I think you know I feel the same.
What 'serious consequences' could possibly come from having omitted one tragedy in a litany of tragedies on a speech that would have been ignored had not Israeli's complained?
I don't think the Pope is often ignored. His influence is immense. By listing all the tragedies save one it gives the appearance that the particular tragedy in question, the suicide bombing in Netanya, is not in the same category. In light of the Catholic Church's longstanding support of the Palestinians and criticism of Israel it makes it seem that the bombing is justified and acceptable. That is what the Foreign Ministry is concerned about. Giving approval to terrorists, even by omission, even unintentionally, encourages more terrorism.
Nope, but it does make you look narcissistic and overly sensitive.
Did you read the Jerusalem Post article which was also posted to Free Republic? That put this in proper historical context. We are most certainly not over sensitive. If anything we were far too quiet during Pope John Paul II's pontificate.
Why does the value of Israeli dead require authentication from the Pope?
Don't be obtuse. By leaving out the Jewish dead the Pope is, perhaps unintentionally, sending the message that Jewish life, Israeli life, isn't as valuable or that the deaths were justified.
Totally agree. When did the Pope claim, or do otherwise?
Pope Benedict XXVI hasn't done yet, except by ommission. I, for one, am willing to give the Pope the benefit of the doubt. Correct the ommission and you will see a very different message coming from Israel.
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.