The UN has decided that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem
42 replies, posted
[URL]http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4866113,00.html[/URL]
[QUOTE]UNESCO has decided that there is no Jewish connection to Jerusalem and the Temple Mount following a Palestinian initiative on Thursday.
There were 26 countries who abstained from the vote, including Serbia and Turkmenistan, while 24 countries supported the initiative and six voted against it. It should be noted that not a single European nation voted for the initiative.
The countries of France, Sweden, Slovenia, India, Argentina, and Togo at first were going to vote for the resolution saying that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem, but were convinced to abstain from voting in the end.
[/QUOTE]
[URL]http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/UNESCO-Jerusalem-resolution-highly-politicized-White-House-says-470070[/URL]
[QUOTE]To say that Israel has no connection to the Temple Mount and Western Wall is like saying China has no connection to the Great Wall.[/QUOTE]
That's actually a pretty damn good analogy.
What?
The mental gymnastics needed to justify this are impossible to fathom.
Is it time for a watexplosion?
I'm not sure what to say. I think this is like claiming that say Catholics have no connection to the Vatican. Who supported this and, more importantly, why?
Is UN bored or something?
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51198617]Is it time for a watexplosion?
I'm not sure what to say. I think this is like claiming that say Catholics have no connection to the Vatican. Who supported this and, more importantly, why?[/QUOTE]
[quote]Twenty-six of the group’s 52-member nations supported the resolution proferred jointly by Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar and Sudan. Six, including the U.S., the U.K., Lithuania, Holland, Estonia and Germany voted against, while 24 states abstained. Both China and Russia supported the resolution.[/quote]
Source: [url]http://hamodia.com/2016/10/13/unesco-passes-motion-no-connection-between-har-habayis-and-judaism/[/url]
Should give you a good idea of who voted for it, to nobody's surprise.
[QUOTE=CroGamer002;51198637]Is UN bored or something?[/QUOTE]
The UN is political, and right no for most countries there's no political gain whatsoever in voting for anything that might be remotely considered in favor of Israel.
I mean, why would France abstain on something like this? Supposedly they should have access to an actual historian or two if they need to make sure, right?
Ha ha what.
[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;51198651]Source: [url]http://hamodia.com/2016/10/13/unesco-passes-motion-no-connection-between-har-habayis-and-judaism/[/url]
Should give you a good idea of who voted for it, to nobody's surprise.[/QUOTE]
Why did 24 abstain? It seems a very weird issue to abstain on. I'm not the biggest fan of how the Palestine situation has gone down, but claiming that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem is ridiculous!
Even if you don't think Israel is a good country, this makes no sense.
Well surely, this must mean that Mecca and the Vatican have no connections to Islam or Catholicism either. After all, we have to be fair about this.
I mean I'm not very supportive of Israel, but this is objectively wrong.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51198698]Why did 24 abstain? It seems a very weird issue to abstain on. I'm not the biggest fan of how the Palestine situation has gone down, but claiming that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem is ridiculous![/QUOTE]
I know France and Sweden were two of the countries that abstained, and they probably did it to not anger their large Muslim populations by outright voting against it.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51198698]Why did 24 abstain? It seems a very weird issue to abstain on. I'm not the biggest fan of how the Palestine situation has gone down, but claiming that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem is ridiculous![/QUOTE]
They're probably trying to be neutral on the matter, but the trouble with that is they're letting a side with clear bias screw Israel.
Not really like the UN can do much about it.
Silly motion regardless.
[QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51198698]Why did 24 abstain? It seems a very weird issue to abstain on. I'm not the biggest fan of how the Palestine situation has gone down, but claiming that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem is ridiculous![/QUOTE]
only reason i can think of is that they don't want to upset some people
If you all had bothered to read up the actual UNESCO report about all of this, you'd have found out that the UN is only talking about the Mosques built in the area and how Israel treat them, not about Jerusalem as a whole. Nowhere does it say that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem.
[url]http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002462/246215e.pdf[/url]
It's another shoah! Who would've thought the jews behind the NWO aren't zionists? hm not that surprising seeing as zionists are isolationist while the world jewry wants complete world domination. Well this won't hurt jews outside of israel one bit, but it just might be one many events leading to the demise of israel and the return of jew troopers to the NWO.
[highlight](User was permabanned for this post ("Gimmick" - Swebonny))[/highlight]
What in the lord of what
[QUOTE=Hauptmann;51198952]If you all had bothered to read up the actual UNESCO report about all of this, you'd have found out that the UN is only talking about the Mosques built in the area and how Israel treat them, not about Jerusalem as a whole. Nowhere does it say that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem.
[URL]http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002462/246215e.pdf[/URL][/QUOTE]
Actually, the report mentions only Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem and particularly the Temple mount while completely ignoring the existence or historical significance of Jewish holy sites or their relation to the State of Israel, which it only refers to as "Israel, the occupying Power".
For example, this:
[QUOTE]Deeply deplores the failure of Israel, the occupying Power, to cease the persistent
excavations and works in East Jerusalem particularly in and around the Old City, and
reiterates its request to Israel, the occupying Power, to prohibit all such works in conformity
with its obligations under the provisions of the relevant UNESCO conventions, resolutions
and decisions;[/QUOTE]
Denies the validity of all Israeli archaeological work in East Jerusalem, an area rich with Jewish artefacts.
Or this:
[QUOTE]Deplores the Israeli decision to approve a plan to build a two-line cable car system in East
Jerusalem and the so called “Liba House” project in the Old City of Jerusalem as well as the
construction of the so called “Kedem Center”, a visitor centre near the southern wall of the
Al-Aqṣa Mosque/Al-Ḥaram Al-Sharif, the construction of the Strauss Building and the project
200 EX/PX/DR.25.2 Rev. – page 3
of the elevator in Al-Buraq Plaza “Western Wall Plaza” and urges Israel, the occupying
Power, to renounce the above-mentioned projects and to stop the construction works in
conformity with its obligations under the relevant UNESCO conventions, resolutions and
decisions; [/QUOTE]
Which completely glosses over the Western Wall being a Jewish holy site or Israel's right to maintain it.
It actually refers to the Wailing Wall as quote unquote "Western Wall Plaza" as if it's not a real thing while implying the place is actually Al-Buraq Plaza, the Muslim name for the place.
[QUOTE=Hauptmann;51198952]If you all had bothered to read up the actual UNESCO report about all of this, you'd have found out that the UN is only talking about the Mosques built in the area and how Israel treat them, not about Jerusalem as a whole. Nowhere does it say that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem.
[url]http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002462/246215e.pdf[/url][/QUOTE]
Incredibly missleading title by the media.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;51199066]Incredibly missleading title by the media.[/QUOTE]
No it's not. See my post above.
Here's another one:
[QUOTE]Reaffirms that the Mughrabi Ascent is an integral and inseparable part of Al-AqṣaMosque/Al-Ḥaram Al-Sharif;[/QUOTE]
Or as Jews refer to it, the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughrabi-Bridge"]Mughrabi gate to the Temple Mount[/URL].
It seems to just be bashing on a lot of the things Israel is doing there. Not actually revoking the connection between the Jewish people and the area, which woud'nt make sense anyway.
Well it's not like it's gonna change anything either way.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;51199133]It seems to just be bashing on a lot of the things Israel is doing there. Not actually revoking the connection between the Jewish people and the area, which woud'nt make sense anyway.[/QUOTE]
No, it is bashing everything Israel does in relation to holy or historical sites in East Jerusalem under the pretense only Muslim holy sites exist there, while ignoring or outright denying the existence or historical and religious significance of Jewish holy sites in the exact same places.
Again, it denies the validity of the Wailing Wall (and Israel's maintaining it as a Jewish holy site) by only referring to it as Al Buraq Plaza, it denies the Mughrabi bridge being an integral part of the Jewsih Temple (connecting the Temple Wall to the Mughrabi gate) by reaffirming it as a part of Al Aqsa only, and completely ignores the Temple Mount itself being a Jewish historic site (being the site of the Jewish Temple, a non disputed historical fact), invalidating all Israeli archeological work there.
From [URL="http://www.wsj.com/articles/unesco-draft-resolution-raises-israels-ire-1476387326"]WSJ[/URL]:
[QUOTE]The resolution omitted the Jewish name for a shrine holy to both Jews and Muslims. Instead, it referred to what Jews call the Temple Mount as the Haram Al-Sharif, as it is known to Muslims.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
The Temple Mount is home to the Al Aqsa Mosque, one of Islam’s holiest sites, and is also where two renowned Jewish temples once stood. The plaza is abutted by the Western Wall, which is also sacred to Jews.[/QUOTE]
From [URL="http://www.ibtimes.com/palestine-wins-victory-against-israel-jerusalem-holy-site-declared-muslim-not-jewish-2431205"]IBT[/URL], in an article titled "Palestine Wins Victory Against Israel: [B]Jerusalem Holy Site Declared Muslim, Not Jewish[/B], In United Nations Resolution":
[QUOTE][B]One of the world's most important religious sites and Judaism’s holiest site, Jerusalem’s Temple Mount and Western Wall, were reclassified as an exclusively Muslim shrine[/B] Thursday after a United Nations organization adopted a polarizing resolution that denies Jewish connection to the site.
The resolution, which condemns Israel for its activities in Jerusalem and the West Bank, asserts that Jerusalem is holy to three monotheistic religions: Judaism, Islam and Christianity. However, it includes [B]a special section pertaining to the Temple Mount that says the site is sacred only to Muslims[/B] and fails to mention it as sacred to Jews. The resolution from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization does not refer to the Al-Aqsa mosque by either the Hebrew term for the site—Har Habayit—or its English translation, the Temple Mount, but only by its Muslim name.[/QUOTE]
No need to even read the source, 100% positive OIC is behind this. What's ~surprising is that Sweden and France would have gone along with it. This is pretty ludicrous just from a historic standpoint, but what can you expect. The people in charge probably can't decide who is higher on the oppression (I mean just general anti-semitism, not stuff with Gaza) ladder, everyone is insane.
[QUOTE=ScumBunny;51199091]No it's not. See my post above.
Here's another one:
Or as Jews refer to it, the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mughrabi-Bridge"]Mughrabi gate to the Temple Mount[/URL].[/QUOTE]
Using the Muslim name for a place that has multiple name is not definitive proof of a Muslim bias.
Whether you disagree with the resolution or not, and I'm not currently weighing either way, saying that this means they've "decided that Jews have no connection to Jerusalem" is purely sensationalist bullshit.
well what's new, muslims really really hate the jews.
i know muslims who think that the holocaust is a zionist hoax and that isreal shouldn't even exist because it's all stolen land etc.
Oh who knows which oil-rich, religious countries have been pushing for this? And oh how odd that the European countries with some of the most severe muslim immigration would pander to them, who could have known?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.