Welcome to the weekend. Well, almost. It’s time to make a plan and get the most out of your time to ride.
Here’s what I recommend…
Saturday, October 5th
Oregon Cyclocross Championships – All day at Alderbrook Park (WA)
Who’s got the best legs and will earn the fabled champs jersey this year? It all comes together at a really fun-looking course and the weather should be perfect. More info here.
Gateway Green and Take a Kid MTB Day Celebration – 10:00 am to 2:00 pm at Gateway Green (NE)
Portland Parks & Rec and NW Trail Alliance are teaming up for a big party to celebrate the completion of a new southern entrance to Gateway Green Bike Park and a new TriMet bridge to get there! More info here.
Bike Farm Ride – 10:00 am at Bike Farm (NE)
Join Portland Bicycling Club for a meet-up at the DIY maintenance and advice center run by Bike Farm, then enjoy a 13-15 mph paced ride through the city checking out our great central city bikeways. More info here.
Bike to Day of Action – 1:15 at Ladds Circle Park (SE)
Join a grassroots show of solidarity to a the International Day of Action protest in north Portland being held to mark one year of genocide by Israel against Palestinians. More info here.
Sunday, October 6th
King Farmers Market Ride – 10:00 am at Alberta Park (NE)
Join Opie (the dog!) and Paul and their fun crew for a group ride to the wonderful weekly market at King Elementary School. More info here.
Coyote Wall Underbiking Extravaganza – 10:00 am at the Trailhead (WA)
Join Portland bike shop Something Cycles and their merry band of underbiking (using older-school bikes without all that fancy suspension and whatnot) fans for an epic MTB ride. More info here.
Coraline’s Curious Cat Trail Ride – 12:00 pm at OMSI (SE)
Tom Howe will take you on a route that could be your very last chance to see the collection of interesting cat statues that are currently strewn about Portland. More info here.
E-Bike Ride – 2:00 pm at Portland Saturday Market (SW)
E-bike shop Nomad Cycles is hosting this ride that will meet at the market an hour before lift-off, then will mount steeds and roll up the west hills to the Rose Garden. More info here.
— Did I miss your event? Please let me know by filling out our contact form, or just email me at maus.jonathan@gmail.com.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Reminder that the Portland Marathon is happening this Sunday from 7 a.m. to 2ish. Starts and ends at Salmon Street Springs. It goes by OMSI at mile 23.5.
A Palestinian solidarity ride at the anniversary of the Oct 7th Hamas attack? Tone deaf at best but this seem like throwing cruel salt in the painful wound of our local Jewish community.
Isn’t Saturday the 5th? I don’t really care either way, but it seems worth noting that Saturday is not the anniversary.
It says “being held to mark one year of “genocide” by Israel against Palestinians”. I think it’s pretty clear the timing of this event is related to what began with the Oct 7 attack by Hamas despite being scheduled on the Saturday before the 7th.
It’s not the only event. There’s been at least four others the week leading up to Oct 7 during Rosh Hashanah. Check out the bike calendar there’s a ride Oct 7 too. It’s a cruel campaign of crude antisemitism by simple-minded bullies who have so little of real meaning in their lives that they co-opt the cause that gets them most acclaim in their small group of cookie cutter narcissists.
Remember in the days after the attack, missing posters were torn down or defaced. There was gleeful dancing and music outside Israeli embassies. The attack downplay or denial began. It wasn’t until Oct 27 that Israel launched their mission into Gaza to try free hostages and destroy Hamas but in the 20 days between antisemitism was center stage. It still is.
Seems like a perfectly good time to do it. It’s been a year of genocide, it’s normal to reflect on things that happen after a year.
John,
Calling Israel’s actions in Gaza “genocide” is an oversimplification of a complex conflict. Genocide means the intent to wipe out an entire group of people, but Israel’s stated goal is to dismantle Hamas, a terrorist group that has attacked Israeli civilians, not to destroy the Palestinian people. The high civilian death toll is a heartbreaking consequence of urban warfare in one of the most densely populated areas on Earth, where Hamas is accused of hiding within civilian areas.
While the blockade on Gaza is harsh, it’s framed as a security measure to prevent weapons from reaching Hamas, not as a genocidal strategy. Israel has also allowed humanitarian aid into Gaza, even during conflicts. Using the term “genocide” ignores these complexities and risks shutting down any productive conversation about finding a peaceful resolution for both sides.
“Dismantle Hamas” is an oversimplification of Israel’s goals.
True, Israel’s other goal was to free the hostages.
Worth pointing out that Hamas’s founding charter advocates for the complete destruction of Israel.
When you categorize one group of people as hostages and another group of people as human shields or collateral damage, you have no moral or ethical ground to stand on.
When did Sarah mention “human shields” or “collateral damage”? I can’t find it.
If you don’t think the Israelis and other 25 (roughly) nationalities are hostages, what do you think they are?
Most people in Gaza are hostages of pro war forces.
Really hard to have a discussion with you when you are only responding to yourself.
I think you are missing the point. Or maybe I am naive and don’t understand why an Israeli life is more valuable than a Palestinian life. If you could explain that part, I think your position would make more sense.
Not sure where you’ve gotten the idea that an Israeli life is more valuable than a Palestinian life.
War is nothing but horror. It is sad beyond words that Hamas started a new war.
Hamas can surrender and the war and its horror could be over today.
Why don’t they?
I’ve asked this question before and never get an answer.
It seems like the idea that “It is ok for Israel to continue killing Palestinians until Hamas surrenders.” keeps coming up.
Do you think Hamas would attack Israel again if they withdrew from Gaza and stopped fighting them?
The only victory for Hamas is the destruction of Israel. The victory for Israel is if the rockets stop coming and the hostages are released.
Which is easier to do to arrive at peace?
Actually the Hamas charter calls for a two state solution and right of return of Palestinians to their homes. It does not call for the destruction of Israel. It says armed resistance to towards these aims is justified under international law (a true fact), so I don’t know but yeah maybe if Israel stopped their brutal attacks and recognized a Palestinian state, they might stop facing armed resistance. Nobody can speak for what future individuals might do – people whose families were killed while fleeing for safety during this last year or before might understandably lash out again. Individually. But the actual government of the people there have said they accept the idea of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.
First thing’s first, Israel has to agree to a ceasefire. Not a pretend ceasefire like the ones Netanyahu has put forth to sabotage negotiations.
Both parties need to agree on the terms of a ceasefire.
So I reread the updated 2017 charter that does not actually replace the classic one I am more familiar with. It was really unpleasant to read. If you were to substitute “Confederacy” with “Hamas” and “Southerner” for “Muslim” you would have essentially the same belief system as our deep south post reconstruction. Just ridiculous.
The interesting part was where they lay claim to Jerusalem in its entirety, but Jews predate Islam by 3000-4000 years. A strong argument can be made that Arabs have been there as long as the Jews, but they can’t let go of religious bigotry and focus on the religious aspect. Muslims are complete newcomers, give me a break. Muslims are the new kids on the block and they want all the good stuff for themselves? Make it make sense.
I didn’t see a real two state solution. I saw the same solution that got the Jews slaughtered or kicked out of all the other Arab nations. Why is it there were barely and Jews in Arab and Muslim countries prior to the early 40’s?
Also, you understand that “resistance” is not the same as marching in the streets with your beer buddies or throwing stuff through Starbucks windows? It’s committing atrocities and seeing your family die horribly because of what you’ve done. Its not a game and far too many of the comfortable class think it is.
So, it’s ok to keep killing innocent Palestinians and destroying Gaza until the Israeli government is convinced that Hamas is completely eradicated? What if people in Gaza that had family members killed by Israel, also now hate Israel. Should Israel keep killing Palestinians until they are gone too?
To the Israelis it clearly is (nothing sinister about that — most people value the lives of their countrymen over those of people living elsewhere). To Hamas they seem to be as well — killing an Israeli is worth losing a (large) number of Palestinians. And when the two sides trade prisoners/hostages, the trades suggest Israelis are worth more. Finally, Israel is willing to go to much greater lengths to protect its civilians than Hamas is. Hamas doesn’t seem to even try.
Those are some of the reasons I conclude that both the Israeli government and Hamas value an Israeli life more than a Palestinian one.
I am sure many Palestinian families see things very, very differently.
If Israel did not exist, Hamas would have to invent some other boogey person to keep the people focused on providing money and labor to the government. Have you seen the videos of Hamas coming out of the tunnels? None of them looked like they had missed a meal, whereas the civilian population are desperate for food. Gazans relationships are still based on family tribal lines and really the hatred of Israel is the glue holding them together under Hamas. It is no wonder Hamas does not care for their lives.
I think it might be more accurate to say it’s one of Israel’s goals. As Sarah said, freeing the hostages might be another. There are probably other goals as well. It is not inconceivable that Israel’s leadership wants to drive the residents of Gaza out of the territory altogether.
But noones allowed to reflect on the Oct 7 attacks. They’re gaslighted out of existence.
Literally nobody will be prevented from reflecting on that.
Bike to Day of Action –
Please don’t forget everyone’s favorite (actual) genocidal chant, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”. If that’s too many words to harmonize together, maybe just yell “intifada” a bunch of times?
If you had any understanding of Gaza prior to the October 7th Massacre you would have a better understanding of who Gaza should be freed from and I’ll give you a hint, its not the Israelis (who drove out all their settlers while leaving in 2005 and destroyed their homes while doing it). Maybe do some research into gender equality, LGBTQ support and sharia law under Hamas rule and then maybe you can add “Free Palestine from Hamas” into your chants.
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1853576/offbeat
Some brave Gazan women breaking into the 20th century a touch late in 2021 with bicycles.
Regardless, best wishes for a pleasant ride (as they all should be)!
No excuse for mass civilian casualties.
I agree, Hamas should never have done what it did on 07OCT.
As far as your implications, we don’t know if there have been “mass civilian casualties”. The IDF is not carpet bombing or anything remotely like that despite absurd accusations to the contrary. Gazans are dying and it is horrible. I want the war to stop. Hamas is not stopping though. If they stop, the war ends. If Israel stops, they get killed because Hamas won’t stop.
We don’t know the casualties because the Health Ministry is controlled by Hamas and knows that high casualty counts acts as a weapon against Israel. The one time independent analysis was possible was at the al-Ahli hospital. Initial reports (by the health ministry) were possibly a thousand dead and that it was an IDF missile that targeted the hospital, than it became 500, then 400, then in the morning it became clear that the missile hit the parking lot and killed dozens. By then it was also clear that it was a Palestinian missile that did the damage. The casualty numbers, as horrible as each one is a life lost, is likely wildly exaggerated.
It’s clear in the comments that no one realizes that Israel declared war against Hamas and is waging that war in an incredibly restrained manner. Once Hamas quits hiding in their tunnels under schools and homes while eating all the emergency relief food while the Gazans starve, surrenders and releases any hostages still alive then perhaps the war will come to an end. To imply they have no agency in their future seems like infantilizing them to the point of caricature. They can stop trying to kill Israelis. We can expect them to stop.
If the Day of Action were actually for the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank, I would think that encouraging Hamas to stop fighting would be the way to save the civilians. We didn’t stop fighting the Germans until a certain political party was destroyed, the same is going to happen to Hamas in Gaza unless they surrender and save their population.
Can you or any others answer my as to why you think they should trying to kill Israelis? I don’t think you can because no one really seems to see to the endstate. Israel wants the missiles to stop and its hostages returned. Hamas wants all the Jews gone (dead). Which do you think is the best endstate?
Yours is a completely one sided accounting of recent events in Israel and Palestine. There’s blame to go around, and all are partly culpable for the violence in the region. Hamas is terrible and their rhetoric and goals are reprehensible, but the same could be said of the democratically elected leaders of Israel.
That’s a lot of mental gymnastics to justify mass civilian casualties.
I am in disbelief how anyone can support Hamas, a terrorist group that have kidnapped, raped and murdered fellow human beings who are Jewish to an extent not seen since the Holocaust. I am in disbelief at the embracing of barbarism and repression by totalitarian terrorists by self-acclaimed tolerant progressives. I am in disbelief that during Rosh Hashanah and the days preceeding Oct 7 there’s been an acceleration of these kind of events.
That’s not a genocidal chant, stop lying. It means freedom, they want to be free. Freedom doesn’t mean genocide, even if that’s what zionists mean when they say freedom. I don’t care if corrupt politicians say it is, they don’t get to decide. They’re not innocent in this.
This is a lot of words to defend a genocide. I don’t think the people of Gaza are ever going to be thankful that Israel is killing so far nearly 200,000 of them, no matter what you claim their condition was before. And Israel is still doing illegal settlements! And invading other countries, and assassinating leaders.
This is beyond defense now. If you’re on the side of Israel here, you’re defending mass slaughter. You should be ashamed and history will not look kindly on you.
Aside, why do you always have to hop in and try to stir things up here, simply because it was mentioned that some anti-war protesters are having a bike ride? If you don’t want people protesting, get off your butt and counter protest or be quiet.
It’s quite clear that neither the Israeli government nor Hamas wants a ceasefire, so the war will continue. Blaming and condemning only the Jews for this situation has been and continues to be antisemitic, as is ignoring the obvious implications of “innocent” slogans.
I’m not going to draw this out again, so I’ll give you the last word.
Well said, very succinct and to the point. I am done as well, best wishes for a nice weekend.
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re just misinformed, but no, the resistance to a ceasefire comes from only one side. The only roadblock to it has been Israel. They killed every proposed ceasefire as well as the negotiators for a ceasefire. Any pretend solution put forth by Israel has been a joke where they make no guarantees they won’t start back up a month from now.
And who brought up Jews? I certainly didn’t. Don’t conflate Israel, an apartheid state, with Jews – a people who live all over the world. That sounds like antisemitism.
The 200,000 dead are most certainly innocent. It’s disgusting to suggest otherwise.
John,
The phrase “from the river to the sea” is super controversial, and how you interpret it really depends on the context. While it’s not inherently antisemitic, a lot of people, especially in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, see it that way.
Here’s the breakdown:
How Critics See It: Many people hear this as a call for Palestinian control over the entire land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, which includes Israel. To them, it feels like a way of saying Israel shouldn’t exist, implying the removal of the Jewish state. So, critics argue that this makes the phrase antisemitic because it seems like it’s denying Jews the right to have a homeland.
How Supporters See It: On the flip side, people who use the phrase often say it’s about Palestinian liberation and equal rights across the region—not about destroying Israel or hurting Jewish people. They view it as a call for freedom, justice, and the end of the occupation, without necessarily wanting violence or harm.
But the context really matters. When it’s used in protests or rallies, especially if there’s aggressive language or images around it, a lot of Jewish communities feel threatened and view it as antisemitic. That said, not everyone using the phrase means it that way, and some genuinely see it as a hope for peace and coexistence.
In the end, whether it’s antisemitic or not depends on who’s saying it and how. But because of the history and political associations behind the phrase, it’s definitely seen as inflammatory and gets strong reactions, especially from Jewish people.
Everybody understands the impact of the statement, and in a society that has adopted the concept that the impact of speech and behavior matters more than intent, it’s very difficult to interpret use of the phrase as innocent regardless of its literal or asserted meaning (in this way it’s the All Lives Matter of Israeli/Palestinian politics).
If people want to express a longing for freedom and national self-determination in a way that would not immediately be understood as being anti-Jewish, there are many other formulations available. When people continue to use the problematic one knowing full well how it will be interpreted, it reveals a lot about their motives.
“From the river to the sea” is more like the “Black lives matter” slogan, and the pushback against using BLM is the usually racist claims that BLM as a slogan is unfair to white people. How you can have the exact backwards and wrong idea that it’s like “all lives matter” is baffling. “All lives matter” is offensive precisely because it was made up in response to BLM, as a counter. The counter to “from the river to the sea” is the mostly cry bullying claims of antisemitism from mostly not Jews or all of Israel to try to silence a demand for peace and freedom for an oppressed people.
No matter what phrase becomes a popular rallying cry for the Palestinian cause, people will come out of the woodwork to call it antisemitism or find some other problem with it, tone policing protesters while thousands are being killed by Israel every day with our support. Because fundamentally, they don’t think Palestinians are fully people and don’t want them to be free.
This might be true if “Black Lives Matter” was widely understood to be a call for exile or death of others. You keep arguing intent while completely ignoring impact.
I can’t tell where the short-circuit is — do you simply not understand what I am telling you? Or do you disagree about what I assert the impact is or think that intent is more important that impact? Can you repeat my argument back to me in the clearest words you can so we can at least see if you get it? Then tell me which part you disagree with.
It would be hard to argue that “Palestinians want to be free” is antisemitic, so I think if you left it at that you’d be on pretty solid ground.
“All lives matter” was invented because white racists thought BLM was saying they don’t matter. That was the “impact” of saying Black lives matter, it made racists feel attacked.
Similarly, “from the river to the sea” makes Zionist feel attacked because the only thing they can imagine freedom for Palestinians means is death to Jews. It’s projecting the actual ideology of Zionism.
Impact is not all that matters, full stop. It is a consideration but not the only one. The disconnect is you think you found one weird trick to gotcha people in a debate like setting, and you didn’t.
Palestinians want to be free. Yes. That is literally exactly what the phrase says. Less passively (they “will” be free).
Yes they do want to be free and what they want to be free of are the Jews that live there as well as all the other people of different religions tucked safely away in Israel. The next question is then what are they going to do to be free. Well, we’ve already seen it when they strapped suicide vests on women and sent them into Israel.
On the same day Darine Abu Aisha committed a suicide bombing, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the religious leader of Islamist militant group Hamas, issued a fatwa, or religious rule, that gave permission to women to participate in suicide attacks as well as listing the rewards in “paradise” that these female martyrs would receive upon their deaths. He also promised Hamas would send many female suicide bombers in order to strike Israelis. Reactions to this in the Islamic world were mixed. While many hailed the female suicide bomber and urged full involvement of all in Jihad, some criticized the cruelty of tearing mothers from their children and sending them to explode themselves.
Notable female Palestinian suicide bombers include:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_suicide_bomber
For a more complete list of horror….
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacks
So saying they want to be free is only half the story.
You are just lying. And you’re using this lie as an excuse for unlimited slaughter of an oppressed people.
Honestly, questioning how people go about gaining their freedom hasn’t looked good throughout history. People called Nelson Mandela a terrorist. They don’t have a whole lot of tools at their fingertips if they don’t want to just sit quietly and accept their prison as they are slowly forgotten about by the rest of the world.
I guess saying I am lying is easier than thinking outside your limited box of experience.
I am sadly not surprised you are okay with women strapping on suicide vests and blow themselves up killing other women and children. How I wish Americans of a certain income level had to work abroad overseas for a year after high school to get an understanding of how life works outside the protections that America provides.
Prison?? Calling Gaza a prison diminishes what they are capable of doing, but I guess that is the point. You do realize that they live on the Mediterranean Sea? Tel Aviv (Israel) is to the north and is wealthy and a paradise. Port Said (Egypt) is to the south west on the same coastline and is a wealthy paradise. If Hamas had put the billions (with a B) they’ve been given since 2007into projects to make the Gazans lives better, they too could be wealthy by now and a paradise. They did not though and instead chose munitions and tunnels.
I think you are still missing the core of my argument.
On a literal level “river to sea” may be what you claim it is. On a literal level, “all lives matter” is also obviously true and harmless. In the sense that the two slogans are harmless on the literal level, absent any history, they are alike.
Both slogans have a history that gives listeners reasons to think that people who utter them mean something much more sinister than the literal text of the slogan. In that way also, the slogans are also alike.
Speakers of both slogans like to pretend this subtext doesn’t exist, that the slogans just mean what they literally say, and that people who are offended by the unspoken subtext are being histrionic — why get upset over such benign words? In this third respect the slogans are alike.
Both slogans are deployed by people who fully understand this dynamic, and are used despite (or because of) the impact they have on “histrionic” listeners. In the way “innocent speech” has been weaponized, the slogans are alike.
Can you see why my claim the “river to sea” and “all lives” slogans are similar is more than a “debating trick”?
Your protestations defending one slogan sound very much like the protestations I’ve heard defending the other. In that fifth way, they are also alike.
PS I am glad to hear you say that impact of speech is only one consideration among many, and does not trump other considerations (perhaps including the speaker’s intent). I am surprised you would say that, but I feel the same way.
I believe I understand your argument, but I just disagree.
“Both slogans have a history that gives listeners reasons to think that people who utter them mean something much more sinister than the literal text of the slogan.”
If not for the prior existence of the slogan “Black lives matter”, nobody would have said a word about people saying “All lives matter”. In fact, probably everyone would agree. People that put up black lives matter signs probably would have agreed. For that matter, they could even have used that slogan themselves! But, because the phrase “Black lives matter” was already becoming a popular slogan of a movement, the response to say “All lives matter” is read as a counter point.
There is no parallel to that in the “From the river to the sea” phrase. This wasn’t invented as a counterpoint to anyone protesting for their own safety, it stands on its own. It (or any other similar phrase) could have been invented today and the same people would complain that it makes them feel unsafe, even if everyone carried around banners saying “Palestinians would not like to be murdered and should live in peace with all people in the area, please”. And so the real argument is that Palestinians should not be using any phrase at all to rally their cause for freedom. They should be silent, protesters in the US should be silent, and we should silently allow our governments to work to beat the Palestinians out of existence.
I don’t believe the bad faith claims that the phrase is intended to mean eradication of Jews. And to the extend that some traumatized people take issue with the phrase, I’m afraid there are more important things than the way some people feel about it. Impact is not the only thing that matters – I certainly never suggested such. It should be taken into account but the impact of staying silent results in a much more significant impact on the people of Gaza.
Yes, the origin of the slogans is different. That is one thing that is not the same. Perhaps the original intent was different as well, perhaps not, neither of us will ever know.
Does that difference invalidate my comparison?
If people complained that “Palestinians would not like to be murdered…” made them feel unsafe, I would not take them seriously.
That’s not my argument, and I would disagree with anyone making it (which nobody is). But the fact that something I’m not arguing is wrong doesn’t mean that what I am arguing is wrong.
What people intend by using and defending a slogan they fully understand is regarded my many as antisemitic and a call for the eradication of Israel is impossible to say. What we do know is that people hear it that way. Unless, you know, histrionics.
I’ve never suggested staying silent about what’s happening in Gaza. There’s a strong case to be made about that and it would be a lot stronger if the people making it would avoid antisemitic slogans. (I realize that you don’t think they’re antisemitic, but frankly that’s not your call to make.) Then we could be talking about the horror in Gaza rather than the antisemitism of people protesting it.
You made one point that addressed my argument, and a lot of other points that were irrelevant.
It is a genocidal chant and people who have never been outside Oregon let alone the US should shut up and read a history book.
Small town provincial uneducated know it alls are so boring and ignorant it is embarrassing.
It is a well-known hate-inciting statement.
Many in this city enjoy being in a bubble that floats far from the real world. To me they’re cookie cutter narcissists with little real meaning in their life who regurgitate whatever their media and Spiderman pointing meme circle of friends feed them as a way to feel morally superior.
According the health ministry. In Gaza, there have been 41,000 deaths which is really tragic but your claim of 200,000 is such a lie it’s amazing that even you would post that.
‘There are 14 million Palestinians in the world so when you keep repeating the same tired slogan that this is a genocide, do you even realize how ignorant that sounds?
There are more Palestinians in Jordan than Gaza and almost as many Palestinians in Israel proper than there are in Gaza.
Why you keep insisting despite any facts that a genocide is being perpetrated just shows a complete lack of any critical thinking.
Repeating fake news and propaganda must be rewarding to you somehow.
That’s a (very conservative, low) estimate of how many were killed by bumbs and bullets, directly. The 200,000 is an estimate that includes starvation and disease, which are being used as weapons by Israel too but are always left out. It came from here: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01169-3/fulltext
It is an estimate, I will emphasize, but given we don’t know for sure, and the number is plausible, it’s important to take it seriously.
This facile pushback against the word genocide depends on defining it in a way that it’s only genocide once it is complete. Which, of course, would mean the Holocaust wasn’t a genocide. Which is ludicrous.
Whatever you call it, they are at least ethnically cleansing the land and making it uninhabitable so they can take it. I don’t understand the people who can see this and defend it. It’s rotten and vile.
Nice try … is lying just part of your agenda?
The 41,000 number is Hamas number, they are the ministry of health in Gaza. Not taking their number at face value explains a lot of your POV.
It’s antisemitism, pure and simple or complete ignorance.
If its ethnic cleansing they are about 2 million people short in Gaza, let alone the entire region.
Your fantasies are really putrid and demeaning to real genocide in the world, meant to discredit real Genocide that occurred in WW2 where Jews were basically eliminated from Europe.
I just returned from the Netherlands where in WW2 the Jewish population of 150,000 was almost entirely extinguished, only 5000 survived the war.
That is Genocide, there is nothing happening in Gaza that even remotely resembles it.
The point of talking about the genocide now is to hopefully get the US to do something about it before it is completed. That would be good. Maybe if people gave a damn about the one happening in Europe sooner instead of waiting until we were directly bombed, it wouldn’t have gotten so bad there. I’m just hoping we can learn from history instead of just repeat it (or rhyme with it).
Why are the Israelis doing this now? Why did they leave Gaza in 2005 and then 18 years later decide they needed to come back and ethnically cleanse Gaza and take it? Also, need a citation on that they actually want to take Gaza. I’ve heard some theories on why (several involving Jared Kushner of all people) it’s assumed that Israel is trying to take over Gaza and I’m curious which one you mean.
Because the moral outrage of Oct 7 gives them cover.
It is completely rational for a right-wing Israeli to conclude that they simply cannot live peacefully alongside the Palestinian people (I think they’re wrong, but I can see how they could arrive there after all that’s happened), and if conditions in Gaza became so terrible that most of the Palestinian civilians fled to Egypt, it would become a lot easier for Israel to manage the territory and maintain security along their border. Everyone knows that if the Palestinians flee, they’re never going to get back in, which is why we saw Egypt reinforcing the border to ensure they didn’t become host to a large and permanent population of refugees.
It’s impossible for me to say what’s in Netanyahu’s head, but I’d be shocked if that thought hadn’t occurred to him.
A lot of things were different in 2005, including who was running Israel.
So you do get it, at least this part. This is put very well.
I just don’t understand the hand wringing about this. We should immediately stop supporting Israel’s current war efforts. We’re spending billions to help them do this, which speaks much louder than the mumbled words of Biden asking to please not be so mean.
Yes I get it. The conflict is extremely complex, and gross oversimplifications lead people to say and believe things that don’t really make much sense.
Some people are even unwilling to denounce an organization like Hamas that has been one of the lead authors of Palestinian misery.
Egypt will not take them in, either will any other Arab country.
Jordan is more of a “homeland” than Israel is but they will not allow any more into their country either and they have about 3 million Palestinians now.
It is telling that NO Arab country has come to their aid, Hamas is as poison to them as they are to Israel.
Only Iran sends them arms for purely geopolitical reasons.
If Egypt and Jordan “took them in”, Israel’s annexation of Gaza would be complete. Is that what you’re suggesting should happen? Should Israel be allowed to annex more territory? Do they need more living space?
You say no Arab country has come to their aid, and when they do come to their aid militarily, you say “no not like that!”.
What you want is for the (as you see it) indistinct Arab monolith to take in some of their own. Because you know, they’re all the same, right? Why should the people of Palestine be allowed to live where they have for hundreds of years?
Most of them lived in what is now Jordan for those hundreds of years.
You know that Jordan was formed in 1946 by the same UN that formed Israel in 1948. Right about when they were invaded by Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and roughly 3,000 random Arab mercenaries for the crime of being Jewish.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-14631981
Jordan captured the West Bank in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and annexed it until Israeli forces took it during the Six Day War in 1967. Jordan gave up its claim to the territory in 1988, and in 1994 became the second Arab state to sign a peace treaty with Israel.
That exact same Jordan that captured, then lost and then signed away the West Bank.
Jordan quit hating the Jews and now is at relative peace with them. The Gazans can do the same if they want to.
All this stuff is so much more complicated than the less than 50% of Israeli’s who are of European descent and the Arabs who are seen as POC by the progressives (for reasons I never could figure out) and therefore the sort of Europeans are bad, POC are good.
Johnv and others know nothing about what you posted, Zero.
They jumped on a Fad protest, did know anything about Gaza or the Palestinians until this conflict.
John v thinks a “Free” Palestine state would be like Sweden or something…..
It doesn’t even occur to him that a Palestinian state would treat half the population like cattle as they do now or throw Gay people off buildings as they do now…It’s just the flavor of the year protest for Americans that know nothing about the Middle East.
For all the problems with Israeli treatment of Palestinians (and there are), Israel is a far better place to live than any place in the region.
It’s too complicated for stupid slogans that only wealthy white Americans Chant….
Please. I have personally been active in the BDS movement since the early 2000s. I remember a time when American politicians made it a personal goal to advance multi lateral peace deals. I can’t speak for John V (as I know nothing about him), but there are a lot of people who have been following the activity in the Middle East very closely for decades who are still looking for a peaceful solution. Yes, a lot of young people have recently awakened to the reality of this conflict, but your idle dismissiveness is ill informed and intentionally insulting. To suggest that only wealthy white Americans are concerned with this conflict suggests to me that you don’t get out much. And to suggest that you are privy to detailed information while those with whom you disagree are ignorant simpletons is not a very effective argumentative style.
Absolutely agree with you on this and have been impressed with your restraint while still delivering well phrased solid truths (for as much as anyone is listening).
One would think the two of us who don’t really agree on any of the political issues, but are both hitting very similar points would cause them to think. Again though, that would require some introspection on their part.
“It doesn’t even occur to him that a Palestinian state would treat half the population like cattle as they do now or throw Gay people off buildings as they do now”
There it is. “The savages wouldn’t know what to do with freedom”. Racism right there on display for the world to see.
And I realized the treatment of the Palestinians by Israel was fundamentally evil over 20 years ago when I first was able to think for myself politically. This isn’t a new thing, and I’m glad more people are waking up to it and speaking out, here and around the world.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/queer-in-gaza-campaign-aims-to-raise-awareness-about-hamas-lgbtq-persecution/ar-BB1jrVC2
How is it racist to speak the truth? This is from msn of all places. There is quite a lot of documentation of gays being thrown from roofs in Syria and Isis held territories, but no video and only the stories of survivors from Gaza. Many things are possible at once. You can think the Gazans are oppressed all you want, but they are also horribly oppressing LGBTQ folks.
Also, they had billions in aid, no Israel and they chose hate and rockets over agriculture and peace. Not what I would have selected for my people.
So no right to self determination because there are instances of regressive views… Got it. You’re grasping for excuses why it’s ok to kill people there (including the gay people you absolutely don’t care about).
Regressive views?? Who are you to define what regressive is to them. That is the culture there. It’s not up to you to call a vibrant culture “regressive”. It’s their choice and they are living life as they see fit. If you are going to champion them, I would actually learn what you are championing. Your quip about the “gay people I don’t care about” is yet another clue you don’t understand the culture there. Gay is baked into the system. The contempt of women to a level of misogyny you can’t comprehend is so strong that men having sex with men (and other things) is completely normal. Why then the hostility toward being gay? I have no idea other than perhaps they don’t want men flaunting feminine behaviors and being seen as less than a man. It’s very old time Greek and I don’t understand the whys, just that it is so. Much like I don’t understand the process of my phone speaking to me, only that it does.
Being anti-war is one thing and I applaud it, but your hatred of Israel means you have chosen a side and it is one you do not seem to understand.
You’re jumping all over the place as I’m doing my best to respond to your statements. Gaza had a lot of self determination and they continually choose war. That is one of the points you are having a hard time with. They are actually aggressors and they are not children. They are adults making adult choices and shaping their own future. The future they want is war with Israel, you can call it “resistance” to sugarcoat it all you want, but war is the goal. Once they don’t want that anymore there will be hope for peace.
A theme you and a few other people are bringing up is that I think it is okay to kill Gazans. I’ve actually been to war and have seen bad things. I’m actually not okay with it. I would choose peace myself, but I haven’t been taught from birth that Israelis in general and Jews in particular are evil and need to permanently go away. Israel finds itself continually being attacked by the same people (literally) and must defend themselves. That is what Israel has been doing since 1947.
“Never again” means “Never again”.
Your wall of text is entirely, 100% irrelevant. Don’t tell me I don’t understand while you run defense for child killers. None of the drivel you are posting justifies the killing of tens of thousands of people and completely erasing their entire world. There simply is no defense and you have to grasp at straws and flail around to try and twist things around to make Israel’s war crimes seem justified.
Ok, then stop right there, there is no “but” you can possibly add after that that will make sense…
Ahh, but you tried your best. The “side” is anti-war. The “side” is anti-genocide. The “side” is anti-child-killing.
No they didn’t. They don’t have a state, they don’t have sovereignty, and they are constantly terrorized by their captors next door. How many protesters and kids had their kneecaps shot out by snipers for peaceful demonstrations? How many reporters were assassinated by Israel for the simple act of trying to show the world the horrors? How many times should they tolerate Israel “mowing the grass” by bombing a few places indiscriminately? How many tens of thousands of Palestinians is Israel *currently* holding hostage with no due process (it’s thousands)? How many settlers are stealing their homes with the full support of the Israeli military? This isn’t the context where anyone in Palestine is going to just choose peace. Peace has to come from both sides and Israel constantly makes sure that will never happen. And they are currently making progress on their final solution as we speak and people like you are running cover for it.
“Never again” means never again for everybody. Israel is really selective about what they mean, and they mean it’s ok to do to Palestine what was done to them.
I can’t respond anymore until you post some of the sources you’re getting your info from. Is it a tik tok channel or something? Are you on some kind of information update from a news source? The stuff you’re talking about is just a litany of propaganda attacks that seem like bullet points in a presentation. They are not connected to anything I’ve said or brought up and are just examples of things you’ve been told and are regurgitating back to me on how Israel is the big bad. If you want to share your vision with people you’d be much more effective at just identifying the source as trying to repeat what you’re seeing.
And Egypt also doesn’t want them as the threat of Jihadism is a danger to their government as well.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-terrorism-charges-against-senior-leaders-hamas#:~:text=From%20its%20inception%2C%20Hamas'%20stated,violent%20holy%20war%2C%20or%20jihad.
From its inception, Hamas’ stated purpose has been to create an Islamic Palestinian state throughout Israel by eliminating the State of Israel through violent holy war, or jihad.
Occasionally the emotions run amuck and conflict spreads between jihadi and Muslim territories.
https://www.npr.org/2012/08/06/158205478/sinai-attack-dashes-hopes-for-closer-gaza-egypt-ties
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2012_Sinai_attack
There are a lot of issues swirling around along with a lot of people who are desperate, hot and don’t see a future as their leadership has told them their only future is violence and indeed spent all the money they receive in aid on weapons and not anything to help the population become self sufficient.
It’s probably worth pointing out that some Israelis have, for decades, pursued a policy of attempting to extirpate Palestinians from all of the land that has since 1948 been recognized to be Palestine. These people refer to these lands as Judea and Samara, and they bandy about slogans that are roughly equivalent to “from the river to the sea.” These parties now have seats in the Israeli cabinet, and they have been using influence over the Israeli military and military justice system, as well as government financing to support Israeli settlement building and exclusion of Palestinians from farmland and villages that have been in Palestinian hands for generations. Israeli settlers have used systematic violence and murder to seize territory, and any retaliation from Palestinians has been met with brutal and sometimes lethal reprisals by Israeli soldiers.
Sure, Palestinians and their supporters may rhetorically talk about “from the river to the sea” BUT THAT IS THE DE FACTO POLICY OF THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT, and they have killed and displaced hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the pursuit of that policy (I’m not even talking about the last year here. These are actions that have been ongoing for generations, and they long predate the awful and reprehensible October 7 retaliation perpetrated by Hamas).
One can recount injustices and killings inflicted by Hamas or Hezbollah, and they are many. But to whine about the “river to the sea” sloganeering of those that stand in solidarity with Palestineans is farce.
But no one does recount injustices and killing inflicted by Hamas and Hezbollah. At these protests who holds a sign for the victims of Oct 7? Who speaks of the attack? No one. They are ignored into denial.
I suspect that has something to do with the fact that the United States doesn’t supply Hamas or Hezbollah with tens of billions of dollars of military equipment and aid on an annual basis. It seems to me that the point of the protests is to convince the United States to reconsider providing unconditional aid to Israel. But that’s pure speculation on my part. I’m not an event organizer or attendee.
The US provides about 10% of Israel’s military budget.
It would be helpful if real facts were presented here.
Why is it OK that the US provides any more than 0% of Israel’s military budget? Why is it so unthinkable that we would stop doing that, in light of widely condemned against-international-and-US-law actions?
The specific amount we supply is irrelevant (although 10% is a LOT!). Why are we doing it if it doesn’t matter?
Iran and Hezbollah are launching daily rockets into Israel and have for years. Iran has sworn to kill all the Jews in Israel.
Are you just obtuse or completely uneducated about the Middle East?
Asking the question of why the US (and most of Europe) supports a democratic society in the region is beyond ill informed.
Sending weapons of war to Israel is currently, right now, against US law, let alone international law.
Every UN member of the world has a responsibility to protect. The fact that they are not probably goes to show there is no such thing as international law or rules based order, only what superpowers decide they want to do. The rockets would stop if Israel ceased its mass slaughter and destruction campaign.
You completely fabricated a number of casualties that is 5 TIMES the actual amount so why should anyone on the website listen or read anything you have to say about anything.
You just make up stuff, have zero clue or knowledge about the situation except for slogans you hear chanted by Neanderthals.
Good night.
I didn’t make it up, I cited my source. You can say they don’t know for sure either, but neither do you. The number of casualties is almost certainly far higher than the bare number of people killed directly with bombs, and to pretend that it’s a neutral stance to assume the unknown number is zero is ludicrous.
Language very revealing of your view of the people of Gaza.
You and the idiots who ransacked a public library DO NOT represent or know anything about the people of Gaza.
You idiotic twisting of words is embarrassing.
Who should we believe? An ad hominem screaming anonymous handle…
.
Or a UN Special Rapporteur:
https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976
Or the Internationation Court of Justice:
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240126-ord-01-00-en.pdf
Or just about every single human right org:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/10/06/israel/palestine-year-horror
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/10/israel-opt-one-year-on-from-7-october-need-to-ensure-a-ceasefire-and-release-of-hostages-more-pressing-than-ever/
Oh, I thought he meant insular progressives and not the Gazans.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/world/u-s-military-aid-for-israel-tops-17-9-billion-since-last-oct-7
That’s since Hamas kicked off this last war on 07OCT. It’s been about 3.8 billion per year before that.
Okay. And your point? It’s okay if it was less than ten billion last year? Is that what you’re saying?
If Israel has been systematically killing, seizing land, and/or otherwise depriving Palestinians of their liberty, freedom of movement, and self determination for decades with no reasonable effort being made to negotiate a long term peace agreement or to recognize Palestinian sovereignty since the 1990s, should the United States be providing them with billions of dollars of military support annually?
My point is not to spread hyperbole. The truth (as much as it can be perceived) is enough.
How many times has Israel been invaded by multiple Arab armies? How many intifadas had it endured? They’ve needed and still need those weapons. Land has changed sides due to combat. Arab land was lost because they lost wars they started.
The idea that wealthy Americans and European have of the Gazans and surrounding Arab nations are guileless, doe like innocents does everyone a tremendous disservice by willfully hiding from the reality on the ground.
It’s a violation of the United Nations charter and international law to seize land and kick out inhabitants through military conquest. In fact, it’s tantamount to genocide to do so, despite the arguments of people like BB that only one genocide has ever occurred and all others don’t count because not enough people have died yet.
Furthermore, some of Israel’s largest territorial gains came through military actions that were initiated by Israel, such as the 1967 six day war.
To suggest that the Israelis have the right to permanently occupy lands and to permanently deny access to the recent inhabitants of those lands with impunity is morally repugnant, regardless of past actions of Palestinians or their Arab neighbors.
So only one of the conflicts can even be argued to have been started by Israel and as the following article relates it is not much of an argument as it was Egypt ejecting peacekeepers, starting a dangerous blockade and then some Russian (well, Soviet) intelligence fabrications that led to Israel’s counter strike. The more things change, right??
https://www.britannica.com/event/Arab-Israeli-wars
They seized land during war and then didn’t give it back to the initiators of the war. Why should they? That was the third war they’d fought with the same people. We still hold California, Hawaii, Philippines, etc. as well as parts of Germany and Japan although that’s for our “mutual self defense”.
Also, I think Israel is denying access until the Gazans quit trying to kill them (or “resisting” as it’s called here).
In a different post I see you talk about being involved in the BDS movement for awhile and I was curious if you’d been to the Middle East?
As an aside I appreciate that you’ve kept up an actual discussion where we respond to what the other person is saying. It can be a rarity here
Previous Portland Calls To Action have resulted in violence and property damage but did nothing, absolutely nothing, to change the situation in Gaza. Portland’s black bandana protesters join with any (and every) social and political cause only to use that movement as an opportunity to break windows, and display anarchic disruption. A shattered Starbucks window does neither support Gaza nor Bibi’s war. It only diminishes Portland.
Agreed. And I find it unfortunate that Jonathan continues to promote events such as this (via his weekend guide) that have a history of committing acts of vandalism in our city.
Agreed. If only those attending these events could channel their anger and hatred into doing something that does make a difference in their own community. Soup kitchens, working with those with disabilities, helping an elderly neighbor with chores. I guess those things don’t bring as much Instagram glamor or glory.
Grandpa logic:
Protesting the Holocaust was pointless. There was nothing the US could do and clearly the USA and its allies did not win WWII because nothing could be done.
There is a difference between performative vandalism by slumming suburban malcontents and the successful and peaceful protests (at least peaceful on the side of the protesters) lead by Gandhi or Martin Luther King.
Right, we won the war, and yet we still have bases of occupation in Germany, Italy, UK, Japan, and most recently Poland, 79 years after the end of the war (and Russia occupying part of Germany in the Kalinin Oblast/Konisburg). General De Gaul was one of the few who recognized our version of the Pax Romana occupation and kicked us out of France in the 1960s. it’s a hollow victory when you have to have occupying forces in the home countries of your so-called allies 80 years later – but then we in the USA are used to that – we still occupy Indian lands in our own country after nearly wiping them out over 100 years ago, as well as in Puerto Rico, Diego Garcia, Guantanamo Bay, and so on.
I think that’s the fanciful comparison winner of the day. Congrats!!