September 02, 2016

Testing My Findings for Cracks: It's Like Testing Ironwork

Allegheny Count Courthouse.  Take note that the prosecutions
of Frs Wolk, Zula, and Pucci began in Washington County.
Uhhhm, I sort of got my head taken-off for a recent article I posted.  I was told
that I should never use the Cipolla Case as a feature article.   When asked why
I do this from time to time, my answer is. "To exonerate him."

The other troubling thing ... to others ... is that I keep mentioning that I am still
testing my findings on the Cipolla Case for cracks, and not announcing my find-
ings as "Case Closed."  I do it to challenge people to come forth and prove me
wrong.  Thus far, no one has proven me wrong.  It's equivalent to me being in
the school yard at recess, saying, "If you're so tough, then knock this off my
shoulder."   It goes like this:::::::

As you might know, I'm in construction.  Well, one government contract con-
sisted in the company building an industrial-strength retaining wall,  in order
to prevent earth from separating from an inclined area and eventually falling
unto a  heavily used highway.  It was also used to prevent a row of houses
from getting dislodged from their foundations.

One of my assignments, with the help of only one other guy, was to tie the
reinforcing bars into a lattice-work configuration that was to be set several
inches off the ground.  These bars get buried in the concrete, to provide the
"tensile strength" of the concrete.  Thus, the lattice-work had to be strong
enough to endure truckload after truckload of concrete that was going to
be heaped upon it.

Well, after that one professional and I constructed our iron latticework,  we
had to test it for strength.  So, we ran on it and even jumped up and down on
it.  Quite frankly, that was the fun part of the job.  All in all, it didn't collapse.

Then, while fully knowing that it was without weakness, I ran on it again, as if
I were retesting it.  I was simply illustrating to an inspector and a corporate prez
that it was ready for a series of concrete pours.  It was a matter of me saying,
"Here. Look.  Show me any weaknesses."  This is the exact same thing that
I'm doing with my Cipolla articles.  The conclusion is that accuser Tim Ben-
dig and story-changer Diane Thompson are such easily provable liars that
Anthony Cipolla was the victim of an orchestrated hoax.  I've posted doc-
umentary evidence at the Wuerlgate site multiple times, including at the
bottom of this post.

As I have stated in print six to ten previous times, all findings on the Cipolla
Case lead to the blatant conclusion that Wuerl deliberately exaggerated the
case, to provide for him a diversionary tactic that would get DA John Pettit
to point his investigative periscope to an entity other than Wuerl's diocese.
This was so that DA Pettit and company would never learn of Wuerl's pri-
vate life and that of Wuerl's former boss, John Cardinal Wright.  Wright
was an alleged Sodomite who allegedly preferred under-aged teenage
males for the purpose of breaking a major priesthood vow.

Contrary to what Wuerl's propaganda machine stated, Wuerl most certainly
WAS in a law enforcement spotlight, immediately after an Attorney F. Peter
Dixon reported criminal priests Robert Wolk, Richard "Sade" Zula, and
Francis Pucci to law enforcement officials.

Wuerl WAS most certainly involved in a triple cover-up, while covering-up
a fourth criminal priest who was a lone-wolf corrupter of male youth.  Thus,
in FOUR instances, Wuerl was violating the Child Protective Services Act
which prescribed a punishment of nothing more than a fine for violating it.

Now, Pittsburgh is in Allegheny County.  But, the Diocese of Pittsburgh op-
erates in SIX counties.  John C. Pettit was the Washington County DA, and
a press release which he issued stated that Wuerl was UNCOOPERATIVE
with law enforcement officials during the criminal investigation which lead
to multi-county indictments of the three previously mentioned priests.

Newspapers expressly quoted DA Pettit saying,

"I don't want to make this look like a witch hunt.  But, we would be
sticking our heads in the sand to think that this was an isolated incident."

Wuerl strategically used the Cipolla Case, in exaggerating it to the hilt, in
order to stop what was about to become a full blown witch hunt of the Dio-
cese of Pittsburgh.

As to Donald Wuerl's intention with his magnification of the Cipolla Case,
it's a matter of CASE CLOSED.  Wuerl was NOT concerned about the well
being of any priests' casualties.  Wuerl did NOT operate in the "Victim First"
mode.  He only said he concerned about victims, to look good.  Wuerl is a

1} The Torquato Retaliations, 2} the ignoring of the John Wellinger report,
3} Wuerl's St. Louis to Pittsburgh ping pong game with Edward Huff,  and
4}Wuerl's reinstatementof criminal priest John S. Hoehl erased ALL reason-
able doubt that Wuerl's only cared about himself and his rise to power.  After
all, Wuerl's attorney did intimidate the victimized Ference family in a deposi-
tion room.  There was no victim-first concern in that case which involved
young Adam getting a bullet in the back of his head on a school bus.  Plus,
Wuerl certainly did NOT care about Paul Dorsch.  Rather, Wuerl fought
against Paul.  Incidentally, Paul left the Catholic Church..

If Wuerl would have reinstated Cipolla as the Vatican mandated, District
Attorney John C Pettit would have immediately ensue with what was go-
ing to look very much like a witch, and in the investigating thereof, Pettit
would have discovered that Cipolla was being used as a scapegoat. Wuerl's
only intention in having a rehearing of the Cipolla Case was to get District
Attorney John Pettit off his back.  Case Closed.