New developments in the Middle East

[Tangled up in Blue]

• Allowing all Israeli citizens, including Arabs, to have a vote
• Allowing all Israeli citizens, including Arabs to serve in the Israeli Parliament
• Allowing all Israeli citizens, including Arabs to serve in the Army (should they want to - they also have the right not to, something Jews don't have)
• Having no policies of segregation
• Having no policies of discrimination

Proves that Israel is not an apartheid state.

Why would Arabs want to vote in Israeli elections or serve in the Knesset or in the Israeli Army even if "technically" (ie officially) there are no policies of segregation or discrimination in Israel? :unsure:

 

[A Century United]

Why would Arabs want to vote in Israeli elections or serve in the Knesset or in the Israeli Army even if "technically" (ie officially) there are no policies of segregation or discrimination in Israel? :unsure:

It's called democracy, Barna, and as full passport-carrying Israeli citizens, why would't they? This is a classic example of tell a big enough lie loud enough and long enough and people will just swallow it. If you want to examine apartheid countries, take a good look at the Arab nations surrounding Israel and check out their policies towards non-Arabs, non-muslims and women.

NB - It is interesting to note that if the Palestinians had accepted the State and borders that they were offered by the UN in 1948, they would have a bigger State than the one they are trying to establish now after 64 years fighting. As I have said before, there will be no peace until the Palestinians learn to love their children more than they hate the Jews.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

If you want to examine apartheid countries, take a good look at the Arab nations surrounding Israel and check out their policies towards non-Arabs, non-muslims and women.

I've been to South Africa thanks.But only in 1996 when Mandela was President.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Are there going to be non jews housed in the new settlements? I don't think so.
Please read entries with some moderation and "a bit" apartheid to quote myself means just that before you go blowing extreme again.
I have not been to Israel and my knowledge is largely 2nd hand from a friend (with direct contact with both Arab and Zionist extremists) deployed with the current UN monitoring mission in the Golan Heights, press articles and news biographies such as Jeremy BOWEN and how he had his driver murdered by Israeli army sniper; a good source?
I do believe that both sides are wrong in which ever extreme views/actions they take.
I also believe there is a majority of decent, hard working people in the area who do not want further violence and that the new settlements are NOT going to help the peace protest.
Not recognizing and learning from history is stupid and ias the likes of PLO preach their hate based on Israel's past and unrepentant actions then that does NOT help either.
Mandela and his way forward is an example of facing the past and moving forward. That was my central point and like others on this blog I am not anti Israel or pro Arab just aware (and interested in) of some of the problems as they do affect and impact on many, many innocent people.

 

[londonblue]

Are there going to be non jews housed in the new settlements? I don't think so.
Please read entries with some moderation and "a bit" apartheid to quote myself means just that before you go blowing extreme again.
I have not been to Israel and my knowledge is largely 2nd hand from a friend (with direct contact with both Arab and Zionist extremists) deployed with the current UN monitoring mission in the Golan Heights, press articles and news biographies such as Jeremy BOWEN and how he had his driver murdered by Israeli army sniper; a good source?
I do believe that both sides are wrong in which ever extreme views/actions they take.
I also believe there is a majority of decent, hard working people in the area who do not want further violence and that the new settlements are NOT going to help the peace protest.
Not recognizing and learning from history is stupid and ias the likes of PLO preach their hate based on Israel's past and unrepentant actions then that does NOT help either.
Mandela and his way forward is an example of facing the past and moving forward. That was my central point and like others on this blog I am not anti Israel or pro Arab just aware (and interested in) of some of the problems as they do affect and impact on many, many innocent people.

You are indeed correct that extremists on both sides cause issues, but they really are the minority. The shame, however, is that they get the greatest amount of air time / column inches. For example, the I had never heard of the "Hand in Hand" web site I linked earlier. I was aware that these things happened, but not specific names of organisations. I certainly have never seen or read anything about them in the media...

However, whether or not Arabs move into the settlements doesn't prove one way or the other that Israel is an apartheid state. Their policies towards minorities does. And there are no policies that discriminate in any way against any minority in Israel.

To that extent South Africa is actually a poor example, because there the minority discriminated against the majority.

 

[londonblue]

Why would Arabs want to vote in Israeli elections or serve in the Knesset or in the Israeli Army even if "technically" (ie officially) there are no policies of segregation or discrimination in Israel? :unsure:

With all due respect Barna, that is a really dumb thing to say, and I would expect more from someone so obviously intelligent. Firstly, as A Century United says, it's called democracy, and as Israeli citizens, carrying Israeli passports why wouldn't they? Using voting as an example, why wouldn't Israeli Arabs want to serve in the Israeli Parliament and allow themselves to voice their opinions? They also have the right to (and have) set up their own political parties. Just because they're a minority doesn't mean they can't influence debates. Israel also uses proportional representation which means that minority parties have a big part to play when it comes to forming coalition governments.

Moreover, to refuse to concede that Israel isn't an apartheid state because it gives people rights that they don't want is, frankly childish. Let's face it, if Israel didn't give all its citizens the same rights then I'm sure you'd be the first to say that it was an apartheid state, so to say that it is an apartheid state because it does give all its people the same rights, but they don't want it, is just ridiculous. Especially as they do want it. You can't have it both ways. It's akin to the argument my kids have when one says to the other, "You can't play with that because I am" and the other replies "I didn't want to play with it anyway".

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

You are indeed correct that extremists on both sides cause issues, but they really are the minority. The shame, however, is that they get the greatest amount of air time / column inches. For example, the I had never heard of the "Hand in Hand" web site I linked earlier. I was aware that these things happened, but not specific names of organisations. I certainly have never seen or read anything about them in the media...

However, whether or not Arabs move into the settlements doesn't prove one way or the other that Israel is an apartheid state. Their policies towards minorities does. And there are no policies that discriminate in any way against any minority in Israel.

To that extent South Africa is actually a poor example, because there the minority discriminated against the majority.

You are picking points that you want to make your case when I am looking at a wider view and trying to see both sides; probably easier for me as unemotional about it. My example of Mandela was as to how the reconciliation "trials" allowed for slate cleaning and assisted lessening of hate and vendetta.

 

[londonblue]

You are picking points that you want to make your case when I am looking at a wider view and trying to see both sides; probably easier for me as unemotional about it. My example of Mandela was as to how the reconciliation "trials" allowed for slate cleaning and assisted lessening of hate and vendetta.

Some examples of "picking points" would be usefull...

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Some examples of "picking points" would be usefull...

Ignoring the displaced Palestinians completely from your posts other than saying it happened years ago but ignoring the fact that the off spring of these people are a huge issue that needs addressing. Clear enough for you? Would they have rights to their land back? would they have rights in Israel if they went back to their ancestral homes? Would they be welcomed back? Or do they and other arabs believe that the policy is to have enough time pass that their rights will be put down as outdated historical?

 

[londonblue]

Ignoring the displaced Palestinians completely from your posts other than saying it happened years ago but ignoring the fact that the off spring of these people are a huge issue that needs addressing. Clear enough for you? Would they have rights to their land back? would they have rights in Israel if they went back to their ancestral homes? Would they be welcomed back? Or do they and other arabs believe that the policy is to have enough time pass that their rights will be put down as outdated historical?

The original question was whether or not Israel is an apartheid state now. Things that happend in 1948 don't prove that it is now. That isn't picking points, but trying to keep to the point in question.

Personally I see this as a very logical question (probably because at heart I'm still a database developer!). To me the criteria for apartheid come from South Africa, e.g. SA used (even though the minority/majority thing is reversed) to actively exclude some of its citizens from participating in society. They didn't have the vote, they weren't allowed to use the same facilities (I remember seeing signs - albeit on the news, in papers and from talking to South African friends) saying "No blacks". They weren't allowed in the same hospitals.

So, that's the criteria. It then becomes an "if" statement (Using VBA syntax):

If "Israel meets those criteria" = true Then
Israel is an apartheid state
Else
Israel is not an apartheid state
End if

Since Israel doesn't meet that criteria then it isn't an apartheid state, and I can promise you (although I doubt you'd believe me) if I thought it was then I would say so, and actively campaign to change that.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Again you miss the point, this thread (original question?) is about the developments, the new settlements. These settlements are on land that was/is Palestinian. Can they (the displaced) come back to their land? If they can't, then, to use your "No Blacks" analogy is there a real or perceived "No Palestinians" sign? There isn't a yes or no answer is there? is the answer "a bit"?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Why would Arabs want to vote in Israeli elections or serve in the Knesset or in the Israeli Army even if "technically" (ie officially) there are no policies of segregation or discrimination in Israel? :unsure:

With all due respect Barna, that is a really dumb thing to say, and I would expect more from someone so obviously intelligent. Firstly, as A Century United says, it's called democracy, and as Israeli citizens, carrying Israeli passports why wouldn't they? Using voting as an example, why wouldn't Israeli Arabs want to serve in the Israeli Parliament and allow themselves to voice their opinions? They also have the right to (and have) set up their own political parties. Just because they're a minority doesn't mean they can't influence debates. Israel also uses proportional representation which means that minority parties have a big part to play when it comes to forming coalition governments.

Moreover, to refuse to concede that Israel isn't an apartheid state because it gives people rights that they don't want is, frankly childish. Let's face it, if Israel didn't give all its citizens the same rights then I'm sure you'd be the first to say that it was an apartheid state, so to say that it is an apartheid state because it does give all its people the same rights, but they don't want it, is just ridiculous. Especially as they do want it. You can't have it both ways. It's akin to the argument my kids have when one says to the other, "You can't play with that because I am" and the other replies "I didn't want to play with it anyway".

Sorry to disappoint you.I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say that Israel is an apatheid state.
However, there are most certainly tensions between Israelis and Arabs within Israel and to suggest there are not, is to be at best, economical with the truth.
I consider myself to be a friend of Israel but I agree with Blue and Pink Army that you seem to be almost willfully ignoring the historical background to the Israeli/Arab conflict, which is the direct cause of so many of today's problems that Israel has with its Arab neighbours over the establishment of a Palestinian state.

 

[londonblue]

Sorry to disappoint you.I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say that Israel is an apatheid state.
However, there are most certainly tensions between Israelis and Arabs within Israel and to suggest there are not, is to be at best, economical with the truth.
I consider myself to be a friend of Israel but I agree with Blue and Pink Army that you seem to be almost willfully ignoring the historical background to the Israeli/Arab conflict, which is the direct cause of so many of today's problems that Israel has with its Arab neighbours over the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Ok. I think we're in agreement. I too don't believe Israel is an apartheid state. After all if it was the UN wouldn't hesitate to impose sanctions, and given that none of the countries that accuse Israel of being so haven't even bothered to take this to the UN speaks volumes.

However, I feel you are ignoring certain things I have said. I have also said Israel isn't perfect. Of course there are tensions between Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis (blimey, given the situation with Gaza I'd be amazed if there weren't), but that doesn't constitute apartheid.

I'm not ignoring the historical background. The point I am making is around is Israel an apartheid state now. (If you want to talk historical background you could do all the way back to biblical times, but to me that would be ridiculous.) I have also posted a video that gives the historical background.

I also feel that the example you have given from 1948 is pointless. You have asked the question would these people be given compensation? The simple answer is I don't know, I'm not a lawyer, or an Israeli one at that. I do, however, know that all people in Israel have the same access to the law, and it doesn't discriminate. So whether or not compensation is due will be based on legal principles, not race or religion.

 

[londonblue]

Again you miss the point, this thread (original question?) is about the developments, the new settlements. These settlements are on land that was/is Palestinian. Can they (the displaced) come back to their land? If they can't, then, to use your "No Blacks" analogy is there a real or perceived "No Palestinians" sign? There isn't a yes or no answer is there? is the answer "a bit"?

In that case you've missed my point. I have been answering this:

I have sympathy with the history of Jews and the difficulties for Israel BUT it is all a bit apartheid there now; and contrary to good sense what is happening, We should study history and learn from it. If, on formation of Israel the Palestinians had been treated fairly and equally then most of the current problems would not exist. Ramping up the stakes is n't helping anyone other than warlords, weapons dealers and terrorists.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

No answer again from you!
No resolution against Israel would get through UN as major backer and financier of UN is the USA who have veto!...and that should be not be new knowledge to you.
1948 might be historical to you BUT the displaced who are now grand parents of dozens each are telling their families of the lands and properties they had taken from them.....not quite biblical.
How would a displaced person with nothing have access to the law? why would they trust Israeli Courts? Does the entrenched example of you not recognising the issue not show that it might be a waste to attempt anything?
Please answer the question and make it clear. Are the new settlements supported by you? Do you think they will help?
I want Israel and Palestine to flourish and co-exist; for me the settlements will hinder progress.

 

[londonblue]

No answer again from you!

What is it that I haven't answered? (This is a genuine question, I'm not trying to be flippant.)

No resolution against Israel would get through UN as major backer and financier of UN is the USA who have veto!...and that should be not be new knowledge to you.

Click Here. More resolutions get through against Israel than have against Syria, Iran, Libya etc put together.

1948 might be historical to you BUT the displaced who are now grand parents of dozens each are telling their families of the lands and properties they had taken from them.....not quite biblical.

I believe that was answered in one of the videos I posted.

How would a displaced person with nothing have access to the law? why would they trust Israeli Courts?

I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. Whether they trust Israeli law or not is up to them, but should they not at least try?

Please answer the question and make it clear. Are the new settlements supported by you? Do you think they will help?I want Israel and Palestine to flourish and co-exist; for me the settlements will hinder progress.

For what it's worth I don't agree with them, but I answered that in my first post when I said I think this was just Israel proving a point, and that it would be interesting how this pans out. What I mean by that is that I don't think these settlements will actually get built.

Now it's your turn. Please be clear, and answer the question. After all this, do you still consider Israel to be an apartheid state?

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

I do not consider Israel to be an intentionally practicing apartheid state; sorry that is a grey answer! I also think it has a far better human rights record than the majority of countries in that region and the world. I also am quite George Orwellian in my cynicism to the idea that we have a free and equal society in this and many other western countries - and I also believe that is largely not intended BUT human nature, greed, tribalism (any other ism!) which are competitive and powerful raw emotions that are difficult to balance along with luck of time/place/date of birth and having "right" parents. Recognising problems/issues is part of the way to finding a solution & better than accepting that things could be worse as they are in other places.