lefty_jakobz
I ❤️ moses
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2013
- Messages
- 3,648
@Fearless why are you avoiding answering?
Seems, Fearless by name only
@Fearless why are you avoiding answering?
@Fearless why are you avoiding answering?
Seems they cant see having two different laws in country is the literal definition of Apartheid. Theres really no racism in Israel or the world unless its against Israelis it would seem.
Once again, your attempts to alter history fall short of convincing...Please provide an exact list of the shared identical policies that apartheid SA has with Israel re your accusation.
The key word being 'identical'.
Don't give me any 'in spirit' bollox.
Once again, your attempts to alter history fall short of convincing...
International criminal law has developed two crimes against humanity for situations of systematic discrimination and repression: apartheid and persecution. Crimes against humanity stand among the most odious crimes in international law.
The international community has over the years detached the term apartheid from its original South African context, developed a universal legal prohibition against its practice, and recognized it as a crime against humanity with definitions provided in the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (“Apartheid Convention”) and the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The crime against humanity of persecution, also set out in the Rome Statute, the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights on racial, ethnic, and other grounds, grew out of the post-World War II trials and constitutes one of the most serious international crimes, of the same gravity as apartheid.
Apartheid as it is presently defined:
The Apartheid Convention defines the crime against humanity of apartheid as “inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them.” The Rome Statute of the ICC adopts a similar definition: “inhumane acts… committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.” The Rome Statute does not further define what constitutes an “institutionalized regime.”
The crime of apartheid under the Apartheid Convention and Rome Statute consists of three primary elements: an intent to maintain a system of domination by one racial group over another; systematic oppression by one racial group over another; and one or more inhumane acts, as defined, carried out on a widespread or systematic basis pursuant to those policies.
Among the inhumane acts identified in either the Convention or the Rome Statute are “forcible transfer,” “expropriation of landed property,” “creation of separate reserves and ghettos,” and denial of the “the right to leave and to return to their country, [and] the right to a nationality.”
The Rome Statute identifies the crime against humanity of persecution as “the intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity,” including on racial, national, or ethnic grounds. Customary international law identifies the crime of persecution as consisting of two primary elements: (1) severe abuses of fundamental rights committed on a widespread or systematic basis, and (2) with discriminatory intent.
https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/...orities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution#
That article is right up there with the “definition” of antisemitism including criticism of Israeli government policy.
1) HRW clearly showed the definitions of Apartheid. I posted them above from the report. What they’re claiming as “wrong to report” is something that has quite literally happened. They’re pulling a “you in this thread” and conveniently ignoring aspects of reality that they don’t like.HRW, therefore, was wrong to claim that “The international community has over the years detached the term apartheid from its original South African context.” That term’s potency, and its sting to Israelis and Jews, stems from the South African analogy: From the oppressive, anti-democratic mechanisms required to enforce the crime to the regime’s well-deserved end.
While promising “detailed legal analysis” of the apartheid charge, HRW actually proved Israel’s innocence. According to the report, “The crime of apartheid under the Apartheid Convention and Rome Statute consists of three primary elements: an intent to maintain a system of domination by one racial group over another; systematic oppression by one racial group over another; and one or more inhumane acts, as defined, carried out on a widespread or systematic basis pursuant to those policies.”
Nowhere does HRW prove that either Israeli Jews or Palestinians constitute a “racial group.” HRW simply assumes that in a world obsessed with race, those who seem weak and popular are “Black” or “Brown” while those who seem strong and unpopular are “white.”
It's just an easy cop out to a very uncomfortable question for the apologists.Sorry that's horseshit and you've just avoided answering the questions. Q3 and 4 weren't even about the past, they're about the present day situation.
What's happened is a travesty of justice, and if you were on the receiving end of it, you would, as expected, resist the notion of your land that you've lived on being taken away and being given to a foreigner just because they're Jewish. Similar to the BLM protests last year, in the fall out there was some accountability by the slave trade nations. This acceptance of accountability goes some way. Until the Israeli or British accept some accountability for what they've done, this cycle of violence will just carry on. If IDF apologists like yourself are too blinkered to accept that as well, then you're just part of the problem.
The creation of Israel was done on false premises, bribery, and threats and it's a joke that people think saying "well, it's done now just deal with it" is an acceptable excuse. Why should anyone have to accept it? Does anyone else accept their land being stolen?
Do you think the evictions in Sheikh Jarrah for illegal settlers should just be accepted?
Don't forget, he was also of Admin of his Whatsapp group at the time too.
@2cents @berbatrick How can that be applied now though? In a modern world, is Jabotinsky still correct that there can be no peace and no acceleration of a state of affairs that could entail it? Open ended questions...
That Wiki post says nothing to his influence.Thanks for that, but there's no denying that Al-Husseini wielded the greatest power and influence amongst his co-religionists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husseini
The conflict began on Monday and followed weeks of spiralling Israeli-Palestinian tension in East Jerusalem. The increased hostilities culminated in clashes at a holy site revered by both Muslims and Jews. Hamas - the militant Islamist group which rules Gaza - began firing rockets after warning Israel to withdraw from the site, triggering retaliatory air strikes.
Please provide an exact list of the shared identical policies that apartheid SA has with Israel re your accusation.
The key word being 'identical'.
Don't give me any 'in spirit' bollox.
I feckin love that shitDock workers in Livorno Italy, today refuse to load a ship with supplies bound for Israel, they stand for solidarity with Palestinians
I feckin love that shit
everyone's favourite political commentor-paedphile defender is back!
I feckin love that shit
The other two guys are like, "What are you on?"
Good for them.Dock workers in Livorno Italy, today refuse to load a ship with supplies bound for Israel, they stand for solidarity with Palestinians
everyone's favourite political commentor-paedphile defender is back!
Dock workers in Livorno Italy, today refuse to load a ship with supplies bound for Israel, they stand for solidarity with Palestinians
What happened to all the moderate voices in Israel? Where are the Israelis who dont want to watch the innocent children of Palestine being blown to smithereens because their corrupt prime minister is waging and ethnic cleanse of a people?
Hmmm. Interesting.We're here, just not heard enough. Some fear to talk, those who do are mostly on the periphery of things. Most of the media toes the line of the right wing - which is the majority - and avoids confrontation on that matter as it's only interested in ratings and income. There are also more and more representative of the right - or simply Netanyahu supporters - in the media and panels.
And yes, tons of Israeli's also don't care. Some of them see anyone who isn't Jewish as a lesser person. Others can't let of the bombings and terror attacks following the Oslo agreement.
Hmmm. Interesting.
Sounds like the UK to some lesser degree.We're here, just not heard enough. Some fear to talk, those who do are mostly on the periphery of things. Most of the media toes the line of the right wing - which is the majority - and avoids confrontation on that matter as it's only interested in ratings and income. There are also more and more representative of the right - or simply Netanyahu supporters - in the media and panels.
And yes, tons of Israeli's also don't care. Some of them see anyone who isn't Jewish as a lesser person. Others can't let of the bombings and terror attacks following the Oslo agreement.
We're here, just not heard enough. Some fear to talk, those who do are mostly on the periphery of things. Most of the media toes the line of the right wing - which is the majority - and avoids confrontation on that matter as it's only interested in ratings and income. There are also more and more representative of the right - or simply Netanyahu supporters - in the media and panels.
And yes, tons of Israeli's also don't care. Some of them see anyone who isn't Jewish as a lesser person. Others can't let of the bombings and terror attacks following the Oslo agreement.
Is this latest conflict just a way of Netanyahu trying to stave off the corruption case and hold onto power? I mean is it more politically motivated?
This is valuable insight here. Thank you.It worked, didn't it? Within three of four days, the govenment that was about to replace him fell through.
I do think Netanyahu tried to create an escalation in Jerusalem and to cause some conflict between jewish and arabs in Israel, as that new govenment - which was headed by a right wing man - was going to enjoy the support of one of the Arab parties.
Did he know exactly what will happen? No. Did he expect it to go this far? I'm not he didn't, and that the Hamas response was a surprise. But he was desperate and that was the last throw of the dice for him. He got what he wanted, and I'm sure he doesn't care about the cost. It's all about his survival, and feck everything else. He's been hampering the country for years now, but he's still got tons of support from idiots who see him as king and the only one who can lead Israel (As after 12 years of him in office, so many don't really know anything else).
It worked, didn't it? Within three of four days, the govenment that was about to replace him fell through.
I do think Netanyahu tried to create an escalation in Jerusalem and to cause some conflict between jewish and arabs in Israel, as that new govenment - which was headed by a right wing man - was going to enjoy the support of one of the Arab parties.
Did he know exactly what will happen? No. Did he expect it to go this far? I'm not he didn't, and that the Hamas response was a surprise. But he was desperate and that was the last throw of the dice for him. He got what he wanted, and I'm sure he doesn't care about the cost. It's all about his survival, and feck everything else. He's been hampering the country for years now, but he's still got tons of support from idiots who see him as king and the only one who can lead Israel (As after 12 years of him in office, so many don't really know anything else).
We're here, just not heard enough. Some fear to talk, those who do are mostly on the periphery of things. Most of the media toes the line of the right wing - which is the majority - and avoids confrontation on that matter as it's only interested in ratings and income. There are also more and more representative of the right - or simply Netanyahu supporters - in the media and panels.
And yes, tons of Israeli's also don't care. Some of them see anyone who isn't Jewish as a lesser person. Others can't let of the bombings and terror attacks following the Oslo agreement.
@lefty_jakobz did you make any such accusation that Israel has identical policies with Apartheid South Africa or that the two governments were in anyway 'identical'? as Fearless seems to be suggesting. I can't seem to find any.
I did a thread search for the term "identical" and I see no accusation made by @lefty_jakobz .Please provide an exact list of the shared identical policies that apartheid SA has with Israel re your accusation.
The key word being 'identical'.
Don't give me any 'in spirit' bollox.
Dock workers in Livorno Italy, today refuse to load a ship with supplies bound for Israel, they stand for solidarity with Palestinians
So cool.
I will be joining one of the many marches across the UK tomorrow (today technically!) too. The tide is changing!