Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

shafique wrote:Hmm, you haven't seen the article by Shulamit Aloni yet then.

Even Bstelem recogizes after researching that there are no jew only roads.

Well, you can understand why people may have the wrong impression when former education ministers write articles with this heading:

This Road is for Jews Only
Yes, There is Apartheid in IsraelBy SHULAMIT ALONI

But it is interesting you quote Btselem - they also document the discrimination that Israel inflicts, including the effect of these roads and colonies.

Cheers,
Shafique

Going OT now. There has never been an independent Palestine, if that is what you mean. Jews wanted to live in peace, Arabs didn't accept that and started their pogroms in Hebron and Jeruzalem among others. Arabs couldn't accept the partition plan. Instead they started a genicodal war. They lost. Big Booboo!

You know what you are, don’t you? A charlatan, quack, buffoon, jester! Take your pick.
I am just looking at your avatar, can’t be conincident, they mask and resemble someone just like yourself.

Listen:
The lessons of humanity to you..
You don’t hold a grab of land with people already living on it unless you are in justified war...Noone invited a state called Israel when it did not exist there for thousands of years, after the demolition of God...
But that does not stop a few good Jewish or Jewish Arabs -left over- to populate… (They are humans and created and indeed can be innocent and rightous people)
There is purpose of living in this world...That is to be servant to God and humanity. That does not mean you become Zionist and ultra nationalist and behave like “……” in a mortal life.

If you behave like ultra nationalists like some did in Europe than you become “……..”
When you become “……….” You start finding a way for repentance. This could also be via providing a piece of land (in this case) where you will pay your duties and confess your sins. This is what the ones involved did without the will of Arabs in Palestinian peninsula.

Now ask yourself why they didn’t confess their sins by providing land from USA, or from the UK or wherever it happened in Germany? As I always believed they knew beforehand what was waiting them in coming years! Now as they achieved their objective, the struggle is on the Palestinians as in today’s terms.. when infact it could have been on the people of those nations in the west so that just like you, we would sit in the middleeast and watch the show… and perhaps pick on them like you do on Arabs.

Now you would enjoy the position of us FD and agree to it, wouldn’t you? As in that case you would be defending (just like us)the rights of whatever the people of that nation in Europe or America would be...

In history no jews were mal-treated in Islamic countries.Islam does not allow it..
If they were to be placed somewhere it could have been Islamic countries but not in the same way the “……….” deceided in America and Europe...
Now those “………” are the main reasons why the Arabs act like the way they are towards Jews today when they shouldn’t be and don’t mean to be. And the problems today the Jews face in ME is not due to Arabs but due to“……….” decisions and actions of “so called” friends of Israel in the west! You get that?

Now despite this and what God ordains on humans, those “………” both in America, Europe, and in Israel cannot solve the current problems that effect both Palestinians, peaceful Jews in ME and surrounding nations. (leaving everbody in misery)…Leaving Palestinians jammed in pieces of lands called “west bank” and “gaza strip” in israel while noone knows how they will properly survive there as Israel almost always blockade everthing even humanitarian aids.

If this Zionism continues without the fear of God, I don’t know how they gonna solve the matters while hatred will be rising from Palestinians and Arabs.
Condemnation from the world will become intense and develop until the jews and their western friends give up bullying and find peaceful means for ruling the land on equal rights and terms with joint impartial affairs.

So we will see, our western colonizers will have some jolly peaceful time ahead of them to suss out as to how to clear the mess and misery they left behind "once upon a time"…while some ruthless people like you continue to blame the Arabs when the violaters are of differant deviated origin.

Flying Dutchman wrote:

shafique wrote:Hmm, you haven't seen the article by Shulamit Aloni yet then.

Even Bstelem recogizes after researching that there are no jew only roads.

Perhaps this explains why:

On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. "Why?" I asked the soldier. "It's an order--this is a Jews-only road", he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. "It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?"

Indeed Apartheid does exist here. And our army is not "the most moral army in the world" as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention centre and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved 'for Jews only', on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an "ingenious proposal".

Taken from the 'Jews Only' Roads thread.

Cheers,
shafique

Flying Dutchman wrote:

Berrin wrote:There is no other single nation in 20 th century that were helped to confiscate a country that belong to some other people for so many centuaries...

There has never been an independent Palestine, .

Right. Palestine is in fact British. No wait, Roman. Or is it Babylonian? Just because every empire under the sun has occupied the land does not mean Palestine never existed. Who cares about whether or not it was independent? The historical reference to an area has no bearing on its independence provided that it is inhabited solely by an ethnic group other than that which controls it. Herodotus referred to it in writing as "district of Syria, called Palaistinê". So what now? Is it part of Syria? Should we give Palestine to Syria and call it fair?

As an aside, I've wondered whether the inhabitants of Sydney or Melbourne would agree that the Aborigines should be given back control over the land they used to unquestionably owned before being denied access so relatively recently.

The same question could be applied to New Zealand, Canada and of course the USA.

Surely the natives of all those countries have as much of a legitimate right as a Russian Jew has over Palestine?

Cheers,
Shafique

Berrin wrote:You know what you are, don’t you? A charlatan, quack, buffoon, jester! Take your pick.
I am just looking at your avatar, can’t be conincident, they mask and resemble someone just like yourself.

Listen:
The lessons of humanity to you..
You don’t hold a grab of land with people already living on it unless you are in justified war...Noone invited a state called Israel when it did not exist there for thousands of years, after the demolition of God...
But that does not stop a few good Jewish or Jewish Arabs -left over- to populate… (They are humans and created and indeed can be innocent and rightous people)
There is purpose of living in this world...That is to be servant to God and humanity. That does not mean you become Zionist and ultra nationalist and behave like “……” in a mortal life.

If you behave like ultra nationalists like some did in Europe than you become “……..”
When you become “……….” You start finding a way for repentance. This could also be via providing a piece of land (in this case) where you will pay your duties and confess your sins. This is what the ones involved did without the will of Arabs in Palestinian peninsula.

Now ask yourself why they didn’t confess their sins by providing land from USA, or from the UK or wherever it happened in Germany? As I always believed they knew beforehand what was waiting them in coming years! Now as they achieved their objective, the struggle is on the Palestinians as in today’s terms.. when infact it could have been on the people of those nations in the west so that just like you, we would sit in the middleeast and watch the show… and perhaps pick on them like you do on Arabs.

Now you would enjoy the position of us FD and agree to it, wouldn’t you? As in that case you would be defending (just like us)the rights of whatever the people of that nation in Europe or America would be...

In history no jews were mal-treated in Islamic countries.Islam does not allow it..
If they were to be placed somewhere it could have been Islamic countries but not in the same way the “……….” deceided in America and Europe...
Now those “………” are the main reasons why the Arabs act like the way they are towards Jews today when they shouldn’t be and don’t mean to be. And the problems today the Jews face in ME is not due to Arabs but due to“……….” decisions and actions of “so called” friends of Israel in the west! You get that?

Now despite this and what God ordains on humans, those “………” both in America, Europe, and in Israel cannot solve the current problems that effect both Palestinians, peaceful Jews in ME and surrounding nations. (leaving everbody in misery)…Leaving Palestinians jammed in pieces of lands called “west bank” and “gaza strip” in israel while noone knows how they will properly survive there as Israel almost always blockade everthing even humanitarian aids.

If this Zionism continues without the fear of God, I don’t know how they gonna solve the matters while hatred will be rising from Palestinians and Arabs.
Condemnation from the world will become intense and develop until the jews and their western friends give up bullying and find peaceful means for ruling the land on equal rights and terms with joint impartial affairs.

So we will see, our western colonizers will have some jolly peaceful time ahead of them to suss out as to how to clear the mess and misery they left behind "once upon a time"…while some ruthless people like you continue to blame the Arabs when the violaters are of differant deviated origin.

Whats with the

Berrin wrote:“……”

constantly? Maybe if you fill in the blanks I can follow better what you are trying to say.

shafique wrote:On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. "Why?" I asked the soldier. "It's an order--this is a Jews-only road", he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. "It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?"

Indeed Apartheid does exist here. And our army is not "the most moral army in the world" as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention centre and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved 'for Jews only', on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an "ingenious proposal".

Shulamit Aloni is a fierce opponent of Israel. In her crusade against Israel she is caught many times on lies. Like this one. Haaretz published other stories about the so called jew only roads. After all kind of organisations jumped on it and investigations, nothing is shown that these roads exist. Only hearsay. Everytime Arabs were allowed on them. Yes, it is a libel and Shulamit Aloni is joining it. Like the accusation that jews spread aids, is popping up so now and then, nothing is proven so far.

Whats with the

Berrin wrote:“……”

constantly? Maybe if you fill in the blanks I can follow better what you are trying to say.

Note how shafique posted after Berrin.

dee7o wrote:So what now? Is it part of Syria? Should we give Palestine to Syria and call it fair?

This is what Assad had to say about it:

"Do not forget one thing: there is no Palestinian people, no Palestinian entity, there is only Syria!"

And yes I do believe Syria has historically a more solid claim to what is now Israel than what today are called Palestinians. The Pali's already have a state by the way, it is called Jordan, as it was part of the original Palestine mandate. Syria is also claiming Jordan and Lebanon, do you agree with that?

Flying Dutchman wrote:Shulamit Aloni is a fierce opponent of Israel.

Not in itself a bad thing, if the opposition is to things that are wrong. She was after all part of the government and presumably was voted in by Israelis who shared her political views.

Flying Dutchman wrote:In her crusade against Israel she is caught many times on lies.

Ok - so she's a politician who tells lies. Isn't that just repetitive - it's like saying 'that lawyer tells lies' or 'that banker is greedy' or 'eh doesn't know what he's talking about'

Flying Dutchman wrote:..Like this one. Haaretz published other stories about the so called jew only roads.

So, this incident didn't actually happen - the soldier didn't use the words 'Jews-only road'? I presume you have some evidence of this?

But at least you will understand why I used the term for the colonialist only roads and why the South Africans agree with this politician that Israel does indeed commit Apartheid.

I fully understand you are taking the official Israeli line to defend the illegal colonies and the continuing denial of basic human rights (such as freedom of movement within Palestinian territory) caused by these colonies and these 'colonial only' roads. But if elected Israeli politicians put it is as bluntly as this:

ndeed Apartheid does exist here. And our army is not "the most moral army in the world" as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention centre and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved 'for Jews only', on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an "ingenious proposal".

..it is not enough to say 'liars, liars, pants on fire' when the South African government agrees with her.

Cheers,
Shafique

event horizon wrote:Note how shafique posted after Berrin.

Is Shafique editing Berrin's posts?

Many people and organisations tried to proof this myth of jew only roads, with hidden camera's or recorders. None succeeded. Do you also think people should proof jews didn't spread aids?

Flying Dutchman wrote:Many people and organisations tried to proof this myth of jew only roads, with hidden camera's or recorders. None succeeded. Do you also think people should proof jews didn't spread aids?

?

The soldier in the article clearly explained why there were no signs to show that the roads were 'jews only' roads.

I simply asked if you had any evidence that this incident did not occur.

I understand you disgree with the former Israeli minister who says there is Apartheid, but why should I believe you and not the South African government and this Israeli minister? Surely there are two points of view here, and you are disagreeing with the South Africans etc.

(If I edit any posts, I will say so, and the forum software will show that I edited it. I haven't intentionally edited any post by Berrin)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I simply asked if you had any evidence that this incident did not occur.

When will you stop beating your wife? Shulamit claims and cannot proof anything. Burden of proof rests on the shoulders of those who claim. I thought you were so interested in Fisking, wanting facts and not base your opinions on hearsay. Shulamit and others will never be able to proof the jew only roads, because they donot exist.

Israeli civilians have equal rights. Human rights for its citizens in Israel should be example for the vile surrounding dictatorships. In the Westbank 90% of the population are since the Oslo agreements under the rule of PA. If you are interested in protesting apartheid rules, you should look at the PA.

You could quite easily have said that you have no evidence that the Israeli Politician's account of a soldier's description of a "Jews only road" was fabricated.

So, I am faced with either believing you that she and the South African government are wrong to say Israel commits Apartheid or whether to believe they are right.

Aloni is quite clear. The South African government is quite clear. Both say the discrimination is akin to Apartheid.

Shall we agree to take different points of view - I'm with the South Africans, you are with the Israeli government.

Cheers,
Shafique

From "Apartheid & Beyond" Winter 2009-November Issue

Article- Beyond Compare:
Julie Peteet

Julie Peteet, an editor of this magazine, is professor of anthropology at the University of Louisville.

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer253/peteet.html

Carter says sorry

We must recognize Israel's achievements under difficult circumstances, even as we strive in a positive way to help Israel continue to improve its relations with its Arab populations, but we must not permit criticisms for improvement to stigmatize Israel.

Will Shafique and Berrin also apologize for their errors and stigmatization?

Carter also continues to bash

Gaza must be rebuilt now
We can wait no longer to restart the peace process. The human suffering demands urgent relief

Will FD join the international plea to act on the cries of homeless and freezing people demanding immediate relief?

Totally agree that we should not stigmatise Israel - we should be fair and only criticise her for the crimes she commits and not imagined/exagerated ones.

Similarly, we shouldn't excuse her crimes and accept spin which seeks to blame the victims of her crimes either.

The breaches of International Law are legal verities - nothing more, nothing less. Pointing out injustices of Israel is not the same as anti-semitism, a point rammed home by the fact that Israeli human right organisations such as B'tselem criticise Israel for its crimes and injustices, precisely because they are crimes and injustices.

What I do rail against though, is the stigmatising of Palestinians. That is a cynical and unjust tactic to divert attention away from Israels continuing violation of International Laws.

This thread is about the South African government denouncing the discriminatory practices against the occupied residents of East Jerusalem which has been illegally annexed by Israel. They make the comparison with Apartheid era discrimination in South Africa - and I for one agree with their assessment - Israel is committing both a criminal and unjust action when they discriminate against those refusing to take up Israeli citizenship (because, under International Law, East Jerusalem is not part of Israel)

Cheers,
Shafique

From the Article Berrin linked above - a very clear description of the issue (it clearly lays out the points of international law, why the comparison with Apartheid is made, where it is relevant etc) - but this description struck me as relevant to the discussions in this thread:

Part of the appeal of the apartheid comparison is that apartheid is a recognized name for an ideology and practice of separation. There is no similar name for what Israel has done. Neither the pre-state Zionist movement nor the state of Israel has ever spelled out an official policy of discrimination against the Palestinians, and Israel did not institute discriminatory practices in one fell swoop. Instead, it has worked in a piecemeal fashion to constrain Palestinian rights and access to resources. In other words, separation in the Occupied Territories has been a process whose legal contours are harder to discern and whose name has yet to circulate abroad.

A corollary assumption underlying the comparison is that Israeli practices cannot be condemned as discriminatory in and of themselves. They cannot stand on their own, partly because they are difficult to understand unless they are seen up close. Most people understand that Zionism, as an ideology and a project, calls for Jewish communal security, and due to centuries of pogroms and the Holocaust, this project commands considerable sympathy. But many people do not understand that Zionism, as put into practice, calls for an exclusivist state that leads to policies characteristic of apartheid, as defined by the UN.
....

It may be time to develop a new language. “Apartheid” cannot thoroughly explain Zionist ideology or Israeli practices. It can simply offer broad points of comparison, a framing in an already powerful concept. Yet the Afrikaans term does have a Hebrew counterpart in the term hafrada, meaning separation from and putting distance between oneself and others, in this case, the Palestinians. In Hebrew, the wall is often referred to as the “hafrada barrier.”

shafique wrote:But many people do not understand that Zionism, as put into practice, calls for an exclusivist state that leads to policies characteristic of apartheid, as defined by the UN.

Where does the UN define this? Or this article refering to a resolution that the UN later on withdrew?

Yes, there is seperation to a certain degree between Arabs and Jews in Israel, I cannot see how this compares to apartheid.

Berrin wrote:Will FD join the international plea to act on the cries of homeless and freezing people demanding immediate relief?

Yes I do. Israel is accepting people from Gaza to their hospitals, for free. Problem here is Hamas, that often refuses people to go to Israel for treatment. Ambulances were transported to Gaza, but were used by Hamas to excute opponents inside them.

And yes, both Israel and Egypt should let in more building materials into Gaza. Only, when materials are let in, often Hamas confisquates them, so that it doesn't reach the people who need it.

Flying Dutchman wrote:

shafique wrote:But many people do not understand that Zionism, as put into practice, calls for an exclusivist state that leads to policies characteristic of apartheid, as defined by the UN.

Where does the UN define this? Or this article refering to a resolution that the UN later on withdrew?

Yes, there is seperation to a certain degree between Arabs and Jews in Israel, I cannot see how this compares to apartheid.

I thought the academic made the points very well. The UN did define what discriminatory practices constituted 'apartheid' and ruled that these were illegal - the article says.

Did these practices stop being illegal, or stop being termed apartheid?

Edit:
Perhaps you are confusing the crime of apartheid (which is still a crime):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid

with resolution 3379 which stated that Zionism was racist, and was withdrawn in 1991 to entice Israel to enter peace talks (and because of pressure from Washington).

On 30 November 1973, the United Nations General Assembly opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (ICSPCA)[1] It defined the crime of apartheid as "inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them."

Cheers,
Shafique

Right, I see. Your discussions are based on non-extisting and non-binding resolutions. Very meaningless!

I agree with your article, there is seperation in Israel, certainly not apartheid. If you want to see apartheid in the ME, check Syria or KSA. I am still waiting for you to condemn the Muslim only roads in KSA (a real example of apartheid). But I will not hold my breath, I am already used to your hypocricy.

shafique wrote:Perhaps you are confusing the crime of apartheid (which is still a crime):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid

with resolution 3379 which stated that Zionism was racist, and was withdrawn in 1991 to entice Israel to enter peace talks (and because of pressure from Washington).

On 30 November 1973, the United Nations General Assembly opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (ICSPCA)[1] It defined the crime of apartheid as "inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them."

So, no - I'm not actually referring to 3379 but was referring to the defined crime of 'apartheid' - which is what the Professor was referring to in the quote I gave above.

Anyway, I'm glad we agree with the article's findings that there is indeed 'separation' in Israel.

As I keep saying, I'm just agreeing with the South African government's view of the illegal discrimination going on in occupied East Jerusalem. I'm not surprised that you don't agree with their references to apartheid -but 'you would say that, wouldn't you'

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:So, no - I'm not actually referring to 3379 but was referring to the defined crime of 'apartheid' - which is what the Professor was referring to in the quote I gave above.

I only see reference to South-Africa. Going throught the definition, it would apply to sharia law, KSA, Syria etc., not Israel.

shafique wrote:Anyway, I'm glad we agree with the article's findings that there is indeed 'separation' in Israel.

Yes, seperation, certainly not apartheid.

Cool, we agree that there is separation.

Incidentally, the word translated into Afrikaans is 'apartheid' and as the article quoted above points out:

Yet the Afrikaans term does have a Hebrew counterpart in the term hafrada, meaning separation from and putting distance between oneself and others, in this case, the Palestinians. In Hebrew, the wall is often referred to as the “hafrada barrier.”

That said, whether we want to call this separation in Israel as 'apartheid' is, of course, a matter of debate. And on this one, I'm with the South African government.

The Arab countries you have mentioned may indeed also be guilty of the crime of apartheid as defined by the UN :

.. defined the crime of apartheid as "inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them."

and also International Criminal Court which:

In Article 7, the crime of apartheid is defined as:

The 'crime of apartheid' means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalised regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime

However, whether you think Arab countries are committing the crime that Israel is accused of is for another thread. I'm happy to concede that you believe Israel is innocent of this crime and the Arabs are guilty.

However, I'm sticking with the South Africans - who, as the title of this thread says - should know!

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Cool, we agree that there is separation.

Incidentally, the word translated into Afrikaans is 'apartheid' and as the article quoted above points out:

Apartheid comes from Dutch. And apartheid and seperation/hafrada are two different things.

shafique wrote:That said, whether we want to call this separation in Israel as 'apartheid' is, of course, a matter of debate. And on this one, I'm with the South African government.

The SA government seems to side with dictators of different countries, so that is no surprise.

shafique wrote:However, I'm sticking with the South Africans - who, as the title of this thread says - should know!

I wonder why building 900 homes for jews in jerusalem has to be compared with apartheid, while thousands new homes for Arabs in jerusalem isn't.

Flying Dutchman wrote:

shafique wrote:Cool, we agree that there is separation.

Incidentally, the word translated into Afrikaans is 'apartheid' and as the article quoted above points out:

Apartheid comes from Dutch. And apartheid and seperation/hafrada are two different things.

What is the Afrikaans word for separation then? (And, what is the English translation of 'apartheid'?)

Flying Dutchman wrote:

shafique wrote:That said, whether we want to call this separation in Israel as 'apartheid' is, of course, a matter of debate. And on this one, I'm with the South African government.

The SA government seems to side with dictators of different countries, so that is no surprise.

Yep - old, tired tactic of smearing those who oppose Israel. No surprise there.

By the same yardstick, though - shouldn't we rightly condemn Israel for giving support to the Apartheid Regime when it was in power? Shouldn't we also condemn the US for doing what you accuse the South Africans of?

Flying Dutchman wrote:

shafique wrote:However, I'm sticking with the South Africans - who, as the title of this thread says - should know!

I wonder why building 900 homes for jews in jerusalem has to be compared with apartheid, while thousands new homes for Arabs in jerusalem isn't.

Because one is illegal under international law and designed to deprive the lawful inhabitants of this occupying foreign land (not part of Israel) of the use of their land - and give the land to Israeli (i.e. occupying power) citizens. Something that is against international law - unambiguously so.

And in any case, your argument is with the South Africans - as I said, you are free to believe you know better than they do, but by the same token we are free to believe their arguments and join them (and the UN, EU, B'tselem etc etc) in condemning Israel's unjust and illegal actions.

Cheers,
Shafique