3 ms·

It's absolutely pointless for us to discuss once again why Israel is considered to be practicing apartheid. It has been established by the major human rights or

It's absolutely pointless for us to discuss once again why Israel is considered to be practicing apartheid. It has been established by the major human rights organisations: among which Amnesty International, Human Right Watch, and in Israel, B'Tselem. That's all we need to know, if you don't agree contest those and their findings- which you can consult online.

krembo 3y ago
[flagged]
smsm42 3y ago
It's indeed pointless, because it is a lie, always was a lie and continues being a lie. Naming the names of some of the far-left groups doesn't make it less of a lie. Arabs in Israel are integrated, have representation in the Knesset and full legal, electoral and all other rights. Talking about "apartheid" is nonsense, which is obvious to anybody who knows what this word means and what legal policies actually exist in Israel.
- Aerbil313 3y ago
  If this[1] is not apartheid, then nothing is. Separate parks with locked doors for children of different religion, the key given to Jewish moms. 1: Raw video by The Guardian, not even much commentary, see with your own eyes: https://youtu.be/ksnLom8OD9E?si=aYvcLqcLQK960fbx https://youtu.be/ksnLom8OD9E?si=aYvcLqcLQK960fbx
  - smsm42 3y ago
    This is not apartheid, and something is, but not this. I don't know what exactly happened with those people - though by the fact that they call Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem "settlers" I can know I can't trust a word that they are saying, and the source - which is the horrendously biased against Israel Guardian - even if everything that they say were true (which I very much suspect isn't), it looks like a property dispute, very likely based on the habit of certain parts of the population (not only Arabic, but often also) to build things first and apply for permits never. This is not always prosecuted, but sometimes it is. Sometimes it leads to very nasty disputes. Never has anything to do with "apartheid", which is lack of rights based on race (or, I allow it, ethnicity). Again, Arabs in Israel enjoy exactly the same rights, so the claim of "apartheid" is pure libel. That doesn't change an iota even if you find some instance of somebody being unjustly treated by somebody else or the legal system (again, I have zero reason to believe The Guardian in this particular case, but even if it did, it would have nothing to do with supposed "apartheid"). Also I note if you watch the film carefully, the Arabs do not just demand the property. They demand the Jews to leave Jerusalem (1:26). Israel is just fine with Arabs living in Jerusalem (even if some may claim they are not fairly treated). Arabs are not fine with Jews living in Jerusalem. And we just witnessed on October 7th what they do to Jews they're not fine with, when they can. In Jerusalem, they can't. But they still would like to. I don't think when they are deprived of this capacity, it's called "apartheid" - it's not what that word was supposed to mean.
  - Aerbil313 3y ago
    I'm sorry, I just realized there are no separate parks, typo. There are only fenced and locked parks for Jewish children. No parks for the indigenous Palestininans.

krembo 3y ago

[flagged]

smsm42 3y ago

It's indeed pointless, because it is a lie, always was a lie and continues being a lie. Naming the names of some of the far-left groups doesn't make it less of a lie. Arabs in Israel are integrated, have representation in the Knesset and full legal, electoral and all other rights. Talking about "apartheid" is nonsense, which is obvious to anybody who knows what this word means and what legal policies actually exist in Israel.

Aerbil313 3y ago
If this[1] is not apartheid, then nothing is. Separate parks with locked doors for children of different religion, the key given to Jewish moms. 1: Raw video by The Guardian, not even much commentary, see with your own eyes: https://youtu.be/ksnLom8OD9E?si=aYvcLqcLQK960fbx https://youtu.be/ksnLom8OD9E?si=aYvcLqcLQK960fbx
- smsm42 3y ago
  This is not apartheid, and something is, but not this. I don't know what exactly happened with those people - though by the fact that they call Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem "settlers" I can know I can't trust a word that they are saying, and the source - which is the horrendously biased against Israel Guardian - even if everything that they say were true (which I very much suspect isn't), it looks like a property dispute, very likely based on the habit of certain parts of the population (not only Arabic, but often also) to build things first and apply for permits never. This is not always prosecuted, but sometimes it is. Sometimes it leads to very nasty disputes. Never has anything to do with "apartheid", which is lack of rights based on race (or, I allow it, ethnicity). Again, Arabs in Israel enjoy exactly the same rights, so the claim of "apartheid" is pure libel. That doesn't change an iota even if you find some instance of somebody being unjustly treated by somebody else or the legal system (again, I have zero reason to believe The Guardian in this particular case, but even if it did, it would have nothing to do with supposed "apartheid"). Also I note if you watch the film carefully, the Arabs do not just demand the property. They demand the Jews to leave Jerusalem (1:26). Israel is just fine with Arabs living in Jerusalem (even if some may claim they are not fairly treated). Arabs are not fine with Jews living in Jerusalem. And we just witnessed on October 7th what they do to Jews they're not fine with, when they can. In Jerusalem, they can't. But they still would like to. I don't think when they are deprived of this capacity, it's called "apartheid" - it's not what that word was supposed to mean.
- Aerbil313 3y ago
  I'm sorry, I just realized there are no separate parks, typo. There are only fenced and locked parks for Jewish children. No parks for the indigenous Palestininans.