Matamoros statue in the Cathedral

[Jeffrey Crawley]

I think Hitler's plans for Europe were drawn up well before Chamberlain
buckled in. Besides he'd seen what a world war looked like - most of us
haven't. An ingominious phase of British history (one of many) but then
there were many anti-communist Nazi appeasers around at the time (a certain
Ambassador J Kennedy for one) and at least it gave the Brits the chance to
regroup and build up some kind of defence. Besides, by 1939 Stalin was too
busy dividing up the spoils of Poland to want to make an alliance with
Western Europe against Hitler.

I can understand if the authorities at the cathedral wanted to remove what
could be considered an inflamatory statue. To most westerners the word
Crusade conjures up a romantic picture of bold knights rescuing the Holy
Land whereas the historical fact was that they were a bunch of self centred,
money grabbing louts who raped, pilaged and murdered their way across Asia
Minor (not bothering to discerne between Christian, Jew or Muslim in their
butchery by the way) and brought terror to the land they claimed to be
'liberating' - mmmmm sounds familiar!

Until somebody brokers a peace deal in the Middle East Santiago is no more
safe than New York, Haifa, London or Madrid. Perhaps removing the causes or
resentment is a small step?




If removing the Matamoros ----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Hansen <VeloTrainaPEOPLEPC.COM>
To: <GOCAMINOapete.uri.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 11:21 PM
Subject: Re: Matamoros statue in the Cathedral


> Well, the ripple I was pursuing was the concept of appeasement, which
> certainly appears to be one of the guiding motives of the good fathers in
> Santiago.  Expressed differently, seeking to somewhat less displease any
> Muslim fundamentalists meaning harm to Spain by removing possibly
> offensive - even if historical - icons from the cathedral.  While removing
> this figure from the cathedral may in fact minimally lessen the
possibility
> of some nastiness being done there, the nature of these people is such
that
> it would only push them to some other target.
>
> The inference to WW II Britian was that Chamberlain's efforts at
appeasement
> by offering up Eastern Europe as a cookie to Hitler in the vain hopes that
> he would then spare the west, did England no good at all and some parties
> believe were in fact largely responsible for the success of Germany and
the
> fact that WW II took place at all.  If Chamberlain was not blatantly more
> staunchly anti-communist than anti-fascist, a linked Europe and Russia
could
> have stopped Hitler before he became flushed with his early and easy
> successes.  Santiago may sleep more soundly, but at the possible cost of
> some other city being attacked.
>
> Charles