I can understand Daniel doesn’t want to be confrontational. But I think he could have probed a bit more. Why didn’t If Not Now apply more rigor to verify reports of soldiers? As I recall, as reported in the mainstream media, the impression was the reports were true. Why were the reports anonymous? I can understand soldiers might not want their identities exposed. But anonymous reports are less credible. On funding, yes there are plenty of international donors sponsoring both those who defend the IDF and those who don’t. But I’m not aware of significant European NGOs who advocate for the IDF. Why did If Not Now resort to funders whose motives might not be so pure? I was disappointed Daniel didn’t challenge Mikhael more on these types of issues. I hope he will find a way to play less softball with future controversial guests.
Benjamin, I appreciate this pushback. It's a fine line, and I can easily see your position. At present, I'm so committed to easing the toxicity of the conversation about Israel, that I really want to get people from all across the spectrum, which won't happen if they think they're going to be getting a lot of pushback. So at present, I'm letting people put their views out there, with sufficient hints from me as to what others might say, letting listeners draw their own conclusions and formulate their own questions. But you're right, that may not be the way to go for the long haul ... we shall see. Either way, I very much appreciate your listening and the very thoughtful feedback.
I must say that I listened to this podcast with a great deal of trepidation but found the issue was given a fresh, different perspective. I understand that the founders of this organization wanted to bring real problems to light and to get someone to address them. It appear they were successful but then the thing grows. The scope grows and we feel that the organization is deliberately undermining the state. Maybe it is the way it gets presented by the Jewish media outside of Israel. Bottom line, I was glad to listen and hear the story.
Thanks for listening, and for bringing such an open, receptive approach to the conversation. That's precisely what "Israel from the Inside" is all about. Delighted to have you as part of the conversation.
Yishar kochacha on another fine interview. I suggest that it might have been interesting had you pressed Mikhael more on the funding issue. Saying that funding from overseas is a longstanding issue for all sides doesn't address the important point you raised in your question about hostile entities. If, for example, to take an extreme hypothetical unrealistic example, one were to find out that Ahmedinejad provided funding to BTS, wouldn't that at least cause one who is a Zionist to pause, and wonder about the wisdom of the enterprise?
Mark, really appreciate this comment. You're definitely right that that's one of the issues that begs deeper exploration. I was trying to give people a sense of the human being that Mikhael is ... I'm on record all over the place has having a huge problem with the European connections, financial as well as exhibitions, etc., but I chose not to go what would have been a more adversarial route. But one can definitely argue that I should have ... I was perhaps influenced by my true appreciation of the special human being that Mikhael is, even if we don't agree about everything. Thanks so much for sharing this.
I can understand Daniel doesn’t want to be confrontational. But I think he could have probed a bit more. Why didn’t If Not Now apply more rigor to verify reports of soldiers? As I recall, as reported in the mainstream media, the impression was the reports were true. Why were the reports anonymous? I can understand soldiers might not want their identities exposed. But anonymous reports are less credible. On funding, yes there are plenty of international donors sponsoring both those who defend the IDF and those who don’t. But I’m not aware of significant European NGOs who advocate for the IDF. Why did If Not Now resort to funders whose motives might not be so pure? I was disappointed Daniel didn’t challenge Mikhael more on these types of issues. I hope he will find a way to play less softball with future controversial guests.
Benjamin, I appreciate this pushback. It's a fine line, and I can easily see your position. At present, I'm so committed to easing the toxicity of the conversation about Israel, that I really want to get people from all across the spectrum, which won't happen if they think they're going to be getting a lot of pushback. So at present, I'm letting people put their views out there, with sufficient hints from me as to what others might say, letting listeners draw their own conclusions and formulate their own questions. But you're right, that may not be the way to go for the long haul ... we shall see. Either way, I very much appreciate your listening and the very thoughtful feedback.
I must say that I listened to this podcast with a great deal of trepidation but found the issue was given a fresh, different perspective. I understand that the founders of this organization wanted to bring real problems to light and to get someone to address them. It appear they were successful but then the thing grows. The scope grows and we feel that the organization is deliberately undermining the state. Maybe it is the way it gets presented by the Jewish media outside of Israel. Bottom line, I was glad to listen and hear the story.
Thanks for listening, and for bringing such an open, receptive approach to the conversation. That's precisely what "Israel from the Inside" is all about. Delighted to have you as part of the conversation.
Yishar kochacha on another fine interview. I suggest that it might have been interesting had you pressed Mikhael more on the funding issue. Saying that funding from overseas is a longstanding issue for all sides doesn't address the important point you raised in your question about hostile entities. If, for example, to take an extreme hypothetical unrealistic example, one were to find out that Ahmedinejad provided funding to BTS, wouldn't that at least cause one who is a Zionist to pause, and wonder about the wisdom of the enterprise?
Mark, really appreciate this comment. You're definitely right that that's one of the issues that begs deeper exploration. I was trying to give people a sense of the human being that Mikhael is ... I'm on record all over the place has having a huge problem with the European connections, financial as well as exhibitions, etc., but I chose not to go what would have been a more adversarial route. But one can definitely argue that I should have ... I was perhaps influenced by my true appreciation of the special human being that Mikhael is, even if we don't agree about everything. Thanks so much for sharing this.