Tag Archives: Eugenio Scalfari

Michel Piccoli, dead at 94: Acted out Benedict’s Renunciation 2 years beforehand

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Il Reformista reports that on May 18, 2020, there passed away Michel Piccoli, one of the most famous French actors of his generation, who appeared in more than 170 films.

In 2011, he played the part of what could arguably be identified as Pope Benedict XVI in the Movie, “Habemus papam” by Nanni Moretti, which “prophetically” showed the Pope renounce using an invalid formula. See the video above, for the key scene in the film.

Even in February of 2013, this film was spoken of in relation to the events of that month.

The cause of Michel Piccoli’s death was listed as a stroke. He was 94 years old. Wikipedia, however, omits any reference to his historic role as the Pope, in the Film, Habemus Papam. And, I think that is significant, because I know that Wikipedia only hides information for ideological reasons.

Michel Piccoli’s death comes within days of the tremendous revelations of Pope Benedict XVI in the new biography by Peter Seewald, Ein Leben, in which there is attributed to the Pope words which express that he never intended to validly resign, that he intended rather to retain the spiritual mandate (Verantvortung, Munus).

The producer of the film, in which Piccoli played the role of Pope Benedict XVI, Nanni Moretti, is a self-declared atheist and Marxists. Several of his films have won awards at important film festivals, an honor only given to those who push the narrative of the global elites. He lives at Rome, and thus is certainly known to the Scalfari, the founder of the Repubblica newspaper, who is a close friend of Jorge Bergoglio, them man whom, historically speaking, is the pope elected in Moretti’s film. In fact, Google.com shows that there more than 10 articles at La Repubblica about Moretti. That is a lot of free publicity for a fellow atheist and Marxist, a lot of friendship.

Scalfari is widely suspected to be the “important and influential person” at Rome, identified by Cardinal McCarrick as the one who lobbied for Bergoglio’s election. The pieces seem all to fit together nicely, don’t they?

Nanni Moretti’s article at Wikipedia also hides the fact that he produced this same film on Pope Benedict’s XVI renunciation 2 years before Benedict XVI “resigned”, by concealing the name of the film under its English title.

Michel Piccoli, when asked about the events of Feb. 11, 2013, at that time, reacted somewhat violently to reporters questions. He definitively refused to discuss his role in the film by Moretti, for some reason.

Well, with his unforeseen death — which is perhaps timely for those in the Vatican — that reason goes to the grave with him.

The use of films to psychologically condition minds in the future to predetermined events, has long been a tactic of the CIA, as I have reported previously. This film, Habemus Papam, must then been seen as part of the calculated and planned coercion put on Pope Benedict XVI from 2011 wards to leave the scene (see here).

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

 

 

 

Bergoglio declares to Scalafari: “I am the proof … that Jesus Christ was not God at all!”

Scalfari-Bergoglio

The Quote comes from his best friend Scalfari. The citation is discussed by the renowned Vaticanista, Marco Tosatti (link: here).

Schermata-2019-10-09-alle-10.25.19

Here is the English translation (by From Rome):*

When it happened that I discussed these phrases with him, pope Francis said to me:

I am the proven proof that Jesus of Nazareth, once he became man, though a man of exceptional virtue, was not God at all

The ego-mania of that is extraordinary. I would say, it is a totally diabolic boast.

Maybe Bergoglio is not the Anti-Christ, but he certainly seems to think he is!

It is important, that though the Vatican issued a statement attacking the reputation of Scalfari, it did NOT repudiate the quote as unauthentic!

Here Bergoglio is Excommunicated, AGAIN, by canon 1364. — Honestly, one cannot name this man any more in the Canon of the Mass, anywhere or any time. Please read this article (link: here) on what to do now. Though it applies to the idolatry he practiced in the Vatican Gardens on Friday, it’s just as applicable now, for this latest outrageous apostasy.

(Image Credits: A montage of Scalfari and Bergoglio: AKA, Scalfari and Bergoglio: Close collaborators)

_____________

* A Note on this Translation:  The Italian main sentence lacks a pronoun for the verb, so it can be read either as translated here, or as They are the proven proof ….. Also, the final clause says in Italian:  is not at all a God. — Regarding the last clause, I have translated it without the indefinite article, “a”, because the adverb “affatto”, which I render as “at all”, expands the denial of ‘God’ to all senses. And since the sense of “God” is The Divine Nature, the phrase “a God”, refers to “The Divine Nature and Existence”, I have held it unnecessary to say “not at all a God”, since that would be a reduplicative denial. — As for the main verb, I understand it according to the context of the speaker, Scalfari, whom history shows is the real spokesman for Bergoglio when he wants to speak to his initiates of things which he does not yet want to say publicly and openly. This is because he uses Scalfari to emotionally drain those who oppose his heresy and apostasy, by speaking with programmed and intentional language which is capable of a plausible denial after the fact. This is a trick to blame his opponents so as to get them emotionally to be incapable or unwilling to publicly criticize him in the future when he does worse things. — To his initiates, who recognize the Scriptural form:  And he said to me, I am the Way, the truth and the Life, the main verb must be read in the first person singular. But for plausible deniability, Scalfari has inserted the quote without a subject into a discourse on the passages of the Bible in which, according to the doctrines of the Jehovah Witnesses (to which Bergoglio seems to be familiar, if not a believer) prove that Jesus is not God. — Being a hermit, who is more concerned with the theological signification of expressions than other senses, I have translated the phrase into English to manifest what more probably both Scalfari and Bergoglio intended it to mean, when they were speaking in private and discussing how to use it for maximum effect against his enemies, because, obviously, Scalfari and Bergoglio both could have included a subject of the main verb, either Esse (frasi) or something similar, to tie down the meaning to one sense only. So my translation could be called the translation of the Occult meaning as intended and formulated.