Thursday, May 5, 2016


May 5, 2016. About 8:39am

Edivaldo doesn't want to be seen but is in the studio. The new puppet master.
He is NOT  a visitor.
What does he plan to achieve now.
LOL. He's staying with his "professor" facade.
Affiliation with the Lateran. Ummmm, they cannot show it.
I have come here to make a in the past years.
People fed false information - in other words the people are stupid.
He was never addressed directly because he always snuck in.
First time it has happened. I'll explain that.
Tit for tat. So the Archbishop hides.
These are real problems....that would be the archbishop.
Not the only one - not true for Guam. It is the only one.
It is not enough to go to Mass.
Great. Go out! Go out Giuseppe. But YOU GO IN GO IN GO IN to our churches and TAKE OUT TAKE OUT TAKE OUT.
LOL The bishop has done a great work fighting against casino. LOL
Fought for defense of life...umm since when?
He's filibustering because he's not used to be asking questions.
He doesn't live here but yet he's supposedly a "permanent professor" at RMS.
Claudia : don't they celebrate mass "normally"
Ambrosian Church. Sorry - we are in the Latin Church.
Sign of peace - discussion in the vatican.
the adaptation that is not allowed is to NOT consume the host immediately
Claudia getting shrill
Oh here we go with the born again story
No documents only the statute - everything else is speeches.
He doesn't quote the speech of Francis which tell them that it is better not to have the way than to create division.
LOL. "The way is for those who are far away from the church - BUT THEY EVANGELIZE IN THE CHURCH.
Not because I have any interest to come to Guam.
He's only been directing things for 25 years.
Claudia had a failed childhood and Catholic formation.
REach out. Well then go ahead. Reach out. Get the hell off the pulpits.
Thank you Edivaldo. These people are sinking their way
Land grabbing.
Every person has to renounce his goods so Gennarini can stay at a Hyatt suite.
There he goes. Gennarini trying to shut Bob down.
LOL. You have the wrong documents.
He says I don't know who drafted the papers. HE SURE AS HELL KNOWS.
He said he had NO role in the deed restriction.
In order to protect the the property assign it to RMS.
Good job, John Taitano: WHERE IS THE ARCHBISHOP
Good job, Patti. They have probably never been asked tough questions before.
And LOL. For someone who had NOTHING to do with the formation of the corporation, he knew which article said way, even though he was wrong about the number.
More later. Courage.


  1. I was hoping that I was going to be one of the callers to make it in the time frame, but it was not meant to be. This is what I would have said:

    1) I was one of those people at the airport. I make no apologies for what happened. If anything, I'm thankful that it showed the extent of our anger at the current situation in our church. I'm guilty of shouting, "Go home!" Why? Because when the Gennarinis come to Guam, something bad happens afterwards. One summer, Fr. Paul was forcibly removed from his position. Another summer, Monsignor James suffered the humiliation of false accusations and being watched while he moved out of his residence. What next? We shall see. Gennarini, "G," claims he was here to teach, but time will tell. Let's wait and see if that turns out to be a lie.

    2) I wanted to clarify some misinformation that G gave in yesterday's interview when he insinuated that a donor gave money to purchase the hotel for the RMS seminary, when in fact, that wasn't the case. The donor wanted A SEMINARY to be formed on Guam and had no knowledge of RMS.

    The quality of the presbyters being formed by RMS is highly questionable. One priest, Fr. Luis was caught performing a sexual act on a minor and was quickly shuffled away to other countries. Fr. Edivaldo, sitting right next to G, is another example of a poor spiritual leader because he claims to have sucked the juice out of girls. Parishioners who are stuck with these presbyters as their priests often complain that they cannot understand them because of their accents and because they ramble in their homilies. They just don't make any sense at all. It's apparent that their formation is sorely lacking. Why should we want this for our island? We don't.

    3) G claimed that their services are open to all. Why then are the doors locked in some parishes when they have their celebrations? Why are other seminarians (Franciscan) denied entry until they have been "catechized?" Another Neo lie.

    4) Claudia claimed that it's a lie when people say they are grabbling land on Guam. I know for a FACT of some people have been asked to donate their property to the Neo, and they weren't even in the NCW in the first place. Another Neo lie.

    5) When the NCW does their testimonials in church, many of their topics are not suitable for children. Added to the fact that they aren't even supposed to be doing testimonials DURING mass, they add insult to injury when they expose our children to topics like fornication, masturbation, and sex. These are subjects that we, as parents, have the right and the obligation to educate our children about and NOT SOME STRANGERS divulging aspects of their lives all to show how the NCW "saved" them. I question how valid their testimonials are and how much they've been doctored to make their lives seem dire and in desperate need of the NCW.

    6) The archdiocese claims we had the opportunity to talk to AAA and address our concerns. I did. When he came to Santa Barbara, I specifically asked him what he was going to do to address the division in our church. His response - shrugged shoulders accompanied with an "I don't know." THIS is what you're talking about? SAD and TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.

    I know I wouldn't have gotten to all of this had my call gone through, but these were the thoughts swirling through my mind as I watched the interview. (BTW - by reading their nonverbal, I could tell how closed off the Gs were to what was being said and even to each other. Despite the fact that they've been married for 30 something years, the male G was dismissive of the female G).

    Before I conclude, I want to thank Patti for having them on the show and asking these tough questions. I didn't think she was adversarial; I thought she asked the questions that needed to be asked.

    I implore everyone to join us in our struggle to take back our church and act on our confirmation promise to become defenders of the faith.

    1. You wouldnt even have that muvh time.

    2. Where is your proof that Fr.Luis commited sexual acts? Honestly, find the information yourselves people.. have you ever talked to the family of the "victim"?

    3. Where is your proof that Fr.Luis commited sexual acts? Honestly, find the information yourselves people.. have you ever talked to the family of the "victim"? If you did you would know this is untrue.. Mr.Rohr, you have destroyed this mans vocation, on a hunch. Not only did you do this, but have caused hardship upon his family simply from misinforming not only your audience but the pulbic on the truths of what actually happened. Truelly, go out and look for the facts before taking what is said here on this blog. Its not objective at all.

    4. 1."have you ever talked to the family of the "victim"? Funny thing about calling a victim "the victim." Usually means there was a perpetrator.

      2. ". . . you have destroyed this mans vocation, on a hunch." Who destroyed "this mans" [sic] vocation? How about the one who shuttled Luis away, or the one who hid him in Qatar, or the one who discerned for Luis.

      3. "Truelly, go out and look for the facts before taking what is said here on this blog. Its not objective at all." This blog does not give circular reasoning, you must be referring to "Diana's" which cites their own posts as "documentation."

    5. If Luis did not do "sexual acts" then all he had to do was say so. He did not. Instead he disappeared.

    6. Dear 11:53 AM - The proof is in the pudding when Luis immediately resigned and the arch immediately accepted his resignation and then he was immediately sent off-island. None of those immediate actions wouldn't have happened if truly he wasn't caught doing the nasty. What say you?

    7. To Anonymous at 11:53 - You're a blind idiot. What family would admit to having her daughter behave in such a fashion? Of course they're going to say anything to make the situation seem not so bad. The proof is really what the POLICE witnessed when they arrived on the scene. There's no denying that - no matter what kind of spin the NCW puts on it.

    8. Becky then is all an assumption then... so who's idiot here? Your blowing hot smoke here. Use ur head instead of speaking out of your hip? How do you know about Luis really?

    9. It was on the news before it was on this blog, specifically the talk shows. It was only later after the arrest and after the news had already gotten out that the charge was reduced to custodial interference, which is still a THRID DEGREE FELONY. So where is LUIS?

    10. Anonymous @ 5:11 - Your ineptitude of the English language is an indication of your lack of knowledge. Perhaps you are one of those seminarians or presbyters whose formation is from the very lacking RMS, a "Cracker Jack" seminary.

      You forget that the police talk too....... The fact that Luis hasn't been charged does not indicate his innocence. More than likely, the family is too embarrassed by the whole incident and just wants it to go away, so they opted not to press charges. The Custodial Interference charge, which is out of their control, still stands. If he were so innocent, why isn't he still on Guam clearing his name instead of being whisked away to parts unknown?

    11. To anonymous 11:53 and 5:11 - Are you seriously defending Luis? Why does Becky have to talk to the "victim’s" family? Are you blaming the “victim” and her family for the incident? Why would a "so called priest" take a 17 year old girl out of school and take her to the beach? If Luis did nothing wrong, then why isn’t he here to defend the accusations against him?
      Becky, I applaud you and the others who were at the airport when “g” arrived. There were those who commented on social media that it was an “embarrassment” for the people of Guam. To them, I say, “The embarrassment is that you let outsiders come to our island and change our traditional values and beliefs!”

    12. Hey Luis, did it smell like orange juice? Hahahaha

  2. Hey, they say you folks have the wrong documents. Was there an amended document for the RMS? If so, was this document just revised because the 3 grantors are here? Something is pao take'.

    1. Yes. They had something. I'll have it up later. An attempt to try to hide even more.

    2. Yawn Yawn Yawn Yawn Yawn (:o Tim you sound like a recorder same old shit!!! everybody's bad except you,give it up no Casino man! pack up and go H O M E...

    3. LOL. Well looks like the same old shit keeps you coming back, doesn’t it. LOL.

  3. On the topic of the "lost sheep" there is an important point Gennarini is missing: the good shepherd goes in search of the one lost sheep to save him and BRING HIM BACK INTO THE FOLD. He does not stay out in the wilderness and leave the other 99 sheep to fend for themselves.

    1. Yep, only on Guam is the shepherd who is lost and is not willing to be found!

    2. @1:02PM, a parallel to this statement is that of "Dead Beat Dads" who just CAN'T seem to UNDERSTAND the word RESPONSIBILITY.

  4. Thank you to Patti Arroyo for a great interview and asking important questions..I though she was very fair...

  5. Did that jerk throw AAA under the bus? LOL!

    1. So that's where Archie's been hiding! lol!

    2. Dear anon at 2.01, of course he did. Genarinni and Co, know that Tony's past is catching up to him. Soon they will have no use for him, this is why they are starting to take their distance and putting the blame on him. This trend will accelerate and amplify.
      James, thanks you for the good laugh.

  6. LOL, did you notice how his nose grew longer and longer with each lie?

    1. So his real name must be Geppetto Gennarini. lol!

  7. So was there a letter written to the Archbishop from Ed Terlaje? According to Di the letter fro Ed Terlaje was written to the former AFC How the words alienation, risk etc. were actually directed to the former AFC members and not to the Archbishop.

    Clarification please!

    1. I will answer in a post.

    2. Shit keeps hitting ur face Tim. We non Neo tired of your nonsense.. You might remember me when u were teaching at St.John...

    3. Nah. I'm pretty sure you were not memorable. LOL. Courage Coward.

    4. Must've gotten a bad grade to hold a grudge for so long! Nobody cares who you really are...non Neo or not. Get over yourself and open your eyes to the bigger picture...or are you lacking in that skill?


Recommendations by JungleWatch