Should Israel give up the Temple Mount for a real peace?

[Reffo]

well, as long as we're glib, they didn't.
You forgot that it wasn't the Arabs who destroyed the Temple, it was the Romans. They (the Romans) built a temple for Jupiter on the site and founded the city of Aelia Capitolina on the ruins of Jer'm. Later on, when Rome embraced Christianity, a church was built on the site, but that was tore down too. When finally the Arabs came to Israel, some 500 years after the temple destruction, the site was "a garbage dump" (according to Wikipedia)

Sorry sharonbn you are clearly factually wrong. We were not talking about who destroyed the temple. Nor were we talking about what the site looked like when the Arabs conquered the land. We were talking about where the Arabs chose to build their mosque and for what reason. Clearly they chose to build it on top of a Jewish holy site (as well as Christian holy site by then) and don't tell me that they did not choose to do so for supremacist reasons because they habitually did similar things with other people's holy sites elsewhere in the world in many lands that they conquered. Here read this ....

http://dttj.blogspot.com.au/2010/07/...quest-and.html

I am sure you can find other reference sites that confirm the above if you choose to dispute the veracity of this one. Just google it.

But even if you want to forget all that. Please explain to me why do they insist, in our time, that non Muslims mustn't pray on that site? Don't you think that's supremacist behaviour on their part? I think many people would agree with me that it IS.

[sharonbn]

I agree that it is wrong and downright immoral policy of the Waqf. This is something that Israel should insist upon in the negotiations.

[dayag]

how do you know? did you ask them?

From history. The Muslim conquerors of Jerusalem were outraged that the Temple Mount had been treated as a garbage dump. In the version of the story below that I heard, Sophronius himself was forced to help clean up the site.

When at last the Greek Orthodox Patriarch Sophronius of Jerusalem was forced to surrender in 638 A.D., Umar is believed to have traveled to Jerusalem personally in order to receive the surrender. Umar had become the second caliph following the death of Abu Bakr, making him one of the earliest successors of Mohammed himself. His procession into the city was a humble one: the caliph was clad in simple attire, leading a camel. His conquest of Jerusalem, once the city had surrendered, was marked by its lack of further killing and destruction. The Christian holy sites were one and all left intact.

When Umar asked Sophronius to guide him to the city’s holy places, the patriarch took the caliph to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Famously, Umar refrained from praying within the church itself, as that would have transformed the church into a Muslim holy site. Instead Umar prayed outside in the streets of Jerusalem.

But the caliph was most curious to see the Temple of Solomon, of fabled magnificence. He was horrified to discover that the Temple was in ruins, and the Temple Mount itself had become a rubbish heap in which the city garbage was regularly dumped.

It was at this moment that Temple Mount’s identity as a site holy to Islam began to take shape. Umar commanded his men to clear the rubbish from the platform. He then had a rough-hewn wooden mosque built at the southern end of the platform, the first incarnation of what is known today as Al Aqsa.

source: http://www.gojerusalem.com/article_5...t-of-Jerusalem

[Reffo]

I agree that it is wrong and downright immoral policy of the Waqf. This is something that Israel should insist upon in the negotiations

You think that insisting would work? The mistake was made many years ago when the then leaders of Israel agreed to enforce this rule in the first place. Dare I say it? In order to appease the Arabs. Did Israel get thanked for that? Do the Arabs acknowledge Israel's magnonimity? Of course not. Do you think their behaviour towards Israel would improve after Israel would totally surrender sovereignity of the site in order to appease the Arabs again? Personally, I would bet against that. It is my opinion that at the least, Israel should insist on reciprocal concessions, real ones, from the Arabs before it makes any further concessions. And not just words, but deeds and make sure that the concessions are actually delivered, reliably and consistently before Israel agrees to implement concessions of it's own again.

[sharonbn]

You think that insisting would work? The mistake was made many years ago when the then leaders of Israel agreed to enforce this rule in the first place. Dare I say it? In order to appease the Arabs.

No, Israel did it to comply with int'l law. At the present, the Temple mount is the site of a Muslim mosque, and it should be controlled and maintained by Muslim authority. that is the law that countries must comply with if they wish to be taken seriously by the world.

This is the difference between Israeli gov't and the Taliban (remember? they destroyed Hindu sites)

Did Israel get thanked for that? Do the Arabs acknowledge Israel's magnonimity? Of course not.

Like I said, Israel got the world's acknowledgement that it is a sovereign country that abides to the int'l law.

Do you think their behaviour towards Israel would improve after Israel would totally surrender sovereignity of the site in order to appease the Arabs again? Personally, I would bet against that.

what I meant was that Israel should insist on safeguard measurements, like int'l inspectors.

[Reffo]

No, Israel did it to comply with int'l law. At the present, the Temple mount is the site of a Muslim mosque, and it should be controlled and maintained by Muslim authority. that is the law that countries must comply with if they wish to be taken seriously by the world.

This is the difference between Israeli gov't and the Taliban (remember? they destroyed Hindu sites)

What the hell are you on about sharonbn? Israel would be like the Taliban unless it gives the Muslims full autonomy over the Temple Mount and it goes along with the Muslim authority to forbid Jews praying, yes, JUST praying at the holiest site for Jews?

Like I said, Israel got the world's acknowledgement that it is a sovereign country that abides to the int'l law.

Which Internetional law states that Jews are not allowed to pray at Jewish holy sites?

what I meant was that Israel should insist on safeguard measurements, like int'l inspectors.

Good luck with that. Since when does the UN safeguard anything? Let alone things that are important to Israel?

[sharonbn]

well.... I was about to give a detailed well thought answer, and then I realised who I am talking to.
its fruitless.

You win.

All the Arabs, men, women and children, want to kill all Jews around the world. They have wanted to do so for the last 60 years constantly without any change in opinion whatsoever. We should never do peace with the Arabs. never. in fact we should all go now and kill all of them right away.

good for you.

[Reffo]

well.... I was about to give a detailed well thought answer, and then I realised who I am talking to.
its fruitless.

You win.

All the Arabs, men, women and children, want to kill all Jews around the world. They have wanted to do so for the last 60 years constantly without any change in opinion whatsoever. We should never do peace with the Arabs. never. in fact we should all go now and kill all of them right away.

good for you.

Ok so you want to play straw men again, I'll do likewise.

None of the Arabs, want to kill any Jews or destroy Israel because they really love us. They never wanted to do so and everything is just a figment of the imagination of us right wingers because we are all just war mongers. In fact we are such a threat to the whole world that we should do you leftists a favor and slash our own wrists so that you will be able to live in peace and harmony forever with your Arab brothers who just adore you.

[Aliyah1995]

Sharonbn, I think you know by now I respect you (at least I hope you do), but I believe you are being a bit harsh on Reffo. Reffo, like me (and many Israelis) is a bit skeptical of our "peace" partners and, I believe, for good reason. No, Israel is not blameless in this conflict, nor do I believe Reffo has indicated so. Don't take this the wrong way, but your last post to Reffo is below your intelligence.

[Reffo]

Sharonbn, I think you know by now I respect you (at least I hope you do), but I believe you are being a bit harsh on Reffo. Reffo, like me (and many Israelis) is a bit skeptical of our "peace" partners and, I believe, for good reason. No, Israel is not blameless in this conflict, nor do I believe Reffo has indicated so. Don't take this the wrong way, but your last post to Reffo is below your intelligence.

Aliyah

I don't mind sharonbn's comments, I can give as good as I get. No amount of tantrums by anyone will stop me from telling what I believe to be the truth.

By the way, I believe sharonbn left us for good. I do believe that it was because of me but I won't apologize because the truth needs to be aired, no matter who is squeamish about hearing it.

[Aliyah1995]

Reffo, FWIW I hope Sharon did NOT leave us. While we have our disagreements, I like his posts. I also wouldn't compare him with the 972 bunch. Sharon is CLEARLY a Zionist, cares about Israel, and he is a poster I can respect even while disagreeing with.

At any rate, ever since Mediocrates disappeared this forum has become a ghost town. Sharon brought a little bit of life back to it.

[Reffo]

Aliyah

Don't get me wrong, I didn't and I still don't want sharonbn to leave. But it seems that while he/she seems to be able to tease, he/she can't take a bit of robust language. Oh well ...

Note: according to Pleepleus sharonbn may be a she, not a he. But it's not confirmed.

[Reffo]

By the way, does anyone know why Mediocrates disappeared? I for one miss his posts.

[Madeline]

By the way, does anyone know why Mediocrates disappeared? I for one miss his posts.

yes indeed. perhaps he will return? I miss barallu very much as well

[Aliyah1995]

Mediocrates, Bararallu, GratefulFred, etc. Aw, those were the days