Good God! The Pope has apologised saying he "is very sorry that some passages of his speech may have sounded offensive to the sensibilities of Muslim believers". Now I'm not stupid, I can read between the lines and can see that's a non-apology apology really. However, the very fact that the Vatican decided to go into PR mode and try and put out a message of "apology" has played right into the hands of the lunatic muslim fringe.
Take a look on the BBC and you'll see that Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt have seen the non-apology apology for what it truly is, a sign of weakness. They're now saying it doesn't go far enough and they want a genuine apology from the Pope in person.
The Vatican have sadly brought this upon themselves. They should've ignored the "protests" rather than appeasing them. I'm no papist, but the small amount of respect I did have for the Pope as just evaporated with his reactionary attitude politically-motivated Islamist opinion.
7 comments:
You could interpret the "apology" as a statement saying "I'm sorry you're too stupid/ignorant to understand my actual point".
“Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
“Show me just what Jews brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
“Show me just what Judasiam brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
“Show me just what Hinduism brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
“Show me just what Christianity brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
“Show me just what Sikhism brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
Which one is offending to whom and are all those statements legitimate examples of freedom of expression?
Benedict: That was my point about it being a non-apology apology.
Anonymong: I don't care. The Pope had nothing to apologise for.
Dizzy: You can see your hyprocrisy. Now if the Pope said something against the Jewish faith you would be up in arms, calling him anti-semitic and the other ammunition that you have, death squads, economical sanctions, bulldozing churches (oh believe me you've done it to Mosque's).
Why the double standards, are Muslims second class just like the Jews were in Nazi time?
No I wouldn't be up in arms actually. The Pope can say what he likes. Everyone can say what they like. I happen to believe in freedom of speech I'm also intelligent enough to read an entire lecture rather than cherry pick the bit I don't like, and then misrepresent it in a vacuous way. It certainly didn't deserve violent protests and firebombing on the street (and oh how ironic that was!).
Please don't go though, I need a mad little troll on the blog. Can we give you a name or something?
Pope annoys Jews http://www.guardian.co.uk/pope/story/0,,1874914,00.html
Jews respond
http://www.guardian.co.uk/pope/story/0,,1874891,00.html
Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain says "However, it is especially important that anyone who does protest does so verbally, not physically, otherwise they put themselves even more at fault."
The Pope has raised an important point about the reasonableness of religions, and that violence is not a reasonable way to promote a religion. He could have balanced the remarks with a statement that the vast majority of Moslems are not violent, and that they have many things in common with Christians. It is right to fight evil, but also right to make sure there is no collateral damage to goodness.
Post a Comment