Middle East peace talks at risk?

soundoff (8 Responses)

1. vic nashville tn
   

   Nearly past 45 years we try to bring peace in Middle East, we gave Billions in aid some received Nobel Peace prize
   Every four years our presidential candidates must answer question about Middle East peace talk
   Middle East peace talk always at risk

   November 10, 2010 at 4:36 pm | Reply
2. Murat A.
   

   Are you guys kidding me? Do you call this an interview? Why don't you just let the Israeli government give you their white paper on the settlement issue and you just post it on your web site. Not one of you ever challenged the anything that the ambassador said. Parker tried to say something like shouldn't Israel embarrass President Obama, it sounded as if she was asking for Israel to give the US of A a break. Wow! it has now come down to this. Israel has to give the US government a break so it does not seem like a totally one sided, closed door dealing party at the table. Who is the world power and the strongest country in the world here? Is it the US or is it Israel. I understand Mr. Spitzer's motives. He is of a Jewish descent and he owes it to Israelis. But what about Parker? What does she owe to whom? Or is she just simply afraid for her job?

   November 10, 2010 at 8:44 pm | Reply
3. Yoram
   

   The Jewish neighborhoods, the ambassador is talking a bout are outside the green line, and therefore they are settlements. Mr. Spitzer should have known that.

   November 11, 2010 at 12:02 am | Reply
4. Werner
   

   For shame Parker Spitzer. You really dropped the ball on this one, sitting coyly as the ambassador spouted his propaganda. Were you muzzled? It's not enough to sit quiet with a visibly guilty conscience. Elliott–where were the hammering questions, your famous zeal for the truth, or even just your spine? What the hell is up with you guys?

   I like Elliott a lot, but on the subject of Israel his instinct for the truth abandons him completely. It's outrageous. First it was snuggling up to Derschowitz, now this. If you become complicit in a guests lies, you lose your integrity, and that's nearly impossible to get back. I mean, what else do you have as opinionators?

   You just lost a viewer who really wanted you to succeed.

   November 11, 2010 at 12:21 pm | Reply
   • marie
     

     oh be quiet not everyone deserves to get hammered. He wasn't asked to NAME CUTS.

     November 12, 2010 at 12:16 pm | Reply
   • Solovey Razboynik
     

     Well stated, Werner. There is no excuse for nodding in assent while Ayalon spouts his hasbara, the same old spiel. "Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel (you may say so, but it is not,neither de facto nor de jure)," "Jerusalem is not a settlement (but you need armed guards to protect the Jewish settlers 24/7)," "We are building in Jewish neighborhoods (but you are evicting Palestinian families)," "How can you tell a citizen that he cannot build an extra room for a new baby or a school or hospital for the community (which should not have been built in the first place)?" Spitzer did not volunteer one different perspective, he just let Ayalon babble on while Parker smiled inanely and nodded like an adoring bobblehead. That was not an iterview, it was a showcase for Ayalon to further drum Israeli propaganda into the vapid brains of the US viewers.

     November 12, 2010 at 9:32 pm | Reply
5. diplolibran
   

   Happened on Parker Spitzer very late Nov 10 (wee hours of Nov 11 out here on the Pacific Coast).
   Great start to the interview and questions, Mr Spitzer, and it heightened my anticipation for frank and full exchange, but why or why was there silent acceptance to Mr Oren's reference to "united" Jerusalem when questioned about the expansion of settlements (or moratorium on settlements, whichever you prefer)?
   The UN established Israel as 55% of the Palestine Mandate Territory (with 45% for a Palestinian state) with Jerusalem to be shared. That is the position of the Palestinians and the US. Why accept it?
   And accept that Palestinians refused to sit down and negotiate? without saying why?
   They did not want to resume talks if settlement expansion not halted.
   Why?
   Maybe b/c Israel promised Prez Carter in 1978 they'd stop and there were 20K settlers. They made the same commitments in the Oslo Accords and I think even at Annapolis, but although the Palestinians had made concessions in return for this, the number of settlers now stands at 500K.
   Why not in desperation actually insist Israel keep a past commitment before starting new talks?
   How depressing to make compromises and find even so their 'state' has shrunk from 45% to 22% in 1967, and today it's 100% occupation with more and more land being expropriated, homes demolished, gradual dispossession. The Wall takes another 10% of the West Bank left to them. Roads with about 600 checkpoints; highways on wch Palestinians are not allowed to drive or cross; streets where Palestinians are not permitted to walk.
   Keep in mind most accept the State of Israel (but pre-1967, 78%, leaving just 22%, less than half originally agreed to) but are resisting Zionist claims to Greater Israel. Not just Palestinians but in 2002 the 22-mbr Arab League accepted 1967 borders (22%).
   I look forward to when the Palestinian side comes to ParkerSpitzer though with some trepidation since in past those speaking (with some great exceptions) often not that aware of American perceptions and reactions in order to present truth, reason, and justice convincingly.
   We can hope.
   With the actual facts from each side there is more hope for a compromise solution, and though many discomforted, both equally unhappy so not dramatically one-sided and blatantly unjust, and will accept for the sake of peace.
   Objectivity and mutual respect are essential.
   Trust CNN will continue to try to be even-handed.
   Knowledge is power. Disseminating information from both sides is a help for those who want to weigh them and be fair.
   Thank you.

   November 11, 2010 at 9:23 pm | Reply
6. Moshe Sharon
   

   An Arab from Gaza and a self-confessed member of Hamas once asked me, “How can we have peace?” I though it was a strange question coming from a terrorist. When I asked him if he was ready to recognize Israel's right to exist, he answered, “There is no such country as 'Israel'; there is only Palestine, my country.” That's why negotiating peace with Hamas or any other Arab faction is a fool's errand. In this man’s mind, Israel’s right to exist is not an issue because there is no Israel; there is just a large, well-armed group of space-occupying Jewish squatters, who deserve death. Furthermore, every U.S. president keeps saying the same mantra, “They [Palestinian Authority] must recognize Israel’s right to exist.” Correction; they must first recognize that Israel exists. Actually, somebody forgot to tell all of the politicians that we Jews don’t need their permission to exist as a nation; G-d gave that to us at Mount Sinai. http://soulfulthoughts.blogspot.com

   March 14, 2011 at 1:32 pm | Reply