Some Questions For Rev. Kit Ketchum Arising From Her Praise Of UUA President Bill Sinkford Meeting With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
U*U minister Rev. Kit Ketchum apparently believes that it was "incredibly courageous" of UUA President Bill Sinkford aka Rev. William G. Sinkford to participate in a The Fellowship of Reconciliation meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and ask him a few comparatively "soft-ball" questions. U*Us can read all about it on her blog post titled Just Full Of Questions Today.
Here is the comment that I just submitted to Rev. Kit Ketchum's "moderated" aka censored Ms. Kitty's Saloon and Road Show blog. It will be interesting to see if she considers it to be "appropriate" and thus deserving of being posted so that others may read it. . .
"Sure, whatshisname probably lied through his teeth."
Strong words Rev. Ketchum.
What about President Bill Sinkford's highly questionable cheap shot aimed at President George W. Bush?
"I could not imagine the current U.S. president taking the time to honor questions about his actions the way Ahmadinejad did today."
Just how truthful is that brazen public statement uttered by President Bill Sinkford? Notice how I didn't say *whathisname* probably lied through his teeth? Doesn't President George W. Bush take the time to honor hard questions about his actions on almost a daily basis? The fact of the matter is that the current president of Iran totally evaded all but one of the questions that President Sinkford asked him and provided a flowery BS answer to the one question he deigned to answer. How does that in any way "honor" the questions that President Bill Sinkford asked Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pray tell?
"But world community is not going to come about if we refuse to talk with those we disagree with, if we are rude, if we are dismissive or call them liars and engage in open conflict with them."
U*Us, including U*U clergy and top level UUA officials like UUA President Bill Sinkford himself. . . do such things on an ongoing basis Rev. Ketchum. I dare say that he was just a tad rude to President Bush in this UUA article wasn't he? Indeed President Bill Sinkford, other top level UUA officials, and other U*U clergy behave in such ways towards victims of clergy misconduct and various other injustices and abuses committed by U*Us. N'est-ce pas?
"He stuck his neck out, trying to get to know and understand the other side. It might look foolish to some but I think it was worth trying."
It looks like hypocritical grandstanding and posturing to some. . . I find it quite interesting how UUA President Bill Sinkford and other UUA leaders studiously avoid trying to get to know and understand the proverbial "other side" when it comes to U*U clergy misconduct and other internal U*U injustices and abuses.
Update 11:00pm - Rev. Kit Ketchum saw fit to post my comment.
I have submitted this follow-up comment (some typos have been corrected in this version) in response to a comment made by U*U blogger MoxieLife aka Jacquline -
"I think talking is good, period. I think when we turn our back on a person/country we are doing a disservice - to ourselves and them."
I very much agree with you on those points Jacqueline, but what President Bill Sinkford did wasn't really "talking". More than anything else it appears to be posturing and grandstanding, particularly in light of his parting shot swipe at President Bush. . . It is remarkably disingenuous and quite ridiculous for UUA President Bill Sinkford to pretend that President George W. Bush is less forthcoming and forthright in answering questions about his actions than President Ahmadinejad, especially in light of the glaringly obvious fact that President Ahmadinejad *totally ignored* aka deftly sidestepped all but one of President Sinkford's questions. The only question that Ahmadinejad deigned to respond to was about the status of women in Iran, and he did so in an evasive manner that failed to address aka *honor* President Sinkford's "questions and concerns".
This is just President Sinkford and the UUA pretending to be players on the world stage when they can't even responsibly deal with serious problems within the U*U World, some of which he seems to be largely responsible for creating. . . The fact of the matter is that President Bill Sinkford, other UUA administrators, and other U*U clergy obstinately refuse to engage in dialogue with people who have legitimate questions and concerns to share about serious problems within the U*U religious community. When President Sinkford and these other U*Us in positions of responsibility turn their back on people who seek dialogue with them towards resolving conflicts and other serious problems in manners that *honor and uphold* U*U principles they are indeed doing a disservice to those disaffected people, themselves as "religious professionals", and the greater U*U religious community which suffers from their failure and refusal to walk what they talk.
President Bill Sinkford can do virtually nothing to influence life in Iran by posing soft-ball questions to President Ahmadinejad, especially when they are left unanswered in any satisfactory way. Do U*Us really think that President Ahmadinejad isn't already keenly aware of the "questions and concerns" that President Sinkford raised in that meeting? If President Sinkford got off his high horse and devoted as much time and energy to responsibly dealing with internal U*U injustices and abuses and other problems that have needed to be dealt with for years now the U*U World would be a lot better off than it currently is.
Update 02.10.2008 3:30pm - In a follow up comment Rev. Kit Ketchum has indirectly compared UUA President Bill Sinkford's meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with Jane Fonda's visit to Vietnam during the Vietnam War*. Here is the waggish comment that I just submitted in response to that unfortunate comparison -
Maybe President Sinkford can get the UUA to send him on a "fact finding mission" to Iran, get himself photographed at the controls of a Shahab-3 missile launcher, and then we can all start calling him Tehran Bill. ;-)
* Personally I think that UUA President Bill Sinkford's recent meeting with President Ahmadinejad is more comparable to Neville Chamberlain's (in)famous "peace in our time" meeting with U*Us know who. . .
No Neville Chamberlain never had a meeting with The Emerson Avenger. ;-)
Here is the comment that I just submitted to Rev. Kit Ketchum's "moderated" aka censored Ms. Kitty's Saloon and Road Show blog. It will be interesting to see if she considers it to be "appropriate" and thus deserving of being posted so that others may read it. . .
"Sure, whatshisname probably lied through his teeth."
Strong words Rev. Ketchum.
What about President Bill Sinkford's highly questionable cheap shot aimed at President George W. Bush?
"I could not imagine the current U.S. president taking the time to honor questions about his actions the way Ahmadinejad did today."
Just how truthful is that brazen public statement uttered by President Bill Sinkford? Notice how I didn't say *whathisname* probably lied through his teeth? Doesn't President George W. Bush take the time to honor hard questions about his actions on almost a daily basis? The fact of the matter is that the current president of Iran totally evaded all but one of the questions that President Sinkford asked him and provided a flowery BS answer to the one question he deigned to answer. How does that in any way "honor" the questions that President Bill Sinkford asked Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pray tell?
"But world community is not going to come about if we refuse to talk with those we disagree with, if we are rude, if we are dismissive or call them liars and engage in open conflict with them."
U*Us, including U*U clergy and top level UUA officials like UUA President Bill Sinkford himself. . . do such things on an ongoing basis Rev. Ketchum. I dare say that he was just a tad rude to President Bush in this UUA article wasn't he? Indeed President Bill Sinkford, other top level UUA officials, and other U*U clergy behave in such ways towards victims of clergy misconduct and various other injustices and abuses committed by U*Us. N'est-ce pas?
"He stuck his neck out, trying to get to know and understand the other side. It might look foolish to some but I think it was worth trying."
It looks like hypocritical grandstanding and posturing to some. . . I find it quite interesting how UUA President Bill Sinkford and other UUA leaders studiously avoid trying to get to know and understand the proverbial "other side" when it comes to U*U clergy misconduct and other internal U*U injustices and abuses.
Update 11:00pm - Rev. Kit Ketchum saw fit to post my comment.
I have submitted this follow-up comment (some typos have been corrected in this version) in response to a comment made by U*U blogger MoxieLife aka Jacquline -
"I think talking is good, period. I think when we turn our back on a person/country we are doing a disservice - to ourselves and them."
I very much agree with you on those points Jacqueline, but what President Bill Sinkford did wasn't really "talking". More than anything else it appears to be posturing and grandstanding, particularly in light of his parting shot swipe at President Bush. . . It is remarkably disingenuous and quite ridiculous for UUA President Bill Sinkford to pretend that President George W. Bush is less forthcoming and forthright in answering questions about his actions than President Ahmadinejad, especially in light of the glaringly obvious fact that President Ahmadinejad *totally ignored* aka deftly sidestepped all but one of President Sinkford's questions. The only question that Ahmadinejad deigned to respond to was about the status of women in Iran, and he did so in an evasive manner that failed to address aka *honor* President Sinkford's "questions and concerns".
This is just President Sinkford and the UUA pretending to be players on the world stage when they can't even responsibly deal with serious problems within the U*U World, some of which he seems to be largely responsible for creating. . . The fact of the matter is that President Bill Sinkford, other UUA administrators, and other U*U clergy obstinately refuse to engage in dialogue with people who have legitimate questions and concerns to share about serious problems within the U*U religious community. When President Sinkford and these other U*Us in positions of responsibility turn their back on people who seek dialogue with them towards resolving conflicts and other serious problems in manners that *honor and uphold* U*U principles they are indeed doing a disservice to those disaffected people, themselves as "religious professionals", and the greater U*U religious community which suffers from their failure and refusal to walk what they talk.
President Bill Sinkford can do virtually nothing to influence life in Iran by posing soft-ball questions to President Ahmadinejad, especially when they are left unanswered in any satisfactory way. Do U*Us really think that President Ahmadinejad isn't already keenly aware of the "questions and concerns" that President Sinkford raised in that meeting? If President Sinkford got off his high horse and devoted as much time and energy to responsibly dealing with internal U*U injustices and abuses and other problems that have needed to be dealt with for years now the U*U World would be a lot better off than it currently is.
Update 02.10.2008 3:30pm - In a follow up comment Rev. Kit Ketchum has indirectly compared UUA President Bill Sinkford's meeting with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with Jane Fonda's visit to Vietnam during the Vietnam War*. Here is the waggish comment that I just submitted in response to that unfortunate comparison -
Maybe President Sinkford can get the UUA to send him on a "fact finding mission" to Iran, get himself photographed at the controls of a Shahab-3 missile launcher, and then we can all start calling him Tehran Bill. ;-)
* Personally I think that UUA President Bill Sinkford's recent meeting with President Ahmadinejad is more comparable to Neville Chamberlain's (in)famous "peace in our time" meeting with U*Us know who. . .
No Neville Chamberlain never had a meeting with The Emerson Avenger. ;-)
Comments