My argument? That the settlers aren't necessarily so noble and honorable. They present a huge problem the Israeli government - at least those further out. They represent an extremist ideology that is as intolerant and extreme as the Palestinian extremists. They are the ones responsible for the firebombing that burned a family alive. They certainly don't represent the mainstream Israeli view but they are a sizeable minority. In this case - it's also the Jews that have to learn to tolerate Arab neighbors.
Okay, a couple things.
1. Using the term "settlers" is problematic, imo. "Settlers" is just a term for Jewish people living on the "wrong" side of some imaginary line which has absolutely no legal relevance to the sovereignty of Israel or the potential sovereignty of an eventual Palestine. All this talk about Jewish people living on the "wrong" side of the line is one-sided and unfair.
So, what we are really talking about here, or should be talking about are extremists on both sides.
"Who are the settlers" is a good question, and the answer, imo is as complex as "who are the Palestinians" (which is routinely boiled down by many here as a death hating cult of Nazi's).
I decided to google the term, and found a fascinating article. It's long read but I think it gives a fair insight into who the settlers are:
Meet the Settlers by Jake Wallis Simons - Telegraph
2. What makes an extremist? What is to be considered an extremist or intolerant ideology? The ideology of the Palestinians and the Jewish people seems significantly different to me. Perhaps you can explain to me what this extremist Jewish ideology is and compare and contrast this with Palestinian extremism.
Compare and contrast? I see them as the same - in fact, I don't see much difference in the end between the extremes of most religions and also of other extreme non-religious ideologies. They are often intolerant of others (the highly religious settlers regard the land as inherently theirs and the Palestinians, even if they have legal rights to the land, as trespassers who belong elsewhere. They indulge in violence to make their point and justify it. They disregard secular authority and the rights of anyone else. Baruch Goldstein is an example (and his tomb is still honored).
Or this fellow: Meir Kahane proposed enforcing Jewish law, as codified by Maimonides,
[6] under which non-Jews wishing to dwell in Israel would have three options: remain as "resident strangers" with all rights but national ones,
[7] leave Israel and receive compensation for their property, or for those who refused either option, be forcibly removed without compensation.
[8] While serving in Israel's
Knesset in the mid-1980s, Kahane proposed numerous laws, none of which passed, to emphasize Judaism in public schools, to do away with Israel's bureaucracy, to forbid sexual relations between non-Jews and Jews and to end cultural meetings between Jewish and Arab students.
[9]
Extremist Israeli rabbis draw criticism from lawmakers, religious leaders amid settler violence
These fringe rabbis, mainly affiliated with the settler movement in the West Bank, are blamed for nurturing a venomous atmosphere that led to the killing of three Palestinians in a July firebombing. Critics say their rhetoric must be restrained to prevent more youths from further radicalization.
Israel this week issued indictments against two Jewish extremists in the case of the West Bank arson in July that killed 18-month-old Ali Dawabsheh and his parents, Riham and Saad, and seriously wounded his brother, Ahmad, who was 4 at the time.
The firebombing prompted soul-searching among Israelis and was condemned across the political spectrum. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged "zero tolerance" in the fight to bring the assailants to justice.
In the days leading up to the indictments, Israeli media exposed another jarring scene: a video from a wedding party that appeared to show a frenzied crowd of the arsonists' sympathizers brandishing military-issued rifles, holding a mock firebomb and stabbing a photo of Ali Dawabsheh.
The video caused a public uproar and put a spotlight on radical rabbis accused of firing up young extremists.
"When we see a handful of rabbis succeeding to turn a handful of youth ... into terrorists ... it means something here is not right and needs to be fixed," opposition lawmaker Karin Elharrar said at a recent hearing about the rabbis.
If the article didn't state their religious affiliation, what group would you think they belonged to? Palestinians.
These extremists aren't so different.
3. Extremist Jews do not represent mainstream Israeli society. Do extremist Palestinians represent mainstream Palestinian society? Some polls would certainly suggest so. With 85% of Palestinians believing that terror attacks are justified, I'm rather inclined to believe that it is significantly more mainstream than in Israeli society.
Whether they believe or not - they do not act on it. They are also a people under occupation - if they had a state, would those polls change?
4. The Jewish people have demonstrated an ability to tolerate (welcome) Arabs. There can be no question that this is so as the evidence is obvious in Israel. This is not reciprocated by the Arab Muslims.
Untrue. Until Israel was recreated, and with that the ongoing and unresolved conflict - Jewish people and Arab muslims had little problem living together.
5. Baruch Goldstein is no hero. His actions should be condemned by everyone in no uncertain terms and I do so now. Goals, like the one he had, should be achieved through peaceful means, not the murder of innocents.
To mainstream Israeli's he's not - to a potent minority, he is.
I asked for proof of his claim and he provided a video of a child injured in an incident of stones thrown at a car. Not what I was asking.
