Daily Archives: February 15, 2015

Facebook And The Nazi Nanny Mind

 

 

 

 

 

 

There are stories around about Facebook asking for ID if they think your name is fake. This might explain why I was asked for proof of identity when I tried to retrieve the long-forgotten password of my “Mundabor” Facebook account.

Facebook must be really dominant, if there are people willing to undergo the hassle rather than switch to an alternative service. I obviously let the account go, or rather sleep. “Mundabor” an invented name? How do they dare…

Apparently, the Redskins* (or people with Redskins among their ancestors) have also been affected, because Facebook says their name are “not real”. But If your name is John Smith, they don’t mind one bit. I wonder how many criminals use fake names or, in case, even “regular” false identity.

I am tempted to open an account with the name Benito Mussolini, or Augusto Pinochet, or Francisco Franco and see what happens. But as every fag on the net could then report me to Facebook, who would ask me for ID, it would not make sense either.

Facebook truly want to control you in any way. Like in North Korea, anonymity has no place. Whatever it is said, they want to know who said it. It would be disquieting, more probably is merely stupid.

Look: psychopaths have real names and operate using them. Charles Manson was generally known with the name “Charles Manson”. There are certainly countless psychos and criminals writing on Facebook, with their true identity, as I write this; they are now reading “statuses” of people, and sifting through hundreds of profiles. They are up to no good on Facebook, with their real names. Having a name and using it does not make a psycho less of a psycho.

Conversely, this simple blogger cannot (as “Mundabor”) have a Facebook page because Nazi Nanny tolerates no anonymity. Still, I get more “referrals” from Facebook than from Twitter, which means that my blog posts are regularly represented within Facebook and my identity is, so to speak, walking and breathing on Facebook anyway. So Facebook is fine with their members reading my articles on their platform, but they are not fine with me posting them directly. Strange world.

Mind: it’s not really a loss, though I am slightly peeved anyway. Still, Facebook would have been another channel to allow you to follow this blog in the way you prefer, and to perhaps introduce it more easily to your Facebook friends.

This is another disquieting example of how, slowly but safely, we are resembling the world in the film “Brazil”, minus the nice music.

At least I know this is no religious discrimination. Merely Nazi Nannyism.

M

*No PC rubbish on this blog. You’re welcome.

Vorisgate: The Lowdown On The Letdown

Mundabor's Blog

Pope say it's a fashion.  I am no St Paul.  Should I, therefore, be silent? Pope says it’s a fashion.
I am no St Paul.
Should I, therefore, be silent?

The first two instalments of the Vorisgate on this blog are my stance on CMTV’s video  “It always comes back to the Pope” and my publishing of the message they addressed to me, with my own reply.

Yesterday a third video appeared, “The Pope IS different”. I have examined Michael Voris’ last effort to square the circle. Predictably, he failed.

Preliminary consideration

I have found in Mr Voris’ video no word of public excuse to the people already publicly blamed by him: Christopher Ferrara, John Vennari, Michael Matt, and Louie Verrecchio. Whilst these four gentlemen may be extremely charitable people and invite the Vortex viewers to not abandon Voris, or may have had private clarifications and reconciliations directly with him, I continue to be of the opinion that we should draw a line in the…

View original post 1,497 more words

Schism, Reactionaries, And Nuking This Papacy.

When you have time (you will need a good half hour; make a tea…) you can do much worse than head to Louie Verrecchio’s site and watch two videos: Michael Voris’ latest “take” on orthodox Catholics, and Louie Verrecchio’s reply to it. Mr Verrecchio has announced a further video, so I suggest you see this first part soon so you don’t have to catch up with too much material.

I will allow myself here to add some points that I think should be said. I refer to Mr Verrecchio’s – as always – excellent reply concerning all the rest.

On the accusation of “Schism”

Plenty of material on this on the linked site. I merely point out that according to Voris St Athanasius and St. Eusebius, and all the others who sided with them, were Schismatics. Voris creates a straw man, and builds a fifteen minutes video against it.

On the “razor’s edge”

There is in the video a very embarrassed acknowledgment that the SSPX & Co. have the right diagnoses. Unfortunately, the solution would be wrong, and it would be preferable to be on the “razor’s edge” of being loyal to both orthodoxy and heterodoxy.

This razor doesn’t cut it. The principle of non-contradiction does not allow to be loyal to the Pope in his heterodox statements (of which there are hundreds) and to claim loyalty to the Church otherwise. If you are with Christ, you must be against Francis in each and every one of his wrong statements. And you must say so, lest you become an accomplice in his sins. There truly can be no way out. The Papacy is not a lesser religion. The Pope is not a lesser divinity. If Christ is right, Francis must be wrong. There are no razor’s edges here. There can only be siding with Truth, or with falseness.

On the legitimacy of the Pope

Besides the straw man of the “Schism”, the other big mistake of Mr Voris – hopefully the fruit of confusion – is to put in the same big “Reactionary” wok both the Traditionalists and all those who, in various guise, deny that Francis is Pope.

The SSPX does not deny that Francis is Pope. They do not deny that the organisation sitting in Rome is the Only Church. When they meet Vatican officials, they do so from a position of full acknowledgment of their role as Bishops, Cardinals, Monsignors & Co. There is nothing in the SSPX that says the See is Vacant. The SSPX’s position is shared by the Remnant, by Mr Verrecchio, by most other “reactionary” blogs and, unworthily of course, by your humble correspondent. To put the two positions together is a muddling of the waters.

On the attitude towards this Pope

There is a rather disquieting trait in the way in which Voris – and many others – keep talking of Francis as if touching him were some horrible offense to Holy Mother Church. We must be logical here.

God is the supreme Good. Everything else is infinitely inferior to him. An offense made to God’s Truth is an offense of infinite gravity. This is true already in the case of the quisque de populo. How much more so, then, if the one causing the offense is the very Pope!

If you love the Church, you must perforce react to offenses to the Church with all the energy the gravity of the fact allows. You must demolish the source of the offense in every permissible way. If you love the Papacy – let me state this again: if you love the Papacy – you must perforce react with outmost energy to the parody of the Papacy this man is staging, day in and day out.

If the King becomes a porn actor, the attack to the King is not an attack to the Crown; it is its defense.

This papacy must be nuked. Not the papacy, mind. This papacy. Not the Crown. The porn actor.

The most effective way to deal with a mortal enemy is his physical destruction, or at least military defeat. The second is contempt and ridicule. 

I recognise that Francis is legitimately Pope. He enjoys physical inviolability. We can, therefore, not advocate the forced remotion of the man from his office through, say, a Swiss Guard coup. We would also be in mortal sin if we willfully and sincerely wished that the man may be given, say, a “Sicilian coffee”. We can – some would say: should – pray for his painless death, or for the Lord to free us from this Pontificate; but that’s that.

But the other way, that is certainly open to us. The second most effective way to deal with this papacy is to bury it under a mountain of ridicule, exposing its falseness day in and day out, making him the butt of jokes, taking every credibility away from him as we, by the very act, extol the importance, dignity, and sacredness of the Papacy he betrays.

If Francis’ senseless rants were met every time with open laughter and public ridicule, they would end very soon. The fuel of his heretical engine is vanity. Destroy his agenda, and he will cease to be a danger. Destroy him in his vanity, and you will destroy his motivation to be a danger in the first place.

This man, whilst still being the Pope, defies every expectation of what a Pope is supposed to be. It is an entirely new situation, a completely new ball game. Our answer to him must be as unprecedented in its harshness as he is unprecedented in the scale, variety and public diffusion of his attacks to Catholic orthodoxy.

Yes, I am a proud Reactionary.

And I think this papacy must be nuked.

M

It Has Come To This Point

Less and less safe in France: the Eucharist in a Tabernacle.

Less and less safe in France: the Eucharist in a Tabernacle.

A French Bishop has ordered the Blessed Sacrament to be taken away from the Tabernacles all over his diocese, and the doors to the tabernacle to be left open to show there is no Blessed Sacrament inside. The only exception is if the Tabernacle is robust enough to resist an attack from your average French Satanist or wannabe Atheist Hero for one day.

It has come to this point.

The persecution is coming. It will not be in my generation I think, but the next one must be prepared for a hard and protracted fight.

In the meantime, Francis complains day in and day out about the Environment and Income Inequality.

M

%d bloggers like this: