Jerome Slater, scholar and press critic, writes:
The New York Times lives in a kind of permanent Groundhog Day. Whenever
it appears to be actually learning something about the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, say in its somewhat critical reporting on
the recent Israeli attack on Gaza, the next day Good morning, it’s a
brand new day. As in today's lead story, which says that an Israeli
settlement with Syria "would also give Arab states and moderate
Palestinians the political cover to negotiate with Israel.” Hello? I
guess the world’s best newspaper plumb forgot that for a number of
years almost all the Arab states and moderate Palestinians have been
practically begging Israel to negotiate an overall settlement of the
Arab-Israeli conflict, and on terms that Israel has been simply crazy
to reject.
Stay tuned for tomorrow's story: Occupation, what occupation?
Stay tuned for tomorrow's story: Occupation, what occupation?
I read similar in a blog post by Stephen Walt.
You call that Groundhog Day.
By the way, it was an amazing movie, a description of the changes one can make in the world by sincere good intent, rather than rationalization.
Sincere good intent, rather than rationalization. Witty the movie critic is apparently more evolved than Witty the apologist for racist Zionism.
I'm not an apologist for racist Zionism. I'm a supporter of humane Zionism.
Are you an apologist for terrorist nationalism? Or, are you a supporter of humane democratic nationalism?
I don't support any ethnic nationalism, Richard.
Humane zionism?my,my,witty.
Alternate universe, DAGON.
So Marshmellow is a supporter of islamic inspired arab nationalistic terrorism.
"I don't support any ethnic nationalism, Richard."
That's your choice. So, you similarly condemn Palestinian nationalism as well, I presume?
I'm don't.
I think Palestine should be viable, healthy, self-defining.
What about ethnically exclusivist, like Israel?
Why does marshmellow insist on lying?
why does chris berel exist? fa…
"…for a number of years almost all the Arab states and moderate Palestinians have been practically begging Israel to negotiate an overall settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and on terms that Israel has been simply crazy to reject."
Make that "absolutely all the Arab states", Phil. The peace offer to which you are referring was first unanimously approved and reapproved by the Arab League starting in 2002.
The offer includes everything Israel claims it has always wanted – peace, recognition, and fully normal relations with embassies and ambassadors and everything. This offer has been on the table for seven years, and for seven years Israel has given it the middle finger. They won't even consider it a starting point for negotiations.
The peace offer requires allowing the opening up of the borders to 100% of Palesinians entering and settling in Israel.
A non-starter. The Arab offer has always been bullshit at best.
The Arab Peace Initiative (Arabic Language: مبادرة السلام العربية) is a comprehensive peace initiative first proposed in 2002 at the Beirut Summit of the Arab League by then-Crown Prince, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, and re-endorsed at the Riyadh Summit in 2007.[1] The initiative attempts to end the Arab-Israeli conflict, to normalize relations between the entire Arab region and Israel, in exchange for a complete withdrawal from the occupied territories and a "just settlement" of the Palestinian refugee crisis.[2] It is supported by large numbers of policy makers and commentators throughout the world, with favorable comments made by the leaders of over sixty countries including American President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.[1]
Israeli officials have made a variety of responses, both supportive and critical.[3] Likud members, including the Chairman, have rejected the initiative.^ The Palestinian Authority strongly supports the plan and Mahmoud Abbas officially asked President Barack Obama to enact it as soon as Obama takes office.[4] Sunni Islamist political party Hamas, the elected government of the Palestinian territories, is deeply divided,[5] and has rejected the plan.[1] Shiite political party Hezbollah rejects it.[1]
The Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas' military wing, committed the Passover Massacre on March 27, 2002 during the Beirut Summit.[6] The bombing as well as other attacks lead to a deeper escalation of the al-Aqsa Intifada and derailed the initiative.[7][8] A 2008 Angus Reid Global Monitor poll found that 67% of Palestinians and 39% of Israelis support the plan.[9] As of 2009[update], the plan has remained dormant with Palestinian and Israeli leaders unable to move further.[1]
I have always found, chris, that if you want to pass off other people's writing as your own, it is better to remove their numerical references to their footnotes.