Turkey to open 'embassy to Palestine in Jerusalem': Erdogan

[dani191]

“Because it is under occupation we can’t just go there and open an embassy,” Erdogan said in a speech to his ruling party in the city of Karaman.

“But, God willing those days are near and… we will officially open our embassy there,” he said, without giving any precise timescale.

he can dream its good to dream

 

[Mucahit]

Israel is trying its luck by supporting separatists Kurdish terror groups inside Turkey so it's only fair that we do the same to them.

 

[Solomon2]

• 
  Monday, December 18, 2017
• 
  Elder of Ziyon

Why the sudden silence when Erdogan says he plans to open an embassy in Jerusalem?


The arguments against the US opening up an embassy in Jerusalem, although all of them are wrong, fall into the following categories:

1) Jerusalem is a final status issue and no unilateral moves are allowed.
2) The UNSC once recommended that all diplomatic missions to Jerusalem be closed.
3) We should maintain the status quo in such a sensitive spot.

Now, Reuters and plenty of other media report, Turkey intends to open an embassy in East Jerusalem, according to a Sunday statement by Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan.

And since then....silence. The Europeans who stumbled over themselves to condemn Trump are silent on Erdogan. The UN and NGOs aren't saying anything.

Even though all the arguments against the Trump declaration apply even more so to the Erdogan declaration.

How can this be? How can the Europeans allow Erdogan to violate the very principles that they so loftily defended in the Security Council two Fridays ago?

A cynical reason could be a latent undercurrent of antisemitism that no one cares to admit. But I don't think you have to play that card here.

Because the main difference between Trump's and Erdogan's words is that no one threatened violence if Erdogan somehow managed to open an embassy, while leaders of hundreds of millions "warned" (meaning, incited) violence against Trump.

So the three reasons that are given above against the US embassy move are justifications after the fact. There is only one rule that matters, which is "Don't piss off the Muslims."

The enlightened world knows, viscerally: Muslims perform terror attacks. Muslims riot. Muslims threaten the world. Therefore, taking the Muslim side in any matter is the only position that the moralistic, ethical world bodies can consider - because they don't want to be on the opposite side of Muslim wrath.

Try this exercise yourself:

Choose any human rights imperative - being anti-apartheid, being against genocide., supporting women's rights, being pro-democracy - literally anything.

Now, look at how Western nations act towards Muslim nations concerning any of those topics. Is there a consistent message being given to Muslim nations about these human rights issues? The answer, of course, is no.

When Western nations deal with Muslim-majority countries, they do not apply any single moral or ethical or political rule consistently. But the one rule that is entirely consistent across Western nations dealing with Muslim nations is the maxim: Don't Piss Off the Muslims.

That is the only rule you need to know to rise in the ranks of the world's diplomatic community.