Terrorism is wrong, no matter what your politics or your religion. What is the pope playing at?
"On Sunday the pontiff prayed for God to stop the 'murderous hand' of terrorists, during his noontime blessing delivered from his Alpine retreat in Italy's northwestern Valle d'Aosta region, where he is vacationing.Benedict referred to the recent 'abhorrent terrorist attacks' in Egypt, Britain, Turkey and Iraq but did not mention attacks in Israel.
"'The pope deliberately failed to condemn the terrible terror attack that occurred in Israel last week,' a[n Israeli] Foreign Ministry statement said."
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/604536.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
50 comments:
What a waste of space that last post was. Anything else Israel would like to bitch about? Get your head out of you ass Monkeys Max. You know that article is bullshit.
By the way Monkeys Max it didn't feel too great when Murphy was bustin on the Jews yet you do not seem to have any problem bashing Catholics or the Catholic Church. Good policy.
No, SS, I am only bashing on one man.
If anything, the Pope should condemn Israel for herding Palestinians into ghettos. How ironic is that? Same goes for Israel-the bombings will stop when they quit oppressing the Palestinians.
Nevermind, DD, I was able to identify where I had heard the sentiment before.
The bombing will end when the puppeteers choose.
Maybe the pope should condemn Arab countries for making the naturalization of Palestinians illegal.
Maybe the pope should condemn Arab countries for insisting that the "refugees" flee in the first place.
Maybe the pope should condemn pseudo-intellectual, anti-establishment types for siding with the Arabs by default.
Maybe the pope should condemn the speeches of the mullahs.
Maybe DD should go and research dhimmi law and population exchange.
Maybe DD's showing his true colors here.
Maybe DD's embracing the identical political view that would be expected of him here.
Maybe you guys can show some hair, identify yourselves and make your intentions more clear. F'ing cowards.
Maybe DD is, no it couldn't be, COMPLKETELY PREDICTABLE in every one of his views.
Maybe I'm predictable because I have principles I stick to in all situations. You should try it some time, it's called character.
Maybe you can read something, actually get educated, and then blow all of that hot air.
No, it's probably better to be un-employed and rail against the establishment.
Maybe you should dodge your taxes (dude taxes are a conspiracy), smoke dope, speak and go freely, and then rail against the only system that really would let you get away with it all.
Maybe your just bitter because America's dole sucks.
I thought that I had already establshed that I was a cowardly coward around here anyway.
Don't worry, though, DD, the name-calling better fits you anyway. All that putting on airs was just getting in the way.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Boring.
Willie Ames won't stand for this!
Does the anonymity frighten or upset you because you don't really know what you're talking about on this subject, or because you want to know more about my "intentions?"
According to DD:
Predictability=Character
I hope the disciples are paying attention.
I could give a shit about your intentions. I want you to take responsibility for your comments like I do. I stand behind everything I post.
Anon,
You must be from Fox News.
Further, according to DD,
Subjects on which he's not educated quickly become boring, not that it precludes him from having an opinion, it just bores him.
DD, you wouldn't hope that you'd be outwitted by anyone at Fox, would you?
Your logic is startling. You must be a philospophy major. Or a theology major or a theatre major.
But I see where you're going here;
If anyone disagrees with you, they must be part of some conspiracy.
And contrary to your delusions of granduer, nobody from Fox gives a shit about you.
"Dude, today on my blog, some dude from Fox News was totally pissed."
Come back when you can contribute something of worth. Thanks for playing. As a parting gift, you get a years supply of Turtle Wax.
In 70 AD the Romans expelled the Jews from Israel and burned the second temple. Soon after Israel became a sandy wasteland (like all other arab nations.) With the creation of the present-day Israeli state and the subsequent wars brought against Israel by the murderous muslim horde, it is clear that all palestinians must be removed from Israel for there to be peace. Just an FYI, but read any history book and you'll find that MOST modern palestinians are actually nomadic arabs from Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and Lebanon who moved into Israel after the Jews returned and actually made the land liveable (something arabs didn't do in over 1900 years of occupation/occasional visits/roaming around.)
Oh, and the only nazi here is you numbnuts.
Never called you a Nazi.
What's your point? I never mentioned Jews. My beef is with Israel, not Jews. I distinguish between a criminal gang- the Israeli state- and a religious order - Jews.
DD, it's great to see that another Anon moved in to take my place while I had to leave and enjoy my turtle wax. He/She sounds much better informed than you.
I intend to use my turtle wax to lube up the closed minds of people like you and shove the truth in.
But I have two additional things to say before I go put my turtle wax to good use.
1. "My beef is with Israel, not Jews" may be a truthful statement (I have no way of knowing) but it sounds an awful lot like the crap I've been hearing for years from people who actually do have a beef with the Jews but disguise it conventiently as being "anti-Israel" (which is a convenient way of saying that your anti the only refuge the Jews have EVER had).
2. When you pigeon hole people by their "major," as you attempted earlier, you reveal quite readily that either a) you are a college-aged spouter worried about "majors" (in which case, check back with me when your perspective broadens) or b) your stunted development makes you view the world through what "major" someone might have been (which, in my case, you were 0-3 guessing).
DD, blogs are a wonderful thing, but so is a little reading. You've obviously not read ONE SINGLE BOOK on the subject or you wouldn't regurgitate the rote Palestinian battle cries.
Go read something, form an educated opinion, and then let me know what you think about the "oppression of the Palestinians."
Besides, who's to say that informing people that you're an uneducated windbag doesn't have "worth?"
But, by the way...
While not posted by me (Anon #1 if you will), I think the Nazi reference actually involved the title of the original post on which we've all been commenting.
Most recent anonymous,
Obviously, you are of the sort that thinks that any criticism of Israel is also a criticism of Jews in general. This is just an attempt to brand me as an anti-Semite. Nice try, but the ruse won't work. Israeli politicians should be held responsible for their actions like everyone else. Regardless of what has happened to Jews in the past, it doesn't give them the right to have their government treat others like dogs.
If I'm not mistaken, one of Israel's illustrious Prime Ministers gained fame by bombing the King David Hotel to drive out the British. I guess it's OK when he does it.
As for the "majors", that was my attempt to ferret out a friend of mine I thought was posting as "anonymous." Nothing more.
Other Anonymous,
I didn't write the original post, so I never called anyone a Nazi to begin with.
I've just got back online after 5 1/2 hours away and I have been pretty surprised by these comments. DD, your latest comment is exactly what I wanted to say: This is my post. If anyone has a problem with it, please direct your comments at me, or attack me, if that is your preferred method.
My point in my very short post (that should hardly warrant 36 comments) is that the pope made a mistake in omission. I did not mean to bring up deeper political conflicts because there are so many we could talk about. My problem is that while the pope rightly declared recent acts of terrorism "abhorrent", his glaring omission delivers a dangerous message.
Perhaps calling the pope a nazi was a bit over the top, but as he did serve in the Hitler Youth, it was not total fiction.
If anyone has a problem with anything I have said, I will be back in the morning (I'm in Europe) to answer any complaints, charges, questions.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Max
Monkey,
Are you implying that being in the Nazi youth movement was voluntary?
He had no more say of whether to join than Jews did about going to camps.
Jewish leaders were very happy with his election.
I'm also pissed that the Pope omitted to speak out against the Hatfield and McCoy feud and the feud between the Lakers and the Celtics in the 80's.
I never had any of it confused. I wrote, "in the original post." That's the original post, please notice, not the original or subsequent comments.
As I understand it, the post is that written by MM (the nazi reference was in the title) and the comments, wholly separate, are those written here by us. The other random anonymous (#2, whose only comment appears to be the "sand" history of Israel) was the one that had the origin of the nazi comment confused.
I don't think anyone really took the nazi comment literally, though I could understand how it would offend many Catholics.
DD, if you'll re-read my comment, you'll see that I made a clear distinction between those that are anti-Israel and those that are anti-Semites. I never called you an anti-Semite, either.
As for that distinction, it certainly exists. However, it has been my understanding that those that are truly anti-Israel are those that haven't read on the subject beyond the skewed AP wire reports or the popular European sentiment (and, transitively, many left-leaners) disproportionately affected by the growing, and unassimilated, Muslim minority.
Once you come to grips with what the issue is, how long it's existed, and the complexity of any solution, you may, just may, be able to sit back and understand that it is far more complicated than "end the occupation, end the bombing."
The fact that you've so easily distilled it into a simple matter that it's clearly not, the more you expose the fact that you've formed your opinion on talking points rather than actual investigation.
Or you've limited your reading to Esposito and Said. Either way, you're the loser.
You can educate yourself on the subject or you can bandy about (even if unintentionally) THIRTY YEAR OLD tempered propaganda originally written by Arafat himself (after '73, he decided that the whole annihalation of the Jews and destruction of Israel thing wasn't going his way and didn't really appeal to left-leaning audience to which he was ungraciously pandering).
In other words, those that are "anti-Israel" but not "anti-Semitic" are generally good-hearted people whose benevolent intentions, sympathy and laziness are being used against them.
And then there's the other. My thoughts on them don't fit here.
But, really, DD, are you "anti-Israel?" I mean think about that proclamation for a moment. What does it mean? You're against its existence (once could easily infer anti-Semitism)? You're against its policies?
Yes, you say, the policies. Okay, then you're against the policies of some Israelis (at the moment the majority, how times change). Do you know which ones? Do you know the names of the parties? Do you know the governmental system? Do you undestand the reversal of public Israeli sentiment over the course of the last twenty years? Can you name one Israeli politician (Besides Sharon or Netahnyahu)?
No, because you don't care about Israel. In fact, you're "anti-Israel."
Which is far different from being anti-Sharon, or anti-settlements, or anti-Likud, or any of the rest. You're just "anti-Israel" due to some vague list of Israeli transgressions that you yourself don't fully understand.
Just "anti-Israel."
While I guess you seem like maybe you might possibly not be what you might so easily be intepreted as, I'm sure you can see why I generally cringe at the blanket statement "anti-Israel."
For instance, I'm not anti-Palestinian or even anti-Palestine. I was anti-Arafat, I'm anti-Arafat's remnants, I'm anti-Al Aqsa Martyrs, anti-Hamas, anti-PLO, anti-intifada, anti-the Arab countries that purposefully ignore the "refugees" just so there will always be a bargaining chip, I'm anti-suicide bombings, I'm anti-five year old children holding machine guns in their school photos, I'm even anti-settlements (but not anti-settlers, if that makes sense). But I'm not anti-Palestinian or anti-Palestine.
And I never will be.
But you, apparently, are quite comfortable being "anti-Israel" (and quick to infer that someone was calling you anti-Semitic, which nobody was).
It's a very fine line to tread, that between "anti-Israel" and "anti-Semitic." Eventually, it seems, you might educate yourself so you don't sound so stupid being just plain "anti-Israel."
As for your reference to early Zionism, yes, the British did indeed have a great many conundrums in attemtping to colonize the entire world. "Palestine" (the British Mandate) and the early Zionists were certainly among them.
But, since you brought it up, and with a quiet wink toward MM, I'll quote Israel's first Prime Minister, "there will be peace when the Palestinians love their own children more than they hate the Jews." (MM suddenly knows who this is, please stay quiet).
Similarly, there will be peace when the good-hearted (we're giving DD the benefit of the doubt here) respect their fellow citizens more than they hate the establishment and embrace the enemy.
Two questions to close:
1. How many Palestinians live peacefully within Israel?
2. How many Jews, in all Arab countries combined, live peacefully?
"Anti-Israel?" (I guess that's three).
SS, I am not implying that being in the Hitler Youth was voluntary; in fact, I know it was not. I don't actually have a problem that Ratzinger was in the Hitler Youth. I do, however, have a problem that the Catholic Church chose someone who had been in the Hitler Youth to be pope. It was not necessary and it sends the wrong message.
In my original post, which I will stick with, I criticised the pope for one thing only. The fact that he was in Hitler Youth only inspired a controversial title.
Anon A-Hole...watch your back! DD knows how to use bamboo fighthing sticks!!!
Anonymous,
Please disregard the above comment. I am a peaceful man.
Way to go DD...lull him to sleep before you wack him with your bamboo fighting sticks!!!!
Who cares what a tired dried up old kraut has to say about terrorism anyway. If he won't clean up his own pedophile infested, organized crime blessing excuse for a holy church, what moral authority does he have to begin with.
Fuck the fag ass Pope! His church is less than shit to me.
He's just another western infidel who deserves to die by the sword of Allah or a maybe a suicide bomb vest full of highly charged explosives courtesy of a whacked out pedophile priest victim.
Fuck the vermin! I can't believe a Jew would care about such a trivial matter as what a Pope thinks.
Beamis,
As does nobody care what you think. You rude piece of shit.
Beamis, I don't care what the pope thinks. I do, however, care what he says because a lot of people listen to him.
That's a pity, because most of his flock doesn't listen to him. They have abortions, use birth control and have fled from regular Mass attendance by the millions. You shouldn't get yourself worked up over a doddering old fool's words, or lack thereof, that mean nothing to most of us----Catholic or not.
SS----what's so rude about the truth?
Skeeter, as the theology major, theater minor (see slip & slide) friend of DD I applaud your positive position of our Holy Roman Catholic Church. I do not assume you are card carrying but at least objective.
As for Annon 1 & 2, Is there no pissibility of being against Israel and her policies w/o being an anti-semite. Aren't you the ones throwing this equality in terms about?
PAX
What's not objective about mentioning that pedophiles are a huge hushed up problem, that people like Cardinal John Law KNOWINGLY placed in unwitting Boston parishes to prey upon the young. He was later given a post in the Vatican (by Skeeters love Pope) because it is a soveriegn country and the Pope knew Law would be able to evade the authorities in Massachusetts who were pondering criminal charges against this disgraced cardinal.
What a low-life organization that attempts to stonewall such heinous acts from seeing the light of day. What vile human wreckage this has created in the name of God, one can only guess at in horror.
Post a Comment