I’ve been on hiatus with visitors aboard, and so only glanced occasionally at the blog. Not much going on. Today I want to wrap up my trip down memory lane with the subject of John Lennon. I left this subject long ago having given up, simply not enough evidence to draw far-fetched conclusions.
John was said to be the son of Julia Stanley. As far as I know there is only one photo of the two of them together.
It’s fake. Check out the lighting on the faces, the unusual straight line down her left side dress, the fact that the young boy’s head is bigger than hers.
There’s more, of course. Julia was said to have been killed by off-duty policeman Eric Clague on July 15, 1958. He was driving within the law and claimed she just “ran straight out in front of me.” No charges were filed, and Clague was removed from the Lennon story.
I have an alternative theory: Since Julia was not John’s mother, she was merely what we call a “literary device,” an invented person used to hide something else. As John became famous, as was known he might be (the Beatles in 1958 were yet to be formally assembled), “Julia” would be in demand for interviews and photos, and she and John would have to play mother son for a continued period. Easier in fact just to kill her off. She never existed in reality, and so killing her was merely removing a ghost from his life. Problem solved.
So we do not know who John’s mother was. What about his father? Alfred Lennon, said to be a merchant seaman, was not much present in John’s life, and didn’t really come to know his son until Beatlemania. I must say his photo bears some resemblance to John, but there could be many reasons for that. One would be that in Intel operations, they do like to keep it all in the family. Alfred could be a real person, and also a hired lifetime actor. He could be a cousin, uncle, or a distant relative. His last name, then, would not be “Lennon,” but rather that of another of his relatives, Julia Stanley.
I’ve got more photos to cover here, and hope that what seems far-fetched may seem less so as we look at real family photos.
This photo is said to be of John with his cousins and aunt and uncle. It’s a regular photo, everyone seeming real. The “uncle’s” hand reaching out is odd, and I cannot explain it other than there was another person erased from the photo. (I can easily do that using Affinity Photo, but back in that time, using razor blades and shading, I do not know.) The person on the left with the impish grin is real and belongs. He is someone I do not know or care about. Two things I might suggest: One, that the woman on the right is John’s mother. To this point she has been AWOL, replaced by the mythical Julia Stanley. The other matter is this: The two boys could easily be twins. They look the same age, are wearing the same shoes, shorts and jackets. Their eyes are eerily identical.
Back when I did this work, I made much too much of the twin angle. There just isn’t enough there. It is intriguing. That’s all. Why have but one set of twins be a Beatle – why not go whole hog and make two groups of lookalikes. Stu Sutcliffe, who did not make the cut in Hamburg, was, in my research, a set of twins later called “Andy Warhol.”
There was a website claiming to have evidence that all four Beatles were in fact twins. Maybe it is still around. But I never found any evidence of either George or Ringo having identicals, and all I had about John was the photo above. Not enough. I dropped the matter.
There are other photos I want to have readers look at.
That is said to be John with “cousins and a lodger,” the “lodger” being the man on the left. But I must ask, why ask a lodger to be in a family photo? I suspect what we are looking at here is John with his real mother and father. I further speculate that the lodger was inserted in the photo over the twin brother, and that we are looking at two parents and two children, one child removed.
This photo is said to be John with “cousin and boarder.” Again, boarders are asked to participate in family photos. I must say, however, that this boarder has adopted far too familiar a pose, his hand around John’s waste, almost familial. Again I suggest that the “cousin” was inserted in a dark room and was used to conceal another boy. Check out the white of her blouse compared to the other whites in the photo. It stands out. This is a photo of a father and two sons, I suspect.
It is hard, however, to make a case for twins with only one photo of the two of him, and the twin deleted from every other photo. That is a tough thing to sell, and I could not do it. Even I could not buy it, though it left me intrigued.
One final photo, and I am done.
The photo to the left is said to be John with his mother, Julia Stanley. I claimed above that there is only one photo of those two, the fake one to the right, and I stand by that. The woman on the left here is not the same person as the woman on the right. I have not done face chops on this, as I think it is easily apparent. Just the length of the chin tells me they are different.
There you have it, my foray into the true nature of John Lennon, real name more likely John Stanley. He appears to be a child from a solid family comprised of a mother, a father, possibly a (twin?) brother, and appeared, if photos can be trusted, to be well loved by both parents. His mother was not killed, his father was not a deadbeat dad. They invented all of that stuff, and gave him the name “Lennon” as a mild twist of the knife, perhaps knowing someday he would pretend to be a lefty, as in Vladimir Lenin.
There are more photos out there. I invite readers to find them and analyze them. I would love to be shown wrong, and to learn that at least one aspect of the Beatles was real.
Piece of Mindful 
Here’s all the Lennon the boy you could ask for. 33 pix, of course. I have photos of similar vintage of family members and none of them have this kind of graininess. Makes the cutting and pasting hard to locate.
https://www.vintag.es/2021/10/john-lennon-childhood.html
LikeLike
Please, anyone who likes photo analysis, these 33 (!) photos are a school. In any that it is him alone, the photos are fine. When he is with others, there are often, if not usually, tells. I urge you take a look and chime in.
LikeLike
Hey Mark, did you get your descriptions right? I reckon the man in both the lodger and border photos is the same person, at a quick glance.
LikeLike
You could be right, but as I see it the “boarder” in the first photo is the guy on the left, and the “lodger” in the second his mother. I stand to be corrected. In both cases, the guy behind him is his father.
LikeLike
I’ve always found suspicious what Yoko Ono said about her marriage with Lennon. She said something like “I’ve always wanted to be with a man coming from working class”, following the release of “Working class hero” .
Really? A japanese woman born into a family of rich bankers in 1933, used to be surrounded by nannies and housekeepers, and most of all with a strict japanese education, eager to live a life with a man from a totally different social, cultural and economic background?
Not a chance. She would have been disowned by her parents. In fact the marriage, if a marriage there ever was, was between two rich people, and I mean rich since birth, not because of the Beatles and Lennon’s talent.
And why the need to say that publicly anyway? These are private things usually, because they involve intimate feelings between two people.
But in this case it was all scripted to instill in people the idea that Lennon was a guy born poor who found fame and made money thanks to his talent. Same ol’ story as you americans say: from rags to riches, and Lennon was in fact living in the States at the time. Nothing is casual with these people, ever.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah I remember this photo, you showed it on one of your old posts about Lennon.
And I found your post about Stu Sutcliffe becoming Warhol convincing, ’cause the moles -or warts- and scars on Stu’s face matched completely the ones Warhol had himself. And the skin complection, the skull, the hairstyle even…
I’d like to be as good as you at face chops/analysis Mark!
Last night I came across a weird comment under a Joy Division’s song on youtube (dunno if you’ve ever heard of brit band Joy Division and their lead singer Ian Curtis who allegedly hang himself on May 18, 1980. Aces and eights, ’nuff said), well this comment just said bluntly “Ian Curtis is now Anton Newcombe”.
Newcombe is the leader of american folk rock band Brian Jonestown Massacre (the name itself…huge red flag for me).
Ian Curtis, 23 when he supposedly died, killed himself just a couple of days before the band would fly to the States for a long tour that was about to be the huge breakthrough of their career…
Curtis was born in 1956, Newcombe in 1967 but if you look at his recent photos he looks way older than 56. Obviously he sold the story of his drug & alcohol addiction and he’s now sober he says, they all do that don’t they?
LikeLike
Very interesting. Sounds like a project. Care to take it on?
“I’d like to be as good as you at face chops/analysis Mark!”
It is just a technique that anyone can learn. There are pitfalls, shortcomings, but for the most part it offers useful information, eye of the beholder and all of that. For the most part, apart from leveling, I use Microsoft Paint, available to all of us who use PC’s. I can easily shrink or enlarge photos to make two of the same parameters.
LikeLike
Thanks Mark, I’ll give it a try and see what happens.
Will let you know. It may just be misdirection, or maybe not.
LikeLike
Yoko, Andy Warhol (Stu Sutcliff), JL. Draw your own conclusions.
LikeLike
Nice hand growing out of Yoko’s stomach there.
LikeLike
Could be a real hand.
LikeLike
Also, why would she desire marrying a working-class man, anyway? Wouldn’t her upbringing hinder any feelings she had for the working class? At best, she probably would’ve felt pity for them, but not eagerness to court them, especially when she was so used to privilege and luxury from an early age.
And as further proof of how fake the Lennon-Ono relationship was, please analyze this photo of them together, taken shortly before John’s “death”. It looks like a past-up. The lines on Yoko’s head looks weird and her face has sharper resolution than Lennon’s. But we don’t see any weird lines on Lennon’s face that corresponds with hers. It never adds up.
LikeLike
I haven’t watched the “Let Him Be” movie, but Mr. Mathis showed a screen shot from the movie of a young man around 28-32 years old. He looks similar to Lennon in his 20’s. So I suppose after John faked his death he had another child with some unknown white woman around 1980.
Another possibility is that the Beatlemania John was a different person from the “Yoko” John. The Beatlemania twin looked better than Yoko John and he was married to Cynthia, a white woman. Maybe the guy in the movie is Beatlemania John.
LikeLike
I know the guy you are talking about. MM speculated that it might be JL’s son. The noses match, with a slight tick to the right. Could well be. Another guy who has that same nose goes by the name “Mike McGear,” Paul’s fake brother.
LikeLike
Hi mate. I haven’t been here for a while. Been taking a break from the web, and working hard. I forgot what the site was called, so I punched in “Something went somewhere”* into the search engine. Sure enough, it was on page 2.
*Funny as fuck that header about Apollo 11 etc.
LikeLike
That expression, “something went somewhere”, was actually the words of a Russian engineer who claimed that Apollo 11 was underpowered, had no astronauts aboard, and likely ditched in the Atlantic.
LikeLike
Beatles were awesome songs and music. I don’t give a fuck if they were semi or fully manufactured. As people like Mathis continually demonstrate, you have to be of peerage families/Phoenician Navy etc to be involved. Always an odd exception etc just because of pure talent. I’m not jealous. They can have their lives, and I mine. I am into meritocracy notwithstanding. Bigger fish to fry than this.
LikeLike
Beatles were a very good vocal group.
LikeLike
Has anyone seen the movie “Yesterday” (2019), about world where the Beatles have been erased from history? In one scene it seems to me that John Lennon makes an uncredited appearance as himself.
LikeLike
I have not seen it, was not aware of it. I think John also appeared in the movie Give My Regards to Broad Streey, as a vagrant.
LikeLike
The following article claims the actor is Robert Carlyle. It includes a pretty good screencap of John’s face from the movie as well as a link to a clip of the scene:
https://www.smoothradio.com/news/entertainment/yesterday-john-lennon-actor/
“Although it was kept a secret until the film’s release (and not revealed in the credits either), Robert Carlyle plays John Lennon in Yesterday.”
Really?
Here’s Robert Carlyle’s IMDB page. He doesn’t look much like John Lennon to me there. What do you think?
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001015/
LikeLike
I simply cannot go down the Beatles rabbit-holes but to me it’s not John’s mother’s left side that looks odd but her right side. Her right arm just doesn’t seem to be sitting properly.
I just did a quick review of your post on Jeffrey Dahmer, Mark. This person has a substack on him and has published 15 articles on him so far. It’s one psyop I cannot get massively interested in – not because it’s not interesting just because not enough time too many psyops – but I thought this post particularly interesting. It seems they’ve substituted Dahmer as the culprit of sexual assault in place of the real culprit, a Catholic priest.
https://thedahmercase.substack.com/p/jeff-dahmers-alleged-1988-conviction
LikeLike
Petra! Nice to know you’re still scrutinizing. I am of the opinion that there are no serial killers. It is all done as psyops designed to keep us in a state of fear. That is critical and key to just about every aspect of public policy, from endless wars to climate change to Covid, all imaginary but solidified by a completely controlled media.
Regarding Catholic priests, it was (is) generally youth in flower that are the objects of attention, and the problem is exacerbated by celibacy, and unnatural state of being. Priests undergo intense training and effective lockdown, effectively shutting down sexually during seminary. Once back in real life, as I see it, they awaken and pick up where interrupted in development, teen age years. By that time they should be engaged in normal adult sexual relationships, whether straight or gay (a large percentage of priests are gay). Celibacy is insanity.
Anyway, interest in youth who have undergone sexual development is not pedophilia, although it is extremely inappropriate, as I see it. It is appropriate to remove these men from priesthood.
LikeLike
By the way, sexual abuse is common in any field where adults have authority over youth. The Catholics were not the worst offenders, but were singled out in psyop fashion. As I understand it, the worst case in the US is the public school system.
LikeLike
Well it would be interesting if it were the public school system because I definitely tend to hear of many more cases of sexual abuse in Catholic schools in Australia than public schools. I’m sure it’s not like that now but in the past there was so much reverence for the church and its representatives whereas you don’t have that same kind of reverence in public schools. In fact, even private Anglican schools seem to have more reporting of sexual abuse than public schools in Australia – no doubt the fact that some of them are boarding school creates more opportunity – also that they’re boys schools rather than co-ed I think would make it easier somehow.
I believe paedophilia technically applies to prepubescent children, however, I don’t believe that just because a child has reached sexual maturity that an older person having a sexual relationship with them is OK because often it’s not what the younger person wants and they can be very much pushed into it even if not physically forced.
LikeLike
Agreed. Sexual relations with a younger person, consensual or not, needs to be severely punished. And who is to say “consensual” when there is such a power imbalance.
LikeLike
There is no gay.
If you wanna say that, following trauma, they became mentally ill, decided that they’re so-called “gay”, and decided to behave accordingly, fine.
Also, isn’t the Catholic Church scandal just another extremely nefarious blackwashing psy-op…?
LikeLike
Gee whiz and golly: no reply at all, yet again, to me exposing the massive individual- and society-decimating agenda that pertains to all things so-called “gay”.
It’s almost as if every psy-op is allowed to be discussed here except that one….
LikeLike
You are free to discuss it and all are free to respond. That people do not respond … for me, I simply do not agree with you, but don’t want to do or say anything that might be considered censorship.
LikeLike
You “exposed” an opinion but provided no evidence for it.
I’m a (straight) theatre guy who has had close friendships with countless gay people over the years. I’ve had long conversations with gay men and women who were not shy about sharing intimate details about their lives. Some were sexually abused as children, some not. A few were among the most stable, emotionally and intellectually mature individuals I’ve known.But even if most or all of them were sexually abused as children and didn’t mention it… well, I also know straight people who were sexually molested by a same-sex parent. Is there a specific “gay-making” trauma? Do you know what it is? Do you have any evidence beyond your opinion?
If you answer, I doubt I’ll respond unless you really are on to something, because getting people on various sides of the “gay” issue–no matter what side you’re on–is obviously part of the diversion and the psy-op.
LikeLike
ScottRC: I never said that there’s anything that is “gay-making”.
I said all “deciding that I must be gay” is a mental illness, and it’s caused by trauma of one form or another.
Individual differences. But always traumatic.
LikeLike
The idea that people “decide” to be gay or straight is not new or original, so the idea that you are “exposing” some big secret that POM readers had no idea about is laughably grandiose. And the idea that people decide to be gay is laughable to anyone who has actually gotten to know gay people and listened to their accounts of coming to terms with their sexuality. As I and others have said, you are stating an unoriginal and unpersuasive opinion without backing it up.
LikeLike
Your fixation on this topic would be… interesting… if I didn’t know how common it is for people who are repressing their own unacceptable-to-them impulses by decrying their outward expression in other people. Stupid people who leap at any chance to point out stupidity in others in order to feel smart. Fascist lefties clutching their pearls over the fascism of the right, and vice versa, in order to convince themselves they stand for freedom. I know it sounds like a cheap shot, AD, but your histrionics on this topic really reek of repression and projection.
LikeLike
You got several of us on another thread asking you to please share your research and haven’t done so yet. Are you just trying to bait Mark, or do you have something to share with us? Please do it or quit going on about it.
LikeLike
Basing on my personal experience with the lgbt world, I tend to agree with A.D., sorry guys.
When I was 18 and a uni student I started hanging out with a group of people. a couple of them being gay, and also a lesbian girl with her very unpleasant girlfriend.
The lesbian girl now grown woman, after several relationships with women ended up getting married with a guy and haa a child. She’s now the most bourgeoise kind of woman if you know what I mean.
As for the two guys, one of them was a very dear friend to me for many years, then we lost contact. Well, this guy never wanted a relationship with another man, he didn’t love homo intercourse at all, and just wanted (still wants I was told recently) live his sexuality as a private fantasy and not as something in real life.
He even told me at some point in our friendship that he believed he ‘d become gay after a traumatic experience (like being raped by a man as a child, he used to dream about a priest) that he felt he’d removed but also felt it wanted to come back to the surface. He wanted to start hypno therapy sessions to see of he could get the memory back, but eventually backed off as he was too scared of what he’d end up finding.
I can’t talk for all gays/lesbians/trans in the world but I still know a bunch of them in my hometown, and the trans especially look like the most miserable people in the world. So freedom to change sex is not a great thing after all, is it?
One thing for sure is that there is no scientifical evidence that people are born gay or with gender disphorya.
It’s not a genetic thing, so it has to be something else.
For me it’s mental illness mixed with being easily brainwashed by the system, also mixed with the human natural instict to be promiscuous and bisexual; the Romans could teach us a lot about that, basing on the still visible Pompei frescos.
In fact religions exist to castrate all human instincts and pulsions, and porn, gender and stuff like that are the result of that castration. Creating taboos and sense of sin only creates a broken society the way I see it.
Just to make things clear I’m not justifying those things but I’ve come to terms with the fact they exist, and most of all that they’re a product of the schizo society and woke -but not awaken- culture we’re living in.
LikeLike
As long as we are speculating about things we do not understand, I had a friend growing up who I see in retrospect was gay at a time when that was a thing to be hidden away. He got engaged twice, once to a very butch gal, once to a pretty nice gal, and each time he set it up so that they would break up with him. He was in the worst possible predicament, gay when gay had to be repressed and hidden. He has lived a miserable life, living now in a tiny house and alone with his dog. He was never violent as some repressed gays tend to be, abusive of wife and kids and all of that. He was just miserable. Had he come out as gay back then, he would have had to leave the state. His family would have disowned him.
LikeLike
This friend I had is gay meaning his family always knew he was, although he never came out to them. His father died of a heart attack when he was young, and some people even told him years later that his dad had died of a broken heart ’cause he couldn’t accept his older son was gay. His father was a “liberal” who voted for left parties…
This guy has always lived with his mother who’s now elderly and blind beside having a heart condition. He has to take care of her 24/7 and I was recently told he’s living a miserable life too, with a job he hates and a shitty family situation (a younger brother who doesn’t give a damn about him and their mother). He never had the guts to move out and live his life as a gay man, he never wanted to find a better job with a higher salary.
So what’s the point of being gay if you don’t have the courage to be who you are? Is it really important what family think at some point, or it’s just another excuse for not living something that you do not feel it’s natural and right?
I came to the conclusion that many lgbt-not all, I rehiterate this- are just a product of the system, they’re very confused, often traumatized as A.D. said, and without strong values. They demand to be accepted by society as they need confirmation that what they’re doing is right and just. They don’t know who they are, that’s the point.
You Mark as a straight man, have you ever had such issues in your life? I bet not.
Me neither.
LikeLike
As Mark says, we are speculating about things we don’t understand.
Scientists may not be able to explain a predisposition toward homosexuality through genetics, but it does not follow that trauma is the only explanation. There are lots and lots of things scientists can’t explain. Personally, I’m comfortable with mystery.
Sex between men and women is necessary for the survival of the human species… but is romantic love? All the emotion and ideation that we attach to our sexual impulses… that stuff is separate from the impulses themselves, right?
The impulse to eat food is also built in. If, as a child, I developed a taste for junk food, and I still prefer it over healthy food, does that mean I was traumatized as a child?
I think our tendency to create meaning where we really don’t need to create it–especially if it’s meaning that makes us feel bad about ourselves, or compels us to make others feel bad about themselves–is certainly trauma-inducing. Though I am straight, I lived in very real fear of people thinking I was gay throughout my early teens (I was a theatre kid who was bad at sports and–horror of horrors–threw a baseball “like a girl). I was bullied by kids who called me gay, a “faggot,” whatever, and–until I learned how to see through and stop fearing and stand up to bullies–that shit was traumatic and I have no doubt that it fucked me up in lots of ways. If I had been secretly attracted to other boys, no doubt it would have fucked me up more.
I dunno, Anna and AD. Maybe I could agree that “gay is a delusion” if we could also agree that the romanticization or emotional meaning that all of us bring to our sex impulses is delusional. I’m 53 and I’d still kind of prefer if hot chicks didn’t poop or fart because it fucks up my idealization of them.
LikeLike
I’m really sorry for what you had to go through in your teens Scott, and I hope you’re doing ok now.
I don’t think trauma can be seen as the only explanation for being lgbt, but I can’t see genetics as having a role in it either.
I talked about my personal experience which obviously doesn’t explain that much really, but it gave me the sense that many of them are not authentically lgbt, they just want to experiment sex with everybody.
There’s a saying in Italy, pretty crude actually, that goes more or less like this: “many people love doing girls, but all love doing men”.
It’s much more vulgar than that in italian, you get the idea.
LikeLike
Anna, I’m glad I was bullied back then–it was great training for the world we live in. It certainly made me more capable of standing up to the face mask and vax bullies.
The interconnectedness of consciousness and the physical body is a reality that materialistic science (including the science of genetics) actively ignores, or takes a reductionist view of, or flat-out denies. Of course genetics can’t codify sexual orientation… or genius… or sense of humor… or any number of other traits that are no doubt influenced by countless internal and external factors.
As for that joke… I assume that hard-core Italian lesbians aren’t fond of it. ha.
LikeLike
Oh, look who’s still here blabbering about the gay & trans psy-op:
our A.D. troll who just throws comments here and there about the subject, even complains that nobody replies then disappears for days.
Weeks ago you told me boldly I AM part of the problem when I said that my girlfriend’s scared to find herself in a public restroom with a 7 ft tall dude with huge byceps claiming to be a woman, and I agree with her.
So dude tell us now, what’s your evidence that gay and transgenders do not actually exist but it’s all a psy-op?
You’ll better start making some sense from now on, and be thankful we don’t know each other personally.
LikeLike
Enoch, I replied but it isn’t immediately showing up. If it doesn’t, perhaps Mark can locate it?
P.S. So now, because I called you out on your twisted tolerance, you’re threatening me…??!!
LikeLike
So your pathetic reply to Scott is all the evidence you can provide here?
You know what, my “twisted” tolerance to your endless shit is over.
Fuck off.
LikeLiked by 1 person
According the teaching of Pope Pius XII there is the superiority of celibacy over marriage.
Pius XII, Encyclical Sacra Virginitas
of March 25, 1954
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/n169_Virg_2.htm
It is forbidden in RCC to ordain gay.
Pope St. Pius V Demands Rigorous Punishment
of Homosexual Clergy
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/n134_Sodomy_10.htm
Saint Cardinal Peter Damian was the first and only Bishop and Doctor of the Church to write a specific treatise on the grave sin of sodomy
St. Peter Damian’s battle against clerical homosexuality
St. Peter Damian, Liber gomorrhianus
Book of Gomorrah
https://akacatholic.com/saint-peter-damian-sodomy-pederasty-and-the-emasculation-of-a-saint-part-i/
I don’t believe Theodore Edgar McCarrick’s misdeeds weren’t known to FBI.
It’s good for FBI to have ally – criminal in destroing Catholic Church from inside.
LikeLike
More than two links puts your comment in moderation. Not my decision.
LikeLike
According the teaching of Pope Pius XII there is the superiority of celibacy over marriage.
Pius XII, Encyclical Sacra Virginitas
of March 25, 1954
traditioninaction.org/religious/n169_Virg_2.htm
It is forbidden in RCC to ordain gay.
Pope St. Pius V Demands Rigorous Punishment
of Homosexual Clergy
traditioninaction.org/religious/n134_Sodomy_10.htm
Saint Cardinal Peter Damian was the first and only Bishop and Doctor of the Church to write a specific treatise on the grave sin of sodomy
St. Peter Damian’s battle against clerical homosexuality
St. Peter Damian, Liber gomorrhianus
Book of Gomorrah
akacatholic.com/saint-peter-damian-sodomy-pederasty-and-the-emasculation-of-a-saint-part-i/
I don’t believe Theodore Edgar McCarrick’s misdeeds weren’t known to FBI.
It’s good for FBI to have ally – criminal in destroing Catholic Church from inside.
LikeLike
Celibacy within catholic religion has nothing to do with theology and religion, but with not wanting that wives and children inherit what belongs to the Vatican.
The Vatican State is arguably the richest in the world. It’s also a theocracy, that means that the Pope is also the monarch of the state and he decides over the life or death of his subjects.
Nobody can ever discuss or fight the power of the Pope/King of the Vatican State.
During the scamdemic the Pope ordered that all Vatican citizens be vaccinated or they’d lose their residency and job (for those who reside and also work within the state).
Someone in Italy years ago has proposed that clergymen marry signing a prenup so that wives and kids cannot inherit anything belonging to the Vatican, but they’re too scared a that widow and her children could find a way through a good lawyer to inherit patrimony and that would create a dangerous precedent.
Re. gay priests, well that’s hilarious because we all know that the Vatican is full of gays, I was even told funny stories about how to become a successful TV personality, politician or actor via some cardinal or bishop’s bed, and that applies to both men and women.
Italian people are never impressed by all the moral BS those people have been saying for centuries.
LikeLike
Priest can’t get married, only before becoming a priest.
After that priest have to live in celibacy with his wife.
“Pope” Francis isn’t a Catholic. He will be declared “Antipope” by the Catholic Church in the future.
“Pope” Francis said: “I believe in God, not in a Catholic God, there is no Catholic God”
in an October 2013 interview with La Repubblica.
Anticatholic, Jewish “Pope” Paul VI (Montini) was reportedly homosexual.
He was easy to blackmail and he promoted homosexuals.
“Nikita and Roncalli – Unknown Aspects of a Pope”
by prof. Franco Bellegrandi
camariero di spada e cappa (honor chamberlain) of His Holiness from the end of Pope Pius XII’s pontificate into Paul VI’s reign. He was a member of the Vatican Noble Guard, the most distinguished corps of the papal military service.
LikeLike
Roman catholic priests cannot get married, end of story.
If they were married before being ordained they can no longer live in the same house with their wives; they stay married as divorce is obviously not accepted, but they’ll live apart from then on. But no worries, they can still entertain themselves with men, women and kids.
Celibacy, yeah sure.
About Pope Francis, he’ll be declared antipope by the church?
Ha. I have bad news for you: they’re all antipopes.
There’s never been a real Pope in the history of the Vatican except for Celestino V and John Paul I, because they’re all crypto jews or were put there by the élites so I’m sorry, I don’t believe the Church will ever do something like that.
The level of corruption and satanism within the Vatican is beyond words.
There’s a movie that came out at the beginning of summer in Italy, title is “Rapito”, kidnapped in english, and tells the story of a jewish child in ca. 1860 taken from his family by order of Pope Pius IX to be raised within the Vatican and later become a priest. I think it’s based on a true story, but the story behind is always the same, only the narrative changes.
So, your “Anticatholic, jewish Pope Paul VI” makes me smile. Yeah, he was gay and living with actor Paolo Carlini throughout his mandate.
I believe Ratzinger-Benedict XVI was gay too, he looked totally gay to me, and Francis-Bergoglio looks like the english actor Jonathan Pryce who I believe impersonates him, or maybe Bergoglio never really existed at all and it was Pryce all along.
So, nothing new under the sun, at least not to me.
LikeLike
Priest can’t get married, only before becoming a priest.
After that priest have to live in celibacy with his wife.
That was my answer to your opinion of theological possibility of married
priests.
And to your surprise priests can live and live in celibacy nowadays.
Jewish movie from Jewish Steven Spielberg about Catholics?
That’s pure truth.
This Jew was a Catholic priest, Father Pio Edgardo Levi Mortara (August 27,
1851 – March 11, 1940).
Father Pio Edgardo Levi Mortara was secretly baptaised by a good Catholic
servant Anna Morisi in a danger of death of a child.
Now we lack of a such practising Catholics.
Father Pio Edgardo Levi Mortara:
Despite all this, I never showed the slightest desire to return to my family, a
fact which I do not understand myself, except by looking at the power of
supernatural grace.
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=3116
What about murdered Catholic child St. Simon from Trent in 1475?
Murdered Catholic child 7-year-old Dominico del Val from Saragossa?
Murdered Catholic child 8-year-old St. Hugh in 1255 at Lincoln, in England?
Murdered Andrei Yushchinsky, a 13-year-old boy in Kiev in 1911?
What about murdered John and Anton Schuessler, Jr., Robert Peterson, and Barbara and Patricia Grimes in Chicago in 1955?
That’s nonsense all Popes were Jewish.
LikeLike
“And to your surprise priests can live and live in celibacy nowadays.”
You really believe that? Good for you. I don’t, as I don’t know any priest or higher clergyman that lives in celibacy.
But maybe in your country they behave better than here, who knows.
About the murders of catholic children throughout history that you listed, a book by Ariel Toaff called “Pasque di sangue”, “Bloody Easters” in english came out years ago sparkling huge controversy; it talks about human sacrifices and blood rituals done with Christian children’s blood by German and northern Italy jewish communities in medieval and more recent times.
It may be true but it only serves the purpose of hiding the millions of other human sacrifices they’ve been practicing for centuries, 9/11 being one of them.
A few names just to misdirect about what’s been going on for a long, long time.
And it doesn’t matter whether all Popes are crypto jews or not, as I said already they’re always put there by the élites, which is the same thing.
Like US presidents and other governments in the world, Popes are chosen inside lodges years before.
It’s all a lie, so I wouldn’t care too much about priests and Popes.
Religions and elections are all fake.
LikeLike
Second Vatican Council, also called Vatican II, (1962–65)
The Vatican II sect is part of the problem.
Modernist “Fr” James Martin said in 2017, at Fordham University,
“I have a hard time imagining how even the most traditionalist, homophobic, closed-minded Catholic cannot look at my friend [in a same-sex “marriage”] and say, ‘That is a loving act, and that is a form of love that I don’t understand but that I have to reverence.” (See news.fordham.edu/inside-fordham-category/lectures-and-events/building-bridge-catholic-church-lgbt-community/).
According to the book The Changing Face of the Priesthood by Vatican II sect “priest” Donald Cozzens (published by The Liturgical Press in the year 2000),
sociologist James G. Wolf’s research concludes 48.5% of priests and 55.1% of seminarians were homosexuals.
The percentage is highest among “priests” under age 40, which in Wolf’s research (published in 1989), would mean those born in and after 1950, with “ordinations” taking place in/after 1974 after the Modernists (anticatholic priests disobedient to their Pope Pius X and their RCC) opened the floodgates to admit sodomites.
Cozzens reports the number of sexually active homosexuals in the Vatican II “priesthood” was a full-fledged “network” of perverts. This is all the more alarming, as Cozzens is sympathetic to the sodomites.
introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2023/08/planned-perversion.html
LikeLike