.jpg)
A.P. [photo/ Mohammed Muheisen
A new book on competing religious and ethnic claims in Jerusalem was co-authored by people on different sides. It is an unusual collaboration.
One co-author is Sari Nusseibeh, President of Al-Quds University. He usually is portrayed as a moderate, the label lending him credibility. Not mentioned was a way of assessing his decency, for example, his having let Al-Quds U. use its chemistry classes to teach bomb-making.
Another misinterpreted statement is that the visit to the Temple Mount by Ariel Sharon, “set off riots that heralded a Palestinian uprising.” The riots were prepared for Arafat by Barghouti, who exploited and distorted Sharon’s inoffensive visit into a religious affront. Sharon did nothing wrong. It hasn’t occurred to the Times that Palestinian Arab leaders are rabble-rousers, and their rabble too easily roused, possibly because of their religious notion of superiority. A co-author hinted at that by explaining that Muslims consider the whole compound a mosque. They think they should have exclusive religious access.
The article: “More recently, the authorities on both sides have accused both Jewish and Islamic extremists of incitement, and there have been sporadic clashes between the police and stone-throwing Muslim protesters on the mount this fall.”
The NY Times should not resort to the question-betting, vague Israeli terms, “incitement” and “extremists.” For decades, the Palestinian Arab leadership has fomented violence and even war. Certain religious Jews want to pray on the Mount, but do not incite to violence.
Again, the article: “The lack of archaeological evidence of the ancient temples has led many Palestinians to deny any real Jewish attachment or claim to the plateau.” Attachment need not come from archeological evidence. Otherwise, why wouldn’t the Times point out that there is no archeological or any other evidence to support the Muslim claim of the site’s holiness to them?
But there is archeological evidence of the Second Temple and archeological evidence of the Jewish presence at the time of the First Temple. Ironically, while claiming no evidence for them exists, the Muslim Waqf destroyed much of it. Also, the Second Temple existed in historical times, and the record shows it.
Mr. Nusseibeh urges a stoppage by “Israeli-led archaeological excavations near the mount that threaten Muslim relics” that “totally flout what is divine!” Why doesn’t he urge stoppage of illegal Arab construction that could have collapsed the whole Mount down and that destroys Jewish artifacts?
By contrast, Israeli excavation endangered nothing, despite malicious rumors spread by Muslim leaders. Israeli archeologists to not threaten the few Muslim relics they find – they are professional, not political.
For more on claims to Jerusalem, click here
Comments