and considering this election season that's saying a lot. And if you wanted more proof that the UN is largely run by a bunch of Jew-hating assholes, here it is:
The UN passed a resolution Thursday denying the Jewish connection to the Temple Mount and the Western Wall
The resolution was supported by 24 states, including Russia and China. 6 countries opposed and 26 abstained.
The resolution maintains that the Western Wall and Temple Mount will
be referred to by their Arabic names and the Hebrew terms for the sites
will only appear in quotation marks in UN references.
Got that? All that history, going back before the Romans? Doesn't matter: the Jew-haters don't care, and the others want to support the Palestinians for whatever reason.
We really need to de-infest that building in New York.
5 comments:
The Jewish media outlet "+972" has an interesting take on this. It directly contradicts what you wrote....
quote:
"Nowhere in the UNESCO resolution is there any statement invalidating or denying Jews’ connection to Temple Mount: the Jewish connection isn’t discussed in any way, either positively or negatively.
It is not mentioned because the resolution is about Israeli damage to a Muslim holy site – Al-Aqsa Mosque. Beyond that there is no general assessment or rejection of any religion’s connection to the site, apart from an affirmation of “the importance of the Old City of Jerusalem and its Walls for the three monotheistic religions.”"
That's THEIR words, not mine. Give it a read, if you would.... Some interesting stuff in there.
http://972mag.com/lets-talk-about-what-unesco-resolution-does-say-instead-of-what-it-doesnt/122629/
Found a number of articles on this, and I tend to agree that when a UNESCO piece refers to Israel as 'the occupying power', it gives me a definite attitude toward them.
I can't get the damned PDF of the resolution to come up for reading, so I'm having to go by what I've read other places. Like
'However, it includes a special section dealing with the Temple Mount, which says the site is sacred only to Muslims and fails to mention that it is sacred to the Jews as well. In fact, it mentions neither the Hebrew term for the site – Har HaBayit – nor its English equivalent, the Temple Mount. The site is referred to only by its Muslim names – Al-Aqsa Mosque and Haram al-Sharif. '
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.747314
Which now has an update with a link to this
'UNESCO Director General Irina Bokova on Friday came out against the agency's executive board for adopting a resolution that disregards the connection between Judaism and Temple Mount and casts doubt over the link between the religion and the Western Wall.
"The Al Aqsa Mosque [or] Al-Haram al-Sharif, the sacred shrine of Muslims, is also the Har HaBayit – or Temple Mount – whose Western Wall is the holiest place in Judaism," Bokova said in a statement. '
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.747466
Which makes me think the resolution goes beyond "The nasty Israelis are treating the poor Muslims bad and should be dealt with for it."
Just found this one:
'UNESCO passed the draft resolution on Thursday. According to the document posted on UNESCO's website and dated October 12, the holy sites will be referred to by their Arabic name, Haram esh-Sharif, while the Hebrew terms will only appear in quotation marks in UN references.
The draft also refers to “Occupied Palestine” and the need to “safeguard the Palestinian cultural heritage and the distinctive character of east Jerusalem,” referencing Islam’s third holiest site, the Al-Aqsa mosque.'
https://www.rt.com/news/362816-israel-suspends-unesco-jerusalem/
I'll keep looking to see if I can find a link that works(for me) to the actual resolution
I think the confusion over this issue is a deliberate attempt to obscure what is actually being discussed in the resolution.
The "Temple Mount" is an AREA, and Wiki says:
>>
The trapezium-shaped platform measures 488 m along the west, 470 m along the east, 315 m along the north and 280 m along the south, giving a total area of approximately 150,000 m2 (37 acres).
>>>
The mosque is a BUILDING, which stands inside that area.
So, the resolution ONLY discusses the actual the Al-Aqsa mosque itself, and NOT the rest of the large piece of property.
It seems that some folks are deliberately mixing the two terms.
I'm trying to leave any political issues out of this, since you and I will differ on them.
But surely you can see the difference in discussing one building inside a 37-acre area, and by using the name of that one specific building, the resolution is clearly not talking about the rest of the property?
THAT is why it only mentions the mosque, and why it refers to it by its (correct) Arabic name.
If they Israelis are preventing people from worshipping at the mosque, they're in the wrong there. No argument.
Part of my problem here is that after some of the bullshit the UN has come out with in the past, I tend to assume the worst of it and the various organizations.
And on THAT, we are in complete agreement.
Post a Comment