**the words "that stand" referring to "based on returning to Israel’s
pre-war 1967 borders, plus negotiated land swaps"
.
The article quoted him accuratly and in the correct context you were
demanding (using the 67 borders a start point to negotiate land swaps).
>You are upset over nothing it seems to me.
well, you would be incorrect that I was "upset about nothing". The
correct comment would be that I clearly misunderstood or misread the
sentences. And you are right...if I had gone back and double checked,
I would seen what you have have pointed out. I was wrong about the
article.
>Does Israel reject that postition? Yes, they want to start with what
they
have no and negotiate back. That is a seperate issue.
and, yet...there are polls showing that a majority of Isrealis side
with Obama.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/25/us-israel-palestinians-idUSTRE74O2RB20110525?irpc=932
Which would make one wonder why the "Friends of Israel" are less
supportive of the Presidents plan than the people of... You know...
Israel.
Thom
http://thomwade.wordpress.com/
http://www.cafepress.com/Thomwade
http://www.in-one-ear.com
_______________________________________
"I want a song to learn and sing, of a life requited."-Echo & the
Bunnymen
--
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.