Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (4002)	10/10/2001 9:13:40 AM
From: Scoobah	Respond to of 281500

You'd think that the West Bank would have been an ideal place for a state of misplaced arabs who truly wanted to be in camel distance to their mosques and lead their pious lives. Obviously, thats not Arafat's dream, so he sacrifices the standard of living of his people in exchange for his ambition. Proof that Arabs and Jews can live together in peace is evidenced throughout the United States.

To: Ilaine who wrote (4002)	10/10/2001 12:29:03 PM
From: Thomas M.	Respond to of 281500

<<< Many have come to believe that the Palestinians' rejection of the Camp David ideas exposed an underlying rejection of Israel's right to exist. But consider the facts: The Palestinians were arguing for the creation of a Palestinian state based on the June 4, 1967, borders, living alongside Israel. They accepted the notion of Israeli annexation of West Bank territory to accommodate settlement blocs. They accepted the principle of Israeli sovereignty over the Jewish neighborhoods of East Jerusalem -- neighborhoods that were not part of Israel before the Six Day War in 1967. And, while they insisted on recognition of the refugees' right of return, they agreed that it should be implemented in a manner that protected Israel's demographic and security interests by limiting the number of returnees. >>> nytimes.com Tom