Comments on: The Archbishop’s Sermon

By: David Thomson

David Thomson — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 10:14:16 +0000

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.

By: a Duoist

a Duoist — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 00:35:06 +0000

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.

By: AndyJ

AndyJ — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 06:09:44 +0000

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-?

By: Ira Zad

Ira Zad — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 00:27:22 +0000

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.