Catholic commentary on culture, media, and politics.

Thursday, July 07, 2005

New York, Madrid...and London

A question to ponder: Will the English respond like America or like Spain to being used like human pinatas? Something tells me Londoners, including its Muslims, were enjoying the respite from the IRA bombings of the 70s and 80s. Al Qaeda may have picked the wrong crusader to bully this time.

Let us pray or the victims, for the British medical teams, for Prime Minister Blair, and say an extra prayer for the butchers who did this.

And plug your ears in advance for the deafening roar of universal Muslim condemnation of what was done today in the name of the Religion of Peace.

30 Comments:

Anonymous Mohammad Q said...

I watch the bombings and find them very nice.

Thank you!

2:48 PM

 
Anonymous midwestmom said...

Let's all say five Hail Mary's for mohammad q, shall we?

What the world needs now is love, sweet love. Sing it with me....

9:53 PM

 
Blogger frenchy said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10:15 PM

 
Anonymous serendipity said...

if he (mohammad q) was serious, im chilled to my bones. If he was kidding, im disgusted. I live in Mumbai, which has suffered no less than 7 blasts in the last 3 years. Killing innocent people is not 'nice' Mr. q, its downright evil.

12:03 AM

 
Anonymous Patrick said...

Something about "only by prayer and fasting..."

12:52 AM

 
Anonymous midwestmom said...

Whether he was joking or not, mo needs our prayers.

And a two-by-four upside the head.

I bet his real name isn't even mohammad. I'm guessing it's Kip. Or Morgan. Probably got off his X-Box just long enough to post something completely retarded on a blog he's never seen before.

6:42 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When the first reports came across the media I think it was Tony Blair who said the terrorist are trying to divert attention away from the G-8 summit and put it on themselves. For Mohammad q post is trying to do the same thing. The question is England going to respond more like Spaniards or Aussie's? One comment I heard which I have thought over is how the terrorist have no imagination, same rhetoric and strategies. They hit a major Western city and the only choice and I do mean only choice given is to surrender or fight. Tell me knowing human nature whose side will gain strength?

9:05 AM

 
Anonymous Patrick said...

Anon:

Exactly, as my original post said. Shall we be Britons or Spaniards?

9:16 AM

 
Blogger Patrick said...

Frenchie and everyone else: passionate comments, including strident disagreement with me, are warmly welcomed. Just try and keep the F-bomb in that B-52 of yours, 'k?.

I know, I know, "How can he delete the F-bomb but keep Mohammad Q's comment"? I'll tell you: Sometimes the idiotic needs to be displayed as such. He used up his one strike.

9:57 AM

 
Blogger Non Sum Dignus said...

"deliver us from evil" (The Our Father)... "authority bears the sword for a reason" (St Paul)... "we are getting what we deserve (St. Dismas), etc, etc.

OK Mo'Q... you and your ilk so desire to ref to The West as "Crusaders"? Dude, you ain't seen nothin' yet.

Hopefully, once all of Christendom grows a backbone (Calling Spain and France!) we will unite and do everything in our power to send you and your murderous, cowardly ilk straight to hell where you can hang out burning in hell for eternity with your founder, mohammed (may he burn in hell).

Oops, one correction, we already ARE sending your buddies to hell! You can thank the US Marines for that.

Dominus Vobiscun, Y'all

3:52 AM

 
Blogger Patrick said...

Ah, yes, Don Dignum, kill, kill, kill -- as our Lord commands and as all the saints have faithfully done.

2:44 PM

 
Blogger Non Sum Dignus said...

*** Ah, yes, Don Dignum, kill, kill, kill -- as our Lord commands and as all the saints have faithfully done. ***

As Pope Urban II commanded when The Holy Land was invaded and the moslems attacked Christendom; as faithful Catholics under Charles Martel did at Tours and Poitiers when the moslems attacked Christendom; as faithful Catholics under Jan Sobieski did at Vienna when the moslems attacked Christendom; as faithful Catholics ordered to fight by Pope St. Pius V did at Lepanto when the moslems attacked Christendom, etc, etc.

Popes and Saints have donned armour to defend Christendom many a time. Are you that enlightened present day that for some odd reason you are exempt? Or could it be that they were all wrong?

I don't know if you have noticed it as of late, Patrick, but we happen to be knee deep in the middle of a war for the very existence of Christendom.

Should we throw rose petals at the infidel moslem horde? Personally, I prefer killing the attackers and sending them to hell.

Also, Our Lord most certainly did command war(s). You do recall God ordering the Hebrews to go to war on more than one occasion, don't you? Unfortunantly, the "Jesus is a super cool peacenick" crowd seems to forget that The Holy Trinity has always existed. So I reinterate, Jesus most certainly did command war(s).

BTW, it's Non Sum Dignus. Not Dom Dignus (who ever Dom Dignus may be)

Dominus Vobiscum Y'all

3:12 PM

 
Anonymous Patrick said...

non sum dignus:

You once signed off with dominus vobiscuN (not M) and I let it slide. But I'm terribly, terribly sorry to have made an error in your handle.

I don't have to time to parse every line of yours. This will have to suffice: I am well aware that popes have authorized legitmate wars. I am well aware that just war is just. I am well aware that Muslim hordes have in the past been rightly rebuffed militarily. I have defended the Crusades many times. "Peacenik, superstar Jesus" is a dumb fantasy created by Sixties maroons.

But in what sense is England a "Christian nation"? How about America -- beyond the conservative catchphrase "Christian America" -- how many of its laws (eg Roe v Wade) or cultural priorities (MTV, Madonna, Hugh Hefner) remotely resemble a Christian worldview? Equating medieval attacks by organized invading Muslims with the amoral evil of al Qaeda (which routinely slaughters fellow Muslims) is unwise and incorrect. Al Zarqawi, bin Ladin and Co. are not attacking Christendom any more than the US action in Iraq was an attack against Islam.

The political and inter-cultural nuances at work here are, uh, slightly more complex than jingoistic take-no-prisoners rants pre-suppose.

"we will unite and do everything in our power to send you and your murderous, cowardly ilk straight to hell where you can hang out burning in hell for eternity with your founder, mohammed (may he burn in hell). Oops, one correction, we already ARE sending your buddies to hell!"

Don't you see how this kind of retarded hyperbole makes you sound? Are these words reflective of the love commanded by Christ? I'm sniffing around for any tiny trace of loving one's enemy, but the trail is cold.

The war against Christianity is being waged far more effectively by Christians themselves at the moment than by a statistically insignificant number of Islamist suicide bombers. (BTW, the "very existence of Christendom" is not, and cannot, be truly extinguished since our Lord promised an indefectible Church, as in, one that will last until His return. Where's your faith?)

One more thing: in refering as you do to the "OT Jesus" you make a logical error. "Jesus" is the given name of the Son of Mary, at a point in history after He acquired a human nature. Although the Eternal Word pre-existed the historical Jesus -- indeed all of creation -- it's fallacious to start talking about Jesus giving the Law to Moses, Jesus sending plagues upon Egypt, etc etc.

4:06 PM

 
Blogger Non Sum Dignus said...

Wonderful example of verbal gymnastics if I ever saw one.

It was stated **Ah, yes, Don Dignum, kill, kill, kill -- as our Lord commands and as all the saints have faithfully done.**

I gave specific responses, to which you tapped danced around every one in a fashion that would make Bill Bojangles proud.

So in a nut shell; yes, Our Lord and various Saints have called for killing.

Stay on target, Patrick. Focus... focus.

Shall I dissect your response? Sure, this shall be fun!

*** I don't have to time to parse every line of yours. *** Just most.

*** Equating medieval attacks by organized invading Muslims with the amoral evil of al Qaeda (which routinely slaughters fellow Muslims) is unwise and incorrect. Al Zarqawi, bin Ladin and Co. are not attacking Christendom any more than the US action in Iraq was an attack against Islam.***
And you really believe that? I suppose the foiled plans for attacks on St. Peter's in Rome and the Cathedral in Stuttgart are just jingoistic rhetoric. Oh, and I almost forgot.... all common sense must be abandoned as well. God forbid anyone recognize the obvious. Also, you underestimate bin-Laden. His level of organization, leadership, logistics, planning, etc, etc, make Saladin look like a rank amatuer. If military history has taught us anything, it's never underestimate your enemy. How unfortunant that you do.


*** The political and inter-cultural nuances at work here are, uh, slightly more complex than jingoistic take-no-prisoners rants pre-suppose. *** More complex than (yet again) recognizing the painfully obvious? Patrick, do you really think this loose confederation of anti-western, anti-Christian Islamo-Fascists really desire a "live and let live" policy? Nothing would make them happier than to carve the heads off of our wives and children. Specifically, because they are Catholic. And you know darn well that's true.
So if you desire to classify my postings as "jingoistic rants", then please do. I pref to look on them as forcfully stating the obvious.


*** Don't you see how this kind of retarded hyperbole makes you sound? Are these words reflective of the love commanded by Christ? I'm sniffing around for any tiny trace of loving one's enemy, but the trail is cold. *** Yes, the same amount of love for ones enemy's as Pope St. Pius V ordered at Lepanto (wait, haven't I covered that already?)

*** The war against Christianity is being waged far more effectively by Christians themselves at the moment than by a statistically insignificant number of Islamist suicide bombers. *** tell that to those who perished on 9-11 and Madrid and London and Bali, shall I go on?

***(BTW, the "very existence of Christendom" is not, and cannot, be truly extinguished since our Lord promised an indefectible Church, as in, one that will last until His return. Where's your faith?)*** On this, I will admit, you have me. Even if the radical moslems do wipe out 99.99% of Christendom, there will ALWAYS be Christ's Church present. But I would imagen by your rationale, what Pope Urban II, Charles Martel, Jan Sobieski, and Pope St. Pius V did was "faithless". Interesting, indeed.

*** Although the Eternal Word pre-existed the historical Jesus -- indeed all of creation -- it's fallacious to start talking about Jesus giving the Law to Moses, Jesus sending plagues upon Egypt, etc etc. *** Hmmm... the Holy Trinity (God) has always existed, hence, the Second Person (still God) in the Holy Trinity (hasn't stopped being God) has always existed. But when God (in all three Persons) ordered various nasty things to happen in the OT, the Second Person of that same Holy Trinity took the day off? Wow! Just for curiosities sake, was The Holy Ghost around when nasty things happened long ago and far away?

Lastly, *** One more thing: in refering as you do to the "OT Jesus" you make a logical error. "Jesus" is the given name of the Son of Mary, at a point in history after He acquired a human nature. *** Technically, your right. But I kinda figured someone as smart as you would have understood that the "Jesus" I was ref'ing to was the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. Silly me.


In the meantime, Dominus Tecum Patrick!

Oops, I almost forgot....
*** You once signed off with dominus vobiscuN (not M) and I let it slide. But I'm terribly, terribly sorry to have made an error in your handle.*** Yep! Typos happen to the best of us. You are forgiven.
3 Pater Nosters and 3 Ave Marias

4:52 PM

 
Blogger Non Sum Dignus said...

Correction. These was never a plot to attack any cathedral in Stuttgart. It was in 2000 in Strasbourg.

Sorry!

Dominus Vobiscum, Y'all

5:50 PM

 
Blogger Kevin Lauer said...

Interesting debate. I agree with Patrick that Christ taught us to love our enemies and that we should forgive, but there's a fine line between forgiving your enemies and allowing them to continue their evil deeds. I don't believe Patrick is saying we should excuse what is being done by the terrorists, but we (as Christians) need to be careful to keep our hearts pure and our attitudes in check. Animosity and hatred such as that exhibited in the posts by Non Sum Dignus serve the enemy more than they serve us. Yes, we must bring the terrorists to justice, but let's not jeopardize our own relationships with Christ in doing so.

5:51 PM

 
Blogger Non Sum Dignus said...

Kevin,
Interesting post. Could you explain how exactly is fighting (yes, and killing) the enemy jepordizing my relationship with Christ?

I hate to beat a dead horse, but when Charles Martel absolutely pounded the invading muslims in the south of France, did he jepordize his relationship with Christ?

I do understand (I hope!) what you are saying.... specifically, don't let hate consume you. Correct?

If I do understand your meaning, then all's well. Rest assured, I'm not consimed by hate. I do, however, recognize the urgency of the task at hand in fighting (and yes, killing) a fanatical enemy.

And unfortunantly, there are those who live in a Polly-Anna world, who, at best, look upon the Islamo-Fascists as a minor inconvenience.

Dominus Vobiscum Y'all

6:01 PM

 
Blogger MMM said...

Good article, and an interesting question posed here in the comments.

Personally I don't think we will respond like America did to 9/11. As yet we are still unsure as to who is responsible. Several claims have been made, but they all have one thing in common, and that is 'claimed' links to Al Qaeda.

Britain is a very culturally diverse nation, We have to be careful in any retaliation we make, as it could have negative impact within the community and cause further tension. This was a lesson learnt when we went into Iraq, so I think we may be more careful this time.

The first thing we need to do is fully investigate the attack. The Met Police are already gathering all CCTV footage that might give clues to the identities of the attackers. People are even handing in photos they had taken on mobile phones etc. There will be a huge operation taking place right now including MI5 and MI6, and the identities of those responsible WILL be found. Then we can react. If it is an international terrorist organisation, then maybe use the SAS to infiltrate and assassinate.

But we will NOT give them publicity. We will respond quietly, when the time is right. We will not give a knee jerk reaction. We are used to dealing with terrorists. We shall never back down, and yes, this time they've picked on the wrong nation.

6:36 PM

 
Anonymous Patrick said...

MMM:

Just the comment I was waiting for. What's the mood like in England now? We read so much about Arab paranoia about a perceived "backlash" as opposed to a real terrorist bombing. Would be very interested to hear more from the British perspective. How will the British Intel agencies you mentioned go about bringing justice to the perpetrators when al Qaeda is notoriously diffuse and "global"?

Kevin:

Yes, and yes. Commenters like non sum dignus enjoy claiming the Pure Catholic High Ground, and painting his adversaries as limp-wristed waifs. As if any thinking person is opposed to killing terrorists or forcefully answering the Islamo-fascist threat. I just think that conversion to Jesus Christ will trump more and more violent counter-terrorism measures, however important they may be. I apparently sin against non sum's ideology in that I don't assume Muhammad to be burning in the fires of hell, nor do I wish anyone to go there.

non sum:

You hear what you want to hear, sir. Sorry, but I can't join you in wishing that the terrorists suffer the torments of eternal hell. Another thing: The Catholic Church has never taught that the prophet Muhammad is in hell. But you're quite certain he is.

Your gung-ho "yahoo" attitude, while admirably firm (backhanded compliment, free of charge) is impossible to argue with. Ergo, I shant. But hell (metaphorically speaking, of course) thanks for contributing to Seize the Dei!

7:38 PM

 
Blogger frenchy said...

I do apologise for dropping a few nasties on ur blog.....however I was completely outraged at mohammed q's comment. It came straight from the heart. Every sinister word was meant at such a comment of his and I still can't believe the insensitive nature of his comment. It's people like him making our world an unfriendly place. http://frenchyadv.com for anyone interested in replying. any feedback welcome. id be interested to hear from mohammed q.

11:30 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First off, I had to post here as "anonymous". I find it absolutely hilarious that Patrick cancelled my Non Sum Dignus account! My gosh, Patrick, I thought you wanted people to post! Obviously, only those who you can look down your nose and sneer at!

Patrick, you cancelled my account rather than read my posts. And you did it without even notifying me!You sir, are a moral coward.

But anyhow... on with my post!!

Patrick,
You posted something that I proved wrong your "kill, kill, kill" post), and were proven wrong. Accept it, practice humility and move on. You are capable of such, are you not?

If you desire not to wish that those that fly airplanes into buldings and roast human beings alive... those that carve the heads off of innocent captives... those that set off car bombs outside of Catholic churches in Iraq, etc, etc, end up in hell, that is certainly your call. I on the other hand, will not shed a tear. If they repent, great. If not, looks like the they're sheol bound.

Another thing: When did I ever state that "The Catholic Church has never taught that the prophet Muhammad is in hell"? (by the way, I like the way you threw in the word "prophet". Shouldn't you have said "FALSE prophet"? How PC of you. I'm sure you have the backing of the limp wristed waif demographic). You also stated "But you're quite certain he is." Sure I am. You are familiar with The Church's teaching on the Unforgivable Sin, aren't you? Something about final unrepentance? In my opinion, that is exactly what the false prophet is guilty of. Oh... I can have that opinion, can't I?

And as far as my 'gung-ho "yahoo" attitude" is concerned, I've earned it. I've actually seen what these animals can do. I have fought against them. I'm sure that you have dealt face to face with these individuals... well as far as Hollywood Blvd anyhow. What a comfortable life you must live. (backhanded compliment, free of charge).

Lastly, your right! it is impossible to argue with my initial response to you. You were proven wrong and your overinflated sense of intellectual superiority and self-worth won't allow you to admit such.

So getting back to the initial posts... your right, Our Lord and the Saints HAVE given the examples that killing can be the correct course of action.

Very good. You get a cookie.

3:22 AM

 
Anonymous Patrick said...

Non sum:

I have no idea what you're talking about re: "cancelling your account." I don't even know how to do that. If you mean deleted a comment, then I can tell you in all honesty that I've only deleted one comment because of profanity, and the commenter was nice enough to apologize.

What will tempt me to ban you is your habit of not reading what I write, and then being called a moral coward. It's called civility. Yu might look into it. To take two instances of your seeing what you want to see: You say, "Our Lord and the Saints HAVE given the examples that killing can be the correct course of action." I never once said I thought killing couldn't be the correct course of action.

You say, "Another thing: When did I ever state that 'The Catholic Church has never taught that the prophet Muhammad is in hell'"? I never said that you stated that the Church taught that he was in hell. What I said was, the Church does not teach that he is in hell, nor that any particular person is in hell, not even Judas (although the case for Judas being in hell at least has some scriptural support. But your Zeal for the Truth (the best euphemism for Blinded by Hate) demands that you be certain that Muhammad is in hell. It's where you very much want him to be, along with his followers who do harm to innocent persons. This, I say, is the unChristian part. And no, I am not opposed to killing terrorists er se.

So non sum, you see I'm a pretty reasonable fella. I allow you to misquote me, to call me insulting names, and I've put up with your near-constant flow of childish sarcasm, along with being falsely accused of "cancelling your account." And not one post of yours has been deleted, despite whatever tech problems you're having.

You say youev fought these animals personally. I have not. So thank you for your service if that's the case. You choose to post anonymously or with a Latinism so you could be the Easter bunny as far as I know.

7:48 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Say what you must. If that's what it takes to make you feel better about yourself.

You still nontheless have failed re: your "kill, kill, kill" post. And also as unfortunant, you have yet to answer a single one of my responses.

Also, "childish sarcasm"? You must be kidding. I supose your "kill, kill, kill" post was a mature, well thought out response. What was said about those that live in glass houses? Sparky, if you can't take it, don't dish it out. If you don't like sarcasm, don't initiate with such. Yes, it really is that simple.

So I will close with, yet again, telling you that Our Lord and the Saints HAVE stated that killing at certain times is a correct course of action. Your verbal gymnastics and ability to tap dance around responing to simple, straightforward responses are telling towards your character, or lack thereof.

I'll keep it real simple...

***Ah, yes, Don Dignum, kill, kill, kill -- as our Lord commands and as all the saints have faithfully done.***

I gave numerous examples of
when Our Lord and the saints have authorized and even participated in such, your sarcasm withstanding.

You have failed miserably in responding to my rather straightforward responses.

How sad..... how sad.

Keep fighting the good fight from the comfort of your recliner. Leave the real fighting to men such as myself. Oh, by the way... I honestly do think that me putting my life on the line so you can be safe and warm does entitle me to an opinion that you find distastful.

9:01 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

OK, time for me to put my ego in check. Patrick, I apologize to you. I did find it rather odd that when I attempted to log in this morning, I was greeted with "no account" or words to that effect. Obviously, it's some sort of 'net foul up, and I mistakenly blamed Patrick for that. yet again, I apologize for such.

Also, I realize that my initial post to Mo'Q was rather fiery. I guess I can live with that. I've been known to be rather fiery in the past.

But Patrick, I must say that I really didn't appriciate the rather sarcastic and condescending "kill, kill, kill" response you posted for me. But I let it go. In fact, I even gave you specific cases to back up my asertion.

Patrick, would it have been so hard for you to simply say something like "you may be right", and left it at that?

Dominus Vobiscum Y'all

9:40 AM

 
Anonymous Patrick said...

Anon/Non sum:

I can't win. I thanked you for your service, I thanked you I appreciate your contribution to the com box. Yet you angrily accused me of kicking you off and have not apologized. Despite a fair amount of nasty personal comments, I've kept the discussion moving forward where many bloggers, trust me, would have disinvited you.

But your last response proves that you see what you want. I've read your comments elsewhere, whoever-you-are. You're more Catholic than the Pope, more traditional than the traditionalists. Fine by me. But don't expect infinite patience from your interlocters.

BTW, I stand by my "kill kill kill" reference. It means you demonstrate a high level of rah rah jingoism, and a low level of evangelization. That's your right, and I think my readers can discern where you're coming from. When challenged, you fall back on macho hyperbole. It's now officially funny how you keep misquoting me, even after I point it out with specific examples.

The amusing irony is calling me a moral coward -- this from a guy (?) who doesn't sign his real name to his opinions.

9:40 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see we both posted at the exact same time. I'll give Patrick the benifit of the doubt that he hasn't read my last posting.

One thing I must say, many folks have various handles.... does that make them cowards?

But I digress, hopefully Patrick simply hasn't seen my last post. I would hate to think that what he just posted was after reading such. Oh well... time will tell

1:56 PM

 
Anonymous Patrick said...

Non sum/anonymous:

"I see we both posted at the exact same time. I'll give Patrick the benefit of the doubt that he hasn't read my last posting."
Hey, I see progress. Apology accepted. Thanks this time for not assuming the worst. And, no, I did not see the post before replying.

As for the "kill, kill, kill" thing, you HAVE to understanding that I meant it to be funny, as though Jesus, in full Army fatigues, stood up and bellowed it in between "blessed are the peacemakers" and "the meek shall inhereit the earth." You misread my tone, which is why I was taken aback at your aggressive follow-ups. My intention was not to set you up or make you mad. I admit email sucks when it comes to conveying the subtleties and tones of irony.

Per using pseudonyms online, frankly I do think there's something cowardly about it. "Cowardly" is a bit strong, but a lot of people come across like Al Capone and say things -- hiding behind a handle -- they'd never dream of saying if their true identities were attached. Someone can sign in as if they're a US Marine or the President of Bessarabia, but for all I know, they're an Idaho soccer mom.

I couldn't care less how you self-ID in St. Blog's; I only mention it because you brought it up.

Thanks for keepin' it lively!

5:02 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Fair enough, I did misread your initial tone. I'm sure you can reasonably see how one could take the "kill x 3" post as an open invitation to Sacas-mania 2005.

OK, enough of that silliness behind us.

I understand what you are saying about the peace that Christ preached about. We all know the passages... "turn the other cheek; carry the pack the extra distance; etc"

Here's what I'm getting at.... Christ was no absolute pacifist (as we both know).

My position is still as straightforward as before. There are instances when killing to defend the innocent isn't just the correct course of action... it's the Catholic course of action (Just War theory, defence of one's family, etc.) Granted, Christ never ran around w/ a .50 cal sniper rifle calling for the deaths of those who opposed Him, but the actions of the Pre-Incarnate Words (and not to mention Canonized Saints, Popes, Catholic monarchs, etc, etc... well, I'm sure you see where I'm going)

And as far as handles are concerned, I kind of enjoy my nom de internet plume. But in the spirit of internet openness, I'll sign off as I do all my correspondence.

Kevin Whiteman
MSgt USMC (ret)

2:13 AM

 
Anonymous Patrick said...

Thanks, non sum/anon/Kevin:

Deft use of French, as well. And thanks for your service in defending the country. It's more than I have done.

Semper fi.

8:14 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sheesh, shouldn't we have kept it this simple from the git-go?
*evil grin with accusing eyes glanced in BOTH directions!*
Pax,
Kevin

8:48 AM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home