Skip to main content

At long last......but they still don't get it!

Credited to Lindsay Foyle, New Matilda


After years of prevarication and evasion about what it has been doing to "clean up its act" in relation to widespread abuse of minors by priests over many years, the Catholic Church in Australia is now confronted with a Royal Commission - which was announced yesterday.   The Commission will look into the whole subject of the way minors have been dealt with, not only by the Church, but also by other bodies, Church and otherwise (Government included).

Perhaps not surprisingly, the Archbishop of the Church in Australia still doesn't get it, as this piece on The Punch so clearly shows.

"There is a textbook study in how not to handle allegations of systematic child sexual abuse and it was written by the retired Anglican bishop Peter Hollingworth. The mistakes made by Hollingworth cost him his job as Governor-General. They are now being repeated, arguably to an even graver and more offensive degree, by Catholic Archbishop George Pell."

****

"This was his (Pell's) quote in full:

“We’ll try and find out from the police how many cases of child abuse they have on their books – I believe it is thousands – and how many of them relate to Catholic priests and teachers. I suspect it will be very, very small indeed.”

It’s an extraordinary and arrogant request. What Pell is basically saying is that the cops should waste their valuable time tallying up the total number of cases so he can justify his institution’s shameful inaction.

Save for an easy apology and some hush money for victims, the key and continuing problem with this scandal is the church’s dissembling about the extent to which paedophilia was either covered up or even enabled with the transfer of known offenders from diocese to diocese. This is the crucial point. It’s not just the abuse, but the cover-up of the abuse."




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more