Oh come on..as if the Palestinians don't know any better, this entire debate is outrageous. Both Olmert and Barak offered the Pales a state, with only a few (5) major settlements remaining. In exchange, 3% of Israel would be deeded to the Pales state. Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem would be relinquished. Bibi's red lines are somewhat stronger. Right of return..forget it. A demilitarized W. Bk a must..( how it is enforced is beyond me however). Both Syria/Abbas are taking the same novel tack..pre-conditions (Israel gives up the Golan and East Jerusalem), then talks. Why talk guys? It's all a farce. Iran is still stalling for time..to test the bomb..(give Iran leverage in this conflict). Until someone acts, nothing will change. Israel should have a deadline..talk within 30 days..or no talks at all. You want Israeli territory, fight for it, we are ready..but don't cry to the UN or Goldstone.

"Clinton: Settlement freeze not a pre-condition for talks" Translation: Even with Israel's pig-headedness over the freeze of illegal settlement we will nevertheless push forward with peace talks. The settlement issue is no longer a precondition; it is time to get down to the nitty-gritty's. Don't worry if this doesn't get resolved this year as we have at least 3 more to go.

The essence of the Arab Israeli conflict has is not "settlements", nor is it "borders", "natural resources", "refugees" or even "Jerusalem". The core of this deadly long conflict is the total refusal of the Muslim-Arabs to accept Israel's RIGHT to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people. Unless and until the Muslim-Arab leadership comes to its senses and accepts that which the entire international community has, that Israel - based on UN resolutions and the right of all peoples to national self-determination and - independence - is the nation-state of the Jewish people and it is here by RIGHT, little can be expected to move along. Jews, within and without Israel, are eager, very eager to achieve an accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Are Muslim-Arabs...??

Israel has an unassailable legal right to establish settlements in the West Bank. Eugene Rostow, a former dean of the Yale Law School who was also under secretary of state in the Johnson years, would write years later that “Israel has an unassailable legal right to establish settlements in the West Bank.” He argued that Israel’s claims to the territory were “at least as good as those of Jordan.” Prof. Stephen Schwebel, who would become the State Department legal adviser and subsequently the president of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, went a step further when he wrote in 1970 that “Israel has better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem, than do Jordan and Egypt.” More at : http://xrl.us/bewv8u

even have settlements in the West Bank? Was it not Israel's 1st PM, Ben Gurion, who advocated for Israel to expand in the Negev region instead? Why are they building in land intended for a Palestinian state?

"pals" as victims, they are better off than if they sat down and made a deal. No one is better at pretending to be "victims" and and they get paid big bucks. o-BUM-a's grandson will be campaigning on bringing "peace" to the middle east to finish his grandfather's dream or rather pipe dream.

All Arab settlement construction must end before we talk about anything at all.

to talk to and really nothing to talk about. How did these areas come to be "occupied" in 67? oh, lost in a war of aggression against Israel. In that case it seems these lands aren't occupied but lost by arabs in a war of aggression. I put money in the stock market and lost in the crash. I want it back. I am not buying anymore stocks til those companies give me my money back. Oh wait, I took a risk and lost so I guess it is reasonable that I don't get the money back. 67 borders are a moot point. the only negotiation should be what Israel is willing to do for the arabs out of the goodness of their heart AFTER the arab people accept their right to exist in peace.

As she chooses to live in LA. What Israel not good enough for you?

Note, the Arabs of Eretz Israel (Land of Israel / Palestine) rejected the establishment of an independent Arab state alongside the Jewish state of Israel time after time, e.g. 1917, 1923, 1937, 1947. Indeed, their leadership "agreed" to set up an independent state only in the late 1980s, more than twenty years after the Six-Day War of 1967, and even that was supposed, from their perspective, to be a "stage" in the march to annihilate the nation-state of the Jewish people: Israel. To this very day they refuse to accept two simple demands: !. Recognize Israel's right to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people, based on UN resolutions. 2. Accept any agreement for peace as the "end of the conflict". They appear to have difficulties accepting either one of these two points because that would mean accepting the legitimacy of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

1. Question: why single out Jews and demand of them not to reside in city neighborhoods, in villages and in towns which are part of a disputed territory? Isn't singling out Jews in this fashion a form of racism, anti-Jewish racism...?? 2. Comment: "Occupation" in Arabic, when used within the context of this Arab Israeli conflict, means the entire landmass from the Jordan River to the Sea, including the UN member state of Israel, all of it. It is time we listen to the Arabs when they speak their language and not the "liberal" and "progressive" language used abroad, away from the conflict itself.

The issue isn't the settlements or even the 1967 borders, it is control! They certainly do want to wipe Israel out, not out of personalized hate, but because they want to control this whole part of the world, and Israel is in the way. We expect in modern times that Man would have changed his stripes, but no, this is in the best tradition of Genghis Khan and Atilla the Hun.

bibi as always palying his old games to stay in power and satisfying his party on the other hand Abbas begin to realize the pal's looking to his useless negotiations as a farce so what's the solution ?? there is no one as what lieberman said contiouning building in the west bank and east Jerusalem but onday israel will run to the UN saying we are ready for solution maybe because to end the demography problem or to end racial discrimination reputation or anything you could imagine but whose will accept a palestinian state with this settlements and Jerusalem that time ??? palestinains ?? huh arabs ?? huh huh muslims ?? dont make me laughing its a religious conflict not a political one so the un will give simple modern unexpensive offer that will end the conflict... one state Jerusalem for all refugees could back settlements not evacuated what israel will do ?? saying no or taking unilateral action ?? even the usa has apublic policy toward settelments with joining the UN and j street the one state will considered as favor one likud and hamas have a common thing they walking the same way toward that even they use the same tactic finding myself smile when im imagining liqud and hamas in the same goverment , really that's funny Sherlock holmes once said when you remove the impossible solutions you will find the right one

Jerry, The west bank was never intended for a Palestinian state, it was Israeli land captured by Jordan in '48 that Israel liberated in '67. The land intended for a Palestinian state is called Jordan as the mandate was "land east of the Jordan River for the Arabs." The land has only been considered occupied or land intended for a Palestinian state in the last 2 decades, when Israel signed a peace treaty with Jordan the land was called "under dispute" as Jordan did not want it back (just like Egypt did not want Gaza back).

Anyone who has a knowledge of Jewish history knows that the Jews have more right to settle in Judea and Samaria than any other people in the world.

B"H If you dig a little bit deeper, the so called "settlement" issue sheds light on the difficulties Israel and the Jews face. It seems that the "palestinians" committed the error of fully believing their own lies by maintaining that the "settlements" (Jewish villages in Judea and Samaria) are illegal. The position of Israel, in accordance with international law, is that "settlements" would be illegal only if Israel occupied the Land from a pre-existent and sovereign power. The fact however is that there was never a "palestine" and the territories in question (that by the way by divine "chance" fully correspond with the Biblical Heartland of Israel) were liberated not from the "palestinians", but from Jordan, the illegal Arab state occupier Britain created on her "Palestinian mandate" to be the Arab state, alongside with Israel, the Jewish state. Talking about two state solutions. As historical facts are facts, it will be very difficult for the "palestinians" to modify them, even if they keep repeating the same lies for almost fifty years now. On the same token, Abbas' organization, the PLO, was created three years before the Israeli "occupation of the West Bank" and (at that time) it meant to "liberate" the whole of Israel of - Jews: notta nice :)

in the kitchen and bedroom that is!!!! If she had been taking good care of Billy boy, Monica would not have been in the picture with her infamous cuban cigars. lol

Mraco,for as long as you live, you will never have a 1/4 of the brain Mrs.Clinton has.At least she is trying hard to get the Israelis & the Palestinian to sit down together to talk about peace. At every opportunity you have, all you do is debase anything & everything concerning Israel & peace. Shame on you.

stealing while he i tries to lie his way out of punishment.

something very fishy going on in the white house, y the sudden change of heart, I smell nobama letter of resignation coming.

during DBG time the west bank as tearm first time used in begining of the 90's, during DBG jerusalem was under Jordenian siege(the jews were starving for food) go look for it I dare you.

Not only are you racist but also chauvenist pig against women. I doubt you even have one true friend with your attitude. You know how to repel better than attract good. Behind that mask of sarcasism I little insecure boy crying himself to sleep every night.

This is very sad if true and it confirms the notion that the Palestinians should not expect much of the Obama aministration. On the Israel/Palestine issue. USA administrations being democrat or republican have always sided with Israel.

Israelis have always lived in a state of fear since the occupation of the Palestinian-Arab lands in 1967. Until you fools learn to elect respectable leaders and not war criminals, those who choose to abide by the fundamental principles of international law and learn to respect the human rights of the Palestinians, Israel will NEVER be in a state of peace. It never has, and now it is up to Israelis to decide if they want this to continue on forever.

Those "Arab settlement constructions," as you call them, house the people who lived in the land of Palestine LONG before you and your crazed settlers decided to barge in. most of them even hold their keys to their old homes in Palestine before they got savagely kicked out by your inhumane system of ethnic cleansing.

I know this will shatter the core of your heart, but it seems that you are grossly uneducated about international law. Let's be fools like you and pretend that it was the Arabs who attacked Israel in '67. Well, even if they did, Israel had no right to annex Palestinian lands. According to international law, it is inadmissible for a state to occupy lands as a result of war. You, in your post, have already conceded that this "war of aggression" was a war. Therefore, Israel's annexation is illegal and thus, you come to find, as recognized with the exception of 4-5 states, that the West Bank, E. j-lem and Gaza are OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY. Put that in your pipe and smoke it ,mate. You are swiftly losing friends.

you have so grossly misrepresented history, and so grossly modified the UN resolutions that you mentioned, that I don't know whether to laugh or cry at post #11. "Note, the Arabs of Eretz Israel (Land of Israel / Palestine) rejected the establishment of an independent Arab state alongside the Jewish state of Israel time after time, e.g. 1917, 1923, 1937, 1947." Wll, there seems to be a lack of supportive arguments to justify your analysis so will help you out. First, in 1919, the Palestine National Council sent a delegation to the Brits asking for independence, as the Palestinian Arabs were the majority of the population at the time. It was unjust that the Brits allotted the Palestinian Jews 55% of Palestine, as they did not constitute even 1/3 of the total population. You clearly have no idea of the demographics of Palestine, pre-1948. The Arab Partition Plan of 1947 was rejected by the Arabs, but you fail to mention the exact reason for doing so. As I said before, the Plan granted more than half of the land to a people that didnt even constitute 1/3 of the land, and 1/3 still seems like a huge number in relative terms. The Arab majority, who constituted more than half of the population, got 45%. This is an unfair proposal, and NO PEOPLE would have agreed to such a disgustingly unjust Plan. "Recognize Israel's right to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people, based on UN resolutions." This is a demand made by YOU and ONLY YOU. Please provide documented evidence from UN resolutions as to the demanding of the Palestinians to recognize Israel's right to exist. This is completely different from accepting the 2-state solution, something that has already been accepted countless times since the PLO in the 1970s. It has been accepted by Hamas, as well as Fatah. During the consensus reached in the 1970s, you and a few ofther countries were actually the minority dissenters of a two state solution. Why don't you search that on google and make yourself useful? You wont sound like an incapable being anymore. But please, don't be so hypocritical. Israel has rejected more UN security council resolutions than all of the countries in the world put together. "Accept any agreement for peace as the "end of the conflict". We have. The PLO and Fatah did more than what was demanded of them by intl law in not only recognizing Israel's right to exist, but accept the two state solution. In 2002, when Saudi Arabia introduced the Arab peace Plan to the Arab League, all Arab states in attendance voted in favor of it, which it called for normalization of ties with Israel and acceptance of the two state solution. Hamas even sent a delegation of its own to the League where it signed the document, authorizing its support for the Plan. "They appear to have difficulties accepting either one of these two points because that would mean accepting the legitimacy of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. " No, you have a hard time accepting the truth, primarily because it is always on the opposite side of you. Learn your history, please.

A two-state solution has been proffered to Palestinians no fewer than three times, and was rejected each time. They want Israel. Which, of course, is never going to happen. Six wars and sixty-one years of unrelenting terror later, they remain victims of their own inability to deal with reality. It may be tragic, but it is a situation exclusively of their own making. Hard to feel sorry for them.

Read Wikipeadia's entry on ancestral Palestinian Origins first. For those who wish to wikibash, please bother to read the cited references. For those of you who are too lazy, here are a few snippits: 'Results of a DNA study by geneticist Ariella Oppenheim appears to match historical accounts that Arab Israelis and Palestinians, together as the one same population, represent modern "descendants of a core population that lived in the area since prehistoric times", albeit religiously first Christianized then largely Islamized, and all eventually culturally Arabized.' And 'A study in October 2000 showed the majority of Palestinians tested were found to have DNA of that of Jews. The conclusion of the DNA results is as follows: According to historical records part, or perhaps the majority, of the Moslem Arabs in this country descended from local inhabitants, mainly Christians and Jews, who had converted after the Islamic conquest in the seventh century AD (Shaban 1971; Mc Graw Donner 1981). These local inhabitants, in turn, were descendants of the core population that had lived in the area for several centuries, some even since prehistorical times (Gil 1992). On the other hand, the ancestors of the great majority of present-day Jews lived outside this region for almost two millennia. Thus, our findings are in good agreement with historical evidence and suggest genetic continuity in both populations despite their long separation and the wide geographic dispersal of Jews.' So the Isreali 'right' to this land based on their own definition is equal to that of the Palestian population. Palestinians aren't some other tribe that simply moved in after the Jewish diaspora. They've been there as long as anyone. You must be blind if you ignore the immense irony about what the Isrealis are doing to the Palestinians. Defenition of a Ghetto: a section of a city, esp. a thickly populated slum area, inhabited predominantly by members of an ethnic or other minority group, often as a result of social or economic restrictions, pressures, or hardships. Sound a bit like modern Gaza? Can you deny that attacks against Palestinian oliver growers don't resemble pogroms? Islreali soldiers wartching on as settlers destroy the property of the olive growers, and retailiate when those Palestians throw stones back at the settlers? And don't you dare deny my right to make these comparisons.