The two-state solution: Revisiting the Clinton Compromise Parameters. I support this. How come the war-mongering anti-Israel trolls can't honestly discuss it?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2012 5:23 PM GMT
    Since someone keeps spamming off-topic posts in the original topic - which has gotten very long - I thought we could start again.

    Original discussion:
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/354843

    On Dec 09, 2011 11:48 PM (EST), pouncer posted this map:
    page002.png

    This is progress.

    1. Previously he misrepresented not just the Barak Plan, but also the Clinton parameters.
    So he could reject and argue against them.
    To rationalize and justify their rejection by Arafat (while pretending Arafat accepted them).
    How can someone spend hours seeking (and filtering) data, posting selective snippets, and get things so wrong?

    2. Specifically, note the red dots which are Jewish villages that would "be evacuated".
    Previously pouncer argued they would remain, with "access roads" disecting the Arab state-to-be.

    3. How many "cantons" are there above? None! It is one contiguous area.
    (Matching the Ross map I posted years ago.)
    Do you see why Mally & Agha don't make the slogan/soundbite "canton" argument and sleazy false comparisons to SA?
    Do you see why Ross and Clinton explicitly reject this?


    pouncer> The two-state settlement is this (the Palestinian plan):

    4. Now, finally, he's giving us a counter-offer?

    5. Yet the only difference is the size of the "fingers".
    In total, a difference of a mere 30 square miles.
    (For those challenged by math, that's a 3 x 10 mile strip.)

    6. At a cost of creating a sixth of a million Jewish refugees.

    Which is the lesser evil?
    Israel retaining a net 30 square miles of land (on which few Arabs reside)?
    Or forcing an extra 111,000 Jews out of their homes? (Above the 56,000 in Israel's proposal.)
    No surprise that pouncer, always seeking to malign and punish Jews, chooses the latter.

    7. All this for the faux "principle" of making land exchanges 1-to-1, exactly even.
    As if that's that important?
    The problem is that Arabs living on the Israeli side of the 1949 Armistice line don't want their villages ceded to a PA state.
    They (despite all the anti-Israeli propaganda) prefer to live in - their homes & villages to stay in - allegedly "apartheid" Israel.

    Previously (in the Yalla, Peace! topic), pouncer fell silent when asked:
    "What is more important?
    Respecting the wishes of these Arab villagers - who don't want their land ceded to Palestine-to-be
    or Making land swaps 1-to-1?"

    Punish the Jews or let the Arabs live - in Israel - in peace?
    Tough question for someone whose raison d'etre is anti-Jewish animus.

    8. 4 months later pouncer figured it out:
    It is more important to respect the wishes of these Arab villagers, thus the 1-to-1 land ratio must be preserved... by uprooting 167,000 Jews!

    9. Hey, why not invent a 1-to-1 "principle" about uprooting people, too?
    If 167,000 Jews are to be uprooted, why not uproot 167,000 Arabs from Israel?
    (For those too dim to understand, I'm not advovcating this. Just showing how ridiculous the faux 1-to-1 "principle" is.)


    10. From pouncer's source, we see this stated by the PA negotiators - in 2008:
    Saeb [Erakat]: We will examine the matter. We have lots of internal complications.
    ...What matters is that we have begun to participate and cooperate.

    This startling admission in 2008!
    Previously the official PA position was our way or the highway, no negotiation, everything or nothing.

    11. Now consider Israel's reponse:
    [Tzipi] Livni: Perhaps the next thing we will do, after knowing the position of each of us, is to have the experts sit together and discuss the gaps and differences between the two maps.

    12. Unfortunately the PA pulled out of the negotiations before that could happen.
    As documented in the original forum topic (back in 2008!), they regressed to the same ol' same old:
    Abbas's spokesman said. "The Palestinian side will only accept a Palestinian state with territorial continuity, with holy Jerusalem as its capital, without settlements, and on the June 4, 1967 boundaries." He called the Israeli proposal a "waste of time."

    Looks like the PA leadership was wasting its own negotiators' time.
    Just as they had wasted the years from 2000-2008.
    Just as they wasted 2008-2011.
    Just as they continue to waste time (and lives!) now into 2012.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2012 10:30 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidWhen will the RJ Arab-Israeli war end???????





    Probably when LIL'AIPAC the current (Wolverine4) stops trying baffle us with bullshit.

    Who does LIL'AIPAC think he's fooling with this damn Clinton Parameters bullshit he keeps bringing up when the reality is that LIL'AIPAC agrees with his professor father who wrote a lengthy article about their belief that Palestinians don't need a "second homeland" because according to them, their homeland is in Jordan and all of Samaria and Judia (the West Bank ) belongs to Israel.

    That is why LIL'AIPAC supports the settlements and also supports Netanyahu and Lieberman who keep promoting even more settlement building to the tune of nearly 8000 more untis approved over the last year.

    LIL'AIPAC and the Zionist Zealots leading Israel cannot have it both ways, they cannot logically approve of the supposed 'Clinton Parameters' while building settlements beyond those Parameters.

    Point is, as long as this liar for his cause LIL'AIPAC spins his lies there exists an obligation to expose him and tell the real story.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2012 4:13 PM GMT
    Anyone have any questions about any of the 12 points above?


    What do people think of the Clinton compromise parameters?

    This is what Clinton proposed in just over 11 years ago:

    A. The establishment of an independent, internationally recognized and sovereign Palestinian Arab state on a net 97% of the disputed territories.

    B. Including the Arab neighborhoods of eastern Jerusalem.

    C. With some form of shared sovereignty over the Temple Mount

    D. With a so-called "right of return" to the nascent Palestinian Arab state.

    E. And a $30 Billion fund to resettle or compensate the Arab refugees and their descendants.

    F. While it is theoretically possibly that Jews living in the areas from which Israel would withdraw (upped to a net of nearly 100% by the Olmert plan) could remain as Palestinian citizens (just as there are 1.2 million Arabs living in Israel), the unpleasant reality is that they would be massacred and must thus be uprooted. (Note that any construction in these areas actually benefits the Palestinian Arabs. I suppose some refugees/descendants could move into these homes - hardly an obstacle to peace, just like construction in the small areas Israel would annex is not an obstacle to peace.)

    Does this sound reasonable?
    If no, what do you object to?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 23, 2012 4:28 PM GMT
    LIL'AIPAC, The Clinton Parameters are one thing,

    BUT YOUR PROMOTING THEM WHILE BELIEVING THAT THE WEST

    BANK BELONGS TO ISRAEL AND THAT THE PALESTINIANS HOMELAND

    IS IN JORDAN, MAKES YOU A LIEING HYPOCRITE !!!


    Do you still agree with your professor fathers propaganda as he wrote in an article: "WHY DO PALESTINIANS NEED TWO HOMELANDS" he goes on to write that greater Israel (the West Bank/or Judea and Sameria) belong to the jews and that Palestinians homeland is in Jordan.

    The above is why you think that Settlements in the Palestinian Homeland of the West Bank are not wrong but the Jews right, Have you now changed your miind ?

    WILL YOU IGNORE THIS FACT THIS TIME AROUND ? OR LIE and deny these facts.



    DO TELL, we are waiting LIL'AIPAC
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 16, 2012 2:18 PM GMT
    Let me add another thing from the original topic.
    This coming from sxydrkhair's source (not quoted selectively):

    President Clinton> Arafat turned down the deal I put together that Barak accepted

    President Clinton himself - sxydrkhair's source! - proved both pouncer's and tokugawa's anti-Israel claims are wrong!
    (Which I'm sure wasn't much of a surprise to anyone.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2012 3:36 AM GMT
    realifedad said
    realifedad said LIL'AIPAC, The Clinton Parameters are one thing,

    BUT YOUR PROMOTING THEM WHILE BELIEVING THAT THE WEST

    BANK BELONGS TO ISRAEL AND THAT THE PALESTINIANS HOMELAND

    IS IN JORDAN, MAKES YOU A LIEING HYPOCRITE !!!


    Do you still agree with your professor fathers propaganda as he wrote in an article: "WHY DO PALESTINIANS NEED TWO HOMELANDS" he goes on to write that greater Israel (the West Bank/or Judea and Sameria) belong to the jews and that Palestinians homeland is in Jordan.

    The above is why you think that Settlements in the Palestinian Homeland of the West Bank are not wrong but the Jews right, Have you now changed your miind ?

    WILL YOU IGNORE THIS FACT THIS TIME AROUND ? OR LIE and deny these facts.



    DO TELL, we are waiting LIL'AIPAC


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Maybe if you'd discuss the hypocracy I expose above, and talk that through then and only then could we view this as an 'honest' effort on your part.

    Still waiting for these points to be addressed, Your ignoring these facts only diminishes your credibiliby. CARE TO RESPOND ?







    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    LIL'AIPAC are you just really dense or so fanatical that you're unembarassable by the fact that you are talking out of both sides of your mouth,



    So when are your going to answer the above questions ? Are you afraid to or what ? Again, your ignoring them just weakens your talking points.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 10, 2012 6:33 PM GMT
    In another topic:

    IanCT saidIsrael has three options.

    1. Two state solution within its 1967 borders, no land swap. East Jerusalem belongs to Palestine.

    2. One state solution - secular state.

    3. Don't agree above? Get out of the historical Palestine! Go back home.

    What an odd set of dictates - or ransom demands?
    If Israel doesn't agree, your "solution" is terrorism forever?

    By the way, just what is "historical Palestine" - other than the Latin/European name for Eretz Yisrael?
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/349491
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2012 5:37 PM GMT

    From MONDOWEISS


    Two-stater says the reality has shifted to one apartheid state



    by Philip Weiss on August 27, 2012


    Here is another sign of the end of the two-state paradigm in the minds of those who were engaged in building two states. The dialogue project, bitterlemons, is closing down. From the two statements below, you can see that Palestinian intellectuals are growing increasingly resentful of normalization efforts, and that the hope that some felt around the two-state solution has drained away, including from European sponsors. (Thanks to Paul Mutter).

    Palestinian partner Ghassan Khatib, formerly of the P.A., says this:


    In the foreword to "The Best of Bitterlemons" compilation published in 2007, I noted that we rarely had trouble recruiting writers. Despite the feeling among many in the Arab world that contact with Israelis is tantamount to accepting Israel's occupation, seldom did authors decline an invitation. Lately, we have observed that this has changed, that even once-forthcoming Palestinians are less interested in sharing ideas with Israelis just across the way. Still, we have been able to present the voices of security chiefs and political prisoners, military generals and farmers losing land, spokespersons for armed groups and peaceniks in an equal and fair manner--rather differently than the situation on the ground.

    Nevertheless, this achievement is bittersweet as the scenery around us grows ever more dark and uncertain. Two decades after the signing of the Declaration of Principles that many hoped would usher in the creation of a Palestinian state and independence, freedom and security, Palestinians and Israelis are barely conversational. The structures created by those agreements have atrophied, corrupted by an increasing imbalance in the Palestinian relationship with Israel. Every day, there is new word of land confiscations, arrests, demolitions, and legislative maneuvers to solidify Israel's control. Israel's political leaders are beholden to a tide of right-wing sentiment and Palestinian leaders are made to appear ever-smaller in their shrinking spheres of control.

    We are now, it appears, at the lowest point in the arc of the pendulum, one that is swinging away from the two-state solution into a known unknown: an apartheid Israel. How this new "one-state" option will be transformed into a solution that provides freedom and security for all remains to be seen.

    Israeli partner Yossi Alpher adds this:


    We are ceasing publication for reasons involving fatigue--on a number of
    fronts. First, there is donor fatigue. Why, donors ask, should we continue to support a Middle East dialogue project that not only has not made peace, but cannot "prove" to our satisfaction--especially at a time of revolution and violence throughout the region--that it has indeed raised the level of civilized discussion? Why fight the Israeli right-wing campaign against European and American state funding and the Palestinian campaign against "normalization"?

    These last two negative developments also reflect local fatigue. There is no peace process and no prospect of one. Informal "track II" dialogue--bitterlemons might be described as a "virtual" track II--is declining. Here and there, writers from the region who used to favor us with their ideas and articles are now begging off, undoubtedly deterred by the revolutionary rise of intolerant political forces in their countries or neighborhood.




    LIL'AIPAC the HYPOCRITE still hasn't answered how he thinks he can approve settlement building on land set aside for a Palestinian state, and further that Palestinians home is in Jordan because there never was a Palestine. Niether of those two beliefs goes along with believing in a two state solution. How does this Zionist pain in the ass think he can have it both ways ?







    LIL'AIPAC your standing on and talking out of both sides of this issue won't work,

    WHICH WAY DO YOU WANT IT ? EIther you are for Settlement building which eats up land set aside for a Palestinian State which only frustrates the chances for that state or you are for a STATE OF PALESTINE AND AGAINST SETTLEMENT BUILDING.


    YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2012 6:01 PM GMT
    I say fuck the fucking two state solution. The Zionist entity should be removed,
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2012 7:21 PM GMT
    yourname2000 saidThis is just another one of the fucktard Wolverine's douchy hate-on Palestinian threads. So I say we fill it up with hot pics of Jewish and Arab men we want to have sex with. I'll go first....Avi Dar.

    tumblr_m1vfxzMkPZ1r7bir1o1_500.jpg

    And here's a hot Turkish dude:
    tumblr_lp0oesozht1qm28e4o1_500.jpg

    And an Arab dude:
    1141128.jpg

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    HOT DAMN !!!!!


    GO TO THE END OF THE LINE ALL YOU BLONDS !!!!



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 30, 2012 11:11 PM GMT
    19Chris91 saidI say fuck the fucking two state solution. The Zionist entity should be removed,





    I guess LIL'AIPAC is too busy spamming with his old posts to respond to any on topic posts.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 3:52 AM GMT
    [quote][cite]realifedad said[/cite]
    realifedad said
    LIL'AIPAC, The Clinton Parameters are one thing,

    BUT YOUR PROMOTING THEM WHILE BELIEVING THAT THE WEST

    BANK BELONGS TO ISRAEL AND THAT THE PALESTINIANS HOMELAND

    IS IN JORDAN, MAKES YOU A LIEING HYPOCRITE !!!


    Do you still agree with your professor fathers propaganda as he wrote in an article: "WHY DO PALESTINIANS NEED TWO HOMELANDS" he goes on to write that greater Israel (the West Bank/or Judea and Sameria) belong to the jews and that Palestinians homeland is in Jordan.

    The above is why you think that Settlements in the Palestinian Homeland of the West Bank are not wrong but the Jews right, Have you now changed your miind ?

    WILL YOU IGNORE THIS FACT THIS TIME AROUND ? OR LIE and deny these facts.



    DO TELL, we are waiting LIL'AIPAC


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Maybe if you'd discuss the hypocracy I expose above, and talk that through then and only then could we view this as an 'honest' effort on your part.

    Still waiting for these points to be addressed, Your ignoring these facts only diminishes your credibiliby. CARE TO RESPOND ?






    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Your Spamming has been reported again





    HMMMMM !!! LIL'AIPAC is apparently repeating posts directed at Pouncer that he didn't even write in this current forum. SOMETHINGS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE. LOL



    LIL'AIPAC, would you like to give a reasonable reply to the GOYIM ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 6:59 AM GMT
    LIL'AIPAC, The Clinton Parameters are one thing,

    BUT YOUR PROMOTING THEM WHILE BELIEVING THAT THE WEST

    BANK BELONGS TO ISRAEL AND THAT THE PALESTINIANS HOMELAND

    IS IN JORDAN, MAKES YOU A LIEING HYPOCRITE !!!


    Do you still agree with your professor fathers propaganda as he wrote in an article: "WHY DO PALESTINIANS NEED TWO HOMELANDS" he goes on to write that greater Israel (the West Bank/or Judea and Sameria) belong to the jews and that Palestinians homeland is in Jordan.

    The above is why you think that Settlements in the Palestinian Homeland of the West Bank are not wrong but the Jews right, Have you now changed your miind ?

    WILL YOU IGNORE THIS FACT THIS TIME AROUND ? OR LIE and deny these facts.



    DO TELL, we are waiting LIL'AIPAC

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 4:04 PM GMT
    realifedad said
    southbeach1500 saidWhen will the RJ Arab-Israeli war end???????





    Probably when LIL'AIPAC the current (Wolverine4) stops trying baffle us with bullshit.

    Who does LIL'AIPAC think he's fooling with this damn Clinton Parameters bullshit he keeps bringing up when the reality is that LIL'AIPAC agrees with his professor father who wrote a lengthy article about their belief that Palestinians don't need a "second homeland" because according to them, their homeland is in Jordan and all of Samaria and Judia (the West Bank ) belongs to Israel.

    That is why LIL'AIPAC supports the settlements and also supports Netanyahu and Lieberman who keep promoting even more settlement building to the tune of nearly 8000 more untis approved over the last year.

    LIL'AIPAC and the Zionist Zealots leading Israel cannot have it both ways, they cannot logically approve of the supposed 'Clinton Parameters' while building settlements beyond those Parameters.

    Point is, as long as this liar for his cause LIL'AIPAC spins his lies there exists an obligation to expose him and tell the real story.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    Will the GOYIM GET ANSWERS THIS TIME ? LOL


    OR JUST MORE SPAMMING OF PRESCRIBED PROPAGANDA
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 5:40 PM GMT
    STILL NO REASONABLE RESPONSES TO THE GOYIM FROM THE LIL'AIPAC SPAMMER


    IS THIS QUESTION SO HARD ?


    LIL'AIPAC, The Clinton Parameters are one thing,

    BUT YOUR PROMOTING THEM WHILE BELIEVING THAT THE WEST

    BANK BELONGS TO ISRAEL AND THAT THE PALESTINIANS HOMELAND

    IS IN JORDAN, MAKES YOU A LIEING HYPOCRITE !!!


    Do you still agree with your professor fathers propaganda as he wrote in an article: "WHY DO PALESTINIANS NEED TWO HOMELANDS" he goes on to write that greater Israel (the West Bank/or Judea and Sameria) belong to the jews and that Palestinians homeland is in Jordan.

    The above is why you think that Settlements in the Palestinian Homeland of the West Bank are not wrong but the Jews right, Have you now changed your miind ?

    WILL YOU IGNORE THIS FACT THIS TIME AROUND ? OR LIE and deny these facts.



    DO TELL, we are waiting LIL'AIPAC



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 9:22 PM GMT
    Clinton had sensible proposals on the whole Israeli-Palestinian issue. I don't understand why they got nowhere.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 31, 2012 10:36 PM GMT
    DCGayJock saidClinton had sensible proposals on the whole Israeli-Palestinian issue. I don't understand why they got nowhere.




    Here's seemingly a pretty well rounded take on what happened the jist of it was that Hardliner Sharron dropped the ball after Barak had come so close, Later on Netanyahu dropped he ball from his predicessor, but of course the Palestinians always get the blame from the Zionist Far right Apologists like our RJ, LIL'AIPAC.


    here it is:

    This is from Frontline.com





    The peace process began with the Oslo accord of 1993. It ended with the last negotiating sessions at Taba, Egypt, in 2001. Over seven years, Palestinian and Israeli negotiators struggled to reach an agreement that could end the 100-year Middle East conflict. In the many carefully negotiated agreements there were positive developments, but also severe setbacks.

    Deeper and deeper mistrust grew on both sides. Palestinians accused Israel of failing to stop expanding Jewish settlements and stalling on agreed withdrawals from West Bank territory. Israel accused Arafat and the Palestinian security forces -- which were established by Oslo -- of not cracking down on militant groups that were trying to sabotage the peace process.

    Here are summaries of the major steps taken in the search for peace, both sides' views of these steps, and video inside the Wye River and Camp

















    "Impasse at Camp David" (6:00)

    A glimpse of the deadlock over the toughest, most sensitive issues. On final borders, Arafat failed to reply to Clinton's compromise proposal and Barak then refused to negotiate with Arafat. But their aides -- the Israeli and Palestinian negotiators -- didn't want to give up.


















    Prime Minister Ehud Barak urged Clinton to convene this summit. Barak wanted to push for a permanent agreement -- skipping interim redeployments called for in the Wye agreement -- and envisioned a two-state solution that would end the conflict.

    Issues never before discussed at senior levels between Israelis and Palestinians -- Jerusalem, statehood, boundaries, refugees -- were put on the table. Barak and Clinton suggested a path-breaking plan permitting a Palestinian state with a capital in Jerusalem. But the Palestinians criticized Barak for coming to Camp David with a proposal for dividing the West Bank they had already rejected. And,in their eyes, the Clinton/Barak plan would have left the new Palestinian state with significant loss of water and good land, almost split by Israeli annexation running east from Jerusalem, and with Israel getting roughly 9 percent of the West Bank. However, U.S. and Israeli officials contend that throughout the summit, the Palestinians rejected Israeli proposals while offering no proposal of their own. Publicly, both Clinton and Barak blamed Arafat for the failure to reach an agreement on a two-state solution.

    Despite the setback, however, Arafat and Barak approved a new series of secret meetings between the negotiators over the following months.












    Analysis:

    » An Interview with Ehud Barak
    FRONTLINE's interview with Ehud Barak in which he discusses Camp David.

    » An Interview with Yasser Arafat
    FRONTLINE's interview with Yasser Arafat in which he discusses Camp David.

    » An Interview with Saeb Erekat
    FRONTLINE's interview with Saeb Erekat about Camp David

    » "The Negotiation Strategies of Israel and the Palestinians"
    Gilead Sher, one of Israel's chief negotiators from 1999-2001, summarizes each sides' dramatically different political strategies and tactical approaches to the negotiations, and how Arafat was a critical obstacle throughout the peace talks. (Note: Sher's article appears toward the end of this newsletter; his is the third out of four essays.)

    » "The Compromise That Wasn't Found at Camp David"
    An article in Ha'aretz summing up Palestinians' objections to Barak's proposals. It includes two maps showing the Palestinian version of Israel's proposal for the final-status arrangement for the West Bank and Jerusalem.

    » An Interview with Shlomo Ben-Ami on Camp David
    Drawing on the diary he kept, Shlomo Ben-Ami, Ehud Barak's representative at the peace talks, discusses in this Ha'aretz magazine interview the stormy details of Camp David's negotiations and the subsequent progress made at the Taba meeting. He analyzes the issues that ultimately derailed an agreement and offers a harsh appraisal of Yasser Arafat as a leader.

    » "Camp David and After: An Exchange"
    This June 2002 article in the New York Review of Books lays out Barak's view of Camp David's failure. It's followed by an opposing viewpoint from Robert Malley, Clinton's special assistant for Arab-Israeli affairs who was at Camp David, and Hussein Agha of Oxford University.

    » "A Different Take on Camp David Collapse"
    A summary by The Washington Post of the Palestinian version of what happened at Camp David, a version diametrically opposed to the Israeli view.

























    In a desperate attempt to salvage the peace effort before Israel's election (hard-liner Ariel Sharon was forecast to defeat Barak) negotiators met in the Egyptian resort of Taba, focusing on new parameters for an agreement which had been developed by Clinton the previous month. The new terms went further than what Israel and the U.S. had offered at Camp David.

    In contrast to Camp David, the Palestinians this time made counter-offers. After a week of off-and-on negotiations, senior Palestinian and Israeli negotiators announced they had never been more close to reaching agreement on final-status issues. But they had run out of political time. They couldn't conclude an agreement with Clinton now out of office and Barak standing for reelection in two weeks. "We made progress, substantial progress. We are closer than ever to the possibility of stiriking a final deal," said Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israel's negotiator. Saeb Erekat, Palestinian chief negotiator, said, "My heart aches because I know we were so close. We need six more weeks to conclude the drafting of the agreement."












    Analysis:

    » "Deconstructing the Taba Talks"
    The Foundation for Middle East Peace's analysis of how the Taba meeting constituted a breakthrough in the negotiations, with details on the final-status map presented by Israeli


    » An Interview with Ehud Barak
    FRONTLINE's interview with Ehud Barak in which he discusses the Taba talks.

    » Clinton's Speech on Reaching a Final Agreement
    Just 13 days before he was to leave office, Clinton presented this overview of the peace process, with details on the new "parameters" he had developed to bridge the impasse at Camp David -- parameters which became the foundation for the Taba negotiations.

    » "The Peace that Nearly Was at Taba"
    From Ha'aretz, a summary of the Taba talks, with a link to the report prepared by E.U. envoy Miguel Moratinos that highlights the progress made at Taba in addressing the greatest challenges to a final peace agreement. While Moratinos' summary has no official status, he interviewed negotiators after their sessions and this final version was agreed to by both sides.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 1:54 AM GMT
    DCGayJock saidClinton had sensible proposals on the whole Israeli-Palestinian issue. I don't understand why they got nowhere.

    Good question.
    See:

    UN Security Council Resolution 242, Oslo Accords, Camp David & Taba.
    I support the CLINTON COMPROMISE parameters. Yet the war-mongering anti-Israel trolls do not.

    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/354843
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 2:18 AM GMT
    Wolverine4 said
    DCGayJock saidClinton had sensible proposals on the whole Israeli-Palestinian issue. I don't understand why they got nowhere.

    Good question.
    See:

    UN Security Council Resolution 242, Oslo Accords, Camp David & Taba.
    I support the CLINTON COMPROMISE parameters. http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/354843






    ______________________________________________________
    from LIL'AIPAC's own words >>>> UN Security Council Resolution 242, Oslo Accords, Camp David & Taba.
    I support the CLINTON COMPROMISE parameters. Yet the war-mongering anti-Israel trolls do not
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The above is a hillarious addition to more repeat spamming that must be noted. LAUGHING MY ASS OFF (LMAO)


    This LIL'AIPAC LIAR time after time is promoting war with Iran, while we the "GOYIM" PROMOTE REASONS NOT TO GO TO WAR, and yet this godamn liar writes above "anti israel war mongers", Does this idiot think no one can read for themselves. What an f'n liar !!!


    POOR LIL'AIPAC claims he's for the 2 state solution "Clinton Parameters", YET APPROVES OF THE SETTLEMENT STEALING OF PALESTINE LAND SET ASIDE FOR THEIR STATE. IN ADDITION HAS MANY TIME PROMOTED THAT THERE NEVER WAS A PALESTINE AND THAT THEY HAVE NO LAND RIGHTS UNTIL GIVEN SO BY AGREEMENT WITH ISREAL>


    LIL"AIPAC WE ARE ALL CAPABLE OF READING AND UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS


    FELLOW READERS CAN YOU BELIEVE THE AUDACITY OF THESE LIES ?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 6:45 AM GMT
    Hey guys !! Here's some new info for you. and Pouncer, LIL'AIPAC's last post went backt just his same old post, so much for progress and no responses for the "GOYIM". LOL !!!




    TRAPPED BY PHILIP WEISS OF MONDOWEISS, Tells his experiences about his 7th or 8th visit to Isael / Palestine and how the settlements and walls are killing any hopes of a two state solution.

    This was my 7th or 8th trip, and I was happy to leave this time. In the last 24 hours I witnessed four threatening incidents on the street, all trivial, yet all contributing to the overwhelming sense of darkness and martial law. The place simply doesn’t work politically. Hillary Clinton’s mantra that the status quo is unsustainable is a thin scraping of the truth, this is a situation of tremendous political imbalance and revolutionary feeling. I wish I could give all my friends passports. One older friend said, There is a 10 percent chance that this situation won’t end in Bosnia.

    Anyone with any sense of the real conditions understands that the two state solution is over. That awareness is widespread within the elites and intelligentsia of Israel and all over Palestine. Yossi Sarid said it in Haaretz, and the knowledge is working its way to the United States. The recent Times op-ed by Dani Dayan, the settler leader, stating that the land is ours and we’re not going away was a healthy intervention by the New York Times in our political life-- trying to break the news to the fantasists that there will be no viable Palestinian state in the West Bank. Anyone who has spent many days inside the occupation can explain why this is the case. I will do so in posts in days to come: show that this is a land of inequality and apartheid and subjugation.

    Here's one example that I find crushing. When I left Israel two days ago, I walked down the great ramp of the Ben Gurion airport exit hall past two dozen images on the walls from the collection of the Israel Museum, beautiful objects showing he history of the land. And when you have gone halfway down the ramp you realize that you will see no Palestinian images. There are images from Egypt and Algeria, something from Persia too, but everything else is Jewish. Jewish coins from the 1st century BC. Beautiful Jewish sculpture and paintings. An iconic black-and-white photo of a Zionist athlete. I did not see a mention of Palestine or the indigenous people. So in this last salute from Israel to the traveler, the central political claim is restated: This place belongs to us, and we have removed all evidence of the people who were here before us. Palestinians are beneath contempt.


    More to come
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 7:33 AM GMT
    Nothing above to see Pouncer but another repeat,


    NO RESPONSES TO "GOYIM" QUESTIONS AND POINTS FROM JEWISH WRITERS EITHER, MAYBE ITS THE COMBINATION. LOL

    Here's more of PHILIP WEISS article on MONDOWEISS

    Another quick example: at an affluent Jewish settlement deep in Palestinian East Jerusalem that looks like a fancy development in New Jersey, there is a fine brick sidewalk. The sidewalk simply stops when the road enters the neighboring Palestinian area. Now the side of the road is dirt and trash. The settlement is served by an Israeli national bus line. The Palestinians—and mind you both groups are in “Israeli” East Jerusalem-- get no such services... .

    The man who showed me these apartheid conditions, Jeff Halper of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, is a famously-ebullient spirit, for he can mix mirth with tragedy in the same breath. But as Halper said, the political despair is so profound here, and the polarization of Israel and Palestine so complete, that some activists seem to have abandoned the South Africa model and begun to turn in their hearts to the Algeria model: you Israelis are a bunch of colonialists who don’t belong here. In a word, the two sides can’t imagine a future living with one another.

    I don’t know whether this is true. I spent less time in the activist community than I have on visits past. The nonviolent struggle was at an ebb because of Ramadan, and I had the impression that the nonviolent struggle is approaching a new chapter, maybe, hopefully, a more international chapter—witness the fact that Ben Ehrenreich is writing about the nonviolent movement in Nabi Saleh for the New York Times Magazine.

    The great fear of course is that Palestinians will abandon a nonviolent approach. This was the fear that Mustapha Barghouti expressed at J Street in March to a room packed with 500 people in which you could hear a pin drop. Hamas leaders laughed at me when we told them nonviolence is the answer, he said in so many words, and then when we got international attention, they came to me and said, This stuff actually works. Then Barghouti challenged the largely-Jewish room: We cannot continue without a sense of progress. People in Palestine must feel that they are achieving something by this pacifist response.

    I don’t think they should resort to violence, I pray that they don't. And yet it's difficult to understand why they haven’t. The message that Israel has dispossessed Palestine and blindered itself to Palestinians’ humanity and tossed them into Bantustans is everywhere so blunt, whether you are in an Orthodox settlement in Ramot, or in the barricaded city of Hebron, or the martial city of East Jerusalem where young Jews in uniform walk through the Muslim quarter with their fingers on the triggers of their M16s, that were I Palestinian I would be filled with dreams of rebellion.

    Palestinians talk about the occupation endlessly. After visiting Yad Vashem my last day I had Iftar dinner (breaking the Ramadan fast) at the home of an old friend in East Jerusalem, and one of his relatives complained angrily of the humiliation involved in entering Palestine from Jordan--which entails a burdensome and arbitrary visa application process in Amman-- even as Israelis can drive their cars into Jordan without any fuss. I’m talking about a secular highly educated household. My friend and I drank bourbon and he got out an Ipad to show the family Jon Stewart’s riff on Romney and Palestinian culture, and everyone was roaring. Yes, this was a great cross-cultural moment, and these Muslims actually feel represented in the U.S. by Jon Stewart. But will that be enough to lift the bleakness? No.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 1:43 PM GMT
    Nothing above but a repeat spamming,

    but here's more on the subject, from those who should know in Israel: comments from Israeli's about Phill Weiss's artical which should give an Idea of the fate of Clintons 'Parameters' abused by Israel's Settlement theft of land, the continued Occupation and the negative results.


    the rug.

    Log in to Reply



    just says:

    August 5, 2012 at 5:33 pm


    “My own despair springs from the fact that for years I thought I could do something to help them, but this time round I seem to have lost that belief.”

    ==========

    Mr. Weiss, you write so very eloquently.

    Don’t lose any of your beliefs that you can help– you and your wonderful “team”do it everyday.

    And I thank you for this.

    Log in to Reply



    Avi_G. says:

    August 5, 2012 at 5:51 pm



    I’m afraid for him, as I’m afraid for the security service woman who interrogated me at the airport two mornings ago.

    Phil, she didn’t interrogate you. You’re an American, you’re white, and you’re Jewish. She merely questioned you.

    Interrogations are far more intrusive, humiliating and nerve racking. You would be seething in anger and reeling about it in a 5000-word essay if you were put through the grueling experience of undergoing an interrogation.


    [...] as I’m afraid for the security service woman. [...] Neither of them chose to be born into this trap.

    I have to disagree. The female security employee has a choice, on several levels.

    On a personal level, many Israelis choose this particular job of working as security personnel at the airport because it’s relatively easy, it pays very well and the hours are great. You may have noticed that most of them are young. There is a reason for that as many take this job after their military service, usually around the age of 22 and before they go to university.

    On a group level, that woman is privileged as she belongs to a group that has chosen to inflict pain and suffering on another group.

    Although, I must say, I find your conclusion offensive for the following reason. It is offensive that you would feel sympathy for someone who CHOOSES to do a job that requires her to discriminate against non-Jews, especially against the Palestinian citizens of Israel, all the while you claim that she had no choice when she was born into that trap of a state.

    She has the option of choosing any other job in Israel, especially since many places now require “previous military experience” — a round-about way of discriminating against non-Jewish Israelis.

    Had you lived through WWII and encountered a young Nazi soldier for whose safety you were afraid because he was born into that trap, then I would have said that it was mighty big of you to fear for him.


    My own despair springs from the fact that for years I thought I could do something to help them, but this time round I seem to have lost that belief.

    This reflects my own feelings from about twenty years ago.

    Although I’m sure that for Danaa such sentiments were rather common in the late 1960s. She saw the warning signs back then.


    You bitch, I will fuck you up,” because of a confrontation that began when I reached over his shoulder to look at a rug hanging from a wall.

    [...]


    That’s one way to explain the shopkeeper who kept screaming at me, You bitch, you bitch, as I walked away.

    Were you carrying with you a bag that could have accidentally bumped into his backside as you were reaching over his shoulder?

    He may have thought that you were trying to humiliate him, sexually, especially since you stood behind him, not in front of him.

    But more importantly, do you have the same perceptions about personal space when you are in the U.S.? Do you reach over people’s shoulders like that?

    What I’m getting at is that I found it far more helpful to behave the same, without altering my behavior based on my own perceptions of what the local norms and customs may or may not be. Why? Because sometimes our perceptions of what is or is not acceptable are simply wrong.

    Log in to Reply


    Daniel Rich says:

    August 6, 2012 at 1:51 am


    @ Avi_G,

    You’ve saved me a lot of time. I couldn’t agree more. Well said en formulated.

    Log in to Reply


    Mooser says:

    August 6, 2012 at 10:24 am


    “How will Israelis respond to such an appeal? I asked.”

    They will regard it as an existential threat, he said.”


    I’m always grateful to have another classic Jewish joke to add to my collection. Thanx, Phil.

    Log in to Reply




    NickJOCW says:

    August 6, 2012 at 9:49 am


    @Avi-G

    You write at the aggressive end of response to Philip’s compassion for the Security woman. If, as you propose, she is 22 then she was born around 1990 and will, I imagine, be fairly typical of her generation. One really shouldn’t be that surprised that a young person growing up in Israel during that period will have absorbed her society’s values and attitudes. One can, however, be fearful for them that they have.

    Log in to Reply


    Avi_G. says:

    August 6, 2012 at 8:00 pm



    NickJOCW says:

    [...] If, as you propose, she is 22

    I’m not proposing; I know from personal knowledge.


    One really shouldn’t be that surprised that a young person growing up in Israel during that period will have absorbed her society’s values and attitudes.

    When one considers the makeup of society, it is the sum total of its members, of individuals. But since you present members of society as blind, yet innocent and helpless sheep then at what point does personal responsibility come into play?

    Does Phil fear for Netanyahu, as well? After all, there are far more fanatic radicals in Israel who are applying pressure on Netanyahu. So how is Netanyahu any different than that female security drone?

    I have no compassion for fascism. I can’t. Alas Israeli society is a fascist society.

    So I won’t fear for that female security drone’s safety. I fear HER and her drone-like ilk. She isn’t trapped as Phil suggests. She has many choices as a member of a privileged group. And in a worse-case scenario she would have the resources and ability of leaving Israel and moving elsewhere, like others have done.

    I view Phil’s concern as exonerating her of all responsibility.





  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 3:09 PM GMT
    Well surprise !!! surprise !!!! Just more spamming with the very same Propaganda post repeated about 8 times now, Handy that the SPAMMER LIL'AIPAC at least removes the old one so its not flooding space, HERE'S SOME NEW INFORMATION ON THE TOPIC.



    Israeli settlements in the West Bank reduce the prospects for a two-state solution by undermining the establishment of a viable Palestinian state.

    The construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank has been one of Israel's most unpopular policies at domestic, regional, and international levels. While Palestinian terrorism has routinely undermined the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and continues to terrorize Israeli civilians, Israel's settlement policies have done little to counter these violent forces or increase the prospects for peace. In addition to frustrating the disgruntled Palestinian masses and strengthening radical elements that advocate violent resistance against the Israelis, settlement activities in the West Bank serve as an increasingly steep barrier to a two-state solution between the two peoples


    Read more at Suite101: Israeli Settlements in West Bank and the Two-State Solution | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/israeli-settlements-in-west-bank-and-the-two-state-solution-a406217#ixzz25EOCwShi
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 4:31 PM GMT
    Ahhhhhh nothing new but a spamming repeat,


    can anyone see the new info above for all the spamming ?

    Here's the jist of it, the Clinton parameters are nothing in light of the continueing settlement theft of land and this fact is well documented by the UN's many resolutions.

    The construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank has been one of Israel's most unpopular policies at domestic, regional, and international levels. While Palestinian terrorism has routinely undermined the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and continues to terrorize Israeli civilians, Israel's settlement policies have done little to counter these violent forces or increase the prospects for peace. In addition to frustrating the disgruntled Palestinian masses and strengthening radical elements that advocate violent resistance against the Israelis, settlement activities in the West Bank serve as an increasingly steep barrier to a two-state solution between the two peoples
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 01, 2012 5:47 PM GMT
    OH MY GOD !!! What false premise to this topic, Those of us against the Israeli /US NEO CON push for war are here accused of being the "WAR MONGERS", and to boot, we who are against the Israeli Zionist Greater Israel push to settle the Palestinians land are at fault for the settlements blocking the peace process by the way the topic reads.


    Lets see how this works for godamn Zionist settlement expansionists, HMMMM !!! They don't believe that Palestine ever existed, they believe Palestinians homeland is in Jordan, they believe thereby that Israel's far right leadership is right in expanding into land set aside for a palestinian state, which is against UN / INternational law, BUT ITS THE PALESTINIANS FAULT FOR THE LACK OF PEACE.


    MY MY !!! IN WHAT WORLD DOES IT WORK FOR THE THEIVES TO DEMAND THEIR VICTIMS NEGOTIATE THE END OF THEIR THEIVING ?


    LIL'AIPAC won't respond to the "GOYIM" ON SUCH SMART ASSED INSINUATIONS OF WRONGDOING, BUT ITS THE 'GOYIMS' FAULT FOR NOT RESPONDING.



    SOMEHOW THE ZIONIST ABOVE HAS EVERYTHING BACKWARDS









    OH !!!!! I ALMOST FORGOT, THERE'S NOTHING BUT MORE SPAM ABOVE