

In all honestly, she could use a bit more thinking before speaking (strategic thinking).
Not that what she says isn’t true (BTW what has been attributed to her - ie. that Israel * is an enemy of humanity - is also true), or that the way she is being persecuted (by people who make a banner of “freedom of speech”) is anything but fascist…
The point is, if our goal is to obtain any tangible results, we need persuasion more than confrontation, and diplomats more than martyrs.
Public opinion was slowly moving in the right direction before the current (so-called) truce… we should go back to talking about the miserable living (and dying!) conditions of the Gazawis (BTW: we should talk more about the West Bank, too).
We need to keep the focus on the victims, not on the assassins.
We need to make people see what their governments are supporting, and what they themselves are allowing to happen.
We need the massacre to stop.
Justice will come afterwards (and it will be far too late anyway, so who the fuck cares?).
* the current Israeli government, not the people or the nation of course. That I even feel obligated to clarify this says a lot about the current state of the public debate.



What I’m trying to say is that, as much as that may make us feel superior, we don’t need to win arguments and, let alone having fascists recognize we are right, we don’t even need to be right in the first place.
I’ll give you a (surreal, thought-experiment-like) example:
Would a blanket amnesty for all of Netanyahu’s crimes be “right”? Should we support it, if it meant stopping the massacre?