David Friedman Said Exactly What Jimmy Carter Did About Israel Retaining Territory
It’s time for yet another clarification on David Friedman.
We’ve already discussed how The New York Times misrepresented the words of Friedman about how Israel would ultimately keep parts of the West Bank, as claiming that he tacitly supports “annexation” of the territories.
This week, Jason Greenblatt, speaking at a Jerusalem Post conference in New York, said, “I will let David’s comments stand for themselves. I think he said them elegantly and I support his comments.”
The Times of Israel (TOI) reported this as if Greenblatt also supports unilateral annexation, editorializing, “In an interview published by The New York Times last Saturday, Friedman suggested that some degree of annexation of the West Bank would be legitimate.”
What TOI didn’t bother reporting is that Greenblatt said explicitly to look at Friedman’s words, not the New York Times headline — which was a lie.
That article quotes Friedman saying, “Under certain circumstances, I think Israel has the right to retain some, but unlikely all, of the West Bank.”
Isn’t that exactly what every peace plan since President Clinton has said? No one is talking about annexation; they are saying that under any possible agreement, Israel will hold on to some part of the territories, and there might be some land swaps.
Even Jimmy Carter said the exact same thing. Visiting the “settlement” of Neve Daniel in 2009, he said, “This particular settlement is not one that I envision ever being abandoned, or changed over into a Palestinian territory. This is part of the close settlements to the 1967 line that I think will be here forever.”
Did Carter say he supported annexation? Not at all, and neither did Friedman or Greenblatt. All of them are talking about Israel retaining territory under a peace agreement.
The false reporting in The New York Times has already spawned J Street mailings, Palestinian condemnations, and protests at the Gaza border. This is not the first time that The New York Times has ascribed motives to newsmakers that align with the paper’s own wishful thinking rather than their actual words.
Elder of Ziyon has been blogging about Israel and the Arab world for a really long time now. He also controls the world, but deep down, you already knew that.