Wednesday, September 29, 2010

The Ethereal Standard: Freeze Edition

When you are a member of the anti-Zionist camp, it is pretty much expected that you need to blame Israel for everything that goes wrong and berate it no matter what is happening. Unfortunately, this often leads to problems with logic, and anti-Zionists often end up contradicting themselves or twisting themselves into knots. We saw a prime example of this with the ending of the settlement freeze.

Now, on the one hand many anti-Zionists on the Huffington Post railed against the renewed construction because they believed it would sink the newly resumed peace talks. This is not a particularly controversial view, in my opinion. Here is an example:

Okay, so because Israel decided to resume settlement building, they have "rejected peace" and have doomed the region to another hundred years of fighting.

The trouble, of course, is that the settlements have been under a moratorium for the past ten months, and no progress was made and no one was claiming that Abbas was "rejecting peace" when he refused to talk for three-quarters of that time. But ah! The anti-Zionists, in the form of talkbacker here, have an answer to that too!

Do you understand now how it works? When the settlement freeze is going on, it's not really a freeze and so Israel can be blamed for the failure of peace talks. But when the "psuedo freeze" ends (and not a moment before) suddenly it is retroactively a great move by Israel and oh isn't it so horrible that it ended? Now there never will be peace.

The ethereal standard moves again. When Israel is "freezing" (even though it is more of a "slowing") that is not good enough. But when Israel is not freezing, suddenly freezing would have been good enough if only they could be convinced to do it a second time. Of course, one can presume that should there be another settlement freeze this time, it will (again) not be good enough.

The more honest of the Huffington Posters have made their position clear: All the Jews must leave before there can be peace. Too bad that is not even close to a realistic point of view, but realism has never been something that is valued among AZs, in my understanding.


  1. The anti-Zios who are against peace talks like to have both ways.

    They like to say such talks will produce nothing for the Palestinians and at the same time they condemn Israel for making it impossible for the Palestinians to participate in them.

    Just don't call them on their doubletalk.

  2. There has never been a freeze.

    That being the case, it is not possible, retroactively or any other way, for it to have been a "great move".

    It is time that there was a freeze, and that it was real.

    There is no reason for anyone to move out, just for no more construction to take place.

    Once a resolution has been arrived at, if there are Israelis who find themselves in Palestine, they should be given the choice to return to Israel or become citizens of Palestine, knowing that they cannot call on back up from the IDF.

    THAT, and not your distortion, is my view.


Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.