Abbas: Allowing Jewish Extremists into Al-Aqsa a ‘Recipe For Violence’

[vierundzwanzig]

27/08/2003


Palestine Media Center – PMC

Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas accused Israel on Tuesday of aiming at increasing the cycle of violence by allowing Jewish extremists to visit Al-Aqsa mosque compound, in occupied east Jerusalem.

“This inciting Israeli policy (of allowing Jewish extremists to visit the site, which Islam’s third holiest place) is a recipe for friction and violence,” Abbas said in a statement reported by Reuters on Wednesday.

Abbas’s statement followed the detention of three Palestinian Islamic Waqf officials by Israeli police for trying to stop non-Muslims entering the site, which Israel reopened to visits by Jews and Christians several months ago.

An Israeli judge freed two of them on bail of 5,000 shekels ($1,120) each and ordered them to stay away from the site for two months. The third was freed.

http://www.palestine-pmc.com/details.asp?cat=1&id=1022

[Fenris]

1. Warum heißt du "vierundswanzig"?

Bist du 24 Jahre alt?

Little rusty.

[vierundzwanzig]

2. 24 hours in a day.

I am (almost) twice as old. I left Germany when I was 28.

[The Magistrate]

3. It Is A Recipe For Violence

Only if Moslems insist on acting violently in response to the presence of persons of another faith at a location the latter hold as their most sacred patch of ground. In other words, violence will result only if a sufficient number of Moslems choose to resort to violence in the furtherance of their own intolerance for the expressions of another religion. Clearly, individual Moslems have a choice in their own actions: there is nothing automatic built into them requiring a violent response to this, like the pulling of a pistol's trigger compells the discharge of a cartridge.

[Darranar]

4. Agreed...

why SHOULDN'T Jews visit their most sacred land?

These aren't Jewish extremists. These are orthodox Jews. There's a difference.

[vierundzwanzig]

5. I don't know

This was a more or less peaceful settlement. Why wake sleeping dogs?

[The Magistrate]

6. Why, Sir?

Do you consider curbing the free expression of religious belief a proper part of any peaceable status quo? What faiths would you proscribe the open expression of to that end?

What, by the way, is wrong with Moslems refraining from violence when other persons express their religious beliefs in close proximity to them? How long is fear of mob violence by Moslems to be the conditioning factor in this matter?

[StandWatie]

14. Jews aren't supposed to go to Temple Mount anyway..

it really doesn't have much to do with religion.

[Cassandra]

15. You're kidding, right???

"Jews aren't supposed to go to Temple Mount anyway. it really doesn't have much to do with religion."

I don't even know what to say to that other than :wow:

Care to explain yourself?

Which part of t-e-m-p-l-e do you not understand?

[StandWatie]

16. a bazillion Halacha rulings say they aren't supposed to go in there

Right wing freaks go petition the Israeli rabbinate over and over and over to change their mind lest there be one piece of Israel out of Jewish control and that's what it's about.

[Cassandra]

17. Hardly a bazillion

and the rulings are religious rulings honoring the sacredness of the site. This is not a control-freak issue.

edit: adding this
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/WO0308/S00085.htm

"Israel’s Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a petition, which is submitted every year by the extremist “Temple Mount Faithful” group, demanding permission to symbolically place a foundation stone for a new temple.

Supreme Court judges backed Israeli police arguments that the visit could lead to violence.

The “Temple Mount Faithful” has been seeking for the past 20 years to build a third temple on the site of the Haram al-Sharif, or Noble Sanctuary, the third holiest shrine in Islam after Mecca and Medina."

The yearly rulings are to keep out the fundies. That doesn't prevent the Temple Mount from being the holiest Jewish site, which it is, whether you like it or not.

[The Magistrate]

18. The Rulings Mr. Watie Refers To, Ma'am

Derive from the precise location of the inner sanctum of the old temple being uncertain at this time: it is therefore felt by some that someone who is not a proper priest might thus accidently trespass upon it. The force, or the degree of acceptance of these strictures, are unclear to me; it is not my religion, after all, and the matter is somewhat arcane. It seems evident certainly some Jews wish to go there, and it seems evident to me they have as much a right to do so as any do.

[Darranar]

19. I personally don't buy those rulings...

of course, being a very liberal Jew, I don't buy lots of rabinnic rulings. It wasn't the placement of the inner sanctum but rather what was in it that made it holy.

[yuvalmadar]

21. And so are many others

The fact a ruling exists doesn't mean everyone agrees with it.

The only status quo in Judaism is the credibility of the bible (Everyone has his own interpretation of it, though), so such argument doesn't prove anything.

[rini]

12. very true

[newyorican]

7. "Extremists" is the word being overlooked here

And that is primarily the Temple Mount Faithful and like-minded endtimers.

The GOI did force the mount to open for visits, but they closed after one hour because there are no tourists. Just a bunch of extremists that have managed to drag the cornerstone for the "3rd Temple" to the (western, I think) gate of the mosque compound.

BTW, the Waqf also doesn't allow Palestinian men under 40 inside either.

On Edit: typos

[GabysPoppy]

8. This account differs with yours

The initial excitement over the opening of the Temple Mount to Jews appears to be wearing off, and in fact religious Jews are finding it harder and harder to enter. This morning, only one group of about 20 religious Jews was permitted to enter. Afterwards, Jews with beards and kippot (skullcaps) were made to wait for up to an hour and a half before being told that the Mount was closed - while all the while, other Jews and tourists were courteously waved in by the police and blessed with, "Enjoy your visit."

Arutz-7's Yosef Zalmanson recounts:
"I arrived around 9:45 AM, and met one person who had just completed his visit. He told me that everything had gone smoothly. When I arrived at the Mughrabim Gate, however , I found that things had apparently taken a turn for the worse. A group of religious Jews was being made to wait, while other tourists were waved straight in. When asked over and over when they would be allowed in, the religious Jews - some of whom had come from as far as Emanuel and Karnei Shomron - were merely told to wait and move back... I soon found out that the direct reason for the delay was the visit of two MKs on the Mount - Gilad Erdan of the Likud and Eliezer Cohen of the National Union. We were happy to hear of their initiative, but felt sure that they would not be happy to learn that their visit was causing us such delays...
"When the MKs completed their visit and were talking to a cameraman, I showed MK Erdan the discrimination and asked him if this was right in his eyes. 'Is it conceivable that in Israel, the Jewish State, religious Jews should be told to wait on the side while other Jews are allowed in?' I asked him. 'Look how they let in some people, while we are forced to wait! Isn't this truly a disgrace?!' He explained that the desired goal of bringing as many Jews as possible to the Temple Mount could be achieved only at a slow pace...
"I again showed him the discrimination going on in front of his eyes, and finally he was in fact moved enough to say, 'Let me go check.' Erdan then returned to the Mount, and returned a few minutes later with good news - he had spoken to the police officer in charge, and we would apparently be let in very soon. Unfortunately, however, he did not stick around long enough to see that just a few minutes later, the police announced to us that the Mount was closed and that we would not be allowed in. It was still 25 minutes before the 'official' closing time, and some of us had come from very far and had waited a long time - but this did not bother the police. 'Come early tomorrow,' were their parting words, 'around 7:30 AM.'"
http://directory.kol-israel.com/asites/?


also

The "Dome of the Rock" is not the El-Aksa mosque"

The Aksa Mosque was built 20 years after the Dome of the Rock, which was built in 691-692 by Khalif Abd El Malik. The name "Omar Mosque" is therefore false. In or around 711, or about 80 years after Mohammed died, Malik's son, Abd El-Wahd - who ruled from 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 center. 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-Aksa, so it would sound like the one mentioned in the Koran.

http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/templemount.html

Just in case their is some confusion

[newyorican]

9. I wasn't there...

the account is the articles. Considering the varied sources the differences I see are pretty much expected.

It does the debate no justice to deny the existence of the Temple Mount Faithful as an extremist group whose goal is to destroy the mosque compound and rebuild the Temple. If the GOI would reign in the crazies with the cornerstone, the model of the 3rd Temple and the red heifer, there might be a chance for progress.

Until then it appears the Waqf will deny entry, to the best of their ability, to those it considers a security risk. Including Palestinian men under 40, funny no one seems to be touched in the same sentimental way about that restriction. Hmmm...

[GabysPoppy]

11. I Have been there

"the account is the articles. Considering the varied sources the differences I see are pretty much expected."

A very telling statement. Let me agree with you here and every time you deride an Arutz-Sheva source, I will expect you to deride a statement from the "Palestinian news source". Anything less will expose you to being biased and hypocritical.

Point number two for your consideration.

Both Mosques were built ON the Temple Mount. The Mosque's were NOT built under the Temple Mount. You're an intelligent individual and I have no doubt you understand both the difference and the implication of that fact.

Point number three. During the 1967 war when Jerusalem was re-united, how easy would it have been for the IDF to blast both mosques to smithereens and claim collateral damage. Yet the GOI and the IDF showed reverance for a Moslem religious entity. On the other hand, while Jerusalem was under the control of the Jordanian government and its inhabitants, religious structures of Jewish origin were destroyed and ransacked. I saw it with my own eyes in the early 1970's. It has taken many years to restore these Synagogues.

Point number 4. Before entering the "Golden Dome", I was given very strict instructions to follow all Moslem practices and to respect all their customs including but not limited to removing my shoes. While on the other hand it could be seen that wasn't the rule of thumb prior to 1967 in regard to Jewish Houses of worship.

All in all it is very disappointing that your only knowledge of the area is limited to very biased sources.

[newyorican]

13. But you weren't there for this incident...

Let me agree with you here and every time you deride an Arutz-Sheva source, I will expect you to deride a statement from the "Palestinian news source". Anything less will expose you to being biased and hypocritical.

Sorry, I don't play the game of displaying derision, outrage or condemnation on demand. If forced to choose, I say door number three as one is "bias" and two is "hypocrisy".

Both Mosques were built ON the Temple Mount. The Mosque's were NOT built under the Temple Mount.

Your powers of observation must be legend.

You're an intelligent individual and I have no doubt you understand both the difference and the implication of that fact.

Pardon my doubting your sincerity, intelligent people don't require a kindergarten explaination of how new buildings are built *on top of* old buildings and not under (imagine that!). But other than the 1st and 2nd temple "ain't nuthin' but bedrock"** (questions surrounding the western wall excluded) I don't get any special meaning from your 'statement'. Sounds as if somebody hasn't gotten over it yet.

Point number three. During the 1967 war when Jerusalem was re-united, how easy would it have been for the IDF to blast both mosques to smithereens and claim collateral damage. Yet the GOI and the IDF showed reverance for a Moslem religious entity. On the other hand, while Jerusalem was under the control of the Jordanian government and its inhabitants, religious structures of Jewish origin were destroyed and ransacked. I saw it with my own eyes in the early 1970's. It has taken many years to restore these Synagogues.

Sorry, I started laughing when you got to "the GOI and the IDF showed reverance for a Moslem entity". Sounds like you feel that was a mistake.

Point number 4. Before entering the "Golden Dome", I was given very strict instructions to follow all Moslem practices and to respect all their customs including but not limited to removing my shoes. While on the other hand it could be seen that wasn't the rule of thumb prior to 1967 in regard to Jewish Houses of worship.

I'm sure there a point hidden in there somewhere. :shrug:

All in all it is very disappointing that your only knowledge of the area is limited to very biased sources.

Awww...I didn't know you cared..*sniff*

** Credit to Jim Sagle for this adaptation of his trademark vulgarism.

[tinnypriv]

10. That looks the more accurate account

Eliezer Cohen is a complete nutcase BTW. Unsurprisingly Arutz 7, Ma'ariv and the back end of a Ha'aretz article are the only sources to mention he visited.

The account does miss off the fact that the reason for the delays and unease over those with kippots etc was that (in the words of Ma'ariv), they need those of the Jewish faith to "keep a low profile". The obvious inference is that gradually increasing access without too much controversy is the best way of gaining sovereignty over the site.

This is a pointless and stupid provocation at any time. Right now it defies belief (excuse the pun).

[rini]

20. Temple Mount

The sacred plateau known to Jews as the Temple Mount the site of the First and Second Temples - reopened last week on a limited basis to people of all faiths for the first time since violence forced its closure to non-Muslims in 2000. Three officials of the Islamic Trust (Waqf), which runs the site, were arrested Monday for obstructing access to the mount, but there have been no other incidents since Israeli police last Wednesday began permitting morning visits by about 100 non-Muslims at a time through the tightly guarded Mugrabi Gate.
During the period of the closure, the Waqf removed "about 13,000 tons of unsifted archaeological rubble," some of which might have contained artifacts affirming that temples once stood there, said Dore Gold, an advisor to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. "The Waqf was exploiting its self-declared exclusive control to engage in activity that involved removing archeological remains as part of their preparation of a huge subterranean mosque," Gold said. "All Israel is doing is re-establishing the pre-September-2000 status quo whereby access is guaranteed to all faiths, which has been a cardinal principal of Israeli policy since 1967." (Philadelphia Inquirer)