[NYer]

The same complaint can be made by those who wish to maintain the authentic tradition of the Roman rite.

Not really ... it's similar but quite different. See my post to Markomalley.

[Petrosius]

I see your point. While I do not want to engage in a dispute as to who has suffered more, it remains that even with all the interference that the Eastern Catholics have regrettably suffered in the past they are still in a better situation today than those who would wish to follow an unadulterated Roman rite. While is was never the intention of Vatican II, nor I would even say of the post-conciliar Vatican, the de facto situation is that the historical Roman rite has not been reformed but replaced by a new rite that has borrowed elements from the Roman rite. Thus the historical Roman rite finds itself today, with the exception of a single diocese in Brazil and the Fraternity of Saint Peter, without its own bishops or hierarchy.