http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.747314?v=53FEA05F856F4BC99CD22026D725F3AE
Here's the full text.
This is UNESCO stating that the Jewish holy sites in Jerusalem (including the Western Wall) are actually Islamic/Arab sites. And presumably endorsing the Christ Myth Theory, as well as declaring that the Masjid al-Haram was built as a pagan shrine- no, those would provoke riots in dozens of countries, and the second one would also cause a lot of suicide bombings.
Does this make it easier to understand why Israelis don't take resolutions by the UN too seriously?
The entire point of democracy seems to be to allow small actors (people) to restrain large actors (states, political parties, etc). This is exactly the opposite: large actors with myriad interests voting on smaller issues, such as the historicity of religious claims. It's literal mob rule. If this isn't enough evidence, (for contrast) check out what UNESCO has said about Mecca.
Here's the full text.
UNESCO adopted an anti-Israel resolution Thursday that disregards Judaism's historic connection to the Temple Mount and casts doubt on the link between Judaism and the Western Wall.
Twenty-four countries voted in favor of the decision while six voted against and 26 abstained while just two were missing from the vote.
The U.S., Britain, Germany, Holland, Lithuania and Estonia voted against the resolution.
A senior source said that the efforts of Israeli diplomats significantly changed the votes of European states, none of which supported the motion. Israeli efforts, he said, succeeded in swaying France, Sweden, Slovenia, Argentina, Togo and India to abstain from the vote.
The resolution, which condemns Israel on several issues regarding Jerusalem and its holy sites, was advanced by the Palestinians alongside Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar and Sudan.
The resolution asserted that Jerusalem is holy to the three monotheistic religions: Judaism, Islam and Christianity. However, it includes a special section dealing with the Temple Mount, which says the site is sacred only to Muslims and fails to mention that it is sacred to the Jews as well. In fact, it mentions neither the Hebrew term for the site – Har HaBayit – nor its English equivalent, the Temple Mount. The site is referred to only by its Muslim names – Al-Aqsa Mosque and Haram al-Sharif.
In the past weeks Shama-Hacohen and Israeli ambassadors in dozens of capitals worldwide attempted to convince as many states as possible to oppose the resolution, or to at least abstain or not vote at all.
The Foreign Ministry issued a brochure with pictures of archaeological findings proving the historic affiliation between the Jews and Jerusalem in general and the Temple Mount in particular, as well as the existence of the Temple Mount at the site where the Al-Aqsa Mosque stands today.
One of the findings shown in the brochure is the Arch of Titus in Rome, on which images of holy artifacts that the Romans took as spoils from the Second Temple in Jerusalem are depicted. These include the Menorah, which is the symbol of the Israeli state today.
In a letter Shama-Hacohen distributed to the ambassadors of UNESCO’s executive board’s 58 member states, he wrote that without undermining other religions’ affiliation to Jerusalem’s holy sites, the archaeological facts and historical evidence presented by the accompanying brochure “leave no doubt…of the deepest and longest Jewish presence in Jerusalem since ancient times.”
This is UNESCO stating that the Jewish holy sites in Jerusalem (including the Western Wall) are actually Islamic/Arab sites. And presumably endorsing the Christ Myth Theory, as well as declaring that the Masjid al-Haram was built as a pagan shrine- no, those would provoke riots in dozens of countries, and the second one would also cause a lot of suicide bombings.
Does this make it easier to understand why Israelis don't take resolutions by the UN too seriously?
The entire point of democracy seems to be to allow small actors (people) to restrain large actors (states, political parties, etc). This is exactly the opposite: large actors with myriad interests voting on smaller issues, such as the historicity of religious claims. It's literal mob rule. If this isn't enough evidence, (for contrast) check out what UNESCO has said about Mecca.
Last edited: