Daniel O'Connor

This is the “Age of Disclosure,” they say. But what if this is really the Age of something else entirely? THE AGE OF DECEPTION Coming 2026 TheAgeOfDeception dot com Official Trailer 1 (Extended):

@TaylorRMarshall The Devil tempts holy people with holy things

Satan has crafted a plan to damn 🔥 EVERYONE. For most people, it's sexual and financial sins. He fishes easily with a wide net in these cases. 🐟 For traditional Catholics who diligently seek to follow every teaching and rule of Christ and His Church, the devil fishes with carefully crafted lures that look like real Catholicism. 🎣 Satan seeks to catch you with pride and schism. Don't bite. Swim away.

@Quis_Ut_Deus_72 @ryanbecker__ @PageauJonathan 💯

@DSDOConnor @ryanbecker__ @PageauJonathan It’s totally lost on people that it’s no act of charity to confirm somebody in mental illness or living a lie. It’s actually an act of Malice. Just look at the suicide statistics for one reason why. But the prime reason is helping them condemn themselves to hell.

The Odyssey is Christopher Nolan's Trick (full video)

@TheMuSinger Haha, I was wondering how a female junto would have to be managed!!

I LOVE this idea! How raw and real. I fear however, that some women would gossip far too much in a female-only version. It's not 'appropriate' to say but true. Maybe our version would have to have the lights out completely so we don't fritter and pull hair out.😏

@ryanbecker__ @PageauJonathan I'm leading "Maoist struggle sessions" because I say Page is a woman and people shouldn't refer to her as "he"😂

@DSDOConnor @PageauJonathan Are we really at the point of going after our own with Maoist struggle session type comments? Over pronouns of all things? Grow up and think for a moment, moreover trust our guy. So tired of the cynicism.

Clarification: I agree that the Antichrist is more likely to be an AI-doomer than himself an AI tech guru. The tech gurus are just the grunt workers preparing the way (wittingly or unwittingly) for the Antichrist. I don't necessarily agree that he's more likely to be an AI-doomer than an AI-messianist. I believe he'll weave both deceptions (along with, above all, the ET Deception) into one yarn

Many of us Catholics (myself included) have been warning for many years of the Antichrist’s likely impending arrival. Big mainstream Catholic media has only mocked and condemned us for doing so. Interesting to see a non-Catholic homosexual big tech guru saying the same thing and being given a big Catholic platform to do so! Oh well. Thiel does make plenty of good points. Ironic that they come from a man who is himself helping to lay down the infrastructure of the Antichrist and is thus enabling the very thing he ostensibly opposes. Particularly with his diabolical promotion of transhumanism. Yet even here I must give a caveat. If I understand him correctly, Thiel warns that the Antichrist is more likely to be a man warning of existential, extinction-level AI crisis than to himself be an AI guru. Here, I agree. As I’ve constantly warned, the AI-doomers and the AI-messianists both equally succumb to the same fundamental deception on the question of AI. As the Catechism says, the Antichrist comes with an “apparent solution to our problems.” Thus the Antichrist will indeed need to hype the “problem.” Still, AI-messianism is the even darker and more dangerous deception, and this is exploding in lock-step with AI-doomerism. Two sides of that one coin – which is belief in the blasphemous and apocalyptic lie that man can do what only God can: create life. Belief in AGI. “A pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in the place of God” – the Catechism on the Deception of the Antichrist.

The Pope and the Antichrist Peter Thiel and Sam Wolfe Read the full essay from our August/September issue at firstthings.com/the-pope-and-t…

@Altymcaltalt3 Darn. You've refuted me.

@DSDOConnor He’s more of a man then you are you useless loser

See how pathetic and sad these people are? It almost beggers belief that they exist

New @IgnatiusPress: "First Line of Defense: The Catholic Man’s Call to Heroism" by Douglas J. Barry & Daniel O'Connor “An outstanding resource ... Filled with sage advice and practical wisdom, it equips men for spiritual battle.”—Deacon Harold Burke-Sivers

In college (c. 2009) I started a "Junto" in my 1800s apartment's dingy brick basement, as part of my "Men of the Ages" group. Men, wine in pewter tankards, bread, a long solid wood table and wood benches I built, and light only from oil lamps. Gathering to discuss philosophy, religion, morals, and politics. One of our Juntos ⤵️ No technology, no distractions, no trivial topics. No asking Google anything or looking anything up (just some printed out notes). No women. (Sorry ladies -- you can have your own juntos). Just men pondering vital matters, challenging each other, debating, and strategizing. And don't underestimate the importance of the surroundings. No plastic, carpets, electric light, tasty food, or cushioned swivel chairs. Just wood, brick, metal, fire, wine, bread. More of this, gentlemen.

@PaxAesthetica @PageauJonathan I've witnessed first hand, many times, the unspeakable destruction wrought on people's lives by the diabolical lie that you can change your gender. If my opposition to that is classed by some as "policing," so be it.

@DSDOConnor @PageauJonathan Fair and true! It's just... I guess I don't understand it, the deep obsession with policing pronouns or whatever. I suppose if it makes you happy, but you seem smart, surely more positive productive uses of your brief time on this lovely planet.

Yes, it was a slip of the tongue, speaking about someone with a male name playing a male character. Gender confusion brings about confusion in all of us. It was certainly not an ideological decision.

@PaxAesthetica @PageauJonathan Yet here you are

@DSDOConnor @PageauJonathan With respect, it's just insane to me that you spend a single second of your time on this beautiful planet thinking, caring, or worrying about this. It feels like a sickness. Let it go, be free.

@ErbunnNinja @MattInformed @PageauJonathan No, I don't think it's pedantic. I don't think Jonathan does either, being that he did issue the correction I suggested

You don’t think it’s overly pedantic to police speech to that degree? I agree with you with regards to transgenderism and the evil it represents. But part of that evil, imho, is its strict attempts to police language so tightly around things like this. Don’t get me wrong, I ain’t saying don’t be annoyed by it, but I have to wonder if you’re looking so attentively to which pronouns were used what is being missed?

What silly comments, @mattinformed and @ErbunnNinja . Transgenderism is among the most diabolical ideologies in existence. A slip of the tongue that comes across as endorsing it (referring to Paige as "he") is extremely important to clarify/correct. We can simultaneously give Jonathan the benefit of the doubt (as you can see, I did) while also pointing out how vital it is to correct something like that. This isn't some little random issue that just I singled out. Go look at the top comments (and the number of likes they have) on Jonathan's video on YouTube. There has been an avalanche of people deeply scandalized -- and understandably so -- by a well known Christian commentator seeming to endorse the lie that a woman can become a man. Me politely and charitably asking Jonathan to issue a clarification/correction isn't "weird" or "nitpicking," @ErbunnNinja . It's utterly bizarre for you to say that. And, @MattInformed , considering that Jonathan's slip of the tongue came within the context of him singing the praises of Nolan for casting Paige -- no, you cannot simply assume that all "reasonable people" would simply know it was a slip of the tongue. Many reasonable people, in fact, thought Jonathan meant what he said. And as I respect @PageauJonathan , I didn't want to see him receiving undue scorn, therefore I asked a couple times for him to clarify/correct this. Jonathan did so, and he was right to do so.

@PageauJonathan Reasonable people understood you properly in the moment.

@andreamhartmann I posted about it now because I wanted to.

@DSDOConnor 2) To push narratives and I have been working hard to pull myself out of the years of propaganda I've taken in. I want to know that you are trustworthy. Thank you.

Basic logic and physics applied to the Charlie Kirk exploding mic theory. Explosions, by nature, proceed omnidirectionally from their point of origin–unless inhibited by a large external force strong enough to resist said explosion and allow its propagation in only one direction. Everyone knows this and has known this since they were kids playing with pop caps. It’s what an explosion is. Explosions, as such, do not proceed merely in one direction… because they *cannot* do so due to these stubborn things called the Laws of Physics. If you want an explosion, or an explosion-like event, to direct its effects in one direction, then you need to be able to contain that explosion in all other directions. Guns use omnidirectional explosions (technically, deflagrations– i .e., rapid combustions–but I’ll continue to use the colloquial term) to produce a unidirectional effect only because the explosion takes place within an extremely strong and rigid chamber with only one opening, and that opening is blocked by the bullet itself. Thus the explosion’s effects are threefold: observed kickback, extreme (but balanced and thus negated and unfelt) force applied to the outside of the chamber/barrel, and the ejection of the explosion/bullet out of the barrel, towards the target– with a momentum equal and opposite to the kickback (cf. The Law of Conservation of Momentum). The omnidirectional explosion is hereby directed to only one lethal direction. If Charlie was killed by an exploding microphone, then there are only two ways this could have occurred: 1⃣First, the explosion proceeded from its point of origin – the microphone – omnidirectionally. But in this case Charlie’s mortal wound would have been immediately adjacent to the position of the microphone, on his right chest. Just like all the 2024 Israeli pager attacks against Hezbollah in Lebanon––the wounds (lethal or not) these exploding pagers caused were directly adjacent to wherever the victim had his pager, and everything else in the vicinity. If the pager was in a pocket, then the torso immediately adjacent to that pocket was devastated. But in many cases, the pager was being held, because the detonation was preceded by the pager ringing and then saying “error,” at which point the user had to look at the screen and then press “okay,” whereupon the device was detonated. Thus, both the hand holding the pager and the face looking closely at it were severely disfigured. Papers have been written on this. ⤵️ Of course, everyone knows this wasn’t the case with Charlie. Charlie’s wound was on the left side of his neck, not adjacent to his Rode mic, which was on the right side of his chest. Even his shirt near the Rode mic remained intact--whereas it would have been torn to shreds if the mic underneath it exploded. No omnidirectional explosion occurred there, period. Therefore, this possibility is ruled out. 2⃣Second, the explosive device was itself like a miniature firearm. It contained a charge and a barrel-like component with which to direct that charge, and at the right time, it was triggered to shoot its projectile into his neck. This, however, is clearly false for a number of reasons: 🔎A barrel strong enough to contain an explosion that powerful so as to successfully shoot a lethal projectile, with even a modicum of accuracy, and capable of ripping open a man’s neck could never be concealed within an object that lightweight and tiny. The smallest gun-like device in existence is the MAC stinger. At 3.25 inches long, it is far larger than the Rode mic Charlie was wearing. Suppressors added to it would make it far larger still. Moreover, the amount of energy such a projectile contains would be insufficient to cause the type of wound we all saw Charlie had. Such miniscule micro-guns can only, at most, fire a 22 round (or some custom made projectile of a similar size/weight). Yes, the MAC stinger is decades old, but that’s irrelevant. Advances in technology have not changed the Laws of Motion which define the absolute boundaries of what is possible here, nor can the CIA’s or Mossad’s “top secret tech” violate these laws. 🔎Even if such a weapon could be concealed within an object that tiny, it would be extremely easily detected. Picking up a Rode mic rigged like that would feel nothing like picking up an actual rode mic, which Charlie would have done innumerable times before. Charlie never would have put it on, and even if it were put on him, it would have exerted obvious excessive force in his t-shirt, tugging it sharply down. Furthermore, Rode Mics (I use them too) are very compact devices with no unused space within them. While it’s conceivable that a miniscule charge could be embedded within them, it’s absolutely inconceivable that a miniature firearm-like device could be. All the mic’s internal components would have to be removed to make room for just a fraction of the space such a device would require. Not only, again, is that impossible, but secondly, the mic would not work. (Charlie’s did.) 🔎No assassination device would ever be designed that way (to shoot off the side – by definition parallel to the intended target), as a miss is likely if not practically guaranteed. In fact, it is virtually impossible, just geometrically, that a projectile shot out of the position of Charlie’s Rode Mic could have struck his neck where we all saw the wound emerge. 🔎Due to kickback, the rode mic would have been propelled – again, Law of Conservation of Momentum -- in the direction exactly opposite the direction of his neck wound. This would also be an easily noticeable result, as there would be nothing other than the mass of the remaining rode mic components to provide the counteracting momentum (as it was only clipped to a light t-shirt–it was not rigidly affixed to a much more massive object which could imperceptibly absorb the momentum). Yet no such thing happened, and this is obvious from all the footage. Both possibilities, therefore, are definitively ruled out. So, no. Charlie wasn’t killed by an exploding microphone. Yes, there are oddities with official accounts of Charlie’s assassination, and they should be explained. I’m not saying the official story is entirely correct either. I haven’t researched it deeply and have no plans to. Here, I’m just addressing one particularly silly theory. Forgive me if this has all been said many times before. (It probably has been. At least, I hope it has been.)

@ThimonsDan @Breaking911

@DSDOConnor @Breaking911 What if we simply subtract 2 minutes from every day. So that the days are now 23:58 long. No one would notice. Then, once a month we add that extra hour back in (turn the clock back), giving us a 25 hour day every month. The problem is that we don't change the clocks enough.

BREAKING: The House has passed legislation to make Daylight Saving Time permanent nationwide, ending the twice-a-year clock changes by a 308-117 vote. Backed by President Trump, the bill now heads to the Senate. If approved and signed into law, Americans would no longer have to change their clocks.

@aussieprolife @jonaaronbray That is not a plausibility

@DSDOConnor @jonaaronbray Okay but to be honest this did not come across in your post - i.e. that it is possible an explosive device in the vicinity of the rode mic, though not in the mic itself, is a plausibility.