1 posted on
07/31/2005 9:43:24 PM PDT by
familyop
To: SJackson
Ping
2 posted on
07/31/2005 9:44:03 PM PDT by
familyop
("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
To: familyop
led to an uncharacteristically strident response by the Vatican on Thursday in which it told Israel to butt out of papal statements. Note to the Vatican: if you can't take it, don't dish it out.
6 posted on
07/31/2005 9:57:19 PM PDT by
Prime Choice
(Thanks to the Leftists, yesterday's deviants are today's "alternate lifestyles.")
To: familyop
"The Vatican explained it couldn't condemn all attacks on Israel, because these attacks were often followed by unlawful Israeli actions. " Unless the Vatican can identify an effective lawful response to the unlawful terrorist attacks on Israel, I find their refusal to condemn them because of Israels supposed unlawful response to be incredibly weak and wrong. I dont respect pacifism.
This is a very informative article. Thanks.
9 posted on
07/31/2005 10:03:14 PM PDT by
elfman2
(This space is intentionally left blank)
To: familyop
Barkan, in his candid remarks to the Post last week, said that Israel was trying to create a new modus operandi in the Vatican, which had, up until then, not made it a practice to condemn attacks in Israel.
Trying a run at the new pope? Ain't gonna work.
If the world would roundly condemn all attacks in Israel, this argument runs, then the level of terrorism against Israel would decline dramatically.
Considering how smart Israelis are, this has got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Maybe they'll next ask the Saudis and the Iranians and the Syrians to condemn attacks on Israel instead of encouraging them. Maybe the ghost of Arafat will rise from its grave to condemn terrorism. Maybe pigs will, indeed, fly...
To: familyop
The Vatican explained it couldn't condemn all attacks on Israel, because these attacks were often followed by unlawful Israeli actions. DUH?!?!?
18 posted on
08/01/2005 1:02:58 AM PDT by
The Red Zone
(Florida, the sun-shame state, and Illinois the chicken injun.)
To: familyop
St. Peter keeps a little black book, even on the Vatican.
29 posted on
08/01/2005 3:57:48 AM PDT by
hershey
To: familyop
There was a sobering ad in Newsweek last week with a map of Israel and the region, showing the range of Russian rockets the Palestinians intend to install in the Gaza Strip as soon as they take over. The rockets would decimate the center of Israel, where 70% of the population resides and 70% of the industrial base is located. There is literally nowhere for Jews in Israel to go if attacked. Their backs are against the sea, and meanwhile the Palestinians are airily discussing the possibility of a few random rocket attacks as if they can't control their own terrorists and it's no big deal if a few Jews die. (The group behind the ad...FLAME...I believe. Fact and Logic about the Middle East.org.)
30 posted on
08/01/2005 4:10:40 AM PDT by
hershey
To: familyop
" has steadfastly declined to comment on the matter, not wanting to exacerbate tensions with the new Pope."Nah. Someone has been writing about it daily and it gets posted here.
36 posted on
08/01/2005 6:58:58 AM PDT by
ex-snook
(Protectionism is Patriotism in both war and trade.)
To: familyop
I have been a constant and steadfast defender of Israel, but this nonsensical criticism of the Vatican is over the top. Coupling this with the idiotic behavior of Sharon lately and arms sales to China, I may have to reconsider my position.
47 posted on
08/01/2005 10:42:45 AM PDT by
Antoninus
(Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini, Hosanna in excelsis!)
To: familyop
"Which explains Israel's frustration with the Vatican."Sheesh..Israel and the Palis will ALWAYS be fighting, for the next millenia or so. Same ole same ole. As they have done for the past 3000 years. It is in their nature to hate each other. They might just one day kill each other off.
86 posted on
08/01/2005 8:23:48 PM PDT by
Windsong
(FighterPilot)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson