Bibi Wins, Two State Solution Dies?
- Thread starter onthebottom
- Start date
Rather than posting things out of context like frank, here is a full statement from Netanyahu:
ANDREA MITCHELL: Prime Minister, congratulations on your victory.
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL: Thank you.
MITCHELL: But -- there's always a but -- critics and analysts here and around the world are saying at what cost. Your hard turn right on the Palestinian issue, what you said about the Arab voters coming out in droves, they say are costing you, costing you support around the world.
NETANYAHU: Well, neither one is -- the premises in your question are wrong. I haven't changed my policy. I never changed my speech in Bar Ilan University six years ago calling for a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the Jewish state. What has changed is the reality. Abu Mazen, the Palestinian leader, refuses to recognize the Jewish state, has made a pact with Hamas that calls for destruction of Jewish state. And every territory that is vacated in the Middle East is taken up by Islamist forces.
MITCHELL: But they are saying -
NETANYAHU: We want that to change, so we can realize a vision of real, sustained real peace. And I don't want a one-state solution. I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution, but for that circumstances have to change.
MITCHELL: But you were reelected on a mandate, certainly Israeli voters, your supporters, believe you were reelected on a mandate against a two-state solution. That is the way the White House is interpreting. The White House says this is divisive, and it's so divisive that now the administration is saying that they will not stop the U.N. from conferring statehood. They will not block -- or at least they're strongly considering not blocking a vote for statehood for Palestinians
NETANYAHU: Well, first of all, that state would become a terrorist state. Iran says that they will arm the West Bank the way they arm Gaza. We withdrew from Gaza. We got just a few months ago, not ancient history but a few months ago, thousands of rockets, Andrea, on our heads.
ANDREA MITCHELL: Prime Minister, congratulations on your victory.
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL: Thank you.
MITCHELL: But -- there's always a but -- critics and analysts here and around the world are saying at what cost. Your hard turn right on the Palestinian issue, what you said about the Arab voters coming out in droves, they say are costing you, costing you support around the world.
NETANYAHU: Well, neither one is -- the premises in your question are wrong. I haven't changed my policy. I never changed my speech in Bar Ilan University six years ago calling for a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the Jewish state. What has changed is the reality. Abu Mazen, the Palestinian leader, refuses to recognize the Jewish state, has made a pact with Hamas that calls for destruction of Jewish state. And every territory that is vacated in the Middle East is taken up by Islamist forces.
MITCHELL: But they are saying -
NETANYAHU: We want that to change, so we can realize a vision of real, sustained real peace. And I don't want a one-state solution. I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution, but for that circumstances have to change.
MITCHELL: But you were reelected on a mandate, certainly Israeli voters, your supporters, believe you were reelected on a mandate against a two-state solution. That is the way the White House is interpreting. The White House says this is divisive, and it's so divisive that now the administration is saying that they will not stop the U.N. from conferring statehood. They will not block -- or at least they're strongly considering not blocking a vote for statehood for Palestinians
NETANYAHU: Well, first of all, that state would become a terrorist state. Iran says that they will arm the West Bank the way they arm Gaza. We withdrew from Gaza. We got just a few months ago, not ancient history but a few months ago, thousands of rockets, Andrea, on our heads.
No link?
Is that because the last time you provided a link it proved me right?
That sounds like a statement made after the election, and of course it only totally confirms what I've said all along:
"MITCHELL: But you were reelected on a mandate, certainly Israeli voters, your supporters, believe you were reelected on a mandate against a two-state solution. That is the way the White House is interpreting. "
Thanks for once again proving my claim is correct.
Just apologize, why do you have to drag this on so long, you know I am right.
Is that because the last time you provided a link it proved me right?
That sounds like a statement made after the election, and of course it only totally confirms what I've said all along:
"MITCHELL: But you were reelected on a mandate, certainly Israeli voters, your supporters, believe you were reelected on a mandate against a two-state solution. That is the way the White House is interpreting. "
Thanks for once again proving my claim is correct.
Just apologize, why do you have to drag this on so long, you know I am right.
You're now citing an interviewer's question as your source? :biggrin1:No link?
Is that because the last time you provided a link it proved me right?
That sounds like a statement made after the election, and of course it only totally confirms what I've said all along:
"MITCHELL: But you were reelected on a mandate, certainly Israeli voters, your supporters, believe you were reelected on a mandate against a two-state solution. That is the way the White House is interpreting. "
Thanks for once again proving my claim is correct.
Just apologize, why do you have to drag this on so long, you know I am right.
This is even worse than your Washington Post references, where you continue to cite a one-word response to one question while completely ignoring the full context of his remarks (and the fact that he was clearly talking about the situation "today.").
You're hilarious.
This is fuji's quote, talk to him, I didn't bring it up.You're now citing an interviewer's question as your source? :biggrin1:
This is even worse than your Washington Post references, where you continue to cite a one-word response to one question while completely ignoring the full context of his remarks (and the fact that he was clearly talking about the situation "today.").
You're hilarious.
All it does is provide yet another source that backs up what I've said all along, and what fuji still says is a lie.
Netanyahu was elected on a promise to not allow a Palestinian state while PM, which is the opposite of supporting the two state solution.
Netanyahu was elected on a promise not to establish a Palestinian state while he was in office. He supports a Palestinian state if circumstances change.
In his own words:
"We want that to change, so we can realize a vision of real, sustained real peace. And I don't want a one-state solution. I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution, but for that circumstances have to change."
How you can think you look like anything other than a total clown while when Netanyahu has been clear exactly what he believes is baffling. Your credibility here is in tatters, everyone can see you lie.
In his own words:
"We want that to change, so we can realize a vision of real, sustained real peace. And I don't want a one-state solution. I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution, but for that circumstances have to change."
How you can think you look like anything other than a total clown while when Netanyahu has been clear exactly what he believes is baffling. Your credibility here is in tatters, everyone can see you lie.
Thank you for confirming the only claim I've made.Netanyahu was elected on a promise not to establish a Palestinian state while he was in office.
Now that you have stated this all you have to do is apologize for calling me a liar.
Who cares if in twenty or thirty years, when he is retired or mostly dead, he thinks there might be a possibility that he supports the two state solution.So you now agree that Netanyahu supports a Palestinian state in future if conditions change? Answer that with a "no "and you are still lying.
As you clearly stated:
Just apologize for accusing me of lying for saying the exact same statement.Netanyahu was elected on a promise not to establish a Palestinian state while he was in office.
People who care about the truth care. You lied and claimed he does not support a Palestinian state when he EXPLICITLY does.Who cares if in twenty or thirty years, when he is retired or mostly dead, he thinks there might be a possibility that he supports the two state solution.
No, what I said is what you, Obama and Netanyahu have all stated:You lied and claimed he does not support a Palestinian state when he EXPLICITLY does.
Now that you have confirmed it you should apologize for calling me a liar for saying the exact same thing.Netanyahu was elected on a promise not to establish a Palestinian state while he was in office.
So are you now retracting all the following false statements:
Do you mean where the majority of MP's voted in don't support the two state solution?
There was no mention of it just being 'current', no time frame at all, just a promise to never allow a Palestinian state.
No, he was elected on a promise to never allow a Palestinian state, not to support one.
Frankfooter said:Now that he's been exposed as someone who won't allow a two state solution, there's no going back.
Lets resolve this first one before we step there.So are you now retracting all the following false statements:
Are you willing to retract your claim that I lied when I said that Netanyahu was elected on a promise to not allow a Palestinian state?
If you apologize for that accusation first we can consider other statements.Netanyahu was elected on a promise not to establish a Palestinian state while he was in office.
Your claim that he was elected on a promise to (your words) "never allow a Palestinian state" is a lie. Instead, he was elected on a promise not to establish one WHILE HE WAS IN OFFICE. He certainly supports one in the future if conditions change, so you are blatantly lying. You were flat out wrong that there was no timeframe on his statement that a Palestinian state would not be established--there was, as Obama noted, during his term. Netanyahu has explained why that is, and what would have to change in future to make a Palestinian state possible.
And I note that I quoted a whole series of your blatant lies, which you just denied even making -- and yet there they are.
You are flailing and wriggling to get off the hook, but the only way off is for you to admit that Netanyahu does support a Palestinian state and that you were wrong to say he does not.
And I note that I quoted a whole series of your blatant lies, which you just denied even making -- and yet there they are.
You are flailing and wriggling to get off the hook, but the only way off is for you to admit that Netanyahu does support a Palestinian state and that you were wrong to say he does not.
So you think he's going to make a Palestinian state happen when he's retired as a hobby?Your claim that he was elected on a promise to (your words) "never allow a Palestinian state" is a lie. Instead, he was elected on a promise not to establish one WHILE HE WAS IN OFFICE. .
Idiot.
This is what I claimed.
Just apologize, I did not lie.Netanyahu was elected on a promise not to establish a Palestinian state while he was in office.
Man up and admit you are wrong.
It isn't his job to make a Palestinian state happen. He has correctly identified that one is not currently possible. Fixing that so I've becomes possible is up to the Palestinians.So you think he's going to make a Palestinian state happen when he's retired as a hobby?
Idiot.
No, his job is now to make sure one doesn't happen as long as he's in power.It isn't his job to make a Palestinian state happen.
As you so clearly stated:
That is some messed up idea of supporting the two state solution you're pushing.Netanyahu was elected on a promise not to establish a Palestinian state while he was in office.
Just apologize and admit you were wrong to accuse me of lying.
Of course here's the kind of things from Palestinians that frank needs to ignore.
In the past 24 hours, two Palestinians died in separate attacks on police with knives. Upset over these attacks, Palestinians respond by attacking police with stones and firebombs. Also a public transit bus is firebombed, and a Palestinian driver ran down 3 police officers then others attacked the emergency responders. Also worth noting is that a strong majority of Palestinians support these kinds of attacks.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/thre-israeli-police-struck-by-car-on-mount-of-olives/
Of course discussing violent attitudes amongst many Palestinians would distract frank from pedantic arguing over news reports.
In the past 24 hours, two Palestinians died in separate attacks on police with knives. Upset over these attacks, Palestinians respond by attacking police with stones and firebombs. Also a public transit bus is firebombed, and a Palestinian driver ran down 3 police officers then others attacked the emergency responders. Also worth noting is that a strong majority of Palestinians support these kinds of attacks.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/thre-israeli-police-struck-by-car-on-mount-of-olives/
Of course discussing violent attitudes amongst many Palestinians would distract frank from pedantic arguing over news reports.
Because if it happened now it would be hamastan, he wants the Palestinians to get a peaceful, free country, which isn't possible right now, as he so clearly said, "conditions would have to change for that".No, his job is now to make sure one doesn't happen as long as he's in power.
Actually his job isn't anything yet except to try and put together a coalition government before the deadline and Hetzog get a chance to become PM.
