The more reviews we get, the worse is the spirit of the Netanyahu speech. Writes Rob Browne (rbguy at Dailykos):
It was quite a horrible speech (laying all the blame on the Arab nations' 1948 partition decision (with no context mentioned), continued expansion of settlements, Jewish only Jerusalem, lack of return for Palestinian refugees, demilitarized state with no ability to forge treaties, etc. I laughed, I cried, I yelled -- sounds like the tag line for a bad movie poster.
When he talks about economic peace, is there anyone who has read Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine" who has any trust in this neo-conservative's idea of economic peace. Any Palestinian should be incredibly scared of that part of his platform.
The thing that stuck out to me though was this paragraph:
"But, friends, we must state the whole truth here. The truth is that in the area of our homeland, in the heart of our Jewish Homeland, now lives a large population of Palestinians. We do not want to rule over them. We do not want to run their lives. We do not want to force our flag and our culture on them. In my vision of peace, there are two free peoples living side by side in this small land, with good neighborly relations and mutual respect, each with its flag, anthem and government, with neither one threatening its neighbor's security and existence."
To me this reads that he is talking about the Palestinians that live within Israel, as well as in the Occupied Territories. This seems like a shout-out to Avigdor Lieberman's followers for a purging of Palestinians from within the final borders of Israel. Truly frightening!
I can only assume that the temperature around the White House rose a few degrees after hearing this speech.
Yes, it certainly seems that he added his voice to those from Max's "Feeling the Hate" video. A great big F— You Obama!! from Bibi. Your move Barak. Make it a strong one. PM
Obama will do little. He did not get the support he needed from Iran.
I don't see how Arabs 1948 refusal to accept the partition decision is taken out of contexts. These are clear historical facts. Plus ,more refusals to accept pretty good offers along the way. In my mind the insistence on sovereignty will bring Aran missiles 10 miles from the one int'l Israeli airport. Will the lobe missiles at the airport and other civilian targets, you beycha
i think that these 'reviews' posted on these blog sites do not constitute either journalism or editorialism but thinly veiled attempts by biased people to color reality into a shade only they see. there is no 'frightening' tone. this is negotiation. the israeli government could make the peace process very quick if it adopted all the positions the palestinians want. everybody else who doesn't realy have a stake in this aside from watching it on the news and clucking in concern could breath a sigh of relief that the nasty israelis are no longer oppressing the poor palestinians, however the results for the jewish people, whom the israeli government represents, would probably not be good. everybody has to fight for their own interests, and characterizing this as somehow 'frightening' is a misrepresentation at best.
The Zionists didn't accept the 1948 partition either. The Stern Gang were receiving money from the Italian fascists to fight the British occupation even as Jews were being slaughtered in Germany. The plan all along was to drive out the Arabs with or without the partition. There were no good offers along the way. Even Israeli foreign minister Shlomo Ben Ami, who took part in Camp David, said he woudl have rejected the miserable offer Israel had made Arafat.
Nutcase. Hasbara horseshit.
Obama doesn't need support from Iran in order to act.
Shinfo, Yeah, this is what the Zionists were lusting after: http://picasaweb.google.com/montreal.palestine/Pa...
The *clear* historical fact is that these European boat people landed on an inhabited land in order to usurp the land of milk and honey that did not belong to them. There is no *good offer* other than the boat people getting the hell out, or accepting to live in peace WITH the natural people of the land. Aside from that, I hope the Americans get fed up with all the poop they've been fed for 60 years and demand a stop pay on the aid we pay in taxes for Israelis to kill people with. In my mind, no decent person would think otherwise.
we are watching very closely from South Lebanon with regards to this racist regime in greater Palestine.
MRW, There's plenty more of the same to be found here: http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2009/01/a... So much for a land without a people!! The Palestinians even had a constitution and elections in 1914.
They just fired Dennis Ross. Abruptly. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1093058.html
Some insight in regard to the Zionist talking point that Jews accepted partition, the Palestinians didn't. This is taken from Walid Khalidi's Before Their Diaspora: A Photographic History of the Palestinians 1876-1948. Washington DC: Institute For Palestine Studies, 1991. "Partition was seen by the Palestinians as imposing unilateral and intolerable sacrifices on themselves . . . The area of the Jewish state according to the UN plan would actually be larger than that of the proposed Palestinian state (5,500 square miles as compared with 4,500 square miles) at a time when the Jews constituted no more than 35 percent of the population and owned less than 7 percent of the land. Within the proposed Jewish state, Jewish land ownership did not in fact exceed 600 square miles out of the total area of 5,500 square miles. Nearly all the citrus land (equally divided in ownership between Jews and Palestinians), 80 percent of the cereal land (entirely Palestinian-owned), and 40 percent of Palestinian industry would fall within the borders of the proposed Jewish state . . . ."
continutation of previous comment: "Jaffa, the Palestinian state's major port on the Mediterranean, would be altogether cut off from its hinterland, and Gaza would lose its traditional links with the wheatlands of the Negev. "Hundreds of villages would be separated from communal fields and pastures. The Palestinian state would lose direct access both to the Red Sea and to Syria. The economic union between the two states, on which partition had been postulated, was know beforehand to be impracticable. The patchwork of subunits into which partition would divide the country bore little relationship to the human and social realities on the ground." And it is documented by Israeli historians that one half of those who became refugees were ethnically cleansed before any Arab army entered Palestine.
well, "Dennis Ross, who most recently served as a special State Department envoy to Iran, will abruptly be relieved of his duties, sources in Washington told Haaretz. An official announcement is expected in the coming days. The Obama administration will announce that Ross has been reassigned to another position in the White House. In his new post, the former Mideast peace envoy under President Bill Clinton will deal primarily with regional issues related to the peace process." — not quite fired, but definitely he has annoyed Hillary.
"the jewish people, whom the israeli government represents, " What a load of hosspuckey. PM
Ross was not only working to undermine Obama's policies, but has been involved with lobby groups trying to whip up fear over Iran's non existent nukes. I get the feeling Obama knew where Ross was at and took him in to placate the Israeli lobby, but given Netenyahu's belligerence, sees no use for him.
And currency.
Yubba-Dubba-Doo
Thanks, Shinfo, great link!
I loved this paragraph: A diplomatic source in Jerusalem speculated that perhaps Ross preferred to work for the National Security Agency, which answers directly to President Barack Obama, and would thus be considered a more enhanced role. The NSA? They wouldn't let that guy within 20 miles of the NSA.
Maybe the disgusting ads scaremongering about Iran that his NGO has blanketed the country with had something to do with it.
Is Holbrooke next? He was founder of that group with Ross.
Netanyahu's speech was entirely predictable. There is nothing scary about it, as in surprise. The policies are failed, old. But, there is no proposal here that is more likely to be effective. The Iranian "election" is a bad sign for the mideast, moreso than Netanyahu's. In Israel, the parties had difficult negotiations to come up with a government. Not so in Iran.
Huh?! What on earth does support from Iran have to do with it?
Why doesn't Israel accept Iran's offer to vacate the premises hasta pronto and go back to Europe? Oh, that's right, the Israelis are "refusing". I guess that makes an attack on Israel somehow justified – b/c they aren't accepting the offer? Bibi's speech was horrible and sounded like an 18 year old AIPAC aspirant attempting to answer basic questions before a crowd of well-educated elders. Instead of understanding that there are other perspectives in the world, he sticks to the racist narrative and labels those who disagree as reluctant and violent. Good luck to us here in Israel – outside pressure is our only hope.
If it is negotiation, it sucked. Footballs. Through a nanotube. It caused outrage among the people it was supposedly directed at and actually lowered their willingness to talk. Seriously, if this was negotiation, Bibi is likely the worst diplomat to walk the Earth. Ever. And by the way: We all do have stakes in this. Considerable stakes. Because you might have noticed that there have been, in recent years, some problems between what can be called the Western World (WW) and the Muslim World (MW). And slowly, very slowly, polticians around the world start to realize that tolerating card-carrying WW member, Israel's lies, hypocrisy, arrogance, brutality and condescension towards MW have not exactly eased the tensions. Israel, fed by religious bigotry and 19th-century colonialist dreams, has heavily contributed to a most severe global conflict, for the sole sake of stealing some land and oppressing some natives. The US, Europe, Russia, heck, just about everybody, has every reason to be fed up with Israel's bullshit and tell them to get their act together and do their part to clean up the mess they helped cause. Small payback for the gazillions of dollars in cash and tech they get each year. Instead we get Benjamin Netanyahu delivering his best "Who? Me? No! Them!" performance while he is continuously working to paint even bigger targets on the West's collective ass.
I just saw the latest ad for United Against a Nuclear Iran (The group Ross founded) and it quotes the State Dept April 30, 2009. Imagine Rahm Emanuel doing ads for right-wing Israel and quoting the White House. Think he'd last long?
both the Palestinians and Israelis (or you can call them 'European boat people' and basically prove yourself to be a bigot, because these 'boat people' happen to be people too) deserve to have a state of their own just like the rest of the nations on this planet. its a basic right called self determination. those nations without states (ie the palestinians, kurds, chechens etc etc) are people who are generally victims of persecution. you ask so nicely for these 'boat people' to live in peace with the natural or other people of the land, but your statement is contradictory. would you choose to live in a peace with a 'boat people' who landed on an inhabited land in order to 'usurp it'? i doubt it. the attitude that israelis are boat people, and that they should 'get the hell out' is a first step to denigrating israelis and denying them, above all people (i guess they are the chosen people) the right to NOT have a country of their own. how nice of you. your attitude is exactly the attitude that promotes endless war.
More palaprop. You guys always leave out the last part of what Shlomo Ben Ami said. He stated he would have accepted the deal offered at Taba. Good try though. Usually the Palaprop is a totally fake quote. http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/democracy-now-de...
the speech was just a slap on the face of Obama and the west. It was just a f… you to the west. And what will they do? Nothing ofcourse
And Arabs would continue to own their lands. They just wouldn't be inside the borders of an Arab nation. Big deal.
It is also document that the first to flee were the wealthy Palestinians who left on their own volition.
I think you hit it bulls eye Richard. Had the Iran election gone the same way the Lebanon election, Obama would have had a hell of hand in what B-Yahou had to say (btw, i think Syria had a lot to do with how Lebanon election went to show Obama they're willing to work with him and stabilize that country). I think B-Yahou intentionally waited until the end of the Iran election and chose to take a real hard line, it was like he was telling Obama, if you can't manage Iran, don't bother me. The real danger here, if Obama doesn't react strong to the B-Yahou speech, it will be seen as a sign of weakness and Israel will target Iran in the next few months.
Own their own lands, except for the settlements, which have gobbled up the prime poistions of those lands and stolen the best water resources of those lands. Nor would they contorl what they watch on TV or listen to on the radio, let alone what planes and helicopters land. In other words, Bibbi is offering them the same deal as Gaza – another prison. Neteyahu is clearly desperate.
Obama needed good news from Iran's election. The same good news he got from the Lebanon election. Israel has always pointed the finger to Iran as a danger, if Nijad had lost the election in favor of Mosawi, that danger would have become far less of an issue and the Netanyahou would have less reason to be so hardline. The results of the Lebanon election was a great sign, in effect Israel could not say, Hizballah is now running our north border.
Where is it documented Ali Baba? What Israeli historian has recorded this? What people have ever led their land of their own volition? Do you really think your vulgar propaghanda is going to wash on this blog?
Yes, Arafat and Barak both said they would have reached a settlement at Taba had Barak ended the talks to prepare the up comming Isreali election that Sharon won. I'm so sick of these liars who pretend that negotiations ended at Camp David.
I think he had two speeches preapred and waited for the results of the Iran election before delivering the hard line speech. Nijad became his best friend. His offer to go to Damascus, Riyadh and Beirut, (if you noticed) he also said Jerusalem (with a smirk) showed how much contempt he had for the whole process. This wasn't, and I am willing to sign the Saudi peace offer since "Israel does not want war", but as the neocon Michael Ledeen always pushed the toppling of these Govts through war. I also think he sealed the fate of Mobarak and the Jordanian king, maybe the only good thing in his speech. If the Mid east was in trouble before, it is now facing real danger. What will N-Yahou wait for to launch the attack on Iran and when? And in the aftermath, what will the Mid east look like…
The expressions 'Pal' and 'Palaprop' are racist.
Arafat did not end the negotiations. Israel ended the negotiations. Arafat wanted to continue negotiating.
What difference does it make?…..The Palestinians don't want a state anyway…and this is Robert Malley and Mohammed Agha who say it. Read it here: http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=6104
It might be good news if they don't let him participate in any negotiations in the peace process. He seems to like to sabotage those.
the expressions Zionist prop and Hasbaranik are racist. Thanks for giving me a new argument
Lies. At least you can try to cover it up with a link to some phony Arafat quote. Getting lazy?
Palestinan terrorist's lust for Jewish blood & murdering civilians has been prevented by the security fence. http://sheikyermami.com/wp-content/uploads/israel...
Big s*** Arab & Muslim countries say f>>> you to the West hourly – then again, Arab & Muslim say f>>>> you to their own citizens hourly
The Unifier – Ari Shavit Benjamin Netanyahu placed the spotlight squarely on one irreplaceable phrase: a demilitarized Palestinian state next to a Jewish State of Israel. He put on the table a clear, realistic and precise diplomatic formula that reflects the worldview of the Israeli majority. The root of the conflict is the Palestinians' refusal to recognize Jewish history, Jewish sovereignty and the Jewish people's right to a state in the Land of Israel. (Ha'aretz)
The Unifier – Ari Shavit Benjamin Netanyahu placed the spotlight squarely on one irreplaceable phrase: a demilitarized Palestinian state next to a Jewish State of Israel. He put on the table a clear, realistic and precise diplomatic formula that reflects the worldview of the Israeli majority. The root of the conflict is the Palestinians' refusal to recognize Jewish history, Jewish sovereignty and the Jewish people's right to a state in the Land of Israel. (Ha'aretz)
The Unifier – Ari Shavit Benjamin Netanyahu placed the spotlight squarely on one irreplaceable phrase: a demilitarized Palestinian state next to a Jewish State of Israel. He put on the table a clear, realistic and precise diplomatic formula that reflects the worldview of the Israeli majority. The root of the conflict is the Palestinians' refusal to recognize Jewish history, Jewish sovereignty and the Jewish people's right to a state in the Land of Israel. (Ha'aretz)
I took another looks at Benjamin Netanyahu's speech and it's clear to me that Rob Browne's quote was directed towards the settlers, not to Lieberman's group. If you read the opening sentence of this paragraph and the closing ones, as well as the following paragraph, it seems clear to me that Netanyanu is telling the settlers that there will be concessions. The last thing Netanyahu wants right now is another round of violence. That will just increase American pressure on him. He wants a slow but steady seizing of the greater Jerusalem area and, in his own immortal locution (from his first stint in office), "a lowering of Palestinian expectations." Bibi is an an Obie wannabe. Obama unveils his Mideast platform at a major university; so does Netanyahu. Obama ends with God; Netanyahu ends with "with God's help" the token invocation of the deity at the sign-off. What is deeply disturbing about his speech is that he continues to ignore the internal, Israeli-Arab problem and that Netanyahu speaks about the Palestinians, not to the Palestinians. Whereas Obama ended with invoking the God and holy books of Islam, Christianity and Judaism, Netanyahu's "b'ezrat hashem" (With God's help) is an empty nod directed at his Jewish audience. Not a kind word to the West Bank Palestinians and no acknowledgement of the 20% of Israel's population who are Arab.
Hey Dan! You're catching on. These boat people European invaders don't "deserve" a right to steal, massacre and usurp the land! The Zionist-sponsored "partition plan" was simply a UN-sponsored theft. The Palestinians had to participation in that. Why should they agree to give boat people half their land? It's nonsensical! Until Zionists such as yourself deal honestly with 1948, there will be no progress.
These are dangerous times. Obama is very important now. One feature of the Iranian election is the degree that the theocracy controls the events. The president works for the supreme leader, not the other way around. We think of the president as the most senior and most authoritative office (at least in the states there is accountability to Congress and courts). But, thats not the case in Iran. The theocracy determined that they wanted Ahmenidijad. They indicated that they are not willing to moderate their positions, their attitudes, their interaction with the world. There was no suppression of voting or counting in Israel. There was in Iran. I don't know what happens in a world in which posture needs to escalate to remain in power. Netanyahu reached the limit of what he could compromise absent CONFIDENT peace features from the Arab and Islamic world (and didn't get that from Iran). The pendulum is likely to swing to the right now, and things could definitely spin out.
Its actually a much further tragedy for the Palestinians. As, they will again be pawns in largely others' wars, this time the militants will be urged to align further with Iran, which is likely to urge more aggressive resistance, somehow thinking that Israelis will "return to Europe, and North Africa, and Iraq, and Iran" in some locales where it is still illegal for Jews to own property. An odd proposal.
Ari Shavit — Masbir (Propagandists) and Jewish Zionist Racist Zionist colonists in Stolen and Occupied Palestine are racist, murderous, genocidal invaders, interlopers and thieves. Under Nuremberg Law and the International Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, the native population has the right to attack any member of the criminal conglomeration of Zionist squatters and their external Zionist supporters at any time and in any place. Signatories to the genocide convention have the obligation to come to the aid of Palestinians in either removing or obliterating the criminal Zionist genocidaires.
Palestinians did not reject negotiations in 1947-8: Second Great Zionist Fraud.
None of my Jewish friends ever told me that the Israeli government represented them, for the very simple reason, none of them is Israeli.
"Who? Me? No! Them!" performance Yes in a nutshell, as if it was the ritualistic core. It reminds of my childhood and later useless arguments with all its tricks and tactics.
ahhh more publicity for your shit blog
There is no Iranian threat. Between the US and Israel and Iran, who starts more wars/violates humanitarian law, and kills more innocent people? Stop scapegoating, Witless.
This can't be correct. A Palestinian once told me, he proved pretty flexible but there was a end to what he could concede to Israel, the majority of Palestinians simply wouldn't have accepted what Israel demanded. The main problem is the reverted propaganda: Israel was so flexible, it made so many concessions. It was the best the Palestinians ever could get. Dennis Ross? Israel's occupation and what happens there in the end undermines Israel's core myths. That it got all the land almost against it's better will. The evil Arabs attacked them and lost. That's why success is such a central point in the Israeli narrative and all it's opponents must be losers, wouldn't they otherwise have to recognize it's accomplishments only?
Paletstinian refusal to recognize Jewish hegemony, in other words. The gall these palestinians have – to refuse to accept jewish version of history! Maybe Net 'n Yahoo should have dabbled in reciprocity and offer a demilitarized jewish state?
The better off and educated also left Germany to a rather high degree really early. So what is the difference? Why is one wise the other framed negatively? Maybe they realized it wasn't exactly the context where they would like to raise their children and that further trouble was ahead. … They obviously were as right about the development in Palestine as the Zionists were about what would happen in Europe. So what do you want to tell us?
I am sorry but I think that this idea that who is leading in what country matters to the U.S. because of what Israel will say about it is total nonsense and a big part of the problem with our Middle East policies and our relations with Israel…If our foreign policy is based on fearing what Israel will say and do, than can't this be interpreted to mean that Israel is the dog and we are its tail…?
Ross Belongs in Jail, Not in Government — at least not the US government.
There was no suppression of voting or counting in Israel. There was in Iran. this suggests you believe the results were manipulated. Did you think this in the first Bush election too, in his second? Given the huge propaganda whirlpool we are facing, what arguments do you find most convincing or what specific evidence that there must have manipulation? What I admittedly find really peculiar about this whole big brouhaha, and yes, I would have preferred a reformist too, didn't we know before that Iran is no democracy? Didn't the real leaders accept Mousavi's candidacy, so why should they worry? We all know they are the ultimate players anyway. Tosk59 listed for you all the main arguments for the "theft" of the election. So you can go and find your favorite ones more easily. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/statistica... I appreciate the calmness of his analysis. Admittedly this argument caught me unguarded: An observation regarding the announced counts was made that seemed credible to this Twitterer – that as the counts were announced "… a perfect linear relation between the votes received by the President and Mir Hossein Mousavi has been maintained…" and that apparently this was very suspicious. Alas, all this proved was that this Twitterer needs to brush up on his statistics, as this theory was debunked by Nate Silver… Nat Silver's analysis: Statistical Report Purporting to Show Rigged Iranian Election Is Flawed http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/statistica...
Who is threatening to attack Israel? The way I see it is Israel has been all along threatening to attack Iran just because they want to continue being an independently sovereign nation that chooses to develop nuclear energy, and because they present a formidable challenge in the region to the agenda of Zionist Israel and its supporters… These Zionists who do not want to get along and live equally amongst their Arab and Muslim neighbors and who insist that that the Arabs must recognize Israel as a Jewish State while the Palestinian natives continue to suffer because of it are the ones who need to go back to Europe…
Very few people even know what Olmert offered. Abbas' attitude is to live good in the West Bank and hope to destroy Israel eventually.
Your hypothesis that the elections in Iran were rigged by the theocracy has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be the case Witty…. From what I have been reading the Iranian people have determined that they want Ahmadinejad and the Supreme leader has supported their vote. Haven't you read all of what has been contributed here in the comments section regarding the Iranian elections…? It has been appearing to me more and more that there has been an internal power struggle taking place in Iran, largely over certain Iranian official's ongoing rampant corruption, that has been made even more obvious through the election debates… The March 14th so-called reformist movement in Lebanon is known to be largely corrupted. And the so-called reformist candidate Moosavi was largely being backed by corrupted Iranian officials. Yet how can you claim to be a reformist, and at the same time be corrupt or backed by corrupted officials? The reason the U.S./Israel prefer to deal with corrupted officials(whether they are elected or not) is because they can be bribed into compromising their people's rights and positions..
That's cause for celebratory libations. I hope the gods don't mind coffee, I don't have any alcohol, the traditional offering.
Hah, if Dennis Ross is billeted anywhere (organizationally) near the NSA, they will bust him for espionage within the week.
Wealthy Jews left Poland in 1968 on their own volition then?
I can only assume that the temperature around the White House rose a few degrees after hearing this speech. LOL. Real funny. Who said Kosniks don't have a sense of humor? I can't believe there are people out there who, based on one pretty little speech, think that Obama is going to stand up to Netanyahu or the Israel lobby. Talk is cheap, and the talk of politicians even cheaper. While sugary words flow like wine from Obama's mouth, neocon and neoliberal policies flow like something else out his ass. Obama has no intention of reigning Israel in, but has merely gone through the usual political theatre of condemning the settlements that every American president since Carter has engaged in. Meanwhile, he has nothing to say on the issue of Israel's massacre and starvation of the Palestinian people other than the usual crap about the siege not being in the interests of Israel's security, as if that is the only consideration. If you believe Obama stacked his administration with Israel-first extremists like Rahm Emmanuel and Dennis Ross so he could take on Israel, there's a bridge for sale in Brooklyn with your name on it. While Obama promises a new era with the Muslims, he has expanded the war in Pakistan creating over 4 million new refugees and hundreds of murdered civilians. While he talks about a rapprochement with Iran, he continues the Bush policy of funding anti-Iranian terrorist groups that have killed thousands of civilians in Iran. And while he mouths the usual softball criticisms of Israel and professes concern for the Palestinians, he assures the crazies in Israel that no matter what, the US and Israel are still BFF and the supply of arms, money and unblinking political support will flow unchecked into Israel as always. That the crazies remain true to their craziness and are calling for Obama's head should do nothing to bolster Obama's credibility, as it says everything about their character but nothing about his. What Obama says is light years away from what he does, and at least Netanyahu and Lieberman have the courage of their convictions leaving no doubt as to where they stand. Give me a ring when Obama actually DOES something radically different than Bush, like withdrawing our troops, imprisoning a few hundred bankster criminals and cutting Israel off the US taxpayer tit, rather than just whispering a bunch of sweet nothings for the ears of the Kos Krowd.
Baloney. Who was the President of 'Palestine' at that time? What was the name or address of the Government building of "Palestine" at that time? Arab propaganda for the weak of mind…
Here is a link: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/2000_2009/20... Sorry, no Arafat quote, phony or otherwise.
<img src=”http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/.a/6a00d834522... /> Jaffa, Palestine: Palestinians gather at the Grand Serai (local government offices) in July 1908, to celebrate the al-Hurriyah Revolution (i.e. the Young Turks Revolution) against Sultan Abdul Hamid and in favor of the restoration of the constitution and the holding of Parliamentary elections. (via Walid Khalidi, Before Their Diaspora).
<img src="link to lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com
Image didn't take. will try again.
The Jewish people don't have a right to a state in the Land of Israel. The root of the conflict is in their belief that they do and that this gives them the right to practice genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid.
What did Olmert offer?
What the Palestinians want is freedom, and they appear to be willing to have it either in the form of a state of their own, or in the form of a unified state of all its citizens. Freedom is one thing that has never been offered to them. All they've been offered so far is bondage and further ethnic cleansing.
Zionist is an ethnic group now?
The Palestinian people have been oppressed for the last 60 years. They have not had a homeland, and have been forced to live in refugee camps. They have had many champions over the years, but when push comes to shove nobody lifted a finger to help them. As a result, in order to promote and protect their own interests, they have resorted to violence (very unsuccessfully) against those who seek to oppress them. I accept this. Perhaps you could open your mind to the concept that Israel is in fact 'fed by' a desire of many people scattered around the world to live in a country of their own as well so that they are not oppressed by other people? In order to protect their interests they have resorted to violence (quite successfully) as well. Perhaps instead of demonizing one side, we can recognize that both have needs and that perhaps the essence of ending a conflict without total destruction of one side is meeting needs of both?
I've commonly read that Israeli leaders didn't know what to do after the six-day war, and it's never specified why, after 80+ years of Zionism in Palestine, it didn't occur right away to do more of the same. Maybe, on seeing the relatively large population of the territories they hesitated for a bit, but it didn't take long to come up with a strategy of building settlements around the existing human realities with generous land confiscation.
"Perhaps you could open your mind to the concept that Israel is in fact 'fed by' a desire of many people scattered around the world to live in a country of their own as well so that they are not oppressed by other people?" Israel's desire to exist peacefully and securely? Maybe. Israel's desire to colonize the West Bank? Not so much.
What Benjamin Netanyahu proposed is a West Bank vesion of Palestine – another open air prison that Israel would not doubt, bomb at will in the sanem fo self defense.
Keep practicing that goose step Chas. You're almost there.
Rubbish. Neteyahu proposed an unworkable idea. All he suggested was a Weat Bank version of Gaza – another open air prison.
Abbas doesn't have to hoep tpo destroy Israel – Israel is doing it all by themselves.
There was no suppression of voting or counting in Israel. There was in Iran. Tell that to Mustafa Barghoutti, who was arrested 8 times by Israeli police and beaten repeatedyl during the last elections, so that he couldn't run his campaign.
Benjamin Netanyahu's diplomatic formul is nothign but a desperate attempt to look tough and pander to his base. He is bluffing and hoping that his diplomatic BS will fool the public. Not a chance. Netanyahu is damned not matter what he does. His coalition is likely to fall apart. Good riddance.
"Palestinan terrorist's lust for Jewish blood & murdering civilians has been prevented by the security fence. " Exactly, now hte Zionist terrorists can massace the Palestinians in peace right Chas? It just so happens that Isreal own Berlin Wall cuts 8-10 km into Palestinian land, which is one of those lucky coincidesnces. What a pitty that Internmational Court of Jusice deemded it to be illgal, just like all of Isrel's settlements in the West Bank and it's blockade of Gaza. Israel is a terrorist state, founded on terrorism by terrorists for terrorists.
Getting desperate Tawan?
"What difference does it make?…..The Palestinians don't want a state anyway" Correction. The palestinians don't want the version of a state that is unqorkable and comprised of banstustans, which remains under complrete Isreli control. What nerve the Palestinians have to want freedom and self determination. Chas, Why should the Palestinians recognize Jewish history, when they played no part in it, but onyl suffered from it? How can you have Jewish sovereignty is a state that is 20% Arab? How can Netanyahu demand that the Palestinains recognize Jewish sovereignty while denying Palestinians sovereignty? Did you know that Israel and the US voted against a UN Resolution last November, callign for Palestinians self determination? If Netanyahu is to demand that Palestinians recognize Jewish people's right to a state in the Land of Israel, then he ahs to do the same with the Palestinian right to a state in the lanf of Palestine.
I'm suspicious based on the reports by many, including Juan Cole and John Walt on their blogs, that the percentage of votes in nearly all districts outside of Teheran was within 1% of the other districts, including from the Mousavi's hometown and regions of the country that were outspokenly for the Mousavi. While that doesn't say anything definitive about the totals, it does say that there is some fraud somewhere. I add up the reports that the elections are supervised by the interior department and that that is one agency that Ahmenidijad controls with limited if any supervision from the Supreme Leader (sounds like 1984).
A very gullible interpretation Marion.
In recent history, Hamas (funded, trained and supplied by Iran) has initiated war on Israel in a few thousand individual incidents in the past five years by firing rockets at civilian towns. Similarly, in 2006, a Hezbollah ally, if not proxy, shelled Israeli civilian towns and abducted two (killed four in the process), thereby starting the Lebanese War in 2006. Most in the world, consider those actions to be actively aggressive.
And poor Yoni can't bring himself to stay away.
Not lies at all. Arafat wanted the negotiations to continue, but Barak withdrew from the negotiations to campaign in the upcoming elections. He lost, and the new prime minister never participated in the negotiations that Barak had left. Arafat was still there, ready to negotiate, and Israel walked away.
What matters is the location of the tail.