its not that simple when a majority of Palestinians refuse to recognize the state, or even recognize it as a Jewish state.
I wouldn't want someone wishing for the USA to not exist anymore to vote in my elections.

Two nations can't become one just like that. It is a long process, in which they develop a common national identity, and only then can a cohesive society be built. A thousand years ago, England had Normans, Saxons and Vikings, fighting each other. It took hundreds of years, but eventually the English nation emerged out of it, and these distinctions were forgotten. Maybe this will happen for Jews and Palestinians, but at the moment, they have no common ground to build a society on.

Let me give you just a few examples:

1. Just five years ago, the majority of Palestinians gave their vote to Hamas, a group that is more Antisemitic than the Nazis. How can we live with them?

2. Israeli society is a Western society, and women are regarded accordingly. Palestinian society is an Arab society, and women are regarded accordingly. These are two very different sets of values. Hamas (which, again, won the majority of Palestinian vote) believes in Sharia law. Do you know how Sharia law treats women? Would you expose the women in your society to it? Well, we won't.

3. Israel is one of the most progressive countries in the world on gay rights. Arab society doesn't even recognize the existence of homosexuals, and homosexual acts are outlawed. There is no way we will agree to put our gays in that position.

4. Israel is democratic and liberal, and has freedom of speech and religion. In the Arab world, thousands are being killed every month because of their religion or their views. We don't want that here.

Those are just a few of the reasons why we can't do what you suggest, and become one country for Israelis and Palestinians. Maybe in fifty years it will be possible, but not now. In the meantime, we must find a solution that will allow both nations to live in sovereignty and peace. The two-state solution is the only way to go.

Have you even read the article? I bet you didn't.

James Traub said: "Maybe that's because they've all swallowed the "Israel lobby's" propaganda" and obviously you didn't see this remark when you made your Hasbara comments.

"1. Just five years ago, the majority of Palestinians gave their vote to Hamas"

If you ever cared to review Hamas's election campaign in 2006, you'll see that they never talked about resistance or terrorism. They talked about ending corruption, shoring up the economy and providing equality in jobs. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/12/israel

"2. Israeli society is a Western society, and women are regarded accordingly."
Israel is not at all a Western society, it's a mishmash of immigrants from eastern Europe, America, Arab countries and former Soviet Union. Israel has more inherent contradictions than any other country in the world.

"3. Israel is one of the most progressive countries in the world on gay rights."
Maybe. THe wohole liberal attitude in Israel is restricted to Tel Aviv and Gush Dan. Go to West Jerusalem and say you're gay, and I hope you'll survive :)
You forgot this attac by Jewish zealots on a gay club in TA in 2009? http://www.voanews.com/english/news/a-13-2009-08-02-voa4-68657962.html

But hey, who said that the world is free of discrimination against gays? Gays themselves haven't declared the world bias-free. Only the Hasbaraists, b/c their main point is to point out Israel's fake connection with the civilization.

" 4. Israel is democratic and liberal" Yes, clearly (LOL); Egypt also have a parliament and elections. We used to hear about second-class citizens, but we never heard about a third and fourth class citizens until Israel showed us what this means: first class citizen (Ashkenazi) second class citizen (Safardi) third class citizen (Falasha Jews) and finally, fourth class citizens (Arabs).

Israel is built around the idea of race supremacy, in other words the chosen people, the gentiles and the goyim. Haven't you heard of the Rabbis calling for end to rent to Arabs? or Ovadia Yusef, the grand ayatollah of Israel, calling on the Palestinian president to die in hell? Do you have access to google news at al?

A Hasbara is a robot that sees only one thing: Israel and this is a result of intensive NLP courses that they have to pass before being selected.

Enlightenment to you Arad.

In Belgium, neither the Flemings nor Walloons every waged a military campaign to drive the other into the sea. Walloons do not carry around their necks symbolic keys to houses that Flemings drove them out of/that they fled while their armies tried to massacre the Flemings. Flemings are not raised on a Holy Book with passages calling for the elimination of the other as Jews or as Amalekites.

A "democratic, one-state solution" is seen, rightly, by the Isrealis as a short interlude before a Rwanda scenario.

You have obviously never been to Israel (beyond a few week vacation, which even that I doubt)

Israel is a Western country, despite though you claim it is a "it's a mishmash of immigrants from eastern Europe, America, Arab countries and former Soviet Union. Israel has more inherent contradictions than any other country in the world." There may be a higher concentration of religious people, but anyone living in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Elait, Haifa, Ashkelon, or really anywhere can compare it to a Western country.

Next you assert "that the Gay acceptance is only in Tel Aviv and Gush Dan." That is not true, I know a person who used to live openly gay in West Jerusalem. Unfortunately of course there are still attacks on gays and such and I by no means declare Israel free of discrimination, but as a whole the culture is far more supportive.

Now you are under the impression: "Israel is democratic and liberal" Yes, clearly (LOL); Egypt also have a parliament and elections. We used to hear about second-class citizens, but we never heard about a third and fourth class citizens until Israel showed us what this means: first class citizen (Ashkenazi) second class citizen (Safardi) third class citizen (Falasha Jews) and finally, fourth class citizens (Arabs)."

By you logic I could say this: "'Britian is democratic and Liberal' Yes, clearly (LOL); Egypt also has a parliment and elections."

But obviously Israel differs from Egypt in the fact that Arabs, Falasa, Safardic Jews, and Ashkenazi Jews all hold multipule seats in the parliment and each has some seats on the supreme court.

Just some enlightenment for you

Have you even read my reply?

I was not replying to the article here, but to AEL's suggestion that there should be a one-state solution, in which Jews and Palestinians live together. Maybe you missed that.

Now, for your "enlightening" comments.

"If you ever cared to review Hamas's election campaign in 2006, you'll see that they never talked about resistance or terrorism. They talked about ending corruption, shoring up the economy and providing equality in jobs."

So what? Would you vote for an Antisemitic group, if it offered ending corruption etc? I guess you would, but I'd expect most civilized people not to.

There are always excuses. The Germans had very good excuses to vote for the Nazis, but they shouldn't have anyway.

"Israel is not at all a Western society, it's a mishmash of immigrants from eastern Europe, America, Arab countries and former Soviet Union."

And all of them came together to form a thriving, liberal democracy. It infuriates you, doesn't it?

"Maybe. THe wohole liberal attitude in Israel is restricted to Tel Aviv and Gush Dan. Go to West Jerusalem and say you're gay, and I hope you'll survive :)"

I assure you I will survive in Jerusalem as well. But a country is ultimately measured by its laws. Israeli laws do not discriminate against gays. Arab countries, to return to my initial point, define homosexual acts as illegal, and in some of them they are punishable by death.

"Israel is democratic and liberal" Yes, clearly (LOL); Egypt also have a parliament and elections."

Lesson one: a country isn't defined as a democracy by the question if it has elections or not. Democracy is determined by things like freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of lifestyle and beliefs, freedom of association, equality in the eyes of the law, and many others. Finally, it is also defined by a process of FREE AND FAIR elections. All of which Israel has, and no Arab country does.

"We used to hear about second-class citizens, but we never heard about a third and fourth class citizens until Israel showed us what this means: first class citizen (Ashkenazi) second class citizen (Safardi) third class citizen (Falasha Jews) and finally, fourth class citizens (Arabs)."

That's a regular fable spread by anti-Semites. Israel doesn't have classes. Like any immigrant society, newer immigrants are lower in the social ladder at first, but in Israel they close the gaps faster than in most other societies.

There is indeed discrimination against the Israeli-Palestinians, not by law, but in certain policies. This is because, to remind you, these people regard themselves as our mortal enemies. Study how other countries treated their "enemy"-citizens at times of war, and then judge whether Israel is better or worse.

"Israel is built around the idea of race supremacy, in other words the chosen people""

Oh yeah? Can you bring anything to back up this piece of nonsense?

"Haven't you heard of the Rabbis calling for end to rent to Arabs? or Ovadia Yusef"

Rabbis?! Lol. Rabbis don't mean shit in Israel. It is a predominantly secular country.

Like every other country, Israel has its share of religious extremists. So some rabbis are talking crap, and we get angry about it, but on the national level, they really mean nothing.

My advice to you is to stop reading Antisemitic literature (your arguments, which I've heard many times before, testify to the kind of books you read), or at least to balance them with some SERIOUS books about Israel and Judaism.

Contrary to what you say, there are indeed better alternatives to the "one-state solution", mainly the two-state solution.

Your comparison to Belgium is ridiculous. I remind you once again that just five years ago, the majority of Palestinians gave their vote to Hamas, a group whose charter defines Jews as the root of all evil, and says they should be killed, to bring judgment day. Do any of the Belgian groups define each other thus?

Would you agree to live in a two nation state with a nation that regards you as the root of all evil?

Finally, even in Belgium it isn't really working, is it? ;-)

Like I said, one day we may come together. But for now, don't even think about it.

Two-state solution can't be achieved b/c of Israel's security.

One state solution is not viable either because Israel wants to be the 3rd religion-based state after Iran and the Taleban.

So what's the solution? Well the Palestinians can just go and vanish anywhere.

A hasbara-ist will always accuse one of anti-semitism and hatred towards Jews once his lies are debunked, and very easily so. He or she will always keep beating around the bush, avoiding to say what he really believes in so that the discussion evolves around that, instead of the article or content in question.

A hasbara will also ignore articles and videos and their content because his concern is only to spread as many lies per day on the comments section, as they can for this is what they are paid for.

You are wrong if you think that these things will constitute a problem.

Yes, most Israelis are not prepared for them now, but they will be.

Open borders? Of course. A "Palestinian state" means that they get full sovereignty, like any other normal country. The only thing we have a right to limit them with is military power. Military power is not just a country's own business, but its neighbors business as well. So we have a right to demand of them to accept some limits. On the rest, it's their business.

We may demand that they accept some other limitations at first, for a limited amount of time. For instance, control over air space. Since they still have many terrorists running around, we have a right to keep control of the air space for a few years, until they get things under control. As long as it is understood that eventually they become fully sovereign.

The water problem will have to be solved on a regional level, through agreements. The solution, of course, will have to be just.

Don't see the point of your border offer. There is nothing sacred about the pre-67 borders. If we are negotiating a final deal, let's form better borders. As for the settlements, I would like to see them remain, and becoming part of the Palestinian state. Officially, the Palestinians reject this solution.

Unofficially, the papers reveal that the Palestinians offered this solution in some places, but it was rejected by the Israelis. Reportedly, Livni said: "they will all be killed the next day". I think she is wrong, and I think we have ways to defend them anyway. I am one of the Israelis who are pushing for that solution, and there are quite a lot of us.

Perhaps you missed the aftermath to the rabbis call "to stop renting to Arabs"? When Israeli civil society reacted with revulsion, when mainline Rabbis (with bigger constituencies) condemned the petition, as did the Israeli government's senior officials, including Netanyahu?
And regarding Arabs status as 4th level citizens or whatever, it might be worth noting that it was an Arab judge who presided over the court that just convicted Israel's former president of rape. No one in Israel thought the composition of the court was remarkable (the other two judges were women), but it seems facts like these need to be constantly pointed out to an world-wide audience obsessed with a country they know nothing about.

I don't consider Gahgeer someone worth responding to, but he said something here that even many of those who aren't Israel-haters get wrong, so it is a good chance to set things straight.

When Israelis say that they want their country to be a "Jewish state", it has nothing to do with the Jewish religion.

Judaism is first and foremost a nationality, only secondly a religion. To say that the Jew is someone who is defined by his Jewish faith is like saying that the Englishman is someone who is defined by his Anglican faith.

I know Jews who are Christians and Jews who are Buddhists. I myself don't consider myself as a Jew by religion, only by nationality.

"Jewish state" means a state that belongs to the Jewish people, just like Holland belongs to the Dutch people, and France belongs to the French people. We are merely demanding the same rights as every other nation.

A "Jewish state" doesn't mean a state that only Jews can be citizens of. About 20% of Israeli citizens aren't Jews, and they are considered equal citizens. A "Jewish state" means a state that regards itself as serving the interests of the Jewish nation.

It means, for instance, that Israel sees itself as obliged to defend Jews everywhere, even Jews who aren't Israeli citizens. It is also obliged to defend a Druze (for instance) who is an Israeli citizen. But it is not obliged to defend Druze who aren't Israeli citizens.

It also means that the state of Israel spends money to preserve the Jewish heritage, and builds museums, libraries and institutions for that matter. If a non-Jew-Israeli contributes to the Israeli culture, then he also becomes part of our national heritage. But we do not see (for instance) non-Israeli-Palestinians as belonging to our national heritage.

Example: say the Italian-Americans demand that the American government spends money to build museums for great Italian figures like Verdi and Garibaldi. My guess is the American people will say no. On the other hand, if they demand to regard the cinema of Italian-Americans like Coppola and Scorsese as an American national treasure that should be preserved, I'm sure the American people will be open to that idea, as these directors are indeed part of American heritage.

This is what a "Jewish state" means. We don't want anything that other nations don't have. Yet, we are condemned for it. Why? I think we all now the answer.

In addition to Arad's poignant comments. Here is another way to look at the differences between Israel & the pals.

..............SUBJECT........................................................................EGYPT........JORDAN.....ISRAEL
- Common Language with:...............................................................Yes................Yes..............No
- Common Religion:..........................................................................Yes................Yes.............No
- Common Customs:..........................................................................Yes................Yes.............No
- Common Heritage:..........................................................................Yes.................Yes...........No
- Its Queen is a Palestinian:................................................................No................Yes.............No
- The state which Palestinian leaders vowed to destroy:...................No..................No............Yes
- Until 1967, Pals were part of this state:..........................................Yes................Yes.............No

Mr. Thomas,
1. Though all three have lived there for a long time. There is not question to the fact that, Jews have lived in this region, longer then Christians and Muslims.

2. As of 1920, there were no states, with recognized boundaries as we know them today.

3. During the 1940's, the British mandate had divided the region along more-less tribal, ethnic and religious boundaries. All of them were Islamic or Christian (Lebanon) majority states, and only ONE a Jewish-majority.

It does not seem anyone had particular problem with the other states. But, they all had problem with Jews having their own state, where they can live in peace. Free of further persecutions, pogrom, and Holocaust.

The core question is. why an advanced group of people, they should be forced to live under the yok of another group which by far lags it in human development?.

Why Jews should live under Islamic sharia law?

Why Jews should not have the same god given right to have their own state where they can live their lives according to their own 4000 year heritage and history. Despite the fact (as you bellicose), Jews were made of hoge-poge from around the world, they successfully manged to establish a civilized society based on law and order, and tradition, speak volume of the viability of this society.

If Israel is a western society, what in the hell are they doing in the Middle East?

Just askin'...

Clearly you never went to Israel, I now live here - lived both in Jru and TA and I have friends spread throughout.

It's no secret that there are many right wing zealots, but the majority of the population is as apathetic to politics as every other nation. I have friends that live in settlements that aren't particularly zionistic or religious. There are many liberals too, the family that I rented an apartment from in Jru went every Friday to protest against the Israeli governments actions in Bi'ilin. If I've learned anything about Israel, it's that it is a pluralistic society as much as one as the States. From the traveling I've done in Jordan and Egypt, I've found that most people I met were pleasant and welcoming.

With regards to this article, I just don't buy the line of Israel-centric Middle East. The people of Tunisia and the people of Egypt and the people of Yemen, just like the people of Iran, have not risen in protest because of Israel and her occupation of the West Bank nor her blockade against Gaza. They have risen because of corruption in their governments, decades of repression, widespread poverty, etc. People think of their stomachs when they starve

Huckleberry asks: "If Israel is a western society, what in the hell are they doing in the Middle East?"

Because Israel happens to be the homeland of the Jews, and a nation can only be truly sovereign if it is sovereign in its own homeland.

If we Jews choose to live in a Western liberal society, that's our business, not anyone else's. I'm sorry that it spoils the wonderful homogeneity of mid-east dictatorships, but judging from what is happening around me at the moment, it doesn't seem that even their own people think that they are the only choice for the Middle East.

And if you consider not to respond to me, then even better, because you make people laugh at you when you write:

"Judaism is first and foremost a nationality, only secondly a religion. To say that the Jew is someone who is defined by his Jewish faith is like saying that the Englishman is someone who is defined by his Anglican faith."

Even the bit about Buddhits and Hindu Jew is even more amazing.

I know Iranian Jews, Russian Jews, Yemeni Jews - they've got nothing in common except religion: their accents are different, their cuisine are different - i.e culturally they are more different than similar.

Israel is a state controlled by the Ashkenazi Jews and is based first and foremost upon the supremacy of Jews - it's part and parcel of Judaism man. Don't you know of the Arab and Safardi Jews who had to change their names "to fit better their surroundings" in Israel?
If Israel is now predominantly seculra, then that's of course because not all Israelis are stupid. But sadly, right-wing politics in Israel is on a sharp rise, like everywhere else in the world. Just see how Israeli TV mocked their kindergarten children.

Everyone in Israel knows about the insufficient funding to the Arab sector while money is poured on settlers in the West Bank. Didn't you hear of Lieberman, who lives in an illegal settlement, plans to transfer Arab towns in Israel to the Palestinian under his "peace" plan?

Attempts by nations to associate themselves with one religion in a globalized world is a big fail. Look at the Taleban and the Vatican - one is living on the run, the other is busy evading scandals.

The crusaders created a "western" kingdom in Palestine.
It stayed for around 200 years, but what happened at the end? you know the answer.

Lebanon is as liberal as Israel - even more (they don't have priests calling on christians not to hang out with Muslim or Druze teenagers).

Israel is a big ghetto for Jews in the Middle East and the social and cultural pressure from the east is immense.

Again, I will use it as a chance to enlighten people about Israel, as a counter to all the hate industry.

"I know Iranian Jews, Russian Jews, Yemeni Jews - they've got nothing in common except religion"

Bullshit. It is actually the religion that sets them apart. There are many different Jewish religions, each with its own Rabbis and customs. But there are several things that are common to all Jews: they all consider themselves as descendant of the same father, they all consider Israel to be their historic homeland, and they all consider the history of the Jewish people as their history.

Just look at Jewish holidays. Except Yom Kipur, they are all marking a historical event that happened to the Jewish people, usually in Israel. They do not celebrate something that happened to some prophet or messiah (as it is in religions like Christianity and Islam), but something that happened to the Jewish nation.

"Don't you know of the Arab and Safardi Jews who had to change their names "to fit better their surroundings" in Israel?"

Yes, and I know many Ashkenazi Jews who changed their names when they immigrated to Israel as well. It was part of leaving the diaspora behind, and assuming an Israeli identity.

Those Antisemitic books you read all forgot to mention that, didn't they? ;-)

"If Israel is now predominantly seculra, then that's of course because not all Israelis are stupid."

Israel is secular because it was formed by atheist Jews. The religious Jews, at first, opposed Zionism - there was some old religious decree that Jews should wait for the messiah before they return to Israel. But by the 20th century, most Jews left religion behind, so that decree didn't matter anymore.

In time, most religious Jews became Zionist as well, and Israel became a bit more religious. But it is still a predominantly secular state. All of our Prime Ministers, thus far, have been atheists.

"Just see how Israeli TV mocked their kindergarten children."

Have no idea what you're talking about. More lies, I guess.

"Didn't you hear of Lieberman, who lives in an illegal settlement, plans to transfer Arab towns in Israel to the Palestinian under his "peace" plan?"

Some more bullshit Antisemitic propaganda. Not Lieberman, nor any other Israeli politician, wants to transfer Arabs anywhere.

"Attempts by nations to associate themselves with one religion in a globalized world is a big fail."

Indeed, which is why I am glad that I live in one of the only states in the Middle East which does not associate itself with one religion.

"Universal franchise for everyone between river and sea is the inevitable outcome."

This is code for war and they are preaching for the the destruction of Israel. There can be no one-state. Israel will be nuking people before this happens - they won't go again into the gas chambers so easily.

Well said.

"Perhaps you missed the aftermath to the rabbis call "to stop renting to Arabs"?"

More than that - besides the ugly race-based reasoning that these rabbis used in this argument, there's the little issue of terrorism and safety for one's family. While not all Muslims are terrorists, a very small % are, and after a few intifadas and thousands of missiles, it's not uncommon for the most liberal Israeli that you'd meet say that they would not want to live next to a Muslim family out of fear that this home then would be used by terrorists. There are just too many stories of trusted and friendly Palestinian workers or even Muslim Israelis who committed terrorist acts.

Time will have to heal these wounds, but first a deal will have to be reached, and that means that the Palestinians will have to sit down to make a deal.

Like you, I always pushed for making peace as fast as possible, believing things might turn worse if we don't. But I'm not wagging my finger at others now, because the recent events might actually prove me wrong.

One of the main arguments of the Israelis who opposed peace talks was that any peace we sign will be signed only with the Arab leaders, and will not be accepted by the people. We, on the other hand, reasoned that the Arabs are probably not going to change any time soon, and we have no choice but to negotiate with the dictators. Well, it appears we were wrong.

If Mubarak's regime falls, the new Egyptian government might very possibly announce that whatever the previous regime signed is illegitimate, and that the peace deal with Israel is null and void. In that case, I will be happy that we didn't sign other deals, and that we still hold the Golan Heights and control the West Bank. They are better assets than papers that the other side doesn't honor.

The commentator you quoted is paranoid. If the Arab dictators fall, the Arab countries can go in two ways: either a theocracy like Iran, or a semi-democracy like Lebanon. Both will be hostile to Israel. But in the first case, we will only become more valuable to the US, and in the second case, the likelihood of war decreases. It is not easy to convince citizens of a democracy to go to war.

In the long run, what is happening now is very good for Israel. The only way we can ever have a normal life is that the countries around us will become normal. I don't think Egypt and Tunisia will turn out like Iran: things have changed since the seventies, and there are other strong forces in the Arab world, which counter-balance the fundamentalists. And if the Arab countries become more democratic, then any agreements we make with them will be a lot more solid.

An inherent design in a Hasbara robot is that he or she still thinks that the flow of information comes from a single source of news; he/she somehow doesn't know that people can google and search for the truth online nowadays.

If the head of Israel's diplomacy, Avigdor Lieberman, lives in an illegal settlement in the West Bank (called Nokdim), then what would you expect from this Israeli government?

- Lieberman presents population exchange plan at UN:

haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-presents-plans-for-population-exchange-at-un-1.316197

- Israeli TV show mocks education at "the hope" kindergarten run by right-wing group Im Tirtzu (you'll see in this subtitled video that Arad basically does say what the children do : Israel's problem is hasbara (PR) and that the whole world outside Israel is called "anti-shemia" (antisemitic):

youtube.com/watch?v=M9Sdkps0Quo

Arad you are entitled to having your opinions, but not your facts.

I remember the group of rabbis who made a group of Peruvians convert to Judaism to let them migrate to Israel in 2002. The moment they went out of the airport, they were bussed into a West Bank settlement. If you want to prove to me that those converts are racially and genetically close to you, and identify with that land more than its inhabitants, then you'd probably get te Nobel prize in biology.

www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/aug/07/israel1

Muslims from Indonesia to Mauritania in Africa pray 5 times a day and fast during Ramadan and all of them, over 1.5bn, turn to Mecca. Islam has prints all over their identity, culture, but they are not all "Islam" nationals. There's no such thing as "religion State". The same thing applies to Christians and followers of all faiths.

Only the Zionists and radical Islamists want to convince the world that such a "nationality" exists.

Israel is Judaism-based, whether or not you can justify it. If not then why all the Arab political parties in Israel carry the slogan "a state for all its citizens"? Why the Bedouins in its south complain of discmination?

Can a non-Jew be accepted as a new immigrant in Israel like any other "western" country? Shall we talk about Israel's dumping of Darfur immigrants to Sudan in Decemer 2010 or - again - the calls by rabbis for their expulsion?

"- Lieberman presents population exchange plan at UN:

haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/lieberman-presents-plans-for-population-exchange-at-un-1.316197"

If you actually bothered to read the article, you'd see that Lieberman emphasizes that he ISN'T talking about transfer.

Transfer is when you take people out of their homes, and move them to another place.

What Lieberman is talking about is to redefine the border lines. Since we are striving for a final peace accord, why not redefine the borders in a way that would be more compatible with the population? So Israel would be extended in some parts to include Jewish populated areas that are currently on the Palestinians side of the green line, and Palestine would be extended to include Palestinian populated areas that are currently on the Israeli side of the green line. No one is to be moved. They will all keep living in their towns, except that they will be under a different sovereignty.

You should be all for that. If Israeli-Palestinian are fourth-class citizens, as you maintain, wouldn't it be better for them to be part of Palestine?

But Lieberman's plan is considered extreme right-wing, because the Palestinians living in those villages reject it. They want to remain a part of Israel. And since they are Israeli citizens, we must respect their wishes.

Calling this plan a "transfer", however, is indeed nonsense.

"- Israeli TV show mocks education at "the hope" kindergarten run by right-wing group Im Tirtzu (you'll see in this subtitled video that Arad basically does say what the children do : Israel's problem is hasbara (PR) and that the whole world outside Israel is called "anti-shemia" (antisemitic):

youtube.com/watch?v=M9Sdkps0Quo"

This is a famous Israeli comedy show, making fun of Israeli right-wing, who supposedly brainwash their children. Pretty funny, actually, but what does that have to do with this discussion?

I don't see the sense of bringing it here, so I must call nonsense on this as well. Could it be that you think that this is an actual kindergarten, and that this is what children are really being taught? I guess it takes a certain amount of intelligence to recognize satire.

"If you want to prove to me that those converts are racially and genetically close to you, and identify with that land more than its inhabitants, then you'd probably get te Nobel prize in biology."

Again: Judaism is first and foremost a nationality, only secondly a religion. When you convert to Judaism, it means you become part of the Jewish nation. Part of the conversion process is learning about the Jewish nation.

You can become part of the Jewish nation without going through a religious conversion. But you cannot religiously convert to Judaism without also becoming part of the Jewish nation.

Your ignorance about Judaism is staggering. And your resulting views are nonsensical.

"Islam has prints all over their identity, culture, but they are not all "Islam" nationals. There's no such thing as "religion State". The same thing applies to Christians and followers of all faiths."

In almost every Arab state, the constitution defines Islam as the state religion, and stipulates that any state law must be implicitly compatible with Islamic law.

In Israel there is no such stipulation. There are some laws that have been passed due to pressure from the religious parties (like a law that forbids farming pigs, or a law that forbids public transportation on Saturday), but they do not come from any self-definition of the Israeli state. There is a constant political struggle: the religious are trying to pass laws that are compatible with religious Jewish laws, while the secular are trying to pass liberal laws. And since there are more secular than religious, the number of religious laws is very little, and is just about things that the secular don't care much about. We don't really need to grow pigs here, when we can import pork meat from abroad, so we throw the religious this bone.

Anyway, the fact that you don't know that most Arab states (I believe only Syria and Lebanon are exceptions) define Islam as their state religion, while Israel doesn't have a state religion, makes your entire point nonsensical.

"If not then why all the Arab political parties in Israel carry the slogan "a state for all its citizens"?"

This slogan has several meanings, some justified, some not. It can mean that the state discriminates against non-Jews, and they want it to stop discriminating. That's justified. But many times it also means that the Israeli-Palestinians simply don't accept that the Jews have national rights here, and want to destroy Israel's identity as a Jewish state.

I know of no other minority in no other country that is so bold. Imagine that, for instance, English-Pakistanis start demanding that England would no longer be an English country, and would be stripped away of any aspects of Englishness. Shakespeare can no longer be the national poet, the history of England is not to be taught in the schools, etc. How would the English react to that?

Palestinian-Israelis have a right to make this demand. They are Israeli citizens, and can express their views on what the character of the state should be. But an outsider like you has no right to it. You want a country that has absolutely no national traits? Start it in your own country, not mine.

"Why the Bedouins in its south complain of discmination?"

Because they are discriminated, like any other minority in any other country. You don't see me condemning your country for discriminating minorities, do you? Reasonable people understand that this is a problem everywhere, and that we must fight to reduce discrimination in our own country, and not condemn other countries for having the same problems. But you, of course, don't really care about the Bedouins, do you? You are just looking for ways to spread hate against Jews.

"Can a non-Jew be accepted as a new immigrant in Israel like any other "western" country?"

Yes.

"Shall we talk about Israel's dumping of Darfur immigrants to Sudan in Decemer 2010 or - again - the calls by rabbis for their expulsion?"

Being flooded with third-world immigrants in a problem everywhere, and Israel is trying to cope like any other country. There are tens of thousands of Sudanese living and working here, who all came in the past decade. Unlike you, we actually care about the plight of the Sudanese. We are not trying to use them to spread hate against other people.

1. Hamas also have a political manifesto, never mind that Hamas politicians and preachers are quite vocal, they don't keep their views secret.

2. When was the last time you have been to a major European city. Israel is more homogeneous these days than any Paris or Malmo

3. I lived in West Jerusalem for years. West Jerusalem have guy pubs and clubs. You are simply inventing this stuff.

4. Yes, there is an Israeli Arab conflict. There are tensions and hostility between the two sides in many quarters. What this has to do with racial supremacy and second and third class citizens? The difference between Ashkenzim and Sfaradim is no longer relevant so much because of the high rate of intermarriage. Ethiopians are seriously lagging behind all groups, but they are gradually catching up. The group with the highest living and education standards in Israel are actually Christian Arabs.

"What Lieberman is talking about is to redefine the border lines. Since we are striving for a final peace accord, why not redefine the borders in a way that would be more compatible with the population?"

Which eventually means that citizens of a recognize so-called "Western" state will lose their citizenship in the "democratic" state, without being consulted, with the final aim of creating a "purer" state that is based on a single religion or identity. I.E the final outcome of any transfer - whether by removing people from their lands like the militias did in 1948 or by drawing the borders now.

"If Israeli-Palestinian are fourth-class citizens, as you maintain, wouldn't it be better for them to be part of Palestine?"

They are not Israeli-Palestinians. This thing doesn't exist- stop creating nationalities at your will. They're Israeli citiznes, just like you. You created their problem, you shoulder the responsibility, not the West Bank Palestinians.

"But Lieberman's plan is considered extreme right-wing, because the Palestinians living in those villages reject it. They want to remain a part of Israel. And since they are Israeli citizens, we must respect their wishes."

Hate towards Arab is rife in Israel don't try to whitewash it. Can it be more striking than the fact that the head of Israeli's diplomacy is Avigdor Lieberman? who European FMs feel ahsmaed about meeting ? Or because he even voted in 2007 against the appointment of an Arab Labourite in the government because it was a blow to your fav-ed Zionism? Israel Beytenu is everywhere in the current Israeli govt: FM, Deputy FMs, and many Israeli news media, secular like you, believe he even controls Netanyahu.

Also consider these examples: anti-Arab hate Facebook groups are listed on the website of the Justice Ministry - and when the deputy attorney general orders their removal, he's threatened with death; At every soccer match of Beitar Jerusalem, "death to Arabs" is a uniform chant. Every now and then protests are organized in Arab cities, like umm al-fahim, demanding the expulsion of Arabs. (those feelings are against Israeli citizens, not the Palestinians, which is another story).

"This is a famous Israeli comedy show, making fun of Israeli right-wing, who supposedly brainwash their children. Pretty funny, actually, but what does that have to do with this discussion? "

Obviously you ignore the meaning of satire, and that it mocks reality. The kindergarten show is about what the elders of Im Tirtzu are saying, not what the kids. Have you seen an Israeli kid saying "our problem is hasbara?" or calling Arabs "demographic threat"? Observe the video and get its message.

"Again: Judaism is first and foremost a nationality"

Repeat it how many times you want - you're only convincing yourselves and those on the payroll of this platitude. I'll give you a morsel of food for thought:

Sayyid Qutub, the ideologue of extremist Islamist groups, believed that only Islam as a nationality can unite racially-different Muslims, and only under its guidance they will become dignified, at a better place and a "light unto the nations".

Now replace the words Qutub, Islam, Islamist and Muslims with Hertzl, Judaism, Jewish extremist and Jewish, sadly you will get the definition of Zionism.

"In almost every Arab state, the constitution defines Islam as the state religion, and stipulates that any state law must be implicitly compatible with Islamic law."

Why are you comparing Israel with Arab states? You think it makes sense? compare it with pre-1920 Palestine: A place where Muslims, Jews, Christians, Druze, Ahmedis, and Bahais lived for an eternity until some Europeans victims of anti-semitism came and started pitting Jewish settlers against their Palestinian neighbours.

"I know of no other minority in no other country that is so bold" - no you don't , but you don't because your knowledge is Israel-centred.

". Imagine that, for instance, English-Pakistanis start demanding that England would no longer be an English country, and would be stripped away of any aspects of Englishness. Shakespeare can no longer be the national poet, the history of England is not to be taught in the schools, etc. How would the English react to that?"

Bringing examples from Europe to draw a similarity with Israel is called comparison fail. First, they are not English-Pakistanis. Most of them are British nationals or just Pakistani. Second, if you look at their rights here, given that they represent only 4% of the UK population, with those of the Arabs, who represent 20% of Israel's population, you'll see that Israel lags five miles behind on the table. British Asians can live any where in the UK (unlike Arabs in Israel); they have access to state funds on an equal footing with all racial or religious groups in the UK (unlike Arabs in Israel). Don't tell me that it's wrong and it will be solved. Successive israeli government since 1948 worked on maintaining this discrepancy btw Jewish and the Arabs to you know why.

"Imagine that, for instance, English-Pakistanis start demanding that England would no longer be an English country, and would be stripped away of any aspects of Englishness. Shakespeare can no longer be the national poet, the history of England is not to be taught in the schools, etc. How would the English react to that?"

This never happened in the UK or the USA and I doubt it will ever happen.

however, the only time such a thing happened is when European Jewish immigrants, who started arriving in Palestine in 1882, and lived there happily with no issues with the Arabs - began to flip in 1920s and - to use your words - "start demanding that England (Palestine) would no longer be an (a Palestinian) English country". That's the only instance in modern history, the only one.

^
This is why Israel views security so high on their agenda.

and Arad, thank you for your comment.

The whole point is that before the release of the Palestine Paper, the army of the hasbara was deafening our ears with the noise about "omert's generous" offer and how
Abbas rejected it.

The papers also give information about Barak's "generous" offer in 2000. All this propaganda was dismantled, and if you haven't read western and Israeli newspapers, then let me tell you: everyone knows that the Palestinians were the generous ones. Evidence? this article, which you didn't read, is one out of many. Check google news again.

All you cared about is spewing your hatred on this platform, a job that is a hasbara's speciality.

But hey, who even thinks that a Hasbara is able to think rationally? you can't do that with the Israel chip in your head and the lies and deception on your laptop's screen.

"The whole point is that before the release of the Palestine Paper, the army of the hasbara was deafening our ears with the noise about "omert's generous" offer and how
Abbas rejected it."

If you want to call it generous, call it generous. Both sides went a long way toward each other, so both can be said to have been "generous". There is indeed a propaganda war, in which both sides try to depict the other as the one refusing peace. The truth is, both are making honest and painful attempts to bridge the gap. Traub's article reflects that nicely.

But that was not at all what my reply was about. I highlighted the fact that while we Israelis are part of the negotiations, and the concessions made by our leaders become part of the national discussion, the Palestinian people are exempt from it. They are not exposed to what is going on, so the Palestinian national consciousness is not changing, not being made aware of the concessions they will have to make.

Witness their reaction now. The PA leaders, to save themselves, must deny the papers and call them fake.

Under such circumstances, how can we believe that peace is possible? We are not seeking peace with the Palestinian negotiators, we are seeking peace with the Palestinian people. They are clearly not prepared to make the required concessions.

Although, I must say, I am so far encouraged by their reaction. In their hearts, they know that these papers come very close to the truth. The fact that they have so far not taken to the street to protest, means that maybe they are beginning to understand that these concessions will have to be made.

The point made in the Palestine Papers (which are only one side of the story) are that the Palestinians attended to Israel's concerns, but even after doing that, they were kicked in the pants.

Refugees? 10,000 return over a period of 10 years - the rest of them can go back to Palestine or stay where they are

Security? NATO or US forces (with as many Jewish soldiers as they wish) to be stationed in the Jordan valley.

Settlements? Almost all of the settlements surrounding Jerusalem - excluding Jabal Abu Ghunem - will remain Israeli

Western Wall? Let's have an international management so that the Old City in Jerusalem, with its muslim, christian and jewish sites, remain open to people of all faiths.

Another point is that after these initial understandings and all the compromises therein, the Israelis, under Netanyahu, refused to recognize them (see Ereikat's meeting with Mithcell and Hale) as part of the Obama-led negotiations.

Israeli historian Benny Morris wrote a very interesting article to the National Interest review after the USA ended its efforts to snatch a settlement freeze from Netanyau. Read it.

After that, and since Morris's article was written before the leaks, you will see that the Palestinians are actually winning this round. Whether or not they'll be able to use it, that's another story.

Thanks for mentioning the National Interest. To which article do you refer: "The Settling Freeze"? I disagree with Morris over his statement that the Israeli center supported the settlements out of blindness. I think they had a very good reason to allow settlement expansion past the Green Line: to put pressure on the Arabs to come to the table, by gradually taking their land. That is, the agreement you get today is better than the one you will get next year. Every step in the history of Israel-Palestine can be seen as an attempt by either side to put time on their side. For Israel to give up settlement expansion without a peace deal is a huge concession.

My point was different, though: the Israelis can't have trusted what the Palestinians were agreeing to in private, until they could see public preparations for the announcement of such a deal. There were never any such preparations; in fact, the opposite was the case.

Perhaps what leaves you with your nagging doubts is the fact that your reply is total nonsense.

My question to you is: does Israel have the basic right to exist, in any borders whatsoever, as a Jewish state? I have asked this question of many anti-Semites, and have yet to receive a straight answer. Perhaps you can provide one.

According to the Palestine Papers, the Palestinians accepted this in private. In public, they have always completely rejected it. That was my point. Please explain how the Israelis should perceive this disconnect.

Were no Jews cleansed from Arab countries in 1948? I would write more if it were worth responding in detail to someone with as little clue as you have.

I see: Zionist equals clueless (not to mention racist).

Let me ask that question again, Mister Not An Anti Semite J Thomas: do the Jews have a right to a country of their own? It's a yes-or-no question, but anti-Semites can't seem to be able to say the word "yes", somehow. Oddly enough, they can't say the word "no" either, and just admit their anti-Semitism. They invariably talk around in circles, exactly like you do, about how much better it would be if we didn't have religious states. Zionism means that the Jews get to have a state. But Zionists are clueless, according to you. They aren't one side of a two-sided dispute, they are just clueless.

By the way, the definition of "clueless" is to state (as you do above) that Israel was the choicest land in the Middle East before the Zionists got there. A statement like that confirms, once again, that you don't know any history, but are happy to mouth propaganda.

The current Israeli government is always using and spreading lies whenever and wherever it can or can't.

haven't you noticed on this website the new far-fetched Hasbara buzz? that the PLO's charter wasn't amended to remove articles calling for the destruction of Israel? even though it was amended twice?

Some Hasbara'ists even started copying/pasting the whole old charter to prove their point!!! where do they get this from?

For the Palestinians, The problem with Netanyahu's 9-month freeze is that under the Roadmap, agreed by UN, USA, EU, Russia, Israeli government and Palestinian Authority, Israel was supposed to halt settlement expansion, including natural growth in the WB and East Jerusalem, for good, not for 9 months. The Palestinians were to crack down on terrorism and reform their security forces, which they did.

Abu Mazen was rare in that he abhorrs violence and he wanted to restore dignity to the Palestinians by committing to agreements and negotiations.

But alas, Israel and the USA wasted him for free.

Netanyahu bragged about footdragging the Americans in his first stint as a prime minister and destroying the peace process:
youtube.com/watch?v=eeT_KLuCdug

Netanyahu has now destroyed the Roadmap.

If the Palestinians wanted a peace deal - that is, if they are ready to agree to a two-state solution with one of the states being Jewish - then the borders are negotiable. They aren't at the bargaining table, not because the Israelis keep building in East Jerusalem, but because the Palestinians don't want to be at the bargaining table. They are happy to sit back and let the rest of the world demand that the Israelis stop building. That being the case, why shouldn't the Israelis build? What would it gain them to stop?