The author seems to be unaware that the "total withdrawal" by Israel from Gaza left in place a blockade, so that Gazans could not import or export anything without Israel's concurrence. What sort of "withdrawal" is that?

As for "Territorial sacrifice is not new for Israel. In its search for peace, Israel has given ...", one might as well have said that about Germany in 1940: it allowed the French to keep part of their own country (while, I understand, pretty much requiring a sympathetic government). Incidentally, the notion that violent resistance to illegal occupation should be regarded as illegitimate "terror" is also reminiscent of German occupations in Europe.

Presumably the vigorous "discussions on territorial concessions in the West Bank" are about how much of the land which is being illegally occupied by Israel should be occupied permanently.

On the 15th July 1937 the Zionist congress determined only jews were entitled to Palestine and began plans for the take over of the area. In December 1947 they declared they had moved thousands of heavily armed jews into the area and would claim it as a jewish commonwealth if the UN didn't accept their demands. Evidence at the partition debate of the UN showed the jews true intent to forcibly remove Palestinians from their lands until they had conquered the entire area of Palestine.

That's just a brief outline of the history, if you search further you can find documentation the zionists sent to the UN, all stating they would accept nothing less than a single jewish state. The resolution which was passed demanded a two state system on defined borders, when the jews refused to accept this the security council returned the resolution to the general assembly making it null and void.

You can see where the credibility of the jews lies, they claim the resolution justifies their invasion and genocide, whilst they deny it's relevance to a two state outcome. In 1917 the British general Allenby was preparing to conquer Palestine, the British government declared their intent to assist the establishment of a jewish nation in Palestine.

When you look at the real facts, instead of the emotional and ideological insanities, it's clear the conspirators had their agenda's for a very long time and none of it included the actual people of Palestine. Looking it it logically, the only way to stop world religious terrorism and gain peace in the middle east is the removal of Israel. But even that wouldn't work as the war on everything by Abrahamic religions is to far advanced to be stopped and they are all crazily armed to the teeth.

The funny thing is this whole conflict is made up by corrupt governments on all sides to misdirect the peoples attention away from the real problems. Both states are served by corrupt by democratically elected governments. I would dare say that for the people on the street they wouldn’t care either way as long as they where free to live their life. Both governments have failed to delivery for their people but seek to blame others for their troubles.

As long as Israel continues to support Jewish
settlements in Palestinian lands there will
always be 'terror.'

It's up to Israel to come to the peace table
with a genuine intent and not continue
as they have done to date.

All the Palestinians want is the Jews out of
the West Bank and Gaza.

Why should the Palestinians accept peace only
on Israel's terms. Why is it treasonous to
advocate a Palestinian State.

Most people support the rights of Israelis to
live in peace and security, but not at the
expense of the Palestinians. Until Israel
realises this - peace will not be achieved.
There must be a way for Israel to exist securely
while allowing justice for the Palestinian people.

Israel must move past using dehumanisation and
delegitimisation as weapons to be wielded against
the Palestinians.

'Here’s the plan: stop the terror, then let’s talk.'

Mmmmm ... more like 'Stop scratching my ankle, then I'll take my foot off your neck.'