Major ‘NYT’ piece calls two-state negotiations ‘phony’–and catastrophic

Israel/Palestine
on 318 Comments

Everyone is talking about the piece by Ian Lustick titled, “Two State Illusion,” that appeared on the front of the Times’s Week in Review section yesterday. An urgent appeal to leaders to stop the charade of a peace process that has failed to produce partition and to start to imagine other ways that the conflict can be ended, the piece is historic for its appearance in such a prominent place. It recalls Tony Judt’s one-state piece, Israel: The Alternative, of ten years ago in the New York Review of Books, though Lustick is less idealistic. He states that for the conflict to end, there will be more violence, that violence is even necessary to its resolution– but that the two-state paradigm will produce a catastrophe.

The piece is most remarkable for doing what the Times has failed to do in its (liberal Zionist) news coverage, inform readers that the two-state model is finished. He begins emphatically:

True believers in the two-state solution see absolutely no hope elsewhere. With no alternative in mind, and unwilling or unable to rethink their basic assumptions, they are forced to defend a notion whose success they can no longer sincerely portray as plausible or even possible.

It’s like 1975 all over again, when the Spanish dictator Francisco Franco fell into a coma. The news media began a long death watch, announcing each night that Generalissimo Franco was still not dead. This desperate allegiance to the departed echoes in every speech, policy brief and op-ed about the two-state solution today..

Lustick’s message is that one-state ideas need to be considered openly in order to help leaders and societies to imagine the future– “less familiar but more plausible outcomes that demand high-level attention but aren’t receiving it.”

He says that many interests corruptly share the need for a claim that the two-state solution is still the reality, including politicians pressured by the lobby to assert that the Jewish state is forever:

American politicians need the two-state slogan to show they are working toward a diplomatic solution, to keep the pro-Israel lobby from turning against them and to disguise their humiliating inability to allow any daylight between Washington and the Israeli government.

Is the Jewish state here forever? Or even another generation? Lustick appears to doubt that. And he’s not mourning its relegation to the junkheap of history. This was bracing and necessary, for American Jews to hear:

But many Israelis see the demise of the country as not just possible, but probable. The State of Israel has been established, not its permanence. The most common phrase in Israeli political discourse is some variation of “If X happens (or doesn’t), the state will not survive!” Those who assume that Israel will always exist as a Zionist project should consider how quickly the Soviet, Pahlavi Iranian, apartheid South African, Baathist Iraqi and Yugoslavian states unraveled, and how little warning even sharp-eyed observers had that such transformations were imminent.

How helpful that Lustick invokes my favorite historical analogy, Algeria, and what right wing colonialism spawned there:

France ruled Algeria for 130 years and never questioned the future of Algeria as an integral part of France. But enormous pressures accumulated, exploding into a revolution that left hundreds of thousands dead. Despite France’s military victory over the rebels in 1959, Algeria soon became independent, and Europeans were evacuated from the country.

Lustick is a realist, and this bit is a very realistic summary of the reality of negotiations. Notice that he acknowledges the importance of the right of return, that it’s not some crazy idea:

The current Israeli version of two states envisions Palestinian refugees abandoning their sacred “right of return,” an Israeli-controlled Jerusalem and an archipelago of huge Jewish settlements, crisscrossed by Jewish-only access roads. The Palestinian version imagines the return of refugees, evacuation of almost all settlements and East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital.

DIPLOMACY under the two-state banner is no longer a path to a solution but an obstacle itself. We are engaged in negotiations to nowhere. And this isn’t the first time that American diplomats have obstructed political progress in the name of hopeless talks.

Lustick says the negotiations are “phony” and that the only question is how to give Palestinians their rights in the current one-state reality. So he is reflecting the ideas of the left:

Had America blown the whistle on destructive Israeli policies [in 1980] it might have greatly enhanced prospects for peace under a different leader. It could have prevented Mr. Begin’s narrow electoral victory in 1981 and … We could have had an Oslo process a crucial decade earlier. Now, as then, negotiations are phony; they suppress information that Israelis, Palestinians and Americans need to find noncatastrophic paths into the future. The issue is no longer where to draw political boundaries between Jews and Arabs on a map but how equality of political rights is to be achieved.

Lustick has a bleak view of the one-state reality under Israel. Again, he reflects the wisdom of the left:

The stage will be set for ruthless oppression, mass mobilization, riots, brutality, terror, Jewish and Arab emigration and rising tides of international condemnation of Israel. And faced with growing outrage, America will no longer be able to offer unconditional support for Israel. Once the illusion of a neat and palatable solution to the conflict disappears, Israeli leaders may then begin to see, as South Africa’s white leaders saw in the late 1980s, that their behavior is producing isolation, emigration and hopelessness.

He says the two-state negotiations are keeping people from being imaginative about the political future of the state, and the region. He says what I have often said, that one state could produce remarkable political combination:

once the two-state-fantasy blindfolds are off, politics could make strange bedfellows… secular Palestinians in Israel and the West Bank could ally with Tel Aviv’s post-Zionists, non-Jewish Russian-speaking immigrants, foreign workers and global-village Israeli entrepreneurs…. Israeli Jews committed above all to settling throughout the greater Land of Israel may find arrangements based on a confederation, or a regional formula more attractive than narrow Israeli nationalism.

A great ending. Lustick offers no hosanna to the Jewish state and knows that political violence is in Israel/Palestine’s future, and he prepares the reader for the inevitability.

The question is not whether the future has conflict in store for Israel-Palestine. It does. Nor is the question whether conflict can be prevented. It cannot. But avoiding truly catastrophic change means ending the stifling reign of an outdated idea and allowing both sides to see and then adapt to the world as it is.

318 Responses

  1. lohdennis
    September 16, 2013, 1:27 am

    This was an amazing piece of journalism considering where it is published: NYT Sunday Review. I don’t know what it takes to get this to be published but it is pretty clear that at least the Sunday Times is changing (remember the Ben Ehrenreich article couple months ago?).

    • Donald
      September 16, 2013, 8:29 am

      “This was an amazing piece of journalism considering where it is published: NYT ”

      Exactly. It’s the internet–in the old days the NYT could ignore or caricature the arguments of people to their left or in the case of Israel, slander them as anti-semitic Europeans. It’s much harder to get away with that now.

      I wonder, though, if the article will sink without a trace, which is what happened with the Ehrenreich piece you mentioned. A NYT Sunday Magazine piece on something so controversial would normally spark discussion in the rest of the press, but that one didn’t. The Sunday Week in Review might be harder to ignore, but we’ll see.

      • traintosiberia
        September 16, 2013, 1:50 pm

        Recently Kerry was expressing his disappointment an some kind of gathering that the Internet has made things difficult, difficult to rule the country.
        In one of the AIPAC ‘s previous yearly meetings, Hilary Clinton in an unguarded moment urged the attendees to keep in mind the power and knowledge the internet had brought to common folks .The news that could or could not have been printed depending on the whims and loyalties of the editorial board and thus brought to or barred from the readers could no longer be hidden and manipulated or misused .

        It was the singular one time accomplishment of bringing the facts successfully directly to the wider American public by Bush Sr in the wake of Samir’s intransigence supported by the Congress and the Senate in 1991 that exposed the facts that American public when given the correct information would punish the purveyors and beneficiaries of the lies and of the anti American activities with an effective punch commensurate with it’s weight. Love expressed as support in polling for Israel sank
        [Two weeks later, a NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey showed that-- voters opposed economic support to Israel by 46% to 44%. Moreover, 34% saw Israel as the greatest impediment to peace in the region while only 33% saw the Arab nations in that role. ]
        Benjamin Ginsberg, Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State, Univ. of Chicago, 1993, p.220

      • Kathleen
        September 16, 2013, 3:00 pm

        The bloody “Times” they are a changin. Change or be left in the dust bins of history the bloody Times too.

  2. miriam6
    September 16, 2013, 1:37 am

    Lustick’s message is that one-state ideas need to be considered openly in order to help leaders and societies to imagine the future– “less familiar but more plausible outcomes that demand high-level attention but aren’t receiving it.”

    On the subject of one state solutions Lustick might do well to read Jonathan Kuttab’s article on the same subject

    As even the Christian Palestinian activist Jonathan Kuttab admits, in this linked to article below , a single state solution CANNOT simply amount to the sort of naïve 1S1P1V one state solution so often mentioned by various commenters on MW

    In this article Kuttab acknowledges that any proposed one state solution MUST take full account and implement safeguards that guarantee the SAFETY of ALL minorities , including the Israeli Jewish population, within any proposed single state.


    .. And although Jewish Israelis may control it now, birthrates suggest that, sooner or later, Jews will again be a minority in the territory.

    What happens at that point is unclear, but unless continued military occupation and all-out apartheid is the desired path, now may be the time for Israelis to start putting in place the kinds of legal and constitutional safeguards that will protect all minorities, now and in the future, in a single democratic state of Israel-Palestine.
    This is both the right thing and the smart thing to do.

    Yet it is possible, especially during this period when Jews are still the majority in power in Israel, to begin to envision the type of guarantees they may require in the future.
    Other countries have wrestled with this problem, and while each situation is different, the problem is by no means unprecedented.

    Strong, institutionalized mechanisms will be needed to prevent the “tyranny of 51%.”
    A bicameral legislature, for example, should be installed, in which the lower house is elected by proportional representation but the upper house has a composition that safeguards both peoples equally, regardless of their numbers in the population. A rotating presidency may be preferable to designating certain positions for each minority (as in Lebanon).

    And constitutional provisions that safeguard the rights of minorities should be enshrined in a constitution that can only be amended or altered by both houses of parliament with a large (80%) majority.

    link to articles.latimes.com

    • Shmuel
      September 16, 2013, 2:01 am

      On the subject of one state solutions Lustick might do well to read Jonathan Kuttab’s article on the same subject

      Why? Kuttab’s basic premise is the same as Lustick’s. Why do you keep citing Kuttab’s article, which basically promotes the idea of a single state, and urges Israel to act now to lay the democratic groundwork for such a state. Do you agree with Kuttab? Do you think he says anything that hasn’t already been said by other advocates of a single democratic state, such as Omar Barghouti or Ali Abunimah?

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 3:23 am

        Shmuel@;

        Can I ask you why you are unhappy that I keep citing this particular article?

        This is only the second time I have done so.

        In fact , if you look at the MW archives you will find that Philip Weiss actually made the Kuttab article a centre piece of an article he wrote a few years ago.

        Except of course Weiss left out the final part of Kuttab’s article

        To explore the difficulties of protecting the rights of a large Jewish minority and other non Muslim/ non Jewish minorities in a single state dominated by Arab Muslims some of whom are secular and some Islamist , was evidently a discomfiting difficult reality Weiss simply preferred to ignore.

        I don’t think Bargouti and Abunimah have said exactly the same thing as Kuttab is saying in HIS article.

        To my knowledge they have not addressed the issue of protection of minorities including the Jewish population in order to avoid the serious problem of the tyranny of the 51% which Kuttab raises in his article.

        Perhaps that is the very specific part of Kuttab’s article you don’t like.

        Kuttab is admitting that it can’t be a straightforward naïve 1S1P1V scenario.

        He is saying that the tyranny of 51% scenario must be avoided.

        A good recent example of the dangers of the tyranny of the 51% imposing their will on the other half of the electorate is Egypt.

        Morsi’s government quite clearly ignored the fears and hopes for a more secular democratic society of the non Muslim Brotherhood Morsi voting electorate and subsequently paid the price for it.

        Those Egyptians who didn’t vote for Morsi were quite obviously alarmed by what they felt was the Morsi government’s attempts to Islamise Egypt at the expense of largely secular Egyptian citizens.

        Such was their alarm that they made the disastrous mistake of inviting the army to organise a coup to depose Morsi.

        We have all witnessed the disaster that was Morsi’s government and the further disaster that has followed Morsi’s clumsy attempts to place and promote the needs and aspirations of the Islamists ahead of those of the more secular half of the Egyptian electorate.

        Egypt’s recent experiences and difficulties only serves to underline the serious dangers of getting these things wrong.

        May I also remind you that the Palestinians have their own Islamist party in Hamas.

        As for whether or not I support a one state scenario I would say I am in two minds about it.

        I can see advantages to it if they get the form and constitution of it right and also disadvantages and the dangers that a one state solution might present , especially if the democratic rights , security and safety of the Jewish population and other minorities within that single state is ignored.

        However, it very much remains the case that it is for the Israelis and Palestinians to create their own solution to their own problem.

        If you can provide me with evidence that Bargouti and Abunimah have addressed this issue of the tyranny of the 51% and the sort of constitutional, legal and democratic protection that minorities including the albeit largish Jewish minority would require in a single state I would be most grateful.

        Meanwhile do not pretend that the one state solution would be a simple solution to a complex, difficult problem.

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 3:54 am

        Can I ask you why you are unhappy that I keep citing this particular article?

        Unhappy? What gave you that impression? I just found Kuttab’s article rather inconsistent with the views you generally express here, and perfectly in sync with Lustick’s article, of which you seemed to be critical.

        This is only the second time I have done so.

        I count 3, but no matter.

        Perhaps that is the very specific part of Kuttab’s article you don’t like.

        Jumping to conclusions again. I actually liked Kuttab’s article (with the possible exception of his reference to confessional democracy). That Israeli Jews would be at risk in a single state — especially considering the ways in which they have treated Palestinians up to now — is a complete banality. I don’t know of any 1-stater who has ever said otherwise. My question was did you like the rest of Kuttab’s article?

        If you can provide me with evidence that Bargouti and Abunimah have addressed this issue of the tyranny of the 51% and the sort of constitutional, legal and democratic protection that minorities including the albeit largish Jewish minority would require in a single state I would be most grateful.

        I’ll let you google Abunimah yourself, but I happen to have this quote from Barghouti’s book BDS on hand:

        While I firmly advocate nonviolent forms of struggle such as boycott, divestment, and sanctions to attain Palestinian goals, I just as decisively, though on a separate track, support a unitary state based on freedom, justice, and comprehensive equality as the solution to the Palestinian-Israeli colonial conflict. To my mind, in a struggle for equal humanity and emancipation from oppression, a correlation between means and ends, and the decisive effect of the former on the outcome and durability of the latter, is indisputable. If Israel is an exclusivist, ethnocentric, settler-colonial state, then its ethical, just, and sustainable alternative must be a secular, democratic state, ending injustice and offering unequivocal equality in citizenship and individual and communal rights both to Palestinians (refugees included) and to Israeli Jews. Only such a state can ethically reconcile the ostensibly irreconcilable: the inalienable, UN-sanctioned rights of the indigenous people of Palestine to self-determination, repatriation, and equality in accordance with international law and the acquired and internationally recognized rights of Israeli Jews to coexist—as equals, not colonial masters—in the land of Palestine.

        Omar Barghouti, Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions: The Global Struggle for Palestinian Rights (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2011), p. 51.

        You might also want to check out Mazen Qumsiyeh’s Sharing the Land of Canaan

        Meanwhile do not pretend that the one state solution would be a simple solution to a complex, difficult problem.

        When and where have I ever done anything of the kind?

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 4:19 am

        I googled Abunimah for you:

        In a democracy, a national government is expected to represent and serve all its citizens impartially. The earliest elections held under a simple one-person, one-vote majoritarian system might produce a well-balanced parliament in terms of Israeli Jewish and Palestinian members, but in the long run, as the population shifts, more Arabs would likely be elected. Given the history of antagonism, Israeli Jews may well fear discrimination as the new minority population.”

        Ali Abunimah, One Country: A Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse (New York: Metropolitan Books, 2006), pp. 113-114

      • amigo
        September 16, 2013, 6:38 am

        “I don’t think Bargouti and Abunimah have said exactly the same thing as Kuttab is saying in HIS article.

        To my knowledge they have not addressed the issue of protection of minorities including the Jewish population in order to avoid the serious problem of the tyranny of the 51% which Kuttab raises in his article. “M6

        How do make such a rediciculous claim.You obviously have not read Ali Abu Nimah,s book.

        He devotes some 20 pages to the subject under the heading , “A united, democratic State in Palestine-Israel.

        He then devotes an additional 25 pages under the heading of , “Learning from South Africa.

        You are a deceiptful person Miriam and are clearly not to be trusted.

        Must be the Zionist in you.

        “If you can provide me with evidence that Bargouti and Abunimah have addressed this issue of the tyranny of the 51% and the sort of constitutional, legal and democratic protection that minorities including the albeit largish Jewish minority would require in a single state I would be most grateful.”M6

        I suggest you read the book.It,s titled “ONE COUNTRY”.
        ISBN 0 -8050-8034-1

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 6:45 am

        To my knowledge they have not addressed the issue of protection of minorities including the Jewish population in order to avoid the serious problem of the tyranny of the 51% which Kuttab raises in his article.

        Left-wing one-staters demand one secular state with equal rights for all, regardless of ethnicity or religion. The phrase “equal rights” includes the protection of minorities. In a true democracy, it’s the majority’s task to protect the rights of the minorities. For lefties, this goes without saying.
        As you are a right-winger, the idea of true democracy and protection of minority rights is completely new to you. You only started bothering about this issue because Jews are slowly becoming the minority now. Therefore, you consider it necessary to address this “totally new” issue.

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 7:24 am

        Shmuel@:

        Thank you for providing me with these two Abunimah / Barghouti block- quotes.

        Let’s deal with Abunimah’s view first.

        So Abunimah starts off by advocating ;

        a simple one-person, one-vote majoritarian system might produce a well-balanced parliament in terms of Israeli Jewish and Palestinian members

        So far not too bad , but then, – hoopla ! demographic crunch time!

        ..but in the long run, as the population shifts, more Arabs would likely be elected. Given the history of antagonism, Israeli Jews may well fear discrimination as the new minority population.”

        It is pretty easy to see why Abunimah wants a simple one vote one person majoritarian democracy.

        The Arabs reach a majority , and , hey presto and bingo ! it’s another exclusivist majority Arab Muslim state and quite possibly one in which the remaining Jews might be likely to flee! ( hopes Abunimah I would imagine..)

        Leaving even more of an Arab Muslim state in place!

        Especially implicit , it seems to me , given the rather threatening tone of Abunimah’s final pay- off line here;

        Given the history of antagonism, Israeli Jews may well fear discrimination as the new minority population.”

        And the problem here is that unlike Kuttab , Abunimah doesn’t even BOTHER to imagine and let alone suggest in his piece what safeguards might be put in place to ensure the continuing presence of a secure , safe and viable Jewish community in his proposed one state.

        Not very reassuring to the Israeli Jewish people at all or to me.

        Unlike Kuttab’s article which recognises Jewish fears of Arab Muslim majority domination in a putative single state and sees that compromise is necessary and seeks to allay Jewish fears of what a majoritarian state might bring , by contrast , Abunimah’s view of what a one state might entail seems to me to be altogether different in substance and more strident.

        In fact what Abunimah’s view strongly implies to me is that the main thing on his mind is achieving an Arab majority state as soon as possible with no particular political safeguards in place for the protection of the Jewish minority against the tyranny of the 51%.

        Fail!

        Again , I much prefer Kuttab’s outline vision of what would be necessary to make a one state solution workable and peaceable.

        Let’s examine Omar Bargouti’s view next.

        Bargouti says;

        Only such a state can ethically reconcile the ostensibly irreconcilable: the inalienable, UN-sanctioned rights of the indigenous people of Palestine to self-determination, repatriation, and equality in accordance with international law and the acquired and internationally recognized rights of Israeli Jews to coexist—as equals, not colonial masters—in the land of Palestine.

        The parts of Bargouti’s vision I have left out of the above quote of a one state solution seem to me to rather driven in good part by present day strident anti Zionist propaganda purposes.

        Also ,in talking about the ; inalienable , UN sanctioned rights of the indigenous Palestinian people to self determination repatriation, and equality in accordance with international law

        suggests a rather different and stronger set of rights on behalf of the Palestinian people from the ones he proposes for the Jewish minority..

        and the acquired and internationally recognized rights of Israeli Jews to coexist—as equals, not colonial masters—in the land of Palestine.

        so -internationally recognised by the international community but not necessarily fully recognised by the Arab Muslim majority that would soon emerge in a single state.

        So it seems to me that again , just like Abunimah, Bargouti is proposing much the same scenario.

        A majority Arab Muslim state dominating its insecure Jewish minority.

        Bargouti accuses Israel of being an ethnocentric , exclusivist state just like Abunimah.

        My question to you Shmuel is this.

        If a Jewish Israeli ethnocentric, exclusivist nationalist state is objectionable to you , why then is a , as proposed by Bargouti and Abunimah , is a ethnocentric , exclusivist ARAB nationalist state any better?

        Shmuel, you are against confessional democracy but I honestly think that would probably be the best most workable solution in a one state solution.

        On examination all three , Kuttab, Abunimah and Bargouti do advocate a single state solution.

        But on closer still examination that is where the similarity ends.

        Looking at all three I only see real seriousness in terms of addressing the concerns of Israeli Jews in Kuttab’s outline of what a more reasonable one state solution could look like.

        Shmuel, you really have to wise up fast to the fact that many Arabs like Bargouti and Abunimah advocate the sort of simple one state solution for one good reason only.

        To establish an Arab majority state as quickly as possible with no safeguards for a Jewish minority which, I imagine would cause the Jewish minority to dwindle away and away , a scenario it seems to me is much preferred by Arab nationalists like Bargouti and Abunimah.

        Whereas Kuttab seems to be advocating an outline of a one state solution which would properly safeguard the rights of the Jewish minority within it and also that of other minorities such as non Jewish citizens and Christian Palestinians.

        Also you haven’t addressed at all the issue I raised of preventing against the emergence and danger of the tyranny of the 51% mentioned in Kuttab’s article.

        You haven’t taken on board how badly the tyranny of the 51% has worked out in Egypt either.

        Personally I am not dead set against the possibility of a viable one state solution.
        However I believe that Kuttab’s outline vision of an unitary ,single state solution is by far the more preferable , most workable , viable solution .

        By contrast the vision outline of a single unitary state dominated by an Arab majority with an insecure unprotected Jewish minority as advocated by Arab nationalists like Bargouti and Abunimah , would be an undoubted success for Arab nationalists but a catastrophe for the Jewish minority

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 8:14 am

        Amigo@;

        I do not have the Ali Abunimah book you refer to.

        Which is precisely why I asked Shmuel to block quote me some of it.

        Which he very kindly did.

        You claim Abunimah addresses the problem of the tyranny of the 51%;

        He devotes some 20 pages to the subject under the heading , “A united, democratic State in Palestine-Israel.

        so you say..

        If that is case , and seeing as I do not have access to the book, perhaps, in the interests of solidarity with the Palestinian people you care about , you can block quote me the relevant passages from Abunimah’s book on the 51% issue and protection of minority rights?

        BTW, Amigo..

        South Africa, – with it’s millions and millions of black working class people STILL living in poverty , and , since 1994 oppressed by a new class of both white and black rich folks and politicians, REALLY has nothing to teach ANYONE about promoting JUSTICE and EQUALITY.

        Really Amigo..

        Haven’t you heard about the massacre of the Marikana miners?

        Thought not…

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 8:16 am

        It is pretty easy to see why Abunimah wants a simple one vote one person majoritarian democracy.

        The Arabs reach a majority , and , hey presto and bingo ! it’s another exclusivist majority Arab Muslim state and quite possibly one in which the remaining Jews might be likely to flee! ( hopes Abunimah I would imagine..)

        This is really a disgusting slur you’ve propagated here. He’s identifying the same problem you’re discussing, Einstein. Nowhere here is saying that this fear would be a good thing, merely that it is likely to exist. Jesus Christ, learn to read for comprehension.

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 8:18 am

        And the problem here is that unlike Kuttab , Abunimah doesn’t even BOTHER to imagine and let alone suggest in his piece what safeguards might be put in place to ensure the continuing presence of a secure , safe and viable Jewish community in his proposed one state.

        Um, it’s an excerpt. He then goes on to discuss safeguards.

        In fact what Abunimah’s view strongly implies to me is that the main thing on his mind is achieving an Arab majority state as soon as possible with no particular political safeguards in place for the protection of the Jewish minority against the tyranny of the 51%.

        You obviously have no idea who Abunimah is or what he advocates. Your uninformed and entirely erroneous characterisation of his views would probably fall into the category of what he calls “fear of brown people”.

        Your assessment of Barghouti, based on a rather twisted reading of a single paragraph (how much clearer can you get than ” unequivocal equality in citizenship and individual and communal rights both to Palestinians (refugees included) and to Israeli Jews”?) seems to be equally uninformed.

        Bargouti accuses Israel of being an ethnocentric , exclusivist state just like Abunimah.

        Because that’s what it is — the very opposite of what they propose for a future state. Kuttab doesn’t seem to disagree (in this or any of his other writings). Kuttab actually suggests that the sooner Israel stops being such a state, the better chance Israeli Jews will have in a unitary state.

        If a Jewish Israeli ethnocentric, exclusivist nationalist state is objectionable to you , why then is a , as proposed by Bargouti and Abunimah , is a ethnocentric , exclusivist ARAB nationalist state any better?

        Try reading something by Barghouti or Abunimah. You really haven’t got a clue (which doesn’t seem to stop you from having an opinion).

        Shmuel, you are against confessional democracy but I honestly think that would probably be the best most workable solution in a one state solution.

        I expressed reservations, not opposition. It’s just that the Lebanese experience hasn’t exactly been peaches and cream. There may be a lesson there somewhere.

        Also you haven’t addressed at all the issue I raised of preventing against the emergence and danger of the tyranny of the 51% mentioned in Kuttab’s article.

        Abunimah addresses it explicitly and Barghouti implicitly. I called it a “complete banality” and noted that I don’t know of any 1-stater who has ever said otherwise.

        You haven’t taken on board how badly the tyranny of the 51% has worked out in Egypt either.

        That was your contribution. Kuttab doesn’t mention it. Tyranny is tyranny, and should be eliminated in the present and prevented in the future.

        Kuttab’s vision is pretty similar to Barghouti’s and Abunimah’s — and Lustick’s for that matter. That you are unfamiliar with their writings or thought hardly makes them “Arab nationalists” or devoid of ideas to safeguard democracy in a future single state. Your assumptions about their ‘real intentions’, without a shred of evidence, speaks volumes about your own approach and how distant it is from Kuttab’s vision. Speaking of which, how about his suggestion that Israel start working on eliminating Jewish privilege in Israel right away?

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 8:24 am

        “If a Jewish Israeli ethnocentric, exclusivist nationalist state is objectionable to you , why then is a , as proposed by Bargouti and Abunimah , is a ethnocentric , exclusivist ARAB nationalist state any better?”

        Hmmmmmmm, good point (even though neither Bargouti nor Abunimah are proposing that, as it is your imagination getting away from you again….) Well, let’s see, the Jews got to run such a state for 65 years. So I propose that the Palestinians population get 65 years to treat the Jews the say way the Jews have been treating the Palestinians since 1948, and then, we can have full equal rights for everyone, okay? (I mean, that’s fairer than your solution, which is to let the Jewish domination continue forever…)

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 8:42 am

        Kuttab actually suggests that the sooner Israel stops being [an ethnocentric, exclusivist nationalist] state, the better chance Israeli Jews will have in a unitary state.

        Exactly! Why doesn’t Miriam understand this? Is she mentally unable or unwilling? Probably the latter.
        Any way, go Shmuel! Go Shmuel!

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 8:47 am

        Shmuel@;

        Your uninformed and entirely erroneous characterisation of his views would probably fall into the category of what he calls “fear of brown people”.

        Shmuel , in your slur on me about ‘fear of brown people’ you seem to have conveniently forgotten all of a sudden that 52% of the Israeli Jewish population is of Mizrahi/Arab Jewish descent.

        In other words they are also ‘ brown people’

        Whose rights I was defending..

        You haven’t taken on board how badly the tyranny of the 51% has worked out in Egypt either.
        That was your contribution. Kuttab doesn’t mention it. Tyranny is tyranny, and should be eliminated in the present and prevented in the future.

        How blithely you talk.

        Shmuel I used the Egyptian situation as an example of the difficulties of democracy and opposing tyranny..

        Are you going to tell me that all is well in Egypt and that the tyranny of military rule in Egypt can be so easily eliminated in the present and prevented in the future ?

        Really?

        For one thing , now that the military in Egypt has gotten away with deposing a democratically elected if albeit authoritarian Islamist government, the Egyptian military now know they can do it again and again…

        I invoked the Egyptian example to illustrate the difficulties and pitfalls of achieving democracy in the Middle East..

        Which you seem blissfully unaware of.

        However , if you are an Israeli Jew I wish you the best of luck surviving in the unitary Arab state replacement for Israel proposed by Abunimah/Bargouti , – you know , the one you seem to be hoping for..

        Careful what you wish for..

        Good luck.

        You are going to need it.

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 9:12 am

        Woody@;

        I SAID these following words — NOT Abunimah nor Shmuel :

        It is pretty easy to see why Abunimah wants a simple one vote one person majoritarian democracy.
        If a Jewish Israeli ethnocentric, exclusivist nationalist state is objectionable to you , why then is a , as proposed by Bargouti and Abunimah , is a ethnocentric , exclusivist ARAB nationalist state any better?

        You said;

        This is really a disgusting slur you’ve propagated here. He’s identifying the same problem you’re discussing, Einstein. Nowhere here is saying that this fear would be a good thing, merely that it is likely to exist.

        Woody the problem is not whether fear is likely to exist

        It is a question of asking WHAT safeguards does Abunimah or for that matter Bargouti propose putting in place to allay those fears?

        He acknowledges the fear but says nothing about his proposed solution for it

        Perhaps you ought to heed your own patronising advice and try reading for comprehension.

        So , on to you second comment ,which, basically and contrary to what you claimed was MY SLUR on the Arabs –finds you revelling in the idea of the oppression of Israeli Jews at the hands of the Palestinians.

        You illustrate the lack of seriousness with which you take a serious problem HERE:

        So I propose that the Palestinians population get 65 years to treat the Jews the say way the Jews have been treating the Palestinians since 1948,

        So you are agreeing with me that the Israeli Jews DO have something to fear should they find themselves in an Arab majoritarian state..

        Well done old chap, well done..

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 9:14 am

        Shmuel , in your slur on me about ‘fear of brown people’ you seem to have conveniently forgotten all of a sudden that 52% of the Israeli Jewish population is of Mizrahi/Arab Jewish descent.

        Well, the thing is that Jewish Arabs don’t identify as Arabs. They identify as Jews. When the Zionists shout “Mavet la aravim!”, they aren’t talking about Jewish Arabs. They mean non-Jewish Arabs.
        Likewise, most Jewish Germans don’t identify as Germans. They identify as Jews. When they say “Germans”, they only mean non-Jewish Germans.

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 9:34 am

        in your slur on me about ‘fear of brown people’

        Do you have any reason — apart from the fact that they are Palestinian Arabs (Muslims?), highly critical of Israel — to presume that Abunimah and Barghouti are Arab nationalists merely seeking an Arab majority in Israel/Palestine, with no concern for democratic safeguards to protect the rights of a future Jewish minority? Then it must be that “brown people” thing Abunimah talks about (based on prejudice rather than legitimate concern). There is certainly room for legitimate concern (Abunimah talks about that too), but that doesn’t involve prejudging the views of Palestinian Arabs (without ever having heard or read them!) simply for being the views of Palestinian Arabs.

        How blithely you talk…

        There’s that imagination of yours again. Have I ever downplayed the situation in Egypt? Have I suggested in any way that the problems there are easily resolved? Have I indicated at any time that a 1ss in Israel/Palestine is a simple matter (I think I asked you that earlier today — no reply)? If you ask me, a 1ss is a pipe dream. I’d rather talk about the ongoing theft, apartheid, ethnic cleansing, torture, closures and daily harassment, and leave the dream-talk to the visionaries.

      • amigo
        September 16, 2013, 10:57 am

        Amigo@;

        “I do not have the Ali Abunimah book you refer to.”M6

        Then why did you make the following assertion??.

        ““I don’t think Bargouti and Abunimah have said exactly the same thing as Kuttab is saying in HIS article.”

        “To my knowledge they have not addressed the issue of protection of minorities including the Jewish population in order to avoid the serious problem of the tyranny of the 51% which Kuttab raises in his article. “M6

        Why should I block quote you pages of text.Buy the book and read it.

        “Haven’t you heard about the massacre of the Marikana miners?”M6

        Please block quote me the page from your Hasbara book that comes from.
        Look under “diversion tactics”.

        Get used the idea that Israel is finished.It has been hijacked by zionist racist bigots who are destroying it.

        No loss to those of us who see it for what it is.

        A blight unto the Nations.

        Better start revising your rhetoric.

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 10:59 am

        Shmuel@:

        Do you have any reason — apart from the fact that they are Palestinian Arabs (Muslims?), highly critical of Israel — to presume that Abunimah and Barghouti are Arab nationalists merely seeking an Arab majority in Israel/Palestine, with no concern for democratic safeguards to protect the rights of a future Jewish minority? … ‘fear of brown people’…

        Would you please stop with this ‘ fear of brown people’ slur?

        I have TOLD you already that 52% of the Israeli Jewish population is of Mizrahi / Arab Jewish origin which means they are the SAME ethnicity as the Arabs you keep alleging I am terrified of plus there are black Jews in Israel too..

        Plus I had a half Egyptian/ half Pakistani boyfriend once , so please stop with the ‘afraid of brown folks’ slur!

        They and the other Jews are the very ones I am concerned about.

        Again I think you are being naïve…

        Well I have tried over the course of several comments of mine to explain why

        Will hope to get back to you later about it

        In the meantime, how much do you know of the sort of persecution Mizrahi Jews faced whilst resident in Arab Muslim majority countries?

        They were frequently denied the protection and rights they ought to have had

        They were later persecuted in many Arab countries (except for Lebanon) over the creation of the state of Israel , an event they had nothing to do with and no control over and no responsibility for

        You should ask them if they seriously fancy living again in the sort of Arab majority state Abunimah and Bargouti propose.

        If you ask me, a 1ss is a pipe dream.

        You mean to say I have been up all night missing my sleep , arguing with you over a one state solution – – - – ONLY for you to tell me you don’t believe a 1ss solution is anything more than a pipe dream ANYWAY!!!!!!!!

        As old man ‘Victor Meldrew’ liked to say

        I don’t believe it!

        Baaaaahhh!!

        Christ on a bike!!!

        I’m off for a nap straightaway..

      • hophmi
        September 16, 2013, 11:14 am

        Yes, it’s very hard to see the visions of Abuminah and others as little more than a reversal of what they see as Zionism – they speak the language of the left, but their vision is simply an Arab majority state in place of a Jewish majority one. This phased-plan thinking has been part of PLO strategizing for a long time.

        Lustick’s analysis is nothing new. It’s Qaddafi’s Isratine written by a Western IR professor. Jews and Arabs in one state kumbaya harmony.

        Like many analyses, he puts no responsibility on the Palestinians for anything in this state. He also makes silly historical analogies that have no relationship to the I-P conflict. French people in Algeria were able to return to France. The Soviet Union fell apart, but a dictatorship has taken its place. South African apartheid did disintegrate, but the economic realities remained the same and remain so today in modern South Africa.

        Israel is a democracy. Its people are Israelis. They’re not Polish and Russian and German. They are staying, regardless of Ian Lustick, who is the umpteenth person to predict some mass emigration. Hey Ian! Israelis love their country. They’re not going to leave. The small coterie of Tel Avivian post-Zionists are not reflective of most of the country, even though they may reflect your personal political views.

        And with all due respect to the common pessimism of Lustick, the two-state solution is neither phony nor unworkable. It is a difficult compromise that always seems most unworkable to Western political science professors and radical extremists on the left and right who are only too willing to impose their utopian views on foreign states much as colonialists did 100 years ago.

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 11:22 am

        In the meantime, how much do you know of the sort of persecution Mizrahi Jews faced whilst resident in Arab Muslim majority countries?

        A fair bit, but that has nothing to do with your (ab)use of Kuttab’s article or ignorant assertions regarding Abunimah and Barghouti.

        You mean to say I have been up all night missing my sleep , arguing with you over a one state solution – – – – ONLY for you to tell me you don’t believe a 1ss solution is anything more than a pipe dream ANYWAY!!!!!!!!

        Actually you have been arguing with yourself. Neither I nor any of the authors I have cited have pooh-poohed the issue of minority rights in a hypothetical single state. For some odd reason, you decided that we all disagree with Kuttab (or, at the very least, fail to approach the matter with sufficient gravitas), and then proceeded to fight with us.

        Up all night missing your sleep? I thought you said you were in the UK. It’s been daylight on this side of the Atlantic for the past 10 or 11 hours.

        I’m off for a nap straightaway.

        Excellent idea.

      • Citizen
        September 16, 2013, 11:22 am

        @ miriam6

        Some Marikana miners were shot dead by the police. The S African press said those shot were charging the police with machetes, spears, clubs, etc. There’s been a lot of wildcat strikes of gold and platinum miners across S Africa in the last few years. I don’t know if diamond miners have also been involved. They want higher wages; there’s also competition between labor unions. If memory serves the government now owns a portion of those mines yet is also pushing minimum wage. I don’t know who privately owns the mines.

        What do labor issues have to do with the end of apartheid style government, with equal treatment under the law for ethnic/religious/racial minorities under a one state solution to the I-P conflict?

        Perhaps a better example for you, as far as South Africa is concerned, is the significant number of white farm families that have suffered murder and/or robbery since the end of apartheid? I don’t think the government has done much about this pattern; it’s nearly unreported in the Western press.

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 11:32 am

        >> … it’s very hard to see the visions of Abuminah and others as little more than a reversal of what they see as Zionism – they speak the language of the left, but their vision is simply an Arab majority state in place of a Jewish majority one.

        As miriam6eee pointed out in a reply to Shmuel, Israel is already an Arab majority state:

        … 52% of the Israeli Jewish population is of Mizrahi / Arab Jewish origin which means they are the SAME ethnicity as the Arabs you keep alleging I am terrified of …

        So there’s no problem.

      • hophmi
        September 16, 2013, 11:49 am

        “Israel is already an Arab majority state:”

        Uh-huh. It’s a majority Jewish state. I’ve seen no inclination amongst the Palestinians to privilege the Arab identity of the people their brethren in the Middle East expelled over their Jewish identity.

      • Citizen
        September 16, 2013, 11:59 am

        @ miriam6
        60 white S African farmers were murdered by black males last June-July. At least 3,000 have been grossly murdered since the end of apartheid. link to aemn.eu

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 12:00 pm

        >> Uh-huh. It’s a majority Jewish state.

        Interesting. Either you’re right and miriam6eee has no idea what she’s talking about, or she’s right and you have no idea what you’re talking about.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 12:09 pm

        Yes, it’s very hard to see the visions of Abuminah and others as little more than a reversal of what they see as Zionism – they speak the language of the left, but their vision is simply an Arab majority state in place of a Jewish majority one.

        Bullshit! It’s inevitable that one group is in the majority. Justice requires that Palestinian refugees are granted their right of return. This right of return plus the birthrates will lead to a Palestinian majority. Again, this demographic development will be just and natural. The current Jewish majority, however, was created artificially by ethnic cleansing and discriminatory immigration policies. Therefore, this Jewish majority is unacceptable. If it had developed naturally, I’d be fine with it.
        Anti-Zionists simply want a country in which all people have equal rights. And in such a country, it doesn’t matter which ethnic group is in the majority, because all people have equal rights anyway.

        the two-state solution [...] is a difficult compromise

        Why should we agree to a “difficult compromise” when we can instead opt for a just solution in which everyone has equal rights?

      • Citizen
        September 16, 2013, 12:15 pm

        Here’s the inside story on the murder of Boer families since the end of apartheid in S Africa: link to genocidewatch.org

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 12:18 pm

        eljay, my e-mail notification says that you wrote this:
        So…which one of you two has no idea what you’re talking about?

        On the website, however, I read this:
        Either you’re right and miriam6eee has no idea what she’s talking about, or she’s right and you have no idea what you’re talking about.

        How come? Did you change your comment afterwards? This isn’t the first time that I notice that the comment on the website is different from the comment in the e-mail notification. Perhaps the site operators can solve this issue.

      • hophmi
        September 16, 2013, 12:29 pm

        ” It’s inevitable that one group is in the majority.”

        Uh-huh. And wouldn’t the Palestinians like to be the one.

        “Justice requires that Palestinian refugees are granted their right of return.”

        Justice requires, justice requires. Justice requires that Jewish refugees are compensated. Justice requires that Jews have a refuge post-Holocaust. Justice requires that Jews be permitted to enjoy the society in Israel that they largely built. Justice requires that the Palestinians not benefit from killing Jewish children.

        I can speak the justice-requires language too. The difference between you and me is that I recognize that both sides have just claims. You don’t.

        ” this Jewish majority is unacceptable”

        Non-Muslim sovereignty has always been unpalatable in the region.

        “Anti-Zionists simply want a country in which all people have equal rights. ”

        And I want an end to the civil war in Syria. Just because I want it doesn’t mean my vision is going to break out.

        “And in such a country, it doesn’t matter which ethnic group is in the majority, because all people have equal rights anyway.”

        You sure the Palestinians see it that way?

        “Why should we agree to a “difficult compromise” when we can instead opt for a just solution in which everyone has equal rights?”

        Because your solution is not just. It’s simply the creation of a Palestinian majority Muslim state.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 12:29 pm

        “Israel is a democracy. Its people are Israelis. They’re not Polish and Russian and German.”

        Nonsense. You ask them and they’ll tell you that it is a state not for all Israelis, but all Jews (well, some will say that it’s a state for the white man…) That’s not a democracy.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 12:31 pm

        “Yes, it’s very hard to see the visions of Abuminah and others as little more than a reversal of what they see as Zionism ”

        Yes, because seeing their vision this way (inaccurate though you are) permits you to favor the demonic Judeo-supremacism of the current zionist state without sparing a thought for the humanity of your victims.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 12:35 pm

        “Plus I had a half Egyptian/ half Pakistani boyfriend once”

        LMAO. “Some of my best friends are brown…”

        “They and the other Jews are the very ones I am concerned about.”

        Yeah, too bad the likes of you can’t spare a thought for the victims of those Jews as they exist and have existed in Palestine.

        “You should ask them if they seriously fancy living again in the sort of Arab majority state Abunimah and Bargouti propose.”

        You should ask their present day victims in Palestine if they fancy living in a ethno-religious Jewish Apartheid state.

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 12:54 pm

        Shmuel@:

        Thank you for your reply and apparently enabling me to continue arguing with myself over these past fifteen/ fifty hours non stop I have been posting on this thread

        (arguing with myself , according to you that is, — though I do tend to argue with myself quite a lot these days…must be the MW effect, or the medication…)

        Shmuel on Mizrahim Jews;

        A fair bit, but that has nothing to do with your (ab)use of Kuttab’s article or ignorant assertions regarding Abunimah and Barghouti.

        On the subject of Mizrahi Jews

        In the first instance it is really crucial that you know more about them

        I have mentioned them because they actually DO have a big connection to my arguments about Kuttab, Abunimah and Bargouti

        If you knew more of the persecution they suffered at the hands of Arab governments you might come to appreciate WHY they are/ might be extremely wary of the prospect of living in a single unitary state with an Arab majority political domination situation.

        I would be delighted if you could look and learn at these websites about the Mizrahim;

        http://www.justiceforjews.com
        link to harif.org
        http://www.jimena.org

        you decided that we all disagree with Kuttab (or, at the very least, fail to approach the matter with sufficient gravitas), and then proceeded to fight with us.

        Well, actually, my first comment blockquoted Kuttab in order to demonstrate that this business of a one state solution has its pitfalls and dangers.

        I blockquoted Kuttab’s last paragraph as it made clearer the fact that guarantees of minority rights MUST be upheld in a single unitary state

        THEN you lot, the other commenters that is , came in and took issue with ME for having the temerity to point out that Kuttab’s article ventured to outline that measures to safeguard minority rights must be put in place for a 1ss to be workable and safe for minority communities including the Jews.

        THEN you brought up Abunimah/ Bargouti you blockquoted then I replied the rest is history.

        Up all night missing your sleep? I thought you said you were in the UK. It’s been daylight on this side of the Atlantic for the past 10 or 11 hours.

        I thought you were Israeli actually which would make your time two hours ahead of UK time

        However that’s now irrelevant as you are American / or Canadian?

        It is approximately 5.53 pm in the UK so I should have been asleep around 11pm LAST ( Sunday night)

        But foolishly I switched on my computer for a sneaky peek, and… well .. now I am exhausted ..

        SO I shall occupy myself for a couple more hours then sleep till its time to get up for work…

        Aaaah..

        I have panda eyes from lack of sleep and addiction to posting on MW

        ( those crazy , constituting an evolutionary dead end in themselves , furry mammals on account of their refusal to mate in a natural fashion like most other mammals do.., – panda bears the wonderful Chinese sent to the city of Edinburgh in the UK , one of which , is it Ting Ting ?..may or may not be pregnant , fingers crossed.. )

        Bye for now..

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 1:11 pm

        “It is a question of asking WHAT safeguards does Abunimah or for that matter Bargouti propose putting in place to allay those fears?”

        No, the issue is that you libeled Abunimah by supposing he favors his positions because it will lead to harm coming to Jews.

        “He acknowledges the fear but says nothing about his proposed solution for it”

        Not true. And you transform your ignorance into a libel against Abunimah.

        “finds you revelling in the idea of the oppression of Israeli Jews at the hands of the Palestinians.”

        Seriously, you can’t recognize satire? Is this what Swift’s land has been reduced to?

        But let’s play with the concept for a second. What, exactly, would be wrong in the Palestinians to treat the Jews in exactly the same way the Jews have treated the Palestinians for the last 65 years? If such an imagined state of affairs would constitute an injustice against the Jews, then it constitutes an injustice against the Palestinians, today and now. And if that is the case, if the Jews of today do not act to end the injustice they perpetrate, then on what basis should I care if, in some imagined future, it is those same Jews who are oppressed??

        “You illustrate the lack of seriousness with which you take a serious problem HERE:”

        No, I illustrate the problem of people like you obsessing over the injustice you suppose will exist under a 1SS while the very same or worse injustices exist now under Jewish rule without a peep of protest from you. Why, exactly, should I give a damn about how the Jews are treated by the Palestinians when those same Jews don’t give a damn for how they treat the Palestinians today??

        “So you are agreeing with me that the Israeli Jews DO have something to fear should they find themselves in an Arab majoritarian state..”

        No, I think that that fear is simply an acknowledgment of the guilt for the crimes they’ve committed against the Palestinians. It’s like the fears that slaveholders in the South had regarding slave revolts. They didn’t fear that they would be dealt with unfairly by the revolting slaves; they feared they would be dealt fairly, that they would get exactly what they deserved.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 1:26 pm

        Plus I had a half Egyptian/ half Pakistani boyfriend once , so please stop with the ‘afraid of brown folks’ slur!
        And? Was he a Jew? Would you ever start a relationship with a non-Jew? Or would you view this as treason?

        They and the other Jews are the very ones I am concerned about.
        What about the brown people who aren’t Jews? Are you concerned about non-Jews at all?

        In the meantime, how much do you know of the sort of persecution Mizrahi Jews faced whilst resident in Arab Muslim majority countries?
        Don’t try to distract. We talk about Israel here.

        Christ on a bike!
        I don’t think they had bikes back then…

      • Hostage
        September 16, 2013, 1:40 pm

        Miriam you’re posting long-winded comments in order to construct a straw man that you can debate against. Nothing about “inalienable , UN sanctioned rights of the indigenous Palestinian people to self determination repatriation, and equality in accordance with international law” would confer rights superior to those enjoyed by indigenous Jews.

        If there was ever an example of the tyranny of the 51 percent it’s the way unelected Jews, representing the JNF, and their ex officio brethren control national land use policy on the board of the Israel Land Authority by operation of a discriminatory law.

        Ali Abunimah devoted an entire chapter to the need for constitutional guarantees of legal equality for minorities and notes that they were indispensable in South Africa. He calls for the establishment of “one secular country shared by all” and notes that “The constitution of the new South Africa enshrines as a principle a need for understanding but not for vengeance, a need for reparation but not retaliation, a need for ubuntu but not for victimiization.”

        He summarized at the beginning of the next chapter:

        I have argued that a successful strategy for democratic transformation in Israel-Palestine will in part require Palestinians to present a vision that meets concerns and needs of ordinary Jews, alongside a principled and sustained campaign to impose a cost for Israeli government abuses of Palestinians.

        – See One Country, pages 160-161

        So Abunimah is explicitly advocating constitutional minority protections, contrary to your exaggerated claims and dissimulation.

      • freespeechlover
        September 16, 2013, 2:12 pm

        Not just Lebanon but Iraq and potentially Syria in the future suggest multiple problems with confessional states. In addition, in a unitary state, one thing that is likely, not even might but likely, to happen, albeit over time, is that people’s identities which are never reducible to one thing–there are gender, social class, educational levels, degrees of religiosity, urban centers vs more rural areas–would create allliances as well as oppositions that would not be “Palestinian Muslim” (to be honest, I find this one dismissive of the prominent role Christians have always played in Arab and Palestinian nationalism) vs “Israeli Jew.” We can already seen nascent niches of the social processes in everyday life where this potential lies. It’s just not part of official political discourse in which everything about society is reduced to a singular sense of who the subjects “are.”

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 3:13 pm

        >> eljay … Did you change your comment afterwards? … Perhaps the site operators can solve this issue.

        On very infrequent occasions, my comments clear moderation quickly enough for me to make changes before the allowable window of opportunity closes.

        It seems you’re getting notified when a comment goes public, which explains why you don’t always see the “final product” in your inbox.

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 3:23 pm

        >> Because your solution is not just. It’s simply the creation of a Palestinian majority Muslim state.

        miriam6eee points out that 52% of Israeli Jews are actually Arabs and – Presto! – hophmeee transforms “Arab state” into scary “Muslim state”.

        It’s so lame and predictable that it’s actually rather funny. :-)

      • American
        September 16, 2013, 3:29 pm

        ”I can speak the justice-requires language too. The difference between you and me is that I recognize that both sides have just claims. ”..hoppy

        You dont have a “just’ claim to Palestine. The ‘Nazis’ holocuast of Jews does not give you a just claim to Palestine, it gives you a claim aganst ‘the Nazis’. Bible myth does not give you a just claim either.

        “Because your solution is not just. It’s simply the creation of a Palestinian majority Muslim state.”…hoppy

        Oh and the creation of majority Jewsh populaton (on stolen land at that) was a just soluton?
        gawd hoppy!….you are living proof that stupidity and hypocriscy come from the same egg.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 3:32 pm

        “Uh-huh. And wouldn’t the Palestinians like to be the one.”

        And given how, as the minority, they’ve been oppressed by the Jews, no decent person can blame them.

        “Justice requires, justice requires.”

        Yeah, anyone who’s read your posts knows that “justice” is a meaningless word to you.

        “Justice requires that Jewish refugees are compensated.”

        Sure, but not before the Palestinians.

        “Justice requires that Jews have a refuge post-Holocaust.”

        Perhaps, but there was no justice in the theft and ethnic cleansing of Palestine. That was adding an injustice to an injustice.

        “Justice requires that Jews be permitted to enjoy the society in Israel that they largely built.”

        No it doesn’t. They built a society on stolen land with stolen property and destroyed lives (including the corpses of dead, innocent Palestinians.) Until they compensate their victims, they don’t deserve a moment’s enjoyment.

        “Justice requires that the Palestinians not benefit from killing Jewish children.”

        And here’s your racism rearing its ugly head.

        “Because your solution is not just. ”

        Telling that, to the zionist, a society where everyone has equal rights is considered “unjust.”

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 3:34 pm

        @ hophmi
        Please learn how to make italics for the quotations. That would make it easier to read your comments.

        And wouldn’t the Palestinians like to be the one.
        Well, it makes sense that the Palestinians are the majority in historic Palestine. Don’t you think? They are the indigenous people.
        Besides, which group is in the majority is not a matter of like or dislike. It’s a matter of justice or injustice:
        natural development = justice
        ethnic cleansing = injustice

        Justice requires that Jewish refugees are compensated. Justice requires that Jews have a refuge post-Holocaust. Justice requires that Jews be permitted to enjoy the society in Israel that they largely built.
        Stop being so Jew-centric. This is about Palestine and its indigenous Palestinian people. Palestinian refugees have a right of return. Palestinians deserve to have equal rights in their own homeland.

        Justice requires that the Palestinians not benefit from killing Jewish children.
        Stop making shit up.

        The difference between you and me is that I recognize that both sides have just claims.
        Non-Palestinian Jews don’t have claims in Palestine.

        Non-Muslim sovereignty has always been unpalatable in the region.
        Ethnic cleansing has always been unpalatable.

        And I want an end to the civil war in Syria. Just because I want it doesn’t mean my vision is going to break out.
        OMG! You are disgusting. Stop distracting. You are defending injustice in Palestine! Don’t you see this? There’s a difference between (a) defending injustice and (b) not achieving justice despite trying. You approve of the injustice in Palestine while disapproving of the injustice in Syria. Double standards!

        Because your solution is not just. It’s simply the creation of a Palestinian majority Muslim state.
        A secular state with equal rights for all is not a just solution!? You must be nuts!

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 3:53 pm

        I thought you were Israeli actually which would make your time two hours ahead of UK time
        However that’s now irrelevant as you are American / or Canadian?

        I see you don’t even read the trivial stuff properly. I wrote “this side of the Atlantic”, as in “our” side, the eastern side. But as long as you’re asking, I was born in Canada, raised in Israel and now live somewhere GMT+1.

      • hophmi
        September 16, 2013, 3:53 pm

        “Well, it makes sense that the Palestinians are the majority in historic Palestine. ”

        They’re not the majority in Israel.

        “natural development = justice
        ethnic cleansing = injustice”

        Then you’ll agree that the natural development of people of Israel is justice, and the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands is injustice.

        “Stop being so Jew-centric.”

        I’m Jew-centric, am I. Anyone who speaks up the rights of Jews is “Jew-centric” How offensive.

        “This is about Palestine and its indigenous Palestinian people. Palestinian refugees have a right of return. Palestinians deserve to have equal rights in their own homeland.”

        It’s also about the SIX MILLION JEWS LIVING IN THE SAME PLACE, ma’am.

        “Stop making shit up.”

        It’s not making shit up to suggest that Palestinians have terrorized their way to the table, and keep expecting a better deal each time.

        “Non-Palestinian Jews don’t have claims in Palestine.”

        Oh yes they do. They’ve been there for generations, and they have built the state of Israel. To suggest that they “don’t have claims in Palestine” is genocidalist.

        “You are defending injustice in Palestine!”

        I’m doing nothing of the sort. I’m trying to explain to you that your utopia is not the same as the aspirations of the people on the ground. You don’t get it.

      • hophmi
        September 16, 2013, 3:55 pm

        “You dont have a “just’ claim to Palestine.”

        Again, there are SIX MILLION JEWS living there. They have a right to be there, and to stay there, and to determine their own destiny. The notion that they have “no claim” is racist nonsense.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 3:58 pm

        I now live somewhere GMT+1.

        Germany?

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 4:21 pm

        miriam6eee points out that 52% of Israeli Jews are actually Arabs

        False (or at the very least outdated).

        1. Even assuming that the definition “Arab Jews” fits all Jews born in or descendants of Jews born in Arab countries, the general term “Mizrahim” (or “yotzei afrika ve-asyah” in statistics lingo) includes Indians and Georgians and Bukharans and Persians and Turks and Bulgarians and lots of others that cannot be called “Arab” by any stretch of the imagination.

        2. The general category of “Jews originating from Africa and Asia” stopped being a majority of Israeli Jews with the large wave of immigration from the FSU (although a minority of those immigrants were also classified as “originating from Africa and Asia”). According to Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, “Jews originating from Europe and America” outnumber the Afro-Asians by nearly half a million (2010).

        3. Since a large number of Israeli Jews are of “mixed heritage” (about 25%, if I’m not mistaken), the CBS decided to base its statistics on “father’s country of origin”.

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 4:23 pm

        Germany?

        Italy.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 4:33 pm

        Italy.

        Too bad.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 4:55 pm

        They’re not the majority in Israel.
        Israel is a part of historic Palestine. The only reason Palestinians aren’t the majority in Israel is that the illegal Zionist immigrants did ethnic cleansing. That’s a crime! The Jewish majority in Israel was created artificially and unjustly. It didn’t come naturally and is therefore unacceptable.

        Anyone who speaks up the rights of Jews is “Jew-centric”
        No. Anyone who tries to justify Jewish supremacism is Jew-centric. This includes you.

        It’s also about the SIX MILLION JEWS LIVING IN THE SAME PLACE
        Almost all of these Israeli Jews deny the indigenous Palestinians equal rights and the right of return. That’s the problem!

        Palestinians have terrorized their way to the table, and keep expecting a better deal each time.
        Palestinians want justice and therefore engage in resistance. That’s their right.

        They’ve been there for generations, and they have built the state of Israel. To suggest that they “don’t have claims in Palestine” is genocidalist.
        Genocidalist? You are totally nuts! Unlike you, I respect the human rights of everyone. Just because I don’t allow Jews to steal and live on other people’s land doesn’t mean that I want to kill them.

        I’m trying to explain to you that your utopia is not the same as the aspirations of the people on the ground.
        Well, the Nazis didn’t want to give up their supremacist state either. They didn’t get what they aspired. So, why should the Zionists get what they aspire?

        Answer me one question: WHY do you deny the Palestinian refugees their right of return?

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 5:16 pm

        >> Then you’ll agree that the natural development of people of Israel is justice, and the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands is injustice.

        The natural development of the people of Israel – all of the people of Israel, equally – is justice.

        The unnatural development of supremacist “Jewish State” remains injustice.

        You know that, but you won’t admit it.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 5:17 pm

        “They’re not the majority in Israel.”

        In de facto israel, they are.

        “Then you’ll agree that the natural development of people of Israel is justice, ”

        Nothing natural about the invasion and zionist takeover of Palestine.

        “I’m Jew-centric, am I. Anyone who speaks up the rights of Jews is “Jew-centric” How offensive. ”

        No, what is offensive is the fact that you will defend israel and Jews REGARDLESS OF THE MERITS. That’s the offensive part.

        “It’s also about the SIX MILLION JEWS LIVING IN THE SAME PLACE, ma’am. ”

        Great. And those who are willing to live in a place where all people are free and absolutely equal, from the Med to the Jordan, without regard for ethnicity and religion should be free to remain.

        “It’s not making shit up to suggest that Palestinians have terrorized their way to the table, and keep expecting a better deal each time. ”

        It is, and it’s extremely racist, too.

        “They’ve been there for generations, and they have built the state of Israel.”

        A squatter who’s been told to leave by the rightful owners has no rights to the property. A thief can never gain good title to that which he stole.

        “To suggest that they ‘don’t have claims in Palestine’ is genocidalist. ”

        Oh, it is not, you drama queen. No one’s saying kill them. We’re saying (at most) that they go back to their home lands. No one’s going to kill a bunch of returning ethnoreligious looneys to Brooklyn.

        “I’m doing nothing of the sort. I’m trying to explain to you that your utopia is not the same as the aspirations of the people on the ground.”

        The aspirations of the zionists is the continued theft of Palestine and oppression and destruction of the Palestinians. You’re defending that. You’re defending injustice.

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 5:17 pm

        >> Shmuel: Italy.
        >> GL: Too bad.

        Why? You’re only a train ride apart. I’d have to cross an ocean to have a coffee with either of you!

        Not that you’d want to – I’m not a terribly interesting person. :-(

        ;-)

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 5:19 pm

        “The notion that they have “no claim” is racist nonsense.”

        No. Racist nonsense in the idea that any Jew in the world has a right to go live in Palestine, but the Palestinians don’t. THAT’S racist nonsense.

      • libra
        September 16, 2013, 5:22 pm

        GL: I don’t think they had bikes back then…

        It’s a little known fact but just a day after an early Israeli entrepreneur invented the wheel, another slapped two together to invent the bicycle. A good thing they stopped at the tricycle or ‘Das Auto’ would be Israeli too.

      • Henry Norr
        September 16, 2013, 6:54 pm

        @miriam6, I strongly suggest that you stop rattling on about Ali Abunimah’s views until you read his book. I’m sure you could get through it in less time than you’ve spent commenting on just this thread.

        In addition to what Shmuel blockquoted for you, here are some excerpts from a section of one of the chapters Amigo cited where Abunimah proposes “eight principles for the one-state solution” (pp. 110-111):

        1. The power of the government shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for and equality of civil, political, social, and cultural rights, and of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, women and men, and of parity of esteem and of just equal treatment for the identity, ethos, and aspirations of all communities.

        2. The constitution recognizes that the state is formed by the free and consenting union of two principal national communities, Israeli Jews and Palestinians, which each have multiple subcultures, shared histories, and sometimes irreconcilable narratives binding them to the country. … It is possible to be a full citizen of the state without belong to either of these communities.

        3. The state, recognizing the distinctive identities of the national communities who live in it, supports their linguistic and cultural traditions and production, all of which are part of the cultural wealth of the country. The state has mechanisms for national communities to exercise autonomy in decision-making related to language, education,, culture, and other matters, but which do not foster interethnic competition, discrimination, or separates.

        4. The state guarantees the freedom of religion and worship of every citizen and does not interfere in the affairs of relgious communities.. The state is neutral among religious groups and any state funding for religious school or other institutions is distributed in a nondiscriminatory, transparent, and equitable manner.


        6. The state recognizes that Israeli Jews have a special relationship with Jewish communities outside the country, and that Palestinians and Israeli Jews of Arab origin are connected to the broader Arab world and to Arab diaspora communities, and that all are free to maintain and develop these vital relationships.

      • talknic
        September 16, 2013, 7:56 pm

        @ Shmuel

        By 1950 the population of Israel was 1,370,000

        There were at least 156,000 non-Jewish Arabs in Israel and some 500,000 Arab Jewish refugees from the Arab states

        That’s 656,000 Arabs of a population of about 1,370,000

        = about 47% NOT INCLUDING the indigenous Arab Jews of Israel!

        link to wp.me

      • talknic
        September 16, 2013, 8:17 pm

        hophmi //“You dont have a “just’ claim to Palestine.”//

        “Again, there are SIX MILLION JEWS living there. They have a right to be there, and to stay there, and to determine their own destiny. The notion that they have “no claim” is racist nonsense.”

        We are not a race. There are many converts, many races amongst our Jewish fellows.

        SIX MILLION Jews have a right to live in Israel. No Israeli Jews have a right to live in Palestine, nor do Israeli Arabs or any other Israeli

        Israel’s borders have never changed from the moment they were Internationally recognized May 15th 1948 as the Israeli Government asked to be recognized ” “MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o’clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.”

        Israel has never legally annexed ANY territory and it has been inadmissible to acquire territory by war, any war, since at least 1933 link to pages.citebite.com

        You have been shown irrefutable evidence time and again, the very fact that you ignore everything you’re shown leaves one with no doubt that you’re a simple propagandist, by definition a liar. Lying is against the basic tenets of Judaism. Anyone who lies on behalf of the Jewish state in order to justify the usurping of non-Jews is a disgrace to both the Jewish state and Judaism.

      • Shingo
        September 16, 2013, 10:18 pm

        I strongly suggest that you stop rattling on about Ali Abunimah’s views until you read his book

        Henry, you are making the assumption that Miriam has any interest in being educated in this matter.

        As Donald, who has the patience of a saint has been forced to acknowledge, Miriam is a troll who has no interest in honest debate with regards to Israel.

      • talknic
        September 16, 2013, 10:22 pm

        hophmi // “Well, it makes sense that the Palestinians are the majority in historic Palestine. ”//

        “They’re not the majority in Israel”

        Israel is not historic Palestine. Israel is ONLY what was recognized as Israel was asked to be recognized “within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947″ Israel has never legally annexed any of the territory it has since illegally acquired by war

        “the natural development of people of Israel is justice…”

        In Israel. Israel does not include any non-Israeli/Palestinian territories acquired by war and never legally annexed.

        “…and the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands is injustice”

        It is NORMAL for countries to expel or inter possible 5th columnists and to freeze their property and assets when at war. In fact it is customary law in the majority of countries. Customary law in a majority of countries automatically passes into Customary International Law. It is not illegal.

        Against Customary International Law Israel illegally razed non-Jewish homes in Israel and in non-Israeli territory and; properties were illegally confiscated despite the fact that Palestinian refugees had not taken citizenship elsewhere, thereby maintaining their Right of return. The Arab states did not forbid their return to Israel and the territories Israel occupied, but actively fought for it through legitimate legal channels (the UN) according to the law.

        Injustice was served on Jewish refugees by the Jewish state. It was Israeli basic law from 1948 that prohibited any Jewish refugee in Israel from returning to enemy states and the fact that the Israeli Government encouraged Jewish refugees to take up citizenship in Israel meant they were not longer refugees, no longer had any Right to return to the Arab States, no longer had a right to their frozen properties and assets

        “I’m Jew-centric, am I. “

        One who never considers or completely ignores the LEGAL and legitimate l rights of non-Jewish party to the I/P conflict can be called Jew-centric

        “Anyone who speaks up the rights of Jews is “Jew-centric” “

        If you say so, no one else has.

        //“Non-Palestinian Jews don’t have claims in Palestine.”//

        “Oh yes they do. They’ve been there for generations, and they have built the state of Israel.”

        A) Non-Palestinian Jews have not been there for generations nor do they or any non-Jewish Israelis have any claims in Palestine.

        B) Israel was declared independent of Palestine. Israel is not in Palestine. Israel is not a part of Palestine. Israel is not Palestine. Israel only occupies what was remaining of Palestine after Israel was declared independent of Palestine. Occupied Palestinian territory does not belong to the Occupying Power.

        “To suggest that they “don’t have claims in Palestine” is genocidalist.”

        It’s a fact. Non-Palestinian Israeli Jews do not have any rights in Palestine

        To claim Non-Palestinian Israeli Jews do have claims in Palestine to the detriment and dispossession of non-Jewish Palestinians is genocidalist

        //“You are defending injustice in Palestine!”//

        “I’m trying to explain to you that your utopia is not the same as the aspirations of the people on the ground. You don’t get it.”

        LOL You’re conflating Jews with Israeli Jews, Palestine with Israel. The usual Israel apologist propaganda MO of mashing everything up in a pathetic attempt to justify the dispossession of non-Jews from non-Israeli territory.

      • RoHa
        September 16, 2013, 11:33 pm

        Those principles seem far too reasonable. We’d better pretend we never saw them.

      • RoHa
        September 16, 2013, 11:53 pm

        “Justice requires that Jews have a refuge post-Holocaust. ”

        Can’t see it. You’ll have to spell out the argument for that.

        Jews who were killed in the Holocaust were wrongly killed, but so were millions of other people. Justice requires that they all be brought back to life, but so far the technical problems haven’t been solved.

        But how does justice require a refuge for those who are still alive? If not having been wrongly killed justifies a refuge, then there should be refuges for everyone, not just Jews.

      • Shmuel
        September 17, 2013, 1:28 am

        That’s 656,000 Arabs of a population of about 1,370,000
        = about 47% NOT INCLUDING the indigenous Arab Jews of Israel!

        Talknic,
        Miriam’s percentage (52) was supposed to be of Israeli Jews only.

      • Shingo
        September 17, 2013, 3:00 am

        Then you’ll agree that the natural development of people of Israel is justice, and the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands is injustice.

        Removal of trespassers is not ethnic cleansing.

      • Shingo
        September 17, 2013, 3:04 am

        Palestinians have terrorized their way to the table, and keep expecting a better deal each time.

        Zionists have terrorized their way to an entire state, and keep expecting more land that doesn’t belong to them.

        They’ve been there for generations, and they have built the state of Israel. To suggest that they “don’t have claims in Palestine” is genocidalist.

        I take this as an aknowledgement that Israel’s creation, and the ideology of the Zionist founders of Israel, was therefore genocidalist , correct?

      • Shingo
        September 17, 2013, 3:11 am

        “They’re not the majority in Israel.”

        Thanks to what you have described as genocidalist actions taken by the founders of Israel. We it not for these genocidalist crimes, they would be the overwhelming majority.

        Are you going to admit that Israel was founded on genocidalist crimes Hop?

        “Then you’ll agree that the natural development of people of Israel is justice, ”

        An individual who becomes an orphan by committing patricide did not become an orphan by natural development.

      • Shingo
        September 17, 2013, 3:14 am

        No. Racist nonsense in the idea that any Jew in the world has a right to go live in Palestine, but the Palestinians don’t. THAT’S racist nonsense.

        It’s worse than that Woody. They are actually arguing that those who have never been to Palestine have greater claim to live there than those who have lived there for centuries but were expelled.

      • miriam6
        September 17, 2013, 4:12 am

        Shingo@;


        Then you’ll agree that the natural development of people of Israel is justice, and the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands is injustice.
        Removal of trespassers is not ethnic cleansing.

        Who are you referring to as trespassers?

        The Jewish settlers in the OPT?

        Why mention ‘trespassers’ in reference in a block quote referring to ethnic cleansing of Jews from Arab lands ?

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 5:10 am

        how does justice require a refuge for those who are still alive? If not having been wrongly killed justifies a refuge, then there should be refuges for everyone, not just Jews.

        Right! Where’s the “state of the homosexual people”? As soon as the gays get their own state, the Jews shall have their own state, too.

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 5:34 am

        Why? You’re only a train ride apart. I’d have to cross an ocean to have a coffee with either of you!

        How typically American of you! You seem to believe that Europe is a tiny place. I just looked up how long a train ride to Rome would take. It’s somewhere between 14 and 19 hours. So, you can see that it’s a long distance.
        Any way, it would be good to have more anti-Zionist Jews in Germany. The more they become, the more difficult it is to ignore them. They could put pressure on our politicians and make them stop supporting Israel.

        I’m not a terribly interesting person. :-(

        Oh, you know that’s not true!

      • eljay
        September 17, 2013, 7:33 am

        >> How typically American of you!

        Canadian.

        >> You seem to believe that Europe is a tiny place.

        I’ve been to and driven around Europe a number of times. Compared to Canada, it is a tiny place! :-)

        >> eljay: I’m not a terribly interesting person. :-(
        >> GL: Oh, you know that’s not true!

        You don’t know that it is. ;-)

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 7:57 am

        Canadian.
        I know that you are a Canadian. And Canada is in North America. That makes you an American. Just like I am a German. And Germany is in central Europe. That makes me a European.
        Or was Canada relocated to Africa?

        Compared to Canada, it is a tiny place!
        I see it this way: Europe is normal and North America is outsized :-)

        You don’t know that it is.
        I am the kind of person who finds boring people interesting.

      • eljay
        September 17, 2013, 8:34 am

        >> I know that you are a Canadian. And Canada is in North America. That makes you an American.

        Wouldn’t that make me North American?

        >> Just like I am a German. And Germany is in central Europe. That makes me a European.

        Fair enough, although it wouldn’t occur to me to say “How typically European of you!”

        >> I see it this way: Europe is normal and North America is outsized :-)

        Europe may be reasonably-sized, but is it really “normal”? ;-)

        >> I am the kind of person who finds boring people interesting.

        Well, then, you’ve scored a jackpot! :-D

      • miriam6
        September 17, 2013, 8:40 am

        GL@:

        In the meantime, how much do you know of the sort of persecution Mizrahi Jews faced whilst resident in Arab Muslim majority countries?
        Don’t try to distract. We talk about Israel here.

        Actually, over 52% of the Jewish population of Israel is of Mizrahi origin so , really your obvious ignorance of Mizrahim apart, – because they make up 52% of the Israeli population they ARE what we talk about here.

        Israel.

      • Shmuel
        September 17, 2013, 9:33 am

        Actually, over 52% of the Jewish population of Israel is of Mizrahi origin

        Source?

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 9:36 am

        Wouldn’t that make me North American?
        North America + South America = America

        it wouldn’t occur to me to say “How typically European of you!”
        Perhaps not you. But isn’t there a song in which people wonder whether a guy is “gay or European”?

        Well, then, you’ve scored a jackpot!
        Do you know why I like boring people? Because it would never occur to them to shoot at you or to steal your land. Boring people respect the law.
        By the way, Miriam and Hophmi aren’t boring at all…

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 9:53 am

        over 52% of the Jewish population of Israel is of Mizrahi origin
        Not true.

        they ARE what we talk about here
        Zionist Jews believe that Israel is their homeland. Therefore, they can’t be regarded as refugees when making aliyah. Besides, just because someone is a victim of persecution doesn’t mean that he is allowed to persecute others and steal other people’s land. Therefore, you need to give Palestinians their land back.
        Miriam, where do your ancestors come from? And why do you almost always put the “@” after the name and not before it? That’s so Hebrew!

      • Memphis
        September 17, 2013, 10:53 am

        Miriam, I have two copies of Ali’s book. I would gladly send you one. If you promise to read it with an open and honest heart

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 11:05 am

        Memphis, you must believe in miracles. Will Miriam accept your very kind offer?

      • eljay
        September 17, 2013, 11:06 am

        >> North America + South America = America

        Hmmm…I thought it was “the Americas”.

        Doesn’t matter. I like you, so I won’t belabour the point. :-)

      • Memphis
        September 17, 2013, 11:29 am

        [quote]Do you know why I like boring people? Because it would never occur to them to shoot at you or to steal your land. Boring people respect the law.
        By the way, Miriam and Hophmi aren’t boring at all…[/quote]

        That made me laugh my ass off

      • edwin
        September 17, 2013, 12:41 pm

        Wouldn’t that make me North American?

        No. Not if Harper has his way.

      • miriam6
        September 17, 2013, 2:39 pm

        Shmuel@:

        Actually, over 52% of the Jewish population of Israel is of Mizrahi origin
        Source?

        You say you lived in Israel but somehow you now need proof of what you ought to have realised when you lived in Israel

        That is that half ( now it’s 52% , – the total Jewish population of Israel having reached the 6 million figure this year)

        You must have not been paying much attention to those around you..

        In the early 20th century, severe violence against Jews forced communities throughout the Middle Eastern region to flee once again.
        In Israel, Middle Eastern and North African Jews were the majority of the Jewish population for decades, with numbers as high as 70 percent of the Jewish population, until the mass Russian immigration of the 1990s.

        Mizrahi Jews are now half of the Jewish population in Israel.

        link to jewishvirtuallibrary.org

        By origin, approximately 50% of the Israeli Jewish population identify themselves as “Edot HaMizrah” (The Eastern Communities)
        link to think-israel.org

        Mizrahi Jews or Mizrahim, also referred to as Adot HaMizrach, are Jews descended from local Jewish communities of the Middle East. The term Mizrahi is most commonly used in Israel to refer to Jews who trace their roots back to Muslim-majority countries.

        Today Sephardic rite make up more than half of Israel’s Jewish population, and Mizrahi Jews proper are a major part of them. Before the mass immigration of 1,000,000 from the former Soviet Union, mostly of Ashkenazi rite, followers of the Sephardic rite made up over 70% of Israel’s Jewish population.
        link to freebase.com

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 17, 2013, 2:53 pm

        “I know that you are a Canadian. And Canada is in North America. That makes you an American. Just like I am a German. And Germany is in central Europe. That makes me a European.”

        “North America + South America = America”

        No, eljay would a North American in the same way you are a European.

        If eljay is “American” because he comes from a state in supercontinent of the Americas, then the equivalent for you would be an “Afro-Eurasian”* because that is the supercontinent you live on.

        * (or, in my opinion, more properly “Afroasian” or “Afrasian” because let’s face it, “Europe” is just a subcontinent on the Asian continent [as is the subcontinent of India] and would properly be called “West Asia” if it weren’t for an accident of history)

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 3:26 pm

        “Europe” is just a subcontinent on the Asian continent

        Europe is NOT a subcontinent. It’s a continent. Look it up: link to en.wikipedia.org
        If you put Europe and Asia together, you get Eurasia. Therefore, an American or African could call me “Eurasian”.
        If you put North America and South America together, you get America. Therefore, I called eljay “American”.

        Woody, what’s your problem with me? We used to get along very well.

      • Shmuel
        September 17, 2013, 3:28 pm

        Miriam,

        I asked for a source for your 52% figure, and you gave me two articles without sources that say “half” and “approximately 50%” — and a rather confused article copied from Wiki that talks about “rites”.

        The only real figures I know of are those provided by the Central Bureau of Statistics, from which it is rather difficult to determine exactly who is “Mizrahi” and who isn’t.

        According to the CBS, the breakdown of the Jewish population of Israel, by continent/country of origin for those born abroad or father’s continent/country of origin for those born in Israel, for 2012 is as follows (in thousands):

        Israel (father born in Israel): 2,445.9
        Europe-America: 1,924.8
        Africa: 891.1
        Asia: 687.1

        There doesn’t seem to be any data for grandfather’s continent/country of birth, which would give a better idea of the ethnic origins of those with an Israel-born father.

        link to cbs.gov.il

        link to www1.cbs.gov.il

        If you know of any other reliable data, especially for the two and half million “with father born in Israel”, I’d appreciate a link.

      • libra
        September 17, 2013, 4:00 pm

        GL: If you put Europe and Asia together, you get Eurasia. Therefore, an American or African could call me “Eurasian”.

        Sadly GL, your impeccable, if pedantic, Central European logic defies the existing definition that the English language has assigned to the word ‘Eurasian’.

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 4:16 pm

        Sadly GL, your impeccable, if pedantic, Central European logic defies the existing definition that the English language has assigned to the word ‘Eurasian’.
        These are two different examples. Some people view Europe and Asia as two continents and America as one continent. Other people view Eurasia as one continent and North America and South America as two continents. That’s all fine by me. And Canada is still in America, whether you like it or not.

      • Sibiriak
        September 17, 2013, 6:28 pm

        Miriam6:

        Kuttab is admitting that it can’t be a straightforward naïve 1S1P1V scenario.

        What exemplary liberal democracies are simply a “straightforward naïve 1S1P1V scenarios” without “checks and balances”, protections of individual rights from majority will etc.?

        Your “straightforward 1S1P1V scenario” seems like a straightforward straw man to me.

      • miriam6
        September 17, 2013, 6:31 pm

        Henry Norr@;

        Thank you for the Abunimah blockquotes.

      • Sibiriak
        September 17, 2013, 6:35 pm

        Shmuel quoting Barghouti:

        a secular, democratic state, ending injustice and offering unequivocal equality in citizenship and individual and communal rights both to Palestinians (refugees included) and to Israeli Jews.

        And “communal rights” is an obvious and substantial negation of a “naive” one person one vote principle.

      • Danaa
        September 17, 2013, 6:54 pm

        Shmuel, beware, the Miriam6 poster-bot is trying to soften you with pandas. Such perseverance you guys (and gals) got!

        May be, just may be, i was hoping hasbara central will send something better along. Hope rings eternal, as they say…

        Off to check out on some latest panda videos….who knows, at this rate I may just be ready for a bout with the Miriam6-bot myself….unless of course, i choose to follow up with Kitty videos….

      • RoHa
        September 17, 2013, 7:19 pm

        “Or was Canada relocated to Africa?”

        No. Though there are plans.

      • just
        September 17, 2013, 8:15 pm

        it’s pandas & potatoes…

        (Danaa, they both have eyes— beware!)

      • Hostage
        September 17, 2013, 9:28 pm

        And Canada is still in America, whether you like it or not.

        The better view is that there really isn’t a legally enforceable border on the US side just yet ;-) See “What’s the Status of the US-Canada Boundary after Medellin?”
        link to opiniojuris.org

      • amigo
        September 18, 2013, 6:04 am

        “Source?” Shmuel to M6.

        Leave Panda alone.She is sleeping so do not wake her up.

        Please.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 18, 2013, 11:24 am

        German Lefty, it was mostly in jest. “Continent” is a somewhat arbitrary label, so to the question of whether there are 4, 5, 6, or 7 continents and whether Europe is one or merely a subcontinent, whether North America and South America are considered 1 or 2 continents, are not questions for which there is a “correct” answer. Rather, there are only stronger and weaker arguments.

        Further, I don’t think I have a problem with you. I have take. issue with a statement or two of yours which I diagreed with, but I have no problem with you at all.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 18, 2013, 11:44 am

        “And Canada is still in America, whether you like it or not.”

        Only if one accepts the position that the noun “America” references anything other than the United States of America. Colloquial English generally does not; the continent is North America, and it and South America are collectively “the Americas.” (“The Americas” is a collective noun, referring to both. It is no more correct in English to split up that noun and refer to each of the remnants as an “America” than it would be to split up a pair of pants and refer to each of the remnants as a “pant”)

        So Canada is either “in North America” or “in the Americas.” Indeed, a Canadian can be “in America” (when he or she visits the USA [and come on down, we love to have you]), but Canada, as such, cannot.

        Of course, this is just conventional colloquial English. Spanish-speakers in the Americas takes a different view.

      • miriam6
        September 18, 2013, 11:58 am

        Shmuel@ :May I point out that I did say I thought there were advantages and disadvantages to a one state solution;

        As for whether or not I support a one state scenario I would say I am in two minds about it.I can see advantages to it if they get the form and constitution of it right and also disadvantages and the dangers that a one state solution might present ..

        .

        link to mondoweiss.net

        Personally I am not dead set against the possibility of a viable one state solution. However I believe that Kuttab’s outline vision of an unitary ,single state solution is by far the more preferable , most workable , viable solution .

        link to mondoweiss.net

        Expressing concern for the safety of minorities including a Jewish minority within a single state is simply good sense if such scenarios are to work out to the satisfaction of all concerned ,Palestinian Arab and Jewish Israelis alike

        It has nothing to do with your slur on me about brown skinned folks

        Kuttab is Arab and all I said on the basis of the evidence I had before me at the time , was just that Kuttab’s outline seemed preferable to others.

      • German Lefty
        September 18, 2013, 12:31 pm

        It is no more correct in English to split up that noun and refer to each of the remnants as an “America” than it would be to split up a pair of pants and refer to each of the remnants as a “pant”.
        This will be my last post on this issue. North America and South America combined are the double continent America. Wikipedia agrees with me. (link to en.wikipedia.org) The USA is the USA. Canada and the USA are in North America as well as in America.

        German Lefty, it was mostly in jest.
        Really? It sounded rather aggressive to me.

        I have no problem with you at all.
        Great. Likewise :-)

      • miriam6
        September 18, 2013, 2:23 pm

        Memphis@;

        Miriam, I have two copies of Ali’s book. I would gladly send you one. If you promise to read it with an open and honest heart

        Hello there dear Mr/Mrs Memphis.

        You can afford TWO Ali Abunimah books?!
        Gosh, you must be affluent!
        In one comment you insult me, in another offer me a book!

        I can’t really afford to splash out on books , I depend on my library membership and the internet.
        Thank you very much for your kind offer if it is meant seriously.

        Except I am not sure how exactly you can send it to me really.
        I have looked online to see if Abunimah’s book is available as an pdf I can read on my computer but I haven’t seen one available.

        Perhaps you have a pdf link to his entire book?

        Alternatively Perhaps with the help of the folks who run this website?
        If you are serious about sending me the book that is.
        I would approach them myself but I suspect, ideologically speaking you are probably their sort of commenter so…

        I was thinking maybe they could arrange for us both to exchange our private e-mail addresses or something?

        In any case, if you are serious with your kind offer I would read the book not necessarily with an open heart but certainly an open mind.

    • Stephen Shenfield
      September 16, 2013, 7:16 pm

      Ian Lustick used to be a strong supporter of the 2SS, interpreting the Algerian experience to support that position just as he now interprets it to support his current position. His argument then went like this (based on my memory of a seminar he gave at Brown University’s Watson Institute of International Studies):

      “People say a 2SS is unrealistic because we cannot expect all the settlers on the West Bank to withdraw. It looked that way in Algeria too. There were millions of French settlers in Algeria and they really regarded it as part of France. And yet they withdrew. If there exists the political will the Jewish settlers will withdraw too.”

      Even though there are now even more settlers, settlements, roads etc., that still makes sense to me. Withdrawal may be difficult, it may be expensive politically as well as financially, but that does not make it impossible.

      The basic trouble is that the shift toward more extreme forms of nationalism in Israel makes ANY solution to the conflict appear remote. Rather than switching back and forth between 2SS and 1SS, let us recognize that under current conditions no solution is possible and the conflict is going to continue. Our hope must be that over time Israel will lose more and more of the support it still has in Europe and the US and become increasingly weak and isolated until the political climate in Israel shifts toward greater willingness to compromise. Only then will it become clearer which kind of solution has the best prospects.

      • James Canning
        September 16, 2013, 7:28 pm

        Interesting post. I agree many settlers would leave Palestine. No need to remove them by force, in my view. (Minority opinion on this site)

      • lohdennis
        September 17, 2013, 12:17 am

        I agree. Most religious zealots will leave or be made uncomfortable so that they will leave.

      • Hostage
        September 17, 2013, 8:18 am

        I agree many settlers would leave Palestine. No need to remove them by force, in my view. (Minority opinion on this site)

        Most people here don’t comprehend the fact that there is an on-going international armed conflict and that the only reason Palestinians have any standing, at all, is due to their armed national liberation movement and the trust established under the Covenant of the League of Nations. The conflict won’t be officially terminated until the belligerent parties give up their respective claims to one another’s territory and the enemy soldiers, civilians, and prisoners are repatriated. The only way that enemy military and civilian settlements can remain is under another interim armistice agreement.

        Exercising self-determination by opting for union with Israel would end the armed conflict and the international trust. See Article 6 of the 4th Geneva Convention and all of those UN resolutions regarding belligerent claims and withdrawal of the armed forces of Israel, like 242 and 338.

        More to the point, it’s irrational to go on talking about illegal settlers and international law in the context of a one state solution. There is no international law that would prohibit migration of the inhabitants within the boundaries of their own state or country of origin/nationality. So, discussions about international law and the illegal settlements are practically moot, apart from the 2SS.

        Minority rights in Palestine were placed under UN guarantee and there is still a prohibition of apartheid regarding the establishment of reserved areas for various ethnic groups, like those envisioned in the Prawer Plan and the hundreds of Jewish-only communal settlements that already exist in Israel and Palestine today. But the USA can, and always has prevented the Security Council from imposing sanctions or referring those situations to an international penal tribunal.

        That leaves it up to the General Assembly and individual states to take joint actions, just like they did in the case of the apartheid regimes in Southern Africa:

        Article V

        Persons charged with the acts enumerated in article II of the present Convention may be tried by a competent tribunal of any State Party to the Convention which may acquire jurisdiction over the person of the accused or by an international penal tribunal having jurisdiction with respect to those States Parties which shall have accepted its jurisdiction.

        – International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, link to www1.umn.edu

        See also “The Credentials Approach to Representation Questions in the U.N. General Assembly” link to heinonline.org

        Realistically, that’s going to be a long uphill battle once the Palestinians give up observer state status an opt into a union with Israel.

      • Hostage
        September 17, 2013, 8:33 am

        P.S. I don’t see any evidence that the armed Palestinian militias are ready to lay down their weapons and end the international armed conflict/insurrection against Israel and its government.

        Everyone here is quick to point out that all of the Palestinian regimes are governing under lapsed mandates. But there is no popular mandate or sizable Palestinian grassroots movement calling for a political union with Israel.

      • James Canning
        September 17, 2013, 3:43 pm

        I agree the illegal Jews now living in the West Bank will not be illegal, if Israel annexes the West Bank.
        I continue to favor 2-states, but to believe illegal Jews need not be expelled. Other measures are possible.

      • James Canning
        September 17, 2013, 5:10 pm

        Thanks. Fanatical Jews would be uncomfortable living under Palestinian laws.

      • ritzl
        September 16, 2013, 8:45 pm

        @Stephen Shenfield When did Lustick hold those 2SS views? Was his change rapid or did it come over the course of years? Just curious in the sense that I think it has bearing on the pace of the broader realization.

        The parallels between the Palestinian justice movement and the anti-Apartheid movement are profound (as everyone here knows). The anti-Apartheid movement benefited from some serious serendipity to move from slow burn to political juggernaut. I think we are currently (mere weeks) into some serious serendipity wrt Israel and its issues within the US political context. Lustick’s conversion pace could well be a bellweather on this issue. That’s certainly how it’s being presented (correctly, imo).

        As an aside (or not), I really disagree with your assertion that withdrawal is possible. If only (and there’s so much more) because Israel is expanding settlements even under the current scrutiny of a “renewed” peace process. That means there is less than zero political will to do so. In fact the political will is exactly the opposite. From any political party in Israel. What will change that, in real time, such that your view of possibility has support?

        At the risk of being repetitious, Israel has precluded the possibility of two states. Whatever the downside, and whatever the cost, and because the world has simply not ponied up on supporting the viability of two states (while continuously mouthing the rhetoric) one state is the only viable option left (i.e. not an option but the outcome), come what may. That is not support, imo. It is simply an acknowledgement of political and physical reality.

        I would love that the Palestinians get their own state, but their lack of success on that front, coupled with Israel’s interminable assimilation of their land and resources, makes one state the unassailable basis for any further discussion on this issue. We should be discussing, now, how we can help the Palestinians gain their civil rights within the one state.

        Israel had a lenghty/its chance to accept its foundational and regional limitations and act accordingly, even as its opponents accepted the fact of Israel’s existence. Israel declined to reciprocate.

        Sorry for the length, and I don’t mean to characterize your comment negatively. It’s not a negative comment.

        Interesting times.

      • talknic
        September 16, 2013, 10:47 pm

        @ritzl “bellweather” :-) bellwether it refers to the bell on a ram

        ” We should be discussing, now, how we can help the Palestinians gain their civil rights within the one state.”

        What would that one state be? Israel or Palestine? Or some newly named entity?

        Palestine has been the longer standing entity. Jewish history in the region has been far longer as Palestinian Jews than either the State of Israel, the Kingdom of David or both. From at least the Roman era til 1948.

        Israel’s past behaviour doesn’t indicate any willingness to comply with anything, anyone, any law, resolution, convention or its obligations as a UN Member state. At every turn towards an equitable solution the little red heifer state has kicked the sh*t out of the china shop.

        An Israeli change of attitude will only come with boycott, divestment, sanctions and as a last resort a bloody big gun to its stupid head.

      • ritzl
        September 16, 2013, 11:24 pm

        Oops. And here I thought all along that it had something to do with wind chimes. Damn public education… ;)

        The Name? Short answer, I have no idea on the name. Pretty low down on the priority list imo, though within an excruciatingly narrow bandwidth of priorities. Probably an illustration of the problems and difficulties more than the solutions. Maybe Israel, til all the suffrage, rights, and trust (wishful thinking, I know) issues are sorted through.

        BDS, long-term BDS or its equivalent, will no doubt be part of the pressure to sort through them. Hostage has said that the latent legal leverage that has accrued to the Palestinians as a people do not go away under a one state scenario, so there’s that as well.

        Maybe, too, an eventual bi-national outcome, after a few generations of struggle, will give all the parties an out on state identity. Good questions. No answers.

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 8:09 am

        One state is the only viable option left (i.e. not an option but the outcome). That is not support, imo. It is simply an acknowledgement of political and physical reality.

        I agree. It looks like Ian Lustick only opts for the one-state solution because he believes that the two-state solution is not likely or possible anymore. I, however, would favour the one-state solution in all circumstances.

      • Stephen Shenfield
        September 17, 2013, 2:44 pm

        I haven’t been following Lustick’s evolution over the years, so I can’t say when he changed his mind or why exactly, or whether it was sudden or gradual. Perhaps I’ll get in touch and ask him.

        When I say “possible” I mean “possible given the necessary political will.” Of course, currently the political will is lacking. But that applies to ALL conceivable solutions.

      • ritzl
        September 17, 2013, 11:27 pm

        @Stephen Shenfield Thanks. I wasn’t being snide. I was just curious whether Lustick’s conversion was precipitous or gradual. You suggest it’s been gradual. That’s relevant, to me.

        I agree that a political will to solve this in 2SS terms could solve it in viable 2SS terms. It’s hard to see where that political will might originate at the moment, or in time to have effect. As I’ve said before, it could be some precipitous or spontaneous upwelling, but it would have to be motivated by something currently peripheral yet huge. I’m not seeing it. Sorry.

      • Sibiriak
        September 17, 2013, 6:39 pm

        Stephen Shenfield :

        Even though there are now even more settlers, settlements, roads etc., that still makes sense to me. Withdrawal may be difficult, it may be expensive politically as well as financially, but that does not make it impossible.

        The basic trouble is that the shift toward more extreme forms of nationalism in Israel makes ANY solution to the conflict appear remote. Rather than switching back and forth between 2SS and 1SS, let us recognize that under current conditions no solution is possible and the conflict is going to continue.

        A profoundly realistic and clear-headed assessment. I agree 100%.

      • Stephen Shenfield
        September 18, 2013, 8:01 am

        I have now read Lustick’s NYT piece (which I should have done before commenting) and see that in fact he still does not exclude the possibility of a 2SS. Rather, he says that the probability of a two-state outcome decreases over time while the probability of a one-state outcome increases. It is hard to argue with that.

        Ritzl: Might the “something currently peripheral but huge” be a disastrous military adventure that the majority of Israelis blame on the settlers and their political backers?

      • ritzl
        September 18, 2013, 12:43 pm

        @Stephen Shenfield It could be, but I guess that’s the definition of peripheral. That’s a pretty unlikely event, but it could happen.

        Personally, I use some truly universal and meaningful exercise of universal jurisdiction for war crimes in my thinking on 1S v 2S probabilities. One where Israeli govt and biz leaders start getting arrested for Occupation crimes whenever they go overseas. That would change peoples’ minds pretty quick about annexation. But while I don’t see that happening either, it could.

        If I was Palestinian, 1S would not be my first choice. But 2S is such a dismally slim and shifting possibility that putting scarce resources and effort into achieving it is not really the basis for strategy. Palestinians probably have to start looking to the next struggle (civil rights) and “suck up their guts” as my old soccer/football coach used to say. If something happens along the way to change that focus/need, it happens.

        Peace.

  3. ToivoS
    September 16, 2013, 3:13 am

    Why? Kuttab’s basic premise is the same as Lustick’s. Why do you keep citing Kuttab’s article

    Maybe because she is willing to accept a one state solution that ensures political rights for the Jews and she doesn’t trust the other Palestinian activists who advocate similar ends. If am completely perplexed about why she is citing approvingly this Kuttab passage but if this is the thinking among some of the Israeli settlers then more power to them. I have heard interviews with settlers that are advocates for a one-state solution that seems to exclude the apartheid option. It might be worth hearing more from such people.

    • Shmuel
      September 16, 2013, 3:33 am

      Maybe because she is willing to accept a one state solution that ensures political rights for the Jews and she doesn’t trust the other Palestinian activists who advocate similar ends.

      Maybe, but I doubt it. What she seems to be doing is citing Kuttab (out of context) as someone who recognises the dangers of a 1ss for Israeli Jews (see, even a Palestinian says so!).

      I have heard interviews with settlers that are advocates for a one-state solution that seems to exclude the apartheid option. It might be worth hearing more from such people.

      Yehouda Shenhav writes about such promise among right-wingers (who believe in the indivisibility of the land and aren’t necessarily sticklers when it comes to questions of sovereignty), but I found that part of his book (Beyond the Two-State Solution) rather unconvincing, to say the least.

      The one who has probably come closest to fitting that bill is Menahem Froman, but he was always rather vague about the “exclude the apartheid option” part and, in any event, was very much a one-man show.

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 5:07 am

        Shmuel@;

        I strongly disagree and reject your notion that I am quoting Kuttab out of context. I’m not quoting out of the context of the full article at all.

        I also provided the link to the article in its entirety in my comment so people could read it and understand the context of my block quotes.

        citing Kuttab as someone who recognises the dangers of a 1ss for Israeli Jews (see, even a Palestinian says so!).

        That’s a rather silly and flippant response to a deadly serious subject.

        Actually I drew attention to the fact that Kuttab is a Palestinian Christian for two reasons.

        One being that it’s important and gratifying to see a Palestinian taking the fears and aspirations of Israeli Jews seriously.

        Secondly, Kuttab and the meaning and context of his article is that he is a Christian Arab Palestinian.

        That is , he is already a prospective minority citizen in a putative single bi-national state!

        Evidently the rights’ of minorities such those of Christian Palestinians like Mr Kuttab , are those of which he is equally concerned to protect , as any Jew might be in any one state scenario.

        Kuttab also refers to how other Middle Eastern nations , in this case Lebanon , accommodates the problem of ensuring fair representation of minorities;


        A rotating presidency may be preferable to designating certain positions for each minority (as in Lebanon).

        One reason Kuttab cites a feature of Lebanon’s political system as an example may well be to do with the balancing act necessary to preserve Lebanon’s delicate political power sharing arrangement between Christian and Muslims in Lebanon.

        Again that would be of interest to a Palestinian Christian like Mr Kuttab who presumably would be seeking to safeguard his communities interests in the context of possible political domination by not only the Muslim Arab majority ( more so than the Palestinian Christian minority) but also the lesser domination of a large Jewish minority within a single state encompassing all of Israel and the OPT.

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 5:31 am

        Evidently the rights’ of minorities such those of Christian Palestinians like Mr Kuttab , are those of which he is equally concerned to protect … Again that would be of interest to a Palestinian Christian like Mr Kuttab who presumably would be seeking to safeguard his communities interests in the context of possible political domination by not only the Muslim Arab majority …

        I must have missed the part where Kuttab discusses any divisions other than Arabs/indigenous Palestinians and Jewish Israelis (beyond a casual reference to “Jewish, Muslim and Christian holidays”). If he is concerned about “political domination [of Christians] by … the Muslim Arab majority”, he does a good job of hiding it in this particular article.

      • Donald
        September 16, 2013, 4:14 pm

        “If he is concerned about “political domination [of Christians] by … the Muslim Arab majority”, he does a good job of hiding it in this particular article.”

        Miriam evidently can’t conceive of someone being concerned about minority rights unless there is self-interest involved.

      • Donald
        September 16, 2013, 4:29 pm

        I just read miriam’s reply to me in another thread, now closed down. She’s a troll, plain and simple. I explained in my usual somewhat longwinded manner, several times, that I agreed that the US is guilty of imperialism and she completely ignored it, while also ignoring the fact that Israel was guilty of the same crime of helping Latin American death squads. In this thread she shows herself incapable of understanding satire (Woody’s post) and reads things into Shmuel which aren’t there.

        If you let her, she will take over comment threads the way RW did with the help of me and other suckers. Decide now if this is what you want to do, because you’re not going to get her to acknowledge any fact or position that she doesn’t want to acknowledge.

      • Cliff
        September 16, 2013, 4:36 pm

        Exactly.

        I give you guys a lot of credit for being patient but I have good intuition when it comes to Zionist commentators.

        That being said, most Zionist commentators are trolls so it’s not clairvoyance.

      • Danaa
        September 17, 2013, 7:10 pm

        Donald, I think you got it alright. Miriam6 is a bot, sent to disrupt threads with various side-arguments and tangents (also known as thread-jacking, or thread-sliding). She is being fed a steady stream of Hasbara pointers and retorts and that’s what she send back to those who take her on. the conversation appears somewhat disjoint and risks sliding into incoherence, because the purpose is to make it so.

        Someone at hasbara-central must have pointed out that she risks appearing not quite the humanoid she pretends to be. And pronto, along come the pandas and the disclosure about UK time zones.

        I understand people have reasons to engage even if they don’t take the bot seriously, same as it was in the RW days. It allows them to make points that need making. I just happen to think those points – and many good ones were made – would stand out better if not buried in an interminable exchange with a troll.

        BTW, is anyone else reminded of one Robert werdine, of the longest long-winded repute? am not saying it’s the same as Miriam6, but they probably report to the same department.

      • miriam6
        September 17, 2013, 8:10 pm

        Danaa@;

        I think the problem here is that you just cannot conceive that anyone could possibly hold a different view and opinion from yours.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 17, 2013, 11:46 pm

        yes danaa, i am reminded of r werdine. i look forward to seeing shorter posts from m6. she needs some lessons in brevity.

      • Shingo
        September 19, 2013, 12:13 am

        Funny, I too thought of Werdine before reading Danaa’s comment, as applied to MY1 as well as M6.

        I recall Werdine’s initial meek and short comments, which soon evolved into rambling opuses, much like MY1, who seems to have evolved from a poorly educated potato seller to a sophist propagandist.

      • miriam6
        September 19, 2013, 1:34 am

        Shingo@;

        I recall Werdine’s initial meek and short comments, which soon evolved into rambling opuses, much like MY1, who seems to have evolved from a poorly educated potato seller to a sophist propagandist.

        Finding MY1 a bit if a handful now are you Shingo?

        Finding your rather limited argumentative style stretched way beyond it’s limits?

        And what is more MY1 can type properly and SPELL.

        Other good traits in MY1′s favour is that he is polite , pleasant , never patronising, has a sense of humour and never stoops to foul language to try to make a point either in his dealings with other commenters , – unlike you.

        Nor would he ever ridicule an ordinary hard working, working class man who sells potatoes for a living.

      • Shingo
        September 19, 2013, 7:50 pm

        Finding MY1 a bit if a handful now are you Shingo?

        Very funny Miriam. Perhaps if you consider having to debate Forrest Gump to be a handful, then you might be right.

        Finding your rather limited argumentative style stretched way beyond it’s limits?

        Not at all. Yours and MY1′s anti intellectual and irrational argumentative styles are hardly a challenge, though the mediocrity of your arguments do make responding to your BS somewhat tedious.

        And what is more MY1 can type properly and SPELL.

        Apparently he does now, which many here have noted, suggesting he has either undergone a crash course in grammar and typing, or that the MY1 pseudonym has been assigned to a new writer.

        Other good traits in MY1′s favour is that he is polite , pleasant , never patronising

        As another commenter here pointed out, the defenders of slavery also took great pride in being polite , pleasant , never patronising, believing that these traits alone would assure them moral authority over the enemies of slavery.

        Nor would he ever ridicule an ordinary hard working, working class man who sells potatoes for a living.

        How do even know he is hard working, or that he does indeed sell potatoes for a living? He seems to have a lot of free time to post here for someone who is supposedly hard working and working class.

      • Danaa
        September 20, 2013, 12:18 pm

        Shingo, one more thing with regard to the Werdine vs MY1 persona – the made-up “oriental” background. Werdine claimed to be a muslim from Lebanon (a Shiite, no less) , complete with made-up names, places and relatives. MY1 claims to be a kurd, a Mizrahi par excellance. An evolving impersonation, no doubt. For some reason someone at hasbara central believes that such outlandish impersonations may actually serve a purpose. Unfortunately, they must be mistaking MW with some other publication, as these personalities they build seem to fall apart at the slightest breeze, even with all the cut and paste material they are being supplied with. And I think you are right, MY1 was assigned to a different writer, one better equipped linguistically.

        Note to Hasbara Central: it is NOT easy to build an artificial persona, not easy at all. to sustain it requires the conviction of the professional actor, and all you got are professional shills, which won’t do at all. also you need to know what’s a step too far, and for israelis, anything shiite is as foreign as a moon landscape. As for kurds, oh well, much work to be done….

        Re miriam6 – that’s just standard issue bot, persona-less. May be a trial run, may be a trainee. Still, got the thread hopping, it’s always nice to see the juices are still flowing, fresh as always. And i am so impressed with the thought and passion people put into their arguments, even knowing it’s a bot, even after all this time.

      • Shingo
        September 20, 2013, 11:05 pm

        Hasbarats posing as Arabs has become something of a cliche Danaa, and now we even have them posing as Iranians.

        Miriam is just a shill cast from the Caroline Glick mold. Emotional, reactive, irrational, anti intellectual, dishonest and hypocritical.

        I have to roll my eyes at her indignation over being insulted. Not long ago, she referred to me as Stinko.

    • miriam6
      September 16, 2013, 3:46 am

      ToivoS@;

      In case there is any confusion in your mind I am a British citizen resident in the UK and not an Israeli.

      I think there has already been some floating of the one state solution idea with full voting rights for the Palestinian Arab citizens within that single state , amongst some Israelis , even among some of those on the Israeli political right.

  4. HarryLaw
    September 16, 2013, 8:45 am

    Ian Lustick say’s “once the two-state-fantasy blindfolds are off, politics could make strange bedfellows…” Presumably those blindfolds need to be removed from every state at the United Nations and all it’s institutions and Agencies plus every political party in both Israel and Occupied Palestinian Territories, a tall order, some might say wishful thinking. One thing is certain is that no notion of a one state proposal [confederated or regional formula] which could make the mere possibility of a non Jewish majority likely would be acceptable to the visions and raison d’etre of Zionists in Israel and abroad. In order for this one state theory to work the mindset of Zionists has to be defeated, its longevity has proved that negotiation with it is futile, it is only when they [Zionists] are confronted with the consequences of their illegality through legal means for instance at the ICC, worldwide BDS or a major regional war [the latter many people regard as only a matter of time] the US, UK and France still wanting to start one yesterday. If the Zionists insist on maintaining a Jewish majority in their own state the best option for them is to remove the settlements from occupied territories and negotiate a two state solution based on International Law, that way Israel would have an inbuilt Jewish majority for the foreseeable future, in such a scenario the 2o% non Jewish minority would not be seen as a fifth column and could attain all the rights as citizens they are denied now.In short what the International community want and what International Law requires is a two state solution based on the Arab league proposals in 2002 with full recognition of Israel’s place in the region [along 67 borders with minor adjustments] with full diplomatic and trading arrangements in place, this is a far better outcome than those suggested by Phil and Ian Lustick much as their contributions to a wider debate are appreciated.

    • Mondowise
      September 16, 2013, 5:36 pm

      thank you HarryLaw, very well said! the 1ss completely ignores and dismisses izraeli accountability with respect to international law, thereby continuing their privileged immunity from it. the zionists are adamant in that they’ll never give up their ‘jewish’ state inherent to the 1ss, they’ve made this abundantly clear…it’s their greatest threat. what part of ‘never’ do those promoting a 1ss not understand? the only way to resolve this conflict is for the international community (including Palestinians) to enforce international law via the ICC and ICJ, implement severe sanctions and discontinue aid for non-compliance. it’s not the Palestinians’ nor the world’s problem settlements are difficult to evacuate regardless of how extensive they’ve become…it’s izrael’s problem alone…so tough! break the law, face the consequences, the end! izrael CAN evacuate ALL settlements if the world stops buying their manipulative excuses of “we can’t”…YES THEY CAN, and they would if they had serious enough legal repercussions to face if they didn’t. 1ss is like the perfect storm, an environment inviting decades of more izraeli apartheid, oppression, aggression, internal war, conflict, etc.

    • Sibiriak
      September 17, 2013, 7:23 pm

      HarryLaw:

      ….what the International community want and what International Law requires is a two state solution based on the Arab league proposals in 2002 with full recognition of Israel’s place in the region [along 67 borders with minor adjustments] with full diplomatic and trading arrangements in place, this is a far better outcome than those suggested by Phil and Ian Lustick much as their contributions to a wider debate are appreciated.

      Well said, and true. Consider also: 1) Discussion of a 1SS can increase support for a two-state settlement (I say “settlement” to avoid suggestion of any “solution” to the problem of historical injustice) 2) a 2S settlement can be a point on the road toward a single state or confederation.

  5. pipistro
    September 16, 2013, 8:48 am

    “Said the NY Times skeleton
    That’s
    [NOW] fit to print”

    link to pipistro.wordpress.com

  6. Ramzi Jaber
    September 16, 2013, 8:59 am

    WOW, what a powerful piece!! 1S1P1V coming soon. Sooner than many believe.

    Of course 1S1P1V is the only stable, fair, and lasting way to solve this. If you analyze the situation using different methods, including mathematical-engineering models, you come to the conclusion that 1S1P1V is indeed the only way.

    And of course 1S1P1V will be totally democratic, not just in the voting aspect. We wouldn’t want it any other way.

    • Krauss
      September 16, 2013, 1:46 pm

      The 1SS is coming any moment now!

      I think that kind of thinking is wishful thinking at best.
      Let’s begin with Lustick’s article.
      There are major problems with all examples he takes.

      Algeria: How large as a percentage of the population were the Europeans? Did they even get to 10% The natives were over 90%. It was a matter of time.

      South Africa: See above.

      Soviet Union: It was a confederation with peoples who have already had nationhood as a clear concept for centuries. There was little mixing inside the lands. Poland was and is full of poles. Israel/Palestine is a lot more mixed, and therefore messy to untangle.

      Baathist Iraq: A better analogy, I think. But it’s also important to remember how the political status quo fell: by an outside invasion by the most military in the world by far. Will China or America invade Israel? I highly doubt it.

      Yugoslavia: A better example but still not good. There was a lot of actors, not just two, and many of them had equal or at least comparative power. There’s a total asymmetric power balance between Jewish Israel and Arabic Palestine. It’s not even close.

      Israel also has demographics on its side. As long as it doesn’t annex Gaza, it can simply outbreed the Palestinians and Arabs inside of Israel. This may sound crude but that’s because it is, that’s literally their plan and they’re doing a pretty good job at it. Even secular Jews have 2.7 children per family. Compare this to the 1.7′ish that’s the norm in most Western secular states. And then you have the 5-6 children/family Haredim who are already soon at 15% of the population and 25-30% of the under-18 population.

      Israel cannot be defeated demographically nor militarily. Their iron grip on the political situation is also far more stable as their opposing partner is far weaker than they are. Sunni Iraqis were a lower percentage of the population in Iraq but they had the same technology/military equipment as the Shiites. Plus they got help from the outside(al-Qaida).

      Does anyone think Israel will let Arabs volunteer by going into Palestine and fight for them?

      The only threat to Israel is two-fold but they are both connected. 50% of the under-18 year olds are either Arab or Haredim. Both are tremendously underperforming in schools. In the first case it’s because the Jewish establishment fears an empowered minority. In the second case it’s a self-chosen path. But the result is the same. They cannot upkeep the standards of Israel that the secular Ashkenazi middle-class has created.
      (My definition of secular here is broad and not the same as in the American context).

      Secondly, as the world grows in its outrage, and Israel becomes ever wealther in the interim(before the demographics start to kick in 2025 and beyond) many of the secular Tel Aviv types will emigrate as they see the impending drop in living standards. They already work a lot harder than most Westerners simply because the people they need to support are so many more. This will only increase. Plus Israel views itself is a Western country. It has far less in common culturally than China, Russia or the other Middle Eastern states.

      If the day comes when it becomes truly isolated, instead of just getting slapped on the wrist, a lot of educated Israelis will start to pack their bags if they see nothing on the horizon.

      Already today 3000 Israelis move to Canada alone per year. That’s more than the entire batch of American Jews who make Aliyah to Israel per annum. And Canada has only 10% of America’s population, so per-capita, 10x more Jews move to Canada from Israel than Jews from America to Israel. That should tell you something.

      • seafoid
        September 16, 2013, 3:27 pm

        Krauss

        Israel remains the occupier of Gaza so it doesn’t matter whether the bots annex it or not. Israel runs life and death in Gaza.
        I think a lot depends on the educated secular jews on the med coast and whether or not they want their kids to grow up in a failing state with deteriorating quality of life.

      • Krauss
        September 17, 2013, 1:58 am

        Israel remains the occupier of Gaza so it doesn’t matter whether the bots annex it or not. Israel runs life and death in Gaza.

        True, but it doesn’t take official ownership, as in it’s there in the government. That’s an important difference from a legal and political perspective, even if it makes not much difference on the ground.

        I think a lot depends on the educated secular jews on the med coast and whether or not they want their kids to grow up in a failing state with deteriorating quality of life.

        This was(and remains) precisely my argument. So we are in agreement or not?

      • seafoid
        September 17, 2013, 11:04 am

        Krauss

        “it doesn’t take official ownership, as in it’s there in the government’ – I wasn’t sure what you meant by this. As far as I’m concerned a Knesset vote on anything to do with the Palestinians is worse than useless.

        Agree on the rest. But I think it could apart before 2025. Zionist Jews are not in control of the dynamic any longer.

      • irishmoses
        September 17, 2013, 10:41 pm

        Seafoid says (quoting Krauss:
        ***”I think a lot depends on the educated secular jews on the med coast and whether or not they want their kids to grow up in a failing state with deteriorating quality of life.” “This was(and remains) precisely my argument. So we are in agreement or not?”***

        I don’t think the “educated secular jews on the med coast”, the Tel Aviv Jews, have or will have much say in the matter. Any liberal Israeli political party or influence has long since disappeared. I suspect, from what I’ve read, that the Tel Aviv crowd are watching carefully and fearfully and planning their exits to Germany or the US when things deteriorate past the point they can stomach it any longer.

        It would be useful to hear from Phil and others who have actually been there or those that live there whether my analysis is accurate.

      • ziusudra
        September 17, 2013, 7:08 am

        Greetings Krauss,
        Your notes impress me & i don’ disagree.
        If you confess to Judaism, you should know that
        Ashkenaz was a biblical figure, but not a people.
        The Judean migrants to Greece starting 200BC
        called themselves Sephardi, also a biblical figure
        from the chaptor of Obadaiah.
        In the 10th C. in German towns, such as Worms,
        Speier, the Germans started calling them Ashkenasi
        not realizing that the Sephardi called their ‘places of
        learning’ Ashkenaz. They themselves later picked up
        the term.
        Your lines of demographics may materialize, but as to
        whom gets the majority is irrelevant due to the great
        masses of alienated Falesteeni.
        We remember the confident of the King telling him to
        oppress his People more because they are so stupid?
        yes, quipped the King, but they are so many!
        Thanks for your Input.
        ziusudra

      • Sibiriak
        September 17, 2013, 7:34 pm

        Krauss:

        I think that kind of thinking is wishful thinking at best.

        Fine, hard-nosed analysis. The “wishful thinking” is, of course, understandable given the desire for some remedy for such blatant, gross and growing injustices as characterize the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

        Btw, Lustick, writes:

        …secular Palestinians in Israel and the West Bank could ally with Tel Aviv’s post-Zionists, non-Jewish Russian-speaking immigrants

        Isn’t it wholly illusory to think that vast majority of non-Jewish Russian Israelis are not incorrigibly hard-core anti-Arab, Islamophobic Israeli nationalists?

      • irishmoses
        September 17, 2013, 10:26 pm

        Top notch analysis Krauss. Hard nosed realism is not a strong point of MW participants. Way too much wishful thinking whenever something ‘positive’ happens. e.g. ‘This time things are about to change.’

        The hard nosed reality is that THE ONE STATE SOLUTION HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 46 YEARS, since 1967. That’s half a century and two thirds the age of Israel. The illusion of a 2SS has only been an Israeli/Lobby smokescreen to delay the time when the world will recognize that fact that Israel has no intention of giving up the occupied territories and has de facto annexed them since the beginning of its settlement program in 1967.

        The existing 46 year one state solution is, by any reasonable measure, an apartheid state, maybe modestly less so within the pre-1967 borders, but the overall single state of Israel-Palestine is apartheid in fact.

        So, the conversation or debate should be whether the existing apartheid single state of Israel-Palestine can realistically be converted to two separate states or to a single democratic state. My conclusion is ‘it ain’t gonna happen’ absent some massive change in US outlook in which (a la the Syrian war plan) the US public suddenly demands the Palestinians be given a state of their own (pre 67 borders) or full and equal rights. I doubt that will happen either.

        Most who comment wistfully on MW about the one state solution (“1S, 1P, 1V”) fail to realize that Israel has lots of easy modifications of the current one apartheid state status that can partially relieve international pressure. One you mention is to carve Gaza as well as the millions of homeless, stateless Palestinians in Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan, out of a new “democratic” single state solution. This would keep the demographics in Israel’s favor and allow the oppression and theft of resources to continue under the guises of “state security” and “common resources that benefit all”.

        I wrote a novel this past year about a hypothetical attack by Israel on Iran and how a female US president attempts, in vain, to prevent that attack. I wanted my novel to end with an I-P solution but the only realistic way I could manage that was to contrive a US invasion of Israel intended to impose a two state solution on pre-1967 borders. The justification for that invasion was the international chaos Israel created in its failed attack on Iran and the sinking by Israel of a US submarine.

        My fictional solution may be contrived but at least it might work.

  7. Shmuel
    September 16, 2013, 9:09 am

    Really, Ramzi. What could someone with a scary Arab name like yours (even scarier than Ali and Omar!) possibly know about democracy? Just admit it, you’re an Arab nationalist waiting for that magic 51%, so you can throw the Jews into the sea, right?

    • miriam6
      September 16, 2013, 9:34 am

      Shmuel@;

      As it happens I really don’t find Arab names scary!!!

      After all I mentioned the name of Palestinian Arab Jonathan Kuttab quite easily..

      Just admit it, you’re an Arab nationalist waiting for that magic 51%, so you can throw the Jews into the sea, right?

      Poor naïve Shmuel

      It has happened before to many minorities in the Middle East including the Mizrahi Jews.

      Nasser expelled Egypt’s Greek community..

      In Egypt under Nasser again , came the expulsion of thousands of Egyptian Jews

      And , earlier than that , what did the Egyptian Muslim Arabs do in 1929 when they got free of the Ottomans?

      Why, Shmuel , they instituted the racist, discriminatory Nationality Law which denied some 90% of Egyptian Jews the opportunity to claim Egyptian citizenship for themselves no matter how many generations they and their families had lived in Egypt.

      The Mizrahi Jews in Israel remember all that , even if you don’t

      And look at the precarious situation of Coptic Christians in Egypt

      Look at how the Iraqis Christians have fled the sectarian bloodshed between Sunni and Shia in Iraq.

      Not forgetting of course the Jews who were ethnically cleansed from Iraq beforehand.

      Ironically , given your distaste for the Lebanese political system , for a time at least , the Jews of Lebanon managed pretty well without discrimination from the Lebanese state.

      You are living in a fool’s paradise if you imagine a Jewish minority could be safe in an Arab majority single state without safeguards.

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 9:46 am

        After all I mentioned the name of Palestinian Arab Jonathan Kuttab quite easily

        When it was useful to instrumentalise a part of his article.

        Poor naïve Shmuel
        It has happened before to many minorities in the Middle East including the Mizrahi Jews … You are living in a fool’s paradise if you imagine …

        OK, I take it all back. You don’t actually read things that Jews write before forming an opinion about their views either.

      • MahaneYehude1
        September 16, 2013, 2:18 pm

        @Shmuel: In the second page of the article Lustick wrote:

        “Those who assume that Israel will always exist as a Zionist project should consider how quickly the Soviet, Pahlavi Iranian, apartheid South African, Baathist Iraqi and Yugoslavian states unraveled, and how little warning even sharp-eyed observers had that such transformations were imminent.”

        Well, two out of five, Pahlavi Iran and Baathist Iraq, are ME states. Both are good example, IMO, that one state solution is not working in the ME. Post Pahlavi Iran became Islamic republic in which the Shiites dominate and other minorities are oppressed like the Suni Arabs in south Iran close to the Gulf. The Baathist Iraq, established after the ideas of the three Baath party founders (Christian, Muslim and Alawite) called for unification of the Arab world into a single state in which all are equal. The Baathist Iraq collapsed and conflicts between all Iraqi peoples, Suni, Shiites, Kurds and others, were emerged.

        Other examples of ME states are not supporting one state solution: Labanon, Egypt, Turkey, Lybia, SA, Gulf States, Jordan and not mention Syria that, I think, the fear of the Alawites minority to lose power and became oppressed minority is the main reason for the long civil war there.

        I will be glad to hear your opinion.

      • seafoid
        September 16, 2013, 3:32 pm

        Ramzi must be Syrian. I’ll ask miriam if the so called jabars ever existed before dudu topaz opened the first jewish supermarket in rishon letzion in 1910,

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 3:37 pm

        In the second page of the article Lustick wrote …

        You miss the point, MY1. Lustick was not holding any of these countries up as models for emulation, just as examples of sic transit gloria mundi.

        As for the ME, I don’t think Middle Easterners (including Israelis) are any more intrinsically democratically-challenged than anyone else — or that Lustick’s other examples have come up roses.

      • amigo
        September 16, 2013, 3:56 pm

        Note Mahane,s miraculous improvement in his english.

        His first post —MahaneYehude1 September 9, 2013 at 1:23 pm

        @Annie: Thanks. Didn’t know about emails.

        I am not Nakba denial and don’t want others deny it. Any way, I send my reply to Shmuel and I don’t think it contains any denies.

        Post from yesterday. Mahane sept 16th,

        “Well, two out of five, Pahlavi Iran and Baathist Iraq, are ME states. Both are good example, IMO, that one state solution is not working in the ME. Post Pahlavi Iran became Islamic republic in which the Shiites dominate and other minorities are oppressed like the Suni Arabs in south Iran close to the Gulf. The Baathist Iraq, established after the ideas of the three Baath party founders (Christian, Muslim and Alawite) called for unification of the Arab world into a single state in which all are equal. The Baathist Iraq collapsed and conflicts between all Iraqi peoples, Suni, Shiites, Kurds and others, were emerged.

        Other examples of ME states are not supporting one state solution: Labanon, Egypt, Turkey, Lybia, SA, Gulf States, Jordan and not mention Syria that, I think, the fear of the Alawites minority to lose power and became oppressed minority is the main reason for the long civil war there.”M1

        An amazing feat in just nine days posting.

        Unbelievable,=. Truly unbelievable.

      • MahaneYehude1
        September 16, 2013, 3:59 pm

        @Shmuel: I understood that he wrote the list as example of dead ideologies (sic transit gloria mundi), but I used them as examples for my point. Any way, I think he shouldn’t give such examples in article titled “two states illusion”, even not to emphasis other issue.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 4:35 pm

        “An amazing feat in just nine days posting.”

        Wow. That’s some difference.

      • libra
        September 16, 2013, 7:24 pm

        amigo: Note Mahane,s miraculous improvement in his english.

        New research shows Israelis are too smart to play dumb.

      • RoHa
        September 16, 2013, 10:17 pm

        I replied to some of his posts, so obviously he has acquired excellent English from me by direct osmosis.

        But our simple potato seller hasn’t yet learned to put his Latin tags in italics.

      • MahaneYehude1
        September 17, 2013, 1:30 am

        @Libra: New research shows Israelis are too smart to play dumb.

        No more than a disgusting and racist comment. Look, I try to avoid such comments, to participate in the discussions here as much as my knowledge allows me, but you and your friends decided not let me do it. I can guess the reasons for that.

        Do you want to reply on my claim above that 1SS won’t work in the ME and there is no even one example of two different peoples living together in one ME state in peace and harmony? What do you think about Lustick article? Do you support his claim about two states solution as an illusion? waiting to your clever input.

      • Shingo
        September 17, 2013, 3:20 am

        No more than a disgusting and racist comment.

        Not in the slightest. States of all persuasions make stupid decisions, including the US and it’s allies. My favourite description of the US in the lead up to the Iraq war was that the US was like a dinosaur – large body with a small brain.

        That’s not racist, that’s a comment about the political status quo in Washington.

        What do you think about Lustick article? Do you support his claim about two states solution as an illusion?

        He is now saying it’s the only solution left you idiot.

      • MahaneYehude1
        September 17, 2013, 5:57 pm

        @shingo: “He is now saying it’s the only solution left you idiot”? Where exactly? maybe in the last paragraph when he said: “It remains possible that someday two real states may arise. But the pretense that negotiations under the slogan of “two states for two peoples” could lead to such a solution must be abandoned. Time can do things that politicians cannot”? Of course two states will emerged: One will be state of Palestine and the other…State of Palestine!!! excellent solution!! very realistic!!

        BTW, Shingo, goodbye!!

      • amigo
        September 18, 2013, 5:33 am

        “BTW, Shingo, goodbye!!”.M6

        Don,t forget to close the door on your way out Mehane.

        Stuck to selling spuds fella.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 9:51 am

        You are living in a fool’s paradise if you imagine a Jewish minority could be safe in an Arab majority single state without safeguards.

        Even if this were the case, would this justify the denial of the ROR and the perpetuation of Palestinian exile? If you find “preemptive” oppression and dispossession acceptable, then you have no sense of justice.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 10:04 am

        You are living in a fool’s paradise if you imagine a Jewish minority could be safe in an Arab majority single state without safeguards.

        If Israeli Jews really believe that they won’t be safe as minority without safeguards, then why don’t they create these safeguards NOW when they are still the majority? You totally contradict yourself. Clearly, you didn’t understand Kuttab.

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 10:34 am

        GLefty@;

        You read my comments WRONG

        Actually I made it QUITE CLEAR I appreciated and approved of Kuttab’s view of a one state solution overall.

        On the other hand I was suspicious and Disapproving of Bargouti and Abunimah’s visions of what I take to be Arab majority rule which would pose a threat to the Jewish minority

        The reason why the Israeli Jews DON’T create safeguards NOW is that they prefer having their own state to themselves , thank you for asking.

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 10:49 am

        >> The reason why the Israeli Jews DON’T create safeguards NOW is that they prefer having their own state to themselves …

        Yup, they like it nice and supremacist.

      • amigo
        September 16, 2013, 11:03 am

        “The reason why the Israeli Jews DON’T create safeguards NOW is that they prefer having their own state to themselves , thank you for asking.”M6

        Exactly Miriam.

        A haven for racist bigots and goy haters.

        You must be real proud to support such cretins.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 11:45 am

        Honestly, Miriam, when I read your comments, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

        I was suspicious of Bargouti and Abunimah’s visions of what I take to be Arab majority rule which would pose a threat to the Jewish minority. The reason why the Israeli Jews DON’T create safeguards NOW is that they prefer having their own state to themselves

        The only reason you are suspicious of Palestinian majority rule is because you fear that Palestinians will behave in the same way as Jews behave now, i.e. oppressing and dispossessing the minority. You project your own Jewish supremacist behaviour onto the totally innocent Palestinians.

        The reason why the Israeli Jews DON’T create safeguards NOW is that they prefer having their own state to themselves

        But Israel is NOT a Jewish-only state. 20% of Israelis are Palestinians. Don’t you think that this Palestinian minority wants and deserves the EXACT SAME safeguards that you demand for a future Jewish minority?
        Clearly, you have terrible double standards:
        Palestinian majority + Jewish minority = safeguards wanted
        Jewish majority + Palestinian minority = safeguards unwanted
        You don’t mind that Jewish majority rule currently poses a threat to the Palestinian minority. Actually, you don’t just don’t mind it. You approve of it. As you said, Israeli Jews want to have a state for themselves. This requires that they drive the Palestinian minority out of the country.

      • hophmi
        September 16, 2013, 11:51 am

        “The only reason you are suspicious of Palestinian majority rule is because you fear that Palestinians will behave in the same way as Jews behave now”

        Oh please. Do you have any humanity at all? The Israelis have experienced generations of terrorism from the Palestinians. Palestinian eliminationist rhetoric is ubiquitous. You don’t have agree with Miriam, but it would be nice if you could bring yourself, sitting pretty in comfy Germany, to acknowledge her humanity and the humanity of the Israeli people.

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 12:09 pm

        >> The Israelis have experienced generations of terrorism from the Palestinians. … You don’t have agree with Miriam, but it would be nice if you could bring yourself, sitting pretty in comfy Germany, to acknowledge her humanity and the humanity of the Israeli people.

        Which humanity – which generations of Palestinians have experienced – would that be?
        - The desire for a supremacist “Jewish State” in Palestine?
        - Jewish terrorism and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homes and lands?
        - The creation of a supremacist “Jewish State” in Palestine?
        - A 60+ years, ON-GOING and offensive (i.e., not defensive) campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction, torture and murder?
        - Refusal to be held accountable for past and on-going (war) crimes?
        - Refusal to honour obligations under international law?
        - Refusal to enter into sincere negotiations for a just and mutually-beneficial peace?

      • hophmi
        September 16, 2013, 12:24 pm

        “Which humanity – which generations of Palestinians have experienced – would that be?”

        I guess you can’t acknowledge it.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 12:25 pm

        “Oh please. Do you have any humanity at all? The Israelis have experienced generations of terrorism from the Palestinians. Palestinian eliminationist rhetoric is ubiquitous. You don’t have agree with Miriam, but it would be nice if you could bring yourself, sitting pretty in comfy Germany, to acknowledge her humanity and the humanity of the Israeli people.”

        You have some nerve. The Palestinians have experienced much worse from the Jews in the Levant than the reverse, yet one would search in vain for any suggestion by you, miriam or most any other zio for the imposition of the protections for the Palestinians against the predations of the Jews that she insist we worry about in some speculative future. It would be nice if you people gave any concern for non-Jews who are suffering today, rather than some speculative future.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 12:32 pm

        The Israelis have experienced generations of terrorism from the Palestinians.
        That’s not terrorism. That’s self-defence against the Zionist invaders and oppressors.

        Palestinian eliminationist rhetoric is ubiquitous.
        Palestinians only want to eliminate Jewish supremacism, not Jewish people. Huge difference! Again, it’s the Zionists who shout “Death to Arabs.” So, you are projecting.

        it would be nice if you could bring yourself [...] to acknowledge her humanity and the humanity of the Israeli people.
        What makes you think that I don’t view Miriam (or any other Israeli) as a human being? Did I call her an animal or an inanimate object? Actually, it’s the Zionists who call the Palestinians animals. See here: link to youtube.com So, again, you are projecting.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 12:38 pm

        “The reason why the Israeli Jews DON’T create safeguards NOW is that they prefer having their own state to themselves , thank you for asking.”

        What racist trash. Half of the population of their de facto state (and 20% of their dejure state) are non-Jews. Do you realize how pathetic you sound, worrying about the treatment of Jews in some imagined, speculative future, when the very people you’re supposedly worried about are committing crimes against the Palestinians on a daily basis, without one squeak of protest from you?? Do you know who disgustingly bigoted that is??

      • Cliff
        September 16, 2013, 2:25 pm

        hoppy said:

        Oh please. Do you have any humanity at all? The Israelis have experienced generations of terrorism from the Palestinians.

        No they haven’t. They haven’t experienced ‘generations’ of terrorism because that would imply there’s tons of dead Israelis and there isn’t.

        There isn’t tons of injured.

        The Palestinians are the ones experiencing ‘generations’ of terrorism – Israeli/Jewish terrorism and colonialism.

        And you have repeatedly insinuated that Palestinian grievances are more or less academic while Israeli grievances are a constant Holocaust.

        Israel butchers more Palestinian civilians AND gets away with ALL of it.

        Israel steals Palestinian land and water and gets away with it.

        You and your cult are not victims so stop acting like it.

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 3:07 pm

        >> I guess you can’t acknowledge it.

        I guess you can’t answer my question.

        But to reply to your comment: Sure I can acknowledge it, but it changes none of the facts.

        What’s really dismal about Zio-supremacists like you is that you think it somehow does change the facts; that it somehow makes injustice and immorality less unjust and immoral.

      • seafoid
        September 16, 2013, 3:35 pm

        How wonderful if israel’s institutions could reflect the humanity of its misunderstood people who unfortunately never found the time to vote in a government arsed about peace.

      • ziusudra
        September 17, 2013, 7:26 am

        Greetings Hophmi,
        It is difficult to see any ‘Menschkeit’ in miriam or you because you only see the advantages, pains, sufferings, aspirations , wishes of the Israelis!
        If you have a practical Democracy, it is not working for the Falesteeni in Israel proper nor the Falesteeni in the WB or Gaza.
        I see you, miriam & any others as solipsistic, narcissistic &, nihilistic.
        Why aren’t the other 50% in the US acting as you do in Falesteena?
        They also follow Judaism. Hence it has nothing to do with Religion.
        It has everything to do with politics, conquest & hegemony.
        ziusudra
        PS You are going to have to fight to defend your theft till the cows come home. Europe & the US will no longer at your side. Mosel Tov

      • Danaa
        September 17, 2013, 7:36 pm

        hophmi: “it would be nice if you could bring yourself, sitting pretty in comfy germany, to acknowledge her humanity and the humanity of the israelis people”.

        care to provide some examples of said humanity? say, with regard to miriam – you sure it’s a human and not a hasbara humanoid, made to measure for MW? can you bring any support for this not being the case?

        Here is a snippet of my arguments for why the miriam6 poster is a bot rather than human:

        1. It does not address the main point but actively tries to slide comment threads on side issues (kuttab! yay!)
        2. It is repetitive and does not seem to evolve beyond a few basic points
        3. It seems to have no first hand knowledge of israelis (including the vaunted Mizrahis)
        4. The points raised have all been seen before, including from you hophmi. that’s because you have no new arguments
        5. The allusions to something slightly personal seem forced, like the poster is trying to build a persona (and failing ….need lessons urgently); make themselves human through panda babies that may or may not have been conceived (of course, I could totally agree that israel has too many people and not enough pandas….please feel free to contact me about ideas on how to redress the imbalance).

        As for the humanity of the israelis. Well, they can be perfectly human towards each other, especially from their own bubble, whichever it is. It’s towards all others outside their immediate bubble-zone (which includes many other nominally jewish, much less Arab or just not-jewish and not blond Ukranian leggy girls) that their humanity is not so manifest. Serious trouble with that Tikun Olam business, I’m afraid.

        But hophmi, by all means go search for that elusive humanity. let me know if you need a flashlamp.

      • Sibiriak
        September 17, 2013, 8:25 pm

        ziusudra says:
        September 17, 2013 at 7:26 am

        Greetings Hophmi,
        It is difficult to see any ‘Menschkeit’ in miriam or you because you only see the advantages, pains, sufferings, aspirations , wishes of the Israelis!
        If you have a practical Democracy, it is not working for the Falesteeni in Israel proper nor the Falesteeni in the WB or Gaza.

        Incisive comments. I like your writing style.

        I see you, miriam & any others as solipsistic, narcissistic &, nihilistic.

        Solipsistic, perhaps–but not really nihilistic: they are steeped in powerful, life-directing values, but unfortunately, ethnocentric ones.

      • irishmoses
        September 17, 2013, 10:47 pm

        Danaa, you are too funny.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 17, 2013, 11:41 pm

        she’s not that far off irish. imagine how much mullah the foreign ministry could save (and all those think tank supervisors) if they could computerize hasbara bots. they only have a few themes they work off. and generally they announce where they’re from, personal background (sky’s the limit; remember r werdermire or whatever his name was , born muslim from little town in lebanon!!! ha!!!) take pose/create unconvincing personality. all that could be programmed w/variation while spewing the same themes. basically arab jews yada yada..code “jewish nakba” settlers code “don’t ethnically cleanse us” the ‘it’s not apartheid’ claim..anyway. so limiting. i’m w/danaa.

      • irishmoses
        September 17, 2013, 11:53 pm

        Annie,
        I was laughing with Danaa at her hilarious comments. e.g. Miriam the bot, and the flashlamp for Hops. Danaa’s one of my favorites.

      • RoHa
        September 17, 2013, 11:54 pm

        Like the pun on “mullah” and “moolah”.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 18, 2013, 12:41 am

        me too irish! just extending the laugh line. but y’never know, given pro israel initiative (and they doooo have gumption), i wouldn’t put it past them.

        ;)

        p.s. they have that limitation after all, NO change in policy. but the window dressing is always amazingly creative/adaptable. too bad the nothing changes tho, so same ol same ol…diversion has its limits. but they sure are good at it. there are only so many ways to package apartheid/ethnic cleansing, and basically it’s just ugly stuff.

    • Ramzi Jaber
      September 16, 2013, 5:00 pm

      Shmuel, why the personal attacks? The insults? The racism? What if someone called anyone with the name Menachim, Shamir, or Baruch a terrorist, across the board without justification or facts? So now for you Ramzi is not only a scary name but its worse than others like Ali and Omar. What does that even mean??? Truly sad.

      Why don’t you engage in a civilized discourse and in the positive exchange of ideas instead of attacking me? This is MW not JPost!!

      You know nothing about me. You don’t know my background. You don’t know my stand on most issues including democracy. Instead of engaging positively and politely, you resort to personal attacks and insults. You ought to look in the mirror.

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 5:05 pm

        Ramzi, Shmuel was kidding!

      • eljay
        September 16, 2013, 5:13 pm

        >> Ramzi Jaber @ September 16, 2013 at 5:00 pm

        I think you severely mis-read Shmuel’s playful comment, which was a riff on one of his exchanges with miriam6eee.

      • tree
        September 16, 2013, 5:37 pm

        Ramzi, I’m sure that Shmuel will apologize himself when he gets the chance, but knowing Shmuel from his years on the site, I can assure you that he was making a snarky remark aimed at lambasting Miriam and poking holes in her racism, and did not intend for any of the comments he made to you to be taken as his true feelings. I can understand your anger, believing as you do that Shmuel was venting his own racist feelings, but that was not his intent and I’m sure he will be upset and apologetic to realize that you took his comment literally.

      • Frankie P
        September 16, 2013, 6:50 pm

        Ramzi,

        You write English very well, and your posts are meaningful, coherent, and full of useful information. That said, you need an intensive course in sarcasm. Don’t you read the comments of others here? Shmuel has commented on MW for years, and I have seen your comments here for some time. Do you actually think that Shmuel, with his long history of balanced, humanitarian commenting, could hold views like the ones he pillories in that sarcastic comment about your name? Not a racist bone in the man’s body, and we should all admit that doing away with those nasty racist bones is a life-long effort.

        FPM

      • Annie Robbins
        September 16, 2013, 11:57 pm

        frankie, shmuel has been gone for months. the upside is, i bet ramzi will never forget who shmuel (the best, the wonderful one and only!)is ever again.

      • Shmuel
        September 17, 2013, 1:44 am

        Thanks, annie.

      • libra
        September 16, 2013, 5:54 pm

        Ramzi,

        I’m sure Schmuel was only joking as an indirect way to bait miriam about her views and did not intend to offend you. But unless English is your first language his sarcasm wasn’t very apparent. It would have been far better for him to engage miriam directly.

        More positively, I thought this was a very perceptive line in Phil’s post:

        He says the two-state negotiations are keeping people from being imaginative about the political future of the state, and the region.

        I couldn’t agree more but breaking this impasse needs more Palestinians using their imaginations like you do. Keep showing the way forward, the tide is getting closer to turning.

      • Donald
        September 16, 2013, 6:01 pm

        What tree said. When I saw Shmuel’s comment, having read him for years, I immediately knew he was ridiculing anti-Arab racism and so did the others who followed up, because they know Shmuel (as well as any of us can know someone through the internet). If people here thought he was serious, there’d have been a lot of comments denouncing him–you wouldn’t have been the only one.

        It is kind of risky engaging in that kind of satire, though, because of the misunderstanding that can happen and happened here.

      • Ramzi Jaber
        September 16, 2013, 6:31 pm

        tree and Donald, thank you for the context you provided. I’m not familiar with Shmuel’s knack for sarcasm. I must say, I took it as a negative personal attack. Now, knowing this context, I wish I were more astute to pick on that and maybe to research Shmuel’s posts to get a feeling on his perspectives before submitting my post.

      • RoHa
        September 16, 2013, 11:00 pm

        “I wish I were more astute to pick on that and maybe to research Shmuel’s posts to get a feeling on his perspectives before submitting my post.”

        Don’t beat yourself up over it, Ramzi.

        As Donald says, this sort of misunderstanding does happen. Several of us have a tendency (overdeveloped in my case) to use sarcasm (as well as dramatic irony, parody, litotes, hyperbole, innuendo, and aposiopesis) and we know we risk being misunderstood whenever we do.

        But I think the discussion would poorer if we did not throw in a few rhetorical flourishes now and then.

      • MahaneYehude1
        September 17, 2013, 12:12 am

        @Ramzi: Any connection to North-East Jerusalem Jaber Hamula?

      • Sibiriak
        September 17, 2013, 7:43 pm

        RoHa:

        Several of us have a tendency (overdeveloped in my case) to use sarcasm (as well as dramatic irony, parody, litotes, hyperbole, innuendo, and aposiopesis) and we know we risk being misunderstood whenever we do…

        Poe’s Law in action.

        Poe’s law, named after its author Nathan Poe, is an Internet adage reflecting the idea that without a clear indication of the author’s intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism.

        [...]Poe’s law, in broader form, is:

        Without a blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of extremism or fundamentalism that someone won’t mistake for the real thing.[2]

        The core of Poe’s law is that a parody of something extreme by nature becomes impossible to differentiate from sincere extremism.

        A corollary of Poe’s law is the reverse phenomenon: sincere fundamentalist beliefs can be mistaken for a parody of those beliefs.

        link to en.wikipedia.org

      • irishmoses
        September 17, 2013, 11:06 pm

        Roha,
        I can put up with your sarcasm, dramatic irony, parody, hyperbole, and innuendo, but your litotes, and aposiopesis are beyond the pale. Ah, now there’s an apt metaphor. Roha, you need to stay within the pale. But that ain’t gonna work as you are an Aussie as I recall. Perhaps the outback will serve as a suitable pale.

      • RoHa
        September 17, 2013, 11:47 pm

        Australia is so far from Dublin that I can’t help being beyond The Pale.
        But in spite of living in a sunburnt country, I am , nonetheless, very pale.
        One of the whiter shades, in fact.

      • RoHa
        September 18, 2013, 2:53 am

        Though I can’t really see what your objections are. After all, litotes is not uncommon, and as for aposiopesis …

      • irishmoses
        September 18, 2013, 4:52 pm

        At first read I thought you must be from Dublin, not Australia but your reference to a sunburnt country makes me think no. If you do in fact live in Dublin, my apologies for placing you 150 degrees of longitude too far west. My comment was beyond the pale.

        I see that Ireland, specifically Dublin, had its own version of the pale. The restriction was on British residents not Jews.

        I think British foreign policy should be described as beyond the pale in that at least three of the world’s great messes were created by the Brits: Palestine, Northern Ireland, and South Africa. The Brits have the cheek to claim that their throwing up of their hands and leaving Palestine in 1947 was justifiable when in fact it was a moral outrage. They created the f*cking mess and put the Palestinian Arabs at risk. It was (and still is) their responsibility to straighten it out. They had 100,000 battle-hardened troops in Palestine in 1947 and had the power to impose a partition before they left, making sure the Palestinians were equipped to defend themselves from the expected aggression of the Jews. To abandon the weak and vulnerable Palestinian Arabs to the tender mercies of the Palestine Jews was unforgivable. You would think they would at least have the decency today to use all their influence to insure the Palestinians get a modest state of their own – pre 1967 borders. Instead they rubber stamp Obama’s feckless AIPAC-driven behavior.

        Now that is beyond the pale.

      • Susan A
        September 16, 2013, 6:23 pm

        Hey Ramzi, Don’t worry about Shmuel: he’s with us! He was, amongst other people, reacting to Miriam6, and he did it, like one or two others, with a sense of humour! I’m sorry you feel hurt, but he was being sarcastic to Miriam because of what she’d said about Ali Abunimah and Omar Barghouti. I have to admit that he made me laugh when he wrote that, but I know he was joking and, well, you have to laugh sometimes in order to be able to go on. If you read the thread earlier on, you will see why he wrote what he did. And it’s good to see your positive, hopeful comments, by the way. We have to live in hope. :) So I agree with tree and Donald. Shmuel is good to read because he seems to know a lot, AND he’s got a good sense of humour :)

      • Shmuel
        September 17, 2013, 1:40 am

        Ramzi,

        I am mortified.

        As other’s have written, I was trying to poke fun at Miriam’s ridiculous assumptions about Omar Barghouti and Ali Abunimah (without knowing the first thing about them), based on nothing but the fact that they are Arabs.

        The comment was meant to be anti-racist, but I guess some issues demand greater caution (and probably shouldn’t be written before going to bed and disappearing for 8 hours).

        My humble apologies.

      • MRW
        September 17, 2013, 2:29 am

        Yeah, Ramzi. I have to weigh in with the rest. You haven’t been around long enough to know that on the rare occasions when Shmuel decides to get sarcastic, he does 10 minutes of special exercises in his chair, his neck twitches, and his teeth glint. Then he punts. Two sentences max. ;-) ;-) The rest of the time he’s writing to us in fucking latin. After all, he escaped Israel for Rome to save his wife and daughter (another on the way yet?). So cut him some slack. ;-)

      • MRW
        September 17, 2013, 2:38 am

        (and probably shouldn’t be written before going to bed and disappearing for 8 hours).

        Story of my life here over the years.

      • Ramzi Jaber
        September 18, 2013, 6:10 am

        Shmuel, as one poster suggested, I took a crash course in sarcasm (lol) so I get your post now! No apologies needed at all. I should have been a bit slower on the trigger. I regret that.

      • Shmuel
        September 18, 2013, 4:00 pm

        No apologies needed at all. I should have been a bit slower on the trigger.

        Thanks, Ramzi. That’s very generous of you, but in such forums, misunderstood sarcasm is always the fault of the writer — especially when it comes to sensitive topics like racism. I’m sorry you had to feel the sting of a racist insult, even for an instant and even where absolutely none was intended.

      • bintbiba
        September 20, 2013, 1:03 pm

        Oh Ramzi habeebi,
        Shmuel was being ironic in response to the blessed Myriam6!
        Shmuel is so valuable to us , to me, to all those who value justice, fair play and dignity.
        So obvious was his kidding.

      • miriam6
        September 20, 2013, 4:36 pm

        Bintbiba@:

        Actually I think Donald had the best advice on the pitfalls of bringing an assumption of racism on someone else’s part into the discussion whether or not its meant in jest.

        Donald@:It is kind of risky engaging in that kind of satire, though, because of the misunderstanding that can happen and happened here.

        For the record it seemed to me that Shmuel was accusing me of racism (see his ‘fear of brown people’ comments to me ) in his comments on this thread.

        I once again say I am not prejudiced , nor racist.

        I think people ought to be able to argue on this site without resorting to scoring a cheap point by seemingly accusing others , as I was falsely accused, of being racist.

      • Shmuel
        September 20, 2013, 6:29 pm

        I think people ought to be able to argue on this site without resorting to scoring a cheap point by seemingly accusing others , as I was falsely accused, of being racist.

        Miriam,

        My remark was a quote from Abunimah (as I noted), entirely appropriate to the subject at hand and your ignorant comments.

        Abunimah explains:

        Coercion is not enough, however; as I have long argued, and sought to do, Palestinians must also put forward a positive vision. Neither can Palestinians advocating a one-state solution simply disregard the views of Israeli Jews. We must recognize that the opposition of Israeli Jews to any solution that threatens their power and privilege stems from at least two sources. One is irrational, racist fears of black and brown hordes (in this case, Arab Muslims) stoked by decades of colonial, racist demonization. The other source — certainly heightened by the former — are normal human concerns about personal and family dislocation, loss of socioeconomic status and community security: change is scary.

        link to electronicintifada.net

      • tree
        September 20, 2013, 7:12 pm

        I think people ought to be able to argue on this site without resorting to scoring a cheap point by seemingly accusing others , as I was falsely accused, of being racist.

        Miriam, you hold racist views whether you are willing to acknowledge them or not, and there is nothing “cheap” about pointing them out to you.

        You proved your bigotry by being greatly concerned about minority rights “safeguards” under a one state situation where non-Jewish Palestinians might someday be in the majority. But at the same time when ask why the Israelis don’t institute such minority safeguards now, you answered thusly,

        The reason why the Israeli Jews DON’T create safeguards NOW is that they prefer having their own state to themselves , thank you for asking.

        clearly showing that you have absolutely NO concern for the rights of minorities unless the minority is a Jewish one. The present day, real life, day in and day out abrogation of minority rights in Israel doesn’t bother you a whit, but the possibly of a future that mirrors present day Israel with Jews on the receiving end of discrimination is the only thing that concerns you. You may very well have your biases so well ingrained that you can’t even recognize them, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist. If you can’t stand people critiquing your comments for their inherent bigotry, then try not making bigoted statements in the first place, and avoid bigoted assumptions about Palestinians whose ideas you haven’t even bothered to read.

      • miriam6
        September 20, 2013, 7:15 pm

        Shmuel@;

        My remark was a quote from Abunimah (as I noted), entirely appropriate to the subject at hand and your ignorant comments.

        In the rest of your quote you and Abunimah seem to be forgetting yet again that 52% of Israel’s population is of Mizrahi/Arab Jewish background and are therefore brown themselves.

        Your comment about my questioning of Ali Abunimah’s ideas in which you said maybe I was only questioning Abunimah ideas on account of him being Arab and you used Abunimah’s line about ‘ fear of brown people’ was a definite slur against me.

        I am not racist.

        You kept claiming that in fact that Kuttab’s ideas for a one state solution were identical.

        So, if I am against Abunimah on account of my alleged ‘terror of brown people’ why on earth would I express my approval and preference for Kuttab’s article?

        Is it not the case that Kuttab is one of those ‘brown’ people?

        In any case you would do well to take Donald’s remark on board and refrain from throwing accusations of racism around.

        Seems to me it has got you into a lot of trouble either way…

      • Shingo
        September 20, 2013, 8:23 pm

        If you can’t stand people critiquing your comments for their inherent bigotry, then try not making bigoted statements in the first place, and avoid bigoted assumptions about Palestinians whose ideas you haven’t even bothered to read

        Outstanding post Tree. I cannot imagine a better summary of Miriam’s bigotry, irrationality, ignorance, rascism, hypocrisy and dishonesty.

      • eljay
        September 20, 2013, 8:39 pm

        >> I once again say I am not prejudiced , nor racist.

        But you are a Zio-supremacist.

      • Shingo
        September 20, 2013, 9:15 pm

        Actually I think Donald had the best advice on the pitfalls of bringing an assumption of racism on someone else’s part into the discussion whether or not its meant in jest.

        There ‘a no danger of that in your case Miriam. Your racism has been consistent, so the chances of it being taken out if context are nil.

        For the record it seemed to me that Shmuel was accusing me of racism (see his ‘fear of brown people’ comments to me ) in his comments on this thread.

        Not just racism, but ignorance, as your comments were exposed as being based on assumption, not sound knowledge.

        I once again say I am not prejudiced , nor racist.

        Just like you keep denying you’re a Zionist while parroting all the Zionist talking points.

        Say it all you like, your racism has been exposed and no one takes you seriously anyway. It’s interesting that you should cite Donald’s comment, when it was Donald that concluded you are a troll with no internet in honest debate.

  8. Obsidian
    September 16, 2013, 9:47 am

    All of you overlook the fact the Israel sits within the becalmed eye of the hurricane that is today’s Middle East.

    Assuming, arguendo, that a fragile, delicately balanced bi-national State arises in Israel-Palestine.

    How long could this fledgling State withstand the violent winds of change that would surround it?

    • German Lefty
      September 16, 2013, 9:53 am

      How long could this fledgling State withstand the violent winds of change that would surround it?
      As soon as Israel respects the human rights of Palestinians, there’s no reason to attack Israel anymore.

    • miriam6
      September 16, 2013, 10:27 am

      Obsidian@;

      What a beautiful , spot on , comment Obsidian

      • Obsidian
        September 16, 2013, 1:05 pm

        @Miriam

        Thank you.

        Chag Sameach

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 2:38 pm

        Chag Sameach
        OMG! Are these holidays still not over yet?

      • Shmuel
        September 16, 2013, 2:57 pm

        Are these holidays still not over yet?

        1 more to go (2 if you want to get technical, 3 if you want to get really technical), 8-9 days long, with full festivals at the beginning and the end. These are a lot more fun than the last ones though (unless you’re a Palestinian under “special” closure, in which case it doesn’t really matter).

      • German Lefty
        September 16, 2013, 3:04 pm

        Thanks, Shmuel. I tried to look it up, but the huge charts I found were somewhat confusing. Jews seem to celebrate a lot.

      • jon s
        September 17, 2013, 12:56 am

        German Lefty, you’re right, our lives are one long party…Envious?

        Maybe it has to do with the fact that Jews couldn’t have sex for nearly half the time…

      • Annie Robbins
        September 17, 2013, 1:20 am

        the fact that Jews couldn’t have sex for nearly half the time…

        oh please, you really believe they didn’t repeatedly cheat? that’s got to be a myth.

      • jon s
        September 17, 2013, 2:29 am

        Really? It was possible to cheat? How come nobody told me?

    • eljay
      September 16, 2013, 11:04 am

      Assuming, arguendo, that a fragile, delicately balanced bi-national State arises in Israel-Palestine.

      How long could this fledgling State withstand the violent winds of change that would surround it?

      There’s no reason to assume it won’t last at least as long as supremacist “Jewish State”, a state which – despite perpetually facing a second Holocaust / being wiped from the map and pushed into the sea / miscellaneous scenarios of terror and devastation – has been alive and kicking (and stealing and colonizing and destroying and murdering) for 60+ years.

      Unlike “Jewish State”, however, this robust and well-balanced new state will be based on justice and equality – ideals that have a longer shelf-life than (Jewish) supremacism and colonialism.

    • marc b.
      September 16, 2013, 11:29 am

      what purple prose. who knew that obsidian was the pen name of Thomas Friedman? The ‘only becalmed eye of the hurricane democracy in the Middle East’. call your lawyer quickly, obsidian, you wouldn’t want to have your intellectual property rights trampled as that phrase is borrowed liberally.

      in reality, there are very few pockets of ‘becalmed eye’ in Israel and the West Bank primarily because the tension between Jewish and non-Jewish Israelis is integral to the foundation and continuation of Jewish supremacy, as is the tension between Israel and its neighbors. there is no Zionist state without the dynamic of ‘us versus them’. that’s the problem for Zionists in either solution, 1 state or 2. Israel as one of two Palestinian states will still have a significant minority, at least, of non-Jewish Israelis who will necessarily be 2nd class citizens in a ‘Jewish democracy’ (poor Pete Beinart, it’s true.) that’s why I am for negotiations based on a one-state solution. it implicitly recognizes the need for equal treatment, while a two-state solution does not.

    • American
      September 16, 2013, 11:44 am

      ‘Assuming, arguendo, that a fragile, delicately balanced bi-national State arises in Israel-Palestine.
      How long could this fledgling State withstand the violent winds of change that would surround it?”’>>>>>

      Depends on how long it would ‘refuse’ to take part in or take a side in conflicts.
      IF there was ever One State it would be smart of it to adopt the Switzerland principle of *complete neturality*.
      A clever person should be able to sell the Switzerland model to the egos of the ‘*light unto the nations’ believers as well as to the war weary and educated on occupation conflict Palestines.
      Would be the Jews chance to salvage something from the destructon Zionist have wrought that they could show offer the world.
      And that Palestines could also claim credit for creating–win-win.

      • Obsidian
        September 16, 2013, 1:17 pm

        The Alps mountain ranges enforce Switzerland’s neutrality. Israel/Palestine have no such fortuitous natural boundaries.

        Belgium had declared neutrality at the beginning of World War 2 but the German Wehrmacht rolled right through her.

      • marc b.
        September 16, 2013, 3:25 pm

        the alps are located in southern Switzerland. none of the major Swiss cities are located in ‘the alps’. there is a clean, wide, flat corridor from southern Germany to northern Switzerland, and on uninterrupted to the Swiss cities, if Germany had intended to invade. next time consult a map, Clausewitz jr.

      • Hostage
        September 16, 2013, 4:03 pm

        Belgium had declared neutrality at the beginning of World War 2 but the German Wehrmacht rolled right through her.

        Talk about a lack of self-awareness. Belgium was a semi-sovereign neutralized state according to The Inquiry series, “Types of Restricted Sovereignty and of Colonial Autonomy”, by Profs W. W. Willoughby, of Johns Hopkins University, and C.G. Fenwick, Bryn Mawr College. The study was completed as part of the US preparations for the Versailles Peace Conference in January 1919, and was published by the US Government Printing Office after its declassification.

        One of President Wilson’s 14 points addressed the fact that it was unacceptable to demand that neutralized states, like Belgium, be left demilitarized and defenseless under the terms of international peace treaties which restricted their sovereignty. Belgium is no longer demilitarized or excluded from military alliances, like NATO:

        Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored, without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired.

        Nowadays it’s simply a given that all states are juridically equal and have an inherent right to exercise self-defense and enter into regional defensive alliances, except of course for the State of Palestine. It goes without saying that Israel and the USA look like idiots when they insist that Palestine repeat the mistakes made by the Belgians.

      • Obsidian
        September 17, 2013, 2:19 pm

        That’s von Clausewitz.

        Read a book.

      • Hostage
        September 17, 2013, 11:45 pm

        That’s von Clausewitz.

        Read a book.

        Reading a book on the subject wouldn’t alter the fact that the majority of English authors, editors, publishers, and websites refer to him as “Clausewitz”. So what’s your point?
        For example:
        * The Clausewitz Homepage
        link to clausewitz.com
        * Clausewitz: A Biography
        by Roger Parkinson
        * Clausewitz on Strategy: Inspiration and Insight from a Master Strategist
        edited by Tiha von Ghyczy, Bolko von Oetinger, Christopher Bassford
        * Clausewitz: Philosopher of War
        Raymond Aron
        * The Essential Clausewitz: Selections from On War,
        edited by ‎Joseph I. Greene
        * Reading Clausewitz
        by Beatrice Heuser
        * Clausewitz Reconsidered
        By H. P. Willmott, Michael B. Barrett
        * Clausewitz’s On War: A Biography
        By Hew Strachan

      • Obsidian
        September 19, 2013, 6:43 am

        My point remains that, declared neutrality is no absolute guarantor of safety, as was the case in Belgium.

        Germany had formed battle plans to invade (neutral) Switzerland, but never used them.
        If Switzerland was invaded, the Alps would serve as the ‘national redoubt’ in a war of attrition.

      • Hostage
        September 19, 2013, 7:26 pm

        My point remains that, declared neutrality is no absolute guarantor of safety, as was the case in Belgium.

        Then Palestine should be doing lots of business with the likes of Boeing, General Electric, and Lockheed Martin to counter the Israeli menace.

      • Obsidian
        September 20, 2013, 8:47 am

        You never cede a point, do you?

      • Hostage
        September 20, 2013, 2:57 pm

        You never cede a point, do you?

        You obviously never get tired of peddling lame-assed hasbara talking points or beating the dead horses of Zionism.

    • Elliot
      September 16, 2013, 12:12 pm

      @Obsidian – that’s an apt image. Watch the eye of the hurricane move out of Israel, bringing the West Bank hurricane with it.

    • American
      September 16, 2013, 12:26 pm

      Obsidian says:
      September 16, 2013 at 9:47 am
      All of you overlook the fact the Israel sits within the becalmed eye of the hurricane that is today’s Middle East.”>>>>

      You overlook that that ‘eye’ radiates agression and chaos outward.
      IF it didnt–and was instead a 1) actual multi culture 2) democratic state 3) that maintained a Netural policy toward all 4) Because of, and justifed by, the fact it sits on the Holy Land of the 3 major faiths in the world that no one wants to see destroyed or reduced to rubble…..
      Then it would be a different story.
      If those who wanted to be in their ancient Jewish homeland—-ridculous as I still think that is, but anyway—–had had two brain cells to rub together this is how they would have gone about it.
      This is how they should go about it now if they want to stay there or those winds of change likely will sweep them out some day.
      To do this kind of 180 though they would have to get rid of their zionist.

    • Woody Tanaka
      September 16, 2013, 12:42 pm

      “the becalmed eye of the hurricane”

      What becalmed eye? The Jews of israeli are committing massive violence on a daily basis against their victims.

      • miriam6
        September 16, 2013, 3:04 pm

        Woody@;

        Come on now

        If Israel is , according to you committing massive violence on a daily basis then exactly how would you describe the level of violence in Syria!?!

        In all honesty just for the sake of having some sense of proportion about things can you tone it down a little?

      • marc b.
        September 16, 2013, 3:39 pm

        Egypt. the apt proportional analogy is Egypt, with the near daily maiming, illegal imprisonment and torture of opponents of the regime, mistreatment of the Christian minority, the theft of property to be consolidated in the hands of the state and a select few individuals, etc.

      • Woody Tanaka
        September 16, 2013, 3:51 pm

        “exactly how would you describe the level of violence in Syria!?!”

        A civil war, of course.

        “In all honesty just for the sake of having some sense of proportion about things can you tone it down a little?”

        Hell no. I will not give the damnable zionists the benefit of “toning it down.” They’ve destroyed MILLIONS of lives over the last 6+ decades and continue to do so to this very minute, often in the most inhumane ways, all over of a racist ideology. You don’t tone down criticism of such evil.

      • Danaa
        September 17, 2013, 7:59 pm

        miriam6 – don’t even dare to go on about Syria. the country that israel has been doing everything in its power to pull asunder. We out there, know what the plans were and still are, and what fate the evil ones have decreed for the Syrian people and their country. Israel, in cahoots with the saudi arabian monster-king and his sly Bandar-Bush rasputin-impersonator, brought and are training and equipping the takfiris as we speak. We know who planned and executed that CW attack (hint – it wasn’t assad’s people), and have a pretty good idea how it was done and with whose help.

        Just like we know that israel was largely behind the horrors that have befallen the Iraqi people. I put the murder of over 200,000 Iraqis and the dismantlement of their country, right along with the murderous campaign to do the same to the Syrian people – at Israel’s feet.

        So yes, Miriam, i accuse the israeli collective (some great people excepted) of being as guilty as sin of inhuman behavior, possibly being behind some of the worst atrocities ever committed in human history (I include Iraq and Syria in that, and lebanon of course; and the “plan” they have for iranians). This web site was founded by Phil Weiss to protest the great c\alamity brought upon Iraq and the Iraqi people, thanks to the machinations of israeli war-crime planners aided by their neocon friends in the US.

        So don’t even think of bringing me that gibberish about the “humane” israelis. the saying in israel – taught in my days to all school children in israel from cradle and on was – a good arab is a dead Arab. To which they’d add sometimes, in perfect hebrew – Inshallah! possibly they toned in down some by now, or perhaps they just whisper it. But everyone knows.

        You may not know miriam, because you know absolutely nothing about the Israeli cult and the ugly hive mind that’s come to fruition there. Of course, you can only truly know it if you speak hebrew, which you don’t. Why don’t you take some lessons and go for a visit? i am sure they’ll treat you well….quite humanly too…. you might even learn a couple of things and won’t have to rush back to hasbara central for new talking points (that somehow never seem very new…).

      • talknic
        September 20, 2013, 8:00 pm

        miriam6 “In all honesty…”

        A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA editHA HA (perhaps I went a little too far)

    • Shingo
      September 16, 2013, 4:21 pm

      How long could this fledgling State withstand the violent winds of change that would surround it?

      The same way it withstands it now, though it has yet to be seen if it will.

      Of course, one thing you are ignoring is how central the IP conflict has been to fueling those violent winds to begin with.

      Solve the cause and you more than likely will reduce the conflict.

  9. Marco
    September 16, 2013, 10:08 am

    I’d argue that the left is making a mistake in blithely supporting a one-state solution. Creating a single democratic state in Palestine will only be a pivotal step in solving the conflict between Palestinians and Israeli Jews, not *the* solution itself.

    After all, apartheid in South Africa and Jim Crow in the American South prevailed in what were single states. You could have a single-state that simply perpetuates the oppression of Palestinians. At the very least, the creation of a single-state will need to be followed be a concerted civil rights movement.

    • German Lefty
      September 16, 2013, 10:24 am

      You could have a single-state that simply perpetuates the oppression of Palestinians. At the very least, the creation of a single-state will need to be followed be a concerted civil rights movement.

      Having a single state that simply perpetuates the oppression of Palestinians would be the right-wing version of the one-state solution. Lefties, however, support the left-wing version of the one-state solution. This means that the Zionist regime has to go away.
      Actually, the number of states is secondary. Equality is the primary issue. That’s why BDS focuses on the number of rights, not on the number of states:
      link to en.wikipedia.org

    • freespeechlover
      September 16, 2013, 2:18 pm

      Yes, that is true. The socio-economic disparities alone would require a very robust civil rights movement, and that could also include disenfranchised Israeli citizens, including sectors of the Mizrahim.

    • irishmoses
      September 17, 2013, 11:30 pm

      Marco, German Lefty, freespeechlover, and others:

      The one-state solution has been in place for 46 years. The existing one state solution is apartheid-like as in South Africa and the Jim Crow US south.

      The Israelis and their lobby and their US lackies would prefer we refer to it as a military occupation, but military occupations, which can be legal, typically end within a few years after the cessation of hostilities. The US military occupations of Italy, Japan and Germany after World War 2 ended in 4, 6, and 7 years respectively. The so-called Israeli military occupation of the captured territories is a mask for the permanent occupation, settlement, and de facto annexation of those territories by Israel. Its governance of the single state of Israel-Palestine is nothing less than apartheid in nature, and has been so since its inception in 1967.

      The only remaining question is whether the existing apartheid state of Israel-Palestine can somehow be converted to either a single democratic state of two separate states. I hold little hope for either.

  10. American
    September 16, 2013, 10:50 am

    ‘The stage will be set for ruthless oppression, mass mobilization, riots, brutality, terror, Jewish and Arab emigration and rising tides of international condemnation of Israel. And faced with growing outrage, America will no longer be able to offer unconditional support for Israel. ”

    The long, long and probably violent slog for equality for Palestines in One State is what has held me back on it. But the case for One State becomes more and more compelling every day.

  11. David Nelson
    September 16, 2013, 11:37 am

    Freud on illusions:

    Freud defines religion as an illusion, consisting of “certain dogmas, assertions about facts and conditions of external and internal reality which tell one something that one has not oneself discovered, and which claim that one should give them credence.” Religious concepts are transmitted in three ways and thereby claim our belief. “Firstly because our primal ancestors already believed them; secondly, because we possess proofs which have been handed down to us from antiquity, and thirdly because it is forbidden to raise the question of their authenticity at all.” Psychologically speaking, these beliefs present the phenomena of wish fulfillment, “fulfillments of the oldest, strongest, and most urgent wishes of mankind.” (Ch. 6 pg.38). Among these are the necessity to cling to the existence of the father, the prolongation of earthly existence by a future life, and the immortality of the human soul. To differentiate between an illusion and an error, Freud lists scientific beliefs such as “Aristotle’s belief that vermin are developed out of dung” (pg.39) as errors, but “the assertion made by certain nationalists that the Indo-Germanic race is the only one capable of civilization” is an illusion, simply because of the wishing involved. Put forth more explicitly, “what is characteristic of illusions is that they are derived from human wishes.” (pg. 39) He adds, however, that, “Illusions need not necessarily be false.” (pg.39) He gives the example of a middle-class girl having the illusion that a prince will marry her. While this is unlikely, it is not impossible. The fact that it is grounded in her wishes is what makes it an illusion.”

    link to en.wikipedia.org

    In order for a more perfect illusion to come about in Israel-Palestine, the “wishes” of the various groups must be aligned. The “Jewish State” might be a “wish” in Zionist lore, but it does not resolve with populations on the ground. Democracy is first and foremost about inclusion, without inclusion you do not have democracy. The creation dis-autonomous enclaves in a Swiss cheese fashion in Palestine is not inclusion and is not democracy. It is an impossible illusion.

    • ziusudra
      September 16, 2013, 1:05 pm

      Greetings Donald Nelson,
      Thanking you for your great Input hoping to hear from you again.
      ziusudra

  12. seafoid
    September 16, 2013, 12:00 pm

    Israel is such a mess. Netanyahu is the best man to lead it over the cliff.

    No American dough to help Israeli Jim Crow grow
    would make a great updated civil rights banner or t-shirt

    link to twitter.com
    link to syndicjournal.us

  13. freespeechlover
    September 16, 2013, 2:21 pm

    For better or worse, Israel is an apartheid state, so it is already not a Jewish state. To say that Israel is a Jewish state is to enter the realm of delusion if not hallucination. It is to deny the one state that already exists. Separation is not possible, therefore the question is how to transform the colonizer/colonized relationship that exists today, albeit in different forms in the Occupied Territories and inside the Green Line.

  14. NickJOCW
    September 16, 2013, 5:18 pm

    The question is not whether the future has conflict in store for Israel-Palestine. It does. Nor is the question whether conflict can be prevented. It cannot. But avoiding truly catastrophic change means ending the stifling reign of an outdated idea and allowing both sides to see and then adapt to the world as it is

    Too true. One state will never work while it is thought of as a Jewish state with Palestinians in it, and coming to terms with that may prove the new nation’s greatest challenge.

  15. James Canning
    September 16, 2013, 6:22 pm

    Bravo, NYT for printing this piece. Important. I disagree that planting Jews in West Bank means such areas must be taken from Palestine.

  16. yonah fredman
    September 16, 2013, 6:46 pm

    When Larry Derfner and Shlomo Sand agree that a two state solution is the path towards peace and that a one state solution is a recipe for conflict, I depend on them. Both of them are people over 55 and therefore I am open ears to hear from younger people with other ideas. All ideas are welcome although many will be scoffed at, but when you get Derfner or Sand to endorse any idea, let me know and I will pay extra special attention.

    • Shingo
      September 17, 2013, 3:16 am

      When Larry Derfner and Shlomo Sand agree that a two state solution is the path towards peace and that a one state solution is a recipe for conflict, I depend on them.

      So I take it you also accept that the Jewish people were invented and that the majority of Jews are converts to the religion right Yonah?

      BTW. When did Sand reject the 1ss?

      • miriam6
        September 17, 2013, 7:51 am

        Shingo@;

        BTW. When did Sand reject the 1ss?

        “You cannot recognize Israel’s right to exist and recognize the right of return for six million Palestinians. It is an oxymoron,” he said.

        “Unlike a lot of other leftists I am not in favor of a one-state solution,” he said referring to the proposed incorporation of Palestinians and Jews into a single state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.

        When pushed, Sand will admit that he is not “morally opposed” to one-state but that it is merely a “dream,” not a serious political project.

        “To have one state for the two societies you need the consensus of both societies, and right now most Israelis don’t want that,” he said.

        link to tabletmag.

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 8:16 am

        @miriam6
        Apparently, you can’t read. Sand is not opposed to the one-state solution. He just thinks that it’s unlikely.
        Besides, I don’t see why the Israeli Jews’ approval of a one-state solution is needed. It’s solely up to the Palestinians how many states should be established on their land.

      • miriam6
        September 17, 2013, 8:34 am

        GL@;

        Apparently YOU cannot read.

        Sand said QUITE CLEARLY right here in this sentence the following;
        ( and take particular note of the bold lettering)

        “Unlike a lot of other leftists I am not in favor of a one-state solution,”

        Again ;

        When pushed, Sand will admit that he is not “morally opposed” to one-state but that it is merely a “dream,” not a serious political project.

      • German Lefty
        September 17, 2013, 2:45 pm

        @ miriam6
        “Not in favour” is not the same as “reject” or “oppose”. Just because he’s not for it doesn’t necessarily mean that he’s against it. He might well be neutral. Furthermore, he stated that he is “not morally opposed” to one state.

      • Shingo
        September 17, 2013, 3:51 pm

        When pushed, Sand will admit that he is not “morally opposed” to one-state but that it is merely a “dream,” not a serious political project.

        Thank you for highlighting the relevant parts in bold Miriam.

        In his own words, Sand is not opposed to a 1ss, but doesn’t believe it is possible.

        It’s clearly YOU that cannot read.

      • Ellen
        September 18, 2013, 1:17 am

        Germany Lefty seems to be an excellent reader. The text reads that Sands is not opposed to a Single State, but he clearly does not see it workable or even possible unless and until both parties agree. Nor does he see that happening. There may be much practical truth in his view. And wouldn’t it be wonderful if something like an agreement could happen? (Practically impossible as too many powerful interests keep the conflict alive on all sides. )

        But maybe something akin to the Northern Ireland peace agreement? The Northern Irish Protestants (ancestors moved in from Scotland way back in the day to occupy) would have to agree to a unified Ireland and break from the UK before it could ever happen. Unlikely for many generations, if at all.

        Along this thought, maybe Israel will become the 51st State of the US and then its citizens keep a peace within Palestine. And then the US gets stuck with Israel. But isn’t it already? After all, hasn’t our government pledged itself to protecting Israel no matter the costs?

      • Hostage
        September 18, 2013, 9:05 am

        Along this thought, maybe Israel will become the 51st State of the US

        The U.S. Constitution won’t allow for the existence or maintenance of a Jewish state as part of the union.

      • amigo
        September 18, 2013, 1:17 pm

        “But maybe something akin to the Northern Ireland peace agreement? The Northern Irish Protestants (ancestors moved in from Scotland way back in the day to occupy) would have to agree to a unified Ireland and break from the UK before it could ever happen. Unlikely for many generations, if at all.”Ellen.

        not so Ellen.All that is required under the Good Friday Agreement is a majority in the North agreeing to secede from the UK and become part of a united Ireland.

        Britain has agreed to this.

        Cannot find that link just now but it is out there.

      • James Canning
        September 18, 2013, 1:54 pm

        Some Israelis would like to be part of the EU. And Nato.

      • Hostage
        September 19, 2013, 8:45 am

        All that is required under the Good Friday Agreement is a majority in the North agreeing to secede from the UK and become part of a united Ireland. Britain has agreed to this. Cannot find that link just now but it is out there.

        You are talking about:

        ARTICLE 1
        The two Governments:
        (i) recognise the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland with regard to its status, whether they prefer to continue to support the Union with Great Britain or a sovereign united Ireland;
        (ii) recognise that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively and without external impediment, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish, accepting that this right must be achieved and exercised with and subject to the agreement and consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland;
        (iii) acknowledge that while a substantial section of the people in Northern Ireland share the legitimate wish of a majority of the people of the island of Ireland for a united Ireland, the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the Union and accordingly, that Northern Ireland’s status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish; and that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with the consent of a majority of its people;
        (iv) affirm that, if in the future, the people of the island of Ireland exercise their right of self-determination on the basis set out in sections (i) and (ii) above to bring about a united Ireland, it will be a binding obligation on both Governments to introduce and support in their respective Parliaments legislation to give effect to that wish;

        link to cain.ulst.ac.uk

  17. lysias
    September 16, 2013, 6:53 pm

    Threatens catastrophe indeed, considering that Israel has all those nukes.

  18. miriam6
    September 17, 2013, 7:19 am

    Mizrahi writer and activist Lyn Julius on the one state solution.

    link to blogs.timesofisrael.com

    • amigo
      September 18, 2013, 5:17 am

      M6, If you zionist freaks are so against the 1SS why do you keep building it???.

      Oh, I forgot,you and your fellow brit , Julius are comfy sitting back in England supporting the construction of a hell you wont have to live in.

      “Lyn Julius is a journalist and co-founder of Harif, an association of Jews from the Middle East and North Africa in the UK”

      I am still waiting for an answer on the matter of Jewish terrorists hanging your fellow Brits from a tree and then booby trapping their bodies.

      Too hot to handle , eh mate.

  19. Obsidian
    September 17, 2013, 9:58 am

    Lustick piece shredded to pulp.

    link to arunwithaview.wordpress.com

    • piotr
      September 17, 2013, 10:59 am

      One sentence from the so-proclaimed shredding: “And as the parties to the negotiations—Israel, Palestinian Authority, the US—are formally committed to the two-state objective—however unlikely this may seem in the foreseeable future—, one simply cannot pronounce it dead and buried.”

      However unlikely? If even somewhat unlikely, say, “preponderance of evidence”, then upon what authority can we forbid “pronouncing it dead and buried”? I say that the blades of this shredder are made of brittle plastic.

      • OlegR
        September 17, 2013, 11:19 am

        You should read on it gets better :)

      • Shingo
        September 17, 2013, 5:01 pm

        You should read on it gets better :)

        If by better you mean more desperate and ridiculous. ;)

        No wonder only 3 people can be bothers to read this clown.

      • piotr
        September 17, 2013, 8:30 pm

        Oleg, is your :) an expression of joy upon reading a rare gem of an argument or a derision?

        In my opinion, Lustick avoids stating the real problem with “two state solution as practiced”, but alludes to it, while Arun goes to incredible mental contortions to “defend” something that he clearly detests. Two further quotes:

        In re to the “peace process,” so long as this continues, however fitfully, and the two-state solution is the only one on the table, then that solution necessarily remains within the realm of the possible.

        However fitfully. Indeed. As long as Johnny at least pretends to read the textbooks, he will pass his exams. If not this year then some time in the future. The fact is that certain things require some minimum energy expenditure to happen, and that we manifestly do not see in the “peace process”.

        As for evacuating enough West Bank settlers to allow a Palestinian state to exist, it’s pretty much understood on all sides that the great majority of settlers will stay where they are, with the big blocs annexed to Israel, lands swaps, etc. Professor Lustick knows this.

        And what are those fabled “blocks”? And who is that “great majority on all sides”? The map proposed by Dennis Ross illustrates the problem:
        link to nytimes.com
        Number one, it leaves Palestine looking like a piece of carrion after a feast of crows. No Palestinian would accept it, regardless of the pressure (with possible exception of employees of some think tanks). Number two, no government of Israel will accept is without a much larger pressure that is possible under the current political climate — as the latter precludes ANY pressure on Israel.

        Importantly, denizens of the blessed planet where “majority of all sides understand that the great majority of settlers will stay where they are” oppose any pressure, including the pressure to expand settlements and to close settlements “outside the blocks”. It is like advocating to start a car while refusing any steps that could lead to filling the tank with gasoline.

      • OlegR
        September 18, 2013, 8:20 am

        /Oleg, is your :) an expression of joy upon reading a rare gem of an argument or a derision?/
        It can’t be both ? :)

        You are making the mistake of thinking that Arun defends 2ss in his article
        I would say that he sees it as pretty improbable but the only game in town.
        What does do is shred to bits Lustigs article regarding the 1ss
        which he does rather well in my opinion.

    • Shingo
      September 17, 2013, 4:59 pm

      Lustick piece shredded to pulp.

      In your dreams. This flat earther is just another useful idiot of the J Street persuasion who’s idea of coping with reality is to place his hands over his ears and scream “la, la, la, I’m not listening”, while refusing to recognize the the 2ss is dead.

      And wow, look at his readership!! 3 comments (probably his pen family members) is all he can scrape together.

    • Sibiriak
      September 17, 2013, 8:00 pm

      Obsidian says:

      Lustick piece shredded to pulp.
      link to arunwithaview.wordpress.com

      I’ve read clearer, more compelling, less sarcasm-infused arguments against a 1SS, but the author does raise some important issues.

      For example:

      Professor Lustick simply asserts this, after which he moves on to this pearl:

      Strong Islamist trends make a fundamentalist Palestine more likely than a small state under a secular government.

      I don’t get the bit here about a “small state.” Is Professor Lustick suggesting that a fundamentalist Palestine is more likely than a secular one only if the latter is “small”—presumably limited to the West Bank and maybe Gaza—or that a fundamentalist Palestine is more likely tout court?

      As for strong Islamist trends, it is odd that Professor Lustick would write this in September 2013, with all that’s happened in Egypt this summer, Bashar al-Assad gaining the upper hand in Syria (for the time being, at least), and the Tunisian Ennahda on the defensive, entre autres. Now it should be said that if an entirely free-and-fair election had taken place on the West Bank these past few years, one would have confidently predicted a Hamas victory over the corrupt, sclerotic Fatah—though it should also be said that there is not the slightest chance of Hamas contesting any election on the West Bank (or of Hamas allowing Fatah to do so in Gaza), now or in the foreseeable future. But in the hypothetical event that such an election were to be organized, say, next week, one would predict a Hamas victory with far less confidence; again, due to the new situation in Egypt, the fiasco of Morsi’s presidency, and the fact that Gaza, thanks to the Egyptian military regime, really is an open air prison now. Hamas is thoroughly isolated and no one is going to come to its rescue—not Tayyip Erdoğan, Qatar’s Sheikh Tamim, or anyone. Khaled Mashal will not be setting foot in Palestine anytime soon.

      I’m not sufficiently well-informed on Palestinian politics to be able to make a judgment on this issue, but it’s an interesting one, imo.

      This is where the author goes off the rails though:

      the disappearance of Israel as a Zionist project? Insofar as the existence of Israel is inseparable from the Zionist project, this signifies the disappearance of Israel tout court. But how does a fully constituted nation and state disappear short of its inhabitants being exterminated?

      Demagoguery, pure and simple. A 1SS means the disappearance of Israel –true–but that hardly implies extermination! If it ever came to that point, many Jews would simply leave, and those remaining would become a minority in a non-Zionist Palestinian state.

      • RoHa
        September 17, 2013, 10:47 pm

        “But how does a fully constituted nation and state disappear short of its inhabitants being exterminated?”

        Perhaps the fully constituted nation and state of East Germany could provide a clue.

      • Hostage
        September 18, 2013, 8:53 am

        Perhaps the fully constituted nation and state of East Germany could provide a clue.

        Exactly. For that matter there are several modern-day examples of countries that emerged from occupation and annexation despite predictions to the contrary, e.g. East Timor, Namibia, and the Baltic states.

  20. OlegR
    September 17, 2013, 10:52 am

    As long as we are in fantasy land how about this fun scenario.

    Seeing the way the world feebly responds to the worst of surrounding atrocities.
    The Israeli public gets even more paranoid than it is right now.
    When a war finally breaks with Iran and the Palestinians foolishly join in a new
    armed struggle in a midst if shooting and the missiles exchanges the IDF in force
    (Think Cast Lead on steroids but without the white phosphorus no need to aggravate )
    recaptures the Palestinians towns sending a stream of new refugees into the already crumbling Kingdom of Jordan.
    When the dust settles Israel annexes Judea and Samaria now almost completely vacant of Palestinians and give full citizen rights to whoever is left a (couple hundred thousands).

    All the while MWer’s spill tons of words of outrage and condemnation and suck on a lemon.

    • Shingo
      September 17, 2013, 4:52 pm

      The Israeli public gets even more paranoid than it is right now.

      The Israeli public get more paranoid no matter whey happens, because their paranoia has always been stoked by their leaders.

      As is the care with the US, most Israelis would be completely ignorant of the fact their own intelligence says Iran is not making nukes and would only ever build one to deter an attack anyway.

      When a war finally breaks with Iran and the Palestinians foolishly join in a new
      armed struggle in a midst if shooting and the missiles exchanges the IDF in force
      (Think Cast Lead on steroids but without the white phosphorus no need to aggravate )
      recaptures the Palestinians towns sending a stream of new refugees into the already crumbling Kingdom of Jordan.

      Thanks for so eloquently laying out Bibbi’s final solution for the Palestinian problem and why his obsession with Iran and desire for war with Iran has absolutely nothing to do with nukes and everything to do with:

      a) diverging the world’d attention from Israel’s criminality in the OT

      and

      b) His/Israel’s plans to justify the final capture of the territory without having to include the Palestinians in it.

      This all remains consistent with what Eskhol described as Israel’s desire to steel the dowry without the bride.

      • OlegR
        September 18, 2013, 8:25 am

        /The Israeli public get more paranoid no matter whey happens, because their paranoia has always been stoked by their leaders./

        Yes well all those massacred Syrian civilians a few kilometers away aren’t helping either.

        /As is the care with the US, most Israelis would be completely ignorant of the fact their own intelligence says Iran is not making nukes and would only ever build one to deter an attack anyway./

        I didn’t know you were the spokesperson for Mossad.

        /a) diverging the world’d attention from Israel’s criminality in the OT/
        I think the world kinda lost his high moral ground (which wasn’t wery high in the first place) over the last few month.

      • Shingo
        September 20, 2013, 7:20 pm

        Yes well all those massacred Syrian civilians a few kilometers away aren’t helping either.

        Israel is helping the rebels carry out those massacres so cry me a river.

        I didn’t know you were the spokesperson for Mossad.

        I am not, Mossad is and that’s what they have reported to the US.,

    • tree
      September 17, 2013, 5:44 pm

      You are making a big assumption that Israel would survive a war with Iran, without the vast majority of Israelis abandoning ship, so to speak. Many, if not most, of them abandoned the north during the 2006 Lebanon War, and only stayed put if they were out of range of Hezbollah missiles. No one in Israel will be out of range of an Iranian missile if Israel starts a war with Iran. Are you really so twisted as to call this a “fun scenario”? Is the perversely banal thought of some unseen commenter “sucking on a lemon” worth the human destruction?

      • just
        September 17, 2013, 6:03 pm

        exactly, tree.

        Oleg– you seem to thirst for war and mayhem and blood.

        Sad, that. It’s seriously deranged and pitiful, indeed.

      • Shingo
        September 17, 2013, 6:24 pm

        Oleg– you seem to thirst for war and mayhem and blood.

        It’s to be expected as it’s a well known trait among Kazars.

      • OlegR
        September 18, 2013, 8:28 am

        It’s Khazars shingo …

      • miriam6
        September 18, 2013, 10:25 am

        Shingo@;

        Did you not once say you were part Jewish yourself Shingo?

        So your slur/stereotype must therefore somehow also pertain to you?

        Given that you are part ‘Khazar’ as well?

        Oleg– you seem to thirst for war and mayhem and blood.
        It’s to be expected as it’s a well known trait among Kazars.

      • Shingo
        September 19, 2013, 12:00 am

        Did you not once say you were part Jewish yourself Shingo?

        Only insofar as my mother’s mother was Jewish, but no, I was not raised Jewish.

      • OlegR
        September 18, 2013, 8:27 am

        /You are making a big assumption that Israel would survive a war with Iran, without the vast majority of Israelis abandoning ship, so to speak./

        Ahh yes the spiders web analogy from Nasrallah.
        How is he doing in his bunker btw , must be hard without enough sunlight?

      • Shingo
        September 19, 2013, 12:03 am

        How is he doing in his bunker btw , must be hard without enough sunlight?

        Better than Ariel Sharon I’d say. He’s already outlasted at least Israeli Prime ministers.

  21. Hostage
    September 17, 2013, 11:11 am

    Lustick piece shredded to pulp.

    link to arunwithaview.wordpress.com

    More like a laughable attempt to convince dimwits that there isn’t already a de facto state in all of the West Bank, including Jerusalem with Israel legalizing outposts it already agreed to remove.

    Israel won’t even stop building settlements and transferring settlers into Palestine long enough to sit at the so-called negotiating table, much less seriously discuss the eventual removal of one-tenth of its population from Palestine. A majority of Netanyahu’s coalition have already publicly stated as much. Here is the latest example: See MKs Urge PM: Tell Kerry Oslo is Dead: In a message, MKs of the coalition urged the Prime Minister to tell the visiting John Kerry that there will be no more withdrawals link to israelnationalnews.com

    The author is really only lying to himself and others when he falsely asserts that the government of Israel supports or is committed to a two state solution. This is nothing but unsupported propaganda:

    Advocates of the two-state solution admit to a man or woman that getting there will be arduous, and many (myself among them) are not too optimistic, but none—not to my knowledge, at least—are portraying it as implausible or no longer possible. And as the parties to the negotiations—Israel, Palestinian Authority, the US—are formally committed to the two-state objective—however unlikely this may seem in the foreseeable future—, one simply cannot pronounce it dead and buried.

    I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for the NYTimes to reprint it for their readers.

    • OlegR
      September 17, 2013, 11:21 am

      Not until we annex the whole lot which we won’t.
      Sorry Hostage no amount of legalistic BS can help you here.
      We don’t run the PA they run themselves.
      And that ain’t gonna change for the foreseeable future.

      • Walid
        September 17, 2013, 4:44 pm

        Oleg, here’s another that doesn’t agree with you, it’s Avraham Burg in Haretz from a couple of years back:

        Palestinians should vote in Jerusalem elections
        We are the only democracy in the Middle East, but for Jews alone.

        … Anyone who is not prepared to do anything to promote two states today – and who is not prepared to pay the price by evacuating the settlements – will, in the end, have to concede all of the state of Israel. That is to say, the Jewish and not so democratic state will be renounced in favor of a legitimate democratic process in which everyone between the Jordan River and the sea has one basic right – the human and civic equality to elect and to be elected. They will have at least the very same rights that are enjoyed by Obama and his new friend who knows just how to manipulate him, Netanyahu.

        link to haaretz.com

      • OlegR
        September 18, 2013, 8:30 am

        I would imagine Avraaham Burg and i disagree on a lot of things ,
        his post Zionism is one of them but nice attempt at “argument from authority”

        link to en.wikipedia.org

      • Hostage
        September 17, 2013, 6:37 pm

        Sorry Hostage no amount of legalistic BS can help you here.

        Sorry OlegR, but the ICJ wasn’t swayed by the Zionist bullshit about annexation. It noted that the PA isn’t running things and that Israel is illegally interfering with the ability of Palestinians to exercise self-determination and sovereignty over their resources and territory.

        Nobody takes you dimwits seriously when you come here and shoot off your mouths about what will or won’t change. If anything is certain, it’s that there aren’t any prophets in Israel doing talkbacks for your side.

      • OlegR
        September 18, 2013, 8:36 am

        ICJ being what , oh i know .
        Impotent Contentious Jerks ?

        Hostage get it dude nobody on your side even bothers reading all the tons of legalistic BS that you spill here daily.Or understands them.That why they love you here so much.
        You are like the ultimate argument from authority but the authority is hollow man.

        That naivete about ICJ somehow solving all the problems.
        Since when did the threat of legal action caused a nation to commit what it sees as a suicide ?
        Wake up man.

      • Hostage
        September 18, 2013, 11:47 am

        You are like the ultimate argument from authority but the authority is hollow man.

        Not really, since international law illustrates common ideals that Zionists can’t tolerate and won’t accept. If that weren’t true, why do so many of you run around shreying about the horrors of delegitimization?

        That naivete about ICJ somehow solving all the problems.

        No, I just believe that there will be a BDS Movement, Israeli Apartheid Week, and lots of people here to remind you about that ICJ judgment until Israel’s persistent violations of international law are finally brought to an end and Zionists embrace justice and genuine peace.

        Since when did the threat of legal action caused a nation to commit what it sees as a suicide ?

        Careful, your mental illness is still showing. Only Zionists view the enjoyment of equal human rights by others or trading land acquired through illicit wars for peace as something tantamount to physical death or amputation. You’re the one who needs to wake up and listen to what you are saying.

        P.S. Engaging in lawlessness and denying your victims recourse to agreed upon legal remedies simply strengthens the position of those who claim that their only option is to take the law into their own hands and engage in armed conflict.

      • Annie Robbins
        September 18, 2013, 11:56 am

        oleg, what kind of argument is this? ‘the icj are jerks and nobody reads you anyway?’ lol. if that’s all you’ve got left in your arsenal of retorts i’d say case closed and chalk another ‘win’ for hostage!

      • American
        September 18, 2013, 12:06 pm

        ”oleg, what kind of argument is this?”

        It’s the arguement of the losers.

      • amigo
        September 18, 2013, 12:59 pm

        “Hostage get it dude nobody on your side even bothers reading all the tons of legalistic BS that you spill here daily.Or understands them.That why they love you here so much.” olegless

        He certainly puts you in your place as evidenced by your responses.

        I envy you olegless, you have much to learn.

      • eljay
        September 18, 2013, 2:42 pm

        >> Since when did the threat of legal action caused a nation to commit what it sees as a suicide ?

        If a state views adherence to international law as suicide, there’s a fundamental problem with the nature of that state.

        Wake up man!

      • Shingo
        September 19, 2013, 12:09 am

        Since when did the threat of legal action caused a nation to commit what it sees as a suicide ?

        A heroin addict might think that giving up junk is suicide, but it’s clearly not. An act of suicide involves doing something that is likely to lead to one’s self destruction. Israel existed for 20 years without the occupied territories and EJ, so it’s demonstrably false to suggest returning these territories is an act of suicide.

  22. pipistro
    September 17, 2013, 1:01 pm

    “I don’t see any evidence that the armed Palestinian militias are ready to lay down their weapons and end the international armed conflict/insurrection against Israel and its government.”

    “Words…
    It’s an iron wall, a psychological wall. Hard to break through. The worst. Nevertheless, it doesn’t need anything more than what words can do to implement the power of those who found out the way to benefit of it.
    First, terrorism. It should be the murderous and residual weapon of what’s supposed to be the weaker party. States with regular armies shouldn’t need to use terrorism. They do. Because it’s often cheaper and always misleading. Moreover, as they decide who is terrorist and who is not, they can use this mere noun as a powerful weapon, so that, by labelling the enemy in front of the world, they are able to cover all what they can’t reach with ordinary arms. It’s the strength of politics and deception.
    What happens in Palestine without this word terrorism? What happens without the anti-semitism bullets, i.e. the Holocaust exploitation based on the blind sense of guilt of Europe, on the inner bad faith of the Zionists and on crass ignorance of a great part of the world?
    And money…
    And what happens – last but not least – without US money that was gained by blackmail thanks the Israel Lobby? In this latter respect, Israeli financing itself through the Lobby is the most profitable investment one can imagine. Pay one, gain hundreds.
    Money, yes. That is not psychological. By the way, I would argue that there are also some people in the neighborhood, now and then, that sell their dignity and their brothers’ life for some loose change. But we can try not to unite people’s attitude with their leaders’ behaviour.
    Heavy burden, then, upon Palestinian shoulders. I guess the last sixty years of Palestine history would have been otherwise very different. On the contrary, although Israelis have been experiencing a mere prevedibile reaction to any occupation, have benefited, since no one dares to expose their egregious crimes, thanks the omnipresent antisemyth-weapon, with the yearly award for the luckiest occupiers in the world.”

  23. Obsidian
    September 17, 2013, 2:16 pm

    Well, I guess it’s up the PA and the Palestinian people to negotiate with Israel and create a de jure Palestinian State.

    Wait. They’re attempting to do that as we speak.

    • Woody Tanaka
      September 17, 2013, 2:36 pm

      “Well, I guess it’s up the PA and the Palestinian people to negotiate with Israel and create a de jure Palestinian State.”

      False. There already exists a de jure Palestinian State that is recognized by the vast majority of the world and its people. What they’re attempting is to get the israeli state’s recognition of Palestine. Nothing more.

  24. irmep
    September 17, 2013, 7:02 pm

    link to timesofisrael.com

    Appears that Netanyahu is up for a final ethnic cleansing push, if this account it true.

  25. Hostage
    September 17, 2013, 8:28 pm

    Well, I guess it’s up the PA and the Palestinian people to negotiate with Israel and create a de jure Palestinian State.

    There already is a de jure Palestinian state. See Abbas changes name of Palestinian Authority to ‘State of Palestine’ link to timesofisrael.com

    In case you missed it, the UN General Assembly upgraded its observer status so that it could pursue legal as well as political solutions.

    The US and Israel are pretending to negotiate with its government right now in order to prevent it from harrassing their officials in the international courts for the next eight months.

    • OlegR
      September 18, 2013, 8:39 am

      Ok it’s all over then .
      Party is over no more conflict they got their state and you guys can all go home…

  26. Hostage
    September 18, 2013, 11:29 am

    Ok it’s all over then .
    Party is over no more conflict they got their state and you guys can all go home…

    They got their state de jure, now they need to dismantle the Israeli de facto apartheid regime.

Leave a Reply