Vatican outrage over church siege

BBC News ^ | April 8 2002 | BBC

[caddie]

Diddle, you said it better than I could.

Aquinas would definitely back the Israelis over the "pink mist" Palestinians.

I see the infiltration of Satanism into the Church hierarchy, in both the homo/pedophile priest thing, and in the Church's condemnation of Israel as it justly defends itself in what is a very measured response to the utter barbarism of the Palestinians.

Where else have I seen Satanism in the Church?

I have seen an awful lot of pro-socialist comments, like, 'economic justice,' etc., etc., in the past decades, from the US Council of Catholic Bishops, and from Rome.

Why is this so bad?

It's envy, pure and simple. Definitely not Christian. No way, no how.

Especially when you factor in all the genocide, world war, lies, and atheism that comes along with 'social justice.'

Let's face it, the Church is infiltrated with hard-core socialists.

Where else have I seen Satanism in the Church hierarchy?

One obvious example is the utter embrace of the Democratic Party Agenda, by the Bishops and Cardinals of the Church.

Think that one of them would censure ANY Democrat politician for his pro-abortion voting record, or other anti-family policies? Dream on.

Whom does the contemporary Church Bishop or Cardinal think is evil? They usually bash the GOP, corporate America, gun owners, males, whites, and all the usual right-wing suspects.

But I tell you the Church is so obviously on the wrong side of this Nativity Church issue, that it is comical.

It's like condemning a SWAT team for breaking a storefront window, after they had bravely subdued an armed robber, and saved a dozen hostages.

I'm saying, 'Huh?'

[dennisw]

1. The actions of the Israelis at the church are reprehensible...

How so? What the heck are you talking about? Israel has a lot of killers trapped there. Jew killers and Jihadists are in your holy Church

it is putting me over the impartiality edge.

Is this what it takes?

[caddie]

Correct. I am stunned that they are so wrong.

[hellinahandcart]

Bethlehem has degraded as tourist town for years because of terrorism, ALL WHILE UNDER THE CONTROL OF ARAFAT, and because the muslims have been trying to build a mosque on the adjacent corner to a major church (possibly THIS church.)

You're correct, it is THIS church. They wanted to expand Manger Square for the Pope's visit (I think it was in prep for the Millenial visit), when along comes a fringe group of Muslims claiming it is Muslim property and they're going to build a mosque they're instead. A huge one. A compromise was reached and only a small mosque was built. Fr Jaeger decried this decision at the time as extremely misguided, since it showed that a vocal fringe group could use threats to gain political power (not to mention land that wasn't theirs). Wonder what's happened to change his attitude? He's in Rome, not under the point of a gun in the Church of the Nativity. Wish the Vatican would tell him to STFU, he's not helping.

I find it troubling that so many on this thread are confusing the words of David Jaeger with the words of the Pope, which were entirely different. It happened yesterday on a thread about a very similar Reuters article. They quote one sentence of the Pope's, and then print a lot of spew from flaming partisans who are not the official voice of the Vatican (in a deliberate effort to get Christians hopping mad, IMO), and yet all the reader remembers afterward is "Pope" since he was mentioned first. Very skillfully done. I'm sorry so many seem to be falling for it.

[caddie]

Dude you are hilarious, and right.

[CWW]

The Vatican had condemned the suicide bombings many times. You just want to ignore that. You also ignore my post where I agree that the palestinians invaded the Chruch. With that being said, it is still a sacred holy site to Christians and there are priests and nuns in the building. What do you want -- an all out blood bath at the alter, because that's where we're headed pal! Don't you think the the Vatican has the right to offer criticism or advise regarding its Church. Also, don't you think that they know just a little more about the situation on the ground than you or I do. The Vatican is in contant contact with the Franciscans there on the ground. Give me a break!

[dennisw]

Deir Yassin was not a massacre. This is a lie told by Arabs. On the internet this lie is exposed.

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/deir_yassin.html

(EXCERPT)........Counting the Dead Surprisingly, after the “massacre,” the Irgun escorted a representative of the Red Cross through the town and held a press conference. The New York Times' subsequent description of the battle was essentially the same as Begin's.

The Times said more than 200 Arabs were killed, 40 captured and 70 women and children were released. No hint of a massacre appeared in the report. “Paradoxically, the Jews say about 250 out of 400 village inhabitants [were killed], while Arab survivors say only 110 of 1,000.”7 A study by Bir Zeit University, based on discussions with each family from the village, arrived at a figure of 107 Arab civilians dead and 12 wounded, in addition to 13 "fighters," evidence that the number of dead was smaller than claimed and that the village did have troops based there.8 Other Arab sources have subsequently suggested the number may have been even lower.9

In fact, the attackers left open an escape corridor from the village and more than 200 residents left unharmed. For example, at 9:30 A.M., about five hours after the fighting started, the Lehi evacuated 40 old men, women and children on trucks and took them to a base in Sheikh Bader. Later, the Arabs were taken to East Jerusalem. Starting at 2:00 P.M., residents were taken out of the village. The trucks passed through the Orthodox neighborhood of Mea Shearim after the Sabbath had begun, so the neighborhood people cursed and spit at them, not because they were Arabs, but because the vehicles were desecrating the Sabbath. Seeing the Arabs in the hands of Jews also helped raise the morale of the people of Jerusalem who were despondent from the setbacks in the fighting to that point.10 Another source says 70 women and children were taken away and turned over to the British.11 If the intent was to massacre the inhabitants, no one would have been evacuated.

[dreadme]

Uh, I don't believe that the pope at the time made use of his most fearsome weapon , the bully pulpit to bring to the attention of America or the UK the fact that the nazis were slaughtering the jews and gypsies and other undesirables.

That silence from Rome was quite deafening.

Where is the condemnation of pallies raghead suicide bombers, and the rightous anger at such tactics?

Peace, peace, peace, is all that is said and it doesn't mention that the only way the arabs are going to settle for peace is upon the dead body of every Israeli, man, woman and child.

Unitl the church can take a stance that is not pro-arab terrorist, then it needs to be quiet and deal with its own messes.

[Leto]

I wish the RCC was this decisive dealing with Pedophiles in their midst. What have they said about the Pali's occupying the church and holding the monks hostage?

Maybe God is sending the Pope a message about His anger with the church.

[MoJo2001]

There is a bloodbath over there in Israel. Many Israelis and Palestinians are dying. I understand why they don't want anyone in the Church to die. However, it's a bloodbath over there. As for the Church, it's merely a building. A symbol! Jesus' birth was the event and his return will be the big event. Not four walls on a building! If Israel decides to destroy it to keep those terrorists from harming anymore human beings either now or later, then I support it.

[dreadme]

didn't cover that in the GED classes in the local prison.

I will take it up with the instuctors when I go back from my homepass.

[dreadme]

got watch those JOOs, next thing you know they will start saying they have a right to protect themselves or something.

[dreadme]

bump,bump,bump

[Cu Roi]

Do you not see the irony in blaming the Israelis for Sabra and Shatilla in a thread that simultaneously highlights Vatican criticisms of Israeli human rights abuses? I mean, these attacks were carried out by a Catholic militia, were they not?

[st.smith]

As for the Church, it's merely a building. A symbol! Jesus' birth was the event and his return will be the big event. Not four walls on a building! If Israel decides to destroy it to keep those terrorists from harming anymore human beings either now or later, then I support it.

I didn't hear too many people here on Free Republic saying it's just a building when the goverment intervened with force in Waco. It's a lot more than a building, it is a religious site and in free states such as Israel and the U.S. religious freedom must be respected. The Church doesn't care about the damn building. It wants to preserve peace and it wants it's autonomy within it's own space recognized. An embassy will receive this type of respect- certainly the Catholic Church in the land of Israel deserves it.

[ELS]

It's about what I perceive as a strong condemnation against Israel while they are defending themselves.

If you have only read the media's interpretations of the Pope's and Vatican's statements on the Israel/Palestine situation, then I think their bias has influenced your perception. The secular, mainstream media interprets the Pope's spiritual statements in a political manner which contributes to a misunderstanding of what he means. The actual statement from the Vatican on April 4, 2002, which reiterates the Pope's position. (FYI, you can find more statements from the Vatican Information Service main page.)

I had a similar conversation about this yesterday, so let me link to that conversation. The Pope, following the just war doctrine, definitely believes that Isarel has the right to self-defense. He is not condemning Israel for defending itself.

[hellinahandcart]

My bad, it wasn't Bethlehem, it was Nazareth. Here. Note that Fr Jaeger and Michael Sabbah, who's also been shooting his mouth off a lot lately, are both interviewed in this piece.

One might almost think these guys were so PO'd at Israel about the mosque business in 1999 that they've held a grudge or something.

[I still care]

War is a terrible thing. Isn't it Sherman who said, "You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out."

When the suicide bombers started blowing up Israeli supermarkets and children that was a declaration of war. I am with Sherman on this one.

If a war is not won decisively it festers, like a wound. Is it possible to "win" this war? Frankly, I doubt it, but letting war criminals run inside a church and get away because it shakes everyone up is no way to win a war. Are the Israelis barbaric? Probably. They are in a war of survival. Were we barbaric in Afghanistan and Vietnam? I'm sure. What's the alternative, to be beaten by people more barbaric than you? Do you send your soldiers, your children into combat with one hand tied behind their back? No, if my son went to war I would say, "Kill them all, don't let anybody get the advantage of you and come home safe for me and your country.

People keep forgetting the first rule of war is to win. "I know I had no hand in making this war, and I know I will make more sacrifices to-day than any of you to secure peace." - William Tecumseh Sherman

[dreadme]

what book is that?

Jews are people of the old testament, but muslims share none of that.

they are better referes to as people of death, for that is what they spread everywhere they go.