Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
NYT: Your parents were among the country’s founders.
Livni: They were the first couple to marry in Israel, the very first. Both of them were in the Irgun. They were freedom fighters, and they met while boarding a British train. When the British Mandate was here, they robbed a train to get the money in order to buy weapons.
NYT: It was a more romantic era.
The New York Times' Deborah Solomon, interviewing Tzipi Livni (war criminal daughter of Irgun mass murderer Eitan Livni):
NYT: Your parents were among the countrys founders.
Livni: They were the first couple to marry in Israel, the very first. Both of them were in the Irgun. They were freedom fighters, and they met while boarding a British train. When the British Mandate was here, they robbed a train to get the money in order to buy weapons.
NYT: It was a more romantic era.
Linkie:
Questions for Tzipi Livni - Israel's Opposition Leader - Interview - NYTimes.com
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Same for Zionists as Hamas, really.
The New York Times' Deborah Solomon, interviewing Tzipi Livni (war criminal daughter of Irgun mass murderer Eitan Livni):
Linkie:NYT: Your parents were among the countrys founders.
Livni: They were the first couple to marry in Israel, the very first. Both of them were in the Irgun. They were freedom fighters, and they met while boarding a British train. When the British Mandate was here, they robbed a train to get the money in order to buy weapons.
NYT: It was a more romantic era.
Questions for Tzipi Livni - Israel's Opposition Leader - Interview - NYTimes.com
The New York Times' Deborah Solomon, interviewing Tzipi Livni (war criminal daughter of Irgun mass murderer Eitan Livni):
NYT: Your parents were among the countrys founders.
Livni: They were the first couple to marry in Israel, the very first. Both of them were in the Irgun. They were freedom fighters, and they met while boarding a British train. When the British Mandate was here, they robbed a train to get the money in order to buy weapons.
NYT: It was a more romantic era.
Linkie:
Questions for Tzipi Livni - Israel's Opposition Leader - Interview - NYTimes.com
Since the exact subject being discussed in this quote was the marriage of Livni's parents, maybe the interviewer was referring to that aspect of the story.
The New York Times' Deborah Solomon, interviewing Tzipi Livni (war criminal daughter of Irgun mass murderer Eitan Livni):
Linkie:NYT: Your parents were among the countrys founders.
Livni: They were the first couple to marry in Israel, the very first. Both of them were in the Irgun. They were freedom fighters, and they met while boarding a British train. When the British Mandate was here, they robbed a train to get the money in order to buy weapons.
NYT: It was a more romantic era.
Questions for Tzipi Livni - Israel's Opposition Leader - Interview - NYTimes.com
Which is why they think it is romantic when the Palestinians are terrorists, they think terrorism is romantic.
The New York Times' Deborah Solomon, interviewing Tzipi Livni (war criminal daughter of Irgun mass murderer Eitan Livni):
NYT: Your parents were among the countrys founders.
Livni: They were the first couple to marry in Israel, the very first. Both of them were in the Irgun. They were freedom fighters, and they met while boarding a British train. When the British Mandate was here, they robbed a train to get the money in order to buy weapons.
NYT: It was a more romantic era.
Linkie:
Questions for Tzipi Livni - Israel's Opposition Leader - Interview - NYTimes.com
The New York Times' Deborah Solomon, interviewing Tzipi Livni (war criminal daughter of Irgun mass murderer Eitan Livni)
Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward.
The New York Times' Deborah Solomon, interviewing Tzipi Livni (war criminal daughter of Irgun mass murderer Eitan Livni):
NYT: Your parents were among the countrys founders.
Livni: They were the first couple to marry in Israel, the very first. Both of them were in the Irgun. They were freedom fighters, and they met while boarding a British train. When the British Mandate was here, they robbed a train to get the money in order to buy weapons.
NYT: It was a more romantic era.
Linkie:
Questions for Tzipi Livni - Israel's Opposition Leader - Interview - NYTimes.com
Are people supposed to be outraged over this or something?
The New York Times' Deborah Solomon, interviewing Tzipi Livni (war criminal daughter of Irgun mass murderer Eitan Livni):
Linkie:
Questions for Tzipi Livni - Israel's Opposition Leader - Interview - NYTimes.com
Are people supposed to be outraged over this or something?
Or surprised, either?
You'd have to have been living in a cave for the last 60 years not to understand the degree of ethnocentric bullshit these combative cousins spew.
And that totally negates their policy of publishing classified national security matters when the publication would aid Al Qaeda.I believe the NYT's official position is support for Arab terrorism in Israel.
Of course! That's why they chose the father of an IDF soldier as their Jerusalem Bureau chief.
And that totally negates their policy of publishing classified national security matters when the publication would aid Al Qaeda.I believe the NYT's official position is support for Arab terrorism in Israel.
Of course! That's why they chose the father of an IDF soldier as their Jerusalem Bureau chief.
Oh, wait...no, it doesn't. The NYT has chosen to side with terrorists.
And that totally negates their policy of publishing classified national security matters when the publication would aid Al Qaeda.Of course! That's why they chose the father of an IDF soldier as their Jerusalem Bureau chief.
Oh, wait...no, it doesn't. The NYT has chosen to side with terrorists.
How, exactly did it help Al Qaeda? (I gather that the underlying ASSumption here is that Al Qaeda is too stupid to have figured out the rather non-specific stuff themselves).
If I had revealed that same information, I'd be in prison.The 9/11 Commission, in seeking to explain how we fell victim to a surprise assault, pointed to the gap between our foreign and domestic intelligence-collection systems, a gap that over time had grown into a critical vulnerability. Closing that gap, in the wake of September 11, meant intercepting al-Qaeda communications all over the globe. This was the purpose of the NSA programa program essential to U.S. national security, in the words of Jane Harman, the ranking Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committeethe disclosure of which has now damaged critical intelligence capabilities.
One might go further. What the New York Times has done is nothing less than to compromise the centerpiece of our defensive efforts in the war on terrorism. If information about the NSA program had been quietly conveyed to an al-Qaeda operative on a microdot, or on paper with invisible ink, there can be no doubt that the episode would have been treated by the government as a cut-and-dried case of espionage. Publishing it for the world to read, the Times has accomplished the same end while at the same time congratulating itself for bravely defending the First Amendment and thereby protecting usfrom, presumably, ourselves. The fact that it chose to drop this revelation into print on the very day that renewal of the Patriot Act was being debated in the Senatethe bills reauthorization beyond a few weeks is still not assuredspeaks for itself.
And that totally negates their policy of publishing classified national security matters when the publication would aid Al Qaeda.
Oh, wait...no, it doesn't. The NYT has chosen to side with terrorists.
How, exactly did it help Al Qaeda? (I gather that the underlying ASSumption here is that Al Qaeda is too stupid to have figured out the rather non-specific stuff themselves).If I had revealed that same information, I'd be in prison.The 9/11 Commission, in seeking to explain how we fell victim to a surprise assault, pointed to the gap between our foreign and domestic intelligence-collection systems, a gap that over time had grown into a critical vulnerability. Closing that gap, in the wake of September 11, meant intercepting al-Qaeda communications all over the globe. This was the purpose of the NSA programa program essential to U.S. national security, in the words of Jane Harman, the ranking Democratic member of the House Intelligence Committeethe disclosure of which has now damaged critical intelligence capabilities.
One might go further. What the New York Times has done is nothing less than to compromise the centerpiece of our defensive efforts in the war on terrorism. If information about the NSA program had been quietly conveyed to an al-Qaeda operative on a microdot, or on paper with invisible ink, there can be no doubt that the episode would have been treated by the government as a cut-and-dried case of espionage. Publishing it for the world to read, the Times has accomplished the same end while at the same time congratulating itself for bravely defending the First Amendment and thereby protecting usfrom, presumably, ourselves. The fact that it chose to drop this revelation into print on the very day that renewal of the Patriot Act was being debated in the Senatethe bills reauthorization beyond a few weeks is still not assuredspeaks for itself.
But please, by all means, continue to cheerlead for terrorists and their supporters.
And that totally negates their policy of publishing classified national security matters when the publication would aid Al Qaeda.Of course! That's why they chose the father of an IDF soldier as their Jerusalem Bureau chief.
Oh, wait...no, it doesn't. The NYT has chosen to side with terrorists.
How, exactly did it help Al Qaeda? (I gather that the underlying ASSumption here is that Al Qaeda is too stupid to have figured out the rather non-specific stuff themselves).
