Trending Topics:

Palestinian negotiators angered as Kerry proposes Israeli demands

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 106 Comments

John Kerry met with Benjamin Netanyahu today after a tense meeting with Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah last night.  According to Israeli Channel 2, Kerry is pushing to lead a three-party summit with Abbas and Netanyahu.  The U.S. Secretary of State wants the summit to produce a framework agreement which would lay out the terms for the continuing talks.  Kerry wants to convene the summit in the next few weeks and to have the agreement include parameters for all major issues to be negotiated.

Last night, a snowy Thursday evening, Kerry met in Ramallah with Palestine Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.  The chilly weather was said to reflect the mood of his Palestinian interlocutors who are angered by the Secretary’s recent ideas, ideas which to them appear to mirror Israeli positions.

The Americans told Palestinian officials they hope to have both sides sign a framework agreement quickly.  The framework agreement would then be the basis of a six- month to one- year negotiation in which the sides would work out the details of a peace agreement.

As reported in Ha’aretz, according to senior Palestinian advisor, the atmosphere at the meeting last night was not good because of “American pressure.”  The Americans want an Israeli presence in the Jordan Valley for a period of 10 to 15 years.  The Palestinians have publicly stated that they would accept an international military presence in their future state, but would not agree to any Israeli military deployment on their territory.

Palestinian negotiators argue that they received assurances in Washington in 2008 from General James Jones that the Americans would reject a continued Israeli military presence in the Jordan Valley. Despite his public statements, leaks from the negotiations claim that Abbas is willing to accept the Israeli military in the Jordan Valley for “three years or a bit more.”

A senior Palestinian official who was present last night complained that “the American tendency is to adopt most of the Israeli demands, whether you are talking about security arrangements or obtaining an interim agreement which is contrary to all the Palestinian declarations prior to restarting the negotiations.”  The Palestinians have often stated that they oppose any interim solutions because they fear that any temporary arrangement could become permanent thus denying them their goal of an independent and viable state.  Initially Kerry stated that he was seeking a permanent final agreement, but his recent statements appear to contradict that.

Kerry angered the Palestinians last week when he suggested that a planned prisoner release of Palestinians held in Israeli prisons be delayed for a month.  The Palestinians said that Kerry was inappropriately trying to pressure them into accepting the security terms he had proposed.

Earlier this week Ha’aretz reported that Kerry withdrew his request for delaying the prisoner release at a Washington meeting with Palestinian head negotiator Saeb Erekat last Monday.  Today in answer to a question at a short press conference before leaving Israel, Kerry confirmed that the prisoner release will take place as planned on December 29.

Erekat was in Washington to attend Haim Saban’s Forum on U.S. – Israeli policy, which featured both President Obama and Kerry.  Both Obama and Kerry addressed the current negotiations while paying homage to Haim Saban, who is a super-rich, Israel first, Israeli-American Democratic party mega donor.  Prime Minister Netanyahu addressed the forum by video from Jerusalem.

Tzipi Livni, the Israel Minister of Justice and lead negotiator, was also present at the Saban Forum, so both Livni and Erekat had a chance to continue their talks in Washington.  They met for seven hours on Sunday and then resumed discussions on Monday, at which time they were joined by Kerry and Martin Indyk, the chief U.S. envoy to the negotiations.

Although there are many disparaging public comments from both Israeli and Palestinian officials about the chances that the Kerry talks will succeed, it is clear that those involved in the negotiations are still very much committed to sitting hour after hour with each other and with the American, to hear what Kerry has in mind.

However,  both sides could be just going through the motions in order to honor their pledge to the U.S. Secretary that they would continue the effort for the full nine- month period allotted to the negotiations.  Maybe fear that the side that stops negotiating would be blamed for failure to make peace is what is keeping the negotiations afloat.

Ira Glunts
About Ira Glunts

Ira Glunts is a retired college librarian who lives in Madison, NY. His twitter handle is @abushalom

Other posts by .


Posted In:

106 Responses

  1. just
    just
    December 13, 2013, 11:54 am

    These 9 months have turned out to be a terrible pregnancy, one doomed to give birth to more genocide, mayhem, and theft by the Israelis– aided and abetted by us.

    The Palestinians should head straight to the UN in order that the spawn of satan not be born.

    • pabelmont
      pabelmont
      December 13, 2013, 12:26 pm

      Agreed. The USA just cannot escape the old (but apparently still current) rules that the USA must do as big-money, big-corporations, BIG-ZION tell it to do.

      Maybe the UN or ICC could make a difference. Maybe the EU (Holland seems to be the first) are doing something, but the USA is acting, as always, as a Zionist lap-dog.

      • Stephen Shenfield
        Stephen Shenfield
        December 13, 2013, 5:11 pm

        I know the Zionist lobby is an important factor always present in the background, but I think the immediate cause of the tendency of American politicians like Kerry to take the Israeli side is that they perceive Israeli Jews as “Western” people like themselves and Palestinians as strange and exotic beings. The tendency is exacerbated by the especially “American” characteristics of Netanyahu (at a superficial level, but that is the level that counts). They spend much more time with Israeli than with Palestinian leaders and the Israelis make good use of their greater access to inculcate their perspective. Only those like Jones with a deeper understanding of the region have a chance of withstanding the brainwashing.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 13, 2013, 7:07 pm

        @Stephen —

        That’s an excellent point. There is a large Palestinian population in America. Diana Buttu (Canadian) is an incredibly effective spokesperson because she thinks like a westerner. She’s a better than average politician by domestic standards as a spokesperson… I know she’s on the outs with Abbas and Erkat but someone like her would do a world of good.

        She projects an air of being a tough negotiator but someone with whom I could imagine peace.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 13, 2013, 9:23 pm

        There is a large Palestinian population in America. Diana Buttu (Canadian) is an incredibly effective spokesperson because she thinks like a westerner.

        The Palestinians don’t need anymore politicians, they desperately need good lawyers versed in international criminal law. Contrary to popular misconceptions, Buttu served as a legal advisor to the Palestinian Negotiations Support Unit in its negotiations with Israel and later as an advisor to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/experts/2443/diana_buttu.html

        There are +120 state parties to various treaties which say that foreign military occupations are illegal. The Palestinians have resolutions in hand, adopted during Emergency Special Sessions of the General Assembly which explicitly state that Israel’s continued occupation of Arab territories in violation of UN resolutions satisfies the customary Definition of Aggression (14 December 1974) contained in A/RES/3314 (XXIX).

        It’s ludicrous for John Kerry to try and negotiate a framework agreement that violates so many norms of international law, since Articles 52 and 53 of the UN Law of Treaties would render it null and void in any event.

  2. amigo
    amigo
    December 13, 2013, 1:45 pm

    Israel,s hypocrisy shows again.

    Israel is demanding a stepped process in dealing with the Palestinians but will not entertain anything but all or nothing wrt to Iran.

    I get so tired of this farce after 30 years following it.

    Drop this BS Abass and go to the Hague and put some pressure on Israel and it,s criminals and their morally bankrupt apologists.

    • JeffB
      JeffB
      December 13, 2013, 5:19 pm

      @Amigo

      Drop this BS Abass and go to the Hague and put some pressure on Israel and it,s criminals and their morally bankrupt apologists.

      The Zionist in me agrees: Oh please Abass, publicly embarrass the President and the Secretary of State by bypassing them and ignoring their process. Make sure that Israel has a free hand until at least 2017 and probably late 2020.

      In exchange they will get the a piece of paper along the lines of, “The following 25 Israelis are jerks and if we had the power arrest them, and weren’t terrified of what holding them would mean even if they do accidentally do end up in a place where arresting them were possible we would definitely toss them in jail”.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 13, 2013, 6:13 pm

        Make sure that Israel has a free hand until at least 2017 and probably late 2020.

        You must be the only one here, apart from Mahane, who thinks that won’t happen regardless.

        In exchange they will get the a piece of paper along the lines of, “The following 25 Israelis are jerks and if we had the power arrest them

        Actually it will compel all signatories to the ICC to be compelled to arrest those jerks should they set foot in the countries. It would also compel the to adopt or implement trade embargoes and freeze assets.

        So your beloved apartheid fascist leaders would end up coiled up in Israel and free to travel only to Washington while their biggest trade partners cut ties and the country descends into an economic black hole.

        So yeah, talk tough and enjoy the status quo while you can, because it’s about to go pear shaped.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 13, 2013, 7:15 pm

        @Shingo

        Actually it will compel all signatories to the ICC to be compelled to arrest those jerks should they set foot in the countries.

        Yep. Just like the arrest warrant against Livni compelled the British government not to see her off but instead arrest her. We just had a test of these warrants with Robert Seldon Lady. Even when they do arrest them once the arresting force understands they are up against an intelligence service they let them go.

        But even if not. So what. Those 25 won’t be the first to die (or effectively die) for Israel they won’t be the last. They will be martyrs and heroes forever.

        So yeah, talk tough and enjoy the status quo while you can, because it’s about to go pear shaped.

        When? I’ve been hearing about how the world is about ready to gang up on Israel since the 1996 bombings. So when exactly does the huge gang up on Israel start? When should I expect Israel’s GDP to be 10% lower than its all time high (a moderate depression) as a result of sanction?

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 13, 2013, 8:01 pm

        Just like the arrest warrant against Livni compelled the British government not to see her off but instead arrest her.

        Let’s see the British government try that kind of stunt once the ICC issues a subpoena for those war criminals.

        Those 25 won’t be the first to die (or effectively die) for Israel they won’t be the last. They will be martyrs and heroes forever.

        Martyrs where? In Israel? I suppose by that logic, Eichmann was a martyr for the Nazi party – a fat lot of good that did them.

        The fact that in spite of your bravado and bluster, Isrsael is skit scared of this outcome, which is why Avichai Mandelblit, a senior Israel Defense Forces (IDF) official at the time, warned that PA (Palestinian Authority) pursuit of Israel through the ICC would be viewed as war by the GOI (Government of Israel).

        I’ve been hearing about how the world is about ready to gang up on Israel since the 1996 bombings.

        It won’t be necessary for anyone to gang up on Israel, just stop trading with them. With the economy tanking, Israel will collapse and all those Israelis will dust of their second passports and put them to use, just as all the skilled and educated Israelis are already doing.
        http://www.haaretz.com/business/.premium-1.551116

        When should I expect Israel’s GDP to be 10% lower than its all time high (a moderate depression) as a result of sanction?

        As soon as Europe, it’s biggest trading partner, implements sanctions.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 13, 2013, 8:59 pm

        Yep. Just like the arrest warrant against Livni compelled the British government not to see her off but instead arrest her.

        No one here is talking about actions initiated by private parties through a British court. We are discussing arrest warrants issued by the ICC and the resulting Interpol red notices to non-member states.

        FYI, Livni talked nonsense about going to the UK to test the law, but I notice she nonetheless kept her *ss at home in Israel until the law there was officially changed – and it is not applicable to warrants issued by the ICC:

        The procedures for arrest and surrender of suspects requested by the ICC are intended to be as straightforward as possible. Extradition procedures have not been used. The process in the UK Act is based on the legislation which was drawn up for the swift transfer of suspects between the UK and Ireland, which became the model for the arrest and surrender of suspects to the two International Criminal Tribunals for former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

        The principle behind the UK’s approach is that the International Criminal Court is the body where any legal difficulties should be resolved. When an arrest warrant comes to the UK authorities, it will not be for the UK authorities to second-guess the validity of the warrant.

        The Secretary of State will make no judgement about the inherent justice of the request, but will pass it on to a court or police officer for action. Once an individual is arrested and brought before a UK court so that that court may approve his delivery to the ICC, the UK court must reach a view on whether the warrant applies to the right person, and whether that person has been arrested on the basis of a correct warrant. The court may, and on application must, make a determination as to whether the individual’s rights have been respected. But such a determination has no impact on the State’s obligation to deliver a suspect to The Hague. Should a UK court determine that an individual’s rights had not been respected, it would be for the ICC, when it heard the case, to decide what to do about it.

        http://www.coe.int/t/dlapil/cahdi/Source/ICC/ConsultICC%282001%2931E%20United%20Kingdom.pdf

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 14, 2013, 8:27 am

        @Hostage

        No one here is talking about actions initiated by private parties through a British court. We are discussing arrest warrants issued by the ICC and the resulting Interpol red notices to non-member states.

        You are right you aren’t talking about Universal Jurisdiction because that’s proven to be a complete failure. But ten years ago if we were having this debate you would have been. Back then the argument was pretty clear cut.

        a) The Geneva convention unambiguously forbids occupying powers from engaging in behaviors that Israel (arguably) performs like transferring its population into occupied territories and collective punishment.

        b) There are recording of Israeli leaders bragging about these policies.

        c) Hence there was clearly enough evidence for an arrest and trial, as per Rwanda or Yugoslavia.

        d) More importantly Universal Jurisdiction was the whole moral basis for Nazi hunting, in particular the kidnapping of Adolf Eichmann so if Israel wasn’t going to argue that its action with respect to Nazi hunting were immoral ….

        ____

        And what happened was this legal theory collapsed under real politics. Donald Rumsfeld made it crystal clear that the United States did not recognize a right for European courts to order the kidnapping of foreign leaders. Countries have no authority over one another’s leaders. Kidnapping leaders is still an act of war.

        Mind you. Donald Rumsfeld is literate, he is intelligent and he has a fairly good legal department. He was perfectly capable of understanding the arguments and utterly totally unequivocally rejected them. Facing that European leaders changed policy, their black letter law and Universal Jurisdiction collapsed. European leaders do not want to commit acts of war.

        In the case of UJ the USA had to speak out of both sides of its mouth since the USA had also enforced UJ itself. In the case of the ICC, the American political class is horrified by the procedure. The American public despises the idea of a UN court that has the right to scoop Americans up and try them without benefit of a jury. Neither political party supports the ICC. Both parties proudly openly reject it.

        ___

        As for Interpol warrants. We just saw in the Robert Seldon Lady case that Interpol will not take on an intelligence service. If an intelligence service is willing to openly state that they view executing an Interpol warrant as an attack they won’t do it. Interpol wants to be an international police force, the police do not challenge the military. Their goal is to act with the permission of governments. They are not a military. There have been many cases where the US military and US intelligence services have refused to obey courts and then the issue gets kicked up to congress to resolve. The police don’t side with the courts and try and force the military to do anything.

        For exactly the same reason Interpol will not take on Mossad. If the ICC starts issuing warrants for Israelis that Israeli refuses to recognize as legitimate Interpol will not attempt to execute them. Mossad is larger and better funded than Interpol ($1.71b vs. $96m). Interpol would lose that conflict and they have no illusions about that.

        The UN without the Security Council is the UN debating society. We’ve seen that with the World Court’s unambiguous order that Israel needs to demolish the separation wall.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 14, 2013, 9:25 am

        @Shingo

        With the economy tanking, Israel will collapse and all those Israelis will dust of their second passports and put them to use, just as all the skilled and educated Israelis are already doing.

        The Israeli economy has more than doubled in the last decade. Who do you think is going that, the easter bunny? Those are skilled Israelis. We have population figures, there is no mass emigration from Israel.

        Let’s see the British government try that kind of stunt once the ICC issues a subpoena for those war criminals.

        Do you really believe the British government has a greater degree of respect for the ICC than for its own domestic courts? Yes, they are going to be perfectly happy to pull that kind of stunt. England lived through World War I. They know how countries react to their popular leadership being killed or captured and it isn’t pretty. The ICC’s position of “I don’t like hornets, lets hit the nest with a stick and see what happens” is not something they are going to go along with.

        If the UK thought capturing Israeli leaders would be a good idea, they have plenty of opportunity. What do they need the ICC for?

        It won’t be necessary for anyone to gang up on Israel, just stop trading with them.

        Why hasn’t that already happened? Trade has more than doubled in the last decade. In 2009 the EU was really upset about Gaza and to show their strong support for human rights, they froze any progress on future trade agreements all the way through 2011.

        But let’s assume they did. Total European trade with Israel is about 30b€ (http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/israel/) That’s imports and exports. If we assume that with a total European block out Israel’s cost of European imported goods rise 10% and exported goods sales prices fall 10% then we are at a bit over 1% of Israel’s GDP. That isn’t even enough to cause a recession in Israel. And that BTW all assumes 0% smuggling which we know from many other trade blackouts is not at all what’s going to happen.

        The EU doesn’t have that much leverage over Israel. The EU would have to do a decade or two of being super nice to Israel to build up enough trade to be able to have the kind of leverage you want them to have. Then they might be able to induce a recession. But the reality is that a country that just recently went through a large scale suicide bombing campaign which on top of everything induced a severe recession to hold on to territory is not going to relinquish it for a moderate recession.

        A moderate depression (10% of GDP) is the minimum I think that’s even conceivable to have major effect on Israeli policy. That’s $25b. If you were to assume that 100% of Israel’s exports to Europe don’t get sold anywhere and all those companies go out of business, you still aren’t at $25b. You would need something like a blockade involving international sanctions. And then you get into the logistics issues.

        No one who is powerful enough to hurt Israel that badly hates Israel. Lots of countries hate Israel, but they aren’t particularly good at projecting power. If they were Israel would have died in the 1950s when it was more hated and much less powerful.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 15, 2013, 2:35 am

        Those are skilled Israelis. We have population figures, there is no mass emigration from Israel.

        They are leaving in greater numbers than they are arriving and an unceasing number are applying for foreign passports.

        And yes, there are still skilled Israelis in Israel but the point still stands that they are leaving at a higher rate than any other western country.

        Do you really believe the British government has a greater degree of respect for the ICC than for its own domestic courts?

        They don’t need to . Their own domestic courts are bound by the treaty with the ICC.

        If the UK thought capturing Israeli leaders would be a good idea, they have plenty of opportunity. What do they need the ICC for?

        Clearly they are not going to go out if their way to create a diplomatic crisis if they don’t have to. An ICC ruling is a different situation entirely, as it is then up to the government to make the case why the ICC arrest warrants should be ignored.

        Why hasn’t that already happened?

        Same reason as above.

        If we assume that with a total European block out Israel’s cost of European imported goods rise 10% and exported goods sales prices fall 10% then we are at a bit over 1% of Israel’s GDP.

        Why make such a limited assumption? If trade falls by at least 50%, then not only will that represent 5% of GDP, but the prices of imports will likely double.

        On top of that, loans and loan guarantees are sure to dry up, along with charitable income. The IDF is in the red to the tune of 20 billion.

        Europe is more than able to hurt Israel without hating Israel.

        The Israelis would be screwed.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 15, 2013, 12:07 pm

        @Shingo & Hostage

        There was just a discussion of this with Lapid. Among Israelis who had left the country during 2011 and had not returned by 2012, 16,000. Same figure for 2010: 15,600. Which is a bit over 2 per thousand. Israel during most of its history averaged 3.2 per thousand.

        http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.550127

        The CIA agrees with Israel’s figures and puts the net at 1.8 per thousand.

        Finally GDP per capita is 16th up from 21 just 7 years ago. Israel is not low for OECD countries but rather fair and rapidly getting better.

        Italy is an example of a country with high (but not drastic emigration) at 9.26.

        There simply is no crisis at all.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 15, 2013, 12:42 pm

        @Shingo —

        They don’t need to . Their own domestic courts are bound by the treaty with the ICC.

        So what? Their domestic courts are bound to enforce the Geneva convention as well. Their domestic courts are bound to enforce the agreements against torture. Their domestic courts are bound to enforce EU regulations prohibiting trade with human rights abusers. The ICC will just be reason 56 that if the government wanted to stop trade it could. But it won’t be reason #1 that if they don’t want to stop trade they will have no choice but to stop trade.

        JeffB: If we assume that with a total European block out Israel’s cost of European imported goods rise 10% and exported goods sales prices fall 10% then we are at a bit over 1% of Israel’s GDP.

        ShingoWhy make such a limited assumption? If trade falls by at least 50%, then not only will that represent 5% of GDP, but the prices of imports will likely double. On top of that, loans and loan guarantees are sure to dry up, along with charitable income. The IDF is in the red to the tune of 20 billion.

        You are counting the same dollars 3 times. 10% is a rather high estimate for additional transportation costs, advertising costs, going through a 3rd party costs, costs of going with more expensive producers outside Europe… That’s not a low estimate at all. 2% wouldn’t shock me, while 20% would.

        100% is a ridiculous estimate. If Israel isn’t selling stuff to Europe they get to recapture some of that productive capacity for their own market. Your figures have them manufacturing SodaStream, tossing it in the ocean and then paying double to import CocaCola. They may be able to sell more SodaStream in friendly countries: the USA, China, India… with higher transportation / advertising costs. If they can’t then they save on the price of manufacturing those goods and recapture that productive capacity for the domestic market to fulfill the now wide open market for imports.

        And that’s BTW best case a good where sanctions are likely to effective. The number one Israeli export is diamonds (didn’t know that) and that’s 24% and that’s on an international market where producers are mostly interchangeable. All sorts of countries would love to stop trading in African “blood diamonds” and replace them with Israeli diamonds if Europe stopped buying Israel’s diamonds. And frankly how will the Europeans possibly enforce this? After that comes medicines (11%) I guarantee you if people in Europe start dying when there is an Israeli medicine available to cure them (especially remember this is Israel which is good at using western media) there will be a backlash.

        But even if I were wrong about 10% and you really did get to 5% of GDP and that did induce a recession, that’s it. The banking crisis, the loans… are just a manifestation of what a 5% drop in production looks like. That doesn’t go on top of the 5% that is the 5% working its way through the system.

        Israel is just not that close to Europe. Trade in goods is just 32% of Israel trade economy and trade is only a 1/4 of the economy of Israel. And not all of that is to Europe. 27.8% is USA, 7.7% Hong Kong, 4.3% is China is economy. Depending on how you you count the USA can be as high as 38%. Europe by being hesitant about building trade with Israel and constantly doing micro sanctions has diminished their role in the Israeli economy.

        The reality is that 1% of GDP is a generous estimate. 2% of GDP, a mild recession is the absolute outer edge of what Europe is capable of. The idea of seeing Israel going up to 50% or more US trade and having Israel reorient themselves away from the EU and towards the USA permanently is not something European business wants. This is a sanctions policy that I think most EU business would see (and rightly) as hurting the EU more than Israel. So because it can’t really change the policy I don’t think any serious sanctions regime is likely: there are lots of Europeans that are more upset about the fall of Nokia than the fall of Palestine.

        BTW Citizen. To continue our conversation. If BDS were a serious movement ready to move up to having politicians support it, they would be having international economics write serious whitepapers on different proposed sanctions regimes and various economic models of their effects. We wouldn’t be working on basic facts. Policies are scored for impact, and they are scored by lobbying firms. That costs real money.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 10:18 am

        You are right you aren’t talking about Universal Jurisdiction

        I already gave you an excerpt from the official British policy statement to the EU regarding its handling of arrest warrants for all of the international criminal tribunals. You’re simply trying to dissemble and use hubris as a substitute for your lack of knowledge about the subject.

        But ten years ago if we were having this debate you would have been. Back then the argument was pretty clear cut.

        Ten years ago the ICC hadn’t tried a single case and Palestine had not yet accepted the Court’s jurisdiction. As for universal jurisdiction, Amnesty International did an exhaustive study this year that cataloged the states which exercise universal jurisdiction over at least one international crime and found that 86 percent of countries still do, usually for war crimes. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/IOR53/019/2012/en/2769ce03-16b7-4dd7-8ea3-95f4c64a522a/ior530192012en.pdf

        FYI, unlike the ICC, there simply are no statutory limitations in the case of universal jurisdiction, and forever is a long time to get away with bloody murder. Just ask all of those 90 year-old suspects that the Wiesenthal Center is still pursuing.

        c) Hence there was clearly enough evidence for an arrest and trial, as per Rwanda or Yugoslavia.

        The Security Council, where the US has Israel’s back, had the Statutes for the ICTY and ICTR drafted and established those Courts as its own subsidiary organs. Its intransigence in other cases at the time caused the General Assembly to go ahead with its plans to draft the statute for an independent criminal tribunal, organized outside the framework of the UN, and to convene its own diplomatic conference of plenipotentiaries in Rome to formally adopt a Statute and establish a Court. At the time, pundits like yourself, claimed that the treaty would take decades to enter into force, if it ever did, and that the majority of countries would never file an accession. But they were wrong on both counts.

        Donald Rumsfeld made it crystal clear that the United States did not recognize a right for European courts to order the kidnapping of foreign leaders.

        Yeah, but that didn’t deprive the Courts there of the power to go after him. In 2010 he had to cut a visit to Europe short because arrest warrants had been requested in Germany, France, and Italy. The last time I checked, Jonathan Turley was still blogging about the fact that Bush and his cronies couldn’t even board a plane for Canada without worrying about being arrested on their arrival. After Bush revealed in his autobiography that he had personally approved the use of waterboarding, he had to cancel his book tour and other visits to Europe. See for example, George W. Bush cancels visit to Swiss charity gala over fears he could be arrested on torture charges http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1354211/George-W-Bush-cancels-Switzerland-visit-fears-arrest-torture-charges.html

        Meanwhile, Rumsfeld is fighting off a flood of lawsuits right here at home over acts committed in Iraq. The Seventh Circuit affirmed a lower court ruling that the former Secretary of Defense can be sued personally for damages by two American military contractors claiming they were detained and tortured in Iraq. http://www.law360.com/articles/263320

      • amigo
        amigo
        December 14, 2013, 11:19 am

        “a) The Geneva convention unambiguously forbids occupying powers from engaging in behaviors that Israel (arguably) performs like transferring its population into occupied territories and collective punishment. ” jeffb

        “Arguably”.

        Would someone get this troll outa here.Enough of this bigoted liar.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 1:41 pm

        The Israeli economy has more than doubled in the last decade.

        So has the poverty rate according to the thousands who took to the streets a few years ago and the OECD, which ranks Israel worst in that category among its 35 members.

        I think the number of passport holders who are dissatisfied probably outnumbers the number who have benefited from any expansion of the economy.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 14, 2013, 10:24 pm

        @Hostage

        I already gave you an excerpt from the official British policy statement to the EU regarding its handling of arrest warrants for all of the international criminal tribunals.

        Yes you did. And I don’t I believe they mean it. They made similar comments about their everlasting binding commitments on things like the Geneva convention which would apply to Livni and the prohibition on torture which apply to Americans who are there all the time.

        You’re simply trying to dissemble and use hubris as a substitute for your lack of knowledge about the subject.

        If you are trying to get into a who knows more about international law contest with me, you win. I’ll throw in the towel now. You have me beat and not by a little bit. Where I think your understanding is lacking is political science and history not law. How and why laws have power.

        Quite simply we can observe that the UN’s clear cut orders are quite often ignored and openly. The UN has neither the consent of the governed as states or peoples for its laws. It plays a role more like the Pope and Church did in the middle ages than a legal system in the true meaning of the word.

        As for universal jurisdiction, Amnesty International did an exhaustive study this year that cataloged the states which exercise universal jurisdiction over at least one international crime and found that 86 percent of countries still do, usually for war crimes.

        And there have been 0 arrests of Americans. With Americans having committed many many war crimes. Similarly Russians. You need to explain that discrepancy if your system actually worked and did anything.

        The last time I checked, Jonathan Turley was still blogging about the fact that Bush and his cronies couldn’t even board a plane for Canada without worrying about being arrested on their arrival.

        I’ve heard these claims from Amnesty International. Canada’s Attorney General Robert Nicholson at the time said that was BS and there was no intent to do anything of the kind. George Bush was in South Africa 4 days ago, he wasn’t arrested. The South Africans knew he was there. 23 months before that Bush was in Africa (Ethiopia, Tanzania and Zambia ) raising money for cervical cancer. Amnesty International called for his arrest. No one tried.

        1) George Bush admits in his book to having ordered torture. I think he’s lying that it was Dick Cheney, but unquestionably there is now reasonable suspicion.
        2) Most of the world are signatories to the convention against torture which mandates such investigations and arrest, regardless of position.

        So if your theory that international law takes precedence over domestic concerns were correct George Bush would have been arrested, many many times on his trips abroad. BTW same with Donald Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld travels all the time (health permitting, he is old) for the Rumsfeld Foundation. http://www.rumsfeldfoundation.org . In May 2011 4 people from Code Pink tried to arrest him on war crimes, they were booted out and one arrested.

        You keep ducking the Robert Seldon Lady example. Just a few months ago we’ve seen what happens with these arrests, no one wants the heat.

        Just ask all of those 90 year-old suspects that the Wiesenthal Center is still pursuing.

        Hitler lost WWI and the current government of Germany doesn’t view itself as a continuation. That’s not at all the same situation that we are talking about.

        Meanwhile, Rumsfeld is fighting off a flood of lawsuits right here at home over acts committed in Iraq. The Seventh Circuit affirmed a lower court ruling that the former Secretary of Defense can be sued personally for damages by two American military contractors claiming they were detained and tortured in Iraq.

        You are a bit out of date: http://blogs.findlaw.com/seventh_circuit/2012/11/court-dismisses-torture-lawsuit-against-donald-rumsfeld.html

        Besides I’ve never claimed that USA courts may not go after USA officials for misconduct during the Bush administration. That’s a totally different thing, it wouldn’t be a threat to the United States the way a foreign power doing it would be. I think Vladimir Putin is a war criminal. I also think his crimes were official acts of the Russian state and as such the USA only has the right to go after Russia not Putin individually for it. Going after Putin is an act of war. I think George Bush is a war criminal and I would support action (possibly military action) against any country that went after him for it. George Bush is still my X-president and an attack on him is an attack on me.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 15, 2013, 9:44 am

        I already gave you an excerpt from the official British policy statement to the EU regarding its handling of arrest warrants for all of the international criminal tribunals. . . . . Yes you did. And I don’t I believe they mean it.

        You obviously aren’t an authority or expert on the subject. The political branches really have no role to play in the handling of arrest warrants and the Interpol red notices for suspects wanted by the courts in Ireland, the ICTY, the ICTR, and the ICC.

        In another recent thread you claimed that we had solved the problem of anti-aircraft missiles in Iraq and Kosovo, where the US actually lost F-15Es and F-117As. You seemed unaware of the fact that the Russians already have a naval base on the Mediterranean in Syria. After the US suspended the bulk of its military aid, the Russians and General Sisi have conducted talks to re-establish their strategic partnership. One of the obvious options for cash strapped Egypt to pay for weapons is by leasing bases to the Russians. See Egypt hails renewed military ties with Russia. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/11/egypt-hails-renewed-military-ties-with-russia-20131114164523666339.html

        The bottom line is that when Israel conducted air strikes against Syria and Obama threatened to conduct US air strikes, the Russians quietly deployed a missile cruiser of their own to the region. See Russia sends missile cruiser to Mediterranean. http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/uk-syria-crisis-russia-ship-idUKBRE9830EO20130904

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 15, 2013, 9:53 am

        Where I think your understanding is lacking is political science and history not law. How and why laws have power.

        I spent much of my adult life reading the daily DoD and CIA intelligence summaries. In case you don’t know, those are examples of applied political science discussions and are only rarely punctuated by any information of real intelligence value. If you want to get a clue about their contents, just read some of the declassified examples in the FRUS. I have spent quite a lot of time doing that too.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 14, 2013, 10:35 pm

        @Hostage —

        Israel’s place on must development indexes has risen solidly over the last decade including those that look at medium income or adjust for inequality. Inequality is way up in Israel and it wouldn’t shock me if poverty is up. The original claim was that the skilled were fleeing because of economic weakness. Fleeing where? Israel is doing better than either the USA or Europe in terms of growth.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 15, 2013, 7:42 am

        Israel is doing better than either the USA or Europe in terms of growth.

        I just pointed out that it is among the worst of the OECD countries. A fifth of the population is under the poverty line, and per capita GDP is on one of the lower rungs of the OECD ladder. See Netanyahu and Flug: The battle begins
        We should support the Bank of Israel governor in her drive to get the government to finally improve the lot of the people. http://www.haaretz.com/news/features/david-s-harp/.premium-1.563121

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 15, 2013, 6:34 pm

        Israel’s place on must development indexes has risen solidly over the last decade including those that look at medium income or adjust for inequality.

        So what? It’s still in the gutter.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 14, 2013, 11:21 pm

        The original claim was that the skilled were fleeing because of economic weakness. Fleeing where?

        It’s not a claim it’s a documented fact. Israel’s economy might be growing etc, but it’s economy is minute and thus, the career opportunities are limited.

        Israel is doing better than either the USA or Europe in terms of growth.

        Growth is measured as a percentage of the size fo the economy. It’s easy to achieve large growth when you have a tiny economy.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        December 13, 2013, 6:21 pm

        Wow, I though that the site had banned this Holocaust denier, JeffB. I see that it has not.

        Oh, well. If that’s the case, then I can no longer, in good conscience, post here. I wish all of you fighting the good fight against zionism well.

      • just
        just
        December 13, 2013, 9:03 pm

        Hey Woody. I think you will be making a mistake if you let the bots run you off.

        They are losing. Their comments show that. C’mon, stay around and ‘fight the good fight’, even if you have to hold your nose.

      • ritzl
        ritzl
        December 14, 2013, 3:12 am

        Agree, just.

      • Taxi
        Taxi
        December 14, 2013, 3:13 am

        Woodyyyyyyyy!

        Don’t leave, pal – Jeffb’s days on MW are numbered anyway. HUGE big loss to the cause if you go. Please please oh pretty please won’t you reconsider? Puleeeeeeeeeez don’t quit on us! Don’t let the bastards bring you down. I’m pleading with you. Please stay. Really hope you stay and give it another chance.

        Please, everyone who thinks Jeffb should be banned, can you please email MW headquarters and lodge an official complaint – help us and Woody out!

      • bintbiba
        bintbiba
        December 14, 2013, 7:03 am

        Yes, Yes, Yes and YES!!!
        Please stay with us ,Woody !!!!

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 14, 2013, 8:32 am

        For the record since this is getting to be a gang up.

        I have never denied the holocaust happened. I do not now nor have I ever had any non mainstream opinion about the death toll during the holocaust. I haven’t done a lot of research so I don’t have strong opinions but all the experts seem to put the toll in about and present consistent evidence for their ranges. I do not (to the best of my knowledge) have any particularly non-mainstream beliefs about it.

      • Sumud
        Sumud
        December 14, 2013, 8:56 am

        Can someone point to the offending post where JeffB did his holocaust denial? Woody – since you say he has done this…?

        More than happy to ask for trolls to be removed but not without some evidence.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        December 14, 2013, 10:48 am

        Thank you all for the kind messages. However, as much as I think that Phil and Adam have done a great job on this site, I think that given that the charge of antisemitism is often levied unfairly to harm the Palestinian movement, that a zero tolerance policy concerning Holocaust denial is necessary to insulate the movement against using the comment section as an indictment on the movement as being antisemitic. That responsibility is doubly so, in my mind, where the Holocaust denier , like JeffB here, is a foe of human rights for Palestinians.

        I will still read this site but so long as JeffB is permitted to comment, I will not .

      • amigo
        amigo
        December 14, 2013, 11:13 am

        “Oh please Abass, publicly embarrass the President and the Secretary of State by bypassing them and ignoring their process.”jeffb

        Well , that coming from a ziotroll who supports the Apartheid regime that announces more illegal settlement expansion every time The President or VP or SOS are getting off the plane to visit.

        Speaking of which , I think it is time for your departure jeff.Go and troll where you can get away with Nakba denial and the rest of your racist diatribe.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 12:46 pm

        “Oh please Abass, publicly embarrass the President and the Secretary of State by bypassing them and ignoring their process.”jeffb

        The fact is, that there is no process the President or Israel have a right to impose. The US is a signatory to several treaties that require it to recognize the State of Palestine and to stop creating impediments to the exercise of its rights in the international community. What Israel and the US are proposing to do is illegal in any event.

  3. HarryLaw
    HarryLaw
    December 13, 2013, 1:51 pm

    At last the Palestinian leadership admit to a huge strategic mistake, but what can they do about it? “the PLO chief negotiator Saeb Erakat, commenting on Kerry’s proposals, said that the Palestinian leadership “perhaps” committed a “strategic mistake” by agreeing to the resumption of negotiations with Israel instead of seeking first the membership of international organizations to build on the UN General Assembly’s recognition last year of Palestine as a non-member state”.
    So far the Palestinians are showing no political acumen whatsoever, they just act with shock and horror at every predictable Israeli maneuver. The difference of course is the Israelis know what they want, they just need the time to implement it. Abbas and co are accommodating them, now Kerry is talking about another 1 year process, is there no end to this lunacy? Abbas is even saying there can be an IDF presence in the Jordan Valley for 3 years or more?? Time for Abbas to retire.

    • Walid
      Walid
      December 13, 2013, 5:34 pm

      “So far the Palestinians are showing no political acumen whatsoever, they just act with shock and horror at every predictable Israeli maneuver.”

      Like taking candy from a baby.

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 14, 2013, 5:36 am

        This week super-negotiator Abbas has once again rejected the boycotting of Israel, preferring to simply go with the boycotting of settlement products. A really great guy to be leading the Palestinians.

        “No we do not support the boycott of Israel,” Mahmoud Abbas said at a press conference in South Africa, which he has been visiting to attend the Mandela memorial, The Star newspaper reported on 11 December”

        http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/south-africa-abbas-opposes-boycott-israel

      • HarryLaw
        HarryLaw
        December 14, 2013, 6:44 am

        Walid, “No we do not support the boycott of Israel,” Well, the supporter of Mubarak and El-Sisi and a wannabe pharaoh himself, Abbas should know the settlements did not sprout up on their own, they were planned and financed by Israel, it is the state of Israel that is responsible for these well documented war crimes, that Abbas refuses to lend support to the boycott of Israel is a slamming indictment of the so called Palestinian leadership, apolitical, no common sense, corrupt, lacking any political objective, in other words the Palestinians are “lions led by donkeys”.

      • yrn
        yrn
        December 14, 2013, 6:47 am

        Walid
        “This week super-negotiator Abbas has once again rejected the boycotting of Israel”
        You want see as an Article in MW, Shhhhhh maybe no one will notice this “shock and horror” on the BDS.
        You are doomed.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 8:16 am

        A really great guy to be leading the Palestinians.

        I suppose he could ignore the Paris Accords and turn the West Bank into another Gaza, like Ismail Haniyeh? Now there’s a winning tactic that has worked out really well for the Palestinians.

        I notice that Hamas still has to negotiate with Netanyahu anyway and rely upon him to allow the necessities of life into the border crossings. The international community has simply abandoned the inhabitants of Gaza to their fate. Only an idiot would follow that example.

        At the same time we criticize Abbas, we make allowances for political activists, who aren’t even living under belligerent occupation, to ignore the boycott and attend Tel Aviv University.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 8:29 am

        Abbas should know the settlements did not sprout up on their own, they were planned and financed by Israel, it is the state of Israel that is responsible for these well documented war crimes,

        He’s smart enough to know that the rest of the world is not coming to his rescue. We are already at the point where EU diplomats trying to give humanitarian aid to people in the West Bank and Gaza are being denied entry or being assaulted and arrested.

        Abbas has filed +400 plus letters with the Security Council asking it to bring those responsible for home demolitions, expropriations, and the illegal settlements to justice. He has accepted the jurisdiction of the ICC for all crimes committed on his territory since 2002. He has instituted a boycott of settlement products, that his own constituents in the West Bank refuse to support, and now you want him to boycott Israel (in violation of its Paris Accords) and turn the West Bank into another Gaza.

      • just
        just
        December 14, 2013, 8:30 am

        Thoughtful.

        Thanks Hostage. I tire of the Abbas bashing. What does one do when between a rock and a hard place with King Bibi backed by the US holding the sword of Damocles over the heads of a People? It’s up to many others to wake up and condemn our combined and reeking hypocrisy, acknowledge the brutality of Israel and her illegal actions, and ultimately break the unholy alliance with the US.

        It’s our responsibility and largely our fault.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 8:44 am

        Thanks Hostage. I tire of the Abbas bashing.

        I get tired of the cognitive dissonance. It’s okay to make-up a rule that allows the leadership of the BDS movement to attend Israeli universities because they (supposedly) have no alternatives, but we ask Palestinians living under belligerent occupation to boycott Israel. WTF, Abbas and his constituents can’t even get a drink of water without Israeli acquiescence. We already know that the rest of the world isn’t going to come to their rescue if the Israelis decide to tighten the screws.

      • just
        just
        December 14, 2013, 8:54 am

        True.

        It IS cognitive dissonance.

      • seafoid
        seafoid
        December 14, 2013, 10:07 am

        @ Just

        “Thanks Hostage. I tire of the Abbas bashing. What does one do when between a rock and a hard place with King Bibi backed by the US holding the sword of Damocles over the heads of a People”

        Well said. Keeping the people there in the land is the main thing for the moment .
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqpAY2OBJzc

        How well did the Jewish leaders do in WW2? How to deal with an insane system? It’s very complex.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 2:19 pm

        You want see as an Article in MW, Shhhhhh maybe no one will notice this “shock and horror” on the BDS.
        You are doomed.

        The rest of the world isn’t living in a land locked territory where every aspect of life is controlled by an Israeli. So this really has nothing to do with the valid reasons we should all be boycotting Israel and demanding criminal and economic sanctions on behalf of Abbas, Haniyeh, their constituents, and the diaspora refugees.

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 14, 2013, 4:07 pm

        “I tire of the Abbas bashing. ”

        Just, not so much about bashing Abbas personally but about what Abbas is doing or not doing when it comes to the UN. Without much effort, it’s easy to rationalize all of Abbas’ inaction simply because Israel carries a big stick and the fear of not abiding by the Paris Accords, while Israel doesn’t respect them. Aside from his not very natural closeness to the Israelis, you have to take into account that he is currently occupying his post in a not very legitimate manner. His term expired over 4 years ago, was extended by law for a year and now he has been overholding his position illegally without calling for elections for almost 3 years.

        Read what Ramzi wrote about the elections and who Abbas represents at the end of this thread.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 7:22 pm

        His term expired over 4 years ago, was extended by law for a year and now he has been overholding his position illegally without calling for elections for almost 3 years.

        You are right, but revolutionary liberation movements don’t usually conduct recurring elections at all. You’re forgetting the PA was an interim creature of the Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO, not vice versa. The least important hat that Abbas ever wore was the President of the PA (which has since been abolished).

        The PA was created in line with the 1988 Algiers Declaration, which stipulated the PLO Executive and Central Committees were in charge of establishing the provisional governments of the State, pending independence, and could also remove them for lack of confidence. The PLO was never bound to comply with foreign policy decisions made by the cabinet, lawmaking, or executive organs of the PA. It wasn’t its official role to conduct negotiations with Israel or other states.

        The 2003 Basic Law didn’t even provide for subsequent Presidential elections. It explicitly stated that the President’s term was the entire “interim period”, after which the President would elected by law. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Palestine_%282003%29#ARTICLE_36

        In any event it was an interim measure which never altered the role of the PLO. The PLO has always been responsible for conducting the foreign relations of the State of Palestine and the PA. The 2005 amendments to the Basic Law regarding elections and terms were promulgated by “The Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization and The President of the Palestinian National Authority, but did not effect the term of office or method of electing The Chairman of the PLO. http://www.palestinianbasiclaw.org/basic-law/2005-amendments

        Abbas was re-elected as Chairman in August of 2009 and in December 2009 the Central Committee adopted a resolution which extends his terms until normal elections can be held.

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 15, 2013, 11:06 am

        “Abbas was re-elected as Chairman in August of 2009 and in December 2009 the Central Committee adopted a resolution which extends his terms until normal elections can be held.”

        Hostage, Abbas has been ruling by decree for the last 9 years. The last 2 amendments to the Basic Law were steered and signed into law by Abbas. This throwing of the ball back and forth between the PLO and the PA or PNA appears to be a lot of acrobatics, confusing ones, to maintain Abbas in office for as long as he wishes to stay there, without any obligation to call elections. We have another Mubarak/Zine al Abbidine-Ali/ Assad/Gadaffi 20+ years dictatorship in the making.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 16, 2013, 1:14 am

        This throwing of the ball back and forth between the PLO and the PA or PNA appears to be a lot of acrobatics, confusing ones, to maintain Abbas in office for as long as he wishes to stay there, without any obligation to call elections.

        I’m not doing any back and forth. The PLO has been in charge of the provisional government of the State since 1988 and it has always had the power to establish governments or to remove them for lack of confidence.

        The original Basic law only stipulated that the President of the PA was elected for the entire “interim period”. Nothing in it prevented Arafat from serving as Chairman of the PLO for life. The Quartet subsequently imposed a requirement for an “empowered Prime Minister” at Ariel Sharon’s request so he wouldn’t have to deal with President Arafat on a daily basis. The Quartet made future assistance contingent on that change to the Basic Law. That’s one of the reasons the amendments on PA term limits and elections were adopted by the PLO. But those Basic Laws always stipulated that the role of the PA did not alter the role of the PLO as the sole representative of the Palestinian people. That included the PLO’s negotiations with Israel and the conclusion of treaties on behalf of the PA or Palestine – and that is what we are talking about.

        Once again, nobody expected Lincoln to conduct legal, constitutionally sanctioned federal elections during our own civil war, and he certainly didn’t. Very few revolutionary or provisional governments ever do.

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 16, 2013, 2:45 am

        Hostage, no reply button on your message of today to me, so I;m replying here.

        The throwing back and forth of the ball was not intended for you but for Abbas that’s actually doing the throwing. What I’m understanding from you is that whether the gizmo is called the Palestinian Authority or the National Authority, it’s of no consequence since there’s a blanket understanding that the final say will always be with the self-mandated PLO, that’s currently chaired by Abbas, that is acceptable to both Israel and the US. The quartet hocus-pocus is simply window dressing since it always goes along with whatever the US decides. When Abbas’ term as President expired ( he had been named President by the PLO of which he is chairman for life it so seems), Abbas himself extended it for another term. For now, Abbas appears to be representing only himself, being considered illegitimate by Hamas and leaving Israelis scratching their heads about negotiating with someone that doesn’t represent anyone but himself. But for Israel’s intents and purposes, Abbas is perfect for the job and he could go on delaying elections for another 10 years under one pretense or another.

        There is no civil war in Palestine, Hostage. Gaza did not cut itself from the West Bank, it was the West Bank that cast it off and helped Israel and the US turn it into a leper colony because it elected the wrong people.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 16, 2013, 6:30 am

        There is no civil war in Palestine, Hostage. Gaza did not cut itself from the West bank, it was the West Bank that cast it off because it elected the wrong people.

        Even in the PA, Abbas was elected President by a larger margin than Haniyeh and his term certainly wasn’t expired when the latter employed his own militia to launch a so-called preemptive coup against the regular PA Security Forces.

    • Sibiriak
      Sibiriak
      December 14, 2013, 3:54 am

      HarryLaw:

      So far the Palestinians are showing no political acumen whatsoever, they just act with shock and horror at every predictable Israeli maneuver.

      Nonsense. Any “shock and horror” has to be feigned, since, as you said, it’s all so predictable. It takes a lot of political acumen to convincingly act as if the “peace process” involved a lot of actual negotiating, as opposed to acquiescence to a Israeli-dictated “solution” being imposed on Palestine.

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 14, 2013, 6:22 am

        “Nonsense. Any “shock and horror” has to be feigned…”

        Nothing feigned, Sibiriak, what you keep seeing of Palestinian leadership horrified is very sincere. And 20 years from now they will continue being so by the same Israeli antics that will have eaten away at most of Palestine. These leaders are more preoccupied with proving their friendship for Israel than they are about looking out for the Palestinians’ welfare. Erekat’s video below of a few years back apologizing to Israel for having “let it down” since 19 years because Palestinians had been unable to “deliver the peace”.

        Erekat talks about solutions having already been reached about Jerusalem, borders, refugees. Looks like these solutions are still private between the Palestinian negotiators and the Israelis. Disregard the snide subtitled English comments but just listen to what Erekat is saying. The original youtube has been removed from the net:

  4. ivri
    ivri
    December 13, 2013, 3:17 pm

    The point is that no matter how you look at it there is no way an agreement can be reached since the constraints that bind each of two sides are inherently irreconcilable. Hence “the process” on and off theatre must go on to ensure that the limited normalcy that does exist is retained. At some point though the general setting will change, most likely due to broader events that are unrelated directly to the conflict, e.g. by dramatic development in Syria and Lebanon and/or a violent clash with Iran, etc., and then everything will have to be recalculated. History has many examples for such dramatic turns and it is therefore more about patience than trying to force the unattainable.

    • JeffB
      JeffB
      December 13, 2013, 5:12 pm

      @Ivri —

      Exactly! Though of course either side could turn around make major concessions and get a deal, neither side’s population is interested in a deal the other’s population would accept. The peoples are simply too far apart. The most liberal Israelis (Meretz) and the most liberal Palestinians managed to strike up a good working deal about a decade ago. But the last decade Israel, post Sharon I can’t imagine even liberal Israelis support that.

      I think the eventual deal will be more or less:
      Israel Annexes Area C and possibly some of B
      Areas A, Gaza and possibly some Palestinian parts of ’49 Israel become colonies though get to be called “a state” as a legal fiction.

      What’s happening in the meanwhile is implementation of this on the ground.

      • talknic
        talknic
        December 13, 2013, 10:02 pm

        @JeffB Whatever keeps your bile flowing …

        A) There’s no such thing as ’49 Israel… a negotiated settlement per the Armistice Agreements has never been reached and Israel has never legally acquired any territory beyond its May 15th 1948 PROCLAIMED and recognized frontiers

        “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.” http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf

        B) “Though of course either side could turn around make major concessions and get a deal, neither side’s population is interested in a deal the other’s population would accept.”

        The Palestinians have nothing of Israel’s and Israel, not happy with over half of 1948 Palestine, has illegally acquired by war http://pages.citebite.com/y1f0t4q1v4son over 50% of what remained of Palestine after Israel was declared. The Palestinians have offered to accept only 22%of their rightful territory for peace . Israel replied by building more illegal settlements in occupied territories. How much more non-Israeli territory does Israel want?

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        December 13, 2013, 10:13 pm

        “How much more non-Israeli territory does Israel want?”

        All of it, of course.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 14, 2013, 8:46 am

        @talknic

        There’s no such thing as ’49 Israel… a negotiated settlement per the Armistice Agreements has never been reached

        I’m not sure exactly what you are arguing, you seem a bit unclear. I agree with you that the armistice agreement shouldn’t be binding since both parties indicated they believed it wasn’t the border. But then go argue with most of your fellow MWers. Because they most certainly believe the Green Line is a border.

        But mainly “’49 Israel” i.e. the armistice lines is just a conventional term for this particular part of Greater Israel. I’m not attaching much meaning to it.

        The Palestinians have nothing of Israel’s … How much more non-Israeli territory does Israel want?

        You seem to be using non-Israeli territory for all of Greater Israel. And that’s what Palestinians have of Israel’s. A recognition the war is over. Israel does value something they can call peace. Because Mexico ceded Colorado, and took the money for Texas the United States doesn’t relitigate the issue regularly. Moreover I’m not sure Israel wouldn’t be happy with less than 78%. They might be interested in more like 65%. The issue is which 65%.

        Judea, the whole point of putting the Jewish state where it is, ended up mostly on the wrong side of the armistice lines. I don’t know that the Jews struggled for millennia to settle next to their ancestral home.

        Finally of course governor Abbas can get a deal far better than President Abbas can ever dream of. The more independent Palestine demands to be, the less they get in terms of territory.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 10:34 am

        I agree with you that the armistice agreement shouldn’t be binding since both parties indicated they believed it wasn’t the border.

        According to the principles of international law codified in the UN Charter, all states are required to respect the permanent armistice lines of demarcation under the terms of, not one, but two Chapter VII UN Security Council resolutions, 62 and 73. The parties are required to treat the provisional frontiers as normal borders. A mutually agreed upon final settlement might alter them, but there is no requirement for that to ever happen.

        FYI, the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations explains that:

        Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. . . .

        . . . The territory of a State shall not be the object of military occupation resulting from the use of force in contravention of the provisions of the Charter. The territory of a State shall not be the object of acquisition by another State resulting from the threat or use of force. No territorial acquisition resulting from the threat or use of force shall be recognized as legal.

      • talknic
        talknic
        December 14, 2013, 12:07 pm

        @JeffB “I’m not sure exactly what you are arguing, you seem a bit unclear.”

        You can’t AFFORD to understand, your whole stupid fallacy ridden world would fall apart.

        “I agree with you that the armistice agreement shouldn’t be binding since both parties indicated they believed it wasn’t the border”

        Problem … you’re pulling straw out of your rrrrrs. I’ve never asserted that “the armistice agreement shouldn’t be binding “.

        It is a nonsense argument. Israel signed the Armistice Agreements so they are binding.

        Israel AGREED ” The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question”

        “But mainly “’49 Israel” i.e. the armistice lines is just a conventional term for this particular part of Greater Israel.”

        Very funny. Israel proclaimed itself and was recognized as it asked to be recognized

        “.. 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 not since legally acquired any territory

        ” I’m not attaching much meaning to it”

        Of course. You can’t afford to.

        “You seem to be using non-Israeli territory for all of Greater Israel.”

        Greater Israel doesn’t exist. The fact that Israel proclaimed and was recognized “within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947” relegated the mythical ‘Greater Israel’ to the rubbish bin

        “and that’s what Palestinians have of Israel’s. “

        You’re delusional. Palestine was subdivided, not Israel.

        “A recognition the war is over”

        Occupation is a part of war.

        ” Israel does value something they can call peace”

        While illegally settling in non-Israeli territory… AMAZING!!

        ” Because Mexico ceded Colorado, and took the money for Texas the United States doesn’t relitigate the issue regularly”

        The US annexed the State of Texas first by a referendum of Texan citizens and then a referendum of US citizens. Same for Hawaii, by agreement, same for Alaska, by agreement. The US adoption of the legal custom was instrumental in the legal custom passing into Customary International Law

        “I don’t know that the Jews struggled for millennia to settle next to their ancestral home”

        Fact is we didn’t struggle for millennia. During the most part of the millennia, we could have immigrated to Palestine, acquired citizenship, bought land and settled. We didn’t. Herzl could have in his life time. He didn’t.

        “The more independent Palestine demands to be, the less they get in terms of territory”

        What a stupid statement.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        December 14, 2013, 12:34 pm

        I agree with you that the armistice agreement shouldn’t be binding since both parties indicated they believed it wasn’t the border”

        They really didn’t say any such thing in the actual text of the agreement. The Security Council did not give the parties the option of disputing the existing status of the international lines of demarcation established by the agreement, since the resolution mandated the establishment of “permanent armistice lines of demarcation”. Those international lines of demarcation are also known as “armistice borders” in international law, e.g. see the Tripartite Declaration Regarding the Armistice Borders : Statement by the Governments of the United States, The United Kingdom, and France http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/mid001.asp

        The parties were only free to make stipulations about the future:

        1) The provisions would not be interpreted as prejudicing, in any sense, an ultimate political settlement between the Parties to the Agreement; and
        2) The Armistice Demarcation Lines defined in the Agreement are agreed upon by the Parties, but without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines.

        So the agreed upon lines are the binding borders that still remain in effect, until hell freezes over or they are replaced by a future territorial settlement or boundary lines.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 13, 2013, 11:03 pm

        I think the eventual deal will be more or less:

        There won’t be a deal if that is what you imagine it will look like.

        What’s happening in the meanwhile is implementation of this on the ground.

        Which would happen regardless, which goes to prove that your original drek about talking and proving to the Israelis they would be safe when Israel takes it’s foot off their neck is an absurdity that you were never serious about to begin with.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 14, 2013, 8:56 am

        @Shingo —

        You are mixing up two things.

        1) What I think will happen mid-term to the Palestinians under their current strategy.
        2) What I think the smart strategy for the Palestinians is and what the results of that strategy would be.

        Those aren’t remotely similar. If the Palestinians were being smart they wouldn’t be pursuing a two state strategy based on independence. A two state strategy is going to force them to make complex geopolitical choices that work very much to their disadvantage. They are inevitable either end up a vassal of Israel or an enemy. What they should be looking to do is to head that off and make that relationship formal now, while it is something they are freely giving.

        That being said. Saying nice stuff about Israel probably would help at the negotiating table. Calling the Israelis war criminals, accusing them of things they aren’t doing, trying to rally the world against them and then expecting Israeli public opinion to support their leadership being nice at the negotiating table is truly dumb.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 14, 2013, 9:33 pm

        Saying nice stuff about Israel probably would help at the negotiating table.

        Evidence and history suggests otherwise. The PLO said nice stuff about Israel in their letter officially recognizing Israel and they still got screwed over. The PA have fulfilled their obligations under Phase 1 of the Road Map Agreement, and Israel still tore it up in the end.

        Calling the Israelis war criminals, accusing them of things they aren’t doing, trying to rally the world against them and then expecting Israeli public opinion to support their leadership being nice at the negotiating table is truly dumb.

        I agree accusing them of things they aren’t doing might be dumb, but they are not doing that. Not a rapist a rapist and not calling a murderer a murderer is not going to change the fact they are what they are and will continue doing it unless someone stops them.

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 14, 2013, 10:30 pm

        @Shingo

        i) They’ve accused Israel of using chemical weapons.
        ii) Multiple times they have accused Israeli soldiers of killing children where the bullets in them came from Palestinian weapons (i.e. they killed their own kids by accident)
        iii) They’ve doctored photos of damage done during air strikes.
        iv) They made false accusations about israeli attempts to destroy holy sites
        etc…

        Come on now. It doesn’t do any good to pretend that reality isn’t happening.

      • Cliff
        Cliff
        December 15, 2013, 5:57 am

        Hasbarat said:

        Come on now. It doesn’t do any good to pretend that reality isn’t happening.

        Come on now, liar, it doesn’t do you any good to pretend that reality isn’t happening.

        Israel has regularly killed children, in addition to using children as human shields and/or torturing them.

        http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/20/us-palestinian-israel-children-idUSBRE95J0UJ20130620

        http://www.cbsnews.com/news/un-report-accuses-israeli-forces-of-using-palestinian-children-as-human-shields-abusing-children-in-custody/

        http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.530993

        http://www.hrw.org/news/2010/11/26/israel-soldiers-punishment-using-boy-human-shield-inadequate

        http://www.france24.com/en/20101003-israeli-soldiers-convicted-using-child-human-shield-palestinian-territories/

        Israel has done tremendous damage on civilian infrastructure and civilians through airstrikes.

        Israel has destroyed holy sites.
        http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/jan/02/israel-gaza-attacks

        Israel has lied repeatedly about the various atrocities it has committed.

        White phosphorus (which Israel enjoys spraying down on Palestinian civilians and children) should be classified as a Chemical Weapon and thus, banned. But the US and Israel haven’t signed the third protocol apparently:

        Some experts believe that phosphorus munitions should be termed Chemical Weapons (CW) because of the way the weapons burn and attack the respiratory system. As a CW, phosphorus would become a clearly illegal weapon.

        The International Red Cross is of the opinion that there should be a complete ban on phosphorus being used against human beings and the third protocol of the Geneva Convention on Conventional Weapons restricts the use of “incendiary weapons,” with phosphorus considered to be one such weapon.

        http://www.haaretz.com/news/israel-admits-using-phosphorus-bombs-during-war-in-lebanon-1.203078

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 14, 2013, 11:24 pm

        i) They’ve accused Israel of using chemical weapons.

        And they have,

        ii) Multiple times they have accused Israeli soldiers of killing children where the bullets in them came from Palestinian weapons (i.e. they killed their own kids by accident)

        So what? They kill children. As Max Blumenthall documented in ghis latest book, they killed an 8 year old in Gaza and then used the corpse for target practice.

        iii) They’ve doctored photos of damage done during air strikes.

        Such as? Even if this was true, would it have made one iota of difference to the fact of the devastation from Israeli air strikes?

        iv) They made false accusations about israeli attempts to destroy holy sites
        etc…

        Israel HAS destroyed holy sites.

        Come on now. It doesn’t do any good to pretend that reality hasn’t happened

      • JeffB
        JeffB
        December 15, 2013, 4:49 pm

        @Shingo —

        We may be at a point of fundamental disagreement here. I think an accusation is either true or false.

        If the Palestinians accuse the Israelis of killing child X and it turns out he/she was killed by friendly fire they owe Israel a sincere public apology. If they failed to do so, then they liars. And that doesn’t change even if the Israelis killed child Y. That’s absolutely fundamental.

        Your claim was that they tried saying nice stuff. My claim was they didn’t. You then claimed the reality forced them to say mean things. I then gave 4 easy examples where the reality did no such thing. You are now excusing lying. No one is forced to lie.

        Similarly doctoring photos. If the Palestinians are giving false reports then the presupposition must become all their reports are false. Doctoring photos is a huge deal.

        And Israel has absolutely has destroyed holy sites. That doesn’t change false claims of their intent or their actions. If Palestinians claim the Israelis did A to B they are lying unless the Israelis did A to B, regardless of whether they did C to D or not.

        The Palestinians are thoroughly dishonest in their propaganda. And getting back to the main point, if they running around doing this sort of thing then they haven’t tried being complementary. They aren’t being forced to lie.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 15, 2013, 6:22 pm

        @JeffB We have had fundamental disagreement since you began spouting your pathetic hasbara.

        I think an accusation is either true or false.

        Cliff has already proven my side of the argument while you simply waffle on about hypotheticals.

        If the Palestinians accuse the Israelis of killing child X and it turns out he/she was killed by friendly fire they owe Israel a sincere public apology.

        Pathetic. Israel has killed thousands fo Palestinian children and the ongoing conflict is entirely a result fo Israel’s aggression. The mother of all war crimes states that all events that result from the act of aggression are the responsibility of the aggressor.

        If a child was killed in friendly fire, it remains Israel’s reprehensibility.

        That’s absolutely fundamental.

        Your claim was that they tried saying nice stuff. My claim was they didn’t.

        And you would be wrong.

        Read the PLO’s statements in the exchange of letters with Israel in 1993.
        http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html

        You then claimed the reality forced them to say mean things. I then gave 4 easy examples where the reality did no such thing. You are now excusing lying. No one is forced to lie.

        Similarly doctoring photos. If the Palestinians are giving false reports then the presupposition must become all their reports are false. Doctoring photos is a huge deal.

        And Israel has absolutely has destroyed holy sites. That doesn’t change false claims of their intent or their actions. If Palestinians claim the Israelis did A to B they are lying unless the Israelis did A to B, regardless of whether they did C to D or not.

        The Palestinians are thoroughly dishonest in their propaganda. And getting back to the main point, if they running around doing this sort of thing then they haven’t tried being complementary. They aren’t being forced to lie.

        You gave 4 examples where they didn’t, which does nor refute the fact they did.

        Similarly doctoring photos.

        Similarly you provided no evidence of doctoring of photos, unless you are referring to photos from Cast Lead which made no difference to the outcome, so it’s a non event.

        In the end, it is Israeli bombs that destroy buildings, not Katusha rockets.

        And Israel has absolutely has destroyed holy sites. That doesn’t change false claims of their intent or their actions.

        Again without any example, you are simply waffling.

        So put up or shut up.

        It is you that is dishonest in your propaganda.

  5. Walid
    Walid
    December 13, 2013, 3:29 pm

    “Haim Saban, who is a super-rich, Israel first, Israeli-American…” An Erekat kind of guy.

    “Tzipi Livni, the Israel Minister of Justice and lead negotiator, was also present at the Saban Forum, so both Livni and Erekat had a chance to continue their talks in Washington. ..” From Livni’s avowal about her MO when she was in the Mossad, makes you wonder what else they continued in Washington.

    • miriam6
      miriam6
      December 14, 2013, 10:35 am

      [email protected];

      From Livni’s avowal about her MO when she was in the Mossad, makes you wonder what else they continued in Washington.

      I wonder if THIS photo sheds any light on the matter..

      Livni and Kerry are laughing their heads off about something ( America and Israel uniting to screw the Palestinians yet again I wonder ? ) – but poor Erekat looks like he is chewing a lemon..

      The end of the affair – perhaps?

      I am referring to the usual dismal failure of I/P ‘peace talks’ – OF COURSE!

      I feel a potential M.W caption competition coming on..

      Any takers?!

      http://a4.mzstatic.com/us/r30/Purple6/v4/63/4e/58/634e5813-3e70-b522-1b3a-2c12a9758a3f/screen568x568.jpeg

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 14, 2013, 4:19 pm

        Miriam, looks like Kerry is tickling her fancy and Erekat is jealous.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        December 14, 2013, 4:47 pm

        [email protected];

        .. looks like Kerry is tickling her fancy and Erekat is jealous.

        Funny!

        Personally I still think Kerry and Livni are probably cackling like hyenas at the thought of stitching the Palestinians up yet again – or perhaps they are laughing about Israel/ America doing to the Palestinians what Erekat may – allegedly ! – have done to Livni – yikes..

        The photo seems to me to inadvertently sum up the power relations between the three though – America / Israel and the Palestinians..

        The love / hate triangle between the three as it were..

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        December 14, 2013, 7:44 pm

        [email protected];

        During my Fleet Street style muck raking adventures online – I found THIS – not terribly revealing – photo of Erekat and Livni ‘together’.. ho hum..

        http://www.israellycool.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/saeb-erekat-with-tzipi-livni1.jpg

        The article accompanying the photo is really funny

        Coming soon: Arab newspaper claims Tzipi Livni had sex with Mr Bean, to prevent him from converting to Islam !!!

        Apparently Erekat threatened to sue over the B.S allegations of a supposed ‘affair’ between him and Livni.

        http://www.israellycool.com/2013/11/06/albawaba-claims-tzipi-livni-slept-with-saeb-erekat-and-yasser-abed-rabb

        Charles Ayoub’newspaper Al Diyar is starting to “leak” the names of those with whom Tzipi Livni slept. The first name that was leaked is Yasser Abed Rabbo, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s Executive Committee.
        The second person Livni allegedly slept with is Saeb Erekat who was the Palestinian chief of the PLO Steering and Monitoring Committee.
        However, Al Diyar is known to pull stories out of nowhere with a level of credibility below the temperatures of Antarctica.

        http://www.findingoutabout.com/tzipi-livni-had-sex-with-arab-leaders/

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 15, 2013, 11:22 am

        Miriam, I had been reading about l’amour à trois in the Arab press but didn’t bring it up because the sources are so-so, as you noted, and the story spread like wildfire and all of them sourced back to the unreliable paper that is practically free to invent any story because of Lebanese laws providing the press with a flexible immunity. But could there be smoke without fire for a change? In any event, Livni asked for it when she shot off her mouth on how she used her sexual talent to get to to her enemies.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 14, 2013, 7:49 pm

        I suspect Kerry is relieved not to be looking at Bibi’s ugly mug. Livni is a lot more pleasant and easier on the eye.

        She also has a history of doing sexual favours for Israel, so who knows what she’s offering Kerry?

      • just
        just
        December 15, 2013, 11:35 am

        Livni has “sexual talents”?

        yech.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        December 14, 2013, 10:29 pm

        [email protected];

        She also has a history of doing sexual favours for Israel, so who knows what she’s offering Kerry?

        OMG I cannot stop laughing at you Shingo!

        No she does not.

        If you believe the Arab presses’ nonsense about the allegedly sexually rampant Ms Livni you really are daft as a brush and twice as gullible!

        ( but who am I to argue with your umm – fantasy life.. )

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 15, 2013, 11:54 am

        Miriam, on checking a bit more thoroughly, it’s looking like Livni never said those things attributed to her. Seems someone “concluded” what she had done based on what other Mossad ladies had said about their work and assumed Livni did the same in her job.

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 15, 2013, 6:37 pm

        OMG I cannot stop laughing at you Shingo!

        I’m always laughing at you Miriam – do you still believe Sir Les Patterson is the Australian ministers of the arts?

        Anyway, I stand corrected, but I recall reading an article in which Livni was allegedly quoted as saying she would have no hesitation about using her sexuality for Israel.

        Personally, I think she’s an attractive looking woman.

  6. HarryLaw
    HarryLaw
    December 13, 2013, 3:46 pm

    Naughty Naughty Walid, but I doubt Erekat has it in him, he would be welcome to it in any case.

    • Walid
      Walid
      December 14, 2013, 6:33 am

      “I doubt Erekat has it in him…”

      Harry, there’s another Erekat that you don’t the know, it’s Erekat the party animal, so there’s nothing impossible or improbable in what I’m wondering:

    • miriam6
      miriam6
      December 15, 2013, 9:37 pm

      [email protected];

      Sigh..

      How many more times must I correct you on this fraught issue ?!?!

      Sir Les serves his nation Australia in his dual role as Australian Ambassador at Large and Chairman of the Australian Cheese Board!

      Anyway – here is Sir Les the international diplomat – ‘reaching out’ to the people of Hong Kong .. especially the ladies of ‘Honkers’ ..

      As for Zippi Livni alleged ‘honey trap’ status – read Walid’s comment and mine on this thread.

      YOU are the only one who still believes this crap about Livni bestowing her sexual favours upon unsuspecting Arab politicians / diplomat’s – all for the benefit of the State of Israel!

      http://mondoweiss.net/2013/12/palestinian-negotiators-proposes.html/comment-page-1#comment-620510

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 16, 2013, 2:33 am

        Miriam,

        Sir Les serves his nation Australia in his dual role as Australian Ambassador at Large and Chairman of the Australian Cheese Board!

        You cannot be serious!! Or are you being sarcastic? There is no such person as Sir Les Paterson. He is the alter ego of a comedian named Barry Humphries.
        https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Barry+Humphries&newwindow=1&espv=210&es_sm=122&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=pquuUtnnNcmmkgWnrYG4Bg&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=1074

        Who has other even more famous alter egos like Dane Edna Everage.
        http://www.ausnotebook.com.au/docs/ARTICLES/Events_Productions/BackWithaVengeance.htm

        Bruce the Shark from Finding Nemo
        http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1076467712/nm0402032

        And the Gobblin King from the first Hobbit film
        http://www.fxguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/HBT-VFXprog-021.jpg

        As for Zippi Livni alleged ‘honey trap’ status – read Walid’s comment and mine on this thread.

        I did, and I stand corrected.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        December 16, 2013, 11:59 am

        [email protected];

        You cannot be serious!! Or are you being sarcastic?

        The latter applies here Shingo..

        Comparing you to Sir Les because you are an Aussie has been a lot of fun for me!

        For my entire adult life I have been aware that Sir Les/ Dame Edna are the comedic alter egos of just one man – Barry Humphries.

        For one thing – many years ago now – my mother and I went along to see a live show by Dame Edna Everage in which Sir Les featured.

        The irony of ‘Sir Les’ is that Barry Humphries is himself a very urbane and cultured man – in complete contrast with Sir Les!

        Barry Humphries is apparently retiring his Dame Edna show and is touring his farewell Dame Edna live show next year – which I intend to go and see.

        Barry Humphries is an Ozzie but I like to think of him as an honorary Brit too!
        He has had a lot of success as a comedian over here.

        Anyway – thank you for the links.

        I mean – what’s not to like about ‘Finding Nemo’!?

        I cried my eyes out for that poor little lost fish!

        As for Livni and Erekat I think there is probably just mutual respect between them ;)

      • Shingo
        Shingo
        December 16, 2013, 5:00 pm

        I am surprised Humphries is still even doing Dame Edna,

        I thought he’d retired that character long ago, though you are right, he/she has become an honorary Brit. Dame Edna took off more in Britain than here in Oz.

        I knew Barry for a few years, when I was dating a close friend of his. He’s certainly a force fo nature.

        With regards to Livni and Erekat, there is clearly a warm relationship between them when only serves to highlight the absurdity of this conflict.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        December 17, 2013, 6:03 am

        [email protected];

        Well as I said Humphries is retiring Dame Edna soon.

        With regards to what you said about Livni and Erekat – I agree – I think the I/P conflict is such a tragedy and a huge waste of human potential particularly for those under occupation by Israel.

        Both the Israelis and Palestinians are intelligent talented people – it is a damned shame they cannot get together and pool the resources they have together plus sharing equally between them the natural resources such as the water / gas reserves – either in a two state solution or one state solution – the latter probably the better option.

        Maybe a sort of federation between two states – with one overarching state?

        I do not think the land can be easily divided between these two peoples.

        So would be better if they lived in one state – one democratic equal secular state with separation of religion from state.

  7. Erasmus
    Erasmus
    December 13, 2013, 3:57 pm

    Another Interim Agreement ????

    That is absolutely a NO GO.

    After Oslo and its 5-years perspective for an independent Palestinian state – it is virually unbelievable that the Palestinan negotiators will fall once again into such a gimmick trap.
    They must have learnt their lessons bitterly and thoroughly enough that such a Kerry strategy is BOUND to FAIL.

    Can anyone tell me whether any planned (?) and agreed time schedule in the entire I-P-negotiation- and “agreement”-history had ever been adhered to ????

  8. Shingo
    Shingo
    December 13, 2013, 4:22 pm

    The U.S. Secretary of State wants the summit to produce a framework agreement which would lay out the terms for the continuing talks.

    …….

    The framework agreement would then be the basis of a six- month to one- year negotiation in which the sides would work out the details of a peace agreement.

    What a load of BS!! Talks about having talks about negotiating.

    This is simply a ruse to buy the time Danon said Israel needs to create more facts on the ground.

    As for Abbas, he cannot be that stupid. 3 or more years will definitely become permanent.

    • Walid
      Walid
      December 13, 2013, 5:37 pm

      “As for Abbas, he cannot be that stupid. 3 or more years will definitely become permanent.”

      Shingo, you’re overestimating the guy; give him a break. Maybe he’ll be smart to give Israel a 99-year lease on the valley, renewable 99 times each time for 99 years. He could then brag that he really never gave them “nutting” since he never gave up ownership.

      • ramzijaber
        ramzijaber
        December 15, 2013, 9:37 am

        ROTFLMAO!!!!

  9. ramzijaber
    ramzijaber
    December 14, 2013, 8:24 am

    I MUST vote on any agreement. The PA cabal doing the zionists’ bidding. How shameful! I did NOT vote for them. They do NOT represent me. Period.

    Dissect all the shatter coming out and you see that Obama/Kerry are using us as a bargaining chip to get an agreement with Iran. All this recent talk is a significant departure from what they said before the Iran negotiations kicked into public high-gear. The Zios are extorting a price from Obama/Kerry. AND THIS IS THE GAME THAT IS BEING PLAYED. THIS WAS THE ZIOS GOAL ALL ALONG: Use Iran as a faux crisis to divert the world’s attention, extort their sympathy, warmonger the world into fear for israel’s artificial security talk, and then gain on the ONLY issue that matters to the criminal zionists: steal all Palestinian land.

    To Abbas, Erekat, etc. etc. etc. I say:
    FIRST, you DO NOT represent me. I did NOT vote for you.
    SECOND, even if you come up with some cuckoomania “agreement”, I WANT MY VOTE on any agreement AFTER I vote for President to represent me.

    Simple really.

    PS: 1S1P1V is the only feasible, stable, lasting, and just solution. Thank you zionists for making this a reality!

    • Walid
      Walid
      December 14, 2013, 11:54 am

      Ramzi, don’t hold your breath waiting for the vote under Abbas, it’s not coming any time soon. When it does, it will be limited to West Bankers only and probably based on something already agreed between the Abbas group and the Israelis a few years ago such as most probably, a deal on the Jordan Valley.

      • ramzijaber
        ramzijaber
        December 15, 2013, 8:36 am

        Sadly, I agree with you Walid. But the Palestinian Spring shall come and shall sweep the zionist occupation and the PA humiliation.

    • Inanna
      Inanna
      December 14, 2013, 6:29 pm

      You’re exactly right Ramzi, this is the price Israel extracts for the US agreement with Iran. But as we know, all this talk is merely a façade that allows Israel to continue working towards the goals of 1948. And now the fig leaf has truly dropped off and we see the US pushing Israeli goals onto Palestinians. But as long as there is injustice, there will not be peace, no matter how much the Americans and Israelis delude themselves.

      • ramzijaber
        ramzijaber
        December 15, 2013, 8:45 am

        Inanna, they certainly delude themselves, they being the US and the zios. True lasting peace can come if and only if there is….
        – justice
        – fairness
        – humility
        – empathy
        – truth
        – remorse
        – forgiveness
        – reconciliation
        by all parties to all parties resulting in a solution that delivers…..
        – freedom
        – justice
        – liberty
        – equality
        – dignity
        – human rights
        – civil rights
        within a workable and practical socio-economic-political structure.

        That is why I believe the only solution due to what the zios continue to do on the ground is 1S1P1V – 1 state, 1 person, 1 vote – where all Christian, Moslem, and Jewish citizens live in peace in the democratic State of the Holy Land.

      • just
        just
        December 15, 2013, 9:41 am

        How I wish that you were part of the ‘negotiations’, Ramzi.

        1S1P1V indeed. There can be no lasting peace without justice and all of the rest of the items on your list…

      • ramzijaber
        ramzijaber
        December 15, 2013, 9:46 am

        thank you for the vote of confidence just! i am not one of the “chosen” ones in the political elite. i am just a low level palestinian who wants to be heard by those who decide for me. but alas, they only hear the zionists.

      • Walid
        Walid
        December 16, 2013, 12:33 am

        Ramzi, I’m seeing that the only honest and competent Palestinian to lead the people is Mustafa Barghouti. In the elections of 20o5, he was muzzled and obstructed from running an effective campaign by the Americans and Israelis that went all out to ensure that their man Abbas won. Do you agree or is there another that could be a good leader?

      • seafoid
        seafoid
        December 15, 2013, 8:51 am

        ” But as long as there is injustice, there will not be peace, no matter how much the Americans and Israelis delude themselves.”

        Sah. And as long as they run their evil system there will never be mental security for Israelis either.
        The Old Testament is fairly clear on what Gd thought of his people thinking they knew everything.
        A lot of those things they mark with Jewish holidays were the results of political stupidity.

  10. just
    just
    December 14, 2013, 7:04 pm

    Israel has ‘exacted’ more than enough already.

    People have suffered and died enough so that Israel can continue to grow into the grotesquerie that it is– a belligerent, murderous and genocidal Apartheid state.

    Democracy, shamocracy.

  11. Talkback
    Talkback
    December 15, 2013, 9:07 am

    The US once more showing that it is not an honest broker and will never be. They know they will fail with their biased approach, but only want to buy time for the prolongation of Israel’s Apartheid regime.

Leave a Reply