Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support -- click here to help us keep going

Analysis News

Is the Obama administration cooking up 'Oslo 3'?

More and more reports are suggesting that the U.S. is planning to put forward an offer that would end the impasse in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and special envoy to the peace talks Martin Indyk. The decision not to confront Jerusalem will prevent a real U.S.-led breakthrough (State Department photo/ Public Domain)

Martin Indyk, the American envoy for Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, gave an hour-long address at the end of the J Street Conference in Washington last month. Indyk said nothing about the talks themselves but some commentators noticed a couple of references to them: first, the American envoy said the talks’ goal was to reach a final status agreement and nothing else; second, that by next year’s conference, he said, “the leaders will have had to make their choice.”

Since most people estimated – and still do – that the talks themselves will go nowhere, the last statement was seen as indication that somewhere along the way the American administration would put forward a proposal of its own – a bridging idea or agreement that the two parties will have to accept or reject (no need to hold your breath, I explain what I believe their response will be by the end of this post).

In the month since Indyk’s speech, speculation about an American-led initiative has become more frequent and explicit. A two-page feature in Yedioth Ahronoth this weekend claimed that the United States has already given up all hope that the parties can reach an agreement on their own. According to the article, an American offer will be put forward before the end of the nine-month designated negotiation period.

The Yedioth report was light on specifics but it did claim that the American proposal will be made of an interim agreement and a certain framework or illustration of a final status agreement. It wasn’t noted if the interim agreement will include evacuating settlements (my hunch: a handful at best, but more likely none), or whether the Palestinian Authority would be upgraded to a recognized state (more probable, since there is no political cost attached to such a move). According to the report, some parts of — Oslo-designated and defined — ‘Area C’ in the West Bank will be moved under Palestinian “control.” I write control in quotes because the Palestinian Authority is not a real sovereign, but rather an extension of Israeli sovereignty.

Today, Zehava Gal-On of Meretz said that the U.S. administration is due to lay out an offer for the negotiating parties in January; Netanyahu didn’t rule out the possibility when asked about it in a cabinet meeting. Gal-On gave a slightly different view of the American offer, estimating that it will be based on the pre-1967 borders with agreed-upon land swaps. However, Netanyahu has in the past rejected this idea — and also in public. Netanayhu also recently spoke out against a territorial compromise over Jerusalem, which is also the position of his main coalition partners, Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid.

Ma’ariv and Army Radio also reported on a possible U.S. offer.

I see no reason to doubt the reports. It’s no secret that no progress was made in the talks. The Palestinian negotiating team even threatened to resign this week following Israel’s decision to advance construction of 5,000 (!) housing units beyond the Green Line. Aside from admitting failure and leaving, the only card the State Department has left is a third-party proposal.

One of the lessons the Americans drew from the failed Camp David summit in 2000 was that President Clinton should have put forward his proposal earlier, hence the tendency by Oslo process veterans to try and do things differently this time. One could add to that the Israeli peace camp’s almost messianic view that only the U.S. can impose a deal that would establish a sort-of Palestinian state and end the occupation. I am sure American diplomats have heard again and again from many peace industry leftists that the sooner they put something on the table, the better.

The administration, however, can only blame itself for the impasse in the talks. For almost five years Benjamin Netanyahu refused to enter direct negotiations under the terms of reference agreed upon in previous rounds of talks. These terms were by no means favorable to the Palestinians – they included the annexation of settlements blocs to Israel and only a symbolic right of return for Palestinian refugees – but Netanyahu rejected them anyway. After two years the Obama administration gave up hope that it might change Netanyahu’s mind. After another three years, it forced the Palestinians to enter negotiations based on nothing; talks for the sake of talks. As long as America continues to decide to avoid any serious confrontation with Jerusalem at all costs, it will be impossible for the U.S. to impose a deal – unless it is imposed on the Palestinians, of course.

It is less likely then that the U.S. will base its new proposal on an immediate implementation of the Clinton parameters, which include dividing Jerusalem and are based on pre-1967 borders (and therefore ensure another showdown with Netanyahu). Yedioth’s version, according to which the first stage will include a transfer of mostly empty land to the PA and certain symbolic benefits – along with the usual monetary bribes – seems to me more likely. The final status agreement will be outlined but postponed to some future point with the specifics negotiated along the way. If that sounds like an Oslo redux, it’s not a coincidence.

Israel will be happy with an interim deal and would like to reject implementing a final status agreement for the foreseeable future. For the Palestinians it will be a disaster but they can’t afford to say no and once again be accused of missing an opportunity for peace and freedom; the entire statehood project would collapse if they do. So both parties will answer “Yes, but.”

Peace will be celebrated. The occupation will continue.

Related:
Don’t cheer these peace talks
Jordan Valley fence would finalize the West Bank’s complete enclosure
The Israeli negotiator who thinks the two-state solution is still possible

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • COMMENTS

    1. You cannot negotiate an impossibility. Israeli defined security needs makes a confederation the only practical real advance I can see, which is not to say a confederation full blown. Transferring empty land to the PA means nothing if the PA cannot develop it. To develop generally, autonomous effort needs be engendered, not government grants which burn up in salary. Autonomous effort, not just PA instilled, means Israeli business. The recent Israeli labor court case presents a way forward: urge the enforcement of labor law as the court has ordered, making such contingent for the granting of money to new businesses, grants controlled neither by the PA or Israel, but an autonomous agency under well defined regulations.

      One thereby potentially moves toward more economic integration within the WB which can form the later basis of expanding PA control under an evolving confederation. If the US strives to “solve” things through Oslo parameters, if must fail, for expanding settlements negate Oslo. Yet present large settlements could respond well to further economic connections, thus driving a public wedge between the vanguard, overtly religious minor settlements and those in the larger settlements for economic advance.

      This is no solution, but a practical attempt to allow both sides to improve their lots under a growing rule of law. Ultimately, IDF policy would feel pressure to conform to the logic of the rule of law as well.

      It is a gamble, I know. But it offers the development of minor economic elites as new players which might see themselves, Israeli and Palestinian, as benefiting under an expanding rule of law. An Israeli labor court has taken the first step. Essential, however, is a seed granting/loan entity controlled directly by neither the PA nor Israel.

      Reply to Comment
      • Kolumn9

        Now look who is trying to impose ideological purity. Only your preferred outcome is possible. Nothing else will be considered. Lighten up. Politics is the art of the possible. There is plenty of money in the Arab World, in Europe and in America. Israeli businesses are not the only game in town. Also, you have a very strange understanding of how business works. It appears you believe that new businesses are ‘granted money’ in order to set up operations. And you argue your ‘inevitability’ on economic grounds. Yeah…

        Enforcement of Israeli labor law on Palestinians means that there is no competitive advantage to Palestinian labor. If you have to pay Palestinian labor 23 shekels an hour then you might as well set up a factory in Israel (to pay the same) or India (to arbitrage on labor costs). This is a crippling ruling for economic integration if it is implemented.

        Your plan is the same as that of people like Bennett and Dayan and just as delusional.

        Reply to Comment
        • There are banks, K9, and IGO’s that provide starting grants. It is called seed money, grants often present in developing countries.

          Israel is the most developed, diversified economy nearby. Some Israeli businesses will want to expand into the area. Israel will undoubtedly control imports into the PA outside of Israel and possibly coming from Israel. The IDF will still be around controlling internal transport through delays and confiscations, less likely when the business is Israeli. Foreigners going into the PA will likely face the threat of restricted travel. The structural skew is so obvious that you must want to hide it.

          Your argument against equal pay was used as well against the minimum wage in the US. It failed. More: they are not of us, let them grovel for what we deign to give.

          You would forbid Jews from economic activity with Palestinians. You would deny the core judicial value of equality. You would cordon off villages in the Jordan Valley and let them rot until they leave. Not just Greater Israel–a pure Greater Israel. Somehow, this sounds familiar.

          Lighten up.

          Reply to Comment
          • Kolumn9

            The Palestinian market is tiny and barely growing. The population is poor and hostile to Israeli products. The Palestinian government and leading organizations are basically hostile to Israeli businesses. The PA is also corrupt and inefficient. Part of the hostility is designed to protect fiefdoms created by politically connected Palestinian businessmen. The rest is pretty natural given the political disagreements on the policy level.

            Israeli businesses are more likely to spend their energy seeking new markets in China, Vietnam, India, Ethiopia or Kenya rather than making terribly unpredictable and highly risky gambles in the PA. All structural factors push Israeli companies to ignore the Palestinian market and they have been doing so for a very long time. There is no engine that is likely to change this trend in the future. Every ‘structural’ element you point to has existed for a long time, so by your reasoning the West Bank should have been economically integrated into Israel by now. But it isn’t.

            The argument against equal pay is one that makes perfect sense when dealing with a rich country next to a poor one. The reason why many former American jobs are in Mexico, India and China is because of the cheaper cost of labor there. Had China or Mexico insisted on paying workers the American minimum wage in the 1980s they would have stayed the poor third world countries they were. Even in America the arbitrage on the cost of labor pushes companies to set up operations in states with more capital-friendly rules and cheaper labor costs. Again, it doesn’t appear that economics is your strong suit.

            I wouldn’t forbid Israelis from doing business with the Palestinians. I just know that for the most part they wouldn’t bother because there are too many risks and there is little money to be made there and minimal growth potential. This is especially true if the labor costs are the same as in Israel. Why bother dealing with the tedious bureaucracy and all the annoying tangential political issues required to set up operations in the West Bank when there are dozens of places on the planet with better infrastructure, more business friendly governments, cheaper labor and a population that doesn’t get the urge once in a while to burn Israeli products or stab an Israeli manager?

            Reply to Comment
          • The one rather obvious structural feature you fail to notice is the occupation itself, its treatment of transport and its failure to enforce the property rights of resident Palestinians. There simply is no common court for contracts and labor.

            Resident Israelis (settlers) would be the ones engaging in business, not large Israeli corporations. Hence the entity for loans and grants. It would be small, but small can make a difference when impoverished.

            Yes, you can make profit by contracting out labor under a friendly foreign host. But said contractors do not live among those they are exploiting. Well, they did under colonialism. Economics can have a social cost. If the IDF suppressed labor dispute under ruinous contracts, violence will come. That becomes a cost of doing business.

            Your logic assumes a true border between these people and “yours,” so, e.g., your Mexico example. But there is not. Much Palestinian political action in the Bank focuses on reminding all of us that they are not in another land; they are here, right where your countrymen are. Framing the matter otherwise, a Mexico and US, serves to pacify thought, which is exactly what one needs so expansion may continue.

            Of course many hate Israeli products; you would too likely if a Palestinian living there. And yes, there have been and likely will be murders. You once again attribute these phenomena to inherent aggregate characteristics rather the outcome of process. Doing so means there is never any wrong on your side, merely evil to be contained. Once again, as in another comment I made to you, the National Socialists thought similarly.

            Better pay will increase buying power which can expand an internal market. Yes, there will be opposition to buying Israeli. What would happen would be Palestinian partners and middlemen.

            And yes, their are fiefdoms in the WB PA. I think they are one reason why Arafat refused to truly try and implement autonomous business. Business will conflict with these fiefdoms, which is good. One needs independent lending sources and an independent judiciary of some kind.

            But I know no economics.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kolumn9

            Indeed, there is no common court for contracts and labor, because there are two different governing entities on the ground, each with its own labor and contract laws and the mechanisms for their enforcement. Israelis in Judea and Samaria have their own economic infrastructure which is entirely integrated into the one of Israel proper. They are also the ones most likely to be targets of violent attacks by Palestinians and the ones least likely to seek economic connections or establish a reliance on the Palestinian economy. The IDF need not suppress labor disputes because there is very little Palestinian labor utilized at the moment and even that can be easily replaced. One only needs to suppress labor disputes where one is dependent on the labor for continuing operations. Additionally, where labor disputes become a political nationalistic weapon production is unreliable and the ‘labor disputes’ have a tendency to turn destructive and fatal. This only further decreases the value of Palestinian labor and removes the incentives for investing in enterprises reliant on it. If you are waiting for the settlers to be the engine for integration with the Palestinians you will be waiting for a very long time. There is not enough value there and too much risk.

            The Palestinians in the WB have a separate economic system and constitute a separate economic entity. That one of the goals of Palestinian political action is to demonstrate that the Palestinians exist nearby serves more of an example of how separated they are from the Israeli (and the settler) economies than anything else. Before the first intifada strikes were a major tactic of the Palestinians. Now the concept is laughable because economic partition has already taken place. So, whether there is a ‘true border’ or not is irrelevant for analyzing the economics of the situation.

            Let’s conclude this. Palestinians hate Israeli products. Occasionally they have and will continue to attack Israelis trying to do business in the territories. You accept these as facts. Whether these are inherent traits (they are not) or the result of the political mobilization on the part of the Palestinians is irrelevant when analyzing the economics of the situation. The Palestinians in the WB are a potential cheap labor force. That is the only economic incentive an Israeli company might have in investing in their employment. When forced to pay Israeli wages and given the political and security risks of doing business with the Palestinians Israeli companies have exactly zero incentive in investing.

            Let’s say I have an idea for manufacturing a product and was looking for a reliable, inexpensive, skilled labor force. I might be willing to mitigate the skills problem with a training program (but probably wouldn’t bother due to costs). There is no way to mitigate cost of labor when the cost is artificially inflated through legal means. There is no way to mitigate the reliability aspect where whether my labor force shows up to work or, instead, lynches me at the factory is dependent on political developments outside my control, not on the labor contracts signed. I would look elsewhere and so does Israeli business and there is no shortage of places in the world that are interested, and where I would be welcomed as someone who creates jobs, not someone who by being as an Israeli is defined as an enemy. Notice that I have made a purely economic argument. Trying to taint it with the stupid associations you have floating in your head really just means that you have a hard time processing it.

            There will be no better pay outside of the tiny number of Palestinian workers employed in factories that are forced to continue operations due to sunk costs. Instead Israeli companies will look elsewhere to invest.

            You once again make an argument for a fictional universe that you prefer to see, and are offended that it is punctured by basic economics and facts. For example:
            “And yes, their are fiefdoms in the WB PA. I think they are one reason why Arafat refused to truly try and implement autonomous business.”

            Arafat CREATED these fiefdoms when he got to the West Bank. They did not exist before. They aren’t a constraint placed on him by external events. They, along with a massively inefficient centralized bureaucracy are part of the design that the PLO chose when its cadres took over the economy in the territories. They based this on the structures of the Arab countries they were familiar with – Egypt, Syria, Algeria, etc..

            “One needs independent lending sources and an independent judiciary of some kind.”

            Yes, and I need someone to give me a billion dollars. Both of these statements are meaningless because they reflect desires, not realities or even feasible possibilities.

            No, you don’t know economics.

            Reply to Comment
          • “Trying to taint it with the stupid associations you have floating in your head really just means that you have a hard time processing it.”

            Enjoy your anger, K9; it seems to keep you going.

            Good bye.

            Reply to Comment
          • The Trespasser

            >There simply is no common court for contracts and labor.

            Oh, there is.
            However it is very difficult to make any kind of business with people who are relying on their belief in Allah more than on scientific instruments or hard labor.

            By the way, it is the single major reason why Arab states are so poor.

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            I’m sure it’s only a question of time, until more of them will praise Mammon and internalize the enslaving concept of hard laborship, too, so that a state like the US can claim to be rich, while more of its citizens become poorer every day. Especially those who work the hardest to make sure that the international welfare case called Israel relieves them of three billion tax dollars every year.

            Btw. how are Israel’s hard working torture, weapon, surveillance and civilian control exporting industries doing? Isn’t it high time for another demonstration in its inofficial testing area called Gaza? I’m curious what genotoxic materials it is going to use next time to influence Gaza’s reproduction rate. Nobody can claim that we cannot somehow profit from such population experiments, right? After all Israel wouldn’t be the first occupier to count calories for imprisoned populations.

            Reply to Comment
    2. XYZ

      Actually, both the Israeli and Palestinian (Arafat) response to Clinton’s bridging proposals at Camp David was “we accept, but with reservations”, which means they (or more specifically, Arafat) didn’t accept them.
      The “interim proposal” of giving the Palestinians formal recognition of a state without final determination of the borders and resolution of the Palestinian refugee situation is a non-starter for the Palestinians for the following reason. In the 1960′s, Arafat’s Soviet patrons told them that the Palestinian goal of driving the Jews into the sea was counterproductive, forcing liberal opinion in the US, Europe and Israel into thinking that there was no benefit in making concessions. Thus, Arafat was advised to make the issue “lack of self-determination” of the helpless Palestinian people. This sounds better than opposing the very existence of Israel within any borders, which is the true belief of both the FATAH and HAMAS leadership. An interim state could then be used to say “see, they finally have self-determination” and everything would then remain in that middle situation” and pressure would ease of Israel from the US and EU then. This is unacceptable to Palestinian public opinion, particularly the more extreme versions, so Abbas will not accept such an interim agreement…it would be viewed as treason to the Palestinian cause.

      Reply to Comment
      • shmuel

        You write as if 20 years ago Israel recognized the Palestinian State, while the PNA never did so. But unfortunately for you and other hasbarists is the other way round.

        Reply to Comment
    3. Average American

      For US Government Envoy Martin Indyk, who is Jewish, to report to American Jewish group J Street on his official activities with The Jewish State, shows clearly who is in charge of these “proposals”, it’s the Jews.

      Plus it’s Kerry-the-Zionist who is presenting it, another Puppet US Government official who with Indyk and several Senators puts Israel First In All Matters.

      Which means any proposal by US will be tilted heavily toward the benefit of the Jews, with the foreknowledge that it won’t be accepted by the Palestinians, just so Israel has cover to carry right on expanding Greater Israel For The Jews Only.

      Reply to Comment
    4. Average American

      I just want to say one more thing. These elements of “we are a people”, the reformation of Our Ethnic Nation, come back to us all ye who are pure of blood, lebensraum to reclaim Where Our Fathers May Have Probably Once Walked, all for The Glory of The State, well this all reminds me of Aryan Fascist Germany in the late 30s.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        Eat your heart out you Jooooooo hating Nazi PIG.

        Reply to Comment
    5. David T.

      So you somehow felt adressed, when Average American was talking about what reminds him of Nazism, Tzuzik?

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        Yep. And I do get your feeble attempt at sarcasm.

        The guy is a jooooooo hating nazi. You don’t like it? Just read his posts. You don’t want to get it? Maybe because you don’t want to get it.

        He keeps on talking about his interpretation of what is in the Talmud (and his interpretation is from Nazi sites). And then he tries to imply that all Jooooooos live by his warped interpretation of the Talmud. That is lumping an entire race of people under the one umbrella.

        If some of us Zionists, display even a hint of doing the same thing about Arabs/Muslims, your kind immediately accuse us of being racists and Islamophobic. So why aren’t you displaying the same ardor condemning the likes of this “average” sh….t when he does it to jooooooos? Hmmmmmmm? Makes me suspicious about you too.

        Reply to Comment
    6. David T.

      It is obvious that he condemns racist, land (re-)conquering concepts based on historical claims – not you.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        It is obvious that you have not read his posts elsewhere in + 972 in which he lumps ALL Jews under the one umbrella using a neo-nazi misrepresentation of the TALMUD as his excuse.

        I am a joooooooo, as he would think of me (not a Jewish person). Therefore he attacked me personally. Now do me a favor David. Before you comment on things, take the trouble to inform yourself properly.

        Reply to Comment
    7. David T.

      Why don’t you condem racist land (re-)conquering concepts based on historical claims, Tzutzik?

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        LOL. You do enough condemning for both of us. And so long as one eyed people like you insist on being anti Israel polemicists, I will keep pointing to how Arabs behave. Just to balance things out. You do like balance, don’t you little buddy?

        I’ll tell you what though. When you decide to have an adult conversation. I’ll talk to you like an adult.

        In the meanwhile, try and keep yourself informed and not just from propaganda sites.

        Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          I know. You support what Average American condemned in his posting.

          Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          I know. You support what Average American condemned in his posting.

          Reply to Comment
          • Tzutzik

            … and you support “Average American’s” Jooooooo hatred. I can smell your stench over the ether. You are kindred souls. Both of you hate Joooooooos. Admit the obvious David you pathetic little bigot.

            Reply to Comment
          • David T.

            I don’t support anyone’s hatred. And you remind me of hating Nazis who tried to convince everybody to admit that they were Jews, because they could smell it.

            Reply to Comment
          • Tzutzik

            You mean Nazis like you David?

            Reply to Comment
    8. David T.

      If I was the Nazi Tzutik, I would tell anybody that I can smell what they are. I would support the acquisition of territory by force based on historical connections or ethnic composition of these areas and would annex territories which are outside of my states borders. I would expell the native population and deny all crimes and strip them of their citizenship because of their different faith or heritage. I would implement a law making a difference between nationals and citizens and grant priviliges to the former. I would ask others to recognize my country not as a state of all its citizens, but only of its main nation. I would see citizens of different faith and heritage as a threat against the state’s character, enemies and discriminate them if not murder them. I would attack other states and claim that I’m defending myself, that I was attacked or that they were ready to attack me. I would occupy their territory and allow settlers to colonialize it. I would have a massive problem with international and human rights law and its organisation and would try to counter their accusations by accusing them of hatred against my people. I would try to paint everyone who would dare to resist my domination and occupation as terrorist. I would kill them without any trial, even their families, including the demolition of their homes. I would imprison them as I like and deny them to speak to lawyers or their family. And if they are in court I would charge them guilty without presenting any evidence. I would torture prisoners. I would commit crimes against humanity and collectiv punishment against whole populations. I would make the occupied live in enclosed areas and prevent them from freely moving around in their own country. And I would support Jewish dissimilation and Zionism …

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        ” if I was the Nazi ….”

        …. Ya ha dia dia bia biri biri biri boom …
        :)

        Seriously though. You are a Nazi David. You sound like a Nazi, you stand up for Nazis. And you hate joooooooos.

        Reply to Comment
    9. David T.

      “You are a Nazi David. You sound like a Nazi, you stand up for Nazis. ”

      Tutzik, I do condem the Nazi atrocities I listed. You won’t ever. So it’s obvious that it’s not me who is or sounds like a Nazi or would ever stand up for someone like you.

      “And you hate joooooooos.”

      It must be very important for your well being to assume this.

      Please continue demonstrating what Zionists are made of.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        David

        It seems to be very important for you to compare the state of the Jewish people to a Nazi state.

        Only people with guilty consciences resort to such lies. So that they will be able to say: “See? The Joooooooos are not better than anyone else, they do it too …”

        That’s why you lie about us so readily David. You have a guilty conscience about how the Jews were treated when they were minorities. And we were not treated well, not just by the Nazies but by others too. For instance, in the early days of the Nazi regime, the Nazis allowed and even encouraged Jews to flee Germany. Unfortunately, bery few were able to go anywhere else because “the civilized” countries did not want to accept too many Joooooos. They didn’t want to burden themselves with too many Jooooooos. So most Jews had nowhere to go. Had there been an Israel, they would have had a sanctuary in Israel.

        But you David are dead set against that. Because you too hate Joooooos.

        Reply to Comment
    10. David T.

      “It seems to be very important for you to compare the state of the Jewish people to a Nazi state.”

      You should have written “state of the Jewish people to a state of the Volkish-German people”. Cause Ethnic cleansing seems to be very important for states, who don’t want to be a state for all of their citizens. But you can’t compare Israel to Nazi Germany, because Israel didn’t commit ethnic cleansing against a Nonjewish minority, but against a Nonjewish majority to become and ensure being a Jewish majority.

      “You have a guilty conscience about how the Jews were treated when they were minorities.”

      I wasn’t even alive back then, you shmock. You on the other hand are alive now and has a guilty conscience about how Jews treat Nonjews.

      “Only people with guilty consciences resort to such lies”

      That’s exactly why you need to lie by accusing others of hatred against Jews. It is important for you and you would NEVER EVER be satisfied, if someone wouldn’t. You need hatred against Jews like a junkie, to justify the existence of Israel and its behaviour towards Nonjews. Otherwise you would have to admit to yourself, that Israel is hated for what it does to Nonjews and you are hated or hate yourself for doing it for Israel or supporting it.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        Well David, I don’t have to go far. YOU hate Jews. Everyone of your posts oozes of hatred for the state of the Jewish people and you make it clear that the Jooooooos have no right to have a state. Only Arabs deserve their own states, 23 states to be exact.

        Reply to Comment
        • David T.

          “YOU hate Jews.”

          Keep telling you this, if this calms your guilty conscience about how you treat Nonjews. LOL.

          “Everyone of your posts oozes of hatred for the state of the Jewish people …”

          How about your feelings for a state of the Volkish German people? LOL.

          “… you make it clear that the Jooooooos have no right to have a state”

          Did Palestinians have a right to their own state in 1919? Ouch, more guilty conscience for you. Lol.

          Reply to Comment
    11. Tzutzik

      “How about your feelings for a state of the Volkish German people? LOL.”

      I need to say no more. With this statement of yours, once again you demonstrate your hatred for Jooooooos.

      Reply to Comment
    12. David T.

      “I need to say no more. With this statement of yours, once again you demonstrate your hatred for Jooooooos.”

      LOL, your obsessed with hatred against Jews, aren’t you litte junkie?

      You must feel very guilty to avoid answering the question, if the Palestinians have a right to their own state in 1919.

      Why do you hate Gentiles, Ttuzik?

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        “Why do you hate Gentiles, Ttuzik?”

        I hate YOU David. But I thought you said you are Jewish, David? Did you lie?

        Or are you just a shape shifter? LOL.

        Reply to Comment
    13. David T.

      “I hate YOU David.”

      Of course you do. You hate Jews who are not like you. Hate for others is so deeply rooted in your system, that you even have to project it.

      “But I thought you said you are Jewish, David? Did you lie?”

      Oh, so you think I was refering to myself, because you cannot even imagine that not all Jews are full of hate for others like you.

      “Or are you just a shape shifter? LOL.”

      I guess, that you had to increase your daily dose of self induced Jew hatred. “Joooooooos” has become to weak, you have to switch to antisemitic stereotypes. How about killing me? Would that satisfy you for a couple of days?

      Thinking about it, I doubt more and more that you are Jew.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        “How about killing me? Would that satisfy you for a couple of days?”

        No, but it would probably satisfy YOU. Because if you ARE Jewish, you would have the satisfaction of seeing another Joooooooo killed. Even if that Jooooo would be YOU.

        See what happens when one argues with an idiot like you, David?

        Reply to Comment
    14. David T.

      “No, but it would probably satisfy YOU. Because if you ARE Jewish, you would have the satisfaction of seeing another Joooooooo killed. Even if that Jooooo would be YOU.”

      ROFL. You totally insane, Ttutik. Were Yigal Amir and his followers not satisfied killing Rabin? And what about those who perform a pulsa dinura course against Jews? Wouldn’t they be satisfied, if the Jew would die?

      “See what happens when one argues with an idiot like you, David?”

      Yes, one finally realizes that it’s actually not me who is the idiot. I hope that happens, before you turn 120. LOL.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        No David, that’s how I talk to all insane people like you. That is the only language you understand.

        I told you. I don’t feed trolls. But there is no law against amusing myself at the expense of trolls like you. I may as well, so long as we talk, right?
        :)

        Reply to Comment
    15. David T

      Tztuik, I can understand why you have to troll all the time. Again you fail to answer factual questions:

      Were Yigal Amir and his followers not satisfied killing Rabin? And what about those who perform a pulsa dinura course against Jews? Wouldn’t they be satisfied, if the Jew would die?

      Let them explain to you and then try to answer them.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        Yes David, but first YOU better answer a factual question:

        When are you going to stop beating your wife?

        Get the symbolism of my counter question?

        No, I guess not. So I will continue to deal with you as a petulant child.

        As I told you before, if you want an adult discussion. You will need to learn to behave like an adult. Till then ….

        Reply to Comment
    16. David T.

      Yes David, but first YOU better answer a factual question:

      When are you going to stop beating your wife?

      Get the symbolism of my counter question?

      No, I guess not. So I will continue to deal with you as a petulant child.

      As I told you before, if you want an adult discussion. You will need to learn to behave like an adult. Till then ….”

      Your counter question would be rational, if I would have accused you of continue to doing something, too. But is just another of your stupidities, because my questions are:

      Were Yigal Amir and his followers not satisfied killing Rabin? And what about those who perform a pulsa dinura course against Jews? Wouldn’t they be satisfied, if the Jew would die?

      Or do you want to suggest, that I somehow adressed you?

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        “Or do you want to suggest, that I somehow adressed you?”

        Sorry David, I didn’t realise that you were talking to yourself again.

        Time to take your medicine, David old buddy.
        :)

        Reply to Comment
    17. David T.

      Just answer the question:

      Were Yigal Amir and his followers not satisfied killing Rabin? And what about those who perform a pulsa dinura course against Jews? Wouldn’t they be satisfied, if the Jew would die?

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        Why should I answer your question you fool?

        But here it is: I am not them and THEY are probably happy about their deeds.

        Me? I hate the bastards. The murderer of Rabin was just as much a criminal as you are for different reasons. And he is rotting in jail for his troubles.

        Reply to Comment
    18. David T

      “Why should I answer your question you fool?”

      I was hoping to distract you for your obession about me. But I obviously failed:

      “The murderer of Rabin was just as much a criminal as you are for different reasons.”

      The only things which ARE actually criminal are your lies about me and those of Zionism, you either justify or deny. But considering the weight of your lies it seems that you could plead for insanity. Cause Jeffrey Blankfort wrote not long ago: “I consider Zionism to be a mental illness which makes otherwise decent folks behave like Nazis or Afrikaners.”

      I would gladly testify in your favour, Ttzutzik.

      Reply to Comment
    19. David T.

      “Why should I answer your question you fool?”

      I was hoping to distract you from your abusive obession about me. But I obviously failed:

      “The murderer of Rabin was just as much a criminal as you are for different reasons.”

      The only things which ARE actually criminal are your lies about me. But considering the weight of your lies it seems that you could plead for insanity. I would gladly testify in your favour, Ttzutzik.

      Reply to Comment
      • Tzutzik

        “The murderer of Rabin was just as much a criminal as you are for different reasons.”

        I bet you don’t even know why I classified you too as a criminal for different reasons, do you David?

        Well, I’ll get you out of your misery. Because you too, like Yigal Amir, are a traitor. You are a acollaborator. But we, the Jews don’t deal as harshly with collaborators as your idols, the Palestinians do. If you want, I can give you a link to show you what THEY do to those whom they accuse as collaborators. But hey, according to you, we Jooooos are the evil ones and the Palestinians are the pure innocent victims who wouldn’t harm a fly.

        Reply to Comment
    20. Click here to load previous comments

    LEAVE A COMMENT

    Name (Required)
    Mail (Required)
    Website
    Free text

© 2010 - 2014 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website empowered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel