When It Comes To Jerusalem, The Washington Post and President Obama Rewrite History

The Washington Post had an article by Howard Schneider yesterday about the dispute over property in in Sheikh Jarrah, a small Arab neighborhood in eastern Jerusalem. I have no problem with an article that presents both the Israeli and Palestinian side of a story like this. I have a huge problem with asserting facts which simply are not in evidence and skewing the picture in favor of one side, in this case the Palestinians.

First, the United States did recognize all of Jerusalem as part of Israel in The Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Act, passed overwhelmingly by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. In addition there are several countries which do have embassies in Jerusalem. To say that the "international community" as a whole doesn't recognize Israel's sovereignty over eastern Jerusalem is inaccurate. The international community is not monolithic and is divided on this issue unless, of course, you don't consider the United States part of the international community.

Yes, the Obama administration has protested the eviction of Arabs from Sheikh Jarrah. They argue that any change of the status quo undermines the peace process. Never mind that the land was taken by force from Jewish owners in 1948. Never mind that the United Nations, which moved the original 28 Arab families into the neighborhood, never obtained or provided any title to the property. Never mind that the families would have had tenancy rights and could not be evicted under Israeli law if they paid rent to the rightful owners. Never mind that the issue was decided through a very long legal process, complete with appeals and due process of law. None of those facts matter. The Obama administration has decided, in advance of any negotiation, that Jerusalem will be divided again. Never mind that President Obama has no say in the matter whatsoever, has no jurisdiction over Jerusalem, and is in effect ignoring American law.

Yes, the article does mention the Jewish ownership but it assumes that "East Jerusalem" is rightfully somehow Palestinian. Please read my post on the relevant parts of the history of Jerusalem from 2007. One point which every article like this ignores:

As the article correctly points out, Silwan, another eastern Jerusalem neighborhood embroiled in a property dispute, was a haven for Yemeni Jews in the 1800s. These were Jews escaping persecution in the Arab world. Why are changes which are a result of Jordanian occupation just fine while reversing those changes as a result of Israel capturing the eastern part of the city unacceptable? Somehow it's acceptable to ignore the fact that there were Israeli controlled enclaves in "East Jerusalem" between 1948 and 1967 and there never was a clean east/west division of the city.

Certainly the Obama administration is working under false assumptions when it comes to Jerusalem. The President of the United States should know better. Unfortunately, the position of his administration is nothing new. It is a continuation of misguided Bush administration policy. The last President who seemed to understand the history was Bill Clinton. How do those who claim that American Jews or a pro-Israel lobby have some sort of undo influence on U.S. foreign policy explain a decidedly pro-Palestinian position on an issue so critical not only to Israel but to Jewish identity as a whole?

The article assumes, like so many others, that "East Jerusalem" is Arab, period, end of story. To the Washington Post this clearly isn't open to debate. They even have the Office of the President agreeing with this incorrect assertion. History to the contrary is conveniently ignored. This is a sort of pernicious, almost hidden media bias in favor of the Palestinians and against Israel. Since the Washington Post is so well respected their assumptions become the assumptions of many in the American public. After all, who has the authority and credibility to challenge the Washington Post, especially when their misinformation is repeated at the highest levels of government?

You were saying ...

Messianic Jews are considered Christians by all of the streams of Judaism without exception. They are considered to have abandoned the Jewish faith. You’ll notice I said 99% of Jews would be offended. I guess they fall into the 1%.

But, the Messianic Jews don't consider themselves to be non-Jews, but complete Jews and believers in Jesus as the Messiah of Israel. But, yeah... other Jews who don't believe that, won't accept them as Jews... I do realize that.

That hasn't stopped them from growing and growing in Israel which they have for decades now. And there's no let-up in their growth, with more and more of their Messianic groups being formed all the time in Israel.

There's over a quarter of a million in the U.S., in Israel over 6,000-15,000 by differing sources, over 200 Messianic groups in Israel, and as I was saying, they're growing all the time, being -- really -- a recent phenomenon (only a few decades, actually).

So, I would expect that the Jews "will do the job" -- like they did back in the first century... once again... :-)

Oh, and if those people preach Christianity here and weren’t born here they are considered to have made aliya under false pretenses and can be deported. Trying to convert Jews to Christianity is illegal in Israel. Part of being a Jewish state.

Yeah, I realize that those who were not born there, would be subject to being deported. But, as it's turning out, many of them are born there... That becomes more and more of a factor as times goes along and more are born in Israel.

As far as converting Jews to belief in the Messiah of Israel being Jesus -- well... you'll notice that the first century Jews who were told to stop what they were doing back then, said that if it was between obeying God and man... they would obey God.

That's all you need to know about that...

AND..., if you really want to blame someone for all this Jewish and Christian thing... you really gotta blame those Jews in the first century for starting it all -- and then, on top of that -- they bring in all those Gentiles...

I'd say that it's the Jews themselves that started this whole thing.

Oh... one more thing on this one... You were saying ...

I like a fantastic Arab-owned restaurant. They've had many opportunities to poison me or kill me in some other way. They have mainly Jewish customers. They could kill many. Why haven't they?

Let me tell you about this great Afghani restaurant in San Francisco that I love to eat at. It's "The Helmand" ... owned by the family of the President of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai.

Now, I have eaten there several times and I think they've got the absolute best food around (different, to be sure, but sure good...). And I don't think they're going to poison me either... LOL... and I'm a Christian, (definitely not Muslim, doncha know...).

I would even encourage a Jew to go there and eat, and not worry about being poisoned either.

But, I do believe that those Afghni Muslims will kill Jews and Christians, one day... (as they have already done, whenever they can...).

It's a well-known phrase with the Muslims over there in the Israeli territories, "First the Saturday people and then the Sunday people."

I think that both you and me are going to be singled out by Muslims... make no mistake about it.

“First the Saturday People, Then the Sunday People”

We are in danger of being subjugated to the ideology of Islamic world domination. The Jews are again in grave danger, and so are all Christians, along with the nations and societies that are democratic. The Ottoman Empire failed. Hitler’s “Final solution”and his Third Reich failed. The Islamic quest has no intention of failing a third time! “First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people,” is not simply their slogan, but their strategy!

First, don’t assume that Israeli Jews don’t understand Arabic. Our population is 42% Sephardic. Those folks are from Arab countries. Hebrew and Arabic are related Semetic languages. If you know one it really isn’t all that hard to learn the other. I could post a long list of words that are the same in both languages.

The attitudes you describe certainly exist. They are almost certainly dominant in the territories. In Israeli cities it is far less common. Again, I know Arabs who encouraged their kids to volunteer for the IDF.

I’ve also been to Indonesia on business thanks to my American passport. The uneducated would have the attitudes you describe. The middle class and business class do not. They knew full well I am Israeli and were looking for ways to do business via third countries.

Read about Abdurrahman Wahid, the late former President of Indonesia (their first democratically elected leader) and the former leader of their Islamist party. He visited Israel in 1994 and pushed for interfaith dialog and peace.

I’ve eaten at Helmand when in San Francisco on business. It was excellent. There is also a very good Persian restaurant (don’t dare call those people Iranian!) and a truly excellent Indonesian restaurant there too.

Just as most people who call themselves Christians don’t take the entire Bible literally many Muslims don’t accept the passages you and others are quoting in the Qu’ran or take it literally.

I’m not polyanna about Islam. If only 10% of the population supported terrorism and violent jihad we’d be talking about >200 million Muslim supporters. Among the Palestinians the number is probably in excess of 50%. There is a very real Islamic threat and I will never minimize that.

Those of us who live with many Muslim neighbors and who do get by in Arabic may have a different attitude that you do not because we are somehow liberal or trusting of Islam. President Bush was out of his mind when he spouted the “religion of peace” nonsense. We just know, first hand, that it isn’t all Muslims. Having seen my fair share of anti-Semitism, I have a major problem with religious intolerance no matter who it comes from or whom it’s directed at.

There are many millions of Muslims who would kill us in a heartbeat just because we are infidels. There are also a lot more moderate, tolerant Muslims than you would imagine. It can be VERY dangerous to talk against jihadists and terrorists if you are a Muslim, even in America. A lot of people are silent out of fear.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.