Tuesday, October 6, 2015

The "Religion of Peace", huh?


I've been reading an interesting book about the Israeli Mossad (their version of our CIA), Gideon's Spies, written by Gordon Thomas.  What I found out for the first time was the circumstance behind the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II back in 1981.

It seems that while the Pope was recovering from his wounds he became obsessed with finding out who was actually behind the attempt on his life.  A Turkish militant, Mehmet Ali Agca, carried out the actual attack, but the consensus opinion was that he was not sufficiently intelligent to pull it off by himself.

Before Agca's attack on the Pope he killed a Turkish newspaper editor who published flattering pieces on the West.  Agca was arrested, but was soon sprung from jail by The Gray Wolves, an Islamic extremist group, and went underground.  He sent a letter the next day to the Turkish press threatening just about everyone, including "the infidel in Rome", "the Commander Pope", and "the Commander of the Crusades", all of course referring to Pope John Paul II.  The suspicious part was that these terms were much too eloquent to be used by the barely literate Agca.

The Pope's confidant and the Vatican's virtual Secretary of State (my title), Cardinal Luigi Poggi, was sent out to ask questions.  That's when the Israeli Mossad began checking their data base and found that the terms "infidel in Rome, Commander Pope, and Commander of the Crusades" were originally used by the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.  Intense digging pieced together that the plot was indeed hatched in Iran.


Two years after the attempt on his life, the Pope visited the man in prison who shot him where he pointedly asked him if Khomeini was responsible, and Agca admitted that yes, it was true.  The Pope forgave Agca and even gave him a rosary crafted in silver and mother-of-pearl.

Pope John Paul II later said during a speech to workers at an Olivetti factory in Ivrea, Italy, "What the Koran teaches people is aggression; what we teach our people is peace.  Of course, you always have human nature which distorts whatever message religion is sending, but even though people can be led astray by vices and bad habits, Christianity aspires to peace and love." 

"Islam is a religion that attacks.  If you start by teaching aggression to the whole community, you end up pandering to the negative elements in everyone.  You know what that leads to:  such people will assault us."

How could this have gotten past by me, the news junkie that I am?  Did you know this?



  1. I did not know this, but it's hardly surprising. Most of the world's religions have been polluted at one time or another; now it's Islam's turn. No wonder Karl Max called religion the "opiate" of the masses.

  2. Well I think the Popes point was that Islam was not polluted, it is inherently and intentionally violent to anyone that does not accept it. Yes, evil people can hijack religion for evil purposes, but most religions are not organically evil, I am beginning to think that Islam is...not all it;s followers, but its teachings do not seem to discourage violence.

    Does anyone know of an Islamic humanitarian organization? (That is not meant to be rhetorical, it is a real question.)

  3. I keep seeing people use the word "Organic" and have never been sure what it means...did I use it correctly?

  4. The pope was clearly forgetting the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, etc. All the religions have blood on their hands.

  5. "Manifest Destiny" damn near wiped out the American Indians.

  6. You are all absolutely correct when you point out that all (Hindu? Buddhist?) religions have had blood on their hands at one time or another. But the connection between conditions/attitudes in the medieval, barbaric days of the Crusades or the Spanish Inquisition (11th to 15th Centuries) seems distant to the supposedly modern 21st Century. Islamic countries today seem to want to be thought of as equals, with modern amenities including nuclear power, national airlines, institutions of higher learning, and all the other trappings of the times, yet just under the surface their attitudes seem to still be those of pre-modern-time barbarians. The most stark exception to this seems to be modern Turkey, where since its inception by Kemal Ataturk after WW I, has tried to be secular. But even that is changing as there is a definite Islamic fundamentalist movement gaining ground there, too.

    To my knowledge the atrocities of our time (WW I, WW II, ethnic cleansing in Cambodia, Bosnia, the unrest in Northern Ireland, etc) were more about ethnic, racial, and economic differences as opposed to differences of religion. To today's Islamic fundamentalists, it's all about religion, period. "Mine is better than yours, the ONLY acceptable religion, and you will agree or die." I don't see any major organized effort today by Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Rastafarians, etc to proselytize.

  7. I really would love to talk to an educated (OK, let's say western university educated) non-partisan (maybe non-religious?) expert on world religions and ask his or her opinion on all this. 'Cause I've got lots of questions. But since this is not possible, I'll just ask you: have you read the Koran? I haven't, so I can't determine if the religion is one of peace or not.

    And I'm just sitting here, being probably very naive, sighing, "Why can't we all just get along...?"

    1. Why can't we all just get along indeed! No, I haven't read the Koran, or to be honest, the Bible either. But the anecdotal evidence, based on what is going on in the world, would not seem to me to contradict what has been said here. As many others have said before, it is all up to the interpreter. Islam must just be the easiest to subvert.