Bergoglio psychophants

Even by Bergoglio's insanely absurd crazy standards, the ring-kissing switcheroo is weird...

Just when one thinks that Bergoglio cannot get any weirder he does something completely absurd, something completely off the charts. Even by Bergoglio's absurdly crazy standards, this is weird:

It is like something from a Benny Hill or Monty Python sketch. For an overweight man with probable drinking problems, one lung, and obviously slow-of-thought, he sure does more fast. That whole ring-kissing switcheroo could spawn a thousand memes, and with good reason.

I have never seen anything like it and I don't know if it is the first time he has done it or if it is a trademark dribbling move.

My initial  comments are the following:

  • First of all, it is really really weird. Even by his insanely-high bizarro standards   it's so weird it's almost creepy.
  • Secondly, it serves these people right for wanting to kiss the ring of a man as perverted as Bergoglio. The man has nothing Catholic about him, and yet they still want to bow down and kiss his ring, that same ring which has adorned some of the worst documents any bishop has ever produced in Church history. They desrerve a slap, not merely having Bergoglio move his hand. Maybe that would teach them that the man is to be avoided.
  • Thirdly, it is as though the man is going out of his way to prove that he is not pope and is not worth of the respect due to one. That he is pope is dubious, that he deserves contempt is unquestionable.

I am not big on the whole ring-kissing thing. There is an indulgence attached to it of some sort, and I suppose to get some poor soul out of purgatory I might bring myself to do it if the man whose ring I was kissing was worthy. Bergoglio most certainly is not. Yes, I know, it is not about the man but about the office. In reality though, kssing someone's ring affirms the man considerably so it should be reserved for good shepherds.

Even if he were worthy, I really cannot see how I could justify kissing a gold-plated silver ring. It smacks of trans-materialism, to borrow some jingo from today's crazy leftists. It's from a man who doesn't know the symbolism of his office, wants to pretend to be humble by using silver instead of gold, yet isn't secure enough in his imbecillity to go all the way through with it so he covers the ring with silver. Kissing his ring only affords him a respect he most certainly does not deserve.

Still, I have never seem him move so fast. It is as though somebody had transported him from a free-masonic temple into the Vatican (or Loreto, where it turns out this particular show was staged), and finding himself there and not having a clue who all these people are or what he's supposed to do, he thought all these people were coming towards him to take a bite out of his hand.

For pure comedy gold, this has to be the most entertaining of Bergoglio's many cringe-worthy stunts. It is most "disturbing", as LifeSite News put it.

It certainly cracked me up anyway, and I suppose unless we prefer weeping that's all we can do at this week's installment of the Bergoglio horror show.

Bergoglio's stupidity catches up with his perversion - Sunday 12th of August to Saturday 8th of September

It has been far too long since I wrote, and it has not been for lack of topics, rather perhaps the exact opposite. There has been so much to write about that it has been difficult to know where to start.

Most of what has caught my attention has been Church scandals, but there have been some siginificant secular news as well. I shall make the unusual choice of starting with the secular news, although I shall only cover  the secular world in brief.  The rest will be taken up by Bergoglio's most headline-grabbing scandal to date, so perhaps it is just as well that my update-rate has been sub-optimal, for otherwise I would have been writing about that very thing all this time; so dominant has it been.

The most significant news was that China may scrap it's abhorrent two-child policy after 40 years of callous murders. What has often been called a one-child policy was for most people always a 2-child policy, since people outside the cities were 'allowed' 2 children, as were those without siblings. I write allowed in quotation marks because I cannot get over how absurd it is that the government sticks its nose into how many children  a couple has. A government can no more allow people to have more than 2 children than it can allow its citizens to breathe, which is to say that having children is a natural right which the government has no right to infringe upon more than it has on our right to breathe. It can only allow it only insofar as it has violated that right in the first place.

In any case, the 2-child policy created a childless society en large, which was not helped by the Chinese traditional preference for boys, or Chinas world-leading suicide rate among women. China is on course to have the oldest population in Asia in a few decades,  and all because of its communist ideologues. When you fight against nature, you will always lose.

I have, however, long maintained that China might indeed become the first country in modern times to outlaw the killing of unborn children, after having allowed and even mandated it. This is because the Chinese are not as ideological as their Western leftists. To them abortion was what they thought would bring them out of poverty. To the Westerners, abortion was a way to rebel against God and former Christendom's cultural and moral heritage, through the 'liberation' of women, which of course, has been the enslavement of women to their sexual appetites. The Chinese have no time for this nonsense; they are materialists. If killing hundreds of millions of children is what they think will bring them wealth, then kill hundreds of millions they shall. They have finally realised that children are not a cause of poverty, but rather a nation's greatest resource, and now they are despreate to increase the birthrate. The easiest and cheapest way is to simply outlaw the killing of children, and you can be sure that if they think that will help their bottom line, then it is exactly what they will do.

I recently read that the Chinese have spoken about introducing a tax on those who don't have children. In other words, my prediction is not far off from being realised.

A bridge collapsed killing at least 35 in Genoa, Italy. This collapse affected me more personally than most other tragedies since I am certain I drove over that very bridge last summer on my way to Florence. In other words, I could have been one of those people. The Italian government, with Salvini at the helm, blamed it on the EU, given it has forced Italy into budget cuts. I hope that was a statement brought out more by being overcome by emotions more than calculated political opportunism, because even by modern political discourse, that is stretching political truthiness beyond breaking point. I do like Salvini a lot, but that was well below the belt. There is much blame to go around, but the EU cannot be blamed for this.

The EU, to the extent it can even be blamed for forcing the Italians to attempt to live within their means, simply called for budget cuts. I am quite certain they never mandated that these cuts be on vital infrastructure. As one good piece pointed out, if Italy did not invest so much on the NATO racket, it might have had more to invest in its infrastructure. Instead of buying fighter jets costing hundreds of millions of euros, they could build very good bridges for much less than that, and save lives while doing it, instead of taking them.  Instead of going along with sanctions on Russia which could have brought billions which might have been used on infrastructure, they decided to go along with the American racket. They could have stood for their sovereignty in both cases. Instead they decided to put the money into the hands of the U.S. military-industrial complex, and the lives this and similar decisions took just ended up being their own.

Russia kept warning against a false-flag chemical-weapons attack in Syria, even providing evidence to the OPCW and the U.N.. The U.S., meanwhile, continued to protect its Syrian Islamists by making the militants know that any false or hoax flag conducted on them would lead to strikes on Syrian government positions, and being the lap dogs they are, the British and French followed suite. This comes as the Syrians and their Russian allies are preparing the final assault on the last major Islamist strong-hold in Syria, having cleared most of the country, despite American interference. The Netherlands, in turn, decided to end support for Syrian militant groups, which confirmed what we have been saying all along - that militants in Syria have been backed up by secular Western countries - in addition to Arab sheiks and Jewish zionists...

Pages

Subscribe to Bergoglio psychophants