Dear Tamar.I loath the idea to give up Jerusalem but I ponder what PM Rabin meant when he agreed that fate of Jerusalem would be decided during future negotiations. It only means that Jerusalem can be " divided, "internationalised ' given away" whatever. Rabin was not " a wicked son". It left us with choice : 'a stupid son" or " wise & pragmatic one'. Did he think PA authority over E jerusalem ,but not PA capital, is acceptable while settlments , borders, refugees , claims etc. being resolved ? I do not know the answer. I am against professing the doom because of giving away part of jerusalem. It is not the end . End comes as the result of the war & war is very possible, We should recognaize that is the way of souverignity & the way of history & we are now still in "1948 ".
Northern California wildfire doubles in size, displaces thousands (Reuters)
from the article: Israel should give up Jerusalem as its capital