Blather, bromides, and a soupçon of bullshit to spice it up:
Most fanciful is the pope’s claim that the mandarins at the United Nations should be entrusted with overseeing AI. He says they “are essential instruments for promoting a civilization of love, for they can foster dialogue among nations and promote the peaceful resolution of conflicts.” This is truly the triumph of hope over experience. (WSJ)
I’m all for love, dialogue, and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. But ask yourself: could the pope, or anyone, by entering into loving dialogue with the members of the IRGC, persuade these thugs to stop murdering fellow Iranian citizens? They have slaughtered some 42, 000 of them in recent months.
You cannot build a “civilization of love” with the anti-civilizational.
Our dear pope is a fool on several levels, and certainly no improvement over his predecessor, Bergoglio the Benighted.
Addendum (5/29/2026, 9:47 AM). Michael Liccione, staunch Catholic, on his Facebook page, emphasis added:
In my view it is imperative, for example, to prevent a regime of deranged religious zealots from acquiring nuclear weapons that they would almost certainly use, starting with Israel and ending up with the US. There can be no negotiated “deal” with the Islamic Republic, no genuine “dialogue” with people who sincerely call your country “Satan.” Their twisted theology, a minority view among a minority of Muslims, makes it impossible for them to abandon their nefarious goals. The Israeli-American “self-defense” we’ve been seeing is accordingly pre-emptive. There was little or no room for that sort of thing in just-war doctrine before nuclear weapons and AI. There should be now.
Bill,
Here, from Chris Jackson, * is another revealing tidbit on Bergoglio’s Boy:
“Then there is Spain.
Pedro Sánchez emerged from his audience with Leo XIV declaring a strong alignment between himself and the Pope. This is the same political leader associated with abortion expansion, euthanasia legislation, transgender ideology, attacks on traditional social norms, and aggressive secularization.
Yet he publicly described Leo XIV as a moral compass.
That statement alone should have generated uncomfortable questions.
How exactly does a socialist architect of modern Spain’s secular revolution perceive such profound alignment?
The answer is not difficult to find.
Migration.
Climate themes.
Poverty rhetoric.
Humanitarian language.
Artificial intelligence regulation.
Global governance themes.
These are precisely the subjects on which modern secular progressives and Vatican officials frequently discover common ground. Notice what is absent. There was no public emphasis on abortion, euthanasia, demographic collapse, Spain’s destruction of Catholic identity or the moral revolution transforming Europe.
The issues that once defined Catholic resistance to secular liberalism increasingly occupy secondary status.
The Great Inversion
A century ago socialists feared the Vatican. Today socialists often praise it. …
Leo XIV may speak of continuity. His defenders may insist that nothing essential has changed. Yet appointments reveal priorities. Administrative decisions reveal assumptions. Political alliances reveal sympathies. And when viewed together, these stories point in the same direction.
The revolution never announces itself.
It simply continues.”
* https://bigmodernism.substack.com/p/the-revolution-never-sleeps
Vito
Thanks, Vito.
As for Prevost’s support for the U. N., go here: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-897698
You will agree with me that there is no right immigrate. Bergoglio and his boy think there is such a right. For thorough documentation, and a primer on Liberation Theology, see Chapter 8 of Peter Schweizer’s THE INVISIBLE COUP, HarperCollins, 2026.
Yes, I agree Bill, that there is no right to immigrate.
Thank you for pointing me to Schweizer’s book, of which I was unaware.
Vito