Francis is stupid. He has the brain of a slow man without an education ranting at the pub. Only add microphones, and journalists.
Among the many senseless statements of the Pope there is the – recently repeated in Turin, but not new at all – sweeping condemnation of the arms industry.
Firstly, the common sense: to condemn weapons as evil is as intelligent as to condemn Nutella, or kitchen knives, as evil. Yes, you can kill yourself with Nutella: but this makes you stupid, not Nutella evil. Yes, you can butcher people with kitchen knives, but this makes you, not the knife, evil.
But let us look at the Gospel:
Jesus states he has not come to bring peace, he has come with a sword. (Mt 10:34). It is clear even to my cat that the sword here has an extremely positive connotation. The sword is, symbolically, what Christ brings to us.
Poor Francis is and old nincompoop. If he weren’t, he would notice the huge statue of St. Michael the Archangel at the top of Castel Sant’Angelo. Brandishing a huge sword.
Jesus also ordered the Disciples to buy swords, at the cost of having to sell their cloak if needs be.
But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one
It is obvious even to my cat that Jesus does not have anything against either weapons used as self-defence, or entire armies.
He actually even speaks of twelve legions of angels, directly referring to the Roman military structures (Mt 26:52). He could have said great multitudes, he said twelve legions. You are supposed to think of a huge, well-ordered, perfectly efficient, absolutely deadly army of angels, not simply “a great quantity of them”.
I have long thought alcohol may play a role in the ramblings of this man, and I have not changed my mind. However, when the man goes so far as to write an encyclical full of extremist rants and third-hand, fully discredited fake “science” you know that he does not need fernet to talk like an idiot, because in his sober state he fulfills the requirements brilliantly.
By the by, I have read a beautiful article about the sophisticated weapons of the Swiss Guard (The site? Arms.com! Oh the irony!) , and their training not only with modern firearms, but even with the old ones. These are people who could hack an aggressor with their own short swords, or make of them “aggressor on a stick” with their pikes, in no times. Using… what, again?
Summa summarum? If you ask Francis, Jesus was evil. Armies protecting our freedom and property are evil. Those who protect Francis himself are evil. Those who sold weapons to all of the above mentioned are evil.
But Francis, who profits of the very weapons defending him; he is, as you all all know, humble and good.
The rumour is alive that The Most Astonishing Hypocrite In Church History (TMAHICH) might be about to abolish the Swiss Guards altogether.
I am not sure this rumour has any basis. What I know is that this would be, if executed, very much like Francis: with one stroke, he would do a great favour to the army of sodomites walking around the Vatican – and able to go in and out without too many questions asked by inflexible Swiss soldiers – whilst at the same time looking as the simple, humble pope so allergic to pomp and circumstance.
In addition, you must know that the Swiss Guards are chosen among Swiss families of unquestionable Catholic tradition, and remain in charge only for a limited amount of time. It’s not that they are sent on the sidewalk, or consigned to destitution. The end of the institution would simply deprive them of a great honour and of a wonderful addition to their CV.
Of course, the Gendarmeria would remain. But these are professional policemen, with a family and a mortgage. They aren’t likely to pose too many questions about who goes in or out and, being Italian, they would most rapidly understand where the wind is blowing.
No, the problems of the fags are really the Swiss Guards, as we have seen already in the past (search this blog). In this perspective, it makes sense that the homos ask Francis what kind of useless pomp this one of the Guards is.
The problem is, though, that the Swiss Guards are a rather beloved Roman (in the broader sense) institution, the darlings of Romans and tourists alike. It is not only that they are only a part of the landscape; they are a part of the Roman heart; a bit like like the Corazzieri, the tall soldiers of a Carabinieri elite unit working as Presidential Guard. If, therefore, Francis were to just get rid of them, very many among the people would start to question what kind of mentality, and what kind of man, this is.
You see, when you make the calligraphers redundant (spare a prayer for the poor devils and their families if it really comes to that: unemployment in Rome is always a tragedy, but unemployment as a calligrapher must truly be a nightmare. I have not read any news about that, so I fear the worse) the general public does not really notice it. But when there are no Swiss Guards at the entrance, they notice it immediately.
Perhaps Francis will try some other solution that keeps both the people and the fags happy; like, say, suspending the Swiss Guard service at night so that they are “allowed to sleep”. Insert here some sugary story about how devastated Francis was at knowing about their long night watches in the cold and damp Roman nights, and Bob’s your uncle…
We shall see. There is no feat of which this Pope would be incapable of, if he were to think he has something to gain from it; and his behaviour suppressing the Vatican report on the homos abundantly shows he has protected them from day one in exchange for their help in his election.
Francis is, if not an old homo himself, certainly a man of the homo lobby in the Vatican. He has already removed a commander guilty of being too “Swiss” with his own fags. It remains to see how far he will go.
A dark, dirty, lewd old man, this one. I am pretty sure his ideal of the Swiss Guards is like in the video below. So un-threatening, un-Swiss, and judgment-free…
O dear Pope Benedict, why have you been so gullible…
The Pope has removed the head of the Swiss Guards and has sent him home for being… too much of a guard. He has also profited of the occasion to blame the man for his professionalism.
Yours truly is more than a tad cynical, and believes in Giulio Andreotti's quip, that “he who thinks badly of others commits a sin, but he is very often right”.
Let us, then, connect a couple of dots, and make a couple of hypotheses.
1. Francis feels safe enough in the Vatican. He doesn't like order, discipline, duty. He removes the head of the Swiss guard – who obviously like them – and feels good in the process. This is the “innocent” (stupid, but innocent) Francis.
2. Ricca & Co. Want more freedom to roam around at night, to get out and let people in. The rigid security of the Guards causes continuous problems by not allowing, or making a ruckus, everytime trannies and junkies should be allowed not only within the Leonine Walls, but even in the same building where the Pope lives. They refuse the homo junkies entry, and demand that the Pope authorises the entry. Ricca and his band of faggots get angry. The head of the guards is removed. This is the “accomplice of perverts” Francis.
3. Francis is fed up with the head of security obliging him to a rigid security standard. No going out at night among the assorted perverts for him. No tranny voyeurism. No smell of homosexual sheep. No plunging in that world of dirt, desperation, and corruption that seems to outright excite him. No questionable people inside, either. This cannot go on, can it now? Less rigidity! More freedom! Who the man thinks he is, a soldier? This is, in case you haven't got it, the pervert Francis.
These are just three possible scenarios. Feel free to make your own.
Before you think all this is unrealistic, reflect on this:
1. There were rumours of the Pope roaming the streets of Rome at night already. The Pope never denied. One like Benedict would have had strong words about it. One like Francis wants, at the very least, you to think he might do it. One wonders.
2. Swiss guards have already reported about the harassment from homosexual prelates within the very Leonine Walls.
3. The Pope lives under the very roof of a notorious faggot, and isn't fazed a bit.
4. It is known that several “gay saunas” are located in the immediate vicinity of the Vatican.
5. Whilst in and out of perverts certainly happened before, the Pope now living in the Domus Sanctae Marthae creates a very special security environment and very obvious security concerns. The edifice lies at the very boundaries of the Vatican City.
6. Many faggots have been killed from fag prostitutes wanting money from them. Pasolini is an example. Versace is another one. I certainly forget several others.
He who thinks badly of others commits a sin, but is very often right.
He who thinks badly of this Pope is merely connecting the dots.
Do you remember the famous 300 page reports that was in everyone's minds – and blogs – around Christmas 2012? The one commissioned by then Pope Benedict XVI and concerning homosexual infiltration in the Vatican?
The last thing I remember is that Benedict had decided to put the report at the disposal of his successor, and that the dimension of the report and the little that had emerged indicated that things were serious indeed.
Nothing has emerged of the report since. We do not know whether Francis even bothered to read it. For all we know he might have put it in his fireside and used it as a humble way to heat his rather extensive humble quarters at the Domus Sanctae Marthae.
In the meantime, we are informed a former Swiss Guard states he has received sexual advances from around two dozen clerical homos during his permanence at the Vatican, among them an undetermined number of bishops and one Cardinal. Swiss Guard soldiers generally stay two years. Do your math.
One wonders. The sin of the sodomites has utterly disappeared from the Vatican radar screens after Francis' election, as we are invited to not “obsess” about such trivial things as a sin crying to Heaven for vengeance. All the while, the Pontiff talks day in and day out of a new theology of mercy and doubt, according to which doctrinal security is bad, a priest must smell of favela, morality is not “pastoral”, and “who are we to judge”. A turn of phrase used by the Pontiff about, erm, the homosexual prelate running the hotel in which he lives. If it sounds creepy, it's because it is.
I do not know about you, but this sounds like open complicity with sodomy to me.
In the meantime the report, if it still exists, lies locked in some very robust safe, protected from the indiscreet eyes of whistleblowers.
We live in strange and disturbing times. And we have a very strange, and very disturbing Pope.