what a scene to imagine this young kid -- >> now, you've got your father writing the forward on here. i noticed another father-son connection that luke janklow is your agent and luke janklow is son to who? >> mort janklow, my father's agent. when i decided to do the book, i asked dad what i -- what should i do next? he said i should take you in to meet mort and talk to my agent about your idea. so we went to new york and went

into see mort and there was talk that mort's son might be in on the meeting, too. and i'm sure he had the same feeling, but i had a little bit of, oh, brother, the son and daughter and this is too much and expecting, no, i'm not going to like this guy. and he came in and immediately we just hit it off and he's terrific and i'm thrilled he's my agent and it was one of those wonderful moments of the two fathers and the two, the daughter and son all together. >> what's the difference of age between you two, luke and you. >> we're about the same age and i think our fathers are about the same age. >> this is the cover of the book, called "posterity,

>> your watching book tv. up next why the international community's opinion of israel has gone down since the 1967 war. he says that oil and geopolitics were to blame early on, but now world opinion is mostly shaped by leftist intellectuals and activists who side with the palestinians. this is about our. >> thank you, john. in recent days israel has been attacked and compelled to take action to defend itself from attacks from gaza. this is the third time in six years. once again voices have been raised criticizing these military operations and demonizing israel, fraction of self-defense that will be

no-brainers for just about any other country in the world. this is a sad and tragic time, especially the more than one-and-a-half million palestinians to have essentially been taken hostage by moss and its efforts to advance this radical agenda. we're fortunate to have with us today joshua whose book seems particularly relevant to current events. he has written hundreds of articles in major u.s. newspapers and intellectual journals on a wide variety of foreign policy, political and ideological topics. he is the author of my creepers books including heaven on marriage, the rise and fall of socialism, exporting democracy, for filling america's destiny and trailblazers of the arabs spring, forces of democracy in the middle east. he is currently a fellow at the

foreign policy institute at johns hopkins university school of international studies. for many years he was at the american enterprise institute. from 2011 test 2013 he was also a fellow at the george w. bush is to. he was a fellow in residence at the washington institute for near east policy, and before that back in the 1970's he was a congressional aide to representative james o'hara and to senator daniel patrick moynihan. joshua. [applause] >> thank you, jim. thank-you for coming here to hear what i have to say. i'm grateful for that. it is bins certainly news combusts striking coincidence

that a process that we have watched repeat itself many times over the past decade and a half is now taking place once again in which israel is attacked as strikes back in self-defense and then it receives widespread criticism around the world and from various quarters in the united states and the medium debate and some misses a subject that i tackle in this program. what does it work this way? eddy of for the book came to me about four or five years ago when writing of our road in a paper and on the internet about the story in a newspaper in sweden, there's a story that ran in the swedish daily which is a wide circulation daily insulin. the star reported that israelis

are now knew soldering palestinians some randomly in order to harvest their body organs for seven new. the story : tsa, had no basis whatsoever and was built around the case of a single to seize palestinian who had a scar on his body because he had been autopsied him about when reporters knew be for other publications follow up of the story and went to this man's family they denied having ever been made such an accusation. in other words, the swedish reporter had essentially made this up the, the swedish ambassador to israel apologized for the story, at which point she was reprimanded and forced

by the swedish foreign ministry to withdraw her apology on the grounds that it was an infringement on press freedoms. well, when i read about this that morning for five years ago i thought, how can this be? if this is so crazy. how did we come to this? i can understand that people feel the you critical of israel at one moment or another or disagree with israeli policies. sure. fair game. he doesn't. but to have an image of israel and wish you could imagine and put and print writers and editors knew in the major western daily newspaper that israelis were randomly slaughtering palestinians to harvest organs, how do we come to a point where people had an image of israel that would allow them to think and write and publish such things. and it was an sawhorse heart and

it was also stunned me because i am old enough to remember 40 years earlier. the time of the six-day war, a time when the support was very, very substantial. public opinion polls showed that in the united states people who didn't have an opinion or care, but of the have to do it to the support for israel verses service was quite overwhelming. i don't remember exactly. eighty-one, something like that. what was interesting is that similar polls were taken in britain and france. the ratio of support for israel was even more one-sided than it was in the united states.

the united states there is still a great deal of support for israel. around the world is completely evaporating. and so i sit down to write this book ask myself the question what it was that have brought about this dramatic change. i cannot think of any case in history in which a country which had not undergone a revolution, a complete change of its political regime was the subject of such a complete reversal and away the outside world regarded that country. as i steady it i thought of or learned about certain things. well, first, the obvious thing. israel's triumph in the 1967 war changed many things. for one think of ways around ever again was the scene as certain as it did on the eve of

the warm when the arab armies were mobilized on its borders and the arab rulers were declaring quite plainly their intention to eliminate israel once and for all. and is well after that was to seem not so vulnerable and very strong. but they were also, i think, more subtle processes that took place. one was the death of pan-arabism to that moment the leading figure in the arab world and was president nasser of egypt and a leading anti of was the idea that he was the great exponent of, pan-arabism. you look back, the plo, palestine liberation organization, was founded in 1964 at the behest of this year. it was not the palestinian

liberation organization. it was the palestine liberation organization because it was not formed with any thought of creating an independent palestine. the point was simply to liberate palestine from the juice so that could become part of this on the bus arab state that this year a spouse. if you look at the palestinian national charter to and which was adopted in 1964 committed makes no mention of having a palestinian state or sovereignty for the palestinians. it is all about the palestinians as part of the arab nation. but the defeat of the arabs in 1967 was so devastating and humiliating that it destroyed his prestige and with the destruction of his prestige it also destroyed the idea of pan-arabism.

that, in turn, cleared the field for the emergence in the next year some of palestinian nationalism. palestinian nationalism have been advocated by a few palestinians among arafat and some of this friends who were mostly working in kuwait. and that was their headquarters. and over the years after 1967 they moved into the plo and took it over. we saw the emergence, the palestinian claim to sovereignty and independence as an issue in the conflict of the first time penitence so instead of a conflict having an image of large or massive arabs against little israel it became now little bit strong israel against

tiny and week palestine. and instead of the issue being israeli was at the end of the war and occupation of territories or several million palestinian arabs lived commensurate of it being a question of people who are trying to deny this is a state of there own, it now became the question of the jews or israelis trying to deny and other people a state of there own that is the palestinians. so this gave the whole conflict a different look, with this is still not a sufficient explanation of the hostility that is the latest in israel today. maybe it the world can't care

about an occupation or about palestinian national aspirations , but this in itself requires explanation. no one cares about other observations. who gets exercised about the occupation of tibet? from our long standing and ruthless than the occupation of the palestinians. in terms of the national aspirations to the palestinians h'm, who champions the national aspirations of the kurds his national aspirations are more powerful rebounded and justifiable and every dimension. vickers chairman of much larger people. about five or six times as many. they have their own culture, language, history.

they have no country of there own. that denied national aspirations . so the question of national aspirations and occupations really can't begin to explain to international mood, the attitudes we see today. this come by the way, and it is manifest in other inconsistencies and the sprout off part of what. they're right with demonization that we see around us some much. for example, british teaching unions have voted for academic boycotts of israeli universities, but these same teacher unions have never voted for or proposed or to my knowledge even discussed or

debated academic boycotts of universities and countries in which areas no academic freedom and no unions of teachers or anyone else. but that passes unnoticed. we have seen recently that the presbyterian church voted to divest holdings from companies that are involved with israel, but has it ever voted to divest from companies that are involved with countries which tonight religious freedom and persecute christians? they're is a woeful and consistency. and also, it goes hand in hand with this, there seems to be no serious interest in the fact that, as this case is decided before the facts and it struck me when the goldstone report was about the last significant war

in gaza. they gallstone report was issued, and the very next morning carl films, foreign minister of sweden and at that moment sweden held the chairmanship for the presidency of the you, so he was speaking on behalf of the entire e you, on the very next morning he endorsed the goldstone report. now, have you ever seen it? it is 500 pages long of very small type. he had not read the report between the day before when it was issued in the morning that he endorsed it in the name of all of europe. not read a summary of it. he was not going to read it. he did not care what was in the report. the point was it condemned israeli and therefore automatically it had to be embraced and endorsed. must be right. because israel is somehow inherently wrong.

israel is by definition the bad guy and never mind. the question is, held as we get to that situation? adelle think this is the results of two different kinds of forces that have been at work over these 40 years. on the one hand, material pressures that were brought to bear, and on the other hand intellectual changes that have altered the equation with regard to the middle east company. the material pressures i mean, first of all, the use of terrorism which was carried out largely a european soil in terms of bombings, hijackings, through the 1970's and did, and fact, terrorize the europeans until they came into and out of complete appeasement of terrorists. there was accounting made, some 204 perpetrators of hijackings and bombings were who lived

through the event, captured and detained and then european prison. endo than 201 or more or less instantaneously released for fear that their comrades would come and do another hijacking and make life uncomfortable. and it was not under europeans. the modern arabs were terrorized and so you can look in the memoirs of arafat's main deputy. he with the french author wrote memoirs that are available in english. and in his memoirs he boasts about the summit meeting in 1974 in morocco which declared the plo to be the sole legitimate

representatives of the palestinian people. and in his memoir, he said, we secured this vote because we created a climate of terror. his words car run the meeting. and so the moderate arab leaders were afraid to go against. on top of the use of intimidation through terrorism in the oil embargo that was implemented at the time of the aum to pour war in 1973. and these two events combined really brought europe and japan to their knees. and european leaders spoke openly of the need to change their orientation on the valleys conflict because of their dependence on arab oil. the next year secretary of state kissinger took in mind the idea that the western countries would have to find some mechanisms to

free themselves from the threat of future oil embargo, to find some countervailing pressure that they could bring to bear. and so he made a tour of european capitals in 1974 to try rally the europeans to join us in some kind of measures to raise this cloud. and he wrote in his memoirs of his terrible frustration. every minister i consulted with was still terrified of a possible confrontation with the auto producers. and so this was a complete failure because the european ministers preferred to appease rather than to resist. in the third part of what i lumped together as the material pressures we brought to bear is the sheer weight of numbers. for every few in the world there

are 100 missiles. one is row, 22 member states of the arab league, 57 member states of the organization of islamic cooperation. and it is a fact of life or of human nature that most people seeing a conflict between the many and a few find it more comfortable to take sides with the many. only the very brave will join with a few. and there is also a practical consequence of this or walling number which, of course, translates into diplomatic pressure, economic policy and also has enabled the arabs to take over the u.n. so at the u.n. you have the security council where the united states has a veto and is not really a problem. but every other body is by

majority rule. and there those have all been dominated by the so-called non-aligned movement is 120 members make up about two-thirds of the u.n. and about half of that movement is made up of the islamic countries, the members of the organizations of the islamic cooperation and there are part of the 22 member states of the arab league. so that makes a kind of telescope and lessened by which the arabs have had their way. not only had their way but turned the wind into a platform and estimate for the campaign against israel. it is astonishing, but the general assembly, which has an unlimited where it. it can take up any issue or problem in the world that never shoes. it has been is an immense proportion of this time every year passing resolution after

resolution denouncing. very rarely passes any resolutions criticizing any other state. does occasionally conflict of of of all the resolutions passed by the general assembly, three-quarters, all the resolutions that mention a particular country, three quarters have been devoted to the denigration of israel. one quarter to any misdeeds by any of the other 194 countries in the world. and on top of this and less churning out of resolutions against israel the un has created three special bodies, to commissions and one bureau which has a multimillion-dollar budget and in large staff that are devoted entirely to proper eating the palestinian cause and denigrating his rule. so these together, the weight of

numbers, the material pressures were brought to bear to change world opinion. but then an equally important part of this change was a transformation that happened on the intellectual level. this was not and engineered situation but they played a part in it and have been able to take it vantage of it to turn around how the world treats this conflict. and that -- this intellectual transformation to do that takes the form of a change in paradigm , the main ideas of leftism of progressivism. for about a century the core idea of leftist progressive thought was class struggle. and this was portrayed not just as a matter of justice but it

was portrayed as that retentive historic structure, one that makes the whole world a better and happier place. sometime in the latter part of the 20th-century after about 100 years this paradigm, this image of how the world was going to be made right the end of this force. it came to be replaced by another kind of morality play of stroke and this was national and ethnic struggle that grew out of the movement against colonialism . but that did not end with colonialism. colonialism died, but anticolonialism did not. it became anti kneele plot -- colonialism. and in this view instead of that class struggle, instead of

workers against capitalists we got the west against the west, and it came also to be overlaid with the images of the heroic civil rights struggle that went on in the united states, the most watched country in the world, and so all of this came to be woven together what. it came to be seen as a kind of struggle that would make the whole world to a better place the as i said, this was not something that was -- this intellectual transition was not math purposefully invented new york yankee your by advocates of the arab side or by israel's enemies. but they were able to take advantage of it. and someone who came to be a

leading symbol of this new paradigm was, in fact, the most prominent palestinian american, i think, that there has ever been. that was endorsed studied of columbia university whose work in particular her book orientalism became immensely influential. the newspaper the guardian wrote that he was the most influential single intellectual of our time. there was a web search done of syllabi, nestle by these days, not when i went to college, but more so by these days of line. and so you can search them broccoli. someone did a search and found that there are 900 courses in

american universities in which his books are a side. there are courses at universities like georgetown, ucla, entirely devoted to the thought of edwards i need. there is even a cambridge introduction to the top. his thought amounts to a complete intellectual fraud. it is not just something i disagree with. it is something that has no legitimate intellectual standing whatsoever. if the world what to look at it with clear eyes, why do i say something that drastic? it boils down to the idea that you can see the contradictory

idea that all white people are inherently racist. he did not say exactly those words but said the same thing. he said, every european in what he could say of the orient was a racist and imperialists and almost totally ethnocentric. and you went about his most important book proving this brought thesis by allegedly examining the work of scholarly oriental this committee essentially people who study the muslim world. and he purported to show that there were all races and imperialists. what he really did was just to go out in the universe of the writings of 19 century european intellectuals of look forces codes.

these people were all or angeles spirits of the people were not or angeles sell. the first file a racist "and then gave them a new label to port. some of them were unimportant. and then you could call them or angeles, but they have those standing in the field. one ." contrary. but he left out entirely people who were genuine giants in the field of oriental studies whose writing clearly went in the opposite direction of what he was purporting to prove about the racist imperialists attitudes of westerners who study the orient. and so one of the most important was to a hungarian jew wrote in

the late 1800's left of the study and live years in the arab countries. at the above course, like all people who study another region of the world, you loved it. that is what normally happens. if you are inactive, people who specialize in latin american studies, chinese studies, whatever it may be. the normal mind set is to afford a great affection for the place and the people he steady. and that was true for oriental sauce. and it was exemplified. so he rode in this capitalizing

his attitude. he was a jew and he wrote, i discovered that islam was the only religion which can satisfy philosophic mines. my ideal was to elevate jury is to a seller rational level. and that it is the real or angeles as opposed to such deeds you or your children have been assigned to read at american universities. so he is emblematic of this whole intellectual process that i have discussed. and despite this kind of fraud, his writing was so in tune with the zeitgeist that he became this most celebrated and revered in masonic figure as the embody

year of this new intellectual. i have described. what he did was he made the that he pull his liberation would redeem mankind, he made the or rentals into the ultimate example of the people of color, the muslims into the representative for rentals and the arabs into the central or core muslims and finally the palestinians into the ultimate quintessential arabs. and by this chain of reasoning abracadabra israel was transformed people with

thousands of years of persecution, but the very embodiment of white supremacy and the persian. and i think in that transformation lies the explanation for the question i ask myself every morning when i have read about the often storied how could people possibly believe such a thing. thank you very much for listening. >> thank you, doctor. i would like to ask the first question. after a do or throw it up to the audience. i would ask you to ask real questions. please be concise so that everyone gets a chance, and also to identify yourself. we will get to some microphones be related to a microphone, steve. as for my question, ideas have

consequences. it strikes me that one of the ideas that has had increasing consequences throughout the middle east is this paradigm shift as you mentioned between pan arab nationalism, secular socialist nationalism and a new revolutionary islamist extremist revolutionary doctrine. as represented to my take, by how moss which is an arm of the muslim brother of which is putting into effect the ideas of former muslim brotherhood fierce who borrowed many ideas of a vanguard party in a ceaseless struggle from communists and applied these in as warmest

context. and that along with the breakdown of the arab world peace process has made it even harder to imagine a compromised on a national basis pitcher in israel and palestine. if the conflict is increasingly defined when in religious terms then how moss or whatever collection of leaders on the other side sees themselves as acting to advance their concept of guns interest, then compromise this off because was for me and it becomes increasingly hard to see any kind of negotiated settlement to this than. and that, taken with, you know, some of the war crimes that have been perpetuated has, says taken palestinians hostage and hide

among civilian star was rockets and civilians in the long term could discredit that cause in the eyes of many non muslims. do you see any impact on israel's average coming out of camino, succession of what looks to outsiders as self-defeating armed attempt to kill civilians with very little gained to the average palestinian street. do you think over time that will make westerners, particularly europeans, look differently at a zero? >> it is a deeper question. i don't want to take questions or have to try to speculate about the future. i would much rather try to speculate about the past. i think the islamists have gained a lot of steam sense, i

think it was, the iranian revolution that really -- even though it was she and most moslems larcenies and they're is a lot of tension between them. i think it was the iranian revolution, the creation of the first islamic republic that really gave a tremendous shot in the arm to his limbs that over the decades, the last 35 years we have seen that that has been on the rise. it is also a backlash, as you were suggesting in some more at the things they're doing. and one hopes that a double spread to the west. the interesting thing is that that reaction against islam as an, i think, is to this point most evident or at this moment

in this current car is a crisis is most evident in the arab world where a lot of people are quite unhappy with the islamists . by far the largest majority of their victims, people who have died at their hands have not been jews or christians but muslims and think what you will about the takeover by the general and egypt, but before the army moved there were millions of egyptians that took to the streets against the muslim brotherhood rule. and i think in this current way in gaza we are not kidding -- we used to talk about tv wars, but something new. that is already something old.

internet, twitter, social medium and we are getting all of these terrible images of innocent civilians who are kidding killed and bombed out of their homes. children among the victims. and jet blue there really has not been the kind of rage in the arab world against israel that we have seen at other moments where there have been niece conflicts. of course most people in the arab world will feel identity with the arabs out of the fight, but there has not been that jury that we have seen on other occasions. and i attribute that to the fact that a lot of people in the arab world are getting sick of the islamists. that think that they do understand that, started this

round of fighting. whether westerners will catch up remains unknown. >> okay. let me open it up to questions at this point. this man right here. >> greetings. my name is jeffrey david kapell. national security consultant, president and sound to founder. an ardent republican and unapologetic neil conservative. on what to think the speaker for extending me the courtesy of a time when diligence. to that end i wanted to revisit a quartet and that seems, in part, defines the united states government and in talking about the scope of your research which seems to look at the impact of strategic information and

influence operations implemented by u.s. and israeli emissaries the goals of which would be to attempt on fairly so still delegitimize israel and on like it from its allies. i wanted to know if in your research you came across any evidence that states empirically the organizational and operational ties between as a seventh less prosperous supporters during the cold war and assets of contemporary u.s. and israeli adversaries. >> i don't know that i have found the gives you are looking for, the kind of hard evidence of institutions and individuals who did x, y, or c. but the broader picture, you don't need to have a special

informational intelligence. the soviet union is gone now. but for at least the last 20 years of its life and it worked very much in this field of trying to transform world sentiment against israel. that was because as one effect of the 1967 war that i left out of my presentations, in order to keep it short, although it was from lead to long anyway, to keep from getting longer, the israel's lightning victory in 1967 was a tremendous relation to the soviet union. the soviets have really pushed that war. they had agitated the egyptians and the syrians. the arab armies were armed with soviet weapons.

and it was seen as to some degree the cold war proxy war. and therefore it was a tremendous humiliation to the soviets. it showed that their side was losing, the weapons are not as good as up to five western weapons. it had a very powerful effect inside the soviet empire to be for one thing, it ignited the consciences of jews with then the soviet union itself though numbers several million who had not had any kind of free of religious or other cultural activities. many of them just that awareness of a heritage that there were jews but had not lived any kind if in jewish life, religiously

or culturally. but they felt this identity and felt that oftentimes is rail to feed these big soviet client states. and so we get the movement within the u.s.s.r. of soviet jews for the right to immigrate for the first time in history of communism that there was some kind of semi mass movement for rights and against the regime. until then there have only been the individual dissident here or there. that was momentous. it also had an effect in the empire which was in the so-called satellite countries where people who are not used but who were under the submit to the soviet move would help hopeless about. if israel could defeat the soviet clients in the middle east this monolith that we are up against is not intolerable, not invincible. and so it did have -- it sent a

shudder through soviet leaders. the result of that was that they mobilized and did not stop until they were gone. a campaign of denigration of israel and zionism played a big role in the u.n., propounding the zionism as racism resolution and so there was certainly a very powerful connection, and there was also in connection -- and you may think of this more in nuts and bolts. in these early years after the plo took over in the palestinian cause was kind of consecrated, then they quite consciously apprenticed themselves to the north vietnamese and the

vietcong and two other communist revolutionary forces around the world who said, we can show you how to the feed a militarily superior enemy, and you don't do it on the battlefield. you do it through politics and informational. that was an enormous transformation. until that point in the arab world the arabs had been alive -- allied with the axis. they were drowning not see escaped criminals in egypt shutting out propaganda. that is where some of the kill the jews drive the jews into the season came from. after 67 the arabs figured up

that this was not working because was repositioned. that is as much as i can add to this subject. >> excellent presentation as always. given the really falsehood, images target israelis the you describe in your book, what is it that israel and its supporters in the west do to counter them? >> well, i wrote a book. i think that israel itself has not been great information,

telling her story. so many things. pretty poor of this. there is of cynicism. my role as a research trying to get information from israeli sources, contract sums set of country is real story i think there is problem on the israeli side. and on this side and the western side for people whose support as well.

and cooking for one thing we have to not be intimidated. physical intimidation going on and on university campuses the boston, los angeles, and last week even more in paris. it is important not to be intimidated. it's also not to be -- important not to be intimidated intellectually by analysis of a part of what israel is up against is that it is up against

the dominant to copper aggressive interpretation of the current stage of world history which is this stage of the struggle of the west against the rest. and then it is intellectually intimidating to go against because you don't want to be a neanderthal. you don't want to be a racist. you don't want to be someone who is on sympathetic to the class of people who have been oppressed or discriminated against in the past. and you should not be unsympathetic to those claims. you should only be sympathetic to them that the extent that they are just and that they don't entail. then people just have to have the intellectual courage to stand up and argue for what they

feel is right even if it goes against their zeitgeist and even if it goes against what seems to be a proper way of thinking by, you know, all of pride and more people. >> this woman in the back. >> debra rice from front page magazine. i appreciate your coming today. i could not help but notice that you did not have any mention of the anti-semitism that has plagued the jews throughout this century and has been a scapegoat it through all of history. certainly the charter of the moss which says it wants to eliminate its use not by diplomatic means but by violence and the unholy alliance between leftist and islamists. also, i might as well add the inherent anti-semitism as well

as anti christian fovea and all of that, some interpretation of islam and certainly in a moss. chrysler did not talk about anti-semitism. because while i am sure it is a factor, the question that was trying to answer is what has changed so dramatically over 40 years it can't be that there was no new anti-semitism or very little anti-semitism in the world 40 years ago. anti-semitism is there today, but it was there. centuries for zero millennia. it is kind of a given.

how much anti-semitism in the world, we had an air wycherley was from the late '40's to the late 60's, the six day war as the epitome of that. you would think when there was not a war just in popular culture the novel exodus was published in the 1950's was the best selling novel and the united states since gone with the wind. then it went on to be translated into other languages and became a best seller and many other cultures. so they just did not seem to me that anti-semitism was a very good explanatory variables for how we got from thursday's to today. and one other problem with anti-semitism, i thought about

the many problems that i was talking about in this overall argument. i thought about this one that was published first of a paper and that a book. and, thought it -- it was all quite nasty. when i read it i thought, this really reeks of anti-semitism in the paper that preceded the book so right at the beginning they serve, we may be called anti-semites, but far from it, not only are we not anti-semites, we are far less of mites. and then people read what they wrote. any number of critics said, you are anti-semite. no, we're not. yes you are. no we're not. at that point it seems to me that the argument goes nowhere.

i feel that i -- it is hard for me to prove that sell and so is an anti-semite but not all hard for me to prove that what someone is saying about his role is false, unfair, on balance, and just, and i would rather keep the argument on that play than to then get myself embroiled in trying to prove what is in someone's heart or mind. >> i think we have time for one more question. will you be signing books afterwards? >> people will buy them i will sign them. [laughter] >> that sounds good this lady up here. >> hi. my question is, when you look at the conflicts and you assign blame or looked at the blame because you have to kind of identify the problems in order to get solutions, would you say

the islamic side has 100 percent of the blame and israel has zero, with you naked like 9010, how would you do that? in other words, the things in zero can do to maybe work also toward solutions? >> let me say two things. one, in terms of -- i think it is less important to assign blame than to think about how the conflict could be ended. to have the only formulas that are convincing to me for ending the conflict before miller's that involve very substantial concessions on both sides. and i think there is no -- endo

i don't have much sympathy for some in israel who seem to take a position, well, we will just have reached -- have everything move on and some of this problem will go away. i don't think that is at all reasonable. and in assigning blame it becomes trickier. i don't -- i am not an israeli. and i don't share their risks israelis are experiencing at this moment and that they cliff with every day. i try to impose on myself of rule of great modesty