Wow. It is amazing how readily you sidestep the facts in analyzing this. So the demand to recognize a Jewish State is just a recent Netanyahu invention to torpedo the peace process? In other words, the fact that the so called "Palestinian right of return" would destroy Israel, and that Palestinian leaders have openly proclaimed this, is irrelevant to the peace process? The fact that the two territories Israel has withdrawn from - Gaza and Sinai - have become havens for terrorism and attacks on Israel? Also, apparently, irrelevant; the only explanation for Israel's reluctance to allow complete "sovereignty" to a Palestinian state can only be because of Netanyahu. I would ordinarily attribute a half-truthful hatchet job like this to ignorance, but since you (the author) are obviously far from an ignorant man, I can only wonder at what generates such an ill-informed article as this. However, since I notice so many comments on Foreignpolicy.com are from the extreme anti-semitic "Jews as Nazis" left-wing ilk, for whom truth is utterly irrelevant ("MMCMILLAN" is a fine example), perhaps you just know your market demographic.

Well researched & documented historical analyses that for example, demonstrates that mostly American $money$ has successfully created & maintains a broad and incredibly influential Lobby that disingenuously results in both American and Israeli behaviours that are disasterous for both nations. The parallel creation, maintenance and integration of infrastructure with propaganda and power machines in both nations is frightening ... a free political daily and political "research institutions" funded by an American, and the targeted placement of select rabid ideological minorities in power positions?!?? Sad, so very sad ...

These bad behaviours are clearly disasterous in the loong run for both "free" nations, and importantly, not consistent with Judaism.

"and I don't mind if they watch porn movies and extreme violence on television,"

Mr. Levy's quote from this source sums up what he considers " universal ethical values so central to much of contemporary Jewish identity."

He castigates Mr. Netanyahu for doing exactly what a democratically elected leader of any nation is supposed to do - attempt to promote and secure the best interests of his nation.
Mr. Levy apparently believes that the best interests of Israel are to surrender to Arabs who wish to obliterate Israel.
Mr. Levy apparently believes that the best interests of Israel are to let Jerusalem be partitioned once more and to surrender its Holy Places to desecration and degradation.
Mr. Levy apparently admires Thomas Friedman who, in a New York Times editorial, just proclaimed that spraying disgusting graffiti on a mosque is the exact same moral equivalent as murdering Jewish babies...

What peoples on Earth, such as the Arabs Mr. Levy is championing, have ever made their cause by mass murder; avowals of annihilation; daily bombings and attacks; and the actual worship of Death - and have thereby ever freed themselves from those they wish to destroy?
None.
Not in all of History.
Israel has the exact same rights to subdue its enemies as does every other country on Earth who, universally, worldwide, without exception, do not allow their local terrorists who demand their "freedoms from oppression" to dictate to their ruling governments.

Mr. Levy quotes Isaiah as a model of repentance on Yom Kippur, as indeed he should.
However, Mr. Levy apparently has zero knowledge of the 3,000 year old religion called Judaism, which does, indeed, lay claim to the Land of Israel and the City of Yerushalyim.

The passage from Isaiah that we read on Yom Kippur, is appealing to Jews to obey a Just Creator and live how The Creator demands that they live.
I would humbly suggest that Mr. Levy actually spend some time in the synagogue this Yom Kippur and try to follow the dictates of his Creator.

This is the end of that Mr. Levy quoted in Isaiah:

"And the Lord will guide you continually and satisfy your desire in scorched places and make your bones strong; and you shall be like a watered garden,
like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail.
And your ancient ruins shall be rebuilt; you shall raise up the foundations of many generations; you shall be called the repairer of the breach, the restorer of streets to dwell in.
“If you turn back your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight and the holy day of the Lord honorable; if you honor it, not going your own ways, or seeking your own pleasure, or talking idly; then you shall take delight in the Lord, and I will make you ride on the heights of the earth; I will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your father, for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”

G'mar Chasima Tova.

As an Editor of Foreign Policy's Middle East Channel.Daniel Levy is given an unlimited forum an unlimited space (7 full pages) to spread his desceptive anti-Israel venum. So my quarrel is more with Foreign Policy for selecting an editor like Mr. Levy who is willing to twist the facts to spread his propaganda. Here is a quote from the article that demonstrate how far Mr. Levy would go to spread his lies: "Israel's leaders accepted the 1947 U.N. partition plan but then secured a much greater portion of Palestine than the United Nations had granted and expelled much of the Palestinian population in the ensuing war." Really Mr. Levy, an "ensuing war"? Who started that war? Why? In attempt to deceive the reader to see Israel as the aggressor, Mr. Levy does not mention that the war started by six Arab countries against a population of only 600,000 Jews because they did not accept the 1947 UN partition. Mr. Levy join the Arab countries in spreading the lie that Israel "expelled much of the Palestinian population" without providing one iota of evidence. How could Israel with its limited resources in 1948 expell close to a million Palestinian? I can only assume that Mr. Levy buys into the Arab propaganda that Israel terrorised the Palestinian population and caused them to flee. The fact is that Israel was less harsh toward the Palestinians during the 1948 War of Independence than almost any other military toward an indiginous population during a time of war, yet in place after place like Yugoslavia to Congo, in spite of genosides we don't see indiginous populations fleeing in masses. The fact was that 800000 Palestinians fleed their homes because Arab leaders who were certain of their victory in the 1948 war, warned the Palestinians to flee or be massacred by Jews. They promised the Palestinian a quick return to their homes after they annihilate the Jewish state.

Mr. Levy continues with his deception spree stating "Israel's leaders captured the Egyptian Sinai in the late 1960s and spent a decade building civilian and military outposts there only to evacuate the area a little over a decade later," again trying to give the reader the impression that the Six Day war of 1967 was Israel's choice. Nothing can be further from the truth. When Gamal Abdul Nasser and his Syrian counterparts amassed their armies at the borders with Israel, expressing openly in their media their intentions of invading Israel, Israel on its part warned King Hussein of Jordan to stay out of the war. If he took that advise, Judea and Samaria would still be under Jordanian control and there would be no settlements. However, the Palestinians obviously would never asked for a state while Jordan controlled the teritory.

This is one of the most deceptive article I have ever seen. It is sad to see how far people like people like Mr. Levy are willing to go to promote their views while distorting facts. We should remind ourselves that the worst enemies of Jews have always been other Jews. However, the most disappoing asect of all this is that a professional magazine like FP appoints to the position of Editor someone who is willing to write this kind of article and to provide him unlimited space for it.

American Jewish Realist, I think you are missing the point. I think you need look no further than the Lebanon and Gaza pullouts to understand Israel's reluctance to engage in further concessions to bring about a Palestinian state (and let's not talk about peace because that is simply unrealistic). I'm not suggesting Netanyahu would ever have pulled out of the West Bank or actually engaged in real peacemaking - I'm not willing to make the broad assumptions that Daniel Levy does - but the previous "concessions" actually brought less peace to the region. So on a purely utilitarian basis, would it not seem somewhat idiotic for Israel to continue to grant concessions? And should the Palestinians and their allies truly be absolved of all blame? Israel should bear some blame, but the implication of what you and Mr. Levy write suggest Israel should bear all of the blame and the point of those to whom you respond is clearly that Israel was put into this position, not due to her own actions but those of her enemies so a certain absurdity now arises when it is "all about Israel".

I also take exception to the short shrift Mr. Levy gives to the concept of the Jewish State, effectively endorsing the rejectionists. I would remind you all that the UN General Assembly, in passing the partition plan in 1947, explicitly endorsed the concept and this is a direct quote: "Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem, set forth in Part III of this Plan, shall come into existence in Palestine two months after the evacuation of the armed forces of the mandatory Power has been completed but in any case not later than 1 October 1948. The boundaries of the Arab State, the Jewish State, and the City of Jerusalem shall be as described in Parts II and III below." Those who voted for partition but now crticize Netanyahu for insisting Israel be recognized as a Jewish State and complete hypocrites, it would seem. Those who look to the UN to establish a Palestinian State but reject that Israel be accepted as a Jewish State are also hypocrites.

As you are purporting your illusions to be facts, perhaps it might be helpful to others who don't know any better to refute your various points -

1) The two state solution - No country in the history of mankind has ever carved a separate State out of territory it has acquired for a people dedicated to the destruction of that particular country.
This has never happened and it will never happen.
Why would any country or people create a country for a people who daily attack and murder anyone, in this case mostly other Muslims and Arabs, who they do not like?
Study history. And come up with a reason to create another hostile Arab State.

2) "The one state solution (unitary democratic and non-sectarian) confronts the issue of an absolute political sovereignty based on race. A "Jewish" state. A master race. This is clearly a racist formulation."
Judaism is a religion. Like most religions, there is absolutely no racism in Judaism. Your claim is false.

3) "An Apartheid solution cannot be sustained."
There are about one and half million Arabs who are full citizens of Israel - most of whom are nominally Muslim.
In the areas under the nominal control of the Arabs - such as Gaza or Bethlehem - nearly all Christian Arabs have left due to the direct threat to their lives from Muslim Arabs.
All non-Israeli Arabs living in Jerusalem were offered Israeli citizenship.
Today, nearly 50% of non-Israeli Arabs living in Jerusalem claim (in an Arab poll) that they would become citizens of Israel if the Palestinian Authority ever established a separate state.
Your "apartheid" claim is a lie.

5) The Palestinian cause and demands for justice, including the same right of return that the Jews maintain, has the full backing of a quarter of all humanity, being the entire Muslim world, and much of the rest.
The Jewish cause and demands for justice, including compensation (the right of return) for being forcibly ejected from their homes throughout the world, are not even considered.
There are no other refugee populations in the world where great grandchildren are considered somehow tied to their mythical homeland.
ALL refugee problems, including the much, much larger ones such as between India and Pakistan or Turkey and Greece, have been solved by the population being absorbed into whatever country they are living in....
Arab refugees will never be able to claim their ancestor's hut in Israel as their own. It's not going to happen.
It never has in all of history, and it never will.

If the Arabs truly wanted to take over Israel, all they would have to do would be to surrender; lay down their arms; and accept total domination by Israel.
Then, massively and peacefully protest every single injury Israel ever does, real or imagined.
If this were done, Israel would cease to exist as a Jewish State within five years.

Of course, the Arabs will never do this.

He disputes reality with argumentation.But reality matters, and endless arguments do not.

I urged Israel supporters to make a viable just and enduring peace (at least with the great majority of both sides) for some forty years.

Didn't happen. Now it can't, because the feasible solutions (the two state solution based upon the 1967 boundaries with some equal territorial swaps, or alternatively the one state solution, unitary democratic and non-sectarian) are foreclosed either by facts on the ground, or a total rejection of the one person, one vote foundation for a unitary state. Anywhere else in the world the rejection of one person one vote basis of democracy would be unacceptable or unsustainable. So Israel is no democracy.

Who could have foreseen the massive changes in the middle east now underway? Who can be so willfully blind to assert that history will not continue to march on? Can the shield of US be maintained forever? Think about it.

...And BEFORE Netanyahu, did Arabs like Israel? Wait, BEFORE there were Jewish settlements -- did Arabs like Jews? Wait, BEFORE there was Israel, did Arabs accept Jews?

Arabs have been hating Jews, attacking Jews, massacring Jews since the beginning of the 20th century. That's a historical fact. Already in the EARLY 1920s. No Netanyahu, no Jewish settlements.

That's part of Arab's legacy. Hating anybody who is not like them. The Infidels.

Wait, but they don't only massacre Jews, or Christians, they also massacre THEIR OWN.... Shiite slaughter Sunnis, Sunnis bomb Shiite mosques filled with worshippers, Hamas drop Fatah members from the top of buildings, Fatah members torture Hamas prisoners to death.

They were also Hitler's staunch allies during WW2.

The problem is not Netanyahu. The problem is the same problem for many decades. Arabs/Muslims who can't live in peace with the rest of the world.

Or within themselves.

I am pleased to see some sensible comments under this appalling article.
It is always a pleasure to find rational opinion about Israel - take the Irish columnist Kevin Myers, for example:

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/

"........come over and meet the conjoined forces of hatred, ignorance, blindness, hysteria and prejudice that the name 'Israel' invariably inspires. Short of Hamas opening up a few death-camps for Jews now, rather than after they've finally defeated Israel, I'm not sure what would destroy the irrational Israelophobia that is so powerful in Ireland.

Critics of Israel deplore its origins within the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which committed the British to making a homeland for the Jews. So do I. It was not British land, and no British government had any right to make any promises about it. But I cannot revisit the past and restore the Hapsburg Empire, or overthrow Bolshevism. Many things resulted from that terrible time. One of those was the formal creation of a homeland in Palestine for Jews. The forces that erupted across Europe in the following decades produced an entirely new world order, in which Israel took its place, as thousands of Palestinians either fled, or were forced to flee, their homes.

But comparable things happened across the world around the same time, in the Punjab and Bengal, East Prussia and Sudetenland, the Baltic and Tartary. And so we must deal with the world that history has bequeathed us. We cannot endlessly undo events or 'return' people to the land their ancestors once inhabited -- either in Kashmir or in Kansas.

But this is where the world religio-cultures divide. For most Muslims do not accept that such historical processes are irreversible. They believe that once land is Dar al-Islam -- the abode of the faithful -- it can never be relinquished. If taken by non-believers, it then becomes Dar al-Harb: the abode of war, and shall remain so until it is restored to Islam. And so Israel has for the past 62 years been Dar al-Harb.

Indeed, neither the 'secular' PLO nor the Islamicist Hamas sees a long-term resolution in the Middle East that will genuinely include the state of Israel. Even for many 'moderate' Palestinians, the twin-state solution is the merely the stepping-stone to the status quo ante the Balfour Declaration. Palestine will thus be restored to the Dar al-Islam and the Caliphate.

Now, if you oppose the right of Israel to exist, that's clear enough: you want the Jews of Israel either dispersed or killed, so there's not much to discuss, other than train timetables, methodology (gas or gun?) and corpse-disposal. It's been done before; maybe this time, you'll get it right.

But if you support the right of Israel to exist, but condemn Israeli methods for coping with Palestinian terrorism, then how do you propose to deal with the volleys of thousands of Hamas rockets into Israeli towns from Gaza? You want a proportionate response? Very well, tell us what is proportionate. If you are against suicide bombers, but are opposed to the wall that has successfully prevented suicide bombers from entering Israel from the West Bank, then what is your realistic and efficient alternative to the wall?

Emoting over the plight of the Palestinian refugees -- a fond pastime in this country -- begs the question: why are they still refugees? Why haven't they been absorbed by their Arab neighbours as the Muslims of the Indian Punjab have been in Pakistan; as the Hindus of Lahore have in Amritsar; as the Germans of Danzig have been in Hamburg?

Why? Because, quite simply, most of Israel's neighbours don't want a permanent, irreversible peace with the Jewish state. They want Dar al-Harb by terrorism and political instability until the day of jihad arrives, after which the Dar al-Islam will be restored. If this means keeping the people of the Gaza Strip confined in an open-air madhouse, so be it. Thus, Gaza is the paradise where Shariah law rules, where it is illegal for girls to ride bikes, where honour-killings are legitimate and where all the members of the 'secular' Fatah movement have been butchered by Hamas. And if Islamic fundamentalists do that to their fellow Palestinians, what have they in mind for the Jews, whom the Koran calls "pigs and monkeys"?

One-hundred-and-fifty Irish 'artists' have announced they are boycotting Israel. What, 150? That's about 140 more than I thought we had. Poor Israel! Being boycotted by Irish daubers it's never even heard of. Yet strangely enough, these 'artists' don't condemn the totalitarian Islamo-Nazism of Hamas, or the emerging Fourth Reich of Iran. No, instead, they obsess over the misdeeds of a democratic state the size of Munster in a democracy-free, Arab landmass as big as the US........"

One point was missed. Netanyahu* has managed to take precisely the worst possible strategy at this time. In terms of demographics, geography and military power time is not on Israel's side. The Arab nations tend to show a greater birth rate and the mortality rate is going to fall further with the advance of cheap technologies. Israel is literally surrounded on all sides by nations that are in a 'cold peace' with it (and in Syria's case closer to a cold war) and the traditional authoritarian allies are either gone or facing an uncertain future. Militarily the balance will not remain on Israel's side for much longer. Add to that serious economic difficulty (though not as bad as Egypt or Syria's) and Israel is simply in a terrible position.

Logically in this position the best thing Israel could do would be to quickly establish a Palestinian state, negotiate the return of the Golan Heights to Syria and do everything possible to show Iran as more of a threat to the Arab world. Instead they've managed to move even further to a fundamentalist right. To put it bluntly, in strategic terms Israel is not only at a disadvantage, the Israel government and people are also actively shooting themselves in the collective foot.

13 LINES ISRAEL’S LOBBY WANT YOU TO BELIEVE

1. Israel is in danger of being pushed into the sea by Iran
2. It is co-operating in the establishment of a Palestinian state
3. Its illegal settlements are supported by Jews worldwide
4. Although a secular state, it claims the land to be given by God
5. It does not employ torture on any of its 7000 political prisoners
6. Its political system is not corrupt & its judiciary is independent
7. Its military and police operate under international law
8. It does not use chemical weapons against civilians
9. It has no disproportionate influence either in congress or senate
10. There is no secret stockpile of weapons of mass destruction
11. It has signed the nuclear non-proliferation treaty
12. It wants an equitable peace and believes in human rights
13. Its policy of state-sponsored assassination is legitimate
________________________________________

You state, "Netanyahu's position was to vote against and quit the government in protest at the 2005 Gaza disengagement plan." Not so. Netanyahu voted for the disengagment for Gaza. In fact, after he did so, Ehud Olmert jumped out of his seat in the Knesset knowing that the motion would then pass and become law. And in fact, it was Ariel Sharon who quit the government, not the other way around. Mr. Levy, the fact that you incorrectly recall such current events lends credence to the accusation that you form your opinions first and then cherry-pick historical events, or invent new "facts", to support your pre-formed opinion.

i hope yes, take this one: don't lie.

"In 1948, the leader of the Palestinians was the Mufti Mohammad Amin al-Husayni who supported Hitler in extermination of Jews (hoping that Hitler will reach Palestine and will finish off the Jews) and who led the Palestinian participation in the 1948 war".

the mufti al-husayni was a great leader for the palestinian like his father but he was not the leader of the palestinian in 1948, it was the arab higher committee at that time he was one of them but he was out of the picture at that time his men made a good effort in 1947 but it was not enougth because they loose most of there power aginst the british (1935-1939), in 1947 the arab committee refuse the partition of palestine plan and offered in the UN one state for all the people who are living in palestine arab and jews, but the jewish agency for palestine refused.

the fact that Haj Mohammed Amin el-Husseini met with hittler is fact he asked him to give a promise for the independent of palestine Arab after germany win the war like what the zionist leaders do when they asked the british in WWI "the balfour promise", he have no other solution.. my enemy's "The british occupation and the zionism" enymy is my friend, and many other in the same position in the world at that time do the same.

Subhas Chandra Bose
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subhas_Chandra_Bose

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bundesarchiv_Bild_101III-Alber-064-03A,_Subhas_Chandra_Bose_bei_Heinrich_Himmler.jpg

Hitler's secret Indian army
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3684288.stm

but how can you ecxplain this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehi_(group)#Contact_with_Nazi_Germany

or this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_David_Hotel_bombing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haavara_Agreement

husayni did somthing wrong because if we want our freedom we must not asked it from a devil, but any one was at that time and watched what is going to happened and the british project to destroy the arab comunity in palestine and the continues immigration for jews to palestine ,he have no other choice.

at that time you must choose between two great powers, some arab palestinian leaders choosed to stand with the british like Raghib al-Nashashibi, but he didn't trust the british

(It was the Mufti Mohammad Amin al-Husayni who called on the Palestinians in 1948 to leave their homes to clear the way for a frontal attack on the new Iindependent Jewish state.)

so what about this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre

and many others like it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arab_towns_and_villages_depopulated_during_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus

read books for benny morris
"The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited"
"1948 and after; Israel and the Palestinians" .
and illan pappe "The ethnic cleansing of palestine".

or study the modern history of the region first before you talk about somthing you don't know.

different planet, Bibi was the only prime minister from a right wing party to freeze settlements for 10 months, where was abbas hiding for 9 months came for a month and left again. Abbas knows he won't get a good deal like he would from olmert and he said no to that anyway.

Is mr levy or tom freedman willing to send their kids to the gaza strip? to make sure no weapons are shot at Israel if it makes peace with the illegitimate government of the fatach. Can they really enforce what goes on in gaza, what the heck are you people talking about, what will happen to hamas once we sign that paper ? they will just become peace lovers,? who is going to pay with blood if not the Israelis, we have paid enough.

How can you make peace with people who consistently incite against Israel , teaching their kids the worst things about jews and glorify terrorists .
Abba was talking about 1948 lines in his speech.

The left hates bibi so much it is amusing , he is liked by the public not because he "refuses to make peace" according to the author and left wing media in Israel , but because he is handling israels affairs well.

I suggest the middle east expert focus on the slaughter that is going on in syria, maybe the kurds deserve their own state why don't you write about that you phony , what about cypress do they have an occupation problem? It is amazing how much the media hates Israel and gives it disproportional attention.

This conflict is not about Bibi, or Abu Mazzen..

Neither it is, about land, who gets what.

It is not about Palestinians and Israelis. Nor about Israeli-Arab conflict.

This conflict is about much much larger agenda. It is about Islam vs. Judea, going back to the dawn of Islam.
It is about tolerance (or luck their of), by Muslim toward anyone who does not follow their strict religious code..

Just ask other non-Muslim indigenous minorities who had lived in the region for thousands of years, and almost all have been purged by the local Muslim.

This is the core issue which Mr. Levy neither gets it, or conveniently choses to ignore, to not anger the Muslim world.

Finally. I have notices in the 7 full page essay, he never spells out what the Pals demand from Israel - beside the proverbial "Pals deserve their own state".

Like the saying goes, "The devil is in the details".

A resumption of talks by the Quartet is pointless.The situation in the occupied territorie­s and the illegal expropriat­ion of Palestinia­n land in the West Bank and in east Jerusalem will need more than a wringing of hands and a plea to God for forgiveness.

Atonement is the expiation or reparation given for an injury or wrong. There is no sense of atonement this Yom Kippur by the current hard-line, right-wing government of Israel. The violation of human rights continues unabated as does the illegal blockade of essential supplies to half a million Muslim families in Gaza. Here there is no light only the darkness of oppression by a brutalizin­g occupation.

I doubt that God is blind.

> the state's occupation of Palestinian territories

First of all, let's be clear on one thing: there is no such people as 'Palestinians'. The people using that name are in fact ethnic Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese and Egyptians. They are the descendants of illegal immigrants allowed into Mandate-era Palestine by the British, to counter Jewish immigration.

It thus follows that it is impossible to 'occupy' the lands belonging to a non-existent people.

OK... now that we've got that one out of the way, let's examine the thorny issue of 'occupation'. Exactly which Fakestinian territories do you think Israel is 'occupying'? Gaza? Surely not. Reassure us that despite the immature and hysterical nature of your article, you're not seriously trying to claim that Gaza is 'occupied'?

What about 'The West Bank', then? To begin with, the 'West Bank' was called Judea & Samaria for roughly 3,000 years until 1948 when Jordan (along with five other Arab armies plus the Fakestinians) instigated a war of aggression against Israel. Jordan turned Judea & Samaria (and East Jersualem) into areas that were in effect 'Judenrein'. Prior to that period, Judea & Samaria had been reserved for 'close Jewish settlement' after the San Remo Conference of 1920 (see also the Balfour Declaration of 1917).

To date, the only legally binding document which governs ownership of Judea & Samaria, is the San Remo Conference, and it has never been abrogated.

Fast forward to 1967, and Israel was again attacked by Arab armies, and this time, the Jews won back East Jerusalem and Judea & Samaria. According to public international law and precedent, the state which holds territory gained after a defensive war, has better title. Jordan's possession of Judea & Samaria from 1948 to 1967 was illegal.

The above notwithstanding, however, it is a fact that currently, 98% of 'the West Bank' is controlled by the Fakestinian Authority.

So... considering all the above... please tell me what land Israel is 'occupying'.

Palestinian and their supporters lead people to believe that, their wish, is only “an end to Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza & E. Jerusalem”. Far from it. Their plan is for more sinister and insidious – going back to 1960's.

These are the stages, (“Phase Plan”) used by PLO, Hamas & other anti-Israel organizations to eliminate Israel – while they cry foul against state of Israel.

(promulgated by PLO's own Political Program Adopted at the 12th Session of the Palestine National Council. Cairo, 8 June 1974 )

PHASE I: THE DENIAL & DE-LEGITIMIZATION.
1) They label the Israelis, “Zionists” (means “Jews” w/o sounding antisemitic), intended to render them as “outsiders”, or “foreign colonialists”.
2) Deny the Holocaust – intended to remove the very reason for which Israel was created. (re: the Akmed in Tehran).
3) They question & deny the Jewish history, & their continued presence in and around Jerusalem (Arafat: in 2000 Camp David).
4) They repeat the same lies on every public stage. (Abu Mazen speech in UNGA. “Jerusalem is to Christians and Muslims” - omits the Jews)

PHASE II – “ZIONISM” AND THE “APARTHEID” EFFECT.
1) They do know that, Zionism was a political movement, created in 1899 to empower Jews to live in their own homeland, safe from further persecutions.
2) They emphasis only the role of the European Jews, - while never mention the 1.2M Jewish refugees, whom many Arab countries had pushed out from their own countries.
3) They wrap the “South Africa” noose and its infamous “Apartheid” system around the Israelis neck.
4) They continue try to convince the world community (through UN Resolutions) that Zionism is a system of Apartheid – which they did succeed of doing for a period of time.
5) They also know that, once they call Israelis “Jews”, they have affirmed Israel's right to exist as homeland for Jews – undermining their own religious belief of “Waqf” (Muslim land).
6) They Adapt a well known propaganda tool. “A lie, if repeated loud, and repeated often enough, soon people will believe it as the absolute truth.
7) In English to the world community, they Speak of “peace”. In Arabic to their own people, they speak or war (Dar Al-Harb) and annihilation of Jews.

PHASE III: THE PROVOCATION & THE VICTIMIZED.
1) Coupled with Phase II, they keep low intensity provocations (through homicide bombing from WB & rockets from Gaza). Then hope for IDF response (which most certainly does follow).
2) They Show the gory pictures of dead children to TV viewers world wide, to generate sympathy for them, and anger against the Israelis.
3) They repeat it often enough such that, the picture of “the ugly Israeli solder shooting innocent civilians” is vivid in people's mind and heart. Render Israel as “racist”, “brutal”, and “ugly” element living among the “peaceful” Arabs.

PHASE IV: THE PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE & INCITEMENT
1) Recognizing the power of words. When speaking for the Palestinians, they use keywords like, “Justice”, “fairness”, “Indigenous people”, “occupied territories”, “victims”, “legal owners”, and “Right of Return” , “International law”- to conjure up positive imagery of the Pals in people's minds.
2)When however, it comes to Israel, they use words like “Stolen land”, “Zionists”, “Colonial occupier”, “discriminations”, “Apartheid”, “massacre”, “criminal”, “war Crimes”, and even “Genocide” is brought up.
3) They keep their people in those refugees camps, throughout the Arab & Islamic states since 1948 to:
a) Continue to play on peoples emotions and sympathy – keep the flame of anti-Israeli alive.
b) Keep the 6M or so refugees as “reserve solders” to be used at the right moment to flood Israel – all under the pretense of “Right of Return”. Then use its democracy to destroy, not only its democracy, but itself as the homeland for Jews.
4) Refer to the land of Israel in religious theological terms, “Dar al Harb” (House of War), to incite the larger Muslim crowd.
5) Play “The good Guy / Bad Guy” scenario. While PLO in WB, depicts the image of the “civilized” “peace loving Palestinians” who is ready to compromise. Hamas in Gaza, plays the opposite role. To force the Israelis for more and more concessions, until nothing is left for them to concede.
6) Use homicide bombing to create psychological fear among the Israelis, with hope they will flee. (“Jews love life, we love death”).
7) Through continued propaganda, render Israel as the source of the problem, and its elimination as the only solution to all the unrest throughout the Islamic countries.

Even if what Daniel Levy says about Bibi is true (and its not), both Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert are not Bibi. Yet neither was able to agree to negotiated peace terms with the Palestinian leadership.

If the Palestinians came out tomorrow and said that they would drop the "right of return" and agree that the conflict is over if Israel would withdraw from the entire West Bank except for the Jewish quarter of the old city of Jerusalem, what would happen? Within weeks, Israel would have new elections and would elect a government that would agree to such terms. But the Palestinians are not offering this.

Under the Saudi plan, Israel would have to withdraw from the entire West Bank, including the Jewish quarter of the old city, withdraw from the Western Wall (the holiest extant site in Judaism) and would have to negotiate the Palestinian right of return. No Zionist party in Israel would ever agree to this - not Labor, not Kadima, certainly not Likud.

In a nutshell, this is what the negotiations or lack of negotiations are about.

Yes, Israel has every right to speak for world-wide Jewry. Jews are not a "religion", nor an "ethnic group" but an people. This doesn't fit the pattern of other religions or ethnic groups or nationalities, but it is truth. We can't be limited or exempted by labels or definitions that apply to the other nations of the world - they don't fit.

What peoples on Earth, such as the Arabs Mr. Levy is championing, have ever made their cause by mass seslichat murder; avowals of annihilation; daily bombings and attacks; and the actual worship of Death - and have thereby ever freed themselves from those they wish to destroy?
None.