« Bishop Salim Ghazal's Speech in Iowa, Nov. 2007 | Main | My Life, The Hollywood Edition »

January 10, 2008

Comments

According to Haaretz he also said:

"These negotiations must ensure that Israel has secure, recognized, and defensible borders," he said. "And they must ensure that the state of Palestine is viable, contiguous, sovereign, and independent."

Which sounds slightly more positive than the dismal idea of bandistans. On the other hand, one has to ask why he chose to say this, and whether the West Bank has gained at the expense of Gaza.

I wouldn't exactly say the JPost "speaks truths." More like: "speaks lies...& once in a while something approximating the truth comes out."

Yes, the Times always pulls punches on these issues for fear of offending their (Jewish) audience, which they feel the need to protect. They DO manage to do some good coverage but their prose always seems to be walking on eggshells when they do.

Keep in mind that the one bad thing Bush said was the Right of Return couldn't possibly involve anyone resettling in Israel. Even the Geneva Accords made at least a symbolic provision for some refugees to resettle. This statement was definitely a sop to Olmert & a thorn to Abbas.

I'm just plain puzzled by the "contiguous" part. Has anyone ever seen a serious proposal for a contiguous Palestine? (I'm discounting the proposals of, say, Ahmedinijad here.)

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Cookbooks