Toppled Palestinian ‘Landmark’ Symbolized Hate

It says something about the way much of the world views the rights of Jews to live in Jerusalem that the erection of new homes in parts of that city is considered such a terrible provocation. Thus, the new housing project in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of the city is generally reported as an outrageous provocation, even though the only reason this area is usually described as “predominantly Arab” or, more outrageously, “traditionally Arab” is because from 1949 to 1967, when this location was illegally occupied by Jordan, Jews were prohibited from living there.

As to whether it is wise for Israel to allow Jews to live in all parts of their capital, that is something that Israelis can debate, though redividing Jerusalem and returning those parts handed over to the Palestinian Arabs to a Jew-free condition seems like a curious way to advance the cause of peace and mutual coexistence. But let’s leave aside the question of Jewish rights or even the strategic wisdom of putting more Jews in these neighborhoods. Let us instead examine the Palestinian claim and what it represents.

When the New York Times reported the fact that ground was being broken for the new housing in Sheikh Jarrah in a story published on Sunday, what it did was to focus on the destruction of what it claimed was a Palestinian “landmark.” What landmark, you ask? Was it a medieval structure that in some way represents the longstanding Arab presence in the city or its culture? No. The building that was toppled to make way for some new apartment houses was just a large home that was built in the 1930s as a villa for one of the most notorious figures in 20th-century history: Haj Amin al-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem.

On the anti-Israel websites, the Mufti’s Nazi associations are glossed over - simply ignored. The world is beside itself at the sight of Jews living in his former home! Some landmark... one that typified one evil man’s hatred and resentments of the Jews.

Thank you for that image.

I feared that since 100% of the muslim apologists on FR have no clue who the Mufti is, and I would guess 75% of the remaining Freepers neither, the entire post would be puzzling to most.

Obviously this photo is from the late 30s, but since then the real ugly face of islam has remained unchanged.

I am currently re-reading From Time Immemorial, by Joan Peters, and the muslin vituperation from that day 'til today has been ugly, relentless and unacceptable to any normal sane human being.
The documentation in this book is overwhelming; suffice to say that the most common negotiating muslim phrase, in private and in public, through diplomacy and the UN, formally and informally, until relatively recently is,

"This in no way suggests that the arab unity is prepared to abandon its primary goal : the annihilation of Israel!"

Nothing has changed. Our press simply has stopped reporting that assertion whenever it is published in the arab press or uttered in mosques throughout the muslim world.

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.