Establishment Of Zionist Regime Was A Castrophe For Muslims
“At a time when industrial, scientific, and military development was arrested in the Islamic world and Islamic states were dismembered, Muslims suffered huge losses from the enemies’ conspiracies, the greatest of which was the establishment of the Zionist regime,” Haddad-Adel told high-ranking officials at a ceremony held to mark the martyrdom of Hezbollah commander Imad Mughniyeh.
-May 18 2008
but it didn't have to be. if the palestinians had accepted the 45% of palestine which was apporiated to them in 1948, and if the Muslims had accepted the Jews settling in the other 55%, there would have been no catastrophe.

Israel's UN Mission: Ban Use Of "Nabka"
Israel's UN mission is seeking to outlaw use of the term Nakbah, according to a statement issued Thursday night by a spokesman for UN Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon.

Deputy head of Israel's UN mission, Daniel Carmon, complained that the word Nakba is meant to undermine the legitimacy of Israel's founding and, therefore, use of the term should be should be forbidden.
-May 16 2008
because the truth of the matter is if the arabs had not been so greedy in 1947-8 there would have been a palestinian state created right next to a jewish one. the palestinians have no one to blame but themselves for theirn situation.

PA Representative Plans Israel's Destruction
Palestinian Authority Representative in Lebanon Abbas Zaki Supports Anti-Israeli Attacks and States: We Act According to the Phased Plan. Once We Get Jerusalem, We Will Move On to Drive Israelis Out of All of Palestine.
-April 24 2008
i take anything i hear from memri with a grain of salt, but what mr. Zaki stated is the number 1 reason of the israeli/palestinian conflict: the Palestinians' refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist. Until the palestinians recognize israel, there cannot possibly be peace between the two no matter what Israel does!

PLO Official: We'll Drive Israel Out Of Palestine
"In light of the weakness of the Arab nation and the lack of values, and in light of the American control over the world, the PLO proceeds through phases, without changing its strategy. Let me tell you, when the ideology of Israel collapses, and we take, at least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety, and we will begin to progress with our own ideology, Allah willing, and drive them out of all of Palestine," added Zaki.
-April 15 2008
and as long as the palestinians continue their goal of wiping out israel, there cannot be peace no matter what israel does

Exterminating Israel Not The Solution
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad  is conducting a problematic or, to be precise, paradoxical foreign policy in our region. Here are three examples:

The first is the occupation of three Arab islands by the Islamic Republic of Iran: The Greater Tunb, the Lesser Tunb and Abou Musa, which belong to the United Arab Emirates. Despite repeated appeals by the small Gulf state to end the occupation and return the land to its real owners, Iran's leaders have refused to do so for different reasons, and perhaps strange ones.

Another example is that since he rose to power, the Iranian president has not missed an opportunity to attack Israel. He reiterates in front of any open microphone that he would do anything in order to wipe the Jews' state off the map.

But these remarks are an insult to intelligence. It should be made clear to Ahmadinejad and his group of tempestuous friends that the Palestinian Arab people, which has been suffering under the Israeli occupation for more than 40 years, is sick and tired of listening to this outdated rhetoric. Not only do his words of nonsense cause irreversible damage to the Palestinian problem, but they also serve the Israeli propaganda in the world.

Mr. Ahmadinejad, please stop selling the Palestinian people different illusions and strange delusions. The Palestinian people have the moral and political duty to curb the ongoing Iranian attempts to cause a rift among the Palestinian organizations. The irony is that they must remember that they are the only people in the world without a state of its own, but with two governments.

The last example relates to Ahmadinejad's visit to Iraq several weeks ago, a visit defined by commentators as a historic visit by an Iranian president to Iraq, an Arab country occupied by Iran's No. 1 enemy, the United States of America. How can this frontal collision in the Islamic republic's foreign policy be explained: An Iranian president visits a country under the burden of the American occupation, and whose new leaders were appointed with the approval of the American government, and are incapable of conducing an independent policy without Washington's policy.
-April 6 2008

Arab Leaders Warn To Reconsider Peace Deal
Arab officials are warning they could withdraw their landmark offer of peace and full ties with Israel in exchange for a return of Arab lands, unless Israel explicitly accepts the initiative.

The warnings reflect increasing Arab impatience with the long-stalled peace process with Israel. Peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians have bogged down since they were relaunched at the U.S.-sponsored Annapolis peace conference last November after a seven-year hiatus.
-March 19 2008
last spring, for the first time in almost 60 years, the arabs offered israel a  semi-valuable peace offer (2002 offer was not viable) and so far Israel almost ignres it. it has to make you wonder how badly israel wants peace with its neighbors.

Protesters to Peres: Eliminate Israel
While the French state welcomed President Shimon Peres in official ceremonies of unprecedented pomp, some Frenchmen were less enthusiastic: Dozens of people in Lyon protested against Peres's tour of the city on Wednesday, holding signs with the slogans "Eliminate Israel" and "Israel is unlawful."
-March 14 2008
i am not trying to be a racist neoconservative, but i can't help but ask: what percentage of these "frenchman" were arab/muslim?

Yeshiva Head: Shooting Was Continuation Of 1929 Massacre
In his eulogy to the eight students gunned down Thursday in a shooting attack at the Mercaz Harav yeshiva in Jerusalem, the religious school's head rabbi Ya'akov Shapira declared the attack "a continuation of the 1929 massacre" of the Jewish community in Hebron. He said the gunman had targeted "everyone living in the holy city of Jerusalem."
-March 7 2008

Saudi Prince Offers Israel Peace Vision
A senior Saudi royal has offered Israel a vision of broad cooperation with the Arab world and people-to-people contacts if it signs a peace treaty and withdraws from all occupied Arab territories.

In an interview with Reuters, Prince Turki al-Faisal, a former ambassador to the United States and Britain and adviser to King Abdullah, said Israel and the Arabs could cooperate in many areas including water, agriculture, science and education.

Asked what message he wanted to send to the Israeli public, he said:

"The Arab world, by the Arab peace initiative, has crossed the Rubicon from hostility towards Israel to peace with Israel and has extended the hand of peace to Israel, and we await the Israelis picking up our hand and joining us in what inevitably will be beneficial for Israel and for the Arab world."
-January 20 2008

Make Gazans Choose
Israel’s leadership is debating. On the one hand, it knows (or so we hope) that the situation in Sderot and Gaza-region communities cannot continue. Yet on the other hand it is justifiably worried about the price of a large-scale ground operation that could exact a heavy casualty toll and burden us with responsibility for the fate of Gaza residents. Israel subjected itself to yet another limitation: Avoiding a humanitarian blow to Gaza residents who are uninvolved in terrorism.

The State seeks all sorts of explanations to show the High Court of Justice that partially cutting off the electricity supply to Gaza does not constitute a humanitarian blow. That’s nonsense, as such measure would clearly hurt the population, but what’s the alternative? After all, the problem is that terrorists disguise themselves and hide among a population that does not reject or object to terror. In fact, it supports it, and terrorists are able to assimilate into it.

Seemingly, Gaza residents should have maintained a quiet border with Israel. After all, they received something they were never given before: They are their own masters. The Egyptians did grant them this option before 1967 and nobody else granted them this opportunity either. This is the first time they can manage their own affairs. Yet still, they support terrorism and give it shelter.
-January 19 2008
the situation in gaza is a perfect example of what would happen if a palestinian state is formed under the current circumstances. the palestinians should not be granted a state until the palestinians totally change their attitude on Israel, and its right to exist. As long as the palestinians refuse to recognize israel they will continue to aim deadly attacks against its civilians and there is no way we can expect israel not to respond.

Olmert To Haaretz: Two-State Solution Or Israel Is Done For
"If the day comes when the two-state solution collapses, and we face a South African-style struggle for equal voting rights (also for the Palestinians in the territories), then, as soon as that happens, the State of Israel is finished," Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Haaretz Wednesday, the day the Annapolis conference ended in an agreement to try to reach a Mideast peace settlement by the end of 2008.
-December 29 2007
israel knows and has accepted that the 4 million palestinians in gaza and the west bank aren't going anywhere and there will have to eventually be a a palestinian state. the problem is, the palestinians have not accepted this.

It's Not Just The Palestinians Who Won't Recognize A "Jewish State"
The document is from 14 May 1948. The context is that the Zionist government has proclaimed a "Jewish state" in Palestine, and is seeking U.S. recognition of that state. The document is President Harry S. Truman's response to that request.

The interesting thing is that the original text of the document is edited with hand-written corrections, to produce the wording finally approved by Truman. And the purpose of the editing is specifically to remove the suggestion that the U.S. recognizes a "Jewish state", and to clarify that it recognizes instead the "state of Israel".

How about that: the United States was asked in 1948 to recognize the "Jewish state", but offered recognition instead to the "state of Israel". Just as the PLO does today.

So why exactly is it uncontroversial when we do it, but an obstacle to peace when they do it?
-December 25 2007

Olmert:  Israel Was Right To Accept Partition 60 Years Ago
"Ben-Gurion was right," declared Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at a parliament session marking 60 years since the UN approved partitioning mandatory Palestine, endorsing the legendary Israeli founder's decision to accept the plan.

Olmert said that division of the land into a Jewish and an Arab state is essential now as well. "There is no other alternative," he said. In the gallery at the special session of parliament were relatives of the ambassadors who voted for the partition at the tense UN General Assembly session on November 29, 1947.

Olmert said Israel "deserves credit from the world" for accepting the partition, while the Arab world rejected it, setting off a two-year war after Israel declared its independence six months later.

Speaking after Olmert, opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu charged that today, the Palestinians want "two states for one people - a Palestinian state, and an Israeli state flooded with Palestinians under what they call the 'right of return"' of refugees displaced during the war, along with their descendants."
-December 3 2007
since i am an atheist, i do not belive in zionism. i am also adamently opposed to the concept of collectively compensating a whole group of people for past crimes. my ONLY basis for supporting the creation of the jewish staet of israel is the legally binding UN resolution 181. as olmert mentions, the jews accepted this partition and effectively recognized the right of a palestinian state to exist. to this day the palestinians still reject the resolution that is supposed to create their statehood. if the palestinians aren't accepting the resolution that is supposed to create their state, why should the rest of the world accept it?

Abbas Adamant: Israel Not Jewish State
Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas is standing firm in his refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Abbas visited Egypt and Jordan for talks and was headed to Saudi Arabia when, speaking to reporters, he said "Historically there are two states, Israel and Palestine. Israel is inhabited by Jews and others. We are willing to recognize that and nothing else."

PA Prime Minister Salam Fayad said in a recent interview to Al-Arabiya TV, that "Israel can call itself whatever it wants, but the Palestinians will not recognize it as a Jewish state."
-December 2 2007
well folks, there you go. the anappolis conference has officially failed. the palestinians have, once again, refused to recognize israel, which means they once again rejected UN resolution 181, which was also supposed to create their state. until the palestinians accept the resolution which is supposed to create their state, they do not desserve one.

Saudis Urge Right Of Return For Palestinians
Saud al-Faisal, the Israeli official said, listed the core "final status" issues that have to be resolved in the accelerated negotiating process launched here, but specified the need for a "right of return" to the refugees‚ a demand that was not specified in the public address by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, nor contained in the Arab League peace plan.
-December 2 2007
translation: Saudi Arabia has just called for israel's destruction

Time To Recognize Israel
The most important country in the Annapolis meeting is the one that is not taking part in it: Iran. Teheran is the reason for everything. The fact that dozens of Arab and Muslim governments agreed to take part in the meeting is related less to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and much more to their fear of a nuclear Iran and of the threat Islamic movements pose to their regimes.

What changed in the meantime is the scope of the Iranian threat. In the past, just like other regimes in oil-exporting countries, the Saudis preferred to pay off their enemies instead of fighting them. The funding offered to al-Qaeda and to other terror elements in the Arab world, including Hamas, came form the Saudi pocket to a large extent (and considering the meteoric rise in the prices of oil, terror was in fact funded by its victims in the West.)

Yet the Saudis cannot pay off Iran. In order to stop it, they need America. And because they cannot refuse America, just like they could not refuse it in 1991, they agreed to sit under the same roof as Israel’s prime minister.

The time has come for them to openly recognize Israel’s existence, its status, and its balancing power vis-à-vis Iran. If they don’t recognize Israel, this will be their problem. There is no need (or point) for Israel to be chasing the Muslim robes.
-November 28 2007
the first step to any peace agreement between israel and the arabs or israel and the palestinians, is the full and unconditional recogntion of israel's right to exist. as long as israel's existence is in question there cannot possibly be peace no matter how much land israel withdraws from.

Arab States Insist Recognition Of Israel Not On Agenda
Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa said before leaving for Annapolis that the league's decision to send its foreign ministers to the conference does not mean normalizing relations with Israel.
-November 26 2007
then the conference is already doomed to fail

Erekat: PA Baffled Over 'Jewish Israel'
Senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat appeared to soften his position Thursday but still rejected Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's call for explicit Palestinian recognition of Israel as "the Jewish state," saying he was baffled as to why Olmert wanted to "poke us in the eye" over the issue.

Asked by The Jerusalem Post whether he recognizes that the Jewish nation has historic rights here, Erekat said: "Israel has rights in the Middle East and the majority of Israelis are Jews. And when we recognized Israel, we recognized the composition of the state." Erekat had told an Arabic satellite TV interviewer earlier this week that the Palestinian Authority "will never acknowledge Israel's Jewish identity."

Erekat told the Post it was up to Israel to decide what to call itself, and that the Palestinians would recognize it accordingly. "Like the Islamic Republic of Iran," he said, "if you change your name to 'the Jewish state of Israel,' we'll call you that."
-November 16 2007
"god" forbid the Palestinians ever genuinely recognize israel. erekat is playing word games. until the palestinians genuinely recognize Israel's right to exist, there cannot possibly be peace, no matter what israel does
Olmert Sets New Condition For Talks
Ehud Olmert, Israel's prime minister, has set forth a new condition for talks on Palestinian statehood, insisting any negotiation must be predicated on the recognition of Israel as the "state of Jewish people".
-November 16 2007
that sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Palestinians: We Will Never Recognize Israel As a Jewish State
Saeb Erekat, chief negotiator for the Palestine Liberation Organization, rejected on Monday the government's demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

In an interview with Israel Radio, Erekat said that "no state in the world connects its national identity to a religious identity."
-November 15 2007
is erekat smoking crack??? does he not know that Saudi Arabia and Iran both "connect their national identity" to Islam? does he not know that his buddies in Hamas want Palestine to haev an islamic identity? bottom line is that if the palestinians do not recognize israel's right to exist, their cannot be peace no matter what the israeli side does. this is why there is no palestinian state today.

The Palestinians Don't Want A State
In last week's column, I discussed one delusion behind the current "peace process": Ehud Olmert's assertion that Palestinian leaders have accepted Israel as a Jewish state. Yet the talks also rest on an even more fundamental delusion: that most Palestinians truly want an independent state alongside Israel.

Granted, polls have repeatedly shown a majority for this proposition. The majority may be razor-thin (the Jerusalem Media and Communications Center's latest poll put it at 51.1 percent), but it exists.

Yet those who seize on this as proof of Palestinians' desire for peace have neglected to ask one crucial question: When Palestinians say they favor a two-state solution, what kind of two-state solution are they envisioning? And the answer, as both these same polls and past Palestinian behavior make clear, is not a Palestinian state alongside a Jewish one - the only solution that Israel could, or the world should, accept. What they want is two Palestinian states, or at best one Palestinian and one binational state.

The JMCC poll, for instance, found that 69 percent of Palestinians want all 4.4 million refugees and their descendants relocated to Israel under any agreement, dismissing alternatives such as compensation, resettlement in Palestine or a quota for relocations to Israel. Previous polls have consistently produced similar results. Yet given Israel's current population of roughly 5.7 million Jews and 1.3 million Arabs, that is a clear recipe for eliminating the Jewish state demographically - not for living in peace with it.
-November 4 2007
see: Why there is no palestinian state today.

Saudi Arabia: Israel Should Abandon Barrier, Halt Settlement Activity As Gesture to Arabs
Israel should stop work on a security barrier in and along the West Bank and halt settlement activity there as a good-will gesture to assure Arab states that it is serious about comprehensive peace talks, Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister said yesterday.
-September 27 2007

A Shocking Disloyalty -- Israeli Arab Knesset Member: Palestine Belongs to Arabs
This week, the Israeli Arab Member of Knesset (MK) Ahmed Tibi (United Arab List/Ram Ta’al) attacked the State of Israel in a fiery editorial published in the Arabic-language newspaper Al-Quds. Tibi wrote in the editorial that “Palestine belongs to its Arab residents, not to the Jewish occupiers.” This absolute rejection of Israel’s existence and Israel’s having any right to having statehood and any land in the Middle East within any borders mirrors his remarks seven months ago in Ramallah where he told a Palestinian audience that they should fight the “occupation” until they take over all of the land.

Tibi’s open call to violence against the country in whose parliament he sits and rejection of Israel as a Jewish state is but one of numerous words and deeds by he and other Israeli Arab MKs that demonstrate their rejection of Israel and embrace of the Palestinian position. This was particularly evident during and after last year’s Lebanon war.
-September 2 2007
the israeli arabs always intrigue me. while many of them are loyal to their country, and while there is no doubt that they suffer from racism by their fellow jews, i have always been amused by how they demand to be treated equally by the state, yet they constantly call for the destruction of their country. the Israeli arabs must decide if they are arab citizens of Israel, or Palestinians. THEY CANNOT BE BOTH!

Peres' Last Sabotage
It is easy to assume that some sort of political and media riot would have erupted had an Israeli president published a plan to annex 100 percent of the territories. Members of the media and political establishment would undoubtedly demand he be deposed. And if the plan mentioned the evacuation of Arab communities, the way President Shimon Peres' plan calls for the evacuation of Jewish communities, then they would demand he be tried for war crimes.

The plan is based on the assumption that the root of the conflict is territorial. And even now that the territorial concessions from Oslo have proved the opposite - that concessions only bring more violence and that Israeli withdrawals strengthen the extremists - the belief in continued concessions has not changed and is a major component of our diplomatic thinking.

Peres, who wrote enthusiastic articles in favor of the greater Land of Israel in a journal I edited, and Olmert, who collected signatures on a petition that stated "liberated territory will not be returned," and later guarded the settlers at the Kaddum camp with me, should know very well that the main reason for the Arabs' war against the Jews is ideological and not territorial, and that even a concession of 100 percent will not satisfy the Arabs.

This is why the 2000 withdrawal from Lebanon strengthened Hezbollah and not the moderates, and why Hamas, not Fatah, won control in free elections after 25 Israeli settlements were uprooted from the Gaza Strip.
-August 26 2007
and for the record, i oppose Israel placing its civilians on Palestinian land, but this article makes one very important point that everyone studying the middle east must understand: the israeli/palestinian conflict is not about land, it is an ideological war, the number one cause being the Palestinians' refusal to recognize israel's right to exist. had the palestinians been so concerned about land, they would have accepted UN resolution 181 which would have given them their own state on 45% of Palestine from the very begining.

Riyadh Gives Talks With Israel Cautious Welcome
"I said before that we are interested in a peace conference that deals with the substantive matters of peace, the issues of real substance and not form or insubstantive issues," the Saudi foreign minister said.

"If that does so, it becomes of great interest for Saudi Arabia and should we then get an invitation from the secretary [Ms Rice] to attend that conference we will look very closely and very hard at attending the conference."

Israel said it hoped Saudi Arabia would attend such a conference. "We hope that many Arab countries will attend this international meeting, including Saudi Arabia," said a statement from the office of the prime minister, Ehud Olmert.
-August 5 2007
for the first time in 60 years the arabs are ready for peace with Israel. All Israel has to do is announce that they accpet the deal under the condition that the "right of return" is dropped, and then the israeli/arab conflict is over. lets wait and see what olmert will do.

51% of Syrians Favor Peace With Israel
Fifty-one percent of Syrians would favor a peace treaty with Israel if it withdraws from the Golan and recognizes Syrian sovereignty there, according to a rare poll of Syrians released Wednesday.

In addition, 63% of Syrians said they favored their country working with the US to resolve the war in Iraq. By a slight 44% to 39% margin, most said they oppose fighters crossing from Syria into Iraq.

Yet three-fourths said they support financial assistance for Iraqi fighters, the Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and Hizbullah.
-August 3 2007

Arab Envoys Extend 'Hand of Peace' to Israel
The one-day visit by the foreign ministers of Egypt and Jordan marked the first time any of the group's 22 member states have sent representatives to Israel.

Although they were not an official delegation from the League, the visit highlighted a change of direction for the Arab body, which once advocated Israel's destruction.

Israel stopped short of embracing their plan, which offers recognition of Israel by Arab states in exchange for all land occupied in the 1967 war, but nonetheless described the meeting as "historic".
-July 28 2007
i think the arabs are serious about peace this time. Now is the moment of truth for Israel.

Most Iranians Willing to Recognize Israel in Return For U.S. Ties
In return for normal relations with the US, most Iranians were willing to recognize Israel and Palestine as independent states, ending Iranian supports for armed groups in Iraq, and adopt a transparent nuclear policy, Terror Free Tomorrow President Ken Ballen wrote in the Wall Street Journal.
-July 13 2007

West Chooses Fatah, But Palestinians Don't
IN THE WEST, there's a huge sense of relief. The Hamas-led government that has been causing everyone so much trouble has been isolated in Gaza, and a new government has been appointed in the West Bank by the "moderate," peace-loving Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas.

So why then do Palestinians not share in the relief? Well, for one thing, the old government had been democratically elected; now it has been dismissed out of hand by presidential fiat. There's also the fact that the new prime minister appointed by Abbas — Salam Fayyad — has the support of the West, but his election list won only 2% of the votes in the same election that swept Hamas to victory. Fayyad and Abbas have the support of Israel, but it is no secret that they lack the backing of their own people.

Palestinians came to realize that the so-called peace process championed by Abbas (and by Yasser Arafat before him) had led to the permanent institutionalization — rather than the termination — of Israel's 4-decade-old military occupation of their land. Why should they feel otherwise? There are today twice as many settlers in the occupied territories as there were when Yitzhak Rabin and Arafat first shook hands in the White House Rose Garden. Israel has divided the West Bank into besieged cantons, worked diligently to increase the number of Jewish settlers in East Jerusalem (while stripping Palestinian Jerusalemites of their residency rights in the city) and turned Gaza into a virtual prison.
-June 25 2007
this article is another pathetic "the world isn't respecting the choice of the Palestinians". yes, we are recognizing Hamas as the elected leader of the Palestinian people. we are choosing not to fund them or deal with them because of their history of terrorism and their refusal to recognize israel. if the israelis had elected such horrible and dangerous people, the world would have no hesitation boycotting them. the world has the right to intervene in the situation in Palestine. the whole world will be efected if chaos continues in the middle east. what if it spills to other countries in the region? what will happen to the price of oil? can we really trust Hamas to keep the peace? the elections in iraq, lebanon, and Palestine, prove that the neo-con's push for democracy in the arab world IS WRONG! every Arab country needs a secular dictatorship to keep the res of the world's democracies safe.

Paying The Price For Ignoring The Voices of The Palestinian People
WHO CAN we negotiate with? To whom do we talk? Well, of course, we should have talked to Hamas months ago. But we didn't like the democratically elected government of the Palestinian people.

They were supposed to have voted for Fatah and its corrupt leadership. But they voted for Hamas, which declines to recognise Israel or abide by the totally discredited Oslo agreement.
-June 20 2007
i find it totally ridiculous when people say we are not "respecting" the choice of the Palestinian people because we are boycotting Hamas. it is a flawed argument because the truth is THE WHOLE WORLD RECOGNIZES HAMAS AS THE LEGITMATE, ELECTED GOVERNMENT OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE, just most countries choose not to deal with them due to their history of terrorism and denying Israel's right to exist. the Palestinians' voices were not ignored, they were heard loud and clear. they want Israel destroyed and replaced with an islamic state. the international boycott is just the response to that voice. lets remember that there were 8 other parties the Palestinians could have voted for besides Hamas and Fatah. every other one of them, at least publicly denounces terrorism and doesn't directly call for israel's destruction.

Arab Armies Planned to Destroy Israel
In an interview on the eve of the 40th anniversary of the outbreak of war on June 5, 1967, Oren said his research of documents in Arab countries had revealed clearly that the Arabs had planned to destroy Israel.

Although this seems obvious to Israel sympathizers who hold to the traditional story of the Arabs' responsibility for the outbreak of war, the intervening decades have seen the promulgation of a myth that Israel was not really in danger.

"The biggest myth going is that somehow there was not a real and immediate Arab threat, that somehow Israel could have negotiated itself outside the crisis of 1967, and that it wasn't facing an existential threat, or facing any threat at all," said Oren, who is a senior fellow at the Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies at Jerusalem's Shalem Center and author of Six Days of War: June 1967. He noted that this was the premise of Tom Segev's book, 1967: Israel, the War and the Year That Transformed the Middle East.

What's behind the myth, Oren argued, is "a more pervasive, ongoing effort to show that Israel bears the bulk, if not the sole responsibility, for decades of conflict in the Arab world, and that the Arabs are the aggrieved party.
-June 6 2007
this is another must-read!

Israel's Position on Arab Peace No Mystery
There has hardly been an Arab peace plan in the past 40 years -- including the current Saudi version -- that does not demand a return to the status quo of June 4, 1967. Why is that date so sacred?

The real anniversary of the war should be now, three weeks earlier. On May 16, 1967, Egyptian President Gamal Nasser demanded the evacuation from the Sinai Peninsula of the U.N. buffer force that had kept Israel and Egypt at peace for 10 years. The U.N. complied, at which point Nasser imposed a naval blockade of Israel's only outlet to the south, the port of Eilat -- an open act of war.
-May 22 2007

Iran Proposal to U.S. Offered Peace With Israel
Iran offered in 2003 to accept peace with Israel and to cut off material assistance to Palestinian armed groups and pressure them to halt terrorist attacks within Israel's 1967 borders, according to the secret Iranian proposal to the United States.

The Iranian negotiating proposal indicated clearly that Iran was prepared to give up its role as a supporter of armed groups in the region in return for a larger bargain with the United States. What the Iranians wanted in return, as suggested by the document itself as well as expert observers of Iranian policy, was an end to U.S. hostility and recognition of Iran as a legitimate power in the region.
-May 22 2007
and at the same time Iran calls for Israel's destruction...

Israel Shows New Openness to Saudi Peace Plan
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert expressed increased interest Tuesday in discussing a Saudi-authored initiative for reaching a comprehensive Middle East peace, inviting the leaders of Arab countries to come to Israel to talk more seriously about the proposal and alternatively offering his own willingness to meet them in any of theirs.

"We heard about the Arab Peace Initiative, and we say come and present it to us. You want to talk to us about it; we are ready to sit down and talk about it carefully," Olmert said. If invited elsewhere to discuss it, he said, "I'm ready to come."
-May 20 2007

Jordan Urges Israel to Accept Peace Plan
The monarch told visiting Israeli parliament speaker that the Saudi-drafted plan offered a historic opportunity for the Mideast, which mustn't be wasted.

Israeli Knesset speaker Dalia Itzik's visit to Jordan came a day after the Arab League picked Jordan and Egypt to take the lead in approaching the Jewish state to promote the Arab peace plan to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
-April 19 2007
this is the moment of truth for Israel. now the ball is in their court. they must not turn down this historic opportunity for peace with its neighbors. i believe the Arab league is serious this time about ending the Israeli-Arab conflict. If they wanted to play games they would have pushed for the right of return during last months conference, which would have cause Israel to understandibly walk away from the table. At the same time if they had completely dropped the right of return from the deal, Israel would have accepted immidietly and the arab league will be seen as weak and having "given-in to Israeli demands". What they did was mention the right of return while not stressing it and indirectly telling Israel to negotiate with them to have this clause dropped so it doesn't look like "
caving-in" to the rest of the Arab world. If Israel rejects this plan, then no more can we blame the Arabs for the Israeli-Arab conflict

The Arab Peace Initiative - Good Bad or Indifferent?
There are three types of reactions to the Arab peace initiative, that was renewed at the recent Arab League Summit, and all are legitimate:
1- The initiative is a GOOD THING and Israel should respond positively.
2- The initiative a BAD THING, very dangerous for Israel and should be ignored.
3- The initiative is Khalam Fahdi, empty talk arising from internal needs of the Saudis and the Arabs, that is not a sincere peace effort.
-April 17 2007

The Right of Return: What If The Shoe Were On The Other Foot?
Even if some were in fact forced to leave by Israeli military commanders, such actions were in response to the attack by the Palestinians.

Olmert is absolutely right as a matter of principle. The best proof of the correctness of his view is to imagine what would be happening today if the shoe were on the other foot. Imagine if the Palestinians had won and many Israelis had been forced to leave, while others left of their own volition or as the result of fear. Now imagine those Israelis seeking a right of return, either in the immediate aftermath of the war or sixty years later. It is inconceivable that a Palestinian state would grant Jewish refugees a right of return. Certainly that would be true if the number of Israeli refugees and their descendants threatened to outnumber the Palestinian population. How can a right of return go only one way?
-April 9 2007

Arab Leaders Revive Peace Plan
Arab leaders meeting in Riyadh on Wednesday unanimously decided to revive a five-year-old plan for peace with Israel and launch a diplomatic offensive to resolve the Middle East conflict.

A resolution reaffirming their commitment to the Saudi-inspired peace plan was adopted by the Arab League heads of state on the first day of their annual summit in the Saudi capital, ministers said.

"We need to take our time studying what has happened at this summit before taking an official position," an aide of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said.

"We are studying the text of this initiative in detail to establish if there is anything new, if there are any changes, and when we've done that, we will react officially," said Olmert's spokeswoman Miri Eisin.
-March 29 2007
Arabs Said Open to Peace Offer Changes
Saudi Arabia's foreign minister suggested Monday that Arab leaders would be willing to consider changes in their 2002 peace offer to Israel to make it "compatible" with new developments.

Several other Arab diplomats said privately Monday that Arab leaders were seeking fresh ways to moderate their position without being seen as giving in to Israeli or American demands to change the 2002 offer.

The diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions, said Arab countries including Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia would be proposing "a repackaging" of the deal.
-March 27 2007
What 'Recognizing Israel's Right to Exist' Means to Palestinians
There is an enormous difference between "recognizing Israel's existence" and "recognizing Israel's right to exist." From a Palestinian perspective, the difference is in the same league as the difference between asking a Jew to acknowledge that the Holocaust happened and asking him to concede that the Holocaust was morally justified. For Palestinians to acknowledge the occurrence of the Nakba – the expulsion of the great majority of Palestinians from their homeland between 1947 and 1949 – is one thing. For them to publicly concede that it was "right" for the Nakba to have happened would be something else entirely. For the Jewish and Palestinian peoples, the Holocaust and the Nakba, respectively, represent catastrophes and injustices on an unimaginable scale that can neither be forgotten nor forgiven.

To demand that Palestinians recognize "Israel's right to exist" is to demand that a people who have been treated as subhumans unworthy of basic human rights publicly proclaim that they are subhumans. It would imply Palestinians' acceptance that they deserve what has been done and continues to be done to them. Even 19th-century US governments did not require the surviving native Americans to publicly proclaim the "rightness" of their ethnic cleansing by European colonists as a condition precedent to even discussing what sort of land reservation they might receive. Nor did native Americans have to live under economic blockade and threat of starvation until they shed whatever pride they had left and conceded the point.
-March 19 2007
despite the many inacuracies of those two paragraphs alone (which i'm not going to waste space trying to correct) IfAmericansKnew indirectly makes one very good point (for the wrong reasons of course). It is not enough that the Palestinians just recognize Israel's existence. The world must DEMAND that the Palestinians recognize Israel's RIGHT to exist. U.N. Resolution 181 is a legally binding resolution which calls for the creation of a Jewish Israel and an Arab Palestine. If Israel doesn't have the right to exist, neither does the future state of Palestine. its that simple.  As long as the Palestinians are refusing to recognize Israel's RIGHT to exist, they are rejecting the resolution which is meant to create their own state, and therefore are not entitled to a state.
Why There is No Palestinian State Today
Its been almost 60 years since the passage of U.N. Resolution 181 which created the state of Israel. The same resolution also called for the creation of an Arab Palestinian state. Yet today, in 2007, there is no Palestinian state, and it doesn't look like there is going to be one anytime soon. Why is this? Is it because the Palestinian people have never been offered a chance at statehood? Is it because those greedy, evil Israelis aren't allowing a Palestinian state to be formed? Is it because the rest of the world doesn't want, or is preventing the formation of a Palestinian state? Or is it because the Palestinians are simply incapable of handling statehood? The answer is none of the above. The Palestinians have been offered (and will probably continue to be offered) their own state many times throughout history. The Israelis and the rest of the world have no problem with, and in fact would prefer the existence of a Palestinian state. And the Palestinians are perfectly capable of handling statehood. There is, however, one major reason why the Palestinians dont have a state, and why, at this moment, they do not deserve a state. And this reason is their refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist.  This is also the #1 source of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Palestinian terrorism and Israeli settlement activity are secondary problems. The Palestinians' consistent refusal to recognize Israel is by far the #1 problem.
-March 15 2007
The Saudi Peace Plan
The Israelis rejected this proposal for one reason: the clause calling for Israel to accept the right of return. While the first four terms of this proposal are reasonable, Israel should and must reject the last item. The right of return is based on the false assumption that the Zionist forcibly expelled the Arabs living in pre-state Israel. If Israel were to accept the right of return, they will effectively be admitting to a crime they did not commit. Aside from this, Israel must reject the right of return in order to preserve their demographic identity.

The peace conference to be held later this month is supposedly intended to improve the peace offer to end the Israeli-Arab conflict and establish peace with Israel. However, it seems unlikely that the Arab league will modify the proposal to one that is acceptable for Israel. The Arabs want the Palestinian refugees to return to Israel to get them out of their respective countries. Another motivation for the Arab League to push for the right of return is because they know that Israel cannot accept this term because if even half of the 4 million refugees return, Israel wont be Israel anymore. The Arabs know that Israel will reject the right of return clause no matter what. Therefore, the motivation of the Arab league to offer this proposal is to show the rest of the world that the Arabs are trying to make peace and it is Israel that is rejecting it.
-March 15 2007
Analysis: Why the Arab Summit Will Not Accept Israel's Demand to Modify the 2002 Peace Plan
It's highly unlikely that the Arab summit in Saudi Arabia later this month will accept Israel's demand to "modify" the section in the 2002 Arab peace plan that calls for the right of return for all Palestinian refugees "in accordance with United Nations Resolution 194." The reason: The Arab governments want the refugees out - and the sooner the better.

Almost half of the 4.3 million Palestinian refugees registered with UNRWA live in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, where they have long been suffering from severe and inhuman restrictions involving residency rights, freedom of movement and employment, as well as property ownership rights.

"The Arab countries don't want to absorb the Palestinian refugees," said an official with the PLO Department of Refugees. "They are eager to get rid of the refugee camps in the Arab countries. That's why they are insisting that the Palestinians should return to their homes."

Both the PLO and Hamas are strongly opposed - for political reasons - to the resettlement of refugees in Arab countries and insist on their "right of return." This, despite the fact that some of the refugees are aware that they will never be allowed to return to their original homes inside Israel.

On the other hand, many of these refugees are unlikely, under the current circumstances, to accept an offer to move to the West Bank or Gaza Strip, where their chances of improving their living conditions are slim. There is no doubt that many would agree to stay in the Arab world once they are offered citizenship, jobs and a better life away from the impoverished refugee camps.
-March 5 2007
see: With Palestine Against the Palestinians.
Israel Pushing to Improve Saudi Peace Initiative
Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni presented Israel's demands yesterday. First and foremost, she said, Israel objects to the document's section on the Palestinian refugees, which was not part of the initial Saudi draft, but was added at the 2002 Arab League summit in Beirut.

Livni said that the original draft presented by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia "was, in my view, positive." That draft called for a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders in exchange for peace and normalization with the entire Arab world.

"Admittedly, the initiative spoke of the 1967 lines, but I only wish we were in a situation in which the conflict was just a border dispute," she added.

The new article inserted at the 2002 Beirut summit, however, demanded a "just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem, to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194," and that resolution calls for allowing the refugees to return to Israel. It therefore contradicts Israel's vision of a two-state solution, which, explained Livni, calls for a Jewish national homeland alongside a Palestinian national homeland, with the latter serving as the solution for the Palestinian refugees.
-March 2 2007
Israel is more than happy to accept this peace deal with the Arab world IF they drop the so called "right of return". and thats perfectly reasonable. The right of return is based on the very common myth that the Zionists forcibly expelled the displaced Arabs out of Israel in 1947-48. By accepting the right of return, Israel will be indirectly confirming this myth to the rest of the world, and thereby accepting responsibility for a crime they did not committ. The "right of return" is just a fancy way of calling for Israel's destruction. If even half of the 4 million refugees returned to Israel, Israel wont be Israel anymore and maybe thats what the Arabs really want.
Quartet Demands Palestinians Recognize Israel
A Quartet statement after talks in Berlin said the new Palestinian national unity government would have to renounce violence and recognise Israel.

The Quartet's statement, read out by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, expressed support for a Palestinian government "committed to non-violence and the recognition of Israel".
-February 21 2007
the number one source of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is the Palestinians' refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist. Until the Palestinians reach this goal, it wont matter how many settlements Israel dismantles or anything else Israel does. This must be taken care of first. I praise the quartet for getting its priorities straight.

"Wiped Off the Map" - The Rumor of the Century
Across the world, a dangerous rumor has spread that could have catastrophic implications. According to legend, Iran's President has threatened to destroy Israel, or, to quote the misquote, "Israel must be wiped off the map". Contrary to popular belief, this statement was never made, as the following article will prove.

So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi:
"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh", is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel".

The full quote translated directly to English:
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

The inflammatory "wiped off the map" quote was first disseminated not by Iran's enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source. Iran's Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote had a life of its own. Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great copy.

The exchange is typical of Ahmadinejad's interviews with the American media. Predictably, both Mike Wallace of 60 Minutes and CNN's Anderson Cooper asked if he wants to "wipe Israel off the map". As usual, the question is thrown back in the reporter's face with his standard "Don't the Palestinians have rights?, etc
-January 19 2007
ok, i believe Ahmadinejad might have been misquoted. he may not have directly threatened to "wipe out" Israel, but wishing a "regime to vanish" means pretty much the same thing as wanting the country destroyed.
Hamas Leader Calls Israel's Exsitence a 'Reality'
Hamas acknowledges the existence of Israel as a reality but formal recognition will only be considered when a Palestinian state has been created, the movement's exiled leader Khaled Meshaal said on Wednesday.

Softening a previous refusal to accept the Jewish state's existence, Meshaal said Israel was a "matter of fact" and a reality that will persist.

"There will remain a state called Israel," Meshaal said in an interview in the Syrian capital, in what appeared to be clearest statement yet by the Islamist group on its attitude towards the state it previously said had no right to exist.

"The problem is not that there is an entity called Israel," said Meshaal, who survived an Israeli assassination attempt in 1997. "The problem is that the Palestinian state is non-existent."
-January 10 2007
this might be "half-assed" but it is a good start for Hamas. Lets hope that the Palestinians dont back-track on this.
Were the Palestinians Expelled?
-December 3 2006

Fatah Member: Abbas Recognition of Israel is 'Political'
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' stated recognition of Israel's right to exist is part of a "political calculation" aimed at ultimately destroying the Jewish state, a terror group leader and member of Abbas' Fatah party told WND in an interview.

The leader said the Fatah party does not recognize Israel and that any final accord that doesn't include flooding the Jewish state with millions of Palestinians will not be supported by the Fatah party and will lead to Palestinian civil war.

"The base of our Fatah movement keeps dreaming of Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jaffa and Akko," said Abu Ahmed, Fatah member and leader of the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades in the northern Gaza Strip. "There is no change in our position. Abbas recognizes Israel because of pressure that the Zionists and the Americans are exercising on him. We understand this is part of his obligations and political calculations."
-October 5 2006
folks, this article is important. No Palestinian party or leader in Palestinian history  has ever recognized Israel's right to exsist. throughout the 90's Fatah, under Arafat, publicly supported Israel's right to exsist, but only to make the west happy. when the western media wasn't listening Arafat, and other Fatah members, would continue their incitement, and to state their ambitions to take over "all of Palestine".  this article further proves that the beliefs of Hamas and Fatah aren't very different. Both parties want Israel thrown into the sea, but Hamas is more honest about its intentions.

Hamas Vows to Never Recognize Israel
Tens of thousands of supporters of Islamic militant group Hamas held a peaceful rally in Gaza on Friday to denounce the state of Israel and declare that they would never recognize its right to exist.

"We ask God to punish the so-called Israel and the allies of Israel and to punish those who recognize Israel and those who called on us to recognize Israel," Hamas lawmaker Mushir al-Masri told the crowd that thronged the Jabalya refugee camp.

"We vow to God that we will never recognize Israel even if we would be all killed," Masri told the cheering audience of men, women and children, many of whom were wearing green Hamas baseball caps and held aloft Hamas banners.
-September 29 2006
this shows how much Hamas cares about the Palestinian people

New Palestinian Unity Government Will Recognize Israel
-September 22 2006
wow! thats really great! but shouldn't they have done this some 60 years ago?

Pakistan Shelves Plans to Recognize Israel After Gaza Incursion
Fearing a strong public reaction following Israeli military’s incursions into Gaza, Pakistan has reportedly shelved plans to establish diplomatic ties with Israel.

‘‘Moreover, a nearly two-year long media debate on recognizing Israel has led to the conclusion that the majority of Pakistan’s public is against any such move and it could result in a political backlash,’’ local daily The Nation said quoting officials.
-July 4 2006

65% of Iraqi Kurds Want Relations With Israel
Sixty-five per cent of Iraqi Kurds think that diplomatic relations between the Kurdistan Regional Government and Israel are "necessary." Of (1,519 people polled in Iraqi Kurdistan,) 22 per cent said it was not necessary for the two states to have relations, while 12 per cent responded that they did not have an opinion.

Those Kurds who believed that the Kurdistan Regional Government and Israel should have relations cited the possible strengthening of the Kurds' position in the region, Israel's democracy, trade (between the two states,) the existence of Kurds in Israel and that some Arab countries have relations with Israel. Those who didn't support establishing relations with Israel cited Israel as an occupying state, its instability and the fact that Kurdistan does not share borders with Israel.
-June 13 2006

Pakistan to Continue Boycott of Israel
The Post also found that Pakistan imposes a wide range of restrictions on all types of commercial activity with the Jewish state, in some cases more so than a number of Arab countries, leading to calls in the US Congress for increased pressure on Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to change his country's policy.
"Products from Israel are not allowed to be imported into Pakistan," Saira Abbas, director of the Pakistani Commerce Ministry's head office in Islamabad, said in a telephone interview. "That is the policy of the government of Pakistan, which prohibits items made in Israel from being brought into the country."
Asked about products manufactured elsewhere that might incorporate Israeli-made parts, Abbas said that, "Even an item made in America which contains components made in Israel will not be allowed into our country."
-April 27 2006
So much for the begining of an Israeli/Pakistani relationship.

Ahmadinejad Threatens Israel Again
Iran's president said on Friday that the existence of the "Zionist regime", Iran's term for Israel, was a threat to the Islamic world, days after declaring Iran had become a nuclear power by enriching uranium.
...
"The existence of the Zionist regime is tantamount to an imposition of an unending and unrestrained threat so that none of the nations and Islamic countries of the region and beyond can feel secure from its threat," Ahmadinejad said on Friday.
"Whether you like it or not, the Zionist regime is on the road to being eliminated,"
-April 14 2006
Ahmadinejad seems to disagree with all those who claim Israel controls U.S. foreign policy, because he seems condifident enough to threaten Israel without fear of U.S. retaliation.

Iran Denies Wanting to Wipe Israel off the Map
Iran's Foreign Minister denied that Tehran wanted to see Israel "wiped off the map," saying President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had been misunderstood, Reuters reported.
"Nobody can remove a country from the map. This is a misunderstanding in Europe of what our president mentioned," Manouchehr Mottaki told a news conference, speaking in English, after addressing the European Parliament.
"How is it possible to remove a country from the map? He is talking about the regime. We do not recognize legally this regime," he said.
-February 22 2006
What a way to play word games. He is basically saying "we dont want to destroy the country of israel, but what we want to destroy what israel is and all the israeli people." Ahmadinejad said it loud and clear: "As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map".

Palestinians Give Thumbs Up to Ahmadinejad's Views
Palestinians share Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's view that Israel cannot co-exist with other nations in the region, said a senior Palestinian official, IRNA reported.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's view is based on historical realities, the representative of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), Mahir al-Tahir, added.
....
He also criticized brokers and supporters of a peace process that is aimed at striking a peace deal with Israel, maintaining that any deal struck with Israel would be of no value as the brokers want to establish peace at the expense of the Palestinians who would have to give up their homeland, rights and sovereignty over the holy sites.
-January 1 2006
So i guess the quote from Saeb Erekat (Cheif Palestinian Negotiator) stating "Palestinians recognise the right of the state of Israel to exist and I reject his comments" does not represent the views of the Palestinian people after all.

Afghanistan to recognize Israel 'soon'
According to the report, The official announcement of the recognition will be made in the next few days.

Senior diplomatic officials said that they were both pleased and not surprised by the story
-September 16 2005
Israel shouldn't get its hopes up after a spokesman, later in the day, said "We will establish relations with Israel after our Palestinian brothers have an independent and free state,"

Mauritania to maintain relations with Israel
-October 10 2005