henry said:

Quote

If he is owned completely by the Jews they wouldn't try to torment him. Sure, the Jews own all of us to some extent, but I would think they own him less than the majority of people in the country.

No, he owes his fame and fortune to them, he is the company boy.  That is why when he went on Jimmy Kimmel, Kimmel made him say "Shalom."  It's why his films are filled with Masonic themes, with cursing and perversion and sadistic violence ( taking pleasure in violence ), the constant theme of vigilante revenge in his films -- which is nothing less than stoking people up to commit murder -- and all kinds of non- or anti-Catholic things.  The idea that he calls himself "Catholic" is so confusing, it makes it look like what he does is acceptable for a Catholic, but it's not.

The Passion of the Christ does not magically wipe away all his other abominations, before and after.  People need to realize that you don't just get to call yourself Catholic, as if that solves everything, while you then go out and do the opposite of what a Catholic should do.  You actually have to do the will of God.  This is part of the reason why you are seeing so few role models, henry.  The devil has us all twisted up, we have lost our common sense and decency.

I remember John Lennon saying at a press conference that the Jews invented showbiz. It is true that just about anyone who makes it in showbiz is a tool of the Jews, so in that sense I understand where you're coming from. I just thought you meant something more concrete, like he is a knowing agent of the Masons and Jews. That's what threw me off.

henry
 :sign-thread-hijacked:
Why don't you go and start a new thread?

henry, I think the expression is "There's no business like shoah business."  Meaning the h0Ɩ0cαųst.

Quote from: Trinity

But you finally hit the nail on the head, Matto.  Conversion is the answer, just as Jesus said and showed us.  That' why He didn't set up a Catholic gov't with a police force to ensure our compliance.  He wanted our hearts.

But you seem to be rejecting conquest. God set up his Pope to be a religious leader, but also to be a King above all other kings. The Muslim who owns the deli by my house remembers this, he calls Benedict the Pope-King. When God saw the Crusaders conquering Jerusalem by the sword, he smiled and blessed them. When God saw the Spanish conquering Mexico, he showed his approval by giving them Our Lady of Guadalupe, the world's greatest recorded miracle, and many other miracles. God leads his armies into battle and is happy when they are victorious, just as the devil leads his armies and are happy when they are victorious.

You know, Matto, our enemies know more about what we should be than we do (I'm referring to your Muslim deli friend).   No wonder they laugh us to scorn.

henry, I think the expression is "There's no business like shoah business."  Meaning the h0Ɩ0cαųst.

Good one!

I think it was Raoul who took you off.  Anyway, your subtopic is ok with me.  I will say, though, that Raoul is one of the gloomy gusses who seem to be in a lot of anger and get all bent out of shape if you step outside the line they think you should be inside of.

Alexandria said:

henry
:sign-thread-hijacked:
Why don't you go and start a new thread?

No, his topic is more interesting.  I'll cut and paste my definitions of religious liberty in another thread.  But Trinity is not listening.

henry said:

I just thought you meant something more concrete, like he is a knowing agent of the Masons and Jews. That's what threw me off.

I am saying that, pretty much.  I don't see how he can't know.  Even his little drunken speech about the Jews could have been a sort of pre-planned "revelation of the method" kind of event.  Just like the film Conspiracy Theory, which admits that certain cօռspιʀαcιҽs are real, but doesn't tell you how to solve them -- Catholicism.  

Not to mention that he blasphemes Christ in that film -- no Catholic should ever, EVER, use Christ's name in vain in a film.  If I even said that by accident, I would be in agony of guilt, but Mel said it in a FILM for everyone to hear, setting a horrible example.  Because of things like this it wouldn't surprise me if he made a pact with Satan himself, let alone the Jews, just to get his pretty mug up there.  

But I know people will defend him and say maybe he was non-practicing at that point, bla bla bla, there's always a defense.  Never mind that after POTC he made another bloody revenge film glorifying vigilante murder.  I didn't watch it, Edge of Darkness, maybe someone can tell me if he blasphemes again.  This guy never changes.  

Another way people defend Mel Gibson is to say he somehow infiltrated Hollywood and made a Catholic film, he beat the Jews at their own game.  This makes me chuckle a little under my breath, because at one time, this is how I thought -- I thought I was going to turn the system against the Jews and be this great film-star prophet.

Let me just say this.  The Jews don't just own production.  They own all the DISTRIBUTION.  That means they own all the theaters where the films play, they control which films will screen in which theaters.  So it's all very well that Mel Gibson paid for POTC out of his own pocket -- that doesn't change the fact that it would never have been seen if, for some reason, the Jews didn't want it to be seen.  James Cameron could have made Avatar for eight billion dollars, everyone on Earth could have wanted to see it, but without that distribution, he'd be playing it on his home computer.  

Now, Passion of Christ opened on 2,000 screens.  How do you think that was possible, henry?  Did he buy all those theaters himself?  He's rich, but not that rich.  

Besides, is POTC really the great Catholic film people think?  Before I was Catholic, I saw bits and pieces of it and found it soulless and repulsive in the way it turns Jesus into an inarticulate slab of meat.  Just the way it is filmed is ugly, and the soundtrack is loud and abrasive.  There may be a place for a film that goes farther than older ones into showing what Jesus suffered, but Mel, with his sadomasochistic fixation, is the last person on Earth who should ever make such a film, in my opinion.  The film comes across as if Gibson is relishing pain and suffering.  The last thing I want to watch is Lethal Weapon 5: The Passion of the Mel-Christ.  But I realize art is subjective, and that others are inspired by the film.