No good deed goes unpunished
Posted by Godefroi on November 14, 2007
After Israel’s decisive victory over the Arab aggressors in 1967, one olive branch she offered was to let the Islamic Waqf control the Temple Mount.
Most Muslims believe that the Al Aqsa mosque built there on the ruins of the Jewish Temple is the same as “the farthest mosque” to which Muhammad supposedly went on his night journey, which is why this particular piece of real estate is so often referred to as “the third holiest site in Islam”. A little bit of sense would tell anyone that since this mosque did not exist during Muhammad’s lifetime, it can’t be “the farthest mosque” from wherever he was when he experienced that hallucination.
Anyway, there are many who will continue to insist that Jerusalem should not belong to the Jews out of fear of them (the Jews) not allowing people of other faiths to convene in the holy sites. That is, the mosque I mentioned, and the historical and religious affiliations with Christianity that exist there as well (I personally think it would be an overwhelming experience to pray at the Western Wall of the temple where Yeshua prayed). Interestingly, the Waqf has done exactly that – ok, not exactly (the Jordanians did during their control of the area before 1967). But they do limit the hours available to non-Muslims to approach and forbid praying by Jews and Christians. Recently they have been doing excavations and “trench-digging” that archaeologists say are causing incalculable damage to Jewish antiquities, which actually has been going on for more than a decade (some troubling details here).
My point (so far): Israel did not have to allow the Arabs to control the Temple Mount. It was a gift from Israel. A nice, peaceful, naive & wasted conciliatory gesture.
Today, in the Apartheid State of Israel™ the KNESSET MEMBER, Israel’s ARAB Minister of Science, Culture and Sport, Raleb Majadle said that the Temple Mount is Islamic, period, and will be under Islamic, not Israeli, law.
From Israel National News.
Speaking before the Knesset plenum, Majadle replied that the digs carried out on the Mount were coordinated, accompanied and supervised by the Antiquities Authority.
This is interesting, since according to this account, “The [Antiquities] Authority, which digs for religious artifacts across the State of Israel, has not inspected construction on Judaism’s holiest site even once since the work began, despite continuous calls for the construction to be supervised and halted.”
MK Eldad asked Majadle pointedly from the plenum floor: “Does Israeli law apply on the Temple Mount or does it not?”
Majadle answered: “In my opinion, certainly not.” Eldad reminded him that in answering parliamentary questions he speaks for the entire government, but Majadle was unfazed: “I will say my opinion. Before I am a government minister I am first and foremost a person and a citizen and a Muslim. With all due respect for the law, the law was meant to respect the religion [?], the person and the citizen and protect him, and not the other way around, enslave him,” he explained. “Therefore I say clearly: Al-Aksa, Al-Haram al-Sharif [as the Temple Mount is called by Muslims – ed.], cannot be under the authority of Israeli law.”
Eldad interrupted him repeatedly, reminding him that he had sworn allegiance to the State of Israel and its laws, but Majadle insisted: “I hereby inform you, esteemed MK Eldad, that I may be a minister for one, two or ten years but I was born a Muslim, and a Muslim I shall die. I respect Israeli law…but if there is a contradiction between the law and my deep faith as a Muslim, I announce that I will know what to choose.”
On one hand, I understand. My faith in Christ is more important than my citizenship. However, if I know going into a job that it will conflict with my faith, it is incumbent on me to find another job. The Knesset is for Israeli law, not Islamic law. If Majadle can’t function that way, he should quit or be fired (more appropriately, he should never have taken the job).
So anyway, in return for Israel allowing the Muslims to retain civil control over their holy shrines (as questionable as the claim may be), the Muslims there are busily and intentionally destroying the evidence of the Jews’ well-documented historical ties to the land. Perhaps Olmert (and his successors) should keep this in mind – along with all the other oh-so-successful attempts at appeasing the Arabs – when considering re-dividing Jerusalem and giving the Arabs another state.