Genocide by Israel

[SHaYap]

What an odd bit of hyperbole. Care to explain it or did you just feel the need to dump an opinion? I used HIS OWN numbers to prove no genocide is occurring and that makes ME a Hitler wannabe?

Well the way you put the numbers forward means that if it didn't succeed as well as you see it, it don't count ... or are you confused on what 'genocide' means ?

Or do you think genocide only counts when its your own kind ?

~

[+and-then]

Well the way you put the numbers forward means that if it didn't succeed as well as you see it, it don't count ... or are you confused on what 'genocide' means ?

Or do you think genocide only counts when its your own kind ?

~

I was simply making the quite VALID point that a "genocide" is commonly accepted as an attempt by one group to totally annihilate another group. Since the population in Gaza and the "West Bank" has grown from about a half million to nearly 2.4 million, I'd say the trend line is all wrong. Shouldn't a population that is being destroyed/annihilated be reduced in numbers? Ergo, no such annihilation is occurring. At worst you have bias and hate crimes being committed and those on BOTH SIDES. The label of genocide in this case is very tenuous and is more a legal point than a reality on the ground.

[praetorian-legio XIII]

Well the way you put the numbers forward means that if it didn't succeed as well as you see it, it don't count ... or are you confused on what 'genocide' means ?

Or do you think genocide only counts when its your own kind ?

~

At the risk of sounding like the second "worst preverted racist" you've come across, how the **** is it genocide when the population of the affected people increases 5 fold. What a goof!

[toast]

Yes I am anti-Zionist.i think this question is off-topic.We are suppose to discuss genocide committed by Israel.

Under full respect for your request in general, but you by yourself placed the Zionist issue into the thread first.

So you cannot say some post later, that this issue is off-topic.

[SHaYap]

I was simply making the quite VALID point that a "genocide" is commonly accepted as an attempt by one group to totally annihilate another group. Since the population in Gaza and the "West Bank" has grown from about a half million to nearly 2.4 million, I'd say the trend line is all wrong. Shouldn't a population that is being destroyed/annihilated be reduced in numbers? Ergo, no such annihilation is occurring. At worst you have bias and hate crimes being committed and those on BOTH SIDES. The label of genocide in this case is very tenuous and is more a legal point than a reality on the ground.

At the risk of sounding like the second "worst preverted racist" you've come across, how the **** is it genocide when the population of the affected people increases 5 fold. What a goof!

You still don't see it do you ? Both of you ?

Just because it didn't succeed ... does not means it was not intended ...

The Palestinian Genocide By Israel

By Professor Francis A. Boyle

30 August, 2013

Countercurrents.org

Before The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal August 21-24, 2013

As-salam alaykum. Distinguishable Judges of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal. May it please the Tribunal:

The Palestinians have been the victims of genocide as defined by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. I say that because of my practical experience: On 8 April 1993 and 13 September 1993 I single-handedly won two World Court Orders on the basis of the 1948 Genocide Convention that were overwhelmingly in favor of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina against Yugoslavia to cease and desist from committing all acts of genocide against the Bosnians in violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention. This was the first time ever that any Government had won two such Orders in one case since the World Court was founded in 1921. On 5August 1993 I also won a so-called Article 74(4) World Court Order for Bosnia against Yugoslavia for genocide. According to I.C.J. Statute Article 74(4), when the full World Court is not in session in The Hague, the President of the Court exercises the full powers of the Court and can issue an Order to the parties in a lawsuit that is legally binding upon them.

Article II of the Genocide Convention defines the international crime of genocide in relevant part as follows:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group such as:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(

Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

© Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

• counter currents org link
  

This Special Session of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights adopted the Resolution set forth in U.N. Document E/CN.4/S-5/L.2/Rev. 1, “Condemning the provocative visit to Al-Haram Al-Shariff on 28 September 2000 by Ariel Sharon, the Likud party leader, which triggered the tragic events that followed in occupied East Jerusalem and the other occupied Palestinian territories, resulting in a high number of deaths and injuries among Palestinian civilians.” The U.N. Human Rights Commission said it was “[g]ravely concerned” about several different types of atrocities inflicted by Israel upon the Palestinian people, which it denominated “war crimes, flagrant violations of international humanitarian law and crimes against humanity.”

In operative paragraph 1 of its 19 October 2000 Resolution, the U.N. Human Rights Commission then:

“Strongly condemns the disproportionate and indiscriminate use of force in violation of international humanitarian law by the Israeli occupying Power against innocent and unarmed Palestinian civilians…including many children, in the occupied territories, which constitutes a war crime and a crime against humanity;…”

And in paragraph 5 of its 19 October 2000 Resolution, the U.N. Human Rights Commission:

“Also affirms that the deliberate and systematic killing of civilians and children by the Israeli occupying authorities constitutes a flagrant and grave violation of the right to life and also constitutes a crime against humanity;…”

Article 68 of the United Nations Charter had expressly required the U.N.’s Economic and Social Council to “set up” this U.N. Commission (now Council) “for the promotion of human rights.” This was its U.N.-Charter-mandated job.

• global research link
  

To a crowded courtroom on the late afternoon of November 25, presiding Judge Lamin Mohd Yunus announced the verdict by an international panel of seven jurists:

“The Tribunal is satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, that the first defendant, (General) Amos Yaron, is guilty of crimes against humanity and genocide, and the second defendant, the State of Israel, is guilty of genocide.”

–

The landmark ruling against Israel for its genocide against the Palestinian people rendered by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal is significant for several reasons:

- In contrast to other non-official courts of conscience on Palestinian rights, for example, the Russell Tribunal on Palestine (New York 2012), the prosecution in Kuala Lumpur took a step beyond war crimes and crimes against humanity to the higher and broader charge of genocide.

- The decision was rendered during the ongoing commission of the alleged crime by the defendant, rather than after the fact as in earlier genocide cases.

- Instead of limiting its ruling to individuals who ordered genocidal actions, the jurists also charged the state as a defendant.

- As a consequence, this case breaks the tradition of immunity of nation-states from criminal prosecution under international law.

- The decision introduces a legal basis for international action to protect minorities from genocide as a lawful alternative to the current response of so-called humanitarian intervention, invasion, occupation and regime change, which have often been as illegitimate and more destructive, and in some cases as genocidal as the original violation being punished.

• thebigpicture blog link
  

BOYLE, Francis. US law professor condemns US & Zionists over Palestinian Genocide

Francis Boyle is a Professor of International Law at the University of Illinois College of Law, Illinois, USA and very active in the defence of human rights and International law. Professor Boyle is the author of Foundations of World Order, Duke University Press, The Criminality of Nuclear Deterrence, and Palestine, Palestinians and International Law, by Clarity Press. (see: http://en.wikipedia....i/Francis_Boyle ).

Francis Boyle on Palestinian Genocide (December 2000): “I would like to propose publicly here in Gaza, Palestine--where the Intifadah began ten years ago at this time--that the Provisional Government of the State of Palestine and its President institute legal proceedings against Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague (the so-called World Court) for violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. I am sure we can all agree that Israel has indeed perpetrated the international crime of genocide against the Palestinian People. The purpose of this lawsuit would be to demonstrate that undeniable fact to the entire world. These World Court legal proceedings will prove to the entire world and to all of history that what the Nazis did to the Jews a generation ago is legally similar to what the Israelis are currently doing to the Palestinian People today: genocide.” [1].

• Professor Francis Boyle link
  

Israel's Crimes against Palestinians: War Crimes, Crimes Against Humanity, Genocide

by Francis A. Boyle | Media Monitors | August 28, 2001

(The author served as Legal Adviser to the Palestinian Delegation to the Middle East peace Negotiations from 1991 to 1993. The viewpoints expressed here are his own.)

The International Laws of Belligerent Occupation

Belligerent occupation is governed by The Hague Regulations of 1907, as well as by the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, and the customary laws of belligerent occupation. Security Council Resolution 1322 (2000), paragraph 3 continued: "Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in a Time of War of 12 August 1949;..." Again, the Security Council vote was 14 to 0, becoming obligatory international law.

• MonaBaker link
  

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Israel's Slow-Motion Genocide in Occupied Palestine

Israel's Slow-Motion Genocide in Occupied Palestine - by Stephen Lendman

Imagine life under these conditions:

Living in limbo under a foreign occupier. Having no self-determination, no right of return, and no power over your daily life. Being in constant fear, economically strangled, and collectively punished.

Having your free movement denied by enclosed population centers, closed borders, regular curfews, roadblocks, checkpoints, electric fences, and separation walls. Having your homes regularly demolished and land systematically stolen to build settlements for encroachers in violation of international law prohibiting an occupier from settling its population on conquered land.

Having your right to essential services denied - to emergency health care, education, employment, and enough food and clean water. Being forced into extreme poverty, having your crops destroyed, and being victimized by punitive taxes. Having no right for redress in the occupier's courts under laws only protecting the occupier.

Being regularly targeted by incursions and attacks on the ground and from the air. Being willfully harassed, ethnically cleansed, arrested, incarcerated, tortured, and slaughtered on any pretext, including for your right of self-defense. Having no rights on your own land in your own country for over six decades and counting. Vilified for being Muslims and called terrorists, Jihadists, crazed Arabs, and fundamentalist extremists. Victimized by a slow-motion genocide to destroy you.

• SteveLendmanBlog link
  

~

You are not blind ... you are not lazy ... you are not even dumb ... or stupid ... but you are just biased and discriminating to the point of racism ...

~

edit : link maintenance

Edited December 3, 2013 by third_eye

[+and-then]

And YOU seem willing to condemn an entire people for an INTENT. So by your logic if I got angry and intended to kill someone but failed in the attempt I am STILL guilty of murder? Actually I think even that premise of your's is silly. Nowhere do you have proof that Israelis have intended to KILL all Palestinians. You might have a claim of ethnic cleansing by stealth but genocide is ridiculous. These two groups of people have hated each other with few exceptions for a couple of millennia. OF COURSE they are going to want to get the other out of the way. If you REALLY need a picture of genocide just google Auschwitz or Dachau or Hutu's.

[SHaYap]

And YOU seem willing to condemn an entire people for an INTENT. So by your logic if I got angry and intended to kill someone but failed in the attempt I am STILL guilty of murder? Actually I think even that premise of your's is silly. Nowhere do you have proof that Israelis have intended to KILL all Palestinians. You might have a claim of ethnic cleansing by stealth but genocide is ridiculous. These two groups of people have hated each other with few exceptions for a couple of millennia. OF COURSE they are going to want to get the other out of the way. If you REALLY need a picture of genocide just google Auschwitz or Dachau or Hutu's.

Only those are good enough for you eh ? If it ain't so it don't count ?

UN buddy ... Court of international Judges ... nobody wants to see it happening again ... just so it counts as one to your satisfaction //

[green_dude777]

And YOU seem willing to condemn an entire people for an INTENT. So by your logic if I got angry and intended to kill someone but failed in the attempt I am STILL guilty of murder? Actually I think even that premise of your's is silly. Nowhere do you have proof that Israelis have intended to KILL all Palestinians. You might have a claim of ethnic cleansing by stealth but genocide is ridiculous. These two groups of people have hated each other with few exceptions for a couple of millennia. OF COURSE they are going to want to get the other out of the way. If you REALLY need a picture of genocide just google Auschwitz or Dachau or Hutu's.

Are you saying you should not suffer a penalty for attempted murder because you failed at committing murder?

And are you saying there's a substantial difference between genocide and ethnic cleansing that one is acceptable and one is not?

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ethnic_cleansing

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/genocide

In your words "You might have a claim of ethnic cleansing by stealth but genocide is ridiculous."

Yeah third_eye, your claim of genocide is ridiculous (The systematic killing of substantial numbers of people on the basis of ethnicity, religion, political opinion, social status, or other particularity.; Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or a significant portion of, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.) but you may have a claim of ethnic cleansing (The mass extermination or expulsion of people belonging to one ethnic or religious group by those of another.) by stealth.

[+and-then]

Only those are good enough for you eh ? If it ain't so it don't count ?

UN buddy ... Court of international Judges ... nobody wants to see it happening again ... just so it counts as one to your satisfaction //

No...it's just the accepted definition. If you want to call murder or ethnic cleansing genocide feel free to but that is a change from the original meaning. What was done for a few decades to the American Indians - THAT was an attempted genocide.

[SHaYap]

No...it's just the accepted definition. If you want to call murder or ethnic cleansing genocide feel free to but that is a change from the original meaning. What was done for a few decades to the American Indians - THAT was an attempted genocide.

Accepted definition ???? Original meaning ???? Now you take it upon yourself to decide what is and is not to the letter of the word ?

And don't change the focus here ... not that it makes any difference ... there is no 'attempted' here or there as the intent was and is quite clear ... your only regret is that it did not succeed or to the level that satisfies you ...

~

[Frank Merton]

Yes I am anti-Zionist.i think this question is off-topic.We are suppose to discuss genocide committed by Israel.

Well if that is the case I don't need to follow this thread since that is plainly a lie.

[RavenHawk]

Yes I am anti-Zionist.i think this question is off-topic.We are suppose to discuss genocide committed by Israel.

I haven’t read either link. I quickly perused them and didn’t see any evidence of genocide. If you want you can pick any item from either link in reply to this post. And I will show that it is not genocide. Q.E.D.

[+and-then]

Accepted definition ???? Original meaning ???? Now you take it upon yourself to decide what is and is not to the letter of the word ?

And don't change the focus here ... not that it makes any difference ... there is no 'attempted' here or there as the intent was and is quite clear ... your only regret is that it did not succeed or to the level that satisfies you ...

~

Wow - a mind reader also.. you should join a circus That definition you use is general enough in scope to encompass nearly any multiple homicide of a single family. The INTENT of genocide is to exterminate a race of people or an entire culture. As I said before anyone who actually believes Israel is committing genocide is a fool and the evidence backs me on this. The use of that word for what is happening in Israel is silly and is coming from whiners and haters who can't stand that Israel survives....in spite of everything, she survives. Now I will leave the conversation to those aforementioned whiners because I am officially bored. Toodles

[buckskin scout]

Wow - a mind reader also.. you should join a circus That definition you use is general enough in scope to encompass nearly any multiple homicide of a single family. The INTENT of genocide is to exterminate a race of people or an entire culture. As I said before anyone who actually believes Israel is committing genocide is a fool and the evidence backs me on this. The use of that word for what is happening in Israel is silly and is coming from whiners and haters who can't stand that Israel survives....in spite of everything, she survives. Now I will leave the conversation to those aforementioned whiners because I am officially bored. Toodles

No Israel is embroiled in a demographic war for its survival against the Palestinians.

And the experts that have voiced their opinions about this crisis, say the Palestinians are ultimately going to prevail in the demographic battle.

And then what happens to Israel as a Jewish State?

[buckskin scout]

I haven't read either link. I quickly perused them and didn't see any evidence of genocide. If you want you can pick any item from either link in reply to this post. And I will show that it is not genocide. Q.E.D.

Oh, Israel has committed plenty of massacres and the fact that they ethnically cleansed 750,000 Palestinians off their homeland in 1947. And ethnically cleansed another 250,000-300,000 Palestinians off their homelands in 1967.

[SHaYap]

~snip

....in spite of everything, she survives.

~snip

You talk of 'her' as if 'she' is your backyard dog ...

~

~edit : typonese

Edited December 4, 2013 by third_eye

[+and-then]

No Israel is embroiled in a demographic war for its survival against the Palestinians.

And the experts that have voiced their opinions about this crisis, say the Palestinians are ultimately going to prevail in the demographic battle.

And then what happens to Israel as a Jewish State?

Love will find a way, baby!

[jeem]

Under full respect for your request in general, but you by yourself placed the Zionist issue into the thread first.

So you cannot say some post later, that this issue is off-topic.

Sorry my mistake.

[jeem]

http://israelipalest...948-to-2005.gif

According to the definition of Genocide provided in the article, the Hatfield's and McCoy's better be glad that business of theirs is over

I took that graphic from your link. I ask again Jeem, where are the mass graves? If Israel is the mightiest and most brutal country in the region and is bent on destroying a population yet that population GROWS by nearly 5 times since the "Genocide" began ... something seems sketchy about it all

Perhaps you missed this

"As documented by Israeli historian Ilan Pappe in his seminal book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (2006), Israel’s genocidal policy against the Palestinians has been unremitting, extending from before the very foundation of the State of Israel in 1948, and is ongoing and even now intensifying against the 1.75 million Palestinians living in Gaza as this Tribunal convenes here today. As Pappe’s analysis established, Zionism’s “final solution” to Israel’s much-touted and racist “demographic threat” allegedly posed by the very existence of the Palestinians has always been genocide, whether slow-motion or in blood-thirsty spurts of violence. Indeed, the very essence of Zionism requires ethnic cleansing and acts of genocide against the Palestinians. For example, concerning the 2008-2009 Israeli slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza – so-called Operation Cast-lead -- U.N. General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, the former Foreign Minister of Nicaragua during the Reagan administration’s contra-terror war of aggression against that country which was condemned by the World Court, condemned it as “genocide."

post 40 is even better

Edited December 4, 2013 by jeem

[jeem]

Well if that is the case I don't need to follow this thread since that is plainly a lie.

Well I am not forcing you to follow this and I think liar are those who deny the fact presented in the link

[jeem]

Accepted definition ???? Original meaning ???? Now you take it upon yourself to decide what is and is not to the letter of the word ?

And don't change the focus here ... not that it makes any difference ... there is no 'attempted' here or there as the intent was and is quite clear ... your only regret is that it did not succeed or to the level that satisfies you ...

~

It won't satisfies him even if the Zionist wipe out entire Palestinian population.He will simply call it a propaganda

[+and-then]

Perhaps you missed this

"As documented by Israeli historian Ilan Pappe in his seminal book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine (2006), Israel’s genocidal policy against the Palestinians has been unremitting, extending from before the very foundation of the State of Israel in 1948, and is ongoing and even now intensifying against the 1.75 million Palestinians living in Gaza as this Tribunal convenes here today. As Pappe’s analysis established, Zionism’s “final solution” to Israel’s much-touted and racist “demographic threat” allegedly posed by the very existence of the Palestinians has always been genocide, whether slow-motion or in blood-thirsty spurts of violence. Indeed, the very essence of Zionism requires ethnic cleansing and acts of genocide against the Palestinians. For example, concerning the 2008-2009 Israeli slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza – so-called Operation Cast-lead -- U.N. General Assembly President Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann, the former Foreign Minister of Nicaragua during the Reagan administration’s contra-terror war of aggression against that country which was condemned by the World Court, condemned it as “genocide."

post 40 is even better

Jeem almost everyone on the planet blames them and slanders them. It's actually ridiculous to the point of being comical if it weren't so deadly serious. One day your life and mine and many millions of others is going to be turned upside down because of this unrelenting hatred against the Jews of Israel. Iran's Khamenei recently called Israel a "rabid dog" yet the world keeps poking it with a stick. And that seem the correct action to most people who want Israel to... what? Give up and go away? You do realize that is never going to happen, right? I'll ask again - is there any sized piece of Palestine that Israel could have a Jewish state on and be accepted by the Palestinians? Think about that.

[green_dude777]

Jeem almost everyone on the planet blames them and slanders them. It's actually ridiculous to the point of being comical if it weren't so deadly serious. One day your life and mine and many millions of others is going to be turned upside down because of this unrelenting hatred against the Jews of Israel. Iran's Khamenei recently called Israel a "rabid dog" yet the world keeps poking it with a stick. And that seem the correct action to most people who want Israel to... what? Give up and go away? You do realize that is never going to happen, right? I'll ask again - is there any sized piece of Palestine that Israel could have a Jewish state on and be accepted by the Palestinians? Think about that.

I'll answer again - they could start with going back to the borders of the UN Partition Plan. The Jews were refugees at the time, when have refugees ever been able to take land from the people already there?

[RavenHawk]

Oh, Israel has committed plenty of massacres and the fact that they ethnically cleansed 750,000 Palestinians off their homeland in 1947. And ethnically cleansed another 250,000-300,000 Palestinians off their homelands in 1967.

I’ll take it that from Jeem’s latest flurry of posts, lacking a reply to me, that he is not interested in answering. So I’ll use yours as a proxy. I preach this tidbit of history all the time.

Massacres have occurred on both sides, but those are hardly *genocide*. Genghis Khan was said to commit genocide on an entire city, but in the end he saved the other cities in the region and the economic infrastructure and the culture went on. Given the known facts, I would have to say that the Palestinians started it, but today that is only history. It is neither here nor there. Genocide is more like Bosnia, Rwanda, Cambodia, or even Nazi Germany. Ethnic cleansing is not necessarily genocide. Genocide just gets lumped in with EC. EC is a long accepted means to simply remove an unwanted population. It is violent but not necessarily deadly. Just about every nation currently and in history has done it. Islam does it with Dhimmi. Jordan did it during Black September. Lebanon does it with their Palestinians. Saddam was doing it to the Shiites and Kurds. The US did it with the Native American. Russia did it to the Jews (Ukraine). Turks tried it on the Armenians. The list is endless, but my favorite is the Alhambra Decree. Spain simply gave all non Catholics a simple choice, convert, leave, or die. Many of the Jews converted but secretively kept elements of Judaism in their lives. The New World gave them an opportunity for a new life and one can see the Jewish influence in the American Southwest in the Hispanic culture here.

How many of those Palestinians had legal title to the lands they squatted on? The Palestinian is a fairly young culture. It is a conglomeration of semi-nomadic herding tribes. Before the 1920s, a Palestinian identified themselves not as a Palestinian but by the tribe they were from. When they migrated into the region, they were not the rightful owners but the rightful owners did not have the means or the will to evict these squatters. Likewise, most of these squatters where unable to purchase the land. So that’s how it stayed until the Ottoman Empire lost the region to the British. The British attempted to return legal rights back to the original owners and for the vast majority of indigenous peoples, they were successful. Where they couldn’t return the land was Palestine. The land was owned by absentee owners that couldn’t be found or no deeds were kept or deeds were forgeries. Because of this, there was no independent government and the region became unorganized. There was no prevalent indigenous direction. As all the other states around were becoming their own countries, Palestine remained a backwater. So the question arose as to what to do with the land. That’s where the Balfour Declaration came about.

In 1909, Zionists seeking a homeland, with financial backing were able to purchase from the legal absentee owners, 200,000 acres in the Jezreel Valley. The Jews acting well within their legal rights removed the squatters from the land. I’m sure this is the reason for the first raid against the Jews. In time Jews legally bought more land or eventually took land from those that attacked them. That is a legal form of transferring land. Most of this land probably didn’t belong to the attackers in the first place and this instituted the Palestinian tactic of attacking from land not theirs or civilian areas. Was there land taken away from legal Palestinian owners? It probably was, but in this chaos, how are you going to tell? This is where Palestinians with legal deeds didn’t bother to be concerned with their neighbor’s legitimacy. And because of that, they got burned. But there’s at least some of the population of Palestinian land owners that have become Israeli citizens.

That’s gotten off the track a bit but it provides the historical background to prove that genocide is not being committed by either side. It’s a land of conflict and as long as the world stays out, it will solve itself naturally.

[RavenHawk]

I'll answer again - they could start with going back to the borders of the UN Partition Plan. The Jews were refugees at the time, when have refugees ever been able to take land from the people already there?

The Palestinian were squatters. Refugees and Squatters. The UN partition is unfeasible.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/UN_Palestine_Partition_Versions_1947.jpg

This is really a joke. What nation could ever exist this way? No nation can exist in 3 separate, non continuous pieces. There is no way to defend that and it is a primary tenet of Zionism not to be beholding to any other entity for security. By accommodating this plan opens the way for pogroms or worse. Then what is the point of a Jewish state?