| Let’s call it what it is 08:56 - Feb 13 with 1832 views | Darth_Koont |
This is apartheid. It’s been going on for decades but these are even more extreme steps from a far-right government that’s just getting started.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-64620734
This is what happens when criticism of Israel is slowly but surely neutered and then removed from the debate. |  |
| |  |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:08 - Feb 13 with 1744 views | itfcjoe |
It's only going to get worse with this newly installed Govt, it's going to push into an all out war in the region - the US are making noises but at what point do they look to step in? So much Israeli influence in their politics though. [Post edited 13 Feb 2023 9:10]
|  |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:13 - Feb 13 with 1725 views | Guthrum |
It's not a coincidence that Israel and South Africa were very close allies (particularly on military and security matters) during the latter's Apartheid era. |  |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:26 - Feb 13 with 1658 views | Darth_Koont |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:08 - Feb 13 by itfcjoe |
It's only going to get worse with this newly installed Govt, it's going to push into an all out war in the region - the US are making noises but at what point do they look to step in? So much Israeli influence in their politics though. [Post edited 13 Feb 2023 9:10]
|
Yes – but more overt in the US with AIPAC etc. and the public debate is similarly more open and balanced with critical, pro-Palestinian and antiracist voices.
In the UK, it’s all swept under the carpet while vocal critics are completely sidelined. With the Israeli government and pro-Israel lobby having unfettered and undemocratic influence as a result.
There’s significantly more criticism and balance coming from within Israel than there is from the UK that shouldn’t be anything like as supportive and biased against the Palestinians being able to see the situation from the outside. [Post edited 13 Feb 2023 9:28]
| |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:30 - Feb 13 with 1636 views | Bent_double |
I find it incredible how little the rest of the world (well, the West) cares about the Palestinians and their cause.
Seems like nobody wants to upset Israel, and always sees the Palestinians as the bad guys. |  |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:32 - Feb 13 with 1619 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:30 - Feb 13 by Bent_double |
I find it incredible how little the rest of the world (well, the West) cares about the Palestinians and their cause.
Seems like nobody wants to upset Israel, and always sees the Palestinians as the bad guys. |
It doesn't seem at all right, does it. |  |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:36 - Feb 13 with 1605 views | Darth_Koont |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:30 - Feb 13 by Bent_double |
I find it incredible how little the rest of the world (well, the West) cares about the Palestinians and their cause.
Seems like nobody wants to upset Israel, and always sees the Palestinians as the bad guys. |
Feeds into our fairly normalised islamophobia and our colonialism by proxy where we see Israel as a western democratic outpost defending us against the savages.
In other words, very similar to our support of apartheid until black people in the US and UK started having a voice and we started looking after our own interests at home. The difference here is that Palestinians have been fairly thinly spread around the world and have very little voice to challenge things domestically. | |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:40 - Feb 13 with 1584 views | MattinLondon |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:32 - Feb 13 by Swansea_Blue |
It doesn't seem at all right, does it. |
Isn’t the Isreal-US relationship quite strong and evokes a lot of sympathy in America? |  | | |
| [Redacted] on 09:47 - Feb 13 with 1546 views | victorywilhappen |
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:13 - Feb 13 by Guthrum |
It's not a coincidence that Israel and South Africa were very close allies (particularly on military and security matters) during the latter's Apartheid era. |
[Redacted] |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Let’s call it what it is on 09:55 - Feb 13 with 1516 views | GunnsAirkick |
It is appalling what is happening there.
There seems to be growing resistance to what is happening among Israeli's now, but any dissent is met with beatings by far-right thugs (both civilian and army). |  | | |
| Let’s call it what it is on 10:34 - Feb 13 with 1398 views | ChorleyBoy |
This topic is always good for a 3-pager and at least seven if you manage to stir GB into action. How many times have we done this topic in the 10 years I've been reading this forum and do we actually manage to say anything new.
In order NOT to make it another Groundhog thread, perhaps we can introduce a few extra elements:
Should we boycott Israeli goods and services?
Should we impose sanctions on Israel and ban their sportsmen and women from competitions?
Should we press our politicians to speak up in parliament about it?
Should we arm Palestine? Iran and Hezbollah do - but they're terrorists, right?
Should we speculate about why our leaders don't respect UNSC resolutions?
Should we speculate why the press brings this up once or twice a year? Do they really care? Do any of us really care? Or is it just a reliable distraction from other events that may be going on?
Perhaps we could also talk about why we bring this up here on the forum. Is it to see who jumps in to support DK in the red corner or GB in the blue corner? It's good to know for sure who the antisemites are on the forum, right?
Perhaps we should just recognise that our concern is little more than hot air because nothing gets done at a political level and we all carry on as normal.
Perhaps give Phil a day off from policing the board. |  | | |
| Let’s call it what it is on 10:45 - Feb 13 with 1356 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Let’s call it what it is on 10:34 - Feb 13 by ChorleyBoy |
This topic is always good for a 3-pager and at least seven if you manage to stir GB into action. How many times have we done this topic in the 10 years I've been reading this forum and do we actually manage to say anything new.
In order NOT to make it another Groundhog thread, perhaps we can introduce a few extra elements:
Should we boycott Israeli goods and services?
Should we impose sanctions on Israel and ban their sportsmen and women from competitions?
Should we press our politicians to speak up in parliament about it?
Should we arm Palestine? Iran and Hezbollah do - but they're terrorists, right?
Should we speculate about why our leaders don't respect UNSC resolutions?
Should we speculate why the press brings this up once or twice a year? Do they really care? Do any of us really care? Or is it just a reliable distraction from other events that may be going on?
Perhaps we could also talk about why we bring this up here on the forum. Is it to see who jumps in to support DK in the red corner or GB in the blue corner? It's good to know for sure who the antisemites are on the forum, right?
Perhaps we should just recognise that our concern is little more than hot air because nothing gets done at a political level and we all carry on as normal.
Perhaps give Phil a day off from policing the board. |
Why would it stir me into action. I am a man of Jewish descent with a wife who is half Jewish and vocal opponent if antisemitism. I rarely join threads about Israel and have never supported the actions of the Benjamin Netanyahu government. Quite the opposite in fact, and any time I have spoken about Benjamin Netanyahu on this board, the illegal settlements on Palestinian land or the disgusting treatment of the Palestinian people, it has been been to condemn them without reservation.
To conflate being against anti Jewish racism with support for the gangster government of Benjamin Netanyahu is piss poor form.
I'll leave it there. |  |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 10:50 - Feb 13 with 1349 views | ChorleyBoy |
| Let’s call it what it is on 10:45 - Feb 13 by GlasgowBlue |
Why would it stir me into action. I am a man of Jewish descent with a wife who is half Jewish and vocal opponent if antisemitism. I rarely join threads about Israel and have never supported the actions of the Benjamin Netanyahu government. Quite the opposite in fact, and any time I have spoken about Benjamin Netanyahu on this board, the illegal settlements on Palestinian land or the disgusting treatment of the Palestinian people, it has been been to condemn them without reservation.
To conflate being against anti Jewish racism with support for the gangster government of Benjamin Netanyahu is piss poor form.
I'll leave it there. |
Fair enough - I'll take that back. It was the Corbyn threads I was perhaps remembering rather than the illegal settlement ones.
Your correction is appreciated. | | | |
| Let’s call it what it is on 11:51 - Feb 13 with 1260 views | DJR |
It seems to me that the more liberal definition of antisemitism in the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, which was drafted in response to the IHRA definition, is a much better definition because it offers more scope for criticism of Israel and its policies.
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2021-03-30/ty-article-opinion/.premium/criticism
https://jerusalemdeclaration.org/
In particular, the definition includes examples, relating to the Israel/Palestanian conflict, of things which are and are not antisemitic, which seem to me to correctly draw the line.
The following is one example of things which under the definition are not antisemitic, but which the IHRA definition could be said to stifle debate on.
"Evidence-based criticism of Israel as a state. This includes its institutions and founding principles. It also includes its policies and practices, domestic and abroad, such as the conduct of Israel in the West Bank and Gaza, the role Israel plays in the region, or any other way in which, as a state, it influences events in the world. It is not antisemitic to point out systematic racial discrimination. In general, the same norms of debate that apply to other states and to other conflicts over national self-determination apply in the case of Israel and Palestine. Thus, even if contentious, it is not antisemitic, in and of itself, to compare Israel with other historical cases, including settler-colonialism or apartheid."
But whatever the definition, there is clearly a tendency in the Government and organisations like the BBC not to be critical of a fellow Western ally like Israel just as, for example, there is never any criticism of the West's role in the conflict in Yemen.
Finally, mention of apartheid brings to mind something I learnt from the BBC documentary on hip hop. According to a BBC news report at the time featured on the programme, the penalty for possession of powder cocaine (predominantly used by whites) was probation, and the penalty for possession of crack cocaine (predominantly used by blacks) was five years. Also interesting to see the key role Clinton and Biden played in penal policies (three strikes and you are out) which led to one third of black males in the US being incarcerated.
EDIT: I meant Biden not Bush, and have corrected my post. [Post edited 13 Feb 2023 13:16]
|  | | |
| Let’s call it what it is on 12:20 - Feb 13 with 1177 views | Darth_Koont |
| Let’s call it what it is on 11:51 - Feb 13 by DJR |
It seems to me that the more liberal definition of antisemitism in the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, which was drafted in response to the IHRA definition, is a much better definition because it offers more scope for criticism of Israel and its policies.
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2021-03-30/ty-article-opinion/.premium/criticism
https://jerusalemdeclaration.org/
In particular, the definition includes examples, relating to the Israel/Palestanian conflict, of things which are and are not antisemitic, which seem to me to correctly draw the line.
The following is one example of things which under the definition are not antisemitic, but which the IHRA definition could be said to stifle debate on.
"Evidence-based criticism of Israel as a state. This includes its institutions and founding principles. It also includes its policies and practices, domestic and abroad, such as the conduct of Israel in the West Bank and Gaza, the role Israel plays in the region, or any other way in which, as a state, it influences events in the world. It is not antisemitic to point out systematic racial discrimination. In general, the same norms of debate that apply to other states and to other conflicts over national self-determination apply in the case of Israel and Palestine. Thus, even if contentious, it is not antisemitic, in and of itself, to compare Israel with other historical cases, including settler-colonialism or apartheid."
But whatever the definition, there is clearly a tendency in the Government and organisations like the BBC not to be critical of a fellow Western ally like Israel just as, for example, there is never any criticism of the West's role in the conflict in Yemen.
Finally, mention of apartheid brings to mind something I learnt from the BBC documentary on hip hop. According to a BBC news report at the time featured on the programme, the penalty for possession of powder cocaine (predominantly used by whites) was probation, and the penalty for possession of crack cocaine (predominantly used by blacks) was five years. Also interesting to see the key role Clinton and Biden played in penal policies (three strikes and you are out) which led to one third of black males in the US being incarcerated.
EDIT: I meant Biden not Bush, and have corrected my post. [Post edited 13 Feb 2023 13:16]
|
Indeed. The IHRA is championed by the most vociferously pro-Israel voices because they know it effectively makes strong criticism of Israel “antisemitic”. Or can easily be characterized that way which does the same job. A feature/“benefit” that the IHRA author himself warned everyone about.
Last week we’ve witnessed the extraordinary situation where a sitting MP apparently can’t call out the Israeli state as apartheid (as described by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty and anyone who saw how apartheid worked in South Africa with its second-class citizens and bantustans). Or as fascist which would be unnecessarily provocative if that wasn’t also the description used by The Times of Israel and Haaretz or a minister in the new government who proudly called himself a fascist homophobe.
Yet our useless politicians and media just nod along to it and the human rights abuse this involves. Our apologism for racism and oppression seems to know no bounds in the current status quo. [Post edited 13 Feb 2023 12:22]
| |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 14:39 - Feb 13 with 952 views | factual_blue |
It's desperately sad the Israeli government can't see the terrible irony in their behaviour. |  |
| |
| Let’s call it what it is on 15:32 - Feb 13 with 870 views | noggin |
| Let’s call it what it is on 14:39 - Feb 13 by factual_blue |
It's desperately sad the Israeli government can't see the terrible irony in their behaviour. |
I'm sure the USD support they get, clouds their minds somewhat. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
