Russia

As far as the Vatican goes, this was a slow news week, which is good. The biggest news of the week, without a doubt, was the re-election to the Russian presidency of Vladimir Putin, who was rewarded for his stellar work.

Few were surprised at the outcome, not least since the polls showed him to be winning with a very large margin. The goal they had set was 70/70, which is to say, a 70% of a 70% voter turnout. The turnout was not quite as high as 70% - I believe it came up just short - but the support was even higher.

Here we have a man who towers above all heads of state in the world today, one who has charted a course which has seen his country steer away from destruction and utter despair into once more being a powerhouse. There is no doubt that most of the scaremongering regarding Russia is blantant propaganda and lies, but there is also little doubt that Russia is a feared nation once again, and most of the credit for that has to go to Putin, a man respected by most who have not not fallen victim to the propaganda of mainline Western narratives.

In the Soviet days, 'Russia' was feared, but today it is very much also a respected country. It is respected by many in the global South, and in the East, and in Latin America, because it has shown that one does not have to bend over to appease the West. In fact, Russia's greatest error after the collapse of the Western Union was allowing itself to be lulled into a sense of friendship with the West, for which it paid very dearly, with the country being looted almost literally to the point of bankruptcy.

There are those who, predictably, have said that the elections were rigged, although they have received a passing grade from observers. What many will find striking is the nothin that 76% of a country's electorate can vote for a single man, can support a man so as to essentially obliterate any meaningful opposition to him.

What a lot of people don't realise is that in Putin, Russians see a man they can trust, a man who they know loves his fatherland, and who has spent his life trying to serve his nation. Most Russians will definitely not agree with everything Vladimir Putin does, and neither do I, because the man is not perfect, as no one is. However, I doubt you will find many Russians who question whether what Putin does politically he does because he thinks it is the best for Russia.

Of which rulers (and I call them rulers and not leaders for a reason) in the West can we say that? Not even Trump comes close, because Trump's "America first" mantra in reality seems to translate to 'Israel first', to 'military-industrial complex first'. We definitely cannot say that about the rulers of the U.K, nor Sweden, nor France. What people also fail to realise is that Russians, although diverse in many ways with regards to ethnicity, have been forged by a common history, and they have a common sense of duty towards their nation.

It probably deserves mention that most Russians are 'ethnically' Russian, but the broader point is that their is a national sense of being Russian, and it would seem as though Russians want a strong ruler who they can respect and who also gets others to respect their motherland. It would seem as though Putin is a near-perfect embodiment of this rule, who actually is a very good leader as well.

One could make a comparison between Putin and Bergoglio, and if one can do it while maintaining a straight face one would realise that the two are polar opposites. The less said about the cabal running things in the Vatican today the better, but I shall say that those who claim that Bergoglio seriously thinks he is acting for the better of the Church, are more than kliley trying to convince themselves of that more than anything else.

I know that this is Edward Pentin's line, but how such a learned and good-natured man can say that in public I really do not understand. He knows more about Bergoglio's evil machinations and the mess they are making than most, so his claim does assume a seriousness that it would not otherwise merit. However, given all the scandals that have been uncovered, all the scheming, all the anti-Catholic statements, I really would like Edward Pentin to elaborate on how exactly it is he concludes that Bergoglio is trying his best and not working out of sheer malice.

So much for intentions. As for outcomes, I'll not waste anyone's time comparing Bergoglio's to Putins save to mention that one has turned his country into a feared and respected nation, while the other is well on his way to turning the Church into an obscene and blasphemous joke. That he will not succeed in his evil plans is neither here nor there, but it says much of the man that those who have always defended the papacy and papal authority are now his most fierce opponents, and that even the general audience is more or less tired of this lewd man, appropriately enough showing up in fewer and fewer numbers at his general audiences, such that some mockingly wonder whether they are still free to attend. As the elections in Russia showed, the people in Russia have taken the opposite view, and feel entirely content with handing over to Putin all the power he needs to do what he thinks is good for the country. If his record is anything to go by, it probably will be.

Finally, it is also interesting to note that Putin got more votes this time around than in 2012, whereas with Bergoglio, genuine Catholics seem to find him more offensive by the month, if not...

Football is one of my biggest TV interests. My favourite league to watch is the English Premier League.

It used to be one of few areas uninffected by the general effiminacy and homosexualism of the U.K. establishment, although it always had its fair share of political correctness, which has been increasing beyond all control. If it continues on its current trajectory, I fear I might be pushed into not watching it.

The latest scandal to hit the league is the firing of a scouting director because he had informed someone else, form what I gather to be an internal memo, that they were not interested in any more African players. His reasons were very simple, and not at all racist - that many of the ones the club have bought have ended up being trouble-makers when they are found themselves out of the starting line-up. I feel sorry for the man, as he seemed to have a hard time understanding why his letter should have become an issue in the first place. He pointed out that he would not also recommend Russian players, because they seem to have a hard time settling into the country. None of these are hateful things, simply his professional opinion, which he is bound to give before his employer shells out milions of pounds on buying the rights to a player.

If the man had been wrong on his professional opinion, for which he gets paid quite well, then he should have been challenged on professional grounds by being disproved. Instead, the media whipped up a storm over it though and he was gone. Everyone is to blame in this, apart from the sporting director, whose only fault is in being honest in his professional evaluation. Honesty, alas, is no longer permitted in the once 'Great' Britain, the same country which imprisons children in hospitals so they cannot get potentially life-saving treatment elsewhere.

In Syria, a Russian jet was downed by anti-aircraft missiles. Nobody knows who provided the rebels with the missules, but it is likely to be the anti-Assad forces, and although the list of thos miscreants is long, we do know that the Western powers have sent weapons to Islamists since the beginning of the war. Whoever is to blame should be warned that the Russians are not in the slightest amused about losing one of their pilots. This war might get much hotter and very soon.

On the topic of Russia, we had the vice-president of the detestable Obama regime telling us that Russia is in "enormous decline". A commentator writing for RT corrected the narrative. Now, Russia Today is obviously a government mouthpiece, but allegations that Russia is in decline keep propping up. The charge is so manifestly false that one wonders whether all of Washington's power brokers are lying to the people of whether they are seriously this deluded. Even Russias demographic problems - their greatest danger - are nowhere near as catastrophic as it is cliamed.

We also had the now infamous "Kremlin List", which was a list drawn up by people within the Trump administration listing threats to Russia within the Russian political establishment. Keen observers noted that the political list was virtually taken from the Kremlin's website, titles and all, with the list of economid figures being taken from the Forbes list of Russian's businessmen.  Our main man Vladimir Putin joked that he was offended/disappointed (different tests depending on the translation) to find himself outside of it. It's a good thing that the Russian leadership has a good sense of humour to go with their wisdom, or the world would be a far more dangerous place than it already is.

Turning to the Church, we have to thank the faithful laity, because when bishops abandon their flock, we still have people willing to put their necks on the line for Holy Mother Church and her Bridegroom. This time it is by launching a new academy called  John Paul II Academy for Human Life and the Family which will work to futeher God's view on these issues. The striking thing is that these are the pople who were kicked out of the Pontifical Academy for Life by Bergoglio the defiler. It is sad when truthful and faithful Catholics no longer have a place in the Church's official institutions.

From Sandro Magister, we were told that Bergoglio intends to attack Humanae Vitae not directly, but through winks and shrugs. His henchmen are already doing it, many of them having replaced faithful Catholics at John Paul's Academy for Life, the above-mentioned.

For my money, it is much more likely that Bergoglio's attack on Humanae Vitae will be much more direct, something along the lines of "it can no longer be said..."

I finally got around to wathing that famous Jordan Peterson interview with the BBC. I did not find it to be the trouncing that many observers have made it out to be, although that was only because the annoying Newman woman kept interrupting him and throwing him of course, never allowing him to build up any steam on any of the topics on which he had received a question. It was actually interesting to observe her technique of disinformation. Step 1, ask a question . Step 2, rephrase his answer into something preposterous he never said, but which you had in your notes as a point of attack. Step 3, allow him a quick response to your ridiculous rephrasing. Step 4, change the topic to something wildy diffrent - "that's some segway", Peterson once remarked.

The most glaring example of Kathy losing the plot was when she said "So you''re basically saying that I should just stay home and play with my dolls". Had I been Peterson, I would like to think that I would have remarked, "Well, if that's what you understood to be my response, then good luck with that and if you can manage playiing with dolls then...