NationStates Jolt Archive

Anyone else think this is disgusting?

That a known dictator who has had travel bans to Europe imposed on him was allowed into Italy and The Vatican City for the pope's funeral? Added to the fact that the heads of state from not only the majority of EU nations, but that of the Americas too were present, and said nothing?

Even more disgusting, and ridiculous that the Prince of Wales was, according to clarence house "caught off guard and shook his hand"?

Since coming to power in Zimbabwe, Mugabe has seized farms and property not belonging to black farmers, and has refused international adjudication on supposedly "democratic elections".

I appreciate that this was the pope's funeral and special circumstances, but think that this ignorance of his travel ban was nothing more but flouting international sanctions. The fact that European governments failed to uphold it just shows how weak our opposition to despots really is.

Anybody else think he shouldn't have been there?

They should arrest him the moment he leaves the Vatican. Persona non grata means persona non grata.

Cut the guy some slack. He's catholic. The leader of his religion died. It's understandable that the travel ban might be lifted for a brief period so he can attend the funeral.

Just thought I'd add this for a bit of background:

Charles shakes hands with Mugabe (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4425385.stm)

Anyone else think this is disgusting?

That a known dictator who has had travel bans to Europe imposed on him was allowed into Italy and The Vatican City for the pope's funeral? Added to the fact that the heads of state from not only the majority of EU nations, but that of the Americas too were present, and said nothing?

Even more disgusting, and ridiculous that the Prince of Wales was, according to clarence house "caught off guard and shook his hand"?

Since coming to power in Zimbabwe, Mugabe has seized farms and property not belonging to black farmers, and has refused international adjudication on supposedly "democratic elections".

I appreciate that this was the pope's funeral and special circumstances, but think that this ignorance of his travel ban was nothing more but flouting international sanctions. The fact that European governments failed to uphold it just shows how weak our opposition to despots really is.

Anybody else think he shouldn't have been there?
What about Bush who broke international law and attacked a country in violation of the UN charter and killed tens of thousands of people in the process? If Mugabe is a persona non grata, then Bush should be one too!

I don't think it was lifted. I think Mugabe's using a loophole because his destination - the vatican - is not an E.U. country.

And I think that turning the death of the pope into a political situation is completely missing the point. If the Vatican invited him, that's none of our business. Mr. Mugabe is there to pay a final hommage to the pope and that's it.

If you don't agree, remove nay and all head of state that is not catholic from the proceedings, as it is purely political to pay hommage to someone from a different fate.

Ein Deutscher']What about Bush who broke international law and attacked a country in violation of the UN charter and killed tens of thousands of people in the process? If Mugabe is a persona non grata, then Bush should be one too!


Wow The Pres must be a pretty good shot to have a kill count of 10000+ thats amazing!!! :p :D

Sorry just had to... The president in actuality has a kill count of a whoping 0 thats zero nil zip, don't place the actions of many people form a handfull of contries on one man who thought he was doing the right thing by trying to free these people. He was going on other people's info anyway.

Wow The Pres must be a pretty good shot to have a kill count of 10000+ thats amazing!!! :p :D
What's so amazing about mass murder?

Ein Deutscher']What's so amazing about mass murder?
It's hard work killing that many people. I bet you'd quit after the first 700 or so.

I tell you, if Zimbabwe had oil or coal, America and Britain would be in there like a shot.

If we take the line of people who shouldn't be there, what about the Archbishop Of Canterbury, second to the monarch as head of the church of England?

Just thought I'd add this for a bit of background:

Charles shakes hands with Mugabe (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4425385.stm)

I don't think we can really blame Prince Charles for that. All those foreign dignitaries all over the place, he probably was just shaking hands with everyone around him.

I can appreciate that it is customary for the Vatican to invite ALL heads of state from countries with catholic populations, I can also appreciate that the Vatican may not be an EU member country.

However, Italy is, and as a member of the EU should have dissalowed Mugabe entry to the country. The last time I checked the Vatican didn't have its own airport, and Italy was still an EU member state.

Surely you can see that allowing him to flout this ban will just allow him to think he can flout any international sanctions imposed upon him?

As for Bush, well I can't disagree that I think he should be investigated over the legality of the invasion of iraq, perhaps he was, I don't honestly know. I do know that Bush and Blair should both be called to account democratically for lying to their citizens over the existence of WMD's. Bush was, and America let him off. Blairs trial by fire will be this may, I just hope that he does not earn a third term.

I can appreciate that it is customary for the Vatican to invite ALL heads of state from countries with catholic populations, I can also appreciate that the Vatican may not be an EU member country.

However, Italy is, and as a member of the EU should have dissalowed Mugabe entry to the country. The last time I checked the Vatican didn't have its own airport, and Italy was still an EU member state.

Surely you can see that allowing him to flout this ban will just allow him to think he can flout any international sanctions imposed upon him?

As for Bush, well I can't disagree that I think he should be investigated over the legality of the invasion of iraq, perhaps he was, I don't honestly know. I do know that Bush and Blair should both be called to account democratically for lying to their citizens over the existence of WMD's. Bush was, and America let him off. Blairs trial by fire will be this may, I just hope that he does not earn a third term.

Additionally, I don't much care whether he is catholic. I do however care when any person has their home forcibly taken by a government because of the colour of their skin, be they black or white (White in this instance). I also care when the driving force behind such criminal action can then rig elections in that same country. Mugabe has little care for the beleifs or emotions of others, so forgive me if I couldn't give a flying duck for his.

I tell you, if Zimbabwe had oil or coal, America and Britain would be in there like a shot.
Sudan has oil. We're not doing anything over there. And we've got plenty of coal here at home. We don't import coal.

I don't think we can really blame Prince Charles for that. All those foreign dignitaries all over the place, he probably was just shaking hands with everyone around him.

While I don't really blame charles for it, I just think it's the last thing he really needs right now. Considering his wedding to the horse is tomorrow (and I thought bestiality was illegal in this country..) which I'm sure only a very small proportion of the population is happy about; He could use all the good press he can get. I like having the monarchy, but with its public relations carrying on as they are, I can't see there being a king or queen after the current monarch has passed away...

I think this is terrible. Regardless of what Mugabe professes to believe, he is the antithesis of everything that Catolicism should stand for. His murderous cruelty to his own people and his corruption make him more than unsuitable for this occasion. It seems disrespectful to allow him to attend this funeral.

While I don't really blame charles for it, I just think it's the last thing he really needs right now. Considering his wedding to the horse is tomorrow (and I thought bestiality was illegal in this country..) which I'm sure only a very small proportion of the population is happy about; He could use all the good press he can get. I like having the monarchy, but with its public relations carrying on as they are, I can't see there being a king or queen after the current monarch has passed away...

Maybe Prince Charles will step out of the line of succession and let Prince William take over as King.

Maybe Prince Charles will step out of the line of succession and let Prince William take over as King.

If he did, I think it would save the monarchy.

But I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

It seems disrespectful to allow him to attend this funeral.

Oh, please, as if the Catholic Church has ever had any shame.

Disgusting? Not really.

Hey maybe instead of not saying anything, the other world leaders should have started a fist fight with Mugabe! Right there in the Vatican!

Disgusting? Not really.

Hey maybe instead of not saying anything, the other world leaders should have started a fist fight with Mugabe! Right there in the Vatican!

Winner take all...of the world.

If he did, I think it would save the monarchy.

But I'm not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

Ah. As an American, I can't say I follow all the shenanigans of the monarchy, but I will say that I usually don't even think of Prince Charles as even being part of the monarchy. I always just imagine that once Queen Elizabeth dies, William will take the throne. Heh.

Disgusting? Not really.

Hey maybe instead of not saying anything, the other world leaders should have started a fist fight with Mugabe! Right there in the Vatican!

Then you beleive mugabe's flouting a travel ban should be ignored?

Then you beleive mugabe's flouting a travel ban should be ignored?

Well, at a funeral? Yeah. By the politicians? Yeah. It's not the politician's job to be bouncers, nor is it to be border guards. Someone messed up, but you can't blame people for NOT choosing to cook up some disruptive drama about travel bans during the funeral of the Pope.

Well, at a funeral? Yeah. By the politicians? Yeah. It's not the politician's job to be bouncers, nor is it to be border guards. Someone messed up, but you can't blame people for NOT choosing to cook up some disruptive drama about travel bans during the funeral of the Pope.

Not during, of course not, I didn't mean to suggest that.

But I'd have expected some sort of comment after the funeral, sadly we Europeans seem to be happy in letting a mass murdering dictator walk all over us.

Not during, of course not, I didn't mean to suggest that.

But I'd have expected some sort of comment after the funeral, sadly we Europeans seem to be happy in letting a mass murdering dictator walk all over us.

Well, it's not the first time. :rolleyes:

Robert Mugabe's retaking farmlands from whites and giving back to the black population is in my opinion a just cause. Those white farmers got that land through good old colonialism and racism and finally when they are on the receiving end, they complain ("ohh it's not fair, this is racist, blacks taking my farm waah")
It's funny how white nations don't care about Darfur or Rwandan genocide and yet there's an uproar from Europe and America when Mugabe takes land from whites.

Oh, please, as if the Catholic Church has ever had any shame.

Well, I'll admit the Church has done a lot of terrible and unjust things in its history. However, this pope was different than his worldly predecessors and abusers. It was him that helped cleanse years of stagnation and decay from the Church. It was him who apologized for not being more involved in stopping the Holocaust, held real diologues with other faiths, sought to reach out to the world, and tried to brige the divides between religions and cultures.
While the Church may not have a good track record, this man deserves more respect than allowing a murderer and tyrant to come to his funeral which is meant to honor him.

Robert Mugabe's retaking farmlands from whites and giving back to the black population is in my opinion a just cause. Those white farmers got that land through good old colonialism and racism and finally when they are on the receiving end, they complain ("ohh it's not fair, this is racist, blacks taking my farm waah")
It's funny how white nations don't care about Darfur or Rwandan genocide and yet there's an uproar from Europe and America when Mugabe takes land from whites.

Translation: Racism is OK, if it's my race that does it. Hypocrite.

Well, I'll admit the Church has done a lot of terrible and unjust things in its history. However, this pope was different than his worldly predecessors and abusers. It was him that helped cleanse years of stagnation and decay from the Church. It was him who apologized for not being more involved in stopping the Holocaust, held real diologues with other faiths, sought to reach out to the world, and tried to brige the divides between religions and cultures.

Yeah, he was great, if you were as he wished you to be. And those "apologies" were too little, too late.

While the Church may not have a good track record, this man deserves more respect than allowing a murderer and tyrant to come to his funeral which is meant to honor him.

I don't think he deserves any more respect than anyone else.

Cut the guy some slack. He's catholic. The leader of his religion died. It's understandable that the travel ban might be lifted for a brief period so he can attend the funeral.
I would have to agree with you here.

I think that the world is taking more interest in darfur than it is in Zimbabwe at the moment, to be honest. Still not enough, of course.

Mugabe is not just a land thief though. That was the least of his cimes. He is also starving the general population by giving food only to his supporters, and he has taken their brief period of democracy away again. Zimbabwe should get the same sort of treatment now that South Africa once had. As should Sudan.

Robert Mugabe's retaking farmlands from whites and giving back to the black population is in my opinion a just cause. Those white farmers got that land through good old colonialism and racism and finally when they are on the receiving end, they complain ("ohh it's not fair, this is racist, blacks taking my farm waah")
It's funny how white nations don't care about Darfur or Rwandan genocide and yet there's an uproar from Europe and America when Mugabe takes land from whites.

The funny thing is, Mugabe didn't really care about dispossessing white farmers until he personally watched a CNN news story where he found out that these white farmers were contributing money to the political campaigns of his enemies, which then set him off into a paranoid panic about them. If the white farmers were politically inactive, I doubt he would have done what he is doing today.

It's not about racial justice or vengeance. It's about consolidating his own power base.

The funny thing is, Mugabe didn't really care about dispossessing white farmers until he personally watched a CNN news story where he found out that these white farmers were contributing money to the political campaigns of his enemies, which then set him off into a paranoid panic about them. If the white farmers were politically inactive, I doubt he would have done what he is doing today.

It's not about racial justice or vengeance. It's about consolidating his own power base.

I agree, initially mugabe's seizure of farms, which he did start before the matter became internationally renowned was as a means to boost his support with the black majority in zimbabwe. Once he found out that white farmers were backing his opposition in order to try and protect their interests he outright endorsed the mobs that were seizing the farms of, and killing white people.

Mugabe and the leader of the congo who as well had travel restrictions did nothing wrong imo by going to the funeral because they both were allowed to go and were promised diplomatic immunity for time being in rome for the funeral by the vatican,so playing devil's advocate here both of them were ok and did nothing technically wrong by traveling to see the funeral of he pope

I don't think we can really blame Prince Charles for that. All those foreign dignitaries all over the place, he probably was just shaking hands with everyone around him.
I'm inclined to agree with Sdaeriji. In a situation like that, one dignitary probably looks like every other dignitary.

I can appreciate that it is customary for the Vatican to invite ALL heads of state from countries with catholic populations, I can also appreciate that the Vatican may not be an EU member country.

However, Italy is, and as a member of the EU should have dissalowed Mugabe entry to the country. The last time I checked the Vatican didn't have its own airport, and Italy was still an EU member state.

Surely you can see that allowing him to flout this ban will just allow him to think he can flout any international sanctions imposed upon him?
I don't like brutal dictators. However, Italy... hell, Rome, itself, has Vatican City completely surrounded. If you want to travel to Vatican City, then you have to go through Italy to do it.

For Italy to use this as an excuse to seize anyone with legitimate business (or, at least, something that's passable as legitimate) in Vatican City sets a dangerous precedent*, as you have one sovereign power (Italy) dictating who can or cannot travel to or from the sovereign territory of another sovereign power (The Holy See). There might be situations where there's valid reason to do this, but I don't think that Vatican City should qualify as such a situation.

* I'm assuming it's a precedent. I really don't keep up well enough with international politics to be sure.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not going to shed a tear or lift a finger if Mugabe is seized. I just think that there might be unintended consequences down the road.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."

For Italy to use this as an excuse to seize anyone with legitimate business (or, at least, something that's passable as legitimate) in Vatican City sets a dangerous precedent*, as you have one sovereign power (Italy) dictating who can or cannot travel to or from the sovereign territory of another sovereign power (The Holy See). There might be situations where there's valid reason to do this, but I don't think that Vatican City should qualify as such a situation.

* I'm assuming it's a precedent. I really don't keep up well enough with international politics to be sure.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation
"Think about it for a moment."

I believe you are correct. It is analagous to when Fidel Castro, amongst others, is granted the right to travel through US territory to reach the UN, even though he would normally be arrested upon entry otherwise.

Your all against him because he's black!!!

Your all against him because he's black!!!
troll

Your all against him because he's black!!!
You might wanna be careful. Somebody might think you were trolling.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation

Yeah, he was great, if you were as he wished you to be. And those "apologies" were too little, too late.

I don't think he deserves any more respect than anyone else.

Nor do I. But the man was a good pope who brought Catholics into the 20th century. His attitudes about blacks, Jews, evolution, etc. were ground breaking for his religion, and he should be lauded for taking such a stand.

Especially because many Catholic fundies decried him as the anti-Christ.

I don't like brutal dictators. However, Italy... hell, Rome, itself, has Vatican City completely surrounded. If you want to travel to Vatican City, then you have to go through Italy to do it.

Not if he was helicoptered from the airport directly to the Vatican. The Airport is International territory, and if he was subsequently helicoptered from the directly to one of the Vatican's several helipads then he wouldn't have broken the ban. He's not set foot in EU territory.

Also, all world leaders are invited to attend the Pope's funeral. There is a decent chance that Mugabe probably only went to piss off the EU, but then again, given the opportunity, wouldn't you?

Robert Mugabe should've never been there, especially at this time, when he just finished rigging an election.
I am also dismayed, and a bit surprised, that the Europeans didn't let him in. Nevertheless, to say something at the funeral itself would be in poor taste.

You might wanna be careful. Somebody might think you were trolling.

--The Modified Democratic States of Cogitation
troll

Lollin' right here.

I think that may have been made facetiously there, Gataway.