Muslim Jerusalem ?

Submitted by Bamaguje (Nigeria), Mar 30, 2010 at 18:06

Other than appeasing Muslims, there's really no basis in international law, history or religion for calling Israeli sovereignty over East Jerusalem "occupation", which is the erroneous basis for all the noise about East Jerusalem "settlements".

East Jerusalem is the abode of the Jewish holiest site, Temple mount - remnant of King Solomon's Temple which was built some 1600 years before the Muslim Caliph Umar bin Khattab invaded and occupied Jerusalem in the 7th century AD.

Would Muslims under any circumstance allow non-Muslim control of Mecca and Medina? Bearing in mind, non-Muslims are barred from even entering either of Islam's holiest cities.

Can Hamas or Fatah be trusted to guarantee Jews unfettered access to their holiest site Temple mount if Palestinians controlled East Jerusalem?

Me think not. The ugly experience of Jordan's two decade occupation during which synagogues were destroyed and Jews/Christians were barred, is enough lesson. And Jordanians are also Palestinians.

The only basis for the unreasonable Palestinian demand of East Jerusalem, was Jordan's illegal occupation (1948-67). No part of Jerusalem was ever alloted to Palestinians by any international agreement. Even the defunct non-binding UN resolution 181, placed Jerusalem under UN administration.

Nafata Bamaguje

Daura, Nigeria

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".