Friday, September 23, 2011

Bill Clinton: Netanyahu Killed Rabin

Sorry, while he seemingly to me implied that, what he really said was:

Bill Clinton: Netanyahu killed the peace process

He basically repeated quasi-sociological claptrap he spoke last year which I commented on at the same forum.

But from this year's story:

Who's to blame for the continued failure of the Middle East peace process? Former President Bill Clinton said today that it is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu -- whose government moved the goalposts upon taking power, and whose rise represents a key reason there has been no Israeli-Palestinian peace deal.

Clinton, in a roundtable with bloggers today on the sidelines of the Clinton Global Initiative in New York, gave an extensive recounting of the deterioration in the Middle East peace process since he pressed both parties to agree to a final settlement at Camp David in 2000. He said there are two main reasons for the lack of a comprehensive peace today: the reluctance of the Netanyahu administration to accept the terms of the Camp David deal and a demographic shift in Israel that is making the Israeli public less amenable to peace.

"The two great tragedies in modern Middle Eastern politics, which make you wonder if God wants Middle East peace or not, were [Yitzhak] Rabin's assassination and [Ariel] Sharon's stroke," Clinton said.

Did he blame Bibi for the stroke as well?

And he wants all Israelis governments to accept what was on the table and refused by the Arabs and repeat the same offer when we all know the Arabs simply refuse and up the ante. They've done this consistently for almost a century.

He doesn't recognize reality:-

"[Palestinian leaders] have explicitly said on more than one occasion that if [Netanyahu] put up the deal that was offered to them before -- my deal -- that they would take it," Clinton said, referring to the 2000 Camp David deal that Yasser Arafat rejected.

But the Israeli government has drifted a long way from the Ehud Barak-led government that came so close to peace in 2000, Clinton said, and any new negotiations with the Netanyahu government are now on starkly different terms -- terms that the Palestinians are unlikely to accept.

That's exactly correct and that's why Netanyahu won the election. The electorate didn't like the Clinton parameters.

"For reasons that even after all these years I still don't know for sure, Arafat turned down the deal I put together that Barak accepted," he said. "But they also had an Israeli government that was willing to give them East Jerusalem as the capital of the new state of Palestine."

They had. Had. New set of negotiating benchmarks now, Bill.

And here's his political sociology:

The Netanyahu government has received all of the assurances previous Israeli governments said they wanted but now won't accept those terms to make peace, Clinton said.

"Now that they have those things, they don't seem so important to this current Israeli government, partly because it's a different country," said Clinton. "In the interim, you've had all these immigrants coming in from the former Soviet Union, and they have no history in Israel proper, so the traditional claims of the Palestinians have less weight with them."

Clinton then repeated his assertions made at last year's conference that Israeli society can be divided into demographic groups that have various levels of enthusiasm for making peace.

"The most pro-peace Israelis are the Arabs; second the Sabras, the Jewish Israelis that were born there; third, the Ashkenazi of long-standing, the European Jews who came there around the time of Israel's founding," Clinton said. "The most anti-peace are the ultra-religious, who believe they're supposed to keep Judea and Samaria, and the settler groups, and what you might call the territorialists, the people who just showed up lately and they're not encumbered by the historical record."

Bill, actually there are many revenant Jews in Judea and Samaria who aren't Russian, aren't religious as there are in Israel and hold viewpoints that see this land as the Jewish national home, to be lived in, to be developed, to be, yes, redeemed, and to be defended.

Hillary, what do you see in Bill?


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Moshiach has form on this redemption idea. What did he do when the Jews in the desert worshipped the false god that was the golden calf?

do you think Moshiach approves of Jewish hatred of Arabs and Jewish torture ?

how long have you been waiting?

And where was Moshiach in 1943? How does Auschwitz fit into the plan?