What was the Arab reaction? It was The Three No’s of Khartoum issued in September 1967: no negotiations, no recognition, no peace. And they all kept that up until Sadat made peace and got back every rood of land he wanted, whereupon the other Arabs assassinated him (done by a group associated, like Hamas, with the Muslim Brotherhood).

Now, forty-one years later, continual and relentless Arab hostility, terrorism, and wars have been the norm. What do you want to give them to reward the Muslims for that record, and will it bring peace? No, it will not. The Muslims will pocket any and all Israel concessions and push for further war, as they have done constantly. The PLO never lived up to its agreements at Oslo, remember. It is the Muslims who drive this war, not Israel. There is nothing Israel can do or give them that will bring about peace or even a cessation of violence. The last 15 years should have proven that over and over.

Remember this, and you will understand the Muslim-Israel conflict. When the Muslims say “Peace in the Middle East” they mean the destruction of Israel and the genocide of its Jewish inhabitants. When they whine for “American evenhandedness” what they mean is that we should help them do this.

What the Israeli government has done over the past 15 years would have been considered fringe-left 20 years ago. Israel has changed a lot. (I don’t think that’s a good thing, but that’s what’s been the case.)

And yet despite the movement of the Israeli government towards acceptance of a two state solution, there has been no reciprocal effort on the part of the Palestinians who are motivated not by a sense of nationalism but by a sense of grievance. And that grievance, above all else, must be maintained.

Even with Abbas withdrawing his nominations of terrorists for the highest honor his government can confer he – as well as Fayyad – denies the rights of a Jewish state.

It is not Israel that lacks a commitment to a two state solution. For better or worse, that’s where the state of Israel is. What’s lacking is the commitment on the part of the Palestinians to accept the same.

What J-Street and its allies advocate is continuing to pressure Israel to concessions in the face of an implacable foe. That’s a moral disaster and will continue breeding enemies.

This occupation is a moral disaster, and breeds far more enemies than can ever be killed.

The Muslims are at war with Israel to destroy the country and murder the Jews, Reaper. And they are convinced that they can grind down the Israelis until they surrender in exhausted desperation. People like J Street are helping to give them this confidence. Just what will you offer the Muslims that they will prefer to getting the whole falalfel, country, genocide and all?

I just think the solution to speech with which you disagree is better speech. I don’t hate AIPAC and nobody’s trying to muzzle me. But maybe J Street will turn into something I can support. AIPAC certainly isn’t.

Good day to you.

Please. I’m so tired of the Walt-Mearsheimer crowd pretending that they’ve been suppressed when they’re in every major news outlet, pretty much anytime.

On my comments thread, not so much. But the First Amendment doesn’t apply here. My blog, my dime, my rules.

We are not monolithic, nor should we be.

You’d think that leaving Gaza would be considered a pretty substantial gesture, and the Palestinian response to be pretty significant, but apparently not.