[Sunday morning] a group of some 10 men and two women gathered at the site, as they have done for several years on Rosh HaShanah, for early-morning prayers. The holiday prayers feature the blowing of the shofar (ram's horn) at several different times. . . .

. . . . The worshipers said that the police had apparently been called by an Arab woman who said the sound of the ram's horn disturbed her children.

A Jewish resident of the Old City told Arutz-7, "How ironic. The loud Arab weddings and nightly prayers by the muazzin [over a powerful loudspeaker] at 4:30 AM disturb our sleep every night." Similar complaints are heard from Jews living near Arab villages in Judea and Samaria.

This action of the Israeli government recapitulates the rulings of the British Mandate, intimidated by Muslim violence:

During the 19th century there were a number of Zionist attempts to to get control of the Wall and surrounding districts, but none succeeded. The Arab owners of the property correctly sensed its importance to the Jews and were not willing to sell, even at very favorable terms offered by Baron Rothschild. On the contrary, the Arab religious authorities, supported by the Turks and later the British, made changes in the streets, buildings and Arab practices specifically to prevent Jewish observance and to disrupt any Jewish presence at the Wall.

After the Balfour Declaration gave the Jews hope for a homeland in Palestine, the Land of Israel, the Western Wall gained national significance among the Jews together with the traditional religious significance. In order to frustrate these Jewish aspirations, the Arab Mufti of Jerusalem started to incite his community against the Zionists who, he claimed, intended to seize control of the Wall. In order to antagonize the Jews, the Mufti ordered the opening of a gate at the southern end of the street the follows the base of the Wall, thus converting it into a thoroughfare for people and animals. In addition the Muslims deliberately held loud-voiced ceremonies in the vicinity. They also complained to the British about the placing of accessories of worship near the Wall, and a partition between men and women was removed by the British police on Yom Kippur of 1928.

In August 1929 an instigated Muslim crowd rioted among the worshipers and destroyed ritual objects. . . . The British set up a committee of inquiry (the Shaw Commission) to determine the causes of the riots and subsequently an international committee . . . [The Jews] asked only that there would be enforcement of the written intent of the Mandate: "according to Article 15 of the Mandate, the Mandatory Power shall guarantee the Jews free exercise of worship at the Wall in the form prescribed by the ritual of their religion without any interference whatever from the Arabs or the adherents of any other religion."

The Arab respresentatives made it difficult for the Commission because they refused to recognize the authority of the British Mandate. They stated, and it is quoted in the Commission's report, "The Palestine Arab nation have rejected continually and in every opportunity the British Mandate over Palestine, and therefore they cannot be bound by any arrangement or regulation derived from that." The Arabs further asserted that, it is the "Balfour Declaration that has incited the Jews to claim certain rights which in reality do not exist" and to generally insist on continued Arab control of all sites in Jerusalem that the Arabs considered sacred.

In Deceomber 1930 the Commission concluded that the Muslims had absolute ownership of the Wall and adjacent property. However, the Jews were to be given free access to the Western Wall for the purpose of devotions at all times subject to explicit stipulations that allowed Jews to come to the Kotel only in small groups and forbade them to pray there on Muslim festivals and on Fridays. In addition, Jews were also forbidden to bring Sifrei Torah to the Kotel, to place any chairs in front of the Wall or to blow the Shofar, lest it offend the Arab population.

The Jewish authorities agreed to this unfair verdict, except for the prohibition of the Shofar, considering it a humiliation. The Arabs rejected the report. The Betar Youth Movement organized Plugut Hakotel, a special unit of young men who would "illegally" blow the Shofar at the Wall on Yom Kippur to stir and arouse the Jewish people and fulfil the commandment of blowing the Shofar. Their activities would always lead to the intervention of the British police.

Sound familiar? European capitulation to Muslim violence and extravagant ahistorical claims has a long history. It's infuriating to see Jews continue to internalize this oppression and inflict it on each other. But it isn't the first time, God knows.

Rabbi Goren blowing a shofar on the Temple Mount.

Goren was controversial for unabashedly advocating that the Temple Mount should be accessible to Jews, and that a third Temple should be built. He is rumored to have said that when Israel retook the Temple Mount and Eastern Jerusalem, it would have been a good idea to blow up the two mosques atop the Mount at the same time. I think that would have created more problems than it would solve, but I understand the impulse. Goren did propose taking advantage of the Israeli victory to take over the Mount and set conditions for its use.

In a confidential memorandum to the Ministerial Committee for Holy Places which he sent shortly after military hostilities had ceased, Goren proposed that

the prime minister should declare that the holy places of the Jews be placed under rabbinic supervision. All the Temple Mount is holy to the Jews and therefore it is in the jurisdiction of the Chief Rabbinate even though mosques were built there. Since it is forbidden for Jews and non-Jews alike to enter the Temple Mount the Chief Rabbinate should request the army to close the Temple Mount for everybody. This step should be taken immediately [Goren's emphasis] before the military curfew is lifted and before free access is given. Now the Arabs are in a state of shock, and their only hope is to stay alive and not be massacred. Now is the moment to set the conditions and basis for the status quo proposed. Through such a step, the exclusive Muslim rule on the Mount will be circumvented. Later it will not be possible to do anything. If this proposal comes from the rabbinate rather than the government it will be seen as a religious matter of holiness rather than a political idea. And since entry will be forbidden for Jews, the Arabs cannot claim discrimination.

Such a ban, which could have lasted years, would have given the Chief Rabbinate time to study the problem including clarifying which areas are permitted to enter and which are not. Goren added that "if the Arabs are suspicious it is possible to give them El Aqsa."

Under those conditions, the Temple remains would not be devastated by Arafat's WAQF and shofar blowers would not be arrested. I think eventually the holy mountain would truly become a house of prayer for all peoples - as long as Jewish sovereignty over the site is assured - because there are too many people with a stake in the site for Israel to deny access to gentiles for long.

The whole article is very interesting as a history of the Israeli rabbinate's diverse views about what should be done with a Temple Mount in Jewish hands for the first time in 2000 years.

Goren was also intransigent about the Palestinians.

Goren bitterly opposed accommodation with the Palestine Liberation Organization; he made headlines in late 1993 when he "ruled" that soldiers could disobey orders and refuse to dismantle settlements in the West Bank. In 1994, he pronounced that religious law commanded Jews to kill Yasir Arafat.

In fact Jewish law does command one to kill a pursuer. And certainly both Israelis and Palestinians would have been better off if Arafat had been offed, let's say, sometime before 1972.

But what we have now is Muslims deciding when Jews can blow shofars at their own holy sites, and the Israeli government carrying out their wishes.

More here.