Recent posts

#1

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Former SSPX US District Su...

Last post by Kephapaulos - Today at 10:04:13 PM

@Kephapaulos

Are you back to posting on here now?

Yes. I am now. At least on occasion before. 

[Ivermectin was baselessly maligned]

#2

General News and Discussion / Your tax $$ paid billions to W...

Last post by TradGranny - Today at 05:40:53 PM

Former CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, who pushed the government's deadly COVID-19 narrative and shamed the unvaccinated,1 admitted he is taking Ivermectin for Long COVID – a condition affecting 17 million Americans2 which many believe could be caused by COVID-19 vaccines. Defending his use of Ivermectin, Cuomo – showing no remorse – stated, "Ivermectin was a boogeyman during COVID. That was wrong. We were given bad information about Ivermectin. The real question is, why?"3

Cuomo's admission comes too late for the millions of Americans who could have benefited from Ivermectin as part of a treatment protocol for COVID-19.4 While Cuomo now admits the government got it dead wrong, he seems less willing to admit the part he played in perpetuating the government's lies in what has become the biggest story of our lifetimes: In cartel-like fashion, the U.S. government bribed private entities to push experimental genetic injections knowing the shots caused serious injuries and even death, while blocking promising but unprofitable repurposed medications with high safety profiles that could have saved lives.

Americans Were Purposely Given "Bad" Information

Ivermectin was baselessly maligned at the height of the pandemic by the U.S. government, its captured medical establishment, and a bought-off mainstream media.5 According to Dr. Pierre Kory – a pulmonary and critical care specialist who has testified and written extensively about the intentional censure of Ivermectin in the U.S. – Ivermectin had the potential to save countless U.S. lives and could have ended the entire pandemic.6

Yet, bought-off hospitals and pharmacies, which were allocated a staggering $178 billion in federal COVID-19 relief money during the pandemic,7 would turn on the Nobel prize-winning drug. According to Dr. Kory in his book The War on Ivermectin.

"In the wake of the global horse-dewormer propaganda campaign, hospitals started pulling ivermectin from their pharmacies. Health systems began harassing and threatening employees with loss of employment if they prescribed ivermectin. Pharmacies became even more brazen in their refusals to fill ivermectin prescriptions."8

Hospitals and pharmacies refused to administer or fill Ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.9 Clinical doctors who spoke out about successes they had treating patients with Ivermectin were shamed or – as in the high-profile case of Dr. Mary Talley Bowden – had privileges suspended.10

    As Cuomo now readily admits, Americans were given bad (and even deadly) information about Ivermectin. Disturbingly, this bad information appears to have been intentional. But why? The most obvious reason is profits. If the public became aware that Ivermectin – a Nobel prize-winning medicine with a high safety profile – had shown potential efficacy against COVID-19, the global market for the government's novel mRNA "vaccines" would have collapsed.11

As we wrote about in 2022, a safe, effective drug for early treatment of COVID-19 would have threatened the public's acceptance of the government's experimental gene therapy rebranded as vaccines, placing in question trillions of dollars in prospective profits for the medical-industrial complex.12

Pharmacies Were Incentivized to Follow the Government's Lethal COVID-19 Narrative

As it always does, the truth eventually wins out. Americans are waking up to the sobering truth that the COVID-19 "vaccines" have inflicted widespread disability and death, even if they are hesitant to admit the actual numbers of those injured and killed.13 Americans are also waking up to another distasteful truth (which we have written about many times before)14 – the U.S. government targeted and paid off "trusted" sources to purposefully spoon-feed bad and even dangerous information to everyday Americans.15 These "trusted" sources chose profits over people.

read more:
https://www.americaoutloud.news/the-government-cartel-paid-billions-to-walgreens-and-cvs-not-to-fill-ivermectin-the-question-is-why/

#3

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Marian Friars Minor

Last post by Lorraine - Today at 04:20:17 PM

Hi Laus, the formation talks are held online, on second Saturdays, through ZOOM, with a time for questions at the end of the talk.  They are recorded, and within a few days are made available through a private link.
Only a few places have chapters, I believe St. Louie is one?
I agree witn Miriam, the order is concerned with the reform of the inner man, not society.

God bless you,
Lorraine

#4

Ask a Traditionalist / Re: Is online shopping on Sund...

Last post by Heinrich - Today at 04:11:33 PM

Is executing enemies of the state on a Sunday considered servile work?

Asking for a friend...

In Jorge's Sect, it's a sin.

Buen jugado, amigo.

#5

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Message to Vigano and Burk...

Last post by queen.saints - Today at 04:03:05 PM

They can as in Lateran IV; not enact the reforms that are necessary or condemn the errors that they should.

It wasn't just that Lateran V didn't enact the necessary reform. It did enact a reform.

[postscript:]

#6

Plagues and Pestilence / Re: Revised opinion on Covid v...

Last post by clau clau - Today at 03:44:33 PM

Our family did what we had to do in to work and support ourselves.

@lauermar

I would say leave it at that and do not worry about trying to convince others of the licitness of what actions you decided to take.

I know of a traditional priest in a care home. Nearly 90 years old.

He was given two options:

1. Do not get the vaccine, and as such, we will never let you out of your room. You'll be stuck here, won't be able to leave to say Masses, hear confessions and won't be allowed to have access to other hospitals and homes for anointing etc.
2. Get the vaccine, so he could have a ministry.

Despite his reservations, he went with #2.

"I won't allow their games to stop me from being a priest. If I die, all the better. Dona ei requiem!"

You should never give into blackmail.  That's weak.

There was no rational reason to not let him out of his room.  Therefore the people threatening him were either idiots or evil.  Neither should be obeyed.  You should resist evil commands and not comply with them.  Otherwise you empower evil even more.  In point of fact they WOULD have let him out of his room, because all his fellow priests and other elderly people who resisted are today out of their rooms.

If more people had said "piss off" then they would not have been able to coerce as many people as they did.

The SSPX should have told them to "piss off" as well. They should hold the secular authorities in more contempt than the mainstream church. If they can disobey the Popes, why cannot they disobey the presidents and the prime-ministers.

Just like Peter, they denied the Logos ("If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.")

My theory is that the SSPX are simply not aware of the alternative media. There were hundreds of sites giving good advice about vaccines. In my opinion they did not consult any of this information but just followed the mainstream view (I think Bishop Williamson is the exception here).

I gave up TV about 30 years ago. This had the effect on me that I was much less affected by mainstream propaganda. I tended to look on the internet for news and consequently came across all kinds of contrary opinions (some of it crazy but nevertheless I formed my own opinion).

I was also exposed to TV in France and Spain (where my wife lived) and I noticed that these countries sometimes had completely different perspectives on world news. Either they held different opinions about common news or they prioritised news in different ways.

I noticed this particularly during COVID. People in the street were literally walking away from me in fear as if I had the black death or some kind of leprosy. Why didn't I manifest this fear? I was a bit concerned but my anxiety was mostly based on evidence I could see of people actually getting sick, and I could not see anybody! I felt like the little boy in Hans Christian Andersen's "The Emperor's New Clothes".

Where did this fear come from? My opinion is that it had 2 causes:

1. Massive propaganda on the TV of people dropping dead in the street. Politicians appearing in hastily arranged dramatic press conferences presenting apocalyptic worst case scenarios.

2. Fear of death due to massive apostacy.

I was not exposed to 1 due to the fact I had not watched TV for 30 years. I occasionally came across the press conferences (via YouTube ) and the pictures of Chinese dropping dead in the street but I was basically immune to most of it because I had been fighting this kind of propaganda for the last 20 years.  Exhibit A: WTC 7 .. and on and on and on it goes ...

I am not frightened of death. In the words of St. Thomas More: "Death comes to us all, my lords. Even for kings he comes!"

I am frightened of judgement though. I need to go to confession more often.

Rant over ...

postscript: 2 people responsible for my resistance to COVID vaccines in particular are Mrs Clau Clau (who has been studying the efficacy of vaccines for years) and Mr Karl Deninger who came out against the COVID vaccine almost immediately. He wrote a fantastic article about the outbreak of Covid of the Diamond Princess cruise ship and how the epidemiology was far more likely to be fecal/oral.  I posted a link to this column around July 2020 and was roundly mocked. I think Xavier was particularly scathing and posted one of his usual "Walls of Text".

I think it is probable that without this I may have succumbed (at least to an initial jab).

#7

Ask a Traditionalist / Re: Is online shopping on Sund...

Last post by Severinus - Today at 03:44:12 PM

Note that I'm not saying there is no distinction betwen servile and "liberal" work, nor saying that paid servile work is fine. I'm disputing that paid "liberal" work is fine. I think the operative distinction is whether the paid work or business transaction is necessary. This is also important to preserve the moral right of teachers, researchers, designers etc. to reject work obligations on Sundays. If "liberal" work is simply allowed, a researcher would not have a backing to object to terms of contract which obliged him to work, say, from noon to 8pm every Sunday. He could say "I personally don't like that" (though again, it's unclear on what basis religiously) but not "my religion prohibits that."

#8

General News and Discussion / Re: the disordered love of ani...

Last post by Bonaventure - Today at 03:42:14 PM

Looks like the tail WAGGED the dog here...

#9

Plagues and Pestilence / Re: Global cancer concerns

Last post by Bonaventure - Today at 03:41:33 PM

I don't believe there is central control.  There is no star council.

I used to think there might be central control. Then I concluded that the control was at the spiritual level. The elites are like pawns in the hands of demons. Since the plans are demonic they may appear coordinated at a human level but they are not.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
-- Ephesians 6:12

"The rulers of the darkness" - demons.

Spot on.

I do think, though, there's an elite we don't really see - ie. the Rothschilds, and the ones we think are elites (politicians, royalty etc) are just their marionette dolls.


Chamath Palihapitiya said as much. He's a multi-billionaire, so I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt (CAUTION: Language):

As I told @Kaesekopf , who would worry about fema camps and being round up, an overwhelming majority of glow boogie men have no coordination, piss poor communication, and can barely function in society.

They're just as f'd up as a trashy tinder date or bar fly. Hooked to SSRIs, booze, porn, drugs, you name it.

#10

Ask a Traditionalist / Re: Is online shopping on Sund...

Last post by ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez - Today at 03:29:08 PM

Let's not act as if Fr. Jone made the definitive traditional teaching which is now beyond question. It's a book of moral theology with an imprimatur.

Let's additionally not pretend that pointing out a possible class prejudice in the interpretation equates to engagng in "class struggle," which implies a Marxist point is being made.

I don't have it handy for quoting, but if I'm remembering it correctly, Prummer says virtually the same thing.