Elie Wiesel hints to Obama, back off Jerusalem...

[GiladS]

FOR JERUSALEM:

As published in The International Herald Tribune, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal on April 16, 2010 and in The New York Times on April 18, 2010:

It was inevitable: Jerusalem once again is at the center of political debates and international storms. New and old tensions surface at a disturbing pace. Seventeen times destroyed and seventeen times rebuilt, it is still in the middle of diplomatic confrontations that could lead to armed conflict. Neither Athens nor Rome has aroused that many passions.

For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than six hundred times in Scripture -- and not a single time in the Koran. Its presence in Jewish history is overwhelming. There is no more moving prayer in Jewish history than the one expressing our yearning to return to Jerusalem. To many theologians, it IS Jewish history, to many poets, a source of inspiration. It belongs to the Jewish people and is much more than a city, it is what binds one Jew to another in a way that remains hard to explain. When a Jew visits Jerusalem for the first time, it is not the first time; it is a homecoming. The first song I heard was my mother's lullaby about and for Jerusalem. Its sadness and its joy are part of our collective memory.

Since King David took Jerusalem as his capital, Jews have dwelled inside its walls with only two interruptions; when Roman invaders forbade them access to the city and again, when under Jordanian occupation, Jews, regardless of nationality, were refused entry into the old Jewish quarter to meditate and pray at the Wall, the last vestige of Solomon's temple. It is important to remember: had Jordan not joined Egypt and Syria in the war against Israel, the old city of Jerusalem would still be Arab. Clearly, while Jews were ready to die for Jerusalem they would not kill for Jerusalem.

Today, for the first time in history, Jews, Christians and Muslims all may freely worship at their shrines. And, contrary to certain media reports, Jews, Christians and Muslims ARE allowed to build their homes anywhere in the city. The anguish over Jerusalem is not about real estate but about memory.

What is the solution? Pressure will not produce a solution. Is there a solution? There must be, there will be. Why tackle the most complex and sensitive problem prematurely? Why not first take steps which will allow the Israeli and Palestinian communities to find ways to live together in an atmosphere of security. Why not leave the most difficult, the most sensitive issue, for such a time?

Jerusalem must remain the world's Jewish spiritual capital, not a symbol of anguish and bitterness, but a symbol of trust and hope. As the Hasidic master Rebbe Nahman of Bratslav said, "Everything in this world has a heart; the heart itself has its own heart."

Jerusalem is the heart of our heart, the soul of our soul.

- Elie Wiesel

http://www.eliewieselfoundation.org/inthenews.aspx

[RoyB]

A lost cause.
Obama will not back off Jerusalem as its a key part in the making of a peace process.
It really doesn't matter anymore if the Palestinians have any right to even claim Jerusalem as their own. It doesn't matter that Jerusalem as a whole is the most sacred place in Judaism, and as a non-believing fella I'd like to think that it means more than just a place of worship for religious nuts, as it means to me.
There are no other people in the world who have more right to have Jerusalem as their own than the Jewish people, and the supposed Palestinians are not really close to be in the head of the list. But as I've said, it doesn't matter anymore.
Israel retook Jerusalem, fought for it, paid with blood for it. If the ancient historical facts doesn't hold, than this should.
What has the Palestinians did for deserving Jerusalem as their capital? Facts show us nothing.
But again, it doesn't matter sadly.
Its easy for powerful people to play with things that doesn't belong to them. They need no excuses, as they could just sit back and urge their allies to back down more and more and give up the things that define them.
Facts mean jackshit.

[GiladS]

Obama will not back off Jerusalem as its a key part in the making of a peace process.

But it's certainly not the only part.

Why this fixation with Jerusalem and the settlements when you have an organization like Hamas running things in Gaza Strip?

The Palestinian are far from having a single leadership that can constitute a partner for peace yet Obama and Clinton continue their campaign to pressure Israel.

Obama should understand that the more he continues such policies the less results he will get and the more harm that will be caused to his constituency.

[BorisA]

Today, for the first time in history, Jews, Christians and Muslims all may freely worship at their shrines.

Wow, historical accuracy is not always needed for some causes, i see.

And, contrary to certain media reports, Jews, Christians and Muslims ARE allowed to build their homes anywhere in the city.

There is something called "theory" and something else named "praxis".

[GiladS]

Wow, historical accuracy is not always needed for some causes, i see.

I have to agree on this.

Though Jews and Christians weren't regarded to be equal to Muslims under the Ottoman Empire (had to wear distinctive clothing and pay a jeziah tax), there was religious freedom. This was continued under the British Mandate and without the special regulations (such as the jeziah tax) that the Ottomans had.

There is something called "theory" and something else named "praxis".

If you are suggesting that Arabs are refused building permits in Jerusalem then you are wrong.

[BorisA]

Though Jews and Christians weren't regarded to be equal to Muslims under the Ottoman Empire (had to wear distinctive clothing and pay a jeziah tax), there was religious freedom. This was continued under the British Mandate and without the special regulations (such as the jeziah tax) that the Ottomans had.

Yeah but that was not the point. Regarding the social status: It would be really sad and wrong if in a democratic state the situation would not be better than in a medieval empire.

If you are suggesting that Arabs are refused building permits in Jerusalem then you are wrong.

Well, i do not know. What would be your honest answer to this (maybe crude) hypothetic scenario; Saudi investor wants to build a closed / open housing complex in a predominently jewish neighbourhood/distric in Jerusalem for Palis. Would it materialize? Could the state garantee their security?

[GiladS]

Yeah but that was not the point.

Just making a side note since I myself believe that social and religious rights are very much entwined.

Regarding the social status: It would be really sad and wrong if in a democratic state the situation would not be better than in a medieval empire.

The Ottoman Empire existed well beyond medieval times (as I'm sure you already know), just thought to mention that since we are discussing historical accuracy.

Well, i do not know. What would be your honest answer to this (maybe crude) hypothetic scenario; Saudi investor wants to build a closed / open housing complex in a predominently jewish neighbourhood/distric in Jerusalem for Palis. Would it materialize? Could the state garantee their security?

Could a Saudi investor do business with Israeli authorities in the first place?

[Hollis]

A lost cause.
Obama will not back off Jerusalem as its a key part in the making of a peace process.

IMHO, the claim of the peace process is not what the process is really about. I have gotten pretty skeptical about foreign involvement and their true intentions. The Palestinians are nothing but pawns to some foreign powers and so are the Israelis. The conflict there seems to serve other purposes. I think if the Palestinians and Israelis were left alone, they would find a road to peace an obtain it.

[bababooey]

Everything is so intertwined these days that having less foriegn influence seems impossible. Speaking as an american, I don't give a damn about what goes on over there, nor do I care for my tax dollars being spent over there. Alas, its not up to me.

IMO, Jerusalem should be shared with the world. It sounds like that is the case today, so why mess with it? If Israel is a good steward of the land, let it be.

Personally, I would rather have a piece of Brazilian beachfront property. I am sure God will hear my prayers there.

[Hollis]

Why should Jerusalem be shared with the world? It would be the only city of the world like that. Funny thing, under Jordanian rule, Jerusalem was locked up, Even Muslims could not worship there (my understanding). After the Israelis took over, it was opened to all people.

[bababooey]

Why should Jerusalem be shared with the world? It would be the only city of the world like that. Funny thing, under Jordanian rule, Jerusalem was locked up, Even Muslims could not worship there (my understanding). After the Israelis took over, it was opened to all people.

IMO, Israel is generous to let all religions worship. If they are a good steward, and it sounds like they are since they allow all religions to worship, let them continue to do so.

All cities should be "shared" with the world. Rome should not just be for the Romans. Athens should not just be for the Athenians. Nashville should not just be for Nashvillians. And so forth. IMO, Jordan was wrong to keep Jerusalem closed (which I did not know, thanks for that factoid).

Witches look at Salem as their "mecca", but you can still find churches of all denominations there. The city is a good steward and provides for the safety of all people.

[BorisA]

The Ottoman Empire existed well beyond medieval times (as I'm sure you already know), just thought to mention that since we are discussing historical accuracy.

It did but about the mindset i would not be so sure. Sadly.

Could a Saudi investor do business with Israeli authorities in the first place?

Like i wrote; a "crude" one. But don't think so much about the financier (ffs could be jewish Eskimo converted to Islam), just try to answer. A PM is also appreciated.

[Moledet]

Well, i do not know. What would be your honest answer to this (maybe crude) hypothetic scenario; Saudi investor wants to build a closed / open housing complex in a predominently jewish neighbourhood/distric in Jerusalem for Palis. Would it materialize? Could the state garantee their security?

No, naturally Palestinians can't live in Israeli territory since they aren't citizens. The housing complex must also be open to all ethnicities, no such thing as building one only for Arabs.
Now, you must also understand that there's no private ownership of land in Israel, all land is public land (apart of 3% that belong to Israel's National Fund). Private investors don't buy land, they merely lease it for 99 years from the state so it doesn't matter who is the investor he can't really own any land.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

No, naturally Palestinians can't live in Israeli territory since they aren't citizens. The housing complex must also be open to all ethnicities, no such thing as building one only for Arabs.
Now, you must also understand that there's no private ownership of land in Israel, all land is public land (apart of 3% that belong to Israel's National Fund). Private investors don't buy land, they merely lease it for 99 years from the state so it doesn't matter who is the investor he can't really own any land.

Interesting, I didn't know this.