Olmert to US; Support apartheid please.

[astronaut]

He's banned !
What joy.
He'll not be missed,
the Astronaughty
narcissist.

He's back !
What joy.

 

[astronaut]

You certainly HAVE defended Israeli actions, although in ameandering hopscotch sort of pattern.

When? I wasn't aware of doing it.

 

[moono]

Narcissist.

Topic;

Referring to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's determination to draw
Israel's final borders by 2010 - with or without an agreement with the
Palestinians - the EU insisted it "will not recognize any change to the
pre-1967 border other than those agreed by both sides."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/727826.html

It can't can it. Neither can anybody else. Negotiation is enshrined in international law. Unilateral action of the part of the land-thieves is a non-starter.

 

[rachamim18]

Moono: As usual you misunderstand. First off, Kadimah has committed to 2008, not 2010. Secondly, it is declared as a unilateral action. It is not meant as a hear all end all. If and when the Arabs ever get their act together, borders along with other vital issues will of coursebe neogiated. until then, Israel is leaving the WB, as it has Gaza, closing the door, and locking it behind them.

 

[tangentlama]

Tangent: Jewschool is pretty right wing. Still , alot of good info. I disagree with Halper although his points should make sense to those who take issue with the "Barrier" as a tool of Apartheid.

It bills itself as 'the web's leading progressive Jewish weblog' and it does contain a good range of views and opinions, but Jewschool isn't right-wing. The very first article is about Salon Mazal in Tel Aviv - "unique and well-used venue for promoting alternative views and opinions, both through public meetings, study groups, film nights and the biggest collection of anti-occupation, anarchist, vegan and queer literature in the Middle East, most of which is unavailable elsewhere." - LOL

http://jewschool.com

 

[TAE]

I was shedding blood for Israel when you were a stain on your daddy's draws.

Who did you kill?

 

[moono]

Gawd, he was shedding 'seed' for Israel earlier. What a drama queen.

Anyway;
Resolution 338, which is a Chapter Seven Security Council Resolution, a binding Resolution, calls for Resolution 242 to be implemented.

That surely means that Resolution 242 must be implemented and Resolution 242 calls for negotiation between all parties.

Breaking it down, unilateral action, or Olmert's plan, simply isn't legal.

Blair has spoken against it, the EU has spoken against it, the UN has spoken against it. What is Bush going to do, dance for the rest of his term ?

 

[tangentlama]

Bush dance? No.
The 'Quartet',ie. US, UN, EU and Russia, have decided to channel funds to Abbu Mazen & Fatah, bypassing the democratically elected Hamas, and effectively forming a parallel administration.

 

[moono]

You expect Abbas to be the negotiator ?

Abbas urges Arab states to help block Olmert's unilateral plan

By The Associated Press


AMMAN - Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said Sunday that he was rallying Arab nations to block an Israeli plan to redraw its borders unilaterally, and instead implement the U.S.-backed road map, which envisions the creation of a Palestinian state.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/728263.html

 

[rachamim18]

JewSchool: I have read many good things on the site but have found the bent decidedly right wing.

Moono: Again, the Resolution, a Security Council Resolution authored by America, was binding on Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. It had nothing at all to do with "Palestinians. It was written in 67, for the 67 War.

Abbas has tried to see himself as negotiator. Israel and the US have placed their bets on him, with Israel funneling surplus Jordanian [American made] arms to Fatah. I am sure that I will be ducking those M16s next Reserve but that is the way it is played in that part of thr world.

 

[moono]

Rachamim;

Moono: Again, the Resolution, a Security Council Resolution authored by America, was binding on Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. It had nothing at all to do with "Palestinians. It was written in 67, for the 67 War.

The Resolution calls on 'all parties' so quit the repetitious falsehoods, liarboy. If it was intended to exclude Palestinians, or any other group, it would have said so.