Author Topic: Challenge to Ignis Ardens Fellayites - Come on in, the water-s fine! (Read 9905 times)

NeelyAnn · « **Reply #15 on:** August 12, 2012, 03:27:56 PM »

Quote from: John Grace

The suspension of Nemmersdorf is obviously based on a personal dislike of Nemmersdorf by the moderating staff. There is really little point making a big deal about it and we should follow Clare's advice of not taking that forum seriously.

It's true Nemmersdorf received no warning. This suspension is very strange. As far as I can see Sarto was asked to cite evidence that Fr Celier favours the reform of the reform. Such evidence has not been provided.

I can't recall Ashmolean every being warned never mind being suspended or banned.

Actually, I was online at the time Nemmersdorf was suspended.

Marie-Elisabeth had posted about some new private revelation that she, and a few others, had been hinting at for sometime.

In reply to a question about this private revelation, she had said to ask Bishop Fellay, Bishop Williamson, ... Nemmersdorf contacted Bishop Williamson and posted the reply which appeared to be a denial of knowledge of this private revelation.

PetrusTOP then countered that post by posting correspondence between Bishop Williamson and the Seer (who ever that is).

Sarto then deleted all of the posts relating to this info.

Nemmersdorf had posted her/his info on 2 different threads where this topic was discussed. I did not get to look at the time of the posts but I think they crossed with the timing of Sartos deleting.

However, Sarto says Nemmersdorf intentionally posted after he had deleted the info once and looked at this as intentional. He deleted the 2nd post of Nemmersdorf too and replaced it with text of the banning.

He later responded to those who had questioned him about this and told them Nemmersdorf had been told why the suspension had been occurred. He also mentioned something about having previously given a warning about this very thing.

I did not find Nemmersdorf's post to be provocative, personally, and I think the double post was not meant to be devious. It seemed to be poor timing to me but who knows. Sarto certainly saw it differently.

John Grace · « **Reply #16 on:** August 12, 2012, 03:57:39 PM »

Quote

However, Sarto says Nemmersdorf intentionally posted after he had deleted the info once and looked at this as intentional. He deleted the 2nd post of Nemmersdorf too and replaced it with text of the banning.

He later responded to those who had questioned him about this and told them Nemmersdorf had been told why the suspension had been occurred. He also mentioned something about having previously given a warning about this very thing.

I did not find Nemmersdorf's post to be provocative, personally, and I think the double post was not meant to be devious. It seemed to be poor timing to me but who knows. Sarto certainly saw it differently.

Sarto will have to prove intent. I regard Nemmersdorf with the utmost of integrity and certainly don't believe the intent was to be devious. If I were Nemmersdorf, I wouldn't waste time on that forum. This suspension is another case of them getting it wrong. I realise their forum has rules etc etc but they got it wrong in this case.No warning was given so I believe it was a bad decision on the part of the moderating team.

I wish again to offer my support to Nemmersdorf. Whilst the suspension is only a week, the principle of the matter is Nemmersdorf should not of been suspended in the first place, and a warning given if the member had done something wrong.

Incredulous · « **Reply #17 on:** August 12, 2012, 04:48:06 PM »

Quote from: Wessex

Crunch time for Ignis has not yet arrived because Menzingen has not concluded a deal with Rome. Since the site is SSPX friendly (whatever that means these days) and most of the contributors are against a deal, I was waiting to see how this interesting situation would work out. However, seeing a so-called SV in John Lane use the site frequently for the purposes of promoting trust in the leadership, the site is becoming more incomprehensible each day.

Hmm... it sounds Ignis Ardens' editor has taken a hint from
the "Artful Dodger" (Cardinal Ratzinger) and is EVOLVING ?

Clelia · « **Reply #18 on:** August 12, 2012, 06:55:15 PM »

Quote from: ultrarigorist

Quote from: Clelia
Quote from: ultrarigorist

inside track from +Williamson, but I find that claim to be ridiculously exaggerated based on among other things, on some private correspondence I became party to.

I colored the particular quote in question, and so I ask:
Just what exactly, would that ridiculous, exaggerated claim be? Would you care to elaborate, or are you also hiding behind your "own little world?"

Thank you.

One of them was this "private revelation" which +W and +F were supposedly both aware of. Another was a supposed letter from +F to +W about 10mos ago offering to make everything right between them or some such nonsense. This party's M.O. involves challenging people into "just ask him yourself". It looks good posted on a forum BUT the reality is somewhat different....
Which I think is why this one intermittently drops off IA for a month or so, then returns with the same story anew.

You still have not elaborated: the last quote above only eludes to some "private revelation" - a "supposed letter" - or "some such nonsense." You mentioned "some private correspondence I became party to." in your top quote, but it just looks like general hearsay or gossip, without sources or links. We need facts and credible sources rather than what appears to be sketchy and without foundation, at best.

I personally do not come here for gossip or hearsay; but rather, for worthy and qualified information.

Thank you.

Maria Elizabeth · « **Reply #19 on:** August 12, 2012, 08:00:31 PM »

Quote from: NeelyAnn

Marie-Elisabeth had posted about some new private revelation that she, and a few others, had been hinting at for sometime.

I believe you have the wrong person for this. Maria Elizabeth did not post about any private revelation.

Is there a Marie-Elisabeth AND a Maria Elizabeth on this chat group? (If yes, then this can be very confusing.)

NeelyAnn · « **Reply #20 on:** August 12, 2012, 08:38:57 PM »

Quote from: Maria Elizabeth

Quote from: NeelyAnn

Marie-Elisabeth had posted about some new private revelation that she, and a few others, had been hinting at for sometime.

I believe you have the wrong person for this. Maria Elizabeth did not post about any private revelation.

Is there a Marie-Elisabeth AND a Maria Elizabeth on this chat group? (If yes, then this can be very confusing.)

Maria Elizabeth,

The discussion was about something that happened on another forum. Marie-Elisabeth is a member of that forum. Sorry for the confusion.

ultrarigorist · « **Reply #21 on:** August 13, 2012, 07:33:10 AM »

Quote from: Clelia

You still have not elaborated: the last quote above only eludes to some "private revelation" - a "supposed letter" - or "some such nonsense." You mentioned "some private correspondence I became party to." in your top quote, but it just looks like general hearsay or gossip, without sources or links. We need facts and credible sources rather than what appears to be sketchy and without foundation, at best.

I personally do not come here for gossip or hearsay; but rather, for worthy and qualified information.

Thank you.

The source of all this is "Dawn Marie", which you can verify by reading her posts on IA for the last few months. She recruits 'messengers' by PM, in the hopes of propagating stuff like the above examples with the appearance of it coming from different directions.

Belloc · « **Reply #22 on:** August 13, 2012, 07:51:07 AM »

Quote from: MaterDominici

I don't pay much attention to who's who when I drop in and read IA, but I know there are a few posters there who would be banned here for their blindness toward the whole SSPX situation.

I think you might have to go chat with them over there.

I have difficluty pulling it up and largely, never go there.......not sure what tech issue is, but takes forever clocking.....

Diego · « **Reply #23 on:** August 13, 2012, 11:41:24 AM »

Quote from: John Grace

The suspension of Nemmersdorf is obviously based on a personal dislike of Nemmersdorf by the moderating staff. There is really little point making a big deal about it and we should follow Clare's advice of not taking that forum seriously.

It's true Nemmersdorf received no warning. This suspension is very strange. As far as I can see Sarto was asked to cite evidence that Fr Celier favours the reform of the reform. Such evidence has not been provided.

I can't recall Ashmolean every being warned never mind being suspended or banned.

Yes, Judaica Ardens' banning has little, if anything, to do with objective transgressions. Personal pique is their guide.

Too, let's not forget that the ѕуηαgσgυє of Satan has an army of paid internet "talk backers:

Quote

ISRAELI HIRES INTERNET SOLDIERS
Saturday, July 18th, 2009

http://rinf.com/alt-news/contributions/israeli-hires-internet-soldiers/6148/

Straight out of Avigdor Lieberman’s Foreign Ministry: a new Internet Fighting Team! Israeli students and demobilized soldiers get paid to pretend they are just regular folks and leave pro-Israel comments on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other sites. The effort is meant to fight the “well-oiled machine” of “pro-Palestinian websites, with huge budgets… with content from the Hamas news agency.” The approach was test-marketed during Israel’s assault on Gaza, and by groups like Give Israel Your United Support, a controversial effort to use instant-access technology to crowd-source Israel advocates to fill in flash polls or vote up key articles on social networking sites.
Will the responders who are hired for this also present themselves as “ordinary net-surfers”?
“Of course,” says Shturman. “Our people will not say: ‘Hello, I am from the policy-explanation department of the Israeli Foreign Ministry and I want to tell you the following.’ Nor will they necessarily identify themselves as Israelis. They will speak as net-surfers and as citizens, and will write responses that will look personal but will be based on a prepared list of messages that the Foreign Ministry developed.”
The full article, translated by Occupation Magazine into English here:
The Foreign Ministry presents: talkbackers in the service of the State 
By: Dora Kishinevski Calcalist 5 July 2009
http://www.calcalist.co.il/internet/articles/0,7340,L-3319543,00.html
Translated for Occupation Magazine by George Malent

http://www.kibush.co.il/show_file.asp?num=34520

After they became an inseparable part of the service provided by public-relations companies and advertising agencies, paid Internet talkbackers are being mobilized in the service in the service of the State. The Foreign Ministry is in the process of setting up a team of students and demobilized soldiers who will work around the clock writing pro-Israeli responses on Internet websites all over the world, and on services like Facebook, Twitter and Youtube. The Foreign Ministry’s department for the explanation of Israeli policy is running the project, and it will be an integral part of it. The project is described in the government budget for 2009 as the “Internet fighting team” – a name that was given to it in order to distinguish it from the existing policy-explanation team, among other reasons, so that it can receive a separate budget. Even though the budget’s size has not yet been disclosed to the public, sources in the Foreign Ministry have told Calcalist that in will be about NIS 600.000 in its first year, and it will be increased in the future. From the primary budget, about NIS 200.000 will be invested in round-the-clock activity at the micro-blogging website Twitter, which was recently featured in the headlines for the services it provided to demonstrators during the recent disturbances in Iran.

See also:
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article23027.htm
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3744516,00.html

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #24 on:** August 13, 2012, 03:03:58 PM »

Quote from: finegan

There's some good discussion on IA, although I get the feeling that many of the British contributors there are a bit disdainful of the rude, outspoken Americans who frequent this forum. Just today, some nice English lady demanded that Americans posting on IA stop making references to "drinking the Kool-Aid." Apparently she found it unseemly... :shocked:

This term, "drinking the Kool-Aid," is one that "Fr. Morrison" of Traditio.com has
been using for years, in regards to believing anything coming out of "Newrome,"
which is another vocabulary word of his. It's part of his vocabulary by frequent
repetition program. Now he's seems to have cloned himself because he goes by
"the Fathers."

His most unseemly refrain is to bad-mouth the Message of Fatima. Any mention
of the Blessed Virgin Mary on Traditio.com is coupled with a coldness, a Jansenism,
that attempts to entomb Her memory in some ancient and distant place, as far
away as possible. It's a mark of a traitor to be so inimical of everything Marian.

His term, Kool-Aid, is a vague reference to the tragic Jim Jones People's Temple
cult, 909 followers who went to remote Jonestown in Guyana in 1978 and committed
mass ѕυιcιdє/murder by drinking Flavor-Aid laced with cyanide.

Perhaps the members of Ignis Ardens would be better informed if they knew
history and where words come from -- and then again, maybe not. You don't need
to know anything about history to drink the Kool-Aid. HAHAHAHAHA

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #25 on:** August 13, 2012, 03:08:22 PM »

Quote from: Belloc

Quote from: MaterDominici
I don't pay much attention to who's who when I drop in and read IA, but I know there are a few posters there who would be banned here for their blindness toward the whole SSPX situation.

I think you might have to go chat with them over there.

I have difficluty pulling it up and largely, never go there.......not sure what tech issue is, but takes forever clocking.....

If I were to go to IA to "chat," considering Nemmersdorfers' experience, I probably
wouldn't last more than 20 minutes. That's not a forum. It's a Kool-Aid party.

Incredulous · « **Reply #26 on:** August 13, 2012, 04:48:32 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: finegan
There's some good discussion on IA, although I get the feeling that many of the British contributors there are a bit disdainful of the rude, outspoken Americans who frequent this forum. Just today, some nice English lady demanded that Americans posting on IA stop making references to "drinking the Kool-Aid." Apparently she found it unseemly... :shocked:

This term, "drinking the Kool-Aid," is one that "Fr. Morrison" of Traditio.com has
been using for years, in regards to believing anything coming out of "Newrome,"
which is another vocabulary word of his. It's part of his vocabulary by frequent
repetition program. Now he's seems to have cloned himself because he goes by
"the Fathers."

His most unseemly refrain is to bad-mouth the Message of Fatima. Any mention
of the Blessed Virgin Mary on Traditio.com is coupled with a coldness, a Jansenism,
that attempts to entomb Her memory in some ancient and distant place, as far
away as possible. It's a mark of a traitor to be so inimical of everything Marian.

His term, Kool-Aid, is a vague reference to the tragic Jim Jones People's Temple
cult, 909 followers who went to remote Jonestown in Guyana in 1978 and committed
mass ѕυιcιdє/murder by drinking Flavor-Aid laced with cyanide.

Perhaps the members of Ignis Ardens would be better informed if they knew
history and where words come from -- and then again, maybe not. You don't need
to know anything about history to drink the Kool-Aid. HAHAHAHAHA

Agreed. Tradio is a place to get information when your Superior general is trying cover up things by controlling the web.

However, Traditio has some "wacked-out" ideas on Our Lady of Fatima and who knows what else?
.
Kool Aid... I guess the Brits forgot this sad 1979 San Franciso cult legacy?
The Kool-aid message is: Beware of cults... they can kill you.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #27 on:** August 13, 2012, 10:49:21 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous

Agreed. Tradio is a place to get information when your Superior general is trying cover up things by controlling the web.

However, Traditio has some "wacked-out" ideas on Our Lady of Fatima and who knows what else?
.
Kool Aid... I guess the Brits forgot this sad 1979 San Franciso cult legacy?
The Kool-aid message is: Beware of cults... they can kill you.

That's exactly right.

I don't have any problem with the style that Traditio.com uses to ridicule error, for
it can be rather effective. They use American idioms a lot, which is very good at
communicating to Americans, but perhaps not to Brits. I don't know about that.

But when they turn their ire and energy against the Message of Fatima, it really gets
my goat. The "clown" never lets up on that, either. It reminds me of a sort of
knock-off of Fr. Robert J. Fox, of infalicitous memory.

MiserereMeiDeus · « **Reply #28 on:** August 22, 2012, 07:36:19 PM »

Quote from: Clelia

Quote from: ultrarigorist
Quote from: Clelia
Quote from: ultrarigorist

inside track from +Williamson, but I find that claim to be ridiculously exaggerated based on among other things, on some private correspondence I became party to.

I colored the particular quote in question, and so I ask:
Just what exactly, would that ridiculous, exaggerated claim be? Would you care to elaborate, or are you also hiding behind your "own little world?"

Thank you.

One of them was this "private revelation" which +W and +F were supposedly both aware of. Another was a supposed letter from +F to +W about 10mos ago offering to make everything right between them or some such nonsense. This party's M.O. involves challenging people into "just ask him yourself". It looks good posted on a forum BUT the reality is somewhat different....
Which I think is why this one intermittently drops off IA for a month or so, then returns with the same story anew.

You still have not elaborated: the last quote above only eludes to some "private revelation" - a "supposed letter" - or "some such nonsense." You mentioned "some private correspondence I became party to." in your top quote, but it just looks like general hearsay or gossip, without sources or links. We need facts and credible sources rather than what appears to be sketchy and without foundation, at best.

I personally do not come here for gossip or hearsay; but rather, for worthy and qualified information.

Thank you.

I don't want to to step into anything, and I don't know what the private revelation is supposed to be about, although I did read some cryptic references to one (or more?) on the thread in question, which I participated in (unless I'm mixing up 2 different threads -- the one I was part of was the one about the letter), but the letter Dawn Marie spoke of was, she said, a letter from Bishop Fellay to Bishop Williamson inviting him to come back "on the circuit" as Dawn Marie put it, an invitation which he turned down. Then with great bitterness she declared that it was one letter that would never be leaked. For some reason D. Marie has made a huge swing from the Williamson camp to the Fellay camp, although I don't know why. She seems to have been quiet on IA recently.

MiserereMeiDeus · « **Reply #29 on:** August 22, 2012, 07:40:23 PM »

Quote from: ultrarigorist

Quote from: Clelia

You still have not elaborated: the last quote above only eludes to some "private revelation" - a "supposed letter" - or "some such nonsense." You mentioned "some private correspondence I became party to." in your top quote, but it just looks like general hearsay or gossip, without sources or links. We need facts and credible sources rather than what appears to be sketchy and without foundation, at best.

I personally do not come here for gossip or hearsay; but rather, for worthy and qualified information.

Thank you.

The source of all this is "Dawn Marie", which you can verify by reading her posts on IA for the last few months. She recruits 'messengers' by PM, in the hopes of propagating stuff like the above examples with the appearance of it coming from different directions.

I don't think the fact that she PMs some people occasionally indicates that she is orchestrating any sort of Machiavellian plot. She's a pretty good sort, but tends to be pretty emotional, and will swing from one extreme to another at times. I don't think she's particularly devious, though.