ترامب ونتنياهو إلى الممانعة أو «التصفير»

ترامب ونتنياهو إلى الممانعة أو «التصفير»

فبراير 16, 2017

ناصر قنديل

– فتح اللقاء الذي جمع الرئيس الأميركي دونالد ترامب برئيس حكومة الاحتلال بنيامين نتنياهو الباب للتكهنات والتساؤلات حول إمكانية ترجمة الخطاب التصعيدي الذي يلتقي عليه كلاهما، وكيفية هذه الترجمة. ويتساءل البعض عما إذا كان الخيار هو الحرب سواء نحو إيران، أو حزب الله، ويتجاهل هذا التحليل حقيقة أنّ اللقاء يجري بعدما جرت مياه كثير في أنهار الشرق الأوسط، سقطت فيها الجيوش الأميركية و«الإسرائيلية» في ضعف القدرة على بذل الدماء، ولم يكن سبب الفشل فيها التراخي والتخاذل من رئيس أميركي اسمه جورج بوش أو بيل كلينتون أو باراك أوباما. فالجيوش لم تخرج من ساحات الحرب وتسلّم الراية للمخابرات لتصنع الفتن إلا بعدما استنفدت كل فرص الاستثمار على فائض القوة التدميري والناري وإمكانيات الترهيب ووصلت إلى العجز عن تذليل العقبتين اللتين خرجت أميركا للحرب لأجلهما واحتلت أفغانستان والعراق لتطويقهما، وهما إيران وسورية. وتلاقت «إسرائيل» بالفشل مع أميركا في حربيها الكبيرتين ضد المقاومة في لبنان وفلسطين في عامي 2006 و2008.

– يلتقي ترامب ونتنياهو بعدما صار شعار إسرائيل الاستراتيجي ترميم قدرة الدرع، وصارت الحرب آخر ما تفكر به «إسرائيل» لتحقيق هذه الغاية، فانكفأت خلف جدار وقبة، جدار تقطع به أوصال المناطق الفلسطينية لتجنّب تبعات الانتفاضات الفلسطينية، وقبّة صاروخية لتتفادى عبرها صواريخ حركات المقاومة، بينما يستعد ترامب للاحتماء خلف جدار وقبة، جدار جمركي يحمي البضائع الأميركية من المنافسة ويتصل بالجدار الذي بدأ ببنائه على الحدود مع المكسيك، وقبة إعلامية يصطنع بها عبر التصريحات والمواقف مظهر القوة، وكلما اصطدم موقف بحقيقة الضعف يحلّ مكانه موقف أشدّ ليونة وأقل تصلباً، كما في المنطقة الآمنة في سورية ونقل السفارة الأميركية إلى القدس والسعي لنسف الاتفاق النووي مع إيران، لتنتقل العنتريات إلى مسرح آخر مرة نحو أوروبا وأخرى نحو أستراليا وثالثة نحو الصين.

– ترامب ونتنياهو يقفان على رأس هرمين متشابهين في التكوين والثقافة. العجز عن بذل الدماء يجمعهما في لغة الحرب، والاستيطان كان أصل نشوء كيانيهما سياسياً وديمغرافياً، وشعار أرض الميعاد عقيدة الحلم الأميركي والحلم الصهيوني، لكنهما يتشاركان أيضاً في التناقض بين العجز عن الحرب وثقافة الغطرسة التي تدفع للتصعيد، بين الضعف في الميادين وتأثيره على نمو التطرف في المواقف، حيث تضعف المؤسسة الحاكمة نحو الناخبين وتحتاج خطاباً شعبوياً لكسب ودّهم، وتنطلق موجات العنصرية ولغة الحروب، لكنها عندما تصطدم بجدار القدرة تتحوّل أوراقاً تفاوضية. ومشكلة الكيانين واحدة في العجز عن صناعة الحرب والعجز عن صناعة السلام، ولهذا يحتمي كل منهما اليوم برفع سعر شراكته في التسويات، عبر فلسفة الممانعة، التي لجأت إليها قوى المقاومة يوم كانت في وضع الضعف عن صناعة الحروب وعدم ملاءمة المعروض من التسويات لثوابت الحد الأدنى لديها. هو تبادل مواقع وأدوار بين قوى الهيمنة والعدوان مع قوى المقاومة.

– ما يجري في واشنطن بين ترامب ونتنياهو هو تصفير ملفات التسويات من كل نقاط البديهيات والثوابت للانطلاق من صفر تفاهمات، والسعي لتحصيل ثمن جديد لكل خطوة في سلم التفاهم. هذا ما يفعله ترامب مع روسيا والصين، إيران، وهو ما يفعله ذاته نتنياهو تجاه القضية الفلسطينية، لكنّ كليهما يحتاج المفاوضات كمسار لتمييع المواجهة، وكليهما يخشى من المفاوضات أثمانها التي تعكس موازين القوى، فيسعى لتمييعها أيضاً. هو زمن التصفير وربط النزاع، وليس زمن الحرب ولا زمن التسوية.

(Visited 578 times, 578 visits today)
Related Videos
 
Related Articles

سورية حصن القدس… واللحظة مفصلية

سورية حصن القدس… واللحظة مفصلية

سامي كليب

بدأ الأوروبيون يستعدون لمرحلة ما بعد نقل السفارة الأميركية إلى القدس. هم يعتبرون أن الرئيس الأميركي الجديد جادٌّ في ذلك ولديه الذريعة الفضلى للإقدام على هذه الجريمة التي لن تخدم سوى إسرائيل. فوفق مداولات داخلية للاتحاد الأوروبي مطلع الشهر الحالي قال مدير عام الشرق الأوسط وشمال إفريقية في جهاز العمل الخارجي نك وستكوت: «إن القرار الأميركي قد يُتخذ في خلال شهر أيار المقبل، أي فور انتهاء مفعول قرار تعليق نقل السفارة الذي كان باراك أوباما قد وقّعه»، ما يعني أن ترامب يستطيع القول أنا لم أتخذ قرار النقل وإنما أوقفت فقط تعليق إنفاذ القانون الصادر عن الكونغرس الأميركي عام ١٩٩٥ بشأن نقل السفارة الأميركية إلى القدس.

مع هذه الخطوة، يكون ترامب قد حقق هدفين لإسرائيل، أولهما الاعتراف بسيطرتها على القدس، وثانيهما افتتاح عهده بتكثيف الهجوم على إيران. هو يعتقد أنه بذلك يضمن قاعدة تأييد له في الداخل الأميركي عبر اللوبي اليهودي الذي ينتمي إليه صهره المناصر بقوة لإسرائيل، كما يضمن فتح ما بقي من خزائن مالية خليجية ضد طهران.

يشار إلى أن ترامب قال صراحة لدى تعيينه سفير بلاده في الكيان الصهيوني: «إن السفير يتطلع لممارسة مهامه من سفارته في عاصمة إسرائيل الأبدية: القدس». بطبيعة الحال لم تتحرك أي جثة من جثث النظام العربي البائس للرد، فما بقي من هذا النظام الوهمي مهتم حالياً بتدمير الدول المركزية ويفتح علاقات مشبوهة تحت جنح الظلام مع أسوأ الحكومات الإسرائيلية.

ما علاقة سورية بالأمر؟

ما سيفعله ترامب، يحمل بذاته إحراجاً كبيراً للأنظمة العربية، من المملكة المغربية التي يُعتبر ملكها محمد السادس رئيس لجنة القدس إلى الأردن حيث الملك عبد الله الثاني هو الوصي الرسمي على المدينة المقدسة مروراً بالسعودية التي يسمى فيها الملك خادم الحرمين… كان العاهل المغربي قد قال قبل أسبوعين إن نقل السفارة يهدد السلم العالمي ووعد بأنه: «لن ندخر جهدا في الدفاع عن هذه المدينة المقدسة»… ممتاز، ولكن كيف ومتى وبأي وسيلة؟

المرجّح، أن محور المقاومة الحالي والذي يكاد ينحصر بسورية وحزب اللـه والمقاومة الفلسطينية الحقيقية وإيران، سيجد الفرصة مناسبة للانتعاش ورفع الصوت واتخاذ إجراءات سياسية وميدانية تجدد حضوره وتعزز موقعه في الشارع العربي. هذا مفيد بعد سنوات من الآلة الإعلامية والسياسية والأمنية والإرهابية الضخمة التي أُريد لها أن تصور حروب المنطقة على أنها حروب سنية شيعية.

هذا بالضبط ما يُقلق نتنياهو الذي يكاد ينصح بالتريث بنقل السفارة، لأن في هذه الخطوة ما يعزز حظوظ منافسه الإسرائيلي المتطرف زعيم البيت اليهودي نفتالي بينيت ويُنذر بتصعيد أمني ويسوغ دور إيران في المحيط العربي، ويقوي شوكة حزب اللـه وسورية، ناهيك عن عدد من المواقف الأوروبية التي صارت شبه مناهضة لنتنياهو.

استعادة وهج الخطاب السوري في الوسط العربي مهم في هذه اللحظة التاريخية، أولاً لأنه يأتي بعد أن انكشفت أوراق كثيرة حول حجم التآمر على سورية، وثانياً بعد التحولات الإقليمية والدولية والانتقال من المجاهرة برحيل الرئيس الأسد إلى القبول الضمني وعلى مضض ببقائه ودوره.

ففي آخر اجتماع أوروبي تم الاتفاق على التالي وفق معلوماتنا:

 ضرورة الحفاظ على نظام حكم مركزي في سورية مع احتمال بعض أوجه اللامركزية الثقافية مثلاً.
 ضرورة الحفاظ على مركزية الأجهزة الأمنية والعسكرية.

 اقتراح نظام نصف برلماني مع احتمال بعض الكوتا للأقليات الإثنية والدينية وتفادي النموذج اللبناني، لا بل القبول ببقاء حزب البعث تفادياً لما حصل في العراق بعد اجتثاثه.

 المباشرة بجهود الإنعاش الاقتصادي (حتى ولو أن بعض الدول مثل فرنسا لا تريد مطلقاً الحديث حالياً عن مشاركة أوروبية في إعادة الإعمار قبل إقرار المرحلة الانتقالية).

لا توجد أي كلمة عن الرئيس الأسد، تماماً كما كان الشأن في آخر لقاء سعودي تركي. ولا كلمة.

طبعاً لا دور لأوروبا في ظل احتمال التوافق الأميركي الروسي، لكن المهم في كل ما تقدم أن سورية التي صبرت وقاتلت وضحت ودُمر قسم كبير منها، حافظت على دورها وصوتها. ثمة فرصة كبيرة الآن لإعادة تعزيز حضور هذا الصوت في الشارع العربي من بوابة فلسطين.. فما رفضه الرئيس الأسد حين استقباله وزير الخارجية الأميركي كولن بأول عام ٢٠٠٣ أي في أوج السطوة الأميركية لناحية قطع العلاقة مع المقاومة وطرد التنظيمات الفلسطينية، لا يزال وسام شرف على الصدر السوري رغم الدمار والدماء والدموع.

من بوابة القدس سيعود الصوت السوري صادحاً في آذان العرب.

Move the Embassy: End the Charade

caged but undaunted

Originally published January 31, 2017 in CounterPunch

Move the Embassy: End the Charade

Among Donald Trump’s first acts as President was suspending Barack Obama’s last – a grant of 221 million dollars in discretionary humanitarian aid to Palestine.

But why pause before the next move against Palestine? Move the US Embassy to East Jerusalem right now and end this charade once and for all.

Politics

US politicians like to preach from on high about justice for Palestinians and Israelis alike… as if the pathway of pain for occupied and occupier is one-in-the same… as if these two dramatically different ends of the scales of justice can, indeed should, be balanced.

When it comes to Palestine, for decades the United States has hidden behind a cheap frilly veneer of neutrality all the while subsidizing, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars, a vicious, often deadly, criminal occupation that has…

View original post 1,838 more words

US Embassy Relocation to Jerusalem ‘a War Crime’

Global Research, February 04, 2017
Jonathan Cook 31 January 2017
iStock 20492165 MD - American and Israeli flags

Analysts fear mixed signals from Trump administration may conceal a plan allowing the US ambassador to work out of Jerusalem 

From the windows of the grey, cube-shaped building that houses the US embassy in Tel Aviv, staff enjoy an undisturbed view out over the Mediterranean and a beach adorned in the summer with sunbeds and parasols.

Most days the only evidence of activity is outside on the pavement: A queue of Israelis snake out of a side door, clutching their documents and watched over by Israeli soldiers as they wait expectantly for a US travel visa.

The drab exterior offers no clues of the incendiary battle raging behind the scenes over whether the embassy’s days are numbered. Israel, and its allies in Donald Trump’s new administration, want to relocate the embassy to Jerusalem, 70km away.

The distance may be short but the move risks a political and diplomatic earthquake, according to most analysts.

Move ‘war crime’

If the Trump’s White House approves the relocation, it would overturn decades of international consensus on Jerusalem.

The message to the Palestinians and Arab world would be clear and provocative, said Nabil Shaath, a senior Palestinian official and former Palestinian foreign minister.

“Moving the embassy is the same as recognising Jerusalem as Israel’s united capital. It’s a war crime,” he told Al Jazeera.

There’s no way we or the Arab world could accept it. It would mean the end of the US as the broker of the peace process. We would fight back and mobilise the rest of the world against the move.

The Israeli army has been advising the government of Benjamin Netanyahu on the possible fallout too, according to a report last week in the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth. A change of address would be seen as a US green light for Israel to extend its sovereignty over the city and its holy places, including the al-Aqsa mosque, in the view of Israeli military intelligence.

Reactions could include mass protests from the Islamic movements inside Israel; riots in the occupied Palestinian territories and neighbouring states such as Jordan, which is the official guardian of al-Aqsa; and the collapse of Mahmoud Abbas’ Palestinian Authority.

The Israeli army believes the move also risks inflaming the wider Muslim world and increasing the threat of terror attacks against Israeli and Jewish sites around the world.

UN protected zone

Tensions over Jerusalem have been high since the United Nations announced a partition plan in late 1947. It treated the city as an internationally protected zone, separate from the Jewish and Arab states it proposed in the rest of historic Palestine.

But months later, in a war that created Israel on the Palestinian homeland, Jerusalem was divided in two, under separate Israeli and Jordanian control.

In that period, Israel worked strenuously to pressure countries to set up embassies in West Jerusalem over stiff opposition from the US, said Nimrod Goren, the author of a book in Hebrew on the battles over the US embassy’s location.

“Initially, Washington stuck by the international consensus so strictly that its diplomats refused even to travel to Jerusalem for political meetings and ceremonies,” Goren, who heads Mitvim, a think-tank on Israeli foreign policy, told Al Jazeera.

But US resolve weakened through the 1950s as Israel’s main institutions, from the parliament to the president’s office, relocated to West Jerusalem.

Illegal annexation

A further turning point came in the early 1960s. “The US started to cultivate much closer ties with Israel, especially in defence matters,” he said. Washington turned a blind eye as Israel offered aid to poor, newly independent states in Africa and others in Latin America in return for establishing their embassies in Jerusalem.

By the time Israel invaded and occupied East Jerusalem in 1967, Goren observed, more than a third of the 54 diplomatic missions in Israel were located in the city.

When Israel formally annexed East Jerusalem in 1980, in violation of international law, declaring the entire city its “eternal, united capital”, the US again pressured states to move out of West Jerusalem. Only El Salvador and Costa Rica remained, until they too pulled out in 2006.

Another significant shift in Washington’s attitude followed the signing of the Oslo accords in 1994. Israel’s lobbyists worked hard to erode the significance of the accords, which, it was widely assumed, would entail the creation of a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem.

In 1995, the US Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which recognised Jerusalem as the “capital” of Israel and required a change in the embassy’s location by May 1999 at the latest.

Daunting ramifications

Like Trump, Bill Clinton and George W Bush promised during their presidential campaigns to implement the Jerusalem Embassy Act. Yet, once in office, they baulked at the daunting ramifications.

The US president, as the chief broker in the Oslo process, could not afford to be seen pre-judging the outcome of negotiations on Jerusalem, the most contentious of the final-status issues.

The continuing sensitivity was evident during Barack Obama’s presidency.

He turned to the US Supreme Court in 2015 to strike down another Congressional measure designed to confer implicit US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. The legislation would have entitled American parents of children born in Jerusalem to list “Israel” as the birthplace on their passports.

Last October, the White House also made a point of publicly correcting the dateline on a press release concerning an eulogy delivered by Obama at Shimon Peres’ funeral in Jerusalem. The press release was re-issued with the word “Israel” struck through.

Confusing signals

Will Trump take a different tack, or will he too relent on his embassy pledge now he is in office?

In an interview late on Thursday, Trump indicated that he was not in a hurry to approve the move. “I don’t want to talk about it yet. It’s too early,” he told Fox News.

The confusing signals from his officials since his inauguration more than a week ago have hinted at a clash behind the scenes, said Nathan Thrall, a Jerusalem-based analyst with the International Crisis Group, a conflict resolution think-tank.

“The truth is no one really knows what Trump will do, even veteran US diplomats,” he told Al Jazeera.

On the one hand, Trump and his closest advisers on the Middle East have gone out of their way to raise expectations. Trump has invested more political capital on the move taking place than his predecessors.

The difference in approach was underscored by his choice of ambassador to Israel. David Friedman, a former bankruptcy lawyer, is more an ideological partisan – an ally of the settlers – than a diplomat, noted Yossi Alpher, who served as an adviser to former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak.

Fear of backlash

At the same time, however, Trump is certain to face strong institutional resistance from the US state department, said Thrall. Its officials have long opposed moving the embassy, fearing the consequences for US relations with the Arab world.

Last month, citing national security considerations, Obama signed a presidential waiver included in the Jerusalem Embassy Act to postpone for another six months the law’s implementation – as has happened without fail since it passed 22 years ago.

Trump could use Obama’s waiver to save face by delaying a decision until at least June, observed Goren.

It is possible too that, despite Israeli celebrations over Trump’s promise on the embassy, Netanyahu may prefer in the end to let the matter lie for a while.

“There seems to be an ambivalence among Netanyahu’s circle,” said Thrall. “On the one hand, he has a lot of problems on his plate at the moment [with a series of corruption investigations] and doesn’t need the possibility of triggering a conflagration in the region. And on the other, there’s no great gain for him. If the US moves the embassy, European states will not follow.”

That is how Palestinian officials and diplomats in Jerusalem appear to be reading recent comments from the administration. Shaath said: “We have signs that the administration has retreated a little. But it may simply be a delay. We can’t be sure.”

Hunt for work-around

A European diplomat based in Israel, speaking to Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity, said: “It looks like Trump’s bark may have been worse than his bite. But there’s still a danger that [US ambassador] Friedman and Netanyahu will find a work-around.”

Morton Klein, the head of the Zionist Organisation of American, one of Israel’s key Israel lobby groups in Washington, told the Haaretz daily last week that Friedman had told him he would work out of US offices in Jerusalem.

Alpher suggested a possible scenario might be for Friedman to take over a section of the US consulate in Jerusalem, which serves the occupied territories. The US embassy could then function separately in Tel Aviv.

“If American Jewish leaders are insistent that the embassy moves, I could see the [Trump] administration choosing that as a compromise,” he said.

Shaath said such a manoeuvre should fool no one. “We would not accept any sort of so-called compromise along those lines. If the ambassador is working from Jerusalem, then the embassy has moved – and we will fight it.”

Israeli Land Seizure Bill Viewed as Prelude to West Bank Annexation

shepherdsarrest3

“If you don’t understand that stealing property from people, especially people that cannot defend their rights because they are at the bottom of the food chain [is wrong], then you have a moral and personal problem.”

Bill would “retroactively legalize” thousands of Jewish houses built on private Palestinian property

By Ben Lynfield

A controversial bill that would legalise the seizure of Palestinian private property and cripple hopes for a two-state peace solution is expected to easily pass in a Knesset vote next week.

A vote on the Settlement Regulation Bill – intended as a major step towards annexation of the occupied West Bank – was originally due to take place in December. But it was delayed until now to avoid criticism from the Obama administration and in the expectation that it would be backed by Donald Trump.

While Israeli officials have used a variety of legal devices over the years to lay claim to Palestinian property, including deploying a law dating back to Ottoman times stipulating that agricultural land left fallow reverts to the state, the bill would enable seizures on a grand scale and without the need to resort to legal sleight of hand. Only Israel’s supreme court could overturn it.

In a 1979 case, the court deemed it illegal to build settlements on what is clearly private Palestinian property, limiting such seizures to state land and purported military necessity. The new law would effectively nullify that court decision, opening even more swathes of the West Bank to Israeli settlement.

Masoud Ganaim, an Arab member of the Knesset, said the bill will “legitimise the theft of land from the Palestinians and is an opening to annexation of the rest of the territory in the West Bank. It will change everything, it will close up the path to the peace process and to any two state solution. There won’t be two states, there won’t be a solution”.

Dror Etkes, director of the moderate Israeli Kerem Navot NGO, which monitors land use in the West Bank, said the bill, if passed, would retroactively legalise many thousands of houses built on private property in hundreds of places. These include not only smaller wildcat settlement outposts built with government backing in violation of both Israeli and international law but also established settlements that were constructed partly on private property such as Beit El near Ramallah, and Eli, on the road to Nablus.

“Almost every settlement in the West Bank has parts that were built on private Palestinian property,” said Mr Etkes, who formerly monitored settlements for the Peace Now organisation. “If you don’t understand that stealing property from people, especially people that cannot defend their rights because they are at the bottom of the food chain [is wrong], then you have a moral and personal problem.”

Mr Etkes said the bill violates the Fourth Geneva convention, which stipulates that an occupying power can only seize property for military necessity. Politicians, army officers and settlers could leave themselves open to prosecution in the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

“This is heading to an escalation of the relations between Israel and the international community, at least parts of the international community that Israel wants to be respected by, namely Europe and sooner or later other countries. Assuming Trump won’t remain president forever, sooner or later it will put Israel in confrontation with important parts of North American politics as well.”

Arab Knesset member Haneen Zoabi termed the bill “an extreme example of Israel’s continuing tradition of land theft.” He added, “This law is illegal by Israeli legal standards and probably will not pass the Supreme Court. Maybe that’s what Bibi and Lieberman expect and count on.”

NGOs and private individuals are expected to petition Israel’s Supreme court in a bid to have the law declared illegal at the first opportunity.

Israel’s hard-right politicians have defended the bill against Arab and left-wing criticism.

Bezalel Smotrich, a Knesset member from the hard-right Jewish Home party that is part of the ruling coalition, said seizing Palestinian private property complies with democratic norms. “Every democratic country confiscates property for the good of the public,” he told The Jerusalem Post. “The settlement activity is a public purpose, not a private purpose.”

Education Minister Naftali Bennet went further by hailing the bill as “leading the way to annexation” of the West Bank.

Rami Mansour, a leading journalist among the Arab citizens of Israel who edits the Arab 48 website, last month called upon Israel’s Arab citizens to reassess their participation in the Knesset in light of the settlements bill, which “changes the rules of the political game.”

“Parliaments generally deal with laws inside their country,” he said. “The United States doesn’t legislate laws that apply to India. But here Israel is legislating a law that applies to territory not under its sovereignty. It is legislating a law to expropriate from Palestinians not by means of military orders but by legislation in contravention of previous practice. This is antidemocratic and turns the Knesset into the tool of the right.”

Israeli rabbis: Trump is the Jewish Messiah

Posted on

????????????????????????????????????

????????????????????????????????????

In a recent Op-Ed at Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz – former Israeli cabinet minister Uzi Baram (born to Arab Jewish mother from Syria) said that extremist Jew members of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government are rallying on US president Donald Trump to help destroy Islam’s sacred Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of Rock at Al-Quds (occupied East Jerusalem). These fanatic religious Jews believe that the Muslim structures are hindering the fulfillment of Jewish salvation represented by the construction of the so-called Third Temple.

Several leading Israel rabbis at the Sanhedrin organization have claimed that two powerful pro-Israel world leaders, Vladimir and Donald Trump, not only support Israel’s right to exist – Trump even accepts Jewish right to Jerusalem as their spiritual inheritance. It is historically unprecedented (reported by Israel Today, November 15, 2016).

Rabbi Hillel Weiss, the top gun at the Sanhedrin sent letters to both Trump and Putin urging them to work together to fulfill a project that will benefit all mankind – the rebuilding of the Holy Temple atop Jerusalem’s hotly contested Temple Mount.

Torah (Old Testament) was written by rabbis in 1312 BCE. It doesn’t mention that Temple Mount would be destroyed first by Babylonian in 586 BCE and later by Roman in 70 AD. Furthermore, neither Torah nor the Christian Bible calls for the reconstruction of Third Temple.

According to the Jerusalem-based Temple Institute, it got the three things needed to rebuild the Third Temple; 1) a plan  (see the model above), 2) one million stones for the building, and 3) Red Heifer.

Ironically, in October 2016, UNESCO declared that Old City of Jerusalem (occupied East Jerusalem) had nothing to do with Judaism.

Jerry Rabow in his 2002 book, 50 Jewish Messiahs, claims that since the disappearance of Jesus (as), more than 50 men and women have claimed to be Jewish promised Messiah.

In my life time, I have read two Jewish Messiahs – multi-billionaire George Soro and former US president Barack Obama.

UN idiot: Al-Aqsa Mosque is Jewish

Posted on

alt

Antonio Guterres, the newly installed United Nations secretary general and a Friend of Israel told Israel Radio on Friday that “it was completely clear that the Temple that the Romans destroyed in Jerusalem was a Jewish temple.”

This is no news to people who have studied the history of Temple Mount and Jewishness from some objective sources. The Zionist narrative of Temple Mount, just like Holy Holocaust is all based on fakes, frauds, and forgeries (watch video below).

The so-called Temple Mount (Solomon Palace or Haikale Sulemani) and part of Old City of Jerusalem were destroyed by Romans in 70 AD to crush the anti-Rome armed rebellion by the people of Judea, who were not Jewish. Majority of them belonged to Hebrew tribes also known as Bani Israel who were descendants of 12 sons of prophet Israel (Jacob). These people who lived in Arabian peninsula converted to Christianity and Islam with the passage of time. Over 90% of current world Jewry is not Israelites but Khazarian Turks.

Israeli historian Dr. Shlomo Sand, author of books The Invention of Jewish People’, ‘The Invention of the Land of Israel’, and ‘How I ceased to be a Jew’ has claimed that the word JEW was invented in late 18th century – most probably by Christian Zionists.

The photo above clearly shows that the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of Rock are not built on top of the Temple Mount. And the so-called Wailing Wall under the Al-Aqsa Mosque is not the foundation wall of the Temple Mount – but of a Roman fortress.

In October 2016, UNESCO declared that Old City of Jerusalem (occupied East Jerusalem) had nothing to do with Judaism.

But don’t expect Netanyahu stop speaking through Antonio Guterres’ mouth in the future.

Related Videos

%d bloggers like this: