What is presently going on in Israel, Gaza and Jerusalem isn’t surprising: and was all too predictable.
But there’s some broader context that really needs to be taken into account and understood: including in regard to the Trump/Kushner ‘Peace Plan’, and especially involving the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan – which is something that media coverage of these present events has failed to acknowledge.
I want to demonstrate here how the flare-up at the Al-Aqsa over the weekend is directly connected to those odd stories you might’ve seen crop up in April about ‘plots’ within the Jordanian royal family: and why this connection is so important to understand.
But let’s look first at the basic, apparent facts being reported.
Israeli police attacking the Al Aqsa isn’t surprising, but the fact that it was also done during the month of Ramadan and just days before Eid celebrations has the whiff of deliberate provocation to it. The violation of the Al Aqsa mosque was apparently provoked by some Palestinian protests and rock throwing.
There are claims by Israeli spokespeople that the Al Aqsa was being used by Hamas to store offensive weapons: which might or might not be true, but this doesn’t appear to have been backed up with any evidence. It also doesn’t seem very likely, given the level of surveillance that location is under.
Palestinian protesters were also provoked by the ‘flag march’ – an annual ‘parade’ of Zionist settlers and nationalists through the Muslim quarter of the city (to celebrate the occupation of Jerusalem) – which is generally considered provocative: and that’s probably the point.
Prior to this, however, protest was also being provoked by recent instances of illegal Zionist settlers ethnically cleansing Palestinians from Sheikh Jarrah – condemned by the UN as being a breach of international law (in fact the UN is calling it a ‘War Crime’).
There could be said to be a sense that Israeli nationalists have been deliberately trying to provoke a response from Palestinians in Jerusalem: and, in particular, to incite some kind of crisis at the Temple Mount specifically.
I don’t want to go over again all the various points about the Temple Mount, the Zionist agenda there, and the mixture of Zionist, Messianic and evangelical Christian operations in play in regard to the Al-Aqsa and Jerusalem. For anyone new to this site, you can check out ‘Why Jerusalem is So Important to the Apocalypse Fantasists‘, and you could also check out the two PDFs (‘The Jerusalem Agenda, Part I‘ and ‘The Jerusalem Agenda, Part II‘, which explore various events – including the Sri Lanka terror attack, the Christchurch massacre and, crucially, the Notre Dame fire psy-op – in the context of Messianic fulfilment, Masonic/Knights-Templar operations and Israel).
In a much older piece, I also laid out the Freemasonic element to all of this too, relating to the rebuilding of Solomon’s Temple (or the Third Jewish Temple) on the spot where the Al-Aqsa presently stands. The project to demolish the Al-Aqsa and build the Third Temple is hardly any great secret anymore anyway: it is pretty much openly stated.
The point is that this multi-faceted interest in seizing the Temple Mount, demolishing the Al-Aqsa mosque and annexing all of Jerusalem, has been going on for a long time: and so nothing that happens there at that site should be considered random or accidental.
All of that is the backdrop for what’s happening – and is yet to happen – in Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.
The symbolic power, for example, of a fire burning at the site (while Israeli settlers look on and celebrate) is very spiritually significant. I know the argument is that those people would’ve been dancing and celebrating anyway (because it was the Jerusalem Day event); but, even so, having that go on while the fire was burning seems to be very unfortunate.
Claims in the Israeli media that the fire was started by Palestinian fireworks seem a little disingenuous, given that the fire seemingly started after the Israeli police raid on the mosque. Clearly that act was designed to be a provocation: as is the annual ‘Jerusalem Day’ march itself (given again that East Jerusalem is Occupied Territory: and that international law doesn’t recognise Israeli claims to the area).
So, arguably, the *response* from Palestinian protesters (and indeed later from Hamas) was actively being sought.
With Israeli forces carrying out new airstrikes in Gaza, and talk by Hamas of a new ‘Intifada’, one wonders how much of this crisis is manufactured: with measured provocations inciting predictable reactions and, in turn, paving the way for desired ‘retaliations’.
That Hamas fired rockets into Israel doesn’t appear to be in any dispute. And that Hamas (and Islamic Jihad) are terrorists isn’t in dispute either.
But Hamas is merely fulfilling its purpose. I’ve argued before, and I’ll argue again very shortly in a longer piece, the case for the idea that Hamas was in fact created by Israel: for the purposes of providing the specific brand of militant, Islamist Palestinian terrorism that the right-wing Israeli state *needs* in order to justify its own agenda and actions. In this context, Hamas was empowered and supported in order to destroy and displace the secular, non-Islamist Palestinian government and resistance of Yasser Arafat and the PLO and to bring an end to any hope of a negotiated settlement or Palestinian state.
Again, there’s a more detailed article I’ve been working on on that subject: specifically, the evolution of Palestinian terrorism/resistance, the downfall of Arafat and the PLO and the orchestrated rise of Hamas as the dominant voice/force in Palestine. So I’ll refrain from getting into all of that here now: but the other article should hopefully appear here tomorrow or in the next couple of days
But the reality is that the Zionist movement loves Hamas. Hamas is exactly what they need.
So the justification that Hamas aggression (firing rockets from Gaza) makes Israeli retaliation necessary might – while true on the surface of it – actually be an ongoing sleight-of-hand routine. What it creates is a vicious cycle of the most extreme element of Palestinian resistance continuously provoking the most extreme element of the Israeli state: with no other parties or interests (neither on the Jewish side nor on the Palestinian side) able to get a voice in the argument or a foot in the door.
Essentially, they’ve reduced the dynamics to one in which Hamas is now Palestine: and Netanyahu and the right-wing extremists are Israel.
Which was essentially always the plan: to reduce the Palestinian cause to one controlled by violent Islamists, because the old Arafat-era PLO had become too respectable and was capable of making too much international headway. The moment Arafat renounced terrorism was the moment Israel needed Hamas.
But, again, I will go further into that in a separate article.
For right now, there’s one more thing we should discuss: and I think it is more significant than people realise.
Something a lot of people don’t seem to know is that custodianship of the Muslim and Christian sites in Jerusalem actually belongs to the King of Jordan and the Hashemite line. The Hashemite family, descendants of the Prophet Muhammad, and specifically the Jordanian King, therefore would also be a significant player or interested party in any forced change in the status of Muslim and Christian holy sites in the city, including the Al-Aqsa.
That often overlooked fact is hugely important, in regard to the Zionist plan/pledge to demolish the Al-Aqsa and build the Third Temple there.
Now note that in the last couple of months we just had a strange controversy in Jordan: concerning an alleged plot against the Jordanian King. To recap those events briefly: At the beginning of April, up to 18 people were arrested in Jordan and it was claimed that a plot threatening the ‘security and stability’ of the country had been uncovered. Among those placed under house arrest were Prince Hamzah (a potential rival to the throne) and a former Jordanian ambassador to Saudi Arabia. The Foreign Ministry had said it had intercepted “communications with foreign parties over the right timing to destabilise Jordan…”
What are the chances that Israel had something to do with this brief instability in the usually stable Kingdom of Jordan? Well, I would say pretty high.
There is no love lost between King Abdullah II and Benjamin Netanyahu.
An article in April reported on the new low in Israeli/Jordanian relations, noting that Netanyahu’s government had actually cancelled Jordanian Crown Prince Hussein bin Abdullah’s visit to the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound in occupied Jerusalem: a move perceived as an insult by the Jordanians. But the blocking of the Crown Prince’s visit of course has huge symbolic value, given the Jordanian royal family’s role as custodians of the Muslim and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem.
Jordan had in fact been addressing the very subject of Al-Aqsa: and had issued a statement calling on Israel to put an end to daily incursions by Israeli settlers into the Al-Aqsa compound under the protection of Israeli security and intelligence forces. Calling, in other words, on Israeli security and intelligence forces to cease their deliberate and measured attempts to provoke the Palestinian worshippers.
Note that this was right about the same time as the story had suddenly emerged about the ‘plot’ in Jordan.
There have certainly been implications that Netanyahu and Israel – who’ve been increasingly and vocally hostile towards Jordan – may have had involvement in the recent Jordanian controversy: or, at the very least, that any alleged plot to topple King Abdullah II would be in the Israeli government’s interests.
This has been building for some time.
Let’s note this article from a while ago, for example, telling us that a series of anti-Jordanian articles ‘appeared almost simultaneously in the Israeli media targeting Jordan and revealing deep Israeli anger and hatred for the Jordanian monarch… The independent daily Haaretz revealed that “Israel has big plans for Jordan, but they don’t include King Abdullah II“…’
Note too that Trump and Kushner’s glorious Middle East Peace Plan, which involved Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, did not involve Jordan: and this is despite Jordan being the US and the West’s strongest and most reliable ally in the Arab world. In essence, the extreme nationalists in Israel took the improved relations with those countries as tacit permission to proceed unopposed with their interests in Jerusalem: which was always the point of what Zionist settlement funder Jared Kushner (a former housemate of Benjamin Netanyahu) was trying to accomplish with his ‘peace plan’.
The stage was set before that, of course, by the Zionist-controlled Trump administration’s legitimisation of Israel’s illegal occupation and its claim to make Jerusalem its capital (which, just to be clear, is entirely against international law).
But with those participating countries essentially washing their hands of the Palestinians (which is what was heavily implied), the only regional power or player in the Arab world still presenting a potential impediment was (and is) Jordan. I made the point in this older article that it was no coincidence that Neo-Con-led policy in the Middle East from 9/11 onwards seemed to result in the destruction, removal or weakening of any government or state that was likely to oppose or react negatively to potential Israeli annexation of Jerusalem and the Temple Mount: including the Baathist governments in Syria and Iraq, the government in Lebanon, and even Gaddafi’s regime in Libya.
At this present point in time, all of the governments or states that weren’t destroyed in war or destabilised with violence and covert warfare have instead been neutralised diplomatically and financially (via the ‘deal of the century’).
All except for the government of King Abdullah II in Jordan: which wasn’t included (or chose not to participate) in Kushner/Netanyahu’s deal.
Though there might be various reasons for Israeli dislike of King Abdullah, the key reason – we can assume – is in Abdullah’s role as custodian of the holy sites in Jerusalem, and the Al-Aqsa in particular. He is a problem for the agenda: he in fact might be the last thing standing in the way of the Third Temple.
And one of the problems is that, unlike various other Arab leaders over the years, Abdullah is actually an important ally of the West and of the United States: and so moving against him or plotting against the Jordanians is more complicated and difficult than interfering in, say, Lebanon or Syria.
For the record, the Jordanians have explicitly condemned the Israeli actions at the Al-Aqsa over the weekend.
Here’s a video you really have to watch to get a sense both of the Zionist fanaticism regarding the Temple Mount and, more importantly, the illegal settlers’ absolute hatred towards King Abdullah II of Jordan. It is from a couple of years ago during the annual Tisha B’Av march around Jerusalem’s Old City: and the speaker is addressing a congregation at the entrance to the Temple Mount. The whole speech is worth watching in full, because it’s very telling (especially the anger towards ‘UNESCO!’): but for the specific part about Jordan and King Abdullah, you’ll want to watch from 1.30 to about 3.10.
In one part, the speaker vows that Abdullah II will ‘lose his crown’ for daring to have custodianship of Christian and Muslim holy sites in Jerusalem: which he sees as an affront to Israel’s divine mandate.
Just to be clear about this subject here, the reason the Hashemite royal family is afforded custodianship of the Christian and Muslim holy sites goes back to the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein bin Ali, from whom the Hashemite royals are descended (with the family’s actual descent tracing back to the Prophet Muhammad – the very reason why they were the Sharifs of Mecca: until Britain decided to put the House of Saud in control of Arabia instead: a saga I’ve previously covered here and here).
And, let’s be honest, the main reason Jordanian custodianship of the sites has been upheld all this time is because it provides Muslims and Christians in Jerusalem’s holy places with a degree of protection from the Zionist fanatics. It is reported that, since 1924, the Jordanian royal family has contributed over $1 billion in maintaining and renovating the Al-Asqa complex on behalf of Jerusalem’s Palestinian Muslims. And, for example, in 2016 King Abdullah funded the renovation of Christ’s tomb in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre on behalf of the Christians. The Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem said of King Abdullah’s role, “Jordan’s role in protecting Christian existence in the Holy Land is clear and undeniable, King Abdullah spearheads the efforts of all Jordanians to sow the seeds of love and brotherhood between Muslims and Christians. We are reaping the fruits of these efforts in this age when sectarian wars are burning entire countries as can plainly be seen…”
This is why the speaker in the video above has so much undisguised hatred of ‘the fake king’ Abdullah of Jordan.
The only other group I’ve seen display such vicious hatred of the Jordanian royal family was the Islamic State group, which claimed in its early statements in 2014 that it intended to “chop the head off the King of Jordan”: which was just one of several curious areas in which ‘ISIS’ policy seemed to line up neatly with Zionist foreign policy interests.
By the way, I apologise if using the Star Trek image above to represent Abdullah II seems like I’m making light: but the fact that he appeared in a Star Trek episode remains one of my favorite random facts of all time.
The video speaker’s claim that Abdullah II isn’t a real king, by the way, is nonsense: assuming *any* royalty of any kind has any real legitimacy (which is debatable), Abdullah II and the Hashemite line is about as ‘legitimate’ as could be possible, given that his family are descendants of the Prophet Muhammad, that his family led the Arab war of independence (even if it was under the cynical manipulation of the British Colonialists), and that custodianship of even the Islamic holy sites in Mecca and Medina had been in that family for generations (until the British decided to create Saudi Arabia: in violation of its war-time promises to the Hashemites: all of which I covered in this older article).
Which actually brings us to another point.
Because as the previously-quoted FT article from April reports, Jerusalem was very much a central issue in the deterioration of relations between both Jordan and Israel and Jordan and Saudi Arabia: ‘There is suspicion in Jordan that the House of Saud wants to take oversight of the city’s Islamic sites from the Hashemites — from whom crown prince Mohammed’s grandfather took the holy cities of Mecca and Medina in 1925 — as the price of Saudi detente with Israel.’ It adds, prophetically, ‘There is more intrigue to come.’
Huh. There surely is more intrigue to come.
Any plans – open or covert – to suggest Saudi takeover of the Jerusalem sites from Jordan (on behalf of Israel) would of course be seen as an outrage to the Hashemites (who, remember, already lost their historically legitimate claims to Mecca and Medina to the House of Saud, thanks to the British).
Was this idea of Saudi/Zionist collusion in Jerusalem part of Kushner’s peace plan – even unofficially? And would that be why the Jordanians had no place in it?
But the question now is whether all of this will escalate further at any point: in regard both to the Al-Aqsa and Jerusalem, as well as the ‘problem’ posed by the Jordanian King. And said problem is that King Abdullah is not willing to budge when it comes to the holy sites in Jerusalem: he takes his commitment to those sites very seriously, because it is a point of honour in respect to his lineage and family name. And he is practically the only thing preventing Muslim and Christian sites in the Holy Land some day being bulldozed.
Which means, essentially, there can be no Third Temple, no Messiah, no evangelicals’ ‘Second Coming’ of Christ in Jerusalem, while the Hashemite King of Jordan is still standing in the way.
Israel, along with its allies like Britain, the US, Saudi Arabia and others, have certainly shown no hesitation in destabilising various countries (regardless of the enormous cost in human life), be it Lebanon, Syria or elsewhere. But, again, Jordan is an ally of Britain, the US and the West: so maybe this is different. Also, Jordan is a very stable (and modern, relatively progressive) country in what has been an otherwise very unstable region: and it is questionable whether the West would be willing to see Jordan plunged into chaos for the sake of Zionist settlers in Jerusalem.
Also, unlike in Syria, for example, there isn’t any sizeable or significant section of the Jordanian population that is opposed to King Abdullah or that could be manipulated into armed uprising or sectarian warfare the way that has been played out in other countries. He seems to be popular among his people, for the most part.
But… recent history also hasn’t given me much faith in the wisdom of Western foreign policy in regard to the Middle East; so, unfortunately, worst-case scenarios are always entirely possible (up to and including reviving the so-called ‘Islamic State’ group as a proxy army if necessary).
At any rate, sooner or later, this whole problem with the Al-Aqsa and the Temple Mount is going to be brought to a head – no matter the cost.
The forces and interests invested in this – be they Zionists, those calling for the Messiah to arrive, Christian end-timers, or Masons and Knights Templar conspirators – are simply too fanatical and too single-minded. What’s been happening over the passed few days is just a taste of things to come in the near future.
Related: ‘Why Jerusalem is so Important to the Apocalypse Fantasists‘, ‘The END-TIMES DECEPTION: Babylon, the Coming Messiah, the Masonic Temple & Forced Prophecy‘, ‘An Alternate Reality: Faisal, A Different Middle East, the Hashemites & the Kingdom of Jordan’, ‘Wahabbism & Zionism: And Their Veiled Origins‘, ‘Trump/Kushner-666, Israel & the 9/11 Redirection‘…
“Something a lot of people don’t seem to know is that custodianship of the Muslim and Christian sites in Jerusalem actually belongs to the King of Jordan and the Hashemite line. The Hashemite family, descendants of the Prophet Muhammad, and specifically the Jordanian King, therefore would also be a significant player or interested party in any forced change in the status of Muslim and Christian holy sites in the city, including the Al-Aqsa. ”
Can we also attribute this to ISIS’s announcement of the caliphate? Because the caliph(if he had been) seems to have a right on this issue. I’m not sure, of course. Because I never understood about these religious affairs.
Well, I don’t think anyone apart from ISIS teenagers actually recognised Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as the ‘caliph’ of *anything*. So no, not really. Also, it’s curious my friend, but ‘ISIS’ never ever mentioned Israel or the Palestinians, as far as I know. It didn’t interest them.
“Well, I don’t think anyone apart from ISIS teenagers actually recognised Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as the ‘caliph’ of *anything*.” Yes, you are right, I don’t remember either.
After reading the next part of your reply, I was corious too.;)
And I have found-read the followings:
Small ISIS cell houses were located in Gaza between 2014 and 2016, when the civil war first started in Syria, and when the ISIS presence emerged. And during the same time period, there had been some interesting developments. While Hamas took a stand against ISIS in the name of preserving power, on the other hand, ISIS formed a front against it. When I say front, I’m talking about the opposition, next to the small conflicts. There were even some conflicts, and Israel had made a statement that Iran might prefer ISIS over the backed elements.
In here there is a statement about the issue from Israeli intelligence Chief, Major General Herzi Halevy: “We don’t want an ISIS defeat in Syria”
And here Israel defense minister words:”I would prefer Islamic State to Iran in Syria”
These were the side of Israel, now the side of ISIS.
There is the issue of Palestine and Israel among the reasons for the emergence of ISIS. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the first founder of ISIS, is a Jordanian man who was a member of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and trained, and then founded the ISIS organization. This man has connections with Palestine. As with many other people and places. There’s a file in docplayer here. The file is in Russian.
“The Heirs of Abu Bakr: On the Ideology and Concept of History in Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State”
The author, Prof. Jakob Skovgaard-Petersen, University of Copenhagen.
His link below, maybe these files can be found here in English, if you check them out.
I’ve also read that this same Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was influenced by Palestinians he knew in Zarqa in the 1980s and went to Afghanistan that way. The group of Zarqawi, which he founded, with the majority of Iraqis, Palestinians and Jordanians in Al-Qaeda, has already started to act independently in a short time. On February 15, 2002, three terrorists from his own group in Van, Turkey, who were going to organize a bomb attack against Israel, were caught at the border by the Turkish military forces, and attack was bloked.
As I have read in these files and some other links, the networks and relationships of these terrorist organizations are very complex. In fact, somewhere my brain started to become watery and I stopped reading.:) The names start with Al, Abu, etc., and after a while, who is who is not remembered. Their types are also similar. Beard, cap, sullen face.:)
How did ISIS act on this issue after this man died, what did they say, this research may be in another day, one day when I have free time.
As a result, my friend, I don’t know the details, but I read these links curiously about what ISIS thought about Palestine and Israel. There may be more details, but they are either limited on the Internet, or maybe none of us will be able to learn for a long time.;)
Thank you, Migo, this is a lot of interesting research and information. What your references here show – and what I’ve learnt from my own research over the years – is that terrorism is very complicated when it comes to figuring out all of the links, state backers, covert alliances, covert financing, intelligence operations, and even rivalries between terror factions. That’s one of the reasons why ‘War on Terror’ never made sense as a concept. Thanks for the strong contribution, my ET friend.
Thank you too, my earthling friend, for this article that you opened the doors to new perspectives by detailing what happened and building questions on it!
My reply is not seen, I guess it cannot pass due to its link inside of it, my friend.
That was great. Probably the best thing that will be written on this topic during this time.Thanks.
Thanks James. Coming from you, that means a lot.
Absolutely fascinating. So it sounds like Jordan is firmly in the crosshairs. I’ll need to read up on those past articles to get a better understanding of what’s behind the agenda for building the Third Temple – tbh I’d not realised before that what appears just bizarre and esoteric conjecturing (and frankly is esoteric) is actually based on such mainstream admissions.
Thanks WoC. Yeah, I used to try to avoid the esoteric side of it: but in the end it becomes impossible to ignore. The Masonic and Templar elements to the Temple Mount business are just very clear: as much so as the Zionist/evangelical element.