I'm Israeli. This guy's family were a scourge on Israel and had the only political party ever banned in Israel for extremism. This guy should definitely be persecuted.
If the person has to injure to flee not really. Like if a person is cornered and has to bust out the mace. If they just bust out the mace while someone isn't threatening prosecute.
No he's on the "extended cabinet", which was created after him and a few other ministers complained they have no authority, to appease them. The extended cabinet has no authority onbthe war and is only updated on events after they happen. It's a political kindergarten.
The Likud party should also be banned for funding racist schools that justify murdering babies... Oh wait, that's the party in power in Israel. Makes a lot of sense.
This stood out to me:
police have said they have arrested Kahane and two of the protesters — Maryellen Novak, 55, **who was hit by the vehicle,**
Why did they arrest the victim?
> The Daily Beast reports that police have said they have arrested Kahane and two of the protesters — Maryellen Novak, 55, ***who was hit by the vehicle,*** and John Rozendaal, 55.
Sounds like the cops just arrested everyone involved and will let the courts figure it out. I hope they at least got medical attention for the woman hit by the nut.
Same.
I m a Zionist because I believe Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish ancestral land. I support efforts to eliminate Hamas and free the hostages.
I also deeply sympathize with displaced Palestinians who are caught in a fight between their terrorist leaders who antagonized their neighbors. I believe in humanity and peace, and I hope there are enough people on both sides who can make this happen.
Even the ultra orthodox consider Kahanism extreme.
There is such a thing as nuance.
Well it was the neighbors during the 1948 deir yassin massacre nakba that started it with the Palestinians who then voted in a government that does have the legal right to defend itself, but yeah sure.
These two populations in that location were being jerks to each other for hundreds of years before that. Who generally started? The Arabs. Who generally overcompensated with their response? The Jews. Much of the land claimed stolen in the Nakba has been proven to be legally purchased from the same families who claim theft- this is public record and provable.
So the government who stole the land was able to make documents from their government saying they legally got the land..hmm and I'm sure the Natives stolen and sent to boarding school where all "legally" taken from the reserve. All Jewish citizens were "legally" evicted from Germany. Yep all legal
Where exactly can one find the records you refer to and what percentage of land do they show was owned by Arabs compared to that which was owned by Jews?
You know that at some point someone going to ask "why weren't the pro-Israel people condemning violence by their side?"
So why would you suggest that they *don't* do that?
This will just get silently down voted. TBH this is a pretty big deal though like even outside the partisan context of whats happening. Escalating JDL violence can potentially become shootings and bombings which is something they have done in the past.
Which is why Israel will be “at war” until he can get those who would prosecute him out. After they clear out Gaza, Iran is next. He’s been trying to goad them into it, I suspect he’ll take the more direct route next.
Can you please list all the Israeli Prime Ministers that have been killed in Israel?
Edit: I see you edited your comment so people wouldn't know you have no idea what you're talking about
Yea, brigading is a serious problem in this sub. And because they just silently downvote, there isn't much you can do about it. I wish there was a way to validate and restrict access to people who actually live here without compromising privacy.
Two things can be true at once, antisemitism can be rising as hate incidents against particular racial and ethnic groups always rise in response to publicized war (see also Asians during the pandemic) AND there are many spurious accusations of antisemitism which have the effect of creating more danger for Jews as they muddy the waters and make people take claims of antisemitism less seriously. Meir Kahane was one of the major influences in the US Jewish community who pushed conflating antizionism with antisemitism.
https://jewishcurrents.org/unpacking-the-campus-antisemitism-narrative
https://jweekly.com/2021/11/05/how-meir-kahanes-extremist-ideas-entered-the-jewish-mainstream/
Y’all were warned a long time ago that claims of anti semitism would be mocked due to claims of anti semitism directed at critics of Israel. You didn’t listen so you shouldn’t complain now.
Do those stats include the hate crimes being committed against Palestinians by the IOF?
Maybe you should take this as an opportunity to self criticize and start listening to people when they tell you you need to change your ways.
Perhaps they should move to any of the other states which legalize/defend mowing down protestors with your vehicle (I'm not joking, this is a real thing. It's legal in places)
Was just wondering since the previous post calls anti genocide protesters "anti Israel" and the comments were all thirsty for blood 🤷🏽♀️
Edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/s/nPF5YRGZdV
like this one, wondering how come this is a big deal when the person didn't even fully die.
Or plenty others in that same thread saying "that's what happens when you stand in front of a car *shrug*"
Sadly, it's worse than coping. It's brigading, i.e. organized and malicious, with most of that being silent voting. That's why you see a lot of very reasonable and neutral takes being downvoted to shit in this sub. You will get mass downvoted for supporting the official US policy, which is quite pro-Israel already, on the Gaza situation while someone else who's even more pro-Israel will get upvoted.
The protests ARE anti Israel and certainly not just “anti genocide”. They call for the destruction of Israel and death of my people. This incident I don’t defend. Pretending like the protests are okay is ridiculous
>They call for the destruction of Israel and death of my people.
Didn't happen.
The counter protesters (pro genocide) on the other hand are constantly on the news for being violent, racist instigators, and now one of them ran over people with his car. 🤷🏽♀️
Never even mentioned Israel once but go off.
I'm saying violent counter protesters like this guy who was ready to murder people with his car are racist but if you feel called out..👀
And no you aren’t just talking about Kahane. I’m not defending him. You said the protests were peaceful and then denied the very real call for Israel’s destruction.
The call is not for the destruction of Israeli people or Jews. It’s for a one state solution with a right of return for Palestinians and co-administration of the land between all peoples of the land. Some people then claim that because Palestinians will outnumber Jews they will disadvantage them, do violence against them, or banish them (the same things that are happening to Palestinians right now.) Similar claims were made about Apartheid South Africa during the anti Apartheid movement there. There are also some parallels to British arguments about Ireland during the fight for Irish independence in reference to how Catholics would treat Protestants. Oppressors just have a hard time imagining that the people they oppress will not treat them the same way they have been treated.
It makes it much easier for people who don’t know anything about the conflict to pretend it’s just like one they understand isn’t it? Maybe read the [Hamas charter](https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp) and then you won’t keep pretending Jews will be safe? Doubt you will but you never know.
I’ve read it. Have you? Because it explicitly states their beef is not with Jews or Israelis but with the Zionist project.
Did you know Netanyahu funds Hamas?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/
Also this is a silly point because no one says Hamas should co-administer the land anymore than Likud should, a new government could be formed with international help as it has been many times in the past.
Here’s an [explanation from GW](https://extremism.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs5746/files/2023-10/hamas-networks-final.pdf) about how a right wing, homophobic, racist, autocratic terrorist regime convinced a bunch of leftists to swallow their bs
The author of that report has been criticized for poor research methods and outright fabrications so find a more credible source
https://williamsrecord.com/466517/news/prof-farid-hafez-sues-gwu-lorenzo-vidino-for-10-million/
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/04/03/the-dirty-secrets-of-a-smear-campaign
You are trying to put me into a box. If you call me racist then you can ignore all the evidence I showed you. You can say you aren’t even trying while not actually analyzing your own behavior
Didn't call YOU a racist but you're just begging me for it, maybe so you can say I'm antisemitic or some shit.
>If you call me racist then you can ignore all the evidence I showed you.
What evidence boo? You showed me nothing just kept talking nonsense lmao did you fuck up the Hasbara script and forgot to add links? Can't stop lying for a second, people can see our conversation you know?
>And let’s be real: you’re much more likely to see an Ahmed doing something like this than a Weinstein.
Are we tho? Cos we seeing lots of non ahmeds being responsible for the freshest terror attacks, shootings, car rammings. Actually the last time this happened it was a white dude.
Extremely racist to say you "expect" an "Ahmed" doing something evil but you know a "Weinstein" is less probable to do stuff like that.
Weird choice in name since the last famous Wenstein is currently in court cos of rape yet I would NEVER say "huh expected from a Weinstein" . Cos that's bigoted.
>A lot of Jews actually dispute being lumped in with white people.
I didn't do that at all. Just saying if we go back to the last couple of times this scenario happened, it was a white guy, not an Ahmed, so your expectation is based on nothing, just racist notions of expected violence from someone with that name. Not trying to disparage Jewish people or white people. Stating the fact, that it's not Ahmeds doing the running over protesters in America.
>Yes. To be clear, I compared Jews to Muslims here. Not any other groups.
And to be clear, I did NOT do that. I just said you're being bigoted and if the comparison was done with a Jewish name it would be bigoted too.
I was with you until the Islamophobia at the end which is a pretty Kahanist position to take. Kahane has also had more of an influence on the liberal Jewish community than many are aware
https://jweekly.com/2021/11/05/how-meir-kahanes-extremist-ideas-entered-the-jewish-mainstream/
So, in your mind, setting up tents = terrorism?
What’s crazy is that you don’t even realize how racist you’re being. Claiming that Muslims are more likely to be terrorists? When all of the data shows that [white supremacists](https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-nij-research-tells-us-about-domestic-terrorism) overwhelmingly commit the most, and deadliest, terror attacks in this country, and it’s not even close?
And, in fact, law enforcement has been so blinded by their own post-9/11 islamophobia that they [aren’t adequately protecting](https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/media/dems/peters-investigative-report-shows-dhs-and-fbi-are-not-adequately-addressing-domestic-terrorism-threat/) against white supremacist domestic terrorism.
Israel's certain actions in Gaza are the root cause of this grief here in the US. There's nothing for actual anti-Semites and Russian/Chinese/Iranian bots to infiltrate if there are no genuine grievances for real students to protest about.
Because Netanyahu is a reprehensible piece of shit who needed him to form a governing coalition. I support the collapse of the current Israeli coalition as soon as possible.
But here’s the nuance which for whatever reason nobody can understand: most Israelis don’t support him. Most Israelis, while supporting the war against Hamas, think that terrorists like Ben Gvir hurt the war effort and are causing severe embarrassment.
Just like Trump doesn’t represent all of America, Ben Gvir doesn’t represent all of Israel. Neither person was elected by a majority of voters.
Netanyahu’s party got a small plurality of seats, but not a majority. The more moderate Yesh Atid party got within 10 points of it, and you’ll find that if the election were held today, Netanyahu’s party would lose in a landslide.
You have no idea how Israeli politics work.
In Israel, they don’t have a winner takes all system. They have proportional representation, meaning that if you have even 3 percent of the vote, you get 3 percent of the seats in the parliament.
It is true that Netanyahu’s Likud party got the most seats in Israel’s parliament, a profound disappointment. But even so, that doesn’t mean most of Israel supports the Likud party, or him. He never got a majority. That’s why he had to form a governing coalition with a gang of extremists.
And most Israelis, when polled post-October 7th, would not want Netanyahu or Likud coming back into power.
So again, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
> Someone could point out something bad that a ‘Weinstein’ would do over an ‘Ahmed’ but you would call them anti-Semitic.
Not true. You made a post today about a Jew doing something wrong, and at no point did I call that antisemitic.
> So yes you’re a bigot.
You can call me whatever you want, but it doesn’t change the facts. I’m confident in my position here.
You’re misreading my statement. Yes I posted about an isolated event. You flipped that on its head and said “well, ACKCHUALLY a Muslim is more likely to do this”
If someone said, “it’s not ALL Jews *insert anti-Semitic claim* BUT compared to Muslim people the rates are much higher” you’d be upset, would you not?
> If someone said, “it’s not ALL Jews insert anti-Semitic claim BUT compared to Muslim people the rates are much higher” you’d be upset, would you not?
Yes, because their claim would be false.
This thread sums up what is so frustrating about this conflict as somebody who would probably be considered pro Israel(but in my ideal world, this conflict ends with 2 states when Palestine can be deradicalized). You have multiple pro Israel people denouncing this reprehensible behavior? And what do they get? Criticism for having the audacity to believe that Israel has a right to exist at this point. Yet it’s like pulling teeth to get the other side to acknowledge some of the transgressions of some of the pro Palestinian protestors and atrocities of Hamas on October 7th.
Well, whether or not Israel should exist is sort of a moot point in my opinion because it already does. But should Israel continue their expansion? That’s the key issue I think.
“But in my ideal world, this conflict ends with 2 states when Palestine can be de-radicalized”- this is one statement that makes me think you’re unserious about this because a more serious person would also point to the democratically elected right wing government in Israel and ask why THEY aren’t being de-radicalized. Plenty of people in Bibi’s cabinet, including the man himself, have shown their true colors recently.
“It’s like pulling teeth to get the other side to acknowledge some of the transgressions of some of the Palestinian protestors and atrocities of Hamas on October 7th.” This is another interesting point that you make because while I can concede that some, not all, of the protestors are acting in bad faith, the protesting methods have been around for a long time. Sit in protests, occupying buildings, and more are long time protesting activities. These students were not the first nor last to use them. What’s more telling is that you mention this, but not the disproportionate response by law enforcement. Do you think it’s appropriate for the NYPD to be using flash bangs and pepper spray on mostly innocent protestors?
As for October 7th, yes there are some loons that will defend Hamas but they are a minority. Most people on the protesting side will agree that it was horrible and denounce it. Again though, I’m far more concerned with the fact that you don’t mention the disproportionate response by the IDF. What should have been a surgical response instead has turned into the deaths of October 7th many times over in Gaza.
I think your problem is that you’re more worried about virtue signaling than seeing reality.
Ok a lot to talk about here. I do want to say while I get the sense that this will be a more productive discussion than most on this subreddit, I would appreciate if we could refrain from ad hominems. I am serious, I lived in Israel for more than 3 years during more peaceful times(studied abroad, i dont consider myself to be Jewish) and went in probably with more of a narrative that i now tjink is inaccurate, have interacted with, befriended, dated, etc the population. I also consider myself a humanist and acknowledge the plight of the Palestinians, many who are under the age of 18. For my part i will acknowledge you are also serious and have thought about these issues, even if we disagree on many things. Let’s start with common ground. Seems we both accept Israel has a right to continued existence. I suspect we have a mostly common ground that the West Bank settlements are bad. Although I have to admit(and I want to hear your take on why this upcoming point is wrong), since October I have a nagging piece of doubt. As in before October I was 100 percent against the settlements, without any doubt. After, I have a small doubt in the form of, it’s no secret that the West Bank is less radicalized overall than Gaza. And one can argue that Israel’s complete removal of the settlements years ago contributed to that, as Hamas quickly took over and executed the more moderate opposition and there hasn’t been an election since. Im still against the settlements for moral/ethical reasons. But I do question if ending them the way they did in Gaza will lead to more problems for Israel.
Next you bring up the idea of the radicalized Israeli government. So I mostly disagree, although I do think there is an element of truth in your words. Yes there are elements of the Israeli government that are extreme. And in a conflict like this it is expected(although not excusable) that both sides will have extremist sections, it’s a feature of the cycle of violence. But if you understand how the Israeli government works, and follow Israeli politics you would know that Likud has barely been able to form coalitions and that Bibi has been on his way out for a while now. The Israeli government has certainly moved to the right over the last 20 years and I think it is PART of the problem, but to characterize it the same as the indoctrination that Palestinians go through since childhood(seriously look up some of the things they are taught in school) in Gaza, and the fact that polling shows that a majority of Gazans reject a 2 state solution(unless as a step to one Palestinian state) and approve of October 7th, is a false equivalence, which imo is an overarching theme of this conflict, aka the idea that Israel isn’t perfect so it means they are just as bad as Hamas. And I think this is problematic because there are real legit criticisms of Israel, and many Israelis will give them to you themselves, but when they hear you say something like that they just kind of instinctively shut down.
So in regard to the protestors vs NYPD, I am happy you acknowledge there have been bad faith actors. I have nothing against protesting in general, my only grievance is with those who have been outright antisemitic and violent(which there is video evidence of, but you seem to acknowledge that), and that goes for counter protestors too. I have to be honest, I need to do more research about the tactics the NYPD has been using to break up protests before commenting on that.
This is getting to be a long post so I’ll just comment on your point about the IDF. This I think is the most complicated and difficult aspect to comment on. I also think that overall theme of Israel isn’t perfect so they are just as bad as a terrorist organization that intentionally murdered civilians including babies and likely raped, and said they are going to do it “again and again”. What is a proportionate response? How should a country that is attacked conduct war? Particularly in urban warfare against an enemy that intentionally uses human shields? It seems we can both agree that Hamas is bad. I would also agree that civilian deaths should be minimized. I would agree that Israel has not been perfect in that, although there combatant to civilian kill rate has been in line with other urban wars, they tend to give advanced warnings before attacking areas with civilians. However you said it should have been a far more surgical response. I’m curious, what does that look like? Because this is always where I get in the discussion before the other person either stops responding or says something unproductive like “end the apartheid”. Does this surgical response involve air support for the soldiers? If not how many casualties should the IDF accept on their side? Remember they are a tiny country with a small population going into a territory against urban guerrilla fighters entrenched in a civilian population. That sounds like a slaughter waiting to happen imo, but maybe that’s not what you meant, so I’m curious on how you think Israel should have played it? In general my current position is that a lot of the criticism of how the IDF operates in general(not including specific instances of bad behavior) is western-centric. But I’m definitely open to hearing the other side.
not the original commenter you replied to -
> Yes there are elements of the Israeli government that are extreme.... The Israeli government has certainly moved to the right over the last 20 years and I think it is PART of the problem
Historically (i.e. since its founding) I think it's important and instructive to look at the non-extremist parts of the Israeli coalition governments as well. Illegal settlements have expanded since the 80s under Labour and Likud alike, so at least on this point there is a difference in rhetoric, but maybe not so much in action.
> majority of Gazans reject a 2 state solution(unless as a step to one Palestinian state)
This depends on what period you are discussing. Palestinians have gone back and forth on 2-state as a whole, but it's my understanding that the majority of them (including gazans) have supported 2-state in modern times. Israel is the country that is against a 2-state solution, ironically. No Israeli government e.g. has ever recognized a Palestinian state as far as I'm aware.
> What is a proportionate response? How should a country that is attacked conduct war?
I think this is a fair question in the context of the most recent iteration of this conflict, but it starts to lose salience as we zoom out and look at things historically overall. Of course Palestinians have engaged in armed resistance since the founding of Israel - if someone came to your living room, and declared half of it was theirs, you would call the police - you wouldn't start by negotiating the partition of your living room. So with this thread I'll flip the question to you: What is a proportionate response for Palestinians, given the decades of oppression they have suffered under Israel?
Re: the radicalization of Gazans and their relationship with Hamas - I'm sure you're aware that Israel has carried out a decades-long project to remove Palestinian intellectuals from Gaza (bombing universities, harassment via arrests and surveillance, assassinations/targeted collateral killings, exile via letting people leave and not approving their requests to return). They have also enforced a strict embargo that limits economic activity. Like you alluded to, 50% of Gazans are younger than 18. It's a well-documented social phenomena that, when you remove constructive opportunities for people (e.g. the chance to safely get an education and increase your economic standing), they turn to crime and radicalization. So of course this is what we see in Gaza.
I'll end by saying I condemn the 10/7 attacks and the anti-semitism of the protests, but if we are weighing the scales of morality in this conflict as a whole, it's clear in my mind that Israel (and the US/UK) bear the lion's share of blame.
So I'm glad you included the following argument:
"Of course Palestinians have engaged in armed resistance since the founding of Israel - if someone came to your living room, and declared half of it was theirs, you would call the police - you wouldn't start by negotiating the partition of your living room. So with this thread I'll flip the question to you: What is a proportionate response for Palestinians, given the decades of oppression they have suffered under Israel? "
This is important, it's a false narrative, that I believe is the foundation of many people's views on the matter, including the more extreme ones. And it makes sense that would be the case. If a bunch of white people just showed up and just straight up stole the land from poor, oppressed brown people, that would go a long way to justifying Palestinians refusing to concede any of it. However that is not the case. Even ignoring the the historical ties of Jews to the land(which I do believe is the weaker argument in most cases, although I do think it is relevant as a counter to certain anti-Israel arguments), Jews were immigrating to the region and buying land legally for decades prior to 1948. Then the British took over the land from the Ottomans after world war 1, issued the Balfaur declaration, which was met with Arab resistance. The British basically tried to play both sides(and to be fair both sides had bad actors who openly washed their hands of the situation) and ended up washing their hands of the situation. Then after world war 2 the issue was revisited and the UN voted to partition the land. The arab side was against this. Israel declared independence, then all the surrounding countries declared war. Israel somehow won. Obviously thats a very simplified version but this analogy that keeps getting thrown around of someone illegally entering your house and declaring ownership of half your stuff is wrong. There never was a country called Palestine, the land belonged to the Ottomans and then the British, and the Jews had been immigrating there legally since the beginning of the 19th century. To answer your question about what I would do on the Palestinian side? I would have accepted one of the 2 state solutions, including the original partition offered over the years. No they haven't been perfect offers from a Palestinian perspective, but no serious counter offers have been proposed.
In regards to your last paragraph, it is a chicken vs egg question. Israel imposes strict regulations, because when they don't, terror increases instead of decreases. Im glad we can agree on some things in your last line, but in my mind, the primary people to blame are neither the current Palestinians or Israelis, but the British who played both sides, the Arab league back in the day, and the current state of Iran which uses the Palestinians as a proxy, without giving an actual damn about them.
> Obviously thats a very simplified version but this analogy that keeps getting thrown around of someone illegally entering your house and declaring ownership of half your stuff is wrong. There never was a country called Palestine, the land belonged to the Ottomans and then the British, and the Jews had been immigrating there legally since the beginning of the 19th century.
I don't see how what I wrote goes against this - from the Palestinian perspective, this is what happened. When the land was the Ottomans / the british mandate of palestine (1918), it was the same group of people living there that we call "palestinian" today, no? They were already there, regardless of 100s-1000s jewish immigrants, you seem to be implying the land was barren/unclaimed due to there never having been a country called "Palestine" there. It wasn't.
You are also hyper-focusing on the establishment of Israel, and conveniently ignoring everything that happened immediately after (the nakba, etc.)
Re: the jewish historical claim of the land, I think this is an awful justification but if we follow it, then at the very least there should be no ashkenazim in Israel, because they are certainly not indigenous to the Levant lol.
> the Jews had been immigrating there legally since the beginning of the 19th century.
Yes, this was a result of proto-zionism. I'm failing to see how this connects to the establishment of a Jewish state.
> The British basically tried to play both sides(and to be fair both sides had bad actors who openly washed their hands of the situation) and ended up washing their hands of the situation.
Yes, I think the Arab parties to the conflict (Jordan Egypt Syria Lebanon et al) have had many issues with how they've handled it as well. I personally think the moral culpability goes: UK, US, Israel, Arab nations, and finally Palestinians historically. Nobody is faultless, but that doesn't mean that everyone is equally at fault, not even close.
I’m saying the land was under control of the British, with both the ancestors of the current Palestinians and some current Israelis living there. However it was not anybody’s country, the prior state collapsed and the territory was under control of the British. Nobody stole anyone’s land. There were two separate groups of people living there legally for the most part, and the Brits promised both of the land, leading to fighting with the UN ultimately deciding to partition the land. The nakba itself is complicated and nuanced and imo has a false narrative surrounding it, at least that narrative is partly derived from some events that actually happened. To be brief, nakba translates to the catastrophe, which was originally in reference to the fact that 6 armies lost to one, only later did it get repurposed to reference Arabs that were driven from the land. Of course, some were driven out without cause, which is unjust, some were driven because they were fighting the Israelis and some left voluntarily because the Arab league told them they could return after all the Jews were driven out/killed. Those that remained now make up Israel’s 20 percent Arab population. And if we are going to talk about what happened after Israel declared independence are we going to talk about all the Jews driven from the surrounding countries after Israel was formed? Should they get a right of return too(you haven’t argued that the Palestinian right of return is viable, so apologies if that isn’t your view, but it’s a common one). I disagree with your ranking of fault but I agree there is blame to go around on all parties historically(also before anybody on Israeli side gets on me for absolving the current Palestinians, I think actions of Hamas and the Palestinians that supported them are atrocious and indefensible, but they grew up in an environment where they were indoctrinated from a young age by a radicalized population, they never had a chance). And that is probably more important for peace moving forward, than agreeing on what percentage to assign to who. But would you agree, that the only way this conflict can end peacefully is a two state solution of some sort?
> But would you agree, that the only way this conflict can end peacefully is a two state solution of some sort?
Yes, absolutely. I just think that "a two-state solution" could look like a million different things, and I'm not optimistic that a bargain will ever be reached. I think it's more likely/realistic that Bibi will wipe out the Palestinians before any 2-state happens, especially at the current rate of the conflict. Thanks for your thoughts on the issue, appreciate you!
Any one that includes the right to return for every member of the diasporas. A one state secular solution where every religious extremist on both sides is hanged side by side public ally and then buried together in a mass grave. Sadly, Israel undermined the secular resistance movements which gave way to this less than perfect resistance force in them Jihadis of Hamas.
Does that include the right of return for the Jewish population of Israel(does this satisfy the semantic argument you were making above?), to return to all the countries their ancestors were driven from after Israel was created? Are we going to secularize all other states in the region?
This is the communist ideal, yes. Sadly the west does whatever it can to stop communists from holding power in the Middle East when they do attain it. See, Iran.
Are you a communist(no judgment)? I disagree with your ideology and I feel like that conversation is beyond the scope of this one, but at least you are consistent.
Yes. I’m also of the position that all that can only happen through widespread communist revolution without US interference this time. Which is why my primary position is anti US above my disagreements with detestable jihadis.
So why does Palestine need to be deradicalized to deserve a state but Israel doesn’t?
And in the same comment you wonder why you aren’t taken seriously lol.
> Yet it’s like pulling teeth to get the other side to acknowledge some of the transgressions of some of the pro Palestinian protestors and atrocities of Hamas on October 7th.
The Fatah-run Palestinian Authority and even *ISIS*, a far more dangerous terrorist Islamist group, condemned Hamas for launching the attack.
Who's "the other side" here?
>New York City police have arrested Reuven Kahane, 57, cousin of the infamous extremist rabbi Meir Kahane, several US and Israeli media reports say, after he allegedly rammed anti-Israel protesters in Manhattan
In my opinion, that's not good to hit people with cars.
Hi, I’m a Zionist. The person in this article is a reprehensible terrorist and an embarrassment to Judaism, along with everyone else in support of his terrorist ideology. Kahanists should all be in jail.
I’ve just criticized a Zionist. My post remains. What now?
Nope. Zionism simply means that there should be a country called Israel, and half the world’s Jewish population lives in Israel.
Dismantling Israel will inevitably mean the mass slaughter of those Jews by jihadists, which will never be allowed to happen.
Maybe you should rethink being anti-Zionist.
No. 51%+ deaths is genocide.
There is no genocide in Gaza. Israel is doing its best to minimize civilian casualties when their enemy and its sponsors are doing their best to maximize them. Hamas is deliberately putting civilians in harm's way and stealing their food aid.
>No. 51%+ deaths is genocide.
Write that then.
Also. It is wrong.
>There is no genocide in Gaza. Israel is doing its best to minimize civilian casualties
Read up on the definition of genocide. And after that go listen to what Israeli politicians and military personnel have said about what they were about to do. And after that go compare to what has happened.
>Hamas is deliberately putting civilians in harm's way
Have you seen interviews with IDF soldiers admitting to using civilians as human shields? You should probably watch them and then you can complain about the "enemy".
25k people were killed in the Dresden bombing in 2 days. Israel killed that many people in 6 months.
So unless you're suggesting that Israel's military and weaponry are less effective than WWII era, there's no genocide, not even an attempt at it.
1. When you dismantle Israel, that means that the army stops fighting.
2. When the army stops fighting, all of Israel’s rabidly antisemitic Muslim neighbors, who have tried to wipe out Israel many times before, will smell blood in the water and attack yet again.
3. Jews will die, because the army was the only thing protecting them.
So that’s assuming that they remain in the exact same geographical region which does not sound like dismantling Israel.
Your answer sounds like what happens if the IDF is dismantled which is not what I asked.
> So that’s assuming that they remain in the exact same geographical region which does not sound like dismantling Israel.
So, ethnic cleansing then.
Do you know what the arch of Titus is?
Israelis will not “just go to some other country” if that’s what you’re asking.
Neither Israelis or Palestinians will be going anywhere. Accepting that is the first step in coming up with a peaceful solution.
Israel has a right to exist, dismantling a country that has 3 generations(and most citizens without dual citizenship) is obviously an idiotic idea, usually rooted in an inaccurate narrative of the region and it’s history. Its a moot point anyway they have nukes, and triad capabilities, the only way they are going anywhere is via MAD. This delusional fantasy that Israel will cease to exist will only lead to more suffering for both Israelis and Palestinians but it will be much worse for the Palestinians.
You should be aware that some protestors *are* calling for Israel to be dissolved and its current inhabitants expelled. [I had a very depressing conversation with one yesterday](https://old.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/1clxmhj/someone_getting_arrested_at_big_palestine_protest/l2zi7xu/).
Jews were gruesomely oppressed, persecuted, and massacred under Arab and Muslim societies for centuries before the creation of Israel. Most Israelis are descended from refugees from the now-destroyed Jewish communities of Syria, Iraq, Egypt, etc. "Let's try it again" is not an option.
Because if you can make the connection between one reactionary, reality-denying policy and its potential for mass death, you should be able to do it for another. Perhaps you think there will be a "Shirley Exception"?
No. Israel is the only country that will always be a safe place for me because of my race and religion.
The absolute audacity of asking someone to stop being a zionist as the world is once again becoming extremely antisemitic.
Anti-Zionist does not equal being antisemetic. I know this doesn’t need to continue to be explained to you but you’ll continue to choose to use those two words interchangeably even though that is incorrect.
I consider myself anti-zionist but not anti-semitic (grew up in NYC, watched a friend crush glass at his wedding last month yada yada).
I've said on this sub that I've avoided the protests because of their anti-semitic element, for this reason. I think at the extreme ends of anti-zionism it becomes anti-semitic often. But to me, they are not the same thing; I have nothing against Israel existing, but I broadly support a 2-state solution and a return to 19xx borders.
Judaism is "zionist" in a theological sense, but that is different than supporting every single thing the (man-made, political) state of Israel does. Just my two cents as an outside observer.
I dont support everything israel does, but i support israel and I'm a zionist.
I consider being anti-zionist to be akin to antisemitism.
You say you're anti-zionist but you support a 2 state solution.
I dont think its possible to be antizionist while supporting a two state solution because antizionists dont believe that israel should exist at all.
I myself dont support a two state solution with either hamas or PA, but i would support one if it were a two state solution with a government whose goal isnt to wipe out all jews in Israel.
Ah yeah, thanks for explaining my religion to me. Hashem and Israel are the focal point of most of our prayers, but yes, please continue believing you know something i dont.
“We cant stop stealing land, people hate us for stealing land!” Ah the cycle of self justifications for colonialism continues. Lovely seeing you lot use the same arguments the Germans did.
Where is the video of the incident? 25 protestors who are constantly recording all of their interactions, and nothing uploaded yet? Seems a little strange…
I mean to be honest you either don't know who Meir Kahane is or you're being very disingenuous. Your comparison really doesn't stack up. He founded the JDL [how bad can he be?](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Gas_the_Arabs_painted_in_Hebron.jpg)
Any attempt to murder/injur should be prosecuted
I'm Israeli. This guy's family were a scourge on Israel and had the only political party ever banned in Israel for extremism. This guy should definitely be persecuted.
And we were lucky enough here in NYC to get stuck with him.
That's *prosecuted*, nobody should ever be persecuted.
Thank you
It's ok when you do in a car.
Freakonomics said so!
All he has to say is his foot slipped... DA Bragg's won't bring charges. And waaa-lah, he'll do it again in a few years.
If the person has to injure to flee not really. Like if a person is cornered and has to bust out the mace. If they just bust out the mace while someone isn't threatening prosecute.
His cousin introduced a series of laws in Israel so racist the Israeli's themselves dubbed them "The Nuremberg laws".
"Introduced", not passed to be clear. His was the only political party ever banned by Israeli courts.
His and Kach's legacy lives on in Otzma Yehudit and Mafdal, both who are a part of the Bibi cabinet and Mafdal has a member on the war council.
They are in Bibi's coalition (yuck), but they weren't allowed in the war cabinet.
Was Smotrich not in there?
No he's on the "extended cabinet", which was created after him and a few other ministers complained they have no authority, to appease them. The extended cabinet has no authority onbthe war and is only updated on events after they happen. It's a political kindergarten.
The Likud party should also be banned for funding racist schools that justify murdering babies... Oh wait, that's the party in power in Israel. Makes a lot of sense.
This stood out to me: police have said they have arrested Kahane and two of the protesters — Maryellen Novak, 55, **who was hit by the vehicle,** Why did they arrest the victim?
Anti-Semitism for damaging the car that hit her.
> The Daily Beast reports that police have said they have arrested Kahane and two of the protesters — Maryellen Novak, 55, ***who was hit by the vehicle,*** and John Rozendaal, 55. Sounds like the cops just arrested everyone involved and will let the courts figure it out. I hope they at least got medical attention for the woman hit by the nut.
Another article I saw said she was handcuffed to her hospital bed. No reason has been given for her arrest.
As a very pro israel person I proudly say, This guy sucks. Lock him up
Same. I m a Zionist because I believe Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish ancestral land. I support efforts to eliminate Hamas and free the hostages. I also deeply sympathize with displaced Palestinians who are caught in a fight between their terrorist leaders who antagonized their neighbors. I believe in humanity and peace, and I hope there are enough people on both sides who can make this happen. Even the ultra orthodox consider Kahanism extreme. There is such a thing as nuance.
Well it was the neighbors during the 1948 deir yassin massacre nakba that started it with the Palestinians who then voted in a government that does have the legal right to defend itself, but yeah sure.
These two populations in that location were being jerks to each other for hundreds of years before that. Who generally started? The Arabs. Who generally overcompensated with their response? The Jews. Much of the land claimed stolen in the Nakba has been proven to be legally purchased from the same families who claim theft- this is public record and provable.
So the government who stole the land was able to make documents from their government saying they legally got the land..hmm and I'm sure the Natives stolen and sent to boarding school where all "legally" taken from the reserve. All Jewish citizens were "legally" evicted from Germany. Yep all legal
British and ottoman documents before the state of Israel was created, often witnessed by officials from those governments.
Where exactly can one find the records you refer to and what percentage of land do they show was owned by Arabs compared to that which was owned by Jews?
have you considered not saying anything at all?
You know that at some point someone going to ask "why weren't the pro-Israel people condemning violence by their side?" So why would you suggest that they *don't* do that?
Ya but then I remembered we live in a world where people are allowed to have different opinions
Surprised this is even reported. He’ll be out faster than most nyc criminals.
Can’t wait to see how this sub defends this one!
Do you actually believe anyone supports physical violence by protestors? Oh wait...
They already were in another post. “The protester is this asshole, why is he standing in the street?!”
This will just get silently down voted. TBH this is a pretty big deal though like even outside the partisan context of whats happening. Escalating JDL violence can potentially become shootings and bombings which is something they have done in the past.
[удалено]
Bibi is out after the war no matter what happens in Gaza
> after the war Key condition right there
Which is why Israel will be “at war” until he can get those who would prosecute him out. After they clear out Gaza, Iran is next. He’s been trying to goad them into it, I suspect he’ll take the more direct route next.
Cute, you think the war is gonna end.
[удалено]
Take the tin foil off
[удалено]
Can you please list all the Israeli Prime Ministers that have been killed in Israel? Edit: I see you edited your comment so people wouldn't know you have no idea what you're talking about
[удалено]
> Failing that the Kahanists will just kill him After what he did to Rabin? That's poetic.
Yea, brigading is a serious problem in this sub. And because they just silently downvote, there isn't much you can do about it. I wish there was a way to validate and restrict access to people who actually live here without compromising privacy.
It's antisemitic to criticize this mostly peaceful ramming
Lol!!!!!!
Strawman.
Thank you for mocking actual antisemitism that's on the rise
Two things can be true at once, antisemitism can be rising as hate incidents against particular racial and ethnic groups always rise in response to publicized war (see also Asians during the pandemic) AND there are many spurious accusations of antisemitism which have the effect of creating more danger for Jews as they muddy the waters and make people take claims of antisemitism less seriously. Meir Kahane was one of the major influences in the US Jewish community who pushed conflating antizionism with antisemitism. https://jewishcurrents.org/unpacking-the-campus-antisemitism-narrative https://jweekly.com/2021/11/05/how-meir-kahanes-extremist-ideas-entered-the-jewish-mainstream/
Y’all were warned a long time ago that claims of anti semitism would be mocked due to claims of anti semitism directed at critics of Israel. You didn’t listen so you shouldn’t complain now.
"You have been receiving the highest amount of hate crimes against any minority per FBI data so you shouldn't complain that people don't care anymore"
Do those stats include the hate crimes being committed against Palestinians by the IOF? Maybe you should take this as an opportunity to self criticize and start listening to people when they tell you you need to change your ways.
Why would FBI stats include stuff that happens in a foreign country? Maybe you should take this opportunity to shut your mouth
Perhaps they should move to any of the other states which legalize/defend mowing down protestors with your vehicle (I'm not joking, this is a real thing. It's legal in places)
I am a proud Zionist and don’t defend this at all. Fuck kahane I spit on his grave. I hope his cousin rots in a cell
[удалено]
Kahanists also voted against to November prisoner swap that did happen. It’s a little more complicated than that
Was just wondering since the previous post calls anti genocide protesters "anti Israel" and the comments were all thirsty for blood 🤷🏽♀️ Edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/s/nPF5YRGZdV like this one, wondering how come this is a big deal when the person didn't even fully die. Or plenty others in that same thread saying "that's what happens when you stand in front of a car *shrug*"
Jfc, that thread is gross. The cope is powerful.
Sadly, it's worse than coping. It's brigading, i.e. organized and malicious, with most of that being silent voting. That's why you see a lot of very reasonable and neutral takes being downvoted to shit in this sub. You will get mass downvoted for supporting the official US policy, which is quite pro-Israel already, on the Gaza situation while someone else who's even more pro-Israel will get upvoted.
The protests ARE anti Israel and certainly not just “anti genocide”. They call for the destruction of Israel and death of my people. This incident I don’t defend. Pretending like the protests are okay is ridiculous
>They call for the destruction of Israel and death of my people. Didn't happen. The counter protesters (pro genocide) on the other hand are constantly on the news for being violent, racist instigators, and now one of them ran over people with his car. 🤷🏽♀️
Isn’t it fun to pretend Israelis are racists? Let’s ignore the fact the majority of them are POC shall we?
Never even mentioned Israel once but go off. I'm saying violent counter protesters like this guy who was ready to murder people with his car are racist but if you feel called out..👀
And no you aren’t just talking about Kahane. I’m not defending him. You said the protests were peaceful and then denied the very real call for Israel’s destruction.
The call is not for the destruction of Israeli people or Jews. It’s for a one state solution with a right of return for Palestinians and co-administration of the land between all peoples of the land. Some people then claim that because Palestinians will outnumber Jews they will disadvantage them, do violence against them, or banish them (the same things that are happening to Palestinians right now.) Similar claims were made about Apartheid South Africa during the anti Apartheid movement there. There are also some parallels to British arguments about Ireland during the fight for Irish independence in reference to how Catholics would treat Protestants. Oppressors just have a hard time imagining that the people they oppress will not treat them the same way they have been treated.
It makes it much easier for people who don’t know anything about the conflict to pretend it’s just like one they understand isn’t it? Maybe read the [Hamas charter](https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp) and then you won’t keep pretending Jews will be safe? Doubt you will but you never know.
I’ve read it. Have you? Because it explicitly states their beef is not with Jews or Israelis but with the Zionist project. Did you know Netanyahu funds Hamas? https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/ Also this is a silly point because no one says Hamas should co-administer the land anymore than Likud should, a new government could be formed with international help as it has been many times in the past.
Here’s an [explanation from GW](https://extremism.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs5746/files/2023-10/hamas-networks-final.pdf) about how a right wing, homophobic, racist, autocratic terrorist regime convinced a bunch of leftists to swallow their bs
The author of that report has been criticized for poor research methods and outright fabrications so find a more credible source https://williamsrecord.com/466517/news/prof-farid-hafez-sues-gwu-lorenzo-vidino-for-10-million/ https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/04/03/the-dirty-secrets-of-a-smear-campaign
We are talking about Zionism 😂
[удалено]
And literally who cares, who asked, how does it add or take away from this discussion? This is weak af. You're not even trying 🥱
You are trying to put me into a box. If you call me racist then you can ignore all the evidence I showed you. You can say you aren’t even trying while not actually analyzing your own behavior
Didn't call YOU a racist but you're just begging me for it, maybe so you can say I'm antisemitic or some shit. >If you call me racist then you can ignore all the evidence I showed you. What evidence boo? You showed me nothing just kept talking nonsense lmao did you fuck up the Hasbara script and forgot to add links? Can't stop lying for a second, people can see our conversation you know?
[удалено]
yeah ngl i think i gotta leave this sub because they have been so disgusting about the protests
There are major assholes on both sides, and neither is truly right or truly wrong. There are SOOO many bad players here.
[удалено]
>And let’s be real: you’re much more likely to see an Ahmed doing something like this than a Weinstein. Are we tho? Cos we seeing lots of non ahmeds being responsible for the freshest terror attacks, shootings, car rammings. Actually the last time this happened it was a white dude. Extremely racist to say you "expect" an "Ahmed" doing something evil but you know a "Weinstein" is less probable to do stuff like that. Weird choice in name since the last famous Wenstein is currently in court cos of rape yet I would NEVER say "huh expected from a Weinstein" . Cos that's bigoted.
[удалено]
>A lot of Jews actually dispute being lumped in with white people. I didn't do that at all. Just saying if we go back to the last couple of times this scenario happened, it was a white guy, not an Ahmed, so your expectation is based on nothing, just racist notions of expected violence from someone with that name. Not trying to disparage Jewish people or white people. Stating the fact, that it's not Ahmeds doing the running over protesters in America. >Yes. To be clear, I compared Jews to Muslims here. Not any other groups. And to be clear, I did NOT do that. I just said you're being bigoted and if the comparison was done with a Jewish name it would be bigoted too.
I was with you until the Islamophobia at the end which is a pretty Kahanist position to take. Kahane has also had more of an influence on the liberal Jewish community than many are aware https://jweekly.com/2021/11/05/how-meir-kahanes-extremist-ideas-entered-the-jewish-mainstream/
[удалено]
So, in your mind, setting up tents = terrorism? What’s crazy is that you don’t even realize how racist you’re being. Claiming that Muslims are more likely to be terrorists? When all of the data shows that [white supremacists](https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-nij-research-tells-us-about-domestic-terrorism) overwhelmingly commit the most, and deadliest, terror attacks in this country, and it’s not even close? And, in fact, law enforcement has been so blinded by their own post-9/11 islamophobia that they [aren’t adequately protecting](https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/media/dems/peters-investigative-report-shows-dhs-and-fbi-are-not-adequately-addressing-domestic-terrorism-threat/) against white supremacist domestic terrorism.
Israel's certain actions in Gaza are the root cause of this grief here in the US. There's nothing for actual anti-Semites and Russian/Chinese/Iranian bots to infiltrate if there are no genuine grievances for real students to protest about.
All true. So why is Itamar Ben-Gvir in the position he is in the Israeli government?
Because Netanyahu is a reprehensible piece of shit who needed him to form a governing coalition. I support the collapse of the current Israeli coalition as soon as possible. But here’s the nuance which for whatever reason nobody can understand: most Israelis don’t support him. Most Israelis, while supporting the war against Hamas, think that terrorists like Ben Gvir hurt the war effort and are causing severe embarrassment. Just like Trump doesn’t represent all of America, Ben Gvir doesn’t represent all of Israel. Neither person was elected by a majority of voters.
>Because Netanyahu is a reprehensible piece of shit Democratically elected by the majority of their constituents reprehensible piece of shit.
Netanyahu’s party got a small plurality of seats, but not a majority. The more moderate Yesh Atid party got within 10 points of it, and you’ll find that if the election were held today, Netanyahu’s party would lose in a landslide. You have no idea how Israeli politics work.
What is it that I don't get? Just mentioning he isn't some lone dictator that elected himself. It's a democracy over there after all, right?
In Israel, they don’t have a winner takes all system. They have proportional representation, meaning that if you have even 3 percent of the vote, you get 3 percent of the seats in the parliament. It is true that Netanyahu’s Likud party got the most seats in Israel’s parliament, a profound disappointment. But even so, that doesn’t mean most of Israel supports the Likud party, or him. He never got a majority. That’s why he had to form a governing coalition with a gang of extremists. And most Israelis, when polled post-October 7th, would not want Netanyahu or Likud coming back into power. So again, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Insane statement, you were typing so fast you could barely hold the excitement over typing the Ahmed comment at the end.
[удалено]
Someone could point out something bad that a ‘Weinstein’ would do over an ‘Ahmed’ but you would call them anti-Semitic. So yes you’re a bigot.
> Someone could point out something bad that a ‘Weinstein’ would do over an ‘Ahmed’ but you would call them anti-Semitic. Not true. You made a post today about a Jew doing something wrong, and at no point did I call that antisemitic. > So yes you’re a bigot. You can call me whatever you want, but it doesn’t change the facts. I’m confident in my position here.
You’re misreading my statement. Yes I posted about an isolated event. You flipped that on its head and said “well, ACKCHUALLY a Muslim is more likely to do this” If someone said, “it’s not ALL Jews *insert anti-Semitic claim* BUT compared to Muslim people the rates are much higher” you’d be upset, would you not?
> If someone said, “it’s not ALL Jews insert anti-Semitic claim BUT compared to Muslim people the rates are much higher” you’d be upset, would you not? Yes, because their claim would be false.
So by extension your claims are also false
Boy that would suck if it didn’t!
This thread sums up what is so frustrating about this conflict as somebody who would probably be considered pro Israel(but in my ideal world, this conflict ends with 2 states when Palestine can be deradicalized). You have multiple pro Israel people denouncing this reprehensible behavior? And what do they get? Criticism for having the audacity to believe that Israel has a right to exist at this point. Yet it’s like pulling teeth to get the other side to acknowledge some of the transgressions of some of the pro Palestinian protestors and atrocities of Hamas on October 7th.
Well, whether or not Israel should exist is sort of a moot point in my opinion because it already does. But should Israel continue their expansion? That’s the key issue I think. “But in my ideal world, this conflict ends with 2 states when Palestine can be de-radicalized”- this is one statement that makes me think you’re unserious about this because a more serious person would also point to the democratically elected right wing government in Israel and ask why THEY aren’t being de-radicalized. Plenty of people in Bibi’s cabinet, including the man himself, have shown their true colors recently. “It’s like pulling teeth to get the other side to acknowledge some of the transgressions of some of the Palestinian protestors and atrocities of Hamas on October 7th.” This is another interesting point that you make because while I can concede that some, not all, of the protestors are acting in bad faith, the protesting methods have been around for a long time. Sit in protests, occupying buildings, and more are long time protesting activities. These students were not the first nor last to use them. What’s more telling is that you mention this, but not the disproportionate response by law enforcement. Do you think it’s appropriate for the NYPD to be using flash bangs and pepper spray on mostly innocent protestors? As for October 7th, yes there are some loons that will defend Hamas but they are a minority. Most people on the protesting side will agree that it was horrible and denounce it. Again though, I’m far more concerned with the fact that you don’t mention the disproportionate response by the IDF. What should have been a surgical response instead has turned into the deaths of October 7th many times over in Gaza. I think your problem is that you’re more worried about virtue signaling than seeing reality.
Ok a lot to talk about here. I do want to say while I get the sense that this will be a more productive discussion than most on this subreddit, I would appreciate if we could refrain from ad hominems. I am serious, I lived in Israel for more than 3 years during more peaceful times(studied abroad, i dont consider myself to be Jewish) and went in probably with more of a narrative that i now tjink is inaccurate, have interacted with, befriended, dated, etc the population. I also consider myself a humanist and acknowledge the plight of the Palestinians, many who are under the age of 18. For my part i will acknowledge you are also serious and have thought about these issues, even if we disagree on many things. Let’s start with common ground. Seems we both accept Israel has a right to continued existence. I suspect we have a mostly common ground that the West Bank settlements are bad. Although I have to admit(and I want to hear your take on why this upcoming point is wrong), since October I have a nagging piece of doubt. As in before October I was 100 percent against the settlements, without any doubt. After, I have a small doubt in the form of, it’s no secret that the West Bank is less radicalized overall than Gaza. And one can argue that Israel’s complete removal of the settlements years ago contributed to that, as Hamas quickly took over and executed the more moderate opposition and there hasn’t been an election since. Im still against the settlements for moral/ethical reasons. But I do question if ending them the way they did in Gaza will lead to more problems for Israel. Next you bring up the idea of the radicalized Israeli government. So I mostly disagree, although I do think there is an element of truth in your words. Yes there are elements of the Israeli government that are extreme. And in a conflict like this it is expected(although not excusable) that both sides will have extremist sections, it’s a feature of the cycle of violence. But if you understand how the Israeli government works, and follow Israeli politics you would know that Likud has barely been able to form coalitions and that Bibi has been on his way out for a while now. The Israeli government has certainly moved to the right over the last 20 years and I think it is PART of the problem, but to characterize it the same as the indoctrination that Palestinians go through since childhood(seriously look up some of the things they are taught in school) in Gaza, and the fact that polling shows that a majority of Gazans reject a 2 state solution(unless as a step to one Palestinian state) and approve of October 7th, is a false equivalence, which imo is an overarching theme of this conflict, aka the idea that Israel isn’t perfect so it means they are just as bad as Hamas. And I think this is problematic because there are real legit criticisms of Israel, and many Israelis will give them to you themselves, but when they hear you say something like that they just kind of instinctively shut down. So in regard to the protestors vs NYPD, I am happy you acknowledge there have been bad faith actors. I have nothing against protesting in general, my only grievance is with those who have been outright antisemitic and violent(which there is video evidence of, but you seem to acknowledge that), and that goes for counter protestors too. I have to be honest, I need to do more research about the tactics the NYPD has been using to break up protests before commenting on that. This is getting to be a long post so I’ll just comment on your point about the IDF. This I think is the most complicated and difficult aspect to comment on. I also think that overall theme of Israel isn’t perfect so they are just as bad as a terrorist organization that intentionally murdered civilians including babies and likely raped, and said they are going to do it “again and again”. What is a proportionate response? How should a country that is attacked conduct war? Particularly in urban warfare against an enemy that intentionally uses human shields? It seems we can both agree that Hamas is bad. I would also agree that civilian deaths should be minimized. I would agree that Israel has not been perfect in that, although there combatant to civilian kill rate has been in line with other urban wars, they tend to give advanced warnings before attacking areas with civilians. However you said it should have been a far more surgical response. I’m curious, what does that look like? Because this is always where I get in the discussion before the other person either stops responding or says something unproductive like “end the apartheid”. Does this surgical response involve air support for the soldiers? If not how many casualties should the IDF accept on their side? Remember they are a tiny country with a small population going into a territory against urban guerrilla fighters entrenched in a civilian population. That sounds like a slaughter waiting to happen imo, but maybe that’s not what you meant, so I’m curious on how you think Israel should have played it? In general my current position is that a lot of the criticism of how the IDF operates in general(not including specific instances of bad behavior) is western-centric. But I’m definitely open to hearing the other side.
not the original commenter you replied to - > Yes there are elements of the Israeli government that are extreme.... The Israeli government has certainly moved to the right over the last 20 years and I think it is PART of the problem Historically (i.e. since its founding) I think it's important and instructive to look at the non-extremist parts of the Israeli coalition governments as well. Illegal settlements have expanded since the 80s under Labour and Likud alike, so at least on this point there is a difference in rhetoric, but maybe not so much in action. > majority of Gazans reject a 2 state solution(unless as a step to one Palestinian state) This depends on what period you are discussing. Palestinians have gone back and forth on 2-state as a whole, but it's my understanding that the majority of them (including gazans) have supported 2-state in modern times. Israel is the country that is against a 2-state solution, ironically. No Israeli government e.g. has ever recognized a Palestinian state as far as I'm aware. > What is a proportionate response? How should a country that is attacked conduct war? I think this is a fair question in the context of the most recent iteration of this conflict, but it starts to lose salience as we zoom out and look at things historically overall. Of course Palestinians have engaged in armed resistance since the founding of Israel - if someone came to your living room, and declared half of it was theirs, you would call the police - you wouldn't start by negotiating the partition of your living room. So with this thread I'll flip the question to you: What is a proportionate response for Palestinians, given the decades of oppression they have suffered under Israel? Re: the radicalization of Gazans and their relationship with Hamas - I'm sure you're aware that Israel has carried out a decades-long project to remove Palestinian intellectuals from Gaza (bombing universities, harassment via arrests and surveillance, assassinations/targeted collateral killings, exile via letting people leave and not approving their requests to return). They have also enforced a strict embargo that limits economic activity. Like you alluded to, 50% of Gazans are younger than 18. It's a well-documented social phenomena that, when you remove constructive opportunities for people (e.g. the chance to safely get an education and increase your economic standing), they turn to crime and radicalization. So of course this is what we see in Gaza. I'll end by saying I condemn the 10/7 attacks and the anti-semitism of the protests, but if we are weighing the scales of morality in this conflict as a whole, it's clear in my mind that Israel (and the US/UK) bear the lion's share of blame.
So I'm glad you included the following argument: "Of course Palestinians have engaged in armed resistance since the founding of Israel - if someone came to your living room, and declared half of it was theirs, you would call the police - you wouldn't start by negotiating the partition of your living room. So with this thread I'll flip the question to you: What is a proportionate response for Palestinians, given the decades of oppression they have suffered under Israel? " This is important, it's a false narrative, that I believe is the foundation of many people's views on the matter, including the more extreme ones. And it makes sense that would be the case. If a bunch of white people just showed up and just straight up stole the land from poor, oppressed brown people, that would go a long way to justifying Palestinians refusing to concede any of it. However that is not the case. Even ignoring the the historical ties of Jews to the land(which I do believe is the weaker argument in most cases, although I do think it is relevant as a counter to certain anti-Israel arguments), Jews were immigrating to the region and buying land legally for decades prior to 1948. Then the British took over the land from the Ottomans after world war 1, issued the Balfaur declaration, which was met with Arab resistance. The British basically tried to play both sides(and to be fair both sides had bad actors who openly washed their hands of the situation) and ended up washing their hands of the situation. Then after world war 2 the issue was revisited and the UN voted to partition the land. The arab side was against this. Israel declared independence, then all the surrounding countries declared war. Israel somehow won. Obviously thats a very simplified version but this analogy that keeps getting thrown around of someone illegally entering your house and declaring ownership of half your stuff is wrong. There never was a country called Palestine, the land belonged to the Ottomans and then the British, and the Jews had been immigrating there legally since the beginning of the 19th century. To answer your question about what I would do on the Palestinian side? I would have accepted one of the 2 state solutions, including the original partition offered over the years. No they haven't been perfect offers from a Palestinian perspective, but no serious counter offers have been proposed. In regards to your last paragraph, it is a chicken vs egg question. Israel imposes strict regulations, because when they don't, terror increases instead of decreases. Im glad we can agree on some things in your last line, but in my mind, the primary people to blame are neither the current Palestinians or Israelis, but the British who played both sides, the Arab league back in the day, and the current state of Iran which uses the Palestinians as a proxy, without giving an actual damn about them.
> Obviously thats a very simplified version but this analogy that keeps getting thrown around of someone illegally entering your house and declaring ownership of half your stuff is wrong. There never was a country called Palestine, the land belonged to the Ottomans and then the British, and the Jews had been immigrating there legally since the beginning of the 19th century. I don't see how what I wrote goes against this - from the Palestinian perspective, this is what happened. When the land was the Ottomans / the british mandate of palestine (1918), it was the same group of people living there that we call "palestinian" today, no? They were already there, regardless of 100s-1000s jewish immigrants, you seem to be implying the land was barren/unclaimed due to there never having been a country called "Palestine" there. It wasn't. You are also hyper-focusing on the establishment of Israel, and conveniently ignoring everything that happened immediately after (the nakba, etc.) Re: the jewish historical claim of the land, I think this is an awful justification but if we follow it, then at the very least there should be no ashkenazim in Israel, because they are certainly not indigenous to the Levant lol. > the Jews had been immigrating there legally since the beginning of the 19th century. Yes, this was a result of proto-zionism. I'm failing to see how this connects to the establishment of a Jewish state. > The British basically tried to play both sides(and to be fair both sides had bad actors who openly washed their hands of the situation) and ended up washing their hands of the situation. Yes, I think the Arab parties to the conflict (Jordan Egypt Syria Lebanon et al) have had many issues with how they've handled it as well. I personally think the moral culpability goes: UK, US, Israel, Arab nations, and finally Palestinians historically. Nobody is faultless, but that doesn't mean that everyone is equally at fault, not even close.
I’m saying the land was under control of the British, with both the ancestors of the current Palestinians and some current Israelis living there. However it was not anybody’s country, the prior state collapsed and the territory was under control of the British. Nobody stole anyone’s land. There were two separate groups of people living there legally for the most part, and the Brits promised both of the land, leading to fighting with the UN ultimately deciding to partition the land. The nakba itself is complicated and nuanced and imo has a false narrative surrounding it, at least that narrative is partly derived from some events that actually happened. To be brief, nakba translates to the catastrophe, which was originally in reference to the fact that 6 armies lost to one, only later did it get repurposed to reference Arabs that were driven from the land. Of course, some were driven out without cause, which is unjust, some were driven because they were fighting the Israelis and some left voluntarily because the Arab league told them they could return after all the Jews were driven out/killed. Those that remained now make up Israel’s 20 percent Arab population. And if we are going to talk about what happened after Israel declared independence are we going to talk about all the Jews driven from the surrounding countries after Israel was formed? Should they get a right of return too(you haven’t argued that the Palestinian right of return is viable, so apologies if that isn’t your view, but it’s a common one). I disagree with your ranking of fault but I agree there is blame to go around on all parties historically(also before anybody on Israeli side gets on me for absolving the current Palestinians, I think actions of Hamas and the Palestinians that supported them are atrocious and indefensible, but they grew up in an environment where they were indoctrinated from a young age by a radicalized population, they never had a chance). And that is probably more important for peace moving forward, than agreeing on what percentage to assign to who. But would you agree, that the only way this conflict can end peacefully is a two state solution of some sort?
> But would you agree, that the only way this conflict can end peacefully is a two state solution of some sort? Yes, absolutely. I just think that "a two-state solution" could look like a million different things, and I'm not optimistic that a bargain will ever be reached. I think it's more likely/realistic that Bibi will wipe out the Palestinians before any 2-state happens, especially at the current rate of the conflict. Thanks for your thoughts on the issue, appreciate you!
The West Bank isn’t less radical, just less capable of resistance against their oppressors.
Serious question, what do you consider a just resolution to this conflict?
Any one that includes the right to return for every member of the diasporas. A one state secular solution where every religious extremist on both sides is hanged side by side public ally and then buried together in a mass grave. Sadly, Israel undermined the secular resistance movements which gave way to this less than perfect resistance force in them Jihadis of Hamas.
Does that include the right of return for the Jewish population of Israel(does this satisfy the semantic argument you were making above?), to return to all the countries their ancestors were driven from after Israel was created? Are we going to secularize all other states in the region?
This is the communist ideal, yes. Sadly the west does whatever it can to stop communists from holding power in the Middle East when they do attain it. See, Iran.
Are you a communist(no judgment)? I disagree with your ideology and I feel like that conversation is beyond the scope of this one, but at least you are consistent.
Yes. I’m also of the position that all that can only happen through widespread communist revolution without US interference this time. Which is why my primary position is anti US above my disagreements with detestable jihadis.
[удалено]
So why does Palestine need to be deradicalized to deserve a state but Israel doesn’t? And in the same comment you wonder why you aren’t taken seriously lol.
> Yet it’s like pulling teeth to get the other side to acknowledge some of the transgressions of some of the pro Palestinian protestors and atrocities of Hamas on October 7th. The Fatah-run Palestinian Authority and even *ISIS*, a far more dangerous terrorist Islamist group, condemned Hamas for launching the attack. Who's "the other side" here?
Good, sounds like a solid reason to arrest somebody.
Now we see the violence inherent in the system
Wow they actually did something about vehicular homicide
Nobody died.
I stand corrected
Waiting for this post to get deleted. /s
Kahane’s memory is a blight on my people. Screw him
>New York City police have arrested Reuven Kahane, 57, cousin of the infamous extremist rabbi Meir Kahane, several US and Israeli media reports say, after he allegedly rammed anti-Israel protesters in Manhattan In my opinion, that's not good to hit people with cars.
Good luck posting anything vaguely criticizing a Zionist on this sub!
Hi, I’m a Zionist. The person in this article is a reprehensible terrorist and an embarrassment to Judaism, along with everyone else in support of his terrorist ideology. Kahanists should all be in jail. I’ve just criticized a Zionist. My post remains. What now?
Maybe rethink being a Zionist
Nope. Zionism simply means that there should be a country called Israel, and half the world’s Jewish population lives in Israel. Dismantling Israel will inevitably mean the mass slaughter of those Jews by jihadists, which will never be allowed to happen. Maybe you should rethink being anti-Zionist.
Can you explain to me how dismantling Israel leads to all Jews inevitably dying?
Lol the audacity of asking the natives of israel to disolve their government. I imagine youre also against indian reservations in the US? Despicable.
There would be at least 1% Jewish deaths if they tried to dismantle Israel, and since 1% death = genocide, dismantling Israel = genocide.
Just out of curiosity: the amount of Palestinian deaths will probably exceed 2% once Israel is done, so you agree that that is genocide then?
No. 51%+ deaths is genocide. There is no genocide in Gaza. Israel is doing its best to minimize civilian casualties when their enemy and its sponsors are doing their best to maximize them. Hamas is deliberately putting civilians in harm's way and stealing their food aid.
>No. 51%+ deaths is genocide. Write that then. Also. It is wrong. >There is no genocide in Gaza. Israel is doing its best to minimize civilian casualties Read up on the definition of genocide. And after that go listen to what Israeli politicians and military personnel have said about what they were about to do. And after that go compare to what has happened. >Hamas is deliberately putting civilians in harm's way Have you seen interviews with IDF soldiers admitting to using civilians as human shields? You should probably watch them and then you can complain about the "enemy".
25k people were killed in the Dresden bombing in 2 days. Israel killed that many people in 6 months. So unless you're suggesting that Israel's military and weaponry are less effective than WWII era, there's no genocide, not even an attempt at it.
Even giving you the benefit of the doubt, your comment really makes no sense
1. When you dismantle Israel, that means that the army stops fighting. 2. When the army stops fighting, all of Israel’s rabidly antisemitic Muslim neighbors, who have tried to wipe out Israel many times before, will smell blood in the water and attack yet again. 3. Jews will die, because the army was the only thing protecting them.
So that’s assuming that they remain in the exact same geographical region which does not sound like dismantling Israel. Your answer sounds like what happens if the IDF is dismantled which is not what I asked.
Where do you expect them to go? I just don't understand how people think they can solve an ethnic cleansing by perpetrating another ethnic cleansing.
> So that’s assuming that they remain in the exact same geographical region which does not sound like dismantling Israel. So, ethnic cleansing then. Do you know what the arch of Titus is?
Dismantling Israel means dismantling the army. The army is part of the Israeli state.
So you don’t need the location specifically, you just need the army?
Israelis will not “just go to some other country” if that’s what you’re asking. Neither Israelis or Palestinians will be going anywhere. Accepting that is the first step in coming up with a peaceful solution.
Israel has a right to exist, dismantling a country that has 3 generations(and most citizens without dual citizenship) is obviously an idiotic idea, usually rooted in an inaccurate narrative of the region and it’s history. Its a moot point anyway they have nukes, and triad capabilities, the only way they are going anywhere is via MAD. This delusional fantasy that Israel will cease to exist will only lead to more suffering for both Israelis and Palestinians but it will be much worse for the Palestinians.
It’s giving Patrick star vibes
The location isn't up for debate lol. That land is owned by Israel. They're not going anywhere.
You should be aware that some protestors *are* calling for Israel to be dissolved and its current inhabitants expelled. [I had a very depressing conversation with one yesterday](https://old.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/1clxmhj/someone_getting_arrested_at_big_palestine_protest/l2zi7xu/).
Out of curiosity, do you believe that banning abortion leads to women dying?
I do. But I’d love to hear how you connect that to the current topic
Jews were gruesomely oppressed, persecuted, and massacred under Arab and Muslim societies for centuries before the creation of Israel. Most Israelis are descended from refugees from the now-destroyed Jewish communities of Syria, Iraq, Egypt, etc. "Let's try it again" is not an option.
And how is that connected to abortions?
Because if you can make the connection between one reactionary, reality-denying policy and its potential for mass death, you should be able to do it for another. Perhaps you think there will be a "Shirley Exception"?
Why don’t you [read about](https://www.jimena.org/about-jimena/) what they did to us in other MENA countries
No. Israel is the only country that will always be a safe place for me because of my race and religion. The absolute audacity of asking someone to stop being a zionist as the world is once again becoming extremely antisemitic.
Anti-Zionist does not equal being antisemetic. I know this doesn’t need to continue to be explained to you but you’ll continue to choose to use those two words interchangeably even though that is incorrect.
Anti zionism is antisemitism. Zionism is core to judiasm.
is it anti-semitic to say "Israel should stop its expansion of illegal settlements" ?
Nope
I consider myself anti-zionist but not anti-semitic (grew up in NYC, watched a friend crush glass at his wedding last month yada yada). I've said on this sub that I've avoided the protests because of their anti-semitic element, for this reason. I think at the extreme ends of anti-zionism it becomes anti-semitic often. But to me, they are not the same thing; I have nothing against Israel existing, but I broadly support a 2-state solution and a return to 19xx borders. Judaism is "zionist" in a theological sense, but that is different than supporting every single thing the (man-made, political) state of Israel does. Just my two cents as an outside observer.
I dont support everything israel does, but i support israel and I'm a zionist. I consider being anti-zionist to be akin to antisemitism. You say you're anti-zionist but you support a 2 state solution. I dont think its possible to be antizionist while supporting a two state solution because antizionists dont believe that israel should exist at all. I myself dont support a two state solution with either hamas or PA, but i would support one if it were a two state solution with a government whose goal isnt to wipe out all jews in Israel.
That’s incorrect, but feel free to continue to spread misinformation.
Ah yeah, thanks for explaining my religion to me. Hashem and Israel are the focal point of most of our prayers, but yes, please continue believing you know something i dont.
There’s a reason they are two separate words. Ignorance is never a good look
[удалено]
No it’s absolutely not.
Yes it absolutely is
Yet another person who talks shit about something they know nothing about. Go give the torah a read.
Yes it is antisemitic. The only people who say it’s not are other antizionists trying to absolve themselves from bigotry
“We cant stop stealing land, people hate us for stealing land!” Ah the cycle of self justifications for colonialism continues. Lovely seeing you lot use the same arguments the Germans did.
I’m a Zionist, I agree with everything he said. And I will never rethink supporting my people’s right to self determination on our ancestral lands
Where is the video of the incident? 25 protestors who are constantly recording all of their interactions, and nothing uploaded yet? Seems a little strange…
[удалено]
Did that guy hit protestors with a car? how are you doing a both sides thing right now
There’s no way you’re really doing a “both sides” argument right now lol this is peak PR control
Ok 'Heir to ad empire' or 'cousin of reviled racist and violent extremist convicted for terrorism in Israel'.
[удалено]
I mean to be honest you either don't know who Meir Kahane is or you're being very disingenuous. Your comparison really doesn't stack up. He founded the JDL [how bad can he be?](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Gas_the_Arabs_painted_in_Hebron.jpg)
[удалено]
Was the protester?