Robert, whenever this topic arises, you always seem to respond to a lot of
things that nobody has said.

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 3:03 AM, Robert Naiman <[email protected]
> wrote:

If one is serious about the "S" of BDS - sanctions, that is, penalties
> enacted by governments - one has to recognize that there is no
> prospect of any government in the world which has an economic
> relationship with Israel being ready to enact a penalty on Israel
> based on one-statism.


Who advocated that?


> I don't agree at all with the claim that the settlement boycott is
> meaningless


Who said that?


> Further, it should be recognized that the two-state solution is not
> just the position of Fatah, it's also the position of Hamas.


And now the real silliness begins. When has Hamas ever adopted any such a
position?


> Every
> election that takes place in the occupied territories is dominated by
> parties that support the two-state solution.


Except that last one.


> 80% of Palestinians
> living under occupation supported the push for recognition of a
> Palestinian state at the UN.
>

Even if opinion polls in the '67 territories were worth anything (and
they're crap), so what? Support for UN membership for one state does not
entail recognition of another. Such nuances may be lost on Western
commentators, but I assure you, people here are well aware of them.

-- 
"Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen
lytlað."
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to