Michael Ratner, I've learned from Google, is an important person. He's a law professor, who taught among other places at Columbia; he's the kind of lawyer who argues significant cases before the Supreme Court of the United States. Where Glenn Greenwald blogs endlessly about matters he cares about, Ratner acts. He's a significant figure in the important American discussion about how the country should behave while at war. You can disagree with him, but it seems you can't brush him off as a clown or a sophomoric lightweight.
All the more disturbing, then, his snippet from Hebron, in which he juxtaposes a picture with one from Nazi Germany. Has he thought through what he's implying? Might he wish to spell it out?
I'd call him out on this, if I thought he'd ever respond, but of course he won't. Even though I think I know considerably more both about Hebron and abut Nazism than he does.