It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Closing US Embassy in the Vatican - Says it's 'unsafe'

page: 7
50
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Not officially closed, just moved.




In the past, the Vatican has insisted that countries maintain embassies to the Holy See and to Rome in separate locations, but it hasn’t protested the U.S. relocation. The State Department official said that while the embassies will be located on the same compound, the Vatican embassy will have separate entrances.

The Vatican is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome. It is the smallest internationally recognized independent state in the world.



To suggest that Obama is anti-Christian by doing this is absurd. The Vatican is merely a powerful 'temporal' power with a vast amount of wealth and lots of dirty little secrets that all the money laundering can't wash away. Why now when the Pope is a nice guy, making reforms, etc? Perhaps this is all part of a plan, in which Obama and the Pope are working in concert to bring the Catholic Church back to being a spiritual center by correcting issues in the past, one of which could include removing the 'embassies' which have no business being there.

I think this is a symbolic gesture meant to signal the end of paying homage to Rome and the seat of the Holy Roman Empire. It may also be that St. Francis is trying to bring the Church back to it's original purpose and dissociate itself from the temporal power of the Holy Roman Empire as well. IMHO, this is all a good sign.




posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Maybe he had a bad experience with a catholic priest, it would explain a lot.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Damn this extremist Cardinals are getting dangerous now... better close the embassy!



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


The vatican probably wanted the embassy out to avoid US spying but decided to put a good face on it and make it look like the US' decision.



posted on Nov, 27 2013 @ 10:46 PM
link   
Unsafe like Benghazi? I doubt it.

Sorry, I still have major butt hurt and heart break about Benghazi. If it is a slap to anyone it is those who are still calling for justice for Benghazi.

Gimme a break.



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Senduko
 



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by quedup
 


Peter the Roman has just been raised from the bowels of the Vatacan - just putting it out there !



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I wonder if it might be the security of the Vatican, and not of the embassy itself, that is the real cause. That would also explain why this breach of etiquette is seemingly sanctioned by the Vatican - it normally would not be.

It makes sense, does it not?

A U.S. embassy is by many considered the ultimate western symbol outside the U.S. itself, and a U.S. embassy in the middle of the ultimate symbol of western faith - yes, I know, it is 'only' the capitol of Catholicism but not all make the distinction - could easily be considered the bulls-eye of bulls-eyes.

And I am not sure, that if I was the man the hat, that I would want to make me and my citizens any more of a target than necessary.

But why know?

Well, 'they' might have picked up increased chatter and decided that now is the time.



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Another worthless story to keep us distracted from the real problems of the world. Congrats on falling for it.



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 07:10 AM
link   
my question is whywe ever had an embassy there when it indeed is not a country.

Tell me the US govt does not give preferential treatment to the Catholic Religion?



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by ChesterJohn
 


The Vatican is a country unto itself but to reiterate and add on to what another poster stated... there's never been a US Embassy in the Vatican, the embassy that deals with the Vatican isn't closing either, just moving... closer to the Vatican.



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Kali74
reply to post by ChesterJohn
 


The Vatican is a country unto itself but to reiterate and add on to what another poster stated... there's never been a US Embassy in the Vatican, the embassy that deals with the Vatican isn't closing either, just moving... closer to the Vatican.



Extremely rich as is assets cannot be calculated
Has more political power over many countries and when caught putting in its nose other countries buisness or as it did in WWII retracts to "WE ARE A RELIGION NOT A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION".
Has an army that is not its own - Swiss Guard
Rules over multitude of people of different Nationalities So basically Roman Catholics are dual citizens

I guess your right it is a country and the smallest at that.



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ChesterJohn
 


It's not just a "may as well be". It is literally a country, a Sovereign State, separate from Italy.

Vatican City
edit on 11/28/2013 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   
This thread is based on falsities and media hype.

The truths are...

1. The embassy is not in the Vatican.
2. The embassy is not being closed, it is being moved.
3. The embassy is actually being moved closer to the Vatican than it was before.
4. The plans for the embassy move started under Bush.

So please, stop with the lies and false conspiracy.



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


That is just.... deeply weird....



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
if its true it is very strange..i wonder what the real reason is..to say its for security is laughable



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 08:46 PM
link   
It seems such a shame that a man who won the Nobel peace prize when he was first appointed as President now thinks the Vatican is unsafe. It just shows that no matter how great the integrity of a person the lobbyists and big money gets its way. War is now big money. A world at war without end is all we have to look forward to.



posted on Nov, 28 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Obama is a tosser as far as presidents go.



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Tsu322
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I saw a documentary the other day and learned that the age of consent in the city of Priests and Choir Boys has recently gone from 12 to 14. They seem to be a little scared I think.

ETA: SnF
edit on 26112013 by Tsu322 because: (no reason given)


from another forum: forums.catholic.com...


1ke
(a) The code of canon law governs marriage, not Italian law.

The Code of Canon Law is incorporated into the legal system of the VCS by the 1929 Law of the Sources of the Law, one of the six constitutional laws of 1929. Article 11 of the Second Law specifically outlines areas that are regulated solely by canon law. These include marriage, prescription of ecclesiastical property, and gifts and legacies upon death.

(b) The age of consent refers to marriage, not illicit sexual intercourse (seeing as how that is a mortal sin)

(c) The age of consent for marriage in the Code of Canon Law is 16 for boys and 14 for girls, and can be set to a higher age by the conference of Bishops. The Code of Canon Law acknowledges that in some cultures girls do marry at this age-- many in Africa, Asia, Middle East, etc. But, the Bishops Conference can set a higher age.

Can. 1083 §1. A man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age and a woman before she has completed her fourteenth year of age cannot enter into a valid marriage.

§2. The conference of bishops is free to establish a higher age for the licit celebration of marriage.

(d) The age of consent does not apply to priests because priests are celibate

(e) If the age of consent as it pertains to illicit sex between persons is governed by the criminal code of Italy, then the Italian government is to be properly accused of being pedophiles, not the VCS.

(f) Saying that all priests are pedophiles because the Italian criminal code specifies an age of consent of 12 (if this is even true since I could not find any documents in English which confirm this accusation) then they lack the ability to use basic logic. They aren't even very good atheists. Atheists usually pride themselves on using logic and reason. These particular atheists would get the stuffing knocked out of them at a freshman debate meet.


great response.

As far as the new the OP posted, which is totally unrelated to the dishonest and underhanded quip by Tsu3222, this is a very disturbing development:

U.S. embassy to Vatican move draws ire


Security and cost savings were behind the move, as the State Department estimates it will save $1.4 million a year by moving from the current building.It will not downsize any embassy personnel, a State Department official told reporters Monday (Nov. 25). At the time, the official did not have total budget information of both embassies at hand. The U.S. Embassy to the Holy See has seven U.S. diplomatic personnel, and the U.S. Embassy to Italy has 63 diplomatic personnel.


I can't find any information about this on the Embassies web site. Weird. I did find this.

The reason cited for doing this is to save $1.9 million a year. I would love to see the accounting though. Never mind how trivial this amount seems compared to abounding examples of wasteful government spending. I'm curious what the Holy Father thinks about the move.

The WP article above had this to say:


In the past, the Vatican has insisted that countries maintain embassies to the Holy See and to Rome in separate locations, but it hasn’t protested the U.S. relocation.


Lastly I would love to know how Obamas' fumbling of the ball during and after the travesty in Libya has anything to do with Vatican City. How about comparing apples to apples Mr. President? Something else is afoot here. Time will tell.

edit on 29-11-2013 by mrphilosophias because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2013 @ 01:26 AM
link   
Direct Communication
Leads to direct advice.
The Appropriate Decisions Follow.
S&F
edit on 29-11-2013 by Wildmanimal because: Add Content




top topics



 
50
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join