Israeli - Palestinian Conflict

rednev said:
South Africa doesn't refer to itself as a black state, in fact it goes out of its way to ensure that it is a state of all citizens. Being a minority is not the reason why Arab-Israelis are made to feel as though they can never be fully part of Israel, so I wouldn't accept your analogy with white South Africans. Arab Israelis are made to feel like outsiders because the law treats them like second class citizens, and perhaps most importantly, the prevailing concept of the 'Jewish State' does too.

Laws in South Africa that you claim discriminate against white people are hardly comparable to Israel's laws that discriminate against Arabs. Firstly, whites in South Africa are still economically advantaged, and black Africans as a group are still economically disadvantaged, and there still exists an institutionalized prejudice against them. Positive discrimination laws exist to level the playing field. In Israel, Arabs are disadvantaged to Jews, both economically and politically. Discriminatory laws in Israel exist to further the political and economic dominance of the Jewish population under the concept of the 'Jewish state', at the expense of the Arabs. For this reason they are more comparable to laws which discriminated against black people in Apartheid South Africa than the laws which apparently discriminate against white people in SA today.
Click to expand...

An Arab supreme court judge threw a Jewish president to prison recently. Just like black judges used to do to white politicians in apartheid SA.
 
holyland red said:
An Arab supreme court judge threw a Jewish president to prison recently. Just like black judges used to in apartheid SA.
Click to expand...


I haven't claimed that the status of Israeli Arabs in Israeli is exactly comparable to the status of black South Africans in Apartheid SA. I said it is more comparable than to the status of white South Africans in modern day SA.

Surely you must be able to admit that Israel, as a constitutionally Jewish State, treats non-Jews as second class citizens?
 
So there are Jews who live in Israel, there are arabs who live in Israel who have Israeli citizenship.
There are palestinians who live in West Bank and Gaza strip - they do not have Israeli citizenship but neither do they have full control over the land they live on. What is their legal status?
 
Traub said:
So, I live in a country with a bit of a dodgy past to say the least. Having said that, we have one of the most forward thinking fair constitutions in the world. Keeping this in mind, white South Africans are legally disadvantaged under affirmative action and black economic empowerment laws. Yet South Africa is still considered a free and fair country.


In addition, white South Africans make up a relatively small proportion of the South African population - a much smaller proportion than Israeli Arabs. Black South Africans are and will always be the majority in South Africa. Does this mean white South Africans can't fully feel part of the state?
Click to expand...


What laws are these? I would like to look into them.
 
rednev said:
I haven't claimed that the status of Israeli Arabs in Israeli is exactly comparable to the status of black South Africans in Apartheid SA. I said it is more comparable than to the status of white South Africans in modern day SA.

Surely you must be able to admit that Israel, as a constitutionally Jewish State, treats non-Jews as second class citizens?
Click to expand...

Not only I admit it, I don't think Jews have any other option if they are to maintain their reclaimed national independence. Not quite an utopian democracy? I agree, but considering both history and currnet geo-political circumstances I think Israel is pretty far from being the worst.
 
Commadus said:
What laws are these? I would like to look into them.
Click to expand...

I don't know about written laws, but I know of SA scholars who don' t even bother applying for academic jobs back home because they're too white to have a real chance of getting them.
 
holyland red said:
Not only I admit it, I don't think Jews have any other option if they are to maintain their reclaimed national independence. Not quite an utopian democracy? I agree, but considering both history and currnet geo-political circumstances I think Israel is pretty far from being the worst.
Click to expand...


Its a recipe for disaster long term. You cant treat a sizable proportion of the population as second class citizens and hope everything will work out fine. Anyway the ticking time bomb of demographics will eventually lead to massive problems for the region.
 
thegregster said:
Its a recipe for disaster long term. You cant treat a sizable proportion of the population as second class citizens and hope everything will work out fine. Anyway the ticking time bomb of demographics will eventually lead to massive problems for the region.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what population you're referring to, but it seems that it is the WB and GS Palestinians rather than Israeli Arabs. The latter represent ~20% of the population in Israel and have done for quite a while. That is unlikely to change dramatically in the foreseeable future.
 
rednev said:
South Africa doesn't refer to itself as a black state, in fact it goes out of its way to ensure that it is a state of all citizens. Being a minority is not the reason why Arab-Israelis are made to feel as though they can never be fully part of Israel, so I wouldn't accept your analogy with white South Africans. Arab Israelis are made to feel like outsiders because the law treats them like second class citizens, and perhaps most importantly, the prevailing concept of the 'Jewish State' does too.
Click to expand...
We may be going off topic here but I wouldn't agree with your assertion about South Africa. For example, when the president says the following:
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/You-dont-understand-democracy-Zuma-told-20120914, you really start to wonder.
rednev said:
Laws in South Africa that you claim discriminate against white people are hardly comparable to Israel's laws that discriminate against Arabs. Firstly, whites in South Africa are still economically advantaged, and black Africans as a group are still economically disadvantaged, and there still exists an institutionalized prejudice against them. Positive discrimination laws exist to level the playing field. In Israel, Arabs are disadvantaged to Jews, both economically and politically. Discriminatory laws in Israel exist to further the political and economic dominance of the Jewish population under the concept of the 'Jewish state', at the expense of the Arabs. For this reason they are more comparable to laws which discriminated against black people in Apartheid South Africa than the laws which apparently discriminate against white people in SA today.
Click to expand...
To me, it seems like you're saying discriminatory laws are fine if it is to level the playing field? If you have a look at the wiki page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_economic_empowerment), you'll see that it aims for the economy to represent the demographics of the country. I wonder how many of the Israeli laws that are pro-Jews follow the same objective?

The laws of Apartheid South Africa were a lot more along the lines of non-whites not allowed to sit on the same benches, go to the same schools, go to the same hospitals etc. IMO, these are not the same type of laws that are faced by Israeli Arabs. Therefore, I don't think one can say Israel's current laws are more comparable to those of Apartheid South Africa.

The main reason why I brought up South Africa though is to show that there is discrimination in all countries. It is unfortunate, and I'm sure it does take place in Israel too. However, discrimination in Israel shouldn't be held to a different standard as to the one other countries are held to.


Commadus said:
What laws are these? I would like to look into them.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if you want the actual legislation but hopefully the wiki link above gives appropriate details. Maybe we should create a different thread for this South Africa discussion so as to not derail this thread.
 
holyland red said:
Hehe, you serve for three long years without getting paid risking your life for your country and then you get social benefits. fecking Nazis them Zionists.
Click to expand...


The thrust of that article has merit but in the details it falls down.

holyland red said:
Hehe, you serve for three long years without getting paid risking your life for your country and then you get social benefits. fecking Nazis them Zionists.
Click to expand...

Israel has conscription so they are legally required to be enlisted so why should they expect anything in return?
 
Commadus said:
So holy not responding to the points. its a nightmare - their status.

http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...if-its-not-occupation-then-what-is-it/259562/

They want the land but not the people.

I like the notion that if you are in possession of something long enough it becomes your property - irrespective of the legal title.
Click to expand...

Of course it is. I wish it was different. They could have got an independent state already if only they made it clear that they'd stop at the 1967 lines (with necessary and agreed land swap), and agreed to live peacefully with a neighbouring Jewish state.

Nothing to do with apartheid though, as we're not discussing Israeli citizens here.
 
I don't think anybody in here is saying ''Israel = South Africa'' because that's just not the case.
The question has to be ''Do actions taken by the Israeli state meet the international standards of what apartheid is'' and personally I think the answer is yes.
Nobody should demonize Israelis, or Jews for being just that. Anti semitism is evil, like all other forms of racism and sectarianism, but to bash off all criticism of Judaism, and Israel as anti-semitism is ridiculous, and to be honest a disgrace to the Jewish people who have, and do suffer from anti semitism.

Why Israel is an apartheid estate.

Non Jews don't have the same access to citizenship.

  • The Law of Return
  • Population registry law
  • Family Unification law
  • Identity Card law



Non Jews don't have the same property rights
  • Absentee Property Law.
  • Land acquisition - this is the big one in my opinion.
  • National planning and building law.
Political participation.
  • Nobody that goes against the ''Democratic Jewish State'' can run for election.
  • No party that goes against the ''Democratic Jewish State'' can register.
Judicial Practice
  • The courts accept Nationality and race as a legitimate case of discrimination in the law.
There's hundreds of other reasons one could consider Israel an apartheid state really. I've just skimmed over this website, here it all is in more detail.
http://www.ceia-sc.org/page55/page112/page185/page185.laws.html
Heres some more good reading, admittedly I have read about 5% of it so far, but I'm enjoying it.
http://www.ceia-sc.org/page55/page23/page23.html
 
jakec said:
I don't think anybody in here is saying ''Israel = South Africa'' because that's just not the case.
The question has to be ''Do actions taken by the Israeli state meet the international standards of what apartheid is'' and personally I think the answer is yes.
Nobody should demonize Israelis, or Jews for being just that. Anti semitism is evil, like all other forms of racism and sectarianism, but to bash off all criticism of Judaism, and Israel as anti-semitism is ridiculous, and to be honest a disgrace to the Jewish people who have, and do suffer from anti semitism.

Why Israel is an apartheid estate.

Non Jews don't have the same access to citizenship.

  • The Law of Return
  • Population registry law
  • Family Unification law
  • Identity Card law



Non Jews don't have the same property rights
  • Absentee Property Law.
  • Land acquisition - this is the big one in my opinion.
  • National planning and building law.
Political participation.
  • Nobody that goes against the ''Democratic Jewish State'' can run for election.
  • No party that goes against the ''Democratic Jewish State'' can register.
Judicial Practice
  • The courts accept Nationality and race as a legitimate case of discrimination in the law.
There's hundreds of other reasons one could consider Israel an apartheid state really. I've just skimmed over this website, here it all is in more detail.
http://www.ceia-sc.org/page55/page112/page185/page185.laws.html
Heres some more good reading, admittedly I have read about 5% of it so far, but I'm enjoying it.
http://www.ceia-sc.org/page55/page23/page23.html
Click to expand...

The above website calls Israel's war of independence a "Zionist terror campaign". That's where I stopped reading.
 
While the source is clearly biased, the points made by Jake (without looking at the descriptions of them on the website) are all valid. Would one of you like to address some of the points?
 
rednev said:
While the source is clearly biased, the points made by Jake (without looking at the descriptions of them on the website) are all valid. Would one of you like to address some of the points?
Click to expand...

Do you really believe the rubbish he posted? Try the political participation bit for easily refuting the crap he came up with.
 
holyland red said:
Not only I admit it, I don't think Jews have any other option if they are to maintain their reclaimed national independence. Not quite an utopian democracy? I agree, but considering both history and currnet geo-political circumstances I think Israel is pretty far from being the worst.
Click to expand...


Why does a particular racial group need national independence? Why can't Israel exist as Israel, just as the British state exists as Britain or the French state as France, instead of existing as a 'Jewish state'?

I appreciate the context of the establishment of Israel as a Jewish homeland, but at some point it will have to move with the times. Nation states existing on racial lines belong to a different era - the world has moved on and so has international law. Of course Israel is far from the worst democracy, and I am under no illusion that the eventual Palestinian state will be a shining example of democracy and human rights, but compared to the Western democracies, Israel has uncomfortable questions to answer.
 
Commadus said:
In what way. You don't consider it Apartheid according to the UN definition?
How do you see it?
Click to expand...
Because the WB and Gaza aren't part of Israel.
rednev said:
Why does a particular racial group need national independence? Why can't Israel exist as Israel, just as the British state exists as Britain or the French state as France, instead of existing as a 'Jewish state'?

I appreciate the context of the establishment of Israel as a Jewish homeland, but at some point it will have to move with the times. Nation states existing on racial lines belong to a different era - the world has moved on and so has international law. Of course Israel is far from the worst democracy, and I am under no illusion that the eventual Palestinian state will be a shining example of democracy and human rights, but compared to the Western democracies, Israel has uncomfortable questions to answer.
Click to expand...
Mainly because Jews are often, as history shows, persecuted. While you can argue that past experience isn't necessarily an indication of the future, it is the best indicator we have. In addition, anti-semitism is still rife even with Israel's existence.
 
rednev said:
Why does a particular racial group need national independence? Why can't Israel exist as Israel, just as the British state exists as Britain or the French state as France, instead of existing as a 'Jewish state'?

I appreciate the context of the establishment of Israel as a Jewish homeland, but at some point it will have to move with the times. Nation states existing on racial lines belong to a different era - the world has moved on and so has international law. Of course Israel is far from the worst democracy, and I am under no illusion that the eventual Palestinian state will be a shining example of democracy and human rights, but compared to the Western democracies, Israel has uncomfortable questions to answer.
Click to expand...

I find the opening questions both simplistic and unfair. I'd argue that if ANY racial group was entitled to national independence it was the Jews. Regardless of history, I reckon the question needs to be addressed according to prevailing standards. It wasn't that long ago that human rights organizations were in full support of the creation of nation states- Kosovo anyone?

It would be a grave mistake to think that nation states are a thing of the past. It may sound old-fashioned on interent message-board discussions, but consider the alternative, particularly in the region Israel is stuck in. How well are Christinas doing in Iraq, Egypt, the Palestinian territories? What about the Muslims among themselves- Syria? even the apparently stable Lebanon? You are aware that Israel would quickly become another country with an Arab majority if it gave up its Jewish nature- how would you see that new Israel's future given the examples set across its borders?

Israel has lots of ground for improvement, and may never enjoy the privilege of being up to the standards of many Western democracies. Still, discrimination against minorities in the west is often just as bad as it is in Israel, despite the institutionalised discrimination resulting from Israel's struggle to preserve both its Jewish and democratic nature. The made-up apartheid claims against Israel are yet another example of double standards employed in the campaign to delegitimise the Jewish state.
 
Israeli Troops 'Rough Up' EU

Diplomats
European diplomats are manhandled as they attempted to deliver emergency aid to homeless Palestinian villagers.​

A French woman diplomat has told how she was dragged from a truck and thrown to the ground by Israeli soldiers as she attempted to deliver emergency aid to Palestinians.
The soldiers threw sound grenades at aid workers and European diplomats, before manhandling them, then seizing their truck piled with tents and aid and driving it away.
The French diplomat Marion Castaing said: "They dragged me out of the truck and forced me to the ground with no regard for my diplomatic immunity.
"This is how international law is being respected here."
The diplomats from France, Britain, Spain, Ireland, Australia and the European Union's political office, were trying to deliver the equipment to Palestinians in the occupied West Bank at Khirbet Al-Makhul, whose home were demolished this week.
The army flattened their ramshackle houses, stables and a kindergarten on Monday after Israel's high court ruled that they did not have proper building permits.
israel-diplomats-1-1-522x293.jpg
Soldiers refused to let the EU diplomats deliver aid
Despite losing their property, the inhabitants have refused to leave the land, where, they say their families have lived for generations along with their flocks of sheep.
The Israeli army said on Friday that security forces had tried to prevent tents from being erected in area, in accordance with the high court decision.
A spokeswoman said: "At the site, Palestinians and the foreign activists violently objected, throwing stones and striking law enforcement officers.
"Reports that foreign diplomats abused their diplomatic privileges are currently being reviewed, and if required, complaints will be filed with the relevant authorities."
However, reporters from the Reuters news agency who were present at the scene said they saw no stone throwing.
Israeli foreign ministry spokesman Paul Hirschson said a formal complaint might be filed with the French over the diplomat's involvement.
israel-diplomats-3-1-522x293.jpg
Marion Castaing is dragged by soldiers
"If she did participate then a formal complaint will be filed because that is not the way diplomats behave," he said.
Israeli soldiers stopped the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) delivering emergency aid on Tuesday. On Wednesday ICRC staff managed to put up some tents but the army forced them to take the shelters down.
Diplomats from France, Britain, Spain, Ireland, Australia and the European Union's political office, arrived on Friday with more supplies.
A spokesman at the British Consulate General in Jerusalem said London was "seriously concerned" by the Makhul demolitions and the refusal to let villagers receive aid.
He said: "We have repeatedly made clear to the Israeli authorities our concerns over such demolitions, which we view as causing unnecessary suffering to ordinary Palestinians, as harmful to the peace process, and as contrary to international humanitarian law."
Israel has destroyed more than 500 property owned by Palestinians in the West Bank and mostly Arab east Jerusalem since the beginning of this year, displacing 862 people, according to the UN's Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs.
 
hehe..."emergency aid"...you just couldn't make it up.

100,000s of people have been shot, slaughtered, gassed and/or eaten across the border for 2.5 years and the EU armed with Palestinian cameramen is busy delivering emergengy supplies in the WB.
 
Despicable stuff by the Israelis. I remember once I way buying coffee at a coffee shop in Arad, and I'll never forget the look they gave me when I asked if they could give me an additional shot and add more vanilla to my latte. Another time it took me almost half an hour to check out at a hotel in Beersheba. There was no need for the sub-human treatment. Trampling on the international law at any given moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.