CiF Watch prompts Guardian correction to Ashrawi claim regarding ‘Jews only’ homes


correction pageOn Nov. 29, we published a post titled ‘Hanan Ashrawi lies at ‘Comment is Free’ about homes for Jews only in Jerusalem‘. 

We focused on Ashrawi’s implicit claim, in her ‘Comment is Free’ essay (Supporting Palestine at the UN today is a vote for peace in the Middle East, Nov. 29) that new homes being planned for the eastern section of Jerusalem were being built for Jews only.   

Here are the first two paragraphs from the original, unrevised version of Ashrawi’s piece at CiF:

jewish citizens

After arguing in our post that Ashrawi’s claim (that new Israeli homes in eastern Jerusalem would be reserved for ‘Jews only’) was false, we also contacted the Guardian’s readers editor to point out the error.  

On Dec. 21, the Guardian published this correction.

correction

As we pointed out in our post, the overwhelming majority of land in Israel is owned by the government, and administered  by the Israeli Land Administration (ILA).  The ILA leases the land out to all Israeli citizens (Jews, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, Druze, etc.), legal Israeli residents (including Arabs living in eastern Jerusalem) or foreigners who would qualify for citizenship under the ‘law of return’.

Ashrawi was slyly attempting to con CiF readers into believing that new homes in eastern Jerusalem would be leased to residents based on a discriminatory policy in order to buttress her broader narrative of Israeli racism.

However, as we learn continually from reading the Guardian and ‘Comment is Free’, the mere lack of evidence is not a serious impediment to those wishing to advance preconceived conclusions of Israeli guilt.

20 comments on “CiF Watch prompts Guardian correction to Ashrawi claim regarding ‘Jews only’ homes

  1. The Guardian “correction” seems like a distinction without a difference. I am referring to what they claimed about “highly unlikely”.

    • Define ‘Palestinian’. If you mean to include Israeli Arabs in the term, then the answer will be rather different than if you don’t.

      Also, do you consider Palestinians, of whatever national origin, living in East Jerusalem to be living in settlements? Because God knows, a housing project with Jews in it in EJ will be considered a settlement, so that rather needs to be taken into account.

      I’m tempted to ask a snarky question in return about how many Jews live in this or that city in the WB or Gaza, but it hardly matters, you’re just playing games here.

      • You have a point about the definition. The word ‘Palestinian’ in this context are those Palestinians who were born in the borders of the West Bank (their land by international law, I might add) who as a geographical consequence are fortunate enough not to have citizenship of a corrupt, redundant and racist ethnocracy, and upon whose land an occupying force is planting it’s citizens in ethnically and religiously pure enclaves, guarded by soldiers and thugs so that no Palestinian is able to come anywhere close, and which same thugs fan out and uproot the olive trees of the surrounding palestinian farmers and rip out their irrigation systems thus destroying their livelihood and as a consequence forcing many to leave their ancestral homes in order to survive. Ethnic cleansing by the backdoor.

        Sorry. I should be more precise in my definitions. Is THAT good enough for you?

        • “(their land by international law, I might add)”

          Not saying it can’t be or shouldn’t be, but “their land by international law” is an opinion about the law, not the law itself.

        • “are fortunate enough not to have citizenship of a corrupt, redundant and racist ethnocracy”

          You must be joking.

        • What international law are you mumbling about?!… The 1949 ceasefire (a.k.a. “Green Line” a.k.a. “1967 borders”) was never instituted or recognized as an international border!… Quite to the contrary… The document that specifies the line specifically states that it is not to be a border!…

    • @Alex Would you like to tell me how many Jews live in now Arab only cities and villages in Judea and Samaria? Can you explain why this doesn’t bother you?

      • You can call the West Bank ‘Judea and Samaria’ to your heart’s content. International law defines this area as Palestinan land and consequently they can do what they like. Your question is therefore, irrelevant.

        • According to Alex Meir Kahane was correct suggesting to deport all Arabs from inside the “internationally accepted” borders of Israel.
          International law defines this area as Israeli land and consequently they can do what they like.
          Even let’s take it a bit further:
          International law defines this area as German land and consequently they can do what they like.
          Two disgusting racists in agreement – not a real surprise.

        • Under International Law the Mandate is the sole legal authority for the land. The Mandate has never been amended nor repealed, so its original version and intent is still international law.

          Under the mandate all of the lands (including all of Jordan by the way) are part of Israel. This will always be the case until the Mandate is either amended or repealed. Period.

          As for what the land is called, until the 1960s it was only called Judea and Samaria. The “West Bank” was a creation, just like the word “Palestine” as introduced by the Romans, as an attempt to artificially wipe out any Jewish connection with the land.

        • “You can call the West Bank ‘Judea and Samaria’ to your heart’s content.”

          Maps throughout history have designated it as such. When you say “International law” you’re merely speaking about some international opinion.

        • It was called Judea and Samaria for centuries!… The only time it was called the “West Bank” was during the Jordanian occupation from 1948 through 1967… As for international law, see my reply above…

  2. Alex
    Care to place a figure on the number of Jews living in Jordan ? Saving you the bother , it’s a big round 0 since Jews are not allowed to own property there .

    • What the hell has Jordan got to do with my question? Zilch. How many pieces of Maundy money is in my Christmas pud?

      • It has everything to do, as you hypocritically accused Israel of being an “ethnocracy”, a patent LIE, while a true racist state can be found in Jordan.

Comments are closed.