Friday, September 22nd | 2 Tishri 5778

Close

Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

Subscribe
October 30, 2014 10:25 am

Who’s More ‘Far-Right,’ Yehuda Glick or the Palestinian Who Tried to Murder Him? (VIDEO)

avatar by Adam Levick

Email a copy of "Who’s More ‘Far-Right,’ Yehuda Glick or the Palestinian Who Tried to Murder Him? (VIDEO)" to a friend

A reporter working in the international press corps here understands quickly that what is important in the Israel-Palestinian story is Israel. If you follow mainstream coverage, you will find nearly no real analysis of Palestinian…ideologies, or profiles of armed Palestinian groups…Palestinians are not taken seriously as agents of their own fate – Former AP correspondent Matti Friedman

The Guardian’s Jerusalem correspondent Peter Beaumont penned two articles today on the attempted murder of Rabbi Yehuda Glick, a campaigner for Jewish rights on the Temple Mount.

glick

Snapshot of the Guardian's Israel page, Oct. 30.

Glick, who’s recovering from multiple bullet wounds at a Jerusalem hospital, was shot outside the Menachem Begin Heritage Center by a Palestinian man from east Jerusalem named Mu’taz Hijazi, a former prisoner (for terror offenses) and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) member.

(PIJ  was formed by Palestinian extremists in Gaza during the 1970s and is committed to the destruction of the Jewish state through Jihad, and the creation of an Islamic state ‘from the river to the sea’.  The group was responsible for scores of deadly attacks on Israeli civilians – including large-scale suicide bombings.)

Related coverage

June 30, 2016 3:51 pm
6

Entebbe: Are We Heeding the Lessons?

July 4th marks the 40th anniversary of the rescue of Israeli hostages at Entebbe. Today we are surrounded by international terrorism....

Hijazi was shot and killed by police today during an attempt to arrest him for the shooting.

Including the headlines, strap lines, photo captions and text, the term “far-right” was used seven times in reference to Glick in the two Guardian articles.  Though Beaumont alluded to the fact that Hijaz served time in an Israeli prison for “security” offenses, no similarly ideologically pejorative term was used to characterize him.  Nor was there any mention of his PIJ affiliation.

So, why is Glick described as a “far-right” rabbi? Well, according to Beaumont, he “is a prominent activist closely associated with recent efforts to gain more Jewish prayer rights on the Temple Mount”, and is closely associated with a group that seeks to rebuild a Jewish Temple on the general location at the Mount compound where the First and Second Temples stood.

Here’s Glick explaining his vision, which includes equal access to the Temple Mount compound for Muslims, Christians and Jews.

In an interview following his release from the prison, Hijazi said: “I’m glad to be back in Jerusalem. I hope to be a thorn in the Zionist plan of Judaizing Jerusalem”.

"Poster published in Palestinian Authority: "Fatah is proud of Muataz Hijazi"

"Poster published in Palestinian Authority: "Fatah is proud of Muataz Hijazi"

Here’s a clip of Rabbi Glick praying for peace with local Muslims “in the name of their shared ancestors on the Temple Mount”.

Yehuda Glick is most known for his campaign to allow Jews to merely pray at the Temple Mount – the holiest site in Judaism – and envisions a future where all three monotheistic religious peacefully share the site.

Mu’taz Hijazi tried to kill an innocent Israeli civilian, is a convicted terrorist, and is affiliated with a violent, antisemitic extremist movement.

Which man is truly “far-right”? The campaigner for Jewish religious freedom at the Mount or the Palestinian who tried to murder him?

To those who don’t hold Palestinians to a lower standard of moral behavior than Jews – and indeed take them seriously as agents of their own fate – the answer should be obvious.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • Julian Clovelley

    Somehow the most important aspects of this story seem to have been lost. The death of an Arab, the attempted assassination of a Jew, and the gunfight that appears to have occurred endangering the lives of police trying to do their almost impossible job. So much wasted life, so much avoidable confrontation and anger, so much sorrow…

    The article instead reads as yet another attempt by a frequent offender, in this pattern of insult, to defame a highly respected newspaper on the apparent grounds that many of its writers do not share this particular Algemenier writer’s worldview. I don’t either. But that does not prevent me feeling a great deal of sadness about events such as these – indeed perhaps more so because the provocations seem so idiotically futile on all sides.

    I sincerely hope that Mr Glick recovers fully. But if his actions are to be a subject of discussion and evaluation – as Mr Levick and the Algemeiner’s editor seem to think – then I think it is necessary to pull back and see how these action appear to some people

    Mr Glick, I understand to be American born, of American parents. According to the internet he was born in 1965, the family emigrating to Israel during his childhood. Everyone’s early years involve a search for personal identity. Mr Glick’s formative years would seem to have occurred long after the wars of the sixties that created the the occupation, the Settlements, and the seizure of Jerusalem.

    That simple reality of timescale is bound to create a different kind of person to one who remembered the agony of the Second World War, the struggles around both Mandate and Partition, the de facto civil war, the Suez crisis and the two wars of the sixties to name but a few. My own memory goes back to the Suez Crisis – about the time I went to High School

    In the American context too, Mr Glick has no memory of the US civil rights struggles of the sixties, the antiwar demonstrations, the assasinations of the Kennedys, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, the Cuba Crisis – and he would have had limited personal view of the Cold War

    Maybe ONLY an American Jew, born in the mid sixties or later, could have built this kind of “Zionist extremist” view, that is so founded in a romantic and mythologically based religious idealism, and so separated from reality. He seems possessed of what to many older people would seem to be a faulty relative scale of values. Because of his relative youth he did not see the view he clings so readily to, in its entirely physical and deliberate “construction phase”. One feels this in his projection of self-Rightness(sic), in the apparent belief that his view is so correct that when he offers others the “chance to join” he cannot grasp that he is in fact insulting them. Joining is not about be absorbed within another’s construct – it us about separate constructs retaining their individual integrity, and co-operating with others from that base, multiculturalism in fact.

    Glick seems to treat a difficult situation as one solvable with the theatricality of the Boston Tea Party. But even that original, fairly innocent, demonstration led to war, and the deaths of so many in the War of Independence. There is no innocence in mimicking that original path in the Middle East context. We know it leads to confrontation. All confrontation is best avoided.

    There is no “Need” to pray in a particular place – however emotionally one feels linked to it. Much of life is about learning to control and not over-exercise your emotions, rather to recognise that others have deep seated feelings too. Patience in the Temple Mount prayer issue should be seen as a gift in the interests of security and peace. Maybe Mr Glick and his follwers might pray for that gift.

    A lesson in reality – in the worlds eyes, modern Israel is not over five thousand years old – it is but seventy five. It came into being as a result of partition that founded a Jewish Homeland that quickly became the State of Israel. The Zionism of the American born Mr Glick, and similar thinkers has been tacked onto it in a manner that fits very badly, as a cloak that is full of holes. It is that ill fitting and hopelessly badly constructed cloak that inspires so much anger and ill feeling. Isreal can be far better than this late nineteenth century attempt at disguise. It will be when it grabs and holds firmly the real history of the State and its various peoples, and recognises there is neither Gentile nor Jew, just one human species in which all are created equal – Our job is to re-unite what once was one, and at the scientific level still is and always will be.

    Stop the arguments over such a small area, see it as historic rather than “sacred”. This is one of those problems that for the time being may prove insoluble. Put no more kids at risk on prayer visits. Stop causing a hard working police even more problems to solve.

    Let the fire go out of this issue and leave the flames in their extinguished state.

    My best wishes to Mr Glick. My sadness for those who have died. My hope that the provocations and responses stop.

    • BH in Iowa

      spare everyone your crocodile tears

  • Dante

    The latter, of course – at least within the convention which allocates the NSDAP to the extreme right.

  • pierre mamou

    In The Flying Inn, Chesterton describes, a centurya ago, England ruled by moderate Islam. Today, England (no to tell Scotland) is acomplishing, by herself, this nightmare

  • Sonia Willats

    Adam Levick, I so agree with you! I have watched Rabbi Jehuda Glick over the last year of two on youtube from time to time, and have noted how HUMBLE he is. I would call both Rabbi Glick and Rabbi Dov Lipman fundamentalist, BUT NOT FAR RIGHT AT ALL. How is he far right by advocating equal access to Temple Mount for all three monotheistic religions? By praying with Arabs?

    The press ‘conspiracy’/ laziness to portray all “Palastinian” Arabs advocating violence as left wing and heroes of conscience, whilst portraying Jews as land-grabbers is absurd. Clearly these journalists have not consulted a map of the Middle East and have no sense of history, faith OR FAIR PLAY.

  • The Guardian has no standard when it comes to its total support of Jew killing. It reveres Muhammad who personally decapitated 600 – 900 unarmed Jews. Everyone who works for the Guardian supports the murder of Jews everywhere in the world. Der Sturmer was pro Jewish compared to the total antisemitism of every word and syllable of the Guardian

    • Julian Clovelley

      Truly Mr Sherman I wonder if you have read a single issue of the Guardian – or realise just how extensive and diverse its coverage is. I get the impression you are relying on the opinions of others rather than reading the items criticised yourself

      Why don’t you give it a try – You might actually learn something new.

      The home page is

      http://www.theguardian.com/uk

      (I read the Australian edition mostly.)

      It may take a while to get used to a news source that publishes conflicting viewpoints. They do it to ensure their readers are well informed

      Unfortunately those more used to propagandist rags that express the one sole view they have come to believe in seem unable to cope with diversity and think everything published must be newspaper policy.. It isn’t – even when it publishes people like Adam Levick – which it has.

      There are actually striking similarities between the Guardian’s approach to presenting news and Algemeiner’s approach but the Guardian is a little less inclined to present opinion as news a fault Algemeiner could well rectify – especially with Zionist and Settlers extremist propaganda articles – articles that are often very misleading or just plain wrong.

  • I think each country has a right to improve itself and its citizebry but not at the cost of sther nations and their citizens. I continue to read how the Israelies feel that the
    Palestinians have only the rights which Israel agrees to grant them. These accusations have been going on every since the creation of Israel. President Trumsn who.wad the.first national leader.to recognise.Israel as a state said in his biogrphy that it was a mistake. Israwl simply efuses to.cooperate on any terms but theirs.
    Simply look at the map of this area and you will see that it is
    Israel who has gained territory Their contined use of false attacks against them gives them the excuse to attack the
    Palestinians with arms long outlawed by the UN . . .phospherous bombs for just one.
    The UN has made many condemnationd against this nation.
    Many Jews from the world over have condemnef Israel for lts
    brutalities.

  • Yoel Nitzarim

    Politicizing individuals, actions, life styles, modus operandi–this mode of living is definitely counterproductive and contrary to human nature. Contrary to what some of the ancient Greek philosophers thought, people are not labels; and they should NEVER be labelled. Yehuda Glick is a rabbi and a man whose work is very important for the Jewish people because it will impact the destiny of the entire Jewish nation. The young man who attempted to murder Rabbi Glick Mu’taz Hijazi, was a terrorist, someone who tries to create fear, chaos, upheaval in society for the sake of a defining moment of hatred. I would very strongly recommend that people stop labeling other people and regard each and every person as a unique creation, created in G-d’s image in this universe. Stereotypes only detract from the sanctity of people’s lives.

Algemeiner.com