Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Video of Cardinal Ravasi Participating in a Pachamama Ritual in 2015

The following video, "Cardenal Gianfranco Ravasi participating in the cult of the Pacha Mama," was uploaded four years ago by the Argentinian Catholic group, QueNoTeLaCuenten, Javier Olivera Ravasi, director (no relation to the Cardinal, I assume).

It clearly shows Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, President of the Pontifical Council for Culture, participating in a windswept and circular "Pacha Mama" ritual in San Marcos Sierras,
Córdoba, Argentina sometime previous to July 13, 2015.

Is this an "authentic" Pachamama ritual? Who knows? Lonely Planet describes the area, thus:
The hippie towns of San Marcos Sierras and Capilla del Monte give a glimpse into Argentina's alternative lifestyles.
One begins to wonder whether much of the current Pachamama craze is as much a re-invention by 21st century European or European-influenced hippies as it is an expression of true indigenous practice.

Indeed, one YouTube commenter wonders why, as he put it, the most "superstitious" elements of indigenous worship are so often highlighted by progressives:
It is curious that they talk about the cult of Pachamama and never speak for example of Tupá the god of the Guarani. Is it not that they do it because Tupá means God and the Guarani were monotheists, and instead they are more superstitious in believing that the earth is the creative goddess? Let me explain what I mean. Progressiveism gives more importance to this pre-Columbian belief because it is the most superstitious of all or almost all while the God of the Guarani was simply God.
The poor Guarani - their monotheistic religion isn't hip enough for septuagenarian Vatican prelates and Marxist professors.

See, it's not idol worship, it's just an alternative lifestyle.

And if you disagree, you're a racist.

H/t Hillary White  

Monday, October 21, 2019

Meet Kyle J Baker SJ, the Stalinist Hippy Trying to Get Catholics Banned from Twitter

Yes, Kyle J Baker is a Jesuit. Or, perhaps I should say, of course he is.

I know what you're thinking, and you're right. He also has been called a Dudeist (seriously).

Today, he reported a number of Catholics - people positively tweeting about the recent accompaniment of five Pagan idols from a Catholic sanctuary into the river Tiber - to Twitter for "racism" and "sick hate mongering."

Apparently, this is not the first instance Baker spent some of his free-time reporting people to Twitter. At least once his efforts have paid off:

Oddly, and even sadly, even though he has 847 followers, he rarely gets more than a few hits of activity on most of his tweets. Today's tweet only had one "like" for a while (though now it has ten), though it steadily garnered what must be a record number (for him) of "replies" - almost 200 by last count - virtually all of which were hostile and mocking about his "reporting". Many said they would report him right back.

Who is Kyle J Baker?

He's an excitable politics junkie who likes retweeting the usual suspects.


He is often very disturbed.

He believes things are very bad and wants them to change NOW.

He mourns glaciers and is a vegetarian.

Two days after the the Nativity of Mary, he lobbied for a Feast of the Nativity for a lesbian poet.

He doesn't seem to like that there are no non-binary gender options when purchasing airplane tickets (maybe he reported the company).

He doesn't like Catholic youth.

He does like Aryan youth.

And so on.

In other words, this Jesuit is just like that school chum who you run into occasionally but try not to talk politics with. Or he's just like 75% of Democrat voters on social media or whatever.

Bless their little liberal hearts.

Except there's more to it than just that.

The hippy Jesuit with the dorky smile is a Stalinist.

If he doesn't like what you have to say, he will try to ban you from saying it. He will try to ban you.

If he could, he'd put you in a concentration camp.

That's simply my own opinion, of course.

There's also this opinion:

But if anything is certain, it's that Kyle J Baker SJ is not really a Dudeist.

In fact he's the anti-Dudeist. 

"Racist! Hate monger! Xenophobe! I will REPORT you!!!"

Careful, man. There's a beverage here.

Vatican Spokesman on the Drowning of the Pachamama Idols: "These people don't believe in dialogue."

At this morning's Synod press conference in Rome, Paolo Ruffini, the Vatican's Prefect of the Dicastery for Communication, said that the men who removed the "Pachamama" idols from a sanctuary at Santa Maria in Traspontina and then threw them in the river Tiber "didn't believe in dialogue."

He also said the act was an "insult" to indigenous peoples.

If you are just now waking up, here's the background:

A few hours ago, just before dawn, Rome time, at least two men, entered the Santa Maria in Traspontina, removed the four or five "Pachamama" idols from one of the sanctuaries, walked to the river Tiber nearby, and after a few prayers, knocked them into the water.

One of them recorded the act for video. At least two videos have been so far uploaded to YouTube by a "Michael Del Bufalo", an account seemingly set up for this purpose.

Under the second video they posted an explanation for their actions:

This was done for only one reason: 
Our Lord and saviour Jesus Christ, his blessed Mother, and everybody who follows Christ, are being attacked by members of our own Church. We do not accept this! We do not longer stay silent! We start to act NOW! 
Because we love humanity, we can not accept that people of a certain region should not get baptised and therefore are being denied entrance into heaven. 
It is our duty to follow the words of God like our holy Mother did. 
There is no second way of salvation.

Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat!
Taylor Marshall quickly posted a longer explanatory video:

Yesterday, there was a minor storm on Twitter when it was discovered that all of Taylor Marshall's tweets had been deleted. "Where is Dr. Marshall?" people asked. Marshall and his friends weren't talking.

Someone quipped, "Pachamama got him."

Not quite.

The mainstream press is now reporting the story. From the Washington Post:
VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis’ controversial meeting on the Amazon has taken a criminal twist after thieves stole indigenous fertility statues from a Vatican-area church and tossed them into the Tiber River. 
Video of the pre-dawn theft from the Santa Maria in Traspontina church was shared and celebrated on conservative social media Monday. The Vatican’s communications czar, Paolo Ruffini, termed it a “stunt” that violated the idea of dialogue.
It won't be long before they blame "Americans" and Donald Trump.

But even the Post is calling them "indigenous fertility statues."

The Synod did indeed take a criminal turn, but faithful Catholics know that this happened more than a week ago.

And the "dialogue" in the Church has been of the one-way Stalinist variety for seven years.

What next for the Synod? Only God knows.

But for now, in the words of Christina Niles,

Pachamama sleeps with the fishes,

Wednesday, October 9, 2019

Francis: "Jesus was not a God at all."

Francis, surrounded by laughing cardinals, leftist nuns and Indians (La Repubblica editorial) 

UPDATE/CORRECTION: The original title of this post was "Francis: 'I am the proof that Jesus was not a God at all.'" Apparently, a more accurate translation of Scalfari quoting Francis is "These facts show that Jesus was not a God at all." This alludes to an earlier part of the conversation that Marco Tosatti did not include in his excerpt where it is discussed, among other things, that Jesus cried out, "why hast Thou forsaken me?" (H/t Hilary White.)

2ND UPDATE: According to a bilingual Italian source cited by Ann Barnhardt "Sono la prova provata” does indeed mean, "I am the demonstrable proof". One of the bizarre things about this story is that no one seems to have access to the full original text. Or to put it another way, La Repubblica would appear to have few actual subscribers these days. (But they do have a very effective paywall.) 

Italian journalist Eugenio Scalfari has just related the contents of another purported conversation with Francis, this time in the form of an editorial on the Amazon Synod.

In it, it is claimed that Francis's true goal is to promote a sort of one world religion.

Even more shocking, Scalfari has Francis denying the divinity of Jesus.

This is the latest of numerous Scalfari articles throughout the last six years in which Scalfari has either quoted or paraphrased Francis purportedly saying various heterodox and heretical things.

Defenders of Francis have always claimed that Scalfari is an untrustworthy source who likes to put words in his pontiff's mouth to conform with his own atheism. But Francis keeps having these "conversations" and never himself denies the substance of what Scalfari has claimed.

In addition, a number of claims and themes that Francis later would explicitly emphasize publicly first made their appearance in a Scalfari piece, later looking for all the world like trial balloons or attempts to "soften up" his Catholic audience.

Such was the case with his famous "proselytism is solemn nonsense", which first appeared in a Scalfari piece from October, 2013 or his support for communion for the divorced and remarried.

Most of yesterday's editorial in La Repubblica is hidden behind an Italian paywall, but the first paragraph is public:
Francesco has been launching the idea of ​​the One God for years. It is an obviously revolutionary idea that involves examining a serious problem that affects everyone...
A few hours ago, Italian journalist Marco Tosatti excerpted a later part of the text:
Chi ha avuto, come a me è capitato più volte, la fortuna d’incontrarlo e di parlargli con la massima confidenza culturale, sa che papa Francesco concepisce il Cristo come Gesù di Nazareth, uomo, non Dio incarnato. Una volta incarnato, Gesù cessa di essere un Dio e diventa fino alla sua morte sulla croce un uomo. 
Quando mi è capitato di discutere queste frasi papa Francesco mi disse: «Sono la prova provata che Gesù di Nazareth una volta diventato uomo, sia pure un uomo di eccezionali virtù, non era affatto un Dio
Google translates this as:  
Anyone who has had, as I have happened several times, the good fortune to meet him and talk to him with the utmost cultural confidence, knows that Pope Francis conceives Christ as Jesus of Nazareth, man, not God incarnate. Once incarnated, Jesus ceases to be a God and becomes a man until his death on the cross... 
When I happened to discuss these sentences, Pope Francis told me: "I am the proof that Jesus of Nazareth, once he became a man, though a man of exceptional virtues, was not a God at all".
Aside from the bizarre nature of someone who calls himself Pope denying an essential item of the Christian creeds, there is also the oddity of "I am the proof." Francis believes he is the proof that Jesus was merely a man? How is that? Perhaps he means that since he has repeatedly preached objective heresy as Pope, Jesus' promise to Peter to protect His Church would appear to have been broken or ineffectual. And such could only happen if Jesus was not God [though, see above].

Almost four years ago I analyzed down what I saw as Francis's "Scalfari strategy":
It's now clear that the Eugenio Scalfari interviews in the anticlerical La Repubblica are actually an important part of Bergoglio's controlled demolition of the Church. In the interviews all sorts of heresies are proclaimed, as befits a South American Jesuit who came of age in the late twentieth-century: Indifferentism (proselytism is solemn nonsense), relativism (what really matters is that we all journey towards our own conceptions of the good) annihilationism or universalism (there is no hell), Kasperism (doctrine should bend to practicality) and so on. 
Bergoglio knows the message that he believes these things, and thus that they are now quasi-official teachings of the Church, will get out, not because everyone reads Scalfari, but because his words will gradually filter down to the bishops, priests and Catholic masses through secondary articles, headlines and the like. And they will be, as it were, implemented, just as surely as if that kissing priest had written an encyclical for him. 
Is Bergoglio worried about opposition? Sure. But telegraphing his thoughts through Scalfari gives him a certain protection. There will always be someone--even the official Vatican spokesman--who will imply (though never actually say) that these are not really Bergoglio's thoughts. Don't trust that atheist journalist spinning his words, etc. etc. This of course is ridiculous, but it gives his potential opponents just enough cover to provide an excuse to mask their own cowardice in doing and saying nothing. And Bergoglio, being an arch-coward himself, knows that most men grapple with that vice. 
Doctrine is never officially challenged or denied, but it is undermined just as surely as if Bergoglio had solemnly declared what's what from the throne of St. Peter.
Of course we've travelled light-years since then. The Amazon Synod with its heretical preparatory document and sacrilegious opening worship ceremonies is now front and center for all to see. What's another silly Scalfari interview, whatever was supposedly said?

And of course, what was said (please, let's grow up and drop the supposedly), shouldn't be a shock.

Does anyone paying attention still really think that Bergoglio believes that Jesus was God? Even his allies and defenders don't believe that. After all, most of them don't believe it, themselves.

Saturday, October 5, 2019

The Perfect Symbol for the Current Pornocracy

The recent tree-planting ceremony in the Vatican, a preview kick-off for the Amazonian Synod, featured a sort of tribal picnic blanket on which were placed various native statues and objects.

The above scene was described by Getty Images, thus:
ROME, ITALY - OCTOBER 04: Pope Francis and Cardinal Cardinal Cláudio Hummes, Archbishop Emeritus of São Paulo, President of the Pan-Amazonian Ecclesial Network (REPAM), stand in front of a statue representing Pachamama (Mother Earth) as they celebrate the Feast of St. Francis of Assisi at the Vatican Gardens on October 04, 2019 in Rome, Italy. During a highly symbolic tree-planting ceremony in the Vatican Gardens on Friday, Pope Francis places the upcoming Synod for the Amazon under the protection of Saint Francis of Assisi. (Photo by Giulio Origlia/Getty Images)
This obviously seems embarrassingly pagan, so apologists for the Vatican soon spread the word that the two most prominent statues ("Pachamama" and a similar one) actually represented the Visitation of Mary and Elizabeth.

How DARE anyone suggest this was a pagan ceremony?*

Apparently, the Catholic shamans moved the objects around like kids would on a play mat.

What were the other objects? To be honest, I don't really want to know, especially that long thing with the purple and orange striped ends. But it turns out that the apologists had cropped a larger image*. Here's a different version, panning right:

Let's pan in more on the right:

Yes, it appears to be a naked man with an erect Coco.

Fertility idol? Not at all, it's simply a statue of one of the prelate inhabitants of Sanctae Marthae taking in a bit of sun.

One Twitter friend made a funny comment:


Okay, but here's some cold water for you:

This is reassuring. And I'm happy I didn't have to become hysterical. The lefties won't get any ammo from me, today.

I'm NOT crazy.

But I'm still not sure I understand what's going on. Is it his arm? Which arm? Does he have half an arm on one side and no arm on the other?

Is that half an arm or are you just glad to see me?

Yes, people are now debating this on Twitter, complete with different pictures at different angles with pointers and little circles and all the rest. What is it, really?

I don't care.

The original photo, however we characterize the native protrusion in question, is still the perfect symbol for the current pornocracy. The term was originally coined by a Protestant historian to describe the corrupt papacies of the 10th century. It originally meant rule by prostitutes.

But I think it could also mean rule by the corrupt and sexually perverted. When they're not scheming to cover up scandals or ambiguify to death Church teachings, they're engaging in "drug-fueled orgies" - one of them, as we all know, broken up by the police just a few hundred yards from that picnic blanket.

But as we also all know, none of the sexually in question has anything to do with fertility.

*H/t Steve Skojec and Nick Donnelly.

Friday, October 4, 2019

MUST WATCH: Suited Man's Hardheaded Response to Terrorist Wannabe on Commuter Train

"I'll kill you, I'm from Afghanistan, I'll kill you, I'll stab you!"

Sorry to say it, but haven't you always wanted to do this, or at least see it done?

Q: "You want me stab you, Kafir?!"

A: BONK!!!

It reminds us of this, I think:

The Daily Mail gives some background:
A commuter was today hailed as a 'hero' after headbutting a man who had allegedly been fighting and making violent threats on board a train from London. 
The suited man, who was believed to have been travelling home, struck the bearded man on the c2c service between West Ham and Barking in East London yesterday. 
Commuters cheered and praised the suited man for protecting other passengers whom the bearded man was said to have been harassing on the train. 
The bearded man was restrained before police took him off at Upminster station in Essex, where he was arrested on suspicion of carrying a knife and theft by finding. 
Del Scott-Lewis, a passenger in his 40s from Ockenden, told MailOnline he was involved in trying to stop the bearded man from attacking anyone on the train. 
He told MailOnline: 'I'm looking round over my left shoulder, facing a girl sitting down. He's mumbling on about 'I'm from f***ing Afghanistan'. 
'Then an old workman behind him has got up and said to this guy 'leave her alone'. Then the guy punched him five or six times. I saw him fall backwards. 
'I turned round and shouted out: 'let's get him off at the next stop'. When I got to him I grabbed hold of his right arm and marched him to the centre of the train. 
'When I got him against the door, this bloke who did the headbutting grabs hold of his left arm. He started struggling. The heatbutt was needed, desperately needed. 
'When against the wall, he started saying 'I'll kill you, I'm from Afghanistan, I'll kill you, I'll stab you'. I was on the phone to 999 and saying 'we need urgent help'. 
'I put the phone down and went to restrain the guy. Before the headbutt comes, he was talking about killing me. Then the word 'stab' came up. 
'We saw no knife, but he made the threat to stab us. When he made the threat, no one had a baton - so we headbutted him.
The suited man helped to restrain the suspect until police arrived
 'If someone threatens to stab you, and you've got no baton on you, the only course available was to shut him up. 
'At that point some of the kids on the train started getting scared. I've never been in a situation like this before. It was a judgement.'
Mark Taylor, who said he was also on the train, told MailOnline: 'The guy was causing trouble. He had tried to sit on the divider between the seats. 
'When a bloke of about 60 asked him to stop he attacked him. The big bloke and some others pulled him off. The big guy restrained him for about five or six minutes while being permanently shouted at and abused. Finally he had enough. 
'No one could blame him and it did the carriage a favour. That's why everyone was laughing. He was hauled out at Upminster. Eventful journey.' 
The video begins with the bearded man having a heated discussion with the tall suited man, who appears to be restraining his fellow passenger with his wrists.
The bearded passenger then shouts at the suited man: 'Look at me I'm stupid!' – before the latter violently headbutts him, sending him forcibly flying backwards. 
The victim of the headbutt was visibly thrown down and backwards by the force of the blow 
Some passengers on the crowded train gasp in horror, while others cheered and laughed at the move. Later, commuters discussed the incident on social media. 
A witness said on Facebook: 'This guy was harassing and trying to provoke fights the entire journey until he was escorted off. 
'Everyone was ignoring him as it was a busy train and no one wanted any trouble. The final straw was when he jumped in between two seats and was practically sitting on a person's head. 
'The passenger simply told him to get down and the guy started laughing and started using horrible language towards him and a lot of other passengers on the train. 
'He then started pushing the passenger and a fight broke out, which was quickly dispersed. 
'After many more horrible and inappropriate comments later another passenger cornered him into the door so he would stop harassing people and said for him to get off the next stop - Upminster. 
'He then started pushing him and insulting him, which resulted in the final headbutt. When he was escorted off the train he still continued to make comments and insults.' 
Lindsey Walsh added: 'I'm in no way condoning violence. However, having witnessed the 15 minute build up prior to this head butt, I can confirm he deserved it. What you are seeing is the head butt with no context behind it.
'But that guy got on the train spoiling for a fight. He had a punch up with an innocent commuter and was abusive to everyone on the carriage. Again, I'm not condoning violence but the guy who gave the head butt was a hero.' 
A separate video also showed the man being pinned to the platform at Upminster station while police officers headed to take him away. 
A British Transport Police spokesman said: 'British Transport Police received a report at 3.35pm on October 3 of a man fighting and making violent threats to passengers on board a train. 
'He was restrained onboard the service and arrested when it arrived at Upminster station. Following a search, the man, aged 29, was further arrested on suspicion of carrying a knife and theft by finding. He remains in custody.'

Thursday, October 3, 2019

BREAKING: Paris Police HQ Stabber Was Recent Convert to Islam

Security personnel guard area near Paris police headquarters after the attack

Do non-Muslims ever go on sudden mass-murder rampages? Of course.

But in nations where Islam is on the rise, ideologically and demographically, these attacks by Muslims are common and predictable. It's literally part of how aggressive Islam instills fear in the rest of the population and reduces it to paralysis and finally resignation regarding the process of Islamization.

This morning, a man went on a stabbing rampage inside Paris police headquarters. Apparently he was an employee and thus had security clearances. Four police employees were killed, three of them officers, before the man was shot dead.

Who was he and why did he do it?

We are all familiar with the usual denials and obfuscations. The man waas not initially identified. Here is one of the initial reports from Sky News:
The motive is unclear but another police union leader, Jean-Marc Bailleul, described it as a criminal act - a "moment of madness" - rather than terror. 
Other media reports in the country have said the suspect had "tensions" with his supervisor.
Now some in French media are reporting that the attacker was a recent Muslim convert. This may have been part of the reason for the "tensions":

(Actu17 later retracted the information that the slain victim was the attacker's supervisor.)

It is now reporting that the wife of the attacker has been arrested.

Reuters is now confirming that the attacker was a recent Muslim convert based on a report from French news agency BFMTV.

Wednesday, September 11, 2019

Thank You for Saving Everyone

For weeks and perhaps months after 9/11, the street side walls of practically every firehouse in Manhattan were covered with cards and letters, many of them written by children. You could walk from Ground Zero well up the length of the island and see them. In many cases the flutter of pinned up notes surrounded photographs of the fallen firefighters from that particular company.

The one I will always remember was the card with a drawing of the intact Trade Center Towers on each side. In between was a heart. Underneath was a message written in a child's hand:

Thank You For Saving Everyone

In many cases, of course, these heroes and heroines physically rescued no one. The leading group that went up the stairs of the second tower that was hit (the first tower to fall) all perished before they could lead a single person out. There was no time. Two made it up to the 78th floor elevator waiting area where the second plane had plowed directly through a crowd. There, they reported back on the conditions and comforted the shocked, injured and dying in the few minutes they all had left. 

Just as as a stretcher can help to save a body, an act of love - received or given - can lead to the salvation of a soul.

They all died. But it is not unreasonable to believe that on the 78th floor that day, the actions of those brave men saved some. Not everyone but some. 

Requiescat in pace.

Reprinted and edited from Save Versus All Wands, September 11, 2014.

Monday, April 22, 2019

"First Muslim Peer" Lord Ahmed Charged with Buggery Against a Boy Under 11 in Sheffield Crown Court

Member of the British House of Lords Nazir Ahmed has been called (and has called himself) the "first Muslim peer". Apparently, this is technically incorrect, with two other Muslims beating him to it by a matter of weeks. (Apparently, appointing Muslims to the peerage was a thing in the Summer of 1998). There have also been a number of earlier Muslim hereditary peers, all converts, I believe.

But he is almost certainly the most well-known current Muslim Lord.

Last month he was charged with attempted rape against a girl under 16. It allegedly occurred in the early 1970's.

Fittingly, perhaps, his peerage is Rotherham, the site of the notorious Muslim mass "grooming" scandals.

Lord Ahmed was also sexually attracted to young boys. Or so it seems.

From the Rotherham Advertiser (4/18/19) h/t Gates of Vienna:
Rotherham peer Lord Ahmed charged with fourth child sex offence

ROTHERHAM peer Lord Nazir Ahmed has appeared at court — alongside his two brothers — charged with a fourth historical child sex offence. 
The peer faced the further allegation of buggery against a boy under 11 when he appeared at Sheffield Crown Court yesterday (Wednesday). 
Ahmed, of East Bawtry Road, Rotherham, appeared at the lower court last month charged with indecently assaulting the boy and two counts of attempted rape against a girl aged under 16 in the early 1970s. 
The former Labour politician would have been aged between 14 to 17 when the alleged abuse took place against the two complainants. 
No pleas have been formally entered but Ahmed’s solicitor told reporters at last month’s hearing outside Sheffield Magistrates' Court “he will be doing everything he can in order to prove his innocence”. 
His brothers (below L-R Tariq and Farouq) have denied sexually abusing the same boy between 1968 to 1972.
Mohammed Farouq (68), of Worrygoose Lane, Rotherham, denied at the earlier hearing four counts of indecent assault, said to have taken place when he was aged between 17 and 22. 
Mohammed Tariq (63), of Gerard Road, Rotherham, denies two counts of indecently assaulting the boy when he would have been aged between 14 to 16. 
A two-week trial date was set for December 2 and the men were granted unconditional bail.