Thomas,

I have independently confirmed with an Aramaic scholar (you might even say the Aramaic scholar) that the word "betray" does not appear in the Caveziel quote, or in the Times transcription of the quote. The Washington Times is dead wrong and its claim to have the "exclusive" translation is funny, don't you think?

I just completed a post on the whole Aramaic mess here:

http://politicalvideos.blogspot....ts- aramaic.html
cadejo4 | Homepage | 10.26.06 - 3:03 pm | #

They're correct; the verb "betray" isn't there. Actually, the whole thing is an incomplete sentence.
Richard | Homepage | 10.26.06 - 4:38 pm | #

I thought it was a pretty hoaky stunt. Caviezel seems to be getting weird.
Peadar | 10.27.06 - 12:46 am | #