Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


gaslighting-iToday we pick up where we left off in yesterday’s post. If you dear reader recall, yesterday we pinned down the definition for what constitutes FAKE NEWS and FrancisCoprophagia. As we demonstrated, these two terms are interchangeable. And just to remind everyone how we have defined FrancisCoprophagia, here is the definition in Francis’ own words: (see here)

the sickness of coprophilia, that is, always wanting to cover scandals, covering nasty things, even if they are true,” he said.

And just to provide a “fuller” definition of FrancisCoprophagia, we can insert the definition of FAKE NEWS provided us by the Urban Dictionary:

fake news often covers actual public figures when they are caught making comments that reveal their utter stupidity and/or hypocrisy.

As we see, and what is the most important takeaway from the above definitions is the following:

FAKE NEWS ≠ FALSE NEWS

Given the above, the next question that needs to be asked is: what is the ROOT CAUSE behind the inception of FAKE NEWS?

The answer to this question is as follows: FAKE NEWS is used to create FAKE NARRATIVES.

A good example of this Modeus Operendi can be seen in the following three screen grabs from our favorite catholic website ZeroHedge:

Dec 10, 2016 (see here)

fake-news-xiii

Dec 12, 2016 (see here)

fake-news-xi

Dec 12, 2016 (see here)

fake-news-x

So that is the timeline.

As we can read, in the initial post, no EVIDENCE is provided that Russia “sought to influence Presidential Election”. 43 hours later (second screengrab), the FBI weighed in and confirmed that there is NO EVIDENCE. Next, 3 1/2 hours later, another US Spy Agency also confirmed that there is NO EVIDENCE that Russia “sought to influence Presidential Election”.

Yet, it would appear that the Republican Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House, also a Republican would rather “believe” the UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS of a “CIA” operative over the official FBI and ODNI assertions that those claims are UNSUBSTANTIATED. (see here – upper left hand corner, second story from the top)

fake-news-xiv

So how is it possible that a TRANSRATIONAL situation  like this can come into existence?

Over the last few years, a term has crept into the English language that defines just this type of a situation. That term is:

G. A. S. L. I. G. H. T. I. N. G.

Here is a definition provided by Wikipedia and it reads as follows: (see here)

Gaslighting or gas-lighting is a form of psychological abuse in which a victim is manipulated into doubting their own memory, perception, and sanity.[1][2] Instances may range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim. The term owes its origin to Gas Light, a 1938 play and 1944 film, and has been used in clinical and research literature.[3][4]

Just to sum up what we have defined above, what we are dealing with is information that is injected into the public domain that is CORRUPTED (FAKE NEWS / FrancisCoprophagia). The CORRUPTION is intended to create a FAKE NARRATIVE (Gas-lighting). The most likely explanation for why this FAKE NARRATIVE is created is to allow individuals/entities to act on this FAKE NARRATIVE. In other words, this FAKE NARRATIVE allows these individuals to act when they otherwise would not be able to act. I.e. it provides them with justification.

And now that we have identified the mechanism, let’s see how this plays out in the ECCLESIASTICAL sub-set of human endeavor.

In the Holy Gospel according to St. Matthew 5:32, we can read the following:

But I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, excepting for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.

Yet:  (see here)

In a letter reportedly leaked by a priest in Argentina, Pope Francis writes that there is “no other interpretation” of Amoris Laetitia other than one admitting divorced and remarried Catholics to Holy Communion in some cases.

So what we are OBJECTIVELY seeing is the contraction between what Our Lord taught (St. Matthew) and what Francis, the bishop of Rome is teaching.

And given our detailed knowledge (at least my regular readers) of the second law of logic, i.e. the law of non-contradiction, both these above two teachings can not be correct.

Given that there has been no meritorious argumentation coming from the bishop of Rome, or his supporters for that matter, and given that he has refused to answer the Dubia of the 4 Cardinals that would clear up this VIOLATION OF THE LAW OF NON-CONTRADICTION, we are left to OBSERVE the manner in which Francis, the bishop of Rome is going about answering the Faithful who are requesting a clarification.

One OBSERVATION that we can make is that Francis, the bishop of Rome is either IGNORANT in terms of the Catholic Faith, or is manipulating that part of the Catholic Faith that comes from DIVINE REVELATION.

A good example of his manipulation was a “homily” that Francis gave in April of this year. In this “homily” Francis made these strange quotes: (see here) (emphasis added)

Pope Francis said: “It hurts when I read that small passage from the Gospel of Matthew, when Judas, who has repented, goes to the priests and says: ‘I have sinned’ and wants to give … and gives them the coins. ‘Who cares! – they say to him: it’s none of our business!’ They closed their hearts before this poor, repentant man, who did not know what to do. And he went and hanged himself. 

And what did they do when Judas hanged himself? They spoke amongst themselves and said: ‘Is he a poor man? No! These coins are the price of blood, they must not enter the temple… and they referred to this rule and to that… The doctors of the letter. “

The life of a person did not matter to them, the Pope observed, they did not care about Judas’ repentance.

The Gospel, he continued, says that Judas came back repentant. But all that mattered to them “were the laws, so many words and things they had built”.

What we are seeing above, in terms of this post, is Francis, bishop of Rome building a FAKE NARRATIVE. The OBJECT of Francis’ FAKE NARRATIVE is the “priests”. To be more precise, it is the “priestly class”. He claims that it was on account of the “priestly class” that Judas hung himself. In other words, he introduces a CAUSAL relationship between the “priestly class” not taking the “coins” and the act of suicide.

Aside for the obvious and clumsy deconstructivist fallacy that Francis entertains in his “homily”, what is OBVIOUS is that Francis is building a FAKE NARRATIVE to justify an action that he has taken and future action that he will take. Needless to say, Francis needs the JUSTIFICATION that a FAKE NARRATIVE provides to take action that Francis would not otherwise be able to take.

That in itself could be understood, or at least in a POLITICAL sense. What can’t be understood… or rather JUSTIFIED is the CAUSAL LINKAGE between the action of the “priests” and the suicide of Judas. This is nothing short of the technique of GASLIGHTING.

Once again, GASLIGHTING is defined as:

a form of psychological abuse in which a victim is manipulated into doubting their own memory, perception, and sanity.

What we are a witness to is Francis, the bishop of Rome engaging in a form of PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE whereby he is manipulating the Faithful “priests” into doubting their understanding of the meaning of the passage contained in Holy Gospel according to St. Matthew 5:32, among others, thereby trying to get them to doubt not only the OBJECTIVE TRUTH that the Catholic Church has taught for two millennia, but also their own memory, perception and sanity (rationality and healthiness of the human mind, like the ability to recognize objective truth).

Fast forward to today, what we have seen since the promulgation of the Joy of Adultery by Francis, is his engaging in is a series of attacks against certain sectors of the INSTITUTIONAL CHURCH, on the basis of FAKE NARRATIVES that he has developed, in order to JUSTIFY his MATERIAL HERESY contained in the “Amoris Laetitia” document. 

The intensity of Francis attacks provide PROOF POSITIVE that Francis is engaging in the psychological abuse that has come to be defined as…

G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.I.N.G.

 

Advertisements