Trending Topics:

For wearing veil, woman is ordered off Jerusalem light rail and frisked

News
on 86 Comments
Leanne Gale, from her Facebook page

Leanne Gale, from her Facebook page

Last week, following Leanne Gale’s report on Jerusalem Day racism in the Forward, I quoted from a number of blogposts by this young American who is working with Ir Amim in Jerusalem. At that time I read a blogpost from January 23, titled “This Harassment Is So Unnecessary” which contains a disturbing story reflected in my headline. I asked her if I could post the whole thing, and she generously agreed. Here it is:

Earlier this afternoon, I was riding the light rail through West Jerusalem.  Next to me sat a Palestinian woman wearing a niqab, a head-covering that covers her entire face except for her eyes.  Next to her was another Palestinian woman wearing a hijab.   They were accompanied by a young child.

As we edged toward the Central Bus Station, a male Israeli security guard approached the woman in niqab and said, in Hebrew, “You’re getting off at the next stop.”

Confused, she pulled out her light-rail ticket, thinking that perhaps he wanted to scan it. Many Palestinian women in East Jerusalem do not speak Hebrew.

He responded in Hebrew, saying, “No, that doesn’t matter.  You’re getting off at the next stop.”

“Can you speak in English?” she asked.  “I don’t understand.  Do you want my ID?”

Dutifully, she pulled out her ID, a piece of paper that declares her permanent residency status.  (The vast, vast majority of Palestinian women in East Jerusalem are not citizens, but rather permanent residents.)

He grabbed her ID and held it above his head as ransom.  “If you want this back, you will get off at the next stop.”  Again, in Hebrew.

Trying to be “helpful,” an elderly Israeli woman said to her in broken English, “he wants you to get off.”

We arrived at the next stop.  The two Palestinian women and the young Palestinian child exited the train.  Two Palestinian men, unaffiliated with the women, followed behind.  I was nowhere near my destination, but I disembarked as well.  Whatever was going to happen, I wanted to be there.

I sat a ways away, across the light rail tracks, so as not to arouse suspicion.  I watched as a group of male security guards surrounded the Palestinian women and child, speaking at them harshly in Hebrew.  I watched as they began to feel the woman up and down, checking her for potential security threats.  There was no female security guard available to conduct the humiliating search.  I watched as the random Palestinian men approached the group, asking what the problem was, attempting to protect the women in some way, despite their own position of weakness.

In the end, the security guards returned the woman’s ID and left her alone to wait for the next train.  The Palestinian men walked away.  Israelis, tourists, and random passerbys continued on their way as if nothing had happened. I crossed the light rail tracks and approached the woman in the niqab.

“What was the problem?” I asked her in Arabic.

She looked at me in shock.  That often happens when I speak Arabic.

“I’m Jewish, I just happen to speak a bit of Arabic.  Are you okay?”

“Yes, yes I’m okay.  It was just a security check, it’s okay.”

“That’s all?”

“Yes, it’s because I’m religious, I wear the niqab.  I get stopped every time.”  Then, she switched to almost flawless English.  “I am only coming into the West of the city because I have a daughter with disabilities, and I come here to arrange aspects of her care. Otherwise, I would not come here.  This harassment is so unnecessary.”

What are you supposed to say to that?  I couldn’t give her advice or fix the problem; she is a Palestinian woman and she will be harassed by male Israeli soldiers, security guards, and police likely for the rest of her life.

“I’m sorry.  I know that doesn’t help, but I’m Jewish and I’m sorry.  I hope you have a good rest of your day.”

“Thank you, habibti, it’s okay, it’s not your fault.”

She was so calm, so powerful in her forceful conviction and relaxed demeanor.  So often, we just assume that Muslim women in hijab or niqab must be submissive or meek.  Not so.

With that, I walked off, too angry to re-board the light rail.  I walked the rest of the way to my destination.

I wish I had snapped photos.  I wish I had taken this woman’s information and asked around at Ir Amim* to see if there was something we could do to help.  I wish I had turned to the security guard and defended this woman, in Hebrew, even before she was forced off the train.  But I was too flustered, too intimidated.

That being said, I’m sure that the quick reflexes and impulses, unfortunately, will come.  Two years ago, I would watch Palestinians get kicked off the light rail and not do so much as lift a finger.  I had no idea what to do.

*Ir Amim is an Israeli organization that that seeks to render Jerusalem a more  equitable and sustainable city for the Israelis and Palestinians who share it.  I am currently interning at Ir Amim as a New Israel Fund-Shatil Social Justice Fellow.

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

86 Responses

  1. just
    just on June 2, 2014, 1:36 pm

    Leanne– I so appreciate reading about your experiences and your feelings.

    “That being said, I’m sure that the quick reflexes and impulses, unfortunately, will come. Two years ago, I would watch Palestinians get kicked off the light rail and not do so much as lift a finger. I had no idea what to do.”

    I hope that it proves not to be unfortunate for you…

    “She was so calm, so powerful in her forceful conviction and relaxed demeanor. So often, we just assume that Muslim women in hijab or niqab must be submissive or meek. Not so.”

    Women– no matter their religion/garb– are a force to be reckoned with, indeed. Too many underestimate their strength.

    In similar news:

    “JERUSALEM (Ma’an) – Israeli police prevented dozens of women from entering the al-Aqsa Mosque compound on Monday.

    Witnesses told Ma’an that Israeli police at the entrances of al-Aqsa prevented some 200 women from entering the mosque. The officers insisted that each woman deposit her identity card before she went inside, though they knew the IDs had been seized by police since Sunday evening.

    One of the worshippers said that the police would not let them enter al-Aqsa until they get their Identification cards from al-Qashla police station near Jaffa gate. ”

    http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=701595

  2. MahaneYehude1
    MahaneYehude1 on June 2, 2014, 1:37 pm

    Weiss:

    Why? Why do you publish such big lie? As a citizen of Jerusalem, I see hundreds of women in buses and in the train wearing hijab or niqab or whatever!!! no one pays attention to them, no one speaks with them.

    • just
      just on June 2, 2014, 1:47 pm

      “no one pays attention to them, no one speaks with them.”

      Really??? Such racism you claim!

      Here’s just one little example to disprove your hysteria and your own lies!

      http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/three-israeli-teens-spit-at-arab-woman-tell-her-to-leave-their-nazareth-neighborhood.premium-1.508400

    • eljay
      eljay on June 2, 2014, 1:52 pm

      >> Why do you publish such big lie?

      How do you know it is a big lie, Potato-man? Did you witness the incident? Or are you suggesting that Ms. Gale has a history of lying?

      >> As a citizen of Jerusalem, I see …

      And as a Zio-supremacist, you choose not to see.

    • Balfour
      Balfour on June 2, 2014, 2:24 pm

      Mahane: And Jewish settlers don’t destroy olive trees, and the Most Moral Army In The World doesn’t close off the Main Street in Hebron to non Jews, and bored Border Patrol snipers don’t shoot Palestinian teenagers and…

      • Accentitude
        Accentitude on June 3, 2014, 5:07 am

        Of course the most moral army in the world doesn’t send its snipers to shoot Palestinian teenagers. What rubbish. We all know that they hand out candy and licorice and hold hands with Palestinians and sing songs and skip off into the sunset each day. When they raid Palestinian homes at night and drag children out of their beds, kicking and screaming, its only so they could take them to the Shin Bet’s Russian Compound where they can ride unicorns, bounce on rainbows, each chocolate and frolic with puppies.

    • Cliff
      Cliff on June 2, 2014, 2:26 pm

      @Kahane

      Stop using Palestinians for your propaganda purposes.

    • Ecru
      Ecru on June 2, 2014, 3:59 pm

      OK MY1 and while we’re denying the verifiable truth let’s just say the Holocaust never happened shall we? It was all staged to make the Germans look bad.

      Sod off you unrepentant bigot.

    • talknic
      talknic on June 2, 2014, 8:22 pm

      @ MahaneYehude1 “Why do you publish such big lie?” … an un-founded accusation…. against the most basic of Judaisms tenets.

      Why is it so many defenders of Israel’s glaring inequalities are so ignorant of common sense human/Jewish values that they lower themselves to false accusations, lies etc even to their fellow Jews? Surely a sickness and if not, what?

  3. MHughes976
    MHughes976 on June 2, 2014, 1:42 pm

    ‘Harassment so unnecessary’ – well, necessary for the purposes which the harassers have, perhaps, or to allay suspicions which can never be allayed finally and will always call for another test, a bit more intrusive and humiliating than the last.

  4. Woody Tanaka
    Woody Tanaka on June 2, 2014, 2:05 pm

    This was a sexual assault, nothing less. I’m not surprised, as such assaults on oppressed women are common, and this kind of criminalizing dehumanization appears to be a pandemic among those in authority in the Zionist entity.

  5. Walid
    Walid on June 2, 2014, 2:47 pm

    Coming face to face with someone in a niqab, especially on a moving public transport could be a spooky experience. Women are in their right to wear what they want, of course, but others are also in their right to be spooked at seeing only a pair of eyes that at times are covered by sunglasses. Niqab wearers usually also wear gloves to not expose any skin, which compounds the spook effect. How would one react to a guy on the tram wearing a ski mask? The Quran never asked for such extreme dress or for even a head covering but only that it be modest. It’s regrettable and sad that the woman is forced to use public transportation to arrange for her daughter’s medical problems and on the west side too. There has to be a way for her to get to her destination without getting on the tram. The tram is relatively new, how did she get around before that?

    • eljay
      eljay on June 2, 2014, 2:56 pm

      >> Coming face to face with someone in a niqab, especially on a moving public transport could be a spooky experience.

      I don’t disagree. I suspect it’s also a spooky experience for a Muslim woman travelling in a supremacist state to have her identification held hostage while she’s forced off a tram and frisked by a bunch of openly-hostile men with guns.

      • Walid
        Walid on June 2, 2014, 3:26 pm

        You’re right, eljay, especially the about the part with the guys feeling her up and down knowing all too well that this was a no-no for a religious woman. I think these jerks wanted to have some fun because if they were that concerned, they would have frisked her right then and there on the tram.

      • just
        just on June 2, 2014, 3:37 pm

        Walid– I can’t say that I have ever been “spooked” by people wearing ‘culturally appropriate’ gear.

        Maybe it’s just me. A guy in a ski mask– that would be spooky.

      • Walid
        Walid on June 2, 2014, 4:02 pm

        Just, this all depends on whether or not you are living in a suicide bomb-prone environment where almost everyone that you see coming your way makes you wonder. Your respect for the religious manifestations of others is stronger than your fear of the unknown and this is what makes you super tolerant of others. On the other hand, a guy on a bus wearing a ski mask doesn’t have any religious connotation so you would be therefore spooked. Would you be spooked by clansmen in white sheets with slit openings for their eyes à la KKK?

      • just
        just on June 2, 2014, 4:27 pm

        “Would you be spooked by clansmen in white sheets with slit openings for their eyes à la KKK?”

        Have been in the past, and would be in the future. I am also spooked by folks with prison tats and gang tats/colors.

        a niqab/hijab– not so much.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder on June 2, 2014, 6:54 pm

        eljay, I don’t think the habit is spooky in itself, but it is frightening because of the context. It immediately signals Muslim and not secular but quite possibly also fundamentalist. You know kind of: wasn’t there a female suicide bomber too? It sends a clear Muslim signal. Hamas and Hisbollah and all you know.

        I don’t envy women that have to wear it. If they choose to do, that is a completely different matter. I do respond to headscarves differently. Some wear them enormously elegantly over here. But even they apparently are offensive to some of my Jewish German co-towners. And that’s because the habit signals Muslim. Obviously.

        In Vienna, I am not completely sure, but maybe it was at a tram station. I turned around and had an orthodox Jew right in front of me inches away really. Huge, black coat, black hat, black beard, peyot and all. And I have to admit that I was startled. Not sure if it was since it was so unexpected, since it was so close, or since it was really the first orthodox Jew I have ever met. But met exactly in this surprise moment.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka on June 2, 2014, 3:11 pm

      No, you’re victim blaming. What is spooky when a random man with the power of the state behind him and the ready-made excuse of “security” abuses it to sexually assault a woman who is minding her own business.

      • Walid
        Walid on June 2, 2014, 4:13 pm

        I’m not blaming the victim for anything, Woody, but she can’t blame me if I’m spooked by her attire. For some, going out and provoking situations by their dress is a form of beatitude, somewhat like brownie points while for others, it’s a sincere manifestation of their faith. How would you react to coming face to face with a guy wearing a 6-inch cross around his neck? Wearing a niqab in Jeddah or Sanaa is surely natural but in London or NYC, it’s a provocation.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka on June 2, 2014, 5:53 pm

        “I’m not blaming the victim for anything”

        Sounds like it to me. First, you’re saying that she’s “provoking situations.” Further, you’re saying that she’s “spooky” and suggesting that she inconvenience herself as a solution, rather than placing the solution where it belongs: teaching the Israeli barbarians to stop randomly sexually assaulting women on the train.

        But it’s a shame that Sa’ed Atshan didn’t say something mildly critical of this woman as she was getting sexually assaulted, maybe then you wouldn’t be so quick to blame her…

        “How would you react to coming face to face with a guy wearing a 6-inch cross around his neck?”

        The same way I would if a came face to face with a guy not wearing a 6-inch cross around his neck. I’d treat him as a human accordingly until I have reason not to.

        “Wearing a niqab in Jeddah or Sanaa is surely natural but in London or NYC, it’s a provocation.”

        Nonsense. If you go to public places like the zoo in big cities in the Northeast in the US, you might see a few women wearing them. It’s not really that unusual, and certainly no provocation.

        But even if what you said were true, this didn’t happen in London or NYC, it happened in a city with a large population that is culturally and religiously closer to Jeddah or Sanaa than London or New York.

      • Walid
        Walid on June 3, 2014, 1:25 am

        “Nonsense. If you go to public places like the zoo in big cities in the Northeast in the US, you might see a few women wearing them.”

        I’m not for religious displays on people although I’m not against them either but I don’t like them. The custom of veiling the face is pre-Islamic and has nothing to do with the religion itself. Those niqabs you see in US cities are something new and extremely rare. Couldn’t you find someplace other than a zoo?

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka on June 3, 2014, 9:45 am

        “I’m not for religious displays on people although I’m not against them either but I don’t like them.”

        It sounds to me that you need to stop focusing on the display and start focusing on the fact that there are people under them.

        “The custom of veiling the face is pre-Islamic and has nothing to do with the religion itself.”

        That, to me, is irrelevant. If a woman believes that her religion requires it, neither I nor you nor anyone but the woman has any place in telling her otherwise.

        “Those niqabs you see in US cities are something new and extremely rare. Couldn’t you find someplace other than a zoo?”

        They’re uncommon, but not rare. I mentioned the zoo because I happened to be at one in the past 2 weeks and noticed a few women wearing them. They have become increasingly common among some African-American Muslims.

    • Elisabeth
      Elisabeth on June 2, 2014, 3:47 pm

      The first time I saw a woman in niqaab was in Turkey (and it was the only time there). She turned around in front of me, and when I suddenly came face to face with someone without a face I alsmost yelped. So yes, it can be disconcerting.
      In the Netherlands (population 16.6 million) there are about 300 to 500 women wearing the niqaab. They get a ridiculous amount of attention in new programs. People get the impression that this is a huge ‘problem’, and that muslim women have themselves to blame when discriminated against applying for jobs.

    • Ecru
      Ecru on June 2, 2014, 4:01 pm

      If Israeli Jews are so “spooked” by Muslim religious wear maybe they shouldn’t have moved to a land where most of the natives were Muslim.

      • benedict
        benedict on June 2, 2014, 6:54 pm

        Israeli jews didn’t move into Israel. Most of them where born there and belong there exactly like any Israeli born Muslim. And most people living in Israel (or jlm for that matter) are not Muslim.

      • Taxi
        Taxi on June 2, 2014, 11:28 pm

        Violent invaders DO NOT belong to the land they’re violently occupying.

      • Ecru
        Ecru on June 3, 2014, 1:05 am

        @ benedict

        Most of the people in Israel aren’t Muslim for the simple reason that the native non-Jewish people were ethnically cleansed by Jews. As for “being born there” – they only had the freedom to be born there because their parents/grandparents indulged in human rights abuses and war crimes.

        If Germans still carry the guilt of the Holocaust (actually ALL non-Jews seem to have to carry that one according to Zionists) then Israeli Jews still carry the guilt for the Nakba – added to each generations own personal culpability in continuing the oppression of non-Jews in Palestine and continuing the violent and immoral occupation.

      • Walid
        Walid on June 3, 2014, 1:32 am

        Not really, Benedict, the only place where there were more of them until the nakba was in Jerusalem, that’s why Israel frantically went all out to yank the Jews in Arab countries to fill the void created by the expelled Arabs. Ecru was talking about Jews that moved to Palestine back then. Those in Israel today are in the majority born there.

      • benedict
        benedict on June 3, 2014, 5:39 am

        yea, that was 70 years ago.

        dont see its relevenc in understanding current reality.

      • pjdude
        pjdude on June 3, 2014, 1:40 am

        No most of Israel’s Jew trace from out side the country. I’m sorry that they got away with the crimes long enough to have kids and grand kids doesn’t magically make them indigenous. The reason most people in “israel” aren’t Muslim is cause the zionists expelled them in a war of conquest.

      • Ellen
        Ellen on June 3, 2014, 4:14 am

        It is not Muslim garb. It is traditional clothing of the region. Covering oneself so completely — both men and women– is pre Islamic and if you spend a day in the harsh desert climate of the Arabian Peninsula. You’ll cover yourself too!

      • Taxi
        Taxi on June 3, 2014, 4:25 am

        Unless one prefers the raw exfoliated look, courtesy of the perpetual blowing of Arabian sandstorms.

      • Ecru
        Ecru on June 3, 2014, 4:49 am

        @ Ellen

        OK yes let’s be pedantic. Trousers then aren’t western garb they’re Asian because the first trousers were from there. Come on!

      • just
        just on June 3, 2014, 6:46 am

        Spot- on, Ellen.

      • Stephen Shenfield
        Stephen Shenfield on June 3, 2014, 6:54 am

        Ellen: Full veiling is traditional to “the region” but only if “the region” is defined much more widely. It existed in pre-Islamic Persia (Zoroastrianism), ancient Israel (Judaism), Byzantium (Christianity), and even ancient Athens (polytheism). Did all these places have “the harsh desert climate of the Arabian Peninsula”?

        I’m sure covering oneself in the desert makes sense, but in what color? White, to reflect the sunlight! But white coverings seem to be reserved for men, while women are forced to cover themselves in black, which absorbs the sunlight and makes things even worse! I have a little insight into how uncomfortable it is to be swathed in black cloth in hot weather because a woman colleague visited Iran under Khomeini and wrote a detailed account of her experience with full veiling there.

        There have been reports of a revival of full veiling among Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem. I wonder how those security guys would have reacted to a veiled woman speaking fluent Ivrit and obviously Jewish in other ways.

      • Ellen
        Ellen on June 3, 2014, 7:57 am

        Stephen, I have much more than a little insight. And do not need to repeat hearsay.

        First of all, women are not “forced ” to wear black. That is nonsense. However, it is traditional in public — so as not to attract individual attention. But not a must and is not always. It is convention. Yet one that is not adopted by all.

        But if you lived in the region, you’d see that women –especially younger women– have lots of individualism in black public dress. (An often it can make your head turn!)

        If you were to spend time out of doors, you’d cover your head and face. Believe it or not, it is cooling!

        Under this light cloak women wear the same dress of any women anywhere. And the black covering is loose, of very thin material and not at all hot. And certainly not “swathed.”

        I worked with a group of “black veiled” women last week in the heat on a particular project. They were not sweating and suffering, but I sure was with no arm cover, tiny head cover and long cotton pants that I thought would be cool, but were oppressive. Man, I wanted off with my clothes an into one of those airy coverings.

        At home dress for these ladies is colorful and often much more elaborate than for a western woman — or nothing more than jeans and a t-shirt.

        Here you’ll see tradition is much more than black
        http://www.saudiembassy.or.jp/DiscoverSA/TC.htm

        Why do men cover in white? Maybe the same reason male birds are colorful — to attract attention. A tradition of personal neutrality? But for now, it is mostly comfortable tradition with many reasons.

      • Ellen
        Ellen on June 3, 2014, 8:23 am

        Stephen, and not to beat a dead camel, but as you brought on the” forced to wear black” line.

        Did you ever wonder why the traditional tent of the desert is black?

        And it was there, living in a Bedouin tent, that I had this astonishing revelation. We’re walking around in khakis and sleeping in white tents. And the Bedouins are walking around in black with lots of layers on and living in black tents. What’re they doing in black? Isn’t white supposed to be cooler? I couldn’t understand it until I lived in it.

        http://www.dwell.com/interviews/article/sixteen-ways-looking-bedouin-tent

        Oh, and BTW, men wear black here too.

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr on June 3, 2014, 10:55 am

        you just basically spelled out for us that Arabs came from Arabia and conquered the land where Israel now is 100s of years ago. Also-it doesn’t explain the even more strict burka (with no eye-slits ) that women have to wear in parts of Afghan and Pakistan. Not the harsh desert climate there that exists in Arabia.
        I do not see the hijab/niqab/burka and so on as a problem for Israelis. In fact Israelis probably see more women in this dress then most countries where the population is not majority muslim. What I can not belive is there is so much social ‘handwringing’ on this site that supports a garment that no matter how many ways you cut it-basically reduces the human underneath to a potato sack or a garbage bag. And before any of you (tanaka) start spouting off about a rascist zionist scourge you should look up all of the political cartoons in the middle eastern /Turkish/Euro press. Even the most avowed anti-Zionist like AbuAsadKhalil has poked horrific fun and criticism of the full head-to-toe cover. So any reference to this subject and ‘racist zionist’ can be discussed with the angry-arab as well.

    • piotr
      piotr on June 2, 2014, 6:30 pm

      In the absence of niqab there would be other reasons.

      There was a case of an Israeli Arab student who took a bus from Tel-Aviv, where she lived to Ariel, where she studied. Passengers overheard her speaking in Arabic on her cell phone, and security removed her from the bus before it enter Ariel. In reply to reporters, the supervisors claimed that the security behaved correctly.

      Thus the young women behaved as “un-Palestinian” as possible, and yet she was humiliated and inconvenienced — left on the side road outside of town, for the sole reason of uttering something in Arabic. And that was correct!

      I know that some Muslim think that niqab or other forms of veiling are required, and some view it as bordeline blasphemous and ridiculous at best, and anything in between, but what kind of “security profile” includes groups of women with small children?

      About modesty, Jewish Orthodox ideas are pretty similar, after all, the Prophet (P.B.U.H.) did not reject Torah (I guess, Muslim, like Christian, view their religion as a correction of what Jews got wrong). I have seen an Iranian Shia webpage with explanation on that topic. First the author argued that veiling is ridiculous because the Prophet mentioned how people were awed by the luminous face of Miriam, mother of Isa, who was a paragon of virtue. That would not be possible if she were veiled, and she was explicitly given as an example to emulate. This was followed by the analysis of the meaning of “jewels” that women are suppose to cover, and at that point the reasoning would suggest something a bit more modest than a bikini, say a combination of sports bra (breast totally covered) and shorts, but then with a good dose of appeal to common sense etc. (rather than Quranic verses, hadith and so on) he managed to arrive at the prescribed Iranian combination.

      • LeaNder
        LeaNder on June 2, 2014, 7:36 pm

        but what kind of “security profile” includes groups of women with small children?

        Great point, piotr. Had this immediately been on Leanne’s mind, I am sure she would have been more brave.

        But then, even buggies are suspicious, if pushed by a Muslim woman.

        For whatever reason I had my first surprise encounter with a Jewish Orthodox man in mind too. It’s somewhere in the pipeline.

        I have to admit I somewhat welcome headscarves around, Wonderful counterpoint to the the occasional hyper-exhibitionism. ;)

  6. seafoid
    seafoid on June 2, 2014, 3:16 pm

    I had a friend in jalazoun camp who wanted to go the other side of the green line in 2000. We went to west jerusalem and jaffa. I’ll never forget the feeling walking around mahane yehuda market speaking arabic and the looks we got. I am reminded of it watching zochrot videos. Zionism is too fragile for honesty about the Palestinian experience.

    • Walid
      Walid on June 2, 2014, 3:29 pm

      seafoid, Palestinians in their face is a reminder of what they did. Those with a clear conscience are not uncomfortable in the presence of Palestinians.

  7. seafoid
    seafoid on June 2, 2014, 4:10 pm

    Walid

    all the pomp of the Zionist state- the uniforms, the Herzl cemetery, Yom Ha 1, Yom Ha 2, yom Ha 3, the standing to attention, the flags , the Ron Arad bring them all back alive, the Peres statesmanshit, those photos from 67, the Jerusalem is gold song, the day they sound the klaxons, the abuse of the Star of David, checkpoints, the sunglasses, the women in uniform, the iterations- they are all supposed to erase the memory of what came before. And one sentence in Arabic brings it back. Ma sha allah. And that is why they HATE Zochrot.

    • Walid
      Walid on June 2, 2014, 4:18 pm

      Especially that the guys doing all this reminding of Israel’s vile ways are Jews.

      • seafoid
        seafoid on June 2, 2014, 5:06 pm

        Darkness has a hunger that’s insatiable
        And Zochrot has a call that’s hard to hear

        But they are there, as a witness

        I still don’t understand how there is so little dissent in Israel.

  8. DaBakr
    DaBakr on June 2, 2014, 4:11 pm

    “i’m Jewish and I’m sorry”. This, in a nutshell is what is wrong with the bleeding heart left-wing Jewish elitists who feel that its Zionism that is the core problem of the Jewish people. They feel SO f’n superior as if they hold the perfection of humanity in their souls that an apology for the existence of ‘Jewish’ people doing what all other peoples do is what she feels is necessary for the State to conduct its national security policy. Far be it from the government to offend the fragile sensibilities of some ignorant young American Jew who decided that she was just going to have to ‘witness’ what was ‘going on’. What was going on is a woman was searched. It is unpleasant and then it was over. Nobody knows what was coming over the wires from hq. In dozens of countries all over the ME , Asia and elsewhere people are screened through security checks based on certain criteria and after the search they go on their way. But this women in her mind has to turn it into a soap opera of the most humiliating and unjustifiable proportions. I’ll get out my 1″ violin and playa tune for the coming of the treaty that the Palestinians will eventually sign with us so security checks can eventually be loosened. Until then-I would tell this girl to take a reality pill for g-ds sake

    • Walid
      Walid on June 2, 2014, 4:34 pm

      You don;t have to be sorry because you’re Jewish, DaBakre, but you do if you are a Zionist. Israel’s got a security problem because of what Israel has done and continues doing to other people.

      Why is the Jews in NYC or elsewhere don’t feel as threatened as the ones living in Israel? Lots of Jews in NYC but they haven’t set up any checkpoints anywhere there and there are more Arabs and Muslims in the US than there are Jews.

    • talknic
      talknic on June 2, 2014, 8:35 pm

      @ DaBakr “They feel SO f’n superior as if they hold the perfection of humanity in their souls that an apology for the existence of ‘Jewish’ people doing what all other peoples do is what she feels is necessary for the State to conduct its national security policy”

      WTF happened to religious freedom and what is life threatening about wearing niqab? An honest answer if you’re capable ….. thx

      • DaBakr
        DaBakr on June 2, 2014, 10:27 pm

        the answer is so simple I can not believe you need an explanation but here goes:
        When a person wears a full length article of opaque cloth covering their entire body, head and face except for eye slits they can easily conceal their identity as either, A) a wanted person, B) a suspected criminal, or C) a person suspected of wanting to infiltrate a certain area to commit mayhem. The policy is not personal though individual soldiers may or may not be more or less polite. It is a job they have to do regardless of the fact that 99.9% of the people searched are exactly what they are supposed to be: extreme and/or orthodox muslim women minding their own business. When the climate changes and there is a treaty in place the policy will change. But I doubt the author will be happy when she contemplates the fact that the world beyond Israel and Palestine is becoming more and more security conscious and oppressive and she is just as likely to witness the same event in many other countries where she will have no excuse to ‘apologize’ for her so-called ‘Jewishness’.

  9. wondering jew
    wondering jew on June 2, 2014, 4:33 pm

    Wearing a face mask, which is what this is, is very offensive, very unhuman to go out in public and not offer your face.

    I don’t know about cops and cops in Israel and how they should react to such a situation. That aspect which is posted about here is something I never thought about before, but my own personal reaction to face covering is: I hate it. I’m against it. And you offend me by going into the street like that. I have to put up with it. I cannot express my offense with offensive words and certainly not with offensive actions, but most assuredly, I am offended. The public square has a nature and showing your face is the price you pay and you’re not willing to pay the price, but can only show your eyes? It offends me.

    When people wear a surgical mask on the street it offends me too. Maybe they have asthma and they have a real reason, but otherwise I am offended.

    • eljay
      eljay on June 2, 2014, 4:58 pm

      >> The public square has a nature and showing your face is the price you pay and you’re not willing to pay the price, but can only show your eyes? It offends me.

      The public square has a nature and justice and equality are the prices you pay and you’re not willing to pay those prices, but insist on being an immoral and arrogant Zio-supremacist? It offends a lot of people.

      Perhaps the public square is anti-Semitic. At the very least, it must be lacking in “Jewish street creds”.

    • tree
      tree on June 2, 2014, 5:35 pm

      And you offend me by going into the street like that. I have to put up with it.

      No, you don’t. You don’t have to go out into public if you don’t want to be offended by how other people dress in public. Perhaps the woman in question would be offended by how you dress as well. In public neither one of you gets to dictate how the other dresses.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on June 2, 2014, 6:41 pm

        tree- There are laws that say what one is allowed to wear and what one is not allowed to wear at certain places at certain times. If that was your point, then you are accurate. As a New Yorker circa 2014 there are certain societal norms that I am used to. One of them is showing one’s face.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka on June 2, 2014, 7:46 pm

        “As a New Yorker circa 2014 there are certain societal norms that I am used to. ”

        Yeah, and in 1910, in Vienna “societal norms” could make one similarly cast suspicions on someone who who wore a “black caftan and black hair locks.” It was base bigotry then and base bigotry now.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka on June 2, 2014, 5:40 pm

      “Wearing a face mask, which is what this is, is very offensive, very unhuman to go out in public and not offer your face. ”

      “Unhuman”?? Good lord, stop being such a bigot. How would you react is someone said “you know what’s very offensive, very unhuman? If people go out in public with little beanies on their heads and fringes on their clothes and they cut off the foreskin from their baby boys’ penises and they don’t work on Saturday. That’s unhuman”??? How would you react to that, you bigot.

    • wes
      wes on June 2, 2014, 5:56 pm

      yonah fredman says:
      June 2, 2014 at 4:33 pm

      “Wearing a face mask, which is what this is, is very offensive,”

      yonah i have to disagree with you on this,many woman in western countries dress inappropriately
      head scarf and niqab should be worn in public especially the niqab when women are menstruating as this sends a signal that she is sexually off limits
      i think that women who do decide to wear the niqab should carry photo identification to clear up any security concerns and consent to be visually identified by officers of the law

      Ecru says:
      June 2, 2014 at 3:59 pm

      “If Israeli Jews are so “spooked” by Muslim religious wear”

      ecru it not only israeli jews but most western people that are “spooked” especially in europe where it is outlawed.
      the acceptance of the niqab is slowly gaining ground and becoming fashionable among young women who which to cover up from the disgusting looks they get from lecherous men

      • Ecru
        Ecru on June 3, 2014, 12:24 pm

        @ Wes

        In EUROPE it’s perfectly valid to criticise use of the burqa and other face coverings in public since there’s a cultural demand to see the face of anyone. I’m a European and I don’t like seeing them here. Even so only two nations have banned their use in public – Belgium (which already had a ban on wearing masks in public on the books so the burqa ban is just an extension) and France. This is hardly all of Europe. (Just don’t tell Hoppy – he likes so much to find one person somewhere who believes something objectionable – i.e. something Hoppy completely agrees with when it comes from an Israeli Jew – and then extrapolate onto entire continents of people)

        In the Middle East? Where these go back millennia and the culture’s completely different? It’s the old saw – “When in Rome…..” (or Byzantium if you prefer since ladies of the Byzantine Empire were known to wear veils on occasion). And since it was European Jews who moved (invaded) the Middle East – they’re the ones who should …. adapt (I SO want to say “assimilate” just because the word drives the Zionists nuts).

    • piotr
      piotr on June 2, 2014, 6:47 pm

      I have to vehemently disagree. We should accept wide spectrum of humanity in the public square. I live in a small town with a large university so I can see assorted types of attire. There are locals who range from sloppy to religious conservative (Amish), and thousands of people from different countries, so at occasion you can see traditional attire that Muslim, Hindu, Chinese and what not.

      The argument that veiling is “very inhuman” was also advanced against covering the face with a beard, more precisely, the custom of having beard was alleged to be “barbaric”, because we rely on facial expressions and a civilized person lets others to see it. A copious mustache makes it even worse. But then we could rely on the others to reveal their degree of arousal, and be offended by male underwear and female brassieres.

      A surgical mask is hardly used in public in Americas and Europe, and expected in Far East if you have a cold. It is a weird in 21-st century to project one own petty norms a “requirements for humanity”.

      • just
        just on June 2, 2014, 6:54 pm

        Many people who are immunocompromised/ suppressed (think chemo, etc) are advised to wear masks in public– and rightly so.

      • JustJessetr
        JustJessetr on June 2, 2014, 11:59 pm

        I know I would be, if the husbands didn’t follow suit. And they don’t, and that makes it wrong in my book.

        But I don’t think your equivocation argument holds water (they rarely do). You’re pointing out the tiny tiny exception to the rule while the veil for Islamic women is much more widespread and politically problematic (from all the comments I’ve read here) for all sorts of people.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew on June 3, 2014, 4:20 am

        I am offended by ultra orthodox women covering their faces.

        Let me repeat: the law is the law. Abuse of the law by policemen is a separate issue, but the point here is that I am being honest in my reaction to the veil. My language is outlandish perhaps at times, but in fact it evokes a strong reaction and I used the language not as absolute fact but as subjective human reaction. I understand that societies change and reactions to covered faces, could very well be a reaction to watching so much cowboy tv as a kid and covering your face was clearly an unfriendly act in that context. I drove a cab in nyc and picked up hundreds of thousands of humans. Not one covered their face. That is the basic unit of human contact that I recognize on a personal basis. I am the human that was created by cowboy tv and driving a cab in nyc and that is my human reaction to the veil.

      • piotr
        piotr on June 3, 2014, 6:12 am

        I do not know when did you drive the cab. In Boston and central PA I could see a variety of Muslim attire. I suspect that the veiled women in Boston were wives of rich Gulf citizens (perhaps middle income by their standards, they were renting apartments for about 4k / month, women would come with children to a garden surrounded by the house dressed “somewhat modestly”, but they would go into town with husbands in full black burqas.) I suspect that they would drive with husbands rather that taking a cab. They did not look unhappy, so clearly, it is their business.

    • Ellen
      Ellen on June 3, 2014, 4:29 am

      There are many practical and deep cultural reasons why some (and fewer all the time) traditional women in the some parts of the Middle East cover their face while outdoors. I can appreciate and understand. It never spooked me, but that is me.

      That you deem it inhuman that a women does not offer her face (which is culturally akin to offering herself) to the public is your cultural ignorance and arrogance.

      Men and women who are covered are much more human, appealing, more human, and attractive than the sunburned sweaty tattooed, kid from London or Brooklyn running around in a tank top with their belly and butt hanging.

      • eljay
        eljay on June 3, 2014, 7:18 am

        >> That you deem it inhuman that a women does not offer her face (which is culturally akin to offering herself) to the public is your cultural ignorance and arrogance.

        IMO there’s a serious problem with any culture in which a woman’s exposed face is considered “akin to offering herself”.

  10. Kay24
    Kay24 on June 2, 2014, 4:41 pm

    Despite the hasbara denials here, that poor woman was humiliated and targeted.
    They should have at least got some women to search her, showing some sensitivity to her, and as women, no one likes to be groped by thugs or strangers. There is no doubt Israel treats Arabs as third class citizens, and do not give them the any respect, because deep down most Israelis have nothing but disdain for them.
    It is already an apartheid nation:

    “A new poll has revealed that a majority of Israeli Jews believe that the Jewish State practises “apartheid” against Palestinians, with many openly supporting discriminatory policies against the country’s Arab citizens.
    59% want preference in public jobs for Jews over Arabs
    49% want the state to treat Jews better than Arabs
    33% object to Israeli Arabs having the right to vote
    69% object to giving Palestinians the right to vote if Israel annexes the West Bank
    74% support separate roads for Jews and Palestinians in the West Bank
    42% object to their children going to the same schools as Arabs

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-new-israeli-apartheid-poll-reveals-widespread-jewish-support-for-policy-of-discrimination-against-arab-minority-8223548.html

    • Kay24
      Kay24 on June 3, 2014, 7:48 am

      Increasing intolerance for dissent & diversity in Israel
      In September 2011 a survey found that a third of Israeli Jews don’t consider Arab citizens to be real Israelis.

      According to a February 2011 survey, 52% of Israeli Jews would be willing to limit press freedoms to protect the state’s image, while 55% would accept limits on the right to oppose the government’s “defense policy.”

      Also in September 2011, Dov Lior, the chief rabbi of settlements in Hebron and Kiryat Arba, told a conference that Arabs are “wolves,” “savages,” and “evil camel riders.”

      A poll done by the Israel Democracy Institute and released in January 2011 found that nearly half of Israeli Jews don’t want to live next door to an Arab.

      In January 2011 the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper reported that civics teachers around the country were complaining of rampant, virulent anti-Arab racism amongst their Jewish students. One teacher said, “When we have a discussion in class about equal rights, the class immediately gets out of control… The students attack us, the teachers, for being leftist and anti-Semitic, and say that all the Arab citizens who want to destroy Israel should be transferred.” Another said: “We’re not talking about a minority, or children from families that have extreme political views, but about normal children who are afflicted with ignorance… The political discourse in recent years has given them the legitimacy to be prejudiced.”

      In November 2010 the chief rabbi of the town of Safed, Shmuel Eliyahu, issued a ruling forbidding Jews from renting property to Arabs. Eliyahu had previously advocated hanging the children of terrorists.

      In December 2010, dozens of municipal chief rabbis on the government payroll signed a letter supporting Eliyahu and his decree prohibiting Jews from renting property to non-Jews. One of the signatories, Rabbi Yosef Scheinen, head of the Ashdod Yeshiva (religious school), stated, “Racism originated in the Torah… The land of Israel is designated for the people of Israel.”

      In December 2010, the wives of 30 prominent rabbis signed an open letter calling on Jewish women not to date or work with Arabs. The letter stated: “For your sake, for the sake of future generations, and so you don’t undergo horrible suffering, we turn to you with a request, a plea, a prayer. Don’t date non-Jews, don’t work at places that non-Jews frequent, and don’t do national service with non-Jews.”

      According to a September 2010 poll, half of Israeli Jewish students don’t want Arabs in their classrooms, while an earlier survey found about the same number oppose equal rights for Arabs.

      In September 2010, the spiritual leader of the Shas party (which sits in PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition government), Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, declared that non-Jews were created to “serve” Jews, stating that: “Goyim [non-Jews] were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel… Why are gentiles needed? They will work, they will plow, they will reap. We will sit like an effendi and eat. That is why gentiles were created.”

      In August 2010, on the eve of peace talks in Washington, Yosef delivered a sermon describing Palestinians as “evil, bitter enemies” and calling on god to make them “perish from this world” by striking them with a plague.

      In 2001, Yosef, delivered a sermon in which he stated: “It is forbidden to be merciful to [Arabs]. You must send missiles to them and annihilate them. They are evil and damnable…The Lord shall return the Arabs’ deeds on their own heads, waste their seed and exterminate them, devastate them and vanish them from this world.”

      In August 2010, Rabbi Yitzhak Shapira, head of a state-funded religious school in the West Bank settlement of Yitzhar, published a book that condoned the murder of non-Jewish children on the grounds that they may grow up to pose a threat to the state, writing that non-Jews are “uncompassionate by nature” and attacks against them “curb their evil inclination.” Several other prominent rabbis subsequently endorsed the book.

      In July, 2009, Israel’s Housing Minister, Ariel Atlas, warned against the “spread” of Israel’s Arab population and said that Arabs and Jews shouldn’t live together, stating: “if we go on like we have until now, we will lose the Galilee. Populations that should not mix are spreading there. I don’t think that it is appropriate for [Jews and Arabs] to live together.”

      In the aftermath of Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s devastating three-week military assault against Gaza that killed more than 1300 Palestinians in the winter of 2008-9, the Israeli daily Haaretz reported that Israeli army units had been printing t-shirts depicting disturbing, violent images such as dead Palestinian babies, Palestinian mothers weeping on their children’s graves, a gun aimed at a child, bombed-out mosques, and a pregnant Palestinian woman with a target superimposed on her belly and the caption, “1 shot, 2 kills”. Another showed a Palestinian baby, growing into a boy and then an armed adult, with the inscription, “No matter how it begins, we’ll put an end to it.” – IMEU

      Many reports show discrimination and inhumane treatment against Arabs, going on in the only democracy in the ME.

  11. wes
    wes on June 2, 2014, 6:03 pm

    thank you philip for this gem of a paragraph.

    undercover niqab……….always good for a laugh

    “Yes, it’s because I’m religious, I wear the niqab. I get stopped every time.” Then, she switched to almost flawless English. “I am only coming into the West of the city because I have a daughter with disabilities, and I come here to arrange aspects of her care. Otherwise, I would not come here. This harassment is so unnecessary.”

    checkout ecru,s reply to mahane above…..you can feeeeeeeeeeel the righteous indignation …….funny man weiss

    “while we’re denying the verifiable truth let’s just say the Holocaust never happened shall we? It was all staged to make the Germans look bad.”

  12. bilal a
    bilal a on June 2, 2014, 8:53 pm

    As a totalitarian secularist, If you do not also object to the French and others banning the Veil

    -you might be singling out the…

    which makes u an anti-something or other.

  13. JustJessetr
    JustJessetr on June 2, 2014, 11:52 pm

    I’ve never approved of the full covering of Islamic women for one reason only: the husbands aren’t required to completely cover up too.

    Hey, if you want to wear all black in the heat of the summer, be my guest. Italian women love to wear skintight and all black clothing no matter how hot the sun. And Italian grandmothers are all in black dresses. What really bothers me is that the Islamic women are told, probably ordered, by the men to cover up because some cleric or the Quran told them too. Fine, if that’s your thing, but it’s outrageous and sexist to not show solidarity with your wife and walk around in shorts while she’s likely suffering under the veil or at least shrouded all in black with the face showing. I see this on the subway from time to time and I can’t help but shake my head. Religion can be a poison.

    I’ve never been able to understand how Orthodox Jews bear a NYC summertime layered in all that black cloth, but at least the men are as modestly dressed as the women. Actually, the men are dressed even more heavily than their wives or daughters who get to wear lighter and lighter-colored clothing, though both sexes are at least covered from neck to toe.

  14. Palikari
    Palikari on June 3, 2014, 12:49 am

    This has nothing to do with racism, but security. The niqab is a security threat because it could easily hide a bomb. Many terrorists hide their bombs under niqabs or burqas. Not to mention it is also a misogynistic humiliation to the women who wear it. It has been banned in some European countries and it should be banned in Israel.

    • Ellen
      Ellen on June 3, 2014, 4:09 am

      With that logic baggy jeans, coats should be banned. And while at it, all clothing. You might be hiding something strapped to your groin!

    • Accentitude
      Accentitude on June 3, 2014, 6:29 am

      The niqab is the mask, veil or face covering that the woman was wearing on her head, not the robe that goes with it. Do you know of many bombers that can easily hide a bomb strapped to their faces?

      If you want to make up lies, at least go so far as to make them sound slightly believable.

      Btw, I am oh so touched by your sincerea and heart-warming concern for the humiliation of Palestinian women who choose to wear the niqab.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka on June 3, 2014, 9:48 am

      Baloney. That’s just an excuse for your bigotry. Nothing more.

    • concernedhuman
      concernedhuman on June 3, 2014, 12:20 pm

      Israel is so advanced and has no metal detectors? NO female security?
      This is clear sexual harassment !!
      This is wrong beyond any thing acceptable.

    • Ecru
      Ecru on June 3, 2014, 12:33 pm

      @ Palikiri

      What about those big fur hats some Jews in Israel wear? Or the huge baggy coats? You could hide so much, and it’s VERY suspicious – wearing such outlandish gear, originally designed to keep people warm in Northern Europe, in what’s nearly a friggin desert? Why they must be up to no good.

  15. talknic
    talknic on June 3, 2014, 2:27 am

    @ Palikari “This has nothing to do with racism, but security”

    Many Ultra Orthodox Jewish women undergo the same treatment?

    “Many terrorists hide their bombs under niqabs or burqas”

    How “many”? Statistics?

    “Not to mention it is also a misogynistic humiliation to the women who wear it.

    http://dalje.com/slike/slike_3/r1/g2012/m03/ox281292126232440863.jpg

    ” “It has been banned in some European countries and it should be banned in Israel

    Including Israeli Ultra-Orthodox Jewish women covering their faces?

    http://leftwing-christian.net/2013/06/29/jewish-women-in-burqas.aspx

    http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/09/religion/2-men-of-god-pic

  16. Kathleen
    Kathleen on June 3, 2014, 5:39 am

    Leanne..so important to be a witness to this abuse.

  17. DICKERSON3870
    DICKERSON3870 on June 3, 2014, 9:05 am

    RE: “I was riding the light rail through West Jerusalem. Next to me sat a Palestinian woman wearing a niqab . . . As we edged toward the Central Bus Station, a male Israeli security guard approached the woman . . .” ~ Leanne Gale

    MY COMMENT: This is apparently the light rail system built, operated and partly owned by Veolia. This is significant because it means that the “male Israeli security guard” might work for (or, at least, be approved by) a French corporation, namely Veolia. If he doesn’t actually work for Veolia, he might work for a company chosen (or, at least, approved by) Veolia. Even if Veolia is not actively involved in the employment of the “male Israeli security guard”, it is still possible that he can reasonably be said to, as a practical matter, be employed at the sufferance* of Veolia (unless perhaps Veolia is contractually excluded from all responsibility/liability for security).
    My point is that due to a French corporation’s long-term involvement with various aspects of the light rail service, this security procedure (i.e., profiling), and any racial or religious discrimination inherent in the way it was used (despite the inevitable claim that the woman was subjected to the scrutiny not because of profiling but instead pursuant to the use of Behavior Pattern Recognition), cannot simply be dismissed as an isolated example of an Israeli soldier/policeman/etc. not having been properly trained or, more likely, just being a bit overzealous. Instead, it might well be viewed as a cautionary example of a French corporation’s complicity in the racial/religious discrimination inherent in Israeli-style security measures like profiling that are anathema to the values Western nations claim to hold dear. This might not only damage the venerable French corporation’s reputation (and help justify/legitimate the BDS campaign against it), it might also cause considerable concern in the West over the possibility that Veolia might inevitably begin using Israeli-style security measures like profiling in their countries, thereby diminishing Veolia’s prospects for new contracts in those countries (and doing so most significantly where there is considerable resistance to the idea of BDS itself, but there is nonetheless legitimate concern as a practical matter over the possibility of being seen as having been responsible for the introduction of Israeli-style security measures like profiling to the West).

    * consent or sanction implied by a lack of interference or failure to enforce a prohibition

    • just
      just on June 3, 2014, 9:37 am

      Interesting point.

      Security could just as well be provided by G4S…Blackwater/Academi…Triple Canopy…Dyncorp

      ugh.

  18. Sycamores
    Sycamores on June 3, 2014, 9:51 am

    i’m move by what Leanne Gale wrote, whatever reservations she had about the Palestinian woman wearing a nijab were quickly forgotten when she realise the person getting harass was another woman like herself.

    in brief interaction of words between the woman after the event Leanne Gale could see the great courage of the Palestinian woman …..

    She was so calm, so powerful in her forceful conviction and relaxed demeanor. So often, we just assume that Muslim women in hijab or niqab must be submissive or meek. Not so.

    ….. and angry with herself for been too flustered, too intimidated to do more to stop the harassment.

    With that, I walked off, too angry to re-board the light rail. I walked the rest of the way to my destination.

    I wish I had snapped photos. I wish I had taken this woman’s information and asked around at Ir Amim* to see if there was something we could do to help. I wish I had turned to the security guard and defended this woman, in Hebrew, even before she was forced off the train. But I was too flustered, too intimidated.

    such interaction among people is known as naivety (maybe even treasonous) for those who want keep the status quo but in reality it’s the only way forward for two people to live together in peace and tolerance.

    • eljay
      eljay on June 3, 2014, 10:22 am

      >> i’m move by what Leanne Gale wrote …

      I was moved as well, by two things in particular:

      “I’m sorry. I know that doesn’t help, but I’m Jewish and I’m sorry. … “

      Although Zio-supremacists on this site are deriding her for making that comment, I thought it was a simple but effective way for Ms. Gale to communicate humility and humanity to a woman who was likely in need of some at that moment.

      “Thank you, habibti, it’s okay, it’s not your fault.”

      The reciprocation is beautiful.

  19. bopfromthedarkside
    bopfromthedarkside on June 3, 2014, 12:30 pm

    And this is the country we Americans are told to support because they are the only democracy in that neck of the woods. What bull!

Leave a Reply