Tuesday, 17 September 2024

Iraq snapshot Tuesday, September 17, 2024.

 Iraq snapshot

The Common Ills

Tuesday, September 17, 2024.  Truth is not a bullet, fact checks are not assaults.


Racist Megan Kelly is in the news for racism again.  The personality fired by all networks remains on her own self-produced show, her misshapen face getting uglier with each year as who she is at the core comes out more and more.  And who she is a racist.

The editor inchief of the conservative magazine National Review, Rich Lowry, appears to have used a racial slur during a conversation on The Megyn Kelly Show, in which the two pundits were discussing the rampant falsehoods about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio. Lowry dropped the slur in place of the word "migrants," quickly correcting himself after.

"Police have gone through 11 months of recordings of calls and they've only found two Springfield residents calling to complain about Haitian [n word]s," he said, seemingly correcting afterward by adding, "migrants."

Kelly did not react to Lowry's apparent slip-up, nor did she address it when he finished speaking. Instead, the two defended Republican vice-presidential candidate JD Vance, who spread the claims despite admitting they are false, praising his "alternative facts."

Vance doubled down on debunked claims about Haitian immigrants abducting pets to eat them and falsely linked the migrant community to rising rates of HIV and tuberculosis in an interview last week with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins. He later admitted the rumors were false but defended spreading them in a Sunday interview with Dana Bash on CNN.

“If I have to create stories so that the American media actually pays attention to the suffering of the American people, Dana, then that’s what I’m going to do because you guys are completely letting Kamala Harris coast," Vance said.

The conspiracy theory that Haitian immigrants in Springfield were stealing and eating pets went viral after former President Donald Trump spread the false claims during last Tuesday's presidential debate. Trump insisted that immigrants were “eating the dogs and cats” of residents, despite local officials consistently debunking the rumors and noting that no evidence supported the claims.

After backlash, Lowry claimed on Twitter/X that he misspoke, insisting that he "began to mispronounce the word 'migrants' and caught myself halfway through."

Remember when you're racist you go on the Megyn Kelly-Glenn Greenwald-Max Blumenthal et al circuit because you'll  be welcomed there.  

Let's move away from the grifter circuit to note CBS' 60 MINUTES.


Those who need and/or prefer text can click here:

More than 1,000 Americans have been convicted in the January 6th, 2021 attack on the Capitol. About 350 trials are still pending and the FBI continues its dragnet for suspects. The attack that stopped the count of the presidential vote triggered the largest prosecution in U.S. history. But now, history is being challenged. Former President Donald Trump calls the convicted, "patriots" worthy of pardons. What is the evidence? We begin with the prosecutor in charge. U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves told us what drives the prosecution of January 6th.

Matthew Graves: The crime was severe. It was an attack on our democracy. Once you replace votes and deliberation with violence and intimidation, you've lost the democratic process. You've lost the rule of law. But it's also about the victims, the officer victims who were injured that day, and making sure we hold people accountable for the harm that they inflicted on the 140 officers who reported physical injury.

Matthew Graves has worked in the Bush and Biden Justice Departments. Now, as U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, he's won more than 1,000 January 6th convictions and lost only two of the cases at trial.

Scott Pelley: What is the best evidence that you've had?

Matthew Graves: The crimes that occurred that day are probably the most recorded crimes in all of our history. You also have the words of the defendants explaining what they were going to do or what they had done.

Evidence from the trials show many in the mob were determined to stop the count of the electoral vote that would certify Joe Biden's victory. They were enraged by President Trump's false claims of a stolen election. 

Treason.  That's what it was.  Everyone sentenced could have been publicly executed for their actions.  And maybe that's why whiny babies are upset over the report?

Emasculated overgrown Daddy's boy Don Jr whined about CBS airing this report Sunday.  

It's so unfair!!!!! Wah!  Wah!  It was as though he was nine-years-old and had wet his pants at school again.

It's really funny how they have to lie and cry and whine like babies to try to distract from the truth.  How hard they work to shut down the truth. 

I hope we defeat Donald at the ballot box.  I hope he lives a long, long life so he can face ridicule and scorn and know how truly hated he is.  He's already Marquise Isabelle de Merteuil in that he can't go out in public unless he wants to be booed.  That's the kind of scorn he should be faced to live with.  For all eternity.  Thus far the two attempts on Donald's life has come from his own supporters.  That's another reality that JD Vance and Donald refuse to deal with.


There was no national trauma on Sunday that required CBS NEWS to alter when a segment was aired.

It's cute, by the way, how it's a threat -- according to Donald and JD -- when a report airs or when they get fact checked.  Accountability, to them, is an assault.  

This as Donald traffics in conspiracy theories that leaves people vulnerable to attacks.  This as Donald appeals to the racists like Megyn Kelly and Glenn Greenwald with the lie that a Black woman can't think and doesn't have a mind.

That is what Donald's saying when he lies that Kamala Harris got the debate questions ahead of time.  And he feeds that racism to his racist pals in MAGA who eat it up because certainly no Black person could ever be smarter -- in MAGA's minds -- than a White person.  If you don't realize how racist MAGA is you need to visit Elon Musk's Twitter.  

Kamala was not fed the questions ahead of time.  What happened is that Donald faced his intellectual superior and he lost.

That's the reality.

In addition, Donna Brazile was no where near the questions and ABC has never been accused of revealing debate questions ahead of time.  Only CNN and that's why they had to let go of Donna Brazile. They fired her.  And, uh-oh, she works for who now?  FOX "NEWS."

Because every other news outlet has standards.  They can't hire someone who fed the Clinton campaign debate questions.  That's unethical and wrong.  Again, CNN fired her.  (Forced her resignation, advised her that it could get messy or she could tender her resignation -- that is how it went down.)  But FOX "NEWS" saw someone who gave a candidate debate questions ahead of the debate and said, "That's someone we want to be in bed with!  That's someone who shares our values!"

Speaking of FOX "NEWS," their wet and soiled panties are in a wad over NBC's Lester Holt rightly noting the climate Donald's created with his rhetoric and lies (Lester called the lies "baseless claims").  His exact words?  "Today's apparent assassination attempt comes amid increasingly fierce rhetoric on the campaign trail. Mr. Trump, his running mate JD Vance, continue to make baseless claims about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio. This weekend, there were new bomb threats in that town."

I believe the Beatles said it best.



"In the end, the love you take, is equal to the love you make."  And if all you offer is hate . . . 

Lester Holt did his job as a journalist.  60 MINUTES did their job as journalists.  Kamala Harris did her job as a debater.  But whenever anyone does their job, Donald gets upset -- probably because he's never done his job.  


The National Association of Letter Carriers has called out Donald Trump for a recent Truth Social post where Trump attacked the United States Postal Service ahead of the November election. In a recent Truth Social post, Trump wrote that the USPS had "admitted" that it was being poorly run and that the public should not trust the USPS to properly function throughout the upcoming election. 

When writing this post, Trump conveniently excludes the fact that Louis DeJoy, his own appointee, remains the individual responsible for overseeing the USPS' operations. In response to Trump's post, which was meant to sow division in America around the mailing system[.]


Give him time and Donald will get around to attacking every grouping of Americans because he hates the whole country.  

Are you getting that Donald's "a real piece of work"?  Way too much drama?

And when Donald Jr fears that Daddy might be targeted with violence, he gets concerned yet as his father pours hatred on other people and lights a match, Don Jr just grins like the idiot he is.   Robert Reich (HARTFORD COURANT) observes:

After JD Vance first began spreading baseless rumors about Haitians in Springfield, members of the neo-Nazi group “Blood Tribe” marched into the city carrying guns, wearing body armor, and carrying Neo-Nazi flags. At an Aug. 27 town hall meeting, one claimed that the city had been taken over by “degenerate third worlders,” blamed Jews for the influx, and warned that “crime and savagery will only increase with every Haitian you allow in.”

Springfield’s Haitian immigrants say they are afraid. Some have kept their children home from school, fearing violence. Others have reported harassment on the street, in their cars, and at stores. A Springfield family whose son died last year when the bus in which he was riding accidentally collided with a car driven by a Haitian immigrant has pleaded for Trump and Vance to stop using their deceased son for political purposes.

Yet Trump and JD Vance are doubling down. Yesterday, before the attempt on Trump’s life, Vance said on CNN that the claims about Haitians eating the pets of Springfield residents came from “firsthand accounts from my constituents.” When interviewer Dana Bash suggested that the claims had caused bomb threats, Vance called her a “Democratic propagandist.” But the connection is indisputable.

Rather than offhand comments, Trump’s and Vance’s claims are calculated. Trump’s last two posts on Truth Social before the debate were AI images of cats and ducks — one depicting cats in military fatigues carrying assault rifles and wearing MAGA hats, the other showing the candidate himself sitting on a plane amid a crowd of ducks and cats.

Trump is now talking about holding a rally in Springfield. “We’re going to get these people out,” Trump said in a Friday news conference. Although Springfield’s Haitian immigrants are in the United States legally, he promised to stage “the largest deportation in the history of our country” if reelected.

Trump’s and Vance’s claims are completely bogus. Ohio’s Republican governor, Mike DeWine, told CBS News on Wednesday that “these Haitians came in here to work because there were jobs, and they filled a lot of jobs. And if you talk to employers, they’ve done a very, very good job and they work very, very hard.”

Another of Trump’s bogus claims is now threatening legal immigrants in Aurora, Colorado, a Denver suburb that Trump has repeatedly asserted is being “taken over” by Venezuelan criminals. “Simply not true,” Aurora’s Republican mayor and city council member wrote in a joint statement.

As in Springfield, Trump’s baseless claims are harming innocent people in Aurora. Immigrants there say they have been told their nationality makes them ineligible for jobs or housing. Trump’s claims have led to threats and drawn armed groups to the city, claiming to offer vigilante-style protection.

Let's take a moment to thank everyone in the Abandon Harris Movement for making it clear that the lives of Haitian Americans and Haitian immigrants do not matter to them.  Hmm?  They want their own protected but others in the crosshairs just aren't important.  I hope the whole country registers this and remembers that the next time those in the Abandon Harris crowd or targeted or in need.  They've decided to vote for Jill Stein (again, they'll announce it this week) with the goal of defeating Kamala and sending Donald back to the White House.

Thanks for demonstrating that is has always be all about you.  Your selfish and you don't deserve sympathy when you get targeted.  You're as trashy as Donald Trump Jr. 

I'm serious.  You truly do not deserve sympathy if you can't stand up for others when they're targeted.

I'm not LGBTQ+.  I'm too old to get pregnant.  But I defend people in those groups and in so many others because that's what we are supposed to do -- stand together.  

But apparently the Abandon Harris Movement has elected to make Donald Trump Jr their mascot because they don't believe in helping anyone else. Got it.  Noted.  



AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman.

We begin today’s show looking at the escalating threats of violence against Haitian immigrants as Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and his running mate JD Vance continue to double down on their racist lies, falsely accusing Haitians living in Springfield, Ohio, of eating people’s pets and other animals in the outdoors. On Saturday, two Springfield hospitals were forced to go on lockdown after receiving bomb threats. This was at least the fourth such case, after a bomb threat on Thursday prompted authorities to order the evacuation of Springfield City Hall and several municipal buildings. Springfield Mayor Rob Rue said the threat came in an email from someone angry over the city’s resettlement of Haitian immigrants. Two colleges in Springfield, Wittenberg University and Clark State College, also received shooting and bombing threats over the weekend, prompting officials to cancel events and move classes online.

On Sunday, Vance defended the far-right racist lies during an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash.

DANA BASH: The Clark County sheriff and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources reviewed 11 months of 911 calls. They only identified two instances of people alleging Haitians were taking geese out of parks. They found zero evidence to substantiate those claims. Also, other evidence that you have talked about, even you’ve retweeted, alleged evidence, are unsourced social media videos from a different city, apparently no connection to Haitians, and this is from a conservative activist who offered a $5,000 reward for such things.

And then, going just back to the schools and the hospitals and so forth being overwhelmed, nobody is disputing that the town of Springfield, Ohio, needs help. But you’re not just a bystander; you’re the senator from Ohio. So, instead of saying things that are wrong and actually causing the hospitals, the schools, the government buildings to be evacuated because of bomb threats because of the cats and dogs thing, why not actually be constructive in helping to better integrate them into the community, because there are a lot of employers there who say that the Haitian workers are helping fill jobs that they need desperately filled?

SEN. JD VANCE: Dana, first of all, let me just respond to a couple things that you said, but I want to start with something you said which I think is, frankly, disgusting and is more appropriate for a Democratic propagandist than it is for an American journalist. There is nothing that I have said that has led to threats against these hospitals. These hospitals, the bomb threats and so forth, it’s disgusting. The violence is disgusting. We condemn it. We condemn all violence —

DANA BASH: Senator —

SEN. JD VANCE: — and threats of violence.

DANA BASH: This happened after you and President Trump were on the —

SEN. JD VANCE: But to say — no, no, Dana.

DANA BASH: — on the debate stage —

SEN. JD VANCE: No, Dana. To say —

DANA BASH: — said that cats

SEN. JD VANCE: Dana, no. You asked — you asked a —

DANA BASH: — and dogs were being eaten.

AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, Republican Ohio Governor Mike DeWine told ABC News Sunday Trump and Vance’s remarks about Haitians were “garbage” and “simply not true.”

MARTHA RADDATZ: And here’s a question I never thought I would have to ask, but do you see any evidence, as governor of the state, that Haitian immigrants are eating pets?

GOVMIKE DEWINE: No, absolutely not. That’s what the mayor has said. That’s what the chief of police has said. I think it’s unfortunate that this — this came up. Let me tell you what we do know, though. What we know is that the Haitians who are in Springfield are legal. They came to Springfield to work. Ohio is on the move, and Springfield has really made a great resurgence, with a lot of companies coming in. These Haitians came in to work for these companies. What the companies tell us is that they are very good workers. They’re very happy to have them there. And, frankly, that’s helped the economy.

AMY GOODMAN: So, that’s the Republican governor of Ohio, Mike DeWine.

Meanwhile, during a campaign event in Rancho Palos Verdes, California, Trump repeated his threats of carrying out mass deportations, beginning in Springfield, if he’s reelected in November.

DONALD TRUMP: We’re going have the largest deportation in the history of our country, and we’re going to start with Springfield and Aurora.

AMY GOODMAN: Trump was referring to Springfield, Ohio, and Aurora, Colorado.

For more, we’re joined here in our New York studio by Guerline Jozef, co-founder and executive director of Haitian Bridge Alliance, which is an immigrant advocacy organization that provides humanitarian assistance to Haitians and other Black immigrants from the Caribbean and Africa.

Welcome back to Democracy Now! It’s great to have you for the first time in our New York studio, Guerline. If you can talk, first of all, about what’s going on in Springfield, Ohio? But when you receive, when the community receives threats like this in one city, from the hospital lockdown, elementary schools closed, colleges going online, threats of bombings, threats of school shootings, this affects more than the community of Springfield.

GUERLINE JOZEF: Thank you so much, Amy, for having me.

And that is the reality, and that’s what we continue to say. Those type of narratives, when they think they’re only attacking one person, one community, it has ripple effects. The reality now in Springfield, the entire community’s lives are at risk. And what we are saying is currently this has been a tactic that’s been used: fear, division. And this is a time for all people in cities like Springfield to come together and fight against those hateful speech, that literally are creating the security issues in Springfield and also in other places across the United States.

AMY GOODMAN: Let’s talk about the tens of thousands of Haitians who have come to Springfield, the Republican governor himself saying these are legal immigrants who have come to work, the corporations here love them. We’re talking about a dying Rust Belt town.

GUERLINE JOZEF: Absolutely. And we have a cohort. The Haitian Bridge Alliance has a cohort of people that we have been working with to really train them to have them to fill those extremely needed positions. And what we’ve seen, what we know and understand, is that as the city of Springfield was in a decline, those Haitian people came there, they revitalized the economy, they pay their taxes, and they are really supporting to create a vibrant community in Springfield. And that is the reality.

And that is the story that needs to be done, just like the elected officials in Springfield — you heard from the governor, you heard from the mayor, you heard from the Sheriff’s Office — that these people are there, and they are supporting, revitalizing the economy, revitalizing the culture. And we need to make sure that is the reality, because this false narrative that continues to create this atmosphere of fear, not only for the Haitian community, but for every single person living in Springfield, is dangerous and cannot continue.

AMY GOODMAN: The mayor of Springfield was pleading for the federal authorities. Now, let’s remember, JD Vance is not only the vice-presidential nominee, he’s the Ohio senator. In fact, he represents all of Springfield. Talk about why tens of thousands of Haitians were essentially invited to Springfield.

GUERLINE JOZEF: They needed help, basically. And I remember in one of the earlier articles from The New York Times, it literally said, “We prayed for a miracle, and the Haitians came.” That’s what someone from Springfield said when they really were trying to say what are the contributions of the Haitians. “We prayed for a miracle, and the Haitians came.” And that’s the reality. And as we are looking into people who are supposed to be leading our country, people who are supposed to be creating opportunities, they are the same ones creating the division. And we really understand this is really rooted in anti-Black racism and in white supremacists.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go to Haitians living in Springfield, Ohio, who said they feared for their safety after JD Vance made false and derogatory claims about their community members eating pets. This is Rose-Thamar Joseph, secretary of the Haitian Community Help & Support Center in Springfield.

ROSE-THAMAR JOSEPH: Since Monday, after the tweet of the Senator Vance, the Haitian community in Springfield are a little bit — are shocked and frustrated. And a lot of them are maybe talking about leaving Springfield. A lot of them ask — there is so much fears in the community. … Haitian people are hard workers. And this is the first reason that Haitian people are here in Springfield. It’s because they heard about the job opportunities in Springfield and around Springfield.

AMY GOODMAN: And this is a Haitian who has been living in Springfield for a year and has two young children. Marc did not want to reveal his last name, did not want to be seen on camera. He told reporters his children have been bullied by other kids, also threatened by teachers. He said he also had to quit his job because he was being harassed at work.

MARC: Since last year, they are facing a lot of problems at school, like they were bullied by other kids. And I had to send email, address the situation several times to the principal. And I had to move to another neighborhood because I was, like, scared for them, and they were, like, very traumatized, especially after all these things they’re saying in the social media, that we’re eating dogs. In our culture, we don’t eat dogs. That’s ridiculous. And even we have local officers say that there’s no evidence. And we see people out there are very aggressive against us in Springfield. I quit my job last week because I was harassed, retaliated. Even, like, they tried to demote me, because other guy employees would call me “[bleep] Haitian,” call me “[bleep]” at work, and the company didn’t do nothing. And I think it is not good. But I don’t really feel like actually I am welcome in Springfield.

AMY GOODMAN: So, that’s a Haitian resident of Springfield, Ohio. Also this weekend, far-right groups started to come into town, like the Proud Boys, who marched Saturday in some parts of Springfield. Guerline Jozef, if you can talk about the program under which Haitians legally come to the United States, Temporary Protected Status? While Trump wanted to end it, he didn’t. He couldn’t. And the Biden administration didn’t start it, but has continued TPS.

GUERLINE JOZEF: Yes. Thank you so much, Amy. And there are two programs. There’s the CHNV program that is for Cubans, Haitians, Venezuelans, Nicaraguans. A lot of people have come legally, regularly through the program. They have people who sponsor them when they come. And then, TPS, Temporary Protected Status, is, as you mentioned, a protected status that former president 45 tried to eliminate, and, you know, the community and organization advocates took him to court, and we were able to fight it. And right now we have a new designation and extension of TPS for Haitians who are already in the U.S. So, therefore, those people, they have their work permits, and they are able to really provide for themselves. And not only that, they pay their taxes. And they are able to really continue to be a part, an integral part, of the American society.

And I also want to highlight that the Haitians have always been an integral part of the very fabric of the United States. That has been historically the fact. And we have people — I personally know people who have been in Ohio, in Springfield, since the 1950s, Amy. So, these people have not only been there continuously to provide and support. And now we have a new flow of Haitians who are coming and also fulfilling not only their dreams, but also the dreams of cities that they are in.

But that is not the first time that we hear those narratives, from the United States, you know, really blaming Haitians for bringing HIV/AIDS into the United States, from 45 saying that he doesn’t want people from S—hole countries, such as Haiti and Nigeria, but he does want people from Eastern Europe who are blue eyes, blonde hair. So we really, really understand those realities also, that when we talk about immigration and we talk about the people we don’t want here, we are talking about Black and Brown. And we want to highlight that.

And to go back to the TPS, we continue to ask for TPS for majority-Black countries and for South American countries, for Honduras and Mauritania, and those haven’t happened. But when it came to other countries — and what we tell the United States and what we tell the Biden administration, as well, is, the way we received the Ukrainians should not be an exception, it should be the rule.

And we really cannot allow people like Mr. Vance and Mr. Trump and Elon Musk and all those people to continue those narratives that are literally taking every ounce of dignity, every ounce of humanity out of my community. I and my community, the Haitian community, have given their lives for the United States. We have the people such as Jean Baptiste Point du Sable, who is the founder of Chicago. We have Karine Jean-Pierre, who is the — literally, you know, the press secretary. So, these are the people —

AMY GOODMAN: For the White House. For the —

GUERLINE JOZEF: For the White House. These are the caliber of people. And it is insulting for Mr. Vance and for 45 Jr. to come to the media and say Haitians have low IQs. Because we are coming from a Third World country, therefore we have low IQs. The disrespect that they continue to bring is just unacceptable.

AMY GOODMAN: In 2016, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump spoke on the campaign trail when he visited Little Italy — rather, Little Haiti in Miami, Florida. He vowed to be a champion for the Haitian American community.

DONALD TRUMP: Whether you vote for me or you don’t vote for me, I really want to be your greatest champion. And I will be your champion, whether you vote for me or not.

AMY GOODMAN: Yet you have, of course, Trump reportedly calling African nations, El Salvador and Haiti — I won’t say the word — “S—hole countries,” sparking an international firestorm, when he reportedly said during a meeting with lawmakers at the White House, “Why do we want all these people from Africa here? These are S—hole countries. We should have more people from Norway.” If you could talk about — I mean, in the last two months, there have been two assassination attempts against Donald Trump, which, of course, should make him even more sensitive to violence against people, targeting people, the kind of fears that the Haitian community feels around the United States right now. During the debate, because President Trump made all these kinds of comments, that have led to thousands of memes of ridicule of President Trump talking about eating pets, did you feel that Kamala Harris spoke out enough against the stereotyping, the caricaturing, the vilification of immigrants in that debate?

GUERLINE JOZEF: It is unfortunate, Amy. The reality is we have not seen the support that is needed. At this point, we are in a state where we have one party that is dragging us into the mud, and that is literally creating hate speech that could turns into violence, and we have not received the support that we need from a vice president in the Democratic Party. So we do hope that they do bring more support into pushing back against those false narratives, because at the end of the day, it is part of what we are trying to create, a better world for all people. So, we really would like to see more of support coming from that side, as well.

AMY GOODMAN: And you’re going to the White House next?

GUERLINE JOZEF: Yes. So, we continue to push, and we are having different meetings. We are looking into how to make sure that — because the reality, Amy, history will judge all of us harshly if we don’t handle this properly, if we don’t support those who are in need, if we don’t make sure that we remove those anti-Black, racist and white supremacist ideologies.

AMY GOODMAN: In terms of electoral politics, the race that might be most affected by this is the very closely contested Ohio Senate race of longtime Senator Sherrod Brown, up against Trump-backed Republican candidate Bernie Moreno, who went to Springfield on Saturday morning and said he supports deporting the Haitians of Springfield.

GUERLINE JOZEF: I don’t — you know, Amy, I think most of people are so confused, they don’t even understand what they are talking about. Deporting the Haitians of Springfield to where? They don’t understand that those people are an integral part of the community, integral part of the economy. They pay their taxes. Even when they talk about the strain that’s being put into, you know, the school, and they have to hire more translators and more interpreters — that’s what happens, and those people are paying into the taxes to be able to get those services. They are not free services, right?

And we really want people to understand, it’s not just, “Hey, these are happening,” but we have to have the context behind the realities. The realities are, we have a city that was in decline, and they made a plea, and people came, and those people happen to be Black and they happen to be Haitian, and they happen to be doing the work that is needed. They are at work on time. They are providing for their families. They are putting into in the economy by paying their taxes. And that is the reality we need to highlight as we continue this unfortunate debate.

AMY GOODMAN: What has horrified many Republican candidates around the country and supporters of Trump is the woman that he’s traveling with, seems to be everywhere. I’m not talking about Melania Trump — she hasn’t been seen since the campaign — but Laura Loomer. I think she’s a 31-year-old far-right influencer. She is seen everywhere with him. Looking at a BBC report right now, “Trump said he was repeating claims he had heard on television, but the theory was aired by Ms Loomer just a day before the debate. On Monday, the fringe pundit and social media influencer repeated the claims to her 1.2m followers … An anonymous source close to the Trump campaign told US news outlet Semafor that they were '100%' concerned about Ms Loomer’s proximity to Trump.” Your final comments?

GUERLINE JOZEF: Anti-Black racism, white supremacist. And that, we just have the proof. And at this point, we feel like — as you mentioned earlier, in 2016, he came and said, “We are going to be your champion.” Now he completely is saying, “I don’t care.” Right? And the reality is, we have to understand that this is about race. It is about the future of America. It is about pushing back against the narrative of the browning of America. It is about keeping America white. It is about making sure that Black and Brown immigrants are vilified. It is about creating division.

But we are calling on the American people, from Ohio to California, from New York to Chicago, to stand against this false narrative, to say, “No, not in our names.” We will not continue to allow people to be dehumanized, to be demonized, to be vilified for the purpose and personal gains of certain people, who absolutely right now cannot and should not be in power.

AMY GOODMAN: Guerline Jozef, co-founder and executive director of Haitian Bridge Alliance, an immigrant advocacy group that provides humanitarian assistance to Haitians and other Black immigrants from the Caribbean and Africa.


Let's wind down with this from Sharon Zhang (TRUTHOUT):

Major defense contractor Elon Musk suggested in a now-deleted post on social media that President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris should be targeted for assassinations after the Secret Service foiled what the FBI said was an apparent plot on Donald Trump’s life on Sunday.

In a post on X, Musk quoted a post from a user who asked, “Why they want to kill Donald Trump?” Musk, adding his own commentary, said, “And no one is even trying to assassinate Biden/Kamala,” with a thinking emoji.

Musk doubled down in a reply to someone telling him to “reconsider” the post, saying, “No one has even tried to do so is the point I’m making and no one will.” This post, unlike the original one, is still up as of Monday morning.

After deleting the post musing about assassinating the president on Sunday, Musk suggested that he was joking. He claimed that there was “context” that users were missing, though left it unclear as to what context would make it a joke, rather than a seeming threat. On Sunday night, he also said in replies to the post that he was making a serious point.

Whether or not he was joking, the post is alarming coming from a man with enormous power who supports the Republican Party, which has been working to radicalize its followers and foment political violence for many years — and who Trump has said he would tap for a cabinet position if he were elected.

It is especially alarming coming from a man with insider knowledge of U.S. defense and security operations. Musk’s SpaceX is a major defense and intelligence contractor, having gotten billions of dollars in federal contracts to support military missions and build a covert network of spy satellites that allow federal officials the ability to monitor nearly the entire globe.

In one post, Musk suggested that he was trying to point out that only Biden and Harris supporters would resort to violence, which is why there have been multiple seeming attempts on Trump’s life. This is patently untrue; research has found that right-wingers are responsible for the vast majority of extremist violence in the U.S., and experts have noted that far right violence is a growing concern as politicians have leaned further right in recent years.




The War on Gaza: Requiem for the Deeply Held Two-State Delusion. Amir Nour Part XI

The War on Gaza: Requiem for the Deeply Held Two-State Delusion. Amir Nour

Part XI

[Links to Parts I to X are provided at the bottom of this article.]

I am for peace. And I am for a negotiated peace. But this accord is not a just
peace.
” (Edward W. Said)[1]

Over the last 50 years, achieving peace in the Middle East region through the “two-state solution” – i.e., carving out two sovereign Israeli and Palestinian states living side by side – to the irreconcilable century-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict, has consistently been endorsed by the “international community” as the best, if not the only, option. However, so far, it has been impossible for the two protagonists to reach an agreement, in particular since the collapse of the talks brokered by John Kerry in 2014 and the continuing, indeed the accelerated expansion of the illegal Israeli settlements established on Palestinian land in the West Bank and annexed East Jerusalem since 1967.  As a result, world powers and leaders have contented themselves with “crisis management”. 

Yet, before[2] – and even more so since – the attacks of 7 October, 2023 and the ensuing unprecedented death toll and destruction caused by the blind and vengeful Israeli reaction to them, as well as the high risk of regional and global conflagration, the international community was still faced with the unescapable reality that there cannot be lasting peace and stability without an agreement that speaks to the national and political aspirations, the security needs, and the human dignity of all the peoples of the region.

Paradoxically enough, both proponents and opponents of the two-state solution are finding new arguments to revive the debate on the way out of a disheartening and bloody situation in the most volatile region of the world. Meanwhile, the “one-state solution” is steadily gaining more and more traction, particularly among Palestinians and their supporters around the world.[3]

The Genesis and Enduring Adverse Consequences of a Bad and Unjust Idea

The idea of establishing two states for two peoples in historic Palestine came together in 1936 when Lord William Robert Wellesley Peel was appointed by the British government to head a commission of inquiry, formally known as “Palestine Royal Commission”, with a view to investigating the causes of unrest among Palestinians and Jews in Palestine, following a six-month-long Arab general strike. The unrest intensified after the April 1920 San Remo Conference awarded the United Kingdom a mandate to control Palestine, which had for centuries been part of the Ottoman Empire, until its dismemberment in the wake of its defeat in the First World War.

In a widely-acclaimed book[4] containing a wealth of untapped archival material and primary sources, Israeli journalist and historian Tom Segev reconstructs in vivid detail the tumultuous three decades of the British mandate in Palestine, when “anything seemed possible and everything went awry”. Tom Segev argues that the British, far from being pro-Arabist as commonly thought, consistently favored the Zionist position, thereby ensuring the creation of the “Jewish state”; and that they did so out of the mistaken and anti-Semitic belief – “a uniquely modern blend of classical antisemitic preconceptions and romantic veneration of the Holy Land and its people” – that the “Jews turned the wheels of history”. At first, he writes, the British were received as an army of liberation, and both Arabs and Jews wished for independence and assumed they would win it under British sponsorship. The Promised Land had, by the stroke of a pen, become “twice-promised”, and as a result, “confusion, ambiguity, and disappointment were present at the very beginning”. In sum, although the British took possession of “one Palestine, complete”, as noted in the receipt signed by British High Commissioner Sir Herbert Louis Samuel, “Palestine was riven, even before His Majesty’s Government settled in”.

Therefore, as it unavoidably turned out, Britain was caught in the middle of a bloody fight between two competing national movements. There were those in the British administration who identified with the Arabs and those who identified with the Jews; and there were also those who found both repugnant: “I dislike them all equally” wrote General Sir Walter Norris “Squib” Congreve, emphasizing that “Arabs and Jews and Christians, in Syria and Palestine, they are all alike, a beastly people. The whole lot of them is not worth a single Englishman.” For his part, High Commissioner Sir Arthur Grenfell Wauchope (from 20 November 1931 to 1 March 1938) compared himself to a circus performer trying to ride two horses at the same time. Of these two horses, he said in a lecture[5], “one cannot go fast and the other would not go slow”. 

In fact, as Chaim Weizmann rightly observed, the British were fooling the Arabs, fooling the Jews, and fooling themselves[6]. And Segev was equally right to conclude that from the start there were, then, only two possibilities: that the Arabs defeat the Zionists or that the Zionists defeat the Arabs; “War between the two was inevitable”.

With its formal approval by the League of Nations in 1922, the mandate incorporated the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which provided for both the establishment of a Jewish national home in Palestine for a minority Jewish population and the preservation of the civil and religious – but not the political or national – rights of non-Jewish indigenous Palestinian majority. Desiring political autonomy and resenting the continued Jewish immigration into their ancestral land, Palestinian Arabs disapproved of the British mandate, and by 1936 their dissatisfaction had grown into open rebellion.

The Peel Commission published its report in July 1937, admitting that the mandate was unworkable and, therefore, proposed that Palestine be partitioned into three zones: an Arab state, a Jewish state, and a neutral territory containing the holy places. Even though it initially accepted these proposals, by 1938 the British government recognized that such partitioning would not be feasible, and ultimately rejected the Commission’s report. And by the time the post-World War Two newly-created United Nations Organization voted the infamous Resolution 181 devising the partition of Palestine, in 1947 – giving 56% of historic Palestine along with 80% of the coast and the most fertile land to the Jewish minority side, and only 43% to the Palestinian majority side –  the binational idea, and its array of supporting factions, had dissolved, soon to be followed by a civil war in Mandatory Palestine, the confirmation of the termination of the British mandate on 14 May 1948, the Israeli “Declaration of Independence” on the same day, and the outbreak, the following day, of the first Arab-Israeli war on 15 May 1948 – which ended with a final armistice agreement concluded in July 1949, also demarcating the so-called “Green Line” which separated Arab-controlled territory from Israeli-occupied territories until the 1967 Arab-Israeli war.

.

undefined

Israeli reconnaissance forces from the “Shaked” unit in Sinai during the war (Attribution: Rafi Rogel)

.

In the aftermath of the Six-Day (June) War, UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242, on 22 November 1967, in an effort to secure a “just and lasting peace” in the Middle East. The Israelis willingly supported the resolution because it called on the Arab states to accept Israel’s “right to live in peace within secure and recognized borders free from threats or acts of force.” For their part, Arab states reacted in a very disparate way: Egypt and Jordan accepted it from the outset because it called for Israel to withdraw from “territories occupied in the recent conflict”, and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), headed by Yasser Arafat rejected it until 1988 for the main reason that it lacked explicit references to Palestinians and their inalienable national rights. As far as the League of Arab States is concerned, it convened a Summit in Khartoum, Sudan, on 1 September 1967, and adopted the “Khartoum Resolution”, famously known for its “Three Noes” contained in its third operative paragraph[7], namely: no peace, no negotiation, no recognition of Israel. 

Although Resolution 242 – and UNSC’s Resolution 338 adopted on 22 October 1973 following the Yom Kippur/Ramadan War, and calling for a ceasefire and for the implementation of Resolution 242 “in all of its parts” – was never fully implemented, it nevertheless constituted the basis of international diplomatic efforts to end the Arab-Israeli conflict until the 1978 Camp David Accords and remains, to this day, at least theoretically, an important touchstone in any negotiated resolution to this longstanding conflict. 

The United States Takes Over the Steering of International Peace Efforts

As history teaches us, efforts aimed at re-building peace almost always follow destructive wars. The two Iraq Wars of 1991 and 2003 paved the way for renewed peace efforts, first within the framework of the 1991 “Madrid Peace Conference”[8] and the 1993 Oslo Accords, and then through such initiatives as “The Middle East Peace Summit” at Camp David[9] in 2000, “The Roadmap to Peace” of the “Quartet”[10] in April 2003, the “Geneva Accord”[11] published in October 2003, the Bush administration-convened “Peace Conference at Annapolis”[12] in November 2007, the “Kerry Initiative”[13] in 2013-2014, and the “Paris Conference”[14] of January 2017 intended to “preserve the two-state solution and create incentives that would move the parties closer to direct negotiations.”[15]

The Madrid Conference, co-chaired by George H.W. Bush and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, marked the first time that Israelis had sat down at a conference table with Arabs since the Geneva Conference in December 1973, and the first time in which all four of the frontline Arab states, as well as Palestinian representatives, sat down with Israelis since the Lausanne Conference of 1949. With the defeat of Iraq at the hands of an American-led military coalition in the Gulf War of January-March 1991 and the end of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union that same year, the George Bush administration “felt that it had to ‘reward’ the Arab countries, especially Syria, for their participation in the coalition against the Iraqi regime and that ‘the time was right to put an end to Arab-Israeli conflict’, using the immense power and prestige of the United States in the Middle East. To do so, the United States proposed reconvening the international conference provided for by UN Security Council Resolution 338 of 1973, but which had been held in abeyance ever since.”[16]

Contrary to the commonly held belief, the Oslo Accords of 1993 (Oslo I)[17] and 1995 (Oslo II)[18] were not a peace treaty; they were in fact a profoundly asymmetric and imbalanced interim agreement in favor of the disproportionately stronger Israeli side.  However, their historic signing, first on the lawn of the White House in Washington D.C, was a moment of great optimism, raising hopes worldwide that a long-sought settlement to a bitter conflict was finally within reach. 

.

undefined

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, U.S. president Bill Clinton, and PLO chairman Yasser Arafat. (From the Public Domain)

.

While the seemingly promising negotiations were still ongoing, Edward Said wrote an important collection of fifty essays, later forming the contents of a fascinating book[19] in which he questioned the very foundation of the Accords and incisively cut through the hyperbole in the press surrounding the Accords almost unanimously hailed as a success and a breakthrough for peace.

Very early on thus, Said realized that the imbalance of power between the signees of what he called a “permanent interim agreement” would set up a problematic dynamic that can neither lead to a real peace nor likely provide for one in the future. He also vehemently criticized the “repressive leadership and inflated bureaucracy” of Yasser Arafat, a leadership which has “in a cowardly and slavish way, tried to forget its own people’s tragic history in order to accommodate their American and Israeli mentors”. 

Later events proved him right, starting with the interim agreements of Taba, Hebron, and the Wye Plantation that would already limit the next phase, that is to say the infinitely more sensitive and complex postponed issues of refugees, status of Jerusalem, exact borders, settlements, and water. Said believed the “peace process” was an “expedient” and a “foolish gamble that has already done far more harm than good”, because, he added, “Peace requires sterner measures than Arafat, Clinton, and company have, or are ever likely to have, taken. And so, some of us must try to make the effort that our leaders will not make”. 

Three decades later, the consensus is that the Oslo accords have failed. Indeed, today’s Israeli-Palestinian reality is marked by “a massive expansion of Israel’s settlement project, a gradual erasure of the Green Line, a symbiosis between Israeli security forces and the settlers, and an authoritarian and divided Palestinian leadership, with the Palestinian Authority acting as Israel’s sub-contractor. Israel’s regime of control also separates between Palestinian groups, with each group given a different set of limited rights. While the Oslo process had the potential to transform a predominantly ethnic struggle into a conflict over land and borders, the ramifications of the one single regime that has replaced the Oslo order cannot be underestimated”.[20]

With the failure of the two sides to reach a peace agreement despite – or perhaps more accurately, because of – the role played by the partial U.S. mediator, the Accords allowed Israel to maintain full control over more than 60 percent of the West Bank (marked in the Oslo I agreement as Area C), including over its settlements and army bases. The PA retained administrative control in Area A, a mere 18 percent of the West Bank, where the majority of West Bank Palestinians live. Since the interim agreement did not include any moratorium on settlement expansion, Israel created facts on the ground. A close examination of settlement growth shows that “in 1993, the year of the first Oslo accord, 273,900 Israeli settlers lived in the occupied Palestinian territories: 116,300 in the West Bank, 4,800 in the Gaza Strip, and 152,800 in East Jerusalem. In 2000, the year of the failed Camp David summit, this number had grown to a total of around 372,000 Israeli settlers. In 2016, when the Kerry mission talks broke down, the total number of settlers in Palestinian territories had more than doubled compared to the beginning of Oslo: from 273,900 to around 613,700 settlers. Notably, in the same time span, the number of Israeli settlers in the West Bank had more than tripled (from 116,300 to 399,300). Today, over 465,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank and another 230,000 live in East Jerusalem. Whether the massive expansion of the settlement project was an Israeli negotiating tactic during Oslo or a response to pressures from the Israeli right, the fact remains that since the Oslo Accords, Israel has constantly expanded its settlements and their population on a massive scale – independently of whether negotiations were taking place or not”.[21]

Thereafter, against the backdrop of the seismic shift in the global geopolitical landscape brought about by the September 11th, 2001 events, and the dismal failure of the Oslo Agreements to achieve the hoped-for “two-state solution” within the intended time frame, the collective Arab stance toward Israel evolved dramatically. Thus, in 2002, during their annual summit in Beirut, Lebanon, the twenty-two members of the Arab League proposed the Arab Peace Initiative (API), which called for normalizing relations with Israel on the condition of the establishment of a viable Palestinian state. The API was initially meant to be a framework to peacefully end the decades-old conflict. While that framework still remains intact today, “the API has played a different function since the Arab Spring jolted the region into an intense zero-sum game between Saudi Arabia and Iran. From then on, Saudi official discourse treated the API as a focal point in the Kingdom’s pragmatic policy toward Israel. It gained a simultaneous function that allowed the Saudis to express their willingness for cooperation, yet still distance themselves from such willingness by emphasizing the centrality of Palestinian rights”.[22]

Later on, with successive bilateral (Israeli-Palestinian), regional, and international peace efforts failing and falling to the wayside, the API was eventually overshadowed, if not clinically dead, when the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan – with regional political mastodon Saudi Arabia programmed to be next – signed normalization agreements with Israel in 2020 and 2021 within the framework of President Trump-brokered Abraham Accords[23], without guarantees for Palestinian rights. 

The UAE showed the way in this regard. On the pretext of stopping Israel’s plan to annex 30% of the West Bank, in July 2020, Abu Dhabi engaged in negotiations with Tel Aviv to normalize relations, further encouraged by and “sweetened” with a US offer to sell the wealthy pro-Western emirate 50 F-35 combat jets; an offer that has not materialized so far, while hundreds of those highly technologically advanced fighter jets have been sold by Washington to its other allies around the world, including, of course, Israel.

The tiny and vulnerable kingdom of Bahrain quickly followed suit. And in December 2020, in a joint declaration between the US, Morocco, and Israel, Rabat and Tel Aviv agreed to normalize relations; and to “recompense” the Alawite monarchy, President Donald Trump, having lost the re-election one month earlier and just a few days before he left office, decided unilaterally, through a simple tweet[24], that the U.S. recognizes Morocco’s sovereignty over the illegally occupied territory of Western Sahara, thus acting one of the most shocking U-turns in American foreign policy.[25]

As for the internally torn and externally fragilized Sudan, it was, in the same month of December, removed from Washington’s sanctions list against “state sponsors of terrorism”, and in January 2021, signed the Abraham Accords Declaration, but has yet to formally sign a bilateral agreement with Israel, deeply engulfed as it is in a devastating and unending civil war.

Finally, as is well-known today, the prospect of the signing of a groundbreaking – and far greater prize for Israel than the other Gulf emirates – Saudi-Israeli agreement within the same framework was only thwarted by the 7 October 2023 assaults, to the great dismay of the “Arab normalizers” and their Western backers and protectors. 

By all accounts, as observed by Ambassador Chas freeman: “Israel has essentially exhausted its military options. It can do more of the same but more of the same will not bring it peace. Only a reconciliation with the Palestinians and Israel’s Arab neighbors can do that. In this context, it must be said, the so-called Abraham accords are a diversion, not a path to peace.”[26]

The Knesset Writes the Epitaph of the Two-State Solution’s Grave

Less than two months before he died, the famous statesman and veteran of American diplomacy Henry Kissinger did an interview[27] – most probably the last he would ever do. In it, he said the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was no longer viable and that it “doesn’t guarantee that what we saw in the last weeks [the 7th of October attacks] won’t happen again”. He added: “I believe the West Bank should be put under Jordanian control rather than aim for a two-state solution which leaves one of the two territories determined to overthrow Israel”.

And on 18 July 2024, the Knesset put the final nail in the coffin of the two-state solution.

Indeed, Israel’s parliament passed a resolution[28] that overwhelmingly and firmly opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state. Such a state in the heart of the Land of Israel, the motion reads,

“will pose an existential danger to the State of Israel and its citizens, perpetuate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and destabilize the region”, and  “Promoting the idea of a Palestinian state at this time will be a reward for terrorism and will only encourage Hamas and its supporters to see this as a victory, thanks to the massacre of October 7, 2023, and a prelude to the takeover of jihadist Islam in the Middle East.”

The resolution was co-sponsored by parties in Netanyahu’s coalition together with right-wing parties from the opposition. It passed with 68 votes in favor, and only 9 lawmakers, all from the Arab-majority Ra’am and Hadash-Ta’al parties, voted against it.

Commenting on the resolution put forward by his own right-wing opposition party New Hope-United Right faction, Party chairman Gideon Sa’ar said that the resolution decision is intended to express the blanket opposition that exists among the [Israeli] people to the establishment of a Palestinian state, which would endanger Israel’s security and future, and that it “signals to the international community that pressure to impose a Palestinian state on Israel is futile”.[29]

Also, expressing the exact same mindset and feelings, albeit in a more candid and crude manner in a clip[30] from an English-language Israeli podcast, hosts Naor Meningher and Eytan Weinstein discussed the idea of eradicating all Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. Weinstein said: “If you gave me a button to just erase Gaza, every single living being in Gaza would no longer be living tomorrow. I would press it in a second”, claiming that “most Israelis” would do the same. Meningher added that they would also want to wipe out Palestinians in “the territories” because “that’s the reality we live in, it’s us or them, and it has to be them.” In a later episode, the two discussed what they deemed to be Israel’s failures in its ongoing war on Gaza, with Weinstein saying that the government should stop “trying to get international acceptance” and “instil sovereignty over and annex the West Bank, Gaza… make it all Israel”. Weinstein went on to say that Israel’s “50-year plan” should involve conquering Lebanon. CBC journalist Evan Dyer shared the clip on X, pointing to Meningher’s former media roles in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s last five political campaigns. “This is not a fringe show or fringe people… the show is as mainstream as it gets,” Dyer wrote, citing a review of the podcast by Times of Israel that billed it as a “platform for free and open conversations”. In response, the podcast posted a gif of a finger pressing a red button.

Image: Mustafa Barghouti (Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0)

undefined

Mustafa Barghouti, the Secretary-general of the Palestinian National Initiative, slammed the passing of this resolution and summed up what that move really means in practice, highlighting the fact that “No Zionist party from both the government and the opposition voted against the resolution”[31], which “represents a rejection of peace with Palestinians and an official declaration of the death of [the] Oslo agreement.”

Similarly, senior Palestinian Authority official Hussein al-Sheikh condemned the resolution, saying the Knesset’s rejection “confirms the racism of the occupying state and its disregard for international law and international legitimacy, and its insistence on the approach and policy of perpetuating the occupation forever”.

For his part, United Nations Secretary-general António Guterres declared that “Recent developments are driving a stake through the heart of any prospect for a two-state solution (…) We must change course. All settlement activity must cease immediately.”, adding that the settlements were a flagrant violation of international law and an obstacle to peace with Palestinians.

In trying to plan for a post-7 October 2023 future, world leaders are obstinately looking to and seeking inspiration from the outmoded and ineffectual visions and initiatives of the past. Joe Biden is calling for a new peace process:

“When this crisis is over, there has to be a vision of what comes next, and in our view, it has to be a two-state solution”[32], he said in one of his many public statements about the nearly year-long war on Gaza. British prime minister Rishi Sunak and French president Emmanuel Macron have made similar comments, and so have several League of Arab States and Organization of Islamic

Cooperation summits. Most recently, the Spanish government hosted a meeting[33] with the Arab-Islamic contact group and European officials bringing together the Secretary-general of the Arab League, the EU Foreign Policy Chief, the Minister of State for Qatar, and the foreign ministers of Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Norway, Türkiye, and Egypt. Speaking to journalists, Spanish foreign minister Jose Manuel Albares emphasized that the contact group is currently “united in implementing the two-state solution.”

All things considered, however, the “peace process” through the two-state solution is well and truly dead; and it is past time for everyone to carry it to the graveyard of failed ideas, and there to whisper “requiescat in pace”![34]

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Get Your Free Copy of “Towards a World War III Scenario: The Dangers of Nuclear War”!  

Amir Nour is an Algerian researcher in international relations, author of the books “L’Orient et l’Occident à l’heure d’un nouveau Sykes-Picot” (The Orient and the Occident in Time of a New Sykes-Picot) Editions Alem El Afkar, Algiers, 2014 and “L’Islam et l’ordre du monde” (Islam and the Order of the World),  Editions Alem El Afkar, Algiers, 2021. 

Notes

[1] Edward W. Said, “Power, Politics and Culture: Interviews with Edward W. Said”, Pantheon Books, New York, 2001.

[2] A Pew Research Center survey (Sarah Austin and Jonathan Evans, “Israelis have grown more skeptical of a two-state solution”: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/09/26/israelis-have-grown-more-skeptical-of-a-two-state-solution/) conducted in September 2023 found that only 35% of Israelis believe “a way can be found for Israel and an independent Palestinian state to coexist peacefully” – a decline of 15 percentage points since 2013. And a Gallup poll (Jay Loschky, “Palestinians Lack Faith in Biden, Two-State Solution”:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/512828/palestinians-lack-faith-biden-two-state-solution.aspx?utm_source=google&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syndication#:~:text=Generational%20Divide%20on%20the%20Two,Palestinians%20aged%2046%20and%20older) conducted between July and September 2023 found that only 24% of Palestinians (of whom a majority of young people) living in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza supported a two-state solution, down from 59% in 2012.

[3] Harriet Sherwood, “Israel-Palestine: Is the two-state solution the answer to the crisis?”, The Guardian, 4 November 2023.

[4] Tom Segev, “One Palestine, Complete: Jews and Arabs Under British Mandate”, Little, Brown and Company, London, 2000; originally published in Hebrew as “Yeme Ha-Kalaniyot: Erets Yisrael bi-tekufat ha-Mandat”, by Keter Publishers, Jerusalem, 1999.

[5] Lecture by Arthur Wauchope, 1 November 1923, Central Zionist Archive, CZA S25/10006.

[6] Chaim Weizmann to the JAE, 7 March 1939, Central Zionist Archive, CZA Z4/303/32.

[7] Paragraph 3 reads as follows: “The Arab Heads of State have agreed to unite their political efforts at the international and diplomatic level to eliminate the effects of the aggression and to ensure the withdrawal of the aggressive Israeli forces from the Arab lands which have been occupied since the aggression of 5 June. This will be done within the framework of the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it, and insistence on the rights of the Palestinian people in their own country.”

[8] For more information on the Conference: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1989-1992/madrid-conference

[9] Akram Hanieh, “The Camp David Papers”, articles, published in al-Ayyam in seven installments between 29 July and 10 August 2000, Journal of Palestine Studies XXX, no. 2 (Winter 2001):

https://www.palestine-studies.org/sites/default/files/attachments/jps-articles/jps.2001.30.2.75.pdf

[10] The Quartet, set up in 2002, consists of the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and Russia. Its mandate is to help mediate Middle East peace negotiations and to support Palestinian economic development and institution-building in preparation for eventual statehood. It meets regularly at the level of the Quartet Principals (United Nations Secretary General, United States Secretary of State, Foreign Minister of Russia, and High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy) and the Quartet Special Envoys.

[11] The “Geneva Accord: A Model Israeli-Palestinian Peace Agreement”: https://geneva-accord.org/the-accord/

[12] To read the “Joint Understanding Read by President Bush at Annapolis Conference”, Office of the Press secretary, the White House, 27 November 2007:

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071127.html

[13] Secretary of State John Kerry, “Remarks on the Middle East Peace”, U.S. Department of State, 28 December 2016: https://2009-2017.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2016/12/266119.html

[14] To learn more about the Conference:

https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/country-files/israel-palestinian-territories/peace-process/initiative-for-the-middle-east-peace-process/article/conference-for-peace-in-the-middle-east-15-01-17

[15] Greg Shapland and Professor Yossi Mekelberg, “Israeli-Palestinian Peacemaking: What We Can Learn from Previous Efforts?”, Chatham House, 24 July 2018 (updated on 14 December 2020).

[16] Michael Fischbach, “Madrid and the Oslo Agreement, 1991-1993: Short-Lived Promises of a Negotiated Settlement”, Interactive Encyclopedia of Palestinian Question, Institute for Palestine Studies, 13 September 2023.

[17] To read the Declaration of Principles: https://temp.org/resource/declaration-of-principles-oslo-accords/

[18] The Oslo II Accord, signed in Taba, Egypt, on 28 September 1995, gave the Palestinian Authority self-governing powers in Area A and shared responsibilities with Israel in Area B of the West Bank, with the prospect of negotiations on a final settlement based on UN Security Council Resolution 242 and 338. Area A corresponds to all major Palestinian population centers and Area B encompasses most rural centers. Area C constitutes the territory outside of the enclaves of Areas A and B (representing about 60 percent of the West Bank) that was to remain under full Israeli control but that was to be gradually transferred to PA jurisdiction.

[19] Edward Said, “The End of the Peace Process: Oslo and After”, Pantheon Books, New York, 2000.

[20] Rafaella A. Del Sarto and Menachem Klein, “Oslo: Three Decades Later”, Israel Studies Review, Volume 38, Issue 2, Summer 2023.

[21] Figures provided by the Foundation for Middle East Peace 2012 and Peace Now 2023a, 2023b.

[22] Aziz Alghashian, “A Revived Arab Peace Initiative from Saudi Arabia Could Save the Middle East”, The Cairo Review of Global Affairs, Winter 2024.

[23] U.S. Department of State, “The Abraham accords”: https://www.state.gov/the-abraham-accords/

[24] https://x.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1337067019385057290?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

[25] To read the official “Proclamation On Recognizing The Sovereignty Of The Kingdom Of Morocco Over The Western Sahara”, The White House, 10 December 2020: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-recognizing-sovereignty-kingdom-morocco-western-sahara/

[26] Sharmine Narwani, “Ambassador Chas Freeman: ‘The Abraham accords are a diversion, not a path to peace’”, The Cradle, 26 August 2024.

[27] Rolf Dobelli, “Henry Kissinger’s (Maybe) Last Interview: Drop the 2-State Solution”, Politico magazine, 12 February 2023.

[28] Jacob Magid, “Knesset votes overwhelmingly against Palestinian statehood, days before PM’s US trip”, The Times of Israel, 18 July 2024.

[29] Noa Shpigel, “With Gantz’s Backing, Israel’s Parliament Passes Resolution Opposing Palestinian Statehood”, Haaretz, 18 July 2024.

[30] Katherine Hearst, “Popular Israeli podcasters call to ‘erase every living being in Gaza and West Bank’”, Middle East Eye, 4 September 2024: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israeli-podcast-hosts-call-erase-every-living-being-gaza-and-west-bank

[31] Mustafa Barghouti was likely referring to the lawmakers from opposition Leader Yair Lapid’s center-left Yesh Atid and the more left-leaning Labor Party, who left the plenum to avoid backing the measure, even though they had previously spoken in favor of a two-state solution.  

[32] The White House, “Remarks by President Biden and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of Australia in Joint Press Conference”, 25 October 2023.

[33] Sertac Aktan, “Spain hosts high-level meeting on Israel-Palestine two-state solution”, Euronews, 19 September 2024.

[34] Latin phrase for a familiar prayer in the Church’s liturgy meaning “may (the deceased) rest in peace”, to which the response is “Amen”. It is customarily abbreviated R.I.P.

Featured image source


Links to Parts I to X:

By Amir Nour, December 01, 2023

The War on Gaza: How the West Is Losing. Accelerating the Transition to a Multipolar Global Order?

By Amir Nour, December 04, 2023

The War on Gaza: Debunking the Pro-Zionist Propaganda Machine

By Amir Nour, December 11, 2023

The War on Gaza: Why Does the “Free World” Condone Israel’s Occupation, Apartheid, and Genocide?

By Amir Nour, December 22, 2023

The War on Gaza: How We Got to the “Monstrosity of Our Century”

By Amir Nour, January 25, 2024

The War on Gaza: Towards Palestine’s Independence Despite the Doom and Gloom

By Amir Nour, February 02, 2024

The War on Gaza: Whither the “Jewish State”?

By Amir Nour, April 17, 2024

The Twilight of the Western Settler Colonialist Project in Palestine

By Amir Nour, August 17, 2024

The War on Gaza: Perpetual Falsehoods and Betrayals in the Service of Endless Deception. Amir Nour

By Amir Nour, August 25, 2024

The War on Gaza: Why the Sustainability of the Western-Zionist Colony Is Nigh on Impossible. Amir Nour

By Amir Nour, September 07, 2024