So Bibi's big speech came and went. He went on and on about how the land - all of it - is ours and that's that, despite the fact that it never was in all of history for a single uninterrupted century. Most, yes. Never "all".

 Anyway,  after alla that, after stating flatly that any and all absence of peace is solely the fault of the Arabs, that "we withdrew with an agreement" (from city centers, continuing to expand settlemens, thereby stealing land) "and once without and agreement" (and also without lifting a total blockade), and yet - shock! still got no peace. I'm tellin' ya, these Ay-rabs... just can't rajuna with them. 

Eventually, towards the end, after promising that he's gonna talk about what "we" have to acknowledge about the Palestinians, he got to his reluctant confession thing. This is a thing of beauty. "among the rooms of our house of Israel, some are inhabited by this population, these people..." Only at the real tail end did he manage to say "Palestinian people" and "Palestinian state" - and that only after qualifying, before and after, that this state can and will only exist if it's absolutely, totally demilitarized. He promised them a flag, an anthem and a government... but left an army out of the deal. 

The problem is not with the aspiration that a Palestinian state be, at least initially, demilitarized. In fact, to sell the Israeli public on a deal that puts the Palestinians in control of hills overlooking our only major international airport, we're gonna have to be pretty sure they ain't got much in the way of, um, temptation lying around. 

No, the problem is the artlessness, tone deafness, and total refusal to realize that the other side will not be dictated to in such an open manner. Then again, opening bargaining positions are traditionally insulting. If the buyer doesn't do the walk-away at least once, you started too low. 

Ah, and the demand that the Palestinians "recognize Israel as a Jewish state." I don't know how pathetic you have to be to let others' definitions of you come on the way of vital arrangements, but I guess the rabbit hole goes deeper than I care to explore... The only "practical" meaning such a "recognition" would have is to give Israel the theoretical "legal" opening to insist that Jewish rule continue even in the event that Jews cease constituting the majority of the population in the state of Israel. To which I say - if it comes to that, that won't help. Eventually, majority speaks. 

Anyway, Netanyahu TOTALLY side-stepped the issue of building in the settlements, which is the current dispute he has with Washington and probably what the O-man was expecting to hear about when Netanyahu promised him an interesting speech. But he said the words "Palestinian state" in a sentence that contained no negation. Which is progress. I can't see Netanyahu surviving with his coalition, nor really doing enough to satisfy anyone. The Palestinians are rejecting the speech, rightly calling it a unilateral renegotiating of every previous deal there was, which again is trying to treat the other side as a child, who basically has to take what's offered.  We've seen how well that works. 

That's it for now. There were a few other things, but I GOTTA get some @#$% work done. I'm beginning to work on a post about the most rocking city of Tel Aviv, whose centennial it is this year. If there's any aspect about the Gotham of the Mediterranian you'd like to know about, our operators are standing by to take your orders.