EU commission, Rocco Buttiglione and Opus Dei

mrhappy42

I see some notes surrounding Mr Buttiglione's connection to Opus Dei:
http://www.google.ie/search?hl=en&q=%22Rocco+Buttiglione%22+opus+dei&meta=

What do people think of people in public office being members of 'secret societies'? Should Mr Buttiglione be allowed into the EU commusion (seing the Italians are not backing down on this) if this is true (not saying it is or is not).

Do you think that certain US politicians are members of Opus Dei?

M
Ps. dont try to get boards sued, keep it balanced etc. etc. etc.

The Corinthian

mrhappy42 wrote:

What do people think of people in public office being members of 'secret societies'? Should Mr Buttiglione be allowed into the EU commusion (seing the Italians are not backing down on this) if this is true (not saying it is or is not).

Depends on what you mean as a ‘secret society’. Opus Dei is not exactly secret, after all, although, if truth were told most ‘secret societies’ are actually pretty public, but do not advertise themselves to the public at large.

Should Buttiglione be disallowed on the basis of being a member of such an organization? Perhaps, although that certainly didn’t rule out Peter Sutherland with his membership to the Trilateral Commission (subject to even more conspiracy theories than Opus Dei).

Or perhaps the reality is that most, if not all individuals at that level of politics are involved in some group or other.

PaulHughesWH

This is not an issue. If this question is going to be posed, why not ask how many MEPs, Commissioners and Europhiles are Freemasons? Hell, the two freaks running for President in the U.S.are from the same Masonic secret society in Yale University.

What happened to democracy? And are we ever going to review how many ex-Communists are pulling the strings in Brussels? In the Eurosoviet, I doubt it.

Should Buttiglione be disallowed on the basis of being a member of such an organization? Perhaps, although that certainly didn’t rule out Peter Sutherland with his membership to the Trilateral Commission (subject to even more conspiracy theories than Opus Dei).

That makes Sutherland the perfect little European, me thinks.

The Corinthian

PaulHughesWH wrote:

That makes Sutherland the perfect little European, me thinks.

Only if you don’t actually know what the Trilateral Commission is about, TBH.

damien

mrhappy42 wrote:

What do people think of people in public office being members of 'secret societies'?

Do you think that certain US politicians are members of Opus Dei?

You should look closer to home. There's one very high profile Minister in the Govt that is allegedly in Opus Dei.

I think Opus Dei and other societies like this prefer to think of themselves as societies with secrets rather than secret societies.

PaulHughesWH

Yeah, but how many high ranking Irishmen are Freemasons?

I think people quicker concentrate on membership of Opus Dei as a scandal simply because it's Catholic. The country and the European Union is being run by Trilats, Bilderbergers, Freemasons, and ex-Communists, and no-one seems to give a toss about that.

therecklessone

PaulHughesWH wrote:

Yeah, but how many high ranking Irishmen are Freemasons?

I think people quicker concentrate on membership of Opus Dei as a scandal simply because it's Catholic. The country and the European Union is being run by Trilats, Bilderbergers, Freemasons, and ex-Communists, and no-one seems to give a toss about that.

But you'll keep fighting the good fight, right? :rolleyes:

PaulHughesWH

Naturally.

The Corinthian

therecklessone wrote:

But you'll keep fighting the good fight, right? :rolleyes:

Of course he will - as will you, from your side of the coin.

therecklessone

The Corinthian wrote:

Of course he will - as will you, from your side of the coin.

Ooh, get her!

mrhappy42

For those things that are secret nothing can be done.

However when someone openely announces they represent an interest other than that of those who elected them I would question that persons ability to govern in my best interst.

I'm not talking about minor third party interests or influences but those with very strongly held beliefs (dogmas?)

The Corinthian

mrhappy42 wrote:

However when someone openely announces they represent an interest other than that of those who elected them I would question that persons ability to govern in my best interst.

So, who exactly has openly announced that they represent an interest other than that of those who elected them? Buttiglione recently said the opposite; that his personal views should not and would not affect his professional behaviour.

I'm not talking about minor third party interests or influences but those with very strongly held beliefs (dogmas?)

Are they conflicts of interests or simply another part of the democratic process?

So when Ben Briscoe refused to condemn Israeli military actions in a Dail vote a few years ago, should he have lost his seat? Perhaps that he was a (practicing) Jew was reason enough to rule him unfit from office? It’s certainly appears to be what is being suggested of Buttiglione.

mrhappy42

Dont think that Ben Briscoe's influence and lack of condemnation is a major influence in my life. But I could be wrong!

I think a better example might be the amount, process etc. agreed on the compensation of the industrial schools/abuse scandal. Or the arms payments in the 70ths...both should give plenty of feedback (Grin). Or the donation of large amounts of money to the GAA through the links with Bertie, which can be truly classed as a dogma (sorry could not resist).

On the openly announced:
Told MEPs last week he thought homosexuality a sin. Wants to paying woman not to have abortions...and I think he represented the italian goverment at some opus dei conference.

I agree with the recent vatican announcement that Cathalic bassing is common after all the recent scandels and this is not what this is about. Just wanted to clarify this.