Why get upset if you think Voris has got nothing substantial?

(. . .)

After we have made satisfaction to God, we must make satisfaction to our neighbor for the wrong which we have done him, in soul and body. I say for the wrong that we have done to his body, that is to say to his person, by speaking of him in an abusive and contemptuous way, or by insulting him by our malicious actions. If we have had the misfortune to offend him by our abusive talk, we must ask his pardon, and become reconciled with him. If you have assailed the honor of your neighbor, for instance, by speaking ill of him you are obliged to speak of his good qualities, as you have spoken about his bad ones. If you have calumniated him, you must seek out all those persons in whose presence you have spoken falsely about him, and tell them that all you said about your neighbor was not true; that you are very sorry about it, and that you beg them not to believe it. If you have wronged him in regard to his soul, that is far more difficult to make good; however, you must do what you possibly can, or you will not obtain forgiveness from God.

When we impute something bad to our neighbor which he has not committed, a defect which he does not possess, we commit calumny; a most detestable act, which unfortunately, and in spite of its great wrong, is very common. This is not detraction, it is more sinful, but from detraction to calumny is only a small step. If we are honest, we must admit that we invariably add something to, or magnify the bad which we know of our neighbor. A slanderous story that has passed from tongue to tongue, no longer resembles that which was said at first, it has been so much engrossed and aggravated; from which fact we must conclude that a detractor is almost invariably also a calumniator, and a calumniator is a very wicked person.

(. . .)

To speak badly of persons consecrated to God, of the servants of the church, is a much greater sin on account of the lamentable results to religion and of the detriment to their position. The Holy Ghost speaking by the mouth of the prophet says: “To abuse and revile His (the Holy Ghost's) servants is to touch the apple of His eye”; that means nothing can offend Him more. This sin consequently is a crime, the enormity of which surpasses all comprehension. Christ also said: “Whosoever despises you, despises me.”

It seems people are not actually discussing the issues, but have resorted to attacking persons, which on its face suggests they are afraid that the details won't favor their position.        

At issue is a sex scandal media campaign launched by Church Militant.

The first question posed:

Do you believe the veracity of the campaigners, when they also promote:

1.  The h0Ɩ0h0αx.
2.  The Noehide laws.
3.  The Opus Dei

There was the case of Fr. Benedict VanderPutten.  After getting wind of what happened there, the SSPX immediately removed him and reported him to the Vatican, and this was after local authorities had opted not to file charges against him due to lack of evidence.

So there are contrary cases also that Voris remained silent about.

You are dead wrong on this case. Sadly, the SSPX did coverup this one for a very long time to the detriment of children. You may find this out very soon.

It seems to me that if our SSPX & Resistance superiors/bishops were actually good shepherds they would have immediately given those perverts the choice of being defrocked or living out their vocations somewhere like Papa Stronsay. (Not leaving them to minister to the faithful like wolves in sheep's clothing, or keeping them as housekeepers who are allowed out amongst the flock.) All these years I defended them with "We don't have perverts like the NO". Silly me.

Tradcast Express did a review of Taylor Marshall's "opus magnum" "Infiltration: The Plot to Destroy the Church from Within."
Tradcast shredded the book- it was almost embarrassing. TM's opinions were left alone, but Tradcast focused on just how poorly docuмented and footnoted the book was, especially for a PHD in Theology who should have known how to write from his dissertation. Tradcast picked up that he used Wikipedia for a lot of his sourcing (lol) instead of Vatican docuмents and biographies that could have provided solid evidence.  
Remember, TM threw Dr King From Fisher More College under the bus for trying to be Traditional as possible, eschewing Vll and inviting Fr Gruner to speak at the college, so I think it's funny that he holds himself up to be such a Rad Trad.
He's a bit snakey to me.