Netanyahu's Wrong Answer

This is the transcribed original text of part of an answer Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu provided Amit Segal of Channel 2 TV when asked about the Jerusalem issue that flared during his Washington visit:

לגבי הר הבית יש סטטוס קוו שנקבע לפני 50 שנה כמעט, אחרי מלחמת ששת הימים, אנחנו מקיימים את זה, אני לא מציע שנתחיל להצית מלחמות דת פה, כן?

and in English translation:

As for the Temple Mount, there exists [there] a status quo, for the past almost 50 years, [since] after the Six Days War, we maintain that.  I do not suggest that we begin to ignite a religious war here, yes?

Of course Israel should not ignite a religious war.  In fact, that is the same reason former Prime Minister Menachem Begin used to avoid altering the status quo (I saw the letter he wrote to Pinchas Pel'i wherein he used that excuse).

But what if there is a religious war already happening, one that is low level and against the law which permits, at the least, free Jewish access to the site?  

In that not hypothetical situation, do the police and courts and legal apparatus act appropriately?  Are Jewish historical artifacts and archaeological treasures properly preserved?

I could go on, but I trust you are familiar with my blog posts concerning the Temple Mount.

In short, Mr. Netanyahu could have answered otherwise.

_________________--

P.S.

This Saturday at Al-Aqsa:

last week, Muslim ladies blocking Jews:

P.P.S.

This is from an interview with Mr. Netanyahu published in Makor Rishon on Friday in which he expresses the same sentiment although he does note that while preventing a 'religious war', the rights of Jews must be assured and thsat Israel does not take orders from Jordan as, for example, in the matter of the Mugrahbi Gate approach bridge:

-_______________________

Postscript

Some may think 'what does Medad and friends want?  after all, Jordan is in charge here and there will be a religious war'.

Will there?  Has there been?

What I can suggest as a rational process is first, that Israel highlight the inherent human rights violations it is forced to commit as well as violating its own laws.  Second, it emphasizes that the Israel-Jordan Peace Treaty actually promotes religious co-existence and respect.  Third, Israel should make it clear that the entrance ramp/bridge is its responsibility solely even if Jordan gets a conferring role.

Fourth, israel should point out that the status-quo has not been maintained except that it is the Islamic side that has altered it.

Fifth, Israel should highlight the damage done to archeological remains and the prevention of any scientific excavation therein.

And sisth, it should announce that if within one year the Waqf or whatever is unwilling to cooperate on new arrangements, they will be unilaterally enforced.

^