Rockets are collective punishment

on 44 Comments

Last week Bradley Burston published a column in Haaretz, “To the leftist who has no problem with rocket fire on Israel,” that cited a piece on our site. Annie Robbins then responded to Burston in a post, “When victims retaliate.” Burston sent along the following response.

Annie, You make a number of excellent points in your post “When victims retaliate,” a response to my article “To the leftist who has no problem with rocket fire on Israel.” 

Among them are these:

Israel’s brutal, decades-long occupation spurs people under occupation to want to respond instinctively and violently. Absolutely true. Targeted assassinations of people not engaged in combat are forbidden under international law. That law applies to the assassinations my government carried out recently. Absolutely true.

“Civilians are, moreover, protected against acts that constitute collective punishment. Collective punishment, intentional attacks against civilians and extrajudicial executions constitute war crimes in IHL.” Absolutely true.

You also wrote that when I spoke at a synagogue in Marin County before the last election, I evaded your questions about the violent settlers and how much of a problem I thought they were for Israel and Palestine. Again, absolutely true. Specifically, among the questions I ducked, you asked how many of the settlers there were the violent ones.

So let me begin with a sincere apology for evading your questions, and with the answers as I see them.

Settler violence against Palestinians and their property is terrorism, nothing less and nothing else. It is much worse than the news media report, and it is growing in scope as the years go by.

Violent settlers are one of the primary issues barring any conceivable solution – one state or two – to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That is the specific purpose of much of the violence, to render any solution impossible.

Violent settlers – if I had to hazard an admittedly guesswork figure – represent 1-2 percent of the settler population, 5,000 -10,000 hard core zealots, many, if not most of them, armed.

To return to the issue of rockets, it seems to me that your citation regarding collective punishment, intentional attacks against civilians, and extrajudicial executions, sums up, in fact, the point I was trying to get across.

We might even be in agreement on this.

It boils down to this: Extrajudicial assassination is wrong. No matter who carries it out. Collective punishment and intentional attacks on civilians are wrong, no matter who practices them or why.

The rockets are collective punishment. The targets of the collective punishment are not unlike the targets of the siege of Gaza, which I abhor and entirely oppose: working people, the elderly, children, pregnant women. Anyone. Arabs as well. Leftists as well.

One more thing in this regard. Although they have entirely understandable reservoirs of rage and bitterness, the rocket crews are acting on policy. Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Resistance Committees are among the more well-disciplined hierarchical military forces in Israel/Palestine. They are much more disciplined than many of the Israeli Border Police that occupy the West Bank. The rocket crews act on orders.

You wrote that “human nature is fighting back when someone is trying to kill you. That said, I support non violent resistance. I do not support killing civilians.” I agree with every word. Just one more thing. It seems that whenever I’m mentioned on Mondoweiss, someone feels it necessary to point out that I live in the “Jewish settlement of Gilo.”

Just this once, I’d like to state for the record that I do not. I never have. For what it’s worth, I live on the 1948 side of the Green Line, and have never lived across it. I live nowhere near Gilo.

I wish you only the best.I wish the people of the Holy Land a large measure of justice, democracy and personal safety. I learned much from your response, and am thankful. You are certainly not the problem. You may, in fact, be part of the solution.

About Bradley

Senior Editor and columnist,

Other posts by .

Posted In:

44 Responses

  1. CigarGod
    March 21, 2012, 11:46 am

    Great job, Annie.
    Not often we get a response like that.

    • David Samel
      March 21, 2012, 12:51 pm

      Ditto, Annie!

      • eljay
        March 21, 2012, 1:07 pm

        >> Great job, Annie.
        >> Not often we get a response like that.

        +1. :-)

    • Annie Robbins
      March 21, 2012, 1:01 pm

      thank you, i am thrilled. thrilled. blown away.

      • Mooser
        March 21, 2012, 2:36 pm

        Annie, I just can’t imagine how much it thrills you to have Bradley Burston tell you “You are certainly not the problem. You may (my italics), in fact, be part of the solution.”

        I’m sure you can stay modest and self-effacing in spite of it.

      • Hostage
        March 22, 2012, 12:21 am

        Rockets are collective punishment

        I think Annie got it right. They are a reprisal against the continuing illegal siege or closure/blockade of Gaza.

        Collective punishment is defined in The Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Under the terms of the convention, protected persons are by definition only those Israelis who find themselves in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals. Sderot is not in the hands of an occupying Palestinian power.

        Under the laws and customs of war a reprisal is, by definition, an otherwise illegal act that is deliberately carried-out in response to the prohibited acts committed by an enemy. Neither Israel nor the United States have ratified the prohibition on reprisals that target civilian objectives contained in the 1st Additional Protocol. For example, Israel has carried out punitive home demolitions as reprisals against real or perceived criminal or terrorist activities using the mandate era Defense Emergency Regulation and “military necessity” as its justification. See the discussion in Bringing Down The House: Israeli Demolitions in the Occupied West Bank, at the Foreign Policy Journal

  2. Taxi
    March 21, 2012, 11:49 am

    Resistance SHOULD be punitive to a brutal occupier. Don’t tell me you think hamas or hizbollah or islamic jihad should launch roses and orange blossom at your colony to reward your numerous crimes of infanticide and ethnic cleansing.

    Because israelis keep electing politicians who promise to keep the occupation going and settlements expanding, well like it ain’t ‘collective punishment’ now is it – more like you guys are reaping what you sow and getting off lightly if you ask me. The people of Apartheid israel should be punished because they approve and desire the occupation and covet Palestinian land by force of arms – and let us remember here that they have been doing this since 1939.

    No ‘civil’ argument on earth can get you any sympathy so long as your colony continues the unjust occupation and its despicable Apartheid practices.

    • Charon
      March 21, 2012, 3:04 pm

      Agreed. Collective punishment is an unfortunate human characteristic that the media is chiefly responsible in promoting. Human beings as a whole have traditionally and unfortunately blamed the actions of a group for the actions of a few within that group. I believe this is why the PTB use the divide and conquer strategy. They know that if country x isn’t going the way they like, they can create tension with country y and justify war to ‘resolve’ the issue. That’s truly what I believe and I’ve been called a kook, but if you gave me three hours with two 20-minute breaks and a cappuccino machine, I could build a good case for my POV. Hot chocolate and bottled water if you don’t like cappuccino. And normal coffee (dunkin donuts brand)

      And another unfortunate aspect of retaliation is to attack civilians. It would make far more sense that in using resistance techniques to go after strategic targets. Mainly military. There is also the fact that element within Israel (probably state sponsored IMHO) have either staged or provoked/promoted/baited counter attacks as a means to attack themselves. The Sinai attacks which resulted in shelling the unrelated Gaza strip come to mind. This is a strange world we live in. I might be crazy, but I mean well. I see flaws and anomalies in what we are told. I speculate based on what we know and what has happened traditionally in history. I could be very wrong, but I’m probably closer to the truth here that what they tell us

      • Pixel
        March 21, 2012, 5:24 pm

        Thank you for your comment.

  3. seafoid
    March 21, 2012, 11:59 am

    “Arabs as well”.

    A bit more work required on that. But a very good post.

    The problem is that Israel is out of control at this stage. No amount of reason is going to change that. Even if only 10,000 settlers are violent there are 750,000 of them in place. Israel has no intention of bringing them back home.

    Gaza will never be free . Gazans will never have rights. That is the end logic of Zionism.

    For all the writings of decent Israelis like Burston the machine continues regardless. . Programmed with one simple instruction-Palestinians don’t belong here. It started with that Migdal structure in the Jezreel valley and has never stopped. That is Zionism.

    They understand that in Gaza. So rockets are collective punishment but they are hardly surprising. What difference would it make if they stopped ?

    Israel needs a gamechanger. It won’t be pleasant.
    BDS would be the easiest.

    • Annie Robbins
      March 21, 2012, 1:06 pm

      seafoid, i agree that bds has the most possibility of bringing about a resolution. i really believe that. a sustained campaign of international non violent pressure.

      i’m just afraid if israel launches another war the entire middle east may become enveloped in flames. but i remain an optimist.

  4. pabelmont
    March 21, 2012, 12:14 pm

    I believe that the Gazan rockets may be terrorism (depends on the definition, and depends on whether the rocketeers were shooting AT military (or, perhaps, government) targets. I assume they were terrorism by most definitions.

    But they cannot be “collective punishment” as defined in Geneva 4 because Gaza does not occupy Israel.

    As acts of war they are much like the bombing of WWII, nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and the firebombing Dresden for example. And much like Israel’s destructive treatment of Gaza and Lebanon.

    Another point: if the Israeli army or border police are un-disciplined, as asserted, then the officers are guilty of the crimes of the undisciplined actors — for failure to maintain training and discipline (or, more likely, for giving either direct orders or winks and nods for war crimes).

  5. David Samel
    March 21, 2012, 12:51 pm

    This appears to be a decent and honest apology. But Burston’s view of the who issue is quite distorted. I actually agree with him that the rockets are deliberately intended to cause damage and even death, and to frighten, panic and terrorize those who escape without injury, and that this effort is at least partially successful. I also do not agree with those who minimize the effects of rocket fire. But Burston fails to appreciate that almost all of the minimization takes place in comparison to the far far greater misery that Israel inflicts on Palestinians. It’s not merely the much higher risk of death and injury, which alone is quite a dramatic contrast. It’s the daily, monthly, yearly, “decadely” control over every aspect of Palestinians’ lives. Burston’s original article certainly criticizes Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, but seems to support the notion of equal condemnation of both sides for their crimes. To me, that is like equally condemning the Nat Turner rebellion and the institution of slavery. Turner’s butchery of dozens of people who happened to be white was not a trivial matter, but some perspective is surely needed.

    I’m also curious about how Burston feels about his emigration to Israel decades ago. He exercised his “right” of return to a place based upon a presumed ancient historical connection, while those who have an undeniable, recent connection to the same land are denied that right. Also, while he enjoyed full and equal citizenship in the land of his birth, he now must know that Palestinian citizens of Israel must endure second-class citizenship. They are native inhabitants who have a much better claim to the land but because of their ethnic identity, they are at a clear disadvantage with respect to Americans like Burston who have chosen to transplant. Does he ever consider the unfairness in his own life’s journey and what would be necessary to rectify it? I fully agree with him that living in Gilo would make matters worse, but aren’t they pretty bad already?

    • eljay
      March 21, 2012, 1:06 pm

      >> David Samel @ March 21, 2012 at 12:51 pm

      Well and eloquently put, as usual.

      • Pixel
        March 21, 2012, 5:27 pm


    • gamal
      March 22, 2012, 8:55 pm

      “but aren’t they pretty bad already?”

      You need to look on the bright side however bad they are now they are going to get a whole lot worse, enjoy it while lasts.

  6. Woody Tanaka
    March 21, 2012, 1:09 pm

    Interesting statement. Although I would have titled it “Burston Admits Thousands Of Armed Jewish Terrorists In West Bank.”

  7. W.Jones
    March 21, 2012, 1:15 pm

    How do Indian massacres of settlers in the US West compare to US army massacres of Indian villages?

    On the face it seems like the same thing, except it occurs within the larger context of the Indians being expelled and deprived of their land. Plus, I assume the casualty rate was pretty lopsided.

    • eljay
      March 21, 2012, 1:25 pm

      >> On the face it seems like the same thing, except it occurs within the larger context of the Indians being expelled and deprived of their land. Plus, I assume the casualty rate was pretty lopsided.

      To paraphrase the heading of this thread: Indian arrows are collective punishment.

      • W.Jones
        March 21, 2012, 3:17 pm


    • Mooser
      March 21, 2012, 2:45 pm

      “How do Indian massacres of settlers in the US West compare to US army massacres of Indian villages?”

      If you would like some insight into that I suggest reading “Simon Girty, Turncoat Hero” (“The Most Hated Man on the Early American Frontier”) by Phillip W Hoffman. 2009, Flying Camp Press.

      • Bumblebye
        March 21, 2012, 4:33 pm

        Girty knew the *real* reason for the Revolutionary war wasn’t taxes, but expansion, which England forbade. I got taught that in school at 14. Here in Blighty we knew!

      • Woody Tanaka
        March 22, 2012, 7:02 am

        The causes of the American Revolution are too complex to be reduced to “taxes” (or even “taxation without representation”), but replacing one absurd reductionist myth — “taxes” — with another — “expansion” — does no one any good.

    • seafoid
      March 21, 2012, 3:19 pm

      The US Congress granted Native Americans citizenship in 1924 ( In their own country, FFS) .
      Palestinians are still denied Israeli citizenship. In their own country.

  8. Annie Robbins
    March 21, 2012, 1:47 pm

    bradley burston, thank you so much for making the time and effort to respond to me. although we come from much different perspectives in life ( i am not a zionist) it’s going to take a lot of effort on everyones part to change the situation there and for the most part i have appreciated your columns since i started reading them a few years ago and think the perch afforded to you at haaretz is one you have used to push the envelope within the zionist bubble. it was for this reason i went to hear you speak and i count myself as one of your fans.

    needless to say there are columns you write i don’t fully agree with but culmatively you’ve made a gutsy positive dent in the discourse. i suppose my point is if we are going to make change we need to find openings within israeli society where we can push that communication and make it work for us to bring about equality (in safety) for everyone and empower a free palestine w/free people in a permanent and lasting way hopefully without destroying anything life affirming and positive in the process and there are life affirming positive people in israel. i know because i have visited and met them, some really wonderful people.

    i was not appreciating being defined as ‘hard’ left nor having the site defined that way either nor being defined as part of the problem so hearing from you i may be part of the solution really just blows my mind and encourages me. i think you are part of the solution too. i believe and have confidence as long as we are engaged, want peace and equality, are passionate, seek justice, are determined, and don’t give up we can be part of the solution even if we don’t agree on everything. it can be overcome if we are willing to really listen (not my specialty).

    i think the passive or lazy or fearful meandering middle, the right, and the hard right are much bigger problems we have to overcome. we’re better off by joining forces to bring about radical change (which is sorely needed) than apart. i liked the way you targeted and took down zoa in your last column

    much appreciation for listening and engaging.

    • Mooser
      March 21, 2012, 2:41 pm

      “we’re better off by joining forces to bring about radical change (which is sorely needed) than apart.”

      Now that’s funny! Everybody here is so much more subtle than me. Yeah, if there’s anything Bradley Burston wants, it’s to join forces with Annie Robbins “to bring about radical change”
      Say, maybe she can get you a writing gig at Ha-aretz!

      • Annie Robbins
        March 21, 2012, 2:45 pm

        mooser, i’m totally serious when i say people should join forces to bring about radical change. anyone who doesn’t think radical change needs to occur before any meaningful permanent peace could take hold is nuts. it’s apartheid, occupation! what were you thinking, something subtle? hellloooo.

      • Annie Robbins
        March 21, 2012, 2:49 pm

        oh, i just realized you used that word..subtle. that was only a coincidence, i thought of it myself! so tell me what kind of change besides radical change will end the occupation? enlighten me plllleeease.

      • Mooser
        March 21, 2012, 2:56 pm

        Tell me what kind of Bradley Burston will endorse, work for, or do anything but subvert “radical change”
        And I hate to tell you this, but Zionism could endure “radical” change and still have more than plenty left over to finish the ethnic cleasing job.
        If the history of Zionism suggests to you that they can be relied on as allies in “radical change” to their own disadvantage, I have a marriage proposal for you. And it’s really big of me to make it.

      • Mooser
        March 21, 2012, 3:02 pm

        “i’m totally serious when i say people, should join forces to bring about radical change”

        Oh, I shouldn’t pop off so readily. After all, I would think that Rachel Corrie thought the very same thing. And she was a very, very admirable, brave and honest person with a deep comittment to “radical change”.

  9. bintbiba
    March 21, 2012, 2:52 pm

    annie , Bradley, me too. A fan . Appreciate you a lot. Thanks.

  10. Mooser
    March 21, 2012, 2:53 pm

    “Just this once, I’d like to state for the record that I do not. I never have. For what it’s worth, I live on the 1948 side of the Green Line, and have never lived across it.”

    Oh, give me a freakin’ break! Of course, it is a well known fact that the settlers exist entirely on their own resources, with no help from Green Line Israel at all. Why as a matter of fact, everybody on the other side of the Green Line spends most of the day clucking, shaking their heads, and saying “Oh, if only we could do something about those nasty settler people”
    Anyway, at least they keep the IDF entirely out of the situation, and never protect the settlers from the consequences of their criminal actions. Nor do they allow the settlers to raise funds and get thugs and goons from outside Israel.

    My frickin God, is the rape of Mondoweiss by “liberal Zionism” so inevitable that we should lie back and enjoy it?

    • Koshiro
      March 21, 2012, 5:35 pm

      While I agree with your point that living in Israel proper instead of in a settlement does not excuse any Israeli from responsibility for the occupation, in this case you’re overreacting. Mr. Burston mentioned his living inside the Green Line specifically to counter previous insinuations that he lives in a settlement. If these insinuations are factually incorrect, it is appropriate for him to set the record straight.

      • Mooser
        March 21, 2012, 6:34 pm

        “in this case you’re overreacting.”

        I beg Mondoweiss readers not to believe Koshiro’s erroneous and insulting statement and check for themselves. Even the most cursory perusal of my comment archives will conclusively prove that I over-react in almost every case.

    • RoHa
      March 22, 2012, 10:58 pm

      “Just this once, I’d like to state for the record that I do not. I never have. For what it’s worth, I live on the 1948 side of the Green Line, and have never lived across it.”

      So since he benefits from the 1948 killing and ethnic cleansing, he can comfortably condemn the killing and ethnic cleansing the settlers are conducting.

  11. braciole
    March 21, 2012, 6:20 pm

    Perhaps Mr Burston would like to answer this question:

    Does he believe the the British and Americans should have foregone the strategic bombing campaign against Germany in World War 2? After all, bombing at that time was as about as accurate as the rocket fire from Gaza is today and was, regardless of claims by its proponents, squarely aimed at killing and terrorizing the civilian population of Germany. The “throw weight” of the RAF and USAAF could be measured in thousands of tons rather than the few kilograms that the Gazans can deliver.

    Since he is concerned about the accuracy of the rockets from Gaza perhaps he would like to demand that Gaza be supplied with more accurate rockets so that the world can clearly see how the Gazans are attacking civilian populations. Perhaps 30-40 batteries of M240 MRLS with XM30 missiles would do. After all these are accurate to within feet. Or if the United States won’t supply the Gazans, how about allowing the Russians to supply several hundred Iskanders (accuracy about 5m) . Until he agrees to this, his argument is meaningless.

  12. kalithea
    March 21, 2012, 8:39 pm

    I can’t stand Zionist logic; it’s not logic but warped thinking and perception that comes from a sense of entitlement and supremacy over the poor “heathen” occupied people.

    Mr. Burston only has to switch the parties into the other’s circumstances to understand how flawed his thinking is and how hollow and patronizing his words sound. I wonder what his excuse is for not applying the Palestinian situation to Jews before he writes anything or opens his mouth? Because truth can only come from doing just that! In other words, if generations of Jewish children were being born into military oppression, occupation, imposed poverty in refugee camps, settler brutality and land theft…gee, I wonder how Mr. Burston would judge Jewish resistance to THAT???

  13. Jabberwocky
    March 21, 2012, 10:23 pm

    The terrorism of the Israeli colonizers in the West Bank does not only consist of acts of blatant violence and shooting. We should also consider their theft and control of the water, destruction of agricultural crops and the theft of private property.

    This would define the majority as terrorists.

  14. andrew r
    March 22, 2012, 12:35 am

    “Collective punishment and intentional attacks on civilians are wrong, no matter who practices them or why.”

    If that’s the case, Burston should turn against Zionism in toto. This is nauseatingly hypocritical as he’s not really rejecting intentional attacks on civilians as a matter of principle. He’s rejecting attacks that do not expand the Jewish and demographic state and only add to its delegitimization.

    Sadly, I have to link another Burston oped.

    “In return for my acquiescence, the settlement movement blackened Israel’s democracy and its very name. We gave them Yitzhak Rabin and they gave us Avigdor Lieberman.”

    In 1949, Rabin gave the order to demolish Iraq al-Manshiya and al-Faluja despite an explicit promise to protect these villages in an annex to the armistice with Egypt. As defense minister, he’s famous for the savage beatings of demonstrators during the first intifada.

    “Settlement has long been, and remains, the fuel for the fire of de-legitimization of Israel, the basis of charges of apartheid and ethnic cleansing. It undermines the foundation of the idea of a Jewish state. It turns the very word settlement into an obscenity.”

    Uri Davis’ work demonstrates that Israel is an apartheid state in the 1949 armistice boundary, nevermind the occupied West Bank and Gaza. Non-Jewish citizens of Israel can not lease land held by the govt. or the JNF, which is 93% of the land in the Green Line. A Palestinian-Israeli, Adel Kaadan, had to wage a ten year legal battle just to live in a small Jewish town. Even though he technically won, the result only applied to him and was not a general ruling against segregating Arabs from Jewish towns. Even though Burston will probably not have a problem with challenging this situation, it’s in place because of the Zionist state he supports.

    “Every morning the settlements expand, the democratic and Jewish character of Israel is undermined, Israel’s standing as a member of the community of nations is called further into question, and the support of this country’s indispensible American ally is clouded, casting a shadow over the security of everyone here.”

    This tells you pretty well what Burston really cares about. The whole decision to create a Jewish state in Palestine was not democratic to begin with as it excluded the Palestinians who should have been able to live in and build their own country instead of being expelled en masse at gunpoint. Burston will not condemn that action because it was necessary for the demographic (not democratic) and Jewish character of Israel.

    “Like many a bigot, I truly have no quarrel with the vast majority of the Jewish residents of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. But I do not want them to force the majority of Israelis, myself included, to live in a new Arab country which retains the name of Israel. I have no problem at all with Arab countries. But I didn’t come here to live in one.”

    Hint: 50% of Jewish Israelis are of Arab background which would make Israel an Arab country as it stands. Now, of course many will disavow that Jews from Morocco, Yemen and Iraq are Arabs, yet they spoke Arabic there, so that would raise the question as to why Muslims and Christians from the same regions who speak the same language are Arabs, but not Jews. The separation of Jew and Arab into mutually exclusive identities is a racist trope that was brought on by European colonialists, Zionists as well as their British and French backers.

    I really get the impression that had the West Bank been cleared of Arabs quickly after 1967, fast enough so that his generation didn’t have to protect the settlers, Burston would be outspoken about as much as he is on 1948. His concern is for protecting the hard-won gains of 1948 which are threatened by the settlements expanding the boundary line to include more Arabs.

  15. kalithea
    March 22, 2012, 3:06 am

    If you accept that one million Palestinians were cleared off their land, through terrorist acts and cleansing and forced to live in poverty as refugees so that guys like Burston could enjoy a second passport and Jews from Eastern bloc countries, New Jersey and Florida could squat on Palestinian land and behave like brutes because of some religious entitlement and destroy Palestinians’ lives in the process; then why give a Zionist, like Burston, an excuse to justify himself and the supremacist, racist ideology that is Zionism?

    I don’t get it. His goal is to rescue Zionism folks, that’s all! He likes to purge his conscience once in a while and is trying to pretend that Zionism isn’t as bad as it looks and could be salvaged if only for those “5000 or so violent settlers”…OH PUH LEEEES! Snap out of it! He’s ALL ZIONISM…period!

  16. Brewer
    March 22, 2012, 5:47 am

    “Sderot was settled by Jews in 1951. According to Walid Khalidi in All That Remains, it along with the settlement of Or ha-Ner, founded in 1957, were established on the village lands of Najd, which means “elevated plain” in Arabic.*

    Najd’s Palestinian villagers, approximately 620 in 1945, were expelled on 13 May 1948, before Israel was declared a state and before any Arab armies entered Palestine. According to UN Resolution 194 and also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 13, Section 2, the villagers of Najd have a right to return home to their personal property and to their native village.

    Today, according to Khalidi, “some old trees grow” on the site of the village. It is “overgrown with cactuses and Christ’s thorn and sycamore trees and contans the crumbled walls of unidentified buildings….””

    The villagers of Najd and their descendants are penned up in Gaza. If they fire rockets, the only protest left them, it cannot be characterised as “collective punishment”. File it under “what I would do in their position”.

    It should also be mentioned that a few Jews lived, unmolested, in Najd before 1948. They owned about 400 dunams of the total 12,000 (from memory).

  17. Talkback
    March 22, 2012, 9:23 am

    Mr. Burston, trying to highlight superficial symmetries of violence to obscure the essential crime. Or is he demanding the right of return for Palestinians, even if Jews would become again a minority like they were in 1948?

  18. Dan Crowther
    March 22, 2012, 9:42 am

    I just read this —- What a crock. Burston is full of Poo. Big Time.

    What he doesnt mention of course, is that the original inhabitants of Sderot and elsewhere are now collectively jailed in Gaza. This is nonsense. The Palestinians in Gaza have every right – including their political leadership- to retaliate and to order that retaliation. It’s not collective punishment, and Ive read the friggin Geneva Conventions.

    Semper Fidelis,


  19. Justice Please
    March 22, 2012, 12:10 pm


    “The rockets are collective punishment.”

    As soon as Israel ends the occupation of the West Bank, ends the siege of Gaza and enacts the Right of Return and apologizes for their various crimes, we will condemn said rockets as “collective punishment”.

Leave a Reply