No Back to Basics for the New York Times on Jerusalem

The New York Times offers its readers “The Jerusalem Issue, Explained.” It asks:

If the NY Times was bothered about the basics, it would add some desperately needed context instead of falsely implying Israel simply “seized” Jerusalem in two wars.

Both the 1948 and 1967 wars were defensive. In 1948, Israel came to control the western half of Jerusalem after defeating invading Arab armies that had mounted a war of annihilation. In 1967, Israel took the eastern half of the city from its Jordanian  occupiers, after the Jordanian army started shelling Israeli positions from within eastern Jerusalem.

In addition, the NY Times fails to note that the Arabs rejected the Partition Plan that would have implemented a UN-administered Jerusalem. The Jews had accepted the plan, which was, of course, rendered moot by the outcome of the war.

Instead, according to the NY Times’ “basics,” Israel seized Jerusalem from both the UN and the Arabs. Go figure.

Ask for some proper context by sending your considered comments to the New York Times – [email protected]