The evidence is exactly the policies they defend.The evidence for it is staring you in the face.
But they make the argument about the terminology,
using an arcane legal definition to avoid the common
one we use. Have they no shame?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The evidence is exactly the policies they defend.The evidence for it is staring you in the face.
I have no husband. Did you have a question that reflected any actual prior knowledge or do you make baseless assumptions in ALL areas?I've answered questions that were worthy.
But not loaded ones of the sort...
Have you stopped beating your husband?
I find it funny when people say that. I wish you were self aware to understand the huge flaw in what you just said (and I'm not talking about the chronological paradox).The dictionary is the basis for language I use.
what ethnicity do you have in mind? How do you define ethnicity? And what "etc"?Ethnicity covers it, as does "etc".
Israel practices apartheid...& war crimes.
All of this is completely beside the point.I have no husband. Did you have a question that reflected any actual prior knowledge or do you make baseless assumptions in ALL areas?
I find it funny when people say that. I wish you were self aware to understand the huge flaw in what you just said (and I'm not talking about the chronological paradox).
what ethnicity do you have in mind? How do you define ethnicity? And what "etc"?
Israel doesn't practice apartheid and war crimes.
The point was to show you howI have no husband.
It appears that I'm far more aware ofDid you have a question that reflected any actual prior knowledge...
Arab, Muslim, Palestinian come to mind.what ethnicity do you have in mind?
How do you define ethnicity?
Religion, ie, Israel's disdain for Muslims.And what "etc"?
Does this mean that you approve of allIsrael doesn't practice apartheid and war crimes.
I’m not denying the existence of apartheid, defending, or justifying such a practice. Just saying it does not exist in Israel and the nation of Israel is not guilty of practicing apartheid.By denying that it exists,
this is to defend, ie, justify, it.
IOW, you deny it exists.I’m not denying the existence of apartheid, defending, or justifying such a practice. Just saying it does not exist in Israel and the nation of Israel is not guilty of practicing apartheid.
Then what are all the walls and ethnic segregation about? What are the 65 laws that are applied according to ethnicity about? What is the very existence of Gaza about?I’m not denying the existence of apartheid, defending, or justifying such a practice. Just saying it does not exist in Israel and the nation of Israel is not guilty of practicing apartheid.
And can’t you see that your perspective is being manipulated by repeated lies? Certainly, there is a difference between right and wrong. Those who hate Israel and want to see the nation annihilated have been very successful at distorting reality.Can't you spot apologetics when you see them? The whataboutism used to deflect away from the actual issue should be a clue. Of course Israel tries to discredit anyone who points out what is happening.
There's a difference between right and wrong, no matter how you define the word "apartheid". The evidence for it is staring you in the face.
Really?IOW, you deny it exists.
This defends it.
That would be about precaution and protection from constant terrorist attacks.Then what are all the walls and ethnic segregation about? What are the 65 laws that are applied according to ethnicity about? What is the very existence of Gaza about?
Really.Really?
Interesting little word game there.As an atheist you deny God exists, does that defend God’s existence?
""There is no doubt that Israel is an apartheid regime, and no doubt that the American Jewish community must play a key role in ending it.""So according to that definition, there is NO apartheid in Israel and the constant charge of apartheid is false and baseless…
Many of the original Jews that became israel are arab and palestinian. There are many christians that are arab too.Two million Palestinians live in Israel. They are citizens of Israel, and as such, they have complete freedom to live where they please and to use any hospital or means of transportation. There is no enforced separation of Jews and Arabs of any type that exists in Israel.
I know that, many are willing to stay complacent.Arab Israelis have the right to vote and to serve in the Israeli parliament (the Knesset).
is that how you survive?They also have access to all the welfare services of the state.
maybe that is one of the reasons the majority of Jews on this earth WILL NOT move to israel.In fact, they have been given a freedom Jews do not have! All Jews, except the small percentage of Ultra-Orthodox, are required to serve in the military — both men and women.
OK...... but do any of them countries have a concentration camp like GAZA and blow up the civilians about every 6 months. OR do what israel is doing now because a few rogue fools are terrorists?The only Apartheid that exists in the Middle East is in the Arab countries where all their Jewish populations were forcibly evicted after the Suez War in 1956. The fact of the matter is that no Jews are allowed to live in Arab nations. That is true Apartheid!”
Supporting terrorism?Whats insane is the disgusting shift to supporting terrorism and the vilification of long-time allies.
Does the U.N. lie, too? Is everyone but Israel lying?And can’t you see that your perspective is being manipulated by repeated lies? Certainly, there is a difference between right and wrong. Those who hate Israel and want to see the nation annihilated have been very successful at distorting reality.
“The allegation that Israel is an apartheid state is one that reveals much more about those who make it than it does about its target. This big lie needs to be called out for what it is, and those who spread it identified for what they are.
There is nothing about the apartheid analogy that will bear serious scrutiny, not the history, not the ideology, and certainly not the practice. Justice Richard Goldstone, appointed by Nelson Mandela to the South African Constitutional Court and a man not afraid to criticize Israel, debunked the charge in a cogent op-ed in The New York Times ten years ago entitled “Israel and the Apartheid Slander” as unfair, inaccurate and malicious. “In Israel there is no apartheid,” he explained. “Nothing there comes close to the definition of apartheid . . . In Israel, equal rights are the law, the aspiration and the ideal.”
The Big Lie About “Apartheid” Israel
From the blog of Trevor Norwitz at The Times of Israelblogs.timesofisrael.com
Uh huh. That's the apologetic line, yes.That would be about precaution and protection from constant terrorist attacks.
Thanks for clarifying that israel is not a race, tribe or family lineageca
calling it apartheid when it isn't about race is cheap showmanship or just intellectual sloppiness?
I agree that at some point they have to recognize each other’s grievances. But how does one make peace with another when they don’t even want you to exist, as Hamas has stated about Israel? Israel has attempted peace negotiations numerous times, yet it is rejected because peace isn’t the goal of terrorists. They simply want Israel gone.All of this is completely beside the point.
Here's the point:
Israel hates Palestinians because of Hamas' Oct 7th and previous attacks.
Palestinians hate Israel because they took their land, blockade Gaza, (which causes poverty and human rights issues), and are currently bombing civilians for 44 days running.
Does this sound like a recipe for peace?
Is the status quo of mutual hate and incessant violence achieving anything for either side?
Will endless whataboutism solve the problem?
Will denying that there is a problem solve the obvious problem?
Do any of the apologetics on either side change the actual facts of the situation?
At some point they need to recognize each others' grievances and start the long and painful process of negotiating peace. If they don't, nothing will change. Ever.
No, reality.Uh huh. That's the apologetic line, yes.
Wanna go according to UN?Your dictionary definition doesn't have any impact on the word in the context of international law. If you want to use the word "apartheid" to refer to anything you think it should then you should be clear about how you mean the word. I'm telling you how I'm using it. The dictionary.com definition, by the way, doesn't do much to support your claim
And I've heard the same chilling rhetoric from Israelis about Palestinians/Gaza not existing. The endless whataboutism is not productive.I agree that at some point they have to recognize each other’s grievances. But how does one make peace with another when they don’t even want you to exist, as Hamas has stated about Israel? Israel has attempted peace negotiations numerous times, yet it is rejected because peace isn’t the goal of terrorists. They simply want Israel gone.