"But even if it hadn't, Zionists ought to understand that a Lexus is no substitute for individual freedom and dignity."This is the first example, but not the last, of his ranting about "Zionists." Here are some others from the article: One wonders what exactly Moor's definition of "Zionist" is. It can't be "Israeli" because Thomas Friedman is one, as he explains in the article. I could go on but I'm not going to try and read his mind. Instead I'll just let the comments about "Zionists" stand on their own, take it as you will.
But what I really wanted to talk about was that his is exactly what the article is all about, and in fact what Mr. Moor is all about. On the one hand he will cry endlessly about how horribly the Palestinians suffer, but then in this article he makes it clear that he wants them to suffer before they give up anything he thinks they deserve. He is more than willing to throw his fellow Palestinians under the bus forever before letting them compromise even one inch for the sake of peace. The above comment sums it up but I like this one too:
"In light of all this, it bears underlining my main point: The Palestinians will one day be prosperous, but not until they're free. Freedom, not wealth, is the more sublime human imperative."Have you got that, Zionists? The Palestinians should remain impoverished forever rather than compromise anything to Israel! We have already seen just how extreme Mr. Moor is in his other works, and we know that he believes the "right" of return is inalienable. Right now he is talking about freedom, but it seems likely that he would also want the Palestinians not to be prosperous until they are granted "their rights," i.e. the right to flood into Israel and destroy it.
It just goes to show what we have already known: That he is more Palestinian than the Palestinians by a long shot. It doesn't bother him in the least if Palestinians suffer, if it means keeping up the struggle against Israel, which places him above and beyond even your average HP talkbacker. One would think that caring about the welfare of the Palestinian people is what makes one pro-Palestinian but apparently that isn't the case. One needs to be willing to screw the Palestinians over for some arbitrary and abstract concept and/or pride, then one can call oneself "pro-Palestinian."
I imagine this is much easier to do for people who don't live in the territories themselves. Like say, Ahmed Moor.