Monday, October 08, 2007

Jerusalem: Who is the Real Mother?

Who is the real mother? The one who claims all of Yerushalayim, or the one who has no problem cutting it in half?


Report: Israel and the Palestinians have agreed that the Temple Mount as well as other parts of the Old City in Jerusalem will be under Jordanian control as part of a future peace deal, a Palestinian daily reported on Monday.
We saw what a wonderful job the Jordanians did when they controlled the Old City of Jerusalem from 1948-1967.
Major damage was suffered while the Mount was controlled by Jordan between the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and 1967, with Jordanians using the gravestones from the cemetery for construction of roads and army latrines, including gravestones from millennia-old graves. The late King Hussein permitted the construction of the Intercontinental Hotel at the summit of the Mount of Olives together with a road that cut through the cemetery which destroyed hundreds of Jewish graves, some of which were from the First Temple Period.[1][2][3] Some fifty thousand Jewish graves out of a total seventy thousand were destroyed or defaced during the nineteen years of Jordanian rule.[4] After the Six-Day War, the Israelis painstakingly repatriated as many of the surviving gravestones as possible (from Wikipedia)
Or here's what PsychoToddler wrote when visiting his Great Grandfather's grave on the Mount of Olives:
Many of the graves look new. This is partially because the cemetery is still in active use and new graves are being dug. It is also because the Jordanians overturned many of the graves during their occupation of the area between 1948 and 1967. My great-grandfather’s headstone was one of those that were rededicated after ‘67. How do we know where it was? First, because my Aunt Sara and her husband visited the grave before the Jordanians took over. And second, because the Chevra Kadisha (Burial Society) kept meticulous records going back hundreds of years.


On our way over we passed numerous graves that were still in a state of disrepair. My cousin told me that there were many that either could not be identified or that didn’t have family to rebuild them. In fact we passed one “mass grave” that was constructed from the headstones of multiple unidentifiable graves.

I was told that the Arabs had looted the cemetery, and that the marble headstones were used to make toilets.


Then again, why go back to the ancient history of 1948? Let's see how well the Palestinians are taking care of Kever Yosef, (Jospeh's tomb in Shechem/Nabuls) which was specifically mentioned by the historic Oslo accords...




Or how about what Arutz Sheva's report from the visitors to Kever Yosef over Chol HaMoed a few days ago...

(IsraelNN.com) Shechem's Arabs have turned Joseph's Tomb into a garbage dump, Jews who visited the site during Chol Hamoed Sukkot discovered. The group of visitors, which included Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu of Tzfat, prayed at Joseph's Tomb with IDF permission on the second day of Sukkot and was shocked to find that the holy site was in ruins.

Arabs have smashed the domes that capped the structure and the grave's marker. More disturbing, however, was the discovery of piles of freshly dumped, smoldering garbage. The walls of the structure were covered with soot, and it was clear that this was the result of recent burning.

In the past, local Arabs claimed that Joseph's Tomb was a holy site for Muslims.
So the bottom line is; the best way to ensure the desecration and destruction of holy sites in Jerusalem is to give control of them to Jordanians or Palestinians.

Thanks Ehud.


Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael

12 comments:

YMedad said...

But do you really think there's a practical way to divide the city? How's he going to do it? But in any case, will there be demos at Annapolis?

Jerry said...

Jameel-

I'm not saying that I disagree with you. But let me pose a question to you that I'd like for you to answer without denying the presupposition:

If the Jordanians would not treat the holy sites entrusted to them properly (albeit not as improperly as pre-1967 because we do have a peace deal with them and presumably there would be some Israeli recourse)- yet a deal that included their sovereignty would bring about true peace between Israel and the Palestinians, would you not approve of such a deal?
Is that too big a price to pay if there can truly be peace?

Now, I know that you're upset about this because you don't think it will bring peace. But that's not what I'm asking. Assume that it can. That it might. Dare say, that the sites won't be transferred to Jordan until we know that it will.

So hypothetically, would you be willing to put these sites in Jordanian hands if it means peace?

Jameel @ The Muqata said...

Since when does "practical" have anything to do with "peace" negotiations between Israel and Palestinians? Was it Oslo I or II "practical"? Chasing after terrorists into Area A -- was that practical? Or abandoning Gaza and the Philadelphia Corridor to allow mass smuggling of weapons?

The Peace Dreamers ignore practicalities...

Jameel @ The Muqata said...

Jerry; Why should Israel abandon sovereignty over it's holiest sites for hypothetical promises which have an awful track record?

Already TODAY the Temple Mount is de-facto under Waqf sovereignty, and the routine destruction of Jewish Temple artifacts is overlooked by everyone. (even by the Israeli government). Why should we assume it would be any better under Jordanian rule?

Yet even WITH an ironclad promise of protection of Jewish holy sites, it seems ludicrous to abandon sovereignty. Jews didn't abandon their Judaism over the past 2000 years, and I see no reason why we should abandon Jerusalem now either.

On a side note, but still of interest...

We are already providing a hugely steep price for peace with Jordan. Approximately 1 meter's height of the Kinneret is given to the Jordanians on an annual basis, which accounts almost exactly to the current water shortage in Israel.

Combine that with routine sewage dumping into the Mountain Ridge aquifer by Palestinians, and our entire water supply is threatened. Is the price of "peace" worth having not enough water?

Anonymous said...

people get the government they deserve

Jerry said...

Jameel-

I know it's your blog, and you can feel free to write about whatever you'd like.

But you didn't answer my question.

Not a promise of peace. Real peace. Hypothetically, would you trade it for these holy sites?

Lurker said...

Hey, Jameel -- isn't that you with the sad face in the upper-left part of the picture?

Jameel @ The Muqata said...

Jerry: Honestly? No. Not even for a promise of real peace.

Why?

We didn't fight for the existence of Israel to be dhimmi under the protectorate of the Arab world.

If I would be willing to disown Jerusalem, I might as well accept the Uganda plan...or live in New Zealand.

(And I don't mind you're asking by the way...)

Lurker: Yes, the splendor was me.

Lurker said...

I think that's the first time I've ever seen a sad splendor...

Anonymous said...

Hi
I found you today through Maven's blog. I'll be reading your blog from now on.
Shalom

Anonymous said...

What? WHAT?! Is this for real? There is truly such an agreement? This has got be a joke, a horrible and obscene joke.

Daniel said...

I suppose that is Moses came down from Sinai and said the "palis" are now dudley-do-right and we should divide the land and there will be peace, I might go along with it.
However why do all the "plans" include making Yesha Judenrein? If Arabians can live in the green line , why cant Jews live in Judae?

Search the Muqata

Loading...

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails