The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Sheikh Muhammad Hussein has condemned a decision by Israeli authorities to demolish the Al-Omari mosque in the village of Umm Tuba near Jerusalem under the pretext that the [700 year old] building had been built without a license.
In case this Ma'an News article bases on facts:
Would anybody, please, show me building application and licence for the Second temple?!
No, not what is written in the Book of Ezra; a notarized building application, an authenticated design and full planning permission and a certified and legalized building licence.
Otherwise, I think it were logic to immediately raze the Western respectively the Wailing Wall.
The Peace of the Night, and good luck!
*
Oh well, just in case any persons thinking they were peace-loving Muslims, intend to enthusiastically lavish me with virtual back-slapping and oriental flowery hymns of praise - think twice!
Next you might be asked for certain documents according the Dome of Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
Salam!
The Israeli politicians ought to be ashamed!
ReplyDeleteSelam Sean,
ReplyDeleteSelam ardent,
I have one question. Is there any corner of the world where sanity reigns, or is the whole world crazy?
all politicians ought to be ashamed!
ReplyDeleteorganised stupidy is rightly put sean.
ownership of land is an interesting minefield (no pun intended) another way to bully and control people.
Ardent,
ReplyDeletethe older I grow the closer I get to the conviction that the phenomenon - almost I had written: 'the virtue' - 'shame' does vanish as soon as people are getting in power.
And that is, indeed, a shame!
Tanyol,
putting it bluntly, my answer to the first part of your question would not be 'Yes'. :)
Chris,
1. generalizing is dangerous and often plainly wrong. Still, I do agree.
2. Glad that you are appreciating this. I think one day I shall try to explain why I chose this combination. Could become a pretty long essay. :)
3. I think I know what you mean. Personally I am not against property. If only I imagine a neighbour dropping in taking one of my (!) books, and off he goes. :)
The same goes for one's own house and garden, and - for state territories. The problem starts, when those in power, f.e. start talking that another country's resources are of vital (!) interest.
These vital interests often bring death.
Yes, I swas wondering how legal it is to walk into someone's town, knock down their chapel and build your own in its place. Seems a strange sort of legitimacy.
ReplyDeleteConstantinople spring to mind.
Hmm by that logic Stonehenge, Hadrian's Wall, even Buck Palace are doomed!
ReplyDeleteDoes that mean also that Corkadoragha will have to be razed too?
GFM, ownership of land and building fences is a White man phenomena.
ReplyDeleteThe Australian Aborigines and the American Indians did not build fences as they believed that they belonged to the land rather than the land belonging to them.
Very simple but society has become far too greedy and complex.
James,
ReplyDeleteI did also think of the Hagia Sophia, at first. But then I thought, it were more appropriate to challenge the Waining Wall's 'right to exist'. :)
Jams,
Not only Stonehenge, I fear the same goes for Seanhenge (photo in the next post to come).
As for Corkadoragha, thanks for mentioning it. Haven't read 'The Poor Mouth' for years. This weekend I will do. :)
Ardent,
I do like this Lichtenberg-aphorism: 'The first American who'd discover Columbus, made a horrible discovery.' Same goes with the first Aborigine discovering the first white man.
But would life be better if Inkas or Aztecs would rule today's world?
Just a question. :)
The nice thing about fences is, one does not run the risk of that one's ground becomes the favourite loo of one's dear neigbours dogs. :)
As for your last statement: d'accord.
James, Hagia Sophia was taken over by the Ottomans, but they did not demolish the building.
ReplyDeleteThe Ottomans just added an extension ... several minarets.
Also the man preaching inside ... he changed his Party Hat.
:)