Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Summer Wine]

Quote:

Palestinian officials, calling the synagogues symbols of 38 years of Israeli occupation, said Israel should have destroyed them before withdrawing.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/624320.html

Should Israel have destroyed the Mosque on the Temple Mount when they invaded in 1966 because they were reclaiming Jewish land (previously controlled by non jews) that had been held by others since 70 AD?

There is depth to this issue that I don't even want to touch, though I will bring up the discrepency.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050913/wl_mideast_afp/mideastgazaisraelreligion

[Nowhere Man]

Not according to Highlander.

[Summer Wine]

Hey the Highlander was only from 1600 ad approx.

[bigverne]

Israeli police have warned people not to attack mosques and will, in fact, protect them. Palestinian police stand by and watch as people desecrate synagogues. A telling difference.

[rapier]

muslims should have destroyed the dome of the rock before withdrawing from Israel.

[On the other hand]

[Summer Wine]

Quote:

I believe that after the Japanese left Korea in 1945, the Koreans tore down almost all of the Shinto temples and shrines that had been put up during the colonial era. Does anyone have a problem with this? I certainly don't

Any muslims on this web want to say how they would feel if Israel tore down the Aqsa ( ) Mosque?

http://www.palestine-info.co.uk/am/publish/article_13268.shtml

[Gord]

[On the other hand]

[Summer Wine]

Old topic, but possibly relevant.

http://www.israelinsider.com/channels/politics/articles/pol_0097.htm

[Bulsajo]

I think there is some perspective missing from this thread.

When the Israelis planned to withdraw from Gaza they knew the synagogues were going to be abandoned along with the communities and neighbourhoods they served.
They only question was whether to demolish them themselves or let the Palestians demolish them.
They chose the option which most suited them politically and strategically.
And so by the same token most of the settlers who were removed chose a scorched earth option with regard to their houses and communities to deny the Palestinians any benefits of their withdrawal.

These are community Synagogues here- there is no equivalent to the Al aqsa mosque, or the Sistine chapel, or Canterbury Cathedral, or the Hagia Sophia.
It's an apples and oranges comparison.

Would anybody be freaking out if a construction company bulldozed a decrepit abandoned church in Detroit in order to make way for an urban renewal project?

[Summer Wine]

Quote:

These are community Synagogues here- there is no equivalent to the Al aqsa mosque, or the Sistine chapel for that matter. It's an apples and oranges comparison.

I think you are missing the point. They don't have an equivilent. They only thing the have is the Synagogues. Do you want to give them back the Temple Mount? It was probably as much a test to see if Palestinians would treat them fairly. In the the 1966 Invasion, how many mosques did they destroy? Are the Palestinians willing to accept Jewish holy places, some of them in the West Bank go back to the 2000 bc, will Christians accept desecration of their holy places in the west Bank? It seems to be a test.

[Bulsajo]

Then blame Sharon and the IDF, because for all practical purposes they've given the Palestinians the green light to have the Synagogues removed.

Gee, I wonder what Netenyahu's position on this will be?
And whether he'll be capitalizing on it politically?

It's not simply a clear-cut religious issue.
But of course these things hardly ever are.

[On the other hand]

[Summer Wine]

Sigh