emilio giuliana

by Emilio Giuliana
There is an insistent desire that tends to relieve the Sanhedrin of Caiaphas from the guilt of the death sentence against Jesus, indicating Pilate as responsible and guilty. FALSE! History and the Gospels are clear and equally clear are the proud Jewish admissions of their will to lead to the crucifixion of CHRIST.
Below I report a writing by the very insightful and learned historian Rutilio Sermonti, which dispels any doubt from yet another ignoble attempt to falsely rewrite history, that of Pontius Pilate.
by Rutilio Sermonti
Responsibilities in their place.
(aurhelio.it) – As a Roman as I pride myself on being, I wish to take on the defense of Pontius Pilate, that excellent man and honored official, who is unfairly reviled, as has been the case for centuries with the subtle action of rabbinic Judaism, who - by making havoc of the evangelical findings - tries to free himself from the accusation of deicideby dumping it on the Romans, and on that in particular.
Let's start by making it clear that, at the time of Jesus' trial, Judea was not a Roman province, rather "federated". The representative of the proconsul of Caesarea (as Pilate was the procurator) it therefore had political-military jurisdiction only over crimes of infidelity to that "foedus", While, for everyone else, and even more so those of sacrilege against the Mosaic law, the exclusive competence belonged to the local Jewish authority, that is, of the Sanhedrin. Indeed, when the guards of the Sanhedrin (not the Roman soldiers!) they arrested Jesus, they tried to have Pilate condemn him on charges of sedition against Rome.
Read More

 
Growing up I learned that there are no enemies to fight, but truths to defend.
Necessary premise to dispel any doubt from the idea that my approach to Andrea Hofer as "different" from the Schutzen is specious, parochial, as supporters or even anti-Habsburg.
The House of Habsburg until Emperor Francis II of Habsburg renounced the title of Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, choosing to retain only the more modest title of Emperor of Austria and Hungary, they held the title of Holy Roman Emperors, title that originated from the coronation of Charlemagne, occurred on Christmas Eve of the year 800. Therefore, those who care and find their model and value reference in Roman classicism, it cannot but benevolently embrace the House of Habsburg. Certainly, as happened in the period of the Roman Empire, even during the regencies of the Habsburgs, not all Emperors were up to and worthy of the task entrusted to them.
For example, Empress Maria Theresa, with a more energetic hand than emperors, who had preceded her centuries earlier - see Conrad II and Maximilian I- implemented an unprecedented Germanization of the Latin-speaking territories, Costa became Kostner, Ciampac divenne Kompatscher, etc.. His son Giuseppe II in the year 1785 on my own initiative I call Trentino South Tyrol. His successor to the throne, brother Leopoldo, enlightened Freemason like Joseph II, both anti-Catholic. Franz Joseph (of whom it is said that he was the son of Napoleon) he wanted and signed the anti-Italian law. This is what the Privy Council expressed itself on 12 November 1866, «His Majesty has expressed the precise order that decisive action be taken against the influence of the Italian elements still present in some regions of the Crown and, appropriately filling the positions of public employees, judicial, of the masters as well as with the influence of the press, operate in South Tyrol, in Dalmatia and on the coast for the Germanisation and Slavisation of said territories depending on the circumstances, with energy and without any consideration. His Majesty reminds the central offices of the strong duty to proceed in this way with what has been established.» Read More