Just out of interest, what would the charges be? And where would the prosecution take place?

Oh, and mistake on date of that letter

Loyalist Conspiracy is back at it again, I see.

This one is particulary nuts, given that it accuses the Pope of being head of the CDF in 1962. He was actually an academic (a professor at the University of Bonn) at the time and didn’t become prefect of the CDF until 1981.

“Oh, and mistake on date of that letter”

No, the date on the letter is correct. It is the claim about who it was who originally issued it that is incorrect (along with the claims about what the CDF was responsible for, and what the letter actually said).

Oh right. Should have followed link. Wasn’t there a later letter sent in early 21st Century, when he was head of CDF?

“Wasn’t there a later letter sent in early 21st Century, when he was head of CDF?”

There’s a whole series of claims about a whole series of documents, most of them apparently originating with the PR operation of American lawyers behind class action suits against the Catholic Church in the United States (presumably in the hope the church will settle to avoid bad publicity).

However, nothing remotely incriminating against the Pope has ever emerged which is why we are subjected to inventions like the ones in this blog post.

this is what I was thinking of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_delictis_gravioribus

Oh, please. Why don’t people just not mind their own business?

Arresting a current head of State is just one of those things which isn’t done. The only way it can be (as with Bashir) is through the International Criminal Court.

If you can get them to issue a warrant then game’s on. If you can’t then it ain’t.

Called Sovereign Immunity.

” Regarding the issue of the cost, think tank Theos found that 77% of Britons think taxpayers should not help pay for Pope Benedict XVI’s visit to Scotland and England.

The Catholic Church is obesely wealthily for an organisation that claims to help the world’s poorest. Sarah Silverman makes the point better than I can. Yet despite the slashing of public services that genuinly help the British public- money is made available for the security costs.”

Don’t be a fool all your life. “Security” in this instance isn’t stopping people from shooting the Pope. It’s stopping people from being crushed to death as they try to see the Pope. Crowds of however many hundreds of thousands.

That really is a legitimate use of taxpayers’ money.

“In 2006, he said that the existence of gay people is a threat to humanity akin to the destruction of the rainforests.”

No he didn’t.

(I should probably leave it at that but I guess I will just get loads of links to lots of news sites claiming he did. This was very widely reported but was actually the product of a rather imaginative interpretation of a press agency journalist. The speech in question never even mentioned homosexuality.)

“aresting a current head of State is just one of those things which isn’t done. The only way it can be (as with Bashir) is through the International Criminal Court.”

If the Pope really is to be classed as a head of state then the Vatican must be subject to the same human rights reports and inspections that other states are, or be ostracised from the international community as are those states who do not allow such checks and balances.

The Vatican cannot have it both ways.

“If the Pope really is to be classed as a head of state then the Vatican must be subject to the same human rights reports and inspections that other states are, ”

It is:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100715/ap_on_re_eu/un_un_vatican

Like all countries that have signed the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Vatican is required to submit regular reports on its efforts to safeguard child rights……..While the Vatican delivered an initial report in 1995, the second, third and fourth reports are now overdue, according to Lee. This puts it on a par with the Caribbean nation of St. Kitts and Nevis. Only five Pacific minnow states — the Cook Islands, Nauru, Niue, Tuvalu and Tonga — have failed to deliver any kind of report.

Mongolia, Senegal and Togo, which also had a 1997 deadline, have since filed their second reports.

Reasons 2, 3, and 4 aren’t reasons, unless you think we should arrest people for not liking gays or for being expensive.

Overall: why I am broadly sympathetic with your position, there are a number of reasons why arresting the Pope is a bad idea:

First, it’s probably not legal. Unless he committed any crimes on UK soil, he’d have to be arrested under international law, which as has already been pointed out is illegal when it comes to heads of state (although I believe whether or not he officially qualifies as one is debatable, something to do with the status of the Vatican itself).

Second: even if it turns out he CAN be arrested, inviting a de facto head of state (or any foreign emmissary) over here then arresting them would set a precedent that would be extremely damaging to world diplomacy, where leaders would feel unsafe to visit one another in person.

Third: it would hugely damage our relations with countries that have a large Catholic population. I know that sounds a little cold, but these things do have to be taken into account.

Finally: there is a real risk that it would create a new breed of Catholic anti-English terrorism, and this could spill over into anti-Protestant terrorism in other countries.

Give it a rest. No one is going to arrest the Pope. Don’t you think that the current atmosphere runs the risk of driving Catholics into the arms of the right?

If Britain welcomes to it’s shores the enabler of a worldwide coverup of child abuse then this is no longer a liberal Britain.

Well, it’s already welcomed tyrants (Mugabe, Pinochet, Abdullah) and war criminals (Bush, Kissinger). Guess this never was a “liberal Britain“.

I can’t believe these comments. You all sound like crazy religious nuts.

The issue I have with the Pope is the fact that he refuses to accept that condoms stop the transmission of HIV. We don’t need such a retard in this country, not on my money.

@ 14. BenSix

I suppose the lesson that we should draw from that pentagram of tyrants is to stop inviting tyrants to our shores, not invite another to make it a sextuplet of haughty tyrants.

you have to laugh – wasn’t this write that one who was totally and mutterly crushed on faqctual and legal grounds a few months ago and here he is at it again. I await his forthcoming article on AGW – the same attention to evidence, detail, fact, law etc seems to apply to adherents of that “theory”.

The pope is a bogotted arsehole but homphobia is not illegal in this country, nor should it be. Besides which his homophobic comments were not made in this country.

The pope might oppose abortion and contraception but he has no legal authority to prevent anybody availing themselves of either.

And the cost of his visit is irrelevant. Economic arguments on who ‘deserves’ police protection would set a precident that would stifle the liberty of everyone in this country.

If there’s direct evidence of his complicity in covering up child abuse by all means arrest him – but remember there are laws against false imprisonment and malicious prosecution as well.

Where were people like you when King Abdullah came to the UK in 2007. This was a visit by a head of state, a legitimate theocracy which executes homosexuals and denies women the right to vote. I don’t remember anywhere the level of hysteria being generated.

19,

You are obviously not familiar with the double standard on here. Individuals identified specifically as Muslims, Jews, Sikhs or Hindus are never going to get the same level of abuse that Catholics get on here, regardless of their actual views or positions.

What (1) crimes has the Pope committed that (2) a person in the UK may arrest him for?

Adam Wilcox’s posts do not appear to provide an answer to that question.

Why is the government protecting the Pope from arrest?

Aside from the reasons already mentioned (diplomatic shitstorm, etc), why wouldn’t they protect him from arrest, if he has done nothing that a person in the UK may arrest him for?

This is just another re-cycling of a pack of lies and inaccuracies. I don’t really understand your agenda Adam.

In 1962, then Cardinal Ratzinger was head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

Untrue

Ratzinger issued a confidential document to every Catholic bishop ordering complete secrecy when dealing with sexual abuse of children

Untrue

….not to inform the Police, and threatening excommunication for those who spoke publicly

Untrue.

In 2006, he said that the existence of gay people is a threat to humanity akin to the destruction of the rainforests.

Untrue.

Old Andrew

> Individuals identified specifically as Muslims, Jews, Sikhs or Hindus are never going to get the same level of abuse that Catholics get on here, regardless of their actual views or positions.

Indeed, LC does have form on that.

Someone mentioned King Abdullah…
Notice the deafening silence on LC of feminists on the subject of women under Islam…overseas or in the UK.

What a ridiculous article.

“Why attempts to arrest the pope were justified” For a start, no attempts have been made to arrest him. The idea was put forward but no actual attempts have been made to act upon it because a.) he hasn’t actually arrived in the country, yet and b.) it’s too fucking stupid for words. It’s stupid because it’s doubtful that he’s committed any crimes which would fall within British jurisdiction and, even if he had, what kind of idiot government/legal system would deliberately alienate a pretty large chunk of the world’s population by sending a few boys from the Met to handcuff their frail, octogenarian leader at Heathrow? If that’s the game we want to play then why not give the Dalai Lama a good kicking next time he shows his face round here? And we all know Just Visiting’s itching to follow through on that American lunatic’s idea for an early bonfire party, so why not club together and get him a petrol can, some matches and a big pile of Korans. I mean, if we’re going to senselessly offend people en masse, let’s at least be even handed about it.

Herr Ratzinger and the rest of the catholic hierarchy have a lot to answer for but so have a great many other people who make state visits to the UK, even the whiney, intellectually challenged ranks of this forum’s christian apologist faction have realised that. Idiotic articles like this one provide them with the opportunity to whinge, moan and indulge in their persecution fantasies whilst, at the same time, deflecting attention from the facts that Ratzinger has welcomed a Nazi apologist back into the catholic fold, massively increased the sum of human misery through his confirmation of the church policy on condoms and other forms of contraception, helped to perpetuate negative views of homosexuals and women etc etc etc. Why not criticise him for these, and similar, bits of idiocy rather than making lunatic suggestions about arresting him?

Turing Machine

Do calm down.

> And we all know Just Visiting’s itching to follow through on that American lunatic’s idea for an early bonfire party

Wrong. I don’t advocate burning books.
Assuming makes an ass out of _you_.

But when comparing American ‘nutters’ – would you prefer a guy who burns books, to one who kills 13 of his own colleagues, injures 30: who did it in the name of Islam – and was even known to his employer in advance as holding extreme views – but they kept him on in the interests of proving their ‘employment diversity’.

Just google foot hood shootings

The bias on LC is evidenced by (i) the lack of threads about that Islamic nutter – or any other of the countless others killing daily around the world in the name of Islam (ii) the existence instead of threads about every possible christian nutter that hits the news – despite their rarity.

> the whiney, intellectually challenged ranks of this forum’s christian apologist faction… indulge in their persecution fantasies

More ad hominems.
Assuming anyone who disagrees with you hasn’t got the grey-matter, is lazy thinking, and allows you to avoid the effort of actually looking at the evidence of reality.

Turing Machine – Until YOU on LC start to address the question of the Islamic nutters who are murdering every day round the world – and do a compare and contrast with the nutters of other faiths – then you are simpy pitching yourself in the ‘christian-hating apologist faction’, with your own ‘persecution fantasies’.

whoops that should have read:

Just google: __fort__ hood shootings

You know, there might be a little more respect for positions like this (that the pope should be arrested for protecting pedophiles) if many of the same group of people weren’t also simultaneously trying to minimize the actions of Roman Polanski and calling for his charges to be dropped…

hypocricy – something everyone can enjoy!