Leave a Reply

5 Comments / 5 Comments

  1. @ Ted Belman:
    You observed correctly, Ted. It was the interviewer who chose to falsely label “compensated emigration” for “ethnic cleansing”. Martin Sherman merely maintained his integrity.

  2. @ roamnrab:

    Quite the opposite. He cut Sherman off repeatedly in order to advance his agenda. Sherman was right to say that we shouldn’t be short sighted. There is nothing wrong with compensated emigration. The interviewer stamped it as “ethnic cleansing” as though that was a bad thing. In reality that principle was followed after WWII in order to acheive peace. Germans were removed from all the surrounding countries enabling these countries to be ethnically homogenized. That is a good thing although we are told otherwise today.

  3. The interviewer couldn’t deal with the logical question: If the Arab population in Area C is committed to Israel’s destruction why should Israel allow it to expand? Why shouldn’t Israel financially encourage Arabs committed to Israel’s destruction to leave? Labeling financial encouragement of fanatics as ethnic cleansing blinds the interviewer from logic and a possible peaceful solution.

  4. If the interviewer is ma’agan Michael he acts, speaks, sounds like an ignorant BBC anti Jewish anti ISRAEL commentator.