“Sorry; can someone provide a quote from the offending article? I don’t see where the headline is substantiated.”
UNESCO says that there is no Jewish connection to Jerusalem or the Temple Mount.
King David ruled in Jerusalem, and his son, Solomon, built the First Temple.
Jesus, according to the Christian Bible, spent a lot of time in Jerusalem, and even entered the Temple (2nd Temple, by that time in history). Oh, yeah, and Jesus was Jewish.
So, connecting these rather large, close dots to each other, by denying that there is any Jewish connection to the city of Jerusalem or to the Temple Mount, UNESCO has ***effectively*** said (i.e. implied) that King David and Jesus never existed.
OTOH, maybe I’m misreading it, and UNESCO can tell us that they DID exist, but that they really lived and were present in some other place - like, for example, in the Lower East Side of Manhattan, or Casablanca, or Beijing, or maybe on the dark side of the Moon.
Yes, I am being sarcastic as Hell - because you’re plainly being dense as Hell, Romulus, so dense as to be purposeful - I simply cannot and will not believe that you are so ill-informed about history. If you are so ill-informed, I apologize - and I’ll recommend some books for you.
Well, that's not the same thing, is it? Suppressing the truth is bad, but it's a different kind of bad from denial of specific truths. The headline's sensational inference is not borne out by the story that follows. Journalistic ethics seems to be vanishing on all sides these days. One has to read with extreme caution.