On the ending of the settlement freeze

Melanie Phillips writes:

How can the settlement freeze be the make or break issue when, during the ten months that the freeze was on, Abbas refused to negotiate at all with Israel?

How can the settlements be the make or break issue when the Palestinian response to the forced removal of the settlers from Gaza was not peace but war?

How can the disputed territories be the issue when Israel has twice now offered to give up more than 90 per cent of these territories to the Palestinians, only for them to refuse it twice point blank (and in 2000 start a campaign of terrorist murder against Israel instead?)

Why is Israel blamed for xenophobic and religious nationalism when Abbas has said repeatedly that the Palestinians will never accept Israel as a Jewish state? Why isn’t he blamed for xenophobia and religious fanaticism?

Why is Israel blamed for ignoring civil rights when the Palestinians -- along with the Observer, Roger Cohen and all who want every last settler out of the territories -- are campaigning for the ethnic cleansing of every single Jew from a future state of Palestine?

How can Salaam Fayad be ‘very serious’ about peace with Israel when he stormed out of a meeting with Israel’s deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon after Ayalon refused to approve a summary of the meeting which said ‘two states’ but did not include the words ‘two states for two peoples’ – a walk-out that tells us that even the supposedly super-moderate Fayad refuses to accept that the goal is the ‘two state solution’?

H/t Scaramouche and FFoF