Keith,

I never said Israel accepted the Arab League proposal.

Some of the terms (comprehensive peace, normalization, implementation of 242/338) are goals of Israel, but the details of implementation need to be negotiated. Other terms (Palestinian state/capital in Jerusalem) were part of recent Israeli proposals. Those were officially off the table when the Palestinians rejected them, but everyone understands that peace will include Palestinian statehood and some compromise re Jerusalem. Some terms are nonsensical, included for Arab rhetorical reasons only (withdrawal from Lebanon, when Israel already did this two years earlier). Re withdrawal to 1967 borders, I already explained why I believe Israel would do something close to but not exactly this. Discussions and negotiations could be helpful here. But massive Palestinian return to Israel is a non-starter. It completely negates the two-state solution and threatens Israel; Israel will never agree to it. (Interestingly, the proposal, while dismissive of Israeli demographic concerns, shows the utmost sensitivity to Lebanon’s demographic balance.) For more, see http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid=1173700685670&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Keith: “I haven’t ever seen any endorsement in any manner by any of the Israeli leader of absolute acceptance of the pre’67 borders”

Hopefully, you never will, for the reasons I’ve already explained.

But many leaders on both sides understand that minor border adjustments make everything possible.

Keith: “nor of acceptance of Palestinian sovereignty over Jerusalem”

Jerusalem is 2/3 Jewish and Israeli, so the deal will never be as simple as “Palestinian sovereignty over Jerusalem”. East Jerusalem alone is almost half Jewish. The formula that Palestinians and Israelis have come up with, time after time in a number of different frameworks, is Palestinian sovereignty over Arab neighborhoods and Israeli sovereignty over Jewish neighborhoods. This is also approximately what Barak offered. Creative solutions would need to be found for the Temple Mount, Rachel’s Tomb, the Mt. of Olives, etc., and many details would need to be worked out re mundane municipal matters, movement between sides, and a few anomalies such as Israeli Beit Safafa, the Armenian Quarter, etc. But with good will and sufficient flexibility on both sides, it could happen.

continued...

Keith: “None of you who have been attacking me personally, and my views, have ever shown any support for either of those two conditions. In fact in response to my most recent article all of you basically suggested I was in dream world if I expected them to come about. “

You have oversimplified and misinterpreted the conflict, and then oversimplified and misinterpreted the positions of people who disagree with you.

Keith: “I disagree on the border issue, the border issue would not up for negotiation. The refugee issue is.”

The Palestinians and Israelis are already committed to a negotiated solution that deals with all of these issues – borders, refugees, Jerusalem, statehood, etc.

And while you say that the Arab League terms/conditions/demands re borders are non-negotiable and re refugees are negotiable, this isn’t what the Arab League or the Saudis have said. So far, they have said that they won’t change any of the terms, and the entire deal is non-negotiable.

Keith: “I am very excited at the recent small constructive steps towards peace. Why belittle my pleasure and the positive move towards a negotiated peace?”

That’s not what I belittled.

Keith: “Your real feelings show Israelis fear peace and think domination ensures security. That’s the status quo. That’s what all of you hold dear to your hearts…and support.”

1) My feelings are just mine, and not representative of all Israelis.

2) What I support is far from the status quo.

3) It is disrespectful and presumptuous to tell other people what they supposedly think, feel, support, etc., especially when you get it so wrong. If you wish to know what I think, ask me, don’t tell me.

Keith: “Any peace agreement would mean Palestinians and Israelis would have secure homelands and neither would have any need to spend billions annually on weapons.”

Inshallah.

Keith: “It is only Israel from who we have heard veiled threats of nuclear attacks on its neighbours.”

You’re not listening.

Keith: “Do you have the same low opinion of Olmert as Yutusu?”

Pretty much.

Dear_Keith
its not rocket science mate.. outright lies ? c’mon man.. thats a rather below the belt approach to debate.
a)Show what I said which was a ‘lie’
b)Show a contrary position which illustrates a)

If you peeeeel back the layers from that article and actually READ it “closely” you will see that I have reported the truth, and nothing but the truth your honor.

QUESTION. Have HAMAS denied their founding charter in anything they have said recently ?
ANSWER: “NO”

BUT but but..says Keith.. errr no mate..sorry. You are not actually ‘reading’ the text, you are inserting your optimism into it.

EXAMPLES. (from_the_article)

The rebel Hamas leaders are charging the others with the following:

Hamas's readiness to accept a temporary state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem; its readiness to abandon the armed struggle by accepting a long-term truce with Israel; its readiness to remain committed to the current cease-fire with Israel in the Gaza Strip; its readiness to endorse the Saudi peace initiative from 2002

1/ TEMPORARY state
2/ LONG TERM TRUCE. (during which they will commit to non violence) (ha!)
3/ Committment to CURRENT cease fire.
4/ Readiness to endorse Saudi Peace initiative of 2002.

Point 4 is the crucial one. So, what did that initiative say ?

Does it matter ? Here is the KEY to understanding that deceptive readiness.... (same article)

[In an attempt to calm the fears of the Hamas rebels, some of the movement's TOP OFFICIALS have issued a number of statements clarifying their strategy in the aftermath of the Mecca agreement.] (Hamas Leadership)

STATEMENT 1 : "The agreement does not mean that Hamas will recognize the Israeli entity," said Hamas spokesman Ismail Radwan.

STATEMENT 2: "The resistance will continue," declared Osama Hamdan, Hamas's representative in Lebanon

STATEMENT 3: "Hamas continues to regard the resistance as a strategic option, and there is no room for concessions in this regard."

Soooooo Keith.. who is the liar ? me ? err ‘no’. I’m simply showing things as they really are. I’ll await your apology.

anddddd....following on from my last post... we have the UPDATE from the Jerusalem post...basically confirming all that I stated.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879091942&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Heading: "ISRAEL REBUFFS PA UNITY GOVERNMENT"

Lets now look at the 'reasons'.

1/ Calls for continued observance of a "TRUCE"
2/ Does NOT renounce violence.
3/ Does NOT recognize Israel.
4/ Vague pledge to 'respect' previous peace deals.
5/ Affirms Palestinians right to 'resist' Israeli "aggression".

Israeli Government Spokesman says:

"Unfortunately the new Palestinian government seems to have said no to the three benchmarks of the international community," he said. "Accordingly, Israel will not deal with this new government and we hope the international community will stand firmly by its own principles and refuse to deal with a government that says no to peace and no to reconciliation."

KEY QUESTION:
So, for Keith, Tony Kevin, CJ Morgan and various other 'peace_over_Israels_corpse_nicks' ..the real question now is:

-Are the Israelis deliberately distorting the nature of the agreement of the PA unity government, or are they simply understanding its true nature ?

The answer to this question will help all of us understand the true potential for a peaceful,prosperous future for both protagonists.

RAPTURE and ARMAGEDDON. Just a PS for those who think whacko Christians are drooling at the prospect of an early retirement from this life and the subsequent end time disaster on the rest. We can do NOTHING to help or hinder Gods own timing and plan. So, while we rejoice at the thought of meeting the Lord, the only thing we can do in the mean time is trust and obey. We cannot speed up, or slow down those events. The thought of catastrophic events befalling an unbelieving humanity is not something I enjoy contemplating.

keith

You still continue to ignore the non Muslims who were given strong incentives (by way of discrimination sometimes positive coercion) to leave Muslim controlled lands.

Or why the Arab lands did not take in the Palestinian refugees, a sort of adjustment that occurred elsewhere in India, Cyprus etc. Their numbers were not large compared to the total number and the surrounding countries were often rich.

I realise that this spoils your argument but it does strongly explain some of the present ill feeling in the Middle East by Christians, Druze and Jews.

Look at some Middle Eastern anti Jewish websites - the descriptions and cartoons bare an almost psychopathic hatred. This should help you understand the basis of Israeli fears of Islam.

I am not anti-Muslim I just want the fanatics to leave the rest of us alone. And the rest of us includes Israel which shares with us the British system of justice and our way of life.

All of you spout propaganda or argue against the interests of peace. You should all take a damn good long hard look at yourselves.

Logic, Israel is not a liberal democracy. It is an apartheid system. Israel doesn't support the articles of the Geneva Convention. You believe a 40 year occupation is reasonable behaviour. You blame the Palestinians for the violence

David, your thinking is leading to a holocaust for the Palestinians. Your message is hate filled. You blame the Palestinians for the violence.

Steve, you believe in a Palestinian state so long as Israel can define it's borders. You blame the Palestinians for the violence.

Yutusu, you believe in a Palestinian state so long as Israel can re-invade any time it feels Palestine isn't doing as it wants. You see oppression as justified because you believe it brings security. You blame the Palestinians for the violence.

Aqvarius, you say you believe in a Palestinian state yet deny the Palestinians the right to Jerusalem. You want Palestinians to stick to the borders as they now stand and negiotiate for all their other stolen lands. You want the international community to police those borders and the stolen lands and yet you blame the Palestinians for all the violence.

It's all evidenced in the posts you've made. Read them and see. I don't see how Isreal can ever truely want peace if you blokes are representative of Israeli opinion.

Peace will need to be forced on Israel by an America afraid of the nuclear armed Iranians. The Americans have woken up to that fact and that's what's happening right now. You blokes opinions don't matter any more. Such rubbish will be swept aside in a surge for peace. And that will be in all our interests.