Daniel, you continue to amaze me how you articulate my and other commenters values and conclusions. Keep going!
I will add that the nuclear peace was held till now that all nuclear parties, no matter how diverse and very opposing systems they have, they respected the “mutual destruction”. I and Israel believe that a nuclear weapon in the hands of a leader that values martyrdom first presents existential threat to it.
I'm sorry but hasn't it been the declared policy of every US Administration - Republican and Democrat - that the Iranian lunatics cannot have a nuclear weapon? So why should it be controversial, when they are on the verge of achieving that, to deny them that goal?
I think Daniel has, by taking the 'bull by the horns', addressed some very important ideas here. Some of them are not comforting, and were not intended to be.
Perhaps MSM and the political leadership should take a leaf out of the deal-maker DJT, by not being overly serious about himself but very determined to land the most effective outcome.
For not writing a vanilla article, I thank you Daniel Jupp.
It’s eerie how often you articulate my thinking on things, Dan. Here it’s uncanny. Every twist and turn but whereas I sense it and mull things over and maybe express a little in discussions with people, you just produce these comprehensive, thorough essays as here. I’m heartened, humbled and even slightly bemused. Reading you is at times like this like reading my own ChatGPT that draws on my inner sensibilities.
Excellent post, full of insights into the insufferable hypocrite tucker carlson and astute observations about Israel, Ukraine, Iran, and Russia. Jew haters like tucker who mask their disdain for Israel under the notion they simply are "America First" folk simply dismiss the fact that many Americans were killed, wounded, and taken hostage on October 7th, and it was Israeli soldiers risking and losing their lives trying to rescue them, without the need for American troops to put boots on the ground. In the mind of tucker and their ilk, saving Americans doesn't extend to Jewish American who have dual citizenship, or are Jewish and living in Israel. They aren't really Americans in the mind of Jew haters. With Iran behind hamas and supporting these attacks, supporting Israel is fully in line with also being America first. Based on the positions taken by tucker, being a talking shill for Qatar for some silver coinage is not inconsistent with being America first, so long as you further Qatar's position on Israel and hamas.
Thanks Steve. That’s a good explanation of how you can be America First and back the Israel strike on Iran at the same time. Tucker is something of a tragedy in my view-this was a guy I very much had come to like and respect until he revealed himself as a Jew hater and an undiscerning fool who would believe any non mainstream guest no matter how stupid or evil they are. Taking Qatari funding is of course the opposite of America First.
“There is little to morally distinguish Ukraine from Russia. Both are former Soviet nations ruled in a dictatorial manner.”
Without disagreeing with the larger point of the piece (and CERTAINLY without disagreeing that the Israel-Iran war and the Rissia-Ukraine war have nothing in common, factually or conceptually), I have to quibble with this. Ukraine may be drifting away from democracy, and even from “democracy”, but there are degrees of non-democracy.
“Russia invaded, but the Ukrainian government had been oppressing and killing ethnic Russians.”
With all due respect, this is not true. Ukraine was never KILLING ethnic Russians before 2022. Ukraine’s government was pursuing an idiotic policy of DISCRIMINATING against ethnic Russians, but that’s a far cry from actually killing anyone. The actual killing started when Russia and its proxies began to meddle in Donetsk and Lugansk – but such killing was more akin to the civil war (and, later, actual war). In other words, Ukraine deserves lots of criticism for its mis-rule of its eastern provinces – but what was NOT happening was actual killing.
“This wasn’t a Hitler style invention as an excuse for invasion-even Russia’s enemies admit that 14,000 people were killed on both sides before Russia directly intervened.”
I am not sure about this. Russia was deeply involved in any actual killings, once they started in 2014 – Russian soldiers “on vacation” were involved in the fighting that by then was a full-blown civil war, Russian hardware was used by what was then called “the separatists”… You may recall the Malaysian Boeing 777 that was shot down by a Russian Buk surface-to-air missile crew in 2014.
Now: one can call all this raw power politics, one can call this Russia pursuing its core interests, one can legitimately point out the stupidity, corruption and short-sightedness of Ukrainian politicians, but it’s still an important point to keep in mind: the KILLING was started by Putin, not by Ukraine. To the extent we base our moral judgments on such things, we must admit that KILLING is not the same thing as oppression or discrimination.
The Malaysian Airways airliner took a route through a known area of conflict, and was one of the very few international flights to do so on the day it was shot down. Why it flew that route when clear guidance was in place is a mystery which Malaysia has never clarified.
Then there's the deed itself. Several sides used the same USSR weapon system, and in effect none admitted anything. Again, that is a mystery that neither Ukraine, the Ukraine separatists nor Russia have ever clarified.
This incident has been exhaustively analyzed and investigated. There are countless photos and videos of THAT SPECIFIC Buk launcher traveling through Russia, then in Donetsk, then back from Donetsk into Russia. The name of the general commanding that particular air defense unit, to which that particular Buk belongs, is known. The names of the officers are known. The pro-Russian separatists were bragging on social media about shooting the Malaysian Boeing down - until they realized that what they shot down was a civilian airliner, and not a military jet, and deleted their posts.
I bring all this up not to assign blame to Russia (to dispute that Russia is ultimately responsible for the shootdown of MH17, at THIS point, is simply unserious), but to point out that back in 2014 - 8 years before the invasion - Russian soldiers were already DIRECTLY involved in the conflict, and the killing.
Now, as I said earlier: you can take the view that Russia is justified in its actions, you can take the view that this is just collateral damage, you can take the view that none of it has anything to do with us, you can take the view that even if does have something to do with us, Ukraine is not deserving of THIS level of our support, you can take the view that supporting Ukraine raises the risk of nuclear war unacceptably high, you can take the view that Ukraine is too corrupt/incompetent/undemocratic for us to care... That's fine. This is hardly the place to re-litigate what has been exhaustively litigated already - the MH17 shootdown in 2014.
But at least let's base our conclusions and judgments on facts.
I don't know where you're getting your info, but I doubt we will resolve this here. So let's agree to disagree.
I wrote a few days in response to another post of his that in my view he has too much of an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" bias, when he looks at Putin and Russia. Globalists/leftists/Democrats may be our enemies, but that doesn't make Putin our friend. They are ALL our enemies, just in different ways. Ukraine may not be the most sympathetic of "allies", but Ukraine's problems (and well-deserved criticism of its failures) don't make Putin a friend.
Regardless, as I said, I agree with the author's sentiment, and agree with probably 99% of what he wrote in this post. Personally, I think the Trump White House should hire him as a speechwriter.
Thanks George for some great responses,, even where we disagree I can see your logic. To be clear, I don’t see Russia as a friend and I do believe that Russia can and has behaved in dangerous ways. My point is not that Russia is blameless, BUT it is that Russia has SOME justification and more than our Globalists do. I see Putin as partially wicked, partially justified, and fully sane. I see our leaders apart from Trump as fully wicked, generally unjustified, and completely insane. In various ways I see them as a more urgent threat to me than Russia.
Overall the Russians have been far more restrained than our leaders. We have directly helped attacks on Russian civilians, blown up a pipeline, authorised strikes deep in Russia, supplied the satellite support and weapons and expertise for those, probably had special forces operating against Russia….so far, Russian response has been very muted. They increase prosecution of the war in Ukraine, but they aren’t blowing up French or German or British infrastructure.
I think I did say that 14,000 had died on both sides, so yes Russia was active too. I don’t think that changes that Ukraine was killing its own citizens-this was definitely the case and it’s not true to say that Ukraine was ‘only’ killing Russians. Of course you are right that Ukraine was discriminating against ethnic Russians, but it was also doing more than mere discrimination.
Well, if we talk about killing, let’s be clear about which killing of whom, and when.
Prior to 2014, and Russia’s annexation of Crimea, nobody was killing anybody in Ukraine. Crimea and the eastern provinces (including Kharkov, Sumy, Zaporozhye), where Russians are in the majority, suffered from underinvestment and general economic neglect by the Kiev government. In a country that where most people lived fairly poorly (though the country had potential), ethnic Russians in those regions (not all Russians everywhere – mostly Russians in those eastern provinces) were generally worse off than those living in the rest of Ukraine. Add to this discrimination based on language requirements, and you have a poisonous situation where there was a sufficient pool of people unhappy with the Kiev government (justifiably so!) and willing to at least entertain some form of separatism and ultimately joining Russia.
But prior to 2014, nobody was killing anybody.
After 2014, Crimea was annexed, and Donetsk and Lugansk became ground zero for what was essentially a civil war, and eventually just a war against Russian proxies and Russian soldiers – by around 2016, any notion of Ukraine regaining those provinces (most of Lugansk, about 40% of Donetsk) was illusory. So it is not surprising that people of all ethnicities are killed in a war, including Russians, Ukrainians and now-former Ukrainians of Donetsk and Lugansk. I am not sure I would blame UKRAINE for these deaths – I would place the blame on Russia, since without its sponsorship of separatism, there would be no killing. Again, we are not discussing whether Russia has core interests that justify its actions that resulted in thousands of deaths during that time period – perhaps it does, perhaps it doesn’t. It certainly doesn’t sound very moral or ethical or high minded, but power politics are not for the pearl clutchers of the local tea club.
In any case, this is all history, and I have no doubt that the separatists can tell you a different story that makes them look like heroes, and not the sadistic venal thugs that they really were. I have never been there myself, though I have been to Crimea around 2011 or so. (My one and only time in Ukraine since I was about 8 years old, and visited relatives in Sevastopol one summer in about 1973.)
Returning to the present, Putin has not been restrained against Berlin or Paris or London because of his convivial nature or reserved temperament. First, Western ACTIONS are not such that they are a casus belli. Supplying weapons and intel and even advisors to one side of a conflict is no more than the USSR did in Vietnam, as one example. America did not bomb the Kremlin in response – and neither is Western support for Ukraine sufficient to trigger such a response from Putin. If anything, the West has put many restrictions in place on the use of its weapons that significantly hamper Ukraine’s ability to change the dynamic.
Second, a more likely scenario is that he does not want to risk a confrontation with NATO, calculating that the downside is far worse than the upside. NATO might be a paper tiger, but it might not be. The performance of Russian hardware vs. Western hardware in Ukraine is surely sobering, for him. Biden might have been senile, but even senile he might have ordered a response that Putin would have found unpleasant.
All of this is somewhat like discussing the trees instead of the forest. If I lived in the UK, would I find Keir Starmer a greater threat to me than Putin? Would I find Muslim gangs raping British girls a bigger problem than Russian soldiers taking some god-forsaken village in eastern Ukraine? It’s an awfully close call, I have to tell you…
Yeah I did - on the fly. But maybe we can find some time later this week. Or meet up in Tehran in a couple of months. There’s a bar there I’m looking forward to trying right next to the old Evin prison they’re turning into an entertainment district.
I am easiest to get hold of by phone on weekdays during the day UK time. I live in a small flat with my family so the only free time is when my kids are at school. 😀
I have been a long-time fan of Tucker Carlson but have been increasingly discomfited by the anti-Semitic tropes that have crept into his conversation. Not just anti-Israel but definitively anti-Jewish. The "soft" anti-Semitic remarks that I have heard in "polite" society all my life about "those people." and sly references to financial gain and power. It is one thing to criticize Israel; quite another to engage in blood libel. What's next, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and matzoh recipes featuring Christian baby blood?
Thanks, Daniel. But there's no excuse for using "woke right", and where's the solid evidence of Qatar funding Tucker? I'm not denying the possibility, but I'm getting more and more careful of what I take as fact.
I hate the term, ideologically it’s nonsense as woke was entirely a leftist creation, and I have argued against it. But the fact remains that when you say it, everyone knows the group you are referring to, which makes it useful in that sense alone.
There’s plenty of other accounts of Tucker’s Qatar links, substack won’t let me share working links but the above gives the addresses. He did a very soft soap interview for which he was paid by the Qataris through a front organisation. Ever since then he’s pressed a Qatari line.
the 13th 'like'-an omen- You are speaking truth, my friend. Most satisfying-the Iranian general who was an IDF agent,
Daniel, you continue to amaze me how you articulate my and other commenters values and conclusions. Keep going!
I will add that the nuclear peace was held till now that all nuclear parties, no matter how diverse and very opposing systems they have, they respected the “mutual destruction”. I and Israel believe that a nuclear weapon in the hands of a leader that values martyrdom first presents existential threat to it.
Thanks Barry. Exactly. It would be insane to allow those who have an Islamic suicide bomber mentality to possess nuclear weapons.
I'm sorry but hasn't it been the declared policy of every US Administration - Republican and Democrat - that the Iranian lunatics cannot have a nuclear weapon? So why should it be controversial, when they are on the verge of achieving that, to deny them that goal?
I think Daniel has, by taking the 'bull by the horns', addressed some very important ideas here. Some of them are not comforting, and were not intended to be.
Perhaps MSM and the political leadership should take a leaf out of the deal-maker DJT, by not being overly serious about himself but very determined to land the most effective outcome.
For not writing a vanilla article, I thank you Daniel Jupp.
Thanks Andrew. 😀
Spot on - as ever…
Thanks 😀😀
It’s eerie how often you articulate my thinking on things, Dan. Here it’s uncanny. Every twist and turn but whereas I sense it and mull things over and maybe express a little in discussions with people, you just produce these comprehensive, thorough essays as here. I’m heartened, humbled and even slightly bemused. Reading you is at times like this like reading my own ChatGPT that draws on my inner sensibilities.
Thank you very much Jim. Did you try to call me? I missed it, so apologies. 😀
I have the same thoughts.
You nailed it.
Yes.
Thank you, Daniel, absolutely brilliant, amazing in every way.🇮🇱❤️👍🙏
Thanks Ivor. 😀😀
Excellent post, full of insights into the insufferable hypocrite tucker carlson and astute observations about Israel, Ukraine, Iran, and Russia. Jew haters like tucker who mask their disdain for Israel under the notion they simply are "America First" folk simply dismiss the fact that many Americans were killed, wounded, and taken hostage on October 7th, and it was Israeli soldiers risking and losing their lives trying to rescue them, without the need for American troops to put boots on the ground. In the mind of tucker and their ilk, saving Americans doesn't extend to Jewish American who have dual citizenship, or are Jewish and living in Israel. They aren't really Americans in the mind of Jew haters. With Iran behind hamas and supporting these attacks, supporting Israel is fully in line with also being America first. Based on the positions taken by tucker, being a talking shill for Qatar for some silver coinage is not inconsistent with being America first, so long as you further Qatar's position on Israel and hamas.
Thanks Steve. That’s a good explanation of how you can be America First and back the Israel strike on Iran at the same time. Tucker is something of a tragedy in my view-this was a guy I very much had come to like and respect until he revealed himself as a Jew hater and an undiscerning fool who would believe any non mainstream guest no matter how stupid or evil they are. Taking Qatari funding is of course the opposite of America First.
“There is little to morally distinguish Ukraine from Russia. Both are former Soviet nations ruled in a dictatorial manner.”
Without disagreeing with the larger point of the piece (and CERTAINLY without disagreeing that the Israel-Iran war and the Rissia-Ukraine war have nothing in common, factually or conceptually), I have to quibble with this. Ukraine may be drifting away from democracy, and even from “democracy”, but there are degrees of non-democracy.
“Russia invaded, but the Ukrainian government had been oppressing and killing ethnic Russians.”
With all due respect, this is not true. Ukraine was never KILLING ethnic Russians before 2022. Ukraine’s government was pursuing an idiotic policy of DISCRIMINATING against ethnic Russians, but that’s a far cry from actually killing anyone. The actual killing started when Russia and its proxies began to meddle in Donetsk and Lugansk – but such killing was more akin to the civil war (and, later, actual war). In other words, Ukraine deserves lots of criticism for its mis-rule of its eastern provinces – but what was NOT happening was actual killing.
“This wasn’t a Hitler style invention as an excuse for invasion-even Russia’s enemies admit that 14,000 people were killed on both sides before Russia directly intervened.”
I am not sure about this. Russia was deeply involved in any actual killings, once they started in 2014 – Russian soldiers “on vacation” were involved in the fighting that by then was a full-blown civil war, Russian hardware was used by what was then called “the separatists”… You may recall the Malaysian Boeing 777 that was shot down by a Russian Buk surface-to-air missile crew in 2014.
Now: one can call all this raw power politics, one can call this Russia pursuing its core interests, one can legitimately point out the stupidity, corruption and short-sightedness of Ukrainian politicians, but it’s still an important point to keep in mind: the KILLING was started by Putin, not by Ukraine. To the extent we base our moral judgments on such things, we must admit that KILLING is not the same thing as oppression or discrimination.
As for the rest of the piece, 100% in agreement.
The Malaysian Airways airliner took a route through a known area of conflict, and was one of the very few international flights to do so on the day it was shot down. Why it flew that route when clear guidance was in place is a mystery which Malaysia has never clarified.
Then there's the deed itself. Several sides used the same USSR weapon system, and in effect none admitted anything. Again, that is a mystery that neither Ukraine, the Ukraine separatists nor Russia have ever clarified.
This incident has been exhaustively analyzed and investigated. There are countless photos and videos of THAT SPECIFIC Buk launcher traveling through Russia, then in Donetsk, then back from Donetsk into Russia. The name of the general commanding that particular air defense unit, to which that particular Buk belongs, is known. The names of the officers are known. The pro-Russian separatists were bragging on social media about shooting the Malaysian Boeing down - until they realized that what they shot down was a civilian airliner, and not a military jet, and deleted their posts.
I bring all this up not to assign blame to Russia (to dispute that Russia is ultimately responsible for the shootdown of MH17, at THIS point, is simply unserious), but to point out that back in 2014 - 8 years before the invasion - Russian soldiers were already DIRECTLY involved in the conflict, and the killing.
Now, as I said earlier: you can take the view that Russia is justified in its actions, you can take the view that this is just collateral damage, you can take the view that none of it has anything to do with us, you can take the view that even if does have something to do with us, Ukraine is not deserving of THIS level of our support, you can take the view that supporting Ukraine raises the risk of nuclear war unacceptably high, you can take the view that Ukraine is too corrupt/incompetent/undemocratic for us to care... That's fine. This is hardly the place to re-litigate what has been exhaustively litigated already - the MH17 shootdown in 2014.
But at least let's base our conclusions and judgments on facts.
The response was based on facts.
Facts such as the shooting and bombing by internal Ukraine disputes from 2014 onwards, of which this event was but one.
Malaysia Airlines got in the way of the Dutch led investigation, as did the various elements of Ukraine.
I don't know where you're getting your info, but I doubt we will resolve this here. So let's agree to disagree.
I wrote a few days in response to another post of his that in my view he has too much of an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" bias, when he looks at Putin and Russia. Globalists/leftists/Democrats may be our enemies, but that doesn't make Putin our friend. They are ALL our enemies, just in different ways. Ukraine may not be the most sympathetic of "allies", but Ukraine's problems (and well-deserved criticism of its failures) don't make Putin a friend.
Regardless, as I said, I agree with the author's sentiment, and agree with probably 99% of what he wrote in this post. Personally, I think the Trump White House should hire him as a speechwriter.
Thanks George for some great responses,, even where we disagree I can see your logic. To be clear, I don’t see Russia as a friend and I do believe that Russia can and has behaved in dangerous ways. My point is not that Russia is blameless, BUT it is that Russia has SOME justification and more than our Globalists do. I see Putin as partially wicked, partially justified, and fully sane. I see our leaders apart from Trump as fully wicked, generally unjustified, and completely insane. In various ways I see them as a more urgent threat to me than Russia.
Overall the Russians have been far more restrained than our leaders. We have directly helped attacks on Russian civilians, blown up a pipeline, authorised strikes deep in Russia, supplied the satellite support and weapons and expertise for those, probably had special forces operating against Russia….so far, Russian response has been very muted. They increase prosecution of the war in Ukraine, but they aren’t blowing up French or German or British infrastructure.
I think I did say that 14,000 had died on both sides, so yes Russia was active too. I don’t think that changes that Ukraine was killing its own citizens-this was definitely the case and it’s not true to say that Ukraine was ‘only’ killing Russians. Of course you are right that Ukraine was discriminating against ethnic Russians, but it was also doing more than mere discrimination.
Well, if we talk about killing, let’s be clear about which killing of whom, and when.
Prior to 2014, and Russia’s annexation of Crimea, nobody was killing anybody in Ukraine. Crimea and the eastern provinces (including Kharkov, Sumy, Zaporozhye), where Russians are in the majority, suffered from underinvestment and general economic neglect by the Kiev government. In a country that where most people lived fairly poorly (though the country had potential), ethnic Russians in those regions (not all Russians everywhere – mostly Russians in those eastern provinces) were generally worse off than those living in the rest of Ukraine. Add to this discrimination based on language requirements, and you have a poisonous situation where there was a sufficient pool of people unhappy with the Kiev government (justifiably so!) and willing to at least entertain some form of separatism and ultimately joining Russia.
But prior to 2014, nobody was killing anybody.
After 2014, Crimea was annexed, and Donetsk and Lugansk became ground zero for what was essentially a civil war, and eventually just a war against Russian proxies and Russian soldiers – by around 2016, any notion of Ukraine regaining those provinces (most of Lugansk, about 40% of Donetsk) was illusory. So it is not surprising that people of all ethnicities are killed in a war, including Russians, Ukrainians and now-former Ukrainians of Donetsk and Lugansk. I am not sure I would blame UKRAINE for these deaths – I would place the blame on Russia, since without its sponsorship of separatism, there would be no killing. Again, we are not discussing whether Russia has core interests that justify its actions that resulted in thousands of deaths during that time period – perhaps it does, perhaps it doesn’t. It certainly doesn’t sound very moral or ethical or high minded, but power politics are not for the pearl clutchers of the local tea club.
In any case, this is all history, and I have no doubt that the separatists can tell you a different story that makes them look like heroes, and not the sadistic venal thugs that they really were. I have never been there myself, though I have been to Crimea around 2011 or so. (My one and only time in Ukraine since I was about 8 years old, and visited relatives in Sevastopol one summer in about 1973.)
Returning to the present, Putin has not been restrained against Berlin or Paris or London because of his convivial nature or reserved temperament. First, Western ACTIONS are not such that they are a casus belli. Supplying weapons and intel and even advisors to one side of a conflict is no more than the USSR did in Vietnam, as one example. America did not bomb the Kremlin in response – and neither is Western support for Ukraine sufficient to trigger such a response from Putin. If anything, the West has put many restrictions in place on the use of its weapons that significantly hamper Ukraine’s ability to change the dynamic.
Second, a more likely scenario is that he does not want to risk a confrontation with NATO, calculating that the downside is far worse than the upside. NATO might be a paper tiger, but it might not be. The performance of Russian hardware vs. Western hardware in Ukraine is surely sobering, for him. Biden might have been senile, but even senile he might have ordered a response that Putin would have found unpleasant.
All of this is somewhat like discussing the trees instead of the forest. If I lived in the UK, would I find Keir Starmer a greater threat to me than Putin? Would I find Muslim gangs raping British girls a bigger problem than Russian soldiers taking some god-forsaken village in eastern Ukraine? It’s an awfully close call, I have to tell you…
Yeah I did - on the fly. But maybe we can find some time later this week. Or meet up in Tehran in a couple of months. There’s a bar there I’m looking forward to trying right next to the old Evin prison they’re turning into an entertainment district.
I am easiest to get hold of by phone on weekdays during the day UK time. I live in a small flat with my family so the only free time is when my kids are at school. 😀
See this now. I’ll try soon when I’m up that early (for me).
I have been a long-time fan of Tucker Carlson but have been increasingly discomfited by the anti-Semitic tropes that have crept into his conversation. Not just anti-Israel but definitively anti-Jewish. The "soft" anti-Semitic remarks that I have heard in "polite" society all my life about "those people." and sly references to financial gain and power. It is one thing to criticize Israel; quite another to engage in blood libel. What's next, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and matzoh recipes featuring Christian baby blood?
Let's see if you can answer a simple question:
What do you think happens if Iran uses a nuclear in Israel?
If you think your life
Won't be permanently changed, you would be a total fool!!
Thanks, Daniel. But there's no excuse for using "woke right", and where's the solid evidence of Qatar funding Tucker? I'm not denying the possibility, but I'm getting more and more careful of what I take as fact.
I hate the term, ideologically it’s nonsense as woke was entirely a leftist creation, and I have argued against it. But the fact remains that when you say it, everyone knows the group you are referring to, which makes it useful in that sense alone.
Re Tucker and Qatar:
https://www.memri.org/reports/tucker-carlson-whitewashes-americas-enemies-%E2%80%93-part-i-qatar
https://thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/the-qatar-papers-tucker-carlson/
There’s plenty of other accounts of Tucker’s Qatar links, substack won’t let me share working links but the above gives the addresses. He did a very soft soap interview for which he was paid by the Qataris through a front organisation. Ever since then he’s pressed a Qatari line.
Thanks Daniel. I’ll read that. And surely “anti-Israel right” does the job better? I also like Frank Furedi's “voodoo right”.
Yes you’re probably right there. I’ll think about which other term to use.