world heritage status to Jesus' birthplace - despite US and Israel

So are we to take it that you have never heard of -

All Tripura Tiger Force
Aum Shinrikyo
Babbar Khalsa International
Balochistan Liberation Army
Communist Party of India
Partido Komunista ng Pilipinas
Continuity Irish Republican Army
Cumann na mBan
Euskadi Ta Askatasuna or ETA
Fianna Éireann
GRAPO
International Sikh Youth Federation
Irish National Liberation Army
Irish People's Liberation Organisation
IRA (Irish Republican Army)
Kach
Kahane Chai
Khalistan Commando Force
Kurdistan Freedom Falcons
Kurdistan Workers' Party or PKK
Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF)
National Democratic Front of Bodoland
National Liberation Army
National Liberation Front of Tripura
Nuclei Territoriali Antimperalisti
Orange Volunteers
Shamil Salmanovich Basayev
People's Liberation Army of Manipur
People's Revolutionary Party of Kangleipak (PREPAK)
REAL IRA
Red Brigades
Red Hand Commando
Red Hand Defenders
Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia - FARC
Revolutionary Nuclei
Revolutionary Organization 17 November
Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front
Epanastatikos Agonas — EA
Communist Party of Peru or Shining Path
Tamil Nadu Liberation Army (TNLA)
Ulster Defence Association (UDA)
Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF)
United Liberation Front of Assam
United National Liberation Front (UNLF)
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia

All officially designated as terrorist groups, and none of which are Islamic.
You might care to reconsider the emboldened statement.

 

Good for them.

 

Ok.

Yes, his explanation should indeed be considered. His 'side of the story' is irrelevant though, as the international community (or that one powerful Western state) has already shown itself to be more concerned about the loss of inanimate objects than the sufferings of hundreds of thousands.

Yes.

Responsible? Are you telling us the Taliban possesses the power to generate earthquakes? Interesting.

?

 

No you don't, you just try to make out that I was knitpicking by coming with a particular medical definition, well I wasn't. So your meaning of "touch" did not include violating the sanctity of the church by using it as a shield in contravention of the Geneve Conventions clearly demonstrating the hollowness of your claim.

The traditional protection offered by Christian churches is for unarmed people. armed people must first relinguish their weapons. Bringing arms into the church is deeply offensive and violates its sanctity. Where is your source for the Israeli forces shelling the church?

So clearly Palestinian gunmen believing Israeli forces have no problem bombing places of worship, did more than just touch, as in lay a finger on, the church.

 

"Considered" is not the same as "taken at face value", why are you distorting what I wrote? You are jumping on the Taleban bandwagon! The concern for inanimate objects is a concern for the sufferings of the population. There is no conflcit between giving humanitarian help and help with infrastructure, important objects of cultural heritage etc. The problem is often making sure the help doesn't wind up in the wrong pockets making matters worse.

So explain this considering the Taliban's terrorising of the civilian population:
The Taliban and their allies committed massacres against Afghan civilians, denied UN food supplies to 160,000 starving civilians and conducted a policy of scorched earth burning vast areas of fertile land and destroying tens of thousands of homes during their rule from 1996-2001. Hundreds of thousands of people were forced to flee to United Front-controlled territory, Pakistan and Iran.

source

Since their rule they have been mainly responsible for civilian deaths under the conflict.

The sufferings of the population were only marginally caused by earthquakes, as shown above nothing in comparison to what the Taliban achieved.

Bin Laden had access to substantial funds which he used on inanimate objects - embassy buildings in Africa, skyscrapers in US etc. rather than humanitarian assistance.

 

Nosferax - what is it you disliked about my listing of terrorist organisations? Don't hide behind the 'dislike' function - enlighten us all.

 

It was used by 200 Palestinians during the invasion by "Israeli" forces. The sanctity wasn't violated because the Church opened it's doors to them.

Did you not read the article I linked to? Google, Seige of the Church of Nativity.

Read the article.

 

Not a 'nuff Moozlams for my liking.

 

Wasn't jebus born in a cattle shed? Perhaps this is why the US objects...

 

That would explain it. America is infamous for not looking beyond its borders, preventing it from knowing that "The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem is one of the oldest continuously operating churches in the world." link

 

You have your answer in the body of the OT here it is in excerpt;

“The Israeli delegate said (Israel the mine reva) Jewish state supported awarding World Heritage status to the ancient church under a completely different procedure that carried no implications for the Middle East peace process.

"The decision taken now was totally political and does great damage in our opinion to the (UN) convention and its image," the delegate said.”

So the answer to your question was 'in black and white' obvious...ha ha...eh? . I have a better idea than the current debacle that the forces the politicalization of the holy site ie the church where Jesus was born. The worlds holiest site, the temple mount is covered with an Islamic atrocity called the dome of the rock. Dismantle the dome of there rock and assemble it in an arab state or nation. That would be a wonderful thing eh?

reva

 

Interesting. Muslims revere Jesus as a prophet, and yet you, who calls himself a Christian choose to call Islam's holy site an 'atrocity'. There is nothing remotely Christian in your opinions. Nothing. You are no more a Christian than I am from Mars.

 

I understand and give you leeway when you make comments that are misconceived or simply false. I also give you credit because you, unlike some of the usual suspects do not seem to be dishonest in making claims or rebutting replies to those you do not agree. This time your comments seems to indicate that you are not aware of why I a Zionist Christian made the seemingly malicious statement about the Dome. I made the statement because my christian bible clearly states the parameters of what is and what is not defilement of temple mount ie the dome.

Without going into one of my long posts where I validate every technical point I will tell you that the dome of the rock (the structure built on the temple mount) defiles the TM.To validate this simply visit the theology, near/middle east history section of your nearest university library or use your preferred search engine etc. While not common knowledge to non-Christians most Christians would say my comments are accurate. When the dome of the rock is either destroyed or the temple mount is reopened it must pass ritual muster. The site will according to Old testament law have to be cleansed by a ritual method. Until then the TM is considered defiled. That is why the western wall is so coveted, its a original piece of the Temple of Solomon that has not been 'defiled, or otherwise soiled by Muslims and others (its not just Muslims that can defile the holy site, in fact if I remember correctly only Jewish priests can enter after themselves have been ritually cleansed. However since the Mount has been 'covered' with the Dome of the Rock the ritual cleansing isn't possible. So, yes seeing that the original site was the temple of Solomon the most holy of christian sites the place where Jesus ascended to heaven, any defilement is an atrocity according to Mosaic law.

Note; Some interpretations claim the Dome of the rock is the the appearance of the Dome of the rock is the "abomination of Desolation mentioned in the bible in several areas, among those are ; Matthew 24:15, and Mark 13:14 etc.

reva

 

I am attempting to stop responding to insult but I will comment on the above. Since you could be from mars (nothing is impossible) you may be as Christian as I (etc) (as you stated your own words). So, I will tell you that it's my wish that God bless you and yours snakestretcher.

reva

 

They hate any reminder that they haven't yet been able to set up death camps.

 

Well, there were the 200 hostages being held.

 

200 Monks and palestinians were held hostage

The couple of dozen militants "used" the church

 

You need to explain why in your view a religious site with open doors cannot have its sanctity violated as it makes no sense at all.

Perhaps you weren't aware of it but your link is a pro Palestinian site with a declared propaganda aim and therefore not a reliable source.

Here is one report for your reading:

The overwhelming smell of urine was the first thing to hit visitors to Bethlehem's Church of the Nativity after the dramatic and bloody 39-day siege of the compound by the Israeli army.

Local Palestinians rushed to the building after the militants holed up there had gone and Israeli forces conducted a security sweep of the building.

The people found dirty dishes piled up on an altar and filthy blankets and the detritus of the siege strewn across the ancient stone floor.

But apart from the stench and these superficial blemishes, the basilica marking Jesus' traditional birthplace was found to be largely unscathed.


As well as the blankets, journalists saw mattresses, lemon peel, lighters, sunglasses, a tube of toothpaste, a bottle of aftershave, plastic bags, cigarette butts, a comb and large cooking pots in the central aisle.

A metal stove and gas canisters had been placed on one side for cooking.

The panes of several windows near the ceiling were broken, but there appeared to be no other damage.

The only serious damage was to a Franciscan study hall next to the church which had been gutted by a mystery fire - and a statue of the Virgin Mary in the courtyard hit by a bullet.

By contrast, the small birth grotto, supposed to mark the exact birthplace of Jesus, was in pristine condition.

Priests said some of the gunmen and foreign activists had initially slept there because it was the warmest spot, but had been persuaded to leave so that daily services could be held there.
One priest complained that foreigners who had slipped in during the siege had desecrated the church by smoking and drinking alcohol.

"This is the place where Jesus was born. I can't believe this is the house of God, just look at it," said Sandy Shahin, a Roman Catholic teenager who rushed into the church minutes after the end of the siege on Friday.

"It's not a church any more, it's a place filled with beds and trash," she said between sobs.

Father Nicholas, a Franciscan priest from Mexico, denied Israeli claims that the several dozen nuns and priests who had stayed in the compound during the siege were hostages.

"We were there by choice," he said, to protect the sanctity of the site.

Having initially expropriated precious items such as candelabras, icons and candlesticks, Father Nicholas said the valuables were later returned.
Israeli bomb experts swept the church at the request of some of the priests and said they found 40 explosive devices, several booby-trapped and hidden in corners and behind cupboards.

The standoff began on 2 April, as more than 200 Palestinians, including wanted militants, policemen and civilians, ran into the church fleeing advancing Israeli troops.

Several armed men and two civilians were shot dead by Israeli snipers over the next 39 days.

The church is no stranger to conflict. It was largely destroyed by the Samaritans during a revolt in 529.

source

 

all irrelevant drivel, as ooosual

BUTTTT

OH MY FRICKEN GOD.......................


that line therein makes you the single worst poster on this forum. He knows, what it is, he knows what will happen, and he knows, what i have said as the cause of ww3.


let it be known, the revA poster is what i will consider the nastiest opinion on the ME conflict here on the political forum!





.


.

 

If they're smart, they're opposing it because of the fact that Jesus is fictitious and the place of his alleged birth is not even a settled issued. Some idiot might as well try making staking out a "Garden of Eden" spot somewhere in Iran and declaring that a World Heritage Site, and maybe a spot on Mt. Ararat for Noah's overloaded Ark..

http://www.religioustolerance.org/xmaswwjb.htm/
Archeological evidence:

Perhaps the most important reason to suspect the accuracy of Matthew and Luke is that Bethlehem in Judea did not exist as a functioning town between 7 and 4 BCE when Jesus is believed to have been born. Archaeological studies of the town have turned up a great deal of ancient Iron Age material from 1200 to 550 BCE 7 and lots of material from the sixth century CE, but nothing from the 1st century BCE or the 1st century CE.

Aviram Oshri, a senior archaeologist with the Israel Antiquities Authority wrote in Archeology magazine:

" 'Menorah,' the vast database of the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA), describes Bethlehem as an 'ancient site' with Iron Age material and the fourth-century Church of the Nativity and associated Byzantine and medieval buildings. But there is a complete absence of information for antiquities from the Herodian period--that is, from the time around the birth of Jesus. 8

According to National Geographic:

"Many archaeologists and theological scholars believe Jesus was actually born in either Nazareth or Bethlehem of Galilee, a town just outside Nazareth, citing biblical references and archaeological evidence to support their conclusion. Throughout the Bible, Jesus is referred to as 'Jesus of Nazareth,' not 'Jesus of Bethlehem.' In fact, in John (7:41- 43) there is a passage questioning Jesus' legitimacy because he's from Galilee and not Judaea, as the Hebrew Scriptures say the Messiah must be. ..."

 

It is interesting how some American Christians would rather insult and condemn Semites with unconditional racist hatred, than to support global efforts of protecting Christian heritage.

 

I'm not distorting what you wrote; I'm simply stating that his explanation should indeed be considered. Now, whether it should be taken at 'face value' is irrelevant, for our approach in this case should solely be to determine whether it is true (or partially true) or not by using the necessary approaches.

It's quite the ride.

How is the above relevant to the case we are discussing?

Excellent.

Of course. Are you implying the Taliban's appeal for humanitarian aid was a ruse, and that in reality they hoped to keep the money for themselves? Perhaps the refusal for aid had nothing to do with such worries, but was really political (as it was in the case of Iraq). Also, one would have to question why a Japanese parliamentary delegation “offered humanitarian aid in exchange for moving the statues out of the country.” Were they not worried about such humanitarian aid getting in the wrong pockets? Or were they perhaps so concerned for the inanimate objects that they were willing to take such a risk? Whatever the answer may be, it is clear (at least in the preceding case) that the international community was more concerned for the safety of the inanimate objects than for the sufferings of the Afghan population.

There are numerous examples throughout history of those in power (or those trying to achieve it) engaging in brutal policies against their own countrymen (yes, that includes the US). Further, there are also numerous examples throughout history of followers of certain groups diverging from the stated policies of mentioned groups, and taking matters into their own hands (perhaps they’re not followers in the first place). Indeed, such are the happenings that occur in war. Also, it is important to look at all forces in a conflict, and not square the blame entirely on one certain group (local or foreign). Keeping all of this in mind, it would indeed be foolish to conclude that the Taliban did not have “the least qualms about the suffering of Afghan civilians.” It seems that you’ll need to provide a more persuading argument to convince us that the Taliban, in reality, cared not for the humanitarian assistance that could have been used to alleviate the various conditions of their population.

Are you telling us the Taliban possesses the power to form droughts?

Interesting.

 

Nope, there was not one hostage actually.

 

Thats amazing, you know its propoganda without even reading it? Fantastic

Well, yes. Trapped in the Church for 39 days, and get killed if you left the Church, 200 people need to go to the bathroom. It is very unfortunate that was the only way they could do so.

Okay.

How many people were shot at through windows by "Israeli" snipers?

Started by a grenade I believe.

Okay.

It was cleaned up and still a church today, still the birthplace of Jesus (pbuh)

See Dixon?

Just like those weapons on the flotilla?

Seems the traps did not work very good if they were all found and removed without injuring people.

Okay, and how does this disagree with the article I linked to?

 

Lies, you mean. Jesus is a solar hero, a myth - a character written of after the alleged facts, no more real than Hercules, and a close relative of the demi-guy.