In Providence RI, Jewish city council member flies Paleetinian flag at
city hall (illegal to fly a foreign flag on a public flagpole under
state law), and encounters pro-Israel protestors, who speak to him, and pro-Palestinian protestors, some of whom hide their identity. He begins
to suspect some of the Palestinian protestors are being paid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQRqg-kkMrY

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

In Providence RI, Jewish city council member flies Paleetinian flag at
city hall (illegal to fly a foreign flag on a public flagpole under
state law), and encounters pro-Israel protestors, who speak to him, and >pro-Palestinian protestors, some of whom hide their identity. He begins
to suspect some of the Palestinian protestors are being paid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQRqg-kkMrY

That makes no sense.

Nate Friedman is in Providence, RI. He finds a Palestinian flag at city
hall put up by a Jewish city council member . . .

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-05-28 3:36 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

In Providence RI, Jewish city council member flies Paleetinian flag at
city hall (illegal to fly a foreign flag on a public flagpole under
state law), and encounters pro-Israel protestors, who speak to him, and
pro-Palestinian protestors, some of whom hide their identity. He begins
to suspect some of the Palestinian protestors are being paid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQRqg-kkMrY

That makes no sense.

How so? Iran (or one of its proxies) wants to promote Hamas and their
cause and hopes to build a bandwagon effect to convince everyone that
their side is the morally and politically just one so that the majority
just accept that doing what they want done seems to be the will of the
people.

It's hard to get a bandwagon effect with only one or two sincere but
misguided devotees. (I may be overly generous in thinking that ANY of
the protesters are actually sincere.) The obvious solution: hire some professionals to get the job done properly. Suddenly dozens of people
show up and naive observers start to think that maybe they are on the
wrong side of history and start to rethink their positions. They can't
tell that most of the pro-Palestinian demonstrators are professionals
who will probably protest anything for the right price. (If they were
offering sexual services, we would call them prostitutes.)

Nate Friedman is in Providence, RI. He finds a Palestinian flag at city
hall put up by a Jewish city council member . . .

I'm sure I've heard of far left Jews in Israel who support the
Palestinian cause. In that case, it's not so hard to believe some
American Jews would have the same views where its easier since they are
not in anywhere near the same danger as Israelis.

--
Rhino

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2025-05-28 3:36 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

In Providence RI, Jewish city council member flies Paleetinian flag at >>>city hall (illegal to fly a foreign flag on a public flagpole under
state law), and encounters pro-Israel protestors, who speak to him, and >>>pro-Palestinian protestors, some of whom hide their identity. He begins >>>to suspect some of the Palestinian protestors are being paid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQRqg-kkMrY

That makes no sense.

How so? . . .

I left words out and had to rewrite it.

Nate Friedman is in Providence, RI. He finds a Palestinian flag at city >>hall put up by a Jewish city council member . . .

I'm sure I've heard of far left Jews in Israel who support the
Palestinian cause. In that case, it's not so hard to believe some
American Jews would have the same views where its easier since they are
not in anywhere near the same danger as Israelis.

In Israel, the politics of Left and Right, as understood in Europe, have
no meaning. Unlike too many other places, Kibbutzim were literally
agricultural communes, an implementation of pure communism, nothing like
the political distortions that gave the world Lenin and Stalin and Mao,
in which both deliberate and failed state policies would result in
starvation deaths in the 10s of millions, plus routine large scale
slaughter through state murders. Israel, decades before the creation of
the state, had the Histadrut, sort of a universal labor union that today provides health insurance services and other fringe benefits. Anywhere
else in the world, the Israeli Labor Party would be seen as well to the
right of anything directly or indirectly influenced by Leninism or later
forms of communism.

There's no Left versus Right with regard to the army. Everybody supports
the army. There's no Right with regard opposing progressivism. The
religious tend to keep to themselves and are not part of the Left or Right
for the most part, and the religious parties only once, briefly, held
Prime Minister during that power-sharing government that briefly took
office away from Netanyahu. The religious parties tend to form
coalitions with whichever party can form the government and they get
what they want: Legal enforcement of the Sabbath (El Al does not fly on Saturday for example), rabbinical students don't get draft, no civil
laws on marriage, etc.

Left versus Right tends to be about little more than the degree to
which punitive measures are taken with regard to the occupation.
Everybody pretty much both recognizes the occupation as a complete
failure but withdrawing from occupation of Gaza was also a complete
failure.

There are Israeli Jews who want to live in peace with the Arabs,
especially the very people murdered, kidnapped, and raped in the October
7 attack. There are Israeli Jews who have criticized the harshness of occupation tactics used by the army in the West Bank. There is plenty of criticism of the Settlements. But each and every time in the last couple
of decades there might have been an Israeli government elected willing
to bend over backwards, a la the Oslo Accords, in support of a
two-state solution, the Palestinians can be counted on to stir up just
enough unrest and trouble, with terrorist attacks, that Israeli voters
will not elect another such government.

Netanyahu entirely owes his political career to Palestinian terrorism.

There have always been Religions Zionists (versus Political Zionists, supporters of the creation of the modern state of Israel) who live there without supporting the modern state of Israel itself as not part of
Bible prophecy, but they are sure as hell not in support of the
Palestinian cause.

But only outside Israel are there willingly duped and deluded Jews (and
plenty of others who truly should know better) who ignore a radicalized
Arab group that utterly lacks rational ambitions, who cannot see acts of terrorism and war, and utterly blame Israel for the fact that there is
no Palestinian state within the pre-1967 boundaries or if the state of
Israel were still to exist. I don't think there are too many living in
Israel apologizing for or supporting terrorism and acts of war. There
are Arab Israelis who sure as hell don't want to live in Arab states.

I think living with terrorism and the results of terrorism, and building
design in large cities set up to thwart bombing attacks at building
entrances largely mitigates against entertaining any stray thoughts that anything good and peaceful can come of terrorist tactics.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-05-28 1:41 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2025-05-28 3:36 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

In Providence RI, Jewish city council member flies Paleetinian flag at >>>> city hall (illegal to fly a foreign flag on a public flagpole under
state law), and encounters pro-Israel protestors, who speak to him, and >>>> pro-Palestinian protestors, some of whom hide their identity. He begins >>>> to suspect some of the Palestinian protestors are being paid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQRqg-kkMrY

That makes no sense.

How so? . . .

I left words out and had to rewrite it.

Nate Friedman is in Providence, RI. He finds a Palestinian flag at city
hall put up by a Jewish city council member . . .

I'm sure I've heard of far left Jews in Israel who support the
Palestinian cause. In that case, it's not so hard to believe some
American Jews would have the same views where its easier since they are
not in anywhere near the same danger as Israelis.

In Israel, the politics of Left and Right, as understood in Europe, have
no meaning. Unlike too many other places, Kibbutzim were literally agricultural communes, an implementation of pure communism, nothing like
the political distortions that gave the world Lenin and Stalin and Mao,
in which both deliberate and failed state policies would result in
starvation deaths in the 10s of millions, plus routine large scale
slaughter through state murders. Israel, decades before the creation of
the state, had the Histadrut, sort of a universal labor union that today provides health insurance services and other fringe benefits. Anywhere
else in the world, the Israeli Labor Party would be seen as well to the
right of anything directly or indirectly influenced by Leninism or later forms of communism.

There's no Left versus Right with regard to the army. Everybody supports
the army. There's no Right with regard opposing progressivism. The
religious tend to keep to themselves and are not part of the Left or Right for the most part, and the religious parties only once, briefly, held
Prime Minister during that power-sharing government that briefly took
office away from Netanyahu. The religious parties tend to form
coalitions with whichever party can form the government and they get
what they want: Legal enforcement of the Sabbath (El Al does not fly on Saturday for example), rabbinical students don't get draft, no civil
laws on marriage, etc.

Left versus Right tends to be about little more than the degree to
which punitive measures are taken with regard to the occupation.
Everybody pretty much both recognizes the occupation as a complete
failure but withdrawing from occupation of Gaza was also a complete
failure.

There are Israeli Jews who want to live in peace with the Arabs,
especially the very people murdered, kidnapped, and raped in the October
7 attack. There are Israeli Jews who have criticized the harshness of occupation tactics used by the army in the West Bank. There is plenty of criticism of the Settlements. But each and every time in the last couple
of decades there might have been an Israeli government elected willing
to bend over backwards, a la the Oslo Accords, in support of a
two-state solution, the Palestinians can be counted on to stir up just
enough unrest and trouble, with terrorist attacks, that Israeli voters
will not elect another such government.

Netanyahu entirely owes his political career to Palestinian terrorism.

There have always been Religions Zionists (versus Political Zionists, supporters of the creation of the modern state of Israel) who live there without supporting the modern state of Israel itself as not part of
Bible prophecy, but they are sure as hell not in support of the
Palestinian cause.

But only outside Israel are there willingly duped and deluded Jews (and plenty of others who truly should know better) who ignore a radicalized
Arab group that utterly lacks rational ambitions, who cannot see acts of terrorism and war, and utterly blame Israel for the fact that there is
no Palestinian state within the pre-1967 boundaries or if the state of
Israel were still to exist. I don't think there are too many living in
Israel apologizing for or supporting terrorism and acts of war. There
are Arab Israelis who sure as hell don't want to live in Arab states.

I think living with terrorism and the results of terrorism, and building design in large cities set up to thwart bombing attacks at building
entrances largely mitigates against entertaining any stray thoughts that anything good and peaceful can come of terrorist tactics.

Fair enough; my phrasing was probably a little too generic in terms of characterizing people as left or right given the historical (and
current) situation in Israel.

One of the women interviewed by Nate Friedman - she was Jewish and
carried a sign supporting the protesters and got interviewed toward the
end - identified herself as belonging to a group of American Jews that
called for an end to the attacks on Gaza. I'd heard of this group before
for similar actions but I'm blanking on the name of the group right now
and can't spare another 40 minutes to watch the video again. I imagine
you know which group I mean.

I've also heard people like Douglas Murray and Melanie Phillips stating
their opposition to certain Israeli Jews that seemed more than a little sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and their aspirations. I wish I
could remember the names of these individuals but it was many months ago
that I saw those videos. (Norman Finkelstein *might* be one of the names
but he could have been someone mentioned in a totally different
context.) Not having heard directly from the individuals in question,
I'm at a loss to give specifics of what they propose. I don't suppose
they'd be keen on a full Hamas conquest of Israel (unless they're
clinically insane) but their views were characterized as excessively sympathetic to the Arabs in Gaza, Judea and Samaria.

One question about the religious Jews. Didn't the Knesset vote to end
the exemption of religious Jews from the IDF around a year ago? I seem
to remember seeing that in the news. It was supposed to come into effect
within a few days and they were anticipating significant resistance from
the religious Jews. But then I never heard about any resistance so I'm wondering if the government backed away from that? Or did the religious
Jews (Haredi? Or am I misusing that term?) have a change of heart and
turn up at the IDF ready to begin training without protest?
--
Rhino

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

. . .

One of the women interviewed by Nate Friedman - she was Jewish and
carried a sign supporting the protesters and got interviewed toward the
end - identified herself as belonging to a group of American Jews that
called for an end to the attacks on Gaza. I'd heard of this group before
for similar actions but I'm blanking on the name of the group right now
and can't spare another 40 minutes to watch the video again. I imagine
you know which group I mean.

There are multiple groups, and yeah, they all deliberately mischaracterize
the war as an attack on Gaza and the deaths (combined of militant and
civilian deaths) as a genocide. They barely criticize Hamas at all. Even
if the current phase of the war is too punitive, seemingly without
military objective, they have never called for release of all living
hostages and unconditional surrender of Hamas. Israel would immediately
stop shelling if that were to happen.

In the United States, I've heard of no group offering a practical
position that would lead to an end to war without continuing shellings
in which civilians are killed. It's always, Israel must back off without
Hamas needing to surrender.

I've also heard people like Douglas Murray and Melanie Phillips stating
their opposition to certain Israeli Jews that seemed more than a little >sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and their aspirations. . . .

Ok. There may be a few that reject reality.

One question about the religious Jews. Didn't the Knesset vote to end
the exemption of religious Jews from the IDF around a year ago?

I should have been clearer. The religious parties are for Jews who live separately from society, like Hassids. There isn't a political party for
Jews who more or less strictly practice religion.

The exemption is specific to rabbinical students, not all religious
Jews. There are numerous religious Jews in the army.

It's not being enforced as far as I understand, and there have been
court cases. I don't know what the final outcome will be.

I seem to remember seeing that in the news. It was supposed to come
into effect within a few days and they were anticipating significant >resistance from the religious Jews. But then I never heard about any >resistance so I'm wondering if the government backed away from that? Or
did the religious Jews (Haredi? Or am I misusing that term?) have a change
of heart and turn up at the IDF ready to begin training without protest?

Haredim is an Orthodox branch that rejects modernity in living according
to religious law. Orthodox Judaism has an enormous variety of beliefs,
whereas Reform and Conservative (an American movement) have relatively
uniform beliefs. Plenty of Orthodox Jews attempt to accomodate the
modern world while living within religious law. They don't try to live separately from the modern world.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-05-28 3:46 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

. . .

One of the women interviewed by Nate Friedman - she was Jewish and
carried a sign supporting the protesters and got interviewed toward the
end - identified herself as belonging to a group of American Jews that
called for an end to the attacks on Gaza. I'd heard of this group before
for similar actions but I'm blanking on the name of the group right now
and can't spare another 40 minutes to watch the video again. I imagine
you know which group I mean.

There are multiple groups, and yeah, they all deliberately mischaracterize the war as an attack on Gaza and the deaths (combined of militant and civilian deaths) as a genocide. They barely criticize Hamas at all. Even
if the current phase of the war is too punitive, seemingly without
military objective, they have never called for release of all living
hostages and unconditional surrender of Hamas. Israel would immediately
stop shelling if that were to happen.

In the United States, I've heard of no group offering a practical
position that would lead to an end to war without continuing shellings
in which civilians are killed. It's always, Israel must back off without Hamas needing to surrender.

Douglas Murray puts it in a nice simple way: whenever there is a war
with Hamas, Hizbollah, or whoever, Israel is never allowed to win. It
always has to back off due to foreign pressure with the enemy undefeated
so that there antagonist is allowed to regroup and rebuild and launch
another attack in a few years. That is a ludicrous proposition. It seems
like the Israeli leadership is finally resolved not to do that any more
and taking one enemy off the board entirely, namely the Hamas leadership
(and hopefully popular support for Hamas although that's probably too
much to hope for).

I've also heard people like Douglas Murray and Melanie Phillips stating
their opposition to certain Israeli Jews that seemed more than a little
sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and their aspirations. . . .

Ok. There may be a few that reject reality.

One question about the religious Jews. Didn't the Knesset vote to end
the exemption of religious Jews from the IDF around a year ago?

I should have been clearer. The religious parties are for Jews who live separately from society, like Hassids. There isn't a political party for
Jews who more or less strictly practice religion.

Isn't the party that Smotrich and Ben Gvir belong to for the strictly religious?

The exemption is specific to rabbinical students, not all religious
Jews.

Yes, those are the ones I meant, the ones that spend years at yeshivas
learning more about Judaism. I over-generalized by referring to
religious Jews in general.

There are numerous religious Jews in the army.

It's not being enforced as far as I understand, and there have been
court cases. I don't know what the final outcome will be.

I hadn't heard of any major unrest from the rabbinical students so I
wondered if they had had a change of heart or the people who expected
trouble were just flat out wrong.

I seem to remember seeing that in the news. It was supposed to come
into effect within a few days and they were anticipating significant
resistance from the religious Jews. But then I never heard about any
resistance so I'm wondering if the government backed away from that? Or
did the religious Jews (Haredi? Or am I misusing that term?) have a change >> of heart and turn up at the IDF ready to begin training without protest?

Haredim is an Orthodox branch that rejects modernity in living according
to religious law. Orthodox Judaism has an enormous variety of beliefs, whereas Reform and Conservative (an American movement) have relatively uniform beliefs. Plenty of Orthodox Jews attempt to accomodate the
modern world while living within religious law. They don't try to live separately from the modern world.

Sorry, I got my terminology muddled. I was trying to think of the term
for the yeshiva students who had previously been exempt from military
service (a policy I know MOST Israelis disagree with) and landed on
Haredi by mistake. The Haredi are the people who mostly live in a
cluster in NYC with a wire encircling their area.(And, of course, they
live in other cities and countries as well.)



--
Rhino

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

On 2025-05-28 3:46 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

. . .

One question about the religious Jews. Didn't the Knesset vote to end
the exemption of religious Jews from the IDF around a year ago?

I should have been clearer. The religious parties are for Jews who live >>separately from society, like Hassids. There isn't a political party for >>Jews who more or less strictly practice religion.

Isn't the party that Smotrich and Ben Gvir belong to for the strictly >religious?

Bezalel Smotrich is a settler in the West Bank. Those families are
militant, if not insane, literally the people who would be civilian
casualties if there were an all-out war. His party is brand new from the
most recent national election, a merger of several tiny parties, none of
which were parties generally associated by Haredi Jews. However, they
would ally themselves with the religious parties as they favored
increased state funding of rabbinical education. I think pre-merger
they held seats in a few small municipalities but no seats in the
Knesset.

, , ,

I hadn't heard of any major unrest from the rabbinical students so I
wondered if they had had a change of heart or the people who expected
trouble were just flat out wrong.

These aren't your typical teenage boys who might rebel against parental authority. Maybe they'd have a different religious interpretation.

I seem to remember seeing that in the news. It was supposed to come
into effect within a few days and they were anticipating significant >>>resistance from the religious Jews. But then I never heard about any >>>resistance so I'm wondering if the government backed away from that? Or >>>did the religious Jews (Haredi? Or am I misusing that term?) have a change >>>of heart and turn up at the IDF ready to begin training without protest?

Haredim is an Orthodox branch that rejects modernity in living according
to religious law. Orthodox Judaism has an enormous variety of beliefs, >>whereas Reform and Conservative (an American movement) have relatively >>uniform beliefs. Plenty of Orthodox Jews attempt to accomodate the
modern world while living within religious law. They don't try to live >>separately from the modern world.

Sorry, I got my terminology muddled. I was trying to think of the term
for the yeshiva students who had previously been exempt from military
service (a policy I know MOST Israelis disagree with) and landed on
Haredi by mistake. The Haredi are the people who mostly live in a
cluster in NYC with a wire encircling their area.(And, of course, they
live in other cities and countries as well.)

It's not the wrong term. Now that I think about it, it's not exactly a
branch of Orthodox, more of a modern description of religious people who
live apart from the modern world if not rejecting it. It can include
Hassidic and Lubovitchers in the view of some, but I don't use the term
as all encompassing like that.

The wire is a Sabbath thing for Jews observing no work permitted on
Sabbath, nothing to do with Haredim. It's an accomodation for living in
the modern world, treating the area within the wire as if it's within
the home so work may be performed without violating the commandment to
keep the Sabbath holy. We're not talking about work like building
something but ordinary tasks of domesticity and living that otherwise
conflict with observing the Sabbath.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 28 May 2025 17:41:18 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

Netanyahu entirely owes his political career to Palestinian terrorism.

Why is this surprising given that his brother both commanded the
Entebbe Raid and was the sole Israeli military casualty of it?

Not long afterwards Bibi made his first attempt at public office. Must
be nearly 50 years ago now.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:

Wed, 28 May 2025 17:41:18 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com>:

Netanyahu entirely owes his political career to Palestinian terrorism.

Why is this surprising given that his brother both commanded the
Entebbe Raid and was the sole Israeli military casualty of it?

Not long afterwards Bibi made his first attempt at public office. Must
be nearly 50 years ago now.

Netanyahu himself, not just his brother, was responsible for his own
impressive military victories. But that's not the point I was making.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 28 May 2025 19:46:07 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

There are multiple groups, and yeah, they all deliberately mischaracterize >the war as an attack on Gaza and the deaths (combined of militant and >civilian deaths) as a genocide. They barely criticize Hamas at all. Even
if the current phase of the war is too punitive, seemingly without
military objective, they have never called for release of all living
hostages and unconditional surrender of Hamas. Israel would immediately
stop shelling if that were to happen.

In the United States, I've heard of no group offering a practical
position that would lead to an end to war without continuing shellings
in which civilians are killed. It's always, Israel must back off without >Hamas needing to surrender.

Bottom line is Israel is taking that stance since they know that if
they don't it's only a matter of time before HAMAS goes for round 2 or
3 or 4.

Based on both October 7th and the longstanding reign of bombs and
missiles from Gaza, it would not at all be unreasonable for Israel to
adopt a "Delenda est Gaza" approach (and yes I do know what Cato the
Elder was calling for) including tunnel demolition.

Of course the "international community" would expect them to build
Gaza a new subway system - which of course is already half built.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)