60 thoughts on “Clinton and Sanders Fiddle While Palestine Burns – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. “Shoot to kill Intifada” – How about the “screwdriver and potato peeler Intifada”? Because one was in fact shot to death in Tel-Aviv after running around with a screwdriver ( 5 people slightly wounded), and the one with the peeler was in Jerusalem (I think he was one of the lucky ones who were apprehended alive).

    1. @ Yuval: You must be very proud, murdering people brandishing screwdrivers and sunglasses for weapons. Or, in the case of Fadi Alloun, murdered having no weapon at all. Maybe in your honor I’ll start calling it the mass murder Intifada or the genocide Intifada.

      1. I’m not proud but ashamed. I was just trying to be helpful, man, I guess it’s very early in Seatlle and you have read my comment, which was actually inspired by Gideon Levi’s latest op-ed (Have you read it?), before drinking your Coffee.

        “Screwdrivers and potato peelers” – that draws attention to their weakness, desperation and lack of planning. Now please consider it again with your normal cognitive function and respond sensibly.

        And I wouldn’t mind an apology, but otherwise keep up the good work!

        1. @Yuval: Irony is very hard to convey online, especially when you don’t recognize the source who’s conveying it. In the text of your comment I did not detect Irony since, on its surface, it didn’t appear much different than the hundreds of other garden variety hasbara comments published here. If you had included a reference or link to Levy I’m pretty sure I would’ve picked on your tone better.

          Of course I’m sorry for missing it. But you might want to offer a clearer sign of your intent to the reader next time.

          Again, sorry.

          1. Okay, this unpleasantness is behind us.

            And speaking of Fadi Alloun – in a video released today, another Palestinian is seen, unlike Fadi Alloun, attacking a police officer with a knife, aiming to his throat, which would make shooting at him justifiable, except that the police officer is seen shooting at him again and again while he is already lying down. It’s been all over Israeli media today, but nobody seems to have pointed out the murder aspect.

          2. Yes, I think it’s the one Yuval is talking about. It happened close to Damascus Gate (bab al’amoud) in occupied East Jerusalem.
            But there’s another video too that I personally find harder to watch. It has been uploaded on youtube by an Israeli and here I post in from Nasser al-Laham’s Facebook (the chief editor at Maan News).
            WARNING: GRAPHIC
            Here’s an article on Maan News on the context: Ahmad (12 years) and cousin Muhammad Manasra (14 years) supposedly attacked an Israeli boy and a grown-up close to an Israeli settlement in occupied East Jerusalem. Muhammad was killed. Maan says this is the surviving boy but I’ve read that it actually is the one who died. Listen to the Israeli, who is asking various times that the cop put a bullet to his head. I’ve seen photos too (IMEU I think), where an adult seems to kick him.
            – maannews.com/Content.aspx?id=768197 (with www not to block the posting)

            And in the meantime, an Israeli Jew who stabbed four Palestinians (three Israeli citizens) in Dimona was neither killed nor called a terrorist (even by Haaretz).

          3. It’s Hassan the 15 yr old boy & he died, refused medical care by Israeli emergency medical personnel who let him bleed to death. I’m expecting a new Mint Press piece out today which will feature this video.

          4. @ Lost: You have a very simple way to end the attacks: remove restrictions on Muslims at the Haram al Sharif. Put things back to status quo ante. Stop sending in police breaking into Al Aqsa. Respect the site. Call off the settler dogs who sniff around waiting for the time they can destroy it. Until you demand that the attacks will continue & you & Bibi will be as responsible for them as any Palestinian who takes up violence as a form of resistance.

          5. @ Richard
            As I wrote yesterday, everyone has different versions of this story (even the names of the two boys vary, maybe because Palestinian names tend to be added by the fathers and the grandfathers name). Al-Jazeera English claim they both died,
            In the Maan article from yesterday, which has been updated it’s said that the boy in the video is the older, Muhammad Manasra, whereas the younger, Ahmad, had died (contrary to what had been written earlier) but now there is a new article: the elder Muhammad died instantly, and Ahmad who’s in the vidéo survived but is in a critical condition in Hadassah.
            This of course doesn’t change anything about the attitude of the police and the bypassers but Hasbara tends to concentrate on details to dismiss the wider picture.

            UPDATE! http://www.maannews.com/Content.aspx?ID=768223&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

          6. @ Deir Yassin: Noa Shaindlinger I think has it right when she says the video pictures the aftermath of Ahmad’s attack by the settler driver which broke both his legs. Ahmad was seriously injured (as you can see on the video) and is now alive. The video does not show the shooting of Hassan, who did die.

          7. @ Richard
            Yes, that’s it, and that’s in fact what Maan News wrote initially before their up-date, and what they write in the new article. I wonder if someone has images of the settler who hit him, and whether it was on purpose, or he ran into the street. I’ve seen live images from Hebron where a military vehicule changed totally direction to drive full speed into one stone-throwing youngster, it was a couple of days ago. I also wonder why the Israeli uploaded the images on youtube: to denounce the attitude of the police ? I guess (and hope) so.

          8. @ Deir Yassin: the IMEMC article I read said the settler driver rammed Ahmad deliberately. I’m guessing he may’ve been trying to escape or run away. THough I don’t know for sure.

            The Israeli shouting curses at Ahmad is the same one filming the video according to what I’ve been told. So this idiot uploaded the video to boast about his prowess and admire his ability to curse in Arabic. It was an act of pure sadism, I’m sorry to say.

      2. Will you ever condemn the attacks themselves or do you believe their cause justifies murdering peaceful civilians going about their day?

        1. @Eilati: When you condemn the murder of Fadi Alloun. When you call for the return to status quo ante at Haram al Sharif. When you call for an end to shoot to kill orders. When you call for the murderer of Hadil Al Hashlomoun to be held accountable. That’s when I’ll raise my voice too.

          1. “When you call for the return to status quo ante at Haram al Sharif. …”

            What do you think should be the rule of law on the Temple Mount/Haram al Sharif?

          2. @ djf: Haram al Sharif is a Muslim holy site. It is in the Muslim-Palestinian portion of Jerusalem. Hence it must be administered by Palestinians eventually.

            Israelis have the Kotel as there place for worship. There is no reason for anyone but Muslims and tourists (which may and should include Jews) to visit the site. There is no reason for any Jew who wishes to destroy the Haram to make a pilgrimage there. Nor should real Orthodox Jews visit it anyway since there is a prohibition on doing so from eminent rabbinic scholars.

          3. Am I your moral compass? What does one have to do with the other?

            Stop hiding behind ambiguity. Do you or don’t you support the current wave of terror/freedom-fighting?

          4. The situation is quite simple at Haram al-Sharif. It is a Muslim holy place and the people who are invading it are the Temple Mount Faithful/Ateret Cohanim and all the nutters who wish it to be demolished so they can rebuild the Third Temple, yea even with animal sacrifices.

            The invasion by Israeli Police/Military, firing stun grenades, in their boots, savagely attacking worshippers is an outrage. Just imagine if the police in Tehran did the same in a synagogue. There would rightly be an explosion outside, a condemnation of virulent anti-Semitism etc. It seems you are incapable of seeing it from the eyes of someone else.

            Palestinians are attacking with what they have, which is basically knives, because they are sick and tired of being firebombed, chased by ‘death to the Arabs marches’, having their lands confiscated, their crops burnt, their people attacked by settlers aided by the IDF and for this to go on indefinitely since Israel’s government is led by settlers of the Jewish Home Party, which is our equivalent to the British National Party.

            Is this so difficult to understand?

          5. I support shooting all the time the attacker still present a threat. In a few cases, I believe the killing was unnecessary yet, the attacker was there to murder peaceful civilians.

            Now, will you give a straight answer or keep on circling the issue? Do you support those attacks?

          6. Four times as many Palestinians have died in the past 2 weeks as Israelis and yet you continue shreying about murdering Israeli “peaceful civilians.” Settlers are not “peaceful civilians.” They are thieves. And Israeli security forces are the enforcers who maintain this calamity. Resistance to Israeli violence and murder is legitimate.

            You endorsed the murder of 30 Palestinians. Shame!

          7. So just to be clear, you support the attacks in Jerusalem on Israelis or stabbing of a ‘settler’ 13 years old by a Palestinian 13 years old.
            A real humanitarian!

          8. @ Eilati: No, you don’t get to interpret my words for whatever agenda you might have.

            As for you, to be clear, you support the murder of 30 Palestinian civilians including a pregnant woman & her 2 yr old baby! Nice.

          9. What do you think about the attackers then? Are you running for congress and afraid your words will hunt you down? I thought you are an opinionated blogger who like to share his thoughts – why is the secrecy all of the sudden?

          10. Your words on Mint Press answered my question
            “Each day, more young people take to the streets with whatever weapon is at their disposal in a heroic, and often fatal, effort to uphold the honor of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the dignity of the Palestinian people.”

            So – you support the murder of Israeli citizens!

          11. @eilati: for being a zio-moron & misconstruing my words, you are now moderated & will be banned on further violations.

            I actually think it is foolhardy to engage in fatal encounters like these. But no I will not condemn this as a reaction to Israel’s ethnic cleansing & war crimes.

  2. ” Really, is that what Palestinians want?”

    I think the Arabs want all their land back, from the river to the Sea, and preferably with a minimum of Jews.
    Am I wrong?

    1. @ Lost
      “I think the Arabs want all their land back”
      Thanks for acknowledging that the land has been taken from the Palestinians ….
      You’re just putting a mirror in front of the majority of the Israeli Jewish population or what ? If you were Palestinian (God forbid) what would you consider to be a just solution ?

      1. “I think the Arabs want all their land back..”

        I was expressing what I believe to be the mindset of the Arabs. I wasn’t acknowledging anyone’s possessory rights.

        If I was a Palestinian, I would accept a two State solution based on the Green Line with land swaps.
        I would emancipate Arab women, reduce the birthrate and toss the imams into the gutter. I would than maintain the most peaceful relations with my neighbors, and hope that Arab civilization doesn’t come crashing down on my head too.

        BTW, you didn’t comment on the rest of my statement, which read, “..from the river to the Sea, and preferably with a minimum of Jews.”


        1. @ Lost: Really. A white pro-Israel hasbarist was trying to channel “the mindset of the Arabs.” Lawdy, that’s mighty white of ya. But hey, I don’t think you get or even deserve that privilege. Stick to hasbara pimpery. It suits you better.

          If I was a Palestinian

          And “If I were a rich man, yaida-diddle-diddle-diddle-dum…” Spare us. You’re not and you wouldn’t look good in black-face or even brown-face.

          BTW, when you toss settler rabbis into the gutter, then you can talk about tossing other religious figures there. Until then, I find it offensive you would suggest disrespecting the religious leaders of other faiths than your own.

          You’re an Islamophobic racist. I put you no notice & consider this a warning.

          1. “If you were Palestinian (God forbid) what would you consider to be a just solution ? ”

            I was responding to Deir Yassin’s question.

            And, BTW, As a rule, I choose not to associate with Rabbis and clerics. I have as little to do with them as possible, so, on a personal level, I’ve already ‘thrown the rabbis into the gutter’, which, for the most part, is where they belong.

    2. @ Personally, I think only an idiot believes that. And if you have such views that were last taken seriously a generation or two ago, you really belong elsewhere. Again personally I believe Israel’s current leaders want all the land from the river to the sea & will do almost anything to get it.

    3. @ Lost Dutchman

      There is a difference between what people want (“sugar and spice and all things nice..”) and what they are prepared to accept.

      Avid readers of Haaretz recognise a discusion theme here recently played on by Professor Shlomo Avineri on one side, and Yossi Bellin and Uzi Benziman on the other.

      Avineri contends that the Palestinian problem is insoluble because the Palestinians want what this Lost Dutchman says they want: all the land from the river to the sea. And why do they want that: because they see Israel as a colonial occupant who will disappear in the course of time, like all other colonial occupants before them. That is, says the Professor, why the Palestinians have never expressed regret about their non-acceptance of the UN partition plan and why they refuse to acknowledge the right of the Jews to a state. They see them as belonging to as religious community rather than a national one.

      Well there are some inconvenient facts here for the Professor to deal with. As Yossi Bellin points out, Abbas did express his regrets about the Palestinians’ non-acceptance of the UN partition plan some years ago. And as far as the recognition of the Jewish right to a state is concerned the Palestinian Declaration of Independence of Nov.18 1988 talks about the UN decision to divide the land between a Jewish state and an Arab state as providing a legitimate basis for the Palestinian demand for sovereignty and independence (and thus, by implication, for a similar Jewish demand).

      The Geneva Peace Initiative of 2003 reinforces this point by stating “Affirming that this agreement marks the recognition of the right of the Jewish people to statehood and the right of the Palestinian people to statehood …’

      Avineri cannot dream away the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002, as repeated in 2008, in which peace was made conditional on Israel withdrawing to the Green Line (with land swaps). Since this was strongly supported by the Palestinian Authority here too there was implicit recognition of the Jewish’ right to a state. Avineri gets out of this by harping on a side issue that has nothing to do with his main thesis viz. that the Palestinians do not accept the Jewish right to a state. It’s good , says the Professor, that we didn’t accept this because look at the mess the Arab world is in now. Yes but it wasn’t then and the iron could have been forged when it was hot .But It has been shown time and again that it is Israel that pays occasionally only lip service to the Palestinian right to a state while undermine the foundations for it. The Israel reaction to the Arab peace plan was entirely negative, and based inter alia on the laughable pretext that the relevant UN resolutions ask for negotiations and here there was a complete plan. Yes Israel would rather negotiate until Kingdom Come meanwhile gobbling up Palestinian land.

      But what about not only recognising the Jewish right to a state but also recognising it as a “Jewish state”, the demand Netanyahu has used as a spanner in the wheel for genuine peace talks? Avineri’s opponents claim that it is clear from many informal conversations with Palestinians that they don’t have a great objection to do this but they have to take the rights of the Arab citizens of Israel into account.

      Lost Dutchman you asked whether you were wrong. You were.

      1. @Arie Brand

        “Avid readers of Haaretz recognise a discusion theme here recently played on by Professor Shlomo Avineri on one side, and Yossi Bellin and Uzi Benziman on the other ”

        I don’t listen to what Jewish pundits have to say. I want to hear what the Arab’ street’ has to say.
        Can you tell me?

        1. To hear what the “Arab street” has to say? Here’s a crazy idea LD – talk to them instead! Why ask the master what he thinks the slave thinks, the rapist what his victim thinks, etc., the white man what he thinks the black man thinks or how about asking a man what he thinks a woman thinks – comprende?

        2. @ Lost: Now you’re just plain condescending & offensive. “The Arab street?” Go to Ramallah or Gaza & find out for yourself. Don’t ask anyone here for that information when you can easily get it yourself. I grow increasingly more offended by you. Don’t know whether you’re simply dumb or deliberately offensive or both.

        3. @ LD

          Those “Jewish pundits” gave an account of some of the relevant ideas of Palestinian negotiators, ideas that matter (unlike most of those found in “the street”). If you find anything wrong with this account let me know.

        1. Avineri’s argument, such as it was, had nothing to do with this and, anyway, this “Lebanese rider” was not part of the original document to which Israel reacted so negatively. About the refugee problem the document merely said:

          “Attain a just solution to the problem of Palestinian refugees to be agreed upon in accordance with the UN General Assembly Resolution No 194.”

          The crucial words are “to be agreed upon”.

          The nonagenarian Uri Avnery, who has seen it all before, commented:

          “When the initiative was first aired, the Israeli government was desperately looking for a way out.
          The first excuse that sprang to mind – then as always – was the refugee problem. It is easy to create panic in Israel with the nightmare of millions of refugees “flooding” Israel, putting an end to the Jewishness of the Jewish State.
          Sharon, the Prime Minister at the time, willfully ignored the crucial clause inserted by the Saudis into their plan: that there would be an “agreed” solution. This clearly means that Israel was accorded the right to veto any solution. In practice, this would amount to the return of a symbolic number, if any at all.
          Why did the initiative mention the refugees at all? Well, no Arab could possibly publish a peace plan that did not mention them. Even so, the Lebanese objected to the clause, because it would leave the refugees in Lebanon.
          But the refugees are always a useful bogeyman. Then and now.”

  3. I (we) support Bernie, but I don’t think he would be up to dealing with the Israel-Palestine situation. He does not seem to want to spend his energy that way. And of course Hillary would be such a disappointment on that score. She would not do what needs to be done. She may surprise, but I don’t think so. And on the other side, the Republican, anyone I see running would be a total disaster for this country.

    This conflict needs to continue until somehow some way the price that Israel is paying for it’s “status quo” is too costly, morally, internationally and maybe with this disruption of normality, an unsettling terrorism, murders back and forth, as awful as that is, maybe this will do something. All Israeli’s seem to want is quiet and security, and that the army should take care of it.

  4. @Yuval

    “except that the police officer is seen shooting at him again and again while he is already lying down”

    I don’t see that occurring in the video Richard posted.

  5. Many comments got a bit off track above. What about Clinton and Sanders?

    My own “take” is that AIPAC (An acronym: unlike RS, I spell it with all-CAPS because it IS an acronym, because I want to catch the eye, and because I want to avoid the suggestion that it is an honorable entity which deserves a single leading capital letter, like “France” or “Friday”); * * * that AIPAC et al. (including J-Street) are so dangerous that Sanders is actually right to ignore Palestine (even though he may do so from personal confusion about Jews and Israel to say nothing of personal confusion about the relation of tghe “personal” to the “political” in a candidate for president). And Clinton was not so bad since she at least indicated that there was a problem needing to be solved, something Netanyahu doesn’t do.

    What America (and all candidates) need is that elusive Constitutional amendment that limits political spending in America to human Americans and which also limits the cumulative annual spending of each American human citizen to a smallish amount (not $1M, but closer to $1,000). If enacted, this would tend to defang the big-Military (a/k/a military-industrial-complex — the USA’s biggest lobbyist), big-Banks, big-Pharma, the Koch brothers, big-Zion (including Adelson et al), big-FossilFuels, and all the other vastly damaging “BIGs” that form the USA’s oligarchic ruling coalition.

    I really don’t see how big-Zion can be defeated (what with its partnerships with big-Military and apparently many non-Zionist “conservative” wealthy donors) unless the entire oligarchic system is first taken down.

    1. “Many comments got a bit off track above. What about Clinton and Sanders? ”

      I think Bernie and Hillary both display good sense in choosing to avoid the I/P vortex.
      More sense than me, anyway.

  6. @Pabelmont

    You wrote:
    “I really don’t see how big-Zion can be defeated (what with its partnerships with big-Military and apparently many non-Zionist “conservative” wealthy donors) unless the entire oligarchic system is first taken down.”

    Perhaps change doesn’t have to be as radical as all that. I understand that AIPAC does not provide funds itself but directs the attention of donors to “deserving” candidates, that is folk willing to support this Israel. I presume that a substantial number of these donors are Jewish. What is required then is a changie of hearts and minds, in the first place in the Jewish community. This might be a matter of generational change. There are signs that such a change is taking place but it will be a fair while before the young of today are themselves in positions that allow them to donate to politicos.

    Also, If this kind of Israeli regime continues the country might become so unpopular that its support becomes a liability. In that case AIPAC will be p…..n against the wind. But I have more hope as far as change in the Jewish community is concerned. For present day Israel to become as unpopular as it deserves to be would require Americans to be a lot better informed than they presently are and to have the interest to look for this information. These are rather heroic assumptions I believe.

  7. ״eminent rabbinic scholars״
    I was under the impression that you detested anything rabbinical either orthodox/ultra.
    It seems your Hebrew studies were quite truncated esp halacha.
    The are many ‘ancient’ ראשונים who hold that since the temple had been destroyed all holiness also went and thus there is no problem going up there.
    The scripture says ביתי בית תפילה יקרא לכל העמים {“my house will be called a house of prayer to all peoples} and thus it should be open to all worshipers. Not only that but it is in contradistinction to the state law which allows access to all holy places to all people.
    Israel should declare it open to all religions. In any event there are opinions that the 3rd temple cannot be built but by the Messiah.
    So Bibi, who is at fault for a lot of the violence, should roll the dice and we can then settle the issue.

    1. @ Rock:

      I was under the impression that you…

      You see, that’s where you went wrong right from the beginning. People like you don’t get to have “impressions” of what my views are. Because they’re invariably wrong. And unlike you I can distinguish between rabbis and determine, based on their views and humanity (or lack of it) which ones I respect and which ones I revile. I don’t detest all Orthodox rabbis, as you claim. But hey, why observe nuance when you can just issue sweeping “impressions” that serve your uses?

      As for rabbinic authorities, you know as well as I that most mainstream Orthodox authorities including the chief rabbis direct their followers not to step foot on Har HaBayit. There are deviants like settler rabbis who observe their own tradition. There are always deviants in every religious tradition.

      I’ll agree to open the Haram to all religions when you advocate opening the Kotel plaza to Muslim worship. I’m sure if they don’t have one already, they can develop a prayer tradition suitable to the Kotel. A deal?

      1. :And unlike you I can distinguish between rabbis and determine, based on their views and humanity (or lack of it) which ones I respect and which ones I revile.:
        and what give you this right as opposed to someone else?

        “I don’t detest all Orthodox rabbi”
        you have expressed your dislike for the orthodox tradition many times and obviously this includes it rabbis.

        “As for rabbinic authorities, you know as well as I that most mainstream Orthodox authorities including the chief rabbis direct their followers not to step foot on Har HaBayit. There are deviants like settler rabbis who observe their own tradition. There are always deviants in every religious tradition.”

        you must realize that the 2 chief rabbis are nothing but a joke. both the sons of former chief rabbis and in particulars Lau’s son. the elder Lau was chief rabbi of TA before being chief rabbis and when he left his 10 yr tenure as chief rabbi he had not filled the TA post for 10 yrs! and guess who is now again the chief rabbi of TA? now that stinks a bit. they are all politicians with some of the highest state salaries and pensions in the country.
        in as much as you may have spent something like 2 years in Israel i have been here for 45 yrs straight and with no doubt out qualify you in this area בתוך עמי אני חי
        as far as ‘deviants’ their opinions are solidly based on halachic sourcesאלה ואלה דברים אלהים חיים
        you speak a lot of naarishkeit for those in the know but most of your main contributors know nothing of what goes on here.
        BTW what is your opinion of the stabbing of a 13 year old boy or today a 60 year old woman at the bus station?
        if we evened out the score 30 jews dead and 30 arabs dead would that make you happy?

        1. @ rock: What gives me the right to distinguish between rabbis? You claim to be a Jew and don’t understand that Judaism gives Jews free will to determine who among them is worth following and who is not? Or do you follow all rabbis regardless of what you think of their level of observance or erudition?

          you have expressed your dislike for the orthodox tradition

          No I haven’t. I’ve expressed my dislike for many teachings of the orthodox tradition, but not for the entire tradition. Some things I don’t appreciate about aspects of Orthodox tradition? Pedophilia, sex abuse, moneylaundering, bribe-taking. All things evident among the Orthodox rabbinate (and which you can find documented in Failed Messiah, a blog maintained by an Orthodox Jew).

          In fact, I admire a number of Orthodox rabbis and lay people. If you’d bother to read this blog, you’d know this because I’ve expressed my admiration for them here, repeatedly.

          2 chief rabbis are nothing but a joke.

          Now that’s hilarious. YOu’ve just finished asking what gives me the right to determine which rabbis are kosher and which aren’t & now you come along & tell us the two Israeli chief rabbis are “a joke.” As for the entire theocratic monopoly in Israel–I agree, it’s a mess. But that is as much the fault of Israeli Orthodox Jews as it is of the nations political leaders who permitted the country to become a theocracy.

          BTW, if you think the only Orthodox rabbis who forbid Jews from making aliyah to Har ha Bayit are these two chief rabbis, you’d be making a serious mistake. You know the majority of Orthodox rabbis have affirmed this view.

          As for how long I lived in Israel compared to you: I’m afraid your length of tenure gives you no special rights here. In fact, your tenure in Israel has blinded you to things that many of us on the outside can see as plain as day.

          Settler rabbis are not respected anywhere but in settlements and certain neighborhoods of Borough Park and Pico-Robertson and a few other places. The fact that you yourself are a settler Jew or fellow traveler is clear as day. Therefore, you would of course defend Lior, Wolpe & the other swine as koshereh Yidden, when they’re anything but.

          As for attacking Israeli Jews: I’d feel a whole lot more horror if you expressed any horror at those 31 (and counting) dead Palestinians. And if you told Bibi to stop strangling Muslim access to Al Aqsa and beating down its doors and shooting tear gas into it.

          You are officially done in this thread. Do not reply here, though you may post in other threads.

  8. @Elisabeth

    Yes, the boorishness of that interviewer struck me as well. And he didn’t seem too well informed either. Fancy talking about France not being a nation some three hundred years ago.

    The answers he elicited seem to confirm LD’s notion about “what the Arabs want”. But these opinions will have little to do with an eventual political outcome. One could probably have heard similar opinions of the average ANC member before the South African multiracial elections of 1994 or from your average Irish Ulster man about the Ulster Scots before the Good Friday Agreement of 1998.

    1. @Arie @Elizabeth

      “The answers he elicited seem to confirm LD’s notion about “what the Arabs want”. ”

      Well thank you very much.

    2. @ Arie and Elisabeth
      The interviewer is Gil Corey-Shuster, he has a long serie of interviews, I watched some of them a couple of years ago. He’s of course biased, an American Jew, and I wonder how he select the statements he chose for his videos, but still some of them are interesting (I remember one asking Mizrahi Jews if they wanted to go back living in the country their family came from)
      Edit: I just looked him up: Corey-Shuster made aliyah from Canada 15 years ago.

  9. Has Sanders said anything about the present situation in Jerusalem? I suggest a variant of Hosea 8.7: those who sow the whirlwind should not be surprised when they reap a breeze.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link