Israeli Apartheid

yosi

Drowned Out said:

The way I understand it, there are many many Israeli laws that either directly, or thru interpretation, discriminate against arab israeli citizens. If there are different laws for different people, then yes, it is an apartheid system. Trying to point out the differences between Israeli apartheid and SA apartheid is inconsequential when SA does not hold a monopoly on the concept. SA is an example, not the definition. Apartheid = 'apart-ness'....Call it segregation if you'd prefer.

Israel (and I'm excluding the West Bank) does not have different laws for different people, at least not in the systematic sense that the apartheid label suggests. There may be particular laws that are discriminatory on their face or in their effect, but if that alone is your definition of "apartheid" then you've stripped the term of any real substantive meaning. By that definition France is an apartheid state because it has particular laws that discriminate against religious Muslims.

mickeyrat

lets start here, how much land has been taken in the 4 short months of this year alone? How many displaced people?

Idris

gimmesometruth27 said:

Idris said:

mickeyrat said:

gimmesometruth27 said:

this week john kerry said that israel was becoming an apartheid state.

no shit sherlock. glad you finally said SOMETHING that resembles the truth.

except that wasnt meant to be heard publically? But I agree. Say it. LOUDLY.

interesting.

(first time I'm hearing about this)

it was all over the new sites two days ago. he has hinted at it in the past, but this was the first time he said it while representing the administration.

Whaaat, that's so funny!

gimmesometruth27

mickeyrat said:

lets start here, how much land has been taken in the 4 short months of this year alone? How many displaced people?

no, we can't talk about that, otherwise we hate jewish people....

gimmesometruth27

mickeyrat said:

lets start here, how much land has been taken in the 4 short months of this year alone? How many displaced people?

but seriously, bibi keeps authorizing more settlements to be built on land that has been stolen, and then he cries when the palestinians go to the world community to ask to be recognized, since obviously the israeli government refuses to do so.

can't have it both ways, bibi.

JimmyV

yosi said:

JimmyV said:

yosi said:

Out of curiosity, are any of you aware of the differences between the situation in Israel and South African Apartheid. I'm asking seriously. When you talk about Israeli apartheid are you really just talking about the West Bank? Do you really think that Israel, within its 1967 borders, is an apartheid state?

I do. Israel does not exist solely within its 1967 borders. It today consists of all the occupied territories as well.

Except that it does not, and failing to recognize the distinction radically misrepresents the reality of the situation. And I'm not talking about legal fictions - Arab Israeli citizens simply do not live their daily lives in an apartheid state.

If Israel was only occupying the West Bank I might agree with you. They are not. They are rapidly building settlements on this land. As long as the settlements continue unabated the distinction between Israel and the settlements is not much of one at all.

yosi

JimmyV said:

yosi said:

JimmyV said:

yosi said:

Out of curiosity, are any of you aware of the differences between the situation in Israel and South African Apartheid. I'm asking seriously. When you talk about Israeli apartheid are you really just talking about the West Bank? Do you really think that Israel, within its 1967 borders, is an apartheid state?

I do. Israel does not exist solely within its 1967 borders. It today consists of all the occupied territories as well.

Except that it does not, and failing to recognize the distinction radically misrepresents the reality of the situation. And I'm not talking about legal fictions - Arab Israeli citizens simply do not live their daily lives in an apartheid state.

If Israel was only occupying the West Bank I might agree with you. They are not. They are rapidly building settlements on this land. As long as the settlements continue unabated the distinction between Israel and the settlements is not much of one at all.

I disagree. The distinction remains vital. It is certainly vital to Israeli Arabs and to Palestinians, as the former live under the same Israeli civil law as their Jewish neighbors, while the latter live under a separate military legal system.

Beyond that, I think that the distinction is important for anyone interested in actually resolving this conflict. Ignoring the distinction and labeling Israel as a whole, and not just the system in place on the West Bank, as an apartheid state is immediately and viscerally seen by Israelis as unfair, hostile, and out of touch with the reality on the ground. Their reaction is to become more insular and less caring of what the rest of the world has to say, since to them, the world isn't just criticizing a particular set of policies (the occupation) which I think most Israelis would accept as a legitimate criticism, but is labeling the entire Zionist enterprise as illegitimate. Since I think everyone would accept that any sort of acceptable resolution will require Israeli action, I don't see how it is at all helpful to alienate the moderate Israeli public with inflammatory and overly broad rhetoric rather than focusing intently on the actual problem, which is the occupation, not Israel as such.

All that said, I would agree that at some point in the future the distinction may become irrelevant. That is precisely what I'm afraid of, because at that point, unless Israel were to unilaterally withdraw from the West Bank, it would either have to cease being a democratic state or abandon its Jewish identity. I would view either of these outcomes as catastrophic. However, I don't think that point has been reached.

Byrnzie

yosi said:

I disagree. The distinction remains vital. It is certainly vital to Israeli Arabs and to Palestinians, as the former live under the same Israeli civil law as their Jewish neighbors, while the latter live under a separate military legal system.

Beyond that, I think that the distinction is important for anyone interested in actually resolving this conflict. Ignoring the distinction and labeling Israel as a whole, and not just the system in place on the West Bank, as an apartheid state is immediately and viscerally seen by Israelis as unfair, hostile, and out of touch with the reality on the ground. Their reaction is to become more insular and less caring of what the rest of the world has to say, since to them, the world isn't just criticizing a particular set of policies (the occupation) which I think most Israelis would accept as a legitimate criticism, but is labeling the entire Zionist enterprise as illegitimate. Since I think everyone would accept that any sort of acceptable resolution will require Israeli action, I don't see how it is at all helpful to alienate the moderate Israeli public with inflammatory and overly broad rhetoric rather than focusing intently on the actual problem, which is the occupation, not Israel as such.

All that said, I would agree that at some point in the future the distinction may become irrelevant. That is precisely what I'm afraid of, because at that point, unless Israel were to unilaterally withdraw from the West Bank, it would either have to cease being a democratic state or abandon its Jewish identity. I would view either of these outcomes as catastrophic. However, I don't think that point has been reached.

Interesting:


http://imeu.net/news/article003473.shtml

Why do some people consider Israel to practice apartheid?

Israel and South Africa are different in many ways. There is ample evidence, however, that Israeli policies meet the broader definition of apartheid by separating and discriminating against Palestinian Arabs, through systems that are institutionalized by laws and decrees. Some of these policies bear resemblance to South Africa during its apartheid era.

Since its inception, Israel has striven to establish and maintain a strong Jewish majority within the state, treating the ratio of Jews to non-Jews as a national security issue. Israel's Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, considers the Palestinian citizens of Israel to be a great "demographic threat" facing Israel.

Over the years, Lieberman has advocated ridding Israel of its indigenous Palestinian inhabitants. He said in a November 5th 2006 interview with the Sunday Telegraph that Palestinian citizens of Israel, who comprise roughly 20 percent of Israel's population, were a "problem" that requires "separation" from the state. He added, "We established Israel as a Jewish country. I want to provide an Israel that is a Jewish, Zionist country. It's about what kind of country we want to see in the future. Either it will be an [ethnically mixed] country like any other, or it will continue as a Jewish country."

Many Israeli policies -- from the expulsion of 750,000 Palestinian Christians and Muslims in Israel's founding years and the denial of their internationally-recognized rights to return to their homes, to the route of Israel's current "security barrier" -- are designed to preserve Jewish demographic predominance.

This has led to discriminatory policies against all major categories of Palestinians either living under or affected by Israeli rule, including Palestinian refugees in exile.


How does Israel discriminate against non-Jewish citizens?

According to the U.S. State Department's annual Human Rights Report in 2010:

"Principal human rights problems [in Israel] were institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against Arab citizens...Arab and other minority residents of the country faced official and societal discrimination in a number of areas, including employment, education, land ownership, and naturalization."

For example:

Ninety-three per cent of the land in Israel is owned either by the state or by quasi-governmental agencies (such as the Jewish National Fund) that discriminate against non-Jews. Palestinian citizens of Israel face significant legal obstacles in gaining access to this land for agriculture, residence, or commercial development.


Most non-Jewish children attend schools that are "separate and unequal" in comparison to those attended by Jewish Israeli children. Government budgets allocate far more money for the Jewish schools.


Many towns in Israel with a majority Palestinian population lack basic services and receive significantly less government funding than do majority-Jewish towns. In fact, more than seventy Palestinian villages and communities in Israel, some of which pre-date the establishment of Israel, are unrecognized by the government, receive no services, and are not even listed on official maps.


The Nationality and Entry into Israel Law prevents Palestinians from the Occupied Territories who are married to Palestinian citizens of Israel from gaining residency or citizenship status. The law forces thousands of Palestinian citizens of Israel to either leave Israel or live apart from their families. Israel's Supreme Court upheld the law when petitioned by Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, and other groups.


Many Jewish Israelis express racist attitudes toward Palestinians and other Arabs.

A January 2011 poll found that nearly half of Jewish Israelis don't want to live next door to Arabs. According to a September 2010 report, half of Jewish Israeli students don't want Arabs in their classrooms and 59% oppose equal rights for Arabs.


Israeli public school textbooks depict Palestinians and other Arabs in a derogatory fashion.


Israeli political figures openly denigrate Palestinians.

Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, former Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel and the spiritual leader of Shas, the third largest party in Israel's Knesset, said that "most people know the Arabs are snakes...and snakes should be dealt with like snakes." (Maariv, 7/12/2001).

Knesset member and former Minister Efraim Eitam called the Palestinian citizens of Israel "a ticking time bomb" and said that they "resemble a cancerous growth - We shall have to consider the ability of the Israeli democracy to continue the Arabs' participation." (Haaretz, 3/22/2002)

Byrnzie

http://electronicintifada.net/content/defining-apartheid-israels-record/4095

Defining Apartheid: Israel’s Record
Uri Strauss
The Electronic Intifada
19 September 2002

“Inside Israel, the State of Israel has maintained a policy of continually establishing new settlements for Jews only that also serve to isolate and cut off Palestinian communities. In addition, there have been massive restrictions on Palestinian construction and minimal investment in Palestinian infrastructure.” (Right to freedom of movement and residence)

“Methods have been designed to obliterate the separate Palestinian identity and replace it with that of another group - a Jewish Israeli identity. These methods have also involved the displacement/forced exile and attempts to ‘clear out’ Palestinians, or remove them from their homeland.” (Right to a nationality; right to freedom of movement and residence)

“Since the illegal annexation by Israel in 1967, all Israeli successive governments have made great efforts to reduce significantly the number of Palestinians residing in East Jerusalem, to assure Israeli sovereignty, a Jewish majority. Those efforts include restrictions on Palestinian construction in the Eastern part of the city, restrictive planning and zoning restrictions (as part of a building restriction), a rigid policy on family unification, and minimal investment in infrastructure. Furthermore, a ‘centre of life’ policy has aimed at depriving Palestinians of residency rights. Palestinians are issued annual permits. If a person has been out of Jerusalem overseas for more than 7 years for whatever reason (including their forcible deportation) or moves from Jerusalem to another part of the West Bank for any reason they lose their residency rights and social benefits (and accordingly lose their right to live in Jerusalem forever). In addition the municipality tax system has led to the dispossession and loss of Palestinian houses and businesses for those who cannot pay, with Palestinians receiving only a small percentage of their tax money back in services. Unlike the rest of the Occupied Territories, Israeli laws apply to East Jerusalem” (Right to freedom of movement and residence)


“93% of the land within Israel was designated State land and through practical policies Palestinians are denied access to this land, which is for the exclusive access and use of Jewish Israelis. Access to the remaining 7% in private ownership is shared by both Palestinians and Jewish residents of Israel, so that Palestinians as 20% of the population in Israel have access to less than 7% of the land. The result of this is confining Palestinians into restricted, deliberately under-developed enclaves with reduced access to necessary resources, services and facilities. Israel has no laws to prevent discrimination in issues of land ownership, leasing, and residency issues. Israel’s use of quasi-governmental agencies and zoning or planning laws continue to confine Palestinians and particular areas and prevent natural growth. 34% of East Jerusalem is expropriated for ‘public use’ - and most of that is used for settlement construction. In occupied East Jerusalem (66%) is not accessible for Palestinians because of Israeli zoning, planning and building restrictions (for e.g. 40% is zoned ‘Green area’)” (Right to freedom of movement and residence)


....“Since 1995, with the Oslo Interim Agreement Palestinian areas within the West Bank and Gaza have been splintered further and made discontiguous. The demographic engineering has intensified with increasing numbers of checkpoints and strategically placed settlements controlling passage of residents internally inside the West Bank, and inside Gaza. Settlements and by-pass roads have been strategically placed to isolate, encircle and cut off communities - dividing the West Bank and Gaza into tiny areas and creating ‘cantons’.” (Right to freedom of movement and residence)

“Since 1996, those seeking to move to other parts of the West Bank from Jerusalem, including to be unified with their families have had their residency rights revoked. Palestinian women born in Jerusalem are not entitled to pass on their residency rights to their children.” (Right to freedom of movement and residence)


....“Palestinians political participation inside Israel is expressly conditional upon the acceptance of the Jewish Exclusivity of the State. These preconditions are expressed explicitly in the 1992 Law of Political Party, and in particular, the amendment of Section 7A(1) of the Basic law: the Knesset, which prevents candidates from participation if their platform suggests “”expressly or by implication,… (1) denial of the existence of the State of Israel as the State of the Jewish people” (Prevention of full participation in political life)

“A basic method used by Israel to racially discriminate against Palestinians inside Israel in the allocation of resources and governmental benefits is by making these rights conditional upon performing a military service. Under law, military service is compulsory for all its citizens and permanent residents. Muslim and Christian Palestinians are exempted automatically as a group according to the discretion given by law to the Minister of Defense. Druze men are called to serve because the exemption of Palestinians did not include the Druze. This is part of Israel’s policy to divide the Palestinians into religious minorities. Orthodox Jews have to apply for individual exemption, for which there are rules that guide this process, which are also under Minister’s discretion.” (Prevention of full participation in economic life)

“Palestinians inside Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories suffer from discrimination in every aspect of resource allocation, including in the allocation of the financial budget for Palestinians inside Israel, to resources (water, electricity, municipal funding for services; etc).” (Prevention of full participation in economic life)

Idris

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJcGTjAFGjk

Byrnzie

foodboy said:

it's quite obvious you are a jew hater. please go away or back under your rock.

:((

Seriously, this kind of gibberish still cracks me up.

I also opposed the Apartheid regime in South Africa during the 1980's. Does that make me a 'white hater'?

:-?

hedonist

That stupid senseless shit of a post you responded to was worth your resurrecting the thread?

If you're tossing back a few - never know! - next round's on me.

And if not, next round's on me.

Cheers.

Idris

I brought this thread back, I was viewing a Mandela clip from 1990, thought I'd post it on the train, but I'm never exactly sure where to place certain videos.

But felt like this thread was alright to do it in, (probably wrong!)

I did it also with the Kony thread, I had a video about Africom and figured that it belonged in that thread cause I remember mentioning Africom in it.

The fault is mine.

Byrnzie

hedonist said:

That stupid senseless shit of a post you responded to was worth your resurrecting the thread?

Nope. Idris resurrected it.

gimmesometruth27

is there a statute of limitations on threads??

if there is, why is it not in the posting guidelines???

seems to me that bumping an old thread means that someone did not have the last word in a thread that people stopped posting in. as if silence in a thread gives it consensus on a position or something.

that is a dangerous precedent to set. that is like saying that "hey the scientific community has decided that hiv is incurable, therefore we will stop trying to research and see if there are any other steps we can take to treat the infected and try to prevent the infection of others....oh well, there has been no research published in 6 months, so i guess there is scientific consensus....."

JC29856

http://rt.com/news/181184-israel-hrw-amnesty-barred/

Byrnzie

JC29856 said:

http://rt.com/news/181184-israel-hrw-amnesty-barred/

Yep, Israel is preventing HRW and Amnesty from examining evidence of the multiple war crimes it has committed. It's hoping it can get away with them. But when the ICC begins investigating Israels' long record of atrocities then no doubt they'll take this into account.

hedonist

Idris said:

I brought this thread back, I was viewing a Mandela clip from 1990, thought I'd post it on the train, but I'm never exactly sure where to place certain videos.

But felt like this thread was alright to do it in, (probably wrong!)

I did it also with the Kony thread, I had a video about Africom and figured that it belonged in that thread cause I remember mentioning Africom in it.

The fault is mine.

Apologies - for some reason (maybe it's just me) but since the site changed, when I bring up a thread with new posts, it sometimes puts me one or two past the latest ones. I couldn't figure out why it was worth bringing it back for that comment - not the topic itself.

gimme, of course there's no statute (though I have seen Kat admonish some for doing that).

It's really not that big of a deal, was just curious.

benjs

foodboy said:

why don't you worry about human rights in china, russia, malaysia, n. korea and many other places and give this a rest. it's quite obvious you are a jew hater. please go away or back under your rock.

How dare you accuse someone of being a "Jew hater" for posting an article? From one Jew to another, if you have nothing with merit to say: please shut up.

badbrains

Rip

https://twitter.com/steketeh/status/503183193013768192