The Times of London (subscription only) publishes a story under the following headline:
The article explains:
A call for religious freedom in Jerusalem by Baroness Ashton of Upholland, the EU foreign policy chief, has been seized upon by extremist Jewish organisations and religious leaders as a statement of support for a controversial third temple on the hilltop in the Old City.
Yet, only two paragraphs later:
Now, some hardline groups are calling for Jews to be allowed to pray on the site they call the “holy of holies” and are interpreting a call for religious freedom in Jerusalem by Lady Ashton as tacit support for the right of Jews to pray at the site.
A representative of Lady Ashton said at the weekend: “It is essential that access to the holy sites in Jerusalem for peaceful worship for all denominations is fully respected.”
There are indeed demands that Jews should be allowed to worship on the Temple Mount, Judaism’s holiest site as well as the religious belief that a third temple will arise in the future.
However, the article and the headline appear to be making a bold and dangerous presumption beyond the evidence provided in the article text itself.
Just how did a call for freedom of worship on the Temple Mount morph into a headline and claim surrounding the building of a third temple?