What should be pointed out again and again is how the mainstream Islamic leadership REFUSES to stand up and denounce the extremists. When was the last time you saw a march against Islamic extremists by other Islamics?
And then they wonder why no one thinks much of them.
It seems almost childishly naive to think that the United States, the global superpower, couldn't be the cause of anything in the world. The Islamic State has already been denounced by the largest names in formal Islam. When was the last time you marched in the streets against the activities of Jundallah? America did that twice. Japan unconditionally surrendered. Comparing the IS to the Japanese government is laughable. |
|
|
|
|
What should be pointed out again and again is how the mainstream Islamic leadership REFUSES to stand up and denounce the extremists. When was the last time you saw a march against Islamic extremists by other Islamics?
And then they wonder why no one thinks much of them.
|
|
|
|
We don't have any publicly available data that Qatar for example funds the Islamic State. This has been a pretty popular misconception because these countries fund other Islamist militias who may also work with say the Al Nusra Front or even contain Al Qaeda affiliates, but that isn't the same as directly funding the IS. In fact, these countries have been, under US pressure, cracking down fairly hard on financial sources for the Islamic State and even Al Nusra recently. Saudi Arabia might have at one point, it is hard to tell, we don't really have that data unfortunately and it is difficult to distinguish between private funders and those allowed to fund with Saudi government complicity / support.
always amuses me those numbies blaming the US for Islamic fanatics. Crazies have been around for millennia. Religious zealots as well. THe numbies refuse to acknowledge that blaming the US is pathetic. We are the EXCUSE. Not the reason. |
|
|
|
|
His statement was highly ambiguous, when it didn't have any reason to be so. We've seen such things before with other groups like Al Shabaab when it was trying to put forth a public image of control during its three way split and internal power struggle. It becomes especially interesting when the Israeli police reports and independent experts/ analysts both agreed that it hadn't been ordered by Hamas leadership and that they seemed to be operating operationally speaking on their own. The higher ups in the Israeli government are the primary faction stating that Hamas ordered it via primary leadership. Hamas still (right now) denies a role in it.
The truth is hard to get at, I don't know what it is, but neither does anyone with only publicly available records to go off of.
|
|
|
|
what am i missing here? A video captured during the conference shows Salah Arouri, who is based in Turkey and is considered a primary figure within Hamas, saying that the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades were responsible for the abduction of the three youths, Eyal Yifrach, 19, Gilad Shaar, 16, and Naftali Fraenkel, 16.
The kidnapping sparked an extensive Israeli crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank.
"It has been said that it is an Israeli conspiracy, and I say it isn't," Arouri states.
"The al-Qassam's mujahedeen were the ones to carry out [the abduction] in show of support for the prisoners' hunger strike," he adds, referring to Palestinian inmates held in Israel. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.611676What is missing is proof / evidence of the act being ordered by Hamas leadership. We already knew that the people who engaged in it were members of the Al Qassam Brigade in the West Bank. That doesn't mean that they were acting under orders though, especially given the weaker control over Qassam cells in the West Bank (since Hamas' main base of power is in Gaza and abroad in exile) we saw the same operational difficulties and freelancing with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in Gaza in 2007 after the Palestinian Authority lost control of the Gaza Strip to Hamas. this feels like semantics to me. your claim was that hamas didn't claim responsibility, not that hamas was or wasn't involved. It isn't semantics at all. There is a big difference for instance between an IDF soldier engaging in an abuse on his own and an IDF soldier engaging in abuses via direct orders from his chain of command and the Israeli government and much different implications, unless you want to suggest that the Fort Hood shootings were directed by the Obama Administration for example. you keep on talking about who is or isn't responsible for some reason. i never responded to any claim you made about that. i was responding explicitly to the claim you made about what that guy said (and NOT about who is or isn't responsible). that being said, weren't you admonishing someone two posts ago for comparing hamas to a large established beaurocratic government? Right, and he didn't claim that Hamas ordered it. Not semantics; a fact and an important distinction. Yes, in so far as groups like Hamas generally have even less operational control over its field operatives which makes said operatives much more likely to act on their own than members of a more tightly structured and monitored system like a federal government. Which just makes my comparison of the two in this specific case all the more potent since the well structured government has less of an excuse for such rogue acting and yet it happens anyway, so no one should be surprised that it also happens within organizations like the al Qassam Brigade. i feel like im missing something. the dude said quite explicitly that al qassam carried it out (mind you, not that members of al qassam carried it out). now, this might be some weird collective usage of nouns... but on the face of it the quote is the quote. Think of it this way then: there is more than one Al Qassam Brigade (which is actually literally true as well). if i read the wiki page on hamas/al qassam will it explain it? No idea, I haven't read it. It is usually pluralized though (Al Qassam Brigades), the trouble with them is that given the territorial divides there are command issues between Gaza and the West Bank. Fatah and its armed wing Al Asqas experienced the same trouble so even while Abbas had denounced violence in the West Bank you still had Fatah elements engaging in violence in Gaza. Then there is, of course, the issue of perceived public operational control. No organization is going to like to admit that it can't control its own members. During the Algerian war for Independence for example the FLN had to take responsibility publicly for a number of acts that it never ordered for the sake of appearing operationally unified and strong. What we really lack in this statement that was made in Turkey by a long exiled leader is clarification. |
|
|
|
what am i missing here? A video captured during the conference shows Salah Arouri, who is based in Turkey and is considered a primary figure within Hamas, saying that the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades were responsible for the abduction of the three youths, Eyal Yifrach, 19, Gilad Shaar, 16, and Naftali Fraenkel, 16.
The kidnapping sparked an extensive Israeli crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank.
"It has been said that it is an Israeli conspiracy, and I say it isn't," Arouri states.
"The al-Qassam's mujahedeen were the ones to carry out [the abduction] in show of support for the prisoners' hunger strike," he adds, referring to Palestinian inmates held in Israel. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.611676What is missing is proof / evidence of the act being ordered by Hamas leadership. We already knew that the people who engaged in it were members of the Al Qassam Brigade in the West Bank. That doesn't mean that they were acting under orders though, especially given the weaker control over Qassam cells in the West Bank (since Hamas' main base of power is in Gaza and abroad in exile) we saw the same operational difficulties and freelancing with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in Gaza in 2007 after the Palestinian Authority lost control of the Gaza Strip to Hamas. this feels like semantics to me. your claim was that hamas didn't claim responsibility, not that hamas was or wasn't involved. It isn't semantics at all. There is a big difference for instance between an IDF soldier engaging in an abuse on his own and an IDF soldier engaging in abuses via direct orders from his chain of command and the Israeli government and much different implications, unless you want to suggest that the Fort Hood shootings were directed by the Obama Administration for example. you keep on talking about who is or isn't responsible for some reason. i never responded to any claim you made about that. i was responding explicitly to the claim you made about what that guy said (and NOT about who is or isn't responsible). that being said, weren't you admonishing someone two posts ago for comparing hamas to a large established beaurocratic government? Right, and he didn't claim that Hamas ordered it. Not semantics; a fact and an important distinction. Yes, in so far as groups like Hamas generally have even less operational control over its field operatives which makes said operatives much more likely to act on their own than members of a more tightly structured and monitored system like a federal government. Which just makes my comparison of the two in this specific case all the more potent since the well structured government has less of an excuse for such rogue acting and yet it happens anyway, so no one should be surprised that it also happens within organizations like the al Qassam Brigade. i feel like im missing something. the dude said quite explicitly that al qassam carried it out (mind you, not that members of al qassam carried it out). now, this might be some weird collective usage of nouns... but on the face of it the quote is the quote. Think of it this way then: there is more than one Al Qassam Brigade (which is actually literally true as well). |
|
|
|
what am i missing here? A video captured during the conference shows Salah Arouri, who is based in Turkey and is considered a primary figure within Hamas, saying that the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades were responsible for the abduction of the three youths, Eyal Yifrach, 19, Gilad Shaar, 16, and Naftali Fraenkel, 16.
The kidnapping sparked an extensive Israeli crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank.
"It has been said that it is an Israeli conspiracy, and I say it isn't," Arouri states.
"The al-Qassam's mujahedeen were the ones to carry out [the abduction] in show of support for the prisoners' hunger strike," he adds, referring to Palestinian inmates held in Israel. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.611676What is missing is proof / evidence of the act being ordered by Hamas leadership. We already knew that the people who engaged in it were members of the Al Qassam Brigade in the West Bank. That doesn't mean that they were acting under orders though, especially given the weaker control over Qassam cells in the West Bank (since Hamas' main base of power is in Gaza and abroad in exile) we saw the same operational difficulties and freelancing with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in Gaza in 2007 after the Palestinian Authority lost control of the Gaza Strip to Hamas. this feels like semantics to me. your claim was that hamas didn't claim responsibility, not that hamas was or wasn't involved. It isn't semantics at all. There is a big difference for instance between an IDF soldier engaging in an abuse on his own and an IDF soldier engaging in abuses via direct orders from his chain of command and the Israeli government and much different implications, unless you want to suggest that the Fort Hood shootings were directed by the Obama Administration for example. you keep on talking about who is or isn't responsible for some reason. i never responded to any claim you made about that. i was responding explicitly to the claim you made about what that guy said (and NOT about who is or isn't responsible). that being said, weren't you admonishing someone two posts ago for comparing hamas to a large established beaurocratic government? Right, and he didn't claim that Hamas ordered it. Not semantics; a fact and an important distinction. Yes, in so far as groups like Hamas generally have even less operational control over its field operatives which makes said operatives much more likely to act on their own than members of a more tightly structured and monitored system like a federal government. Which just makes my comparison of the two in this specific case all the more potent since the well structured government has less of an excuse for such rogue acting and yet it happens anyway, so no one should be surprised that it also happens within organizations like the al Qassam Brigade. |
|
|
|
what am i missing here? A video captured during the conference shows Salah Arouri, who is based in Turkey and is considered a primary figure within Hamas, saying that the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades were responsible for the abduction of the three youths, Eyal Yifrach, 19, Gilad Shaar, 16, and Naftali Fraenkel, 16.
The kidnapping sparked an extensive Israeli crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank.
"It has been said that it is an Israeli conspiracy, and I say it isn't," Arouri states.
"The al-Qassam's mujahedeen were the ones to carry out [the abduction] in show of support for the prisoners' hunger strike," he adds, referring to Palestinian inmates held in Israel. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.611676What is missing is proof / evidence of the act being ordered by Hamas leadership. We already knew that the people who engaged in it were members of the Al Qassam Brigade in the West Bank. That doesn't mean that they were acting under orders though, especially given the weaker control over Qassam cells in the West Bank (since Hamas' main base of power is in Gaza and abroad in exile) we saw the same operational difficulties and freelancing with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in Gaza in 2007 after the Palestinian Authority lost control of the Gaza Strip to Hamas. this feels like semantics to me. your claim was that hamas didn't claim responsibility, not that hamas was or wasn't involved. It isn't semantics at all. There is a big difference for instance between an IDF soldier engaging in an abuse on his own and an IDF soldier engaging in abuses via direct orders from his chain of command and the Israeli government and much different implications, unless you want to suggest that the Fort Hood shootings were directed by the Obama Administration for example. |
|
|
|
what am i missing here? A video captured during the conference shows Salah Arouri, who is based in Turkey and is considered a primary figure within Hamas, saying that the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades were responsible for the abduction of the three youths, Eyal Yifrach, 19, Gilad Shaar, 16, and Naftali Fraenkel, 16.
The kidnapping sparked an extensive Israeli crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank.
"It has been said that it is an Israeli conspiracy, and I say it isn't," Arouri states.
"The al-Qassam's mujahedeen were the ones to carry out [the abduction] in show of support for the prisoners' hunger strike," he adds, referring to Palestinian inmates held in Israel. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.611676What is missing is proof / evidence of the act being ordered by Hamas leadership. We already knew that the people who engaged in it were members of the Al Qassam Brigade in the West Bank. That doesn't mean that they were acting under orders though, especially given the weaker control over Qassam cells in the West Bank (since Hamas' main base of power is in Gaza and abroad in exile) we saw the same operational difficulties and freelancing with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in Gaza in 2007 after the Palestinian Authority lost control of the Gaza Strip to Hamas. Sometimes you don't need proof or evidence that acts are being done with, at a minimum, the acquiescence of leadership. Take the IRS debacle as a comparative example ,,, I have higher standards than that. And your comparison is pretty bogus since Hamas is not in operational control of the West Bank which is where the attack occurred. Also, comparing a spread out terrorist organization with secretive cells to a federal government structure is way off in terms of methodology of operation. |
|
|
|
what am i missing here? A video captured during the conference shows Salah Arouri, who is based in Turkey and is considered a primary figure within Hamas, saying that the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades were responsible for the abduction of the three youths, Eyal Yifrach, 19, Gilad Shaar, 16, and Naftali Fraenkel, 16.
The kidnapping sparked an extensive Israeli crackdown on Hamas in the West Bank.
"It has been said that it is an Israeli conspiracy, and I say it isn't," Arouri states.
"The al-Qassam's mujahedeen were the ones to carry out [the abduction] in show of support for the prisoners' hunger strike," he adds, referring to Palestinian inmates held in Israel. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.611676What is missing is proof / evidence of the act being ordered by Hamas leadership. We already knew that the people who engaged in it were members of the Al Qassam Brigade in the West Bank. That doesn't mean that they were acting under orders though, especially given the weaker control over Qassam cells in the West Bank (since Hamas' main base of power is in Gaza and abroad in exile) we saw the same operational difficulties and freelancing with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in Gaza in 2007 after the Palestinian Authority lost control of the Gaza Strip to Hamas. |
|
|
|
|
They probably need to release a new patch or a version for the wallet, did you try reinstalling it, or updating the wallet, maybe that will help fix your problem.
|
|
|
|
|
The idea of receiving text news is acutally not bad, and if you can pick your criteria of have choices on what kind of news you would like text to your phone then much more better. Sometimes people just dont have the time and search the news and to get news out of no where, where you dont need to look for it might be the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
It has much more freedom to move money around without being question from an authority which is your own, and no more ridiculous limits and freezes on anyones bitcoin account. The only thing that paypal has is the chargeback feature and the time it takes to send money.
|
|
|
|
Going all the way back to Smith in 1776 a "vibrant" middle class is required for any capitalist system to work. That is a large part of what makes capitalism unique, and why it is generally considered to be the most just economic system. For it to work the majority of your money has to be out there in the economy among the middle and lower classes circulating. If you end up in the situation where we are, with the vast majority of the money concentrated in the hands of a few, the system breaks down.
Look at the recent economic crisis. The entire crisis was essentially a recognition that pricing discovery had broken down completely. At the end of the day any free market system at its basest level is nothing BUT a price discovery mechanism. If price discovery has broken down your entire economy is essentially a farce...it is not doing its primary job.
In this case the break down was essentially caused by investment level hyperinflation. Econ 101...too much money chasing too few goods leads to inflation. The same thing happens with investments as happens with a loaf of bread at the corner supermarket. If you end up with too much capital in your top 20%, where that money tends to be put into investments instead of spent against goods and services, you end up in a situation where the real economy stagnates due to lack of wealth while investments get expensive because there is so much capital chasing so few investment opportunities.
In the past this has been self correcting to some degree because of the limited investment opportunities. Today we have the technology to create and track a multi trillion dollar derivatives market which allows us to artificially leverage the relatively few investment opportunities out there that are actually backed by hard assets.
It will eventually end up "correcting" anyway, the odds of our economy surviving it are just FAR worse than they have been in the past.
I want to note that I'm not even sure why you arguing for a "Robin Hood" type tax system. The argument against taxing the rich always boils down to "we shouldn't tax the rich to give to the poor". Well I don't want to speak for you but I bet he generally agrees. Most people agree some sort of welfare is always needed to hope those who would never be able to help themselves (such as the mentally handicapped) or those who are down on their luck; as an example. Hell not I am not arguing for a robin hood type system. I have no desire to tax the rich and give it to the poor. I want to tax the rich and PAY OUR BILLS WITH IT. We can make a logical argument for it (the wealthy are the only ones who can AFFORD to pay) or we can make a moralistic argument (they hold 90% of the wealth, derived 90% of the benefit, they should pay 90% of the bill) or we can just shrug and say "sometimes you just get screwed". I don't really care. I don't want my children to have to grow up in a third world country, and that is where America is headed if we don't do something about our fiscal problems. This is why economic stupidity annoys me so much right now. We have serious, serious problems and by all accounts we have a very limited window in which to fix them. This is SERIOUS with nothing less than the very survival of our nation at stake. This is bar none the biggest clear and present danger that the US has ever faced. Alternatively you can take the Steve Forbes approach which is to drive us off a cliff while yelling "See you in Hell !!!". Seriously though, this is our number one threat at the moment and it probably was the true number threat back in the early 2000s as well. You seem to think Americans somewhat get it, I'm not so convinced. Just because 80% of people think we have a problem doesn't mean they are willing to fix it or can identify the problem. I mean come on, you basically have 50% of people that want to balance the budget AND are willing to cut nothing and not pay a dime more to do it. Another 30% are only willing to cut defense. I suppose they are counting on God to swoop in and save them but I got a hard time believing the big man is a fan of selfish stupidity. |
|
|
|
Going all the way back to Smith in 1776 a "vibrant" middle class is required for any capitalist system to work. That is a large part of what makes capitalism unique, and why it is generally considered to be the most just economic system. For it to work the majority of your money has to be out there in the economy among the middle and lower classes circulating. If you end up in the situation where we are, with the vast majority of the money concentrated in the hands of a few, the system breaks down.
Look at the recent economic crisis. The entire crisis was essentially a recognition that pricing discovery had broken down completely. At the end of the day any free market system at its basest level is nothing BUT a price discovery mechanism. If price discovery has broken down your entire economy is essentially a farce...it is not doing its primary job.
In this case the break down was essentially caused by investment level hyperinflation. Econ 101...too much money chasing too few goods leads to inflation. The same thing happens with investments as happens with a loaf of bread at the corner supermarket. If you end up with too much capital in your top 20%, where that money tends to be put into investments instead of spent against goods and services, you end up in a situation where the real economy stagnates due to lack of wealth while investments get expensive because there is so much capital chasing so few investment opportunities.
In the past this has been self correcting to some degree because of the limited investment opportunities. Today we have the technology to create and track a multi trillion dollar derivatives market which allows us to artificially leverage the relatively few investment opportunities out there that are actually backed by hard assets.
It will eventually end up "correcting" anyway, the odds of our economy surviving it are just FAR worse than they have been in the past.
I want to note that I'm not even sure why you arguing for a "Robin Hood" type tax system. The argument against taxing the rich always boils down to "we shouldn't tax the rich to give to the poor". Well I don't want to speak for you but I bet he generally agrees. Most people agree some sort of welfare is always needed to hope those who would never be able to help themselves (such as the mentally handicapped) or those who are down on their luck; as an example. |
|
|
|
|
Anyway, taxing the rich more is simply a way to get us out of this fiscal mess we are in. It is basically impossible to cut over 50% of our budget out to balance and even if we did the job losses from that would drive tax revenue way down, sink us into a depression for sure, and require us to cut again to balance the budget. Why cant' we all just suck it up and pay what the average American had to pay during our most prosperous times in the 50s-60s?
|
|
|
|
Let's put this into numbers using IRS data: SOI Tax Stats - Individual Statistical Tables by Size of Adjusted Gross Income http://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats---Individual-Statistical-Tables-by-Size-of-Adjusted-Gross-IncomeMiddle Class: People with taxable income around $60k a year will pay an average tax rate of 15% with around 1% of their income being taxed as capital gains. Percent of income from Salaries and wages: 80% Percent of income from Partnership or S Corp: 1% Rich Class: People with taxable income over $10 million a year will pay an average tax rate of 25% with around 50% of their income being taxed as capital gains rates (most of it at 15%). Percent of income from Salaries and wages: 19% Percent of income from Partnership or S Corp: 22% (I put both but I doubt you can combine them since it is unlikely you have a partnership AND another job to where you net over $10 million a year. It is more likely you have either a partnership where you split the earnings or you get a salary). In other words, the majority of TAXABLE income from the super rich is taxed at 15% which is the same rate a married filing jointly family is taxed at who makes $60k. The taxes paid are flatter than people think. Honestly though, the people getting hosed the most, in my humble opinion, are those in the upper middle class who can't afford a good tax accountant but earn enough (mostly from wages) to be in a higher tax bracket. Those in the 100k-500k range. I'm not saying they are suffering but they get the breaks like the 10mill club gets. Time to cut the BS and face the fact that the rich aren't paying enough, mostly on their "investments". In fact, I'd be willing to compromise and say the first 10% of your total income will be taxed at capital gains rates and every investment type income after that will be taxed at 50%. To be fair, we can tax none-investment type business income that employ more than 3 people (yeah, no getting around the rule) at 25%. SEE! I'm for "small business" and the middle class. |
|
|
|
I don't believe you thought that through. "Are you going to believe all this theory, or your lying eyes?" Or in this case, ears. I'll give an example then: I speak to a lot of Nigerians concerning Boko Haram, they tell me all about how it is a CIA plot to discredit Islam and keep Goodluck Johnathan and southerners in power after the 2015 elections. Now I could just listen to people on the street here and there, or I could file that away, look at larger attitudes through a more rigorous polling methodology, see how they compare, and examine intelligence reports as well as well as my own background knowledge of the situation. Again, you're discussing something other than American opinion/perspective, which is almost totally based on what they see on their favorite news program. And that is what forms opinions for most people. I'm not talking about negotiations with a country that has no interest in negotiations (Israel) I'm talking about using discourse of right and wrong to politically force action from Israel through external means. Israel can only use Hamas as an excuse for as long as the international community allows them to, and instead of surrendering to that propaganda and obfuscation line I'd rather further public discourse through attention to right and wrong. It's also an example of someone who purports to be a senior Hamas spokesman accepting blame for the kidnappings. Whatever is the truth beyond that remains cloudy to most. He didn't accept blame for them though. |
|
|
|
|
You seem to flitter between realpolitik and the issuing of your own opinions. Maybe it's just the nature of communicating over forum boards here and I have been misinterpreting.
I'll boil down my stance here though in a nut shell:
1.) Israel isn't a partner for peace, Abbas in the West Bank is for the Palestinians.
2.) There can be no peace unless Israel is a partner
3.) In order to make Israel a partner the pressure needs to come from external forces since it certainly isn't going to come within Israel given the rise of conservatism domestically and the powerful Ultra-Orthodox lobby.
4.) Thus in order for international pressure to build against Israel and force Israel's hand (something we've seen happen before) a discussion of right and wrong absolutely needs to take place, constantly and in public.
|
|
|
|
As far as the NPR link goes, after reading it here I see that the source is Saleh al-Arouri; which would mean that the attack did not stem from Hamas leadership in Gaza, but rather more likely through an exile chain operating independently in the West Bank and directed from Turkey (where he lives).
But even here there isn't evidence of it being directed even from Turkey. All he said in his statement was that Al Qassam Brigade members carried it out, which we already knew, it was merely determined that they were operating alone and not under the direction of Hamas (by the Israeli police chief of the area and by independent analysts). While this douche bag is praising them, he did not actually state that he or Hamas in Gaza ordered the attack. Which of course makes the NPR headline a bit misleading.
Who corrected it? Hamas? Nope.And that's the problem. Corrected it? Hamas denied that it carried the attack out from the start. Or do you mean who solved the situation by rescuing the students? That question would seem to imply that you think that Gaza's operational headquarters in Gaza have operational control of the West Bank branch of the attackers or even of the larger West Bank Qassam Brigade branch. It doesn't matter in the least what either one of us thinks. Perception is key, and American perception remains the same or worse. I can't say that I fully agree. I saw much more outrage, particularly among the youth in our country and on social media during this conflict than I did during Operation Cast Lead, or during Operation Pillar of Defense. Now I don't have solid data on it, so who knows. As far as the kidnappings go, it is in Israel's interests to blame the leadership of Hamas for it because it wants to destroy the unity government so that it isn't forced into a peace process that it doesn't want to take part in. Just another example of Netanyahu's administration not being a partner for peace. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
