Ignorance fights back; or, december, please EXPLAIN yourself?

[Guinastasia]

On page two of this thread, you said the following, when pointed out that the Pope is opposed to the potential war against Iraq:

The Pope supports a regime that murders the Jews. What else is new?

Do you even HEAR what is coming out of your mouth? (so to speak?)

What the FUCK did you mean by this? For someone who is quick to paint ANYONE who remotely criticizes Israel as an anti-Semite, do you have any idea what a hypocrite you are?

Good GOD, man, why the FUCK are you even here, at a board devoted to fighting IGNORANCE? Just making sure that ignorance gets a chance to defend itself?

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[samarm]

Seems over the top. I guess he is inferring that the Catholic religion is responsible for the death of Jews. Well, you could say pretty much any religion is responsible for the deaths of some people, but what he said is quite extreme, I agree.

[Avalonian]

I said it in another thread today, and even considered starting a Pit rant with this title…

december is the PETA of the Straight Dope.

He makes points just to cause a stir, and he’s been doing it for ages. His stated points and analogies in various threads are at such odds that it’s impossible to believe he has conviction in anything he says. I can’t believe he hasn’t been booted for trolling yet.

[samarm]

On second thoughts, what he said was extremely fucking insensitive and inflammatory, and if I didn’t know it was decemeber, I would also suggest it was trolling. Just want to make it clear that I don’t support in any way what he said.

[samarm]

Ha! Funny you should mention the T word… I think we were both thinking the same thing.

But he can’t be… a you know what… can he? He’s an established poster… above reproach?

[wring]

interesting that “against a war w/Iraq” apparently = supporting the regime. no, wait, it’s not interesting, it is just more channeling of the GOP party line. wonder if there’s sufficient fiber in that diet.

[december]

Originally posted by Guinastasia *
** Just making sure that ignorance gets a chance to defend itself*

Thank you. Iraq and the Palestinians believe in killing Jews. So did the Nazis, obviously. Many historians believe that Pope Pius XII cooperated with Hitler, or didn’t oppose him enough. E.g., from a review of Hitler’s Pope, a recent best-seller

Eugenio Pacelli, Pope Pius XII, has long been the subject of controversy over his failure to speak out against Hitler’s Final Solution. In Hitler’s Pope, award-winning journalist and Roman Catholic John Cornwell shows that, even well before the Holocaust, Pope Pius XII was instrumental in negotiating an accord that helped the Nazis rise to unhindered power–and sealed the fate of the Jews in Europe. Drawing upon secret Vatican and Jesuit archives to which he had exclusive access, Cornwell tells the full, tragic story of how narcissism, longstanding personal antipathy for the Jews, and political and spiritual ambition combined to make Pius the most dangerous churchman in history. A firm and final indictment of Pius XII’s papacy, Hitler’s Pope is also a searing exploration of its lingering consequences for the Catholic church today.

My comment assumed that this accusation against Pope Pius XII was well-known to Dopers, but perhaps it needed to be spelled out. I apprecite the chance to do so.

Today, Pope John Paul II seems to be giving support to the Palestinians and to Saddam, who also murder Jews. My comment referred to a post making that point. Evidence is here, e.g.,

Top Catholic Church officials have been unsparing in their public criticism of the U.S. for planning what Rome considers an immoral war. The Vatican has been resolutely unmoved by arguments based on Catholic just-war doctrine that defend war on Iraq. The pope’s top lieutenants continue hammering the U.S. and its coalition partners for contemplating what one of them called, in a typical formulation, “a crime against peace.” Two days ago, Catholics world-wide who obeyed the Holy Father’s request offered their Ash Wednesday fasts for peace. There is even talk that the pope could win the Nobel Peace Prize.

Regarding the Vatican’s support for Arafat vis a vis Israel, we have this comment from Professor Glenn Reynolds (“Instapundit”)

This is absolutely pathetic, but no great surprise given the antisemitism we’ve already seen emanating from the Vatican lately. The “it’s not antisemitism, it’s antizionism” argument just won’t wash anymore.

From Meryl Yourish,

The Vatican did not establish full diplomatic relations with Israel until 1997, nearly fifty years after Israel’s birth.

The Pope said that Israel was “desecrating Christian holy sites” when the IDF surrounded the Church of Nativity during its takeover by Palestinian terrorists, yet didn’t mention later how the church really was desecrated—by those selfsame terrorists.

When Kurt Waldheim’s Nazi past was revealed, the Pope didn’t let that stop him from honoring the man that no one else in the world would meet with.

The Vatican signed an accord with the Palestinians condemning any “unilateral action” on Jerusalem by Israel. No such accord was signed with Israel when Jordan ruled Jerusalem, threw out all the Jews, forbade Jews to visit the Western Wall, and descrated Jewish holy sites and graveyards.

Yeah, he issued a document condemning the Holocaust. But it took a long time, said some things that made you wonder if he really meant it, and didn’t stop him from allowing crosses to spring up over Jewish remains in Auschwitz, or the beatification of Edith Stein, or other acts that show he doesn’t really seem to give a damn about what Jews think.

Here’s the thing: After centuries of bigotry, hostility, and murder of Jews by Catholics (among others), we tend to be extremely suspicious of the Church, and adopt a wait-and-see attitude. Some scholars argue that Christianity—particularly Catholicism—is the glue that held anti-Semitism together over the centuries. Even today, in the 21st century, we hear cries of “Christ-killers,” and not just from laymen.

Links and cites for her statements are available at her site.

[Mtgman]

Originally posted by december
**Today, Pope John Paul II seems to be giving support to the Palestinians and to Saddam, who also murder Jews. **

Except, of course, that the equivelance of “not overthrowing” and “supporting” exists only in your own mind.

Enjoy,
Steven

[GIGObuster]

This time december has gone too far, unfortunately I said that several months ago regarding other issues, it seems that even moderators had a discussion about his status but nothing much came of it.

I wonder if they need a UN resolution to act against him?

Jean Paul II is Pius XII?

Instapundit = Insta Troll?

And a blogster’s opinion? (the desecration was not referring to the church, for starters)

This time, seeing your pathetic reply, I am 100% in favor of Guins’s opinion about you.

[Avalonian]

*Originally posted by december *
Today, Pope John Paul II seems to be giving support to the Palestinians and to Saddam, who also murder Jews.

A newspaper headline in december-world: Pope prays for peace, supports Hussein

There isn’t a :rolleyes: big enough.

[wring]

can you explain further how ‘seems to be’ = ‘is’, and in what fashion is the Pope ‘giving support’ to Saddam (other than ‘I don’t think that war is the answer at this point’).

“support” does not equal “refusing to agree to assasinate” for example.

[beagledave]

What.An.Ass.

Take a gander at the “just cause” teaching, among others…and why J2P2 (and the U.S. Catholic Bishops) thinks that pre-emptively invading Iraq doesn’t qualify.

Let me educate
your ass

People of good will may differ on how to apply just war norms in particular cases, especially when events are moving rapidly and the facts are not altogether clear. Based on the facts that are known to us, we continue to find it difficult to justify the resort to war against Iraq, lacking clear and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature. With the Holy See and bishops from the Middle East and around the world, we fear that resort to war, under present circumstances and in light of current public information, would not meet the strict conditions in Catholic teaching for overriding the strong presumption against the use of military force.*

Just cause. The Catechism of the Catholic Church limits just cause to cases in which “the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations [is] lasting, grave and certain.” (#2309) We are deeply concerned about recent proposals to expand dramatically traditional limits on just cause to include preventive uses of military force to overthrow threatening regimes or to deal with weapons of mass destruction. Consistent with the proscriptions contained in international law, a distinction should be made between efforts to change unacceptable behavior of a government and efforts to end that government’s existence.

<snip>

Our assessment of these questions leads us to urge that our nation and the world continue to pursue actively alternatives to war in the Middle East.

Whether or not one agrees with the church’s moral teachings on the morality (or lack thereof) of military actions in these kinds of actions…only a kneejerk ass would equate those teachings with anti-semitism.

december, I have never participated in a thread pile on of you…in spite of numerous differences of opinions. Guess I get to join the party. :rolleyes:

[hansel]

Isn’t John Paul II the pope who publicly apologized to Jews for centuries of mistreatment at the hands of Catholics?

[elucidator]

Any chance we can get december to run for President on the Republican ticket?

[norinew]

I watched the UN debate today and was amazed by the position of the French. Their minister stated that “we can disarm Iraq by peace or we can disarm them by war.” Then went on to explain that the French position was that peace was better then war. The basic assertion that there is a peaceful means to disarm Iraq is simply not true as evidenced by the fact that Saddam has had 12 years to disarm and has not done so. At the end of the first Persian Gulf war, he agreed to disarm, in return for the coalition forces ceasing hostilities and here we are 12 years later still waiting for him to disarm. Just how long does he need to disarm?

So when others, like the Pope, come out on the side of peace, they are in effect saying that it is OK for Iraq to keep its weapons of mass destruction. This leads to the belief, backed by history, that the Catholic Church is anti-Semite. It might not be true, but as the saying goes, actions speak louder then words.

Personally, I am not Jewish or Catholic, but to take an objective view it certainly looks like the Pope and the Catholic Church is anti-Semitic and that is the basic reason for their objection, not that they are against war. History has shown repeatedly that the Catholic Church is willing to take up arms when they feel it is necessary, so the call for peace rings hollow. In case anyone is interested, a prime example is the crusades, another is the inquisition.

That is not to say that all who oppose war with Iraq are anti-Semitic or in favor of them keeping their WMD, but the end result is the same. Iraq certainly is anti-Semitic, so a reasoned argument could be made that to oppose the US efforts to disarm Iraq as having the same effect as helping them and therefore those who oppose war are anti-Semite as well. This US citizen does not want war, and if possible it should be avoided, but when there is no other option then war must follow or we will lost any creditability we have in the eyes of the world and the world will be a much less safer place for it.

To continue with France, The Washington Times today had an article on France selling aircraft parts to Iraq. See http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20030307-545570.htm for details. It may be that France objects for commercial reasons, not because they object to war on principle or are anti-Semitic. Other countries, like Germany, also have commercial ties with Iraq and it seems quite the coincidence that those countries also oppose war with Iraq.

I wonder how many other nations and individuals object for the same reasons…

[Lobsang]

Guinastasia is pitting people your ‘thing’?

(no diss, just seems like you pit people a lot. or is it that old pittings are just re-appearing)

[Guinastasia]

december, the Hitler’s Pope book has been hotly debated and while Pius may not have done enough, he certainly did some, and so do many other personel at the Vatican-ever hear of Monseignor Hugh O’Flaherty?

I hope the mods ban your troll ass and soon, you fuckwidget.

[elucidator]

Trouble is, we keep saying we know for sure that Saddam bin Laden has got oodles and gobs of anthrax and sarin and nerve gas, the whole nine yards. We keep saying we’re totally sure, got intelligence, yessiree bob, no doubt about it. But somehow, we can’t quite bring ourselves to tell Mr. Blix where to find it. So to date, public proof of such is zero, zip, nada.

Now, I know for sure Mt. Rushmore exists. Been there, seen it, can tell you right where to find it. No doubt in my mind. There it is.

Remember when we were sure that Saddam had nukes? Doesnt. Remember when we said for sure the aluminum tubes were only useful for nuke making? Not so. Remember when we said we had proof that Saddam was shopping in Africa for uranium? Nope.

Things like this tend to erode our credibility. People start getting the idea that we’re not real reliable. We stretch the truth a bit. Fudge the facts.

Lie.

[elucidator]

So, Eluc, what does that have to do with december?

Well, not much, come to think of it…

[iampunha]

december, why do you bother to make a point that a book is a best-seller? Ann Coulter’s book was a best seller. Does that give it any credibility?

[sub]Why I even bother I don’t know. But I do know many of us are running out of pearls for this character.[/sub]