≡ Menu

Anatot Pogrom Victims Suffered Sexual Abuse

anatot pogrom victim

Image from publication, 'The True Right' with caption: 'Nazileftist smashed with blows.'

If all I did in this post was tell you about the suffering of Israeli peace activists who were beaten and brutalized at a pogrom at Anatot a few days ago, I would be telling you little that was newsworthy or that you didn’t know already.  I’ve already reported here that senior Israeli police officers not only stood by and did nothing while bones were broken and one settler attempted to knife a protester, but that the police actually directly beat up the activists who’d come to support a Palestinian farmer whose land had been stolen by the settlement.

No, all this would be old news.  But what Idan Landau has done is to focus very specifically on the level of sexual violence meted out to the female protesters by the settlers.  But not just by the male settlers, by the female settlers specifically.  I’ve read about the violence of which settlers are capable for years.  That’s nothing new.  But what Idan has collected in his blog post is new.  Here is my translation (pardon the strong language which is in the original Hebrew) along with links to the original Hebrew eyewitness sources.  Israeli journalist Haggai Matar quotes this victim:

“Outside [the vehicle], settlers are banging on the windows making a sign with their fingers drawn across their throats to show that they would slash my throat.  They shriek: ‘Bring her outside [the vehicle].  We’ll deal with her.  Give her what she has coming to her, the whore!’”

Tali Harkavy writes in Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity:

“‘Hellenist [derogatory term for Jew who betrays her religion].  Arabs fuck her in the ass.’  I want to get away.  To run.  I retreat quickly with my back to the path and my front to the attackers.  Afraid to turn my back on them.  One approaches too closely and rubs his crotch: ‘I’ll fuck you.’  He was serious.”

Sarah Benninga writes in Sheikh Jarrah:

“When the wives of the male attackers saw their husbands hitting male and female protestors alike, they [the settler women] applauded and spat at me: ‘Traitor,’ ‘You deserve it.’  And when they heard their husbands threaten us: ‘We’ll fuck you in the ass,’ they suddenly turned into men themselves, applauding their husbands’ sexual conquests as if they were one of the boys.”

Tal Konig reports in HaOketz:

“Three went to the hospital.  Among them, Yassine [the Palestinian farmer originally attacked] with an open head wound, his wife over whose head they broke a broom handle, after which they abused her sexually.”

Stavit Sinai tweeted:

“The settlers actually stripped me naked.  I tried to calm myself.  History will bury them and their evil apartheid in blood.”

Landau interprets the language of the settlers as their means of revenge and redemption of their self-respect.  Through rape, sodomy and other physical and verbal acts the honor of the tribe is upheld.  It’s primitive, brutal, bestial, but alas all too human.  We think we are Jews, that we don’t do such things, that we are civilized, that we have our sacred books and traditions that raise us above such brutalism.  Alas, violence like this reminds us that we are only those things in our best moments.  In our worst, we are no different.  And when we are no different, we have betrayed those traditions which we like to think set us apart or above the worst humanity has to offer.

Finally, a word about the image Idan features in his post.  Note that the face of the victim has been literally defaced.  She is no longer a human being.  She is in Hebrew a “SmolaNazi” (“Nazi leftist” or the equivalent of “Islamonazi”).  This is the face of the Occupation.  This is the dehumanization that settlements and oppression of another people do to Israel.  And keep in mind that, as I’ve written before, Anatot is not Yitzhar; it isn’t the worst of the settlers, the ones harboring the real Jewish terrorists willing to put a bullet in an Arab’s back just for looking at ‘em.  Anatot is known for being an average settlement where Israelis moved for improved quality of life and for inexpensive housing giving them more house for their money.  These are the economic settlers, not the ideological settlers.  If Occupation can turn these people into beasts it can do this to anyone, even the best of us.

So far, not a peep from the Israeli government about an investigation of this incident or prosecution of the criminal acts that took place.  Really, they can’t.  70% of the residents of Anatot are police officers.  Can they try ten or fifteen police officers for serious crimes without the entire national police force rising up as one in protest?  These criminals are, in effect, the state.  Can the state arrest and try itself?

If Israelis themselves won’t pressure to investigate, perhaps you can contact the Israeli embassy or consulate nearest where you live and protest this brutality and demand that they take action.  Tell them that actions such as these are a disgrace to Israel’s reputation and bring ignominy upon it.  That may get them to take notice.

And once again, I warn that the U.S. government is allowing American Jews to send tens of millions of dollars to brutal, violent settlers and settlements just like this one, tax-free.  We Americans and the Obama administration are colluding in this brutalization through our tax-deductible contributions.

Bufferfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditlinkedintumblrmail
youtube

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Dorothy Naor October 4, 2011, 1:18 PM

    Yes indeed! Americans who do not protest the money sent to Israel are colluding in the brutalization of Palestinians and of those who stand in solidarity with them. Please urge all to engage in bds (boycott/divestment/sanctions) and to insist that the American government stop sending Israel $3 billion in military aid!

    • Mary Hughes-Thompson October 5, 2011, 12:26 AM

      Dorothy, we call the White House, we send emails, we demonstrate. Senator Dianne Feinstein’s office hangs up on us when we call. I think the last check we write when the country is almost out of money will be to Israel, for whatever is left in there.

  • Kalea October 4, 2011, 6:29 PM

    And like you said, Anatot is not the worst, and the state is complicit. The obstacle becomes more and more overwhelming as I expect it to.

    So how’s that Zionism working out for you now? You’ll agree with me yet. Time is on MY side; not yours and every new move Israelis make proves me right; just like I was right about Eilat.

    I don’t want to gloat; I just want everyone awake.

    The only way to reverse this is to reject Zionism. You’ll see; that’s what it will take. I once believed BDS would work; but the obstacle is too overwhelming and growing. I’m no longer sure BDS will succeed. This is not South Africa; this is much worse; it’s become legitimized Apartheid. Zionists are the equivalent of Afrikaaners; but Afrikaaners never had the unconditional protection of Congress.

    • mary October 5, 2011, 2:29 AM

      I think it has gotten to the point where only international intervention is going to make this horror of an occupation end. BDS does not have the impact that it did on South Africa (probably because the US is on Israel’s side), the Palestinians are not strong or unified enough to stand up to the tyrants, and the Arab world, as always, is too fractured and afraid of US retaliation (and there is a little too much “US support” at stake for most Arab governments).

      I must mention that although this is an excellent article, I object to the use of the word “pogrom” to describe this incident. This is not a pogrom, it is an act of wanton thuggery that is politically motivated.

      • Tony Litwinko October 5, 2011, 11:45 PM

        Ref: “I object to the use of the word pogrom. . . “–Mary

        That is, until you keep the following in mind:

        From Wikipedia online: A pogrom (Russian: погром) is a form of violent riot, a mob attack directed against a particular group, whether ethnic, religious, or other, and characterized by killings and destruction of their homes and properties, businesses, and religious centres. The term usually carries connotation of spontaneous hatred within the majority population against certain (usually ethnic) minorities, which they see as dangerous and harming the interests of the majority.

        According to Encyclopaedia Britannica, “The term is usually applied to attacks on Jews in the Russian Empire in the late 19th and early 20th centuries”.[2] The term is also used in reference to attacks on non-Jewish ethnic minorities; reviewing its uses in scholarly literature, Werner Bergmann proposes that pogroms be “defined as a ‘unilateral, nongovernmental form of collective violence initiated by the majority population against a largely defensive ethnic group, and occurring when the majority expect the state to provide them with no assistance in overcoming a (perceived) threat from the minority.”[3]

        In which case, as it did with me, the slight discomfort comes from associations of the word, not from its meaning or practical definition, that association being almost exclusively with regard to Russians against Jewish Russians in the 19th-20th centuries. I think however, once that association is neutralized, the word is appropriate.

        • lidia October 6, 2011, 10:55 PM

          As a matter of fact, pogroms in Russia were very often officially sponsored or at least tolerated.

          Revolutionaries were always against pogroms, of course, because they saw them as a part of government oppression.

          So, it was classical pogrom! Just like Christal-night, albeit on the smaller scale, but constantly repeated by colonialist settlers with the full support of Zionist state.

        • Robert Soran-Schwarz (@_No1) October 8, 2011, 12:42 AM

          It was by no ways a “pogrom”. Letting all the rest aside: people who come from elsewhere can’t be objects of a pogrom by subjects living on site :-)

          • Richard Silverstein October 8, 2011, 1:20 AM

            Now can you explain why the Holocuast wasn’t a Holocaust. I’d like to see you work your magic on that one.

            How about “lynch?” Would that satisfy you? Or is there some abstruse definition of lynch that this situation also would violate?

      • lujean October 6, 2011, 9:06 PM

        The US is on Israel’s side only because the US politicians are allowed to accept bribes from Israel’s 200+ lobbies which should be banned as foreign propaganda. Lobbies are like UNIONS. US politicians sell their souls to get the millions $ from lobbies. There is no democracy in America anymore as lobbies control who runs and who gets the most money. There is a growing group trying to break the union control so people can get jobs without being forced to pay dues and allegiance to the get-rich-quick union bosses. US politicians do not have the integrity to turn down the Israeli lobby money to get elected or re-elected! Dr. Ron Paul is the only one honest enough to spell it out. He has already said publicly our government has to stop sending billions of $ overseas, which is what happens no matter Israel’s crimes against humanity, it’s brutal and illegal occupation and confiscations of lands and homes not belonging to them.

      • Vicky October 7, 2011, 4:48 AM

        I disagree with you on BDS, Mary. It took a long time for the South African BDS movement to take off – black South Africans and their supporters called for it in the late ’50s/early ’60s, but the movement only gained serious traction abroad in the 1980s. Once it had caught on internationally, apartheid was brought down very quickly.

        The Palestinian call for BDS was only issued in 2005. Considering the movement is six years old, it’s already achieved a substantial amount, and awareness of its goals has certainly risen sharply since the initial call to boycott was made.

  • Kamal Hassan October 4, 2011, 6:31 PM

    Israeli leaders are fully responsible about the deteriorating situation in Palestinian occupied territories. Israel have fully stocked those ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS with the most vile and belligerent Jewish settlers on earth. Those extremely ungrateful settlers that didn’t make good neighbors to Palestinians on Palestinian stolen land, must go and go quickly before any equitable and viable solution is to be found. Illegal settlements mean exactly that, they’re ILLEGAL in any language period. ALL settlements must GOOOOO.

  • Zahav October 4, 2011, 6:41 PM

    Once you cast someone as the other, all becomes permissible. We know this only too well.

    • David October 4, 2011, 7:25 PM

      It is the “other” only to the extent that such differentiation leads to a master/slave relationship. I say this because Israelis are the “other” for Palestinians, I think. The dominance relationship is what brutalizes both parties. It follows a path of increasing violence, as it did in Europe during the Holocaust. Each incident for which there is no accountability or postive reward encourages the expansion of the violence as a question: Can I do this, too? Getting away with murder in the occupied territories raises the possibility of getting away with mass murder. IMHO. I believe this is true: Israel is, and has been, testing the waters to see what “solutions” can be implemented. It is just so scary, so transparent and terrifying.

      • Steve October 4, 2011, 8:25 PM

        to David: Your second sentence seems apologetic for the Israelis who are the oppressor, as if you wish to make the field of conflict level to minimize the overwhelming mass of guilt on the part of Jews, not Palestinians, in this conflict, as if to tune out of your perceptions and your readers’ thinking, the raw facts of overwhelming and repeated with impunity violence by the Jews of Israel, and erasing in our minds the overwhelmingly NONviolent activism of Palestinians resisting such brutal occupation and colonialist theft and lies. Please, don’t vaguely generalize about both sides when the urgent issue of the place and time is the very specific violence Israelis are perpetrating against those (Palestinians) from whom they routinely are stealing land and natural resources, as well as their cover-ups of their crimes. But you are absolutely right to say Israel is “testing the waters to see what ‘solutions’ can be” carried out with continued impunity. U.S. racists are thrilled to have Israel as a living laboratory of mass population control.

        • David October 5, 2011, 12:25 AM

          You describe vividly what I am trying to understand, but not in the sense of “understanding” as apology or mere explanation. Just plain understand what happens in the dominance thing. It has happened before, and of course as you express, it is happening now. I don’t disagree on the rights of the matter at all and I think that Israel is unambiguously the aggressor. It is the progressive abuse, the increasing violence and the modes of this violence that is scary. That’s what I am calling attention to…the increasing dominance. Sorry if it sounds like laboratory speak: We are on the same page in terms of sympathies and urgency, believe me.

  • Jon Benton October 4, 2011, 7:39 PM

    Thus far, I’ve seen nothing on this blog on the Palestinian murder of Ascher Palmer and his baby, Yonaton, not on the murders or the IDF cover-up. Why is that?

    • Richard Silverstein October 4, 2011, 8:20 PM

      Maybe because the deaths happened due to stone throwing & not a deliberate attempt to kill. He lost control of the car which resulted in the deaths. And maybe because the stone throwing resulted from a previous killing of a local Palestinian, for which the stone throwing was supposed to take revenge. Bur all that matters for you are Jewish deaths. Palestinian deaths count for nothing. Now we understand yr settlerist thinking.

    • Steve October 4, 2011, 8:55 PM

      At least three facts should be kept in mind about the death of Asher Palmer and his baby Yonaton, if indeed a stone was throne through the windshield by someone, thereby causing his car to crash and killing him and his baby. First, there is no evidence the perpetrator of such an alleged crime was a Palestinian. Israeli government agents have more than once murdered Israeli Jews when it served their propaganda-war purposes to enflame fear of, and thus hatred of, allegedly violent Palestinians.
      Second, Asher was reportedly laid to rest in Hebron. Why in Hebron? Hebron is in the middle of the West Bank, which is Palestinian Territory, illegally occupied by perhaps the most fanatical Zionists the state could pull together into a front-line occupation force (all heavily armed and very aggressive toward the hundreds of thousands of Palestinians of Hebron, both Christian and Muslim). When white people from Europe traveled beyond the established borders of their colonial state (which Israel is, by the way), those “frontiersmen” usually took guns with them because they knew they were invading someone else’s lands and were therefore in the wrong, morally, even if they could appeal to their nationalist ideology and Big Daddy government bluecoats to rationalize their westward expansionism. Every frontiersman and woman of the American West was part of a nationalist colonial project that ignored the rights of the indigenous people, exactly as the Jews of Israel’s post 1967 occupation have done so.
      There is a key difference, however, between the European invasion of America and Zionist Jews’ invasion of Palestine. The invasion and colonization of America weren’t illegal in Western legal tradition. But by 1946, such invasion, conquest and annexation by war, and colonialist transfers of indigenous populations off their land and transfer of the conquering nation’s people into that land — all of these actions were made explicitly illegal for all member states of the United Nations.
      Trouble is, as Ali Abunimah eloquently points out on electronicintifada.org, UN Resolutions even are never enforced against white nation-states, which is what Israel is, basically, poisoned fruit of Europe’s anti-semitism and its refusal during the Third Reich to open borders for those being slaughtered by Hitler’s corporate-sponsored gang — and i don’t mean only Jews, but communists unionists, outspoken university students and religious Christians, Roma, gays, lesbians, and other “others”.
      To raise the straw man of this relatively extremely rare murder, if it was, allegedly by a Palestinian, is, thirdly, to ignore the killings of Palestinians by illegal “settlers” and IDF snipers virtually every day. It is a case of massive hypocrisy. Surely, if it was a murder, it would be good to hold perpetrator accountable. But multiply it by hundreds if not a thousand, and you get what Palestinians suffer routinely at the hands of Israelis, who refuse to hold their fellow Israelis accountable for killing Palestinians. Like white racists said of the Native Americans a century ago, “the only good injun is a dead injun,” so too do far too many Israelis insist God told them to take the land away, or to pretend Palestinians don’t even exist. Thus the Israelis keep electing fascists like Netanyahu and Lieberman, and “liberal” thieves and war criminals like Olmert and Livni. Obama is just as bad, drunk on the power he inherited from BushCheney and even expanding it, with Congressional collusion.

      • lidia October 4, 2011, 10:50 PM

        Steve, Zionist colonialism has less to do with the West fault to save Jews from Hitler than the Zionists’ openly voiced desire to colonize Palestinian land.

        See Ben Gurion in 1938 (!)

        “If I knew it was possible to save all [Jewish] children of Germany
        by their transfer to England and only half of them by transferring them
        to Eretz-Yisrael, I would choose the latter—-because we are faced not
        only with the accounting of these [Jewish] children but also with the
        historical accounting of the Jewish People.”

        Enough said

        • David October 5, 2011, 12:36 AM

          Has anybody ever asked: If the homeland is so central to Judaism, why was it not in fact the destination of all Jews throughout the 20 centuries of the “diaspora”? It would appear that Judaism abandoned this homeland for a very long time. They say that we Jews were in “exile.” I don’t recall exile, as such. Rather, I was born and grew up in Chicago; was this my exile? Sure — some Jews were not exiled and certainly some migrated to the homeland, but most jews made no attempt to live in the region. So, how central is Jerusalem and “the land” at all to Judaism? This “exile” business is a fairy tale, a superstition, and its full of holes. Why is it embraced in place of the hard truth that most Jews never wanted to live in Palestine throughout those centuries, that is perhaps not convenient.

          • mary October 5, 2011, 2:45 AM

            You are correct. Anytime the world’s Jews wanted to live in Palestine, they could have gone there. Jews have lived alongside Muslims and Christians in Palestine for thousands of years. Jewish “exile” is a myth perpetuated by zionists wishing to justify the occupation. These facts do not fit in with the so-called historical narrative. “Exile” and “banishment” stories are just as phony as Netanyahu’s whopper about his “family name” which he told with a straight face to the UN. (Well, he called the UN “a place of lies,” didn’t he?)

      • Shmuel October 7, 2011, 2:13 AM

        Breaking news: a Palestinian has been arrested for throwing the stone on Palmer’s car and stealing his gun from the car (from his dead body – doesn’t get much worse than that)

        So please stop the “accident” or “don’t know if it was a Palestinian” rubbish.

        Can’t you guys call a spade a spade when a Palestinian does evil?

        • Vicky October 7, 2011, 5:14 AM

          I am more than happy to call a spade a spade. What I will not do is try to make out that this is a conflict between two equal sides who are both equally capable of committing equally horrific acts. Daily life for Palestinians in Hebron is close on unbearable, thanks to the combined effort of settlers and state and military (as if you could separate the three). Military occupation is inherently brutal and violent, so when a Palestinian attacks a soldier or hurls rocks at a settler vehicle, I’m not going to respond as though his behaviour is on a par with the occupation that regiments every aspect of his life – from the amount of water that he can drink to how safe his children are as they walk to school.

          In Hebron, they are not very safe – they are protected from settler violence by the staff of Christian Peacemaker Teams and the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine/Israel. Sadly CPT and EAPPI can’t be on hand all the time. If they were, perhaps eight-year-old Taleb Jaber would not have died last week after he was run down by settlers. Shmuel, if I remember rightly you have served in the OPT; you must know how common these hit-and-runs are. You must also know how rare it is that any effort is made to find the culprits. To me, things in the Territories get a lot worse than taking a gun from a dead man.

          As a pacifist, I condemn violence against anyone, including those who are killers themselves. I don’t think anything ever makes killing right. But can people who are prepared to maintain a brutal occupation through army service reasonably characterise Palestinian violence against settlers as evil? No. That’s hypocrisy.

        • lidia October 7, 2011, 6:17 AM

          So, if Zionists “arrest” a Palestinian, he IS guilty. Nice logic and nice law. Now I know why setters are NEVER guilty – they do not get arrested or get released.

          Breaking news – Zionists commit daily crimes against Zionists – IOF, settlers and so on, and almost NEVER pay for it.

          Murderer of 10 years old girl is NOT arrested. Because the girl was Palestinian and the murderer was a Zionist Jew.

          http://english.al-akhbar.com/blogs/gadfly/pro-israel-whitewash-10-year-olds-killing-unravels-court

          • lidia October 7, 2011, 6:18 AM

            Sorry for misspelling, it should be – Zionists commit daily crimes against NON-Zionists

        • Richard Silverstein October 7, 2011, 11:10 AM

          You’re neglecting as usual what came before. A Palestinian from that vicinity had recently been killed. Of course no one would be charged or held accountable. This was a protest against that because Israel never holds anyone accountable for killing or maiming Palestinians. If yr justice system was fair & not loaded against them, they might not feel the need to do these things.

    • lidia October 4, 2011, 9:36 PM

      WHAT this colonizer did on the Palestinian land with his baby on the first place? WHY he was robbing Palestinians with his baby in tow? How many Palestinian has he murdered?

      You want your babies safe? Do not bring them to colonize others’ land! Palestinians on their own land have NO way to stay safe and save their babies from colonizers and IOF – the colonizers’ army.

      • Richard Silverstein October 4, 2011, 11:40 PM

        Sorry, but I don’t justify the deaths of others. Nor should you. Whether his settlement of the land was just or unjust (& it was certainly unjust) he didn’t deserve to die, nor did his baby. To even remotely suggest otherwise is cruel.

        • lidia October 5, 2011, 10:10 AM

          I was NOT saying he should die. I was asking the logical question. If one throws his baby from the high rise, who is to blame?

          • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 10:41 PM

            I have seen more people on the far right & far left in this blog deny they are saying precisely what they did say. It’s getting quite old. You were justifying his death or something awfully close to that. However bad the things might’ve been that he or his fellow settlers did & do to Palestinians, he didn’t deserve to die.

          • lidia October 5, 2011, 11:20 PM

            NO ONE deserves to die. But if somebody acts criminally insane, who is to blame in the resulting death? Of course, the babies are innocent, but they could be victims of their parents’ behavior.

            Please, point my words with the meaning: “the settler and his baby deserve to die” – there are NOT such words by me.

          • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 11:48 PM

            I don’t think settlers as a class are “criminally insane.” THere may be individual settlers who are criminals who’ve assaulted or killed Palestinians. But I hesitate to automatically place every settler in that category.

            That doesn’t mean I have any sympathy whatsoever with the settlement enterprise or Occupation or anything the settlers are doing there.

          • lidia October 6, 2011, 9:36 AM

            As a matter of fact the very “settlement enterprise” is a crime, not only by my opinion, but by international law too. Anyone who is of age taking part in it is a criminal.

          • Shmuel October 7, 2011, 2:24 AM

            Lidia – internaional law does not work like you may want it to.

            The state of Israel may be breaking IL by allowing and building settlements (jurists may argue on this point), but their is no law forbidding individuals from buying land and living there. The people are not criminals on an individual basis by any criminal codex simply by virtue of their living on a settlement. As individuals they are not and will not be answerable to the ICC or other tribunals.

            As for deserving to die, or what was he and his baby doing there, I see life means little to you, I’m glad you don’t have the finger on the trigger.

          • Richard Silverstein October 7, 2011, 11:12 AM

            I don’t see the need for endless bickering here & tit for tat postings. It just drags down the level of discourse.

            I think you’ve both made yr points. So let’s move on to new ground please.

          • lidia October 7, 2011, 3:28 AM

            Shmuel one more time is having his own(?) law. The Zionist state IS breaking international law regarding colonial settlements on the West Bank and in Jerusalem. If Shmuel does not like the law, he could invent his own(?).

            And when state is breaking the law, it means there are people who do it – state is just a legal fiction, not a real agent. So, when state commit war crimes, they are committed by troops. When Zionist state commit crimes, moving its Jewish citizens to occupied land, it is the citizens who commit the crime.

  • Shunra October 4, 2011, 8:53 PM

    Their threats and their plan of action remind me forcibly of one of the gagged cases from earlier this year.

    It is almost as if soldiers or cops are being trained in using sexual violence to subdue uppity women. And Palestinians.

  • Shmuel October 5, 2011, 8:23 AM

    Without going into the illegality of the settlements (which should neither justify violence on either side nor excuse any other illegal behavior) I feel on ought to put on paper the “other” side of the Anatot incident.

    I happen to know well a family who lives there and in view of the reported incident enquired as to what they saw of the incident and what facts they know. I beg to mention that these friends are not extremists and do not have an ideological axe to grind. They present the facts as follows:

    1. The incident took place on the second day of the Jewish festival of Rosh Hashanah, on of the holiest days of the year even for non-religious Jews.

    2. The field in question belongs to the Palestinian who came to his field on the day in question.

    3. The settlers on Anatot do not deny his right to the field which is within the boundary of the settlement. By decision of the Supreme court the Palestinian is entitled to enter the settlement and farm his land, but it is classified as farming land and not as land for building on.

    4.Usually the Palestinian comes alone or with a family member or two, but on this day he came with about a dozen people including “internationals” dressed in “kaffias” and instead of working the land they demonstrated there and set up a building with a Palestinian flag on top.

    5. This was seen as a provocation by the settlers, especially on Rosh Hashanah, and they drove them out of the settlement using non-violence (and I quote) “like the Palestinians use in Bil’in and Na’alin)

    6. The demonstrators then blocked the entrance to the settlement with their cars, and prevented the settlers from entering or leaving the settlement. The settlers smashed windows of the cars that blocked their entrance.

    7. Ben Arush is indeed a policeman who lives there, but aside from him there are only 3 or 4 policemen who live there (not 70% by a long shot)

    8. They deny adamently any sexual assault, but women were removed in the same manner as were the men which obviously involves physical contact of sorts.

    Provocation is provocation – the demonstrators obviously expected the response they got, otherwise why go there with a flag? Did they really expect the settlers to invite them to their homes for tea in these cicumstances?

    • mary October 5, 2011, 10:28 AM

      The point is, the settlers are there illegally and that is why the demonstration took place. The settlers, by their presence, are the provocateurs.

      • Shmuel October 5, 2011, 10:49 AM

        The point is also that if you go to demonstrate provocatively even for a good or just cause, knowing full well against who you are demonstrating, don’t come crying if the demonstration turns nasty. For that’s the reason you went there in the first place. You didn’t go there to drink tea with them, but to get a good camera shot.

        These settlers genuinely believe they are right even though international law may be against them (not all jurists agree to this), so sticking a Palestinian flag in their back yard is asking for trouble, and violent trouble.

        • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 11:01 AM

          Sorry. The man owns the land. He has a right to do on it as he wishes including planting a Palestinian flag on it. Besides if the hadn’t stolen his land to begin with he wouldn’t be planting a flag on it. The original provocation was the theft.

          To blame protesters for provocation in this context is insulting. And are u saying that if someone demonstrates in a supposedly free society & democracy that they should expect the police to stand by & enjoy the show, & to suffer broken bones & cracked skulls? If that’s the sort of democracy you’re offering I’d say: No thanks.

          • Shmuel October 5, 2011, 11:18 AM

            His land isn’t stolen, it’s right there farmed by him inside a settlement. That’s called co-existence, but no, he had to provocate and put a red flag in front of the bull to prove once and for all that he doesn’t want to co-exist.

            Where does that leave hope?

          • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 10:24 PM

            I have waited to rebut the inaccurate claim you’ve published until I had first hand information to do so. Here is information from an activist who not only knows Yassine and his situation, but has visited his land with him several times:

            …It [would] be wrong to say that he has free access to his lands.

            The settlement of Anatot is (or at least seemed to be) a “moderate” settlement, they know that he owns those lands and that he has a Jerusalem ID, so when he comes to the gate they open it (they tried to prevent him in the past, but then after he called the police and the civil administration they explained to the settlers that there is no legal basis to stop him) – however, he is constantly harassed by settlers: anything he planted is always uprooted, his [well] was [poisoned] (זרקו לו חומר מסריח לבור המים), he is constantly threatened, and they try to put pressure on him in many ways not to come.

            The story of the lands is explained in the following presentation:

            And in Dror Etkes’ article

            And this from another activist:

            Michael Sfard is Yassin’s lawyer he filed numerous complaints against settler harrasment and preventing yassin from accessing his land.
            you can see some youtubes following previous attacks on this channel
            http://www.youtube.com/user/Emanyassin

            And yet a third account:

            For example they wouldn’t let him enter with a tractor or any heavy agriculture equipment to plow they try to restrict his step in any way they can or even cant.

            First, you might want to consider apologizing to Yassine for the inaccuracy of what you wrote, which I presume was based on something you read or were told, but which was nonetheless inaccurate. But even more important, perhaps you or a colleague might want to offer Yassine legal representation to actually create a situation in which he COULD farm next door to Anatot and realize the dream of co-existence you claim to believe in. What do you say?

          • lidia October 5, 2011, 9:04 PM

            His land (THIS PART of it) isn’t stolen YET, it’s right there farmed by him inside a settlement (i.e. STOLEN land), so he has to be grateful that not ALL his land is stolen as NOW?

            I am going to take over the home of Shmuel, but I would let him, from the greatness of my heart, for some time only to keep a broom closet. If he is not happy, too bad, it means he doesn’t want to co-exist.

            Yes, I have NO hope for Shmuel. He is hopeless. But he will learn as fast as all other colonizers had – when Palestine are free form such “co-existence”

          • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 11:00 PM

            when Palestine are free form such “co-existence”

            I’m not quite sure what this means, but it comes awfully close to violating my comment rules. Please read them. If you want to deny the rights of Jews to live in Israel that’s something that crosses a red line for me. You decide. If that’s what you believe this isn’t the place for you.

          • Shmuel October 5, 2011, 9:25 PM

            Glad to see you have been gifted with prophesy, lidia “His land (THIS PART of it) isn’t stolen YET” – how should I worship you?

            His land has not been stolen at all, and there is no reason to change that. He just doesn’t like his new neighbours. He sounds like those who used to complain when the blacks moved into the neighbourhood…

            NONE of HIS land was stolen, I’m sure you sincerely believe that if privately owned land was so easy to steal he would not have been left with the broom closet but would have had it all stolen. This just shows the complexity of owning land.

            As for more epithets, “hopeless” – “colonialist”, well if it makes you feel good,then carry on. It really helps discussion and dialogue.

            Try also “idiot” or “fascist” or “yid” that would really make me angry.

          • lidia October 5, 2011, 10:21 PM

            Shmuel has no arguments, as usual for hasbarniks, so he prefer to turn discussion to my (and others) humble persons.

            Shmuel pretends that “new neighbours” aka Zionist settlerist colonies on stolen Palestinian land are something akin to Blacks moving into “white” neighborhood. Sure, it is the same. Let us see
            1) The Blacks were brought by the “Black state” to the land which was for a thousand years and more populated by non-Blacks.
            2) The “Black state” waged war and ethinc cleansed majority of native whites from their land.
            3) the “Black state” robbed the reminding whites of their alnd
            4) the “Black state” gave the robbed land of whites to imported Blacks to live
            5) enough with this…

            Next time I am sure Shmuel will tell us how the Palestinians who do not like Zionists settler colonizers are just like Jews in Palestine land stolen before 1948 (aka TelAviv) who do not like non-Jews living there.

            Yes, Shmuel is hopeless, but if somebody else is interested in facts about private Palestinian land stolen by Zionists, there are a lot of well-documented cases. In fact, from all Palestine only 8% of land was NOT stolen by Zionists, but bought (always this was also very dubious, but let it be such for now). ALL other 92 % of Palestinian land WAS STOLEN by Zionists and is being stolen just now.

            I am sorry that I have to call Shmuel a colonizer, but I have a habit to call spade a spade, unlike Shmuel who calls Zionist colonizers helpless Blacks suffering from racism:)

            By the way, I also like Shmuel(?) logic. Some of my relatives were murdered by Nazis. But not ALL of them. So, by his logic, no one was, because, if murdering Jews were so easy, Nazis sure would not let anyone live.

            Sometimes, even the most greedy robber could not rob his victims 100% in one go.

          • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 10:56 PM

            Lidia, Shmuel has been commenting here longer than you. And though I often disagree with his views, I don’t appreciate him being called a “hasbarnik” (which isn’t even a real term, I think you mean “hasbaranik”). Please try to take some of the edge out of your comments and take a step back to watch and listen to how others respond to commenters like Shmuel before you jump in feet first.

          • lidia October 5, 2011, 11:11 PM

            So, if somebody has been posting here for years about how Zionists colonizers are just “new neighbors” for Palestinians, and Palestinians being the same as white racists, it is somehow not hasbara, but mere “other opinion”? Nice to learn it :)

            I never said that Shmuel is payed or something. But it is simple. I am using arguments of anti-Zionists, so I am an anti-Zionist. Shmuel uses arguments of hasbara – so he is hasbaranik. If Shmuel call me anti-Zionist, I would not protest, because for me it is not a curse word. Sure Shmuel has nothing against helping hasbara a bit, for him hasbara is OK, is it not?

          • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 11:47 PM

            My strong preference is to argue against someone’s views as strongly as you like. But unless your opponent has personally insulted you, try to avoid the personal attacks. I know it’s hard as this subject has lots of emotion & suffering concealed within it. I argue with Shmuel all the time & disagree with him strongly. But despite all those disagreements I think he’s here to hear the other side & I’d like him to. That means he’ll want us to hear his side & he’s entitled to that as well.

            Israelis are real people. Sure, they or their government have committed great injustices against Palestinians. Some of them are even personally responsible for great evil. But you should not turn them into demons or monsters as a class despite the fact that I understand why you might wish to do so..

          • Shmuel October 6, 2011, 12:47 AM

            Richard’
            Firstly, what I wrote is not my claim but bringing as near as verbatum as I can what I was told by my friend in Anatot. In my legal experience both sides of the arguement will “improve” their claims by use of hyperbole and hiding facts. I have little doubt thet Yassine is harrassed and not allowed to work his land as freely as he might want, but I also think that alleged poisoning the wells is most likely a rehash of old anti-semitism and far from fact, as is probably the “sexual assault” which was most likely violence without sexual connotation. The truth lies somewhere inbetween.

            As for Rosh Hashanah, since talmudic times all festivals abroad are two days instead of the original one (since the fixing of the month was by messenger from the Sanhedrin, so there was a doubt as to the date until the messenger arrived). RH was no exception, but because the festival is on the first of the month even in Israel there was a communication problem outside of Jerusalem to notify the masses as to the date and the festival, so a permanent 2 day Rosh Hashanah was fixed with all the exact halachah concerning both days. The 2 days are called in the talmud “yoma arichta” “the long day” and it is halachicly considered as such. Only sibce the advent of Reform and Conservative Jewdaism was there any change to a one day RH which is unanimously rejected by orthodoxy.

            I go into such detail about RH because the “provocation” by Yassine could not have been but deliberate on the Jewish holiday. In Israel you can’t miss the fact that it’s a holiday, and in fact (unfortunately) there is a “seger” closure of the WB from entering “closed military areas” over the whole festival, a fact that would be known to all Palestinians.
            The is history of provocations on Jewish holidays – the Yom kippur war and the second intifada began on RH 2000 (or 2001?)

            Yassine certainly doesn’t need my legal assistance if he is represented by Michael Sfarad, they don’t come much better than that in this field.

          • lidia October 6, 2011, 9:40 AM

            I was not calling Zionists monsters, I just call them colonizers. It is not a matter of my emotions, but of a hard fact. If you want to hear the opinion of a colonizer, it is your right. I have heard them enough to have a clear picture.

          • lidia October 6, 2011, 11:17 PM

            So, when Shmuel calls colonization of Palestine West Bank “co-existence’, it is OK, because it does not crosses a red line for you. But to say that Israel is a modern-day Rhodesia does crossed? Nice to know.

            Was you in 1990 year for right of Whites to live in Rhodesia and against people who “want to deny” this right? Just curious.

        • David October 5, 2011, 11:04 AM

          Sure, it’s provocation. But, the record demonstrates that just being a breathing “Arab” (Palestinian) on the West Bank is a form of provocation, so your point here has no teeth for me.

        • Elisabeth October 6, 2011, 1:33 PM

          Sometimes you sound reasonable Shmuel, and sometimes your comments just blow me away. This one did: “He just doesn’t like his new neighbours. He sounds like those who used to complain when the blacks moved into the neighbourhood…”

          Wow! I do not even know where to start. This feels really hopeless.

        • mary October 8, 2011, 6:55 AM

          That isn’t the point at all, Shmuel. Demonstrations by unarmed persons only turn “nasty” when the authorities become uncomfortable enough with the message the demonstrations convey. Israel is a perfect example. It has the habit of dealing with demonstrations by using live ammunition. It also uses heavy doses of tear gas which have resulted in many serious injuries and at least one death.

          “Sticking a Palestinian flag in their backyard” indeed. It’s the Palestinians’ backyard and not the settlers’. You would do well not to forget that.

    • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 10:37 PM

      The 2nd day of Rosh HaShana in Israel is not a holy day at all. And you must not be religious or you would recognize that fact. In the Diaspora, the second day is celebrated as a chag, but not Israel. If you require an explanation of the halacha around this I’d be happy to oblige. So I’m afraid yr friends sold you a bill of goods on that one.

      I have heard from more than one Israeli source that Anatot is known as a community in which many police reside. One source offered the 70% figure though I haven’t verified it. But the fact is that there were MANY settlers wearing police paraphenalia and police issued sidearms who were not on duty. They clearly lived in Anatot.

      As for sexual assault, they didn’t see what happened to Shavit Sinai which I’ve documented in my recent post. You may want to send them Shavit’s original Hebrew version.

      You still defend the violent, brutal, sadistic response of the settlers. Regardless of yr friendships there, you are doing an injustice to decency and fairness.

      • Shunra October 5, 2011, 10:46 PM

        Shmuel’s right to say it counts as a holy day – at least, it’s holy enough for public transportation to be shut down, along with all other businesses. It is an official day of rest.

        As to celebration as a Chag – it’s celebrated as a “yom tov” among the orthodox, with prohibitions on using electricity and driving and writing and so forth. There is a specific order of prayer, unlike regular days.

        Your other points still stand, though! Shmuel is wrong, and his friends are lying.

        • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 10:52 PM

          Thanks for clarifying that.

          Jeez, I guess it’s possible but that’s not what I learned at Jewish Theological Seminary about the way it’s celebrated in Israel. As far as I can tell there is no specific halachic support for why it should be celebrated as a chag.though there are sometimes Orthodox customs which permit “severe” interpretations of law in order to “protect” the sphere of holiness around a sacred day such as Rosh Hashanah. So perhaps that’s why the Orthodox may celebrate the 2nd day there.

          • Shmuel October 6, 2011, 12:57 AM

            See my explanation above concerning RH – JTS is of course Conservative so you got taught the party line there regarding why only one day!

            Shunra – it’s easy to say that my friends are lying, but friends don’t usually lie to friends (that is them to me). They might be ignorant of certain facts, but I believe that what I quoted here was in good faith and not a distortion. It’s all too easy to see all in black and white.
            I hope your friends are honest to you and you don’t have reason to doubt their integrity when they discuss things with you.

          • Clarification October 6, 2011, 9:15 PM

            According to the Torah, Rosh Hashana is one day.

            The rabbis made it though into two days, and the Torah grants them the ability to do so.

            Unlike other holidays,this pertains to both Israel and outside of Israel.

            In cases of other holidays, outside of Israel it is celebrated 2 days because people were unsure about the exact timing of the holiday/scheduling.

            With modern calendars, many people are saying this should be changed, although it’d require a mass meeting of rabbinical scholars,and we don’t normally change tradition.

          • Richard Silverstein October 6, 2011, 10:51 PM

            Thanks, I stand corrected. I misremembered what I was taught a few decades ago at school.

  • Andrew October 5, 2011, 9:20 AM

    “If Occupation can turn these people into beasts it can do this to anyone, even the best of us.” Come on man, those are the genetic degenerate bastard children of the Monsters that did the same things in 1948. They were Monsters when they landed in Palestine, they were monsters in ’48, in ’67, and now in 2011. A society of pure evil except for 200 peace activists in a population of 6 million
    just sick.

    • lidia October 5, 2011, 10:11 AM

      Andrew, a bit (even though not much) more than 200. Maybe 5000.

    • David October 5, 2011, 10:27 AM

      Certainly, the Zionist enterprise selected for marginal types from the start. And now, “settling the land” selects again from that same pool! I know that are many other factors to consider, of course, but this realization does help explain, to my puzzlement, the extraordinary meaness viciousness of these settlers regarding the native “arabs” (they don’t recognize anything as “Palestinian”) over whom they have near total control anyway.

      However “Monsters” does not explain anything nor does “degenerate bastard”.

      • Shmuel October 5, 2011, 11:01 AM

        “marginal types” – “same pool” – “monsters” – “degenerate bastard children” – “pure evil”

        I admit I’m all of these, and so are my 6 million co-citizens. We have tails, cloven hooves and horns to wit. The devil in disguise, lucifer’s agents, the anti-christ. And worse than all this we’re ZIONISTS!!!! OMG!!!!

        Don’t you, Andrew, Lidia and David, get backache from supporting the wings on your backs and the halos above your heads, and from being such sanctimonious pious pr**ks?

        • David October 5, 2011, 11:16 AM

          Well said! And, yes, the wings do irritate a bit!

          But, it’s like they say in real estate “puff for puff.” Nothing better describes the Zionist ethos than the words “sanctimonius” and “pious”. The settlers, and perhaps all of Israel, is suffused with its own “self-righteousness”. Indeed, the country is unresponsive to any request, demand or criticism completely. Israel does whatever it wants, when it wants, because it “excuses” itself everything and it is the goal of guys like myself to keep calling attention to this pimple on the face of the state.

          I appear sanctimonious because this is the only way to neutralize the overweening smug self-justifications of Zionism from the initial pious absurdity, the fundamental hypocrisy, that the book the Jews wrote says they are entitled to this land occupied by other people. Thus “armed”, a gleam in their eyes, the Zionists have generated a record of crimes as long, or longer, than any “evil empire” or racist state ever. And I know it and this bothers you a lot.

          • David October 6, 2011, 11:51 AM

            I don’t understand all the angst about Rosh Hashanah, the second day and all. What’s the relevance? Is Shmuel suggesting that the provocation of the second (disputed) day of the holiday is, what?, “disrespecful?” Should the indigeious population be better mannered? If this is the critique of the provocation, it is incommensurate with the issues and desperation reflected in the event. I could not fault my adversary for exploiting a holiday in any case.

            And the words “co-existence” leave me cold as well. One can just imagine the French in Algeria or the British under the Raj complaining that the “wogs” don’t seem to understand their efforts at co-existence!

            Both matters are pretty near invisible and meaningless.

        • lidia October 5, 2011, 11:20 AM

          One needs not to be angel – just not to be colonizer -i.e thief, robber, murderer, rapist, torturer – I suppose it is clear enough

          • David October 5, 2011, 11:36 AM

            Do I have to give back the wings?

          • lidia October 5, 2011, 9:09 PM

            David, you could keep them, if you wish :)

        • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 10:26 PM

          I tend to agree with yr overall sentiment, though the 2nd paragraph was over the top and unnecessary imo.

      • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 10:43 PM

        This has a racist tone that makes me uncomfortable. “Pool” sounds an awful lot like “gene pool” to me & that gets into territory that I’m uncomfortable with.

        • David October 6, 2011, 1:11 PM

          I understand your discomfort about “pool.” I am not a racist and someone’s “genome” is not a matter of interest for me. I retract any such allusion and will leave it with the thought that the Zionist call probably had appeal to those who were not so well integrated into their home economies and societies for whatever reasons.

          I am also sensitive to your remarks asking Lidia to tone it down. I believe that it is important to retain Shmuel and others with similar views on this site and I see where you are coming from.

          I try very hard to understand “the other side”. My comment about the displaced persons coming to the shores of Palestine itself stirs a modicum of true sympathy with their history, i.e. the insistence on a separate state and now the insistence on a “Jewish” state. I can understand the personal sense of it, the pull. But, I think that Zionism and all its ramifications, good and bad, has seen its day and is an anarchronism in the modern world, as outdated as communism, per se.

          Anyway — keep up the good work.

          • Richard Silverstein October 6, 2011, 5:38 PM

            Thanks for your understanding. I have to restrain some on both sides of the argument. Many more on the pro Israel right. But some on the opposite side as well. Otherwise it would be nothing but a shouting match or a mutual admiration society.

          • lidia October 6, 2011, 11:09 PM

            David, sure, Zionism is in the same box as communism, great logic.

            Zionism is a colonialist enterprise. Given the constant support from imperialist states – former(?) colonial masters themselves, it is still somehow “legit” by imperialist mind.

            I do not know what you have meant by “communism”, but the great state of the world capitalism just now sure push people to look for alternative, and Marxism is not the last of them.

            If you meant USSR, it was a place when Jews (like me) had rights and were able to live good life without being colonizers. It was USSR which saved a great majority of Jews from Hitler – while Western states waited. If USA opened second front even the half of an year before, Anna Frank would stay alive, and millions of other Jews and non-Jews as well.

            By the way, Rhodesian colonizers were poor and what not as well. It is funny that I feel NO sympathy whatsoever with them. They preferred to go to Africa and rob and murder natives instead of stay and struggle with their own rulers. They were tool of imperialism and they were not better than Nazis. Only they were murdering and robbing non-Whites, so it was OK.

          • David October 6, 2011, 11:30 PM

            Lidia: You are barking up the wrong tree here! I did not say that there was anything in common between communism and Zionism except that they were both “dated” in some sense. If Israel is a colonial enterprise — and I think that it is — one reason for its isolation today is that it is grounded in such an anachronistic ideology. The routine humiliation of the subjugated of former times was not instantly tweeted around the world, pics and all. The exploiter got away with the enterprise in part because nobody was watching, literally. Of course, there’s much more to it.

            As for “communism”, I intended only to draw attention to the Leninist materialism of production and workers, that is, the factory basis of economic life. The economic realm is far more complex today and much value is created from materials more ephemeral than iron, bricks etc.

            I certainly don’t deserve lectures on either the evils of colonialism or the strengths of Jewish life in the Soviet Union. I do understand these things.

            As an aside — it ocurred to me today that perhaps it would be helpful to term the alloy of Judaism and Zionism, an incompatible mix in my view, “Zudaism” to differentiate it from Judaism which does not support imperialism and exploitation of other people’s property. In this manner, the Zionist were not be Jews, as such, but “Zews” and the appeal of Zionists to Judaism and, finally, anti-Semitism would be reduced to anti-Zemitism and defanged. The “Jewish” state of Israel would then be properly the “Zewish” state of Israel. (One does what one can.)

          • Shmuel October 7, 2011, 2:42 AM

            Lidia -which USSR did you live in which gave Jews rights? They were forbidden to worship, many refused jobs, not allowed religious artifacts (I even had to smuggle in prayer books, mezuzot and tefillin – basic Jewish religious needs. Kosher meat was not available, and a brit had to be performed clandestinely.
            Of course, if you were a true communist Jew then you had privilage, but then you were hardly Jewish anymore.
            And your ID had “Jew” stamped in it.

            I know nostalgia isn’t what it used to be, but it seems that 20 years since the fall of the iron curtain have badly affected your memory!

          • lidia October 7, 2011, 3:20 AM

            I lived in the USSR when I got (like non-Jews) the right to free higher education and got it. The same regarding free health-care, almost free childcare, very affordable housing and much lesser level of racism than in Israel. In the USSR I could wed ANY man regardless of his “race”.

            And yes, Judaism was NOT state sponsored in the USSR, unlike in Israel. So, public transportation was (horror!) operating all week round. But, as usual, Shmuel’s words need to be taken with caution. ALL religions were NOT state-sponsored. So, Jews were NOT discriminated. The great majority of the USSR Jews were (and still are) non-religious. We still (horror) eat sandwiches with butter and ham, and for this our Jewish brethren in Israel kindly call us “Russian swines”.

            So, I was NOT discriminated and NOT privileged in the USSR. While “Russian” Jews in Israel are discriminated regarding Ashkenazim and privileged regarding Palestinians and so on.

            But I found the words of Shmuel regarding “Jew” in my USSR passport the most funny. In Israel, there is STILL no option to call oneself simply “Israeli”. Every citizen is classified by religion, even if one does not have any. Anyway, this classification is BY LAW of Israel a reason for discrimination, while in the USSR there was NO law giving anyone more rights regarding what was in one’s ID.

          • Richard Silverstein October 7, 2011, 11:14 AM

            The first Jewish citizens of Israel are now able to change their religious category to None. Yoram Kaniuk was the first to do so this week.

          • lidia October 7, 2011, 11:54 AM

            yes, I have read the news. So, his religion is listed still, even as “none”. WHY it should be listed at all? The answer is simple – because the Zionist state is founded on racist(religious) base. Without “religion” listed there will be no way to tell a Jew from non-Jew, and Jews in Zionist state are privileged. So, as long as the state is Zionist, it will demand the religion being not the personal matter, but a state matter. So, there will be no equality under law in Zionist state and even no civil marriage or divorce. In short, a nice place it is.

          • Richard Silverstein October 7, 2011, 6:44 PM

            I don’t think u understand that religion is crucial to many Israeli citizens including Muslims & Christians. If you’re demanding a secular state many non-Jews do not want that. They want all religions treated equally & for those wishing no religion to be treated w respect as well.

            I should add that I would have no problem with a state that completely separated synagogue, mosque, church & state. That sort of secular state would be fine w. me as long as all religions were guaranteed the right to worship as they chose.

          • lidia October 8, 2011, 2:42 AM

            I am not “demanding” anything. I just tell how it is.But what non-Jews want does not matter in Zionist state, and it is a fact.

          • Richard Silverstein October 8, 2011, 2:37 PM

            That’s pretty much true. But doesn’t necessarily have to remain so forever. One of the goals of this blog is to point to a different vision for a future Israel. Not one that must be purely secular or anti-Zionist. But one that rejects some of the worst chauvinism of the current system.

          • lidia October 8, 2011, 9:21 PM

            I am aware that RS is a Zionist and wants Israel to be a nicer Zionist state. I am not telling here what I think about such notion from the moral point of view. But it is just not possible. All “the worst chauvinism of the current system” is not someone’s whim, but the only way to maintain a “Jewish state” on Palestinian land. And without “Jewish state” there is no Zionism.

          • Richard Silverstein October 8, 2011, 9:42 PM

            You are not aware of what I am or what I believe. And saying I believe in a “nicer ZIonist state” is not only false, it’s insulting. Do NOT characterize my views for me. Especially if you don’t understand them.

          • lidia October 8, 2011, 9:56 PM

            Sorry, I was not trying to offend. But if your goal is not “anti-Zionist” state, so how to define it? The state of all people is sure anti-Zionist, as it is anti-aparteid, anti-”pure Arian” and so on. All other options are Zionist.

    • Richard Silverstein October 5, 2011, 6:06 PM

      Your comment is almost as sick as they are. And you are turning them into monsters in ways just as objectionable as the ones they use to turn the peace activists into monsters.

      We are all human beings some behave well, some badly. The goal is to encourage or compel all of us to behave reasonably decently. Not to turn any one group of us into evil monsters.

      • lidia October 5, 2011, 8:57 PM

        of course, we all are human beings. But what Andrew meant – human beings which murdered, exiled, robbed and raped Palestinians in 1947 were not different from human beings which are doing it NOW. If you do not like Andrew calling them monsters, than do not say that in 1947 Zionists somehow were not the same colonizers as now
        .

      • lidia October 5, 2011, 9:08 PM

        By the way, it was NOT Andrew who used the word “beast”. It was RS himself. So, to call such human beings “beasts” is OK”?Should it somehow encourage or compel modern day colonizers to behave reasonably decently?

  • lidia October 6, 2011, 11:36 PM

    One more fine example of Shmuel-style “co-existence” by colonizers of Palestine land.

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/dozens-of-settlers-surround-idf-patrol-in-west-bank-and-assault-soldiers-1.388594

    “Dozens of settlers surround IDF patrol in West Bank and assault soldiers
    IDF patrol vehicle near Shilo trapped by roadblocks; settlers and soldiers clash in what a senior officer calls ‘crossing a red line.’”

    I am sure IOF soldiers were to blame for not appearing to want “co-existence”enough . Of course, when a Palestinian child throws a stone to IOF tank, he is shot on the place (and often shot WITHOUT being throwing anything). But when Jews-colonizers punch their own IOF – they “will be arrested soon”, yeah.

  • David October 7, 2011, 9:48 AM

    This may be a duplicated comment as my pc went bananas for a moment.

    Shmuel: I am certain you know that throwing a rock is incommensurate with the firepower of the settlers and the IDF and is inconsistent with the picture you attempt to create, as has been pointed out here.

    The situation is not analogous to bickering neighbors living uneasily side by side on the West Bank, exchanging occasional grim reminders of just how silly some neighbors can be by resorting to violence. This won’t wash at all.

    If such tit for tat among neighbors were a good picture, my neighbor today would be an American Native in a modern “teepee”. The bickering in the West Bank is not about a noisy neighbor or a neighbor who leaves garbage in the street. It is about the steady dispossession of Palestinians of their property and the possession of that property by others who have not lived in the region for 1300 years like the Palestinians and who have all the cards stacked in their favor.

    The right wing settlers know no law and this tiny minority of Israelis who have led the state into the abyss (and it is my feeling that Israelis have allowed this out of confusion and sentimentalism only.) The assault on IDF by settlers reflects the utter lawlessness of these people and their inability therfore to live among any others anywhere. Confrontations of this nature, while not to be celebrated, are better and healthier for both Israel, the state, and for the dispossessed Palestinians. These people have no respect for the civil authority that has fed them, housed them, and favored them again and again. And all Israelis should take note of this boundless aggression born and sustained on their money, on the sacrifices they have made, willingly or not.

    • lidia October 7, 2011, 10:50 AM

      David, the main culprit is NOT settlers, but the Zionist state itself. It has been NOT led into colonizing even more of Palestine by some “right-wingers”. As a matter of fact the settlements were even more eager promoted by Avoda’s governments.

      The case of settlerism is Zionism as such. Zionists’ goal is Palestine without Palestinians – all of Palestine and even more land (of Syria and Lebanon, for ex.)

      To blame settlers for settlement project is not unlike blaming Lieutenant Calley for USA aggression against Vietnam. He was a war criminal, sure, but he was only a tool of the USA rulers. Without them, he would not be in Vietnam, murdering civilians.

      • David October 7, 2011, 11:16 AM

        Of course. I was trying to focus on the disconnect, however slight, between mainstream Israeli society and the foaming at the mouth settlers. Sure, the settlers are the current incarnation of Zionism unfettered, a view which they encourage, identifying with the founding settlers in spirit if not politically. It is pointless to keep charging Zionism, as such, as there is no way to indict the doctrine that has become so shameful but to indict the practitioners, to use Zionist law to prosecute these Zionists.

        The US and Israel devastate one people after another, country after country, with impunity. But individuals can be indicted and held liable for the policies directing them.
        It is not useful to lecture me about the evils of Zionism, believe me.

  • David Marchesi October 7, 2011, 2:03 PM

    The only hope for Israelis is to confront their past and present actions honestly, and to draw the conclusion that they are in no way superior to any other people. However, the pseudo-religious nature of Zionism (Zionists rather than Jews are God’s Chosen People) has rarely been admitted by any in the Israeli Establishment, or by Jewish Boards of Deputies etc around the world. David’s suggestion of Zudaism might actually be a useful label – but, in the end, sticks and stones ( + F-16′s , Uzis, etc) may break my bones but words can never hurt me. Thus, as Chomsky notes, Bibi’s advisor pointed out (c. 1993)that Palestinians might well call their future “state” “fried chicken” , since it would be totally controlled by Israel .It is quite vital for any colonist to recognise that he is , in the end, only top-dog because of the power of the State of Israel, and, of course, behind it, that of the USA.To see himself as superior through merit or birthright is absurd and degrading. It is ,above all ,cowardly. Macho men who brutalise peaceful protestors are , in any country, pretty despicable.

  • David October 7, 2011, 7:55 PM

    I have to confess that it is the smug, self-satisified conceit of the pro-Israel folks I encounter here in the US that is just intolerable. It is a reflection of that self-righteousness and pristine superiority that is inculcated into children among the settlers, as far as I know. One settler father says to his small son, “spit on her!” and the boy, the little boy, spits on this adult Palestinian woman! Who are these people and why does anyone in the civilized world tolerate this stuff? Why do Israelis allow this stuff, even allowing for their “Zudiasm?” It is just so hard to understand. I just can’t imagine encouraging my son to spit on any living thing, much less an adult human, man or woman. But then I don’t believe that I am chosen to redeem history, no less.