Thursday, October 29, 2015

Eyeing Temple Mount Terrorists

Michael L.

{Cross-posted at Jews Down Under and The Jewish Press.}

lightThis should prove interesting.

As I write, The Algemeiner is reporting that Israel and Jordan will cooperate in the installation of video surveillance cameras on the Temple Mount, perhaps within days.  The Palestinian-Arabs do not like it because they know such footage will show the world who the aggressors are on the Mount.  On the other hand, the videos, which apparently will be live-streamed to the web, will also be used as a tool to maintain the racist status quo.

If you are a Jew or a Christian or a non-Muslim of any sort, you are denied the right to pray at the site by the Jordanian Waqf... whatever that is, exactly.  At Judaism's holiest site, within the ancient Jewish capital of Jerusalem, within the Jewish State of Israel, only Muslims are allowed to pray.  The policy could hardly be more at odds with western liberal values and, yet, all the western governments support it.

Here, for example, is a recent video of a Danish Christian pro-Israel woman getting kicked off of the Temple Mount only because they have her on film from a previous visit singing.  I am rather surprised that they did not drag her away as a terrorist.  Instead, the Waqf police told her that she had no right to sing in the mosque.  She said that she was not in the Al-Aqsa mosque, but outside.  He told her that the entire Temple Mount is a Muslim mosque.

And now the Arabs are even trying to claim possession of the Western Wall.

So, just who exactly is trying to alter the status quo on the Temple Mount?



This new policy, however, of streaming live action footage from the Mount to the internet is, in my view, an absolutely terrific idea.  Let Arab-Muslim "worshipers" on the Mount - with their holy rocks and holy pipe bombs - aggressively intimidate non-Muslims by screaming at them, Alahu Akbar!!, and physically trying to drive them away, while the cameras roll 24/7.

It was not all that long ago that US Congressman Dennis Ross met the crazed Women in Black who have recently been banned from the site... or so I sincerely hope:



People should be greeted in a spirit of education, graciousness, welcoming, and spirituality.

Instead they get spit upon.  I have been to scores of historical sites throughout the United States and I was always treated with the utmost graciousness.  It took me to visit home territory to be treated like an outsider.

The Temple Mount is one of the most historically significant sites in the world and, yet, within the State of Israel non-Muslim visitors are treated like garbage when they visit.

With luck, however, the video live-streaming will have a moderating effect on Arab behavior and perhaps they will feel a little less free to demonstrate their violently racist hatred toward others on the holiest site to the Jewish people.  It must be emphasized, by the way, that the Temple Mount is emphatically not the third holiest anything to anyone.  That is a lie that has be drummed up since the rise of Zionism at the end of the nineteenth-century and the beginning of the twentieth.

Although Jerusalem has had on-again, off-again significance in Islam, it was always dependent on the political moment.  Prior to the rise of Zionism the Temple Mount was essentially a ruin.  Some Jews would pray there, but the site was ignored by the Muslims because it had held no political value for centuries until the major aliyahs began.  It was only when the Jews started to come home in significant numbers that suddenly the Muslims re-discovered their third holiest site.

In any case, according to the Jerusalem Post:
PA officials have over the past few days dismissed the idea, arguing that Israel would use the cameras to arrest Palestinians “under the pretext of incitement.”

PA Foreign Minister Riad Malki said earlier this week that the Israeli-Jordanian agreement to install the cameras, which was reached under the auspices of US Secretary of State John Kerry, was a “trap.”
A pretext and a trap, eh?

The implication is that incitement to genocide against Jews is merely a pretext for locking up Arabs.  This can only mean that there is nothing morally wrong, not to mention illegal, about spreading such incitement.  As for the cunning trap, my recommendation to Muslims who go upon the Mount is to play nice with others and then you will not have to fall into this insidious "trap."

Adnan Abu Odeh, a high-level Jordanian politician said, "The cameras will document anyone who caries out an assault or Jews who want to pray there.”

Fascinating.

The obvious implication is that there is a moral equivalency between a thug endeavoring to assault an innocent person... and Jews praying.  The ethical blindness and hypocrisy of those like John Kerry, Barack Obama, Ban Ki-moon, and all those European leaders for whom this stance seems fair, is profound.

32 comments:

  1. Drones. Lots and lots and lots of drones. Pester the hell out of them. A mid grade consumer type quadcopter can operate up to 300 yards from its controller and can remain aloft up to 30 minutes. So for around the clock single view coverage you'd need 50 drones. Triple that for 3 views. 150 drones at an annualized cost of a $1,000 for each including night vision optics retrofit. To that add 15% for vehicle loss, shoot downs, etc and another 15% for replacement batteries. They can follow a pre programmed flight profile and autostream to a hosted storage appliance array.

    Who's writing the grant?

    ReplyDelete
  2. There is an agreement. You - indeed many of us -,might think the agreement results in some very peculiar and unfair conditions, but what is important is that there is an agreement.
    And what is of immeasurable importance is that successive Israeli governments have not sought to change that. And still do not.
    What is important is that Israel has kept its side of the bargain. Conspiracy theories abound but they do not reflect the reality.
    However " unfair" the agreement is, it is a sacrifice that Israel was prepared to make. One presumes they thought at the time that it would help to bring peace. One cannot fault them for their optimism. It was of its time.
    I don't know what - if anything - should or could change. Perhaps nothing. I hope that by using the cameras that some of the more colourful accusations may be more difficult to make. We shall see.


    The article below speaks to some of those issues. And is a really fascinating analysis of what is happening. From a psychological perspective.

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/losing-palestine/.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kate,

      I feel reasonably certain that this agreement did not include tossing ancient Jewish artifacts from the period of David into the garbage heap for the purpose of annihilating Jewish history.

      If the Jews wish to sovereignty over Jewish land then they must claim sovereingty over Jewish land, particularly the Mount.

      Otherwise it will be constantly used as a wedge against Israel and a claim of Arab sovereignty within Israel.

      How weak is Israel, anyway?

      Again, do you honestly think that the West will throw away its highly important economic and technological relations with Israel merely because Israel allows Jews to pray on Judaism's holiest site?

      The status quo is immoral and should be opposed.

      Delete
    2. The status quo IS immoral yet Liberals and even Bibi's support it. That's cause morality evaporates when it confronts Muslim/Arab exceptionalism. Could be the oil, the head chopping, the violence in general or the guilt but evaporate it does.

      Mostly it is fear. The Israeli Supreme Court has said :

      "every Jew has the right to ascend the Temple Mount, to pray on it, and to commune with his Creator. That is part of the freedom of religious worship; that is part of the freedom of expression. At the same time, this right, like other basic rights, is not an absolute right, and in a place at which the likelihood of damage to the public peace and even to human life is almost certain – this can justify limiting the freedom of religious worship and also limiting the freedom of expression."

      Delete
    3. There are a lot of different points in that.
      They need to be dealt with separately.
      That might take some time.

      Starting with the very last sentence:
      The status quo is immoral and needs to be opposed..
      When that decision was taken, in all probability what would happen could not have been envisaged. Maybe you can accuse people of extreme naiveté. Or a kind of " selling out". But perhaps the idea that it would go some way to buy peace was something we could see as understandable. Even honourable, in its way.
      We look at everything now with the benefit of hindsight.
      Making that agreement might have been - in real terms - quite stupid, but it was done in good faith. It has not been responded to with good faith. Obviously.
      But it wasn't an " immoral" decision. Its outcomes have been hugely messy and miserable. Without doubt. But morality exists in different forms. Sometimes being willing - even in the face of total hostility - to keep your promise, to retain that integrity, is more moral than getting the outcome that you would prefer. Or, in this case, the outcome that would be fair. I don't know what should happen,
      but sacrificing things that are hugely precious to one can, surely, be seen as deeply moral. It's turned into a horrible mess, for complex reasons. But commitment to a promise and being prepared to sacrifice something so important are not things to be ashamed of.
      That doesn't mean it is not a horrible mess.
      No one can wave a magic wand and change the status quo. What you suggest would involve more horror. And it would play into the hands of everyone who has tried - by lying - to weaponize this situation. It would say that they were right; that Israel was always intending to do this. That they have been right all along. I cannot see how that would help anyone.
      It's a holy site. For three major religions.
      I get what you say about how the mosque was, in fact, horribly neglected before it became something that could be used as a kind of symbol to rally against the hated Jews. Of course. But it is a holy site. And a beautiful and indispensable part of the cultural heritage of the world. It is a mark of something, maybe civilization itself, to be able to recognise the need to preserve and respect the holy and sacred sites of other traditions. Especially in the most difficult and hostile circumstances. And they don't get any more difficult than these.
      Watching ISIS blowing up Palmyra can only tell us quite how necessary it is to be as different from them as it is possible to be.


      I'll have to come back on the other points a bit later.

      Delete
    4. Just to be clear, I was commenting on what Mike had written. It was before Doodad's comment had been posted.
      Doodad's quote from the Israeli Supreme Court is really interesting. I hadn't read that before.

      Delete
    5. If we were more willing to blow up mosques Palmyra would still be there.
      Muslim behavior is disgusting precisely because it's cost free.

      Delete
    6. "Muslim behavior is disgusting precisely because it's cost free."
      You nailed it. We'll only see an end to this shit when people stop tolerating it.
      Up until now there has been a very effective shuck and jive routine put on by the western left. My feeling is that most people know in their hearts that this muslim behavior is foul and disgusting, and that western governments and media are out of touch with the masses. A backlash is forthcoming and it's going to get ugly.

      Delete
  3. Scientists have just confirmed that all the Terrorstinian knife attackers and road rage killers were infected with a serious case of Islam. There is no known cure according to officials.

    /snark

    ReplyDelete
  4. Birmingham university in the UK has had anti-Semitic posters etc posted all over campus.
    Pictures of Hitler etc.
    One Jewish girl ( I won't publish her twitter address) has bravely kept her twitter feed open and has been receiving neo-Nazi and
    "anti-Zionist" abuse all day. Including pictures of Auschwitz. Some - a few - good people on twitter are offering much needed support.
    Britain: 2015.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. European Jewry needs to arm itself and the kids need martial arts.

      Maybe Krav Maga.

      Maybe Kung Fu.

      Delete
    2. Herr Gerald Kaufman:

      https://youtu.be/ZS9XP5sy4V0

      Delete
    3. Jeff,
      our media didn't even cover this story.
      He's a grandee of the Labour Party; he holds the position of "Father of the House" in the Commons. This was not considered news by our national press or broadcast media. As someone said on Twitter, it seems it's open season on Jews in Britain today.
      Some people were wondering whether Corbyn would reprimand him, but one would have to ask what part of what Kaufman said would Corbyn disagree with?: Nothing.
      Also, and very disappointingly -although not surprisingly - you can check out horrible distortions in an article by David Aaronovitch, in the Times (£), via UK media watch.
      Aaronovitch writes in the Jewish Chronicle but still seems to give unquestioning credibility to particular sources re Israel/Palestine. He will believe whatever Haaretz and Amnesty etc have released. And so it goes on.

      Delete
  5. From THE HILL: Sanders promises to lead fight against Islamophobia

    As Howard Cosell would say, "Down goes Sanders! Down goes Sanders!"

    Truly sad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sanders panders.

      It seems like every 3 or four election cycles we've got an old fart who panders shamelessly to college kids who believe themselves to be knowledgeable and worldly just seconds after hatching from the cocoon of American prolonged infancy.

      "“There is a lot of anger being generated, hatred being generated against Muslims in this country, that is absolutely correct." Is it?

      Hey Bernie,
      There's a better than even chance that the young lady you have your arm around believes that the Holocaust was a hoax, or thinks it was well-deserved, or both.



      Delete
    2. And, needless to say, hate crime statistics by religion demonstrate that Jewish people are far more likely to be targeted for violence than are Muslims.

      It's not even close.

      Delete
    3. That's true, but hate crime against Jews doesn't count. So it's irrelevant.
      It's the same in the UK.

      Delete
    4. Thanks, Mike, For pointing that out. The last time I looked, I believe hate crimes against Muslims came up right behind Pacific Islanders. Number 12 on the old hit parade, I believe. Sounds like a real emergency.
      So the bloom is off the rose, and it turns out that Bernie is just another politician rather than the sainted savior of civilization that 18 year olds (and middle aged 18 year olds) believe him to be.

      Delete
  6. With cameras on the Temple Mount, Palestinian Muslim Arabs will have to be creative. Don't worry, they will be.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mike,

    Here's my favorite part of your piece:

    Adnan Abu Odeh, a high-level Jordanian politician said, "The cameras
    will document anyone who caries out an assault or Jews who want to
    pray there.”

    Fascinating.

    Were you channeling Spock?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. P.S. Thanks for also posting Rubio's speech. He really gets it.

      Delete
  8. I posted a link to this on the Friday thread, but am re-posting it on this one in case anyone might be interested.
    Apologies for the repetition.

    It's a seriously interesting piece by Ben Cohen about BDS.

    h/t Mick Hartley:

    "Essentially a form of domestic anti-Semitism."

    http://mickhartley.typepad.com/blog/2015/10/essentially-a-form-of-domestic-anti-semitism.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. k,
      The link gave me a blank page.

      Delete
    2. Now, that is flat-out weird.

      If you go to Hartley's site - you can find the link on my blogroll - you'll see that it is the second article from the top.

      yet the URL is identical to what Kate posted.

      How odd.

      Delete
    3. Oh, I'm sorry, Jeff.
      Hope you got through to the article the way Mike suggested.
      Don't know what happened there. (?)
      It's a really interesting piece, though.
      I hadn't thought of it in that way before.
      Be interested to know what you think.

      Delete
    4. The links are ctually not quite identical. Discarding the blog url, the good sub-link is
      2015/10/essentially-a-domestic-form-of-anti-semitism.html
      2015/10/essentially-a-form-of-domestic-anti-semitism.html is the bad one.

      They're close. (Maybe it was changed.)

      Delete
    5. Hey, when you're in IT, you obsess over stuff like this. ;)

      Delete
    6. Randall,
      thanks! Again.
      I didn't know you were in IT but it's certainly coming in useful!
      Apologies for the mistakes and thanks for sorting them out. :)

      Delete