Netanyahu to tout 10-month settlement freeze, save East Jerusalem

Especially if they settle in "non-other" state sovereign land and do not affect Palestinian private property. Private property should not be violated unless for military purposes. No country has the right to enforce citzens of its own county to settle in conquered land from another country. This is not the case with Israeli settlements in the West Bank . They are right in their place, and will stay there 'till negotiations will produce another political settlement. They might be removed, they might become Palestinian citzenes or might be annexed legally to Israel. Only negotitiations will decide their fate. Before negotiations....Palestinian sovereignty does not exist. Nothing was robbed to them.

Hamas declared a cease fire from May 2008, until it ended in November. This was a cease fire, except in their minds it did not include about 85 rockets and mortars fired over the fence. At least Israel is declaring up front the exception.

It sounds like Haaretz censors are allowing only those posting their venom against Bibi. Well Mr. Censor, Bibi will not be elected by the Jew haters who seek to destroy the Jews. Israelis alone elect their leaders not the Haaretz talkback crowd who hate Jews with a passion. Guess what Jewish Haaretz censors, you too will be targeted if the Jew Haters on Haaretz talkback get their way-One State Judenrein. This business about a settlement freeze to resume negotiations is just a ruse. There will never be negotiations because The Palestinians want a One State solution-end of story. This State will be devoid of Jews. Swiss Dino, Micheal, Johnboy and the other 24 carat Jew Haters on Haaretz may fool naive Israelis who don't recognize anti-semitism but not those Jews in the Diaspora who know their deceit and deception. We live with it every day.

A proposed "freeze" is cynical double talk especially when East Jerusalem is excluded. Many such promises have been made in the past and none have been honored. It all adds to Palestinian frustrations.

"Can Bibi really be so foolish??" To stop illegal behaviour? I hope so. " If Abbas wants a freeze on settlements, let him come to the negotiating table and make an offer. " The Palestinians have nothing of Israel's to offer. "Otherwise, what is there to talk about???" Israel's illegal activities are illegal, talks or no talks.

"do tell by which code of law you deem jewish settlement under the 1920 treaty of san remo illegal/1922 mandate ?" Treaties? Who with? "how israels present existence [ like all other mandated territories]can be seperated from those treaties.." They weren't treaties. " and under which further treaty the towns and villages have become illegal by the act of jewish settlement .?" They're illegal under the Geneva Conventions and the laws of Sovereignty. The territory is not Sovereign Israeli territory, it was never legally annexed.

The simple fact is that if Israel wanted a settlement freeze, Israel would have chosen Labor and Meretz to govern. However, Labor and Meretz (the two most settlement hating parties) were trounced. Israel soundly rejected settlement freezes. As does Likud ideology. Bibi has no mandate for any settlement freeze whatsoever. Even for a single day.

Nobody can solve the problem more than the Israelis and the Palestinians themselves,they have tothink of possible peace.Neither Condy,norHillary can force opinions on both parties,unless the're willing,hopefully they will be fare and come to their senses.people ..and the whole world is tired of thi problem.

Convincing me or convincing Obama is a wasted effort. The PLO is the negotiator for the Palestinians. They are the ones needing convincing. I'm not the one worried about the "demographic bomb" that has the potential to have more then 50% disenfranchised and looking for civil and equal rights in a single state. I'm not the one working furiously to intermix and intertwine two separate populations so two states becomes impossible. I've been though and seen the US' civil right struggle. It wasn't always pretty. If you want the one state, you'll get that issue. If you want two states, the PLO needs to be convinced to come and negotiate. The US can help, but if you don't want the help, you'll get the one-state by default. Once two-states becomes impossible, enjoy the ride.

If there is no freeze,no use of negotiations,no more land to negotiate about.all settelments must be removed,better yet,leave them for the returning palestinians,they need homes when they head back.

Mmm. First, I can't speak over Israelis because their opinions matter more than mine. With that said, is the Islamic Fundamental Ideology to be awarded with Holy Jerusalem? Not only Jerusalem, but the Eastern Part of Jerusalem which holds the Temple Mount, the sliver of land chosen by H-shem to build His temple? As a Jew, I will say that Jerusalem must never be divided. It is the holy of holy for the Jews. Palestinians just blow the significance of "Al Quds" out of proportion so that they have a reason to not accept peace with the Jews. I couldn't care less for the settlements in the West Bank. All peoples can worship in Jerusalem, but non-cowardice Jews will never relinquish control of Jerusalem for a fragile "peace." Never. A reality check for you.

What do you think is still holding our leaders back from annexing the West Bank - our historic national homeland, says you - and all its population, to our sovereign territory, 42 years after we captured them? For your information: 1- Our leaders themselves have admitted that the status of Jerusalem is subject to negotiations. Not so for Gush Dan. 2- Nobody is demanding us to "freeeze construction in Gush Dan". Do you know why? Because Gush Dan is in Israel. East-Jerusalem is not. Only fools believe that we can teach the rest of the world what international law is.

...B4 seen for example, this lady in LA is able to say with such confidence the Israeli Mindset. A Mindset that when scrutinized clearly is false. Why? Well to start, israelis are some of the most diverse people I know, and getting them to agree on anything is nearly impossible and to generalize the entire population of 6+ million peoples into such a general statement well that seems only a tad brash. Secondly, how many peace/left wing camps exist in Israel, and how many on hte Palestinian side? I can count at least 4 off hand for the Israeli side, yet I have never once seen a Palestinian left wing organization that is as far left as Peace Now and others. Thirdly, 1937, 1948, 1978 Khartoum 3 no's which surely put Natalie's Serpentlike spin into question, most notably, "Israel is always unwilling to share what they feel belongs to them. They are willing to share things which belongs to others" So natalie please reconcile your statements

Can Bibi really be so foolish?? If Abbas wants a freeze on settlements, let him come to the negotiating table and make an offer. Otherwise, what is there to talk about???

... is to leave it in the hands of its rightful owners, the Pals... ... all the intrusive Jewish "settlement" that is going on there now is self-defeating... ... it would create a bone-of-contention forever...

I don't particularly with anything you say there, except that I think Israel would be nuts to try to ressurrect the old Christian South Lebanon idea. Apart from anything else, I don't think the South Lebeanese Christians would trust Israel now. Anyway, I'm glad to see you're not trying to maintain the ludicrous fiction that the withdrawl from Gaza was a generous gift to the Palestinians from Israel.

...another flip flop...This guy doesn't feel peace in his heart or soul...his actions are all for political manuevability that results in nothing... Settlements are illegal..just sincerely stop construction and move towards peace.

Interesting theory. Logic tells somefolk that no matter which part they don`t freeze, it`s still illegal. So?????? Can't you live with it? I personally have no problem with it. Let's see what Obama says. That is indeed worrysome . Two options. He might accept Nataniahu's offer, or might reject it. I make a bet fo the first option. Nothing else is needed. WE have been announcing for months that this is the perfect partial solution. " Temporarly freezing", and the ball jumps to the palestinian courtyard.

What price Michael? Prices depend on what you get after paying it. Sharon goy away from Gaza becaue he believed that it is useless to be there. In order to cement the jewish state the best thing to do is to be as close as possible to the 67 borders. That does not mean stick to the 67 borders but as close as possible. At what a price Gaza and S Lebanon? Depends If shooting restarts maybe Israel should reconsider the option of a Christian buffer zone in south Lebanon. Gaza is neutralized anyway.

Would make more sense. We already have enough buildings from Rishon to Netanya, while there is plenty of empty land in the center of our historic national homeland in Judea and Samaria.

Israel is always unwilling to share what they feel belongs to them. They are willing to share things which belongs to others. The problem is that, once Israel is sharing something which belongs to others, then then think it belongs to them. Go back to step one and repeat endlessly. This is the philosophy behind settlement expansion and the growth of Israel. This is why there will never be a fair peace.

"abbas and olmert had negotiated for years without u.s. meddling." What a laugh! Yahoo's strategy is to do the same - for as many years as it takes to get rid of the Palestinians. That's exactly why Obama must get fully involved and impose a final deal.

"Get over it, the International community has already decided, that East Jerusalem would become the capital of an eventual Palestinian state, that is as certain as the Amen in the church. Never before has anyone put it so succintly or so directly! Three cheers for Swiss (Dino)!

vh: "and jb do tell us all whilst we stand with bated breath HOW the 1.2 millionarabs inside the 1949 armisitice lines are different??????" The arabs on the "Israeli" side of the Green Line were annexed along with the territory when Israel claimed both following the end of the 1948-49 war. Those arabs are therefore regarded by everyone as "Israelis", and that means that (a) they are not "stateless" and (b) they are not "protected persons". I shall now leave it to you to ponder How Very Different their status is to the stateless "protected persons" of Gaza and the West Bank. You know, a people who have lived now for 42 years under the belligerent occupation of a foreign power that is hell-bent on colonial expansionism at their expense. They live in a land of "occupiers" and "occupied", and the status of the former is very, very different to the status of the latter.

East Jerusalem is already lost! The 10 month settlement freeze can only mean that Netanyahu will not be ready to push more settlements till next September. Which means that September 2 will be the date for Cast Lead II. Seems to be a favorite day for starting wars. Operations will be from Jerusalem north toward Ramallah and East from Ariel to the Jordan River. Bets, anyone?

vh: "do tell by which code of law you deem jewish settlement under the 1920 treaty of san remo illegal/1922 mandate ?" JEWISH settlements? victor, the illegality of these colonies comes about because they are all 100% pure ISRAELI settlements. And it is quite clear that under international law it is illegal of an OCCUPYING POWER to colonize OCCUPIED TERRITORY. That this particularly nasty little occupying power carefully choices its colonists by means of a racist selection criteria is its problem, not mine. Because it is the CITIZENSHIP of these colonists that makes this entire enterprise illegal, victor, not their ETHNICITY. Therefore to question me on their ETHNICITY is called (and this isn't a legal term, victor) "A Red Herring".

instead of using long words of which clearly you have no understanding . do tell by which code of law you deem jewish settlement under the 1920 treaty of san remo illegal/1922 mandate ? how israels present existence [ like all other mandated territories]can be seperated from those treaties and under which further treaty the towns and villages have become illegal by the act of jewish settlement .?

and jb do tell us all whilst we stand with bated breath HOW the 1.2 millionarabs inside the 1949 armisitice lines are different??????

"Viper, want to learn a basic lesson in logic?" Yes please ".. a total freeze is a total freeze, and a partial freeze is a partial freeze." Ah, there's two types of freezes I see.. " If you freeze activity in the West Bank, you freeze activity in the West Bank. If you don`t freeze activity in Jerusalem, but you freeze activity in the West Bank -- guess what? You still freeze activity in the West Bank." I see. Interesting theory. Logic tells somefolk that no matter which part they don't freeze, it's still illegal.

there is no 'the territories', its Palestinians land and under international law illegaly occupied. wether you build a city of pure gold,a canal flowing with freshly sqeezed milk by 200 virgin maidens and hold hands and dancing around an apple tree,the fact still remains that it's illegaly occupied territory, regardless of how you 'develop' it.

Netenyahu really needs to get his head out of the sand. Offering a halt on plannig permission isnt enough, as he proposes this new scheme of his he knows full well that the thousand of permits already granted will continue even if this proposal is accept by the cabinet. As for jerusalem, No negotiations! East jerusalem belongs to the palestinians and is under illegal occupation. The palestinians can make a lot of concessions, but East Jerusalem is not one of them. If he wants to genuinly restart peace talks and avoid forcing a one state solution on the palestinians, then he knows he has to take his hands off EJ,theres no other way.

Ciipora, you forget that in the Olmert days Condy, the Bush emissary, was a much more frequent visitor here than Hillary is... (... and the one time that Hillary came, she put-her-foot-in-it...)

"Israel has demonstrated good faith on numerous occasions. Walking out of Gaza was a tremendous show of good faith. What did that bring?" You see SDHD this is a perfect example of how propaganda can ruin chances of peace. There are loads of Israelis and supporters of Israel who genuinely believe that Israel's withdrawal from Gaza was a unique act of generosity and the fact that the Pals did not react by throwing flowers shows they can't be trusted over any withdrawal from the West Bank. SDHD it's rubbish. Israel withdrew from Gaza, just as it withdrew from South Lebanon, because local resistance had made the price of staying there too high. In the case of Gaza, Sharon also hoped that by removing the few hundred settlers there, he would get US support for keeping hundreds of thousands of settlers in the WB. There was NO generoisity, NO good faith. So let's kill the myths and give real peace negotiations a chance.

vh: "where else in the world would a government interfere in the development of towns and villages for political reasons?" victor, the "settlements" were actually settled precisely for political reasons. After all, this is occupied territory, and so Israel has been PUTTING ITS OWN CITIZENS IN HARMS WAY by "settling" them in amongst a sullen and hostile popln. That is using YOUR OWN CITIZENS as human shields, and that is supposed to be unconscionable. The only reason you'd consider doing it is for "political gain", which is exactly why Israel has done it i.e. to create "facts on the ground" to assist Israels demand to be allowed to annex this territory.

SDHD: "Ask for the moon, and get nothing. Brilliant strategy" Try to take it all, and risk losing everything. Doesn't sound very sound to me but, then again, I'm not in thrawl to hubris.....

It can never legally be Israeli land unless the PA formally agrees that Israel can annex it. Israel cannot gain territory by force of arms, the UN Charter explicitly forbids it. It cannot settle its people on occupied territory, Geneva Convention 4 forbids it. It cannot redraw the J'slm boundary to take in Gilo etc., an occupying army does not have sovereignty. And the international courts do not accept ancient ethnic land claims from a couple of millenia back. So the legal position is crystal clear, Israel is occupying it illegally and there's no two ways about it. Question: What is it that's so important to Israel about having control of Arab suburbs and villages in E J'sem? What is so difficult about having 2 parliaments in the city, an Israeli one in the West and a Palestinian one in the East? Why can't there be a unified city umbrella administration to co-ordinate joint utilities etc? Why must Israel, which has no sovereignty there, have the whole cake? I find it mystifying.

SDHD: "Why should the timeline default to 1948-67 as to who can develop the territories? Jordan kicked out every single Jew from the territory." SDHD is, of course, attempting to compare a STATE (Jordan) with a PEOPLE (Jews). The correct comparison - which, I'll point out, Salvador did allude to - is between "occupiers" i.e. between one occupying power (Jordan) and another occupying power (Israel). Neither was entitled to develop "in favor of the occupiers" rather than "in favor of the occupied", and that is as true when the occupier was "Jordan" as it now when the occupier is "Israel", and the "Jewishness" of Israel is completely immaterial to everyone except the racist regime that rules Israel.

SDHD: "When is the PLO going to demonstrate some good faith?" When they recognized Israel and got nothing in return but hollow promises that were never fulfilled. When they offered all the territory up to the Green Line, and got nothing in return but creeping annexation over that line. SDHD: "Israel has demonstrated good faith on numerous occasions." Wait for it.... Wait for it.... SDHD: "Walking out of Gaza was a tremendous show of good faith." Hahahahahahah! I suggest you look up "Dov Wiesglass" and read his take on that "good faith" a.k.a. "political formalhyde" SDHD: "What did that bring?" Bad faith, SDHD. Bad faith aplenty.

Listen SDHD (secure Digital High Definition?): It is very simple, but people made it difficult. It is arguable that it is "their property" in the first place. Christianity, Jusaism and Islam are mere religions and are not tied to one race or another. The Jews who moved back according to you are mostly, American, Russian, Ethiopian, European and asian...among others,as you can see it from their features clearly. I do not think they have every right to do what they want because their ancestors were originally from Palestine or whatever you want to call it.Jews who do have historical deeds to property in the West Bank or Gaza, should be able to control it. All I say is that Israel Exists and must satisfy itself with the 1948 borders and must make peace and business with the Arabs and prosper as the whole region would, instead of bullying everyone!Who the hell invented borders? People should be able to live anywhere in the World without restrictions, of course while respecting other ppl

SDHD: "If you don`t freeze activity in Jerusalem, but you freeze activity in the West Bank -- guess what? You still freeze activity in the West Bank." Which would be true IF you freeze activity in the West Bank, but would be otherwise untrue. It is otherwise, SDHD. Haaretz: "A senior official in Jerusalem said the move would include a commitment to a series of limitations and restrictions on settlement building, but would not halt construction in East Jerusalem." Fact: Israel insists that Jewish neighbourhoods inside East Jerusalem are NOT settlements. Ergo: any reference to "limitations and restrictions on settlement building" are NOT with reference to construction in East Jerusalem. Conclusion: The Israel offer to "freeze" the West Bank is not a "freeze" at all, but is instead a offer to "limit and restrict" construction in the West Bank. Scorecard: VIPER's logic is impeccable, and yours is nonexistent.

so, we agree that obama is not needed. since you claim that negotiations between olmert and abbas yielded nothing, there is only one solution: said negotiations should from zero.

"Well, what a post...development of towns and villages that are under occupation...well, yes the International community has every right to interfere when the development occurs in favor of the occupiers." Why should the timeline default to 1948-67 as to who can develop the territories? Jordan kicked out every single Jew from the territory. Now it's YOUR business because Jews moved back in and developed their properties? Who the heck are you?

"That will require, in my opinion, that he demonstrate to Abbas or somebody in the PLO some good faith. He`s shown none so far." When is the PLO going to demonstrate some good faith? Israel has demonstrated good faith on numerous occasions. Walking out of Gaza was a tremendous show of good faith. What did that bring?

"hang on, he said freeze, right?" Right. "how can you say a freeze and then say limitations, a freeze means a total halt" No, a total freeze is a total freeze, and a partial freeze is a partial freeze. If you freeze activity in the West Bank, you freeze activity in the West Bank. If you don't freeze activity in Jerusalem, but you freeze activity in the West Bank -- guess what? You still freeze activity in the West Bank.

"no halt of construction in East Jerusalem is a non starter!" Ask for the moon, and get nothing. Brilliant strategy. You don't think the Palestinians want to start a peace process? You must not like the Palestinians that much.

Well, what a post...development of towns and villages that are under occupation...well, yes the International community has every right to interfere when the development occurs in favor of the occupiers. No one would interfere if the occupying power was doing the development in favor of the occupied(Israeli responsibiliy in the first place!) For your second point, it is not a concession to freeze settlements, as if you do continue in expanding settlements, it means you do not want peace. We can actually call it a basic common sense requirement. From you post I would assume that your conception of Peace is when the Palestinians make peace with Israel by: Remaining occupied, Shutting up when the settlers can build houses while they can't, when they provide cheap labor, and stop violence. Why would the Palestinians want such a peace? There is something called self-respect and dignity which the palestinians deserve as any other people on this planet. The Jewish did get that!

In the past freezes have been cosmetic. They're announcec with a great fanfare and then quietly behind the world's back Israeli officials have worked with the settlers to make sure that the 'freeze' doesn't impede the settlements too much. If the Pals fall for this, it'll be the same thing all over again.

Get over it, the International community has already decided, that East Jerusalem would become the capital of an eventual Palestinian state, that is as certain as the Amen in the church. The only way to keep your dream of a "whole of Jerusalem = Israel" alive, is to accept the concept of a future binational Israel, where the West Bank (and Gaza ??) Palestinians will have exactly the same rights and duties as the Jewish Israelis.... Time to make your choice.

Snowing Obama isn't what is needed. As you stated, Abbas and Olmert negotiated for years. The problem is that they accomplished NOTHING. If Netanyahu actually wants to accomplish more than posturing, he needs to do something to get the PLO to the table. That will require, in my opinion, that he demonstrate to Abbas or somebody in the PLO some good faith. He's shown none so far. Declaring that the Palestinians can have a state without sovereignty or independence and setting the precondition that East Jerusalem will be non-Arab with constantly expanding city limits is the Netanyahu message so far. That's not good faith. Obama cannot make Abbas show up. Obama cannot negotiate for the PLO.

"A senior official in Jerusalem said the move would include a commitment to a series of limitations and restrictions on settlement building, but would not halt construction in East Jerusalem." If you were to read the article carefully, the series of limitations and restrictions on settlement building will apply to East Jerusalem construction, however not a full "settlement" freeze on the capital. The Premier is seeking the option for a 10-month freeze in West Bank settlement construction. FREEZE, not limitations. Also the title of the article is clear of the position. Basic reading comprehension!

government interfere in the development of towns and villages for political reasons? if arabs want to talk they will talk no one has to entice them with idiotic concessions !

are you not the one constantly whining that obama has been disrespected, even humiliated? well, now barak ravid is implying that israel is seeking u.s. approval. one can only hope that you and the others will show some little bit of appreciation-and yes, we know that israel is not the superpower. the u.s. is, so its leader should act like one.

the u.s. administration should stop interfering and making more than unuseful statements. abbas and olmert had negotiated for years without u.s. meddling. if the u.s. has any positive contribution, then by all means transmit through normal diplomatic chanels, not through press interviews and statements. bullying will only engender hostility. israel is a sovereign state.

... or all sorts of loopholes and exceptions be devised by the settlers and their shtadlanim?... ... who will assure implementation?...

10 months is a nice round sum of time to complete the current building operations he allowed. Then he allows the next lot, gets into a fix, laughing in his sleeve, and re-promises a freeze of building operations until the new ones are done. And then people say he has no strategy. A fox always have a strategy. Only - the wolves are too trusting and dumb to expect it.

Article 6 of the Mandate indicates the right of Jews to settle in Judea and Samaria. Judge Stephen M. Schwebel, former President of the International Court of Justice, determined that Israel?s presence in Judea and Samaria was rooted in self-defense and therefore did not constitute ?occupation.? Eugene Rostow, former Dean of Yale Law School and former Undersecretary of State and co-author of UN Security Council Resolution 242, asserted that 242 entitles Jews to settle in Judea and Samaria. The Oslo Accord and its derivatives do not prohibit ?settlements.? Moreover, Israel has constrained construction to state-owned ? and not private ? land, avoiding expulsion of Arabs landowners. But, Obama regards ?settlements? as a critical obstacle to peace?. More at : http://xrl.us/bewv9i

A letter to PM Nentenyahu: I urge you not to stop the building on settlements that belong to Israel. Doing so would only acknowledge that you are illegally building homes on PA property. Don't fall for Obamas demands. He could care less what happens to Israel, all he wants to do is please the Arabs. For Gods sake, Jerusalem was,is, and forever more will be the Jews capitol. Every inch of it. If the Mosque is the problem, remove it. Put it out at some desert, but whatever you do, never give up expanding nor Jerusalem. If Obama tries to bribe you with money or threaten you by anyother means...just remember that God is greater than he and he will make things happen.

Here I thought the point was to get the Palestinians to the table. Bring Obama to the table is easy. He'll talk to anybody anytime, even the Iranians or Netanyahu. If it could advance peace, he'd talk to Lil' Kim. This is just posturing on Netanyahu's part. And even the Republicans in the US Congress would see it for that.

"Netanyahu is considering seeking either cabinet or governmental approval for a ten-month freeze in West Bank settlement construction" So we are talking about a FREEZE, correct? "A senior official in Jerusalem said the move would include a commitment to a series of limitations and restrictions on settlement building," Apparently not, then. So in Israeli-speak a "freeze" is, you know, a sorta slow-down-ish kinda , you know, restriction-ishy thingey. But not a "freeze", even though we are going to call it a "freeze". "but would not halt construction in East Jerusalem." Oh, fer' cryin' out loud! So it isn't even going to be a slow-down-ish, restriction-ishy "we'll call it a freeze even though it isn't a freeze". Not. Even. That.

I hope Bibi will not ask and will not get a settlememnt freeze.I hope Abbas will finally go away and allow someone else to talk peace.

Netanyahu is asking Palestinians not to care about the Arab inhabitants of East Jerusalem and let Israel go on with its fascist ways of demolishing homes, annexing land in East Jerusalem. If they are let to do that, what will stop them from blowing up the Aqsa Mosque and kicking more Christians and Muslims out of Jerusalem? If left to its own devices, Israel could help the world have wWIII, and it will be the U.S.'s fault, because it's suppose to enforce UN Security Council Resolutions. It is like a corrupt police officer favoring someone because he is a relative. If Israel is serious about peace, it will stop all settlement activity on land taken in the 1967 war as 242 and 338 and the Geneva convention demand. I do not support any Palestinian leader talking to those who think it's okay to demolish homes in East Jerusalem and annex land. Sorry, this is just a ruse, a trick. We're tired of the lies and tricks. When we say stop building settlements, we mean it.

To Bibi the world is his "Mother". SO Bibi is going to "ASK" for a "TEMPORARY" settlement freeze "MAYBE" and only if you stand on your head!........Can anyone really take Bibi,s "WORDS" truthfully. Or are they jokes(rhetorical nothings) for Israeli right wingers to chuckle at!

no halt of construction in East Jerusalem is a non starter!

how can you say a freeze and then say limitations, a freeze means a total halt, buying more time bibi?, the world sees your double talk.

We'll have to hope the Bargouthi governement accpets the partial freeze

Netanyahu to inform Cabinet of 10-month negotiation stall. The man has a decades long track record. Netanyahu has never honored any promise he has made to anyone. He is not credible. Playing silly games will convince no one. Indeed, any prattle about a "10 month freeze" will only reinforce the belief that Netanyahu is not serious about negotiations and has no intent of a two-state solution.

Settlements in the Occupied Territories are illegal under international law. Acceptance of any "freeze" would be tantamount to a compromise of that FACT.

=isn't= a "settlement freeze". New PM, different lies and different dance.

East Jerusalem has to be on the top of the FREEZE! also Bibi has to cease demolishing the Palestinian houses in Jerusalem !!!