Yes, it's disturbing and disgusting.
However, it's not proof that JP2 was an antipope, if the standard of proof is incontrovertible evidence of manifest and pertinacious heresy, and explicit apostasy according to the exact meaning of that term.
Here's a question. Is there the possibility of a lower standard of proof that JP2 was an antipope? In other words, it is incontrovertible that JP2 enticed and poisoned the minds of countless Catholics with all of this new age garbage. It's not manifest and pertinacious heresy (he does not explicitly reject any Catholic dogma), nor is it apostasy (he does not explicitly profess faith in a false god), yet it is clearly an act of doctrinal poisoning. He is poisoning the mind of anyone who listens to this speech. That is incontrovertible. Is that sufficient to mark him as an anti-pope?