Archive for May 2023

Bear Grylls – Not a fan

I often receive random emails from readers, this was one such.

This might amuse. A quick summary of a quick investigation into Bear Grylls.
You are quite the adventurous type so let me know how plausible you think all of this is. There is probably more. It did not take long to find these things:
Firstly, his name “Bear.” In gay culture, a bear is a larger and often hairier man who projects an image of rugged masculinity
Someone a few years back told me they had worked with Bear Grylls and that various TV shows were faked/staged. This is actually public record. One example here
More specifically, in recent articles I thought it was odd that an SAS survivalist specialist would not know to cook vegetables before consuming them.
Lost father at young age. Educated at Eton. Owns his own Island. OBE.
His SAS Story is interesting. Reservist in 21st regiment. From this site: “However, in 2014 both of the SAS reservist regiments mentioned above, alongside the Honourable Artillery Company (HAC) left the Special Forces to be placed under the command of the 1st Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance Brigade.”
Allegedly broke his back in a parachute accident in 1996. In 2021 Grylls posted an image to IG and stated his back is painful every day. The daily workout routines he claims to do are extreme..
Hung out with Zelensky a few weeks ago. There are other articles that say he tried to poison him with a chocolate bar. Apparently now he is an ambassador though. It’s all so clownish.
Here he is with Obama too:



How he met his wife borders on absurd:  Men’s Vogue revealed that on New Year’s Eve, Bear was naked and “freezing on the north coast of Scotland” when their paths crossed for the first time. This was a few months before he left to climb Everest in 1998. He even confessed that a wave swept his clothes away, which left him desperately looking for his trousers on the beach but despite the ill-clad meeting, Bear and Shara fell in love with each other.
Breaks back in 1996 and within two years he is one of the youngest climbers to reach Mt Everest. Astonishing.



Not only did he survive a parachute accident, in 2019 he also got stung by a bee which he is apparently deathly allergic to.
He seems to like to get naked and run around with other naked men on camera. I can’t find any other images of his back. In this video from around 2008 there do not appear to be any scars on his back.
Has written 85 books whilst having many near death experiences, being in constant pain, climbing mountains….. What a legend.
Due to his proclivity to get naked and run around with other naked men on camera, as well as his name, and combined with all the remarkable malarkey, my conclusion is fake and gay.
BROKE BACK and climbed MOUNTAIN. So along with his name this is another one of their jokes. He is a gay actor.
Assuming that his role may be the impossible to achieve exception to the men are pigs agenda. The vegan to carnivore flip is probably just to antagonise and confuse the general population.
I doubt his diet change is real. Even if the claims in recent articles are true: Anyone eating tons of raw vegetables for 18 months, who then switches to a carnivore diet is probably very likely to do better. In the same way that anyone eating the SAD diet is going to do better on a vegan diet. In neither case does this prove that they are optimal.

I admit, I have no idea what Bear Grylls gets up to, I have never found him remotely interesting and always assumed he was a ticket taking fake, but I have never personally looked into any of it.

He just simply always looked like a fraud to me from the get go. To what degree and detail is the case, I admit, is not of particular interest to me, it remains simply higher than I am comfortable with, in my opinion.

Shadowbans are real

Update: the woman I was taking about is Sharyl Attkisson. You can read her story here.

I think it was on twitter some decade ago I first became aware of shadowbanning. Since then, the effect has been constantly growing.

In the sense that it has become more and more obvious.

The flip side is the artificially augmented boosting that the gatekeepers get.

Every single one of the tech players do it and facebook was also caught essentially stealing advert revenue because people who paid for ads would have rather unimpressive exposure if they were not current narrative friendly.

YouTube does it, Google does it, they all do it.

So, for people who have not bought a ticket, the only way is for literal word-of-mouth marketing and manual linking to the person being shadowbanned. Even then they can mess with your contact emails, make your site “invisible” to prospective clients and many such examples.

I also have had what I call psyops emails for years, on and off, depending more or less on my online activity. I also had my phone and computer hacked a number of times over the last three decades. These were sophisticated attacks that according to IT professionals that investigated it, at least on some occasions were state level actors.

There have also been attacks from private entities, but the nature of those is more well known to me.

My point is simply that big brother has been active in a way I have personally been able to confirm at least since 1995. And I was aware of their abilities since the very early 90s.

I am not particularly troublesome, but I had some experiences that can draw attention to you, and invariably there are state actors that given little or no oversight can and do decide to “have some fun”. A relatively well-done aspect of this, at least as far as Hollywood goes, is the attitude of the spooks in the old film Enemy of the State, with Will Smith.

The private hackers are invariably more malicious, well, on a day to day basis I mean. When the state actors become vicious you’re literally screwed. Note for example the lady who was smart enough to figure out the FBI was uploading child porn to their computer to try and frame her husband. I forgot the name, as it was a while back, but she undoubtedly saved him years of jail time. Given the last 3 years, Edward Snowden and so on, I think it is clear even to the average normie that if you are targeted by state actors with malicious intent, you’re pretty much screwed.

None of this is news to me, as both the reality and the trajectory of it all was clear to me by about 1992/1993, nor should it be to you.

I also don’t believe in self-censorship all that much, beyond the obvious emotionally charged hyperbole. Ultimately, ruling you by the fear in your own mind is the goal.

And yet, the self-censorship that has resulted in the last 30 years is quite astonishing, and has progressed pretty much along the lines that I predicted way back then and later put in writing more than a decade ago.

So, if you get shadowbanned, consider it a badge of honour to some extent. If nothing else, it shows you’re probably not a ticket taker.

And this is why I like Country Music

I don’t care if most people don’t. I always liked it.

I figure in some past lives I must have been a pissed off Red Indian, an Eastern Monk, A Japanese Samurai, and a Southern Redneck too.

Y’all my white(ish) Niggers.

Enjoy the lyrics of this song by Corb Lund, they are awesome.

From Russia with Love

Friendly warning.

Knowing Russkies as I do, I would not be too worried, YET, firstly because this is still a soft warning, meant for people who have two functioning brain cells yet. And is quite a ways from a real warning.

That said, if in individual terms this is the equivalent of saying “Hey Tovarisch, you know I can slap your face from here if you carry on behaving like a drunk bitch, right?” with a smile and a good humorous attitude, the real warning will be the equivalent of a decent punch to the face that knocks you on your ass. And the Russkie will still be smiling, and even friendly. May even help you get back up if you learnt your lesson properly.

Just letting “tits” (Meloni) and “bindi” (critical path dot Rishi) and “bidet” (incontinent Joe) know the score.

Truth = Action

The response to the previous post appears to require some detailing that I thought was obvious, but clearly is not for some.

The reason that things like:

  • The “relativity” of truth
  • The “racism” of math and the objective scientific method
  • “critical” race theory
  • The destruction of attention spans (TikTok, etc)
  • The “whole word” reading method
  • The pushing of “social” media
  • The absurd “new math”
  • The wiping out of classic history
  • The idea of “personal” truth
  • Body “positivity”
  • “Beauty” at any size
  • The “normalisation” of sexual deviancy in all its forms
  • The destruction of the very idea of traditional marriage
  • The implementation of fault-free divorce
  • The implementation of divorce at all
  • The implementation of contraception
  • The implementation of baby murder
  • Feminism in all its forms
  • The concept of “toxic” masculinity
  • The absurd idea that violence is “never” the answer
  • The monopoly on violence by government
  • The idea that 40, 60, 70% taxes is just fine
  • The idea that you need 4 years of expensive schooling to learn trades that have historically been learnt as an apprentice in a year or two
  • The mass media is there to “inform” you
  • A slew of other nonsense, make your own list

are pushed constantly at you, is because if they can destroy your ability to:

  • Understand as a fundamental principle that objective reality and hence objective truth exist, and that it is not relative at all, but absolute
  • Use logic, reason and the actual scientific method, the real one, which includes at a minimum the effective repeatability of experiments, the ability to do basic math, statistics, percentages, set theory, ratios, and fractions, not the nonsense they peddle now as “peer reviewed” scams

then, they have succeeded in effectively preventing you from being able to notice the truth to a degree that far surpasses that of any other time in history. Including when men worshipped either myths or demonic beings under the guise of “gods”, be they Babylonian, Aztec, Greek, Egyptian or whatever.

And why would the rulers of this planet, those with almost infinite power to decide the fate of entire nations want people not to be able to see objective reality as it is?

Very simple:

Because if you really saw it, you would immediately round up all your friends, and they would too and in minutes, a mob of righteously murderous men would rip them out of their ivory towers and burn them at the stake if they were feeling merciful.

The true reality under which we live is not just far more horrible than you know. It is far more horrific than you can imagine in your worst nightmares, and what some of these people get up to makes the human sacrifices of the Aztecs seem like a day at the beach.

The ability to discern fact from fiction, truth from lies, logic from fallacies and so on, is not just “a good idea” it is absolutely essential for a humanity that might live in the relative freedom of a chosen servitude; to God instead of Satanic pedophiles. The alternative is total submission to these demon-infested “rulers of the Universe”.

And that is why being a zealot for truth matters.

Stop being lukewarm

Revelation 3:15-17

I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.  You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.

It is possibly the biggest source of personal frustration when I encounter the lukewarm, which frankly, seems to be literally everyone, with exception of my children, and most pure being the littler ones.

I understand that obstinacy, especially given the average human monkey, leads to nothing good, of course.

And yes, we all see through a glass darkly. Every one of us.

Even so, some things are obviously true. Obviously clear to anyone who cares to look.

Two plus two is, and always will be, four.

It is also a sad fact that I doubt if there are even a handful of people that would be willing to die over that fact. If faced with the prospect:

“Defend that two and two is four to death, or, allow all of humanity to forego the very concept of mathematics, calculation and so on.”

Put that way, it would mean either you sacrifice yourself, or, humanity will literally be forever reduced to about the same level as bonobos, and in fact, possibly lower, in fact, almost assuredly lower; though I don’t expect most people reading this to have the imagination necessary to envision why unless they put some serious thought into it.

I also appreciate that the argument for Sedevacantism takes a certain level of ability and education. You not only need to be able to read, but have the intelligence, will and desire to do so, in the specifics of the details of Church history, law, dogma and credo. I understand that too. I know it is a minority that can do that and the rest tend to follow for the usual reasons, because their family or friends have done so and humans are at times essentially herd animals.

However, if you are one of them; and you have taken the time and effort to learn why Sedevacantism is the only valid Catholicism left, why on God’s green Earth would you give a second’s time to obvious heretics?

If you have understood and accepted that the Novus Orcians are impostors, fake “Catholics” then it is absolutely impossible that you should make any exception for any of them.

“Oh but…” just doesn’t come into it.

It doesn’t matter if on this particular Tuesday afternoon, of the blue Moon, he told the truth on this one point.

It doesn’t matter if he calls out Bergoglio.

It doesn’t matter if he saves starving orphans in Africa.

It doesn’t matter if “he makes so much sense”.

This is not about a “bad” Catholic that is badly catechised, or a weak one that fails. Or a bad one that is in mortal sin every week through a retinue of bad character traits. It’s about fake clergy pretending to be of a religion they patently are not.

They are, in essence, spiritual mass-murderers.

Would you extend the same “benefit of the doubt” to a serial killer? Does it matter if he had a really bad childhood? Or he hears voices? Or he really doesn’t realise the evil he is doing?

Are you going to be buddies with Ted Bundy because he really knows how to get women close to him?

And if you are an actual believer, spiritual mass-murderers are worse than mere physical ones. Physical mass murderers take your life on Earth and your body, but spiritual ones are trying to throw your soul into hell for eternity.

So, if you are a Sedevcantist, that is, an actual Catholic, you do not accept, in any way, shape or form:

Una-cum masses, they are a blasphemy and a heresy.

Novus Ordo anything.

Vatican II anything.

That includes ALL the fake clergy and pomp of the fake “Catholic” Bergoglian Church and ALL their members.

Because they are not Catholics. Just as two plus two is not five.

On the Weakness of the Heretics: Michael Lofton

I have covered the knowing heretics, fake Catholics, and Freemason Satanists several times, and by now, I should hope it is clear that I give no “clergy” that doesn’t specifically reject Vatican II and the Fake Popes from 1958 on any kind of pass. They are knowing heretics, and to be treated as such, as per Cum Ex Apostolato Officio; to wit (emphasis added):

(iii) that all such individuals also shall be held, treated and reputed as such by everyone, of whatsoever status, grade, order, condition or pre-eminence he may be and whatsoever excellence may be his, even Episcopal, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal and Primatial or other greater Ecclesiastical dignity and even the honour of the Cardinalate, or secular, even the authority of Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, and as such must be avoided and must be deprived of the sympathy of all natural kindess.

But… but… what about some poor wanna-be Catholic “priest” that is ignorant of the whole Vatican II issue, and the rampant sodomy in the seminaries, and the utter manifest heresy of Bergoglio in real-time, never mind all of it since 1958, you say?

Yeah… that’s like saying that an adult, who takes all the courses to be a firearms instructor, then points a loaded gun at a child and pulls the trigger and then claims he didn’t know the gun was loaded when he did it. Even if you assume he’s telling the truth, and even if you could somehow determine it with absolute certainty (impossible), the fact remains that such an idiot would and should, go to jail, or preferably the death penalty, for what is known legally as criminal negligence. Or as I prefer to call it, criminal stupidity. Yes, being stupid enough is a crime. Because really stupid people should not be allowed to take certain jobs. You don’t want a 50 IQ retard trying to fly a plane. And I don’t care whose feelings it hurts. Ditto these fake “idiot” “priests”. If they are that stupid, they have no business being priests, and no, I do not give them the benefit of the doubt, and neither should you. Why? Because it is Church dogma to not do so. If you act like a heretic, practice like a heretic, promulgate heresy, regardless of your possible retardation, we are to treat you like a heretic. And must be deprived of the sympathy of all natural kindess. See above.

So that deals with the intentional, knowing heretics.

But what about the laymen who are also trying to lead people to Hell? Well, once again, I have detailed some of these grifting liars, Emo Jones, Tay-Tay Marshall, Michelle Voris, Milo Yankmypoleus and their kind. And one hopes it is now relatively easy to spot them. And we have a generic witch test for all who profess to be “Catholics”, it’s really simple:

Do you reject Vatican II and all those who promulgate it?

Anything other than a resounding YES! means you are dealing either with a knowing impostor, an egomaniacal fame or status hungry “smartboi”, or, at best, a deceived, lazy, ignorant.

Yes, yes, I know, charity and all that, but let me point something out here: It is by using and appealing to your charity when they have absolutely no right to do so, that these snakes enter your home and pervert it. And the Catholic Church also dogmatically explains that one should use prudence and avoid anything suspect.

Great. We got that cleared up. What then of the autistically persistent laymen? And here I add a couple of warnings:

  1. First of all assure yourself as best you can that they actually are simple laymen. The example of note here is John Salza. Who has written a retinue of lies against Sedevacantism, supposedly in defence of Catholicism as a simple, pious layman. Except… that Salza was (is) a self-confessed freemason. Oh, oh, but he’s not anymore… right, because Satanists are such paragons of truth-telling. Get it through your head, freemasons are Satanists, that is literally what Freemasonry is. The literal worship of Lucifer. The fact the lower echelons might not be immediately aware of it… again… see criminal stupidity above. And if a freemason did honestly convert and became a Catholic (there are historical examples) then the only thing they may continue to do is explain how freemasonry is Satanic. That’s it. And that is the only legitimate thing they might be allowed to speak on as laypeople. Because once you have been a Satanist, it’s really quite obvious you should never be allowed to say anything at all about Catholicism, other than it is the absolute truth and you were absolutely wrong. And should such a person go on to write long tracts on why this or that theological position is better or worse, they are to be immediately assumed to be simply continuing their Satanic mission. These people, once you discover they are in fact freemasons or associate with such, etcetera, can safely be dismissed as liars at the very least, and heretics almost to a certainty.
  2. But let us now assume you have satisfied yourself that they are not intentional deceiver or gatekeepers. And further (somehow) satisfied yourself they are not grifters either, making a buck from their “preaching”. And by making a buck I mean, literally making their living, or a substantial part of it from it. Because if they are, well, then their intent might not be consciously Satanic, but they are certainly at least useful idiots for Satan.

Ok then, assuming they even pass the Satanists/Grifter smell test, what are we left with? The smartbois. The Gammas who do it for personal ego/stature/status.

Are there honestly deceived people who believe they are “Catholics” when instead they are just fooled, lazy ignorants? Yes. Plenty of them. Millions. maybe even over a billion of them. Certainly.

Why do I call them lazy ignorants? Because they are. Is it harsh? Not really, it is a statement of fact. If I decided to call myself a prince of the blue garter belt of Liliputz, or whatever, you can bet I would not do so until I have studied with care what and how one becomes or is born as a Prince of Liliputz, and even if I fit those requirements, I would then delve deeply into what it takes to belong to the order of the blue garter belt, and why that isn’t gay somehow, if indeed it is not!

And how much more important is your claim to belong to a specific religion, to a specific God, with specific rules, because after all, if God is real, and Good, and Loving, then he MUST have, at a minimum, a Way for you to find Him and His rules and a way for you to KNOW what those rules are. And indeed there is: The Catholic Church. And it is your minimum duty to ensure you are actually in it, and not fooled into some travesty of it through your laziness of not bothering to learn your own religion.

So, if you’re one of the lazy ignorants, either get offended, flounce off in flamboyant fake indignation, or, get your lazy ass off the couch, and start reading. And learning.

But what about the smartbois?

Ah yes.

And here we encounter one such: Michael Lofton (because I am still being charitable here and still investigating him). He appears to have spent a LOT of time and effort to defend the heretic, fake, impostor riddled “Catholic Church” headed by the Vicar of pedophiles himself, Bergoglio. Now, why would that be?

If we give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he’s a true believer (in the Novus Orco, fake Church) and not a grifter (but he does make considerable revenue from his podcasts) or an intentional deceiver, then we need to assess what he is, and why he’s doing it.

At first glance, what I can say so far is that he certainly likes to use the sophist’s method preferred by Bill Clinton when asked if he had sex with Monica Lewinsky. For those young-uns among you, here is the detail:

During his grand jury testimony, Clinton questioned the exact meaning of the word ‘is’ in an attempt to defend a false affidavit in which Lewinsky claimed ‘there is no sex of any kind, in any manner, shape or form with president Clinton’. When asked by former Deputy Independent Counsel Sol Wisenberg, to confirm the affidavit was ‘utterly false’, the former president gets into semantics. ‘It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement,’ Clinton said with what seems like a smirk on his face. 

I remember watching that on TV and seeing the lawyer take him to task on it, saying effectively: Wait…what? Are you saying that your statement was “true” because you weren’t physically having sex with Monica Lewinsky at that specific time the question was asked?!

It was truly baffling and absurd. Well, Michael does quite a bit of this.

When cornered on certain topics he tries to dodge by becoming absurdly “specific” about certain words.

For example, watch this video from 53.20 on, where he admits that Bergoglio said that Proselytising is a sin. But, he goes on to “explain” that what Bergy-the-Oleous means by that, is “to use force” to convert people to Catholicism.

Which is, of course, abject nonsense. “What does he mean by Proselytism?” he says, “the question is, is proselytism the same as evangelisation?” And he goes on to say that “convincing people” of the truth is evangelising, and fine, but Proselytism is, according to him, understood by Bergoglio to be the use of “coercion and force”. He doesn’t explain how he knows this, or what evidence he has that Bergy-the-Olous uses this word this way, of course. But does it matter? No. Because we know very well what words mean around here.

But hey, don’t take my word for it. Let’s go to my 13 volume set of the Oxford English Dictionary and look them both up.

Evangelise means:

  1. to preach the gospel or
  2. to bring under the influence of the gospel
  3. the state or condition of being evangelised or converted to the Christian faith

And Proselytise means:

  1. To make proselytes
  2. To make a proselyte of

What is a Proselyte?

It is defined as:

  1. One who has come over from one opinion, belief, creed or party to another; a convert
  2. A gentile convert to the Jewish faith
  3. to convert form one religious faith or sect to another

In short, they are perfectly synonymous of each other, and if anything evangelise is the one that could potentially have some “force” attributable to it since in definition 3 it simply states to be “converted to the Christian faith”. And in definition 2 one might be “brought under the influence of” by having a gun pointed to one’s head with a command to convert. One (if autistic) might try to argue that in this case, the presumption is that perhaps it’s okay to do it by any means, including against the individual’s free will.

While in the definitions of Proselyte the implication of free will of the convert is clearly always grammatically present.

So, it is, of course a lie. Nonsense. And it is said to run cover for the never-was-Catholic, protector of Pedophiles on Earth, Bergy-the-Oleous, fake “pope” and grand vizier of Moloch.

He does this in other ways and in other videos. He in fact tried to dismiss the entirety of the Code of Canon Law using similar subterfuge, I forget now the detail and I can’t be bothered to look for it presently, but the case is clearly made, if you listen to him for any length of time on the topic of Sedevacantism, that he is dishonest.

So WHY is he dishonest? Is he getting paid for it? (I don’t know)

Is he funded by some rich heretic interested in funding gatekeepers like the money man behind both Emo Jones and Church Militant’s ex(sure)gay guy Voris, Marc Brammer? (I don’t know)

Does he make a substantial amount of money from his podcasts? Yes. Is it enough to keep him in the level of luxury he wants? I don’t know but I doubt it, these guys tend to be greedy.

So can I definitely point at him and scream “KNOWING HERETIC! BURN HIM!” Well, I certainly will treat him like one, because he is, but no, I can’t quite yet do that, because he may just be stroking his own ego instead of have a vested interest in sending souls to Hell for a third party.

But what we can be certain of is that the he is a sophist. And I mean that in the EOD version n. 3:

One who makes use of fallacious arguments; a specious reasoner.

And by specious, here they mean EOD definition n. 2:

Having a fair or attractive appearance or character, calculated to make a favourable impression on the mind, but in reality devoid of the qualities apparently possessed.

And, without surprise, he not only never argues Sedevacantism honestly, but he is absolutely terrified of even beginning to have an argument with someone that (though ultimately wrong) knows enough to prove him to be absolutely flawed in all his reasonings concerning Catholicism.

Peter Dimond is ultimately wrong because he doesn’t not recognise Baptism of Desire and of Blood, which the Church and Canon Law in fact do recognise, and as a result of that error he then rejects the few remaining valid Priests and Bishops (sedevacantists).

That said, Dimond would wipe the floor with Lofton, because autistic though Dimond is about baptism of desire (he literally twists the meaning of the black on white word of Canon Law of 1917 to “make his case”, not unlike Lofton himself) he is pretty rock-solid on most other aspects of Catholicism. In fact, barring that (serious and unfortunate error) and a few other points which are really so far-out as to be literally non-issues for almost anyone at all, Dimond is sound in his Catholicism. But note how Lofton resorts to specious ad hominem instead of answering the question.

If I were tasked with arguing Dimond I would say that we essentially only have one main point of contention, and it is baptism of desire and baptism of blood. I would have to research the various places this was clearly stated by multiple Popes etcetera, which would be pointless, because it is addressed in the canon Law of 1917, and Dimond has already shown that his approach to it would be autism redux with no ability to objectively evaluate the relevant code. So, arguing with him would be pointless and fruitless for us both. But I have no doubt he would be able to recite the various passages from Papal Encyclicals that he uses (erroneously) to make his case, from memory. I certainly could not.

Lofton instead, tries to side-step the entire major point of the Sede vs Heretics arguments, and never really addresses them in his own “takes”.

Tell us Michael, where is the Code of Canon Law, or the Dogma, that says 70 years is too much for an interregnum? Oh wait…what is that? There isn’t one?

Right.

And the Church has been without a Pope for a few years before and for over 70 with no clear way of knowing who was Pope because there were up to three at a time claiming it. But that was fine was it?

Oh and, no one judges the Pope… yet… there have been more than 40 antipopes before 1958, so… SOMEHOW we must be able to know when a Pope is a heretic, eh Michael? And definitely judge it so. Why don’t you explain that one away too.

But I want to now address those who get affected by specialbois or deceivers, whichever he is, like Lofton.

That is, those who get convinced by him on the basis that he introduces right at the start of the linked video, and that is, that oh, well, if there are only a few actual Catholics left (i.e. if Sedevacantism is true and there are “only” 200,000 to a 1,000,000 catholics left) then one should despair and become oh… he doesn’t know… Say Eastern “Orthodox” or a Copt or maybe a Syrian Catholic… (are there even 200k of those guys?!) because, you know, as Jesus Himself and all the Apostles clearly stated, Christianity is a popularity contest!

If you don’t have the numbers you just don’t play, right?

Go to a “winning” team like Russian Orthobros. Or stick with the Molochian usurpers LARPing at being “Catholic” clergy, because, hey, they have the numbers!

Right. Sure.

If you go along with hat argument, then, it is patently obvious, that your flaw here is not just your ability to do logic, perceive truth, or understand objective reality, but also, that you are supremely weak, and more akin to a herd animal than a reasoning, thinking, human being.

And, at best, that’s the type of “Catholic” Michael Lofton is, Ladies and Gentlemen, by his own admission at 18.10 or so of his video.

So I rest my case.

Matthew 7:13-14

“Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Bruce Charlton Redux

Recents commentary on SG has revived some chatter about Bruce Charlton, which, I personally concluded is an intellectual coward; something I have trouble making any allowance for, and hence, I have largely ignored Bruce since late 2022.

Bruce has undeniably some positives here and there, his short pamphlet available on the internet entitled addicted to distraction is quite brilliant and I suggest everyone reads it.

That said, the man is completely incoherent despite his claims of Christianity being a net positive and true, he persists in polluting it with essentially utterly heretical, illogical and nonsensical fluctuating positions.

My last blog post on it was this one, to which he later responded with a comment on his site thus:

@Gf – Fine, that’s good. Those Roman Catholics who disagree with your assumptions can now see more clearly where their assumptions differ, and whether they personally regard their different assumptions as correct, or not. 

I must say, though, it’s a bit childish – because clearly false – to assert in your Headline that I don’t understand Roman Catholicism At All; simply because we disagree about the institutions essential actuality! 

Ummm… except he goes on to totally prove he really has no clue in the very next paragraph.

That aside; in particular I disagree 100% and with absolute personal certainty with your first and foundational assumption “1. The Catholic Church is the one and ONLY Church instituted on Earth by God.”- and by its implication (I presume) that you assume there is no salvation outside of (whatever you define as) the RCC.  

He states this is my personal certainty, which is true enough, and I mentioned it in that post as one of the baseline assumptions of Catholicism (Sedevacantism being the only Catholicism left). I had assumed that Bruce understood the baseline reason why this is axiomatic for anyone who considers themselves Catholic, since it is simple enough a child understands it.

Either Christianity is true or it is not, there is no grey area here. And if Christianity is true, God is a loving God who doesn’t lie, which means He would leave a Way for the truth to be known and followed and remain infallible and uncorrupted, despite humans being all flawed, until the end of days, that is, His return, as stated quite clearly in the Bible. So… IF like Bruce pretends to do, you accept Christianity is true, and given that for over a thousand years there was no other Christianity but Catholicism, complete with Popes and so on, you can only reasonably conclude that Catholicism MUST have been true. At least for at least 1054 years. After that you might be excused if you erroneously think the Eastern “Orthodox” carried on the One True Church. Well… if you are absolutely lazy and intentionally remain ignorant of all history for the last nearly 1000 years. Because the Eastern “Orthodox” did not proselytise, made deals with the Muslims, retreated in the face of conquest, asked for help from the Catholics AFTER their schism and then backstabbed the crusaders who came to help them repeatedly, right up to teaming up with the Muslims to kill them; not once, not twice, but three crusades in a row. Then whined and bitched like victims for the next 900 years when the fourth crusade sacked Constantinople. They even refused to simply take over the fortresses that the Catholics built and maintained in the Outremer for two centuries, when the European resources were finally drying up. They didn’t stop the invasion of Malta, and in any case, they have their own, insular, almost Jewish factions, and currently various splits too.

So you’d be foolish at beat to think the Eastern “Orthodox” are where the infallible Church of God resides. And the very idea that another sect, that promptly split into thousands of factions of Protestantism, 500 years later still is the true Church is clearly ridiculous. Particularly since it was started by an ethnically Jewish theological hitman called Martin, with gluttony, vulgarity and rape of maids and a fetish for sex with nuns as his main personality traits, who ultimately hung himself from his bedpost (possibly in erotic auto-asphyxiation gone wrong).

Given the above, it really does not take Sherlock Holmes powers of reasoning to conclude that Catholicism is it. At which point, you need to familiarise yourself with what Catholicism is, and what its rules are.

And when you do, you realise that by those very rules, two things become immediately clear:

1. Catholicism creates the best society possible for human beings.

2. The Vatican II abomination and its resulting Novus Ordo “Church” are clearly the antithesis of Catholicism.

Given these readily provable and knowable facts, and the level of logic even a child can grasp, since what is true cannot be false, and vice versa, if you accept Christianity as being true, then:

1. Catholicism is Christianity

2. Catholicism is true

3. All that is not Catholicism is false

4. Catholicism is the only way to salvation

There are some nuances, but in broad terms this is it. So, pretending that the axiomatic point that Catholicism is the ONLY true Church, is merely a personal choice is either utterly ignorant, or the conclusion of someone too stupid to do basic research and basic logic, or, the intentional lie of a gnostic deceiver.

You’ll see that I assumed (as charity dictates) that Bruce is merely an ignorant, and a hit and miss thinker. This despite his clearly gnostic tendencies, not to mention absurdist notions of Mormonism being in any way valid. Truly, if you don’t know the story of Mormonism I suggest you go to the theatre and watch the Book of Mormon, it’s not historically perfect, but it is hilarious and effectively points out some of the complete nonsense of that made up cult.

My conviction is rooted in a primary understanding of God the Creator as our Heavenly Father who Loves us all as His individual children – and the utter inconceivability that such a personage would set-up mortal life on this earth (and all its incredible variety of situations through persons, time and place) – and with this mortal life being directed-at salvation – to have such absolute dependence on the contingencies of any possible human institution. 

What did I say? The man is either supremely ignorant of Christianity as a whole, or pretending to be. The Catholic Church has human servants in it, from the Pope (currently not present since 1958) to the last layman, none of which are infallible. The Church, and the Pope, when there is one and he is speaking ex cathedra only, are infallible not because of any human attributes, but because it is supernaturally protected from error by God Himself. As a Loving God would. The Church is not a human institution at all, it is a divine one, populated by humans here on Earth, and infallible through God’s Grace and nothing else!

But apparently Bruce, in Bruce-logic land, thinks a loving omnipotent God would set up a flawed, corruptible, “Church”.

No, Bruce. No. God gave us free will, so we are free to ignore Him and His Church, but if we but choose to look and investigate, it becomes clear very fast what the DEMONSTRABLE FACTS are.

I can understand that – in earlier eras and places – Men did not distinguish the individual from the group in the way that we now cannot help doing.

What a lot of unsubstantiated nonsense. Pure invention with millions of counter examples to discredit it all over the place at all times of history.

Each Man experienced himself in terms of the groups to which he belonged – mostly by birth. To be separated was not to be himself. 

Again, what utter rubbish. Scouts existed at all periods of history. They mixed with other tribes and races and cultures.

Therefore life and salvation used to be (necessarily) conceptualized in terms of groups. men were (mostly unconsciously, unaware of any alternatives) immersed in the groups into which they were born and grew. The religions that grew were spontaneously church-based and church-led – nothing else was even possible; and that was good and right for those times and places.  

And here we see the modernist, secular, gnostic, nonsense raise its beastly head. There are plenty of communities where the truth binds them as a people of one faith, without wiping out their individuality, in fact, Catholicism has always done this. And continues to do so.

But now, especially in The West, almost the opposite is the case. We find it difficult or impossible to consider ourselves primarily in terms of our group membership;

Don’t judge the world by your own measure, Bruce.

and confront an alienated world, cut off inside our own consciousness – and often seeking escape from this alienation by distraction and drugs. 

Again, speak for yourself. While distraction (in all its forms, pornography, wealth, drugs, materialism in general, entertainment, etc) is pervasive, it has always existed. Is it more prevalent today? Sure. But being “cut off” from “others” cannot be done unless you are first “cut off” from your own inner self and inner nature. In short, only those who do not know themselves fall so easily to it all. And the primary culprit for this lack of self-awareness is lack of hardship.

We must now (and indeed do, in practice) accept own our ultimate responsibility for our personal salvation;

It was always this way, Bruce. There has never been a magical group discount to salvation!

Where do you even come up with such specious nonsense?

and I think it is unhelpful to pretend otherwise;

No one here is “pretending” anything, except you Bruce; making up weird “psychological” theories that would have that other fantasist, Freud, blush.

and try (but fail) to make ‘obedience’ primary – when what the ancients considered obedience is literally impossible in a situation when we Must *choose* who exactly to believe and obey; and must choose frequently. 

Seriously, are you this dimwitted or are you in fact an intentional deceiver?

Are you implying, with a straight face, that salvation was, or is, or can be, achieved by forcing obedience on people?!? Really Bruce? Are you sure you’re not a closet Muslim? They believe that shit. Christians sure don’t.

The obedience is self imposed, dummy.

No one forced me to become Catholic. Or to go to Mass. Or to confess. Or to believe Catholic dogma. I choose it. As does every Catholic. We choose to obey. It is the paramount dogma of Catholicism that no one can be forced to become a Catholic, it must be freely chosen, without any coercion at all, by anyone!

It might be said that our great task nowadays is to become conscious of (and understand) much that was previously unconscious (and implicit); and then to take responsibility for our choices. 

Again, pure psychobabble nonsense. Every man, in every age, in every culture, since the very first man, and until the very last one, has had to, does now, and always will in the future, have to learn as much as he can about himself and the world, and whether he knows it or not, likes it or not, wants to or not, always, will, take responsibility (willingly or not) for his choices. Because that is how reality works Bruce.

And that is why at best Bruce is evasive (cowardly) in his thinking. And I’ve not even brought up his “Mormonism Lite” here.

I hope that clarifies things for all the SG denizens.

How to be a movie star in the USA

There are only a few requirements really.

As long as you’re willing to ignore, if not actually partake, in the rampant child sex abuse and satanic lifestyle and rituals, you really only need one of two requirements:

Belong to a specific over-represented ethnicity, and/or, just don’t be obese.

Not being obese in the USA already makes you a complete outlier. This was already true in 1996, when I first visited it. My more recent visit in October 2019, was too brief to get a decent sample size view of things, but certainly, What I did see was large all over.

It’s not a perfect metric, as it’s anecdotal and somewhat unconscious, but, being male, when you visit a new country or area, aside from special interests you may have of geography, architecture, cultural specific events or whatever, something you’ll notice is how the women look. For example, walking in Oxford street in central London, you will see hundreds of objectively beautiful women in the space of an hour or so on the crowded sidewalks.

The same is true proportionally in smaller European cities, be they Rome, Turin, Berlin, Dublin, Moscow, St. Petersburg, or many others you might pick at random. And some countries, like Kazakhstan, although relatively sparsely populated, have a very high percentage of objectively beautiful women. Some may be relatively ethnically invariant, like Japan, and for some that might be not their cup of tea, yet, once again, there are plenty of objectively beautiful women in Tokyo. Something one can still note even if perhaps they have a thing for tall blonde girls.

The first time I visited the USA, however, I was in my late twenties and on that trip I was single, so that particular radar was rather active, which is why I remember precisely that when I went to visit my brother, who lived within walking distance of Berkley University, so a large student campus, it was three weeks before I saw what I considered to be a beautiful woman. And she was Indian. It left me a rather bad taste regarding the US in general.

There were other factors too, that made me think I’d never want to live there, but as an overall sense of the place, it didn’t leave a good impression. And I honestly think it has to do with what passes for “food” in the USA.

Anyway, that’s my advice for fame in the USA: Not being obese puts you on the short list.

Valley of the Saints Update

Most of the things I do which matter to me, since childhood, are difficult for me to put into words. Especially words that make sense to other people, and even more difficult, that actually translate a meaningful amount of my real motivation, intention or sense of things.

It is, essentially, why I write. And why my non-fiction is generally peppered with footnotes and references, as well as being rather verbose, though generally I am not thought of as boring despite the usual length of my non-fiction works.

In part it’s because in each instance, each book is pretty much a conclusive reference work for the whole topic and covers it holistically and as fully as anything can be covered. You can see this in each of the three topics I covered so far, each of which has behind it a few decades of interest in one way or other, though that is not always immediately obvious to those who don’t know me personally.

The Face on Mars covered not just the anomalies on Mars, but antigravity technology, human history, Egyptian pyramid details and history, solar system history, Biblical history, Tesla’s work, astronomy in general, and gives enough basic science and historical space exploration information that would allow anyone even only partially interested to have many jumping off points.

Systema: The Russian Martial System was written to both de-mythologise some of the cults of personality that were building up around Systema, as well as the quasi-cult aspects crediting supernatural aspects that in reality are purely scientific and have a very sound foundation in advanced human performance science, which —admittedly— the Russians (Soviets to be precise) developed and have knowledge of far in advance of the West. As a result, it initially upset the status quo initially but to date has generally been quietly accepted by serious practitioners and remains the most comprehensive work of its kind. It succeeded indeed in explaining the little known aspects of military science that are the basis on which Systema was developed, as well as introduce how to apply such principles in ways that will benefit any physical endeavour (with concomitant psychological benefits). So much so that people who practice martial arts unrelated to Systema that have read the book and apply the lessons in it, experience jumps in ability at their chosen martial art that surprise both them and their training partners.

Reclaiming the Catholic Church exposes the deception of —and details the heresy present in— Vatican II, while detailing also who did it, why, and how. And how actual Catholicism is diametrically opposed to the usurping, fake, and literally demonic, current Novus Ordo “Catholic” Church, run by that arch-enemy of mankind, Bergoglio. And how it has been this way since 1958, making Sedevacantism the only Catholicism left. Responding to every single objection that has ever been raised against Sedevacantism. It also lays out the original virtues of actual Catholicism, the courage and infinite faith of its practitioners, and the simple historical fact that they forged, and ultimately created, all that is best about Western civilisation; a fact that no honest historian can deny, regardless of their specific religious beliefs, the best case in point being Rodney Stark.

In my fiction, the path is much easier, there I just need to describe a story, and my imagination was always good in this regard, I routinely won essay competitions at school based certainly not on my grammar but the ideas in the stories.

I mention all this, not to boast, but, as is my nature when trying to explain one of those difficult to verbalise concepts, to provide enough evidence that, hopefully, an objective observer can satisfy him or herself that I am telling the demonstrable truth, without hyperbole or exaggeration.

I have found this to be necessary in my life, though it was only in my early 40s that I realised the reason was the IQ gap, and that an easier way to get along with most humans was to simply avoid the issue altogether or to dumb it down to a point that it may as well be better to keep silent. But what would be the point of that? After all, the point is to share some useful or interesting consideration for the benefit, interest or entertainment of all.

One of the benefits of blogging is that I do not need to interact endlessly with each person that raises the usual objections (which in 99% of cases have already been addressed in the very points I make, if only they considered them before reacting in usual “But…” fashion). And I can simultaneously reach many more people. They can choose to ignore, disbelieve, dismiss my thoughts, experience and factual presentation of objective truths without disturbing me further, and those who instead are interested (always a minority) can continue to interact in a mutually fruitful way.

While concepts of astronomy, human history, martial arts and models of reality that best serve humanity might be sometimes difficult to explain in words, they are, approximately, like explaining the two times table instead of advanced calculus when compared to trying to explain the mechanism of my internal processes.

I do not need to explain anything important to myself in words. Since as far back as I remember, and I remember being younger than 2 years old, before my brother was born, my internal processes have always been instinctive, wordless, fully formed, and essentially not often mistaken. My internal ability to process, or perceive, the natural and good path of what I can only describe as the numinous, has always been good. My personal decisions may not always be wise, correct, or in any way “safe”, especially for me, but my sensing of the path of what I might call “light” for lack of a better word, is seldom ever wrong, though I obviously cannot give you satisfactory evidence for this. Whether I always take it or not is another topic.

I would say that almost all of my important life decisions have been made with that internal sense inside me. I think of it as the instinct of my heart, leading me sometimes down impossible pathways and dangerous, uncharted territory, but always that being the only way I see to hold true to myself and my sense of the numinous I mentioned. And that sense of the numinous embodies all sorts of concepts for which words are such a miserly approximation as to make them insulting, were it not for their being the only way we have to try to transmit the concepts across. It embodies, in shifting eddies of importance based on the specific situation or event: honour, the holding true to yourself, the truth, putting loved ones before your very life, holding the line even in the face of terror, death and a hopeless battle with infinite enemies of Love. Justice, related to honour, and more, duty. Law and order for all, the steel wall of truth in the face of lies. Strength or fortitude, the will to hold on when there is nothing left in your flesh to do so and your spirit is broken, tired and defeated. Beauty, that necessary balm to allow you to survive the duties of honour, justice and strength or fortitude, and hidden most, in the deepest centre of it all, Love; without which, nothing at all matters.

Such is my engine, and my eyes and my motive force, and my faith in it is yes, my own, but also far more than me. It is rooted in the ultimate truth that without this truth, all is nothing and all is meaningless and as it clearly is not that, God is. And God is Love.

So.

Sometimes —most times— I will not be able to explain it to anyone else. Some, a few, may be able to sense it at times. My son, my daughters, my wife, a friend, my father, my brother. Maybe. But in any case it will not matter nor alter my course, for ultimately, my service, my duty, my absolute devotion, is to that truth. That Love. That which most men, without having anything but the faintest of ideas of what He really is, call God.

Which brings me to the point of this particular entry, and for which, I am sure, this introduction will be deemed overkill by most. Especially anyone who ever appended the title “editor” to their name.

The Valley of the Saints. Why do that? What’s it really for? That sticky post at the top there, what’s it all about? Isn’t it just a way to raise money? Surely.

Sure. In the material world of things, that corrupt travesty of reality we all inhabit, the dominion of the adversary, you can see it as just a cynical way to raise cash. Especially if you are a secularist with little to no belief in actual Catholicism. But if you think that is the main reason or purpose it was created or came into being, you’d be wrong.

I cannot explain the intent, the origin, or the impetus for doing it, other than it is a tiny, almost imperceptible, yet unstoppable, undeviating force that comes from my centre though it is rooted outside of me.

Wordless to me, and as such, largely unknown to my conscious, word-filled brain, but absolute and eternal to my cells and heart and bone marrow.

And now, that you who have done so have put your money and your intention, and your own hearts and motive force in motion towards this too, I have proof. Not that I needed it for myself, and not that I can transmit it satisfactorily to anyone else, but perhaps, in the telling of it, a shadow of its light will reflect and be recognised within you too.

The naming of trees after saints or loved ones passed on, and even one archangel so far, the prayers I offer to them and the people who do the naming, they all join together somehow, like invisible lines of force on the spiritual aether, and more rarefied and subtle than even Maxwell’s equations, they resonate, invisible to the human eyes and the stunned and fooled human heart, but all-perceptible to those hearts that still sense their connection to God, whose word for Him: God, is such a truly tiny, almost entirely meaningless scribble that it would be an obscene blasphemy were it not for His infinite Love, that makes it humorous to Him even as I write these pitiful words to try to explain my ever-fallible attempts at listening to Him and acting for His glory, extremely aware that most times I just muddy His name by associating it at all with myself in any way. And yet He loves me. And He loves you. Yes he does. You specifically, in detail, and the Saint you want to honour, and the loved one you miss or care about or revere. And what is more, what is the real miracle, is that he knows you. He knows me. He knows us in all our pettiness, weakness, disloyalty, viciousness, unworthiness, and still, and yet, He truly Loves us.

I still struggle with that, and most days I put it out of my mind, for such Love hurts. It hurts in a way that heals us. Having that Love radiate at you is like having a force squeezing all your impurities out of you, like a fever of sweating out all your evil deeds and thoughts and perversions and weaknesses. It hurts like it hurt me to walk around Venice at night, alone, in 2016. It hurts like looking at a painting of Michelangelo or Leonardo da Vinci. It hurts you with infinite Love, like the pure and innocent smile of my blue-eyed baby daughter, or blonde-haired son, or the knowing, cheeky smile of my happy, relentless little daughter number three, the forceful hug of my stepdaughter, or the gentle one of my eldest.

But this small valley I watch over now, is slowly and surely, inexorably, changing and becoming somehow brighter. That light of the numinous that no one can define but all who have felt it recognise. And with each named tree, each prayer made, each thank you written and thought and whispered, somehow, we all of us grow. And that light begins to spread in ways we cannot know, and touches others and helps them too. Helps them reach and feel and know, find and sense, that Love. That Love that hurts. And that we, all of us, need so much.

Thank you all who have contributed and who continue to do so and will do so in the future.

I don’t know how, exactly, even if I sense it, and I cannot explain it to you, much less with worldly proofs to satisfy the lost, but somehow, you are helping create a power, a sense, a light, that creates a peace over the valley I watch over; not as “owner” but merely as guardian for a time. As long as I can, while here. And I promise, my prayers for your Saints and your loved ones and for you, are as true and good as I know how to make them. And in the doing them, you better me. You help push me into that light, that Love that hurts. It is for this I thank you. And I pray, I truly pray, that each of you fees some of it too, that you can sense at least as much of it as you are helping me feel. And hopefully a lot more too. Truly, thank you, every one, with all my heart. May God bless and cleanse and help every one of you feel His Love.

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