The Al-Aqsa injustice.
In 1925, the highest Islamic authority in Jerusalem published a tourist guide.
Page 4 contains a sentence that modern Palestinian leaders desperately wish nobody would read:
"Its identity with the site of Solomon's Temple is beyond dispute".
In other words, the very Islamic authorities responsible for the site openly acknowledged that the Temple Mount was the location of Solomon's Temple- the same site on which the Al-Aqsa Mosque and Dome of the Rock were later built following the Muslim conquest of Jerusalem in the 7th century.
Not written by Zionists.
Not written by archaeologists.
Not written by Christians.
Written by the Supreme Muslim Council itself - the official Islamic authority that controlled the Temple Mount, headed by Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini.
The same Haj Amin al-Husseini who later became one of Hitler's closest allies in the Arab world.
The guide was sold to visitors at the entrance to the Temple Mount.
In 1925, nobody felt the need to deny Jewish history.
Because the facts were obvious.
The archaeological evidence was overwhelming even then.
The denial came later.
Why?
Because the conflict was never really about archaeology or facts, or even about territory.
The conflict is about religion. Specifically, Islamists couldn't stand that Judaism - a religion they believe was superseded by Islam - not only survived, but returned to its ancestral homeland, rebuilt its sovereignty, revived its language, and flourished.
In the early decades of the conflict, this struggle was explicit. False accusations that Jews were threatening Al-Aqsa fueled riots and massacres against ancient Jewish communities, from Jerusalem to Hebron. The message was clear: Jewish sovereignty, and even Jewish presence, was unacceptable.
But over time, the narrative evolved.
With the rise of the PLO and the influence of Soviet-style propaganda, the conflict was increasingly reframed in secular, anti-colonial language. The objective remained the same, but the marketing changed.
Instead of a struggle against Jewish self-determination, it became a struggle for "liberation".
Instead of denying Jews political rights, it became fashionable to deny their history.
Instead of openly opposing Jewish presence, the battle shifted toward eroding the historical, archaeological, and moral foundations of that presence.
It is therefore unsurprising that Temple denial emerged under Yasser Arafat and the PLO. Once the struggle shifted from defeating Jewish sovereignty to delegitimizing it, denying Jewish history became a strategic necessity.
Watch the timeline:
• 1925: Supreme Muslim Council - Solomon's Temple is "beyond dispute."
• 2000: At Camp David, Yasser Arafat tells President Clinton there was never a Jewish Temple on the site. Clinton was reportedly stunned.
• 2015: Mahmoud Abbas declares Jews are "desecrating" Al-Aqsa with their "filthy feet."
• 2016: UNESCO passes a resolution referring to the site only by its Islamic names.
• 2023: Abbas claims Jews excavated beneath the mount and "found nothing."
The historical position did not change.
The political usefulness of denying it did.
The irony is extraordinary.
Jews are today forbidden from freely praying at the holiest site in Judaism.
The Temple Mount is the location of both the First Temple built by Solomon and the Second Temple rebuilt after the Babylonian exile.
For nearly 2,000 years Jews prayed facing this exact location.
Three times a day.
Every day.
The Western Wall itself is not the holiest site in Judaism.
It is simply the retaining wall beneath the Temple Mount.
The actual holy site is above it.
And yet Jews are not allowed to freely pray at the holiest site in Judaism.
Think about how extraordinary that is.
A Muslim can pray freely on the Temple Mount.
A Jew often cannot.
The world's only Jewish state controls Jerusalem, yet Jews are still expected to worship at the foot of their holiest site rather than on it.
Imagine telling Muslims they may visit Mecca, but not pray there.
Imagine telling Christians they may enter the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, but must remain silent.
The outrage would be immediate.
Yet when it comes to Jews, this arrangement is treated as normal, and it further demonstrates how this conflict was never about land.
And the justification is usually that the site is home to Al-Aqsa, Islam's third-holiest site - the Al-Aqsa injustice.
But that claim deserves scrutiny.
The Quran mentions Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa - "the Furthest Mosque" - in Surah Al-Isra. Yet the mosque structure standing in Jerusalem today did not exist during Muhammad's lifetime. It was built decades later under the Umayyad Caliphate after the Muslim conquest of Jerusalem.
Early Islamic texts, including the Hadith and historical records, suggest the original “farthest mosque” mentioned in the Quran was not in Jerusalem but closer to Mecca, specifically in a place called Al-Ju‘ranah, to where Muhammad had his nightly journey. Some Shiite scholars have suggested that the Al-Aqsa referred to in the Quran is in a different location altogether, supporting the idea that the identification with Jerusalem is not universally accepted within Islam.
So the world's only Jewish state is expected to prevent Jews from praying at their holiest site because a disputed mosque now occupies the location?
Which brings us to the real issue.
Notice what repeatedly triggers violence.
Not housing projects.
Not borders.
Not settlements.
Not checkpoints.
Those claims are just ear candy for westerner "human rights" activists.
The Second Intifada itself was largely ignited by Ariel Sharon visit to the temple mount.
Again and again, Islamist movements mobilize masses not around territory, but around the fear that Jews might pray on Judaism's holiest site.
That tells us something important.
This conflict cannot be understood as a territorial dispute. It's a religious war.
A struggle over whether Jewish sovereignty, Jewish history, and Jewish prayer can be tolerated in a place that is holy for Jews, and many Muslims don't consider holy for muslims.
And it's the same struggle we see in Europe when churches are vandalized and torched.
The smoking gun remains the 1925 guide.
When acknowledging the Temple carried no political cost, they openly admitted its existence.
The Temple did not disappear.
The archaeology did not disappear.
The historical record did not disappear.
Only the strategy changed, to erasure, denial and rewriting of history.
@destinationXIX
