Why is the Muslim Brotherhood Obsessed With Jerusalem?

Egypt: Musel Brothers Top Dog Claims  Jerusalem Will Be New Centre of Islam, not Mecca or Medina

Generals say they’ll “hand over power to the elected president at end of month”

No way to tell yet how this assurance will play out in light of the new powers the military has claimed for itself. But Sharia or civil war look like the two likeliest scenarios. “Egypt generals say they’ll ‘hand over power to the elected president’ at end of month,” by Allen Pizzey for CBS News, June 18 (thanks to JW):

I won’t hold my breath.  There is less than a fifty-fifty  chance  that the military will hand power to the Muslim Brotherhood to turn Egypt into (another) totalitarian sharia hell. Either way,  another war against ISRAEL  is just around the corner.  The  debate in the video below pits the Egypt that once was against the revival of Islamofascist madness that consumes the whole Middle East. It captures the mood of the present situation perfectly.

“Next year in Jerusalem”

Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Koran, not once. 

 Jerusalem appears in the Jewish Bible 669 times and Zion (which usually means Jerusalem, sometimes the Land of Israel) 154 times, or 823 times in all. The Christian Bible mentions Jerusalem 154 times and Zion 7 times. In contrast, the columnist Moshe Kohn notes, Jerusalem and Zion appear as frequently in the Qur’an “as they do in the Hindu Bhagavad-Gita, the Taoist Tao-Te Ching, the Buddhist Dhamapada and the Zoroastrian Zend Avesta”—which is to say, not once.


Egyptian Commentators Debate (Proposal of Jerusalem as Capital)

Thanks to Mullah for the tips….

Egypt : Anti-Israel chant sweeps across Egypt on weekend of Election (Jun 16, 2012)

For over 3,300 years of history, Jerusalem has been a capital city for only the Jewish People. Jews have always lived in Jerusalem, except when they were massacred or driven out. There has, however, been a nearly unbroken Jewish presence in Jerusalem for the past 1,600 years. And since the early 1800’s, the population of Jerusalem has been predominantly Jewish. Even when the Jordanians captured and occupied Jerusalem from 1948-67, they (the Jordanians) never sought to change it to their capital (replacing Amman) nor make it the capital of all Arab-“Palestinian” people. Even during the 19 years Jordan “occupied” most of Jerusalem, Arab leaders from other Arab countries hardly ever bothered to visit this city! Only to the Jews has Jerusalem ever held special meaning! The reality is that Jerusalem was never an Arab capital and that it never was, until the Jews revitalized it, a dusty provincial city that hardly played and economic, social or political role.

Another myth deals with the issue of Jerusalem and its Temple Mount. The myth is that Jerusalem is really an Arab city and that it is a central focus of Islam. The truth is that the Arabs expressed very limited interest in the Temple Mount before 1967 after the Six-Day War. Besides, Mecca and Medina (both in Saudi Arabia) are Islam’s holiest cities!

Islam’s  Koran mentions Mecca 2 or 3 (implied, but not actually written) times. It mentions Medina 5 times. It never mentions Jerusalem and with good reason. There is no historical evidence to suggest Mohammad ever visited Jerusalem! And if he did visit Jerusalem, it could not have been until 6 years after his death. Therefore, the notion that Mohammed ascended to Heaven from a rock in Jerusalem (today’s Dome of the Rock) is even more ridiculous!

One more thing about Jerusalem in general and its Temple Mount in particular. Jerusalem appears in the Jewish Bible 669 times and Zion (which usually means Jerusalem, sometimes the Land of Israel) 154 times, or 823 times in all. The Christian Bible mentions Jerusalem 154 times and Zion 7 times. All told, in the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) and the New Testament, the terms “Judah” or “Judea” appear 877 times, and “Samaria” is used on 123 occasions.

Hold on to your hats, everybody. It gets even better. Upon closer look at their  Koran, we have uncovered something quite amazing. These Muslims may actually be more Jewish than Muslim! Get this… the Koran mentions “Israel” [or “Israelites”] 47 times, “Jew” or “Jewish” 26 times! Even “Christian” or “Christians” gets 15 mentions!

OK, so maybe Mohammed just forget to mention “Jerusalem”. Maybe he also forgot to mention the Haram-esh-Sharif, their name for Judaism’s Temple Mount. Perhaps it was an honest oversight. That desert heat can do strange things to one’s brain. But surely “Palestine” is mentioned all through the Koran. After all, the poo’ poo’ ancient “Palestinians” go way back, right? WRONG. “Palestine” and “Palestinian” are nowhere to be found. Perhaps that’s because these so-called Arab “Palestinians” have ancient historical roots going ALL THE WAY back to June 1967! So much for the Arab, Muslim or “Palestinian” ancient religious or physical connections to a single ounce of turf in the so-called “occupied” territories!

From 1948 to 1967, when East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount were occupied  by Jordanian Forces following the 1948-9 Arab-Israeli War, Jerusalem itself was ignored by the Arab world. No Arab leader ever paid a visit, not even to pray at the al-Aqsa Mosque or the Dome of the Rock (both located on the JEWISH Temple Mount). Also noteworthy during this 19 year period of Jordanian occupation’ no Jews were allowed there… not that there was much for them to see since the Arabs destroyed 58 of Jerusalem’s Jewish synagogues! Even the Arabs of “Palestine” placed so low a priority on Jerusalem that the PLO’s founding charter, the 1964 Palestinian National Covenant, made no reference whatsoever to it. Only when the Jews recaptured it after the 1967 “Six Day War” (initiated by the Arabs) did the Arab world SUDDENLY grow very passionate about Jerusalem!

Can any Muslim in the world produce any credible evidence for their connection to this holy site, other than Mohammed’s dream? Believe it or not, the one and only source for the Muslim’s claim to Jerusalem and the site of the Holy Temple, is a mention in the Koran of a dream that Mohammed had about a “furthest mosque”. Perhaps this “far away mosque” is the site of the White House in Washington DC or a Nevada “chicken ranch?”

In truth, the Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa mosques are just but two of hundreds of thousands of Muslim mosques around the world. Except for these two minor mosques, Jerusalem itself has no  Islamic significance. In fact, far more Christian shrines are in Jerusalem than Muslim ones!

When a Jew prays from anywhere in the world, he faces the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. When a Moslem prays, even while IN Jerusalem, he faces Mecca, Saudi Arabia (1,300 miles away due east!). So in many cases, even when a Moslem is in Jerusalem, his “hind quarters” are facing these two Jerusalem mosques! What does THIS tell you! And when Islamic suicide bombers try to take apart Jerusalem piece by piece, what does THAT tell you?

2 thoughts on “Why is the Muslim Brotherhood Obsessed With Jerusalem?”

  1. There is no connection – just the violent utterings of a group of psychotic thugs called islamists who have no need of reason.

  2. Fitzgerald: Occupation? What occupation?

    Friday, 20 July 2012 (a reposting from October 2005)

    A commenter recently recommended that readers here acquire “knowledge of the day to day lives of the Palestinians and their experience under occupation.”

    “Occupation”? What “occupation”? All the territories the Israelis now possess are theirs by legal right — the right conferred by the League of Nations Mandates Commission, when it carefully defined the territory which would be set aside, from the vast territories in the Middle East that had formerly been in the control of the Ottoman Turks as part of their empire, and which had been won by the Allies. An Arab State, a Kurdish State, and a Jewish state were all promised. The Arabs got their state — no, in the end, they got far more than their state but rather, in 2005, 22 members of the Arab League, the most richly endowed with natural resources of any states on earth, enjoying the fruits of the greatest transfer of wealth in human history The Kurds did not get their state, because by the time things had settled, Kemal Ataturk was driving a hard bargain and would not permit it. The Jews got the Mandate for Palestine set up for the express purpose of establishing the Jewish National Home, which would inexorably become, all parties realized, in time a Jewish state. It did not seem wrong then, and does not seem wrong now, that the Jews should have a state of their own. They asked only for the right to have no barriers put up to their immigration, and no barriers put in the way of their buying land. That was it. That was the sum total of what they demanded. Until the 1948 war, when five Arab armies attacked, not a single dunam of Arab-owned land (and remember that nearly 90% of the land, in any case, remained the possession of the state or the ruling authority, as in the Mandatory period) was appropriated. No one should dare to write about this subject without having done the research on demography, land ownership, and law.

    The Israeli claim to the West Bank (as Judea and Samaria were carefully renamed by Jordan after 1948, in precisely the same way, and for the same reason, that the Romans, nearly two thousand years before, had renamed Judea as “Palestine” and Jerusalem as Aelia Capitolina) is not that of a military occupier, though it is also that. The main legal and historic claim is that based on the League of Nations Mandate, which in turn, was based on a considerable historic and moral claim recognized by the educated leaders of the then-civilized world, who actually knew something of the history of the area, and were not nearly as misinformed as so many have been by the mass media, and the laziness and prejudice of journalists today.
    The notion of “occupation” of course evokes imagines of Occupied Paris, or Occupied Berlin, after the war. It implies no justification for the claims of the power with the military presence. But the claim of Israel to the lands it took in 1967 are based, for the Sinai, on the standard rules of post-war settlement, the rules which have obtained for centuries, whereby a victor in a war of defense keeps what he has won. If the Israelis chose not to, or were forced not to exercise that right, it does not mean that the right did not exist. It did, and it applies even more forcefully to Gaza and the West Bank. But the claim there is not based merely on the successful conquest of territory to which otherwise Israel had no claim. It did have a claim, a claim based clearly on the Mandate for Palestine — and like all the other League of Nations Mandates, was formally accepted, taken over as it were, by the United Nations when it came into being. This is a matter of record. It cannot be undone.

    Whatever else one wishes to say about the West Bank or Gaza, the word “occupation” is a tendentious, and cruel, misnomer. What it seeks to imply, what it seeks to implant in the minds of men, is clear: Israel has no rights here. This is nonsense. This is the very reverse of the truth. Read the Mandate, and the Preamble to the Mandate, for Palestine. Then read the records of the Mandates Commission — and especially how they reacted when the British unilaterally announced that the terms of the mandate would not be applied to Eastern Palestine — that is, the consolation prize given to Abdullah of the Emirate of Transjordan.

    Read it, and understand it.

Comments are closed.