Author Topic: Krah visits Israeli Special Forces base (Read 11398 times)

John Grace · « **Reply #30 on:** July 10, 2012, 09:41:09 AM »

As Veritas1961 states

Quote

Respectful questioning of authority, based upon public docuмentation of unquestionable authenticity and transparency, does not in Catholic moral teaching amount to “calumny.” So: please substantiate by proofs, by examples, not assertions, that these docuмents posted by faithful members of Catholic Tradition contained calumnies.

Regarding these rumours outlined by Fr Rostand for example, it is quite easy to provide him with docuмentation from the public domain. I remain disturbed a priest of all people would dismiss facts as "rumours". It doesn't say much for the type of clerics involved in the Society.

Even initially Fr Lindstrom tried the "internet rumour" approach with me. It insulted my intelligence and whilst he is a good priest, he took the wrong approach. Yes, we must discern what we read on the internet but let these clerics not insult people by suggesting fact is rumour and we are children who can't discern what is true and false.

Even Clare on Ignis Ardens suggested I was some type of troublemaker. That was not my intent at all.

JPaul · « **Reply #31 on:** July 10, 2012, 10:52:49 AM »

Quote

There is no doubt Fr Morgan is one of the better SSPX priests but I can't recall any allegations raised against Krah or Bishop Fellay. I recall William of Norwich asked questions based on substantiated facts.The Ignis Ardens team removed the file before any alleged request to remove it.

I think that someone either privately threatened or forewarned them of the request. I know of other posters who left at that time were targeted privately.
And no they never addressed the charges, they simply attacked those who were making them known.

John Grace · « **Reply #32 on:** July 10, 2012, 11:42:02 AM »

Quote from: J.Paul

Quote
There is no doubt Fr Morgan is one of the better SSPX priests but I can't recall any allegations raised against Krah or Bishop Fellay. I recall William of Norwich asked questions based on substantiated facts.The Ignis Ardens team removed the file before any alleged request to remove it.

I think that someone either privately threatened or forewarned them of the request. I know of other posters who left at that time were targeted privately.
And no they never addressed the charges, they simply attacked those who were making them known.

Whilst also another excellent cleric, I'm afraid we can't ignore even Fr Clifton only got angry over events of the past three months. A very short span of time.

What William of Norwich presented in his dossier was/are substantiated facts. I suppose when we see Fr Rostand go to extraordinary length to dismiss facts as rumours, it demonstrates all that is wrong and rotten in the leadership of this "pious union"

Fr Laisney had not even the courage or the conviction to answer the questions put to him by Veritas1961. Valid questions based on facts.

No charges were made.That is the trouble facing Menzingen. 'William of Norwich' raised valid questions based on facts that can be proven.

With politicians, we might allow for this as they are elected to be corrupt and tell lies.They are professional liars. We expect better from priests and Bishops.

This Krahgate and what is happening in the SSPX is a disgrace.Atleast with a politician he/she would be removed from office.

John Grace · « **Reply #33 on:** July 10, 2012, 11:57:11 AM »

I do accept the point made by some who feel nothing could really be done. It's a valid point. Increasing our prayers and supporting these priests threatened with expulsion should be priority.

1531 · « **Reply #34 on:** July 10, 2012, 12:51:22 PM »

I don't think, John Grace, that we can accuse some priests like, for example, Fr Clifton, of only having reacted recently. For many priests there was not always an avenue for them to react publicly, and some held their fire in an effort not to create waves until they were absolutely sure that the situation was becoming untenable. Some are more cautious and sometimes that is better. Fr Lindstrom, is certainly one of those who is more cautious, but he is no fool, and is very much attached to the SSPX and Mgr Lefebvre, and Tradition!

John Grace · « **Reply #35 on:** July 10, 2012, 01:11:00 PM »

Quote

Fr Lindstrom, is certainly one of those who is more cautious, but he is no fool, and is very much attached to the SSPX and Mgr Lefebvre, and Tradition!

I'm not aware of anybody stating otherwise. I certainly haven't.

John Grace · « **Reply #36 on:** July 10, 2012, 01:15:58 PM »

Quote

I don't think, John Grace, that we can accuse some priests like, for example, Fr Clifton, of only having reacted recently.

Who is the "we" here? My specific point was that in the letter from Fr Clifton he specifically outlines how events of the past three months

Quote

Events in the Society over the last three months have led me first to sadness and anguish, and finally to despondency and anger. The terrible divisions which now undermine our Society are not the fruit of rebellion and disobedience, but clearly are the result of a seismic change of principle on the part of our Superiors in the relation to Rome.

John Grace · « **Reply #37 on:** July 10, 2012, 01:17:33 PM »

Quote

For many priests there was not always an avenue for them to react publicly, and some held their fire in an effort not to create waves until they were absolutely sure that the situation was becoming untenable.

Which situation?.

drivocek · « **Reply #38 on:** January 22, 2013, 12:05:33 PM »

Quote from: John Grace

Dinner with Johannes Lohmeyer

Favourite quote from Max Krah is
Quote
Every day is champagn day (Winston Churchill)

Why is AIPAC advertising on this site?

P. S. This may not be the time and place to express my thoughts and that is all that they are - thoughts. My initial reaction to the Siscoe/Krah "interview" was that a well-trained agent (smooth and polished) handled that interview like a "pro" with the interviewer giving him all the credibiity.

Am I wrong to think this?

Quantum Potes, Tantum Aude.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #39 on:** January 22, 2013, 12:13:57 PM »

Neotrads aren't even remotely Christians.

The Remnant is a neotrad rag.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #40 on:** January 22, 2013, 01:02:25 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Neotrads aren't even remotely Christians.

The Remnant is a neotrad rag.

Just to clarify:

There is a certain attitude that is unmistakable, and can be found among many supposed traditionalists. They say things not out of ignorance, but with manifest lack of reverence for the Catholic Faith. Their priorities are very clearly not with Catholicism. They typically show themselves to be engaged to some extent with today's popular culture but most telling of all they show their true loyalties by showing their brusque contempt for those opposed to feminism, liberalism, zionism, "neo-conservatism" in general.

Some are genuinely ignorant.

However, those who write about Traditionalism in newspapers are not -except with a few exceptions - ignorant of what's really going on.

Traditionalism for them is a social identity connected to their family life.

And for them the goal is to adapt Traditionalism to their social needs.

And their social needs often revolve around fitting in with Republican liberals (ie "conservatives") or the equivalents overseas, Novus Ordo "pro-lifers" etc. (not to knock pro-lifers, but the conciliar church is not strongly pro-life)

For them traditionalism is politics. It's their way of participating and enlarging themselves. And while some may actually have a sentimental attachment to the religion - it's very apparent that they are primarily interested in manipulating the people who actually have the Faith to suit their ends. And invariably they betray their complete departure from the traditionalism of the Archbishop and really from Catholicism into a kind of neo-traditionalism, which is about (in the US) Republican Catholicism.

Incredulous · « **Reply #41 on:** January 22, 2013, 01:30:37 PM »

Quote from: drivocek

Quote from: John Grace
Dinner with Johannes Lohmeyer

Favourite quote from Max Krah is
Quote
Every day is champagn day (Winston Churchill)

Why is AIPAC advertising on this site?

P. S. This may not be the time and place to express my thoughts and that is all that they are - thoughts. My initial reaction to the Siscoe/Krah "interview" was that a well-trained agent (smooth and polished) handled that interview like a "pro" with the interviewer giving him all the credibiity.

Am I wrong to think this?

Quantum Potes, Tantum Aude.

Drivocek,

Well yes, but I don't think the interviewer was so smooth and professional.
Robert is a Kentucky neo-trad who unwittingly acted as a naive patsy for Menzingen.

I agree with your assessment that the interview was an obvious ploy by Msgr. Fellay. It was his attempt to whitewash the image of his zionist attorney.

Prior to the interview, Max Krah was the SSPX's "elephant in the room", that Msgr. Fellay was reluctant to explain.

Consider for a moment, the blatant audacity (and stupidity) of the superior general to bring his zio-attorney to Kansas City, USRAEL and act like he was
a normal trad.

In the end, the interview back-fired beautifully on Msgr. Fellay and it turned out to be a blessing for us.

In the interview, Dr. Maxie tried to delude us and get us off his zio-trail. However, he ended-up revealing a mother-load of information, particularly about the Jєωιѕн source of the 80 million Euro trust fund he was administering.

When the interview was published and the controversy broke-out, he actually came on Ignis Ardens and tried to defend himself and do damge control. But soon it was discovered the inheritance funds were from old European Gutman/Rothschild, i.e., tainted money. After that, Dr. Maxie vanished from the forums.

Maxie tried to deny that he was Jєωιѕн, but far worse, in his answers, he admitted he was a zionist, by speaking favorably of the Israel and ADL.

May there be more interesting interviews by Robert Siscoe of SSPX officials posted in the neo-trad Remnant.

Our Lady of Good Success.. pray for us!

Domitilla · « **Reply #42 on:** January 22, 2013, 02:10:50 PM »

Incredulous stated: "May there be more interesting interviews by Robert Siscoe of SSPX officials posted in the neo-trad Remnant."

From your lips to God's Ear. Yes, may it be so! Maybe the next one will bring the whole house of Menzingen down.

Machabees · « **Reply #43 on:** January 22, 2013, 03:11:39 PM »

Quote from: J.Paul

Quote
It is not a coincidence that the pilgrimage was arranged by an Israeli Mossad officer, Oren Hieman, who is also Mr. Max's eMBA classmate. Recall that Mr. Max's eMBA records showed his US$140,000 graduate degree, was sponsored by the SSPX.

Does this actually mean that the SSPX paid for his degree?

If so, scandal scandal comes to mind. How is it that they paid to train him to take over their business? Look at the whole picture. Does not seem like a Mossad intelligence operation?

"Recall that Mr. Max's eMBA records showed his US$140,000 graduate degree, was sponsored by the SSPX."

Gee...with Bishop Fellay sponsoring that kind of money to one secular individual for a secular end, why couldn't Bishop Fellay sponsor the money to a many number of seminarians for a SPIRITUAL end, in order to have many more Real Priests to offer the Divine Mass, go out to give the Faith...for the Honor of God, and in grace, it overcomes the Devils agents.

Is Wisdom lacking here...or is there a plan?

Incredulous · « **Reply #44 on:** January 22, 2013, 04:37:51 PM »

Quote from: Domitilla

Incredulous stated: "May there be more interesting interviews by Robert Siscoe of SSPX officials posted in the neo-trad Remnant."

From your lips to God's Ear. Yes, may it be so! Maybe the next one will bring the whole house of Menzingen down.

I always like Domitila's posts!