Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: Augstine Baker on October 06, 2011, 10:22:05 PM
-
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Antifa-Neonαzιs Mobilize Their Thugs Against Life
Left extremists are allowed to rule and operate how they like. As a diversionary ploy the Joke-Republic hides behind the nαzι-craze. [Meaning that it can use fascism in various ways to control people.]
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-lPYNzN5q0yQ/To5rZARc9II/AAAAAAAABqw/dJP-RtSHJac/s1600/article.13988.jpg)
(kreuz.net) The regional group of Dusseldorf's ‘Aktion Lebensrecht für Alle’ [Pro-Life for Everyone] was brought to silence by violent left-extremists last Saturday.
The pro-lifers planned a demonstration on Saturday evening, October 1st.
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2011/10/antifa-neonαzιs-mobilize-their-thugs.html
-
Over a hundred antifa-Neonαzιs came to do malicious violence. They tore the improvised video screen down and cut the power.
The left-stormtroopers shouted various insults over megaphones and speakers like, "Mary should have aborted, so we'd be spared from you", "My uterus belongs to me" and "No God, no State, no Patriarchate".
I don't know if St. Louis IX was reprimanded or not for branding the lips of blasphemers, but they sure deserve it.
-
The pseudo-Austrian kreuz.net makers call anybody "nαzι", which is the Jєω's abbreviation for National-Socialists (therefore the correct German abbreviation would be: "Naso").
By now I'm sure that kreuz.net is a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation of anti-Zionist Judaics who camouflage their operation by using naive catholics for their own purposes. When I first heard this theory a year ago or so, I didn't agree but today I do.
In reality kreuz.net ridicules us roman-catholics all day and hates us Germans. Quite cleverly packed usually, but nonetheless they do.
That's why most befriended German-speaking traditional catholics who formerly read or even contributed to kreuz.net (via reader's comments or editorially) turned away from them in disgust. We catholics don't share the screen with kreuz.net .
Augustine Baker, I appreciate a series of your own comments, but I'm amazed that you're translating and transporting the kreuz.net nonsense to the Anglo-Saxon world via several forums. I think it's redundant and there are much better and catholic sources you could transport.
Furthermore kreuz.net aggressively protects the Judaizer Krah and systematically deletes any poster's hint to the Krah-Gate and the poster's account.
An example for kreuz.net's madness? They recently published another one of their countless articles against a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ FRG-German conciliar-catholic named Berger: www.kreuz.net/article.13827.html (http://www.kreuz.net/article.13827.html)
Original sentence:
"Im übrigen arbeitet Berger als Deutschlehrer in Erftstadt bei Köln. Deutsch war die wichtigste Kommunikations-Sprache der nαzι-Größen."
English translation:
By the way, Berger is a teacher of German language in the town Erfstadt near Cologne. German was the most important communication language of the top nαzιs.
See? That's pure ridicule mixed with madness and malice. That's no joke from kreuz.net by the way, because they're regularly using this way of "arguing". There's countless real arguments you could use to criticise the sick modernist Berger. But kreuz.net is obsessed with using their "nαzι" club. They're also obsessed with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, by the way. They're always exaggerating our real catholic concerns beyond measure, so that in the end they caricature it. Well, they stink and they harm Catholicism.
-
Thank you, Ethelred.
Once being a bastion of Catholicism in Germany and a great sign that there is in fact a Christian resistance to ʝʊdɛօ-Freemansonry and Liberalism, it now became the bad joke of miserable times.
I hope that there may be another truly Catholic news portal in our country sometime in the future.
By the way: If you see what happened to Altermedia and Co., you wonder why nothing ever happens to this sort.
-
Could it be that a terrible irony is now being played out whereby a politically vulnerable SSPX, apart fron its religious uncertainties, is now being used as some kind of battlefield within Jєωry? If the Zionist cause is now being pushed into a corner, incredible as it may seem, what better place to seek allies than among those trad Catholics with neo-con sympathies to replace those lefties who are abandoning it. Menzingen using Jєωιѕн contacts may feel there are benefits to be had in knowing people of influence to ease its position in a hostile world. The chief asset of Zionism of course is the h0Ɩ0cαųst Industry which may provide an answer to why Bp. Williamson is continually being ostracised and why Rome is politically nervous when it comes to the Society. However, this does not exclude the possibilty that rival Jєωιѕн interests may see the Society as a gentile organisation with a reputation for opposing the nєω ωσrℓ∂ σr∂єr and seek to give it a higher profile than it would normally have. I have little knowledge of the conflicts and tensions within world Jєωry; this always seems to be hidden from view.
-
Pyrrhos, exactly. Thanks for your comment.
Wessex, I think it could be. Thanks for your comment, too.
Some catholic experts on Judaism use to say: If two Jєωs meet, there's three opinions...
:-)
That's good for us catholics, because we are or should be one herd with one faith and one shepherd.
P.S. The shepherd bit is a kind of problem for several decades now. But it'll be resolved soon by our divine shepherd. We've just to hold out and stay faithful, with the help of God. Patience!
P.P.S. You know the prayer of an humorous impatient catholic? "Please, dear Lord, give patience to me .... but as quickly as possible please!"
-
The pseudo-Austrian kreuz.net makers call anybody "nαzι", which is the Jєω's abbreviation for National-Socialists (therefore the correct German abbreviation would be: "Naso").
By now I'm sure that kreuz.net is a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation of anti-Zionist Judaics who camouflage their operation by using naive catholics for their own purposes. When I first heard this theory a year ago or so, I didn't agree but today I do.
In reality kreuz.net ridicules us roman-catholics all day and hates us Germans. Quite cleverly packed usually, but nonetheless they do.
That's why most befriended German-speaking traditional catholics who formerly read or even contributed to kreuz.net (via reader's comments or editorially) turned away from them in disgust. We catholics don't share the screen with kreuz.net .
Augustine Baker, I appreciate a series of your own comments, but I'm amazed that you're translating and transporting the kreuz.net nonsense to the Anglo-Saxon world via several forums. I think it's redundant and there are much better and catholic sources you could transport.
Furthermore kreuz.net aggressively protects the Judaizer Krah and systematically deletes any poster's hint to the Krah-Gate and the poster's account.
An example for kreuz.net's madness? They recently published another one of their countless articles against a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ FRG-German conciliar-catholic named Berger: www.kreuz.net/article.13827.html (http://www.kreuz.net/article.13827.html)
Original sentence:
"Im übrigen arbeitet Berger als Deutschlehrer in Erftstadt bei Köln. Deutsch war die wichtigste Kommunikations-Sprache der nαzι-Größen."
English translation:
By the way, Berger is a teacher of German language in the town Erfstadt near Cologne. German was the most important communication language of the top nαzιs.
See? That's pure ridicule mixed with madness and malice. That's no joke from kreuz.net by the way, because they're regularly using this way of "arguing". There's countless real arguments you could use to criticise the sick modernist Berger. But kreuz.net is obsessed with using their "nαzι" club. They're also obsessed with ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs, by the way. They're always exaggerating our real catholic concerns beyond measure, so that in the end they caricature it. Well, they stink and they harm Catholicism.
It's a rhetorical device to describe people's behavior as fascistic, which it is and does recall various techniques used to attack the Church during the nαzι period.
You're failing to mention that kreuz.net frequently criticizes die nαzιcrazy German Media for doing the same thing you're accusing them of doing.
If it weren't for kreuz.net, Berger would probably still be working in Cologne and at Holy Cross.
-
It's a rhetorical device to describe people's behavior as fascistic, which it is and does recall various techniques used to attack the Church during the nαzι period.
These riffraff call themselves Antifa--anti-fascists, but they're themselves what they claim to fight against.
A quote most likely misattributed to Churchill, but nevertheless true:
the fascists of the future will be called anti-fascists
-
By now I'm sure that kreuz.net is a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation of anti-Zionist Judaics who camouflage their operation by using naive catholics for their own purposes. When I first heard this theory a year ago or so, I didn't agree but today I do.
Was ist das eigentlich?
Why would anti Zionists be inside an organization to subvert it? Wouldn't they be Zionists? I am operating in the understanding that there is such a creature as Anti-Zionist Judaics who don't have the agenda of world domination that Zionists do. Or is that an impossibility? For Judaism, by its nature, to not desire world domination.
-
It is senseless to say "look - they're like the nαzιs" - they're bad - if you have to do that with Catholics to convince the audience that someone is bad - then you've lost the battle. If something deserves execration it isn't because it's something nαzιs once did.
-
By now I'm sure that kreuz.net is a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation of anti-Zionist Judaics who camouflage their operation by using naive catholics for their own purposes. When I first heard this theory a year ago or so, I didn't agree but today I do.
Was ist das eigentlich?
Why would anti Zionists be inside an organization to subvert it? Wouldn't they be Zionists? I am operating in the understanding that there is such a creature as Anti-Zionist Judaics who don't have the agenda of world domination that Zionists do. Or is that an impossibility? For Judaism, by its nature, to not desire world domination.
Considering that kreuznet is itself frequently accused of being fascist itself, among other things and that it frequently posts articles and perspectives often seen in fascist publications and fora, as well as defending the Palestinian side, if not cause, it makes that poster's accusations look pretty hysterical.
-
It is senseless to say "look - they're like the nαzιs" - they're bad - if you have to do that with Catholics to convince the audience that someone is bad - then you've lost the battle. If something deserves execration it isn't because it's something nαzιs once did.
Well said!
Why would anti Zionists be inside an organization to subvert it? Wouldn't they be Zionists? I am operating in the understanding that there is such a creature as Anti-Zionist Judaics who don't have the agenda of world domination that Zionists do. Or is that an impossibility? For Judaism, by its nature, to not desire world domination.
Well, I think the people behind kreuz.net are doing a pretty smart fαℓѕє fℓαg operation.
Still they're weird, too. (People who always fake automatically become weird.)
Their very radical public opposition to "Israel" and Zionism could be a part of their fαℓѕє fℓαg operation, or it could be genuine, I don't know for sure. It's not consistent. What we know for sure is that Judaism is a mortal enemy of our Lord, in its Zionist and its anti-Zionist variety. Although the latter variety is easier to cope with for us catholics, it's no good.
In a similar way, on the one side the people behind kreuz.net allegedly propagate some of Bishop Williamson's texts, whilst on the other side they protect Krah who hates Bishop Williamson by removing any pointer to the Krah-Gate, and they promote him by printing his counter statements. Again, not consistent.
Also they usually downplay Islam and sell it as morally superior to for example the decadent West. So they try to cast out devils by Beelzebub, and this is their trademark.
-
It's a rhetorical device to describe people's behavior as fascistic
It was communist Stalin's invention to call any opponent "fascist", and to name this huge betrayal "anti-fascism".
That's part of the Stalinism and it was and is the state's official doctrine in many communist states. For example it was in Eastern Germany named "German Democratic Republic", or GDR in short. Since the European Union is communist too, the so called "anti-fascism" is a common practice in the entire EU zone, too.
In reality your so called "rhetorical device" is a Stalinism device.
Later on "nαzι" became a synonym to "fascist" and today it's used by the leftists and the Jєωs to defame any opponent as "fascist" or "nαzι".
Today's Federal Republic of Germany's cancelor Merkel and "Team Merkel" member Krah were shaped in the GDR, so it's no surprise Krah and his mentor Fr Pfluger call Bishop Williamson a "nαzι", too.
However we catholics love truth and justice, and so we don't use popular but wrong names to defame opponents.
, which it is and does recall various techniques used to attack the Church during the nαzι period.
Not at all. The national-socialists weren't fascists. That's just what the communist Stalin said. In reality the national-socialists were, well, national-socialists. But since communists are always either national-socialists (like Stalin and his national Bolshevism) or international-socialists (like the Jєωιѕн Trotzky and the high finance) they prefer to use the disguising words "fascist" or "nαzι" in order to distract from themselves.
Let's quote the inventor of fascism, Mussolini: Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.
That's the real definition of fascism.
So in reality today's globalist world ruled by Jєωs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC19fEqR5bA) is fascist, but hardly anybody says it. As distraction the mass-media owned by a few Jєωs brainwash the public with their favourite words "You're a fascist" and "You're a nαzι".
kreuz.net is part of this brain-washing system and by transporting it you're too.
You're failing to mention that kreuz.net frequently criticizes die nαzιcrazy German Media
Is there anybody they don't criticize aside bad pope Pius XII ?
The pseudo-Christians behind kreuz.net who intensively protect Krah and his Jєωιѕн backers name any of their opponents "nαzι", exactly like the Jєω's mass-media do. They're no different in their means.
If it weren't for kreuz.net, Berger would probably still be working in Cologne and at Holy Cross.
Berger is an unimportant, modernistic, pro-conciliar, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and weird leftist. He's an easy target for busybodies like kreuz.net are.
To put him into line with national-socialists however because he's a German teacher (see my translation in my post here some days ago) is pure vicious insanity. Another trademark of kreuz.net .
-
To put it in a nutshell: kreuz.net is a filthy, anti-German and anti-traditional website which caricatures true Catholicism by exaggerating any real christian matter beyond all measure.
The makers behind kreuz.net are boiling mad and use pornographic language and graphic pictures all day to underline their madness.
They don't speak and act like catholics but are filled with hate against virtually any of their real and alleged opponents. That some or even many of their opponents usually are wrong doesn't make kreuz.net right. You can't cast out devils by Beelzebub.
A sound person who's not (yet) catholic but reads kreuz.net must believe we Christians would be mad dogs.
So in reality kreuz.net does not only give ammunition to the enemies of our Lord, but they damage traditional Catholicism, and they do so much more efficiently than any open enemy of Our Lord could do.
Ask the cui bono question.
kreuz.net is a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation.
It's a kind of Internet 9/11 for the German-speaking catholic world.
It's no surprise that over 90% of the reader's comments on kreuz.net are anti-catholic or directly satanic. No sound catholic administrator would ever allow this!
Augustine, why don't you translate some hand-picked but typical kreuz.net screaming tantrums word-by-word and include their ill-favoured and/or pornographic pictures? They're having their screaming every day, so this is easy.
This way the Cathinfo users would see for themselves why they really don't need the kreuz.net's filth in the Anglo-Saxon catholic world.
-
It's a rhetorical device to describe people's behavior as fascistic
It was communist Stalin's invention to call any opponent "fascist", and to name this huge betrayal "anti-fascism".
You don't think the editors of kreuz.net are aware of that?
Also, nαzιs are a bad thing and there are people who are demonstrably Fascist who should be discouraged.
That's part of the Stalinism and it was and is the state's official doctrine in many communist states.
So, because they accuse the anti-Church media of using Fascist techniques in their treatment of the Church, the editors of Kreuz.net are Communists? That's absurd. For example it was in Eastern Germany named "German Democratic Republic", or GDR in short. Since the European Union is communist too, the so called "anti-fascism" is a common practice in the entire EU zone, too.
In reality your so called "rhetorical device" is a Stalinism device.
No, it's putting the square peg in the square whole.
Later on "nαzι" became a synonym to "fascist" and today it's used by the leftists and the Jєωs to defame any opponent as "fascist" or "nαzι".
Today's Federal Republic of Germany's cancelor Merkel and "Team Merkel" member Krah were shaped in the GDR, so it's no surprise Krah and his mentor Fr Pfluger call Bishop Williamson a "nαzι", too.
Kreuz has always been sympathetic to Bishop Williamson, actually, and attacks the media for its nαzι-delusion.
However we catholics love truth and justice, and so we don't use popular but wrong names to defame opponents.
It makes sense to portray people as they are in an effective way so that people get the message. It's called rhetoric.
, which it is and does recall various techniques used to attack the Church during the nαzι period.
Not at all. The national-socialists weren't fascists. That's just what the communist Stalin said. In reality the national-socialists were, well, national-socialists. But since communists are always either national-socialists (like Stalin and his national Bolshevism) or international-socialists (like the Jєωιѕн Trotzky and the high finance) they prefer to use the disguising words "fascist" or "nαzι" in order to distract from themselves.
You're equivocating. The term Fascist comes from Musolini and is a meaningful description which can be, in the parlance of some, a means of short circuiting discussion, but why not call a Fascist a Fascist?
You do realize that National Socialism is an evil thing, yeah?
Let's quote the inventor of fascism, Mussolini: Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.
That's the real definition of fascism.
So, the Germans didn't create an alliance with Business and the State?
So in reality today's globalist world ruled by Jєωs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aC19fEqR5bA) is fascist, but hardly anybody says it. As distraction the mass-media owned by a few Jєωs brainwash the public with their favourite words "You're a fascist" and "You're a nαzι".
kreuz.net is part of this brain-washing system and by transporting it you're too.
No it's not.
You're failing to mention that kreuz.net frequently criticizes die nαzιcrazy German Media
Is there anybody they don't criticize aside bad pope Pius XII ?
The pseudo-Christians behind kreuz.net who intensively protect Krah and his Jєωιѕн backers name any of their opponents "nαzι", exactly like the Jєω's mass-media do. They're no different in their means.
You don't have any idea what the spiritual condition of the editors of kreuz.net is.
I just refuted your whole point. They protect Krah for reasons I don't understand, but they've always defended Bishop Williamson and frequently attack the soft delusional thinking behind the people who see nαzιs behind everything, often pointing out that it is they who are the nαzιs.
Meanwhile, a post which is supposed to be about how these Antifa-nαzιs attacking an interesting Pro-Life demonstration becomes a forum for you to lash out against kreuznet with your, frankly, mendacious accusations.
If it weren't for kreuz.net, Berger would probably still be working in Cologne and at Holy Cross.
Berger is an unimportant, modernistic, pro-conciliar, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and weird leftist. He's an easy target for busybodies like kreuz.net are.
To put him into line with national-socialists however because he's a German teacher (see my translation in my post here some days ago) is pure vicious insanity. Another trademark of kreuz.net .
Oh, I get it, it disproves your point, so its insignificant.
He may be insignificant, but the problem of clerical ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs isn't.
In fact, kreuz.net is the only group that sees the abuse crisis in its proper light as an ideological campaign conceived to manipulate public opinion and attack the Church.
-
It is senseless to say "look - they're like the nαzιs" - they're bad - if you have to do that with Catholics to convince the audience that someone is bad - then you've lost the battle. If something deserves execration it isn't because it's something nαzιs once did.
Well said!
When he says "Catholics" he means our special group of three or four people that think like me.
I'm not interested in persuading merely Catholics, but non-Catholics as well, of the injustice of either Fascism or Communism.
Why would anti Zionists be inside an organization to subvert it? Wouldn't they be Zionists? I am operating in the understanding that there is such a creature as Anti-Zionist Judaics who don't have the agenda of world domination that Zionists do. Or is that an impossibility? For Judaism, by its nature, to not desire world domination.
Well, I think the people behind kreuz.net are doing a pretty smart fαℓѕє fℓαg operation.
Still they're weird, too. (People who always fake automatically become weird.)
I'm more worried about people who distort the facts and engage in all kinds of special pleading. Like you complaining about people describing things as evil which are evil.
Their very radical public opposition to "Israel" and Zionism could be a part of their fαℓѕє fℓαg operation, or it could be genuine, I don't know for sure.
They're not just anti-Israel, they're anti-Jєωιѕн. Assuming you read the blog regularly, I think it's safe to say that you're aware of this and aren't including it in your post for the convenience of your argument. It's not consistent. What we know for sure is that Judaism is a mortal enemy of our Lord, in its Zionist and its anti-Zionist variety. Although the latter variety is easier to cope with for us catholics, it's no good.
In a similar way, on the one side the people behind kreuz.net allegedly propagate some of Bishop Williamson's texts,
Actually, they write articles that defend him and very unsarcastically refer to him as a "Hero-Bishop" a "Martyr-Bishop" and so forth, while crticizing the nαzι-delusional media of malice against the Bishop. whilst on the other side they protect Krah who hates Bishop Williamson by removing any pointer to the Krah-Gate, and they promote him by printing his counter statements. Again, not consistent.
Also they usually downplay Islam and sell it as morally superior to for example the decadent West. So they try to cast out devils by Beelzebub, and this is their trademark.
They portray Islamic society as morally superior to unterhosen-kultur NS-Deutschland, which it is.
-
Also, some of the photos which appear on the site ARE unfortunate, and some of the language in some of the articles is unfortunate, but I can't translate everything, nor would I want to necessarily follow a post which is difficult to understand or doesn't make a strong enough point.
Their photos of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs are invariably bizarre and disgusting, but I think it captures the essence of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs' madness and viciousness.
Speaking of which, Cardinal Schoenborn and the rest of the Old Liberal Bishops in Germany have something in common with you, they all hate kreuz.net and make some of the same complaints you do about their "tone" and their "anger".
Actually, kreuz.net is one of the most accurate blogs out there.
They predicted the Motu Proprio among other things and they were instrumental in giving a boost to Father Andreas in Kolping or attacking the insanity of Medjugorje for example.
-
Also, nαzιs are a bad thing
So, because a certain ideology named X is a bad thing you call other people not belonging to that ideology X-ies? That's insincere.
There's a rule of thumb for the Germans and partly for others, too: The leftist and Jєωιѕн mob call virtually any of their opponents "nαzι" and "Fascist" here. In most of the cases these opponents are not fascists however, let alone national socialists.
This is called a "Totschlagvokabel", i.e. character assassination. It's easy to use and you don't need any argument.
It usually works because most Germans and others have successfully been brain-washed in order to believe in the "h0Ɩ0cαųst" lie. See Bishop Williamson's good unmasking of it.
If a thinking German sees somebody in the German-speaking zone who's using the character assassination words "nαzι" or "Fascist", you can bet the latter one is an idiot or worse.
Kreuznet uses it all the time.
Today's Federal Republic of Germany's cancelor Merkel and "Team Merkel" member Krah were shaped in the GDR, so it's no surprise Krah and his mentor Fr Pfluger call Bishop Williamson a "nαzι", too.
Kreuz has always been sympathetic to Bishop Williamson, actually, and attacks the media for its nαzι-delusion.
You're talking about the Kreuznet guys who protect the archenemy of Bishop Williamson named Max Krah and his backers, and who successfully prevent the publishing of the Krah-Gate by deleting any link to it, because the Krah-Gate exposes a complot against Bishop Williamson inside the SSPX.
These Kreuznet guys are just allegedly sympathetic to Bishop Williamson. In reality they often sum up his Eleison Comments with their own words in a misleading way, when the Bishop's official German version is no longer than Kreuznet's "special summarise" ! Of course they also never link to Bishop Williamson's original Eleison Comments website, so that the readers can't see the manipulation.
Also they exaggerate so much with their seemingly praise for the Bishop that in the end they ridicule him. By calling the good Bishop a "martyr-bishop" for example. Now this is an unacceptable misuse of the word! Another trademark of Kreuznet.
P.S. Of course the good Bishop Williamson suffers a lot, and I'm sure he would die for the Faith, i.e. become a martyr in the end if necessary. But thank God he's still living, and may our Lord bless him with many years to live! Anyway, he's not a martyr.
The Kreuznet guys don't mind this misuse of words because they don't care exact definitions, as long as it's sensational and attracting the mob. That's why many traditional catholics see Kreuznet as a pseudo-catholic "Bild-Zeitung", with the "Bild-Zeitung" (literally "picture magazine") being the most dumb and mendacious newspaper in the entire German-speaking zone. Run by Zionists of course.
I've yet to meet a good traditional priest who would share your excitement about Kreuznet. Those I know can't stand Kreuznet because of their anti-christian means. Do you know one?
However we catholics love truth and justice, and so we don't use popular but wrong names to defame opponents.
It makes sense to portray people as they are in an effective way so that people get the message. It's called rhetoric.
In case of the "nαzι" and "Fascist" verbal-club it's just the rhetoric of the extremists.
I don't know one single decent German who would use the "nαzι" or "Fascist" verbal-club against his opponents.
The term Fascist comes from Musolini and is a meaningful description which can be, in the parlance of some, a means of short circuiting discussion,
The short circuit is only in the heads of the extremists calling their opponents "nαzι" all day, like Kreuznet does.
but why not call a Fascist a Fascist?
But hardly anybody does it! Who really applies the true meaning of: Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.
Who calls Montsanto etc, or the "bailouts" i.e. nationalisation of countless private banks fascist or communist? Kreuznet doesn't. They concentrate on such "big guns" like the left schoolteacher Berger whom they line up with national socialists.
You do realize that National Socialism is an evil thing, yeah?
There's no catholic socialism. But this fact doesn't entitle you or the Austrian Kreuznet extremists to defame opponents as national socialists who are not.
By your "logic" you can call opponents "child molesters" because child molesting is a very evil thing?
You obviously have no idea how microscopically small the number of national socialists is in the German-speaking zone, do you? You shouldn't believe the lies of the Jєωιѕн owned German mass-media which blows up these numbers. Anybody here who's not a Jєω or pro-Jєωιѕн leftist is called a "nαzι", in particular we traditional catholics. And Kreuznet is "fighting" against that by calling them "nαzιs"? How dumb or how false-flag.
So, the Germans didn't create an alliance with Business and the State?
Indeed Hitler didn't create a merger of state and corporate power. For a short time he intended to but then saw it didn't work. So he let the business run rather privately within certain frames like in every country. And it worked well, economically speaking.
Hitler's state was actually more liberal than the USA, Federal Republic of Germany, etc is today.
The pseudo-Christians behind kreuz.net who intensively protect Krah and his Jєωιѕн backers name any of their opponents "nαzι", exactly like the Jєω's mass-media do. They're no different in their means.
You don't have any idea what the spiritual condition of the editors of kreuz.net is.
It's in a very bad condition. To see this you just have to read Kreuznet for a some years and work for them or talk with people who worked for them until the former noticed they got abused and their work got manipulated.
I just refuted your whole point.
I must have missed that. Could you repeat your refutation?
[the guys behind kreuz.net] frequently attack the soft delusional thinking behind the people who see nαzιs behind everything, often pointing out that it is they who are the nαzιs.
You're actually saying that according to Kreuznet those who see "nαzιs" behind everything are the "nαzιs", and this is why the Kreuznet guys often call their opponents "nαzιs"...
That's a pretty dumb attitude, don't you think? According to that "logic" Kreuznet must be "nαzιs" too because they call so many of their opponents "nαzιs". Very strange.
Meanwhile, a post which is supposed to be about how these Antifa-nαzιs
There you go again.
So those pro abortion criminals are "nαzιs", because they are pro abortion?
No, but because -- let's repeat your words: "You do realize that National Socialism is an evil thing, yeah?"
You're lost in shortcuts. Expand them: "... how these anti-fascist National-Socialists..."
with your, frankly, mendacious accusations.
You didn't prove a single of my rejections of the Kreuznet extremists' rhetoric to be untrue, so don't call me mendacious.
Calling opponents "nαzιs" who are not national socialists is mendacious.
[Berger] may be insignificant, but the problem of clerical ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs isn't.
But Kreuznet massively downplayed the exposure (by the mass media) of many ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and child abusing clerics who have worked in the Church unobjected when bishops and cardinals like Ratzinger where their diocesan superiors!
Also Kreuznet protected the conservative but anti-traditional Austrian Bishop Krenn when the media came at him because he protected ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ seminary deans in his diocese (I think he just didn't see trough them, but still he protected them).
Of course the mass media used these things to attack the church, but why on earth did Kreuznet negate the fact of actual massive ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and child abusing practice in the German Newchurch dioceses, when you simple could not deny it and even many conservative catholics were ashamed?
Guess how Kreuznet called the exposing mass medias? "nαzιs" of course. Because it's the verbal-club of the idiots with no arguments.
In fact, kreuz.net is the only group that sees the abuse crisis in its proper light as an ideological campaign conceived to manipulate public opinion and attack the Church.
... by denying the massive child abuse and other crimes perpetrated by parts of the rotten Newchurch clergy which was covert by then bishops and cardinals like Ratzinger. Weird again.
Kreuznet and unfortunately you too try to cast out devils by Beelzebub.
This is impossible however.
(In this context: devils = anti-christian mass media, and Beelzebub = denial of the child abusing.)
Like you complaining about people describing things as evil which are evil.
Well, you distort again. I didn't complain about them because they described whatever. I complain about their non-christian means.
Kreuznet and you are saying: The end justifies the means.
This is impossible however.
They portray Islamic society as morally superior to unterhosen-kultur NS-Deutschland, which it is.
So you also don't know Islam. The Islam is as amorally and as dangerous for eternal life as the western democrazies. See North Africa veteran Archbishop Lefebvre's excellent words about the Islam, their polygamy, etc.
You use presence form. Where's this "NS-Deutschland" you and the Kreuznet extremists talk about all day? Because it means "National Socialist Deutschland". I've been under the impression it ceased to exist in 1945. Did I miss its revival? When did that happen?
Also, some of the photos which appear on the site ARE unfortunate, and some of the language in some of the articles is unfortunate, but I can't translate everything, nor would I want to necessarily follow a post which is difficult to understand or doesn't make a strong enough point.
Their photos of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs are invariably bizarre and disgusting, but I think it captures the essence of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs' madness and viciousness.
You say to warn about pornographic means you've to show pornographic. Because Kreuznet also publishes pornographic pictures.
Speaking of which, Cardinal Schoenborn and the rest of the Old Liberal Bishops in Germany have something in common with you
Yes, they speak the German language (like I do) and like the "leading National-Socialists did", in order to quote the Kreuznet extremists.
Actually, kreuz.net is one of the most accurate blogs out there.
It's a pseudo-christian website which use evil means to attack alleged opponents.
The guys behind it damage traditional Catholicism immensely. And they prevent the Krah-Gate from being exposed in German-speaking Internet with all means.
They're skillfully running a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation.
-
When he says "Catholics" he means our special group of three or four people that think like me.
For "Catholics" I could have substituted almost any category of people with any genuine moral sense.
If people can only detect something is bad because "nαzιs did it" then they are really lacking a moral compass. If a person can't see something is bad without drawing some lurid connection to Auschwitz and cattle cars then you're dealing with someone who fundamentally lacks moral sense.
Now the followers of the liberal society have no real moral sense. No real objective morality. For something to be bad they try to evoke "bad people" who are hated as having done similar things. It works for those people because "morality" for them is mostly an excuse to hate other people.
For anyone with an authentic moral sense, the comparison to the "nαzιs" seems like senseless parroting of left-wing propaganda, it does show contempt for the audience, as though the audience thinks like a typical person helplessly indoctrinated with nearly 7 decades of anti-nαzι propaganda, unable to conceive of evil in a different form. It will never convince the liberals to take such comparisons seriously. They will laugh at it. The Jєωs might cluck about it - but in truth they like this idea that the evil of the nαzιs becomes the measure of all morals.
-
Ethelred, I can appreciate your hostility to the Muslims being in Europe.
But one can't really judge such things by the Turks or other criminal groups that operate in Europe.
Having spoken a great deal with various Muslims it really is apparent that they believe in natural morality a great deal more than most nominal Christians.
-
Also, nαzιs are a bad thing
So, because a certain ideology named X is a bad thing you call other people not belonging to that ideology X-ies? That's insincere.
No it's not insincere. Especially when the people so described ARE acting like Fascists as in the case described above.
There's a rule of thumb for the Germans and partly for others, too: The leftist and Jєωιѕн mob call virtually any of their opponents "nαzι" and "Fascist" here.
So what. The National Socialists weren't only enemies of the Jєωs, you know. They were also implacable enemies of the Catholic Church. That's something you seem bent on ignoring in your attempt to schmear kreuz.net. Maybe you're a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation? In most of the cases these opponents are not fascists however, let alone national socialists.
In all of the cases I've seen discussed in NS-Germany by kreuz.net, the moniker is deserved.
I hate Fascism because I'm Catholic. It's that simple and when I see the tactics and behaviors employed by National SOCIALISTS, I think it's important to call attention to that fact, and the fact that this ideology will, whatever concessions they offer in the meantime, attempt to destroy the Church and Her patrimony.
This is called a "Totschlagvokabel", i.e. character assassination. It's easy to use and you don't need any argument.
Are you defending these "nαzι anti-fas" and what they're doing or what?
It usually works because most Germans and others have successfully been brain-washed in order to believe in the "h0Ɩ0cαųst" lie. See Bishop Williamson's good unmasking of it.
A point which, if one were to regularly read kreuz.net as I do, would be lost to you because kreuz.net frequently points out this phenomenon.
If a thinking German sees somebody in the German-speaking zone who's using the character assassination words "nαzι" or "Fascist", you can bet the latter one is an idiot or worse.
kreuz.net is not only Europe's most popular Catholic site, it's Europe's most popular RELIGION site. I don't think it got that way by being idiotic.
Obviously, you've got an axe to grind
Kreuznet uses it all the time.
Today's Federal Republic of Germany's cancelor Merkel and "Team Merkel" member Krah were shaped in the GDR, so it's no surprise Krah and his mentor Fr Pfluger call Bishop Williamson a "nαzι", too.
Kreuz has always been sympathetic to Bishop Williamson, actually, and attacks the media for its nαzι-delusion.
You're talking about the Kreuznet guys who protect the archenemy of Bishop Williamson named Max Krah and his backers, and who successfully prevent the publishing of the Krah-Gate by deleting any link to it, because the Krah-Gate exposes a complot against Bishop Williamson inside the SSPX.
No, I'm talking about the articles which appear in the publication describing Bishop Williamson as a hero and attacking the German thought police who use the h0Ɩ0h0αx [another word used by kreuz.net] to show how this is used to attack the Church and make its prelates timid.
These Kreuznet guys are just allegedly sympathetic to Bishop Williamson. In reality they often sum up his Eleison Comments with their own words in a misleading way, when the Bishop's official German version is no longer than Kreuznet's "special summarise" ! Of course they also never link to Bishop Williamson's original Eleison Comments website, so that the readers can't see the manipulation.
Most German Catholic readers of kreuz.net are able to read Bishop Williamson's words in English or in German.
But just for fun. Why don't you show where kreuz.net has been misleading.
Also they exaggerate so much with their seemingly praise for the Bishop that in the end they ridicule him. By calling the good Bishop a "martyr-bishop" for example. Now this is an unacceptable misuse of the word!
How is that a misuse of the word? Another trademark of Kreuznet.
P.S. Of course the good Bishop Williamson suffers a lot, and I'm sure he would die for the Faith, i.e. become a martyr in the end if necessary. But thank God he's still living, and may our Lord bless him with many years to live! Anyway, he's not a martyr.
Bishop Williamson is a hero. I love him as much as you apparently do.
The Kreuznet guys don't mind this misuse of words because they don't care exact definitions, as long as it's sensational and attracting the mob.
Is the term "martyr-bishop apt or not? You seem to think that it is and then you proceed to attack kreuz.net for describing him that way as if they are really trying to make him look ridiculous. That's why many traditional catholics see Kreuznet as a pseudo-catholic "Bild-Zeitung", with the "Bild-Zeitung" (literally "picture magazine") being the most dumb and mendacious newspaper in the entire German-speaki-ng zone. Run by Zionists of course.
A lot of traditional Catholics comment on kreuz.net, so I don't know that you're talking about.
I've yet to meet a good traditional priest who would share your excitement about Kreuznet. Those I know can't stand Kreuznet because of their anti-christian means. Do you know one?
No, actually, I don't. Kruez.net is too polemical for them. Father Gero Weisshaput, for example, was complaining about them despite the fact that they've written articles in praise of him. For his part, he's cited them and gien a monitem that "you have to hold your nose sometimes at kreuz.net". Whatever. I'm almost sure that you wouldn't consider him a "good" priest.
However we catholics love truth and justice, and so we don't use popular but wrong names to defame opponents.
It makes sense to portray people as they are in an effective way so that people get the message. It's called rhetoric.
In case of the "nαzι" and "Fascist" verbal-club it's just the rhetoric of the extremists.
I don't know one single decent German who would use the "nαzι" or "Fascist" verbal-club against his opponents.
That's probably because they're stunned into submission by the menace of the h0Ɩ0h0αx and its shame peddlers.
The term Fascist comes from Musolini and is a meaningful description which can be, in the parlance of some, a means of short circuiting discussion,
The short circuit is only in the heads of the extremists calling their opponents "nαzι" all day, like Kreuznet does.
but why not call a Fascist a Fascist?
But hardly anybody does it! Who really applies the true meaning of: Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.
Who calls Montsanto etc, or the "bailouts" i.e. nationalisation of countless private banks fascist or communist? Kreuznet doesn't. They concentrate on such "big guns" like the left schoolteacher Berger whom they line up with national socialists.
I don't think economics is as important as theology or orthopraxis. It's a religion magazine with no discernible sympathy to any particul
You do realize that National Socialism is an evil thing, yeah?
There's no catholic socialism. But this fact doesn't entitle you or the Austrian Kreuznet extremists to defame opponents as national socialists who are not.
By your "logic" you can call opponents "child molesters" because child molesting is a very evil thing?
You obviously have no idea how microscopically small the number of national socialists is in the German-speaking zone, do you? You shouldn't believe the lies of the Jєωιѕн owned German mass-media which blows up these numbers. Anybody here who's not a Jєω or pro-Jєωιѕн leftist is called a "nαzι", in particular we traditional catholics. And Kreuznet is "fighting" against that by calling them "nαzιs"? How dumb or how false-flag.
So, the Germans didn't create an alliance with Business and the State?
Indeed Hitler didn't create a merger of state and corporate power. For a short time he intended to but then saw it didn't work. So he let the business run rather privately within certain frames like in every country. And it worked well, economically speaking.
Hitler's state was actually more liberal than the USA, Federal Republic of Germany, etc is today.
The pseudo-Christians behind kreuz.net who intensively protect Krah and his Jєωιѕн backers name any of their opponents "nαzι", exactly like the Jєω's mass-media do. They're no different in their means.
You don't have any idea what the spiritual condition of the editors of kreuz.net is.
It's in a very bad condition. To see this you just have to read Kreuznet for a some years and work for them or talk with people who worked for them until the former noticed they got abused and their work got manipulated.
I just refuted your whole point.
I must have missed that. Could you repeat your refutation?
[the guys behind kreuz.net] frequently attack the soft delusional thinking behind the people who see nαzιs behind everything, often pointing out that it is they who are the nαzιs.
You're actually saying that according to Kreuznet those who see "nαzιs" behind everything are the "nαzιs", and this is why the Kreuznet guys often call their opponents "nαzιs"...
That's a pretty dumb attitude, don't you think? According to that "logic" Kreuznet must be "nαzιs" too because they call so many of their opponents "nαzιs". Very strange.
Meanwhile, a post which is supposed to be about how these Antifa-nαzιs
There you go again.
So those pro abortion criminals are "nαzιs", because they are pro abortion?
No, but because -- let's repeat your words: "You do realize that National Socialism is an evil thing, yeah?"
You're lost in shortcuts. Expand them: "... how these anti-fascist National-Socialists..."
with your, frankly, mendacious accusations.
You didn't prove a single of my rejections of the Kreuznet extremists' rhetoric to be untrue, so don't call me mendacious.
Calling opponents "nαzιs" who are not national socialists is mendacious.
[Berger] may be insignificant, but the problem of clerical ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs isn't.
But Kreuznet massively downplayed the exposure (by the mass media) of many ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and child abusing clerics who have worked in the Church unobjected when bishops and cardinals like Ratzinger where their diocesan superiors!
Also Kreuznet protected the conservative but anti-traditional Austrian Bishop Krenn when the media came at him because he protected ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ seminary deans in his diocese (I think he just didn't see trough them, but still he protected them).
Of course the mass media used these things to attack the church, but why on earth did Kreuznet negate the fact of actual massive ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and child abusing practice in the German Newchurch dioceses, when you simple could not deny it and even many conservative catholics were ashamed?
Guess how Kreuznet called the exposing mass medias? "nαzιs" of course. Because it's the verbal-club of the idiots with no arguments.
In fact, kreuz.net is the only group that sees the abuse crisis in its proper light as an ideological campaign conceived to manipulate public opinion and attack the Church.
... by denying the massive child abuse and other crimes perpetrated by parts of the rotten Newchurch clergy which was covert by then bishops and cardinals like Ratzinger. Weird again.
Kreuznet and unfortunately you too try to cast out devils by Beelzebub.
This is impossible however.
(In this context: devils = anti-christian mass media, and Beelzebub = denial of the child abusing.)
Like you complaining about people describing things as evil which are evil.
Well, you distort again. I didn't complain about them because they described whatever. I complain about their non-christian means.
Kreuznet and you are saying: The end justifies the means.
This is impossible however.
They portray Islamic society as morally superior to unterhosen-kultur NS-Deutschland, which it is.
So you also don't know Islam. The Islam is as amorally and as dangerous for eternal life as the western democrazies. See North Africa veteran Archbishop Lefebvre's excellent words about the Islam, their polygamy, etc.[/quote] of course Islam is dangerous. Kreuz.net frequently pens articles which attack Islamism and Multiculturalism. That's why I love this page.
You use presence form. Where's this "NS-Deutschland" you and the Kreuznet extremists talk about all day? Because it means "National Socialist Deutschland". I've been under the impression it ceased to exist in 1945. Did I miss its revival? When did that happen?
considering the tactics of the German Government the SDP and the Greens, I'd suggest to you that this is very much an apt description and that you are being morbidly literalistic.
Also, some of the photos which appear on the site ARE unfortunate, and some of the language in some of the articles is unfortunate, but I can't translate everything, nor would I want to necessarily follow a post which is difficult to understand or doesn't make a strong enough point.
Their photos of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs are invariably bizarre and disgusting, but I think it captures the essence of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs' madness and viciousness.
You say to warn about pornographic means you've to show pornographic. Because Kreuznet also publishes pornographic pictures.
Of course, but they're mostly disgusting photos of elderly sodomites walking in public without any clothes where children are.
Kreuz.net shows the true face of the Gommorist.
Speaking of which, Cardinal Schoenborn and the rest of the Old Liberal Bishops in Germany have something in common with you
Yes, they speak the German language (like I do) and like the "leading National-Socialists did", in order to quote the Kreuznet extremists.
No, you detest kreuz.net for no good reason.
I'm inclined to believe that it's because you object to kreuz.net's hard-hitting stance on ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity or how they've correctly portrayed how the German Church is basically at the beck and call of the German government because of the Church-tax, or how this official Church structure is run by Old Liberals who often use their official status to persecute real Catholics like Father Gero Weisshaupt or Msgr Werner.
Actually, kreuz.net is one of the most accurate blogs out there.
It's a pseudo-christian website which use evil means to attack alleged opponents.
The guys behind it damage traditional Catholicism immensely. And they prevent the Krah-Gate from being exposed in German-speaking Internet with all means.
They're skillfully running a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation.
You have yet to demonstrate that they are doing that. You seem more concerned about appearances than anything else.
-
Also, nαzιs are a bad thing
So, because a certain ideology named X is a bad thing you call other people not belonging to that ideology X-ies? That's insincere.
No it's not insincere. Especially when the people so described ARE acting like Fascists as in the case described above.
There's a rule of thumb for the Germans and partly for others, too: The leftist and Jєωιѕн mob call virtually any of their opponents "nαzι" and "Fascist" here.
So what. The National Socialists weren't only enemies of the Jєωs, you know. They were also implacable enemies of the Catholic Church. That's something you seem bent on ignoring in your attempt to schmear kreuz.net. Maybe you're a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation? In most of the cases these opponents are not fascists however, let alone national socialists.
In all of the cases I've seen discussed in NS-Germany by kreuz.net, the moniker is deserved.
I hate Fascism because I'm Catholic. It's that simple and when I see the tactics and behaviors employed by National SOCIALISTS, I think it's important to call attention to that fact, and the fact that this ideology will, whatever concessions they offer in the meantime, attempt to destroy the Church and Her patrimony.
This is called a "Totschlagvokabel", i.e. character assassination. It's easy to use and you don't need any argument.
Are you defending these "nαzι anti-fas" and what they're doing or what? Not aware of where it's unacceptable to describe someone engaging in Fascistic behavior as a Fascist.
It usually works because most Germans and others have successfully been brain-washed in order to believe in the "h0Ɩ0cαųst" lie. See Bishop Williamson's good unmasking of it.
A point which, if one were to regularly read kreuz.net as I do, would be lost to you or those who don't read kreuz.net, because kreuz.net frequently points out this phenomenon and describes it impeccably.
If a thinking German sees somebody in the German-speaking zone who's using the character assassination words "nαzι" or "Fascist", you can bet the latter one is an idiot or worse.
You're begging the question. A thinking German? I don't mean to be glib, but what's that supposed to mean? Sounds like humbug. Most "thinking" Germans believe the h0Ɩ0h0αx. In any event, kreuz.net is not only Europe's most popular Catholic site, it's Europe's most popular RELIGION site. I don't think it got that way by being idiotic.
Today's Federal Republic of Germany's cancelor Merkel and "Team Merkel" member Krah were shaped in the GDR, so it's no surprise Krah and his mentor Fr Pfluger call Bishop Williamson a "nαzι", too.
Kreuz has always been sympathetic to Bishop Williamson, actually, and attacks the media for its nαzι-delusion.
You're talking about the Kreuznet guys who protect the archenemy of Bishop Williamson named Max Krah and his backers, and who successfully prevent the publishing of the Krah-Gate by deleting any link to it, because the Krah-Gate exposes a complot against Bishop Williamson inside the SSPX.
No, I'm talking about the articles which appear in the publication describing Bishop Williamson as a hero and attacking the German thought police who use the h0Ɩ0h0αx [another word used by kreuz.net] to show how this is used to attack the Church and make its prelates timid.
These Kreuznet guys are just allegedly sympathetic to Bishop Williamson. In reality they often sum up his Eleison Comments with their own words in a misleading way, when the Bishop's official German version is no longer than Kreuznet's "special summarise" ! Of course they also never link to Bishop Williamson's original Eleison Comments website, so that the readers can't see the manipulation.
Most German Catholic readers of kreuz.net are able to read Bishop Williamson's words in English or in German.
But just for fun. Why don't you show where kreuz.net has been really misleading.
Also they exaggerate so much with their seemingly praise for the Bishop that in the end they ridicule him. By calling the good Bishop a "martyr-bishop" for example. Now this is an unacceptable misuse of the word!
How is that a misuse of the word? Another trademark of Kreuznet.
P.S. Of course the good Bishop Williamson suffers a lot, and I'm sure he would die for the Faith, i.e. become a martyr in the end if necessary. But thank God he's still living, and may our Lord bless him with many years to live! Anyway, he's not a martyr.
Bishop Williamson is a hero. I love him as much as you apparently do.
The Kreuznet guys don't mind this misuse of words because they don't care exact definitions, as long as it's sensational and attracting the mob.
Is the term "martyr-bishop" apt or not? You seem to think that it is and then you proceed to attack kreuz.net for describing him that way as if they are really trying to make him look ridiculous. That's why many traditional catholics see Kreuznet as a pseudo-catholic "Bild-Zeitung", with the "Bild-Zeitung" (literally "picture magazine") being the most dumb and mendacious newspaper in the entire German-speaki-ng zone. Run by Zionists of course.
A lot of traditional Catholics comment on kreuz.net, so I don't know that you're talking about.
I've yet to meet a good traditional priest who would share your excitement about Kreuznet. Those I know can't stand Kreuznet because of their anti-christian means. Do you know one?
No, actually, I don't. Kruez.net is too polemical for most of them. Father Gero Weisshaput, for example, was complaining about them despite the fact that they've written articles in praise of him. For his part, he's cited them and given a monitem that "you have to hold your nose sometimes at kreuz.net". Whatever. I'm almost sure that you wouldn't consider him a "good" priest.
However we catholics love truth and justice, and so we don't use popular but wrong names to defame opponents.
It makes sense to portray people as they are in an effective way so that people get the message. It's called rhetoric.
In case of the "nαzι" and "Fascist" verbal-club it's just the rhetoric of the extremists.
I don't know one single decent German who would use the "nαzι" or "Fascist" verbal-club against his opponents.
That's probably because they're stunned into submission by the menace of the h0Ɩ0h0αx and its shame peddlers.
The term Fascist comes from Musolini and is a meaningful description which can be, in the parlance of some, a means of short circuiting discussion,
The short circuit is only in the heads of the extremists calling their opponents "nαzι" all day, like Kreuznet does.
but why not call a Fascist a Fascist?
But hardly anybody does it! Who really applies the true meaning of: Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.
Who calls Montsanto etc, or the "bailouts" i.e. nationalisation of countless private banks fascist or communist? Kreuznet doesn't. They concentrate on such "big guns" like the left schoolteacher Berger whom they line up with national socialists.
I don't think economics is as important as theology or orthopraxis. It's a religion magazine with no discernible sympathy to any particular economic system, except subsidiarity.
You do realize that National Socialism is an evil thing, yeah?
There's no catholic socialism. But this fact doesn't entitle you or the Austrian Kreuznet extremists to defame opponents as national socialists who are not.
Why can't you answer a simple question?
By your "logic" you can call opponents "child molesters" because child molesting is a very evil thing?
No, I call child molesters, pederasts or ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs.
You obviously have no idea how microscopically small the number of national socialists is in the German-speaking zone, do you?
If I stop counting lamb's quarter and dandy lions as weeds, I suppose I could say that my garden is relatively weed-freed. You shouldn't believe the lies of the Jєωιѕн owned German mass-media which blows up these numbers.
Begging the question again? You're assuming two false things, one: that kreuznet's characterization of nαzι behavior on the part of the government and individuals in germany are untrue or inapt, and two, that kreuz.net is informed by "Jєωιѕн liars". That's simply libelous. Anybody here who's not a Jєω or pro-Jєωιѕн leftist is called a "nαzι",
Actually, kreuz.net is called nαzι. So what? in particular we traditional catholics. And Kreuznet is "fighting" against that by calling them "nαzιs"? How dumb or how false-flag.
I think it's important to remember that the nαzιs were also Socialists and that their system was anti-Catholic. Is that so hard for you to admit?
So, the Germans didn't create an alliance with Business and the State?
Indeed Hitler didn't create a merger of state and corporate power. For a short time he intended to but then saw it didn't work. So he let the business run rather privately within certain frames like in every country. And it worked well, economically speaking.
Hitler's state was actually more liberal than the USA, Federal Republic of Germany, etc is today.
The pseudo-Christians behind kreuz.net who intensively protect Krah and his Jєωιѕн backers name any of their opponents "nαzι", exactly like the Jєω's mass-media do. They're no different in their means.
You don't have any idea what the spiritual condition of the editors of kreuz.net is.
It's in a very bad condition. To see this you just have to read Kreuznet for a some years and work for them or talk with people who worked for them until the former noticed they got abused and their work got manipulated.
sour grapes
I just refuted your whole point.
I must have missed that. Could you repeat your refutation?
National Socialist tactics are in use by these antifas. It's by no means unapropos to describe them thus.
[the guys behind kreuz.net] frequently attack the soft delusional thinking behind the people who see nαzιs behind everything, often pointing out that it is they who are the nαzιs.
You're actually saying that according to Kreuznet those who see "nαzιs" behind everything are the "nαzιs", and this is why the Kreuznet guys often call their opponents "nαzιs"...
You're like those people who attack the messenger when it comes to uncovering Marxist infiltration in the Catholic Church. But Communism is dead, they say. Yeah sure. National Socialism isn't dead either.
That's a pretty dumb attitude, don't you think? According to that "logic" Kreuznet must be "nαzιs" too because they call so many of their opponents "nαzιs". Very strange.
No, it makes sense to demonstrate the absurdity of a term like racist by accusing someone else of the same thing.
As you note, anyone can be called a nαzι or a Fascist, except in this case, these people are acting like nαzιs.
Meanwhile, a post which is supposed to be about how these Antifa-nαzιs
There you go again.
So those pro abortion criminals are "nαzιs", because they are pro abortion?
No, but because -- let's repeat your words: "You do realize that National Socialism is an evil thing, yeah?"
No, they're nαzιs because they're acting like brownshirts in their antagonism to the Catholic Church and their promotion of agendas which would have been supported by the nαzιs. It's also fun to hang them by their own petards. Obviously, their accusations of Traditional Catholics being nαzιs are absurd. After all, Archbishop Lefebvre's father fought them and died in a KZ.
You're lost in shortcuts. Expand them: "... how these anti-fascist National-Socialists..."
with your, frankly, mendacious accusations.
You didn't prove a single of my rejections of the Kreuznet extremists' rhetoric to be untrue, so don't call me mendacious.
You've done nothing but base your attacks on ethereal points.
You maintain that "nαzι" as a term is off limits because the National Socialist Party hasn't been in existence since the end of the War or that you insist that National Socialists are rare.
You don't suppose that the methods and tactics of the National Socialists aren't employed by the Church's enemies in the continuation of the Kulturkampf, do you?
Calling opponents "nαzιs" who are not national socialists is mendacious.
Not if they act like nαzιs.
[Berger] may be insignificant, but the problem of clerical ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs isn't.
But Kreuznet massively downplayed the exposure (by the mass media) of many ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and child abusing clerics who have worked in the Church unobjected when bishops and cardinals like Ratzinger where their diocesan superiors!
At least, you show your true colors.
You've either bought into the media lie of the abuse-hoax, or you're a perpetrator of that hoax and the "moral hysteria" behind it.
Also Kreuznet protected the conservative but anti-traditional Austrian Bishop Krenn when the media came at him because he protected ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ seminary deans in his diocese (I think he just didn't see trough them, but still he protected them).
I noticed that and how is that different from the way in which kreuz.net is portraying the situation?
Of course the mass media used these things to attack the church, but why on earth did Kreuznet negate the fact of actual massive ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ and child abusing practice in the German Newchurch dioceses, when you simple could not deny it and even many conservative catholics were ashamed?
Probably because the cases in which German priests actually abuse children are rare and that the issue is being used to manipulate people's feelings against the Church despite the fact that there's a massive campaign on hand to normalize sɛҳuąƖ interactions with minors on the part of the SPD and the Greens.
Guess how Kreuznet called the exposing mass medias? "nαzιs" of course. Because it's the verbal-club of the idiots with no arguments.
perhaps because the German media was created by and run by former nαzιs in the post-war period, like Spiegel for example, which was founded by a nαzι propagandist.
In fact, kreuz.net is the only group that sees the abuse crisis in its proper light as an ideological campaign conceived to manipulate public opinion and attack the Church.
... by denying the massive child abuse and other crimes perpetrated by parts of the rotten Newchurch clergy which was covert by then bishops and cardinals like Ratzinger. Weird again.
Actually, kreuz.net consistently portrays the abuses for what they are: "rare occurences perpetrated by ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖly disturbed individuals".
Kreuznet and unfortunately you too try to cast out devils by Beelzebub.
This is impossible however.
No, not really. Your cases are all pretty weak so far, with the possible exception of the poor moderation, but even that can be justified to some extent by the sheer volume of the comments which dwarfs any Traditional Catholic site I've ever seen with the possible exception of AQ back before its moderator decided to attack Father Malachi Martin.
(In this context: devils = anti-christian mass media, and Beelzebub = denial of the child abusing.)
That's another libel.
Like you complaining about people describing things as evil which are evil.
Well, you distort again. I didn't complain about them because they described whatever. I complain about their non-christian means.
You haven't demonstrated that they are using non-Christian means.
Kreuznet and you are saying: The end justifies the means.
This is impossible however.
No, I'm saying that there's nothing wrong with calling X, X.
They portray Islamic society as morally superior to unterhosen-kultur NS-Deutschland, which it is.
So you also don't know Islam. The Islam is as amorally and as dangerous for eternal life as the western democrazies. See North Africa veteran Archbishop Lefebvre's excellent words about the Islam, their polygamy, etc.
of course Islam is dangerous. Kreuz.net frequently pens articles which attack Islamism and Multiculturalism. That's why I love this page.
You use presence form. Where's this "NS-Deutschland" you and the Kreuznet extremists talk about all day? Because it means "National Socialist Deutschland". I've been under the impression it ceased to exist in 1945. Did I miss its revival? When did that happen?
Considering the tactics of the German Government the SDP and the Greens, I'd suggest to you that this is very much an apt description and that you are being morbidly literalistic. The German government's approach to the Catholic Church, pro-life issues, and the tactics it employs do indeed resemble those used by National Socialists. Not to mention their outlook on sɛҳuąƖ morality.
Also, some of the photos which appear on the site ARE unfortunate, and some of the language in some of the articles is unfortunate, but I can't translate everything, nor would I want to necessarily follow a post which is difficult to understand or doesn't make a strong enough point.
Their photos of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs are invariably bizarre and disgusting, but I think it captures the essence of ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs' madness and viciousness.
You say to warn about pornographic means you've to show pornographic. Because Kreuznet also publishes pornographic pictures.
Of course, but they're mostly disgusting photos of elderly sodomites walking in public without any clothes where children are.
Kreuz.net shows the true face of the Gommorist. Is that what you object to? The fact that they're exposing the evils of Sodom?
Speaking of which, Cardinal Schoenborn and the rest of the Old Liberal Bishops in Germany have something in common with you
Yes, they speak the German language (like I do) and like the "leading National-Socialists did", in order to quote the Kreuznet extremists.
No, you detest kreuz.net for no good reason.
I'm inclined to believe that it's because you object to kreuz.net's hard-hitting stance on ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity or how they've correctly portrayed how the German Church is basically at the beck and call of the German government because of the Church-tax, or how this official Church structure is run by Old Liberals who often use their official status to persecute real Catholics like Father Gero Weisshaupt or Msgr Werner.
Actually, kreuz.net is one of the most accurate blogs out there.
It's a pseudo-christian website which use evil means to attack alleged opponents.
The guys behind it damage traditional Catholicism immensely. And they prevent the Krah-Gate from being exposed in German-speaking Internet with all means.
They're skillfully running a fαℓѕє fℓαg operation.
You have yet to demonstrate that they are doing that. You seem more concerned about appearances than anything else.