

The methodical development of imagination is based in the experience of one of the pillars of Catholic mysticism, the founder of the order of Jesuits and great Catholic saint Ignatius of Loyola (sixteenth century).

His book Spiritual Exercises is a mainstay in Catholic monasteries, and insistently calls upon the Christian to imagine the Holy Trinity and the conversation of the Three Persons, Christ, the Mother of God, the Angels, and so on. This is all categorically forbidden by the saints of the Universal Church. They testify that when an ascetic begins to live in his fantasies, to look at himself in his own “films,” and believe them, instead of fulfilling Christ’s commandments and struggling with his passions, he comes to complete spiritual and emotional disturbance.

The authoritative collection of ascetical writings of the ancient Church, The Philokalia, decisively forbids such “spiritual exercises.” Here are few quotes from that book.

St. Neilos of Sinai (fifth century) warns, “Do not desire to physically see the Angels or Powers, or Christ, that you may not lose your mind from accepting a wolf instead of a shepherd, and worshipping our adversaries, the demons.”[xi]

St. Simeon the New Theologian (ninth century), discusses those who while praying, “imagine heavenly blessings, the ranks of angels, or habitations of the saints,” stating plainly that “this is a sign of prelest (delusion).” “They are deluded who are on that path, who see light with their physical eyes, smell fragrances with their sense of smell, hear voices with their ears, and suchlike.”[xii]

How right was that nobleman (St. Ignatius Brianchaninov wrote about him), who, when seeing the Catholic book The Imitation of Christ by Thomas Kempis (fifteenth century) in his daughter’s hands, tore it away from her, saying, “Stop playing romance with God.” The examples cited above leave no doubt as to the reasonableness of these words. It is a great misfortune that in Catholicism, as we can see, people have ceased to differentiate between the spiritual and the emotional, sanctity and fantasy. This is the greatest calamity that can befall any Christian Church.

Read it all.

{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }

1 David B. December 28, 2012 at 9:11 pm

Sun News Network’s Michael Coren debunks claims of Nazi influence in the Catholic Church & Pope Pius XII involment with the Nazi’s. Also he debunks claims made in the book Hitler’s Pope.

2 1389 December 28, 2012 at 10:30 pm

@David B.

Michael Coren is a Roman Catholic and he is entitled to his opinion. He does excellent work on behalf of the Counterjihad and I respect him.

That said, it was the moral obligation of Pope Pius XII to defrock and disavow Stepinac and everyone who was associated with the Ustashe. He did not.

– Blog admin 1389

3 ADHD December 31, 2012 at 7:46 pm

What bugs me, having seen the video-clips about Aloyzije Stepinac, is that he did eventually speak up in defence of the Jews and the Gypsies – but not the Serbs (even after Ante Pavelich had his brother imprisoned and murdered)!! It’s exactly as they have it: for Stepinac the Great Schism of 1054 was worse than the Reformation – and that for that reason the Orthodox Serbian PEOPLE were the ones to be blamed of the Yugoslavs for that state of affairs!?!! Where was his sense of Christian duty, of understanding that these still were Christian sheep, even if they were heretical by his “Church”‘s definition?? [Similar things can be raised against Queen (“Bloody”) Mary I of England, Mary Queen of Scots, Kings Charles IX and Louis XIV of France on the one hand; Jean Chauvin (Calvin) and John Knox in Presbyterianism on the other.

On the other hand, if we leave the former Yugoslavia alone for a while, I can’t but note how the Russian Orthodox Church has always been strongly xenophobic – and still to some extent is (not to mention her being heavily intermixed with Russian politics, including even Communist politics during the time of the USSR)!!! Remembering how in the time of Peter the Great her adherents, spurred even by Orthodox priests and even at least one “Patriarch Joachim”, wanted to seize and burn down the “German Suburb” outside of Moscow – and kill all its inhabitants, is one of the MANY things that stops this former Orthodox from feeling comfortable in that branch of Christianity. [Not to forget how Russian Orthodoxy opposed such little things like shaving your beard and moustache, interacting with non-Orthodox (whether they were Protestant or Romanist (Catholic) or even fellow “Old-Believer” Orthodox.]

Perhaps that’s the most decisive part of why I can’t feel OK with ANY of the three basic branches of Christianity: Catholic, Orthodox OR Protestant!!!! [Also, I don’t see The Imitation of Christ as a book of “romance” with Christ. Perhaps I’m wrong, but if any book is supposed to promote the desire to become as close to Christ-likeness, that’s supposed to be the one.] Yes, it’s a lonely life, but at least I don’t have to bow my head to any human being, be he a Pope, Patriarch, Bishop, minister or anybody else whom I’m not convinced is genuinely Christ-like…

4 1389 December 31, 2012 at 7:51 pm

I for one can’t really blame Russia for being xenophobic. The rest of Europe has never been friendly to Russia and has attempted to make too many inroads over the centuries. But as they say, YMMV (your mileage may vary).

5 ADHD December 31, 2012 at 8:13 pm

I’ll not deny that the rest of Europe (aside from the Balkan peoples suffering under the Ottoman-Turkish yoke – and even there the Bulgarians proved less than stellar in their loyalty!) were never truly friendly to Russia – though after the Crimean War of 1852-1856, France started in the 1860s to turn to her, finally signing a mutual treaty in 1893 (the basis for the “Triple Entente Cordiale” which become one side in World War I). [The French Emperor Napoléon III later in life regretted his pushing for the preservation of the Turkish Empire, saying that it would have been better to have been carved up instead right then and there.]

[I’ll here mention that according to some British historians, the stage for the Crimean War was set up by a rather mediocre yet pushy Ñikoláy (Nicholas) I with his designs for Russia’s expansion and freedom for the Balkans, who so antagonised many of the Western bigwigs with his poor manners and personal idiosyncrasies. It thus seems that if Europe has been often unfriendly, it also was somewhat matched by some ineptness on the part of Russia’s statesmen.]

The sad truth about Russia is that she frequently in her history has been like a see-saw: either too ready to Westernise OR preferring to instead resist everything and stay in her own semi-Asiatic shell. This state of affairs was really started under Peter the Great – beforehand, Iván IV (“Gróznïy” – “the Terrible / Awesome”) had a bit of experience that way too (he after all waged war with Poland and destroyed the Teutonic Knights.

6 ADHD December 31, 2012 at 8:19 pm

What I’d nevertheless like to stress in my above message is however how much of the time it’s the Russian Orthodox Church that has been one of the leading bulwarks of Russian xenophobia, trying to stop even the Russian people from being able to make more objective decisions as how to interact with the rest of Europe and thence the world, including which innovations to embrace, which inventions to accept at what time.

As somebody with Russian blood with me, it pains me hugely to think how the Russian destiny could have been different if Peter the Great and his successors wouldn’t have had to struggle against the inertia of the Russian people as much as they had to. [This bearing in mind admittedly how much Peter I was excessively pushy in terms of forcing reforms when a slower approach might have spared his people much upheaval, bitterness and unnecessary resentment…]

7 Eirenikos January 8, 2013 at 6:35 am

Smokecreen or not, the perspective offered by the gentleman presenting us with this particular view of history, is narrow in the extreme. Certainly the despicable acts of the Ustashi in the 1940s have been lately matched by the brutal regime of Milosevic. Without a doubt, too few Serbs stood up to oppose his rabble rousing in the late 80s and early 90s. On the contrary, there is evidence of widespread support for such distasteful characters as the genocidal Arkan as he was known, and his blood crazed wife, a popular pop / folk singer in Serbia in the 90s.

Susannah Heschel’s well documented work Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany, points to (with equally few exceptions) a Lutherism that happily embraced the blood curdling, shrill, propaganda of Josef Goebels not to mention the murderous policies of his ideological twin Heinrich Himmler.

All in all, a balanced bunch.

8 myth buster January 14, 2013 at 6:34 pm

Narrow minded indeed is the one who imputes presumption onto the words of these saints, for St. Paul said similar things, and indeed, the goal of every Christian should be to draw near to death unable to recall a single UNCONFESSED sin, though if memory be deficient, Confession and the Anointing of the Sick will fill the gap. Concerning Teresa, those who are consecrated to perpetual virginity are called spouses of Christ, and the Church warned parents not to dissuade their daughters from taking vows of virginity, for “How can you criticize her for wanting to be the wife of a King, rather than the wife of a soldier?”

Verily, it is right to desire and seek the salvation of sinners even before attaining Heaven yourself, for St. Paul wrote, “I have become all things to all men, that I may save some of them.” Did St. Paul imagine that he was their savior? By no means, but rather he proclaimed the Gospel for the conversion of sinners, that they may believe and repent, and so be saved. So too did these holy ones seek the conversion of sinners unto salvation by proclaiming the boundless love and mercy of Christ, even to the point of rejoicing in their sufferings, as did St. Paul. If this seems strange to you, is it not stranger still that the Russian Orthodox Church has a patron saint of atomic bombers? No, it is libelous to impute evil motives on them that love the Lord, and I dare say that one could no more accuse St. Francis of Assisi of presumption than one could accuse St. Paul for saying, “I have finished the race; I have fought the good fight. From now on, the crown of righteousness awaits me, and not only me, but all those who love the Lord’s Coming.” Nor could any accuse Teresa of delusion any more than accusing St. Paul of being a pretender to the title of Apostle after meeting Jesus in person.

What then, shall we say of the cautionary words of the earlier saints? They rightly caution against the dangers of demons impersonating Christ, Mary, angels or saints, as well as the dangers of allowing the human imagination to run wild. One can discern genuine Heavenly encounters from delusions and demonic counterfeits according to the doctrines proclaimed by the visionary.

9 marija markic February 13, 2013 at 6:30 pm

What happened to my comment?

Our answer is here in italics. The short answer is that it was not published.

Do you pay for this blog or do we? Have you bothered to read our comment policy? Anti-Serbian rants are not published. And we do not publish praise of those who kill Serbs.
CzechRebel blog admin.

10 marija markic February 14, 2013 at 12:56 pm

Editor’s note: Some trolls just never quit. Marija Markic, evidently a Croatian troll, thinks that she has the right to vent her hatred of Serbs on our blog. If we were liberals, we would probably call what Marija Markic is trying post here “hate speech.” We will omit her nasty remarks and publish only her sugar coatings. Our comments are in italics.
CzechRebel blog admin

Let’s set the landscape here first:

1. None of the admins and team members on 1389 Blog are ignorant or inexperienced in these matters. For example, the two administrators have been covering the conflict in Balkans since the Kosovo War in 1999. William Dorich, Sparta, Julia Gorin, James George Jatras and J P Maher have been covering it longer and, for some of them, much longer. None of us receive any funding from any people or organization to support our views.

2. While most of our staff covering the Balkans are Orthodox, J P Maher is a very devoted Roman Catholic, who has lived in the Balkans and visited there many times. He is also a linguist who specializes in the language, (or if you prefer to call them, languages) spoken by both Serbs and Croats. He has gone so far as to visit a town that had supposedly fallen victim to Serbian destruction. Of course, everything proved to be still intact. (It is kind of hard to rebuild a 500 year old building, exactly as it was, complete with mold and age stains, if you want to try to argue that it was somehow recreated after having been destroyed by those eeeeevil Serbs. Yes, he took pictures.) Personally, I find it interesting how many of our Orthodox Saints suffered martyrdom, not under pagans, not under Muslims, not under Communists, but under the thumb of Roman Catholic terror. Even here in North American, we have St. Peter the Aleut who was butchered cruelly by Jesuit priests. Has the Vatican ever bothered to apologize? So, we suspect that anyone who praises those who so freely butcher our fellow Orthodox is not being on the level. Heck, if it were up to me, J P Maher would be the next Pope. He is the ONLY Roman Catholic I know who could ever straighten out the mess in the Vatican.

3. Since we are only human, there may be some things we do not know. So, we have published an email address for the blog. Send the data to us via email, don’t post them here. We just don’t publish that stuff.

4. We are NOT a debate forum. If you want to argue about this stuff, go to Blogmocracy. They debate EVERYTHING. They even have a guy there who is both Roman Catholic and pro-Serb. You will have fun there. We strongly recommend it for those who want do that kind of thing.

5. Don’t insult our intelligence with your groundless lies. Even when you email us, we need sources. Your lies and name-calling prove only one thing: that you are a liar and a defamer.

That said, here is the nice part of her comment:

Today is Valentine’s day, may . . . your heart be filled with warmth and happiness. \

God bless Marija

Sorry, but that is all of her comment that was fit to print. 🙄

11 ADHD February 14, 2013 at 3:17 pm

To Marija Markich:

May God Bless you too and open your heart! God doesn’t respect divisions between people: when we come before Him, He’ll NOT Judge us as to whether we were good “Orthodox, Protestants or Romanists”; nor will he look at whether we were good Croats, Serbs, Canadians, Americans, Russians, Chinese or whatever. He’ll Judge us instead as to whether we were good CHRISTIANS!!! If we fail by THAT measurement – and have not accepted that HIS SOLE WAY OF GRACE is THE WAY of our salvation, we’ll be in BIG TROUBLE!!!

May I suggest you open your Bible and start reading it quite independently of any commentaries, advice from your priests or anything else? Note in particular the Gospel of St. John. Let’s see how you fare…

12 ADHD February 14, 2013 at 3:19 pm

Postscript: just as I’m part Serb, one of my very best friends is half-Croat and half- Austrian – and we’ve been good friends for over 27 whole years!!! He has done a tremendous amount of good for me and has incidentally proven that Serbs and Croats don’t need to be enemies in the slightest!!! May God Always Be with him!!!

13 marija markic February 14, 2013 at 7:12 pm

Editor’s note: Our better judgment tells us to just delete everything further that this individual, Marija Markic, attempts to post. (If we followed our own comment policy to the letter, that is what we would be doing.) However, we will publish every word of this complaint along with our comments in italics.
CzechRebel blog admin

I am speechless.

Well, you should be. We have tried to let you know nicely that this is not the appropriate forum for your causes. We just don’t say nice things about mass murders like Alojzije Viktor Stepinac. If God in his infinite mercy forgives this butcher, fine. Why don’t you play the above video? And it is not just this video; we have known about this individual for years. We just put your first message in the trash along with the many other inappropriate and all too often disgusting comments that we receive on a regular basis. If you have some actual data that might change our minds, you might try to email it to us. That is what email is for.

Then you wrote asking what happened to your rant in favor of the mass murderer, Stepinac. At that point, we suggested that you read the comment policy. Is it so hard to find? Just click! Let me help you with a few of the important clauses of said policy:

All comments are “subject to comment moderation.” That means that not every comment gets posted.

“Comments are moderated to exclude . . . incoherent rambles . . . inappropriate ad hominem attacks . . . and other material that would compromise the quality of this blog.” This sort of rules out praise for a mass murderer that the blog post has just condemned. It also rules out the nasty stuff that you put in the next comment about us.

“Blog moderation is not censorship. This is our blog. . . . We support your right to post what you want on your own blog, and to decide for yourself which comments you want to display on it.” This is followed by tips on starting your own blog. So, put what you like on your blog and email it to us. We will look at it, if you like.

“1389 Blog is a counterjihad blog. We take a conservative stand on other issues as well. We are under no obligation to give ‘equal time’ to any of our opponents, including jihadis or leftists of any stripe.” As any rational being should be able to figure out, we support the survival, both physical and spiritual, of the Serbian people. We, the admins, would lay down our lives for that without a second thought. We thought most people could understand that we would not post anti-Serbian stuff. But then, we guess we need to add that to our policy.

“1389 Blog is a blog, not a forum. . . . A forum focuses primarily on discussion and debate among its members. If you are interested in joining a forum, there are plenty of forums and newsgroups throughout the Internet that cover a broad range of subject matter.” Why this is NOT clear is beyond us. Not a debate forum! So don’t argue here!

“Comments containing . . . bigoted or racist remarks (especially anti-Semitic remarks), . . . will be deleted.” You said nasty stuff about the Serbian people. We promised to delete that kind of stuff. Why should we grant you special privileges?

Which paragraph of my article showed hate?

We don’t keep comments that we choose not to post. However, the post you attempted to put up was filled with praise for a man who helped murder many Serbs.

If you had a shred of decency, you would consider the fact that 1389 lost all of her Serbian relatives in Europe to the Nazis and their fellow butchers like Stepinac. We have other writers here who lost family to the Nazis in the Holocaust as well. When someone comes here saying good things about those Nazi collaborators, we don’t take very kindly to it.

As if all that were not enough, blog admin 1389 also has Jewish relatives and under NO circumstances will she put up with Nazi collaborators or those who support them. That is her line in the sand and I warn you: do not even THINK of crossing it. You would be wise to stop pushing your luck. 😈

Perhaps you would like to post nice things about other serial killers. Want to say nice things about Jeffrey Dahmer? How about Ted Kaczynski, Ed Gein, or John Wayne Gacy? Do you have nice words for Jack the Ripper? Well, Stepinac and company killed a vastly greater number than those five put together.

If memory serves me correctly, your last post was basically a rant accusing the poor Serbs–the true victims of the Balkans violence–of some nasty things. That is what the lame-stream media does. 1389 Blog refuses to help them perpetrate any more blood libel against the Serbs.

I resent the fact that I am called a hater, a liar and defamer.

Resent it all you like. If you praise the butcher Stepinac, you are a hater. If you blame the victims, you are a liar. This is a well-researched blog. It looks as though you hate that fact. We take great risks to bring the truth to our readers. In similar manner, we take great risks to bring the truth to those whom we meet in person. You want to post things to undermine the truth and have the nerve to complain when we do not print it.

Why don’t you print it and let others form their own opinion?


You are still trying to dictate our policies. No wonder you find Hitler’s people so “saintly.” Let us make one thing clear: This blog never has been and never will be a site where Nazi war criminals are praised. We don’t care whether the Roman Catholic Church (and/or any of its popes) has seen fit to enable, collaborate with, beatify, or even canonize totalitarians such as Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler, Streicher, or Stepinac – we condemn those totalitarians wholeheartedly. You love dictators because you are a dictator at heart.

14 CzechRebel February 15, 2013 at 1:30 pm

Apparently, Marija Markic still cannot figure out how to use email. Everyone else seems to be able to email us. We simply won’t post things in comments that should be sent in an email. What she want us to do was not clear either.

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: