The EU has been the PA’s bighearted sugar-daddy; Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas’ bountiful and boundless papa-bear; the deepest honey-pot the Palestinians could ever hope for.

For at least a decade, the eminent New York Times columnist, the maharishi of Mideast punditry, has relentlessly pushed the canard that settlements are a main obstacle to Mideast peace. Why?

The PA owes Israel at least $5 billion dollars in economic damages and reparations. News item: “Israel, US negotiating over tax monies to be handed over to Palestinians”. Nothing could be more absurd.

With settlements the biggest friction point between the US and Israel, it’s time to reflect on their usefulness. They are the best Israeli response to Palestinian terrorism, and they exact a real price from the Palestinians for their recalcitrance.

Had Benjamin Netanyahu taken 12 cabinet posts, fired 11 diplomats, legislated a haredi army exemption, and annexed the West Bank with a government of only 30 seats – the country would have been on fire! Yet the leftist of government of the year 2000 did wildly outrageous things similar to this, and the media was silent. A worthwhile reminder for the year 2009.

An entire generation of Religious Zionists was orphaned by the passing of the legendary Dr. Burg. His departure left Religious Zionists up on the hilltops with Hanan Porat, far from the national consensus or from influence on public discourse.

It is simply not true that the repercussions of a breakdown in a bad peace process would be unimaginably worse than its continuation. Lessons for today’s peace negotiators from the past.

In our day, to be a ‘Doresh Yerushalayim’, a seeker of Jerusalem, involves the demand of a surety, the demand of title, the staking of a political, national and exclusive claim to the city.