President Obama Speaks on Middle East
President Obama’s speech on the Middle East is now under way…
[Video removed…]
A transcript: Obama’s Speech on the Middle East.
President Obama’s speech on the Middle East is now under way…
[Video removed…]
A transcript: Obama’s Speech on the Middle East.
3![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 9:33:16am |
4![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 9:35:12am |
Am I allowed to say "Fuck Iran" yet?
5![]() |
Who Watches the Watchmen? Thu, May 19, 2011 9:35:42am |
And it's one, two, three
What are we paying for?
7![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 9:37:03am |
Obama: Assad has a choice, lead the transition, or get out of the way.
Assad: Heh. You don't get to remain a dictator by getting out the way or transitioning to something else. The Hama Rules rule for a reason in the ME (and daddy stayed in power using 'em to the hilt). My own error is that I didn't use enough power to crush the opposition weeks ago.
Unless the US is going to get involved in Syria to the same extent that the US/NATO is in Libya, Assad isn't going anywhere unless the Syrian people rise up and are joined by the military in that uprising. That isn't likely to happen as the military has pretty much remained solidly behind the Assad regime. There were some reports that some units refused to fire on protesters, but they were dealt with by Assad's loyalists.
Sanctions aren't going to get Assad to change tactics.
8![]() |
recusancy Thu, May 19, 2011 9:37:42am |
"Our message is simple: if you take the risks that reform entails, you will have the full support of the United States."
9![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 9:39:10am |
Gubments can't be silently oppressive with the interwebz and twitter, now can they?
11![]() |
Flounder Thu, May 19, 2011 9:40:26am |
I don't why the President is having a speech today, the end of the world is on Saturday, you would think he would find something better to do
/
12![]() |
BARACK THE VOTE Thu, May 19, 2011 9:40:29am |
14![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 9:40:55am |
I have been saying for years that women are the key to a better day.
15![]() |
BARACK THE VOTE Thu, May 19, 2011 9:41:32am |
16![]() |
Who Watches the Watchmen? Thu, May 19, 2011 9:41:34am |
17![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 9:41:35am |
Hot Air commenter....
And he wonders why many Americans think he’s a Muslim.
18![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 9:41:42am |
re: #11 Shropshire_Slasher
I don't why the President is having a speech today, the end of the world is on Saturday, you would think he would find something better to do
/
Like stopping hamburgers from skool lunches!!!
///
19![]() |
Who Watches the Watchmen? Thu, May 19, 2011 9:43:25am |
trade > aid
investment > assistance
That sounds like a job for the private sector.
22![]() |
Stanghazi Thu, May 19, 2011 9:44:03am |
Here's the transcript and the word cloud (I like word clouds!)
[Link: politicalwire.com...]
23![]() |
watching you tiny alien kittens are Thu, May 19, 2011 9:45:17am |
re: #18 Cannadian Club Akbar
Like stopping hamburgers from skool lunches!!!
///
That would be removing Pork from skool lunches, him being a muslim and all...
///
24![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 9:45:39am |
re: #20 Lidane
How hiring: Head choppers.
/
25![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 9:46:22am |
re: #23 ausador
That would be removing Pork from skool lunches, him being a muslim and all...
///
No, silly. It just Pork Chop shaped!! (the ones I had were)
26![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 9:46:49am |
This part is particularly good - because he admits that his own Administration's policies towards Bahrain, Yemen, and even the Saudis has been flawed:
Our opposition to Iran's intolerance - as well as its illicit nuclear program, and its sponsorship of terror - is well known. But if America is to be credible, we must acknowledge that our friends in the region have not all reacted to the demands for change consistent with the principles that I have outlined today. That is true in Yemen, where President Saleh needs to follow through on his commitment to transfer power. And that is true, today, in Bahrain.
Bahrain is a long-standing partner, and we are committed to its security. We recognize that Iran has tried to take advantage of the turmoil there, and that the Bahraini government has a legitimate interest in the rule of law. Nevertheless, we have insisted publically and privately that mass arrests and brute force are at odds with the universal rights of Bahrain's citizens, and will not make legitimate calls for reform go away. The only way forward is for the government and opposition to engage in a dialogue, and you can't have a real dialogue when parts of the peaceful opposition are in jail. The government must create the conditions for dialogue, and the opposition must participate to forge a just future for all Bahrainis.
27![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 9:46:58am |
re: #22 Stanley Sea
And for this season of change to succeed, Coptic Christians must have the right to worship freely in Cairo, just as Shia must never have their mosques destroyed in Bahrain.
Sneaky Obama speaking out in favor of Christians just to cover how Muslim he is!
28![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 9:47:56am |
I like this:
For the Palestinians, efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure. Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won't create an independent state. Palestinian leaders will not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and rejection. And Palestinians will never realize their independence by denying the right of Israel to exist.
29![]() |
BARACK THE VOTE Thu, May 19, 2011 9:51:28am |
That is the choice that must be made - not simply in this conflict, but across the entire region - a choice between hate and hope; between the shackles of the past, and the promise of the future. It's a choice that must be made by leaders and by people, and it's a choice that will define the future of a region that served as the cradle of civilization and a crucible of strife.
30![]() |
Ericus58 Thu, May 19, 2011 9:53:56am |
Sovereign and continuous State in regards to a Palestine......
*raises eyebrows as to what that actually means
31![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 9:55:27am |
re: #28 Obdicut
With that in mind, how exactly can he turn around and restart the peace process when that's precisely the situation Israel faces? With Hamas involved in the PA, the amount of pretzel logic need to claim that the Palestinians accept a 2-state solution is mind-boggling, especially when both Hamas and Fatah refuse to accept Israel (Fatah being part of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority).
Heck, we can't even get the PA to adhere to their obligations under Oslo.
It's also notable that Obama didn't mention Jerusalem, but rather that there would be land swaps - parts here, for parts there. Also, I'm curious how he intends to have a contiguous Palestinian state when Gaza and the West Bank are separated as they are now.
33![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 9:55:53am |
And this is going to rile up the a lot of anti-Israel people:
Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people; each state enjoying self-determination, mutual recognition, and peace.
I find the idea of Israel as a perpetually Jewish state problematic in some far future scenarios, but it's certainly an accurate observation.
34![]() |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Thu, May 19, 2011 9:56:38am |
re: #31 lawhawk
With that in mind, how exactly can he turn around and restart the peace process when that's precisely the situation Israel faces? With Hamas involved in the PA, the amount of pretzel logic need to claim that the Palestinians accept a 2-state solution is mind-boggling, especially when both Hamas and Fatah refuse to accept Israel (Fatah being part of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority).
Heck, we can't even get the PA to adhere to their obligations under Oslo.
It's also notable that Obama didn't mention Jerusalem, but rather that there would be land swaps - parts here, for parts there. Also, I'm curious how he intends to have a contiguous Palestinian state when Gaza and the West Bank are separated as they are now.
Really big skywalk.
35![]() |
wrenchwench Thu, May 19, 2011 9:57:35am |
re: #31 lawhawk
It's also notable that Obama didn't mention Jerusalem, but rather that there would be land swaps - parts here, for parts there.
It got a mention, if not much else:
I know that these steps alone will not resolve this conflict. Two wrenching and emotional issues remain: the future of Jerusalem, and the fate of Palestinian refugees. But moving forward now on the basis of territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues in a way that is just and fair, and that respects the rights and aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians.
36![]() |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Thu, May 19, 2011 9:57:40am |
Did the US just remove support from Assad?
38![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 9:58:32am |
re: #8 recusancy
"Our message is simple: if you take the risks that reform entails, you will have the full support of the United States."
Oh Lord. That sounds lovely, but why do I have a vague headache starting...?
40![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 9:59:30am |
42![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:00:05am |
re: #30 Ericus58
Sovereign and continuous State in regards to a Palestine...
*raises eyebrows as to what that actually means
Continuous? Bush said 'contiguous', was it not that?
Either way, I have never known what the hell they're envisioning. Gaza kind of screws that one.
43![]() |
Stanghazi Thu, May 19, 2011 10:00:19am |
Obama: I wouldn't be standing here if past generations hadn't turned to the moral force of nonviolence. #MEspeech
45![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:00:57am |
re: #31 lawhawk
With that in mind, how exactly can he turn around and restart the peace process when that's precisely the situation Israel faces? With Hamas involved in the PA, the amount of pretzel logic need to claim that the Palestinians accept a 2-state solution is mind-boggling, especially when both Hamas and Fatah refuse to accept Israel (Fatah being part of the PLO and the Palestinian Authority).
Heck, we can't even get the PA to adhere to their obligations under Oslo.
It's also notable that Obama didn't mention Jerusalem, but rather that there would be land swaps - parts here, for parts there. Also, I'm curious how he intends to have a contiguous Palestinian state when Gaza and the West Bank are separated as they are now.
A land swap would be rational there, except that it still leaves Gaza as this weird terrorist enclave, and also, the PA is not going to give up the strip. In terms of real estate, it's a gold mine.
46![]() |
Stanghazi Thu, May 19, 2011 10:01:08am |
owillis Oliver Willis
fox: obama siding with palestinians. jeez. like clockwork.
47![]() |
wrenchwench Thu, May 19, 2011 10:01:19am |
re: #40 Alouette
Stuck in cubicle land here. What did he say?
Stanley posted a link to the whole pre-speech transcript.
48![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:01:59am |
re: #33 Obdicut
And this is going to rile up the a lot of anti-Israel people:
I find the idea of Israel as a perpetually Jewish state problematic in some far future scenarios, but it's certainly an accurate observation.
The anti-Israel people can get over themselves.
49![]() |
darthstar Thu, May 19, 2011 10:02:20am |
50![]() |
jhrhv Thu, May 19, 2011 10:02:40am |
Good job Mr. President. Nice strong ending made me proud and even a little hopeful.
51![]() |
sagehen Thu, May 19, 2011 10:03:00am |
re: #30 Ericus58
Sovereign and continuous State in regards to a Palestine...
*raises eyebrows as to what that actually means
Contiguous. He means that since the West Bank and Gaza don't touch, and the only way from one to the other is through Israel, there'll have to be a land swap to put all the people from both into one chunk of space.
(does that mean Israel will get Gaza by giving up a section that borders on the WB? Another great Mediterranean resort? WIN!!)
52![]() |
Stanghazi Thu, May 19, 2011 10:03:28am |
AdamSerwer AdamSerwer
Shorter Republicans on Twitter: Obama is saying everything we would say, but we hate his ME policy anyway
53![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:03:40am |
Woohoo! Code Pink was already sending me furious updates about how much they hated Obama for knuckling under to Netanyahu. The knuckle is complete! The ranting will begin!!
54![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:05:08am |
re: #51 sagehen
Contiguous. He means that since the West Bank and Gaza don't touch, and the only way from one to the other is through Israel, there'll have to be a land swap to put all the people from both into one chunk of space.
(does that mean Israel will get Gaza by giving up a section that borders on the WB? Another great Mediterranean resort? WIN!!)
That means Israel will have to give up a corridor through the Negev so the Palestinians can have a "contiguous" state (of course this will cut Israel in two, thus making it non-contiguous), while the Palestinians give up nothing.
55![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 10:05:13am |
re: #37 Obdicut
Thanks. Missed that part (should have searched).
56![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 10:05:16am |
re: #46 Stanley Sea
owillis Oliver Willis
fox: obama siding with palestinians. jeez. like clockwork.
re: #53 SanFranciscoZionist
Woohoo! Code Pink was already sending me furious updates about how much they hated Obama for knuckling under to Netanyahu. The knuckle is complete! The ranting will begin!!
Lol@theCrazee!
57![]() |
recusancy Thu, May 19, 2011 10:05:18am |
re: #51 sagehen
Contiguous. He means that since the West Bank and Gaza don't touch, and the only way from one to the other is through Israel, there'll have to be a land swap to put all the people from both into one chunk of space.
(does that mean Israel will get Gaza by giving up a section that borders on the WB? Another great Mediterranean resort? WIN!!)
I think he meant contiguous more in the sense of not having the west bank carved up into bits and pieces.
58![]() |
ProGunLiberal Thu, May 19, 2011 10:05:48am |
59![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:05:49am |
re: #40 Alouette
Stuck in cubicle land here. What did he say?
He said that it's a problem that remains.
There's a transcript in one of the posts above.
60![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:05:51am |
re: #53 SanFranciscoZionist
Woohoo! Code Pink was already sending me furious updates about how much they hated Obama for knuckling under to Netanyahu. The knuckle is complete! The ranting will begin!!
Are there like three people in the world who give a fuck about what Code Pink says?
61![]() |
Stanghazi Thu, May 19, 2011 10:05:52am |
lol
Shoq Shoq Value
by AngryBlackLady
RIGHT/LEFT/TEAPARTY OPTICS SUMMARY:
The speech went too far. It did not go far enough. Where's the Middle East again?
62![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:06:34am |
re: #33 Obdicut
And this is going to rile up the a lot of anti-Israel people:
I find the idea of Israel as a perpetually Jewish state problematic in some far future scenarios, but it's certainly an accurate observation.
Well, if no one else will, I am curious.... How is Israel a Jewish State problematic?
63![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:07:34am |
re: #51 sagehen
Contiguous. He means that since the West Bank and Gaza don't touch, and the only way from one to the other is through Israel, there'll have to be a land swap to put all the people from both into one chunk of space.
(does that mean Israel will get Gaza by giving up a section that borders on the WB? Another great Mediterranean resort? WIN!!)
Think simpler, a highway in between has been suggested.
65![]() |
Ericus58 Thu, May 19, 2011 10:08:39am |
re: #51 sagehen
Contiguous. He means that since the West Bank and Gaza don't touch, and the only way from one to the other is through Israel, there'll have to be a land swap to put all the people from both into one chunk of space.
(does that mean Israel will get Gaza by giving up a section that borders on the WB? Another great Mediterranean resort? WIN!!)
Mama always said that I was a poor speller.....
66![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 10:08:41am |
re: #61 Stanley Sea
lol
Shoq Shoq Value
by AngryBlackLadyRIGHT/LEFT/TEAPARTY OPTICS SUMMARY:
The speech went too far. It did not go far enough. Where's the Middle East again?
Nebraska, Hello!
67![]() |
Darth Vader Gargoyle Thu, May 19, 2011 10:08:44am |
68![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 10:08:51am |
re: #51 sagehen
Various proposals include a tunnel/bridge concept allowing Palestinians to traverse Israeli territory without having to cross a border, or vice versa.
69![]() |
ProGunLiberal Thu, May 19, 2011 10:09:08am |
re: #63 Buck
I prefer Railway. They can transport more things more efficiently. Let's not get the Palestinians hooked on cars if we can avoid it. Global Warming and all, you know?
70![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 10:09:14am |
71![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:09:17am |
re: #62 Buck
Pretty simply: if the majority of the people who live there are not Jewish, then describing it as a Jewish state is problematic.
That's not really likely to happen anytime soon.
72![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 10:09:23am |
re: #62 Buck
Well, if no one else will, I am curious... How is Israel a Jewish State problematic?
I believe he's referring to the idea that population growth of non-Jewish Israelis is, in my understanding, higher than that of Jewish Israelis. In the moderate term, this isn't an issue, but if Jews become an increasingly small minority in the country, that could lead to some messy situations.
73![]() |
treasured people Thu, May 19, 2011 10:10:08am |
When Obama talked about rights of all religious groups, he mentioned something about Christians and Muslims getting along in Egypt. He neglected to mention that Jews are not allowed to live in most Muslim countries and Israelis cannot travel to most Muslim countries. I suppose it's a side point that will be of little interest to most, but the great democracy of Iraq is hard line anti-Israel.
74![]() |
recusancy Thu, May 19, 2011 10:10:11am |
re: #71 Obdicut
Pretty simply: if the majority of the people who live there are not Jewish, then describing it as a Jewish state is problematic.
That's not really likely to happen anytime soon.
Hence the need for Palestine to exist.
75![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:10:24am |
For those wondering what is referred to when speaking of a contiguous Palestinian state, it addresses and encompasses two issues.
The first, as several have correctly noted here, is the concept of not creating what the Israel haters refer to as Bantustans within the portion of the Palestinian state that is in Judea and Samaria.
Second, there has been a plan on the table for at least a decade to build an elevated express roadway connecting the Gaza Strip to either the balance of the Palestinian state or to Jordan to enable transit to the balance of the Palestinian state. It does not create a non-contiguous Israel in the Negev, although it does create some very serious security issues.
76![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:10:44am |
re: #68 lawhawk
Various proposals include a tunnel/bridge concept allowing Palestinians to traverse Israeli territory without having to cross a border, or vice versa.
They're probably working on the tunnel already.
77![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:10:57am |
re: #51 sagehen
Contiguous. He means that since the West Bank and Gaza don't touch, and the only way from one to the other is through Israel, there'll have to be a land swap to put all the people from both into one chunk of space.
(does that mean Israel will get Gaza by giving up a section that borders on the WB? Another great Mediterranean resort? WIN!!)
Somehow we've had this phrase rolling around U.S. foreign policy for a while--I recall Bush using it, although that WILL be forgotten when the wingnuts start to wail.
I honestly cannot see how it's going to happen. If I were the PA, I would never give up Gaza for more of the Judean desert. Hamas will not give up their Fortress on the Med. Gaza's legal status is totally vague, deliberately so.
Ideal solution would be if Egypt would take back the strip, under some sort of working agreement about patrol with Israel, and offer the Gazans a choice of repatriating to Egypt as Egyptian citizens, or relocating to the newly minted Palestine in the West Bank.
Never, ever going to happen.
And this is BEFORE we start to argue about the settlement blocks or Jerusalem, or the Hamas Charter, or what might go into the Constitution of any Palestinian state to be declared.
I seriously wish I had an answer for any of this.
78![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:11:28am |
re: #54 Alouette
That means Israel will have to give up a corridor through the Negev so the Palestinians can have a "contiguous" state (of course this will cut Israel in two, thus making it non-contiguous), while the Palestinians give up nothing.
Which will not happen.
79![]() |
sagehen Thu, May 19, 2011 10:11:40am |
re: #63 Buck
Think simpler, a highway in between has been suggested.
Which would make Israel non-contiguous, so not really a solution.
80![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 10:12:01am |
This didn't get included in the speech:
Obama announces $1 billion in debt forgiveness for Egypt and $1 billion in loan guarantees to finance infrastructure. via cnn ticker
81![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:12:02am |
re: #57 recusancy
I think he meant contiguous more in the sense of not having the west bank carved up into bits and pieces.
So what do we do with Gaza?
82![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:12:12am |
re: #76 Alouette
They're probably working on the tunnel already.
But this time the Israelis would promise not to blow them up.
83![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:12:25am |
re: #60 Alouette
Are there like three people in the world who give a fuck about what Code Pink says?
Probably about four thousand, but they all own a lot of pink clothing.
84![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:12:30am |
re: #79 sagehen
Which would make Israel non-contiguous, so not really a solution.
No, there can be spaces where the highway is raised, or below other highways...
85![]() |
recusancy Thu, May 19, 2011 10:12:41am |
86![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:13:02am |
87![]() |
King of the Douche, now you may bow Thu, May 19, 2011 10:13:33am |
88![]() |
makeitstop Thu, May 19, 2011 10:13:35am |
re: #80 lawhawk
This didn't get included in the speech:
Obama announces $1 billion in debt forgiveness for Egypt and $1 billion in loan guarantees to finance infrastructure. via cnn ticker
He did mention that in the speech.
89![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:13:49am |
re: #71 Obdicut
Pretty simply: if the majority of the people who live there are not Jewish, then describing it as a Jewish state is problematic.
That's not really likely to happen anytime soon.
It won't.
90![]() |
mr.fusion Thu, May 19, 2011 10:14:50am |
Main headline on Drudge
91![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:14:57am |
re: #86 SanFranciscoZionist
Who controls the highway?
You assume (as I do) that peace is not achieved by that time.
However, the concept is only possible if there is peace.
92![]() |
Ericus58 Thu, May 19, 2011 10:15:42am |
93![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 10:15:50am |
re: #91 Buck
You assume (as I do) that peace is not achieved by that time.
However, the concept is only possible if there is peace.
Peace or not, it would be a very awkward situation between two nations.
94![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:17:50am |
re: #90 mr.fusion
Main headline on Drudge
Well to be fair, that is what the AP is reporting.
Did Obama say 1967 Borders without the land swap rider? Probably not. However that is what the AP is reporting.
95![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:18:05am |
re: #77 SanFranciscoZionist
Somehow we've had this phrase rolling around U.S. foreign policy for a while--I recall Bush using it, although that WILL be forgotten when the wingnuts start to wail.
I honestly cannot see how it's going to happen. If I were the PA, I would never give up Gaza for more of the Judean desert. Hamas will not give up their Fortress on the Med. Gaza's legal status is totally vague, deliberately so.
Ideal solution would be if Egypt would take back the strip, under some sort of working agreement about patrol with Israel, and offer the Gazans a choice of repatriating to Egypt as Egyptian citizens, or relocating to the newly minted Palestine in the West Bank.
Never, ever going to happen.
And this is BEFORE we start to argue about the settlement blocks or Jerusalem, or the Hamas Charter, or what might go into the Constitution of any Palestinian state to be declared.
I seriously wish I had an answer for any of this.
Your suggestiong that Egypt take over the Gaza Strip is a logical one, but is also one that will never occur for several reasons. To cite just two, Egypt will not take it back because it comes with a couple million Palestinians who Egypt would just as soon not have any actual responsibility for. Second, given the looming threat of a very anti-Israel regime in Egypt -- even the so-called "moderate" candidates for office have raised questions about the continued viability of the peace treaty with Israel -- Israel is not about to let Egypt get control of a finger sticking into Israel's nether regions.
Frankly, one of Menachem Begin's biggest mistakes when negotiating peace with Anwar Sadat was that he did not insist the Egyptians take back the Gaza Strip. His reticence was almost certainly a result of his experiences during the Shoah and Israel's formative years, and his fear that Egypt would use the Gaza Strip, as it did between 1948 and 1967, as a launching pad for fedayeen attacks against Israelis. The Egyptians, for their part, were no more interested in the Gaza Strip then they would be today.
97![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:18:52am |
re: #73 treasured people
When Obama talked about rights of all religious groups, he mentioned something about Christians and Muslims getting along in Egypt. He neglected to mention that Jews are not allowed to live in most Muslim countries and Israelis cannot travel to most Muslim countries. I suppose it's a side point that will be of little interest to most, but the great democracy of Iraq is hard line anti-Israel.
It's taken for granted in all of this that Jews will not be permitted to live as citizens in any Palestinian state, that Israelis will not be permitted to travel freely in the new Middle East, and that reparations for the Jewish refugees will never be discussed, while the Right of Return continues to be something Abbas will nevah, nevah give up.
We know this. It's fully accepted, so fully accepted that it is considered distasteful and beside the point even to bring it up.
And Iraq deliberately wrote its constitution to prevent Jewish refugees from returning home and voting.
Nothing new.
98![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:19:29am |
re: #79 sagehen
Which would make Israel non-contiguous, so not really a solution.
Elevated highway, and the Israelis have previously been receptive to the idea.
99![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:20:12am |
re: #79 sagehen
Which would make Israel non-contiguous, so not really a solution.
Israel giving stuff up is ALWAYS a solution! In fact, it's the ONLY solution!!
//moonbat
100![]() |
Feline Fearless Leader Thu, May 19, 2011 10:20:12am |
re: #34 EmmmieG
Really big skywalk.
I'd expect a big tunnel since there must already be considerable tunnel-digging experience available in the Palestinian controlled territory.
101![]() |
Lidane Thu, May 19, 2011 10:20:45am |
re: #80 lawhawk
This didn't get included in the speech:
Obama announces $1 billion in debt forgiveness for Egypt and $1 billion in loan guarantees to finance infrastructure. via cnn ticker
Yes it did. I heard him clearly mention both those things.
102![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:20:50am |
re: #85 recusancy
Give it to the Amish.
They'd probably turn a good profit off of it, too. I'm envisioning quilts.
103![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 10:21:03am |
Who are we kidding?
The status quo will remain.
104![]() |
abolitionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:21:06am |
re: #54 Alouette
That means Israel will have to give up a corridor through the Negev so the Palestinians can have a "contiguous" state (of course this will cut Israel in two, thus making it non-contiguous), while the Palestinians give up nothing.
Corridors for transportation of goods and people for one group do not necessarily have to sub-divide and impair the territory of another. There exist these things called overpasses, underpasses, elevated roadways and railways, and (dare I mention) tunnels. In an atmosphere of peace, contiguous borders does not have to be the either/or sort of issue that most see as a form of zero-sum game.
105![]() |
Kragar Thu, May 19, 2011 10:21:32am |
re: #102 SanFranciscoZionist
They'd probably turn a good profit off of it, too. I'm envisioning quilts.
But then you would be contributing to black market button smuggling
106![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:22:16am |
re: #95 sliv_the_eli
Your suggestiong that Egypt take over the Gaza Strip is a logical one, but is also one that will never occur for several reasons. To cite just two, Egypt will not take it back because it comes with a couple million Palestinians who Egypt would just as soon not have any actual responsibility for. Second, given the looming threat of a very anti-Israel regime in Egypt -- even the so-called "moderate" candidates for office have raised questions about the continued viability of the peace treaty with Israel -- Israel is not about to let Egypt get control of a finger sticking into Israel's nether regions.
Frankly, one of Menachem Begin's biggest mistakes when negotiating peace with Anwar Sadat was that he did not insist the Egyptians take back the Gaza Strip. His reticence was almost certainly a result of his experiences during the Shoah and Israel's formative years, and his fear that Egypt would use the Gaza Strip, as it did between 1948 and 1967, as a launching pad for fedayeen attacks against Israelis. The Egyptians, for their part, were no more interested in the Gaza Strip then they would be today.
You are correct, in all particulars.
This is a hell of situation, where Israel's made peace with the two nations it took the land from in 67 to begin with, but they don't want their land back.
107![]() |
darthstar Thu, May 19, 2011 10:22:45am |
re: #105 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
But then you would be contributing to black market button smuggling
hooks are for crooks
108![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:22:53am |
AP: Obama says that Palestine must be based on 1967 borders.
Transcript: The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps
Which begs the question, there were no "borders" in 1967 or in 1948, just temporary cease-fire lines.
109![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:23:03am |
re: #103 Varek Raith
Who are we kidding?
The status quo will remain.
Bleah. The status quo isn't much good.
110![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:23:26am |
re: #105 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)
But then you would be contributing to black market button smuggling
Buttons come through the tunnels, from Egypt.
111![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 10:23:48am |
I'm not getting audio off this feed. Is it over?
112![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:24:26am |
re: #85 recusancy
Give it to the Amish.
The Palestinians would never give it to the Jews' landsmann
(extra credit for anyone who recognizes the film reference).
113![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:24:27am |
re: #110 SanFranciscoZionist
Buttons come through the tunnels, from Egypt.
I'm envisioning ladies in abayas and prayer caps, churning butter.
This isn't good.
114![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:24:50am |
re: #106 SanFranciscoZionist
You are correct, in all particulars.
This is a hell of situation, where Israel's made peace with the two nations it took the land from in 67 to begin with, but they don't want their land back.
They wanted their land back, but without the Palestinians who were on it.
115![]() |
darthstar Thu, May 19, 2011 10:24:59am |
116![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:25:14am |
re: #112 sliv_the_eli
The Palestinians would never give it to the Jews' landsmann
(extra credit for anyone who recognizes the film reference).
I don't recognize, but I'm going to guess The Frisco Kid.
117![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:25:41am |
re: #114 Alouette
They wanted their land back, but without the Palestinians who were on it.
I have a detailed explanation of how the Palestinians got into their present mess. It starts with a game of musical chairs.
118![]() |
recusancy Thu, May 19, 2011 10:26:20am |
re: #111 Conservative Moonbat
I'm not getting audio off this feed. Is it over?
More stuff here: [Link: www.whitehouse.gov...]
119![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 10:27:19am |
re: #109 SanFranciscoZionist
Bleah. The status quo isn't much good.
The problem is, it's very hard to me to see any clear way we could realistically have a positive improvement in the status quo any time in the near future, short of major, *constructive* transformation of politics in the region, which seems rather unlikely.
120![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 10:27:41am |
re: #119 Simply Sarah
The problem is, it's very hard to me to see any clear way we could realistically have a positive improvement in the status quo any time in the near future, short of major, *constructive* transformation of politics in the region, which seems rather unlikely.
And yes, I know I'm preaching to the choir here. :P
121![]() |
treasured people Thu, May 19, 2011 10:27:53am |
re: #97 SanFranciscoZionist
Yes, nothing new. Still, it is disingenuous for the President to talk about the rights of all religions in the Middle East and somehow neglect to mention the rights of Jews.
122![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:27:58am |
re: #114 Alouette
They wanted their land back, but without the Palestinians who were on it.
Every Arab nation in the immediate area, and few that aren't, have laws barring Palestinians living in their country from full citizenship and equal rights.
This is a regional issue, which people keep trying to solve by making it specific to Israel.
123![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:29:02am |
re: #121 treasured people
Yes, nothing new. Still, it is disingenuous for the President to talk about the rights of all religions in the Middle East and somehow neglect to mention the rights of Jews.
True. But par for the course.
124![]() |
sagehen Thu, May 19, 2011 10:29:28am |
re: #111 Conservative Moonbat
I'm not getting audio off this feed. Is it over?
Obama's speech is over, now it's some junior staffers at the state department answering twitter questions from around the world.
125![]() |
Mostly sane, most of the time. Thu, May 19, 2011 10:29:38am |
The tickety-tickety-tap is distracting.
126![]() |
wrenchwench Thu, May 19, 2011 10:30:20am |
127![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:31:04am |
re: #97 SanFranciscoZionist
It's taken for granted in all of this that Jews will not be permitted to live as citizens in any Palestinian state, that Israelis will not be permitted to travel freely in the new Middle East, and that reparations for the Jewish refugees will never be discussed, while the Right of Return continues to be something Abbas will nevah, nevah give up.
We know this. It's fully accepted, so fully accepted that it is considered distasteful and beside the point even to bring it up.
And Iraq deliberately wrote its constitution to prevent Jewish refugees from returning home and voting.
Nothing new.
SFZ, while I think you are correct that reparations for Jewish refugees will never be discussed, I don't agree that it is taken for granted that there will be continued clamoring for a so-called "right of return" by Arabs to Israel. To the contrary, one of the great flaws of Western thinking on this subject is that Western elites have wrongly assumed that this is an issue that will be compromised on by the Arabs as part of a final settlement. That is the essence of the oft-recited, but misguided, phrase "We all know what a final settlement will look like". The Arabs have no intention of giving up on this claim -as Abbas recently made clear, again -- because they have no intention as yet to give up on their goal of destroying Israel. Until that mind-set changes, there can be no peace, and until the West acknowledges that that mindset exists, the West will continue to wrongly put the onus on Israel to offer grand gestures and territory in exchange for empty promises.
129![]() |
wrenchwench Thu, May 19, 2011 10:33:23am |
re: #128 Stanley Sea
NPR's twitter guru
Two months ago that position didn't exist. Two years ago it was a bird watcher.
130![]() |
mr.fusion Thu, May 19, 2011 10:33:37am |
re: #108 Alouette
AP: Obama says that Palestine must be based on 1967 borders.
Transcript: The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps
Which begs the question, there were no "borders" in 1967 or in 1948, just temporary cease-fire lines.
Check out the comment section in that article.....just amazing
131![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:33:48am |
re: #127 sliv_the_eli
SFZ, while I think you are correct that reparations for Jewish refugees will never be discussed, I don't agree that it is taken for granted that there will be continued clamoring for a so-called "right of return" by Arabs to Israel. To the contrary, one of the great flaws of Western thinking on this subject is that Western elites have wrongly assumed that this is an issue that will be compromised on by the Arabs as part of a final settlement. That is the essence of the oft-recited, but misguided, phrase "We all know what a final settlement will look like". The Arabs have no intention of giving up on this claim -as Abbas recently made clear, again -- because they have no intention as yet to give up on their goal of destroying Israel. Until that mind-set changes, there can be no peace, and until the West acknowledges that that mindset exists, the West will continue to wrongly put the onus on Israel to offer grand gestures and territory in exchange for empty promises.
Sorry, my brain is a little dazed this morning. You mean that you think that I'm right that the right of return will continue to be an issue, but I'm wrong to think that everyone understands it will?
May be.
132![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:35:43am |
re: #130 mr.fusion
Wow. Seriously.
Obama says same damn thing as every other President, suddenly is the epitome of all evil. Bush pretty much said there's be Palestine by the time he left office, for chrissake.
133![]() |
darthstar Thu, May 19, 2011 10:35:58am |
re: #129 wrenchwench
Two months ago that position didn't exist. Two years ago it was a bird watcher.
Somebody got a degree in communications so they could get a job sending tweets.
134![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 10:36:08am |
re: #123 SanFranciscoZionist
True. But par for the course.
Sadly, I'm not sure there's much that can be done on that for now. As long as the Palestinian issue can be used as a wedge/crutch/distraction, it will remain easy for the Jews to be exploited politically in this manner. At least in my mind, it seems like that won't be fixed until some period after the Palestinians' situation is, somehow, resolved. And even then, I don't even want to speculate how long it would take to be purged from the system. Alternatively, any situation where Jews were no longer treated as unwelcome would almost certainly indicate conditions where something could be worked out for the Palestinians.
135![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:36:11am |
And then there's the weirdo anti-semites:
Ooooohhhhh, this is sooooo delicious! Can't wait to hear comment from all the NY Jews and the Hollywood Jews who put this guy in office.
136![]() |
Ming Thu, May 19, 2011 10:36:28am |
About a contiguous Palestinian state, is this also supposed to include the Golan Heights? The logic seems to be: countries surrounding Israel donate some land to the Palestinians. Egypt gives Gaza, Jordan gives the West Bank, and Syria gives the Golan Heights. Then they say: all 3 of these lands must be contiguous, because it's repulsive to us to have to pass through Israel, to get from one part of our Palestinian State to another.
I don't see why the Palestinian State needs to be contiguous at all. Before 1967, this land belonged to 3 entirely different countries: Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. If these 3 countries get their land back, that's one thing. But I don't see why these 3 pieces of land then have to be connected to one another.
137![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 10:36:31am |
The 1967 borders position is what most people I know who consider themselves reasonable liberals agree with. It's what most people I know view as the "common sense" position.
138![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:38:16am |
re: #130 mr.fusion
Check out the comment section in that article...just amazing
Yahoo comments, just like Fox or HuffPoo
139![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 10:38:40am |
I really don 't think people who view the reestablishment of Israel as a stepping stone to the end time should have any voice in the discussion. It's just impossible to tell who they are.
140![]() |
Charles Johnson Thu, May 19, 2011 10:38:40am |
By the way, here's the exact quote from Obama's speech:
The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.
Note: he didn't say "1967 borders," and he didn't "side with the Palestinians." It's nothing but a re-wording of the same position the US has taken for many years.
141![]() |
darthstar Thu, May 19, 2011 10:39:04am |
re: #132 Obdicut
Wow. Seriously.
Obama says same damn thing as every other President, suddenly is the epitome of all evil. Bush pretty much said there's be Palestine by the time he left office, for chrissake.
Did you think the discussion following a speech on the Middle East, Israel, and Palestine would be rational or mature? This is one topic that has the potential to make the never ending debate on abortion sound reasonable by comparison.
142![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:39:05am |
re: #132 Obdicut
Wow. Seriously.
Obama says same damn thing as every other President, suddenly is the epitome of all evil. Bush pretty much said there's be Palestine by the time he left office, for chrissake.
Being just like Bush is not the expectation that he set.
I seriously think it was the Obama campaign that tied McCain to four more years of Bush policies.
143![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 10:40:08am |
re: #142 Buck
Being just like Bush is not the expectation that he set.
I seriously think it was the Obama campaign that tied McCain to four more years of Bush policies.
Non sequitur
144![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:40:22am |
re: #136 Ming
About a contiguous Palestinian state, is this also supposed to include the Golan Heights? The logic seems to be: countries surrounding Israel donate some land to the Palestinians. Egypt gives Gaza, Jordan gives the West Bank, and Syria gives the Golan Heights. Then they say: all 3 of these lands must be contiguous, because it's repulsive to us to have to pass through Israel, to get from one part of our Palestinian State to another.
I don't see why the Palestinian State needs to be contiguous at all. Before 1967, this land belonged to 3 entirely different countries: Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. If these 3 countries get their land back, that's one thing. But I don't see why these 3 pieces of land then have to be connected to one another.
Israel annexed the Golan Heights. Syria does not get to keep it.
145![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:40:29am |
re: #142 Buck
On Israel? What did Obama say he would do in regards to Israel than what he is actually doing?
146![]() |
darthstar Thu, May 19, 2011 10:40:45am |
re: #140 Charles
By the way, here's the exact quote from Obama's speech:
Note: he didn't say "1967 borders," and he didn't "side with the Palestinians." It's nothing but a re-wording of the same position the US has taken for many years.
It's not what President Obama says or does, but what others say he says or will do that matters.
147![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:41:49am |
re: #137 Conservative Moonbat
The 1967 borders position is what most people I know who consider themselves reasonable liberals agree with. It's what most people I know view as the "common sense" position.
There were no borders in 1967.
148![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:42:31am |
re: #140 Charles
By the way, here's the exact quote from Obama's speech:
Note: he didn't say "1967 borders," and he didn't "side with the Palestinians." It's nothing but a re-wording of the same position the US has taken for many years.
Right, but it is coming from the AP wire the other way.
I think it is strange for AP to say it that way.... Don't you?
149![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 10:43:26am |
re: #148 Buck
Right, but it is coming from the AP wire the other way.
I think it is strange for AP to say it that way... Don't you?
Take what Obama said over the AP.
Geez, you're so predictable.
;)
150![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 10:43:50am |
re: #148 Buck
Right, but it is coming from the AP wire the other way.
I think it is strange for AP to say it that way... Don't you?
What AP reported is not what the President said.
151![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 10:44:03am |
re: #144 Alouette
Israel annexed the Golan Heights. Syria does not get to keep it.
I've never understood why the people who live in the territories gained in 1967 are considered Palestinian and not Egyptian and Syrian refugees but the whole situation has never made a whole lot of sense to me.
152![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 10:44:16am |
I think we can all agree that, in the end, this is all the fault of the Jews for settling in an utterly dysfunctional part of the world!
/
153![]() |
sagehen Thu, May 19, 2011 10:44:23am |
re: #108 Alouette
AP: Obama says that Palestine must be based on 1967 borders.
Transcript: The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps
Which begs the question, there were no "borders" in 1967 or in 1948, just temporary cease-fire lines.
That AP article leads with a flat lie. "...endorsing the Palestinians' demand for their future state to be based on the borders that existed before the 1967 Middle East war..."
Bullshit. Any reference to 1967 borders, by any president, ever, means *after* the war.
154![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:45:08am |
re: #145 Obdicut
On Israel? What did Obama say he would do in regards to Israel than what he is actually doing?
Look you said Bush. Not me... The expectation is that he would do things differently. You know ... Change?
You want specifics? They don't matter.
155![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:45:48am |
re: #154 Buck
As usual, you're completely unable to back up your claim.
156![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 10:45:59am |
re: #147 Alouette
There were no borders in 1967.
There were lines on a map serving as de-facto boarders. When people refer to them as borders you know what they mean.
157![]() |
Charles Johnson Thu, May 19, 2011 10:46:53am |
That AP article is ridiculously distorted.
Obama absolutely did NOT say the borders should be based on the pre-war 1967 lines. That's complete made-up crap.
158![]() |
PhillyPretzel Thu, May 19, 2011 10:47:05am |
Here is an article from The Wall Street Journal: [Link: online.wsj.com...]
159![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 10:47:10am |
re: #154 Buck
Look you said Bush. Not me... The expectation is that he would do things differently. You know ... Change?
You want specifics? They don't matter.
I'm pretty sure Obama didn't run on being a complete Bizarro Bush.
160![]() |
sagehen Thu, May 19, 2011 10:48:08am |
re: #142 Buck
I seriously think it was the Obama campaign that tied McCain to four more years of Bush policies.
Right. It had nothing to do with a Republican primary where all the contenders competed over which of them would most vigorously and assertively continue all of Bush's policies.
//
161![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:48:12am |
re: #157 Charles
The MSM can't bother with simple things like factchecking their reportage on enormously important speeches. They've got to figure out how to best erect easily-subverted paywalls!
162![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 10:48:21am |
re: #151 Conservative Moonbat
It's easy when you have a media conflate refugees from the original 1948 war for Independence with those who suddenly found themselves under Israeli control after 1967. The West Bank was part of Transjordan until 1967. Gaza was part of Egypt until 1967. The Golan was part of Syria until 1967. The old City of Jerusalem and East Jerusalem was part of Jordan until 1967.
But Jordan made it clear they don't want the West Bank back, and Egypt refused to take back Gaza in 1981. So, it's on Israel to help birth a new Palestinian state on the rump of territories it captured for Egypt and Jordan when those same Palestinians refuse to accept Israel's very existence.
163![]() |
Buck Thu, May 19, 2011 10:48:39am |
re: #155 Obdicut
As usual, you're completely unable to back up your claim.
What claim? That Obama ran as the "not Bush" candidate? That Obama painted McCain as the "voted with Bush 90% of the time" candidate?
Hmm...
I don't think I failed to back anything up.
164![]() |
Charles Johnson Thu, May 19, 2011 10:49:11am |
When people refer to the "1967 lines" they're always talking about the post-war armistice lines. The Associated Press article is full of shit.
165![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 10:49:54am |
re: #157 Charles
That AP article is ridiculously distorted.
Obama absolutely did NOT say the borders should be based on the pre-war 1967 lines. That's complete made-up crap.
They're just cashing in on drudge traffic.
166![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:50:18am |
re: #163 Buck
Your claim is just idiotic, dude. You said "Being just like Bush is not the expectation that he set."
He's not just like Bush. His attitude towards Israel is pretty much just like Bush's. That is one very small part of him. There's still plenty of other areas where he's different; of course on any number of issues, he and George Bush agree.
167![]() |
BARACK THE VOTE Thu, May 19, 2011 10:50:25am |
168![]() |
ReamWorks SKG Thu, May 19, 2011 10:50:37am |
I was just in the Golan Heights a few weeks ago, on the Lebanon end. I had a great time.
Image: 5556391993_fd68e6b74a_b.jpg
(I'm the one on the left, not in Green.)
Israel offered it back to Syria, in exchange for peace. They declined. (Note that Egypt got back its Sinai, so I have no reason to doubt the offer was genuine.)
170![]() |
Charles Johnson Thu, May 19, 2011 10:51:23am |
Bizarre. First, an Associated Press writer tries to distort what the President said to promote a pro-Palestinian line, then you have Drudge Report using that distorted article to promote an anti-Obama line.
I can has journalism?
171![]() |
wrenchwench Thu, May 19, 2011 10:52:06am |
re: #170 Charles
Bizarre. First, an Associated Press writer tries to distort what the President said to promote a pro-Palestinian line, then you have Drudge Report using that distorted article to promote an anti-Obama line.
I can has journalism?
172![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:52:25am |
re: #132 Obdicut
Wow. Seriously.
Obama says same damn thing as every other President, suddenly is the epitome of all evil. Bush pretty much said there's be Palestine by the time he left office, for chrissake.
But that was OK...I forget why that was OK, again. U.S. foreign policy on the Middle East hasn't gone much of anywhere, but the perceptions of the players by the wingnuts has.
Obama sounds exactly like Bush when he talks about Israel. And no, 'but we were mad at Bush too' please. I was there. All the talk was about he was Israel's bestest, bestest friend evah. Israelis were pissed that Condi lectured them on the settlements, but American conservatives never noticed.
173![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 10:53:13am |
Big Headline on Fox News: Obama Shocker! Backs Palestinians, tells Israel to PULL BACK TO '67 BOARDERS
174![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 10:53:22am |
re: #162 lawhawk
It's easy when you have a media conflate refugees from the original 1948 war for Independence with those who suddenly found themselves under Israeli control after 1967. The West Bank was part of Transjordan until 1967. Gaza was part of Egypt until 1967. The Golan was part of Syria until 1967. The old City of Jerusalem and East Jerusalem was part of Jordan until 1967.
But Jordan made it clear they don't want the West Bank back, and Egypt refused to take back Gaza in 1981. So, it's on Israel to help birth a new Palestinian state on the rump of territories it captured for Egypt and Jordan when those same Palestinians refuse to accept Israel's very existence.
So in reality the people currently referred to as Palestinians are an amalgamation of peoples who reside in lands now occupied by Israel who share no common ethnic or cultural background?
175![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:53:23am |
re: #134 Simply Sarah
Sadly, I'm not sure there's much that can be done on that for now. As long as the Palestinian issue can be used as a wedge/crutch/distraction, it will remain easy for the Jews to be exploited politically in this manner. At least in my mind, it seems like that won't be fixed until some period after the Palestinians' situation is, somehow, resolved. And even then, I don't even want to speculate how long it would take to be purged from the system. Alternatively, any situation where Jews were no longer treated as unwelcome would almost certainly indicate conditions where something could be worked out for the Palestinians.
The second-class status of Jews in the Middle East predated the Palestinian refugee crisis by hundreds of years, and my bet is it will outlast it by a similar amount of time.
176![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:53:24am |
re: #106 SanFranciscoZionist
You are correct, in all particulars.
This is a hell of situation, where Israel's made peace with the two nations it took the land from in 67 to begin with, but they don't want their land back.
I think they would both take the land. It's the Palestinians that come with it that they don't want.
177![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 10:53:44am |
re: #164 Charles
There's the 1948/9 armistice border - aka the Green Line.
There's the 1967 armistice border - which extends Israel's control over that of Gaza and West Bank to the Jordan River. Israel relinquished Sinai (also captured in 1967) to Egypt as per Camp David Accords.
Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005. It is not occupying Gaza. The Israelis have turned civil administrative control over most of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority under Oslo and the followup agreements (Wye, Gaza/Jericho, etc.). That split the territory into A, B, and C territory with different levels of security control/PA responsibilities and limits on Israeli movements.
178![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:53:59am |
re: #135 Obdicut
And then there's the weirdo anti-semites:
My mother is a New York Jew by birth (they moved to LA when she was a baby.) Does her opinion count? Or mine?
179![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:54:18am |
re: #99 SanFranciscoZionist
Israel giving stuff up is ALWAYS a solution! In fact, it's the ONLY solution!!
//moonbat
It's the final solution.
180![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:55:17am |
re: #136 Ming
About a contiguous Palestinian state, is this also supposed to include the Golan Heights? The logic seems to be: countries surrounding Israel donate some land to the Palestinians. Egypt gives Gaza, Jordan gives the West Bank, and Syria gives the Golan Heights. Then they say: all 3 of these lands must be contiguous, because it's repulsive to us to have to pass through Israel, to get from one part of our Palestinian State to another.
I don't see why the Palestinian State needs to be contiguous at all. Before 1967, this land belonged to 3 entirely different countries: Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. If these 3 countries get their land back, that's one thing. But I don't see why these 3 pieces of land then have to be connected to one another.
Jordan formally ceded their West Bank property to the PLO in 88. Egypt wouldn't take back Gaza on a bet. Syria actually wants the Golan returned.
But how do you operate a state in three pieces?
181![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:55:33am |
re: #178 SanFranciscoZionist
I'm a New York Jew now too. I've become the cliche. At least I'm Sephardic, which breaks it up a little.
182![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 10:55:54am |
183![]() |
shutdown Thu, May 19, 2011 10:55:56am |
re: #164 Charles
This is a very good pictorial description of Israel's borders over time.
Israel's Story in Maps
184![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 10:56:15am |
re: #175 SanFranciscoZionist
The second-class status of Jews in the Middle East predated the Palestinian refugee crisis by hundreds of years, and my bet is it will outlast it by a similar amount of time.
Oh, it certainly isn't the cause. It is, however, a very convenient means to sustain and justify the policy. Clearly, it wouldn't disappear overnight, but I think it would, at least, help increase the potential for gradual change. Maybe I'm just being overly optimistic again (I do that when I'm not predicting doom and gloom everywhere).
185![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:56:48am |
re: #142 Buck
Being just like Bush is not the expectation that he set.
True, but in this case BS. People who assured me that George W. Bush was the best friend Israel ever had are now ripping Barack Obama apart for continuing his approach to the Middle East. Makes sense only in light of an animus toward Obama.
186![]() |
BARACK THE VOTE Thu, May 19, 2011 10:57:02am |
re: #182 Killgore Trout
The wingnut Puke Funnel is operative, all systems go.
This will be the wingnut spin on this, no question.
187![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 10:57:38am |
re: #145 Obdicut
On Israel? What did Obama say he would do in regards to Israel than what he is actually doing?
He said he'd do EXACTLY what he's doing, and the wingnuts insisted he would try to destroy Israel 'cause they just KNEW.
188![]() |
Lidane Thu, May 19, 2011 10:57:42am |
re: #182 Killgore Trout
I must have heard a different speech, or I'm even more clueless about the whole Israeli/Palestinian conflict than I thought. I didn't get that impression at all.
189![]() |
Targetpractice Thu, May 19, 2011 10:57:57am |
re: #186 iceweasel
The wingnut Puke Funnel is operative, all systems go.
This will be the wingnut spin on this, no question.
Ayep. "Obama sold Israel out! He's giving in to the Palis! Just like we said he would!"
190![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 10:58:12am |
re: #186 iceweasel
The wingnut Puke Funnel is operative, all systems go.
This will be the wingnut spin on this, no question.
I'm curious who was the source of the talking point. Who was first? Fox or AP?
191![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 10:58:19am |
re: #186 iceweasel
I might note taking that fake umbrage actually harms Israel, as it makes it appear that the US has weakened its support when it hasn't. It might encourage other to attack Israel to show them as losing US support.
Oy.
192![]() |
Stanghazi Thu, May 19, 2011 10:58:24am |
re: #186 iceweasel
The wingnut Puke Funnel is operative, all systems go.
This will be the wingnut spin on this, no question.
And Sister Sarah, great friend to Israel, will pipe in in 4, 3, 2, PUKE.
193![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 10:58:46am |
re: #108 Alouette
AP: Obama says that Palestine must be based on 1967 borders.
Transcript: The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps
Which begs the question, there were no "borders" in 1967 or in 1948, just temporary cease-fire lines.
I don't know that it begs the question. President Obama -- or at least his speechwriters -- got it right by referring to the 1967 "lines". AP, like most of the media, continues to knowingly mis-report the facts, largely because they need to treat the armistice lines as "borders" in order to support the legally incorrect assertion that what we refer to as the West Bank is "occupied" territory and not, as is actually the case, "disputed" territory.
194![]() |
ReamWorks SKG Thu, May 19, 2011 10:59:00am |
How many of you all have been to Israel?
I am actually a Palestinian refugee. My maternal grandfather was born in Gaza City, his family was kicked out in 1929. But since we're the wrong religion, we're not considered to be refugees. We're "occupiers". Or something.
I doubt if most Americans know that the majority of the Jewish population in Israel are of mid-east origin.
195![]() |
PhillyPretzel Thu, May 19, 2011 10:59:02am |
Text of the Persident's speech: [Link: blogs.wsj.com...]
196![]() |
makeitstop Thu, May 19, 2011 10:59:24am |
197![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 10:59:25am |
re: #186 iceweasel
On the PA-Israeli conflict, Obama rehashed the same position taken since the GWHB days - the final status to be negotiated between the parties on borders to be decided by them. In other words, that's the same language used under Oslo.
Not really new or different from other iterations on the ME policy.
198![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 10:59:47am |
199![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 11:00:14am |
re: #196 makeitstop
Is that their headline - complete with typo?
Journalism is dead.
Sorry, typo is mine.
200![]() |
BARACK THE VOTE Thu, May 19, 2011 11:00:30am |
re: #192 Stanley Sea
And Sister Sarah, great friend to Israel, will pipe in in 4, 3, 2, PUKE.
No doubt about it.
re: #191 Obdicut
I might note taking that fake umbrage actually harms Israel, as it makes it appear that the US has weakened its support when it hasn't. It might encourage other to attack Israel to show them as losing US support.
Oy.
Agreed.
re: #190 Killgore Trout
I'm curious who was the source of the talking point. Who was first? Fox or AP?
I'm curious too, but I strongly suspect Fox had a bunch of cut and paste stuff lined up, screaming "Obama hates Israel".
Have we seen any clist blogs calling him a seekrit mooslim yet?
201![]() |
Targetpractice Thu, May 19, 2011 11:00:37am |
re: #198 Killgore Trout
Heh, Fox even plays the full clip that refudiates the bogus talking point.
Pay no attention to man at the podium!
/
202![]() |
ProGunLiberal Thu, May 19, 2011 11:00:42am |
re: #180 SanFranciscoZionist
But please, for the sake of everything holy, DO NOT give Syria back the Golan until Assad and his evil crew of horseshit is out. Put under UN receivership or something until then.
203![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 11:00:54am |
re: #194 reuven
You look exactly like a friend of mine. Who is a totally awesome dude, and is a civil engineer in Israel.
204![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 11:01:03am |
re: #116 SanFranciscoZionist
I don't recognize, but I'm going to guess The Frisco Kid.
Excellent, and accurate, guess. One of Gene Wilder's many great films, together with a young Harrison Ford.
205![]() |
ReamWorks SKG Thu, May 19, 2011 11:01:21am |
re: #203 Obdicut
I'm definitely not civil.
206![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:01:41am |
re: #151 Conservative Moonbat
I've never understood why the people who live in the territories gained in 1967 are considered Palestinian and not Egyptian and Syrian refugees but the whole situation has never made a whole lot of sense to me.
Politics. And bad lines on maps, something England had a positive genius for. And more politics.
207![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 11:01:46am |
re: #197 lawhawk
On the PA-Israeli conflict, Obama rehashed the same position taken since the GWHB days - the final status to be negotiated between the parties on borders to be decided by them. In other words, that's the same language used under Oslo.
Not really new or different from other iterations on the ME policy.
Of course, this was also just a relatively minor part of the speech probably included mostly because it really isn't possible to avoid commenting on it in a major ME speech.
208![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:01:53am |
re: #152 Simply Sarah
I think we can all agree that, in the end, this is all the fault of the Jews for settling in an utterly dysfunctional part of the world!
/
Where do you think we learned it from?
209![]() |
makeitstop Thu, May 19, 2011 11:02:06am |
re: #199 Killgore Trout
Sorry, typo is mine.
Ah.
Well, journalism is dead anyway. I heard what he said, and I'm watching major news orgs reporting pretty much the opposite.
What a world.
210![]() |
Obdicut Thu, May 19, 2011 11:02:55am |
re: #207 Simply Sarah
And yet there will be more focus on it than on any other part of the speech.
Even though a real solution for Israel involves stemming the tide of the antisemitism in the Arab states, which means making those societies more open and liberal, which is what the rest of his speech was about.
211![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:02:59am |
re: #154 Buck
Look you said Bush. Not me... The expectation is that he would do things differently. You know ... Change?
You want specifics? They don't matter.
Buck, the people who didn't want that change are now the ones pretending he changed everything in regards to the Middle East.
So I would say that specifics matter quite a bit.
212![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 11:03:10am |
Well, it's no surprise that we have another bogus outrageous outrage. Wingnuts just can't seem to learn.
213![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 11:03:23am |
re: #204 sliv_the_eli
Excellent, and accurate, guess. One of Gene Wilder's many great films, together with a young Harrison Ford.
My second favorite Western of all time (after Blazing Saddles)
214![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 11:03:39am |
The unabomber may be involved in the Tylenol poisoning in the 80s.
Interesting.
215![]() |
Ming Thu, May 19, 2011 11:03:49am |
re: #180 SanFranciscoZionist
About operating a state in 2 or 3 pieces, I'm not sure why that's a problem. The state of Michigan isn't contiguous. For that matter, Alaska is not contiguous with the "lower 48" states.
Suppose Canada gives some territory to Mexico. Is Mexico then "entitled" to some kind of "corridor" through the continental United States, so Mexico can be "contiguous"? My point is that this is precisely the situation with Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinians. (Maybe Syria can be included.)
I'm in favor of a land settlement, pretty much like Obama said (similar to the 1967 lines). I have my disagreements with both sides, frankly. But the issue of a CONTIGUOUS Palestinian state kind of sticks in my craw. It seems like they want to avoid as much contact with Israel as possible. I mean, I assume there will be an Israeli embassy in Palestine, and a Palestinian embassy in Israel. It's not like Israel and Palestine will be hermetically sealed (whatever that means) off from each other.
216![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 11:04:08am |
re: #122 SanFranciscoZionist
Every Arab nation in the immediate area, and few that aren't, have laws barring Palestinians living in their country from full citizenship and equal rights.
This is a regional issue, which people keep trying to solve by making it specific to Israel.
Absolutely true. However, although many of those countries' current residents might not even realize it, the reason for those laws is to keep the Palestinian refugees and their descendants in a constant state of anguish and anger so they and the rest of the world can be manipulated as part of the long-term goal of destroying the Jewish state.
217![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 11:04:28am |
re: #214 Varek Raith
The unabomber may be involved in the Tylenol poisoning in the 80s.
Interesting.
Sigh. I used to look up to him.
218![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:04:48am |
re: #168 reuven
I was just in the Golan Heights a few weeks ago, on the Lebanon end. I had a great time.
Image: 5556391993_fd68e6b74a_b.jpg
(I'm the one on the left, not in Green.)
Israel offered it back to Syria, in exchange for peace. They declined. (Note that Egypt got back its Sinai, so I have no reason to doubt the offer was genuine.)
A friend of mine is bicycling through the Golan right now. He says it's gorgeous.
219![]() |
darthstar Thu, May 19, 2011 11:05:12am |
re: #214 Varek Raith
The unabomber may be involved in the Tylenol poisoning in the 80s.
Interesting.
Great...so he's going to get credit for tamper-proofing containers?
220![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 11:05:50am |
Hot Air is trying to talk the wingnuts from jumping off the cliff...
Update II: Seriously, how the Associated Press could make this kind of a mistake is beyond me. Not only is this point clear in the text, Obama delivered it accurately as well. Here’s the video, via Greg Hengler:
The wingnuts aren't buying it. Outrage!
221![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 11:05:52am |
re: #210 Obdicut
And yet there will be more focus on it than on any other part of the speech.
Even though a real solution for Israel involves stemming the tide of the antisemitism in the Arab states, which means making those societies more open and liberal, which is what the rest of his speech was about.
And the focus on this part of the speech is exactly how all those problem regimes like it, since it takes the focus off of their own messes, as is usual for Israel and anything negative for another country in that part of the world.
222![]() |
NJDhockeyfan Thu, May 19, 2011 11:06:25am |
Obama: Palestinians won't gain independence by denying Israel's existence
For the Palestinians, efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure. Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won’t create an independent state," US President Barak Obama said during his speech on Thursday.
"Palestinian leaders will not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and rejection. And Palestinians will never realize their independence by denying the right of Israel to exist,' he added.
Jimmy Carter won't like to hear that.
223![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:06:37am |
re: #174 Conservative Moonbat
So in reality the people currently referred to as Palestinians are an amalgamation of peoples who reside in lands now occupied by Israel who share no common ethnic or cultural background?
Uh, they're mostly Arabs, all Arabic-speaking now, and...yes. But they now functionally exist as a national group.
224![]() |
lawhawk Thu, May 19, 2011 11:08:38am |
re: #218 SanFranciscoZionist
I was there back in 1993, and it is absolutely spectacular. The Golan is strategic not only for military purposes, but because it's the headwaters for the Jordan River, which is relied upon for Israel, Palestinian, and Jordanian water needs.
Water resources are one of the few areas where the three sides have a modicum of agreement - although Palestinians keep demanding still greater shares.
225![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 11:08:50am |
Looks like Fox News is sticking with their bogus headline.
226![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:08:53am |
227![]() |
ReamWorks SKG Thu, May 19, 2011 11:09:07am |
Does anybody believe that if Israel did not exist, this part of the world would be peaceful? That Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt wouldn't be at war with each other all the time? Even the "Palestinians" are basically divided into two opposing factions. I don't see how they'd get along in a contiguous piece of land.
228![]() |
sattv4u2 Thu, May 19, 2011 11:10:38am |
re: #225 Killgore Trout
Looks like Fox News is sticking with their bogus headline.
I thought it was APs bogus headline
229![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 11:10:55am |
re: #227 reuven
Does anybody believe that if Israel did not exist, this part of the world would be peaceful? That Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt wouldn't be at war with each other all the time? Even the "Palestinians" are basically divided into two opposing factions. I don't see how they'd get along in a contiguous piece of land.
Agreed. Not only would they still be killing each other they'd be using the same tactics of kidnappings, suicide bombings and car bombs. It's what they do.
230![]() |
shutdown Thu, May 19, 2011 11:11:04am |
re: #223 SanFranciscoZionist
Uh, they're mostly Arabs, all Arabic-speaking now, and...yes. But they now functionally exist as a national group.
You are not entirely accurate. Where there was no such thing as a "Palestinian" prior to Israeli statehood, the creation of a nominal "Arab State" at the end of te British Mandate created a de facto nationality for anyone living in those areas. Arguably, the rejection of that state by the Arab nations, and the subsequent invasion of Israel, abrogated its existence and claims, but it nonetheless existed, on paper, at the time Israel was established.
231![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:11:15am |
re: #191 Obdicut
I might note taking that fake umbrage actually harms Israel, as it makes it appear that the US has weakened its support when it hasn't. It might encourage other to attack Israel to show them as losing US support.
Oy.
They don't care. This is about U.S. politics for them, it's got fuck-all to do with Israel.
And the ODS sufferers in Israel will continue to follow the dance. Caroline Glick is going to go bananas.
232![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 11:11:36am |
re: #228 sattv4u2
I thought it was APs bogus headline
Fox's headline is even worse than AP's. Both are bogus.
233![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 11:11:51am |
re: #131 SanFranciscoZionist
Sorry, my brain is a little dazed this morning. You mean that you think that I'm right that the right of return will continue to be an issue, but I'm wrong to think that everyone understands it will?
May be.
Precisely. I think far too many people fail to understand that this issue is an essential plan of the war on the Jewish state and, also, that the Palestinian "leadership" is too invested in it -- or too scared for their own lives -- to abandon or compromise on it.
234![]() |
shutdown Thu, May 19, 2011 11:12:21am |
For anyone who is interested, I found and posted an interesting analysis of Resolution 242 on the front page
235![]() |
Killgore Trout Thu, May 19, 2011 11:12:42am |
236![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 11:13:18am |
re: #227 reuven
Does anybody believe that if Israel did not exist, this part of the world would be peaceful? That Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt wouldn't be at war with each other all the time? Even the "Palestinians" are basically divided into two opposing factions. I don't see how they'd get along in a contiguous piece of land.
Well, the American end-timers pushing for war in the area so Jesus can come back aren't helping.
237![]() |
BARACK THE VOTE Thu, May 19, 2011 11:13:27am |
238![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 11:14:06am |
re: #235 Killgore Trout
Though he still has hard feelings about the whole "bullet in the head" thingy.
239![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 11:14:45am |
re: #228 sattv4u2
I thought it was APs bogus headline
Another AP bogus headline: Obama tells Israel: Go back to 1967 borders.
Obama's urging that a Palestinian state be based on 1967 borders — before the Six Day War in which Israel occupied East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza — was a significant shift in the U.S. approach and seemed certain to anger Israel.
*head desk*
240![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 11:14:51am |
re: #227 reuven
Does anybody believe that if Israel did not exist, this part of the world would be peaceful? That Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt wouldn't be at war with each other all the time? Even the "Palestinians" are basically divided into two opposing factions. I don't see how they'd get along in a contiguous piece of land.
Well, the only way it would be more peaceful would be if the lack of Israel as a 'stabilizing' force for those regimes had caused them to all have fallen apart sooner than they are now and with them being replaced with better systems instead of worse ones. But that's neither here nor there, really.
241![]() |
sliv_the_eli Thu, May 19, 2011 11:15:07am |
re: #148 Buck
Right, but it is coming from the AP wire the other way.
I think it is strange for AP to say it that way... Don't you?
No. Par for the course for AP, Reuters, AFP and all the media outlets that will simply copy and paste what they get from those wire services.
242![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 11:15:41am |
re: #230 imp_62
You are not entirely accurate. Where there was no such thing as a "Palestinian" prior to Israeli statehood, the creation of a nominal "Arab State" at the end of te British Mandate created a de facto nationality for anyone living in those areas. Arguably, the rejection of that state by the Arab nations, and the subsequent invasion of Israel, abrogated its existence and claims, but it nonetheless existed, on paper, at the time Israel was established.
Is there a good fairly non-biased book that hashes all this out? Everything I've tried to read comes off as propaganda for one side or the other.
243![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:15:44am |
re: #194 reuven
How many of you all have been to Israel?
I am actually a Palestinian refugee. My maternal grandfather was born in Gaza City, his family was kicked out in 1929. But since we're the wrong religion, we're not considered to be refugees. We're "occupiers". Or something.
I doubt if most Americans know that the majority of the Jewish population in Israel are of mid-east origin.
Most don't, and the anti-Israel crowd works hard to keep it that way.
Also, mentioning ongoing land struggles isn't fair, since it suggests that this is more of a regional post-colonial conflict than a matter of pampered white Europeans sweeping in to screw up an ancient indigenous land. So don't mention '29, dude!!
//Sore spot. Alice Walker tells this astonishing bubbemeiseh about meeting a Jewish woman on some 'peace trip' to Gaza who explains that her Jewish husband will no longer visit family in Israel because the evil Israeli El Al people see that he was born in Palestine on his passport, and treat him badly, assuming he is an Arab. Fucking gullible eejit, Alice is.
244![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:16:17am |
re: #196 makeitstop
Is that their headline - complete with typo?
Journalism is dead.
'67 Boarders. I think those were those hippies that lived in my grandfather's barn for a couple of months back in '67.
245![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 11:16:54am |
I just know that my son is going to call me this afternoon, all outrageously outraged over Obama's bogus statement. He's stuck up there in the wilds of Canada with no access to news sources other than Charles Adler.
246![]() |
Lidane Thu, May 19, 2011 11:17:06am |
re: #220 Killgore Trout
The wingnuts aren't buying it. Outrage!
Of course they're outraged. Obama gave a speech about the Middle East and didn't announce that he was nuking Mecca and Medina.
247![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:17:09am |
re: #202 ProLifeLiberal
But please, for the sake of everything holy, DO NOT give Syria back the Golan until Assad and his evil crew of horseshit is out. Put under UN receivership or something until then.
Israel's keeping the Golan. Not to sweat it.
What the hell to do about Assad is something else.
248![]() |
BARACK THE VOTE Thu, May 19, 2011 11:17:12am |
re: #236 Conservative Moonbat
Well, the American end-timers pushing for war in the area so Jesus can come back aren't helping.
Related page I did earlier:
Porter Brings Religious Right Leaders, Dominionists And Prophets Together For Israel
249![]() |
makeitstop Thu, May 19, 2011 11:17:27am |
re: #244 SanFranciscoZionist
'67 Boarders. I think those were those hippies that lived in my grandfather's barn for a couple of months back in '67.
Ah. 1967.
I was going to say it must have been a very large barn. /
250![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:19:33am |
re: #207 Simply Sarah
Of course, this was also just a relatively minor part of the speech probably included mostly because it really isn't possible to avoid commenting on it in a major ME speech.
Yes, but the wingnuts, like the moonbats, don't really care what happens in Syria, since they already know whose fault it is. Moving on...
251![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 11:20:01am |
re: #242 Conservative Moonbat
Is there a good fairly non-biased book that hashes all this out? Everything I've tried to read comes off as propaganda for one side or the other.
Try The History of Palestine on my website. It was written in 1850, so is completely free of any "Zionist" influences.
252![]() |
NJDhockeyfan Thu, May 19, 2011 11:20:08am |
Just visited the cesspool known as HuffPo. They are not happy.
253![]() |
mr.fusion Thu, May 19, 2011 11:20:33am |
re: #140 Charles
By the way, here's the exact quote from Obama's speech:
Note: he didn't say "1967 borders," and he didn't "side with the Palestinians." It's nothing but a re-wording of the same position the US has taken for many years.
I hate to say it, but you had it nailed in the second comment of this thread......the "side with Palestinians" will be the new version of "Apology Tour."
254![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:21:04am |
re: #215 Ming
About operating a state in 2 or 3 pieces, I'm not sure why that's a problem. The state of Michigan isn't contiguous. For that matter, Alaska is not contiguous with the "lower 48" states.
Well, yes, but we don't have a problem with Canada.
255![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:21:36am |
re: #217 Conservative Moonbat
Sigh. I used to look up to him.
Updinged on the presumption of invisible sarc tag.
256![]() |
NJDhockeyfan Thu, May 19, 2011 11:22:05am |
re: #254 SanFranciscoZionist
Well, yes, but we don't have a problem with Canada.
You never know. I think I can hear them sharpening their hockey blades on a clear night.
257![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 11:22:07am |
re: #254 SanFranciscoZionist
Well, yes, but we don't have a problem with Canada.
Speak for yourself!
/
258![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 11:22:16am |
259![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:22:42am |
re: #229 Killgore Trout
Agreed. Not only would they still be killing each other they'd be using the same tactics of kidnappings, suicide bombings and car bombs. It's what they do.
The big difference is, the world would not care much.
260![]() |
sattv4u2 Thu, May 19, 2011 11:22:51am |
re: #254 SanFranciscoZionist
Well, yes, but we don't have a problem with Canada.
I do
I'm still pissed that when the Montreal Canadians beat the Boston Bruins
261![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 11:24:00am |
re: #251 Alouette
Try The History of Palestine on my website. It was written in 1850, so is completely free of any "Zionist" influences.
Cool, thanks. I was actually looking for a neutral treatment of the more recent history.
262![]() |
Simply Sarah Thu, May 19, 2011 11:24:06am |
re: #260 sattv4u2
I do
I'm still pissed that when the Montreal Canadians beat the Boston Bruins
That's not fair. The Habs aren't from Canada, they're from Quebec!
263![]() |
mr.fusion Thu, May 19, 2011 11:24:41am |
re: #261 Conservative Moonbat
Cool, thanks. I was actually looking for a neutral treatment of the more recent history.
Good luck
264![]() |
shutdown Thu, May 19, 2011 11:25:04am |
re: #242 Conservative Moonbat
Is there a good fairly non-biased book that hashes all this out? Everything I've tried to read comes off as propaganda for one side or the other.
I could not presume to say. It is such a highly politicized topic that "non-biased" will depend on your own person point of view. This publication is a purely factual illustration:
[Link: search.barnesandnoble.com...]
I have glanced at tit but not read all the way through.
265![]() |
Decatur Deb Thu, May 19, 2011 11:25:20am |
re: #261 Conservative Moonbat
Cool, thanks. I was actually looking for a neutral treatment of the more recent history.
Do you read Finnish?
266![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:25:27am |
re: #230 imp_62
You are not entirely accurate. Where there was no such thing as a "Palestinian" prior to Israeli statehood, the creation of a nominal "Arab State" at the end of te British Mandate created a de facto nationality for anyone living in those areas. Arguably, the rejection of that state by the Arab nations, and the subsequent invasion of Israel, abrogated its existence and claims, but it nonetheless existed, on paper, at the time Israel was established.
I agree that there is a Palestinian nationality, in some potential sense, although the fact that the state existed on paper for a really ephemeral period of time pretty much ranks it up there with the Lone Star Republic.
I deal all the time, however, with people who believe that there was a longstanding nation, national identity, culture, and peoplehood of Palestinians. It's there now, but it sure as shootin' wasn't at the turn of the twentieth century.
I spend a lot of time dealing with people who have idyllic pastoral fantasies about what Old Palestine was like. Did I mention I have a thing against Alice Walker?
267![]() |
sattv4u2 Thu, May 19, 2011 11:25:50am |
268![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:25:58am |
re: #236 Conservative Moonbat
Well, the American end-timers pushing for war in the area so Jesus can come back aren't helping.
How much of an impact are they really having, though?
269![]() |
engineer cat Thu, May 19, 2011 11:26:53am |
i support a return of judea to its AD 66 borders, and reparations from the romans for the destruction of the temple
270![]() |
sagehen Thu, May 19, 2011 11:27:07am |
re: #254 SanFranciscoZionist
Well, yes, but we don't have a problem with Canada.
*ahem*.
Celine Dion. Justin Bieber.
I most certainly do have a problem with Canada.
271![]() |
webevintage Thu, May 19, 2011 11:27:09am |
On Twitter:
jaketapper
In "Arab Spring" Speech, POTUS Offers Aid to Egypt +Tunisia, Chastises Bahrain, Pushes 1967 Borders for Israel
sigh.
272![]() |
sattv4u2 Thu, May 19, 2011 11:27:12am |
re: #268 SanFranciscoZionist
How much of an impact are they really having, though?
Keeps grocery store check-out stand newspapers in business
273![]() |
shutdown Thu, May 19, 2011 11:27:37am |
re: #267 sattv4u2
I have glanced at tit
I try to do more than glance!!
Dammit. I was hoping for a pass on that typo...
274![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:28:11am |
re: #252 NJDhockeyfan
Just visited the cesspool known as HuffPo. They are not happy.
Well, if Obama has pissed off the far left and the far right this thoroughly, he must be doing something right.
275![]() |
SanFranciscoZionist Thu, May 19, 2011 11:28:55am |
re: #261 Conservative Moonbat
Cool, thanks. I was actually looking for a neutral treatment of the more recent history.
Neutral? What is this word, 'neutral'?
276![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 11:28:57am |
277![]() |
sagehen Thu, May 19, 2011 11:30:15am |
re: #266 SanFranciscoZionist
I agree that there is a Palestinian nationality, in some potential sense, although the fact that the state existed on paper for a really ephemeral period of time pretty much ranks it up there with the Lone Star Republic.
Which some people are still loyal to; and the current governor of what used to be that Republic has suggested he'd like to resurrect. So... maybe a more potent analogy than intended.
278![]() |
Vicious Babushka Thu, May 19, 2011 11:31:10am |
re: #261 Conservative Moonbat
Cool, thanks. I was actually looking for a neutral treatment of the more recent history.
O Jerusalem by Larry Collins and Dominique La Pierre is a good history. Written in the 1970's.
There is a selection of books at my website but they all have a pro-Zionist bias, except for the ones listed on the Amazon sidebar.
279![]() |
Velvet Elvis Thu, May 19, 2011 11:32:13am |
re: #268 SanFranciscoZionist
How much of an impact are they really having, though?
On the Republican Party? A fairly large one.
280![]() |
Ericus58 Thu, May 19, 2011 11:38:14am |
re: #239 Alouette
Another AP bogus headline: Obama tells Israel: Go back to 1967 borders.
*head desk*
"Israel's PM Benjamin Netanyahu rejects withdrawal to 'indefensible' 1967 borders."
BBC
281![]() |
Varek Raith Thu, May 19, 2011 11:38:55am |
Man, this sucks.
Jeff Conaway in Coma from Overdose