It's obvious what is wrong with the Sharon proposals.

[keithyboy]

Everything is designed to make one believe that the Palestinians have turned down any offer that has been made in the past. Listening to the US spokesperson on C-Span this morning, it is obvious that the land that Sharon will agree to give the Palestinians is mostly uninhabitable and the land that the fense and the Settlements occupy contain most of the WATER supplies of the entire area. That why the borders are so choppy and that is why the Palestinians are so resentful. It's about the WATER!! The jist of it is to send the Palestinains to the Negev desert. The Israelis have already annexed or occupied the most fertile lands that were once Palestinian farms and a source of their livelihood. No matter how we try to dress it up, the Palestinians understand much more accurately than we do (thanks to the pundits who explain the situation always in terms of making the Palestinians look bad).

[MAlibdem]

1. The Palestinians HAVE turned down every offer made in the past...

Thus there is no peace. Yassir Arafat is responsible for much of the gridlock in the peace process because should peace actually come, he would retain little power.

[Tinoire]

5. Here you go for Barak's Lie of a "Generous" offer

No one in their right mind would have accepted this garbage offer. But keep defending it. It's a great chorus to keep repeating as the US does everything to remain complicit in this outrageous land theft.

A speckled map of bantustans is what Israel offered the Palestinians. Total fucking garbage which would have guaranteed that they would NEVER have an independent state. It is a good thing the average Palestinian is not as gullible as the average misinformed American who runs around wailing "Why do they hate us".

Flash presentation of the "Generous" Offer:
www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf

Brought to inquiring minds by Gush Shalom (Translated from Hebrew, the name means "The Peace Bloc"), the hard core of the Israeli peace movement, founded by an ex-Israeli terrorist of the Stern-Irgun gang, Uri Avnery, who is disgusted at what was done to steal the Palestinian's land.

History:

The Gush was founded by Mr. Uri Avnery and others in 1993, when it became apparent that all the older peace groups in Israel were either unable or unwilling to oppose the repressive measures introduced by the new Labor party government headed by Yitzhak Rabin.

When Rabin expelled 415 Islamic activists from the country in late 1992, a spontaneous protest by Jewish and Arab Israelis led to the setting up of protest tents opposite the prime minister's office in Jerusalem. This protest lasted for 45 days and nights during the winter. Following the debates in the tents, and in view of the silence of other Israeli peace groups, some of the protesters decided that a new Israeli peace movement was needed. They defined themselves as "Peacer than Peace Now" and founded Gush Shalom.

http://www.gush-shalom.org/english/intro.html

[bicentennial_baby]

9. Whoa Cass, that's so weird!

I was just reading an essay by Avenery last night about this exact issue! It's in this great book I got this week, The Other Israel: Voice of Refusal and Dissent. The name of the essay is "Politicus Interruptus"...here's a relevant excerpt:

"When something like that occurs again and again, it raises questions. It may be called "politicus interuptus". A moment before the consummation, Barak draws back. I am not a psychiatrist and am not qualified to deal with mental problems. But I believe that every time, when Barak saw the actual price of peace in front of him, he shrunk back at the last moment. There was a dissonance between the price of peace (withdrawal from the occupied territories, evacuation of settlements, conceding East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount, return of a symbolic number of refugees) and the ideas he was brought up on. He could not shoulder the responsibility and broke down."

[Tinoire]

10. You really impress me!

"politicus interuptus" is the most apt term I've ever heard for this.

Thank you- I will be using that one in the future :)

You're a wealth of knowledge BB!

[TahitiNut]

2. Settlements

While it's just fine for Palestinians to live under Israeli governance, it's permanently not OK for Israelis to live under any foreseen Palestinian governance. The West Bank settlements are preemptively regarded as sovereign Israeli territory forever. This does not demonstrate any openness to a mutual respect, now or any time in the future. This embeds antagonism and animosity in the most permanent fashion.

[Classical_Liberal]

3. What do you mean it is permanently not ok for Israelis

to live under Palestinian governance. Palestinians have said it is ok so long as they accept Palestinian governance. If they want the places on the west bank to be under israeli governance, it isn't ok.

[TahitiNut]

4. It's not OK from an Israeli perspective.

Look at how they've run the wall/fence. The current Israeli map of the West Bank looks like Swiss Cheese ... gnawed in from the edges.

[Tinoire]

6. But of course they refuse

to smoothen out the lines of the fence by bringing those lines withing their own territory...

Land theft in action...

Good point :hi: The Israeli perspective is totally skewed.

[markomalley]

7. It is indeed obvious what is wrong

The short answer is that there are zionists in Palestine. That is the fault of the US, lock stock and barrel. We need to support the rightful occupants of that parcel of land and do everything possible to restore their ownership of the whole parcel, particularly considering we were instrumental in stealing it from them in the first place.

[halley]

8. Congress

I have a question-does Congress have to ratified this proposal?
All in all it's okay-but the part that's get me-is that Israel will
CONTROL the settlement in regards to water, airspace, etc. This is
unacceptable.