Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Saturday, July 2, 2011
John Paul II wanted Vatican recognition of Israel long before December 30, 1993 when diplomatic relations were sealed in Jerusalem with the signing of the Fundamental Agreement between the State of Vatican City and the State of Israel.
Clear signs of John Paul II’s intentions were already evident in his April 20, 1984 Apostolic Letter “Redemptionis Anno” when he used the term “State of Israel” for the very first time in an official Vatican document (“For the Jewish People who live in the State of Israel and who preserve in this land such precious witness of their story and faith, we must invoke a desired security and just tranquility which is the prerogative of every nation and condition of life and progress for every society.”)
Ambassador Nathan Ben-Horin - a retired Israeli diplomat who served three times as Israel’s unofficial emissary to the Vatican in the Rome Embassy between 1961 and 1985 is presently in Rome for the launch of his recent book, "Nuovi Orizzonti tra ebrei e cristiani". In this interview, he explains the change in world circumstances that first impeded and then made possible the historic breakthrough between the Vatican and Israel. ... [Read the rest].
Saturday, April 2, 2011
We know a lot more today about what happened in the Gaza war of 2008-09 than we did when I chaired the fact-finding mission appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council that produced what has come to be known as the Goldstone Report. If I had known then what I know now, the Goldstone Report would have been a different document.(And no, despite the date, it's not an April Fool's joke). Jeffrey Goldberg:
The allegations of intentionality by Israel were based on the deaths of and injuries to civilians in situations where our fact-finding mission had no evidence on which to draw any other reasonable conclusion. While the investigations published by the Israeli military and recognized in the U.N. committee’s report have established the validity of some incidents that we investigated in cases involving individual soldiers, they also indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy.
We now have a situation in which the founder of Human Rights Watch has denounced his organization for spreading falsehoods about Israeli actions in the Gaza war, and in which the author of the United Nations report condemning Israel now condemns his own work. Who is going to go next?CAMERA (Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America) asks:
While that's a dramatic and notable admission, the question remains: Why didn't he know then what was known then?