July 19, 2017: Temple Mount

With regard to “Islamic authorities, police spar over metal detectors” (July 17), the gall of Muslims protesting the use of metal detectors at the entry of the Temple Mount is breathtaking.

Letters (photo credit: REUTERS)
(photo credit: REUTERS)
Temple Mount
With regard to “Islamic authorities, police spar over metal detectors” (July 17), the gall of Muslims protesting the use of metal detectors at the entry of the Temple Mount is breathtaking. To ignore that it was Muslim terrorists who murdered in cold blood Israeli police officers, thus requiring these checks, is typical of their perpetual victim mentality. After all, how dare the Israeli government impede on their rights to freely commit terror?
In contrast, at the Western Wall, where there are often long lines for security checks, visitors usually exhibit patience, knowing that their own safety is the aim. On the Temple Mount, the Muslims can safely assume that any gun-bearing visitors are likely to target non-Muslims, whose safety is probably of no concern to them.
Allegiance to the status quo cannot supersede security concerns. How self-demeaning can the Israeli government become?
Reading that “Islamic authorities in Jerusalem called on Palestinians on Sunday to avoid entering the Temple Mount, following a decision by Israel to place checkpoints with metal detectors at the compound gates” was quite the eye-opener.
Wow! Perfect! Keep them away! Brilliant move, Israel. I just wish this were all that was needed to be done, and Israel could now gain control of the Temple Mount and proceed with what is rightfully ours.
To the Islamic Authorities, my rebuttal: You made your bed. Now go lie in it!
The status quo of endless, fruitless negotiations, settlement expansion, indiscriminate shootings, poverty, powerlessness, despair, economic siege, military occupation and violations of the sacredness of the Noble Sanctuary (Temple Mount) are wholly inappropriate and unsustainable.
The idea of a two-state solution is incontestable. Genuine progress must be achieved quickly before we are all dragged back into the dark ages.
When Jews wish to go up to the Temple Mount, they are subjected to the most rigorous searches, including in some cases complete body searches. Until now, when Arabs went up, not only were they not subjected to searches, the site was so sacred to them that their youngsters played ball games there.
In 1999, the Muslims, without consent from Israel, opened up the southeastern corner of Temple Mount, destroying precious Jewish artifacts from Temple times. Some 9,000 tons of debris was removed. This resulted in the ongoing sifting project to find the artifacts among the debris. How come the government stayed silent?
Eventually, security was beefed up and cameras were installed.
However, at the end of Ramadan in 2014, the Arabs rioted and forced the Israel Police to abandon its policing station on the Temple Mount, leaving the Arabs to destroy all the cameras, recording equipment and computers. They also looted the building, taking recordings as well as written records. So much for cameras!
In 2015, then-US secretary of state John Kerry brokered a deal to install cameras again. It must be questioned whether those cameras were ever installed. If they were, they were poorly positioned – otherwise, the weapons smuggled onto the Temple Mount could have been identified.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is too full of sound bites that are plain spin and far from the truth. An independent inquiry is required to identify the failures on Temple Mount.
Coincidentally, with the approval of a bill by the Knesset that would require a two-thirds majority vote to divide the sovereignty of Jerusalem, French President Emmanuel Macron, in his meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, had the chutzpah to call for Israel to share it’s capital, Jerusalem, with the Palestinians (“PM: Israel won’t tolerate Iran bases in Lebanon, Syria,” July 17).
With so many Jews leaving France and the vast influx there of Muslims, really, President Macron, wouldn’t it be politically correct to share your capital with the Muslims?
Zichron Ya’acov
Rescuing Hadassah
I read with interest David M. Weinberg’s spirited defense of efforts by Hadassah Medical Organization director-general Prof. Zeev Rotstein to save the organization from its economic woes (“Rescuing Hadassah,” Know Comment, July 14). Nevertheless, this does not explain Rotstein’s obstinate opposition to the departing physicians finding a home in a new pediatric oncology department at Shaare Zedek Medical Center.
In this, Rotstein received the backing of both the Health Ministry and the High Court of Justice, yet it would not have cost Hadassah any money since Shaare Zedek was prepared to foot the entire bill, and Rotstein would have been free to continue with his economic recovery program.
The gracious and generous thing would have been for Rotstein to wish the departing physicians well in whatever employment they found. Sadly, his actions sent the message that if he can’t have them, neither can Shaare Zedek.
How this conforms to Rotstein’s motto “The patient at the center” I have difficulty understanding. Perhaps Mr. Weinberg can explain it to me.
Ma’aleh Adumim
As the father of a little boy who lost his life at age 12 to leukemia, I am deeply disturbed by the bitter dispute between the doctors and the management of the Hadassah Medical Organization.
I have nevertheless been extraordinarily blessed by having found Judaism late in my life, and have to this day embraced it for its compassion and caring, in particular for our children. To see, therefore, the lack of caring for the real victims – the children – in this high-stakes struggle at Hadassah makes me immensely sad. It brings to mind the beautiful words by the composer De Victoria in his “Reproaches,” when God calls out to the Jews:
O, my people, what have I done to you?
Or wherein have I grieved you? Answer Me.
Kfar Saba
Lack of balance
The Media Comment column of July 6 (“Yes, the press is not objective”) triggered a letter I have been meaning to write for some time, for I have noticed that the very lack of objectivity that Eli Pollak and Yisrael Medad describe has been apparent in news items in the paper that serves as their host: The Jerusalem Post.
To give but a few examples, attorney Itamar Ben-Gvir is described as being a “right-wing radical” who “represents the right of the Right on the Israeli political dial” (“Israel’s alt-right ramps up the pressure on Trump,” June 1). And Honenu, a group of lawyers representing accused settlers, is called a “right-wing group” (“6 Israeli Jews charged with nationalistic attacks, terror against Israeli-Arabs,” April 24).
On the other hand, attorney Leah Tsemel, whose sole area of practice seems to be defending Palestinian terrorists (as is her and their right, just as it is the right of Honenu and settlers to defend and be defended), is described merely as a “top lawyer for Palestinians” (“More terrorism charges added against manager of World Vision Gaza,” January 13). And Jeff Halper, an advocate for the Palestinian right of return and as far to the leftside of the spectrum as you can be without actually falling off, is merely called a “left-wing activist” (“Israeli left-wing activist claims to have been detained over BDS activity,” March 14).
In the Post, apparently there are no extremes on the Left.
Double standards have no place in a respectable and generally balanced newspaper such as yours.