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 : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cary Salsberg who wrote (70138)	4/30/2003 1:08:23 PM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

I need to look at this more closely, but at first glance, it looks like both sides rejected certain parts of the proposal and that was why the talks broke down. Take a look at the document below for what each side rejected: These notes, by EU envoy Miguel Moratinos, were accepted by both sides as an accurate record of what took place. They were first published in Ha'aretz newspaper on 14 February, 2002 al-bab.com I don't think a formal rejection says anything about "destroying Israel", but a move to a suicide terrorist intifada as a response, does Why? As the talks broke down and the occupation continued (with increased settlements), how else would the Palestinian side fight? You do know that Arafat supposedly (I must believe news releases) acknowledged that he should have accepted the Taba offer. I didn't actually, but that is nice to hear. If true, that means what I have said re time changes a lot must be valid in this case. That is, there IS hope for another peace plan, and this time perhaps Arafat's expectations will have been lower than they were before.