Skip to main content

Sardonic CNN: Francis "Slaps," "Smacks" & "Shouts" at Woman, then "Denounces Violence against Women"

Today, CNN Wire's apparent sarcastic headline was "Pope Francis Slaps woman's hand, then denounces violence against women."

The ironical article reported Francis saying women are "continuely insulted, beaten," then reported that Francis was "sorry" for "slapping" and for "smacking a woman's hand" and possibly he was also "sorry" for "the altercation [which] also appears to show him shouting at the women" according to CNN.

It appears that even the pro-Francis CNN seems to be a bit sarcastically unbelieving and sardonically mocking of the Francis apology as well as his stated concern for women "insulted" and "beaten."

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Comments

Alexis Bugnolo said…
It seems even worse, that the woman was called a B*ch by Bergoglio, see https://www.barnhardt.biz/2020/01/02/my-prediction-for-arsh-2020/
5:24 AM
BrotherBeowulf said…
Sounds like Bruja—which means witch in Spanish and is NOT translatable as b*tch. It is nowhere near as course as that. “Bruja” is common expression of anger directed at women in particular.
8:29 AM
Sam Sham said…
Bruja can, indeed, mean bitch or witch. The level of anger or animosity usually distinguishes between meanings. I’d say Francis (who is known as angry, vindictive and dour most of the time in private, seemed really angry toward the woman in the video. He wasn’t calling her a witch. We got a rare glimpse of the real Bergoglio. He was known in Argentina as the “priest who never smiles.”
9:57 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...
6 comments
Read more

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...
Post a Comment
Read more

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...
3 comments
Read more