Shining the light on 'Spotlight'
Fabricated episodes. Character defamation. Devious storytelling. This is the definitive review of the Hollywood movie Spotlight, which purports to chronicle the Boston Globe's 2001-2002 investigation of the Catholic Church sex abuse story.
The heavily hyped Hollywood production – starring A-list actors Michael Keaton and Mark Ruffalo – professes to dramatize the paper's pursuit of the troubling crimes committed by abusive priests in the Archdiocese of Boston.
However, after thoroughly studying the film, TheMediaReport.com's Dave Pierre reports:
"Spotlight claims to be 'based on actual events,' but it does not bode well when the very first scene of the film is a complete fabrication.
"It also does not bode well for the film's authenticity that a possible lawsuit looms as at least four individuals have now stepped forward to say they have been falsely portrayed in the film.
"And the film grossly misrepresents the way that Church officials responded to cases of abusive priests years ago and essentially ignores the role that secular psychologists played in the crisis.
"The film also conveniently ignores the Globe's long history of hypocrisy when it comes to reporting the issue of child sex abuse. While Spotlight kindly refers to Church officials as 'scumbags' and 'good Germans,' the Globe never applied any of those pleasant labels to others who committed child sex crimes and whom the Globe often celebrated in its pages."
Our detailed review of 'Spotlight':
• Real-Life Characters Portrayed in 'Spotlight' Threaten Lawsuit Claiming Fabricated Depictions (November 2015, w/Addendum, 3/16/16)
• 'Based on Actual Events'? Except the Very First Scene From 'Spotlight' Is Completely Bogus (November 2015)
• 'Cardinal Law Knew of Abuse and Did Nothing'? Actually, Cardinal Law Did Exactly As He Was Told To Do By Psychologists (November 2015)
• 'Spotlight' Neglects to Mention the Boston Globe's Own Long History of Rank Hypocrisy on the Issue of the Sexual Abuse of Minors (November 2015)
• No, Cardinal Law Did Not 'Call Down the Wrath of God' To Punish the Boston Globe (November 2015)
• Fact Checker: More Ways That 'Spotlight' Got It Wrong (November 2015, w/ Addendum, 12/5/15)
———————
[See also the new book: Sins of the Press: The Untold Story of The Boston Globe's Reporting on Sex Abuse in the Catholic Church by David F. Pierre, Jr. (Amazon.com)]
Tell me P- Does it give a demonic some sick pleasure to mock the Almighty God. Keep bowing down and worshipping the "Queen of Heaven". Is it any wonder, that you have a problem with scriptural passages and fail to understand their application, those that expose the horrible action and inaction of your wicked cult.
Catholics- I ask that you might research the history of 3 men(if they can be called men), (1) Father Lawrence C. Murphy (2) Father Marcial Maciel (3) Ex- Father Oliver O'Grady. I prefer not to mention them again by name, because the stories of these creeps are disgusting.
(1) Priest who molested up to 200 deaf boys, appealed to then Cardinal RAT-zinger who refused to defrock the pervert. In his(1) personal letter he claims repeatedly, only accusations and allegations, but ends with, " I have repented of any of my past transgressions, and have been living peaceably. I simply want to live out the time I have left in the dignity of my priesthood." Like the peace and dignity you left the children you raped? Several letters written by Archbishops with no response from Card RAT or the vatican. (1) never tried or disciplined by your cult and also got a free pass from police and prosecutors who ignored victims.
(2) Molested teenage seminarians, children and even his own children. Letters sent throughout career by priests and respected adults to vatican, pope john paul and card RAT with consistent unresponsiveness, overlooking charges and ignoring allegations. PJP II publicly congratulating him(2), for he was a great fundraiser for the vatican and curia. Pope RATzinger finally condemns his(2) actions after he's long dead and gone. Notice yet the MO(mode of operation) of coverup and secrecy.
(3) Ohhh! Father O'Pedophile- So proud of his nasty indiscretions that he agreed to make a movie, enjoying the stage and exposing the world to the mind of a proud, sick and perverted catholic priest, more the norm and majority than the rarity they try to convince us of.
So I can continue to name more, both bishops and priests, who not only molested one minor but did it also in multiples. Take these three instances and mutiply by thousands of hierarchy, clergy, nuns, coaches and laity of the cult, with an uncountable, closer to infinity, amount of victims and one has to ask a very serious question. What type of creep (i.e. Publion) would lie for, make numerous excuses and defend the actions and inaction of such a filthy, despicable organization(cult) of creeps? Maybe, even moreover, what kind of disgusting, deceiving, filthy and despicable creep are you, Publion? And NO P. They have absolutely NO right to claim themselves as the moral authority, when they amount to some of the most disgusting hypocrites walking and free on this planet. This world would be much better off without all of the hierarchy of your cult, their lies and deceptions.
All catholics should read 2 Peter 2 and the rest of the bible for yourselves. Don't let anyone brainwash you with their ignorance. Since you enjoy scripture so much P, I'll give a sample.
"But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying [or mocking] the sovereign Lord who bought them-bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their DEPRAVED CONDUCT and will bring the way of TRUTH into disrepute. In their GREED these teachers will exploit you with fabricated stories. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping." 2 Peter 2:1-3
If this doesn't end your blindness and stupidity, then I guess nothing will. Period!
'Dan', on the 22nd, appears to be directing his harsh invective at 'P'… and sort of challenging him… with what we are expected to accept are established facts.
But I have real doubts about his 'facts'. Based upon my paradoxical experience of having actually seen a boy who had been raped. But 'Dan' informs us that a Father Lawrence Murphy molested 200 deaf boys, and he uses yet stronger words when he says "like the peace and dignity he left the children he raped".
Well having actually seen a traumatized victim of sodomy, a 12 year old boy, I can say without doubt it would be impossible for any man to do that to 200 victims… without being detected. Yes,… impossible… because even an orphanage has a house mother or a visiting nurse. Dan didn't say if the boys had parents, but if they did, then what he has described is utterly impossible
Dan also says that "our cult got a free pass from police and prosecutors who ignored victims". Well Dan… perhaps you should name those police and prosecutors because their offence would be the greatest of all. A sex offender is usually a sick person…..but what excuse could the police and prosecutors make, if they failed to enforce the law,
I'm beginning to think that 'Dan' is one of those people who has convinced himself that he is a hero on a great mission. And the truth can be sacrificed… for the sake of slaying his imaginary fire-breathing dragon..
On the 22nd at 1055AM ‘LDB’ tries to run a play that we saw quite a while ago here: rather than try to deal with the (inconvenient) complications and nuance of the term “synergy” he will – now, as he did then – try to reduce the term “synergy” to the more cartoon-friendly “conspiracy”. This gambit would make then make it easier for him to go the cartoon-route of ‘conspiracy theory] and ‘conspiracy theorists’ and so on.
Thus his claim quickly follows – supported by nothing in his comment nor by the meaning of the two different terms – that “’synergy’ is code for conspiracy”. Which – right on schedule – instantly gives him the opening he was seeking then and is seeking now: “and there is a theorist afoot”.
Alas, no. If he doesn’t recall what I wrote quite some time ago in regard to an earlier effort of his to run this play, then I will say it again: ‘synergy’ is not synonymous with ‘conspiracy’: two separate entities can work synergistically without working conspiratorially.
He then – as best as can be sussed out – tries to use some form of sarcasm as an epithetical whack at a conceptualization I made against which he has nothing better than epithet and sarcasm: There are “interests” and they have “agendas” – to ‘LDB’ this is all kinda “spooky”; the childish mind is so easily frightened, is it not?
And then, lastly, we see yet another gambit often deployed by Abuseniks with nothing else to bring to the table: they try to change the subject. In this case, ‘LDB’ will try to bring in some topic that has nothing to do with the Catholic Abuse Matter we are working with on this site.
And this is from someone (longtime readers may recall) who claims to have an advanced and elite education and also to be – in some form – an attorney.
And ‘Dan’ returns on the 22nd at 303PM.
He opens with a plaintive type of epithet: am I “a demonic” who derives “some sick pleasure to mock the Almighty God” … ? Alas, I am not mocking God, Whose presence in all of this remains rather conjectural at best (except in ‘Dan’s personal cartoon). I am doing what I can with ‘Dan’s material, not God’s.
Then more bits about “worshipping ‘the Queen of Heaven’”, which bit can be found in any number of fundy tracts and pamphlets.
From that he will swing – somewhat histrionically – into a reference to three priests or former priests.
As to the first: it apparently escaped ‘Dan’s notice that the Pope was faced with an elderly man against whom not even “police and prosecutors” had (or perhaps could have) built a demonstrable case. ‘Dan’ deals with this uncongenial actuality by simply presuming that the “police and prosecutors” had simply given him “a free pass” because – ‘Dan’ apparently has been informed by ‘god-gram’ – they “ignored victims”. An equally if not more plausible possibility is that the allegations could not be proven or demonstrated.
We also see how easily ‘Dan’ uses “molested” and “raped” interchangeably. He surely cannot be considered to be “persnickety”.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 22nd at 303PM:
As to the second: the Maciel case is certainly one of the failures of John Paul II’s pontificate. I note that Maciel’s appetites were of such a nature as to confound any usual categories: he abused male seminarians and children (female as well as male) and married and sired his own children. He appears to have been a remarkably talented and twisted human being.
But I would also note that while in 1998, with JP2 still in firm control, then-Cardinal Ratzinger was not able to proceed against Maciel, yet in 2004 – the year before JP2’s death – the case was re-opened by Ratzinger’s office and shortly thereafter Maciel relinquished his role (I don’t imagine he did that voluntarily).
In 2006 Maciel was required to retire to a life of “prayer and penitence” and he died in 2008.
Maciel had managed to achieve a position, I imagine, where it was possible that more damage would be caused to those who built their lives on his apostolate than on the victims he created. A judgment call and not an easy one.
There are no doubt those who, from the point of view of Victimist dogma and for those who find it – for whatever reason(s), not necessarily invalid – convenient and/or preferable to disagree with the decision. And that’s as may be. It was hardly an easy decision and the problem was not resolvable by simplistic cartoon thinking.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 22nd at 303PM:
Warming – still somewhat histrionically – to his little project here, ‘Dan’ will then bring up a third case: the Oliver O’Grady case.
It is notable that for all the claims about him, he was convicted of only four counts of “lewd and lascivious acts” with a minor. According to noted Stampede tortie Jeff Anderson he had done much much more, but that remains only what Jeff Anderson – hardly a sterling source – says. Anderson also noted that the police refused to file charges in connection with earlier allegations.
He had been sent by the cognizant Ordinary for psychiatric evaluation and a second opinion and neither of them recommended removal from ministry nor did they conclude that a diagnosis of pedophilia was justified. Curiously, although sentenced to 14 years for the four lewd-and-lascivious convictions, prison authorities paroled him after only half the time was served. He was subsequently deported back to Ireland.
He became the subject of a documentary (he did not “make a movie”). And at this point I think that he decided that his best opportunities lay in the direction of playing the unmasked (but presently repentant) abuser for all the role was worth: he reports that he himself was a childhood victim of abuse; that his Ordinary knew of his actions and moved him to another parish (in light of the psychiatric evaluations and the refusal of the police to bring charges, a single transfer would have been understandable, but I do not know the number of his transfers); and seems generally to tell a story that conforms nicely to all of the major plot-points of the Stampede ‘script’.
But several years later, in late 2010, he was found with child-pornography and in early 2012 he was sentenced in Ireland to three years imprisonment on the charge.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 22nd at 303PM:
The cases ‘Dan’ has put up here do not, upon examination, fulfill his hopes for them. The cases certainly deal with persons who should never – I would say – have been in the priesthood to begin with; and surely in hindsight they should have been handled more forcefully than they were by all authorities involved.
But a) they do not in themselves measure up to his characterizations of them and b) they do not demonstrate that the Church is and/or always has been an organization organized around abuse.
‘Dan’ will preemptively try to spin his recitation here as demonstrating that such cases are not a “rarity” but rather are “more the norm” (note the curiously cautious “more” here). If that were the case, we should have seen far more such cases.
He then assures us that he “can continue to name more”. Perhaps he can put forward more names. But the problem then remains as to demonstrating – by more than (burnished) allegations and media amplification – that each ‘name’ did what he was accused of doing. There aren’t that many convictions in the criminal forum (a forum itself rendered questionable because of my own assessment of the criminal justice system in a time of Stampede, and because of Judge Kosinski’s assessment of the contemporary criminal justice system generally). And the settlements achieved by torties in the civil system have their own profound evidentiary problems, as I have explicated often and at length here.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 22nd at 303PM:
But on the basis of the three cases he discussed here ‘Dan’ will then try the following sleight of hand: just “multiply” these three cases by the number (“thousands”) of “hierarchy, clergy, nuns” and – he will toss in – “coaches and laity of the cult”. This is cartoon ‘thinking’. One might as easily take the Billy Doe case in Philadelphia and multiply it by the number of allegations ever made or even by the still-undetermined number of still ‘un-reported’ cases (a number which would surely more closely approach ‘infinity’).
But with this cartooneryin place, ‘Dan’ will then be able to create a convenient little pile of blocks leading to this: his “very serious question” as to why any “creep” (such as myself, as he takes care to name) would “lie” (he will have to provide an accurately-quoted instance of this) and “make numerous excuses” (actual assessment is – in the Abusenik Playbook – merely ‘making excuses’, doncha see?) and “defend the actions and inaction” of – had you been waitttting forrr ittttttttt? – “such a filthy, despicable organization (cult) of creeps”.
He will then indulge his predilections to riff on that “creep” bit a bit further.
All of which leads – had you been waittttting forrrrrrr itttttttt? – to his summation declamation (Abuseniks and ‘Servants’ do like to declaim) as to the lack of moral authority of the Church, without which the “world would be much better off”.
Whether the “world would be much better off” without the Church is a question any reader is welcome to consider. Whether the world would be much better off simply relying on types such as ‘Dan’ with their god-grams as sufficient substitutes for the Church is another question readers may consider as they will.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 22nd at 303PM:
“All catholics” are then advised to read the second chapter of the Second Letter of Peter and also while they’re at it “the rest of the bible” (sic) too. Presumably, I would say, many of those Catholics would bring much more capacity to the project than ‘Dan’ (whose god-grams don’t seem a sufficient substitute for serious and careful and prayerful study).
But this bit then gives him an opening to take us through one of his preferred Scriptural 3x5s, in regard to “false prophets” and so on. (The reverse of this bit: ‘Dan’ is precisely not a false prophet – and how could he be, with his stored collection of god-grams?)
And having put all of his blocks into the pile he has constructed for himself here, ‘Dan’ will try to end matters with that nifty declamatory “Period!”.
As with all cartoons, it all seems so simple and clear.
True 'facts' for Malcolm Harris,
1- I've been directing my comments towards Publion, but in the hopes that others might research the bible and learn the difference between right and wrong, to realize that catholicism and also others religions have been fooling you, with out and out lies. Strange that you mention my 'harsh invective' towards P, without any acknowledgement of the slander, lies and stupidity he directs at me.
2- I wrote Fr. Murphy "molested 'up to' 200 boys". Very different from "Father Lawrence Murphy molested 200 boys". Notice the 'up to'.
3- You claim, "without doubt it would be impossible for any man to do that to 200 victims…without being detected." You do realize that rape is not just sodomy, but also oral sex and any sexual contact without the other party's consent. This happened over a 25 year period with deaf and mute boys, up to half who lived in the orphanage, 24 hours a day. I'd say that would make it very possible, considering all the other filthy malfeasance attributed to your clergy and hierarchy.
4- You claim, "what excuse could police and prosecuters make, if they failed to enfoce the law. Are you kidding me? In my own personal experience I was falsely accused by clergy, catholic thugs, school staff and nuns. Police, prosecuters and judges would never listen to my side of the story(truth), because they totally believed clergy, nuns and catholics would never lie. They are such good christians, hypocrites, perverts, pedophiles, thieves and slanderers, but never liars. Maybe now you can understand why I'm a little harsh with Publion, when he wants to insist on repeating those falsehoods against me, ad nauseum. Absolutely cowardly, to say the least.
5- I have but one hero, Jesus Christ and God, my only Father, and will defend His truth until the day I die. Would appreciate your not twisting 'facts' and trying to make myself the liar. Please take a closer look at your churches sins, before judging the innocent.
Thanks Dan
Another 'fact' to add, 'Fr. Lawrence Murphy had a massive stroke while gambling at a casino and died, several months after he requested that the Vatican halt a canonical trial against him because of his ill health.' (Wiki) After all the sins of perversion and child molesting, a little gambling and deception shouldn't be so bad. Laughable, if it wasn't so sick and sad.
"Alas, I am not mocking God" "I am doing what I can with 'Dan's material, not God's." And it doesn't last very long before you've added a new mock to your repertoire, 'god-gram'. Already hear your excuses of that directed towards me, 'not mocking God'. Explain then how two out of four times you used your 'god-grams' sarcasm, when mentioning my suggesting that catholics read "the Second Letter of Peter" and your snide "one of his preferred Scriptural 3x5s, in regard to 'false prophets'." You might be able to fool some of your brain-washed catholics, but you truly mock God and disrespect His power.
Excuses and more excuses. You even have excuses for your excuses. Now your even making excuses for Cardinal RATzinger- "with JP2 still in firm control, then-Cardinal Ratzinger was not able to proceed against Maciel". So in other words, your church is run as a dictatorship. You mean the "Great John Paul II", moral authority of the world doesn't have enough common sense to remove the slime from his church, and that kept pope to be, Card RAT-zinger's hands tied. Catholics, this is where the problem lies. No true followers of the One and Only God, would allow any known perverts or pedophiles to continue on in the church, nor allow leaders to protect, hide and grant safe harbor or asylum to the detestable creeps. Your church has been in need of a thorough house cleaning long ago, and God is in anticipation of that day. Again I ask, read Revelations chapter 17 and 18. That is the absolute description and prediction for your idol worshipping, apostate church. Don't allow false teachers and leaders to deceive you.
Read the Word, especially the New Testament and use the intellegence God gave you. These are some bible verses that will help you understand God's wonderful promises for you and help you to recognize false churches. Exodus ch. 20, Jeremiah ch. 7 and 44 (Queen of Heaven), Gospels, Matthew (especially chapter 5-7 and 23 and 24), Mark, Luke and John, Romans, 1 Corinthians 13 and my favorite book of Ephesians, 1 and 2 Peter and 1 John ch. 1-5. This will give anyone a good start and beware, Satan is extremely powerful and will do anything to deceive and keep you from learning the truth.
Hey Jim, I caught your comment 12/23 and apologize, knowing how from your past experience you want nothing to do with God and deny His existence. I can understand how my debating could drive you nuts, discussing things you want nothing to do with. Can't tell you how many times I've wanted to give it up, but got sucked back in. Wish you were able to give God a chance, because I believe He is truly what you really need to heal your hurt and pain. I think you equate false religion with God, and nothing is farther from the truth. Do you really believe that their filthy lucre is going to bring you happiness? God holds out His hand with riches worth more than all the gold in the world, but He won't force you to take it. They are love, faith, hope and probably the the most difficult, forgiveness. You surely won't find this in any of this world's religions. All you'll find is words without action and lies, and that's why I belong to none of them. Wish you well, Dan
P.S. You may not have to hear any more from me, because to quote you, I'm tired of all the 'bullshit'. Actually was tired of it weeks ago, before I even started.
The Light has come into the world, and people who do evil things are judged guilty because they love darkness more than the light. People who do evil hate the light and won't come to the light, because it clearly exposes what they have done. But everyone who lives by the truth will come to the light, that his works may be revealed, that they have been done in God. And the light shines in the darkness, but the darkness could not understand it. The world cannot hate you; but it hates me, because I testify of it, that it's works are evil. Book of John
And from ‘Dan’ on 24th at 109AM: more of the same: it’s all just ‘mocking’ and – but of course – not mocking Dan but mocking – had you been waitttttingggg forrrrrr itttttttttt? – God.
If there’s a relevant argument to be made from the Second Letter of Peter then ‘Dan’ can put it up here, rather than just reference the Letter; but – of course – ‘Dan’ is so deep into the world of his own personal cartoon that he simply presumes, without even thinking about it, that everyone will ‘see’ what he sees.
But rest assured: lots of other people might be fooled, but ‘Dan’ is not fooled. He is protected from being fooled – doncha see? – by the power of his magic cartoon god-gram suit.
And on he goes, then, about “excuses and more excuses”. And indeed, he riffs on that.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 109AM:
And in the process reveals the level of his mental functioning: since then-Cardinal Ratzinger was not able to proceed against Maciel while John Paul II was still in effective control of his own Papacy, then – ‘Dan’ concludes confidently – the Church “is run as a dictatorship”.
This is a) mere playing with words and concepts, as if they were toy blocks with which one might construct whatever little construction one might cartoonishly prefer to see.
And b) this reflects ‘Dan’s utter unfamiliarity with the concept of working within an organization. Which is not so surprising, really, since I imagine ‘Dan’ has been pretty much of a loner for most of his years. One might speculate – if one were clinically inclined – as to which came first: being a loner or being immured in the whackness of one’s personal cartoon. But that’s an adventure for another forum and not for this one.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 109AM:
And in his effort to riff further in that epithetical mode, ‘Dan’ will then go on about John Paul II’s capacities. But – of course – the John Paul II of 2004, wracked with Parkinson’s and the consequences of age – was not the John Paul II of his earlier Pontificate.
And – as I said in a recent prior comment on this thread – the decision as to what to do about the Maciel case, given the fact that the man had achieved a position of so much stature and influence, was hardly to be resolved by whatever ‘Dan’s concept of “common sense” might be (his concept of “common sense”, we recall, includes his god-grams).
In that sense, it is true that even the Pope’s “hands were tied”, to some extent. That is the grimy nature of human reality, which is precisely what gives cartoons their alluring charm: they seem to reduce everything to such clear simplicity. Whether Maciel’s case could have been handled differently, while trying to cover all the bases that the case encompassed, is surely open to debate and discussion; but it most surely would not have been well-resolved using the cartoon that ‘Dan’ has created for himself to make his life seem to have a mission and a purpose.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 109AM:
But since ‘Dan’ then raises the issue as to just “where the problem lies”, then I would say this: the problem – the primary Problem – is and always has been that of living out one’s ideals and one’s commitment to be faithful to Christ in a world shot through with the effects not just of the cumulative power of innumerable individual sins but in a world so shot through with the effects of Sin within the human heart and soul that one cannot even rely completely on one’s own dedication and loyalty and intelligence and resolve.
That is the Problem. It always has been and the Church has always proclaimed that while she is commissioned and guided by God, yet she too participates and indeed is comprised-of the same humanity, afflicted by the same effects of sins and Sin, as all human beings and all human historical endeavors.
Thus, this is a situation – one might say The Situation – that cannot easily be resolved by simplistic and childish cartoonery, the allure of which is itself a temptation to flee from reality and cocoon oneself ever deeper in profound (one might possibly even say ‘fundamental’ or even ‘abyssal’) fantasy.
And that also goes for the far-too-easy deployment by some of those fantasists of the word “true”. In a world shot through with the effects of sins and Sin, then “true” (as in both i) genuine and ii) accurately comprehending reality) cannot ever presume to have reached utter fulfillment.
It can only pretend to such fulfillment. Through, as I said, the ever-thicker larding-on of fantasy.
Which fantasy, as we see here and in many other places, can then be used epithetically, in order to pretend to a this-worldly achievement of a pure high-ground from the heights of which one can play Zeus and toss one’s favorite thunderbolts, as epithetical, irrational, and juvenile as they may be.
Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 109AM:
And I would also note that “thorough house cleaning” is not the same as complete eradication (as in the world being “better off without” the Church). Nor is it at all irrelevant here that on several occasions public authorities decided that ‘Dan’ himself was in need of some significant “house cleaning”.
God – it will come as no surprise to those familiar with Catholic teaching – is always with His Church, and that includes repairing and restoring His Church. ‘Dan’s effort here to draft God and Scripture into his personal fantasies for his own cartoon purposes (and he is hardly alone in this gambit) reveals itself for what it actually is: a personal fantasy.
Thus ‘Dan’s larding-on of his favorites from his well-thumbed stack of Scriptural 3x5s can remain right where it was put.
And he is well-advised to recall that Satan can use even the rather-unwell for his purposes, deluding them that they are actually E-ticket holders in some illusory Disneyworld of self-importance. When actually, their fantasized ‘truth’ and actual truth or Truth remain two separate things.
On then to ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 251AM:
Here he reaches out to ‘Jim’ to do some ‘ministry’.
That may seem nice, but there was – as so often with Abuseniks – an ulterior motive: the whole bit platforms a lead-in to ‘Dan’s announcement (in that queasy juvenile just-entre-nous way that Abuseniks so often deploy here) that, alas and “P.S.”, we may not be hearing “any more from” ‘Dan’ because (hand to forehead) he is “tired of all the ‘bullshit’”. Thus the Servant and self-declared prophet. (Who, it is then revealed, was thus “tired” even before he began .)
Thus another Broadway bit closes, whether before or after its time is for readers to consider.
But his performance did indicate that I had missed a JR comment (the 23rd at 950AM).
It is indicative of the extent of ‘Dan’s phantasmagoria that JR – ever the canny showbiz person – saw his opening to don the Wig of Reason: things around here have “degenerated into a debate” (and JR, despite what he likes to remind us, isn’t really into “debate”, or discussion, or exchange, or – let’s face it – just about anything that isn’t basically an approving riff on his own favorite stack of 3x5s).
He’s also demonstrated himself not really into “thought” either, unless that term includes basically an approving riff on his own favorite stack of 3x5s.
One might well wonder if the connecting of ‘JR’ and “thought” isn’t itself somewhat oxymoronic.
And – as if on cue – he nails down that surmise by merely repeating his “2000” bit (the problems with which have already been discussed), adding in the also-familiar factoid that the insurance companies actually paid “half” of the three billion paid out (to those 2000?). Apparently unfamiliar with insurance practice, JR does not mention that if indeed the insurance companies paid a great deal of the settlement money, then the Church’s premiums would increase significantly. But – as so very often – that’s a factoid that is only valuable to JR as a factoid, and not as a prompt for further thought and analysis.
And he wraps it up with a bit that only serves to remind us of one of the come-ons that no doubt lubricated the Stampede: the Church is “loaded with gold” so it’s not like what we’re doing is really going to bother anybody.
EVIL MEN AND SEDUCERS WILL PROCEED FROM BAD TO WORSE, DECEIVING OTHERS BUT BEING THEMSELVES DECEIVED. 2 TIMOTHY 3:13
SATAN'S ATTRIBUTES: "TRUTH" SLAYER, imposter, DECEIVER, slanderer, MOCKER, accuser, LIAR, malicious, perverter, trickster, profane and last but not least, BABBLER.
Remind you of anyone, or simply defines the attributes of your church's hierarchy.
GOOD RIDDANCE, PUBLION
P.S. "BEWARE OF WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING." They come to you as Godly, holy, flattering, false prophets, when in reality, they are truly ravenous wolves (HYPOCRITES).
Nothing new from ‘Dan’ on the 25that 1238AM.
What we see here is simply the darkly marvelous psychic economy that has invested itself in using Scripture in the projectile, but never considering the possibility of its being equally or even more valid in the recoil. In other words, one should always recite one’s favorite Scriptural bits in front of a mirror before one starts launching them like Jovian thunderbolts into the world beyond oneself.
Although the “good riddance” bit seems ungrounded, unless of course ‘Dan’ is referring to his (yet to be realized) departure.
Publion says, 12/24 @ 1:23pm, "If there is a relevant argument to be made from the Second Letter of Peter then 'Dan' can put it up here, rather than just reference the Letter; but – of course – 'Dan' is so deep into the world of his own personal cartoon that he simply presumes, without even thinking about it, that everyone will 'see' what he sees."
Mr. Research, might want to take a look at Dan says 12/22 @ 3:03 and pay special attention to Dan's more than 'relevant argument' pertaining to your's and your church's nastiness in regards to their DEPRAVED CONDUCT, bringing disgrace and extreme shame to the way of TRUTH, and let's not forget their GREED. I even capitalized the words so you could 'see' them and possibly overcome your 'blindness and stupidity'.
So before you go criticizing others in regards to their intellegence, you may want to be more 'thorough' with your own reading comprehension. And while were mentioning it, 'thorough house cleaning' for your church would need extermination and complete eradication. It's been given way to many chances for repentance, but just doesn't seem to change, other than going from bad to worse.
Also in your 'juvenile' obsession with 'cartoons', I found your own 'personal cartoon', one that fits you perfectly. Rocky and Bullwinkle Show: A bumbling, dumb moose with a big head, who thinks he's 'Mr. Know It All'. I suggest in the future you might be a bit more careful who you insult, for God has a way of knocking you down a few rungs. I'd definitely exercise more caution in mocking or testing His patience with you. GOOD RIDDANCE
But by the 26th at 3AM ‘Dan’ has apparently managed to get a grip on himself.
And that results in his mere repeat reference to his three (favorite?) horror-stories – from the 22nd at 303PM. Which, as we saw, aren’t at all up to the load-bearing tasks he wishes to heap upon them.
Clearly, also, ‘Dan’ is rather completely convinced that his own performance is a stellar example of what Bible-reading can do for a human being. But I would say – once again – that he needs to put himself in front of a mirror; using the Bible as nothing more than a weapons-cache for one’s assorted favorite forays hardly does justice to the Bible’s possibilities.
His use of scream-caps simply indicates that abiding Abusenik tendency to substitute screaming for thinking and presuming that one has thus somehow provided a more effective presentation (especially when larded with whatever epithets come to mind).
Thus my “reading comprehension” is quite sufficient. The real problem is that what I have ‘comprehended’ isn’t what ‘Dan’s cartoon-presumptions want to see. Not my problem.
And how does his mentation resolve the discrepancy between “house-cleaning” and “extermination and complete eradication”? Simple! He merely equates them. It’s amazing what one can accomplish inside one’s mind, if one has closed it off from any uncongenial external actualities, is it not?
And he will then try to bring it home with a stab at the (more specifically: his) ‘cartoon problem’: but here he can only come up with an epithet about Rocky and Bullwinkle, upon which he lovingly riffs for a while. That must console him.
And the obligatory final bit – this time including a threat – that I should be careful about ‘insulting’ God because God (or rather ‘Dan’ with his god-wig on) doesn’t have limitless patience.
One wonders if his tendency to threaten those children on the other side of the fence who mocked the ravings of the ‘Dan-god’ was what attracted the attention of the authorities so many times.
Upon such mentation as this the Stampede has fed and engorged.
I absolutely did not "repeat reference to his three (favorite?) horror-stories" and you know it. You falsely claimed I had no 'relevant argument' from scripture so I pointed it out to you. DEPRAVED CONDUCT is not God's reference to these three horror stories, but rather His two word description to your entire hierarchy, the coverups, secrecy, lies and false catholic teachings. I'll help you define it.
DEPRAVED (syn.)- corrupt, perverted, degenerate, immoral, sinful, indecent, wicked, vile, sick, twisted, morally polluted, disgusting, debased, despicable, ungodly- need we say more?
When I use what you call 'scream-caps', it's only to bring emphasis to an important word or phrase in a sentence, that might help the 'blind to see, deaf to hear', or dense to understand.
Now, as if you were there, I have a "tendency to threaten those children". Your despicable lies and perverting of truth has become complete idiocy, along with your balderdash and stupidity, which tends to make a dumb jackass look pretty smart. So keep on mocking and testing His patience, but you won't stand before Him and claim you weren't warned.
DAN, SERVANT OF THE ONLY TRUE GOD (Hope that annoys you immensely.)
Apparently ‘Dan’ meant some other part of his comment of the 22nd at 303PM. Sorry, I’m not a mind-reader. Perhaps ‘Dan’ can learn to express himself more carefully.
And then we see a rather sterling example of the ‘Dan-god’ at work: “depraved conduct” is not ‘Dan’s term but rather is “His two-word description”. And ‘Dan’ knows this is God’s own description … how? By God-gram of course, or else – in his vision of it, anyway – ‘Dan’ and God enjoy the same sort of internal thought-sharing as the Persons of the Trinity. That can’t be ruled out, I suppose.
A dictionary definition of “depraved” follows that bit. For readers who might not know what it means.
Then an excuse for his scream-caps: and once again it demonstrates that the only way Abuseniks have of further explicating their 3×5 talking-points is to scream them at readers.
I specifically used the term “wonders” in regard to his encounter(s) with children. Surely something attracted the attention of somebody who called the police, who then saw fit to arrest him, and a judge then had him committed for – at the very least – psychiatric observation … and all of this multiple times.
That much, certainly, easily survives his blizzard of epithets.
His repetition of his favorite, self-awarded title certainly doesn’t annoy me. It’s always better, I would say, to have a point demonstrated vividly rather than simply describing the dynamics involved.
COUGH!!!! COUGH…….!!! Can't SEE FOR THE SMOKE…. SO MUCH SMOKE! CAN"T BREATHE!!!!! 2000 out of 11,000 "compensated" VICTIMS NEVER MENTIONED.
TALK OF IMAGINARY SKY DICTATORS OR FANTASY DEMONS. CLOUDS TRUTH ABOUT THE CRIMES AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES HERE AND NOW ON TERRA FIRMA.
HELP!
I can't agree with you more. The smoke has gotten in your eyes. Good luck with your imaginary money god. I thought I was assisting victims, like yourself, to bring attention to their terrible crimes and coverups. Your anger and blame towards the one who gave you life, rather than laying full blame on the false church, isn't much better than perpetrators blaming victims. Hope that doesn't backfire on you.