Note the key distinction here. Stevens is saying that Jews need to be careful. Piker is saying that Jews should stop being overly pro-Israel. The former is fine; the latter is very much closer to blaming the victim or telling them that they are the ones who need to change themselves in response to violence.

Let's try a hypothetical. Guy parading around in a Muslim neighborhood, carrying a sign that says "Ben-Gvir is great. Kill everyone in Gaza". That would be inflammatory. No-one should be surprised if someone took exception to the sentiment he was expressing, perhaps violently, regardless of what the law is regarding freedom of speech and religion. On the other hand, I noticed a guy at the baseball game at Greenfield Village last Sunday, that had the tassels of his prayer shawl hanging out of the bottom of his shirt. Not overtly inflammatory to the vast majority of people. That being said, I read an article, maybe 20 or more years ago, about rising antisemitism in Germany. One man quoted in the article said he now tucks the tassels inside his pants, and wears a hat over his Yamaka. The guy was being pragmatic, by camouflaging the outward signs of his faith. It is sad that people feel they need to do that, but we can't control every nutter.

Steve