Not Today, Not Tomorrow. Israel, Australia, and Jerusalem - by Stephen M. Flatow

...Some supporters of Israel think that they have to be grateful for whatever few crumbs the world throws our way. They think the Jews will look unreasonable unless they praise that which deserves no praise. I disagree. I say that turnabout is fair play.

Stephen M. Flatow..
Algemeiner..
19 December '18..

The Australian government has decided that Israel’s capital should be torn in half, resuming the apartheid-like status that prevailed the last time the Arabs occupied part of Jerusalem.

Would the Temple Mount be in Israel’s part of Jerusalem? Nope. Judaism’s holiest site is “Palestinian,” according to the Australians.

What about the Western Wall? Not that either. It’s “occupied territory.”

How about the Old City’s Jewish Quarter, where Jews have lived since time immemorial? Off-limits to Jews.

The Mount of Olives, the world’s oldest Jewish cemetery? Not a chance.

What about other Jewish sacred sites in and around the Old City walls, such as Solomon’s Pools or the Tower of David? If Australia has its way, they will be renamed Suleiman’s Pools and the Tower of Daoud.

Australia’s decision to recognize only “western Jerusalem” as Israel’s capital is not “a step in the right direction,” as some pundits have claimed. It’s an outrageous attempt to promote the redivision of Jerusalem — to give the most Jewishly significant part of the city to the Palestinian Authority.

The Central Bus Station is not where the priests of ancient Israel led the Temple service, and the Ben-Yehuda pedestrian walkway is not where countless Jews have prayed and wept throughout the centuries for the return of the Jewish people to their land. The construction of neighborhoods to the west of the Old City began in modern times to alleviate overcrowding within the city walls.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

(Video) Jerusalem: The Media Myth of Two Cities

HonestReportingVideo
May "11


The history of Jerusalem did not start in 1967. Thousands of years of Jewish history took place in what is now called "Arab East Jerusalem." Only when the Jewish residents were driven from their homes in 1948 was the city divided between East and West.

This video shows the reality of Jerusalem today and includes interviews from survivors of the fall of Jerusalem.



To discuss the issue of Jerusalem, join our Facebook Group "The History of Jerusalem Did Not Start in 1967."

To read more about the issue of Jerusalem, check out the Jerusalem resources section of the HonestReporting website: http://www.honestreporting.com.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

The Silly Idea of DM Barak for Jerusalem

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA-Weekly Commentary
16 December '10

Jerusalem will be discussed at the end of the negotiations, with reference to the Clinton parameters, namely: Western Jerusalem and the Jewish suburbs for us, the heavily populated Arab neighborhoods for them, and an agreed upon solution in the "Holy Basin".

Defense Minister Ehud Barak’s Speech at the Saban Forum December 10, 2010


Take a close look at the wording of Mr. Barak’s remarks and the package begins to unravel.

Ehud Barak doesn’t even try to claim that there is some nice clean geographical division between areas that he proposes be part of a Palestinian state and those remaining inside Israel.

Instead it is the western part of Jerusalem and a patchwork of Jewish neighborhoods that are physically interwoven with and/or adjacent to Arab neighborhood remaining inside Israel with the rest being part of a Palestinian state.

The rest, that is, except for the “Holy Basin”, whose disposition won’t actually be resolved.

Now in fairness to Ehud Barak, he isn’t the only adult pitching the silly notion that such an arrangement could contribute to a robust and sustained peace.

But that doesn’t make it any less silly.

Presidents of the United States can say it.

Rich people who bankroll forums and initiatives can say it.

And academics in their ivory towers can most certainly say it.

But it doesn’t make it any less silly.

It is silly because, first and foremost, the success of the arrangement relies on an absolute best case scenario.

In a best case scenario there are no Arab elements seeking to exploit arrangements in Jerusalem to launch attacks against Israelis or otherwise create situations that ultimately engulf the area in conflict.

In a best case scenario, the actors administering a carefully balanced arrangement in the “Holy Basin” do so without any consideration of their own interests.

But the world, unfortunately, is anything but a best case scenario world.

Why then does Ehud Barak say what he says?

Is he a blind ideologue or does he think that he can get points for “talking the talk”, confident that it remain just that: talk?

Either way, it is a silly idea.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

The Newest Barak Bungle

Yisrael Medad
My Right Word
13 December '10

I truly dislike it when diplomats, politicians, pundits and other riff-raff say:

The outline and the principles of an agreement are clear, known, and quite widely agreed upon

because that stifles debate, quashes freedom of thought and the possibility of exploring new avenues.

But anyway, here is Ehud Barak from last week at the Saban Center:

e) Jerusalem will be discussed at the end of the negotiations, with reference to the Clinton parameters, namely: Western Jerusalem and the Jewish suburbs for us, the heavily populated Arab neighborhoods for them, and an agreed upon solution in the "Holy Basin".

Now, to illustrate that despite being "clear, know and agreed upon", Barak then goes on to emphasize Israel's worries:

(Read full "The Newest Barak Bungle")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

The Illusion of Divided Jerusalem Solutions

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
Weekly Commentary
11 March '10

How did the philosopher get out of the pit?

He assumed a ladder and climbed out.

And that's pretty much what people do when they assert that dividing Jerusalem is workable.

Let's make this clear.

It doesn't matter how neat the collection of dotted, hatched and other lines and colored zones may appear on the map.

Nor does it matter what kind of alphabet soup titles you can come up with for the various and sundry international forces to be deployed on the scene.

Or even the dazzling security gizmos included in the plan.

At the end of the day, the moment you allow yourself to go beyond best case assumptions, these schemes all collapse.

The geography is simply too tight and intertwined to support it.

What's the fallback position?

Interesting question: Beyond the rhetoric, does the Palestinian leadership realize that if they stand firm on Jerusalem at the negotiating table they may never reach a deal?

Are the Palestinians going to wager their destiny on international acceptance of a unilaterally declared state with a divided Jerusalem and that that acceptance can ultimately push Israel out? (Hint: there are many important countries that could give a damn about Jerusalem, but have reasons much closer to home not to want the precedent a unilaterally declared state would be),

Or do they have a face saving fallback position?

Can the Palestinian leadership, for example, find a way to develop a strong national pride in their possession of the authority to appoint the Mufti of Jerusalem and pay the salaries of the Waqf on the Temple Mount?

Yes. There are ways down the tree.

And the biggest favor that third parties can do for the Palestinians is to let them know that they are, indeed, up on a tree when it comes to their demands and expectations for Jerusalem.
.