This is a challenge to Neri and all the peacemakers here to explain to me in practical and not theoretical terms how peace can become a reality by:
Listening to the Palestinian NARRATIVE that includes the
-NAQBA,NAQSA, violent occupation, apartheid state
- No Jewish State, Return of Refugees, No Jewish history
- Jerusalem is an Arab city and no territorial compromise
Let me also point out that the recent unilateral declaration of independence request to the UN also seems to be a roadblock.
Jeff, I think you are in the wrong place, this is a peace activist place,
you are anti Palestine and have no belief in possibility of peace with the palestinians, post after post
I am not sure I follow - I want peace, I am guessing as much as you. I don't want to fight in wars. I dont want to live with teh fear of me or my family being killed by terrorists. The question is how we get there. I am not anti-Palestinian, I am for a just lasting peace.
We cannot ignore statistics when it does not suit us. I was responding to your comments to Michael like " you are fixtated with the radical voices of Palestine". My point is simply I think these ideas are more wide spead. Am I happy about this, no but not sure why this makes me against peace. Strange how the "peace camp" think they have a monopoly of peace, I want "peace now" I do, I just don't want to end up in peices later. I would hope you would respect that and adress the points that I have made not make accusation about my intentions. I believe it was you who was urging teh end to personal attacks, and yet here you are leading one against me.
I honestly appreciate your opinion, I wish you would respect mine.
Another lecture for Jeff simply because he does not follow your agenda and TELLS the Israeli and Jewish side in reply to Radical Palestinian Arab views. Is that anti peace according to Your wisdom? Perhaps you can outline how we can bring the Arabs back to the negotiating table and your vision of how peace will be achieved and policed.
I also scoured the various postings of the pro Palestinian crowd and it would seem that they are not lectured to. An oversight perhaps or is that the peace activist agenda rather than peace.
Neri, am I missing something ? The only voice of "moderation and reason" (LOL) that I see here is Sussan. At least she says something in a straithforward way. The other peacemakers, whenever they make an appearance, is simply to lecture without any content as to the reasoning. They happen to be far and few between . Out of the 4000 plus there may be 1 or two postings (in a busy week) per week.
You may see a lot of potential but frankly, in the current environment, I see no hope. All I see is an intransigent Abbas and cheering crowds for that position. I see no demonstrations for peace on the Arab side and I see a well entrenched Hamas calling for Israels destruction. I see only evil and nothing good in a Palestinian state that calls for the flooding of Israel with foreign Arabs and one where the twin charters of both PLO and Hamas call for the elimination of Israel.
All I see are radical Palestinians whether in Israel or around the world. It is funny that although we have a large Palestinian population , no one that arrived here pre 1967 calls himself a Palestinian or even a refugee. Why is that, Neri?
BTW: The naming of squares and buildings after terrorist-WHAT do you call that-Benign?
I tell you what, Michael, your comments above are like someone saying most black people are the Nation of Islam and think just like Farrakhan even if a lot of them do. However, such prejudiced thinking from colonials is not surprising. They had to demean and dehumanize those they dispossessed and occupied to assuage their conscience, and then Stern goes on how the white man of the West is civilized and what not...It's a very old narrative that is many decades old used to justify conquest of others.
Palestinians under UN resolution 242 are not required to accept that Israel be called a Jewish state. That's an internal Israeli matter. That idea was brought up around 2005 by Ariel Sharon's government when Abbas was trying to find ways to placate the Americans, meet their demands, and follow the Road Map. To make things more difficult, that concept was brought up because even Abbas's moderate stance wasn't enough for an Israel that wants to keep the West Bank and build more settlements. The more the PLO tried to compromise, the more Israel moved the goal posts.
Israel at any rate rejected under Netanyahu the two state solution based on UN Resolution 242. So, there is no international basis to negotiate a peace settlement or recognize even the Israel of 1948. Thus, it's more than understandable that Abbas put it back at the UN since Israel's Netanyahu is rejecting the international understandings and Israel even agreed to UN 242, and the wording in English was even drafted by an ally of Israel i.e. Goldberg, I believe. The French and Russian texts were not as generous to Israel. However, since Israel built all those settlements and wants to build more, it has put itself in a trap.
242 does not mention anything about a Palestinian state or Palestinians - anywhere... Withdrawel of troops was from Jordan and Egypt to "secure borders" not all teh borders.... But resolution 181 does say that Palestine will be divided into a JEWISH and ARAB state - this is from 1947 well before Ariel Sharon.
Talk about goal posts - the whole no buling settlements is a major shift that did not exist for 15 years previous...
Perhaps Basil should also learn about Jordans annexation of Judea and Samaria and its recognition by the UK and Pakistan.
The Partition of 1947 was made Null and Void by that annexation as well by the failure of the Arab States and the Palestinian leadership to agree. Contracts are null and void if not agreed and signed by all the parties and not subject to a second try after the elapse of 63 years.
There is a new reality and new negotiations based on secure and recognized borders as per 242.
Even Farakhan and the Nation of Islam do not advocate the destruction of the USA and do not follow it with acts of bombings and terror. But in any case this is an orange and apple argument .
242,338 and all the other resolutions do not call for a Palestinian state but rather for negotiations towards a secure border with Egypt, Syria and Jordan (High Contracting Parties). I am flabbergasted at the way that you pulled out a red herring out of mid air and called it a fact.
The operating agreement is Oslo and Oslo calls settlements and Jerusalem a final issue and does not oblige Israel to stop building. That is a fact. Israel was founded in 1947 as a Jewish state with its flag and anthem signifying this. The League of Nations referred to it as "the Jewish Homeland".
If you read 242, it does not call for a "new" Palestinian state but rather a withdrawal to secure and recognized borders. Security is the domain of Israel and not the UN's or the quartet and certainly not the Arab's.
The Arabs cannot be trusted simply as a result of all the wars they started and the terror they initiated.