The Campaign to de-legitimize Israel with false charge of Apartheid
P-Dub
http://www.jcpa.org/text/apartheid.pdf
P-Dub: The truth is the truth. Try it on.
coaste...@yahoo.com
Who would know better than South Africans? From Wiki:
[edit] By South Africans
In 2002 Anglican Archbishop and Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu
wrote a series of articles in major newspapers,[132] comparing the
Israeli occupation of the West Bank to apartheid South Africa, and
calling for the international community to divest support from Israel
until the territories were no longer occupied.[132]
Other prominent South African anti-apartheid activists have used
apartheid comparisons to criticize the occupation of the West Bank,
and particularly the construction of the separation barrier. These
include Farid Esack, a writer who is currently William Henry Bloomberg
Visiting Professor at Harvard Divinity School,[133] Ronnie Kasrils,
[134] Winnie Madikizela-Mandela,[135] Dennis Goldberg,[136] and Arun
Ghandhi,[137][138]
On 15 May 2008, 34 leading South African activists published an open
letter in The Citizen, under the heading "We fought apartheid; we see
no reason to celebrate it in Israel now!". The signatories, who
included Kasrils and several other government ministers, COSATU
General Secretary Zwelinzima Vavi, Ahmed Kathrada, Sam Ramsamy and
Blade Nzimande, wrote "Apartheid is a crime against humanity. It was
when it was done against South Africans; it is so when it is done
against Palestinians!"[139]
On 6 June 2008, Mr. Kgalema Motlanthe, the Deputy President of the
African National Congress, who had recently visited the Israeli-
occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, told a delegation of Arab Knesset
members visiting South Africa to study its democratic constitution
that conditions for Palestinians under occupation were "worse than
conditions were for Blacks under the Apartheid regime."[140]
In a letter to the President of the Canadian Union of Public Employees
(CUPE), Ontario, Willie Madisha, the President of COSATU wrote, "As
someone who lived in apartheid South Africa and who has visited
Palestine I say with confidence that Israel is an apartheid state. In
fact, I believe that some of the atrocities committed against the
South Africans by the erstwhile apartheid regime in South Africa pale
in comparison to those committed against the Palestinians."[141]
Hendrik Verwoerd, then prime minister of South Africa and the
architect of South Africa's apartheid policies, said in 1961 that "The
Jews took Israel from the Arabs after the Arabs had lived there for a
thousand years. Israel, like South Africa, is an apartheid state."[39]
[142][143]
Former deputy mayor of Jerusalem Meron Benvenisti relates in his 1986
book Conflicts and Contradictions that during the 1970s, an official
of the South African apartheid compared Israeli-Palestinian relations
to South African policy for the Transkei in a meeting. The Israeli
officials present expressed shock at the comparison, and the South
African official said "I understand your reaction. But aren't we
actually doing the same thing? We are faced with the same existential
problem, therefore we arrive at the same solution. The only difference
is that yours is pragmatic and ours is ideological."[144]
In 2008 a delegation of ANC veterans visited Israel and the Occupied
Territories, and said that in some respects it was worse than
apartheid.[145][146] One member said "The daily indignity to which the
Palestinian population is subjected far outstrips the apartheid
regime." Another member, human rights lawyer Fatima Hassan, cited the
separate roads, different registration of cars, the indignity of
having to produce a permit, and long queues at checkpoints as worse
than what they had experienced during apartheid. But she also thought
the apartheid comparison was a potential "red herring".[147] Andrew
Feinstein, a former ANC parliament member, was shocked to see footage
of teenagers heaping abuse on and throwing stones at Palestinian
children, especially done in the name of Judaism. The delegation's
final formal statement made no mention of comparisons with apartheid
and Dennis Davis, a high court judge, said he thought the use of the
term in the Middle East context was "very unhelpful".[145] Davis also
noted that "There's no racial superiority here. There's no pervading
ideology that confirms the inferiority of Palestinians." and concluded
"But I think it's incredibly unhelpful to say you can simply take this
to be apartheid and therefore the South African struggle is the same
and the South African solution is the same. That's a very lazy form of
reasoning."[148] One of the Jewish members of the delegation said that
the comparison with apartheid is very relevant and that the Israelis
are even more efficient in implementing the separation-of-races regime
than the South Africans were, and that if he were to say this
publicly, he would be attacked by the members of the Jewish community.
[146]
In May 2009, The Human Sciences Research Council of South Africa
released a legal study with the findings that Israel is practicing
both colonialism and apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territories.
[149] According to this study, Israel practices the "three pillars" of
apartheid in the occupied territories:
The first pillar "derives from Israeli laws and policies that
establish Jewish identity for purposes of law and afford a
preferential legal status and material benefits to Jews over non-
Jews".
The second pillar is reflected in "Israel's 'grand' policy to fragment
the OPT [and] ensure that Palestinians remain confined to the reserves
designated for them while Israeli Jews are prohibited from entering
those reserves but enjoy freedom of movement throughout the rest of
the Palestinian territory. This policy is evidenced by Israel's
extensive appropriation of Palestinian land, which continues to shrink
the territorial space available to Palestinians; the hermetic closure
and isolation of the Gaza Strip from the rest of the OPT; the
deliberate severing of East Jerusalem from the rest of the West Bank;
and the appropriation and construction policies serving to carve up
the West Bank into an intricate and well-serviced network of connected
settlements for Jewish-Israelis and an archipelago of besieged and non-
contiguous enclaves for Palestinians".
The third pillar is "Israel's invocation of 'security' to validate
sweeping restrictions on Palestinian freedom of opinion, expression,
assembly, association and movement [to] mask a true underlying intent
to suppress dissent to its system of domination and thereby maintain
control over Palestinians as a group."
dsharavi
> > Good article.
> >http://www.jcpa.org/text/apartheid.pdf
Excellent article.
> > P-Dub: The truth is the truth. Try it on.
On Nov 25, 2:30 pm, "iconocl...@yahoo.com" <coaster132...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Who would know better than South Africans? From Wiki:
Naturally, H excised from his Wiki excerpt the views of the following
South Africans:
In an essay comparing their experience as black South Africans whose
families fought against apartheid with the current situation in
Israel, Rhoda Kadalie and Julia Bertelsmann wrote:
"Israel is not an apartheid state ... Arab citizens of Israel can
vote and serve in the Knesset; black South Africans could not vote
until 1994. There are no laws in Israel that discriminate against Arab
citizens or separate them from Jews. ... South Africa had a job
reservation policy for white people; Israel has adopted pro-Arab
affirmative action measures in some sectors. Israeli schools,
universities and hospitals make no distinction between Jews and Arabs.
An Arab citizen who brings a case before an Israeli court will have
that case decided on the basis of merit, not ethnicity. This was never
the case for blacks under apartheid."[173]
Benjamin Pogrund, author and member of the Israeli delegation to the
United Nations World Conference against Racism, has argued that the
petty apartheid which characterized apartheid-era South Africa does
not exist within Israel:[171][dead link]
"The difference between the current Israeli situation and
apartheid South Africa is emphasized at a very human level: Jewish and
Arab babies are born in the same delivery room, with the same
facilities, attended by the same doctors and nurses, with the mothers
recovering in adjoining beds in a ward. Two years ago I had major
surgery in a Jerusalem hospital: the surgeon was Jewish, the
anaesthetist was Arab, the doctors and nurses who looked after me were
Jews and Arabs. Jews and Arabs share meals in restaurants and travel
on the same trains, buses and taxis, and visit each other’s homes.
Could any of this possibly have happened under apartheid? Of course
not."[174]
In response to increasing inequality between the Jewish and Arab
populations, the Israeli government established a committee to
consider, among other issues, policies of affirmative action for
housing Arab citizens.[175] According to Israel advocacy group Stand
With Us, the city of Jerusalem gives Arab residents free professional
advice to assist with the house permit process and structural
regulations, advice which is not available to Jewish residents on the
same terms.[176][177][178]
Differences in motivations
Critics of the claim that Israel is motivated by racism argue that,
unlike apartheid, Israeli practices, even if they deserve to be
criticized, are not prompted by racial hatred.[179] Benjamin Pogrund
writes:
"In any event, what is racism? Under apartheid it was skin colour.
Applied to Israel that's a joke: for proof of that, just look at a
crowd of Israeli Jews and their gradations in skin-colour from the
"blackest" to the "whitest"... Occupation is brutalising and
corrupting both Palestinians and Israelis... [b]ut it is not
apartheid. Palestinians are not oppressed on racial grounds as Arabs,
but, rather, as competitors — until now, at the losing end — in a
national/religious conflict for land."[174]
John Strawson, professor of international law at the University of
East London argues against likening the concept of Zionism to
apartheid, saying
"...the way in which the "one-state solution" was posed recycled
much of the old discourses on Zionism which constructed it as an
essentially racist ideology comparable to apartheid. At the core of
the argument is the position that as Israel defines itself as a Jewish
state this is an ethnic state based on a racial hierarchy. In this
account Jews become the South African white population and the
Palestinians the non-whites. The racist content of the state was seen
in many laws which discriminate against non-Jews and in favor of Jews.
(25) Any discriminatory laws are seen as proof of a racist regime a
position which if systematically argued would find almost all states
as mainly characterized by racism. However, some apparently
discriminatory laws, such as the 1950 Law of Return should perhaps be
seen as affirmative action in that it turned the Nazi discrimination
and definition of a Jew into the basis for citizenship in Israel. The
view that Israeli as a state based on ethnic-nationalism is inevitably
racist is a highly problematic. First most European states defined
themselves as nation-states and ethnicity has played a major role in
sustaining nationalism. Within the Middle East the relationship
between ethnicity and state formation is clearly at work in Turkey
where constitution defines a citizen as a Turk (despite the 30% of the
population who are Kurdish), and Egypt’s official title is the "Arab
Republic of Egypt" (and yet it contains large Coptic, Nubian and
Berber minorities). It is not the case that supporters of the Kurdish
right to self determination are denounced as racist who seek establish
an exclusive ethnic state. Nor is it the case that states not based on
ethnic-nationalism are consequently accommodating to the indigenous
populations as the example of the United States and the position of
First Nation American graphically demonstrates. The view that suggests
that the attempt to create an ethnic-national state is either
motivated by racism or unique is thus highly problematic given any
serious study of nationalism. (26) Zionism is a form of nationalism
which along with other all other nationalisms is necessarily based on
the privilege of inclusion and the discrimination of exclusion.[180]
Strawson also argues against the analogy as applied to Israel proper
by saying
"Israel...lacks the features of an apartheid state. The
Palestinian, Druze and other minorities in Israel are guaranteed equal
rights under the Basic Laws. All citizens of Israel vote in elections
on an equal basis. There are no legal restrictions on movement,
employment or sexual or marital relations. The universities are
integrated. Opponents of Zionism have free speech and assembly and may
form political organizations."[180]
Michael Kinsley's article "It's Not Apartheid", published in Slate and
the Washington Post, states that Carter "makes no attempt to explain
[the use of the word 'apartheid']" and refers to Carter's usage of the
term as "a foolish and unfair comparison, unworthy of the man who won
-- and deserved -- the Nobel Peace Prize..."
"To start with, no one has yet thought to accuse Israel of
creating a phony country in finally acquiescing to the creation of a
Palestinian state. Palestine is no Bantustan... Furthermore, Israel
has always had Arab citizens.... No doubt many Israelis have racist
attitudes toward Arabs, but the official philosophy of the government
is quite the opposite, and sincere efforts are made to, for example,
instill humanitarian and egalitarian attitudes in children. That is
not true, of course, in Arab countries, where hatred of Jews is a
standard part of the curriculum."
Citing what he calls "the most tragic difference," Kinsley concludes:
"If Israel is white South Africa and the Palestinians are supposed to
be the blacks, where is their Mandela?"[181][182]
Criticism of the "Israeli apartheid" usage for its inherent
implication of racism has been widespread. In 2003, South Africa's
minister for home affairs Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi said that "The
Israeli regime is not apartheid. It is a unique case of democracy".
[183] According to Fred Taub, the President of Boycott Watch, "[t]he
assertion ... that Israel is practicing apartheid is not only false,
but may be considered libelous. ... The fact is that it is the Arabs
who are discriminating against non-Muslims, especially Jews."[184]
Similarly, in 2004, Jean-Christophe Rufin, former vice-president of
Médecins Sans Frontières and president of Action Against Hunger,
recommended in a report about anti-Semitism commissioned by French
Interior Minister Dominique de Villepin[185] that charges of apartheid
and racism against Israel be criminalized in France, to the extent
they're unjustified.[14] He wrote:
"[T]here is no question of penalising political opinions that are
critical, for example, of any government and are perfectly legitimate.
What should be penalised in the perverse and defamatory use of the
charge of racism against those very people who were victims of racism
to an unparalleled degree. The accusations of racism, of apartheid, of
Nazism carry extremely grave moral implications. These accusations
have, in the situation in which we find ourselves today, major
consequences which can, by contagion, put in danger the lives of our
Jewish citizens. It is why we invite reflection on the advisability
and applicability of a law ... which would permit the punishment of
those who make without foundation against groups, institutions or
states accusations of racism and utilise for these accusations
unjustified comparisons with apartheid or Nazism."[14]
Irwin Cotler, a Canadian MP and anti-apartheid activist who was once a
lawyer for Nelson Mandela said "The second manifestation [of anti-
semitism] is the indictment of Israel as an apartheid state.[186]
The idea that "Israeli apartheid" implies a policy of racial or other
discrimination against Arabs or Muslims has been rejected by other
figures. In 2004's The Trouble with Islam Today, Irshad Manji argues
that the allegation of apartheid in Israel is deeply misleading,
noting that there are in Israel several Arab political parties; that
Arab-Muslim legislators have veto powers; and that Arab parties have
overturned disqualifications. She also points to Arabs like Emile
Habibi, who have been awarded prestigious prizes. She also observes
that Israel has a free Arab press; that road signs bear Arabic
translations; and that Arabs live and study alongside Jews. She also
claims that Palestinans commuting from the West Bank are entitled to
state benefits and legal protections.[187]
Malcolm Hedding, a South African minister who worked against South
African apartheid, says:
"Calling Israel an 'apartheid state' is absolute nonsense. You
might have structures that look like apartheid, but they're not. The
barrier fence has nothing to do with apartheid and everything to do
with Israel's self-defense. There was no such barrier until the second
intifada, when people were being murdered on the highways. And the
country does not dehumanize its minority in the sense of apartheid.
The issues are totally different."[188]
Hedding believes Israel has proven its desire to reach an
accommodation with the Palestinians while granting political rights to
its own Arab citizens within a liberal democratic system, but that the
Palestinians remain committed to Israel's destruction. By contrast, he
says, it was a tiny minority in South Africa that held power and once
democracy came, the Nationalist Party that had dominated the masses
disappeared.
Julia I. Bertelsmann, editor-in-chief of New Society: Harvard College
Student Middle East Journal and Rhoda Kadalie disagree with the
analogy, and believe it is motivated by politics. They say that the
"Neither the far right nor the ANC's left can tolerate or even
comprehend the economic success of South African Jews, which was
largely achieved in spite of - not because of - both governments. Nor
can they come to terms with a strong, successful, and democratic
Israel. It goes against the dualism between strong oppressors and the
weak oppressed according to which every political issue is framed in
South Africa and every government failure is justified." They also
note that Israel has been ranked "free" consistently in Freedom
House's Freedom in the World rankings, unlike South Africa was during
apartheid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy#Criticism_of_the_apartheid_analogy
Deborah
Student
The defenders or the racist ethnic cleansing narscisstic DNA obsessed
ethnocentric
Zionist cult with psychopathic delusions of grandeur are keen to point
out some
difference in Israel but not the occupied territories to South Africa
Israel has many similarities to Ian Smiths regime in Northern Rhodesia.
We did travel through Rhodesia on 2 occasions on our way to Zambia.
The private hotels were segregated but the government run Victoria Falls
hotel were not (1966)
The racist Zionists should not complain when a spade is called a spade.
Until you abandon this racist ideology you will become progressively more
ostracized by mankind. You will only have yourself to blame if the world
rejects you and both the guilty and innocents Jews suffer. "Kick a Jew"
event
at school in the USA is a very serious warning signs. Stop kicking the
Palestinians
After all they are Jews converted to Islam based on Schlomo Sands work.
Streching the envelope seems to be pattern of behaviour of Talmud
intoxicated
followers for 2000 years. When there is an expected back lash they cry
"anti-semitism"
This is a hollow cry. There is urgent need for behaviour modification.-
humility and
modesty is sorely lacking amongst the children of David.
Learn from the examples of great South Africans Jews like Joe Slovo
Albie Sacks,
Harold Wolpe , Dennis Goldberg , Ruth First, Wolfe Kodesh, Jack and Ray
Simons
Lionel Bernstein, Arthur Goldreich and many others. They were all
Non-Zionist
Jews
ES
http://www.sahistory.org.za/pages/governence-projects/rivonia-liliesleaf/rivonia-trial.htm
Joe Bruno
All these accusations of Apartheid in Israel are nonsense. Apartheid,
as it existed in South Africa, was a system of laws which forced
Blacks to live in their own isolated communities and forbade them to
interact with whites.
Israel has no such laws. There is some discrimination against
minorities there, but it is not embedded in or promoted by the legal
system.
Tell it like it is.
I agree, and the wall that keeps the muslims of Palestine
from interacting with the jewish population is just there for show.
fla...@verizon.net
On 26-Nov-2009, Student <stu...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> I lived 26 years of my life under apartheid.
Your lies grow ever more delusional.
> The defenders or the racist ethnic cleansing narscisstic DNA obsessed
> ethnocentric
> Zionist cult with psychopathic delusions of grandeur are keen to point
> out some
> difference in Israel but not the occupied territories to South Africa
And thanks for further proof of your delusions -
as well as your projecting.
Susan