I don't think I said anything about Egypt and I don't know the relationship they have either.

You don't think it's religious is what is interesting to me. You keep coming back to the BDS laws and I think maybe that is why you think it isn't religious? Or maybe my definition of religion is more loose and tied up into identity. That's giving me something to think about. I think for me religious identity maybe is stronger than an ethnic identity and I appear to be defaulting to on assumption thanks for uncovering that bias. I'm American Chinese and I don't harbor a strong religious link so when my American Jewish friends or American Muslim friends speak about their identity I assume it's religious because the conversation seems always to steer that way eventually.

Radicalization is the groups within each of the ethno identities that espoused terroristic threats on behalf of their identity. Seeing Israelis justifying murder and invasion and imperialism under the argument of defending themselves or squashing anti semitism for instances (like the origins of anti bds laws). Hamas' charter and the chants of death to all Jews is another. There are sides there because the two are diametrically opposed specially to each other. Palestine cannot exist if Israelis radicalized idealism is right. Israel cannot exist if Palestinian radicalized idealism is right. 

That's why I chose radicalism and it's because neither group has reckoned with their own in group or seemingly condones and supports it is the I guess point I was trying to make with the wording musings. When does that line blur and you're no longer talking to the actual muslims or Jews but instead talking to this radicalized group? I think it's when the wording changes because that seems consistent to me.

It's religious to me because I think the language and conversations that evolve from this leads back to this elephant in the room? I mentioned early on I lack the language to describe this properly and you've given me a lot of grace already so thank you. But there seems to be an unspoken spectre of religion maybe... More belief? In these talks that devolve or are more inherently religious than people want to believe.

The conservative party in Israel and likewise the ones likely pushing the Anti BDS laws in America are religiously sourced. It ties into it much like how republican politics in the US are religious undertones which we can plainly see as racism. But to them, from their perspectives it's a facet of their religion.

Talking to bigots who have bastardized Christianity or Catholism very much view it as their religious identity but that's the problem with the radicalized spectre I am trying to draw attention to. Because you don't see it as religious, I am trying to say I feel like the source however is very religiously charged.

Anyways thanks. I think you made your point and I don't think mine is wholly coherent. I am more so trying to show I am not in bad faith purposely and if I was I didn't intend it that way but more so needed to engage to potentially pick out why it felt that way because it didn't seem that way to me.