Announcement

**ad hoc** · 15-06-2009, 07:55

That cunt Bibi

"The simple truth is that the root of this conflict has been and still is the refusal to accept the right of the Jewish people to have a state of their own,"

Nothing to do with a fucking occupation you disgusting piece of scum?

**Anton Gramscescu** · 15-06-2009, 08:31

That cunt Bibi

Ad hoc, am I right in thinking that there has been a change in language under this government? There has always been that pre-condition about "recognizing the state of Israel", but I get the impression in the last month or so that the language has shifted to be "recognizing the state of Israel as a Jewish state". Is this actually new language or has it always been there in political discussion and I've never noticed it?

**ad hoc** · 15-06-2009, 08:52

That cunt Bibi

As far as I'm aware it's new. Likud have realised that they're going to have to give way on a few points so they've changed the demand for recognition of the state of Israel (which Fatah/PLO have agreed to for years, and even Hamas have made conciliatory noises about) to recognition of Israel as a Jewish State, so as to add another level of impossibility to teh preconditions. Israel as a Jewish State means absolutely under no circumstances any return for refugees and it also puts the status of the Israeli Arab population under serious threat. It's just another indication that they (Netanyahu and co) do not want peace in any circumstances.

**Anton Gramscescu** · 15-06-2009, 08:59

That cunt Bibi

Sounds about right to me. Is there also perhaps a worry on their part that that a one-state solution (i.e. a bi-national federation) might be gaining ground within the international community as an idea since a two-state solution clearly isn't going so well?

**Wyatt Earp** · 15-06-2009, 09:14

That cunt Bibi

It's possible Washington hasn't fallen for it, but is just making encouraging noises. I mean, it's possible. Hope springs eternal and that.

It's the demand that the state be unarmed that had me screaming at the telly this morning. Netanyahu runs the most Prussian-militarist country you can imagine (well, OK, we'll except the likes of North Korea), with every citizen a soldier and all guns pointed at Gaza and the West Bank. But they don't get a popgun. He must know the Palestinians will never accept that, and at some level he must know they shouldn't have to. It's all about seeming to make concessions without actually making concessions.

I mean, if it's rockets he's worried about, just go for a ban on rockets.

**loose cannon** · 15-06-2009, 11:42

That cunt Bibi

It's practically a Versailles Treaty declaration.
I'm surprised that he hasn't demanded war reparations from the Palestinians.

**Bill Poster** · 15-06-2009, 16:07

That cunt Bibi

And yet the news websites go with the headline "Netanyahu backs Palestinian state".

In much the same way as "American Religious Right backs abortion"

You feel like half a sentence is missing from the end there.

**G-Man** · 15-06-2009, 18:53

That cunt Bibi

If Obama falls for any of this utter shit, he's not even 1/100th of the man he wants to appear to be. However, so far he's called it "an important step forward" What step? There's been no step whatsoever.

It's early days. Netanyahu is stating the starting premise, and so should.. well, who is going to represent Palestinian aspirations? Well, so should whoever that is going to be. It's fair to encourage a statement that suggests that negotiations are possible without endorsing the demands stated.

**ad hoc** · 15-06-2009, 19:33

That cunt Bibi

But it's like there have been conditions on the table for donkey's years, and now, Netanyahu has taken them all off and imposed new, much stricter ones, just because he's noted for being more hard line and settler friendly than any other prime ministers. This is like if the Palestinians nominated Hamas to speak for them and their opening gambit was that Israel must recognise that all the land which Israel sits on is actually Palestine, and they're being allowed to stay there on a semi-permanent lease basis.

This is not a starting premise this is a massive retrograde step. It's basically the death knell of the peace process.

**Anton Gramscescu** · 15-06-2009, 19:58

That cunt Bibi

If it were Netanyahu's last word on the subject, that's probably true. But as G-man says, if this is just an opening gambit, then not necessarily.

But it's not cause for optimism, that's for sure.

**Guest** · 15-06-2009, 23:02

That cunt Bibi

If Netanyahu's idea of moving things forward is to behave like a draconian, racist cunt, then he's kicked off very well.

The Israeli electorate have now voted him in as leader twice, having had a pretty good look at him the first time, so we can assume that he's spewing out what most of them want to hear. There is no hope.

**ad hoc** · 16-06-2009, 06:41

That cunt Bibi

I'm sure it's not Netanyahu's last word on the subject. But an important step forward? It's a massive step backward.

**Anton Gramscescu** · 16-06-2009, 07:50

That cunt Bibi

Backwards for Israel from where it was six months ago; forwards (barely) for the coalition from where it was six days ago, no?

**ad hoc** · 16-06-2009, 07:57

That cunt Bibi

Coalition? The Israeli government coalition?

Backwards for Israel, for peace, for the Palestinians.

Forwards for... well, who knows really. He's come up with something that hard line Likudites and whatever Avigdor Lieberman's party is called can sign up to, I guess, and something that the hard line Israeli lobby in the US can cheerlead knowing that it kills peace, but is that a step forward? I dunno really. He's in favour of an impossible Palestinian state. how does this move anything forward, save for the warmongers?

**ad hoc** · 16-06-2009, 07:59

That cunt Bibi

It's good for Hamas, too.

**ad hoc** · 17-06-2009, 06:28

That cunt Bibi

Meanwhile, yesterday while at a press conference standing next to Jimmy Carter Ismail Haniyah said this:

"If there is a real project that aims to resolve the Palestinian cause on establishing a Palestinian state on 1967 borders, under full Palestinian sovereignty, we will support it"

Now that really is an important step forward. A fuck's sight more of one that Netanyahu's weasel shit. Obama should acknowledge it as such.

**ad hoc** · 17-06-2009, 06:39

That cunt Bibi

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/6/16/743206/-Hamas-prepared-to-accept-an-independent-state-alongside-Israel

**nefertiti** · 17-06-2009, 07:08

That cunt Bibi

I think that Obama was right to say that Netanyahu's statement was a step forward.

BiBi has uttered the word "Palestinian State". Sure, he has added all kinds of impossible demands to it- because his aim is to maintain the status quo- but under Obama that's not an option.

The key thing is Netanyahu has uttered the words he said he would never say. The key concession has been granted, there should be a Palestinian State. Now the negotiations begin.

Without wanting to trivialise the Palestinian position I think Netanyahu is behaving like a spoiled two year old in a tantrum, who has finally agreed that it's time to go to bed. He is demanding all kinds of ridiculous concessions that Daddy and Mummy read them a story every night and that it can stay up later than its siblings. But the fact is, it's agreed to go to bed.

I agree that the statement by Haniyeh is incredibly significant. And I think Obama's use of Carter (who Hamas claim brought a message from Obama) is a good portent for future diplomacy.

And go Jimmy!

**ad hoc** · 17-06-2009, 07:16

That cunt Bibi

According to that Daily Kos piece Netanyahu's mentioned "a limited Palestinian state" a few times before.

**Anton Gramscescu** · 17-06-2009, 07:19

That cunt Bibi

Wow. That is a major step.

Ad hoc, why do Palestinians use the phrase "a Palestine state on 1967 borders" if there was no Palestine in 1967 (Gaza having been part of Egypt and the west bank part of Jordan)? It seems a particuarly odd phrase in terms of Gaza, whose borders were actually fixed after the camp david accords in '78.

What the actually seem to mean is a settlement in which *Israel* has its 1967 borders and Paelstine has the residue.

**Anton Gramscescu** · 17-06-2009, 07:24

That cunt Bibi

I'm unclear about all Netanyahu's backs and forths, but he did actually sign (though never fully implement) the Wye agreement in 1996. And since this was a part of the Oslo process, signing it rather implicitly recognized an eventual palestinian state, didn't it?

**nefertiti** · 17-06-2009, 07:32

That cunt Bibi

I hadn't realised that he had made these statements before. And AG your deep knowledge is admirable.

I think Carter's visit (NB with a letter from Gilad Shalit's dad to cover his arse against APIAC attack) and the accompanying Hamas statement has to be seen as part of Obama's peace process.

**ad hoc** · 17-06-2009, 07:33

That cunt Bibi

Well the 1967 borders are the 1967 borders (of Israel, obviously). They're the ones recognised by the UN, etc etc. "Palestine" is recognised by all Palestinians as being what is now israel plus the WB and Gaza, so "a Palestinian State on 1967 borders" means the bit that's left once we accept that some of Palestine is Israel.

**ad hoc** · 17-06-2009, 07:56

That cunt Bibi

What's really revealing is that Netanyahu's "concession" was featured prominently on the front pages of all the news websites and headlined "Netanyahu accepts Palestinian State", and Haniyah's speech is really really hard to find. Even the Guardian which is vaguely even-handed (though the pro-occupation lobby find it pro-Palestinian, and I find it a bit the other way) had the big story about Netanyahu, and today, buried deep within the website, not on the front page or even highly visible on the world news page, a piece about Carter's visit with Haniyah's statement briefly touched upon in the last paragraph

Announcement

That c**t Bibi

That c**t Bibi

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment