Actually anywhere from 20-40% of the Israeli population is against the occupation. Bunch of delusional leftists, no doubt.
She's typical of the politicized lefties of non-poli-sci and history backgrounds. They are not inculcated with and are not peer-reviewed by established "fact checking" and such implicit in those departments.
Her cant is Chomskyesque. Note the lefty obsessions, but without the "post-modern" lingo by which other lefties make their work unreadable (though she uses the term "discourse" in her first sentence, but thereupon engages in plain-language insinuations a la Chomsky.)
She's pretty slick, like Chomsky. The first paragraph is an example. She dismisses "retaliation", and by proximity implicates that it was "foreplanned" by the Israelis. This is sophistry. First, the "retaliations" weren't against the PA at first, they're against Hamas and I. Jihad, which it seems Arafat has issues with too. Second, any country has a "variety" of plans for all sorts of situations. Third, she subsumes specific "retaliations" into a "plan" against "Arafat" without analyzing the very retaliations. Fourth, the focus on Arafat is a typical lefty side step, a "decontextualization" of "voices" that might upset their mindset and mental zoo of the current crisis. In other words, they don't have to confront what Hamas thinks or Islamic Jihad thinks, and publicly expresses, to wit, killing of all jews and the destruction of Israel. Read this more as the opening of the mind of a western academic rather than an analysis of the players.
I like this sentence, "The plan includes everything that Israel has been executing lately, and more." The Chomskyesque innuendo, lack of factual connection, and glibness is quite well inculcated into this worman.