When Reuters Calls

Note: What you are about to read is a combination of what I said, what I should have said, what the Reuters journalist didn't want to hear, what she won't ever write. I specifically said that I was speaking off the record; the woman who called me did not say the same. I will not share her name but the rest of the conversation is, to my mind, fair game.

So, hours ago, a journalist called me on the eve of Rosh Hashana, on the eve of several nations declaring that they see pink elephants flying in the skies, purple pandas, and a state of Palestine. In this case, the journalist didn't ask me about what the Canadians are fantasizing about, what the Australians salivate for, or what the UK dreams of. Instead, she said she was writing an article Reuters will run tomorrow on a recent announcement that building will begin on E1. She asked if I could comment on the building of the settlement.

First, allow me to explain that according to Western media, the fate of the world rests on Israel not building on E1. E1, in case you are wondering, is the mountain across the valley. It's where I see the clouds rolling in, the sun setting. No one lives there and yet this beautiful mountain...not even a mountain but more than a hill...has become the center of her attention. Till the next article and chance to suggest we in Israel are colonizers, genocidal maniacs, or whatever they wish this week.

She asked if she could interview me for Reuters and I hope at least she was a bit surprised that the name didn't have the effect she expected. I declined her invitation, explaining that Reuters is, in its veins, anti-Israel and anything I say is likely to be twisted and taken out of context. Why then, I asked her, would I want to speak to Reuters? And then I decided to correct her. She wanted to speak to someone from the settlement of Maale Adumim...that term again.

And so I began. When you begin a discussion using the wrong terms, you'll almost definitely end up in the wrong place, I explained.

For example, calling Maale Adumim a "settlement". I told her that it was a city, not a settlement. This fell on deaf ears. The ship has sailed on this debate in her mind.

She asked about the Palestinian claim that we would be denying the future Palestinian state contiguity if we build on E1. I asked her if she'd ever seen E1, ever been to Maale Adumim. She answered that yesterday, she was in El Azariya - the Arab neighborhood to our left as you leave Maale Adumim. As an American Jew, she's lucky she got out alive. 

I told her no one lives on E1; there are no homes there. There will never be Palestinian homes there, nor will there be contiguity for Palestinians. I explained that on the ground, between the Azariya and the Dead Sea, there is Route 1, a major highway. They will never be blocked or imprisoned with a direct road to a direct highway...so that claim is absurd.

She said that a Palestinian state would require contiguity, and I repeated that it won't be happening any time soon. She asked about the Bedouins who live on E1 - and I asked her if she understands who Bedouins are - by definition, they are nomads...they don't have homes up there; they have tents. And in any event, the Bedouins hate the Arabs as much as the Arabs hate the Bedouins, but yes, they probably hate us more.

I then asked her if she would identify Maale Adumim as being in the West Bank, a term coined by the Jordanians. You see, my city is in Yehuda, often teamed with the Shomron. These two areas were called by these names 2,000 years ago...Judea and Samaria. These were their names until the Romans came and called it Palestine (from the Hebrew word Philistim, which means... ready for it...invaders). Ironic, right? The Palestinians took a term that defines exactly what they are...oh, the irony.

And when the Jordanians lost ignobly in 1967, they added their own term. West Bank. Why would a name that only existed for 19 years still be relevant almost 60 years later? It was the Jordanians, I explained to the Reuters journalist who really didn't care, who were the occupiers; they captured this land from the British Mandate when they went to war against the United Nations Partition Plan.

Even Wikipedia and other sources get right a critical and telling point. The Partition Plan was accepted by the Jewish population but rejected by the Arab states and residents. And when the Jews declared their State, five Arab nations invaded in an attempt to destroy that State. It was the first of many times when an Arab "Palestine" could have been brought into existence. It didn't happen. It never happened. It will never happen.

And yes, Israel captured the land from a nation that had stolen it. The Partition Plan did not specify Jordan getting any of this land (they had already been gifted with 2/3 of the area of the British Mandate). Thus, Jordan's land grab in 1948 was an occupation. When we captured the land, we took it from an occupying force, and therefore, it is not considered occupied. This fell on deaf ears. The ship has sailed on this debate in her mind.

I decided to tackle one more issue - after all, let's be honest. How often do you get the chance to actually speak to someone from CNN, Reuters, or the BBC? I tried one more time to see if Reuters could be fixed. I talked about the incessant misnaming of horrific attacks. There are no terrorist acts to Reuters, at least none in Israel. 

"Terrorism is political," she asserted. No, terrorism is a brutal attack on civilians for the purpose of causing terror. For example, as she lives in Jerusalem, I reminded her of the recent attack in Ramot. No, that isn't terrorism. Apparently, that ship sank long ago

And October 7...there she hesitated...and then followed the "style guide" for how to write for Reuters. It was then that I asked if she was Jewish. It did not comfort me that she answered that she was. She called herself an American, and though she could not see it, I smiled. She is from New York; I was from New Jersey. 

I offered to show her around Maale Adumim; it's a beautiful city with a culture hall, a music conservatory, and healthcare facilities that treat Arabs (no Jew goes into Azariya for healthcare or anything else nowadays). I told her about the two ridiculous Palestinian Arabs who came to my city after we'd just finished building a three-story mall with dozens of stores. They claimed the land was theirs and showed the deed that justified their claim. After panicked discussions, the city approached the Jordanians to check on the claim. They'd ruled this land for 19 years, not enough to rename it, but enough to tell us if such a deed was valid.

Amazingly enough, the Jordanians were in a good mood that day and told our city that the claims of the Palestinians had been investigated and proven to be a lie, just like most of their "history". The deed was fake. No one lived on this land before my people came and began building here. Look at all the mountains to the east and to the north...other than three other Jewish towns, there is nothing. No Arab cities, no bones or culture unearthed. Dig in this land, and it is my history you will find, no matter what Reuters wants there to be.

She wants to speak to me to get the quote she needs for her article - the radical settler. The one who is supposed to say things I don't feel - I don't hate all Palestinians, but I don't support a Palestinian state either - at least not on my land. The way I see it, life in the Middle East is a series of simple, honest truths. I don't chant death to the Arabs. I'm a rotten radical settler, if she would take the time to see. I'm a grandmother, a mother, a wife, a sister, a friend. 

I don't live with hate or fear or anger. I just live. In a beautiful city that is of no interest to them unless I agree to label it a settlement. My life is not controversial, my needs rather limited. 

But what I really want to tell Reuters, what they will never print, is the truth. The only truth, the lasting truth.

Peace will not come when we want it; it will come when THEY want it.

If we stop fighting, we will die; if they stop fighting, there will be peace.

They can live in our State; their state offers us only death.

No matter what I answer, the quotes will be butchered, twisted. It is the Reuters way, practically in their style guide. Don't write about the amazing lengths that Israel has taken to save Jews all over the world; ignore the many countries assisted by our search and rescue teams, don't speak of our innovation and our determination to make this world a better place.

The truth is they are as blind to what and who we are as their ancestors - the ones who murdered my grandfather's family in Poland, the ones who drove his ancestors out of Spain. The ones who threw a flaming torch into the synagogue where my grandmother was hiding. The ones who verbally assault lovely young Israeli women and any other Israeli tourists. The ones who burn synagogues and books and people. 

Our history is too long and too strong for them and so they prefer the images and soundbites of a people destined to never have a home. Never because they refused all offers in all lands. 

Reuters? Yeah, no.