Latest news with #ChristianZionist
Vancouver Sun
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Vancouver Sun
Two Israeli embassy staffers killed in shooting outside Jewish museum in Washington
Two Israeli embassy staffers were shot and killed on Wednesday evening outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, D.C. The male victim was identified as Yaron Lischinsky. His final post on social media was a repost of a message condemning the United Nations' false claim that 14,000 infants in Gaza were facing imminent starvation, labeling it a modern-day blood libel. According to Israeli Ambassador to Berlin Ron Prosor, who taught him as a master student, Lischinsky was a Germany-born Christian Zionist who had served in the Israel Defense Forces and 'chose to dedicate his life to the State of Israel and the Zionist cause.' Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The female victim was Sarah Milgrim. She spent five weeks in Israel researching the role of friendships in peacebuilding for her final master's project, according to a LinkedIn post she shared two years ago. Milgrim's work built on a stint with Tech2Peace the previous summer, where she developed a passion for capturing the stories of Jewish and Arab participants. Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Yechiel Leiter revealed that the victims were a couple who were about to be engaged. Lischinsky had recently purchased an engagement ring and planned to propose next week in Jerusalem. 'Yaron and Sarah were our friends and colleagues. They were in the prime of their lives,' the Israeli embassy wrote on X. 'The entire embassy staff is heartbroken and devastated by their murder. No words can express the depth of our grief and horror at this devastating loss. Our hearts are with their families, and the embassy will be by their side during this terrible time.' Yaron and Sarah were our friends and colleagues. They were in the prime of their lives. This evening, a terrorist shot and killed them as they exited an event at the Capital Jewish Museum in DC. The entire embassy staff is heartbroken and devastated by their murder. No words… U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said that authorities were 'actively investigating and working to get more information to share.' 'We will bring this depraved perpetrator to justice,' she added. The shooting occurred around 9:15 p.m. near the intersection of 3rd and F Streets NW, in front of the museum and just behind the FBI's Washington Field Office and the U.S. Attorney's Office. Israeli embassy spokesperson Tal Naim Cohen wrote on X that the victims had been shot 'at close range.' 'We have full faith in law-enforcement authorities on both the local and federal levels to apprehend the shooter and protect Israel's representatives and Jewish communities throughout the United States,' said Cohen. Police are questioning a 30-year-old man from Chicago who is believed to have acted alone. Following the shooting, he entered the museum, where he was detained. D.C. Police Chief Pamela Smith said Wednesday night that the suspect chanted, 'Free, free Palestine' as he was taken into custody. Ted Deutch, CEO of the American Jewish Committee, told ABC News that his organization was hosting an event at the museum that evening. 'We are devastated that an unspeakable act of violence took place outside the venue,' Deutch said. 'At this moment, as we await more information from the police about exactly what transpired, our attention and our hearts are solely with those who were harmed and their families.' Danny Danon, Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations, condemned the incident as a 'depraved act of antisemitic terrorism.' 'Harming the Jewish community is crossing a red line,' Danon wrote on X. 'We are confident that U.S. authorities will take strong action against those responsible for this criminal act. Israel will continue to act resolutely to protect its citizens and representatives everywhere in the world.' The FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force is involved in probing the attack. U.S. President Donald Trump extended condolences to the victims. 'These horrible D.C. killings, based obviously on antisemitism, must end, NOW!' he wrote on Truth Social. 'Hatred and radicalism have no place in the USA. Condolences to the families of the victims. So sad that such things as this can happen! God Bless You ALL!' 'These horrible D.C. killings, based obviously on antisemitism, must end, NOW! Hatred and Radicalism have no place in the USA. Condolences to the families of the victims. So sad that such things as this can happen! God Bless You ALL!' —President Donald J. Trump U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi visited the scene and said she was 'praying for the victims of this violence as we work to learn more.' Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa'ar condemned the attack, expressing outrage and emphasizing that representatives of the Jewish state are under constant threat. 'Horrified by this morning's terrorist attack, in which two of our embassy staff in Washington, D.C., were murdered. Israeli representatives around the world are constantly exposed to heightened risk, especially in these times,' he said. 'We are in close contact with American authorities. Israel will not surrender to terror.' Israeli President Isaac Herzog stated: 'I am devastated by the scenes in Washington, D.C. This is a despicable act of hatred, of antisemitism, which has claimed the lives of two young employees of the Israeli embassy. 'Our hearts are with the loved ones of those murdered and our immediate prayers are with the injured,' he continued. 'I send my full support to the ambassador and all the embassy staff. We stand with the Jewish community in D.C. and across the U.S. 'America and Israel will stand united in defense of our people and our shared values. Terror and hate will not break us,' Herzog said.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
'Project Esther' exposes the reality of Trump's agenda to fight antisemitism
President Donald Trump has enacted a raft of suppressive policies ostensibly designed to combat antisemitism, such as cutting off funding to universities that he claims haven't done enough to curb antisemitism on campus. But if you take a look at the little-known playbook that appears to have inspired many of his most aggressive moves, it becomes evident how little it has to do with ending bigotry against Jews. The playbook is called Project Esther, a policy paper created by the Heritage Foundation, arguably the most influential right-wing think tank of the Trump era. Heritage also produced Project 2025, the extreme policy manifesto that has shaped much of Trump's agenda. Project Esther is a kind of miniature Project 2025, offering guidance on using authoritarian tools to crush criticism of Israel across the country. Trump has used many of the extreme policies it has recommended, including deporting immigrants who express pro-Palestinian sentiment and attacking academia using public defunding. There was some reporting on Project Esther before Trump entered the White House, although it got relatively little attention. But new reporting from The New York Times details how it came together and lays out how much Trump appears to have hewed to it. The White House didn't respond to the Times' query about Project Esther's influence on its goals, and Heritage couldn't confirm its influence, but a co-author of Project Esther told the Times he believed it was 'no coincidence that we called for a series of actions to take place privately and publicly, and they are now happening.' The Heritage Foundation formed an antisemitism task force after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, which helped lay the groundwork for the Project Esther paper. Strikingly, only one of the four people who started the task force was Jewish, according to the Times, while two of them were Christian Zionist leaders. The task force was joined by mainly conservative and Christian organizations, rather than Jewish organizations. In a pitch deck that Heritage used to entice donors for the task force, George Soros — a Jewish billionaire and the bogeyman at the center of countless antisemitic conspiracy theories — is listed at the top of 'masterminds' behind what it calls an antisemitism 'ecosystem,' as Forward reported in 2024. That deck also singles out Jewish Voice for Peace — a progressive Jewish organization known for its organization of protests that criticize Israeli policy — at the top of its list of 'organizers' contributing to the antisemitism ecosystem. In its statement of purpose, the task force identified anti-Zionism as 'hatred against Jewish people,' even though there has long been a tradition of anti-Zionism across the international Jewish community and it isn't inherently antisemitic to criticize the ideology of Zionism. In other words, this antisemitism task force was giving heavy Christian Zionist vibes. Christian Zionists view their unconditional support of Israeli policy and Israeli expansionism as a spiritual duty. John Hagee, a pastor and chair of Christians United for Israel, has espoused repugnant antisemitic beliefs, and other Christian Zionists often weaponize a nominal concern about antisemitism — even while trafficking in antisemitic tropes and beliefs. As Emily Tamkin wrote for MSNBC in her assessment of Hagee's appearance at a rally to support Israel in 2023, 'One can support Israel and also spread antisemitism.' The Times reports that the Heritage antisemitism task force's policy recommendations served as the basis for Project Esther, which is an astonishingly radical and paranoid document — and not without some problematic statements about the Jewish community of its own. In a document that sounds plainly McCarthyist, Project Esther posits that the pro-Palestinian movement in America is 'part of a global Hamas Support Network (HSN)' and that this network is 'supported by activists and funders dedicated to the destruction of capitalism and democracy.' It continues: [T]he HSN benefits from the support and training of America's overseas enemies and seeks to achieve its goals by taking advantage of our open society, corrupting our education system, leveraging the American media, coopting the federal government, and relying on the American Jewish community's complacency." That last line is an astounding example of Project Esther's condescension to American Jews — who the authors seem to think aren't up for the challenge of identifying antisemitism. But this perspective also holds that activists in America objecting to U.S. support for Israel, as it commits what many human rights organizations and genocide scholars have described as genocide, are actually part of some nihilistic, shadowy international terrorist organization that wants to covertly take over and destroy America. The assessment doesn't just preposterously conflate criticizing aid to Israel with supporting Hamas; it suggests that criticizing Israel is tantamount to a siege against the state in America. Based on its hyper-reactionary assessment of the pro-Palestinian movement, the Esther Project promotes a variety of policies that appear designed to circumvent First Amendment-protected speech and identify and suppress pro-Palestinian speech as support for terrorism. Many of its proposals, like a focus on deportations, have already been enacted. But some others, such as purging social media and expanding the idea of 'material support for terrorism,' haven't emerged in full force — and hopefully won't. There has been a surge in antisemitism in America in recent years across the political spectrum, which is a deeply distressing social problem worthy of serious engagement. Notably, Project Esther has nothing to say about antisemitism on the political right, which, according to a recent study, is more common than it is on the left. But the proposals of the Esther Project aren't good-faith efforts, nor are the Trump policies they've seemingly helped inspire. They instead exploit the reality of antisemitism to advance an antidemocratic project of unconditional support of Israel. This article was originally published on
Ya Libnan
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Ya Libnan
Trump is shaking up US-Israel relations in a way no one has in decades
P resident Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a meeting in the Oval Office on April 7, 2025. |By : Joshua Keating What's the opposite of a 'bear hug'? That was the phrase often used to describe President Joe Biden's approach to Israel since the October 7, 2023, attacks: publicly and enthusiastically backing Israel, particularly when it comes to its wider regional conflict with Iran and its proxies, while quietly trying to restrain Israel's actions in Gaza. Now President Donald Trump is traveling through the Middle East this week for a multi-country tour and dealmaking bonanza that pointedly does not include a stop in Israel. (Trump has denied the snub, saying his trip is 'very good for Israel.') The trip is the latest example of how Trump's approach to the country often seems like a mirror image of his predecessor's: He has little interest in restraining or pressuring Israel on its war in Gaza, but perhaps even less interest in supporting Israel on wider regional issues or aligning the two countries' approach to the region. This is still an administration that is fiercely 'pro-Israel' in rhetoric and in its willingness to punish Israel's critics in America. But in practice, as he conducts his foreign policy, Trump seems remarkably unconcerned about what Israel has to say about it. 'The one message that's consistent [from Trump] is, 'I have plans for the region. You're welcome to be a partner, but if you prefer to be ignored, go ahead,'' said Nimrod Novik, former foreign policy adviser to the late Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres. This is not the Trump that Israel was expecting When Trump was reelected last November, the response from the Israeli government was near rapturous. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had an often fraught relationship with Biden's administration, praised Trump for 'history's greatest comeback' and predicted a 'powerful recommitment to the great alliance between Israel and America.' It's not hard to figure out why Netanyahu was so optimistic. During his first term, Trump, who often describes himself as the most pro-Israel president in history, took a number of precedent-smashing steps to demonstrate that support, including moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, which is not considered the country's capital by most of the international community, and recognizing Israel's sovereignty over the disputed Golan Heights. His first term included the Abraham Accords — a series of deals, mediated by the United States, normalizing relations between Israel and a number of Arab countries — as well as the scrapping of President Barack Obama's Iran nuclear deal, loathed by Netanyahu's government. Even by the standards of the US-Israel relationship, Trump's approach stood out for its unconditional support . There were early indications that the second term would bring more of the same. For his ambassador to Israel, Trump picked Mike Huckabee, a Christian Zionist whose views on Israeli-Palestinian issues would put him on the far right even in Israeli politics. One of Trump's most notable domestic initiatives so far has been a widespread crackdown on universities and activists over last year's anti-Israel protests. Nor has his White House engaged in much Biden-style soul-searching about Palestinian civilian casualties in Gaza: Trump quickly lifted the limited restrictions on arms exports to Israel and sanctions on violent West Bank settlers that Biden had put in place. His suggestion that Gaza be ' cleaned out ' of its Palestinian inhabitants to make room for a resort was received ecstatically by the Israeli far right. But when it comes to the Middle East, writ large, it's been a different story. Trump seems remarkably unconcerned about appearing to be on the same page as the Israelis in his approach to the region, and has repeatedly negotiated directly with Israel's main adversaries while cutting Israel out entirely. In early March, Axios reported that Trump's envoy for hostage affairs, Adam Boehler, had been negotiating with Hamas over the release of American hostages — without coordinating with Israel, and breaking a longstanding precedent of the US refraining from direct talks with the terrorist group. The news created a firestorm of controversy and Boehler was removed from the talks, but just this week, Hamas agreed to release the last surviving American hostage, Edan Alexander. The negotiations that led to the release, led by Trump's all-purpose foreign envoy Steve Witkoff, reportedly came after Hamas reached out via an 'Arab Americans for Trump' group. Israel learned about the talks not from the White House, but from its own intelligence services It was not the only surprise Netanyahu has gotten recently. During an Oval Office meeting with the prime minister last month, Trump dropped the surprise announcement that he was dispatching Witkoff and other negotiators to begin direct talks with Iran over its nuclear program. Netanyahu, who learned of the talks only after arriving in Washington, DC, has pushed the US to insist on a complete dismantlement of Iran's nuclear program. But officials including the secretary of state and vice president have suggested they might be open to Iran maintaining some type of civilian nuclear program — effectively returning to a similar framework to the one Trump tore up in 2018. And while Israel welcomed Trump's decision in March to step up the US air campaign against the Houthis, the Yemeni militant group that has been firing missiles and drones at Israel as well as ships traveling through the Red Sea since the start of the Gaza war, Trump abruptly announced an end to the bombing earlier this month. He said he had received assurances from the Houthis that they would refrain from attacking US ships. (The rate at which the campaign was burning through American money and munitions also probably played a role.) Trump's announcement made no mention of Israel, even though the Houthis had attacked Tel Aviv's airport days earlier . The message was unmistakable: Israel could deal with the Houthis on their own. All in all, the Trump administration has been in direct talks with three of Israel's main adversaries — Hamas, Iran, and the Houthis — to cut deals without Israel's input, a nearly unprecedented situation according to longtime observers of relations between the two countries. 'I don't think there's an administration, Democrat or Republican, that has even come close to undertaking the sort independent outreach that the Trump administration has now contrived over the course of the last three months,' said Aaron David Miller, a veteran Mideast peace negotiator who served in several US administrations. A changing GOP meets a changing Middle East What explains the new frostiness in the US-Israel relationship? One answer may be that Trump is simply growing frustrated with Netanyahu . If there's one consistent theme in Trump's worldview, it's skepticism about allies that, as he sees it, take more from America than they give. During his Oval Office meeting with Netanyahu, Trump brushed aside a suggestion that he should lift tariffs on Israel, saying, 'We give Israel $4 billion a year. That's a lot. Congratulations, by the way.' Some Trump critics in the US have been crediting him for his approach to the relationship. The New York Times's Thomas Friedman praised the president for realizing that ' Netanyahu is not our friend ,' while former Bernie Sanders foreign policy adviser Matt Duss credited him with handling 'Netanyahu more effectively than alleged foreign policy expert Joe Biden did.' Netanyahu himself is probably not the only factor here. The second Trump term has also seen the rise in influence of the so-called restrainer wing of Republican foreign policy, who want to reduce America's military footprint abroad, especially in the Middle East, at the expense of traditional hawks. While not uniformly anti-Israel (though some outside Trump allies like Tucker Carlson would probably qualify ), the restrainers are much less inclined to think that US and Israeli interests are aligned. Vice President JD Vance, for instance, has stated that while Israel has a right to defend itself, he doesn't believe the US should be drawn into a war with Iran. Trump's speech in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, which included pointed shots at 'neocons' and 'nation builders,' may have been an indication of which faction is winning the battle for influence. And according to reporting by the Washington Post , former national security adviser Mike Waltz, one of Trump's most traditionally hawkish advisers, was fired in early May in part because of Trump's anger that Waltz had been in communication with the Israeli government about using military force against Iran. This is also not the same Middle East that Trump dealt with last time around. Israel isn't the only longstanding US ally getting snubbed on Trump's trip; previous presidents might have been expected to make a stop in Egypt or Jordan. But Trump is making a beeline for the Gulf, home of lucrative arms and computer chip deals , not to mention golf resorts and free 747s . During Trump's first term, the Saudis and Emiratis were more or less aligned with the US and Israel on wider regional security matters — namely, the perceived danger posed by Iran. This was the context that made the Emiratis' recognition of Israel in the Abraham Accords possible. This time, when Trump sits down with Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the UAE's Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan, he's likely to hear a different story. The Saudis and Iranians have reached a detente , and both Gulf countries have tried to extricate themselves from the long and brutal conflict with the Houthis in Yemen. Both now support a deal with Iran that would avoid war, and both supported an end to the US campaign against the Houthis. They're also increasingly frustrated with Israel's war in Gaza and the anger it has provoked throughout the region, including in their own populations. The scenes coming out of Gaza have raised the costs of appearing to be aligned with Israel. 'Both MBS and MBZ have his respect. He listens to them,' said Novik, now a fellow at the Israel Policy Forum, of the Saudi and Emirati leaders. 'They believe that what happens in Gaza doesn't stay in Gaza. It's destabilizing the region, and that's bad for business.' All indications are that Trump is these days more interested in what he calls the 'gleaming marvels of Riyadh and Abu Dhabi' than the winding streets of Jerusalem. A case in point: Both the first Trump administration and the Biden team sought a major regional deal that would tie US nuclear or security cooperation with Saudi Arabia to Saudi recognition of Israel. Though Trump is still calling for the Saudis — who have never recognized the Jewish state — to normalize relations, his team has reportedly dropped it as a demand for US-Saudi nuclear cooperation. If this comes to pass, it would effectively be giving up on what would be the crown jewel of the Abraham Accords process. A hands-off stance on Gaza All this is a dramatic shift, but it's certainly not the change that critics of Biden's support for Israel were hoping for. Trump has iced out the Israelis on regional diplomacy just as Israel is considering a plan for an ' intensive escalation ' of its military operations in Gaza. This could include the destruction of most of the enclave's remaining buildings and and would give civilians a choice between moving to a tiny 'humanitarian area' or leaving — though it's not clear what countries would be willing to accept them if they did. Trump and his senior officials have not spoken out publicly about the plan and, according to Axios' reporting , have 'effectively given Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a green light to do as he sees fit.' Israeli officials say the operation will begin if there is no ceasefire and hostage deal by the end of Trump's visit to the region this week, though there are few indications that Trump is actively involved in pushing for one. It seems unlikely that Trump would employ pressure tactics that Biden was unwilling to use , such as conditioning military aid or addressing the Israeli public directly about the war. Trump has shifted radically on policy in the past, but for the moment, his cold shoulder doesn't seem any more likely to put an end to the ongoing catastrophe in Gaza than Biden's bear hug.
Daily Maverick
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Navigating the new normal: Is mainstream media out of touch with today's political reality?
Is the 'legacy' media full of, as Boris Johnson might put it, 'doomsters and gloomsters'? There can be little doubt that the political tide has shifted significantly to the right over the past decade and a half. Meanwhile, much of the mainstream media, excluding the far-right press, has arguably maintained its traditional values, and as a result, is becoming increasingly at odds with the zeitgeist. Does this make mainstream media stubbornly out of touch with reality, or a principled stand against a morally decaying world? A striking example of this stance came recently from prominent left-wing voices Naomi Klein and Astra Taylor in the Guardian, where they described Donald Trump's politics as a form of 'end times fascism'. They argue that the far right is no longer interested in building a better world for future generations. Instead, it is engaged in a frantic grab for resources and power in anticipation of global collapse — whether that endgame is down to climate change, war, or societal breakdown. The elite, meanwhile, are busy planning to survive through their monstrous wealth accumulation, off-planet escape fantasies, or moving to some type of nationalist fortress. Far right extremism here is a kind of 'Rapture' related ideology, to use the phraseology of closely aligned Christian Zionist fundamentalism. What makes today's far right different from that of historical fascism, they argue, is the absence of even a destructive vision of progress. At least in the 1920s and 1930s Mussolini and Hitler had some kind of horizon they were aiming towards. Yes, a few eggs would have to be broken in the bloodbath of making the omelette, but beyond lay a Modernist Elysium, with trains running on time and all enemies incinerated. Existential threats Today's far right, by contrast they say, has abandoned any pretence of a better future. Faced with existential threats like unregulated AI, climate breakdown, and growing inequality, it offers only nostalgia, domination over marginalised groups, and an ideology rooted in supremacist survivalism. US President Donald Trump's absurd rhetoric about making America a great manufacturing power again is a case in point. Cunningly, however, emotional rewards are on offer to those Maga faithful who support this bleak agenda: the dismantling of diversity and inclusion programmes, celebration of mass deportation to El Salvadorian mega-prisons, attacks on trans healthcare, vilification of vaccine purveying educators and scientists, and a rollback of regulations that protect the economy and environment. Despite being thin gruel, these are all framed as victories against the liberal elite. While a striking argument, it does seem to overstate the point somewhat. It is true that we are witnessing severe global crises, the greatest for many years. From state-sponsored genocide in Gaza to widespread conflict and hunger in Africa and South Asia, the outlook is bleak. But is all hope lost? Surely we are not quite in a 1939-type situation, or worse? For a refreshingly upbeat voice from the centre right comes the ex-chief economist of the Bank of England, Andy Haldane. Writing in the Financial Times he critiques the rise of what he calls 'the panicans' — those who overreact to events with apocalyptic fear. He could, plausibly, be referencing Klein and Taylor. Ironically, he notes, both the liberal left and the extreme right are guilty of this: the former sees disaster everywhere, while the latter talks tough but retreats quickly when challenged. Haldane points to trade policy under Trump as a case in point. This is famously his cornerstone policy, an obsession that has been the one common thread through his colourful career. Yet he quickly buckled under pressure. It took only 24 hours of bond market mayhem for 'Liberation Day' to turn into a hasty and humiliating retreat. Maga bluster More recently, the announcement that the US and China have supposedly agreed to reduce tariffs suggest that global economic interdependence is stronger than Maga bluster. 'From Liberation Day to capitulation day took 40 days,' said one trader. This rapid backtracking suggests that the real-world constraints of global trade and finance hold far more sway than Trump and his crypto-bro acolytes might admit. The Smoot-Hawley tariffs of the 1930s lasted four years. Richard Nixon's tariffs of the early 1970s which led to the Great Inflation lasted four months. The worst of Trump's tariffs lasted barely a week. As one fund manager quipped, 'Sun Tzu's The Art of War met the Art of the Deal'. The tariffs could be re-escalated, but all signs point the other way. Indeed, despite external expressions of dismay, the past month has been a political godsend for many world leaders. Trade war and talk of a new world order are breathing life into flagging and unpopular regimes (Xi Jinping in China, Emmanuel Macron in France, Vladimir Putin in Russia), and providing compelling directions for new moderate ones (Friedrich Merz in Germany, Mark Carney in Canada, Keir Starmer in the UK, and Anthony Albanese in Australia). Three points seem clear. First, the reason that Trump and his team have backtracked at such breakneck speed is that the economic outlook for the US is so grim. A total of 62% of US CEOs now expect a slowdown or recession in the next six months, according to Chief Executive magazine, as executives grapple with Trump-fuelled uncertainty. The damage has been done. Second, both Klein and Haldane are, in a sense, correct, because they are referring to different realities of the world we live in. While economic fears may have receded slightly following some sanity entering the room, the broader political and social outlook remains deeply troubling, especially when viewed through the lens of democracy, civil liberties, and global stability. Brutally polarised Finally, there is a lesson for the media in general. When the world is such a brutally polarised place and beset with such mad dog extremists in every form, moderation and an ability to sympathise with both poles is surely the best path to tread. Everything has shifted. As former Polish leader Lech Walesa once remarked, 'It is easier to turn an aquarium into a fish soup than a fish soup back into an aquarium.' The world we knew might not be coming back, but that does not mean we should stop communicating with the other new worlds that we now have. DM
The National
25-03-2025
- Politics
- The National
Israel ambassador nominee Huckabee faces tough questions over personal beliefs at Senate hearing
Former governor of Arkansas is an outspoken proponent of Israel and has been described as a Christian Zionist
