22/3/2007

"A UN human rights envoy has likened Israel's treatment of Palestinians in occupied territory to "apartheid", and said that failure to tackle the situation will make it hard to solve abuses elsewhere."

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/181D9639-1F51-46E5-839E-292BBEFDE726.htm

"I wonder if any of these numbers are authentic."

If you follow the links you will see how the numbers were calculated, what sources were used, and you can determine yourself whether the numbers are authentic. But just for the record - THEY ARE!!!

"It's clearly a conspiracy theory and I don't know how you guys can claim to know anything about this without being Mathematics Professors."

ren - I think you're being sacrcastic, but just in case you aren't this ain't a conspiracy. It's drawing attention to the fact that America spends an obscene and disproportionate amount of money on Israel. This money is used to fund further military incursions; further uninspected nuclear, chemical and biological weapons; further illegal settlements (http://www.videosift.com/video/Illegal-Israeli-Settlements-British-Press-vs-American-Media) and apartheid walls; further illegal attacks on Lebanon; and a great deal of this money is sent back to America to fund AIPAC's continued campaign to mislead the American people and silence any public criticism of Israeli government policy.

Firstly, Syria does not have nuclear weapons - nor are there any signs that it is intending to develop them. Secondly when you say ' Which country in the Middle East hasn't constantly tried to wipe out its neighbors?' you surely aren't referring to Israel. For over fifty years they have attempted to wipe out the Palestinians through land-grabs, military operations, economic sanctions, resource stealing, apartheid walls, etc. Furthermore, they have collectively punished the Lebanese people on numerous occasions by indiscriminately bombing their capital city, major industrial centers, and infrastructure. Thirdly, Israel has a huge undeclared arsenal of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons which is subject to no outside inspections. They acquired this arsenal by lying to the Americans and the rest of the international community. Iran (and Iraq for that matter) has been a lot more open about its nuclear program than Israel ever has.

While I strongly support the right of Israel to exist it is about time the international community put pressure on Israel to conform to the same international standards that it seems so desperate to impose on the Islamic world. Israel, and America (heavily influenced by AIPAC) are just as responsible for bringing instability to the Middle East as Iran, Syria, and Iraq.

One final point, when Pakistan got the bomb it was referred to by the Western Media as 'the Islamic bomb' - despite the fact that Pakistan was being ruled by a non-Islamic party at the time. However, we never hear Israel's undeclared and illegal nuclear arsenal being referred to as 'the Jewish bomb, or India's as the 'Hindu bomb', or America's as 'the Christian bomb'. This is just another example of the complete double-standards of the Western media.

Great post!

It's about time the Gulf states started exerting political pressure on Israel (and America) to negotiate. I've always been pissed off by the way the Gulf governments encourage a domestic anti-Israel rhetoric (which at times is often anti-semitic) - in part to appease the more radical sections of the public - but make no real attempt to exert political influence on America or Israel to negotiate with the Palestinians.

It's nice to see an Israeli politician being put on the spot, but he doesn't look uncomfortable, and I don't really hear anything new. We've heard the same rhetoric before - and he shows no signs of compromising on the important issues. Settlements were removed because they were too costly to defend - not as a gesture of peace towards the Palestinians. Furthermore it is perfectly clear that they intend to steal further land for settlements in areas which are cheaper to defend. He makes no apologies for the illegal apartheid wall and again, as always, there is no possibility of any kind of joint control of Jerusalem. "Israel never initiated...Israel always just reacted" - this is completely untrue. Israel initiated the murder and expulsion of Palestinians in 1948. Furthermore, if violence stops Israel will still not negotiate on the key issues - like Jerusalem and the right of return. Israel did not simply attack Hezbollah, they collectively punished the Lebanese people - and for this he makes no apology. "I'm not making any account with the past" - again, Israel refers to past injustices committed against the Jewish people and Israel to justify its actions, but will never accept that Palestinian actions are a direct result of past injustices committed against them by Israel. How has Israel forgiven and forgotten?

I'm jealous Gwaan! I wish I'd thought to post this.

This was/is a GREAT song. The Specials are KING!

But every time I hear it I think "How could the world have turned a blind eye to apartheid for so long???" And I know there are things happening in the world now that we will look back on and wonder the same thing.

I am looking into the Article on jordanian citizenship and the possibility that I received incorrect information. However, my point still stands. Israel is not guilty of apartheid as the country has a policy of not discriminating against muslims and christians as I mentioned in the quote from Barak.

In reply to your comment:
“Article III(2) of Jordanian Law No. 6 of 1954 on Nationality (last amended 1987) states that: "Any person who, not being Jewish, possessed Palestinian nationality before 15 May 1948 and was a regular resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan between 20 December 1949 and 16 February 1954."

There is no provision in the Jordanian citizenship laws that discriminates against Jews - simply for being Jewish. Jordan was flooded by Palestinian refugees after they were forced off their own land by the Jewish army, Irgun and Haganah. This huge influx of refugees left Jordan with a difficult situation. It gave citizenship to non-Jews because otherwise they would have been stateless. However, Jewish people who possessed Palestinian citizenship before 1948 were not stateless and had citizenship of a new country - Israel.

In reply to your comment:
“Ok I'm back from my mini vacation with my kids. Damn there are so many comments here and I dont have time to deal with all of them. I hate when these things come up when I'm on vacation.

Farhad, Joedirt and others, Palestinians are not Israeli citizens. If you want to argue that Israel is praticing apartheid then be prepared to criticise every arab country in the region. While Israel is not perfect it is a secular pluralistic society that accepts all religions. In contrast to many Arab countries that have declared Islam to be the state religion. Anyone in the world can become Israeli. Jordon has a law barring only Jews from becoming citizens and Jews and christians are descriminated against and are not provided with the same rights as muslims in every Arab country.

In 2002 the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the government of Israel is not allowed to allocate land based on religion or race. Here is a quote from Israels Chief jusstice Aharon Barak "The principle of equality prohibts the state from distinquishing between its citizens on the basis of religion or nationality...The Jewish character of the state does not permit Israel to discriminate between its citizens"

Critisizing Israel is one thing, singling out Israel is anti-semitic

””

From AICE (Surely, you can't argue with leading Jewish-American non-profit)

The integration of religion and state in Israel is visible in many fields, some expressly regulated by statutory law[18] and some relying on a legal regulation. Among them are the application of a religious test to the Law of Return[19], which provides for automatic Israeli citizenship to Jews wishing to reside permanently in Israel; the exclusive application of religious jurisdiction and religious law in matters of marriage and divorce[20]; the conduct of religious education financed out of state funds[21]; and the establishment of a special Ministry of Religious Affairs[22].

You know what, I am tired of your ignorant crap and really am bored of listening to your non-sense. How is criticizing Israel as being pro-apartheid have anything to do with anti-semitism. I never said other Arab countries weren't also. But clearly if you are Muslim (Palestinian or Israeli) you are going to have a hard time traveling anywhere.

You know what IS anti-semitic? Putting Palestinians in fenced in concentration camps. Learn WTF "semitic" means you ignorant parroting moron.

In reply to your comment:
“Palestinians are not Israeli citizens. If you want to argue that Israel is praticing apartheid then be prepared to criticise every arab country in the region. While Israel is not perfect it is a secular pluralistic society that accepts all religions. In contrast to many Arab countries that have declared Islam to be the state religion. Anyone in the world can become Israeli. Jordon has a law barring only Jews from becoming citizens and Jews and christians are descriminated against and are not provided with the same rights as muslims in every Arab country.


Critisizing Israel is one thing, singling out Israel is anti-semitic”

Article III(2) of Jordanian Law No. 6 of 1954 on Nationality (last amended 1987) states that: "Any person who, not being Jewish, possessed Palestinian nationality before 15 May 1948 and was a regular resident in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan between 20 December 1949 and 16 February 1954."

There is no provision in the Jordanian citizenship laws that discriminates against Jews - simply for being Jewish. Jordan was flooded by Palestinian refugees after they were forced off their own land by the Jewish army, Irgun and Haganah. This huge influx of refugees left Jordan with a difficult situation. It gave citizenship to non-Jews because otherwise they would have been stateless. However, Jewish people who possessed Palestinian citizenship before 1948 were not stateless and had citizenship of a new country - Israel.

In reply to your comment:
“Ok I'm back from my mini vacation with my kids. Damn there are so many comments here and I dont have time to deal with all of them. I hate when these things come up when I'm on vacation.

Farhad, Joedirt and others, Palestinians are not Israeli citizens. If you want to argue that Israel is praticing apartheid then be prepared to criticise every arab country in the region. While Israel is not perfect it is a secular pluralistic society that accepts all religions. In contrast to many Arab countries that have declared Islam to be the state religion. Anyone in the world can become Israeli. Jordon has a law barring only Jews from becoming citizens and Jews and christians are descriminated against and are not provided with the same rights as muslims in every Arab country.

In 2002 the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the government of Israel is not allowed to allocate land based on religion or race. Here is a quote from Israels Chief jusstice Aharon Barak "The principle of equality prohibts the state from distinquishing between its citizens on the basis of religion or nationality...The Jewish character of the state does not permit Israel to discriminate between its citizens"

Critisizing Israel is one thing, singling out Israel is anti-semitic

”

"Israel is well known for treating its Arab population as second class citizens."

Gwaa, no one said Israel is perfect. Ofcourse there will be some level of discrimination against arabs. That may never change. It just so happens that Israeli settlers and a lot of orthodox israelis are discriminted against as well. I've heard first hand from Israelis that many of them dont like first Arabs, second orthodox jews. In fact one secular Israeli who was removed from Gaza as part of the disengagement was declined housing in a secular settlement inside Israel because he was classified as a gaza settler and they didnt want his type around.

So there's discrimination. It doesnt mean its apartheid.

Gwaa, no one said Israel is perfect. Ofcourse there will be some level of discrimination against arabs. That may never change. It just so happens that Israeli settlers and a lot of orthodox israelis are discriminted against as well. I've heard first hand from Israelis that many of them dont like first Arabs, second orthodox jews. In fact one secular Israeli who was removed from Gaza as part of the disengagement was declined housing in a secular settlement inside Israel because he was classified as a gaza settler and they didnt want his type around.

So there's discrimination. It doesnt mean its apartheid.

In reply to your comment:
“In response to your ill-informed comments: "If you want to argue that Israel is an apartheid nation then prove it by showing how it discriminates and racially segregates its OWN citizens."

It always annoys me when people say that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Firstly, this is just factually wrong, for example Kuwait is a democracy. Secondly, democracy does not simply mean the rule of the majority. A democracy is also measured by the way the majority treat the minorities - how they protect minority rights.

Israel is well known for treating its Arab population as second class citizens. In fact during the recent invasion of Lebanon, the majority of people killed by Hezbollah rockets in northern Israel were Arabs who were not given access to bomb shelters. Assad Ghanem, senior lecturer in political science at Israel's Haifa University has argued that "This is not a democracy, it is an ethnocracy...We are not full citizens, this country is only for the Jews." Arab Israelis now make up 20 percent of Israel's six million-plus population, but until very recently there was not a single Arab minister (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6254691.stm). The appointment of the first Arab minister is an important step, and one which should be applauded - but the backlash from many areas of the Israeli public shows what a divisive issue this is in Israel.

Formally, Israeli law guarantees equality to Israeli Arabs, but in reality Israeli Arabs experience discrimination in many aspects of life. A report by an Israeli judge (Theodor Or) who wrote 'The Report by the State Commission of Inquiry into the Events of October 2000', stated that:

"The Arab citizens of Israel live in a reality in which they experience discrimination as Arabs. This inequality has been documented in a large number of professional surveys and studies, has been confirmed in court judgments and government resolutions, and has also found expression in reports by the state comptroller and in other official documents. Although the Jewish majority’s awareness of this discrimination is often quite low, it plays a central role in the sensibilities and attitudes of Arab citizens. This discrimination is widely accepted, both within the Arab sector and outside it, and by official assessments, as a chief cause of agitation." Furthermore, the Orr Commission of Inquiry's report stated that the "Government handling of the Arab sector has been primarily neglectful and discriminatory", that the Government "did not show sufficient sensitivity to the needs of the Arab population, and did not take enough action to allocate state resources in an equal manner." As a result, "serious distress prevailed in the Arab sector in various areas. Evidence of distress included poverty, unemployment, a shortage of land, serious problems in the education system, and substantially defective infrastructure.'"

The National Committee for the Heads of the Arab Local Authorities in Israel addressed the unequal treatment of Israeli Arabs in a document produced in December 2006. They argued that: "The Israeli legal system includes a number of core laws that produce and reinforce inequality between the Arabs and the Jews in Israel (de jure) ... The official bias is not restricted to symbols such as the Israeli flag, but also to deeper legal issues concerning all Palestinian Arabs ... [t]he official definition of Israel as a Jewish state created a fortified ideological barrier in the face of obtaining full equality for the Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel ... We, the Palestinians in Israel, are an integral part of this place ... Israel has tried over the past decades to disengage us from this place, not through physical transfer but through intellectual emotional transfer. Israel has tried to create a new identity on the basis of 'loyalty to the state' ... The State has not determined a position acceptable to us yet in terms of nurturing our Arab culture."”

Ok I'm back from my mini vacation with my kids. Damn there are so many comments here and I dont have time to deal with all of them. I hate when these things come up when I'm on vacation.

Farhad, Joedirt and others, Palestinians are not Israeli citizens. If you want to argue that Israel is praticing apartheid then be prepared to criticise every arab country in the region. While Israel is not perfect it is a secular pluralistic society that accepts all religions. In contrast to many Arab countries that have declared Islam to be the state religion. Anyone in the world can become Israeli. Jordon has a law barring only Jews from becoming citizens and Jews and christians are descriminated against and are not provided with the same rights as muslims in every Arab country.

In 2002 the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the government of Israel is not allowed to allocate land based on religion or race. Here is a quote from Israels Chief jusstice Aharon Barak "The principle of equality prohibts the state from distinquishing between its citizens on the basis of religion or nationality...The Jewish character of the state does not permit Israel to discriminate between its citizens"

Critisizing Israel is one thing, singling out Israel is anti-semitic

http://www.adl.org/Israel/apartheid/confronting_the_apartheid_analogy.pdf

And here is the ADL on the apartheid analogy. I can't stand Dersh either, but the sourcing of the AIPAC paper does appear to be thin.

'Apartheid' like 'Holocaust' is one of those words that have a tendency to be overused when an advocate wants to draw attention to an issue. The word is an Afrikaans word for 'apartness' and it seems to me to describe a very specific system of division and deprivation based solely upon race.

That said, I couldn't disagree more with the ADL's position on the West Bank and Gaza. In those areas, I think that there is clearly a political movement of division, deprivation, and dominion based solely upon national origin. Until Israel comes to terms with the problems in these areas, the apartheid charge (however else unsupported) will stick.

rickegee

Thanks for posting the Dershowitz paper - although I can't stand Dershowitz it is always good to hear both sides of an argument!

I think it's a little unfair to accuse Jimmy Carter of cynicism. I think he used the word apartheid to illustrate the appalling treatment of the Palestinians and the obvious, although not perfect, similarities with the situation in South Africa. The vast majority of Americans were opposed to apartheid in South Africa - and I think Carter believes that if they knew more about the situation in Israel/Palestine they would be opposed to what is going on there too.

He may also have used the term 'apartheid' for exactly the reason you say - 'that American media will cover race'. It is far more difficult getting any media or political forum in the States to fairly cover the issue of Israel/Palestine without incredible pro-Israeli government policy bias - as Carter is arguing.

In the interest of further nuance, I attach the Alan Dershowitz response to the Israel Lobby paper:

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/research/working_papers/dershowitzreply.pdf

I am particularly wary of Zionist conspiracy theories, whether they are advanced by Palestinians, anti-AIPAC people like the Harvard guys, Edward Said, or Jimmy Carter. This line of reasoning draws upon a history of thought that is mostly unsavory and based solely on a fear of the imaginary 'Judeofascist'.

However, there are a lot of truths in this thread, and in the Carter book, about the untenable state of affairs in the Palestinian ghettos of Israel.

I would be interested to know what Jimmy Carter thinks about the Israeli/Palestinian negotiations of the 1990s. I do love how Jimmy Carter takes on human rights issues and acts as an extra-governmental moral gadfly.

However, I also marvel at his cynicism. He uses the word 'apartheid' to sell books and to get on TV. He knows well that the word has racialist overtones and that American media will cover race. The situation in Israel is far, far, far more complicated than South African-style apartheid.

Reln you speak like someone whose never been to Israel to see just how un-apartheid the treatment is.