Pope Francis on Thursday gently scolded Congress on a variety of issues, from immigration to foreign policy, but on one unexpected topic — the weapons sales that fuel armed conflicts around the world — he couldn’t have been much more blunt.
He was speaking about his determination “to minimize and, in the long term, to end the many armed conflicts throughout our world,” when he said this:
Here we have to ask ourselves: Why are deadly weapons being sold to those who plan to inflict untold suffering on individuals and society? Sadly, the answer, as we all know, is simply for money: money that is drenched in blood, often innocent blood. In the face of this shameful and culpable silence, it is our duty to confront the problem and to stop the arms trade.
Those were fighting words, especially given where he spoke them. The U.S. is by far the largest arms supplier in the world, with domestic manufacturers selling more than $23.7 billion in weapons in 2014 to nearly 100 different countries. During the Obama administration, weapons sales have surged to record levels, in large part due to huge shipments to Gulf States, particularly Saudi Arabia.
The weapons sales to Saudi Arabia include cluster bombs and other munitions being used to hit densely populated areas, schools, and even a camp for displaced people in Yemen.
And a healthy chunk of those arms sales — especially to Israel and Egypt — are heavily subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer.
Congress, which could have blocked any of this, went along happily — in no small part because of the approximately $150 million a year the defense industry spends on lobbying and direct campaign contributions.
William Hartung, director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy, praised the Pope’s comments as “a refreshing change from the antiseptic language that too often surrounds discussions in this country concerning the global arms trade.”
Hartung wrote in an email to The Intercept:
The recognition that arms sales can result in the spilling of “innocent blood” for profit is a far cry from the cover stories so often used to justify multi-billion-dollar arms deals — that they promote “stability” and are only for “defensive purposes.” As the country that reaps the most money from the international arms trade, the United States bears a responsibility to take the leadership in curbing weapons trading around the world. A good start would be to cut off U.S. supplies to Saudi Arabia until they stop engaging in indiscriminate bombing in Yemen, which has caused a humanitarian catastrophe of the highest order.
Hartung’s research shows that the volume of major arms deals concluded by Obama in his first five years far exceeds the amount approved during the eight years of the Bush administration.
U.S. firms make up seven of the top 10 arms-exporting companies, with Lockheed Martin and Boeing coming in at numbers one and two. Also in the top 10: Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, United Technologies and L-3 Communications.
In June, the State Department announced it was lifting the freeze it imposed on the repressive government of Bahrain, despite recent human rights abuses including arbitrary detention of children, torture, restrictions for journalists and a brutal government crackdown on peaceful protestors in 2011.
And in August, Secretary of State John Kerry announced that he would even further speed up U.S. arms sales to Gulf countries. As part of his attempt to reassure Gulf states alarmed by negotiations with Iran, he said the U.S. “had agreed to expedite certain arms sales that are needed and that have taken too long in the past.”
Thursday’s speech was not the first time the Pope has spoken out about the arms trade. He referred to it as “the industry of death” in a talk with Italian schoolchildren in May. “Why do so many powerful people not want peace? Because they live off war,” he said.
“This is serious. Some powerful people make their living with the production of arms and sell them to one country for them to use against another country,” he said. “The economic system orbits around money and not men, women. … So war is waged in order to defend money. This is why some people don’t want peace: They make more money from war, although wars make money but lose lives, health, education.”
The Pope spoke well, befitting an honourable man. But the Pope, being a man of Peace, may not understand the mind of those who thrive of wars, human misery and destruction.
Although all nations, including the most peaceful ones, wish to defend their citizens and territories from genuine foreign invasions and other harms, not all nations have the weapons to do this. They have to buy from those who make them. This is how the arms trade was born.
As for any product that you sell, markets must created and demand must be generated. Environments that are inducive to arms sales include “Coalition” nations that can be pitted against one another while they buy the weapons to render each other extinct, from those that manufacture them. An icing on the cake, is population reduction through war. Like the little Syrian boy that washed ashore in Turkey, for example.
And like any other product, arms have to be tested. Often on unwitting nations and citizens, feeding them uranium, scalding them with white phosphorus, depleted uranium, sending soldiers to nuclear fallout, torturing others with weaponized nanodevices and burning others with ADS, to mention a few. Field testing is a selling point in arms trade. Invasions help a great deal in the field testing phase.
So trillions flow in my friends, while blood flows out. And all are happy in the spirit of capitalism. Someone forgot to tell the Pope, that it’s not going to happen any time soon. Because not all men are of good will.
The typographical and gramatic errors in this comment reflect the pace of writing the comment with a few minutes left on the library computer. There was no time for correction. The logic should be clear though. Apologies.
He also spoke about protecting life at all stages and the attacks on marriage.
The Popes morality is not served cafeteria style where you can pick and choose what you agree with. This goes for both left and right.
True speach in our days 2015
Thanks. Good coverage of an under-reported and significant part of the pontiff’s speech.
I wish people in our media and public life generally weren’t so shocked by this man. They have seemingly all forgotten that the papacy was not always as solicitous of well-heeled ‘Merkun Pharisees as it has been under Benedict. His predecessor John Paul II operated in a different time, was profoundly anti-Communist (for good reasons) and yet he still spoke regularly about the failings of our “capitalist” side during that bipolar era.
I’m thoroughly amused by reports about the non-attendance of highly placed, ultra-rightist “Catholics”. Like 3 of our Supreme Court justices and some members of Congress. They were so, so, so, loud c. 10-20 years back about the wrongness of being a “cafeteria Catholic”. And now, oddly enough, they are are turning their backs on the pontiff more rapidly, publicly and shamelessly than their left-of-center Catholic opponents ever did.
I wonder to what extent the Pope had this forum — this opportunity — due to Boehner’s desire to stick it to the weakly Christian lapel pin fascists who now rule his party. The ones who effectively forced him out.
Me loves the Pope. Big time Jesuit educated athiest on Holy See man-crush.
Someone must have felt nettled by the Pope’s little talks.
http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Donald-Trump-crashes-Pope-Francis-party-in-New-6528044.php
I wish articles like this would include suggestion to tax their outlandish profits to get the money necessary to resettle refugees. They make profit, and their basic business is, destroying communities. They share responsibility and the point of sale of weapons is an accessible point to collect the costs of war.
Nikola Tesla was working on Directed Energy Weapons since the early 1900’s and claimed to have developed an effective weapon by the 1930’s, and the papers were taken by the U.S. military when he died. I thought it was the Nazis and the Operation Paperclip scientists who developed the weapons, but apparently Tesla developed them first…well over 75 years ago. But if you dare mention these weapons, which the entire American military are currently working on (with their defense contractors), as are much of the military around the world…you are totally out of your mind.
Wow! Talk about a conspiracy of silence. These are the weapons currently being used, not the weapons that were considered cutting edge during the Manhattan Project in the 1930’s.
There were reports from Iraq that an exotic for of energy weapon had been used.
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/7/25/u_s_broadcast_exclusive_star_wars
I suspect that directed energy technologies have only been used under certain battlefield conditions that could be tightly controlled for secrecy sake.
The technology was well-known enough. When Robert Oppenheimer was at Los Alamos during WWII, he and his fellow scientists deliberately spread a rumor in Santa Fe bars that what they were working on, up on that mesa, was some kind of electromagnetic cannon or rail gun.
The rail weapon uses a physical projectile and is there a mere extension of conventional weapons systems (top speed of projectile is Mach 7). The directed energy technologies are directing, or re-directing, pure energy to a target at the speed of light.
Here is the film that the Democracy Now report referenced;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfr-1fJMTbo
They are already in use.
https://www.google.com/search?q=navy+directed+energy+pictures&biw=1366&bih=673&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0CBwQsARqFQoTCKuimceimsgCFYWpHgodUAsKsw
I think the only “shameful” thing about all of it – and this article too – is how easily progressives, liberals and the other pseudo leftists have been so eager to embrace a religious pontiff who basically represents and endorses everything they [liberals] profess to hate. The fact that he spoke before Congress is disturbing enough but Naomi Klein, for goodness sakes! Of all people! Has she now become a Vatican puppet? Is the pope now a fan of her husband’s great documentary “The Take” ? So much for pseudo-leftist, liberal, progressive BS. I completely agree with Matt Taibbi who points out the very vagueness with which Francis speaks. Anyone can attribute their own meaning to his fuzzy wuzzy pearls of wisdom. Why does anyone even care which side he says he is on when he is the head of one of the most backward and repressive institutions in the world. That institution, wealthier than many nations, has caused more suffering and death in history than any Islamic nation. By the way, has the pope taken in any refugees? No one in Europe goes to church anymore. Even in Italy and Ireland those numbers are way down. If he’s truly against the death penalty and the sale of arms he should send a letter of protest to President Obama to stop executing Moslems every Tuesday. I think Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone put it so correctly: “And this pope, for all his good qualities, is to me a modern version of an old religious scam.”
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-do-we-care-whose-side-the-pope-is-on-20150923
The best time to find religion is when god agrees with you.
Rejected the Church at 7 thanks to my parents who were interested in letting me be me and didn’t fight it. I’m 48 now and while I haven’t changed my mind about the church I am at least glad that Ratzinger is gone and Francis is in charge. He hasn’t come close to fixing what’s wrong but at least he’s made a start. Something the rest of them couldn’t be bothered to do.
Taibbi, as usual, hits it out of the park.
Your angry rant against the Pope makes one thing abundantly clear: you viciously attack him–and totally ignore the what he said to Congress. His speech was brilliant because he confronted the US government for its arms exports to despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia. He is an activist Pope who has not only said excellent speeches, but actually has done things like getting USA and Cuba to restore diplomatic relations–no small accomplishment that. Your problem is that you’re too busy hating the Pope to see that he’s actually doing some great things given his unique position in world affairs. I think the Pope is great! Viva la Papa!
what he said to Congress in his speech was spot on. Regardless of your hatred for the man, his speeches around the world are excellent and he has done remarkable things, like getting Cuba and USA to restore diplomacy. Taibbi and you both come across as haters who refuse to see the good that this Pope has done in the world.
It’s possible to agree with someone without believing everything they agree with. Furthermore, you don’t have to be Catholic to understand what he’s saying here. There is nothing vague about any of this, it is a pretty direct and straightforward message with you simply do not want to hear.
Now stick it up conservative, poor hating, bomb loving, proto-fascist ass! :)
> By the way, has the pope taken in any refugees?
I don’t agree with several things the pope & the Catholic Church say & do, but in this particular case, yes, he does provide shelter for a couple of families of refugees to live in Vatican City, and also told other catholic parishes, monasteries, organizations, etc. around the world to do the same (let’s see if they—including self-proclaimed catholic politicians—follow his lead in this).
As much as I hate seeing church and state mix, one can’t fault the pope for this message. He is obviously Dead on… unfortunately despite the faux fawning of most of the corrupt Washington Cartel, his message is also Dead on Arrival. There will only be increased arms sales and increased death/displacement. The money is too good, and Russia has upped the ante in Syria. Obama must either match, raise, or fold. I think the hawks will win, and whether under Obama or the next regime, we will be at war with Russia… as unthinkable as that may seem. Neither side will go nuclear… hopefully.
“Peace Sells, but who’s buying?” – Megadeth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdEupVsL07E
The Zionists disapprove;Their rags hid what he said from headlines and put it in the restricted subscription content.
The power of owning the medium.They control the horizontal,and vertical and we stew in their poison juices.
Pope’s Blind Spots
http://www.accuracy.org/release/popes-blind-spots-sex-abuse-militarism/
“He couldn’t have been more blunt”.
‘Couldn’t’ being the operative word.
Most amusingly, Roll Call transcribed Francis’ speech thus:
I haven’t seen any video of the pope’s speech, but what’s been quoted from it is extraordinary in its bluntness and honesty. Contrast how little the truth is used in those chambers with the pope’s in-your-face critique of the present system–in the very government chambers that allow the massive arms sales by the multi-billion dollar corporations. Now, I’m speculating that the pope didn’t get a welcome or ovation on par with that enjoyed by Bebe Netanyahu. Of course, Israel is one of the leading purchasers of American weapons. Gee…funny how it all works…
using American taxpayer money, of course.
Nixon would have Congress give Israel 10 mil and they would promptly kickback a mil to Tricky Dick.
I’m glad that kind of act doesn’t happen any more.
Cannot the Pope grant an indulgence to erase the sins of the arms dealers? So the solution to the problem is in his hands.
More precisely, the “absolution” is in his hands.
typical hippie atheist trying to sound intellectual and funny…
your white guilt has warped you into thinking america/religion bashing is okay all while being hyper sensitive about pretty much everything else
that coexist bumper sticker on your car is further evidence that you are only lying to yourself, trying to make yourself out to be somebody who are not
cherry picking tolerance makes you no different than those you can’t tolerate
That’s the first time I’ve heard the Pope described that way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=On8lhFbtvE4
@ charliethreeee
“Perhaps few people know that Pietro Beretta arms factory Ltd. (the largest arms industry in the world) and is controlled by the Holding SpA Beretta and the majority shareholder of the Beretta Holding SpA after Gussalli Ugo Beretta, is the IOR (Institute for Works of Religion [commonly known as the Vatican Bank]) private institution founded in 1942 by Pope Pius XII and headquartered in Vatican City.”
https://usahitman.com/vbmsipb/
I wonder if the elite is mulling an overthrow of the Vatican. That might not be as far fetched as it sounds.
Yeah, like in ‘Godfather, Part III’!
Nicely conveyed Dan.
This of course ties right in with the earlier Intercept article, “The One Thing Pope Francis Could Say That Would Truly Stun Congress”. In the end, these arms sales are made by, approved by, or conducted under the oversight of states with colonial ambitions, and are only allowed insofar as they are in alignment with those ambitions.
The United States of America, foementing war all over the planet, interfering in the lives of people everywhere, creating division, pitting neighbor against neighbor, and then when the only solution is blood-letting, they supply the weapons to all parties.
Yes indeed, wonderful investment, this perpetual warfare.
And Obama, Congress, the military industrial alliance, and corporate America remain silent, as the blood soaked lucre flows into their treasuries.
Pope Francis should name the players in this game of death, and shame this government.
Until some powerful individual calls them out, nothing will change.
Jesus you Yanks are pathetic. A nation of overweight Pontius Pilates with fake opinions and do-nothing attitudes with a label and an ready insult for everything and a whining rejection of any comebacks. James Brown summed you all up – Talkin’ Loud and Sayin’ Nuthin’. You argue between yourselves which is bluer, the sea or the sky, then sit back and pass the buck to “someone more powerful” whilst taking pride in your “democratic processes” that the rest of the world laugh at. You are f*cking lazy cowards that hid from WW2 whilst the British Empire crumbled into your palms until the Japs bombed you off your fat arses but you now want to convince the world you are tough guys after beating up some Iraqis. Good grief. You won’t fight the Russians. You won’t fight the Chinese. You won’t even fight Iran. But you might end up in another Civil War the way you are all going. If you can’t shoot it with a drone or drive over it in an Abrams, you won’t even show up. Call them out yourself, be brave like Ed Snowden, taste the mace and feel the baton, your tax dollars paid for them after all.
“He couldn’t have been much more blunt.”
I very much disagree and to prove that he could have been much more blunt
I would advise Mr. Froomkin to read his own article.
If the small list of examples which are cited in the article would have been
spelled out for the corrupt corporate congress it would have been
a small increase in bluntness.
He could have been much more blunt.
On a related note,
the address to the congress was barely adequate and was deliberately
sabotaged by its own ending wherein the “pope”
promoted the delusion that if more young people started having families
the world would be a better place.
THAT is one of the LAST things the world needs and it makes the whole
address seem as if it could be out of touch with reality.
You are a tough audience.sheesh.
That you would call me “a tough audience” is indicative of
how they try to train us to expect so little.
Nowhere did the “pope” explicitly cite the glaringly atrocious
predatory weapons sales of the corporate states of america
while he almost pandered to the egos
of the corporate owned criminals before him.
They deserved to be shamed and he asks them to
“take the leadership” in solving the very situations which they create and
celebrate.
No.
If I were “tough” I would have recommended that he bring some corpses
with him and demand that the perverts identify their victims one by one.
As it is, all I am saying is that he held his punches and too many
good intentioned people are willing to celebrate
what was, at best, a lackluster performance.
Arthur Jensen: The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance! … It is the international system of currency which determines the totality of life on this planet. That is the natural order of things today.
Pope Concern Troll: We have to ask ourselves, why…
reposting from Jon’s thread, a contrast in speech
vs.
sold to, simply for money, arms drive vs. system, must make war, empire
passive externality vs. existential interdependence. supplication vs. confrontation.
I’m not saying Bernays would be proud, but truth to power? Maybe in 300 years, eh?
@AdamJohnsonNYC, @MattCrossin nail this dynamic in far pithier terms
https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonNYC/status/647062168500871168
I take it back. Bernays would be proud.
So let’s sell or give free arms to our enemies, start a world war while at the same time disarming our people. Either the Pope is blind or he is part of the evil agenda.
Yes, that’s totally what he was advocating. Yeesh, the fascist right is just as stupid as I remember it.
Given that arms races and weapons proliferation are a huge source of conflict and violence in the Middle East, the US should cease any and all forms of military aid and weapons sales to any entity in the region for the foreseeable future.
Indeed. Providing arms and military aid money to that part of the world is like bringing a gasoline truck to a forest fire. Cutting off cash-on-the-barrelhead sales might also help, although that might simply shift it to third-party sellers. Worth a try, though.
We used to try and quarantine arms sales, that’s what the Curtiss-Wright lawsuit was about. U.S. v. Curtiss-Wright, 299 U.S. 304 (1936). The Gran Chaco war was killing a lot of people and FDR wanted to embargo it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Curtiss-Wright_Export_Corp.
….thank you, c.n. …..
Look this is a moral no-brainer for any purported “civilized” nation that is a member of the UN and that isn’t about territorial expansion and/or economic colonialism (i.e. “free markets” until you have something another wants at a price they don’t want to pay or to not sell to you at all). If you want another nation’s promise or help in the event of attack by another nation, be willing to sign a reciprocal defense treaty with that nation. No arms need to be trafficked to any nation. The bigger relatively economically stronger nations only need engage in treaties with the relatively weaker ones (militarily and economically) against outside aggression. Every nation has a treaty with every other nation to that effect, and no one aggressively attacks another nation on a MADD theory amongst the big boys. No more proxy wars because every war necessarily implicates the big boys and biggest arms traffickers so the big boys have an incentive to tamp down any such ambitions amongst their treaty allies. And if little relatively weak nations attack one another the big boys step in directly to put a stop to it, collectively, consistent with their treaty obligations and overwhelming international military force being brought to bear on the situation. And that way the only “interest” being served is one of international peace and/or cessation of hostilities before they become problematic.
But that’s not what the “international order” is all about–morality or legality. It is about economic expansionism and who has the military might to open, exploit and control markets (to the degree that is possible) for products and resources. And the American arms trade should make that abundantly clear. There is absolutely no logical or moral reason for the US (or any economically powerful nation with significant arms manufacturing capacity) to export weapons or weapons technology outside its borders–except profit. It most certainly doesn’t enhance this nation’s defensive “security” (although it certainly enhances its “offensive” capacity via proxies).
And if push comes to shove and someone attacks your reciprocal treaty ally–be willing to intervene directly in their defense with your soldiers and weapons consistent with your legal obligations. Short of that willingness among and between nations to enter into such defense treaties makes it their problem and only their problem. But let them kill each other old school with rocks, clubs and knives and not M16s and cluster munitions.
If other nation’s want to peddle arms to whomever, let them. Some people will always want to kill one another but the purported “civilized” nations of the world shouldn’t be in the for-profit arms business of assisting belligerents to kill each other in any way. But the international community will never solve this problem (assuming they want to which I don’t believe they do) of numerous armed conflicts all across the globe so long as the big arms exporters of the purported “civilized” nation’s are permitted to conduct their “trade” without sanction.
It is one thing to believe that all humans have a right to some weapon(s) for the purposes of self-defense. It is another matter entirely to believe that all humans have a right to traffic in military grade weaponry. That latter is a choice. And it is a choice made for one reason and one reason only–money.
No matter how much or little our purported “competitors” in the international arms trade could possibly sell to anyone in our absence in the trade, none of that trade could ever amount to a threat to a nation (and its treaty allies) who are in possession of literally a minimum of 7,500 nuclear weapons or the nation that foolishly spends more money than all other nations combined on conventional weapons and force projection capability.
America engaging in the “arms trade” is the second most immoral, hypocritical and cynical thing America does–next to directly bombing defenseless nations in service of America’s “interests”.
And people wonder why some of us American citizens aren’t very “nationalistic” when it comes to some of the activities taken in our purported names. It’s because those actions are morally, logically and legally repugnant.
Picking a nit here rr, but ‘profit’ is too anemic a term for the purpose. Enhancing offensive capacity yes, but beyond that it maintains hegemony of the dollar. This is what Franc was getting at, when he was speaking honestly to a Spanish magazine last year, about “the balance sheets of the idolatrous economies” being sorted. But he wasn’t honest in front of Congress. What is truly instructive about this speech, imo, is his fundamental choice to dissemble.
https://medium.com/@matthewstoller/the-solution-to-isis-is-the-first-amendment-95fc2c94f52e
@ Benjamin AP
Fair enough and I’d agree with all of the above. By “profit” I just generally meant the mechanism and logic of neoliberal global capitalism rather than actual “security” and most certainly not in any “moral” sense because I believe capitalism in most respects to be an immoral unsustainable system. But you are right the fundamental global commodity is oil, IMHO, and preservation of the US dollar as the globe’s primary currency is dependent on recycling those dollars in whichever way the US sees as the most efficient and profitable. Weapons of war are well suited in that regard.
Like I’ve said in the past, I hate the hypocrisy of America. If it wants Saudi Arabia’s wealth, do what it does to all the other defenseless nation’s it likes to bomb–invade it, bomb it to dust and take what they want (then again that didn’t work out too well in Iraq and it isn’t ever going to work with Iran). At least then we’d be transparent about what it is we are doing and maybe the world would rise up against it. Then again, trying to invade and control the nation with the two most holy sites on the planet, at least to over 1.2 billion people, is going to have a lot of blowback. So maybe this is the only way TPTB think they can prop up the house of cards that is neoliberal global capitalism.
Smart long term thinking and strategy would require putting in the time and money as a nation now, like the space race before, into getting off the oil nipple and changing the logic and go to technologies of global capitalism forever. Better to be the leader in the race to the inevitable rather than the laggard.
Yeah I figured this is where you were coming from. ‘Profit’ just stuck out (to me) because it has the passive connotation of accumulation/neutral vice, as opposed to the very active forces of extortion and control. Again, picking nits here, but I thought it might be worth jumping off on. I thought your post was excellent.
Precisely. Which is why Froomkin’s notion that Franc “couldn’t be more blunt” is bogus imo. Franc used the passive voice in one venue, the active voice in another. In the presence of power, he elided agency. It’s to be expected. But low hanging fruit shouldn’t be catapulted in the absence of a meaningful alternative. It’s the best we’ve got. But it’s still a “liars conversation”.
That seems to be the case. Without a meaningful alternative and/or crisis, there is no incentive to change structure.
Right. One would think. But that’s assuming the national interest corresponds to something we can identify with substance at this juncture. The ideology of market logic seems to have externalized the aggregate of human motivation to such a degree that common sense has lost any trace of provenance on mother earth. Case in point, Exxon’s own scientists ringing the bell on anthropogenic climate change, 35 years ago.
http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/Exxons-own-research-confirmed-fossil-fuels-role-in-global-warming
After reading the speech, I felt a bit disappointed. I had expected more explicit exhortations on curbing rampant unregulated capitalism and on leaving a functional ecosystem to our descendants, but the references were few and oblique. I doubt that many on the hill listened carefully enough to even hear them.
Dan latched onto the only poignant sentence in the entire speech.
The pope also got in a dig at the death penalty, which could be timely in the Glossip case.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/24/pope-francis-congress-abolish-death-penalty
Anyway, he’s signaling that the American bishops need to talk about a number of issues they’ve neglected in the rush to ban same-sex marriages and abortion. I’m curious if the Oklahoma archdiocese is going to speak up in the Glossip case, or if the California archdioceses are going to say anything about the arms industry.
….not….only in a dream….
Brilliant speech – it lathered up the pride of Americans and appealed to our sense of justice, while speaking in terms of family and brotherhood. I had hoped he’d mention the war industry to Congress and Papi came through. I doubt his speech will have much effect on the behavior of the ‘elected’ stooges, but the people who naively vote for these professional liars may see things more clearly now and act differently in the future.