W. Sungenis/Palm on Anfossi-Settele and Bruno, part I of V

Proemium : With Sungenis on Settele-Anfossi Affair · W. Sungenis/Palm on Anfossi-Settele and Bruno : part I of V · part II of V · part III of V · part IV of V · part V of V

I

Sungenis to me

10/04/15 à 17h59

Re: Reading but not bed time

Yes, in bad health, and Olivieri knew it. He was also understood as a weak pope who did not have the verve to fight, in addition to the fact that the Settele affair was only six years after Pius VII had been returned to the Vatican after being in exile in Florence under orders of Napoleon. Add to this the fact that Napoleon had taken all the Galileo files back to Paris and they were not returned until 1845, and add to that Olivieri's two whopping lies about why the 1616 and 1633 Church condemned Galileo, along with Pius VII's total lack of scientific knowledge, and you have a recipe for disaster.

All this information, by the way, comes from the top Galileo historians: Mayaud, Finochiarro and Fantoli.

Blessed Easter to you as well

Robert

II

Me to Sungenis, cc David Palm

10/04/15 à 18h49

Re: Reading but not bed time

Our dear David Palm - hello by the way, not leaving you out - found you had miscited Mayaud as all court feeling Olivieri was dishonest etc while DP reads Mayaud as saying all court felt Anfossi was dishonest etc.

If Pius VII was weak, having all of the court against himself, except Anfossi, would have been even more daunting than having just Olivieri, right?

In that case, one may fairly well say he might have done under circumstances a heroic effort not to disrupt the act of 1633 as a judgement (the rescinding of which according to Anfossi's stated reason would have been necessary for moving earth to be licit), if using one's weakness to stay at the matter at hand only (index/imprimatur for Settele) can count as heroic.

As to the difference between hundred years earlier and Pius VII's day, see my essay "Aquinas vs Paley":

New blog on the kid : Aquinas vs Paley
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2015/04/aquinas-vs-paley.html

I was reading up on DP on Pastor Aeternus, the § 8 and 9 do not guarantee Church is ALWAYS using its right according to Her duty.

Hans Georg Lundahl

III

Sungenis to me

10/04/15 à 19h57

Re: Reading but not bed time

In a message dated 4/10/2015 12:49:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, hgl@voila.fr writes:

[Rest as dialogue:]

[HGL:]

Our dear David Palm - hello by the way, not leaving you out - found you had miscited Mayaud as all court feeling Olivieri was dishonest etc while DP reads Mayaud as saying all court felt Anfossi was dishonest etc.

RS:

That was must a mistranslation of one word in French that can be taken either way depending on the context. My French translator, Hildegard Pohl, sided with "deception" instead of "disillusionment," but I fixed it in the next edition, so Mr. Palm needn't lose sleep over it. In fact, I thank him for finding it.

[HGL:]

If Pius VII was weak, having all of the court against himself, except Anfossi, would have been even more daunting than having just Olivieri, right?

RS:

Indeed, but Olivieri was the ring leader.

[HGL:]

In that case, one may fairly well say he might have done under circumstances a heroic effort not to disrupt the act of 1633 as a judgement (the rescinding of which according to Anfossi's stated reason would have been necessary for moving earth to be licit), if using one's weakness to stay at the matter at hand only (index/imprimatur for Settele) can count as heroic.

RS:

Perhaps.

[HGL:]

As to the difference between hundred years earlier and Pius VII's day, see my essay "Aquinas vs Paley":

New blog on the kid : Aquinas vs Paley
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2015/04/aquinas-vs-paley.html

I was reading up on D[avid] P[alm] on Pastor Aeternus, the § 8 and 9 do not guarantee Church is ALWAYS using its right according to Her duty.

Hans Georg Lundahl

RS:

Indeed.

IV

Me to Sungenis, cc David Palm

11/04/15 à 10h55

Re: Reading but not bed time

@Robert : Agreed on all points except one.

It was not this time "déception"="disappontment", already fixed as said, but whom the papal court was angry at and thought Pope had been too lenient against : ringleader Olivieri (or overt ringleader, since behind such, in my experience, there may be covert ones), as you think or Anfossi as David Palm and I think.

If Papal court considered Olivieri dishonest and thought Pope had been too lenient, that would mean Pius VII would have had people to lean on if he had wanted to back Anfossi.

If the Papal court rather considered (or pretended to do so) Anfossi as a dishonest person whom the Pope had shown too much favour, that means if the Pope had openly sided with Anfossi to the full, he would have been alone with Anfossi, or at least he would have had a reasonable apprehension of such a result.

This on top of him being ill would go a long way to in my book at least excuse him for not backing Anfossi to the full.

@David: I'll try not to harass you, but I thought I ought to let you know the weakness of your argument as argument especially if it is wellsupported as a fact. Most especially so.

Hans Georg Lundahl

V

David Palm to me

11/04/15 à 16h06

Re: Reading but not bed time

Dear Hans,

Just to you (I don't care to have a "trialogue" which, as we saw last time, turned into a free-for-all).

I'm afraid your (and Sungenis's) interpretation of the Acta entry, as reproduced by Mayaud, is impossible. In that entry it is unambiguously Fr. Anfossi, (the Reverendum Dominum Patrem Sacri Palatii Apostolici Magistrum, later just Patre Magistro = Master of the Sacred Palace) who is described as causing “great scandal and disgrace of the Holy See [magno scandalo Santaeque Sedis dedecore]”. He’s described as being a “stiff-necked and deceptive man [hic durae cervicis homo falsissimique]” and “very tenacious in his false judgment [sui judicii in omnibus tenacissimus]”. And he’s said constantly [non cessabat] to resort to “nonsense” [nugiis] in support of his opposition to the Roman Congregations and to “sensible men” [tam Congregationes quam sensatos viros] (see N. Mayaud, La condamnation des livres coperniciens et sa révocation à la lumière de documents inédits des Congrégations de l’Index et de l’Inquisition, p. 240).

Sungenis's contention that Fr. Olivieri was "strong arming" the Pope is yet another of his conspiracy theories, but remains an unsupported assertion, made up out of whole cloth and based on nothing more than his imagination and wishful thinking. He has never offered a shred of evidence in its support and what is gratuitously asserted may be gratuitously denied.

Sungenis constantly insists that it's important that the full records of the Holy Office were held by Napoleon. But he never says just what information the Holy Office would have found in those records that supposedly would have influenced the proceedings. Speaking of the opening of the full archives of the Galileo case, Prof. Francesco Beretta states, “This opening, officially celebrated in 1998, . . . failed to bring to light any sensational new knowledge” (“The Documents of Galileo’s Trial,” in Galileo and the Church, p. 193.) They certainly had the 1633 decree itself before them and according to the new geocentrists this by itself should have been sufficient. Thus Sungenis’s insinuation may be set aside as an empty diversion.

As for his contention that Fr. Olivieri lied to the Pope, let us remember two things. First, it was not only the Pope to whom Olivieri presented the matter but to all the cardinal-prefects of the Holy Office. And the Commissary General had this to say about those discussions with the cardinal-prefects: "the Most Rev. Father Master of the Sacred Palace [Fr. Anfossi] was not present at the two said meetings of the consultants (I do not know for what reasons). As a result, he was not aware of the proposal or of the discussion; and this was certainly unfortunate for him. For he would have heard the difficulties which some advanced at first, the solutions which others gave, and the ideas which everyone presented, until at the second meeting everyone shared an admirable consensus . . . No less uniform were the feelings of the Most Eminent Lord Cardinals; thus the decision had all the signs of having been dictated by the Holy Spirit" (Finnochiaro, Retrying Galileo, 204-5).

So there was no conspiracy, no subterfuge, no wrongdoing as Sungenis claims. Rather, all was done openly and in good order. The Holy Office had theological consultants prepare expert testimony. There was back and forth discussion, with ample opportunity for both sides to present their cases. The cardinal-prefects of the Holy Office officially sided with those who advocated the narrow interpretation of the 1633 decree and a broad allowance of views not covered by the 1633 decree to be held within the Catholic Church. And Pope Pius VII was willing at every step to approve. This ended with a general, positive permission bearing the Pope’s signature.

And second, the fact is that the Commissary General, Fr. Olivieri, acted fully in line with the Church’s perennial rules of canonical interpretation, which mandate that the 1633 decree against Galileo must be interpreted strictly, as narrowly as possible and as affecting as few people as possible. This may not be convincing to Sungenis, who has a private dogma to uphold, but it convinced the cardinal-prefects of the Holy Office and ultimately Pope Pius VII, which obviously matters a great deal more.

So you see, Hans, I do not argue that Pius VII's decree went against the 1633 decree. Rather, he ruled in line with the Church's perennial canonical tradition that a canonical penalty must be interpreted strictly. And the 1633 decree unambiguously references a strict heliocentrism, with an immobile sun at center of the universe and a mobile earth -- a view which nobody will ever hold again. So at most the 1633 decree is an ecclesiastical dead letter. But whether other cosmological views fell under that decree was an open question. And that question was answered authoritatively and definitively by Pius VII in the negative. It is a decision that his successors have clearly followed.

God bless,

David

With Sungenis on Settele-Anfossi Affair

Proemium : With Sungenis on Settele-Anfossi Affair · W. Sungenis/Palm on Anfossi-Settele and Bruno : part I of V · part II of V · part III of V · part IV of V · part V of V

I

Sungenis to me

13/03/15 à 21h38
also cited earlier corresp.

Gift for you

Hans,

I noticed that you said you did not have a copy of GWW.

Do you have an address I can send the three volumes to, as a gift to you? I'd be happy to do so. You are a scholar in your own right, and you've got a pretty strong will to boot :)

Also, since this issue is pertinent, I've attached a PDF of the portion of GWW that deals with the Pius VII and Settele affair. I thought you might enjoy it for bedtime reading.

What is your physical situation? I mean, do you have a place to call your own. Where are you located? Can I help you in any way?

Robert

[ Pius VII and Canon Settele.pdf (2455.1 Ko) ]

II

Me to Sungenis

10/04/15 à 12h46

Reading but not bed time

I had perhaps too hastily assumed Pius VII was as eager to get away from Middle Ages as Gregory XVI.

He was in bad health?

Blessed Easter,
Hans Georg Lundahl

And he Said "rozumiesz?"

1) HGL's F.B. writings : Latin and Conlangs, Featuring Alcuin, 2) More on Post-Alcuinic Latin, 3) My Real Friends on FB are Those who Allow me to Repost, 4) Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : And he Said "rozumiesz?"

I did understand that, so I am not notifying him on this one again, I already told him before, if he answered, he could count on being published.

The kind of shouting and nagging I have been dealing with is sth he typefies. Note well, I am leaving him anonimous, as he wanted.

All of below on Wednesday in Easter Week, 8-IV-2015.

HGL

[notified CdCC, RW and TK, this one is with CdCC]

HGL's F.B. writings: My Real Friends on FB are Those who Allow me to Repost
http://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.fr/2015/04/my-real-friends-on-fb-are-those-who.html

CdCC

stop stalking me, please and I hope you do know what consent and friendship really mean because you don't seem to understand it.

HGL

• 1) I am not stalking you, this was a notification;
• 2) I don't seem to understand how to be YOUR friend, so? Did I seem as if I wanted to?
• 3) If you answer, count on it being published.

You see, I have lots of people who are REALLY stalking me about this or that or sundry thing they disagree with me about, including both the linguistic questions we discussed AND my having disappointed Chris Ferrara (who is NOT my friend), so, they want me to get confronted with their arguments without having to do so themselves, I want them to get confronted with my answers. That is why I consider it a waste of my already much stolen time (by them, not you) if an interesting discussion (of general interest) cannot be shared with the public so everyone who reads me can see how stupid they are.

CdCC

you are stalking me by making fun of my beliefs and thinkings on your blog. please, stop teasing me, my friends and delete your blogposts, otherwise I will report you to authorities and/or blogger.

you are being a nuisance and publishing things I post without my explicit consent.

HGL

report if you like. I made fun of very little of your beliefs, I basically answered when you were trying to make fun of mine. Your attitude is btw very far from hip, it's more like bourgeois and, let's put it like this : Opus Dei. The Puritan or even "Calvinist" Catholics. You are btw perfectly free to retaliate in kind, but it seems you know you lost the debate.

CdCC

Still you made fun, no one made fun of your beliefs.

And do not label me as Opus Dei because they made a lot of problems in my country.

Btw I don't do shaming in public. It is not my style. Learn some manners, too.

HGL

If you retaliated, I would not consider it shaming. If I was trying to shame anyone, it was not you, it was rather my coutryman TK. I did not say you were Opus Dei, I did say you had as bourgeois and hyperstrict values as they. And I have known three of them. Btw, as to learning some manners, the guys who agree with you about me are exactly the kind of guys I consider myself to be discreetly stalked by.

If it can be of any consolation, there is on the blog another debate on top of the linguistic one.

HGL's F.B. writings: On the Greatest Philosophers - who's that?
http://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.fr/2015/04/on-greatest-philosophers-whos-that.html

CdCC

i will be polite with this one: leave me alone and do not talk to me ever again, rozumiesz?

Correspondence with Sungenis on My Affairs

"Sungenis" in the following headings stands for Robert Sungenis.

Sungenis to me

13/03/15 à 21h38

Gift for you

Hans,

I noticed that you said you did not have a copy of GWW.

Do you have an address I can send the three volumes to, as a gift to you? I'd be happy to do so. You are a scholar in your own right, and you've got a pretty strong will to boot :)

Also, since this issue is pertinent, I've attached a PDF of the portion of GWW that deals with the Pius VII and Settele affair. I thought you might enjoy it for bedtime reading.

What is your physical situation? I mean, do you have a place to call your own. Where are you located? Can I help you in any way?

Robert

[Attached file on Pius VII and Anfossi affair, not yet read]

Me to Sungenis

14/03/15 à 11h16

re: Gift for you

Wonderful!

I have no place where I know beforehand I can sleep. OK, I could call homeless shelters such a place, since I theoretically have sth like 75% assurance if I phoned I would be accepted, BUT I also know that though I get good food there and it's warm, I am not sure of getting even any sleep, so I avoid them.

I am however endowed with a snail mail adress, as many homeless are, and last year of the one before one Lynch who is nephew of a deceased Holy-Ghost-Father sent me St Patrick after the Ancient Narrations. I kept it and read it and then sent it to ma, which made her happy.

Now, carrying a book in the bag is soemwhat heavy, so if there are three volumes, I'd appreciate if you send one at a time, and wait till I tell you I have sent it to ma or someone else or donated to a library (which I will obviously only do after reading it myself).

Unless of course you prefer to take the offer of publishing my essays on topic though my solution differs from you in details and wait with sending me the books till I can pay an appartment or buy a caravan (supposing I marry someone with a driver's licence or who knows how to conduct horses) where I can keep all three.

And of course, when it comes to income, your violinist son could contribute too by playing my compositions.

In both cases royalties are according to my long standing offers voluntary, but I count on your not being stingy.

Now, as to my present mail adress, it is (at Salvation Army):

ESI St Martin
27 ter Bd de St Martin
75003 Paris

Will look at the pdf too now.

Hans Georg Lundahl

[Did not yet keep the last promise, lack of internet time.]

Sungenis to me

14/03/15 à 14h21

Re: Gift for you

Hans,

I see what I can do. I'm off to Mexico and will be back late next week.

Do you know French? If so I need translation work, and I would pay you for it.

Robert

Me to Sungenis

14/03/15 à 15h19

Re: Gift for you

My work is writing, not translating.

Yes, I know French, more than the French will give me credit for. But translation is dryer work than writing, I want to stay in my own business.

My offer to you or your publisher as well as to anyone else (i e a non-exclusive offer) is here:

https://hglwrites.wordpress.com/a-little-note-on-further-use-conditions/

My offer to your son, equally non exclusive, is top link on this main index page:

http://ppt.li/musicalia

One week

no reply.

Me to Sungenis

21/03/15 à 11h10

Is this why you (if it was you?) discounselled your son from playing my music?*

For now it is Lent, from tomorrow even passion weeks, so now is not the issue.

But I gave him an offer, he did not reply, someone, possibly the father whom he trusts, is obviously counselling him not to have anything to do with me.

http://www.av1611.org/othpubls/roots.html

Now, the problem with such an association is of course, I have not been dabbling into the occult to compose, and I am not writing Heavy Metal even, or even rock.

So, I am being boycotted by music élite here, possibly because I specified not to use for charities that promote abortion (Téléthon which i targetted is about as promotion aborting as March of the Dimes), possibly because of a well known pianist and 33:rd degree mason being a camp survivor and some such people thinking I need to accept their version (and completely so) of what happened on every level and not just where they were witnesses because victims (e g of humiliations or of people getting marched off to presumably be gassed - which I consider may have been a recurrent scare tactic), possibly because of some gypsy superstition against composing music on the paper - which is what I do. Or did.

At the same time, Evangelicals who knew I prayed the Rosary before composing (and whose prayers may have contribited to my hardly praying any rosaries any more, being too tired and carnal by now, also not composing last year), may have considered THAT as delving into the occult, and may then have spread the suspicion in general terms (but not specifying the Rosary's role in their suspicions) so that Catholics ALSO should suspect me of composing under diabolical control.

As usual, if you reply, you can count on correspondence being disclosed, if I find it interesting enough.

But it is also this, some people have decided they owe me a lesson, I hope you are not among these, but I am not totally betting on it.

Hans Georg Lundahl

* Note : I had forgotten giving the offer in view to the father a week earlier and was thinking of a previous time. About a year earlier. Or was concerned about the week's non reply. I can't recall which, I often sleep in places where I am deprived of sleep, thank God not this night.

Sungenis to me

22/03/15 à 02h54

Re: Is this why you (if it was you?) discounselled your son from playing my m...

Hans,

I don't know what you're talking about. You really need to stop the suspicion and speculation. I wish you well, my friend, and I hope you accomplish what you want.

God speed.

Robert

Me to Sungenis

22/03/15 à 18h00

Re: Is this why you (if it was you?) discounselled your son from playing my m...

I'd like to stop suspecting and speculating, but admit if I give a good offer, never hear a word about why it is supposed to be bad from the other guy's p o v and miss lots of time of my life over the guys not taking it, I consider SOMEONE may have given them counsel adverse to me, right?

And whom would they rather listen to than their fathers?

Hans Georg Lundahl

Sungenis to me

23/03/15 à 03h02

Re: Is this why you (if it was you?) discounselled your son from playing my m...

Except this time you're wrong :)

I never said a word to my son about you.

Me to Sungenis

23/03/15 à 09h31

Re: Is this why you (if it was you?) discounselled your son from playing my m...

Noted.

Between me and readers

In that case also Robert did not transmit the link at the end of the "Gift for you" correspondence, which I sent the 14th of March./HGL

Mes Dettes Annuelles au système boursier de Suède

Bureau de recouvrement de dettes à moi

16/03/15 à 09h41

AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669

Références à rappeler impérativement : 1730669 /CSN LUNDAHL HANS GEORG

AVIS AVANT POURSUITES
Madame, Monsieur,
Nous vous informons avoir été mandatés par CSN CENTRALA STUDIESTODSNAMNDEN afin de procéder par tous moyens légaux au recouvrement des sommes suivantes que vous restez lui devoir :

Principal :	5894.00
Intérêts de retard :	13.29
Dommages intérêts amiables Art 1153 al 4 Cc :	0.00
Clause pénale :	0.00
Dommages intérêts :	0.00
Total restant dû :	E 5907.29

Nous agissons ce jour afin de régler ce litige de façon amiable.

Nous vous indiquons qu'à défaut de règlement entre nos mains par chèque ou mandat A L'ORDRE DE FRANCE CONTENTIEUX sous HUIT JOURS, nous transmettrons votre dossier à notre Huissier de Justice.

Ce dernier aura pouvoir d'engager toutes poursuites judiciaires à votre encontre, notamment une saisie sur votre compte bancaire ou votre salaire.

Il est à noter que les frais engagés, en raison du préjudice subit par notre mandant, resteront à votre entière charge et ne feront qu'alourdir votre dette.

Veuillez agréer, Madame, Monsieur, nos salutations distinguées.

Service Juridique
[personne humaine anonymisée, comme le bureau]

MOYENS DE REGLEMENT :
Virement bancaire : Banque HSBC, Agence de Mazamet (France)
IBAN FR76 3005 6002 7302 7302 7535 578 / BIC/SWIFT Code : CCFRFRPP

[deux autres moyens omis pour anonymiser le bureau]

Article L111-8 du CPCE modifié par la Loi n°2014-344 du 17 mars 2014 - art. 12 : A l'exception des droits proportionnels de recouvrement ou d'encaissement qui peuvent être mis partiellement à la charge des créanciers dans des conditions fixées par décret en Conseil d'Etat, les frais de l'exécution forcée sont à la charge du débiteur, sauf s'il est manifeste qu'ils n'étaient pas nécessaires au moment où ils ont été exposés. Les contestations sont tranchées par le juge.
Les frais de recouvrement entrepris sans titre exécutoire restent à la charge du créancier, sauf s'ils concernent un acte dont l'accomplissement est prescrit par la loi au créancier. Toute stipulation contraire est réputée non écrite, sauf disposition législative contraire.
Cependant, le créancier qui justifie du caractère nécessaire des démarches entreprises pour recouvrer sa créance peut demander au juge de l'exécution de laisser tout ou partie des frais ainsi exposés à la charge du débiteur de mauvaise foi.

Loi n°78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 : Conformément aux dispositions de la Loi Informatique et Libertés du 6 janvier 1978, vous disposez d’un droit d’accès et de rectification pour toute information vous concernant. Le destinataire des données est la société France Contentieux. Les informations que nous possédons et nécessaires au traitement de votre dossier sont conservées dans nos fichiers conformément à la législation.

Moi à Bureau de recouvrement de dettes

16/03/15 à 10h53

re: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669

Je vous informe, j'ai essayé de me faire un revenu sur mon écriture, selon les conditions suivants:

https://hglwrites.wordpress.com/conditions-dutilisations-ulterieures/

Et voici une/deux des intrigues (avérées) qui ont été montées pour m'en empêcher:

http://correspondentia-ioannis-georgii.blogspot.fr/2014/10/avec-albin-michel-editeurs-sur-la.html

http://correspondentia-ioannis-georgii.blogspot.fr/2015/02/une-femme-pretendait-me-vouloir-aider.html

À vous de noter si c'est une seule intrigue parce que ça nie la même prémisse pour ma solution de trouver un revenu, ou deux intrigues différentes, puisque les éditeurs sont distinctes de x qui s'est présentée comme [anonymisée aussi].

Donc, que ce serait "impossible" pour un éditeur quelconque de prendre mes blogs ou plutôt une sélection de messages sur un ou plusieurs blogs comme manuscrit.

Erroné, mais cette erreur vient d'ajouter du temps avant que je sois en position de repayer les sommes.

Aussi, je compose (au moins avant, moins cette dernière année qui m'a beaucoup fatigué) de la musique.

http://hglundahlsmusik.blogspot.fr/2008/11/whats-deal-cest-quoi-ce-truc.html

Voici quelques observations à propos quelquesunes des intrigues possibles (avérés uniquement dans mon expérience que vous pourriez taxer de subjective, à savoir que des gens qui ont d'abord montré un intérêt pour mes compositions se soient de la suite montrés "perplexes", comme s'ils avaient perdu la mémoire.

[Avec corrections apportées à l'orthographe, j'étais fatigué]

http://hglundahlsmusik.blogspot.fr/2015/03/le-boycott-de-mes-compositions-en.html

Notez, ça fait depuis 2005 que des musiciens français savent que je compose, il s'agit donc effectivement d'un boycott.

http://hglundahlsmusik.blogspot.fr/2014/03/britten-netait-pas-plagiaire-moi-non.html

Juste pour le cas qu'il y ait des critiques de musique sur place incapable de distinguer entre "pastiche" (reproche critique, et qui a été faite à Ravel) et "plagiat" (sens primaire : délit dans le code de la propriété intellectuelle et artistique, sens dérivé : hyperlatif de pastiche).

Telle est ma réponse.

S'il y a sur Centrala Studiestödsnämnden qui voudraient donner occasion non seulement à moi, mais aussi à d'autres suédois endettés, soit catholiques conservateurs, interessés par mes textes, soit musiciens, interessés par mes compositions, de se retrouver en état de leur repayer, ils sont biensûr très bienvenus à transmettre.

Entre temps, je vis sans revenu.

Cette page (à laquelle je donne le lien depuis les deux pages de conditions) note mon numéro de compte postal:

http://www.webcitation.org/5cxxNeXzW

Je cite:

La Poste, France
Caisse National d'Epargne
Code établissement: 10011
Code guichet: 00020
N° du compte: 1022192955Z
Clé RICE: 24
Bergérac, 24
IBAN-IDENTIFIANT INTERNATIONAL DU COMPTE:
FR81...10011...00020...102...2192955Z...24
BIC-IDENTIFIANT INTERNATIONAL DE L'ETABLISSEMENT:
PSSTFRPPCNE

Vous êtes libres à faire une requête chez La Poste combien s'y trouve pour l'instant.

Et s'il y serait des sommes importantes versées depuis que j'avais vérifié moins de 10 €, vous êtes de ma part libres d'en prendre et de verser à CSN (dans le sens suédois, Centrala Studiestödsnämnden).*

Hans Georg Lundahl

* Notez, j'ai aussi une dette au moins morale, mais aussi en quelques PV, une somme moins importante qt aux PV, mais assez importante qm quand à la dette morale, à SNCF et RATP.

Bureau de recouvrement de dettes à moi

16/03/15 à 11h00

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669

Monsieur,

Votre email est tout à fait incompréhensible. Il reste près de 6000 € à rembourser à CSN, nous pouvons vous proposer un remboursement maximum en 18 mensualités de 327.44 € Sans réponse précise de votre part sous 48h, nous reprendrons la procédure à votre encontre.

Cordialement,
[personne humaine anonymisée]

Moi à Bureau de recouvrement de dettes

16/03/15 à 11h49

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669

Je ne considère pas ma réponse incompréhensible.

Relisez.

Je vous ai d'ailleurs donné ce qu'il vous faut pour votre procédure si vous y allez. Vous avez mon numéro de compte postal, je ne possède pas d'autre compte.

Hans Georg Lundahl

Bureau de recouvrement de dettes à moi

16/03/15 à 12h04

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669

Monsieur,

Je représente un cabinet de recouvrement, ce que vous faites pour gagner votre vie ne me concerne pas.
Pouvez-vous payer selon les modalités que je vous ai clairement proposées, oui ou non.
Si oui, alors remplissez l’autorisation de prélèvement ci-joint et adressez-nous-la à [anomynisé]
Si vous ne pouvez pas, veuillez me fournir votre déclaration de revenus pour 2014, pas des liens menant sur je ne sais quels sites et qui ne font pas progresser mon dossier de recouvrement.

Comptant sur votre compréhension
Cordialement [etc.]

Moi à Bureau de recouvrement de dettes

16/03/15 à 15h33

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669

"Si vous ne pouvez pas, veuillez me fournir votre déclaration de revenus pour 2014, pas des liens menant sur je ne sais quels sites et qui ne font pas progresser mon dossier de recouvrement."

Ma déclaration de revenus est : 0€.

Sauf ce que j'ai fait en mendicité (pour supplémenter mon manque de revenus sur mes métiers). Et donc aussi consommé pour survivre.

Hans Georg Lundahl

Moi à Bureau de recouvrement de dettes

16/03/15 à 15h50

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669 (encore)

Oh, d'ailleurs, les sites ne sont pas "vous ne savez pas quels sites", ce sont les miens, ils expliquent mes démarches d'avoir un révenu et aussi les obstacles.*

Mais comme dit, mon révenu [sic scripsi] était 0€.

Voulez-vous que je remplisse le formulaire quand même, juste au cas que mes démarches auparavant sans réussite donneraient des fruits?

Ou est-ce une chose impossible tant que je n'ai pas de revenu connu en avance?

Hans Georg Lundahl

* Et je viens aussi de proposer que celui qui reclame [sic scripsi] le paiement pourrait les avoir pour proposer à d'autres étudiants suédois endettés et fauchés de payer pour soi-même et pour moi avec l'utilisation commerciale de mes productions artistiques et intellectuelles. Vous pourriez leur au moins transmettre les liens.

Mon adresse postale:

ESI St Martin
27 ter Bd de St Martin
75003 Paris

C'est une boîte à lettres, chez l'Armée du Salut, pas un appartement, ni un endroit pour dormir. Juste une boîte à lettres, et je vis de jour en jour.

Bureau de recouvrement de dettes à moi

16/03/15 à 16h09

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669 (encore)

Monsieur,

J’entends que vous n’avez pas de revenus, il me faut votre déclaration de revenus officielle pour pouvoir le prouver à mon client. Sans ce document, la procédure à votre encontre continuera

Cordialement, [etc.]

Moi à Bureau de recouvrement de dettes

16/03/15 à 16h57

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669 (encore)

"il me faut votre déclaration de revenus officielle pour pouvoir le prouver à mon client."

En Suède, j'aurais pu déclarer un révenu [sic scripsi] nul.

En France les Finances Publiques ne prennent pas ce genre de déclaration, selon ce qu'on vient de m'indiquer.

Donc, le document que vous demandez est non-existant.

Mais je viens de vous autoriser ici même en écrit de chercher sur mon compte postal.

S'il y a davantage que les dix euros dont j'étais au courant, après de prélever, ayez la bonté de me signaler, même si rien ne reste, puisque ça me dirait que les choses commencent à aller dans le bon sens pour moi.

Avec regrets,

Hans Georg Lundahl

Bureau de recouvrement de dettes à moi

17/03/15 à 12h02

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669 (encore)

Monsieur,

Pour la dernière fois, nous n’avons pas le pouvoir de faire ce que vous m’indiquez. Nous sommes un cabinet de recouvrement amiable

Cordialement, [etc.]

Moi à Bureau de recouvrement de dettes

17/03/15 à 12h09

RE: AVIS AVANT POURSUITES /DMD 1730669 (encore)

Ah, vous n'avez pas le pouvoir de regarder mon compte, même si je l'autorise?

J'avais pas compris que vous l'aviez dit.

Mes excuses.

Mais précisément en tant que cabinet de recouvrement amicable, ne serait-ce pas indiqué de faire passer mes propos à Centrala Studieistödsnämnden?

Merci en avance, et Bonne Fête de St Patrick!

Hans Georg Lundahl

Diatribe with Robert Bennett (Two Teas)

1) New blog on the kid : Chris Ferrara the Conspirator, 2) HGL's F.B. writings : Debate with John Médaille on Geocentrism, 3) Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : Getting Back to Tom Trinko on Geocentric Satellites and Some Other Things, Especially Whether Literal Belief is Protestant, 4) With David Palm and Sungenis, 5) With David Palm, Sungenis, Robert Bennet and Rick DeLano, 6) Christopher Ferrara Bumps In And I Get Angry, 7) Aftermath of the Quarrel, 8) Diatribe with Robert Bennett (Two Teas), 9) HGL's F.B. writings : Continuing Debate with Mark Stahlman and John Médaille and Others (sequel I), 10) Continuing Debate with Mark Stahlman and John Médaille and Others (sequel II), 11) Where I Get a Dislike to Mark Stahlman

Introductory remarks from Robert Bennett (two teas, noted) to me:

To Hans Lundah [sic], interspersed with comments

Robert Bennett, interspersed with my comments:

[Placed as in quotation in original letter, so as to make his new remarks stick out as answers.]

I

Robert Bennett

« The firmament was set in rotation at the first gulp of forbidden fruit, not to stop until the Lion of Juda returns. This precludes complete cessation of cosmic rotation… “

Hans Georg Lundahl

In St Augustine, the firmament or the light within it, he doesn’t say which and at another point leaves the question undecided, and explicitly so, was set in rotation around Earth on day 1.

Robert Bennett

[AMDG] So the firmament was created on Day 2, according to Scripture, and set in rotation on Day 1, according to Augustine…or possibly Lundah?) [sic] …. rotating before it was created…

Even the Almighty would be challenged by that contradiction.

Augustine warned against those who would weaken the faith by arguing from ignorance. He should include those who misquote him.

Hans Georg Lundahl

Mea Culpa. No, St Augustine does not say the firmament starts rotating on day 1.

But the light which was created on day one started rotating that day, that he does say.

If Sun rotates because of rotating aether, that obviously means the aether is something other than the firmament.

My own idea about the firmament between the waters is oxygenized athmosphere.

H2O below it. Some H2O but mostly H2 as “waters above the firmament”. And some H2 used to create Sun and Stars on day 4. And some H2 reunited in double proportion to O2 to form the H2O when the waters of the heavens were opened at the deluge.

But this does not mean aether would not have been rotating.

II

Hans Georg Lundahl

I am not convinced of the visionary Hildegard of Bingen.

Robert Bennett

[AMDG] There’s no relevance to your lack of conviction. Private revelation – to Augustine or Hildegard – is judged by the Church to be ‘take it or leave it’…not binding in conscience according to its content. So we can say, each to the other, ‘Es macht nichts’… But reference to Hildegard’s works are based on comparison of her visionary statements with scientific facts in today’s world. And. so far, her interpretation of reality is not in conflict with present facts, but with present interpretation of those facts. Alternate causes without contradiction.

Augustine makes no claim of divine revelation, AFAIK, and he makes no statement about nature testable today… IMBW.

Hans Georg Lundahl

St Augustine does however make a serious claim of having studied the Bible.

III

Robert Bennett

“The 16 fixed stars(angels?) need only supply the aether winds to fully counter the sidereal rotation of Sun and Moon to conflate Scripture(necessary) and Hildegard(optional).”

Hans Georg Lundahl

I have no idea what you mean by “16 fixed stars” since the fixed stars (each probably not quite fixed and probably moved by an angel) are innumerable.

Robert Bennett

[AMDG] So lack of conviction is based on ignorance of Hildegard’s content? An interesting epistemology.

Hans Georg Lundahl

A conviction decidedly for or against needs to be based on knowledge of content. I pleaded lack of conviction.

I do however know that if she said anything about “16 fixed stars”, this was not the exact typical terminology of the Middle Ages.

As I said : I have no idea what you mean by “16 fixed stars” (in Hildegard of Bingen) since the fixed stars (each probably not quite fixed and probably moved by an angel) are innumerable (in common usage of what fixed stars means to the Middle Ages).

IV

Robert Bennett

“God could grant Joshua’s request indirectly by using the angels of solar and lunar aether as instruments of His will… Wo ist der fehler? »

a

Hans Georg Lundahl

God is not said simply to have granted Joshua’s request, but to have obeyed him.

Robert Bennett

[AMDG] And somehow it’s known that God could not have obeyed Joshua indirectly, by angelic implementation? God has never used angels to send a message or in effecting His will?

Hans Georg Lundahl

But the word “obey” implies God adjusting His behavior to the command of Joshua. His own behavior. That is the point. Otherwise it would have read that God granted the request or something.

b

Hans Georg Lundahl

Furthermore, if the aether is the habitation of Sun and of Moon, for them to stand still as seen from Earth (Joshua 10) and also “in their habitation” (Habacuc 3:11)the habitation also needs not to move, since if it moved, either they would stand still in it, but move with it as seen from Earth, though faster, at stellar angular speed, or they would stand still as seen from Earth but by moving against the movement of their habitation. One could get around it by saying aether rotating around Earth is not what Habacuc meant by their habitation.

Robert Bennett

[AMDG] Joshua 10:13 references shamayim not zĕbuwl

Hans Georg Lundahl

I am not a Hebraist, in Douay Rheims Habacuc 3:11 reads “in their habitation”. And Latin has “in habitaculo suo » in the Vulgate.

V

Robert Bennett

“Any one of Hildegard’s 4 aether types could be the source of the obvious global atmospheric circulation and jet streams eastward and its conflict with the firmament’s westward motion, balancing only in the GSZ. “

Hans Georg Lundahl

I have no idea of what her 4 aether types are.

Robert Bennett

[AMDG] Blissful ignorance, a fortiori.

Hans Georg Lundahl

Blissful or not, when I posted the words before Christopher Ferrara’s interruption, I counted on an explanation.

Final remarks:

Robert Bennett

Enough of the irrational posturing…. Like David and Chris previously, Bennet(sic) is bailing out …

No more missives, svp..

AMDG,

Robert B.

Hans Georg Lundahl

For one thing, deleting a last letter is different if it changes pronuntiation and if it is just omission of a double letter.

For another thing, I was tired.

For a third, I have corrected all Bennet to Bennett. Except where he put “Bennet(sic)” Since my fault was involuntary, I feel I had a right to correct it without falsification.

For a fourth, just as some oaf seems to have prayed that I may trust Robert Sungenis less on spelling of Slavic names, so someone seems to have prayed that for saying this I should be shown untrustworthy myself. Mission accomplished. Before correction, I had in fact written “Robert Bennet” which really does merit a (sic) from his writing.

For the fifth, as he asked for “no more missives” this answer will be given on message board (unless I was excluded) instead of per missive.

Hans Georg Lundahl

With Red Cardigan on Abusive Filtering of her Blog

Me to Red Cardigan

09/03/15 à 10h17

On the message "Destroying the family is good for business" ....

... which seems no longer to exist, did you by any chance show some poster for a pron mag to illustrate a point?

Because, the message and your entire blog got filtered on the giant library Bpi:

New blog on the kid : Et la Bpi alors ...
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2015/03/et-la-bpi-alors.html

You do not need to answer, if you do, it will be visible on my blogs (you know the famous Wellborn protocol):

Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : If you wish to correspond with me
http://correspondentia-ioannis-georgii.blogspot.com/p/if-you-wish-to-correspond-with-me.html

Hans Georg Lundahl

Red Cardigan to me

10/03/15 à 22h41

Re: On the message "Destroying the family is good for business" ....

Dear Mr. Lundahl,

I have no idea why the library you link to filtered my post. There is nothing pornographic in it, and the links in it are to a news article and to Rod Dreher’s blog at The American Conservative. There are some links in the quote from Rod Dreher’s piece as well, but those are his links and do not go anywhere other than to reference materials and sources he is citing.

I find it interesting that my post is being censored. The most charitable assumption is that certain words used in discussing the topic triggered a “keyword” alert, but one would think that the post would actually be read before someone would decide it was inappropriate.

I appreciate your bringing this to my attention!

Sincerely,

[signed real name of Red Cardigan]

Me to Red Cardigan

11/03/15 à 09h42

Re: On the message "Destroying the family is good for business" ....

Dear [Red Cardigan],

My hunch is that "redcardigan" contains the letter sequence "redcard".

Which in its usual football or sports connotation is not used in French sites, since they use "carte rouge" instead.

I did alert a librarian, and even if we are right about origin of mistake it is his duty to have corrected it by now.

All the best!

Hans Georg Lundahl