Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Ralph's avatar

I agree with most of what the author has written. And incidentally, I miss your commentary at PLB. ;-)

I must emphasize one factual error that is commonly repeated, and which is important to correct. Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount was not the precipitating event that caused the Second Intifada. The Second Intifada occurred as a result of Yasser Arafat's unwillingness to agree to the concessions offered to him by Ehud Barak at the Camp David Summit in the summer of 2000, after which he declared that he would seek to attain ALL of his aims by armed means. The concessions at the time included a hitherto unthinkable idea of surrendering part of the Temple Mount compound-- the holiest site in Judaism-- to Palestinian control. Then opposition-leader Ariel Sharon vehemently opposed this, and so visited the mount to emphasize its importance to the Jewish people and to the state of Israel. But this was not the factor that resulted in the Intifada. PLO Chairman Arafat had already declared his intention to engage in an Intifada. And to wit, violence had been breaking out for months before even the Camp David Summit, including an incident in which a Palestinian "police" officer shot an Israeli counterpart on a joint patrol, roughly in March of that year by my memory. I recall those days and months vividly. It was an intensely painful time.

Another interesting point for readers to know. Although Palestinians and many Arab sources oddly deny the importance of the site to Judaism, the Arabic phrase for the compound actually testifies to its Jewish origins, and is almost indistinguishable from the Hebrew phrase, as anyone who knows the language would recognize. It is called, in Arabic, "Bayt Al Makdish." In Hebrew, "Beit Hamikdash." In English, the "House of the Temple."

Expand full comment
1 more comment...

No posts