“Pope Backs Sanctions for South Africa” ( New York Times headline, Sept.11,1988) Yet DENOUNCES U.S. sanctions against Cuba (Consistency, Please, Vatican.)


POPE BACKS SANCTIONS FOR SOUTH AFRICA–“At the start of a five-nation tour of Africa, Pope John Paul II today offered his approval of the strict economic sanctions against South Africa now under consideration by the United States Congress. He said such measures are morally acceptable as a last resort in the struggle against apartheid. (NY Times, September 11, 1988.)

PONTIFF BLASTS U.S. SANCTIONS–“The economic sanctions (against Cuba) were “oppressive, unjust and ethically unacceptable.” (Pope John Paul January 26, 1998)

Vatican swinishness regarding Cuba didn’t start with this Pope. Far from it. In fact, the last three have all chanted the KGB-concocted anti-Cuba embargo mantra like champs. The KGB-concocted pro-South Africa embargo line was also dutifully chanted. ( A Pope who the KGB almost assassinated might have been expected to know better.)


But no. After all, in 1988 tens of thousands of Cuban and Soviet troops were being stomped and humiliated by grotesquely outnumbered –but superbly-trained and motivated troops from the South African Defense Forces.

So in 1988 it was imperative that the world rescue Castro’s military regime from military humiliation. Today the world must rescue Castro’s military regime from bankruptcy. Both times the world has answered the summons splendidly.



6 thoughts on ““Pope Backs Sanctions for South Africa” ( New York Times headline, Sept.11,1988) Yet DENOUNCES U.S. sanctions against Cuba (Consistency, Please, Vatican.)”

  1. The Church has never been our friend. When Pope John Paul I came to Miami, he met with everyone including Jewish leaders, but he refused to meet with Cuban exiles even though there were thousands of Cubans along the route of his entourage waving at him and even though Cubans are the largest Catholic community in Miami. He went to Cuba and gave castro a patina of legitimacy that he did not deserve. The two popes that followed have done the same. How dare the Vatican which is an imminently political entity decide our future, but that is precisely what they have done. Raul even thanked the current pope for his role in the USA’s formalized relations with the tyranny.

    Seriously folks, its time that Cubans stopped thinking of the Church as our friend. Personally speaking, I’m a Christian and I believe in God, but I don’t believe in the Catholic Church. One more thing, look at Archbishop Wenski in Miami. He can’t show more disdain for Cuban exiles, because it’s not possible. He doesn’t even try to hide his disdain.

  2. The Church has never been the friend of Cuban liberty. When the late John Paul I came to Miami, he refused to meet with Cuban exiles, even though Cuban exiles are the largest Catholic community in Miami. There were thousands of Cubans greeting him along the route of his entourage, but he refused to stop to say a word. Years later, he went to Cuba and gave fidel castro a patina of legitimacy that he did not deserve. The popes that have followed have done the same. Its outrageous that we Cuban exiles have been completed marginalized by the Church. The Church which is an eminently political entity [despite their hypocritical claims to the contrary] have decided our future. raul castro even thanked Pope Francis for his role in bringing the US and Cuba together. And what about Archbishop Wenski of Miami? He is disdainful to Cuban exiles, he doesn’t even try to hide his dislike for us. In the Northeast, the Boston Diocese was famous for their public engagement with the tyranny stance and the late Cardinal Cooke of NY public favored engagement with the regime.

  3. Moda, goddess of fashion, is a powerful deity, and all sorts of people bow down before it, even the high and mighty. John Paul II dared not offend the goddess regarding one Che Guevara, just as the Vatican has long been careful not to provoke her regarding Castro, Inc. After all, what would all those Latrines say, not to mention the many other third world Castrophiles and first-world “progressives”? No, one must be pragmatic and very clear about the numbers, as well as (earthly) risks and benefits. Cubans were never especially good Catholics and never will be, and Moda has never favored their deliverance or redemption, so leave them as they are and follow Moda’s dictates–like practically everyone else does.

  4. And to think that three popes have seen fit to debase themselves, their office and their church before such vile refuse, who have nothing to do with the poor, marginalized or helpless, and everything to do with perversity, darkness and maleficence. Lord, the abomination.

    JPII and Ratzinger were clearly over the hill when they played into the claws of Castro, Inc., but Bergoglio does not have that excuse, and he has gone considerably further than they did. Everything suggests he means to stay his course, and he may well go further still. Can he really be so blind, so gullible, so ignorant? Does he, like Bill Clinton, need or crave popularity to feel worthwhile and validated? Is he really that weak? Or is it worse? Is it arrogance, self-righteousness, or coldly calculated political maneuvering to raise the value of his firm’s stock and his own? The mere fact such questions can be seriously considered means there is a very serious problem here, even if the Vatican is oblivious or indifferent to it. Lord have mercy.

  5. And Bergoglio, titular “Vicar of Christ,” smiles behind the tyrant, apparently delighted with the occasion–the occasion being his welcoming of indisputably documented Evil into the precincts of the chief temple of the Roman Catholic Church. Indeed, that is how this vicar greeted the tyrant: “Bienvenido.” But we, of course, mere Cubans, are supposed to accept this, or at least keep our mouths shut, and presumably hope for the best. Alas, we have brought this mockery and humiliation upon ourselves, or certainly we are too much to blame for being where we are. Lord, the shame.

  6. Here’s a thought: Why isn’t Bergoglio focused on his native Argentina, which has been fucked up longer than Cuba, and why isn’t he ALL over the Nisman murder and everything connected to it? Could it be because that wouldn’t play nearly as well as his Cuba venture? Is this another version of the case of Che Guevara, who had precious little to do with his own country and far more to do with alien places like Cuba, Africa and Bolivia? What is Bergoglio doing about Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Ecuador? Why should Cuba occupy him preferentially? Because of the Obama/US connection? Why am I thinking much more of Henry Kissinger than a man of God? What is wrong with this picture?

Comments are closed.