Author Topic: Pablo and his filth - Will it ever end? (Read 4471 times)

cebu · « **on:** February 24, 2016, 02:36:11 AM »

This was posted on Paul the non Mexican's YouTube account (now removed). He is writing to someone who dared to question a statement of Fr Pfeiffer. Bear in mind this is Fr Pfeiffer's right hand man and the 'perfect Christian gentleman' as described by the Wrecusant -

Father Voigt walked out with tens of thousands of dollars in Our Lady of Mount Carmel donations; he stole a new van that was donated to the Seminary and kept the funds. He misrepresented private donations that had nothing to do with him. He told Faithful 30,000 dollars was donated to Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church on the condition matching funds would need to be asked for; this was not true. Two families called me I told them this was not true. Father Voigt leveled several diabolical curses upon my son as he laid dying; filthy diabolical curses amplified through his Priesthood, diabolical curses which my son never recovered from. After Father Voigt cursed my innocent son he went downhill fast. It was Father Pfeiffer and Father Hewko that provided sacraments to him before he died.
you are an asshole.
So are your Trad Catholic Pharisee Whited Sepulcher friends.
After a proper time of mourning, rest assured I will settle all family business.
May dogs find your grave to be a favorite spot to urinate.
Arrogant bastard."

You will read in this the usual threats made by Paul against anyone that crosses him.

God have mercy on them all.

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** February 24, 2016, 11:19:05 AM »

Quote from: marbles

Quote from: cebu
This was posted on Paul the non Mexican's YouTube account (now removed). ..

You will read in this the usual threats made by Paul against anyone that crosses him.

God have mercy on them all.

If it has been removed, why did you bring it up again ? Do you know what the sin of detraction is ?

And if you call on God to have mercy, while failing to show mercy yourself, you are simply being a hypocrite, apart from taking God's name in vain.

1. Pablo posted it publicly and the quote is HIS OWN WORDS! Since when can a man's own words be considered detraction? You've been listening to Donald Trump too long.
2. Related to #1, whenever a man's own words tend to destroy his reputation you know that the man has serious issues! (whether it's Donald Trump or Pablo the M_exican.)
3. Pablo is the right hand man of Fr. Pfeiffer and his group is "public" enough to receive major donations from all over the world. The Faithful have a right to know what kind of organization they are donating to and supporting.
4. Pablo, Fr. Pfeiffer, and the various cult members blindly following Fr. Pfeiffer are all presuming to slander some very good priests and bishops. They are quite bold and aggressive in their slander. We all need to know who's in the right.
5. Mercy presumes the person in question is repentant. You don't "have mercy" on someone obstinately living in sin, any more than God would have mercy on such a one! In this matter we imitate God our Father in heaven.

Now if someone repented of their evil ways, I would hope that all of us here would be quick to forgive him.

Nevertheless, we should stick to principles and try to avoid focusing on persons and personalities as much as possible. We must stay objective and stick to the facts, and inform people of the truth. Very little connecting of the dots is necessary. We certainly don't want to misrepresent or distort anything.

Matthew · « **Reply #2 on:** February 24, 2016, 01:59:15 PM »

As for the CONTENT of pablo's rant, I don't think it's deserving of a response.

Only this: it's another classic case of "projection". That is to say, he projects guilt upon his enemies for things he himself is guilty of. "The best defense is a good offense", and all that.

I'm sure we've all seen the bad guys (Freemasonic politicians, etc.) use this tactic, including recently in Ukraine, Syria, etc. Are you guilty of aiding Islamic terrorists? What better defense than to accuse your OPPONENT of doing this very thing. Are you guilty of using chemical weapons, depleted uranium, etc.? Accuse your opponents of this crime!

It's classic villain behavior.

Incredulous · « **Reply #3 on:** February 24, 2016, 09:22:08 PM »

Hmm... :scratchchin:

Here are some Wiki professional psychologist opinions: :detective:

Psychological projection
Also known as blame shifting, is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unpleasant impulses by denying their existence while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude.

Theoretical examples
Projection tends to come to the fore in normal people at times of crisis, personal or political[16] but is more commonly found in the neurotic or psychotic in personalities functioning at a primitive level as in narcissistic personality disorder or borderline personality disorder.

Related theory:
Newman, Duff, and Baumeister (1997) proposed a new model of defensive projection. In this view, people try to suppress thoughts of their undesirable traits, and these efforts make those trait categories highly accessible—so that they are then used all the more often when forming impressions of others. The projection is then only a by-product of the real defensive mechanism.

Catholic theory:
Any man who subjected himself to demonic encounters on a wholesale basis like Mr. Hernandez did in Phoenix, is likely suffering from a demonic possession. :farmer:

Please help someone and bring in the exorcist!

OHCA · « **Reply #4 on:** February 24, 2016, 09:54:31 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

As for the CONTENT of pablo's rant, I don't think it's deserving of a response.

Only this: it's another classic case of "projection". That is to say, he projects guilt upon his enemies for things he himself is guilty of. "The best defense is a good offense", and all that.

I'm sure we've all seen the bad guys (Freemasonic politicians, etc.) use this tactic, including recently in Ukraine, Syria, etc. Are you guilty of aiding Islamic terrorists? What better defense than to accuse your OPPONENT of doing this very thing. Are you guilty of using chemical weapons, depleted uranium, etc.? Accuse your opponents of this crime!

It's classic villain behavior.

I think everybody is being too hasty in their judgment of Pablo. We should give Martin a chance to ask Pablo some questions before passing judgment. I'm sure everybody is partially to blame and both sides could have handled it better.

subpallaeMariae · « **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2016, 12:45:13 AM »

Regarding the last 2 posts from OHCA: it is sometimes difficult to believe I am reading a Catholic forum. I have been sickened to see the tone of many posts in the past year. Can you not see that you employ the same tactics that Pablo is accused of, when you attack in this manner?

ManuelChavez · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2016, 09:16:48 AM »

Quote from: OHCA

Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: ManuelChavez
Quote from: OHCA
Quote from: Matthew
As for the CONTENT of pablo's rant, I don't think it's deserving of a response.

Only this: it's another classic case of "projection". That is to say, he projects guilt upon his enemies for things he himself is guilty of. "The best defense is a good offense", and all that.

I'm sure we've all seen the bad guys (Freemasonic politicians, etc.) use this tactic, including recently in Ukraine, Syria, etc. Are you guilty of aiding Islamic terrorists? What better defense than to accuse your OPPONENT of doing this very thing. Are you guilty of using chemical weapons, depleted uranium, etc.? Accuse your opponents of this crime!

It's classic villain behavior.

I think everybody is being too hasty in their judgment of Pablo. We should give Martin a chance to ask Pablo some of his fαɢɢօty questions before passing judgment. I'm sure everybody is partially to blame and both sides could have handled it better.

Matthew, please ask OHCA to cease and desist this defamation of my character.

Whine much?

I have politely asked you to behave in a manner suitable for a Catholic.

In light of your blasphemous Jєω-worshipping, I don't think you know what that is.

"As the elderly man stepped out of his vehicle, my heart raced. I could not believe that Jerry Goldsmith himself [a Jєω] was just a few feet away.

"I tread nervously toward him. I had no idea what to say. I could have . . . told him I worshiped him as a god, or uttered a thousand other things about his career or the honor it was to be in his presence."

http://reelmusiconline.blogspot.com/2009/08/my-goldsmith-moment.html?m=1

You continue to harp on that situation which I have already explained in detail.

Stop. Now.

The "situation" is blasphemy, and your explanation did not help you any.

You chose not to accept my explanation, because you harbor Ill will against me.

As I said before, I was not saying that I worship him as a god, nor would I have ever said that. I was referencing another situation:

By: Jeff Bond (Member)

I was actually at that concert and that's the first time I met Goldsmith and the very first time he yelled at me! smile My best friend was explaining what big fans we were and I jokingly said "We worship you as a god" to which Goldsmith immediately winced and snapped "No you DON'T!!" Ouch. FANTASTIC concert though--he did a Boys From Brazil suite that was probably the best thing I've ever heard him do in concert.

This is what I referenced. Film music fans familiar with Jeff Bond and Film Score Monthly would have picked up this reference as a poke on that incident. It was a stupid thing to say, and I had no intention of saying something stupid.

Not only that, but you are highlighting something I wrote years ago, while you ignore what you are doing now. You dig up old dirt, a molehill, to cover for your current, grave offences. Stop.

Matthew · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2016, 10:46:21 AM »

Manuel,

I moderated OHCA's post, but 99% of it was fine. Simple opposition, satirizing your past posts, making a good point, etc. You have often repeated that "both sides are at fault", "we need to ask questions", etc.

So the only part you can really object to is the adjective "fαɢɢօty" which I agree is inappropriate and not necessary.

OHCA's post now reads:

Quote from: OHCA

I think everybody is being too hasty in their judgment of Pablo. We should give Martin a chance to ask Pablo some questions before passing judgment. I'm sure everybody is partially to blame and both sides could have handled it better.

cebu · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2016, 11:02:25 AM »

Is it me or does anyone else find it ironic that there has been much justified criticism of Bp Fellay for having the suspect Maximilian Krah as his right-hand man when the exact same thing is happening in Boston KY with Fr Pfeiffer and Paul Hernandez ? That said, I think Herr Krah is a practising Catholic.

ManuelChavez · « **Reply #9 on:** February 25, 2016, 11:10:07 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

Manuel,

I moderated OHCA's post, but 99% of it was fine. Simple opposition, satirizing your past posts, making a good point, etc. You have often repeated that "both sides are at fault", "we need to ask questions", etc.

So the only part you can really object to is the adjective "fαɢɢօty" which I agree is inappropriate and not necessary.

OHCA's post now reads:

Quote from: OHCA
I think everybody is being too hasty in their judgment of Pablo. We should give Martin a chance to ask Pablo some questions before passing judgment. I'm sure everybody is partially to blame and both sides could have handled it better.

Thank you. That one word was my issue with his post. I didn't mind the rest.

TheRealMcCoy · « **Reply #10 on:** February 25, 2016, 02:23:22 PM »

We can choose to be the blow fly or the honey bee.

To the OP: I don't believe it will ever end without Divine Intervention.