Israel struggles to counter Palestinian rock-throwing threat

[Scott]

Off-topic post removed.

[Seastallion]

What has 2000 years ago got to do with anything? Should all Euro Americans go home because the native Americans owned the north American continent 2,000 years ago?

Should the Norman descendents leave Britain and go back to France, etc etc etc?

Occupation of land 2,000 years ago confers nothing on present day peoples.

This argument can be played both ways - if history is deemed irrelevant (or at least, unrealistically reversible), then basically "ownership" claims boil down to conditions (economical, social, political...whatever), and having the capability (or will) to make things happen.

Of course, it has a lot to do with the perceived "statuette of limitations" of such things - 2000 years? 500 years? A hundred? And, of course, who decides? Most times this would be dependent on each side's agenda and narrative, rather than based on some agreed upon principals.

Stating the historical background (and yes, culture and religion are a part of that) is useful for better understanding of the connection between people and land. That said, it does not necessarily have to be a very compelling argument for the opposition and its supporters. Getting bogged down in historical (or more often, pseudo-historical) debate on these issues usually does little to promote conflict resolution, and more often leads to each side digging heels or even moving further away from any common ground. The situation would possibly be better served by a temporary suspension of historical justification, which might allow dealing with more tangible issues pertaining to the conflict. Little hope for that, though, even on TVF.

Most cases, these things are not resolved based on "rights", but in accordance with contemporary conditions. The "rights" are secondary, in the sense that they do not, by themselves, affect the wished for change.

Back on topic:

Throwing rocks at traffic is a life-endangering act. Those wishing to claim otherwise are welcome to try it at home. There were a few cases of this in Thailand - Ayutthaya and Bangkok spring to mind. If I remember correctly, no one in his right mind condoned or justified it at the time. Matter of fact, kinda recall a popular notion was to stone the culprits when caught...

There is not good way for Israel, international public-opinion-wise, to deal with the rock throwing issue on an operative level. The Israeli government recognizes this, but given that the allowing the current state of things to carry on is not acceptable, and with its voter base displeasure augmented by general public sentiment - it might not have a lot of maneuvering space (from their point of view). The bad news, for the Israelis, are that even with enhanced enforcement and stricter rules, this isn't very likely to go away. The newly announced candidate for the Chief of Police post would probably play a significant part in tackling these issues.

As for the Palestinian leadership(s?) - a bit like playing with fire. Abbas cannot. due to political considerations, publicly go against it or even attempt to calm things down. He's already in hot water over a documented action of the Palestinian security forces against Palestinian demonstrators (part of them security cooperation agreements and understandings, which survive each crisis), and his public support is not much even on a good day. Worse, it is not even certain that he can actually do much about it. Many of those partaking do not answer to the Fatah or the PA, and many are not even well organized. Therefore, Abbas attempts to weather the storm, using it as much as possible without sinking the boat. The Hamas position is supportive of rock throwing in general, and this is no exception. While outright mayhem is probably not on their wishlist for this winter, some strife with religious connotations is welcome. Trouble is that their control over these things is tenuous as well, and that the fanning of the flames might have undesired results.

Oh, and without pointing fingers, the page width format for this topic seems to be messed up (or it could be just me). Mods?

Obviously claims of rights because of 2000 year old ancestral ties are ridiculous, especially when the ancestry is questionable and most especially when the "other party" has obvious current ties.

What is germane is contemporary conventions and law. If Thailand was to decide that it wants half of Laos on the grounds that it used to "own" it, and Thailand followed through and invaded, it would be in breach of international law, and would (should) be stopped by the international community.

A group of people with claims of a collective identity and claims of ties to the land now known as Israel, accepted the international community's grant of a right to that land, despite it meaning that some indigenous people would be displaced. They accepted it. But they didn't really, because from the very begining of the state of Israel, some 70 years ago, they, the Israelis, have encroached outside the area designated them that they agreed to and displaced hundreds of thousands of indigenous people. That encroachment continues to this day. Less than 50 years ago they did a major incursion, capturing large amounts of land that was not theirs (as they had agreed in setting up their state) and displaced a million more. By propaganda and sheer bullying insistence, they have somehow got the world, and even the people they are dispossessing, to agree that that 1967 land grab can remain on their books. Despite international law. Yet even that was not enough...the land grabs continue. Why does the international community tolerate it? If it was any other state, it would not be tolerated.

Back to OP. Yes, throwing rocks can be fatal. Do you really think an oppressed and occupied people would worry that their rocks might kill one of the people who represent their oppressors? It truly is a David and Goliath scenario, where an embattled underdog, weak, with only a stone to sling, battles an immensely stronger and brutal opponent trying to take over his homeland. Freedom fighters throwing rocks against people whose security forces use bullets. Brave? Or just blindly angry at the injustices imposed upon them their entire lives? I think the latter, and I can not blame them for their anger.

[JingerBen]

These maps cut through the fog of propaganda about the nonexistence of Palestine.

Of course, Dan.

The obsessive Israel demonizers continue to push the big lie that Jews are invading "white people" who have colonized Israel and oppressed the "non-white" people, when Jews are actually INDIGENOUS PEOPLE of Israel. The connection of the land of Israel to the Jewish people is for real and without question.

Diaspora Jews throughout the ages have said Next Year in Jerusalem.

Not Next Year in Boca Raton.

"Next year in Jerusalem" was the Zionist dream.

'Next year in Boca Raton" was the reality for most of them.

[Jingthing]

Not sure what's up with the maps. We know the more recent history before Israel of British Mandate Palestine and before that Ottoman Turk rule. Duh!

Anyway, back to rock throwing.

So innocent:

https://www.facebook.com/Gilad.Hadari.il/videos/670970103017679/

[dexterm]

Morch wrote...

Throwing rocks at traffic is a life-endangering act.

Yes, of course it is. The solution is easy. As an illegal Israeli colonist don't put yourself in a position where you provoke rocks being thrown at you by Palestinians resisting occupation. End the occupation = end the stone throwing resistance.

Get out of the occupied West Bank to the safety of pre 67 borders. Israelis are playing the victim card when they are in fact the invaders/aggressors.

[DaddyWarbucks]

Morch wrote...

Throwing rocks at traffic is a life-endangering act.

Yes, of course it is. The solution is easy. As an illegal Israeli colonist don't put yourself in a position where you provoke rocks being thrown at you by Palestinians resisting occupation. End the occupation = end the stone throwing resistance.

Get out of the occupied West Bank to the safety of pre 67 borders. Israelis are playing the victim card when they are in fact the invaders/aggressors.

The obvious solution to the problem... and it would benefit everyone, especially the Israelis.

[Jingthing]

I think it's time for Israel to get more HARD CORE with the rock throwing terrorists. Israeli government has been too tolerant in the past. Enough is enough. The way to any path towards peace is not with these murder rocks.

I love how these "progressives" (and also Islamists and fascists) want to give morality lectures to Israel. They speak with no moral authority on the matter. They don't think Israel should have ever existed and want it to stop existing. Israel should not listen to people with such hostile intentions towards Jews and no sympathy for WHY the Zionist movement gained traction to begin with. They say Jews go home but Israel IS home to many millions of Jews, the vast majority BORN there, and the majority with backgrounds from the MIDDLE EAST / NORTH AFRICA REGION.

No, dudes, Israel is NOT the victim now. (Been there. Done that. Didn't like it!) THAT IS THE POINT OF ISRAEL. For Jews, a TINY global minority, to NO LONGER be the eternal victims of the whims of the hostile and often GENOCIDAL majority.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Jingthing

[up-country_sinclair]

The occupying colonists and their apologists shouldn't be surprised that those they've displaced would rise up.

This is just the beginning.

Edited September 27, 2015 by up-country_sinclair

[DaddyWarbucks]

I think it's time for Israel to get more HARD CORE with the rock throwing terrorists. Israeli government has been too tolerant in the past. Enough is enough. The way to any path towards peace is not with these murder rocks.

I love how these "progressives" (and also Islamists and fascists) want to give morality lectures to Israel. They speak with no moral authority on the matter. They don't think Israel should have ever existed and want it to stop existing. Israel should not listen to people with such hostile intentions towards Jews and no sympathy for WHY the Zionist movement gained traction to begin with. They say Jews go home but Israel IS home to many millions of Jews, the vast majority BORN there, and the majority with backgrounds from the MIDDLE EAST / NORTH AFRICA REGION.

No, dudes, Israel is NOT the victim now. (Been there. Done that. Didn't like it!) THAT IS THE POINT OF ISRAEL. For Jews, a TINY global minority, to NO LONGER be the eternal victims of the whims of the hostile and often GENOCIDAL majority.

It's not about giving morality lectures to Israel.

It's about getting them to live within their 1967 borders and stop grabbing the Palestinians' land and terrorizing their people.

[Jingthing]

It's also about the incredible naivete of thinking the conflict would be over if the 1967 borders ever happen. Which, let's face it, they probably never will.

I'm not really fooled by any of this. We have pretty obvious cheerleaders for Israel to be trashed here. I don't see any difference in the tone here and the leaders of Iran.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Jingthing

[Furryman]

I think it is horribly sad to see Israel turning into a mirror of the very thing most of the Israelis fled Europe to get away from, a hyper-militarized, violent and racist state.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Furryman

[DaddyWarbucks]

It's also about the incredible naivete of thinking the conflict would be over if the 1967 borders will ever happen. Which, let's face it, it probably never will.

It will happen sooner or later because the just cause of the Palestinians is supported by a majority of the civilized countries of the world.

[Furryman]

It's also about the incredible naivete of thinking the conflict would be over if the 1967 borders ever happen. Which, let's face it, they probably never will.

True, because the extremists on both side rely on the conflict to stay in power, and as far as they are concerned, the common people just trying to live their lives can just suck it.

[Jingthing]

I think it is horribly sad to see Israel turning into a mirror of the very thing most of the Israelis fled Europe to get away from, a hyper-militarized, violent and racist state.

What a load of BS. There is no genocide of Arabs by Israel. The Palestinian Arab population has increased greatly in the region. To suggest an equivalence of Israel and Nazi Germany is Judeophobic hate speech.

This is why Israel and her supporters should never listen to such hostile voices. And they don't.

If you actually want to be constructive, you've got to stop pushing the hate speech lies.

BTW, racism exists everywhere. But the Palestinian Arabs are much more racist. Do you think they would allow even ONE Jew in their state?

Edited September 27, 2015 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

It's also about the incredible naivete of thinking the conflict would be over if the 1967 borders will ever happen. Which, let's face it, it probably never will.

It will happen sooner or later because the just cause of the Palestinians is supported by a majority of the civilized countries of the world.

Israel needs to be involved or forget about it.

[Furryman]

Did I say there was a genocide? No. Don't put words in my mouth. Nor did I say they were equivalent.

There is no denying that Israel is indeed a violent, hyper-militarized and racist state.

I understand how they got there, and I empathize with them. It does not make the evil they do in the name of security any less abhorrent, just like the cause of freedom does not justify the abhorrent acts of Hamas.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Furryman

[Jingthing]

You said they turned into a mirror of Nazi Germany and that is a big lie. Not fooled by the spin.

Criticism Israel fairly. Fine.

But this pushing of saying they are like Nazi Germany is targeted at Jews hot buttons and it is hate speech, pure and simple.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Jingthing

[DaddyWarbucks]

I think it is horribly sad to see Israel turning into a mirror of the very thing most of the Israelis fled Europe to get away from, a hyper-militarized, violent and racist state.

What a load of BS. There is no genocide of Arabs by Israel. The Palestinian Arab population has increased greatly in the region. To suggest an equivalence of Israel and Nazi Germany is Judeophobic hate speech.

This is why Israel and her supporters should never listen to such hostile voices. And they don't.

If you actually want to be constructive, you've got to stop pushing the hate speech lies.

BTW, racism exists everywhere. But the Palestinian Arabs are much more racist. Do you think they would allow even ONE Jew in their state?

Hate speech?

Tell it to the UN where during the 2014-15 session of the General Assembly twenty resolutions were adopted criticizing Israel with only three on the rest of the world combined.

[Furryman]

You said they turned into a mirror of Nazi Germany and that is a big lie. Not fooled by the spin.

Yes a mirror, a reflection. They forced a population, defined by race, out of their homes and left them in refugee camps for half a century. They have enforced their version of order on that population with overwhelming violence and military power. They constantly encroach on the little bit of land left to that displaced population, with the hope of simply driving that population out permanently.

The analogy is clear, and fits perfectly.

[Jingthing]

I see you are doubling down on the Nazi equivalency hate speech. As I suspected. At least you are not trying to hide it now. Thank you for fully coming out. Personally not interested in further communication with people who push such neo-antisemitic tropes. Welcome to my ignore list.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Jingthing

[DaddyWarbucks]

You said they turned into a mirror of Nazi Germany and that is a big lie. Not fooled by the spin.

Yes a mirror, a reflection. They forced a population, defined by race, out of their homes and left them in refugee camps for half a century. They have enforced their version of order on that population with overwhelming violence and military power. They constantly encroach on the little bit of land left to that displaced population, with the hope of simply driving that population out permanently.

The analogy is clear, and fits perfectly.

Spot on.

All the rest is propaganda.

[Furryman]

I see you are doubling down on the Nazi equivalency hate speech. As I suspected.

Please point out where what I said was factually incorrect?

Besides how can it be hate speech when I have no hatred for any of them?

I have compassion for the victims of violence on both sides. I hold the perpetrators of that violence, again on both sides, in contempt.

My most fervent wish is for all of them to stop looking backwards and hoarding up hatred, and look forward to a better future.

I despair that that wish will probably never become a reality

Edited September 27, 2015 by Furryman

[Jingthing]

You said they turned into a mirror of Nazi Germany and that is a big lie. Not fooled by the spin.

Yes a mirror, a reflection. They forced a population, defined by race, out of their homes and left them in refugee camps for half a century. They have enforced their version of order on that population with overwhelming violence and military power. They constantly encroach on the little bit of land left to that displaced population, with the hope of simply driving that population out permanently.

The analogy is clear, and fits perfectly.

Spot on.

All the rest is propaganda.

OK, you too.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/behind-europe-anti-semitic-slurs-article-1.1891349

Behind Europe's anti-Semitic slurs

All this helps to explain why anti-Israel protesters, politicians and commentators are pathologically obsessed with the Jewishness of Israel.

A 2012 survey of Norwegians showed 38% of respondents deem Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to be the equivalent of Nazi policies toward Jews. Studies over the last decade of German attitudes toward Israel consistently reveal that nearly half (at times more than 50%) of Germans view Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to be comparable to the Nazis obliteration of Jews.

Put simply, the obscene parallel likening Israel to Nazi Germany has gained traction across Europe.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Jingthing

[Furryman]

Put simply, the obscene parallel likening Israel to Nazi Germany has gained traction across Europe.

The real obscenity is denying the truth of the similarity.

Similarity is not equivalency.

[DaddyWarbucks]

Yes a mirror, a reflection. They forced a population, defined by race, out of their homes and left them in refugee camps for half a century. They have enforced their version of order on that population with overwhelming violence and military power. They constantly encroach on the little bit of land left to that displaced population, with the hope of simply driving that population out permanently.

The analogy is clear, and fits perfectly.

Spot on.

All the rest is propaganda.

OK, you too.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/behind-europe-anti-semitic-slurs-article-1.1891349

Behind Europe's anti-Semitic slurs

All this helps to explain why anti-Israel protesters, politicians and commentators are pathologically obsessed with the Jewishness of Israel.

A 2012 survey of Norwegians showed 38% of respondents deem Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to be the equivalent of Nazi policies toward Jews. Studies over the last decade of German attitudes toward Israel consistently reveal that nearly half (at times more than 50%) of Germans view Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to be comparable to the Nazis obliteration of Jews.

Put simply, the obscene parallel likening Israel to Nazi Germany has gained traction across Europe.

If Israel's treatment of the Palestinians can't be compared to the Nazis, then what can it be compared to?

[Furryman]

Yes a mirror, a reflection. They forced a population, defined by race, out of their homes and left them in refugee camps for half a century. They have enforced their version of order on that population with overwhelming violence and military power. They constantly encroach on the little bit of land left to that displaced population, with the hope of simply driving that population out permanently.

The analogy is clear, and fits perfectly.

Spot on.

All the rest is propaganda.

OK, you too.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/behind-europe-anti-semitic-slurs-article-1.1891349

Behind Europe's anti-Semitic slurs

375]

All this helps to explain why anti-Israel protesters, politicians and commentators are pathologically obsessed with the Jewishness of Israel.

375]A 2012 survey of Norwegians showed 38% of respondents deem Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to be the equivalent of Nazi policies toward Jews. Studies over the last decade of German attitudes toward Israel consistently reveal that nearly half (at times more than 50%) of Germans view Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians to be comparable to the Nazis obliteration of Jews.

375]Put simply, the obscene parallel likening Israel to Nazi Germany has gained traction across Europe.

If Israel's treatment of the Palestinians can't be compared to the Nazis, then what can it be compared to?

South Africa under apartheid comes to mind.

[Jingthing]

Back to topic of stone throwing and the issue of Jews having the right to pray in JERUSALEM ... Abbas clearly being a total racist and provoking terror violence against Jews with these comments:

Filthy Jewish feet indeed. Abbas has a filthy racist MOUTH.

Just for some fun, you may also want to click on the "Japanese Zionist" video which appears at the end of Abbas's potty mouth speech.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Jingthing

[Morch]

What has 2000 years ago got to do with anything? Should all Euro Americans go home because the native Americans owned the north American continent 2,000 years ago?

Should the Norman descendents leave Britain and go back to France, etc etc etc?

Occupation of land 2,000 years ago confers nothing on present day peoples.

This argument can be played both ways - if history is deemed irrelevant (or at least, unrealistically reversible), then basically "ownership" claims boil down to conditions (economical, social, political...whatever), and having the capability (or will) to make things happen.

Of course, it has a lot to do with the perceived "statuette of limitations" of such things - 2000 years? 500 years? A hundred? And, of course, who decides? Most times this would be dependent on each side's agenda and narrative, rather than based on some agreed upon principals.

Stating the historical background (and yes, culture and religion are a part of that) is useful for better understanding of the connection between people and land. That said, it does not necessarily have to be a very compelling argument for the opposition and its supporters. Getting bogged down in historical (or more often, pseudo-historical) debate on these issues usually does little to promote conflict resolution, and more often leads to each side digging heels or even moving further away from any common ground. The situation would possibly be better served by a temporary suspension of historical justification, which might allow dealing with more tangible issues pertaining to the conflict. Little hope for that, though, even on TVF.

Most cases, these things are not resolved based on "rights", but in accordance with contemporary conditions. The "rights" are secondary, in the sense that they do not, by themselves, affect the wished for change.

Back on topic:

Throwing rocks at traffic is a life-endangering act. Those wishing to claim otherwise are welcome to try it at home. There were a few cases of this in Thailand - Ayutthaya and Bangkok spring to mind. If I remember correctly, no one in his right mind condoned or justified it at the time. Matter of fact, kinda recall a popular notion was to stone the culprits when caught...

There is not good way for Israel, international public-opinion-wise, to deal with the rock throwing issue on an operative level. The Israeli government recognizes this, but given that the allowing the current state of things to carry on is not acceptable, and with its voter base displeasure augmented by general public sentiment - it might not have a lot of maneuvering space (from their point of view). The bad news, for the Israelis, are that even with enhanced enforcement and stricter rules, this isn't very likely to go away. The newly announced candidate for the Chief of Police post would probably play a significant part in tackling these issues.

As for the Palestinian leadership(s?) - a bit like playing with fire. Abbas cannot. due to political considerations, publicly go against it or even attempt to calm things down. He's already in hot water over a documented action of the Palestinian security forces against Palestinian demonstrators (part of them security cooperation agreements and understandings, which survive each crisis), and his public support is not much even on a good day. Worse, it is not even certain that he can actually do much about it. Many of those partaking do not answer to the Fatah or the PA, and many are not even well organized. Therefore, Abbas attempts to weather the storm, using it as much as possible without sinking the boat. The Hamas position is supportive of rock throwing in general, and this is no exception. While outright mayhem is probably not on their wishlist for this winter, some strife with religious connotations is welcome. Trouble is that their control over these things is tenuous as well, and that the fanning of the flames might have undesired results.

Oh, and without pointing fingers, the page width format for this topic seems to be messed up (or it could be just me). Mods?

Obviously claims of rights because of 2000 year old ancestral ties are ridiculous, especially when the ancestry is questionable and most especially when the "other party" has obvious current ties.

What is germane is contemporary conventions and law. If Thailand was to decide that it wants half of Laos on the grounds that it used to "own" it, and Thailand followed through and invaded, it would be in breach of international law, and would (should) be stopped by the international community.

A group of people with claims of a collective identity and claims of ties to the land now known as Israel, accepted the international community's grant of a right to that land, despite it meaning that some indigenous people would be displaced. They accepted it. But they didn't really, because from the very begining of the state of Israel, some 70 years ago, they, the Israelis, have encroached outside the area designated them that they agreed to and displaced hundreds of thousands of indigenous people. That encroachment continues to this day. Less than 50 years ago they did a major incursion, capturing large amounts of land that was not theirs (as they had agreed in setting up their state) and displaced a million more. By propaganda and sheer bullying insistence, they have somehow got the world, and even the people they are dispossessing, to agree that that 1967 land grab can remain on their books. Despite international law. Yet even that was not enough...the land grabs continue. Why does the international community tolerate it? If it was any other state, it would not be tolerated.

Back to OP. Yes, throwing rocks can be fatal. Do you really think an oppressed and occupied people would worry that their rocks might kill one of the people who represent their oppressors? It truly is a David and Goliath scenario, where an embattled underdog, weak, with only a stone to sling, battles an immensely stronger and brutal opponent trying to take over his homeland. Freedom fighters throwing rocks against people whose security forces use bullets. Brave? Or just blindly angry at the injustices imposed upon them their entire lives? I think the latter, and I can not blame them for their anger.

Figured the first comment would be along these lines, TVF is, indeed, reassuringly predictable.

Without getting too sidetracked by the OT meta-issue, it exemplifies the gist of my post - under almost no circumstances is there to be an acceptance, or consideration of the other side's claim as legitimate or morally acceptable. The temporal criteria for arguments is arbitrary, and there would be as many negative descriptions of the opposition as possible.

My point was that this sort of adherence to the litany of woes, vile deeds and sins committed, is not very constructive.

Conflict resolution is difficult, and painting the other side as evil incarnate makes it harder. Who wants to make a deal with the Devil?

So again, this cuts both ways. There are similar stances and styles of delivery on both sides. Most of it unoriginal, dogmatic and netted out as a knee-jerk reaction. Or more like preaching, really, and at least on TVF it's converting the converted. We ought to code the repeated ad nauseam arguments, and make topics much easier to follow ("#31", "Counter with #14" etc...). Thing is that stepping off the pulpit might mean having do face a rather more tangled reality than most imagine, or care to accept. That would also mean less one-liners and emoticons....

As for the rock throwing (and again, disregarding the tone and the emotive imagery) - Palestinian rock throwing at Israeli security forces is probably acceptable within the context of resistance to the Israeli occupation. Specifically picking civilians and civilian vehicles as targets is a different matter (security vehicles are clearly marked). Most instances of the public outcry among the Israelis are in relation to the latter.

Some could raise the question of whether Israeli (illegal) settlers in the West Bank are considered civilians (as far as targeting them goes). Given that their presence, the constant friction and, in many cases, their own actions toward the Palestinians, contribute much to the situation - guess some would find it understandable. I would like to think that placed in a Palestinian rock thrower shoes, I'd make a different choice, but granted, easier said than done.

If rock throwing is to be seen as an acceptable form of resistance (while acknowledging it can be fatal) - why would there be an outrage over harsher measures taken to counter it? Doesn't match that well with Portraying rock throwers with a certain heroic romantic hue. If you can't take the heat etc.

And no, throwing a rock at a civilian vehicle is not bravery. Throwing rocks from a vantage point at unarmed worshipers is not bravery.

Anger, there sure is a lot of that, yes. Brings to mind a certain passage from Proverbs dealing with the relationship between the two.

But regardless of how one sees it - where does it lead?

The rock throwing, by itself, is not an existential threat to Israel. It does not affect a constructive change with Israeli public opinion. It does not earn the Palestinians much international support, except in cases where the perpetrator gets shot or is young and arrested (sadly, sometimes both). It damages the credibility of non-violent resistance claims. Saying it is a way to channel anger, ok, but that's not really a productive solution. It seems that the only thing it "does" is feed the cycle of violence - with the ever present risk of things getting out of hand and going too far for anyone's taste.

[Morch]

Of course, Dan.

The obsessive Israel demonizers continue to push the big lie that Jews are invading "white people" who have colonized Israel and oppressed the "non-white" people, when Jews are actually INDIGENOUS PEOPLE of Israel. The connection of the land of Israel to the Jewish people is for real and without question.

Diaspora Jews throughout the ages have said Next Year in Jerusalem.

Not Next Year in Boca Raton.

"Next year in Jerusalem" was the Zionist dream.

'Next year in Boca Raton" was the reality for most of them.

Except that it is part of a Jewish prayer which existed long before Zionism (and is said even by anti-Zionist Orthodox Jews).

[Scott]

Continued off-topic posting will result in suspensions.