Tag Archives: psyops

Barnhardt has more sense than Burke

By Br. Alexis Bugnolo

I am continually amazed at how many of the same arguments used to promote despair among us who are faithful to the Church and Canon Law are the same over many blogs. It is almost as if there is some campaign or pysop targeting us. Unfortunately for whomsoever is behind it, they err greatly by attempting to tangle with Ann Barnhardt.

Barnhardt has an excellent post entitled, Q & A: Ann, even if Pope Benedict were to re-submit a valid resignation, he will never publicly act as pope again, so isn’t this all an exercise in futility?

In her reply she exercises a prudence of a Cardinal, far beyond that of even Cardinal Burke because:

  1. She recognizes the problem
  2. She recognizes how deep the problem is
  3. She recognizes how to solve the problem radically
  4. She has the integrity and moral courage to say what it is in public
  5. She has the honesty to advocate it be done

I agree 100% with Ann Barnhardt’s analysis and solution and I undersign her proposal. But I want to add that one of the biggest problems in the 7 year Crisis in the Church has been the vain hopes we have all put in the Cardinals to act like men, to act like men of God, and to act like apostles of Jesus Christ. None of them has shown the capacity or competence to do this. At most, like Cardinal Burke, they limit themselves to commenting on the problem, as if, like Barnhardt and myself, who are not members of the clergy, he could do nothing about it.


But here I would point out, something which Ann does not, that her questioner has proposed a question which is quintessentially characteristic of the psysop, of the individual trained to control your mind and manipulate your emotions. So let me unpack that question, in an critique which I will call “psyoptic analysis”, that is how to see pysops for what they are.

  • Ann, even if Pope Benedict were to re-submit a valid resignation

First, the questioner poses a question using Barnhardt’s first name: make it familiar, insinuate friendship.

Second, propose a possibility within the context of the affirmation of an impossibility, use “even if”.

Third, insinuate that Benedict already submitted a valid resignation by saying “resubmit”.

  • he will never publicly act as pope again

Fourth, affirm that which your want to come about as if it were a divine certitude: he will  never.

Fifth, deny that the Pope will every be allowed access to the public again:  publicly act.

Sixth, deny that the Pope, even if he is the pope, will ever be allowed to use his power again: as pope again.

  • so isn’t this all an exercise in futility?

Seventh, imply despair by affirming no solution.

I get comments like this from a operative in Minnesota/Wisconsin using a polish name. He leaves positive comments, but when it counts he leaves statements like this question above. Statements like this might be repeated by simple catholics who see them in comment boxes and do not think about them. But in themselves they are excellent examples of now nefarious a pysop can include so many lies and falsehoods and deceits and present them in a psychologically appealing way.

There is a lot of evil behind Bergoglio’s claim to be pope and behind the denial of all of those who say Benedict is not the pope. A lot more evil that we can imagine.

Beware, then of the pysop, and learn to crush it as Our Lady crushes the head of the serpent with a cogent response like that given by Ann Barnhardt in the post cited above.


CREDITS: The Featured Image above is a screenshot of the webpage of Ann Barnhardt cited in this article, used here according to fair use standards for editorial commentary.

+ + +

Donate to support FromRome.Info

Make a donation to Save Old St. Mary’s Inc., a non profit which is supporting Br. Alexis Bugnolo’s Apostolates like FromRome.Info -- If you would like to donate more than $10.00 USD, simply increase the Quantity below from 1 to a higher number.



Exposing and Recognizing Bergoglian Trolls

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

A troll is a mythical creature of Nordic folklore. J. R. R. Tolkien made them famous by including them in his books, The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings.

But on Social Media, the term “troll” has another meaning: a commentator whose intent is to disrupt, attack, insult, create division, distract, divert, etc…  Some people just have problems interacting with others, because they have a mind which has fallen into the intellectual vices of perpetual suspicion, anger, envy, jealousy, etc. etc.

But since the time Barrack Obama ran for the U.S. Presidency, trolls have become a phenomenon of paid political warfare and of state sponsored psyop. (A psyop is a person involved in psychological warfare and informational warfare.) They attack or infiltrate in such a way as to control the narrative and dupe the unsuspecting. They may appear to be enemies, but some pretend to be friends.

Pro Obama trolls were called Obots.  I think you can call a pro Bergoglian troll a Bergbot.  The suffix -bot is used because these individuals are so methodical in their attacks and so frequent in their comments across many platforms of social media, that they are either paid professionals working a full time job at doing this or are using computers running on high level Artificial Intelligence systems.

In this post, then, I want to talk about Bergbots and how to recognize them.

A typical Bergbot

Here is an example of one of the most clever Bergbots around. He is fluent in Polish, but lives somewhere in the USA. I think in Minnesota. I infer from what I know of him that he is a paid employee of either the US Democrat party or of the US State Department.

He pretends to be a trad on Gloria.TV, where one long time user reported to me that he successfully infiltrated the Polish forum and attacked every point of doctrine and historical fact which showed the Aggiornamento was run by Modernists and sodomites. He used numerous names and thus was hard to recognize. He changed them often. He did this for 5 years.

After posting some articles on Gloria.TV, the From Rome blog started to receiving comments from an individual who acts in the same way.

Recently I see him on other blogs which are linked to by the From Rome blog. And so I feel that it is my responsibility to warn everyone.

An example of how a Bergbot trolls a pro Benedict blog

Here is an example of his type of trolling.

I do not think that Benedict would ever leave the Vatican because when he resigned he recommended that the Cardinals elect his successor so that he could be free of the worry of running the Church.

Let’s enumerate all the lies he has woven into that one comment.

  1. Pope Benedict
  2. recommended
  3. that the Cardinals
  4. his successor
  5. running the Church

The comment appears to refer to the Declaration, Non solum propter, of Feb. 11, 2013, However, in that declaration,

  1. The man who is the Pope, inasmuch as he is the man Joseph Ratzinger, and not inasmuch as he is the Pope
  2. declared
  3. that those who are competent to do so
  4. elect a new Supreme Pontiff.
  5. because he was renouncing the ministry on account of his age

Unpacking the lies of the Bergbot

There are some important things this Bergbot has done in a single comment to contradict or alter those 5 truths.

First, he has tried to make it appear that the call for a conclave had papal backing. But the man Joseph Ratzinger has no authority to call anything. Neither does a pope have authority to call a conclave to elect another pope, since that only happens when a pope drops dead, or renounces the petrine munus.

Second, Ratzinger declared, he did not recommend. “Recommend” as a word seems innocent, but “recommend” unlike “declare” implies consent.

Third, though Ratzinger made his declaration in front of the Cardinals, he said nothing about Cardinals electing anyone. To say those who are competent to elect, could refer to the Roman Church in the absence of Cardinals or to the Cardinal Electors. But Ratzinger intentionally did not specify which. Which should be an obvious sign to everyone that he had something else in mind than what we might think.

Fourth, Ratzinger never said anything about electing his successor. He said a new supreme pontiff. “Supreme pontiff” is a term used before in reference to the Pope, but the correct canonical term for the office of the pope is Roman Pontiff. Because there can be supreme pontiffs of any organization or Church, not just the Church of Rome.

Fifth, “running the Church” implies governance. But the power of governance is attached to the office which Ratzinger never renounced, not to the ministry which he did renounce. “Running the Church” is not a concept found in the declaration of Feb. 11, 2013. But by adding it the Bergbot has implied a renunciation of office, not ministry.

Bergbot’s goals

It is important, then, to see how the Bergbot is attempting to alter the perception of reality by such a short comment.

He is trying to instill a false memory, by which you believe that the Pope validly resigned the Office of Pope and willed the election of Bergoglio by the Cardinals.

The reality is that Ratzinger renounced the petrine ministry, and added the phrase to convoke a conclave without specification of time, leaving the matter, as it were, in the air, and indeterminate.

The Cardinals if they were awake and faithful and knowledgeable about what Ratzinger said in his declaration, would have done nothing. Because it is not an act which is conformity with the norm of Canon 332 §2, it is simply the statement of an old man who is tired and has not yet said in canonical proper form what he wants to do about it.

I hope this helps you to see how important it is to monitor the comments of your blog and how important it is not to let comments which appear to be doing the same things, to be published on your blogs, even if they appear to be friendly. Trolls play on bloggers and social media sites which want to receive the affirmation which comes from a commentator taking enough time to leave a comment. This is how they weaponize social media platforms to control the narrative.

In the above example, if you reply to the Bergbot, you can see that he has an easy way out: he can claim that he was poorly informed and was speaking inexactly. And then he can lash out at you for being a nit-picker and for being inhospitable to commentators, etc. etc. I am sure you can imagine more self-righteous ways he can hide what he was trying to do. Then he will change is name, IP address and email and come back to your blog and try a different trick.

The only solution with a Bergbot is to block them permanently. But first take note of their email address and I.P. and when next you run into a suspicious commentator, see if there is any similarities.

Finally, if the problem were only with Bergbots as individuals, that would be enough. But when Catholic journalists, News Outlets and Websites start taking money from George Soros or State sponsored Psyop Organizations, then they too start playing with the memory of reality in the same way. And if you won’t accept their arguments they will also lash out at you, 24/7. Perhaps you used to read such websites.

Saint Michael, the Archangel, defend us in battle …