Disqualifying Dr. Paul Byrne Because He Proclaims the Truth

[21] Hear, O foolish people, and without understanding: who have eyes, and see not: and ears, and hear not. [22] Will not you then fear me, saith the Lord: and will you not repent at my presence? I have set the sand a bound for the sea, an everlasting ordinance, which it shall not pass over: and the waves thereof shall toss themselves, and shall not prevail: they shall swell, and shall not pass over it. [23] But the heart of this people is become hard of belief and provoking, they are revolted and gone away. [24] And they have not said in their heart: let us fear the Lord our God, who giveth us the early and the latter rain in due season: who preserveth for us the fullness of the yearly harvest. [25] Your iniquities have turned these things away, and your sins have withholden good things from you.

[26] For among my people are found wicked men, that lie in wait as fowlers, setting snares and traps to catch men. [27] As a net is full of birds, so their houses are full of deceit: therefore are they become great and enriched. [28] They are grown gross and fat: and have most wickedly transgressed my words. They have not judged the cause of the widow, they have not managed the cause of the fatherless, they have not judged the judgement of the poor. [29] Shall I not visit for these things, saith the Lord? or shall not my soul take revenge on such a nation? [30] Astonishing and wonderful things have been done in the land.

[31] The prophets prophesied falsehood, and the priests clapped their hands: and my people loved such things: what then shall be done in the end thereof? (Jeremias 5: 21-31.)

The prophets of the counterfeit church of conciliarism have been prophesying falsehood for over fifty years now.

The conciliar prophets have told us that the Catholic Church had to "open up" to the world, from which she has to learn nothing and to which she has been sent by her Divine Founder and Invisible Head to convert.

The conciliar prophets have told us that it is impossible for dogmatic truth to be expressed adequately at any one time, that its expression is dependent upon the historical circumstances in which it was pronounced, thus necessitating "adjustments" from time to time, a proposition that is at the heart of Modernism and has been condemned dogmatically. (See Jorge Applies the Death Penalty to the Nature of Dogmatic Truth for a refutation of this belief, expressed throughout the apostate priestly career of Joseph Alois Ratzinger/Benedict XVI that has been reiterated recently by the Argentine Apostate, Jorge Mario Bergoglio.)

The conciliar prophets have told us that non-Catholic Protestant sects are in "partial communion" with the Catholic Church even though this is a total falsehood. 

The conciliar prophets have told us that us that adherents of false religions that reject the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ can help establish a "better" world by fighting "irreligion" with "religion."

The conciliar prophets have engaged in the sacrilegious exercise of "inter-religious prayer" services that are repugnant in the sight of the Most Blessed Trinity and represent direct violations of the First and Second Commandments.

The conciliar prophets have stated that "religious liberty" is a God-given "right" that is at the at the cornerstone of the "just society," which is nothing other than a blasphemous, heretical contention.

The conciliar prophets have exalted the falsehood is "separate of Church and State" guarantees the "life of the Church" in the modern civil state even though true pope after true pope condemned this falsehood in the most stark terms imaginable.

The conciliar prophets have praised the United Nations as a the "last hope for peace and concord" in the world. (See Appendix E below).

While opposed to "artificial" means to prevent the conception of children, the conciliar prophets have inverted the ends of marriage and have thus promoted a "natural" means of limiting family that was promoted by moral ethicists in the 1950s who coopted Pope Pius XII's October 29, 1951, Address to Midwives on the Nature of Their Profession, a notion that was condemned in the strongest terms by Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, who knew the mind of Pope Pius XII very well, at the "Second" Vatican Council. (See Forty-Three Years After Humanae Vitae, Always Trying To Find A Way and Planting Seeds of Revolutionary Change.)

The conciliar prophets have even changed the terms of opposition to the direct, intentional killing of innocent human life by almost never referring to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, substituting instead such anthropocentric (man-centered) slogans as "human dignity" and "solidarity" that make complex the very simple words of the Fifth Commandment: Thou shalt not kill.

These false prophets of a false church have misused the words "mercy" and "compassion" and "human dignity" to oppose the death penalty as a matter of principle, thereby making it appear as though there is no distinction between the life of an innocent human being and that of one adjudged after full due process of law to be guilty of a heinous crime deserving of death.

The conciliar prophets have opposed abortion with conciliarspeak and have opposed the death penalty as a matter of principle while supporting the imposition of the death penalty upon those deemed by the false prophets of the death-dealing medical industry in the United States of America and elsewhere in the civilized world  to be "brain dead." Countless numbers of Catholics have signed up to be participants in their own execution by vivisection and/or have agreed to the vivisection of their relatives in order to "give the gift of life." How tragic it is that not an insubstantial number of priests in fully traditional venues where no concessions are made to the falsehoods of conciliarism or to the nonexistent authority of the conciliar authorities clap their hands quite vigorously in response to the false prophets when they prophesy in behalf of the falsehood known as "brain death," even urging parishioners to sign up to be "organ donors,'thus making them unwittinginstruments in their own vivisection should they be unfortunate enough to be considered a "candidate" for body snatching.

Not even the hard evidence that the parameters what constitutes acceptance of "brain death" keep being pushed more and more by the body snatchers in the medical industry does anything to dissuade this vigorous applause, no, not even the facts below as contained in a new lawsuit: a report such as this one from five years ago:

The New York Organ Donor Network pressured hospital staffers to declare patients brain dead so their body parts could be harvested — and even hired “coaches” to train staffers how to be more persuasive, a bombshell lawsuit charged yesterday.

The federally funded nonprofit used a “quota” system, and leaned heavily on the next of kin to sign consent forms when patients were not registered as organ donors, the suit charged.

“They’re playing God,” said plaintiff Patrick McMahon, 50, an Air Force combat veteran and nurse practitioner who claims he was fired as a transplant coordinator after just four months for protesting the practice.

The suit, filed in Manhattan Supreme Court, cited four examples of improper organ harvesting.

In September 2011, a 19-year-old man injured in a car wreck was admitted to Nassau University Medical Center. He was still trying to breathe and showed signs of brain activity, the suit charged.

But doctors declared him brain dead under pressure from donor-network officials, including Director Michael Goldstein, who allegedly said during a conference call: “This kid is dead, you got that?” the suit charged.

The patient’s family consented to have the organs harvested.

“I have been in Desert Storm, Iraq and Afghanistan in combat. I worked on massive brain injuries, trauma, gunshot wounds, IEDs. I have seen worse cases than this and the victims recover,” McMahon told The Post.

That same month, a woman was admitted to St. Barnabas Hospital in The Bronx still showing signs of life, the suit said.

She had a kidney transplant earlier in life and network officials used that to pressure her daughter into giving consent.

“They say to her, ‘If you give us permission we will use your mother’s organs and we will help many, many people who need them,’ ” he said.

McMahon’s objections were ignored by a neurologist, who declared her brain dead — and her organs were harvested, according to the suit. McMahon even claims he tried to get a second opinion.

A month later, a man was admitted to Kings County Hospital in Brooklyn, again showing brain activity, the suit said. McMahon claims his protests were again blown off by hospital and donor-network staff, and the man was declared brain dead and his organs harvested.

In November 2011, a woman admitted to Staten Island University Hospital after a drug overdose was declared brain dead and her organs were about to be harvested when McMahon noticed that she was being given “a paralyzing anesthetic” because her body was still jerking.

When he objected, another network employee told hospital personnel McMahon was “an untrained troublemaker with a history of raising frivolous issues and questions,” the suit charged.

“I had a reputation for raising a red flag,” he said.

In order to harvest organs, the network needs a “Note” — an official declaration by a hospital that a patient is brain dead — and consent from next of kin.

The network hired marketing and sales professionals to “coach” workers to tailor their pitches based on the family’s demographics, said the suit, filed by McMahon’s lawyers Michael Borrelli, Alexander Coleman and Bennitta Joseph.

The suit said that on Nov. 4, McMahon told Helen Irving, president and CEO of the network, “one in five patients declared brain dead show signs of brain activity at the time the Note is issued.”

Irving, the suit said, replied: “This is how things are done.”

Network spokeswoman Julia Rivera said she hadn’t seen the suit, but noted that only doctors can declare a patient brain dead.

She called McMahon’s claims of a quota system “ridiculous. There are no quotas.”

A Staten Island University Hospital spokeswoman declined comment. Reps for the other three hospitals could not immediately be reached. (Organs taken from patients that doctors were pressured to declare brain dead: suit.)

As I have noted in many articles over the years, including No Room In The Inn For Jahi McMath, Every Once In A While, Dr. Paul Byrne on Brain Death, Stories That Speak For Themselves, Headless Corpses?, First-Hand Evidence Of Fraud, Why Should Death Of Any Kind Get In The Way?, Grand Illusion, Every Once In A While, Canada's Death Panels: A Foretaste of ObamaCare, Someone Was Killed To Keep "J.R." Alive, Trying To Find Ever New And Inventive Ways To Snatch Bodies, Dispensing With The Pretense of "Brain Death", Good Rule Of Thumb: Reject What Conciliarists Promote, To Avoid Suffering In The Name Of Compassion, Just Obey God, Death To Us All, Choosing To Live In States Of Apoplexy, ObamaDeathCare, Death Panels Really Exist, No Human Being Is A Vegetable, Dr. Byrne's Jahi is alive -- praise the Lord and pass the ammunition and an article that attorneys recently to use against Dr. Byrne in court in Reno, Nevada, in 2016, Dr. Paul A. Byrne's Refutation), there is no such thing as "brain death," which was invented out of whole cloth by the medical industry in 1968. Now, of course, some in the body-snatching business are dispensing with the pretense of "brain death" as they seek to declare "brain dead" as many people a they can.

Why, my good and few readers, do even some traditional Catholics believe the medical industry, whose medical universities have revised the Hippocratic Oath to justify the surgical execution of innocent preborn children and "brain death"?

The conciliar authorities go "Yassir, Massa Medical Industry, we believe in 'brain death.' You're the 'experts.' We believe."

Why do we do so?

Since when do Catholics make judgments concerning truth and error on the basis of the "mainstream"?

Well, some do when they persist in ignorance on the subject and/or seek to justify their own endorsement of the myth of "brain death" that has resulted in the killing of living human beings for their vital members.

To admit error? Impossible.

Well, impossible, at least for those who believe that their clerical state gives them expertise in areas that they simply do not possess.

Lest anyone reading this article, whose beginning has been taken whole from Good Rule Of Thumb: Reject What Conciliarists Promote as I know that readers forget and that repetition is the mother of learning, think for a nanosecond that the story from the September 25, 2012, edition of the New York Post online is not indicative of the deception about "brain death" that is used throughout the corrupt medical industry throughout the world, here are two other stories to consider to disabuse you of that notion:

My son Christian was 15 years old when he had an accident on his way to school. His heartbeat stopped and the doctor on emergency call reanimated him with electroshock. A rescue helicopter took him to Hanover Medical University [located in Hanover, Federal Republic of Germany].

The doctors left us in no doubt that Christian was severely hurt and there was little hope of his survival. Nevertheless, I still hoped that his life was being saved by a miracle. Christian didn’t seem to be badly hurt; there were just a cut at his lip, a grazed cheekbone and another graze on his forehead. His wounds weren’t covered and had stopped bleeding. Christian seemed to be fast asleep. He breathed with the help of a respirator, and there were different monitors displaying diagrams around his bed. At his bedside we could see a catheter filling so fast that it had to be replaced by a bucket. The upper part of his body was not covered and seeing him like this made me feel cold inside. Gently I touched his arm. Christian was warm.

I thought that all the treatment was meant to help my child. But I was wrong. The doctors tried to keep him alive in order to save other people’s lives with his living organs. He was not being treated for his own benefit but for the benefit of others. They had prevented him from dying because only living organs can be transplanted successfully. The abundance of infusions, they had to give him in the beginning to prevent him from dying on the way to the hospital, had to be irrigated so that they would not harm the organ recipients. The doctors’ biggest worry was to prevent him from dying before the organ retrieval. Some time later they asked us to leave the room as they wanted to make an electro-encephalogram. Apart from that, they were waiting for a team of neurosurgeons, we were informed. Instead of the expected 20 minutes, the encephalogram took one and a half hours. There is nothing in the files about an electro-encephalogram, but instead of this an electro-cardiogram. We did not see any neurosurgeons although there is a protocol of two neurosurgeons in his file at that particular time when we were waiting outside the sick-room. Instead of the neurosurgeons, the emergency ward came and explained to us Christian was “dead and clean from barbiturates” and that we would be asked about organ donation and he was telling us now so that we could begin to think about it. That was all. The world stood still for me. The past was gone, the present moment unbearable, there was no future.

They showed us into a small dark room, lit only by streetlight and the lamps from the corridor. We were waiting there motionless, frozen in horror. All at once the assistant medical director came, “Surely Christian was socially-minded?” Was he? I couldn’t tell this moment. “There are other children bound to die if they don’t get a new organ in time.” I was petrified with horror and my only thought was, “It’s over.” The doctor urged us to consent as there were other parents being as desperate as we sitting at the bedside of their children but we were able to help them! I didn’t want anyone to die neither my child nor any other children. I was unable to answer. My husband decided the matter. “If we could help what would they take?”

“Either heart or liver or kidneys, maybe cartilage.”

I could not think properly and didn’t realize that organs can only be retrieved in an operation. We had to abandon hope. We were separated from our child, could not hold him and had to let go of him. We had to say goodbye to him forever while he was still treated, while he was warm, while the monitors were on, and while he was given infusions. I failed to see that he was “dead”, but believed in what the doctors said and trusted them.

After five days Christian was transported to Wolfsburg. I needed to see him for the last time, feel his presence, touch him, delaying for a moment the endless time, afterwards, without him. The undertakers had warned us that he might look very much altered. I didn’t understand what they meant at the time. Did he look ugly? I didn’t mind because when he had chicken pox his face was so swollen I could hardly recognize him. Nothing could stop me. The following morning I was told Christian would be in the small chapel of our cemetery. When I arrived there a cemetery attendant was about to disappear behind the next corner. Reluctantly he came back. When I urged him, he opened the coffin. There Christian was lying - deadly pale, as cold as a stone, not moving. Though I hadn’t seen a dead body before there was no doubt that he was dead. There was a cut from his chin to the neckline of his shirt, he had no eyes. My child looked like a drawn goose.

What had we given our consent to?

Having looked through the medical report I learned that they had retrieved his heart, liver, kidneys, and eyes, and they had even removed his pelvic bones and sold them. Our consent to the removal of one organ had been changed into a multi-organ removal without asking us. The last sight of my child burnt itself into my soul. When I think of him, I have to fight the horrible impression that he was looking so undignified and exploited. This sight of my son still haunts me in my dreams.

But there was something else that worried me afterwards. How could it be that my son was dead while he looked alive and was treated as a living patient? Neither he nor his treatment had changed.

In his medical report I found three different death notices: the first at 17.00 hours, when they diagnosed his brain death they declared as death. The second death notice was documented after the retrieval operation, and the third one a day after. How often can a human being die, how many deaths can he die? I thought there is only one death.

I heard the word “brain death” the first time. And it was difficult for me as a non-professional to learn about the meaning of brain death. It is also named “death of the person” or “death of the individual”. If you think it means that a person or individual has died, you are wrong. It only means that the personal or individual aspects of a human being are out of order. The autonomy of the control systems has failed. Dying is a process, not a dot-like event. A brain dead person is about to die. There is no way back to life. Brain death is a definition of physicians to call someone dead when the brain fails. Only on condition that a person is declared dead can they can legally remove living organs while the respirator is still on.

Maybe you don’t understand what I mean. Maybe you think that he would have died anyway, why couldn’t they make use of him? That’s not my point. What I want to make clear is that dying persons are not dead. There is some life ahead of them which they have to complete. Mental and spiritual processes are still going on. A human being needs his own death like a ship needs a floodgate to get into different waters safely. My child did not have the chance to die in this way; instead the ship of his life was sunk abruptly. What a traumatic death he had to suffer after the transplant surgeons had broken him up! My son was a human being, an individual, and no object, and even less recycling material. (Renate Greinert Story.)

TWISTED

"For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places." Ephesians 6: 12

My husband went to the X-ray department of the hospital to pick-up the documents and the X-rays of our son. The woman attending the desk slipped the X-rays from the large envelope and said, "Oh. Well at least he's OK, isn't he?" My husband was shocked and replied, "No, matter-of-fact, my son died here in this hospital!" The woman's eyes widened, she dropped the X-rays, backed away from the counter, turned and walked away. My husband had to help himself to the items she had gathered for him.

The ambulance and hospital records revealed an entirely different account of what took place that dark day.

In the ambulance our son was conscious and "used purposeful movement with his left arm." He was then given drugs that would sedate him and increase his heart rate. Records stated he had a gag reflex.

There was no mention of the drugs used in the ambulance in the hospital records. In ER he was responding to pain, breathing on his own and continued to have a gag reflex.

In laymen's terms, he had flunked the clinical criteria for "brain death."

In an effort to ventilate him he was given pain meds and repeated doses of a paralyzing drug-seven repeated doses. My son fought for his life against those that tried to overtake him. Oh! How our son was tortured.

X-rays were taken-however, their findings were not recorded in the hospital records until much later, long after he had been declared a "donor" and "brain dead" and after his surgery. The notations made here indicated no major damage to the main part of his brain. This statement was repeated more than once throughout the medical documents.

He had a head injury, no doubt, requiring intensive treatment. What he received, rather, was a death sentence as he was immediately treated as an organ donor. The ER admitting records indicate, "brain dead," "fatal head injury" and "donor."

The Swan-Ganz line, oversaturating his system with fluids and all other procedures for the pretreatment of living human dissection was done. This is standard protocol for "organ donors"-a procedure immediately implemented. Unbeknownst to all of us, conscious and fighting for his life, he was being prepared to be conveniently killed.

Pronounced dead once? Twice? Three times? Then murdered!

"See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ." Colossians 2:8

Pronounced "brain dead" in ER and a "donor," obviously alive, he is pronounced dead three more times!!

First death-a convenience death-invented to schedule and regulate the actual time of real death. We were told five hours after his having been admitted into ER that he was "dead." The hospital records confirm this time, stating "brain death" had occurred after the apnea test was performed. Obviously my son's organs had already been sold to the highest bidder-he received the death sentence and despite his fight for life, he had been condemned to death. Despite the fact that he could not respond due to being sedated, "brain death" was pronounced.

Second death: the "paper death"-the death certificate. This indicates that he died one and one half hours prior to the apnea test and having been labeled "brain dead!"

Third death-the true "physical death"-having completed their ritualistic rite, our son had been dissected alive and in doing so, killed. The medical records indicate that our son had been given anesthesia nineteen hours after he was suppose to be DEAD! Two drugs were administered-one to relieve pain and a paralyzing drug to inhibit movement-prior to this fatal dissection-half way through his torture, all pain medications was withdrawn. The length of time for his beating heart and other vital organs to be cut out was three and one half hours.

The doctors and staff at this hospital had listed a variety of different times of death. Relatives testified having called the hospital inquiring of our son's condition was told he had died-two and one half hours prior to the apnea test and one and one half hour prior to the death certificate. The hospital reported to a newspaper he died the following morning. There were so many conflicting reports that it was all too obvious to many the seriousness problems of the "brain death" declaration of death.

A Living Hell

Unbeknownst to us, alive and fighting for his life, our son was repeatedly and constantly being tormented and tortured. I have to live with this and it has been a daily struggle.

I now know that my son responded to my touch and voice. The "box" that the two nurses were viewing was that of my son's vital signs. There is no doubt in my mind that his blood pressure and heart rate increased in my presence. I also have no doubt that the reason for the "box" being turned away from me and my family was to conceal the signs of his life-heart beat, respiration, and blood pressure. I have asked Jesus a million times to forgive me of my ignorance and for delivering my son to this throne of demons.

I asked for my son's blessings. I had told him that Jesus would see him "today" in heaven-all as if he his death were imminent-and I know that he was listening. I can only imagine his horror! I left him for dead! I left him there alone and walked away. God have mercy on me!

I believe that had I not been deceived, my son would be alive today. The two doctors' reports stated this fact. I believe whole heatedly that the Lord of Life did hear my prayers. Had I not requested that he be delivered into the hands of a level one hospital where organ transplantation is facilitated in great haste, he would have been treated for his injury. I understand now the fight that I had to take him to this hospital, for those of the fire department and ambulance crew knew the lurking evil. Their silence was deadly.

There is a price paid for deception and the lack of knowledge. The consequence, of which I can attest, will affect me my entire life. Organ donation and my ignorance thereof was the vehicle, the tool necessary for the organ transplant team to carry out their sadistic plan.

I have to live with this ugliness and wait to see my son again. This pain-this incredible void-is most difficult to endure. I cannot view his pictures and enjoy the memories of this beautiful creature that God created, blessing me with his birth and life. I am haunted by the TRUTH of what I witnessed and the revealing of his torture and death. My negligence of his foolishness and playing with a gun is a burden all of its own. To allow him to be taught such a perverse doctrine is quite another, this having the ability to take his life given any number of medical scenarios that could have arisen in his lifetime. You see, he had permitted "organ donor" to be put on his drivers' license at which time the preparations for the ceremonial sacrifice commenced.

"Father forgive them for they know not what they have done." (Bernice Jones Story.)

Still want to believe in "brain death"?

You believe in a lie.

You believe in a myth.

You can yell and scream and call Dr. Paul Byrne all kinds of nasty names, as some clergy do, sadly.

The examples cited above are no more "abuses" of a "legitimate" and morally licit "medical procedure" than what happens in your typical staging of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic Novus Ordo service when some "unauthorized innovation" outrages "conservative" Catholics. The Novus Ordo service is itself an abuse that engenders further abuses not intended or "approved" by conciliar authorities in Rome. In like manner, "brain death" is an abuse of truth that engenders increasingly "broader" definitions as to who can be declared as "brain dead" and thus targeted for execution by vivisection.

Well, well, well. You still don't believe me. Well, here's a bit more proof from five years ago:

OTTAWA, Ontario, 4 September, 12 (LifeSiteNews.com) – As Ontario’s organ donation agency aggressively campaigns to grow a list of registered organ donors, a legal scholar has slammed the updated national guidelines for establishing the moment of death, arguing that the guidelines were deliberately loosened to “increase the proportion of donors eligible for organ harvesting”.

Jacquelyn Shaw, BSc, MSc, LLB, LLM, writing in the McGill Journal of Law and Health, wrote that the updated 2008 Canadian Council for Donation and Transplantation (CCDT) guidelines, “dramatically altered the criteria for brain death declaration with the goal of increasing organ supplies.”

In Canada the whole-brain criteria for death has been practiced since 1968, but the new “brainstem” criteria enables doctors to declare a patient brain dead “potentially weeks, or more, sooner than under a whole-brain criterion,” observes Shaw.

This enables the CCDT to hit donor increase targets by “making many more organs available sooner, and in a more transplantable state” – but this begs the question, is someone declared dead under the brainstem criterion really dead?

While organ and tissue donation agencies which operate on the CCDT guidelines, such as Ontario’s Trillium Gift of Life Network, stress that brain death is death itself, underscoring that neurological death is “permanent and irreversible and there can be no hope whatsoever of recovery”, Shaw argues that there are both medical and legal problems with this criteria.

The updated CCDT criterion of death requires that only the lower part of the brain which is responsible for breathing, wakefulness, and certain other reflexes be shown to be permanently non-functional. “Significantly, the CCDT’s criterion contains no requirement for non-functionality of the brain’s cortex, responsible for conscious awareness, voluntary movement, sensation (e.g. pain), and communication,” wrote Shaw.

“A brainstem criterion could declare dead some patients who are only super locked-in. With damaged brainstems, but intact cortices, such patients might retain pain-awareness, but could be declared brain-dead under CCDT standards, making them eligible for (unanaesthetised) organ harvesting.”

Because not all patients may be actually dead when their organs are harvested, Shaw argued that the CCDT’s brainstem criterion may “infringe patients’ rights to life and to physical and psychological security of the person.”

Shaw said that the USA and other nations have rejected the brainstem criterion of death due to a high risk of error.

Dr. John Shea, MD FRCP(C), who has written extensively about the highly controversial theory of brain death, told LifeSiteNews that respect for life means that “it’s important to determine that a person is actually dead before harvesting organs because if they are not dead, and you harvest the organs, you are essentially killing them.”

“With brain death criteria, there is no absolute certainty that the person is dead,” he said. “Criteria for establishing brain death have been deliberately developed in such a way so that even though a person is not biologically dead, they are declared dead so that their organs can be harvested and no one can be prosecuted.”

“The fact is that people have to be alive when their organs are harvested because their organs are harmed when death actually occurs,” he said.

The gruesome fact that organ donors are often alive when their organs are harvested — a necessary condition to produce healthy, living organs — prompted three leading experts last year to advise the medical community to adopt a more “honest” moral criteria that allowed for the harvesting of organs from “dying” or “severely injured” patients, with proper consent.

The experts argued that this approach would avoid the “pseudo-objective” claim that a donor is “really dead,” which is often based upon purely ideological definitions of death designed to expand the organ donor pool. They argued this would allow organ harvesters to be more honest with the public, as well as ensure that donors don’t feel pain during the harvesting process.

Dr. Paul Byrne, an experienced neonatologist, clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Toledo, and president of Life Guardian Foundation told LifeSiteNews at the time that “all of the participants in organ transplantation know that the donors are not truly dead.”

“How can you get healthy organs from a cadaver? You can’t,” he said.

Shaw called the CCDT’s updated guidelines for brain death determination in Canada “significant, dangerous, [and] under-the-radar” adding that they are “virtually unknown” and that they warrant “greater public attention.”

Meanwhile, numerous stories have emerged of awakenings following medical declarations of brain death. In one particularly chilling case, 21-year-old Zack Dunlap, who was in a locked-in state following an ATV accident, recounted hearing doctors discuss harvesting his organs in his presence. Zack showed signs of life mere moments before he was scheduled to be wheeled into the operating theater to have his organs removed, when one of his relatives tried to get him to react by digging a pocketknife under one of his fingernails.

These stories provide weight to the arguments of doctors, like Shea and Byrne who say that the declaration of brain death is not sufficient to arrive at a moral certitude of actual death and that the recovery of organs based on that declaration is immoral. (Canada’s new ‘brain death’ criteria slammed as scheme to increase organ donations.)

Some might protest by claiming that these "abuses" can be corrected, that a "strict adherence" to "brain death" needs to be maintained.

What idiocy.

What utter idiocy.

Do we really expect those who believe in the killing of babies in their mothers' wombs to be honest about anything?

Anything?

Why believe these killers when the actual evidence proves them to be merchants of body-snatching who prey on unsuspecting relatives, filled with grief and confusion, by using a combination of sentimentality and guilt ("give the gift of life," "let your relative 'live on' in a recipient," "your relative would have wanted it this way even though he didn't sign up to be an 'organ donor'") to pressure bereaved human beings into agreeing to the execution of their loved ones.

This is monstrous. It is even more monstrous and scandalous beyond all telling that any Roman Catholic, no less members of clergy, could be party to encouraging parishioners to become accomplices in their own executions and that of their loved ones. Such men are not reliable moral guides. They have to be moral monsters to ignore the evidence presented in these stories and also willfully blind to the point of complete irresponsibility not recognize that cases above are not isolated instances whatsoever.

The medical industry has dispensed with the pretense of "brain death." Why does any Catholic, whether in or out of the conciliar structures, still keep to the pretense?

Indeed, Dr. Paul Byrne was “disqualified” by a Canadian judge, Lucille Shaw, on Friday, October 20, 2017, the Feast of Saint John Cantius, from testifying in the case of a twenty-seven year-old woman, Taquisha McKitty, who was declared “brain dead” after a drug overdose, because he was said to be “biased” precisely because he has provided incontrovertible evidence concerning the fact that “brain death” is manufactured, profit-making myth created by modern Aztecs in order to vivisect living human beings:

Dr. Paul Byrne’s testimony denied by judge over his lack of understanding of Canadian medical guidelines, and his ‘lack of independence, partiality and bias’ on the subject of brain death.

A judge has adjourned the case of a Brampton woman who was declared dead in September but has remained on life-support to allow her family to find a new expert witness.

Taquisha McKitty, 27, was admitted to Brampton Civic Hospital on Sept. 14 after a drug overdose. She was declared dead on Sept. 20 by Dr. Omar Hayani after he determined that her brain had ceased functioning.

McKitty’s family argues that she is moving voluntarily, and that she is not brain dead, and hopes to have her death certificate revoked.

Judge Lucille Shaw granted a two-week injunction to keep McKitty on life-support on Sept. 28.

On Friday, Shaw denied the testimony earlier this week from Dr. Paul Byrne, the first expert witness the McKitty family brought in, over his lack of understanding of the Canadian medical guidelines, and his “lack of independence, partiality and bias” on the subject of brain death, which constitutes death in Ontario.

The family’s lawyer, Hugh Scher, has asked for the case to be adjourned for 30 days so they can retain a different expert, ideally a Canadian neurologist.

Erica Baron, the lawyer representing Dr. Hayani, opposed the request, saying the family’s counsel had weeks to reach out to experts after concerns were first raised about Byrne’s eligibility.

When someone is disqualified as an expert, it does not usually give lawyers the right to seek another expert, Shaw said. However, the judge acknowledged the “extraordinary circumstances” of the case and agreed to adjourn it to Nov. 6.

yrne, a specialist in pediatrics, has written about brain death and has testified in court in cases about brain death in the U.S.

“Dr. Byrne cannot be an independent witness . . . when he opposes the concept of brain death,” Shaw told the court.

Byrne is the president of Life Guardian Foundation, a Christian organization he co-founded, which disagrees with the concept of brain death.

Byrne told court he thinks brain death is a made-up concept meant to facilitate the collection of organ donations.

He testified that he would never pronounce someone dead solely because their brain has stopped functioning, even though he recognized that is a respected medical opinion and legal standard in the U.S.

Shaw ruled that Byrne has never reviewed the Canadian medical guidelines on determination of death before the case, and has never applied them.

Brain death in Canada, according to the Canadian Medical Association Journal, requires “the irreversible loss of the capacity for consciousness combined with the irreversible loss of all brain stem functions . . . including the capacity to breathe.”

Shaw told the court that in most cases, counsel would not be able to bring another expert witness, but acknowledged the “extraordinary” circumstances at play.

Outside of court, Pastor Wendell Brereton, a spokesperson for the McKitty family, called the decision “bittersweet.”

“To disqualify Dr. Byrne is to disqualify a weighted opinion of a world-renowned doctor,” Brereton said. “But at the same time, the adjournment affords is time for Taquisha, which is ultimately what the family is looking for, time for her to recover.”

McKitty had overdosed on a combination of cocaine, cannabinoids, benzodiazepine and oxycodone.  (Judge Shaw Dismisses Dr. Paul A. Byrne's Testimony in Legal Battle to Revoke Death Certificate for Taquisha McKitty.)

This is truly remarkable.

A world-renowned medical expert is deemed to be “biased” because of his expertise concerning the simple fact that “brain death” is a myth and that the vital organs of a cadaver are useless to “recipients” for “transplantation.” “Brain death” had to be invented in order to provide the fig leaf of a new “legal” definition of death so that the body snatchers can anesthestize a living human being and begin their bloody work of carving that person up. It is only after a person who has been declared “brain dead” is truly dead, and the truth of the matter is that “donors” are killed by “professionals” in white coats with medical degrees.

Truth, though, was killed in most courtrooms of the world a long time ago. Most judges today believe that the objective truth on matters morality, medicine and science is either superstitious or indicative of an uninformed bias demonstrative of an unwillingness to accept the “consenus” on a particular matter.

Remember, there was a “consensus” in the crowd gathered together in Jerusalem on Good Friday when Pontius Pilate posed the following question to them about he had derided Truth Himself with the question, “Truth? What is that?”

And Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked him, saying: Art thou the king of the Jews? Jesus saith to him: Thou sayest it. And when he was accused by the chief priests and ancients, he answered nothing. Then Pilate saith to him: Dost not thou hear how great testimonies they allege against thee? And he answered him to never a word; so that the governor wondered exceedingly. Now upon the solemn day the governor was accustomed to release to the people one prisoner, whom they would.

And he had then a notorious prisoner, that was called Barabbas. They therefore being gathered together, Pilate said: Whom will you that I release to you, Barabbas, or Jesus that is called Christ? For he knew that for envy they had delivered him. And as he was sitting in the place of judgment, his wife sent to him, saying: Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him. But the chief priests and ancients persuaded the people, that they should ask for Barabbas, and take Jesus away.

And the governor answering, said to them: Whether will you of the two to be released unto you? But they said, Barabbas. Pilate saith to them: What shall I do then with Jesus that is called Christ? They say all: Let him be crucified. The governor said to them: Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying: Let him be crucified. And Pilate seeing that he prevailed nothing, but that rather a tumult was made; taking water washed his hands before the people, saying: I am innocent of the blood of this just man; look you to it. And the whole people answering, said: His blood be upon us and our children.

Then he released to them Barabbas, and having scourged Jesus, delivered him unto them to be crucified. Then the soldiers of the governor taking Jesus into the hall, gathered together unto him the whole band; And stripping him, they put a scarlet cloak about him. And platting a crown of thorns, they put it upon his head, and a reed in his right hand. And bowing the knee before him, they mocked him, saying: Hail, king of the Jews. And spitting upon him, they took the reed, and struck his head.

And after they had mocked him, they took off the cloak from him, and put on him his own garments, and led him away to crucify him. And going out, they found a man of Cyrene, named Simon: him they forced to take up his cross. And they came to the place that is called Golgotha, which is the place of Calvary. And they gave him wine to drink mingled with gall. And when he had tasted, he would not drink. And after they had crucified him, they divided his garments, casting lots; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: They divided my garments among them; and upon my vesture they cast lots. (Matthew 27: 11-15.)

Most sadly, the Roman soldiers who mocked Christ the King, Who was their own very King and that of their empire's, have much company today. Indeed, each of us mocks Christ the King when we sin by pride, when we make ourselves the arbiters of moral right and moral wrong, when we think that we do not need the graces that He won for us by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces, to grow in virtue in this life and to persevere at all times in a state of Sanctifying Grace so as to be ready to meet Him as Our Divine Judge after we have died.

Most judges today, noting a few exceptions here and there, are legal positivists. Legal positivism is the belief that morality is determined by human law—and or by the very fact of an existing practice or pattern of behavior—regardless of its moral liceity. In other words, if the “law” says that something is “legal” it is, perforce, “moral” and thus binding upon all citizens. Legal positivism is simply a means, at least in most instances, to give legal sanction to moral relativism. (There are, of course, those instances when judges use legal positivism to justify unconstitutional enactments, such as the so-called Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, by simply stating that what is patently unconstitutional is constitutional because one more judges say that it is.)

Positivism has overtaken almost every aspect of law, education, medicine, science, and journalism to such an extent that those who, say, present solid, fact-based scholarly arguments against “climate change” are deemed to be “thought criminals” unworthy of respect and, quite possibly, “guilty” of endangering the survival of the planet.

What Dr. Paul Byrne calls the mendacity of “brain death” has made possible by medical positivism, which has been enabled in its turn by legal positivism. The “experts” say something is so, well, then, it must be so. Those who disagree are “quacks” or “misguided.” Dr. Byrne has no “opinion” to offer. He has the truth to proclaim, something that no court wants to believe exists outside of the “mainstream” opinion or, perhaps, more accurately, groupthink consciousness.

We live in a word that is completely upside down

What Dr. Byrne experienced in Canada is nothing new, though.

To wit, it was in February of 1999, that I was held up at the Canada border while driving my 1995 Saturn station wagon filled to the brim with copies of Christ or Chaos and other publications of mine. I was questioned at length concerning the purpose of my visit to Canada, whereupon I explained that I was going to speak at a Catholic forum (a regional Wanderer Forum) at Saint Clement's Church in Ottawa, Ontario. It was immediately thereafter that I was told to wait until there could be an inspection of my materials as I was asked repeatedly, “Are you bringing in any ‘hate’ literature into this country? Anything that opposes the ‘rights of women’ to ‘choose; what to do with their bodies? Any opposition to ‘gay’ people and their lifestyle?" I explained that I held to the Catholic Faith, which rejects sin while exhorting the sinner to convert as he seeks out the ineffable mercy of the Divine Redeemer in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance. This only got me in more trouble, and it is with reluctance that the senior officer, perhaps fearing an incident, permitted me entry into the country, putting me seriously behind schedule as a result.

Mind you, that was eighteen years, eight months ago!

The situation in Canada, where most of the conciliar “bishops” have been fashioned after the Montinian/Bergoglian pattern long before the Argentine Apostate stepped out onto the Balcony of the Basilica of Saint Peter on Wednesday, March 13, 2013, is even worse today.

Truth?

What is that?

As I have noted before, some might object that "vital organ donations" should proceed as long as there is a “dispute” within the medical community as to whether "brain death" constitutes a true criterion or is what, in all truth, it is: a manufactured myth to harvest human body members for the sake of profit.

Sure, the “dispute” exists.

The dispute, however, is based on false premises. And even those who claim that it is morally licit to proceed with “vital organ donation” because the matter is in dispute and has not been pronounced definitively by a true pope forget one little-bitty qualification that blows their contention right of out of the: if there is doubt as to what constitutes genuine death, the doubt goes in the favor of human life.

However, there is no doubt at all. The facts are plain. The medical-industry invented this false notion of "brain death" in 1968 to justify the killing of human beings for heart transplantation surgery.

One lie begets other lies.

The lie of the Protestant Revolution, which began five hundred years ago tomorrow, October 31, the Vigil of All Saints, has resulted in the proliferation of Protestant sects numbering as many as thirty-three thousand, producing irreligion in its wake as a logical consequence.

The lie of “civil liberty” without the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by His true Church, the Catholic Church, has resulted in the lie of the monster civil state of Modernity that is now being used by God as a chastisement upon us for refusing to take seriously Holy Mother Church's Social Teaching.

The lie of “religious liberty” has led people to believe that the path to social order and personal salvation can be found in any religion or in no religion at all.

The lie of “public education” has led to a taxpayer-subsidized machine to program their captives to be steeped in one ideologically-laden slogan after another to make them willing servants of the monster civil state and to participate merrily in neo-barbaric practices that were eradicated in Europe in during the First Millennium and in most parts of the Americas in the second half of the Second Millennium by the missionary work of the Catholic Church.

The lie of contraception and “family planning” led to increases in the rates of marital infidelity, the abandonment of spouses and children, the proliferation children with stepmothers and stepfathers and step-siblings, leaving many children rootless and without any sense of being loved unto eternity that each person craves for whether or not he realizes it.

The lie of contraception led steadily to the acceptance of eugenic sterilization and then sterilization for any reasons and, ultimately, to the acceptance of surgical baby-killing on demand.

The lies of contraception and explicit instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments broke down the natural psychological resistance of children to matters that are age inappropriate, robbing them of their innocence and purity, turning them into hedonists as they have grown older, leading eventually to the widespread acceptance of the sins that destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha with fire and brimstone.

The lies that were told by Fathers Annibale Bugnini, C.M., and Ferdinando Antontelli, O.F.M., in the 1950s gave us unprecedented and most radical changes in the Holy Week ceremonies that started to accustom Catholics to ceaseless change as an ordinary feature of the liturgical life of the Catholic Church, climaxing in the Trojan Horse that was the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service that, no matter how many times the conciliarists to “fix it,” will always be an instrument of innovation and experimentation as it was designed to be precisely that from the moment Bugnini and Antonelli began their plans for the "Mass of the Future."

Thus it is that the lie of “brain death” has accustomed most people, Catholics and non-Catholics alike, into accepting uncritically the representations made by a medical industry that endorses the violation of the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage and of the violation of the surgical dismemberment of the innocent preborn and that is in league with the pharmaceutical industry to use us a walking guinea pigs for drugs designed to keep us dependent on them as the “high priests and priestesses” of “modern medicine.”

When did the lie of “brain death” originate? At the beginning:

[1] Now the serpent was more subtle than any of the beasts of the earth which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman: Why hath God commanded you, that you should not eat of every tree of paradise? [2] And the woman answered him, saying: Of the fruit of the trees that are in paradise we do eat: [3] But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of paradise, God hath commanded us that we should not eat; and that we should not touch it, lest perhaps we die. [4]And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death. [5] For God doth know that in what day soever you shall eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened: and you shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil. (Genesis 3: 1-5.)

It is very easy to be deceived.

It is very easy to be deceived by the lie of how “special” we are, of how we are “not like others.”

It is very easy to be deceived by others and to let human respect get in the way of a firm defense of the truth when necessity compels such a defense lest souls be imperiled.

It is very easy to be deceived by the prevailing trends in what passes for popular culture, to give unto the “high priests and high priestesses” of banking, commerce, industry, education, law, entertainment, social science, politics, law, government, news and information and medicine the status of near-infallibility as even Catholics have been convinced to live as naturalists without regard for anything supernatural whatsoever.

Do not believe the false prophets. Do not follow the priests and presbyters who have swallowed the falsehoods of the false prophets of the medical industry hook, line and sinkers. Suffer for the truth without compromise as consecrated slaves of Christ the King through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, our Immaculate Queen, no matter what you might have to suffer in this passing, mortal vale of tears.

Never sign up to be an “organ donor.”

Tell your family members that they must never sign up to be “organ donors”—or, if they have, to rescind the "permission" that they have given to be unwitting accomplices and accessories in their own execution by means of being vivisected alive. Tell them to sign and then to present to health care providers (as well as to make part on their last will and testament) Dr. Byrne’s Advance Care Directives (see Advance Care Directives.)

Do not delay. Do not follow their false prophets in the world or the priests/presbyters who proselytize in their behalf.

We must pray to Our Lady to keep us from being so deceived, especially by the lies that we tell ourselves, which is why we must be assiduous in praying as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits. Please remember to pray for Taquisha McKitty and her family during the next week so that they can find a true medical expert whose testimony will be permitted by Judge Lucille Shaw, for whom we must also pray so that she can overcome her bias in favor of the monstrous lie that is “brain death."

We must always raise the standard of Christ the King as we exhort one and all to recognize that Our King, Who awaits in tabernacles for our acts of love and thanksgiving and reparation and petition, must reign over each man and each nation and that His Most Blessed Mother, Mary our Immaculate Queen, is to be honored publicly by each man and each nation, including by the government of the United States of America, in order to know what it is to be blessed abundantly by the true God of Divine Revelation.

May each Rosary we pray this day and every day help to plant seeds for this as we seek to serve Christ the King through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary our Immaculate Queen, who do not view any living human being as a ready product for dismemberment in the name of the lie “providing the gift of life.”

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.