View Single Post
  #39  
Old 03-16-2013, 07:29 PM
Neezar's Avatar
Neezar Neezar is offline
SupaDupaMod
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South
Posts: 6,480
Send a message via Yahoo to Neezar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyburn View Post
I assume your refering to what happened in Argentina after they lost the Faulklands war..?

What exactly are you accusing Francis of? Are you saying he supported the Military dictatorship? or are you accusing him of supporting the Communist Rebels?

The problem with this, is the same problem with accusing the previos Pope of Benedict XVI of being a Nazi.

EVERYONE who lived in Argentina would have had sympathies with one side or another during that period of time. If he wasnt political, and wasnt killing people, then his sympathies do not make him a terrorist

Similarly...EVERY male youth in 1930s Germany would have been invested in The Hitler Youth movement. To NOT be part of that would probably mean you wouldnt make it through the 1940s alive.

Its no different to me. YES he took sides passively in a civil war...but if he didnt take an active role, then who cares...and believe me, he wouldnt have survived thirty odd years since, if he had been directly or even remotely involved politically, or in killings

They released a statement saying that it was lies and slander http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is7KPI7Ob-0

Meanwhile...in Rome...Francis I has said he would like "A poor church, for the poor" Guess he's going to take his sickle and demolish the Roman Curia by half lol Apparently, one of the Cardinals said he should name himself Clement...because the last Pope to be called Clement was the Pope responsible for the supression orders against the Jesuits, and it would be consider a rebuke, and a righting of a wrong in history...apparently, Francis laughed, and said he would prefer to be called Francis because he wants his focus to be on the poor.
He was politically involved by his own admissions. He NOW says that he met with people to plea for mercy for some of the religious prisoners and that they (at least two he knew personally) were released soon after.

Although he suggests he had no power (or responsibility) in them being kidnapped and tortured (which ironically happened right after he publically shunned them), he seems to readily admit that he may have had enough political power to see them shown some mercy.

Who knows? I understand what your saying though. He had to remain silent to stay alive.
Reply With Quote