As for the Palestine papers, you should actually read them rather than rely on the Guardian lying about what is in them. See for yourself the “good-faith” that Palestinians demonstrated. If you are too lazy to do that, then you can see the Palestinian side’s reaction to the exposure of these negotiations – sound like they were sincere? Sounds like they’d have sold it effectively to the Palestinian “Street”? Compare and contrast with the Israeli side who voted in a party in 2006 whose sole common platform was pulling out of the majority of the West Bank and removing over 100,000 of the 250,000 settlers there.

I have to say I think Israel should always consider a compliment when they read the screed anti-Israelis come up with. It must be one of the only countries so utterly blameless that people feel compelled to lie to attack it.

Mr Yo-Yo, I am intrigued by your deployment of the phrase “good-faith” (also “armchair reader” but that’s just funny, and “howler”, which we’ll come to that later). I can’t prove my motives to you, and wouldn’t try to anyway. But there’s an unspoken accusation in the air (or coming down the wires, whichever) isn’t there? Let’s leave it unspoken for now.

I stand by my original point sans the inferences of others. I am however happy to concede what may have been a tactical error in bothering to attempt any sort of factual correction.

To clarify: I accept that Nasser appeared, very much, to be threatening war prior to June 5. I agree that Israel had informed him that a blockade of the Straits of Tirana would be considered an act of war by Israel. And I stand by what I actually wrote re. Jason’s assertion (as opposed to your expansion and reinterpretation of it).

That said, the question of who started the 6 Days War is of little relevance to the topic of this thread. It certainly has no bearing on the marginally more important subject of the continued military occupation and civilian colonisation of Palestine (’67 borders for Mr Yo-Yo’s information) which goes on apace even after the Israeli government entered into ‘peace negotiations’ in what (in the light of recently leaked PA documents) can be understood to be bad-faith (correct usage, but I’m sure that’ll still be controversial), as the very least in the last several years with the PLO in 1991.

The situation with East Jerusalem and the West Bank is absolutely clear cut. Israel told Jordan to sit out the war and in fact reiterated it request when Jordan shelled Israel. Jordan continued this unprovoked attack because – and the conversation is a matter of public record – Nasser told Hussein that Egypt was defeating Israel and Hussein wanted his slice. As we now know it didn’t end that way. But as we all know, Israel is always the “aggressor” no matter what. According to John, it was the aggressor when it killed terrorists planting a bomb – and no doubt would have been an aggressor when reacting to that bomb going off and people still manage to claim Israel was the aggressor in 2006 when Hizbollah made a completely unprovoked attack on undisputed sovereign Israel territory.

I wish Israel could use the same arguments Hamas somehow manages to use – Israel didn’t bomb Gaza, the IAF did so thats ok.

Surely there’s a factual error in here somewhere? Even if you buy into the argument of ‘pre-emptive self defence’ you have to agree that the first military strike in ’67 was Israel’s, no?

As to your comment that Israel attacked and killed 4 Gazans on Nov 4. As mentioned by someone else, Israel was attacking a group that was in the process of planting bombs along the border.

Further, you might not be aware of this if you only read MSM publications from the time, but since the day the ceasefire went into place until Nov when it completely unraveled, a total of 116 rockets or mortars were fired at Israel. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, FOX, BBC, Guardian, etc… did not report these attacks because they never report an attack on Israel unless someone on the Israeli side dies, or Israel retaliates, killing someone in return.

As to your support for the establishment of a Palestinian State on the 67 borders, that is all fine and good, but if that is all the Arabs are really asking for, then why did they attack Israel in 1967, before Israel occupied even a single inch of the area the Palestinians are now demanding?

p.s. What would be the ‘sound’ one Jew typing anyway?

You don’t sound Jewish.