I had thought the Philippines was the last place on earth where the Roman Catholic Church was not thoroughly cucked. Now it is cucked there also.
Muslims in the Philippines have been pissed at Christians ever since the Spanish conquered the place and imposed Roman Catholicism with fire and steel. And not very long ago, the Roman Catholic priesthood in Mindanao was mighty comfortable with fire and steel.
The Muslims in Mindanao in the Philippines think the crusades happened yesterday, and are at it again, attempting to seize the traditionally Muslim city of Marawi from Christians, killing priests and Christian teachers, burning their homes, churches, the usual. In response, President Duterte declares martial law and applies heavy weapons. And the Church seems to be more worried that martial law might lead to “human rights violations” than terror directed at Christians.
I am perfectly sure President Duterte will violate “human rights” all over the place. When I was in Davao, he was always violating the human rights of small time crooks and big time corrupt officials, and everyone loved him for it. I loved him for it. I would love to see Trump similarly violating the human rights of our federal bureaucracy.
According to the Roman Catholic priesthood of Mindanao, terrorism “is totally against the tenets of any religion of peace. Especially so when terrorism is perpetrated while our Muslim brothers and sisters are preparing for the holy month of Ramadhan. Terrorism distorts and falsifies the true meaning of any religion.”
You will notice there are no Muslim clerics in Mindanao saying that this terrorism is against the tenets of their religion
because it is not.
@Jim interesting theory: https://balioc.tumblr.com/post/162371120846/so-if-my-historical-sources-are-telling-me-the
OT: Jim, you like to point to Australia and Tony Abbott as some kind of example. Well, have you seen this out of Australia?
http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/census-2016-milestone-passed-as-australian-becomes-more-asian-than-european-20170626-gwz3ow.html
“Census 2016: Milestone passed as Australia becomes more Asian, less European”
“Australians born of Australian parents will soon be a minority.
The census shows Australia reached a “tipping point” in 2016 where only slightly more than half its residents had two Australian-born parents.
The long-term low of 50.7 per cent is a step down from 54 per cent in 2011 and 57 per cent in 2006.
More than a quarter of Australia’s population in 2016 was born overseas (26.3 per cent, up from 24.6 per cent) and for the first time since colonisation, most of the overseas-born came from Asia rather than Europe.”
So just what great victory did Tony Abbott win for Australia that’s proof that Trump and co. can win against the courts and “the Cathedral”/”the Swamp”?
Slight change of topic:
Taking the mainstream narrative of the Reichstag Fire episode at face value, a Marxist follower of official European Marxism, without official sanction, committed an act of treason against a foremost German political institution with no loss of life. The German government used the act to suppress Marxist opposition.
Taking the mainstream narrative of the Congressional Baseball Shooting at face value, a Bernieist-Marxist follower of official American Bernieism-Marxism, without official sanction, committed an act of treason against an actual high-ranking human being Republican politician, severely injuring him and shooting others. The Trump government shows no sign of using the act to suppress Globalist-Marxist opposition in the slightest, indeed shows every sign of cucking over it. The most that can be forlornly hoped is Trump being good at long-term, ‘served cold’ revenge memory and acting at some hazy future date.
Looks like, not only will Trump NOT create a Reichstag Fire moment, he won’t even use one handed to him on a silver platter.
Jim, it’s time to admit that Trump’s whole campaign and Presidency has been 99% vanity project, and the main hope for him going forward over the next 3.5 to 7. 5 years is that the situation gets pushed to the brink of Civil War, with Trumpism then dragged kicking and screaming to our side.
America’s last chance was never destined to be easy.
3.5 to 7.5 years is not enough time for alt-right memetic-consciousness (call it “memeciousness”) to seize the critical mass of fighting-age men indispensable for any participation in civil war. It’s more like 23.5 to 27.5 years, really.
The nazi revolution followed 19 years, counting from 1914 to 1933, of immense hardship. If you want a similar revolution, need similarly immense hardship. America isn’t there yet.
Rhymes, not repeats.
at the same time as status through leftism broke down, the youth gained better ability to communicate with each other than had ever before existed
spreading memes doesn’t take very long anymore. everyone knows about virtue signaling now. By the time everone knows to hate Emerson and Thoreau without ever having read their stuff, our task will be complete.
We need to use it, not Trump. Trump can’t act against the SPLC except by getting their 501c3 status revoked for campaigning against him, which this terrorism is irrelevant to.
If the terrorist had lived, he could have been charged with treason.
There are a number of things that can be done to the legacy media by the government, but none of them can be done because of their active conspiracy to sedition. Be sure that Trump is helping the journalists make fools of themselves, the rest is up to us.
There are some smart people here so I want to throw a thought to the wind:
We need our own social media. The /pol/s and /rel/s and /react/s and various nationalist groups on facebook, among countless others, have been the best place for discourse. They’ve been better than the chans. There is something about having a mix of real accounts, pseudoreal accounts and frog accounts which make the debates a lot more entertaining. You can make groups of a few thousand in size and you end up with different groups each having different “regulars”, and different cultures, and forming large friendship networks and connections between nationalists and traditionalists
We had something amazing and we still have it to an extent, but Zuckerberg is cracking down. He’s hiring thousands of more staff to filter out the fake accounts, to filter tradposting and fashposting, and filter our memes
The alt-right has competent people. Why is there is not a single well-designed alternative to Facebook? I believe that the best way to co-ordinate ourselves in the future is exactly what Zuckerberg is cracking down on (I like to call it “Tbook” and “Fashbook”, as opposed to “Normiebook”)
We need an alternative social media which encourages real identities while simultaneously allowing anon and pseudoanon accounts, and which allows people to make and manage their own groups
Going to paste this on Vox Popoli as well, since they have people who made Infogalactic.
We have a good alternative to twitter: Gab.ai
Facebook requires more code. If Gab makes money, we will have our own facebook soon enough.
You cannot whip up a decent alternative to Facebook/Messenger in your garage overnight. Needs a team of good people.
Gab.ai has a pink front page with hindi language on it, it makes me feel like a total fag before even clicking signup. I find myself glancing at the front page and immediately closing the window
If we want to replace twitter, can we not get a decent design? We are after all attempting to appeal to the manly and traditionalist white males. I cannot be the only one of them who immediately clicks X after looking at the front page
Not what I see when I type gab.ai into my browser.
Here’s a screenshot of what I get. From the uk. http://imgur.com/a/fmTI7
Having hindu language on the front page makes me immedietly think of a cesspit full of spambots and perverts, rather than high civilization
I dunno, the attempt at internationalization helps ward off some accusations. At any rate, its design is pretty decent, but you can always join and complain to Torba about how to edit it.
Anybody can set up a white box facebook/twitter clone for a small amount of money.
The alt-right will not use it-there are no normies to troll there-so what’s the advantage over /pol?
We formed an amazing community of various trads and fashys around Europe and the US, it wasn’t just about trolling normies. The fact that normies were around and getting caught up in it was a bonus, but trolling wasn’t what it was about
If facebook clones are so easy to set up why do I not see a single one with a decent design?
There was even a group called “The Jewish alt right (and righteous goys)” which ended up getting zucced by lefty jews who infiltrated it. I’m proud of the fact that they then let me into their new secret group (after posting arguments originating from here), though not all of the zionist alt-right jews on there fully trust me yet
One particular Jew called Amadeo was a great debator and obsessed with getting Christians to deny the messiah, so I showed him to my Orthodox Christian friend who knows some Orthodox Christian ex-jews. He got in touch with him, and added him to another group (one which I’m banned from) and tagged him in a thread and got his friends to really grill him
Can you see why this is more fun than /pol/? There’s the personal element. We enjoy reading messages from familiar characters. We enjoy repeated interactions
>more fun than /pol/
>We enjoy reading messages from familiar characters. We enjoy repeated interactions
Good. Stay away from imageboards if you want to namefag.
You don’t see a single one with a good design because you people can neither scrape together a few thousand dollars to pay a decent front end guy to put a better design on the existing white box clones, nor the skills to do it yourselves, nor the motivation to learn those skills. Why else?
Jim is seen posting on the bitcoin forums in 2008. I’m an entry level scientist. I certainly won’t be the one scrapping money together
So ask him for a few thousand and build your FB clone.
Fact is that a clone is doomed, same reason Euro can’t replace $ as world reserve currency. Pax’s project has a snowball’s chance in hell. Gab does not.
A Facebook clone would have the same problems as Facebook.
What is being proposed is not a clone, but rather something that does well what Facebook presently does, but does badly.
For that, there is a market.
Not easy, and should not be a clone. Should address the censorship problem – copyright violating posts on torrents, black marketing on crypto currencies, gray market drugs and hormones. Which requires an identity system not rooted in the domain name system, but ultimately in Zooko’s triangle. But the user hostile part of Zooko needs to be hidden. names based on domain names, for example joe@example.com, should be derivative of Zooko names, which look like line noise. But you should never need to pay attention to the Zooko name unless the government seizes the domain.
Think about what facebook does and recognize that it’s not going to happen. A protocol for structured personal websites and free hosting for them will happen, and discord and gab have.
That’s an amazing thought.
Facebook works by providing free hosting, paying for itself by selling data to advertisers and by working in very close collusion with the intelligence agencies, who want a well-oiled machine for their realtime automatic keyword searches and flagging system to catch terrorists. Presumably people on the right are reluctant to help make the next version of that.
But the next version could be a system were a personal page is actually a personal website, with a protocol for adding “friends” (that are actually other personal websites), with “groups” existing not on a central server but on someone’s personal server somewhere, with clinics having open agreement about what a friend is and what a group is.
The protocol would accept standard stuff such as likes and photos and reject unrelated innovations. To add something new would require getting lots of people to “agree” it should be added and update their clinics to see the new content
For instance one day I might build my personal city in VR space, with trainstations reflecting links to other servers – to friends and groups which I am fond of. My hip young friends with the new clinic update will join in and fly around my new “page”, while grandma who is still using an archaic clinic will still be able view my photos without getting asked to put on her headset.
Regardless of how much this sounds like where we’re heading, I’m still a believer in the Great Man Theory of History. I think at least in its early stages it would need someone very competent on top to control the direction of the protocol
Suppose every website could have an “account” on the network, if you proved that you owned the server, and submitted the proof using the right protocol.
Well as soon as the system had even a very small market share, every business would now have an incentive to connect to the network, knowing that there could be messages, complaints and “friend requests” waiting for them
It’s similar with Infogalactic. We can grow Infogalactic by making endless pages about random businesses, until word catches on that if you own a business you better check your corresponding Infogalactic article, and sign up for a verified account
Your idea is sound. Paraphrasing, it is peer-to-peer facebook.
I would recommend using the Qt toolkit and libtorrent-rasterbar library, adding a durable identity system rooted in public keys that are normally invisible to the user and not directly manipulated by the user, a protocol negotiation system to allow protocol updates without the hard fork problem.
QT toolkit for the UI and libtorrent-rasterbar for peer to peer communication. Of course the big problem is that neither one can be easily ported to android. Theoretically both are available on android, but the android environment for C++ is fundamentally broken.
Facebook’s initial target and audience was girls blogging that they were hot, and boys arranging assignations with them, thus Facebook + Messenger.
I would suggest an initial target and audience of massive copyright violation, blog posts announcing torrents and downloaders commenting on them, and or crypto currency use.
I now have a 19 year old Eastern European girl in my house and I didn’t need to backpack to find her, just joined a few traditionalist and natsoc groups (before the crackdown) and ended up messaging hot girls about the importance of having white children. You wouldn’t see that happen on /pol/ because random trolls and debators do not have pictures of their bodies for strangers to browse, ways to message them, or information about their real-world location and relationship status.
And you would not see it on a dating website either, since you need plausible deniability. A dating website signals being a desperate loser. But being in a political or religious group and coincidentally chatting to them works fine. I chatted to a lot of men and married/older women as well and made a good friendship network before being banned, so there is plausible deniability in every casual conversation.
We basically need a 4chan but with a plausible excuse for women to post pictures of their bodies, and for men to post pictures of themselves doing normal activities such as being shirtless on a boat with a dog and a group of friends, signalling all the usual stuff; and the ability to message strangers or other group members. Interestingly some groups had very strict rules, functioning similar to the selection effects of a church. Plausible excuses for meeting men and women to have kids with was found on fash/tradbook, but is not found on either 4chan or dating websites.
If a peer-to-peer facebook takes off by abusing copyright, hopefully the designers would be smart enough to get authentic normal people posting on it with attached photos of their hot bodies and active social lives. If that becomes the dominate culture then more people will copy it in order to fit in to the network, leading to more unprotected-sexual hookups producing more white children to fight in the coming civil war, and more young fashy boys and girls joining the network knowing subconsciously that it might lead to them having white children.
(My dude you must have some real badness cooking for us.)
R. J. Rosenstein: ‘hey you should fire this Comey guy’
R. J. Rosenstein: ‘btw ur under investigation for firing Comey’
With jews you lose.
Which is why Trump told Rosenstein to request it
No kidding.
Could you explain this sequence of events please?
Are you saying that Trump is friends with some Jews, and they serve him, defending him from other, enemy Jews?
Trump managed to be a top mogul in Jew York City, he probably knows Jews better than Hitler did.
Trump has a history of taking people who were planning on attacking him, offering them jobs, and then making them look like petty two-faced backstabbers when they attack.
Off topic: Was the baseball assassination attempt the opening shots of the second civil war?
Certainly not. The general Right in the United States is far too submissive to make even the least bit of hay given such an opportunity. Many more acts of wanton and obvious aggression aimed at ersatz “normie,” rightists will be required before talk of civil unrest is anything more than media buzz for mid-wit political rags trying to score ideological points for their flavor of establishment cream.
http://i.imgur.com/bYUOAte.jpg
“Terrorism distorts and falsifies the true meaning of any religion.”
Alinsky is right that polarizing is a winning tactic, we should adopt it.
Ok, so make em stop just saying that and force them to take the obvious next step. So any Iman who won’t preach against terrorism is therefore teaching a false religion. So if the religion is false, there can be no objection to closing the mosque. So the cucked priests are now boxed in and to retract that idiotic statement or accept the consequences. At that point every Imam also has to pick a position, “against terrorism and in support of closing mosques who won’t renounce or publicly declare in support”, and either play is a losing hand for them too.
We all know the reality. There may indeed be Imams against terrorism but they are smart enough to keep their heretical mouths shut lest they be beheaded. So put em all in a no-win scenario along with their fake “Christian” enablers.
It has nothing to do with “fer” or “agin.”
We are seeing that a Bernie Bro is capable of as much violence as anyone else on the planet. The question is, how big is the circle of people a Bernie Bro can involve in his planning without being ratted out compared to the same question for other demographics of concern?
With regard to Mao’s aphorism regarding revolutionaries being fish swimming in a sea, instead of being focused on the fish, what about this “sea”? Is it a puddle or an ocean or what sized body of water in between?
Related: http://forward.com/opinion/159955/converts-who-changed-the-church/
How do you know there aren’t any Mahometans saying that this terrorism is against the tenets of their religion?
Honest question. I don’t understand their language over there, but maybe you do.
I do know Nasrallah condemns it implicitly and explicitly in his speeches, unless the translations are wrong.
I don’t know whether or not you truly believe that terrorism is a tenet of Islam, but if you take the discussion there you’ve lost already. Because the people that, for now, defend the invasion for their own reasons, will always be able to claim it’s not.
It’s the same principle that allows all sorts of communists to claim they are democratic.
But whether or not terrorism is part of Islam is completely irrelevant. Islam is incompatible with other religions very much like (pre-cucked) Christianism is – and should be. And other religions include the atheist creed, etc.
It matters what is done, not what is said.
What is done is Jihad and it has broad support.
That would be the Nasrallah who is head of a terrorist organization.
Shiite terrorists condemn Sunni terror, and explain that their own terror is quite different. And they are right. It is different. But not so different that Christians should much care.
IIRC the Shia have a much smaller terror count even when their proportionally smaller population is considered. Excising Islam from anywhere that isn’t already Dar al Islam is preferable, but in the mean time it would make sense to throw Shia propaganda at anyone who is too xenophilic to accept the broad approach.
If we are going to be conquered and convert to Islam, on the whole I think I would prefer converting Islamic State’s Islam than Iran’s Islam.
Iran’s Islam has similar inherent problems to Christianity, without Christianity’s redeeming features.
My point was simply that Shia muslims produce anti-Sunni messaging organically and it presents an additional opportunity to subvert liberal messaging. Granted that makes little difference in a world where Sunnis are the breeding majority of Europe and the political allies of the US; however, acting on the assumption that Islamic conquest isn’t an absolute certainty, there is little opportunity cost in amplifying conflicting orthodoxy as propaganda.
Because CNN stage managed one Muslim anti-terrorism demonstration and one in Germany had more journalists than Muslims.
The fact that the journalists and academics can’t astroturf Muslim anti-terrorism demonstrations the way they used to astroturf nigger demonstrations of all kinds during the last century implies that Muslims don’t want to do that even for food, money, or even for White pussy.
…that isn’t true. You don’t get pussy for cucking, ever. The journalist women won’t sleep with the musulmen who jump through their hoops. Maybe one or two musulmen can get a highly laid career out of cucking, but if he’s not secretly supporting terrorists anyway, he’s not going to get any White pussy, or mud pussy either.
I find it hard to believe that a revival of the martial spirit of Christianity will not happen. I don’t know how large it will be, and I don’t know how effective it will be, but it seems to me like it is inevitable.
Unless they deal with the internal problems of feminist rebellion. They will not be able to do so.
Christianity’s martial spirit is smothered by the legions of impotent effeminate Christians. Jay is right.
Christianity functions when it is the heart of society, the charitable empathetic spiritual core which the outer limbs, the military and the law, use their might to defend. Christianity is something to fight for, not something to fight with.
Christianity flourishes when it is fought for. Progressivism did not attack Christianity from the outside; it could not have won. Progressivism brought Christianity into a form of competition which Christianity is not equipped for. It brought Christianity into a competition of altruism.
Progressivism convinced Christians that the good behaviors motivated by Christian principles ought to be instantiated into political law, (ending slavery, civil rights act, welfare state) and thusly drained Christianity (and, therefore, Christians) out of its position as the heart of the West and dispersed it into the law and enforcement (the limbs), whilst progressivism filled the void. It usurped Christianity’s place. Christianity finds itself beset on both sides. It faces invaders which must be met with force externally, and a popularity contest internally. Christians must armor up for war, and yet they must rehearse vacuous beauty pageant lines about world peace. They must apply makeup as they draw battle lines.
Consider the portion of Christians stationed at military bases around the globe relative to the portion of Christians lurking the halls of Academia. The physical manifestation of the proverbial limbs and heart of the contemporary West.
Christianity would be flourishing if Christians obeyed the traditional teachings of the Church, despite getting called sexist. Instead, Christians hold out hope that they can just prove that THEY’RE the ones who are really the nicest friendliest kindest folk around. I for one think God would be happier with a smaller, obedient Church than a massive impotent one.
I think there is much wisdom in what you have said. How do we square this with our Christian societies of old, when the heart and the limbs were both thoroughly Christian. Say in the Spain of the 1500s, or America of the early 1900s.
The limbs operated for Christianity, but they didn’t operate through Christian means. How exactly does one go to war in a Christian way? How does one collect taxes in a Christian fashion? I think the answer is that you don’t. You go to war to keep your Christian society alive. You collect taxes to keep your Christian society functioning.
The limbs contained many Christians, but they operated for Christianity (among other things, like the nation), not through it.
The heart pulls the strings and the limbs do the work. They have different roles. The Christian warrior’s heart tells him to pursue what leads to peace, so he uses his limbs to destroy the enemy. Christianity is complicated. I don’t blame the Catholic Church for choosing not to give the masses Bibles.
I think for me as a Christian the thing that makes me going to war, or collecting taxes acceptable, is the distinction between the kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of earth. For me the kingdom of heaven will not occur on this earth until the end times, in other words, it isn’t appropriate for us as Christians to try to build utopias.
I believe that the common Jew listening to Jesus, even the apostles, believed that Jesus was going to be a literal king ruling a literal earthly kingdom in Israel. That is why they always scolded, or ignored him when he talked about his death. I even suspect Judas was in a way attempting to push Jesus hand. I believe that our ancestors understood that the kingdom of heaven was not an earthly kingdom, thus all of the bloody wars.
I believe modern Christians have lost this distinction, and believe that this earth is to be the kingdom of heaven.
Modern Christians who translate soul to consciousness and imago dei to blank slate uniformity often also translate heaven into The Cloud and sometimes even suggest that the Elect will have their personalities reconstructed by The Computer.
Modern Christians from 100 years ago who talked about pie in the sky when you die – what do you think they meant? Pie on Earth now, of course. A New Jerusalem, everywhere, made possible by modern mass production. Peace on Earth when capitalism is obsoleted as it obsoleted feudalism (which is of course false).
You can call mainstream Christians of 100 years ago un-Christian, and certainly there were other Christians opposing them, unlike now, when Christians argue for transsexualism but against gay marriage. All churches were then being and now are captured vertically by university men.
Jim’s most important single statement is probably that consciousness isn’t particular to humans and niggers.
Please expand on that last sentence. I’m not as familiar with Jim’s writing as you are and I’m not certain I grasp the correct meaning.
The Japanese famously saw this coming back in the days of the Shogunate: nothing good could come if foreigners from the Vatican could influence politics in their country through their religion. To this day, Japan is, for the most part, free from unwanted external religious influences.
The Sakoku Edict of 1635 stated that:
– The Japanese were to be kept within Japan’s own boundaries. Strict rules were set to prevent them from leaving the country. Anyone caught trying to leave the country, or anyone who managed to leave and then returned from abroad, was to be executed. Europeans who entered Japan illegally would face the death penalty too.
– Catholicism was strictly forbidden. Those found practicing the Christian faith were subject to investigation, and anyone associated with Catholicism would be punished. To encourage the search for those who still followed Christianity, rewards were given to those who were willing to turn them in. Prevention of missionary activity was also stressed by the edict; no missionary was allowed to enter, and if apprehended by the government, he would face imprisonment.
– Trade restrictions and strict limitations on goods were set to limit the ports open to trade, and the merchants who would be allowed to engage in trade. Relations with the Portuguese were cut off entirely; Chinese merchants and those of the Dutch East India Company were restricted to enclaves in Nagasaki. Trade was also conducted with China through the semi-independent vassal kingdom of the Ryukyus, with Korea via the Tsushima Domain, and also with the Ainu people through the Matsumae Domain.
“To this day, Japan is, for the most part, free from unwanted external religious influences.”
Dude how high are you?
If Japan was not conquered by progressivism why do their population have a TFR and their men hold their hands up in a subway so they don’t get accused of sexual harassment? What would the samurai say about that?
How come no Japanese corporation is allowed to lay anyone off? Who came up with that idea, don’t you think it might have come from the same people who created the EUSSR?
Population of Japan in 1700 was 30 million, in 1900 50 million, in 2000 127 million. The decline in a population alone does not necessarily mean that population is cucked. There are naturally occurring cycles of population growth and decline. This idea that a population must always be growing is false.
It’s not the population figures themselves, it’s the population structure. Japan will soon be 50% old people. Think about that.
Yes good news they’re going to die.
Good news all round.
We don’t HAVE to pay for their retirement – it’s a choice.
As it happens in America, Europe and Japan that choice is made: the money is already derived away to nothing. Gone.
Why assume that socialism is external influence? You think premodern East Asia was libertarian or what?
Obviously premodern East Asia was not libertarian. But it wasn’t socialist either. Korea was a caste society with no growth, so you could claim that’s similar, but at least the average peasant didn’t have to change slogans every now and then to avoid being killed.
Japan and China were not nearly as bad as now. Disasters like the Cultural revolution, state mandated lifetime employment, nationalizing the whole economy, mandatory infanticide and AAing your smartest girls so much they don’t reproduce didn’t happen until they got conquered by white leftists after the war to save communism. The Ming dynasty taxed and regulated more than 1787 America, but not anywhere close to Post new deal western levels. They didn’t even have paper money after Yongle.
American nukes happened.
Lifetime employment is completely independent of progressivism and indeed, generally contrary to capitalism. Its also decreasing in countries as they become more Westernized.
Its tied to long-term orientation and feudal sensibilities, both discouraged by the ZOG.
*have a TFR of 1.4
The Japanese and the Swiss. Collectively the most cautiously smart people on earth! They scarcely make blunders.
I wonder what would happen if Duterte violated the human rights of a few cuckold priests when he was done with muzzies.
The Christians of the Philippines are not yet ready for that.
K, but that’s not actually what I asking.
Simpsons did it first.
See: Latin America, 1980s, Liberation Theology.
While Trump is in office, Duterte has free reign, more or less. What happens after that depends on the next administration. Worst comes to worse, he can always pivot to China, as he telegraphed towards the end of Frothy Latte’s tenure.
No, what I meant is that the Filipino population, being devout catholics will not accept Duteret manhandling their priests, whatever the cause. At least not in the near future
They are not more Catholic than Latin Americans.
And yet:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassinated_Catholic_priests_in_Guatemala
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Rother
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutilio_Grande
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%93scar_Romero#Martyrdom
Did the government eliminate the priests? As part of official policy? Was this overt or Covert? Perhaps then Duterte must take the covert path, i.e traitor priests dying in mysterious circumstances. That might work.
I heard you the first time. And it doesn’t answer my question.
Will they accept him manhandling traitors to the faith and to the people?
They refuse to accept that some one in the robes can be a traitor who requires manhandling.