I was ROFL reading that “codes of conduct” and “peer review” would ensure that “think tanks” would not be influenced by the views of contributors (“Experts for hire,” WJW, Sept. 25). Can anyone believe that Qatar would support Indyk if he continuously blamed Qatar’s support for Hamas and Hamas itself the way he blames settlements for the on-going conflict? It is just laughable. Indyk arrived at his drumbeat of criticisms of Israel independent of donors. Yet, by holding these views, he has a platform and substantial income supplied by Qatar and others. Were Indyk an honorable man, he would refuse money from anyone with a substantial interest in the conflict, particularly one supporting terrorists, as Qatar does.
We read about Palestinians who support peace, but what else? It’s easy to claim to support peace, when you are not accountable for peace and when you don’t make compromise to facilitate peace. Every Palestinian supports the “right of return.” Would that mean peace? Every Palestinian demands a state encompassing all the disputed territory. Would that mean peace? No Palestinian stands against Hamas. Does that indicate peace? Germans, too, wanted peace, but none stood against the Nazis. All Palestinians have demands on Israel in order for there to be peace, but none offer any compromises on anything that would mean peace.
If the Palestinians cannot compromise, accept Israel and fight their own terrorists, then I’m not listening to their meaningless chatter about how they support peace.