The Paranoid, Supremacist Roots of the Stabbing Intifada

[Mosby]

Last edited Sat Oct 17, 2015, 11:44 PM - Edit history (1)

In September of 1928, a group of Jewish residents of Jerusalem placed a bench in front of the Western Wall of the Temple Mount, for the comfort of elderly worshipers. They also brought with them a wooden partition, to separate the sexes during prayer. Jerusalem’s Muslim leaders treated the introduction of furniture into the alleyway in front of the Wall as a provocation, part of a Jewish conspiracy to slowly take control of the entire Temple Mount.

Many of the leaders of Palestine’s Muslims believed—or claimed to believe—that Jews had manufactured a set of historical and theological connections to the Western Wall and to the Mount, the site of the al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock, in order to advance the Zionist project. This belief defied Muslim history—the Dome of the Rock was built by Jerusalem’s Arab conquerors on the site of the Second Jewish Temple in order to venerate its memory (the site had previously been defiled by Jerusalem’s Christian rulers as a kind of rebuke to Judaism, the despised mother religion of Christianity). Jews themselves consider the Mount itself to be the holiest site in their faith. The Western Wall, a large retaining wall from the Second Temple period, is sacred only by proxy.

The spiritual leader of Palestine’s Muslims, the mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini, incited Arabs in Palestine against their Jewish neighbors by arguing that Islam itself was under threat. (Husseini would later become one of Hitler’s most important Muslim allies.) Jews in British-occupied Palestine responded to Muslim invective by demanding more access to the Wall, sometimes holding demonstrations at the holy site. By the next year, violence directed against Jews by their neighbors had become more common: Arab rioters took the lives of 133 Jews that summer; British forces killed 116 Arabs in their attempt to subdue the riots. In Hebron, a devastating pogrom was launched against the city’s ancient Jewish community after Muslim officials distributed fabricated photographs of a damaged Dome of the Rock, and spread the rumor that Jews had attacked the shrine.

The current “stabbing Intifada” now taking place in Israel—a quasi-uprising in which young Palestinians have been trying, and occasionally succeeding, to kill Jews with knives—is prompted in good part by the same set of manipulated emotions that sparked the anti-Jewish riots of the 1920s: a deeply felt desire on the part of Palestinians to “protect” the Temple Mount from Jews.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/10/the-roots-of-the-palestinian-uprising-against-israel/410944/

He is factually wrong with a couple things in this piece, one big one is stating that "The mainstream rabbinical view for many years has been that Jews should not walk atop the Mount for fear of treading on the Holy of Holies". That's the mainstream orthodox position, nothing more.

[Little Tich]

1. I think that the oppression and Apartheid caused by the settlements and the occupation

can easily explain current events. It's completely unnecessary to bring in neocon ideas about the "clash of civilizations".

Oppression + Trigger = Revolt

[shira]

2. That's what u think, but Palestinian stabbers say it's about Jews defiling al-Aqsa....

You think you know better than they do?

[grossproffit]

3. +1 SMH

[King_David]

5. There's another Poster in this group who also "knows" better than the Palestinians

[Little Tich]

7. +972 Mag: The real roots of violence in Jerusalem

By: Aviv Tatarsky
Source: +972 Mag, May 17, 2015

Prior to the outbreak of violence in Jerusalem last summer, some believed a new trend of 'Israelization' within Palestinian society in East Jerusalem offered a 'solution' for securing Israeli dominance in the city. But true equality carries a cost Israelis are not necessarily ready to pay.

On Jerusalem Day, it is worth asking what effective response we can offer for the violent crisis that has raged in the city for almost a year. Some observers blame ongoing discrimination against East Jerusalem residents for the rage and violence that erupts from the Palestinian population in the city. The response they propose is based on narrowing gaps and ending discrimination. This is also the solution proposed – at least declaratively, and after a wholesale “strong arm” approach – by right-wingers, who do not conceal the fact that their chief motivation is to prevent the division of the city. However, the immediate motives behind the wave of violence that began last summer were not the shortage of classrooms, dilapidated infrastructure, or even house demolitions. The tinder-box was ignited by the murder of Muhammad Abu Khdeir, the war in Gaza, and the pressure applied by the Jewish Temple Mount organizations – all factors at the heart of the wider national conflict.

The current reality in Jerusalem is unique against the background of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Jerusalem is the only place where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians live in daily friction with Israelis and with the Israeli authorities. There is no Israeli presence in Gaza, and the same is true in Areas A and B in the West Bank (with the exception of military incursions, which can create havoc but do not occur on a daily basis). In Area C, which is under full Israeli control, there are no large Palestinian population centers capable of waging a struggle that can challenge Israel. This reality enables Israel to have its (occupation) cake and eat it, too. Jerusalem is the only place where Israel has not managed to “disengage,” and accordingly, it was predictable that it would be in Jerusalem that the illusion of the “shrapnel in the rear-end” would be shattered. (Naftali Bennett famously compared the Palestinians to shrapnel left in the body that one must simply learn to live with.)

In other words, even if it was only up to the Palestinians, there could be no solution to Jerusalem that did not involve a solution to the national conflict. In reality, of course, it will take two to stop the violent tango. I intend to devote most of this article to the Israeli partner in the dance, which under present circumstances is naturally the dominant of the two.

In order to understand the context, let’s go back two or three years. In 2012-2013, there were very few violent incidents of a national nature in Jerusalem. This period represented the peak of a process that had continued over almost an entire decade. At the same time, Palestinian residents began to be increasingly present in areas that have previously been almost exclusively Israeli, such as the shopping centers in the west of the city and the Hebrew University (including the first generation of East Jerusalem high-school graduates who chose to take the Israeli matriculation examinations rather than the Palestinian Tawjihi). And what seemed to be the most significant development of all, was the new phenomena of Palestinians moving to live in Israeli neighborhoods such as French Hill, Pisgat Zeev, and Gilo.

Read more: http://972mag.com/the-real-roots-of-violence-in-jerusalem/106795/

[shira]

10. 972 is an awful source. Look, Abbas & his cronies scream about Israel trying......

....to change the status quo at the Mount, that Jews who are there defile the area, and that those Palestinians who attack Jews & become martyrs are heroes. Your sources ignore that, but the facts couldn't be more clear. Same incitement as 100 years ago.

I take Abbas at his words, and his beloved "Martyrs" at theirs. These terrorists attacking Jews are actual victims to Abbas & his Israel hating Western friends. What else needs to be said? I don't need Israel hating lunatics at 972 or anywhere else telling me how it is when I can go directly to the source - the Palestinians themselves. Why trust any source that sees terrorists as victims suffering at the hands of the oppressive Jews?

The difference this time is that it's not Palestinians in the W.Bank or Gaza who are attacking Jews. It's those within Israel - those who are not under occupation, settlements or pretend Apartheid - which goes to show how insane a 1-state solution really is. That's just a call to war.

Time to wake up to reality.

[Little Tich]

11. East Jerusalem isn't in Israel, so your claim is bogus. n/t

[shira]

13. Yeah, it is. Since 1980 E.Jerusalem is in Israel.

Its residents are either citizens of Israel or permanent residents who could've been citizens any time over the past 35 years.

[azurnoir]

15. not even the US recognizes Israel's unilateral attempt at annexation

[shira]

17. Doesn't change the fact that E.Jerusalem has been in Israel since 1980....

These attacks aren't coming from the W.Bank. They're coming from within Israel today. Big difference from years past & something that most armchair professional "analysts" are oblivious to.

[Israeli]

12. "" 972 is an awful source. ""..........

Sure shira .....

....its only an Israeli Left wing source compared to all the American Right wing sources you give , at least look on the bright side you havent called it antisemitic ......yet.

[geek tragedy]

14. I love it when people who link to rightwing, racist authors and publications

and repudiate every leftwing publication then turn around and claim to support Meretz.

[shira]

16. It's all about accuracy and honesty - no matter the source.

Many Leftwing sources tend to support far Rightwing extremist organizations like Hamas & Hezbollah - and try selling them as part of the "Global Progressive Left". We see insane rightwing sources like Mondoweiss and IfAmericansKnew posted here frequently.

There is no Right/Left divide anymore.

It's centrists and moderates on one side (from center left to center right) vs. the unhinged fascist extremists (from both the right and left) on the other.

[Israeli]

18. ....and think nobody will notice ;)....nt.

[geek tragedy]

4. Goldberg thought we needed to invade Iraq to protect Israel. nt

[shira]

6. What makes Goldberg worse than Hamas defenders who support terror against Jews? n/t

[oberliner]

8. That is not true

His support for the Iraq invasion was based on completely different reasons entirely.

Also:

How Did I Get Iraq Wrong?

I didn't realize how incompetent the Bush administration could be.

By Jeffrey Goldberg

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2008/03/how_did_i_get_iraq_wrong_5.2.html

If you genuinely care to hear why he supported the war at the time (and how we felt about it afterwards), read his own words on the subject instead of putting words in his mouth or believing BS from other sources.

[geek tragedy]

9. ....

Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction clearly are not meant solely for domestic use. Several years ago in Baghdad, Richard Butler, who was then the chairman of UNSCOM, fell into conversation with Tariq Aziz, Saddam’s confidant and Iraq’s deputy Prime Minister. Butler asked Aziz to explain the rationale for Iraq’s biological-weapons project, and he recalled Aziz’s answer: “He said, ‘We made bioweapons in order to deal with the Persians and the Jews.’ ”

Iraqi dissidents agree that Iraq’s programs to build weapons of mass destruction are focussed on Israel. “Israel is the whole game,” Ahmad Chalabi, the leader of the Iraqi National Congress, told me. “Saddam is always saying publicly, ‘Who is going to fire the fortieth missile?’ ”—a reference to the thirty-nine Scud missiles he fired at Israel during the Gulf War. “He thinks he can kill one hundred thousand Israelis in a day with biological weapons.” Chalabi added, “This is the only way he can be Saladin”—the Muslim hero who defeated the Crusaders. Students of Iraq and its government generally agree that Saddam would like to project himself as a leader of all the Arabs, and that the one sure way to do that is by confronting Israel.

In the Gulf War, when Saddam attacked Israel, he was hoping to provoke an Israeli response, which would drive America’s Arab friends out of the allied coalition. Today, the experts say, Saddam’s desire is to expel the Jews from history. In October of 2000, at an Arab summit in Cairo, I heard the vice-chairman of Iraq’s Revolutionary Command Council, a man named Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, deliver a speech on Saddam’s behalf, saying, “Jihad alone is capable of liberating Palestine and the rest of the Arab territories occupied by dirty Jews in their distorted Zionist entity.”

Amatzia Baram said, “Saddam can absolve himself of all sins in the eyes of the Arab and Muslim worlds by bringing Israel to its knees. He not only wants to be a hero in his own press, which already recognizes him as a Saladin, but wants to make sure that a thousand years from now children in the fourth grade will know that he is the one who destroyed Israel.”

It is no comfort to the Kurds that the Jews are now Saddam’s main preoccupation. The Kurds I spoke with, even those who agree that Saddam is aiming his remaining Scuds at Israel, believe that he is saving some of his “special weapons”—a popular euphemism inside the Iraqi regime—for a return visit to Halabja. The day I visited the Kalak Bridge, which divides the Kurds from the Iraqi Army’s Jerusalem brigade, I asked Muhammad Najar, the local official, why the brigade was not facing west, toward its target. “The road to Jerusalem,” he replied, “goes through Kurdistan.”


...

There is little doubt what Saddam might do with an atomic bomb or with his stocks of biological and chemical weapons. When I talked about Saddam’s past with the medical geneticist Christine Gosden, she said, “Please understand, the Kurds were for practice.” ?

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2002/03/25/the-great-terror

Comparing Muslims (Saddam, Iran, Palestinians)who don't like Israel
to Hitler is Goldberg's specialty. He peddles hysteria.