Amadi Talks

if you are CO-CHAIR OF THE DSA, a political party that has made palestine its ENTIRE PLATFORM for the past THREE YEARS—yes, i expect you to have knowledge of the stages of the peace process. if you want people to listen to your solutions, i expect you to know what has and has not already been tried, and to know why you would or wouldn't have been happy with the major proposals made at each major step. including at camp david in 2000.

In 1993, the Oslo Accords were signed, creating the framework for a future Palestinian state. In 1995, Oslo II was signed, which divided the West Bank into three parts: Area A, Area B, and Area C. Area A is under full Palestinian control. Area B is under Palestinian civil control with Israeli security. And Area C is under full Israeli control. (It also divided Gaza into Areas A, B, and C. Gaza is supposed to be Area A, but due to a little thing known as "the government in charge of Gaza killed a thousand Israelis in one day", there is substantial Israeli presence.) Jewish Israelis are barred from entering Area A, for their own safety. (Arab Israelis are also theoretically barred, but this ban isn't enforced as strictly.) Area A includes most of the West Bank's population.

This was supposed to be temporary, renegotiated after five years.

So, five years pass, and Clinton gets together the leader of Israel, Ehud Barak, and the leader of the Palestinian Authority, Yasser Arafat, at Camp David to talk it out.

The Israelis really, really, want peace. Ehud Barak is begging for a deal.

As Robert Malley and Hussein Agha write in an article fairly critical of Israel and Barak, "Barak was eager for a deal, wanted it achieved during Clinton’s term in office, and had surrounded himself with some of Israel’s most peace-minded politicians." Malley and Agha continue later that "If there is one issue that Israelis agree on, it is that Barak broke every conceivable taboo and went as far as any Israeli prime minister had gone or could go". They criticize him for, seemingly, being too flexible and acquiescent: "Yet, at the same time, he gave clear hints that Israel was willing to show more flexibility if Arafat was prepared to “contemplate” the endgame" (in a negative context). According to them Barak made massive concessions: sovereignty over all Arab sectors of East Jerusalem, a Palestinian state in over 90 percent of the West Bank with land swaps to help compensate. These were huge and changing. According to them, Arafat demanded sovereignty over the Temple Mount, as opposed to Israel's proposal for Palestinian "permanent custodianship" -- the Temple Mount, the holiest site in Judaism (it now has the Al-Aqsa Compound on top of it), was to be in Palestinian hands, and that was a red line for him.

"Barak apparently took the view that, faced with a sufficiently attractive proposal and an appropriately unattractive alternative, the Palestinians would have no choice but to say yes. In effect, each successive Palestinian “no” led to the next best Israeli assessment of what, in their right minds, the Palestinians couldn’t turn down." Agha and Malley write. This was to be a dangerous mistake. Arafat turned down offer after offer after offer, making no counter-proposals and suggesting, contrary to the archeological, historical, and even Muslim record, that the Second Temple was in Nablus. (Previously, I have referenced him as saying it was in Hebron; this was in error, and I apologize for saying so. I do not know how the two got mixed up in my mind.) Shockingly, this did not suggest to Barak and the Israeli negotiating team that he was a reliable partner.

In late September 2000, a few months after the talks collapsed, Ariel Sharon, the leader of the right-wing party Likud (who would later unilaterally withdraw from Gaza, paving the way for Hamas' rule, but that's another story), visited the Temple Mount. Again: this is the holiest site in Judaism, and is, as basically all accounts agree, the site of the destroyed Second Temple. Sharon did not pray there. Sharon did not do much of anything there. He merely existed on the Temple Mount as a Jew.

That is what started the Second Intifada (which was, at best, tolerated by Arafat), in which over a thousand Jews died. A Jew existing on the holiest site in Judaism.

As Hussein and Agha continue, in late December, in the middle of the Second Intifada, Clinton and Barak made yet another proposal, which they summarize as follows: "Palestine would have sovereignty over 94 to 96 percent of the West Bank and it would as well have land belonging to pre-1967 Israel equivalent to another 1 to 3 percent of West Bank territory. Palestinian refugees would have the right to return to their homeland in historic Palestine, a right that would guarantee their unrestricted ability to live in Palestine while subjecting their absorption into Israel to Israel’s sovereign decision. In Jerusalem, all that is Arab would be Palestinian, all that is Jewish would be Israeli. Palestine would exercise sovereignty over the Haram [Temple Mount/Har HaBayit] and Israel over the Western Wall[.]"

Israel gave and gave and gave so much, and what it got in return was suicide bombings.

That is the environment in which Sharon came to power. That is, in many ways, what destroyed the Israeli left and its promise of peace. Because they tried peace, they tried so very, very, hard for peace, they gave up so much that no one else would be expected to give up -- and what they got in return was death and terror and fear. That is what Israelis think of when they hear intifada.

And I am not excusing Benjamin Netanyahu or his actions, nor the abandonment of the peace process, nor Israel's admittedly heavy-handed response to the Second Intifada.

But if you don't understand why Israelis are skeptical of peace, if you don't understand the cause of this view, if you don't understand what caused the collapse of the peace talks -- why the hell should I listen to you? Why should I care?

You don't need to know the precise details of the negotiations. What you need to know is this:

#but it does mean a lot of people believe it isn’t

#a lot of people believe there’s no hope for peace

#this combined with all the broken peace treaties in the last decade or so

#make it look like peace is not possible

#and it is so important that we both don’t give up hope

#and also understand the historical context

Not letting these stay in the tags. Peace is very much possible... but for it to happen, people need to have hope that it is possible, and that hope is not possible without understanding what has happened before to shape how the people involved understand their meaningful options.

--

and if you dig into the data a two state solution is, if not easy, surprisingly hopeful! let’s talk about the data for a moment. reminder: it is from september 2024.

The vague two state solution got less support than the more detailed one, so here’s the more detailed two-state solution the survey had. Now, I have so fucking many issues with this, but it is better than the current situation and that’s what matters.

Mutual recognition of Palestine and Israel as the homelands of their respective peoples. The agreement will mark the end of conflict, the Palestinian state will fight terror against Israelis, and no further claims will be made by either side.

The independent Palestinian state which will be established in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip will be demilitarized (no heavy weaponry).

The future Palestinian state will have a democratic political system based on rule of law, periodic elections, free press, strong parliament, independent judiciary and equal rights for religious and ethnic minorities as well as strong anti-corruption measures. The state of Israel will have a democratic political system whereby Israeli law formally guarantees equality of Arab Israeli citizens, who will have equal rights as Israeli Jews by law.

A multinational force will be established and deployed in the Palestinian state to ensure the security and safety of both sides.

The Palestinian state will have full sovereignty over its air space, its land, and its water resources, but Israel will maintain two early warning stations in the West Bank for 15 years.

The Palestinian state will be established in the entirety of West Bank and the Gaza strip, except for several blocs of settlement which will be annexed to Israel in a territorial exchange of similar size. Israel will evacuate all other settlements.

West Jerusalem will be the capital of Israel and East Jerusalem the capital of the Palestinian state.

In the Old City of Jerusalem, the Jewish quarter and the Wailing Wall will come under Israeli sovereignty and the Muslim and Christian quarters and Temple Mount will come under Palestinian sovereignty.

Palestinian refugees will have the right of return to their homeland whereby the Palestinian state will settle all refugees wishing to live in it. Israel will allow the return of about 100,000 Palestinians as part of a of family unification program. All other refugees will be compensated.

The agreement will include formal guarantees by the US, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, who will create a joint commission to ensure proper implementation on both sides.

The agreement will be part of a larger peace agreement with all Arab states.

Now, 34% of Israelis (25% and 69% of Arabs) support this, and 34% of Palestinians (29% in the West Bank, 42% in Gaza) do. Those numbers aren’t great, but they don’t scream “this is impossible”. They scream “ok this is going to be hard but let’s try”.

But what makes this even better is the survey added one-sided and paired incentives. One-sided incentives are offered to one group (Israeli Jews and Palestinians, which I believe includes Israeli Arabs). The best performing one sided incentive, Israel releasing all Palestinian prisoners after the agreement is implemented, seems rather unfeasible. (Indeed, for Israeli Jews, even when paired with an incentive, it gets support to drop to just 16%)

But the second-best performing one, which gets almost 2/3rds of Palestinians to support a two-state solution?

Let Palestinians keep working in Israel. I’m not an expert on Israeli geopolitics, but given that per the wording it’s already happening it doesn’t seem terribly unfeasible.

For Israel, basically anything gets majority support. Palestine combating incitement! Israeli factories still being allowed to operate in Palestine! Security forces commit to cooperating! The best performing and probably easiest one is combating incitement.

They tested paired incentives but not the specific combination of combating incitement and Palestinian workers keeping their jobs, but it doesn’t seem terribly unlikely some sort of cobbled-together deal along those lines could gain majority support. And even if it doesn’t, sometimes leaders make unpopular decisions.

Buddy ask the average White American how they feel about gay and trans people, since we're taking the census and the piss. Hell, look at the people in charge currently pushing anti trans and anti queer legislation and tell me how they identify. Look at the racial demographics of our last election and tell me who you think is out here going rah rah for the gays and theys.

The audacity to suggest that my entire community is homophobic (I.e., you spend zero time around Black queer and trans folk) but somehow yours is worthy of a closer, more nuanced look... Really some OG white supremacy, actually! "Those savages, they don't understand things like gender and sexuality, they're just angry uncultured brutes!" -mentality shared between 1700s race scientists and 2026 You, apparently.

They said Cass Elliot died choking on a ham sandwich. That lie spread around the world, and the truth couldn’t catch up for decades.

On July 29, 1974, in London, Cass Elliot—"Mama Cass" to millions—was found dead in a borrowed flat. She was only 32 years old. She had just finished two weeks of sold-out shows at the London Palladium, a career milestone most singers only dream of. A friend found her in bed, looking peaceful. A half-eaten sandwich sat on a nearby nightstand.

By the next morning, the rumor was everywhere. But it wasn't true. The coroner confirmed the cause immediately: heart failure. There was no choking and no food involved. The sandwich was irrelevant, but the story was too "perfect" for a cruel world to let go. It became a punchline that a woman of her size wasn't allowed to escape, even in death. For forty years, late-night comedians made jokes and newspapers repeated the myth without checking. It became "common knowledge" because, apparently, if you are a woman who doesn't fit the mold, the world will find a way to make you the joke.

Before the lie and the tragedy, Ellen Naomi Cohen was a force of nature. Born in Baltimore, she was smart, magnetic, and gifted. By the 1960s, she was the anchor of The Mamas & The Papas. Think of "California Dreamin'." That warm, iconic harmony wraps around you like summer, but Cass’s voice is what holds it together. It was rich, pure, and unmistakable. Musicians knew that when Cass sang, you stopped to listen.

Yet, the industry didn’t know how to handle her. She was brilliant, but she wasn't thin. Executives told her to lose weight to be a star; TV producers worried her appearance would be a "distraction." While male rock stars could be disheveled or overweight and be called "authentic," Cass was constantly scrutinized. She faced fat jokes on talk shows and was expected to laugh along.

Cass did what many women feel forced to do: she tried to "fix" herself. She endured years of crash diets and extreme weight loss cycles. She would lose 50 pounds, then gain it back, caught in a loop because the industry’s hunger for thinness was bottomless. Offstage, she was a dedicated single mother to her daughter, Owen, and a famously generous friend. She was "Mama Cass" because she took care of everyone. But the world still wouldn't let her be great without an asterisk. Even at the height of her solo success with "Dream a Little Dream of Me," reviews prioritized her dress size over her talent.

When her heart finally stopped at 32, the autopsy revealed heart muscle damage (myocardial degeneration). This is often linked to the physical strain of extreme yo-yo dieting and malnutrition—the very "solutions" the world demanded of her. The industry that told her she needed to change is likely what killed her. And when she died, the world turned that tragedy into a joke about a sandwich.

Her daughter, Owen, now 57, has spent her life defending her mother’s memory. She once noted that perhaps if the world had just let her mother be, her heart wouldn't have been under such impossible strain. We are still doing this today—reducing women to their measurements and making thinness a prerequisite for respect. But Cass Elliot’s voice is still here. It’s in the coffee shops, the movies, and the airwaves.

For my whole life, my mind has been my greatest asset. So when it feels like my mind is progressively malfunctioning, it is an absolutely horrifying thing.

It is scary, for someone who has always excelled at languages, to have a hard time getting everyday words out.

It is scary, for someone who has an eidetic memory, to not be able to remember the simplest things.

Just look at how it's described in 2026 (now), in 2016, in 2006 and in 2004 (below the cut).

one of said sources, Rashid Khalidi, is a former PLO spokesperson. like, actively produced propaganda in an official capacity for the PLO.

another of the sources claims that “as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible” was a position that “enjoyed the unanimous support of Zionists of all inclinations” (emphasis my own), which is just… an utterly batshit and easily-disproven statement for anyone who has ever met a Zionist (or for that matter, a Jew) or read the writings of the early Zionists.

(Yoinked this from LinkedIn, genuinely interested in seeing how responses align with demographics) (so far it’s those of us over 35 being indignant but I wanna see how those fully plays out) (it’s cultural and technological history/memory, bruh)