Israel, Hamas and their ‘Kabuki politics’

Posted on April 21, 2012

Last month, Israeli political pundits were so excited by the departure of Hamas leader Khalid Mashaal from Damascus that British Jewish Chronicle published an article on March 15, 2012 with headline: 

Hamami from London
Leave Damascus now

“It’s Clear: Hamas has left Iran’s axis of madness“. The Jewish pundit claimed that “Hamas has made a decision to focus on a political course instead of arm resistance. But, its two other partners in crime – two smaller organizations in the Strip, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committee (PRC), which still maintain their headquarters in Damascus and are supported by Tehran – are the ones behind the current rocket attacks against Israeli soldiers“.

On April 20, Hamas leader Moussa Abu Marzouk’s interview with America’s oldest Jewish newspaper, daily Forward, shocked the entire Zionist world. The Zionist media quoted Moussa Abu Marzouk saying that Hamas will not be committed to any deal or treaty signed between the Zionist regime and Mahmoud Abbas’ Fattah group.

The statement makes sense – because how could the Zionist regime expect Hamas to abide by a deal or treaty to which it was not a party? But, then how one could expect some rational thinking from one-track minded Zionists!

The Zionist regime has refused to hold direct negotiations with Hamas leadership even though Hamas won a landslide victory in 2006 elections which former US president Jimmy Carter claimed ‘very democratic and fair’.

Abu Marzouk in a long interview said emphatically: “We will not recognize Israel as a state. It will be like the relationship between Lebanon and Israel or Syria and Israel“. He also said that “as long as there is occupation on our ancestral land, we have the right to defend our land under international law by all means including military resistance“.

In fact, Abu Marzouk was just repeating the statement made by Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran while attending Iran’s 33rd anniversary of Islamic Revolution.

Abu Marzouk denied Israeli propaganda lies that Hamas targets Israeli civilians and use children as shields. He claimed that when Israeli soldiers take cover behind civilians – it’s impossible to avoid collateral damage. The Israeli myth of suicide bombing is in fact mostly Mossad false flag operations.

Hamas constitution doesn’t recognize the Jewish occupation of historic Palestine.

It’s reported that like Jew-hating Hollywood director and actor, Mel Gibson, Abu Marzouk also believe that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are genuine. According to Canadian Jewish academic and blogger, Henry Makow, PhD – Lionel Nathan Rothschild was, most probably, the author of The Protocols.

It seems Moussa Abu Marzouk’s interview with US Jewish daily Forward proves that some of Hamas leaders may have distant themselves from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for Qatari $250 million bribe – but they’re still part of “Iran’s axis of madness“.

====





Rats desert a sinking ship

Rats desert a sinking ship, fools ride



I would say Hamas is making a U-turn and preparing to distant itself from "Arab Spring" axis of madness. Its Egptian "Mama" after being sucked (*ucked) by the Americans and Puppet military councel, is trying to do the same, join the axis of revolution. 

•  Brothers of America
• "O people and political forces"
• "Arab spring" is a great asset for Palestinian cause - commented
• Hamas: The Growing Distance from Damascus
• Khalid Amayreh: "The Syrian regime must change, or it will be changed"

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Elie Wiesel: ‘Don’t equate Iran with Holocaust’

Posted on April 20, 2012 |

In an interview with Israeli daily Globes (April 19, 2012), the father of Holocaust Museum industry, Elie Wiesel, 83, has cautioned Israeli propagandists to avoid comparing Iranian threat to the Zionist regime with the Zionist patent ‘Holocaust’.

In response to the question that Benji Netanyahu has frequently compared the Holocaust to the (non-existent) threat the Zionist regime is facing from Iran – Elie Wiesel said: “Iran is a danger, but to claim that it is creating a second Auschwitz? I compare nothing to the Holocaust“.

Wiesel also told the Globes: “Only Auschwitz was Auschwitz” – and that no other (non-Jewish) human tragedy or genocide can be compared with Auschwitz.Thanks to Zionist-controlled mainstream media – Wiesel have successfully surronded hiself as a Holocaust survivor and humanitarian with myths and lies. He was even awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in 1986 – even though he never uttered a single word in support of nine million native Muslim and Christian Palestinians being treated worse than Jews under Nazis by Elie Wiesel’s fellow European Jews.

“Only Auschwitz was Auschwitz”

So what is Elie Wiesel? Dr. Norman Finkelstein, whose both father and mother were Holocaust survivors – called Wiesel “a liar” in his famous book, ‘The Holocaust Industry’. World renowned Jewish academic and a Crypto Zionist, Dr. Noam Chomsky called Wiesel “a terrible fraud”. Jewish magazine Tikun Olam called Wiesel “the Master propagandist – Any political movement would give its eye teeth to have him on its side“.

Wiesel made a fool of himself on several occasions by asserting that the name Jerusalem appears more than 600 times in the Bible while it doesn’t appear at all in Koran. Wiesel has never felt ashamed to tell his listeners that while Jerusalem is the most holy city for Jews – it’s only the third holiest city for Muslims, therefore, Israel should exclusively control it as an eternal part of Israel.

Wiesel’s fellow Jewish writer, Israel Shamir slammed Weisel for misinterpreting Jewish scripture. Shamir claimed the name of Jerusalem is not mentioned even once in the Jewish Holy Book, the Torah. He also said that Jews were not even mentioned in the Jewish Bible. None of the great and legendary men Wiesel named, from King David to the prophets, were not called ‘the Jews’. This ethnonym appears the first and only time in the Bible in the Persian story of the very late Book of Esther. Persian Queen Esther was the force behind the first Persian Holocaust (Purim) during which militant Jews killed nearly 75,000 non-Jewish Persians, over 2,000 years ago.

For more on Elie Wiesel’s double standards – read Professor Daniel A. McGowan’s 2005 article here.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Barefaced Hasbara: Tufts “Friends of Israel” Exploit Name of Palestinian Writer to Brownwash the Nakba

by Linah Alsaafin

10-04-2012

In their ongoing bid to portray "Israel" as a peace-loving, multicultural, and progressive state and in an attempt to camouflage its war crimes, human rights abuses and atrocities, pro-"Israel" lobbies and student groups in United States campuses use several hasbara (propaganda) tactics, such as blackwashing - recruiting black and minority students to stifle critics of "Israeli" apartheid - and pinkwashing.

A similar tactic that has been repeatedly used by the "Israeli" government is "brownwashing" or as Palestinian blogger Abir Kopty called it, "Arabwashing".

A host of "Israeli" leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, audaciously and unashamedly boast about "Israel's" treatment of Palestinian citizens, claiming "Israel is the only place in the Middle East where Arabs enjoy full civil rights."


Never mind the racist Citizenship and Entry Law that was recently upheld by "Israel's" "liberal" High Court of Justice, nor the equally racist Law of Return, the Present Absentees Law, the mass expropriation of Palestinian land, the glaring economic and social inequality that plagues Palestinian citizens of "Israel", the persecution of Palestinian political dissidents and the Prawer plan that threatens to uproot nearly 300,00 Palestinian Bedouins in the Negev (Naqab) who are "unrecognized" on their own land and denied access to water and electricity. For it appears that family life, equality, freedom of expression, property and human dignity don't qualify as "rights" according to "Israel" and its supporters.
Tufts "Friends of Israel" and the Hillel Cultural Arts and Education Committee, organizers of "Israeli Independence Week", took "brownwashing" to a whole new level - or more precisely, hit a new low.

In the event's Facebook page, (which has now been changed) Tufts "Friends of Israel" falsely claimed that among the speakers in the week-long celebration of "Israel's" "independence" would be Palestinian author and journalist Sayed Kashua, known for his satirical sitcom "Arab Labor." I was utterly shocked when I read yesterday that a prominent Palestinian writer and critic of "Israeli" racism was supposedly due to give a lecture at an event that celebrates the ethnic cleansing and catastrophe of the Palestinian people.

Therefore I, along with other Palestinian and Palestine solidarity activists, started a petition calling on Mr Kashua to cancel his lecture.

Following the publishing of the petition, I got in contact with Mr Kashua in an interview with journalist Zuheir Bahloul in this morning's show on Radio Ashams, a Nazareth based radio station. Mr Kashua declared he had no idea that he was scheduled to speak at "Israeli" "independence" week.
Kashua was invited by the Tufts University rather than pro-"Israel" student groups, and the event, which has been scheduled for some time, is a reading of his book and has nothing to do with "Israeli" "independence" week in any way, shape or form.

And after Tufts "Friends of Israel" deleted Kashua's name from the speakers' list on their Facebook page, it became clear that that they have deceitfully used his good name, reputation and event to brownwash the Nakba.

Moreover, Kashua pledged that if he finds out that the event has anything to do with celebrating "Israeli" "independence", he will immediately cancel it, as he refuses to be an accessory to re-branding Palestinian ethnic cleansing as a celebration.

I am truly sorry that Mr. Kashua has been subjected to this type of shameful deceit by the Tufts "Friends of Israel" and that he had to face criticism over such misleading allegations. Because of this, we demand that Tufts "Friends of Israel" both publicly clarify their actions and apologize for them.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Out Come The Knives: The Smear-Campaign Against Mel Gibson

Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars.com
April 18, 2012

Every so often we are painfully reminded that, yes, an effort is underway- conspicuous because of the concerted nature of the attacks- designed to undermine the few who tell the ancient tale of freedom for a change… and that to audiences worldwide.

Actor and director Mel Gibson, under fire by the entire mainstream media a few years back for alleged misdoings, has now been carefully targeted in yet another psyop. This time with the welcome help of a disgruntled screenwriter who just happens to, oops, present a letter he wrote after his screenplay for Gibson’s work in progress was rejected both by the director and Warner Bros. And oops, it just happens Gibson is again being portrayed as a cartoon-like anti-Semite. Now it just happens that the lone filmmaker in Hollywood – effectively fighting tyranny with such outstanding works as Braveheart, The Passion of the Christ and Apocalypto — is now being scrutinized in the extreme by both low-grade tabloids and self-professed “serious” magazines.

Gibson’s works are prime examples of how storytelling at its core signifies both the story itself and serves to illustrate the age-old, everlasting struggle against tight-gripped tyranny. Two giant forces, both measureless and complex in their endless expressions, are “slugging it out”, as Gibson told a startled automaton- Diane Sawyer- who stuttered her way through the interview, frowning a lot while nervously glancing over her notes.

The establishment media once again jumped at the opportunity to revive its smear-campaign against Gibson, redeploying their media tricksters and gadgets in an attempt to discredit him. Notice it’s always the same old nonsensical sewer-tactics employed. Puny smears by puny minds. And just like previous attacks, this one seems to be designed to hinder Gibson doing his important work.

Why important? As we have seen, every film flowing from Gibson’s hands turns out to be crucial storytelling exposing in all of its layers the eternal fight against tyranny. When Braveheart (a powerful tribute to one man in the face of tremendous evil) was released, expectations for future projects were high. The films after that exceeded those expectations.

Just like in the previous attacks, the mainstream media again denounces Mel Gibson for so-called “anti-Semitism”. During the last “controversy” self-declared “voice of the left” Arianna Huffington in 2009 even argued for a revival of non-existent “Hollywood values” and, in the same breath, for Gibson to be burned at the stake:

“(…) Now is the time”, screamed Huffington, “for Hollywood to show what those values really are by making Gibson pay the price for his bigotry and intolerance.”

Just like in the days of J. Edgar Hoover, when every important person, both inside and outside Hollywood, had the dubious honor of blackmail-space reserved in the FBI-director’s desk, the arrows have now been let loose on Gibson, not for anything he might have done mind you, but rather with the aim of stopping the man from capturing audiences around the world with any more works. In other words: the current “controversy” serves nothing more than to hinder the filmmaker from simply doing his job. In an age where many filmmakers, royally sniffing it up in the bathroom, are producing predictive programming to audiences everywhere, the crusade launched against Gibson should raise all thinking people’s eyebrows.

Remember the Playboy-interview from July of 1995, where Gibson identified the power behind the throne with stunning accuracy. With the conversation turning to then-president of the United States, Bill Clinton, Gibson suggested that he was obviously groomed for the job early on in his career (an admitted fact).

“Do you really believe that?”, asked the surprised interviewer (he shouldn’t be), to which Gibson replied:

“I really believe that. He was a Rhodes scholar, right? Just like Bob Hawke. Do you know what a Rhodes scholar is? Cecil Rhodes established the Rhodes scholarship for those young men and women who want to strive for a new world order. Have you heard that before? George Bush? CIA? Really, it’s Marxism, but it just doesn’t call itself that. Karl had the right idea, but he was too forward about saying what it was. Get power but don’t admit to it. Do it by stealth. There’s a whole trend of Rhodes scholars who will be politicians around the world.”

Put aback by Gibson’s words, the interviewer retreaded into a kind of retardedness (popping up more and more these days); a sort of dream-like nothingness that hangs on people’s heads, like a hat- and then, aware of the tape recorder, the reporter retreats into the mantra of the numb when confronted with an outburst of sudden truth:

“This certainly sounds like a paranoid sense of world history. You must be quite an assassination buff.”Gibson: “Oh, f***. A lot of these guys pulled a boner. There’s something to do with the Federal Reserve that Lincoln did, Kennedy did and Reagan tried. I can’t remember what it was, my dad told me about it. Everyone who did this particular thing that would have fixed the economy got undone. Anyway, I’ll end up dead if I keep talking s***.”

Not dead, thank God. Although the New World Order is pulling all the stops to make sure his career will be.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Gilad Atzmon on Meria Heller Show

Wednesday, April 18, 2012 at 10:31PM Gilad Atzmon

 

http://meria.net/

Meria with Gilad Atzmon-The Wandering Who? Jewish Identity Politics

http://meria.net/

11/4/12 Meria interviews Gilad Atzmon on his excellent book “The Wandering Who? A Study of Jewish Identity Politics”. What’s in a name? Israel is a state, Palestine is the land; anti-semitism; few Jews can claim origin in Palestine; initial Zionist plan; Nationalism created unpaid armies; disarm Israel; the Jewish state; the “chosen” ones; exceptionalism in USA and Israel; losing the American dream; what is a zionist? anti-semitism feeds the Israeli project; Jewish anti-zionism; Iran- PRE traumatic stress; Israel the only aggressor; who controls world politics ? AIPAC pushing for war; Jewish religion follows the Talmud not the Bible; Jewish secularization; US & Israel – Old Testament driven; what was the biggest victim of WW2? NWO and the Zionist agenda; new Nazi’s? American politics cheaper than tanks; Americans fighting Israel’s wars; complicity of citizens; the Protocols of Zion; and lots more.

 

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

UN Unanimously Votes for Syria Monitoring Mission

Apr 21, 2012

NEW YORK, SANA_ The UN security council on Saturday voted unanimously in favour of deploying 300 observers in Syria.

Al-Jaafari: Syria Showed Full Cooperation and Commitment to Annan Plan

Syria's Permanent U.N. Envoy Dr. Bashar al-Jaafari said Syria has showed full cooperation and commitment to the plan of the UN Envoy to Syria, Kofi Annan, as it has a real interest in the success of the plan and the work of the U.N. observers due to its keenness on the security of Syria and safety of its citizens.

In his speech during the UN Security Council session al-Jaafari addressed those who claim problem of minorities in Syria by saying " in Syria there is only a national unity."

He added that the UN should guarantee commitment of the armed groups to Annan's plan.

Churkin: Countries that Have Influence on Opposition Should Encourage it to Stop Violence, Apply Annan Plan

Russia's Permanent UN Envoy Vitaly Churkin stressed that the resolution adopted today by the United Nation Security Council (UNSC) on the deployment of UN observers in Syria sends an important international message.

In his speech before the UN Security Council, Churkin said this resolutions shows that only the UNSC has the right to make resolutions for resolving regional crises such as the Syrian crisis.

The Russian Envoy added that any group of friends or countries with interests or any other party must clearly abide by the UNSC resolutions and not undermine the possibility of implementing it.

Churkin affirmed the importance of this resolution to push the process of peaceful settlement in Syria forward besides being embodies a unity and consensus of the Council regarding Annan's six points plan.

He made it clear that any attempt to impose outside powers on the Syrian people could exacerbate the crisis, calling on countries that have an influence on the opposition to encourage it to stop violence and apply Annan's plan.

In a press conference following the UN session, Churkin said there are powers that want to implement plans, contrary to what the international community wants regarding the achievement of security and stability in Syria.

"Russia aims to establish a political process, end violence and to attain the aspirations of the Syrian people and those who want the best for Syria have to support that," he said.

Baodong Reiterates China's Commitment to peaceful Solution to Syria's Crisis

For his part, China's Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Li Baodong, reiterated Beijing's commitment to reaching a peaceful solution to Syria's crisis and within the framework of respecting the will of the Syrian people and keenness on Syria's territorial integrity.

In his speech before the UN Security Council, Baodong added that Annan represents an important channel to solve the crisis in Syria, calling upon all Syrian sides to completely cooperate with Annan in order to launch a political process led by Syria.

Baodong stressed his country's rejection of all efforts and statements that could hinder Annan's mission, hoping that the monitors' mission will fully respect Syria's sovereignty and work in accordance to the authorization granted by the Council.

M.Nassr / Ghossoun

• Gatilov: Russia-Proposed Draft UNSC Resolution on Observer Mission Stabilizes Halt of Violence
• Observers Visit Syria’s Homs, UNSC to Vote on Expanded Mission

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Pentagon: "No silver bullet" for Syria

Via FLC

"...Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, outlined the steps the United States is taking to pressure the regime of President Bashar Assad, including direct non-lethal support to the opposition such as communications equipment and emergency humanitarian assistance of $25 million. But the two made clear that unilateral military action is far from a solution.
"There is no silver bullet," Panetta told the House Armed Services Committee. "At the same time, the situation is of grave consequence to the Syrian people."

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

'Never Again' is an Empty Slogan

By Gilad Atzmon

The United States must resolve that ‘never again’ is not just an ‘empty slogan’, said U.S. President Barack Obama on Thursday, in a statement marking Holocaust Remembrance Day. Yet, I am left bewildered, what does president Obama refers to? Is  ‘never again’ a universal message pointing at genocides in general or did he refer to Jewish suffering only? With  1,455,590 dead Iraqis due to an Anglo American criminal war, it seems as if the USA is actually complicit in an actual genocide.

Obama's comments followed Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s Holocaust Memorial Day address at Yad Vashem where he stated that Israel's "enemies tried to bury the Jewish future but our future was born again in the land of our forefathers, here we built a base, and a new beginning of freedom, and hope and action.”

Netanyahu, as usual, was almost correct. The ‘Jewish future’ was indeed born again after the holocaust just to introduce total misery, racism, expansionism, oppression, death and carnage to the entire Middle East. The so-called ‘Jewish State’ has managed, in just a few decades, to locate itself as the primary threat to world peace.  With the Jewish State and its lobbies pushing for a war against Iran, there is little room for doubt- Israel is driven by a suicidal inclination in the spirit of Biblical Samson. Yet, being a nuclear super power, Israel’s potential self-inflicted tragedy may as well put an end to the world, as we know it.  

In Yad Vashem, the Israeli PM, once again explored the most banal pre-traumatic stress symptoms. He went on to say that today’s generation “faces calls to exterminate the Jewish State,” and that lessons of the past must not be forgotten. Netanyahu obviously focused on Iran, calling it an existential threat to Israel, and to world peace. He added, "It is the world’s responsibility to stop Iran securing nuclear weapons."

PM Netanyahu is obviously wrong.  It is actually obvious that nuclear Iran could only save Israel from itself.  It would restrain the Jewish State and stop it from exploring its lethal inclinations.

If Obama is sincere, if ‘never again’ isn’t just an ‘empty slogan’ as he says, he better goes out of his way to restrain Israel’s genocidal inclinations and its belligerent pro-war Lobbies around the world.

 The Wandering Who? A Study Of Jewish Identity Politics

  The book can be  ordered  on Amazon.com  or Amazon.co.uk

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

"$70 billion in U.S. taxpayer dollars for security forces of dubious capability!"

Via FLC

"... The US combat role in Afghanistan will end in 2014, but it seems as if the US commitment to Afghanistan will go on. We're starting to get some idea of how expensive that commitment will be.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai is asking for the US and NATO allies to spell out how much aid they are willing to contribute. In particular, Karzai has asked for the U.S. to commit to at least $2 billion per year for the Afghan Security Forces after 2014. This is in line with the $2.3 billion minimum that American officials have said is under discussion. Bottom line: The Afghan security forces will cost the U.S. at least $20 billion over the next ten years. Adding the $50 billion that we have already spent, and the total is $70 billion in U.S. taxpayer dollars for security forces of dubious capability...."

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

Coptic Church: No Pilgrimage to Jerusalem Before Liberation

Egyptian Copts take part in the Good Friday procession along the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem's old city on 13 April 2012 ahead of Orthodox Easter. (Photo: AFP - Jack Guez)

By: Bisan Kassab

Published Friday, April 20, 2012

The Coptic Orthodox Church in Egypt reiterated its stance of prohibiting pilgrimage to occupied Jerusalem. This announcement was made in response to Mufti Ali Gomaa’s visit to al-Aqsa mosque last Wednesday.

Cairo – As expected, the visit of Grand Mufti of Egypt, Ali Gomaa, to al-Aqsa mosque in occupied Jerusalem was met with thousands of critical comments from the media and on social networking sites.
The position of Dar al-Ifta, the highest authoritative Islamic institute, headed by the Grand Mufti, is being regarded in stark comparison to that of the Coptic Orthodox Church. The late head of the church, Pope Shenouda, had always stood against Copts going on pilgrimage to or even visiting Jerusalem “except with our brothers the Muslims following its liberation,” as his famous saying goes.
The Orthodox Church’s position did not begin with Shenouda. It can be traced back to Pope Cyril VI who banned the travel of Copts to Jerusalem in 1968, one year after its occupation.
This stance was consistent with his well-known and strong relationship with former Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser.

When Anwar Sadat, Nasser’s successor, visited Jerusalem, Shenouda refused to accompany him, creating a rift between the two men.

When Anwar Sadat, Nasser’s successor, visited Jerusalem, Shenouda refused to accompany him, creating a rift between the two men.

Ultimately, this led to the Pope’s exile to Wadi Natrun in Egypt’s western desert in 1981. Sadat was assassinated less than one month later.
Shenouda paid a price, namely sacrificing his relationship with the head of state, for refusing to normalize with Israel.
But those who insisted on visiting Jerusalem and going on a pilgrimage to holy places there, against the instructions of the church, have, in their opinion, paid a higher price.
Pope Shenouda was unwavering on the issue. He excommunicated all those who disobeyed the papal order and banned them from performing the sacraments.
The punishment still applies today to all those who visit the occupied lands, even since Shenouda’s death.
“All those who visited Jerusalem in the recent delegations will be subject [to the decision],” Anba Morcos, the Orthodox church’s official spokesperson, told Al-Akhbar.
He was referring to the visit of hundreds of Copts to Jerusalem this Easter. The visit received ample media attention, in anticipation that the church would change its position after the death of Shenouda.
Morcos revealed that the excommunication period will be decided based on the opinion of the regional bishops where those involved live.
“Pope Shenouda used to impose a one-year excommunication in these cases, with some exceptions such as for the elderly who long to see Jerusalem before they die,” he said.
The spokesperson also stressed that Mufti Gomaa’s visit to Jerusalem will not change his church’s position.
“Jerusalem has not been liberated yet, and Mufti Gomaa’s position faces extensive criticism,” Morcos says.

“Jerusalem has not been liberated yet, and Mufti Gomaa’s position faces extensive criticism.”

The Anglican Church takes a similar position on the issue, as “the Mufti does not represent all Muslims,” according to the head of the church, Reverend Ikram Lamai. The Anglican Church does, however, allow its congregation to visit occupied Jerusalem.

“Although the church has been against such visits since the 1970s, it does not punish offenders and allows them the freedom to agree or disagree with its opinion,” Lamai says.
The Catholic Church – the smallest Christian denomination in Egypt – stands alone on the issue. It has never announced any position against visiting Jerusalem.
This has been interpreted by most Egyptian Catholics as implicit support for pilgrimages.
Speaking on the issue, the spokesperson of the Catholic Church said to the media that his church “does not oppose visits to religious sites in Jerusalem.”
This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!

The Sultan’s Preacher Goes to Jerusalem

By: Rana Mamdouh

Published Friday, April 20, 2012

Egyptian Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa (C),
walks out of Jerusalem's Dome of the Rock mosque during his visit
to the Al-Aqsa mosques compound,
Islam's third holiest site, on 18 April 2012. (Photo: AFP - STR)

Completely disregarding popular opinion opposed to normalization with Israel, Egyptian Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa visited the al-Aqsa mosque in occupied Jerusalem, stirring a storm of criticism.

Cairo – “Do not reconcile even if all the sheikhs stood against your sword...and men who are full of fractures...those who love the taste of gruel and riding slaves...whose turbans hang over their eyes...and their Arab swords forget the years of glory...do not reconcile.”

The words of Amal Donkol’s poem, harshly critical of sheikhs, were on the lips of the Egyptian public as they responded to Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa’s visit to Jerusalem under the patronage of Israeli occupation.

Some Egyptians are seeing the visit as a continuation of “the ruler’s sheikhs’” determination to minimize the influence of Al-Azhar, the centre for Arabic literature and Islamic learning, and of its religious scholars.

They compared the Mufti’s visit to the late Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi shaking hands with Israeli President Shimon Peres at a UN inter-religious conference in 2008.

Remarkably, the shameful handshake took place during the inhumane Israeli blockade on the people of Gaza. It triggered a violent debate in political and legislative circles in Egypt, with calls for the sheikh’s removal.

Tantawi had also received chief Israeli rabbi Lau in Al-Azhar in spite of the opposition of most scholars. He responded saying, “If my enemy comes to me, whether Israeli or non-Israeli, I will meet with him.”

the mufti’s visit and the al-Azhar sheikh’s handshake do not represent the policies of Dar al-Ifta, or Al-Azhar.

Senior researcher at Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, Amr Hashem Rabih, explained that the mufti’s visit and the al-Azhar sheikh’s handshake do not represent the policies of Dar al-Ifta, the highest authoritative Islamic institute, or Al-Azhar. But the acts were not out of line with the policies of the Egyptian government on this issue.  

The visit also opposed the policies of the Orthodox church in Egypt under the leadership of the late Pope Shenouda III. According to Rabih, the church adopted a firm policy on pilgrimage to Jerusalem that does not change according to government policy.

For more than 40 years, the church has barred Copts from visiting Jerusalem and has taken an absolute stand against normalization in all its forms.

Rabih explained to Al-Akhbar that during the time of late Grand Sheikh Jad al-Haq Ali Jad al-Haq in the 1980s, Al-Azhar vocally opposed normalization with Israel and Muslims visiting Jerusalem.

His position was in response to fatwas by some clerics allowing such visits following the Oslo Accords between the Palestinian authority and the Zionist government. Al-Haq also refused to meet Israeli President Ezer Weizman during his visit to Egypt in 1996.

Wasil said that solidarity with Jerusalem can be expressed by supporting its people politically and economically, thus establishing their presence in the city.

Former Grand Mufti Nasr Farid Wasil condemned Gomaa’s visit to Jerusalem and warned that “visiting Jerusalem while it is under Zionist occupation is a form of normalization.”  

“It insinuates that the question of occupation has been solved, as if it can be visited by everyone and that there is no longer any need for independence or calling for Zionists to lift their control over Jerusalem,” he said.

Wasil said that solidarity with Jerusalem can be expressed by supporting its people politically and economically, thus establishing their presence in the city and being a thorn in the side of plans to Judaize it. The censure of political, cultural, and economic normalization with Israel should continue, according to Wasil.

Historically, Al-Azhar’s position on normalization and the Camp David agreement between Egypt and Israel has fluctuated depending on the general politics of the country and the president at the time’s position.

In 1952, a law was enacted giving the president of the republic the right to appoint the Grand Sheikh instead of senior Al-Azhar scholars.

This influenced the political positions of Al-Azhar clergy, who represent the oldest religious institution in the Islamic world.

While Sadat’s visit to Israel in 1977 caused widespread Arab and Islamic fury, Al-Azhar’s Grand Sheikh at the time, Mohammad al-Bisar, provided religious cover for the visit.

At the same time, Grand Mufti Abdel Halim Mahmoud issued a fatwa facilitating the peace accords, going against an Al-Azhar policy dating back to 1956 forbidding reconciliation with Israel because it had usurped Palestine and displaced its people.

The religious scholars’ committee at the time qualified the long-standing policy by saying that

“reconciliation with Israel is not permissible under sharia since the usurper insists on usurpation and it would enable the offender to continue in its claims.”

In 1952, a law was enacted giving the president of the republic the right to appoint the Grand Sheikh instead of senior Al-Azhar scholars.Today, under the leadership of Sheikh Ahmad al-Tayeb, Al-Azhar’s stand on normalization remains unclear. He commented on the mufti’s visit to Jerusalem saying that he had not known about it and that he will not visit Jerusalem while it is under occupation.

Tayeb was reluctant to express an official position on Gomaa’s visit, which was made without the permission of the institution he represents. The current stance differs from Al-Azhar’s position during Mubarak’s time, when it was headed by Tantawi and explicitly supported normalization.

Tantawi was not satisfied by shaking hands with the Israeli president in front of the cameras, he also issued a series of fatwas, described by observers as unusual, allowing the creation of the separation wall between Egypt and Gaza. He said the wall would protect Egypt from its enemies.

Amna Nasir, professor of faith and philosophy at Al-Azhar University, said that regardless of the official position of the Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar, most scholars have been in agreement for a long time about not visiting Jerusalem while it is under occupation.

“This position is shared with the Egyptian [Coptic] church that bars Christians from visiting until the liberation of the holy city from Jewish desecration, regardless of some Copts visiting Jerusalem lately,” she said.

Nasir expressed “fear that the Mufti’s visit to al-Aqsa mosque will extinguish the hostility Arabs and Muslims have toward Israel.” She considers it a call for normalization with the Zionist enemy under the pretext of visiting al-Aqsa mosque.

This article is an edited translation from the Arabic Edition.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!