Bill Clinton: 'I killed myself to give the Palestinians a state'

[ericson00]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/bill-clinton-palestinians-israel-223176

Bill Clinton went on the defensive over his record on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as his wife's, after a spectator at a Friday afternoon campaign event repeatedly pressed the former president on the issue.
Clinton was explaining his wife's policy positions in Ewing Township, New Jersey, when a spectator yelled, "What about Gaza?"


“She and the Muslim Brotherhood president of Egypt stopped the shooting war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza,” Clinton responded.
“She said neutrality is not an option,” the spectator said, prompting boos from the audience, but Clinton told them to stop.
“Depends on whether you care what happens to the Palestinians as opposed to the Hamas government and the people with guided missiles,” the former president answered.
“They were human beings in Gaza,” the audience member said.
“Yes, they were,” Clinton said. “And Hamas is really smart. When they decide to rocket Israel, they insinuate themselves in the hospitals, in the schools, in the highly populous areas, and they are smart.”

THANK YOU PRESIDENT CLINTON for standing up against the anti-Israel fringe types out there. [link:.com/poll/189626/americans-views-toward-israel-remain-firmly-positive.aspx?g_source=Politics&g_medium=newsfeed&g_campaign=tiles|Majorities/pluralities of Democrats], like majorities of I/Rs, Americans at large, especially in this age of Islamic terror, stand with Israel.

[BillZBubb]

1. Yet, somehow he is still very much alive!

It's a friggin' miracle!

[yourpaljoey]

2. Bill Clinton talking nonsense once again

[scscholar]

3. And we see how successful he was

Looks like we voted for the wrong spouse.

[Mosby]

5. the point is he tried

And Arafat fucked him.

The whole conflict is bullshit aimed at Israel and the West.

What other refugee group exists almost 70 years after the fact?

NONE.

[ericson00]

7. sometimes I really wonder if the left would be happier

if Jews weren't a prolific constituency of the Democratic Party. Probably they don't realize there'd be even fewer house seats for Dems and Senators, Govs, etc. too.

Maybe the anti-Israel left should go join the British Labour Party.

I wonder how some of these types would feel if say, Steve Israel, a Dem rep. for 16 years, and is now retiring (prob due to the far-left wanting to oust him) is replaced by Jack Martins as punishment for the anti-Israel sentiment and Islamism-splaining that clearly has erupted in the party?

[Scootaloo]

29. You think America's fawning reverence for Israel is about appealing to Jews?

Oh Ericson, you know so little about the way American politics works. Neither party gives a flying shit about the 1.7% of the country that is in some degree Jewish.

No, it's about the 77% of the US that is Christian. Jesus needs his landing strip, after all. Among other weird apocalyptic fantasies involving Israel found within American christendom.

[Mosby]

30. that reasoning only applies to republicans

Last edited Sat May 14, 2016, 04:53 PM - Edit history (1)

The end times stuff only appeals to evangelical xtians and the vast majority of them are republicans.

As for Dems, Israel is seen as a modern liberal success story, that's where most of the support on the mainstream left stems from, that and the commitment American Jews have to Democratic party values like justice, inclusion, compassion and a social safety net.

[catnhatnh]

4. Lying asshole!

I left the White House broke. and dead! plus dead broke! Just once I'd like to hear, "It was actually not too hard and when I finished I was in good shape..."

But no-even after a life of luxury beyond the imaginings of the average American the narrative never changes-"I was born and raised down in Alabama
On a farm way back up in the woods
I was so ragged that folks used to call me Patches
Mama used to tease me about it
'Cause deep down inside she was hurt
'Cause she'd done all he could....."

I hope the lying prick chokes to death on it.

[Mosby]

6. you can criticize him for a lot of things

But the economic improvements under his watch is not one of them.

[catnhatnh]

8. He was a NAFTA humping republican

Fuck'im.

[Mosby]

9. nafta was a mistake, just like all the trade agreements

He has expressed regret about the three strikes bill, little late imo.

The dem leaders have embraced free trade unfortunately.

[Jackie Wilson Said]

26. But not voting for the Democrat in November is sick and insane.

[Mika]

10. You mean improvements like this? ...

[Little Tich]

11. Whatever he did, it didn't help the Palestinians,

Last edited Sat May 14, 2016, 09:23 AM - Edit history (1)

and if they'd accepted the "generous" offers they were given, things could've been even worse than now.

The offer from Barak was nothing but a scam:
2000 Camp David Summit: Territory
Source: Wikipedia

Based on the Israeli definition of the West Bank, Barak offered to form a Palestinian state initially on 73% of the West Bank (that is, 27% less than the Green Line borders) and 100% of the Gaza Strip. In 10–25 years, the Palestinian state would expand to a maximum of 92% of the West Bank (91 percent of the West Bank and 1 percent from a land swap). From the Palestinian perspective this equated to an offer of a Palestinian state on a maximum of 86% of the West Bank.

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit#Territory

Very informative Flash Map detailing Barak's "generous" offers:
http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/downloads/baraks_offers/barak_eng.swf
Source: http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en/channels/downloads/baraks_offers

The Clinton Parameters were also a scam - no map, and no mention of what areas Palestinians would sign away, and what land they would get in the already lopsided swap. It wasn't even sure what areas were considered to be the 100% of the West Bank that would be the basis for swaps. No right of return, no Palestinian control of their own borders - In spite of the Parameters being completely lopsided, the Israeli side had 20 pages of objections. The Palestinians mostly wanted clarification of the details and of course, maps.

The Clinton Parameters: Territory
Source: Wikipedia

The Clinton Parameters proposed a Palestinian state comprising between 94–96% of the West Bank and the entire Gaza Strip. Israel would annex the remaining land, which would include Israeli settlements, containing 80% of the settler population, mainly in major settlement blocs. Israel would cede 1–3% of land to the Palestinians in land swaps to compensate for the annexations. The Palestinian state would have to be contiguous, and annexed areas along with the number of Palestinians affected would be as minimized as possible.

Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clinton_Parameters#The_details

Next time an American President formulates parameters for solving the I/P conflict, they'd better be fair and detailed with maps.

[shira]

12. The Clinton Parameters map you say doesn't exist...

http://www.zionism-israel.com/ezine/bantustans.htm

[Little Tich]

14. The Clinton Parameters didn't come with a map, your map is only one of several interpretations of

what the Parameters could have looked like. We still don't know which version of the West Bank area that was used - the Israeli version is about 95% of the Palestinian one, and it would've given Israel an extra 5% by default with no land swaps.

On top of that, Israel accepted the Clinton Parameters, but with 20 pages of objections. The interpretation of what that map would look like looks different altogether, with the West Bank cut up in 3 isolated areas and no Palestinian access to the Jordan River.

The Clinton Parameters didn't come with a map, which is a bit strange - I don't know of any other zoning / partition proposal that didn't come with a map.

[shira]

16. That's a map from Dennis Ross who was actually there. n/t

[oberliner]

20. You have no idea what you are talking about

You might want to consider expanding beyond Wikipedia for your information.

Israel did not accept the Clinton Parameters "with 20 pages of objections". Go to the source material that Wikipedia used to construct this paragraph. It comes from an interview with Ehud Barak conducted by Ari Shavit of Ha'aretz in September of 2002.

If you actually read the interview (which I'm assuming you haven't), you will note that Barak says that he accepted the parameters when they were proposed by Clinton, and that Arafat did not. The 20-page document was sent later, after Arafat had rejected the parameters as a basis for negotiation.

"The true story of Camp David was that for the first time in the history of the conflict the American president put on the table a proposal, based on UN Security Council resolutions 242 and 338, very close to the Palestinian demands, and Arafat refused even to accept it as a basis for negotiations, walked out of the room, and deliberately turned to terrorism."

[Little Tich]

25. So the Israelis came up with their 20 pages of objections after accepting the Parameters on Dec 31,

2000, and the Palestinians voiced their reservations on Jan 2, 2001 when they accepted the Parameters?

What kind of negotiator brings up new things when the framework has already been established?

[Little Tich]

32. On the basis of the interpretative map Shira provided,

could you please explain how the areas transferred to Israel wouldn't cause logistical problems for Palestinian communities and hamper their expansion? What I want to know most, is in what direction East Jerusalem could expand, and how Ramallah, Jericho and Betlehem could connect with it and form a viable economic entity? The thing is that they could do that without the swaps, but there's a lot of white stuff between them on the map.

And would the land swaps from Israel be able to alleviate any problems caused by the land swaps from Palestine?

You know, there's a nagging suspicion that the Israelis would have given land that was of lesser value for land the Palestinians needed for a viable state. Explain how the Clinton parameters weren't a scam that favored Israel...

In a way, this isn't really interesting, it's just that Bill Clinton maintains he didn't try to scam the Palestinians while he obviously did so. This belongs to the dung heap of history, and has nothing to do with current events and the French peace initiative, which seems to be aimed at being fair to everyone.

[6chars]

33. boo hoo. a longer drive.

that was 16 years ago, a whole generation. so instead of a longer drive, they get to go on stabbing sprees.
a child whose family fled in 1948 and ended up in a refugee camp in Syria or Lebanon or Jordan or Egypt would have lived their whole life, grown old and died never living anywhere but that refugee camp thanks to the policies advocated by the many friends of the Palestinians (such as some at DU) which oppose anything that would improve their lives other than getting 100% of their demands all the time.

[shira]

13. An offer so awfully bad that Arafat wished he had accepted it....

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jun/22/israel

The Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat, yesterday belatedly accepted a Middle East peace plan put forward 18 months ago by the then US president, Bill Clinton.

But the Israeli government said the offer, which was discussed by Israeli and Palestinian negotiators at Taba in Egypt in January last year, was no longer on the table.

The Israelis had claimed the Taba package was generous and that Mr Arafat had been foolish not to grab it. Mr Arafat had repeatedly insisted that it was far from generous.

But, in an interview published yesterday in the Israeli daily Haaretz, he said: "I am prepared to accept it, absolutely." During the interview, a Haaretz reporter put the Taba proposals to Mr Arafat and he endorsed each of them.

The main elements of the Taba plan include: a division of Jerusalem between Israelis and Palestinians; a compromise on the future of the 3.5 million Palestinian refugees; and creation of a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza.

Mr Arafat's willingness to accept a deal now will add to the sense of confusion and weakness surrounding his leadership. The mood among Palestinians has been turning against him.

His isolation was underscored yesterday when Jordan's King Abdullah claimed the Palestinian leader had lost control over Palestinian militant groups.

King Abdullah said: "Over the years I always thought Arafat was capable of controlling Palestinian public sentiment and extremism. I think that is no longer the case today."

Against a background of almost daily fatalities, there is no sign of a peace plan acceptable to Mr Arafat and the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon. The US president, George Bush, postponed until next week at the earliest a speech in which he is expected to sketch out ideas for the creation of a "transitional" Palestinian state.

[azurnoir]

15. well if the Israeli offer was in earnest why didn't take Arafat up on this?

[shira]

17. Make up your mind first. Was the offer shit or not shit? n/t

[azurnoir]

18. I asked you a valid question my opinion of the offer which I haven't given isn't at issue here

[shira]

19. Sharon was a rightwinger, so what do you expect? Besides, Olmert did one better....

...in 2008 that Abbas rejected. It went further than Clinton's Parameters.

So Arafat should've accepted the 2000 offer when he had the chance, correct?

Or was it a shit offer?

BTW, I answered you so that means you answer me next.

[azurnoir]

21. so Sharon did not want peace? He broke away from Likud and started Kadema which we're told

was a Centrist party - the same one that Tzipi Livni and Ehud Olmert belonged to

[shira]

22. Answer my last post and we can continue. I answered you.

I also just finished editing that one by adding a little more that you probably didn't see when you just posted.

[azurnoir]

23. at the moment I have no opinion one way or the other about the offer-Arafat so we are told

was willing to take it up so that's what I am going with

[shira]

27. Of course, denial. Here's the interview...

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/features/a-jewish-state-definitely-1.125580

Love how you deny and ignore any and everything you don't wish to believe.

[azurnoir]

31. I haven't ignored anything it seems your comment was an excuse to post an article about

how the Israeli establishment didn't believe what Arafat said

[Scootaloo]

28. That's hilarious.

Maybe BIll needs ot eat more salmon. Get that Omega 3 fatty acid going, so he can remember the 90's a little better.