Pope Francis waves to the crowd from the Speakers Balcony at the US Capitol, September 24, 2015, in Washington, DC. Pool/Getty Images
If President Barack Obama had delivered the text of Pope Francis’s speech to Congress Thursday as a State of the Union address, he would have risked being denounced by Republicans as a socialist.
While most Republicans chose not to complain, and Democrats tried not to gloat, Francis’s speech to Congress was stunning in the breadth, depth, and conviction of its progressivism. That might not have been fully and immediately appreciated by everyone in the House chamber because the combination of Francis’s sotto voce delivery and his heavily accented English made it difficult, lawmakers said, to grasp everything he was saying.
But there was no mistaking his thrust. He made detailed arguments for openness to immigrants, addressing the human roots of climate change, closing the gap between the rich and the poor, and ending the death penalty — all of which invigorated the Democrats in the room.
“It was pretty progressive. He had a little right-to-life stuff in it,” Rep. James Clyburn, the third-ranking House Democrat, said as he cracked a smile thinking about how Republicans would receive the speech. “That’s enough for them.”
The pope isn’t going to change many hearts and minds in the badly divided Congress, lawmakers said, but the moment provided a brief respite from political warfare. Several presidential candidates, including Sens. Bernie Sanders, Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz, as well as Ben Carson, attended.
Rubio, a Roman Catholic, said in a brief interview that Francis “struck the right tone.” Sanders, a self-described socialist, seemed to like the content even more.
“Pope Francis is clearly one of the important religious and moral leaders not only in the world today but in modern history,” he said in a statement released after the speech. “He forces us to address some of the major issues facing humanity: war, income and wealth inequality, poverty, unemployment, greed, the death penalty and other issues that too many prefer to ignore.”
Democrats were eager enough to present Congress as united that they joined a Republican-led standing ovation when Francis told lawmakers of “our responsibility to protect and defend human life at every state of its development.” Several of them said it was out of respect for the pope. But there was another good reason: It strengthened the perception that the whole speech — most of which they liked — carried unifying themes.
Unity was good for Democrats because the speech favored their policies
Francis was interrupted a few times by whoops from the Democratic side of the chamber — by Steve Cohen, a Jewish Memphis Democrat who got excited about Francis’s mention of the Golden Rule; by New York’s Nydia Velázquez when he called for an end to the death penalty; and by Philadelphia Rep. Chaka Fattah when he mentioned his upcoming visit to that city. The Republicans in the room were a bit more staid. Cruz often appeared unmoved during moments when Rubio, who was sitting nearby, applauded. That was the case when Francis asked whether the greater opportunities sought by past generations of immigrants are “not what we want for our own children?”
It was a home crowd. Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) had announced he would boycott the event over climate change, and there was a brief murmur when it became obvious that three conservative Catholic Supreme Court justices — Antonin Scalia, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas — had not shown up. But it seemed that everyone in attendance just wanted to catch a glimpse of Francis and hear what he had to say.
Big-name guests filed into the public galleries above the House chamber long before the pope’s arrival: Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Rep. Gabby Giffords, mega-donor Tom Steyer, and Carson. House members filled the seats in their chamber, followed by the Senate and four Supreme Court justices. At about a minute past 10 am, Francis strode down the center aisle of the House chamber, clad in his familiar white robe and skullcap.
Lawmakers, who had been admonished not to touch the pope, refrained from trying to shake his hand or pat his back. There was no rush to crowd him the way members of Congress try to get into pictures with the president during the annual State of the Union address. When he got to the end of the aisle, he quietly shook hands with Secretary of State John Kerry and then made his way to the rostrum.
Samantha Power, the US ambassador to the UN, pulled out a baby blue iPhone and began snapping pictures. Though she later took to Twitter to commemorate the moment, Power hadn’t posted any of her photos by midday.
For his part, Francis warmed up the audience by describing America as “the land of the free and the home of the brave.” He was slow to move into more politically charged territory but unimpeded when he did. There were 10 standing ovations after his initial greeting, and they were bipartisan.
Francis tackled tough issues at the heart of the US political debate and gently admonished lawmakers to build bridges
At times, Francis seemed to be speaking directly into the headlines and newscasts of the day.
Less than a week after Carson said that America shouldn’t elect a Muslim president, Francis warned that “a delicate balance is required to combat violence perpetrated in the name of a religion, an ideology or an economic system, while also safeguarding religious freedom, intellectual freedom and individual freedoms.”
As Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump promises to build a wall between Mexico and the US, and to prevent Syrian refugees from being admitted to America, Francis compared the current refugee crisis to the one that arose in World War II and said that “we the people of this continent are not fearful of foreigners, because most of us were once foreigners.” That drew a standing ovation. Rubio, who has shifted his emphasis on immigration reform over time, leaped to his feet.
And while Democrats continue to bask in this summer’s Supreme Court decision protecting same-sex marriage, the pope said he was concerned that “fundamental relationships are being called into question, as is the very basis of marriage and the family.” The issue that caused the biggest stir before the speech — climate change — factored prominently in Francis’s remarks. He spoke of the human roots of global warming and said, “I am convinced we can make a difference.”
But perhaps the most unexpected run in the speech was an admonishment as gentle as it was clear: Politics is about building bridges, not destroying them. Francis never mentioned the international nuclear nonproliferation deal with Iran by name or the gridlock in American politics, but he seemed to be speak to both matters.
“When countries which have been at odds resume the path of dialogue — a dialogue which may have been interrupted for the most legitimate of reasons — new opportunities open up for all,” he said. “A good political leader is one who, with the interests of all in mind, seizes the moment in a spirit of openness and pragmatism. A good political leader always opts to initiate processes rather than possessing spaces.”
Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Joe Pitts, speaking about the pope’s limited remarks on abortion and same-sex marriage, said he was displeased that Francis had been “unfortunately politically correct.”
For liberals, though, he was simply correct about politics.
LA HISTORIA DE LAS BOISERIES DEL PALACIO ERRÁZURIZ EN BUENOS AIRES
Si tienen la oportunidad de visitar el Museo Nacional de Arte Decorativo de Buenos Aires, antiguo Palacio Errázuriz, les sorprenderá saber que las boiseries de uno de sus salones (los paneles de madera tallada que recubren la pared) no son reproducciones del siglo XX como sucede en la mayor parte de los edificios de estilo francés en Buenos Aires, sino que son autenticas reliquias del siglo XVIII procedentes de una importante residencia parisina.
Esta residencia conocida como el Hôtel Letellier se sitúa en el Nº11 de la Rue Royale, en pleno centro de París.
Foto satelital de París con el Hôtel Letellier señalado en rojo, la Plaza de la Concorde en verde, la iglesia de la Madeleine en rosa y el Museo del Louvre en azul:
Fuente: Google Earth.
Fotografía del Hôtel Letellier:
La residencia fue construida en 1781 por Luís Letellier, arquitecto del Rey Luís XV que estuvo a cargo del diseño y la edificación de la Rue Royale, nombrada así en honor a Su Majestad. Curiosamente ocho años después de haber sido terminado el hôtel, a 300 metros del mismo se levantó la famosa guillotina que acabó con la vida de los reyes Luís XVI y Maria Antonieta.
Grabado de la ejecución de Luís XVI el 21 de enero de 1793 en la Plaza de la Concorde. La Rue Royale está marcada en rojo, y a pocos metros de allí se encuentra el Hôtel Letellier:
Posteriormente, a principios del siglo XX el hôtel fue habitado por Natalie Keshko, Reina de Serbia, quien falleció en 1941. Una placa conmemorativa colocada en el edificio recuerda su paso por la residencia.
Retrato de la Reina de Serbia:
Fuente: forum.alexanderpalace.org
Fotografía de la placa colocada en la fachada del Hotel Letellier:
Aproximadamente en 1910 las boiseries del Salón de Compagnie y de la habitación principal fueron desmontadas y vendidas, al igual que los paneles de madera del Gran Salón de la residencia Nº13, vecina del 11, también construida y habitada por Luís Letellier.
Luego de haber sido despojado de sus paneles de madera se colocaron copias en yeso de los originales y se declaró al Hôtel Letellier Monumento Histórico de Francia.
Pero lo más curioso es lo que sucedió con las boiseries. El primer grupo de paneles correspondientes al Gran Salón del hôtel Nº13 fueron comprados por Alexander Hamilton Rice y llevados a su residencia de la Quinta Avenida en New York. Años mas tarde, cuando la residencia fue vendida, la señora Rice donó las boiseries al Philadelphia Museum of Art donde se encuentran actualmente.
Frente del Philadelphia Museum:
Fuente: wikipedia.org
Las boiseries del Gran Salón del hôtel Nº13 exhibidas en el museo:
El segundo grupo de paneles correspondientes al Salón de Compagnie del Hôtel Letellier fueron adquiridos por el Conde Moïse de Camondo y colocados en el Gran Salón de su nueva residencia parisina en la Rue Monceau Nº 63. En 1935 el conde donó al estado francés la residencia con toda su colección para transformarla en el Museo Nissim de Camondo, llamado así en honor a su hijo muerto en la Primer Guerra Mundial.
Si comparamos las boiseries del Nissim de Camondo con las del Philadelphia Museum, podemos observar que a pesar de encontrarse originalmente las primeras en el Nº11 y las segundas en el Nº13 de la Rue Royale, son prácticamente idénticas:
Comparación Nº1:
Comparación Nº2:
El tercer grupo de boiseries, las que correspondían a la habitación principal del Hôtel Letellier, fueron adquiridas por Matías Errázuriz y su esposa Josefina de Alvear para su nueva residencia en Buenos Aires, que casualmente había sido diseñada por René Sergent, el mismo arquitecto que construyó la mansión de Moïse de Camondo, y al igual que este, en 1937 los Errázuriz donaron el palacio con la mayor parte de la colección al estado argentino, quien lo transformó en el Museo Nacional de Arte Decorativo.
Frente del Palacio Errázuriz:
Fuente: sobreargentina.com
Los cuatro paneles de madera tallada de la habitación principal del Hôtel Letellier fueron colocados en el salón Luís XVI del Palacio Errázuriz, llamado el Salón de Madame.
Ubicación del Salón de Madame en la planta baja del museo:
howed you the 88.88 alignment between the Washington monument (Osiris’s phallus) and the Capitol building (Isis’ womb), which matched the 88.88 alignment at the Vatican. Care to guess which year the Washington Monument was opened?…
Repase sus conocimientos sobre la dinastía británica.
PORANNIE GOLDSMITHPUBLICADO: 13 DE NOVIEMBRE DE 2022, 17:03 EST
No todos los linajes son iguales. Si bien cabría esperar que el príncipe Carlos fuera el máximo exponente de la realeza, otros son incluso de mejor cuna. Por ejemplo, su difunta esposa. La familia de la princesa Diana, la Casa Spencer, es una dinastía británica de larga tradición que se remonta al siglo XVI. Los Windsor , en cambio, son de ascendencia alemana, y adoptaron su apellido actual en 1917. Es decir, Carlos ascendió socialmente por matrimonio.
Aquí, conozca a los Spencer.
ILUSTRACIÓN DE RODICA PRATO
1. Henry Spencer, primer conde de Sunderland (1620-1643)
El fundador de la casa Spencer nació como el tercer barón Spencer y más tarde recibió el título nobiliario del primer conde de Sunderland, lo que dio origen a un nuevo título para los hombres Spencer de mayor edad que duraría hasta la década de 1750.
2. Georgiana, duquesa de Devonshire (1757-1806)
La cuarta tía abuela de Diana también se casó con un hombre casi 10 años mayor que ella y fue vista como una influenciadora, popularizando el polvo francés para el cabello, entre otras tendencias.
3. Lady Diana Spencer (1710-1735)
Ella era la homónima de Diana, y mucho más. La Lady Di original estaba destinada a casarse con el príncipe de Gales, pero el primer ministro del rey Jorge II le advirtió que buscara una esposa que representara una amenaza política menor para su hijo.
4. Charles Spencer, tercer conde de Sunderland (1702-1722)
Fusionó a los Spencer con los Churchill a través de su matrimonio con Anne Churchill.
5. Sarah Churchill, duquesa de Marlborough (1660-1744)
El primer ministro era primo lejano de la princesa Diana. A día de hoy, algunos miembros de la familia aún llevan el apellido Spencer-Churchill.
7. Dama Bárbara Cartland (1901-2000)
La novelista romántica era la abuelastra de Diana (es decir, la madre de su madrastra). Ostenta el récord de más libros publicados en un solo año.
8. Albert Spencer, séptimo conde Spencer (1892-1975)
El abuelo de Diana fue miembro de la reserva del ejército. Su padrino fue el rey Eduardo VII.
9. Raine Spencer (1929-2016)
El segundo marido (de tres) de la socialité británica era el padre de Diana, aunque se dice que Diana y sus hermanos llamaban a su madrastra "Lluvia Ácida".
10. John Spencer, octavo conde Spencer (1924-1992)
El padre de Diana crió a la futura princesa y a sus tres hermanos, ya que le fue concedida la custodia tras su divorcio de Lady Frances Roche.
11. Lady Frances Roche (1936-2004)
La madre de Diana era una aristócrata por derecho propio, hija de un barón y una baronesa. En 1967, dejó a John Spencer por el heredero del papel pintado, Peter Shand Kydd.
12. Príncipe Carlos (1948- )
El Príncipe de Gales es, por supuesto, el heredero del trono británico y se casó con Diana cuando ella tenía 20 años. La pareja finalmente se divorció en 1996.
13. Princesa Diana (1961-1997)
La protagonista de nuestro árbol genealógico, la Princesa de Gales (nacida Diana Frances Spencer), fue una activista e icono de estilo.
14. Lady Sarah McCorquodale (1955-)
La hermana mayor de Diana salió con Carlos antes que Diana. De hecho, fue Sarah quien los presentó.
15. Lady Jane Fellowes (1957-)
La otra hermana de Diana se casó con Robert Fellowes. Posteriormente, este recibió el título nobiliario, lo que convirtió a Jane en baronesa.
16. Charles Spencer, noveno conde Spencer (1964-)
El hermano de Diana es escritor y reportero de televisión; reside en Althorp, la finca familiar. Es padre de siete hijos, entre ellos Lady Kitty Spencer.
17. Príncipe Guillermo (1982-)
Segundo en la sucesión al trono, el duque de Cambridge es el hijo mayor de Diana. Tiene tres hijos con su esposa, Catalina (de soltera Middleton).
18. Príncipe Harry (1984-)
El hijo menor de Diana, el duque de Sussex, se retiró de sus deberes reales en 2020. Ahora reina en Santa Bárbara, California, donde vive con su esposa Meghan (de soltera Markle) y sus dos hijos.
19. Lady Kitty Spencer (1990-)
La sobrina de Diana, de 30 años, se ha hecho famosa como modelo. Recientemente se casó con el magnate de la moda Michael Lewis, de 62 años.
20. George Washington (1732-1799)
El Padre Fundador era primo octavo de Diana, cinco veces eliminado.
21. Audrey Hepburn (1929-1993)
Audrey y Diana compartían algo más que un estilo: eran primas lejanas. Hepburn también pertenecía a la nobleza holandesa por parte de madre.
22. Glenn Close (1947-)
En el programa " Encontrando tus Raíces" de PBS , Close descubrió que era prima octava de Diana. Se conocieron en 1989, aunque desconocían su vínculo en ese momento.
23. Oliver Platt (1960-)
El actor era primo segundo de la Princesa de Gales a través de sus tatarabuelos, aunque ambos nunca se conocieron.
Una versión de esta historia apareció en la edición de noviembre de 2021 de Town & Country .
Enki works in mysterious ways. He sees the angles. He sees the alignments. He understands space. He understands time. It's '2010' and he comes in peace. Contact via earthquakes... This is it. This is how it begins...
Haiti - Chile Alignment...
Behold, the Earth-Shaker opens the Pentagonal Stargate...
The pentagram is the symbol of Venus. Venus is the goddess/planet of love. Love in many languages is amor. Amor is the reverse of Roma. As they say, all roads lead to Rome. Even the pentagram. The Pentagonal Contact Sequence started back on April 6, 2009 near Rome...
Orbitally reversed and it becomes Megafault starring Brittany Murphy (who had an Italian father linked to the mob)...
...whose untimely deathmarked the winter solstice 2009 at the apex of the pentagonal 'V' apex.
...reenacted right before the 'V' premiere (Nov 3, 2009) via Balloon Boy on Oct 15...
...which was orbitally 'stereo aligned' with Feb 25-26, or the Chile 'Big One' (Feb 27).
Contact via earthquakes = Contact with V = Contact with Peace = Contact with Love (Rome, Venus) = Contact via Pentagram
All in the 'Big One' space-time geometric overlay...
And that's how Contact is being made in 2010.
Just the tip of the iceberg.
* * *
NOTE: For those new here, please note that this strange thing that I do on this website is not the typical hindsight-driven dot connecting stuff that you may have seen out there. Here, much emphasis is placed on foresight. I regularly make predictions or multicontextual pattern projections to demonstrate that it is something very real - albeit 'impossible' according to the current paradigm - that I discuss and try to show again and again. So, for instance, even though I decided not to bring it up in the main text of the article purely for readabililty, both the April 2009 Italian earthquake and the January 2010 Haiti 'Big One' were, to a considerable degree, projected beforehand. (See here & here - the latter not including STRUG entries thus appearing less impressive than what was actually going on 'underground' projection-wise.) Even the latest Chile mega-quake was no surprise around here (especially on STRUG) - evidenced by the fact that I was able to quickly write up and post this article within 24 hours of the catastrophe. For many months, in fact, I kept highlighting the Vancouver Olympics (Feb 12-28) and its general timeframe, based on various patterns, in particular the following golden/phi-based timecode which had 'Big One' (mega-quake) written all over it.
Not surprisingly, there was to be further twists which I was able to closely follow, leading me to make a necessary adjustment just in time for (i.e. before) the early-January quakes including Haiti. (I haven't yet fully explained what caused me to make the adjustment but that it was a valid move is obviously not in question.) After Haiti, the status of the February 2010 window became uncertain - was it still radioactive or had it released all its energy in January? We now know the answer: Another small time shift, another 'Big One' (this time in Chile), coming the day before the closing ceremony of the 'V Olympics' instead of the opening ceremony. And it was decidedly pentagonal in nature. This is important because in addition to what's already been discussed the pentagram is nearly synonymous with (i.e. found encoded in its geometry) the golden ratio, i.e. '1 : 1.618', therefore linking back to the phi-based timecode above.
Now we take a look at the National Mall and its crowd sections which we will label "A, B, C, D, E...": https://www.supertorchritual.com/underground/articles/trump-inauguration-crowd.html
Let's focus on section A and the crowd in it, and work out the geometry of the sight line from the Capitol camera. (Note: The ground elevations of the crowd sections will be noted in the diagrams, which you can use to check the calculations. You can also use Google Earth.)
The goal here is to see the extent of the "blind spot", i.e. the area behind the crowd (= height ~1.77 m) that's hidden from the Capitol cameraman. As you can see above, the blind spot does not cover the entire length of the gap between crowd sections A and B. This means part of this gap (green segment) should be visible in photos taken by the Capitol camera. And that is indeed the case:
Let's examine section B:
This time the blind spot does cover the whole length of the gap between the two crowds (B & C). This means no visible gap should appear in the photo, and that is indeed the case:
Next, section C:
Again, and even more so, the blind spot completely covers the gap between the crowds (C & D). We don't see the gap in the photo:
Next up, section D:
The blind spot extends even further into the next crowd (E). Obviously no gap is visible from the perspective of the Capitol cameraman:
Section E is the last crowd in the Mall. The subsequent sections - F, G (& H) - are all empty. This is the huge white, empty area you see in this picture from the Washington Monument:
And yet, in the photo from the Capitol it becomes just a thin, barely noticeable white line:
Conclusion
So there you have it. There is no escaping it: Donald Trump's inauguration was half empty (in the National Mall), "period". That's not an opinion or wishful thinking or propaganda. It's irrefutable fact.
That fact in itself is not important. What's much more important is what this reveals about the people who promoted and/or eagerly believed the silly, blatantly false conspiracy theory. It's like believing in the Flat Earth theory (which inexplicably got popular last year). The lack of rational thinking demonstrated by this is worrisome.
It's more understandable with average people on the internet. But it's quite disturbing with the President of the United States and people like Alex Jones (Infowars) with a huge audience and influence. How much of it is willful lying and how much of it wishful thinking or self-deception? Of course, with Trump, we know who he is; he is who he is and does what he does. And people voted him into the White House knowing this. So it is what it is. But...
As made clear by the example of the inauguration crowd size, the level of intelligence exhibited by the likes of Alex Jones in their conspiracy theories is quite low. They are highly unreliable conspiracy theorists at best, an unofficial propaganda arm for the new establishment now in power at worst. Listen to them and trust them at your own peril. Things are different now, and they may have become the opposite of what they represented. Think twice before you drink the Kook-Aid in Jonestown. Remember: There is truth, and there is everything else. That's not political.