Sixth Annual Israeli Apartheid Week

[earth_as_one]

What is there to investigate, and while these so called investigations go on, how many more must die because of Israelis caution and hesitation in fear of distancing one country or another. Like Moshe Dayan, Ariel Sharon is/was the perfect person to bring peace. The same fiction/lies could be written about Mahatma Gandhi, you pick a topic and post every negative thing you can find irregardless of source. Jerusalem belongs to Israel, always has and always will. Do you even know exactly what the word racist means. (Palestinians and Israelis are mostly the same people racially, like the Irish and Brits.)

You statement indicates that you support making one group of people homeless refugees and awarding their homes to other people, based on who these people are. Like Goober, you also refuse to condemn war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by one side in this dispute and refuse to acknowledge the injustice and oppression suffering of one side in this dispute based on who they are.

Do you even know exactly what the word racist means?


Back on topic.

Opponents of Israeli Apartheid includes many prominent Jews.

For example, Henry Siegman, former national director of the American Jewish Congress:

Imposing Middle East Peace
By Henry Siegman

January 7, 2010

Israel's relentless drive to establish "facts on the ground" in the occupied West Bank, a drive that continues in violation of even the limited settlement freeze to which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu committed himself, seems finally to have succeeded in locking in the irreversibility of its colonial project. As a result of that "achievement," one that successive Israeli governments have long sought in order to preclude the possibility of a two-state solution, Israel has crossed the threshold from "the only democracy in the Middle East" to the only apartheid regime in the Western world.

The inevitability of such a transformation has been held out not by "Israel bashers" but by the country's own leaders. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon referred to that danger, as did Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who warned that Israel could not escape turning into an apartheid state if it did not relinquish "almost all the territories, if not all," including the Arab parts of East Jerusalem.

Olmert ridiculed Israeli defense strategists who, he said, had learned nothing from past experiences and were stuck in the mindset of the 1948 war of independence. "With them, it is all about tanks and land and controlling territories and controlled territories and this hilltop and that hilltop," he said. "All these things are worthless. Who thinks seriously that if we sit on another hilltop, on another hundred meters, that this is what will make the difference for the State of Israel's basic security?"

It is now widely recognized in most Israeli circles--although denied by Israel's government--that the settlements have become so widespread and so deeply implanted in the West Bank as to rule out the possibility of their removal (except for a few isolated and sparsely populated ones) by this or any future Israeli government unless compelled to do so by international intervention, an eventuality until now considered entirely unlikely.

It is not only the settlements' proliferation and size that have made their dismantlement impossible. Equally decisive have been the influence of Israel's settler-security-industrial complex, which conceived and implemented this policy; the recent disappearance of a viable pro-peace political party in Israel; and the infiltration by settlers and their supporters in the religious-national camp into key leadership positions in Israel's security and military establishments.

Olmert was mistaken in one respect, for he said Israel would turn into an apartheid state when the Arab population in Greater Israel outnumbers the Jewish population. But the relative size of the populations is not the decisive factor in such a transition. Rather, the turning point comes when a state denies national self-determination to a part of its population--even one that is in the minority--to which it has also denied the rights of citizenship.

When a state's denial of the individual and national rights of a large part of its population becomes permanent, it ceases to be a democracy. When the reason for that double disenfranchisement is that population's ethnic and religious identity, the state is practicing a form of apartheid, or racism, not much different from the one that characterized South Africa from 1948 to 1994. The democratic dispensation that Israel provides for its mostly Jewish citizens cannot hide its changed character. By definition, democracy reserved for privileged citizens--while all others are kept behind checkpoints, barbed-wire fences and separation walls commanded by the Israeli army--is not democracy but its opposite....

The rest of the two page article here:
Imposing Middle East Peace

 

[ironsides]

You statement indicates that you support making one group of people homeless refugees and awarding their homes to other people, based on who these people are. Like Goober, you also refuse to condemn war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by one side in this dispute and refuse to acknowledge the injustice and oppression suffering of one side in this dispute based on who they are.

Do you even know exactly what the word racist means?


Back on topic.

Opponents of Israeli Apartheid includes many prominent Jews.

For example, Henry Siegman, former national director of the American Jewish Congress:

You could oppose the cruelty done by both sides if you wanted to be fair about it. You only condemn war crimes committed by Israel and ignore those committed by the Palestinians. (that is why I ignore what is being done, both sides seem to enjoy it.) This has turned into a blood feud, similar to what happened in Northern Ireland. As there, it was the people themselves who said we have had enough, and until that happens the Israel Palestinian issue will go on for years. You and all the "anti this or that" groups will not stop it.

Do you even know exactly what the word racist means? Yes, this is not a race war.

 

[CDNBear]

You statement indicates that you support making one group of people homeless refugees and awarding their homes to other people, based on who these people are. Like Goober, you also refuse to condemn war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by one side in this dispute and refuse to acknowledge the injustice and oppression suffering of one side in this dispute based on who they are.

:roll:

Do you even know exactly what the word racist means?

We both do, it seems to be you that has the issue here.

Opponents of Israeli Apartheid includes many prominent Jews.

Most Israeli's do.

For example, Henry Siegman, former national director of the American Jewish Congress:

Again I must ask, do you actually read these things? Or do you just blindly post what others have told you "This mean something"?

Olmert was mistaken in one respect, for he said Israel would turn into an apartheid state when the Arab population in Greater Israel outnumbers the Jewish population. But the relative size of the populations is not the decisive factor in such a transition. Rather, the turning point comes when a state denies national self-determination to a part of its population--even one that is in the minority--to which it has also denied the rights of citizenship.

When a state's denial of the individual and national rights of a large part of its population becomes permanent, it ceases to be a democracy. When the reason for that double disenfranchisement is that population's ethnic and religious identity, the state is practicing a form of apartheid, or racism, not much different from the one that characterized South Africa from 1948 to 1994. The democratic dispensation that Israel provides for its mostly Jewish citizens cannot hide its changed character. By definition, democracy reserved for privileged citizens--while all others are kept behind checkpoints, barbed-wire fences and separation walls commanded by the Israeli army--is not democracy but its opposite....

Your highlights, take his commentary out of context.

On page two of this article, of which I agree almost 100% with, he outlines Palestinian culpability, and more importantly puts the construction of homes in Jerusalem in perspective.

You truly are funny.

 

[CDNBear]

You could oppose the cruelty done by both sides if you wanted to be fair about it. You only condemn war crimes committed by Israel and ignore those committed by the Palestinians. (that is why I ignore what is being done, both sides seem to enjoy it.) This has turned into a blood feud, similar to what happened in Northern Ireland. As there, it was the people themselves who said we have had enough, and until that happens the Israel Palestinian issue will go on for years. You and all the "anti this or that" groups will not stop it.

Do you even know exactly what the word racist means? Yes, this is not a race war.

Well said.

 

[DurkaDurka]

I must have missed Israel Apartheid Week in Toronto during the last 2 weeks, judging by the lack of stories covering it (even in eye weekly), I would have to assume no one cares.

 

[CDNBear]

I must have missed Israel Apartheid Week in Toronto during the last 2 weeks, judging by the lack of stories covering it (even in eye weekly), I would have to assume no one cares.

No one with any decency anyways...:lol:

 

[earth_as_one]

I condemn all Palestinian war crimes.

List of all Palestinian war crimes:
1) Firing mortars and rockets at Israeli civilians. This war crime has resulted in 28 deaths over the past 10 years, some of whom were Israeli civilians. This war crime did not result in any deaths during the year preceding 2008/2009 Israeli slaughter of Palestinian civilians known as Operation Cast Lead and has caused only one death since then. I support bringing those responsible for this war crime to justice.

Any Israeli apologist wish to condemn all Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity as I have just condemned all Palestinian war crimes? They are listed and detailed in this UN report along with the above Palestinian war crime:
United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict

 

[earth_as_one]

I must have missed Israel Apartheid Week in Toronto during the last 2 weeks, judging by the lack of stories covering it (even in eye weekly), I would have to assume no one cares.

You are right. Opposition to Israel's war crimes and crimes against humanity doesn't get a lot of press in Canada. In fact you'd be hard pressed to find a Canadian news story which details the contents of the Goldstone report or criticizes Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Canada's government unshakably supports Israel, even when their soldiers put handcuffed children into pits next to tanks and artillery as they shell their relatives. We all saw the pictures of Israel shelling civilian areas with high explosives and chemical weapons which melt human flesh on contact. Try finding a Canadian politician statement condemning these and other Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity. Compare that to finding statements by Canadian politicians condemning Palestinian war crimes and its clear Canada's government has chosen sides in this conflict. Another clue are recent attempts by our government to criminalize any criticism of Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity.

I agree with you that few people in Canada care about these war crimes and crimes against humanity. But that doesn't mean they aren't important or that they aren't going on. Its more a statement about Canada and Canadians rather than an indicator that these things aren't happening.

What do you believe? Do you accept the findings of the Goldstone Report? Do you believe that referencing the Goldstone Report should be a criminal offense?

 

[MHz]

What is there to investigate, and while these so called investigations go on, how many more must die because of Israelis caution and hesitation in fear of distancing one country or another.

Surely you aren't trying to indicated there is a 'wedge' between the US and Israel over this incident about the land grab in Jerusalem?

Here's the problem: This is one of those diplomatic flareups that may trigger fire drills in the governments and polemic fireworks from pundits but which, upon analysis, is really much less than meets the eye. It's actually a fake crisis.
First, of all, on the face of it the Israeli action seems genuinely to have been much more of a screwup than a calculated affront. And if someone was trying to undercut the U.S.-Israel relationship, it seems certain they represented a fringe group and not the Netanyahu government. Subsequent statements of defiance by Netanyahu regarding building within Jerusalem were more in response to U.S. efforts to make additional political hay out of the dustup than they were related to the initial misstep.
Second, there is no real "or else" backing up U.S. demands for a reversal, an inquiry and the offering of a meaningful olive branch to the Palestinians. Obama, with few foreign-policy accomplishments to point to thus far in his young presidency, needs the peace process at least as much if not more than Netanyahu does. Time and leverage are, for the near term at least, on Netanyahu's side ... which is one reason why the U.S. government is opportunistically trying to use this crisis as a pretext to gain concessions out of the Israelis in advance of talks with the Palestinians.
Further, the United States can't really turn its back on Israel and embrace the Palestinian side any more closely than it has because there is really no there there. And were the United States to ally itself more closely to the Palestinian position (as I believe some at high levels wish they could), the administration knows they would inevitably find the Palestinian authorities made gaffes of the magnitude of this most recent Israeli blunder on an uncomfortably frequent basis -- thanks to the fact that the Palestinian government is more defined by rifts than by meaningful accomplishments.
Finally, most importantly, the U.S. argument that the Israelis need to be seen to be more quietly cooperative with U.S. efforts or Obama won't be able to effectively stop the Iranian nuclear weapons program is undercut by the fact that the United States won't, in the end, actually stop the Iranian nuclear program. We just don't have the domestic will or the international support to do so. Just as each successive deadline for Iranian compliance with international cease and desist requirements has evaporated so too will the illusions that the U.S. can engineer anything like effective sanctions against the Iranians in an effort to penalize them for their noncompliance.



The fake U.S.-Israel crisis: Obama's flawed response to an ally's gaffe | David Rothkopf


You aren't taking into account the 'calming effect' a hanging has on the 'law breakers'. A Court with the will and the way to executed members og any Government that intentionally commit war crimes or allows them to be committed is as guilty of the crime as if they were there in person. I think you are deluding yourself of you think that would not curtail just about every crime a politician can commit, no matter how much they are bribed via the Banksters.

Like Moshe Dayan, Ariel Sharon is/was the perfect person to bring peace.

Ariel's nickname is " the butcher " he got for his treatment of civilians once his military forces had them bottled up and unarmed. Women and children were targeted with the same method of death as any man, fighter or not.

Moshe Dayan once said: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.”

To his credit he used the military against other military powers. Those words were put into practice in the Sinai in '67. After cutting off supply lines and letting the Egyptians surrender the air assault continued until they were all dead. I wonder if the Liberty picked up the calls from the pilots saying there were signaling that they surrendered . Sinking her with all hands would cover up a major war crime.

The same fiction/lies could be written about Mahatma Gandhi, you pick a topic and post every negative thing you can find irregardless of source.

List all the Nations Israel has something against. Europe is targeted by Israeli nukes, how do they feel about that fact?

Jerusalem belongs to Israel, always has and always will. Do you even know exactly what the word racist means. (Palestinians and Israelis are mostly the same people racially, like the Irish and Brits.)

It is a form of discrimination, using a military force against a civilian population is a crime that automatically goes to the highest court and there are no appeals (I would hope) I was quite convinced they should be before a war-crimes court even before operation cast lead. That includes both sides all the way back to Nov,47.
Jews see themselves as being a race apart defined by God, who has written that He has turned His back on the 12 Tribes until He has claimed the land again at which time He will invite Israel back. They were under contract they broke the contract God had them removed by a Gentile army, Neb. Gentile armies have always controlled the land, Jews were permitted a Temple as part of their Religious services, when that proved not to be enough Rome destroyed the Temple. The prophecy for that event actually call Romans the people of the Prince to come. Jesus's Apostles were preaching the Gospel to Romans much earlier than 70AD. It was being preached in Rome by that year, and no the Roman army was not Christians, they were ungathered Gentiles, same as us. Gentiles are gathered at the time Jerusalem is taken away from the Gentiles. That same High Priest who comes from the 12 Tribes also has His back turned to Israel (as a Nation). Jews can convert to Christianity anytime. The elder Jews would have them killed but the option is there.
Their claim to the land cannot precede Abraham, the High Priest of Salem was favored by God, Salem was a Gentilian city that far back. The 'Je' was added for the 12 Tribes and it's last name change will be to New Jerusalem and it be for a pure people that is neither called Jew or Gentile.

You should be leary of taking a Jews understanding of the Bible when the topic is related to anything after 70 AD. Or at least also read the viewpoint of the other side of the coin. The view of the Jews who believe the exile into the Nations is still in effect make much nicer neighbors than the ones currently running Israel.
That $3B in arms the US gives Israel yearly would not be needed, that doesn't mean it would then be sent as cash, the arms would just be given to another Nation in the region. Donations and contracts for humanitarian projects would still pour in from other sourses. (if the bankers were making money at the same time)

 

[MHz]

No one with any decency anyways...:lol:

What an indecent thing to say.

 

[CDNBear]

I condemn all Palestinian war crimes.

No you don't

List of all Palestinian war crimes:
1) Firing mortars and rockets at Israeli civilians. This war crime has resulted in 28 deaths over the past 10 years, some of whom were Israeli civilians. This war crime did not result in any deaths during the year preceding 2008/2009 Israeli slaughter of Palestinian civilians known as Operation Cast Lead and has caused only one death since then. I support bringing those responsible for this war crime to justice.

8O...:roll:...:lol:...And there's the proof.

Any Israeli apologist wish to condemn all Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity as I have just condemned all Palestinian war crimes?

I condemn all Israeli war crimes.

They are listed and detailed in this UN report along with the above Palestinian war crime:
United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict

Unfortunately, I can not and will not believe unsubstantiated, unsupported and suspicious testimony, to determine their findings, such as...

1, The report finds that Israel intentionally targeted the al Bader flour mill to deny civilians sustenance. According to the UN, the Palestinians needed 450 tons a day. While the mill can only produce 220 tons of flour per day, and the Israeli's shipped 618 tons a day.

Furthermore, Israel implemented a daily recess, to facilitate the transfer of humanitarian aid. This is compounded by the fact that the report failed to acknowledge that Hamas repeatedly confiscated humanitarian aid, as acknowledged and condemned by UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, who was prompted to demand Hamas release the commodities. Why was Hamas not charged with "denying sustenance to the civilian population" by the "mission"?

And of course, lets not forget, that had Israel truly wanted to deny the civilian population of flour, it could have simply ended to shipments of raw wheat to the mill. :lol:

Seems to be some irrational thinking in the Goldstone report there.

2, The accusation that Israel purposely targeted civilians, in Mosques.

Well, given the fact that the "mission" ignored credible eyewitness testimony, along with photographic evidence, that there were secondary explosions, ie the incidental firing of heated munitions at said Mosques.

The eyewitness testimony, could not determine the direction of the projectile, nor what type of projectile was used, or by whom it was fired. But the "mission" was able to determine, without fact, and without question both the motive and the responsible party. And of course that was Israel, targeting civilians.

Evidence such as...Of the 15 people killed in the attack on the al-Maqadmah Mosque, 5 were identified by an Hamas website, as members of Iz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas's terrorist wing. And 2 others were identified, by the same website, as members of Al Quds Brigade, Islamic Jihad's terrorist wing. These identification were complete with personal histories, including their accomplishments in attacking Israeli civilian targets and their beliefs in wiping Israel off the map.

One can only come to the conclusion, that the "mission" had a predetermined finding.

3, Why did the "mission" summarily dismiss, without cause, evidence, eyewitness testimony, including video and photographic proof that Hamas was using Hospitals and Ambulances?

4, The "mission" found that Israeli strikes on he al Zeytoun area were attacks on civilians, because it was considered a "pacifist area". When reports from both sides of the conflict reported armed clashes between Hamas and the IDF in the area.

This leads me to ask, why they chose to accept obviously suspicious "eyewitness" testimony.

Therefore, any other finds offered by that report are suspect at best. Any claims of Israeli war crimes are tainted by the shoddy and dare I say, criminal collation of evidence.

 

[DurkaDurka]

What do you believe? Do you accept the findings of the Goldstone Report? Do you believe that referencing the Goldstone Report should be a criminal offense?

I won't claim to have read the report but from my point of view, they have both been pretty barbaric to one another over the last 60 years. Labeling attacks & counter attacks as "war crimes" is not really conductive to anything though other then propaganda. The two sides are set in their respective positions and nothing is going to change that other then drastic changes being made by both, until then, more of the same.

 

[MHz]

I must have missed Israel Apartheid Week in Toronto during the last 2 weeks, judging by the lack of stories covering it (even in eye weekly), I would have to assume no one cares.

This would be it's 5th gathering, the not caring part and the lack of reporting is about 50 years old. If you didn't hear anything it must be working quite well. Did you know that Canadian Reservations are actually a racist (discriminatory) practice, they became one in about 1950, not a big deal apparently. Nobody bats an eye when 'we' keep them in court for 20 years at a cost of 100M to the taxpayers. Don't worry if that didn't make the news either, it was only deemed important enough for one day. lol

 

[CDNBear]

You are right. Opposition to Israel's war crimes and crimes against humanity doesn't get a lot of press in Canada. In fact you'd be hard pressed to find a Canadian news story which details the contents of the Goldstone report or criticizes Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The reason for that is, there is still some journalistic integrity in our media. They don't like printing or publishing lies and erroneous testimony.

Canada's government unshakably supports Israel, even when their soldiers put handcuffed children into pits next to tanks and artillery as they shell their relatives.

Unsupported by fact.

We all saw the pictures of Israel shelling civilian areas with high explosives and chemical weapons which melt human flesh on contact. Try finding a Canadian politician statement condemning these and other Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity. Compare that to finding statements by Canadian politicians condemning Palestinian war crimes and its clear Canada's government has chosen sides in this conflict. Another clue are recent attempts by our government to criminalize any criticism of Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Unsupported by fact and reality.

I agree with you that few people in Canada care about these war crimes and crimes against humanity. But that doesn't mean they aren't important or that they aren't going on. Its more a statement about Canada and Canadians rather than an indicator that these things aren't happening.

8O

What do you believe? Do you accept the findings of the Goldstone Report? Do you believe that referencing the Goldstone Report should be a criminal offense?

I actually do. It should be a hate crime to use something so contrived and full of lies to promote hate against Israel.

What an indecent thing to say.

The fact that you think it's indecent, means I'm right...thanx.

 

[YukonJack]

"Israeli Apartheid".

Classic illustration of what an oxymoron is.

 

[DurkaDurka]

This would be it's 5th gathering, the not caring part and the lack of reporting is about 50 years old. If you didn't hear anything it must be working quite well. Did you know that Canadian Reservations are actually a racist (discriminatory) practice, they became one in about 1950, not a big deal apparently. Nobody bats an eye when 'we' keep them in court for 20 years at a cost of 100M to the taxpayers. Don't worry if that didn't make the news either, it was only deemed important enough for one day. lol

No, it's called the mid east news fatigue. I have got to the point where I don't care what people do to each other over there. They need to work out their issues with gun, bombs, pens whatever, it's not an issue the UN will ever fix.

If you want to make this about my supposed ignorance. By all means. 8O

 

[MHz]

I won't claim to have read the report but from my point of view, they have both been pretty barbaric to one another over the last 60 years. Labeling attacks & counter attacks as "war crimes" is not really conductive to anything though other then propaganda. The two sides are set in their respective positions and nothing is going to change that other then drastic changes being made by both, until then, more of the same.

The broader picture is why can 33 Countries take land away from somebody and give it to a 'certain' group as a gift for no other reason than 'they used to live there'. At the same time they are executing people for doing the same thing if it is done at the point of a gun. That also means moved by death or threat of death and with no compensation for property.
The charges have to be pushed through to trials and execution if found guilty.
That also means the members of the security council would also have to be subject to the Courts decisions. lol
By the heritage Laws the ones living on Reservations have the right to reclaim their land or start being paid rent until a selling price can be established. Base price plus a certain percentage of the gross GDP, say 10% for starters.

 

[CDNBear]

I won't claim to have read the report but from my point of view, they have both been pretty barbaric to one another over the last 60 years. Labeling attacks & counter attacks as "war crimes" is not really conductive to anything though other then propaganda. The two sides are set in their respective positions and nothing is going to change that other then drastic changes being made by both, until then, more of the same.

This is why it won't end until a third party forces them to end it.

The broader picture is why can 33 Countries take land away from somebody and give it to a 'certain' group as a gift for no other reason than 'they used to live there'. At the same time they are executing people for doing the same thing if it is done at the point of a gun. That also means moved by death or threat of death and with no compensation for property.
The charges have to be pushed through to trials and execution if found guilty.
That also means the members of the security council would also have to be subject to the Courts decisions. lol
By the heritage Laws the ones living on Reservations have the right to reclaim their land or start being paid rent until a selling price can be established. Base price plus a certain percentage of the gross GDP, say 10% for starters.

 

[DurkaDurka]

The broader picture is why can 33 Countries take land away from somebody and give it to a 'certain' group as a gift for no other reason than 'they used to live there'. At the same time they are executing people for doing the same thing if it is done at the point of a gun. That also means moved by death or threat of death and with no compensation for property.
The charges have to be pushed through to trials and execution if found guilty.
That also means the members of the security council would also have to be subject to the Courts decisions. lol
By the heritage Laws the ones living on Reservations have the right to reclaim their land or start being paid rent until a selling price can be established. Base price plus a certain percentage of the gross GDP, say 10% for starters.

Ok, in your utopia the powers that created the present situation would be held responsible for their actions. In reality, would you rather see peace pursued or have both sides accuse each other of "war crimes" and continue more of the same?

 

[MHz]

No, it's called the mid east news fatigue. I have got to the point where I don't care what people do to each other over there. They need to work out their issues with gun, bombs, pens whatever, it's not an issue the UN will ever fix.

If you want to make this about my supposed ignorance. By all means. 8O

Nope, you are more than welcome to keep some distance on this topic or any other one, most people do.

It isn't like that place is the only place where somebody is held back from being able to 'fight back'. I happen to see the Palestinians since 1947 have been subjected to the very same things we preach to the world that we are opposed to. Reality would show that we only find those things detestable when it is us under the oppression. If we are the oppressors whatever we decide to do is deemed to be 'righteous'.