Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support.

Click here to help us keep going

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

The wave of Jerusalem attacks Israelis don’t hear about

One hundred Palestinian bus drivers in the capital have quit their jobs because of such violence from Jewish racists.

Illustrative photo of an Egged bus (Photo by Kw0/CC 3.0)

Illustrative photo of an Egged bus (Photo by Kw0/CC 3.0)

If you’d asked me how many East Jerusalem Palestinian bus drivers in the capital had quit their jobs because of the violence they’d faced from Jewish assailants, I’d have said oh, maybe three. When I read in Haaretz on Sunday (truly a must-read) that the number is roughly 100 — or one out of three Palestinian bus drivers in the capital — I was amazed. East Jerusalem Palestinians, on the whole, are poor; driving for Israel’s giant Egged bus cooperative is a very, very good job for an ordinary eastside resident, paying about three times the average East Jerusalemite’s salary. When 100 of these drivers quit their jobs because of the menace of racist Jewish marauders, it means that that menace is overwhelming.

I had no idea. And I keep up with the news and I’m extremely alert to stories about Jews abusing Arabs. I knew from the Israeli media that on the nights after Palestinian terror killings, bands of young Jews would roam the streets on Jerusalem’s Jewish westside, attacking Arabs in their path and chanting “death to the Arabs.” After the death of Egged driver Yousef Hassan al-Ramouni a month ago — he was found hanged in his bus in what Israeli forensic pathologists ruled a suicide, but which Palestinians commonly believe was a murder — there was a story or two about East Jerusalem drivers complaining about Jewish attacks. But with those rare exceptions and the story of the murder by burning of 16-year-old Muhammad Abu Khdeir, the only Jerusalem violence you hear about in the Israeli media lately is Palestinian-on-Jewish — the murders by car and knife, the stoning of the light rail, the violent protests against the police.

But Jewish violence against Arabs in Jerusalem? As far as we Israeli Jews can gather from the news, these are not exactly isolated incidents, but they’re not a “phenomenon,” either. Nothing to make a normal Palestinian bus driver quit his job.

I didn’t know, we didn’t know. In Israel, any incident of Arab-on-Jewish violence is a big story, while a plague of Jewish-on-Arab violence has to be going on for years and years, like the “price tag” settler attacks, before it qualifies for sustained media attention.

Read also: Settler violence — it comes with the territory

The resignations, formal or effective, by the 100 Palestinian bus drivers have come only in the last month, since the driver Ramouni’s hanging death, said Tamir Nir, the Jerusalem city councilman in charge of local transportation. In a Sunday interview on TLV1 radio, he told me that Jewish attacks on Palestinian drivers have become a full-blown phenomenon in the last six months, growing especially intense in the last two.

Most of the assaults have been verbal, he added, but “about 40” were physical. However, a Palestinian attorney representing many of the former Egged drivers painted yet a much bleaker picture for Haaretz’s Nir Hasson:

“The situation is catastrophic,” said attorney Osama Ibrahem, who represents more than 40 drivers who have been attacked — mainly in the past four months. “Not a day passes without a physical assault,” he said. “I’m not talking about verbal assaults. They don’t even count those; that’s something they’ve learned to live with.”

Hasson reported that Egged buses are frequently stoned in East Jerusalem neighborhoods, regardless of whether the driver is Jewish or Arab. He also wrote that “Jewish drivers complain of passengers who suspect them of being Arabs and demand to see their identity cards before boarding.”

I asked Councilman Nir if Palestinian passengers were also attacking Jewish drivers. “No, I don’t know about it, I don’t think that they are,” he said. “But as you know there are attacks on the train.” Yes, about that we know.

“We also have problems with Arab taxi drivers,” the councilman continued. “They suffer too, from violence, and not only violence — some people don’t want to drive with them, don’t want to pay them.”

He said Egged plans to install security cameras in the buses, and that he’s lobbying to get barriers put up between drivers and passengers, but until now no measures have been taken to protect Palestinian drivers, who have been under ongoing attack for the last half year. “Unfortunately, I heard about the issue only about three weeks ago,” he said. “It came up only after the death of the driver. I didn’t know about it before, nobody told me about it.”

I believe him. That’s how pathetically in the dark Israeli Jews are about Jewish-on-Arab violence: even the head of transportation for the Jerusalem Municipality didn’t know that local Palestinian bus drivers had been getting attacked regularly until one of them was found hanged in his bus last month.

Read also:
WATCH: Israeli Jews attack Palestinian on public bus
A frightening new era of Jewish-Arab relations in Israel

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. Much thanks to Nir Hasson for this terrible story and to Larry for bringing it here. These terrorists will of course, not have their homes demolished for their behavior. If you bristle at the terrorist label, are you more comfortable with hate crimes. “He said Egged plans to install security cameras in the buses, and that he’s lobbying to get barriers put up between drivers and passengers, but until now no measures have been taken to protect Palestinian drivers, who have been under ongoing attack for the last half year”. I said on another thread I’ll never ride a bus here again and encourage others to walk, car pool or take the train. Egged is in no hurry to protect the drivers, fine. Maybe they’d like their busses to be emptier (over 30% of the population disagreed with segregated buses according to poll on Dahlia Sheindlin’s story).

      Reply to Comment
    2. Pedro X

      This is not new news. I24news, the Daily Star, Times of Israel and others all reported of a mass resignation of Arab bus drivers following the suicide of an Arab bus driver. The resignations were caused in part by the false claims of the PA that the bus driver was killed. The Israeli pathologist and physician hired by the family of the deceased both agreed it was suicide.

      The fact of the matter is that there has been a mini-intifada going on in Jerusalem with hundreds attacks on Jews by Arabs each month. There have also been indiscriminate attacks by Jews on Arabs. Unfortunately Arab drivers are an easy target for those hating Arabs.

      In the last half year, the increase in violence has been fueled by the killing of three Israeli teenagers on their way home from school and the killing of a Palestinian teenager, followed by the recent spate of killings by Palestinians, and the incitement of the PA in relation to the temple mount.

      The fact that 80% of Palestinians are in favor of killings of Jews in car attacks, knifing and shootings as have been going on, tensions, attacks and counter attacks are unlikely to stop.

      Reply to Comment
      • Felix Reichert

        You are right. There has been a mini-intifada going on in Jerusalem. For years.

        With hundreds of attacks by Jewish people on Arabs each month.

        Reply to Comment
        • Joel

          @Felix

          “With hundreds of attacks by Jewish people on Arabs each month.”

          Oh, and please provide a source for this claim.

          Reply to Comment
      • Felix Reichert

        Oh, and please provide a source for this claim:

        “The fact that 80% of Palestinians are in favor of killings of Jews in car attacks”

        Because it’s obvious bullshit, obvious propaganda, and you’re obviously lying and talking out of your ass.

        I’d love to be wrong though. So let’s see your source.

        Reply to Comment
        • “Oh, and please provide a source for this claim:

          “The fact that 80% of Palestinians are in favor of killings of Jews in car attacks”

          C’mon Ex – put up or shut up – a verifiable, reputable source. Otherwise you’re going to look like a LIAR.

          Reply to Comment
        • Whiplash

          Last week’s PSR poll by Palestinian pollster found 80% of Palestinians approve of attacks resulting in murders of Jews. Algemeiner reports:

          “The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research last week asked a sample of 1,270 Palestinian Arab adults in the territories what they thought of the recent wave of attacks in which Palestinians stabbed Israelis or ran them over with their cars. Eighty percent responded that they support such attacks.

          Note that the respondents weren’t talking about theoretical future attacks. They were commenting on recent attacks which they know all about. Here is what they are endorsing:

          —Ramming a car into a crowd at a train station in Jerusalem. The fatalities included a 3-month old infant.

          —Stabbing an unarmed young woman standing at a bus stop in Gush Etzion.

          —Axing and machine-gunning four rabbis at prayer in a Jerusalem synagogue.

          Could the 80 percent endorsement be a fluke? A one-time aberration? A momentary lapse in good judgment, spurred by recent tensions?

          Hardly. There is a remarkable consistency in Palestinian public opinion. The same polling institution surveyed 1,200 Palestinians in the territories in late September and found that 80 percent support resuming the firing of rockets from Gaza into Israel.

          Why is it that 80 percent of Palestinians embrace the brutal murder and terrorization of Israeli civilians?”

          Maybe it has something to do with decades of incitement to violence against Jews by Palestinian leaders, schools, mosques, media and culture. Maybe it has something to do with the ADL findings that 93% of the Palestinian population holds anti-Semitic views. Maybe Palestinian culture is just violently racist.

          Reply to Comment
          • I don’t find any of the date you provided at PCPSR’s website.

            Reply to Comment
          • Found it – details

            Gaza War and the peace process:
            Belief that Hamas has won the Gaza War drops from 69% three months ago to 66% in this poll; 22% believe the two sides were losers. In the Gaza Strip, only 58% say Hamas came out a winner.
            Percentage of satisfaction with war achievements compared to the human and material losses sustained by the Gaza Strip drops from 49% a month ago to 42% in this poll. 56% are currently dissatisfied with the achievements. In the Gaza Strip, 66% are dissatisfied with war achievements.
            Despite that, an overwhelming majority of 77% supports the launching of rockets from the Gaza Strip at Israel if the siege and blockade are not ended.
            Opposition to disarming Gazan armed groupsstands at 49%. In the Gaza Strip opposition to disarming these groups stands at 45%.
            About two thirds (66%) believe that Iran, Turkey and Qatar combined have given the Gaza Strip the ability to remain steadfast against Israeli attacks and to be able to continue to launch rockets during the war; only 8% believe Egypt too has contributed to that.
            Only 46% of the public has heardabout President Abbas’ plan to set a deadline for ending occupation and building a state. Among those who have heard about the plan 69% support it and 28% oppose it. Only 43% of those who have heard about the plan believe the chances for its success were medium or high and 56% believe its chances for success were low or non-existent.
            The public is divided over the most effective means of ending occupation and building a Palestinian state: 42% believe that armed confrontation is the most effective means; 26% believe negotiation is the best means, and 28% believe that popular non-violent resistance is the most effective route to statehood. Three months ago, 44% said armed confrontations were the most effective means while 29% selected negotiations, and 23% selected popular non-violent resistance.
            58% say that the two-state solution is no longer practical due to Israeli settlement expansion and 38% think it is still practical. Similarly, 70% believe that the chances for establishing a Palestinian state next to the state of Israel in the next five years are slim or non-existent. Despite that, only 28% support and 71% oppose the abandonment of the two-state solution and the adoption of the one-state solution.
            In the absence of viable negotiations, 80% support joining more international organizations; 73% support joining the International Criminal Court; and 60% favor resort to popular non-violent resistance; 56% support return to an armed intifada, and 49% support dissolving the PA. Three months ago, support for a return to armed intifada stood at 50% and six months ago at 41%.
            A majority of 79% favors Hamas way of resisting occupation; this percentage stood at 81% three months ago. Furthermore, 62% favor the transfer of Hamas’ armed approach to the West Bank and 36% oppose that. Three months ago support for this transfer stood at 63%.
            In this regard, only 28% support the merging of Hamas’ al Qassam Brigades into the PA’s National Security Forces as a way of meeting the demand for disarming Hamas and 68% oppose that.
            In light of the tension in East Jerusalem and the increase in the level of mutual violence, 80% support and 20% oppose attempts by individual Palestinians to stab or run over Israelis in Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank.

            Reply to Comment
          • I didn’t see what you wrote though in the actual survey I cut and pasted, which was more fuel to the fire and not necessary, in my humble opinion.

            Reply to Comment
          • dan

            maybe you would feel the same way after living under a brutal military occupation your whole life?

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Of course it has nothing to do with a violent 47-year occupation. Maybe Jewish culture is just violently covetous. You like the sound of that, Whip? I didn’t think so.

            Reply to Comment
          • ben

            How can Plestinians be anti-semetic when they are themselves semetic. They are however anti a lot of people who came from Eastern Europe jewish converts and stole their lands and properties.

            Reply to Comment
          • Pedro X

            There are self hating Jews who are anti-Semitic, so there is no problem with Arabs being anti-Semitic. An ADL poll found that 93% of Palestinian Arabs are anti-Semitic.

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Well I can’t imagine why. They’ve had such a nice experience with anti-(Arab) Semites in the Weat Bank and EJ for 47 years. Ungrateful bastards. It must be genetic.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Well let’s see how come, shall we?

            In 1947, Palestinian Arabs rioted and attacked Jews after UN resolution 181 which partitioned Palestine into two states, one JEWISH and one Arab.

            In 1948, the same Arabs, together with neighboring Arabs, attacked Palestinian Jews after those Jews declared the birth of the JEWISH state of Israel.

            In 1967, again, the Arabs attacked Israel and tried to destroy the JEWISH state but instead, Israel gained control of the West Bank.

            Then for 47 years, Israel offered to give up lands and all it asked for in return was for a formal peace deal and recognition.

            But to this date, the Palestinian Arabs refuse to recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, yet they expect Israel to just get out unconditionally.

            Screw the Palestinian Arabs and screw all those who support them. THAT will never happen!!!! We will never give them what THEY want unless THEY give US what WE want too!!!!!!!

            Reply to Comment
          • Bryan

            Gustav – can you not understand that in 1947 Palestinian Arabs were miffed at have the majority of their land assigned to a minority of recent immigrants, especially since the UN had absolutely no authority to impose such a deal; partition would only be legitimate if the proposal was accepted by both sides.

            In 1948 Arab armies entered the part of Israel assigned to an Arab state to prevent its attempted conquest by Israel.

            In 1967, Israel attacked Egypt.

            Can you simply not understand that calling Israel a Jewish state is about as offensive as calling the USA a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant state. Whites may be the dominant elite but such a phrase would denigrate just over 20% of the population.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Bryan, how can you get so many things so one sidedly wrong in such a short post? Let me take each of your points on and try to get you to look at the other side of the coin just a little bit…

            Bryan:”can you not understand that in 1947 Palestinian Arabs were miffed at have the majority of their land assigned to a minority of recent immigrants”

            First: in 1947, the Palestinian Arabs considered themselves first and foremost as Arabs. They considered themselves as part of the surrounding Arab people. How is that relevant, you might ask? And my answer is that it is highly relevant because if you look at what we the Jewish people were offered out of our historical homeland is a tiny fraction of a percentage of what the Arab people got. Just look at the map of the Middle East if you doubt what I say!

            Second: Yes, we got 55% of Western Palestine which was actually 55% of 20% of historic Palestine because Jordan used to be known as Eastern Palestine and it represented 80% of the total area of Palestine. So in fact, we ended up with about 12% of the total area of historic Palestine.

            Third: even if you want to dismiss that. Even then, the 55% of the land that we were allocated, contained the virtually uninhabitable Negev desert which represented about 50% of the area that we Jews were allocated. That is, only about 28% of the land (of western Palestine) which the UN allocated to us was habitable. Whereas virtually all the 45% which was allocated to the Arabs were fertile lands.

            So much for your implication that the Arabs had the right to be miffed …

            Bryan:”especially since the UN had absolutely no authority to impose such a deal; partition would only be legitimate if the proposal was accepted by both sides.”

            Really? Tell that to the Bosnians who seceded from Serbia. Tell that to the Pakistanis too who represented about 12% of the total population of India yet India got partitioned into two states in 1948. You know, India and Pakistan?

            Bryan:”In 1948 Arab armies entered the part of Israel assigned to an Arab state to prevent its attempted conquest by Israel.”

            Really? So you are claiming that in 1947 we were the ones who attacked the Palestinian Arabs? They were not the ones who rioted because they were unhappy with the partition? Don’t you realize that this claim of yours contradicts your above claim in which you said that the Arabs were miffed?

            Bryan:”In 1967, Israel attacked Egypt.”

            Wow!!!!

            Really? You mean after Egypt kicked out the UN peace keepers from Sinai…

            Blockaded international water ways…

            Mobilized their army and lined them up along Israel’s borders …

            Launched guerilla attacks, by Palestinian Arabs who called themselves Fedayeen, into Israeli territory who ambushed and murdered Israeli civilians…

            Openly declared their intention to destroy Israel and dared Israel to react to their saber rattling …

            You mean after all that, Israel attacked Egypt? You are absolutely right, we DID!

            …oh but wait!!! We did not attack Jordan. Jordan attacked US. And after we ended up defending ourselves from their unprovoked attack against us, we ended up occupying the West Bank..,

            Bryan:”Can you simply not understand that calling Israel a Jewish state is about as offensive as calling the USA a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant state. Whites may be the dominant elite but such a phrase would denigrate just over 20% of the population.”

            Can you not understand how plainly wrong your analogy is?

            A better analogy would be the the 22 Arab Muslim states who exist in the Middle East and North Africa but nobody seems to complain about them and other non Arab Muslim states.

            … Or even about England which is officially known as an Anglican state.

            …but somehow, a small Jewish state which offers a refuge to a historically persecuted minority (us the Jews) is so offensive to you guys? Well then Bryan, that says more about the people who find us offensive than about us. And it ain’t saying anything flattering about those people …

            Reply to Comment
          • Bryan

            Gustav I appreciate your response, tendentious though it may be. “First: in 1947, the Palestinian Jews considered themselves first and foremost as Jews, a group that had lived for centuries in Iraq, Iran, Morocco, Yemen, France, Germany, Britain, America, Australia, South Africa, Russia, Poland etc., etc., but very few in Palestine itself, which had a small Jewish population, and far more Christian pilgrims and residents, because Jewish religious authorities had long argued that Jewish dispersion was God’s will.
            To speak of a Jewish homeland with continuity over centuries is about as sensible as arguing that the English have rights to colonise Normandy, North Germany or Scandinavia because significant elements of their population had originated in those lands. All this nonsense about an historical homeland is largely based on biblical rather than archaeological evidence, and long before the supposed first century enforced exile there were large expatriate Jewish populations in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Turkey, Greece, etc., etc. Indeed all the evidence is that the Palestinians have been in their homeland for two millennia, and are the descendants of an original Hebrew population who had converted first to Christianity, and then to Islam.
            Britain had of course no right to promise a Jewish home (not a Jewish state) within Palestine (certainly not in all of Palestine including Transjordan) a promise that was made before Britain had even conquered the land, and was made for the most cynical motives. Do not knock the Negev, because one of the most potent memes of Zionism is the superiority of Jewish technology (and capital investment) which apparently permitted the desert to bloom.
            Regarding the Bosnians who seceded from Serbia, and the Pakistanis who created a state within Greater India, this was not achieved as the result of a UN partition proposal, in contravention of the principles of the UN Charter. (And don’t patronise me by arguing “You know, India and Pakistan?” since I guess I’ve read a hundred times more history books than you have, matey)
            Some Palestinians did indeed riot in 1947 because they were unhappy with the partition, but there were also Jews that were unhappy that there was a partition at all.
            You dispute my argument that “In 1967, Israel attacked Egypt” before eventually conceding that “You are absolutely right, we DID!” None of your points about (1) a request for UN peacekeepers to leave Egyptian soil, though a readiness for them to redeploy to Israeli territory (which the Israelis refused), nor (2) tensions over the Gulf of Aqaba (which would likely be resolved by Egyptian discussion scheduled with the USA) nor (3) a little bit of sabre-rattling talk (similar to Israeli invective against Iran) nor (4) a very partial mobilisation of the Egyptian army suggest anything to the contrary.
            Of course you are right that Jordan (and Syria) entered the War once Israel had attacked Egypt, but the consensus of Israeli politicians and historians seems to be that these resulted from miscalculated Israeli aggression in the demilitarised zone, in the case of Syria, (Moshe Dayan – “at least 80% of the clashes” were engineered by Israel) and the raid on Samu, in the case of Jordan (Yitzhak Rabin – “we had neither political nor military reasons to arrive at a confrontation with Jordan, or to humiliate Hussein”.)
            You respond to my claim that calling Israel a Jewish state is about as offensive as calling the USA a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant state, by arguing that all Arab states are equally bad (not a brilliant defence is it?). But the few states calling themselves Islamic Republics are all outside the Arab Middle East (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Mauritania) and whilst this terminology is offensive, it refers to the system of government not the nature of society. Israel’s Arab neighbours, like Jordan and Lebanon, have powerful and influential Christian minorities and in this respect are far more pluralist then Israel. Regrettably the Anglican Church is the “established” church in England, but this is largely a symbolic status, and certainly does not mean that only Anglicans have a right of return to the UK or a sole right to own land, and England does not insist on being recognized as an Anglican state.
            I’ll readily concede that in the past (before my lifetime) Jews were a historically persecuted minority, and that a minority of that minority felt a need to establish a refuge. The tragedy is that they believed they could do so by establishing a state in the heart of the Arab middle east, and now many Jews realise this was a tragic mistake and that they are safer, freer and more prosperous living in countries like America, Australia, Britain, France or Germany. An even greater tragedy is that with a spirit of compromise the Jews of Israel, many of whom were born within the land, could live at peace with their neighbours. Refreshingly the journalists writing for +972 Magazine, if not some of the posters, seem convinced of this.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Bryan:“First: in 1947, the Palestinian Jews considered themselves first and foremost as Jews, a group that had lived for centuries in Iraq, Iran, Morocco, Yemen, France, Germany, Britain, America, Australia, South Africa, Russia, Poland etc., etc., but very few in Palestine itself, which had a small Jewish population, and far more Christian pilgrims and residents, because Jewish religious authorities had long argued that Jewish dispersion was God’s will.

            Really? In 1947 about one third of the population of Palestine was Jewish and most of us were secular Jews. Here, read this…

            http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/07175DE9FA2DE563852568D3006E10F3

            “Arabs, 1,203,000; Jews, 608,000; others, 35,000; Total, 1,846,000.”

            Bryan:”To speak of a Jewish homeland with continuity over centuries is about as sensible as arguing that the English have rights to colonise Normandy, North Germany or Scandinavia because significant elements of their population had originated in those lands. All this nonsense about an historical homeland is largely based on biblical rather than archaeological evidence,”

            Want archeological evidence that the area that Palestine is on was historically a Jewish land long before European colonists (the Romans) destroyed our state and caused most of us to flee? Here, read this …

            http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Israel

            You might also want to look at this …

            http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele

            And this too…

            http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/temple-at-jerusalem/jewish-captives-in-the-imperial-city/

            “In the most famous of the panels, Roman soldiers carry the Jerusalem Temple spoils on parade, including the menorah, the showbread table and trumpets, which were then deposited in Rome’s Temple of Peace. This panel and the others were recently subjected to high-resolution three-dimensional scans, resulting in stunningly crisp, high-quality images of the relief that are accurate within less than a millimeter and are free from the distracting visual distortions of the marble’s age and discoloration.”

            To be continued

            Reply to Comment
          • Bryan

            My point was not that the 1947 Jewish population of Palestine was small relative to total Palestians, but that it was small relative to the Jewish population of other lands. Over 11 million Jews worldwide, 600,000 in Palestine – means that the homeland of 94% of the world’s Jewish population was outside Palestine.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Bryan:”My point was not that the 1947 Jewish population of Palestine was small relative to total Palestians, but that it was small relative to the Jewish population of other lands”

            …well, Bryan, I don’t know what you meant to say, but this is what you DID say …

            Bryan:”but very few in Palestine itself, which had a small Jewish population, and far more Christian pilgrims and residents, because Jewish religious authorities…”

            …far more Christian pilgrims. As against the reality that in 1947, the proportion of Jews in Palestine was one third of the total population.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Bryan:”and long before the supposed first century enforced exile there were large expatriate Jewish populations in Egypt, Libya, Syria, Turkey, Greece, etc., etc. Indeed all the evidence is that the Palestinians have been in their homeland for two millennia, and are the descendants of an original Hebrew population who had converted first to Christianity, and then to Islam.

            There you go, displacement theology at it’s best. We are not us but the Palestinian Arabs are us.

            Now, let’s get real! It is quite probable that a percentage of the Palestinian Arabs are descendants of Hebrews. It is also highly probable that a larger percentage of them are descendants of Arab invaders who took over Palestine during the 7th century AD.

            But who cares? We (most of us at least) never denied them THEIR rights. They are the ones who deny OUR rights to be here. We, most of us that is, have agreed with the two state solution long ago. It is they who argue that there is no room for a Jewish state. And you too seem to agree with them. Keep that up and this conflict will go on and on and on … we are not going away! We are not leaving! We are staying put where we are, like it or lump it!

            Bryan:”Britain had of course no right to promise a Jewish home (not a Jewish state) within Palestine (certainly not in all of Palestine including Transjordan) a promise that was made before Britain had even conquered the land, and was made for the most cynical motives.”

            Yes, but Britain had the right to establish other states in the region while ignoring the rights of people’s like the Kurds right? In any case, irrespective of Britain, we are back, we won our wars and we are here to stay. We don’t care what people like you have to say about it. We are not going to self destruct just because you feel it would be a good idea.

            To be continued …

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Bryan:”Do not knock the Negev, because one of the most potent memes of Zionism is the superiority of Jewish technology (and capital investment) which apparently permitted the desert to bloom.”

            Nevertheless the desert is a desert. If we can make something of it then bully for us but a desert is just not as valuable as the more fertile 45% of the lands which the Arabs were given.

            Bryan:”Regarding the Bosnians who seceded from Serbia, and the Pakistanis who created a state within Greater India, this was not achieved as the result of a UN partition proposal, in contravention of the principles of the UN Charter.”

            Really? Why not? Because no Jews were involved? The partitioning of India was no different than the partitioning of Palestine. And Bosnia got it’s independence against the wishes of the majority Serbian population. There are other examples too but why bother? You have a closed mind.

            Bryan:”(And don’t patronise me by arguing “You know, India and Pakistan?” since I guess I’ve read a hundred times more history books than you have, matey)”

            Are you sure about that? Or are you just one of those idle boasters? Remember, you don’t even know me!

            Bryan:”Some Palestinians did indeed riot in 1947 because they were unhappy with the partition, but there were also Jews that were unhappy that there was a partition at all.”

            But you won’t find a single respectable history book which claims that Jews started the rioting in 1947 in reaction to the UN vote to partition Palestine.

            Bryan:”You dispute my argument that “In 1967, Israel attacked Egypt” before eventually conceding that “You are absolutely right, we DID!”

            Again with your distortion of what I said. Go read again what I said.

            Bryan:”None of your points about (1) a request for UN peacekeepers to leave Egyptian soil, though a readiness for them to redeploy to Israeli territory (which the Israelis refused),”

            Of course we refused. Because the Egyptians wanted to unilaterally overturn the agreements reached as part of Israel’s withdrawal from Sinai following the 1956 war.

            Bryan:”nor (2) tensions over the Gulf of Aqaba (which would likely be resolved by Egyptian discussion scheduled with the USA)”

            There should have been no need to resolve anything. The Egyptians had no right to close off any international waterways.

            Bryan:”nor (3) a little bit of sabre-rattling talk (similar to Israeli invective against Iran) nor (4) a very partial mobilisation of the Egyptian army suggest anything to the contrary.”

            A little bit of sabre rattling? … If you say that hysterical promises to chanting mobs and on Arab radio accompanied with martial music about the imminent destruction of Israel is just a little bit of sabre rattling then that says a lot about YOUR attitude.

            Also, I notice that you have gone strangely quiet about the Fedayeen attacks. I guess those were just minor provocations, according to you, right? And what about the massing of troops along the Egyptian, Syrian and Jordanian borders? They were just joking, right ….?

            As for your claim that negotiations would have resolved everything. Yeah, right … Israel had no choice but to mobilize it’s citizen army. Consequently it’s industry ground to a halt. Israel faced economic collapse if those negotiations would have been protracted. THAT was the game which Nasser, Egypt’s leader was pursuing. He was hoping to cause an economic collapse in Israel after which he hoped to March in and take over triumphantly. That is why Israel had no choice but to launch it’s preemptive strike against Egypt.

            Egypt chose to play with fire and it got burnt …

            To be continued …

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Bryan:”Of course you are right that Jordan (and Syria) entered the War once Israel had attacked Egypt, but the consensus of Israeli politicians and historians seems to be that these resulted from miscalculated Israeli aggression in the demilitarised zone, in the case of Syria, (Moshe Dayan – “at least 80% of the clashes” were engineered by Israel) and the raid on Samu, in the case of Jordan (Yitzhak Rabin – “we had neither political nor military reasons to arrive at a confrontation with Jordan, or to humiliate Hussein”.)”

            Once the war started with Egypt, we actually welcomed the opportunity to teach the Syrians a lesson but we pleaded with Jordan to stay out of the war. Unfortunately, they did not listen. They started shelling West Jerusalem so we had to respond. Read this …

            http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War

            “On June 5, Nasser had induced Syria and Jordan to begin attacks on Israel by using the initially confused situation to claim that Egypt had defeated the Israeli air strike. In the afternoon of June 5, Israel retaliated against Jordan by launching an offensive to encircle East Jerusalem.”

            But here is a question without notice, tell me Bryan, Jordan ruled over. The West Bank for 19 years, between 1948 and 1967. Why didn’t they establish an Arab Palestinian state during that time? And where were people like you? Why didn’t you admonish the Jordanians like you admonish us day in day out about the establishment of an independent Palestinian Arab state? You people didn’t have any urgency about it then. Only since 1967 did your ilk come out of the woodworks. That in itself tells a story on it’s own …

            To be continued …

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Bryan:”You respond to my claim that calling Israel a Jewish state is about as offensive as calling the USA a white Anglo-Saxon Protestant state, by arguing that all Arab states are equally bad (not a brilliant defence is it?).

            Yes, actually it IS a valid defence. Any mention of discrimination is valid. And you people make it a habit of sounding off against us but not against others who are much worse than us about being religious states. You guys at the least are bigots.

            Bryan:”But the few states calling themselves Islamic Republics are all outside the Arab Middle East (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Mauritania) and whilst this terminology is offensive, it refers to the system of government not the nature of society.”

            What, and Saudi Arabia is not Islamic? Or Even the proposed Palestinian state? Just look at the PLO or the Hamas charter. They specifically mention Islamic … and then there are of course some of the gulf states too … have you not heard about their religious police and the things they do?

            Bryan:”Israel’s Arab neighbours, like Jordan and Lebanon, have powerful and influential Christian minorities and in this respect are far more pluralist then Israel.”

            Wow, so now you consider Lebanon and Jordan more democratic than us. I think I am wasting my time arguing with you. You are far gone … !!!

            Bryan:”Regrettably the Anglican Church is the “established” church in England, but this is largely a symbolic status, and certainly does not mean that only Anglicans have a right of return to the UK or a sole right to own land, and England does not insist on being recognized as an Anglican state.”

            Why regrettably?

            As for the right of return, I didn’t know that Anglicans were ever a persecuted minority who require a sanctuary on this earth where they won’t be persecuted. We Jews however were persecuted and in many places the old signs of persecution are emerging again.

            Bryan:”I’ll readily concede that in the past (before my lifetime) Jews were a historically persecuted minority, and that a minority of that minority felt a need to establish a refuge.”

            You’d be surprised how many people on this site deny even that. The fact that we were a persecuted minority who were murdered from time to time for the sin of being born Jewish.

            Bryan:”The tragedy is that they believed they could do so by establishing a state in the heart of the Arab Middle East”

            Yes, in our ancestral homeland. But the bigger tragedy would have been not to be able to establish our sanctuary. The events about 70 years ago in Europe are a testimony to that fact. Had Israel been in existence at that time, many more European Jews would have been saved.

            Bryan:”and now many Jews realise this was a tragic mistake and that they are safer, freer and more prosperous living in countries like America, Australia, Britain, France or Germany.

            As good a life as many of those Jews have for now, the non religious ones face extinction. Not by murder this time, but through assimilation. Good luck to them, that is their choice. But in a couple of centuries, those countries won’t have Jewish communities. Oh and stop pretending that even in those places, the Jews don’t face bigotry from sections of the non Jewish community. Not on large scale, I grant you that. But hatred of Jews exists in all those places. Particularly in France and Germany (what a surprise – they have a long cherished tradition of Jew hatred – such traditions don’t just go away overnight). In many cases, the old form of Jew hatred has been replaced by a new mutation: The hatred of ISRAEL!

            Bryan:”An even greater tragedy is that with a spirit of compromise the Jews of Israel, many of whom were born within the land, could live at peace with their neighbours. Refreshingly the journalists writing for +972 Magazine, if not some of the posters, seem convinced of this.”

            What can I say about the journalists of + 972? I’ll try to be kind. At best, they are left wing ideologues. They are just dreamers who don’t live in the real world. At worst? Well … I won’t say it …

            Reply to Comment
          • David

            Reality:

            1. The Partition Plan (UNGA Res. 181, 29 November, 1947)

            Palestinians rejected the Partition Plan for entirely justified reasons based on international law. While Jews made up just 31% of the population (90% were of foreign origin, only 30% had become citizens, thousands were illegal immigrants) and owned only between 6% & 7% of the land, the Partition Plan (recommendatory only, contrary to the British Class A Mandate, never adopted by the UNSC) outrageously proposed they receive 56% of Palestine (including its most fertile areas) in which Palestinians made up 45% of the population. (10% of Palestine’s Jewish population consisted of native anti-Zionist Palestinian/Arab Jews.)

            Although Palestinian Arab citizens made up at least 69% of the population and owned about 94% of the land, including state land (see below*), the Partition Plan recommended they receive only 42% as a state. (The 2% of Palestine comprised of Jerusalem and Bethlehem was to be placed under international control, i.e., a corpus separatum.)

            No wonder Palestinians rejected the Partition Plan. Indeed, it proved so unworkable that when Polish born David Ben-Gurion (nee, David Gruen) et al. declared the state of Israel effective 15 May 1948 (after Jewish forces had already expelled 400,000 Palestinian Arabs per the Jewish Agency’s Plan Dalet – e.g., 30,000 from West Jerusalem in March, 60,000 from Haifa in April, 75,000 from Jaffa in late April and early May and captured large portions of the Partition Plan’s recommended Palestinian state, e.g. Jaffa), the UNGA was in the process of shelving the Partition Plan in favor of a UN Trusteeship.

            When war erupted due to necessary intervention by reluctant outnumbered/outgunned Arab state armies to stem the accelerating expulsion of Palestinians, a US proposed cease-fire was accepted by the Arab League but rejected by Israel. The Arab forces were defeated by Israel.

            By the end of the war Israel had seized 78% of Palestine, expelled 400,000 more Palestinians for a total of about 800,000 and bulldozed over 500 of their towns and villages, including churches, mosques and cemeteries. It was only the beginning.

            * Land ownership in all of mandated Palestine in 1947:
            By Sub district – Acre: 87% Palestinian owned, 3% Jewish owned, 10% state owned; Safed: 68% Palestinian owned, 18% Jewish owned, 14% state owned; Haifa: 42% Palestinian owned, 35% Jewish owned, 23% state owned; Nazareth: 52% Palestinian owned, 28% Jewish owned, 20% state owned; Tiberias: 51% Palestinian owned, 38% Jewish owned, 11% state owned; Jenin: 84% Palestinian owned, less than 1% Jewish owned, 16% state owned; Beisnan: 44% Palestinian owned, 34% Jewish owned, 22% state owned; Tulkarm: 78% Palestinian owned; 17% Jewish owned, 5% state owned; Nablus: 87% Palestinian owned, less than 1% Jewish owned, 13% state owned; Jaffa: 47% Palestinian owned, 39% Jewish owned, 14% state owned; Ramleh: 77% Palestinian owned, 14% Jewish owned, 9% state owned; Ramallah: 99% Palestinian owned, less than 1% Jewish owned, less than 1% state owned; Jerusalem (West and East): 84% Palestinian owned, 2% Jewish owned, 14% state owned; Gaza: 75% Palestinian owned, 4% Jewish owned, 21% state owned; Hebron: 96% Palestinian owned, less than 1% Jewish owned, 4% state owned; Bersheeba: 15% Palestinian owned, less than 1% Jewish owned, 85% state owned. (Village Statistics, Jerusalem: Palestine Government, 1945; subsequently published as United Nations Map no. 94b, August, 1950)

            48% of the total land area of mandated Palestine was privately owned (‘mulk khaas’) by Palestinian Arabs. Total Jewish privately owned land was between 6% and 7%. About 45% of the total land area was state owned, i.e, by those who had citizenship, and it was comprised of Communal Property (‘mashaa’), Endowment Property, (‘waqf’), and Government Property, (‘miri’.) The British Mandate kept an extensive land registry and the UN used the registry during its early deliberations. It has in its archives 453,000 records of individual Palestinian owners defined by name, location & area.

            2.
            The 1967 war:
            At 7:45 AM on 5 June 1967, Israel attacked Egypt and thereby, Jordan and Syria who each shared a mutual defense pact with Egypt. The attack took place just hours before Egypt’s VP was to fly to Washington for a prearranged June 7th meeting with the Johnson administration to defuse the crisis between Egypt and Israel based on an agreement worked out in Cairo between Nasser and Johnson’s envoy, Robert Anderson. In a cable sent to Johnson on May 30, Israel’s PM Eshkol promised not to attack Egypt until June 11 to give diplomacy a chance to succeed. However, on June 4, when it heard about the June 7th meeting and the distinct possibility that it would rule out war, Israel’s cabinet ordered its armed forces to attack Egypt the next day. In short, the war was another massive land grab by Israel.

            Prime Minister Menachem Begin, Minister without portfolio in Eshkol’s cabinet, while addressing Israel’s National Defence College on 8 August 1982: “In June, 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.” (New York Times, 21 August 1982)

            Meir Amit, chief of Israel’s Mossad: “Egypt was not ready for a war and Nasser did not want a war.”

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Channeling Aunt Caroline again I see.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            You have a very easy formula Brian. When cornered, you just dismiss what the other guy says. But you are dishonest to the core of your being. If you would be an honest human being, you would debate and refute the bits that you disagree with, offer proof and reasons why you disagree. But you know very well that if you’d take that path, you’d lose the debate.

            It’s just easier this way, isn’t it Brian? You are lazy, even as a propagandist.

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Comparing your insistence that Israel be formally recognized as the Nation State of the Jewish People (and with all that Netanyahu and Bennet and Feiglin imply by that)–a state in which in fact a Jew to this day cannot legally marry a non-Jew, and in which the non-Jewish partner in an interfaith marriage is often subjected to second-class treatment by the state–and only Jews are entitled to 80% of the land–and to which only Jews can return–to the situation today with England and it’s Anglican Church is the height of dishonesty. And the height of absurdity. It epitomizes much +972 hasbara.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Before I comment about your malicious propaganda Brian, let me state that I am not a fan of our current marriage laws. Moreover, most secular Israelis feel like me about it. So in time, they WILL change…

            Having said that, I will also call you a compulsive liar for intimating that those who end up in mixed marriages are second class citizens. They are NOT!!! Thousands of such marriages exist.

            You are also a compulsive liar about our land laws. Ther is no legal discrimination about land laws in Israel. People are free to buy and sell privately owned lands and they do.

            State lands are not sold to anyone. State lands are only leased to anyone, be they Jews or Arabs.

            I’ll tell you what though Brian, your PLO friends are the ones who are guilty of discrimination when it comes to selling land. They have a law which states that any Arab who sells lands to Jews will be sentenced to death. And they have actually enacted such sentences.

            I don’t suppose you’d care to comment about THAT, would Ya, Brian?!

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Gustav, what is malicious about pointing out facts?

            Please read, everyone:

            http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/shavuot/.premium-1.596678

            Please tell us what you think about the treatment of Thomas Lebreton?

            Please tell us what you think about the treatment of Vu Linh?

            Please tell us what you think about the treatment of the various others described.

            Would you still like to pursue my “intimating that those who end up in mixed marriages are second class citizens”?

            In addition are you seriously going to tell me that an Israeli Arab has as much freedom to buy land in Israel proper as an Israeli Jew? Seriously?

            About your thoughts on being guilty of discrimination when it comes to selling land. Please tell me what Binyamin Netanyahu and Naftali Bennet and Moshe Feiglin would do to Jews, were Tel Aviv and Haifa and their environs occupied by Arab invaders and Jews “sold land” to those Arabs. Please tell me what you think they would do.

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            ‘Rona Shulman and Thomas Lebreton had been together for six years and had two daughters before they decided to tie the knot. But they had to leave Israel to get married, because Thomas isn’t Jewish, and Israeli law does not permit marriages between members of different religions within its borders.

            When they returned to Israel from France, where the ceremony was held, Rona and her two daughters received gas masks at the airport. Thomas did not.

            “They said he wasn’t entitled to a gas mask because he’s not an Israeli citizen,” recounts Rona. “I asked them, ‘What’s he supposed to do if there’s a war? His family goes into a sealed a room and he stays outside?’ So eventually, we had no choice but to purchase him a gas mask.”’

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            ‘Vu Linh met her Israeli boyfriend about 10 years ago, when he was traveling around Asia and made a stop a near her home in Vietnam. After she followed him to Israel, they first considered what many other couples in their situation have done – going to Cyprus to get married. But her boyfriend came from an observant Jewish family, and it was important for his parents that they not only have a proper wedding in Israel, but also that their grandchildren be recognized as Jews.

            In deference to their wishes, Linh decided to undergo an Orthodox conversion. “I took classes for over a year, I kept Shabbat, I kept kosher, I did everything I was supposed to,” she says. But ultimately, the rabbinical court refused to approve her conversion. She and her partner continue to live together as a married couple and already have two children, an 8-year-old and a 5-year-old. Asked if she has plans to put them through conversion, she replies, “If they really want, they can do it themselves when they grow up. But for now, I don’t want it.”’

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            I stand by what I said:

            I don’t like our marriage laws. And I am not alone, most secular Israelis don’t like it either. Why? Because there should be an option to marry in a civil ceremony. Right now we don’t have that option.

            Having said that. Marriages between Israeli Jews and non Jews, outside of Israel which take place under the laws of those countries, including civil ceremonies, are fully recognized in Israel and those couples are NOT second class citizens. Your example of the gas mask at the airport was gratuitous and stupid. In no country are non citizens entitled to get the entitlements which citizens get. That is why the woman was not issued a FREE gas mask. Of course, once she would become a citizen, she would get the same entitlements as all Israeli citizens. And being married to an Israeli, there are very few obstacles to her becoming a citizen unless she would have a proven criminal record or would be deemed to be a security risk. I hope even you would not object to that would ya, Brian? After all, you were the one who mentioned the GAS MASK. That should tell you that Israel is a country which has to take it’s security very seriously, thanks to your cherished Saint Palestinians who have been making war on us for the last 100 years. Even before there was “occupation”…

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            … did I just accuse you of bias, Brian? That is putting it mildly…

            All countries have some bad laws. Such bad laws can be changed over time in democracies and often they are changed.

            I accepted SOME of your criticizm about our marriage laws. But the fact that you are prepared to use that one silly law as an excuse to deny us the right to maintain our Jewish majority state speaks volumes about your grudge against us.

            The thing that makes the attitude of people like you even more obscene is the fact that we want our Jewish majority state because we want one place on this earth where Jews are guaranteed not to face the kinds of discrimination and hatreds which we faced as minorities elsewhere for centuries. Yes, in Arab countries too. Yet you scrape the bottom of the barel and point at a less than perfect law which we have today and try to use that as an excuse to deny our right to live in a Jewish majority state.

            That says more about people like you, Brian that about us. You know why? Because if we would apply your standards against any other country in this world, we would find that no country has the right to exist because even the most perfect of countries have SOME bad laws which need fixing yet noone says that they have no right to exist. Think about THAT!!!!

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Gustav, I have never ever denied that it is your right to come to a final settlement on the RoR issue that engineers in reasonable assurance that Israel will remain Jewish majority while also a state of all its citizens. You are changing the subject and introducing a sinister note to my intentions that is not supported by the evidence. Remember I am for two states unless Israel makes that just impossible, which it seems determined to do of its own accord. I respect your emphasizing that you don’t like your marriage laws and that you are not alone. You misread, however, in part. The woman is a citizen. As are her children. The man is not Jewish. But married to a Jewish female citizen and fathered their two children. Those three were given gas masks. The husband of a citizen and the father of those children was refused a gas mask. Because he is not a citizen. However, Haaretz would disagree with you on how easy and obstacle-free the path to citizenship actually is:

            “Two categories of intermarried couples face special challenges in Israel. The first is couples like Rona and Thomas, in which one spouse is not an Israeli citizen and – despite being married to an Israeli citizen – is forced to undergo an arduous process and wait years to receive citizenship, during which time they are not eligible for many of the benefits and privileges conferred on Israeli citizens.
            The second category is made up of couples in which the woman is defined as “other” – a citizen of Israel though not a Jew as per halakha. In such cases, unless the woman goes through a full Orthodox conversion, the children of this couple are not considered Jewish by law and, therefore, cannot marry in Israel either.”

            You skipped over Vu Linh. Why was it made so hard for her to convert to Judaism? It would have nothing whatsoever to do with racism would it? I don’t know the answer to that and neither do you but that we have to ask it is an indication that perhaps something is not right? And we DO have to ask. Dan Meridor is asking questions that ought to make people uncomfortable:

            “Netanyahu won’t call me and he knows why…. When I hear from the party that Arabs have human rights but not civil rights … when I hear that certain people are a cancer, when I hear statements that I don’t even want to repeat, could I really be their detergent and represent them?”

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Brian:”Gustav, I have never ever denied that it is your right to come to a final settlement on the RoR issue that engineers in reasonable assurance that Israel will remain Jewish majority”

            So why did you say this …???

            Brian:”Comparing your insistence that Israel be formally recognized as the Nation State of the Jewish People (and with all that Netanyahu and Bennet and Feiglin imply by that)–…”

            In that post of yours you clearly sided with the Saint Palestinian’s refusal to accept our state as the Jewish nation state alongside 22 Arab Muslim States which already exist and who are recognized despite of some very draconian Muslim laws which they enforce and not just enforce, but enforce STRICTLY!!!

            I object to double standards and hypocrisy, Brian. Why do you support Arab double standards and hypocrisy??? And why don’t you support our insistence that the Saint Palestinians have an obligation to show that in exchange for lands they have to clearly renounce their 100 year war against the idea of the Jewish state???

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            It’s odd how you do this every time, Gustav—change the subject –and it’s always back to this deceptive insistence that if Abu Mazen will not formally “recognize the Nation State of the Jewish People” it means you cannot come to a fair, secure, enduring two-state solution with him. This is false. How many times does this have to be gone over? Abu Mazen has very good and genuine reasons for not surrendering to Netanyahu on this and you know that very well. And it has nothing pertinent to do with other Arab states, as Bryan usefully went over with you , above. It is also false, an empty exercise in changing the subject, to say that I don’t support the Palestinians having an obligation to clearly agree to a permanent end of conflict in a fair final agreement. You are just making that up. Your way of styling it—the “100 year war against the idea of the Jewish state”—is simply a contentious device, a rhetorical ploy that could be just as equally turned around on you. Meanwhile you have yet to address the subject at hand.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            No Brian, what is odd is you turning the subject around. This is what my first post on this thread was…

            GUSTAV:”But to this date, the Palestinian Arabs refuse to recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, yet they expect Israel to just get out unconditionally.”

            Then you and your twin (Bryan) turned the discussion around about how “obnoxious” it is to demand the recognition of our state as the nation state of the Jewish people because … because … Because just because …

            Yeah, I am sure that your favorite fellow, this shitty little Abu Mazen, has good reasons why he does not want to recognize our state as the nation state of the Jewish people. His reason is the same reason why in 1947 the Arabs refused to accept the UN Resolution to partition Palestine into TWO states, one Arab state and one JEWISH state. Yes, the wording of the UN resolution specifically mentioned JEWISH state which the Arabs rejected THEN and which your shitty little Abu Mazen whom you so admire still rejects!!!

            So if he still rejects it, it means he still does not renounce the state of WAR which the Arabs declared on us in 1947 and acted upon by making war on us. Therefore, till he relents, he will get nothing from us, hear that Brian dear? NOTHING!!! Absolutely NOTHING!!! Even if you and the rest of the leftist world stand on your collective heads….

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            I confess I agree with Dan Meridor. The horror. I’m just a vicious vicious leftist.

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Former justice minister Dan Meridor trashes ‘Jewish state bill’–says law’s proponents are singling out minorities for narrow political gain. In an interview with Israel Radio, Meridor took issue with the bill’s treatment of the country’s Arab minority, and accused its proponents of seeking political gain at the expense of Israel’s integrity as a democratic country.

            “The current bill is completely superfluous. Who will benefit from a law saying that the state is the nation state of the Jewish people? Of course that is what it is. We and our parents devoted our entire lives to building this country for the Jewish people. You can’t have a law that sets down the state’s obligation to promote the heritage and culture of the majority and not the minority. Doesn’t the minority have a right, like Jews anywhere else in the world have the right? …bills that have no purpose other than short-term political gain and create unnecessary complications both on the international and the internal level. You can’t mess around with the constitution for political ends. Therefore, if it isn’t too late to invoke reason – let it go, set it aside, it’s pointless.”

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            You can agree or disagree with anyone you like, leftist or rabid right winger, but my point still stands Brian.

            The Arabs have inflicted 100 years of war on us because our state was declared a Jewish state.

            So, before we give up any tangible strategic assets like lands, we need a formal assurance from the Arabs that the state of war between us has ended.

            How do they do that? By formally declaring that they now recognize our nation state of the Jewish people. Simple ain’t it? A bit like Germany was required to give up their Nazi ideology as part of ending their state of war against the free world.

            Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            “About your thoughts on being guilty of discrimination when it comes to selling land. Please tell me what Binyamin Netanyahu and Naftali Bennet and Moshe Feiglin would do to Jews, were Tel Aviv and Haifa and their environs occupied by Arab invaders and Jews “sold land” to those Arabs.”

            WTF, you just outed yourself Brian.

            With your above paragraph you clearly endorse the PLO policy to execute any Arab who sells land to Jews. You are trying to say that we would not behave differently but you have no shred of evidence to support your claim.

            … and you have the hide to claim that our land policies are discriminatory? But next to the land policies of your Saint Palestinians, our land policies are positively benevolent. Think about that too, Brian dear!!!!

            Reply to Comment
    3. Joel

      Councilman Nir sounds like a boob, with his “education”,”security cameras” and “partitions”.

      Please.

      Undercover police, as bus passengers, have to target the thugs and the the bus routes that the thugs are following.

      Arrest and more arrests and prosecution to the fullest extent of the law will stop the violence and abuse of the bus drivers. Period.

      That Egged and the Jerusalem police haven’t acted proactively in this matter is very troubling.

      Reply to Comment
      • Whiplash

        The bus line looked at the cost of cameras, protected booths and bus marshals. The cost came in at 72 million dollars a year. This money Egged does not have.

        I also suspect that the Police do not have the resources to place a patrol officer on each bus run.

        More than hard police work and harsh sentences are needed. Community cooperation in defusing the tensions is needed, but unlikely since the Arab community sees any cooperation as treason and the Jewish community believes attempts at cooperation with Arabs is futile.

        Reply to Comment
    4. Since the police haven’t acted proactively, the idea of security cameras and partitions is the most proactive measures to take. For instance, taxi drivers in some US cities have partitions in their cabs for their protection.

      Reply to Comment
      • Whiplash

        You should gift Egged the 72 million dollars a year needed for cameras, partitions and bus marshals. If not you should volunteer to ride the buses and tackle Jewish and Arab thugs.

        Reply to Comment
        • Why?

          Reply to Comment
          • 72 million dollars strikes me as somebody taking the cream off the top and jacking up the cost. Why a bus marshall now? Anyway, a bus marshall wouldn’t be necessary if there were security cameras and a partition for the driver. The point is, if it is considered a priority for the safety of ALL drivers and ALL passengers, money will be found for it. I agree that community cooperation to diffuse tensions are needed, but the rest of your remark is incendiary in itself so why’d you bother? As the GoI has done so much damage, maybe to the point of it being beyond repair, much, much more is going to be required on the part of the GoI to demonstrate sincerity and the willingness and desire to repair the breach.

            Reply to Comment
    5. RK

      How about organizing volunteers to accompany the bus drivers on their routes to fend off and discourage as well as document these racist attacks?

      Reply to Comment
    6. Bruce Gould

      Stateless people will usually have extreme feelings, because they know that no one is looking out for their interests. The problem is the statelessness of the Palestinians, which Israel exploits in every conceivable way. The needs to be a “Jewish state” so Jews can “determine their future”, but the Palestinians have no need of that – they aren’t quite human.

      Reply to Comment
      • Joel

        @Bruce Gould

        “Stateless people will usually have extreme feelings, because they know that no one is looking out for their interests”

        East Jerusalem Arabs have the option to hold Israeli citizenship or not.

        In this region, the more extreme feelings come from people with States. The most extreme feelings come from people who want to destroy their States in order to build a Caliphate.

        Reply to Comment
    7. Brian

      Greg Pollock: “I mentioned “the conformity fear in us all” above. I admire you, Larry, so much because you have and continue to break through that…not easy at all.

      Yes! Larry Derfner is an unusually strong, resilient, clear-minded person. Of excellent character. An exemplar!

      Reply to Comment
      • Suggo

        In Brian speak, that means that Larry gives him a woody

        Reply to Comment
        • Joel

          “I admire you, Larry.. continue to break through..”

          “strong, resilient”

          Mmmm…

          Reply to Comment
          • You and “Sluggo” should take your relationship to the next level already and leave the straight men alone.

            Reply to Comment
    8. Margot Dunne

      I love Jerusalem. I felt I fitted in there. But Jerusalem is fractured, rubbing against itself like two tectonic plates. On the one hand are the people in West Jerusalem who were kind to me when I had an accident, & on the other hand is the equally kind taxi driver from East Jerusalem who looked out for me when I needed a guide. But these people are being driven further & further apart by Israel’s self-righteous policy of occupation & annexation, so that violence in Jerusalem is becoming the norm again, & distrust & hate rule on both sides. The problems on the Egged busses are symptoms that will not go away with cameras or marshals.

      Reply to Comment
      • Bryan

        Margot you make a perfectly reasonable point; that your mild criticism of illegal occupation and annexation should be dismissed as bigotry tells us everything we need to know about Sluggo – he is a nasty maggot.
        Sluggo, before you object to the term brain-washing tell us how much of the Israeli educational curriculum is dedicated to an understanding of Arab culture, European history including the Enlightenment, and modern international relations, or are you just told that Arabs are bad, Iranians are evil and Europeans are murderers?

        Reply to Comment
        • Sluggo

          Margo was talking about the education at Jewish schools in Australia.

          Reply to Comment
          • Bryan

            Margot’s post was clearly about Israel. You responded by suggesting that Margot believed Jews were brainwashed. Margot herself did not talk about “the education at Jewish schools in Australia.” I simply asked you if you though the segregated and largely religious education system in Israel provides the sort of broad liberal education that allows Israelis to be informed citizens.

            Reply to Comment
          • Sluggo

            Yes she did. She has some very bigoted view about the Jewish community in Australia.

            As far as your question, I do not have the facts to argue a position. But since you ask such a loaded question, why don’t you tell us what you think

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Margot,

            You undoubtedly have figured this out already, but to be polite and orient you to the ecological food chain of this site, so to speak–

            –note: “I do not have the facts to argue a position.” BUT reserve the right to call a woman with a perfectly reasonable and polite argument “an ugly cow.”

            The very definition of trollery. To men this creature invariably sprays, like a skunk, some crude sexual stuff that manages to be both homophilic and homophobic at the same time, to bait them. To women this creature invariably sprays something about their being ugly, animalistic or slutty, to bait them. And here’s the funny thing. While at least ‘Merav’ doesn’t even try to ever present anything non-cretinous, ‘Sluggo,’ thinks he can slide back and forth in his greasy way between the rankest trolling 90% of the time and an occasional half-way serious comment and no one will notice and will take ‘Sluggo’ halfway seriously. Everyone notices the greasy slide though.

            Cordially,
            Brian

            Reply to Comment
    9. Report: Acid used in West Bank attack was vinegar …
      The Jerusalem Post

      5 days ago – The acid used in the Palestinian attack on six Israelis Friday in the West Bank was actually vinegar, Channel 2 reported Saturday.

      Reply to Comment
    10. Margot Dunne

      To be fair to Sluggo, I did criticise Jewish education in Australia a while back. I think I then admitted that using the term “brainwashed” was incendiary, & I hope I implied that I shouldn’t have used it. Terms like that can be hurtful. Sorry, Sluggo. But I tried to explain that we have a large number of private schools, all receiving state money, & most of them with religious agendas of different stripes. I think I also mentioned that I don’t agree with children being cocooned in particular belief systems advocated by their schools, without much opportunity to hear other views. I have noticed that some people in our society here behave as if they have been subject to this sort of education, & I mentioned Jewish people because we were talking about Israel – I could have equally mentioned Christian fundamentalists or Moslems etc., but we weren’t discussing them. May peace be with us all.

      Reply to Comment
      • Margot Dunne

        Thank you, Sluggo. Blessings.

        Reply to Comment
      • Brian

        Sluggo,
        May we expect your brave and courageous apology to Margot for calling her an “ugly cow”? May we expect also your brave and courageous apology for numerous, crudely offensive, sexually-laced remarks on this site? I look forward to our constructive dialogue following that apology. Are you capable of that?
        Brian

        Reply to Comment
        • Gustav

          Brian, you have no idea what an ugly creature you are …

          Margot and Sluggo made peace with each other. They declared a truce and agreed to conduct a civilized discussion in the future.

          But here you go trying to stir further friction by bringing up an exchange between those two which they both agreed to drop. What does that say about YOU Brian? That you want to foster hatred and confrontation instead of changing to respectful civilized discussions.

          Since that you want, come to me boyo. I’ll give you what you want. I’ll give it to you in spades, if that’s what you enjoy!!!

          Let’s start by reminding everyone of your bigoted comment against the Ammerican people. What did you call them? You all but claimed that ALL Americans are idiotic. And you dare claim that we Israelis discriminate against non Jews? What a hypocrite … what a bigot you are Brian…

          What next? Are you going to say that all Australians are idiotic? What would be the difference between saying that and what you said about the American people?

          Reply to Comment
        • Brian

          No? I didn’t think so. I was givin’ you a chance, Sluggo. Well, anyways, glad we cleared that up. The born again preacher of who is equipped is himself unequipped.

          Reply to Comment
          • Gustav

            Poor cupcake …

            You poor innocent lamb of a victim, Brian.

            You will keep. Stop pretending that you have been the epitome of civility since you have been posting here.

            At least Sluggo’s posts tend to have a sense of wry humor. Your’s, Brian, are just sad little posts. You know why? Because you are trying so hard to be funny but you just haven’t got it in you.

            You are begging to be laughed at rather than be laughed with, if you know what I mean.

            Reply to Comment
          • Brian

            Oh yeah? The interaction between Arajs, Sluggo, and Baladi Akka here

            http://972mag.com/how-long-must-palestinians-pay-for-the-holocaust-op-ed/100309/

            just confirmed my diagnosis of the slimy Sluggo and his unctuous double dealing, in spades, pal. In spades. Baladi called him on it. Nothing could better confirm what I was getting at here. If the point is lost on you that’s your problem. Now I’m gettin’ on my hoss and ridin’ out of town, pardner, this conversation’s over.

            Reply to Comment
    11. Gustav

      … and my first post to you about the refusal of your Saint Palestinians to recognize our state as the nation state of the Jewish people, was to your following incidiary comment …

      BRIAN:”Well I can’t imagine why. They’ve had such a nice experience with anti-(Arab) Semites in the Weat Bank and EJ for 47 years. Ungrateful bastards. It must be genetic.”

      So you were the one who went off topic, and you were the one who started with your standard accusations against us Brian dear. I just wanted to make clear why there is no progress. There is no progress because your Saint Palestinians still reject the idea of the Jewish state. I wanted you to understand that we have not had a nice experience with THEM either…

      Reply to Comment
    12. Click here to load previous comments