Trump's plan never had a snowballs chance in hell of success! No new plan is going to cover the war crimes of the occupier, illegally annexing territory. As for Akleh's death? It had more to do with the years of ongoing illegal occupation and the illegal annexing of Palestinian and the bullet that killed him came from an Israeli gun!

David as usual tries to excuse the inexcusable! And needs to stop what he does. And try to talk from a lot higher up!
Alan B.

That's a really cheap shot David Singer,
Like saying the mass shootings in the US were the fault of gun laws or some other thing,
- Rather than placing the blame directly on the one who fired the bullet.

Meanwhile while not check out an essay which provides an accurate description of the all-the-way-down-the-line benighted applied politics of right-wing Israeli nationalists - which is mutating almost every day.

It is by by Philip Weiss titled A small, arrogant, violent, wicked nation and a Jewish mutation.

#Allan B

You state:
1. "Trump's plan never had a snowballs chance in hell of success!"

Why? It offered an independent second Arab state - in addition to Jordan - in 70% of the last remaining 5% the territory of the Mandate for Palestine for the first time in recorded history - giving self determination to 95% of the Arab population living in the West Bank and 100% of the Arab population in Gaza.

End result: The Arabs would end up with about 80% of the territory of the Mandate for Palestine and the Jews 20% - when the prospect of the Arabs getting any part of Palestine in 1920 was nil.

What madness would possess the PLO to refuse to at least negotiate on Trump's Plan - even worse - to refuse to negotiate on any plan to be proposed by Trump before its terms were even known?

2. "the bullet that killed him came from an Israeli gun!"

Actually Akleh was a woman - not a man. You can't even get that right.

What is your evidence for concluding that the bullet came from an Israeli gun when that has not been established?

#Armchair critic

It is irrefutable that Palestinian Arab violence in the West Bank and Gaza escalated after the PLO refused to negotiate with Israel on Trump's Plan. Had negotiations been commenced it is reasonable to assume such violence would not have occurred whilst those negotiations were in progress - certainly not on the scale that happened.

Comparing the situation in the West Bank and Gaza - where conflict for control of these areas between Arabs and Jews has been raging since 1920 - to gun violence in the US being horrendously and mindlessly committed by mentally disturbed individuals - is nonsense.

Successful negotiations between Israel and the PLO could end the violence. No amount of amendments to the US gun laws will stop a repeat of the insanity of Uvalde

Trump says Netanyahu "never wanted peace" with the Palestinians
http://www.axios.com/2021/12/13/trump-middle-east-peace-netanyahu

#Daffy Duck

Yes - there are Jews who are not Zionists like Philip Weiss.

They existed when the Balfour Declaration was made in 1917 and have continued to do so ever since and will do so in the future. They see no need to have an independent State where Jews are the majority population.

It is fine for the Arabs to have 22 such countries where Arabs are the majority - but one for the Jews is too much for these Jewish anti-Zionists to support.

More interestingly - why do you oppose Zionists for doing what the League of Nations and the United Nations legally empowered them to do - reconstitute the Jewish National home in 22% of the territory comprised in the Mandate for Palestine after 3000 years of dispersion?

After all this is taking place on Jewish biblical and historic territory whose area is about one third the size of Tasmania or the size of New Jersey.

Should world peace continue be threatened because Jewish anti-Zionist haters like Philip Weiss give oxygen to organisations such as the PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad - and also Iran - who also do not agree to this Jewish nation building that begun 100 years ago?

Balfour Declaration was made in 1917...

"it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

How exactly do you read that, you always bring it up?
With your eyes half open or half shut?

You think that forcing people off the land you want into even smaller prison camps that it doesn't prejudice their civil or religious rights?
Do you think that because Israel treats Palestinians the way they do that means you can treat everyone that way?
Is that how you read it?

I've had so many arguments with you in the past David Singer.
You've always got to argue the point with everyone, but what did you actually do to establish the state of Israel yourselves?
- Apart from blow up the King David Hotel and kill 91 people and injure 46 more in what can only be described as a blatant terrorist attack?
- And then the people involved in doing this founded the Likud party, that Netanyahu until recently lead, he didn't want peace, and nor do you.
It seems to me you all just want them gone.
- That's not in the spirit of the document.

You mention the Balfour declaration in 1917, how many of your family were there at the time, in the war?

You take offense with the things I say and have threatened me with lawfare, abusing me for not posting with my full name so you can lead court proceedings against me.

I know where my Great Grandfather was in 1917, he was there in the Second battle for Gaza,
Your nation is caked in blood but still it's never enough.

You speak of Zionism.
To herald in the Messianic age and have all the 'Goyim' as your slaves?
To rule over all people and nations.

Instead of asking why would Palestinians wouldn't accept your offer, how about providing a valid argument why they would.

You know I look at that cartoon you added in, it kind of offends me.
It almost looks like your making fun of the fact that a member of the press was shot and killed, and that you're offended that the rest of the media dared to hold Israel accountable for it's actions.

"The media missed their mark last week when blaming an Israeli soldier for allegedly firing the bullet that tragically killed Palestinian Arab journalist Shireen Abu Akleh – rather than investigating why that bullet should ever have been fired at all."

It almost seems like you've gone as close to the concept of 'blaming the victim' as one can go, without actually doing so.
What are you saying, it's their fault because they wouldn't leave?
- Almost seems that way.

Tell me did you investigate why that bullet was fired?
Who fired it David, and why did they do it?

#Armchair Critic

You ask:

"Balfour Declaration was made in 1917...

"it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

How exactly do you read that, you always bring it up?"

I read that to mean:
1. there was no identifiable group called "Palestinians" in 1917 - a term first dreamt up in the 1964 PLO Charter.
2. the Mandate would not permit other countries to force their Jewish populations to move to Palestine
3. the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine did not have any political rights in Palestine under the Mandate following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War 1 - having been Ottoman citizens for 400 years.
4. The civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities that existed in Palestine at the time of the Ottoman Empire's defeat were not to be prejudiced.

You further ask:
"Instead of asking why would Palestinians wouldn't accept your offer how about providing a valid argument why they would." (sic)

The offer is not my offer - but an offer proposed by President Trump to resolve a conflict that has been raging unresolved for 100 years.

I am not suggesting in my article the Palestinians Arabs do anything other than sit down and negotiate with Israel on Trump's Plan. That plan offers the Arabs a second State in former Palestine - in addition to Jordan -and results in about 80% of former Palestine coming under Arab sovereignty with the remaining 20% going to the Jews.

Can this conflict only be resolved if the Arabs control 100% of former Palestine? If 80% is not enough will 85% be sufficient?

Until negotiations take place - one can only assume they want 100% and the conflict continues.

Your Jew-hatred is again revealed in this incredible statement:
"You speak of Zionism.
To herald in the Messianic age and have all the 'Goyim' as your slaves?
To rule over all people and nations."

Shame on you.

"Shame on you."

You know what?
I'm going to withdraw that statement and apologise for it, I'm sorry.
- Because I don't think it's fair to make a blanket statement like that against all Jews.

But let me ask this question:
Was it or was it not representative of that which devout Orthodox Jews themselves think and believe?

"I am not suggesting in my article the Palestinians Arabs do anything other than sit down and negotiate with Israel on Trump's Plan."

Ok, what if I said to you I plan to move into your house and live there,
- In exchange I'm willing to help facilitate your moving to somewhere else?
What if I also suggested that you move to the Northern Territory or to Western Australia,
- And I said that all I want is for you to sit down with me and negotiate?
- Would you be willing to sit down with me and negotiate this?
- And do you think this would be a fair proposition?

"Can this conflict only be resolved if the Arabs control 100% of former Palestine? If 80% is not enough will 85% be sufficient?"

- That's not for me to say, I'm Australian, maybe you should ask them instead.

"Until negotiations take place - one can only assume they want 100% and the conflict continues."

One could also assume they want a fairer more equitable deal than the one that others decide for them,
- Just as you would if presented with the same offer I hypothetically offered you above? No?

#Armchair Critic

1. Thank you for withdrawing and apologising for your scandalous Jew-hating statement - which is also not what "devout orthodox Jews" think and believe as you now falsely claim. You need to withdraw and apologise for that further defamation of "orthodox Jews" as well. Generalisations such as yours are signs of pure hatred against a group of people that need to be backed up with facts before you utter them.

2. I would be willing to sit down and negotiate your offer which might be very attractive if you offered me a new house, a guaranteed job and $500000 moving expenses. Until you negotiate you never know what the end result can be. The Arabs just refuse to negotiate - a sure recipe for keeping the conflict going. Under Trump's proposal no Arab is required to move anyway as 95% of the West Bank Arab population and 100% of Gaza's population reside in the area presently designated by Trump's Plan for a second Palestinian State - in addition to Jordan - in former Palestine. The remaining 5% of the Arab population living in the West Bank would gain Israeli residency or have the right to choose to accept compensation and move literally down the road to the new Palestinian State.

3. Keeping on killing and maiming Jews to try and get a better offer has not worked very well for the Arabs. They occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967 driving out all the Jews then living there - but during those 19 years they never sought to set up the second state in former Palestine that the Trump Plan offers them. Indeed they did not even claim sovereignty there - being happy to become Jordanian citizens and elect their own representatives to Jordan's Parliament. 55 years later they now want that second State and Trump offers it to them. Their response? No negotiations to explore and try to work out a possible deal.

.