Ardeshir Dolat has forwarded a short article from the Australian Broadcasting System’s web site that quotes the Archbishop of Canterbury as follows:
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has issued an angry rebuke to those in the United States who favour military action against Syria or Iran.
“When people talk about further destabilising of the region, when you read about some American political advisers speaking about action against Syria and Iran, I can only say that I regard that as criminal, ignorant and potentially murderous folly,” he said.
As you know, I’m all against invading or bombing Iran–although I think we’re entitled to attack the terrorist training bases in both countries on the grounds of legitimate self defense–but frankly this sort of thing is insulting to the United States, Iraq, and all members of the coalition. Not one word about the murderous activities of the mullahs or the Allawites. Not one little suggestion that maybe they should stop blowing up innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, Lebanon and Gaza.
Look deeply into your own glass house, Archbishop, before you start lobbing rocks at us.





PJM Home
Accomplice to Evil: Iran and the War Against the West
The Iranian Time Bomb: The Mullah Zealots’ Quest for Destruction
The War Against the Terror Masters: Why It Happened. Where We Are Now. How We’ll Win.
Tocqueville on American Character: Why Tocqueville’s Brilliant Exploraton of the American Spirit is as Vital and Important Today as it was Nearly Two Hundred Years Ago
Machiavelli on Modern Leadership: Why Machiavelli’s Iron Rules are as Timely and Important Today as Five Centuries Ago
Freedom Betrayed: How America led a Global Democratic Revolution, Won the Cold War and Walked Away
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
4 Comments
1. Ira Zad:Is this bishop in UK? If he is, it figures. Right now, certain factions within the UK political elite who have always had soft spots in their hearts for the Iranian mullahs (remember Jack Straw?), are trying to prevent any serious action against the regime by the US. And the bishop is just a convenient loudspeaker since he is basically like a Christian Ayatollah.
What the Europeans are trying to do (maybe minus France now) is to see if they can get their own elements, i.e, Rafsanjani and Khatami gang, back into power in Iran. That will kill 3 birds with one stone in that they get rid of Ahamdinejad and Khamenei(eventually and later, as the new head of the council, Rafsanjani can convince the ‘Council of Experts’ to replace Khamenei upon his death, or sooner, with Khatami. It was initially Rafsanjani who made the same council elect Khamenei himself as the Supreme Leader many years ago.)
Second, Rafsanjani and Khatami will most likley put a freeze on the nuclear activities of Iran, hence satisfying US and Israel.
The third is a point of slefish economic profit for Europe itself: Under Rafsanjani and/or Khatami, EU will reclaim all the contracts they lost to the Russians and the Chinese under Ahmadinejad’s reign.
And frankly, judging by President Bush’s back-pedalling on Iran in the last few days, people who back the archbishop are winning in their effort to neuter US into inaction against the regime.
The only losers, as usual, will be the Iranian democracy and people; and of course American interests in the region.
Oct 6, 2007 - 5:27 pm 2. AndyJ:It is far easier to analyze and criticize that which is at a distance than those who share your house.
Hiding under the American umbrella for safety is good because we, alone, allow those we protect to insult and abuse us… We must believe in a higher principle and hold some values far more deeply than our own personal comfort and security… I wonder if the good Archbishop could name some values -HE- holds above his own personal safety and security-?
Oct 6, 2007 - 11:09 pm 3. a Duoist:The good archbishop’s entire house is collapsing around him (American Anglicans are in the midst of a major schism, after losing a million members over the past thirty years to more robust Protestant sects); perhaps his internal schism explains his intemperate remarks.
Unfortunately, his proposed alternative–’peace’–ensures the
support from the Christian religious Left for the theofascism Right in Iran. So strange, this love by the Left everywhere for the fascist Right, just so long as the fascism is opposed to American capitalism.
If the good Archbishop thought about the careers of Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, he would realize that their respective methods of ‘militant non-violence’ were designed to achieve FREEDOM, not peace, and that the eventual result of achieving freedom first was peace.
Militant non-violence is one approach for Iran’s regime change in philosophy; but that still leaves a line drawn in the sand: no fascism is ever to be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons. Apparently, the good Archbisop has never read any of the 50,000 books written on the homicidal/suicidal nature of fascism.
Chamberlain’s ghost shudders in shame.
Oct 7, 2007 - 5:35 pm 4. David Thomson:One should never forget the role that race plays in the thinking of Rowan Williams and the Western “elites.” This gentleman would have a hard enough time dealing with an Aryan Adolph Hitler—but he is virtually helpless when it come to darker skinned thugs. The scoundrels who are the leaders of Iran and Syria are ultimately perceived to be victims of Western Imperialism. Williams’ ingrained pacifism is admittedly a major reason for his intellectual and moral confusion. Still, the racial aspect may even be of greater importance.
Oct 8, 2007 - 3:14 am