T Nation

WikiLeaks and the Vatican



Secret diplomatic cables revealed today, as part of the WikiLeaks releases, that while the Vatican was appalled by revelations of clerical sexual abuse in Ireland in 2009 and 2010, it was also offended by demands that the papal ambassador participate in a government-sponsored probe, seeing it as an insult to the Vaticanâ??s sovereign immunity under international law.
That stance, according to the cable, came off in Ireland as â??pettily proceduralâ?? while failing to confront the reality of clerical abuse, and thereby made the crisis worse.
The cables also contain critical diplomatic assessments of Pope Benedict XVIâ??s recent decision to create new structures to welcome disgruntled Anglicans, as well as the perceived technological illiteracy and communications ineptitude of some senior Vatican officials.
PR woes in the Vatican, according to one cable, have lowered the volume on the popeâ??s â??moral megaphone.â??


Why does Assange hate the Vatican?

Does he release dirt on other churches too?

Who finances him, does his laundry, services his car, in other words, what flimsy excuse can we find to ignore the information in his releases?


I don't think Assange hates the Vatican. Just like I don't think he hates the United States or any other country he's dropped their knowledge out in public.


What are you doin with this one Chris? I don't think I understand your motivation for this thread. Is this some sorta "Let's face it like men of God" thing? I'm not being sarcastic in the least, I don't get it.


I know you are being sarcastic, but since Assange thinks nothing should be private, how bout he show us how it's done by publishing all his credit information, all his phone numbers, his e-mail accounts, home address, work address, all his contacts and their phone numbers, e-mails and information and the numbers to all his accounts? He should put this information out there first before releasing any information about others, no?


Has he put out people's credit information?


No, but...

Why would credit information be wrong and the Vatican's financial information be ok? Where do we draw the line once everything is now public information?

What about Wikileaks' financial information for example? He should release that, and all their e-mails, private letters, communicatioins and private documents. Hell, make it all public. Why not?


Maybe you should check out this thread


2nd this. yes ... for fairness sake he should.
but one of the reason assange do wikileaks is for free sex with his groupies.
he reaches superstar status from it (wikileaks).
information freedom for all? I don't think it's no. 1 on the list.


seen it.


the line is pretty easy to draw actually.
the Vatican is a state.
and strangely, wikileaks seems to think that informations about public institutions should be public.

it's certainly naive and simplistic, but it's not absurd.


I don't get your point.


I'll remind you that the IOR is not a public institution, it is a private entity.


I wasn't making one. I honestly didn't understand why you started this thread. No more to it than that.


yes. and ?

we were speaking about wikileaks here.
the money laundering "scandal" has not been leaked by wikileaks. the information came from police sources.


The original post of this topic says: "Secret diplomatic cables revealed today, as part of the WikiLeaks releases...". Does this mean Wikileaks had a hand in revealing the scandal or is it just the case of bad journalism on part of the article's author?

I'm not saying police haven't backed up the information with an investigation, only that the article mentions a Wikileaks release in relation to it.

How does Wikileaks get it's money? Does Wikileaks accept public donations? If so, they should open their books and all their e-mails and communications.

Fair is fair.


Someone inside of wikileaks would have to leak the info for procedure to stand.


wikileaks hadn't a hand in revealing the IOR scandal.
and the article's author doesn't seems to be guilty of bad journalism.

actually, you may be guilty of superficial reading.

the article states that wikileaks revealed secret diplomatic cables about many things : children abuse in Ireland, vatican's relationship with Hugo Chavez, Vatican's position about climate change or about the Da Vinci Code, etc.
but nothing about the IOR and money laundering.

that's two separate issues.
with two different sources.


Because of the fact that Assange leaked Vatican documents, and I thought it was an interesting story, specially since it released documents talking about stuff the sensationalist love to argue one side of the argument about.


Yes, you said Vatican is a state (which it is, but a private state) and that wikiLeaks thinks information about public institutions should be public. Well, even though the Catholic Church is a "public society" open to all. Vatican City as well as the Vatican Bank are not public institutions. I was just pointing that out.