Mai Khalid Afana, a Palestinian doctor and lecturer was executed a few hours ago by Israel murderers after accidentally being on the "Jews Only" side of the road. — StreetlightX

"Attempted stabbing, ramming attack thwarted near Jerusalem The terrorist was shot and killed by IDF soldiers. One soldier was lightly injured and treated at the scene."

"A Palestinian woman who arrived at the scene attempted to run over soldiers who were securing engineering work and then exited her car and tried to stab the soldiers. The terrorist was shot and killed by the soldiers, and one soldier was lightly injured and treated at the scene."

https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/attempted-stabbing-ramming-attack-near-jerusalem-no-injuries-reported-671156

@BitconnectCarlos

https://twitter.com/activestills/status/1405199195028561922?s=20

-June 15, in a Palestinian neighbourhood in Jerusalem.

For right-wing and many centrist members of the alliance, including Mr. Bennett, the flags march is a matter of national pride: a celebration of their democratic right to walk through areas of Jerusalem captured by Israel during the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, which Israel now considers part of its undivided capital. Each year, it features thousands of marchers waving Israeli flags as they proceed toward the Western Wall, a sacred site in Judaism. But it was aborted in May because of the rocket fire from Gaza.

One of the last acts of Mr. Netanyahu’s government was to reschedule this year’s aborted march for Tuesday, its path rerouted from some of the most sensitive parts of the Old City of Jerusalem. The decision was upheld by Omer Bar-Lev, the new center-left minister for public security — to the praise of his new right-wing allies.

“I congratulate Public Security Minister Omer Bar-Lev for his decision to hold the flag dance,” tweeted Nir Orbach, a hard-right member of the coalition who almost dropped out of the alliance before the confidence vote. “The flag dance is part of the culture of religious Zionism and is held regularly. It does not need to be a political dance or proof of governance, it needs to be a display of joy.”

Compare this to Dave Hann's description of outright fascist+racist organisation the National Front in the UK:

Almost as soon as the date for the second Carnival had been advertised, the NF countered it by declaring that they intended to march through the heart of the East End’s Bangladeshi community in Brick Lane on the very same day. Their move, which was an acknowledgment of the opposition generated by RAR events, sought to disrupt the Carnival and divide the anti-fascist movement. Prevarication followed by political expediency on the part of leading SWP members almost allowed them to achieve their goal.

It was announced from the Carnival stage that the situation in the East End was under control so people should stay and enjoy themselves. In fact, local ANL activists had telephoned their ANL national steering committee and begged them to send more “people down to help the anti-fascists at Brick Lane. Alongside the local ANL, members of various Trotskyist groups, anarchists and local anti-racists from the Hackney and Tower Hamlets Defence Committee tried to harass a 700 strong NF march but their numbers were too small to create any more effective action against the marchers and their police escorts. Local Bengali youth were kept away from the Front invaders by large numbers of antagonistic police. A rally at Church Road concluded the march and opened another fascist offensive. Groups broke away to threaten and cause damage to the area and its people. One gang of 50 to 60 skinheads smashed up shops on Brick Lane before being driven off by locals. — David Hann

The mode of operation is the same; only the march is also through conquered ground-turned-racially segregated neighbourhood. Note that such practices are explicitly called part of the culture of Zionism, according to one of the march's political advocates in the state of Israel, as the New York Times documents.

Yes. Zionists shouting racialised death threates while marching through a Palestinian dominant neighbourhood. Accompanied by the marching drums of incendiary bombs dropped on civilians in Gaza.

Perhaps it is Palestine who faces an existential threat instead?

I ask you to turn this post about - imagine it was a Jewish community standing on this precipice, what would you recommend? I think we already know - get the rifle, never again.

And Israel's aggression is not blatant because you're under the impression you didn't start it? — Benkei

Yes. It's a complex chain of events.

So as long as I don't throw the first punch I'm in the clear? Are you 6? Because that's the exact argument I get from my daughter when she hurts her little brother "but he started it!" — Benkei

You're comparing Israel and Palestine to children right now. The level of arrogance is unbelievably. The term "be less white" has never made more sense to me than it does now.

Ethnic cleansing is not two children fighting.

It is worth mentioning though that the Arab states themselves are in a complex network of alliances and are by no means united. — BitconnectCarlos

Right. I'm not worried about a united Arab invasion of Israel. It's been proven that won't work.

On the contrary, if I lived in Israel I'd be worried about a collapse of Arab culture in to chaos. As example, how many psychopaths have been born in the Syrian civil war? There are so many Syrian kids who've never known anything but chaos.

It's not clear to me that Israel is tenable over the longer run, but who knows, I guess we'll find out.

In an ideal world, Israel would become an actual democracy and allow self-determination for all people under its rule. — StreetlightX

Which would lead to a Palestinian state. To my understanding, the Palestinians don't wish to be citizens of Israel, even if they were full citizens like any other. They wish to have their own country, just like the Jews wish to have their own country.

To the degree I have an opinion, it would be that the interests of both Jews and Palestinians is probably not well served by either of them having their own state in that part of the world. Israelis are likely doomed to eternal conflict, and a Palestinian state is likely to become just another repressive Arab dictatorship. To me, just one view from far away, both parties seem to be clinging to a land that's not worth having.

Since you have no argument I guess we're done. — Benkei

Sounds like a good plan to me.

Much of this thread reminds me of my growing disenchantment with NPR. Endless descriptions of the problems, with limited interest in specific solutions.

So many stories on NPR these days are of the type "Hey, look at this, this is so bad!" Ok, much of it is, agreed. But what do you want to do about it? That requires too much thinking, so it's on to the next story, which has the theme "Hey, look at this, this is so bad!"

And now I'm doing it too. Hey, look at this thread, this is so bad!!! :-)

NPR does do that a lot. So does the New York Times and some other publications. Too often the background reporting consists of interviews with advocacy groups--people with a major stake in depicting this, that, or another problem as a terrible tragedy. I understand how that works. Unfortunately, the advocate's views may be heavily slanted without being factually wrong. So, there is a large crowd of people who want to come into the US camped on our border. That is true enough. Cue the crying child, the distressed mother. I'm sure they are not happy. The NPR or NYT news stories do not mention that we are not obligated to let all (or any) of them into the country, and we didn't ask them to make a long trip north through Mexico for nothing,

Yes, it's sad that people drown in the Mediterranean trying to get to Europe. Yes, it is sad that they paid to get smuggled into southern Italy in a leaky boat. Yes, it is sad that they traveled a long way to get to Europe only to end up getting fished out of the sea and taken back to Libya--if they were lucky. But fleeing every bad place for the promised land won't be the solution. Can't be the solution.

But all one gets in these stories is the same weepy narrative.

To the degree I have an opinion, it would be that the interests of both Jews and Palestinians is probably not well served by either of them having their own state in that part of the world. — Foghorn

The idea that either would simply pack and leave is so fantastical that it belongs in the same book as Harry Potter. Not worth entertaning except as fantasy fiction.

You're comparing Israel and Palestine to children right now. The level of arrogance is unbelievably. The term "be less white" has never made more sense to me than it does now.

Ethnic cleansing is not two children fighting. — BitconnectCarlos

I'm not comparing Israel and Palestine to children, I'm comparing your moral thinking to that of a six year old.

The essential divide in this issue is between those who are out for blood and those who actually seek solutions. — BitconnectCarlos

I'd add those seeking a peaceful solution. There are many with "final solutions" in their mind there.

The idea that either would simply pack and leave is so fantastical that it belongs in the same book as Harry Potter. Not worth entertaning except as fantasy fiction. — StreetlightX

A huge percent of your posts are of this type, trying to inflate yourself by reducing someone else.

I've already said multiple times that I agree Israelis are not going to leave. If you'd actually read the thread, you'd see you are debunking claims of your own invention.

But all one gets in these stories is the same weepy narrative. — Bitter Crank

Very well said Mr. Crank, your post seemed to nail it pretty well.

I've been slowly coming to peace with the NPR narrative in this manner. Boomers are no longer the focus of American culture, because we are on our way out. This is a completely normal progression of affairs, not a conspiracy.

NPR is now aimed at a younger audience, which makes perfect sense from a business perspective. The younger audience is, well, younger. They find consciousness raising pieces meaningful because they haven't been listening to them since 1962. To them, this is all news.

But what I want to know, and NO ONE at NPR will answer this question....

Why don't they play Tommy Dorsey records on the radio anymore???? What the hell is going on????
Oh, and where are my glasses, does anyone know?

I'm comparing your moral thinking to that of a six year old. — Benkei

I know, you could move to the Middle East. You'd fit right in!

The essential divide in this issue is between those who are out for blood and those who actually seek solutions. — BitconnectCarlos

I cast my vote for this. The Mid East conflict is a lot like this thread, lots of yelling, not all that much thinking.

And, I suspect it's a lot like this thread in that there's a lot of conflict addiction going on. I think forum threads like this can provide some insight in to larger conflicts. We all know that exactly nothing will be solved by this thread. And before we read even the first post we knew this thread would be conflict based. And so we clicked on the link, and jumped right in!

As example, look at the cable news industry. Conflict, conflict, conflict, all day long. Extremely popular.

Once we humans get wrapped up in some victim pose, that can be so satisfying to our egos that it can become near impossible to let it go. And of course, if one is going to be a victim, one needs an enemy.

Here's a two-state solution and how to get there:

1. Israel to unilaterally recognise a right for the Palestinians to have a sovereign state where the 1967 borders will be the basis for the size of Palestine
2. stop all further settlements in WB and evictions in East-Jerusalem, recognise ownership rights in East Jerusalem
3. repeal all discriminatory laws in Israel proper
4. no more collective punishment of Palestinians
5. no more blockade of Gaza and its air space and sea
6. no more mass destruction in response to ineffectual missiles or balloons
7. tear down the wall
8. For the interim period, Gaza and WB remain occupied territories but they will be policed instead of military oppression
9. Palestinians to commit to an indefinite cease fire as long as Israel maintains the above 8 points
edit: 10. forgot: Palestinians to recognise Israel along the 1967 borders as the basis of the size of israel

In other words, stop the crimes. There's no excuse.

Enter into the transition period where Palestine should be set up:
1. include the political wing of Hamas in talks as well as PA
2. land-for-land exchanges to arrive at comparable land size
3. Israel to pay Palestine an amount equal to all the monies spent supporting illegal settlers so it has the means to settle the new lands it receives through the land-for-land exchange
4. Palestine to hire their own first and Israeli contractors second (which will lead to "reparations" flowing back to Israel and creating economic interdependence)
5. have religious leaders negotiate the Temple Mount
6. Jerusalem as independent city-state administered by Palestinians and Israelis alike
7. gradually transition policing activities in Palestine to Palestinians
8. Set up a special task force of like minded Israelis and Palestinians to investigate (terrorist) crimes committed by Israelis against Palestinians and vice versa, where jurisdiction will be with the state of the victim
9. retreat from WB and Gaza and set up border controls
10. Declare a Palestinian state
11. Party with your Israeli neighbours

I agree with the establishment of a Palestinian state, as expressed already above.

As has been discussed already, this doesn't really solve the conflict, because a Palestinian state is seen by many (especially Hamas) as being just a stepping stone to the real goal, the end of the Jewish state.

So, I see this...

1) The establishment of a Palestinian state.

2) A civil war between Hamas and the PLO, with Hamas the likely winner.

3) The arming of the Palestinian state by outside powers, such as Iran.

4) Hamas continues to pursue it's long stated goal of ending the Jewish state, leading to ever more conflict and violence, and ever more victims.

It's also not been established that Palestinians would actually be better off in a Palestinian state. All the other Arab states seem to be some version of chaos, corruption, oppression, incompetence, etc. That doesn't prove anything about the future of a Palestinian state, but it's a large pile of evidence which shouldn't be ignored.

All that said, I agree, establish the Palestinian state. And if that state should attack Israel, roll the tanks across the border, go house to house to find the leaders, hang them all, and then leave.

As example, Syria has tried to invade Israel on multiple occasions. Every time they try that they get their butts kicked. So they've finally learned that lesson and don't try anymore.

If a Palestinian state were to attack Israel, Israel should avoid the usual tit for tat limited engagement which never leads to anything but a repeat of the exercise a few years later. If a Palestinian state were to attack Israel, find every Hamas leader, and kill them. Make it clear to one and all, fuck with us, and you die.

That's how the Middle East works. It's a knife fight in an alley. You either win, or you die.

Or, an even better solution for the Israelis, pack up your stuff and get out of the ghetto. I know, I know, not gonna happen, agree. But that would the rational choice.

Hamas continues to pursue it's long stated goal of ending the Jewish state, leading to ever more conflict and violence, and ever more victims. — Foghorn

This is false. Hamas rejects Israel because recognising it recognises the existence of territory belonging to that State. It believes the territory Israel claims is all illegal and therefore Israel can only be recognised as part of a negotiated settlement. Hamas will accept something along the 1967 borders and has put that in writing in 2017.

This could be true, and I will investigate further, thanks. If you can provide recent public statements from Hamas to this effect that would be welcomed, or I can do the homework.

But honestly, it's pretty much impossible to accept you as a reliable source of information given how hopelessly partisan and self involved all of your posts on this subject are. I'm still convinced that your only real interest in this subject is to call people stupid from a position of imaginary moral superiority. Almost all of what you write here, all about Benkei, Benkei, Benkei, Benkei, Benkei.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/hamas-2017-document-of-general-principles-and-policies

No, I call people stupid from a position of being actually informed. If human rights activism is being self-involved. Guilty. I'm not going to apologise for it.

So now we appear to have competing claims from the two of you regarding what it is that most Palestinians really want, and would accept as a basis for peace.

To refine that a bit, the question may not be what MOST Palestinians want, but what do those with the most guns want? You know, when did majority opinion really matter in the Arab world?

In any case, I don't claim to know the answer, so a debate between the two of you on this subject would be helpful.

And Benkei, please try to act like an adult, like BitconnectCarlos has done.

No, I call people stupid... — Benkei

Because you're a juvenile dickhead. You're like 12 years old emotionally. And I know this for sure, because I'm 13.

To refine that a bit, the question may not be what MOST Palestinians want, but what do those with the most guns want? You know, when did majority opinion really matter in the Arab world? — Foghorn

Yeah, it's comments like this that disqualify you. It's funny how you like to pretend to be impartial though.

A place to start perhaps...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas_Covenant

Here's one section that may merit focus.

The 2017 charter accepted for the first time the idea of a Palestinian state within the borders that existed before 1967 and rejects recognition of Israel which it terms as the "Zionist enemy".[2] It advocates such a state as transitional but also advocates "liberation of all of Palestine".

What does "liberation of all of Palestine" mean to Hamas?

I read the quote to mean that Hamas will accept the 1967 borders for now, but desires the end result to be the end of a Jewish state.

Yeah, it's comments like this that disqualify you. It's funny how you like to pretend to be impartial though. — Benkei

Is there any chance you could just shut up when you don't have anything useful to say? Again, nobody is interested in your emotional situation.

Here's a summary of Hamas by the BBC.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-13331522

The 1988 charter - Hamas's charter defines historic Palestine - including present-day Israel - as Islamic land and it rules out any permanent peace with the Jewish state.

In 2017, Hamas produced a new policy document that softened some of its stated positions and used more measured language. There was no recognition of Israel, but it did formally accept the creation of an interim Palestinian state in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem - what are known as pre-1967 lines.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-palestinians-hamas-document/hamas-softens-stance-on-israel-drops-muslim-brotherhood-link-idUSKBN17X1N8

Hamas advocates the liberation of all of Palestine but is ready to support the state on 1967 borders without recognizing Israel or ceding any rights,” said Meshaal, in a shift that brings Hamas more into line with the position of Fatah.

QUESTION: How is the liberation of all of Palestine consistent with the existence of a Jewish state?

Ok, a quick google search suggests to me that Hamas still seeks the end of Israel, but is attempting to strike a more moderate tone so as to somewhat unify the Palestinian position.

This is a first impression, additional discussion welcome.

The bottom line question seems to be, would the establishment of a Palestinian state along the 1967 borders lead to a real peace? Or just the next chapter of the conflict?

Best I can tell, Israel has concluded the later, and thus sees little reason to agree to a Palestinian state.

And now I'm doing it too. Hey, look at this thread, this is so bad!!! :-) — Foghorn

People haven't been banned because of their comments on this thread (yet), so it isn't bad.

says the guy who came in here and couldn't answer a simple question after 4 attempts. So, right back at ya.