What about Israel? Pope condemns on Sunday terrorism [...] but leaves out Israel

Yediot Ahranot ^ | 25 July 2005 | Diana Bahur-Nir

[Conservative til I die]

"Wow, talk about blind loyalty." Talk about blind ignorance.

I think that description fits as well. The point is, blind loyalty and ignorance is supporting your chosen cause at all costs and not even considering an argument from the other side. In this case, the issue is the Israeli Foreign Minister's actions. They've offended a lot of people and for the most part, everyone's criticism has focused solely on the FM's actions. Labeling anyone who is critical of the FM, even when by and large they are pro-Israel, as an anti-Semite is ignorant and immature behavior.

[CWOJackson]

"Labeling anyone who is critical of the FM..."

Actually, if you had taken the time to read through the posting you would find that this is about their blind ignorance regarding a totally different issue.

[jess35]

The Pope's clarification was certainly unhelpful.

"It's not always possible to immediately follow every attack against Israel with a public statement of condemnation," a statement from the Vatican press office said Thursday night, "and (that is) for various reasons, among them the fact that the attacks against Israel sometimes were followed by immediate Israeli reactions not always compatible with the rules of international law." "It would thus be impossible to condemn the first (the terror strikes) and let the second (Israeli retaliation) pass in silence," said the statement, which had an unusually blistering tone for the Holy See. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050728/ap_on_re_mi_ea/vatican_israel_1

It seems his position is clear. Boy, some people sure hate it when the Jews "forget their place", don't they?

[JohnnyZ]

I have a keychain with a gold coin

Wow, a holy keychain on one hand, calling the Pope a Nazi on the other.

Yeah, you are a bigot. Realize it and repent.

[JohnnyZ]

Giving approval to terrorists, even by omission, even unintentionally, encourages more terrorism.

There was no "approval" -- you should take that back. There was a blanket condemnation of terrorism and mention of specific major AQ linked attacks.

The Vatican has gone out of its way over many years to condemn individual attacks in Israel, but if they do not condemn every single attack individually it does not mean they "approve", and those attacks not named individually are still condemned generally.

Sheesh.

[JohnnyZ]

I simply have no patience for alleged moral leaders who are completely absent from the largest conflict in the present-day world.

So the forceful condemnation of terrorist attacks .... you missed that huh?

Please, you're a bigot. Willfully blind.

[Zechariah11]

Is it just me or is the writing in this article garbled. The first sentence abruptly changes tenses and the fourth is an incomplete thought.

[jess35]

"Forceful condemnation"?

Did you miss the point where the Vatican criticizes Israel for responding to terrorism with anything other than a lawsuit and a strongly worded protest?

The Pope has basically put Israel on the same level as the Pals and I want to know why more Catholics are NOT asking why.

[thoughtomator]

You're the one who is wilfully blind, to a fault that you could easily diagnose in any other European who behaved in the same exact way. But I understand that the doctrine of infallibility prevents you from seeing what is so obvious to non-adherents of that doctrine.

[JohnnyZ]

Did you miss the point where the Vatican criticizes Israel for responding to terrorism with anything other than a lawsuit and a strongly worded protest?

That is complete BS.

The statement said some of Israel's responses was NOT ALWAYS consistent with international law.

It did NOT say that the few exceptions (that were not consistent with intl law) were equivalent to terrorism.

For you to spread those lies and defamations and attacks stinks of ignorance, bigotry, or worse.

[JohnnyZ]

to a fault that you could easily diagnose in any other European who behaved in the same exact way

If I could find another Euro with anywhere near the strong and consistent record of condemning terrorism, including that against Israel, as the Pope and the Vatican, I would be more than willing to compare.

But the fact is the Vatican has been a lonely voice in support of the right of Israel to exist in peace. If Israel has to break a few eggs to defend itself, I tend to figure that's the price of making an omelet. But the Vatican consistently opposing terrorism as inherently evil and certain other violent actions as avoidable and less than ideal.

Of course bigots like you ignore that record entirely.

[thoughtomator]

The record is not at all clear as you suggest. The Vatican has many apologists for terror who have spoken as its voice in recent years. Shall I pull up some of the many available examples of this for you?

[JohnnyZ]

And bigots have many apologists for themselves.

Shall I use you as an example?

[thoughtomator]

At this point you've become unmoored from reason, having no substance to support your assertions, and are reduced to name calling, as have the others who have attempted to make the same charge against me.

[JohnnyZ]

attempted to make the same charge against me.

Attempted? Try proven beyond a reasonable doubt, Bub.

[thoughtomator]

The only thing proven here beyond a reasonable doubt is your inability to employ reason.