FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: 'Spiegel' Offers 1 Million Euro Bounty on Pope Benedict
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
WANTED!

Seems like they're desperate because they want to crown their assault with something more sustainable. You know, it's a cruel irony in all this, though we repeat it often, that the people responsible for the abuse in the first place are themselves, largely of the same political and philosophical bent as the journalists and political low-jobbers craving the power and financial resources of the Church.

It's funny too since 'Spiegel', Germany's 'Time', was founded by a National Socialist.

http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2010...-euro.html
Der Spiegel is a bigger rogue and prankster than that fiend Eulenspiegel.
It's kinda silly for them to offer this 'bounty.'

If there were anything they could hang on the Pope, it would have come out years ago.

Why wouldn't a victim 'cash in' the minute his Papacy became announced?? Or heck, when he was running the CDF!
(03-16-2010, 02:31 AM)Iuvenalis Wrote: [ -> ]It's kinda silly for them to offer this 'bounty.'

If there were anything they could hang on the Pope, it would have come out years ago.

Why wouldn't a victim 'cash in' ??

They've been sprinkling suggestions for a few years now here and there in the worldwide press.  Now it's time to tell the big lie and repeat it till people believe in that more than they fear God.

Oh, and Berlusconi probably has a whole army scouring the 7 Hills of Rome for a dirty story to hang Pope Benedict with.
(03-16-2010, 02:31 AM)Iuvenalis Wrote: [ -> ]It's kinda silly for them to offer this 'bounty.'

If there were anything they could hang on the Pope, it would have come out years ago.

Why would you be thinking that now.  We just had stuff come out about him and his brother. Ratzinger's diocese was involved with transferring an abusive priest to another parish. The Vatican claims that then Archbishop Ratzinger took him out of his parish for therapy, and that his assistant turned around just a short time later and sent him to another parish without Ratzinger knowing about it. We're expected to believe that Bishop Ratzinger, despite this priest being accused of forcing an 11 year old to perform a sex on him.... we're expected to believe that Ratzinger didn't know he had been transferred to another parish, and never bothered to follow-up to see what happened to this person, who ended up abusing again.  I'm sorry, but as much as I'd like to, I'm having a really hard time believing that one.  Because what will seem most likely to the non-Catholic world is that Bishop Ratzinger himself transferred this person to another parish, or perhaps even more likely directed his assistant to do it for him, and that this administrator has just agreed to take responsibility for it to avoid the Church and papacy from being disgraced. I mean, what are the chances that after Ratzinger transferred this person for "therapy", that his assistant would just put him back in another parish without talking to Bishop Ratzinger about it first?  Very low, I think. And those are the criticisms I be reading about it on the web, too.  So, I'm fearing the possibility of some proof coming out that Ratzinger himself transferred this person, and I'm sure there are dozens of people who have it out for the Church trying to investigate that right now.  Let's hope that doesn't happen, not for Ratzinger as a person, but because of what it will do to the integrity of the papacy and the Church. 

Over on that there big board, people be saying how outlandish it is that Ratzinger would ever do such a thing, despite all these other bishops and cardinals doing it like Cardinal Law and multiple bishops from me homeland of Ireland and our Cardinal who made kids sign secrecy oaths after being raped.  It's not outlandish.  And there's a good chance of it, and I'm just hoping he was telling the truth. Gotta keep in mind also that as Cardinal Ratzinger he penned a letter which American attorneys are saying would come close to obstruction of justice in your country, and that he was, in a veiled fashion, encouraging bishops to keep silent about abuse and not report it.  It's looking really bad at this point.  It all depends on whether these people after the church are able to ferret out anything else linked to the Pope (if there is anything to ferret out, hopefully he was being truthful).  You know, the ones who hate the Church, this is the time when they'd want all of this to come out, right in the middle of someone's pontificate, not around conclave time.  This is when it'd do the most damage.
I trust the man implicitly.  I mean, what has he ever lied to the entire world about, apart from the Third Secret of Fatima?
(03-16-2010, 11:02 AM)ggreg Wrote: [ -> ]I trust the man implicitly.  I mean, what has he ever lied to the entire world about, apart from the Third Secret of Fatima?

Yeah, that's why they're offering 1 Million Euro for pure slander to schmear him.  Even the most junior traditionalist Catholic knows that the Reds use these schmear campaigns to persecute the Church.

If you can't see a schmear job and put the blame where it belongs and perhaps realize that Benedict is trying to ameliorate the problems you yourself are concerned with, you've got some problems with your loyalties, son.

Moreover, the solution to the problem which Benedict has been proposing, that of not ordaining homosexuals to the priesthood, is even more odious to the world than is child abuse.  Truly, the more the rest of the world drifts away from the Catholic moorings, the greater the barbarity.  It's more than a little ironic that German's Justice Minister, who belongs to the masonic  'Humanitaets Union' is covering up for an 80 year old pederast who has abused as many as 400 and Humanitaets even has had the temerity recently to draft a constitution favoring sex with children.


I think you have some real mixed loyalties
:.  There's something sulfurous about them, like one of the other more perfidious posters on this forum.
well i know a few who would clean spankfulll out for allot less then a mil euros.
im sure papas italiano aids know a few lookin for some well paid jobs. bounties work both ways
lol
i can hear the press crying now" bounty offered and contract fullfiled on spankfull" Catholics rejoice> the outrage!!!!!)
pooo
Reminiscent of Larry Flint and "Hustler" magazine who offered bounties for people who had ever slept with the Congressmen prosecuting President Clinton. It doesn't take much bait to lure the cockroaches out of the walls. Good men suffered for what they had done wrong decades past.
(03-16-2010, 04:50 AM)Fartmeister Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-16-2010, 02:31 AM)Iuvenalis Wrote: [ -> ]It's kinda silly for them to offer this 'bounty.'

If there were anything they could hang on the Pope, it would have come out years ago.

Why would you be thinking that now.  We just had stuff come out about him and his brother. Ratzinger's diocese was involved with transferring an abusive priest to another parish. The Vatican claims that then Archbishop Ratzinger took him out of his parish for therapy, and that his assistant turned around just a short time later and sent him to another parish without Ratzinger knowing about it. We're expected to believe that Bishop Ratzinger, despite this priest being accused of forcing an 11 year old to perform a sex on him.... we're expected to believe that Ratzinger didn't know he had been transferred to another parish, and never bothered to follow-up to see what happened to this person, who ended up abusing again.  I'm sorry, but as much as I'd like to, I'm having a really hard time believing that one.  Because what will seem most likely to the non-Catholic world is that Bishop Ratzinger himself transferred this person to another parish, or perhaps even more likely directed his assistant to do it for him, and that this administrator has just agreed to take responsibility for it to avoid the Church and papacy from being disgraced. I mean, what are the chances that after Ratzinger transferred this person for "therapy", that his assistant would just put him back in another parish without talking to Bishop Ratzinger about it first?  Very low, I think. And those are the criticisms I be reading about it on the web, too.  So, I'm fearing the possibility of some proof coming out that Ratzinger himself transferred this person, and I'm sure there are dozens of people who have it out for the Church trying to investigate that right now.  Let's hope that doesn't happen, not for Ratzinger as a person, but because of what it will do to the integrity of the papacy and the Church. 

Over on that there big board, people be saying how outlandish it is that Ratzinger would ever do such a thing, despite all these other bishops and cardinals doing it like Cardinal Law and multiple bishops from me homeland of Ireland and our Cardinal who made kids sign secrecy oaths after being raped.  It's not outlandish.  And there's a good chance of it, and I'm just hoping he was telling the truth. Gotta keep in mind also that as Cardinal Ratzinger he penned a letter which American attorneys are saying would come close to obstruction of justice in your country, and that he was, in a veiled fashion, encouraging bishops to keep silent about abuse and not report it.  It's looking really bad at this point.  It all depends on whether these people after the church are able to ferret out anything else linked to the Pope (if there is anything to ferret out, hopefully he was being truthful).  You know, the ones who hate the Church, this is the time when they'd want all of this to come out, right in the middle of someone's pontificate, not around conclave time.  This is when it'd do the most damage.

I'm with ya on this one.
Pages: 1 2