Sunday, July 29, 2012

Mitt Romney calls Jerusalem the capital of Israel


Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Of course he did.

Romney is escalating the competition for the Presidency by demonstrating he's a stronger supporter of the Jewish state than Obama. on Friday Obama announced $70 million in additional military aid to Israel to help develop a rocket system to intercept missiles from Gaza and Lebanon.

29 July 2012 at 23:12  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Your Grace. What we need right now in that area is the status quo, and this man will provide that. Anything less is weakness in the Islamic eye. One has no doubt that Johnny Iran will blow the place to pieces if he could...

29 July 2012 at 23:22  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Romney is a Morman, you only need to read a book entitled

"The Islands of Destiny"
By William Walker

To see the bigger picture here

29 July 2012 at 23:27  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


1. Candidate Romney will say many things that won't necessarily bind President Romney. This doesn't matter unless President Romney moves the US Embassy out of Tel Aviv.

2. It's in the US interest to prevent rocket strikes against Israel. It's not necessarily a political ploy.


29 July 2012 at 23:33  
Blogger Rebel Saint said...

I'm confused. When did Jerusalem as the capital city of Israel ever come into question? I've just referred to an encyclopaedias (from 1998) and a dictionary (1986) and both cite Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Doesn't a nation get to determine it's own capital city?

Did Romney not also declare London the capital of GB?

29 July 2012 at 23:36  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

The question Rebel is as to whether it is the capital of Palastine or Israel

29 July 2012 at 23:53  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Do you really think Obama or Romney will break ranks with the UN Security Council?

Rebel Saint
The status of Jerusalem is a core issue in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, West Jerusalem was among the areas captured by Israel, while East Jerusalem was captured by Jordan.
Israel captured East Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War and subsequently annexed it.

Israel's Basic Law refers to Jerusalem as the country's "undivided capital". The international community has rejected this annexation and treats East Jerusalem as Palestinian territory held by Israel under military occupation.

The international community does not recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and the city hosts no foreign embassies.

In November 1967, the United Nations Security Council called for Israel to withdraw "from territories occupied in the recent conflict" in exchange for peace treaties. In 1980, the Knesset passed the Jerusalem Law, which declared that "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel", thus formalising Israel's unilateral annexation. This declaration was declared "null and void" by United Nations Security Council Resolution 478.

Palestinians see East Jerusalem which contains the Temple Mount as the capital of their future state.

Here's a view from Chief Rabbi Sacks:

"I remember the moment when I first stood on Mount Scopus – today the site of the Hebrew University – looking down on the old city of Jerusalem, and realised that it was here that Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues stood, contemplating the ruins of what had been Judaism’s holiest place. While the others wept, Rabbi Akiva smiled.

“Why do you weep?” asked Rabbi Akiva. They replied “How can we not weep, when we see a fox walking through the Holy of Holies. The question is, how can you smile?” Rabbi Akiva replied: “The prophets foresaw Jerusalem’s destruction and they also foresaw its rebuilding. I have seen the first prophecy come true. Now I know the second will also come true.”

Zion refers to the city of Jerusalem and more specifically to Mount Zion. The Kabalah sees Tzion as the spiritual point from which reality emerges, where God is, located in the Holy of Holies of the First, Second and coming Third Temple.

Fulfillment of prophecy?

30 July 2012 at 01:17  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Midrash Tanchuma sums up the centrality of and holiness of this site in Judaism:

"As the navel is set in the centre of the human body,
so is the land of Israel the navel of the world
situated in the centre of the world,
and Jerusalem in the centre of the land of Israel,
and the sanctuary in the centre of Jerusalem,
and the holy place in the centre of the sanctuary,
and the ark in the centre of the holy place,
and the Foundation Stone before the holy place,
because from it the world was founded."

According to the Talmud, it was from a rock - the Foundation Stone - located on Zion, that the world was created. It was the first part of the Earth to come into existence. It is the centre point of the world and on it the Holy of Holies was constructed. It was where God gathered the earth that was formed into Adam. It was on this rock that Adam — and later Cain, Abel, and Noah — offered sacrifices to God. It was the place where Abraham fulfilled God's test to see if he would be willing to sacrifice his son Isaac. It is also identified as the rock upon which Jacob dreamt about angels ascending and descending on a ladder and consequently consecrating and offering a sacrifice upon.

What are the chances Israel will ever surrender East Jerusalem?

30 July 2012 at 01:46  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


What has the UNSC to do with anything? It is an irrelevant toothless creature of no particular importance. It has no authority. It has no power. It has no standing. No one actually listens to it, so it's hard to 'break ranks' with it. Periodically, the major powers might trot out the UNSC to provide a patina of international covering for some act of diplomacy or use of force. Otherwise, the UNSC has all the importance of the Jerry Springer Show, and considerably less intellectual substance.

To your question. Would I expect President Romney to move the American Embassy to Jerusalem? No, I wouldn't. The burden of responsibility changes one's perceptions.


30 July 2012 at 02:05  
Blogger Gnostic said...

If Romney is the best the US can come up with to counteract the rolling disaster that is Obama then god help them.

30 July 2012 at 08:20  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

The Midrash Tanchuma is a wonderful reading, only the symboloism can be found in many comparative mythologies

Like the Ben Ben stone or primeval mound which is is said to be the Omphalus

30 July 2012 at 08:33  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Your Grace,

Of course Jerusalem is the capital city of Israel- we've been through this before on other threads. Can't see the controversy myself.

30 July 2012 at 08:47  
Blogger Lakester91 said...


If Jerusalem was captured by Jordan and then ceded to Israel, how does one come to the conclusion that it is a Palestinian occupied territory?

I also wonder whether those who think Israel shouldn't exist think the same of Kosovo. The latter is a nation of immigrants who eventually came in such numbers that they could demand independence. Surely they have less of a mandate for self-governance than the Jews in Israel? Will you also support the Islamic Republic of Bradford when she secedes from the UK?

30 July 2012 at 09:12  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Where did I say I supported any position on Jerusalem? I merely pointed out the background to the dispute over Jerusalem as a united capital of Israel, Palestinian expectations and certain commitments previously given by Israel.

30 July 2012 at 09:44  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

If Jerusalem is being claimed as a capital, due to it's importance as a spiritual centre to the Jews

Then that claim is inseperable from it's positioning in relation to the Flower of life and Pyramid Harmonics

Therefore we see the whole thing is a Masonic-Zionist Grand Plan which also relates to the Temple in Man at Luxor

The question ought to be, why can we not accept a Tradition which is both Common and Universal without all these damned secret societies turning us into Big Brother fascist style states

30 July 2012 at 10:05  
Blogger bananabrain said...

umph... the "jerusalem" that is the religious centre of judaism has never included what is now known as "east jerusalem" - it is really all about the old city and the Temple mount area. therefore, there's no particular religious reason the palestinians can't have a capital called "east jerusalem" or the israelis can't have a capital called "jerusalem". the whole "undivided" thing is a bit of a red herring in my view; they worked out where all the lines should go during the sadly ill-fated oslo process. the question then becomes: under what circumstances do you draw the line? obviously there are maximalists that are trying to establish "facts on the ground" in east jerusalem, but if there's something in it for them i'm sure the israelis will manage to come up with a solution.



30 July 2012 at 13:12  
Blogger bluedog said...

One struggles to think of a single British or European politician who could have delivered that speech from the same location.

Angela Merkel and Boris Johnson, possibly.

David Cameron or Francois Hollande, not possibly.

30 July 2012 at 13:24  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

I do not think that Mitt Romney was making a point by saying that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel. He just did not know any better, which says all that needs to be said about his fitness, or otherwise, for the most powerful office on earth. But what of the whole trip to Israel, and what of the "culture" remark there? There are vastly fewer Jews in America than is generally supposed even by Americans, they are by no means all pro-Israeli, and most American Jews would never vote Republican in a million years. Netanyahu does have form when it comes to interference in American elections, but his record of success at it is far from unqualified. No, Romney is trying to ingratiate himself elsewhere.

Mormons are quite fond of the Garden Tomb, the made-up alternative for Victorian Evangelicals who did not like the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Then as now, their attitude to Levantine Christianity was much like their attitude to the Sub-Apostolic Fathers: they either did not know, or did not want to know, about entirely matter-of-fact descriptions of all things "Romish" existing during the lifetimes of the Apostles and providing the context that the New Testament text presupposes. Nor did they wish to be confronted with the entirely matter-of-fact existence of communities of that kind which have been present continuously for two thousand years, right there in the Bible Lands.

Christian communities that go all the way back to the Day of Pentecost are problematic enough in themselves for them, without those communities' having become, at best, Anglican or Lutheran rather than, say, Baptist, and far more commonly Latin Catholic or Maronite Catholic, Melkite Catholic or Greek Orthodox, Syrian Catholic or Syrian Jacobite, Armenian Catholic or Armenian Apostolic, Chaldean Catholic or Assyrian. As part of Evangelicalism's general upward trend in educational terms, Evangelical theology is increasingly looking beyond the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to its earlier and more cerebral roots, and thus to a place within the older, broader and deeper Tradition. Approaches to the Middle East are starting to reflect this shift. But most churchgoers, and indeed most clergy, are not academic theologians.

Such continuous communities are even more problematical for Mormonism, which maintains, not that the Church was reformed in the sixteenth century, but that the Church began again from scratch in the nineteenth, having died out at some point in the first or second. Standing contradictions of that whole theory simply do not compute. But the white Evangelicals, vastly more Zionist-inclined than the black ones, are most disinclined to vote for a Mormon, although one does have to ask for whom else, exactly, they might otherwise consider casting their ballots this November. No one who subscribed to Christian Zionism has ever become President of the United States: George W Bush is a United Methodist, and he was in fact the first President ever to express himself in favour of a Palestinian State; the Southern Baptist Convention was a very different body in the 1970s, and Jimmy Carter himself is no longer a member of it because it has changed so much.

30 July 2012 at 22:47  
Blogger David Lindsay said...

But Bush was an aberration, and Carter is a relic of a vanished world. "Mainline" Protestantism is simply no longer a force in the Republican Party, any more than Southern Evangelicalism is in the Democratic Party, indeed very considerably less so, and again their is a racial divide, with a heavy black Evangelical influence within and over Democratic politics, such that black Evangelicalism itself remains close to the historically interracial Evangelical commitment to social justice and to peace, whereas most of white Evangelicalism (in America, far less so elsewhere) has gone whoring after the false gods of neoliberalism and neoconservatism.

Burkeans and Kirkians, cultural Anglophiles who oppose any foreign state's (or ethnic lobby's) undue influence over American policy no matter how much affinity they might feel with that other country, figures who on those grounds are advocates and practitioners of extensive measures to ameliorate by government action the less humane effects of capitalism: the GOP is now no more characterised by these than by those who, not unrelatedly, are sufficiently in touch with the American missionary institutions that begat, bore and nurtured the (often Christian-led) Arab nationalism of the Near East; foundations of Episcopal, Presbyterian, Lutheran and Methodist churches that were then still sufficiently orthodox to bother to send missionaries at all, and which were then still sufficiently orthodox to be considered worthy of continuing contact by Anglican, Reformed, Lutheran and Methodist churches of missionary origin.

In this, Mitt Romney is right. Culture makes all the difference.

30 July 2012 at 22:47  
Blogger len said...

Quite refreshing to hear a Politician support Israel.

'Political Correctness' seems to have emasculated all our European Politicians.

30 July 2012 at 23:25  
Blogger Huldah said...

'Mitt Romney calls Jerusalem the capital of Israel.'


1 August 2012 at 06:38  
Blogger Tommy said...

Its not what he says its what he doesnt say. I know when a politicians lying cos I can see their lips moving.

1 August 2012 at 17:31  
Blogger Bigland said...

Obama also said Jerusalem was the capital of Israel.

2 August 2012 at 08:27  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older