- Bilderberg (1217)
- Free Palestine (458)
- FreeNet Project (28)
- Gay Marriage (3292)
- Gaza Strip (1003)
- Israel Apartheid Week (56)
- Israel Crimes Against Humanity (41)
- Israeli Apartheid (281)
- Left Wing (750)
- Liberal Views (110)
- Max Blumenthal (120)
- Max Keiser (1055)
- No Nato (196)
- Occupation Pictures (2105)
- Occupation Supporters (5)
- Occupied West Bank (155)
- Occupy Bilderberg (113)
- Occupy Boston (474)
- Occupy Canada (1)
- Occupy Canary Whalf (1)
- Occupy Cardiff (101)
- Occupy Detroit (314)
- Occupy Europe (86)
- Occupy Florida (387)
- Occupy Fort Lauderdale (47)
- Occupy France (213)
- Occupy Greece (249)
- Occupy Houston (301)
- Occupy Inverness (6)
- Occupy LA (907)
- Occupy Lisbon (154)
- Occupy London (439)
- Occupy London Stock Exchange (279)
- Occupy Madrid (174)
- Occupy Miami (276)
- Occupy News (6)
- Occupy Oakland (608)
- Occupy Rome (181)
- Occupy Wall Street (415)
- Stop Globalization (111)
- West Bank (2110)
ShoutBoxLast Message3 months, 1 weekago
- coupon : true nutrition discount code «link» coupon code
- discount : very terrific site «link» true nutrition coupon code ..
- download : very remarkable website «link» free music downloads .
- Pakista : pakistan
- Guest_4834 : pakistan
- true nutrition : awesome «link» protein discount code
- free : highest quality «link» free music.
- web design : great «link» website is here
- gratis : neat «link» descargar ares gratis.
- gratis : extraordinary «link» descargar ares gratis.
- free : quite fine page «link» free music downloads ...
- me1341 : definitely outstanding blog «link» ...
- timmy : why does captalism trample the weak. «link»
- fun : «link»
- dem6 : take the power back «link»
- hardskin : Left power - get the right wing scum !
- coupon : very remarkable web page «link» true nutrition coupon
- twosons : nice site. «link»
- download : really good website «link» convertxtodvd free download key
- y : «link»
- whey : quite awesome information site «link» whey protein
- convertxtodvd : quite good site «link» convertxtodvd
- mujeres : genuinely great blog «link» mujeres
- Cassi : honestly really good internet page «link» true nutrition discount code save
- mujer : absolutely fine resource site «link» mujer busca hombre en toluca
- casada : very impressive resource site «link» mujer busca hombre df
- Wiltshire : very wonderful site «link» mujeres buscando hombre en df
- best : absolutely terrific blog «link» best type of protein powder
- mujer busca : truly awesome blog «link» mujer busca hombre en df
- hombre : Here «link» mujer busco hombre df
- types protein : «link» types of whey protein powder
- coupon : «link» true protein discount code
- seokatalog : hello there and thank you for your info – I’ve definitely picked up something new from right here. I did however expertise a few technical issues using this website, since I experienced to reload the site many times previous to I could get it to load correctly. I had been wondering if your web hosting is OK? Not that I am complaining, but slow loading instances times will sometimes affect your placement in google and can damage your quality score if advertising and marketing with Adwords. An
- seokatalog : Hey, is this website on joomla?
- convertxtodvdkey : quite convertxtodvd free very good web page «link» key convertxtodvd
- Loading ...
Tag Archives: south-africa
When I come here and see the situation here, I find that what is happening here is ten times worse than what I had experienced in South Africa. This is Apartheid.- Arun Gandhi, after his 2004 visit to The Holy Land.
This week in Bethlehem, the second international Christ at the Checkpoint Conference concluded with a major breakthrough in the evangelical world and was attended by over 600 Evangelical Palestinian Christians, Christian Zionists and Messianic Christians.
They came together with Hope in the Midst of Conflict under the banner Christ at the Checkpoint, to seek understanding between Jews and Christians and reflect on what would Jesus do about the Israeli occupation of Palestine and concluded with: The Christ at the Checkpoint Manifesto:
Also this week, peace and justice activists in Johannesburg concluded a week of programs highlighting the similarities between the Apartheid regime in South Africa and that of Israel.
Learn More about that @
Israeli Apartheid Week is a global annual international series of events held in cities and campuses with the goal to educate people about Israeli Apartheid and because its always about the money to build Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions campaigns.
Last year, Israeli Apartheid Week took place in more than 40 cities across the globe and the good news is that over 100 participated this year!
When it came to South African Apartheid, the US was one of the last to get on-board and only did so when President Ronald Reagan was forced to sign a Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act because the citizens movements in the United States had so effectively turned around United States politics that the Republican senators were telling him that it was in the interest of the Republican Party to sign.
Originally posted here:
Israel, Africa and Apartheid: Israeli Ambassador to South Africa Arthur Lenk speaks to JN1
Post-Apartheid South Africa has diplomatic ties with both the State of Israel and the Palestinian state. JN1 talks to Israeli's newly appointed ambassador to…
See the rest here:
The shock that gripped the shrunken peace camp following Hillary Clinton’s statement that the settlement construction freeze is not what we thought it would be, but rather what Benjamin Netanyahu thought it would be, is reminiscent of other shocks generated by American peace plans ever since the 1960s.
Had the educated people of this camp not outnumbered its foot soldiers, this shock and amazement could be compared to other superstitions, like the correlation between rainfall and women’s fertility.
But precisely because the Israeli intelligentsia is always coming up with prophecies about “American pressure,” it would not be unreasonable to assume that we can once again expect expert regurgitation of speculations about a “first-term president” versus a “second-term” one, and about when he stops being an “incoming” president and starts being a “lame duck.”
The truth is simpler. Regardless of whether there is a Democrat or a Republican in the White House, the United States became a distinctly pro-Israel world power after the 1967 war. It has no intention of being a “balanced mediator” when it comes to the conflict with the Palestinians.
Barack Obama’s public relations moves in the Arab world have frightened many average Israelis. But Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, allies of the final takeover of the West Bank, know very well that U.S. policy has not changed. It doesn’t take a genius to read the working papers of past prime ministers.
The prevailing attitude of all U.S. administrations was drafted by Henry Morgenthau, and was later updated by Kenneth Waltz. One line guided all of them – Dennis Ross, Martin Indyk, George Mitchell – essentially, that any possible settlement must match the positions of the stronger party.
This is how the Americans abandoned the refugee issue, and this is why they abandoned the opposition to settlements. Netanyahu is no genius. He is simply not interested in saying good-bye to the occupation. That is all. After all, he came to power because of this. To complain about him is to complain about November rain.
The Israeli public’s choice is a different matter. The spokesmen of the dovish camp tell us horror stories about a future binational state. But the binational state is already here. It has a rigid apartheid legal system, as the High Court of Justice fades away.
The system preserving this apartheid is more ruthless than that seen in South Africa, where the black were a labor force and could therefore also make a living. It is equipped with the lie of being “temporary.” Occasionally, Israel’s indifference comes up with allegations against the Palestinians.
Abba Eban captured the allegation by coining a phrase repeated by the doves of all parties, who never really went to battle over Israel’s future and allowed the “settlement project” to spread. After all, occupation makes Israelis richer. Why oppose it?
Sign in with your Google Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to like sternchenproductions’s video.
Sign in with your Google Account (YouTube, Google+, Gmail, Orkut, Picasa, or Chrome) to dislike sternchenproductions’s video.
Uploaded on Feb 23, 2012
VIEW IN HD
Mbuyiseni Ndlozi is a PhD candidate and the Chairperson of the Post Graduate Association at Wits University in Johannesburg, South Africa. Ndlozi is a member of the South African Students Congress (SASCO) and a board member of BDS South Africa. Mbuyiseni is active in campaigning on both domestic and international issues, including worker rights, student issues and Palestine solidarity. He recently attended the South African session of the Russell Tribunal on Palestine, a people’s tribunal that found Israel guilty of the crime of apartheid under international law.
The interactive transcript could not be loaded.
Go here to see the original:
Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel, and never mind saying it,as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Peace for Israel means security and that security must be a reality. (A Testament of Hope: The Essential Writings of Martin Luther King Jr., HarperCollins 1991, pg. 670)
[T]he equivalence simply isn’t true. Israel is not an apartheid state. …
Whereas apartheid was established through a series of oppressive laws that governed which park benches we could sit on, where we could go to school, which areas we were allowed to live in, and even whom we could marry, Israel was founded upon a liberal and inclusive Declaration of Independence. 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. (Z Word, March 2008)
Apartheid is dead in South Africa but the word is alive in the world, especially as an epithet of abuse for Israel. Israel is accused by some of being ‘the new apartheid’ state. If true, it would be a grave charge, justifying international condemnation and sanctions. But it isn’t true. Anyone who knows what apartheid was, and who knows Israel today, is aware of that. Use of the apartheid label is at best ignorant and nave and at worst cynical and manipulative. …
“Apartheid” is used in this case and elsewhere because it comes easily to hand: it is a lazy label for the complexities of the Middle East conflict. It is also used because, if it can be made to stick, then Israel can be made to appear to be as vile as was apartheid South Africa and seeking its destruction can be presented to the world as an equally moral cause. (From the December 2005 issue of Focus, published by The Helen Suzman Foundation)
For those who haven’t heard, the first week in March has been designated as Israel Apartheid Week by activists who are either ill intentioned or misinformed. On American campuses, organizing committees are planning happenings to once again castigate Israel as the lone responsible party for all that maligns the Middle East. …
My perspective is unique, both as the vice consul for Israel in San Francisco, and as a Bedouin and the highest-ranking Muslim representing the Israel in the United States. I was born into a Bedouin tribe in Northern Israel, one of 11 children, and began life as shepherd living in our family tent. I went on to serve in the Israeli border police, and later earned a master’s degree in political science from Tel Aviv University before joining the Israel Foreign Ministry.
The crime of Apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity “committed in the context of an institutionalized 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.”
On November 30, 1973, the United Nations General Assembly opened for signature and ratification the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. 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.”
The term apartheid, from Afrikaans for “apartness,” was the official name of the South African system of racial segregation which existed after 1948. Complaints about the system were brought to the United Nations as early as 12 July 1948 when Dr. Padmanabha Pillai, the representative of India to the United Nations, circulated a letter to the Secretary-General expressing his concerns over treatment of ethnic Indians within the Union of South Africa. As it became more widely known, South African apartheid was condemned internationally as unjust and racist and many decided that a formal legal framework was needed in order to apply international pressure on the South African government.
In 1971, the USSR and Guinea together submitted early drafts of a convention to deal with the suppression and punishment of apartheid. In 1973, the General Assembly of the United Nations agreed on the text of the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (ICSPCA). The Convention has 31 signatories and 107 parties.
“As such, apartheid was declared to be a crime against humanity, with a scope that went far beyond South Africa. While the crime of apartheid is most often associated with the racist policies of South Africa after 1948, the term more generally refers to racially based policies in any state.”
Seventy-six other countries subsequently signed on, but a number of nations have neither signed nor ratified the ICSPCA, including Canada, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and the United States. In explanation of the US vote against the convention, Ambassador Clarence Clyde Ferguson Jr. said: “[W]e cannot…accept that apartheid can in this manner be made a crime against humanity. Crimes against humanity are so grave in nature that they must be meticulously elaborated and strictly construed under existing international law…”
In 1977, Addition Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions designated apartheid as a grave breach of the Protocol and a war crime. There are 169 parties to the Protocol.
The International Criminal Court provides for individual criminal responsibility for crimes against humanity, including the crime of apartheid.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) came into being on 1 July 2002, and can only prosecute crimes committed on or after that date. The Court can generally only exercise jurisdiction in cases where the accused is a national of a state party, the alleged crime took place on the territory of a state party, or a situation is referred to the Court by the United Nations Security Council. The ICC exercises complimentary jurisdiction. Many of the member states have provided their own national courts with universal jurisdiction over the same offenses and do not recognize any statute of limitations for crimes against humanity. As of July 2008, 106 countries are states parties (with Suriname and Cook Islands set to join in October 2008), and a further 40 countries have signed but not yet ratified the treaty. However, many of the world’s most populous nations, including China, India, the United States, Indonesia, and Pakistan are not parties to the Court and therefore are not subject to its jurisdiction, except by Security Council referral.
Article II of the ICSPCA defines the crime of apartheid as below:
Read the original post:
Israeli Apartheid Week is an annual series of university lectures and rallies of the Israeli situation with the Palestinians held in February or March. According to the organization, “the aim of IAW is to educate people about the nature of Israel as an apartheid system and to build Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaigns as part of a growing global BDS movement”. It began in Toronto in 2005 and, by 2010, spread to 55 cities around the world including locations in Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, South Africa, the West Bank, Mexico, Norway and Australia. The Israeli Apartheid Week is regarded as anti-Semitic by various political figures. Jason Kenney criticized the event, claiming that: “This week is nothing more than an unbalanced attempt to paint Israel and her supporters as racist. I call on all Canadians to reject anti-Semitism and all forms of racism, discrimination and intolerance.” Conservative MP David Anderson criticized the event by saying that labelling Israel as an apartheid state is “abhorrent,” and interim Liberal leader Bob Rae said the campaign “continues to defy logic. This year the focus continues to be on Israel, rather than on the appalling massacres and human rights violations that have reached intolerable heights in countries such as Syria and Iran.”
The organizers said the week has “played an important role in raising awareness and disseminating information about Zionism, the Palestinian liberation struggle and its similarities with the indigenous sovereignty struggle in North America and the South African anti-Apartheid movement.” An international divestment campaign was also said to have gained momentum in response to the 2005 statement by over 170 Palestinian civil society organizations who called for boycotts, divestments and sanctions. They also claimed that important gains had been made in the campaign in countries like South Africa, the United Kingdom, Canada and the United States.
The years preceding 2008, a significant year in that it marked the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the state of Israel, had seen a sharp increase of literature and analysis that was said to have sought to document and challenge alleged Israeli apartheid, including reports issued by major international bodies and human rights organizations and findings published by political leaders, thinkers, academics, and activists. The efforts were also said to have highlighted the role that people and governments across the world could play in providing “solidarity with the Palestinian struggle by exerting urgent pressure on Israel to alter its current structure and practices as an apartheid state.”
Opponents of Israeli Apartheid Week argue that it has fomented an upsurge of anti-Zionism on Canadian and American campuses. There is evidence that some supporters have expressed anti-Semitism.
Cities to have hosted a previous event of the Week are, amongst others: Oxford University (Oxford), New York City, University of Toronto and University of Ottawa, Canada;Montreal, Hamilton, London, Cambridge and Soweto, South Africa.
Speakers have included Balad MK Jamal Zahalka in 2007 and former MK Azmi Bishara, also of Balad, who began Israeli Apartheid Week 2008 with a live broadcast from Soweto.
In 2009, locations included Abu Dis, Berkeley, Boston College, Emory University, Bir Zeit, Edinburgh, Edmonton, Johannesburg, Oxford, Kalkilya, San Francisco, Soweto, Tulkarm and Washington, D.C.
In 2010, locations include Jerusalem, Amsterdam, Bard (NY), Beirut, Berkeley, Bethlehem, Bil’in, Bogota, Bologna, Boston, Cape Town, Caracas, Chicago, Connecticut, Duluth, Dundee, Durban, Eastern Cape, Edinburgh, Edmonton, Gaza, Glasgow, Guelph, Hamilton, Houston, Ireland, Jenin, Johannesburg, Kingston, London (ON), London (UK), Madrid, Melbourne, Minneapolis/St.Paul, Montral, Nablus, New York City, Nil’in, Ottawa, Oxford, Peterborough, Pisa, Pretoria, Providence, Puebla, Roma, San Francisco, Seattle, Sudbury, Tilburg, Toronto, Truro (CA), Utrecht, Vancouver, Waterloo and Winnipeg.
The first Israeli Apartheid week was held Jan 31 to February 4, 2005.
The 2006 Israeli Apartheid week was held February 13 to 17, 2006.
Please select a country to view World Afghanistan Akrotiri Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Arctic Ocean Argentina Armenia Aruba Ashmore and Cartier Islands Atlantic Ocean Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas, The Bahrain Baker Island Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burma Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Clipperton Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Republic of the Cook Islands Coral Sea Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curacao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Dhekelia Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Polynesia French Southern and Antarctic Lands Gabon Gambia, The Gaza Strip Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City) Honduras Hong Kong Howland Island Hungary Iceland India Indian Ocean Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Jan Mayen Japan Jarvis Island Jersey Johnston Atoll Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kingman Reef Kiribati Korea, North Korea, South Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Micronesia, Federated States of Midway Islands Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Namibia Nauru Navassa Island Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pacific Ocean Pakistan Palau Palmyra Atoll Panama Papua New Guinea Paracel Islands Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Islands Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Barthelemy Saint Helena, Ascension, and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Southern Ocean South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Spratly Islands Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States United States Pacific Island Wildlife Refuges Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Virgin Islands Wake Island Wallis and Futuna West Bank Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe European Union
From the early 16th century through 1917, the area now known as the West Bank fell under Ottoman rule. Following World War I, the Allied powers (France, UK, Russia) allocated the area to the British Mandate of Palestine. After World War II, the UN passed a resolution to establish two states within the Mandate, and designated a territory including what is now known as the West Bank as part of the proposed Arab state. Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War the area was captured by Transjordan (later renamed Jordan). Jordan annexed the West Bank in 1950. In June 1967, Israel captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem during the 1967 Six-Day War. With the exception of East Jerusalem and the former Israeli-Jordanian border zone, the West Bank has remained under Israeli military control. Under a series of agreements signed between 1994 and 1999, Israel transferred to the Palestinian Authority (PA) security and civilian responsibility for many Palestinian-populated areas of the West Bank as well as the Gaza Strip. Negotiations to determine the permanent status of the West Bank and Gaza Strip stalled after the outbreak of an intifada in mid- 2000. In early 2003, the “Quartet” of the US, EU, UN, and Russia, presented a roadmap to a final peace settlement by 2005, calling for two states – Israel and a democratic Palestine. Following Palestinian leader Yasir ARAFAT’s death in late 2004 and the subsequent election of Mahmud ABBAS (head of the Fatah political party) as the PA president, Israel and the PA agreed to move the peace process forward. Israel in late 2005 unilaterally withdrew all of its settlers and soldiers and dismantled its military facilities in the Gaza Strip and redeployed its military from several West Bank settlements but continues to control maritime, airspace, and other access. In early 2006, the Islamic Resistance Movement, HAMAS, won the Palestinian Legislative Council election and took control of the PA government. Attempts to form a unity government failed, and violent clashes between Fatah and HAMAS supporters ensued, culminating in HAMAS’s violent seizure of all military and governmental institutions in the Gaza Strip. Fatah and HAMAS in early 2011 agreed to reunify the Gaza Strip and West Bank, but the factions have struggled to implement details on governance and security. The status quo remains with HAMAS in control of the Gaza Strip and the PA governing the West Bank. Since the collapse of direct talks between the Israelis and Palestinians in late 2010, President ABBAS has reaffirmed that he will not resume negotiations until Israel halts all settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Middle East, west of Jordan, east of Israel
32 00 N, 35 15 E
total: 5,860 sq km
land: 5,640 sq km
water: 220 sq km
note: includes West Bank, Latrun Salient, and the northwest quarter of the Dead Sea, but excludes Mt. Scopus; East Jerusalem and Jerusalem No Man’s Land are also included only as a means of depicting the entire area occupied by Israel in 1967
slightly smaller than Delaware
total: 404 km
Read more here:
Is Israel an apartheid state?
In the last few years, its become common to hear Israel called an apartheid state a label that alleges that Israel maintains an oppressive legal system like the one once used in South Africa that institutionalized segregation, discrimination, and domination based on race.
Is there any truth to the charge? In apartheid-era South Africa, black citizens were totally disenfranchised, subject to oppressive laws that controlled every aspect of their behavior, and completely segregated from the ruling white minority. In Israel, on the other hand, Jewish and Arab citizens have equal protection under the law, enjoy freedom of religion and speech, and possess full voting rights. (In fact, Israels 120-member parliament, the Knesset, currently includes 12 Arab Israeli members.)
The Israel-South Africa comparison is so inapt that it would be laughable if it werent so insulting. What could possibly motivate those who apply this label and its evil connotations to the only democracy in the Middle East? Benjamin Pogrund, a South African Jew now living in Israel who saw firsthand the oppression and misery caused by the apartheid system in his native country, sums it up: Apartheid is a lazy label for the complexities of the Middle East conflict. If it can be made to stick, then Israel can be made to appear to be as vile as was apartheid South Africa and, therefore, seeking its destruction can be presented to the world as an equally moral cause.
Using human terms, Pogrund describes the vast difference between apartheid-era South Africa and Israel: Two years ago, I had major surgery in a Jerusalem hospital, he says. The surgeon was Jewish, the anesthetist 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 others homes. Could any of this possibly have happened under apartheid? Of course not.
Those who protest Israeli apartheid usually have a noticeable lack of public indignation to express toward those countries and regions where real human rights violations are all too common. In Saudi Arabia, for example, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly simply dont exist and women are second-class citizens (and thats being generous). In Iran, politically motivated killings and kidnappings are common, ethnic and religious minorities harshly repressed, and freedom of the press is non-existent. In Zimbabwe, government security forces imprison, torture, and murder opponents. In Hamas-controlled Gaza, as well as parts of the West Bank controlled by the Palestinian Authority, a residual community of Christians is regularly harassed, intimidated, and even subject to murder by radical Islamists. During 2009, the regimes in both Gaza and Saudi Arabia expressed their approval of crucifixion as a punishment under the law.
But those who protest Israeli apartheid are silent about all that. Why? Because their real agenda is not to improve the plight of Palestinians, but rather to attack Israel. The apartheid slur is just another tool for Israels enemies to delegitimize and undermine the Jewish states right to exist. The comparison of Israel, the Middle Easts only democracy, to the brutal discrimination of a fallen, evil regime is false. Those who offer it simply reveal their own agenda.
COMPARE TO: Please make a choice Afghanistan Algeria Azerbaijan Albania Armenia Angola Argentina Australia Austria Botswana Belgium Bangladesh Belize Bosnia and Herzegovina Bolivia Burma Benin Belarus Brazil Bhutan Bulgaria Burundi Canada Cambodia Chad Sri Lanka China Chile Cameroon Colombia Costa Rica Cuba Denmark Ecuador Egypt Ireland Estonia Eritrea El Salvador Ethiopia Czech Republic Finland Fiji France Gambia, The Gabon Georgia Ghana Germany Greece Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Croatia Hungary Iceland Indonesia India Iran Israel Italy Cote d’Ivoire Iraq Japan Jamaica Jordan Kenya Kyrgyzstan Korea, North Korea, South Kuwait Kazakhstan Laos Lebanon Latvia Lithuania Liberia Slovakia Lesotho Libya Madagascar Moldova Mongolia Malawi Mali Morocco Mauritania Oman Mexico Malaysia Mozambique Niger Nigeria Netherlands Norway Nepal Suriname Nicaragua New Zealand Paraguay Peru Pakistan Poland Panama Portugal Papua New Guinea Guinea-Bissau Romania Philippines Russia Rwanda South Africa Senegal Slovenia Sierra Leone Singapore Somalia Spain Sudan Sweden Syria Switzerland United Arab Emirates Trinidad and Tobago Thailand Tajikistan Togo Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Tanzania Uganda United Kingdom Ukraine United States Burkina Faso Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela Vietnam Namibia Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Aruba Antigua and Barbuda Andorra American Samoa Bahrain Barbados Bermuda Bahamas, The Solomon Islands Brunei Congo, Republic of the Cayman Islands Comoros Cape Verde Cyprus Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Equatorial Guinea Faroe Islands French Polynesia Grenada Greenland Guam Kiribati Liechtenstein Luxembourg Mauritius Malta Maldives New Caledonia Vanuatu Netherlands Antilles Palau Qatar Marshall Islands Puerto Rico Saint Kitts and Nevis Seychelles San Marino Saint Lucia Tonga East Timor Virgin Islands Samoa Swaziland Serbia and Montenegro Saudi Arabia Hong Kong Macau Palestine Taiwan Guadeloupe Martinique Reunion West Bank French Guiana Saint Helena Anguilla Cook Islands European Union Gibraltar Guernsey Gaza Strip Man, Isle of Jersey Mayotte Montserrat Montenegro Monaco Niue Norfolk Island Nauru Pitcairn Islands Tokelau Tuvalu British Virgin Islands Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Akrotiri Antarctica Navassa Island Bassas da India Bouvet Island Coral Sea Islands Jarvis Island Dhekelia Europa Island Baker Island Glorioso Islands Howland Island Clipperton Island Jan Mayen Johnston Atoll Juan de Nova Island Kingman Reef Christmas Island Palmyra Atoll Midway Islands Southern Ocean Paracel Islands Spratly Islands Saint Martin Svalbard Saint Barthelemy Tromelin Island Wake Island Indian Ocean Arctic Ocean Atlantic Ocean Pacific Ocean Northern Ireland Scotland Yugoslavia Soviet Union Czechoslovakia East Germany England West Germany Wales Facts and figures Background: The September 1993 Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements provided for a transitional period of Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Under a series of agreements signed between May 1994 and September 1999, Israel transferred to the Palestinian Authority (PA) security and civilian responsibility for Palestinian-populated areas of the West Bank and Gaza. Negotiations to determine the permanent status of the West Bank and Gaza stalled following the outbreak of an intifada in September 2000, as Israeli forces reoccupied most Palestinian-controlled areas. In April 2003, the Quartet (US, EU, UN, and Russia) presented a roadmap to a final settlement of the conflict by 2005 based on reciprocal steps by the two parties leading to two states, Israel and a democratic Palestine. The proposed date for a permanent status agreement was postponed indefinitely due to violence and accusations that both sides had not followed through on their commitments. Following Palestinian leader Yasir ARAFAT’s death in late 2004, Mahmud ABBAS was elected PA president in January 2005. A month later, Israel and the PA agreed to the Sharm el-Sheikh Commitments in an effort to move the peace process forward. In September 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew all its settlers and soldiers and dismantled its military facilities in the Gaza Strip and withdrew settlers and redeployed soldiers from four small northern West Bank settlements. Nonetheless, Israel controls maritime, airspace, and most access to the Gaza Strip. A November 2005 PA-Israeli agreement authorized the reopening of the Rafah border crossing between the Gaza Strip and Egypt under joint PA and Egyptian control. In January 2006, the Islamic Resistance Movement, HAMAS, won control of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC). The international community refused to accept the HAMAS-led government because it did not recognize Israel, would not renounce violence, and refused to honor previous peace agreements between Israel and the PA. HAMAS took control of the PA government in March 2006, but President ABBAS had little success negotiating with HAMAS to present a political platform acceptable to the international community so as to lift economic sanctions on Palestinians. The PLC was unable to convene throughout most of 2006 as a result of Israel’s detention of many HAMAS PLC members and Israeli-imposed travel restrictions on other PLC members. Violent clashes took place between Fatah and HAMAS supporters in the Gaza Strip in 2006 and early 2007, resulting in numerous Palestinian deaths and injuries. ABBAS and HAMAS Political Bureau Chief MISHAL in February 2007 signed the Mecca Agreement in Saudi Arabia that resulted in the formation of a Palestinian National Unity Government (NUG) headed by HAMAS member Ismail HANIYA. However, fighting continued in the Gaza Strip, and in June, HAMAS militants succeeded in a violent takeover of all military and governmental institutions in the Gaza Strip. ABBAS dismissed the NUG and through a series of Presidential decrees formed a PA government in the West Bank led by independent Salam FAYYAD. HAMAS rejected the NUG’s dismissal and has called for resuming talks with Fatah, but ABBAS has ruled out negotiations until HAMAS agrees to a return of PA control over the Gaza Strip and recognizes the FAYYAD-led government. FAYYAD and his PA government initiated a series of security and economic reforms to improve conditions in the West Bank. ABBAS participated in talks with Israel’s Prime Minister OLMERT and secured the release of some Palestinian prisoners and previously withheld customs revenue. During a November 2007 international meeting in Annapolis Maryland, ABBAS and OLMERT agreed to resume peace negotiations with the goal of reaching a final peace settlement by the end of 2008. Borders: Egypt 11 km, Israel 51 km Population: 1,500,202 GDP per capita: $3,523.34 per capita Alternative names: Gaza Strip, gaza strip administered by israel, , Qita Ghazzah, Gaza Top Rankings Bottom Rankings COMPARE Gaza Strip TO THESE COUNTRIES: Maps of Gaza Strip Popular articles