POPE WILL SCOLD BUSH ON IRAQ, CARDINAL SAYS

Catholic World News, May 13, 2004

Rome, May. 13 (CWNews.com) - When Pope John Paul II meets with George W. Bush on June 4, the Pontiff will tell the US President that America has taken the wrong course in Iraq. That is what a former apostolic nuncio to the US told a leading Italian newspaper.

Cardinal Pio Laghi told Corriere della Sera that the Pope will repeat the same message that Bush "chose not to listen to" before the war. Cardinal Laghi met with President Bush in March 2003, as a personal envoy from the Pontiff, in a last-minute diplomatic effort to stop the war in Iraq.

The 82-year-old Italian prelate, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington during the 1980s, said that the American leader would be received with appropriate honors in Rome, as "the successor to the President of the United States who, in 1944, liberated Rome and restored the rights of the people." But today, the cardinal argued, the US leader must be reminded that "the actual choices made by America are not bringing the Middle East closer to respect for human rights."

The Pope's message, the cardinal continued, would stress that "the fight against terrorism cannot be confined to repressive and punitive measures, but must address the deeper causes that nourish the injustice." He added that the struggle against terrorism cannot be used to "justify a renunciation of the principles of a state under law, because the end does not justify the means."

Cardinal Laghi said that President Bush had been insistent in seeking a personal meeting with Pope John Paul. "I think he changed his agenda to make this meeting possible," he revealed. Speaking for himself, the Italian cardinal said that he was stunned by the reports of abuse of prisoners by US troops in Iraq. He said: "This is not America; it is the madness of a few people." However, the cardinal also said that American policies in Iraq showed a failure to understand the mentality of the Muslim world. "To bomb mosques, to enter into the holy cities, to put female soldiers in contact with nude men-- these are acts that show an incomprension of the Muslim world, which I find surprising." He added: "We must build bridges toward Islam, not deepen the divide."

Cardinal Laghi insisted-- as he has in the past-- that the top priority for American policy in Middle East should be a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That conflict, he said, is "the primary source of terrorism."

http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=29542

-- Greg (dotcom@dot.com), May 18, 2004

Answers

bump

-- Greg (dotcom@dot.com), May 18, 2004.

That's what the Cardinal hopes. I think the Pope and the President will talk about the future of Iraq and the Middle East. They will agree to work together for a new Iraq and for a UN peace keeping force to help the new government get on its feet.

OK, I admit, I read the press, and I know that is what is going on. Read this article: Vatican will back UN mandate in Iraq.

In Christ,
-bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson-nospam@hotmail.com), May 18, 2004.

This hardly refutes the above article. As they're walking out of the woodshed, JPII tells Bush to turn Iraq over to the UN pronto before he mucks it up any worse. Then Bush will ask for a grip-n-grin to prop up the Catholic vote cuz he's tanking so bad in the polls even though he's "pro life". At that point JPII remembers he's late for another appointment and leaves quickly, snickering to himself.

-- Greg (dotcom@dot.com), May 18, 2004.

LOL! Greg, you've quite an imagination!

Thing to remember about all this is that Bush is the one requesting the audience and that Bush is the one who has changed his plans at least once to fit them into the Pope's schedule. Bush wants something from the Pope, and it isn't the Catholic vote (I don't think he thinks a papal audience is going to give him that if he doesn't have it already). No, this has something to do with the war on terrorism.

-bill

-- Bill Nelson (bnelson45-nospam@hotmail.com), May 18, 2004.

Five months out from the election, Bush trails badly against a Catholic candidate. He bends over backwards to get a photo-op with the Pope so he can say "we're still friends" despite the Pope continuing to condemn his war. But this has got NOTHING to do with winning the Catholic vote! Nooo sir!

-- Joker (joker@cybernet.com), May 18, 2004.

Bush wants something from the Pope, and it isn't the Catholic vote

LOL, Bill.

Say, Bill, I have a bridge in New York that's for sale. Runs from Manhattan over to Brooklyn. I can give you a good deal on it.

-- Greg (dotcom@dot.com), May 18, 2004.

My, my, my, what a bunch of cynics. What Catholic vote is he trying to get? He's not trying to woo the Gregs and The Jokers, who wouldn't vote for him under any circumstances and the undecideds don't even know who the Pope is, and couldn't care less.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), May 19, 2004.

You mustn't interrupt their momentum now, Brian. They feel very sure Bush has to lose. If we could picture a Democrat becoming president soon, I'd wonder. WHO?

But when hatred for the President is the motivation, even exploiting the Pope is considered good for the cause. My feelings for John Paul II would make it impossible. These innocent boys actually think the Pope hates Bush. He hates war, so he must hate Bush. Like WE do!

They are sure going to be disappointed.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 19, 2004.

How do you know who I would and wouldn’t vote for Mr Crane? I am a skeptic but NOT a cynic, and the war is just one thing I will consider when voting. Bush is trying to win the illiterates to whom one photograph of Bush and the Pope smiling together is more convincing than thousands of words of policy or thousands of bodies piling up in Iraq.

I don’t hate Bush or anyone, Mr Chavez. Don’t mistake my mockery for hatred. Some of us are able to disagree with others without hating them. Of course the Pope doesn’t hate Bush, though I’m pretty sure Bush hates the Pope for refusing to budge over Iraq. That doesn’t stop him from exploiting the Pope if it’s considered good for the cause of his re-election.

-- Joker (joker@cybernet.com), May 19, 2004.

What planet is the cardinal on? The end justifies the means? Where in US policy in Iraq do we see disregard for law and order (except on the side of the terrorists who are praised by the international Left and rooted for by the anyone but Bush crowd)? Where do we see an end- justifies-the-means modus operandi in the US Military in Iraq? We aren't assassinating people or repressing their rights! We've just provided electricity, fresh water, and hospital facilities to levels NEVER seen in Iraq's history. We've rebuilt and funded their schools, reorganized their economy - look at the strength of the new Iraqi dollar, the booming construction and the new freedoms of press, religion and association... hitherto unheard of freedoms flowing directly from the US Military aegis.

Only by systematically NOT reading the news or systematically only reading a priori Leftist and negative news makers (they make, fake the news, spin it negatively, never report successes and hype failures)... could one come to the conclusion that what the US is doing is Iraq is "repressive" or the occupation isn't far better in terms of human rights than anything those people experienced in their whole lives.... they have new LOCAL representation in democratic committees, real say through their tribes and religious representatives...the list goes on and on...

Only someone so hide-bound by ideology and bias could not see this. We had the power to level Fallujah...we didn't out of respect for both the Iraqis and Law.

So excuse me, but some Vatican Officials are simply not basing their moral judgments on reality.

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), May 19, 2004.

Joker,

You said I am a skeptic but NOT a cynic From my Webster's Dictionary:

skeptic="one who habitually questions matters generally accepted"

cynic="one inclined to question the sincerity and goodness of people, morose, sarcastic"

When you say Bush trails badly against a Catholic Candidate. He bends over backwards to get a photo-op with the Pope so he can say "we're still friends" despite the Pope continuing to condemn his war. But this has got NOTHING to do with winning the Catholic vote! Nooo sir! you are being cynical, not skeptical (questioning, doubting). I stick by my statement. I am not condemning you for this, I am often cynical and skeptical myself. As in, I am skeptical that you will vote for Bush.

I don't think there is one thing correct with that statement you made.

Bush trails badly---He does?

Against a catholic Candidate---Does the fact that Kerry is a baptized and confirmed catholic make him the "catholic candidate?" Bush is more Catholic than Kerry in thought and action.

the Catholic vote---what Catholic vote? Some Catholics despise Bush, and many Catholics despise Kerry. These folks are unlikely to change their mind. I repeat that I think the undecideds (the illiterates as you say) don't know the first thing about the Pope, and couldn't care less.

You really think that Bush hates the Pope? Dios Mio! There has been talk of Bush converting to Catholicism for crying out loud. His brother has already done so.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), May 19, 2004.

Is this just a news service spin of what Cardinal Laghi meant? Oh--Come ON! You know all those journalists are impartial--( ! )

''Cardinal Pio Laghi told Corriere della Sera that the Pope will repeat the same message that Bush "chose not to listen to" before the war. Cardinal Laghi met with President Bush in March 2003, as a personal envoy from the Pontiff, in a last-minute diplomatic effort to stop the war in Iraq.''

Corriere DS has long been an apologist for communists. Would they add something to what a Catholic prelate intends? Like our pal Greg said? Take a President of the U.S. to the woodshed? Why not also quote Gorbachev; who had a job there (might still)--? Let's beat up W. in front of the Pope! Lol!

Here's analyst Jker's take: ''Bush is trying to win the illiterates to whom one photograph of Bush and the Pope smiling together is more convincing than thousands of words of policy or thousands of bodies piling up (someplace).''

Is that undecided illiterates, Joker; or the ones like me, who love to see stacks of bodies, and wouldn't care if a Pope agrees with you? (He doesn't.) I'm stupid, so what do I know? Literacy doesn't help; I'm decided and MORE: Kerry must fall. Your jokes won't elect him.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 19, 2004.

From the keyboard of the humble and modest Eugene Chavez:

I'm stupid, so what do I know?

FINALLY! we agree on something.

-- David H (bennett@cyberplanet.com), May 19, 2004.

Mr Crane: “sceptical” is a compliment and “cynical” is an insult. They are quite different as your dictionary shows. I don’t think what I said questioned Bush’s sincerity. I think he sincerely wants the Catholic vote. Probably he sincerely believes he’s doing good too. I just disputed Bill’s assertion that Bush doesn’t want the Catholic vote. Bill seems to agree with those who say Bush is stupid. I don’t. I think he’s a clever politician who wouldn’t go to all that trouble to see the Pope unless it would help him politically.

“Bush trails badly” – well that’s what the opinion polls say. Maybe they’re all just liberal leftist propaganda.

“a Catholic Candidate” – hey I never said he was a GOOD Catholic.

Maybe I should have worded it “I’m pretty sure Bush hates the Pope’s refusal to budge on Iraq.”

My jokes aren’t designed to elect Kerry, Mr Chavez. Don’t worry, I have lots of material on him and his “Pope Pius XXIII”. I'll let you see it if you're a good boy and keep your nasty temper under control.

-- Joker (joker@cybernet.com), May 19, 2004.

Joker,

Are you Peter K. from Australia?

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), May 20, 2004.

No Mr Crane. And I'm not a pacifist either if that's what you're getting at. I know sometimes you have to kick a few butts; just that we're kicking the wrong butts IMHO.

-- Joker (joker@cybernet.com), May 20, 2004.

No that's not what I'm getting at. I ask because our friend from down under disappeared about the time you showed up. He is against the war, you are against the war. He is in his 50's, you are in your 50's. He traded barbs with Eugene, and so do you. And you spell skeptic with a "c" (sceptic). And for some reason I have been thinking since your first post that you were a regular forum contributor adopting a pseudonym.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), May 20, 2004.

Mr Crane, did it occur to you that more than one person might be against the war and might take offense at what Mr Chavez says? Even a loyal American? I spent some time in England and picked up some bad habits like their spelling, and like failing to give unquestioning approval to every war our governments get us into. (Looking back I see Mr K actually spells skeptic with a K.) I have to admit I told a white lie about being over 50 because Mr Chavez cheesed me off with his assumptions about my age. I’m not a teenager though. I have contributed here under another name a long time ago. But mostly I just read it to get a laugh.

I won’t comment on Mr Chavez’ latest offering since he’s asked me to stop “badgering” him.

-- Joker (joker@cybernet.com), May 20, 2004.

Mr Crane,
Did it occur to you as it has to me, this person is full of double-talk? We could forgive the following: ''Bush trails badly against a Catholic candidate. He bends over backwards to get a photo-op with the Pope so he can say, "we're still friends," despite the Pope continuing to condemn his war. But this has got NOTHING to do with winning the Catholic vote!'' (Big joke.)

If he didn't flip-flop and say later on, ''My jokes aren’t designed to elect Kerry, Mr Chavez. Don’t worry, I have lots of material on him and his “Pope Pius XXIII”.'' It seems our Joker is neither fish nor fowl. He has no preference in our coming election; just has it in for Bush. The Iraq war is his best pretext.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 21, 2004.

Did it occur to you that some people swallow neither everything Bush says nor everything Kerry says, but recognise that they are both "full of double-talk"?

-- Joker (joker@cybernet.com), May 21, 2004.

Never mind; we know all about your vendetta. You can't live without bashing one candidate. It isn't Kerry.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), May 22, 2004.

Mr Chavez, as you want me to "stop badgering" you, would you please reciprocate?

-- Joker (joker@cybernet.com), May 23, 2004.