FMC Blog: Free Speech Zone

Israel/Palestine Conflict May Lead to Nuclear War

Once again the Palestinian/Israeli conflict spirals out of control. However, this particular battle has produced circumstantial evidence that the conflict has become more dangerous than ever before. Unless a permanent solution is found soon, the violence may increase in severity until the conflict ends tragically. In the latest fighting, Israel has bombed the HAMAS controlled city of Gaza for the stated reason of neutralizing HAMAS and stopping them from firing rockets into Southern Israel. As of the date of this article, approximately 900 Palestinians and 15 Israelis have been killed. HAMAS' stated reasons for firing the rockets is to end the siege of Gaza by Israel which HAMAS alleges is preventing the free movement of people and goods and causing a humanitarian crisis. Israel denies the existence of a humanitarian crisis and refuses to end the siege of Gaza unless HAMAS recognizes Israel or is out power.

In general, what makes the Palestinian/Israeli conflict so dangerous is that half the world, (three billion people (Jews, Christians & Muslims)) are emotionally, historically and religiously attached to the land known as Israel/Palestine. This fact was demonstrated in the last few days as demonstrations erupted in more than 95 countries around the world.

Moreover, due to the affordability of satellite TV, in even the most underdeveloped countries, billions of interested people are exposed to 24 hour graphic coverage of this latest battle in Gaza. Western News stations like BBC and CNN no longer have a monopoly on reporting news. Many Middle Eastern TV stations have surpassed the reach of BBC, CNN and other western media.

As to graphic images, dozens of news stations like Aljazeera have been broadcasting live and prerecorded graphic images of Palestinian babies blown up into pieces by the Israeli military. One particular gruesome scene that was played over and over again was that of a three year old little girl with her heart protruding out of her body after a bomb fell on her house. Another station, Al Alam, repeated the scene of four dead babies who were placed next to each other in the same refrigerator of a morgue because of the large number of dead in Gaza. The graphic and often emotional coverage of this latest battle is inspiring the fury of the masses which in turn are putting enormous pressure on their governments to join the fight on the side of the Palestinians. This conflict is much more dangerous than most people realize.

For example, Egypt is receiving so much negative media coverage for not opening its border with Gaza that People throughout the Arab and Muslim world started calling for the overthrow of the Egyptian government and demonstrators attacked Egyptian embassies in several countries. The pressure on Egypt is so intense and ruthless that a shaken Egyptian president was forced to hold two press conferences to explain his government's position and to distance Egypt from Israel. Similarly, the friendly nation of Jordan came under so much pressure for not breaking diplomatic relations with Israel that King Abdullah held a publicity stunt in which he was seen donating blood for the people of Gaza and for the first time in recent memory he referred to Israel as the Enemy. Even the Saudi government was not immune from attacks and calls for the overthrow of the Saudi government. Media outlets repeated scenes of demonstrators burning the effigy of the King of Saudi Arabia with the Israeli flag wrapped around him for hundreds of millions of people to see. Saudi Arabia is perceived as a secret ally of Israel in the desire to destroy HAMAS and the refusal of the Saudi government to allow demonstrations against Israel only reinforced this belief. Whatever the truth, the Saudi government was so shaken by the attacks against it and the constant portrayal of the Saudi King rapped in the Israeli flag that the official Saudi media began publicizing Saudi efforts to raise money for the people of Gaza.

The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is becoming extremely dangerous and can only be described as a ticking NUCLEAR BOMB. Currently, only Israel has nuclear weapons in the Middle East. But Iran may also go nuclear and if that happens the Arabs will try to do the same. Without a doubt, there is no conflict on earth that has the same global impact as the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Because of the potential for global instability, the entire world must do all it can to bring peace between the Palestinians and Israelis. The question is can this conflict be solved after many wars failed to end the conflict? The answer is YES but time is running out.

Currently, there are four proposals to the Israel/Palestinian conflict and three have been attempted and failed. The first is that the Israelis and Palestinians continue fighting until one submits to the other, a plan that has been tried and failed. The second is a plan where both people separate by creating two separate countries. This plan is referred to as the two state solution and all attempts to implement it have failed. The third is to divide the Palestinian territories and place them under the control of Egypt and Jordan. This solution has been tried (1948-1967) and also failed because it did not address the core of the conflict. The fourth solution is based on integration of both Israelis and Palestinians in one nation and is the only solution that has proven successful.

For the last 20 years the world has focused on the two state (two country) solution which has clearly failed. However, contrary to unanimous belief, neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis are to blame for the failure of the two state solution. The two state solution failed because the concept of creating two separate countries by dividing Israel/Palestine was and still is a difficult pill to swallow for Israelis & Palestinians. It is a fact that Israelis and Palestinians have religious, historical and emotional attachments to every square inch of the land that includes Israel and Palestine and neither side is eager to embrace permanent separation or "amputation" as described by Israeli novelist Amos Oz. Consequently, it is highly unlikely that permanent separation will lead to permanent peace.

In light of the above facts some may think that a solution is impossible. NOT TRUE. The Palestinian/Israeli conflict can be solved as long as both sides give up the notion that they deserve exclusive control and rule over Israel/Palestine.

In light of the attachments that both parties have for the same territory, the solution cannot be in separating but in finding a formula for living together. Many Israelis and Palestinians agree that Israel/Palestine is indivisible. Thus, the solution lies in uniting Israelis and Palestinians in one country while guaranteeing both sides equality and absolute security. What is being proposed here is the creation of two sovereign states similar to New York and New Jersey, joined together in a confederation to form one country.

To illustrate further, after occupying the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, Israel could have annexed those territories into Israel by providing the Palestinians with Israeli citizenship. Israel did not do this and instead chose to treat the West Bank and Gaza as part of Israel without granting the Palestinians citizenship, equality or political participation. Legally, Palestinians were and continue to have the same status as American blacks in the 19th century. Israel did not integrate the Palestinians into Israel because Israelis were afraid that the Palestinians may one day outnumber the Jews and vote Israel out of existence. While this is a legitimate concern, Jews and Israelis who fear equality for Palestinians assume that granting the Palestinians equality would lead to the destruction of Israel. This is a false assumption.

The world has produced many successful formulas for different people living together and sharing power and a formula can be found in this case. An example of a formula is the creation of a confederation of Israel/Palestine based on the principles of free trade and the free movement of labor and people. As to the national government, Israel and Palestine can each contribute 50% to the national parliament, a formula that would guarantee security, and eliminate political dilution from demographic changes and make certain that extremist become marginalized.

The above formula is an example that gives Palestinians and Israelis most of what they want while allowing both people to be independent and secure. Moreover, with this solution, Jerusalem becomes a non-issue and borders become less relevant.

As proof that integration can work, consider that Israel has one million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship who are often referred to as "Israeli Arabs." It is important to note that they are not participating in violence. This is because Palestinians who are citizens of Israel have civil and political rights while the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have nothing.

Without a doubt most readers of this article will think that the author is naïve, idealistic, stupid, Zionists or trying to destroy Israel. We understand your beliefs. However, please ask yourself if Israel destroys Hamas or Islamic Jihad will there be peace between Israelis and Palestinians? Consider that Hamas was created in 1987. Before HAMAS was created, Israel fought five major wars and numerous other battles. Moreover, before HAMAS there were the PLO, Fatah, PFLP, PFLP-GC, 15 May Organization, Abu Ali Mustapha Brigades, Al-'Asifah, Arab Liberation Front, Force 17, Black Hand , Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - Special Command, Popular Resistance Committees, Popular Revolutionary Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Black September, Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Doghmush, Omar Ben al-Khatib Warriors, Palestinian Liberation Army, Palestinian Popular Struggle Front, Palestinian fedayeen, Swords of Truth, Rejectionist Front, among other organizations. Today most of the above organizations have been destroyed or just vanished. However, the conflict has not ended as the above organizations have been replaced by Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Holy Jihad Brigades, Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Army of Islam, As-Sa'iqa, Tanzim, Al-Quds Brigades, among others. The point here is that even if Israel destroys HAMAS, the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians would not be solved and it would only be a matter of time before a new group forms to replace HAMAS. Israelis and Palestinians must realize that what they have done for the last 70 years will never bring peace to either Palestine or Israel under the best of circumstances. Under the worst of circumstances this conflict may lead to an all out nuclear war where millions will die and this is no longer an exaggeration.

To summarize, Israel and its neighbors have fought numerous wars and no side has given up on their fundamental claims. For the last 20 years, both sides have tried to separate by creating two separate countries but this approach has failed because all sides have attachments to Israel and Palestine. The only solution that has a record of success is integration as demonstrated by the Palestinians who are citizens of Israel. If peace is not found then the day may soon come when the governments of the Middle East maybe overthrown by people who want to directly intervene on behalf of the Palestinians. If an uprising erupts throughout the Middle East then nuclear war may soon follow. Therefore, the choices are between total annihilation or equality for Palestinians and security for Israel. There are no other choices.

Posted January 11, 2009 by Kamal Nawash



You sent an article to my inbox in which you write: "Hamas' stated reason for firing missiles into Israel is to end the siege".

It�s not clear how firing kassams and grad�s into civilian populations helps them end the siege. Seems to my mind that it�s only made the siege worse. Indeed, in addition to trying to kill a innocent Israeli civilians, by inviting a counter-attack, they are now responsible for the deaths for 100�s of gazan�s by placing their military installations in mosques, schools and hospitals.

Well, firing missiles into Israel is not working. Perhaps they should try something else.


Posted January 11, 2009 by Guy

Good article because you're not taking sides. However, the world must be aware that Hamas takes children on raids against the IDF with them, and that they are launching missiles from heavily populated civilian areas.

The only entity preventing peace, therefore, is Hamas; therefore it should be eradicated and shut down. If Israel's incursion into Gaza means the destruction of Hamas, then so be it.

Posted January 11, 2009 by bassizzzt

Dear Kamal,

This is an impressive article with a beautiful solution to the current conflict. I command you for this article and I will share it with my contacts and post it at several of my sites.



Posted January 11, 2009 by Edip


Now let's finally move forward with Israel entering its fourth week of an incursion into the same Gaza Strip it voluntarily evacuated a few months ago, a sense of reality among Arabs is spreading through commentary by Arab pundits, letters to the editor, and political talk shows on Arabic-language TV networks. The new views are stunning both in their maturity and in their realism. The best way I can think of to convey them is in the form of a letter to the Palestinian Arabs from their Arab friends:

Dear Palestinian Arab brethren: The war with Israel is over. You have lost. Surrender and negotiate to secure a future for your children. We, your Arab brothers, may say until we are blue in the face that we stand by you, but the wise among you and most of us know that we are moving on, away from the tired old idea of the Palestinian Arab cause and the "eternal struggle" with Israel . Dear friends, you and your leaders have wasted three generations trying to fight for Palestine , but the truth is the Palestine you could have had in 1948 is much bigger than the one you could have had in 1967, which in turn is much bigger than what you may have to settle for now or in another 10 years.

Struggle means less land and more misery and utter loneliness. At the moment, brothers, you would be lucky to secure a semblance of a state in that Gaza Strip into which you have all crowded, and a small part of the West Bank of the Jordan. It isn't going to get better. Time is running out even for this much land, so here are some facts, figures, and sound advice, friends.

You hold keys, which you drag out for television interviews, to houses that do not exist or are inhabited by Israelis who have no intention of leaving Jaffa, Haifa, Tel Aviv, or West Jerusalem. You shoot old guns at modern Israeli tanks and American-made fighter jets, doing virtually no harm to Israel while bringing the wrath of its mighty army down upon you. You fire ridiculously inept Kassam rockets that cause little destruction and delude yourselves into thinking this is a war of liberation.

Your government, your social institutions, your schools, and your economy are all in ruins. Your young people are growing up illiterate, ill, and bent on rites of death and suicide, while you, in effect, are living on the kindness of foreigners, including America and the United Nations. Every day your officials must beg for your daily bread, dependent on relief trucks that carry food and medicine into the Gaza Strip and the West Bank , while your criminal Muslim fundamentalist Hamas government continues to fan the flames of a war it can neither fight nor hope to win.

In other words, brothers, you are down, out, and alone in a burnt-out landscape that is shrinking by the day. What kind of struggle is this? Is it worth waging at all? More important, what kind of miserable future does it portend for your children, the fourth or fifth generation of the Arab world's have-nots? We, your Arab brothers, have moved on.

Those of us who have oil money are busy accumulating wealth and building housing, luxury developments, state-of-the-art universities and schools, and new highways and byways. Those of us who share borders with Israel, such as Egypt and Jordan, have signed a peace treaty with it and are not going to war for you any time soon. Those of us who are far away, in places like North Africa and Iraq, frankly could not care less about what happens to you.

Only Syria continues to feed your fantasies that someday it will join you in liberating Palestine , even though a huge chunk of its territory, the entire Golan Heights, was taken by Israel in 1967 and annexed. The Syrians, my friends, will gladly fight down to the last Palestinian Arab. Before you got stuck with this Hamas crowd, another cheating, conniving, leader of yours, Yasser Arafat, sold you a rotten bill of goods - more pain, greater corruption, and millions stolen by his relatives - while your children played in the sewers of Gaza .

The war is over. Why not let a new future begin?

Youssef M. Ibrahim, a former New York Times Middle East Correspondent

Posted January 11, 2009 by Youssef M. Ibrahim,

I agree with you on the one state solution. Thank you for the article.

Posted January 11, 2009 by E. Aoun


As always, extremely thoughtful. I tend to agree with you as someone who has no dog in the fight. Not sure how such a process gets started. I think there are folks in Israel who agree with you and are influential; less sure about the Palestinians. I think they believe that eventually their demographics will win out.


Posted January 11, 2009 by David

You are absolutely right. The unfortunate fact is that Israel will refuse to even discuss this solution. You may recall this was the solution many leftist palestinian organizations advocated, a democratic state for arabs and jews.We may still have a chance ,every day becomes less likely,with a two state solution. I believe the two states will, after hostilities subside, need each other to survive and ultimately will end in the model you propose.

Posted January 11, 2009 by Basel

"To summarize, Israel and its neighbors have fought numerous wars and no side has given up on their fundamental claims."

Face it, Mr. Nawash. The opposing fundamental claims of Israel and "its neighbors" are:

1. Israel has no right to exist.
2. Israel does have a right to exist.

Is a nuclear confrontation possible? -- Yes.

Is that what you want? --No? Then fight for the recognition by Israel's neighbors, including the Palestinians, of Israel's right to exist. Israel will fight for it to the death -- its or yours.

Posted January 11, 2009 by Melvin

Dear Mr. Nawash;

I'm sure your concern for the Palestinians is heartfelt... it's just terribly misguided.

Please don't talk to me, I'm not the problem. The problem lies in the heart of the Moslem community. There is no moral outrage in the Moslem community when other Moslems kill innocent women and children. The Palestinians are typical; they make a deal for peace and then kill, they make another deal, and kill again... are you so ignorant? They will not be happy until they kill all the Jews and Christians in Israel and posses all the land (Then, they will probably start a war with another Moslem sect.)

One of the most destabilizing forces in this world has been Moslems. They are hateful and repressive, unwilling to compromise on almost any issue, especially if they are dealing with a non-Moslem. Face it; Moslems do not consider me, as a Christian, even worthy of human consideration.

There are no deals with Moslems. They have no regard for humanity if they feel iy in any way impedes their religious understanding - it's their way or the highway.

About 600 AD, after the establishment of the Moslems religion, they marched across the Middle East and north Africa, killing and conquering... they have never changed. As the world tries to establish enlightened paradigms for leadership and government, the constant enemy to this direction comes from the Moslem camp.

Unless they change, nothing changes and I, for one, will argue that we should distance ourselves from them and fight them with a ferocity they demand.

You are talking to the wrong people!

Cautious Regards,

Posted January 11, 2009 by John

Sorry. You are merely calling for the destruction of Israel "by other means." The solution is for the Muslims and, above all, Hamas, to come to realize and accept that Israel is there to stay. That means Hamas must be destroyed or rendered impotent. When that is done, and the flow of arms into Gaza virtually ends, there will be no need for, or opportunity for pretense of, impediment in any kind of commerce with Gaza.

Posted January 11, 2009 by Melvin

Nice try, however the solution is not going to come from human beings this time, but from God. It is the one explained in The Christian Herald No 10.

Posted January 11, 2009 by Grigore

Mr. Nawash,

This is the first truly disappointing position letter I have received from you. If the world would shed its anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli knee-jerk reflex for just a short time-truth would shine through. Hamas is a terror group; they indoctrinate children and all under their rule to hate, they intentionally kill innocents as a strategy, they hide behind civilians in war, they disseminate disinformation and so on. They are driven by hate, not love or peace and Israel is the antithesis of that. All who visit their know that.

As far as one state for all, come on! One tiny Jewish state in a sea of Mulsim lands is just too much for Arabs and Muslims to get their arms around and I think you know this. Look at history; no peple have been more oppressed for more time than Jews. The Jewish peope need a nation where they are in control of their destiny-the Arabs have clearly shown that the Jews cannot entrust their well being let alone their survival as a people to them.

Posted January 11, 2009 by Marc

I think you need to better understand the so-called "occupation" situation in the West Bank and Gaza. Prior to Israel establishing a presence in Gaza and the West Bank in '67, a result of a war not initiated by Israel, Jordan and Egypt occupied those territories, a result of the '48 war. By the way, I don't recall people criticizing Jordan and Egypt to stop occupying those territories. Since neither had legal sovereignty over the territories, when Israel gained control of the territories, they fell into disputed control. The West Bank and Gaza are not legally under the legal control of anyone, including the Palestinians. A piece of land doesn''t get legal ownership simply because one group or another says it's their land.

Posted January 11, 2009 by British

Dear Kamal

We've been having some seminars on this, around here. It is, as you know, a very old but very necessary topic.

Besides the formulae you offer, another hypothesis
would be "Israpal", or "Palis",
a unitarian highly decentralised state (as opposed to a confederation), with all communities granted the same rights, including universal political representation.

The problem with the confederation is that the two "independent states" (NY and NJ - like, as you mention) would have to have constitutional boundaries, and these are impossible to draw to everybody's liking (as you yourself recognize, by recalling the "amputation" story).

But "Israpal" has a supplementary problem. Israel still believes there should be a "Jewish state" in the Middle East, and Israel is defined as such by its basic law. And "Jewish" could mean anything from religious to "ethnic", but will never include "Palestinian". On the other hand, "Palestinian" could mean anyone from the geographical area, independently of religion. Could we reconcile those notions?

That is the question. If it would be only a problem of tags, names and words, it would be simple. But words have "inclinations", as Thomas Aquinas once observed.


Nuno Rogeiro, Lisbon, Portugal

Posted January 11, 2009 by Nuno, Lisbon Portugal


Your article "Israel/Palestine Conflict May Lead to Nuclear War"
basically proposes as the only feasible solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict the dissolution of Israel. This is merely another version
of the genocidal and rejectionist stance of the Arab/Muslim world.
Unsurprisingly (as you must know), no-one in Israel will agree, so the proposal is dead in the water. Why should Israel commit hari-kiri?

You say, the two-state solution "has clearly failed." I agree with you, actually. But your account of the other options is unsatisfactory and incomplete. The first is that the conflict continues until one or the other side gives up. You think this path has failed. But it has not. As a result of defending itself, Israel has survived and has even flourished, and its people according to
opinion polls are remarkably happy and in addition highly patriotic.
They believe in themselves and their right to exist; they will not give that up. And there is no obvious reason why Israel should do
so: she is superior in morale and military might than any of her
enemies, and has really not lost any of the wars forced upon her.
She can defend herself indefinitely, and as far as the present specific enemies on her borders is concerned, she either has cowed them or will soon do so. Hezbollah was cowed by the Second Lebanon War that has so often been termed a Hezbollah "victory" simply because it survived, but such a view is less tenable when one realizes that many more such victories and Hezbollah will be no more (while Israel will continue to flourish): Hezbollah armed groups were forced back from the border with Israel, the terrorist organization was forbidden weapons and rockets between the border and the Litani River, it was subjected to U.N. inspections and control in that region (of course I admit that the U.N. "peace-keeper force" is incompetent and unwilling to fulfil the mandate given it by the U.N.
Security Council and Lebanon itself -- nevertheless this control was resisted by Hezbollah, until it was forced to accept that humiliating and restrictive ruling). Nasrallah has gone into permanent hiding, and has even admitted on Lebanese television that he made a major error of judgment in shooting rockets off into Israel, invading its borders and kidnapping its soldiers, which were the actions that precipitated the Lebanon war. Anywhere between 400 to 600 Hezbollah soldiers were killed, and thousands of rockets destroyed, with very low Israeli casualties, again demonstrating the extraordinary effectiveness of the Israeli armed forces even when it considers its performance below par. Since the Hezbollah "victory" in the Second Lebanon War Hezbollah has not dared to shoot off any more rockets into Israel, and it was quick to dissociate itself from the few rockets set up by splinter Palestinians in south Lebanon. Of course, it continues to build up an enormous rocket arsenal north of the Litani, and there will no doubt therefore be another Israel-Lebanon war when Iran and Syria give the signal, this time much more severe than last time. But Israel will prevail.

Your basic error is that you know little about Jews or Zionism and drastically underestimate Israeli morale and unity. The enemies of Israel have always underestimated this side of Israeli life, because they cannot grasp liberal democracy itself and the pluralism and
openness of debate in Israel, including tolerance of self-criticism.
Being of totalitarian/authoritarian mentality (totalitarian if jihadi Muslims, authoritarian if secular racists), Israel's enemies interpret open debate as loss of nerve, lack of patriotism, and weakness. Actually, it is a tremendous strength. These anti- Zionists are also the victims of their own antisemitism, taking for granted deficient moral virtue, self-sacrifice or abilities amongst Jews.

Israel is ready to wait for generations for the rest of the Arab- Muslim world to grow up. It has flourished without the cooperation of that world; it will continue to do so. It will never accept again becoming the vulnerable, persecuted and despised Dhimmi minority of traditional Muslim society. Why should it? Who would want such a fate? Have a look at the Christians of the Muslim world: look quickly though because they are almost all immigrating to the Western democracies due to the intolerable and intolerant persecution by Muslims. Lebanon itself is an object lesson in what happens when people of other religions of the Book try a "one-state" solution with Muslims. There are seven times more "Lebanese" Christians living outside of Lebanon and the Muslim world than remain in it.

Israel is much better off as it is.

So Israel's self-defense against Arab/Muslim aggression has not failed, as you assert. It has succeeded brilliantly, and Israel has survived and is even an inspiring success story. It is willing to endure another 70 years, or ten times 70 years, of Muslim/Arab hostility, although naturally it will make every realistic effort to seek peace.

By the way, Israel does not claim "exclusive control and rule over Israel/Palestine." You are wrong there. Israel is quite willing to live with an Arab state controlling the West Bank and Gaza, as long as it is peaceful. It has supported the two-state solution from before its formal establishment in 1948. It accepted Jordan's rule over the West Bank and Egypt's over Gaza, and that may be the eventual outcome of the present impasse. It is the extremist elements in the Muslim/Arab world that insists on "exclusive control and rule over Israel/Palestine." Your proposed one-state solution would create just such exclusive control and rule by the Muslim/Arab majority. It therefore will not happen. Although absorption of the West Bank and Gaza into Jordan and Egypt is also unlikely, it is much more probable an outcome than your chosen option. It is Palestinian nationalism that has failed, not Israeli.

By the way, you state that Hamas was created in 1987. This actually is not true. The Muslim Brotherhood was created in the 1930s, and from the start was centrally driven by raw antisemitism, encouraged as it happens by the Nazis their allies. Hamas is merely the Palestinian off-shoot of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

As for nuclear war, well, Iran must be prevented from gaining nuclear weapons. If it does get them, it is true that the Middle East will
become an even more unstable and deadly place for all its peoples.
But you can believe that Israel will defend itself well, so we must wait to see how things turn out.

Melbourne, Australia

Posted January 11, 2009 by Dr. Ben

Dear Kamal,

This is an impressive article with a beautiful solution to the current conflict. I command you for this article and I will share it with my contacts and post it at several of my sites.



Posted January 11, 2009 by Edip

Posted January 11, 2009 by Daniel Pipes


Hello my friend. I just received your e-mail today. After reading and thinking about what you wrote, I have a few comments.

First, I want to thank you once again for taking a stand for peace and reconciliation in this terrible problem. The too few voices calling for peace and reconciliation are often drowned out by the many calling for violence as a solution.

In my opinion, the biggest obstacle to peace has been Hamas who has never honored a peace accord for more than a few days. Basically, only as long as it took them to reposition men and weapons to renew the attack. Each time Israel has agreed to stop shooting, or pull their troops out, or to allow more access for workers to enter Israel proper, Hamas has used those stops to increase their rhetoric. You've heard it. "Israel is weak! We forced them to stop bombing us. We forced them to allow our people to return to Palestine!" This emboldens new sacrificial lambs to go off to die for the political masters of Hamas (and the PLO before them). I can see no reason to believe that Hamas will honour any new deal for peace, no matter who brokers it.

Hamas, and the PLO before the, have sworn to never stop until they have eliminated Israel and driven every Jew into the sea. That does not bode well for any brokered peace accord in my opinion. And the Israelis know this. They know that they can not trust the Palestinian leaders to make any deals in good faith. Both sides know about "al Taqiyya". Even if Hamas truly wanted to make peace with Israel and to peacefully coexist, al Taqiyya would always be there, the elephant in the room, causing doubt and mistrust.

You posited that the only viable solution to ending the conflict would be to (once again) merge everyone there into one nation with no partitions. I assume you also want a return of all Palestinians from the camps and where ever they may have settled during their Diaspora. This is probably the bet solution in the minds of the Palestinians and their supporters in Israel and abroad. In one, possibly two elections, there would no longer be a Jewish government. The Jews would soon find themselves in the position that Palestinians are in today. Not long after that, I seriously doubt that there would be a Jew left alive anywhere in what was once Israel.

My humble solution to most of the problems there would be for the Palestinians to be accepted by their Arab and Syrian cousins and be allowed to leave the camps (the breeding grounds for angry young men) and to assimilate into the nations that have been hosting them for so long. If the Arabs would stop using the displaced Palestinians are pawns in the political games of keeping unrest going, the problems in that area of the Middle East would dwindle to a much lower level. Unfortunately, The existing Arab governments must keep their people's anger focused on Israel rather than allowing them time to see the wrongs of their own Kleptocracies.

I realize that that does not address the wrongs of the Palestinians being denied a life in what has been their land since 77 AD when the Romans drove the Jews out of the Roman colony of Palestine. Then again, the Jews feel that the land is theirs and they are only pushing out squatters who settled in their empty homes so that they may resume their rightful ownership of their homeland.

Your second plan of forming separate countries by dividing the land between the Israelis and the Palestinians has not worked well so far. Besides the Gaza, there are at least a dozen Palestinian controlled areas throughout Israel. In every case, the Palestinians have used having a quiet place to organize future attacks into Israel. Then take the Temple Mount. It is covered by an Israeli laws that gives control of the Dome on the rock to Muslims. Would the Saudis and Muslims have allowed any Jewish or Christian control over any part of al qabba or in Medina?

Unfortunately, so long as this issue is clouded by religion and the Arab nations find it politically beneficial to keep the hate alive, I do not see that there ever will be a peaceful solution that allows both sides to coexist as equals. And, again unfortunately, it appears to me that the greatest part of the trouble is caused by the Muslims. Yes, there are Jewish troublemakers who are often as violent as their Muslim brothers. But the majority of those who cause strife seem to be Muslims. Until there are more outspoken Muslims like you, who are willing to scorned by those who seek violence who will demand peaceful reconciliation between all of the involved parties - Christian, Muslim and Jew. There will never be a peaceful solution.

That brings me to my last thought on this topic. Until the moderate, peaceful Muslims rein in their violent coreligionists; until they openly scorn and denigrate those who relish murder as a political solution, the world will see the Muslims as a monolithic block and no matter how just your cause, you will be seen as all being potential suicide bombers and snipers who hide in a mosque to shoot at innocent women and children then cry over the return fire that destroys the mosque. Something must be done and it must be done with-in the Muslim community. Until the extremist Imams and Mullahs are stopped from preaching their fiery rhetoric of hate and violence and until the madrassas stop teaching that Jews are dogs and apes who use the blood of Muslim and Christian children to make their matzo for special holy days, the hate will continue.

I am for a peaceful, equitable settlement of the problems in Israel/Palestine. Both groups have legitimate grievances. Both groups have "sinned" against the other. So long as they both want an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, the fighting will continue. So long as the Muslims openly state that they want to kill every Jew, to drive them from the land and into the sea, there can be no peace.

That is my two cents worth.

Best regards,

Posted January 11, 2009 by Glenn

Good article. I see a problem with Israel giving more Palestinians citizenship because of the hate taught in Palestine against Jews and Israelis. More suicide bombings could take place and for the time being, it is nearly impossible for that to occur with the security Israel has put into force. The old saying, hurt me once, shame on you, hurt me twice, shame on me.

Posted January 11, 2009 by Maria

Posted January 12, 2009 by Alain

Dear Mr. Nawash,
Let us all pray together right now that what you state does not come to pass. The concequences of such an action would be cataclysmic for the whole of human civilization. I have never understood just why any one group would call for the total anihilation of another especially when solutions include equal treatment and opportunities. Nothing has ever been gained by guns. What results is the stronger resolve of the other to " win" and in the end there are no winners. Only dead babies, grieving mothers and desolation. Both Isreal and the Palestinians need to come to this realization. Both peoples have a right to exist, thrive and function. Anything else will leave the other side angry and looking for revenge. The outcome of this we can see and if it is not acceptable to either side, everyone needs to take a new approach and simply do something else. Peace and Joy

Posted January 12, 2009 by Meg

You make an interesting proposal, but fanaticism will never allow it. It has not been Israel or western nations screaming for the destruction of Gaza and the West Bank. All that we have heard for thirty years are Arabs and other Muslims calling for the destruction of Israel. How can anyone make peace with organizations which have made every effort to destroy you? There is no evidence that the Palestinians want peace.

A nuclear exchange would not surprise me, but it would impact Arab and Persian peoples far more than Israelis. An attack on the United States in an effort to force American involvement would result in the Middle East being bombed back into the Stone Age. Instead of casting veiled threats toward America, you might give thought to pointing out to Arab and other Muslim countries the extent of the destruction that would accompany America's wrath. An attack on America would lead immediately to the complete and total destruction of Middle Eastern countries.

Posted January 12, 2009 by John

Hi Kamal,

It's totally astounding that your "" newsletter is totally ignored by Palestinians, both Christian and Muslim.
Apart from my comment, there is not ONE SINGLE message posted taking the view of the Palestinians. Every single message is coming from Jews and Zionists.
There are countless moderate intellectuals, both Jewish, Arab and Christian who post to, and not a single one of seem to be bothering with your site. WHY?


Posted January 12, 2009 by Alain

As a palastenian I feel proud that you are comparing Hamas to Israel as an equivalent power which it is. The only thing I think you messed to mention is that Israel is a terrorist organization by using the internationally forbidden weapons. Israel now is acting as a savage dog trying to save its situation for failing to invade Gaza for almost 17 days. On the other hand on 1967 Israel was able to invade three Arab countries on only 6 days. This tells you how strong Hamas is and it is really supported by God that is stronger than the unites states who supports so called Israel.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Jawad

The military invasion of the Gaza Strip by Israeli Forces bears a direct relation to the control and ownership of strategic offshore gas reserves.
This is a war of conquest. Discovered in 2000, there are extensive gas reserves off the Gaza coastline.
British Gas (BG Group) and its partner, the Athens based Consolidated Contractors International Company (CCC) owned by Lebanon's Sabbagh and Koury families, were granted oil and gas exploration rights in a 25 year agreement signed in November 1999 with the Palestinian Authority.
The rights to the offshore gas field are respectively British Gas (60 percent); Consolidated Contractors (CCC) (30 percent); and the Investment Fund of the Palestinian Authority (10 percent). (Haaretz, October 21, 2007).

The PA-BG-CCC agreement includes field development and the construction of a gas pipeline.(Middle East Economic Digest, Jan 5, 2001).
The BG licence covers the entire Gazan offshore marine area, which is contiguous to several Israeli offshore gas facilities. (See Map below). It should be noted that 60 percent of the gas reserves along the Gaza-Israel coastline belong to Palestine.
The BG Group drilled two wells in 2000: Gaza Marine-1 and Gaza Marine-2. Reserves are estimated by British Gas to be of the order of 1.4 trillion cubic feet, valued at approximately 4 billion dollars. These are the figures made public by British Gas. The size of Palestine's gas reserves could be much larger.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Yazid

So we try your plan. Do you think that all the hate Israel groups will disappear. No, they will start a civil war within Israel blowing themselves up and everyone they can. This will look like the sectarian battle between Sunni and Shiite in Iraq and will force an outside army to try and stop the killing. When you have Islamic fundamentalists who believe it is their religious duty to kill all non Muslims, starting with the Jews, and that their reward is 72 virgins and thousands and thousands willing to do so you will never have peace. Islam must be brought into the 21st Century whereby its adherents can coexist with and respect people of other religions and accept the notion that there are many ways to God. Only when this happens will peace come to Israel, Palestine, the mid East and earth.

Posted January 12, 2009 by JP

Mr. Nawash,

The problem here is that you are light years ahead of your people. If your people thought like you did you would have everything you want. You are too inteleigent to be an Arab, you should have been born a Jew. :)

Posted January 12, 2009 by Jackamo

You write:
The Palestinian/Israeli conflict can be solved as long as both sides give up the notion that they deserve exclusive control and rule over Israel/Palestine."

Whom are you kidding? Or, are you deliberately trying to deceive people? It is ONLY the Arab/Moslem side which claims total control over the entire territory of British Mandate Palestine. Have you ever bothered to read the Hamas Covenant? Or the PLO Charter?

Posted January 12, 2009 by Carl

Mr. Nawash, I appreciated your article. I don't know if you ever reply to questions, but is your proposal a bit like the situation in Lebanon, which does not seem to be working well? If not, how is it different?

Posted January 12, 2009 by Loren

Carl is absolutely right. Only one side continually clamors for the total destruction of the other.

Here are some excerpts from the Hamas covenant and from the PLO Charter (which has NOT been officially revised, by the way):

PLO: Its very name is its program. The "Palestine" they are determined to "liberate" is all of British Mandate Palestine. The PLO was formed years before Israel captured Gaza, Judea and Samaria; so the dispute over those areas has nothing to do with the PLO's goal.
"We, the Palestinian Arab people, who believe in its Arabism and in its right to regain its homeland, to realize its freedom and dignity, and who have determined to amass its forces and mobilize its efforts and capabilities in order to continue its struggle and to move forward on the path of holy war (al-jihad) until complete and final victory has been attained, "
"Article 2: Palestine, with its boundaries at the time of the British Mandate, is a indivisible territorial unit."
"Article 17: The partitioning of Palestine, which took place in 1947, and the establishment of Israel are illegal and null and void..."

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)."

"Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious."

"HADITH Sahih Bukhari [4:52:176] Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' "

So, whether we are talking about Hamas or about the PLO/Fatah, we are talking about people who want total war against Israel and the Jews. Any suggestion that these people would be willing to live as equals alongside Jews is a deliberate deception designed to destroy both Israel and the Jews.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Abdul

Your solution is not idealistic. It is unrelated to reality.

If the people were different people then then the people would be different and they would do different things. So what? The people aren't different.

Your approach was tried. The confederation of secular Jews and secular Arabs is what was tried in 1948. The Jews in power were 100% secular. They wanted a secular state. The Arabs would not cooperate.

Now it is too late for that. Most of the Jews in Israel are religious at some level.

Jews and Moslems would have to stop being religious or would have to change their religion for you scheme to work. People have been trying to get religious Jews to stop being religious since before Islam was around. I wouldn't bank on it happening now.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Yaakov Watkins

Hamas advocates genocide against the Jews:
Dr. Walid Al-Rashudi, head of the Department of Islamic Studies at Saud University in Saudi Arabia, in a speech broadcast last week on Hamas TV, said:
"Oh Allah, inflict as many losses as possible on the Jews, kill them one by one and don't leave even one."

A one-state solution with such would-be murderers of Jews??? Anyone who advocates that is an accomplice to the murder of Jews.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Montedoro

There are those little issues that Hamas wants all Jews dead and Israel off the map. All Hamas has to do is stop lobbing bombs into Israel. Then they can talk. The rest is all nonsense. As far as I'm concerned, Hamas has zero credibility. The ball is in Hamas' court. Sorry, but I couldn't agree with you less.
"There is only one decisive victory: the last."

Posted January 12, 2009 by Carl Von

I disagree with Carl von that "Hamas has zero credibility". Hamas is perfectly credible. They make no secret about wanting to obliterate Israel and the Jews. We should all take them at their word. And those who support Hamas also agree with Hamas's goal.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Montedoro

Kamal, you can not force a solution because there is too much world division. Palestinians and the greater Arab and Muslim world demand the eradication of Israel - Israel demands the right to exist as a free people in their historical homeland. Since the Arab world is strong, their goals will not change. Since Israel is small, she can only continue to defend herself until the situation changes. Attempting to force a "solution" will not result in a resolution in todays world is defined as pressuring Israel - which will weaken her and increase conflict.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Steven

Very well said Montedoro, but do not forget that Hamas was elected as representatives of the 'Palestinian' people.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Steven

Mr. Nawash, conclusions are opinions and you are certainly entitled to your own (especially that this is your web site). However, your reasoning itself appears flawed because (for example) you state: "The third is to divide the Palestinian territories and place them under the control of Egypt and Jordan. This solution has been tried (1948-1967) and also failed because it did not address the core of the conflict. . . "
It failed because (at the time) Egypt and Jordan were part of the core-conflict. Since this is no longer the case, it is a different (proposed) solution in 2009. The foregoing is the best and really the only viable strategy. The streets of Gaza need to be cleaned and cleared of radicals and the most organic way to accomplish that is to have Arabs police other Arabs, therefore, the world would not see it as a racially motivated situation.
A 'one state solution' is neither plausible, practical or for that matter fair because one of the roles Israel has is as a REFUGE for a traditionally oppressed ethnic group, the Jews. Arabs have NOT been traditionally oppressed, except at the hands of other Arabs and/or as the recipients of 'pay back' after habitually starting-up with their neighbors. Jews deserve such a refuge, as Muslims have Mecca and Christians have the Vatican City/State as their cultural/religious capitols and in both these other examples, the Islamic and Catabolic capitols are NOT multi-ethnic.
While Christians and Muslims may THINK that Jerusalem represents their own holy city, in reality:
a) Jesus was a Jewish prophetic king (not a Christian) and besides, if Jerusalem was so holy to Christians, why was ROME chosen as the primary Christian capitol in 334-CE?
b) With due respect to the Muslims, there was no single mosque located anywhere in Jerusalem during the Islamic prophet Mohammed's lifetime.
Hamas (and Iran) have created this most recent conflict in hopes of loosing enough Arab civilians to spark the world into opposition to Israel. In this respect, the mission has been successful, but only because much of the world is naturally inclined to blame Jews for anything and everything that is objectionable (even when they are fired upon first).
Lastly . . . . news flash: This already is a nuclear conflict because the bunker-busting weapons Israel used to destroy the Iranian built underground facilities bordering Gaza and Egypt carried a nuclear micro-charge. But even more interesting is what was destroyed. These were not mere tunnels between Gaza and Egypt. These were entire cities with somewhat sophisticated weapons fabrication equipment. When the TV newscasters were shown speaking about civilian Arab casualties and we (concurrently) saw the giant plumes of smoke in the far background, the (false) inference was that these (massive) weapons were being used against civilians, when in fact these were being detonated on bare ground to destroy Hamas' (underground) weapons making capabilities, donated to them by Iran.
Here is the best chance of achieving Peace (albeit possibly temporal, which would still ,be preferable to what we now have): 1) End the refugee status for Palestinians from 1948 and 1967 (and especially for their offspring. If the world wishes to support them financially, it is free to do so without mandating that they 'return' to a country where most have never once set foot. ) 2) Gaza should be merged into Egypt. If WB can not maintain lawfulness, it should be merged into Jordan. This may not be a permanent solution but at least it is a Band-Aid. Right now we have not even a band-aid.
Finally, if the world truly wants peace--it should stop resenting Jews for being high-functioning intellectually (and this suggestion goes equally for some Jews as well).
Thank you.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Trollstein

Dearest God,

Creator of all, most merciful, most forgiving. Sustainer of all things....please forgive all of these bloggers for their lies and manipulation of all facts. It is a shame that the OPPRESSOR is crying as the OPPRESSED!! It is a shame that every Zionist on earth has made a comment here. Please forgive them for their narrow-mindedness and not even try to put themselves in others shoes. Although, they will always remind you of what happened to them. Forgive those who do not want peace, forgive those who feel that their blood is worth 100x more important than another human beings blood. Please guide us, help us to make sense of this, and have compassion for others. The Prophet Mohammed(PBUH) used to say, "you will never reach true IMAN(pure religion in your heart) until you want for your neighbor (JEWISH, CHRISTIAN, MUSLIM) what you want for yourself!! SHAME ON US ALL!!

ps- John... it is 2009 and NO-ONE has killed more people in the name of Religion than the CRUSADES!! Never forget that!!!

Posted January 12, 2009 by Sheri

Dear Kamal .

you are so delusional !

Posted January 12, 2009 by Palestine

Dear God, Do not forgive that anti-Semite and hypocrite Sheri for her narrowminded, genocidal Jew-hatred! If You feel inclined to forgive her for anything, let it be for her ignorance of the Crusades which were nothing more than a long-belated and weak response to Moslem aggression three centuries prior.

In its charter -- its fundamental statement of purpose -- Hamas advocates genocide against the Jews:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory)." AND "Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious." AND "HADITH Sahih Bukhari [4:52:176] Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' "

Hamas was elected in a free election. The Arabs who voted for Hamas are no more innocent civilians than the Germans who voted for the Nazis. In both cases, the candidates for office made their program perfectly clear to everyone, and in both cases the voters knew perfectly well what they were voting for. They sowed the wind and they reaped the whirlwind. Hamas aims its rockets at civilians, and they use their own civilians as human shields precisely in order to increase the number of civilian casualties for public relations purposes. Like the Nazis whom they admire, Hamas needs to be crushed utterly, and like with Germany, regardless of civilian casualties. Stop the whining. They do not deserve it.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Ahmed

I understand how complicated this whole thing must be, although I also tend to be naive in my hope that we can all someday see an end to all this hatred, sectarianism and unforgiving, unremorseful violence. I myself will pass on in a few years or less from long ago misdiagnosed cancer. I could nurture hatred and wish for revenge against the burned out doctor who blew the call and send me and my whole family into years of living in "the twilight zone" and to end me at a time when I am still needed. I can understand anger, I can understand the urge for revenge, but in my deepest mind I can also see that vengeance can never satisfy. If there is a God and there is evil, or even if there is not, vengeance only brings a horrible and never ending cycle of teaching the next generation and the next to hate. Would anyone's vision of the unknowable God whoever or whatever it is want that? Surely not! And so as each day passes closer to my own encounter with the circle of life, I can only try to let anger pass through me and fade away. I can only counter it with love and forgiveness. I can only be true to what the best of what humanity hopes to achieve, to be like the cream and rise to the top. And so it continues. Small voices find each other and speak the words of peace. Large masses growl and seethe and yearn for "justice" , mistakenly thinking that violence will satisfy or change things for the better. And meanwhile Earth, the only place that we can hope to call home is hurtling toward extinction. The few look up, see the real crisis and act. The many look down and nurture their anger. forgetting that the concept of always another chance is fading with the health of the planet. It's so sad really.
I congratulate you on your brave effort to educate the world about the fact that there are still peacemakers alive and well. Raise your voices as loud and with love and honor as you can. If I hear you above the "media" then perhaps others will as well. Choose hope.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Karen

Dearest Khahmed (whatever your name is)

There is nothing in my statement that is Anti-Semite,anti Jewish... Those words no longer silence anyone!! Those are just words that TRY and shut up people. Try something new. I hope that those words do not turn around one day and bite you in the behind. See, by calling all people who do not AGREE with Israeli's (repeat ISRAELS) killing of innocent people on THEIR land,--------------- you will miss those that really are Anti-Semite!!! Becareful.

Please dearest GOD, have mercy on Khahmed and forgive him for trying to manipulate the truth and make Islam his enemy!! You are all Seeing, all Hearing, all Knowing!! you know the truth, you know what is going on. Expose those that are committing these atrocities you know who they are into to face judgement on earth and guide the rest of us into helping to find PEACE on earth!!!

Khahamed--- although the Israelis are not putting Hamas and it's people in is still killing them and the WORLD sees and they are GUILTY as charged!!!!!! Oh I know, its all in defense!! You can not defend yourself on occupied land. It's IMPOSSIBLE!! You need a new argument my friend. My cousin.... from the family of Issac brother of Ismail, son of Abrahim!!!

Posted January 12, 2009 by Sheri

While I fully understand your suggestion, and also the fine belief behind it, I must disagree. In a perfect world, maybe. Today? No. The biggest obstacle to peace is Hamas and their goal of destroying Israel. If they didn't want to destroy Israel and kill Jews, there would have been peace long before now. Hamas must be removed as much as possible so the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank can be unified in the goal of living in peace with Israel and building a real nation, and not a terror base. Iran's influence must somehow be capped. When these goals are achieved, Palestine and Israel living side by side in peace, and both thriving. America and Canada are not one state, and they live side by side peacefully. Israel must stay a Jewish state. Your idea, while thoughtful, is not an option. As to all the broadcasting of images around the world, this I agree is creating a hornets nest. People everywhere would be better served to protest outside of the media outlets and demand honest and fair reporting of facts, not manipulation.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Nancy


My question to you is before Hamas was created"what was the problem then", "why was there no peace". Since Hamas is the problem NOW, what has been the problem the past 60 years?? IT seems to me that Israel will always have some kind of problem with everyone who is Palestinian!!!!


Posted January 12, 2009 by Sheri

Sheri, or whatever her name is, is a real phony. Does she agree or disagree with the saying of Muhammad which is part of the Hamas Covenant as someone pointed out above: "HADITH Sahih Bukhari [4:52:176] Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' "

Does Sheri agree or disagree with the declaration that "non-Moslems are your open enemy" (Koran)?

Does Sheri agree or disagree that "non-Moslems are the vilest of creatures" (Koran)?

Sheri is certainly an anti-Semite because she denies to Jews what she allows for everyone else, namely, the right to live in their homeland as Jews. Israel, after all, is the ancient Jewish homeland where a Jewish state once existed. There was never an Arab Palestinian state there. Heck, there wasn't even a Palestinian people until forty years ago.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Taka

WHY are we being so sensationalistic about this. Lets focus on addressing the problem. There is no one around to do 'nuclear' war. ...

Posted January 12, 2009 by Azmat

Sheri asks what was the problem before Hamas was created. That is a legitimate question. The problem was not that Israel had a problem with the so-called "Palestinians", but that Israel was invaded by the armies of five Arab countries on the very first day of its existence. The stated purpose of the Arab war against the Jews was to drive the Jews into the sea. The Jews accepted the partition. The Arabs refused to accept the partition, and they refused to create a Palestinian Arab state. So it is not the Israelis who have had a problem with the "Palestinians". It was (and is) the Arabs/Moslems who have always had a problem with a Jewish state of any kind in that region of the world. The Arabs who remained in Israel after Israel won the war against the invading Arab armies have been living better than Arabs in any Arab country in the world. This is a religious conflict because Moslems, based on the teaching of the Quran and Muhammad, adamantly refuse to accept Jewish sovereignty in a territory which was once dominated by Moslems (not Arabs). That is the root of the conflict.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Montedoro

Posted January 12, 2009 by TW


No Palestinians until 40 years ago. Then who lives there now, did they come with the Jew of Europe?? Where they on the same plane, boat, spaceship? Where the HECK did these people come from LIE #1.

Jews are Islams enemy LIE #2

Can illegal occupation cause all this? Can it make people hate people!! All of this hate toward Israel is because of the OCCUPATION!! You can quote 7000000000000 verses the enemy is not ISLAM it is OCCUPATION!! Something NONE of you will talk about. I wonder if the rules were turned and imaginary Palestinians were the occupiers how much sympathy they would get. I'll answer that........NONE

YOUR ANTI-SEMITE card is USED UP!! No more uses, do not pass GO and do not collect $200.


ps Im sorry if the truth hurts!!!

Posted January 12, 2009 by Sheri


Why are they "so-called Palestinians", are these people not real. What the heck are we listening to on TV about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. (or I should say what we USED to hear about...there is no more news on the Gaza siege anymore) Seriously, are these people not real!! What about all the people that I know that are Palestinian? Are they ALL lying to me. What are they, are the ALIENS that people see in their sleep.

OCCUPATION caused all this. Israel was created in 1948. SInce then they have done nothing but STEAL land. They build ILLEGAL SETTLEMENTS ON "so-called"Palestinian land. They have checkpoints ever 1/2 mile...they make day to day life for "so-called"Palestinians miserable----yet "make beleive"Palestinians still go on, with a HUGE smile on their face and determination in their life. I guess it's just like why we feel when we see Africa and everything they go through on a daily basis YET they still have a smile on their face and determination in their life.

You will not make a comment that PALESTINIANS did not exist. Because my friends will not agree.

Also, Jesus was born in Bethlehem, Palestine!!!! Bet he would be PISSED if you told him it doesn't exist!!!!

Posted January 12, 2009 by Sheri

You are woefully misinformed or a liar.
1) Jesus was NOT born in Palestine because Palestine did not exist then. Palestine is the name of that territory which the Romans gave it after they drove the Jews out.
2) The notion of "Palestinians" referring to Arabs came about around 1967. From 1922 until the end of the British Mandate, the word "Palestinian" referred to the Jews who lived there. The Arabs who were living there were called Arabs because they were just like the other Arabs from Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan. There was no "Palestinian" people. Even the PLO Charter does not refer to "Palestinians". It refers to "Palestinian Arabs" as that part of the Arab nation living on the territory of British Mandate Palestine. After 1967, under Soviet tutelage, the notion of a "Palestinian people" was invented in order to present the Moslem/Arab war against the Jews in a more favorable light so that people in the West would view the conflict falsely as a conflict between Israelis and a small people, the "Palestinians". The nature of the conflict did not change, however. It always was an Islamic war against Jewish sovereignty in that territory. Calling it "Palestinian-Israeli Conflict" is a deliberate propaganda lie. So, the people, of course, exist. But, the nationality "Palestinian" is phony.
3) As for the Israelis stealing land, that is an outright lie. The settlements were built on public land, not on "Palestinian" land. Since there never was a "Palestine", there never was any "Palestinian" land. There was land that was privately held by Arabs, and that land remained held by Arabs unless it was sold to Jews. The rest of the land was public land which was in the hands of the Turks for many centuries, then in the hands of the British during the Mandate period, then in the hands of the Jordanians and Egyptians from 1948-1967 (we are talking about Judea, Samaria and Gaza), then in the hands of the Israelis who became the sovereign power in 1967. These public lands were never "Palestinian" lands. Therefore, the so-called "settlements" are not illegal.
As for the checkpoints, you know as well as everyone else that there were no checkpoints until less than ten years ago. Had the Arabs behaved themselves instead of blowing up Jewish schools, buses and restaurants, there would be no checkpoints today.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Montedoro


How do you sleep at night???

Posted January 12, 2009 by Sheri


I forgot...


You can manipulate anyway you want. EVERYTHING you posted is a LIE. People can do their own research and find out the truth themselves.

That all!!!

Posted January 12, 2009 by Sheri

If a one state solution is put into affect with unobstructed access of all to all parts of the Israel/Palestine lands, we won't even have to wait for the Arabs to become a majority. They will start to destroy Israel and Jews immediately. This is their nourishment.
As long as Hamas can operate, it will NEVER give up it's hope of making sure that no Jews live in that part of the world. Sorry. But you better think of another solution. Personally, I don't give a damn what the "world" thinks. The world comprises a bunch of thugs who would destroy America too, if they only had a way. And this might just be the beginnig of it.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Mel Driller

Montedoro, Palestine existed well before the birth of Jesus. You are right in that it was the name Rome gave to its territory. The name came from the Philistines of Biblical fame. The same people who today's Palestinians derive their name from. They are still called Philistines in Arabic today. The land was not called Palestine by the residents though. They called it Judea in the north and Israel in the south. The Philistines lived next to Judea. They simply took advantage of the Jews being driven out by the Romans to move in to the empty homes and towns. That last item is why Jews say Israel belongs to them. Imagine being driven out of your home by a military invasion. Then, when you returned, you found strangers living in it. Would you have them evicted or just walk away because they said the house was now theirs?

Posted January 12, 2009 by Glenn

This is a religious conflict which is using the ownership of land as a cover. If land and freedom were all that was needed then 1) move Gaza into the Sinai and increase its size 10 fold. 2) Move the West Bank Palestinans into Jordan and let them share power with King Abdullah and lastly 3) Take southern Israel and create Judah for the religious (non-secular) Jews. This is a proposal for 4 independant countries: Isarel, Palestine (part of Jordan), Judah and Gaza.

Posted January 12, 2009 by Richard

This proposal is NONSENSE. No minority has lasted in an Arab Muslim country. The Arab Muslims are intolerant and adhere to the concept of dhimmitude. The Coptics in Egypt suffer constantly. The Christians have essentially left Gaza and the West Bank. Bethlehem went from 80% Christian to 15%. When Hamas took over Gaza, they burned the Christian bookstore and knifed the owner to death. Get real. Islam is generally intolerant and in the Arab states it borders on Nazism. The columnist is absolutely wrong about Gaza being under Egypt and the West Bank under Jordan. It worked except to the extent that Jordan and Egypt were still intent on making war against Israel at the time. This is no longer true. The only powers capable of controlling the savagery of the Palestinians are Egypt and Jordan. The conflict between Hamas and Fatah have proven how primitive and savage the Palestinians are. They can never be trusted. (Ask the Kuwaitis who hate them for betraying Kuwait when the Iraqis invaded.) Besides, Jordan is 80% of Mandate Palestine so let the little killers have their "Palestine" -- and hopefully Amman can control them. BTW, they are not just having a little snit over destroying Israel. They also want to destroy Jordan and take that over too, so hopefully, the Jordanian government can control this culture of death, hate and destruction.

Posted January 13, 2009 by Ja

I have to admit that this is a thought provoking and a balanced proposal. Good historical background.


Posted January 13, 2009 by M. Max


I have reflected further on my earlier email, and would like to apologize to you, Kamal, for the sometimes too peremptory and sharp tone to my
original response. I know you wrote with good intentions and I
welcome that. In these days of constant unjust attacks and classically eliminationist threats against Jews and Israel, it is easy to get too sensitive and express oneself too sharply.

But I would also like to strengthen the case I previously argued, that a one-state solution is not really viable nor is it even preferable to the present situation.

I realize that you specified a "federation" of two states, and so
some of my remarks may have seemed to you wide of the mark. But I believe
that in the end what that federation would entail would be something
like the "one-state solution" of Lebanon - which has not worked at
all, really. Although it, too, began with a 50-50 divide of the
political system, we can now see that the Christians are thoroughly
intimidated and splintered in their inability to counter the
sometimes violent and always discriminatory pressures from the Muslim
communities. Even before the terrors of the civil war of the 70s,
and all the more afterwards, the only real solution for most of them
has been to immigrate.

There is a further difficulty. A major component of the allegedly
secular "Palestinian nationalism" from the time of Haj Amin el-
Hussaini right up to the present (e.g., notice the pronouncements of
the Sabeel Institute of East Jerusalem, among others) is really pan-
Arabism, as expressed in the ultimate goal of either merging
"Palestine," should it ever come to pass, or federating it, with a
pan-Arab state centered in Damascus. The Palestinians and their Arab
supporters actually do not want a state just of "Palestine." (This
is the real reason, I believe, that as Abba Eban famously remarked,
they have never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity for
peace.) Even for Yasser Arafat that "Palestine" was to be a stepping-
stone to the pan-Arab federation of Greater Syria. So the
Palestinians in the federation you propose would not really have
loyalty to the Isratine or Palestreal you propose, but rather to
Greater Syria (or the Muslim Caliphate) in which, of course, the Jews
no matter what their percentage of Isratine/Palestreal will again be
merely a small and threatened minority just as the Christians have
always been, even in their hey-day, in Syrian-controlled "Lebanon."
Surrounded by often militant and authoritarian states allied to only
one half of the "federated" Isratine/Palestral, the power equation
would inevitably be drastically and permanently altered in the
Palestinians' favor, and so there would be very little bulwark
against persecution all over again of the Jewish population.
Unfortunately, the deep-rootedness of antisemitic mythologies in the
Muslim/Arab worlds would create many new "crises": the federation
would not be the end of Jewish victimization and antisemitic
agitation. Fine words would not change this underlying reality. So
the federation would not solve the problem of Arab-Israeli conflict
and would only irrevocably weaken and worsen the Jewish situation and
possible responses.

Until the internal narrative and world-view of the Arab and Muslim
mainstream and dominant religious authorities become more truly
tolerant and welcoming to diversity of religions, cultures and
peoples, more self-critical and reformist in religion too, until, in
short, the Muslim mainstream becomes as you are, federation will not
work. And if that happy day comes, then federation will not be

A further point: the Jews of Israel are deeply democratic and
liberal. None of their neighbors are. In effect, the proposal to
create a federation in which the Jewish community becomes merely a
mythical 50% of a basically unsympathetic and traditionally non-
liberal, non-democratic and non-Jewish population, would mean that
they as a political community would have to give up or water down
their own liberal democracy, become intertwined with those who have
no liberal democratic traditions or sympathies, and inevitably
accommodate these traditions including the proposed racist criteria
for their own community and its workings. This would weaken liberal
values and democracy amongst the Jews of former Israel, and turn them
into something resembling the factions and tribes of Lebanon. The
logic of the system leads inexorably to a feud culture requiring the
elevation of "strong men" to govern each racially and religiously
defined community. Arabs and Muslims have usually complained that
Zionism is undemocratic and racist, but the truth is very much
otherwise; ironically, this proposed solution would certainly turn on
the permanent establishment of an undemocratic and explicitly racist
definition of "Jew" and "Arab." For example, there would no longer
be any minority of Israeli Arabs having full civil rights in a Jewish
state, with all the humanizing challenges and reciprocal
responsibilities that poses to both Jew and Arab.

In any case a major reason for Israel is that the Jews need a state
of their own which will ensure their self-defense, and to no longer
depend as a powerless community "on the kindness of strangers," who
have often been fair-weather friends if they have been friends at
all. Although even Israel requires some international friends, at
least it has an autonomy and power that can give some assurance to
the most persecuted people in history. The federated state you
propose would never provide that fundamental right and need. I have
mentioned how widespread the oldest hatred, antisemitism, is in the
Muslim/Arab world and in leftist circles even in the West. That
antisemitism makes Israel all the more necessary, not less. Every
slanted newspaper article and blog, every vicious video or
mythologically antisemitic television series in the Middle East or in
the West, strengthens in Jews the sentiment of "Never Again!" will
Jews leave their survival in the hands of others.

The other major justification for Israel is that only in a Jewish
state can Jewish culture and Judaism itself flourish on its own
terms, without the pressure to accommodate to non-Jewish or even anti-
Jewish cultures and pressures. Judaism is a truly great and
inspiring religion. Jewish culture is rich, warm and distinctive.
Both need a future. So for the well-being and future growth of
Jewish culture and Judaism itself, Israel provides a unique sanctuary
and resource for Jews world-wide. That self-determined world-
historical purpose and future would necessarily be diluted or would
disappear altogether in the federated state you propose, in which
Jews would again be in exile, even in their own land.

Melbourne, Australia

Posted January 13, 2009 by Ben Tzur

Sorry Kamal, NO can do. The 'One State' solution you are advocating for is a recipe for the destruction of our Jewish homeland, Israel has always belonged to the Jews, even before Islam became a religion for the Muslims. In fact, this is precisely why Jerusalem is not even mentioned in the Koran even once. it became important to the Muslims when they saw this as a weapon to be used against the Jews. There is MUCH documentation for this, straight from the lips of the Arab leaders.

Therefore, as dangerous as this situation is, Zionists will never go along with their own national suicide. The Arabs are not the only ones willing to sacrifice for their goals.....


Posted January 13, 2009 by Adina

Kamal, the only permanent solution Hamas will accept is the extinction of Israel, and therefore the solution Israel must immediately direct itself toward is the extermination of Hamas. It may well then appear that the only permanent solution the Palestinians will accept is the extinction of Israel, and if that turns out to be the case, Israel must immediately direct itself toward is the extermination of the Palestinian people. And it may well then appear that the only permanent solution the Middle Eastern Islamic nations will accept is the extinction of israel, and if that proves the case, Israel will necessarily direct itself toward the extermination of Middle Eastern Islamic nations.

I don't think events will proceed quite that far, but that is the direction many Muslims are pursuing.

Yes, it's technically possible -- conceivable in theory -- for Islam to make its peace with Israel, but I see and have seen exceedingly little to suggest that it will do so, and I have watched events closely all my adult life. I am 88 years old.

Posted January 13, 2009 by Melvin

There is no such nation as Palestine.
Those who call themselves Palestinians are Arabs who are from:
Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc.
The Palestinian people was created after the six day war.
So called Palestinian society is the most Nazified society on earth.
Israel must exist from the Jordan to the Mediterranean.
Kol HaKavod to the IDF!

Posted January 13, 2009 by Jeffrey

Dear President Kamal Nawash:
After reading your article, we come to an end that President would be a PEACE AMBASSADOR to the U.N. to explain your measure in constructing and moving peace for Israelis and Palestinians. May God bless Israelis and Palestinians!

We appreciate your concern and your measure to avoid nuclear war in the XXI century!. We thank you very much.

Posted January 13, 2009 by RVNAF

"Philistines" were of Greek and Cypriot background. Not Arabs and not Muslims (as Islam would not come into existance for another 1,150 or so years, during the life of its prophet mohammed.)
Moreover, they were all carted off into bondage by the Mesopotamians (today Iraq) in or around 600-BCE and have not been independantly heard from since. Pls see: "Jews, God and History" by Max Dimont.
"Liar, liar, pants on fire"???
That's your answer to historical points?

Posted January 13, 2009 by Trollstein

As a Jewish convert to Islam, I'm in a unique position. I see both
sides. The political leaders of Israel have done their level best to
undermine the moderate Muslims (or drive them away, as in the case of
Edip) and then claim there's no one to work with. On the other side,
the radical Muslims have done everything they possibly can to
undermine the view of Islam in the Western world. How many Americans
know that Bismi'llah ir-rahman ir-rahim are the most used words in the
Qu'ran? How many understand that Islam is the religion of deep
surrender, of true peace, of the God of compassion and mercy?

There's tragedy enough on all sides. I don't fault the radical Muslims
because the vast majority are simply uneducated. How are they supposed
to know the core of Islam when no one had taught them? I don't blame
rank-and-file Israelis, who are simply scared to death.

The shaytan has found many openings into this mess. The colonialists
of the last century did everything in their power to undermine the
institutions of Islam that kept it vital and healthy for hundreds of
years; that kept radical factions from gaining ascendancy. Back then,
not just anyone could credibly claim to be a shaykh or imam and
dispense widely distributed legal opinions. The power hungry on both
sides of the divide have manipulated public opinion to deflect from
their own blemishes and rally support. The Saudis have entered an
unholy alliance with those who completely misunderstand the core
teachings of Islam and then done their best to export these mis-
teachings to the rest of the Muslim world. And the Americans have done
their best to prop up the Saudis because it was profitable and
politically advantageous from a strategic point of view. These are
just some of the places where those of us who have been bleseed with
an education ought to do our best to shine some light.

Posted January 13, 2009 by Roy

Kamal I hate you for everything you do and say. I know you are from Jerusalem, how can you be so "open minded" with the people who stole your land and killed your people.

You are a disgrace to every Arab. I have watched you for five years. Who gave you the right to speak on our behalf? Who told you can go on CNN and represent me? If ever I see I will spit in your face you scum of the earth you.

I can't tell you how much I hate you Kamal. Asshole

Posted January 13, 2009 by Asshole


Who on earth was living in Palestine before the creation of Israel? Are you saying it was a land without a people? I wounder who was fighting you in the 1920 and 30s if no one lived in Palestine....

I am neither Arab nor Muslims but it is beyond common sense to believe what Trollstein is saying. The word Arab does not refer to a race or ethnic group. It is a language group and a people who choose to be identified as Arabs. The point is that how can Jews have a moral stand when they exclude others and make them homeless to create a home for themselves. Do u actually think u will ever find peace. The answer is no.

Trollstien, you are lucky that there are still people like Kamal who want to live with you as brothers. If I was you I would work with Kamal to create a new future for your people before people like Kamal disappear.

Rosa From Brazil

Posted January 13, 2009 by Rosarita

I hope there is peace in the Holy Land before I die, so that I can visit the Wailing Wall, and gaze upon the Dome Of The Rock!

Posted January 13, 2009 by Ron

That's the beautiful thing about freedom of religion. . . guys like you are free to convert and also, freedom of speech permits us to have all voices heard. Kamal provides the freedom of the press and so we have three necessary freedoms to human dignity.
Too bad such is not the same case in all the world.
Some of us may not prefer to 'surrender' in the same sense as yourself.
You wrote: "The colonialists of the last century did everything in their power to undermine the
institutions of Islam that kept it vital and healthy for hundreds of years; that kept radical factions from gaining ascendancy. Back then, not just anyone could credibly claim to be a shaykh or imam and dispense widely distributed legal opinions."
The war which gave rise to this situation was a war of independence of (mainly) Arabs from the non-Arab Turks.
M.E. Arabs have since migrated into every European country, the USA Canada and Australia. While it is certainly true that the Supreme Allied Powers had a major role in selecting the regional kings, they left no 'colonial' populations behind and willingly departed the M.E., most by 1925.
Our global oil money has been rebated to often radical (inc. Wahabist) schools.
The West is not blameless, nor is Israel. But the punishment has hardly fit the crime.

You asked:
"Who on earth was living in Palestine before the creation of Israel?"
Hebrews and Arabs were the majority. What's the point? Hebrews and Arabs are still the most part of Israel.
Israel has a Hebrew majority by general principle because there is no other place where Jews are the majority. Arabs and Muslims are the majority in many, many places and nations. They do not have the same detriment to be reckoned. The Middle East was filled with pockets of Jews, all minorities and some badly abused. They are all now Israelis. The native Jews of Jordan were evicted by denial of their citizenship.
" wonder who was fighting you . . . "
I am an American.
"The word Arab does not refer to a race or ethnic group."
It certainly does. That is the common usage--by far and away. Arabs are a Semitic sub-category, although the word 'anti-Semitic had typically referred to whites who dislike Jews (who are all biblically 'Semetic's and some are racially Semetic).
"The point is that how can Jews have a moral stand when they exclude others and make them homeless to create a home for themselves."
Because they are seeking refuge from a world that has a limited place for them. Peace is available to the Palestinian-Arabs, along with greater prosperity then they have found in any other M.E. nation (lacking oil wealth).
"you are lucky that there are still people like Kamal who want to live with you as brothers. If I was you I would work with Kamal to create a new future for your people before people like Kamal disappear."
I do not want Kamal to disappear. I want him to awaken. Nice people get along with other nice people, regardless of race or religion. It is the others that use whatever excuses they can to cover up the truth.

Posted January 13, 2009 by Trollstein

When I left this blog yesterday I thought these people have flipped their lids and are honestly trying to tell people that Palestine NEVER existed and was created after the Jews got there!! I thought I have heard something like this before. "They do not exist"?? These "So-called this or that". THEN I REMEMBERED SOMETHING I HEARD BEFORE!

Elie Weisel, holocaust survivor and author of the book "The Night", was a guest on The Oprah Winfrey Show. He talked about that the Holocaust came in phases.

PHASE 1- Hilter took away their ADDRESS!! They became NON EXISTENT!!. He said "WHEN YOU TAKE AWAY SOMEONES ADDRESS ITS AS IF THEY NO LONGER EXIST. They are NON -EXISTENT!!! Hence'' Palestinians never existed, they are made up of Lebanese, Jordanians, Syrians, Polish, German, Irish, Aliens, Rabbits, Clowns, Camels!! whatever!!! "THERE WERE NO PALESTINIANS ON THIS LAND" They took away Palestinian's ADDRESS.

PHASE 2- Forced Jews to live in SLUMS of city. (aka GAZA)

LASTLY and MOST IMPORTANTLY- Hilter convinced himself and EVERYONE around him that the JEWS were horrible, vile, disgusting people who need to be EXTERMINATED before they take over and EXTERMINATE them. The GERMANS needed to get rid of them before they could get rid of the GERMANS. Sounds a lot like the arguments up there that" ISLAM IS OUR ENEMY, HAMAS IS THE ENEMY, we must destroy them before they destroy US!!! We must elimanate them before they can do the same to us. It's in their books, it's in their teachings!!!"

I can not believe that people who have suffered so much, and who never,ever let people forget what has happened to them, are willing to write GARBAGE and lies in order to commit atrocitites on innocent people!!! NO matter what the excuse the death of innocent WOMEN AND CHILDREN are NEVER allowed.

In the words of Elie Weisel--- "to remain silent and indifferent is the greatest sin of all".

TO THOSE WITH ANY COMPASSION- Scream from the top our your lungs and tell these people they are nothing but LIARS!!

We will NO LONGER be silent.

Posted January 13, 2009 by Sheri

Posted January 13, 2009 by Andrew


"This I won't do, enough is enough."

Some Zionists even disgusts themselves. It's about time!


Posted January 13, 2009 by Jacob

It's absolutely great analysis and solution, how can we communicate this ideas with the people "Israeli Palestinians" and what would we do with Hamas Hezbulla Iran Russia and Israel and the "moderate country around it" and the US, maybe you need to address that as well, I do not think that the problem is limited to only 2 parties Israel and Palestine, or what do you think?

Posted January 14, 2009 by Mohamed Awadalla


It's absolutely great analysis and solution, how can we communicate this ideas with the people "Israeli Palestinians" and what would we do with Hamas Hezbulla Iran Russia and Israel and the "moderate country around it" and the US, maybe you need to address that as well, I do not think that the problem is limited to only 2 parties Israel and Palestine, or what do you think?

Posted January 14, 2009 by Mohamed

Nazi Israel is murdering Moslems and Christian since its foundation by Adolf Hitler in 1939, it is the end for Nazi Israel.

Posted January 14, 2009 by George

AA and Sheri,

Since that you two hate Kamal Nawash and my question is why. Obviously Kamal knows how to communicate with "zionists". Don't you think Kamal is an asset to ur people. How can u expect Americans to respect you when you hate the one Arab that Americans trust.
I mean Trollstein does not agree with Kamal but he is here engaging in a dialogue that was began by Kamal.

Posted January 14, 2009 by Bret

You wrote:
"- Jews and Arabs (be them Catholic, Christian or Muslim) are of the same Semitic origin, it's the SAME people in reality."
This comes from the bible story of Noah. Noah was said to have three sons, one of them named Shem. Shem was said to be the father of the Semitic people, which included Arabs and Hebrews. That is as close as they get to being the "same" people. Other shared traits are similar due to close proximity, such as the food and language similarities. But they are not the same people. The cultures are quite disparate and that is part of the key to understanding the present situation. Jews are seeking refuge in Israel. Arabs have no such need for refuge and do not qualify along the same standards. moreover, even if they did, their refuge would not be in Israel. Israel is the sole refuge for Jews. That much must be appreciated before progress can be made toward normality and peace. Until this point is appreciated, the Arab cause will (by its very core nature) be seeking to bust the Jewish refuge.
"- after the first world war, news started coming in that Jews had been persecuted and that they should offer them refuge. They OFFERED some land to some families and sold other lands, so did other Arab families."
The foregoing is perhaps the greatest oversimplification in world history. After WW1, the Arabs gained their independence from the Turks. The Jews of the Mid East also wanted their independence and were fairly entitled to it but were scattered in dozens of (newly formed) Arab nations. So the only possible way to achieve this was to migrate them into one nation. Thus, the same exact treaties which created all the various Arab nations also created the Jewish Nation. This was a legal transfer of title and deed, not an 'offer'.
"The first massacre was performed in Der El Yassine. More than 400 Palestinians were assassinated."
The Der Yassin attack was the first time the Jews hit back after 25+ years of civilian massacres against them. To listen to your history, one would get the idea that the last 90 years of M.E. history could be printed on a bumper-sticker. Actually, many volumes of cogent documents exist, which I assume you have no use to read. See: "Semites and Anti-Semites" by Prof. Bernard Lewis (Princeton).
"- Do you think that Palestinians didn't live in miserable camps, oppressed, humiliated, raped, deprived of goods, stolen their last pieces of land, on a daily basis, LONG BEFORE HAMAS came? "
When I visited Israel in 1984, the Palestinian-Arabs of W.B. and Gaza were relatively contented. There was no great love between Arabs and Hebrews but then again, is there great love between Irish Catholic and Protestant? Is there great love between Serb and Bosninian? If there even great love between West Indian (Island) blacks and Say, Detroit Blacks? Not really. The problems started when the Soviet Union allowed Jews to escape and migrate to Israel. This pissed off the local Arab day-workers, who's market-value suffered as a result. The person who most fomented this discontent was an Arab Christian woman (community leader) who started a general strike. One thing led to another and when Pope John-Paul met with Yasser Arafat, this legitimized the PLO Chairman and opened the flood-gates to hell. Also, and this is very important: JEWS DO NOT RAPE. It is not only contrary to their religion but is contrary to their culture. Go to any country where Jews live and count on one hand how many Jewish rapists are in jail. Of the very, very few, 99% of them are statutory rapists, not forced. Anyone who claims otherwise is not only grossly mistaken but their other information is then also rendered suspect.
"Put batons of dynamite in their women's vagina and ask for money . . "
Calling the above statement absurd is a shameful insult to absurd people all over the world. What shocks me is the type of mind which even dreams such things up.
"- Resolution 242 as well as countless other UN resolutions have been ignored by Israel: they are illegally occupying a territory."
Another bumper-sticker with no stick.
First of all, a world tribunal which does not mandate basic civil rights among its voting members has no moral authority to order around those nations which do provide freedoms of speech, religion, press and the ballot-box.
But even assuming that it does, Res. 242 has been argued as to its legal meaning for decades. There is no definite resolve to this and so you may claim that Res. 242 provides for anything you like but that does not make it so. The fact is that international diplomacy is quite often an endeavor in nebulous and conflicted documentation. That way, all competing sides get to go home and claim they won the treaty debate. ^This is exactly what took place with Res. 242 and besides, Res. 242 came decades after the previous world Tribunal, the League of Nations had legally mandated the creation of "the Jewish National Home" in Palestine.
A very momentous event took place in 1907. The worldwide sales of automobiles went from 5,000 the year before to 75,000, with another large qty remaining on backorder. From then forward, the world began to see the Arab peoples as movie-stars. Within 10 years thereafter, all the Arabs nations had gained their independence--after 400 years of subjugation by the Turks. Within 15 years after that, all but one (Jordan) turned their backs on their liberators (the British, French and Americans) and joined in league with Hitler's Axis powers. The royal family of Jordan had their own reasons. Namely, the giant chunk of Palestine (37,000 out of 45,000 sq. miles which the British handed to them). Those are the facts. Ironically, had the Nazis won, today there would be no Jews and no Arabs either. Only their oil would remain, which is the primary reason why the world gives one hoot for them. When literally millions of Christian (and some Jewish) Sudanese blacks were butchered (and many sold into slavery) by Islamic invaders from the North, the world looked elsewhere. As soon as the murdering moved into Islamic zones in Darfour, all of a sudden (as if by magic), out came the celebrities to marathon and rally. For one moment you may forget the Hebrews (and disregard your totally false sound-bites about them). Just consider the foregoing example and this answers the similar argument being debated over who is the oppressed peoples and who is the aggrandized.

Posted January 14, 2009 by Trollstein

This article makes a lot of sense, though I disagree with some parts of it. The intent is good, but I don't think its practical for the forseeble future. A bi-national state will lead to a civil war that will claim more lives than all of the wars have claimed combined up to now. A confederacy could be considered as a long-term goal, maybe as a micro-scale of the E.U. model and including Jordan and/or Lebanon as well, with many incremental steps in between. Maybe in 50 years it can become a reality.

About the nukes, that's my biggest fear as well, and I don't think the author's warning is an exaggeration. If things continue on this course, the whole region may become a gigantic fireball in our lifetimes. It's also possible that a nuclear holocaust will take place in another part of the world - maybe India & Pakistan. Would be nice if we had no nukes - anywhere - in a couple of decades, or at least if the big ones like Russia and the U.S. reduced their stockpiles to...maybe no more than 150 warheads each - at least that would give the world a chance for survival.

Posted January 15, 2009 by Shlomo


Rather than tell us why Kamal's ideas don't work why don't you tell us what is your solution?

Posted January 15, 2009 by Babel

Dear Sir/Madam:

The widespread emphasis on the 'proportionality' (or lack thereof) of Israel's attacks on Gaza desperately needs a dose of historical context.

By Algerian estimates, up to 700,000 Algerian civilians were killed during the eight year French-Algerian War (18,000 French are also believed to have died). Russia decimated Chechnya during that republic's attempt to break away, resulting in between 100,000 to 200,000 civilian fatalities in three years (Russian casualties were reported to be about 5,500). In the early 1950's, the British Army put down the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya - over 10,000 locals were killed, with few British casualties.

During the Second World War, Germany hit Britain with a barrage of rockets (similar, as Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu has recently pointed out, to the "blind" and erratic rockets of Hamas). In response, the British helped bomb Dresden to smithereens; the ensuing conflagration caused between 25,000 to 45,000 (mostly civilian) casualties in two nights.

Our history books are replete with contemporary examples of extravagant disproportionality in response to terrorism and acts of war. When it is not Israel that is doing the responding, the latitude granted is comparatively unlimited.


Posted January 15, 2009 by Mr. Leslie J. Sacks

As I have written in earlier blog posts, I see no military solution. In that respect, I think Kamal and myself are in agreement.
I see intellectual (reasoned) solutions and spiritual solutions.
As the public becomes more desperate for a resolve, concepts previously considered far-fetched or even improper may see new vitality.
Yet, the world changes and it does so on its own schedule and often without our permission. So I propose the following:
1. Egypt should please annex Gaza and establish law and order and a stable government with civil rights and stop the attacks on other nations, including a cessation of civil war against Fatah.
2. Israel should make some token effort and stage a ceremony to welcome a delegation of, say, 50,000 Arabs as Israeli citizens. These should be people from outside Gaza and W.B.
3. Those Arabs born outside Israel should please have permanent residence where they were born. All Palestinian-Arabs, wherever they now reside, should become a hybrid nationality. Namely, a special administrative population who has self governance, both locally and together--collectively. Each nation who has such populations would issue special passports as (example) 'Palestinian-Egypt Adimn. Distr.' or Palestinian-Lebanon A.D.. This hybrid nation would have no need for a military since they are under the care and support of the various administrative states, as well as the financial support of the balance of the world.
BTW: Kamal's proposal side-steps the (about) 6-million Palestinian-Arabs who live outside Israel and right now have no nationality and generally, no human rights. Long term solutions are not likely while this group remains in 'limbo'.
As to the spiritual solution:
I could wallpaper this blog with personal opinions and some would undoubtedly (unaviodably) seem antagonistic. But for a brief summary:
God did not create humans in His image. We humans created the likeness of God to conform to our own. We trade in this license we have created for ourselves, and sometimes we fight over trade rights.
People are often selfish and we lack the discipline necessary to operate with a full measure of honesty, especially when it comes to one's own interests. To understand that is to make some corrections.
Volumes of scriptures exist (like algebra books) and we ignore or massage most of the rules in our personal favors anyway. There is a woman preacher on TV. She has a blackboard the size of a bus and spends her 1/2 hour disassembling the scriptures for its hidden (or inferred) meaning--or to reveal subtle language inflections. I say that God is really quite simple and requires very little (if any) trigonometry.
The purpose of life is to evolve. The path to social evolution is treat others as one would like to be treated. We should consume what we need and save a little and have a few toys but we need to stop worshiping money.
One of the problems with ancient scripture (all varieties) is that by its core nature, it resists evolution. But evolution will occur whether we accept it or not. If we welcome it, it may be more of a friend. If we fight it, we will loose and in the process, our scientists will become famous for killing and our nations will be bankrupted by building things intended to blow up.
We humans have one foot in the cave and the other in the clouds. We need to have both feet on the ground.
All I have for now.

Posted January 15, 2009 by Trollstein

If you believe that nuclear war is a future threat, then I think you shouldn't present as an immediate one. It does the opposite of what you intended, which is to raise an alarum. Exaggeration is the clarion of propaganda. You have been much more a call to reason. It is why I wrote.

I appreciate your proposal of a one-state solution for its positive naivete:
Why can't people understand how the other feels and live together? You are not alone in this hope and there are some in Israel, too, who think this is the way forward. But in the end, it is what we might call a non-starter. Israeli Jews cannot be expected to now reject Zionism (which is what you propose). Jewish survival is now dependent on the survival of Israel as a Zionist state. It is the immutable fact. What is unfortunate is that the Palestinian side does not realize that Palestinian survival is no longer a fact but a political choice --- something that must be achieved through political, not violent, means. Abbas has realized it but it may be too late for him too.

The solution IS acceptance of Israel's existence as a Zionist state and the establishmenet of two states, Israel and Palestine, in which both give sides give up maximal demands and through which the economic and even social integration you propose can be achieved. The solution remains the Oslo Accords, which Fatah at least has come back to support but may now be too much challenged by Hamas. To get to the two-state solution, the extremists --- Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and their backers --- must be rejected, isolated, and neutralized by the entire international community. The two-state solution is difficult but not impossible. And in my view, you can not throw up your hands at stopping the use of violence for political aims to propose a more unlikely solution --- one-state --- in which violence isn't stopped. Once there is an end to the hope of extirmination, everything is possible.

Well, this is my view. What I agree with profoundly is your statement: "It is sad."


Posted January 15, 2009 by Eric

Trollstein, Not to pick nits but move forward a little bit further in history. True, Noah and Shem are a portion of the story. But Ibrahim/Abraham is the last point prior to divergence. One son, Ishmael/Ismael, went on to found the Arab line and Isaac who was the first of the Hebrew line.

Posted January 15, 2009 by Glenn

You are correct. But the earlier comment was that 'Hebrews and Arabs' were said to be the 'same people'. Issac had both parents from one tribe and Ismael had Abraham as one parent and his mother was not from the same tribe, they were connected through both tribes being Semitic.

Posted January 15, 2009 by Trollstein

Posted January 15, 2009 by USPCN

Obviously, you and I disagree as to your factual narritive (on almost every level). I will not post another 15-inches of objections to your sweeping statements, except to say that I object to them as a grouping. As one example, "apartheid" is a system which discribed a white colonial population, who has displaced native black Africans and saught to keep them disenfranchised. But that only describes Israel in your mind and in the minds of those who disregard the Jew's own refugee status.
But I only have one question for you . . . Why is there zero newsprint to be found which would infer that any Jews evicted any Arabs from any land in 1947/48? Certainly there was no lack of news reporters. The London Times was all over the Palestine issues and yet, not one inch of newsprint can be located (from anywhere in the world) which reported (at the time) of any evictions of Arabs. What explains this? 10-dollars says you don't bother to answer (nor would I, given the gross and ambigious lack of evidence and with no explanation for it).

Posted January 15, 2009 by Trollstein

PS> If Arabs spent as much time bettering their conditions as they do fabricating complex fables, they would today be thriving with a Swiss level standard of living.

Posted January 15, 2009 by Trollstein

Dear Kamal,

I condem the Israeli heavy handedness in dealing with the militant Hamas members.
I also condem the Hamas rocket attack on the Israeli population.

I am writing to express support and solidarity for your maturity and objectivity in dealing
with the issue.

I saw how you presented your view points on Aljazera TV and how they pulled the plug off you
because of your and factual reasoning.

I just want you to know that many people share your view point.


Posted January 16, 2009 by Emeka

Kamal also wrote:
"To illustrate further, after occupying the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, Israel could have annexed those territories into Israel by providing the Palestinians with Israeli citizenship. Israel did not do this and instead chose to treat the West Bank and Gaza as part of Israel without granting the Palestinians citizenship, equality or political participation."
The above statement is correct. Kamal has identified one of the core controversial subjects. It would be very nice if this appitude of his also extended to some of the other core subjects.
It is very true that Israel has always rejected any notion of loosing its Jewish majority. It is also true that the Arab residents of W.B. and Gaza were treated as landscape, rather then persons. This is why Israel actually favors a two state solution, something they have generally been accused of rejecting. There is no adequate solution to this dilemma. Israel issists that it remain the first and last refuge for world Jewery. Its opponents have chosen to fight them over this point (and others) and up till now, they have lost such battles. If they continue to fight over this, the outcome will probably not change--at least any time in the short term.
While I think it was unfair for Israel to treat the Palestinian-Arabs from W.B. and Gaza as pawns, I see no viable alternative and more importantly, Israel did not create the pawn status for these people. The combined Arab leadership had rendered their own people as pawns and Israel was (IMHO) merely going along with that same program.

Posted January 16, 2009 by Trollstein

The three prongs of global anti-Semitism

While the world's tendency to dislike Jews has abated somewhat in the past 100 years, it has not disappeared and in fact still thrives in its own (updated) ways.
There are a few reasons why Jews continue to be objectionable. Some minor aspects are probably justified, such as Hebrews being too often condescending and judgmental. But each ethnic group has its own strong and weak points and these fall into the same groupings as other cultures. What has historically gotten Jews killed is their tradition of education and achievement. Reading and writing became a Hebrew religious obligation (at least among men) and over thousands of years, this has produced Hebrews who simply surpass the averages. Much of the rest of the world deeply resents this and in extreme cases, wars of extermination have been waged against the Jewish culture. That is the prime motive and it is both evil and inherently devolutionary.
The result is a three tiered war against the Jews:
1. Where Jews are the minority (today in about 80 countries) they experience varying degrees of impediments. Everything from mere insults, to second class treatment in some business transactions and even substandard rights in legal matters. These events are typically administered subtly but from time-to-time, blatant events occur which are easily identifiable as such. In the case of the USA, Jews actually gained a slight amount of popularity during the last years, due to the rise of global terrorism. But this slight popularity gain was not an artificial benefit. It was a net decrease in Jewish unpopularity. Nothing to be euphoric over.
2. In the one and only place in the world where Jews are the majority, they have a 90 year old border war to contend with, that never goes away. Common sense tells us that this conflict over is not over a few thousand sq. miles of land. Never before in world history has any such conflict continued for decades, regardless of who is right or wrong and regardless of how much human misery has been invested. In every other example, the stronger side simply wins the conflict (regardless of the equity involved); the weaker side looses and perhaps at some time in the near or long-term future, those positions may reverse (the weaker side becomes the stronger), at which point a revisitation of the border-conflict can occur. However, never has such a border-war been in perpetual play for nearly this amount of time--while the weaker side continues fighting--despite their desperate disadvantages. There is a good reason for this historical disparity. Because this war is not over borders and is rather, over Jews in the aggregate.
3. The third rail of Global Anti-Semitism reveals itself in the rise of hatred of those Jews who have no personal involvement in the Mid East affairs. They are neither Israelis, nor are they involved in anything remotely political. Yet, they are expected to publicly condemn Israel and if they do not, they are labeled "Zionist Nazis".
At risk of being repetitive, Zionism no longer exists. Zionism was a movement for the creation of a Jewish national refuge. Once created (in practice) in 1948, "Zion" (which was a mystical and therefore a theoretic place) was replaced by the nation of Israel. Today (in reality) there are only Israelis, anti-Israelis and pro-Israelis. There is no place on any map named "Zion" and therefore, no such thing as "Zionism". Those people who favored an end to slavery were called "Abolitionists". Once slavery was abolished, there were no more "Abolitionists". The same is true for "Suffragettes". These were people who demanded that women vote. Once women acquired the right to vote, these people became "feminists", not "Suffragettes". Those who oppose Israel use the concept of "Zionism" as a boogie-man, to be accused of all types of unspeakable (and generally factually unfounded) crimes. Those who consider themselves "Zionists" are naive (at best) and playing into the word game proffered by the anti-Jews.
Lastly, since I realize some people try to use semantics herein, the term "Anti-Semite" came into the lexicon in 1879, invented by a minor Viennese journalist, Wilhelm Marr. While the term was new, the special and reserved hatred it represented was very old, going back to the adoption by Roman Emperor Constantine (334-CE) of the 'sanitized' versions of the Christian Gospels, which have since been accepted as true. Thus, while Arabs are technically Semites and due to their population (in the hundreds of millions) they are rightly seen as the more significant "Semitic" population, nonetheless, everyone knows what "Anti-Semitic" means in practice and there is no need (or purpose) for bickering on this point-of-order.

Posted January 16, 2009 by Trollstein

Here is the wonderful Hamas so many of you ignorant fools support over Israel or even the Palestinian people!

Hamas is nothing to admire. They are the offspring of dogs! They are like wild animals that, in a mindless frenzy, eat their own kind. They are worse than wild animals. God gave them a brain to think with and a soul to feel with. They have thrown away both of those gifts. They are the true kafreen.

Posted January 19, 2009 by Glenn

Dear Kamal
You can go around in circles and circles trying to find a solution to the problem in Palestine but there is only one solution and that is.
No Isreal, none of this dividing states give the land back to the rightful owners and thats it.
A Jew is a jew he lies and cheats and makes people believe they are innocents.
they are villians sons of monkeys and pigs, they are destined for hell ( accept or deny it) that is their abode.

Honor to Islam Honor to the Prophet and Victory for Islam.
The dead of the muslims will go to janah and the dead of the jews will go to hell, so who are the real victors.
The end is for the rightous.

Posted January 19, 2009 by Mujahid

I don't mind going to 'hell', as long as you are not there.
Thank you for your post. Your vicious statements do more to support my points then anything I could have said.
As a post script to my earlier comments: I it regrettably becoming clear where this conflict is headed.
IMHO: The radical Arab militancy intends to again bring its Jihad to U.S. soil. Thus, they intend to turn U.S. public opinion against Israel, whom they anticipate will be blamed.
There is no other logical reason to explain their recent plan of actions in Gaza, namely, to attack a far superior military, hide among civilians and invite the type of retaliation which has been incurred.

These are people who are brainwashed and hypnotized by the shared belief that "Judgment Day" is not only imminent but must be encouraged and cultivated (like tomato plants).

A word of advise to anyone reading--who fits the above description:
Throughout history, whenever a population took a (commonly shared) position that 'the end of the world' was impending, the outcome was typically that they proved themselves correct, but only to the extent that their own world ended. Everyone else's world remained viable.

Posted January 20, 2009 by Trollstein

Posted January 26, 2009 by Muammar Qaddafi

In response to Muammar Qaddafi's remarkable post, which simply put repeats Kamal's own proposals in a more general way: not even one of the points and objections raised by my counter-argument, in the posts of January 11 (beginning "Sir:") and January 13 (beginning "For Publication in the name of Ben Tzur") have been addressed. Those posts frankly present the chief rationales for the mainstream Jewish and Zionist point of view, the view of the vast majority of Jews around the world and of Israelis themselves, which must in all fairness be respected and taken into account by all who are truly interested in resolving this conflict. Israel has accepted the Arab states around it, and wishes peace. It has actually made peace with those of its neighbours who were willing to have peace, the two states of Egypt and Jordan. But it is the other Arab states who have not accepted Israel and do not wish peace. This is what must change if there is to be any movement forward. Eliminationist goals are not acceptable, and cannot be the basis for dialogue.

President Qaddafi of course adds to Kamal's proposal the further stipulation (which we also find in the Saudi "peace plan") that Palestinians schooled from infancy in an all-pervasive culture and even extremist religious outlook of antisemitism and violence must be given the "Right of Return" to invade all the towns and cities of Jewish Israel, there obviously to work the same sort of terrorist massacres and anarchism that they did in the 1920s and 30s in British Mandate Palestine against Jews, in the 60s in Jordan against Jordanians and in the 70s in Lebanon against Lebanese, especially Lebanese Christians (not to speak of their expulsion from Kuwait in 1991 for working against that state there). All of this has been the bitter fruit of the culture of authoritarian intolerant feuding violence we see still going on presently in their treatment of each other in Gaza and the West Bank. Effectively, this support for the "Right of Return" means that there is no acceptance of the Jewish state or its legitimacy, and naturally Israel will never accept that. But just in terms of the historical track record of Palestinian society, this proposal is self-refuting. If Qaddafi is so benevolently inclined to the Palestinians, I would like to see evidence of this by his offering to accept all Palestinians willing to take refuge in his own country and integrating them fully into his own society. With all respect, however, I suspect that he will not do this, because this would end up tearing apart his own country too as Jordan, Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza have already been torn apart. Such a proposal would be the death of Libya. As a secondary evidence of this benevolent view of Palestinians, I also wonder how much aid Qaddafi has provided over the years to UNWRA? Most Arab nations have given very little. The contributions of the U.S. far exceed all Arab giving. That is so despite the fact that UNWRA in Gaza is little more than a Hamas auxillary, and everywhere serves the Palestinian extremist goals.

With all due respect, Colonel Qaddafi, I submit to you that peace will only come to the Arab-Israeli conflict when Arab states accept that Israel is in the Middle East to stay, and is a legitimate state. I call upon you to accept this; it would be an enormous step forward toward peace in the Middle East if you made such a declaration. The future economic and cultural benefits, too, from such a peaceful accommodation would be enormous also for all Arab states, and certainly for the Palestinians themselves, who must be weaned from their grotesque "cult of death" to a more constructive and morally decent cult of life and tolerance.

Posted January 27, 2009 by Ben Tzur

Posted January 30, 2009 by Trollstein


The standard Palestinian negotiating position for years has been that it get 150% of its demands. E.g., following the Oslo Accords, Arafat steadfastly refused to meet even one of the explicit conditions set for the Palestinian Authority in those accords, while rejecting even Israeli actions consistent with the Accords, going so far as to condone (or rather secretly to fund and direct) the terrorism constantly emanating from his side, ramping it up especially when Israel had met previous demands making peace seem inevitable. Even Israeli repairing of structures in the Jewish portion of the Old City (in 1997, I believe), outside the Temple Mount, spurred him to create a three-day riot against "Israeli desecration of the Temple Mount" that resulted in many Palestinian casualties, but which he blamed on Israel. And at Camp David and Taba in 2000 Arafat was not satisfied with Israel's offer of 97% of the pre-67 West Bank (some say 95% - with the missing 3% or 5% compensated for with territorial concessions elsewhere), and all of Gaza, with sole access to a highway linking the West Bank and Gaza, and even possession of the Temple Mount and east Jerusalem - he demanded 100% of the pre-67 West Bank, (effectively also booting Jews out of the Old City altogether and restricting their access even to the Western Wall, their most holy shrine - which he denied was their legitimate holy shrine), and he also added to his previous demands the "Right of Return" that would eliminate Israel altogether. Following which, he instigated the Intifada, as George Mitchell concluded in his investigative report on the Intifada.

For such intransigent terrorism, there are and should be penalties. They ought not to be cost-free, and time does not stop. Time in fact has worked against the Palestinians, further penalizing them. Since Camp David and Taba, the Jewish presence in the Disputed Territories has inevitably continued to grow. Too bad for the Palestinians that they did not seize the best peace deal they could get, because it required them to live non-aggressively with Jews and a Jewish state of Israel. At the time, even Saudi Arabia reproached Arafat for his spurning the incredibly generous Israeli offer. Peace was in his grasp: he refused it. Israel will probably simply not be able to make a similarly generous offer in the future - especially considering how Palestinians have responded to previous peaceful concessions.

For example, there was the response to Barak's offers at Camp David and Taba: the Intifada. Or again, Israel under Ariel Sharon unilaterally withdrew all Jewish communities from Gaza; we know the Gazan response. It was not for peace, but for accelerating violent aggression. Now, after nearly three years of rockets, attempted suicide bombings and kidnapping, we finally have the Israeli response. Intransigence has its penalties. The Palestinians are responsible for their own condition, and cannot forever play the victim card.

Even now, if the Palestinians wanted peace, there would be peace. If Jewish communities in the West Bank disturb them, if ethnic cleansing of Jews from the territories they still control is their (antisemitic) goal, then they had better make peace now and accept what they can get.

What would be better, of course, is that they relinquish their racist refusal to live with Jews even within their own borders, and develop a genuine and humane secular democracy in their own territories which as a matter of course gives citizenship to its own Jewish population and ensures secure and tolerant coexistence with them and with Israelis outside them. Such a decent society is what is taken for granted throughout the Western world. They can take as their model Israel itself, a secular democracy that allows over a million Muslims and Christians full citizenship in Israel and has established a deeply rooted peaceful, secure and tolerant coexistence with them within its borders.

The longer the Palestinians refuse this option, the more justified and likely are the responses of the Jews of Hebron and elsewhere to disregard Palestinian claims and just get on with their own lives. The Sixty Minutes report presented by SSPV depicts the inevitable result. It is noticeable that the report implies a one-sided censure of Jewish religious attachment to Biblical sites in the West Bank, which have legitimate, deep and justified Jewish meaning, but which even for the "settlers" does not imply expulsion of Muslims and Christians, but the report does not imply censure of Arab racist ethnic cleansing or Islamic religious "waqf" claims proposing elimination of Jews from the whole of the West Bank (and even from Israel itself). The Sixty Minutes report is manifestly very one-sided and biased.

The idea that Jews in Hebron and east Jerusalem are "settlers," by the way, ignores their long residence in both places, and that they have merely returned after the 67 war to places they occupied before Arabs murdered or expelled them from it a generation ago. In Hebron, it is interesting to know, many "settlers" actually come from the same families whose members were murdered there or fled in 1929. They are as much refugees returning to their homes as settlers.

In summary, the all too frequent Palestinian intransigence, violence and racism makes it inevitable that Palestinian complaints will not be respected by Israel nor control what happens in the Disputed Territories.

Posted February 01, 2009 by Ben Tzur

There already are two states in Palestine. The denial of which constitutes one of the greatest slights-of-hand in the history of the world.
"Palestine" took its name in 134-CE. For the next 1,775 years, everyone knew where Palestine was and its geographic boundaries remained unchanged. It comprised approximately 45,000 sq-miles.
After WW1, 37,000 of the 45,000 sq-miles were arbitrarily and unlawfully lopped off and handed to become Jordan. That is Palestinian state number 1.
Although the above event was an unlawful act, as it had usurped the authority of the USA, France and Japan to set those boundaries along with England, nonetheless, what remained of Palestine, legally became "The Jewish National Homeland" by default, under standing international law. That is Palestinian State # 2 ((Israel).
For years we have been told that the Arabs wanted another nation called "Palestine" (which would be State # 3.) But that was a smoke-screen. What they really wanted was Palestinian state # 2 (Israel).
Now that this bluff has sufficiently been called, we are being told (mainly by Arabs) that a two (really three) Palestinian state solution is not possible after all.
AS to these Jewish so called "Settlements". I happen to agree that some horse trading must occur to create this third Palestinian state. Nor am I opposed to the trading of some of these neighborhoods. But they should NOT be traded as appeasement. Only in return for a comprehensive and final peace agreement. Such an agreement should rightly require a new disposition for the nationless (Palestinian) people, those living outside Israel, the West Bank and Gaza (about 6-million). They should be granted citizenship where 95% of them were born, right where they now live. Otherwise, here is what will likely occur:
1. The state of war, attack and counter attack will continue.
2. The effected Arabs will suffer much worse then the effected Hebrews.
3. But the entire world will also suffer, because of the incendiary nature of the situation, the politics of oil and also, because the Jews will continue to be inhibited in doing the things they do best:
Invent, improve, and perfect.

Posted February 02, 2009 by Trollstein

Fact And Fiction Regarding Gaza Casualties:

Every war has civilian casualties. It is one of the tragic elements of violent conflict. Sadly, the war in Gaza was no different and innocent lives were lost and should be mourned. It is still necessary, however, to separate fact from fiction about the casualties of war and ensure that scurrilous accusations about the behavior of the Israeli Defense Forces do not go unchallenged. History has shown that Israeli soldiers are routinely smeared by officials from human rights organizations, the UN and propagandists in the Arab world and beyond. To cite just a few examples, in the first Lebanon war, Israel was accused of killing 10,000 Lebanese and leaving 600,000 homeless. Later, it was learned the figures were inventions of Yasser Arafat's brother, Fathi, who headed the Palestine Red Crescent. In 2002, Israel was charged with killing 500 people in the Jenin "massacre." It was a lie. A total of 56 people died, 34 were terrorists. In the second Lebanon war, the Lebanese Prime Minister claimed another "massacre," but instead of 40 dead as he claimed, only one person had died. In Gaza, we are told that 1,300 Palestinians died, most civilians. What is the source for these statistics? The principal source appears to be Palestinian health officials who are all employed by Hamas. Given that Hamas killed Palestinians who crossed the organization during the fighting and have been exacting more revenge since the cease-fire, how likely is it that any of these officials will provide accurate information? Since it is in the interest of Hamas to minimize the number of casualties among its troops and maximize the number of civilians, is it surprising that Palestinians claim fewer than 100 terrorists were killed? Usually journalists seek two sources to verify information, but in this case, most were satisfied with one that was unreliable and likely biased. At the least, the media could have presented the figures as unverifiable claims. What about the UN sources? They have their own bias from years of working for the benefit of the Palestinians, cooperating with Hamas and apologizing for terror against Jews. Moreover, since UN officials were unlikely to have gone around Gaza counting bodies, they likely relied on the same tainted Palestinian sources. Meanwhile, how do we know how many of the casualties were terrorists and how many were not? We know that Hamas ordered the fighters to take off their uniforms and try to blend in with the civilian population. We know they hid in private homes. If a dead man is found, is it clear that he is not a terrorist? What incentive do Palestinian officials have for reporting that he is? What about women and children? Obviously, they were innocent victims. Unfortunately, because of Hamas's cynical use of women and children as rocket crews, ammunition carriers and human bombs, even small numbers of these normally innocent groups of people may very well have been combatants. It is also not clear how civilians died. According to the Palestinians, Israel murdered them all. But how many died from Hamas rockets that fell short? We know of at least two Palestinian children killed that way. How many died when booby-traps set for Israeli troops went off in rooms full of Palestinians trapped there by Hamas? How many were killed by secondary explosions when arms caches hit by Israeli forces exploded? How many died because they were in the vicinity of rocket crews that drew Israeli fire? The truth is the people reporting casualty figures have made no effort to determine the cause of death because that would limit the propaganda value of the dead. A deeper philosophical question is whether Palestinians who did nothing to prevent the Hamas attacks are "innocent." According to the IDF, 700 of the dead were terrorists, mostly from Hamas, and 250 were civilians. Another 200 people are still unaccounted for. If these figures are accurate, then the majority of the casualties were indeed terrorists. Israel, of course, has its own bias, but it also has a record of integrity and, unlike the Palestinian Authority, is an open democracy that allows its claims to be checked independently. Every individual should be mourned whatever the true number of casualties. So long as Hamas uses its children as shields, as rocket crews and as suicide bombers, however, Israel can do nothing to achieve peace with the Palestinians. Golda Meir's observation remains as true today as when she said it more than half a century ago: "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us."

Posted February 02, 2009 by Mitchell Bard

Mitchel Bard commented: [Golda Meir's observation remains as true today as when she said it more than half a century ago: "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us."]

In the end this is what it boils down to. The recent flare up in Ireland of extremist individuals is a reminder that peaceful solutions are no guarantee and everyone needs to work and implement the simple creed: Treat others as you wish to be treated.

Your article was refreshingly honest. Your concerns that this situation could boil into a nuclear catastrophe are not unfounded. The fanatical stance of individuals on both sides of the issue highlights the fact that death is an option. It's only a matter of time before nuclear weapons are used - whether by an army or terrorist.

The biggest tragedy is that people cannot open their minds to new concepts and realities but hold onto a world that doesn't exist anymore. It would be a shame that this land which is small in stature but big in the hearts of many people could be wiped off the map in a moment. Yes - the situation in the Middle East is dire.

Posted March 18, 2009 by Keith

Everything in the world is in the active process of evolution. Down to the smallest grain of sand, which will (over time) become something different.
Except religion.
Religion rejects evolution and generally insists that perfection has already been achieved.
But in the stark light of reality, evolution can not be suspended. Only its perception can be temporally manipulated.
Eventually, nature will tell us what God intends, not the opposite. We can only hope that in the interim, the hot-heads can be restricted.

Posted March 18, 2009 by Trollstein

"Abbas is ready to accept a Jewish state in the framework of a two-state solution."
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas demands Palestinian statehood and an Israeli commitment to a two-state solution, but recently reiterated his longstanding, extremist position denying Israel comparable legitimacy. "I say this clearly," Abbas told a conference in Ramallah, "I do not accept the Jewish State, call it what you will. His refusal to recognize the fundamental Jewish character of the State of Israel is just one of many barriers that Abbas has erected along the road to peace.
In 2008, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert extended a peace proposal to Abbas that would create two nation-states. Under the plan Israel would have withdrawn from almost the entire West Bank and partitioned Jerusalem on a demographic basis. Abbas rejected the offer.
Abbas also continues to insist on a "right of return" for Palestinian refugees, a position no Israeli leader will accept. Even respected Palestinians, such as the head of Al-Quds University, Sari Nusseibeh, believe his position is unrealistic.261
As recently as 2005, when campaigning for the Palestinian Authority presidency, the "moderate" Abbas held a flag of the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Bridgade (a U.S.-designated terrorist group) and referred to Israel as the "Zionist enemy. A few days later, after winning the election, Abbas dedicated his victory to the "shahids [martyrs] and prisoners" and his "brother shahid Yasser Arafat.
Israel's leaders remain committed to peace, but after Palestinians have repeatedly rejected offers that would have allowed them to establish a state, it should be clear to all that the biggest obstacle to a two-state solution is the leadership of the Palestinians and their more than 60-year refusal to live with a Jewish state.

Posted May 01, 2009 by Mitchell Bard

Mr Nawash,

I am a pro-israel jew. I am very deeply touched by the article you have written. As i jew i feel an inherent right to live in this land called israel. As a child of god i feel it is my duty to share it with the rest of his children, regardless of faith. The muslims and the jews are very similar in their teachings. We are both children of Abraham and we both worship the one true god. I know this sounds naive, maybe even zionist ( which i am sure some will say because i am a jew) but this is what i feel. When i see pictures of dead Palestinian children i wish to cry. I think of my own Son and I think of the pain those Palestinian parents must feel. I cry because i see my brothers slaughtered by my brothers. I think of the jewish children who have been killed by HAMAS. I think of not only my son but my fellow jews, their children being killed, and i cry with them. I thank you for your attempt to be a voice of reason for both of our great Religions and people. May god bless you and your children and may he give us the clarity and reason to settle this centuries old conflict peacefully.

*That is to say this land belongs to muslims such as yourself and jews such as me.

Posted May 24, 2009 by ian

"There is urgency to resolve the Palestinian-Israel conflict."


President Barak Obama has said the Palestinian-Israeli conflict "is a critical issue to deal with, in part because it is in the United States' interest to achieve peace; that the absence of peace between Palestinians and Israelis is a impediment to a whole host of other areas of increased cooperation and more stable security for people in the region, as well as the United States."289

It may be argued that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is urgent for the United States if you believe that the conflict is really an impediment to Arab cooperation on the Iranian nuclear issue. The evidence, however, is that the Arab states have never seriously cared about the Palestinians and that they have their own self-interest in seeing Iran's nuclear ambitions thwarted, an issue which has nothing to do with the Palestinian question.

The parties also do not see any urgency. In fact, in September 2008, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas turned down then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's sweeping offer for Palestinian statehood that would have given the Palestinians 98.1% of the West Bank and allowed thousands of Palestinians to return to Israel.290 Yet, Abbas turned down the offer, claiming there were "gaps,"291 and failed to offer a viable counteroffer.

Following his May 2009 meeting with President Obama, Abbas also made clear the Palestinians are in no hurry to negotiate with Israel, let alone make any concessions. He expressed the view that Obama's opposition to Israeli settlements would eventually bring down the Netanyahu government and he was content to put off any peace talks until Netanyahu is out of office. Jackson Diehl wrote in The Washington Post that "Abbas and his team.. plan to sit back and watch while U.S. pressure slowly squeezes the Israeli prime minister from office. 'It will take a couple of years,' one official breezily predicted."292 Until then, Abbas stated, "in the West Bank we have a good reality.. we are having a good life"293.

This statement contrasts starkly with the typical image projected by the PA and the media of the Palestinians as an impoverished, suffering people. Abbas also left no doubt that the Palestinian leadership feels no urgency for a resumption of the peace process. Abbas told Obama, "There's just about nothing you can do."294

Israelis also see no urgency. While the Israeli public and prime minister are committed to peace with the Palestinians they are very cognizant of the Palestinians' obstinate position. Furthermore, Israelis see no chance of reaching an agreement with the Palestinians so long as their leadership remains splintered with Hamas controlling the Gaza Strip and the West Bank barely controlled by the unpopular and politically weak Abbas.

Israelis also need confidence building time to recover from fighting three wars in the last nine years that have cost more than 1,200 Israeli lives and forced parts of the country to live in a state of almost constant anxiety as a result of years of rocket bombardments. Indeed, during Obama's meeting with Abbas, the president told the Palestinian president that the Israelis have good reason to be concerned about security.295 The American president should therefore understand that now is not the time for a rush to diplomacy and that the first priority should be creating a sense of security in Israel.

"Peace now" is not just a slogan, it is what every Israeli wants. President Obama should be applauded for sharing this desire and wanting to make it a reality; however, the conditions in the region will have to radically improve before it will be possible to achieve the goal Americans and Israelis share.

Posted June 05, 2009 by Micthell Bard

Hi. Hope is tomorrow's veneer over today's disappointment.
I am from Central and now study English, tell me right I wrote the following sentence: "The auction ends today, november th at pst."

With respect ;), Lindsey.

Posted August 11, 2009 by Lindsey

The above is all very interesting but it is excessive complexity to what should be rather simple.
We humans have a large variety of imperfections and some shared defects. We pollute our planet. We waste natural resources and consume without pause, everything in sight.
We slaughter each other, either without cause or, without sufficient cause. We only stop beating each other long enough to torture animals. We are the masters of our own disasters.
In the past 3,200 years of monotheism, our behavior has only marginally improved and only then during short periods between wars and genocides. We are monkeys with fancy push-buttons that light up pretty colors.
Our salvation is not found in rationalization of our own crude behavior or explaining who is "Gods chosen" monkeys. Our salvation is found in improving our own behavior. And here's the shame. While we don't know very much, we do know how to define our own misbehavior. Rather on acting on these instincts, we prefer to highlight everyone else's misbehavior. God speaks equally to everyone. Always has. It is up to us to pay attention. Campfire stories not withstanding.

Posted August 11, 2009 by Trollstein

Excuse me. Above all things, never be afraid. The enemy who forces you to retreat is himself afraid of you at that very moment.
I am from Honduras and also am speaking English, give true I wrote the following sentence: "provillus hair regrowth treatment."

Best regards 8), Xylona.

Posted September 01, 2009 by Xylona

The rootcause for all Islamic terrorism is from Quran itself and Palestine is just a day today excuses to blow up innocent ppl around the world from Muslims. No wonder Islam and Terrorism go hand in hand.We live in One of the muslim stae where there is no other religion can be preached except Islam..Y ??? It's afraid of the truth....UN and US must force to establish religious freedom across the ME soon ....

Posted September 29, 2009 by joyking

Good article. I like the FMC Position and that sounds just fine.
Why didn't anyone think of this before!

Because Islam is unilateral. Because there can only be one state, according to Arab/Palestinian leadership. It cannot BE any other way. Muslim doesn't accept secular or Jewish. The end.

I find it arrogant and condescending that you imagine this wouldn't have already happened, were it possible.

Posted June 05, 2010 by Khione

The problem is the extremists settlers control the Israeli government, every day more land is stolen form Palestinians and this is why hamas was formed. For years Israel did not want to make peace and than Hamas was created and now it is Hamas's fault peace was now made even though they were not created. Israel's excuses no longer work, people around the world have realized after decades that Israel does not want a two state solution but all of Palestine and is slowly ethically cleansing the Palestinians.

This article is so unbiased that every time the word HAMAS was mentioned it is in capitals which says it all. The WWW and satellite television has helped people to realise the truth and sites like this are dead.

Posted June 14, 2010 by Dave

Posted July 15, 2010 by Eric Robert Powell

this conflict between israel and so call
palstinens is about arabs hate the west
israel is part of the west.
and being in the west means have a blog
have a website,personal opnion have a voise in wich cars you or not.and to vote on partys.
i do not want to offend moderator kamal
hamas islamic jihad al qada regime of iran all hate the west.there its terrorist boot cmap
there is palstine as europe as the U.S
and iran hate not just the west also
greatest nation on this earth the U.S
if they could they would wipe us all off
start with israel.
iran regime of iran and other terrorist they express it loud yes this conflict could lead to nuclair war.

Posted September 30, 2010 by alberto gorin

Everybody knows now that Israel is now a reality and no Arab country can match its military power. By firing missiles, you are making more stern and stronger in their resolve. Better it would be to keep peace with them and Live and Let Live principle should be the criteria.

In all middle east, there is going to be revolutions against the autocratic regimes, in which they will kill their own people. Who is at loss?? Just think over it and make peace with the neighbouring countries and bring up the economic level of your people in general so that there is no such uprisings in future like that.

Some social reforms are must and keeping in view the oil reserve these countries have, its very easy for them to provide their people, good education, shelter and basic necessities, as compared to other third world countries.

Otherwise,they will become another the time to come.

Posted March 05, 2011 by Hira54