Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Coyote, et al,
Now I'm not sure how much, if any, of this is true. But I ASK THE QUESTION: Do historically, radicalized Arabs, whether Taliban, DAESH, HAMAS, Arab League Forces, have a history of intentionally destroying ancient religious sites?
I don't know about Arab League Forces, but I don't tend to lump them in with extremists such as Daesh and the Taliban. I don't know if Hamas should be in that category either since their focus is less religious than territorial.
Extremist sects, regardless of religion, seem to share a propensity to destroy the artifacts of other religions deemed false. Even in ancient times - and, I'm scouring my limited memory of this - didn't the God of the Old Testemant order his followers to destroy the idols and cities of false religions? Christianity certainly destroyed ancient religious sites as well when they conquered new territories. That is so far back in history now no one cares or notices and at the time there was little desire to protect such sites.
I also think that destruction of holy sites is, like rape, a weapon of war designed to demoralize the opposition or wipe out their culture.
We know that each side, from time to time, screws up and takes actions that, in hindsight, they would rather not have done. I know that in April, 2014, the Masque in the village of Kherbt al-Taweel near Nablus was intentionally destroyed. But there is there a long standing history or pattern of destruction.
I'm just asking if there is anything to these patterns of radicalise Muslims actually doing this over a long period of time?
Most Respectfully,
R
I don't think that the pattern of radical Islam is any different than that of any other extremist religious group. It's just that it's occuring in recent times so we're more aware of it. I think what people forget in this is that it was Islam that protected many of those sites for hundreds or a thousand or more years.
Then why is the hamas charter written along extremist Islamic religion lines, showing that you have either not done your research or you are spouting islamonazi propaganda.
The evidence shows that hamas has systematically destroyed all traces of non Islamic religions from gaza, and that fatah have done the same in the west bank just not as openly
Christianity preferred to combine pagan practises and places into their religion so they did not alienate the natives. Sometimes this backfired as in the case of missionaries who where crucified by the natives to see if they would be resurrected. I would not say 400 or even 300 years ago is a long time, just look at what the Christians destroyed in the US and Australia because it was pagan religious artefacts. Even today Indian burial grounds are destroyed in the name of progress
When they immigrated back, after all that time, they brought back foreign cultures. How are they any more "First Nation" than the people who stayed behind, and absorbed foreign cultures?
Because they retained their distinct and recognizable Jewish culture, regardless of what other cultural attributes they may have gained they never LOST their originating, First Nations, Jewish culture. As opposed to the "Palestinian" people who were entirely swallowed up by the invading culture.
I think this is the spot where we disagreed before. I see people, you see cultures. I also think there is a tendency, when you label people indiginous (or as you are trying to make the claim for "first nations") - to give them special rights denied to other peoples in the area no matter how long they have been there and when those rights are expanded to include immigrants who's ancestors left that land three thousand years ago it becomes very questionable.
The only things we can know for sure is this:
Jerusalem is a very important Holy Place for three closely related major world religions. Can we agree on that?
No one usurped anything - cultures and religions (as part of the culture) build upon the ruins of older existing ones. Claiming "usurption" is claiming theft and undermines the authenticity of almost every culture and religion existing today. We will probably not agree on that one.
- Jerusalem has in the recent past been governed by the Ottomans, Jordanians, and a consortium of Israel and Jordan.
- Under the Ottomans Jews were forbidden from access to the Temple Mount. Under Jordan, those rules were somewhat relaxed, but access was still very limited. Under joint adminstratorship, Jews have more access, but are not allowed to actually pray.
- You propose Israeli/Jewish administratorship only, as the best and most just solution because the Jewish sites are the oldest and Israel will guarantee rights of access and preservation.
- I propose a continued joint management of some sort over religious sites because of the importance of the site to 3 world religions no ONE should be soley in control, the importance of preserving the archeological integrity of the site (which I would trust Israel over Muslims to do) and serious trust issues between Muslims and Israeli's that will take much time and cultural change to resolve.
- When it comes to Jerusalem - I also propose a joint management because it of it's importance to multiple peoples but this may become moot as Israel has been steadily driving out the Arab presence through a series of initiatives and laws. Joint management might also be able to address the Palestinian violence directed at Palestinians that sell property, innocent civilians as well as those Israeli's who try to fraudulently buy buy Palestinian property by misrepresenting themselves. If a city is jointly managed - then there is no longer anything to be gained in altering demographics or committing terrorism. Maybe.
As I keep asking and not getting an answer to the question "WHAT ARE THE TIES TO JERUSALEM FOR THE CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS THAT ARE NOT STOLEN FROM THE JEWS.
As far as I can see the most holy places for Christians are Bethlemem and the hill outside of Jerusalems city walls. For the muslims it is the Jewish cities of Mecca and Medina.
So no we cant agree on your fantasy as it is not holy to any religion but Judaism.
I also think there is a tendency, when you label people indiginous (or as you are trying to make the claim for "first nations") - to give them special rights denied to other peoples in the area
Well, yes. But ask yourself what "special rights" I am asking for the Jewish people. I'm not asking for exclusive or special rights of access. The only special right I'm asking for is the right of preservation of a First Nations culture -- a sacred trust that the original Jewish historical, culture and religious significance is preserved and recognized.
Doesn't seem like asking for a lot. Yet neither the international community nor the Arab Muslim community seems to be able (willing) to do so.
You are asking for sole control, and primary recognition in all ways of the Jewish right to those sites. It is a sacred trust to more than the Jews.
Sole Israeli control because the international community and the Muslim community are demonstrably unable to preserve Jewish culture and Jewish rights.
I disagree, on several fronts.
First the Muslim community DID preserve those sites prior to the establishment of Israel, did they not?
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
Then you are either reading a different set of history books to the rest of the members or you are spouting islamonazi propaganda. Just look at the Church built there by the Christians that was demolished and replaced by a carbuncle to islam. Or the Jewish grave markers used to line a sewer, the remains dug up and thrown on a refuse heap. How is that preserving the site ?
So there are no attacks on Jews from muslims on or around the Temple Mount. No rocks dropped on the heads of Jews praying at the western wall, no stone's petrol bombs, fireworks thrown at Jews entering the Temple mount to start a riot .
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
Currently, there is a lot of tension surrounding holy sites in Jerusalem - and it is driven by a mixture of emotions, conspiracy theory and bits of truth. There is a small fanatical group of Jewish extremists who believe they must tear down the Al Aqsa Mosque and build the Third Temple. This has driven an unfortunately widely believed conspiracy theory that Israel intends to destroy it and feeds every alarmist reaction to any attempted change on Israel's part even clearly reasonable ones like an umbrella at an entrance. How do you address that? I have no idea, but it's another reason why I believe joint control is so critical.
Christianity took the Pagan gods and heros and turned them into saints and demons. Churches were built on top of holy Pagan sites and the original histories erased. In terms of the American First Nations, their sacred rites, religions and language were beaten out of them in boarding schools. Often times, Christianity systematically destroyed foreign faiths where it could, and incorporated them where it could not.
Humanity, Phoenall, et al,
Clearly, there was an intention adopted by the UN General Assembly that the City of Jerusalem, and the greater Municipal Area, should be under a special international regime --- administered by the United Nations; Trusteeship Council designated the Administering Authority. This was the UN intention all the way through 1949 and General Assembly Resolution 303 (IV).
Just as clearly, this did not happen. While we often think of the unauthorized Arab League Military intervention to defy the resolution of the General Assembly and engage in a deliberate effort to alter by force the implementation of General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) - The Partition Plan, it did accomplish a number of its secondary objectives. One of the political-military (POL-MIL) objectives was for the Jordanian Army (the Arab Legion, trained and led by British officers) took the Jewish quarter of Old Jerusalem and seized control of the West Bank area on the western side of the Jordan River.
(COMMENT)Furthermore, has you bothered to keep up with this post you would see that I called for a 'free' Jerusalem for all!
The "Free Jerusalem Movement" was actually a mantra and organization substructure behind the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). This cost the Hashemite King his life when he was assassinated by Arab militants (the proto-PLO gunmen) entering the Al-Aqsa Mosque in the Old City of Jerusalem. A faction of Fedayeen Arab Militants opposed to Jordanian rule was becoming popular emerging lands rath in 360º (Fortification).
Prior to the general outbreak of hostilities in 1947 and War in 1948 The Old City of Jerusalem was divided into four separate quarters:
From 1949 and until 27 June 1967, Jerusalem was divided in two distinct sectors:
• Jewish,
• Christian,
• Arab and
• Armenian.
• West Jerusalem was under Israeli control and covered about 38 square kilometers, and
• East Jerusalem was under Jordanian control and covered about 6 square kilometers.
After annexation, Israel attempted to (as best they could) provide all groups free access to holy sites.
The PLO would eventually rise to be the most generally recognized faction of Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), and becomes the "the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people (1974) in any Palestinian territory that is liberated." In the 1988 PLO Declaration of Independence, Jerusalem is declared its capital. Recognized as they (the PLO) are, the decision on Jerusalem goes unchallenged; although a political concern to Israel.
While the Internationalization of The City of Jerusalem was propably the best solution, it has been overtaken by events --- largely in part to very slow reaction times on the part of the UN to put the plan into action.
Just My Take ---
Most Respectfully,
R
Mr Rocco
As you are aware, I am sure, Israel did not include Jerusalem within the bounds of Israel at the formation of state. "Annexation" is a clear indicator of this.
Ben-Gurion, declared, at the end of 1949, Jerusalem as an "inseparable part of the State of Israel", he also declared Israel is no longer bound by Resolution 181 and the corpus separatum null and void...
In July 1980, Israel passed the Jerusalem Law, the law declared Jerusalem the "complete and united" capital of Israel... Still not recognised by virtually every country in the world, except Israel.
Declaring exclusivity over Jerusalem is not acceptable to Muslims, Christians NOR Jews... Nor is it acceptable, by most of the international community for one party or other to maintain exclusivity within Jerusalem...
IMHO there needs to be a concerted effort to remove Jerusalem from the 'expectations' of ALL potential 'owners' and maintain that Jerusalem should be placed under a special international regime...
This, in my opinion, can be the only solution to the arguments over Jerusalem. A holy city to many more than just Jews, Muslims and Christians...
Wrong again as Israel lost Jerusalem when Jordan invaded and stole it from the UN.
Once the arab league invaded then 181 became null and void and the land became free for everyone. Because the UN refused to take any action against the arab league regarding Jerusalem then the corpus separatum was also nullified. The only answer would be to go to law and have the judges decide on legalities alone who owns what and why, something that the arab's don't want as they will lose the lot to Israel. Then we will see 1947/1949 all over again, and this time the world will have to take sides or witness a wholesale massacre of two groups.
Jerusalem was declared NOT within the bounds of Israel at time of independence by... ISRAEL!
I also think there is a tendency, when you label people indiginous (or as you are trying to make the claim for "first nations") - to give them special rights denied to other peoples in the area
Well, yes. But ask yourself what "special rights" I am asking for the Jewish people. I'm not asking for exclusive or special rights of access. The only special right I'm asking for is the right of preservation of a First Nations culture -- a sacred trust that the original Jewish historical, culture and religious significance is preserved and recognized.
Doesn't seem like asking for a lot. Yet neither the international community nor the Arab Muslim community seems to be able (willing) to do so.
You are asking for sole control, and primary recognition in all ways of the Jewish right to those sites. It is a sacred trust to more than the Jews.
Sole Israeli control because the international community and the Muslim community are demonstrably unable to preserve Jewish culture and Jewish rights.
I disagree, on several fronts.
First the Muslim community DID preserve those sites prior to the establishment of Israel, did they not?
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
I also think there is a tendency, when you label people indiginous (or as you are trying to make the claim for "first nations") - to give them special rights denied to other peoples in the area
Well, yes. But ask yourself what "special rights" I am asking for the Jewish people. I'm not asking for exclusive or special rights of access. The only special right I'm asking for is the right of preservation of a First Nations culture -- a sacred trust that the original Jewish historical, culture and religious significance is preserved and recognized.
Doesn't seem like asking for a lot. Yet neither the international community nor the Arab Muslim community seems to be able (willing) to do so.
You are asking for sole control, and primary recognition in all ways of the Jewish right to those sites. It is a sacred trust to more than the Jews.
Sole Israeli control because the international community and the Muslim community are demonstrably unable to preserve Jewish culture and Jewish rights.
I disagree, on several fronts.
First the Muslim community DID preserve those sites prior to the establishment of Israel, did they not?
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
Many fell into disrepair because the waqf would not allow the christian sites to make repairs.
The mount itself and the buildings there were in terrible shape. Jordan eventually paid for most of the repairs and re-roofing of the dome.
Christianity took the Pagan gods and heros and turned them into saints and demons. Churches were built on top of holy Pagan sites and the original histories erased. In terms of the American First Nations, their sacred rites, religions and language were beaten out of them in boarding schools. Often times, Christianity systematically destroyed foreign faiths where it could, and incorporated them where it could not.
Personally, I think we owe restitution for that. And we need to take responsibility.
And by "we", I include Islam and Muslims who need to take responsibility for building on top of Jewish holy sites and erasing the original histories (or trying to). Don't you think?
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
No evidence that joint control has failed?!
Except the fact that two of the three faiths which you claim the site is holy to are not permitted to hold services there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to worship there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to pray there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to bring any recognizable item of their faith there.
Except the fact that access is restricted for two of the three faiths.
Except that members of at least one faith are harassed and screamed at when they visit the site.
Except that members of one faith stock weapons inside their supposedly holy place in order to harm people.
Except the fact that irreplaceable archeological finds are being taken by truckloads to the dump.
Except that those finds are then rejected as being authentic because they were not found in situ.
Except that one faith's history is being denied and erased.
That seems to me to be a colossal failure. Success would mean:
That all archeological finds are scrupulously preserved and protected in situ. That people of all faiths are permitted to visit at all times and be free from harassment or harm. That people of all faiths are able to hold worship services, to pray, to sit quietly in peaceful relationship with what they imagine G-d to be. That buildings for these purposes are able to be built, re-built or restored as long as they do not interfere with the existing buildings.
That would be success.
Currently, there is a lot of tension surrounding holy sites in Jerusalem - and it is driven by a mixture of emotions, conspiracy theory and bits of truth. There is a small fanatical group of Jewish extremists who believe they must tear down the Al Aqsa Mosque and build the Third Temple. This has driven an unfortunately widely believed conspiracy theory that Israel intends to destroy it and feeds every alarmist reaction to any attempted change on Israel's part even clearly reasonable ones like an umbrella at an entrance. How do you address that? I have no idea, but it's another reason why I believe joint control is so critical.
The Temple can be re-built without disturbing either Al Aqsa or the Dome of the Rock. Its a non-issue.
While I agree that there is a widely-believed conspiracy theory that Israel intends to destroy it and that feeds alarmist reaction -- I don't think this is caused or driven by the tiny fanatical group which wants to restore the Temple Mount to its original condition (though that group certainly doesn't help).
I think it is driven by Arab/Muslim/Palestinian ideology -- some religious and some political. Some arising strictly internally and some as a direct response to the conflict with the Jewish people.
When they immigrated back, after all that time, they brought back foreign cultures. How are they any more "First Nation" than the people who stayed behind, and absorbed foreign cultures?
Because they retained their distinct and recognizable Jewish culture, regardless of what other cultural attributes they may have gained they never LOST their originating, First Nations, Jewish culture. As opposed to the "Palestinian" people who were entirely swallowed up by the invading culture.
I think this is the spot where we disagreed before. I see people, you see cultures. I also think there is a tendency, when you label people indiginous (or as you are trying to make the claim for "first nations") - to give them special rights denied to other peoples in the area no matter how long they have been there and when those rights are expanded to include immigrants who's ancestors left that land three thousand years ago it becomes very questionable.
The only things we can know for sure is this:
Jerusalem is a very important Holy Place for three closely related major world religions. Can we agree on that?
No one usurped anything - cultures and religions (as part of the culture) build upon the ruins of older existing ones. Claiming "usurption" is claiming theft and undermines the authenticity of almost every culture and religion existing today. We will probably not agree on that one.
- Jerusalem has in the recent past been governed by the Ottomans, Jordanians, and a consortium of Israel and Jordan.
- Under the Ottomans Jews were forbidden from access to the Temple Mount. Under Jordan, those rules were somewhat relaxed, but access was still very limited. Under joint adminstratorship, Jews have more access, but are not allowed to actually pray.
- You propose Israeli/Jewish administratorship only, as the best and most just solution because the Jewish sites are the oldest and Israel will guarantee rights of access and preservation.
- I propose a continued joint management of some sort over religious sites because of the importance of the site to 3 world religions no ONE should be soley in control, the importance of preserving the archeological integrity of the site (which I would trust Israel over Muslims to do) and serious trust issues between Muslims and Israeli's that will take much time and cultural change to resolve.
- When it comes to Jerusalem - I also propose a joint management because it of it's importance to multiple peoples but this may become moot as Israel has been steadily driving out the Arab presence through a series of initiatives and laws. Joint management might also be able to address the Palestinian violence directed at Palestinians that sell property, innocent civilians as well as those Israeli's who try to fraudulently buy buy Palestinian property by misrepresenting themselves. If a city is jointly managed - then there is no longer anything to be gained in altering demographics or committing terrorism. Maybe.
As I keep asking and not getting an answer to the question "WHAT ARE THE TIES TO JERUSALEM FOR THE CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS THAT ARE NOT STOLEN FROM THE JEWS.
As far as I can see the most holy places for Christians are Bethlemem and the hill outside of Jerusalems city walls. For the muslims it is the Jewish cities of Mecca and Medina.
So no we cant agree on your fantasy as it is not holy to any religion but Judaism.
You were answered.
Well, yes. But ask yourself what "special rights" I am asking for the Jewish people. I'm not asking for exclusive or special rights of access. The only special right I'm asking for is the right of preservation of a First Nations culture -- a sacred trust that the original Jewish historical, culture and religious significance is preserved and recognized.
Doesn't seem like asking for a lot. Yet neither the international community nor the Arab Muslim community seems to be able (willing) to do so.
You are asking for sole control, and primary recognition in all ways of the Jewish right to those sites. It is a sacred trust to more than the Jews.
Sole Israeli control because the international community and the Muslim community are demonstrably unable to preserve Jewish culture and Jewish rights.
I disagree, on several fronts.
First the Muslim community DID preserve those sites prior to the establishment of Israel, did they not?
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
Then you are either reading a different set of history books to the rest of the members or you are spouting islamonazi propaganda. Just look at the Church built there by the Christians that was demolished and replaced by a carbuncle to islam. Or the Jewish grave markers used to line a sewer, the remains dug up and thrown on a refuse heap. How is that preserving the site ?
So there are no attacks on Jews from muslims on or around the Temple Mount. No rocks dropped on the heads of Jews praying at the western wall, no stone's petrol bombs, fireworks thrown at Jews entering the Temple mount to start a riot .
You keep up the idiotic screeching of "islamonazi propoganda" but your inability to look beyond the last few years indicates a failure of reading comprehension.. (Review your history books).
Islam controlled the Middle East for over a thousand years. Many of the great monuments of older religions still stand. So clearly, Islam did a decent enough job of protecting them. The main threat now is extremist militias looting, pillaging and destroying that history. The lesser threat is who controls what in Jerusalem.
Currently, there is a lot of tension surrounding holy sites in Jerusalem - and it is driven by a mixture of emotions, conspiracy theory and bits of truth. There is a small fanatical group of Jewish extremists who believe they must tear down the Al Aqsa Mosque and build the Third Temple. This has driven an unfortunately widely believed conspiracy theory that Israel intends to destroy it and feeds every alarmist reaction to any attempted change on Israel's part even clearly reasonable ones like an umbrella at an entrance. How do you address that? I have no idea, but it's another reason why I believe joint control is so critical.
Humanity, Phoenall, et al,
Clearly, there was an intention adopted by the UN General Assembly that the City of Jerusalem, and the greater Municipal Area, should be under a special international regime --- administered by the United Nations; Trusteeship Council designated the Administering Authority. This was the UN intention all the way through 1949 and General Assembly Resolution 303 (IV).
Just as clearly, this did not happen. While we often think of the unauthorized Arab League Military intervention to defy the resolution of the General Assembly and engage in a deliberate effort to alter by force the implementation of General Assembly Resolution 181 (II) - The Partition Plan, it did accomplish a number of its secondary objectives. One of the political-military (POL-MIL) objectives was for the Jordanian Army (the Arab Legion, trained and led by British officers) took the Jewish quarter of Old Jerusalem and seized control of the West Bank area on the western side of the Jordan River.
(COMMENT)Furthermore, has you bothered to keep up with this post you would see that I called for a 'free' Jerusalem for all!
The "Free Jerusalem Movement" was actually a mantra and organization substructure behind the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). This cost the Hashemite King his life when he was assassinated by Arab militants (the proto-PLO gunmen) entering the Al-Aqsa Mosque in the Old City of Jerusalem. A faction of Fedayeen Arab Militants opposed to Jordanian rule was becoming popular emerging lands rath in 360º (Fortification).
Prior to the general outbreak of hostilities in 1947 and War in 1948 The Old City of Jerusalem was divided into four separate quarters:
From 1949 and until 27 June 1967, Jerusalem was divided in two distinct sectors:
• Jewish,
• Christian,
• Arab and
• Armenian.
• West Jerusalem was under Israeli control and covered about 38 square kilometers, and
• East Jerusalem was under Jordanian control and covered about 6 square kilometers.
After annexation, Israel attempted to (as best they could) provide all groups free access to holy sites.
The PLO would eventually rise to be the most generally recognized faction of Hostile Arab Palestinians (HoAP), and becomes the "the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people (1974) in any Palestinian territory that is liberated." In the 1988 PLO Declaration of Independence, Jerusalem is declared its capital. Recognized as they (the PLO) are, the decision on Jerusalem goes unchallenged; although a political concern to Israel.
While the Internationalization of The City of Jerusalem was propably the best solution, it has been overtaken by events --- largely in part to very slow reaction times on the part of the UN to put the plan into action.
Just My Take ---
Most Respectfully,
R
Mr Rocco
As you are aware, I am sure, Israel did not include Jerusalem within the bounds of Israel at the formation of state. "Annexation" is a clear indicator of this.
Ben-Gurion, declared, at the end of 1949, Jerusalem as an "inseparable part of the State of Israel", he also declared Israel is no longer bound by Resolution 181 and the corpus separatum null and void...
In July 1980, Israel passed the Jerusalem Law, the law declared Jerusalem the "complete and united" capital of Israel... Still not recognised by virtually every country in the world, except Israel.
Declaring exclusivity over Jerusalem is not acceptable to Muslims, Christians NOR Jews... Nor is it acceptable, by most of the international community for one party or other to maintain exclusivity within Jerusalem...
IMHO there needs to be a concerted effort to remove Jerusalem from the 'expectations' of ALL potential 'owners' and maintain that Jerusalem should be placed under a special international regime...
This, in my opinion, can be the only solution to the arguments over Jerusalem. A holy city to many more than just Jews, Muslims and Christians...
Wrong again as Israel lost Jerusalem when Jordan invaded and stole it from the UN.
Once the arab league invaded then 181 became null and void and the land became free for everyone. Because the UN refused to take any action against the arab league regarding Jerusalem then the corpus separatum was also nullified. The only answer would be to go to law and have the judges decide on legalities alone who owns what and why, something that the arab's don't want as they will lose the lot to Israel. Then we will see 1947/1949 all over again, and this time the world will have to take sides or witness a wholesale massacre of two groups.
You need to go check REAL history books Phoney...
Screw the Hasbara BS you constantly read... IT'S BIASED AND WRONG!
Jerusalem was declared NOT within the bounds of Israel at time of independence by... ISRAEL!
Now, wake up, smell the coffee... As you managed to do in your previous love affair with Neo Marxism and you will see that, once again, you have backed the wrong side you schmuck!
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
No evidence that joint control has failed?!
Except the fact that two of the three faiths which you claim the site is holy to are not permitted to hold services there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to worship there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to pray there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to bring any recognizable item of their faith there.
Except the fact that access is restricted for two of the three faiths.
Except that members of at least one faith are harassed and screamed at when they visit the site.
Except that members of one faith stock weapons inside their supposedly holy place in order to harm people.
Except the fact that irreplaceable archeological finds are being taken by truckloads to the dump.
Except that those finds are then rejected as being authentic because they were not found in situ.
Except that one faith's history is being denied and erased.
That seems to me to be a colossal failure. Success would mean:
That all archeological finds are scrupulously preserved and protected in situ. That people of all faiths are permitted to visit at all times and be free from harassment or harm. That people of all faiths are able to hold worship services, to pray, to sit quietly in peaceful relationship with what they imagine G-d to be. That buildings for these purposes are able to be built, re-built or restored as long as they do not interfere with the existing buildings.
That would be success.
There is absolutely no guarantee that Israeli-alone control would accomplish that or do better. Quite the opposite in fact since there are those among the Jews who believe a third temple should be built.
I can't go along with that. The people of today should not be punished for what the people of hundreds of years ago did. It would be unjust - we have no control over what our ancestors did only our own actions.
I can't go along with that. The people of today should not be punished for what the people of hundreds of years ago did. It would be unjust - we have no control over what our ancestors did only our own actions.
Interesting that you would admire that concept when discussing things in a different context, but then turn around and reject it when discussing Islam. Is there a reason for that?
And well, yes, we are responsible for our own actions.
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
No evidence that joint control has failed?!
Except the fact that two of the three faiths which you claim the site is holy to are not permitted to hold services there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to worship there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to pray there.
Except the fact that two of the three faiths are not permitted to bring any recognizable item of their faith there.
Except the fact that access is restricted for two of the three faiths.
Except that members of at least one faith are harassed and screamed at when they visit the site.
Except that members of one faith stock weapons inside their supposedly holy place in order to harm people.
Except the fact that irreplaceable archeological finds are being taken by truckloads to the dump.
Except that those finds are then rejected as being authentic because they were not found in situ.
Except that one faith's history is being denied and erased.
That seems to me to be a colossal failure. Success would mean:
That all archeological finds are scrupulously preserved and protected in situ. That people of all faiths are permitted to visit at all times and be free from harassment or harm. That people of all faiths are able to hold worship services, to pray, to sit quietly in peaceful relationship with what they imagine G-d to be. That buildings for these purposes are able to be built, re-built or restored as long as they do not interfere with the existing buildings.
That would be success.
There is absolutely no guarantee that Israeli-alone control would accomplish that or do better. Quite the opposite in fact since there are those among the Jews who believe a third temple should be built.
BULLSHIT The other religious sites controlled by Israel are open to all without restriction, so the evidence shows that you are spouting Islamic propaganda. The sites controlled by the arab muslims are closed to everyone but muslims, and the artifacts from other religions defaced, defiled and damaged
You are asking for sole control, and primary recognition in all ways of the Jewish right to those sites. It is a sacred trust to more than the Jews.
Sole Israeli control because the international community and the Muslim community are demonstrably unable to preserve Jewish culture and Jewish rights.
I disagree, on several fronts.
First the Muslim community DID preserve those sites prior to the establishment of Israel, did they not?
Second - there is no evidence that joint control (as exists now) has failed.
Then you are either reading a different set of history books to the rest of the members or you are spouting islamonazi propaganda. Just look at the Church built there by the Christians that was demolished and replaced by a carbuncle to islam. Or the Jewish grave markers used to line a sewer, the remains dug up and thrown on a refuse heap. How is that preserving the site ?
So there are no attacks on Jews from muslims on or around the Temple Mount. No rocks dropped on the heads of Jews praying at the western wall, no stone's petrol bombs, fireworks thrown at Jews entering the Temple mount to start a riot .
You keep up the idiotic screeching of "islamonazi propoganda" but your inability to look beyond the last few years indicates a failure of reading comprehension.. (Review your history books).
Islam controlled the Middle East for over a thousand years. Many of the great monuments of older religions still stand. So clearly, Islam did a decent enough job of protecting them. The main threat now is extremist militias looting, pillaging and destroying that history. The lesser threat is who controls what in Jerusalem.
Currently, there is a lot of tension surrounding holy sites in Jerusalem - and it is driven by a mixture of emotions, conspiracy theory and bits of truth. There is a small fanatical group of Jewish extremists who believe they must tear down the Al Aqsa Mosque and build the Third Temple. This has driven an unfortunately widely believed conspiracy theory that Israel intends to destroy it and feeds every alarmist reaction to any attempted change on Israel's part even clearly reasonable ones like an umbrella at an entrance. How do you address that? I have no idea, but it's another reason why I believe joint control is so critical.
I say differently as the muslims have destroyed whenever they could in the last 1400 years anything that came before islam. Just look at the damage done to ancient ruins by Daesh in Palmyra. The Jewish artefacts thrown away from the Temple mount, the Christian churches destroyed or damaged.
Many of the ancient monuments have been defaced by the muslims both arab and non arab, and it is still going on today, look at what happens to Rachels Tomb on a regular basis when the Palestinians have their control of it.
And the arab muslims make a mountain out of a grain of sand again because it suits their propaganda and rhetoric. The group wanting the destruction is of no importance and no authority, but this does not stop the Palestinians from LYING about "Zionist" atrocities and breaches of international laws. Maybe a concerted effort by the rest of the world to dismantle the eyesores and have them shipped to the road outside Medina where the original Al Aqsa mosque stood would solve the issue.
