No Pope Here!

by naked as innocent babes Wed Jul 05, 2006 18:31

Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar of Jerusalem has sent a letter to Ratzinger asking him to condemn this year's "pride" march in Jerusalem which is scheduled for August. the Rabbi is delighted with Ratzinger's devil day 6/6/06 declaration that single sex families (the vanguard of Spanish liberal reform) represent the "eclipse of God's plan".

Curiously enough, the Israeli pride day is organised by the only such group in the world to get the demographic thing sort of right. Rather than call themselves a "LGBT" they call themselves "Gay men, Lesbian, Bisexual and Trans" or "GLBT" for short.

Now I'm not gay. nor am I lesbian. I've never really felt unhappy with the gender my parents' embryo grew into, and I don't enjoy the idea of wearing tampons.

But I do believe it has passed the stage that we globally face down these forces of ultra-conservatism. So I'm hoping groups will take inspiration from this forthcoming Saturday's "protest the pope!" & protest him wherever he goes. If that means stripping naked or making noise, or simply lining the streets and turning your back on him - it must be done.

rabbi shlomo amar :-
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArtVty.jhtml?sw=be...34641
Mr Ratzinger's eclipse & Vatican "family procreation" document
http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/international/ticker/detai...46000
coverage of global devil day 6/6/06
http://indymedia.ie/article/76483

link to protest group & plans for 8 / 7 / 06

http://www.jonotesperevestit.tk/

by M Cotton Wed Jul 05, 2006 22:19

I am tired of the gratuitous and cowardly targetting of Kathy Sinnott on Indymedia.ie. She responded comprehensively to the criticisms which some people keep repeating, needlessly, on Indymedia. This stuff about her sitting on the ID group meaning that she supports oppressive actions by others associated with those on the same group is completely untrue. Every instance of such behaviour that she has found out about she has immediately challenged the relevant group and has had two of them kicked off the ID group entirely.

If you are concerned about the records of MEPs you can usefully devote yourself to finding out all that so many others on so many of the other groups have been involved in - there is as much and more to be disgusted by. But, hey, why let ignorance interfere with the pleasure of giving a good person a kicking, eh?

I dont agree with Kathy's stance on everything but this much I know from seeing her at work at close quarters: if the complacent male chauinists who run our country had a fraction of her committment and honesty this country would be a much better place. So she is pro life - she is entitled to be just others take the opposite view: she is also vehemently opposed to putting corporates interests ahead of people's interests. Time and again she has spoken out against injustices of this kind and it is disheartening to see that there ares still some gullible people on the left who dont realise that it is the right wing coroporate establishment that have set out to smear her precisely because she was beginning to succeed where many leftwingers were failing. She had to be brought down and this 'right-wing' zealot tag is all a part of that campaign.

by iosaf Thu Jul 06, 2006 01:46

I doubt she will have much luck in booting him off. In fact as president of the parliamentary group, one would normally expect him to be speaking for that group & Kathy Sinnott

& so I am not casting anonymous slurs on her name. I am publically asking why does a MEP for Ireland sit with the Independent Democracy group whose president is a Polish League of Families member, a man whose party supported the ban on ice cream, tampon adverts and selling beer whilst Ratzinger visited Auschwitz.

http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wybory_prezydenckie_w_Pols..._2005

I don't think this event notice for a protest against the presence of the guest star of honour, Mr Ratzinger at the utlra-conservative 5th world family conference in Valencia this weekend, is the right place to discuss Sinnott's lack of political judgement or her betrayal of her voters. That would be best be done in an article looking at her voting record (as you suggested) & a proper assesment of her role as a MEP.

I also find it odd, that Sinnott publishes on an indymedia space, when her fellow travellers in Europe would not be allowed publish on the polish indymedia site.

link to protest group & plans for Ratzinger's visit to Valencia 8 / 7 / 06

http://www.jonotesperevestit.tk/

by hmmmm Thu Jul 06, 2006 18:45

An Irish man has protested the pope.

in 1988 our own Ian Paisley held a plackard upon which was writ - "you are the antichrist" and shouted at the then pope, Karol Wotyla, John Paul 2. The plackard was wrestled from Dr Paisley's hands by Eurodeputy von Hapsburg, a devout catholic and direct descendent of the Hapsburg emperors of Austro-Hungary.
There were many good reasons for Ian doing this, the free kirks (of which there are many variations) hold that the antichrist rather than being an incarnate "son of the divil" is any individual who undermines the church of Christ and understanding of the Christian message. All popes have been identified as "antichrists" since the days of Luther, when a RC priest argued that the latinate form of Luther's name added up to 666, a follower of Luther correctly pointed out that the Latin inscription on the triple crown or tiara worn by all popes (except Joseph Ratzinger) "vicar of christ" adds up to 666.
The Catholic church itself has two interpretations of the "antichrist" one as "undermining institution which replaces worship or attention to an individual instead of the Christ" (the one fundamentalist protestants use to condemn the Popes of Rome) and the other older theory of Irenea which is bit more like the Hollywood version. But of course that's relevent to our "Global day of Satan 666 news updates" thread :-
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/76483

Well anyway. This will be the first time people will stand pelt naked with pimpley bums & protest the Pope. Be he antichrist or not - Ratzinger is not welcome.

http://www.jonotesperevestit.tk/

by M cotton Thu Jul 06, 2006 21:57

It's a bit much to say this isnt the place to discuss Sinnott while simultaneously accusing her of 'a lack of political judgment' etc and then expect others not to refute that charge when they know it is completely wrong.

Sinnott is not a politician in the ordinary mould - in fact she's not a politician at all in that she is exclusively concerend with matters of principle. She sees the EU as a fundamentally undemocratic, coroporate-driven, anti-people entity. Ind Dem members of the Polish League of Families resigned following her challenges to them about oppressive actions against homosexuals. Her reasons for joining Ind Dem - as the only truly Independent MEP on that group - are because it is the only EU Group that is opposed to the so-called EU constitution and the undemocratic structure of the EU itself. Tampons may be important, they may not be (seriously implicated in toxic shock syndrome, among other health hazards, because of the bleaches used in them, btw) but I can see that they may not weigh as heavily on Sinnott.

Kathy has no truck with Fascism whatsoever and is no apologist for it - more than almost any other MEP, and consistent with her pro-life ethic she has fiercely challenged corporate driven oppression since her election. She is the hardest working MEP in Europe, sitting on more than twice as many committees as others.

The left reserve a particular hatred for people who oppose abortion or are morally traditional. What they completely fail to see is that they are frequently as vicious, intolerant and single-minded about their own moral orthodoxies as any of those they challenge. They frequently victimise and abuse people in a way which scandalises them when it is directed back at them.

Anyone who doesnt read Polish will have problems with the link you gave.

by Chris Thu Jul 06, 2006 22:17

In fact she is a regular contributor. Should she not use her own voice
to refute or disclaim? or probably not entertain anything said about her.

She put up an excellent fight against Micheal Martin, and there will be another election
soon enough. She fought her way into Europe. She has both gonads and a voice.
Let her reply.

by granfalloon - (look it up in wiktionary) Fri Jul 07, 2006 04:01

You all have the link I left above for the nudity and cacophony thing, you might be interested in the web stats - 240,000 visitors have downloaded more than 700,000 pages.
Go on visit :-
http://www.jonotesperevestit.tk/

5000 banners have been produced with the slogan "Jo no t'espere" (which is Catalan or Valencian for I'm not waiting for you") and are now visible on balconies throughout the city. These compete with the balconies which are draped in the Spanish or Papal colours or various Kathurlick symbology.

Accordingly the group organising the "5th world Family day" have accused the organisers of "Jo no t'espere!" of wishing an assassination attempt on the pope The group wishes to make it clear it is studying "all legal options open to us to prosecute those responsible for this libel, and are utterly stupified at the ridiculousness of the accusations" . However, it is not only those interested in Liberty .:. Equality .:. Tolerance who are being attacked by the "Family Day" organisers and Roman Catholic Church, the central government in Madrid and the state TV broadcaster TVE has been attacked for not wanting live coverage or a complete rebroadcast of a Ratzinger mass. & why should they? The pope is going to attack the promotion of tolerance which is one of the few things the current Socialist regime may be proud of.
http://www.europapress.es/europa2003/noticia.aspx?cod=2...ch=73
http://www.levante-emv.es/secciones/noticia.jsp?pNumEje...67014
http://servicios.lasprovincias.es/valencia/pg060607/pre....html

The international federation of atheists FIDA has issued a declaration condemning the use of public space to foment the majority religious denomination as well as the unjustifiable cost (see below) and will celebrate daily seminars and information days during the Papal visit and has called on all atheists, agnostics and free thinkers to attend protest events & wish bring attention to this spectacle masquerading as religious sentiment .

In addition valencia indymedia have organised a video post-production team from the university of Valencia to bring together all coverage of protest events during the Ratzinger visit. I know some of these people, one very sweet girl who first told me about the plans to protest the Papal gig confirming to me that her parents never baptised her "i didn't get water" . They're an experienced bunch of people who indeed saw off skinheads during the immediate aftermath of Madrid bombings when the mayor of Valencia (a far right stronghold ) "ordered" the public home whislt the university refused the students assemble to demand an explanation for the lies from the then PP (Aznar) government on the bombings.

some figures -

The Ratzinger altar measures 2,000 m² (squared) and has cost 600,000€ to build.
1,000 Health personal using 198 vehicles and 2 helicopters have been called on to be paid for by the public purse.
7,000 portable toilets have been hired at the tax payers' expense.
1,000 CCTV cameras have been procured for the security needs of the Papal entourage paid for by the regional government of Valencia from central Madrid taxes.
5,000 police will be drafted into the city.
1,500,000 religious tourists are expected.
the Metro is not working properly since the worst accident in Spanish history at the Jesus station earlier this week.

the total cost to the taxpayers of Spain and the regional goverment of Valencia and the municipal authority of Valencia is estimated at over 20,000,000€. & The Vatican is not offering a cent towards this cost.
Property Speculation has shot through the roof with Valencians offering rooms & flats to tourists.

"20,000,000 euros is what a visit from the pope costs"

by dot - . Fri Jul 07, 2006 11:34

Including barriers(not needed) and outdoor screen (largely unused)

Have fun in the sun .

face paint on the moon.

by pat c Fri Jul 07, 2006 13:56

i am suprised at your defence of kathy sinnott. she opposes abortion, contraception and divorce. do you really identify with her vision for ireland?

The Polish League of Families are still carrying out their homophobic attacks both legal and illegal. i cannot understand how miriam & KS are unaware of this.

by pat c Fri Jul 07, 2006 14:00

Just to clarify: I dont think that Kathy Sinnott herself is homophobic.

But its not enough to say that some MEPs resigned from the group. As long as KS is in the same Euro Group as the LPF then she will share some responsibility for their actions.

by G-man Fri Jul 07, 2006 15:37

Here is Kathy Sinnott's hard work at the European Parliament. Signed by her and three others:

Maciej Marian Giertych (League of Polish Families, and personally an anti-gay and anti-foreigner NUT)
Johannes Blokland (Dutch Christian/evangelical conservative party)
Patrick Louis (the anti-Muslim right-wing 'Mouvement pour la france)

***
Written Declaration on the appeal to the United Nations for an international treaty on a total ban on abortion and euthanasia

The European Parliament,

- having regard to Rule 116 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the principle of human dignity and the right to life,
– having regard to Pope John Paul II's Encyclical 'Evangelium Vitae' of 25 March 1995,
– having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
– having regard to the 108th US Congress' Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003,
– having regard to the UN Declaration of the Rights of the Child,
– having regard to the UN DOHA Declaration on the Family,

A. whereas the right to life – from conception to its natural end – is an innate right of every human being,

B. whereas the right to life, especially of those who are weak and defenceless, must always be protected globally,

C. whereas there is no clear, global and uniform ban on the killing of innocent human beings,

D. whereas the contemporary threat to human life stems from the ill-will of a few decision-makers who ignore the principles of natural law,

E. whereas a majority vote has been assumed competent to overrule natural law,

1. Condemns all acts against human life at every stage thereof;

2. Calls on the Member States to take all necessary measures to protect the right to life, especially to safeguard the right to life of those who are weak, defenceless and voiceless;

3. Points out its concern at the fact that many governments, in legalising abortion and euthanasia, are illegitimately changing legislation – even going against their own constitutions and the will of their people while succumbing to pressure from lobbying groups;

4. Calls on the United Nations to ensure that the right to life – from conception to its natural end – is protected by international law;

5. Calls on the United Nations to establish an internationally binding treaty that will protect all human life and ban all acts against human life, including abortion and euthanasia;

6. Instructs its President to forward this declaration, together with the names of the signatories, to the governments of the Member States, the Commission, the Council, the United Nations, the Holy See, the United States Congress, and the President of the United States of America.

by . Fri Jul 07, 2006 15:38

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/decladoc/document/2005/P6_DCL(2005)0012/P6_DCL(2005)0012_EN.doc

by chris Fri Jul 07, 2006 18:04

Pat c- I did not defend her, I simply said that the woman had the gonads to take on the FF machine in Cork. That was the last time I watched a television. I have said here and in the ed lists that Miriam should not defend her, she is a regular contributor. if she has whatever balls are necessary to fight on her platform then she should have the same ones to speak up, be answerable and not allow someone to defend her.

you have misconstrued me.

I say it again , I am not interested in political shades, fences, shadows, umbras, penumbras. Sinnot must reply. can I be any clearer?

I , by the way am not pissed at being misconstrued, it just gives me stomach ache-
check out the ed lists for the earlier conversation.PC ,and remember
please that I have not the time for arguing on issues that do not concern me. She has been asked thru these pages to defend her alleigance and I support that call. as to denial of spainsh civil war, I take a jaundiced view of fundamentalism in all dogmatic religions-
not as a politician, which I am not, but a writer.

by iosaf Fri Jul 07, 2006 18:56

380,000€ to provide a state funeral for C.J. Haughey attended by 2000. (normal state funeral social security allowance 635€)
7,000,000€ to provide security for the visit of potus (president of the United States) most his travel costs are covered by the USA.
20,000,000€ to entertain the head of state of the Vatican.

Now of those 3 people, the Boss, Bush & Ratzinger - only one takes up a collection. & I assure you not one cent from the "pass the plate" in Valencia is going to the taxpayer. & I'd also remind you that 20 million euro is worth more to the Spanish economy and treasury than the Irish.

Ratzinger is thus a very expensive guest - I'd wager to suggest he's the most expensive guest you can get. We already know that during his visit to Poland the TV channels lost advertising revenue on tampons, the ice cream sellers were put of business for four days and the breweries as well - http://indymedia.ie/article/76290 yet there was an increase in acquisitive crime.

Since his accession to the throne of the Vatican State, Ratzinger has attacked the democratically elected governments of both Spain and its constituent regions of Catalonia and the Basque.
The Roman Catholic Church in Spain has alligned publically with the right wing opposition the PP.
Ratzinger's attacks have not only been verbal they have been symbolic (C/f the 8/12/05 when after a tirade against the liberal gender agenda of the Spanish socialists and the Spanish bishops had declared the Catalan estatut "incompatible with Catholic morality" [ in reference to the "right to die with dignity clause 19" ] Ratzinger met with the Guardia Civil and put on one of their hats. (c/f http://indymedia.ie/article/75681 and the photo http://indymedia.ie/article/75681#comment147103 )

Let me again remind all readers in Ireland and the english speaking world as much as here in the spanish state, that under the rules formulated for election of pontiff, Ratzinger's election was not only abnormal - but highly irregular & possibly illegal. I pointed out that such would be the case 2 months before the death of the last pope.
( c/f the rules :- http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_co....html & where I brought your attention to them
http://indymedia.ie/article/68509 )

Which is why I declared him the black pope. http://indymedia.ie/article/69460 That sweet little "prophesy" never mentioned an "african pope" it merely offered the superstitious the opportunity to expect an illegitimate "coup d'etat" in the Holy See.


There can be no doubt that a very large section of Spanish society and the people of Valencia resent the visit of this reactionary ultra conservative. As there can be little doubt he is an unwelcome guest in most civilised countries. This is no "holy man saint" like Karol Wotyla before him. He must be protested in the strongest terms. & the RC church and organisers of the "5th world family day" are going to be sued for libel for publically stating the group "jo no t'espere vestit!" wish see him assassinated. that would be too much like fulfilling Fatima
notes on preparations over here in "Spanish state / paisos Catalanes" for the Black Pope's visit :-
http://indymedia.ie/article/77048?comment_limit=0&conde...57475

by pat c Fri Jul 07, 2006 20:19

sorry for causing u stomach upset. unfortunately your style of writing leaves itself open to misterpetation. you did praise KS.

i'd also say fair play to brendan ryan for standing up to the martin machine. brendan ryan was supporting the rights of the disadvantaged long before anyone heard of kathy sinnot. oh, and, unlike KS, he also supports womens rights. (this is a relative comparison, i'd disagree with BR on a lot of things, but he doesnt want to bring women back to the dark ages.)

by Daithí Fri Jul 07, 2006 23:34

She is advocating the unprecedented destruction of women's rights, backed up by the maddest and baddest of Europe's far-right fruitcakes.

There are none so blind as those that cannot see.

(Oh and for the record, Pat C is most definitely not in Labour. He'd never be in any party that would have him ;-) ).

by iosaf Sat Jul 08, 2006 00:51

one side a protest against Ratzinger's invitation to Valencia and the politics of the Family & on the other a discussion about only one noted spokesperson, a professional political and MEP Kathy Sinnott, a "fellow contributor to indymedia".

The politics of "Family" is something which has been hijacked by right wing and ultra-conservative elements, who under Ratzinger's rise to power in the last years of John Paul's term as pope built a strategic alliance with the fundamentalist christian right in the USA. It has meant a very tangible increase in the power of the RC church at a time that its status has been eroded to a "faith group".
An example being the influence on the Italian referendum on fertility last June (c/f http://indymedia.ie/article/70263 )

Kathy Sinnott is not by any means the worst example of such "family political beliefs" & judged either on her contributions to our site or her record in the EU parliament. I can think of Mr Edlridge as an example of someone much more "ultra-right". But he is not a professional politician voting on behalf of Ireland. Kathy has seen some very positive behaviour and good written questions tabled in the parliament including issues close to our hearts.
But her role as a member of the US / EU liason delegation and the group she sits with in the EU parliament suggests the possibility that she is "soft right" which in our language all to quickly turn to accusations of being a closet "fash".
However, the analogy of "left v. right" doesn't really work when talking about the family or those with a family agenda - because the agenda has been set by the historic past - the dominance of the Christian churches in general and Roman Catholic church in particular in education in most western states; and also as those parties which at face value seem most "liberal" in social policy are more often than not "right wing" in economics or foreign policy ( the PD's now or the FG of FitzGerald before).
For those states who recently acceded to the EU which were "eastern block" the rise of conservative catholic values may be an understandable reaction to centralised state socialism and its arguable "excesses". But if we are to discuss what is good and bad about one representative of Ireland in the EU, Kathy Sinnott, we ought also consider the needs and popular opinion of her constituency. Ireland being one of the few EU states which elects MEP's by constituency and not on a national list. She is by no means a Dana. & I regret opening such an attack on her.

But---- we ought think about the concerted politics of the European "family agenda" dominated by the RC church with its axis of power presently set by Opus Dei, and the values promoted by US fundamentalist christians. Some protesting Ratzinger tomorrow will say he is responsible for the millions who die from AIDS in Africa, others might equally argue the conservatives of the USA from Reagan to Bush must take that responsibility (through the mexico city policy c/f : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico_City_Policy ) I simply believe we must begin not with question of christian sexually related morality or presumptions on demography but rather with the rule .:. we are all created equally .:. and the observed fact that globally the poor find it harder to have families or make choices related to fertility. Which is of itself neither a "left wing" nor "right wing" starting point.

For those readers interested in the protests against the visit of the Pope to Valencia & the politics of the "5th global family day" & the confrontation in media in Spain read this comment

http://indymedia.ie/article/77048?comment_limit=0&conde...57475

The confrontation in Valencia has now taken a not unpredictably ugly turn. Members of the collective "jo no t'espere vestit" have been threatened today by far right elements. I am not a member of that collective (its valencia based) but I do know so of the people, but I was a bit shocked to find a blood spattered white dove on the doorstep a little more than an hour ago.

by Not Angry, Not from Termonfeckin. Sat Jul 08, 2006 03:20

A hypothetical question to advocates of women's rights. Which of the following two females' rights do you support? A pregnant woman who wishes to have an abortion, or the female foetus who she wishes to abort?

by surprise surprise Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:19

Oh so you thought it was all a jolly bit of happy clappy lovey duvvy protest rather that a real KULTURKAMPF ?

Or maybe the dove was just run over by a car ?

I've often seen dead birds on country roads in Bavaria.
Victims of collisions with cars.

by righteous pragmatist Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:59

I don't like the Catholic Church but I don't like Islam either.

Benedict is going to condemn Muslims but he thankfully has no legal powers.

Islamic regimes all over the world oppress homosexuals, lesbians, unmarried women, mothers, young girls, young men, cut off the heads and hands of criminals and commit genocide and mass murder and sponsor terrorism against liberal democratic tolerant Western countries.

Islam is our real enemy.

But why do leftists protest against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq where they are pitched battles with these Islamofascists? Why do you justify the bombing of Jews by Palestinians? Why do you cry out about the supposed abuse of Islamic terrorist suspects in Gitmo but ignore the war crimes committed by an Islamic regime in Sudan?

by pat c Sat Jul 08, 2006 19:15

i'm certainly more enlightened than KS who wants women to produce at least one baby per annum with none of this divorce nonsense. as long as KS sits with the LPF then she bears responsibility for their actions.

I'm not in the LP but Brendan Ryan has a record of working fopr the disadvantaged that stretchs back almost 40 years. he supports womens rights. KS wants to destroy womens rights.

by M Cotton Sat Jul 08, 2006 20:35

Im in total agreement with your last post and especially this:

"But---- we ought think about the concerted politics of the European "family agenda" dominated by the RC church with its axis of power presently set by Opus Dei, and the values promoted by US fundamentalist christians."

Ratzinger is closer to that lot than he is to the majority of true catholics.

An aspect of recent scandals in relation to the Catholic church which it seems a lot of people may not have thought about is that under John Paul II, the church was vehemently opposed to the war and to corporate induced poverty. The church has undoubtedly been targetted for that reason. The paedophilia, which deserves to be exposed for what it is, was nevertheless well known for many a long decade. It is not unique to the Catholic church but clearly 'celibate' priests are more likely to cater to their sexual instincts in ways they probably would not do if it werent for the bullshit that celibacy is.

But what better weapon with which to destroy an instiution which was fighting tooth and nail in many parts of the world against corporate fascism? I dont regret for a second that the Catholic Chruch has been made to account for itself - and even now it seems as though it may be avoiding much of what it deserves on this account. But you have to look at what is known about paedophile cover ups in all walks of life - especially for example the judiciary, the police and other powerful groups who include paedophiles. That includes socialists, communists, conservatives, muslims, christians etc etc.

Ratzinger, is making a choice. He sees the writing on the wall. The threat to the church is this: we will destroy you with the paedophilia issue if you dont tow the line on war and poverty and to 'save' the church he is bringing it more into line with the 'new world (US) order'. That's not at all Catholic of course and it looks as though his papacy will be every bit as divisive - possibly even fatal - for the church as was anticipated by millions of catholics.

by Chris Murray - The Unmanageables Sat Jul 08, 2006 21:17

Wasn't exactly pro-women either-

He changed his crest and furthered the Mariology cult, unless that was some sort
of benign signal. His encyclicals were of the anti-woman , anti-homosexual variety that we are
used to.

His image was gentler and people responded to him warmly enough, but he did not address
issues regarding women priests nor did he address and confront the issue of paedophilia.
I think he was genuinely spiritual , however, he was part of the systemised abuse of the church.

The Boston scandal stands out in that respect. I object to reading about him somewhere
in this thread as the 'saintly' one. The bureaucracy of the Catholic church and the repression of women
started in the first century AD. Ratzinger is its inheritor and he inherited from a sucession of male popes that have translated spirtuality into systemised dogmatism. Sometimes within a bureaucratic edifice small changes need to be made first, but I cannot recall
a single positive encyclical by JP2
that opened up any of the barriers to the ministery of women. The accepted notion that women
cannot minister because it would invert the bride/ bridegroom concept or that the 12 were men
is not enough. In fact more can be had reading Finnegan's wake or Shakespeare. The bloodlessness
of the Catholic Church was and is progressive.

The images from John Paul the second's funeral were arresting. especially the closing of the red curtains behind the coffin. Benedict XV1 may be the last pope or the black pope, but he is the inheritor
of his patriarchical forbears.

by nihilist obstat Sat Jul 08, 2006 22:16

And indeed the Polish Pontiff Wotyla also attracted protests on the occasion of his visit to Berlin in 1996 - particularly from the gay community and others opposed to his version of "family values". A former Hamburg prostitute Domenica Niehoff, the self-styled Popess Domenica, conducted a mock beatification ceremony for the German transsexual Charlotte von Mahlsdorf (Lothar Berfelde).

So despite the colourful Iberian hyperbole of that CofI apostate, iosaf mac diarmada, this is not the first time that a Pope's visit has generated protests.

by + nihil vestit Sun Jul 09, 2006 19:09

funny thing happened on the way to Mass.

Ok this wasn't the first time a pope has been protested & its good we realise its about time it became an institution.
The Papal press office got around to claiming Zapatero was the first state leader to refuse an invitation to mass. The papal press officer is Spansih born been around a long time, "oh well when we were in Cuba (love the "we") Fidel Castro went to Mass, & when we were in Poland the generals went to Mass"
bla bla ribbid.
Well Castro checked out the tattoos on Diego Maradona. he's into spectacles. ZP and the Pope made quite a picture together. They both grimacing as TVE reported that "the exchange was cordial and based on poverty, Africa, war but not boys who like boys or girls or who like girls".
ZP's wife didn't go with him, she's a piano teacher probably well excommunicated by now - so the vice went instead (lovely woman gave up smoking months ago sticking with it too). La Vega grinned from ear to ear as she shook Ratzinger's hand & slightly nodded her head - Ratzinger not really sure what to do with his ring - she glances back at him "my head is going no lower are you going to punch me or have you copped i'm not kissing your ring?"- She then said loudly enough for the media to hear I hope we remember to find common blah blah and work together blah blah grinning like the cheshire cat - ratzinger looked spooked and gave her a set of rosary beads.
[[[which must have been said quite loudly, as normally they whisper things at each other for this type of thing, and thats why we have "voiceovers" - and at any rate the photographer's cameras make so much noise you can't really hear what people say.]]]

I commented to one person that when you think about it, seeing the pope is cheaper than going to a music festival or even most types of gigs where the star requires a special stage with bullet proof glass and 2000 square metres. It was only 20 million. somewhere between a tenner and a score a head.

The souvenir baseball caps are dinky - white and yellow stripes and just the right size to hide embarassment.

O course I now have an indulgence. I'm holier than thou :-)
bless yiz

by Tank Girl Sun Jul 09, 2006 21:08

Does Miriam believe that the Sinnott story will just go away? Brendan Ryan just reported the facts that Ms Sinnot was part of an alliance that included anti gay and anti semites. Its actually in Ms Sionnotts own interests for this issue to be resolved once and for all. Either she gets the Polish fascists out of the European Group or she should leave it. If shes still associated with the Polish Family League come the nnext election then it will certainly be an issue.

But it wont be the only issue. Kathy Sinnot has a fiercely anti woman agenda and this will be well publicised. Not just by Brendan Ryan and the Labour Party. Kathy will find that Anarchists, Trotskyists, Greens and Independents will be equally keen to see that the truth is spread about Sinnotts Hand Maids Tale Agenda.

by M Cotton Tue Jul 11, 2006 12:18

From Kathy Sinnott

"Miriam,

The deputy who made the comments about Franco is one of the three we put out of the group a long time ago. As I have explained, the three are the League of the Polish family, the others say they are not and are from more than one or other group but ran on the Leagues list. These critics have also continued to complain about Lega Nord despite our action in sending them from the group. None of which was done for the critics' benefit but because Lega Nord had transgressed the principle on discrimination of the group.

I am not silent in the face of these critics because of fear, but because I am not sure that the truth cuts it with them.. I see no criticism of Irish MEPs who share a group with politicians that were part of repressive communist governments. Or criticism of Irish politicians who sit with people who agreed publicly with the Franco remark. Or of commissioners who have criminal records . I think all of the criticism they make of me are red herrings and that the critics are just out for me maybe for other reasons or none. I can not do anything about that because truth is important to me and I spend my life pursuing it as best I can. Lies are hard to defend against particularly when they can be amplified so easily by the internet.

The reality is that IND DEM is the only free group in the parliament, remember Unity in Diversity. The other groups give it lip service, we unite on the five points and can completely disagree on all others. No one tells me how to vote etc. Because we are for more democratic, transparent, closer-to-the-citizen Europe, we have many detractors maybe this is a motive here?"

I have absolutely no doubt that she is right - it is the threat to corporate interests which Sinnott and others like her represent that is the real driver behind these idiotic 'far-right' insults that are being thrown at her. Everyone - left right or centre - who challenges the European project is labelled as far right/racist. As I've said before, there is a certain leftwinger who appears to buy all his views and principles in a boxed set. He or she then seeks out the company exclusively of other people who have bought the same package and are incapable of understanding that some people opt for be-spoke opinions, tailored to the complexities of individual issues. To be a true lefty, in some people's minds, you must oppose or support various issues in an identikit fashion - ergo if you oppose abortion, tha't it! You're for public burning! Talk about totalitarian.

We have pro-life leftwingers and rightwingers posting on Indymedia. The issue comes down to whose rights matter to you most - those of the foetus or the woman. I'll defend Sinnott's right to argue her point of view without victimisation or misrepresentation. She has, in fact, several times responded to the same criticisms on Indymedia, for those who obviously don't realise that ( and for others who know that perfectly well), and has understandably concluded that presenting the facts doesnt appear to make any difference to those who want to villify her mostly because she doesnt think like them, or because she upset heros like Brendan Ryan. Whatever Ryan's own track record, he owes Sinnott an apology and he knows that full well. His remarks about here where those of the classic, sour male loser defeated by a woman. The fact Sinnott is anti-abortion does not make her evil any more than the fact others are pro-choice makes them evil. BTW Chris, its surprising you seem to think the locus for assertiveness and strength of purpose is the male scrotum. Balls are not needed at all, I can assure you!!!

by Chris Murray - The Unmanageables Tue Jul 11, 2006 13:43

actually I say "internal gonads" meaning ovaries/womb/ menstruation:
thus the anti-catholic stance. Tho' Pat did say I tend to be mis-interpreted.

As to pro-choice/pro-life that is an illusion based in the debasement of language and culture
that women experience as a result of losing theirs, because they stop acting from intution
and ape the structures that men create for them. ie subversion is always better than engagement.

Engagement and eunuchism, is well treated in the Female Eunuch by Greer- and tho it was written a long time ago it still has pertinence for women activists.

by The Cat Tue Jul 11, 2006 13:48

I knew you said gonads! I went back searching for it, but failed to find it. Ms Kelly has to reduce it to a scrotum thing!

by pat c Tue Jul 11, 2006 14:11

"As to pro-choice/pro-life that is an illusion based in the debasement of language and culture that women experience as a result of losing theirs, because they stop acting from intution
and ape the structures that men create for them. ie subversion is always better than engagement."

I dont know if i understand what you mean there. pro-choice/pro-life is most certainly not an illusion. certainly not for those of us who campaign for a womans right to choose. i doont think i was physically attacked by illusory youth defence members.

the fact remains that kathy sinnot is a vicously anti-choice person. she wants to control womens bodies, not just to outlaw abortion, but also to outlaw contraception. she also wants to outlaw divorce.

kathy sinnot is a woman as are many of YD etc, many of those involved on the pro-choice side are male.

i dont know if acting from intutition is such a good idea. is it not better to evaluate a situation, analyse the availabe evidence and act on that?

by iosaf Tue Jul 11, 2006 14:37

It was based on conflicting information from both the EU parliament website and Wikipedia's list of allignment of EU deputies.

I categorically apologise to Kathy Sinnott for any hurt my mistake might have caused, and have since the weekend considered asking that this complete thread be removed from the record.
It mistakenly associates Ms Sinnott with a pro-Franco speech in the EU parliament, and mistakenly calls attention to a "naked protest" which of course didn't happen. Everyone who wanted to see the Pope saw him and had a great time, everyone who didn't went to the beach. The two didn't mix.
You know things work that way. the EU parliament is just not user-friendly enough to quickly determine who has voted for what. Imagine that. The whole page is distortion, lie, manipulation, omission, waffling bullshit................................. just like the Sunday Papers you get on the street.


alternatively we could think "we had something to debate".

by Chris Murray - The Unmanageables Tue Jul 11, 2006 17:34

Anyone would think that you were a feminist-

Now, the connection between the hand and the heart when writing is something that
I do not mistake, tho' the interpretation may be mistaken.

I refuse to take a political stance on a debate between two groups of women with differing views
because the debate is a construction based in a debased culture of masculinist bullshit.

As to my personal views on issues concerning abortion, pregnancy, breast-feeding and women's issues. They belong in the private sphere and not here. As to the gonads, they are not connected to the
writing (as yet)....

Or in other words attempting unity across feminism based on an argument specifically to do with the way women experience these issues interests me, or changing the way we look at things.
Prolife/Prochoice as an issue is not for the legislators moral/political/legal but the people directly involved. (man/woman)

by pat c Tue Jul 11, 2006 18:12

Anyone would think that you were a feminist-

i'm a better supporter of womens rights than KS is.

I refuse to take a political stance on a debate between two groups of women with differing views
because the debate is a construction based in a debased culture of masculinist bullshit.

actually its not. one lot of women want to oppress all women by denying them control of their bodies. those women including KS are your enemies.

the state is a reality, not an imaginary construction of masculine bullshit. that state needs to be challenged.

there will be women as well as men on the side of the state.

there will be women as well as men opposed to the state.

As to my personal views on issues concerning abortion, pregnancy, breast-feeding and women's issues. They belong in the private sphere and not here. As to the gonads, they are not connected to the writing (as yet)....

you are entitled to keep your own views private. but the debate isnt going to wait for you.

Or in other words attempting unity across feminism based on an argument specifically to do with the way women experience these issues interests me, or changing the way we look at things.

in present capitalist society men also have a vote on these things. you might also think about linking up with the men who support womens rights.

or would you prefer to build a sisterhood with women like Sinnot who wants to turn women into baby machines?

Prolife/Prochoice as an issue is not for the legislators moral/political/legal but the people directly involved. (man/woman)

unfortunately that does not address the real world situation. in ireland at present it is very much the legislators who are involved.

thats a reality thats not going to be wished away.

there is going to be a savage fight in the years to come. a fight against women like KS.

but you will have men on your side.

i see this as part of my fight as well. its a fight for the kind of society we are going to have.

some like KS want a return to a priest ridden society where contraception, divorce, ivf and sex education are banned. KS isnt homophobic but many of the "pro-life" lobby are.

there isnt going to be any return to the closet.

This Is War!

by Flynn - [email protected] Fri Jul 14, 2006 14:03

Perhaps now we can have the full story on the Bank of the Vatican,Roberto Calvi, Bellasconi,Blair the P2 Masonic Lodge, Offshore Banks as in the Barclay Brothers Channel Islands ins. As well as the great Irish Gas giverway,coupled to this connumdrum we have the remarkable fact of over 20 International Bankers that have been Murdered, or have Commited Suicide,or are standing awaiting Trial, if all roads lead to Rome,this one certainly started there. Only yesterday the Former Bank Of Scotland was found dead on Heathland,an aquaintence of another ScotsBanker, Shot dead on his doorstep last Year.Fact are like Chisles that wanna ring and dinna want to be diputed, R.Burns.

by Get Real - None Sat Aug 25, 2007 17:06

Where are all the feminists today when women are being trafficed for sex, when women are filling themselves with chemicals so that men can exploit them without being held responsible for any pregnancy that occurs.
Women today are excited and flattered if a man asks them to move in with him - no commitment - just free sex for him.
Men expect women to take the chemicals and blame them if they don't. Then the men persuade them to have abortions which cause many of them lifelong problems, both physical and mentally.
When will women cop on and start having respect for themselves as human beings and not sex objects to be exploited by men and the pharmaceutical industry?

by Sceptic Sun Aug 26, 2007 15:33

There have been numerous anti papal protest since 1978 let alone 1878 – whoever wrote that it would be the first one since 1878 is pretty ill informed. The pope is bound by scripture, tradition and a body of doctrine – he can’t suddenly change the rules on gays, women priests, abortion to satisfy demands from mainly if not totally atheistic and secular sources in respect of what might well be transient and whimsical social trends and fashions. The idea of Irish going to Spain to protest against the Pope’s visit there is a bit daft – they would be visitors there themselves and much less distinguished and welcome ones than the Pope. The idea of a naked protest is even more daft – most probably this would be a crime and the police there would be a lot less lenient and a lot more firm with protestors breaking the law there than our own rather benign species here – having observed protests in Spain and Ireland the cops there have no problem using CS gas and heavy enough tactics. The Gárdai and PSNI are pussycats in comparison.. Also this is nothing to do with Roberto Calvi or anything like that. That’s just throwing everything into the pot and reflects deep anti-catholic prejudice and protest for its own sake rather than protesting about anything substantial. Go there and disgrace yourselves by stripping publicly if you like but don't be winging to the Irish media and the Irish consular service if you get a few bashes to the head with truncheons or a few strategically placed kicks in the torso because this is asking for it.

by Tampon Sun Aug 26, 2007 19:59

Thus I made the allusion to the 1878 attack on the funeral procession of a pope by members of a masonic lodge (french rite). I would be happy to argue the history of protests against papal visits or to be more precise - protests organised or sponaneous on the routes taken by pontiffs in alive, dead or if it happens undead forms. I am resident in the Spanish state, quite welcome to the point of enjoying the company and facilities of lodges of that same rite & was delighted at end that the protest I announced here ended in naked people going to the beach & far right catholics listening to family policy from Joseph Ratzinger.
I'm now glowering at my computer screen pretending I'm morpheus from the Matrix movement making the "come on & slap me if you dare" beckoning hand signal to Mr Skeptic.

.:. e:p:a:l:
Take me on - let's talk papal history with citation.

by Sceptic Sun Aug 26, 2007 20:28

The most famous was in 1983 when John Paul II was jeered by a crowd of regime supporters in Managua. See the link. There were also protests during his visits to Holland and if recall right Belgium and the US on the issues of women priests by individual women and nuns who made statements at public occasions. I don't have links for these but they would not be hard to find. But protests were there. Our own Mr. Paisley also protested during the same Pope's 1982 visit to Scotland.

by tampon Sun Aug 26, 2007 22:36

I knew it the first time I read your comments Skeptic. I took myself off to the lists and report comment this button & let my gut feelings be known :- He is the one . Oh yes, they scoffed, they said it would be waste of red & blue jellybeans, they said the Oracle wouldn't even offer you a sniff of her cookies. But now you've proved them wrong with your citation & near eye-blinking faster than wind i breap na súl agus ar nós na gaoithe responses.
I'll be challenging you no longer & from now on wherever you bring the fight I'd only hope to be your yeoman, your pageboy, your annal writer, your hagiographer. Indeed you've almost brought me to renounce my sedevacantist mistrust of the German Pope & seek the sacraments of the Roman church & take out a contract of assassination on the first minister of the Stormont Assembly & hereforth accept the mother church of Rome as the only true church and moreover shall dedicate myself to prayers and intercessions and need be the purchase of indulgences & filig of tax deductable charitable donations to the end of seeing you raised to the pontifical throne in your own time, Sir.

You are the one

by Sceptic Mon Aug 27, 2007 20:43

I am unsure what to make of your last comment. However you can be sure I have no great desire to occupy the Chair Of Peter myself. I would urge you not to entertain thoughts of assassinating Mr. Paisley - that would not be right or productive. Also you should consider quitting your involvement in freemasonry - its generally not a good idea to have Catholic lodges or for catholics to be in them.

by iosaf - (I wrote this article under the name "Tampon") Sat Jul 18, 2009 17:37

I respect the right to worship as I believe many IMC Ireland contributors do,
I have more than often admired and appreciated the folkloristic function of religiosity &
I can not deny the contribution of ecclesiastical patronage to occidental culture.

But I too, as all others have the self-evident and unalienable right, in no way granted by a god to express my opinions & to form public assembly.

I have & had the right to encourage others to oppose the foreign policy of the Roman Catholic state which is the Vatican.

I am tired of these religious spam attacks on our community & now today worse I feel my back texts on Vatican Diplomatic relations and state visits are being attacked. I'm well tired of having hackneyed bible quotes & religious fanaticism of the Christian type thrown at me & all of us on IMC ireland & feel moved to write something about these people who belong to the religious fringe on indymedia ireland and utter minority in indymedia global circles who presume, I suppose through shallow reading of my writing yet it would appear certain familiarity with my back articles, that every time I take to the QWERTY and criticise or encourage others to criticise the Vatican state, I am in fact attacking catholics or the right to worship.

It would be one short step for such people if they had the money to use Ireland's proposed blasphemy laws - Though I maintain that whilst the fraudulent cult of Scientology is allowed to operate in the Irish state it will be that group who first take advantage of those proposed laws

What galls me even more is the cocksure citation of biblical texts and the attitude which drips in moral relativism. That same supposed error of the post-modern age in which we live which all christians & many practicant jews and muslims constantly rail against.

::- That same moral relativism which yells about the right to life in Ireland & Malta and organises flash mobs in my own home state of Spain to prevent morning after pills for teenagers.

::- That same moral relativism which champions supposed "family values" which are supposedly normal and prevalent . Despite the reality of family life in Spain where currently factually and statistically it is estimated that 43% of children are being raised in non-nuclear families (meaning they are raised in single parent homes, partnerships which are not their biological parents or thanks to Spanish marriage law - single sex parents)

& that statistic is relevant to the article I wrote above supporting the protests against Ratzinger's family values exercise in Valencia.

::- That same moral relativism which preaches to Africa saying not to use condoms yet has not the courage or the political maneuverability to preach to the USA and ask it to end capital punishment or even had the consistency to speak out against the execution of mentally handicapped prisoners before the US Supreme Court finally accepted such sentences constituted "cruel & unusual punishment" in the last five years.

I know biblical texts remarkably well as I also know the talmud and am familiar with the Quran. As a classical musician & organist, I grew up & have spent much of my adult life proximate to various liturgical and christian denominational traditions.

I actually read latin, greek and have small hebrew and arabic. Thus I am not only more than prepared to debate at length the ridiculous postulation of theological concepts and chistological issues (such as the nature of the trinity & that millenial debate on the homoousios or nature of the godhead - but I am also relatively through the minimum qualifications to do so.

c/f wikipedia for theologians : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoousia
or c/f a back image of mine for those who just want to laugh this religious spammer off
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/74240?&condense_comment...38969 )

& more to the Irish point - I am worried that soon the Irish government will make it illegal to tell the truth as it is - Scientology is fa raudulent cult which masquerades as a worship option and systematically infiltrates social concern groups, agenda & state institutions.