[Loy]

Binkie, Binkie, Binkie.....

People in the rural areas only heard about the revolution months after they toppled Somoza? For the most part, this is a fairly questionable statement. I mean, sure there were people who were ignorant of what was happening on the political arena, but that has less to do with them being rural, and more with the fact that their personal lives don't afford them to think too much about politics. This isn't a situation that happens just in Central/South America, but the whole world. (for example, I just explained to 4 different people, at different times, all last week that there was a smoking ban in Washington state. In case you didn't know, it passed 65/35 a few months back. Thus, Washington has now fallen prey to savages just like other formerly wonderful places like California, Massachusettes, and Austin....sorry, I'm rambling).

why do I question this statement? Simple-remember those Christian Base Communities? The ones that sprung up all over the place (if I remember correctly, they numbered in the few hundreds)? The ones that were energizing the people around them on all aspects political? Well, they were mostly in rural areas.

And you keep trying to tie the Catholic Church in with the anti-Sandinista movement. However, this is a false assertion. The church in fact had very few problems with Liberation theology (the movemnt that provided the Sandinistas not only with most of their ideological thrust, but the support neccesary to overthrow an American backed dictator), and these problems were mostly in interpretation, not politics.

Does this mean that there weren't priests who had a problem with the Sandys? Of course there were. However, they were NOT acting in accordance with what Rome said, and for you to assert that by funding these priests (who, on a basic level, were actually hereticals. A point I tried to communicate with a bit of sarcasm with my "not real catholics' statement. Again, have to remember that sarcasm doesn't work well unless it's blatant enough for 4 year olds to get when dealing with the written form), we were supporting a major Roman Catholic movement is....well, it's laughable once all the facts are looked at.

Speaking of looking at all the facts....you keep bringing up a censure of Catholics....in actuality it had nothing to do with their religion (Nicaragua was one of the few countries in the western hemisphere that made freedom of religion one of the cornerstones of their theological make-up....not suprising considering that most of their supporters did so out of religious beliefs) and everything to do with these priests calling for the execution of all Government employess who were priests and preachers that didn't step down from either position. THIS was the main thing that caused tension between Rome and Managua.

As far as the passage backing up what you were asserting-umm....you were asserting that there was a hatred between the church and the Sandinistas, and that the Sandinistas were fanning the flames. Looking over the passage (and the rest of the book, which, by the way, was my main source of information for all the above statements...however, most every bit of library-diving I've done has basically re-itterated all above points), nothing of the sort was said, or insinuated.

As for the "fun with hand grenades"....am doing a bit of library diving Monday, so will put that alongside with what else I'm working on. Will post when I find it again. (note to self-write notes for shit like this, damnit!!!)