Temple Mount Tempest

Jordan, whose state-directed news agencies have employed language of incitement against Israel over it permitting Jews to visit the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, visit - not pray - now has another antagonist over the holy site:

Amman is reportedly frustrated with Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman’s new agenda, namely his desire to strip the Hashemite Kingdom of its custodianship over the Temple Mount, according to the Haaretz daily.

On Friday, there was this in Jordan:

Hundreds of Jordanians took to the streets of downtown Amman on Friday in protest against the decision by US president Donald Trump to relocate the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. 

Waving Jordanian and Palestinian national flags and carrying banners, the protesters denounced the Trump’s decision and expressed their solidarity with Jerusalem...

“God willing, the Zionists will leave the city. Jerusalem will definitely be liberated.” 

Jordan is the recognized custodian of Jerusalem's Islamic holy sites and Christian ones too, as per self-pronouncement and the 1013 agreement signed with the Palestinian Authority. * And Saudi Arabia of the Two Mosques of Mecca and Medina.

While researching for this post, I discovered something of a "of a "Wow. Just wow!" quality.

An official Jordanian Royal lie:

"On 21 August 1969, a painful incident took place in Al Aqsa Mosque, when a Jewish extremist barged into the holy site and set it on fire."

He was Christian.

Rohan. Denis Michael Rohan.

Oh, and as for any "frustration" in Jordan-Saudi Arabia relations, besides rumors, I did find this:

Jordan has banned the import of frozen poultry from Saudi Arabia following the outbreak of a highly pathogenic avian influenza virus.  The precautionary measure seeks to protect the country’s poultry stock and also protect public health, the Ministry of Agriculture, which placed the ban, said.

The only other item that relates to the "frustration" perhaps is in Rami Khouri's piece.  He used this language therein:

Saudi threats and intimidation

a heavy-handed power play to force Palestine and Jordan to follow Saudi orders.

crude but brutal political message to Jordan's King Abdullah and Palestine's President Mahmoud Abbas on how to behave on the Jerusalem issue and regional alignments.

*
The Hashemite attention to Jerusalem was not limited to restoring Islamic holy sites. It also involved building colleges, religious schools and centres to safeguard heritage, including:

The Dawa and Religious Studies College in Jerusalem, established in 1978
The Islamic Sciences College in Jerusalem, established in 1975
The Islamic Sciences College in Qalqilya, established in 1978
Al Aqsa Secondary School for Islamic Jurisprudence, established in 1958
A school for Islamic jurisprudence in Jenin, established in 1975
The Islamic Jurisprudence School in Hebron, established in 1962
The Islamic Jurisprudence School in Nablus, established in 1962
The Islamic Archaeology Department in Jerusalem, established in 1977
The Islamic Heritage Revival Department in Jerusalem, established in 1978

^

Is the ODS Odd?

Caught this item by my friend Daoud Kuttab:

ODS Movement looks to popularize one-state solution for Palestine
The Popular Movement for One Democratic State in Historic Palestine (ODS) is stepping up efforts to increase the awareness and the popularity of its cause. ODS spokesman Radi Jarai told Arab News that his movement wants to make the concept “much more accessible and understandable to people.”Jarai, an active member of Palestine’s nationalist Fatah party who has spent years in Israeli prisons, said the movement is currently made up of academics and thinkers...ODS was founded in March 2013 and welcomes both Jews and Palestinians as members.
...Yoav Haifawi, an Israeli activist and publisher of the Free Haifa blog, told Arab News that he is a longtime supporter of the one-state concept.“The biggest obstacle we face is that Israel is a privileged country for Jews. Therefore, as a colonial state that gives privileges through discrimination, the decolonization of Palestine cannot happen as long as Israel is strong and Palestinians are weak.”

Uri Davis, a Jewish member of Fatah, told Arab News that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) is the representative of the Palestinian people...The one-state solution, Davis said, would mean a change “from the current state of affairs into a single Palestinian sovereignty (stretching) from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River under a liberal-democratic Palestinian Constitution; single Palestinian citizenship; and a single Palestinian currency, hopefully leading to a socialist democratic Federal Republic of Palestine.”

Few PLO factions have been supportive of ODS so far...

I am not sure that the state has to be socialist, I would oppose after Israel's experiment in socialism until 1977, but I suggest that the group consider:

a) including Jordan in the territory for after all, it was part of Palestine

b) trying out a federation or condominium arrangement forst for a while

and

c) try Israel as the one state.  That way, no Arabs need kill Arabs as with almost every other Arab state.

The foundation declaration is here.

^

About "Palestinians:

From the Naval Intelligence report previously mentioned:

Bedouins were the last group mentioned at the bottom.

Immigrants, eh?

Invaders, eh?

Maybe they were also "colonialist settlers"?

^

What Was That "Whole"

Pro-Arab advocates who seek to deny the Jews a state in the area that was the Palestine Mandate usually point to the White Paper of 1922, the Churchill White Paper.

And they note it draws

attention to the fact that the terms of the Declaration referred to [that is, the Balfour Declaration - YM] do not contemplate that Palestine as a whole should be converted into a Jewish National Home, but that such a Home should be founded `in Palestine.'

To comment:

Palestine included the territory both West and East of the Jordan River but as a result of British machinations, all the areas east of the Jordan River were to have the application of the articles of the League of Mandate Mandate postponed.  Not cancelled. Simply postponed.

Here:

In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions, and to make such provision for the administration of the territories as he may consider suitable to those conditions...

Therefore, to establish a Jewish state in all of Western Palestine is quite an appropriate interpretation to this document.

Moreover, let's not overlook another paragraph in this policy statement (a policy statement, not something internationally legal and which was unduly influenced by Arab terror pogroms in April 1920, May 1921 and November 1921) which reads

it is not the case, as has been represented by the Arab Delegation, that during the war His Majesty's Government gave an undertaking that an independent national government should be at once established in Palestine. This representation mainly rests upon a letter dated the 24th October, 1915, from Sir Henry McMahon, then His Majesty's High Commissioner in Egypt, to the Sharif of Mecca, now King Hussein of the Kingdom of the Hejaz. That letter is quoted as conveying the promise to the Sherif of Mecca to recognise and support the independence of the Arabs within the territories proposed by him. But this promise was given subject to a reservation made in the same letter, which excluded from its scope, among other territories, the portions of Syria lying to the west of the District of Damascus. This reservation has always been regarded by His Majesty's Government as covering the vilayet of Beirut and the independent Sanjak of Jerusalem. The whole of Palestine west of the Jordan was thus excluded from Sir. Henry McMahon's pledge.

^

Scary

Last week, a sign showing a guillotine was held aloft at the anti-"Netanyahu-is-Corrupt" demos:

Now we have Eran Volkowsly's caricature today in Haaretz, with left-wing humor:

A double-bladed battle axe.  

And, by the way, Persians and Mamelukes used them and they were termed tabarzin.

The text reads:

This will scare them

What scares me is either the obliviousness of Israel's leftists - and that includes most of the media which provided protective cover for that guillotine by pooh-poohing the whole incident (in democracies we change leader wither through the ballot or a judicial process) - to the seriousness of introducing bloody violence into the public discourse, something they always blame the right-wing for doing or, the possible encouragement Volkowsky lends to even worse characterizations.

Netanyahu was displayed with a noose last year.  That was "art".

Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked was drawn naked.  Art.

It keeps getting worse.  And the Left demands morality and ethics in public life.

And they are hypocritical as when President Rivlin was portrayed in a keffiyeh because that's as we all "know", is incitement to murder.

Sure, for Volkowsky and his editor, it's "funny".  Funny as only the Left defines humor.

That's scary.  Really.

^

When The British Navy Patrolled the Palestine Mandate

Going through this handbook, to which I was alerted by EOZ,

I found a short history of British naval operations in the Palestine Mandate during 1936-38:

All aboard.

^

Dear Jess

Dear Jess,

I read your letter to Lorde, published in The Jewish Chronicle.  

I would just want to make one comment. (I was published also in TheJC awhile ago.)

You write 

"Israel’s illegal settlements break the Geneva convention, which is true".

No, Jess, they do not.

Let me explain it to you briefly and concisely.

A.  The League of Nations Mandate of Palestine, which was to reconstitute the Jewish people's national homeland through the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine, guaranteed, Article 6, to "encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes."

In other words, the act of "settlement" in and of itself, is not illegal.

B.  And where was this settlement activity to take place?

If we look to Article 25, we read

In the territories lying between the Jordan and the eastern boundary of Palestine as ultimately determined, the Mandatory shall be entitled, with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations, to postpone or withhold application of such provisions of this mandate as he may consider inapplicable to the existing local conditions

So, as you probably know your geography, all the area west of the Jordan River is the territory in which settlement by Jews is permitted, nay, encouraged.

C.  Until the creation of the Palestine Mandate, Jess, no state called Palestine existed.  It was a region, an area.  The Ottoman Empire ruled it, having conquered it from Mamelukes who conquered it from Crusaders who had conquered it from Arabs (who first came to the area of Palestine in 638 CE) and who had conquered it from the Byzantine Empire.

And you surely know, Jess, that "Palestine" is the Latin name given by the Romans to Eretz-Yisrael, the Land of Israel, the Jewish homeland since around 1200 BCE or so, three-thousand years ago.  You see, Jess, when the League of Nations wrote "historic connection", this is all that they were referring to, all these foreign peoples preventing the Jews from reestablishing their national home in Eretz-Yisrael.

And the Arabs living in the area called themselves Southern Syrians and demanded at first that the British reunite "Palestine" with Syria.

D.  At the end of the Mandate period, during which the Arabs consistently rejected all forms of compromise, they all went to war against Israel.  Jews who had lived in the areas now known as the "West Bank" had been ethnically cleansed by the thousands from that area either by Mufti-led riots in 1920, 1921, 1929, 1936 and then during the war of aggression the Arabs launched following the November 29, 1947 Partition Plan mentioned above.

They lost.  And the territory that the United Nations intended to become the Arab State in Palestine was conquered and occupied, illegally, by Jordan which later annexed it, also illegally.

E.  In 1967, after years of continuous Arab terror, by at first the fedayeen in the 1950s and then the PLO/Fatah from 1964 when hundreds of Israelis were killed, the Arabs declared war against Israel. Jordan fired artillery shells into Israel and part of its army invaded Jerusalem.

Israel defended itself.  Legally.

So Israel became the belligerent occupier of Judea, Samaria and Gaza.  And it quite legally continues to administer those areas until a peace treaty is eventually signed, if the Arabs ever decide to negotiate in good faith.

In fact, the famous UN SC Resolution 242 demanding Israel's withdrawal from territories - and to who should those territories be "returned", as it were?  To Jordan which illegally occupied them?  242 doesn't even mention any "Palestinians".

F.  Now, according to the Geneva Convention you mention, III, can you point to a specific "crime" of "settling"?  No.  It doesn't exist.  All point to Para. 49 which reads:

Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive

No one has forced me or my neighbors to live here in Shiloh or other Jewish communities established since 1967.  In fact, some of us are now in places where their parents or relatives lived prior to the 1948 war.  No one transferred me here.  No one deported me to here.

We're here quite legally.

In fact, even the US State Department isn't sure exactly how illegal, supposedly, "settlements" are.

Jess, those using that paragraph have twisted its meaning and intent and applicability.

E.  And Jess, are we "illegally occupying" Jerusalem, the Jewish People's eternal capital?  That's ridiculous, correct?

Jess, write to Lorde again and update her what you learned.

Demography Demonology Dead?

Israel, we have lectured to for five decades, cannot maintain its rule over Judea and Samaria because there are too many Arabs.  It started in government deliberations in the months after the 1967 Six Days War and continued until today.

Or yesterday.

Here's the Haaretz report by Amira Hass:

Lebanon Census Finds Number of Palestinian Refugees Only a Third of Official UN Data

A census in Lebanon finds 175,000 Palestinian refugees living in the country, while the UN figure put their number at 500,000

Fox News via Associated Press:

Census shows there are 174,422 Palestinians in Lebanon

BEIRUT –  The first official census of Palestinian refugees in Lebanon has revealed that there are 174,422 Palestinians now living in Lebanon, a figure almost two thirds less than previously estimated.

The Jewish Press asks:

 How Did Lebanon Misplace a Quarter-Million ‘Palestinians’?

A based-in-England Arab outlet spins it this way:

Palestinians in Lebanon less than half previous estimate, census shows

Palestinian leaders believe revelation of fewer Palestinians in the country should encourage politicians to improve their conditions

And further informs that the

UNRWA welcomed the census and will be able to better plan its programmes with the “updated and accurate information...Now we will have scientific data in hand,” 

And details the method:

The census was conducted by the Lebanese Central Administration of Statistics and the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics under the umbrella of the Lebanese Palestinian Dialogue Committee, a group formed by the Lebanese government to study and propose policies related to the Palestinian population.

Hundreds of Palestinian and Lebanese youth went from house to house with tablet computers to conduct the count, and the data was then linked to the location of the dwellings using a geographic information system, Director-General of the Lebanese Central Administration of Statistics Maral Tutelian Guidanian said.

The point is that

The census contradicts earlier estimates of more than 450,000 Palestinian refugees in Lebanon.

According to the official Palestinian Authority's population data, there were  2,935,368 Arabs residing in the territory they call the 'West Bank' at the end of 2016.

If we apply the Lebanese Theorem Principle, there are probably under 2,000,000 Arabs in that area in actuality.

We know that the data show that in 2015 24.4% of the West Bank population are refugees while 68.5% of Gaza Strip population are refugees.

We also know the emigration figures are high as findings show that 23.6% of youth (15-29 years) in Palestine desire to migrate abroad.

We know the birth rate and fertility is low.  We know the growth rate is low. 

And now via Lebanon we know they cheat at statistics.

It would seem the Demography Threat is not as bad as it is portrayed.

_____________

Yoram Ettinger, who has been on this issue for years,  just wrote me that his data indicates but 1.85 million Arabs living in Judea and Samaria.

Yakov Faitelson is also exact in details on this matter and accuses the Pal. Authority of hiding data.

Ian Lustick who has jettisoned the Two-State Solution long ago ("Dead Plan Walking"), and again just recently, and who believes that the "paths to political decisions in Israel and the United States that could result in that outcome via negotiations are so implausible that the negotiations themselves end up protecting and deepening oppressive conditions", has argued that population data is being manipulated - by Zionists. Who is been manipulating really?

^

Reversing the Reconquista in Cordoba

I have blogged previously on the parallel between the Cordoba Cathedral where Islamist activists are attempting to use prayer attempts to reclaim a church that had been turned into a mosque and is not a church again to the Temple Mount where Muslims refuse the right of jews that they demand for themselves.

A recent update:

Spanish Cathedral Targeted for Reversing the ReconquistaThe Cathedral of Córdoba has become a battleground in the campaign to reduce the influence of the Church in Spain and beyond.

The Cathedral of Córdoba... the cathedral’s ownership is now also a target of protest from both the Spanish left and Muslim activists.
The dispute is part of a long-running campaign to seize the church on the basis that it should not belong to Catholics, but to the whole world...

...The region of southern Spain known as Andalusia, al-Andalus in the Arabic, was the political center of Moorish control of the peninsula.

Moorish culture reached its zenith under the Ummayad Dynasty of rulers who claimed the title of caliph with their capital at Córdoba...But the crown jewel of all al-Andalus was the Great Mosque, the symbol of Ummayad power and glory.

The mosque was commissioned in 784 by Abd ar-Rahman I and was subsequently expanded by his successors until it was able to welcome 40,000 people and was considered one of the largest and greatest architectural achievements in the entire Islamic world...The site of the mosque, however, had very ancient roots. According to archaeologists, after Visigoths captured Córdoba in 572, they established a church on the site that by the time of the Muslim invasion had the title of the Basilica of St. Vincent. It was initially allowed to continue as the last Christian church by agreement with the new Muslim overlords, but, soon, half of it was taken to provide additional prayer space for newly arriving Muslims from Damascus.

The rest of the basilica was eventually “purchased” from the Christians and destroyed in order to build the new Great Mosque...when Córdoba was captured by King Ferdinand, one of the first decisions he had to face was what to do with it.
The new ruler decided to transform the mosque into the city’s new cathedral...The minaret, meanwhile, was converted to a bell tower, with bells brought from Santiago de Compostela. In effect, Ferdinand preserved the mosque’s beauty for posterity.

As Dario Fernandez-Morera has convincingly demonstrated in his important study, The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise: Muslims, Christians and Jews Under Islamic Rule in Medieval Spain (2016), Andalusia was far from a paradise for Christians and Jews, as they suffered from political and social disabilities, had to pay the jizya (religious tax), and endured persecutions and oppression under sharia (Islamic law).

...In 2004 and 2006, Muslims in Spain and elsewhere, mostly recent converts to Islam, petitioned the Holy See to allow Muslim prayers in the cathedral. In 2007, the secretary general of the Arab League, Amr Moussa, used a summit in Córdoba on “Islamophobia” by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to demand publicly that Muslims be granted the right to pray there.

In April 2010, during Holy Week, two Muslims grew violent when asked to stop praying in the cathedral and seriously injured two security guards; and by that August, Islamic groups renewed their calls for the right to worship.

In 2013, an organization called the “Platform for the Mosque-Cathedral of Córdoba” secured more than 350,000 names for a petition demanding the seizure of the cathedral, a push heavily promoted by the Spanish socialist newspaper el País...The irony of this, of course, is that political leaders in Spain are actually proposing that Christian churches be seized once more, just as they were 1,200 years ago, and handed to Muslims.

Nina Shea, the director of the Center for Religious Freedom at the Hudson Institute, told the Register, “What is unique in this case is it is not an Islamist government doing this, but a left-leaning one — left-leaning officials who are anti-Catholic, and maybe anti-Muslim too, but they see this as a convenient way of suppressing religion; suppressing Catholicism in Spain.”

Should this alliance succeed, it would be an immense victory — and not just a symbolic one — for the Islamist cause at a time when Europe is already purging its own Christian history.

As Bishop Fernández notes, “They want to reverse the Reconquista.”

No status quo there.

^ 

Is the Two-States Solution 'Dead'?

The question being asked by Toufic Haddad in an article is Is the Two-States Solution 'Dead'? (h/t=MD)

And we will ignore the other question: was the Two-State Solution ever alive, as far as the Arabs were concerned?

Haddad phrases the problem so:

the logic embedded in the latest two-state obituary writing is dangerous, uninformed, and carries within it the seeds of future conflict, not binationalism or peace.

Why would people think it dead?

One aspect he notes is:

The number of settlers and the breadth of the settlement project since 1967 supposedly make it impossible for decolonization to occur. Somehow a magical threshold of irreversibility has been crossed,

 But he considers that

this position is baseless practically, morally, historically, and politically.

Why?  Because

the decolonization of French Algeria entailed the removal of 800,000 pied-noirs in the early 1960s. With roughly half a million Jewish settlers in the OPT, we are still far from such numbers. 

They went back to France, across the sea, to a different continent. We Jews residing in Judea and Samaria (and previously, Gaza) are in the regions of our historical national homeland.  The Arabs are in a territory that was the result of an imperialist conquest and which, until the 1920's and even later, they called Souther Syria and demanded that "Palestine" de dissolved.


Haddad continues his corruption of facts:

Was it practical to move half a million Jews to the OPT to begin with? The majority was implanted there on stolen land, using brute force...Israel is based on impracticability, but this has not stopped it from attempting to create a Jewish state, based on biblical notions of return and chosenness—notions that should be anathema to a secular Jew, let alone a Palestinian. 

We were not 'moved' but simply moved, even against government policies. No land was stolen (and if there were a few cases of improperly registered property, the courts set aright the situation). If any land is stolen it is the properties Jews owned prior to 1948 from which Jews were ethnically cleansed.

He has a demand:

Progressives therefore have an obligation to demand the full decolonization of the territory occupied since 1967. 

I, for one, would suggest a decolonization of Arab conquests and occupations.  If Jews need be removed from Judea and Samaria, forming an apartheid regime in a "Palestine", can then Arabs living in Israel be removed to "Palestine"?

I am shocked, shocked I tell you learn from Haddad that

Israel acts as a facilitator of the Zionist project, whose full objectives have not been met: securing, consolidating, and legitimizing a Jewish state throughout the whole of historic Palestine. 

Of course, I am of the Zionist Revisionist camp but the Zionist Organization accepted the 1922 removal of Transjordan from the Mandate, the 1937 Partition, the 1947 Partition, an Autonomy Plan, etc.  The Arabs are those whose full objectives is the total removal of any Jewish presence anywhere is a fictional "historic Palestine".

He ends with

Only a one-state reality—the product of social and political forces calling for equality and historical reconciliation—deserves to be considered. Unfortunately we are currently witnessing the lowest levels of such activity in the history of the conflict. 

There is a one-state reality: Israel.

^ 

Balfour Declaration Followed by the Talaat Pasha Declaration

History, not fake news:-

A few months after the issuance of the Balfour Declaration, the leader of the Zionist movement, Chaim Weizmann, who had played an important role in its issuance, led a Zionist commission to the Middle East to explore ways and means for implementing the declaration, including “the establishment of good relations with the Arabs and other non-Jewish communities in Palestine.”

In Cairo, he managed to persuade a number of prominent exiled Syrian and Palestinian nationalists “that Zionism has come to stay, that it is far more moderate in its aims than they had anticipated and that by meeting it in a conciliatory spirit they are likely to reap substantial benefits in the future.” Healso succeeded in allaying the fears of the Egyptian Sultan (later King) Fuad of Zionism’s alleged designs on Islam’s holy places, especially its supposed intention to destroy the Dome of the Rock and to reestablish the Jewish temple on its ruins.

Yet his most important achievement was the establishment of a personal relationship with Emir Faisal ibn Hussein of “Great Arab Revolt” fame...The two struck an immediate rapport in their first meeting (on 4 June 1918), with Faisal readily conceding “the necessity for cooperation between Jews and Arabs” and “the possibility of Jewish claims to territory in Palestine.” Yet it took several moremonths and a string of further meetings for the two to sign an agreement (on 3 January 1919) supporting the creation of a Jewish national home in Palestine in accordance with the Balfour Declaration and the adoption of all necessary measures “to encourage and stimulate immigration of Jews into Palestine on a large scale.”

In a letter to a prominent American Zionist a couple of months later, Faisal amplified this pledge: “We Arabs, especially the educated among us, look with the deepest sympathy on the Zionist movement … and we regard [the Zionist demands] as moderate and proper. We will do our best, in so far as we are  concerned, to help them through: we will wish the Jews a most hearty welcome home.”

Nor was Faisal the only regional leader to accept the Jewish right to national revival. 

On 12 August 1918, the Ottoman Grand Vizier Talaat Pasha issued an official communique expressing “sympathies for the establishment of a Jewish religious and national center in Palestine” and offering “to put this work under the high protection of the Ottoman Empire, and to promote it by all means which are compatible with the sovereign rights of the Ottoman Empire that do not affect the rights of the non-Jewish population.”

^

"Moderate" Jordan Keeping Matter Calm (Not)

Straight from the official news site of the Kingdom:

Extremist settlers storm Al-Aqsa Mosque 
Ramallah, Dec.17 (Petra) -- Groups of extremist settlers Sunday continued their provocative storming of the Al-Aqsa Mosque yards/ Haram Al Sharif, a Palestinian official source told Petra.

The Director General of the Islamic Awqaf and Al-Aqsa Affairs, Sheikh Azzam Al-Khatib, told Petra's reporter in Ramallah that extremist Jewish settlers continued their storming into the Muslims' holy shrine entering from the Bab al Magharebah Gate under heavy protection of Israeli forces and police.

Al-Khatib stressed that settlers provocatively toured the Al-Aqsa yards and listened to explanations on the alleged "Temple mount". Muslims worshippers placed in different parts of the mosque protesting against the settlers provocations and started chanting "Alah Akbar" God is the Greatest, he added.

"Settlers' provocations created a state of tension anger prevails inside the compounds of the Muslim's holy shrine, Al-Khatib explained.

Article 9 of the Jordan-Peace Treaty?

Why doesn't Israel's Foreign Ministry say something?

^ 

Jewish Snakes and the Temple Mount

The Al-Araby {The New Arab} web site goes anti-Semitic with Jews as snakes:

Also this (h/t):

It gets other anti-Semites going:

Snakes are jinns or non-believers.

And this:

Palestine’s blessing is linked to destruction of the center of global corruption [Jews of Israel], the snake’s head. When the snake’s head of [global] corruption is cut off, here in Palestine, and when the octopus’s [Jew’s] tentacles are cut off around the world, the real blessing will come with the destruction of the Jews, here in Palestine, and it is one of the splendid real blessings in Palestine.”
[Palestinian cleric, Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas), July 13, 2008]

and this.

UPDATE

Here from ADL.

The Temple Mount - A Muslim View

Excerpted and translated (via Google Translate) from Al-Bawaba, written by one Suffian Shawa:-

Israel will not demolish Al-Aqsa Mosque but will build the Temple in Jerusalem ..?     December 15, 2017 (also here and note the photomontaged picture with a Haredi Jew and also here)

Al Quds Al Sharif [Odd. Not Ah-Haram Al-Sharif?] is one of the holiest places in the world. It is a light that shines in the night and in the day. It is the heavenly melody, which is raised by the angels and the birds sing it until the people of the earth hear it. It increases their faith and increases their determination to hold on to it and not to give up any part of it. Upon one's arrival at the high gates of the holy city of Jerusalem, his sins are washed away and strengthened in the presence of the Lord, which is sacred to all the owners of the three heavenly religions.
The Jews occupied Palestine with the help of England as a national homeland for the Jews, aided by British colonialism, and in particular by the British Foreign Secretary, Sir Balfour, in 1907 (sic!), where he issued the ominous promise. Then the Jews emigrated to Palestine (!) and established the small colonies first and then established the State of Israel in 1948 and occupied part of Jerusalem and then completed their occupation of Jerusalem in 1967


...Of course, the recognition of Trump is contrary to international law and to Security Council resolutions. It is not an American city to be given to whoever it wants. It is a Palestinian Arab city built by the Canaanites in 5000 BC. There is no right for the Jews at all.


Trump's decision goes back to the religious dimension of the Christian and Evangelical Christians who believe that the establishment of Israel and the rebuilding of Solomon's temple represent the foundation for Christ's return. They agree with the Jews in this difference with the Jews believing in the Messiah on condition that he be among the children of Israel.


What is important in this article is that Israel, according to the beliefs of their rabbis, who brought it from the tributaries of history, believe in a superstitious belief that Solomon's Temple was built by King Solomon to be a temple for the Jews and a dwelling place for the Lord Yahweh, who believes in the Jews after he is tired of dwelling above the clouds. (as if the Al-Buraq winged creature was real) They also claim that the Holy Mosque was built on the ruins of the Temple of Solomon, which was built in Jerusalem or Jerusalem, and that they insist on rebuilding the third Temple. 


Under the auspices of the Holy Mosque, the Holy Mosque, the Holy Mosque in the Koran and honest conversations in the Hadith of the Prophet (peace be upon him) the Mosque of the Holy Mosque in Mecca, God ordered our master Adam built it and the second is the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem (!)...before any other building, whether Solomon's temple or other.

...The Qur'an states: "It is darker than those who forbid the mosques of Allah to mention His name and seek their destruction. . Al-Baqarah. This is a strict prohibition in preventing the demolition of mosques. Those who seek to destroy it are sinning against Allaah in this world and in the Hereafter it is a great punishment. This applies to Al-Aqsa Mosque in Al-Quds Al-Sharif especially since it is a holy mosque. Jerusalem.

...[Solomon] said: "In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious the Most Merciful. We spent the Book to the Children of Israel, to be scattered twice in the land, and to proclaim a great height. If the promise of the first came, we sent upon you." We have sent you the ball over them, and we have given you money and children, and we have made you more obnoxious. You have done well for yourselves, and if you have come to them, then the promise of the others comes to you, and to enter the mosque as they entered or once, And the interpretation of these verses as interpreted by Imam Al-Shaarawi Hama...

...Since we have chanted the ball to them, that is, God has returned the ball to the children of Israel and given them money. Now they are the owners of the sons and daughters of Russia and others. They are all in the army. We made you more obnoxious and alienation means begging the power of others. This is what Israel is doing with America. And Russia. If the promised promise is the time that the Lord has left open to the Muslims to return to the worshipers of God loyal to him religion then they will defeat the children of Israel and they will drag their faces in the dirt and then enter the Aqsa Mosque and entered the first time of the Amir of believers Omar bin Khattab .. And this is the word of God, and it shall not be revealed For him, Al-Aqsa Mosque will remain without demolition, God willing, because the Muslims will enter it as they entered it for the first time.

Anti-Semitism.

Historical mythology.

Radical political theology.

Anti-scientific.

You tell me how to make peace based on compromise with this outlook.

It's mainstream thinking.

Even 'moderate' Daoub Kuttab is published there.

^

Completely Out? They Were Never In Ever

Published:

President’s spokesman: We won’t agree to any changes on the 1967 borders of Jerusalem

RAMALLAH, December 16, 2017 (WAFA - Official PLO news agency) – The Palestinians will not accept any changes to the 1967 border of East Jerusalem, Nabil Abu Rudeineh, spokesman for President Mahmoud Abbas, said on Saturday.

Abu Rudeineh was reacting to statements attributed to a White House official saying that the United States considers what Muslim refer to as Al-Buraq Wall, while Jews call the Wailing or Western Wall, as part of Israel.

“This American position proves once again that the current US administration is completely out of the peace process,” said Abu Rudeineh.

I am going to suggest that the Palestinian Authority, whether or not it has reconciled with Hamas-Gaza, is completely out of everything.

If it wasn't for the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization] and its Fatah terror arm founded in 1964 (after the fedayeen failed and brought about the 1956 Sinai Campaign) trying to "liberate" Israel in the pre-1967 period, there would have been no war and Judea, Samaria and Gaza would not have been in Israel's hands as a result of that defensive war against Arab aggression.

They do not negotiate. They reject.

They do not properly rule their own populace.

They do not conform to the Oslo Accords.

They incite.

They fund terror.

Their educational system avoids all reference to peace and coexistence and compromise.

They maintain myths and historical untruths about their past, sites and events and promote anti-Jewish sentiment.

Out?

They were never in.  Ever.

^ 

Let's Rewrite That Poll's Results For Clarity

A new study and poll out, it is claimed, suggest that "Anti-Semitism Rare But Anti-Israel Talk Common On Elite Campuses".

The story reads

The study, conducted by Brandeis University’s Steinhardt Social Research Institute, surveyed Jewish and non-Jewish students at Brandeis, Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Michigan.

The strong majority of Jewish students at all four schools said that they had not been exposed to anti-Semitism on campus and that their schools were not a hostile environment for Jews. The number of students who felt their schools were hostile to Jews ranged from 2% at Harvard to 21% at Michigan.

At all four schools, over 95% of Jewish students felt safe on campus.

A majority of Jewish students — ranging from 63% at Penn to 75% at Michigan — said that they had heard hostile remarks towards Israel. But most students at the three private schools studied said that their universities did not have “a hostile environment toward Israel.” An exception was Michigan, which has been the frequent site of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaigns against Israel. There, 51% of students said that their school was hostile towards Israel.

A friend of mine rewrote it and it seems, in this new version, to be completely out-of-touch with reality. Could the Jewish version also be out of whack?

Racism Rare But Anti-African Talk Common on Elite Campuses, Study Finds

 

A new survey of Black students at some of America’s most elite universities has found that they rarely experience racism but that most have been exposed to anti-African hostility.

 

The study, conducted by Brandeis University’s Steinhardt Social Research Institute, surveyed Black and non-Black students at Brandeis, Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Michigan.

 

The strong majority of Black students at all four schools said that they had not been exposed to racism on campus and that their schools were not a hostile environment for Blacks. The number of students who felt their schools were hostile to Blacks ranged from 2% at Harvard to 21% at Michigan.

 

At all four schools, over 95% of Black students felt safe on campus.

 

A majority of Black students -- ranging from 63% at Penn to 75% at Michigan -- said that they had heard hostile remarks towards Africa. But most students at the three private schools studied said that their universities did not have "a hostile environment toward Africa." An exception was Michigan, which has been the frequent site of Boycott Africa! (BA!) campaigns against Africans. There, 51% of students said that their school was hostile towards Africa.

 

However, the study found that support for an boycott of African academic institutions and scholars, one of the main demands of BA! campaigns, had very limited student body support. Brandeis had the highest support for that measure of the four schools, and that was only at 12%. "These results suggest that campus BA! resolutions may not represent the view of a majority of students on campus, but rather the agenda of a vocal minority," the authors wrote.

 

Most Black students do not find Black or African issues to be the most pressing concern on campus, with topics like sexual assault and mental health taking higher priority.

^