MISSION STATEMENT ... To celebrate where it's deserved! ... To take the Michael out of institutions and individuals where it's deserved! ...
Recently I had occasion to prepare my gravestone epitaph:
GENE...
Educator, Novelist,
Humanitarian and Humorist
- TO KNOW HIM WAS TO LOVE HIM -
Rest in Peace
....... But while I am still walking the earth do not hesitate to contact me at:
bobbyslingshot8@gmail.com
Saturday 6 April 2024
Another wonderful review of Granny Barkes Fell in Woolworth's...
'The genius of James Joyce is alive and well and living amongst us. His name is Gene Vincent.'
Had Ratzinger unfrocked Kiesle in 1985, the abuse of children at St Joseph's would not have continued for a further three years. That is a FACT, no matter how often you try to deny it.
Ratzinger's apology in full reads as follows [my footnotes}:
“I can only express to all the victims [1] of sexual abuse my profound shame, my deep sorrow and my heartfelt request for forgiveness. I have had great responsibilities [2] in the Catholic Church. All the greater is my pain for the abuses [3] and the errors [4] hat occurred in those different places [5] during the time of my mandate."[6]
1 ALL THE VICTIMS, Gene: victimS, plural: you can tell this by the S on the end of the word. All the victims of sexual abuse that occurred during Ratzingers time as Archbishop of Munich [1977- 1982] and later head of the Congregation of the Faith and Pope - that is, 1985 - 2013. The phrase "ALL THE VICTIMS therefore must include the victims of Stephen Kiesle between the years 1985-1988, when Ratzinger failed to unfrock Kiesle. [2] I HAVE HAD GREAT RESPONSIBILITES [see 1 above]: and one of those was to detect, root out and expel priests and others in the Catholic Church whose favourite hobby was buggering small boys and raping little girls. These GREAT RESPONSIBILITIES obviously include those children abused by Stephen Kiesle after Ratzinger failed to unfrock him in 1985. [3] THE ABUSES - these must include the abuses committed by Stephen Kiesle after Ratzinger failed to unfrock him [unless you can prove differently, Gene?]. [4] THE ERRORS - these must include Ratzinger's failure to unfrock Kiesle in 1985 and probably his failure to alert Fr Thomas Ryan that he was allowing a convicted paedophile rapist to minister to the young people in his church. [5] THOSE DIFFERENT PLACES - except, of course at St Joseph's Church, Penole, CA, where Stephen Kiesle, still a priest, continued to abuse children during the years 1985-1988 - Ratzinger made it clear that his apology did not include this, didn't he, Gene, and you can prove that, can't you? What's that? oh, you can't? Dear me, and YOU call ME a lying tosser... [5] DURING MY MANDATE: that is, during the years 1985 - 2013.
It is clear to anyone whose mind has a greater ratiocinatory capacity than a pair of skid-marked underpants that Ratzinger was apologising for all the sexual abuse committed on his watch 1985-2013 by priests whom he failed either properly to oversee, accurately to diagnose and condignly to punish, as well as arranging for their being unable to access children and young people ever again.
"I can only express to ALL the victims of sexual abuse my profound shame, my deep sorrow and my heartfelt request for forgiveness." It's that word ALL that gives it away, Gene: I'm sorry if it's confusing. Stuff your pissy little opinions up your arse. I will not apologise for telling the truth, and I will go on telling it until you acknowledge that it is the truth. In the meantime, I continue to wait for your answer to this:
"Detters can we leave A.N. WILSON and ARIANNA HUFFINGTON behind?"
Not until you have dealt honestly with this example of your lying bastardy:
'Gene writes beautifully - something not always the case with authors of trail-blazing literary works.' [A.N. WILSON]
"The genius of James Joyce is alive and well and living amongst us. His name is Gene Vincent." [A.N. WILSON]
'I was enthralled. A new star has shot into the literary firmament. [ARIANNA HUFFINGTON]
When you are going to admit that you have made these reviews and their authors up? Make no mistake: I am going to keep on asking until you tell the truth, or I lose patience, inform Mr Wilson and Ms Huffington and let nature take its course.
Aidan Purves-Brownrigg 124 Manor Road Deal Kent CT14 9DD
A. N. Wilson c/o The Oldie 65 Newman Street London W1T 3EG
Dear Mr Wilson,
Please find enclosed a copy of a novel, "Granny Barkes fell in Woolworths" , published in December 2023. Its author uses the pseudonym Gene Vincent, under which he also operates a blog - "Gene Vincent...a voice in the wilderness." You can find this at https://genesmusings-gene.blogspot.com/
I also enclose two screenshots of postings on this blog, where Mr Vincent claims that you have reviewed this book in the following terms:
'Gene writes beautifully - something not always the case with authors of trail-blazing literary works.' [A.N. WILSON] "The genius of James Joyce is alive and well and living amongst us. His name is Gene Vincent." [A.N. WILSON]
In fact the book is, as you will see, the kind of dreadful rubbish that gets vanity publishing a bad name - a sort of "painting by numbers" collage of disconnected sentences bulked out with meaningless photographs. Some measure of its quality may be gathered from the fact that at this writing it occupies position number 1,688,360 on the Amazon Best-Sellers list.
On the other hand, in claiming that, not only have you reviewed this book but also reviewed in glowing terms, it seems to me that Mr Vincent is jeopardising your professional position as a book-reviewer as well as publishing blatant and libellous lies to which, despite many warnings from correspondents to his blog, he refuses to admit.
What you might wish to do about this is, of course, entirely up to you, but it occurred to me that the whole situation might form the basis of one of your entertaining articles in The Oldie, as well as making sure that Mr Vincent's preposterous claims as to your estimate of the literary quality of his book are thoroughly exploded. If, in the process, Mr Vincent were to undergo public exposure and humiliation, many of his readers would see that as a bonus.
And, lest we forget:
ReplyDeleteHad Ratzinger unfrocked Kiesle in 1985, the abuse of children at St Joseph's would not have continued for a further three years. That is a FACT, no matter how often you try to deny it.
Ratzinger's apology in full reads as follows [my footnotes}:
“I can only express to all the victims [1] of sexual abuse my profound shame, my deep sorrow and my heartfelt request for forgiveness. I have had great responsibilities [2] in the Catholic Church. All the greater is my pain for the abuses [3] and the errors [4] hat occurred in those different places [5] during the time of my mandate."[6]
1 ALL THE VICTIMS, Gene: victimS, plural: you can tell this by the S on the end of the word. All the victims of sexual abuse that occurred during Ratzingers time as Archbishop of Munich [1977- 1982] and later head of the Congregation of the Faith and Pope - that is, 1985 - 2013. The phrase "ALL THE VICTIMS therefore must include the victims of Stephen Kiesle between the years 1985-1988, when Ratzinger failed to unfrock Kiesle. [2] I HAVE HAD GREAT RESPONSIBILITES [see 1 above]: and one of those was to detect, root out and expel priests and others in the Catholic Church whose favourite hobby was buggering small boys and raping little girls. These GREAT RESPONSIBILITIES obviously include those children abused by Stephen Kiesle after Ratzinger failed to unfrock him in 1985. [3] THE ABUSES - these must include the abuses committed by Stephen Kiesle after Ratzinger failed to unfrock him [unless you can prove differently, Gene?].
[4] THE ERRORS - these must include Ratzinger's failure to unfrock Kiesle in 1985 and probably his failure to alert Fr Thomas Ryan that he was allowing a convicted paedophile rapist to minister to the young people in his church.
[5] THOSE DIFFERENT PLACES - except, of course at St Joseph's Church, Penole, CA, where Stephen Kiesle, still a priest, continued to abuse children during the years 1985-1988 - Ratzinger made it clear that his apology did not include this, didn't he, Gene, and you can prove that, can't you? What's that? oh, you can't? Dear me, and YOU call ME a lying tosser... [5] DURING MY MANDATE: that is, during the years 1985 - 2013.
It is clear to anyone whose mind has a greater ratiocinatory capacity than a pair of skid-marked underpants that Ratzinger was apologising for all the sexual abuse committed on his watch 1985-2013 by priests whom he failed either properly to oversee, accurately to diagnose and condignly to punish, as well as arranging for their being unable to access children and young people ever again.
"I can only express to ALL the victims of sexual abuse my profound shame, my deep sorrow and my heartfelt request for forgiveness." It's that word ALL that gives it away, Gene: I'm sorry if it's confusing. Stuff your pissy little opinions up your arse. I will not apologise for telling the truth, and I will go on telling it until you acknowledge that it is the truth. In the meantime, I continue to wait for your answer to this:
"Detters can we leave A.N. WILSON and ARIANNA HUFFINGTON behind?"
Not until you have dealt honestly with this example of your lying bastardy:
'Gene writes beautifully - something not always the case with authors of trail-blazing literary works.' [A.N. WILSON]
"The genius of James Joyce is alive and well and living amongst us. His name is Gene Vincent." [A.N. WILSON]
'I was enthralled. A new star has shot into the literary firmament. [ARIANNA HUFFINGTON]
When you are going to admit that you have made these reviews and their authors up? Make no mistake: I am going to keep on asking until you tell the truth, or I lose patience, inform Mr Wilson and Ms Huffington and let nature take its course.
Date as postmark
ReplyDeleteAidan Purves-Brownrigg
124 Manor Road
Deal
Kent
CT14 9DD
A. N. Wilson
c/o
The Oldie
65 Newman Street
London
W1T 3EG
Dear Mr Wilson,
Please find enclosed a copy of a novel, "Granny Barkes fell in Woolworths" , published in December 2023. Its author uses the pseudonym Gene Vincent, under which he also operates a blog - "Gene Vincent...a voice in the wilderness." You can find this at https://genesmusings-gene.blogspot.com/
I also enclose two screenshots of postings on this blog, where Mr Vincent claims that you have reviewed this book in the following terms:
'Gene writes beautifully - something not always the case with authors of trail-blazing literary works.' [A.N. WILSON]
"The genius of James Joyce is alive and well and living amongst us. His name is Gene Vincent." [A.N. WILSON]
In fact the book is, as you will see, the kind of dreadful rubbish that gets vanity publishing a bad name - a sort of "painting by numbers" collage of disconnected sentences bulked out with meaningless photographs. Some measure of its quality may be gathered from the fact that at this writing it occupies position number 1,688,360 on the Amazon Best-Sellers list.
On the other hand, in claiming that, not only have you reviewed this book but also reviewed in glowing terms, it seems to me that Mr Vincent is jeopardising your professional position as a book-reviewer as well as publishing blatant and libellous lies to which, despite many warnings from correspondents to his blog, he refuses to admit.
What you might wish to do about this is, of course, entirely up to you, but it occurred to me that the whole situation might form the basis of one of your entertaining articles in The Oldie, as well as making sure that Mr Vincent's preposterous claims as to your estimate of the literary quality of his book are thoroughly exploded. If, in the process, Mr Vincent were to undergo public exposure and humiliation, many of his readers would see that as a bonus.
Yours etc.,
Aidan Purves- Brownrigg
Detterling do you take me for a total bollocks?
ReplyDeleteGENE