Posted on 05/22/2014 10:45:22 AM PDT by Olog-hai
The Vaticans Secretary of State made a dramatic revelation ahead of Pope Franciss visit to Israel next Sunday and Monday, declaring that the pope will talk about the Palestinian peoples right to have a homeland, sovereign and independent.
Cardinal Pietro Parolin holds a role in the Vatican City State, located in the Italian capital of Rome, equivalent to that of a prime minister.
When asked what the pope particularly intends to talk about during the visit, Parolin revealed he would talk about on the one hand, Israels right to exist in peace and security within internationally recognized boundaries. On the other side, the pope would talk about the Palestinian peoples right to have a homeland, sovereign and independent, the right to move around freely, the right to live in dignity, according to Parolin.
In fact, the Vatican recognized the State of Palestine in 2012 amid the United Nations (UN) vote to confer Palestine non-member observer state status, a status until then only held by the Vatican.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
Why look at it with “new eyes”,I thought that truth is truth and not defined by “old or new”. The truth is as Petronius describes it,whether one likes it or not.
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
The Vatican's choice to fast track "palestine". They did establish relations with Israel in 1994, less than 50 years than most of the non Muslim world, and only a few months later than Jordan. A few years after Egypt.
That state already exists, it's called "Israel".
It needs to be tripled in size.
Liberation theology. It is his religion.
That's asinine!
It's exactly like saying: "68% European and 32% Lutheran."
Does the infallibility thing still apply?
I don't know if Jesus is ever referred to in the New Testament as "King of the Jews" outside the passion narratives, when the chief priests are trying to get Pilate to condemn him by telling him that Jesus claims to be a king--then Pilate calls him "the King of the Jews."
Only if the Pope invokes it, as I understand these things. I admit articles like this make me uncomfortable, I’ll wait to see what he demands. Should that be the case, exploration of demands relative to Jews, or criticism of them, would be a reasonable topic of discussion. I kind of like Feiglin’s plan, I’ve written similar things about a unilateral separation for years. Maybe the Pope will. If Kerry objects, just tell him they’re Puerto Ricans. Or residents of a number of American territories.
Funny, my History book states that the League of Nations in 1925 decided that TransJordan was the Arab state and that Palestine would be the Jewish state.
I think the answer is obvious it doesn’t, he’s wrong!
I was talking about a possible peace solution. We’ve tried the same old same old for decades and it’s not working any better now than 30 years ago.
The truth is the opposite of what Petronius describes. Like it or not.
Don't care... they can't have someone else's country. It doesn't work that way. (Oh, and they can't have the United States, Denmark, France or Italy either.) What kind of kool aid do they drink over there?
And do you not want all of Israel/Palestine for the Jews? Where is the moral difference?
If you’re going to use canards to excuse the genocidal bent of the “Palestinians” (something the Israelis absolutely do not share), then you aren’t arguing from a moral standpoint. That also refers to the current Judenrein status of what the UN is insisting we call “Palestine” today (ruled by Fatah and Hamas); the Jewish state of Israel is not draconian in any way towards Arabs within its borders, whose livelihood for the record is better and more free under the Jewish state than under the Islamic pseudostate.
In the Septuagint, "Kingdoms" 3 & 4 (= I Kings and II Kings), the various Israelite kings are called kings of Israel or kings of Judah (Iouda), not "kings of the Jews."
That was after the kingdom split under Rehoboam, the son of Solomon. The northern ten tribes retained the name “Israel” under Jeroboam’s rule, while Rehoboam’s southern kingdom was named “Judah” after the tribe the Jews came from, which also included the tribes of Benjamin and Levi; Jeroboam founded his own priesthood from “the lowest of the people” (1 Kings 12:31 and 13:33), who quickly turned to paganism.
Judah of course was the name that the Romans rendered “Judaea”.
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.