I am constantly amazed that Becky Johnson can see the moving of a railing on a public planter as a gross violation of human and homeless rights, yet the bulldozing of homes is fine, because the end will justify the means. To put it differently, you support the homeless in Santa Cruz and the creation of homelessness in the Middle East. This inconsistency is remarkable, and I honestly had to re-read earlier posts that were so pro-military occupation because I thought they were posted as a joke. Can you please explain this huge, huge, huge hypocrisy? How the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank is fine and dandy, but the occupation of Iraq is the worst thing that has ever happened (I'm being glib, I know). I know for me that the ends justify the means in trying to make Santa Cruz less attractive to elements that are not desirable, so moving a rail seems rather modest. Look around the area- you do NOT see the huge amount of non-local homeless people in the downtown areas of any other local city (Salinas has 150,000 people, yet I have never seen congregations of several dozen homeless people just sitting around). The fact is, Santa Cruz is an attractive place for homeless people. If it wasn't why would people flock from around the country to be homeless here? But I digress; I still want to hear the justification for the fight against the "fascist" policies of our city, but the acceptance of the "reasonable" actions of the Israeli military?