Edthespark (to me): “Tell me something,how much exactly will the Palestinians be getting in handouts.a billion or a trillion.You don’t know do you, well lets wait and see.”
Well, actually I do know, according to the leak reports that I cite. You could know too, easily, if you but clicked on the first link, to Allison Deger’s coverage. Here it tells you precisely:
‘The deal includes significant financial support from the U.S., Europe and the Gulf states to the new Palestinian state, to a tune of $30 billion over five years, with additional support for specific development projects from Australia, Canada, Japan and South Korea. Most of the funding will come from “oil producing countries,” described as “the main beneficiaries of this agreement.”’
But you seem to be saying rhetorically, that I don’t know what I’m talking about. Maybe I was generalising, so as to drive a point?
But you want the details – because just imagine, if it was a “million dollars for each Palestinian”. Are you now deciding on their behalf that this would be great and fair? Indeed you continue:
“Lets say a million dollars for each person displaced in 1948.would that be ok with you.”
– are we now bartering on behalf of Palestinian refugees? If you had read the same mentioned link, you’d see that Palestinian refugees are completely absent from the document.
So let’s not start selling out Palestinians, you and me, here on Mondoweiss comments. There are enough people trying to do that already.
“Madonna is a not a cruel, uncaring person. Maybe if she knew the extent of Israel’s crimes, she too would care more for a just settlement for Palestine.”
It’s because she trusts Americans for Peace Now to inform her about how ‘peace’ can be achieved. Now look at what Yossi Alpher, who writes weekly security Q&A’s for Americans for Peace Now, expresses himself:
“[A] major Israeli military offensive to reconquer the Gaza Strip and physically eliminate the Islamists there… is undoubtedly feasible. Countless politicians, including Netanyahu, have periodically promised to do precisely this. But then they confront the reality that this scenario would almost certainly involve hundreds of Israeli dead and would leave Israel responsible for the welfare of over two million Gazans under a new occupation.”
When Palestinian civil society urged her to cancel, she ignored it because it had a “political agenda”. I don’t think she’s stupid – I think she picked her side, and that this makes her indeed cruel and uncaring, under the guise of a peacenik.
‘Trump moved [the embassy] to West [by Israel, the ‘united capital] Jerusalem saying, “In making these announcements, I also want to make one point very clear: This decision is not intended, in any way, to reflect a departure from our strong commitment to facilitate a lasting peace agreement. We want an agreement that is a great deal for the Israelis and a great deal for the Palestinians. We are not taking a position of any final status issues, including the specific boundaries of the Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, or the resolution of contested borders. Those questions are up to the parties involved.”’
The moving of the embassy is in itself taking a position on final status issues. Jerusalem is one of those. It is Israel’s unilateral annexation, cemented in ‘base law’ (1980) that has made the issue of having an embassy anywhere in Jerusalem, a politically partisan issue, siding with Israel, since the annexation is a flagrant violation of international law, and considered null and void by the UNSC.
Yes bcg, he said “phosphates” i Hebrew (‘fosfatim’).
I don’t think it’s so chemically accurate… I’m not an expert in chemistry, but from what I’ve gathered, I undestand that the massive gathering of minerals, especially Potash and Potassium Chloride for fertilizing, taken from these artificial pools (where he’s floating, where the hotels are), have caused an imbalance which leaves a lot of the actual salt (Natrium Chloride), which is heavier, to aggregiate disproportionally at a rate of some 25 cm pr year at the surface, and that is actually pushing the water level, at the southern pools, up (ironically, while the general water level goes drastically down). This is apparently causing a flooding of these hotels and may now mean irreversible damage – they may have to just close or be rebuilt higher up.
The company which profits from the mining is reportedly reluctant to foot the bill of balancing this over-aggregation of salt.
Thank you Wondering Jew, you are right about the ‘Americanization’ – I changed the formulation in article to be accurate about that, yet still convey the same idea, which I think is the essence of what she was saying.
As to “[t]he belief in coexistence must be tempered by realism” and “Bibi will not get us there, but your alternative will not get us there either”, I would say this:
Herzl’s settler-colonialist scheme was coupled with the notion “if you will it, it is no dream”. You posit that my “choice to present this belief as a leap of faith is not acceptable”, since it is ostensibly beyond realism.
Yet I would point out, that my suggestion is far more simple, and involves far less inherent violence, than Herzl’s. My suggestion is simply to relinquish Apartheid rule. I will give you this – settler-colonialist ventures were not “unrealistic”, since they really happened. Nonetheless, de-colonization is also something that happened. Relinquishing of Apartheid is also something that really happened.
I would thus suggest that your idea of “realism” is based in the notion of maintaining status quo for an indefinite period of time. This is no doubt a comfortable position to take from the standpoint of the privileged Jew. But for the Palestinians living under Apartheid, which includes unlivable conditions, I would say it’s unrealistic. That’s the reality that most Zionists simply deny, saying “that’s life”. But life is what we make it. And I think the Zionist solution really, really sucks.
Eljay, that Kushner is Trumpal is undoubted. But will he be triumphal with his deal of the century?
Well, it seems Kushner has a wide success criteria:
“Success can look like a lot of different things. It can look like an agreement, it can look like a discussion, it could lead to closer cooperation, maybe resolve a couple of issues, maybe not?”
By the descriptions and indications of how those issues are meant to be solved, I kind of hope he goes for the “maybe not”. But hell, it’ll be a success anyway. So maybe he could just go home instead? Then again, all this “shuttle-diplomacy” must be playing out good for his business.
Jon66: “or is Israel simply ‘preserving’ their status so they can have a right to return to their homes?”
No, Israel has been attempting to get rid of the ‘problem’ by sending them to third countries under shady economic deals, reportedly countries like Rwanda and Uganda. As mentioned in the piece, the UN has pointed out that Israel could provide them with a Temporary Protected Status, which would not infringe upon the possibility to send them back to their home countries when it becomes safe to do so. But Israel is not doing that. If it wanted to ‘preserve’ their status while protecting them, it could have used the TPS. More obviously, Israel is using the limbo to preserve its own possibility to kick them out when the time is more opportune, regardless of the risk to their lives.