Jared Kushner’s 2019 Bahrain economic plan for Palestine—$50B in Gulf-funded investments, deferred political issues, and free movement—mirrors Trump’s Art of the Deal strategy but was dismissed by Abbas (84) and Hamas as a ploy to legitimize Israeli annexation. Pollack argues it pressures Palestinians by framing financial incentives as leverage, yet past rejections (like Arafat’s 1995 Camp David deal) show history repeating. With Western focus fading and Sunni states aligning with Israel against Iran, the conflict’s future hinges on whether economic pragmatism can override entrenched resistance. [Automatically generated summary]
Today I talk about Jared Kushner's speech in Bahrain where he tries to put forward a deal to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli disputes.
I'll give you my thoughts on it.
I'll play a clip from Kushner and I'll give you my recollection of the Camp David proposals of almost 20 years ago.
Before I do though, can you mosey on over to the rebel.media slash shows and would you please consider becoming a subscriber?
You get the premium content, which means you get the video version of the podcast.
And you also get Sheila Gonridge's show and David Menzie's show, and of course, the satisfaction of knowing that you help us pay our bills.
All right, without further ado, here is today's podcast.
You're listening to a Rebel Media podcast.
Tonight, can Donald Trump bring his deal-making skills to the intractable Palestinian-Israel standoff?
It's June 27th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're the biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I'm publishing that is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Let me show you a clip of Jared Kushner.
He's Donald Trump's son-in-law and general fixer.
Intractable Conflict Obsession00:05:58
Take a look at this.
Numerous well-intended programs, investments, and plans have been derailed by violence, political instability, and the lack of a resolution to the long-standing core issues of this conflict.
To be clear, economic growth and prosperity for the Palestinian people are not possible without an enduring and fair political solution to the conflict.
One that guarantees Israel's security and respects the dignity of the Palestinian people.
However, today is not about the political issues.
We'll get to those at the right time.
The goal of this workshop is to begin thinking about these challenges in a new way.
Let's try to view this conflict and the potential of the entire region through a different lens and work together to develop a concrete plan to try and achieve it.
For a moment, imagine a new reality in the Middle East.
Imagine a bustling commercial and tourist center in Gaza and the West Bank where international businesses come together and thrive.
Imagine the West Bank as a blossoming economy full of entrepreneurs, engineers, scientists, and business leaders.
Imagine people and goods flowing quickly and securely throughout the region as economics become more integrated and people become more prosperous.
This isn't a stretch.
This is actually the historical legacy of the Middle East, specifically of Gaza and the West Bank.
It is a legacy of great cultures coming together as a center of commerce, innovation, and prosperity.
What do you make of that?
I'll give you some thoughts on the substance of it, and we'll ask a smarter guy than me, our friend Joel Pollock, in a moment.
But you know the first thing I thought about when I saw that clip?
It's how long it's been since I heard anyone serious in politics, in a leadership position, a decider, talk about the Israel-Palestine issue.
You know that Sherlock Holmes story where the clue was the dog that didn't bark?
I think about that a lot.
We're so busy listening and responding to and thinking about the dogs that bark in our life, maybe we don't notice the voices we no longer hear.
A Canadian example was the national unity crisis under Stephen Harper.
You know, for years, we forget sometimes.
That was the central obsession of the Liberal Party, for example.
It makes sense.
In 1995, the Quebec separation referendum came within half a percent of succeeding.
And that was after Brian Mulroney's PCs and their disastrous Charlottetown Accord.
And of course the Bloc Québécois itself, remember them, emerged from Mulroney's coalition.
It was all the country's fancy people seemed to talk about.
And then suddenly, when Stephen Harper and his conservatives took office with very few seats in Quebec, I might add, and he himself being a true blue Westerner, sometimes called a cowboy, well, you'd think separatism would have boiled over in Quebec, but the opposite.
He cooled it off so much that the Bloc Quebecois just sort of evaporated as a party.
Same with the provincial Partique Wine.
Same with the national afraidness on the subject.
And by the way, Harper also cooled off any lingering Western separatism too.
For a decade under Harper, national unity was the dog that didn't bark.
Incredible how quickly Justin Trudeau has inflamed that again, by the way.
But that's the thing.
It was an obsession of the political class, the media class, the pundits, the pollsters, the lobbyists.
All federal spending was viewed through that lens of how can we keep Quebec in.
Anyone and everyone was walking on eggshells about Quebec.
Political leaders for every party, well, they just had to be from Quebec, obviously, and then that just stopped.
And that's what I'm thinking about, the Israel-Palestinian issue.
It was an obsession of the West.
During the Cold War, it was obviously less dominant than the central challenge of that age, although it was sort of a proxy for the Cold War with Israel being backed by the Democratic allies and the Arab states generally being on the side of the Soviet Union.
But when the Berlin Wall fell and before the horrors of 9-11 changed the, I suppose, the next chapter, there was this brief holiday from seriousness.
Francis Fukuyama called it the end of history.
And filling that empty void of things to talk about, I guess, was the Israel-Arab dispute, more particularly the Israel-Palestinian dispute.
I should tell you that all of Israel's disputes with all of its Arab neighbors and all of its domestic terrorism and all its fights with the Palestinians, all of its wars and all the terrorism in the past 75 years, 100 years, its War of Independence in 48, the famous Six-Day War in 1967, the 1973 Yom Kippur War, all of the war in Lebanon, and all the terrorist attacks and Israeli counterattacks, you know that all of that combined for the past 75 years,
you know the total death toll on both sides for that entire history of the modern conflict?
Do you know it's less than 100,000 souls?
I mean, listen, that's terrible.
But in the scope and the scale of things, that is a drop in the bucket.
You know, the Syrian civil war, that alone has cost half a million lives in, what, five years?
The civil war in Yemen, much briefer, much more recent, is estimated to have already cost 70,000 lives.
That's as much as a century of disputes between Israel and the Palestinians.
My point is not to dismiss the tragedy of the Israel-Palestinian conflict or any of the other conflicts, but to point out that the amount of political interest and political capital and attention the political media spent huffing and puffing about Israel and the Palestinians is bizarrely disproportionate compared to other conflicts, even in the same region.
It is small.
But the media make it look huge.
For years, the size of the international press corps in Israel was as large as it was in cities like Paris or London.
The CBC was the worst, by the way.
CTV, the same.
Huge and obsessed.
Peace Dividend Dreams00:15:09
During Bill Clinton's term as president, that was really the end of history interregnum from 1992 to 2000.
What a time to be president, eh?
The world was at peace.
People were talking about the peace dividend.
We don't have to pay the military anymore.
Everything was happy.
The two Germanies were reuniting.
Perpetual peace was upon us.
During Clinton's tenure, did you know that Yasser Arafat, the head of the terrorist Palestinian Liberation Organization, the PLO, Arafat became the number one most frequent visitor to the White House of any foreign leader.
Can you believe that?
The number one visitor.
I suppose it was a millenarian thing.
Do you know what I mean by that?
The end of the millennium.
Maybe Bill Clinton wanted some sort of legacy other than Monica Lewinsky.
Maybe Israel, too, was feeling strong.
So everybody wanted to be known for all time as the bringer of peace.
And who knows?
Maybe the Messiah would come.
It's the second millennium.
And so Israel and America offered a terrorist named Yasser Arafat.
They offered him everything.
And I really do mean everything.
All the land, the Gaza and the West Bank.
There were a few acres of exceptions, land that was densely inhabited by Jews, but Israel gave up other land in compensation.
Israel gave the Palestinians control over the Temple Mount.
The Temple Mount is in the remains of the Jewish temple itself.
Israel gave Palestinians around the world the right to move back into Israel.
150,000 a year, which for a tiny country like Israel is stunning.
That would be, you know, what's that?
Israel, a country of what, seven, eight million people.
That would be like almost a million people coming into Canada every year, all Arabs.
Oh, and billions of dollars of cash to the PLO.
And security promises.
In fact, America and Israel would actually train and arm the Palestinians.
I'm not making any of this up.
You can check it out for yourself.
It's called the Camp David Accords.
Every single thing was given to them.
And they had this happy handshake.
Israel, the Palestinians, Bill Clinton, it was going to be wonderful.
The three men, Israel's Ehud Barak, the PLOs, Yasser Arafat and Bill Clinton.
You know, they met for two solid weeks at the U.S. President's Camp David retreat.
And they had that deal.
But then Arafat just said, no, didn't mean it.
He was given every single thing.
And all he had to do was to accept yes for an answer.
But he didn't.
He wouldn't, or maybe he couldn't.
I don't know.
He didn't want peace for some reason.
I've heard it said that he was worried he himself would be overthrown by hardliners.
Or maybe it's that he didn't want the boring and hard work of actually building a country, you know, picking up the garbage, cleaning up, you know, doing the day-to-day humdrum work.
Maybe he preferred the exciting work of being a gun-toting airplane hijacker.
I don't know.
Or maybe he just saw the sweep of history.
Maybe he thought in terms of centuries, not weeks, or even four-year terms like a president.
Bill Clinton, of course, was just six months away from his own retirement.
And maybe Arafat thought, huh, I'll wait out these infidels.
I won't go down in history as the Muslim to make peace with the Jews.
I don't know.
Who knows what was in his mind?
But he scuppered the perfect deal.
And not only did he reject the deal, but he immediately sparked a violent uprising across Israel, the most deadly other than any war in Israel, called an intifada, the second intifada.
And not only did this kill the peace deal, but it actually killed the Israeli political left because it proved to every Israeli, right or left, that you could literally offer anything and everything to the Palestinians.
There literally was nothing left to offer them.
They got everything.
And they would still reject you.
It proved that the peace process wasn't about peace.
It was just about the process.
Ehud Barak was the last left-winger, if you can call him that, elected as prime minister, and he was gone 18 years ago.
Don't take it from me.
Take it from Bill Clinton himself.
Here's what he wrote in his autobiography.
He said, Arafat once complimented him by telling him, you are a great man.
And Clinton responded, I am not a great man.
I am a failure, and you made me one.
Even Clinton said it.
I suppose it's better to be disillusioned than illusioned.
And sure, leftists around the world, including Canada's own Justin Trudeau, they still love the Palestinians for whatever reason.
When Donald Trump, I don't know if you recall, when he cut $25 million from the Hamas-run Gaza Strip because of their terrorism, Justin Trudeau jumped to the front of the line to restore their funding by giving them our money.
I mean, seriously, but with the departure of Barack Obama a couple years ago, the focus, the obsession on the Israel-Palestine issue was really gone.
I mean, Canada and the leftists of the European Union aren't that important in the region.
Only America is maybe Russia.
And with the rise of ISIS in 2014 and the rise of Iran's nuclear program, there are more important things to do than talk about the PLO.
Trump dispatched with those old illusions in a few tweets.
Here's an example.
He's got a ton of these.
He said, it's not only Pakistan that we pay billions of dollars to for nothing, but also many other countries and others.
As an example, we pay the Palestinians hundreds of millions of dollars a year and get no appreciation or respect.
They don't even want to negotiate a long overdue.
He was ranting here.
He had two tweets.
Peace treaty with Israel.
We have taken Jerusalem, the toughest part of the negotiation, off the table.
But Israel for that would have had to pay more.
But with the Palestinians no longer willing to talk peace, why should we make any of these massive future payments to them?
Holy moly.
And that's not even his toughest tweet, by the way.
That was about 18 months ago he wrote that.
Trump is focused on other things in his life.
China, North Korea, real threats, economic threats, nuclear threats, even the free trade deal with Canada, Mexico, a long-running stalemate between the PLO and Israel just isn't a top issue for Donald Trump.
Why would it be?
And really, it hasn't been a top issue for most Sunni Arab countries either.
They're either worried about being devoured by a terrorist group like ISIS, like Syria was, or being devoured by Iran.
And I think slowly they just realized Israel might be their ally, possibly, against some of these threats, especially against Iran.
And Israel probably isn't going anywhere.
And that what the PLO terrorists want isn't really that important in the scheme of things.
You'll remember one of Trump's first visits as president was to Saudi Arabia and then immediately to Israel thereafter.
And in Saudi Arabia, Trump told the Arab countries to throw off extremism in language that you could never imagine Obama saying.
It's a choice between two futures, and it is a choice America cannot make for you.
A better future is only possible if your nations drive out the terrorists and drive out the extremists.
Drive them out.
Drive them out of your places of worship.
Drive them out of your communities.
Drive them out of your holy land and drive them out of this earth.
That was the first time any American president had spoken so bluntly to the Saudis.
And the rest of the Saudi-oriented leaders were there too.
That was a bunch of Arab leaders who listened.
All the Sunni states in the region.
And they accepted what Trump said more or less, or at least they accepted that Trump said it.
And now here's Kushner, his son-in-law and fixer.
Numerous well-intended programs, investments, and plans have been derailed by violence, political instability, and the lack of a resolution to the long-standing core issues of this conflict.
To be clear, economic growth and prosperity for the Palestinian people are not possible without an enduring and fair political solution to the conflict.
One that guarantees Israel's security and respects the dignity of the Palestinian people.
However, today is not about the political issues.
We'll get to those at the right time.
The goal of this workshop is to begin thinking about these challenges in a new way.
Let's try to view this conflict and the potential of the entire region through a different lens and work together to develop a concrete plan to try and achieve it.
For a moment, imagine a new reality in the Middle East.
Imagine a bustling commercial and tourist center in Gaza and the West Bank where international businesses come together and thrive.
Imagine the West Bank as a blossoming economy full of entrepreneurs, engineers, scientists, and business leaders.
Imagine people and goods flowing quickly and securely throughout the region as economics become more integrated and people become more prosperous.
This isn't a stretch.
This is actually the historical legacy of the Middle East, specifically of Gaza and the West Bank.
It is a legacy of great cultures coming together as a center of commerce, innovation, and prosperity.
Well, look, that sounds great, very positive.
It feels like that end of history moment after the Cold War again.
We can all get along.
We can all, I don't know, find common ground, eat the same McDonald's, watch the same music videos.
There's never going to be another war because we'll all be buying and selling stuff to each other.
I mean, it's nice.
It didn't work under Bill Clinton.
Not sure why it would work now.
Maybe because the rest of the Muslim world is a bit tired of the Palestinian issue.
They're concerned about other issues.
Maybe because they, I don't know, really want to be rich like Dubai in Gaza, the West Bank.
Maybe because Donald Trump drives a hard bargain.
I don't know.
I'm a skeptic.
I'm a skeptic.
But look at this.
Immediately after Kushner's announcement, look at this headline.
The Palestinians, or at least some of them, have rejected the idea.
Here's a PLO diplomat quoted in that LA Times story.
Hassan Zomlot, the head of the Palestinian mission to the UK, and another ambassador to Washington, dismissed the conference as a way to legitimize Israel's annexation of the Palestinian territories.
They're talking about Kushner's speech in Bahrain where he said those things.
Here's what the Palestinian officials said.
This is the most disingenuous, deceitful act by a state in a long time in the history of international relations, said Zamlot in a phone interview Tuesday.
Their idea is that this is a real estate deal with Israel getting the property and Palestinians getting the cash.
The problem is that Palestine is not for sale.
You know, I got to admit, it did sound a little bit like a real estate pitch.
That's Kushner's business, by the way.
He's a huge real estate developer in New York, and that's Trump's business too.
He's a real estate developer.
So maybe that insult stings because maybe it's close to the truth.
Maybe it's right.
But look, real estate developers get deals done, and this is a deal.
It's a deal that there's money and there's emotion and there's religion and there's geography.
I mean, maybe no deal is doable.
For Yasser Arafat, no deal was doable.
Why?
I don't know.
Because he was worried about being killed or being hated or making the wrong choice in the grand sweep of history?
Who knows?
But that was the perfect deal he was offered.
I'm a deep skeptic here.
There is no tradition of liberal democracy in Arabia.
There just isn't.
There's no civil society left in Gaza, not much in the West Bank.
There's no real free market.
There's no entrepreneurial class.
There's some crony capitalism and some robber barons.
I don't know.
What do you think?
I'm a doubter.
But our next guest is a bit more sanguine.
Stay with us for Joel Pollack next.
And joining us now is our friend Joel Pollack, senior editor-at-large at Breitbart.com.
Joel, great to see you again.
Jared Kushner, who's the master fixer for the Trump administration, although I think he's too liberal for many Republicans, seems to be spearheading the greatest part of the deal of all, a deal to solve the Palestinian problem.
I'm a big skeptic because what he says sounds a lot like the deal that was tried and failed 20 years ago.
Basically, give everything to the Palestinians and a ton of cash and think that they'll be reasonable like us and take the deal.
I see this as just a vanity project.
Am I being too pessimistic?
Well, I don't think so.
This time, they are doing things in a different order.
And if you can see behind me, by the way, I'm on stage here just before the start of the Democratic debates, which are going to take up the rest of the week here in Miami, Florida.
That's the commotion behind me.
The candidates have been walking through and preparing, and it's going to be pretty exciting to see how this all shakes out over the weekend.
But yeah, look, they're putting things in a different order this time.
They're not putting the political solutions first.
They're putting the economic solutions first.
And I think the reason they're doing that is to say, look, we know there's this roadblock, there's this intransigence, this refusal to negotiate on the final settlement issues, Jerusalem, refugees, borders.
Let's look past that.
Let's look to where we want to go.
Let's look to the eventual goal.
For too long, I think previous administrations have said the agreement is the goal.
And what Jared Kushner has actually done is interesting.
He has said, no, the future is the goal, the better future, the integrated region, the economic growth, the West Bank and Gaza prospering, Israel safe, Palestinians with dignity, people making money, people investing, people finding work.
That's the image, that's the vision he asked people to imagine.
And that was refreshing.
There's been too much emphasis on where the parties divide.
He's asking people to fast forward in their minds and think about a future that works for everybody, even if there are still disputes about other things.
And I think it's very effective.
Now, Palestinians haven't agreed to anything yet, but I think what he's doing is creating more pressure for them to agree.
It's going to be harder and harder for them to leave $50 billion on the table.
All he's asking them to do is join this economic plan before they get to the political issues.
I think it's a no-brainer for the Palestinians, and he's increasingly making this sale to the general public in the Middle East.
Now, when I first heard $50 billion was at stake, I thought, oh my God, first of all, that's going straight into a bunch of Swiss bank accounts.
I mean, Yasser Arafat died a billionaire.
But then I learned that the money would not be coming from America, but rather from the Gulf states.
That made me feel slightly better about it, that it wasn't American money.
But look, I have no doubt that an ordinary Palestinian man and woman, a man or woman living in Ramallah or even in Gaza, would like to move away from constant conflict to, I mean, if you want to be visionary, to a future like Dubai.
Missed Opportunity in Middle East00:07:30
I mean, there was once a point in time where West Bank Arabs were amongst the most liberal, secular, educated, but they have no say.
The last Palestinian elections, you know, Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, there's no political dissent.
There's no genuine free press.
You could have 99% of Palestinians agree to this happy future, but if you can't get the terrorists at the top to agree, what's the point, Joel?
Look, I think the point is to move forward regardless of what the Palestinian leadership says.
If they agree to this, then great.
You can start integrating the region.
You can start moving ahead with peace initiatives, economic initiatives, and you can presume that peace is a mutual goal.
If they decline, well, then Israel has done its best.
It's a massive amount of money, $50 billion.
If they'll walk away from $50 billion, they're not interested in peace at all.
They're not interested even in talking about it.
So I think it's a win-win for the administration.
Either way, they're going to move past this in terms of their foreign policy.
They're basically saying we are not going to let our entire Middle East policy be tripped up on this issue anymore.
And I think it'll be convincing to other Arab states, other Arab communities.
They'll say, look, we've done everything we can for the Palestinians.
We put all this money on the table.
They still walked away.
It's time for us to move on as well.
And so I think it's a win-win for the administration.
I think it's very interesting the way they've done it.
I think it'll be successful.
Well, let me ask you, because, I mean, Mahmoud Abbas, who is the, you know, I don't even want to call him a moderate.
His thesis was a Holocaust revisionist anti-Semitic thesis in school.
Like the guy, I don't even want to call him moderate, but I suppose compared to Hamas he is, at least he's not crucifying people literally on the streets.
He's not invoking Sharia law in the same way as Hamas is.
But like, how could Hamas even do?
How could you even do it?
Who do you even do a deal with?
I mean, would you literally do a deal with the Hamas terrorist group, which runs Gaza?
I mean, listen, if this is just a thought exercise, if this is just a call the bluff exercise, fine.
I mean, I think it's pretty easy to call the bluff.
These guys hardwired in their party constitution of Hamas is the destruction of Israel.
I mean, listen, I think it's great to daydream and envision things, but I don't even know how you could ever get it done if it's even possible.
How would you do it?
Does the administration have any ideas?
Well, first of all, Mahmoud Abbas has been in power forever.
You're right, but he's also 84 years old and he's not in the best of health.
So this is not a situation that's going to last forever.
I'm not saying a better leader will come after him.
Quite the opposite, in fact.
After him, the entire project may dissipate.
And then you may have a freer hand in the Middle East to figure out this question without having to calc out to the PLO and the Palestinian authorities.
So that may change the issue itself.
The assumption of Western foreign policy elites has been that time is on the Palestinian side.
And Trump has thrown that assumption out.
And actually, when you look at it from his perspective, Trump has made it such that time is actually on the Israeli side.
Palestinians are running out of time to do a deal.
And I think the fact that this economic plan is coming now in advance of any kind of concessions from Israel or any sort of agreement from the Palestinians, I think makes it clear that Palestinians are at risk of being left behind.
So whether it gets to a deal or not, I think it does move the ball forward in terms of foreign policy.
It makes our foreign policy more coherent, and it, again, releases us from being held hostage by this corrupt, terrorist dictatorship in a tent.
Yeah.
Well, we were in, we had a little rebel mission to Israel last summer, and the country's strong.
It's optimistic.
It actually has the highest birth rate.
And I'm not just talking about the Arab population, the Jewish birth rate, which is, I think, an indication of optimism and economic prosperity and hope of any Western nation.
Militarily, I saw the F-35s in the sky.
Like, Israel's doing great.
And I guess this is sort of the dog that didn't bark, Joel.
I mean, under the Clinton administration, no one visited the White House more often than Arafat.
Now, it's not an obsession of the West or of the Saudis or others.
I think you're so right between dealing with the crisis of ISIS and now the crisis of Iran and just moving on.
I think maybe you're right.
And Kissinger's terrible statement is true that maybe the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Last word to you, my friend.
Well, this is the Trump administration's way of getting out from under that problem.
I think that's true.
They never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
But basically, Trump and Kushner are saying that's not going to hold back American foreign policy any longer.
You don't get a veto over what we do.
And the American administration has decided that for the broader interest of the United States, especially confronting Iran and building strategic alliances in the Middle East, they're not going to let the Palestinians hold up the issue any longer.
Putting this massive amount of money on the table, $50 billion, is a way of signaling, first to the Palestinians about what they're losing if they don't go with the deal.
And secondly, to the other states in the region about how little the Palestinians care if they turn this down.
Yes, Palestinians say that money is not the issue.
They want certain issues.
They want dignity.
They want Jerusalem and all that other sort of thing.
What Trump is basically saying is you can't hold the entire region back because you're upset about those issues.
We're going to move forward regardless.
You can decide to be part of that, or you can decide to sit on the sidelines and let other people determine your future for you.
Very interesting, Joel.
I know you're so busy there.
I'm grateful that you jammed us in, and I know you've got a laptop and you've got a phone.
And thanks for working with us when we lost you briefly there on Skype.
Good luck at the Democrats.
Maybe we'll have you on in a few days to talk about how all that went because it's very interesting to me.
Thanks, my friend.
Take care, Joel.
Thank you.
All right.
Well, I'm so grateful for our friend Joel Pollock.
As you can see, he's there.
The Democratic presidential nominations, they're not really in full swing yet, but boy, it reminds me in some ways of the Republican nomination.
So many candidates, so many colorful characters.
We'll have to ramp up our coverage of that.
Of course, here in Canada, we've got our own federal election coming first.
But it's very interesting to talk with Joel, who I regard as an expert on the question of Israel and those issues, wouldn't you?
All right, stay with us.
more Head on the Rebel.
Well, that's our show for today, folks.
What do you think?
Like I said, the first thing I thought of when I saw Jared Kushner was, whoa, I haven't heard anyone serious talk about the Palestinian and Israeli issue in a long time.
That was my first reaction.
My second was, look, I've seen this movie before, 19 years ago.
It didn't work then.
Why would it work now?
As Joel says, maybe that's the whole point.
Trump's offering them a huge swack of dough.
I should point out that $50 billion is not American money.
It's money from the Arab countries, which makes me feel better.
I thought, geez, if you've got $50 billion, how about build a fence in the United States first, a wall.
But maybe it's calling the bluff.
And maybe when the Palestinians say no, as they seem to be doing, Jared Kushner and Donald Trump will move on to other things.
And so will the Arab world.
I don't know.
We'll find out in the months and years ahead.
Well, that's our show for today, folks.
On behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters to you at home, good night.