Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Wed 09/19/2007 View Tue 09/18/2007 View Mon 09/17/2007 View Sun 09/16/2007 View Sat 09/15/2007 View Fri 09/14/2007 View Thu 09/13/2007
1
2007-09-19 Iraq
Pope refuses to meet Rice: report
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Penguin 2007-09-19 14:28|| || Front Page|| [11131 views ]  Top

#1 I would think that with so many of his flock serving in the US Forces in Iraq that he would want to help as much as he can.
Posted by Penguin 2007-09-19 15:04||   2007-09-19 15:04|| Front Page Top

#2 It said the reply "illustrated the divergence of view" between the Vatican and the White House about the "initiatives of the Bush administration in the Middle East."

Sad to say, it's difficult to tell which of them get's it less; The Pope or Rice. My money is on Rice being more oblivious to Islam's threat. Her "unhelpful" criticism of Israel for declaring Gaza an "enemy entity" is a fairly clear demonstration of this.

Not that the Pope's own deafening silence over Islam's continued predations against Christianity make much sense, either. It's just that Rice is part of a more effective machine to thwart Islam and her actions do not sufficiently demonstrate any such notion. While one might attempt to excuse Rice's glaring ineptitude as merely reflecting the Bush administration's will, too often her own positions have been so obviously wrong and immoral that someone with more integrity would have resigned their position rather than be the conduit for such diplomatic twaddle.

Worst of all is having to watch two immensely powerful forces—Vatican and American alike—abstain from unequivocal language and timely intervention in a way that only guarantees more of a bloodbath downstream. This is moral irresponsibility on a horrific scale.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-09-19 15:17||   2007-09-19 15:17|| Front Page Top

#3 "The Pope? How many divisions does he have?"
-- Napoleon Buonaparte
Posted by mojo">mojo  2007-09-19 15:40||   2007-09-19 15:40|| Front Page Top

#4 When to Pope can keep his Priests from diddling little boys he'll be able to take the moral high ground. Until then he's a tourist attraction like the Queen of England.
Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2007-09-19 16:04||   2007-09-19 16:04|| Front Page Top

#5 Sheesh. Instead of a misleading AFP headline (there was ONE alleged refusal, back in August), perhaps reading the original story at the Corriere.it site might shed some light and context on the matter.

Rice denied audience with Pope


Posted by mrp 2007-09-19 16:07||   2007-09-19 16:07|| Front Page Top

#6 Should a wayward Lutheran, like myself, care?
Posted by 3dc 2007-09-19 16:31||   2007-09-19 16:31|| Front Page Top

#7 mrp, your link doesn't do much to disspell the negative perceptions of both parties.

The Vatican believes that the United States may be taking too lightly the issue of guarantees for religious minorities in the new Iraqi constitution and has said so to the government in Baghdad.

So, how is the Vatican ducking this issue supposed to be constructive? Benedict should be even more vocal about the plight of Iraqi Christians—at the hands of Muslims, no less—instead of forcing America to shoulder the entire burden.

In reply, it was told that threats and violence against Christians are no more severe than those experienced by other minorities.

Which is—in some ways—correct. America stands for complete religious freedom. Although we may one day need to consider banning Islam, we have yet to do so. Therefore, our overt policy must be to support all factions equally. It is the Vatican who must most strongly put forth the case against persecution of Christians—especially so in Muslim majority countries—and has yet to do so in any great measure.

On Iran, the Vatican is known to detest the truculent anti-Semitism of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but regards another preventive war as a disaster.

In other words, Benedict's revulsion somehow does not manage to exceed his aversion to openly stating—or, at least, understanding—the need to meet Islam's violence in equal measure. Pacifism in the face of a warring enemy is suicide, something that I recall the Catholic Church takes a dim view of.

A papal run-away get-away vacation, it was thought, was a good excuse for avoiding a meeting that was seen as not essential and could have created confusion or misunderstanding in international public opinion, above all in the Middle East.

Major bullshit. The time is now—if not yesterday—for the civilized world to present a united front against Islam's war upon the West. Anything less is simple cowardice.

No one will say so officially but the refusal may also have been prompted by Ms Rice’s stance in 2003, when she was Mr Bush’s national security adviser. On the eve of the Iraqi conflict, it was Ms Rice who said bluntly that she did not understand the Vatican’s anti-war stance. She treated John Paul II’s envoy, Cardinal Pio Laghi, with a coolness that bordered on disrespect when he was sent to Washington on 2 March 2003 on a desperate mission to avert military intervention. Clearly, the incident has not been forgotten.

So—as always—we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. We're damned for liberating Iraq and damned for not protecting its liberated Christian to a better degree. Total horseshit. The Vatican cannot have it both ways. Either they assume a much more active role in combating Islam or they sit down and shut the fuck up about those of us who are brave enough to enter the fray.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-09-19 16:32||   2007-09-19 16:32|| Front Page Top

#8 Interesting article, mrp. The pope dislikes Secretary Rice because in 2003 she was cool to the Vatican's representative's request that we not invade Iraq. Therefore he took the opportunity of being on summer vacation to not meet with her, despite a personal request from President Bush, with whom he has cordial relations. The Vatican is additionally frustrated because the Americans aren't protecting Iraqi Christians from what, admittedly, is extreme harassment by the Muslim population, although the Americans claim that the Muslims are harassing other groups (and, of course, each other) just as badly.

High school?
Posted by trailing wife 2007-09-19 16:35||   2007-09-19 16:35|| Front Page Top

#9 Lovely fisking, Zenster. :-)
Posted by trailing wife 2007-09-19 17:05||   2007-09-19 17:05|| Front Page Top

#10  High School?

No, it isn't. It is part of a most serious matter involving international diplomacy, a realm in which the Holy See has been embroiled for nearly 2000 years. The Pontiff and the President have different responsibilities and obligations, and they work best together when they have common objectives and principles.

Benedict XVI is the leader of more than 1,000,000,000 Catholics around the world, an enormous number of whom live in daily contact with people of other faiths, particularly Islam. For example, of the 4 million inhabitants in the United Arab Emirates, around one million of them (25%) are Catholic. In Saudi Arabia, it is estimated that one million of the people living there are Catholic, too. Most of them cannot, in any possible way, be protected by their native countries. The Pope's first responsibility is for their spiritual welfare, and the spiritual life of their fellow Catholics worldwide.

In reply, it was told that threats and violence against Christians are no more severe than those experienced by other minorities.

I believe that reply was made by the Maliki government, not by the Bush administration.

Zenster, Catholics and our fellow Christians are being persecuted all over the world. No single Christian organization in the world is more aware of their plight than the Holy See, and no other religious organization has spent more time and effort to alleviate their suffering. Bishops and other clergy are routinely arrested, imprisoned, harassed, and sometimes murdered while carrying out their religious duties. Sometimes simply bearing witness for one's faith at the point of death is as important, or more so, than bearing arms for one's country.

Posted by mrp 2007-09-19 17:11||   2007-09-19 17:11|| Front Page Top

#11 Zenster, Catholics and our fellow Christians are being persecuted all over the world. No single Christian organization in the world is more aware of their plight than the Holy See, and no other religious organization has spent more time and effort to alleviate their suffering. Bishops and other clergy are routinely arrested, imprisoned, harassed, and sometimes murdered while carrying out their religious duties. Sometimes simply bearing witness for one's faith at the point of death is as important, or more so, than bearing arms for one's country.

While that may—despite any negative outward appearances—indeed serve to modulate exactly how vociferous Benedict is regarding Islam's predations upon all other faiths, it gives him absolutely ZERO reason to appease Islamic terrorists by condemning America's willingness to fight Muslim aggression.

Benedict is nine kinds of fool if he thinks that—by denigrating America's intervention against Islamic expansionism—such abject obeisance to Islam is going to buy a whit time or respect for his flock. Muslims will only laugh the louder as they slaughter such meek prey.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-09-19 17:30||   2007-09-19 17:30|| Front Page Top

#12 Mojo. "The pope how many divisions" is not from Napoleon but from Stalin.
Posted by JFM">JFM  2007-09-19 17:43||   2007-09-19 17:43|| Front Page Top

#13  ... it gives him absolutely ZERO reason to appease Islamic terrorists by condemning America's willingness to fight Muslim aggression.

Zenster, the US and Coalition forces did not invade Iraq in 2003 to fight "Muslim aggression". We invaded Iraq to removed Saddam Hussein and his fellow Baathists from power, the main reason being Saddam's failure to comply with 17 UNSC resolutions. John Paul II did not see that as a sufficient reason for war, and made that very clear. Catholics are free to agree or disagree with the Holy See's decision. I happen to agree with the President, as did Catholic theologian Michael Novak. Neither of us has yet been "condemned".

Did you see the Rantburg post concerning that Turkish music video, the one by the "folk singer"? Did you read on how it glorified the would-be papal assassin Mehmet Ali Ağca and the teen-ager who shot and killed a priest, while the cleric was praying in a church? The Holy Father holds a weekly audience in front of thousands of people in St. Peter's Square. He lives in the cross-hairs of terrorism every single day. That beautiful, holy, 80-year old man.

Benedict is nine kinds of fool if he thinks that—by denigrating America's intervention against Islamic expansionism—such abject obeisance to Islam is going to buy a whit time or respect for his flock. Muslims will only laugh the louder as they slaughter such meek prey.

Pope Josef Ratzinger is no one's fool. Christ's message is one of Love for all mankind. Love for you, love for me, and love for that blood-thirsty Talibani now planting an IED in an Afghan roadway. I love that Talibani, as I believe the Pope does, too, because that's the commandment made by Christ to his disciples. Keeping that in mind, I've not seen any mention of the Vatican condemning the Coalition mission in Afghanistan, nor of it condemning the GWOT, which now permeates every corner of the planet.
Posted by mrp 2007-09-19 18:25||   2007-09-19 18:25|| Front Page Top

#14 Did you see the Rantburg post concerning that Turkish music video, the one by the "folk singer"? Did you read on how it glorified the would-be papal assassin Mehmet Ali Aðca and the teen-ager who shot and killed a priest, while the cleric was praying in a church? The Holy Father holds a weekly audience in front of thousands of people in St. Peter's Square. He lives in the cross-hairs of terrorism every single day. That beautiful, holy, 80-year old man.

After over a half-hour's search, I cannot unearth the lengthy article I wrote about Benedict's visit to Turkey. If you are familiar with it, then you know my own respect for his more effectual stance than any predecessors to the throne of Saint Peter.

As someone who acknowledges that Jesus' words contained much wisdom—while not necessarily accepting Christ's divine origins—it is impossible for me to have "love for that blood-thirsty Talibani now planting an IED in an Afghan roadway". Some people just plain need killin' and Muslim terrorists fall into that category all too readily.

While Pope Benedict may well be protecting his flock through understatement of Islam's avowed threat to all other religions, he does DIDDLY SQUAT for those of us who are agnostics and atheists. Protecting this world's religions might seem like a fine and noble thing but there remain many of us who do not choose to participate in the prescribed spiritual pantheon.

Those of us who opt out of worship in any form are far more vulnerable to theocracy of any sort and it is unreasonable to expect that we should shrug off the inaction of highly placed individuals in other church offices solely because they deem Islam's threat to be less than significant, or overwhelming for that matter. I find Islam to be of greater danger than Nazism and communism combined. Therefore, Benedict's mealy-mouthed appeasements for Islam's horrendous crimes cut no ice with me.
Posted by Zenster">Zenster  2007-09-19 22:51||   2007-09-19 22:51|| Front Page Top

23:51 Swamp Blondie
23:47 Zenster
23:43 RWV
23:42 JosephMendiola
23:36 SteveS
23:35 JosephMendiola
23:26 JosephMendiola
23:25 Zenster
23:16 Muggsy Phump4546
23:14 JosephMendiola
23:11 JosephMendiola
23:09 Muggsy Phump4546
23:07 JosephMendiola
23:06 Muggsy Phump4546
23:04 Zenster
23:01 JosephMendiola
22:59 Redneck Jim
22:54 Gary and the Samoyeds
22:53 Remoteman
22:51 Muggsy Phump4546
22:51 Zenster
22:48 Gary and the Samoyeds
22:48 Muggsy Phump4546
22:40 Anonymoose









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com