Posted on 12/31/2004 6:57:12 AM PST by B Knotts
Apparently people who have commented have not read the original post or are ignoring it. Like that's a surprise.
Yes, that is the case in Latin. I'm not sure if that has carried over into Italian.
Thank the good Lord for the correction. This is such a better story than yesterday's version.
About 40 posts.
No apologies / retractions yet.
A whole lot of spinning going on though. Some of it is actually amusing. Dan Rather would be proud of them.
There is alot of "Bad" in the Catholic Church to believe in.
And there are alot of Hyper-sensitive catholics. Like You.
Maybe the boys and girls at CWN were the ones who did the translation. Just ran it through Babblefish.
Some people are going to believe what they want to believe. A year from today we are still going to hear about how the Pope attacked Israel over the tsunami aid.
Yes, I'm afraid you're quite right.
The thing is: I ran it through Babelfish, after suspecting something rotten in the State of Denmark, and received at least the basic meaning of the story (if a bit discombobulated). So, they did even worse than Babelfish.
Glad to see that this was wrong. Unfortunately I was one of the ones that believed the mistranslation, guess I should acknowledge that at least.
Thank you for posting this correction. How did it become mistranslated anyway?
And there are alot of Hyper-sensitive catholics. Like You.<<<<<<<<<<<<
And there is a lot of anti-Catholicism among the posters here.
I've run some Pravda (not this) through Babblefish. It's actually quite funny. The 'journalists' seem only to want the biggest scoop without regard for accuracy. Had accuracy been an issue maybe someone else would have caught this soon. But no, they just repeated it, knowing that many would believe it and ignore a retraction.
My question is: why did all these other sources just run with what CWN had written, and not one bothered to look at the original source and translate for themselves? I think it says a lot about how the media operate, even after Rathergate.
FYI PING
Under the Just War doctrine, which was first set forth by St. Augustine, several criteria must be met before a war may be deemed just, one of which is that the war is undertaken as a last resort. There is, to say the least, a tension between the Just War doctrine and the concept of preemptive war.
I happen to think the Pope was right about Iraq. We went to war to destroy weapons that did not exist and we are now trying to impose democracy in an area of the world where, if the people were allowed to vote for whomever they wished, we would almost certainly end up with an Islamic state.
Tens of thousands of Iraqi Christians have fled since we deposed Saddam: they are being targeted by Islamic extremists and we are unable, or unwilling, to protect them. Ironically, Saddam Hussein was able to protect them from Islamic extremists.
Much of Iraq is in a state of anarchy, and the human cost, both in terms of dead and maimed Americans and dead and maimed Iraqi civilians, has been appalling. And there is no end in sight.
Long live the Pope and the Holy See.
We know who our enemies are and will never forget.
And who are these enemies you speak of?
I await your answer, though I am sure you will dodge it.
What is that supposed to mean? I hope it isn't supposed to mean what it seems to mean.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.