Right Wing Israelis Marching in Jerusalem cry ‘Butcher the Arabs

[JonScholar]

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4077292,00.html

Dozens of right-wing activists marching through Jerusalem Wednesday were filmed chanting inflammatory messages and singing provocative songs in the capital, including “Muhammad is dead,” “May your village burn,” “Death to leftists,” and “Butcher the Arabs.”

The disturbing utterances were made during the traditional “Flag Dance” on the occasion of Jerusalem Day, which drew tens of thousands of Israelis to the capital to celebrate its unification following the 1967 Six-Day War.

The offensive chants and songs can be clearly heard in the video, filmed by members of the Sheikh Jarrah Solidarity Movement. Elsewhere, Arab residents hurled stones at Jewish protestors during the tense day. The Jerusalem Police deployed in the city in force ahead of time in a bid to prevent friction between Jews and Arabs.

During Wednesday’s violent clashes, police detained at least 15 rioters, both Jewish and Arab. A focal point of tension was the Old City’s Damascus Gate, where Jewish marchers and Arab business owners hurled stones and fruit at each other. Some Jews entered the Muslim market in the area and chanted “Death to the Arabs” and “Muhammad is dead.”

Read More: http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4077292,00.html

http://silwanic.net/?p=17707

Wadi Hilweh Information Center - Silwan also reported:

Israeli extremists staged a racist march in honor of Jerusalem Day today, from the Palestinian neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah. The streets of East Jerusalem stood empty, save for the thousands of Israeli marchers, supported by Israeli troops, who chanted slogans against Arabs, Muslims and Christians. Phrases such as “death to Arabs” rung out. Right-wing extremists attacked a group of left-wing Israeli counter-protesters before Israeli police eyes, who did nothing to impede the assault. Three left-wing Israelis and one American protester were arrested by police. The American citizen remains in police custody.

Read more: http://silwanic.net/?p=17707

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[provis99]

2. It's nice that they have a hobby.

Ethnic bigotry and intimidation is a pleasant way to enjoy the day.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mosby]

5. sad

Why would anyone throw fruit at another person?

Sounds like the police did a good job keeping the situation from escalating given that both sides were throwing stuff including rocks.

[cali]

7. got a comment about the Jewish marchers spewing vile hate?

[Never Stop Dancin]

8. He did comment

[cali]

9. no he/she did not comment on that specifically.

[Never Stop Dancin]

10. I think

people can comment on what they want to, no? He condemned all involved.

[Mosby]

58. I don't really know what to say

It is shocking to me that people who consider themselves observant Jews would say bigoted, racist stuff like that, it makes me sad.

[LeftishBrit]

6. Disgusting

[shira]

11. Well, at least these disgusting haters protested peacefully, right?

Looks like they'd get along famously with their fellow rightwing activists coming in on flotillas to meet and greet with Hamas.

Maybe not - the flotillistas are more violent than the rightwingers calling for butchery.

[tootrueleft]

12. Any comment on the 'butcher the arabs' thing?

[shira]

13. You mean besides calling them disgusting haters? n/t

[tootrueleft]

14. Yes. On the 'butcher the arabs' thing.

[shira]

15. Yes, only disgusting hatemongers would utter such horrible incitement. n/t

[tootrueleft]

16. Glad to hear it.

[shira]

17. What do you think of BDS'ers calling for an end to an Israeli apartheid, nazi state? n/t

[tootrueleft]

18. Can you clarify if you refer to an end to israeli apartheid or the israeli state?

[shira]

19. The Israeli apartheid/nazi state. The whole racist state itself.

How do you end "apartheid" in Israel without destroying Israel?

[tootrueleft]

22. BDS protests the actions o the israeli state, not the states existence. Why misrepresent them?

[aranthus]

23. He's not misrepresenting B DS.

Among other things, it seeks the Right of Return, which is inherently related to eliminating the Jewish State.

[tootrueleft]

24. In other words eliminating religious apartheid. South africas still on the map y'know...

[shira]

27. Oh please, the full RoR will make Israel a Palestinian state with Hamas in charge....

...and that would destroy Israel and its Jews, and you know that if you know ANYTHING at all about Hamas or the PLO and their views on Jews.

[tootrueleft]

29. Are you really on a liberal board supporting apartheid?

[shira]

30. There is no apartheid as Israel is a liberal state and all its citizens enjoy equal rights.

Jimmy Carter said as much:
"Israel is a wonderful democracy with equal treatment of all citizens"

Are you saying on a liberal board that Israel must allow a full RoR (one state) and allow the empowerment of Hamas in free elections - despite what Hamas stands for (basically the closest thing to the Nazi agenda)?

[tootrueleft]

31. So there is no favor granted in israel or the occupied territories based on religion?

[shira]

34. The conflict outside Israel in the territories is with a national foreign entity.

That's not apartheid either.

Jimmy Carter is on record saying Israel "WILL" become an apartheid state. He is not describing Israel as an apartheid state now but rather predicting that it will be.

[tootrueleft]

36. So I take it you support palestinian statehood, lest a one state solution causes apartheid to

magically appear from nowhere?

[shira]

37. Sure - the conflict should have ended with Israel's peace offers either in 2001 or 2008 accepted...

...by the PA. There's no good reason why the PA rejected their own self rule, free of occupation and settlements on close to 100% of the 1967 borders (with land swaps).

[tootrueleft]

42. Always the fault of the people being opressed and occupied, isn't it?

[shira]

44. The PLO and Hamas aren't being oppressed. They're oppressing/subjugating/abusing Palestinians. n/t

[tootrueleft]

45. So it wasn't israel blockading the people of gaza? You should phone the news channels LOL!!

[shira]

46. All Hamas/PLO need to do is agree to a peace offer, end of conflict, settlements...

...and they'd have their own state.

They've chosen the path of more war and that has hurt Palestinians.

Not to mention Palestinians have zero freedoms under Hamas/PLO authority (women's rights, gays, religious minorities, no freedoms of speech, press...).

[parkia00]

48. Really though, how do you send settlements?

Lets say all the planets are in alignment and the ruling powers of both sides sign a final peace. What's to stop the settlers from doing what they want to do. Will Israel use it's authority to prevent any new settlements from popping up? What if the settles pop up a new settlement in an area agreed to go to the PA? Would the PA have the right to kick them off the land? And if the armed settlers resort to violence will the IDF stand idly by cause it's not happening in Israel? You know the political life expectancy of any Jewish Knesset member that publicly calls for an end to settlements. It's almost as impossibility.

[shira]

49. You see settlers illegally building in Gaza these days? How about the Sinai or south Lebanon? n/t

[parkia00]

50. Not talking about those settlements...

I'm talking about the West Bank. Those settlements in Lebanon, Sinai and Gaza were tiny and far in between. But somehow I think you already know that.

[Shaktimaan]

52. wait...

Are you saying that none of the settlers from Lebanon, Sinai and Gaza fought against leaving or made failed attempts to go back and re-establish outposts there?

Those settlements in Lebanon, Sinai and Gaza were tiny and far in between.

So what? How EXACTLY would that make it easier for anyone to cross a heavily guarded border with tons of building materials and start building their own town without interference?

Ummmmm... what do you see preventing the Palestinians from just arresting them?

[parkia00]

55. Palestinians arresting Settlers?

You know, you are right. I have never seen that before. I wonder what would happen if Palestinians tried to enter a settlement to arrest someone or clear the settlement. What do you think will happen? So far from what I can see, the settlers seems to have indeed found a easy way to bring large amounts of building materials across the heavily guarded border into the West Bank and for some strange reason the border posts don't seem to have spotted them. Consistently. Must be some sort of conspiracy!

[Shaktimaan]

57. you were asking...

what was to prevent settlers from building in areas designated to go to the PA, right?

Well, so far in every area that settlers had been living that was later designated to go to Arabs, NONE of those areas had any problems with re-settlement by Israelis. This includes areas in the West Bank, the Sinai, Gaza, Lebanon... what makes you think that there would suddenly be any kind of issue?

I wonder what would happen if Palestinians tried to enter a settlement to arrest someone or clear the settlement.

Clear the settlement of who? We are talking about land that Israel would cede to the Palestinian government. The PA takes control of the area AFTER Israel clears it of Israeli settlers. The PA could only be arresting settlers that tried to re-enter Palestinian land AFTER being expelled.

the settlers seems to have indeed found a easy way to bring large amounts of building materials across the heavily guarded border into the West Bank

Really? In an area of the west bank under the PA's sovereignty? Oh, no, not there. Not in the places that Israel designated as being under Palestinian control, right? Only in the places that Israel HASN'T GIVEN TO THE FREAKING PALESTINIANS YET, RIGHT!?

---

You seem to think that there's nothing to stop the settlers from building new settlements in any area they please, regardless of what agreements Israel signs. Well, it's pretty obvious that some settlers want to go back to Gaza, don't you think? What stopping them? (Hint: If the settlers drove in there with weapons and building materials they would be stopped by IDF border guards. If they managed to evade them somehow and then entered the strip they would be either kidnapped or shot by Hamas.)

It's pretty obvious that the settlers would like to take back Joseph's Tomb from the Palestinians. What is stopping them there, I mean it's in the West Bank, right? And you said that the WB would be totally different! (Hint: If the settlers drove in there with weapons and building materials they would be arrested by the Israelis or PA police. If they threatened anyone they would get shot, probably by the PA police force.

Well, what about Homesh, that's a good one. The settlers were evicted and the settlement destroyed. So they went BACK and rebuilt it only to be evicted and have their settlement destroyed again. So they aren't having as much luck rebuilding as you predicted. BUT, they haven't been entirely prevented from doing it at all either, which is significant. An Israeli judge ruled that the only reason the settlers were allowed to go back at all was because Israel never transferred ownership of the area over to the PA.

In other words, once Israel formally gives the land to the PA no one will go back there trying to rebuild anything because they don't want to get arrested or shot.

So, to answer your question, What's to stop the settlers from doing what they want to do.

• Israel will use it's authority to prevent any new settlements from popping up.
• The PA has the right to kick any non-citizens off their land, as well as arrest them.
• If the armed settlers resort to violence, (storming the border like Rambo I guess you're imagining?) then the PA would probably just shoot them. Right? http://tinyurl.com/627m6hz

[parkia00]

60. You gave very good reasons for your argument. Thank you.

And I respect that you took the time to explain them. I really wish I could believe that this would happen but I still doubt it. The settlements in the West Bank cannot be compared to those in Gaza, Lebanon or the Sinai. They are much larger and much more well established and are much closer to the heart of Israel. And woe to any Israeli politician that pushes for their removal.

[Shaktimaan]

61. Well, we ARE discussing 2 different things.

1: Will Israel dismantle all of the WB settlements?

2: Will Israel be able to enforce the removal of the settlements it does agree to?

The answer to no. 2 is what I addressed. Sure they will. As for question 1. Obviously not. No one thinks Israel has the desire or political willpower to demolish all those settlements. But that's not SUCH a big impediment to peace in the long run. No one expects them to at this point. Most of those settlements are right along the border and will become incorporated into Israel, offset with land swaps. Once you subtract the area of all the roadblocks, buffer zones, settler-roads, etc., we're not talking about much land at all. 2, maybe 3% tops of the whole WB.

There are other, more serious obstacles to any peace agreement. This one makes for good copy bc it has a big emotional component, but it isn't a really serious impediment at the end of the day. Refugees on the other hand. Or Jerusalem. THOSE are real zero-sum issues.

And woe to any Israeli politician that pushes for their removal.

Nah, most Israelis HATE the settlers. They're crazy, don't forget. Almost everyone is in favor of trading settlements for a peace treaty. It's just that after what happened with Oslo and Camp David and especially in Lebanon and Gaza they are leery about the Palestinians being able to hold up their side of the bargain, aka: ending terrorism. Remember, back in 2005 the plan to leave Gaza was HUGELY popular among Israelis. It's just the aftermath they're not so hot on.

[Shaktimaan]

54. oversimplifying is the mark of a weak, dishonest argument.

The fact that the Palestinians are being oppressed and occupied has absolutely no bearing on their relative guilt or innocence regarding either their historical or current predicament.

It certainly simplifies the conflict if you just assume that the weakest, most oppressed group is inherently the righteous one. Unfortunately history is far less retarded than that. And most conflicts are considerably more complicated to understand.

[parkia00]

56. Well Geee... talk about oversimplifying!

Where the hell did I indicate in some way the "most oppressed group is inherently the righteous one". Please show it to me. And not just to me, to everyone here where I indicated the activities of the righteous Palestinians! Where were you aiming at? <---?---> Oh and by the way I was addressing something said earlier by another poster about the Palestinians simply agreeing to peace terms set by Israel and the settlements will automatically stop; of which I disagreed. I was not talking about the entire conflict and the evils that the Palestinians did under their notion of freedom fighting.

So your "The fact that the Palestinians are being oppressed and occupied has absolutely no bearing on their relative guilt or innocence regarding either their historical or current predicament." is indeed very true but unfortunately has nothing to do with settlements and the point I was trying to make about the possible halt to settlements or even if it was possible at all without some really nasty blowback to anyone that tries to put a stop to said settlements. SO if you would forgive me, I'm not really sure where the bus you are on is going.

[Shaktimaan]

53. He's saying...

that all Israeli citizens have equal rights under the law, not that Israel has eradicated all forms of racism or discrimination.

Now I am not defending discrimination. But I am criticizing attempts to conflate it with apartheid, which is an entirely different thing, both in type and degree. Allow an analogy...

So there is no favor granted in the US or the occupied territory of Iraq based on religion, race, sexual preference or ethnicity?

Is the US an apartheid state?

[JonScholar]

32. The residents of the occupied territories have been under Israeli rule for decades...

and they obviously don't have rights equal to those of Israeli Jews

[shira]

33. So the remedy to that is one-state with Hamas and/or the PLO in charge? n/t

[JonScholar]

35. The remedy to that is to allow the Palestinians self sovereignty

That can come in two forms. Either Israel will annex the West Bank and Gaza, but grant all of its residents full citizenship, or Israel will withdraw entirely to the pre-1967 borders and allow a viable Palestinian state to be formed. The former is the most just solution because it would allow dispossessed Palestinian refugees equal rights to travel and settle in their historic homeland as Israeli Jews, the latter option is the most realistic given the current political climate. But Israel has offered the Palestinians neither

[shira]

38. Israel offered very credible deals in 2000 and 2008 that would end the conflict, occupation...

...and grant Palestinians self-rule.

There's no good reason the PA rejected both offers and you know it.

[JonScholar]

39. delete

[JonScholar]

40. No Israel didn't shira, you know that's not true

Neither 2000, or 2008 offered the Palestinians a contiguous, viable state. In both offers the Palestinian state was fragmented into bantustans by Israeli settlements, security zones, and checkpoints. On top of that all the most valuable land was to be annexed by Israel with virtually nothing offered in return. I won't go over this with you again

[shira]

41. The Olmert 2008 offer was a 100% land offer for a contiguous Palestinian state, no bantustans.

If the hilltop settlements were the most valuable land then it would have been used between 1948-67 for Palestinian homes, but it was barely used at all.

Making excuses for PA/Hamas antisemitic, intransigence and warmongering is pitiful.

[shira]

43. And here's a map proving it...

http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/images/iht_daily/D171209/olmertmap.pdf

[Shaktimaan]

51. right... so?

Neither do Iraqis have equal rights to US citizens despite two occupations and the intervening us-led sanctions. Occupying territory doesn't mean the people all become your citizens, you know.

[LeftishBrit]

25. Unfortunately, usually it doesn't

Mostly people who support BDS don't say, 'We will boycott you UNTIL and UNLESS you make change X and do Y and stop doing Z'. They say essentially, 'We will boycott you because you are such a wicked country'. That's what I have most against the movement.

[JonScholar]

26. It's implied that BDS will stop once Israel allows the Palestinians self determination nt

[shira]

28. No, BDS stops once there's a one-state solution with full RoR....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnpilMYsR0I

These truly racist, rightwing freaks are against any peaceful cooperation b/w Jews and Palestinians.

[Shaktimaan]

59. Is it?

What are the terms?

Are they consistent? Are they articulated somewhere? Is everyone on the same page regarding their implementation? Do they all describe things that Israel has the authority to control?

I'd love to see an actual list that lays out the terms and expectations in a clear, concise way. Where is that?

[LeftishBrit]

20. I am against BDS and against calling countries 'Nazi' which is just a term of abuse generally

As regards the term 'apartheid': I tend to use the term rather broadly for many countries ('economic apartheid', etc.), and don't think of it as a uniquely demonizing term, but some people think I am wrong to use it so broadly.

If people say that ANY state should be 'ended' in the sense of destroyed, then I think they are supporters of war rather than peace.

[parkia00]

47. Personally....

I think they would get along better with their Palestinian version of themselves.

[LeftishBrit]

21. All quite depressing; remind me of the BNP