Jordan condemns storming of Al Aqsa Mosque by Israeli forces

[webfact]

Jordan condemns storming of Al Aqsa Mosque by Israeli forces
English.news.cn

AMMAN, July 27 (Xinhua) -- Jordan on Sunday condemned storming of Al Aqsa Mosque compound by Israeli forces, the state-run Petra news agency reported.

Jordan's Minister of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs Hayel Daoud called for international efforts to end these measures by Israel.

He said such raids into the yards of the mosque represent a stark violation.

Jordan oversees the holy Islamic and Christian sites in Jerusalem under the 1994 peace deal with Israel an other deals with the Palestinian Authority, which envisages east Jerusalem as the capital of its future state.

Israeli forces stormed into Jerusalem's al-Aqsa compound on Sunday after dozens of Palestinians hurled stones and firecrackers at police officers, officials said.

Full story: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-07/27/c_134448506.htm

-- Xinhua 2015-07-27

[Lissos]

How about condemning the chav Muslim youth lobbing stones, Jordan.

Do you approve of this alleged 'holy place' being used as a chav bunker?

If so, keep doing what you're doing (only condemning Israel for responding)

If not, slap an Islamic ASBO on the sexually frustrated young chavs.

[Jupiterjim]

Guess they can't do their dirty work then run and hide in the Mosque.

[Seastallion]

From the report, it does seem like Israeli police were justified.

It would be interesting to know what set the youths off.

[Steely Dan]

Perhaps if the Palestinians had not desecrated their own Mosque by using it as an explosives dump for attacking Jews worshipping on Temple Mount then there wouldn't be a problem. Jordan should also wind it's neck on considering the Israelis are currently loaning them 16 military helicopters with which to attack ISIS.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-rioters-attack-police-on-temple-mount/

Edited July 27, 2015 by Steely Dan

[NeverSure]

"...Palestinian Authority, which envisages east Jerusalem as the capital of its future state."

That's what this whole Israel/PLO conflict is all about - that Temple Mount in E. Jerusalem. It is often called The West Bank which it is part of.

The Muslims aren't going to get it but they are apparently going to die trying. They want all of E. Jerusalem including most of the sites mentioned in the Old Testament as Jewish sites. This Temple Mount was the site of the Jewish Temple which the Old Testament says contained the Holy of Holies and the Ark of the Covenant. That temple was destroyed by the Romans in the first century BC and now has a Muslim mosque on it - and thus this story.

I give the OP author credit for being one of the few who called it like it is.

Cheers.

Edited July 27, 2015 by NeverSure

[Lissos]

It would be interesting to know what set the youths off.

Assumption there, that something other than 'themselves' set themselves off.

Young males, overflowing with testosterone. Fighty, bored, bravado.

It is a palpable thing I found in that particular area and in parts of Nablus, a wild eyed energy. As I say, sexual frustration. It manifests as seeking confrontation / destruction in the west, and can happen there.

[ABCer]

With all due respect to Religion of Peace in general and its sensitive Reps from any ME country in particular:

# the things with Caliphate being not so glorious

# the friendly ties with Israel however temporary and being only a tactical move yet being a necessity

# the desire to keep power in their hands and heads on their shoulders being a strong motif

The leaders and pillars of many ME countries should readjust their own position and rein in the position of their sponsored brethren inside and around Israel.

Using plain language - if they want help (and it looks they need it) - they should stop

provocations, aggression, sponsoring Jihad against Israelis, using political pressure in UN and generally learn to live in peace rather than war with Israel.

If Egyptians can do it why not the rest?

[dexterm]

With all due respect to Religion of Peace in general and its sensitive Reps from any ME country in particular:

# the things with Caliphate being not so glorious

# the friendly ties with Israel however temporary and being only a tactical move yet being a necessity

# the desire to keep power in their hands and heads on their shoulders being a strong motif

The leaders and pillars of many ME countries should readjust their own position and rein in the position of their sponsored brethren inside and around Israel.

Using plain language - if they want help (and it looks they need it) - they should stop

provocations, aggression, sponsoring Jihad against Israelis, using political pressure in UN and generally learn to live in peace rather than war with Israel.

If Egyptians can do it why not the rest?

What on earth has this got to do with IS. A complete straw man deflection.

[Seastallion]

It would be interesting to know what set the youths off.

Assumption there, that something other than 'themselves' set themselves off.

Young males, overflowing with testosterone. Fighty, bored, bravado.

It is a palpable thing I found in that particular area and in parts of Nablus, a wild eyed energy. As I say, sexual frustration. It manifests as seeking confrontation / destruction in the west, and can happen there.

I made no assumption... They didn't do it for no reason.....I accept your suggestion as one of the possible reasons. Very likely.

Yours is the assumption that it was fighty bored youths. It may not be that, though.

[dexterm]

Since Israel occupied East Jerusalem 48 years ago, the policy of allowing Jews to worship at the Wailing Wall, while Muslims worship at Al Aqsa mosque has worked fine (apart from Ariel Sharon's stroll in 2000 in his successful attempt to stir up trouble). Access is allowed to Jews so long as they dont attempt to pray there and treat it like a synagogue. How would Jews feel if Muslims rolled out their prayer mats at the Wailing Wall?

Muslims quite rightly see it as a desecration and an attempt by the perpetrating Jewish fanatics as the first step in what they really want to do...destroy Al Aqsa mosque.

This could be part of the current right wing Israeli government's plans to create another intifada as a smokescreen to carry out its ultimate solution.

[Seastallion]

Since Israel occupied East Jerusalem 48 years ago, the policy of allowing Jews to worship at the Wailing Wall, while Muslims worship at Al Aqsa mosque has worked fine (apart from Ariel Sharon's stroll in 2000 in his successful attempt to stir up trouble). Access is allowed to Jews so long as they dont attempt to pray there and treat it like a synagogue. How would Jews feel if Muslims rolled out their prayer mats at the Wailing Wall?

Muslims quite rightly see it as a desecration and an attempt by the perpetrating Jewish fanatics as the first step in what they really want to do...destroy Al Aqsa mosque.

This could be part of the current right wing Israeli government's plans to create another intifada as a smokescreen to carry out its ultimate solution.

Ahhh...so it wasn't testosterone-fueled youths creating trouble......they were provoked...YET AGAIN.

[dexterm]

Trouble started when hundreds of Jewish hardliners provocatively tried to enter the mosque in an already tense weekend.

"The Palestinian news agency meanwhile said Jewish settlers had assaulted a Palestinian child near one of the gates leading to Al-Aqsa Mosque on Saturday, prompting a group of Palestinians to intervene before the police dispersed them."

"The Times of Israel newspaper reported that tensions were high between the Muslim and Jewish communities after a video emerged over the weekend of a Jewish woman insulting Islam's Prophet Muhammad."

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/07/jerusalem-al-aqsa-clashes-150726061324203.html

Edited July 27, 2015 by dexterm

[MikeTexas]

As a suggestion...If you don't want troops attacking your Mosque don't hide in them...Just saying

[MikeTexas]

I've found that it doesn't take much to offend Muslims

Edited July 27, 2015 by MikeTexas

[ABCer]

With all due respect to Religion of Peace in general and its sensitive Reps from any ME country in particular:

# the things with Caliphate being not so glorious

# the friendly ties with Israel however temporary and being only a tactical move yet being a necessity

# the desire to keep power in their hands and heads on their shoulders being a strong motif

The leaders and pillars of many ME countries should readjust their own position and rein in the position of their sponsored brethren inside and around Israel.

Using plain language - if they want help (and it looks they need it) - they should stop

provocations, aggression, sponsoring Jihad against Israelis, using political pressure in UN and generally learn to live in peace rather than war with Israel.

If Egyptians can do it why not the rest?

What on earth has this got to do with IS. A complete straw man deflection.

I think it is self-explanatory.

But for a straw head man - here is an explanation.

Muslim Arabs must learn to live in peace with Religious Jews. Everywhere. Anywhere.

When you stop your "Namaz" and take your hands off your eyes you will see what I clearly stated in previous post.

I never use straw man deflection tactics. You will be hard pressed to find a poster with clearer defined position.

Personally, I am not religious.

To me a Jew praying at Kaaba would not be an insult to Prophet Mohammed. I would say this Jew is knocking on a wrong door. Spitting on the stone or pissing on it - would be a sacrilege!

Equally, a Muslim on a praying carpet in a Synagogue would not be an insult to Moses. I would say this Muslim is knocking on a wrong door. Spitting on the floor or pissing on it - would be a sacrilege!

There is a great chance that the above Muslim and Jew would have been killed. Unfortunately.

The day when the Jew will be politely shown the nearest Synagogue and the Muslim will be politely shown the way to the nearest Mosque - that will be the day of Peace.

Until then Muslims must not be allowed to live among other religious people. And other religious people must not live among Muslims. They should be Isolated. For their own good.

You may agree or disagree with me - I really do not care. No more straw man deflection?

As to storming of the Mosque - Muslims very often use this tactics - attack from the Mosque or attack and hide in the Mosque. Both ways in my opinion are sacrilege!

Edited July 27, 2015 by ABCer

[dexterm]

The strawman deflection was mentioning IS, as though the Palestinians on Al Aqsa were IS members..they are deadly enemies.

Until then Muslims must not be allowed to live among other religious people. And other religious people must not live among Muslims. They should be Isolated. For their own good.

...they were ....until hundreds of Jewish fanatics invaded the Al Aqsa compound disrupting the separate worshiping areas.

I too am an atheist. I also can see the irony in religious nutjobs on both sides getting upset when different sects are praying to the same god anyway.

[oneday]

When terrorists stop using mosques as hiding places or even staging areas then the storming of mosques will stop.

[MikeTexas]

So it was reported by Al Jajeera that "Jewish hardliners" started everything...Now that's an unbiased source if I ever saw one.

[Linky]

With all due respect to Religion of Peace in general and its sensitive Reps from any ME country in particular:

# the things with Caliphate being not so glorious

# the friendly ties with Israel however temporary and being only a tactical move yet being a necessity

# the desire to keep power in their hands and heads on their shoulders being a strong motif

The leaders and pillars of many ME countries should readjust their own position and rein in the position of their sponsored brethren inside and around Israel.

Using plain language - if they want help (and it looks they need it) - they should stop

provocations, aggression, sponsoring Jihad against Israelis, using political pressure in UN and generally learn to live in peace rather than war with Israel.

If Egyptians can do it why not the rest?

What on earth has this got to do with IS. A complete straw man deflection.

I think it is self-explanatory.

But for a straw head man - here is an explanation.

Muslim Arabs must learn to live in peace with Religious Jews. Everywhere. Anywhere.

When you stop your "Namaz" and take your hands off your eyes you will see what I clearly stated in previous post.

I never use straw man deflection tactics. You will be hard pressed to find a poster with clearer defined position.

Personally, I am not religious.

To me a Jew praying at Kaaba would not be an insult to Prophet Mohammed. I would say this Jew is knocking on a wrong door. Spitting on the stone or pissing on it - would be a sacrilege!

Equally, a Muslim on a praying carpet in a Synagogue would not be an insult to Moses. I would say this Muslim is knocking on a wrong door. Spitting on the floor or pissing on it - would be a sacrilege!

There is a great chance that the above Muslim and Jew would have been killed. Unfortunately.

The day when the Jew will be politely shown the nearest Synagogue and the Muslim will be politely shown the way to the nearest Mosque - that will be the day of Peace.

Until then Muslims must not be allowed to live among other religious people. And other religious people must not live among Muslims. They should be Isolated. For their own good.

You may agree or disagree with me - I really do not care. No more straw man deflection?

As to storming of the Mosque - Muslims very often use this tactics - attack from the Mosque or attack and hide in the Mosque. Both ways in my opinion are sacrilege!

Oh no, I dont want to have to leave Malaysia, nor do I want the Jews, Buddhists, Christians, Sikhs etc etc to leave as it is a nice multicultural place to live.

Although Indonesia has over 60,000 churches I dont really like the place. Perhaps the Maldives, a nice Muslim place where people of all religions enjoy life. Oh if only I could afford it.

Perhaps some should stop with the generalisations.

[Seastallion]

So it was reported by Al Jajeera that "Jewish hardliners" started everything...Now that's an unbiased source if I ever saw one.

Correct. Al Jazeera is an excellent unbiased source...it's why several Muslim countries ban their journalists and ban their broadcasts....including Jordan.

[Catoni]

"...Palestinian Authority, which envisages east Jerusalem as the capital of its future state."

That's what this whole Israel/PLO conflict is all about - that Temple Mount in E. Jerusalem. It is often called The West Bank which it is part of.

The Muslims aren't going to get it but they are apparently going to die trying. They want all of E. Jerusalem including most of the sites mentioned in the Old Testament as Jewish sites. This Temple Mount was the site of the Jewish Temple which the Old Testament says contained the Holy of Holies and the Ark of the Covenant. That temple was destroyed by the Romans in the first century BC and now has a Muslim mosque on it - and thus this story.

I give the OP author credit for being one of the few who called it like it is.

Cheers.

Actually it was 70 A.D. when the Roman Army under Titus destroyed the great Jewish temple on Temple Mount in Jerusalem when the Jews revolted. A pagan Roman Temple to Jupiter Capitolinus was built in it's place.

The temple to Jupiter on the Temple Mount was demolished immediately following the First Council of Nicea in 325 A.D. on orders of Constantine the Great.

The Roman Emperor Julian II ... the last pagan emperor, was going to rebuild the Jewish temple, but was killed in battle fighting the Persians before he could do so. His Christian successor cancelled the plans.

The Moslems captured Jerusalem in the 7th century... and built their mosque on the site.

[Thorgal]

This happened on Tisha B'Av.

Tisha B'Av is a Jewish holiday to remember by mourning the destruction of the first and the second Jewish Temple...

Back in 2000, the same trouble as in OP resulted in the second intifada with 3.000 victims.

I hope this will not fuel another black page in the history of Jerusalem...

Up to the 3 clerical leaders in Jerusalem to make such religious clashes impossible and encourage religious tolerance for all traditions.

[EnglishJohn]

I've found that it doesn't take much to offend Muslims

I am offended by what they are offended by.

And I am offended by what they are not offended by.

[arjunadawn]

Since Israel occupied East Jerusalem 48 years ago, the policy of allowing Jews to worship at the Wailing Wall, while Muslims worship at Al Aqsa mosque has worked fine (apart from Ariel Sharon's stroll in 2000 in his successful attempt to stir up trouble). Access is allowed to Jews so long as they dont attempt to pray there and treat it like a synagogue. How would Jews feel if Muslims rolled out their prayer mats at the Wailing Wall?

Muslims quite rightly see it as a desecration and an attempt by the perpetrating Jewish fanatics as the first step in what they really want to do...destroy Al Aqsa mosque.

This could be part of the current right wing Israeli government's plans to create another intifada as a smokescreen to carry out its ultimate solution.

Ahhh...so it wasn't testosterone-fueled youths creating trouble......they were provoked...YET AGAIN.

Muslims have rolled their prayer mats out on more than the Wailing Wall. Indeed, they rolled them out on the Temple Mount. No serious scholar or honest mind buys the historical revision of the Temple Mount being remotely meaningful in Islamic history; it has always ever only had value insofar as it had value to others. In fact, the Islamic Wakf, which administers the islamic properties atop the Jewish mount noted lastly, in 1924, in A Brief Guide To Al-Haram Al-Sahrif- Jerusalem (Supreme Moslem Council), noted this property was the site of the Temple of Solomon, a fact which is protested today. Had it not been the case that islam seeded every vanquished religious site with a mosque atop it there might be some liberty with their utterly fictitious claim that "the furthest mosque" was in the detested land of the Jews, Jerusalem. This land only became intriguing to islamic leaders when a struggle to re-anchor islam in Syria opposed to Arabia was asserted. It was this useless land, between all other worlds, that the claim was then offered was the site of the prophet's night journey. This would have been utterly blasphemous in the time of the prophet because when the Jews of Medina would not even accept the qibla in the direction of Jerusalem as a token offering from the prophet, they were outcast and have suffered islamic wrath ever since.

Political expediency was what compelled a very temporal leader to adjust history to move religious idolatry closer to Syria. In so doing, however, he was never able to compensate for the fact that this land was utterly worthless to muslims. Indeed, as noted previously, even the famous Kingdom of Heaven captured this absurdly weak claim to Jerusalem when Saladin was asked "What is Jerusalem Worth?" (Veritas et Aequitas?) and the response was "Nothing... [pause] Everything!"

A movie yes, but illustrative of the point above.

In fact, his grandson later transferred Jerusalem because it was useless to muslims, everyone always knew this. Mentioned in the Koran zero times, Jerusalem only began to occupy the imagination of muslims as they launched out from their lands on conquest and looking over their shoulder realized that those who they sought to conquer had their eye on something in their own rear. Still, centuries plodded on and under no leader was Jerusalem afforded much more than the token conquest capstone of mosque. It is only in the modern era that histories are revised, quite absurdly, to fabricate a connection that actually never existed. This is abhorrent equally to reason as it is to those of faith.

"An historical survey shows that the stature of the city, and the emotions surrounding it, inevitably rises for Muslims when Jerusalem has political significance. Conversely, when the utility of Jerusalem expires, so does its status and the passions about it. This pattern first emerged during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad in the early seventh century. Since then, it has been repeated on five occasions: in the late seventh century, in the twelfth century Countercrusade, in the thirteenth century Crusades, during the era of British rule (1917-48), and since Israel took the city in 1967. The consistency that emerges in such a long period provides an important perspective on the current confrontation." http://www.meforum.org/490/the-muslim-claim-to-jerusalem

I doubt Jordan had any alternative but to respond. Everyone of any intellectual caliber understands what is really at play with regard to the Temple Mount. It has to do with creating and inculcating legend into islamic lore. This land was never of any value to their prophet, only a brief expediency to attempt to placate Medina Jews, and that failed.

1925-wakf-temple-mount-guide.pdf

[BKKBobby]

Since Israel occupied East Jerusalem 48 years ago, the policy of allowing Jews to worship at the Wailing Wall, while Muslims worship at Al Aqsa mosque has worked fine (apart from Ariel Sharon's stroll in 2000 in his successful attempt to stir up trouble). Access is allowed to Jews so long as they dont attempt to pray there and treat it like a synagogue. How would Jews feel if Muslims rolled out their prayer mats at the Wailing Wall?

Muslims quite rightly see it as a desecration and an attempt by the perpetrating Jewish fanatics as the first step in what they really want to do...destroy Al Aqsa mosque.

This could be part of the current right wing Israeli government's plans to create another intifada as a smokescreen to carry out its ultimate solution.

Ahhh...so it wasn't testosterone-fueled youths creating trouble......they were provoked...YET AGAIN.

Muslims have rolled their prayer mats out on more than the Wailing Wall. Indeed, they rolled them out on the Temple Mount. No serious scholar or honest mind buys the historical revision of the Temple Mount being remotely meaningful in Islamic history; it has always ever only had value insofar as it had value to others. In fact, the Islamic Wakf, which administers the islamic properties atop the Jewish mount noted lastly, in 1924, in A Brief Guide To Al-Haram Al-Sahrif- Jerusalem (Supreme Moslem Council), noted this property was the site of the Temple of Solomon, a fact which is protested today. Had it not been the case that islam seeded every vanquished religious site with a mosque atop it there might be some liberty with their utterly fictitious claim that "the furthest mosque" was in the detested land of the Jews, Jerusalem. This land only became intriguing to islamic leaders when a struggle to re-anchor islam in Syria opposed to Arabia was asserted. It was this useless land, between all other worlds, that the claim was then offered was the site of the prophet's night journey. This would have been utterly blasphemous in the time of the prophet because when the Jews of Medina would not even accept the qibla in the direction of Jerusalem as a token offering from the prophet, they were outcast and have suffered islamic wrath ever since.

Political expediency was what compelled a very temporal leader to adjust history to move religious idolatry closer to Syria. In so doing, however, he was never able to compensate for the fact that this land was utterly worthless to muslims. Indeed, as noted previously, even the famous Kingdom of Heaven captured this absurdly weak claim to Jerusalem when Saladin was asked "What is Jerusalem Worth?" (Veritas et Aequitas?) and the response was "Nothing... [pause] Everything!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6aPgA5549g A movie yes, but illustrative of the point above.

In fact, his grandson later transferred Jerusalem because it was useless to muslims, everyone always knew this. Mentioned in the Koran zero times, Jerusalem only began to occupy the imagination of muslims as they launched out from their lands on conquest and looking over their shoulder realized that those who they sought to conquer had their eye on something in their own rear. Still, centuries plodded on and under no leader was Jerusalem afforded much more than the token conquest capstone of mosque. It is only in the modern era that histories are revised, quite absurdly, to fabricate a connection that actually never existed. This is abhorrent equally to reason as it is to those of faith.

"An historical survey shows that the stature of the city, and the emotions surrounding it, inevitably rises for Muslims when Jerusalem has political significance. Conversely, when the utility of Jerusalem expires, so does its status and the passions about it. This pattern first emerged during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad in the early seventh century. Since then, it has been repeated on five occasions: in the late seventh century, in the twelfth century Countercrusade, in the thirteenth century Crusades, during the era of British rule (1917-48), and since Israel took the city in 1967. The consistency that emerges in such a long period provides an important perspective on the current confrontation." http://www.meforum.org/490/the-muslim-claim-to-jerusalem

I doubt Jordan had any alternative but to respond. Everyone of any intellectual caliber understands what is really at play with regard to the Temple Mount. It has to do with creating and inculcating legend into islamic lore. This land was never of any value to their prophet, only a brief expediency to attempt to placate Medina Jews, and that failed.

Its unlikely that your average Muslim goes into a intellectual disection of why Al-Aqsa is the third holiest site for Muslims. You over-analyze Muslims and Islam.

[kamahele]

Simple, short story. Ultra Orthodox crazies, tried to trespass at the Mosque, young Muslims a the mosque threw rocks and were beaten back by Israeli authorities. So who is right? I'm not a supporter of Islam or any other religion. I think Jerusalem should be bulldozed and nuclear waste dumped into the remaining crater to deter this kind of fighting but I think my wish isn't going to come true anytime soon. The religious will just find another piece of land to fight over.

[Lissos]

Simple, short story. Ultra Orthodox crazies, tried to trespass at the Mosque,

The mosque? Or the wider mount? It may be splitting hairs but this is another one of those issues. al Aqsa mosque is that pokey structure in the corner, but some classify the entire compound, the multiple gates, the Dome and the rest as the Mosque. It makes it confusing for readers when they claim they tried to enter the Mosqu when it seems they entered a gate on the mount.

If the whole mount is the Mosque, how come I and nobody else has to take their shoes off when walking on the mount? Once you enter the compound of the Ummayad Mosque in Damascus, your shoes are already off and western women are veiled. In that compound, people do sit around socialising as is often the case, but their shoes are off and they are veiled.

On the mount in Jerusalem, you ain't, so to me it is not the forbidden sanctuary, there is the temple mount and the al Aqsa mosque is in the corner. People can claim Jews visiting is provocative, but that's just another example of Islamic thinking - "All or nothing" which has long characterised it. We are expected to accomodate Islamic demands and sensitivities and..... well that's it. One way street. We walk on eggs shells around them (even in the west) lest they go apeshite over things.

The Dome of the Rock was built as a symbol of Islamic victory in its conquest.

Edit : fixing broken quote bracket (again)

Edited July 27, 2015 by Lissos

[arjunadawn]

Ahhh...so it wasn't testosterone-fueled youths creating trouble......they were provoked...YET AGAIN.

Muslims have rolled their prayer mats out on more than the Wailing Wall. Indeed, they rolled them out on the Temple Mount. No serious scholar or honest mind buys the historical revision of the Temple Mount being remotely meaningful in Islamic history; it has always ever only had value insofar as it had value to others. In fact, the Islamic Wakf, which administers the islamic properties atop the Jewish mount noted lastly, in 1924, in A Brief Guide To Al-Haram Al-Sahrif- Jerusalem (Supreme Moslem Council), noted this property was the site of the Temple of Solomon, a fact which is protested today. Had it not been the case that islam seeded every vanquished religious site with a mosque atop it there might be some liberty with their utterly fictitious claim that "the furthest mosque" was in the detested land of the Jews, Jerusalem. This land only became intriguing to islamic leaders when a struggle to re-anchor islam in Syria opposed to Arabia was asserted. It was this useless land, between all other worlds, that the claim was then offered was the site of the prophet's night journey. This would have been utterly blasphemous in the time of the prophet because when the Jews of Medina would not even accept the qibla in the direction of Jerusalem as a token offering from the prophet, they were outcast and have suffered islamic wrath ever since.

Political expediency was what compelled a very temporal leader to adjust history to move religious idolatry closer to Syria. In so doing, however, he was never able to compensate for the fact that this land was utterly worthless to muslims. Indeed, as noted previously, even the famous Kingdom of Heaven captured this absurdly weak claim to Jerusalem when Saladin was asked "What is Jerusalem Worth?" (Veritas et Aequitas?) and the response was "Nothing... [pause] Everything!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6aPgA5549g A movie yes, but illustrative of the point above.

In fact, his grandson later transferred Jerusalem because it was useless to muslims, everyone always knew this. Mentioned in the Koran zero times, Jerusalem only began to occupy the imagination of muslims as they launched out from their lands on conquest and looking over their shoulder realized that those who they sought to conquer had their eye on something in their own rear. Still, centuries plodded on and under no leader was Jerusalem afforded much more than the token conquest capstone of mosque. It is only in the modern era that histories are revised, quite absurdly, to fabricate a connection that actually never existed. This is abhorrent equally to reason as it is to those of faith.

"An historical survey shows that the stature of the city, and the emotions surrounding it, inevitably rises for Muslims when Jerusalem has political significance. Conversely, when the utility of Jerusalem expires, so does its status and the passions about it. This pattern first emerged during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad in the early seventh century. Since then, it has been repeated on five occasions: in the late seventh century, in the twelfth century Countercrusade, in the thirteenth century Crusades, during the era of British rule (1917-48), and since Israel took the city in 1967. The consistency that emerges in such a long period provides an important perspective on the current confrontation." http://www.meforum.org/490/the-muslim-claim-to-jerusalem

I doubt Jordan had any alternative but to respond. Everyone of any intellectual caliber understands what is really at play with regard to the Temple Mount. It has to do with creating and inculcating legend into islamic lore. This land was never of any value to their prophet, only a brief expediency to attempt to placate Medina Jews, and that failed.

Its unlikely that your average Muslim goes into a intellectual disection of why Al-Aqsa is the third holiest site for Muslims. You over-analyze Muslims and Islam.

I assume this is an invitation to accept mob mentality as a governing force here; reason should be suspended and facts are irrelevant. They scream therefore it is! If this is the argument of last resort/retort than you are correct, not much light can be shed further. When mob emotion are the facts than reason is dead.

As an aside, inherent in so much of the liberal or otherwise blind support for raging islam is the premise that they do not know better. If ever there was a more racist point of view I have not noted it (No, you do not state this here but those that do share a common premise). Irrespective of shared history "your average muslim [does not] go into an intellectual disection [sic] of why..." It is a total capitulation to a thinking mind to assign a vast people to non accountability for their actions because of the premise they do not know history. It presumes a base instinctive drive as their preoccupation. Perhaps you are correct but I would rather suppose malignant intent rather than primal stupidity.

[dexterm]

Simple, short story. Ultra Orthodox crazies, tried to trespass at the Mosque,

The mosque? Or the wider mount? It may be splitting hairs but this is another one of those issues. al Aqsa mosque is that pokey structure in the corner, but some classify the entire compound, the multiple gates, the Dome and the rest as the Mosque. It makes it confusing for readers when they claim they tried to enter the Mosqu when it seems they entered a gate on the mount.

If the whole mount is the Mosque, how come I and nobody else has to take their shoes off when walking on the mount? Once you enter the compound of the Ummayad Mosque in Damascus, your shoes are already off and western women are veiled. In that compound, people do sit around socialising as is often the case, but their shoes are off and they are veiled.

On the mount in Jerusalem, you ain't, so to me it is not the forbidden sanctuary, there is the temple mount and the al Aqsa mosque is in the corner. People can claim Jews visiting is provocative, but that's just another example of Islamic thinking - "All or nothing" which has long characterised it. We are expected to accomodate Islamic demands and sensitivities and..... well that's it. One way street. We walk on eggs shells around them (even in the west) lest they go apeshite over things.

The Dome of the Rock was built as a symbol of Islamic victory in its conquest.

Edit : fixing broken quote bracket (again)

The mosque? Or the wider mount? It may be splitting hairs

You are indeed splitting hairs. The purpose of the Jewish fanatics was not to quietly wander around the compound taking friendly snaps. In previous attempts at storming al-Haram ash-Sharif/Temple Mount en masse, their intentions were far from innocent.

'The [Jewish] protesters, chanting "the mosque will burn and the temple rebuilt" '

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4589054,00.html