Meg, again, more personal attacks. I will skip over this part, since you seem to be using emotions rather than facts. You claim that the "TIA/TFP/Atila/Plinio Cult Issue" is not new, and is not a diversion. Let's take a look at the facts here:

1) According to the stats, this defamatory thread, titled "Atila and the TFP", was created by Cera, March 26, 2019 - one day after Atila published his article exposing SSPX's agent in Quito (which was published March 25, 2019)

2) Although the other defamatory thread, titled "Plinio Correa de Oliveira", was started May of 2018, the last post on the thread was made Neil Obstat on November 7, 2018 (see bottom of page 2 on the thread). From then on, there was silence on the thread for five months, until Cera recently "resurrected" the thread April 3, 2019 (see top of page 3 of the thread). Again, this curious "resurrection" ocurred only one week after Atila published his article on the SSPX Agent in Quito. Why after five months of silence did Cera suddenly find it convenient to enter the fray, right after Atila exposed SSPX's fraudulent activities? More suspicion.

3) Cera and Mega have continued to make other personal attacks against TIA/Atila/Plinio recently on other threads. These other threads were created to discuss TIA's recent exposés on SSPX's fraudulent activities, which confirms suspicion that these personal attacks from Cera and other SSPX followers are mere diversions created to deviate attention from SSPX's frauds.

Lastly - sure, you can say I am "new" here, since I signed up on this site last Christmas, which was close to four months ago. However, I have been following this site for a while, at least since November of last year to my knowledge. But regardless of all this, again - what does my being "new" on this site have anything to do with the issue at hand? Again, you seem to be an expert at diversions.

Please, stop with the sand attacks. Why don't you go tell Fr. Purdy to clear up the confusion here? Again, go ask him to come forward and clarify all of this for his followers by:
1) Proving that he actually speaks Spanish.
2) Proving that his docuмent does not in fact contradict the tradition of the Church.

You keep copying and pasting all the same arguments, despite the fact that we are showing that there is evidence against them. The more you keep insisting on the "cult" nonsense, the more it shows that there is no defense for Fr. Purdy, who seems to prefer to cower in silence and instead sends two ladies to cover for him.

If you feel that what I have written is defamatory, that's your choice. I truly believe that Plinio was a cult leader. Therefore, I do not want to remain silent. I can hardly agree that speaking the truth is in any way defamatory. Perhaps you believe that Guimaraes is somehow a prophet or enlightened individual? I can't really account for such a defense of him by his fans.

We can keep going round and round, basically covering the same thing over and over, if that's what you want. I have a lot of free time these days. Have at it.

Meg, keep distracting from the actual issue here, you just keep proving me right. I just showed you that, contrary to what you are claiming, these personal attacks against Atila/TIA are new, they were created right after Atila published his exposés showing SSPX is leading fraudulent activities, and you and Cera are responsible for these recent diversions. Interesting that you only felt like "speaking the truth" about Atila/TIA shortly after these publications against SSPX were made. This can hardly considered noble or honest, contrary to the mirage you trying to portray here.

It just proves that Fr. Purdy prefers to hide under the skirts of two women instead of face the issue publicly like a man.

As I have said, it's not about Fr. Purdy.

Yes it is Meg. You are constantly distracting from the issue here. Please explain to me why it is that:
1) You seem to have made it your personal mission to spew out any and all trash on Atila/TIA only recently, right after Atila posts an article showing the dishonesty of SSPX (and more recently of Fr. Purdy).
2) If you are not affiliated with SSPX, why do you conveniently make it your aim to divert any and all attention away from SSPX's dishonesty?

If you respond with a diversion again, you prove my two points right. Answer my two questions before continuing more of your trash talk.

Calm yourself. This is just a forum.

Your questions have already been answered. I won't be responding to you again today.

I don't believe that I'm wrong to speak out against a cult leader and his followers. You are free to disagree, of course. Controversial subjects are allowed to be discussed here. As such, there are bound to be disagreements.

You are making personal attacks -- in logic we call this an "ad hominem" -- rather than actually addressing my arguments.
Allow me to remind you what the two arguments are:
1) Fr. Purdy does not speak Spanish, so he cannot present himself as an authority on how Our Lady's title should be translated into English.
2) Fr. Purdy contradicts Dom Gueranger: while Dom Gueranger says February 2 is concerned with the Purification of Our Lady, Fr. Purdy says February 2 is concerned with the Presentation of Our Lord.

These are not personal attacks on Fr. Purdy. I have no doubt, if it could be shown that Fr. Purdy is actually a Spanish speaker, Mr. Atila would be the first to apologize and recant. But the silence on these two important questions is frankly deafening. I believe you can sympathize with my plight here.

Thus, since you are much more knowledgeable on this matter than it originally seemed, I invite you to answer these two arguments and whether they are right or wrong.

Calm yourself. This is just a forum.

Your questions have already been answered. I won't be responding to you again today.

My questions have not been answered Meg. Your diversion/hit and run tactics are starting to become really obvious, and it shows not only your bad faith, but your extreme dishonesty. Again, I pose my questions for all CI readers to see:
1) Why have you and Cera been posting all of this anti-TIA/Atila trash only recently (right after TIA exposes SSPX) if you have not been sent here to cover for SSPX/Fr. Purdy and defame Atila/TIA? 
2) If you are such a noble defender of the "truth", why is it that you haven't come up with all this anti-TIA trash until now? 
3) Why do you refuse to address the very serious issues by diverting attention with all sorts of personal attacks? 
4) Why do you keep trying to defend Fr. Purdy by excusing him from the scene, saying that "this is not about Fr. Purdy"? 
If you're too afraid to answer these questions, call Fr. Purdy and ask him to clarify all this publicly. It's really simple.
And it's interesting you just responded to Last Tradhican - didn't you just say you wouldn't be responding today? Didn't you also say "that you have a lot of free time these days" and that you would very happily "keep going round and round"? 
You are only proving that you and your cohorts (including SSPX/Fr. Purdy) are dishonest, and use diversion/hit-and-run tactics to try to escape the issue.

Meg, you're running out of ammo. Is that all you have - a smiley face? You are only proving my point right, and that is that you have been sent by SSPX/Fr. Purdy. Just call him and ask him to defend himself like a man, instead of sending two ladies to cover for his obvious frauds.
Bullying, personal insults, intimidation, diversion, hit-and-run moves - all of these are tactics used by the SSPX. You prove yourself to be a member of the SSPX when you resort to these tactics, rather than using reason and logic like a civil Catholic person.

Actually, I would have preferred to use a 'rolling eyes' emoticon, but sadly, they aren't available to use anymore here.

Nice try, but sarcasm is not a valid argument. You are simply showing how intellectually deficient you are when you resort to this kind of childish game.
I repeat: Bullying, personal insults, intimidation, diversion, hit-and-run moves - all of these are tactics used by the SSPX. You prove yourself to be a member of the SSPX when you resort to these tactics, rather than using reason and logic like a civil Catholic person.
If you don't have anything more to say, then just call Fr. Purdy, really simple. Let him defend himself. All you are doing is further ruining what little is left of Fr. Purdy's/SSPX's prestige and making an absolute fool of yourself.

I am reposting this since it was lost in the general cascade of other posts. I offer it once more for Meg and Cera's consideration, as well as anyone else who would like to contribute to this polemic. I believe moving back to these questions will put the discussion back-on-track. So, I ask them to give their opinions to these two theses:

[Two arguments]:
1) Fr. Purdy does not speak Spanish, so he cannot present himself as an authority on how Our Lady's title should be translated into English.
2) Fr. Purdy contradicts Dom Gueranger: while Dom Gueranger says February 2 is concerned with the Purification of Our Lady, Fr. Purdy says February 2 is concerned with the Presentation of Our Lord. 

I eagerly await their responses.  :-\