in their Media like the suicide Mickey Mouse, it's follower the "Islamist Killer Bee" and other "children programs" aimed at creating new generations of terrorists and suicide bombers. There is no hope unless Palestinians change their schools syllabus to include Israel and remove the call to its destruction. There is no hope unless Palestinains stop the Suicide Bomber Summer Camps for their kids. There is no hope unless Palestinians denounce terror and officially recognize Israel's right to exist! So you see Hani, THERE IS NO HOPE because the real Hope Killers are the Palestinains themselves!

By keeping alive the idea that the creation of OUR state is a "catastrophe" is what kills any hope. We were justified in what happened in 1948 - and I'm sure that's not how the text-book phrases it. Is any place given to events leading to the 1948 war such as the Arab riots in the 1920's & 1930's, is any place given to Jewish historical roots in this region, is there any mention that the leader of Palestinian Arabs was the Mufti of Jerusalem who was an ally of Hitler. Please don't tell me I'm the hope-killer. It's the one-sided presentation that I object to, even if it's hidden by a poor attempt to be balanced. Excuse me, but it's not balanced - the Arab position is wrong, not that no refugees were created, but how & why & that even today, questioning our legitimacy is wrong, a misleading interpretation of history. The national tragedy of the Palestinians is as much self-inflicted or a result of the manipulation of the surrounding Arab states as it is from any actions on our part. And appeals to sentimentality, "oh, we lost our homes, blah, blah, blah, don't cut it, at least not with me. If the text clearly said that the responsibility & the perpetuation of refugees was primarily the fault of the Arabs who caused the war & then refused to integrate the refugees, unlike Israel, who integrated a larger number of refugees from the Arab World, it would approach a semblance of balance. If mention was made of the expulsion of ancient Jewish communities in Jerusalem, in Hebron, etc. this too would add balance. So don't label me a hope-killer. And while I'm on the subject of hope-killers, maybe you would like to comment on your Arab MK's who never miss a chance at Israel-bashing. Tell me how that creates hope?

The problem with us, is that self hating jews, can be worse than our enemy's together. I think an evangelical Christian Government would be better than the one that we have right now.

Israel's government is consumed with intense hate for G-D and G-D's gift to every Jew for all eternity - the Holy Land of Israel - therefore, they are determined to brainwash Arab Muslim children to reject G-D given Jewish ownership of the Land and instead embrace wicked lies inciting rabid Jew-hate resulting in the mass murder of Jews. For the L-RD has chosen Jacob for Himself, Israel for His own possession... And He gave their land as a heritage, a heritage to Israel His people. Pslam 135 Jews have had a continuous presence in Israel for 4,000 years. Jerusalem is the Jews' holiest city. Hebron is the second holiest city. There NEVER was an Arab country of Palestine. Jerusalem was NEVER the capital of any Arab or Muslim entity. Jerusalem is mentioned over 700 times in the Jewish Bible, not once in the Koran.

That the arabs refused partition? That they lauched a war to prevent the creation of Israel? That the vast majority of Arabs left without even seeing an Israeli soldier?

In 1948, we Palestinians made a grave mistake. We were offered our own state in our ancestral homeland, next to our ancestral cousins in their ancestral state. Never before had we governed ourselves independently. Had we accepted, we would be living in peace and prosperity. Instead, we attacked our cousins, lost, and have been crying ever since about what they did to us. The great disaster is that we choose to deny that the Jews diserve to be here in their own nation. They had accepted that we diserved our own nation. What now? Is there none among us that can lead us to where we should be?

Did any of you READ the book? According to the article, the book mentions the "Nakba" and identifies it as a term used by Palestinians. Not glorified...but rather a subjective fact. These is no insinuation that studying "Nakba" will become part of the curriculum...or that the Zionist vision will be erradicated from the lesson. Put it on the table and discuss it, within its context of time might help ease the pain for some and make others more understanding. Ignoring the term Nakba...won't make it go away Schools are the perfect place for these kind of lessons.

has returned Israel to her legitimate owners , but the 6000 mostly secular if not anti religious brave Women and men , who gave their life for this country

Its nice to see that we are not entirely alone in this, not alone in swimming in a sea apparently filled with the biyuv of hatred and paranoia. Truth and peace are two words that seem anathema in the Israel reflected by Ynet Talkbacks these days. We are being lead by these towards a new Metzada.

This is copied and pasted from the article: “The third-grade book, Living together in Israel, states that some Arab residents were driven out of their homes and became refugees and that Israel confiscated many of their lands.” Now, if you do an in-depth search of the synonyms for “confiscate,” you will find “steal.” You can make of it whatever you want to, use any euphemism you choose, but it comes down to the same thing. The indication that Arabs were “driven out of their homes and became refugees” doesn’t give the impression that these people gave up their land freely or were necessarily properly compensated. When I say that 2-300 years ago the US “confiscated” Indian lands, you can just about bet that it means that we stole it. Calling a baby by its proper name won’t kill you. As for English, well, it’s my second language, too.

The only two catastrophes that have happened to the Palestinians are now dead. One was called Husseini and the other was called Arafat. Would it be possible to have a small mention of them also in the textbooks ?

It is impossible to be completely objective when writing anything, and schoolbooks are no exception. The overriding concern when writing schoolbooks must be the truth, an important secondary concern must be that the children are being taught to be good citizens of the nation that they belong to. As my continuing Palestinian Arab history series shows, 1948 was a catastrophe for most Arabs in Palestine. But the reason that it was so disastrous for them was not because the Jews managed to avoid being pushed into the sea as the combined Arab world so fervently desired. The reason it was a Naqba was because the Arabs of Palestine were treated like dirt by their own leaders and by the leaders of the Arab world. They were used as pawns by Amin al-Husayni, the Mufti of Jerusalem, for his own aggrandizement and anti-semitic aims; they were used as pawns by the Arab League, they were used as pawns by the Arab nations who committed them to refugee camps, and (as we will see as the series continues, iy"h) they were and are continuing to be used by the UNRWA for its own self-preservation. (From the pan-Arab perspective, 1948 was also a tragedy - because weak dhimmi Jews winning a war against the proud Arab nation was the ultimate disgrace. Histories must emphasize the honor/shame society of Arabs as well in explaining why this was a "naqba.") Read the rest at http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2007/07/teaching-naqba-to-israeli-arabs.html

Arm your enemies and if you dont have enough enemies create some more, SICK

This is a rare day for honesty - from an Education Minister and from a Palestinian Arab. Ali, if where you want to be is at peace with yourselves and with us there is a chance if there are more like you and like Jacob. Trouble is Jacob South Pacific is a little distance away - we need you here.

will the book include accounts of the Hebron and Tzfat pogroms? Or the Maaleh Akrabbim, Avivim and Maalot terrorist attacks? Will the book mention the fact the Arabs (foreign armies and armed local groups) attacked the newly declared state ? Will the book analyze Amin el Husseini's association with Hitler and his intentions to carry out the extermination of the Jews in Palestine?

I dont believe it. I dont want to believe that!

In case you think that I suggest that Israel should run around and beat itself over the head, read my first post again. I did suggest that one wait a few hundred years before admitting to whatever sins were committed to get what one wanted. In light of the fact that the Arabs brought most of what happened on themselves, it simply doesn't pay to keep stirring the mess over the lesser evils before the issue in the grand scheme of things has even been settled.

I don't usually have the time or the inclination to read your comments, M. Hartley, but this time it was Keren who called attention to it. In fact, if you're going to compare the US and Israel, the Jews are the Indians. The Jews are the ones who got their ancient land "stolen", since that's the term that you use. Arabs are relatively newcomers. Jews got their land taken away again, in modern times, mostly by Arabs who had not lived in the area more than two years. The War of 1967 should have solved part of that problem but by mishandling it, Israel allowed the Arabs and the rest of the anti-Jewish world to claim it as Arab land. And people like you, unfortunately, repeat that lie. There are many sources where you can get information before you post another TB such as that one. There are books on the subject and there's the internet. For your convenience, I have included part of an article that gives an overview briefly and better than I could. "The Balfour Declaration set aside the whole portion of Palestine for the modern Jewish homeland, returning the "Holy Land" to its rightful owners. The British reneged and gave away most of the land, and created a fictitious Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, formerly Transjordan. The British Mandatory rulers gave away this land as a political concession. Arab "Palestine" was to be Jordan, not Gaza, Judea and Samaria. Refusing a later partition of the remaining land, the Arabs all launched a war to annihilate the only Jewish state. It was then that they conquered illegally Gaza, Judea and Samaria. The Arab leaders told the local Arabs to leave their homes, that they could return once the Jews were "removed". Those faithful to their Arab brethren and cousins diligently obeyed. Egypt and Jordan then "occupied" these disputed territories of Gaza, Judea and Samaria for nineteen years, from 1948-1967. Arab nations again attempted to annihilate Israel and the Jewish people in 1967. It was an attack to eliminate the only Jewish state amongst 22 Arab states. According to international law, when an aggressor attacks another and loses land it becomes legally the property of the aggrieved not the aggressor. Legally, the lands conquered by Israel in 1967 - Judea, Samaria and Gaza - belong to Israel." Taken from a 2005 article on Israelinsider by Gary Fitleberg.

With OUR children , OUR future existence you wrote . NOt YOUR , you are living in Italy . And let the Tora be instructed in the religious schools

I suggest you read all of my tb's. Keep, however, in mind that your Minister of Education approved what's being peddled in that book. My basic feelings on that sort of thing are very simple: You start garbage with me, I beat the s--t out of you in my defense, and I keep whatever I took in the process until I damn' well feel like giving it back, if ever. I don't know how to say it any more clearly.

If certain segment of the Israeli Jewish public have a death wish, then they should commit suicide and spare the rest of the public the same fate.

There are more of us than you realize. What is there un-Palestinian about being for peace and prosperity? I am FOR an independent Palestinian nation where we are free from oppression at the hands of outside AND inside forces. Ironically, you are right: I want to "Get a life"

I'm sure you realize that for every article anywhere justifying side A there are just as many articles justifying side B; with the occasional sides C and D thrown in to really befuddle the issue. I do, however, find it amusing to see people only go back in history to the point that supports their opinion. And of course, when all else fails, the old testament is dragged out as proof that the land belongs to Israel. Wouldn't it have been totally foolish for the ancient Hebrews to have suggested that the land, actually, belonged to the Canaanites???? History is written by the victors, and I don't understand all the rummaging around to justify the fact that, like it or lump it, there is a State of Israel, and to hell with how it got there. Since Keren seems to read into my tb's what suits her instead of what I'm saying, let her explain it to you.

Trying to present a "balanced" view of history sounds like a lovely if it weren't for the fact that while Israeli schools will teach about the Nakba, the Palestinians have suicide kindergarten and Farfur the Mouse.

B"H It is so strange to have a government that considers its presence a Nabka. Why, if its influence is a Nabka, does not Israel vote this one out and replace it with one that does not promote itself as a Nabka. Tamir has responsibility to lift up and not lower down. Nabka adds a negative light to a positive situation and should not be used for a government that sees itself responsible for "peace" and not "pieces".

Why is the only question not being asked is: is what's in the book true? Did the arabs refuse the Jews' right to sovereignty? Did they refuse to compromise with the Zionists? Were arabs expelled? Were many villages bulldozed? If its all true, then that's what we should teach all of our children Arab and Jewish - in a fair and balanced way. This notion that the early Zionists, brilliant and rightious as they were in rescuing our people, did nothing that harmed Arab Palestinians certainly is not true. Israel was a country that was born in bloodshed....of course the cause was right, but Israel can't reconcile with anybody if it won't tell the truth about what happend in 1947 - 1949. Both sides of the story. That's what separates Israel from its neighboring arab states. Authors like Morris and Segev, based on original sources have debunked some myths about the establishment of the State of Israel. (And leave M. Hartley alone - she's a very insightful talkbacker who is hardly an Israel hater). If independence to the Jews is seen as a catastrophe to the Palestinian Arabs, how can putting words to the truth be wrong for the school books? Again, the main question I want answered is does the book tell the truth? Both sides have their respective stories and many Palestinian arabs have a legitimate beef with Israel. I think a strong Israel is an honest Israel.

I get the \feeling that at YNET the bottom line is that a view can be censored out because the content is offensive. But again I ask (only 3rd time), if in the eyes of our Minister of Education, Israel's creation can be termed a disaster, then by what right does she hold that Israel should continue to exist? A rhetorical question to be sure as she will ignore it, but why does Ynet hold it fit to censor this out. Intellectual cowardice extends to such a limit?

Our government is publishing books stating that the establishment of Israel is a disaster - can we get a reality check soon or else we will end up without a country.