I don't want to say much about tomorrow's judgment, but I do want to make one point. The case being decided tomorrow is a land dispute that was instituted decades ago, and pre-dates 1992. Tomorrow's verdict is not and cannot be an endorsement of what happened in 1992, no matter how much some people want to portray it that way. It's a ruling on a land dispute.

I think we do ourselves an equal disservice if we follow this pattern of escalation and make it out to be about something that it's not.