In the 21st century, anti-Zionism means anti-Semitism

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
32,035
2,921
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
(April 8, 2022 / JNS) How many deadly terrorist attacks must take place inside of Israel before it starts being called another intifada? Thursday’s incident in which a Palestinian gunman killed three and wounded several others in downtown Tel Aviv left Israelis wondering about whether the fourth such atrocity in the last few weeks is merely the beginning of a new security crisis. But what this series of murders is called is less important than whether the world reacts as it always has to violence against Israel with more sympathy for the killers than their victims.

Yet even at times such as these, some American Jews neither empathize with the people of Israel nor support their right to self-determination or self-defense. The publicity given to the decision of a Chicago synagogue to officially declare its house of worship to be dedicated to the cause of anti-Zionism might have made it an outlier to the more than 80 percent of American Jewry that polls say thinks that “caring about Israel” is essential to being Jewish. But the attention given Tzedek Chicago, as the synagogue is named, is just the latest instance in which the hostility of Jews on the far-left to Israel’s existence has been illustrated.

Its members and those who share their views claim that the existence of Israel is an injustice. They subscribe to a version of Judaism that doesn’t merely discard some of the religious beliefs and practices that most Jews have long held sacred—as is the case with the majority of American Jews who identify with the liberal denominations. Both Reform and Conservative Judaism officially subscribe to Zionism. But portions of the Reconstructionist movement and other offshoots of non-Orthodoxy Jewry go further and fetishize the Diaspora. Theirs is a Judaism stripped of its particularity and its roots in the Land of Israel and Jewish peoplehood, and which consists solely of universalist beliefs that bizarrely seem to hold that all peoples have basic rights but the Jews.

Anti-Zionism had considerable support until 1948 because many Jews feared that the creation of a Jewish state would undermine their right to equal citizenship. But the Holocaust proved the need for a Jewish state, and rather than undermine Jewish rights, Israel’s creation made all Jews stand up taller while also inspiring most Americans to greater respect for their Jewish neighbors.

While Reform’s 1885 “Pittsburgh Platform” was officially anti-Zionist, the movement evolved in the 20th century, and the two greatest leaders of American Zionism in the first half of the 20th century were Reform rabbis—Abba Hillel Silver and Stephen Wise (who is unfortunately better remembered for his silence and opposition to efforts to rescue European Jews during the Holocaust).


Support for Zionism became normative among American Jewry, which rallied to the Jewish state’s defense during the crises of 1948, 1967 and 1973. But the problem was that the tribal and sectarian nature of Israel seemed to contradict the universalist and non-sectarian ideals of many Americans. That was especially true among Jews whose political liberalism made them more likely to take a dim view of a country founded on the notion of defending a specific people rather than one that viewed its mission in broader terms.

Seen in that light, the small but not entirely insignificant comeback of anti-Zionism in the last generation is not surprising.

Though anti-Zionist groups like Jewish Voices for Peace and IfNotNow don’t have mass followings, their foothold on college campuses has begun expanding into the rest of the community. Support in the leftist base of the Democratic Party for toxic ideas like intersectionality, which analogizes the Palestinian war on Israel with the struggle for civil rights in the United States, is growing. The ability of ideologues to promote critical race theory indoctrination into schools and corporate settings also provides a platform for anti-Zionists. That concept illogically labels Jews and their state as beneficiaries of “white privilege” and therefore oppressors by definition.

In practice, this creates a justification for anti-Zionism and those who believe in singling out the Jewish state for discriminatory BDS boycotts. It also provides a rationale for denying to Jews the same rights no one would think of denying to any other people, thus giving a pass to behavior that is indistinguishable from anti-Semitism.

This matters because Jews who support anti-Zionism provide intellectual cover and legitimacy for those who aren’t content to merely talk about a world without an Israel but to inflict violence that seeks to advance that perverted goal. And that is why the contrast between recent events in Israel and the virtue-signaling in Chicago stands out.

In the past, even if they condemned acts of terrorism against Israel, the international press and supposedly friendly Western governments have always wound up blaming the victims in one way or another. But those who claim, as some are doing now, that the actions of the killers were an understandable, if regrettable, reaction to the “occupation” or to some other item from a laundry list of alleged Israeli sins are once again misunderstanding the nature of the conflict.

As the Palestinians have made clear throughout the last century, their problem isn’t with what Israel does but the mere fact of its existence. Having seen them reject numerous two-state-solution deals over the last generation, support for such a scheme among Israelis has dwindled.

The idea of more than 7 million Israeli Jews giving up the sovereign state that protects their national existence is madness. That’s not just because the invasion of Ukraine illustrates what happens when hostile neighbors feel empowered to attempt to destroy a country. It’s also the lesson that even a cursory knowledge of Jewish history imparts to its students. For 20 centuries, Jewish powerlessness and the lack of sovereignty over its ancient homeland was a prescription for degradation, oppression and slaughter that culminated in the Holocaust.

Viewed with hindsight, debates among Jews about the merits of a Jewish state prior to the Holocaust seem foolish. But with many thinking that a Jewish state was a pipe dream while establishing rights for religious minorities in countries where anti-Semitism was prevalent was the priority, these arguments make more sense. But the slaughter of 6 million men, women and children was the final proof that Jewish powerlessness could no longer be tolerated, and that the right of Jews to their ancient homeland had to be reasserted.

Still, anti-Semitism and intolerance for Jewish power didn’t die with the Nazi regime; it remains inextricably tied to Palestinian national identity and Islamist ideology. It also found a home on the intersectional left. As they have proven again and again, the Palestinian goal is not stripping Israel of the territories it won in a defensive war in 1967. They will not recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state no matter where its borders are drawn.

Those Jews who now call themselves anti-Zionist are not, as some claim, advocating for a more just world or the redress of Arab grievances. A world without Israel cannot be achieved by any means but by waging war on its citizens, and taking their freedom and rights from them by force. Whether they admit it or not, these anti-Zionists are taking the side of those who seek to eliminate the one Jewish state on the planet by the same violent means and hateful ideas that have always been the toolkit of anti-Semites. The members of Tzedek Chicago may claim that their synagogue stands for justice, but far from representing an idealist strain of Judaism or support for human rights, the leftist war on Israel is an expression of Jew-hatred.

As Israelis mourn their dead and continue to defend themselves, the reaction of the rest of American Jewry to this anti-Zionist synagogue and all who share its views should be one of contempt, not curiosity or tolerance.

Jonathan S. Tobin is editor-in-chief of JNS (Jewish News Syndicate).

In the 21st century, anti-Zionism means anti-Semitism (jns.org)
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
32,035
2,921
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
‘Anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitism,’ Rules German Judge
Ruling against participants in pro-Gaza rally notes that ‘Zionist’ is really just a code word for ‘Jew’
By | February 3, 2015



A German judge last week equated condemnation of Zionism with anti-Semitism, undercutting the arguments of many who claim that hostile criticism of Israel is not the same as hating the Jews.

In judging the case of 24-year-old Taylan Can, a German citizen of Turkish decent known for is anti-Israel activism, Judge Gauri Sastry refused to allow the defendant to hide behind the notion of legitimate criticism of the Jewish state.

Can was ultimately convicted for incitement against an ethnic minority for his role in a July 18, 2014 demonstration in Essen, Germany, where he and others used the term “Zionist” to stir up anger against Israel and local Jewish residents.

At his hearing, Can insisted he was not an anti-Semite, and was merely opposed to the policies of the State of Israel. But Judge Sastry was having none of it. Die Welt quoted her as clarifying that “‘Zionist’ is the language of anti-Semites, the code for ‘Jew.’”

It was likely that particular portion of Judge Sastry’s ruling would be overturned when Can appealed to higher courts, but European Jewish groups nevertheless praised the unprecedented and bold decision that had publicly unmasked one of the more dangerous lies of our times.

PHOTO: Pro-Gaza rally in Essen, Germany last summer

'Anti-Zionism is Anti-Semitism,' Rules German Judge - Israel Today
 
  • Like
Reactions: RobI

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,670
6,839
113
A complex subject- the American Jews, especially the last couple of generations.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
So not willing to discuss the facts?

You keep going on about self determination being a universal right yet here you are arguing that the Jewish majority in Israel should have that right. Sounds pretty much like you think some religions should be treated differently than others. Then again, you also deny Palestinians right to self determination by trying to push them into a One State peace that Palestinians overwhelmingly hate.



p.s. Canada's definition of antisemitism


Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

  • Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
  • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
  • Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
  • Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
  • Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
  • Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
  • Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
  • Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
  • Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
  • Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
  • Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
So not willing to discuss the facts?

  • Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
The facts:
I support all people having the right to self determination.
You don't.

Israel's basic law states that the state only gives Jews the right to self determination in Israel.
By your own terms that makes Israel a racist endeavour that refuses to give Palestinian or 'Israeli Arabs' living under their rule the right to self determination.
That means you just admitted, again, that Israel is apartheid.

The Knesset (Israel’s parliament) passed the Basic Law on July 19, 2018. The Basic Law recognizes that “the right to national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish People.” (Basic Law § 1(c).

Israel’s occupation of Palestinian Territory is ‘apartheid’: UN rights expert
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
32,035
2,921
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
palestinian movement is anti-semitism

Antisemitic Speaker at Duke University Mocks Jewish Students



When asked what would happen to Israelis if Palestinians took all the land “from the river to the sea” during Duke’s anti-Israel week, keynote speaker Mohammed El-Kurd replied “I don’t care. I truly, sincerely, don’t give a f…” The audience roared its approval. Clearly Duke University’s antisemitism problem is going from bad to worse.

Who is Mohammed El-Kurd? Despite his name he claims to be Palestinian. He has an extensive Canary Mission rap sheet detailing his hatred of Israel, Jews, America, the police, his adoration for terrorism, spreading misinformation, denial of Jewish history, and more. He is notorious for quotes such as “Zionists have an unquenchable thirst for Palestinian blood”. In his book Rifqa he claims that Israelis “harvest organs of the martyred, feed their warriors our own.”

Who decided to pay El-Kurd and put him on the university’s stage, to speak before Duke students and faculty? Duke has a history of hosting “Israel Apartheid Week” (IAW) in which lies about Israel and Jews are promulgated in order to destroy the world’s only Jewish state. In February, despite student concerns about inviting such an antisemitic speaker, the Duke Student Government voted—without a quorum— to spend $16,000 on IAW, which included $5,000 designated for El-Kurd. Ironically the vote also came soon after the DSG voted for the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Association) definition of antisemitism. Apparently the DSG doesn’t understand IHRA since they violated it so readily.


When the North Carolina Coalition (NCCI) learned about the plans for El-Kurd, we immediately became concerned for Jewish and Zionist students on campus. We warned Duke University that hosting Mohammed El-Kurd would create a hostile atmosphere for Jewish students on campus. NCCI and others sent letters and made phone calls to Duke president Vincent Price, Provost Sally Kornbluth, and the Office of Institutional Equity expressing our concern. CAMERA on Campus wrote a petition which garnered more than 2000 signatures on short notice, asking Duke to halt his funding. The response from the administration was a determined, deliberate silence that speaks volumes.

Just before the El Kurd talk, about 10 brave Duke students stood outside the auditorium, handing out fliers. These included quotes from El Kurd’s blood libel against Jews and explained that his hateful rhetoric incites violence and threatens Jewish students.

Once the program started, and El-Kurd went up to talk, he was met with thundering applause from most of the audience. He started by mocking the fliers due to content but also “terrible graphic design.” He crumbled up the paper in front of the audience which howled approval. He mentioned the student who had written in the Duke Chronicle expressing her concern for student safety in light of his antisemitic speech. He pretended to get out a miniature violin to ridicule her feelings. The audience roared with laughter. He was asked what does “Palestinian liberation” look like? “We want our land back from the river to the sea” (wild applause), he wants refugees in camps to return (wild applause), he wants (terrorist) prisoners to be released—again enthusiastic applause.

El-Kurd has done well for himself as a professional victim. He whined about his circumstances which included speaking before Congress at the age of 11, attending university in the US, and of course his current book tour where he can earn $5000 a pop to speak while wearing a suit.

Of course, El-Kurd has copious free speech opportunities in America, but Duke doesn’t have to pay for his hate-mongering, nor is it obligated to put him on stage. Clearly, Duke is fostering a hostile atmosphere for Jewish and Zionist students. It’s time for the administration to stand up against antisemitism, and to find the backbone to protect students’ Title VI Civil rights.

Antisemitic Speaker at Duke University Mocks Jewish Students | Amy Rosenthal | The Blogs (timesofisrael.com)
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
The facts:
I support all people having the right to self determination.
You don't.
...
Yet you have obsessively been arguing that Israel shouldn't exist and demanding the Palestinians ignore their own self-determination because you want them to become Israeli. Only one of us supports a Two State peace (as endorsed by Canada and the UN).


And of course you want to ignore the topic of the close overlap between anti-zionism and anti-semitism as it would force you to admit that you quest for human rights takes a break when discussing Israel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GerryB

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
Yet you have obsessively been arguing that Israel shouldn't exist
I have never said such a thing.
Its sad you have to lie.

But I guess its bound to happen after you make a big fuss about claiming to be all for the right of self determination except when it comes to Palestinians.
Really does show your support of Apartheid doesn't it?
I mean you couldn't even comment and say that you support the right of self determination for Palestinians under Israeli rule and don't agree with the basic law.

That's apartheid in a nutshell, isn't it?
You claim to support human rights but when not when they are applied to Palestinians?
Nope, all you can do is change the subject.

Support equal rights, end apartheid basketcase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jolly_Penguin

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
I have never said such a thing.
...
Funny when you say I'm the one lying then go into an obsessive rant about your own warped version of reality.

Yet you have spent tens of thousands of posts claiming Israeli is illegitimate. You also have been very clear that you don't support either Palestinian or Israeli self-determination. The people on both sides overwhelmingly hate the idea of a One State peace yet you keep demanding they ignore their own will because your western elitism.

My support of a Two State peace is explicitly because I recognize that both sides have a right to self determination as long as they respect the other side has the same right. Your Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and even some in Fatah oppose the idea of a Two State peace because it would mean Israel continuing to exist and are they constantly praising terror attacks like the Fatah member who shot up a restaurant this past week. And I can guarantee that you will shortly be posting numbers of dead Palestinian attackers as if they were really innocent civilians.

And the Canadian government agrees that many anti-zionist statements qualify as anti-semitic.


p.s. How can you claim to support equal rights when completely ignoring what Palestinians and Israelis want? Or by equal rights, do you mean they both have the right to do what you demand they do?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
My support of a Two State peace is explicitly because I recognize that both sides have a right to self determination as long as they respect the other side has the same right.
Stop lying about my views, its boring.

Israel has enacted a Basic Law that specifically gives the right of self determination only to Jews and not Palestinians/Israeli Arabs.
This is the apartheid one state solution that is already in effect.

There has been no peace talks for 8 years and every single Israeli PM in the last decade has stated they would not surrender land to create a two state solution.

The one state apartheid solution is in place.

This is what you keep defending.

The Knesset (Israel’s parliament) passed the Basic Law on July 19, 2018. The Basic Law recognizes that “the right to national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish People.” (Basic Law § 1(c).

Israel’s occupation of Palestinian Territory is ‘apartheid’: UN rights expert
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
Stop lying about my views, its boring.
...
Are you saying you haven't been endlessly pushing a One State peace that both Palestinians and Israelis hate?

Self-determination means that Israeli shave the right to remain Israelis (which the vast majority of Arab Israelis want) and the right for Palestinians not to be forced into becoming Israelis.


p.s. the weakest part of your fake ethical argument is that instead of actually arguing for both sides to engage in real talks, you demand Israel unilaterally impose a solution Palestinians hate and make excuses for Palestinian factions like Hamas who reject the concept of peace in its entirety.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
Are you saying you haven't been endlessly pushing a One State peace that both Palestinians and Israelis hate?

Self-determination means that Israeli shave the right to remain Israelis (which the vast majority of Arab Israelis want) and the right for Palestinians not to be forced into becoming Israelis.


p.s. the weakest part of your fake ethical argument is that instead of actually arguing for both sides to engage in real talks, you demand Israel unilaterally impose a solution Palestinians hate and make excuses for Palestinian factions like Hamas who reject the concept of peace in its entirety.
I'm not pushing anything. My preference is the one state solution with equal rights. But I'm not 'pushing' that on anyone.


That article also says:
In a poll conducted in 2020 by Tel Aviv University and the PSR, 42% of Israeli right-wing voters openly supported “an apartheid state” as a solution to the conflict, while only 13% supported one democratic state, with equal rights for all.

As well as:
Two-thirds of the public (65%) approve and 27% disapprove of the assessment that Israel is an apartheid state.
 

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 16, 2007
32,035
2,921
113
Toronto, Ontario
canadianmale.wordpress.com
Under Federal Scrutiny, NYU Law School Faces Uproar Over Anti-Semitism
The school is legally bound to confront anti-Semitism on campus. Jewish students are still waiting.


New York University School of Law may be legally obligated to punish some of its star students after nearly a dozen student groups signed a statement that defended terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians and bemoaned the "Zionist grip on the media."

The statement, drafted by NYU Law School’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine, has elicited harassment complaints from Jewish students who say that the letter—and some of the responses it sparked from students—constituted vicious anti-Semitic attacks.


"The Zionist grip on the media is omnipresent," the statement read. "Palestinians are not obligated to engage in racialized ‘nonviolence’ theory and wait around for a United Nations action that will never come as their homes are taken from them."

Several students who signed and organized the statement are attending the law school on scholarship as part of the Root-Tilden-Kern Program, widely considered the most prestigious public interest law scholarship in the country. The scholarship’s winners have gone on to hold federal office: They include Lamar Alexander, a U.S. senator and former secretary of education, and Jenny Yang, who served as chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission during former president Barack Obama’s second term.

Current scholars include Zaynab Said, who signed on behalf of NYU’s Black Allied Law Students Association; Maya Goldman, who signed on behalf of the Disablility Allied Law Students Association; Yosmin Badie, who sits on the board of NYU's Students for Justice in Palestine; and Allison Hrabar, who signed with the valediction, "from the river to the sea"—a call for the elimination of Israel.


NYU may have no choice but to punish these students because the university in 2020 agreed to adopt a zero-tolerance policy toward anti-Semitism as part of a settlement with the Department of Education’s civil rights office, which was investigating a string of anti-Semitic incidents at the elite scool. The agreement obligates NYU to "take all necessary actions, including pursuant to its student discipline process," to address anti-Semitism on campus. Should the Biden administration decide to enforce the terms of that agreement, inaction could jeopardize NYU’s federal funding under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

The law school told students on Tuesday that it was investigating the harassment complaints "as required by our policies." But some students doubt the investigation will amount to much.

"Blatantly anti-Semitic remarks can be made in public with zero consequences at this law school," said Gary Dreyer, the president of NYU’s Law Students for Israel. "This has gone on for years, and it has only gotten worse."

Under Federal Scrutiny, NYU Law School Faces Uproar Over Anti-Semitism (freebeacon.com)

SO called Pro-Palestinian Movements has nothing to do with the Palestinians people. they are terrorist apologists, anti-jewish hate mongers and many like that "Partisan Girl or Syrian Girl" have direct ties to neo Nazis and white supremacists
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
I'm not pushing anything. ...
Your entire posting history(s) speaks otherwise.

If you had any interest in a productive peace, you would be encouraging both sides to negotiate. Instead you want an imposed solution that will satisfy no one and keep making excuses for Palestinians who reject the concept of peace.

BTW. that same polling organization has 57% of Palestinians opposing peace talks and 44% thinking armed action is the best way forward, and their most damning question which you refuse to even discuss...
1650151013677.png
The fact that this is even considered a reasonable question to ask speaks volumes.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
And just a reminder that your obsession about Israel is simply to avoid examining your own views about Jews.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GerryB

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
Your entire posting history(s) speaks otherwise.

If you had any interest in a productive peace, you would be encouraging both sides to negotiate. Instead you want an imposed solution that will satisfy no one and keep making excuses for Palestinians who reject the concept of peace.

BTW. that same polling organization has 57% of Palestinians opposing peace talks and 44% thinking armed action is the best way forward, and their most damning question which you refuse to even discuss...
View attachment 138688
The fact that this is even considered a reasonable question to ask speaks volumes.
Its an occupation. Negotiations mean shit while their is an occupying army with snipers, missiles, tanks and walls.

But for interest, lets note what has been tried.
Negotiations - 20 years of Oslo Accords only resulted in the pretence of talks while Israel established 'facts on the ground' through colonization of Palestine.
Peaceful protests - the Great March of return saw one year of weekly protests and Israel using snipers to kill 200 and injure 14,000
Boycotts - BDS has had some success though you still call it 'antisemitic'. The multiple reports of apartheid are really the only way BDS has the power to be successful.
Military resistance - last year's attack on Al Aqsa resulted in Gaza using indiscriminate weapons and Israel's disproportionate response resulted in global attention and protests.

So given those attempts, which one do you think they should consider?
(I know, you want another 20 years of settler colonization covered by pretend peace talks)

Give those options I back boycotts as being the most peaceful and the most likely to succeed with the designation of Israel as apartheid.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
91,806
22,230
113
And just a reminder that your obsession about Israel is simply to avoid examining your own views about Jews.
I fully support peaceful, non-racist Jews who respect basic human rights like those in:
B'tselem
IJVCanada
Ifnotnow
Breaking the Silence

Feel free to join those against racism and hate.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
I fully support peaceful, non-racist Jews who respect basic human rights like those in:
...
While staying silent on the extremist, religious and hateful motivations of groups like Hamas and their complete rejection of the concept of peace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GerryB

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,575
6,753
113
...Negotiations mean shit ...
Thank you for putting to rest your claims of supporting peace.


And of course you are accepting that 44% or Palestinians in their latest polling supports attacks on civilians inside Israel. And considering the attacks that have been going on recently, it shows that a chunk of Palestinians are willing to act on it. Hamas has been openly praising attacks like the guy who shot up a restaurant calling it a heroic operation and even members of the Fatah leadership have been praising them. But your complaints about these attacks is typically that attackers were killed in the act or arrested and usually end up quoting those killed in the act as innocent victims of the 'evil' IDF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GerryB
Toronto Escorts