There is another 1 page article today on Silwan, Jerusalem in NZZ Nr 53, page 6, 5 March.
Article dig deep into Israeli national identity (preferred topic for NZZ?) which is about three pillars – Holocaust, Army and Bible, from which historical rights to the Holy Land are derived (‘…drei Pfeiler der nationalen Identität für Israeli: den Holocaust, die Armee und die Bibel, aus der historische Rechte auf das Heilige Land abgeleitet werden’). This is not true as Jews and Israelis have tradition and culture. Israel is a leading world economy, frequently referred as start up nation, people are proud of Hi-Tech, Medicine, Agriculture. Israel has a solid ground to Palestine in accordance with the international law. Unfortunately it has to have an army to protect itself from another Holocaust. But no worries – NZZ cannot be blamed in anti-Semitism (3D concept) because they reference Y. Mizrachi from Emek Shaveh.
Emek Shaveh according to their website is supported as follows:
– Anna Lindh Euro-Mediterranean Foundation (www.euromedalex.org)
– The Beracha Foundation (berachafoundation.com)
– Cordaid (www.cordaid.nl)
– The Royal Norwegian Embassy Tel-Aviv
– British Shalom-Salaam Trust (www.bsst.org.uk)
More information in support of this political narrative is available at http://www.alt-arch.org
NZZ does not mention property rights, neither that Jews were pushed out by British from this village in 1936-1939 n Arab revolt. But no worries, NZZ cannot be blamed in selective reporting because they probably write only on the specific subject of ‘archeology and politic’.
Here is more from Wikipedia and other references:
In the mid-1850s, the villagers of Silwan were paid £100 annually by the Jews in an effort to prevent the desecration of graves on the Mount of Olives.Jewish visitors to the Western Wall were also required to pay a tax to the inhabitants of Silwan, which by 1863 was 10,000 Piastres. Nineteenth century travelers described the village as a robbers’ lair. Charles Wilson wrote that “the houses and the streets of Siloam, if such they may be called, are filthy in the extreme.” Charles Warren depicted the population as a lawless set, credited with being the most unscrupulous ruffians in Palestine.”
In the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine the Yemenite community was removed from Silwan by the Welfare Bureau into the Jewish Quarter as security conditions for Jews worsened. and in 1938, the remaining Yemenite Jews in Silwan were evacuated by the British authorities. According to documents in the custodian office and real estate and project advancement expert Edmund Levy, the homes of the Yemenite Jews were occupied by Arab families without compensation.
Computer algorithm can be used to analyze anti-Israel bias in media. This research can identify
There were number of articles where antisemitism can be considered (f.e. Next year in Palestine, from Holocaust to Nakba) and letters were written to NZZ as i learned from JPOST media comment.
Last week, there were number of articles about Jews in Switzerland, Yiddish, culture and an external comment (by Daniel Dettling) was published by NZZ about New Antisemitism.
The publication was good in principle but i was surprised it was about Germany. There is a lot of support to Israel and right of Jews to Palestine in Germany rather than in other EU countries. There are much more comments on Antisemitism in Norway, Sweden, UK, France.
I feel these publications are rather an excuse in case of critic< also in order to publish more anti-Israel texts in future. NZZ is, in my opinion, do not present Israel’s point of view and pro-Israel argumentation base, like
They can disagree with these points but hiding these is a subject for 3D test.
NZZ, Nr. 38, 15 Feb 2013 page 22 publishes 6 readers comment to the opinion of Daniel Dettling. All 6 are against articles and blaming / mentioning Israels violation of international law and human rights.
These comments are perfectly illustrating that D. Dettling point is correct. Here are some words used in 6 comments published by NZZ
Questions to NZZ that i would ask:
If NZZ readers do not see Anti-Semitism and physical attacks on Jews in Europe – NZZ may need to perform 3D check on their own articles.
by the way, Isn’t it that attacking Israel on a question of Legality of Settlements is a major obstacle to reaching peace agreement?
The 3D Test of Antisemitism is a set of criteria for distinguishing legitimate criticism of Israel from antisemitism
”Spillmann seemingly does not even realize how anti-Semitic such a letter is in its damnation of the people of Israel.” http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=298990
58% rise in anti-Semitic attacks in France in 2012
Kontorovich says, “international opinion is squarely against Israel, and if international law were a popularity contest, Israel would be voted off the island. But the whole point of international law is to buffer international politics, rather than serve them.”
The Legal Case for Israel, Professor Eugene Kontorovich
legal arguments on both sides are durable on what are central points of contention. It therefore makes little practical sense to raise the profile of the issue of legality, for it would only add an insoluble element to what is already an extremely difficult problem.
The United States supported the applicability of the Geneva Convention and the unlawful character of settlements until February 1981 when President Ronald Reagan disavowed this policy by asserting that settlements are not illegal. President Reagans policy has been sustained, implicitly, by subsequent U.S. administrations, all of whom have declined to address the legal issue, although they have all opposed, with varying emphasis, settlements or settlement expansion. However, on April 14, 2004, President George W. Bush, in a further retreat from past policy, told Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that, In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949
May 29, 2002
Our opposition to the settlements is political. Washington feels that Israel would be better protected and more accepted inside borders where there are no settlements, so a decision on their future must be accepted on the basis of their feasibility.
February 02, 1981
“ As to the West Bank, I believe the settlements thereI disagreed when, the previous Administration refereed to them as illegal, theyre not illegal. Not under the U.N. resolution that leaves the West Bank open to all peopleArab and Israeli alike, Christian alike.
I do think perhaps now with this rush to do it and this moving in there the way they are is ill-advised because if were going to continue with the spirit of Camp David to try and arrive at a peace, maybe this, at this time, is unnecessarily provocative.”
President Ronald Reagans statements in an interview with the New York Times, February 02, 1981
Professor Julius Stone also wrote that “Israel’s presence in all these areas pending negotiation of new borders is entirely lawful, since Israel entered them lawfully in self-defense.” He argued that it would be an “irony bordering on the absurd” to read Article 49(6) as meaning that the State of Israel was obliged to ensure (by force if necessary) that areas with a millennial association with Jewish life, shall be forever “judenrein”.
Professor Ben Saul took exception to this view, arguing that Article 49(6) can be read to include voluntary or assisted transfers, as indeed it was in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice which had expressed this interpretation in the Israeli Wall Advisory Opinion (2003).,
Israeli Settlements and International Law, May 2001
In 1998 the Israeli Minister of Foreign Affairs produced “The International Criminal Court Background Paper”. It concludes
International law has long recognized that there are crimes of such severity they should be considered “international crimes.” Such crimes have been established in treaties such as the Genocide Convention and the Geneva Conventions…. The following are Israel’s primary issues of concern [ie with the rules of the ICC]: The inclusion of settlement activity as a “war crime” is a cynical attempt to abuse the Court for political ends. The implication that the transfer of civilian population to occupied territories can be classified as a crime equal in gravity to attacks on civilian population centres or mass murder is preposterous and has no basis in international law.
Understanding UN Bias Against Israel, The Jerusalem Institute of justice
I did not find article about ‘International Critic’ in printed version today (but article is still with NZZ online) . NZZ Nr.26 1 Feb 2013 page 5. has the follwoing header:
Israes Air Force engages in Syria. Moscow sees an unacceptable violation of UN Charter (Israes Luftwaffe greift in Syrien ein. Moskau sieht einen inakzeptablen Verstoss gegen Uno-Charta)
Anti-Israel vocabulary is still here (as usual Israel violates something + UNO + unacceptable etc.), no analysis, no prove, no legal advice … If Israel is not violating UNO charter, nobody can blaim NZZ in misreporting as they just wrote something about somebody. One can say official position of Moscow was not exactly correct
but NZZ is fine as it only ‘information’.
By the way, what about attacks fulfilled by Russia, US, France and Turkey?
Jewish News Service - ISSN 1662-2626
Nahost, Europa, Deutschland und die Welt...
Leben und Alltag in Jerusalem & Israel
Reporting Media Bias against Israel
Promoting and defending Israel and the Jewish People, I blog about combatting antisemitism and BDS, as well as Middle East news and politics
Israel and its impact on our world
Street Art in Israel
Liberal! Was sonst!
"Um Zions willen will ich nicht schweigen" Jes 62
was so eine Perspektive ausmacht...
From my articles, comments and ruminations
The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.