Seidemann Corrupting History

In a recent mailing sent out by Kares Shapiro and Mark Gold of "Partners for Progressive Israel" on the issue of Sheikh Jarrah, they include an appeal by Danny Seidmann 

along with a clip of him speaking, ominously, about a renewal of the "Naqba" and quoting him about the legal aspect of the property dispute so:

They purchased the claims to the East Jerusalem property from the earlier Jewish owners and took the Palestinian residents to court in order to evict them—to make way, it must be noted, not for descendants of the Jewish residents, but for settlers who never lived there, and who ultimately seek to drive out Palestinian presence from the city.

The Arabs living there at present, it should be noted have no connection to that area of Jerusalem or the former resident either. They were resettled from other areas in the city. In fact, the history of Silwan itself, Kfar Shiloah in the Hebrew, is one of ethnic-leansing of its Jewish residents - not during the 1948 war, when the aggressive Arabs lost their intended war of Jewish extinction - but during the 1930s, during yet another round of Arab terror.

In other words, the Jewish expulsion resulted not from mutual hostilities or an attack by Jews on Arabs but by Arab aggression on Jewish civilians seeking to eradicate their existence in the neighborhood a decade prior to the Naqba situation (itself brought upon the Arabs by their lawlessness, their violence, their rejection of diplomacy and compromise).

I am no lawyer but I do know the history of the conflict and Seidemann is corrupting our understanding of what happened, when it happened and for what purpose. When that happens, the law becomes irrelvant.

Danny Seidmann Is Rocked (Updated - Now Twice)

Danny Seidmann and I (I think I've informed you already) are old acquaintances and I always seek to treat him as a friend.  I have no reason not to.

He is an ideological and political rival and yes, seeks my removal from Shiloh.

From Peace Now, he moved to Ir Amim and then over to Terrestrial Jerusalem.

And now, he got rocked while at Sur Bahir (Baher?). He got stuck in

...a traffic jam in the center of the village [and as he relayed], just as school was getting out. I didn’t see it coming, but should have: I was a sitting duck. The rock was probably thrown at point blank range; it smashed the side window with enough force to leave a deep gash in the back of my head. I was fortunate: I did not lose consciousness, nor my sense of orientation.

UPDATE

A toddler was seriously injured in that same are now.

His reflections?

For me this changes nothing...no rock can move me to hate...

...a group of prominent residents of Sur Bahir paid me a visit, expressing regrets...They told me that they had gone today from classroom to classroom in the schools, telling these young men and women: “...do you have any idea whose skull you bashed in? Only because of him you are sitting in this classroom, because he is the guy who got it built.”...But it was also very sad. Worse than sad – it was colonial...The rock...was hurled because I am an Israeli – the occupier. It’s also possible that it’s because I am a Jew...As long as the occupation exists, events like this will happen and no one is exempt from them...this ends not when Palestinians behave better, or when our Shin Bet becomes more efficient. It ends when occupation ends. Until then, I remain a symbol of that occupation, and not without reason. And no good deeds, as it were, will redeem me or protect me.

Well, the conclusion is irrational.  And maybe he should have been thinking of Arabs as Arabs while amidst Arabs.


As one dear friend wrote to me: 

Nothing will knock sense into him.

He got hit in the first place despite his good deeds.  And since Jews "got hit" before the so-called 'occupation' that somehow began in 1967, there is a disconnect in his historical fact framework.  And I can assure him that is the 'occupation' ends, the rock-throwing will continue just as there was terror from 1920 on. 

Even that +972 blogger knows better of:

the dangers of assuming, as Danny may be doing here that violence will end the moment the occupation does. It’s not realistic for either side, for nowhere in the world has violence ended.

In the second place, as another friend noted to me, 

the entire article is very significant. it shows that they do not care if more violence results so long as their vision of 'peace" is achieved. the last sentence is very revealing: increased violence can't deter progress. how is their progress with more violence?

A third (yes, we share thoughts) conveyed this

 The "sacrifices for peace" mentality.

In other, alright, in my words, what was expressed was the 'logic' that Arabs are not responsible for their actions, another version of the "victimization" concept.  It's all up to the Jews.  Peace efforts are all ours for the Arab is 'handicapped' - by we Jews as Zionists, although I really do not believe Arabs truly make a distinction between Jews and Zionists.

It is time we Jewish Zionists consider taking a better charge of matters.

____________

P.S.

Dani Dayan wrote:

"I call on the police, the GSS and all other security bodies to catch the persons who threw the stones that struck Adv. Danny Seidmann and to pursue the matter to the full extent of the law and to uproot this despicable phenomenon from out of our midst.  We cannot allow ourselves to be reconciled to such behavior amongst us.

^

Helping Out the Enemy

Ah, Danny, how far you've gone:-

On June 4, 2007, the American Task Force on Palestine, Americans for Peace Now, and the Foundation for Middle East Peace held a joint congressional briefing entitled "Jerusalem on the 40th Anniversary of the Six Day War: Challenges to the Viability of a Two State Solution."

The event, featuring Danny Seidemann and Dan Rothem, focused on the problems facing the city of Jerusalem as well as the repercussions of these problems on a two state solution...

...Seidemann observed that “the conflict is being reduced to its volcanic core, the old city and its environs.” This point formed the center of his argument. Seidemann believes that if there “was an element that was mismanaged this was it.” He stated that Jerusalem itself has the capability to touch off conflict if mishandled and that recent history abounds with examples to support this claim. He addressed what he sees as a threat to the stability of Jerusalem. The Israeli Antiquities Authority, which receives more than 50% of its income from extreme religious settlers, harbors clear political goals, including displacement of Palestinians, messianic aspirations on the Temple Mount, and the sabotaging of any political process. He pointed out such plans as the opening of tunnels beneath, and relocation of ramps to the Temple Mount as possibly destabilizing to the peace process.

...During the question and answer period Seidemann stressed that he believed that “a political division does not mean a physical division,” an idea which differed from his counterpart Rothemen. When questioned on how to take the religious needs of the Muslims, Christians, and Jews into consideration in the dividing of the city he stated, “Israel will need to cede sovereignty over the Temple Mount as part of a package of assurances of unimpeded access and respect for religious sites.” He also expressed the belief that when a final agreement will be made there will be “no alternative than the extraction of settlers.” In closing Seidemann may have made the most powerful statement of the presentation, stating that as both a Zionist and a Jew “my achievement can only be given to me by a Palestinian… only we can give the Palestinians what they want.”