Wednesday, June 4, 2014

ISN'T IT FUNNY?

Isn't it funny? The Chancery Three have spent the better part of a year trying to convince us that a volunteer at Santa Barbara parish was a de facto employee in order to justify their brutal eviction of Fr. Paul; but now that their own de facto employee has gotten them into major trouble, they will try to convince us that she was just a volunteer!


It does not matter that Jennifer Dulla is not on the payroll, her frequent stories in the U Matuna do not appear as letters to the editor or op-ed's, they appear and are placed as news stories. Her name on these frequent stories makes her a de facto employee many times more than the man at Santa Barbara who quietly helped out around the parish with church chores and whose name was on none of it.

It does not matter that the Santa Barbara volunteer had a criminal past and Ms. Dulla does not. That is not the issue at this point. The issue is that the Archbishop's case against Fr. Paul rests on the redefinition of a volunteer as a de facto employee. But now, in order to extricate himself from the trouble caused by the "misinformation" propagated on his watch in his own newspaper, he must redefine his own de facto employee as a volunteer.

If Ms. Dulla can be redefined as a volunteer who acted alone without any connection to the Archbishop and without any requirement of responsibility on his part, then the Santa Barbara man can also thus be defined as a volunteer who acted alone and without any connection or requirement of responsibility of Fr. Paul.

And while the presence of the Santa Barbara volunteer resulted in no harm even though the Archbishop believed him to be capable of harm, Ms. Dulla's "error", on the Archbishop's watch, DID cause real harm:
  1. A Cardinal's name was used without his permission to falsely promote an event.
  2. The false promotion resulted in nearly 100 people spending nearly $1000 each to attend the falsely promoted event. 
  3. The youth were told that they would be going to Manila to evangelize Filipino's, which was both a lie and an insult to their hosts. 
So which de facto employer should be removed? The one who allowed an ex-convict to set up tables and chairs for church events and run errands for the pastor? Or the one who allowed a scandalous hoax which abused the name of a Cardinal of the Catholic Church as well as the trust of a whole diocese?






72 comments:

  1. If Jennifer did write the article on her own accord, then she needs to take responsibility. If not, then she should be defended by the brothers and sisters in the NCW. No one has come forth to say that she is an innocent victim. I guess she is biting the bullet!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What I know of Jennifer is that she is a sweet and loving person that does not have a deceptive bone in her body. She approaches her stories with joy, with trust in the Lord and with a child-like (not immature but as God asks us to approach him) awe. And that is inspiring. She exhibits these qualities, but to a certain fault. That fault has put her in this position that I believe others led her to and allowed to happen.

      If this is pinned on her and her alone, shame on those who would take advantage of her good soul. Jennifer wrote the article, but I believe she was fed lines by people that she completely trusted.

      I want to put my name to this, as I am neither a Neo or otherwise, and that I do not have communications with Ms. Dulla. However, this is about her and what I believe is her innocence in this matter. Although she should be responsible for when she puts pen to paper, there are forces and influences involved that should be greatly considered.

      For her sake, I pray she learns from this without the scars of distrust apparent in her future writings.

      Delete
    2. I agree with you about Jennifer's qualities. And we can assume that she received such important information from a trusted source and she did not just report hearsay. Unfortunately those who made up the story are probably not going to come forward. And I don't think Jennifer will take the blame either. She and the Umatuna will probably just try to pass it off as incorrect information. Normally this would not be a big deal. Newspapers do it all the time. But this involves the misuse of a Cardinal's name and position. It also fits the pattern of how Kiko allows the media to be used for his support.

      Delete
    3. I am sure Jennifer is a sweet loving person. I never met her. But she is in a position of responsibility and under her watch and the watch of the editor the integrity of the cardinal Archbisjjop of Manila has been called into question. This is what this incident is about. If it is left unresolved when will Jennifer do this again. Can anyone walk into her office and tell her what to write. These are serious media concerns. There must be standards we follow.

      Delete
  2. Jennifer Louise is a young, talented woman. Dabbling in media, as any young person would do fancies herself the NCW Barbara Walters. There have been too many FB posts with seminarians and priests taken all over the world. She should back off for a while and reconfigure her approach. Playing with fire, young lady.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ms Diulla is not employed by archdiocese. Ms dulla in gratitude to the way donates her free time in service. Ms dulla did not wrote the article . Article was written by a youth member going to Manila. He thought cardinal was invite them only later he noticed he should said cardinal bless them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 10:08'

      Now that sounds like a really weak lie. Her name is attached to the article. And now you want to blame it on an anonymous youth? Shame on you. Your ESL gives you away. Is that how dumb you consider the people of Guam? WE WILL CHEW YOU UP AND SPIT YOU OUT. TAI RESPECTU.

      Delete
    2. I doubt that this is true. If it is, the Ms. Dulla is not as bright as we think she is.

      Delete
  4. Why would this "youth member" think that the cardinal had given his blessing specifically to the NEOs of Guam? Did he/ she just fabricate this story? Or was he/ she told that this was the case?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why would this "youth member" even think that the cardinal had sent his blessing to the NEOs of Guam? Was this a total fabrication? Or was he/ she told that this happened?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Janet B - MangilaoJune 5, 2014 at 10:56 AM

    Wow, Anon June 5 @ 10:08AM...
    Nice spin, but watch out! That much spin and it just might bounce back to you. By the way, if Jenn did not write it, why did she put her name to it? also, if she did not write it, then who actually did, and where did they get any info from?
    Laughable attempt, but still another example of the lies we have come to expect whenever the heat gets a little too high for our "spiritual leaders".
    Shameful situation we have here on Guam where no one with a brain has a reason to believe anything that comes forth from the Chancery.

    ReplyDelete
  7. People need to know the truth of this particular matter as it is an international story. Jennifer may be the victim here of being used. However, even if this is true, she is a writer, every writer knows, including Tim Rohr, that if you publish any statement in print or social media, to maintain integrity of self, or the paper, one must be able to show every statement is authentic. If Jennifer was told to,wrote the article with given details what to,write, she had a moral duty tomre check the story by phoning the Manila chancery. No excuse for this. A good writer researcher double checks all data given prior to publication. This is why Tim's publication is accepted with trust. His readers know, of he posts he has researched and it's true. People only want the truth in media. I am sorry, but who ever informed Jennifer to write this is yes to blame, but she still wrote without research and this is unacceptable. It raises serious questions over printed media in the archdiocese. She has clearly contributed to the problems although not fully .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only possible explanation for Jennifer not to have checked the story is that she received it from someone she does not question. Ultimately, the Archbishop has to be held responsible for the misuse of the Cardinal's name and he should publicly apologize in this the U Matuna to him.

      Delete
  8. Catholic printed media this weekend needs to print an apology to the cardinal archbishop of Manila explaining that a mistake was made in last weeks paper. This is common practice in media. To not apologize shows a poor standard of a catholic publication. Truth of facts is of importance in media. People have a right to know that the publication writes the truth of facts. If this is shown not to be the case then we have to ask is this paper worth financing .

    ReplyDelete
  9. 10. 08am. Excuse hard to believe.

    ReplyDelete
  10. They call it ghost writing . A youth wrote the article, as ms Jen was over worked. Ms Jen nearing dead line and exhausted just passed it to print without reading and put her name. Does not mean she wrote it. Like president obama people write his thoughts placed under different names. Simple.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Archbishop would certainly be aware of whether or not Cardinal Tagle invited a group from Guam to evangelize in the Philippines. The story was published on May 18, so if the Archbishop or his close advisors knew that no invitation existed and that the "youth member" was wrong, why wasn't even the simplest retraction printed the following week? Another thing: Why didn't the Umatuna put the "youth member's" name in the by line and not Jennifer's? I don't believe that Jennifer would have put her name on the article if she had not read it. The whole thing stinks.

      Delete
    2. I know Jennifer Dulla, she really is the nicest sweetest person in the world. I am not a Neo but like most of us non-neo's out there, we don't really care for all the fighting back and forth. We simply are keeping an eye out for the Catholic Church and support the Truth and what the real Church Teachings are about. In that sense, I cannot support bad talking about Jennifer Dulla since she really is a very wonderful person and I can almost see her as getting wrong information and trusting in it. She is that kind of person. If someone ghost wrote the article and used her name, I can see that happening. You have just got to meet Jennifer Dulla to know that she meant no harm and no misinformation. I am asking please that we stop throwing her name back and forth like this.

      Delete
    3. Ghost writing? If that was true, then it even more imperative that the editorial staff and the publisher of the Umatuna make sure that the ghost writer is not printing anything ghosy, to coin a new word, especially when attributing statements to someone else, and that someone is a CARDINAL. I hope that Dulla comes forward and discloses how and where she got that information, but to do so means disclosing the culprits of the LIE. Will she? Or will she just fall on her sword to shield those truly responsible for the LIE?

      Delete
    4. If it was indeed someone else who penned the article, then I don't believe the editorial staff were aware. My understanding, like a penned op/ed for the PDN, they do not accept Anonymous or "pen named" submissions.
      To me, Anon at 11:43 am is blowing smoke to distract.

      Delete
    5. If she is going to fall on her sword, she should first demand a lot money. Make them pay!! Lol......

      Delete
    6. 12:48. Jennifer is a big girl. She has the option of telling us where she got the information. She has chosen so far not to do that. We shall see what she says, if anything, in this week's Umatuna. Meanwhile, Chuck White's point above is spot on. The article appeared on May 18. If it was incorrect, the Archbishop has had two weeks to correct it. He did not. It is not proper for the bishop of one diocese to solicit or promote and event in another bishop's diocese without going through the bishop of the diocese himself. We either have to believe that someone of the stature of Cardinal Tagle gave no thought to proper protocol and sent a personal invitation to the members of another bishop's diocese, or that the entire thing was made up. Because the Archbishop did not correct the story, we can easily assume that the story either came from him or was authorized by him. This is why Jennifer won't speak. But then there are consequences for that.

      Delete
    7. Janet B - MangilaoJune 5, 2014 at 2:41 PM

      To Anonymous June 5, 2014 at 11:43 AM:

      Always so cute to see the lengths the kikos will go to try and cover their tracks. And of course, as past history has shown time and time again, the kikos are horrible liars. And every attempt to lie uncovers something else more revealing. Your post is another good example. But first, thank you for your wonderful contribution on defining ghost writing. Fascinating!

      We have heard from kiko defenders that Jenn is not an employee of the Archdiocese, merely a good natured volunteer. But, based on what Anonymous June 5, 2014 at 11:43 AM says, Jenn is an employee by DOL standards. Here’s why:

      Anon tells us that a deadline was nearing. Well, a contributor does not have deadlines. If they have an article then they submit it and the paper decides whether to publish or not, and when. If the contributor has no article, then no submission, therefore no deadline. But if the paper wants a story and asks you to research it and write it, and they place a deadline for submission of said article, then she is an employee. She must have had a full plate of lies to cook up, because you definitively knew how exhausted she was. I guess spinning yarn for someone else must be very demanding and mentally fatiguing, especially when her professional reputation is at stake. Oh my, anon certainly has a lot of inside knowledge! You have revealed much without even realizing it. LOL

      Whether or not she used a “ghost writer”, apparently only you and a few others know, Fr Adrian. But that does not relieve her of content responsibility, especially since her name is on the article. Nor does it relieve the Archbishop because his name is on the entire content of the paper.

      But the most interesting part of your comment comes at the end, Fr. Thanks for saving the best for last! You state: “Like president obama people write his thoughts placed under different names.” Again, this inside information is very revealing. Fr Adrian has just told us that the thoughts written by Jenn, or her “ghost writer”, are actually the thoughts of the Archbishop. That is actually what we believed all along, but we appreciate the clarification from the Chancery.

      So what have we learned from Fr Adrian:
      1. Fascinating description of a ghost writer
      2. Jennifer Dulla is an employee of the Archdiocese, at least by Labor Law standards
      3. What Jenn wrote was actually the thoughts of Archbishop Anthony.

      Thanks, Fr Adrian. That actually was “Simple”

      PS - only one question remains. Did you just mistakenly reveal the truth? Or was this really a devious plan to have you replace the Archbishop by revealing something he doesn't want the world to know?

      I personally don't think Fr Adrian is that smart. Time will tell.....

      Delete
    8. Buzz around town Brother Tony is in PI .......

      Delete
    9. Anon @ 12:48pm You may be reading this within a skewed perspective. If anything, this post and the clear majority of the comments have been nothing but charitable and generous to Jennifer. You may not like the situation that Jennifer finds herself smack in the middle, but stating the facts does not mean we are "bad talking" or just "throwing her name back and forth."
      That being said, may I suggest you also refrain from speaking, as a non-neo, for "most" of the non-neos. You have no idea what the sentiments of "most" of the non-neos are. You should be concerned with your own opinion of this blog and the situation.

      Delete
    10. No one has said anything horrible about Jennifer, folks.

      Delete
    11. God help us Janet. We know Fr. Adrian does lie but if he has set this drama up to make the Archbishop look bad then it is a very serious issue.

      Delete
    12. That's right, there have been no horrible comments about Jennifer, just facts and possibilities, but comments indicate that most believe that she was just a pawn in the whole scheme of things. Fingers are pointing at the Archbishop and Kikos, but don't forget that Jennifer does have to take some level of responsiblity for the article if it is wrong.

      Delete
    13. Jennifer is also guilty if she was aware that it was a lie and agreed to attach her name to the article, and guilty if she chooses to cover it up, or take the blame for others.

      Delete
  11. This story now is serious because it involves a cardinal. We simply want to know.
    1. Was the NCW invited to Manila by cardinal tagle who then invited the youth of Guam to evangelize. There is no problem with this guys.
    2. If the cardinal did not invite the NCW to Manila then that is ok. However if the cardinal did not invite, then people want to know why the catholic print media of Guam wrote an article saying the cardinal did invite. But if he did not invite, then something else is at play here.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Jennifer is a good person no question. But she has to stand on moral ground for what is right. I suspect she is a victim, like many others, but victims at some point have to make a stand so we can heal. Am sorry for her but there is a trust issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, though I have been trying to be kind to Jennifer. I don't think she's much worried. She's in Manila celebrating their "persecution" with the Arch and Pius, probably in the hardship lounge at the Shangri-La where poor Filipino's stand in bathrooms and had sirs and mums warm towels to clean themselves with. Ah, such is the life of the persecuted.

      Delete
    2. If Jennifer is in Manila celebrating, then the written article if a lie does not have an impact on her.

      I am wondering if they are going to make an appointment to see Cardinal Tagle or if they already have an appointment to see him!

      Delete
    3. I heard she did not go.

      Delete
    4. As a good Neocat, she will cover the story for the Umatuna Si Yu'us. Who knows what is to happen in Manila. Will she write on how His Eminence Cardinal Tagle welcomed them? This will sure cover up their tracks.

      They seem to be very confident and not worried about the good Cardinal's name.

      Delete
    5. All of you see you are fool. You think joy is not us. You will see Filipino Cardinal with our brothers. Then you are delete! By.

      Delete
    6. According to my app on United.com, our humble Archbishop occupied seat 3A on flight 183 Wednesday night. Our airport bishop has no shame and no regard for what Pope Francis said out bishops called to be humble servants in the vineyard!

      Delete
    7. That seat 3A is first class, BTW.

      Delete
    8. Janet B - MangilaoJune 5, 2014 at 8:18 PM

      Nice short note from Deacon Harold. He had to be short as he was getting ready to board the flight to Manila.
      You still need to work on your english though.
      Bon voyage

      Delete
    9. Business class. Don't think there's 1st on that trip.

      Delete
    10. It's called Business First.

      Delete
    11. I heard Jen didn't go, too.

      Delete
  13. Sure The Archbishop is in the PI! He needed to go ASAP. He and Kiko are going to a recording studio to do a duet. CDs will be in made in mass production in the PI! Make sure you listen to KOLG for his latest song!

    It will be a new version of "Together Forever", first sung in Spanish and the. Translated into Chamorro!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Where is Pius? Did he recover enough to continue being persecuted?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where in the world is Fr. Pius? Flying First on Dubai Air.

      Delete
  15. Was practically all Neo last summer....Neo priests photographed at canonization, All Neo on PILGIMAGE TO MANILA. So who's being persecuted here? Archbishop hasn't invited me anywhere. I'm beginning to feel rather persecuted, too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sorry you are not included. Aside from all these NEO trips, word has it that he invites his NEO priests sometimes to breakfast.

      Most of us are not invited to participate. We only know of this when there is a memo published. Did anyone see if you are interested, please contact.....nope.

      It's okay guys, we have better things to do than to go around trying to make ourselves known. Some people will do anything to get noticed! It's beginning to become a popularity contest for them.

      Delete
    2. It's ok, I don't have the plane/hotel dough anyhow. Only thing in my trash bag is real trash.

      Delete
  16. Fr. Pius is now in the Philippines. it is believed the archbishop has arrived in the republic. As information becomes available with certainty it will be posted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is Father Pius going to check into St. Luke's too? I hope he has more than centavos in his pocket. But then again, most of the. Act as if they don't have a cent to their name and live off the livelihood of others.

      PAY YOUR DUES FOR THE USE OF THE CHURCH!

      Delete
    2. Let's publish deadbeat Neo communities in the parish bulletin.

      Delete
    3. How many pilgrims have gone to evangelize PI? Hope it's enough.

      Delete
    4. Janet B - MangilaoJune 5, 2014 at 8:23 PM

      Somebody recently posted that our dear Archbishop suffered through a 3 hour first class trip last night, Wed June 4. I went to the same app "United.com" and was also able to verify. Seat 3A. Yep. He's there for sure.
      No shame!

      Delete
    5. I don't know how many pilgrims went, but the Mayflower was not full .

      Delete
    6. Fr. Pius is in Manila with the Archbishop to pay homage to their leader, Kiko-san, and to dance in the streets. I heard there is about 100 of them including all the seminarians...neo seminarians that is.

      Delete
    7. These PILGRIMS will now get to together and write their own version of "Pilgrim's Progress."

      Delete
    8. Neo seminarians in Manila, diocesan seminarian touring Europe. Very surprised more not signing up. See the world.

      Delete
    9. From video doesn't seem Fr. pious will be doing too much dancing

      Delete
    10. Anonymous (June 6, 2014 at 2:34 PM), your comment "Neo seminarians in Manila, diocesan seminarian touring Europe. Very surprised more not signing up. See the world." seems to imply that ALL the seminarians who are/were traveling are doing/did so at the expense of the Archdiocese. That may have been the case for the RMS seminarians who recently accompanied the Archbishop to the Philippines.

      However, the lone "diocesan seminarian touring Europe" is doing so with his family, at his family's expense while he is on Summer Break.

      Anonymous at 2:34 PM, are you in a position to begrudge the "diocesan seminarian" time with his family who has financed the trip for themselves? I think not.

      Delete
    11. I also think not. Aside from that- are there two seminaries or not?

      Delete
  17. Archbishop was not in 3a lies lies lies. Arcbisnop sat in 33a back plane main cabin. Lies lies lies. Satan will welcome you in hell for your lies. Kiko kiko kiko kiko kiko kiko kiko we love you. Kiko kiko kiko Guam love you. Chant kiko kiko kiko we love you. Kiko kiko kiko Guam love you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is this one of the neo songs they sing. It sounds like a troubled person .

      Delete
    2. May be this is meant to be an over zealous prayer for the Manila group. To sing the words in a group would be a cult. Prefer to think it is a prayer of some over religious kid.

      Delete
  18. What kind of sick lunatic writes like Anon June 6 at 12:14AM?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whoever it is should have gone to bed heading toward total psychosis.

      Delete
  19. Tim can you please explain to,readers. We come to,the jungle to air views concerns, this is now frightening. What kind of a person are we dealing with here. It is sick.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Why so much focus on kiko he is not that important to life on guam

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 3:38,

      Sounds like something Kiko would say as an anonymous commentor.

      Delete
  21. Where does one find the video of this meeting?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you can stomach her site...Diana posted a video of the meeting on her blog.

      Delete
    2. Concerned at 10:09, there is no need to go to "Diana's" blog. You can see the video right here:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha_qccc_zP0

      Delete

Recommendations by JungleWatch