The positions presented on the site reflect an extreme ideology, and a profound examination elicits suspicion that its goal is not to help change world views toward Israel, but to sway public opinion in Israel to the right.

   For example: the site presents the settlements and the West Bank as assets that Israel must under no circumstances relinquish, and brings selective quotes to corroborate this worldview. For example, former US president Lyndon Johnson is quoted as having said (sometime in the 1960s) "an immediate return to the situation as it was on June 4... is not a prescription for peace, but for renewed hostilities." In contrast, prominent and more relevant presidents such as Clinton, Bush and Obama, who supported and support the idea of two states, are not mentioned.

   "Holding on to Judea and Samaria can prevent the fate of the Gaza periphery communities from happening again," the site states, and adds that the areas of Judea and Samaria are meant to block a possible infiltration into Israel and to give it time to call up reservists. The settlements are described as "renewing ancient Jewish settlement" and a possible evacuation of them as "a violation of human rights."

   The site continues with unbridled lashing out against the entire Arab world, both moderate and extreme, and describes the Middle East as "the most violent and treacherous neighborhood in the world," and the Palestinian leadership, with which Prime Minister Netanyahu wishes to hold peace talks, as "calling for the destruction of the Jewish state and a war of jihad." Further distortions and sweeping descriptions against the Arab and Muslim world abound, along with descriptions usually used by speakers for the extreme right wing.

   But no less interesting than for what it contains--is what the site omits: the authors chose to leave out many facts and terms, the most outstanding of which is the accepted solution by the majority of Israel's citizens: two states for two peoples. There is simply no mention of a worldview that advocates this solution. The Arab initiative, and the willingness of Arab states to sign a peace agreement with Israel are also not worthy of being part of PR according to the Information Ministry. The Palestinian Authority, the security cooperation, the joint battle against Hamas--they are also not on the site.

   Even more astonishing: anyone trying to learn how they should cope with questions relating to the separation fence--as anyone who has ever talked to a foreigner knows, comes up in every encounter, whether favorably or otherwise--will find no answer. The Information Ministry's site elected not to explain anything about the fence and the High Court of Justice's rulings about it.

   A government site that dictates to citizens what to think, what to say and how to view reality--belongs in benighted fascist states. Moreover, adopting these positions and the attempt to market them will only hurt Israel and its position in the world. The inaccuracies, the selective and tendentious choice of how the Israeli-Arab conflict is presented will only increase the abhorrence of Israel and its policy. Distorted information tainted by racism will do damage, and further intensify the rift between Israeli society and the Western world.