The Jerusalem Myth

Roudy

Diamond Member
Mar 16, 2012
59,154
17,463
2,180
Myths and facts about Jerusalem and Temple Mount

One of the most popular lies that has become universally accepted as if it was an indisputable truth is the myth about Jerusalem being the third sacred place to Islam. It is quite rare to hear the honest truth, that Jerusalem is the First and Only Holiest place to Judaism! As a matter of fact, Jerusalem is not mentioned at all in the koran, and Muhammad has never been there (perhaps he did not even know about the existence of Jerusalem!). The tale about his dream flight has been related with Jerusalem in a very recent time for political strategy purposes.

1) The Islamic claim to the Temple Mount is very recent - Jerusalem's role as "The Third Holiest Site in Islam" in mainstream Islamic writings does not precede the 1930s. It was created by the grand mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini.
Most of the problems surrounding Jerusalem can be traced to two areas of dispute: the political area that asks Jerusalem to be the capital of both Israel and the hypothetic Palestine; the other and most contentious problem is the holiness of Temple Mount to both Judaism and Islam.
The role Jerusalem has in the Hebrew Holy Scriptures is well known and not open to debate; however, there are varying opinions on the holiness of Jerusalem, specifically Temple Mount to Islam. Many if not most opinions that counter Islam's claim point out the Jerusalem is not mentioned in the qur'an and did not occupy any special role in Islam until recent political exigencies transformed Jerusalem into Islam's "third holy site". This falsehood was created by the grand mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini. The mufti knew that nationalist slogans alone would not succeed in uniting the masses against arriving Jewish refugees; he therefore turned the struggle into a religious conflict. He addressed the masses clearly, calling for a holy war. Since the moment when he was appointed to the position of mufti, Haj Amin worked vigorously to raise Jerusalem's status as an Islamic holy centre.

2) The Islamic claim to Jerusalem is false - There were no mosques in Jerusalem in 632 c.e. at the death of Muhammad... Jerusalem was [then] a Christian-occupied city
‒by Dr. Manfred R. Lehmann, writer for the Algemeiner Journal. Excerpts of the article originally published in the Algemeiner Journal, August 19, 1994‒
The muslim "claim" to Jerusalem is allegedly based on what is written in the koran, which although does not mention Jerusalem even once, nevertheless talks of the "furthest mosque" (in Sura 17:1): «Glory be unto Allah who did take his servant for a journey at night from the sacred mosque to the furthest mosque». But is there any foundation to the muslim argument that this "furthest mosque" (al-masujidi al-aqsa) refers to what is today called the Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem? The answer is, NO!
In the days of Muhammad, who died in 632 of the Common Era, Jerusalem was a Christian-occupied city within the Byzantine Empire. Jerusalem was captured by caliph Omar only in 638 c.e., six years after Muhammad's death. Throughout all this time there were only churches in Jerusalem, and a church stood on the Temple Mount, called the Church of Saint Mary of Justinian, built in the Byzantine architectural style. The Aqsa mosque was built 20 years after the Dome of the Rock, which was built in 691-692 by caliph Abd el-Malik. The name "Omar mosque" is therefore false. In or around 711, about 80 years after Muhammad died, Malik's son, Abd el-Wahd ‒who ruled in 705-715‒ reconstructed the Christian-Byzantine Church of St. Mary and converted it into a mosque. He left the structure as it was, a typical Byzantine "basilica" structure with a row of pillars on either side of the rectangular "ship" in the centre. All he added was an onion-like dome on top of the building to make it look like a mosque. He then named it El-Aqsa, so it would sound like the one mentioned in the koran. Consequently, it is crystal clear that Muhammad could never have had this mosque in mind when he wrote the koran (if he did so), since it did not exist for another three generations after his death. Rather, as many scholars long ago established, it is logical that Muhammad intended the mosque in Mecca as the "sacred mosque", and the mosque in Medina as the "furthest mosque". So much for the muslim claim based on the Aqsa mosque. With this understood, it is no wonder that Muhammad issued a strict prohibition against facing Jerusalem in prayer, a practice that had been tolerated only for some months in order to lure Jews to convert to Islam. When that effort failed, Muhammad put an abrupt stop to it on February 624. Jerusalem simply never held any sanctity for the muslims themselves, but only for the Jews in their domain.

3) The present Arabic name of Jerusalem is "Al-Quds"... but "Al-Quds" is an abbreviation for "The Jewish Temple"!
The Arabic name for Jerusalem is "Al-QuDS" (The Holy), which is abbreviation for another Arabic name used for Jerusalem until the last century, "Bayt al-MaQDeS" (The Holy House), since the 10th century c.e. The name "Bayt al-MaQDeS" is a translation of the Hebrew "Beyt ha-MiKDaSH", which means "House of Holiness", "Temple". But Islam has no Temple, only the Jews did. Thus the Arabic name for Jerusalem makes no reference to Muhammad's alleged trip to Heaven, but rather refers to the Jewish Temple!
In fact, it can be seen that significant Islamic interest in the Temple Mount does not precede the Six-Day War in 1967.

The greatest lie ever told about Jerusalem
‒by Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East analyst & commentator; January 7, 2001‒
The 13th century Arab biographer Yakut noted: «Mecca is holy to muslims; Jerusalem is holy to the Jews».
The terrorist PLO leader Yassir Arafat and the Arabs claimed the Holy Jewish Temple Mount and Jerusalem based upon one extraordinarily huge lie told over and over again. Here then is a brief history of the religious war against the Jewish people, the Jewish State of Israel and her 3000 year old Eternal Capital, Jerusalem. Would be conquerors invariably issue false claims to provide justification for their march to conquest. The more recent call to "Jihad" against the Jews of Israel was first called in 1947 after the U.N. partition in a "fatwa" (religious ruling) by the Saudis ‒ supposedly to save the Al-Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount from the Jews. Thus, Yassir Arafat, with the full support of the Arab nations, later claimed the Jewish Temple Mount as the third holiest site for Islam - including all of Jerusalem. Therefore, as in the past, this claim has its root in a classic religious war - in addition to other spurious reasons offered.
This myth of Jerusalem as Islam's third holiest city based upon the mythical ascension of Muhammad from Al-Aqsa to Heaven has grown exponentially in the recent telling since 1967. When you tell a Big Lie and repeat it often, it achieves credibility and legs of its own. In Islam, telling a lie to infidels for the sake of enlarging your own believers' faith or defeating the infidel is acceptable, even desirable.
 
Last edited:
Myths and facts about Jerusalem and Temple Mount

One of the most popular lies that has become universally accepted as if it was an indisputable truth is the myth about Jerusalem being the third sacred place to Islam. It is quite rare to hear the honest truth, that Jerusalem is the First and Only Holiest place to Judaism! As a matter of fact, Jerusalem is not mentioned at all in the koran, and Muhammad has never been there (perhaps he did not even know about the existence of Jerusalem!). The tale about his dream flight has been related with Jerusalem in a very recent time for political strategy purposes.

1) The Islamic claim to the Temple Mount is very recent - Jerusalem's role as "The Third Holiest Site in Islam" in mainstream Islamic writings does not precede the 1930s. It was created by the grand mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini.
Most of the problems surrounding Jerusalem can be traced to two areas of dispute: the political area that asks Jerusalem to be the capital of both Israel and the hypothetic Palestine; the other and most contentious problem is the holiness of Temple Mount to both Judaism and Islam.
The role Jerusalem has in the Hebrew Holy Scriptures is well known and not open to debate; however, there are varying opinions on the holiness of Jerusalem, specifically Temple Mount to Islam. Many if not most opinions that counter Islam's claim point out the Jerusalem is not mentioned in the qur'an and did not occupy any special role in Islam until recent political exigencies transformed Jerusalem into Islam's "third holy site". This falsehood was created by the grand mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini. The mufti knew that nationalist slogans alone would not succeed in uniting the masses against arriving Jewish refugees; he therefore turned the struggle into a religious conflict. He addressed the masses clearly, calling for a holy war. Since the moment when he was appointed to the position of mufti, Haj Amin worked vigorously to raise Jerusalem's status as an Islamic holy centre.

2) The Islamic claim to Jerusalem is false - There were no mosques in Jerusalem in 632 c.e. at the death of Muhammad... Jerusalem was [then] a Christian-occupied city
‒by Dr. Manfred R. Lehmann, writer for the Algemeiner Journal. Excerpts of the article originally published in the Algemeiner Journal, August 19, 1994‒
The muslim "claim" to Jerusalem is allegedly based on what is written in the koran, which although does not mention Jerusalem even once, nevertheless talks of the "furthest mosque" (in Sura 17:1): «Glory be unto Allah who did take his servant for a journey at night from the sacred mosque to the furthest mosque». But is there any foundation to the muslim argument that this "furthest mosque" (al-masujidi al-aqsa) refers to what is today called the Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem? The answer is, NO!
In the days of Muhammad, who died in 632 of the Common Era, Jerusalem was a Christian-occupied city within the Byzantine Empire. Jerusalem was captured by caliph Omar only in 638 c.e., six years after Muhammad's death. Throughout all this time there were only churches in Jerusalem, and a church stood on the Temple Mount, called the Church of Saint Mary of Justinian, built in the Byzantine architectural style. The Aqsa mosque was built 20 years after the Dome of the Rock, which was built in 691-692 by caliph Abd el-Malik. The name "Omar mosque" is therefore false. In or around 711, about 80 years after Muhammad died, Malik's son, Abd el-Wahd ‒who ruled in 705-715‒ reconstructed the Christian-Byzantine Church of St. Mary and converted it into a mosque. He left the structure as it was, a typical Byzantine "basilica" structure with a row of pillars on either side of the rectangular "ship" in the centre. All he added was an onion-like dome on top of the building to make it look like a mosque. He then named it El-Aqsa, so it would sound like the one mentioned in the koran. Consequently, it is crystal clear that Muhammad could never have had this mosque in mind when he wrote the koran (if he did so), since it did not exist for another three generations after his death. Rather, as many scholars long ago established, it is logical that Muhammad intended the mosque in Mecca as the "sacred mosque", and the mosque in Medina as the "furthest mosque". So much for the muslim claim based on the Aqsa mosque. With this understood, it is no wonder that Muhammad issued a strict prohibition against facing Jerusalem in prayer, a practice that had been tolerated only for some months in order to lure Jews to convert to Islam. When that effort failed, Muhammad put an abrupt stop to it on February 624. Jerusalem simply never held any sanctity for the muslims themselves, but only for the Jews in their domain.

3) The present Arabic name of Jerusalem is "Al-Quds"... but "Al-Quds" is an abbreviation for "The Jewish Temple"!
The Arabic name for Jerusalem is "Al-QuDS" (The Holy), which is abbreviation for another Arabic name used for Jerusalem until the last century, "Bayt al-MaQDeS" (The Holy House), since the 10th century c.e. The name "Bayt al-MaQDeS" is a translation of the Hebrew "Beyt ha-MiKDaSH", which means "House of Holiness", "Temple". But Islam has no Temple, only the Jews did. Thus the Arabic name for Jerusalem makes no reference to Muhammad's alleged trip to Heaven, but rather refers to the Jewish Temple!
In fact, it can be seen that significant Islamic interest in the Temple Mount does not precede the Six-Day War in 1967.

The greatest lie ever told about Jerusalem
‒by Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East analyst & commentator; January 7, 2001‒
The 13th century Arab biographer Yakut noted: «Mecca is holy to muslims; Jerusalem is holy to the Jews».
The terrorist PLO leader Yassir Arafat and the Arabs claimed the Holy Jewish Temple Mount and Jerusalem based upon one extraordinarily huge lie told over and over again. Here then is a brief history of the religious war against the Jewish people, the Jewish State of Israel and her 3000 year old Eternal Capital, Jerusalem. Would be conquerors invariably issue false claims to provide justification for their march to conquest. The more recent call to "Jihad" against the Jews of Israel was first called in 1947 after the U.N. partition in a "fatwa" (religious ruling) by the Saudis ‒ supposedly to save the Al-Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount from the Jews. Thus, Yassir Arafat, with the full support of the Arab nations, later claimed the Jewish Temple Mount as the third holiest site for Islam - including all of Jerusalem. Therefore, as in the past, this claim has its root in a classic religious war - in addition to other spurious reasons offered.
This myth of Jerusalem as Islam's third holiest city based upon the mythical ascension of Muhammad from Al-Aqsa to Heaven has grown exponentially in the recent telling since 1967. When you tell a Big Lie and repeat it often, it achieves credibility and legs of its own. In Islam, telling a lie to infidels for the sake of enlarging your own believers' faith or defeating the infidel is acceptable, even desirable.
You are to racism, what MLK was to peace.
 
"You are to racism, what MLK was to peace."

"Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals. "


How about discussing the content of the OP, and explaining what it is you consider offensive and for what reasons ?

If you feel there's inaccurate information given, then how about posting something you feel is more accurate?
 
"You are to racism, what MLK was to peace."

"Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals. "


How about discussing the content of the OP, and explaining what it is you consider offensive and for what reasons ?

If you feel there's inaccurate information given, then how about posting something you feel is more accurate?
That's like arguing with the KKK to accept blacks.

I'm not interested in his racist bullshit.
 
Myths and facts about Jerusalem and Temple Mount

One of the most popular lies that has become universally accepted as if it was an indisputable truth is the myth about Jerusalem being the third sacred place to Islam. It is quite rare to hear the honest truth, that Jerusalem is the First and Only Holiest place to Judaism! As a matter of fact, Jerusalem is not mentioned at all in the koran, and Muhammad has never been there (perhaps he did not even know about the existence of Jerusalem!). The tale about his dream flight has been related with Jerusalem in a very recent time for political strategy purposes.

1) The Islamic claim to the Temple Mount is very recent - Jerusalem's role as "The Third Holiest Site in Islam" in mainstream Islamic writings does not precede the 1930s. It was created by the grand mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini.
Most of the problems surrounding Jerusalem can be traced to two areas of dispute: the political area that asks Jerusalem to be the capital of both Israel and the hypothetic Palestine; the other and most contentious problem is the holiness of Temple Mount to both Judaism and Islam.
The role Jerusalem has in the Hebrew Holy Scriptures is well known and not open to debate; however, there are varying opinions on the holiness of Jerusalem, specifically Temple Mount to Islam. Many if not most opinions that counter Islam's claim point out the Jerusalem is not mentioned in the qur'an and did not occupy any special role in Islam until recent political exigencies transformed Jerusalem into Islam's "third holy site". This falsehood was created by the grand mufti, Haj Amin al-Husseini. The mufti knew that nationalist slogans alone would not succeed in uniting the masses against arriving Jewish refugees; he therefore turned the struggle into a religious conflict. He addressed the masses clearly, calling for a holy war. Since the moment when he was appointed to the position of mufti, Haj Amin worked vigorously to raise Jerusalem's status as an Islamic holy centre.

2) The Islamic claim to Jerusalem is false - There were no mosques in Jerusalem in 632 c.e. at the death of Muhammad... Jerusalem was [then] a Christian-occupied city
‒by Dr. Manfred R. Lehmann, writer for the Algemeiner Journal. Excerpts of the article originally published in the Algemeiner Journal, August 19, 1994‒
The muslim "claim" to Jerusalem is allegedly based on what is written in the koran, which although does not mention Jerusalem even once, nevertheless talks of the "furthest mosque" (in Sura 17:1): «Glory be unto Allah who did take his servant for a journey at night from the sacred mosque to the furthest mosque». But is there any foundation to the muslim argument that this "furthest mosque" (al-masujidi al-aqsa) refers to what is today called the Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem? The answer is, NO!
In the days of Muhammad, who died in 632 of the Common Era, Jerusalem was a Christian-occupied city within the Byzantine Empire. Jerusalem was captured by caliph Omar only in 638 c.e., six years after Muhammad's death. Throughout all this time there were only churches in Jerusalem, and a church stood on the Temple Mount, called the Church of Saint Mary of Justinian, built in the Byzantine architectural style. The Aqsa mosque was built 20 years after the Dome of the Rock, which was built in 691-692 by caliph Abd el-Malik. The name "Omar mosque" is therefore false. In or around 711, about 80 years after Muhammad died, Malik's son, Abd el-Wahd ‒who ruled in 705-715‒ reconstructed the Christian-Byzantine Church of St. Mary and converted it into a mosque. He left the structure as it was, a typical Byzantine "basilica" structure with a row of pillars on either side of the rectangular "ship" in the centre. All he added was an onion-like dome on top of the building to make it look like a mosque. He then named it El-Aqsa, so it would sound like the one mentioned in the koran. Consequently, it is crystal clear that Muhammad could never have had this mosque in mind when he wrote the koran (if he did so), since it did not exist for another three generations after his death. Rather, as many scholars long ago established, it is logical that Muhammad intended the mosque in Mecca as the "sacred mosque", and the mosque in Medina as the "furthest mosque". So much for the muslim claim based on the Aqsa mosque. With this understood, it is no wonder that Muhammad issued a strict prohibition against facing Jerusalem in prayer, a practice that had been tolerated only for some months in order to lure Jews to convert to Islam. When that effort failed, Muhammad put an abrupt stop to it on February 624. Jerusalem simply never held any sanctity for the muslims themselves, but only for the Jews in their domain.

3) The present Arabic name of Jerusalem is "Al-Quds"... but "Al-Quds" is an abbreviation for "The Jewish Temple"!
The Arabic name for Jerusalem is "Al-QuDS" (The Holy), which is abbreviation for another Arabic name used for Jerusalem until the last century, "Bayt al-MaQDeS" (The Holy House), since the 10th century c.e. The name "Bayt al-MaQDeS" is a translation of the Hebrew "Beyt ha-MiKDaSH", which means "House of Holiness", "Temple". But Islam has no Temple, only the Jews did. Thus the Arabic name for Jerusalem makes no reference to Muhammad's alleged trip to Heaven, but rather refers to the Jewish Temple!
In fact, it can be seen that significant Islamic interest in the Temple Mount does not precede the Six-Day War in 1967.

The greatest lie ever told about Jerusalem
‒by Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East analyst & commentator; January 7, 2001‒
The 13th century Arab biographer Yakut noted: «Mecca is holy to muslims; Jerusalem is holy to the Jews».
The terrorist PLO leader Yassir Arafat and the Arabs claimed the Holy Jewish Temple Mount and Jerusalem based upon one extraordinarily huge lie told over and over again. Here then is a brief history of the religious war against the Jewish people, the Jewish State of Israel and her 3000 year old Eternal Capital, Jerusalem. Would be conquerors invariably issue false claims to provide justification for their march to conquest. The more recent call to "Jihad" against the Jews of Israel was first called in 1947 after the U.N. partition in a "fatwa" (religious ruling) by the Saudis ‒ supposedly to save the Al-Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount from the Jews. Thus, Yassir Arafat, with the full support of the Arab nations, later claimed the Jewish Temple Mount as the third holiest site for Islam - including all of Jerusalem. Therefore, as in the past, this claim has its root in a classic religious war - in addition to other spurious reasons offered.
This myth of Jerusalem as Islam's third holiest city based upon the mythical ascension of Muhammad from Al-Aqsa to Heaven has grown exponentially in the recent telling since 1967. When you tell a Big Lie and repeat it often, it achieves credibility and legs of its own. In Islam, telling a lie to infidels for the sake of enlarging your own believers' faith or defeating the infidel is acceptable, even desirable.
You are to racism, what MLK was to peace.
You are to shit what flies are to dung. On the bright side of things, you should be happy you weren't flushed after you were born in the toilet. But then again, they poop in holes in the ground where you were born, no?
 
"You are to racism, what MLK was to peace."

"Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals. "


How about discussing the content of the OP, and explaining what it is you consider offensive and for what reasons ?

If you feel there's inaccurate information given, then how about posting something you feel is more accurate?
That's like arguing with the KKK to accept blacks.

I'm not interested in his racist bullshit.
Boo boo the Groinless IslamoNazi worshipping piece of shit is upset at the truth. Awwww.
 
You are to shit what flies are to dung. On the bright side of things, you should be happy you weren't flushed after you were born in the toilet. But then again, they poop in holes in the ground where you were born, no?
You sure do like to talk about cocks and butts of late. Is there something you're not telling us? Do you look at a man's hairy ass and find love? Is your favorite show, Glee?
 
"You are to racism, what MLK was to peace."

"Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals. "


How about discussing the content of the OP, and explaining what it is you consider offensive and for what reasons ?

If you feel there's inaccurate information given, then how about posting something you feel is more accurate?
That's like arguing with the KKK to accept blacks.

I'm not interested in his racist bullshit.


OK, so you're not even willing to discuss with me what is 'BS' in that post and what you agree are facts? That doesn't leave much room to have a discussion :eusa_silenced:

I *thought* that discussion was the point of this forum, yes?
 
You are to shit what flies are to dung. On the bright side of things, you should be happy you weren't flushed after you were born in the toilet. But then again, they poop in holes in the ground where you were born, no?
You sure do like to talk about cocks and butts of late. Is there something you're not telling us? Do you look at a man's hairy ass and find love? Is your favorite show, Glee?
You're right, i should have mentioned this before...someone showed me a picture if your face and it reminded me of cocks and men's hairy butts. Don't blame me, blame your genes. Just out of curiosity, do your childhood friends call you "buttface"? Assuming you have any friends, that is.
 
"You are to racism, what MLK was to peace."

"Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals. "


How about discussing the content of the OP, and explaining what it is you consider offensive and for what reasons ?

If you feel there's inaccurate information given, then how about posting something you feel is more accurate?
That's like arguing with the KKK to accept blacks.

I'm not interested in his racist bullshit.


OK, so you're not even willing to discuss with me what is 'BS' in that post and what you agree are facts? That doesn't leave much room to have a discussion :eusa_silenced:

I *thought* that discussion was the point of this forum, yes?
He doesn't let the facts ever get in his way.
 
Er, Roudy? I don't mean to be rude, being the new kid here and all - but do you think you could tone down the scatological discourse a bit, please? It seems that talk is getting Loinboy agitated - and it's difficult to discuss things with someone who's worked up........

Now I don't kid myself that I've got any 'right' to even make such a request, but I'd be grateful if you'd help me out here.
 
"You are to racism, what MLK was to peace."

"Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals. "


How about discussing the content of the OP, and explaining what it is you consider offensive and for what reasons ?

If you feel there's inaccurate information given, then how about posting something you feel is more accurate?
That's like arguing with the KKK to accept blacks.

I'm not interested in his racist bullshit.

You're a true mental midget small fry!
 
Er, Roudy? I don't mean to be rude, being the new kid here and all - but do you think you could tone down the scatological discourse a bit, please? It seems that talk is getting Loinboy agitated - and it's difficult to discuss things with someone who's worked up........

Now I don't kid myself that I've got any 'right' to even make such a request, but I'd be grateful if you'd help me out here.
Sure thing, I'll do my best. But you know, they understand only one language. Reasoning with them is a waste of time.
 
"You are to racism, what MLK was to peace."

"Ad hominem's are not valid rebuttals. "


How about discussing the content of the OP, and explaining what it is you consider offensive and for what reasons ?

If you feel there's inaccurate information given, then how about posting something you feel is more accurate?
That's like arguing with the KKK to accept blacks.

I'm not interested in his racist bullshit.

You're a true mental midget small fry!
Swish!
 
Thanks, Roudy, for being nice to the new kid : )

I was thinking it'd be best to find out what LoinBoy thinks before I tried to ascertain his reasons - but if he chooses not to elucidate his objections, I've obviously got no way of forcing him. Oh well! There are so many other folks on these forums who DO want to have a discussion or two....
 
Thanks, Roudy, for being nice to the new kid : )

I was thinking it'd be best to find out what LoinBoy thinks before I tried to ascertain his reasons - but if he chooses not to elucidate his objections, I've obviously got no way of forcing him. Oh well! There are so many other folks on these forums who DO want to have a discussion or two....
So you want me to argue Roudy's racist apartheid claim that Jerusalem is a "jew only" city, fine, let's do it.

If there is no historical connection to Jerusalem for muslims, why do they keep finding archeological evidence of mosque's in that area?

in early 2007...Israeli archaeologists had unearthed at the site a Muslim prayer room from the time of the Saladin, dating to the 11th century
If there is no historical connection for muslims, why is Israel secretly excavating near muslim holy sites to find any evidence of ancient temple's that would nullify muslim claims to their holy land?

The Jordanian, Turkish and Palestinian Islamic authorities have all expressed deep concern at Israeli excavations at the Mughrabi Gate that are seen as a prelude to the plaza’s expansion.
If there is no muslim history to that area, why are the Israeli's destroying so many Palestinian homes?
Until it was destroyed by Israel in 2004, the stone ramp that led to the Mughrabi Gate -- one of the main entrances to the elevated compound of mosques known as the Haram al-Sharif -- was the only visible reminder that the quarter, once home to 1,000 Palestinians, had ever existed.
This is just the standard MO for zionists to re-write history as a prelude to more illegal land expansion.

As for Mohammed...
Al Buraq mosque, believed to be located close to the Mughrabi Gate and marking the site where the Prophet Mohammed tethered his horse on his Night Journey between Mecca and Jerusalem.
Happy?
 
Thanks, Roudy, for being nice to the new kid : )

I was thinking it'd be best to find out what LoinBoy thinks before I tried to ascertain his reasons - but if he chooses not to elucidate his objections, I've obviously got no way of forcing him. Oh well! There are so many other folks on these forums who DO want to have a discussion or two....
So you want me to argue Roudy's racist apartheid claim that Jerusalem is a "jew only" city, fine, let's do it.

If there is no historical connection to Jerusalem for muslims, why do they keep finding archeological evidence of mosque's in that area?

in early 2007...Israeli archaeologists had unearthed at the site a Muslim prayer room from the time of the Saladin, dating to the 11th century
If there is no historical connection for muslims, why is Israel secretly excavating near muslim holy sites to find any evidence of ancient temple's that would nullify muslim claims to their holy land?
If there is no muslim history to that area, why are the Israeli's destroying so many Palestinian homes?
Until it was destroyed by Israel in 2004, the stone ramp that led to the Mughrabi Gate -- one of the main entrances to the elevated compound of mosques known as the Haram al-Sharif -- was the only visible reminder that the quarter, once home to 1,000 Palestinians, had ever existed.
This is just the standard MO for zionists to re-write history as a prelude to more illegal land expansion.

As for Mohammed...
Al Buraq mosque, believed to be located close to the Mughrabi Gate and marking the site where the Prophet Mohammed tethered his horse on his Night Journey between Mecca and Jerusalem.
Happy?
They don't find mosques in that area idiot. The only historical mosque is the one the Muslims built on a Jewish temple aka DOME OF CROCK. Jews have thousands of artifacts and archeological sites that proves its 100% Jewish land.

Figure it out douchebag, Islam is younger that Christianity AND Judaism. Jerusalem was and will always be a Jewish city.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Roudy, for being nice to the new kid : )

I was thinking it'd be best to find out what LoinBoy thinks before I tried to ascertain his reasons - but if he chooses not to elucidate his objections, I've obviously got no way of forcing him. Oh well! There are so many other folks on these forums who DO want to have a discussion or two....
So you want me to argue Roudy's racist apartheid claim that Jerusalem is a "jew only" city, fine, let's do it.

If there is no historical connection to Jerusalem for muslims, why do they keep finding archeological evidence of mosque's in that area?

If there is no historical connection for muslims, why is Israel secretly excavating near muslim holy sites to find any evidence of ancient temple's that would nullify muslim claims to their holy land?
If there is no muslim history to that area, why are the Israeli's destroying so many Palestinian homes?
This is just the standard MO for zionists to re-write history as a prelude to more illegal land expansion.

As for Mohammed...
Al Buraq mosque, believed to be located close to the Mughrabi Gate and marking the site where the Prophet Mohammed tethered his horse on his Night Journey between Mecca and Jerusalem.
Happy?
Don't don't find mosques in that area idiot. The only historical mosque is the ones the Muslims built on a Jewish temple. Figure it out douchebag Islam is younger that Christianity AND Judaism. It was and will always be a Jewish city.
"Mohammad's night journey" is fiction and a recitation of Mohammad's dream. Mohammad NEVER SET FOOT IN ISRAEL OR JERUSALEM. in fact it doesn't even say that his spirit went to Jerusalem. All it says is that his spirit went "over there". And over there can be ANYWHERE. And don't tell me how Muslim invaders like Saladin did what Muslims do, invade, loot, and rape lands NOT THEIR OWN.

Happy now, next?
 
Don't don't find mosques in that area idiot. The only historical mosque is the ones the Muslims built on a Jewish temple. Figure it out douchebag Islam is younger that Christianity AND Judaism. It was and will always be a Jewish city.
Why is it, you can't find any evidence of temple's around those mosque's, when excavating that area?

Happy now, next?
Care to address the archeological discoveries of ancient mosque's in that area? Or all the Palestinian homes you have to destroy so you can build your strip center at Wall Zero?
 
Don't don't find mosques in that area idiot. The only historical mosque is the ones the Muslims built on a Jewish temple. Figure it out douchebag Islam is younger that Christianity AND Judaism. It was and will always be a Jewish city.
And that's why you're a racist asshole!
 

Forum List

Back
Top