Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Mel Gibson's sequel  (Read 74448 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Mel Gibson's sequel
« Reply #40 on: August 16, 2025, 04:56:43 AM »
While you played her like a fiddle, I called het  and FE out numerous times over placating fαɢɢօts, for which I was eventually banned. Tell me, did you get banned? She was also soft on the jew question and actually had many semitiphiles and Israel firsters posting there, the place was infested with fαɢɢօts, fαɢɢօt enablers and jew water boys and girls. Actually if I remember correctly, a tranny took them down in the end. That's what happens when you allow so much of a whiff of fαɢɢօtry or Jєωιѕн surpremecism in your house, they will  eventually divide it and take it down. I think Quis was fair for the most part, he's the one who sent me here, but it was Vox's forum and she imploded it in the end. And over a fαɢɢօt.

Offline rum

Re: Mel Gibson's sequel
« Reply #41 on: August 22, 2025, 04:00:36 PM »
While you played her like a fiddle, I called het  and FE out numerous times over placating fαɢɢօts, for which I was eventually banned. Tell me, did you get banned? She was also soft on the jew question and actually had many semitiphiles and Israel firsters posting there, the place was infested with fαɢɢօts, fαɢɢօt enablers and jew water boys and girls. Actually if I remember correctly, a tranny took them down in the end. That's what happens when you allow so much of a whiff of fαɢɢօtry or Jєωιѕн surpremecism in your house, they will  eventually divide it and take it down. I think Quis was fair for the most part, he's the one who sent me here, but it was Vox's forum and she imploded it in the end. And over a fαɢɢօt.
Sure, I give you kudos. The people I tend to criticize are people who disappoint me. I don't waste my time on poche types, who are too obvious to attract my interest.

The people who disappoint me are those who are on the right track, but get misled. They're just not anti-jwish enough. I'm not anti-jwish enough.

I preferred Quis to Vox. One of my troll accounts on FE, I forget which one, also sent you a PM recommending Cathinfo.


Offline rum

Re: Mel Gibson's sequel
« Reply #42 on: August 22, 2025, 04:57:48 PM »

Re: Mel Gibson's sequel
« Reply #43 on: August 23, 2025, 06:04:41 PM »
I was misled as well. I believed in this nonevent until my late-20s. But I didn't have a best friend for over 20 years (as Caviezel has had in Gibson) who knew it didn't happen, and my good friend's father as well (Hutton). In my conversations with this good friend, who made me millions of dollars (as Gibson has made Caviezel), I never thought (or my good friend never thought) to converse on this topic? Yeah, right.

As you can see in the clip I posted Caviezel is virtue-signalling and depicting himself as a hero. It's noxious behavior. He's saying "at Auschwitz, I would have been there. When slavery was legal, I would have been there." Meaning he would have "fought the good fight". Ooh so brave of him. You can be sure Caviezel wouldn't mention the role jws played in the trade. It's a noxious pattern of behavior he's exhibiting.

His entire demeanor as a public figure reeks of play-acting virtue. It's insufferable behavior. Has this guy ever laughed at a fart joke?

Caviezel has never once in his public life called out the jws. He's some sort of psy-op. Perhaps Gibson and Caviezel are psy-ops without even knowing it.

I've corrected you in the past about Anne Barnhardt and Nostradamus, without any thanks from you. I rarely read your posts. Who knows what other goofy stuff you promote that I could also provide some correction.

I think of the line "if it doesn't gel, it isn't aspic." Anyone with a Catholic sense, or even a decent pagan sense, would spot a phony in Caviezel. He really reeks.

  

Like his masonic bud Mel, Hollywood Jim... has always had something in his left eye. 


Re: Mel Gibson's sequel
« Reply #44 on: August 23, 2025, 06:09:42 PM »
While I hate the Protestants' anti-catholic, anti-Mary "re-interpretation" of Genesis, I always took the crushing of the serpent's head in the garden as Christ, who allowed His human nature to be tempted, decided at that moment to accept His death and reject the weakness of His humanity, as an example to all of us.

As much as it's true that Our Lady will "crush satan's head", we have to remember that Christ's death on the Cross was/is not the end of this prophecy.  Christ died, the Church was born, and 2,000 years later, we're still fighting satan.  Our Lady's victory is not yet complete.

But in the case of the Garden, and with Christ on the cross, He alone is Our Redeemer.  He alone sufficed to God the Father.  It is true that it was His victory, alone, who saved us from sin.  (Our Lady does play a mystical part in all of this, without question).

But the larger story, post-Crucifixion, post-Resurrection...THAT is when Our Lady took a part in helping the Apostles and praying for the Church.  So Her "crushing the head of satan" is ongoing and also, yet to come (God will give Her the final victory).

So, I think both are true.  Christ did crush satan's head through His crucifixion, because satan ruled all the world through sin.  But Our Lady will also crush satan's head at the end of time, through the Church, as the battle for souls wages on.  Our Lady plays a part in both victories, because the story from Eden long ago, is not finished until the end of time.

The prottys always focus on Christ's redemption and think that "the story is over" because "Christ died once and for all", and they believe "once saved, always saved".  This is their error.  Life goes on, the battle goes on, and Our Lady plays the most important part.  Of course, the prottys have no idea about this.

You have an artistic imagination.

Note: Freemasons state publicly that masonry contributed to Mel's unique creativity and Hollywood success.