On my alternate media there are conflicting views about this Pope Francis.Webster Tarpley thinks his great as he is not a CIA man as is against austerity.Prof Michel Chossudovsky thinks that he was chosen to enslave South America and more particularly Venezuela for its oil and independant banking system.

Time will tell but I trust no Roman Catholic Pope as they supported the Nazis during WW2 and have a long history of oppression to achieve power.

It would seem it doesn't matter who or what you are, there's always something dubious or suspicious about us? Therefore wouldn't it be fairer for the moment, to closely observe him for now, and judge him on all his future activities as Pope.

Rather than to judge him on material that's seems based only on rummour, and could well prove wholly fallacious?

I find it interesting how we always seek to find flaws in important people, usually based on mere hearsay and is often just suppositional. Still the Catholic Church does need to work very hard in order to restore much of the trust and faith it lost, even squandered, after the awful, criminal behaviour of many of it's priests and others within it's aegis.

Their overt willingness to fully collaborate with the upcoming Royal Commission into crimes perpetrated against children, will be closely observed. By the many victims who have hitherto followed the Church, it's pastoral and ecclesiastical teachings.

Maybe then, the Church can begin the long process of rebuilding that essential trust, and become a true spiritual force once more.

Another link for those interested more in facts than in slander:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324077704578362701947035938.html

I would suggest that we need to take a much wider and longer view both historically, and in the now-time of 2013, of the applied politics of the Catholic church altogether.
Therefore why not Google - The Vatican in World Politics.

One very iteresting reference that comes up is this one:
http://concordatwatch.eu a site which is very much relevant as to how the Catholic church uses deliberate deception to further its power, and to obtain FOREVER immunity from any kind of democratic accountability.

Also http://www.vaticancrimes.us

Whenever you read anything about the Catholic church in the Wall street Journal or any of the Murdoch press remember that Rupert Murdoch is a right wing Catholic and a Knight of the church too - a Knight Commander of Saint Gregory in fact.

>>Rupert Murdoch is a right wing Catholic and a Knight of the church too<<

“Pope John Paul II has awarded papal knighthood to comedian Bob Hope, news magnate Rupert Murdoch and entertainment executive Roy Disney--all non-Catholics” (http://articles.latimes.com/1998/jan/03/local/me-4508)

So I still think that facts are more important than expressions of personal frustrations, whatever their cause, especially if both, the facts and frustrations, are only very marginally related to the original question stated in this article: Does Mario Bergoglio, Pope Francis, have blood on his hands?