What is a reasonable response?

[Roudy]

The problem is Muslims consider the Jews praying on the Temple Mount, "an attack" on the Al Aqsa. That's why the Al Aqsa needs to be shut down entirely, until Muslim animals understand the concept of co-existence.

And if they don't it will remain shut. This isn't that shithole Mecca where Muslims get to behave like intolerant savages.

 

[aris2chat]

Muslims have a right to pray at al-Aqsa. Everyone else should have a right to the mount itself when it is not time for services. If they want to quietly recite a pray should be no one elses business.

If Israel were to allow free movement of Palestinians in Israel and Palestine, I would agree.
As Israel does not - with maybe an excuse that they are worried that Palestinians would do mischief if given free movement, then Palestinians - Muslims in fact, as Jordanians and others have an interest here - should be allowed to bar the ultra aggressive invaders from this site, especially when many Zionists have openly stated an intention of tearing it down to build a Jewish Temple on the site.

If Zionists with that mischief in mind are allowed in it would not be long before a excuse is manufactured by Israelis to damage then damage some more, then to bomb, utterly destroy the mosque, at which point they will claim there is no reason to not rebuild it as a Jewish temple.

We know that is the agenda Aris. So don't pretend innocence.

The US does not allow Mexicans free access and movement to the US. It "tries" to control its borders to limit the Mexicans from entering the US. A visitor, depending on the type of visa, is not allowed to work in the US, buy property in the US and they cannot vote in the US.
Israelis certainly are not allowed free access in arab states.
Israel does not want palestinians that seek to undermining the state moving freely in Israel. They don't want potential terrorist have access to Israel to cause damage or death.
Muslims in other countries that support terrorism are having their citizenship or visas revoked.
With the creation to the PA, why should those wanting their own state have free movement or access to Israel? They want their own state, they should be treated as foreigners, and in many cases has hostile foreigners.
With the desolation of the PA, Israel might well draw a line in the sand and after removing all weapons give them their own state but certainly much smaller that what they had wanted. They could then close the borders. They might deport those unwilling to accept Israeli authority and send them to gaza labeled as traitors. Without a unity government Gaza will become the new palestine but will no longer get tariffs from Israeli and as a hostile state can still be subject to some blockades and sanctions, even a no fly zone. All refugees could be deported from the middle east host countries to gaza.
Whether in the PA or Israel, if palestinians do not accept Israel's right to exist and stop hostilities the future could become quite bleak. Israel will not accept people in Israel who do not want to live peacefully under Israeli law. They should not have to. Most arabs in Israel are happy as Israelis. Those who are not should leave not be permitted to undermine Israel.
With so many refugee from syria and africa, it is not likely that other countries would accept palestinian migration in large numbers, and certainly not if they have ties to terrorism. Those that did get in would have to accept identity as citizens of that state, not as palestinians waiting for statehood. They could not engage in violence against Israel or their new country. No country wants another "Lebanon" or Black September.

Your equivalence is off the mark.
Had the US invaded and occupied Mexico, then not allowed Mexicans free movement in Mexico, that would be an equivalent.

If you like you could take Texas or New Mexico as a broad equivalent of Israel. But Israel is an invader in Palestine and trying to annex through military power. You have no right to try to control Jerusalem. You should at least stay away from the Mosque, and arrest any of your own who provoke through claiming it for Israel, and agitating for it to be torn down to be replaced by a Temple.

Some believe California and Texas should be part of Mexico.

 

[Roudy]

No population can tolerate what the Israeli Occupation Forces do to them in Palestine.

Don't want uprisings? Get out. Make peace. Secure your borders.

You have it upside down. It's the Arabs that need to show they want peace. Then maybe they'll get some land that never belonged to them. Want peace? Stop being terrorist animals, or else continue living as depraved savages.

Israel's border are secure, and it is doing fine, thank you. Achmed Beezle.

 

[aris2chat]

The incitement and violence has led to Muslim leaders being barred from Jerusalem for six months.
Push too hard and you will not like the results. It could get worse not better for those that cannot accept Israeli law within Israel or the right of Israeli statehood.

.............and to think what palestinian statehood could have looked like if Arafat had accept the agreement rather than plan a second intafada.
With Israeli security at stake, no future deal will ever be as generous.

 

[Beelzebub]

The incitement and violence has led to Muslim leaders being barred from Jerusalem for six months.
Push too hard and you will not like the results. It could get worse not better for those that cannot accept Israeli law within Israel or the right of Israeli statehood.

.............and to think what palestinian statehood could have looked like if Arafat had accept the agreement rather than plan a second intafada.
With Israeli security at stake, no future deal will ever be as generous.

If you think that threats will make you safe, then you are a slow learner.

 

[Roudy]

The incitement and violence has led to Muslim leaders being barred from Jerusalem for six months.
Push too hard and you will not like the results. It could get worse not better for those that cannot accept Israeli law within Israel or the right of Israeli statehood.

.............and to think what palestinian statehood could have looked like if Arafat had accept the agreement rather than plan a second intafada.
With Israeli security at stake, no future deal will ever be as generous.

If you think that threats will make you safe, then you are a slow learner.

Tell that to the Palestinians and the rest of the Muslim world.

Israel isn't going anywhere, get that through your empty skull.

 

[Coyote]

The Temple Mount and ‘Disproportionate Response’
November 26, 2014 12:50 am
Author:Maurice Ostroff


The Temple Mount atop Jerusalem's Old City. Photo: Dave Bender

Since pundits who profess to understand the Arab-Israel conflict regularly accuse Israel of “disproportionate response,” it would be interesting to know whether these opinion makers consider the current attacks on Jews in Jerusalem to be a “proportionate” response to activists who wish to pray on the Temple Mount.

What is all this verbal and physical violence about? The current “status quo” permits Jews to visit the Temple Mount but not to pray while there. By way of background, the Temple Mount, believed to be the site of the First and Second Temples, is the holiest place in the world for Jews. It is also believed by Muslims that about 550 years after the destruction of the Second Temple, Mohammed flew to this site on a winged horse named Buraq and then flew to heaven to plead with God before returning to Mecca. The Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock stand on the site today, and it is the third holiest place for Muslims.

In 1948, Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem where the Temple Mount is located – and annexed it in 1950. The annexation was considered illegal and void by the Arab League and all countries except Britain, Iraq, and Pakistan.

During its rule, Jordan refused to honor its undertaking in terms of the 1949 Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement to allow free access to Jerusalem’s Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the cemetery on the Mount of Olives. Jews were barred from the Old City and denied access to the Western Wall and other Holy Places. Synagogues were destroyed and tombstones were used in the construction of latrines. Christians were also adversely affected.

By contrast, when Israel took control of East Jerusalem after the 1967 Six Day War, Israel showed extreme respect for the Islamic religion. In a conciliatory act, Moshe Dayan ordered the removal of the paratroopers who had liberated the Mount and lowering of the newly raised Israeli flag. He made arrangements known today as the “status quo,” which provided that the Islamic Waqf would continue to manage the site while Israeli police would be responsible for security. Non Muslims including Jews would be allowed to visit but strangely and perhaps naively not permitted to pray.

Now, however, some religious Jews who revere this sacred site are vexed by the remaining condition prohibiting Jewish prayer on the Mount and a group of activists led by Yehuda Glick have for years made a practice of praying silently there.

Whether or not we agree with Rabbi Glick’s actions and even if we consider them to be provocative, they don’t by any stretch of imagination resemble the hysterical descriptions by some opinion makers. And they of course don’t justify the attempt on his life. In an incendiary speech in Ramallah on the 10th anniversary of the death of Yasser Arafat, PA President Abbas warned against changing the status quo despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s repeated declaration that the status quo will not be altered. Moreover, when Israel closed entry to the Mount for one day in an effort to stem the violence, Abbas called this a “declaration of war.” And Abbas said that activists like Glick who wish to share in praying, tolerance, and respecting one another at the site, were “contaminating” the Temple Mount.

It is worrying that U.S. Sate Department spokesperson Jen Psaki and Secretary of State Kerry seemed to accept these incendiary reactions as unworthy of comment.

But of course, when Israel builds a house in East Jerusalem or uses force to stop the murder of its citizens, this is an outrage that the U.S. condemns immediately. Talk about a disproportionate response.

IMO, the Jews should march onto the Temple Mount and pray to their hearts content. A cult who forbids people to pray at their holy site should stand aside while all that Islamic obscenity is bulldozed down the hill. Let them go to the trash dump to worship their idols.

Muslims have as much right as Jews to pray there, even if you don't think so.

They need to respect each other's rights, not destroy each others sites.

Then why do the muslims refuse to allow anyone but a muslim to set foot on the mount to pray, and this has been common practise for the last 1400 years on and off

How would I know? I'm just saying - both religions need to respect each other's rights and tolerate each other's access. It belongs to no ONE religion.

 

[Coyote]

The Temple Mount and ‘Disproportionate Response’
November 26, 2014 12:50 am
Author:Maurice Ostroff


The Temple Mount atop Jerusalem's Old City. Photo: Dave Bender

Since pundits who profess to understand the Arab-Israel conflict regularly accuse Israel of “disproportionate response,” it would be interesting to know whether these opinion makers consider the current attacks on Jews in Jerusalem to be a “proportionate” response to activists who wish to pray on the Temple Mount.

What is all this verbal and physical violence about? The current “status quo” permits Jews to visit the Temple Mount but not to pray while there. By way of background, the Temple Mount, believed to be the site of the First and Second Temples, is the holiest place in the world for Jews. It is also believed by Muslims that about 550 years after the destruction of the Second Temple, Mohammed flew to this site on a winged horse named Buraq and then flew to heaven to plead with God before returning to Mecca. The Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock stand on the site today, and it is the third holiest place for Muslims.

In 1948, Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem where the Temple Mount is located – and annexed it in 1950. The annexation was considered illegal and void by the Arab League and all countries except Britain, Iraq, and Pakistan.

During its rule, Jordan refused to honor its undertaking in terms of the 1949 Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement to allow free access to Jerusalem’s Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the cemetery on the Mount of Olives. Jews were barred from the Old City and denied access to the Western Wall and other Holy Places. Synagogues were destroyed and tombstones were used in the construction of latrines. Christians were also adversely affected.

By contrast, when Israel took control of East Jerusalem after the 1967 Six Day War, Israel showed extreme respect for the Islamic religion. In a conciliatory act, Moshe Dayan ordered the removal of the paratroopers who had liberated the Mount and lowering of the newly raised Israeli flag. He made arrangements known today as the “status quo,” which provided that the Islamic Waqf would continue to manage the site while Israeli police would be responsible for security. Non Muslims including Jews would be allowed to visit but strangely and perhaps naively not permitted to pray.

Now, however, some religious Jews who revere this sacred site are vexed by the remaining condition prohibiting Jewish prayer on the Mount and a group of activists led by Yehuda Glick have for years made a practice of praying silently there.

Whether or not we agree with Rabbi Glick’s actions and even if we consider them to be provocative, they don’t by any stretch of imagination resemble the hysterical descriptions by some opinion makers. And they of course don’t justify the attempt on his life. In an incendiary speech in Ramallah on the 10th anniversary of the death of Yasser Arafat, PA President Abbas warned against changing the status quo despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s repeated declaration that the status quo will not be altered. Moreover, when Israel closed entry to the Mount for one day in an effort to stem the violence, Abbas called this a “declaration of war.” And Abbas said that activists like Glick who wish to share in praying, tolerance, and respecting one another at the site, were “contaminating” the Temple Mount.

It is worrying that U.S. Sate Department spokesperson Jen Psaki and Secretary of State Kerry seemed to accept these incendiary reactions as unworthy of comment.

But of course, when Israel builds a house in East Jerusalem or uses force to stop the murder of its citizens, this is an outrage that the U.S. condemns immediately. Talk about a disproportionate response.

IMO, the Jews should march onto the Temple Mount and pray to their hearts content. A cult who forbids people to pray at their holy site should stand aside while all that Islamic obscenity is bulldozed down the hill. Let them go to the trash dump to worship their idols.

Muslims have as much right as Jews to pray there, even if you don't think so.

They need to respect each other's rights, not destroy each others sites.

Yet Muslims can pray on the Temple Mount, while Jews cannot.

Hossfly's opinion may sound pretty much out there, but in reality, the only ones being discriminated there are the Jews.

I stand by what I said. It belongs to more than one religion. They need to allow access to both and both need to respect the other's rights of access. Bulldozing an historic religious site that is very important to one religion is just as intolerant as those who seek to prevent access.

 

[Coyote]

The Temple Mount and ‘Disproportionate Response’
November 26, 2014 12:50 am
Author:Maurice Ostroff


The Temple Mount atop Jerusalem's Old City. Photo: Dave Bender

Since pundits who profess to understand the Arab-Israel conflict regularly accuse Israel of “disproportionate response,” it would be interesting to know whether these opinion makers consider the current attacks on Jews in Jerusalem to be a “proportionate” response to activists who wish to pray on the Temple Mount.

What is all this verbal and physical violence about? The current “status quo” permits Jews to visit the Temple Mount but not to pray while there. By way of background, the Temple Mount, believed to be the site of the First and Second Temples, is the holiest place in the world for Jews. It is also believed by Muslims that about 550 years after the destruction of the Second Temple, Mohammed flew to this site on a winged horse named Buraq and then flew to heaven to plead with God before returning to Mecca. The Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock stand on the site today, and it is the third holiest place for Muslims.

In 1948, Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem where the Temple Mount is located – and annexed it in 1950. The annexation was considered illegal and void by the Arab League and all countries except Britain, Iraq, and Pakistan.

During its rule, Jordan refused to honor its undertaking in terms of the 1949 Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement to allow free access to Jerusalem’s Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the cemetery on the Mount of Olives. Jews were barred from the Old City and denied access to the Western Wall and other Holy Places. Synagogues were destroyed and tombstones were used in the construction of latrines. Christians were also adversely affected.

By contrast, when Israel took control of East Jerusalem after the 1967 Six Day War, Israel showed extreme respect for the Islamic religion. In a conciliatory act, Moshe Dayan ordered the removal of the paratroopers who had liberated the Mount and lowering of the newly raised Israeli flag. He made arrangements known today as the “status quo,” which provided that the Islamic Waqf would continue to manage the site while Israeli police would be responsible for security. Non Muslims including Jews would be allowed to visit but strangely and perhaps naively not permitted to pray.

Now, however, some religious Jews who revere this sacred site are vexed by the remaining condition prohibiting Jewish prayer on the Mount and a group of activists led by Yehuda Glick have for years made a practice of praying silently there.

Whether or not we agree with Rabbi Glick’s actions and even if we consider them to be provocative, they don’t by any stretch of imagination resemble the hysterical descriptions by some opinion makers. And they of course don’t justify the attempt on his life. In an incendiary speech in Ramallah on the 10th anniversary of the death of Yasser Arafat, PA President Abbas warned against changing the status quo despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s repeated declaration that the status quo will not be altered. Moreover, when Israel closed entry to the Mount for one day in an effort to stem the violence, Abbas called this a “declaration of war.” And Abbas said that activists like Glick who wish to share in praying, tolerance, and respecting one another at the site, were “contaminating” the Temple Mount.

It is worrying that U.S. Sate Department spokesperson Jen Psaki and Secretary of State Kerry seemed to accept these incendiary reactions as unworthy of comment.

But of course, when Israel builds a house in East Jerusalem or uses force to stop the murder of its citizens, this is an outrage that the U.S. condemns immediately. Talk about a disproportionate response.

IMO, the Jews should march onto the Temple Mount and pray to their hearts content. A cult who forbids people to pray at their holy site should stand aside while all that Islamic obscenity is bulldozed down the hill. Let them go to the trash dump to worship their idols.

You of course worship the one true God of the Universe that allows trash dump worshipping of idols <guffaw>. ~ Susan
PS If You haven't heard, the Muslim religion allows no worship of idols.

There is no Muslim religion. It's a cult.

It's no more a cult than Christianity or Judaism. Calling it a "cult" is right out of the Rightwing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism. By claiming it "isn't a religion" they seek to remove religious protections it has under our constitution and allow open persecution of Muslims and their freedom to worship in our country. Shoddy crap.

 

[aris2chat]

The Temple Mount and ‘Disproportionate Response’
November 26, 2014 12:50 am
Author:Maurice Ostroff


The Temple Mount atop Jerusalem's Old City. Photo: Dave Bender

Since pundits who profess to understand the Arab-Israel conflict regularly accuse Israel of “disproportionate response,” it would be interesting to know whether these opinion makers consider the current attacks on Jews in Jerusalem to be a “proportionate” response to activists who wish to pray on the Temple Mount.

What is all this verbal and physical violence about? The current “status quo” permits Jews to visit the Temple Mount but not to pray while there. By way of background, the Temple Mount, believed to be the site of the First and Second Temples, is the holiest place in the world for Jews. It is also believed by Muslims that about 550 years after the destruction of the Second Temple, Mohammed flew to this site on a winged horse named Buraq and then flew to heaven to plead with God before returning to Mecca. The Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock stand on the site today, and it is the third holiest place for Muslims.

In 1948, Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem where the Temple Mount is located – and annexed it in 1950. The annexation was considered illegal and void by the Arab League and all countries except Britain, Iraq, and Pakistan.

During its rule, Jordan refused to honor its undertaking in terms of the 1949 Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement to allow free access to Jerusalem’s Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the cemetery on the Mount of Olives. Jews were barred from the Old City and denied access to the Western Wall and other Holy Places. Synagogues were destroyed and tombstones were used in the construction of latrines. Christians were also adversely affected.

By contrast, when Israel took control of East Jerusalem after the 1967 Six Day War, Israel showed extreme respect for the Islamic religion. In a conciliatory act, Moshe Dayan ordered the removal of the paratroopers who had liberated the Mount and lowering of the newly raised Israeli flag. He made arrangements known today as the “status quo,” which provided that the Islamic Waqf would continue to manage the site while Israeli police would be responsible for security. Non Muslims including Jews would be allowed to visit but strangely and perhaps naively not permitted to pray.

Now, however, some religious Jews who revere this sacred site are vexed by the remaining condition prohibiting Jewish prayer on the Mount and a group of activists led by Yehuda Glick have for years made a practice of praying silently there.

Whether or not we agree with Rabbi Glick’s actions and even if we consider them to be provocative, they don’t by any stretch of imagination resemble the hysterical descriptions by some opinion makers. And they of course don’t justify the attempt on his life. In an incendiary speech in Ramallah on the 10th anniversary of the death of Yasser Arafat, PA President Abbas warned against changing the status quo despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s repeated declaration that the status quo will not be altered. Moreover, when Israel closed entry to the Mount for one day in an effort to stem the violence, Abbas called this a “declaration of war.” And Abbas said that activists like Glick who wish to share in praying, tolerance, and respecting one another at the site, were “contaminating” the Temple Mount.

It is worrying that U.S. Sate Department spokesperson Jen Psaki and Secretary of State Kerry seemed to accept these incendiary reactions as unworthy of comment.

But of course, when Israel builds a house in East Jerusalem or uses force to stop the murder of its citizens, this is an outrage that the U.S. condemns immediately. Talk about a disproportionate response.

IMO, the Jews should march onto the Temple Mount and pray to their hearts content. A cult who forbids people to pray at their holy site should stand aside while all that Islamic obscenity is bulldozed down the hill. Let them go to the trash dump to worship their idols.

You of course worship the one true God of the Universe that allows trash dump worshipping of idols <guffaw>. ~ Susan
PS If You haven't heard, the Muslim religion allows no worship of idols.

There is no Muslim religion. It's a cult.

It's no more a cult than Christianity or Judaism. Calling it a "cult" is right out of the Rightwing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism. By claiming it "isn't a religion" they seek to remove religious protections it has under our constitution and allow open persecution of Muslims and their freedom to worship in our country. Shoddy crap.

Groups and mosques everywhere that engage in terrorism or inciting violence are loosing religious protection and tax exempt status.

 

[Beelzebub]

The Temple Mount and ‘Disproportionate Response’
November 26, 2014 12:50 am
Author:Maurice Ostroff


The Temple Mount atop Jerusalem's Old City. Photo: Dave Bender

Since pundits who profess to understand the Arab-Israel conflict regularly accuse Israel of “disproportionate response,” it would be interesting to know whether these opinion makers consider the current attacks on Jews in Jerusalem to be a “proportionate” response to activists who wish to pray on the Temple Mount.

What is all this verbal and physical violence about? The current “status quo” permits Jews to visit the Temple Mount but not to pray while there. By way of background, the Temple Mount, believed to be the site of the First and Second Temples, is the holiest place in the world for Jews. It is also believed by Muslims that about 550 years after the destruction of the Second Temple, Mohammed flew to this site on a winged horse named Buraq and then flew to heaven to plead with God before returning to Mecca. The Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock stand on the site today, and it is the third holiest place for Muslims.

In 1948, Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem where the Temple Mount is located – and annexed it in 1950. The annexation was considered illegal and void by the Arab League and all countries except Britain, Iraq, and Pakistan.

During its rule, Jordan refused to honor its undertaking in terms of the 1949 Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement to allow free access to Jerusalem’s Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the cemetery on the Mount of Olives. Jews were barred from the Old City and denied access to the Western Wall and other Holy Places. Synagogues were destroyed and tombstones were used in the construction of latrines. Christians were also adversely affected.

By contrast, when Israel took control of East Jerusalem after the 1967 Six Day War, Israel showed extreme respect for the Islamic religion. In a conciliatory act, Moshe Dayan ordered the removal of the paratroopers who had liberated the Mount and lowering of the newly raised Israeli flag. He made arrangements known today as the “status quo,” which provided that the Islamic Waqf would continue to manage the site while Israeli police would be responsible for security. Non Muslims including Jews would be allowed to visit but strangely and perhaps naively not permitted to pray.

Now, however, some religious Jews who revere this sacred site are vexed by the remaining condition prohibiting Jewish prayer on the Mount and a group of activists led by Yehuda Glick have for years made a practice of praying silently there.

Whether or not we agree with Rabbi Glick’s actions and even if we consider them to be provocative, they don’t by any stretch of imagination resemble the hysterical descriptions by some opinion makers. And they of course don’t justify the attempt on his life. In an incendiary speech in Ramallah on the 10th anniversary of the death of Yasser Arafat, PA President Abbas warned against changing the status quo despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s repeated declaration that the status quo will not be altered. Moreover, when Israel closed entry to the Mount for one day in an effort to stem the violence, Abbas called this a “declaration of war.” And Abbas said that activists like Glick who wish to share in praying, tolerance, and respecting one another at the site, were “contaminating” the Temple Mount.

It is worrying that U.S. Sate Department spokesperson Jen Psaki and Secretary of State Kerry seemed to accept these incendiary reactions as unworthy of comment.

But of course, when Israel builds a house in East Jerusalem or uses force to stop the murder of its citizens, this is an outrage that the U.S. condemns immediately. Talk about a disproportionate response.

IMO, the Jews should march onto the Temple Mount and pray to their hearts content. A cult who forbids people to pray at their holy site should stand aside while all that Islamic obscenity is bulldozed down the hill. Let them go to the trash dump to worship their idols.

You of course worship the one true God of the Universe that allows trash dump worshipping of idols <guffaw>. ~ Susan
PS If You haven't heard, the Muslim religion allows no worship of idols.

There is no Muslim religion. It's a cult.

It's no more a cult than Christianity or Judaism. Calling it a "cult" is right out of the Rightwing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism. By claiming it "isn't a religion" they seek to remove religious protections it has under our constitution and allow open persecution of Muslims and their freedom to worship in our country. Shoddy crap.

Groups and mosques everywhere that engage in terrorism or inciting violence are loosing religious protection and tax exempt status.

And what about the synagogues and temples where hate is encouraged?
Surely the synagogues of settlements themselves are direct acts of aggression against the Palestinians state, which they are trying to disrupt?

 

[Roudy]

IMO, the Jews should march onto the Temple Mount and pray to their hearts content. A cult who forbids people to pray at their holy site should stand aside while all that Islamic obscenity is bulldozed down the hill. Let them go to the trash dump to worship their idols.

You of course worship the one true God of the Universe that allows trash dump worshipping of idols <guffaw>. ~ Susan
PS If You haven't heard, the Muslim religion allows no worship of idols.

There is no Muslim religion. It's a cult.

It's no more a cult than Christianity or Judaism. Calling it a "cult" is right out of the Rightwing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism. By claiming it "isn't a religion" they seek to remove religious protections it has under our constitution and allow open persecution of Muslims and their freedom to worship in our country. Shoddy crap.

Groups and mosques everywhere that engage in terrorism or inciting violence are loosing religious protection and tax exempt status.

And what about the synagogues and temples where hate is encouraged?
Surely the synagogues of settlements themselves are direct acts of aggression against the Palestinians state, which they are trying to disrupt?

Sorry Achmed. Synagogues don't preach hate, mosques do.

True story.

 

[Coyote]

The Temple Mount and ‘Disproportionate Response’
November 26, 2014 12:50 am
Author:Maurice Ostroff


The Temple Mount atop Jerusalem's Old City. Photo: Dave Bender

Since pundits who profess to understand the Arab-Israel conflict regularly accuse Israel of “disproportionate response,” it would be interesting to know whether these opinion makers consider the current attacks on Jews in Jerusalem to be a “proportionate” response to activists who wish to pray on the Temple Mount.

What is all this verbal and physical violence about? The current “status quo” permits Jews to visit the Temple Mount but not to pray while there. By way of background, the Temple Mount, believed to be the site of the First and Second Temples, is the holiest place in the world for Jews. It is also believed by Muslims that about 550 years after the destruction of the Second Temple, Mohammed flew to this site on a winged horse named Buraq and then flew to heaven to plead with God before returning to Mecca. The Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock stand on the site today, and it is the third holiest place for Muslims.

In 1948, Jordan occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem where the Temple Mount is located – and annexed it in 1950. The annexation was considered illegal and void by the Arab League and all countries except Britain, Iraq, and Pakistan.

During its rule, Jordan refused to honor its undertaking in terms of the 1949 Israel-Jordan Armistice Agreement to allow free access to Jerusalem’s Holy Places and cultural institutions and use of the cemetery on the Mount of Olives. Jews were barred from the Old City and denied access to the Western Wall and other Holy Places. Synagogues were destroyed and tombstones were used in the construction of latrines. Christians were also adversely affected.

By contrast, when Israel took control of East Jerusalem after the 1967 Six Day War, Israel showed extreme respect for the Islamic religion. In a conciliatory act, Moshe Dayan ordered the removal of the paratroopers who had liberated the Mount and lowering of the newly raised Israeli flag. He made arrangements known today as the “status quo,” which provided that the Islamic Waqf would continue to manage the site while Israeli police would be responsible for security. Non Muslims including Jews would be allowed to visit but strangely and perhaps naively not permitted to pray.

Now, however, some religious Jews who revere this sacred site are vexed by the remaining condition prohibiting Jewish prayer on the Mount and a group of activists led by Yehuda Glick have for years made a practice of praying silently there.

Whether or not we agree with Rabbi Glick’s actions and even if we consider them to be provocative, they don’t by any stretch of imagination resemble the hysterical descriptions by some opinion makers. And they of course don’t justify the attempt on his life. In an incendiary speech in Ramallah on the 10th anniversary of the death of Yasser Arafat, PA President Abbas warned against changing the status quo despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s repeated declaration that the status quo will not be altered. Moreover, when Israel closed entry to the Mount for one day in an effort to stem the violence, Abbas called this a “declaration of war.” And Abbas said that activists like Glick who wish to share in praying, tolerance, and respecting one another at the site, were “contaminating” the Temple Mount.

It is worrying that U.S. Sate Department spokesperson Jen Psaki and Secretary of State Kerry seemed to accept these incendiary reactions as unworthy of comment.

But of course, when Israel builds a house in East Jerusalem or uses force to stop the murder of its citizens, this is an outrage that the U.S. condemns immediately. Talk about a disproportionate response.

IMO, the Jews should march onto the Temple Mount and pray to their hearts content. A cult who forbids people to pray at their holy site should stand aside while all that Islamic obscenity is bulldozed down the hill. Let them go to the trash dump to worship their idols.

You of course worship the one true God of the Universe that allows trash dump worshipping of idols <guffaw>. ~ Susan
PS If You haven't heard, the Muslim religion allows no worship of idols.

There is no Muslim religion. It's a cult.

It's no more a cult than Christianity or Judaism. Calling it a "cult" is right out of the Rightwing Playbook on Anti-Muslim Extremism. By claiming it "isn't a religion" they seek to remove religious protections it has under our constitution and allow open persecution of Muslims and their freedom to worship in our country. Shoddy crap.

Groups and mosques everywhere that engage in terrorism or inciting violence are loosing religious protection and tax exempt status.

Any individual church, mosque, or synagogue that engages in terrorism deserves to lose their religious protection. However - that's a long ways from trying to strip an entire religion - the majority of who's adherents do not engage in those activities of it's status as a religion. There are those who are trying to remove the civil rights from Muslims who are no more likely to engage in violence than Christians or Jews and I totally oppose those actions. Unquivacably.

It is Shoddy Crap and those who push for it are fear mongering bigots every bit as bad as the anti-semites behind the Nazi's.