Well, gee, let's go back to arguing the racist premise of the OT:

"Jerusalem is the eternal undivided capital of Israel. While all the cowardly, morally corrupt world governments have abandoned Jerusalem, preferring to support the Arabs/Muslims in their despicable jihad to takeover Jerusalem and all of Israel, only devoted Christians have established their International Christian Embassy in Jerusalem in support of Israel and the Jewish people."

As noted many times, Jerusalem is only part of Israel as long as it can keep it.  That alludes to the fact that there are those who wish to take it away.  To characterise "the Arabs/Muslims" quest as a "despicable jihad" is a subjective opinion.  Perhaps they do have justification to do so and it's the "devoted Christians" who will be proven wrong in the end.

Does the allowance for this language open the door for similar characterizations of Jews with whom we disagree?

As I've stated before, I'm for a one-state solution.  I don't believe that this holy land, sacred to Jews, Christians and Muslims, should be "owned" by a state that institutionally prefers one faith over the other.  As an Israeli Arab, I've seen first hand how difficult it's been for Israel to sustain democratic principles while advantaging certain Jews over all other citizens.

Feb 11, 2012 -- 10:31PM, Shusha wrote:

Feb 11, 2012 -- 10:01PM, Miraj wrote:

As I've stated before, I'm for a one-state solution.  I don't believe that this holy land, sacred to Jews, Christians and Muslims, should be "owned" by a state that institutionally prefers one faith over the other.  As an Israeli Arab, I've seen first hand how difficult it's been for Israel to sustain democratic principles while advantaging certain Jews over all other citizens.

Miraj,

Do you think a Palestinian government will do a better job of running a true democracy with no disadvantaging of any group?

I think a pluralist government with no faith bias could do a better job.

Feb 11, 2012 -- 10:52PM, Shusha wrote:

Where are you going to find a pluralist government with no faith bias in Israel and Palestine? Good luck with that!  :)

I think it's possible.  Despite the common depictions of Jews and Arabs as "Middle Eastern", we're both actually quite universal.  I have no doubt that leaders could be found among several of the religions involved who would be able to create and manage a unified state.

Feb 11, 2012 -- 11:42PM, LeahOne wrote:

I don't think 'racist' is an accurate descriptor - but then it's better than nothing. 

Having read about the official disrespect for Jewish historical and religious sites in and around Jerusalem by the Jordanians  - not to mention their ethnic cleansing of East Jerusalem! - and seeing the recent lies by the Waqf and the PA ( and that slug Zahi Hawass!) in their attempt to deny the Jewish history of Jerusalem , I am NOT at all convinced that any currently possible form of government *but* Israel would guarantee the rights and preserve the heritage of Jerusalem.

I studied archaeology in college.  I cannot begin to convey how revolting it was for me to witness Dr. Hawass betraying the science of archaeology and prostituting himself by making public statements repeating the Big Lie.  This is my #1 reason  as a student of archaeology for NEVER allowing non-Jewish control of Jerusalem again. 

It's not about my Jewish beliefs:  it's about the well-documented continuing denial of factual history by the PA, the Waqf, that pig Arafat and others.  And the deafening silence of all the rest of Arab historians on that Big Lie.

theworldofbiblicalarchaeology.blogspot.c... 

OK, so this is a blog entry, but from what I can tell the writer checked his facts. 

I understand your feelings about this, Leah, but, then, I see repeated attempts on this board to deny the history of the Palestinians, and I wonder why tit for tat is enough of an excuse to do this to each other.