Knesset Member Accuses Joint List of Political Hypocrisy Over Yoav Segalovich
Knesset Member Muhammad Abu Al-Haj (Shoko) has accused the Joint List of political hypocrisy regarding their stance on Yoav Segalovich joining the United Arab List. Abu Al-Haj stated that the Joint List leadership had previously approached him in January, requesting he explore the possibility of including Segalovich in their list, specifically in the second position. He revealed that his response was clear: Segalovich would remain with his party, Yesh Atid, and that he would not allow his party to be undermined or Segalovich to join a political project he believed served a "divide and conquer" policy.
Abu Al-Haj criticized the Joint List for their sudden opposition to Segalovich, highlighting their past praise for him, calling his actions "bold" and "courageous," and presenting him as someone who understood and worked with the Arab community. He questioned why Segalovich's background as a Zionist, former army officer, and police brigadier general, which was known to the Joint List previously, was suddenly deemed problematic and a violation of "national constants" after he chose to join the United Arab List instead.
The Knesset member argued that Segalovich had not changed, but rather the list he chose to join. He accused the Joint List of engaging in political theater and making exaggerated claims for media attention, citing the example of the Sakhnin hospital issue. Abu Al-Haj asserted that the Arab community needs tangible achievements and workable plans, not empty slogans or political maneuvering.
He further challenged the Joint List to present their own political and public programs instead of attacking others, pointing out their internal disputes that have prevented them from holding a press conference. Abu Al-Haj concluded by stating that the Joint List's actions, including their political miscalculations, contributed to the rise of the current right-wing government, and urged them to reflect on their own role and learn from their mistakes.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.