So the San Francisco Chronicle has an article titled "Palestinians skeptical about Mideast peace plan as long as Israeli checkpoints disrupt daily life". That really reads more like an description of the article than it's title. And this article just makes me want to vomit.
In pain after chemotherapy, Hassan Hamai gripped the armrests of a wheelchair as medics pushed him over an earthen rampart at an Israeli military checkpoint, one of dozens of barriers crisscrossing the West Bank.
They don't mention that Israel doesn't allow ambulances through their checkpoints because the Palestinians were using them to smuggle explosives. So whose fault is this again?
Under the peace plan, Israel must ease restrictions on Palestinian movement in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, in tandem with the dismantling of militant groups by Palestinian security forces.
However, Israel is reluctant to remove the checkpoints until Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas acts against the militants. Abbas is trying to negotiate with the armed groups to halt attacks, rather than disarm them.
Not the differences. The PA is required to "dismantle" militant groups like Hamas. All they are attempting to do is convince them not to attack Israel. And they've failed at that so far. Until Hamas can be dismantled they will continue to attack Israel. Either the PA accomplishes that or someone else will have to. If Hamas remains free to attack Israel, I don't see how there can ever be peace.
There is paragraph after paragraph condemning the checkpoints.
Palestinians and Israeli peace activists say the checkpoints have been ineffective in stopping Palestinian militants, noting that bombers and gunmen, who have killed hundreds of Israelis in the past 33 months, have found alternate routes into Israel.
So they should remove them? And make it easier for Hamas to slaughter women and children in busses and markets? Of course they found alternate routes (including ambulances and posing as pregnant women). Their main ones were blocked.