Pope's comments on Abbas been distorted

lol!!!! your link doesn't work.

 

One more time, from the Vatican Insider of the Italian newspeper "La Stampa":

Source: http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/e...ne-palestina-vaticano-vatican-vaticano-41113/

 

The Vatican "insider", Iacopo Scaramuzzi, was not there at the time.

But anyway, the Pope recognises the state of Palestine and has previously called Abbas a man of peace.

 

Except La Stampa is just a newspaper like any other. And the "Vatican insider"... is of La Stampa.
Don't go suggest it is the official press release agency of the Vatican.



At the end of the day, Abbas received a medallion / decoration of Angel of peace of the Pope.
You can go nit pick all you want about the words. but to receive that award and the statehood... does say it all.

 

A recognition of the Pope regarding "Palestine" has nothing to do with that that the Pope said to Abbas in their meeting in the Vatican "may you be an angel of peace".

The medallion that was given to Abbas is only a symbolic present that represent the commitment that the person who gets this medallion should has for peace, but of course Abbas showed numerous of times that he is not so much commitment for peace with his funding and supporting anti-Israel statements, anti-Israel school curriculum, sending money that the US and Israel is giving to the PA for terrorist femilies, a calling in the last riots in Jerusalem for "all ways" valid, was the man behind 1072 massacare and so on.

 

The Pope has called Abbas a "man of peace" before.

 

Really? Actually it's Palestine - you don't need the quotation marks.

And Abbas was previously called “a man of peace and a peacemaker.” - Note, does not contain the words "may you" which has only been used in your source of Vatican Insider, Iacopo Scaramuzzi.. And who is he? Yes. a journalist who was not at the meeting.

So what is the difference between “a man of peace and a peacemaker.” and “You are a bit an angel of peace,”?

 

If we will go according history, "Palestine" (= The Land of Israel) is the place where the homeland of the Jews will be established. Such of place as "Palestine", as you refer it was never existed.
"Palestine" as you refer and the Arabs refer to is just a fiction.

The Pope didnt say "you are a bit...", but actually he said "MAY you be...".
"May be..." and "You are...." are two different things, you know that right?

Let's us not forget, Abbas showed numerous of times that he is not so much commitment for peace with his funding and supporting anti-Israel statements, anti-Israel school curriculum, sending money that the US and Israel is giving to the PA for terrorist femilies, a calling in the last riots in Jerusalem for "all ways" valid, was the man behind 1072 massacare and so on.

 

Yeah, they labelled Nelson Mandela a 'terrorist' too. At least those who wanted apartheid and oppression to continue unmolested in South Africa did; and that's precisely what is occurring vis-a-vis Israel-Palestine.

 

You still don't need the quotes. The Pope has recognised the state of Palestine as have practically every other country on Earth. You need to accept it. Also which history are you referring to? I've never seen that in my history books! In my history books, Israel was a sectioned off area in Palestine established last century.

Still you have not said what is the difference between “a man of peace and a peacemaker.” and “You are a bit an angel of peace,”? Or are you now saying that the Pope never said “a man of peace and a peacemaker.” in 2014?

 

"Extremists, who us? We just know better than GOD, that's all. "

I love conservatives. Now they're more Catholic than the Pope

 

It's according to the an historical documet of the Mandate by the UN.
As well history shows that the name "Palestine" was first used by the Roman emperor Hadrian in 135 AD when he called ths place "Syria- Palestine" to vanish the presence of the Jews from this territory. Before of that Herodotus used the name "Palaistine", but of course that name has nothing to do with the "Palestinians", because Herodotus used that name because of the presence of the Philistinis that been in that area. Thus if you want to believe that "Palestine" exist, then you need to refer the "Palestinians" also as the descendents of the Philistins" But of course it can be happend, because the Philistinis they've been dissepeard long ago.

The Pope didnt say in the meeting of theirs in the Vatican that Abbas is an angel of peace, but he actually said "may you be an angel of peace".

 

The State of Palestine is recognized in UNGA res. 181, which Israel recognizes and their declaration of independence recognizes.

 

Incorrect,,

 

I question these appeals to history. There are multiple versions, and they do change as we discover more about the relationships between peoples, political borders, advent of caring about political borders, etc.

But, let's remember that a nation can call itself absolutely anything it wants.

They can chose an historic name for some place or people or can concoct something brand new. It makes absolutely no difference of ANY kind. People don't lose or gain property due to a name. Borders don't depend on a name. People don't gain or lose citizenship due to a name. A nation's right to exist doesn't come from the name that is chosen.

Two nations in Africa call themselves Congo.

America named itself for an explorer from a country that had no lasting holdings in America.


And, let's remember that people continue to own their property when borders change - they just become citizens of the new country.

 

Resolution 181 has not validity today, because the resolution needed the acceptnace of both sides (Jews and Arabs) in 1947, and when the Arabs rejected resolution 181 (= partition plan) then it has not validity. Not in 1948 and not today.

What I wrote are historical facts.
It is an historical fact that Hadrian called that place "Syria-Palestine" for the purpose of venishing the presence of Jews in that land, and it is an histrical fact that Herodotus called used the name "Palaistine" because of the existance of the Philistinies in that area (the area of Gaza). Therefore, if you are support the "existance of Palestine" today, then it means that the "Palestinians" are the descendents of the Philistinies, and according to that belong to the area of the Agean Sea.

A nation can call themselves however they want as long they are a nation. As long there are no evidences for that nation's history and the characteristics of such nations, then no one can call themselves that they are a "nation".

A nation right to exist doesnt come from the name, but come from the characteristics of the nation, and when there are no such according to history (a nation must has an history).
Let's us not forget as well that if you like to call yourself "Palestinians" because of that the name "Palestine" had been used for some time, then it means that you also know from where this name was created, and if so, then you would know that such of name was created because of the existnace of the Philistinies at ancient times. Thus, if you want to call yourself a "Palstinian", then it means that you are the descendets of the Philistines, and by that belong to the area of the Agean sea.
And if you wnat to name yourself "Palestinian" because you lived in the time that the place was named "Palestine", and also to name your descendents "Palestinians", then it means that also the Jews are also "Palestinians" because they lived at the time before 1948, and by that also their descendents. But of course you would disagree with me about such claims, right? If so, then you are agreeing with me that there are no such thing as "Palestinians".

 

bull (*)(*)(*)(*).

UNGA Resolution 181 is valid today, as it is cited in Israel's Declaration of Independence, the Oslo Accords, etc...

- - - Updated - - -

again, bull (*)(*)(*)(*).

a nation has a right to exist when the world community says so.

 

I didn't dispute your history. I dispute using that history in setting borders, recognizing property rights, determining statehood, etc.

Nations need no history.

If you want to know why a nation chose its name, you need to ask them. THEY are the ones that chose the name.

There are Palestinians when a people chooses to call itself Palestinian. It takes no more than that. Whether it is historically accurate is totally irrelevant. Whether the region was previously called "Palestine" makes no difference. Whether there is a perception (true or not) from history of a conflict in use of the name, it makes no difference.

Similarly, what Israel chooses to call itself is the business of Israel and nobody else.

When there became two nations called Congo, we might not have liked the confusion it caused. We may disagree with the history of the name as applied to the history of the borders, we may not like their government, etc. But, they get to choose their name, and their name changes nothing about borders, rights, property ownership, or any other such factor.

Lots of nations have borders that don't match history and have names that don't match the population.

 

The UN offered the partition plan for the sides ( the Jews and the Arabs), and for the plan to be fulfilled it needed to two sides acceptnce, which means that when the Arabs rejected the plan, the plan (AKA resolution 181) is no more valid and cant be fulfilled.

A nation needs evidences for it's existence, when a nation has no evidence, it cant be called as such.

 

Israel is ethnic cleansing Palestine, so yeah... that would mean there will be "anti-Israel" statements from that country.
It proves nothing Abbas is not working on peace. And since he is getting international recognition through the UN.... rather peaceful right there.

- - - Updated - - -

So...
don't be such a fascist and respect their opinion.

 

If you dont dispute history that I metioned, then you can dispute the non-existence of the "Palestinians".

Nations need history. History is part of their characteristics of the nation.

They chose that name because the land named as such, and if the land named as such and the Arabs want to call them as "Palestinians" becuase the name that was used, then it means two options:
1. if you like to call yourself "Palestinians" because of that the name "Palestine" had been used for some time, then it means that you also know from where this name was created, and if so, then you would know that such of name was created because of the existnace of the Philistinies at ancient times. Thus, if you want to call yourself a "Palstinian", then it means that you are the descendets of the Philistines, and by that belong to the area of the Agean sea.
2. And if you wnat to name yourself "Palestinian" because you lived in the time that the place was named "Palestine", and also to name your descendents "Palestinians", then it means that also the Jews are also "Palestinians" because they lived at the time before 1948, and by that also their descendents. But of course you would disagree with me about such claims, right? If so, then you are agreeing with me that there are no such thing as "Palestinians".

Israel is the other name of Ya'akov. The name "Israel" is part of the Jewish heritage, part of the Jews. Israel is also the initials of the three fathers and the four mothers of Judaism (Iseec/Ya'akov, Sarah, Rachel/Rivka, Abraham and Leah), while "Palestinians" cant rely on such with their name. The "Palestinians" use the name because the territory was named as such, and if so then it leaves us with two options as I described above.

 

"Palestine" according to history is the place where the homeland of the Jews will be established.
If we will look a little bit earlier in history we even see that that name "Palestine" was used to venish the presence of the Jews from this territory, and was relied on the existence of the Philistines that lived in the area of Gaza.
Are you suggesting that the "Palestinians" are the descendents of the Philistines? Because if not, then you cant justify the existance of the "Palestinians" through "Palestine".

Let's us not forget also that Israel is not ethnic- cleansing the Arabs, they are using the same roads and let them control over themselves in the West Bank (with the existance of the PA, and in Gaza after the disangegment).

So are you saying that when Abbas planned the massacre of 1972, it actually was an act of peace?
So are you saying when Abbas give the money of America to terrorist femilies is an act of peace?
So are you saying that when Abbas called for "all ways" valid in the last riots on Jerusalem was an act of peace?
So are you saying that when Abbas denied part of the Jewish history is an act of peace (with his thesis that was been confirmed by the USSR)?
So are you saying that when Abbas let hatred curriculum in schools in the West Bank is an act of peace?

And so on.

I'm not a fascist, I respect other opinions, but I cant accept opinions that says that I should be dead. I dont think that anyone would accept such opinion.

The US never accepted such opinions from Al-Qeada.. Does America is a fascist state too?
Norway is also not accepting such opinions from radical Muslims. Does Norway is a fascist state too?
France is also not accepting such opinions. Does France is a fascist state as well?

 

It doesn't matter whether there were Jews in the area of Palestine. That is a total irrelevancy. We do not take land away from those who own it on the grounds that there were people of some other religion living there at some point in history. And, we do not make political borders match the borders of historic peoples.

There are Palestinians for one reason only: There are people who call themselves Palestinian. That is TOTALLY sufficient.

Your "options" are nonsense. Look at other places on earth. You are willfully confusing yourself.

 

is currently a UN recognized nation

But it is. It is expanding beyond their recognized borders at the expense of Arabs for the sake of the Jew-nation.
Hence the criticism is just. Something you can not accept and demand their "anti-israel" venting must end.
Rather fascist.

The head of the Catholic world gave him a medal of being a man of peace.
Go boohoo already.

We all know Abbas doesn't call for a genocide. Do I spot them stereotypical "zionistic lies"? He demands that the thieving racist Jews return what they stole and end their ungoing thievery. Something you are in denial. And that is a rather disgusting position that rivals holocaust denialism.

 

I didnt write in my comment about that there were Jews in the Land of Israel. I only said that the name "Israel" is part of the Jews, part of the Jewish haritage. Before that I wrote you about the name "Palestine".

So if I will tell you that I'm stending right now behind you, would yu also take that as a fact? Just because someone "call it"? no, right? you will say that I'm not stending behind you because I'm not near you, correct? If so, then you will show by that that you need evidences for what is that you call and say about yourself, youcan just say something that doesnt have evidences and then people believe it as fact.

For a nation you have to have characteristics which show that there is such nation, when there are non then there is no such nation.

I'm not confusing yourself, I'm following the meaning of the word "Palestine". Which the Arabs need to follow as well if they like to call themselves as such.