Netanyahu: No war crimes trials for Israelis

Israel bars war crimes. Turkey bars Israel.

Is this storyline is Good?

Netanyahu's views on the actions of some of his soldiers and officers is almost as distorted Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's and the holocaust.

Didn't happen. Right. < :-)

I think Israelis and Arabs just love war and destruction. Let them have at it.

I think we should give all of the Israeli's US passports and let them move to Florida and NY. Give the land they leave to the Palestinians, and watch it turn from green to brown.

Netanyahu: No war crimes trials for Israelis.

I'm sure Hitler was saying the same thing about his men.

say ‘Yes’ to the Jewish state.” he said. “Without recognition of Israel as the state of the Jews we shall not be able to attain peace.”

Und say "Yes" to Deutschland as der Aryan state, ja.

Strange how when people like David Duke spew their racist views of what the US should be like, they are criticized heavily (rightfully so), but Netanyahu spewing comparable comments is almost given an air of legitimacy.

For 62 years, the Palestinians have been saying ‘No’ to the Jewish state.

The big question is "why in Palestine?", there is no valid reason why it should be there. The Palestinians just want their land back and to live normal lives.

“This distorted report, written by this distorted committee, undermines Israel’s right to defend itself. This report encourages terrorism and threatens peace"

Replace 'this distorted report' with 'our military's actions', and 'written by this distorted committee' with, 'led by the Israeli government', and his comments are bang on. Netanyahu is himself proving to be a terrorist doing every bit as much damage to his country as anyone else possibly could -- let alone how many others he's helped kill off in ghetto-like surroundings and firing rockets at them to boot!

Time to stop giving Israel carte blanche once and for all and make them see that while they would have support for a lot of things, it is not unwavering support and Israel, too, must push for peace and be responsible.

I'm sure Hitler was saying the same thing about his men.

Heh, does that mean you finally have decided he was a bad man? Good for you! That is a major step for you.

Strange how when people like David Duke spew their racist views of what the US should be like, they are criticized heavily (rightfully so), but Netanyahu spewing comparable comments is almost given an air of legitimacy.

Interestingly, you write things that one can find on Duke's site, so you have much in common. Now, are you or are you not aware that Israel and the US are two different countries. David Dukes opinions about the US have nothing to do with Israel. Are you or are you not aware their are many theocracies? (Iran is one, I don't hear you whining much about that. Guess it is only when it comes to Jewish countries, huh?)

there is no valid reason why it should be there.

Yes, there is. It is there. It has a right to be there. It has as much right to be there as Canada, the US, Australia or New Zealand etc. I don't hear you whining about them. Guess it is only Jewish countries you have a problem with, huh?

kinniku: While I don't agree with much of sabiwabi's rather radical views on the subject, do you actually have anything to comment on in terms of the article? I agree wholeheartedly that Israel has every right to exist where it is, but I disagree with Netanyahu's declaration that Israel can do whatever it wants to 'defend' itself, and his calling anyone who disagrees distorted (or anti-Semite). The guy went overkill, and now he's doing it again in saying that NO Israeli will face war crimes charges, as though they are exempt from any law that would hold others from doing the same to them.

Again, support for Israel needs to become conditional, and if those conditions are not met, the support (at least monetary and weapons) needs to be pulled UNTIL conditions are met.

smithinjapan,

Sure. I will comment. First, Netanyahu was not prime minister then, Olmert was. So, Netanyahu did not go 'overkill'. If anyone did (I think they did, BTW), it was Olmert, not Netanyahu. Netanyahu is stuck defending Olmert's horrible policies.

Now, on to specifics:

Of course I would disagree with the statement that Israel can do whatever it wants. I also disagree with calling anyone that disagrees with Israeli policy an antisemite. However, you will admit that many that claim to disagree with Israeli policy are actually anti-semites. So, those people tend to blur the line to the point that it can be difficult to reasonably criticize Israel.

BTW, I am surprised you can find anything to agree about with sabiwabi's opinions, but to each its own I guess.

I wouldn't mind stopping all support for Israel, but I then we would probably have to support her enemies as the status quo is always to put our hand into everything.

Guess it is only Jewish countries you have a problem with, huh?

Did you notice I don't complain about Birobidjan? I complain about murderous racist regimes, it has nothing to do with them being Jewish. Notice that I also don’t complain about the Neturei Karta. But you know all this, and yet you continue to try to portray me as an Anti-Semite whining about Israel because they are Jews.

Seeing how Israel was created and how it has behaved ever since, I believe Israel lost its legitimacy. The Zionist regime has no more right to exist as the Nazi regime. And I don’t have much sympathy for people who moved to an occupied land just to accept subsidies paid for by US taxpayers. So I don’t complain about Israel because they are Jewish, I complain about them because of the way that regime has always acted.

Netanyahu was not directly involved in the recent war crimes against the Gazans, but his actions described in this article, defending his soldiers, has made him an accomplice to those war crimes and crimes against humanity. Good work Bibi.

Did you notice I don't complain about Birobidjan?

Umm...that is not a country. It is a town. Don't you know the difference?

Notice that I also don’t complain about the Neturei Karta.

Umm...just because you don't complain about some Jews, does not erase your complaints about others based merely on the fact that they are Jews.

yet you continue to try to portray me as an Anti-Semite whining about Israel because they are Jews.

You portray yourself that way whenever you make ridiculous claims such as suggesting that Jews faked the moon landings, were top Nazis or when you make ridiculous claims such as Ari Fleischer being an ordained rabbi. Just because you throw some a bone does not erase the majority of your commentary.

I believe Israel lost its legitimacy.

Ummm...you have been constantly claiming it never had any. Make up your mind.

The Zionist regime has no more right to exist as the Nazi regime.

They do not compare, no matter how much you try. Although it is funny considering that you have suggested on a number of occasions that the Nazis were patriots protecting their country and Europe against Jews.

I don’t complain about Israel because they are Jewish

Sorry, your history shows otherwise. Your constant bleating about Jews controlling Western governments and media shows you true side.

Netanyahu was not directly involved in the recent war crimes against the Gazans,

Correct.

but his actions described in this article, defending his soldiers,

What specific actions are you talking about? Defending his soldiers? Any leader would do the same in the same circumstances.

has made him an accomplice to those war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Since when has defending someone suddenly made that person also into an accomplice? Were he to knowingly agree with illegal actions, THAT would make him into an accomplice. Here, he does not believe (rightly or wrongly) there were illegal actions. In such a case, it would only be natural for a leader to make such a defense.

“This distorted report, written by this distorted committee, undermines Israel’s right to defend itself. This report encourages terrorism and threatens peace,” Netanyahu.

A little bit overboard.

Were he to knowingly agree with illegal actions, THAT would make him into an accomplice. Here, he does not believe (rightly or wrongly) there were illegal actions. In such a case, it would only be natural for a leader to make such a defense.

He knows it, therefore he is an accomplice. You actually expect someone to believe that they don't see anything wrong with what they did? As long as they say they believe it was right, then its OK and we should not question it? I know you always pretend to believe the Israeli version of things, but ...

What specific actions are you talking about?

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday vowed never to allow Israeli leaders or soldiers to stand trial on war crimes charges over their actions during last winter’s military offensive in the Gaza Strip"

This I still believe is the best answer for these fighting tribes.

I think we should give all of the Israeli's US passports and let them move to Florida and NY. Give the land they leave to the Palestinians, and watch it turn from green to brown.

Yelnats- Great Idea,move all english speaking Isrealis to USA/Asia,let staunch hebrews and staunch arabs stay in Israel.

Once population goes to lower levels,politics will change .

Bibi will be sent to retirement,new Palestine/Israel can emerge.

Billions USD dollars will be saved in arms exports. Middle East saved. Hope it Can ,come true? I support your vision.

kinniku: "However, you will admit that many that claim to disagree with Israeli policy are actually anti-semites."

No excuse whatsoever. Only people who cannot argue rationally use 'anti-Semite' as a defense for when their arguments are taken into question, and would use the fact that there ARE anti-Semites out there as rationale for it (I'm not at all indicating that's what you are doing) or that such criticism can be easily confused.

"BTW, I am surprised you can find anything to agree about with sabiwabi's opinions, but to each its own I guess."

sabiwabi has criticized what Netanyahu said. I believe what Netanyahu said is wrong. In that regard we share a common criticism -- it differs as to WHY we disagree. Don't confuse people having some points in common as supporting each other. I agree with what Chavez said about Obama in regards to the Nobel Prize, but in no way does that mean I support the man, does it? Likewise you agree that Netanyahu is stuck with Olmert's practices (my bad, by the way, on saying Netanyahu went overkill!), but I'm sure that does not mean you side with sabiwabi since he is also criticizing the man.

Yelnats- We only need to get english speaking Israelis ,to support this via their people living outside Israel.

In fact I have met a few of them,they are happy.

It looks like the Jews did learn something from their experience in Warsaw...

How to imprison a minority population in ghettos, persecute them and make their lives a living hell before finally sending in the army to liquidate this civilian population.

And then turn round and say 'what? what did i do?'

He knows it, therefore he is an accomplice.

That is patently ridiculous. If he had nothing to do with it, he had nothing to do with it. You just said so yourself.

You actually expect someone to believe that they don't see anything wrong with what they did?

Right or wrong, he believes Israel was defending itself. I agree to a point.

As long as they say they believe it was right, then its OK and we should not question it?

I never said that. I am questioning it. I don't know all the answers. It is healthy to question things. In a healthy way, of course. I see nothing wrong with an investigation. What I do see as wrong is if there analysis is one-sided and ignores that both sides were involved in what could be considered war crimes.

I know you always pretend to believe the Israeli version of things, but ...

No, I do not. I just don't believe your version of things. They are always tainted.

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday vowed never to allow Israeli leaders or soldiers to stand trial on war crimes charges over their actions during last winter’s military offensive in the Gaza Strip"

Well, my response would be when are Hamas' soldiers planning to be put on trial? I would assume, never is the answer. So, I can understand Netanyahu's response, even if I don't totally agree with it. The issue seems to completely ignore any and all so-called war crimes on the Palestinian side. Starting with such a premise leaves me thinking the continued process will be unbalanced as well.

smithinjapan,

My main point is that it is entirely impossible to take the word of someone on an issue where that person has a predisposition toward racism of one side or the other. I used the term anti-semetic, but anti-anything fits in here (such as anti-Islamic). I would never take the word of someone about the Palestinians who also speaks badly in general of people of the Islamic faith. I also think it is dangerous to give support or agreement to racism even if parts of the argument agree with our own arguments. Racism should be rejected entirely. That is what I try to do and I have tried to be very balanced in my rejection.

My main point is that it is entirely impossible to take the word of someone on an issue where that person has a predisposition toward racism of one side or the other.

You're not referring to me, are you. As I have pointed out numerous times, you wouldn't need to resort to this name-calling if you had a valid argument. Or as smithinjapan stated: "Only people who cannot argue rationally use 'anti-Semite' as a defense for when their arguments are taken into question, and would use the fact that there ARE anti-Semites out there as rationale for it."

"Only people who cannot argue rationally use 'anti-Semite' as a defense for when their arguments are taken into question, and would use the fact that there ARE anti-Semites out there as rationale for it."

Ummm...I respond to any and all of your arguments quite fully and I also point out your comments are anti-semetic. Quite a difference from what smithinjapan was suggesting and he even kindly went out of his way to acknowledge that he was not suggesting that that was what I was doing.

You see, you cannot claim that Jews are behind a mass conspiracy involving pretty much every bad thing that happens on the planet earth and then expect anyone to take anything you say seriously when you comment about anything related to Jewish people. Since I have never made ANY such negative comments about ANY religion, ethnicity or race, it is clear that no such problems arise from my comments.

As for Israel, I believe it is healthy for there to be questions, seriously asked, about what happened in Gaza. This is for the good of Israel as well. Then I think the same should be done for the Palestinians. Next, Hamas and Fatah stop their in-fighting, next they make peace with Israel. That is what I think should happen.

This is just a gigantic waste of time. The entire region is a walking war crime. Situations like this are just going to be used as a political weapon that will drive the two sides further apart in the end. Get over it and get back to the table and work on a peace agreement so there are no more conflicts and no future war crimes.

kinniku: "My main point is that it is entirely impossible to take the word of someone on an issue where that person has a predisposition toward racism of one side or the other."

Agreed. But in this case I was talking about people in general, and so were you when you said 'it creates a blurry line when people criticize', although of course in other instances we were talking about a specific poster. There is no excuse in other instances, bottom line. I think we agree on that. However, in many cases Netanyahu or whomever else is in charge calls ANYONE who disagrees an anti-Semite. Hell, I've had people on here call me anti-Semite because I thought the Israeli response to Palestinian rocket fire was over-the-top.

"I also think it is dangerous to give support or agreement to racism even if parts of the argument agree with our own arguments. Racism should be rejected entirely. That is what I try to do and I have tried to be very balanced in my rejection."

You're right... racism should indeed be rejected in its entirety, but if a racist bigot points to the sky and says it's blue, I can't disagree with said person on the grounds that they are racist. Saying Netanyahu is wrong here is pointing out the obvious. Are you going to disagree with it simply because someone who might be racist says it's so? Now, WHY people might think he's wrong is another matter.

,” Netanyahu:“Israel will not take risks for peace if it can’t defend itself.” !!!!!!! I wish he tells President Obama those words when they meet, to save a lot of efforts and money for the so-called peace process.

No war crimes trials for Israelis:::(because they are not under humanity laws. “This distorted report, written by this distorted committee, undermines Israel’s right to defend itself;;; Unbearable distorted PM.

If the US believed in democracy it would argue for elections, South African style. Because that's what the situation is - SA style apartheid, forced separation of different peoples, greater rights for some and less rights for others.

Of course, the Jews would lose, being in the minority and all...

The apartheid regime in Israel simply cannot be reasoned with.

refusal to face war crimes trial means Israel is guilty of war crimes.

The apartheid regime in Israel simply cannot be reasoned with." Nope, they can't even from day one when they had nothing. What's the words to that old disco song.... no black, no jews and no gays.... looking for the place...

Even after Israel finally gets annihilated, which they eventually will, you'd say the same thing, you got a real Farrakhan in you. Remind me of of Crown Heights speakers.

cow76: Jews are not all Israelis and all Israelis are not Jews. Thanks.

I think Israelis and Arabs just love war and destruction. Let them have at it.

I'll drink to that.

The U.N. report...

Not worth the paper it's written on. Hard to believe there are actually posters passionately defending a U.N. report. :-D

Netanyahu is correct to disregard it.

Israel is really selective about justice. It has a way of using the UN when it suits its purposes. Israel is currently in violation of at lease two UN resolutions that relates to building in the occupied territories.

In addition, any adequate assessment of Israel must be viewed in the context of how they treat the Falashian Jews, brought to Israel in great fan fair only to suffer discrimination and humiliation on a daily basis. If they can't get a fair shake in Israel how can we seriously expect anyone else will let alone the disenfranchised Palestinian majority.

The regime in Tel Aviv is by all definition a carbon copy of the regime that imprisoned Nelson Mandela, the world most respected statesman for 27 years without trial

Moderator: Comparisons with South Africa are not relevant. Stay on topic please.

The Israeli government is one of the most rogue administration. Even the many non israeli and israeli jews are against its policy. You can find many sites like "jewish voice for peace" that asks the action against Israeli government. I used to hate Bush US government, but I didn't hate Americans. I have two jewish friends and they hate what Israeli government does, too. (They are not israeli) Many posters here mix up the Israeli government and Jews. Most of us hate Israeli government and it's policy but not Jews (who are not neccessarilly israeli). So anti-Israeli government isn't anti-Semitic.

Everton2 and FromEurope,

I hope you don't mind me grouping my response together for the both of you as you both have written similar comments. I question whether you both actually know what the words 'regime' mean (hint when used negatively it is used to descibe an authoritarian government such as a dictatorship where citizens of the country have little or no say or influence, BTW, not the case with Israel) and I further question whether you are attempting to look at this situation logically or if you are merely relying on emotive responses. Let's play a game called "What if?". What if a country that was at war with Israel were to finally make peace with Israel. Would Israel be able to stay at peace with that country? Of course, the answer is 'yes' and we don't even have to play 'What if?' to know this. Look at Egypt and Jordan and the fact that they are at peace with Israel. Has Israel attacked these countries? No. Have these countries attacked Israel. No. That is what would happen if the other countries, including Palestine, were to make peace with Israel.

Everton2,

Discussions about racism in Israel is a delusory argument. The situation you described, while actual, is not a part of a government sanctioned policy. It is merely a sympton of racism on the parts of individuals. All you managed to do is prove Israelis are humans, too. Nobody is attempting to say Israelis are better than any other group of people. We are talking about how the countries act with other countries and how they are treated. Your point about the settlements is also delusory. Let me explain why by asking another question. How many settlements are there in Sinai now? Zero. How many are there in Gaza now? Zero. How many in Jordan now? Zero. So, let's play 'What if?' again. How many settlements will there be in a future independent Palestinian state? The answer is zero. So, instead of focusing on what is on the land, maybe it would be better for the Palestinians to focus on getting the land back and then using what is on the land.

FromEurope, your comments on anti-semitism and anti-Israeli sentiments seem to indicate that you have not actually read the conversation up to now. No one is attempting to suggest that anti-Israeli government is the same as anti-semitic. In fact, I and others have just discussed above that we know they are not. That doesn't mean one cannot comment about racism when it does exist and comment on the effect it would have on the opinion of someone discussing Israel or Jews in general.

Kinniku I am suggesting that we need to have a close look in the possibility of war crime by the Israeli soldiers and judge them, in spite of what Netanyau claims. We are talking about the war crime in Gaza perpetrated by Israel, not about the getting back the territory or the good relationship between Israel and Egypt or Jordan.

Of course I would disagree with the statement that Israel can do whatever it wants. I also disagree with calling anyone that disagrees with Israeli policy an antisemite. However, you will admit that many that claim to disagree with Israeli policy are actually anti-semites.

I wanted to point out that there are actually many Jews who disagree with Israeli policy. And I don't think they are anti-semites, like you affirm.

FromEurope,

I am suggesting that we need to have a close look in the possibility of war crime by the Israeli soldiers and judge them, in spite of what Netanyau claims.

As I mentioned, such questions would be healthy. However, I notice your lack of interest as shown by your lack of comment of any close looks at Hamas behaviour and of the possibility of war crimes on the part of Hamas soldiers. Pretty unbalanced if you ask me, and even if you don't.

We are talking about the war crime in Gaza perpetrated by Israel, not about the getting back the territory or the good relationship between Israel and Egypt or Jordan.

Nope. It does not work that way. You cannot lightly and brazenly use a specific term like 'rogue regime' and ignore that fact that what you refer to as such has made and kept peace with its neighbors and left the Gaza Strip intending not to return there. That is not a 'rogue regime'. A rogue regime would be North Korea taking aid from Japan and not being a state of war with Japan and still firing rockets in Japan's direction. It is about whether Palestinians really want to get a state of their own or keeping supporting Hamas which does not want to live peacefully side by side with Israel. So, sorry. It most certainly is about back territory for the Palestinians. That is what it is all about.

I wanted to point out that there are actually many Jews who disagree with Israeli policy.

Again. You are not pointing out anything new, not even in this conversation. In fact, what you wrote doesn't even make a lot of sense in the scheme of things. They disagree with what policy? All Israeli policy? Some? A little bit. To each their own? As far as my 'affirming' anything. Since I was already speaking of such a thing when you came along, you were 'affirming' what I had to say, or repeating it anyway. It still doesn't change the fact that that doesn't mean one cannot comment about racism when it does exist and comment on the effect it would have on the opinion of someone discussing Israel or Jews in general. Haven't your two Jewish friends mention that to you as well?

In your comment, you always play with the words. (like your "What if" game) Your comment is always the critics about the other posters and I don't see your own opinion.

What do you mean by "your lack of comment of any close looks at Hamas behaviour and of the possibility of war crimes on the part of Hamas soldiers." ? Did you read the caption?

Netanyau says "No war crimes trials for Israelis".

My comment is "we need to have a close look in the possibility of war crime by the Israeli soldiers and judge them" What else do you want ? When I say "we", it's of course I meant the UN. What do you expect ?

Don't try to change the subject by expanding the point. That's what you do always to scramble the points. For me, what you write doesn't make much sense on this issue. I don't see any of your comment about what Netanyahu said. You just trip up the other poster's comment. Maybe you want to show that you know a lot of things, but when it's irrelevant, it's irrelevant. (or maybe it's relevant like when the butterfly wings in Brazil, there is a storm in Europe...) Don't try to justify yourself by writing unneccessary long comments. Short precise, relevant comments are always the best.

In your comment, you always play with the words. (like your "What if" game)

Ummm...in my 'what if' I was describing FACTS. Nothing confusing about it. Did you read the facts? Did you understand them? My opinion is there and I'll write it again. Israel cannot be considered a 'rogue regime' because when it has been given the opportunity to make peace, true peace, it has and that peace continues today. It is my strong opinion, that were Palestinians also give a real serious peace with Israel a chance, they would get the nation they have been dreaming of. I am not writing in a secret code. It should be easy to see this is what I am saying.

What do you mean by "your lack of comment of any close looks at Hamas behaviour and of the possibility of war crimes on the part of Hamas soldiers." ?

Ummm...I meant 'Could you answer the question?'. I specifically said I think your opinion is unbalanced and that this judgement of Israel is equally unbalanced. Again, what is your answer?

I don't see any of your comment about what Netanyahu said.

Then you need to read it again. I wrote specifically 'Well, my response would be when are Hamas' soldiers planning to be put on trial? I would assume, never is the answer. So, I can understand Netanyahu's response, even if I don't totally agree with it. The issue seems to completely ignore any and all so-called war crimes on the Palestinian side. Starting with such a premise leaves me thinking the continued process will be unbalanced as well.' Why should I have to write it again now? Why not actually read what I write before you claim incorrectly that I have not commented?

You just trip up the other poster's comment.

Sorry, again you do not seem to understand. I find it terribly annoying when someone says racist things and is called on it and others jump in with 'not all people who criticize Israel are racists' diversion. Anyone and everyone knows this, but it does not change the fact that when someone encounters racism they should reject it.

I don't see any of your comment about what Netanyahu said.

Then I can only suggest a reading primer would be of some help to you as I have indeed commented specifically on it. I even put it in this post for you. Why should I have to do that? Can't you just read it for yourself?

Maybe you want to show that you know a lot of things, but when it's irrelevant, it's irrelevant.

Everything I wrote is completely relevant both as a response to what you wrote and what is in the article. You are trying to claim Israel is the most rogue 'regime' in the world. You brought that up. I responded, with facts. You were wrong.

Maybe instead of hyperbole and anecdotes about your two Jewish friends you might want to deal in straight facts. I think those are always best.

'Well, my response would be when are Hamas' soldiers planning to be put on trial? I would assume, never is the answer. So, I can understand Netanyahu's response, even if I don't totally agree with it.

Hey I like your "what-if" game. What if we discover that an Auschwitz inmate escaped after he attacked and killed a camp guard that was trying to push him into the gas chamber. Do you think it would be understandable that some people might feel his actions were acceptable considering the situation and that he should not be tried for murder.

You might feel like this is a stupid analogy, but its not. Gaza IS a concentration camp and the "world community" is sitting idly while the people are suffering and dying (for about 60 years).

I would actually hope that both sides go to trial so that Hamas can tell its side.

Hey I like your "what-if" game.

If you like it so much, you should play it better. My 'what if' game dealt in facts. Yours is your own made up story. However, it is nice to see you add the addition of gas chambers in Auschwitz to your story. Does that mean you finally understand and admit that you know people were gassed there? While it is not on topic here, that is wonderful to know. Does that also mean you now realize the Nazis were bad, too? That would be a great step for you, too.

Gaza IS a concentration camp

The situation in Gaza, as horrible as it is, would disappear the moment Hamas decided to make peace with Israel. If you truly understood my "What if" game, you would have understood that. When Israel left Gaza to be run by the PA it was not anything like it is now. The Rafah border was being open to Egypt and had extremists not ruined things, Gaza would still have that open border and the others that were being talked about.

"world community" is sitting idly while the people are suffering and dying (for about 60 years).

Well then, maybe it is time for both sides to recognize each other's right for their nations to exist and live side by side in peace. However, you are against that aren't you? You do not believe Israel should be allowed to exist. This is the reason more reasonable people have trouble making their honest criticisms of Israel heard. They get mixed up with the kind of nonsense that you suggest when you write how Jews are controlling Western governments and media and how top Nazis and Hitler were really Jewish. Again, how could anyone take seriously opinions on Israel when you continue to write things like that?

The situation in Gaza, as horrible as it is, would disappear the moment Hamas decided to make peace with Israel.

You know very well they've done that, several times. The Israelis always find a way to push the Palestinians to react. BTW, the Israelis broke the cease fire before the carnage of last Dec-Jan, not the Palestinians.

You know very well they've done that, several times.

I know very well that they've done no such thing. A "10 year truce which can be used to fortify for the fight to win the final battle" (Hamas' words, not mine) is not what I am talking about. I am talking about true mutual recognition and a true peace. That has never been offered by Hamas.

The Israelis always find a way to push the Palestinians to react.

Yes, so you say. Then again, you say lots of things that don't match with reality. BOTH sides have pushed each other to react at times.

BTW, the Israelis broke the cease fire before the carnage of last Dec-Jan, not the Palestinians.

Nope. That is not correct.