Skip to main content

"The Fountain of Propaganda" & Was "George Floyd [a] Porn Star! This is Why He May Have Been Killed?"

A few days ago, I was reading  renowned statistician William Briggs' website and found out that seemingly gay activist Fr. James Martin and some of the United States Catholic bishops who were possibly implicitly claiming with the gay activist that George Floyd is a saint in heaven may be drinking from "the Fountain of Propaganda":

"But most do not know what is happening. I had an interaction with a guy who exploded when I told him George Floyd was a porn actor and counterfeiter. He told me that this “could not possibly be true since [he] didn’t hear about it on the media.” I told him search for it, but don’t use Google, use Duck Duck Go, because Google censors results. That’s when he asked about my tinfoil hat."

"This was a completely normal average guy. Like most, he only drinks from the Fountain of Propaganda [the liberal media]. He won’t believe it’s bad until the knife is on his neck. Maybe not even then. Remember those two white boys who got rocks through their window from the rioting rabble? They cried “But we’re on your side!” They didn’t understand. They probably still don’t, excusing the rocks as mistaken identity."
[https://wmbriggs.com/post/31286/]

This Tweet claims that gay activist Fr. Martin believes Floyd is a saint:

How does Fr James Martin know George Floyd is in Heaven? Has the Church canonised him?
[https://mobile.twitter.com/thecrushedbones/status/1269173729277480965]

The guy may be wrong because apparently Martin may thinks Floyd is Jesus:

James Martin, SJ
After being brutalized and humiliated by civic authorities, and being pushed to the ground as a
crowd watched, this innocent man was killed ultimately by asphyxiation, not by a loss of blood,
and in his final moments, he cried out for a drink of water and spoke to his mother.

Is renowned statistician Briggs or are Martin and some of the United States Catholic bishops
drinking from "the Fountain of Propaganda?

It appears that according to the Zimbabwe news outlet iharare.com "George Floyd [was a] Porn
Star! This is Why He May Have Been Killed?':

Derek Chauvin, the officer in question was likely known to Floyd as the two had previously
worked together as bouncers at the same club for over a decade.

This was confirmed by Maya Santamaria, who is former owner of El Nuevo Rodeo.

“Chauvin was our off-duty police for almost the entirety of the 17 years that we were
 open,” Santamaria told KSTP.“They were working together at the same time, it’s just that
Chauvin worked outside and the security guards were inside.”

Santamaria also told the TV station that Chauvin “had a real short fuse,” adding that he often
pulled out mace and pepper spray when she thought it was unwarranted.

Could it be that Chauvin was settling a workplace personal vendetta with Floyd? Or could
Floyd’s other job have triggered such a vicious reaction?

George Floyd is much talked about as a beloved community member and former athlete, who was
outspoken against gang violence.

Fans of the por_n website, TheHabibShow may have found the face of the recently slain Floyd,
eerily familiar as there is a much less talked about dimension to Floyd... "

[Photo Deleted]







George Floyd Porn Actor, Pictures of the Actor on set with Kimberly Brinks

... Could it be that the heinous, heartless and unforgivable act by Derek Chauvin was driven by a
jealousy and inferiority complex over Floyd’s prowess in his other work?

When we see such inhuman acts , we look into everything to try to understand why.

But can we ever really understand what drives a man to use the power he has to kill someone he
may have known for over a decade?


Comments

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...

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...

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...