… you have to do something to deserve the Noble Prize for Peace.
Why didn’t we see this coming?
They must have been impressed with his performance in Copenhagen. They must have loved his speech at the UN. They must have loved how he stuck it to Poland and how he is throwing Israel under the bus.
Didn’t Arizona State decline to give President Obama because he hadn’t done anything yet?
So they give him the Noble Peace Prize so that he might do something in the future?
Let’s review:
- POTUS called for the abandonment of nuclear weapons…. like that’s going to happen.
- He expanded American diplomacy…. read "we’re sorry were us", as we bow to a Saudi king.
- He replaced Pres. Bush’s unilateralism with multilateralism. Though Pres. Bush had, what, 43 nations involved in Iraq and Pres. Obama can get … who?… to help in Afghanistan?
Old Scandinavian hippies want to encourage Pres. Obama… so they give him an atta boy. Much like L’Osservatore Romano did, right?
Both really important entities, too.
Al Gore can give him some tips about how to handle his knew prestige.
I bet those aging Scandinavian hippies are thinking… "Now let’s see if he’ll bomb Iran or send more troops to Afghanistan."
The Academy Awards now impress me more.
Thus endeth the rant.
Loading ...
The funniest part is the fact that the period for nominations closed two weeks after Obama’s term began.
Actually, I think it is hilarious. It is so obviously a total set up that it makes me laugh….
They don;t have ears to hear, Father. You know that better than I do. Better than I do because you follow the news. I gave up on that a long time ago. It’s surprising what you still keep track of, really…
Suffering comes in many forms and has often been imposed by the government of nations. To be faced with suffering at the hands of a blind man without morals (cf. Kant’s Autonomy notion–he is moral in that regard…which doesn’t really count because it’s mostly wrong thinking) is to see the future of another historical decline. I would like to ask my brothers and sisters ion the faith why they voted him in, but I fear they wouldn’t know how to phrase the answer. At least I can’t see what in this man could attract a Christian. Soon we will also look like our evolutionary predecessors.
This is like giving one of the Nobel science awards to Ray Bradbury.
To have predicated the award – even in part – upon Obama’s rather naive suggestion that nuclear weapons be abandoned – would have been irrational even for the Nobel Committee. Abandonment of nuclear weapons – even if, in the highly improbable event, it should occur – is, by no means, a certain path to peace. A world without such weapons, unfortunately, might see more conflagrations and local and regional conflagrations expanding into major wars. The most likely explanation is that he got it because he is who he is.
But Father! But Father! He brings us “hope”. He stands for “change” and “yes, we can.” That’s so much more impressive and inspiring than defying the Taliban, or cleaning up land mines, or serving in the poorest parts of Africa, or suffering in a Chinese prison. He’s the Chosen One. How can we deny him any honor???
Maybe we’ve gone commie already and the people behind the prize were coerced.
No, I’m not into conspiracy theories, it just crossed my mind.
Mr Obama was, apparently, ‘humbled’ to receive this honour. If he was so ‘humbled’, and truly as intelligent as everyone says he is, then he should decline the honour in recognition of all those previous laureates whose achievements have changed our world.
But I don’t think he will.
And I dread to click on NCR’s website today. At least the Tablet went to press before this was announced.
The idea that this man has received the same award as Blessed Mother Teresa is sickening and very frightening. This latest debacle clearly reveals that the Nobel Prize is now awarded for idealogues and not for people who actually DO something to earn such a distinction, which really isn’t all that distinctive anymore. Even Jimmy Carter was more deserving than this phony.
Well, there’s one more worldly honour shown for what it is: tinsel.
Even my 23 year old son, who doesn’t really go to church any more, told me this morning that the Nobel Prize no longer has any meaning. I replied that it hadn’t had any real meaning for over a generation now.
One word comes to mind: “Arafat”.
I stopped paying attention to the Nobel Prize / The Acadamy Awards / etc / etc/ etc/ in 1989 when Jethro Tull was awarded the Grammy for Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance Vocal or Instrumental!
Just think, one day we may not be able to have a conversation like this one without being arrested. That is a reality in other parts of the world already.
For years people have looked to our government to save them from certain things and to provide others they lack: what they get now is the human version of a savior. Now we know why God had to take on our flesh in order to really show us the Way. I wonder if Isaiah was this disappointing..no he was God’s mouthpiece and this guy speaks for someone else. Of course.
My only reaction is:
DY-NO-MITE!!!!
Given the language of the Nobel citation, those zany Scandinavians wanted to be like so many Americans late last year.
By voting for Obama, they voted against George W. Bush.
Maybe it is a “self esteem” award like they give in school now.
Dynomite? I can hear the original TV personality saying this. But Dynomite?
It’s a look into the creepy psyche of the Euroleft intelligentsia. As noted, the man hadn’t been in office a month when the nomination went in. Nothing he’s done in the nine months since warrants so much as an attaboy. They have made this man into an idol and have accord to him hopes and worship that no man deserves. Unholy, when you think about it.
Help us our, Father, we need a word that means BEYOND UNHOLY and sinking fast into oblivion!
I meant: HELP US OUT with a T instead of the r.
By voting for Obama, they voted against George W. Bush.
Yes. This was one last chance to void their bowels on the man’s legacy.
In any event, here’s a link to a poll being conducted by the Cincinnati Enquirer:
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091009/CINCI/91009002
Rich: Did you say POLL?
So…I guess that hopey-changey thing is working out just fine.
If level of achievement is one of the criteria, then my cat should have received part of the award for medicine, because it’s able to sense when I’m feeling down.
It’s just like actually thinking that the Academy Awards, or the Grammys, or any other award actually means something. Usually, it’s just the inbreeds and self-referentials patting themselves on the back.
Ignore it. They give him a prize for peace when he encourages the slaughter of innocents and views pregnancy as a ‘mistake’.
eo quod deceperint populum meum,
dicentes: Pax, et non est pax
Ez 13:10
Obama can get … who?… to help in Afghanistan?
The British (in Helmand, where we are losing troops at a dreadful rate)
The Canadians
Nato troops
Please pray for them. They are only boys, and they are very very brave.
Padre
Kudos for the Friday Cavalcade of Comedy – I KNEW we had a hit on our hands!
m
Okay, I’ll give it a try myself. The award was given to the indocible and hypogenous ignis fatuus.
WOW! The comments are popping up on this site and others faster than zits on a teenagers face.
As for B.O. getting the prize, it’s the Cult of Personality on steroids.
in related news, the Vatican has announced that I will be beatified tomorrow and canonized on Saturday. I shall be known by the name of “St. Maynardus the Somewhat Good”. The commemorative cards, medallions, etc. will bear my motto: “He Meant Well”…
The next thing you know he’ll be getting law degrees from Catholic Universities….
And why not? He’ll be rewriting the law books.
Aware that faithful and influential members of the Church through the years have received this award, the bestowal upon our president shows just how irrelevant such “crown(s) of leaves that wither” really are…
I can almost hear Rick Moranis as Merv Griffin commenting on this historical event: “Oooooooo – he’s goooood. Up next – Virginia Graham oooooooo she’s wonderful…”
m
These are the people/organizations that were also nominated. Draw your own conclusions.
Sima Samar, women’s rights activist in Afghanistan: “With dogged persistence and at great personal risk, she kept her schools and clinics open in Afghanistan even during the most repressive days of the Taliban regime, whose laws prohibited the education of girls past the age of eight. When the Taliban fell, Samar returned to Kabul and accepted the post of Minister for Women’s Affairs.”
Ingrid Betancourt: French-Colombian ex-hostage held for six years.
Handicap International and Cluster Munition Coalition: “These organizations are recognized for their consistently serious efforts to clean up cluster bombs, also known as land mines. Innocent civilians are regularly killed worldwide because the unseen bombs explode when stepped upon.”
“Hu Jia, a human rights activist and an outspoken critic of the Chinese government, who was sentenced last year to a three-and-a-half-year prison term for ‘inciting subversion of state power.'”
“Wei Jingsheng, who spent 17 years in Chinese prisons for urging reforms of China’s communist system. He now lives in the United States.”
“Dr. Denis Mukwege: Doctor, founder and head of Panzi Hospital in Bukavu, Democratic Republic of Congo. He has dedicated his life to helping Congolese women and girls who are victims of gang rape and brutal sexual violence.”
[Great comment. You get a WDTPRS Gold Star for the day.]
By voting for Obama, they voted against George W. Bush.
Yes. This was one last chance to void their bowels on the man’s legacy.
In any event, here’s a link to a poll being conducted by the Cincinnati Enquirer:
Yes 790
No 3246
Kinda say it all.
Dynomite? I can hear the original TV personality saying this. But Dynomite?
Comment by Luke
Doesn’t everyone know that Alfred Nobel invented dynamite?
Thanks robtbrown. I didn’t know.
Psalm 14 anyone?
bnaasko: I’m with you! PLASTER. Ezekiel 13:10 indeed. Good call.
I knew that Nobel invented dynamite (kinda like powdered nitroglycerin, much more stable than the liquid form).
In his will he left most of his estate for the Nobel Prizes.
The purpose of the Peace Prize was According to Nobel’s will, the Peace Prize should be awarded “to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.
I hope someone brings up how after “dissing” Bush-America by declaring that he would eschew intefering in the internal affairs of other nations, since June, 2009, he and his Secretary of State, have been interfering full-bore in the internal affairs of Honduras, but providing (along with the other members of the Socialist International at the UN) protection to Friend-of-Hugo-Chavez Zelaya, and even now are calling for his “reinstatement” to run for President.
This, in a country whose 1980 Constitution only allows any President to serve for one term of office. Zelaya was deposed according to Honduran law by the Honduran Supreme Court, and they appointed Micheletti until Nov, 2009 general-election.
Michelleti himself cannot run again.
Peace Prize indeed: it’s peace against socialist power grabs!
Come off it, gang. All this is just sour apples over the stunning successes in every theater of super-human accomplishment by His Oilyness Barack the Great.
I just heard that the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces are standing ready to award PrezBO the Medal of Honor, based on what would without any doubt have been his combat heroics, had the US military deserved to be honored by his participation.
Any chance Benedict XVI might step down in favor of Barack I? Novus ordo types get a tingle down their collective legs at the mere thought of such a possibility.
Thus saith Sacred Scripture (Is 5: 18-23):
“Woe to those who draw iniquity with cords of falsehood, who draw sin as with cart ropes, who say, ‘let him make haste, let him speed his work that we may see it; let the purpose of the Holy One of Israel draw near and let it come, that we may know it!’
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight!
Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine, and valiant men in mixing strong drink, who acquit the guilty for a bribe, and deprive the innocent of his right!”
Father Z, You write…”Pres. Bush had, what, 43 nations involved in Iraq.” Is that supposed to be something to be proud of?
It’s amazing how quickly the thin veneer of being non-political is dropped. Some of the comments here are a disgrace…”Euroleft intelligentsia”, Un-Holy (The invasion of Iraq was Un-Holy!) and worst of all…”Scandinavian Hippies” Spoken like a true xenophobic Republican American.
You seem to have forgotten about Obama’s broadcast to Iran and his dumping of Bush’s Missile Base in Eastern Europe. Both huge acts of Peace, so he has actually done something. More than your warmongering ever Bush did.
Yeah you might love the bells and smells of TLM but ask yourself if you are guilty of any of the following… [you know… I took your comments in stride up to this point as the observations of your typical liberal democrat… ho hum. But now I see what a sad case you are.]
The idlotry of flag worship?
Being Patriots first and Christians second? [Someone may have to convince me not switch you off after this seriously obtuse and hateful comment.]
Observing civil religion?
Blessed are the peacemakers
Is it demeaning, if not racist, to suggest with an award like this that no accomplishments are required for recipients of a certain race?
Yes a POLL, already voted, almost 5 to 1 Obama does not deserve the Nobel, get out the vote let’s make it a blowout.
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091009/CINCI/91009002
I can’t believe the waste of a perfectly good batch of electrons over this silly little man and his huge ego
Hey! The Novus Ordo was inspired by the Holy Spirit as well as the EF. We in America can’t help that we got a poor translation of the Mass. Or that they left certain things out they thought we were too dumb to grasp like the “dew of the Holy Spirit” phrase that’s missing in the English.
CarpeNoctem…Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
What are you talking about? Have you people lost your senses? You talk as if he has actively PURSUING some secret evil agenda. You can always tell when an arguement is weak becuase it comes out as slurs and insults. I’d expect such hysterics on Fox News but not here.
Why have you people never ever bothered applying all this scripture to ANY other leader since Clinton? It’s embarrassing! It’s like being part of some wacky conspiricy theory club.
Prudentius: BO is intent on killing. Only the killing he wants goes on behind the scenes by and large. We never said Bush was an all-around great guy, but he opposed abortion. While you may justify BO’s reception of this honor because he droppoed a missile base, it’s unjustified on the basis of his forceful stance in favor of planned parenthood. Don’t go there.
I just read the novel Fr. Elijah for the first time last week, so this has me a little freaked out…
Prudentius, you noble Christian patriot, explain to us, whatever our failings, what is going on in Honduras, and why Mr. Obama is blessing that good people with the benefits of his sanctions.
What evil has Honduras done to merit such attention?
Maynardus: Sorry I can’t make it to Rome ( they won’t miss me amongst the thousands) but I’ll watch on EWTN. ( I won’t be going to Oslo either)
“It’s amazing how quickly the thin veneer of being non-political is dropped. Some of the comments here are a disgrace…”Euroleft intelligentsia”, Un-Holy (The invasion of Iraq was Un-Holy!) and worst of all…”Scandinavian Hippies” Spoken like a true xenophobic Republican American.”
It’s amazing how you can draw a caricature of my politics based on a few code words.
– What does the invasion of Iraq have to do with idolization of Barack Obama? How do you know anyway that I support the invasion of Iraq? Can nothing else be a sin since Iraq was invaded?
– How do you figure I am a Republican? (I am an independent and support no party)
– How do you figure I am xenophobic? (I have lived abroad over 10 years, speak 2 foreign languages, and will probably live in Europe again)
Your comment was a disgrace. Think clearly about your assumptions next time you set fingers to keyboard, and exercise some prudence, “Prudentius.”
PS – if you think my comments on the leftist intelligentsia on the Nobel committee were harsh, you should try reading comments on European news sites…
I can’t understand what you guys are getting so worked up about. I mean, he made a speech in Cairo, for crying out loud.
I’m not interested in Obama, I don’t support him or any nation or leader. I am just worried at the direction the so-called Traditionalist scene is becoming.
I worry about how blantantly partisan and narrowly nationalistic some of the opinions on here are. How un-christian the language being used is, and just how misguided the the insinuation that Obama is demonic is!
This is his payoff for the assault on Notre Dame, pacifying the Catholic Church.
Oops-in the comment I made under ‘Assumption Grotto’ I said ‘Norway’….the Nobels are awarded in SWEDEN…my bad…
Mike Morrow-I hope you’re being sarcastic!
I’m still shaking my head over this-any one of dinsdale’s list would have been more deserving.
ANYONE in the world, with some few exceptions irishgirl, would have been more deserving.
Obama in the same company as Mother Teresa. How demeaning to the memory of Mother Teresa.
irishgirl – the Peace Prize is awarded by a committee selected by the Norwegian parliament, and is awarded in Oslo. Back when Alfred Nobel started this, Sweden and Norway were in union under one monarch. Norway got to give the Peace Prize.
Prudentius: those who side with Satan on the abortion issue can easily and rightly be called demonic. No man who believes he can make up his own morals as he travels through life could be seen as God-fearing. When we follow self we fall prey to the world the flesh and the devil. Traditionalist is a political word. Orthodoxy and dissension better reflect the reality.
NB: When OB goes to visit a place and asks that the crucifixes be removed it’s a sign that he’s an enemy of the cross of Christ. We’re simply religious people who view politics from the standpoint of religious principles.
You seem to have forgotten about Obama’s broadcast to Iran and his dumping of Bush’s Missile Base in Eastern Europe.
Why do you insist on the Stalinist elimination of the concept of Central Europe?
What do you think should be US policy toward the independence of the Ukraine and Belarus?
Both huge acts of Peace, so he has actually done something. More than your warmongering ever Bush did.
Blessed are the peacemakers
Comment by Prudentius
I am glad that Obama has begun an attempt to place the US in more of a neutral position between the Israelis and the Moslems. That notwithstanding, whether or not the Middle East explodes will have little to do with the US.
Oh dear…
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/vatican-congratulates-obama-nobel
You can determine everything you need to know by the URL. I’m sorry but I just don’t understand why stuff like this keeps happening.
This makes me sort of fume.
…evil Catholics have corrupted our poll – this is *not* representative of Cincinnati moms, who love Obama…
Fr. Z – before you say that the Academy Awards impress you more, remember that AlGore is an Oscar winner.
jkking: “It’s hoped that this very important recognition will further encourage [Obama’s commitment to peace].” (from the article)
In my own opinion they’re simply highlighting their approval of the peace measures he has taken. In one sense it just highlights that all honors and awards are plaster compared to the one we hope to hear when we see God vis a vis.
“I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who have been honored by this prize.” President Barack Obama
At least he recognizes that much!!! Than again, it’s probably just some ‘false humility’!
Prudentius, I also find it quite disturbing that some traditionalists seem to unscrupulously adopt American nationalist rhetoric. The US has never been a Catholic country and the Church should not involve itself in any way in its petty political matters, though it should continue to camapign on moral issues (eg abortion, peace, social justice). [ALL: Does you see how this underscores what I wrote about after the Notre Shame event? Traditional liturgical expressions terrify liberals, because traditional Roman liturgy exposes the emptiness of their world view. And they continue to think – obtusely – that traditional is fundamentally about lace. Dopey.]
This award is a bad joke. Of course the reason it is a bad joke is that the anti-war left was taken in by Mr. O. Of course they have now become quite a bit less anti-war now that the Bush foreign policy has become the Bush/Obama foreign policy.
Those of us on the anti-war right have no expectations of Mr. O. Thus we have not been disappointed.
However, the disastrous wars of the Middle east are destroying the United States.
For those who fancy themselves friends of Israel, the term ‘enabler’ should come to mind. If the day should ever come that Israel is ‘pushed into the sea’ it will be due in no small measure to the blank checks (literally and figuratively) given to that state by the US.
The Church isn’t involving itself. Catholics are applying their faith to political issues and commenting on them. After all it’s the orthodox thing to do. Not traditionalist or lefty. Orthodox.
chcrix, I couldn’t agree more. Personally I would love to Israel destroyed and replaced with an exclusively Catholic state. The idea of a Jewish or Islamic state in the Holy Land is equally repulsive.
It’s just like actually thinking that the Academy Awards, or the Grammys, or any other award actually means something. Usually, it’s just the inbreeds and self-referentials patting themselves on the back.
Comment by Bryan
All you need to know about the Oscars is that Alfred Hitchcock, now commonly regarded as the best director in history, never won the award for best director.
Prudentius, I also find it quite disturbing that some traditionalists seem to unscrupulously adopt American nationalist rhetoric. The US has never been a Catholic country and the Church should not involve itself in any way in its petty political matters, though it should continue to camapign on moral issues (eg abortion, peace, social justice).
Comment by shane
What do you mean by petty political matters?
BTW, Hitchcock was a practicing Catholic.
You seem to have forgotten about Obama’s broadcast to Iran and his dumping of Bush’s Missile Base in Eastern Europe.
Actually, the Nobel Peace Prize committee must have forgotten about them, since each more likely increases the possibility of war rather than peace.
Shane:
I didn’t say I wanted to see Israel destroyed. I said that IF it ends up like the medieval kingdom of Jerusalem it will be due in no small measure to unthinking US support. I recommend the writings of Uri Avnery and Alfred Lilienthal.
Re: Vatican congratulations
Well, it’s not really congratulating Obama. Look at that boilerplate. It’s just the “congratulatory statement for whoever ends up winning the Nobel Peace Prize”. I do feel sorry for whatever sub-secretary was responsible for thinking up how to fill in the blanks. What a scramble to think of any achievement…
However, it’s unfortunate. I guess Rush was just talking about it on the radio, and my mom was all mad at Pope B, for something I highly doubt was ever brought to his desk. Sorta like the thank you note that German woman keeps hauling around, trying to prove that the Pope thinks Harry Potter is evil.
Sigh. Sometimes the Vatican’s polite nothings are taken waaaay too seriously. Sometimes I wish they’d just politely say nothing at all instead.
None of you have gone to the heart of the matter: What will Michelle wear? And will the awards banquet count as a “date night”?
Luke,
You wrote…
those who side with Satan on the abortion issue can easily and rightly be called demonic
And what of those side with Satan on the issue of going to war on a lie for oil? What weight do you give to every other kind of murder and warmongering?
We’re simply religious people who view politics from the standpoint of religious principles.
That’s just not true is it though, you are displaying open politcal bias towards the Republican Party who, for your information, never ever considered changing the law on abortion in all the time they were in office!
From the Catholic.com message boards:
“See, this is the real reason Chicago did not get the 2016 Olympics – the IOC did not want to witness the spectacle of handing out Gold medals before the races had been run.”
This reminds me of a Law & Order episode that I watched the other day. I think it’s Season 14 Episode 2 entitled, “Bounty”.
“That’s just not true is it though, you are displaying open politcal bias towards the Republican Party who, for your information, never ever considered changing the law on abortion in all the time they were in office!”
So… signing the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban was nothing? Connor’s Law was nothing? Appointing a pro-life SCJ was nothing?
I’m no fan of GWB but I recognize the contributions he did make to pro-life causes.
Maybe you should step off the “Republicans are evil!” soapbox for a minute and recognize that both parties’ members have their flaws, including Obama.
Prudentius: Believe me, if any of my friends chimed in here they would vouch for the fact that I don’t know enough about politics to be either Dem or Rep. Maybe I spoke in haste. The one thing I know is that governments are made up of communities and communities, families, and families individuals. Where do we draw distinctions? Sadly we choose between the lesser of evils at most polls. No individual, pre-born, born, or at the end of their life should have their rights pulled out from underneath of them. OB was the only candidate who was on record for allowing late-term abortion survivors to be left without life support. The choice was easy for me. I support no political party, but do my best–which is nothing to brag about–to choose a candidate based on my faith and belief that we each have inalienable rights given to us by God as images of his divine Son.
This is the ultimate triumph of liberal “good intentions” over actual achievement. Obama has done nothing (or next to nothing) to further world peace – some say he may have seriously hindered it. No matter – he *means well* – i.e. he intends the same as the European establishment.
Recall that the last sitting president to be awarded the NPP was Woodrow Wilson – another classic case of a man who just *wanted* world peace more than anyone else though he had little idea of how to achieve it. No matter – he meant well, even if in spite of his policies (some would say because of them) the biggest war ever broke out less than a generation after he left office.
Cool blog, JoAnna–love your slogan!
Sadly, none of that changes the fact that he has made overtures for world peace.
Of course both parties are deeply flawed but you don’t get that impression on this forum do you, especially if the clergyman running it seems to be impressed by Bush’s coalition of the willing
Prude–
Today the Nobel Committee chose to honor the dishonorable, to put hope in the hopeless, to call for the sacrifice of security in the undiciplined, flailing grasp at an easy peace. Tie that in with the ideas of Isaiah’s hymn of the winepress and hum the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” behind it, and it makes one take pause and consider how far we have fallen in this world. (These are simply my thoughts with respect to foreign policy… the errors he is committing in domestic policy are even more distressing to me as a Christian and as an American.)
Quite frankly, Obama is out of his league as a world leader, and the European elite want to applaud that through this once-hallowed award. Congratulations, Mr. President. Enjoy it while you can. I hear you have a war-room meeting this afternoon and at least three more years in office to look forward to. I hope this fawning adulation doesn’t risk our national security with respect to the tough decisions you still have to make for us and for the world.
We need peace-real peace… peace gained through justice, sacrifice, honor, and mutual respect among nations and peoples. Anything less is simply the absence of war, which I assure you is not peace.
We need our boys and girls off the battlefield so they can go home to their families and return to their lives. The job of world security has rested on their shoulders and their sacrifices far too long. I know, however, in my own work in the military, that there is an eagerness in their hearts… not for easy solutions, not for half-answers, not for ‘settling’ in uneasy compromise, in leaving a mission undone which their brothers and sisters have given their last full measure of devotion. Our young people fighting the ongoing wars desire a greater peace than I suppose anyone who hasn’t been on a battlefield can imagine.
That’s what’s wrong with today’s award.
Did I slip the fabric of dimensions into Bizarro World in my sleep?
To think these are the kind of people who now speak reasonably:
Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas official
“Obama has a long way to go still and lots of work to do before he can deserve a reward. Obama only made promises and did not contribute any substance to world peace.” [And this is from an official Hamas? Interesting.]
We’re not arguing that BO hasn’t “introduced” (overtures) measures that could lead to peace in a relative view of that term. Has he really changed the world in a profoundly positive and moving way? I think that the question here.
Those who voted this man into office should realize their dislike [hatred] of republicans doesn’t justify their vote for a killer. I mean killer in the broad sense of the word.
Prudentius,
I wholeheartedly agree with JoAnna. President Bush is not evil simply because he engaged in committing our country to war. While the wars were not a good idea, they in no way, shape, or form amount to the evil that our current President promotes profusely. His entire cabinet and all of his advisers are adamantly pro-abortion. He has flouted his pro-death stance at every corner. He is pushing for a legalization of same-sex “marriage”, he opened the door for tax-payer funding for destroying human embryos. More humans will die under his policies in one year than will die in the entire duration of “Bush’s wars”.
In addition, while Kmeic claims that Obama was his “Catechism come to life”, I cannot disagree more. Catholic tradition has always upheld subsidiarity for meeting the needs of the people. John Paul II interpreted this as reaching into the economic sphere. In fact, the Catechism explicitly condemns socialism (and extreme capitalism) in all its guises. John Paul II in Centesimus Annus refences that the free market is the best economic system. More recently, Benedict XVI in Caritas in Veritate emphasized that true charity comes from the heart, not coercion. These are all principles that the Catholic Church holds, and our current President does not.
Insofar as the President shows concern for the poor and downtrodden, I find the evidence underwhelming. Common sense holds that throwing money at a problem doesn’t make it go away. If common sense holds this why is doing just that considered compassion?
This has nothing to do with “party politics”.
Prudentius wailed: You talk as if he has actively PURSUING some secret evil agenda.
President Obama’s evil agenda is not secret, Prudentius.
Obama hasn’t made any greater “overtures for world peace” than any other U.S. president. He hasn’t ended a single war, reconciled any hostile nations, or achieved a single thing. The best you can do to justify this “peace” prize is point to some empty words he has spoken and a dubious decision regarding middle defense in Eastern Europe.
But look, the Nobel Peace Prize hasn’t meant anything for a LONG time. Remember that terrorist mass murderer Yasser Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize, and, as was pointed out above, President Woodrow Wilson also won this prize, even though his actions paved the way for World War II. This prize is nothing more than the Nobel committee gushing, “OMG he smiled at me! OMG! OMG! OMG!”
“middle defense”
Errr, make that “missile defense.”
I think Alfred Nobel would have been outraged that the Peace Prize would EVER be awarded to a Head of State…people who, by definition, must act in their own or their country’s interest. It is not possible for a Head of State, regardless of party, to act selflessly, and Obama has demonstrated this over and over again. His hesitancy in Afghanistan is NOT a position taken because of his desire for peace… and the removal of the missile bases in Poland and the Czech Republic was done to appease Russia, not to forward the cause of peace. BO is the ultimate self-serving politician. The real shame of his supporters is that they aren’t willing to admit the reasons WHY they do what they do…at least then they could claim honesty as their banner.
Obama receives the Nobel Prize.
That’s what you call a thousand dollar saddle on a ten dollar horse.
Back on the topic, reading through the list of candidates makes me disgusted. A woman fighting for woman’s rights in Afghanistan under the Taliban and exiled for it…a Congolese doctor fighting to heal the scars of sexual assault and abuse in a war-torn country…a man who suffered in a Chinese prison for fighting against socialism and its brutality…a man who threatened to socialize banks and almost succeeded in socializing the auto industry, who proposes to socialize the health care system, who promotes abortion unlike any politician in US history, who calls a child a “punishment”. One of these doesn’t belong, one of them is different than the others.
Why do I get the sinking feeling that the true suffering of those real heroes for worthy causes was rejected for purely political posturing? Obama wasn’t in office more that a few weeks when the voting was done…
Does the title of One World Order fit into the stink? You’re so right, mrteachersir, but that’s the direction I see coming. The European Union will soon have another new name and another continent to rule over.
The prize committee gave Obama the award in order to encourage the President to continue emasculating the United States. How will Obama now be able to act tough on Iran, for example, when Obama has been made a puppet of the indecisive and delusional international community through this action? What a farce!
(In the meantime, Obama twiddles his thumbs as Iran, the biggest threat to world peace in a long time, draws closer to developing nuclear weapons and then doing who knows what with them. Handing them off to terrorists? Nuking Israel?)
Our Lady of Peace, pray for us!
CarpeNoctem,
You wrote…”Obama is out of his league as a world leader” No Bush was out his depth outside Texas, Obama is clearly a master of international diplomacy.
And I still need to know why Catholic Priests are attacking this particular leader rather than any of his horrific predecessors? [First, no… you really don’t need to know that. Second, this particular leader is in office now. Third, you seem to think that priests are not allowed to have opinions.]
With all due respect, what you wrote about our boys, their sacrifice, the mission, your notions of what constitutes honour. All this might be true but these are all entirely secular notions which have nothing to do with Jesus of Nazareth, Our Lord God the Father or even the Church. [And you know better than other people about that, I suppose.]
God does not favour or bless your boys, their boys, your nation, or any nation. He is never glorified by any killing and his son has already made the ultimate “sacrifice” for us. [John 15:13]
Jason Keener
If my country was next to Israel I’d be trying to get Nukes as fast as possible too. Is there any reason why Israel is permitted to have them but nobody else in the region is? Obama is at least for trying to reduce weapons and speak with Iran, another massive gesture of peace.
So what do you suggest instead, continuing down Bush’s path to war with Iran yet you write Or Lady of Peace pray for us?
Henry Edwards,
You might want to expand on why you think not pointing rockets at your enemies is actually bad for Peace? You might care to explain how you think proliferation and a pre-emptive strike policy fits with Catholic just war teaching?
Actually, don’t bother, it would only confirm the pro-war, nationalist, rightwing stereotype of what Liturgical traditionalist people are like. It is so blindingly obvious. [That’s it. That’s just nasty. Go take your meds and find another blog to read. You’re gone.]
Not to usurp Henry Edwards, who I’m sure is totally capable of replying to Prudentius,but…
Prudentius, do you buy that there is a Just War theory? If so, how can you reconcile that with your statement that God blesses no nation or people in war, that there can be no honor in war, etc.?
If you’re confused by my point, consider what “Just” means. It isn’t called “Necessary-evil War” theory.
Oh, and God clearly blessed Israel, both in warfare and as a nation. So, empirically, there’s a problem there.
Finally, considering the history of Christendom, I find the idea that God is never glorified in war, never blesses warfare, etc. to be a horribly chronologically-bigoted thing to say. You really shouldn’t be so prejudiced, as if, finally, you figured this all out, and for 2000 all Christians were mistaken.
In Christ’s peace, and remember, He once commanded his disciples to buy swords (Luke 22: 35-38. Oh, and don’t say its a metaphor, as that’s clearly wrong. It’s for defense, true, which is why they don’t need a bunch, but it’s some straight-up swords He’s telling them to get.).
Obama is clearly a master of international diplomacy.
Comedy is not pretty.
ergh…through in a “years” after 2000 in my post.
Stupid typing.
ACK… “throw” in.
One of these days, God willing, I will post something online without a single error.
Perhaps ths post?
:-)
Prudentius: I thought your post above declared your view that name calling was “bad.” Why do you throw names around?
If you choose a different stance than the majority of us, then so be it. We should be angry that you helped a Democrat into office, but we’re not. We don’t understand where you’re coming from, but then you don’t seem to grasp our position either. Where do we go from here?
Over 100 comments, Father. This news really hits a nerve, doesn’t it! The first comment here reminds us that the nomination came 2 weeks after O was sworn in. Now I know there’s a conspiracy! I have to stop thinking about this before I lose my lunch.
Prudentius,
It is extremely naive to think that Iran will be just another country that has nuclear weapons, if they get them. Do you know about how the ruling clerics in Iran and the President of Iran believe they can hasten the coming of an Islamic Messiah if they stir up world strife by starting something like a nuclear war? Do you really think Iran would not hand off nuclear weapons to terrorists that could target the United States or Israel in a dirty bomb attack?
While it is unfortunate that countries have nuclear weapons, it is acceptable that Israel is allowed to keep theirs because Israel uses their nuclear weapons as a deterrent and not as a tool to blackmail the world with terrorist threats or nutty apocalyptic visions.
You asked what I suggest we do. First, we should wake up to the reality that Iran is a menace and not continue to fall into this foolish idea that we can somehow talk the problem away with yet another round of useless U.N. negotiations. How many years have we already been engaged in that useless charade? In any event, how can you hold honest negotiations with a corrupt regime that just admitted to the world they were lying about their program?
If things like tough sanctions, further isolation of Iran, or a naval blockade do not work, a war might be the only option left to defend the free world from the threat that Iran poses. No sane person wants a war, but sometimes it is the only option left on the table.
What is so sad in this is our Peace Prize Winner’s utter incompetence in dealing with the situation. Is it Obama’s plan to impose sanctions on Iran or try a naval blockade AFTER Iran already has the bomb and is threatening to wipe Israel off the map? Where is Obama’s sense of urgency and his energy in confronting the real enemies of peace? Why didn’t Obama encourage and support the Iranian people a few months ago when they were taking to the streets in protest of the leadership? That’s right. Obama does not want to interfere at all in the affairs of other countries, even when those countries are a direct threat to the United States and a menace to freedom and human dignity. Obama talked about sitting down with the President of Iran for direct talks (another useless charade, by the way), but he hasn’t even done that yet!
Yes, Our Lady, Queen of Peace, pray for us. We need it!
Prudentius wrote: “And what of those side with Satan on the issue of going to war on a lie for oil? What weight do you give to every other kind of murder and warmongering?”
I just love how those with a certain political bent, and there is no denying yours Prudentius, you wear it like a huge, oversize cloak, always try to equate the prudential judgement of whether or not it was right to go to war in Iraq, with abortion, something that always is, has always been, and will always be, intrinsically evil. Nice try. First, the carping “no blood for oil” is one of the saddest, most pathetically incorrect cliche’s the left has ever come up with. Anyone who is remotely serious, and who isn’t a completely agendized party hack, knows that the United States has not spent hundreds of billions of dollars for oil. If so, why do US oil companies have virtually no leases in Iraq, no wells, no way to ship or sell the oil? Why are all the major internationals involved in Iraq now European, primarily from those countries opposed to the 2003 invasion? Why do you insist on repeating sad, completely discredited lies? One can argue whether it was wise to invade Iraq or not – but those judgements need to be made based on the costs involved, the suffering the Iraqis endured under Saddam and during the (largely past) insurgency, and intangibles like the benefits of bringing a measure of freedom to a place that has never known it. To simply shout in people’s faces here, call them hypocrites, and tell them how partisan they are, says far more about you than it does about any of those opposed to your perfect, leftist, dissident talking points.
What’s next, Prudentius? Plan on equating abortion with capital punishment? How about “social justice?” No? Then, health care? The simple fact of the matter is, all of the aforementioned issues combined don’t add up to the import of the always intrinsic evil of abortion. Furthermore, all of the above are prudential issues. Your nom de plume on this site makes a mockery of the term.
Prudentius: Actually, don’t bother, it would only confirm the . . . . . stereotype of what Liturgical traditionalist people are like. It is so blindingly obvious.
Hmm … Maybe you’re really onto something here. Perhaps the good folks in my typical round-church parish — with whom I regularly attend both daily Mass and morning prayer in the ordinary form — really ought to be informed what a literally blindingly cunning fraud I am, notwithstanding any clearly misleading appearance of a devoted Vatican II Catholic. Evidently, you just can’t trust anybody or anything you see these days.
Indeed, almost anyone you meet might be (gasp!) one of those horrid “liturgical traditionalists”. Reminds me of the popular cold-war era show about the under-cover agent Mat Sbornik — “I was a Communist for the FBI”. As a mathematician, I was probably one of the few viewers who recognized “Mat Sbornik” as the name of an eminent Russian mathematics journal.
Just thinking some more, stating that those here who may have supported the invasion of Iraq in 2003 were in league with Satan is incredibly offensive. Why don’t you write the Vatican and see if they agree with you? When they reply that they do not, will you retract your statement? If not, who, then, is the lock-step partisan, trumping faith with politics?
Yours is one of the worst posts I’ve ever seen. I can’t recall anyone on this site more urgently needing prayers of conversion.
You might want to expand on why you think not pointing rockets at your enemies is actually bad for Peace?
You really don’t know what the Eastern European missile base was, do you?
Can I point out to a certain banned poster that opposing abortion and opposing the war in Iraq is not an either/or proposition? I’m tired of this diversionary tactic, where a clearly Catholic view – opposition to abortion – is equated with a non-moral equivalent, and for a position not mentioned by the previous poster. A sort of bait-and-switch strawman. All your stamping of your feet over the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan will not make us overlook the fact that abortion is wrong, and clearly in conflict with Catholic teaching, or that our Nobel-Prize winning president is the most pro-abortion president in the history of our nation.
That’s not a Republican or Democratic issue, that’s a Catholic issue.
Pru-
I have plenty of grief for our other presidents. I am an equal-opportunity critic of the ways that other politicians have not been friends of the Church or life or peace. The Republicans have probably been an even greater block to getting things done on the life issues we all hold so dear because of their cowardice in actually doing anything meaningful… and because they have relied on political illusions so long (pro-life, fiscal responsibility, pro-family) and not delivered, I think this is why they are in an eclipse right now, but I digress.
I hope you have the ability to be similarly objective in your observations and are not just a fanboy for Obama. Let’s face it Bush is not our president, nor is Clinton. This is Obama’s war in Afghanistan, which Obama has not figured out how to prosecute OR end. In either case, his indecision is costing lives and forcing a bad ending that dishonors those who have died or been injured on all sides of this conflict. And THAT is something that Oslo took into consideration when making today’s award? Ha!
That, along with his naivite that the Muslim world does not anything but laugh at an adversary who is trying to ‘negotiate’ is the basis of my critique that he is an international affairs light-weight. Unlike the Chicago ooze he climbed out of just a couple months ago, payola is not going to buy off this bear for long… and when it comes back it will be hungrier than before. His miscalculation is that he can get his second term wrapped up before this matters. Our miscalculation is that he has anything more than this in his sights.
Yes, Christians are called to peace, but not to be pacifists at any price. That’s the rub which makes the mix of politics and religion very interesting and challenging. Do I have all the answers? No. But I can tell that you aren’t even asking the right questions.
You did get one thing right, there is no glory in killing.
From the London Times, hardly a conservative rag:
“Rarely has an award had such an obvious political and partisan intent. It was clearly seen by the Norwegian Nobel committee as a way of expressing European gratitude for an end to the Bush Administration, approval for the election of America’s first black president and hope that Washington will honour its promise to re-engage with the world.
Instead, the prize risks looking preposterous in its claims, patronising in its intentions and demeaning in its attempt to build up a man who has barely begun his period in office, let alone achieved any tangible outcome for peace.”
Ouch. Even the Eurolibs can see through this one.
Father
You let Prudentius stay in the game until the bottom of the third…hopefully that’s longer than the Yankees will be in any game in the playoffs. I too dislike the Yanks intensely, but Prudentius just rose to the top of my dislike list even more than the guys in pinstripes! Good umpiring on your part.
This illustrates the secular version of the great apostasy – the apostasy from reason. Seems like those prayers -to- Obama, as shown on Youtube, are “working.”
You wrote…”Obama is out of his league as a world leader” No Bush was out his depth outside Texas, Obama is clearly a master of international diplomacy.
I agree about Bush, but it is sheer fantasy to say that Obama is a master of international diplomacy.
And I still need to know why Catholic Priests are attacking this particular leader rather than any of his horrific predecessors?
Abortion.
With all due respect, what you wrote about our boys, their sacrifice, the mission, your notions of what constitutes honour. All this might be true but these are all entirely secular notions which have nothing to do with Jesus of Nazareth, Our Lord God the Father or even the Church.
Comment by Prudentius
Obama is also secular. Why then do you support him?
Prudentius said: And I still need to know why Catholic Priests are attacking this particular leader
And we’d like to know why you aren’t.
If my country was next to Israel I’d be trying to get Nukes as fast as possible too. Is there any reason why Israel is permitted to have them but nobody else in the region is?
There are many reasons why Israel has nukes. Three of them are Einstein, Teller, and Szilard.
So what do you suggest instead, continuing down Bush’s path to war with Iran yet you write Or Lady of Peace pray for us?
Comment by Prudentius
I’m afraid you’ve missed the point. It’s not whether the US will be at war with Iran, but rather whether Israel will be.
With all due respect, Israel and Poland and any other nation is responsible for their security with their own men and women. Not our money, not our weapons and not our men and women. [Ummm…. you do know that the issue with Poland is not so much that someone might shoot missiles at Poland but rather over Poland. Right? And for Israel to see to its own defense alone, surrounded as they are by incredible numbers compared to their own, will more than likely result in some pretty loud explosions we would all rather not see more of.]
Jack Palance played a character known as Simon the Magician in the movie The Silver Chalice. He was to pretend to fly atop a tower using an extended arm and cables. However, his self regard overpowered his reason, he believe he really could fly and leaped from the tower to his death. IMDB says he wanted to convince crowds he was the new messiah. Interesting, no?
Manuel said: With all due respect, Israel and Poland and any other nation is responsible for their security with their own men and women. Not our money, not our weapons and not our men and women.
A very “Randian” outlook on things . . . .
Kerry said: Jack Palance played a character known as Simon the Magician in the movie The Silver Chalice.
Ah, so that was the name of that movie. They showed it on TBN the other night, and I caught a few minutes of it while channel surfing. I recognised the Simon Magus legend . . . and the Joseph of Arimathaea/Holy Grail legend . . . but I didn’t realise that was a young Jack Palance playing the Magician.
One legend says Simon Magus fell to his death while trying to fly. In some versions, it is a duel between Simon Magus and Sts. Peter and Paul in the presence of Nero, with Simon Magus boasting that he, the Standing One, can fly. The Magician starts to fly, but through the prayers of Sts. Peter and Paul, the demon invisibly holding Simon Magus in midair is compelled to release his grip, and the Magus falls to his death. In anger, Nero orders the deaths of Peter and Paul.
In another version, Simon Magus boasts that he, the incarnation of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, claims that he will duplicate Christ’s sign of the resurrection. He has his followers seal him in a tomb, boasting that he will rise again the third day — but the Magus was unable to break out of the tomb and dies trapped in his own grave.
I don’t know what sign or wonder Obama might promise to bedazzle his literally adoring followers.
ah, you missed the most important parts:
One: He rescinded the “bush” rules that stopped tax money from funding abortions overseas, so now, not only do your tax dollars help fund clinics so they can use other money from their budget to pay for abortion, but now NGO’s can pressure (read bribe) Filipino politicians to change the law on birth control in public hospitals and legalize abortion…
Two: He rescinded the “conscience” rules that protected the jobs of those who didn’t want to do or prescribe abortion/euthanasia pills. Yes, there is a “civil rights” era law that still is intact, but that law is a lot harder to prove they fired you because of your pro life actions.
BTW: we have hundreds of thousands of people here in the Philippines who are suffering…the typhoon is over, but the north now has massive floods. keep us in your prayers please.
With all due respect, Israel and Poland and any other nation is responsible for their security with their own men and women. Not our money, not our weapons and not our men and women.
Comment by Manuel
You don’t think US policies are a matter of self interest?
I have a friend who in the early 90’s was Dep Commander of all US Forces in Europe. He told me that a Congressional delegation came over and asked why can’t the Euros take care of themselves. They anticipated the question and had a map ready: The map showed where US forces were stationed in the world and where US business was operating. They were the same places.
US relations with central European nations (e.g., Poland) serve the expansion of US business.
If Israel is attacked by Iran, Israel has the military power to wage war to the point that oil production in the Middle East would be disrupted. A serious disruption could cause world wide economic depression.
robtbrown – “My only reaction is: DY-NO-MITE!”
Rob, I saw this earlier today and didn’t have time to post a reply. I just want to say that it made me laugh out loud. I wanted to stand and applaud. An absolutely beautiful example of contextual literacy!
The timing of the committee’s vote a couple of weeks after he took office is crucial to understanding why he won the prize. If I remember rightly, the only internationally significant act of Mr O as president before their vote was his lifting of the ban on using US taxpayer (I’m not one) money to fund abortions around the world. In the liberal mind, this is promoting peace and human rights. This would be the first peace prize given for promoting abortion, I think.
Fr. Z, glad to see you “actively participating” in this conversation.
But to all those who say us “Liturgical traditionalists” are all pro-war, flag worshiping Republicans are in for a treat.
I have been actively against Iraq and Afghanistan from Day 1…although Afghanistan is much more reasonable.
I worship no flag: I am a Catholic FIRST and an American SECOND.
How could I be a Republican? I was a conscientious objector in the last election, because I could not morally support any candidate.
I am traditional, insofar as I would like the Sacred Liturgy to be celebrated with the respect and dignity it deserves. Thank God for Summorum Pontificum
Nevermind Obama’s petty broadcast to Iran (“Now, that just isn’t nice” was about the gist of that)
Nevermind his hatred of future generations (you know…that abortion thing)
OBAMA HAS DONE NOTHING FOR DIPLOMACY. HE HAS MERELY PROMISED A GREAT MANY THINGS, AND HAS DONE NOTHING TO DESERVE THIS AWARD.
St. Jude, patron of lost causes, pray for the end of relativism in our world, especially in our home of America.
Personally I wonder if the Nobel wasn’t a consolation prize for losing the 2016 Olympics… after all, Mr. and Mrs. Obama did come all the way to Denmark (which is practically next door to Norway on a global scale) just last week and didn’t just lose but lost by a landslide (Chicago only got 18 votes out of 95!), so maybe the Nobel committee thought this would cheer him up :-)
Not to get off topic, but as an Illinois resident I do believe Rio “deserved” the Olympics far more than Chicago… it is, after all, in one of the biggest CATHOLIC countries in the world, on a continent that is home to about HALF the world’s Catholics, and which has never had the chance to host the Games. It also means we won’t be hit with all the inevitable higher taxes, corruption, etc. that were bound to ensue from a successful Chicago bid. I do believe it would be nice for Chicago to host the Games someday, but not now, and certainly not under Mayor Daley.
But, I digress.
Believe it or not, one of our corrupt ex-governors, George Ryan, has been repeatedly nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize because of his actions against the death penalty while in office. He imposed a moratorium on executions which remains in effect to this day, and just before leaving office in 2003, commuted the sentences of every single person on Illinois’ death row to life without parole. He’s also currently doing time in a federal prison after having been convicted of corruption charges.
Probably the only thing keeping Ryan from winning or being seriously considered for the Prize is the fact that he is a Republican! Next thing you know, Blago will win the prize for his “efforts” to enact universal health care!
This awards burns me if for no other reason than that it cheapens the awards given to Blessed Mother Teresa and other more deserving candidates. I remember my dad, who won two Bronze Stars in World War II, getting very torqued back in the 80s when he heard that a bunch of people who fought for a few days in Grenada (remember that?) got the same medal. The same thing is happening here.
“How could I be a Republican? I was a conscientious objector in the last election, because I could not morally support any candidate.”
Joseph A. – Thanks for the post. I think it admirably sums up the admittedly minority view in this thread.
The wars of the middle east have NOTHING to do with either the interests or defense of the citizens of the United States and everything to do with what the founders called “faction” politics.
Folks on the other side of this divide—please, consider this before you tune me out.
Q1. Does Mr. Obama believe that he is ‘evil’ in supporting abortion? Clearly the answer is no. We would say that belief in what he is doing is irrelevant. In other words willful ignorance related to the actions one takes does not excuse those actions.
Q2. Did Mr. Bush believe that it was necessary to launch a pre-emptive war against the country of Iraq? Clearly the answer is yes. Does that excuse him from the blood of thousands of Americans (more than were lost during 9/11) and the tens or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi dead? Absolutely not. Indeed, as more and more documentation has filtered out over the years since then, it has become evident that Messrs. Bush and Cheney simply ignored all intelligence that conflicted with their desires for war. There were no weapons of mass destruction, and no links to Al Queda. And there never were. Willful ignorance does not shield one from culpability.
Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama are EXACT equivalents. Both believe (I will assume genuinely) that they act for the best. Both ignore anything that contradicts their pre-dispositions. Both are culpable for the evil they have wrought.
:Flame retardant suit on:
aging Scandinavian hippie
I resemble that remark.
Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas official
“Obama has a long way to go still and lots of work to do before he can deserve a reward. Obama only made promises and did not contribute any substance to world peace.” [And this is from an official Hamas? Interesting.]
See, just further proof he can bring divergent sides together. :-)
chcrix,
“There were no weapons of mass destruction, and no links to Al Queda. And there never were.”
I’m sure your statement that there were no such weapons comes as consolation to the Kurds who were gassed by Saddam back in the 1990s – they weren’t killed by WMDs, but by conventional means! How nice for them.
/sarcasm off/
As for Iraq’s nonexistent links to Al Qaeda, in 1999, ABC News broadcast a report of communications between Bin Laden and Hussein. Hussein offered bin Laden a zone to set up bases. Jim Quinn has broadcast a this report more than once on his morning radio show.
I’m not using that as a means to justify the Iraq War. That war is over, and the ones who have suffered the worst are the Iraqi Catholics – ignored by Bush, brushed off by our State Department, and really not covered very much by our own Catholic media.
Bush is gone. BO is in the White House and deserves every bit of criticism aimed at him. If this bothers the Left, be it the secular Left or the Catholic Left, then so be it.
Salvation doesn’t come from politics, not from the spineless Republicans or the corrupt Democrats, it come from Christ and His Church.
Did I see someone try to claim a moral equivalence between intervention in Iraq and abortion? Really?
Readers (and Father Z) please! What does the Psalm say?
“Place not your trust in princes,
Those sons of men in whom there is no salvation.
When they breathe their last, they return to their earth.
On that very day their plans perish”
Sic transit gloria mundi. Shakespeare warned that we have but a few moments on the stage and then we are gone. All this will pass, more quickly than you think.
Oremus.
Dinsdale: And don’t forget – our government (n.b. I do not say WE) encouraged the Kurds in their revolt and then hung them out to dry. If the U.S. government was so worried about “weapons of mass destruction” why aren’t the U.S. at war with North Korea?
Joe: “in 1999, ABC News broadcast a report of communications between Bin Laden and Hussein.” So, there was a broadcast report of communications. Was that report true? Was it as true as the Czech supplied report of a meeting between AQ and an Iraqi INT officer – the one that turned out to be a fabrication? Was it as true as the forged documents showing Iraqi “yellowcake” purchases?
Consider that the Iraqi government was secular in nature and a natural enemy of Al Queda. True, politics makes strange bedfellows. But serious long term cooperation is something else. Look at U.S. support for the Taliban and Al Queda.
Folks, we’re being taken for a ride. At BEST our “leaders” can claim they were taken for the same ride. Recent revaluations indicate that that is not the case.
As thinking catholics it is incumbent on us especially to re-examine our positions in the light of data and experience and to hold our government to the same standards in foreign policy that we would apply to the domestic sphere.
chcrix said: Dinsdale: And don’t forget – our government (n.b. I do not say WE) encouraged the Kurds in their revolt and then hung them out to dry. If the U.S. government was so worried about “weapons of mass destruction” why aren’t the U.S. at war with North Korea?
Nice diversionary tactic. You claimed Saddam Hussein never at any time had WMDs. Dinsdale pointed to evidence that Iraq did have WMDs, so it’s no good for you to try and change the subject to whether or not the U.S. government was really so worried about WMDs. Just admit you were wrong. (You might also recall certain events that happened on 11 Sept. 2001 that led to a change in U.S. policy re WMDs.)
Obama was nominated for the Peace Prize just 11 days into his presidency. Here are some things peaceful things he did in his first 11 days:
• Day 3 (January 22) Obama announces the closure of the Guantanemo Bay detention camp within a year.
• Day 4 (January 23) Obama overturns the Mexico City Policy thus permitting the U.S. to fund and promote abortions internationally.
• Day 4 (January 23) Obama orders air-strikes on Pakistan killing at least 18.
1974: “[T]he greatest destroyer of peace is abortion.” —Mother Theresa’s Nobel Peace Prize speech
Sorry Jordanes, you need to recheck Dinsdale’s post.
As I read that post, Dinsdale was conceding that gas was not a WMD – a sentiment that I agree with (consider WWI). Gas warfare is no more WMD than is say a few 1000# HE bombs. His point was that Saddam was a killer. True.
The fact remains that even under Christian Just warfare theory the invasion of Iraq can’t be justified.
But this is good. My larger purpose is to reach out to people who frequent this blog. I want them to apply the reasoning powers they use with great facility to deconstruct bizarre and fallacious statements made by theological and liturgical radicals. But I want them to start using those powers with equal skepticism with the radical (perhaps we might even say Jacobin) view that certain actions of the state are not to be scrutinized.
chcrix said: Sorry Jordanes, you need to recheck Dinsdale’s post.
Um, no, I’m sure you do.
As I read that post, Dinsdale was conceding that gas was not a WMD – a sentiment that I agree with (consider WWI). Gas warfare is no more WMD than is say a few 1000# HE bombs. His point was that Saddam was a killer. True.
No, he clearly was responding to your careless assertion that Saddam Hussein never at any time possessed WMDs. He correctly pointed out, sardonically, that if he didn’t he could never have gassed the Kurds. Rather than concede that you’d exaggerated, you then launched into another attack on the U.S.’s policies, alleging (quite illogically) that the U.S. cannot really be serious about WMDs if the U.S. chose to use military force against Iraq but has not yet done so against North Korea.
The fact remains that even under Christian Just warfare theory the invasion of Iraq can’t be justified.
I’m not so sure about that, but be that as it may, your claim that Saddam Hussein never had WMDs is false.
But this is good. My larger purpose is to reach out to people who frequent this blog. I want them to apply the reasoning powers they use with great facility to deconstruct bizarre and fallacious statements made by theological and liturgical radicals. But I want them to start using those powers with equal skepticism with the radical (perhaps we might even say Jacobin) view that certain actions of the state are not to be scrutinized.
Why do you think any of the Catholics who frequent this weblog believe that certain actions of the State are not to be scrutinised?
It’s well and good to wish others to use their reasoning powers. Just make sure you’re using yours too.
Given that Iran now has Nuclear technology, I suspect the WMDs were either moved there or falsely traced to Iraq.
There where 3 WMD found in Iraq:
Qusay Hussein,Uday Hussein & Saddam Hussein.
Can anyone help me to understand who it is in the Vatican that has writen in praise or, at least, in support of the award to Obama, as I have just read? Why can’t we have names attached to such articles as listed on Zenit?
Today, Obama pledged to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, as well as change other legislation regarding homosexuals.
That the Vatican newspaper seems to be ok with this president, who in most areas of morality, works against the principles of the Teaching Magisterium of the Church, is a mystery to me. If anyone has any inside knowledge as to why the confusion, let me know.
As to the Peace Prize, one can only state that misguided emotion has triumphed over rational judgment.
chcrix – nice job of cutting out one of my comments and using it to suit your point of view.
Actually, no, it isn’t.
“chcrix – nice job of cutting out one of my comments and using it to suit your point of view.
Actually, no, it isn’t.
Comment by Joe from Pittsburgh — 11 October 2009 @ 7:33 am ”
You gotta help me with this one Joe. From the context I can’t quite figure out what you are saying.
The relevant part of my post is:
“Joe: “in 1999, ABC News broadcast a report of communications between Bin Laden and Hussein.” So, there was a broadcast report of communications. Was that report true? Was it as true as the Czech supplied report of a meeting between AQ and an Iraqi INT officer – the one that turned out to be a fabrication? Was it as true as the forged documents showing Iraqi “yellowcake” purchases?”
If the answer is “no it isn’t” does that mean you don’t think the ABC report was true (the most natural question since that is the first question in my response) or do you mean “no it isn’t” in response to the subsequent questions – i.e. you do NOT believe it is as true as the admitted frauds I cited? In other words since it NOT true as the fabrications that you are saying that it IS true in CONTRAST to the fabrications?
BTW I am not trying to be obtuse here.
Of course, we should keep our eye on the ball. If the communication between Saddam and Bin Laden was true that does not imply an alliance between these natural enemies. After all Bin Laden was once in regular communication with agencies of the U.S. government.
Jordanes:
Well, obviously I don’t agree with your interpretation of the Dinsdale post. Perhaps if D is about he might enlighten us.
“No, he clearly was responding to your careless assertion that Saddam Hussein never at any time possessed WMDs.”
I concede that it was carelessly worded.
Instead of “There were no weapons of mass destruction, and no links to Al Queda. And there never were.” let me reword it.
“There were no weapons of mass destruction and no links to Al Queda. Furthermore, intelligence available to the U.S. government indicated that all biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons research had been terminated and that all known stockpiles of related materials had been destroyed by 1998 at the latest. There was also a complete dearth of information linking Al Queda and the Baathist dictatorship.”
I think that should cover it. I also don’t think it helps your case.
Now, I’d like to make another suggestion. It seems to me that this discussion has veered far from the appropriate grist for Fr. Z’s mill. I do not wish to try his patience or the patience of those who might rightly expect posts to be on subject matter more directly related to the focus of this blog. Is there some other venue where we could continue the discussion? I’d be willing to use email if that was the choice. I’d even be willing to create a Facebook entry for myself if that seemed like a good option. So, if anybody wants to follow up you could contact me as “TheOldCrusader” this is a Gmail account (so append the needed “at gmailDOTcom”) I created in case anyone wanted to take me up on it. I didn’t want to publish my regular email.