Is it time for the West to Boycott Israel like we did South African Pre-1993?

Seaneh

JustinDee wrote: »

Enough with the smart-Alec tone, thanks.

It is relevant because there is no power in Gaza to anyone but the Hamas regime. The PA link you mention is nothing more than tokenistic. Worthless until Hamas come to the table. This could happen if they openly democratised Gaza but as everyone knows the likelihood of this is slim as it is. More sides to this conundrum than some folk care to admit.

And how is that relevant to the PA going to the ICC to pursue charges against Israel?

Seriously?

HOW?!?!

JustinDee

Seaneh wrote: »

And how is that relevant to the PA going to the ICC to pursue charges against Israel?

Seriously?

HOW?!?!

If the ICC is somehow brought into the picture by the PA, this also makes the PA responsible for what has happened in Gaza. See? If they want to represent Gazans, they will also have to answer for them and in turn what Hamas has done there. What they would answer for has been outlined for you already.
Seriously, THAT'S how.

Scofflaw

JustinDee wrote: »

If the ICC is somehow brought into the picture by the PA, this also makes the PA responsible for what has happened in Gaza. See? If they want to represent Gazans, they will also have to answer for them and in turn what Hamas has done there. What they would answer for has been outlined for you already.
Seriously, THAT'S how.

A murderer may take a thief to court, and the murderer's criminality does not acquit the thief of theft. If the PA are responsible for actions in Gaza that would be a separate case that can happen anyway - it would not happen purely as a result of the PA taking Israel to court.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Seaneh

JustinDee wrote: »

If the ICC is somehow brought into the picture by the PA, this also makes the PA responsible for what has happened in Gaza. See? If they want to represent Gazans, they will also have to answer for them and in turn what Hamas has done there. What they would answer for has been outlined for you already.
Seriously, THAT'S how.

wrong on so many levels.

JustinDee

Scofflaw wrote: »

A murderer may take a thief to court, and the murderer's criminality does not acquit the thief of theft. If the PA are responsible for actions in Gaza that would be a separate case that can happen anyway - it would not happen purely as a result of the PA taking Israel to court.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I have never once said that it would happen automatically as a result of any ICC interjection or that it was even the same 'case'.
What I do say however, and this is why this process has yet to see the light of day, is that if action was undertaken by the PA, backed up by its allies, it would be reciprocated in kind by Israel and their own allies. It is in the PA's best interest to exclude the Gazan side of things as it would only bring Hamas into proceedings, thus weakening their own stance.

That is not "wrong on so many levels" as claimed by the other poster. It is describing what is happening right now.

Pat Mustard

JustinDee wrote: »

I have never once said that it would happen automatically as a result of any ICC interjection or that it was even the same 'case'.
What I do say however, and this is why this process has yet to see the light of day, is that if action was undertaken by the PA, backed up by its allies, it would be reciprocated in kind by Israel and their own allies. It is in the PA's best interest to exclude the Gazan side of things as it would only bring Hamas into proceedings, thus weakening their own stance.

You believe that the PA will not make a complaint about Israelis to the ICC because you say that Palestinians may also be prosecuted by the ICC.

I say that the PA has little to lose in comparison with the Israelis.

You say that if Palestinians were prosecuted, this would weaken the stance of the PA. By implication, you are saying that prosecution of Israelis before the ICC would be hindered because Palestinians would also be prosecuted.

That makes no sense, whatsoever.

JustinDee

The Mustard wrote: »

You believe that the PA will not make a complaint about Israelis to the ICC because you say that Palestinians may also be prosecuted by the ICC.

I say that the PA has little to lose in comparison with the Israelis.

You say that if Palestinians were prosecuted, this would weaken the stance of the PA. By implication, you are saying that prosecution of Israelis before the ICC would be hindered because Palestinians would also be prosecuted.

That makes no sense, whatsoever.

I'm saying that if the PA is to push for ICC action on Israel, Israel would reciprocate.
It makes perfect sense because it is why nothing has happened thus far.
If the PA is to somehow credibly include Gaza within its remit, it must not only be able to administer Gaza but be responsible for what has happened there. West Bank I can understand and see absolutely viable case but Gaza? Not a hope as the PA has no power or in the eyes of Gaza's ruling regime, no jurisdiction.

Nodin

JustinDee wrote: »

I'm saying that if the PA is to push for ICC action on Israel, Israel would reciprocate.
It makes perfect sense because it is why nothing has happened thus far.
If the PA is to somehow credibly include Gaza within its remit, it must not only be able to administer Gaza but be responsible for what has happened there. West Bank I can understand and see absolutely viable case but Gaza? Not a hope as the PA has no power or in the eyes of Gaza's ruling regime, no jurisdiction.

...that makes even less sense.

Pat Mustard

JustinDee wrote: »

I'm saying that if the PA is to push for ICC action on Israel, Israel would reciprocate.
It makes perfect sense because it is why nothing has happened thus far.

No, it's just not realistic.

I believe that it's not going to matter terribly much to the PA that some of their affiliates get prosecuted, because if Israelis were prosecuted there would finally be leverage against Israel. At the moment, the actions of the IDF are almost entirely unchecked.

The reason that Israelis have not been prosecuted so far are:
1. The State of Palestine was recognized by the UN until late last year so the PA could not make a valid complaint to the ICC.
2. The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel, because Israel is not a party to the Rome Statute, Israel has not consented to ICC jurisdiction and the UN Security Council has not referred any Israelis for prosecution by the ICC.

JustinDee wrote: »

If the PA is to somehow credibly include Gaza within its remit, it must not only be able to administer Gaza but be responsible for what has happened there. West Bank I can understand and see absolutely viable case but Gaza? Not a hope as the PA has no power or in the eyes of Gaza's ruling regime, no jurisdiction.

I don't know what point you are attempting to make with this.

coolhull

A holiday in Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, North Korea, Pakistan........ They all sound like fun, provided of course that you're not

a/ female
b/ gay
c / a drinker
d/ a smoker
e/ have your own opinion
f/ broadminded
g/ likes to cast a vote occasionally

Actually, a gay. hard-drinking,opinionated democratic, lesbian smoker,would have an exciting vacation
No, I think I'll take a break in Israel, but the rest of you guys enjoy yourselves in your chosen destinations. See which of us gets back safe

Nodin

coolhull wrote: »

A holiday in Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Syria, North Korea, Pakistan........ They all sound like fun, provided of course that you're not

a/ female
b/ gay
c / a drinker
d/ a smoker
e/ have your own opinion
f/ broadminded
g/ likes to cast a vote occasionally

Actually, a gay. hard-drinking,opinionated democratic, lesbian smoker,would have an exciting vacation
No, I think I'll take a break in Israel, but the rest of you guys enjoy yourselves in your chosen destinations. See which of us gets back safe

Do please explain to me what that has to do with the OP.

coolhull

Nodin wrote: »

Do please explain to me what that has to do with the OP.

The point being posted by the OP was made moot many posts ago.
So is it only okay as long as we all agree to call for boycott of the only free democratic country in the Middle East?
But of course we must'nt dare critise the countries who hang, torture, imprison. flog,stone or behead their own citizens.
Ok, you tell me. Which Mid-East country would you visit if you win the Lotto?
(incidentally, another pastime forbidden in Palestine under pain of death)

Nodin

coolhull wrote: »

The point being posted by the OP was made moot many posts ago.
So is it only okay as long as we all agree to call for boycott of the only free democratic country in the Middle East?
...........

I'd have no problem in visiting Gaza or the West Bank.

Now - you realise that the reason we want Israel boycotted and under UN sanctions is because of the millions of Palestinians whose lands it occupies? They don't have a vote. Thus Israel is a democracy in the same sense ancient athens or Apartheid South Africa was. It's not "free and democratic" in the way a Western European state is.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

Do please explain to me what that has to do with the OP.

Maybe he is saying that this continued obsession with Israel when there are far worse perpetrators out there is all just a big circle jerk for those of a similar political disposition.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Maybe he is saying that this continued obsession with Israel when there are far worse perpetrators out there is all just a big circle jerk for those of a similar political disposition.

North Korea, Iran and Syria are under sanctions for their various acts and thus are dealt with.

Pakistan is a democracy and US ally, flawed thought it may be. Saudi Arabia, though a loathsome regime, is not illegally colonising lands outside its borders.

coolhull

Nodin wrote: »

I'd have no problem in visiting Gaza or the West Bank.

Now - you realise that the reason we want Israel boycotted and under UN sanctions is because of the millions of Palestinians whose lands it occupies? They don't have a vote. Thus Israel is a democracy in the same sense ancient athens or Apartheid South Africa was. It's not "free and democratic" in the way a Western European state is.

Palestinians don't have a vote? I'm confused here. Then who elected Hamas?

wes

coolhull wrote: »

Palestinians don't have a vote? I'm confused here. Then who elected Hamas?

The vote was ignored by Israel and West, when they plotted with Fatah to over throw them, soon after the election. Since then, all involved be they the West, Israel, Fatah and Hamas, have paid no heed to the will of the Palestinian people, lest they dare vote the wrong way again.

Secondly, the PA as it stands has little to no power, and it is the Israeli regime, who controls the lives of Palestinians, and not the PA. The Palestinians in the occupied territories have no say in how they are governed, so Israel is not really a democracy.

Israel btw is also still expanding outside there borders, where there settlers live under a different set of laws, and enjoy superior access to natural resource such as water etc. To claim that Israel is a democracy, while there continued expansion outside there border continues, is basically denial of what is happening is any of Israel responsibility.

Nodin

coolhull wrote: »

Palestinians don't have a vote? I'm confused here. Then who elected Hamas?

Thats Gaza. All resources into Gaza are controlled by Israel. Hamas can be considered at best the prisoners choice of represenative.

The West Bank contains three times the number of Palestinians and is being colonised by Israel. The inhabitants have no vote in Israeli elections, yet are subject to Israeli power. Both the occupation and settlement building are judged illegal by international law. What steps do you think should be taken to end this?

jank

Nodin wrote: »

North Korea, Iran and Syria are under sanctions for their various acts and thus are dealt with.

Pakistan is a democracy and US ally, flawed thought it may be. Saudi Arabia, though a loathsome regime, is not illegally colonising lands outside its borders.

A master of avoiding the question.

This is a thread about a boycott. Those in favour of a boycott of Israel should be in favour of a boycott of China as they are colonising Tibet and Western China? I dont approve of everything Israel does, but some people are obsessed with the topic.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

A master of avoiding the question.

This is a thread about a boycott. Those in favour of a boycott of Israel should be in favour of a boycott of China as they are colonising Tibet and Western China? I dont approve of everything Israel does, but some people are obsessed with the topic.

I addressed the topic of china earlier in the thread, I believe.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

I'd have no problem in visiting Gaza or the West Bank.

Now - you realise that the reason we want Israel boycotted and under UN sanctions is because of the millions of Palestinians whose lands it occupies? They don't have a vote. Thus Israel is a democracy in the same sense ancient athens or Apartheid South Africa was. It's not "free and democratic" in the way a Western European state is.

See, there you go again. Hand wringing on one hand and then openly admit that you would have no problem whatsoever visiting Palestine who are more or less run by terrorists, democraticly elected but terrorists none the less. If you were consistant you would boycott both.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

I addressed the topic of china earlier in the thread, I believe.

Its impossible because you like your iPhone too much?

Nodin

jank wrote: »

See, there you go again. Hand wringing on one hand and then openly admit that you would have no problem whatsoever visiting Palestine who are more or less run by terrorists, democraticly elected but terrorists none the less. If you were consistant you would boycott both.

"terrorist" is a label. Gaza is where Hamas are and the West Bank is where Fatah are in power, by the way.

Seeing as the Palestinians are not occupying and colonising Israeli territory, I'm not seeing the lack of consistency myself.

What do you think should be done about the Israeli occupation?

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Its impossible because you like your iPhone too much?

I'd suggest addressing the the post, rather than making some faceitous remark.

lapsed

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Slightly OT, but I was watching Deadliest Warrior there today and it was the US Navy Seals vs Israeli Commando's, at the end of the episode when the Israeli Commando's were commenting, they stated "It doesn't matter which side won, we fight the same enemies" and the American's laughed. It saddened me. A nation (Palestine) being bullied off their land by force and those forcing them a

re backed by one of the most violent, over-armed countries in the world,

how can they fight that. Reminds me of us during the British occupation, a small nation against a world power.

Name one shot ever fired by an American army in any of the wars Israel has fought. Arms supplies , yes. Army, no. And all of Israels enemies are armed by first , the Soviets, and now by the Russian Federation. Anyone wanting to know why Israel thinks like it does should read transcripts of Cairo Radio and Damascus Radio . As for the Palestinians, they deserve our sympathy, if for no other reason than the perennially inept and corrupt leadership they have.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

I'd suggest addressing the the post, rather than making some faceitous remark.

No, my point is a serious one. A boycott on china in your opinion is unworkable as too many things are exported out of there, like iphones.

You are more than free to boycott any item that is produced from China, as you are more than free to boycott items that is exported from Israel. On an induvidual basis it makes no difference other than of course one may have to do without a lot of more things if one boycotts good from China. Such as iPhones, so are you going to put your money where your mouth is?

jank

Nodin wrote: »

"terrorist" is a label. Gaza is where Hamas are and the West Bank is where Fatah are in power, by the way.?

Would you call them terrorists?

Nodin wrote: »

Seeing as the Palestinians are not occupying and colonising Israeli territory, I'm not seeing the lack of consistency myself.

Only for the fact that they are not as militarily powerful as Israel. Do you really think if the shoe was on the other foot that there would even be an Israel? Don’t Fatah and Hamas have at their core of their own manifesto the destruction of the Israeli state?

You have no issues supporting a regime that calls for the destruction of the Israeli state? Yet on the other hand pontificate about Israel's Foreign Policy? Really??

Nodin wrote: »

What do you think should be done about the Israeli occupation?

I believe in the two state solution, ideally with Jerusalem as a shared capital. Now, not sure how realistic that is but its a hell of a lot more realistic than calling for Israel to just go away and retreat back to the borders of 1967 or 1948.

Am I a fan of the occupation and Israel's foreign policy? No, neither am I a fan of Hamas and Fatah. You have no problem supporting one and complaining about the other. Just like a hardened Zionist can see no wrong with Israel. Pontificate away...

Busted Flat.

Seaneh wrote: »

Let me start by saying where I stand.

I believe Israel is a profoundly racist society and this extends into government.

There have been many incidents of institutional racism in Israel down through the years from Arab Israeli's having the word Arab stamped on passports and ID cards (they still have 7 stars on both to identify them as Arabs) to Ethiopian Jews being excluded from receiving housing from the Housing Committee to their enforced apartheid laws in The West Bank and Golan Heights and their treatment of the population of Gaza and well as Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians from Northern Israel.

But this latest instance reported by Haaretz is surely close to being the straw that broke the camels back?

How can we in the west, with good conscience, continue to buy Israeli goods, allow Israeli institutions to function in our society and accept Israeli Embassies in our countries?

I think we (the EU) should expel Israeli Ambassadors, ban Israel from European Sporting Events (athlethics, soccer, etc) and ban the import and sale of Israeli products in the EU until such time as Israel no longer operates an Illegal Apartheid occupation of Palestinian lads, an Illegal block of Gaza and Discriminates against Ethiopian Jews, Arab Israeli Citizens and African Migrant Workers.

IT worked against South Africa, and it will work against Israel too.

Ban them from sporting events, expel their Ambassadors, ban their products and isolate them politically and economically and they will be forced to fall in line.

We cannot accept this anymore.



What say you Boards.ie?

I agree 100%. Maybe when they realise, that the world has lost all respect for them over what happened in Germany in the 40's, over their criminal activities in Gaza, bordering on genocide. Surly there must be some decent people in Israel, that should be able to shout stop. IMO I think that is highly unlikely.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

No, my point is a serious one. A boycott on china in your opinion is unworkable as too many things are exported out of there, like iphones.
.....

Again, a simplistic notion. The fact is that far too many items - components in particular - are manafactured in China for a boycott to make an economic impact on that state. Certain goods might be targeted as a symbolic gesture and to make a political statement, but thats about it.

jank wrote:

Only for the fact that they are not as militarily powerful as Israel. Do you really think if the shoe was on the other foot that there would even be an Israel? Don’t Fatah and Hamas have at their core of their own manifesto the destruction of the Israeli state?

You have no issues supporting a regime that calls for the destruction of the Israeli state? Yet on the other hand pontificate about Israel's Foreign Policy? Really??

"What if" is rather irrelevant. The fact is that in this instance Israel is in breach of international law. As we're dealing with facts and the real world, thats whats important.

Fatah has recognised Israel, btw.

Nodin

Busted Flat. wrote: »

I agree 100%. Maybe when they realise, that the world has lost all respect for them over what happened in Germany in the 40's, .........

Sorry, I don't quite follow you there....

BlaasForRafa

Nodin wrote: »

Again, a simplistic notion. The fact is that far too many items - components in particular - are manafactured in China for a boycott to make an economic impact on that state. Certain goods might be targeted as a symbolic gesture and to make a political statement, but thats about it.

So you boycott Israel because its easier eh. I suppose that says enough about your stance in and of itself.

JustinDee

Nodin wrote: »

...that makes even less sense.

Sorry. Maybe its my command of English or something. I honestly can't explain it any other way. Israel would reciprocate any ICC approach in kind, and because the PA has no teeth in Gaza, no political power or otherwise due to Hamas' unopposed, undemocratic and uncontested grip on the place as well as their modus operandi.

JustinDee

coolhull wrote: »

Palestinians don't have a vote? I'm confused here. Then who elected Hamas?

There is a difference between the situation in West Bank and Gaza.
Hamas took power following an election SIX years ago.
Since then, Fatah were kicked out and no opposition to Hamas whatsoever is permitted to operate in Gaza. In fact they have been prohibited by any means necessary. Every attempt to hold elections in the last few years has been scuppered by Hamas. Even with Likud-Beitenu coalition in Israel seemingly doing their best to make Hamas and their likes as popular as possible in their own yard.

Seaneh

JustinDee wrote: »

Sorry. Maybe its my command of English or something. I honestly can't explain it any other way. Israel would reciprocate any ICC approach in kind, and because the PA has no teeth in Gaza, no political power or otherwise due to Hamas' unopposed, undemocratic and uncontested grip on the place as well as their modus operandi.

And we are saying this matters not a jot and wouldn't deter the PA in any way from going to the ICC as they would not and cannot be held responsible for the actions of Hamas even though they (the PA) represent all of Palestine (Including Hamas controlled Gaza), just like the regional government of Basque Country isn't responsible for the actions of ETA and so forth. Your grasp of this is insanely bad.

JustinDee

Seaneh wrote: »

And we are saying this matters not a jot and wouldn't deter the PA in any way from going to the ICC as they would not and cannot be held responsible for the actions of Hamas even though they (the PA) represent all of Palestine (Including Hamas controlled Gaza), just like the regional government of Basque Country isn't responsible for the actions of ETA and so forth

The PA cannot credibly charge Israel over anything outside its own remit. They won't answer for Hamas' jurisidiction, even ignoring how Hamas maintain that power in Gaza.
Gaza simply won't come into it. And this is why they have not done so already. If the PA was to include Gaza in its charges, it will also have to answer for what goes on in Gaza when a likely reciprocative charge is made by Israel.

Seaneh wrote: »

Your grasp of this is insanely bad.

Enough with this subjective, condescending tosh.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

Again, a simplistic notion. The fact is that far too many items - components in particular - are manafactured in China for a boycott to make an economic impact on that state. Certain goods might be targeted as a symbolic gesture and to make a political statement, but thats about it.



"What if" is rather irrelevant. The fact is that in this instance Israel is in breach of international law. As we're dealing with facts and the real world, thats whats important.

Fatah has recognised Israel, btw.

So you cannot boycott china yourself because your cosy middle class standard of living would suffer. That's fair enough but seems any easy get out clause. Good things forbyou that Israel don't make iPods so.

Anybody is free to boycott products from a certain country, that's the good thing about living in a free country. Pity the rest of the Middle East was so liberal.



What if indeed, especially when you ask me a question on "what" should happen with regards Israels occupation. So if you don't want such dialgoue don't ask open ended questions. The facts are this, Israel occupy Palestine by military force. They have the boots on the ground. The US have their backs. Nobody is strong enough to push them out. They tried in 1967 and failed. Them are the facts. Nobody ever said realpoltic was fair. No amount of well meaning but futile lefty whinging will change that. These are the cold hard facts, boycott away by all means but it won't change the facts of the situation one iota.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Anybody is free to boycott products from a certain country, that's the good thing about living in a free country. Pity the rest of the Middle East was so liberal..

I've said that a boycott of China would be a political act without economic significance. I never said that it should not occur.

jank wrote: »

What if indeed, especially when you ask me a question on "what" should happen with regards Israels occupation. So if you don't want such dialgoue don't ask open ended questions. The facts are this, Israel occupy Palestine by military force. They have the boots on the ground. The US have their backs. Nobody is strong enough to push them out. They tried in 1967 and failed. Them are the facts. Nobody ever said realpoltic was fair. No amount of well meaning but futile lefty whinging will change that. These are the cold hard facts, boycott away by all means but it won't change the facts of the situation one iota.

The occupation took place after 1967.

Apartheid South Africa once enjoyed US support as well, but following a long and concerted campaign, it was overturned.

Nodin

JustinDee wrote: »

Sorry. Maybe its my command of English or something. I honestly can't explain it any other way. Israel would reciprocate any ICC approach in kind, and because the PA has no teeth in Gaza, no political power or otherwise due to Hamas' unopposed, undemocratic and uncontested grip on the place as well as their modus operandi.

I'm afraid I still don't understand. If Israel takes charges against Hamas, why would that make any difference to the far more serious charges against Israel? Hamas is already internationally listed as a "terrorist" organisation....its not like they're going to be dropped from 'favoured nation' status and banned from the Eurovision.

Scofflaw

jank wrote: »

So you cannot boycott china yourself because your cosy middle class standard of living would suffer. That's fair enough but seems any easy get out clause. Good things forbyou that Israel don't make iPods so.

jank, this is your second wrist-slap for gratuitously personalising the debate on this thread. Is it necessary to ask you to stop posting on it?

moderately,
Scofflaw

JustinDee

Nodin wrote: »

I'm afraid I still don't understand. If Israel takes charges against Hamas, why would that make any difference to the far more serious charges against Israel?

The PA either is representitive or it isn't. Some folk here don't seem to be able to make their minds up on which or cherry-pick when it suits.
They either encompass all of Palestine or they don't.

Hamas will not be too happy if their leadership come up against charges involving not even the likes of purges, attacks, assassinations or disappearances during the previous decade, but of how they maintain their grip on Gaza and its people.

Nodin

JustinDee wrote: »

The PA either is representitive or it isn't. Some folk here don't seem to be able to make their minds up on which or cherry-pick when it suits.
They either encompass all of Palestine or they don't.

Hamas will not be too happy if their leadership come up against charges involving not even the likes of purges, attacks, assassinations or disappearances during the previous decade, but of how they maintain their grip on Gaza and its people.

I'm sure they wouldn't be, but I'm still not seeing how that would hold the PA/Fatah back.

Fearghal_01

Individuals can choose not to buy goods from Israel, but and EU boycott would be more effective, however The EU has made it clear that it is out of the question to boycott Israel, but it is possible that they would boycott Israel Settlements. I have created a petition calling for this and you can sign it here:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/EU_trade_with_Illegal_Israeli_Settlements/

jank

Nodin wrote: »

I've said that a boycott of China would be a political act without economic significance. I never said that it should not occur.

As I said you are free to boycott china and encourage others to do so, well are you?

Nodin wrote: »

The occupation took place after 1967.
.

After they won the the six day war, still doesnt chaange any of the facts though?

Nodin wrote: »

Apartheid South Africa once enjoyed US support as well, but following a long and concerted campaign, it was overturned.

There is no comparison. Domesticly Arabs have a vote in Israeli elections, blacks pre apartheid never did.
This is an issue of foreign policy, it can only be resolved that way hence why most are calling for the two 'state' solution.

hatrickpatrick

jank wrote: »

See, there you go again. Hand wringing on one hand and then openly admit that you would have no problem whatsoever visiting Palestine who are more or less run by terrorists, democraticly elected but terrorists none the less. If you were consistant you would boycott both.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
I'm no ally of Hamas (they're scum, IMO) but one has to differentiate between instigators and reactions. Hamas would probably never have come into existence at all, and certainly wouldn't enjoy the large support base it has today, if the Israelis had never tried to colonize outside their legitimate border in the first place.

The intifada would never have happened if there wasn't any occupied territory to liberate in the first place, ergo while both sides have committed atrocities, Israel are the ones who bear responsibility for starting the entire chain reaction in the first place. Stealing private property at the point of a gun is disgusting, and it really doesn't matter how one attempts to justify it. There are literally no circumstances whatsoever in which it is ok. None.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

..................

There is no comparison. Domesticly Arabs have a vote in Israeli elections, blacks pre apartheid never did.
This is an issue of foreign policy, it can only be resolved that way hence why most are calling for the two 'state' solution.

You'll find that the West Bank, Arab East Jerusalem and Golan are treated in many ways as if they are part of Israel, and Israel is the de facto ruler there. As Israeli settlers have full rights under Israeli law, and Palestinians are ruled by martial law, often kept on seperate roads etc, it is indeed a similar situation to Apartheid South Africa.

Seaneh

Just to those who say you can't call Israeli occupation of Palestine Apartheid here's a much more learned and informed man than me.
Former US president Jimmy Carter explains how Israel enforces Apartheid rule in Palestine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iton9kaijck

And in more depth here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faeCA8EmtGo

fasttalkerchat

Boycotts don't work so well now. Supply chains and business in general is too complex. I think that its fair enough to boycott stolen olives, but beyond that its difficult.

Get in touch with people visiting Palestine and get them to buy something for you or donate money to these groups (that you can trust).

If Israel play Ireland in sports boycott the game but be careful about protesting against Israeli teams as some are anti-Zionist and its so easy to be taken for an anti-semite.

And probably the most important thing you can do is educate others! So many people think that because Palestinians are Arabs that they probably are creating the problems for themselves and the Zionists are just reacting. I have never met any non-extremist with a logical reason for supporting Zionism.

jank

Nodin wrote: »

You'll find that the West Bank, Arab East Jerusalem and Golan are treated in many ways as if they are part of Israel, and Israel is the de facto ruler there. As Israeli settlers have full rights under Israeli law, and Palestinians are ruled by martial law, often kept on seperate roads etc, it is indeed a similar situation to Apartheid South Africa.

Em, no its not and it has been mentioned here previously what the key differences are. It is a foreign Policy issue not a domestic issue. Everybody has a vote in the west bank something that was lacking in South Africa. Anyway, we should stick with facts shouldnt we?

jank

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?....

The intifada would never have happened if there wasn't any occupied territory to liberate in the first place, ergo while both sides have committed atrocities, Israel are the ones who bear responsibility for starting the entire chain reaction in the first place. Stealing private property at the point of a gun is disgusting, and it really doesn't matter how one attempts to justify it. There are literally no circumstances whatsoever in which it is ok. None.

This is all well and good but what happened in 1948 and 1967? If I recall correctly, Israel was attacked on both occasions in an attempt to destroy the state. If you want to blame someone why not blame the Arabs who instigated a resistance to a Jewish state in 1948? (which was mandated by the UN no less!!)

Israel doesnt give a **** what we think about it. The sooner people realise that the sooner we can stop having these pointless debates.

History is littered with winners and losers. Might be unpalatable for our 21st century sensibilities but humans have been conquering each other since day one. Does it make it right? No, but them are the facts and unless someone has a bigger gun than Israel and the US the situation is not going to change anytime soon. Lets not forget the reason the Jews fled Europe after WWII in the first place!

Seaneh

jank wrote: »

Em, no its not and it has been mentioned here previously what the key differences are. It is a foreign Policy issue not a domestic issue. Everybody has a vote in the west bank something that was lacking in South Africa. Anyway, we should stick with facts shouldnt we?

so you are claiming that everyone in the west bank gets to vote to choose which government rules them and enacts laws upon them? because you are either wilfully lying or extremely ignorant of reality.

which would go hand on hand with your ignorence of the international laws concerning Annexation of lands during war post the 4th geneve convention, you ignorence of the fact that palestinians and Israeli's in the west bank are subject to separate laws and have totally different rights which cover such basic human rights as land ownership, right to education, freedom of movement, freedom of speach, right of peaceful assembly, access to water, self determination, right to a civilian trial (9000+ Palestinian civilians currently held without trial under military law by israel), and so on and so forth. while tgeir homes are demolished, lands stolen, villages and farms destroyed to make space for american and british citizen "settlers" who are imported to displace Palestinian communities and so fort.

and that all ties in nicely with your generally ignorant demenour in this thread as a whole.

Your Zionust revisionist nonsense is transparent in the extreme and does nothing but paint you as a useful idiot.