UKMW prompts correction to UK daily that placed the Temple Mount in “Palestine”

Earlier, we noted the following tweet from Sussex Friends of Israel in response to an article published at Lancashire Post, a UK regional daily.  (Note the bottom of the tweet which shows the photo caption.)

As you can see, the photo caption placed the Al Aqsa Mosque in “Jerusalem, Palestine”.

We promptly emailed editors at Lancashire Post arguing that there is of course no such country as “Palestine” and that the Jerusalem holy site in question is in Israel.  Editors upheld our complaint and revised the caption accordingly.

In Sept, 2016, UKMW prompted a similar correction at The Independent. 

Related Articles

10 replies »

  1. The so-called “People of the Ghetto” group (in itself an insulting name for these turds) are perfectly free to go to their Al-Aqsa mosque and pray there. Of course, if they choose to fly there they will have to go through significant metal detectors and security checks at whichever airport they use (even Manchester, I believe). I can’t imagine why any reputable media outlet should choose to give column space to such twisting of facts as these actors present.

  2. No doubt Mr Farmer is studying his Latin primer for an appropriate response Ab Absurdo.

  3. Of course, under Article 80 of the UN Charter, no part of the UN has the authority or jurisdiction to diminsh the rights granted “peoples” under League of Nation Mandates existing at the creation of the UN – of which the Mandate for Palestine was not only one of several but the addition of the word “peoples” was directly in reference to that Mandate’s special solicitude for the “Jewish people.”
    Consequently, absent an agreement which never came to pass thanks to Arab rejectionism, the UN, whether acting through the Security Council or General Assembly, could do no more than suggest resolutions of the conflict. That is why none of its resolutions has been mandatory – and if they had, they would be of no legal import.
    So, while the idea of a “corpus separatum” for Jerusalem and Bethlehem, which was supposed to last only 10 years before a plebiscite was to allow the populations to choose their future, is a legal fiction – though for some countries, such as the US it still serves as the excuse for not relocating its embassy.
    Jerusalem was never to be divided, and only was during Jordan’s belligerent 19 year occupation. So, what could possibly be the justification of re-dividing it now and restore Jordan’s ethnic cleansing of its Jewish inhabitants? That, of course, is a rhetorical question and the current conduct of the Waqf, the Palestinian Arabs and Jordan confirm why Jewish rights will never be safe should the Temple Mount ever revert to Muslim control.