| Didn't you just tell Gus that Arabs had no representation inside Israel?|
No. Can you read?
BTW, I'm still waiting for the full quote of Menachem Begin's opinion that Nasser didn't want war in 1967.
Let me know when you find it.
How could the Palestinians turn down Barak's "generous" offer?
<<< The resulting scenario is obvious: The settlers would continue their long history of violent attacks against Palestinians, and when the Palestinian state tried to impose law and order, the settlers would demand protection from the Israeli army, which would use the new roads to send in tanks and heavy artillery just as it has done in the past week. The Israeli roads and settlements turn the claim of offering the Palestinians 90% of the land into a cruel hoax. With the Israeli military patrolling those roads that crisscross the Palestinian state, Palestinians would face humiliating searches and would not be able to move freely. Imagine someone offering you a house in which you were going to have large rooms (90% of the space) but they were in charge of the hallways between the rooms. You would quickly realize that your freedom to be ''at home'' was remarkably compromised. For a people who have endured 33 years of military occupation, complete with a long history of documented torture, house demolitions and harassment, this doesn't sound like such a great deal. >>>
<<< As noted, Barak's plan is a particularly harsh version of familiar US-Israeli rejectionism. It calls for terminating electricity, water,telecommunications, and other services that are doled out in meager rations to the Palestinian population, who are now under virtual siege. It should be recalled that independent development was ruthlessly barred by the military regime from 1967, leaving the people in destitution and dependency, a process that has worsened considerably during the US-run "Oslo process." >>>