Why are we angry at the New York Times?
Sunday's Haaretz has a piece by Akiva Eldar, titled "Israel has a secret plan to thwart the division of Jerusalem." It begins in this direct manner:
The government and settler organizations are working
to surround the Old City of Jerusalem with nine national parks,
pathways and sites, drastically altering the status quo in the city.
The article several times refers to these settler groups, and what one critic calls their "extreme right-wing ideology."
The same story is in the Guardian from Sunday:
Israel is quietly
extending its control over East Jerusalem in alliance with rightwing
Jewish settler groups, by developing parks and tourist sites that would
bring a "drastic change of the status quo in the city", according to
two Israeli groups.
Well, Sunday's New York Times has the same story, but in a much-milder form: Parks Fortify Israel's Claim to Jerusalem. The headline is, of course, grotesque. And the piece puts off the idea that settler groups have played a part in the planning till the 21st paragraph.
While it is true that the article (which is written by two reporters who are married to Israelis), contains sharp and prominent criticism of the plans, generally the piece devolves into on-the-one-hand/on-the-other-hand consideration of the two sides in the matter, as if an enlightened American publication should be giving such a platform to religious expansionist groups. Consider these absurd paragraphs, high in the story:
[East Jerusalem's] annexation by Israel was never recognized abroad.
At the same time, there is a battle for historical legitimacy. As
part of the effort, archaeologists are finding indisputable evidence of
ancient Jewish life here. Yet Palestinian officials and institutions
tend to dismiss the finds as part of an effort to build a Zionist
history here.
In other words, while the Israeli narrative that
guides the government plan focuses largely — although not exclusively —
on Jewish history and links to the land, the Palestinian narrative
heightens tensions, pushing the Israelis into a greater confrontational
stance.
A historical Israeli narrative, laundered of its rightwing expansionist religious ideology. A confrontational Palestinian narrative. That's why we're angry at the New York Times.
The archaeological claims to ancient Jewish finds in Jerusalem are for the most part bogus. The so-called archaeologist are zionist zealots- they have little standing in the academic world. One of the biggest myths consists of the 'Wailing Wall' supposedly built by Herod. In fact, this wall was most likely built by the Christian Roman emperor Julian about 600 years after Herod's reign. It was in fact the foundation for a Christian Church that the Moslems converted into a Mosque 300 years later. The Jews never had a temple there. (The original temple was probably located about 200 meters down the hill from the current wall and was probably completely dismantled by the Romans or other urban renewal renovations). One would expect the Times to consult with academic experts before passing off such pseudo history as fact.
Some people confuse the quite reasonable assertion by skeptical archaeologists, that there was never a 'First Temple,' with the completely unreasonable assertion by Sheikh Ikrema Sabri, the former mufti of Jerusalem, that: “There was never a Jewish temple on al-Aqsa, and there is no proof that there was ever a temple. Because Allah is fair, he would not agree to make al-Aqsa if there were a temple there for others beforehand. The wall is not part of the Jewish temple. It is just the western wall of the mosque. There is not a single stone with any relation at all to the history of the Hebrews.” http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/... Being a cynic, or meta-cynic, I suspect that some of the champions of this assertion are using it to discredit the skeptical but reasonable archaeologists I mentioned to begin with.
Absolutely correct. Israeli historian and professor Shlomo Sand's March or Feb 2009 radio interview in PulseMedia addresses some of that archeological evidence. Listen: http://z.pe/4qT He goes further and laughs how people at his university are working day and night to find a Jew gene in the DNA. Comical. He says there is not one book existing that details the exodus of the Jews, or any archeological proof anywhere that the Romans exiled Jews.
The Nazis did the same thing, teaching Aryan myths as fact; German archeologists were sent sent abroad and claimed to find ancient relics and archeological evidence.
In examining history I remember one thing that guides me, although I forget it frequently. But It try to find the bits, the grouting in the tile of path that leads off elsewhere and that isn't apparent. For 1500 years the world believed the Ptolemaic view of the world that the the sun revolved around the earth; that the earth is the center of the universe. Ptolemy lived in the 2nd C. HIs complicated system predicted celestial motion with great accuracy in a system you could roughly describe as a system of gears that worked across the sky, and each new discovery over the centuries fit into this system. Every single person, every person, leader, academic of every religion, nationality, and color, believed it fiercely for the next 1500 years. And it was dead wrong. Profoundly, absolutely, and completely, dead wrong. We lived in Ptolemy's imagination, inside his head, for 1500 years until Copernicus came along. Abrahamic religions and their adherents believe words written by guys we dont know who were telling tales as they knew them and as were passed down to them, and we ascribe immortality and infallibility to their 2 BCE and 2CE minds, capabilities, and ability to write. Fucking stunning, isn't it.
Of course, the Times is mute. It can't get out of the habit. Maybe if it has one ounce of self-preservation, it can read the 660+ comments on Frank Rich's article this weekend. Apart from a few clapping seals who promised 'I'll pay for a subscription, Frank! Please. Please! I'll pay! Just bill me!', the majority go to town on the TImes and the MSM for not doing their job. The anger and disgust is rife. From all over the continent. And a few of those comments knock the I-P coverage as substandard. Surprised the monitors let those comments through.
What pisses me off about this is that we US taxpayers are eventually going to foot the bill for moving these displaced Americans and people like Lieberman, who lives in the West Bank. We wont even do this for our own citizens living in tents or the Katrina victims.
Thanks for calling attention to yet another example of the kind of reporting from the NYT that drives me apoplectic. This kind of article requires such a meticulous deconstruction that I end up ignoring them on my own site for the simple reason that I don't have time to rip them apart. In this instance, I'll pick just one phrase in the hope that it can be taken as emblematic in tone for the whole article. The annexation of East Jerusalem by Israel in 1967 was never recognized "abroad". By choosing the word "abroad" instead of "internationally", the writers are engaging in the kind of insidious editorializing that the NYT so often parades as "balance". Instead of a blunt statement of fact — that in international law, East Jerusalem is seen as occupied territory — we get the implicit subjectivity of conflicting perspectives: we (in Israel) see it this way, but the folks abroad have a different view. When bias gets hidden as balance, the guilty will never own up. Rather than defend their position, they will resolutely claim to have none.
There most certainly is a book that describes the Exodus in great detail, in addition to the First Temple. It is called "The Bible". Best selling book in history. Why it should be dismissed as history when other writings from the same period are considered "reliable"? Is it because you don't like what is written in it?
I love this, 'now with added ideological value,' from Ynet: The Bemuna (”in faith”) Company, owned by settlers, has recently won an Israel Land Administration bid for a construction project in Jaffa. The land in question, however, is adjacent to the Ajami neighborhood – one of the oldest Arab neighborhoods in the mixed city, which stretches south of Old Jaffa – and since Bemuna’s declared motto is the Judaization of mixed cities like Jaffa, Jerusalem and Lod, the local Arab community is up in arms over the project. The company won an ILA bid for the construction of 20 housing units, but it may eventually build up to 200 units. The project, said to be on its way in a matter of months, will be marketed exclusively to young religious couples, at a price 10% lower than the current property value in the area. The project will also include a synagogue, a yeshiva and a mikveh. Beemuna CEO Israel Zeira said: "A young, national-religious couple looks for several elements when buying a home. They look for a community of similar principles and the right educational system, and they want their home to be in a place with added ideological value. The people living next to our projects benefit at well, since their neighbors are a public of high quality, which raises real estate values."
please visit my blog for first hand accounts of the settlement expansion process ibnezra.wordpress.com
Good pick from the NYT. two points:
The question is what does unauthorized mean with Israel dictating the rules? Including highly restricted building permits to built on ones own land? Is this really a matter of buying up property? I'd like to know more about the precise process. And why, if it is really a legitimate "buying-up-process" should it be so highly secret? And strictly I wonder why Ethan Bronner didn't consult the obvious Palestinian scholar in the field. Could it be Abu el Hai is too controversial? But she surely represents the Palestinians view of matters.Nadja Abu El-Hai
Sorry, wrong link: Abu El-Haj Facts on the ground, Excavating Jerusalem.
Cudja try that link again?
Cudja try that link again? Hmmm? Now this is preculiar. Since I have no preview option, I have to check the html tags here again. And it was fine there????? Last test: Excavating Jerusalem
I don't trust the narrative constructed by the Right, nor the Left. The Left's narrative reminds me of the leaders in The Planet of the Apes denying there was ever a human civilization on the site of their empire (knowing the truth to be otherwise) because they believe the world is better off burying the destructive, nuclear-armageddon past sowed by humanity. So the area where the Statue of Liberty slowly sinks into the ocean becomes "The Forbidden Zone." (The Left has taken the same ignorant, anti-intellectual approach to the Kennewick Man.) The Left's narrative also reminds me of Communist airbrushing. The Left's motive is a post-religious world, because it ignorantly believes that organized religion is at the root of humanity's troubles. (As if Leftists aren't State-worshipping proselytizers themselves.) The Right's narrative reminds me of…well, Citizen has got it — Nazi myth-making. Peas in a pod.
I am a bit slow it seems. None of the links work: controversial: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=9418 Nadia Abu El-Hai / Facts on the ground – Chapter 6. Excavating Jerusalem (Google Books) http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=9418 Text quote, H-Net review, by Apen Ruiz http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=9418 Now what will happen to this?
The "Jewish" state was meant for the safety and security of Jews. The proximity to holy stones is completely irrelevant.
The Left's narrative reminds me of the leaders in The Planet of the Apes denying there was ever a human civilization on the site of their empire (knowing the truth to be otherwise) because they believe the world is better off burying the destructive, nuclear-armageddon past sowed by humanity. Good old Ed's well-known mental condesenturbations. Why would anyone want to deny there was a human civilization anywhere before? But after Heinrich Schliemann almost everybody–whatever their political leanings–must be aware that ideology driven archeology may well occasionally destroy what it is looking for. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Schliemann#...
One could refer to a Judean or Jerusalem Temple during the Israelite or Greco-Roman periods, but to use the term Jewish before the fourth century is highly misleading, and I would argue that the terms Jewishness or Jewish should not be used before the 10th century and the efforts of Saadyah Gaon and his colleagues to crystallize Medieval Rabbinic Judaism. From Ancient to Modern Judaism lists my online essays on the subject.
"Why would anyone want to deny there was a human civilization anywhere before?" My point is, how much of the denial of historic biblical Jewish presence in what is now the Levant is being done out of political expedience by the Left in order to undermine the moral authority of The Big Three (Judaism, Christianity, Islam)? Big Government is a jealous God, and it doesn't like competition for hearts and minds, even if it is willing to regularly enter into Faustian bargains with religous charlatans on the road to consolidating totalitarian power. And once government begins undermining science (in this case, archeology) out of political expedience, how can it hold itself up as some objective authority that is somehow morally superior to the religiously "superstitious"?
Big Government and its partners construct false narratives and myths all of the time in order to consolidate power and "keep the peace," (ie contain and marginalize challenges to their moral authority). All hyper-secularism in general and Leftism in particular really amount to are subjective belief systems whose adherents impose their own biased (and often warped) "reality" and "morality" on humanity via coercive state taxation, administrative and police powers. But Big Government and its tentacles don't represent or respect the interests of the average person today anymore than the pre-Reformation Church represented and respected the interests of the average medieval Joe. Only today, Big Government has far more power than the Church ever dreamed of.
I have no clue why LeaNder appears to be annoyed with what Ed said. I merely meant that Jewish archeology appears to in fact mimic Nazi archeology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_archaeology Israeli psuedo-archeology has been flaunted in some of the History Channel segments. Real archeologists thinks such productions are a joke.
LeaNder appears to be annoyed with what Ed said sorry citizen, I will ignore him from now on. Even if it feels his stereotypes are send my way. Maybe it would help if he addressed points directly and without his usual sweeping generalizations. You tell me what he is alluding to here, what reality, whom is he addressing?: The Left's narrative reminds me of the leaders in The Planet of the Apes denying there was ever a human civilization on the site of their empire (knowing the truth to be otherwise) because they believe the world is better off burying the destructive, nuclear-armageddon past sowed by humanity.
Concerning Himmler's Ahnenerbe. A friend, who owns a cute little studio and exhibition house a little south from Cologne, was tricked into exhibiting photos from the Ernst Schäfer exedition to Tibet without being informed of the context. Only when the exhibition was already announced and the photos on the wall he found out it was organized under Hitler's Ahnenerbe. … http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XZWTEwWwgE Himmler was a real nutcase. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XZWTEwWwgE
Refugeeism was just a Congress Zionism variant tailored to the American environment. It made possible the construction of Jewish networks of trust without the baggage of religious law or of separate national identity. Safety and security among non-Jews was never the issue. To achieve such a goal, Jews would only have had to renounce those behaviors that make Jews a threat to non-Jews, e.g., support for Zionism (Marxism, Friedmanism, etc.), financial aggression, and corrupt Jewish social networking.
Anyone who has done the guided tour of the Old City might question, as I did, , that the putative site of the Last Supper is on the upper floor of the building housing King David's Tomb. Of course, there were Jews in Palestine before the creation of Israel, so certainly traces of them my be found, and used selectively.