Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

Fearless said:
Immigration controls were put in place - except for Arabs.
Click to expand...
The Hope Simpson Commission led to the 1930 White Paper, which was reversed by the 1931 MacDonald Declaration. There was no permanent change in policy in Palestine from the Hope Simpson Commission, but what the Hope Simpson Commission did do was refute everything that you're trying to say today.

Stop posting propaganda and trying to pass it off as history.
Fearless said:
It doesn't repeat anything in South Africa, apart from further insulting those who suffered under it. The proper version I mean, not the jutation you're harking on about.
Click to expand...
The above applies again...
 
Fearless said:
Considering the report also states that 25,000 Jewish immigrants, bringing along healthy capital investment, could be the sole reason for Arab unemployment is absurd
Click to expand...
Please, proceed to deny that there was a Zionist policy of boycotting Arab labor.

Because that's detailed in the Hope Simpson Commission too...
 
Fearless said:
It doesn't repeat anything in South Africa, apart from further insulting those who suffered under it.
Click to expand...
4 December 1997

Mr Chairman; Mr Suleyman al-Najab, Special Emissary of President Yasser Arafat; Members of the diplomatic corps; Distinguished Guests,

We have assembled once again as South Africans, our Palestinian guests and as humanists to express our solidarity with the people of Palestine.

I wish to take this opportunity to congratulate the organisers of the event, particularly the United Nations Information Centre and the UNISA Centre for Arabic and Islamic Studies for this magnificent act of compassion, to keep the flames of solidarity, justice and freedom burning.

The temptation in our situation is to speak in muffled tones about an issue such as the right of the people of Palestine to a state of their own. We can easily be enticed to read reconciliation and fairness as meaning parity between justice and injustice. Having achieved our own freedom, we can fall into the trap of washing our hands of difficulties that others faces.

Yet we would be less than human if we did so.

It behoves all South Africans, themselves erstwhile beneficiaries of generous international support, to stand up and be counted among those contributing actively to the cause of freedom and justice.

Even during the days of negotiations, our own experience taught us that the pursuit of human fraternity and equality - irrespective of race or religion - should stand at the centre of our peaceful endeavours. The choice is not between freedom and justice, on the one hand, and their opposite, on the other. Peace and prosperity; tranquillity and security are only possible if these are enjoyed by all without discrimination.

It is in this spirit that I have come to join you today to add our own voice to the universal call for Palestinian self-determination and statehood.

We would be beneath our own reason for existence as government and as a nation, if the resolution of the problems of the Middle East did not feature prominently on our agenda.

When in 1977, the United Nations passed the resolution inaugurating the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian people, it was asserting the recognition that injustice and gross human rights violations were being perpetrated in Palestine. In the same period, the UN took a strong stand against apartheid; and over the years, an international consensus was built, which helped to bring an end to this iniquitous system.

But we know too well that our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians; without the resolution of conflicts in East Timor, the Sudan and other parts of the world.

We are proud as a government, and as the overwhelming majority of South Africans to be part of an international consensus taking root that the time has come to resolve the problems of Palestine.

Indeed, all of us marvelled at the progress made a few years ago, with the adoption of the Oslo Agreements. Leaders of vision, who saw problems not merely from the point of view of their own narrow constituency, had at least found a workable approach towards friendship and peaceful co-existence in the Middle East.

I wish to take this opportunity to pay tribute to these Palestinian and Israeli leaders. In particular, we pay homage to the memory of Yitshak Rabin who paid the supreme sacrifice in pursuit of peace. We are proud as humanists, that the international consensus on the need for the implementation of the Oslo Agreements is finding expression in the efforts of the multitude of Israeli and Palestinian citizens of goodwill who are marching together, campaigning together, for an end to prevarication. These soldiers of peace are indeed sending a message to us all, that the day is not far off, when Palestinian and Jewish children will enjoy the gay abandon of children of God in a peaceful and prosperous region.

These soldiers of peace recognise that the world we live in is rising above the trappings of religious and racial hatred and conflict. They recognise that the spurning of agreements reached in good faith and the forceful occupation of land can only fan the flames of conflict. They know from their own experience that, it is in a situation such as this, that extremists on all sides thrive, fed by the blood lust of centuries gone by.

These Palestinian and Israeli campaigners for peace know that security for any nation is not abstract; neither is it exclusive. It depends on the security of others; it depends on mutual respect and trust. Indeed, these soldiers of peace know that their destiny is bound together, and that none can be at peace while others wallow in poverty and insecurity.

Thus, in extending our hands across the miles to the people of Palestine, we do so in the full knowledge that we are part of a humanity that is at one, that the time has come for progress in the implementation of agreements. The majority of the world community; the majority of the people of the Middle East; the majority of Israelis and Palestinians are suing for peace.

But we know, Mr Chairman, that all of us need to do much more to ensure that this noble ideal is realised.

As early as February 1995, our government formalised its relations with the State of Palestine when we established full diplomatic relations. We are proud of the modest technical assistance that our government is offering Palestine in such areas as Disaster Management, women's empowerment and assistance to handicapped children. But the various discussions with our counterparts in Palestine are an indication that we can do more.

We need to do more as government, as the ANC and other parties, as South Africans of all religious and political persuasions to spur on the peace process. All of us should be as vocal in condemning violence and the violation of human rights in this part of the world as we do with regard to other areas. We need to send a strong message to all concerned that an attempt by anyone to isolate partners in negotiations from their own mass base; and attempt to co-opt them as tools for one's own policies is bound to hurt the peace process as a whole.

We must make our voices heard calling for stronger action by world bodies as well as those states that have the power, to act with the same enthusiasm in dealing with this deadlock as they do on other problems in the Middle East.

Yes, all of us need to do more in supporting the struggle of the people of Palestine for self-determination; in supporting the quest for peace, security and friendship in this region.

But at least we can draw comfort from the fact that, our meeting today is yet another small expression of our empathy.

We hope that, by this humble act, we are strengthening the voice of peace and friendship in Israel and Palestine; so that, as we enter the new millennium, we shall all have taken a giant stride towards a world in which our humanity will be the hallmark of our relations across colour, religious and other divides.

I thank you.
Click to expand...

and

Mandela led the African National Congress from a prison cell for 27 years before leading South Africa’s transition from apartheid to democracy and becoming president. He retired in June. Concluding his Mideast tour with a hero’s welcome in Gaza, he repeatedly invoked the similarity between the struggle of Palestinians and nonwhites in South Africa. ``The histories of our two peoples, Palestinian and South African, correspond in such painful and poignant ways, that I intensely feel myself being at home amongst compatriots,″ he said. Mandela recalled a time when both movements were treated as pariahs by the international community _ a period that saw the forging of close bonds between the Palestinians and the ANC. The long-standing fraternal bonds between our two liberation movements are now translating into the relations between two governments,″ Mandela said. It was an admiration readily reciprocated when Mandela toured a refugee camp that he said reminded him of conditions at home.

https://apnews.com/article/50d3fcbf00a542e6b8b0decd975d04e2
Click to expand...
 
Have you not figured out that he just wastes people's time until they longer wish to discuss anything in here yet?

It would be nice if we had some opposing views in here but there's no point entering into a debate with someone conversing in bad faith.
 
Carolina Red said:
Please, proceed to deny that there was a Zionist policy of boycotting Arab labor.

Because that's detailed in the Hope Simpson Commission too...
Click to expand...

I'm not denying it but also this.....

"P.I.C.A.'s (a major Jewish settlement agency) relations with the Arab.—In discussing the question of the effect of Jewish Settlement on the Arab it is essential to differentiate between the P.I.C.A. colonisation and that of the Zionist Organisation.
In so far as the past policy of the P.I.C.A. is concerned, there can be no doubt that the Arab has profited largely by the installation of the colonies. Relations between the colonists and their Arab neighbours were excellent. In many cases, when land was bought by the P.I.C.A. for settlement, they combined with the development of the land for their own settlers similar development for the Arabs who previously occupied the land. All the cases which are now quoted by the Jewish authorities to establish the advantageous effect of Jewish colonisation on the Arabs of the neighbourhood, and which have been brought to notice forcibly and frequently during the course of this enquiry, are cases relating to colonies established by the P.I.C.A., before the KerenHayesod came into existence. In fact, the policy of the P.I.C.A. was one of great friendship for the Arab. Not only did they develop the Arab lands simultaneously with their own, when founding their colonies, but they employed the Arab to tend their plantations, cultivate their fields, to pluck their grapes and their oranges. As a general rule the P.I.C.A. colonisation was of unquestionable benefit to the Arabs of the vicinity.
It is also very noticeable, in travelling through the P.I.C.A. villages, to see the friendliness of the relations which exist between Jew and Arab. It is quite a common sight to see an Arab sitting in the verandah of a Jewish house. The position is entirely different in the Zionist colonies."
 
Smores said:
Have you not figured out that he just wastes people's time until they longer wish to discuss anything in here yet?
Click to expand...
Tbh I mostly just posted it in case any other poster were interested. But yeah your right it is a waste of time.
 
Smores said:
Have you not figured out that he just wastes people's time until they longer wish to discuss anything in here yet?

It would be nice if we had some opposing views in here but there's no point entering into a debate with someone conversing in bad faith.
Click to expand...

It literally is like talking to a staunch anti vaxxer / anti masker during one of the worst pandemics in history.

But it's better to converse loudly, even with him, so others can learn and see what's really happening than to keep quiet and let them continue unaccounted.
 
The more fearless scrapes the barrel trying to justify apartheid the more obvious it is.
 
Carolina Red said:
Please, proceed to deny that there was a Zionist policy of boycotting Arab labor.

Because that's detailed in the Hope Simpson Commission too...
Click to expand...
Fearless said:
It is also very noticeable, in travelling through the P.I.C.A. villages, to see the friendliness of the relations which exist between Jew and Arab. It is quite a common sight to see an Arab sitting in the verandah of a Jewish house. The position is entirely different in the Zionist colonies."
Click to expand...
We all know which side won out between PICA and the Zionists.
 
Fearless said:
Both were zionist. But given that there are more Arabs flourishing in Israel than anywhere else in the region, I guess PICA's version prevailed.

Click to expand...

Your use of a lower case z isn't lost on me. My use of an upper case Z shouldn't be lost on you.

Stop posting propaganda and trying to pass it off as history.
 
I am sure Mandela complained about villages not having electricity or running water. Or that the development plans of the suburbs were not fair.
If that is apartheid, then someone shall tell AI that they are living in a world of Apartheid. You can easily find the same schemes even today in Louisiana, Brazil, Colombia, Australia, Russia ... everywhere...
 
Dumbstar said:
It literally is like talking to a staunch anti vaxxer / anti masker during one of the worst pandemics in history.

But it's better to converse loudly, even with him, so others can learn and see what's really happening than to keep quiet and let them continue unaccounted.
Click to expand...
It is like that. I liken it to a QAnon weirdo that’s disappeared off the deep end and struggles to distinguish between reality and delusionary thoughts.

I agree with your second point aswell (and what @Sweet Square) said though - it’s better to mention it for the benefit of other posters and ignore him.
 
UweBein said:
I am sure Mandela complained about villages not having electricity or running water. Or that the development plans of the suburbs were not fair.
If that is apartheid, then someone shall tell AI that they are living in a world of Apartheid. You can easily find the same schemes even today in Louisiana, Brazil, Colombia, Australia, Russia ... everywhere...
Click to expand...
AI is an apolitical non profit organisation there to highlight human rights abuses regardless of where they take place. The fact that a report against Israel brings out the usual deflecting nonsense from yourself (and someone else) is derisory. Firstly you say that it’s antisemitic (whilst not reading it) and with no actual evidence to back yourself up, then you have further nonsense saying ‘what about x country, what about y country’. Why don’t you try engaging with the topic at hand and address it rather than making up pathetic excuses.
 
UweBein said:
I am sure Mandela complained about villages not having electricity or running water. Or that the development plans of the suburbs were not fair.
If that is apartheid, then someone shall tell AI that they are living in a world of Apartheid. You can easily find the same schemes even today in Louisiana, Brazil, Colombia, Australia, Russia ... everywhere...
Click to expand...
Actually reading the report by AI, or the report done by the United Nations, or the report by Israeli human rights group B'Tselem, all concluding that apartheid is occurring in Israel, would be really beneficial to your contributions to this thread.
 
Carolina Red said:
Actually reading the report by AI, or the report done by the United Nations, or the report by Israeli human rights group B'Tselem, all concluding that apartheid is occurring in Israel, would be really beneficial to your contributions to this thread.
Click to expand...
I am paraphrasing the AI report. At least the bits about electricity, urban planning etc. It is hilarious to get from there to a conclusion that it is Apartheid. In that regard AI made me laugh, so reading is was not a total waste of time.
 
UweBein said:
I am paraphrasing the AI report. At least the bits about electricity, urban planning etc. It is hilarious to get from there to a conclusion that it is Apartheid. In that regard AI made me laugh, so reading is was not a total waste of time.
Click to expand...
You're right, it's hilarious that 3 separate non-government entities tasked with tracking human rights abuses have concluded that the Israeli government is perpetuating an apartheid state. Someone hold me while I laugh myself silly.
 
Carolina Red said:
2 lawyers who don't like the conclusions made by the UN, Amnesty International, and B'Tselem. I'm shocked.
Click to expand...
Fearless said:
Then you've quite finished laughing, lets see your opinion on this.

What's good for the goose.....

https://www.9bedfordrow.co.uk/media/1743/hbk-apartheid-1-converted.pdf
Click to expand...
NGO monitor, an opaquely funded think tank with ties to the isareli govt and American pro Israeli lobby, which exists to undermine any criticism of Israel, shock horror doesn't agree with several international human rights organisations that are critical of Israeli policy. Is that really the best you can come up with @Fearless.
 
Superden said:
NGO monitor, an opaquely funded think tank with ties to the isareli govt and American pro Israeli lobby, which exists to undermine any criticism of Israel, shock horror doesn't agree with several international human rights organisations that are critical of Israeli policy. Is that really the best you can come up with @Fearless.
Click to expand...
It's how propaganda systems work. You use one biased source to verify the claims of other biased sources. Like a little merry-go-round, it keeps spinning and spinning.
 
Superden said:
NGO monitor, an opaquely funded think tank with ties to the isareli govt and American pro Israeli lobby, which exists to undermine any criticism of Israel, shock horror doesn't agree with several international human rights organisations that are critical of Israeli policy. Is that really the best you can come up with @Fearless.
Click to expand...

How about you dismantle their arguments one by one instead of insulting me? Oh i wonder why.
 
RedTiger said:
It's how propaganda systems work. You use one biased source to verify the claims of other biased sources. Like a little merry-go-round, it keeps spinning and spinning.
Click to expand...
Propagated by trolls and bots like a certain individual in this thread. Let’s not forget, hasbara is a real thing.
Fearless said:
How about you dismantle their arguments one by one instead of insulting me? Oh i wonder why.
Click to expand...
What?! I’ve been asking the same of you since last summer. I just get links, random YT vids from yourself.
 
Fearless said:
Rather you were educated than shocked, and it would be really beneficial to your contributions to this thread.
Click to expand...
You don't like the fact that I point out all your BS propaganda. Consider me shocked a 2nd time!

Superden said:
NGO monitor, an opaquely funded think tank with ties to the isareli govt and American pro Israeli lobby, which exists to undermine any criticism of Israel, shock horror doesn't agree with several international human rights organisations that are critical of Israeli policy. Is that really the best you can come up with @Fearless.
Click to expand...
Well done.

Fearless said:
How about you dismantle their arguments
Click to expand...
It's rather apparent that they do a good enough job of that themselves...
Leonard Fein, writing for The Forward in 2005, said that NGO Monitor is "an organization that believes that the best way to defend Israel is to condemn anyone who criticizes it."[61]

Yehudit Karp, a member of the International Council of the New Israel Fund and a former deputy attorney general of Israel, said that NGO Monitor has released information "it knew to be wrong, along with some manipulative interpretation".[62]

The New Israel Fund said in May 2011 that NGO Monitor "knowingly published false information in its newsletter", regarding the NIF funding of Coalition of Women for Peace (CWP). NIF stated that NGO Monitor's director was provided with the correct information verbally in advance.[63] NGO Monitor responded by asserting that its report was based on NIF grant information.[64] NIF's rejoinder stated that its public records lag the end of the reporting year by several months, but reiterated that updated information was provided to NGO Monitor verbally. NIF also stated that it asked CWP to remove mention of NIF's name from the CWP website.[65]

In July 2009, HRW issued a statement saying, "NGO Monitor ... conducts no field investigations and condemns anyone who criticizes Israel".[66]

Uriel Heilman, a managing editor for the Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) and a senior reporter for The Jerusalem Post, wrote in an online opinion column that there were a "couple of disingenuous (read: inaccurate) elements" in the May 2009 digest of NGO Monitor. Heilman rhetorically asked whether the situation itself was "enough for Steinberg and NGO Monitor's followers without Steinberg having to stretch the truth?" Gerald Steinberg, head of NGO Monitor, later conceded the phrasing was confusing and revised the statement.[67]

Kathleen Peratis, a member of the board of Human Rights Watch, called into question the research methodology underlying an op-ed by NGO Monitor's Steinberg for not saying specifically where or when HRW statements have been unverifiable.[68] In 2006, she criticized NGO Monitor for accusations against Human Right Watch and its "executive director, whose father fled Nazi Germany". Peratis took issue with an op-ed by NGO Monitor's Gerald Steinberg titled "Ken Roth's Blood Libel",[69] and argues those like NGO Monitor "who want selective exemption of Israel from the rules of war" may not "have faced the implications of getting what they wish for".[68]

In 2009, David Newman criticized NGO Monitor for concentrating "almost entirely with a critique of peace-related NGOs and especially those which focus on human rights, as though there were no other NGOs to examine". He said that NGO Monitor, which he describes as a right-wing organization, had consistently refused requests to investigate the activities and funding of right-wing NGOs, many of which, Newman said, were facilitating illegal activity in the West Bank.[70] In response, NGO Monitor wrote that it is "an independent research organization, providing detailed, systematic, and source-based analysis and publications regarding the activities of NGOs in the Arab-Israeli conflict. The ideological label employed by Newman, 'right wing', is neither accurate nor relevant".[71] Newman also criticized NGO Monitor again in 2009, as well as in 2010 and 2012.[72][73]

In January 2010, thirteen Israeli human rights organizations released a common statement describing NGO Monitor and Im Tirtzu as "extremist", and criticised an "unbridled and incendiary attack" by them against human rights groups.[74]

Ambassador Andrew Stanley, the EU representative to Israel, took issue with NGO Monitor's description of EU policy as operating in secret, writing that "as Prof. Steinberg is fully aware from the various conversations we have had with him, funding of projects by the European Union worldwide is carried out by open and public calls for proposals published on EU websites, including the website of the Delegation of the European Union to the State of Israel."[75]

Michael Edwards lists NGO Monitor among a group of organisations who use deficiencies in NGO accountability as a pretext for politically motivated attacks to silence views with which they disagree. Edwards states that they "single out liberal or progressive groups for criticism while ignoring the same problems, if that is what they are, among NGOs allied with conservative views".[14] According to Joel Peters, NGO Monitor's activities include "high profile campaigns with the aim of delegitimizing the activities of Israeli civil society and human rights organisations, especially those advocating the rights of Arab citizens of Israel and/or address the question of violations of human rights in the Occupied Territories",[13] to which NGO Monitor responded by saying, "Our aims and objectives (holding political advocacy NGOs accountable, providing checks and balances, researching and publishing on these issues) are clearly spelled out."[76]

According to Naomi Chazan, NGO Monitor is closely linked to a "tightly knit, coordinated set of associations" whose goal is to undermine liberal voices in Israel and entrench a negative image of them by means of having "continuously hammered away at their key message—in this instance, the abject disloyalty of certain civil society organizations and their funders and their collusion with Israel's most nefarious external detractors". Chazan states the aim is that "by reinforcing this mantra by every available means, innuendo could be transformed into fact".[17]

In an editorial published by The Forward, J.J. Goldberg termed the organization "one of the smoothest left-bashing operations."[77]

Ilan Baruch, Israel's former ambassador to South Africa, said in a report by the Policy Working Group (PWG), published in September, 2018 that the organization "disseminates misleading and tendentious information, which it presents as factual in-depth research". NGO Monitor's efforts were designed to "defend and sustain [Israeli] government policies that help uphold Israel's occupation of ...the Palestinian territories".[15][78] The Dutch government has also criticised NGO Monitor, singling out the unreliability of their accusations against human rights defenders. Dutch Foreign Minister Stef Blok said "the government is familiar with the accusations by NGO Monitor against a broad group of Israeli and Palestinian human rights organisations, as well as with criticism of the conduct of NGO Monitor itself", citing the PWG report. "This research shows that many of NGO Monitor's accusations are based on selective citations, half-facts and insinuations, but not necessarily on hard evidence", Minister Blok added.[79]
Click to expand...
 
So, about the Israel government perpetuating an apartheid state and that whole discussion we're meant to be having about that before someone threw a dead cat into the room...

I know little about this entire situation and thanks to this thread I still know very little.
 
Fearless said:
I was expecting more from you - especially you. Not a single rebuttal to any of the reports findings. How arrogant.
Click to expand...
We expect the bare minimum from you and you still fail us miserably.
 
Mr Pigeon said:
I know little about this entire situation and thanks to this thread I still know very little.
Click to expand...

That's the strategy all around. AI releases a report and instead of focusing on that and how the situation can be improved, we just get denials, whataboutism and accusations of antisemitism. Not just here, but everywhere this is discussed. It's all the proof we need the Israeli government doesn't want to make the situation any better.
 
Dammit, I keep interpreting AI as artificial intelligence instead of Amnesty International.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.