In a front-page news story and a lead editorial, the New York Times today blames an Israeli politician and former general, Ariel Sharon, for the fact that Muslims emerging from Friday prayers at Al Aksa mosque in Jerusalem rained stones on Jewish worshipers at the Western Wall. In the Times's view, as in Yasser Arafat's, Mr. Sharon's visit was inappropriately "provocative." So, the Times editorial writes, "Ariel Sharon, the Likud leader, did Israel no favor by provocatively leading his supporters to the Temple Mount on Thursday, asserting Jewish claims to the Muslim holy site at a moment when authority over the area is the most sensitive remaining issue in the peace talks." It's hard to see how a visit by a Jewish Israeli politician to a Jewish holy site that is under Israeli political sovereignty can fairly be criticized as "provocative." Imagine the Times writing an editorial saying, "Martin Luther King Jr., the civil rights leader, did African Americans no favor by provocatively leading his supporters to Selma, Alabama on Thursday, asserting black claims to integration at a moment when racial segregation is a sensitive and disputed issue." Or, to give a more recent example, "Matthew Shepard, the gay University of Wyoming student, did gays no favor by provocatively visiting a predominantly heterosexual bar on Thursday at a time when gay rights are still a sensitive issue." The editorial calls on Yasser Arafat to accept international control over the Temple Mount -- presumably control by the same United Nations that for years condemned Zionism as racism and that to this day routinely issues harsh and unjustified criticism of Israel while turning a blind eye to Arab human rights violations. But the Times editorial doesn't condemn the Arabs for throwing stones at the innocent Jewish worshipers, and it doesn't criticize the mufti or imam whose sermon reportedly whipped the crowd at the Friday services into the stone-throwing frenzy. No, the only person blamed for the violence was Mr. Sharon. All he did was walk around with a tour guide on the Temple Mount plaza. He was quoted afterward saying "Arabs have the right to visit everywhere in the Land of Israel, and Jews have the right to visit every place in the Land of Israel." It's a liberal, inclusive view, in contrast to that of the Israeli left, which speaks of the need for separation from the Palestinian Arabs and wants to partition the Arabs into a state of their own on the West Bank. To consider Mr. Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount an inappropriate provocation, as the Times apparently does, one would have to be either ignorant or biased. We'll give the Times the benefit of the doubt and say they are ignorant. The editorial, after all, also claims that "The Temple Mount contains two of Islam's holiest mosques, the Dome of the Rock and al-Aksa." And anyone with even a cursory knowledge of Islam would know that the Dome of the Rock is not a mosque.
Sloppy Spelling: In the international section of today's New York Times, an article about security efforts at the State Department refers to President Reagan's secretary of state as "George P. Schultz." A second reference is to "Mr. Schultz." In fact, the correct spelling of the man's name is "Shultz." There should be no "c."