The lie that Israel wants Peace

Back in 2013, the NYT wrote a piece about Naftali Bennet:

Naftali Bennett, the Israeli economy minister. This nationalist neophyte has performed a public service by clarifying the objective inherent in Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank: “The attempt to establish a Palestinian state in our land has ended,” he said this week.

Speaking to a settlers’ conference, Bennett urged Israel to “build, build, build” in order to establish an “Israeli presence everywhere,” called for the rapid annexation of more than 60 percent of the West Bank, declared that the land had been Israel’s for 3,000 years, and characterized the quest for a two-state solution as a colossal exercise in futility.

In short, two states? Fuhgeddaboutit.

His comments followed equally dismissive remarks early this month from Danny Danon, the deputy defense minister. He said most Israelis had “given up the idea of land for peace” and urged Israel to annex wide swaths of the West Bank.

Bennett and Danon were being explicit about an aim implicit in Israeli actions — as opposed to words — since the lightning victory in the 1967 war delivered all the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River and ignited a strong vein of Israeli religious nationalism. The “miracle” of annexation of East Jerusalem and control of the West Bank was proof of a mission to hold all of Eretz Israel — the biblical “Land of Israel” to which Bennett referred. (At the age of 41, Bennett has never lived in an Israel that did not exercise humiliating dominion over West Bank Palestinians.)

This Messianic view of the Jewish state’s destiny has grown for the past 46 years, despite undertakings from various leaders, including Netanyahu in 2009, to seek a two-state peace. If the number of Israeli settlers in the West Bank, outside East Jerusalem, has almost doubled in the past dozen years to over 350,000 (Bennett put the number at 400,000), it is because the notion that all the land belongs to Israel by divine decree has been ascendant and compromise increasingly seen as a deficit of faith. Construction has spelled out what official government policy could not quite say: We have no plans to leave.

It is in this sense that Bennett’s statement is a true public service. Far better to have clarity about the meaning of Israel’s actions in the West Bank than to have a fait accompli — the growing settler presence — cloaked in governmental opacity about the ultimate objective. If the aim is known then a judgment can be made, not least by American Jewish organizations.

Kerry, in a speech this month to the American Jewish Committee (A.J.C.), laid out what holding all the land means: “Israel will be left to choose between being a Jewish state or a democratic state, but it will not be able to fulfill the founders’ visions of being both.” That is no less true for being a tired refrain.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/21/opinion/global/roger-cohen-why-american-jews-matter.html?_r=0


Yesterday Mr Bennet surpassed himself. Building all over the West Bank is not enough, his sights are now set on keeping the Golan Heights. The Golan Heights are actually part of Syria that Israel took and kept, but their occupation of it is not recognised by the world. The excuse he uses is ISIS, which quite funny as it has been proven that Israel have been helping ISIS and working with them. (UN Reveals Israel’s Support for ISIS http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/02/un-reveals-israels-support-for-isis/ )

However, back to the plans of Mr Bennet:

Education Minister Naftali Bennett on Sunday launched a campaign to gain international legitimization for Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights, arguing that while the deep-seated disagreements about the West Bank will not be resolved easily, there is no question that the Golan will remain in Israel’s hands.

“I call on the international community: Recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights,” he said at a conference in Herzliya. “You can choose: It’s either Israel or the Islamic State. It’s either a democracy that elects its heads, or a barbaric organization that cuts off heads. Because in the Golan there’s no such thing as occupation. In the Golan, no one claims human rights abuses, at least not on our side.”

Bennett said he’d like to “challenge the international community to exhibit morality, values and justice. It can be done regarding the Golan Heights. To this day, no state in the world has recognized the Golan as part of Israel, including our friend, the United States of America. It is time the world stand by the right side — Israel’s side.”

Keeping the Golan, which Israel captured in 1967 and officially annexed in 1981, is an Israeli consensus, Bennett said, calling on opposition leader Isaac Herzog and MK Yair Lapid to rally the country around his Golan-themed campaign.

Bennett, the head of the Orthodox-nationalist Jewish Home party, lamented that only 23,000 Jews live in the northern territory. He announced a plan to bring an additional 75,000 Jews to the Golan within the next half-year, mostly through financial incentives.

A fervent opponent of the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Bennett said that the international community’s position on that matter makes an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement unlikely in the near future.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/dropping-west-bank-annexation-bid-bennett-turns-to-the-golan/


Another step on the path 'from the Euphrates to the Nile' and destroy all who get in the way?

Israel are blessed of God .

No matter how much the media lie about Israel God is protecting them and blessing them , what a mighty and awesome God i server .

[img][/img]

So the views of one man is now what all "Israeli" wants.
His views are appalling and I rightly condemn them, but I also condemn this to claim this is what Israel wants. I never say this is what the Palestinians want, I say Hamas or Fatah, a big difference.

Vicar of Dibley wrote:Israel are blessed of God .

No matter how much the media lie about Israel God is protecting them and blessing them , what a mighty and awesome God i server .

" />  

amen xx

It doesn't matter how many threads by one bitter twisted person are posted it just shows how bitter they are and i say again Israel forever Israel will never be wiped out

Belatucadros wrote:So the views of one man is now what all "Israeli" wants.
His views are appalling and I rightly condemn them, but I also condemn this to claim this is what Israel wants. I never say this is what the Palestinians want, I say Hamas or Fatah, a big difference.

You didn't realise that this is a view shared by the Israeli Government?

The two-state solution is dead
Just ask Israel's own ministers.

The peace process is dead. There is no peace; there is no process. And the fabled two-state solution has been buried with it.

Don't take my word for it. Read the views of Israel's new leaders - as documented below - who are refreshingly open, honest and blunt about their opposition to the long-standing, US-led formula of "two states for two peoples".

In fact, while Rice expects the new Israeli government to "demonstrate … a genuine commitment to a two-state solution", the ministers who constitute that coalition government have proudly and publicly demonstrated the exact opposite - some of them since being appointed to their official posts, by Benjamin Netanyahu, earlier this month.

Is anyone paying attention? In a recent press conference, US President Barack Obama said he continued to "believe that a two-state solution is absolutely vital" but was aware that a new Israeli government had been formed "that contains some folks who don't necessarily believe in that premise".

"Some folks" is a convenient understatement from the US president. Let's be clear: These are not fringe voices, or a minority of extremists. These are not junior figures, or a handful of uber-hawks. The (under-reported) fact of the matter is that the vast majority of the ministers who make up the cabinet of Israel's 34th government, from the prime minister downwards, don't believe in a two-state solution, don't want a two-state solution, and don't think a two-state solution is going to happen.

So can the rest of us stop pretending, please?

Here they are in their own words…

1) Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister (Likud)

During the recent Israeli election campaign, Netanyahu - who has a long history of opposing Palestinian self-determination, despite having accepted the concept of a demilitarised Palestinian state in a single speech at Bar-Ilan University in 2009 - ruled out an independent Palestinian state on his watch.
As CNN reported: "Asked by an interviewer with the Israeli news site, NRG, if it was true that a Palestinian nation would never be formed while he's prime minister, Netanyahu replied, 'Indeed'."

Under fire from the White House, he later tried to walk back this specific remark, on US television, yet his own party released a statement on his behalf, during the campaign, that explicitly stated that "any evacuated territory would fall into the hands of Islamic extremist and terror organisations supported by Iran", and therefore, "there will be no concessions or withdrawals; they are simply irrelevant".

2) Silvan Shalom, interior minister (Likud)

Netanyahu has appointed Shalom as Israel's chief negotiator with the Palestinians yet, according to Haaretz, the latter told a meeting of Likud Party activists in 2012: "We are all against a Palestinian state, there is no question about it."

Shalom has also called the occupied West Bank a "bulletproof vest" for Israel.

3) Tzipi Hotovely, deputy foreign minister (Likud)

She may be a deputy minister but Hotovely is the de facto foreign minister in the new government - given Netanyahu is technically the serving foreign minister - and, therefore, Israel's envoy to the world.
Back in 2012 she said she was "opposed to a Palestinian state" and, in her inaugural address to Israeli diplomats on May 21, reports AP, Hotovely said: "This land is ours. All of it is ours. We did not come here to apologise for that… We expect as a matter of principle of the international community to recognise Israel's right to build homes for Jews in their homeland, everywhere."

4) Moshe Yaalon, defence minister (Likud)

Yaalon, a former supporter of the Oslo peace process, who once called for the use of "chemotherapy" against the "cancer-like" Palestinian threat, told Charlie Rose in 2014: "We should find another way, not just talking about the 1967 lines and a Palestinian state."

5) Naftali Bennett, education minister (Jewish Home)

Aside from repeatedly comparing Palestinians to monkeys, Bennett - the former head of the Yesha Council, which represents Israel's illegal settlements - told the New Yorker in 2013: "I will do everything in my power to make sure they never get a state."
In an interview with the Guardian in the same year, he explained: "There is not going to be a Palestinian state … it's just not going to happen."

6) Ayelet Shaked, justice minister (Jewish Home)

Aside from sharing a piece on her Facebook page during 2014's Gaza war which referred to Palestinian children as "little snakes", Shaked declared at a Tel Aviv campaign event in February: "We should manage the conflict and not give up on any centimetre of land. Yes, it's not perfect, but it's better than any other alternative."

7) Uri Ariel, agriculture and rural development minister (Jewish Home)

Ariel, a settler and former secretary of the settlers' Yesha Council, said in 2013: "We need to state clearly that there won't be a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River."

Yisrael Katz, transportation and intelligence minister (Likud)

"I am opposed to a Palestinian state. It is unacceptable, mainly because of our rights to this land," Katz told an executive meeting of the Council of Jewish Communities of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip in 2013.

9) Haim Katz, welfare minister (Likud)

Commenting on Palestinian violence in 2013, Katz said: "The conclusion is clear", that is, "not to establish a Palestinian state, for this will become a terror state on the outskirts of Tel Aviv".

10) Danny Danon, science and technology minister (Likud)

In an interview on Israel National Radio in 2012, Danon said the Oslo process was "finished", declaring: "Enough with the two-state-solution. Land-for-peace is over. We don't want a Palestinian State. We need to apply Israeli sovereignty over all Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria [the occupied West Bank]."

11) Zeev Elkin, Jerusalem affairs and immigrant absorption minister (Likud)

Elkin has said Netanyahu was "wrong" to have opened the door to the possibility of a (demilitarised) Palestinian state and, in an interview with the Sovereignty Journal in 2013, explained: "Whoever objects to the 'two state' solution does not need to present an alternative solution because the basic situation is that this territory belongs to us."

He was even more explicit back in 2011: "There is no place for a Palestinian state, not in temporary borders and not in any other configuration."

12) Yariv Levin, tourism minister (Likud)

In a speech to settlers in 2014, Levin said: "We must … leave behind the slogans of 'land for peace' and 'two states for two people'" because "the two state solution is no solution".

A year earlier, he revealed: "We will try, slowly but surely, to expand the circle of settlements, and to afterwards extend the roads… At the end of this process, the facts on the ground will be that whatever remains [of the occupied West Bank] will be merely marginal appendage."

13) Ofir Akunis, minister without portfolio (Likud)

Akunis was quoted in the March 2015 issue of the Sovereignty Journal as saying: "My objection to a Palestinian state stems primarily from the fact that our right to the land is eternal and irrevocable. The Land of Israel is the property of the Jewish People and there is no people in the world that would surrender its motherland."

Back in 2013, he told Arutz Sheva: "I will oppose any outline that includes two states… This is my ideological and historical position."

14) Miri Regev, culture and sports minister (Likud)

Regev has sponsored legislation calling on Israel to annex the Jordan Valley and thereby thwart any move towards an independent Palestinian state.

"If Regev's bill becomes law," observed the Jerusalem Post in 2013, "Netanyahu would be unable to accept the American offer to put the Jordan Valley and border crossings into Jordan under Palestinian control."

As the Daily Beast noted in February, Regev is "a staunch conservative who strongly opposes a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict".

15) Gila Gamliel, gender equality, minorities and senior citizens minister (Likud)

An opponent of Israel's "disengagement" from Gaza in 2005, Gamliel said in a 2013 interview with Al Monitor that she disagrees "with the word 'occupation'", in reference to the West Bank, and wants Gaza to "annex itself to Egypt, some of the Palestinians can annex themselves to Jordan. They have many countries".

16) Gilad Erdan, public security, strategic affairs and public diplomacy minister (Likud)

Speaking at an International Institute for Counter-Terrorism conference in 2014, Erdan said: "To continue talking about Palestinian statehood with the same determination and the same confidence as 15, 20 years ago is irresponsible."

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/05/state-palestine-israel-zionist-150527070943455.html

Palestine don't want peace they just want to wipe Israel of the map

Yes another copy and paste sassy.
I do not deny some Israeli's like you only want a one state solution.
You are as hateful as they are and two peas in the same bod, that argument just will not cut it. The fact is you ignore that the many of the BDS do not recognise Israel and never will.
All roads lead back to one thing, the many Arabs not recognizing Israel. So the question you have to ask yourself is, do you support the state of Israel existing?

Belatucadros wrote:Yes another copy and paste sassy.
I do not deny some Israeli's like you only want a one state solution.
You are as hateful as they are and two peas in the same bod, that argument just will not cut it. The fact is you ignore that the many of the BDS do not recognise Israel and never will.
All roads lead back to one thing, the many Arabs not recognizing Israel. So the question you have to ask yourself is, do you support the state of Israel existing?

well said didge

Belatucadros wrote:Yes another copy and paste sassy.
I do not deny some Israeli's like you only want a one state solution.
You are as hateful as they are and two peas in the same bod, that argument just will not cut it. The fact is you ignore that the many of the BDS do not recognise Israel and never will.
All roads lead back to one thing, the many Arabs not recognizing Israel. So the question you have to ask yourself is, do you support the state of Israel existing?

Don't start about C&P, because that would be very hypocritical of you.  The Israeli government do not want peace, they want the whole of Palestine, and that just happened to be an article with a lot of quotes from the members of the present government in it.

As for BDS, it was a weapon that was used against the government of S.Africa to great effect to bring down apartheid.  It is a weapon that is against the goverment to make them treat Palestinians as human beings and to stop the illegal settlements, which in turn are a weapon used by the Israeli Government to take over Palestine.

risingsun wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:Yes another copy and paste sassy.
I do not deny some Israeli's like you only want a one state solution.
You are as hateful as they are and two peas in the same bod, that argument just will not cut it. The fact is you ignore that the many of the BDS do not recognise Israel and never will.
All roads lead back to one thing, the many Arabs not recognizing Israel. So the question you have to ask yourself is, do you support the state of Israel existing?

Don't start about C&P, because that would be very hypocritical of you.  The Israeli government do not want peace, they want the whole of Palestine, and that just happened to be an article with a lot of quotes from the members of the present government in it.

The Israeli Government may not want peace, neither does Hamas, so where does that lead your argument Sassy. Two wrongs do not make a right. I admit the failings and wrongs of one, you try to excuse the other.
The fact is at many times in history, there could have been a Palestinian state and at every opportunity, the PLO, Fatah and Hamas have denied this, not Israel. There is no denying this, this is why they keep people as refugees, it gains sympathy, so does placing people in harms way as Hamas does all of which you turn a blind eye to. The fact is your hate is antisemitic and you fail to see why, as both nations have a right to exists, you only care that one does, I care that both exist

You have been shown over and over again where Hamas have offered peace, and Hamas still say they will accept the 1967 borders. I presume you are working on the presumption you tell a lie often enough and people will believe it.

The PLA and Hamas have said that they are prepared to sit down and discuss peace but everytime this has happened Israel wreck any chance of that happening.

Even last year Israel said to the PLA you can have peace with us but you can't have peace with Hamas as well

They never even gave it a chance.

Irn Bru wrote:The PLA and Hamas have said that they are prepared to sit down and discuss peace but everytime this has happened Israel wreck any chance of that happening.

Even last year Israel said to the PLA you can have peace with us but you can't have peace with Hamas as well

They never even gave it a chance.

Poor lies again, as every time Israel has made concessions
Why did Israel leave Gaza Irn?
Why is it the Arab nations have never recognized Israel?
Why is it they never recognised resolution 242?
Now I know you are very poor at history, but at every turn, how many excuses are you going to give for the PLO, Fatah and Hamas for not recognising the state of Israel?

You do realise that you can't recognise a State until it's borders are defined, and Israel's borders are not definied.

risingsun wrote:You do realise that you can't recognise a State until it's borders are defined, and Israel's borders are not definied.

In other words you are saying you do not recognise the Israelis to have self determination.
I on the other hand recognise the Palestinians to have self determination, even though they have never had a a nation.
Your antisemitism  is shinning hun

Belatucadros wrote:

risingsun wrote:You do realise that you can't recognise a State until it's borders are defined, and Israel's borders are not definied.

In other words you are saying you do not recognise the Israelis to have self determination.
I on the other hand recognise the Palestinians to have self determination, even though they have never had a a nation.
Your antisemitism  is shinning hun

Not what I said.

A ‘right to existence’ for a State is not an esoteric right, it must materialize within a clearly defined territory. Although this ‘right to existence’ is intrinsically connected with the issue of borders, the fact that the borders of Israel are not yet defined goes largely unnoticed when Israel demands Palestine recognise it.

Belatucadros wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:The PLA and Hamas have said that they are prepared to sit down and discuss peace but everytime this has happened Israel wreck any chance of that happening.

Even last year Israel said to the PLA you can have peace with us but you can't have peace with Hamas as well

They never even gave it a chance.

Poor lies again, as every time Israel has made concessions
Why did Israel leave Gaza Irn?
Why is it the Arab nations have never recognized Israel?
Why is it they never recognised resolution 242?
Now I know you are very poor at history, but at every turn, how many excuses are you going to give for the PLO, Fatah and Hamas for not recognising the state of Israel?

What concessions did Israel make Didge. How generouis were they to the people of a country they were occupying?

You tell me why they left Gaza because I really want to hear your explanation.

Why did the Arabs say no...

http://www.mepc.org/articles-commentary/commentary/original-no-why-arabs-rejected-zionism-and-why-it-matters

It's a long read Didge but go through it and let me know what you think.

I think you should be telling me why Israel has never complied with Resolution 242.

And why has Israel refused to recognise and accept a sovereign state for Palestine?

History not your strongpoint is it

risingsun wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


In other words you are saying you do not recognise the Israelis to have self determination.
I on the other hand recognise the Palestinians to have self determination, even though they have never had a a nation.
Your antisemitism  is shinning hun

Not what I said.

A ‘right to existence’ for a State is not an esoteric right, it must materialize within a clearly defined territory. Although this ‘right to existence’ is intrinsically connected with the issue of borders, the fact that the borders of Israel are not yet defined goes largely unnoticed when Israel demands Palestine recognise it.

No a nation has a right by self determination.
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
Do you back democracy over theocracy?
Simple questions

Belatucadros wrote:

risingsun wrote:

Not what I said.

A ‘right to existence’ for a State is not an esoteric right, it must materialize within a clearly defined territory. Although this ‘right to existence’ is intrinsically connected with the issue of borders, the fact that the borders of Israel are not yet defined goes largely unnoticed when Israel demands Palestine recognise it.

No a nation has a right by self determination.
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
Do you back democracy over theocracy?
Simple questions

A nation (Palestine) has a right to self determination
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Palestine has a right to exist
Do the people with the self determination have a right to chose they own way of goverment
Simply question.

risingsun wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:


No a nation has a right by self determination.
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
Do you back democracy over theocracy?
Simple questions

A nation (Palestine) has a right to self determination
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Palestine has a right to exist
Do the people with the self determination have a right to chose they own way of goverment
Simply question.

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Now answer mine
No a nation has a right by self determination.
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
Do you back democracy over theocracy?

Belatucadros wrote:

risingsun wrote:

A nation (Palestine) has a right to self determination
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Palestine has a right to exist
Do the people with the self determination have a right to chose they own way of goverment
Simply question.

Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Now answer mine
No a nation has a right by self determination.
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
Do you back democracy over theocracy?

Israel has a right to exist, in the borders it was given, at the most the 1967 borders. I back democracry over theocracy when the people want it. Because that is what self determination means.

risingsun wrote:

Belatucadros wrote:
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Now answer mine
No a nation has a right by self determination.
Do you believe in self determination?
Do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
Do you back democracy over theocracy?

Israel has a right to exist, in the borders it was given, at the most the 1967 borders. I back democracry over theocracy when the people want it.   Because that is what self determination means.

But Sassy, theocracy does not allow for democracy and I am well and truly against theocracy,because it does not allow for a vote sassy, so how is it a self determination?
Well considering Israel had a bigger land mass in 1967, why is it Sassy now this landmass is smaller?
Does that show it makes concessions?
Why is it the lands they took were occupied by Jordanians, Syrians, and Egyptians, not Palestinian?