A correspondence with a fishy FB page called Scholasticum

Their page

Scholasticum
Catholic Church · Educational Organization · Charity Organization
https://www.facebook.com/Scholasticum-1649070132036906/

I

Me to Page

Sat 6:43pm

I suppose you are in general philosophy thomistic, except for some scoticism on principium individuationis (me too, haecceitas rocks).

But how Thomasic are you on questions like angelic movers?

HGL's F.B. writings : Debating with Sungenis, Mainly
http://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2016/03/debating-with-sungenis-mainly.html

II

Page to Me

Wed 11:20am

This FB page is for the Institute: regarding particular theses of Saint Thomas or Bonaventure, you have to contact our instructors. However, Its not in harmony with Scholasticism to deny the equivocity or multivocity of terms; that denial rather is a modern error.

III

Me to Page

Wed 1:16pm

was I denying multivocity of terms like "idea"?

(ante rem, in re, post rem)

as to your instructors, why not forward our correspondence?

IV

Page to Me

Wed 5:41pm

You misunderstand. The FB page is for publicity, to public relations right now. Perhaps in the future, though.

As for multivocity, if you did not deny it, then we did not say you denied it.

[Please

check out his last line!]

V

Me to Page

just after

OK, and the person DOING this publicity has no relation otherwise to the instructors?

I happened to think that was a usual procedure?

VI

Page to Me

Thu 6:16pm

No, I am not a member of the Faculty, only a lowly FB volunteer.

VII

Me to Page

just after

I was not saying YOU were a member of the Faculty.

I am saying you have THEIR contact information.

If not, I think you were somewhat stupid to volunteer.

VIII

Page to Me

Fri 2:49pm

Right now we are very busy with the many things regarding starting and founding and setting up an institute, we don't have a PR person to answer questions from the net....sorry...

IX

Me to Page

Fri 7:20pm

WELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL .... if you know the faculty members THAT well, you also are able to forward and see if one can make a kind of exception.

X

Page to Me

St Joseph's Day, 8:40am

Dear Mr. Lundahl, no, we cannot make such an exception, we have much greater responsibilities at this time. Thank you.

XI

Me to Page

11:53am

Oh, a scholastic with "greater responsibilities" than answering questions.

VERY interesting.

Half a correspondence on Catholic Church and Bible

I was replying to an article on the site Risen Jesus, not at all sure if it was this one I just linked to* or another.

I seem to have in my initial response said sth about Catholic Tradition being why we know the authors (apart from genuine or forged claims by real author to be such and such a person, most authors are known in such a way as would make the category pseudepigrapha - wrong attribution - at least possible, except for the fact a tradition is there attributing the book to such and such an author**. So, I might have asked why he believed Catholic tradition about Gospel attributions, but not about ... "Catholicism" ... as in the parts of Catholicism rejected by Protestants.

Now, my original latter is so far still lost somewhere on their computers, and I therefore start with a belated reply and give mine to it. Labelling the reply II, in case the I should reemerge.

II

Nick Peters to me

07/01/16 à 21h20

Risen Jesus

Hi Hans. Thanks for writing. Please accept our apologies for the delay in our response. We just discovered a glitch in the contact area of our website which resulted in us not receiving about 500 messages. The issue has now been resolved and we are working diligently to respond to those messages that were not received. Mike's a busy guy, so he has me, his son-in-law and apologetics colleague Nick Peters to help him with these questions. I'd answer that we have textual evidence that is there independent of the Catholic Church. The transmission of the manuscripts is not dependent on the doctrines derived from those manuscripts or traditions. Hope this helps! Sorry about the delay! In Christ, Nick Peters

III

Me to Nick Peters

1/8/16 at 4:22 PM

re: Risen Jesus

I'd love to respond to this, but I cannot find my earlier message.

So, if you find it, please forward it again back to me. But to my new mail, hgl@dr.com, please, since this one will close.***

Meanwhile, here:

1) "I'd answer that we have textual evidence that is there independent of the Catholic Church."

As for OT, you have Jews who rejected Christ. But as for Gospels, you have precisely Catholic Church plus its clearly non-Protestant rivals about position of being THE apostolic Church.

There was a time before Chalcedonians split around 1053 into Catholic and Orthodox, but neither is Protestant, nor were their positions before that date so.

There was a time before Nestorians and Monophysites diverged from each other and from Chalcedonians, like before 451 and before 431. But Nestorians and Monophysites (or Armenians plus Copts, since there are two groups) also have clearly non-Protestant positions clearly reminding of Catholic ones, shared with Catholics and Orthodox, and so had the Christian people before that split.

You do NOT have a text tradition by the way of Donatists, Montanists, Novatians. These left too little records of their own, apart from Tertullian who was a Montanist.°

2) "The transmission of the manuscripts is not dependent on the doctrines derived from those manuscripts or traditions."

If we can presume God has given full preservation for the salvation relevant portions of the text, why should He not also have preserved His own CHurch in Her fulness in one of the five non-Protestant groups? These being, as said, Catholics, Orthodox, Cops and Armenians, Nestorians. And finding out which of them is the true Church is NOT like looking for a needle in a haystack, since there are only five of them.

Now, I do not think doctrines of the true Church, especially as proposed under penalty of excommunication for those not believing it (the doctrines that are dogmas), can be merely DERIVED from texts and traditions and not be included IN them.

Since the promise was, precisely, to preserve His Church, and to preserve Revelation as a whole ("my word"/"His word"), not to preserve a specific collection of texts.

Also, without a doctrinal community, where do you find a decision even on what texts BELONG TO the Word of God?°°

No, the transmission of manuscripts can very well go on humanly speaking as usual without all conclusions draw from them remaining the same. But the transmission of manuscripts of the Gospel can also not, independently of the Church, establish they are history rather than fiction. We know this from the community that received them, precisely as we know from the community that received Lord of the Rings, in the reverse case, that it is fiction and not history.

Anyway, whether you bother to reply to this, or not, please do send my original message to other adress, and thank you for sending me this reply!

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Holy Martyrs Lucian (priest) and
Maximian and Julian of Beauvais
8-I-2016

Notes:

* Risen Jesus : Review of Bart Ehrman’s book “Forged: Writing in the Name of God”… http://www.risenjesus.com/review-of-bart-ehrmans-book-forged-writing-in-the-name-of-god

** The tradition I have heard about the name "J. R. R. Tolkien" on covers of Lord of the Rings is that he wrote it. And that the claim of his having translated it from a very ancient Adunaic book (a claim stated in the book) is a literary joke. Precisely as Umberto Eco joked about having found a manuscript by Adso of Melk containing a story in which a Brother Jorge obsessed with apocalypse etc. commits murders of any readers of a certain manuscript, simply by poisoning the pages, because he found the treatise by Aristotle on Comedy a poisonous reading. This story is of course from a very XXth C. view on what fanaticism entails, and among other things it is there to claim Catholicism in Middle Ages was very like Stalinism in this respect. We have no such story from the known manuscripts of the Middle Ages. The Name of the Rose is a novel, not a reedition of an autobiographical manuscript. This I believe on the tradition I have from when the books were published. I was sixteen for the latter book, not yet born for the former (actually my mother was eighteen when it was completed in 1955 : the chronological distance is like the distance between us), but for either of them, I believe tradition about who wrote and what kind of book it was meant to be taken for.

*** This is a notification to readers wishing to correspond to me, that this has already happened. Will change on "if you wish to correspond with me" page too.

° And even he doesn't give you complete Bibles, just confirmation by way of heresy early separated from Catholic Church that even before that separation Catholic Church accepted such and such a book. Which Tertullian quoted. °° Tertullian's doctrinal unity is no longer extant and isn't helpful for all that many books even for his quotes.

Was Dwight Ever Outright Heretic? If So, it is Here I Blamed him

1) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Fable and Allegory, 2) Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : With Dwight on Definition of Fundies, 3) Dwight Longenecker Not Knowing What Computers Are, and Not Answering a Challenge On It, 4) With Dwight on Fundies, Again, 5) One item on Dwight, related to Teen Marriages, 6) Was Dwight Ever Outright Heretic? If So, it is Here I Blamed him, 7) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica (again) : Dwight Longenecker and Bildungsroman

Me to Dwight

13/05/15 à 10h37

This one too, Modernist Heretic!

Here* is a piece of utter blasphemous heresy, worthy of the once well known Dean Inge of sad memory:

"Instead, we should think of it like this: God is good, beautiful and true and it his nature to pour his graces into the world at all times. His goodness, truth and beauty radiates in and through his creation as the sunlight radiates into the world bring light and life to all things. This radiation of goodness, truth and beauty is never ending, all present and all powerful.

"Prayer is the means by which we join our will with His will. If you like we become the channels and directors of that goodness, truth and beauty in the world.

...

"We’ve all experimented with a magnifying glass to make a fire. The magnifying glass harnesses and focusses the existing sunlight for a particular purpose: to light a fire. I believe prayer works like that magnifying glass: it concentrates, focusses and magnifies God’s great power for a particular application.

"That works: Then I remember that in the Magnificat the Blessed Mother sings, “My soul magnifies the Lord…” and I wonder if this other deeper meaning is part of the mystery of her who’s whole life was a prayer."

This makes:

• 1) God impersonal, like pantheism does, unless one prefers to say your rubbish IS pantheism;
• 2) bypasses and in a quiet way actually does away with God's being all knowing.

Bruce Almighty might be bad, but not half as bad as your text.

Repent or go to Hell.

THIS rubbish is certainly NOT what I intended to convert to when leaving Swedish Church for Catholicism, indeed, it is kind of what I hated about Modernist Lutherans even while technically being one myself.

If you want a debate, that is fine, and if you want to be "mature", do that not by fudging theology, but by defending or recanting your theses. Feel free to suspend my warning (which is btw not an ecclesiastic superior one, I am not pretending to be your bishop or pope) until debate is over, when I hope you might be doing sth better than chosing the Hellfire.

Your "other deeper meaning" is heresy and adding heresy to a word with Marian connexion, especially one by Herself, is also insulting to Our Lady.

Hans Georg Lundahl
from Nanterre University Library
on St Robert Bellarmine
(and Our Lady of Fatima, by now?)
13-V-2015

* How Does God Answer Prayer?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/how-does-god-answer-prayer

So, if above is heresy, where is truth? Here:

God grants prayers as He wishes. How pleasing a person is to Him is certainly part of why He wishes or not to do so. But any event He is perfectly free to grant even the worst prayer, as to the quality of soul praying and of attitude in prayer, and to deny any prayer, even the best, except He will not do that to prayers of His Blessed Mother. God wants us, but does not need us, to prepare the arrival of His goodness by praying and by praying well and by being in the state of grace while praying.

One item on Dwight, related to Teen Marriages

1) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Fable and Allegory, 2) Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : With Dwight on Definition of Fundies, 3) Dwight Longenecker Not Knowing What Computers Are, and Not Answering a Challenge On It, 4) With Dwight on Fundies, Again, 5) One item on Dwight, related to Teen Marriages, 6) Was Dwight Ever Outright Heretic? If So, it is Here I Blamed him, 7) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica (again) : Dwight Longenecker and Bildungsroman

Me to Dwight

13/05/15 à 10h19

If you answer, count on getting published ...

Main peeve I have with your text* is this one:

Another example is universal sex education. The sex educators think that teen pregnancy, STDs and abortion will be reduced if only more young people were educated about contraceptive techniques, safe sex techniques and varied sexual practices. Of course when this happens there are more young people having sex so there are more STDs, teen pregnancies and abortions. The sex educators look at the results, scratch their heads and say, “I guess we need MORE sex education at a younger age.” So they start telling first graders about X rated stuff.

Teen pregnancy is of course lower if pregnancies are prevented or shortened by contraceptives or abortion.

BUT you seem to be OK with teen pregnancies being targetted as sth which should not be there?

You see, what a Catholic wants to avoid is UNWED teen pregnancies. And you seem to be NOT proposing the cures for that:

• 1) change legislations back so that the 14 v / 12 m age limit of the Catholic Church over centuries gets to be civil law again;
• 2) change regulations, school system, taxes so that not only rare genius teens-fit-to-be-employers (there was one in GB in the news), but also someone just wanting to have a regular job with an employer shall be able to support a family while still in teens;
• 3) ban co-ed after puberty (see Divini Illius Magistri) and any school concerts involving rock or disco and dancing, so that unfortunate teens who cannot yet afford to marry shall be less tempted.**

Subsidiary peeve:

A good example of this is left wing economics. Every experiment in socialism and communism has been a social, economic, human and political disaster of gigantic proportions. Nevertheless, left wingers continue to believe that what is needed is not to get rid of socialism forever, but to have MORE socialism.

• 1) I agree that socialism, socialising what could and should be private property, is bad;
• 2) I do not agree that every experiment in communism was bad : Benedictines, kibbutzniks and hippies on voluntarily communist collective farms seem to be doing fine and dandy;
• 3) and there are of course other restrictions on private property while it remains private than socialist taxing, some of which are good: max prices (steles with the decree of Diocletian will still stand in Greek villages and the text will be preserved from eradication by erosion by Greek Orthodox clergy or the men doing their work), minim wages, antitrust laws.

The main problem with Fiscal Socialism (which means a bloated Public Sector providing more and more of the livelihoods and including those that do bad things, like abortion, psychiatry, child protective services doing statenappings, public school teaching evolutionist or heliocentric lies ... while banning or plotting to ban home schooling ...) is that it is so close to a trust. With post offices, I don't see*** how it could be done otherwise, but the general observation stands.

Meaning of course that Big Business has a moral problem pretty similar to Socialism.

Still want your adress not shown, as usual?

Hans Georg Lundahl
ESI St Martin
27 ter Bd de St Martin
75003 Paris

* Modernism is Madness
May 12, 2015 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2015/05/modernism-is-madness.html

Only peeve on "continue reading" is you are not identifying Bergoglio as an Antipope proning what you rightly call madness. At least in the broader sense of the word.

** To recommend starting fasting in teens, even if Catholic Church requires it only from 21, is of course also a bonus for chastity.

*** I could make a try, but I am not sure how to get it together in all respects. Contracted local businessmen known for honesty and integrity (i e preferrably no bankers or stockmarket brokers!) - is such a contract really all that different from the post office systems we have? Don't know, but that was the system when post offices started.

With Dwight on Fundies, Again

1) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica : Fable and Allegory, 2) Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl : With Dwight on Definition of Fundies, 3) Dwight Longenecker Not Knowing What Computers Are, and Not Answering a Challenge On It, 4) With Dwight on Fundies, Again, 5) One item on Dwight, related to Teen Marriages, 6) Was Dwight Ever Outright Heretic? If So, it is Here I Blamed him, 7) Φιλολoγικά/Philologica (again) : Dwight Longenecker and Bildungsroman

I

Me to Dwight

08/12/15 à 10h27

This is Why I tend not to adress you as Father

Longenecker, here is what you wrote on on Fundamentalists and Progressives:

Above all both types believe themselves to be right. This is what we call pride. This is not just a sickness. It is sin. The devil never. Never. Never for all eternity will admit that he was wrong.

Though pride will make one unwilling to admit one was wrong (no one, presumably, ever fully admits he is wrong about sth he still is holding to : the moment you admit it is wrong, you have put it in the past and are admitting you WERE wrong), so will truth, clarity and being right.

I agree. Fundamentalism is a sickness, but that depends of your definition of fundamentalism. I’d say fundamentalism has several characteristics.

Are all of them sick? Does one occur without the other ones or without some other ones, and is it then not sick?

Let us take them, one by one:

• "First is an extreme literalism about religion and religious texts and teachings."
  
  This is indeed the very first thing people think of when they hear the word fundamentalism.
  
  Someone who is saying "fundamentalism is a sickness" will most often be taken as saying "it is sick to be extremely literal about religious texts and teachings.
  
  
• "This is also combined with legalism–in which adherence to the moral code and strict rules become the be all and end all of the religion."
  
  If by extreme legalism you mean a firm no to contraception and abortion and divorce and remarriage, well, Fundies and Catholics go together among Progressive Protestants as being stamped as having this sickness. If it were one.
  
  
• "Thirdly, fundamentalism is also marked by a tendency to paranoia, blaming others and eventually scapegoating others."
  
  If Fundamentalism is in today's society a minority, I don't see how this is totally avoidable. At least an unpopular minority. Not a cool minority.
  
  When Christians were a minority among Pagans, they were both unpopular and cool depending on before whom, but they were at leat sufficiently unpopular to be persecuted from time to time.
  
  Were they blaming Pagans? Yes. Were they right in blaming Pagans? Yes.
  
  
• "Fourthly, fundamentalism has a fortress mentality in which those on the inside are the true, right and righteous believers. Those on the outside are infidels, apostates, heretics, the damned and the lost."
  
  You have described very accurately:
  
  
  • Early Christians among Jews and Idolaters,
  • Medieval Catholics facing Mohammetans, Jews and the new batch of Heretics that arose after year thousand : Petrobrussians, Albigensians, Valdensians.
  • Counter Reform Catholics facing Reformers and the Tyrants helping them, and later also a new rise of Jewry plus of course the Secret Societies, and the Revolutions (from English 1640's to Russian 1917 and beyond).
  
  
  How marked the fortress mentality is, depends on how much one is required to confront oneself with those outside. But it was always there. If you call this is sickness, you are agreeing with Swinburne's curse on the pale Galileean.
  
  If you object that people like Chesterton were very genial, well, Chesterton was also very much a fortress mentality man. It does not always go with chronical anger or fear.
  
  
• "Fifthly, fundamentalism is, as a result of all this, an unhappy, frightened and often angry place to be."

The social situation of being stamped as sick is also an unhappy, frightened or angry place to be.

So, supposing fundamentalism were a sickness, stamping a fundamentalist as sick because of it is making the sickness worse. Or at least the occasion for it.

Thus, you are inciting people in general to treat Fundamentalists in such a way as to provoke, if possible, fear, loathing of your company, anger at not getting rid of it and so on.

The situation does not always have this effect on the victims of such a trial.

If I rejected Ratzinger twice over, because he bowed down to Psychiatric diagnoses and that sham expertise, namely 2006 in the fourteenth world day of health and 2010 after he had "forgiven" Susana Maiolo, but put her in mental hospital for a week, why should this self erection into super shrink on Bergoglio's side make him any more acceptable than Ratzinger was?

I had and have a soft spot for Ratzinger, even while rejecting him as Pope or Pope Emeritus. I had to the last moment hoped he would call some kind of counsil to find out who was Pope if there was one, instead of presuming without further investigation that Alejandro IX, Michael, what's the name of the current Palmarian - yes, another Gregory, Gregorio XVIII - were just to be ignored. Since he has left off papacy and no longer prolongs the guilt of posing as a Pope while not teaching Catholicism, I hope for his salvation. But the gestures about World Day of Health and Susana Maiolo told me he was not promoting accurate Catholicism.

Nor are you. The KIND of things you consider as sicknesses are actually the KIND of things that are either virtuous or sinful, that are actus humani and not actus hominis (a man sleeps or sneezes - an actus hominis - a man makes a valid confession, an actus humanus). Therefore you have lost the compass.

And I mean that in a moral sense, not in a "pathological" one. You are, like Bergoglio, inciting to consider Fundamentalists as "he has an impure spirit" - in the modern counterpart. Even if you are pretending to yourself that you can reserve sanity for a small middle strip, with equal pathologisation of the other side, of the progressives. Modern society is NOT buying that, it IS progressive and therefore will not treat them as mental cases, just because you say so.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre University Library
Immaculate Conception of the BVM
8-XII-2015

PS, you are in fact basically endorsing the criminal behaviour of Norway which just took away five children from a couple (Norwegian mother, Roumanian father) for them giving the children "a Christian indoctrination"./HGL

Dwight to me

No answer in mail.

Was based on post of his:

Standing on my head : Is Fundamentalism a Sickness?
December 4, 2015 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2015/12/is-fundamentalism-a-sickness.html

Page 2 : Is Fundamentalism a Sickness?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/is-fundamentalism-a-sickness

II

Me to Dwight

16/12/15 à 10h03

Are you trying to ruin me, or what?

"In fact none of these labels work because, of course there are plenty of conservative Catholics who aren’t rabid anti Semitic, flat earth fundamentalist crazies."

Give me one fundamentalist among Catholics today who is flat earth.

I personally corrected James Hannam who had suggested that Church Fathers were taking liberties with literal inerrantism when accepting roundness of Earth.

As for the rest, well, guess if I am NOT a happy man when so many want to isolate me from potential readers, while I am a writer.

I have study loan debts for five years or so of study loans (I have exams for five years and one week, spent more years, read more than I needed for exams, though not always on same subject) and stepping down to streetsweeper with such a debt to pay is not really offering any prospectives of a decent life.

Meanwhile people like you, demonising fundamentalism, are doing what they can to keep me not read by blog readers and ultimately also not by book readers who would pay for paper format and thereby help me give something back to dear old Sundsvall - a city which centralises study loans in Sweden.

And you suggest that if I am joyless it is all because I am a fundie?!

Give me a break!

"So think the best, give them the benefit of the doubt, don’t argue, wish them well and be at peace."

Well, let us put it like this, if there is one thing you learn from Academia, apart from subject, it is arguing. Except me, I learnt it earlier from C. S. Lewis, things like Fern-Seed and Elephants.

Telling people not to argue with me is like raising a plague flag.

Hans Georg Lundahl

Dwight to me

No answer in mail.

Was based on post of his:

Standing on my head : The Discontented Catholics
December 15, 2015 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2015/12/the-discontented-catholics.html

III

Me to Dwight

17/12/15 à 09h40

Just in case you imagined sth - I am NOT "deeply saddened"

I am not deceiving you, if you were here and were telling me those things about me, you would risk a whiplash or sth worse.

That enemies* of the faith give me as rough a time as they can, perhaps I am too patient, perhaps not. But when I see a priest (or supposed such, Pope Michael thinks even Father Hesse was not really a priest) who is giving water to their treadmill, I am not "saddened", I am not "deeply concerned", I am fuming.

And your line about discontented Catholics yesterday is precisely doing their work./HGL

* Open and declared such - Mahometans, Protestants especially Huguenot, thinking I am too rough on the Cévennols, thinking I ought to agree on their version of the Calas case, which I do not, Atheists and Pantheists and other Marxists, Jewry with a "declared scepsis" about the Faith ... you know what I mean.

Dwight to me

No answer in mail.

Was based on post of his:

Standing on my head : I’m Saddened. Deeply Saddened. Not.
October 22, 2013 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker 50 Comments
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2013/10/im-saddened-deeply-saddened-not.html

A post which I most providentially found when asking myself why there were no answers.

And if Dwight is a priest, or even (despite heresies) a pious man, his prayers may have sth to do with the decisions of God.

IV

Other post by Dwight

Standing on my head : Why I Converted to the Catholic Faith
December 29, 2015 by Fr. Dwight Longenecker
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/2015/12/why-i-converted-to-the-catholic-faith.html

Quote:

Yes, there were actually lots of different groups. The uncomfortable problem for the Protestants is that these different sects were identified by the apostolic church as heretics and schismatics.

Comment

Now, non-literal belief or literal non-belief in Genesis, where were they found?

Non-literal belief about six days, in favour of one-moment creation, was found in the Apostolic Church - along with literal belief.

But literal non-belief (and frankly, believing in millions of years is MUCH closer to literal non-belief than to non-literal belief) in Genesis was ONLY found in certain of the sects that St Irenee stamped as heretical.

Not sent

As a separate mail. You saw how he treated the other three mails. No answer. If he bases this on my calling him a heretic in an earlier mail (will be published in other post) ... well, he could have tried to defend himself? I mean, what I wrote is here as that other letter, an attack on what he represents as claiming to be a "Catholic" priest.

With Olduvai on Levels

HGL to Olduvai project

4-X-2014, c. 15:00

Info on Levels at Olduvai

On Laetoli, by wiki, I found two levels marked by biostratigraphy, two dated by potassium argon, five (including one separation between two levels of same name) without any direct dating at all.

So, if you have any corresponding info about levels in Olduvai, and would care to share it, I would appreciate.

Hans Georg Lundahl

Olduvai project to HGL

No answer, even 14 months to 15 months later.

Lettres sans réponse, à Clichy et à l'Ambassade d'Ukraine

1) New blog on the kid : Intrigues contre lecture de mes blogs en France?, 2) Dominance d'Ukraine, Absence de France, ça Continue?, 3) Ukraine toujours la référence pour les lecteurs français?, 4) Mais pourquoi la Russie voudrait-elle lire justement mes blogs tellement? , 5) Et les autres blogs? En suédois, allemand, sur sujets autres, vieux?, 6) Correspondance de Hans Georg Lundahl : Lettres sans réponse, à Clichy et à l'Ambassade d'Ukraine, 7) New blog on the kid : Et Somme Tout, Aujourd'hui?, 8) Et maintenant?

I

Clichy à moi

02/12/15 à 17h13

Accusé de réception : Contactez-nous

Bonjour,

Vous avez laissé un message sur le formulaire contactez nous. Nous vous en remercions. Il sera transmis au service concerné. Nous vous ferons un retour dans les plus brefs délais. Cordialement

[Le texte de mon message n'est pas copié, il est un peu la même question que la lettre suivante, en plus d'un aveu où j'ai mis les URL par colle, et une question si les Clichois sont très ukrainiens, en moins la référence aux Juifs.]

[J'avais aussi émis l'attente que d'un sdf la mairie n'allait pas exiger une amende, vue l'impossibilité de la payer. Je n'avais pas prévu ce genre de bloccade, comme il semble d'être au lieu d'un procès.]

II

Moi à l'Ambassadeur d'Ukraine à Paris

02/12/15 à 17h23

Bonjour, votre excellence, vous connaissez les Ukrainiens mieux que moi, j'imagine

Or, il m'est un peu mystérieux pourquoi:

• 1) j'annonce les URL de mes blogs en France
• 2) j'ai davantage de lecteurs en Ukraine qu'en France (je ne me suis jamais, que je sache, déplacé en Ukraine)
• 3) et les lecteurs en Ukraine ne semblent pas très avides de transmettre la lecture à leurs potes français.

J'ai une petite théorie, elle n'est pas totalement belle.

La France est assez Marxiste, culturellement. Le Marxisme a des racines dans la juiverie, spécifiquement celle de l'empire des Czars (dont aussi la juiverie d'Ukraine), et eux ils veillent, avec leurs camarades ici en France, pour que mes blogs ne deviennent pas une menace à "l'orthodoxie marxiste", notemment en ce qui concerne son adhésion à l'évolutionnisme.

Mais peut-être vous vous demandez d'où je tire ceci du lectorat, que ce soit en France ou en Ukraine?

J'ai accès à des statistiques, fournies par le logiciel même de blogger, et parfois, quand je les trouves intéressantes, je les partage en format lisible avec mes lecteurs. Voici le dernier billet depuis mon constat de suprématie ukrainienne parmi les lecteurs:

New blog on the kid : Ukraine toujours la référence pour les lecteurs français?
http://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2015/12/ukraine-toujours-la-reference-pour-les.html

Croyez-moi, d'ailleurs, ce que je souhaite, ce n'est pas d'avoir moins de lecteurs en Ukraine, plutôt davantage, mais en avoir davantage en France.

Bonne lecture, d'abord, et ensuite, une réponse bien explicative est souhaitée de ma part.

Respectueusement,
Hans Georg Lundahl

III

Pas de lettre de réponse, ni de l'un, ni de l'autre. Par contre, au lieu de domination d'Ukraine, c'est maintenant domination de la Russie. Et dépuis, aussi le mur de la part de Silveren777 - non ce message dans le lien ne vas pas tout au bout de nos débats, il reste un peu, mais le débat s'est séché./HGL