The Western Wall is one of the holiest of Jewish sites, sacred because it is a remnant of the ancient wall that once enclosed the Jewish Second Temple.[12][13] The Jews, through the practice of centuries, had established a right of access to the Wailing Wall for the purposes of their devotions. As part of the Temple Mount the Western Wall was under the control of the Muslim religious trust, the Waqf.[14] Muslims consider the wall to be part of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, the third holiest site in Islam, and according to Islamic tradition the place where the prophet Muhammad tied his horse, Buraq, before his night journey to heaven.[14] There had been a few serious incidents resulting from these differences.[15]
As a result of an incident, which occurred in September 1925, a ruling was given which forbade the bringing by Jews of seats and benches to the Wall even though these were intended for the support of worshippers who were aged and infirm.[15] The Muslims linked any adaptions to the site with the Zionist project, and feared that they would be the first step in turning the site into a synagogue and taking it over.[14]
Several months earlier Zionist leader Menachem Ussishkin gave a speech demanding “a Jewish state without compromises and without concessions, from Dan to Be’er Sheva, from the great sea to the desert, including Transjordan.” He concluded, “Let us swear that the Jewish people will not rest and will not remain silent until its national home is built on our Mt Moriah”, a reference to the Temple Mount.[14]
In September 1928, Jews at their Yom Kippur prayers at the Western Wall placed chairs and customary screens, a few wooden frames covered with cloth, between the men and women present. Jerusalem commissioner Edward Keith-Roach, while visiting the Muslim religious court overlooking the prayer area, pointed out the screen, mentioning that he had never seen it at the wall before. This precipitated emotional protests and demands from the assembled sheiks that it be removed. Unless it was taken down, they said, they would not be responsible for what happened. The screen was described as violating the Ottoman status quo that forbade Jews from making any construction in the Western Wall area and played into Muslim fears of Zionist expropriation of the site, though such screens had been put up from time to time. Keith-Roach told the beadle that the screen had to be removed because of the Arabs' demands. The beadle requested that the screen remained standing until the end of the prayer service, to which Keith-Roach agreed. When the Jewish beadle failed to remove the screen as agreed, ten armed men were sent in, urged on by Arab residents who were shouting, "Death to the Jewish dogs!" and "Strike, strike". A violent clash took place with worshipers and it was destroyed.[14]
The intervention drew censure later from senior officials who judged that excessive force had been exercised without good judgement, although the British government issued a statement defending the action.[14]
The internal politics of both sides had been willing to adopt extreme positions and to make use of religious symbols to whip up popular support.[14]
Zionist literature published throughout the world used the imagery of a domed structure on the Temple Mount to symbolize their national aspirations. Zionists had appropriated an Islamic minaret from the Ottoman period on the old city wall as a symbol for their propaganda. A Zionist flag was depicted atop of a building very reminiscent of the Dome of the Rock in one publication, which was later picked up and redistributed by Arab propagandists.[14]
Haj Amin al Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem distributed leaflets to Arabs in Palestine and throughout the Arab world which claimed that the Jews were planning to take over the al-Aqsa Mosque.[14] The leaflet stated that the Government was "responsible for any consequences of any measures which the Moslems may adopt for the purpose of defending the holy Burak themselves in the event of the failure of the Government…to prevent any such intrusion on the part of the Jews." A memorandum issued by the Moslem Supreme Council stated, "Having realized by bitter experience the unlimited greedy aspirations of the Jews in this respect, Moslems believe that the Jews’ aim is to take possession of the Mosque of Al-Aqsa gradually on the pretence that it is the Temple", and it advised the Jews "to stop this hostile propaganda which will naturally engender a parallel action in the whole Moslem world, the responsibility for which will rest with the Jews".[16]
The Shaw Commission stated that some sections of the Arabic Press had reproduced documents concerning the Wailing Wall which "were of a character likely to excite any susceptible readers." In addition, it stated that "there appeared in the Arabic Press a number of articles, which, had they been published in England or in other western countries, would unquestionably have been regarded as provocative."[17] One consequence was that Jewish worshippers frequently were subjected to beatings and stoning.[14]
In October 1928, the Grand Mufti organised new construction next to and above the Wall. Mules were driven through the praying area often dropping excrement, and waste water was thrown on Jews. A muezzin was appointed to perform the Islamic call to prayer directly next to the Wall, creating noise exactly when the Jews were conducting their prayers. The Jews protested at these provocations and tensions increased.[18][19][20][21]
Right wing Zionists began making demands for control over the wall; some went as far as to call openly for the rebuilding of the Temple, increasing Muslim fears over Zionist intentions.[22] Ben-Gurion said the wall should be “redeemed”, predicting it could be achieved in as little as “another half a year”.[14] During the spring of 1929 the Revisionist newspaper, Doar HaYom ran a long campaign claiming Jewish rights over the wall and its pavement. On 6 August the British Palestine Police Force established a police post beside the wall. On 14 August the Haganah and Brit Trumpeldor held a meeting in Tel Aviv attended by 6,000 people objecting to 1928 Commission's conclusion that the Wall was Muslim property.[23]
). It's said that Arafat "balked," even in news reports at the time, which bothered me quite a bit because it was OVERWHELMINGLY clear that he had turned down the offer because the Israeli delegation publicly stated they would not under any circumstances discuss a counter-offer or a compromise. They had worked out that proposal with Clinton alone and didn't want to hear anything from Arafat except a yes or a no.
). And analyst after analyst all came to the same conclusion I did, the same conclusion that news anchors carefully avoided: Israel wasn't looking for a 'yes.' They had Arafat by the balls and they were looking to bury him, and Clinton was stupid enough to play along.