• Advertise here

Blog Awards

  • Sablogpolitics

  • Sablogpolitics

  • Sablogrunnerupgroup

  • Sablogrunneruppost

  • JIB


« More Greenhouses Destroyed | Main | Justin Blend’s Rwandan Diary - Part 2 »

May 16, 2006



I don’t really understand the anti-Zionist lobbies fixation with the settlements. In their warped logic, Jews have the right to live anywhere in the world except in the heartland of biblical Israel. Can you imagine what the outcry would be if Israel called for the dismantlement of Arab villages Israel. Their argument is based on a racist notion of an exclusively Arab Palestinian state. So much for a multicultural, binational state.


Its a "let the attack you" mentality.

The problem with the settlements is that the jews need security and special roads where they can be protected. it means that they need checkpoints etc.

So the settlements are not so much of a problem if the military leaves allowing the palestinians to attack the settlers.

Its the same with the fence/wall that they mention. they want us to remove it so that they can attack us.

Its all about us removing the barriers and security. Its never about them accepting responsibility not to attack us. If they stopped attacking us then we could live in those areas without checkpoints, walls and security.



Palestinian nationalism is about grievance not a constructive liberation movement. Consider the following news story Israel to axe six West Bank outposts before US summit

The six outposts, which house 175 settlers, are Givat Assaf, Givat Haroeh, Maale Rehavam, Mitzpe Lachish, Mitzpe Yitzhar and Ramat Gilad. They were all listed in a government report last year as deserving immediate eviction.

Givat Assaf, Maale Rehavam and Ramat Gilad are all named after people who were killed in terror attacks. These are places where "extremist" Israeli "settlers" live. But note something Israel's "extremists" build; the Palestinians' extremists destroy.

That's because one comes from a positive national movement; the other form a destructive one.



1) perhaps u could do a similar run of Israel vs Palestine. That may illustrate some further interesting trends

2) Noticeable is how the Darfur line has hardly increased as the killing has entered the mind of the world's publics. Thats exactly why the Holocaust and Rwanda happened.


The Israel trend line is much higher than the Palestine one.

Again its important not to read too much into it but going with my theory of hate being a stronger driver than care - people would be more interested in analysing Israel to find fault with it than in analysing Palestine.

But the two issues are basically the same. I.e. a search on the security barrier would typically be "Israel's apartheid wall" rather than "apartheid wall against Palestine".

The search on "Israel's apartheid wall" is really a search against Israel and Palestine .

Either way, i will be monitoring the evolution of this new offering from Google. Its still under Google labs so it will take a while to develop.


"It is hoped that South Africans would become more aware and more active and that civil society will support the government in supporting the Palestinian cause."

How do they define the Palestinian cause? If you count the doctrines of the ruling Hamas party then is it not the total erradication of Israel?

Oh, and the UN this year stated the worst humanitarian disaster to be happening in the Democractic Republic of Congo. Shows you how aware the world is even about stuff like this.

"Eastern Congo is suffering the world's worst current humanitarian crisis, with a death toll outstripping that in Sudan's strife-torn Darfur region, according to a top UN official. United Nations emergency relief coordinator Jan Egeland"



Soccerdad, great point. The disengagement from Gaza was a test for Palestinian nationalism. For the past 75 odd years it has only been as expression of a desire to destroy the Jewish State. The disengagement was an opportunity for them to transform it into an expression of a desire to build their own state. And what was the first thing they did? Destroyed the synagogues and hot houses. To adapt an old Golda Meir quote, there will only be peace when the Palestinians want their own state more than they want to destroy ours.


In his book the case for Israel deals with the fallacy that people support the Palestinians against Israel , because the Palestinians are percieved as the 'underdog': " Viewed from a global perspective , Israel is clearly the underdog. The Palestinians have the widespread support of a billion Muslims. Add to that the United Nations , , the European community, the third world, the Vatican , many influential academics , the international left , the far right and many Protestant churches. The Palestinians have far more support than the Tibetans , the Kurds , the Armenians , the Chechens and many real underdogs. Moroever the nations that are opressing these other underdog groups-China , Turkey and Russia , are far more powerful than tiny tiny Israel , with the population of approximately 5.37 million Jews and 1.26 million Arabs. Yet these other 'underdogs' recieve little support from those who champion the Palestinians"

Every pro-Palestinian lefty should know that his pro-Palestinian work means that to him/her/it genuinely opressed people like the Kurds , Tibetans , South Sudanese etc are worthless.
These people are persecuted and subjected to genocide but recieve not a fraction of the international support recieved by the Palestinians who have brought what they suffer on themselves by 86 years of relentless terror to to try to drive the Jews into the sea.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search this Blog

Contact Us

  • Email_1

Events & Lectures

  • Advertise your event or lecture here

News Feed

Comments Disclaimer

  • Comments on this site are the views and opinions of the persons who write the comments and do not reflect the views of the authors of this blog. Comments are often left unmoderated. Should you feel that you have been personally slandered in the comments, please let us know and we will remove the offensive comment.