PA holds olive branch in one hand, stone in the other

You have it absolutely correct. A few points, however-the treaties and conventions you mention were incorporated into the UN Charter, which when ratified by the US became the Supreme Law of the Land (US) by way of Article 6 section 2. Never having been abrogated that part of the UN Charter is the international Law as it relates to Israel (If the Persians can change the name of their land to Iran, then the REAL Palestinians (the jews of Mandatory Palestine ( the British coined the name-Read your history not Arab/Arafat propaganda}) can change the name of theirs to Israel. Under the terms of the Treaty and its iterations, Jew have the right to settle anywhere between the Mediterranean Sea and Jordon River. Therefore, these settlements are not illegal under international law. They may not be desirable, but they are legal. Furthermore, the Treaty prohibits transfer of any of the land from the mandate. Now if the Israelis wish to give up their land, that is their right, not Obama's.

Just as Israelis and the rest of humanity do, Palestinians have human rights. That's all we need to know. Now, let the serious negotiations begin. Since Israel is the big elephant in the region of lilliputian entities, it is their turn to prove that they are interested in achieving a just peace for all people in the region. Note it is about more than meeting the entitlement needs of a single people. Americans will be watching and we the American people will ultimately decide who deserves our support. The current Israeli government hasn't fooled us. We Americans are not interested in dragging a millstone around. Americans want real progress and a commitment to honest and serious negotiation. When will Israelis realize that they are loosing in the court of world opinion. Do something constructive for a change.

SDHD: "Regarding the Jewish population, you claim that only 10,000 Jews lived in E. Jerusalem, gaza and the West Bank?" The total Jewish population in the territory that was assigned to the "Arab state" was no more than 10,000. SDHD: "Where is your information from? Electronicintifada.com?" It comes from the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine. http://www.mideastweb.org/unscop1947.htm SDHD: "Also, you`re still a dunce about Jewish rights. You say they applied to the Mandate and not Israel?" The rights of individual Jews to settle in "Palestine" does not translate into a right for the "Jewish Nation" to declare a "Jewish state". The latter right derives entirely from Res181, not from anything that came before it. After all this back'n'forth, and you **still** don't understand what I am saying! Unreal....

TA: "see,it worked..you are an atheist." No, actually, it didn't work. Nowhere did I say that I deny the existence of god, and therefore this statement "you are an atheist" is completely unfounded. Mind you, it is often very difficult for True Believers (especially the dim ones) to grasp the difference between an "atheist" and an "agnostic". Report card for TA: D+ Must Do Better. Care to try again, sonny? After all, you only way forward for you is "up".

I can show you documents too, putz. No more than 550,000 Arabs were displaced, and most of them never even saw an Israeli soldier. They got out of the way of a war that THEY started, and they did so at the request of the 7 Arab armies Israel was fighting. Regarding the Jewish population, you claim that only 10,000 Jews lived in E. Jerusalem, gaza and the West Bank? Again, you're full of crap. Where is your information from? Electronicintifada.com? Also, you're still a dunce about Jewish rights. You say they applied to the Mandate and not Israel? They applied to the PEOPLE of a region which had a transfer of government to the locals -- which is what the Mandate was for -- to administer for a brief period, then transfer autonomy. Same people. Same region. Same rights. Same moron refuting this concept.

I can show you documents too, putz. No more than 550,000 Arabs were displaced, and most of them never even saw an Israeli soldier. They got out of the way of a war that THEY started, and they did so at the request of the 7 Arab armies Israel was fighting. Regarding the Jewish population, you claim that only 10,000 Jews lived in E. Jerusalem, gaza and the West Bank? Again, you're full of crap. Where is your information from? Electronicintifada.com? Also, you're still a dunce about Jewish rights. You say they applied to the Mandate and not Israel? They applied to the PEOPLE of a region which had a transfer of government to the locals -- which is what the Mandate was for -- to administer for a brief period, then transfer autonomy. Same people. Same region. Same rights. Same moron refuting this concept.

throwing the sprat to catch a mackerel. see,it worked..you are an atheist. nought wrong with that,at least one out of three not bad going ha?

SDHD: "Nonsense. No more than 500,000 Arabs... and most of them LEFT." Over 700,000 Arabs were forced to flee from the advancing Israeli forces, SDHD. SDHD: "Try 120,000" The pre-1947 Jewish population in the territory assigned to the "Arab state" was no more than 10,000. I'm sorry if that offends your pre-conceptions, but it is nonetheless true. 1) There was a "Palestine". 2) There was an Arab popln that was spread throughout "Palestine". 3) There was also a Jewish popln that was highly concentrated into discrete settlements inside "Palestine". The committee that drew up the Partition Plan were able to include ALL those Jewish settlements inside the "Jewish state", and so what remained outside it (i.e. in the "Arab state") amounted to no more than 10,000. I can show you the documents if you want.

I was born into a family that was nominally Presbyterian, but I have never once worshipped within a Presbyterian church. Indeed, I have never once worshipped within ANY church, any synagogue, any mosque nor, indeed, within ANY place of worship. The only times I have ever been inside any place of worship has been in connection with births, marriages, or deaths, and I am not about to change my spots now. Yeah, I know, how heathen of me....

I wasn't the one who mentioned islam,you did. i also read you are an atheist. so,what's the problem,ashamed of being a muslim hiding it? or are a christian hiding it? whaat???whaat?i bet it is the muslim part that gets your goat..admit it,you said it,not i ta ta

SDHD: "There is continuity of the territory in question." SDHD: "There is continuity among the involved players." SDHD: "There is continuity of the politics." You fall down in that last line, because in vhardman's list of treaties it is quite clear that all legal and legislative power within that territory resides ENTIRELY with the Mandatory. So you have to explain how you get from *there* (the Mandatory is supreme) to *here* (the Jews are supreme). You still have not explained that step, and I will point out **AGAIN** that if you rely upon vhardman's list of treaties then you can't get from *there* to *here*. You are missing out a step - a necessary step - and you and I both know why you can not stand up and acknowledge what that step is.

I'll make it even more brief for you, dimwit... Continuity. There is continuity of the territory in question. There is continuity among the involved players. There is continuity of the politics. And, there is continuity of the rights from pre-Israel to post Israel territory. Israel doesn't have to be mentioned prior to its existence for the continuity of the espoused rights to be adopted and maintained, nimrod.

TA: "I read some where that you were a Jew." You read wrong. Neither Jew nor Muslim. TA: "Have my eyes deceived me,or did I need BINOCULARS to decipher what I read?" That I can't answer, because I have no idea what you are babbling bout. TA: "Just curious..." Why, exactly?

SDHD: "Johnboy can`t imagine rights for a state being derived from agreements drafted before the existence of that state because the state isn`t mentioned in the agreements." There are, indeed, rights enshrined in those agreements, SDHD, and they amount to this: Jewish INDIVIDUALS have a right to come to "Palestine" and hence become "citizens of Palestine" i.e. they have a right to become a part of the body politic of Palestine. Now, SDHD, explain to me how you go from that to a "Jewish state"??? Because that requires a FUNDAMENTAL step-up i.e. from the right of Jews to become a part of the body politic to a right for Jews to USURP that body politic. I am saying that it is impossible to get from (A) to (B) using only the list of agreements that victor supplied. And you have done nothing to demonstrate otherwise, since ALL you have contributed is... polemic. Nothing more, just.... polemic.

"But let`s keep this in perspective: more than 700,000 ethnic Arabs were cleansed from the "Jewish state" 1947-49, while less than 10,000 ethnic Jews were cleansed from the "Arab state" 1947-49." Try roughly 500,000 Arabs... most of them left on their own to get out of the way of a war they launched. Then try tens of thousands of Jews. And this is the bullshit excuse you come up with to rationalize cleansing Jews out of the territories again? Or to deny their right to reclaim and develop their lands after only being absent for 19 years? Racist twit.

"700,000 ethnic Arabs were cleansed from the "Jewish state"" Nonsense. No more than 500,000 Arabs... and most of them LEFT. "while less than 10,000 ethnic Jews were cleansed from the "Arab state" 1947-49." Try 120,000. And this is the excuse you try to come up with to justify removing 500,000 Jews from their homes 60 years later, birdbrain?

Johnboy can't imagine rights for a state being derived from agreements drafted before the existence of that state because the state isn't mentioned in the agreements. It's even more entertaining to watch this imbecile twist himself into semantic pretzels given that those documents specifically deal with the region of Israel as well. He's such a twit. Johnboy, vhardman says THOSE RIgHTS are CONTAINED in those documents, not that Israel is contained in those documents. You think the rights for a Jewish homeland aren't contained therein? Stupid literalist.

SDHD: "Except, those documents all exist " Indeed they do. SDHD: "and so does the Jewish state," Indeed it does. SDHD: "with its foundation laid, in part, within those documents." Hahahahahahahahah!!!! I do love the use of weasel-words, SDHD. You know: "in part" The problem that you have is that you can't get your two "parts" to join together **WITHOUT** the "part" that lies between them. You know, The Plan That Must Not Be Mentioned. You simply can not get from your beginning to your desired end without going thru that middle, and you don't **want** to do that because you know the consequence of acknowledging that Plan of Partition. So, come on, smart-arse; join those dots for me WITHOUT that line going through Res 181. Ben Gurion couldn't do it but, then again, he had a brain so he understood the problem. But you? You, not so much with the brains....

"Err, so sorry, but all **I** did was respond to vhardman`s list of int`l agreements, none of which make any mention of either "Israel" nor the "Jewish State"." Except, those documents all exist and so does the Jewish state, with its foundation laid, in part, within those documents. But, you're a literalist putz when it comes to issues like that. Too bad you are more liberal witih your interpretations whenever it suits you.

Whether Sykes & Picot or even Balfour had no right mattered not.Israel was/is Jewish and those bodies whether they presented the agreement who cares. Eventually Israel was going to be REBORN inspite of whoever.You accept it or not who the blazes cares. Sour grapes perhaps?Victor is right and has been throughout his posts(I notied)Brief,consistent and to the POINT.

I read some where that you were a Jew. Have my eyes deceived me,or did I need BINOCULARS to decipher what I read? Just curious...

By all means take the US to court! But here Zion, stuck to the fact please satisfy yourself with whinig as you are used YOU ARE THE DEFENDANT, AND THE ARGUMENT they do it too! Case closed.

HP: "Jonnyboy is still mistranslating historical documents but that,s par for the course as there,s still no Palestine state that he can call his own and there never will be one ,it,s to late as time has moved on since May 1948,sorry for you?" Err, so sorry, but all **I** did was respond to vhardman's list of int'l agreements, none of which make any mention of either "Israel" nor the "Jewish State". Yet victor insists that those agreements are the foundation stones for the "state of Israel" as the "Jewish state". I merely pointed out that victor was attempting to square a circle - no more, no less. I certainly was not arguing that any of those agreements have any relevence today. You thought that I was? How odd. Maybe you simply weren't paying attention...

Jonnyboy is still mistranslating historical documents but that,s par for the course as there,s still no Palestine state that he can call his own and there never will be one ,it,s to late as time has moved on since May 1948,sorry for you?

....except only one of us notices it.... JB: "Israel is not mentioned in the Balfour Declaration, nor is `a Jewish state`." SDHD: "Extrapolate, birdbrain." Extrapolate from what, SDHD? From a non-existent right that was never granted? How wonderfully zionist of you.... SDHD: "Where does any law state that gaza and the West Bank should be ethnically cleansed of Jews to suit your racist biases?" According to the Partition Plan there was to have been no ethnic cleansing of any citizens of Palestine from either the "Jewish state" nor the "Arab state" - Chapter 3 (1), if you want to look it up. But let's keep this in perspective: more than 700,000 ethnic Arabs were cleansed from the "Jewish state" 1947-49, while less than 10,000 ethnic Jews were cleansed from the "Arab state" 1947-49. But I'm sure that such a comparison has no place in your "racist bias", which is why you can rant and rave while being completely oblivious to the actual numbers involved.

holds an olive branch behind it's back and waves an automatic rifle in front. No contest.

"Balfour had no right to give anything to anybody and neither did any treaty signed by the US. And none of the things you have ever cited has a single word allowing you to uproot and displace anybody, in any way." Meanwhile, you believe in the right to uproot and displace Jews to make ethnically pure Arab territories.

"Israel is not mentioned in the Balfour Declaration, nor is `a Jewish state`." Extrapolate, birdbrain. Where does any law state that gaza and the West Bank should be ethnically cleansed of Jews to suit your racist biases?

vh: "israels rights are contained in the balfour declaration" Israel is not mentioned in the Balfour Declaration, nor is 'a Jewish state'. vh: "the san remo convention" See above. vh: "and the 1922 mandate" See above. vh: "the anglo -american convention 1924," See above. vh: "the un charter 1945" See above. vh: "the vienna convention on treaties 1968" See above. vh: "there are no treaties which give arabs any rights except in arab mandated territories !!" Two points to make about that sentence: 1) This is, and never has been, a "jewish mandated territory" 2) The treaties that Victor mentions gave Jews no rights other than that of being able to come to Palestine to BECOME Palestinians "as of right and not on the sufferance" (Churchill White Paper 1922).

I just can't believe two smart reporters like Amos Jarel and Avi Issacharoff are swallowing such Israeli propaganda but I guess it isn't unlike others I know who have missed the truth. Of course, in a way they are in good company as Alison Weir who founded If American Knew discovered she almost missed it also. And it wasn't until she looked deeper did she discover it. (see URL) I wish Tom Friedman and others at New York Times would get with it as they are repeatedly a mouthpiece for the Israeli establishment. ( http://www.ifamericansknew.org/media/ap-report.html) Nevertheless, Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff should keep before them Israel's chronic history of rejecting peace proposals as you indicated out and I have enclosed that list below for them & others. Indeed, I am sooo sick of Israeli officials hijacking peace I want this conflict to be taken out of their hands & sent back to the UN where it belongs... Dutch P.S.Israel's 40 yrs of rejecting or undermining peace.... The Rogers Plan (1969) ; The Scranton Mission on behalf of Nixon (1970) ; The Sadat land for peace and mutual recognition proposal (1971); The Carter call for a Geneva Conference (1977); The Saudi King Fahd's off er (1981); The Reagan Plan (1982); The Shulta Plan (1988); The Baker Plan (1989); A continuation of the Taba negotiat- ions (2001); The Saudi Peace Proposal on behalf of the Arab League (2001); The 1993 Oslo Accord: The 22 Arab comprehensive peace initiative, based on the Syrian initiative (2002) ; and Syria's own peace initiative (2003); The Roadmap to peace by the US & Quartet (2004) which was later anesthesized by the evil doers in Israel to continue expanding the illegal settlements....

"The PA has sought peace and been categorically rejected." Israel allowed the PLO into the region. Israel allowed them to form a government. Israel provided them with zones, to the lion's share of their population to be self-administered with no Israeli presence. Israel offered 100% of gaza, 94% of the West Bank, a 3% equivalent of the West Bank in a swap from Israel, and a capitol in E. Jerusalem. The Palestinians rejected that. You're an ass.

You ask to be corrected: "In order to make a Palestinian State, the land must... comprise land that was won in 1967". Actually - any land not designated for 'Israel' in the 1947 Parition Plan (on which Israel's Declaration was, and still is, based) is occupied Palestinian land. Until a peace treaty is agreed and new borders drawn up. "No Jews are welcome there" Actually, no Arabs are welcome in Israel. The PA has offered Palestinian citizenship to any settlers who choose to remain. "Was not the Palestinian Mandate comprised of both Israel and Jordan?" No. "Was not Gaza Egyptian?" No. "but I do not understand why Israel is the sole authority that has to create this state from their land." Their land being that allocated under the Parition Plan. "Nor do I understand why Israel can not declare ancient sites... Jewish Heritage sites?" Question back - Why are there 137 religious sites officially recognised by Israel - none of which are Christian or Muslim?

The Palestinians conducted negotiations while fomenting violence as a pressuring tactic. It backfired becuase the violence they fomented (suicide bombings) disgusted the rest of the world. They are using the same tactics but scaling down the violence to a simmer instead of a boil.

I've interviewed a large number of Arabs of the years and the overwhelming (and depressing) consensus has been that most (!) openly felt that if they could they'd like to have (and not just) the middle east free of all jews. The genocidal impulse was clear and often shared among the generations. The most substantive complaint I've encountered about the Shoah was that it was incomplete. The corruption of their countries and the problems of their daily lives seemed--- quite in contrast to what we'd expect-- of less concern then the dream of a world without Jews.. The hate runs deep and most believe old.. some consider it dating to days of Muhammad.. On the one side National Socialists and on the other Islamists united in their will for a "final solution" to what they see as the "Jewish problem".

Even if the jews grant a 1'1 land swap all of east jerusalem an internationalized holy sites and a humanitarian retun 15000/year for fifty years the palestinians will militirize the palestinian state and the arabs will repudiate everything . Jstreet will be happy but not iran and alqeida or the islamic world califate idealogues.More the embittered jewish whole of israel movement will be outraged and the arabs sunni and shia will have nuclear weaponry. A new king will arise in he usa who loves the strong and is in contempt of the weak.

And all the more reason to take this conflict out of Israeli and Americans hands. This is what people are proposing now given Israel's chronc history of avoidance and undermining and the US chronic failure to hold Israel's feet to the fire. Trust me, this dysfunctional relationship will end as people are committed to its end. And although it is no small thing it is a necessary step at this point in time for sake of the Palestinian people and those in the region....Dutch P.S. Israel's 40 years of rejecting & undermining peace proposals P.S. Israel's 40 years of rejecting & undermining peace proposals The Rogers Plan (1969); The Scranton Mission on behalf of Presid- ent Nixon (1970) ;The Sadat land for peace and mutual recognition proposal (1971); Carter's call for a Geneva International Conference (1971); The Saudi King Fahd's offer (1981); The Reagan Plan (1982); The Shultz Plan (1988) ; The Baker Plan (1989); A continuation of the Taba negotiations (2001); The Daudi peace proposal on behalf of the Arab League (2001); The unofficial Geneva Peace Initiative (2003); The 1993 Oslo Occord; 22 Arab state comprhensive initiative based on the Syrian initiative (2002); Syrian own peace initiative (2003) The Roadmap to peace by the US and Quartet (2004) which the evil doers in Israel once again undermined and rejected....

using from your torah guys a rock vs machine guns and uzi's

If negociations fails again then Pres. Abbas can declare Unilateral Independance. If this fail, then he should dismantle the P A and pass everything to the OCCUPYING POWER, and ask for a Bi National State, where everybody have the same right as citizens.

so you want us jews and israelis to leave? we have no claim here? almost like you yanks have no claim to texas, california or new york... all stolen from the indians or mexicans. you should give it back. does my comment sound ridiculous? like all of your comments sound... get off your high horse.

Muslims understand the language of force well!The history confirms this

Compare Pals and Nazis is obscene? No, the Pals axis with the Nazis & then Holocaust denial was obscene. Have you ever heard of the alliance between the Grand Mufti & Hitler? No? Then you need to do some studying.

The so-called palestinians NEVER had dominion over the land of Israel so their claims to this land are 100% bogus. This land was Jewish centuries before advent of islam. Jerusalem is City of David - not City of mohammed. When under Jordanian control, not a single muslim leader deamed Jerusalem important enough to visit. The koran establishes islmaic custom to claim that which is most important to the enemy thus their claims to Jerusalem & all our holy sites. Truth must be told.

Israels only means of survival is to have power. 6-8 million jews in israel 8 million more in the world struggling for survival against 1.2 billion muslims who are against Israel and the jews having their little bit of holy land to call their own. Muslims do nothing to better the world. They only create chaos. The day tel aviv is attacked by leb or syria is the day beirut and damascus will cease to exist

Just wondering what the prayers to allah were that made muslim worshippers throw rocks at jewish worshippers at their holy of holy site. I go to shul and come out thinking peaceful thoughts

Please correct me if I am wrong. In order to make a Palestinian State, the land must be contiguous and comprise land that was won in 1967. No Jews are welcome there and in order for this to be acceptable Arabs of Palestinian descent are allowed to move into what will then be left of Israel. This seems kind of hard to swallow. Why only land Israel won? What about Jordan and Egypt? Was not the Palestinian Mandate comprised of both Israel and Jordan? Was not Gaza Egyptian? I'm all for a two state solution, but I do not understand why Israel is the sole authority that has to create this state from their land. Nor do I understand why Israel can not declare ancient sites of major historic importance Jewish Heritage sites? I do not believe Israel is asking the mosques be removed but rather protected by this status. If UNESCO agrees with Israel's declaration both Jewish and Arab interests are served. What is wrong with that?

they had as much right after conquering the ottoman empire as any other colonial gift from britain like the usa and canada !

It seems that any talk of a peace process brings the worst out of them. Then they wont go into negotiations without first getting everything they want without negotiations. It's a tragic and quite redundant/repetitive.

We used to know all about this under the British Empire. I'm sure if you look through newspapers from our colonialist era you could find similar articles. "Why, oh why, can't the natives just behave themselves? How dare they throw stones at us? Don't they know that if they keep peaceful and well-behaved, we may give them freedom in 25 years or so, if we feel like it? It's lucky we're so civilized and restrained ourselves, with our Judaeo-Chhristian morals, otherwise a lot of the natives could have been hurt. It just goes to show that we deserve to be ruling them.'

a machine gun in the other.Now which is more lethal,stone or machine guns?

... can be used for beating, in the wrong hands... but I guess that a fairy-wand would be even more ineffective...

As long as there is a power imbalance between the Palestinians and the Isralis, the peace talks are futile. Abbas is playing it right in accepting indirect talks which might take ages. Israel continues its land grab policies until there is no other alternative but a binational state which by the way many Palestinians prefer. Meanwhile, Netanyahu is trying to flare up a new intifada but the Palestinians are now much wiser by not obliging. there will be no intifada the way Isreal wants it. So eat your hearts out Mr. Netanyahu et al, you'll have to pay your dues, soon.

... rather than Palestinian, provocation... ... who can honestly doubt this?!

"PA holds olive branch in one hand, stone in the other" Is this any different from what the US keeps saying that they prefer negociated solution with Iran but that "all options are on the table, including the military option"? We live in a small village, and people learn from each other - the good, the bad and the ugly! It's also similar to the American foreign policy term "The stick and the carrot".

Sorry, correction: The left holds a Uzi. The other hand forces Palestinians to stand in font of the Merakava as live protection.

Sykes and Picot did not ever own the Middle East. They were just two colonialist bureaucrats. Balfour had no right to give anything to anybody and neither did any treaty signed by the US. And none of the things you have ever cited has a single word allowing you to uproot and displace anybody, in any way.

So what's the difference, except in the power of the weapon? Let us Israelis exchange the gag for an olive branch at least. Then at least there'll be a point of departure and a tiny patch of common ground. Why should even that be too much to ask of ourselves?

israel is holding M16 in one hand and another M16 in the other ... so we the victims are blamed while the POOR israel is crying !!! what a word full of justice !!!

Obvioulsly Israel did not provoke Nazi Germany! Israel did not yet exist at that time!

israels rights are contained in the balfour declaration the san remo convention and the 1922 mandate the anglo -american convention 1924, the un charter 1945 the vienna convention on treaties 1968. there are no treaties which give arabs any rights except in arab mandated territories !!

It's interesting that in the last two sentences you switch from provoke to compel. Is Israel's conduct provoking people to throw rocks?

voluntary legal obligations, offering at best a tiny fraction of the territories it has illegally acquired in order to keep the bulk of what it has illegally acquired. The Palestinians have the stones left of their destroyed homes and villages, home made rockets and antiquated small arms. Israel has some of the most sophisticated military equipment in the world and is backed by the world's remaining super power. It completely dominates the airspace, territorial waters and boundaries (incl those with Egypt, under the 2005 agreement) Provocation? Who has for 62 years been wiping who off the map? http://tinyurl.com/y8ewves/myths-mis-conceptions-propaganda/#who-is-being-wiped-off-the-map Who refuses to recognize International Law? http://tinyurl.com/y8ewves/myths-mis-conceptions-propaganda/#UN-biased Who has, even before 14th May, prevented there being a Sovereign Palestinian state? http://wp.me/pDB7k-jA Who created Palestine refugees and then refused RoR? http://wp.me/pDB7k-jS

If the Palestinian Authority exploits attention directed to negotiations as a PR jumping off point for riots Israel cannot be to blame, regardless as to whether international voices automatically view Palestinians inflicting violence on Israeli citizens as a sign that Israel must have acted criminally or immorally to provoke them. Israel did not provoke Nazi Germany. Israel is not compelling kids to hurl rocks over the Western Wall plaza.

Israel mocked Mahmoud Abbas credibility?s in every chance it got. It will be an addition power to the Muslim?s and the Jew?s extremist if the indirect negotiating fails. The agony is that the extremists on both isles do not want peace and they rather live in conflict because they believe they are the closest to God. These extremists are missing the conscious link in their DNA.

land confiscation, sanctions and expanding settlements just to name a few. Israel doesn't even bother to extend an olive branch or maybe I missed something Lieberman/Netanyahoo said or offered to the contrary? Let's get serious, let the Palestinians have their stones? Can we agree on that? Now as for negotiations, who is kidding who, it will be a dark day when Israel is brought to the negotiating table. Netanyahoo came to this kicking and screaming and because he was forced into it by the Americans - no surprise he has been igniting the situation with one provocation after another - like there is any shortage of those - but he can announce all he wants regarding Hebron as being part of "Jewish heritage" places (something ridiculous to that effect) but when you start pouring gasoline in Jerusalem - working towards inflaming that hot button issue with provocative actions - moving settlers there or worse, as surely he knows what happened back in 1996 when he ignited the riots that left hundreds dead in a few days when he started to dig under the Al-Aqsa mosque and I'm sure he knows what followed when Sharon made his infamous march towards the mosque - and so we are left with a repeat of a bad B movie. Here we go again, Zionists don't want to negotiate, watch them use the nuclear option - take provocative actions in Jerusalem. A cursed city if there ever was one.

recognize jewish state or go back to the desert or jordan.

The PA has sought peace and been categorically rejected. The stone-throwers are people frustrated by the realization that Abbas cannot - no one can - achieve a Palestinian state. Israel has managed to prevent any serious negotiations and provoke a Third Infitada. And now Issacharoff wants to blame the PA. Has not the PA essentially upheld it's end of the bargain? Has it not stopped terrorist attacks against Israel from the West Bank? Has it not tried to negotiation in good faith? Who has stonewalled any negotiation? Which party allows the unrestricted attacks upon the other side by it's settlers? Which nation continues to allow it's settlers to destroy the orchards of the other side? Which nation uses a 'separation fence' to separate the farmers of the other side from their fields? The old excuse was that Arafat didn't want peace. The new excuse is that the PA hasn't tried. Twaddle. The truth is that Israel is not honest enough to be honest about it's self.