Dear Call Me Jorge,
I have been suspicious of Allen for a long time. If you ask me he is some sort of high-level agent. I'm not quite sure who he is working for. He could be a double or triple agent like Malachi Martin.
Just the fact that he writes for the National Catholic Reporter is enough to raise suspicion of his real motives. He also seems to have unprecedented access to information which makes me think that he is being fed this "intelligence". IMO he is a very skilled and very subtle propagandist. He spins information by first stating enough facts to lower your guard and then inserting his carefully spun piece of public opinion swaying propaganda. He's a true master of the art of propaganda and no hack like most liberal/socialist journalists.
Anyway, any time I read one of his articles I'm on the watch for a subtle piece of propaganda. In the case of this FOB piece I think the propaganda lies in:
1) Implying that Bergoglio does not have "friends" among the Catholic hierarchy. He certainly does -- they are unofficially called "the gay lobby". I think "gay mafia" is a better term. And he has other modernist "friends" in the Catholic hierarchy as well.2) This goes along with point 1. It is the idea that Bergoglio is a "lone wolf" as opposed to being part of a larger conspiracy which has infiltrated the Catholic church. If we don't know who our enemy is then we don't know who to fight. We should not waste too much time fighting the FOBs that Allen mentions. We need to concentrate on the conspiracy inside the Church.3) Referring to these heretic co-conspirators of Bergoglio as "friends" lowers your guard. "Oh, they are just 'friends'. How nice. Well, everyone should be allowed to have 'friends'-- even the pope." So anyone that attacks these "friendships" is automatically a bad guy. How can you be "anti-friend"? It's a case of establishing the language and definitions for the debate. Once you accept your opponents language and definitions you have already lost the debate. These guys are heretic anti-Catholic leaches that have attached themselves to Bergoglio -- and he welcomes this relationship because he is also a heretic anti-Catholic leach.4) Specifically in this case Allen is launching a pre-emptive propaganda attack to prepare the way for the July 28 meeting with Traettino. This is necessary because this is going to be such a revolutionary act that Allen is attempting to "soften the blow" by saying that it's "not unprecedented". Actually it IS unprecedented and Allen knows it. That is why he must deny it. This is already setting the "talking points" for the way to spin this meeting in the media. Talking point 1 -- it's "not unprecedented". Even if it wasn't "unprecedented" that still does not make it OK for a pope to preach at a heretical non-Catholic church. By saying it is " not unprecedented " Allen is implying it is "normal". It is most certainly NOT normal. It is revolutionary. It is another step forward in the Modernist revolution. It is an attempt to establish a new "beach head". And once this becomes "normal" it is very difficult to turn back the clock.5) What do you know about Traettino after reading this article? Allen makes him seem like a nice harmless guy. He's not. He is being financed specifically to attack the Catholic Church. This is also true of Tony Palmer. If you find out who is paying the bills for these guys then there agenda will become quite clear. Allen is the kind of journalist/agent with the kind of contacts and information sources to do that kind of research, but he doesn't. He's protecting these guys. Maybe after it is too late he will spill the beans to show us just what a super-journalist he is. Or at least some of the beans. The ones he wants us to know about while hiding the others.
Call me paranoid, but Allen is very dangerous IMO.