Skip to main content

Next month, Ron Paul is due to be the keynote speaker at a conference that can charitably be described as a cesspool of hate.  The Fatima: The Path to Peace conference is being held in Niagara Falls, Ontario--just across the border from Buffalo.  According to Talk2Action's Rachel Tabachnick, even for a guy with a history of hanging around extremists, this is pretty revealing.

Paul is accustomed to sharing the stage with conspiracy theorists - John Birchers, Christian Reconstructionists, and Neoconfederates - but this time it's the international summit of a radical Catholic traditionalist organization. The Fatima Crusaders not only reject the reforms of Vatican II, but also teach that the Vatican is in collusion with the United Nations to form a one-world government.
The Fatima Crusaders believe that God will use Russia to punish the entire world unless Russia is converted to Catholicism.  They take their name from an appearance of the Virgin Mary to three Portuguese children in 1917.

The speaker list is chock full of extremists of various shades.  The most revealing one, though, is Roberto Fiore, the leader of Forza Nuova, an Italian neofascist party.  Talk2Action's Bruce Wilson dug up a 2008 video showing Fiore ranting in Budapest against Jews and gays.  Among some of the other extremists due to speak there are a guy who believes Jewish masons are invading the Catholic church and a Euro-MP who claimed the Norwegian massacre of two years ago was due to a "multi-racial society."  The Fatima Center has also frequently put out anti-Semitic and anti-Masonic literature, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

It's amazing that so many people--including some on the left--consider Paul a hero, despite his long history of lying in bed with kooks and racists.  Well, this conference says a lot about the real Ron Paul.

As a side note, one of the speakers is Roméo Dallaire, the leader of the UN peacekeeping force during the Rwandan genocide and now a Canadian senator.  This is alarming to say the least.  Fatima portrays itself as an organization dedicated to world peace, and it's inconceivable Dallaire would have lent his name to this conference if he knew their true extremist agenda.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  His keynote speech at the John Birch Society's (19+ / 0-)

    50th anniversary in 2011 is her on youtube:

    "I was a big supporter of waterboarding" - Dick Cheney 2/14/10 UID: 8519

    by Bob Love on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 03:40:06 PM PDT

  •  I'm so so impressed watching (10+ / 0-)

    Al Sharpton at the moment revisiting 50 years ago with his guests. Such dignity, grace and memories they all share.

    They were true activists in every sense of the word back then. Thrilling listening to them and the pride they feel for what they accomplished.

    And they carry zero outrage. They just keep at it, trying to change the system. Their tenacity is unlike anything we have witnessed. No self-pity or anger evident anywhere. Just pride. How I admire them.

    Paul and his supporters can go to hell.

    •  It's hard to dispute that the decline of the (0+ / 0-)

      movements of the1960's paralleled the rise in the level of outrage they projected. I'm not certain what significance that has but it's a fact. I was mobilized by outrage at the  time but most were not.

      The only exception I can think of is the movement for LGBT rights. I think that's related to the AIDs crisis though.  

      Nothing human is alien to me.

      by WB Reeves on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 04:54:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I seem to remember (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Womantrust, Eyesbright

        quite a bit of outrage about the Vietnam war. But I guess we don't talk about that one anymore. Very embarrassing. We lost. Had to run home with our tails between our legs, took down Cambodia in the process. Wasn't too wonderful for Thailand either. Lotta Vietnam vets with broken lives, the lucky ones who made it home alive.

        And it's 1, 2, 3. what are we fightin' for?

        I abandon the ground of harming others, and cultivate the ground of benefiting others.

        by vlyons on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 05:23:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The "Feel like I'm fixing to Die Rag" (0+ / 0-)

          isn't what I'd describe as a cry of outrage. More like sardonic Black Humor. Events like the levitation of the Pentagon we're noted for having a naively optimistic character. The iconic image of flowers in the barrel of a soldier's rifle was emblematic of hope rather than an expression of outrage. Even the protests at the 1968 Democratic National Convention were originally conceived as a celebration of life not, as the violent confrontation they became. That violence was almost entirely due to the brutal actions of the Chicago Police.

          That was a big turning point for the anti-Vietnam war movement. After that the radical wing of the anti-war movement did become more and more dominated by a tone of outrage that climaxed in the wake of the Christmas bombings, the invasions of Laos and Cambodia and the Kent State shootings. But as the outrage increased, the more and more marginal this wing became to the mass peace movement. The collapse and fragmentation of SDS into a welter of warring factions was a material expression of this process. By the time the war actually ended in 1974, the peace movement was pretty much a spent force.

          Nothing human is alien to me.

          by WB Reeves on Sat Aug 24, 2013 at 04:18:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Mel Gibson! ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ... Where ar't thou?


    Appraise the Lord! : Tax Church Property. O <-- Circle of Trust. YOU are Here: ------------> x

    by Great Ape on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 03:53:16 PM PDT

  •  Roméo Dallaire? Really? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Empower Ink

    That's a shame. Had no idea he was like that.

  •  Poor Libertarians, (7+ / 0-)

    everywhere they turn in a room full of friends all the best seats are taken by fascists. What to do? What to do?

    You show a little grit and you lands in jail.

    by cal2010 on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 04:06:45 PM PDT

  •  Anti-Masonic literature (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pvasileff, vlyons, Womantrust

    is probably no longer as interesting as during the era of the Antimasonic Party which dissolved in 1834 to become the Whig Party. The AP got started in Batavia, N.Y. when a Mr. Morgan was killed mysteriously during his publication of an expose of the Masons. The criminal investigation was impeded by Masonic oaths of secrecy, which involved government officials. William Henry Seward, a WNY lawyer at the time, made the basic arguments that if the Masonic oaths of secrecy assist the cover-up of murders, Masons can't be trusted in public office. John Quincy Adams directly challenged specific office holders and the Masons were in retreat for several decades. The issue of secrecy remains fundamental to republican government where Masonic oaths of secrecy are rather mild compared to oaths related to security clearances. Secret government, which early republicans like JQA thought sufficiently damaging to the Constitution to justify a third party movement, has by now thoroughly undermined the oath of office, one of the reasons why elected officials are not remotely expected by voters to uphold the Constitution. If Rep. Paul has been at all interested in advocating sunshine legislation he should probably not undercut such efforts by association with discredited organizations.    

  •  With all due respect to the hidden doctor (5+ / 0-)

    it looks as if Ron Paul has given himself another list of people to disavow, by associating himself with this CrackpotCon.

    Hermits have no peer pressure. -- Steven Wright
    Support Small Business: Shop Kos Katalogue

    by tytalus on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 04:26:20 PM PDT

  •  Explaining Satan's role in current human history (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AnnetteK, Gooserock, emelyn

    is going to the topic of a talk of one of the speakers (see the entry on John Doak from the linked page).


    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

    by richardak on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 04:44:50 PM PDT

    •  many, many, many people around the world (0+ / 0-)

      believe in satan, and believe that satan plays an active role in human affairs.

      when i encounter ideas (admittedly, such as this one) that are far removed from my own world view, i try to be as respectful and tolerant as possible, particularly if these ideas are widely held. i never stand next to a guy bowing to Mecca and openly laugh at him for thinking there is some invisible being out there over the horizon he is bowing to. he has his beliefs, and who am i to laugh at him?

      i am often surprised at the lack of tolerance around here...

      •  But how many believe they can divine (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Satan's hidden hand in human affairs? That they have a perfect understanding of God's will that commissions them to shape public policy accordingly?

        Nothing human is alien to me.

        by WB Reeves on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 06:34:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "perfect understanding" (0+ / 0-)

          i dont know about perfect understanding (probably nobody), but MANY people, from martin luther king to malcom x, from Ghandi to the osama bin laden, from FDR to your local councilmember, believed they were acting out politically in accordance with their religious beliefs. i find that to be pretty normal.

          •  The religious aspect is almost incidental (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            richardak, radmul

            Power seekers will always cloaked themselves in robes of absolute authority. Whether they pursue their desires through politics, religion, some combination of the two or some entirely different means is purely a matter of what proves to have greater efficacy.

            What we're dealing with here isn't religion per se but Messianic egotism.

            Nothing human is alien to me.

            by WB Reeves on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 07:04:19 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  It's one thing to act in accordance to your (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            WB Reeves

            religious beliefs, and quite another to suggest that Satan is behind the actions of people that you don't agree with.

            The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

            by richardak on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 08:33:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  What's a "Conspiracy Theorist"? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    social liberal

    You know it's true that if someone on this site had asserted two months ago that all our electronic communications were being monitored by the NSA, that person would have been banned from this site as a "Conspiracy Theorist", right?

    The funniest part of where we are now is that it is the exact people that would have hounded such an individual off the site with sneers about black helicopter CT thgat are the ones shouting loudest and longest now that we should always have assumed all our communicationsd were being monitored by US military intel, and that npot only does no ojne have any right to be shocked and appalled at the extent of the surveillance, that we damned sure better start shouting how much we like it, or otherwise we're no better than  a cross-burning.

    Clap On, Clap Off, The Clapper!

    by ActivistGuy on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 05:11:06 PM PDT

    •  its called cognitive dissonance (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      i love how at the end of this diary, the author puzzles why a politician he/she DOES respect is also speaking at the conference, and speculates that maybe he does not know about the true nature of the conference.

      some people will go to any lengths to avoid having to think critically about their beliefs.

      •  The founder of the group Ron Paul is speaking at.. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        is a holocaust denier.

        Perhaps you should educate yourself about the group, before attacking others for not exercising critical thinking skills.

        I know critical thinking isn't the strong point of Ron Paul cultists...but you could at least make an effort.

        •  i replied to this comment up above (0+ / 0-)

          and i will think critically about whether this conference is about holocaust denial or not.. i bet not...

          •  So you are fine with Ron Paul speaking at (0+ / 0-)

            a Stormfront conference.  So long as the conference has a catchy title about peace.  

            And think that anyone who might have a problem with that isn't "critically thinking" or "showing tolerance"  

            Good to see where you are coming from, and your definition of tolerance.

            God forbid anyone dare question the actions of a politician.  Apparently, that is forbidden when it comes to Ron Paul.

            We need to accept what he says and does unquestionably, I guess, to earn your vaunted approval as "critical thinkers"

            •  lol (0+ / 0-)

              why dont you go ahead and ask me if i am fine with ron paul speaking at a stormfront conference.

              if i reply yes, then you are correct. but if i reply no, you apologize. deal?

              •  Why are you afraid to answer my questions? (0+ / 0-)

                Are you fine with Ron Paul speaking at a Stormfront conference?  Even if the conference is about food allergies?

                How do you distinguish between those groups?  Why is the Fatima group entitled to "tolerance" while Stormfront isn't?

                How do you distinguish between groups that deny the holocaust?

                •  this is a different set of questions as the other (0+ / 0-)

                  answers below:

                  1. i believe stormfront is primarlly a racial organization. i would have a hard time believe their conference is about food allergies. while i support ron paul's right to speak where he pleases, i would question my admiration of him.

                  2. the same way i distinguish between my laptop and a cheeseburger. i just know.

                  3. i dont. nowhere on the fatima website did i see that they deny the holocaust.

                  •  A little research on the group and speakers... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Frederick Clarkson

                    would show you that this group isn't that far from Stormfront in terms of racial beliefs.  

                    And you'll forgive me if I need a better answer than "you just know."  After all, intellectual diversity and tolerance is at stake.

                    And Stormfront actually bans the use of racial slurs.  So I guess since you won't see it on the website, they aren't racist.

    •  So you are fine with holocaust denial? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WB Reeves, FG

      After all, they are just conspiracy theorists.

  •  I post this only because it's alarming, worrisome (0+ / 0-)

    to know that there are so many crazy, conspiracy theory true believers out there. I mean, I know that they're out there, but when I read about their beliefs, I just shake my head in wonder that people could follow this crap. I'm always confused about the motivations of their leaders. Do they REALLY believe these silly conspiracy theories; or do they just say this crap, knowing it's BS, but don't give a damn if it achieves the end result they want. And sucks in more money from gullible people. Grifters and sociopaths. That's what I keep seeing.

    I abandon the ground of harming others, and cultivate the ground of benefiting others.

    by vlyons on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 05:26:54 PM PDT

    •  I met this CT nut once... (0+ / 0-)

      who used to believe the government was tracking all our communications. all of them! he said that they were building massive server farms to keep it all stored. just crazy!

      he was good for a laugh, thats for sure.

      •  So you are fine with holocaust denial? (0+ / 0-)

        Just a CT after all.

        I'm just trying to understand your viewpoint.

        •  my viewpoint is that we need MORE... (0+ / 0-)

          ... intellectual diversity, not less. but when we become open to more diverse viewpoints, we may encounter some that are truly offensive. holocaust denial is one of those.

          but that is just ONE among thousands of CTs, all of which get tarred with the same label. you expertly picked the most offensive of them all and are now asking ME about it as if i had brought it up. an excellent illustration of how to suppress conversation.

          •  That is one among thousands of CTs...sure... (0+ / 0-)

            but it happens to be one that is accepted by a rather large number of conspiracy theorists.

            Its one of about 5 major conspiracy theories.

            But I guess I'm not tolerant of intellectual diversity, since I have a problem with David Dukes views, and the views espoused by the KKK and Stormfront.  I guess I just don't respect intellectual diversity, like you and Ron Paul.

            •  data behind that stat? (0+ / 0-)

              because i actually suspect the opposite is true. that there are tons of people that believe things like "we dont know everything there is to know about 9/11" and "the government is spying on all of us" and "a powerful cabal is driving us towards world government" but who are not holocaust denialists.

              •  Spend some time at the comment threads (0+ / 0-)

                at conspiracy theory sites.  

                Besides, you should be more tolerant of my views.

                •  no thanks! (0+ / 0-)

                  i guess conspiracy theories are your thing? i wouldnt even know where to go for that sort of thing. i will leave you to it.

                  i am completely tolerant of your views, but not of your "facts". :)

                  •  I do like to do research on conspiracy theories... (0+ / 0-)

                    Though I actually exercise critical thinking skills, so don't believe them all hook, line and sinker.  

                    For someone calling themselves a social liberal, you sure do seem intent on defending a homophobic, anti-feminist, pro-life, organization - and a homophobic, anti-feminist, pro-life politician.  

                    You may wish to rethink that name.

                  •  Here's some facts for you (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Frederick Clarkson

                    During WWII Nazi Germany under the leadership of Adolph Hitler carried out a systematic policy of genocide against the Jews. Millions were exterminated. The ostensible justification for this was that they; men, women, young and old were all implicated by race in a global conspiracy.

                    Today there are those who claim this never happened and/or that whatever anti-Semitic policies the Nazis pursued were a legitimate response to a perceived threat.

                    Do you believe in tolerating such views and treating them as legitimate for debate?

                    Nothing human is alien to me.

                    by WB Reeves on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 07:22:06 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  thanks for the history lesson (0+ / 0-)

                      1. i am pretty sure there is no human being alive that does not know what the holocaust is. no idea why you felt the need to type it out, other than perhaps to imply i am ignorant of the most basic facts of history known even to a first grader? what is the point of that?

                      2. i have never said holocaust denialism should be treated as legitimate. btfsilence brought up the topic and then released a flood of innuendo. if you read my comments carefully, not once have i said such a thing.

                      •  I think your belief that (0+ / 0-)
                        ...there is no human being alive that does not know what the holocaust is
                        is almost certainly mistaken.

                        In any case, I shouldn't think framing a question as specifically and precisely as possible ought to be taken as a personal affront. The formulation wasn't about what you do or do not know about the Holocaust but about what the essence of Holocaust Denial is. No offense was intended. Only clarity.

                        I don't think that posing the question clearly makes any suggestion that you expressed an opinion previously. If anything it would suggest the opposite. The issue had been raised more than once in these threads and I thought that it could benefit from a frank and unambiguous response.

                        The larger point is that all views and perspectives are not equal and do not possess equal legitimacy. No appeals for tolerance or open mindedness will make the "ideals" of  "Ron Paul equivalent to those of FDR anymore than they could make the views of Gandhi and Hitler worthy of equal consideration. If Tabachnick is accurate in saying:

                        The Fatima Crusaders not only reject the reforms of Vatican II, but also teach that the Vatican is in collusion with the United Nations to form a one-world government.
                        it would seem the Crusaders legitimacy within Catholicism is open to challenge as well.

                        It's a mistake to elevate a general principle above the specifics of a case.


                        Nothing human is alien to me.

                        by WB Reeves on Sat Aug 24, 2013 at 07:38:17 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  here is the problem: (0+ / 0-)

                          the quote you pulled out is in fact from the diary, and it is one i would be happy to discuss. i find it pretty easy to be tolerant of such CTs, as i think should most people. i dont remotely care that the Crusaders are "legitimate" within catholicism or not. i myself am a catholic who believes in abortion, contraception, gay marriage, sex for fun, and all sorts of other heretical ideas. In any case, such a conversation would be appropriate within this diary.

                          what this sub-thread has been about, however, has been holocaust denialism, which as far as i can tell the diarist never brought up at all. btfsilence introduced the concept, and then began accusing me of holocaust denialism.

                          then you come along, and lecture me about it, and act surprised that i find it offensive?

                          to your larger point that "all views and perspectives are not equal and do not possess equal legitimacy": obviously. if you are willing to include nazism as one of those views, of course your statement is true. but it has also become trivial.

  •  Why American politics sucks in 3 easy steps (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    1. Be completely close minded about intellectual diversity. Label anything that is too different from your own ideas as "extreme" and "bizarre" rather than just different. Cherry pick weird sounding quotes.

    2. Challenge the mental health of those with "extreme" or "bizarre" views. Label those who hold these ideas not approved by CNN/New York Times as "racist", "conspiracy nuts", "neo-nazis".

    3. Guilt by association: tar anyone who is not as close minded as you as suspect, because they did not run away from intellectual diversity as fast as you did. If necessary, use second degree tar by association, in which you note that this or that speaker at this conference once shared the stage with some other "extremist".

    Repeat until only corporate candidates in suits who speak in nothing but 30 second blurbs of absolute banality are left standing.

    •  Seems to Be a Synopsis of the Original RW (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      social liberal

      revolution messaging handbook circa 1965.

      Another one not to forget: Never allow readers or viewers to infer respectability of a Democrat. Use only first names or nicknames, never use professional titles. It's "Bill" or "Bubba" not "President Clinton" for example.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 06:10:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  So you don't find holocaust denial... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      phenry, WB Reeves

      to be extreme and bizzare...but just intellectual diversity.

      What exactly is holocaust denial, then?  What would it take for you to consider a viewpoint "extreme"

      You seemingly wouldn't have a problem with Ron Paul speaking at a stormfront convention.  Just intellectual diversity, after all.

      And yes, when the views someone expouses includes holocaust denial, calling it racist and referring to them as "neo-nazis" isn't far off the mark.  

      Your arguments would work better at Stormfront.  Oddly, they are also big fans of Ron Paul.

      •  holocaust denial? (0+ / 0-)

        the "conspiracy theory" mentioned in the diary is about "one world government". if the diary had been about ron paul attending a holocaust denialism conference, i would not be defending him.

        •  Somehow I have a feeling you would still be... (0+ / 0-)

          defending him.

          But I guess you are fine with Ron Paul attending a KKK rally, so long as the rally is about the environment.

          God forbid anyone raise any questions about the man.

          •  go ahead and ask me (0+ / 0-)

            ask me if i am ok with "ron paul attending a kkk rally".

            why speculate if i would be defending him or not when i am right here encouraging you to ask me the question? what are you scared of?

            •  Do you have a problem with Ron Paul.. (0+ / 0-)

              publishing a newsletter that pretty much could have been printed by the KKK?

              Do you have a problem with Ron Paul accepting a donation from the founder of Stormfront?

              Do you have a problem with Ron Paul keynoting a conference set up by a holocaust denier?

              Are we allowed to criticize Ron Paul for any of these?  Or am I just not being "tolerant" enough?

              •  answers below (0+ / 0-)

                in response to your questions:

                1. "pretty much could have"  = sorry, i dont care

                2. "accepting a donation from" = anyone can donate to anyone. there is no application process. thats about as silly as the right wing smears about chinese national donating to the clintons.

                3. depends on what the conference is about. if its about holocaust denial, yes. if its about astronomy, no.

                4. yes, you are allowed to do as you please. sadly, no, you dont sound very tolerant.

                •  well, looks like you are gone (0+ / 0-)

                  nice talking to you. have a good night.

                •  Of course, anyone can denote... (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  1.  Gotcha.  You don't care if your politicians publish a racist neo-confederate newsletter.  I do.  But I'm not tolerant, I guess.

                  2. And generally when politicians get donations from loathsome groups they disagree with, and when they are made aware of the donation, they decline to accept it.

                  Not with Ron Paul and Stormfront, though.

                  3.  So no problem if Ron Paul speaks at a KKK rally dealing with Astronomy?

                  4.  Since your definition of tolerance includes neo-nazis, KKKers, and holocaust deniers, I will take your lack of faith in my tolerance as a compliment.

                  •  you are back! :) (0+ / 0-)

                    1. those are your labels. i thought it was an investment newsletter? i can call the washington post a racist neo-confederate newsletter and then tar you for subscribing to it - its just labels. i bet now you go dig for the two sentences in the whole history of he publication that make you label the whole thing "racist", in order to "prove" your point. in any case, weren't those newsletters published like 100 years ago?

                    2. frankly, i would be more impressed if politicians gave money back from ANYONE who had financial interest in their policies. so for example, if obama and romney had given back all the corporate money. fringe groups with ideological motives? im a LOT less concerned about.

                    3. I would find it hard to believe that the KKK would put together a rally on astronomy. if you can prove to me that the conference being discussed here is actually about holocaust denialism, then you will have made a legitimate point.

                    4. sounds good. :)

  •  CPAC? Republican National Convention? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gooserock, radmul

    Most republicans regularly speak at a "conference whose speakers include racists and conspiracy theorists".

  •  I heard Ted Nugent will open the (0+ / 0-)

    festivities with the national anthem of Austria.

    Anybody know what time the Austrian Economists breakout group is scheduled for?

  •  Okay I'm really having a problem with this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    social liberal


    While I've never heard of these "Fatima Crusaders", isn't it a bit overboard to quote their objections to Vatican II as prima facia evidence of CT???

    I know a lot of my family members, whom are Catholic, were outraged after Vatican II.  

    I'm missing the point on how they're being CT  by believing "that God will use Russia to punish the entire world unless Russia is converted to Catholicism."

    Hell, I was told, as a Catholic, one of the Revelations of Fatima included the conversation of "Godless Russia" into a Christian nation and that when the Blessed Virgin did convert Russia, we would know the "End Times" are near.  We were even told that the 3rd and final revelation was sooo bad that the Pope could not release it to the world!

    In 1979 I actually touched the Virgin Statue that cried tears of blood when it came through Binghamton, New York at our local Catholic Church!


    And BTW, I evolved passed that Catholic brainwashing.

    My point, it's their faith system.  It's their beliefs.  Who really cares???  

    But how it's CT is a bit of a mystery to me.  

    The Pope did say this:

    Pope Urges Forming New World Economic Order to Work for the ‘Common Good’

    Published: July 7, 2009

    VATICAN CITY — Pope Benedict XVI on Tuesday called for a radical rethinking of the global economy, criticizing a growing divide between rich and poor and urging the establishment of a “true world political authority” to oversee the economy and work for the “common good.”

    As for this offshoot of The Cult of the Blessed Virgin...isn't that the way of the world?  Humans being human?  Isn't that how we got Mormonism?  People gathering and believing and then teaching different things?
    The Vatican II is where this "cult" got it's authority from anyways, so it's really not CT.

    I really do find it odd that a "Christian DEM in NC" would bash other Christians and tell us they're conspiracy theorists for having their faith.

    -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

    by gerrilea on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 05:32:57 PM PDT

    •  kudos to you for doing your own thinking! eom (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
    •  There founder is a holocaust denier. (0+ / 0-)

      Maybe you should do some research on exactly what "conspiracy theories" they espouse.

      •  ROFL...good gracious...I really could care less. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        social liberal

        The "teachable moment" ended when a Christian accused another Christian of CT, the evidence provided to us was their disagreement with Vatican II and the message of Fatima.

        As for the holocaust stuff. if the diarist was upset about that, they would have told us in their diary quotes.  Hey, but that's how I understand things.  If it's important, I quote it or specifically mention it.

        -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

        by gerrilea on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 06:35:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Fair enough. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          In rereading your post, I see that you've pretty much stuck to the Vatican stuff.

          I had you confused with some of the other posters here, who don't seem to have  a problem with any of the stuff espoused by the group.

          •  There are extremists in every group... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            social liberal

            I don't believe anything any of them say, not anymore.

            I will admit, there was a time when I did believe and pray to the Blessed Virgin and was in awe of the pomp and pageantry of seeing the statue "that cried tears of blood".

            The Secrets of Fatima were a big deal in my family and the Catholic Church I was a member of.  The Vatican II was still a sore spot for some of my Catholic Aunts and Uncles, they talked about it for years and years and years and they didn't talk nicely about it either.


            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

            by gerrilea on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 07:01:00 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  You should have no problem, gerrilea (0+ / 0-)

          Indeed, you are concern trolling:  

          if the diarist was upset about that, they would have told us in their diary quotes.
          That is disingenuous.  Christian Dem in NC did not get into detail but he did state:  
          The Fatima Center has also frequently put out anti-Semitic and anti-Masonic literature,according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.
          He cited his source.  

          Just because you would have written the diary differently, does not make this diary wrong or inadequately supported.

          •  OH PLUEASE. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            social liberal

            "concern trolling"?

            What the f**?  

            concern troll

            January 27, 2011 Urban Word of the Day
            A person who posts on a blog thread, in the guise of "concern," to disrupt dialogue or undermine morale by pointing out that posters and/or the site may be getting themselves in trouble, usually with an authority or power. They point out problems that don't really exist. The intent is to derail, stifle, control, the dialogue. It is viewed as insincere and condescending.

            A concern troll on a progressive blog might write, "I don't think it's wise to say things like that because you might get in trouble with the government." Or, "This controversy is making your side look disorganized."

            MY posting is a legitimate question of how any Catholic or Christian IS a Conspiracy Theorist??? Especially those that may believe that Vatican II was the destruction of the Catholic Faith and/or that the Blessed Virgin and her warnings were???

            AND how hypocritical it appears to me that one "Christian" would accuse another "Christian" over a matter of faith???  It's a bizarre perspective that I still have a problem with.  It's like reading, "My God is more powerful that yours" and/or "If you don't believe what I do, you're going to burn in the fires of HELL!"



            BECAUSE anti-Semite does not equal Holocaust Denier, from my perspective.

            And the link to the SPLC NEVER SAYS THAT EITHER!

            It does say that some Catholics hate Jews...Oooohhh, evil!  Religious people of different faiths don't like each other....who could have ever guessed that???

            See my previous point stated above!

            IN FACT, it says this:

            And he describes the World War II Nazi genocide of the Jews as "a reaction to Jewish Messianism (in the form of Bolshevism)."
            You, sir owe me an apology!  

            And what I was taught as a Catholic WAS that the Blessed Virgin appeared at Fatima and that Russia had to be converted into a Christian Nation!  EVERY Mass I went to there would be a prayer said for their conversion!

            AND WHERE did I say the diary wasn't written properly or inadequately supported???

            OH wait, I didn't.  The diarist's point was to emphasize the group's disagreement with Vatican II AND the conversion of "godless Russia"!

            Again, you owe me a formal apology for your false accusations and misrepresentations.

            -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

            by gerrilea on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 08:46:02 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Perhaps (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              You are too close to the issue, given your own background, which you have invoked as a source of authority in all this. (Try reading Rachel Tabachnick's underlying essay and see if that doesn't help clarify the matter.)  But here is some info to help bring you up to speed on what your background did not teach you.  

              The Vatican has for several decades been trying to contend with a number of far right Catholic groups that are into various CTs and  anti-Semitism (the Pius X Society being the best known).  Just being into Fatima does not make one a conspiracy theorist or an anti-Semite, but there are also Fatimists who are those things.  And those are the groups of interest here.  The problem has been so severe that the Vatican has spent decades trying to sort it out.  The Vatican's World Apostolate of Fatima (WAF) is an effort to distinguish between approved and unapproved approaches to a focus on Mary via what the past two popes called the New Evangelization.  Unapproved approaches were characterized conspiracy theories involving the secret of Fatima and the consecration of Russia.  The Fatima Crusader is clearly in the non-approved camp. Here is what the WAF has to say about it, in its barely restrained language.

              WAF/BAPC Cautions

                  WAF/BAPC’s are an integral part of the WAF and, as such, are also part of a Public Association of the Faithful under the Pontifical Council for the Laity.  This ecclesial status requires that they be governed by the rules and regulations of the apostolate.

                  The focus of the formation portion of the WAF/BAPC gathering must be primarily Fatima.  While other “Church Approved” apparitions will sometimes be discussed for comparison or other purposes, there must never be discussion about or promotion of apparitions which have not been formally approved by the Church.

                  Faithfulness to the magisterial teaching of the Church and loyalty to the Pope and the Bishops and Pastors in communion with the Chair of Peter is an absolute requirement.   Any and all discussion of things like defects in the Consecration of Russia performed by Blessed Pope John Paul II on March 25, 1984 which made it unacceptable to heaven, and any and all discussion about alleged parts of the Secret of Fatima which are purported in certain corners to have not yet been revealed is strictly prohibited.  People who promote either of these two allegations are not welcome in WAF/BAPC’s.  In addition to causing great confusion and deep division, and of far greater consequence, they encourage people to pray that the Holy Father will finally perform and consecration properly and reveal the rest of the secret instead of praying for the conversion of sinners, the salvation of souls and world peace. [emphasis added]

                  The materials used by WAF/BAPC’s must be only those provided or approved by the WAF, USA Board of Trustees.

              Sometimes (but not always) religious ideas can lead to or incorporate CTs.  This is one of those cases, as Rachel Tabachnick wrote in her piece:  
              The Fatima Crusaders not only reject the reforms of Vatican II, but also teach that the Vatican is in collusion with the United Nations to form a one-world government.


              •  Thanks for the clarifications. (0+ / 0-)

                These "Fatima Crusaders" sound just like the cult that Joseph Smith started, we call them Mormons.

                The church has lost control of many parts of it's "kingdom" before, ie the Protestant Reformation and the schism between "Roman Catholics" and the "Orthodox Church" centuries before that.

                As a reformed Irish Roman Catholic believer, the Church lost any and all authority I believed it had when I learned of the pedophilia rings and the things I learned from the many books written by Naomi Klein, like Fences and Windows.  The evil the Roman Catholic Church, my church, has spread and continues to spread is beyond any rationalizations.  They destroyed the progressive social movements and their leaders in South America that threatened their monopoly.  They still are doing it to this day!

                As the diarist stated here:  "What would __ think if he found out what they were preaching???

                Well, what would Jesus say if he found out what "His" Church has done in his name?

                It's all hypocrisy, including the points made by the diarist.

                The Roman Catholic Church's days are numbered, in my opinion, and they're doing all they can to keep control.

                As Americans, shouldn't we be teaching/supporting tolerance?  This diary sounds like we should be hating those people because they have a different belief.  Beliefs that the Church is attempting to destroy.  I simply cannot agree to it.  I really could care less if they worship a pink polka dot teddy bear, it's their choice.

                As for the claims of CT about a NWO.   The NY Times article I linked above makes pretty clear that's what the Papacy IS now supporting.  I'll be clear here, "a New Economic Order".  Just like NAFTA and GATT and our shameful membership in the WTO.   It's collusion upon a grand scale.

                -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

                by gerrilea on Sat Aug 24, 2013 at 02:01:12 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

  •  Converting Russia to Catholicism. (0+ / 0-)

    That sounds like a fun weekend.

  •  Racists and conspiracy theorists? (0+ / 0-)

    Yep, that sounds about par for the course.

    If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

    by Major Kong on Fri Aug 23, 2013 at 08:04:22 PM PDT

  •  why would someone like Rand Paul, (0+ / 0-)

    who has his tastebuds craving the power of the White House, have even the remotest interest in speaking to a group like this? What's the "upside" for him, in other words? To consolidate the crazies? The Republicans already have that pretty much locked up.

  •  "Birds of a feather...." N/T (0+ / 0-)

    “The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor.” - Voltaire.

    by LamontCranston on Sat Aug 24, 2013 at 08:25:37 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site