Yes I am bad for owning the whole loaf but you are just as bad for dreaming you can own it

Did you listen to Ethan Bronner’s multimedia report on the article where you rightly point out that he only called Israelis?

He says that both sides have elements that oppose the two-state solution. And for both it is giving something up, and that for both the dream is the whole pie. Then he realizes what he’s done, and says one side has to give up the dream and the other side has to give up the practice.

So Palestinians giving up the dream of one Palestinian state (how many people still seriously say this?) and Israelis giving up the practice of one (the occupation) are equivalent? Naturally, there was no mention of occupation and international law, and how they play into these "dreams" and "practices"…

Posted in Beyondoweiss, One state/Two states

{ 14 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. dalybean says:

    Bronner has supposedly spoken with admiration of the settler’s erotic attachment to the land, even though it is being revealed as sheer intransigent greed.

  2. Chaos4700 says:

    Hypocrisy is the bread and butter of Zionists.

  3. Shmuel says:

    This attitude of both sides having a problem, both having extreme positions, both having to compromise (even if one has to give up its “dream” and the other its “practice”), ignoring the current and constant violation of international law and Palestinian rights, is the narrative that places all its eggs in the “peace-process” basket. No need to address injustice or Palestinian suffering now, because all that will be worked out in the “process”. No need to address the wall or the siege or the settlements, because that will all go away once peace breaks out. It is thus counter-productive to “antagonise” the Israelis over such issues, because this is all about negotiations and diplomacy and rapprochement. The Palestinians will just have to grin and bear it (assuming we even remember that they are being oppressed and abused), or they’ll “miss another opportunity”. As the Israeli ambassador assured us a little while ago, these things take time. Why are these “natives” so bloody impatient and short-sighted? Eye on the prize. Eye on the prize. Unless, of course, you happen to be eyeless (in Gaza).

    • Chaos4700 says:

      It is thus counter-productive to “antagonise” the Israelis over such issues, because this is all about negotiations and diplomacy and rapprochement.

      You’d think we would have learned from Neville Chamberlain’s example, the folly of that approach.

    • That was an amazing comment Shmuel.

      Eye on the prize. Eye on the prize. Unless, of course, you happen to be eyeless (in Gaza).

      Well said.

    • MRW says:

      I agree, Shmuel. Gotta tell you, I love your comments. Would that everyone in the Israeli leadership had your moral center, I’d be off the web doing important things, and not worrying about WWIII.

    • Citizen says:

      Shmuel–man, your comment is concise, meaty, and eloquent. I wish you the best.

  4. potsherd says:

    LA Times has interview with Mustapha Barghouti
    link to latimes.com

  5. Pingback: Did NYT’s Bronner Even Go To a Friday Protest? « LobeLog.com