Author Archive

What I expect Russia *may* do. Soon(ish).

The first point to understand about Russian tactics is that they are almost invariably asymmetrical and —from a Western perspective at least— considered to be prime examples of “out of the box” or “lateral” thinking.

The reality is that Russians are among the most pragmatic people on Earth as a culture. They suffered nearly a century of dystopically and absurdist lies from their own government, and learnt to adapt to this surreality by countering it with whatever worked at a practical level to keep them alive and one step ahead of the murderous bureaucracy.

Such murderous bureaucracy now infects the West at levels that would have made the Soviet rulers blush with shame.

So, in practical terms, what does this mean?

In order to explain this in terms even our American friends might understand, Russia is basically the skinny foreign kid that was bullied for a while by an obese transvestite with blue hair. The natural instinct on a fair playing field is that the skinny kid’s best outcome would derive from picking up a brick and grafting it to side of the head of the freak. Preferably skilfully enough to not outright kill the fat tranny, but to do enough damage it’s not going to be soon forgotten. And that would indeed work best… except… the school they are in is an absurdist one where most of the other kids are at least a bit fat. And even if not, most of the popular kids paint their hair weird colours.

So the skinny kid decided to play it smart and suffer the bullying for a couple of years. Just taking shots and getting his lunch money stolen and just carrying on as best he can. Always being dignified and just dusting himself off and getting up again after a beating, with tears on his face maybe, but no whining to teachers. After a while most of the school at least sympathises a bit with the skinny kid. So when the skinny kid starts to give some push back, while the “popular” “consensus” is supposedly against this “rude foreigner”, secretly, a lot of the smaller, non-obese, non-hair-painted-weird-colours kids have a secret weak spot for the skinny underdog.

The fat tranny enlists everyone to bully the skinny kid more, but almost all of them —except for super-gay and floppy-haired Just-in Shitwater, from Cucknada, and whoever the fuck runs Australia and New Zealand— only do a token form of bullyism. You know, throw sand from the sidelines. Shout a few insults, but don’t actively get too close. That skinny kid has started punching back and in truth they are soft and scared.

So… what is the skinny kid to do?

Carry on letting the fat tranny and his token gay friends bully him still (even if less successfully than they’d like)?

What would you do to end the bullying?

Now, I dunno about you, but I know what I would do. And I’m fairly sure I know what a skinny Russian kid would do. We think pretty similarly me and Russians. Do what works.

He’d wait. And then he’d pick up that brick. And when the moment is right, he would fuck the fat tranny up bad enough to put him in hospital for 2 weeks and leave his face permanently a bit different, what with the stitches and missing teeth and broken jaw.

And then for good measure, he might also slap a few of the gay friends of the fat tranny upside the head and make them shit their pants. Physically. In public. While they bleed and cry on the ground.

And what would happen after that? Oh the school authorities would be appalled. Appalled and shocked! And then, they would make sure no bullying happens anymore. Because that skinny Russian kid? He has a skinny, humble looking father. But that father came to school, right after his son hospitalised fat tranny and a couple of his gay friends, and just walked into the principal’s office and said:

“Hi. My name Ivan. I’m father of Vitaly…”

“Ah yes, good, your son…”

“No. Shut fuck up or I gut you with my fish knife *flick* (fish knife comes out). You listen very well now. My son. No more bullying of him. Or I come to your house, shoot your dog, fuck your fat wife, for which she would thank me, and THEN I gut you with my fish knife. You understand, fat fuck?”

And the principal, in that moment knows Ivan is not kidding. He sees the fish knife brand too. It’s called Hypersonic Nuclear Option. Long for a brand name but it’s all neatly etched on the shining blade.

So. I would NOT be surprised if Zelensky’s office (wherever it is, in whichever country) suddenly turns to hot dust. And maybe a few American advisors or politicians suddenly also die of suddenly.

It may be a while yet. But if this nonsense doesn’t end soon (it won’t) that’s my best guess. I don’t know the timeline and I could be way off, but I would say sometime this year.

I know popcorn is mostly genetically modified now, but my wife makes the best ham and cheese sandwiches and a lovely cup of tea.

I hope I can get a nice rocking chair to view it all from my porch before the main event.

Ann Triples and Quadruples Down.

In her latest post on the subject she admits that the Petrine See has been vacant before for up to two years and ten months. And goes on to add that two years and ten months is NOT some line in the sand.

Because well… as I have been saying for years… there IS no line in the sand. There IS no rule for how long an interregnum can last.

So tell me Ann, of Bergoglio lasts another 20 years, will you then STILL be TOTES DIFFERENT from is 1958 Sedes?

Even more absurdly, she goes in her immediately previous post, to quote various doctors of the Church that state that one cannot be considered a schismatic if in good conscience he assumes the present “Pope” to be invalid due to rumor or fact that convinces him of this to the best of his ability and conscience to grasp.

So, to summarise, we 1958 sedes:

1. Are NOT schismatics. Since fact, reason, logic, Catholic doctrine AND the infallible magisterium of the Church, in the form of Canon Law, ALL line up telling us we are indeed correct in our belief that from Roncalli to Bergoglio they all are fake clergy, as are ALL Novus Ordo “clergy”, without exception, so any “Pope” that may come from their ranks would similarly be invalid.

2. Are NOT wrong on Catholic dogma, canon law or doctrine. And Ann cannot, at ALL find any fault with our reasoning in fact.

But… we are still wrong because… oh yeah, according to Ann we’re very stupid.

But she will not say exactly HOW or precisely WHY she thinks this, other than implying that 64 years is too long. Yet she refuses to say where the line of “too long” is.

And then she accuses US of being incapable of doing basic logic?

OooooK Ann.

How’s that bottle of tequila doing? Wait, what number bottle is that? This stuff’s not cheap you know…

Ann doubles down

This may be a longish one, but hopefully those of you who care about actual Christianity may find it instructive, useful, and perhaps even entertaining.

Ann Barnhardt, while saying Sedevacantists are being spiteful, raging at her and so on, actually calls people like me ideologues who are working for Satan. No, I’m not making this up.

I’ll post the relevant parts of her blog post below with commentary so you can see for yourself.

Yes, the 1958 Sedevacantists AND the “Fwanciss is definitely Pope, stoopid!” contingent are already sending spiteful, mocking emails. I’ll post some later so you can see their hissing, pride-soaked venom as they try desperately to hold the irrational premise that the objective binary reality of Pope Benedict being dead and the See being vacant for a matter of minutes is “exactly the same thing” as the error and corollary IDEOLOGY that there has been no Pope since the death of Pope Pius XII sixty-four years ago in ARSH 1958.

I have no doubt, some who emailed her may well fit her description, and my own blog posts have certainly been mocking, but not in a vicious way, (certainly by my standards anyway, being as rhetoric nukes are a speciality) and I believe, rather, in a way fitting to her demonstrated egotistical pride. Which I specified in an earlier post (use the search me button on the sidebar if you care)

But I always made it a point to explain I believe Ann is sincere in her error. That I did not think she is an intentional deceiver. I still hold that view, however, as I have noticed with others –Bishop Sanborn being the prime example– once a person not only begins to live in dogmatic and canonical error, but prides themselves in it, they seem to begin a descent into deeper error and deeper pride rather quickly.

Now, far be it from me to pretend to be a model Catholic. I also always stated that I may not be a very good one, but I am a fervent one. I have many flaws and some are hard to correct even over time, but I do not pride myself on these things. On some I may be stubborn and if asked specifically I may explain my thinking, but none of my flaws continue in a specific and clear assault against reason as a result of personal pride. Despite my many flaws, putting my ego before reason and logic has never been one of mine. Possibly putting my sense of justice before reason has, but it is not for personal pride, I assure you, no matter how it may look to you or others.

That all said, Ann seems intent in making two false accusations against me and people I know personally that while different (and better than me) in many respects all hold the same generic beliefs. One accusation is somewhat excusable; she believes we are ideologues. That is, that our Sedevacantism is the result of some cargo cult-like brainwashing. This is absolutely false, I certainly am unaware of a single Sedevacantist that I met personally that is one or became one as a result of anything other than deep, personal investigation, reflection and study. Usually over a period of years. I don’t even know anyone that is a “cradle Sedevacantist”.

So that accusation is as false as, say, the often repeated, and retarded, accusation of Protestants that Catholics “worship Mary and the Saints”. It may be “understandable” but only insofar as that the person/s making such accusations are either, lazily ignorant of having ever looked into the matter deeper than 30 seconds on even converged google would take, or are knowingly and intentionally remaining “ignorant” because to do otherwise would put the lie to their nonsensical accusation.

Now, Ann is not stupid. Or ignorant. So, unfortunately I can only conclude she is intentionally remaining “ignorant” of our position. Out of charity I have assumed from the start that this is due to her personal pride, injured by, I believe –because I take her word for it– what I would call trailer-park-pope “sedevacantists” i.e. mentally challenged schizophrenics, autists, and con-men who have “elected” some quasi-homeless guy as the “real” Pope, or who belong to spook-infested “wandering Bishops” of the “old Catholic Church” (literally a CIA psyops that was linked to JFK murder and a bunch of other stuff).

I believe her when she said that such “sedevacantists” emailed her horrible, pornographic, vile messages. But I would posit two things:

Firstly: such people are not actual sedevacantist and I assume not Catholic at all. My personal experience of sedevacantist is that they are unfailingly polite, dignified and morally as well as logically sound. They tend to be men and women that can disagree with you totally while remaining completely composed and dignified as they explain their perspective. In fact, in my experience, I am, honestly, the rudest, most outspoken of the lot. Genuinely, without exception so far.

Secondly: Ann has certainly said enough about herself to make it clear she is absolutely and totally (rightly) rejectful of anything even mildly suggestive of sexual impropriety. So, being called a whore, receiving sexually explicit insults and so on, I have no doubt, are absolutely offensive to her and by whatever measure “painful” enough that they cause a real (and rightful) resentment towards the perpetrators, and, as a rule, against the totality of whatever “class” one might tend to put them in. So, if she has associated such insults with Sedevacantist, it is not unreasonable to assume that she considers the lot of us as basically rapey orcs deserving of hellfire. Be that as it may, her perception is in error by every metric that I have any personal experience of.

I do not mean that her reaction is in error. Remember that since even my teens, I have always stated clearly (yes in writing even some 30 years ago) that the whole concept of “freedom of speech” is absolute nonsense that only a people as enstupidated by brainwashing as the average Americans are could believe in. Similarly, even as a pre-teen, when I first heard the English adage “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me” I there and then thought the whole concept was absolutely retarded and the people who came up with it absolute idiots. And I have not changed my mind since. You may disagree (if you are stupid and lack any kind of imagination) but that would be because you are wrong and I am right. I’ll give you an example at the end of this post to prove it.*

So it is not her reaction to the vile messages that is wrong. But it is wrong to assume those who sent it are actually Sedevacantists, and, in any case, it is wrong to let a personal offence colour out perception of objective facts unrelated to it. If a child rapist says 2 and 2 is 4, it would be absurd for me to reject that, and therefore math as a whole, simply because the person who said it, as far as I’m concerned, deserves to be burnt at the stake.

So, even if she hates Sedes on principle, she should STILL take the five minutes it would take to either confirm, or REJECT our position on FACTUAL, OBJECTIVE FACTS. Not her emotions.

But I believe she knows the facts, which are easy enough to summarise:

1. Roncalli approved the first two Vatican II docs before he died. This is indisputable. One of those has direct heresy in it, making him an antipope posthumously (as most of the more than 40 antipopes before him have been). He was also a Freemason and the vote that made him “Pope” was the result of blackmail against Giuseppe Siri, who was voted Pope twice before Roncalli was “picked”. Election by blackmail is invalid. So it is very clear Roncalli was not viably elected, but even if you ignore this, it remains clear he was a public and notorious heretic since nothing is more public than official documents issued by the Vatican for the whole world. As a result, Roncalli falls foul of canon 188.4 of the code of canon law of 1917 which was (and remains) in full force in 1958.

2. Every antipope after Roncalli, to date either produced the remaining 14 documents of Vatican 2 (Montini) or promulgated them and continued to pretend they were Catholic doctrine when in fact they ALL contain direct heresy. As far as I know I am the only person that has detailed at least SOME of the DIRECT heresy present in 15 of the 16 documents (see RTCC).

So, in short, there is no escaping the fact that sedevacantists are correct. As per Code 188.4 and as per the infallible and perpetual encyclical of Pope Paul IV Cum-ex Apostolato Officio, on which Canon 188.4 is based (as the notes to it make clear).

Ann knows this. I am sure she does.

She also knows that there is NO RULE whatever concerning how long an interregnum lasts (the period between Popes when none occupy the seat). We KNOW FOR A FACT that interregnums without anyone on the seat lasted at least a few years before. We also know that there was a period that lasted some 70 years during which there were 2 and even 3 “Popes” and during which time it was almost impossible for the average Catholic at the time to know which was legitimate, and it all got sorted out only after most of them died. So it’s not like we haven’t got precedents to go on.

Her ONLY objection is as below:

64 years is too long.

That’s it.

And that is an Ann Barnhardt opinion. Supported by NOTHING in Catholic dogma or Canon Law. Literally nothing. But it gets worse, because not only does she refuse to address the facts that are black on white written down as per the infallible magisterium of the Church, but she goes on to accuse those of us who DO follow it as being agents of Satan.

I’m happy to let them vent not only their spiteful rage, but their dishonesty – because I don’t believe that any of them are stupid enough to not savvy the difference. But what they ARE trying to do is convince as many “normies” as possible of the lie that it IS the same, thus sowing chaos, error and confusion exactly like the enemy who came into the wheat field and sowed the weeds.

And to that I DO take objection. Very much so.

So Ann, supposedly, according to you I am not stupid. I am evil.

Yet you:

1. Refuse to show me where my supposedly fake stupidity lies. Where is the error, Ann. Point it out clearly in small words, since it’s so obvious, yes? After all, maybe I really am that stupid, and if it’s so obvious why not take a minute to spell it out?

2. Choose to believe a bunch of demonstrable heretics (if not apostate or even never-were Catholics) were “Popes” and presently are “priests” and “bishops” when most of them have not even been validly ordained.

3. You quote “canon law” from the fake, invalid, “code” of 1983, created by the same enemies of the Church, as if it was valid, (which it is not) yet you ignore and choose to not ever mention or show your reasoning as to why you do so, the code of 1917 which was infallibly present, valid and remains the most vetted document ever compiled on Earth in 1958 and to this day.

I KNOW you got this before. I know you received my emails on it. And I know you will continue NOT to address this. Which tells me that your error is one of pure pride at this stage Ann.

I am genuinely sorry for the suffering some orcs may have inflicted on you, and I still think your error is genuine, but you can only ignore facts so long before it mutates from an error due to a wound to an error due to pride.

In my opinion you have now crossed that line. And the next one is not far off, and that is knowing and intentional deceit to salvage your ego.

I Truly hope you don’t cross that line and come to your senses very soon. I pray you do.

* Example of why absolutism of free speech and the whole “sticks and stones” nonsense is nonsense, for the mentally challenged: A child rapist knocks on your door and cheerfully announces he saw you have beautiful children and he will try to rape one as soon as practicable.

What would a good father do in such a situation? Turn the pedo’s head into a pink cloud there and then. If you do not, it is only because, either, you are a vile child rapist yourself, or, you fear the consequences due to your local law. But in many, even most, places on Earth not too long ago, such a response would not even have been punished by the law.

Now I hear the morons say “Oh but that is not free speech because…” shut the fuck up. You just proved my point.

Hear ye, Hear ye! Ann Barnhardt is now a sedevacantist

Truly this year is ending with a bang!

You write a post wishing death by flesh-eating bacteria that starts at the anus… and a short time later Ratzi the Nazi fake “Pope” drops dead. Coincidence you say? Nah, magic fingers. But, first things first.

First of all, let me welcome Ann into the fold!

Welcome sister, here is that tequila shot I mentioned a while back!

Also, I’m curious which button you will advise your followers to push now?

You see, Ratzinger has finally kicked the bucket, so all those people who erroneously thought Ratzinger was the “real” Pope, because he had never validly resigned… well… they are now in a bit of a pickle. Since they don’t recognise the absolute Satanist Bergoglio as Pope —quite rightly, of course— they are now, by default, sedevacantist.

And Ann herself, has specifically stated in her podcast 101 (see link above) that when Ratzi drops dead, and Bergoglio still lives, then, of course, she will become a Sedevacantist, as canon law demands of us.

Whatever her errors, I have always assumed Ann is an honest person. Totally wrong about the papacy, but genuinely so. Which means that I expect her to follow through; and from now on —at least until Bergoglio drops dead— she will be calling herself a sedevacantist and acting as one.

And maybe, if Bergy the Oleous dies soon enough, she might go on to believe that, whatever “conclave” springs up, (say composed of “father” Martin and a few of his altar boys and so on) could then elect a brand now Pope she would consider legitimate because only a few years would have passed.

I mean it might be hard, because if we let the Novus Orco pick who will become Pope next, it’s quite likely they will make Bruce Jenner at the very least a cardinal if not Pope. And of course, Bergoglio can last another 20 years.

In which case… same question I asked before:

When is the cutoff? Because if you sit as a sedevactist for 20 years, how is that different from us, who have done it since 1958?

Remember Ann, there is, and has never been, a time limit to an interregnum.

So… down that Tequila, and have another for me too.

UPDATE: So, as per her blog, she’s doubling down on not being anything at all like the 1958 Sedevacantists! With a slightly hysterical tone to it I imagine. Because 64 years is TOTES different to a few hours, you see?! To which I repeat the question I asked her a few years ago in various ways, and say:

Tell me Ann, WHERE in ANY Catholic doctrine does it say what the time limit on an interregnum is? I have asked you this for a few years now. Where is the cut off? 2 years? 3? Well, we know it has to be longer than that because it’s happened before, so? 20 years? While you hope and pray Bergy drops dead before 21 years pass? 30 years? 60? When did we 1958 Catholics suddenly cross the non-existent time-line that exists only in your mind? And in what guise and why have you ignored the Code of Canon Law of 1917, which represented (and still does) the infallible magisterium of the Church back in 1958 and continued to do so certainly to 1983 when the “new” and fake code was put together by invalidly ordained, fake clergy, and apostate, public heretics? Do tell. We have asked these very reasonable questions for years now. Why do you have no response?

Are you going to share that tequila like a good sport, or are you just… wait… are you necking the whole bottle now?

I get that some unbalanced freaks with strong incel tendencies may well have been viciously rude to you about this sort of thing, but this is not about you Ann, or your feelings. It’s about the Truth. It’s about our Lord. So I hope you will find your way to it soon. And don’t feel bad about having been wrong. I was utterly wrong about pretty much EVERYTHING related to the spiritual realm of life for over 40 years.

It’s fine. You’ll be fine. And when/if you do come over to the sede side, believe me that every sede I know will champion your honesty and the steadfastness you have demonstrated over the decades. I know you’re not evil or a deceiver. But you are mistaken.

God be with you this day and going forward to 2023.

Goodbye to some idiots and to 2022

Overall 2022 was a pretty tough year for me. I got a pretty harsh version of Covid followed a couple of months later by a bout of pneumonia that saw me go to hospital with oxygen mask. And then another relapse of pneumonia just a few weeks ago, this last thankfully recognised and caught earlier, so not as debilitating as the first one, but still kept me off my feet for the better part of a month or so.

In between we all also had various flu and colds and I injured my back and got tendonitis in both arms, mostly my left, which is still not healed properly after 4-5 months.

So that’s the down side.

But there were some pretty awesome up sides too.

I almost got the house sorted in terms of fixing up all the crap the seller left me. I managed to collect a decent amount of olives and produce some olive oil. I had most of the property cleared. I certainly learnt a bunch of new skills, made some awesome new friends, who helped me in many and varied ways in a spirit of real Catholic community I have never even heard of before, much less experienced.

I managed to spend more time with my children and wife than I ever would have had I remained at my previous work in the UK.

And of course, our fourth daughter was born just a short while ago. We also saw all our children grown and make us laugh and feel awesome at all the things they learn and do and how their characters show themselves.

All in all, it was definitely a tough but also a productive year. Hopefully 2023 will be even more productive and I really hope a lot healthier for all of us generically.

My farewell to so-called personalities on the world stage, with appropriate zings:

Milo – The Gay Freemason is no longer the icon he fancied himself. After reinventing himself more times than he can count, he is, inevitably, settling into what he’s becoming. A fat, bitter, middle aged gay man that no one finds funny or entrtaining anymore. I mean… this was his 2022:

I’m not gay anymore! Ooops ok, I slipped up once! But no, it’s cool, I work with the other gay guy that says he is no longer gay, Gary, who also pretends to be Catholic, like I do, and is funded by the same fake Catholic as Emo Jones! But wait, that’s not all! No, there is more! I also sell cheap madonna statuettes on line, and on 3 am infomercials! But it’s ok because I’m a traditional Catholic! Oh yeah, and also Jewish. And… no wait, now I am an intern for MTG that butch looking politician woman, except… no wait, I am Kanye’s campaign manager, along with the gay small mexican, except no, wait, I am fired from that… but it’s ok because I am no longer Jewish. And now Andrew Tate has been arrested and thank God, so I can bitch about him since no one cared about my rants against DeSantis who’s probably a sedevacantist, and fuck I hate those actual Catholics! And oh fuck, I’m still fat. And loosing subscribers by the day. Fuck, they are gonna gut me like a fish. Fuck, fuck, fuck!

Andrew Tate – I genuinely don’t know much about the guy. Several younger guys asked me my opinion of him and saying he is “based” or whatever. I have learnt when some internet personality is pushed on me as the next cool thing, invariably it’s far from a positive experience when I look into them. What I have seen of Tate was a short video where some journalist type was supposed to follow him around with a camera and record a day in the life type of thing. The video clip was shot from the back of a fancy sports car with Tristan Tate in the driver seat if I recall. And what I saw was Andrew panicking. Being scared such a day would ruin his reputation. Put him in a bad light, whatever. Frankly I thought it was a bit pathetic. I have been interviewed several times, for a couple of documentaries on TV for a book I wrote both in the US and UK, for a pretty huge event in the national news of Kazakhstan and China, in some newspapers for various things, and so on, so I understand just how the media can twist things to do a hit piece. But damn, son, don’t go getting all high pitched and teary eyed even before the camera starts rolling.

The other thing I saw was a few very short clips of him kickboxing, and given he is in his physical prime at 36 and I am out of training for several years, 53 and never been as ill as I have this year in my entire life, I would not look forward to a deathmatch in the ring with him, but it’s not to say I would necessarily lose either. He is a scared fighter. He’s scared of getting hurt. Vicious in offence and somewhat cowardly in defence. He’s fast and I am sure strong for his size. So I am not saying he’s incompetent in the ring, but I have fought fighters like him before, and I don’t have a lot of respect for them. For their attitude mostly. So that’s about the sum total of what I know about him plus what I read in the papers about his recent arrest, which I pretty much shelve, because… well, newspapers. Who the fuck believes anything they say anymore, about anything?

Somewhere along the line I read he’s converted to Islam and may have four wives and around as many children, but that could all be bullshit. I got a Belzarian (sp?) vibe from him, that other internet poser that had bundles of money and whores around him, and apparently it all turned out to be fake and he had a trust fund or something. Supposedly Tate came from poverty, in which case if he is a genuine multi-millionaire, the likelihood he did it as some kind of pimp in Romania is relatively high. He’s no computer whizz kid, and to make that much money that fast… shadiness is pretty much guaranteed. Apparently he was a big brother contestant and slapped some woman around on video and so on. I honestly don’t know much about the guy and he may be a total piece of shit or he might just have pissed off the wrong people, but either way, I am not going to spend more time on trying to figure out any of it. He’s a boastful prick, with bad taste across the board, and I don’t like the way he behaves in the ring, which tells me all I care to know. Good luck in a Romanian jail tho. If he comes out of it he may well do a reverse Milo: coming out as fully gay now and doing tranny onlyfans for democrat politicians while being owned by some gang of gypsies.

Scott Adams – aka Clott Adams aka Dilbert guy. This “world influencer” (according to him) got all serumed up with the gene altering shots then got all pissed off that it was the obvious bad choice and insists that no one could know whether taking the shots was good or bad. Doubling and tripling down on stupid life decisions is no way to go through life. His gold digger wife (who apparently wasn’t fucking him anyway) left him supposedly because she got cancer and Scott’s first concern was (according to her) “Oh so is this gonna mean even less sex now?” Whatever happened there it sure sounds like true love and a match of equals on the narcissistic scale. But Scott being so smart, he said his health is so crap now (but it can’t be the genetic serum shots he idiotically took against all the advice of people who had superwpowers, you know: the ability to read) that he will kill himself if things are not better within a year.

So 2023 may be his last year. And he also got cancelled for mocking woke culture in his Dilbert cartoon. But since Scott is too smart to believe in God, his genial solution to a shitty period of life is apparently suicide. So it may be that he will move to Canada, where I think they will offer him a complementary free drink if he uses their latest euthanasia service.

Archbishop” Vigano – Blah, Blah, Blah. You were knowingly silent for nearly 60 years. Tell the truth. Call them all fake Popes and fake Bishops and fake clergy. Repent properly, not half-heartedly.

Donald Trump – Shut the fuck up. No one cares about your troubles. You cucked to the Jews you surrounded yourself with, you left the J6 morons rot in jail (morons yes, but not deserving of what is happening to them). You didn’t support Flynn. You didn’t have Fauci and a bunch of other terrorists dragged out onto the white house lawn and executed on the spot for crimes against humanity. You didn’t disband the FBI, CIA and IRS after surrounding yourself with loyal military men. You failed. And now you are selling fantasy cards of yourself at $100 a pop? Fuck. Clown world redux.

Fauci, Bill and Melinda Gates, Alan Dershowitz, George Soros, all the tranny billionaires and all the other pedos from Epstein Island – may you all die from a flesh-eating bug that starts in your anus and takes a week to get to your blackened spine and heart.

To all the colluding politicians, CEOs, “doctors” and “clergy” – May those same flesh-eating anus-first bugs get to work on you too after they are done with those guys above. You only deserve second-hand ass-flesh eating bugs.

To all the heathens, agnostics, atheists, pagan larpers, churchians and schismatics – Repent! Get properly catechised, baptised and join the One, True, Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church (ergo, become a Sedevacantist).

To all sedevacantist around the Earth – God bless you and your families every one.

***

There. Don’t go saying I just hate everybody now!

Bye-bye 2022 and hello 2023.

May honourable, honest men prevail going forward. And don’t be pussies.

Requiescat in pace et in amor, Pelé

I have never cared at all for football. Or soccer as the English call it. Calcio, in my country.

I used to watch the matches as a child because my grandmother was a fan of Juventus and my grandad did not object to watching games. My brother and I used to sit on the small sofa behind their large comfortable armchairs and laugh at the funny names that some of the players had. Capello was a favourite one. It means hair (singular) in Italian. Zoff was the only player I sort of cared about. Because he was the goalie and as such not as much part of the unwashed peasant masses of the rest of his team. Plus he was very good. Yes, my noble blood always strove and recognised excellence even at a young age.

That said, the only other player I cared at all about from that time to more modern ones, was Zizou. Zinedine Zidane. I had no idea how he played but I saw an interview he did a few years before his infamous last world cup, and I liked the guy for his qualities as a man. He didn’t let fame go to his head. Loyal to his wife and children. From a humble background he didn’t become an arrogant consumer. I liked him as a man. And when he headbutted that rat-weasel-wop Materazzi I was sorry for two things:

One: That I knew it would always be considered a “mark” on his name, which I knew he’d care little about, as would I in his shoes, but I was sorry for him nonetheless.

Two: That he didn’t hit that rat-weasel between the nose and upper lip, breaking his nose and knocking his teeth out. Fuck Materazzi. With his sports ethics of a maggot crapped out by a rat-weasel.

The best came afterwards though, when Zidane was being interviewed by an Italian presenter, who probably originated from the same litter of rat-weasels as Materazzi. The presenter asked a question of Zidane that was essentially “How could you?! A headbutt! You’re a professional, the captain of the team, it’s the world cup, what kind of…” and on, and on, and on, he went describing how Zidane was supposedly obviously some kind of savage for reacting in such a barbaric way to a non-event.

I was fuming at the TV as the wop-rat-weasel blabbed on, and on, before finally coming to the end of his “question”, which was really a J’accuse!

I mean, I get it, for that presenter, whose sister I assume must indeed be a cheap whore who sells her ass in the back streets of Naples for a couple of Euro, it would have been a non-event to have a total stranger, while playing a sports game, accuse your sister of being a whore.

But for a normal man like Zizou… not so.

And Zidane’s reply was brilliant. I don’t remember it verbatim but it was along the lines of:

“Yes, I am the captain, yes it’s the world cup, yes I’m a professional, but first, and above all, I’m a man.”

It shut the rat-weasel up almost as well as a headbutt would have.

So that is the sum total of my football knowledge and “heroes”. Except for one more.

Pelé.

I was small when on TV they showed his world famous kick where he basically did a backward somersault to kick the ball in the net.

I never forgot that, although I never followed his career as I had no interest in football. But every time I saw a snippet of him somewhere, he was smiling and friendly and humble. He had a quality that I found in many Brazilians who do martial arts, a genuine love of the game and no ego, regardless of their skill. A true sportsman. And by all accounts he was, and he was also a very loving man who espoused the principles of loving others as yourself (if not more) very well.

He was one of the true great men of sports as sports was intended to be: a competition among men of honour and dignity, born of honesty, fair play, and a lot of hard work, sweat, and blood.

May he smile down on us from above, his sins forgiven and in the presence of a loving God I am sure he knew.

The SirHamster Saga (Autism Redux!)

A while back I posted a critique of SirHamster’s theological error, here.

He responded with the full text of his response, as I asked, which I paste below and critique as I go.

This will probably interest only autists (whether Protestant or Catholic) but I know we have armies of such people in the ranks, so… enjoy.

SirHamster in Calvinistic and erroneous Bold, and me in Beautiful Just and True Italic.

Last week, the @Kurgan left me a Thanksgiving day present comment. I got sidetracked with life, but there’s a lot I’d like to write in response.

Long thread inc. Inviting Bible monomaniacs to talk about the Bible has predictable consequences.

First off, an acknowledgement that Kurgan honored me with a long blogpost here.

The Kurgan took my comments as criticizing Catholic dogma, but I had a very narrow scope with my points. Given purgatory as a reality, “optimal” behavior means minimizing actions in life that increases time spent there.

If his conscience is clear, good for him. I highlighted specific behavior as a useful signal for self-reflection.

But here’s the comment I want to specifically address. It is a tangent from this other thread where I had a long discussion with Katzman.

social.infogalactic.com/micropost/b8da07c8-6de3-411f-ad9c-01e8aa7c2a58/comment/f8cf5446-6599-4054-9fa6-266dfffa6d85

For context, I made a point that Christian violence is a form of giving one’s life. In support of that, I referenced “He who lives by the sword dies by the sword.” Several points Kurgan makes here:

– The referenced passage is not about “I will kill you”

– The passage is about people who make a living with weapons (eg violence)

– The passage does not apply to Kurgan as a farmer

– It is inaccurate to apply the passage to anyone who might use violence to kill

Let’s do a Bible study! The referenced passage, which I was in fact referring to, does not actually say the quote I used. I Had a little Mandela moment, but that’s just my brain replacing the passage with a pithy summary. `

And behold one of them that were with Jesus, stretching forth his hand, drew out his sword: and striking the servant of the high priest, cut off his ear. Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword.`

Matthew 26:51-52 biblehub.com/drbc/matthew/26.htm

You will see cross references to Mark, Luke, and John. In the last account we find that the unnamed sword-wielding disciple is Peter, first Pope of the Catholic Church.

So, what are the facts of the passage? Jesus is being arrested by the authorities. Peter is ready to die for his Lord and take up arms. He draws his sword and draws blood. Jesus rebukes Peter. `Jesus therefore said to Peter:

Put up thy sword into the scabbard.

The chalice which my father hath given me, shall I not drink it?` (John 18) Jesus heals the wounded, submits to arrest, and all the disciples including Peter flee the scene.

Those are the facts. What does it mean?

1. Jesus submitted to arrest. He points out that he could call on angels to prevent his arrest, but God’s will is for Him to take up a cup of suffering. The rest is history. Jesus conquers sin and death.

2. Peter’s behavior is a normal Bravo response to protect his Alpha, but it was not the right response because it did not fit in God’s plan. This was self-defense to protect the most important person in Mankind’s history. It was valid, but not right. Having established the facts of the passage and its general meaning, we are now equipped to do the harder work of applying this Biblical truth to our own Christian life.

And hereafter is where he goes spectacularly wrong.

What role does violence play in the Christian life? Kurgan is against using this passage as support of pacifism. I find little fault in that.

And yet…

Modern pacifism is almost always passivity in the face of evil, which bears evil fruit.

Correct so far.

Christians behavior must follow Divine logic so that we can bear good fruit.

Again correct.

Divine logic is given in Jesus’s command. `

Sure, when He actually gives one we can see applies to the situation at hand.

Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword.` The command is for Peter to put away the sword.

Yup. Still all good so far…

The reason is a principle: All that take the sword will perish with the sword.

No. The reason is that if Jesus does not fulfil his task as determined by God the Father, then Humanity is doomed. The Principle is mentioned in passing as instruction in general terms. Beware you who tend to use a sword to solve problems, for if that is how you live, that is how you will die. He is instructing Peter individually in that moment, cautioning him against his impulsive nature by referencing a principle that applies in this case, because Peter is too dim to understand/see/grasp that Jesus not only knows what He is doing, but is doing it precisely as He needs to do it. So Jesus is basically saying something like: “Peter, you dumb oaf, stay your hand, don’t you know that dumb oafs like you who try to live by the sword end up with a gladius in their guts eventually? Read the room dude! I am Jesus. You think I don’t know what I am doing or can’t get out of this if I wanted to? Not everything is a nail only because you have a hammer (sword) for all your problems! Wakey! Wakey Pete!”

That principle is what I referenced.

Yes, and you referenced it wrongly. Out of context and globally on top of it. See the errors of binary thinking. Repent, Protestant! Back to reason and logic 101 you go!

Those that take the sword will perish with the sword. Kurgan’s first point: > `The referenced passage is not about “I will kill you”`

Drawing a weapon is intent to kill. No intent, leave your weapon in its scabbard. Peter was ready to kill and die for Jesus. Swinging his sword at someone’s head is “I will kill you”. Jesus protected Peter from dying by removing cause for his death. The sword is put away. The wound is healed. The guards have no need to arrest the disciples, just their master.

***

Ah. Let’s add the full quote from SirHamster here, so you know what he’s actually referencing. The red text is him quoting me and the bold below it his response.

Despite the fact that your quote about swords is, I believe, rather out of context. And as such falsifies its meaning rather a lot.

Once you put “I will kill you” on the table, you can’t complain if and when they do it to you first. You have to grudgingly respect that they outplayed you. 

There are different games you can play in life. Once you choose to live by certain rules, you are playing a particular game.

Jesus played a game that did not involve killing his opponents.

***

So…umm… YES, you did mean it exactly as I said. In your binary protestant mind, ANY move that can result in death of the opponent is defined in your head as “living by the sword”. But that is a gross simplification and retarded take. There is a world of difference between a man who instinctively reacts to a problem with violence –as Jesus clearly indicates to us Peter was prone to– that is, a ‘hothead type” or even a cold headed one, but a man who literally makes his living by violence, and a man who in defence of say a child or an innocent kills a bad guy intent on murder.

Living by the sword does NOT mean that any action that can result in death of an opponent, even with full intent to kill him, because that is the only option left in that moment to safeguard something you deem is far more valuable than the punishment you might have to endure for this transgression against life, or law, or whatever, qualifies as “living by the sword”. As I said, such a take is, to any persona able to reason normally, a most retarded take.

And there’s an important long-term consequence here: Peter’s life is not defined by death in battle carrying a sword against the Jewish/Roman authorities. The Catholic Church’s first Pope dies by the cross like his Lord and Master, Jesus Christ. He suffers a greater death, and earns a greater glory. This is one lesson of “perish by the sword” – the Christian has better options to serve a greater purpose.

Sure. And certainly Peter’s life was best defined as dying upside down on a cross than by getting killed by Romans. But that was Peter’s path. because of how things were in that specific instance. Now you can argue that Jean Parisot le Valette would have better served Christianity by telling all the Catholic knights in his command, and the the Catholic citizens of Malta, to surrender, and let themselves be tortured, killed and the Maltese populace put the fire and sword, be caputured and subjected to rape and slavery and murder. And shortly after Malta fell, the entire rest of Christendom too can also have submitted themselves as martyr. You could argue for that. But:

1) I would think your argument is completely idiotic.

2) You cannot in good reason and logic explain how that would have demonstrated the glory of God and his Church better than the history which in fact did take place, with the subsequent civilisation of the entire globe wherever Catholicism touched, including the vicious mass-murdering savages of South America, and the limiting of the barbarous and backward Muslims to the lands they had already conquered and put to the fire and the sword for 400 years with little response by Christians.

In other words, the response of the sword to the bestial thugs assaulting Christendom, was, in my humble opinion, not only justified, but the correct one. Not withstanding the fact that having to kill scores of heathens, evil though they may be, is still sub-optimal. Perhaps, a great orator or a Saint so steeped in prayer might have obtained a bloodless win. Sure. It certainly has happened before in other contexts. But I am not such a saint, nor such a pious man. I, like the great philosopher Harry Callahan, know my limitations. So if and when the time comes, I’ll be taking out as many enemies as possible before they do me in.

But the principle itself is a simple truth, and it has simple cold logic like a sword. All who kill die in like manner.

And this is just simply and factually nonsense. Plenty of people killed a bunch of people and then died decades later, peacefully, in their sleep.

It is just. It echoes “Judge not, lest ye be judged.”

Your personal opinion on the matter is not how reality works. Your statement above is simply, and outright false. Proving my point. Furthermore, the statement that those who live by the sword will perish by it, is also, clearly, to be taken metaphorically, that even if you “get away” with killing a bunch of people for fun and profit and do die peacefully in your sleep at an advanced age, ultimately, your destination is still going to be “the sword”. That is, Hell.

It reflects God’s covenant with Noah. `Whosoever shall shed man’s blood, his blood shall be shed: for man was made to the image of God.`

Uh…yeah, so thanks for proving my point that the interpretation, is, indeed metaphorical, rather than literal, as I have just stated.

There might be an objection that the passage about Jesus’s arrest is not about “I will kill you”. Which is true, as the passage is about Jesus. But I didn’t say Jesus’s arrest applied to the situation. I applied Jesus’s stated principle about the sword to Christian violence.

Yes, we noticed. You totally screwed the interpretation up, ignored the clear passage and the metaphorical level too, to simplify it to the most moronic level possible by a binary, blinkered, vision of things. We got it. That’s my point.

And a principle of violence applies to all forms of violence, including the subset of Christian violence. Drawing a weapon is intent to kill, and the principle of “take the sword” applies to all weapons.

Eh. In case you doubted the absurd, absolutist position he takes, he confirms it right here above. I rest my case with respect to moronic binary takes from protestants. I think anyone that can do logic or think normally can see it at this point. And only other blinkered brain-damaged protestants would disagree here.

Kurgan’s 2nd point: > `The passage is about people who make a living with weapons (eg violence)`

Not only. Hotheads too. As I specified above. Again, Sirhamster’s reductionist thinking is in evidence.

Note that making this argument forgoes accepting the logic of the objection I just addressed.

Yes. Wrong, illogical, erroneous “logic” based on completely false premises is not accepted as valid.

Accepting this as true, the passage is applied to those who make a living with weapons – which boils down to soldiers and police.

Ummm, no. It applies also to enforcers in general, thugs, violent men from all walks of life, whether legitimised by government or not.

Those who use violence against the out-group, and those who use violence against in-group. Yet as we see in this situation, Jesus is giving this lesson to one who does not make a living with weapons – Peter, ex-Fisherman and Bravo disciple, and per Catholic belief, appointed Pope.

Yes. Notoriously blustery, hot-headed and impulsive Peter. As he is clearly and variously shown to be throughout the New Testament. One who “lives by the sword” is not necessarily someone who has to be paid to use his sword. It is and can be also someone who is a fisherman but reacts impulsively and violently to a situation that has alternatives to it. Like in the case of Jesus needing to suffer crucifixion in order to save all mankind. You could easily replace that “lives by the sword” with, say “thinks with his fists” same thing.

Christ stated he will build His Church on “this rock” before his arrest. What applies to men of violence is being used for one who does not make his living by weapons, to persuade and instruct him not to take up arms at this point in time. And Peter does not die by the sword. So we Christians who do not make a living by weapons clearly have something to learn from this passage, even accepting it true that it is not about us.

Sure. Everyone has something to learn from the passage. At its most basic: Try to not be one of those idiots who only sees nails because you like using a hammer.

Level 2: If you literally make your living by violence, you will be judged as such and come to a similar end, in this life or the next.

Level 3: When there are alternatives, even if you might not see them, the best Christians respond with martyrdom instead of murderdom.

Possibly level 4 (theoretical only for me anyway): It is always better to suffer the violence your enemy will do to you than to respond with violence. I personally reject this take, think it’s wrong, a lie and not borne out by history.

And that answers Kurgan’s 3rd point, (exact quote) `

It doesn’t apply to me now who earns his living by other means.`

As a follower in Pope Peter’s Catholic Church, Kurgan ought to find something applicable in this passage about Peter to himself.

Always did, even before I knew of the passage’s existence. the Samurai ethic (which is mostly what I grew up with) is very clear that living in the way of budo (bu=war do=way) you obviously accept that death is your ever present companion; and the likelihood of you dying peacefully in your bed is low to none. And I have always hated the “thank you for your service” and “thin blue line” morons. Especially in volunteer armies. You chose to be a soldier or a cop. Getting your ass shot or stabbed or blown up dead is part of the job. Suck it up, buttercup. I certainly never felt myself a “hero” or conversely would I have felt myself a “victim” if I had caught some lead shrapnel in my ass when I was working as a bodyguard/security guy.

Perhaps Kurgan’s doom is not death gun’s blazing, but glorious martyrdom. St. Kurgan pray for us.

Well, personally I hope to die at the age of 105 surrounded by loving family. If not that then at 105 surrounded by my enemies and a deadman switch connected to a ton of C4 that clicks on just as I breathe my last. Dying in martyrdom is really, really low on my list and I tell you right now if that is how I have to go out I’ll be very pissed off about it.

Last point: `It is inaccurate to apply the passage to anyone who might use violence to kill`. Pope Peter was not a man who made his living by the sword. Pope Peter was acting righteously in defense of the Savior of the World. Pope Peter was ready to take up arms to establish Jesus’s kingdom against corrupt authorities. If there is anyone worth killing and dying for, is it not Jesus? But Jesus instructed Peter with this principle, and chose a different death for him.

Yes, because Jesus had a mission that completely went counter to that form of reply. But I don’t have Jesus by my side to “defend”. In fact we are surrounded by clown-world trannies intent on raping our children, “medical” psychopaths intent on killing us through genetic experimentation for their demonic schemes, and a legion of other degenerate demon-infested scumbags hellbent on chaos, pain and murder of all we hold dear. So… yeah, if and when it comes down to it, I’m not gonna go quietly into the night buddy. And frankly, I only have contempt for those who will because of cowardice, rather than a genuine sense of martyrdom.

With that, I consider all of Kurgan’s points answered.

As I said originally. You’re so wrong you’re not even addressing what you think you are.

What surprised me about the comment, and why I consider it a gift, is that all points are so simply answered.

Simple as in simple-minded, yes. But not simple as in true or correct, my friend.

But it is a gift, because this gives me cause to write at length about what I like to talk about. I might have to consider blogging though, this chain of SG comments is rather unwieldy, even with 512 characters. I respect the Kurgan’s intellect. I do not write off-the-cuff against him.

Well, I respect your intent, if not your intellect, friend. You do have good intent, I am sure. And you don’t hold a grudge, which is a great quality and rare. But as far as your capacity for logical and well-reasoned argument… eh… not so much at all.

I can do that for people who are not as smart, as it is easy find obvious flaws in half-baked ideas.

Without wanting to be glib… mote…beam…something about eyes…

Some have accused me of fearing the Kurgan, based on the fact that my moderation on him tends to be lighter than it mayhaps ought.

I harbour no such delusions.

That has more to do with him being smarter than most of his detractors, and they generally fail to understand and address his points.

I appreciate your noticing.

I don’t consider myself to have that limitation, but it takes a bit of work to adopt the right context for engagement.

I’ll (respectfully) disagree here. You have a good natured and honest approach, which often carries water far enough to at times even measure up to intelligent discourse, but ultimately, a certain level of intelligence also is required to get deeper into things. My abrasive nature makes the first quality of good natured honesty difficult for most, which is a simple tool I use to sort the morons from the non-morons. And you certainly pass the first hurdle of not letting your emotions get disturbed by my rhetoric, so I salute that aspect of your character, but, in all honesty, your reasoning ability is still quite a ways from meeting a level of discourse that I would find truly interesting.

All that said, I like the Kurgan, even in his combativeness.

And I like you too, buddy.

We need Christian fighters for our near future, and we must sharpen our iron for the conflicts to come. With respect to Christian violence, do not play the game of the sword lightly. Those who kill will be killed. The glory of death in battle pales in comparison to building God’s Kingdom. Buy your sword, but build.

Can’t fault that last paragraph, which really seems to me to fully support my entire thesis throughout, so I fail to see how you can even disagree with it.

For 2023: Stop being afraid

The amount of fear in the world has increased exponentially in the last 3 years.

We have gone from waking up and going about our day to various versions of waking up in a semi-constant panic/anxiety attack.

Some of us are constitutionally adapted to this and/or resilient to it to a level that makes us stronger than most.

Most people, however, are not.

The fear of being “cancelled” online as well as in real life has become almost constant.

Some of us, most of us in fact, probably can’t afford to lose our jobs. Some may not even have jobs anymore and are surviving on handouts or even government handouts.

The worry of not being able to provide for your loved ones if you have a family, or even just of being left alone and homeless for those who are either alone or have had to cut ties with the serum takers trying to push the genetic modification on you, is real, and of course unlikely to go away due to a few words you read on a stranger’s blog.

But read these words nonetheless. In them you may find solace after all. They are snippets of life, wisdom (if you can call it that), and experience I have learnt that is about as absolute and true as I have been able to find in my 53 years on this Earth. Not all of these things will resonate, apply or be possible for you. But I think at least one or three will. I say this with some confidence because I have lived a rather unusual life and at various times been an atheist, an agnostic, a somewhat zen shintoist-agnostic, briefly a Deist, and now a hardcore Catholic (which means Sedevacantist, as we are the only actual catholics left), which came about in a real road to Damascus moment.

If you’re thinking “Well, this guy is unreliable! Changes his mind too much!”

Well… you’d be wrong, but given that today’s average attention span is about six seconds, I can see why you might think that.

The reality is that while my model of the world and how it works and what is the best approximation of the ultimate truth and reality that I can comprehend has continually upgraded, my ethics as such have changed very little.

I still believe pedophiles and those responsible for the deaths of thousands if not millions of people deserve to be burnt at the stake.

I still think stealing and lying is wrong.

I still believe in justice. And that often has very little to do with the so-called law.

And those are the important parts, really, but of course, my thoughts on many things have evolved and grown, and only a complete idiot would say otherwise.

I have learnt at a fairly young age that pretty much everything you are told and you think happened in the past, as far as human history goes, is a pack of lies. But even I was surprised by two things:

1) The real extent of the lies. It is truly, astronomically, monumental. Paradoxically, this fact fits very well with the Catholic belief that we live on a planet that is under the dominion of the father of lies. You really have no idea how deep and pervasive the lies are and have always been.

2) The utter stupidity and zombie-like attitude of “following the crowd” that the very vast majority of human beings has. And trust me I was no great believer in humanity to begin with. I had concluded with absolute certainty by age 26 that the very vast majority of humanity was composed of idiotic monkeys that were no better than chimps, and often far worse than actual chimps. But the sheer absolute retardation I have seen on display from everyone ranging from supposedly intelligent, strong, well-read people, to old friends, and even family, has made me realise that Professor Cipolla’s first law of human stupidity (we always underestimate the number of idiots) is not only correct, but vastly more correct than I could have ever guessed.

The corollary to all this is that precisely because so many people are idiots, it has been extremely easy to make them even stupider and more malleable over the last century or so, and as a result, we, the thinking few, are surrounded by a sea of cretinous mouth-breathers with less agency than amoebas.

And I admit, that IS a scary thought. Not for me so much, I have had decades of practice at living surrounded by idiocy, incompetence and lies, but I fear for my children. And yours. Especially since chances are, even most of those reading this are probably still on the idiot spectrum, and nowhere near as close to the edge of intelligence as they fancy themselves. Which means their poor kids are probably just as screwed.

But the things is, dumb or not, even the ruminant-like retards, if they only could stop being afraid, would be useful.

People who are unafraid speak their mind, and act, mostly, in a natural manner, and nature, though wild, is usually right at least at some fundamental levels.

If everyone had just said “No, fuck you.” To the jab, to “equality”, to “diversity”, to trannies and pedos, to feminism, and public homosexuality, and gay fake “marriage”, and all the other degenerate behaviour we have now descended into, we would not be living in this dystopian clown world.

But most people ARE afraid.

But you know what happens if you stop being afraid and you just go about your day normally and don’t take the nonsense they are handing out? Most of the time, absolutely nothing. Because THEY are afraid.

I have interacted with everything from government officials, military personnel, police, work colleagues, employers, employees, strangers, shop keepers, the vaxxed and the purebloods, and everything in between.

And when I charge in with some of my beliefs, blatantly and unequivocally, I have met pushback precisely once after hundreds if not thousands of interactions. And the pushback was really, really mild. One moron insisting he got vaxxed “to protect his family”. That was it. He didn’t even raise his voice.

But I get it. Not everyone is built like me. But even so, do you NEED to be afraid? No. You do not.

And here are some bullet points I have learned at various points in my life (not in chronological order).

  • Pray. Try this, even if you are an atheist. After all, what you got to lose? Try it. And see if it doesn’t work. But give it a good try, a real one. Not a fake, sarcastic, shitty, fake “try”.

  • If you live in a country where you are able to, purchase, train in and learn to use a firearm. For the secular-minded especially, this may give peace of mind more than you know. I met a guy not long ago who had been assaulted in his own home and had his wife and child molested at gunpoint. He went from a pacifist type to armed to the teeth overnight. And like my dad always said: better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. Train. Be safe. Learn. Don’t be an idiot with a gun. Be someone that respects firearms and treats them properly and responsibly.

  • If you have the inclination, study Catholicism and its history and why there were so many men and women and even children, willing to die rather than deny Jesus Christ. And learn why the Novus Ordo “Catholicism” is a Satanic inversion. If you want to save time, you can read either Believe! Or RTCC, or both, as I compiled a lot of information there that has been useful not just to me but to over a hundred people from all walks of life that have since converted to Sedevacantism. Not because I am so great, but because they found out the truth and checked it out for themselves once they read it in my books.

  • Stop. Sit if you need to. Close your eyes in a quiet place. And feel the tension in your body. Tension is anxiety. Anxiety is fear. Fear is tension. Let it go. Consciously breathe deep and slow and force your muscles to relax.

  • Realise consciously that as you go through your day, whether you have tension and fear inside you or not, affects every interaction you have. Subconsciously everyone picks up on fear. It’s part of our lizard brain. It’s a biological inbuilt survival system. Stop being afraid for the next interaction and notice the difference. Notice how smiling comes easier. Notice how actually paying attention matters.

  • Pay attention. To everything. Like a child does, not like a paranoid secret agent on the run. Notice the trees. The wind. The clouds. The old man with the dog. Notice the fear in all the other people around you. Notice the insects. The birds in the sky. Listen to your child. Observe him or her. Be in their world.

  • If you are young, join a martial art club. Or if that is really not for you (how do you know unless you really try it first?) pick something. Ideally a sport. But if not that then an art form. Painting, drawing, sculpting, playing an instrument, and become good at it. Or do both, a sport and an art form. Work at it. Become good at it.

  • If you are old(er), do it too anyway. What you worried about, going to your grave with a perfect body with no scars? And even if so, you can still learn some form of art. Not fake post-modern, demonic crap. Actual art. Pick up some watercolours. Buy a guitar, a flute, a harmonica. Get a notepad and a pencil. Start. Devote time to it. Get good at it. Work harder and faster at it. You have a lot more responsibilities and people to take care of, and pay attention to, and a lot less time than the youngsters, so move your ass!

  • Love. Love God. Send Him love. Send it to the sky, the air, the grass, the trees, the little bugs, your cat, your dog, and most of all the people in your life. Use reason so as not to confuse lust and love, or pity and love, or any other thing and love, sure, but when you do love, love truly. Love fully. Throw your whole self into it. And if it blows up in your face, read the poem If, by Rudyard Kipling. And do as it says. It’s the only way to be.

  • Read. Read physical books, not just kindle stuff. If you can’t afford to buy them find a library. Read. Read instead of watch tv. Read instead of browse the net. Read a book instead of this or other blogs. Read! Trust me, if you do this and you read through your life, and you make it a habit, it will help you more than you can guess.

  • If you can, buy some land, a house, whatever you can afford, in a rural area far from cities. Don’t get deluded, farming and living off-grid is very hard and not easy at all. But nothing worthwhile is easy. Plan, work, and do. Every day do a bit more to be able to live that way as soon as you can. And try and do this in a place where at least some of the people see things as you do for the most part. And make friends with them.

  • Learn about natural ways to heal disease. Remember that all medicine that actually works came from plants or animals in the first place.

  • Practice thinking how you will react to different adversity without getting tense or anxious about it. This takes training and good self-observation to do.

  • Know one day you will die. Prepare your will. Have your things in order. No one gets out alive. But how you go out, you may get a say in it if circumstance or luck is with you. If you have that good fortune, make it count. Make it good. Make it something your progeny will talk about with pride for generations to come.

But above all, friend, whoever you are, however smart, dumb, rich, poor, lonely or smothered by family and friends you might be, sick or healthy, happy or sad, above all, be unafraid.

Everyone dies in the end, so run your race and do your best, but for all that is good, and holy and true, and beautiful, stop being afraid.

We are not given to a spirit of fear.

So don’t be.

Stand.

Walk straight. And if your body is bent and broken, don’t let your mind and your soul be.

Look up. Be upright. Be up.

God be with you. God is with you. You just got to see and be with Him too.

How you know you’ve achieved mastery in your marriage

You know what they say, third time lucky!

My current and final wife, you know, the third one, but actually the first one married in Church as a Catholic, which means she can’t divorce me!

I mean murder is on the table for us Catholics, but until I wake up with a carving knife buried in my chest, you know I’m on to the ultimate marriage mastery streak here.

You know what my wife wanted as a gift this year? A set of proper iron pans.

That’s right gentlemen. Buy my upcoming book on relationships to find out how!

Working title: Caveman Theory.

Merry Christmas

All content of this web-site is copyrighted by G. Filotto 2009 to present day.
Website maintained by IT monks