Do we recall this 2007 incident?
Haaretz’s Chief Editor asked US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to “rape” Israel, using other unsavory terminology as well in his request for American pressure.
The comments were made during a confidential briefing by Rice on September 10...at the residence of US Ambassador Richard Jones. Some reported that [the late David] Landau's remarks were greeted with "blatant discomfort" by some of those present...Landau, who was seated next to Rice, referred to Israel as a “failed state” politically, and said that a US-imposed settlement is the only thing that can save it. He asked Rice to intervene, going so far as to say that the Israeli government wanted “to be raped” and that it would bring him much satisfaction to see this happen.
The comments were first revealed by Channel 2’s Arab-affairs expert Ehud Ya’ari, who refrained from naming who spoke them, but confirmed them with colleagues who were present and termed them “embarrassing” in his report. Former World Jewish Congress leader Isi Leibler then went public, saying it was Landau; he was joined by New York Jewish Week Editor Gary Rosenblatt, who criticized Landau in his weekly column.
Haaretz is still at it, demanding in an editorial a diplomatic rape of Israel:
Obama, support Abbas' UN resolution, no matter what Netanyahu says
Security Council members, especially the United States, must adopt this peace-advancing move and ignore the denunciations of the prime minister.
Haaretz Editorial | Apr. 9, 2016
Abbas is expected to submit to the UN Security Council this month a draft resolution reflecting international consensus that could help to jump-start the stalled peace process...It would define the settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal and an obstacle to peace and condemn continued Israeli construction in the occupied territories, as well as any action whose purpose is to change the demographic balance in the area.
...Last month Obama admitted that he did not believe an Israeli-Palestinian agreement would be reached before he leaves office in January. But that should not prevent him from preparing the ground for a future international effort to advance the two-state solution he believes in.
A veto of the latest resolution, which does not include a single clause that contradicts U.S. policy, would constitute a diplomatic and moral renunciation of the peace process. It would give Israel permission to continue its settlement policy and would heighten the Palestinians’ frustration and despair, which feed the terror attacks.