Whispers of Vipers

I should not be surprised that within 48 hours of the nomination of Pope Francis I to lead the Roman Catholic Church that some think they have found dirt on the Pontiff.  Accusations of Bergoglio being a collaborator with the military junta in Argentina.

The first article is written by Heracio Verbitsky and posted online at Alternet.org, a site funded by the Tides Foundation and George Soros' Open Society Initiative.  The other article is posted online at Huffington Post and is based upon the reporting of another Argentinian journolist Olga Wornat.

Both articles share one accusation, that Bergoglio actively helped the military junta in the kidnapping of Jesuit priests.  Wornat claims to have concrete proof that he was a collaborator including from Jesuits, but does not name anyone.  Verbitsky does name the two Jesuits, in fact unlike Wornat who just says the Jesuits in question worked with the guerrillas, he does go into detail saying Bergoglio told the Jesuits to stop what they were doing when Peron fell from power but they persisted and were picked up by the new military government.  And Bergoglio tried to get them released and after six months of harsh imprisonment the two Jesuits were released.

Verbitsky however must be considered a very biased writer in this regard.  A hostile witness perhaps or the Bill Ayers of Argentina.  He freely admits to being a communist guerrilla and did participate in shootings and quips 'luckily no one died.'  He was also accused of being involved in a plot that resulted in the death of 21 people in 1976, charges against him were only dropped due to the statue of limitations.  Strange for a person living in a glass house to accuse another.

Wornat's critical thinking processes are a bit challenged.  She claims to be Bergoglio's intimate and knows what he is thinking due to a book she wrote.  Which must come as a surprise to the people who have read Bergoglio's books.  Perhaps Wornat is trying to puff up her credentials by lying to the Huffington Post writer?  Looking at her list of publications, Wornat seems more in line with Kitty Kelly - writing unauthorized and titillating books.  Her book on Christina de Kirchner on the other hand seems to be a paean to Mrs. Kirchner.

What is really odd about the interview is Wornat's attitude in the Storni case.  Storni was an Argentine archbishop who had fled the country to seek sanctuary in the Vatican due to molestation charges.  Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, sent Storni back to Argentina to face justice.  Wornat seems to have issue with the Church paying for Storni's lawyer, was she expecting the Church to be unfair and merely throw Storni to the wolves?  Deny him the due process that Verbitsky enjoyed?  What the whole story does highlight is how Rome treated the case most seriously and also of Bergoglio being a fair man.  Hardly the dark past Wornat alludes to.

Drone Debate

Sen. Rand Paul [R-KY] just concluded an almost 13 hour long filibuster of the US Senate. This filibuster has delayed the confirmation by the full Senate of Brennan to head the CIA. The reason why Sen. Rand spoke, with able assistance for 13 hours, is very simple as he wants a simple answer to a very serious question.

Sen. Paul wants to know if the Obama administration, via the CIA that Brennan is nominated to head, is willing to use drones to kill American citizens on American soil without the due process of the law. Yes or no, that is all Sen. Paul wanted to know.

The response he got from Attorney General Eric Holder can be charitably called a 'maybe' answer. Two strawmen were brought out by Holder in his answer – Pearl Harbor and 9/11. There is a simple logical fault in using these two examples, neither attack was carried out by American citizens. Unlike Hassan Nidal at Ft. Hood or Timothy McVeigh at Oklahoma City.

In the case of Nidal and McVeigh, regular means were used to apprehend the killers. A routine traffic stop detained McVeigh long enough for them to connect the rental truck VIN to him. Nidal was bodily tackled and stopped in his killing spree.

So this administration wants a blank check to determine if an American citizen is an imminent danger. Without recourse to the American judicial system to rule if they have enough evidence to make such a finding. And then to send a remote control aircraft to kill that American citizen. Let me rephrase that, this administration wants to have the ability to assassinate American citizens on US soil without any oversight.

If you are not disturbed at that thought, just contemplate the government getting bad intelligence and sending out a drone on that information. Remember that wedding party in Iraq that American aircraft bombed by accident? Now imagine that happening on Main St in Peoria, IL – a drone fires a Hellfire missile at someone's SUV. Its noon in Peoria. The Hellfire hits and detonates, exploding the gas tank for good measure. Besides Betty Sue and her twin girls getting murdered because of bad information, how many people in the surrounding area just got killed or maimed also.

Now do you think armed drones over the US is such a good idea?

P.S. You may want to look up a movie from the 1980s called 'Blue Thunder' with Roy Scheider. LAPD is loaned a new helicopter. An armed helicopter that can also spy. Scheider's character Murphy finds out the organization supplying Blue Thunder has an ulterior motive of eliminating domestic threats. This administration is trying to replace Blue Thunder with something almost like a video game, just press the R1 on your X-Box controller to fire a Hellfire missile to blow up the target and get Achievement Points which is now a medal that can be worn between the Silver Star and Bronze Star.