28 may 2018
Dozens of Israeli settlers on Monday morning broke into al-Aqsa Mosque under heavy police presence.
Quds Press reported that 52 Israeli settlers, escorted by a large police force, entered the Mosque from al-Maghareba Gate, roamed its courtyards, and performed Talmudic rituals before leaving the site via al-Silsila Gate.
According to the news agency, about 30 Israeli policemen stormed the Mosque in a morning patrol.
The Israeli police allow settlers to visit the Mosque on a daily basis, except Saturday and Friday, in two rounds: in the morning and the afternoon, even during the holy month of Ramadan.
Quds Press reported that 52 Israeli settlers, escorted by a large police force, entered the Mosque from al-Maghareba Gate, roamed its courtyards, and performed Talmudic rituals before leaving the site via al-Silsila Gate.
According to the news agency, about 30 Israeli policemen stormed the Mosque in a morning patrol.
The Israeli police allow settlers to visit the Mosque on a daily basis, except Saturday and Friday, in two rounds: in the morning and the afternoon, even during the holy month of Ramadan.
27 may 2018
Dozens of Israeli settlers on Sunday morning broke into al-Aqsa Mosque via al-Maghareba Gate.
The PIC reporter said that the settlers were escorted by a large police force that accompanied them until their tour in the Mosque's courtyards ended.
Al-Maghareba Gate was opened in the early morning hours and dozens of Israeli policemen were deployed inside the Mosque to secure the break-in.
In a related context, many Jerusalemite men and women are still prevented from entering the holy site under police orders.
Israeli settlers carry out daily break-ins into al-Aqsa Mosque under the police protection especially in the early morning hours taking advantage of the small number of Palestinian worshipers in the Mosque during this period.
The PIC reporter said that the settlers were escorted by a large police force that accompanied them until their tour in the Mosque's courtyards ended.
Al-Maghareba Gate was opened in the early morning hours and dozens of Israeli policemen were deployed inside the Mosque to secure the break-in.
In a related context, many Jerusalemite men and women are still prevented from entering the holy site under police orders.
Israeli settlers carry out daily break-ins into al-Aqsa Mosque under the police protection especially in the early morning hours taking advantage of the small number of Palestinian worshipers in the Mosque during this period.
24 may 2018
Nearly 100 Israeli settlers have stormed Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied Jerusalem on Thursday morning.
According to the Religious Endowments Authority, 55 settlers and 45 students broke into al-Aqsa Mosque in the early hours of Thursday.
Visits by Jewish groups, including politicians, have triggered violence over the years, with Palestinians fearing that Israeli hardliners are trying to take control of the site.
According to the Religious Endowments Authority, 55 settlers and 45 students broke into al-Aqsa Mosque in the early hours of Thursday.
Visits by Jewish groups, including politicians, have triggered violence over the years, with Palestinians fearing that Israeli hardliners are trying to take control of the site.
Two senior Angolan diplomats were fired this week for attending a gala dinner hosted by the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs to celebrate the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem.
Manuel Augusto Jao Diogo Fortunato - a senior adviser and the number 2 figure in the Angolan Embassy in Tel Aviv - attended the 13 May event with the approval of Angola’s Director for African, Middle East and Regional Organizations, Joaquim do Espírito Santo.
Angolan media reports said that Angola's Foreign Affairs Minister, Manuel Augusto, fired Fortunato and Santo for “failing to comply with procedures and harming Angola's good reputation.”
Fortunato was one of twelve envoys from African countries to participate in the event. Other African countries that attended were: Rwanda, South Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Zambia, Tanzania, Nigeria, Republic of Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Those African nations that did attend were heavily criticized for betraying Africa’s legacy of anti-colonialism and undermining the Palestinian liberation struggle.
Source: Afro-Palestine News Wire Service
Manuel Augusto Jao Diogo Fortunato - a senior adviser and the number 2 figure in the Angolan Embassy in Tel Aviv - attended the 13 May event with the approval of Angola’s Director for African, Middle East and Regional Organizations, Joaquim do Espírito Santo.
Angolan media reports said that Angola's Foreign Affairs Minister, Manuel Augusto, fired Fortunato and Santo for “failing to comply with procedures and harming Angola's good reputation.”
Fortunato was one of twelve envoys from African countries to participate in the event. Other African countries that attended were: Rwanda, South Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Zambia, Tanzania, Nigeria, Republic of Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Those African nations that did attend were heavily criticized for betraying Africa’s legacy of anti-colonialism and undermining the Palestinian liberation struggle.
Source: Afro-Palestine News Wire Service
The Hamas Movement’s spokesman Fawzi Barhoum slammed the US ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, for his cheerfulness to receive a picture of Occupied Jerusalem from Jewish settler groups, showing the holy city with the famous view of the Dome of Rock replaced by the alleged Jewish temple.
In a press statement on Wednesday, Barhoum described the behavior of Friedman who was smiling while receiving the picture as a racist action that reflects the US-Israeli serious partnership in attacking the Palestinian, Arab and Islamic holy places.
Barhoum perceived this step as inciting the demolition of al-Aqsa Mosque and called for taking serious actions by Arabs and Muslims to protect the holy site and to support the steadfastness of the Jerusalemite people.
In a press statement on Wednesday, Barhoum described the behavior of Friedman who was smiling while receiving the picture as a racist action that reflects the US-Israeli serious partnership in attacking the Palestinian, Arab and Islamic holy places.
Barhoum perceived this step as inciting the demolition of al-Aqsa Mosque and called for taking serious actions by Arabs and Muslims to protect the holy site and to support the steadfastness of the Jerusalemite people.
23 may 2018
Palestinian officials are condemning the “despicable actions” of the US Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, who was recently photographed while receiving a poster depicting an aerial image of occupied East Jerusalem, in which the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock have been erased and replaced by a simulation of the Jewish Third Temple.
The photo shows a smiling Friedman — who is a vocal supporter of Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise — posing next to the poster during a visit to the Israeli city of Bnei Brak.
The photo of Friedman sparked widespread controversy, forcing the US Embassy in Israel to issue a statement claiming that Friedman “was not aware of the image thrust in front of him when the photo was taken. He was deeply disappointed that anyone would take advantage of his visit to Bnei Brak to create controversy.”
Secretary-General of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), Saeb Erekat, released a statement in reaction to the photo, asking “how long would these despicable US actions remain without being faced by an Arab and Islamic response.”
He said, according to Ma;an News Agency, that for the US ambassador to accept such a picture with a smile “indicates approval and recognition,” adding that “they are actually turning the conflict into a religious one.”
Meanwhile, Arab member of the Knesset, Ahmad Tibi, commented saying “this madman wants to make peace, good thing you did not move the embassy there!”
Mahmoud Al-Habash, a senior adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas,slammed Friedman for posing with the doctored image, saying “the end result these criminals seek—and among them the terrorist settler David Friedman—is the erasure of the Palestinians from Jerusalem and their banishment from it.”
“Friedman’s appearance with a big photo of the Haram al-Sharif in which the Dome of the Rock was removed and the Temple was put in its place is a provocative move and a racist message that incites to the destruction of the al-Aqsa Mosque. This is a clear adoption of the radical Jews’ claims and beliefs about the al-Aqsa Mosque and the city of Jerusalem,” al-Habash said.
“Hiding the holy places to Islam in Jerusalem is the racist objective of extremist Jews, which is prevalent in the occupying state,” he continued.
Friedman, Trump’s former bankruptcy lawyer, has directly supported Israel’s settler movement and announced his disdain for the two-state solution — the internationally recognized solution for the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
He has been an open supporter of recognizing an undivided Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, which flies in the face of Palestinian aspirations centered on East Jerusalem becoming the capital of a future, independent Palestinian state — long considered the most viable solution for ending the conflict.
He has positioned himself as a divisive and controversial figure in Israeli-Palestinian politics, accusing former US President Barack Obama of being an “anti-Semite” and comparing American Jews who oppose the half-century occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, to prisoners who served as guards in Nazi concentration camps.
Friedman also serves as president of the American Friends in Beit El Yeshiva — a nonprofit group that supports the illegal settlement of Beit El near Ramallah in the occupied West Bank. His name appears on several buildings in the settlement that he had directly funded with his organization.
Palestinians have long feared that Israel has been attempting to shake up the status quo at the holy site, in the shape of routine Jewish incursions on the site and right-wing Israeli calls to demolish the mosque and replace it with a third Jewish temple.
The photo shows a smiling Friedman — who is a vocal supporter of Israel’s illegal settlement enterprise — posing next to the poster during a visit to the Israeli city of Bnei Brak.
The photo of Friedman sparked widespread controversy, forcing the US Embassy in Israel to issue a statement claiming that Friedman “was not aware of the image thrust in front of him when the photo was taken. He was deeply disappointed that anyone would take advantage of his visit to Bnei Brak to create controversy.”
Secretary-General of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), Saeb Erekat, released a statement in reaction to the photo, asking “how long would these despicable US actions remain without being faced by an Arab and Islamic response.”
He said, according to Ma;an News Agency, that for the US ambassador to accept such a picture with a smile “indicates approval and recognition,” adding that “they are actually turning the conflict into a religious one.”
Meanwhile, Arab member of the Knesset, Ahmad Tibi, commented saying “this madman wants to make peace, good thing you did not move the embassy there!”
Mahmoud Al-Habash, a senior adviser to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas,slammed Friedman for posing with the doctored image, saying “the end result these criminals seek—and among them the terrorist settler David Friedman—is the erasure of the Palestinians from Jerusalem and their banishment from it.”
“Friedman’s appearance with a big photo of the Haram al-Sharif in which the Dome of the Rock was removed and the Temple was put in its place is a provocative move and a racist message that incites to the destruction of the al-Aqsa Mosque. This is a clear adoption of the radical Jews’ claims and beliefs about the al-Aqsa Mosque and the city of Jerusalem,” al-Habash said.
“Hiding the holy places to Islam in Jerusalem is the racist objective of extremist Jews, which is prevalent in the occupying state,” he continued.
Friedman, Trump’s former bankruptcy lawyer, has directly supported Israel’s settler movement and announced his disdain for the two-state solution — the internationally recognized solution for the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
He has been an open supporter of recognizing an undivided Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, which flies in the face of Palestinian aspirations centered on East Jerusalem becoming the capital of a future, independent Palestinian state — long considered the most viable solution for ending the conflict.
He has positioned himself as a divisive and controversial figure in Israeli-Palestinian politics, accusing former US President Barack Obama of being an “anti-Semite” and comparing American Jews who oppose the half-century occupation of the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, to prisoners who served as guards in Nazi concentration camps.
Friedman also serves as president of the American Friends in Beit El Yeshiva — a nonprofit group that supports the illegal settlement of Beit El near Ramallah in the occupied West Bank. His name appears on several buildings in the settlement that he had directly funded with his organization.
Palestinians have long feared that Israel has been attempting to shake up the status quo at the holy site, in the shape of routine Jewish incursions on the site and right-wing Israeli calls to demolish the mosque and replace it with a third Jewish temple.
By Ramzy Baroud
Two important truths have to be restated in order to understand the context of the US government’s decision to relocate its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which officially took place on 14 May.
First, the precarious relationship between the US government and international law. Historically, the US has used international law to achieve its own political ends, and relegated international and human rights laws when they were seen as obstacles to US political and military ambitions.
A case in point was the US government’s manipulation of United Nation resolutions that paved the way for war against Iraq in 1990-91; yet, its dismissal of the UN as “irrelevant” when international consensus rejected American military intervention in Iraq in 2003.
However, a far more consistent example is the US attitude towards Israel and Palestine. For decades, the US has used its “veto” to block scores of resolutions condemning Israel’s military occupation of Palestinian land or calling for practical mechanisms to bring an end to Palestinian suffering and subjugation.
While the strategy works well at the UN Security Council, it has faced considerable limitations at the General Assembly, which is, by far, a more democratic and internationally representative body than the UNSC. Various US ambassadors – notable amongst them Madeline Albright and, today’s Nikki Haley – have unleashed wars of verbal abuse, threats and outright bullying against countries that refused to toe the American line.
Haley, in particular, although the least politically-experienced of all US ambassadors, has been the most outspoken. Her attacks on Palestinians and their supporters – as in the majority of the international community – are now staple in media coverage of UN proceedings.
While it is true that the US move to relocate its embassy is a “violation of international law”, it is of little essence to American foreign policy, which is essentially predicated on challenging or violating global principles of peace and conflict resolution.
The other important context is this: as per American law the US embassy was, legally speaking, already relocated to Jerusalem many years ago. “The Jerusalem Embassy Act” of 1995 was made effective on 8 November of that same year, thus becoming public law, bypassing the consent of the president. It passed with an absolute majority in the Senate (95-5) and the House (374-37).
Using a loophole in that same law, past administrations have signed a waiver, once every six months, to delay the inevitable move, which was intended to take place by 31 May 1999. The resolution was introduced by a Republican majority Congress; however, it won near consensus from both parties.
Although US President Donald Trump had signed the waiver once, in June 2017, a few months later, in December, he decided to take US support of Israel a step further by recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. On 14 May 2018, that became a reality.
While it is important to remember that Trump’s decision, however daring, is consistent with the US anti-UN, anti-Palestinian and pro-Israel attitude, a question must be asked: why now?
The answer can be approached in three different ways: first, the kind of politician Trump is (extremely opportunistic); second, the nature of his political base (right-wing conservative Christian-Evangelicals) and, finally, the mounting political pressure which his faltering administration is experiencing on a daily basis.
First regarding Trump himself: In March 2016, then Republican presidential candidate, Trump, delivered his famous speech before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Here, he revealed the type of politician he truly is – by Washington’s standards, a “good politician”, as in one devoid of moral values.
In his speech he made many promises to Israel. The large crowd could rarely contain its giddiness.
Of the many false claims and dangerous promises Trump made, a particular passage stood out, for it offered early clues to what the future administration’s policy on Israel and Palestine would look like. The signs were not very promising:
“When the United States stands with Israel, the chances of peace really rise and rise exponentially. That’s what will happen when Donald Trump is president of the United States,” Trump declared, an untrue statement that was preceded with a loud applause and ended with an even louder cheer.
The truth, however, is that Trump’s love affair with Israel is actually relatively recent. He had made several pronouncements in the past that, in fact, irritated Israel and its influential backers in the US. But when his chances of becoming the Republican nominee grew, so did his willingness to say whatever it takes to win Israel’s and its friends’ approvals.
Second, Trump’s evangelical base: Trump is desperate to maintain the support of the very constituency that brought him to the White House in the first place. This right-wing, white, conservative, Christian-Evangelical constituency remains the foundation of his troubled presidency.
This constituency, a major bloc in the US political system, voted for Trump in solid numbers. Among the white Evangelicals, 81 per cent reportedly voted for him.
Although these voters claim to be “value voters”, their take on morality is often inconsistent and, at times, quite bizarre. Their “love” for Israel, for example, is quite provisional as they believe in prophecies pertaining to the “second coming of Jesus Christ” as a prelude to the “Rapture”: it is then that the faithful will be sent to heaven, and all the rest, including the Jews, will perish in a hellish eternity.
However, according to that inexplicable thinking, for the prophecy to be fulfilled, Jews would have to be in complete control over the land of Palestine.
As moronic and dark such ideas may seem to the rest of the world, they have created a temporary alliance between Israel’s right-wing government, the Evangelicals (of whom Vice President, Mike Pence, is an important member) and Donald Trump.
Which leads us to the third and final point: The massive political pressure suffered by Trump’s vulnerable administration.
The US is currently experiencing unprecedented political instability and polarisation. Talk of impeaching the president is gaining momentum, while his officials are often paraded before the Department of Justice investigators over various accusations, including collusion with foreign powers. Trump, himself, is being accused of various demeaning charges of indecency and corruption.
Under these circumstances, there is no decision or issue that Trump can approach without finding himself in a political storm, except for one issue, that of accommodating Israel to the fullest extent. Indeed, being pro-Israel has historically united the US’ two main parties, the Congress, the media and many Americans, leading among them, Trump’s political base.
However, Trump’s decision will neither cancel nor reverse international law. It simply means that the US has decided to drop the act, and walk wholly into the Israeli camp, further isolating itself from the rest of the world and, once more, openly defying international law.
- Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine Chronicle.
Two important truths have to be restated in order to understand the context of the US government’s decision to relocate its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which officially took place on 14 May.
First, the precarious relationship between the US government and international law. Historically, the US has used international law to achieve its own political ends, and relegated international and human rights laws when they were seen as obstacles to US political and military ambitions.
A case in point was the US government’s manipulation of United Nation resolutions that paved the way for war against Iraq in 1990-91; yet, its dismissal of the UN as “irrelevant” when international consensus rejected American military intervention in Iraq in 2003.
However, a far more consistent example is the US attitude towards Israel and Palestine. For decades, the US has used its “veto” to block scores of resolutions condemning Israel’s military occupation of Palestinian land or calling for practical mechanisms to bring an end to Palestinian suffering and subjugation.
While the strategy works well at the UN Security Council, it has faced considerable limitations at the General Assembly, which is, by far, a more democratic and internationally representative body than the UNSC. Various US ambassadors – notable amongst them Madeline Albright and, today’s Nikki Haley – have unleashed wars of verbal abuse, threats and outright bullying against countries that refused to toe the American line.
Haley, in particular, although the least politically-experienced of all US ambassadors, has been the most outspoken. Her attacks on Palestinians and their supporters – as in the majority of the international community – are now staple in media coverage of UN proceedings.
While it is true that the US move to relocate its embassy is a “violation of international law”, it is of little essence to American foreign policy, which is essentially predicated on challenging or violating global principles of peace and conflict resolution.
The other important context is this: as per American law the US embassy was, legally speaking, already relocated to Jerusalem many years ago. “The Jerusalem Embassy Act” of 1995 was made effective on 8 November of that same year, thus becoming public law, bypassing the consent of the president. It passed with an absolute majority in the Senate (95-5) and the House (374-37).
Using a loophole in that same law, past administrations have signed a waiver, once every six months, to delay the inevitable move, which was intended to take place by 31 May 1999. The resolution was introduced by a Republican majority Congress; however, it won near consensus from both parties.
Although US President Donald Trump had signed the waiver once, in June 2017, a few months later, in December, he decided to take US support of Israel a step further by recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. On 14 May 2018, that became a reality.
While it is important to remember that Trump’s decision, however daring, is consistent with the US anti-UN, anti-Palestinian and pro-Israel attitude, a question must be asked: why now?
The answer can be approached in three different ways: first, the kind of politician Trump is (extremely opportunistic); second, the nature of his political base (right-wing conservative Christian-Evangelicals) and, finally, the mounting political pressure which his faltering administration is experiencing on a daily basis.
First regarding Trump himself: In March 2016, then Republican presidential candidate, Trump, delivered his famous speech before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Here, he revealed the type of politician he truly is – by Washington’s standards, a “good politician”, as in one devoid of moral values.
In his speech he made many promises to Israel. The large crowd could rarely contain its giddiness.
Of the many false claims and dangerous promises Trump made, a particular passage stood out, for it offered early clues to what the future administration’s policy on Israel and Palestine would look like. The signs were not very promising:
“When the United States stands with Israel, the chances of peace really rise and rise exponentially. That’s what will happen when Donald Trump is president of the United States,” Trump declared, an untrue statement that was preceded with a loud applause and ended with an even louder cheer.
The truth, however, is that Trump’s love affair with Israel is actually relatively recent. He had made several pronouncements in the past that, in fact, irritated Israel and its influential backers in the US. But when his chances of becoming the Republican nominee grew, so did his willingness to say whatever it takes to win Israel’s and its friends’ approvals.
Second, Trump’s evangelical base: Trump is desperate to maintain the support of the very constituency that brought him to the White House in the first place. This right-wing, white, conservative, Christian-Evangelical constituency remains the foundation of his troubled presidency.
This constituency, a major bloc in the US political system, voted for Trump in solid numbers. Among the white Evangelicals, 81 per cent reportedly voted for him.
Although these voters claim to be “value voters”, their take on morality is often inconsistent and, at times, quite bizarre. Their “love” for Israel, for example, is quite provisional as they believe in prophecies pertaining to the “second coming of Jesus Christ” as a prelude to the “Rapture”: it is then that the faithful will be sent to heaven, and all the rest, including the Jews, will perish in a hellish eternity.
However, according to that inexplicable thinking, for the prophecy to be fulfilled, Jews would have to be in complete control over the land of Palestine.
As moronic and dark such ideas may seem to the rest of the world, they have created a temporary alliance between Israel’s right-wing government, the Evangelicals (of whom Vice President, Mike Pence, is an important member) and Donald Trump.
Which leads us to the third and final point: The massive political pressure suffered by Trump’s vulnerable administration.
The US is currently experiencing unprecedented political instability and polarisation. Talk of impeaching the president is gaining momentum, while his officials are often paraded before the Department of Justice investigators over various accusations, including collusion with foreign powers. Trump, himself, is being accused of various demeaning charges of indecency and corruption.
Under these circumstances, there is no decision or issue that Trump can approach without finding himself in a political storm, except for one issue, that of accommodating Israel to the fullest extent. Indeed, being pro-Israel has historically united the US’ two main parties, the Congress, the media and many Americans, leading among them, Trump’s political base.
However, Trump’s decision will neither cancel nor reverse international law. It simply means that the US has decided to drop the act, and walk wholly into the Israeli camp, further isolating itself from the rest of the world and, once more, openly defying international law.
- Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and editor of Palestine Chronicle.
22 may 2018
Dozens of Israeli settlers stormed on Tuesday morning Jerusalem’s al-Aqsa Mosque—the third holiest site in Islam—via the Maghareba Gate.
Hordes of Israeli settlers, escorted by policemen, broke into al-Aqsa Mosque and carried out a round of sacrilegious tours.
At the same time, the peaceful Muslim worshipers have been subjected to tough crackdowns and restrictions by the Israeli police near the main entrances to the site.
Several worshipers have been searched and dozens more have had their IDs seized while attempting to enter al-Aqsa to perform Ramadan prayers.
Hordes of Israeli settlers, escorted by policemen, broke into al-Aqsa Mosque and carried out a round of sacrilegious tours.
At the same time, the peaceful Muslim worshipers have been subjected to tough crackdowns and restrictions by the Israeli police near the main entrances to the site.
Several worshipers have been searched and dozens more have had their IDs seized while attempting to enter al-Aqsa to perform Ramadan prayers.
