You say, "the questions you pose need [not] engage the attention of actual Catholics to the point of wasting time responding as though there were anything rational posted by you."
Then you go on for twenty paragraphs wasting time responding. You apparently don't know what it is you're saying. In fact, I knew the content of your screed even before I read it--which is too bad. Your posts used to be witty and informative. Now you only pile up insults and shed no light on any of the issues. That's fine with me, I can give as well as I get, but it doesn't advance anybody's knowledge about what's happening in the Church. This suggests a real lack of conviction on your part and an acknowledgement that the facts are not on your side. If they were, you would cite them. In fact, you can't--because the Pope himself never explains his actions. No theology was ever presented by Rome to justify its allowing Buddhists to pray at our altars--it was simply something the Pope wanted to do. No reason was given for elevating a heretic like Kasper, either. It sort of "just happened", as though elevating such men were a matter of course in the Catholic Church. Fine. But these are heterodox actions just the same--and leaves papal defenders helpless to explain them rationally. So they do what you do--hurl insults.
The rest of your post is the usual self-entertainment in which you please yourself to advance schism as thjough it were the Faith. The fact that neither you nor the other schismatics are in charge of the pope cannot be made too often. You don't like him. You despise him. You revile him. He excommunicated your heroes and adjudged SSPX a schism which it is. You don't like it? Tough!