I completely agree with you, McGrath, that the presence of armed (wo)men among many unarmed in a church is no reason to target it. As long as the weapons are not used.

I don't understand why there is no more pressure from the church officials to hand over the weapons, for the weapons in the hands of a minority can lead to a dangerous situations for the unarmed majority among the refugees:

There could be some temptation to fire from the sanctuary of the church to Israeli soldiers and then to sneak back. Even in the case it goes wrong and the army follows you inside of the church you have a big propaganda victory. That women and children might get killed in that event just makes the propaganda victory sweeter for you.

Both parts have shown such little concern for civilian lifes that in the case a church is stormed in the next days I wouldn't know whom to believe. The Israelis would claim they had been attacked from the church even if it was a lie and the Palestinians would say that there has been no such attack even if it would be true.

Viewed from the propaganda angle, the Palestinians have to gain more than the Israelis from such an attack. So my first guess bet would be on them to lie. However, Sharon has shown so much contempt of world opinion in the last weeks and months that viewed from that angle I'd be less sure in the placement of the bet.

Wolfgang