WikiLeaks: Pope refused to cooperate in sex abuse investigation

[Better Believe It]

WikiLeaks: Pope refused to cooperate in sex abuse investigation
msnbc.com staff and news service reports
December 11, 2010

Pope Benedict refused to allow Vatican officials to testify in an investigation by an Irish commission into alleged child sex abuse by priests, according to U.S. diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks, The Guardian newspaper reported.

Benedict was also reportedly furious when Vatican officials were called upon in Rome, The Guardian reported Saturday.

The Murphy Commission of Inquiry into sexual and physical abuse "offended many in the Vatican," according to a cable dated February 26, 2010.

"The Vatican believes the Irish government failed to respect and protect Vatican sovereignty during the investigations," it said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40616870/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security


-------------------------------------------




WikiLeaks cables: Vatican refused to engage with child sex abuse inquiry
Leaked cable lays bare how Irish government was forced to grant Vatican officials immunity from testifying to Murphy commission
By Heather Brooke
December 11, 2010

The Vatican refused to allow its officials to testify before an Irish commission investigating the clerical abuse of children and was angered when they were summoned from Rome, US embassy cables released by WikiLeaks reveal.

Requests for information from the 2009 Murphy commission into sexual and physical abuse by clergy "offended many in the Vatican" who felt that the Irish government had "failed to respect and protect Vatican sovereignty during the investigations", a cable says.

Ultimately, the Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone (equivalent to a prime minister), wrote to the Irish embassy, ordering that any requests related to the investigation must come through diplomatic channels.

The Irish government wanted "to be seen as co-operating with the investigation" because its own education department was implicated, but politicians were reluctant to press Vatican officials to answer the investigators' queries.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/10/wikileaks-vatican-child-sex-abuse-investigation

Read the full articles at the above links.

[seabeyond]

1. another NO SHIT from wiki. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

6. careful....your hatred is bubbling over

I'm not sure why you want to protect the child rapists, but I'm glad this information is getting out.

[seabeyond]

8. wow, i say no shit... and you say i want to protect child rapist. where is your integrity?

where is your honesty? yet dare to lecture me.

hate?

with a no shit, we know this. = hate?

what a dishonest poster you are

[seabeyond]

10. btw.. you didnt actually address the very little in my post. the no shit. we already know this.

are you going ot argue that? of course not. why? cause we already know this. it is not anything new.

genius

[DisgustipatedinCA]

18. Oh, right, that part.

Very well, then. Go ahead and show me where we already knew that the Pope was livid with the Irish government for letting this investigation happen. Just to let you know how arguments work, you need to defend the assertion you have made, namely, that we knew all of this already. This is not a point I need to argue; that's incumbent on you. Thanks.

[seabeyond]

20. snort.... nt

[pipi_k]

11. I say "no shit" too....

and wonder how that equates to wanting "to protect the child rapists".

What "no shit" means is that anybody who's been paying attention for the last ten years or so isn't surprised by this information.


That accusation about wanting to protect child rapists by exclaiming "no shit" is comparable to this:


Person A: Wikileaks reveals the sun rises in the East!!!!

Person B: uh...yeah...no shit...

Person C: Why are you trying to protect the sun??


sigh...

:eyes:

[DisgustipatedinCA]

19. "not suprised by" does not equal "we knew this"

The information is useful to have in the public domain. That's pretty much the beginning and end of it. Thanks.

[pipi_k]

21. Ummmm....Maybe I'm wrong, but didn't most of us already know it anyway?

Or, at the very least, have a feeling about it...

In any case, "having it in the public domain" isn't going to fix what happened, and it's not going to stop it from ever happening again.

So..wheee....we all "know".

And the people who think the Pope is one step up from a pond slug will not be surprised, and the people who think the Pope is God himself STILL won't believe any of it.

Business as usual...

[Better Believe It]

27. So the less we can prove and learn with government documents the better. Of course.

We all knew about the Vietnam war so screw the Pentagon Papers!

Hey .... we all know about how bad slavery was so why do we need to read government documents like the Emancipation Proclamation?

Hey .... we all know how bad things were under British rule so why read government documents like the Declaration of Independence?

Hey .... we all know shit so why bother to read?

[Luminous Animal]

30. There's that idiotic word "surprise" again. As if factual confirmation of that which we strongly

suspected is somehow supposed to surprise us. You don't see the NY Times reporting, "Surprise! The NSA is spying on you!" Surprise!, There were no WMDs in Iraq!" "Surprise! The CIA tried to kill Castro!"

[Better Believe It]

24. I hadn't seen the cables. How did you manage to get them before WikiLeaks?

I wished you would have somehow posted the secret government documents exposing the Vatican on this issue.

[Poll_Blind]

2. Any institution of a religion which refuses to cooperate with a child sex abuse investigation...

...should lose all tax breaks in America.

PB

[Angry Dragon]

3. I really do not care if they were "offended" or not

They have a moral obligation to come forward
I truly wonder where their morals have gone

[katnapped]

4. Wait...wait

You mean a bear DOES shit in the woods?

[rug]

5. Yes.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_eVQg42Xdh0s/TM_C0RlW0EI/AAAAAAAAAmI/T0_lBe2q5Yc/s1600/does+a+bear+shit+in+the+woods.jpg

[Laf.La.Dem.]

9. That is way too funny

Thanks - made my day:toast:

[coalition_unwilling]

26. LMAO -- Wife and I are laughing still. Thanks for the comic relief - n/t

[lunatica]

7. Maybe the Church will re-institute the Inquisition to go after Assange

and his followers. This stuff was supposed to stay secret! Imagine the harm it has done to the Holy Church to expose this!

[katnapped]

12. Probably invoke the lightning too!

SIN SIN SINNER ASSANGE!

[polichick]

13. The Catholic Church is the biggest con in history...

American "democracy" may turn out to be the second biggest.

[AmandaMae]

14. what a surprise...

[Raksha]

15. Oh yeah, sure..."Vatican sovereignty" is what really needed protecting in that investigation.

Re "The Vatican believes the Irish government failed to respect and protect Vatican sovereignty during the investigations," it said.

Sure it was. :sarcasm:

The arrogance of these people is beyond belief, even though we should be used to it by now.

[Reader Rabbit]

16. This opens the RCC up to thousands of lawsuits.

As many of the posters are saying here, "No, duh!" But with the documentation, all those who were abused now have the ammunition they need to get justice in a court of law.

[piratefish08]

17. Wikiobvious

[siligut]

22. Sometimes information needs to be repeated

Hammered in, and hammered often, because that is what the deniers are doing.

[siligut]

23. DUers are a more aware group

There are some people who don't know this. I want some meatier stuff from Wikileaks too, and I keep thinking it will come.

[soryang]

25. Obama refuses to conduct torture investigations n/t

[DCKit]

28. "I'm sorry.... that I got caught." nt

[Odin2005]

29. Those who defend child molesters are no better than the molesters themselves/

Ratzo and his cronies can go straight to Hell.

[Luminous Animal]

31. Kick.