Posted on 07/28/2005 2:37:25 PM PDT by ExitPurgamentum
1 hour, 31 minutes ago
The Vatican on Thursday denounced some Israeli retaliation against past terrorism as violations of international law in an ongoing spat over Pope Benedict XVI's failure to specifically condemn attacks against Israel in recent remarks.
On Monday, the Israeli Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem summoned the Vatican envoy to express outrage over what it called Benedict's deliberate failure to mention a July 12 suicide bombing in the city of Netanya when he condemned recent terror strikes in Egypt, Britain, Turkey and Iraq.
"It's not always possible to immediately follow every attack against Israel with a public statement of condemnation 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," said a Vatican statement, which had an unusually blistering tone.
"It would thus be impossible to condemn the first (the terror strikes) and let the second (Israeli retaliation) pass in silence," said the statement.
The Vatican did not describe any specific alleged violations of international law. Israel has in the past responded to terror attacks by raiding towns where suspected terrorists live and destroying their homes. But since a Feb. 8 cease-fire with Palestinians went into effect, Israel has halted most retaliatory operations.
The Israeli Foreign Ministry refused to comment on the Vatican's latest statement.
On Sunday, as Benedict addressed pilgrims while on vacation at his Alpine retreat, he prayed for God to stop the "murderous hand" of terrorists. He denounced as "abhorrent" the terror strikes at a Red Sea resort in Egypt, the mass transit attacks in Britain and other strikes in Iraq and Turkey.
Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls said Monday that Benedict had been referring to the attacks of the last few days. He called it "surprising that one would have wanted to take the opportunity to distort the intentions of the Holy Father."
Navarro-Valls said the Netanya attack "falls under the general and unreserved condemnation of terrorism" by the pontiff.
The Vatican statement Thursday was prompted by criticism of Benedict's predecessor, John Paul II, by an Israeli Foreign Ministry official in the Jerusalem Post on Tuesday.
In the paper, Nimrod Barkan, head of the ministry's World Jewish Affairs department, was quoted as saying that during John Paul's tenure, Israel "quietly" protested his failure to condemn attacks against Israel.
Referring to Monday's summoning of the Vatican envoy, Barkan was quoted as saying: "We will have to weigh other steps" if the protest is not effective.
"What could be worse than implying that it is OK to kill Jews? What am I supposed to do?" Barkan was quoted as saying.
The Vatican said Barkan was "inventing" his contention that Israel made numerous protests to the Holy See about John Paul's record.
"The interventions of John Paul II against every form of terrorism and against every single act of terrorism against Israel have been many and public," the Vatican said.
The Vatican statement also denounced Monday's complaint about Benedict as "presumptuous."
"Just as the Israeli government understandably doesn't allow itself to be told by others what it should say, neither can the Holy See accept teachings and directives by some other authority regarding the leaning and content of its own statements," the Vatican press office said.
Copyright © 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
| Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. Questions or Comments Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - |
Is a barking Nimrod.
The US criticizes Israeli policies as well. Would he accuse the US of saying it's OK to kill Jews?
Nimrod, which is worse - to issue not-strong-enough press releases or to work for a government that uproots Jewish families from their homes and businesses?
Nimrod?
The Pontiff mentioned specific acts of terrorism. Notably absent from his comments was the Netanya attack. The Netanya attack was included in the "other attacks" portion of the statement. I see...
The "resettlement" was part of the US's "roadmap". Condi made a special trip last week in which she re-iterated that the US (we) expect the "resettlement" to continue on time and on schedule.
With rockets raining down on "settlements" and Jews dying, Condi praised Abbas for everything that he has done to reign in terror.
Short version: "if you want our support, you'll move out of Gaza." And that just sucks...it's okay for us to defend ourselves against terror and terrorists. It's okay for us to go after terror, terrorists and regimes that support terror, but it's not okay for Israel to do it.
After all, it's just Jews that are dying.
There's a history
between Catholics and Jews
that goes back some years . . .
No one should be shocked
that it continues today.
Remember this book?
Hitler's Pope : The Secret History of Pius XII
That wasn't a book, that was toilet paper sold in book form to gullible suckers. I'll bet you bought one.
Yet, interestingly, Nimrod clearly hasn't chosen to publicly criticize the Secretary.
The Church's position is that it is wrong to retaliate against a murderer's family for his crime.
Like the US' position on the roadmap, this is not likely to change.
Does the US think that it is OK to kill Jews? No.
Does benedict XVI think it is OK to kill Jews? No.
Perhaps Nimrod shouldn't apply double standards while he is bitching about them.
It's the catholic equivalent of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Pimp it all you want - it only reflects badly on bigots like yourself.
I type normally.
But my browser formats posts
like this. It's that damn
Microsoft software!
Some where deep in the menus
there must be a switch . . .
Should the Pope be stoned?
You might also like to see what the Vatican and the Roman Catholic church got up to in Yugoslavia during WWII
http://www.reformation.org/holocaus.html
Stoning is, like, old . . .
Of course, someone might do a
Pulsa Denura . . .
Let's get real - how many terrorist attacks on Israel has the Vatican sponsored in the last 500 years?
I don't see this as hating Catholics or the Pope. I do see it as recognizing a problem and addressing it.
When you compare the two societies, which one is teaching children in schools to hate, how to kill and how honorable it would be to kill as many as possible of the other side?
Which society vilifies beyond the pale in it's daily newspapers? Which one talks of extermination the other side?
Which side is putting the plan into motion?
Which one has capitulated on issue after issue in the interest of peace. If the Palestinians won vast regions of land during the Seven Day War, would they have given most of it back in the interest of peace?
I don't think Israel is perfect. Neither are we.
Where I find fault with the Pope, is this condemnation of Israel as if it were the agressor. One might expect a Pope that would say what he said about Israel, to have condemned the U.S. instead of the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
I don't like the Pope's comments. I think he is wrong on this issue.
If Israel deserved these comments, then the Palestinians Hezballa et all, deserve a ten volume book on the same subject, condemning them in no uncertain terms.
I have seen one.
Pardon me. "I HAVEN'T SEEN ONE."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.