U.S. got between Israel and Arafat......

[XXXManager]

I explained to you why you are wrong, according to your own quotes. That has nothing to do with what I believe or not believe.
As to the PLO - PLO was not formed in Israel. Therefore it is international and qualifies to be "international" and therefore - by your quote - a group.
If it is not in some list of someone - and I wish if possible to see which list you refer to - it is because they have some hidden (or otherwise) agenda.

Secondly - Several palestinian terrorist organizations located in Israel - including Hizballah, Hamas, Izadin el kasam and others - are in the "list" of the US as terrorist organizations even before the 9/11. That is also a fact.
Check out the list at the link you yourself brought:
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2000/2450.htm
So the argument you have brought forward seems strange and unclear to me and basically invalid.

As to the definition you bring forward that may call "Israel" (I guess you mean the Israeli army (or IDF)) terrorist organization...
When I was 15 years old, I was with a group of friends who littered the classroom floor with stuff before a class and caused the class to start late... Our teacher called us terrorists. Since then I learned not to take the words of a madman too seriously. If someone can not see the difference between IDF and a terrorist organization, I for one would not bother explaining to them the difference unless I knew them and cared about them personally.
What some palestinians call or categorize IDF is not my concern.

"premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant/*/ targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience. "

That would qualify also the actions of the UN in the balkans, the actions of the US in.. well... everywhere, the actions of Russia in... well... everywhere on their side of the globe, china etc... Hell even a rock concert - as terror according to this definition
I see this as a loose and unclear definition of the term terrorism but it will do for now...

As to IDF specifically
1. it is foremost tactically driven rather than politically driven.
2. etrated against combatant rather than noncombatant

As to you specifically, I do not know what your views are, so I do not refer to you specifically but only what you say. I am quite sure you are not the enemy though.

you claim one needs to understand both sides.. and that you do. I do not want to sound well.. harsh.. but what makes you think you understand the sides? I dont things the sides understand themselves...

Claiming that someone understand things and he has therefore the key to solve problems well... that is a bit far fetched..

"Whether we like it or not, Arafat was elected to represent the Palestinian Authority... The PA is designated to represent the Palestinian people in their negotiations with Israel.... If Arafat is taken out by anyone except himself or the Palestinian people you will see violence in Israel and the Middle East like never before...."
Elected? What made him elected? Do you know who was the other candidates in the PA elections? Do you know it was only one person? Do you know no one really knew that person? Do you call that elections? Like Saddam is elected in Iraq? LOL. they both won remarkably their "democratic" elections. 90-99% of the votes.
Do you also know when were the elections? about what? 10 years ago? oh.. more? right..
The PA is representing the Palestinian people? That is a joke. and you would understand the joke if you knew enough about both the Palestinians and their "leadership" (imho).
"If Arafat is taken out by anyone except himself or the Palestinian people you will see violence in Israel and the Middle East like never before...." yeye - We have heard threatening prophecies like that before.
Btw - where was that logic before taking out the leader of Iraq?
and the leadership of Afghanistan?
Do you think that Arabs in the middle east will suddenly stop loving Israel as they do now?
When you have people dying every day you stop caring so much about cynical politics and start thinking about why a "leader" who supports terrorism and stopped representing his own people for so long still being feathered by counties like the US and EU and start thinking why such an obstacle for a possible peace arrangement is not removed for the benefit of all sides.
As for the roaring "violence in the middle east".. I guess you consider your own country's action in the Middle East love making?
Remember - I am not the enemy here either.
I only call things as I see them as well.

Facts are (my facts of course - others may disagree) -
Most Palestinian groups are terrorist. Even if they have "nice" political fronts.
Chances are - if you negotiate a peace treaty with a terrorist or terrorist organization you will fail.
If you are in a position where you face a terrorist - shortest route around it is not to wait for him to remove himself (as you saw in Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea, Cuba, ....) but to remove him.
Claiming that your enemy calls you a terrorist and therefore your claim that he is a terrorist is invalid - requires you to be very unconfident person for it to stick. ("you" doesn't mean anyone specific)
When you have cancer, you don't have to worry about getting cancer (but about curing it). Same for violence. (now add "middle east violence to that fact).
Poor people don't make their leader legitimate. The whole issue if "Palestinians are miserable" and therefore Arafat is a legitimate person is based on ill logic.