Vatican officially recognizes Palestine, while Israel fumes

[SarthakGanguly]

Pope Francis welcomes Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (R) upon his arrival at the Vatican June 8, 2014. (Reuters/Riccardo De Luca)

Palestinian statehood
Tags

Human rights, Law, Middle East, Politics,Religion, Vatican
The Vatican has become the latest country to recognize the state of Palestine, after a new treaty was finalized on Wednesday. Unsurprisingly Israel has hit out at the move, saying that it damages prospects for peace in the region.

The treaty, which was agreed, though has yet to be formally signed states the Vatican has switched its diplomatic allegiance from the Palestinian Liberation Organization to the state of Palestine. It was finalized days before the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is due to visit Pope Francis.

Abbas is traveling to the Vatican to attend the canonization of four new saints by the Pope, two of which are Palestinian nuns. The move to grant them sainthood has been described as a "sign of hope" for the region by the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, Fouad Twal, Vatican Insider reports.

The Vatican has been unofficially referring to the state of Palestine for over a year. Pope Francis visited Israel last year and the Vatican’s official program referred to Abbas as the president of the state of Palestine. During his visit to the Holy Land, he called for peace from both sides.

A spokesman for the Vatican, the Reverend Federico Lombardi confirmed the news saying: "Yes, it's a recognition that the state exists," AP reports.

The decision has brought condemnation from Israel, with the country’s foreign ministry saying it was “disappointed” at the move.

"This move does not promote the peace process and distances the Palestinian leadership from returning to direct and bilateral negotiations," the ministry said in a text message, AP reported. "Israel will study the agreement and will consider its steps accordingly."

Vatican Foreign Minister Monsignor Antoine Camilleri said the move was not politically motivated, but was simply in line with the Holy See’s position.

In 2012, the Vatican welcomed a decision by the UN General Assembly to recognize Palestine as a non-member observer state. However, the latest treaty is the first legal document between the Vatican and the state of Palestine, which can be considered as official diplomatic recognition.

The treaty in question concerns the activity of the Catholic Church in Palestine. In April 2014, a Catholic Monastery was vandalized not far from the Israeli capital of Jerusalem in a hate crime carried out by Israelis. Slogans condemning peace talks with Palestine as well as graffiti disparaging Jesus and Mary was daubed on the walls.

This is not the first time that Pope Francis has made a diplomatic decision that was not to everyone’s liking. In April, he honored the 100th anniversary of the slaughter of Armenians by Ottoman Turks and called it “the first genocide of the 20th century.”

During a mass at the Armenian Catholic rite at Peter’s Basilica, the Pope said he had a duty to honor the innocent men, women, children, priests and bishops who were murdered by the Ottoman Turks.

“Concealing or denying evil is like allowing a wound to keep bleeding without bandaging it,” said the pontiff.

Vatican officially recognizes Palestine, while Israel fumes — RT News

Good, this happened before as well. Many times the Church wanted the ottomans to take action against the Jews who had taken refuge in their areas.

As far as the Jews were and are concerned, the Christian far right has more in common with the Islamic right. So this is a good exercise in practising honesty.

 

[ZeusMK]

if you realy think that, than you are stupid.

no normal human beeing can have fun of murder or that dumb things you mentioned.

you need to see a doctor.

No i would have really done that and i would have felt completely sane.
I mean why not, who did i had to answer to at the end?
Once i'd reach a level where political leaders and law would've been my bi%tch, i would have been the king of the world..

I think, if id follow that (no point) theory i would have done that, and if you are not doing it right now that may be you are not sane or you are already developing some sort of enlightenment inside you of which you yourself are not completely aware of and are confused of how to interpret it or fear what changes would it bring to your life if you embrace it.

You yourself have acclaimed now that we are human beings, that we are something special and not just flesh encapsulated animals..
Brother i hope that very soon you'll also question the fact that why you are a human, someone special who would not feel good if he harm (let alone) murder someone and that we are binded with each others..

Use your mind and soul. Don't tell me. The only person this will benefit is you yourself.

 

[LordTyrannus]

No i would have really done that and i would have felt completely sane.
I mean why not, who did i had to answer to at the end?
Once i'd reach a level where political leaders and law would've been my bi%tch, i would have been the king of the world..

I think, if id follow that (no point) theory i would have done that, and if you are not doing it right now that may be you are not sane or you are already developing some sort of enlightenment inside you of which you yourself are not completely aware of and are confused of how to interpret it or fear what changes would it bring to your life if you embrace it.

You yourself have acclaimed now that we are human beings, that we are something specials and not just flesh encapsulated animals..
Brother i hope that very soon you'll also question the fact that why you are a human, someone special who would not feel good if he harm (let alone) murder someone and that we are binded with each others..

Use your mind and soul. Don't tell me. The only person this will benefit is you yourself.

maybe i will take your argument into account in a later decade.

now it is world peace, but later this maybe change and i need to show more rabiat skills.

 

[Baloch Pakistani]

there is no such thing as enlightenment. it is just another stupid idea of fake understanding of existance. nonsense.

there is no such reason of existance. We are here and later we will not here any longer.

roflmao.

Ok, suppose there is no God and a believer dies and goes into his grave and then nothing happens, game end. But suppose if there IS a God in reality and a non believer like you dies and goes to his grave and then on the judgement day he is resurrected from his grave then what will he answer to God? Bcz God says in Quran that :

"Then will the true promise draw nigh (of fulfilment): then behold! the eyes of the Unbelievers will fixedly stare in horror: "Ah! Woe to us! we were indeed heedless of this; nay, we truly did wrong!"

Just think about this option at least for once. You are better of to be believer than a non believer. A non believer has everything to lose and nothing to gain.