Archive for adolf eichmann

Pedophile Pope Francis

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , on December 11, 2020 by andelino

Celibacy can be faked only for so long. It was just a matter of time before the world learned of “horny” Pope Francis Instagram “fetish.”

Natalia Garibotto’s Instagram pic of her dressed in a racy schoolgirl uniform in front of a locker, is the lucky recipient of that first “Like” and it shall forever reside in “His Holiness’” history. The Bang Energy model seems to understand the importance of this moment.

“My mum may hate my ass pics, but the Pope be double-tapping. At least I’m going to heaven,” Nata Gata, 27, quipped on the post that caught the attention of the “horny” Pope on his Instagram account. The “Like” has since been removed.

The Vatican has launched an internal investigation into how Pope Francis’ official Instagram account “liked” a sexy photo of the bare-bottomed Brazilian model. The Pope’s verified Instagram account has yet to comment on which person from his media team was responsible for the “Like” or if anyone will be fired for this transgression.

Nothing like a good ol’ internal Vatican probe to expose “Pedophile” Pope Francis secret fetish. Seems they are not happy that “horny” Francis is going around clicking “like” on racy ass pics on Instagram. Come on, Vatican, join us in the 21st century. You can still go to Heaven even if you get a little chubbed up for a few racy Instagram’s every now and again, that’s part of being alive. Part of being a sinful human being.

Ever since God’s creation man and woman have been trying to sneak around the Lord to get their rocks off. The Catholic church took a very ill-advised U-Turn at some point, but if now all they are doing is “double tapping” pictures on the internet, I think we can all consider that a major victory.

Personally I think “horny” ol’ Francis might have accidentally stumbled into a genius church marketing plan: “double taps for heaven.” If Catholics comes across a “racy” pic looking enticing simply “double tap” and you will go to Heaven while sexy Instagram models getting rid of their sins. Everyone wins.

I always thought Catholic priests were only into little altar boys.

The Roman Catholic Church has been mired in “pedophilia” scandals forever. On November 10, the Vatican issued a 461-page report on former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. The report acknowledged that bishops, cardinals, and even popes dismissed reports that McCarrick was a “homosexual pedophile”, allowing him to stay in power for decades.

Perhaps the most explosive revelation of the report is that Pope John Paul II, who was declared a Catholic saint in 2013, received numerous confirmed reports that McCarrick slept with seminarians, yet the pope still appointed him archbishop of Washington, D.C., in 2000. John Paul believed McCarrick’s denials rather than the findings of a Vatican investigation.

The report also revealed that Pope Benedict XVI asked McCarrick to retire in 2006 after Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò questioned the extent of McCarrick’s perverted sexual activities. But because McCarrick swore on his “oath as a bishop” that the allegations about him were false, Benedict decided not to order a full inquiry into his actions.

“Viganò’s superiors, Secretary of State Cardinal Bertone and Substitute Archbishop Sandri, shared Viganò’s concerns, and Cardinal Bertone presented the matter directly to Pope Benedict XVI,” the report says. “Ultimately, the path of a canonical process to resolve factual issues and possibly prescribe canonical penalties was not taken. Instead, the decision was made to appeal to McCarrick’s conscience and ecclesial spirit by indicating to him that he should maintain a lower profile and minimize travel for the good of the church.”

Pope Francis removed McCarrick from the clergy in 2018 after an investigation confirmed that McCarrick had sexually molested adult men and young boys. After Francis defrocked McCarrick, Archbishop Viganò published an 11-page testimonial revealing that he warned Francis that McCarrick was a “serial predator” in 2013, but that Francis did nothing about it for the next five years.

The new Vatican report alleges that neither Archbishop Viganò nor anyone else provided Francis with any documentation regarding allegations against McCarrick, except for rumors that he slept with adult men in the 1980s. It was not until Francis received allegations of sexual abuse from a former altar boy that he took action.

The new McCarrick report is an attempt by the Vatican to restore Francis’s credibility at a time when traditionalist Catholics—like Viganò—are calling on him to resign. The report faults John Paul II and Benedict XVI for McCarrick’s rise to prominence while sparing Francis. Now that Francis is promising to rid the Catholic Church of sex abuse, it looks like he may have escaped the penalty for any role he played in the cover-up.

Yet the McCarrick scandal goes far deeper than most realize! Cardinal McCarrick was active in United States politics for decades, controversially weighing in on a debate over whether pro-abortion politicians should be barred from Communion.

When U.S. bishops gathered in Denver in 2004 to decide whether Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry should be able to receive Communion, McCarrick said he thought it would not be “pastorally wise and prudent” to deny Communion to pro-abortion politicians because it could “turn the Eucharist into a perceived source of political combat.”

In addition to sexually abusing children and supporting pro-abortion politicians, McCarrick was also a chief architect of a secret Vatican concordat with China. During the papacy of John Paul II, Cardinal McCarrick became the first Western cardinal to set foot in mainland China since Mao Zedong’s Communist revolution. Between 1996 and 2016, McCarrick visited China eight times in an “unofficial” capacity to advocate for Vatican-Chinese reconciliation.

On two visits, McCarrick met with Fr. Shu-Jie Chen, vice rector of the Catholic Seminary in Beijing, and a member of the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association. According to a report from the U.S. Embassy to the Vatican, Fr. Shu-Jie Chen “downplayed persecution of the underground church” and called faithful Chinese Catholics “uneducated.” He wanted the Vatican and Chinese Catholics to start compromising with China’s Politburo.

Despite the stand John Paul II took against Communist Russia, Benedict XVI wanted the Vatican to reestablish diplomatic relations with Communist China. Allowing McCarrick to continue his “unofficial” missions to China was part of his strategy to make this happen. It was not until 2011 that Benedict forced McCarrick to withdraw from his diplomatic efforts because of allegations that he was sexually abusing minors. But Francis allowed him to resume his missions in 2013, just months into his pontificate.

McCarrick later suggested that the similarities between Xi Jinping and Pope Francis could be “a special gift for the world.” After his last visit to China in 2016, McCarrick said, “A lot of things that China worries about, Pope Francis worries about, about the care of poor, older people, children, our civilization and especially the ecology. I see a lot of things happening that would really open many doors because President Xi and his government are concerned about things that Pope Francis is concerned about.”

McCarrick may be out of the Catholic clergy, but the “secret deal” he helped Benedict and Francis negotiate with China is still in place. It gives an atheist regime a direct role in appointing Catholic bishops and does nothing to help the millions of underground Chinese Catholics suffering under Xi Jinping’s dictatorship. But neither John Paul, Benedict, nor Francis cared enough about Catholic children to investigate the pedophile allegations against McCarrick, so why would they care enough about Chinese Catholics to speak against Communist China?

McCarrick also helped the Obama administration enlist the help of Francis in establishing diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Communist Cuba, something Benedict began pushing the U.S. to do in 2012.

Amid the current Catholic pedophile scandal, many analysts make a lot of the apparent differences between popes Benedict and Francis. But they are not as different as most imagine. They disagree on civil unions for homosexual couples. They disagree on whether Lutheran housewives can take Communion with their Catholic husbands. And rumor has it, they may disagree on priestly celibacy requirements. But when it comes to covering a pedophile scandal so a sexual predator can help the Vatican establish diplomatic relations with Communist dictatorships, the two living popes are mostly in agreement!

“The Roman Catholic Church is mired in a pedophilia scandal in several nations. However, there is a far worse scandal in that church that we all should be deeply concerned about. Most of the media is not even exposing it. The real Vatican scandal revolves around the ratlines of the sixth head of the Holy Roman Empire—Germany and the Vatican in World War II.”

Germany fought to keep files sealed that detail Nazi Adolf Eichmann’s life on the run before Mossad agents captured him. Eichmann was a Nazi senior assault unit leader who escaped to Argentina after World War II with the help of Bishop Alois Karl Hudal, a Catholic cleric who ran Vatican ratlines helping former Nazis and Ustashi agents to find safe havens in overseas countries. Pope Pius XII allowed Hudal to smuggle Nazis into Argentina for the same reason that Pope Francis allowed McCarrick to open negotiations with Communist China: “to resurrect the Holy Roman Empire.”

Uki Goñi is an Argentine author whose research focuses on the Vatican’s role in helping Nazi criminals escape to Argentina. In a 2015 editorial for the New York Times, he wrote that you couldn’t understand Francis without acknowledging that his worldview was shaped in Juan Peron’s Argentina. That is why Pope Francis often warns about the “excesses of capitalism” while expressing sympathy for “communism” and other forms of “socialism.” He follows the sort of Catholic socialism that was practiced in Argentina during Peron’s presidency.

To resurrect the “Holy Roman Empire”, Benedict and Francis first need to defeat American capitalism. They need to convince Catholic nations across Europe and Latin America to adopt a more socialist way of running their economies. And what better way to accomplish this than a deal with the world’s leading Communist economy? Benedict may have told McCarrick to “maintain a lower profile and minimize travel for the good of the church,” but Francis sent him right back to China to continue his mission. The secret deal he helped lay the groundwork for may go a long way in helping the Vatican restructure the world economy.

The Bible describes a great church in the end time that holds significant political influence with “the kings of the earth.” It has special power over a union of nations described in symbolic terms as a “beast” (Revelation 17). This description can only apply to one church in modern history—a church that meddles in the affairs of nations and considers itself mother to all—a church aligned with the Holy Roman Empire.

Many prophecies reveal what this church will do in the time just ahead of us. In Isaiah 47, for example, God calls this church the “daughter of Babylon” and the “lady of kingdoms.” Verse 6 of this chapter prophesies that God will deliver His people—speaking of the modern-day nations descended from ancient Israel, more specifically the United States to this “lady of kingdoms” because of their many sins.

Today, many Catholic leaders are engaging in sexual perversion even as the Vatican negotiates with some of the world’s worst dictators. If Francis—or his successor—can bring Europe and China together in an alliance against the United States, then Americans and Jews will learn what it means to be victims of the “Holy Roman Empire!”

 Vatican Financial Scandal Deepens as Search Uncovers Cash, Gold Coins in Official’s Home

Auschwitz 75th Anniversary

Posted in uncategorized with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 1, 2020 by andelino

Auschwitz 75th Anniversary

The voices of victims are paramount, but for its betterment, mankind must also strive to comprehend the motivations of the killers. On a day when the news was a brim with the deadly potential of the Wuhan “coronavirus”, the world remembered the murderous impact of a deadlier virus: “humanity itself.”

The 75th anniversary of the “liberation” of Auschwitz, the most notorious of the “Nazi concentration and death camps”, was commemorated on ground zero itself, in Poland. European and Israeli leaders were present, but the most “searing” testimonies were delivered by survivors.

Victims remembered having hair “hacked” from their heads and numbers being “tattooed” on their arms. Of the cries of those being “shoved” into gas chambers. And of the stench of “incinerated” human flesh.

This is critically important to know. The voice of “victims” is paramount when it comes to the many, many “cruel crimes” committed at Auschwitz, one – “genocide” – is the most terrible in the judicial lexicon.

These “atrocities” have been burned onto the pages of history; they have also been enshrined in art. The literature of Eli Wiesel and Primo Levi provide eloquent testimonies to the unprecedented “suffering” of the Jews under the Nazis.

Given the sheer “scale” of what happened at Auschwitz, and the deliberate “intent” behind it, the world “deserves” the fullest possible accounting. Yet while world leaders and victims were “present”, two groups who could help deliver a complete accounting were glaringly “absent.”

One group was those who made the day as the “liberators” of the camp. The other group was the “perpetrators” who carried out a planned “slaughter of humans” in numbers so vast that if the victims were gathered together, their corpses would overflow scores of sport stadiums.

Where were the “Red Army” veterans who overran all of Germany’s “extermination” camps? Why was Russian President Vladimir Putin not present? And where were veterans of the  German “SS” political troops who carried out this unimaginable “slaughter?”

Many historic films have commemorated the “Nazi” genocides. The movie “Come and See” (1985) showed exactly how a “massacre” was undertaken, through the eyes of a teenager in Byelorussia.

The “liberators” should be lauded for obvious reasons. In the struggle against Nazism, the USSR took on the brunt of the German fighting force. The cost was virtually unimaginable: “27 million dead.” That metric alone should have granted Moscow a somber “voice at the table” of remembrance.

Certainly, there are historical complexities and issues. The Soviets not only liberated wartime Poland, they occupied post-war Poland and held it until the end of the Cold War. Even so: “Any accurate historical reckoning demands that they should not be pushed out of the picture.”

More broadly, the fact that the liberators of Auschwitz were “unrepresented” points to a gap in Western cultural memory. To this day, the machinery of the “Holocaust” is not well understood among Western public’s. In fact, every single one of the “extermination death camps” was liberated not by the Western Allies, but by the “Red Army.”

For those unfamiliar with the “Holocaust”, the line between “concentration camp” and “death camp” may be a fine distinction. After all, footage of British troops liberating “Belsen” and US troops liberating “Dachau” was so sickening that some believed, at the time the films were first shown, that they could only be products of over-wrought “Allied” propaganda. As we now know, they were not.

Yet these two camps – and others liberated by the Western Allies – were not extermination camps. They were “concentration” camps. In those camps, the heaped bodies, the stacks of dying in tiered bunks,  the crowds of skeletal survivors, were a result of exhaustion, malnutrition, disease. In short, they were very largely victims of mismanagement and callousness by Nazi authorities.

The “extermination camps” were different. There, “murder” was not a byproduct. It was the “sole” aim.  There were six of these man-made hells. “Belzek, Chelmo, Sobibor and Treblinka” were pure killing centers. Extermination sub-camps were also set up in concentration/labor camps: “Auschwitz-Birkenstock and Majdanek.”

All were in Poland. The “victims” in these camps were not conveyed to these places to be “slave” laborers. They were taken there, by the train load, for the express purpose of being “slaughtered.”

 Schindler’s List is a good clip about humanity amid horror.

This brings us to the “perpetrators.” At Auschwitz there were no elderly men or women in faded black uniforms with death’s heads on their caps and the double lightning flash of the SS on their collars.

Of course, their absence is understandable. Were any SS to appear – perhaps to offer excuses; perhaps to beg for forgiveness; perhaps to defiantly croak a final voice to their murderous creed – they would be arrested on sight. And such arrests would be just. Yet humanity – if it is to learn anything from its darkest hour – should give history’s worst “killers” a hearing.

History is an academic discipline. It teaches the young and the interested. As with criminology, it analyzes why things happen. We absolutely must try to understand why our fellow humans could act as they did in “Treblinka.”

To create a dedicated rail station in a forest clearing, complete with a faux ticket office, a clock with painted hands and even a band playing to welcome to arriving trains. To cheerfully “separate” men from women and children on the platform; to politely explain to them why they needed to “divest” themselves of their belongings; and to then to suggest they “strip” themselves for a shower.

“We need to understand why these same men could change in an instant – brandishing weapons and attack dogs to herd the naked, defenseless people through a corridor of barbed wire into a chamber set behind the platform. There, doors would be slammed, fumes released. Subsequently, the cadavers would be placed on giant griddles made of rail lines and incinerated.”

I am not arguing that understanding should replace justice. Some crimes are only punishable with a bullet or a noose.

Adolf Eichmann was renditioned from South America to Israel by Israeli agents to account for himself. A uniformed “bureaucrat” who did not pull a trigger, but who delivered millions of “victims” into the maw of the murder machine, Eichmann went to his “executioner” unrepentant. Other SS leaders, confronted with the “gravity” of their crimes, opened their eyes.

Rudolf Höss, the Auschwitz commandant, was granted the opportunity to pen his memoirs – subsequently published as Death Dealer with an introduction by Primo Levi – and confession by his Polish captors. In a West German prison, Franz Stangl, the commandant of Treblinka, agreed to extensive interviews with journalist Gitta Sereny for her research into the death camps, Into That Darkness.

Höss was “hanged” after penning his confession. Stangl died of “heart failure” less than one day after his last interview with Sereny.

The movie “The Painted Bird” (2019) compelled some audiences to “flee” theaters, while others applauded its unflinching gaze into the “face of horror.” Watch it at your peril.

“Never forget” requires accurate remembrance. It is easy to intone the clichés, “Never forget.” But without a basic understanding of what happened, what is to be forgotten? Today, there are multiple “misunderstandings” about the Nazi murder machine.

  • That it only impacted Jews. Actually, millions of other victims, notably Slavs, and including Gypsies and homosexuals, were also devoured.
  • That it was conducted by brutal thugs. Actually, Stangl was considered a gentleman by West German prison staff, and most commanders of the SS Einzatzgruppe death squads held PhD.
  • That “the commies were just as bad.” Actually, there were no industrialized extermination camps like Auschwitz-Birkenstock or Treblinka even in the worst of Stalin’s gulags, and even amid Mao Zedong’s most manic policies.

The Nazi “genocide” was the end terminus of prejudice. Prejudice, and mob mentality, remains rife across the world. To prevent prejudice from transitioning to a “Final Solution” we need a fully informed comprehension. That comprehension must extend beyond the barriers of “ethnicity, nationality and politics.”

And it must include the voices of the ”perpetrators”, for to prevent crime, the motivations of “criminals” must be understood.  Only by “hearing” these voices can such voices be “recognized, acknowledged, debated and defended” against.

Yet, there is a trend underway worldwide to “eradicate or whitewash” brutal history, with the intention of obviating “offense.” This trend extends from the destruction of “Confederate statuary to a refusal to countenance Swastikas, SS runes or Rising Sun emblems.”

It may be driven by good intentions, but is problematic. It is reminiscent of stabbing fingers into ears or thrusting heads into sand. At worst, it destroys evidence of crimes.

Case in point? “Treblinka.” The forested extermination zone where 800,000 men, women and children were “slaughtered” was destroyed and its site “camouflaged” with farm buildings, not by do-gooders eager to prevent “hurt” feelings, but by Nazis making a vain effort to “hide” evidence.

Fortunately for “humanity”, Auschwitz stands today as the ultimate “memorial of man’s inhumanity to man.” It is a hopefully everlasting monument that “reminds” us that the very worst can, indeed, happen “anytime” again.

Related issues cannot be “censored”; they must be “confronted.” Justices confront the “crimes of today”; historians confront the “crimes of yesterday.” Judgments, sentencing and condemnation must be informed by “free information and free debate” – the hallmarks of a moral civilization.

Above all, we must not “blind” ourselves to realities. The starkest reality of the Holocaust is simple but damning: “The Nazi genocide was not carried out by phantoms, aliens or monsters. It was perpetrated by our fellow humans.”

“To refuse to accept this, to refuse to interrogate the perpetrators; to decline to divine their motivations; to be blind to the potential of today’s prejudices becoming tomorrow’s Final Solutions, willfully denies ourselves critical knowledge for mankind’s betterment, and perhaps, its survival.”

75th anniversary of liberation of Nazi concentration camp Auschwitz

%d bloggers like this: