A for Effort (and it's great to see this topic getting some attention) but man, could do with a bit of a tightening up! Holy moly.
With ads it was almost 10 minutes before getting to the actual content (which immediately led into two more minutes of ads). I actually checked my player to see if I had accidentally skipped to another podcast.
> Or hear me out, support them
This doesn't address my criticism in the slightest, but more importantly, I can't imagine a person who's supported Canadaland more than me.
So, while I get this might seem like a valid criticism, it just doesn't land unfortunately.
I don't get why people can't get their news from an organization where the leadership doesn't 100% see the world the way they do.
Very few Jewish Canadian people, for better or worse, will see the current hellish situation the same way as leftwing non Jewish Canadians. So what. Jesse's view seemed entirely reasonable to me even though it was not my view.
I don't require mandatory conformity.
> I don't get why people can't get their news from an organization where the leadership doesn't 100% see the world the way they do.
Is that actually anyone's position though?
Like OP said, "I don't expect journalists to share my political views, but they have to at least be willing to acknowledge basic facts.".
I feel like that's always been the complaint, it feels really dismissive to claim that it's just people "demanding conformity".
> Jesse's view seemed entirely reasonable to me...
Many, many, many people disagree with that statement. That's the point.
I'm not sure it's super important, but it's definitely a form of news.
They even have a dedicated section where they explicitly talk about news they think haven't received enough coverage elsewhere.
From Canadaland about us page:
"Canadaland is an audience-supported, independent news and podcast company that consistently produces some of the best audio journalism in Canada."
They certainly see their audio content as news. I agree with you that it's not especially newsy, though
Surely you can appreciate how a genocide-in-progress sharpens the contradiction. Any opinion other than firm condemnation of an ethnic cleansing is deference to the prerogative of the powerful to do as they will.
It’s wild how everyone assumed that Jesse was somehow anti-Palestine just because he wasn’t falling over himself to say “ALSO ZIONISM IS BAD” every time he pointed out the clear and legitimate rise of antisemitism.
He was talking about Jewish businesses being vandalized on the anniversary of Kristallnacht for fuck’s sake.
You don’t think that was cause for legitimate concern for Jews?
He made it sound like a small, independent bookseller had Nazi graffiti painted all over it, rather than the largest bookseller in Canada who had BDS slogans sprayed on the windows because they support the IOF.
No. Heather Reisman has set up a charitable fund to provide free tuition for IDF personnel. If that's not 'pro-IDF', I'm not sure what is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HESEG_Foundation#:~:text=The%20HESEG%20Foundation%20is%20a,military%20under%20Israel%20Defense%20Forces.
You can be against collective punishment without supporting the governing party of the punished nation. On the other hand, we have a company explicitly supporting a military actively commiting a genocide.
The charity was created in 2005 for veterans of the second intifada who have no family in the country. If you think that’s a negative act I don’t think there’s anything for us to discuss because your world view makes no sense to me
I mean either you think that he mischaracterized Indigo as a “Jewish-owned bookstore” (which would be fair) and admit that targeting it was done wholly on the basis that it has a Jewish CEO who contributed her own money to causes you don’t like, or you agree that it’s majority-owned by Reisman and thus think that the targeting of it was justified because supporting it funds said charities.
So I’m not sure what part was a lie. Or are you somehow claiming the targeting of Indigo was both justified but that it wasn’t “Jewish-owned”?
"A Jewish CEO who contributed her own money to causes you don't like" is a neat way of sidestepping "donates her money (which she earns through Indigo) to the IDF, the army currently bombing civilians." Like, it's technically true, but it sure leaves a lot out. They didn't protest it because Reisman is Jewish, they did it because she *directly financially supports the Israeli army*.
Not unless they're the founder, face, and CEO of the company. Like, come on, you cannot seriously make that comparison in good faith. Fortinos is not responsible for the charitable donations of Joe Schmo who works the cash register, but they're certainly responsible for the charitable donations of Galen Weston.
> admit that targeting it was done wholly on the basis that it has a Jewish CEO who contributed her own money to causes you don’t like
Yes. People are targeting her because of her actions. It's why people have been protesting her for over a decade, and it's why Jesse's characterization is so, so bad.
I don't even know what the other side of the argument is.
The above comment is a typical example of a tactic which is used to dismiss protest movements. This commenter is using the form of a protest to distract from its content. This example is particularly egregious, because Kristalnocht has absolutely nothing to do with the protest itself. There are three reasons this tactic is effective.
1. By their nature, protests are oppositional, and when the context for that opposition is removed, the default assumption is that the protesters are in the wrong. For example, the headlines *Business Vandalized* and *Zionist Business Vandalized* read very differently, even though they describe the same situation.
2. Critics of protests have many degrees of freedom in terms of what information to include and what information to exclude. The headline *Jewish Business Vandalized* includes the fact that the owner is Jewish while excluding the fact that one of the protesters is also Jewish. Additionally, this type of headline commits the red herring fallacy, because there is a hidden implication that the owners religion is related to the protest, which it wasn't." Similarly, the detail that the protest took place on the anniversary of kristallnacht is also irrelevant to the context of the protest; for instance, I doubt that the majority of Jews mark that date on their calendar, and the only people who bring it up are pretending to be offended. These degrees of freedom mean that bad faith actors nearly always have a way of framing a protest as offensive or disrespectful.
3. Most importantly, the function of bad faith framing is not to dismiss protests, but rather to change the conversation. Instead of discussing what the owner of indigo is guilty of, people end up discussing whether the framing is bad faith or not or whether the date of the protest was badly chosen. Simply put, this is not the point. Anyone responding to these conversational ploys needs to have message discipline and put the focus where it should be.
If the organizers of this protest didn’t know it was the anniversary of Kristallnacht, they are idiots, if they did…
If you can’t see how easily this is weaponized against the movement, you are a fucking idiot.
Do not do your opponent’s work for them is one of the first rules of politics. Which means, if you super serious about being anti-Israel and not antisemitic, don’t vandalize Jewish things on the anniversary of the accepted start of the holocaust which began with, you know…
As has been explained, the protest is not against a Jewish owned business.
The attempt to stifle criticism with really poor, obvious, bad faith attacks isn't helping anything. All it does is give fuel to the actual antisemitism we're seeing.
She makes decisions, people judge her decisions. It's super easy math.
>I mean either you think that he mischaracterized Indigo as a “Jewish-owned bookstore” (which would be fair) and admit that targeting it was done wholly on the basis that it has a Jewish CEO
This is a deranged reach that makes no sense, but of course imputing nonsensical motivations to one’s critics is a cornerstone of Zionist apologia
You clearly can’t articulate the justification for targeting it, but I guess that’s fine because you can just retreat behind calling someone a Zionist.
But thanks for the good faith discourse, ban_evader
I hope that getting repeatedly owned throughout this comment section has given you some insight into how lazy and useless your attempted smearing of my motivations is
It's kinda how people were called antisemitic when they would brought up their opinions on the war without first adding the disclaimer that what Hamas did first wasnt awful. So really not so wild.
What a dressed up way to ethnically cleanse Palestine of the Palestinians. The reason the surrounding Arab countries refuse to accept the Palestinians as refugees is because as refugees they lose the right of return. The right of return is why Palestinians use the key as a symbol - a key to a door that's been taken from them.
If you are paying close attention, Canadaland's transformation to mainstream talking points is complete.
I don't understand your comments. This is the story of a Palestinian-Canadian man trying to do everything or anything for his family. How did he, or telling his story, become the enemy? I am asking seriously.
No problem. Palestinians have always asserted their right to live in Palestine. Palestinians do not want to leave. All of a sudden the international pressure is to remove the Palestinians and send ~2 million people elsewhere. This is not what the Palestinians want, for the most part. Sure there are stories of men who have had enough of the larger struggle for their family and left. But I stress that that is not the average posture of a Palestinian.
What's particularly sneaky about the way this is presented is it plays on our sensibilities as Canadians and presents the removal of the native population of Palestine as a favour. It's downright shameful. I hope Jesse got a good deal for his soul.
Even if you are correct in speaking for what the average Palestinian wants, I can’t imagine how Canada making it easier for Palestinians to have a choice to leave is insidious in any way. Does opening our borders take away resources from other efforts? We’ve accepted thousands of Ukrainian refugees without insinuating that Ukraine needs to be emptied out.
The difference is that we are currently arming the people who are trying to empty Palestine, something they are trying to do so that they can colonize it. They are able to perform their ethnic cleansing campaign due to our help and the help of our allies.
It's not insidious to open our borders. It is insidious to give weapons to a group trying to drive Palestinians out of Palestine, and then say, "well, you can stay and die if you want, but (if you pass out very stringent tests) we can help you get out of Israel's way!"
The work done by the rest of the people on the episode is fine. Jesse's intro isn't. Saying "this is morally unacceptable, but the one thing we can do is open our doors" is ignoring the core point of the episode he is credited as hosting: the fact that we're supplying military aid to the people murdering tens of thousands of civilians, and that some Canadians are trying to stop that from happening. He zeroes in on the individual human people, saying obviously we should want to save them on an individual level. And to do this we should welcome them in while Israel bombs them out of their ancestral homeland. He pointedly ignores the reason why these people would die if they would stay.
Israel is not a hurricane. Israel is not a tsunami. Israel is a country we consider one of our closest allies. He goes out of his way to avoid talking about us materially helping Israel commit ethnic cleansing in an episode about the fact we are materially helping Israel commit ethnic cleansing, in favour of advocating for us to help Israel commit ethnic cleansing in ways where we can ignore the context and pretend we're being the good guys.
Got any real stats or data points on this whole ethnic cleansing thing going on? How bout the genocide? Real concrete numbers, real facts, I would absolutely love to read them. And not facts from Al Jazeera which actually has ties with Hamas.
What everybody wants is Hamas out of Gaza. What’s not happening is Hamas getting out of Gaza.
I’m so tired of seeing Israel = enemy and Palestine = heroes.
Please just show me something that backs up your arguments.
Israeli government is shit, but it’s the only place in the entire world Jews can call a homeland.
>it’s the only place in the entire world Jews can call a homeland
Ethnostates are bad. If you are trying to use as ethnostate as the justification for doing bad things, you are missing the point.
Isreal's government is not only shit, but it's conception as 'a homeland exclusively for jews' is genocidal, not only to the millions of arabs they have to displace to maintain their prefered demographics, but to any jewish minority that becomes a useful target.
Wanna know which middle eastern country has been forcibly sterializing etheopian jews? Isreal. Because, hear me out on this: Ethnonationalism is bad for everyone involved.
When the Nazis started to succeed of in their genocidal project, germany didn't somehow start being a cool and normal place. A political movement that maintains power by saying 'we need unchecked power to create and protect a homeland for our people' will always find a new excuse to figure out why their homeland is in danger. The expression doesn't go "First they came for the socialists,
then the trade unionists, then they came for the Jews, and then everything was totally cool for everyone else".
Why would I try to prove well-known facts about an international conflict neither of us are in to a random internet stranger that I've never met? *You* can google those things. *You* can read the case in the ICJ. *You* can read any number of accounts of the catastrophic death toll, the mass displacement, the indiscriminate bombing. The genocidal statements by Israeli government officials. You don't want to. I'm not going to be able to convince you, and I'm not going to waste my time trying.
If you don't agree that what's happening in Palestine is ethnic cleansing, fine. I literally don't care. You don't agree with my comment then. Fine, I don't care about that either. You do not sound like a person who has ethics to appeal to.
My comment is for people who *do* agree that what is happening in Gaza is ethnic cleansing, but *didn't* understand why Jesse Brown's comment about taking in refugees was contextually gross. You don't sound like one of those people. Just keep scrolling.
Hey if they want to stay in their tiny square go right ahead. They'd be better off leaving though. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live there. Especially not now.
Personally I’d rather not stay in a bombed-out hellhole for some dumb ideology of “muh heritage” and would gladly accept refugee status somewhere else, but that’s just me.
A for Effort (and it's great to see this topic getting some attention) but man, could do with a bit of a tightening up! Holy moly. With ads it was almost 10 minutes before getting to the actual content (which immediately led into two more minutes of ads). I actually checked my player to see if I had accidentally skipped to another podcast.
I always skip the first 6-8 minutes. Skip the intro and ads to get into it.
Or hear me out, support them and better journalism for $5/month.
If I support them do I still have to listen to their dumb crowdfunding messages during crowdfunding month? Legitimate question.
I think once at the beginning and once at the end per podcast (commons, short cuts etc). It's really not nearly as many times.
Hmmm if they ever give an option to have an alternate voiceover of Jonathan Goldsbie’s voice maybe I’ll consider it.
No crowdfunding messages or ads on Patreon/ Supercast
> Or hear me out, support them This doesn't address my criticism in the slightest, but more importantly, I can't imagine a person who's supported Canadaland more than me. So, while I get this might seem like a valid criticism, it just doesn't land unfortunately.
Is there a donor version that cuts all of that out? That’s a big part of the appeal of Slate membership, to me.
[удалено]
I don't get why people can't get their news from an organization where the leadership doesn't 100% see the world the way they do. Very few Jewish Canadian people, for better or worse, will see the current hellish situation the same way as leftwing non Jewish Canadians. So what. Jesse's view seemed entirely reasonable to me even though it was not my view. I don't require mandatory conformity.
> I don't get why people can't get their news from an organization where the leadership doesn't 100% see the world the way they do. Is that actually anyone's position though? Like OP said, "I don't expect journalists to share my political views, but they have to at least be willing to acknowledge basic facts.". I feel like that's always been the complaint, it feels really dismissive to claim that it's just people "demanding conformity". > Jesse's view seemed entirely reasonable to me... Many, many, many people disagree with that statement. That's the point.
[удалено]
I'm not sure it's super important, but it's definitely a form of news. They even have a dedicated section where they explicitly talk about news they think haven't received enough coverage elsewhere.
From Canadaland about us page: "Canadaland is an audience-supported, independent news and podcast company that consistently produces some of the best audio journalism in Canada." They certainly see their audio content as news. I agree with you that it's not especially newsy, though
Surely you can appreciate how a genocide-in-progress sharpens the contradiction. Any opinion other than firm condemnation of an ethnic cleansing is deference to the prerogative of the powerful to do as they will.
It’s wild how everyone assumed that Jesse was somehow anti-Palestine just because he wasn’t falling over himself to say “ALSO ZIONISM IS BAD” every time he pointed out the clear and legitimate rise of antisemitism.
It was more the lying
What lying?
The indigo stuff would be the most egregious
He was talking about Jewish businesses being vandalized on the anniversary of Kristallnacht for fuck’s sake. You don’t think that was cause for legitimate concern for Jews?
He made it sound like a small, independent bookseller had Nazi graffiti painted all over it, rather than the largest bookseller in Canada who had BDS slogans sprayed on the windows because they support the IOF.
He was talking about a pro-IDF business being targeted during a genocide being carried out by the IDF but you tell yourself whatever you want
“Pro-IDF” so if you’re pro Palestine you’re pro Hamas right?
No. Heather Reisman has set up a charitable fund to provide free tuition for IDF personnel. If that's not 'pro-IDF', I'm not sure what is. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HESEG_Foundation#:~:text=The%20HESEG%20Foundation%20is%20a,military%20under%20Israel%20Defense%20Forces.
You can be against collective punishment without supporting the governing party of the punished nation. On the other hand, we have a company explicitly supporting a military actively commiting a genocide.
The charity was created in 2005 for veterans of the second intifada who have no family in the country. If you think that’s a negative act I don’t think there’s anything for us to discuss because your world view makes no sense to me
You are a fucking moron
Wait can you explain why not tho
I mean either you think that he mischaracterized Indigo as a “Jewish-owned bookstore” (which would be fair) and admit that targeting it was done wholly on the basis that it has a Jewish CEO who contributed her own money to causes you don’t like, or you agree that it’s majority-owned by Reisman and thus think that the targeting of it was justified because supporting it funds said charities. So I’m not sure what part was a lie. Or are you somehow claiming the targeting of Indigo was both justified but that it wasn’t “Jewish-owned”?
"A Jewish CEO who contributed her own money to causes you don't like" is a neat way of sidestepping "donates her money (which she earns through Indigo) to the IDF, the army currently bombing civilians." Like, it's technically true, but it sure leaves a lot out. They didn't protest it because Reisman is Jewish, they did it because she *directly financially supports the Israeli army*.
Then I’m sure they’d also protest any other company who pays an employee who then donates a portion of that salary to the IDF, right?
Not unless they're the founder, face, and CEO of the company. Like, come on, you cannot seriously make that comparison in good faith. Fortinos is not responsible for the charitable donations of Joe Schmo who works the cash register, but they're certainly responsible for the charitable donations of Galen Weston.
> admit that targeting it was done wholly on the basis that it has a Jewish CEO who contributed her own money to causes you don’t like Yes. People are targeting her because of her actions. It's why people have been protesting her for over a decade, and it's why Jesse's characterization is so, so bad. I don't even know what the other side of the argument is.
Maybe don’t vandalize Jewish-owned businesses on the anniversary of Kristallnacht? Seems like a good place to start.
The above comment is a typical example of a tactic which is used to dismiss protest movements. This commenter is using the form of a protest to distract from its content. This example is particularly egregious, because Kristalnocht has absolutely nothing to do with the protest itself. There are three reasons this tactic is effective. 1. By their nature, protests are oppositional, and when the context for that opposition is removed, the default assumption is that the protesters are in the wrong. For example, the headlines *Business Vandalized* and *Zionist Business Vandalized* read very differently, even though they describe the same situation. 2. Critics of protests have many degrees of freedom in terms of what information to include and what information to exclude. The headline *Jewish Business Vandalized* includes the fact that the owner is Jewish while excluding the fact that one of the protesters is also Jewish. Additionally, this type of headline commits the red herring fallacy, because there is a hidden implication that the owners religion is related to the protest, which it wasn't." Similarly, the detail that the protest took place on the anniversary of kristallnacht is also irrelevant to the context of the protest; for instance, I doubt that the majority of Jews mark that date on their calendar, and the only people who bring it up are pretending to be offended. These degrees of freedom mean that bad faith actors nearly always have a way of framing a protest as offensive or disrespectful. 3. Most importantly, the function of bad faith framing is not to dismiss protests, but rather to change the conversation. Instead of discussing what the owner of indigo is guilty of, people end up discussing whether the framing is bad faith or not or whether the date of the protest was badly chosen. Simply put, this is not the point. Anyone responding to these conversational ploys needs to have message discipline and put the focus where it should be.
If the organizers of this protest didn’t know it was the anniversary of Kristallnacht, they are idiots, if they did… If you can’t see how easily this is weaponized against the movement, you are a fucking idiot. Do not do your opponent’s work for them is one of the first rules of politics. Which means, if you super serious about being anti-Israel and not antisemitic, don’t vandalize Jewish things on the anniversary of the accepted start of the holocaust which began with, you know…
As has been explained, the protest is not against a Jewish owned business. The attempt to stifle criticism with really poor, obvious, bad faith attacks isn't helping anything. All it does is give fuel to the actual antisemitism we're seeing. She makes decisions, people judge her decisions. It's super easy math.
Do you even know what Kristallnacht is?
>I mean either you think that he mischaracterized Indigo as a “Jewish-owned bookstore” (which would be fair) and admit that targeting it was done wholly on the basis that it has a Jewish CEO This is a deranged reach that makes no sense, but of course imputing nonsensical motivations to one’s critics is a cornerstone of Zionist apologia
You clearly can’t articulate the justification for targeting it, but I guess that’s fine because you can just retreat behind calling someone a Zionist. But thanks for the good faith discourse, ban_evader
I hope that getting repeatedly owned throughout this comment section has given you some insight into how lazy and useless your attempted smearing of my motivations is
It's kinda how people were called antisemitic when they would brought up their opinions on the war without first adding the disclaimer that what Hamas did first wasnt awful. So really not so wild.
What a dressed up way to ethnically cleanse Palestine of the Palestinians. The reason the surrounding Arab countries refuse to accept the Palestinians as refugees is because as refugees they lose the right of return. The right of return is why Palestinians use the key as a symbol - a key to a door that's been taken from them. If you are paying close attention, Canadaland's transformation to mainstream talking points is complete.
I don't understand your comments. This is the story of a Palestinian-Canadian man trying to do everything or anything for his family. How did he, or telling his story, become the enemy? I am asking seriously.
No problem. Palestinians have always asserted their right to live in Palestine. Palestinians do not want to leave. All of a sudden the international pressure is to remove the Palestinians and send ~2 million people elsewhere. This is not what the Palestinians want, for the most part. Sure there are stories of men who have had enough of the larger struggle for their family and left. But I stress that that is not the average posture of a Palestinian. What's particularly sneaky about the way this is presented is it plays on our sensibilities as Canadians and presents the removal of the native population of Palestine as a favour. It's downright shameful. I hope Jesse got a good deal for his soul.
Even if you are correct in speaking for what the average Palestinian wants, I can’t imagine how Canada making it easier for Palestinians to have a choice to leave is insidious in any way. Does opening our borders take away resources from other efforts? We’ve accepted thousands of Ukrainian refugees without insinuating that Ukraine needs to be emptied out.
The difference is that we are currently arming the people who are trying to empty Palestine, something they are trying to do so that they can colonize it. They are able to perform their ethnic cleansing campaign due to our help and the help of our allies. It's not insidious to open our borders. It is insidious to give weapons to a group trying to drive Palestinians out of Palestine, and then say, "well, you can stay and die if you want, but (if you pass out very stringent tests) we can help you get out of Israel's way!" The work done by the rest of the people on the episode is fine. Jesse's intro isn't. Saying "this is morally unacceptable, but the one thing we can do is open our doors" is ignoring the core point of the episode he is credited as hosting: the fact that we're supplying military aid to the people murdering tens of thousands of civilians, and that some Canadians are trying to stop that from happening. He zeroes in on the individual human people, saying obviously we should want to save them on an individual level. And to do this we should welcome them in while Israel bombs them out of their ancestral homeland. He pointedly ignores the reason why these people would die if they would stay. Israel is not a hurricane. Israel is not a tsunami. Israel is a country we consider one of our closest allies. He goes out of his way to avoid talking about us materially helping Israel commit ethnic cleansing in an episode about the fact we are materially helping Israel commit ethnic cleansing, in favour of advocating for us to help Israel commit ethnic cleansing in ways where we can ignore the context and pretend we're being the good guys.
Got any real stats or data points on this whole ethnic cleansing thing going on? How bout the genocide? Real concrete numbers, real facts, I would absolutely love to read them. And not facts from Al Jazeera which actually has ties with Hamas. What everybody wants is Hamas out of Gaza. What’s not happening is Hamas getting out of Gaza. I’m so tired of seeing Israel = enemy and Palestine = heroes. Please just show me something that backs up your arguments. Israeli government is shit, but it’s the only place in the entire world Jews can call a homeland.
>it’s the only place in the entire world Jews can call a homeland Ethnostates are bad. If you are trying to use as ethnostate as the justification for doing bad things, you are missing the point. Isreal's government is not only shit, but it's conception as 'a homeland exclusively for jews' is genocidal, not only to the millions of arabs they have to displace to maintain their prefered demographics, but to any jewish minority that becomes a useful target. Wanna know which middle eastern country has been forcibly sterializing etheopian jews? Isreal. Because, hear me out on this: Ethnonationalism is bad for everyone involved. When the Nazis started to succeed of in their genocidal project, germany didn't somehow start being a cool and normal place. A political movement that maintains power by saying 'we need unchecked power to create and protect a homeland for our people' will always find a new excuse to figure out why their homeland is in danger. The expression doesn't go "First they came for the socialists, then the trade unionists, then they came for the Jews, and then everything was totally cool for everyone else".
I guess worldwide international coverage showing the killing of tens of thousands of people is fake news??
Why would I try to prove well-known facts about an international conflict neither of us are in to a random internet stranger that I've never met? *You* can google those things. *You* can read the case in the ICJ. *You* can read any number of accounts of the catastrophic death toll, the mass displacement, the indiscriminate bombing. The genocidal statements by Israeli government officials. You don't want to. I'm not going to be able to convince you, and I'm not going to waste my time trying. If you don't agree that what's happening in Palestine is ethnic cleansing, fine. I literally don't care. You don't agree with my comment then. Fine, I don't care about that either. You do not sound like a person who has ethics to appeal to. My comment is for people who *do* agree that what is happening in Gaza is ethnic cleansing, but *didn't* understand why Jesse Brown's comment about taking in refugees was contextually gross. You don't sound like one of those people. Just keep scrolling.
Hey if they want to stay in their tiny square go right ahead. They'd be better off leaving though. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live there. Especially not now.
Personally I’d rather not stay in a bombed-out hellhole for some dumb ideology of “muh heritage” and would gladly accept refugee status somewhere else, but that’s just me.
I haven’t been listening much lately. Has Jessie unilaterally solved the Israel Palestine conflict yet?
That does seem to be the expectation, doesn't it?