Call Apartheid in Israel by Its Name

[Boston1]

I should have said libel since its written

Quote

li·bel

ˈlībəl/

noun

noun: libel; plural noun: libels

1. 1.
   LAW
   a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
2. synonyms:
3. defamation, defamation of character, character assassination, calumny, misrepresentation, scandalmongering; Moreaspersions, denigration, vilification, disparagement, derogation, insult, slander, malicious gossip;
   lie, slur, smear, untruth, false report;
   informalmudslinging, bad-mouthing
   "she sued two newspapers for libel"
   
4. 1. • the action or crime of publishing a false statement about a person."a councilor who sued two national newspapers for libel"
        
      • a false and malicious statement about a person.
      • a thing or circumstance that brings undeserved discredit on a person by misrepresentation.
   2. 
      
      
      
   3. 2.
      (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) a plaintiff's written declaration.
   verb
   
   verb: libel; 3rd person present: libels; past tense: libelled; past participle: libelled; gerund or present participle: libelling; past tense: libeled; past participle: libeled; gerund or present participle: libeling
   1. 1.
      LAW
      defame (someone) by publishing a libel."she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
   2. synonyms:
   3. defame, malign, slander, blacken someone's name, sully someone's reputation, speak ill/evil of, traduce, smear, cast aspersions on, drag someone's name through the mud, besmirch, tarnish, taint, tell lies about, stain, impugn someone's character/integrity, vilify, denigrate, disparage, run down, stigmatize, discredit, slur; Moreinformaldis, bad-mouth;
      formalderogate, calumniate
      "she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
      
   4. 1. • make a false and malicious statement about.
      2. 
         
         
         
      3. 2.
         (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) bring a suit against (someone).

End Quote

Regardless your very first example is miles off

Quote

Inequality: injustice; partiality

Examples:

• The permiting process for new construction: Israel continues to demolish the homes built without permits

End Quote

You have not proven that the permitting process is racially dependent

The process of building with out a permit however is an illegal one. In virtually every country.

If you want to convince anyone the issues are racially based instead of economically as I have. You'd do better supporting your accusations with say, a form that clearly asks for race on a building permit application.

What "false and malicious" statement have I made?

Permitting process: Palestinian building permits 'political', admits Israel

Jerusalem (AFP) - Approval of building plans for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank is subject to political considerations, Israeli defence officials have acknowledged.​

"Political considerations" that discriminate against one ethnic group and favor another ethnic group.

Discrimination?

You have yet to support your claim that the permiting process is skewed because of economics nor have you offered any evidence or specifics to disprove my claims or show them to be libel, slander etc.

Hold on here.

I showed plenty of economic information indicating that Arabs simply can't afford permits.

And of course there is a political process. What else would you call the planing and zoning department ? Its a government agency, highly subject to political whims

And yes when you make one accusation after another against Israel with nothing but paper thin anecdotal evidence in writing then its libel.

It would appear to be malicious and deliberate.

Did you ever dig up that building permit application ? Does it mention anything about race ?

I thought apartheid required a racial distinction ?

 

[Coyote]

I should have said libel since its written

Quote

li·bel

ˈlībəl/

noun

noun: libel; plural noun: libels

1. 1.
   LAW
   a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
2. synonyms:
3. defamation, defamation of character, character assassination, calumny, misrepresentation, scandalmongering; Moreaspersions, denigration, vilification, disparagement, derogation, insult, slander, malicious gossip;
   lie, slur, smear, untruth, false report;
   informalmudslinging, bad-mouthing
   "she sued two newspapers for libel"
   
4. 1. • the action or crime of publishing a false statement about a person."a councilor who sued two national newspapers for libel"
        
      • a false and malicious statement about a person.
      • a thing or circumstance that brings undeserved discredit on a person by misrepresentation.
   2. 
      
      
      
   3. 2.
      (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) a plaintiff's written declaration.
   verb
   
   verb: libel; 3rd person present: libels; past tense: libelled; past participle: libelled; gerund or present participle: libelling; past tense: libeled; past participle: libeled; gerund or present participle: libeling
   1. 1.
      LAW
      defame (someone) by publishing a libel."she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
   2. synonyms:
   3. defame, malign, slander, blacken someone's name, sully someone's reputation, speak ill/evil of, traduce, smear, cast aspersions on, drag someone's name through the mud, besmirch, tarnish, taint, tell lies about, stain, impugn someone's character/integrity, vilify, denigrate, disparage, run down, stigmatize, discredit, slur; Moreinformaldis, bad-mouth;
      formalderogate, calumniate
      "she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
      
   4. 1. • make a false and malicious statement about.
      2. 
         
         
         
      3. 2.
         (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) bring a suit against (someone).

End Quote

Regardless your very first example is miles off

Quote

Inequality: injustice; partiality

Examples:

• The permiting process for new construction: Israel continues to demolish the homes built without permits

End Quote

You have not proven that the permitting process is racially dependent

The process of building with out a permit however is an illegal one. In virtually every country.

If you want to convince anyone the issues are racially based instead of economically as I have. You'd do better supporting your accusations with say, a form that clearly asks for race on a building permit application.

What "false and malicious" statement have I made?

Permitting process: Palestinian building permits 'political', admits Israel

Jerusalem (AFP) - Approval of building plans for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank is subject to political considerations, Israeli defence officials have acknowledged.​

"Political considerations" that discriminate against one ethnic group and favor another ethnic group.

Discrimination?

You have yet to support your claim that the permiting process is skewed because of economics nor have you offered any evidence or specifics to disprove my claims or show them to be libel, slander etc.

Hold on here.

I showed plenty of economic information indicating that Arabs simply can't afford permits.

And of course there is a political process. What else would you call the planing and zoning department ? Its a government agency, highly subject to political whims

A political process that favors one ethnic group over another.

And yes when you make one accusation after another against Israel with nothing but paper thin anecdotal evidence in writing then its libel.

I have supported everyone of my claims with multiple sources and examples. You have not disputed any of my citations or claims with specific evidence. All you have shown is that the poverty rate among Arab Israeli's is much higher. If they can't afford a permit, they aren't going to be able to apply for it and they aren't going to be denied yet they are denied. ONE permit in 2014 approved. That is a number so far out of the ballpark compared with the Jewish permits approved.

It would appear to be malicious and deliberate.

What it appears to be is in your head. If you claim it is, then support it.

Did you ever dig up that building permit application ? Does it mention anything about race ?

I thought apartheid required a racial distinction ?

I never claimed Israel was apartheid.

 

[Boston1]

I should have said libel since its written

Quote

li·bel

ˈlībəl/

noun

noun: libel; plural noun: libels

1. 1.
   LAW
   a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
2. synonyms:
3. defamation, defamation of character, character assassination, calumny, misrepresentation, scandalmongering; Moreaspersions, denigration, vilification, disparagement, derogation, insult, slander, malicious gossip;
   lie, slur, smear, untruth, false report;
   informalmudslinging, bad-mouthing
   "she sued two newspapers for libel"
   
4. 1. • the action or crime of publishing a false statement about a person."a councilor who sued two national newspapers for libel"
        
      • a false and malicious statement about a person.
      • a thing or circumstance that brings undeserved discredit on a person by misrepresentation.
   2. 
      
      
      
   3. 2.
      (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) a plaintiff's written declaration.
   verb
   
   verb: libel; 3rd person present: libels; past tense: libelled; past participle: libelled; gerund or present participle: libelling; past tense: libeled; past participle: libeled; gerund or present participle: libeling
   1. 1.
      LAW
      defame (someone) by publishing a libel."she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
   2. synonyms:
   3. defame, malign, slander, blacken someone's name, sully someone's reputation, speak ill/evil of, traduce, smear, cast aspersions on, drag someone's name through the mud, besmirch, tarnish, taint, tell lies about, stain, impugn someone's character/integrity, vilify, denigrate, disparage, run down, stigmatize, discredit, slur; Moreinformaldis, bad-mouth;
      formalderogate, calumniate
      "she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
      
   4. 1. • make a false and malicious statement about.
      2. 
         
         
         
      3. 2.
         (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) bring a suit against (someone).

End Quote

Regardless your very first example is miles off

Quote

Inequality: injustice; partiality

Examples:

• The permiting process for new construction: Israel continues to demolish the homes built without permits

End Quote

You have not proven that the permitting process is racially dependent

The process of building with out a permit however is an illegal one. In virtually every country.

If you want to convince anyone the issues are racially based instead of economically as I have. You'd do better supporting your accusations with say, a form that clearly asks for race on a building permit application.

What "false and malicious" statement have I made?

Permitting process: Palestinian building permits 'political', admits Israel

Jerusalem (AFP) - Approval of building plans for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank is subject to political considerations, Israeli defence officials have acknowledged.​

"Political considerations" that discriminate against one ethnic group and favor another ethnic group.

Discrimination?

You have yet to support your claim that the permiting process is skewed because of economics nor have you offered any evidence or specifics to disprove my claims or show them to be libel, slander etc.

Hold on here.

I showed plenty of economic information indicating that Arabs simply can't afford permits.

And of course there is a political process. What else would you call the planing and zoning department ? Its a government agency, highly subject to political whims

A political process that favors one ethnic group over another.

And yes when you make one accusation after another against Israel with nothing but paper thin anecdotal evidence in writing then its libel.

I have supported everyone of my claims with multiple sources and examples. You have not disputed any of my citations or claims with specific evidence. All you have shown is that the poverty rate among Arab Israeli's is much higher. If they can't afford a permit, they aren't going to be able to apply for it and they aren't going to be denied yet they are denied. ONE permit in 2014 approved. That is a number so far out of the ballpark compared with the Jewish permits approved.

It would appear to be malicious and deliberate.

What it appears to be is in your head. If you claim it is, then support it.

Did you ever dig up that building permit application ? Does it mention anything about race ?

I thought apartheid required a racial distinction ?

I never claimed Israel was apartheid.

Well if your going to claim that the permitting process is racially biased then you might want to do more than just offer conjecture.

Show us the permit application and make particular note of where it asks for race.

presenting op ed pieces that simply complain complain complain and don't do anything to prove this charge of racial discrimination isn't a very strong argument.

Unless the documents ask for race then I don't see how anyone can claim that the permitting process takes race into account.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I should have said libel since its written

Quote

li·bel

ˈlībəl/

noun

noun: libel; plural noun: libels

1. 1.
   LAW
   a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
2. synonyms:
3. defamation, defamation of character, character assassination, calumny, misrepresentation, scandalmongering; Moreaspersions, denigration, vilification, disparagement, derogation, insult, slander, malicious gossip;
   lie, slur, smear, untruth, false report;
   informalmudslinging, bad-mouthing
   "she sued two newspapers for libel"
   
4. 1. • the action or crime of publishing a false statement about a person."a councilor who sued two national newspapers for libel"
        
      • a false and malicious statement about a person.
      • a thing or circumstance that brings undeserved discredit on a person by misrepresentation.
   2. 
      
      
      
   3. 2.
      (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) a plaintiff's written declaration.
   verb
   
   verb: libel; 3rd person present: libels; past tense: libelled; past participle: libelled; gerund or present participle: libelling; past tense: libeled; past participle: libeled; gerund or present participle: libeling
   1. 1.
      LAW
      defame (someone) by publishing a libel."she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
   2. synonyms:
   3. defame, malign, slander, blacken someone's name, sully someone's reputation, speak ill/evil of, traduce, smear, cast aspersions on, drag someone's name through the mud, besmirch, tarnish, taint, tell lies about, stain, impugn someone's character/integrity, vilify, denigrate, disparage, run down, stigmatize, discredit, slur; Moreinformaldis, bad-mouth;
      formalderogate, calumniate
      "she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
      
   4. 1. • make a false and malicious statement about.
      2. 
         
         
         
      3. 2.
         (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) bring a suit against (someone).

End Quote

Regardless your very first example is miles off

Quote

Inequality: injustice; partiality

Examples:

• The permiting process for new construction: Israel continues to demolish the homes built without permits

End Quote

You have not proven that the permitting process is racially dependent

The process of building with out a permit however is an illegal one. In virtually every country.

If you want to convince anyone the issues are racially based instead of economically as I have. You'd do better supporting your accusations with say, a form that clearly asks for race on a building permit application.

What "false and malicious" statement have I made?

Permitting process: Palestinian building permits 'political', admits Israel

Jerusalem (AFP) - Approval of building plans for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank is subject to political considerations, Israeli defence officials have acknowledged.​

"Political considerations" that discriminate against one ethnic group and favor another ethnic group.

Discrimination?

You have yet to support your claim that the permiting process is skewed because of economics nor have you offered any evidence or specifics to disprove my claims or show them to be libel, slander etc.

Hold on here.

I showed plenty of economic information indicating that Arabs simply can't afford permits.

And of course there is a political process. What else would you call the planing and zoning department ? Its a government agency, highly subject to political whims

A political process that favors one ethnic group over another.

And yes when you make one accusation after another against Israel with nothing but paper thin anecdotal evidence in writing then its libel.

I have supported everyone of my claims with multiple sources and examples. You have not disputed any of my citations or claims with specific evidence. All you have shown is that the poverty rate among Arab Israeli's is much higher. If they can't afford a permit, they aren't going to be able to apply for it and they aren't going to be denied yet they are denied. ONE permit in 2014 approved. That is a number so far out of the ballpark compared with the Jewish permits approved.

It would appear to be malicious and deliberate.

What it appears to be is in your head. If you claim it is, then support it.

Did you ever dig up that building permit application ? Does it mention anything about race ?

I thought apartheid required a racial distinction ?

I never claimed Israel was apartheid.

Well if your going to claim that the permitting process is racially biased then you might want to do more than just offer conjecture.

Show us the permit application and make particular note of where it asks for race.

presenting op ed pieces that simply complain complain complain and don't do anything to prove this charge of racial discrimination isn't a very strong argument.

Unless the documents ask for race then I don't see how anyone can claim that the permitting process takes race into account.

It doesn't need to be on the application. Everything is right there on everyone's ID.

 

[Boston1]

Yeah yeah yeah, another cry of racism with exactly no evidence to support it.

Nothing new here

Move along people

PS
just like the apartheid clam

 

[P F Tinmore]

Apartheid in a nutshell.

Start @ 37:00

 

[Hollie]

I should have said libel since its written

Quote

li·bel

ˈlībəl/

noun

noun: libel; plural noun: libels

1. 1.
   LAW
   a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation.
2. synonyms:
3. defamation, defamation of character, character assassination, calumny, misrepresentation, scandalmongering; Moreaspersions, denigration, vilification, disparagement, derogation, insult, slander, malicious gossip;
   lie, slur, smear, untruth, false report;
   informalmudslinging, bad-mouthing
   "she sued two newspapers for libel"
   
4. 1. • the action or crime of publishing a false statement about a person."a councilor who sued two national newspapers for libel"
        
      • a false and malicious statement about a person.
      • a thing or circumstance that brings undeserved discredit on a person by misrepresentation.
   2. 
      
      
      
   3. 2.
      (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) a plaintiff's written declaration.
   verb
   
   verb: libel; 3rd person present: libels; past tense: libelled; past participle: libelled; gerund or present participle: libelling; past tense: libeled; past participle: libeled; gerund or present participle: libeling
   1. 1.
      LAW
      defame (someone) by publishing a libel."she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
   2. synonyms:
   3. defame, malign, slander, blacken someone's name, sully someone's reputation, speak ill/evil of, traduce, smear, cast aspersions on, drag someone's name through the mud, besmirch, tarnish, taint, tell lies about, stain, impugn someone's character/integrity, vilify, denigrate, disparage, run down, stigmatize, discredit, slur; Moreinformaldis, bad-mouth;
      formalderogate, calumniate
      "she alleged the magazine had libeled her"
      
   4. 1. • make a false and malicious statement about.
      2. 
         
         
         
      3. 2.
         (in admiralty and ecclesiastical law) bring a suit against (someone).

End Quote

Regardless your very first example is miles off

Quote

Inequality: injustice; partiality

Examples:

• The permiting process for new construction: Israel continues to demolish the homes built without permits

End Quote

You have not proven that the permitting process is racially dependent

The process of building with out a permit however is an illegal one. In virtually every country.

If you want to convince anyone the issues are racially based instead of economically as I have. You'd do better supporting your accusations with say, a form that clearly asks for race on a building permit application.

What "false and malicious" statement have I made?

Permitting process: Palestinian building permits 'political', admits Israel

Jerusalem (AFP) - Approval of building plans for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank is subject to political considerations, Israeli defence officials have acknowledged.​

"Political considerations" that discriminate against one ethnic group and favor another ethnic group.

Discrimination?

You have yet to support your claim that the permiting process is skewed because of economics nor have you offered any evidence or specifics to disprove my claims or show them to be libel, slander etc.

Hold on here.

I showed plenty of economic information indicating that Arabs simply can't afford permits.

And of course there is a political process. What else would you call the planing and zoning department ? Its a government agency, highly subject to political whims

A political process that favors one ethnic group over another.

And yes when you make one accusation after another against Israel with nothing but paper thin anecdotal evidence in writing then its libel.

I have supported everyone of my claims with multiple sources and examples. You have not disputed any of my citations or claims with specific evidence. All you have shown is that the poverty rate among Arab Israeli's is much higher. If they can't afford a permit, they aren't going to be able to apply for it and they aren't going to be denied yet they are denied. ONE permit in 2014 approved. That is a number so far out of the ballpark compared with the Jewish permits approved.

It would appear to be malicious and deliberate.

What it appears to be is in your head. If you claim it is, then support it.

Did you ever dig up that building permit application ? Does it mention anything about race ?

I thought apartheid required a racial distinction ?

I never claimed Israel was apartheid.

Well if your going to claim that the permitting process is racially biased then you might want to do more than just offer conjecture.

Show us the permit application and make particular note of where it asks for race.

presenting op ed pieces that simply complain complain complain and don't do anything to prove this charge of racial discrimination isn't a very strong argument.

Unless the documents ask for race then I don't see how anyone can claim that the permitting process takes race into account.

It doesn't need to be on the application. Everything is right there on everyone's ID.

Are you sure it's on everyone's ID? It's comical how Islamic terrorist huggers whine about "apartheid" while ignoring the double standard maintained by Islamics.

Tell us about ID's and building permits for the kuffar in Gaza'istan and Abbas'istan.

 

[RoccoR]

Coyote, et al,

While Coyote may have asked for a position on the matter, I'm not sure that Coyote actually promoted the claim that Israel is "apartheid."

I never claimed Israel was apartheid.

(COMMENT)

The entire idea of using the allegation of "Apartheid" as a political means to accomplish, though the use of legal trickery and emotional sympathy, is becoming quite the unsubstantiated process of the day. It is the politically motivated use to suggest that some illegal activity is somehow justified using an argument that is deductively invalid or that has very little inductive strength. The constant allegation of "Apartheid" trying to be used by Arab Palestinians to impugn Israel.

9/4/2014
A US court has ruled against the Khulumani Support Group in its 12-year legal battle to bring US corporations to book for aiding the apartheid government. But Khulumani will appeal against this ruling, says national director Marjorie Jobson.

"We survived multiple assaults on this lawsuit," says Marjorie Jobson, Khulumani's national director.

The group, which has been fighting this battle since 2002, filed a complaint against Ford Motor Company and IBM in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and in April this year, was offered the opportunity by presiding judge Shira Scheindlin to resubmit the complaint and provide more evidence.
SOURCE: South Africa: US Judge Rules Against Apartheid Claim
​

The general attempt is to suggest that Israel has no justification to establish a system of controls in the Israeli-occupied West Bank to counter Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) attacks and offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power; including the institution of Identification Systems (a very common security measure in nearly every country).

The HoAP allege that Israeli settlements, pursuant to the Oslo Accords, in which the agreement established both Areas "A" --- "B" --- "C" somehow violate Palestinian territory and sovereignty. Where separate roads military and checkpoints, to mitigate HoAP use of ambushes and improvised bombing is somehow unacceptable. The use of the Barriers to separate Israeli communities and HoAP communities to reduce the potential for infiltration, kidnapping and murders of of innocent civilians.

The HoAP content that Israel is not permitted to establish it own domestic laws pertaining to marriage, citizenship, land ownership and immigration restrictions to meet the needs of the Israeli Population. the HoAP consider all this as a form of an institutionalized regime supporting a systematic domination by one racial group (pick one of several that make-up the Israeli population) over any other racial group ( Arab Palestinians).

The HoAP do not consider any of the attacks against Israel and it citizens as a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.

Finally, the HoAP, attempt to convince their target audience that the feel-good General Assembly Resolutions have the force of law. They attempt to apply 21st Century considerations to acts that occurred in the 20th Century. They try to establish a belief that the Arab Palestinians had a state prior to the establishment of the Mandate.

All these claims, and many more, have been alleged by the HoAP as a justification for the threat and use of force against Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Hollie]

Hamas argues for return of Jews to Gaza

Hamas argues for return of Jews to Gaza

Ironically, while the international community and even Israel continue to maintain that the 2005 Gaza pullout was a good thing, Hamas is making an indirect argument on why the forced evacuation of nearly 10,000 Jews from the coastal strip was a foolish move.

...

Hamas is now saying that no one should be surprised by this outcome, because it was the very presence of Jews in Gaza that kept things relatively quiet in the area, as compared to Judea and Samaria (the so-called "West Bank"), which prior to 2005 saw far more violence than Gaza.

While meeting with leaders from Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas' rival Fatah movement, Gaza-based Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar rejected a reconciliation deal that called on Hams to adopt non-violent resistance to Israel, as opposed to armed confrontation. Zahar pointed out that since there are no Jews living in Gaza, Hamas has no one against whom to conduct peaceful protests.

"Against whom could we demonstrate in the Gaza Strip?" Zahar asked. "When Gaza was occupied [sic] that model was applicable."




Islamo-logic!

 

[Boston1]

Coyote, et al,

While Coyote may have asked for a position on the matter, I'm not sure that Coyote actually promoted the claim that Israel is "apartheid."

I never claimed Israel was apartheid.

(COMMENT)

The entire idea of using the allegation of "Apartheid" as a political means to accomplish, though the use of legal trickery and emotional sympathy, is becoming quite the unsubstantiated process of the day. It is the politically motivated use to suggest that some illegal activity is somehow justified using an argument that is deductively invalid or that has very little inductive strength. The constant allegation of "Apartheid" trying to be used by Arab Palestinians to impugn Israel.

9/4/2014
A US court has ruled against the Khulumani Support Group in its 12-year legal battle to bring US corporations to book for aiding the apartheid government. But Khulumani will appeal against this ruling, says national director Marjorie Jobson.

"We survived multiple assaults on this lawsuit," says Marjorie Jobson, Khulumani's national director.

The group, which has been fighting this battle since 2002, filed a complaint against Ford Motor Company and IBM in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and in April this year, was offered the opportunity by presiding judge Shira Scheindlin to resubmit the complaint and provide more evidence.
SOURCE: South Africa: US Judge Rules Against Apartheid Claim
​

The general attempt is to suggest that Israel has no justification to establish a system of controls in the Israeli-occupied West Bank to counter Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) attacks and offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power; including the institution of Identification Systems (a very common security measure in nearly every country).

The HoAP allege that Israeli settlements, pursuant to the Oslo Accords, in which the agreement established both Areas "A" --- "B" --- "C" somehow violate Palestinian territory and sovereignty. Where separate roads military and checkpoints, to mitigate HoAP use of ambushes and improvised bombing is somehow unacceptable. The use of the Barriers to separate Israeli communities and HoAP communities to reduce the potential for infiltration, kidnapping and murders of of innocent civilians.

The HoAP content that Israel is not permitted to establish it own domestic laws pertaining to marriage, citizenship, land ownership and immigration restrictions to meet the needs of the Israeli Population. the HoAP consider all this as a form of an institutionalized regime supporting a systematic domination by one racial group (pick one of several that make-up the Israeli population) over any other racial group ( Arab Palestinians).

The HoAP do not consider any of the attacks against Israel and it citizens as a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.

Finally, the HoAP, attempt to convince their target audience that the feel-good General Assembly Resolutions have the force of law. They attempt to apply 21st Century considerations to acts that occurred in the 20th Century. They try to establish a belief that the Arab Palestinians had a state prior to the establishment of the Mandate.

All these claims, and many more, have been alleged by the HoAP as a justification for the threat and use of force against Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually her latest is that apartheid does not exist in Israel. And I failed to acknowledge that. But it seemed like a bit of a backflip as she's so quick to cry foul over every little thing Israel does.

Even when Israel gives away building permits to the Arab Muslims who otherwise can't afford them I still hear cries of foul rihgt and left. Having read a few of her own posts I think they gave away 1,100 free permits specifically to Arabs and thousands more retroactively which I'd be surprised if they were ever paid in full.

Deal is unless someone can come along and show where race is mentioned on the application then I call BS.

The sad part is that all the while these people are crying over imaginary prejudice in the Israeli system. I'd love to see anyone show a single building permit issued to a Jewish person in Gaza, or Jordan, or Syria or Saudi. Pretty sure thats just some of the Muslim countries where they don't allow Judaic people to buy land.

Does kinda screw things up tho when Coyote tries to be reasonable doesn't it ;--)

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

While Coyote may have asked for a position on the matter, I'm not sure that Coyote actually promoted the claim that Israel is "apartheid."

I never claimed Israel was apartheid.

(COMMENT)

The entire idea of using the allegation of "Apartheid" as a political means to accomplish, though the use of legal trickery and emotional sympathy, is becoming quite the unsubstantiated process of the day. It is the politically motivated use to suggest that some illegal activity is somehow justified using an argument that is deductively invalid or that has very little inductive strength. The constant allegation of "Apartheid" trying to be used by Arab Palestinians to impugn Israel.

9/4/2014
A US court has ruled against the Khulumani Support Group in its 12-year legal battle to bring US corporations to book for aiding the apartheid government. But Khulumani will appeal against this ruling, says national director Marjorie Jobson.

"We survived multiple assaults on this lawsuit," says Marjorie Jobson, Khulumani's national director.

The group, which has been fighting this battle since 2002, filed a complaint against Ford Motor Company and IBM in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and in April this year, was offered the opportunity by presiding judge Shira Scheindlin to resubmit the complaint and provide more evidence.
SOURCE: South Africa: US Judge Rules Against Apartheid Claim
​

The general attempt is to suggest that Israel has no justification to establish a system of controls in the Israeli-occupied West Bank to counter Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) attacks and offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power; including the institution of Identification Systems (a very common security measure in nearly every country).

The HoAP allege that Israeli settlements, pursuant to the Oslo Accords, in which the agreement established both Areas "A" --- "B" --- "C" somehow violate Palestinian territory and sovereignty. Where separate roads military and checkpoints, to mitigate HoAP use of ambushes and improvised bombing is somehow unacceptable. The use of the Barriers to separate Israeli communities and HoAP communities to reduce the potential for infiltration, kidnapping and murders of of innocent civilians.

The HoAP content that Israel is not permitted to establish it own domestic laws pertaining to marriage, citizenship, land ownership and immigration restrictions to meet the needs of the Israeli Population. the HoAP consider all this as a form of an institutionalized regime supporting a systematic domination by one racial group (pick one of several that make-up the Israeli population) over any other racial group ( Arab Palestinians).

The HoAP do not consider any of the attacks against Israel and it citizens as a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.

Finally, the HoAP, attempt to convince their target audience that the feel-good General Assembly Resolutions have the force of law. They attempt to apply 21st Century considerations to acts that occurred in the 20th Century. They try to establish a belief that the Arab Palestinians had a state prior to the establishment of the Mandate.

All these claims, and many more, have been alleged by the HoAP as a justification for the threat and use of force against Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

In my opinion, labeling Israel "Apartheid" does a disservice in more than one way. Apartheid was hard wired into South Africa's legal and political system, with a total separation of races down to every detail. To make that claim of Israel does a real disserve to those that actually suffered under Apartheid.

But there is another aspect - by using such extreme comparisons, those who call Israel "apartheid" end up deflecting attention away from what are real inequities and injustices that occur in Israel's treatment of Palestinians and Arab Israeli's including funding of education, issuing of permits for expansion or new construction, confiscation of land under absentee owner laws, and even the lack of a single citizenship: Israeli. And this last aspect I find puzzling. There are no Israeli's. There are Arab Israelis. Jewish Israeli's. And, there was a movement to further split Palestinians by adding a citizenship for Christians.

When you have those divisions - all "seperate but equal" - can you have real equality in a society? Can you have a unified citizenry? Do other countries have these citizenship divisions?

 

[Coyote]

Coyote, et al,

While Coyote may have asked for a position on the matter, I'm not sure that Coyote actually promoted the claim that Israel is "apartheid."

I never claimed Israel was apartheid.

(COMMENT)

The entire idea of using the allegation of "Apartheid" as a political means to accomplish, though the use of legal trickery and emotional sympathy, is becoming quite the unsubstantiated process of the day. It is the politically motivated use to suggest that some illegal activity is somehow justified using an argument that is deductively invalid or that has very little inductive strength. The constant allegation of "Apartheid" trying to be used by Arab Palestinians to impugn Israel.

9/4/2014
A US court has ruled against the Khulumani Support Group in its 12-year legal battle to bring US corporations to book for aiding the apartheid government. But Khulumani will appeal against this ruling, says national director Marjorie Jobson.

"We survived multiple assaults on this lawsuit," says Marjorie Jobson, Khulumani's national director.

The group, which has been fighting this battle since 2002, filed a complaint against Ford Motor Company and IBM in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and in April this year, was offered the opportunity by presiding judge Shira Scheindlin to resubmit the complaint and provide more evidence.
SOURCE: South Africa: US Judge Rules Against Apartheid Claim
​

The general attempt is to suggest that Israel has no justification to establish a system of controls in the Israeli-occupied West Bank to counter Hostile Arab Palestinian (HoAP) attacks and offense which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power; including the institution of Identification Systems (a very common security measure in nearly every country).

The HoAP allege that Israeli settlements, pursuant to the Oslo Accords, in which the agreement established both Areas "A" --- "B" --- "C" somehow violate Palestinian territory and sovereignty. Where separate roads military and checkpoints, to mitigate HoAP use of ambushes and improvised bombing is somehow unacceptable. The use of the Barriers to separate Israeli communities and HoAP communities to reduce the potential for infiltration, kidnapping and murders of of innocent civilians.

The HoAP content that Israel is not permitted to establish it own domestic laws pertaining to marriage, citizenship, land ownership and immigration restrictions to meet the needs of the Israeli Population. the HoAP consider all this as a form of an institutionalized regime supporting a systematic domination by one racial group (pick one of several that make-up the Israeli population) over any other racial group ( Arab Palestinians).

The HoAP do not consider any of the attacks against Israel and it citizens as a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population.

Finally, the HoAP, attempt to convince their target audience that the feel-good General Assembly Resolutions have the force of law. They attempt to apply 21st Century considerations to acts that occurred in the 20th Century. They try to establish a belief that the Arab Palestinians had a state prior to the establishment of the Mandate.

All these claims, and many more, have been alleged by the HoAP as a justification for the threat and use of force against Israel.

Most Respectfully,
R

Actually her latest is that apartheid does not exist in Israel. And I failed to acknowledge that. But it seemed like a bit of a backflip as she's so quick to cry foul over every little thing Israel does.

I don't "cry foul" over every little thing.

Even when Israel gives away building permits to the Arab Muslims who otherwise can't afford them I still hear cries of foul rihgt and left. Having read a few of her own posts I think they gave away 1,100 free permits specifically to Arabs and thousands more retroactively which I'd be surprised if they were ever paid in full.

And they gave away many times that number of "free permits" to Jews, in addition to providing funding and infrastructure to illegal settlements (Jewish only). I doubt they were paid for in full or otherwise. What you failed to do is disprove my claims of inequalities and discrimminations beyond resorting to insults.

Deal is unless someone can come along and show where race is mentioned on the application then I call BS.

Really now....discrimmination doesn't exist unless race is specifically mentioned? Is that what you are now claiming? Think about that.

The sad part is that all the while these people are crying over imaginary prejudice in the Israeli system. I'd love to see anyone show a single building permit issued to a Jewish person in Gaza, or Jordan, or Syria or Saudi. Pretty sure thats just some of the Muslim countries where they don't allow Judaic people to buy land.

The sad part is, when you can't come up with a decent rebuttal or disprove my claims - throw in the other Middle East countries and obfuscate. It's kind of like saying well - Country X doesn't kill it's gays, they just throw them in prison for life, you guys shouldn't be complaining because Country Y throws them into bonfires. (and no, this isn't a commentary on gay policy in Israel).

Does kinda screw things up tho when Coyote tries to be reasonable doesn't it ;--)

Warning: criticizing Israel is not allowed.

 

[Boston1]

Well you are complaining that Israel what, doesn't provide enough free building permits to its impoverished Arab Muslims ?

Over here you have to buy those things. They don't just give them away. Just up the road they have the highest land use fees in the country. Erie Colorado, $40,000. Its insane but I guarantee if I walked in there claiming to be a minority ( Native American ) and demanded a free building permit, all fees waved, they'd laugh their asses off and throw me out.

Now would you call that racism or prejudice ?

 

[Coyote]

Well you are complaining that Israel what, doesn't provide enough free building permits to its impoverished Arab Muslims ?

No. That's not what I've argued. You're the one running around posting about free permits. Nice try though, but no cigar. Not even a cigarello.

Over here you have to buy those things. They don't just give them away. Just up the road they have the highest land use fees in the country. Erie Colorado, $40,000. Its insane but I guarantee if I walked in there claiming to be a minority ( Native American ) and demanded a free building permit, all fees waved, they'd laugh their asses off and throw me out.

Now would you call that racism or prejudice ?

Hey! I know! Show me specific evidence that Palestinian permits were denied on the basis of cost and we'll solve this issue

 

[Boston1]

Well you are complaining that Israel what, doesn't provide enough free building permits to its impoverished Arab Muslims ?

No. That's not what I've argued. You're the one running around posting about free permits. Nice try though, but no cigar. Not even a cigarello.

Over here you have to buy those things. They don't just give them away. Just up the road they have the highest land use fees in the country. Erie Colorado, $40,000. Its insane but I guarantee if I walked in there claiming to be a minority ( Native American ) and demanded a free building permit, all fees waved, they'd laugh their asses off and throw me out.

Now would you call that racism or prejudice ?

Hey! I know! Show me specific evidence that Palestinian permits were denied on the basis of cost and we'll solve this issue

So you want me to prove I can't afford something ? or that you can't afford something ? Or that someone half way across the world can't afford something ?

Seems pretty silly to me.

But if you want to believe that asking for a building permit in Israel has something to do with race, you should be able to show where it asks for race on the publicly available application for a building permit.

Its your claim, I can't imagine why you refuse to prove it.

 

[Coyote]

Well you are complaining that Israel what, doesn't provide enough free building permits to its impoverished Arab Muslims ?

No. That's not what I've argued. You're the one running around posting about free permits. Nice try though, but no cigar. Not even a cigarello.

Over here you have to buy those things. They don't just give them away. Just up the road they have the highest land use fees in the country. Erie Colorado, $40,000. Its insane but I guarantee if I walked in there claiming to be a minority ( Native American ) and demanded a free building permit, all fees waved, they'd laugh their asses off and throw me out.

Now would you call that racism or prejudice ?

Hey! I know! Show me specific evidence that Palestinian permits were denied on the basis of cost and we'll solve this issue

So you want me to prove I can't afford something ? or that you can't afford something ? Or that someone half way across the world can't afford something ?

Nope. I'll be satisfied if you just provide me with a document that shows permits were denied on the basis of income. That's all. Should be easy.

Seems pretty silly to me.

That is what you risk, Grasshopper...

But if you want to believe that asking for a building permit in Israel has something to do with race, you should be able to show where it asks for race on the publicly available application for a building permit.

Its your claim, I can't imagine why you refuse to prove it.

And you should be able to show that it is denied on the basis of income...it's not rocket science....or is it?

 

[Coyote]

Here are some more "free permits"....actually, it's kind of a two-fer. Not only do they get retroactive legalization but they get to build on private Palestinian land. Inequities in government policies towards Palestinian landowners and Jewish landowners?

Ofra

Israel Moves to Retroactively Okay Settlement Homes Built on Palestinian Land
Israel announced on Thursday the initiation of a municipal plan that would retroactively legitimize structures in one of the largest West Bank settlements, and which were built on private Palestinian land.

Over 58% of Ofra's structures are built on private Palestinian land, a fact which has delayed potential construction plans.

However, in an attempt to allow further construction in Ofra, the state told the High Court of Justice on Thursday that it was drafting a jurisdiction plan for Ofra, the legal significance of which would be the retroactive approval of past construction plans, even on private Palestinian land.

Ofra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Status under Israeli law
The Sasson Report in 2003 introduced criteria for determining the legality of a given settlement under Israeli law. In June 2007, Haaretz reported that 179 of the 600 buildings in Ofra are considered illegal by the Israeli administration.[28]

Ofra is built on private Palestinian land.[7] In a December 2008 report, B'Tselem has argued that while all Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal under international law, Ofra is illegal even under Israeli law stating that it violates 3 of the 4 established criteria for legality in the Sasson report. According to the report, while Ofra was authorized in 1979, it was never defined a jurisdictional area, never had an outline plan approved and no lawful building permits were issued. The report added that at least 58 percent of the settlement's built-up area is registered in the Land Registry Office under the names of Palestinians. Ofra residents claim the land was purchased legally from the Palestinians.[29][5] They contended that the land was purchased legally but suggested that showing documents of the purchases would lead to Palestinian retribution attacks. Land deals are usually kept secret to protect Palestinian sellers. [30] The Yesha Council accused B'Tselem of trying to remove Jews from their land saying the group "will spare no means - even lies" in order to harm the settlements.[29]

Homes were built on land bought with forged documents. Hundreds of structures in Ofra came under a demolition order from the Civil Administration after the villagers of Ein Yabrud laid a petition at the Israeli High Court of Justice over construction on their private land.[31]

A secret database, published by Haaretz in 2009, confirmed that Ofra was largely built on private Palestinian lands, without approval.[32] In September 2011, the Israeli government set up plans to legitimise the settlement retroactively.[33]

Ofra's settlement fence was built without permits over wide swathes of land belonging to the Palestinian villages of Deir Dibwan and Silwad. The IDF has confirmed that permits were lacking, and undertook to rebuild the fence closer to Ofra within 2012. Top quality soil from this agricultural land is systematically harvested, according to Haaretz 'stolen', for settlement use.[34] One house near the settlement, owned by the Palestinian Shehadeh family, who won a Jerusalem district court judgement in their favour, is still used as a yeshiva for Ofra's married men, and was expropriated by the IDF in favour of the settlers 10 days after the verdict was passed.[35] In the wake of a suit filed in 2008, on 9 February 2015, the Israeli Supreme Court ordered the demolition of 9 Ofra homes as standing on land with Palestinian title. The government was given2 years to demolish the housing,[36]

 

[Boston1]

Well you are complaining that Israel what, doesn't provide enough free building permits to its impoverished Arab Muslims ?

No. That's not what I've argued. You're the one running around posting about free permits. Nice try though, but no cigar. Not even a cigarello.

Over here you have to buy those things. They don't just give them away. Just up the road they have the highest land use fees in the country. Erie Colorado, $40,000. Its insane but I guarantee if I walked in there claiming to be a minority ( Native American ) and demanded a free building permit, all fees waved, they'd laugh their asses off and throw me out.

Now would you call that racism or prejudice ?

Hey! I know! Show me specific evidence that Palestinian permits were denied on the basis of cost and we'll solve this issue

So you want me to prove I can't afford something ? or that you can't afford something ? Or that someone half way across the world can't afford something ?

Nope. I'll be satisfied if you just provide me with a document that shows permits were denied on the basis of income. That's all. Should be easy.

Seems pretty silly to me.

That is what you risk, Grasshopper...

But if you want to believe that asking for a building permit in Israel has something to do with race, you should be able to show where it asks for race on the publicly available application for a building permit.

Its your claim, I can't imagine why you refuse to prove it.

And you should be able to show that it is denied on the basis of income...it's not rocket science....or is it?

You are completely confused.

No one suggested permits were issued on the basis of income.

I'm saying that just like everywhere else you have to be able to afford the permit fee.

Stands to reason that the lower 20% of the income earners, say under $2500 a year average GDP for Arab Muslims in Israel, couldn't afford to build; and therefore simply aren't buying too many permits.

I didn't say anything about permits being issued according to income level.

Yikes, try and keep up

 

[Boston1]

Here are some more "free permits"....actually, it's kind of a two-fer. Not only do they get retroactive legalization but they get to build on private Palestinian land. Inequities in government policies towards Palestinian landowners and Jewish landowners?

Ofra

Israel Moves to Retroactively Okay Settlement Homes Built on Palestinian Land
Israel announced on Thursday the initiation of a municipal plan that would retroactively legitimize structures in one of the largest West Bank settlements, and which were built on private Palestinian land.

Over 58% of Ofra's structures are built on private Palestinian land, a fact which has delayed potential construction plans.

However, in an attempt to allow further construction in Ofra, the state told the High Court of Justice on Thursday that it was drafting a jurisdiction plan for Ofra, the legal significance of which would be the retroactive approval of past construction plans, even on private Palestinian land.

Ofra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Status under Israeli law
The Sasson Report in 2003 introduced criteria for determining the legality of a given settlement under Israeli law. In June 2007, Haaretz reported that 179 of the 600 buildings in Ofra are considered illegal by the Israeli administration.[28]

Ofra is built on private Palestinian land.[7] In a December 2008 report, B'Tselem has argued that while all Israeli settlements in the West Bank are illegal under international law, Ofra is illegal even under Israeli law stating that it violates 3 of the 4 established criteria for legality in the Sasson report. According to the report, while Ofra was authorized in 1979, it was never defined a jurisdictional area, never had an outline plan approved and no lawful building permits were issued. The report added that at least 58 percent of the settlement's built-up area is registered in the Land Registry Office under the names of Palestinians. Ofra residents claim the land was purchased legally from the Palestinians.[29][5] They contended that the land was purchased legally but suggested that showing documents of the purchases would lead to Palestinian retribution attacks. Land deals are usually kept secret to protect Palestinian sellers. [30] The Yesha Council accused B'Tselem of trying to remove Jews from their land saying the group "will spare no means - even lies" in order to harm the settlements.[29]

Homes were built on land bought with forged documents. Hundreds of structures in Ofra came under a demolition order from the Civil Administration after the villagers of Ein Yabrud laid a petition at the Israeli High Court of Justice over construction on their private land.[31]

A secret database, published by Haaretz in 2009, confirmed that Ofra was largely built on private Palestinian lands, without approval.[32] In September 2011, the Israeli government set up plans to legitimise the settlement retroactively.[33]

Ofra's settlement fence was built without permits over wide swathes of land belonging to the Palestinian villages of Deir Dibwan and Silwad. The IDF has confirmed that permits were lacking, and undertook to rebuild the fence closer to Ofra within 2012. Top quality soil from this agricultural land is systematically harvested, according to Haaretz 'stolen', for settlement use.[34] One house near the settlement, owned by the Palestinian Shehadeh family, who won a Jerusalem district court judgement in their favour, is still used as a yeshiva for Ofra's married men, and was expropriated by the IDF in favour of the settlers 10 days after the verdict was passed.[35] In the wake of a suit filed in 2008, on 9 February 2015, the Israeli Supreme Court ordered the demolition of 9 Ofra homes as standing on land with Palestinian title. The government was given2 years to demolish the housing,[36]

Wait a minute now. One phony claim at a time.

"they get to build on palestinian land" ??????? What palestinian land ? For that matter what palestinians ??????

There is no such thing as a palestinian. We have Jordanians, Israeli's and Arab Muslims who refuse citizenship. But there is no such thing as palestine ergo there can be no such thing as a palestinian.

The next little jewel in that crown of crap was it being Arab Muslim land. Arab Muslim land is east of the Jordan. The Judaic people were awarded EVERYTHING west of the Jordan. Go check your mandate and ref, the Jordan Memorandum. Its extremely clear.

Also if a land owner fails to pay his/her taxes for x number of years around here they forfeit their land. So if a land owner in another country abandons their land and fails to pay, why is it unfair if the gov then auctions off the land ?

 

[Shusha]

Hmmmm Ofra is an interesting case study. First, most of the information I can find about it all sources itself in a single B'tselem report and I'm having some difficulty finding other sources. I can't find any confirmation that "58% of the land is registered to Palestinians", other than that one report, and frankly, so many of these reports confuse privately owned land with "Palestinian land", I'm just not willing to take their say-so.

What makes Ofra especially interesting in that the Jewish residents claim they purchased the land fair and square from Palestinians, even paying far more than the land was worth, but failed to register their purchase for fear of Palestinian retribution on the sellers for selling to Jews. If true, what a nice scam -- "sell" the land, but if it fails to get registered -- its still yours.

On the other hand, the Palestinians appear to be claiming that they didn't sell the land at all, and that the Israelis took it, but they failed to register a complaint against it and allowed the Israelis to have the land for many years, giving the Israelis the belief that they now had legal title to it.

Its a mess.

But I think that is the lesson here. These are not black-and-white "you stole my land" issues. They are complex. A Palestinian village has some land which is designated as Area B in Oslo. But they think that more of the land around their village (Area C) "belongs" to their village, even though the land was never registered to private individuals. Or the land was actually purchased by their family in the past, but they failed to register it in order to avoid paying taxes. So its technically not theirs. Or they actually never purchased it, but assumed it to be part of the village and thus "their" land.

And then a Palestinian decides to sell his land, actually privately owned and registered, to an Israeli, but is actually fearful of his life if it is discovered. So he asks that the land not be registered, to which the Israeli agrees. Or, possibly, he is not really fearful of his life, but realizes that if the Israeli doesn't register the land purchase -- the land is still technically his. Or, possibly, Israelis just start using and building on land, claiming they purchased it when they did not.

Its a mess.

And I think we would do well to remember that there are all sorts of actors here: Jewish Israeli migrants and returnees; Arab Israelis; Palestinian citizens; governments; courts and they all have different goals and different end games.

My point being, trying to reduce it down to "Israel is bad", "Israel is apartheid" or "Israel is discriminatory" is a fool's game. Its complicated.