Abbas Wants Pre-’67 Borders And People In Hell Want Ice Water
You want what you had before you got your ass kicked? Sorry, Pal. That’s not the way it works.
RAMALLAH, West Bank - Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday laid out his most specific demands for the borders of a future independent state, calling for a full Israeli withdrawal from all territories captured in the 1967 Mideast war.
Abbas’ claim comes as Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams are trying to hammer out a joint vision for a future peace deal in time for a U.S.-hosted conference next month.
With Israel seeking to retain parts of the West Bank and east Jerusalem, Abbas’ comments appeared to set the stage for tough negotiations, which are expected to include complicated arrangements such as land swaps and shared control over holy sites.
In a television interview, Abbas said the Palestinians want to establish a state on 6,205 square kilometers (2,400 square miles) of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. It was the first time he has given a precise number for the amount of land he is seeking.
“We have 6,205 square kilometers in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip,” Abbas told Palestine TV. “We want it as it is.”
According to Palestinian negotiating documents obtained by The Associated Press, the Palestinian demands include all of the Gaza Strip, West Bank, east Jerusalem and small areas along the West Bank frontier that were considered no-man’s land before the 1967 war.
Abbas said his claim is backed by U.N. resolutions. “This is our vision for the Palestinian independent state with full sovereignty on its borders, water and resources.”
Israeli government spokeswoman Miri Eisin declined to comment, saying she did not want to prejudice negotiations. But the Palestinian demands appear to exceed anything that Israel would be willing to offer.
Israeli and Palestinian negotiators held their first working meeting this week as they try to hammer out a joint declaration in time for next month’s conference. The U.S. hopes the document will provide a launching ground for full-fledged negotiations on a final peace agreement.
Israel captured the territories in the 1967 Mideast war and hopes in a final peace deal with the Palestinians to hold on to parts of the West Bank where Jewish settlement blocs are located. Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005.
Despite Abbas’ tough public stance, aides to Abbas said he has agreed in recent talks with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to exchange West Bank land Israel wants to keep in a final peace deal with an equal amount of Israeli land. This would allow Israel to annex the West Bank area where the settlement blocs are located.
As part of the proposal, Abbas offered Olmert about 2 percent of the West Bank, the aides said. Olmert is seeking some 6-8 percent of the West Bank, but has said the exact amount of territory should be decided in future negotiations. The aides spoke on condition of anonymity since they were not authorized to discuss sensitive diplomatic matters with the media.
In exchange for the West Bank land, Israel is reportedly considering transferring to the Palestinians a strip of area between the Gaza Strip and West Bank to allow for a connection between them.
Abbas said the joint statement at the conference must deal with the main hurdles preventing a final peace agreement.
“The international conference must include the six major issues that are Jerusalem, refugees, borders, settlements, water and security,” Abbas said.
(AP)
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
Pre-67 borders? is this guy on crack? we’re talking about a quasi-legitimate group of people at best who have no leverage whatsoever..Israel is negotiating with them and this guys jumps out of the gate with this kind of talk? what a joke that is..any land Israel has given the Pali’s is too much in my book
October 10th, 2007 at 8:10 amI read somewhere something like, “Never in history has a group of people deserved their own country less than the Palestinians”. I totally agree. I have called the practitioners of Islam, “NeoPhilistines”, but now I read in the English-Arabic dictionary that the Arabic word for Palestinian is basically “Philistine”. They don’t even try to hide it!
October 10th, 2007 at 8:22 amIt’s all part of the bigger plan that the gay man Arafat had. To wit:
1. Negotiate for land.
2. Kill Jews
3. Get more land
4. Kill more Jews
Then repeat steps 1 and 2 until all the Jews are dead or pushed into the sea.
I got two words for Abbas. They rhyme with “duck stew”
October 10th, 2007 at 8:42 amHA!..tell him to put it on his Christmas list…wait, sorry… How about writing a letter to that Mickey Mouse knock-off on Pali TV? Dumb-ass
October 10th, 2007 at 10:05 amJohnF
… but now I read in the English-Arabic dictionary that the Arabic word for Palestinian is basically “Philistine”. They don’t even try to hide it!”
“Philistine” is derived from “Palestine” but not for the reasons you think. Philistine literally means native of Palestine in Latin, and in Arabic there is not a sound for the hard “P” that Germanic and Latin languages have, so it’s pronounced “filistine”. Pepsi, for example, in the Middle East is actually pronounced “bebsi.”
Don’t you think that for this conflict to finally end that we need compromise on BOTH sides? We aren’t going to get anything but more blood shed if both leaders remain bitter and unwavering.
October 10th, 2007 at 10:12 amActually, I think going back to where the borders were pre-67 is a great idea.
While we’re at it, we should set the borders where they were back a little further, say around 1167BC.
Anyone?
October 10th, 2007 at 11:06 amI have to admit that Steven D’s idea has a serious ring to it. And while I’m thinking of it, the Jews should remember their God and kick the Philistines’ asses….again! Nothing’s changed: David and Goliath are both still standing off. With the help of the one true God, a tiny nation can kick ass again.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:38 amSteven D:
Great idea. That would give Isreal back all of its land from the Euphrates to the Sinai, and Lebanon and Syria.
October 10th, 2007 at 11:56 amAll of which was Jewish land long before Muhammed was even born. Great plan.
““Philistine” is derived from “Palestine” but not for the reasons you think. Philistine literally means native of Palestine in Latin, and in Arabic there is not a sound for the hard “P” that Germanic and Latin languages have, so it’s pronounced “filistine”. Pepsi, for example, in the Middle East is actually pronounced “bebsi.” ”
Dude. Do you just make shit up when you post? So they call themselves *B*alestinians??
The etymology of ‘Philistine’ goes much farther back than the Romans who brought *Latin*. I can’t remember it at the moment but a word very similar to Philistine is all over ancient Egyptian and Old Testament writings. And Balestine
“Don’t you think that for this conflict to finally end that we need compromise on BOTH sides? We aren’t going to get anything but more blood shed if both leaders remain bitter and unwavering.”
Yep. Apparently you do make shit up. Not aware of any Israelis that are “bitter”. And I reckon the ‘Balestinians’ have a good reason to be bitter…. losing all them wars and shit.
Cheeburger, Cheeburger, Cheeburger, Bebsi, Bebsi, Bebsi
October 10th, 2007 at 12:37 pmNo coke, pepsi.
Ok, The American, listen up:
Palestinians ARE Philistines.
Period, end of sentence. David said to Goliath, basically:
“Shut the fuck up, you uncircumcised philistine.” Just before he planted that puke.
That was like, many moons ago, skippy. A Palestinian is a Philsitine no matter how you slice it, how you dice it, or how you try to hide and deny it it.
They can’t even run a freakin’ sewer system, and they want more land? WTF for? To turn into more dust bowls?
I got two words for Abbas and Hamas and all his lil Iranian buddies hiding behind the curtain, and they aren’t Merry Christmas.
October 10th, 2007 at 12:52 pmI had mentioned on one of these postings a few months ago that if so many of the mid-east folks are so adamant about going back to old territorial calims, that we should use the pre-biblical records, which is exactly what Steven D is endorsing, and I think that it would be great if that could be sprung on the pigs in a nice little diplomatic surprise. Like have Olmert sugget the boundaries in person, on TV to Abbas, see if he accepts, then it is too late to backtrack, see if the pig sticker knows the regional history, toerh than the past 50 years of bombs and shootings.
October 10th, 2007 at 12:54 pm“The Arabic word for Palestine, فلسطين, which is pronounced “Falasṭīn,” derives from the Latin term Palaestina. After the Bar-Kokhba revolt of the Judeans and the subsequent Roman repression and exile, the Romans renamed the entire district of Judea “Palaestina” as a mark of insult to their defeated enemies. This is because of their knowledge of the region’s history and the fact that the Philistines and the Israelites were warring peoples. The Arabic language’s lack of the “p” phoneme, and the tendency to arabacize the “t” and “k” of foreign words as the corresponding Semitic emphatic consonants, resulted in this nomenclature after the Muslim conquest brought Arabs to the region in 636 AD, often used interchangeably for the entire greater Syrian district (Arabic: “Shaam”).”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines
see ya baba
October 10th, 2007 at 1:19 pmWikipedia?? It figures. Internet link education.
October 10th, 2007 at 1:26 pmWikipedia? That’s laughable. Try this one:
“WHAT DOES “PALESTINE” MEAN?
It has never been the name of a nation or state. It is a geographical term, used to designate the region at those times in history when there is no nation or state there.
The word itself derives from “Peleshet”, a name that appears frequently in the Bible and has come into English as “Philistine”. The Philistines were mediterranean people originating from Asia Minor and Greek localities. They reached the southern coast of Israel in several waves. One group arrived in the pre-patriarchal period and settled south of Beersheba in Gerar where they came into conflict with Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael. Another group, coming from Crete after being repulsed from an attempted invasion of Egypt by Rameses III in 1194 BCE, seized the southern coastal area, where they founded five settlements (Gaza, Ascalon, Ashdod, Ekron and Gat). In the Persian and Greek periods, foreign settlers - chiefly from the Mediterranean islands - overran the Philistine districts. From the time of Herodotus, Greeks called the eastern coast of the Mediterranean “Syria Palaestina”.
The Philistines were not Arabs nor even Semites, they were most closely related to the Greeks. They did not speak Arabic. They had no connection, ethnic, linguistic or historical with Arabia or Arabs. The name “Falastin” that Arabs today use for “Palestine” is not an Arabic name. It is the Arab pronunciation of the Greco-Roman “Palastina”; which is derived from the Plesheth, (root palash) was a general term meaning rolling or migratory. This referred to the Philistine’s invasion and conquest of the coast from the sea.
The use of the term “Palestinian” for an Arab ethnic group is a modern political creation which has no basis in fact - and had never had any international or academic credibility before 1967.”
October 10th, 2007 at 1:39 pmyeah, kinda quick ! but might remind your hypothetic academic knowledge though, baba
October 10th, 2007 at 1:40 pmFrenchie:
It’s way better than anything you got baba….
October 10th, 2007 at 1:48 pmI can’t see the difference a part you wanted your own reconfiguration of the same “Lapalisse truth”
October 10th, 2007 at 2:00 pmFrenchie used the word hypothetical. Or tried to. The word means conjecture. The difference between conjectured history vs factual history was a favorite topic of Cicero when he said:
“The first law of the historian is that he shall never dare utter an untruth… There shall be no suspicion of partiality in his writing, or of malice.”
That doesen’t jive with a Chomskian view of the world, but then again, unlike Chomsky, Cicero was a man ahead of his time.
October 10th, 2007 at 2:07 pmWhen are these with palirabies going to be put down?
October 10th, 2007 at 2:13 pm“..but might remind your hypothetic academic knowledge”
Scouring the net for a paragraph that you can post completely out of any context to the discussion is “hypothetic academic knowledge” Frenchie. It’s something you see frequently over at DailyKos and in virtually every Dhimmicrat speech since that party was conquered by the moonbats.
October 10th, 2007 at 2:14 pmwho is Chomsky ?
yeah you quote Cicero, favorite in latin declinaison ; sorry, I am no latinist, but I have heard of the man though, cousin
October 10th, 2007 at 2:25 pmt’as raison baba, il n’y a que des vrais lettrés ici !
October 10th, 2007 at 2:35 pmNoam Chompsky M.I.T. professor of linguistics.
October 10th, 2007 at 2:40 pm“who is Chomsky ?”
You… but with a Harvard degree… sorta.
October 10th, 2007 at 2:40 pm“who is Chomsky ?”
Hugo Chavez’ favorite author!
October 10th, 2007 at 2:45 pm“t’as raison baba, il n’y a que des vrais lettrés ici”
Actually the link you gave was not all that bad for a one page distillation of a people’s history and their impact on a region. Most on Wikipedia are not all that good or complete in my view.
But to use a footnote to try and post a “Mr. Greenie”?
October 10th, 2007 at 2:48 pmTsk, tsk, tsk Frenchie.
Bash, thanks;
I heard of him though as a leftist intellectual and anti sionnist, even as a originated born jew, but never read a single line of him
October 10th, 2007 at 2:57 pmbaba, you forgot in Art !
October 10th, 2007 at 2:58 pm