Israeli Apartheid - Segregation, Control and the Creation of Bantustans in the OPT
sliverstain
Posts: 340
Israeli Apartheid
Segregation, Control and the Creation of Bantustans in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).
By Owen Powell
08/29/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- The question of Israel as an apartheid state has received increasing attention over the last years as Israel has continued colonial expansion in the West Bank while simultaneously attempting to diverge itself from the Palestinians. The purpose of this article is to highlight the growing systemization of apartheid in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) with particular reference to Israel's policy of unilateral disengagement. The need for this debate is highlighted by the effective outcomes of disengagement which has already resulted in the segregation of Palestinian communities and delineation of exclusive Jewish space by means of the segregation barrier. Furthermore the creation of Palestinian enclaves or ghettos in the OPT bears a striking resemblance to the South African policies during the apartheid era which sought the establishment Bantustans as a means to facilitate segregation and to secure privileges for an ethnic minority.
The term "Bantustan" refers to an apartheid regime policy which set about the creation of "independent" homelands for black South Africans. These homelands possessed no genuine sovereignty and consisted of fragmented pieces of land in which the white authorities attempted to force people to live. Boundaries of the Bantustans were typically drawn to exclude valuable resources and arable land. The Bantustan policy was policy designed to facilitate the control of natural resources, exploitation of black South Africans and the delineation of excusive "white" space.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14750.htm
So true.
The conditions in gaza, at this moment in time, are worse than Warsaw in 1940, pre-Nazi Liquidation. And there are 1.2 million Palestinians being starved and degraded.
Who's the fascists now?
Segregation, Control and the Creation of Bantustans in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).
By Owen Powell
08/29/06 "Information Clearing House" -- -- The question of Israel as an apartheid state has received increasing attention over the last years as Israel has continued colonial expansion in the West Bank while simultaneously attempting to diverge itself from the Palestinians. The purpose of this article is to highlight the growing systemization of apartheid in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) with particular reference to Israel's policy of unilateral disengagement. The need for this debate is highlighted by the effective outcomes of disengagement which has already resulted in the segregation of Palestinian communities and delineation of exclusive Jewish space by means of the segregation barrier. Furthermore the creation of Palestinian enclaves or ghettos in the OPT bears a striking resemblance to the South African policies during the apartheid era which sought the establishment Bantustans as a means to facilitate segregation and to secure privileges for an ethnic minority.
The term "Bantustan" refers to an apartheid regime policy which set about the creation of "independent" homelands for black South Africans. These homelands possessed no genuine sovereignty and consisted of fragmented pieces of land in which the white authorities attempted to force people to live. Boundaries of the Bantustans were typically drawn to exclude valuable resources and arable land. The Bantustan policy was policy designed to facilitate the control of natural resources, exploitation of black South Africans and the delineation of excusive "white" space.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14750.htm
So true.
The conditions in gaza, at this moment in time, are worse than Warsaw in 1940, pre-Nazi Liquidation. And there are 1.2 million Palestinians being starved and degraded.
Who's the fascists now?
The world's greatest empires progress through this sequence:From bondage to spiritual faith; spiritual faith to great courage; courage to liberty;liberty to abundance;abundance to selfishness; selfishness to complacency;complacency to apathy;apathy to dependence;dependency back again into bondage
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
so often we become what we hate
http://www.myspace.com/thelastreel http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=19604327965
Again, there are parallels, but the two should not be equated. The political circumstances are far different.
In many cases ... However, the Palestinians WANT their own land, or bantustan, or whatever term you wish to use. They have no real desire to be integrated into Isreali society. You might understand the South Africa situation better than me, so I will defer to you here if needed ... But didn't black South Africans really just want to be treated fairly? Did they want their own state? Did they use terrorist tactics as a means of realizing their goals, to the same extent the Palestinians do?
Similar to what the American Indians had to endure on their reservations. People often forget what was done to the native Americans and of the ongoing injustices the traditional indians suffer at the hands of 'progressives' and the FBI.
That's quite the news source, you have there! HAHAHAHA!!!
What, the National Enquirer didn't have a suitable story, for you? How about "The Globe"?
did'nt dick cheny called madela a terrorist in the 80's
also The anc used "terrorist" tactics to fight the south african government, they blew up buildings, clubs, cars. also Israel had a nice supply of arms to the south african apartheid government, also even now israeli/south africans are some very wealthy people, due to diamonds and such, weird no?
just thought I'd add that.
Dick Cheney is a fool, though, so no great shocker there.
As for the Israel/South Africa weapons link ... That developed because both countries were having such a hard time purchasing weapons. Basically the two teamed up because no one else wanted to get involved. South Africa because of apartheid-caused embargoes, and Israel because the entire Middle East, supported by the Soviets, was turning the screws and no one in the West except the U.S. was wanting to "destabilize" the region further. I find it kind of ironic that Britain and other European nations basically created Israel, and then left their creation high and dry, surrounded by hostile forces.
Israel was backed by everything America had, the only reasom they (Israel)got involved with South Africa was for money, big big money. I'm sure you are not making an excuse for Israels hand in supporting apartheid South Africa are you? acting like they are these two innocent countries that just started getting bullied for now reason
America gives it to Israel, Israel gives it to south africa, south africa gives part control over gold and diamonds (which south africa had alot of)
Israel helped support apartheid south africa, since America was backing Israel, America in turn was behind it also, yet America would "stand up against racism in south africa" while supporting it. that's the reality.
I think Britain ran after the creation of israel when they saw that it was a mistake?
Actually, I think the arms embargoes on South Africa were totally justified.
South Africa wasn't bullied, they pretty much made their bed.
As for Britain ... Is running from ones' so-called mistakes a decent response when something goes wrong?
well yeah, that's what i'm saying, if an arms embargo on South Africa was justified, why is one on apartheid Israel not? as I've noted the connections, israel created it's own problems.
Israel is hated only because the way in which they came to be and continue to live. we know this because jewish people were coming to palestine after ww2 (around that time?) in a fair amount of peace. How did the zionists think that they could just take something and not expect anger?
To the second part, it's not a decent response on the part of Britain, I was just pointing out the reason to why they may of just cut and run like they did. Also I supsect america may of had a hand in Britain leaving, perhaps saying "we'll take over", america needing a firm cock, I mean hand in the mid east.
the ANC killed quite a few "civilians" and bombed targets as well, was it terrorism or freedom fighting? nevertheless after it ended south africa went into a sort of civil war.
You know what one of the reasons why apartheid failed? The cost of it, building seperate schools, bathrooms and the likes. it's a very expensive thing.
Some palestinians i'm sure would love to have no more jews on that land like some africans wanted no more whites, but on both cases those groups were/are very small, for the most part the anger towards said governments were/are justified. end the oppression.
anyway like I was saying, south africa is a total mess, the current ANC government is very corrupt, crimes are constant, it's really bad.
But that's what happens after so many years of suffering.
Its not a wall, it's a 95% fence & 5% concrete. Yes, I know some of you might think "what's the difference"? Well, the difference is a wall is quite permanent, and arouse evil associations like the ones of the (ex) Berlin wall. A fance is something common between neighbors, it is transparent and easy to be moved. That's why using a "wall" which doesn't really exist as another excuse for terrorists to act against Israeli civilians deep into Israeli territory, is not valid.
In addition to that, I think too many people forget something crucial: The Palestinian area is an autonomy, an intermediate stage of what will become the state of Palestine. Hence, in many aspects the Palestinian area is considered to be a foreign country, which is why they have different ID's, car plates etc'. The same thing goes to entrance-approval (~daily / weekly/ monthly working visa). Once the Palestinians get in, they have some restrictions (for example, can't get on an Israeli bus, they have special organized transportation) and that's not because Palestinian is a foreign country, but because its a hostile one.
Bad as it sounds, Israel could have simply refuse for ANY Palestinian to get into its territory and solve "that problem". But Israel is allowing Palestinian entrance because it is still holds some responsibility for their lifes. Most of them are in fact good people who deserve to earn money & support their families, and if the Palestinian authority can't provide working places for them, we will.
As for the interior roadblocks and curfews: Though its number was reduced, those aspects are WRONG WRONG WRONG and should disappear ASAP. Hard as it is (and it is, trust me it is when it comes to a 12 years old boy with a bombing-belt across his waists, for example) in this case we must defend ourselfs within Israel- Palestine borders, not via controling civilian's lifes.
Good post. And it is good to see that others can recognize how wrong the internal checkpoints and curfews within the palestinian areas are, apart from the rabid anti-Israelis. As I understand it, those checkpoints, are there because of settlements inside the territories, and roads reserved for settlers that cannot be crossed, if a settler's car is coming.
So I dont mind the fence as much, as I mind Israel's controlling of civilians inside the "autonomous" area. And 5% wall, is still a lot of kilometres of wall...
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
You don't mind the fence, others who've never really been around it decided its a wall, and use it as one symbol of an none-existed apartheid. The concrete part, btw, is due logistical problems which didn't enable a fence placing - that's it. The whole purpose of this specific infrastructure in to prevent the access of suicide bombing / the delivery of a bombing-belt into Israel, and do you know what? It workes, and for that reason the fence should stay till it'll be safe enough to remove it.
About the checkpoints: the main reason is delaying suicide bombers or other terrorists who wants to hurt settlers & others Israeli civilians. The problem is, it didn't really work out & only hurt everyone.
Just one more thing: I noticed there's too much hostility towards settlers. please remember they are humans too, most of them are harmless just like most Palestinians are, and most important thing: The Israeli govt (believe it or not, it started via left wing govt) encouraged these people to live there, providing them tax benefits etc'. Most of Yehuda & Shomron areas are beautiful green places, and people who wanted to have a better "quality of life" took the opportunity to live there. Others, of caurse, took the opportunity to implement their Idiology. Either way, 30 years of actual living in the same place makes one person attached to it, the same way the Palestinians who might have lived there once probably feel.
We're on the same page there.
That's one of the most difficult parts of this. The settlers have lived there for some time too. However they keep demanding being protected by Israeli military, something they probably have to be and can somewhat righfully claim. But the whole settler thing was about expanding Israeli territory to a greater Israel, which is failing and are not very possible anymore. A solution to that problem will be painful to many. If Israel is planning on keeping all of them, then the palestinian territories are Bantustans in the sense that they are not viable, and all the best areas are taken by the others. The settlers probably has to go, or they have to integrate into a new palestinian state. Sucks for them, no doubt. However, it also sucks for millions of palestinian refugees still, so. This cant be solved through force, control, curfews and watchtowers. Israel has to evacuate a lot of those settlements if any lasting deal is to be possible, I think. The Gaza pull-out were an example of that. Maybe Israel could just withdraw their forces, and the settlers could take their chances. It also can't be denied that settlements are breeding ground for extremism.
Israel withdraw and compensate the settlers in some way. Build them new houses and so on. Can't be that hard if they put their mind to it. Although protests will and can be massive. But the settlements are remnants of a failed "greater Israel" strategy that should be scrapped and officially put to rest. That is my opinion on it.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
That is true, it is very common amongst neighbours. However, neighbours don't typically build fences on other people's lawns, effectively stealing a portion of their land. In the rare case that does happen there are some serious ramifications. Neighbours don't usually use razor wire either.
As for restricting traffic. You must understand that Jaresualem (sp?) is one of the holiest sites to Islam, Judaism and Christianity. Personally, I don't give a shit about holy land. I don't have a holy land and I don't have a special holiday either. I have no religious right to anything because I don't believe I should. I also don't believe other's should which negates the whole concept of Israel. Israel could be part of the Yukon for all I care. If it wasn't for your religious beliefs I'd say have the Yukon, but you wouldn't accept it. Israel would not exist if not on a chunk of "holy land". Does god all righteous, fair and just really want you to kill a million Arabs to occupy the land gifted to you? What if I don't believe in your god? I guess then I don't believe it's your land. Funny how belief makes all the difference, too bad there is nothing substantial to it. "I'm gonna rule the fucking world in the name of Gorg from planet Zarcon, because I believe I should!"
I don't mean to trash your beliefs, as I have my own that I wish be respected. I'm just trying to put it in perspective. I believe I should have equal fortune as everyone else, but capitalism won't allow it, I guess I just have to accept it. We can't just give everyone what they believe they should have. Problem is, your not a Jew if your not Jewish and you probably don't live in Israel either. Effectively making Israel a relgion based state. Not so different than your neighbours. You both just happen to think the other should give up their land for your personal beliefs. Well Gorg is the only god that matters and when Zarcon rules the planet it'll be a rude awakening
excuse me? logistical problems. what sort of logistical problems could possibly precipitate the building of a solid concrete wall rather than this apparent fence you speak of? we can't possible put up a chain link fence here but we surely can build a solid wall?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Here's shiraz providing an obvious objective viewpoint filled with facts, and you geniuses who live thousands of miles away, are trying to tell her "how it really is":rolleyes::rolleyes:
Interestingly, none of you even consider or acknowledge that several of the worlds most reknowned historians and intellects agree that Israel does have a right to exist in that exact part of the world. You just keep on blabbing about how the Jews and Israel stole the land, illegally occupy .....and blah...blah...blah.
None of you ever mention all the good positive things Israel has done and continues to attempt to do, so many times; for the Palestinians and for the people of Israel.
Facts are, there are bad, violent entities on both sides who are determined to cause violence, destruction and murder; as means to meet their own end. And you can include elements within Palestine, Iran and Syria........in that equation.
The constant, biased, unobjective, short-sighted hammering and kicking of Israel and Jews is beyond mindnumbing. Simultaneously, you give Muslims from all over the world a tender and loving hand-job.
What a joke.
I only mentioned the settlers are also attached to that place for a good reason, and they deserve the IDF's protection because the Israeli govt encourage them to live there & they didn't arrive there on their own, because I don't think all of the hostility towards them is justifaied.
I think the solution is an Israeli withdraw under an AGREEMENT. The Gaza pull-out was proven to be wrong, as the Hamas took the opportunity to launch rockets over Israeli town of Sderot, instead of actually doing something useful for its own people. Same goes to the Rafich passage (Palestine-Egypt border), which was immediately used for weaponds smuggling, while the Palestinian people started to feel the lack of food (cause Israel & the rest of the world refused to finance a terror govt).
I think not all settlements should be evacuate, because few of them turned into small towns, and one of them, Ariel, became a large city which serves people from all over the Israeli area, including Israeli arabs. The problem is so far, the Palestinian authority doesn't care about it, they don't want to hear anything else other than "past based" talking (=returning all the original pieces of land & having an automatic right to return to Palestine).
Israel is a VERY small place, and Palestine is going to be a lot smaller. There are almost 2 millions Palestinians from Jordan who actually want to move there as soon as they'll be able to do so. I believe Palestinians have the right to return to their home-land, but the reality is there is no room for everyone here, so maybe they should get a limited quota per year (5000-10000, the same like the average number of people who are doing "aliya" every year). But again, the Palestinian authority is living in the past, unlike the Israeli govt they've showen no will to compromise (remember the Barak offer in 2000, the Gaza pull-out etc'), and as long as it keeps on thinking in that kind of a fixed way, no peace is gonna come.
BTW that little sweet fence has guns on it, soldiers protecting it, yes just a fence. just a very large fence.
settlers are also humans? sure, so are killers and thieves, so was hitler, nazi soldiers, terrorists. the debate is not about settlers being humans or not, it's about them living on someone elses property. They have no right.
Gaza pull out? how about the land grab the next day?
Of course there are some guns on (little part of) it & soliders protection around it. That fence was built in order to prevent terrorists from getting into Israel, so basically if you mess with the fence (=criminal) you'll probably get hurt. Is that your shocking point, Israel is protecting its civilians? Well, shame on us...
I don't have a problem with you don't believe a single word I'm saying, the only thing that bags me is how automaticly you are choosing to do so, only because you simply don't agree with my point of view. If you had actually bothered to read my posts on this thread, you would have seen I explained how come the settlers themselves are not the correct adress for all of your hostility, cause the only reason they are still living in those areas is because the Israeli govt decided not to pull them out of there (unlike what happened with the settlers in the Gaza area). It is not up to the people who live there to decide anything, so I don't see the point of hating, dissing and comparing them to nazi soldiers.
Anyway, I don't see any reason for me responding to your posts anymore, so lets just live it there.
building a fence is not solving the problem as to why these terrorists are created, it's really simple. The fence is not helping.
As far as the settlers go, why don't they just move? also many of them want to be on that land. btw america will take em in.
if you mess with the fence it's criminal, if you take land is it not criminal? if you break down homes is it not criminal? If you cut off water supply is it not criminal? if you target civilians is it not criminal?
But you have no reason to respond to anymore of my posts.
It's always up to the people,