"Roosevelt's Pope"by, the Desertmonk
Pius XII could not be faulted if, when asked about his support regarding the apparitions of Fatima, he had instead replied "The Pope of Democracy, that's me!"Now, if the reader regards himself as "mainstream Joe public", and has drunken deeply of the Masonic bilge that passes for modern education, then he might as wellclose the book right now, for he is not going to see the point of this analysis. But for those of us whose point of departure is the life of Our Lord Jesus Christ
in unaldulterated clarity, and with just a smattering of historical knowledge, the words of this pope will begin to appear quite strange. Exhibit number one will be
this ditty from a letter he wrote to the American bishops at the onset of his pontificate: "To one who turns the pages of your history and reflects upon the causesof what has been accomplished it is apparent that the triumphal progress of Divine religion has contributed in
no small degree to the glory and prosperity which yourcountry now enjoys. It is indeed true that religion has its laws and institutions for eternal happiness but it is also undeniable that it dowers life here belowwith so many benefits that it could do no more even if the principal reason for its existence were to make men happy during the brief span of their earthly life. Itis a pleasure for Us to recall the well-remembered story. When Pope Pius VI gave you your first bishop in the person of the American John Carroll and set him overthe See of Baltimore, small and of slight importance was the Catholic population of your land. At that time, too, the condition of the United States was so perilousthat its structure and its very political unity were threatened by grave crisis. Because of the long and exhausting war the public treasury was burdened with debt,industry languised and the citizenry wearied by misfortunes was split into contending parties. This ruinous and critical state of affairs was put aright by thecelebrated George Washinton, famed for hiscourage and keen intelligence. He was a close friend of the bishop of Baltimore. Thus the Father of His Country and the
pioneer pastor of the Church in that land so dear to Us, bound together by the ties of friendship and clasping, so to speak, each the other's hand, form a picturefor their descendents, a lesson to all future generations, and a proof that reverence for the Faith of Christ is a holy and established principle of the Americanpeople, seeing that it is the foundation of morality and decency, consequently the source of prosperity and progress."
For the average, brainwashed American Catholic, these words ring true. And probably, such people are clueless that George Washington was a Freemason, a secretsociety that was condemned over a dozen times by the Roman Pontiffs from its inception in 1717. Archbishop Carroll, meanwhile, had a penchant for vernacular liturgies and preaching from the pulpits of the "separated brethren". (And rest assured that he never recalled that annoying dogma about the Apostolic Church being the sole ark of salvation, because apparently he did not believe that either.) These words will be elaborated further below. For the moment let us forward the pages of history to August 30th, 1943 and the Allied bombing of Rome. Here is a quote from a letter to President Roosevelt: "Recent events have naturally focused the world's attention for the moment on Italy, and much has been written on what policy she would or should now follow for her own best interests. Too many, we fear, take for granted that she is entirely free to follow the policy of her choice; and we have wished to express to your excellency our conviction that this is far
from true. Of her desire for peace and to be done with the war, there can be no doubt; but in the presence of formidable forces opposing the actuation or even the official declaration of that desire she finds herself shackled and quite without the necessary means of defending herself. If under such circumstances Italy is to be forced to bear devastating blows against which she is practically defenseless, we hope and pray that the military leader will find it possible to spare innocent civil populations and in particular churches and religious institutions the ravages of war. Already,we must recount with deep sorrow and regret, these figure very prominently among the ruins of Italy's most prosperous and important cities. But the message of assurance addressed to us by your excellency sustains Our hope, even in the face of bitter experience, that God's temples and the homes erected by Christian charity for the poor and sick and abandoned members of Christ's flock
may survive the terrible onslaught. May God in His merciful pity and love hearken to the universal cry of his children and let them hear once more the voice of
Christ say: Peace! We are happy on this occasion to renew the expression of our sincere good wishes to your excellency."
The above sounds more like the pathetic bleating of a sheep than the voice of the shepherd. Allow the author to indulge his knowledge of history for a few minutes, plant his buttocks squarely in the Holy Seat, and send the following hypothetical letter to dear Mr Roosevelt: "We hope this letter finds you well. As you know, We are the divinely appointed vicar of Jesus Christ, to whom both of us will render an account on His terrible Day of Judgment. For Our part, We have been entrusted with the faithful transmission of Apostolic Tradition, and its application for time and eternity. Ideologies, politics, and uniforms mean nothing to us insofar as they involve the passing and ephemeral things of this world. Lately, We have been accused of aiding and abbeting "enemies of the Allies" by nefarious persons who equate providing medical care and sustenance to wounded German and Italian soldiers, their wives and children, as acts of partisanship and aggression. On such specious grounds, such men have had the temerity to "punish" Us with the indiscriminate bombing of churches, schools, convents, monasteries, hospitals, orphanages, and other places of sanctuary. Such acts cry to Heaven for vengence.
"Allow Us to add, Mr President, that none of this comes as a particular surprise. Your country has a long and sordid history of making treaties with the European powers of Spain, Portugal, and France, with Mexico, and with the indiginous natives of your land, known as "Indians" and then subsequently breaking them. The history of your land, as archived in Our libraries, is a study of oppertunism and skulduggery. Your 'Gunboat Diplomacy', renowned even in your own circles, has been the source of countless suffering of those peoples missionized by the Spanish and Portugese Crowns, from the Carribean to the Phillipines. Moreover, yours is a land that has been conceived and watered by blood, not of martyrs witnessing for the Faith, but of 'Patriots' who have shed the life of their veins that banking houses might better exploit the homesteader. Your country has been built not by colonial and missionary activity, but by robbery, deception, and conquest. And whenever sane voices have raised their protest above the din, as did Jefferson Davis of happy memory, your predescessors responded with increasing brutality. And now, under the pretext of 'liberating' Italy from foreign occupation, and solving political problems which hardly concern your affairs, you introduce such barbarity
to these sacred lands hallowed by the blood of countless martyrs.
"Allow me, Mr President, to give you a few suggestions based upon reality rather than mythology. Surely your are aware that Italy has no interest whatsoever in continuing any hostilities, as the Italian people want nothing further than to return to their farms, rebuild, and resume to the affairs of family life. As for Herr Hitler, he has no desire that German armies, desperately needed elsewhere, particularly in the East, remain on Italian soil. The government of Mussolini has, predictably, ended in shambles, forcing the Germans to remain here after their withdrawal from North Africa for strategic reasons. We are certain an armistice can be arranged whereby all foreign troops can unilaterally withdraw from the penninsula without further bloodshed and property damage. Although we understand this may give Germany a considerable tactical advantage, are not the lives of Italian Citizens and the preservation of the priceless heritage of Our shrines worth the price? In fact, may I go further, and urge the Allies to generously negotiate with Germany to end this geopolitical madness, dropping unrealistic demands for 'unconditional surrender'. Many voices in the higher eschelons of the German Reich also want a cessation of this conflict, and have vowed to bring those responsible in their country for crimes against the Geneva Convention to justice, if only the Allies will reciprocate. We are confident, Mr President, that sincere gestures of good will
will bear much fruit in returning the affairs of men to sanity and justice."
The above would flunk diplomacy, but that is precisely the point. Since When did the Roman pontiffs think that trying to pander to thugs was going to get them anything of value, either in this world or the next? To emphasize the comparison, another quote is cited, this from a letter of December 20th, 1940: "In being elected to a third term of the presidency of the United States of America, at a time of such grave moment for the life of nations, your excellency has received from your country a singular proof of confidence. The personal relations had with your excellency on the occasion of Our visit to the United States, when We were Cardinal Secretary of State to the late lamented Supreme Pontiff, and the gracious reception you extended to Us, put Us in the way to appreciate your generous spirit; and today, while We offer you Our congratulations, We pray Almighty God to guide your mind and heart in the noble and arduous task of leading a free and vigorous people for the greater stability of universal order, justice, and peace."
Once more, the infatuation of this pontiff for the United States is on full display. Today, thanks to the testimony of men like Whittigar Chambers, historians know that Roosevelt was a man who could reasonably be charged with treason. Not only did he ignore warnings that his staff was saturated with Soviet agents who had ready access to classified information regarding the American war effort, but he himself bartered lands and peoples with Stalin at Tehran and Yalta as though they were so many pawns on a geopolitical chessboard. The verdict of history, and subsequent events, have not been kind to the memory of this president; at best, he displayed stupidity and arrogance of the first degree. At worst, he was a communist collaborator, for whatever reasons. To cite but one example: scholars of that period now know the intelligence agencies of the Allied nations broke the Japanese code sometime in 1938. Pearl Harbor may have been a surprise to Admiral Kimmel, but a bevy of facts and unusual horse rides suggest the attack was entirely expected by Roosevelt and his cronies.
Apparently, Pius XII was completely unaware of any of this. Moreover, he aided the propaganda campaign. Consider this radio address of Chirstmas 1944: "Taught by bitter experience, they [the people] are more aggressive in opposing the concentration of dictatorial power that cannot be censored or touched, and call for a system of government more in keeping with the dignity and liberty of the citizens. These multitudes, uneasy, stirred by the war to their innermost depths, are today firmly convinced- at first, perhaps, in a vague and confused way, but already unyieldingly- that had there been the possibility of censuring and correcting the actions of public authority, the world would not have been dragged into the vortex of a disastrous war, and that to avoid for the future a repetition of such a catastrophe, we must vest sufficient guarantees in the people itself."
One would be hard pressed to exagerate how incredible these words are coming from between the lips of a Roman pontiff. For starters, let the reader consider that, unlike World War I, the governments of all the warring powers in Europe, bar none, were supposedly instituted along the lines of popular sovereignty: The United States in 1776, the British with the "Glorious Revolution" of 1688, France in 1789, Germany with the Weimar Republic of 1919, Russia with its revolution in 1917, and Italy with its "unification" about 1870. (The sole power to surrender short of being utterly dismembered was Imperial Japan.) The fact that "popular sovereignty" had produced more bloodshed in ten years than the Roman Empire had caused during the course of its existence over eight centuries has been completely lost on this pontiff. He continues: "In such a psychological atmosphere, is it to be wondered at the tendency towards democracy is capturing the people, and winning a large measure of consent and support from those who hope to play a more efficent part in the destinies of individuals and of society?"
Holy Father, what is to be wondered is how the Chair of Peter could so easily be transformed into a platform for spouting Masonic gibberish, complete with all the buzzwords. France in 1789 also saw a "tendancy towards democracy" where the Estates General lost their figurative heads, rolled out the guillotines, and then Louis XVI, among many others, lost their real heads. The same cycle was then repeated dozens of times throughout Europe in the 19th century, and extended to the rest of the globe in the 20th. And now we are expected to believe that at last democracy is the solution? A much better example of a political solution would be Franco's Spain or Salazar's Portugal, but the successes of these two Catholic confessional corporate states receive scant mention throughout the entire course of your pontificate. Why is that? Could the answer be that these two statesman were pariahs on a geopolitical stage dominated by Masonic intrigues, and the Vatican feared association with them? One would hope not.
But what is one to make of the following? On September 3rd, 1941, Mr Roosevelt sent the following letter via his attache: "At my request, Mr Myron Taylor will discuss with Your Holiness certain matters with regard to which I am very desirous that he explain my feelings and American opinion. These are matters in regard to which I feel very strongly. The first of these relates to the problem of the Russian Government and the Russian people toward religion. In so far as I am informed, churches in Russia are open. I believe there is a real possibility that Russia may as a result of the present conflict recognize freedom of religion in Russia, although, of course, without recognition of any official intervention on the part of the church in education or political matters within Russia. I feel that if this can be accomplished it will put the possibility of the restoration of real religious liberty in Russia on a much better footing than religious freedom is in Germany today. There are in the United States many people in all churches who have the feeling that Russia is governed completely by a communistic form of society. In my opinion, the fact is that Russia is governed by a dictatorship, as rigid in its manner of being as is the dictatorship in Germany. I believe, however, that this Russian dictatorship is less dangerous to the safety of other nations than is the German form of dicatorship. The only weapon which the Russian dictatorship uses outside of its own borders is communist propaganda which I, of course, recognize has in the past been utilized for the purpose of breaking down the form of
government in other countries, religious belief, et cetera. Germany, however, not only has utilized, but is utilizing, this kind of propaganda as well and has undertaken the employment of every form of military aggression of its borders for the purpose of world conquest by force of arms and by force of propaganda. I believe the survival of Russia is less dangerous to religion...than the German form of dictatorship. Furthermore, it is my belief that the leaders of all churches in the United States should recognize these facts [suddenly these are facts and not merely his opinions] clearly and should not close their eyes to these basic questions and by their present attitude on this question [which, of course, was summed by Pius XI in one of his moments of greater acumen, when he penned in Divini Redemptoris: "See to it, Venerable Brethren, that the Faithful do not allow themselves to be deceived! Communism is intrinsically wrong, and no one who would save Christian civilization may collaborate with it in any undertaking whatsoever. Those who permit themselves to be deceived into lending their aid towards the triumph of Communism in their own country, will be the first to fall victims of their error. And the greater the antiquity and grandeur of the Christian civilization in the regions where Communism successfully penetrates, so much more devastating will be the hatred displayed by the godless.] directly assist Germany in her present
Three weeks later, on September 20th, Pius XII replied: "We have received with satisfaction and pleasure your esteemed letter of September third and we gladly avail Ourselves of the return to Washington of His Excellency Mr Myron C Taylor to forward to this note of cordial acknowledgement..." History assures us that the pope gave the ambassador another note, surrepticiously promising the president that the Holy Seat would remain silent regarding the "lend-lease" act, which not only gave naval destroyers to the British, but would begin the pipeline of supplies that would flow into Russia via the Alaskan Highway. Later, Pius would complain that this silence weighed heavily on his conscience. He should know. For ten long years he was privy to the intimate details of Pius XI's "relief efforts" to theRussian people. He knew of the betrayals, the lies, the insults, and the brutality from first hand accounts. In retrospect, one can only wonder at his actions at the time.
What we do know for sure is that the Vatican's silence regarding the true nature of the "lend-lease" program probably killed more people than the atom bombs.
One of the least known aspects of WWII was the desperate attempts of the Germans to sever the supply lines, which was the real impetus for unrestricted submarine warfare and the invasion of Norway. While they were marginally successful in shutting down convoys to Archangel, the Germans had no means to impede the
Trans-Siberian railroad. The Japanese tried to help their ally by occupying several of the Alutian Islands, but did not want to do anything that might involve
Russia directly. Since the occupation of Manchuria in 1936, Japan and Russia had been in a delicate state of undeclared truce, and the overextended Japanese were
wise in not wanting to exascerbate the Russian bear, or so it seemed. In retrospect, the stance was tragic. Nearly everybody knows what happened on December 7th,
1941. But hardly anybody knows that just one day before, on December 6th, the Russians, fortified by the supplies of Lend-Lease, were able to hold the line against
the Germans outside Moscow. Had Moscow been overrun, it is entirely feasable that Russia would have signed an armistice, and the course of history dramatically
altered (and also makes one wonder about the history of the Trans-Siberian railroad- did somebody know something back in 1925 when rebuilding the heavily damaged
line became top priority for the Soviet government?).
After the war, Pius would develop the newfound bond between the Apostolic Church and that most sacrosanct place of modern society, namely, the voting booth. In an allocution to priests dated March 16th, 1946, he had thihs to say: "The exercise of the right to vote is a grave moral responsibility, at least with respect to
the electing of those who are called to give to a country its constitution and its laws, and in particular those that affect the sanctification of holy days of
obligation, marriage, the family, and the just and equitable regulation of many social questions. it is the Church's duty to explain to the faithful the moral
duties that flow from this electoral right."
Thus we have the first pronouncement on voting from a Roman pontiff who would become a veritable dogma factory, as we shall see later. But just what moral
duties flow from this "electoral right"? Well, let us ask a few questions: How can one know that the candidates representing any party are giving an honest
rendidtion of what their intentions and qualifications are without spending an inordinate amount of time investigating, or alternately putting blind faith in a source
claiming unimpeachable witness? How does one know the voting process itself is not suspect, observing that ballot boxes can be rigged and votes influenced by
coercion, human respect, and suchlike factors? How can one guarantee that the written constitutions will be upheld altruistically, and that politicians will be
forthright and of the highest moral calibre? The simple answer, of course, is that, given the human condition, one can guarantee nothing. Which is why the whole
Masonic ritual of campaigns, pledges, and voting is essentially silly and no Catholic can be obliged to take a part in it. but that will not deter Pius XII.
On March 10th, 1948 he will make an even stronger statement: "In the present circumstances, it is a strict obligation for all those who have the right to vote,
men and women, to take part in the elections. Whoever abstains from doing so, in particular by indolence or weakness, commits a sin grave in itself, a mortal fault.
Each one must folloiw the dictate of his own conscience. However, it is obvious that the voice of conscience imposes on every Catholic to give his vote to the
candidates who truly offer sufficient guarantees for the protection of the rights of God and the good of souls, for the true good of individuals, families and of
society, according to the love of God and Catholic moral teaching."
Pius XII was of course all but telling Catholics how to vote in the upcoming elections, which involved the Christian Democratic Party (Italian: Democrazia
Cristiana) and the Popular Democratic Front (Italian: Fronte Democratico la liberta that comprised the Italian Communist Party (Partito Communista Italiano) and the
Italian Socialist Party (Partito Socialista Italiano). What Pius XII should have told Italians is that if they do vote, they cannot in good conscience vote for men
who foreseeably will take the country on the path to disaster. Of course, we can be fairly assured that had Pius XII obeyed Our Lady of Fatima and performed the
Collegial Consecration of Russia she requested at the onset of his pontificate, he probably need not have worried about communist politicians in 1948.
To understand why that was so tragic, this chapter will end with a short discussion of WWII from a perspective seldom heard in American circles. Let us start
with Japan. Whatever else can be said about the Japanese, they were anticommunistic. Early on, Imperial Japan saw the menace that Communist Russia had become. A
little known book by Charles Callan Tansil, Back Door to War, chronicals the Roosevelt foreign policy for the years 1933 to 1941. He makes a convincing case that
the Japanese invaded Manchuria largely to prevent Russian communists from infiltrating China. Meanwhile, the extant to which the Roosevelt administration rebuffed
the dire warnings of the Japanese, in tandem with the dispicable propaganda campaign in the United States media which depicted the Japanese as imbeciles, forced that
empire to one conclusion: The United States was in on the plot. Resorting to the only reasonable alternative, they signed a treaty with Germany to contain Russia
and began an armaments campaign the current world knows little about. By 1939, Japanese technology was becoming superior to that of the United States. The
super-battleship Yamato, for example, not only boasted the biggest displacement, the most massive armor, and the biggest cannon of any naval vessel afloat at the
time, but it was the first ship to use fluorescent lighting. The I-400 class submarine was designed to be able to carry out surprise attacks against targets
anywhere in the world, and was the first vessel that could circumnavigate the globe without surfacing. Japanese torpedoes were vastly superior to their American
counterparts, having a propulsion system that made them virtually undetectable (and highly feared by American seamen. Ship for ship, the Japanese demonstrated
during the Solomen Island campaign they could outfight the Americans. In short, the Japanese High Command really felt that if they could just deal a knockout blow
to the United States' Pacific fleet they could force an armistice and turn their full attention on Russia, while meanwhile ammasing a colonial empire to rival the
Abundant evidence exists that the highest eschelons of the Japanese government were infiltrated by Masonic agents working for the Allies. Students of the
Battle of Midway still wonder how the Americans were able to catch Admiral Nagumo's fleet by surprise at its most vulnerable moments, when decks were strewn with
refueling planes, and promptly send the carriers Akagi, Kaga, Soryu and Hiryu to the bottom of the Pacific in Japans worst naval defeat in four centuries. The
assasination of Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto by Operation Vengeance, on April 18, 1943, during the Solomon Islands campaign. He was killed on Bougainville
Island when his transport bomber aircraft was shot down by U.S. Army fighter aircraft operating from Kukum Field on Guadalcanal, after they got details of his
iteniary. Other events could be cited, but these should suffice. As for the lies the United States government created concerning this theatre of war, they would
fill volumes. And the proof is that, once Imperial Japan was reduced to a shambles, the communists had little trouble overruning, China, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia,
Laos, and Tibet, aided by subsequent United States' administrations that was duplicitous towards Chinese leader Chiang Kai-shek.
But let us move to the other side of the vast bulk of what was then known as the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and start with the end of the Great War,
also known as WWI. By 1924, a scant seven years after the Russian Revolution, Joseph Stalin had consolidated political power in Russia to his favorite person,
himself. Having witnessed from the inside the failure of Bela Kun and other radicals to form communist governments in the chaos of Europe in the aftermath of the
Great War, he took matters into his own hands. (As a quick aside, let us note that Archbishop Eugenio Pacelli was a direct witness to the failure of the uprising in
Bavaria, in his capacity as Nuncio at Munich. He was transferred at his request during the socialist uprising Kurt Eisner shortly after the German surrender.
Returning to Munich, he found, according to this quote from Monsignor Schioppa: "...confusion totally chaotic... a gang of young women, of dubious appearance, Jews
like the rest of them hanging around the boss of this female rabble was Levien's [a political thug] mistress, a young Russian woman... and it was to her that the
nunciature was obliged to pay homage in order to proceed... Levien is a young man, also Russian and a Jew. Pale, dirty, with drugged eyes, vulgar, repulsive..." At
the climax of events, the Archbishop was actually threatened at gunpoint.)
But events for "Uncle Joe" Stalin deteriorated rapidly in the 1930's. Generalissimo Franco thwarted years of planning on the part of the communists to seize
Spain with his epic crusade known to history as "The Spanish Civil War". Meanwhile, one of Adolph Hitler's sworn goals was the crushing of the communist ideology,
which he and the German people rightly saw as the foremost threat to humanity at that time. (Although it must be noted that Hitler, unlike Franco, a devoted
Catholic, unfortunately saw the organic, deified, naturalist state, and not the Kingdom of Our Lord Jesus Christ, as the ultimate solution to this crisis.) Germany,
like Japan, was gaining a technological edge over the "Allies", especially in aeronatics, where they pioneered the development of ballistic missiles and jet
propulsion, and physics, where they were well on the way to constructing nuclear bombs. In a desperate bid, Stalin, well aware of German animosity over the
provisions of the Versailles Treaty that blamed Germany for the carnage of WWI, and also aware of German war stratagy, which very loosely was the "Schlieffen plan".
A breathtaking gambit, the The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, (officially the Treaty of Non-aggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) in the
late hours of 23 August 1939. (Another interesting note is that shortly after this pact, Stalin exaserbated the simmering conflict with Japan in what would become
known to history as the battles of Khalkhin Gol, or Nomonhan, as referred to by the Japanese.) However, probably neither Generals Ribbentrop or Molotov believed the
treaty was worth the paper it was printed on even before the ink of their signatures was dry, but it set the stage for the German invasion of Poland and subsequent
invasion of France.
Things became much more dire for Uncle Joe on the 22nd June 1941, when Germany invaded Russia, upsetting his own plans for a surprise attack on the German Reich
from partitioned Poland. Over the next six months the Wehrmacht sliced and diced the Russian army in a campaign that would have made Napolean blush with envy.
Moreover, we further know that during this time Hitler wanted to sign an armistice with England (in fact, the "miracle of Dunkirk" was no such thing, The Germans had
allowed the British to evacuate as a good will gesture.) but Churchhill not only would hear nothing of it, but exaserbated the Germans by unilaterally commencing
what would become known as the "ariel bombardment campaign" with the indiscriminate bombing of German metropolitan areas.
In this context, the utter tragedy of Pius XII's reply to Mr Roosevelt are now clear. Had he listened to Our Lady, in all likelyhood the Russian bear would
have found itself caged between Germany and Japan. One can only speculate, but had Germany overrun Moscow in the waning days of 1941, and had Pius XII pestered
Roosevelt for a rapproachment with Japan a few months before and then immediately consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart, that Christmas might have been very,
very merry indeed!