All-in-all the perfect spot for Zion, which, as Wm. Blake knew well, is a state of mind. But certain foolish Jews are obsessed with the original stones as if they were magic. They're rocks, people, rocks! Like you'll find anywhere, sheesh!

Certainly this doesn't appear to be beyond Rabbi Lior who it seems is difficult to accuse of of being some lone nut given the leadership role the settlers have stood him in for so long and given that he was even elected to the Supreme Rabbinical Council of Israel. For instance, according to Wikipedia, he has suggested that medical experiments should be performed on captured arab "terrorists." He has also issued a halakhic ruling that Israel must shoot arab civilians living in areas from whence attacks on jews originate. And he has further said it is flatly against jewish law to employ or rent property to arabs.

I.e., insanity seems to run in the Mideast neighborhood, and to not be much of a respecter of political, ethnic or religious boundaries.

Steve F, I can't add much to Phil's excellent reply and I look forward to reading your response to it. It displays the sort of maturity and sense of proportion that Zionists, liberal or not, signally lack.

I would only add that the whole issue (extremism in ME states) is irrelevant to the concerns generally addressed here, namely the occupation and the Lobby that supports it. What does the racism and/or medieval attitude of some Arab clerics in certain states surrounding Israel have to do with our disgust with an ally which oppresses and holds captive a native population, and which uses the power of it's ethnic brethren in the West to intimidate opposition to it's crimes? Where is the connection? Does the former somehow licence the latter? It's a violent neighbourhood, ergo our violence is justified? Shooting rock-tossing children or bombing kids' swimming pools in the West Bank is OK, because Israel has some scary neighbours?

What if your standard was applied elsewhere? Remember Gen William Boykin (still as far as I'm aware some top honcho in military intelligence) who opined before the war that he'd had a dream where his God smashed the living daylights out of their God, being bigger 'n all? Would that justify a dominant Mexico in it's continuing atrocities against desperate American asylum-seekers?

What if Arabs quoted former MK and minister Re'havem Ze'evi's conviction that Palestinians were 'lice that should be exterminated'? or that one of Israel's prominent clerics, Yaacov Perrin, told the congregation at Baruch Goldsein's funeral that '1000 Arabs are not worth one Jewish fingernail'? Would that not throw any violent words or action against Israel into more acceptable relief?

'Bad neighborhood? You moved there, dude.'

Says it all. Can't stand the heat? Get out of the kitchen. Or rather, if you are an American Jew who feels that the kitchen is there to stay eternally at any cost, then get yourself over there to defend it and stop helping to bleed American blood, treasure and international goodwill in defence of another country.

OK – I get it. The Jews shouldn't have moved there so now they must leave the West Bank even if it puts them in mortal harm. That is a view imposed on no other country or no other problem. And keep in mind who settled Israel. Largely two groups – refugees from the Holocaust and the larger group today – those kicked out of their homes by the Arabs. I expect one thing from you, Phil. Even though you carry just a wee bit of Jewish baggage, try to judge the Jews on the same basis as you judge others. If there are other countries which you would advise to put themselves in mortal danger to make peace, so be it. But don't look for ways to justify a disgusting double standard.

looking into these books isnt antisemitic is it?
afterall the rabbis wrote this stuff and not some gentile.

http://www.come-and-hear.com/dilling/dcontents.html

priceless stuff….so pure so blameless.

give me a break and look into your books first.
remove the plank in your own eye before pointing out the one in your brothers eye.

Heeding Steve's advice would be benefitial if he did it himself. Personally, I believe Steve is too focused on certain extremes that he conflates with every Muslim in the periphery here. From Morocco to Iran, most are sympathetic to the Palestinian cause but they are much more focused on their own problems that they deal with on their home turf. You create a picture that every state surrounding Israel is waiting to burn it to the ground; that simply is not the case as Phil stated in his post that they are attempting at reform. As a matter of fact, two Arab nations with the biggest army are at peace with Israel and Syria have hinted at it also; the Saudis have addressed a plan for a two-state solution, not the destruction of Zionism by advocating a one state solution.

But what really is hurtful is that Steve is too narrowly focused on the extremes that he finds so objectionable; where's his nuanced outlook here? In the end, Israel cannot do anything to stem the tide of Wahhabism unless it delegitimises their cause of concern, that Israel is a demon that oppresses other Muslims.

It's tough to ignore Sword of Gideon's remark, but he made a major oversimplification here: Israel is not responsible for Arab "lunatics", but it does itself no favours by making life miserable for Muslims.