@Ultraviolet I never said Benedict was a prisoner. However, if he is under the control of others in the Vatican, they can do what they want. Anyway, Benedict said himself he wanted to expand the Papacy, and he wrote a lot about it in the 1970s. Germans. Sorry you struck out. Again.

You always "never said" anything whenever you realize you're wrong or you've contradicted yourself. .
"However, if he is under the control of others in the Vatican, they can do what they want."
But your claim here contradicts the popular claim Benedict is being kept prisoner in the Vatican.
Like I said, pick one stupid conspiracy theory and stick with it.
"Benedict said himself he wanted to expand the Papacy, and he wrote a lot about it in the 1970s. "
Totally irrelevant to the claim you made here or countering claims anywhere else.
"Again"? Still waiting for that time-stamped photo of yourself, tough guy. :D

@Ultraviolet when you lie and conflate you can always be right. I never said Benedict was a prisoner. Ever. Not only are you wrong, you're stupid.

"when you lie and conflate you can always be right" No evidence shown here that I did.
Theory vs. fact. That's a "stupid" distinction you fail to appreciate.:D
" I never said Benedict was a prisoner. Ever."
If you want to get technical. I didn't accuse you. I said, "people like you". And you jumped right on it as I expected you to, because you identify as one of them.
Sucker. :D
...this also explains why you only thought to defend your position on these grounds only now.
...now that you're scrabbling to avoid a position you've already freely accepted. :D

@Ultraviolet liars never see any "evidence" of their own behavior. When you say people like you, you're saying me. It's a way for cowards to accuse someone with out actually doing it. So now you're wrong, stupid, and a coward. Keep going.

" liars never see any "evidence" of their own behavior."
...entirely understandable when none is presented.
"When you say people like you, you're saying me."
Wrong. Learn basic sentence structure, dummy.
"It's a way for cowards to accuse someone with out actually doing it."
You just contradicted yourself since you admitted I didn't actually accuse you...
"...with out (sic) actually doing it" Your words. A direct admission by you the act did not take place.
"So now you're wrong, stupid, and a coward."
...which explains why I'm the one correcting your mistakes, amirite? Like you said, keep going. ;-)
As for cowardice, I'm still waiting for that time-stamped photo of yourself, the one that's going to show why nobody DARES ask why you're not wearing your mask.
Protip: next time you link someone else's instragram, pick a tougher-looking guy. Dwayne Johnson, perhaps.

@Ultraviolet "People like you" is saying "you". That's very basic. Indeed, the import of your stupid post was to accuse me of being a Benedict conspiracist like the ones who think Benedict is a prisoner. It's a simile to discredit me by accusing me of being something you disdain. I have an MA in English.
You should've learned all this in 4th grade, though. For example, I could say you're like Liberace, which would be me accusing you of being a flamboyantly gay pianist. But that would be wrong because you need to be smart to be a pianist.
Wrong, stupid, and cowardly. The unholy trinity of the douche. That's you kid. I equally pity you and laugh at you.

"People like you" is saying "you". That's very basic.
Repeating your mistake doesn't change it. The noun "people" describes a general group. "People" was the subject of the sentence you're referencing, not you. Like I said, learn basic sentence structure, dummy.
"Indeed, the import of your stupid post was to accuse me of being a Benedict conspiracist..."
Uh-oh... Jimmy's running for his thesaurus in an attempt to sound educated. This is always fun. :D
No. The 'import' was to show that you can't get your stories straight and change them according to the circumstances. That was the 'import', since you're using the term. Maybe you should use a dictionary and look it up before using it. :D
"like the ones who think Benedict is a prisoner."
...and by acknowledging I drew a comparison between two separate sources, as you just did saying, "like the ones who think" you again admit I did not accuse YOU personally.
My focus was on your inability to stick with a single narrative.
"It's a simile to discredit me by accusing me of being something you disdain."
Whoo... a simile. :D You really are trying tonight.
.....annnnd... you don't know what a simile is either.
A simile (using "like" or "as") is a piece of figurative language drawing an interesting and direct parallel. Every comparison using "like" is not a simile... dummy.
In the context I used "like" it was an equivalence.
As for discrediting you... you're doing a fab job discrediting yourself. With just a little guiding help from me. ;-)
"I have an MA in English."
:D Cool story, bro. Sure you do.
And mayhaps you can slap a time-stamped post-it on it and take a photo of yo' Masters unredacted to prove that right? No? Excuses? It's in storage? Too busy? Some moar BS???
Then your claim has about as much weight as all your other personal claims.
If you genuinely did have one ( an MA in English, that is) you'd show a greater appreciation of nuance. Either that or your MA isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
"You should've learned all this in 4th grade, though."
Funny you should mention it. That's where I learned "without" was one word, and not two in the context you used them. :D
...a shockingly simple error for a guy claiming a MA in English no less.
"For example, I could say you're like Liberace, which would be me accusing you of being a flamboyantly gay pianist."
Yes, you could. Unfortunately, I wouldn't fall into such an easy gambit the way YOU did.
"But that would be wrong because you need to be smart to be a pianist."
A pianist needs talent. and effort.
www.sbs.com.au/news/keys-to-success…
Intelligence aka being "smart" or even professional education aren't necessary criteria. You see? Even when you try to be a wit, you fail miserably.
"Wrong, stupid, and cowardly. The unholy trinity of the douche. That's you kid."
Every time you get butthurt at losing, you resort calling me a "kid". Douche is a new one for you.
No surprise, it's moar big talk from a classic internet tough-guy. Gotta love "cowardly" from the guy who backed down when it was time to start trading time-stamped photos. ;-)
It's also an ad hominem fallacy from a guy who's claiming to have a Master's Degree in English no less.. Bravery is no prerequisite for demonstrating your errors -including the one you just made.
Are you still laughing? ;-)

@Ultraviolet I never stopped laughing. Look at all that rage. You're wrong, stupid, and cowardly. The truth does that to people like you. Bless your heart.

When I start bawwing you're a "douche" and sneering you're a "kid" then you can accuse me of "rage". Not before. When I call you a "dummy", hey, I back it up. ;-)

@Ultraviolet you are a douche, and you are a kid. Idk what the issue here is. And yes, you're full of rage. :(

@Ultraviolet you've written around 1000 words of impotent rage. I've written around 250 words of rebuttal. You need to really get a new hobby.

Someday you'll discover that correcting errors requires more work than making them. ;-)
Now call me a few moar names. It's all you've got left at this point, Jimbo. :P

Well I certainly won't call you 'Catholic', so don't worry about that. I've corrected all your errors. The name calling is for your own edification.

"Well I certainly won't call you 'Catholic', so don't worry about that."
From you, it wouldn't mean very much one way or the other, Jimbo.
"I've corrected all your errors."
Like you posted a photo of yourself, amirite? ;-) Stick to what's happening here on GTV.
...as opposed to a less intellectually-demanding venue. ;-)
.

I gave you access to my photo. You can see what I look like at any time. So I really don't understand your anger about that.
Also, I don't care if you insult my intellect, because everyone can see who has the intellect issues. You're not really helping yourself.
I actually think you're jealous. You're so pathetic. I joined this site to comment on Catholic news, but I've spent most of my time engaging with a troll. I don't have to, of course, but I pity you.

"I gave you access to my photo."
Fibber. You mentioned an instagram account name. Not even a link to it. But there's no proof it's yours. That's what time-stamps are for... catching guys like you.
Every time I point this out, you duck it. You'll duck it again. Seriously, how hard is a selfie with you holding up a card showing today's date and your user name?
"So I really don't understand your anger about that."
There's no anger, I'm just pointing out the BS as it runs out of you.
"Also, I don't care if you insult my intellect, because everyone can see who has the intellect issues."
...that's why you had to justify yourself by citing your (unproven) academic credentials to a complete stranger.
"I actually think you're jealous. You're so pathetic."
See my last point. Now tell me why I'm jealous of a guy I routinely correct. What's there to be jealous of??? ;-)
"I joined this site to comment on Catholic news, but I've spent most of my time engaging with a troll."
Wow. Moar name-calling! Protip: Being right doesn't make me a troll. It just means you're wrong.
It's always amazing how guys like you end up reference your interest in Catholic-related subjects after displaying an absolute lack of anything even approaching Catholic virtues.
Now call me a "kid" again, don't forget to say I'm "obsessed" (that comes sooner or later).
Then bawww about your bad asthma and your insomnia and whatever else you think will make you appear as a sympathetic, likeable-sounding guy.

So, who is a guy like me? And what's my motivation to lie? Please, enlighten.
Of course you could easily find a photo of someone and make a fake timestamp. So really we all know it doesn't matter what I do. You are a total weirdo.
I brought up my degree to shut you up about my supposed lack of education re: writing. I falied because You're stupid, and you simply can't reason with a stupid person
And of course nowhere did I claim any Catholic virtue for myself, but I can certainly see the lack of it in others like you. As I said I came here to read about Catholic news. So as usual you are lying about me.
I also never said I was likable and don't care how anyone sees me. You're not hurting me with your endless bilge. Like I said, I pity you and laugh at you.

" And what's my motivation to lie? Please, enlighten."
Since I didn't state a motivation, much less one to lie, there isn't any need for me to explain. ;-)
"Of course you could easily find a photo of someone and make a fake timestamp. So really we all know it doesn't matter what I do."
Proving what I said a post ago... "Every time I point this out, you duck it. You'll duck it again." Of course, it would be a lot easier for you to just take the darn photo and post it.
But that isn't going to happen. Instead, it's going to be one excuse after another, one avoidance after another. All a far cry from the bold claim, "And if you saw me, laughing is the last thing you'd do. That is a guarantee."
Sure, tough guy.
One selfie with a time-stamp card in your hand sure would settle the matter.
My offer is still good, btw. If I claim I'd laugh in your face,then I gotta post a photo showing why...and my photo has to be time-stamped. In fact, I already took that photo and it's dated 06/17/20. ;)
I posted a preview hoping you'd man up and make good on your big claim..
But you backed down and you're still backing down because that's what internet tough-guys do when somebody calls their bluff. :D
Even on the internet, you back down.
Since it's the internet you run your mouth a little more but it's all same thing. You're backng down. Again.
"I brought up my degree to shut you up about my supposed lack of education re: writing."
...and like so many of your personal claims, the facts simply don't support it in actual practice. Making a claim and proving it are two different things. That doesn't change when you're bragging about what you look like or your "degree" or anything else, Jimbo.
"I falied because You're stupid, and you simply can't reason with a stupid person"
Protip: "you" doesn't need capitalization and the sentence needs a period at the end. Something to remember when you're bringing up a Master's degree in English and calling someone stupid as well.
"And of course nowhere did I claim any Catholic virtue for myself,"
...and once again, you're reproving a point I made four hours ago.
"You always 'never said' anything whenever you realize you're wrong or you've contradicted yourself."
You never "said" it, nowhere you did "claim" it, all the while advancing just the opposite. In this case with some threadbare virtue-signalling references to your interest in Catholic news.
"but I can certainly see the lack of it in others like you."
Matthew 7:5 much? Unlike you, I don't pretend.
"As I said I came here to read about Catholic news."
Vs. what you orignally wrote:
"I joined this site to comment on Catholic news, "
One of your many problems is you can't get your stories straight. The two aren't mutually exclusive, but it's reflective of your writing. You spout off without a second thought and get irritated when people notice the discrepancies.
"Like I said, I pity you and laugh at you."
Sure you do. Up next, bawwing about your sore throat, right? :D

Usually you should only comment on something after you read it and understand it.
Secondly, all willful action, even lying, have motivations.
Third, I never said I was a "tough guy". And that's not exactly what I meant when I wrote that. It doesn't matter, because nothing really frightens me, but maybe if you had looked at my IG you would've known what I was talking about.
Fourth, the pity is overtaking the merriment. You've got deep rooted psychological issues. You've been trolling since I joined.
How sad that I threaten you so much.

In analogy, do you also falsely believe God abandoned the world and let the devil abuse societies? No, God has been removed and dethroned from societies by rebelling children co-operating with the devil. Neither has pope Benedict XVI abandoned Church and remains Vicar of Christ adhering to visible signs of Petrine Office - munus. In contrary, he also has been removed by adulterous and disobedient mother who incited revolt with her children to separate from her Sacramental spouse and biological father. Then the (apocalyptic) harlot united in adulterous union with another man - potentially Lawless one.. [Is Pope Benedict XVI Still Pope (but Francis Bishop of Rome?) Mazza Thesis Revisited]