PCUSA passes resolution that includes "the map that lies"

Perhaps the most problematic resolution passed by the Presbyterian Church USA was not the divestment resolution that has received all the headlines, but this one that calls for for the church to revisit whether they support a two-state solution  at all.

Part of its rationale:

B. The Two-State Solution Then and Now

[See Map 1 and Map 2 under “Additional Resources.”]

These maps clearly delineate the present status of the so-called “two-states” of Israel and Palestine. Map 1 shows the erosion of the Palestinian territory, over six decades, which was to provide for a viable state. In the panel outlining the U.N. Partition Plan in 1947, as well as the panel showing a significant loss of territory from 1949–1967, a two-state solution still appeared viable. As can be seen in the panel showing the present state of Palestine since 2005, it is hard to look at this portion of the map and think that a two-state solution can ever be achieved. It is important to remember that all the white space in what once was a contiguous West Bank (named because it is west of the Jordan River) represents land now controlled by the Israeli military. The green splotches (often referred to as Bantustans or cantons) are separated by thirty foot concrete walls, electrified and barbed wire fencing systems, and checkpoints managed by the Israeli military through which all Palestinians, as well as others (tourists, for instance), must pass to travel between Palestinian cantons or into Israel proper. Tourists pass through easily, of course, as they go to visit holy sites on the Palestinian side of the walls (Bethlehem, for instance). Palestinians do not. They are prevented from visiting friends and family in other regions, conducting business, receiving adequate medical care, pursuing an education, or even getting to their olive groves for planting and harvest. As it presently stands, the “Palestinian state” has no contiguity and the matrix of Israeli occupation prevents free movement among Palestinians.

Here is PCUSA's version of "the map that lies":

As I've discussed in much greater detail in the past, the first three maps are complete lies.

The white sections in Map 1 were privately owned Jewish land but the green portions were not Arab-owned land by any definition; most of it was state land.

Map 2 shows the UN partition plan, though of course the UN didn't refer to the green areas as "Palestinian land" but as "Arab." Either way, the Jews accepted it, the Arabs didn't, and it has no importance except for what could have been if Jews had been accepted as a nation that deserves self-determination.

Map 3 shows no "Palestinian" land since the green areas were either annexed by Jordan or taken over by Egypt. At the time, virtually no Palestinian Arabs demanded an independent state in those territories - but they did demand that Israel be destroyed, as the majority do today.

So what does it mean when a resolution is based on lies?

It means that PCUSA cares as little for the truth as they do about Jewish national rights - something that this resolution will try to undermine even further.