• Advertise here

Blog Awards

  • Sablogpolitics

  • Sablogpolitics

  • Sablogrunnerupgroup

  • Sablogrunneruppost

  • JIB


« Democracy of Hypocrisy denies Dalai Lama entrance visa | Main | Jewish Board confronts Masuku threats against Jewish community »

March 24, 2009



After what the Jews have been through do those who call for the end of Israel (the euphemistically called 'One State solution' ala Rwanda really think the proudest Jews in the world- the Israeli Jews- will lay themselves open to the whims of the Arabs who have showed them so much hate and tried to destroy them, and live or die on Arab whims.
The whole point of Israel is so we didn't have to lie at the feet of those who hate us, begging and praying for mercy, after so many years of persecution because we had no land of our own.

and others who call for Israel's replacement by a 'unitary Palestine' know full well that this would lead to a second Holocaust of Israel's five million Jews.

How well did the 'unitary state ' work in Lebanon where hundreds of thousands of Christian Lebanese were massacred by the PLO and Syrians and went from being a majority in 1975 to a minority today? How well did the Animist and Christian Nilotic Blacks in Darfur and Southern Sudan fare in Sudan where millions have been massacred, or the Kurds in Iraq where 800 000 were butchered by Saddam Hussein?We all know how minorities fare in Arab countries and what makes anyone think the Jews in your suggested 'unitary Palestine' would fare any better, given the amount of hate in Palestinian society for Israel's Jews.

Why out of a massive landmass under Arab control , and a number of Arab states (today they number 22) it is regarded as such an injustice that a number of Arabs should be a minority in a Jewish State, where they enjoy full civil and political rights.
Jewish statelessness had led to the slaughter of 6 million Jews during the holocaust.

Bennet and her ilk falsely refers to the nation-state as an anachronism, conveniently ignoring currents events around the world and recent history.
Those insulated academics who refer to the nation-state as an anachronism are ignoring the message of recent history, which has seen the birth (or rebirth) of a plethora of nation-sates, from the ruins of enforced multi-national artificial entities : Hence in the last 18 years we have seen the independence of nation-states including the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Eritrea and East Timor.

The meaning of Israel is clear. The Jew has experienced too much death, and a portion of the Jewish people decided that they would die quietly no more (especially after Hitler's Holocaust). So it is: and no argument, no clever political talk, no logic and no parading of right and wrong can change this fact.The Jews returned to Israel because it was their ancient land. From 1810 onwards, Jews in the Land of Israel have been murdered by Arabs. The pious Jews of Safed, who would raise no hand in their defense, were robbed and murdered and burned out again and again by Arabs - as where the Jews in Jerusalem and Tiberias. Bedouin Arabs passed through Land of Israel at will-and robbed and killed Jews for profit. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Arab feudal lords in the Land of Israel organized pogroms precisely as the Tsar had organized pogroms.

In 1920 Jews where massacred by Arabs in Jerusalem, in 1921 in Jaffa and in 1929 in Hebron. Thousands of Jews where murdered in 1936 to 1939 in the Nazi inspired Arab Revolt. Since 1948 Arabs have launched wars against Israel to try to drive Jews into the sea and since Arafat launched the latest war in 2000, after rejecting a peace deal, thousands of Jewish men women and children have died in Israel by bomb, bullet and knife. Jews will never again be put into a position where they can be subjected to another Holocaust (particularly in the ancient Jewish homeland).

We know that a 'one state solution' would lead to Rwanda style massacres of Jews- i.e a second holocaust.
I condemmn with total contempt malicious assertion that as a nation-state Israel is an anachronism and an embarrasment towards "progressive"' diapora Jews.
People like Judt canot expect a whole country to dissapear and it's people subjugated, exiled or massacred just to spare them embarassment in the social circles in which they move.
And why should Israel be the first nation-state to be dismantled to suit the multi-cultural utopian fantatsies of leftwing idologues like Judt. Why shouldn't Judt's 'binational' experiment be tried elswhere like India and Pakistan, Irana nd Iraq and Germany and France.
Indeed one could ask if these leftwing ideologue fanatics also wish to force the 15 former member states of the Soviet Union back together, or Yugoslavia, and why they did not oppose the indepedence of East Timor.
He points out that the dissapearance of Israel and the subjugation of her Jews to Arab rule would lead to slaughter.
Alan Dershowita makes the point: "He quotes as making this powerful point:
'If the day were ever to come when the Jews of Israel lost the power to defend themselves and had to submit to the rule of their neighbours, the outcome would not be "pluralism" but slaughter...One must hate Israel very much indeeed to prefer such an outcome to the reality of the liberal democracy that exists in Israel today"

Steve and Mike, tell me you have published the most extreme position one can get on the conflict.
Tell me would you ever publish an article by a Kahanist calling for the expulsion of all Arabs from Greater Israel?
I am not suggesting that myself but juist wondering if you are guilty of double standards in your willingness to accomodate the extreme left.


A few more points.
Steve, you said a few months ago on IAS that you would never entertain discussion with anyone, who supported a Greater Israel and was against handing over Yehuda-Shomron to the Arabs.
But you are happy to accomodate someone who supports a greater Palestine, and this is what it would be after several million Arabs infested Israel coming in under the so-called Right of Return (I will NOT apologize for using the word infested-I am using it quite deliberately).

It would be an Arab majority state called 'Palestine' in which the Jews would wait huddled in their ghettos to be massacred.
Now there is a double standard here, Mike and Steve, you will accomodate anyone no matter how extreme there position is against Israel, but you will not accomodate anyone on the right of the political spectrum.
i.e I dont see you accomodating a Kahanist in a guest blog explaining why the solution should be a Greater Israel and transfer of Arabs out of Greater Israel.
You were quite happy to accomodate Doron Isaacs in demonizing Israel and the even more extreme Jonathan Berger who wrote on this blog that Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians is NOT a war crime or a crime against humanity.

Interesting that even the most leftwing ISRAELI Jews do not support the 'one state' Rwanda solution.
Only Jews who support it are those living outside of Israel.
I would challenge them to say if they would be willing to move, as Jews, to this unitary Palestine, but then the Law of Return for Jews would have scrapped, and only Arabs would be able to enter under the so-called 'Right of Return".


By the way I wonder why when leftwing Jews curse Israel, they always mention they are a descendant of a holocaust survivor.
All the more reason that is so reprehensible of them to support a Final Solution that would lead to a second holocaust.

Religous Fundamentalist 1

Hi Steve and Mike

In the spirit of open-minded debate, I would like you to publish my letter. It supports the notion that the world is controlled by reptilian humanoids and is their control through the mechanism of the Illuminatti, a subsect of Freemasonry (a front company of International Zionism).

Would you mind if I send it to the gmail address? Would you prepared to publish it or will you fascist zionist censors crush my right to speak freely?


I must admit, RF1's previous comment was the first time that I have ever laughed out aloud while on the Supernatural blog


Serious questions for one state solution advocates…

• In a 1 State Solution will all illegal dwellings built by Arabs in East Jerusalem will be recognized as permanent legal homes?
• Would this also mean that all Israeli settlements over the green line be recognized as legal Jewish communities?
• Why are the Palestinians insistent on removing settlements if a 1 state solution will make communities like Ofra and the adjacent Palestinian village of Turmrsaya, equal in all aspects?

• Will Hezbollah stop claiming parts of Northern Israel/Palestine If a 1 state for all its citizens is declared?

• Would Jews be allowed to freely visit the Temple mount?


Damn Hillel beat me to it.

I swear I was planning to write the same thing, the whole David Icke reptilian Illuminati Zionist conspiracy guff.

But how about this, I had a revelation the other week, during a dream inspired I know by God, that I am the reincarnation of the prophet Daniel. Really I am 'cause I say so. So can you publish my revelations on your website if I send you an e-mail about my epiphany. Okay?

Mike and Steve, I suggest, since you have jumped the shark, that you invite Bonagini Masuku and Farid Esack to write up the next guest blog posts here on exactly how and according to what timetable Israel should be dismantled, and just where exactly the dastardly Zionists should be allowed to move to, if anywhere, all in the spirit of open-minded debate mind you. And then after that, you feature weekly guest blogs from names picked randomly out of the Joburg and Cape Town telephone directories, and ask these random people from all walks of life, most of whom of course wouldn't be expected to know Golda Meir or David Ben Gurion from the Easter Bunny, what their opinions are on you know the Middle-East, all in the spirit of open-mindedness. I look forward to all this very avidly.


RF1, send us your letter in its entirety and perhaps we will also use it for crossing swords. Incidentally, one of my claims to fame is that David Icke has linked to us on one of his forums. We saw lots of referrals coming through in our site usage statistics. He wasn't very kind to us. Perhaps your letter will cause him to reconsider?

The one-state solution is gaining popularity around the world today. It is not legitimate but it is relevant and may even transpire if enough Israelis forget about why Israel was created in the first place.

Ruth Gavisson wrote an excellent essay on this notion - explaining why we need to justify our existence even though other nations aren't asked to do the same. Perhaps I will write a review of her essay.

Her essay is part of a volume of essays focusing on the very topic. The volume was put together by Yoram Hazony.


Steve drones:
"The one-state solution is gaining popularity around the world today. It is not legitimate but it is relevant and may even transpire .."

It is gaining popularity Steve, because Jew-hatred is increasing in its hysterical pitch and depth, and many people would like to see the Jews driven into the sea. The one-state final solution is a way for them to prettify and legitimise their Jew-hate frenzy. It gives cover to their Jew-hatred. Gettit? no of course you don't. What do you think Durban 2 is going to be about after all?

Steve I'm jealous now that you will publish RF's letter on the reptilian aliens, but my far more relevant one, that I am the reincarnation of the prophet Daniel you do not consider. I'm going to sulk now...

Yes the destruction of Israel and even a second Holocaust may indeed transpire Steve. Heartening to see you are so phlegmatic on it.


"The one-state solution is gaining popularity around the world today. It is not legitimate but it is relevant and may even transpire .."

"The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is gaining popularity around the world today. It is not legitimate but it is relevant and may even transpire that it be included as factual history in school syllabi around the world."


Steve and Mike now belive that calling for a one state Rwanda solution is an accpeptable view.

They are becoming so politically correct that they are sliding into post-Zionism.
Perhaps next you can host some far-left maniac to explain why killing of Israeli children is actually an act of liberation, as so many of the left say.


"Holocaust Denial and the views of David Irving is gaining popularity around the world today. It is not legitimate but it is relevant and may even transpire that it be included as factual history in school syllabi around the world."



The Prophet Daniel

And it transpired that on the twelth day of the month of Adar in the year of 5769, a man of the tribe of Jehova, born in the valley of HaShunit Ma'ayei Lvanim in the time of Milchamat Hatasha, and having returned to the Holy Land of his forefathers, and having no prior visitations of the heavenly host, after a light dinner of tuna sandwich and a beerut schora proceeded to have a light shlof. However not able to sleep he felt a presence around him, it was a Malach of great power and wisdom, and spoke with the man who had returned to the land of his forefathers, telling him of his mission and who he truly was. He was told he was the man who had been HaNavi Daniel, he who had slept unharmed with lions, he who received the wisdom of understanding the dreams of kings.

And now he understood his mission once again, to speak to the people of Y'Isra'el once again, as he did in times past, to prophecy the meanings of their dreams and visions, to tell them what Hamas and Hezbollah really meant when they said all the Jews must die everywhere. For the Ye'hudim in both Ha'Aretz Y'Isra'el and the Diaspora did not understand what the meanings of these words were, only he who has visions of the angels, who knows the secret meanings of the sefer Zohar, can understand the meaning of the luach Hamas:

"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Muslim Hadith).

Wait, have patience my people for I will tell you what it means. Without my second sight, you cannot understand its hidden esoteric meanings. It means not what it says, it means if HaYe'hudim make peace with the trees and stones, and cease their Zionist war on nature, the lamb of Israel shall indeed lie with the lion of Hamas, and all will be well and good. So plant a tree, vote for Greenpeace and peace shall finally reign on the land of milk and honey and brother shall cease to make war on brother.

So endeth the sermon of Daniel the Prophet previously known as Lawrence, reborn again to lead his people to redemption and liberation.

With apologies to the Blacklisted Dictator.

Ha you all thought that was Posner writing didn't you? Fooled you.

PS I do not want to hear from some smart-aleck who studies too much Tanach and Talmud that Daniel is not considered a prophet/navi by the rabbinate because he never spoke directly to HaShem, and spoke only for future generations not his own. I am a prophet because I say so, and you are the future generations I now speak to! So I speak now for the present generation, hence I am now a prophet. So there!

The Blacklisted Dictator

Gary, Lawrence and RFI,

If one believes that a single state is historically inevitable does it mean that..

(1) one necessarily thinks it is a good idea?
(2) one shouldn't discuss it, even if such a discussion reveals fundamental flaws in the idea?
(3) one is automatically obliged to discuss other ideas (reptilian humanoids etc) to ensure some sort of fair play?

And if a single state could exist in a world where there was a real sustainable peace between Israel/Jews and her present enemies in the Middle East and throughout the rest of the world, would it inevitably be a bad idea?

I am not, as the world stands and before The Cape Messiah lives anointed 24/7 in Gaza with Hamasites, advocating a single state solution.

And, just for the record, I am not adverse to a discussion about reptilian humanoids. I have seen some great footage on You Tube of Dick Cheney in such a guise, so it is quite possible that RF1 might also be an alien.

Religious Fundamentalist 1

Steve, I realised that would be your argument before I posted my comment.

Hysteria (ala the Prophet Daniel and the Prophet _____ previously known as Gary) aside, the fact that a belief is commonly held hardly gives it legitimacy. (See for instance that reptilian humanoid Galileo, Copernicus ...)

That the argument for a one state solution needs to combatted is probably true, but it needs to be attacked on it's legitimacy, not given a hearing as a "solution" if only those damn zionists would lighten up.


I think discussions about the one state solution have increased due to despondency over the two state solution rather than it being a good idea.


Benjamin: "I think discussions about the one state solution have increased due to despondency over the two state solution rather than it being a good idea".

It is not Israel's fault that the 2 state solution isnt being realized and the one state solution is basically saying the Arabs should have all of Israel to themselves.


So talking about a 1 state solution is actually telling the Arabs they dont have to compromise, they just have to keep resisting a peace settlement and they will get all of Israel to themselves.
i.e If a settlement is not reached the Israelis have everything to lose and the Palestinians nothing to lose.
Is that justice?


And what public holidays would this Fantastisk Wunder-état celebrate I wonder?

Pesach Benson


You intelligently and articulately touch on issues Israelis and Palestinians are now grappling with. I've blogged about the one-state solution in the past. Here are six reasons why the one-state solution won't work.

1) The Jewish people deserve to live in a Jewish state. This isn't something Jews have to apologize for. Yes, this is very much about preserving the Jewish character of the Jewish state.

2) A one-state solution negates Palestinian national aspirations.

3) Jews and Arabs don't share the language, history, religion, culture, or values required to make a bi-national effort work.

4) The Arabs have no history of successful multi-ethnic states. Start with modern Lebanese and Iraqi history.

5) The South African model doesn't apply. Among the reasons why: Jews and Arabs don't have the same economic interdependence of South African blacks and whites.

6) In any event, there's no unified Palestinian leadership for Israel to deal with, qualified to make heart-wrenching concessions, sell it to Palestinians (and the Arab world) and make it stick.

I dare say the Hamas-Fatah divide points to a three state solution.



I am glad that people have been playing the argument, not the women. That said, I am offended that you request an intelligent debate after writing a post of unintelligent emotional dribble.

Your post was not a realistic suggestion for peace. It was amost a song by John Lennon. I'm surprised you didn;t end it with "can't we all just get along".

If you want to suggest a one state solution and not have people accusing you of calling for Israel's destruction, then you have to address the reasons why people make such accusations. The argument of "I'm an orthodox decendent of a holocaust survivor and so I love fluffy bunnies and Israel too" does not address the myriad of reasons, many of which have been mentioned above, why a one state solution will lead to dead Jews, expelled Jews, persecuted Jews and a Jew-free Jerusalem.

So if you want intelligent debate then answer these questions and we can talk:
1) When the Jews are in the minority what will protect them. You may not suggest Arab promises because they have never kept any. Likewise, the UN is not a valid answer, see Dafur, Bosnia, Zimbabwe etc.

2) The arabs still openly call for Israel's destruction, see Hamas' democratic victories. How will giving them control of our police, defence forece and government gel with this ideology.

3) Pre-1967 Jews were not allowed at the kotel, today anyone is. Today the Moslems control the temple mount, Jews may go there but are not allowed to pray. They have guards that watch for people who might be praying.
What indication do we have that jews will have access to all of Israel in a one state solution.

Thse are just a few questions but if you would answer them it would go a long way to us not considering you either a self hating Jew of so obscenely ignorant niave that this discussion is a waste of time.

Empress Trudy

Any fool knows that the 'one state' solution is merely a transitional phase between Israel and Jewish extinction. That's more or less the point of it.


Why are the one state solution advocates not answering?


Shaun, they never answer when you actually lay out the facts and ask hard questions.
Trust me I've experienced it many times.


The one state solution remains a far out theoretical, at least for now.

The latest incarnation of the two state solution (via a NY times article):

Bipartisan Statement on U.S. Middle East Peacemaking

" My understanding is their thinking coincides in significant degree with that of both George Mitchell, Obama’s Middle East envoy, and Gen. James Jones, Obama’s national security adviser who worked on security issues with Israelis and Palestinians in the last year of the Bush administration, an often frustrating experience.

This overlap gives the report particular significance."

Makes it worth a read, if only to understand what the US administration is thinking

Religious Fundamentalist 1


If you think that the US administration is actually still thinking, then you probably haven't opened a newspaper since Obama's election day.


I tried to warn that Obama's victory would lead to the destruction of Israel and victory for world terror, but 78% of American Jews put their liberalism before the survival of fellow Jews and millions of other people in the West.


Mike: in your original post, you mentioned “imposing a one-state solution”. If the one-state solution were ever to be adopted, I don't think it would be imposed on people against their will. The 2-state solution is slowly becoming untenable as settlements continue to grow (with government approval and aid), undermining the very basis for a two-state solution. Neither the West Bank nor the Gaza Strip can be considered a viable national territory. A reversal of the settlement policy seems almost impossible at this stage, so a realistic Palestinian state is really not likely. As the Palestinians increasingly feel that they are being forced into Bantustans, it seems that this approach will gain more support – from both sides who want the bloodshed to end.


Green Mamba asked what public holidays would this Fantastisk Wunder-état celebrate. Right now, all religious holidays (Jewish, Muslim and Christian) are respected, is it not? Why would this be a problem in a single state?


Pesach Benson spoke about preserving the Jewish character of the Jewish state. I do not want to get into a discussion about what exactly constitutes a Jew and what does not.
However, we do need to ask where this "Jewish character" ends. There are about 400 000 geographically-dispersed settlers in the West Bank and Jerusalem alone. No one can exactly delineate where the Jewish character actually is in relation to the land. Israel itself has no official borders. Since portions of the Jewish population are interspersed into the Palestinian territories, this concept of attributing a religious character to that land is questionable.

Regarding the negation of Palestinian national aspirations: Are their aspirations really a democratic secular state based on territorial sovereignty? Many Palestinians are so disillusioned with their national leadership that they might welcome the idea of its demise, provided equal rights as citizens of a single state were on offer to them.

Pesach also stated: 3) Jews and Arabs don't share the language, history, religion, culture, or values required to make a bi-national effort work.
People also said that about South Africa, Pesach.


Religious Fundamentalist 2 asked When the Jews are in the minority what will protect them. Did we need a whites- only police-force, government and army to protect whites in South Africa?
3) Pre-1967 Jews were not allowed at the kotel, today anyone is. Today the Moslems control the temple mount, Jews may go there but are not allowed to pray. They have guards that watch for people who might be praying.
What indication do we have that jews will have access to all of Israel in a one state solution.

In one democratic state, everyone has access to all land. Is there any part of South Africa where one is legally barred from entering? Obviously, there are areas where you would think twice about entering due to crime.


shaun said
• In a 1 State Solution will all illegal dwellings built by Arabs in East Jerusalem will be recognized as permanent legal homes? - Yes

• Would this also mean that all Israeli settlements over the green line be recognized as legal Jewish communities? – Yes

There would be no dispute about the Green line, Shaun!

• Why are the Palestinians insistent on removing settlements if a 1 state solution will make communities like Ofra and the adjacent Palestinian village of Turmrsaya, equal in all aspects?
They are only insistent on removing settlements as the 2 state solution is touted as THE only means of resolution

• Would Jews be allowed to freely visit the Temple mount? Yes,they should if all muslims were to be allowed to pray at al-aksa mosque



You've simply stated the obvious. You've made a wish list which has no connection to reality whatsoever. Saying that we will all have freedom of movement in a democratic state does not answer the allegations that there is no evidence, either from past actions not current rhetoric and even policy, that this will happen.

You also have a fundamental misunderstanding of the differences between SA and Israel. SA was a racist state, oppressing the local population for no reason at all. The capacity for forgiveness of this people is what prevented bloodshed. Israel is not this. If the Palestinians are oppressed it is only military minimums required to protect Israeli citizens for Arab violence. When SA stopped oppressing the whites the only thing left was the history and consequences thereof. If Israel however were to remove military activities (for example by entering into a single state) then what is left is still the Arabs clearly stated goal of killing Jews. Your comparisons therefor are childish at best.

I urge you to let your capacity for seeing logic overide your desire to appease the non Jewish world.


"One state solution" is ab obvious oxymoron. There is absolutely no way of this coming about - neither through democratic processes nor by some kind of imposed decree (hard to imagine who would impose it). Neither Jews nor Arabs would have anything to do with it. So why bother debating it? I suspect Ruth knows this. So then, surely, if you want to trumpet liberal sentiments (some of which I share) then for goodness' sake find a vehicle for doing so that is rational. Otherwise at best you could be accused of ignorance and at worst of wilful antagonism.

But if I hear another remark like "People said that about South Africa too, Pesach" I think I may scream. Not only does this trounce logic, but gives liberal thought in general a bad name through sheer lack of insight.


Hi Ruth

Thank you for you responses.

I would greatly appreciate your input in my follow up.
• We both agree that Jews should be given the freedom to Pray at the temple mount as you stated, “In a democratic state, everyone has access to all land.”
With whom would this significantly religious agreement be negotiated? Both the Wakf and Raid Salach, the most learned and revered Muslim leaders in Israel both agree that Jews have no right to worship on the temple mount and that the entire area should remain under Islamic sovereignty.
How can a peaceful person expect to impose a religious concession on faithful Muslims?

• From the Koran, to the later Caliphs and during the conquest of Saladin and the crusades, There is no precedence for a sovereign Arab or Muslim state on the western side of the Jordan river. Furthermore, Jerusalem has never been a significant capital of any Islamic or Arab union. Are you aware of these facts?

• Finally, a similar question posed by other bogglers is still unanswered.
From the Balkans to Lebanon to Iraq, a forced multinational state with Muslim “cooperation” has lead to a slaughter of enormous proportion.
By imposing a one state solution how do you propose avoiding a similar occurrence?
I greatly appreciate you constant reference to South Africa. But you also admit that certain areas in SA have become no-go areas. The recent xenophobic attacks, the SA government’s support of human rights violators and the everyday murder and rape of innocent victims is very quickly turning your “rainbow nation” dream into a nightmare.

I eagerly anticipate you response


All people who support the 'one state solution' know that this will mean an Arab dominated state called 'Palestine' replacing Israel.
They know it will lead to massive slaughter of Jews.
They support a one state solution because they want this to happen.


ruth, do you also support a 'One China' polcy?
i.e China's opressive rule of Tibet, and according to their wishes Taiwan?


Re: your response to Pesah's 3rd point:

Religion is by far the biggest factor. In Israel it is an extremely divisive factor. In SA it was one of the most powerful uniting factors. Why do you say in SA we also had different religions? It's overwhelmingly Christian. You definitely need to reconsider your views on the role played by religion as both a unifying and dividing factor.

Just because certain things worked in SA does not mean you can export the solution. There are many critical differences.

Blacks in SA never threatened to throw the whites into the sea. Targetting white civilians was never an objective of the ANC struggle. They targetted government, police, army and infrastructure. Whites were killed, but often when it happened ANC leaders actually apologised and disciplined the offenders. See the Pretoria bombing in the early 80s.

Blacks never cited religious texts (which cannot ever be changed) in order to justify the targeting of whites. The Hamas charter does this.

The ANC Freedom charter called immediately for a state in which all will be equal. Various Palestinian charters call for total victory and what amounts to the annihilation of the Jews.

The separation is also key. The separation in SA was borne of a racist policy of segregation. The separation in Israel was born in international law. It was created by a lawful UN resolution. It was then extended during a war provoked by the Arabs who refused to abide by the UN partition plan - a people who weren't calling for equal rights like the ANC were at the same time, they were calling for the removal of a Jewish presence in the land.

Why not call for a single state solution with Jordan and Palestinians? (I.e. Jordan + West Bank...I think the Palestinians could benefit from their institutions and they have the important common denominator of Islam.


More on the differences between South Africa and Israel/Palestinians in this older post written by Mike entitled Seeking Mandela


Gary many people who support the one state final solution do want a mass slaughter of Jews, not all though, some like Ruth just live in a parallel universe which has no bearing on the real world. What matters to them, and Ruth typifies this, is the world of make believe and wishful thinking, not the facts on the ground, facts they avoid at all costs. As somebody pointed out here, she may as well start singing Lennon's Imagine. Of course the fact that Ruth's position here is the same as Jew-haters the world over is lost on her, as are its implications.

Shaun Ruth has no knowledge whatsoever of Arab Muslim and Muslim culture, history, religous dogma, Islamic jurisprudence, its history of oppression and slaughter of Jewry and other infidels, its history of violent internal schisms that is ongoing, the Muslim oppression and slaughter of their fellow Muslims and "heretical" Muslims and the like - that much is obvious. And she doesn't want to know, it gets in the way of her fantasies of the one state solution. So she will just ignore what you and others point out since the harsh facts of history will confuse and disorient her, it gets in the way of her holy grail lalaland fantasy which she will just continue to repeat ad nauseum. Facts be damned. Facts interfere with her world of make believe, so all the worse for the facts. Cognitive dissonance.

Ruth in the real Middle-East, the one you don't hear about on BBC and CNN, the slaughter and oppression of Arab Muslims by other Arab Muslims is routine, their harsh oppression of women and "heretics" and unbelievers (like Christians and other infidels) is pervasive. If Muslims treat one another with such disdain and harshness, if they regard the lives of their fellow believers so cheaply, and their own women are constant victims of violence and repression, why would the Jew be so much better off when the discourse on Jewry in the Arab Muslim world is so poisonous, irrational and Nazi-like in its hate and this irrational murderous hatred is inextricably tied to Islam itself? Not that you will address nor even acknowledge all this, anymore than you addressed the pertinent facts that others mention here and you just keep on ignoring these uncomfortable facts (because they destroy your dream-world fantasies) and keep on repeating your reality-free prescription for Middle-East peace.

Ruth I have the words of a corny Bucks Fizz song (those of you under 35 won't remember...thankfully that cheezy pop band Bucks Fizz) running through my mind, every time I read your uh comments..

(and thanks to the miracle of the net, found the lyrics quickly enough, here they are...)

Stars in your eyes, Little one, Where do you go to dream, To a place, We all know, The land of make believe

Run for the sun, Little one, You're an outlaw once again, Time to change, Superman, Will be with us while he can, In the land of make believe

Your world is turning, From night to day, Your dream is burning far, far away

Into the blue, You and I, To the circus in the sky, Captain Kids, On the sand, With the treasure close at hand, In the land of make believe In the land of make believe

Run for the sun, Little one, You're an outlaw once again, Time to change, Superman, Will be with us while he can, In the land of make believe


Firstly thank you (and Steve) for posting your views.

South Africa offers a caution of the dangers of pessimism. In the 1980's you would have been labeled a madman if you had ever suggested that in a decade we would have a black president and a largely peaceful country. There are however some critical differences:

1. There never was any other option in South Africa, it was a two state solution that was political untenable. It is the opposite between Palestinians and Israeli's. There is no major political, movement on either side, who embrace this model. The one state solution, for it's first step, requires the very difficult task of changing the whole political landscape. Given the recent elections (on both sides) that seems near impossible.

2. The Nats didn't give up power because they suddenly realized the injustice of Apartheid, they gave it up because the system was collapsing. It was negotiation or civil war (and they gave that serious consideration). In short they didn't have a choice.

3. Even if 1,2 (and all Steve's points) were false, neither side has a Mandela, or even a De Klerk, to realize it.

The Blacklisted Dictator

If you are a prophet (as you say you are), you must come to Africa and prove it. Any shmuck can be a prophet in Israel.
I challenge you to go and live in Cape Town and see whether you can get a bigger following than The Cape Messiah. If you want to quote The Dalai Lama to get support from Jewish Buddhists then it is kool.
You can use any method that you like to get a following. You must also have an internet petition and you must get judges and nobel prize winners to sign it.
I will adjudicate fairly. There are no appeals to higher authorities.
But please don't go to game reserves and lie down with lions unless you have taken adequate travel insurance.

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.