[Bleeding Red]

Originally posted by Agamemnon+Nov 8 2004, 05:59 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Agamemnon @ Nov 8 2004, 05:59 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Bleeding Red@Nov 8 2004, 01:22 PM
The issue is not about favouring one religion over another. It is about buring a murderous terrorist at the foot of the Holiest Jewish site. Should Ariel Sharon be buried Mecca? Medina? (it has been noted that Jews have lived there hundreds of years in the past) Sharon will not be buried at the Temple Mount either. I do not recall any Israeli PM being buried there.

There are peaceful alternatives - Abu Dis is a suburb of Jerusalem, the PA could still say he is buried in Jerusalem. The Martyr's Cemetary in Gaza, reserved for the PA's hounored heros (all of whom took at leat one Jewish life with them) or his family cemetary in Gaza.

Is there a monument to the highjackers of the 9/11 planes at the foot of ground zero? If their bodies were ever found should they be buried there?

All of the examples of innappropriate burials are useless, as none are parallels of the current situation. The terrorists don't value ground-zero as a holy-site. Sharon doesn't value Mecca or Medina as a holy-site. Jerusalem is holy to both. Why would it be ok to bury Israelis there, who by all Palestinian accounts are terrorists themselves, but not Palestinians? You still haven't explained that to me, beyond the fact that apparently Israeli feelings on the issue dominate any other religion/race simply because its holy to them (ignoring any other religious needs).

Is a peaceful resolution one that will cause more violence or a compromise?

Gee. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that a peaceful resolution will result in a compromise... not more violence. That's my opinion at least.[/b][/quote]
I stated that Sharon will not be buried at the Temple Mount either. I am pretty sure that the Jerusalem Wakf and head Imam along with the rest of the Arab world would throw a fit at the suggestion. And again, I do not recall any Israeli PM being buried there. ALso, I did mention that Faisel Husseini, a prominante Palestinian from Jerusalem who was involved in both the first Intifada and peace negotiations is buried on the Temple Mount.

There are Palestinians/Muslims buried there. But why wouldn't a devout Muslim want to be buried in Mecca? or Medina?

This is about politics. You can say my analogies are not good, but how hard is it to make the leap - one side's freedom fighter wants to have his hounored grave in an area disputed by two sides. The other side sees that as an affront and unacceptable. Arafat also saw himself as the keeper of the Church of the Sepulchure (sp?) would the church allow him to be buried in that yard?

You're pretty far removed from the conflict (unless you live there) yourself to be passing personal moral judgement on people you've only seen in the news.

Now you are making the judgement call. Does that mean that the other posters who do not live in the US shouldn't make judgement calls on GWB? Or because I have not sat at the same table as Arafat, I do not know what I am talking about?
Conversations with Friends & Family living there, academics, journalists, speakers on both sides, Palestinian visitors that speak about their experiances visiting their families in the disputed territories and terror attack survivors (I am a terror attack survivor - Jul. '90) - as well as news sources and time spent in Israel, lead me to feel that I can say that Arafat should not under any curcumstances be buried at the Tmple Mount with conviction.