• 0 0
    Hhmmm yes---subsequent developements
    • Labhras
    • 16.02.10 | 10:09 (IST)

    "It will be based, as I have said many times, on the 1967 lines, with the agreed swaps, and taking into account subsequent developments," she said. "Those are the very clear parameters that the United States believes that the parties should negotiate over. " HC Well if that aint a deal breaker or what. Given that statement Israel has no reason to make peace, just sit around while they ensure subsequent developements create the Greater Israel. Lets Face it Clinton and Obama---you aint what we thought you were. Not to worry---the Bi National state will solve all this in due course. Only obsctacle will be coming up with a name but we will leave that decision to the majority of the citizens of the new nascent state. And it will not be Israel. Never miss an opportunity to let greed rule the day.

    from the article: U.S. denies dropping demand for Israel settlement freeze
    First published 19:51 15.02.10 | Last updated 20:42 15.02.10
Haaretz Headlines
Ahmadinejad, Natanz nuclear facility
Ahmadinejad unveils three new Iran nuclear projects 31 comments
New Delhi bomb - AP - February 2012
Netanyahu: Iran's terror acts undermine the world's stability 32 comments
Megron outpost in West Bank - Fitoussi
Carlo Strenger / Israel's severe right wing syndrome 13 comments
Croatian president at Yad Vashem - AP
President of Croatia apologizes to Jewish Holocaust victims 6 comments