The first link to Khalidi’s “advocacy of a two-state solution” actually nowhere includes “advocacy of a two-state solution.” He calls it “universally applauded” before proceeding to point out that it is “deeply flawed,” careful to never actually throw his own support behind the idea.

In fact this link is full of misleading statements about the history of Israel such as crying out about the “uprooting the world’s oldest and most secure Jewish communities, which had found in the Arab lands a tolerance that, albeit imperfect...” He’s proud of the way those Jews were persecuted in Arab lands but is in a fit about the rights of Israel’s Arab citizens, who enjoy more rights and more security than Jews in Arab countries ever did? Here’s a bit of much needed accuracy on this topic: http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/jewref.html

Referring to the Jewish question post World War II, Khalidi writes, “It is even more ironic that the former should have been resolved not where it arose in its most acute form, in the West, or at the West’s expense, but rather in Palestine...” He’s still suggesting that the creation of Israel was a mistake.

The final sentence reads, “These strengths must be deployed not just for a defensive steadfastness but for a positive goal of liberation, peace and justice, one that can change the terms of the conflict and the way it is understood, and win over enough of their opponents and enough of the outside world to change the unfavorable balance of forces that today keeps them scattered, dispersed, confined and imprisoned sixty years after the destruction of Arab Palestine.”

Does he mention a “two-state solution”?

No. He writes “liberation.”

Now where have we heard that word before?