The New York Times just ran a column by Shmuel Rosner calling for Palestine to become part of Jordan in order for Palestinians to obtain political rights. The column includes several swipes at Palestinians as lesser to Israeli Jews, and needing to be separated from Israel:
Since 1967, Israel hasn’t been able to identify a Palestinian leadership that can be trusted to keep the peace and maintain order…. And so it has always hoped that Israel’s eventual separation from Palestinians will include a guarantee of — to put it bluntly — adult supervision.
Why does the Times have this guy in its stable? The anti-Palestinian racist viewpoint is adequately represented by Bret Stephens and Thomas Friedman, but they also write about other things— Stephens wants a war with Iran, for instance and doesn’t like Trump. He and Gail Collins have adorable Resistance lovefests sometimes. Thomas Friedman loves CEO’s and austerity and war and occasionally even says something sensible about global warming.
But all Rosner does is talk about Israel from a far right perspective.
Back in May Rosner said that the slaughter of 60 Palestinians that week at the Gaza border was for their own good:
I believe Israel’s current policy toward Gaza ultimately benefits not only Israel but also the Palestinians. Of course, it does not benefit the Palestinians who dream about “returning,” or in other words, about eliminating Israel. But it is the only way forward for those who have more realistic expectations.
Four years ago during the 2014 Gaza slaughter, he expressed narcissistic contempt for liberal American Jews who were critical of the onslaught that killed more than 500 children.
On matters of life and death, war and peace, Israelis are going to make their own decisions. If they lose the support of some liberal Jews over it, that would be regrettable, but so be it.
Does the Times and its readers really need a columnist whose only role is propagandist for this particular country?