COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE INDEPENDENT
First, the silly pope is speaking only for the
establishment, something senior levels of the Church have always been an
intimate part of.
This pope's entire term has been characterized very much by
his own form of populism.
All the show and
publicity over no traditional papal apartment, no fancy cars, etc.
The papacy obviously is not a democracy, but what is wrong
with "populism" in a democracy anyway?
Nothing, of course.
What these establishment words really intend to suggest is
that we are seeing incipient fascism, and despite that notion being promoted
daily by our dishonest and self-interested corporate press, it is utter
nonsense with no basis in fact.
This false theme just reflects the establishment lashing out
over the seeming loss of its new world order, and, by the way, was there ever a
more creepy, fascist-tinged phrase than "new world order"?
Second, Hitler was not elected, and talking this way
reflects pure historical ignorance, yet I’ve read it a number of times. So much
for the idea of people learning from the past.
Hitler, in his period of trying to be elected, never got
more than about 37% of the vote.
He was appointed
Chancellor by an aged (some would say, senile) President von Hindenburg, who
was tired of the political turmoil in the streets of the time.
Hitler then quickly proceeded to seize absolute power with a
wave of measures following the staged Reichstag fire event.
Now, more than a few observers have seen parallels between
the Reichstag fire and all the measures which followed 9/11 and the beginning
of the effort in earnest by America to establish a “new world order.”
I don’t know and remain open to whatever full evidence would
reveal, but it is always true that big, sudden, watershed events in history,
plotted ahead by leaders, were accompanied by massive lies.
