'Apartheid' Mindset Appears to be Alive and Well - Israeli Poll Indicates Support for 'Apartheid' Policies

yanshuf

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
13,193
yanshuf,

What is your opinion of this statement, bearing in mind it is not a poll of the entire Jewish population of Israel. Could you just give us your opinion of the two-thirds cited, without anymore prevarication:

My opinion is that it's detached from reality: Israel has no contro, and is not going to gain control over more 2.5 million Arabs. Area C has no such number of Arabs. If area C is annexed then there would be a certain number of Arabs who'd be given Israeli citienship, but not 2.5 million.

Israelis, in general, see Arabs as their enemy, especially when Arabs from the Gaza strip launch missiles on a daily basis, thus I couldn't accuse them Israelis in such conditions, that they hate Arabs.

There is worse polls, like this one, where more than two thirds of Arabs in PA and Hamas areas say they would love to kill all Jews, as the Hamas charter says:

73% of 1,010 Palestinians in W. Bank, Gaza agree with 'hadith' quoted in Hamas Charter about the need to kill Jews hiding behind stones, trees.
 


Carlos the Jackal

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
1,184
My opinion is that it's detached from reality: Israel has no contro, and is not going to gain control over more 2.5 million Arabs. Area C has no such number of Arabs. If area C is annexed then there would be a certain number of Arabs who'd be given Israeli citienship, but not 2.5 million.

Israelis, in general, see Arabs as their enemy, especially when Arabs from the Gaza strip launch missiles on a daily basis, thus I couldn't accuse them Israelis in such conditions, that they hate Arabs.

There is worse polls, like this one, where more than two thirds of Arabs in PA and Hamas areas say they would love to kill all Jews, as the Hamas charter says:

73% of 1,010 Palestinians in W. Bank, Gaza agree with 'hadith' quoted in Hamas Charter about the need to kill Jews hiding behind stones, trees.
except the hadith does not speak of any need or order to kill Jews. The hadith says that before the day of Judgement there will be a war between Muslims and Jews, and that the very rocks and trees will go against the Jews.

“The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews.
The Jew will hide behind stones or trees.
Then the stones or trees will call:
‘Oh Muslim, servant of God, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.’”

It is not an order of any kind, it is a description of what will happen right before Judgement day.
 

yanshuf

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
13,193
except the hadith does not speak of any need or order to kill Jews. The hadith says that before the day of Judgement there will be a war between Muslims and Jews, and that the very rocks and trees will go against the Jews.

“The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews.
The Jew will hide behind stones or trees.
Then the stones or trees will call:
‘Oh Muslim, servant of God, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.’”

It is not an order of any kind, it is a description of what will happen right before Judgement day.
It really shows how different life is here and on your side of the moon. This hadith is brought as justification and strengthening of the claim that the Arabs should kill all jews in the Land of Israel.
 

onlyasking

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,660
You really do show ignorance.
Yours had better be a strong argument.

Even just looking at the West Bank.......never mind the state of Israel, Jews have settled on the West Bank for centuries. Jewish 'settlements' like Hebron have existed for centuries and right throughout the centuries of Ottoman rule.
Does the fact that Jewish communities were to be found across the middle east mean that the Arabs in Palestine should have meekly accepted the arrival of millions of people from beyond the middle east without question?

Tell me of any other long-established population which during the past few decades has been expected by the UN, USA, UK etc to simply stand aside for such a massive influx from afar.

Many other Jewish settlements were established under British Mandatory administration prior to the establishment of the State of Israel. The only time, in the last thousand years or more, Jews were not allowed settle the West bank was for the 19 years Jordan illegally occupied it. The plaestinians.....and people like you, see this illegal expulsion of Jews from their communities as justification for Jews to re establish those communities there.
It is beyond my powers of comprehension how any of that undermines my assertion that millions of people from Europe arrived in a short space of time to a land beyond Europe which was already home to over a million people who were not from Europe. The fact that there were already Jewish communities there, and also Jews who lived among Arabs, does not reduce the injustice of demanding that the Arabs of Palestine carry the can for the genocidal savagery of Europeans in their treatment of the Jews of Europe.

And as for your ignorant point about millions of people from Europe taking over cities? How do yopu think modern day America, Auatralia etc came about? You need to look in the mirror to see racism
I repudiate colonialism, so I'm not going to stand over the genocidal treatment of the native peoples of America or Australia.

However, is it your contention that, however deplorably they are treated, people of native Australian stock are denied on racial grounds the right to vote for the legislatures that control the most important facets of their existence i.e. where they can travel, which water supplies they can use, when their land is to be stolen, when their homes are to be demolished etc.

Once more - every adult Jew on the West Bank is entitled to vote for Knesset elections, while every adult non-Jew on the West Bank is prevented from doing so.

On the West Bank, voting rights to the legislature that determines the day to day activities and the future of that place are granted or withheld according to race. There's a name for that.
 

onlyasking

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
5,660
No command, but an inevitability
Perhaps such a slavish devotion to a collection of ancient words can partly explain the dire circumstances of so many ordinary muslims in muslim countries.

Western powers probably take great comfort from the fact that people like you think future developments are "inevitable" because "it is written".
 

The System Works

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
2,259
Website
www.thesystemworks.wordpress.com
Twitter
@mendingtheworld
There is a tiny flaw in the initial reporting on this survey and subsequent commentary. It was all bollocks.

I address it here: Haaretz Manufactures Another Lie « Cranky Notions

A number of disparities were picked up by Ben-Dror Yemini, a senior journalist with the Hebrew daily Maariv:

According to the survey, 53 percent of Israelis are not opposed to having an Arab neighbor. That much is clear. But when Gideon Levy passes from reporting to overt incitement masquerading as “interpretation,” he writes that “the majority doesn’t want… Arab neighbors.” Could it be that the second Gideon Levy didn’t properly read what was written by the first Gideon Levy?

Moving on: According to the survey, 33% of Israelis support revoking the voting rights of Israeli Arabs. That’s a grave figure in and of itself. But when it comes to the “interpretation,” Levy writes that “the majority doesn’t want Arabs to vote for the Knesset.” Again, Levy the interpreter seems not to have read Levy the reporter. Is he capable of formulating a sentence that includes only the truth? And where in the hell is his editor? Was there not a single editor who could properly parse the results of the survey?
Not only that, but headlines claiming that most Israelis support an apartheid regime do not even reflect the findings of the survey. The Israelis polled were asked about the granting of voting rights to Palestinian Arabs if the territories were annexed. It did not relate to the current situation, but to a hypothetical situation. Most Israelis oppose the annexation of the territories in the first place.
 

Little_Korean

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
4,081
The poll was conducted by a public opinion firm, Dialog, which interviewed 503 people out of an Israeli Jewish population of just under 6 million.
Given the small sample and the general unreliability of polls, I'd hesistate to jump to conclusions in regards to this poll.
 

IvoShandor

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
7,270
Twitter
yes
except the hadith does not speak of any need or order to kill Jews. The hadith says that before the day of Judgement there will be a war between Muslims and Jews, and that the very rocks and trees will go against the Jews.
It is not an order of any kind, it is a description of what will happen right before Judgement day.
Sophistry indeed! The very existence of the hadith precludes any kind of harmonious co-existence with Jews. Believing that one day,one will kill Jews is no huge leap away from believing that they should be killed. The whole idea presupposes that Jews are vile and their destiny is destruction.

It is frequently the case that abuse and ridicule are hurled at those those who ascribe to the State of Israel policies redolent of Apartheid South Africa, a state that was treated as an international pariah. Numerous instances of such knee-jerk attacks on Israel's critics have surfaced on this forum among others.

It would appear that Apartheidist policies do after all enjoy substantial support among those who bask in their own much trumpeted 'democratic credentials'. Despite the deeply anti-democratic nature of Israeli rule in the territories it controls, Israel's sympathisers and supporters simply will not hear of any allegations that racism may underpin much of Israeli policy across those territories.

Is Israel becoming an openly 'Apartheidist' state? Discuss.
Well, if there are indications of support for mooted policies that would amount to a version of apartheid,doesn't that suggest that Israel is, as of this moment,not an "apartheid state"?
 
Last edited:

L'Chaim

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
18,736
Yours had better be a strong argument.



Does the fact that Jewish communities were to be found across the middle east mean that the Arabs in Palestine should have meekly accepted the arrival of millions of people from beyond the middle east without question?

Tell me of any other long-established population which during the past few decades has been expected by the UN, USA, UK etc to simply stand aside for such a massive influx from afar.



It is beyond my powers of comprehension how any of that undermines my assertion that millions of people from Europe arrived in a short space of time to a land beyond Europe which was already home to over a million people who were not from Europe. The fact that there were already Jewish communities there, and also Jews who lived among Arabs, does not reduce the injustice of demanding that the Arabs of Palestine carry the can for the genocidal savagery of Europeans in their treatment of the Jews of Europe.



I repudiate colonialism, so I'm not going to stand over the genocidal treatment of the native peoples of America or Australia.

However, is it your contention that, however deplorably they are treated, people of native Australian stock are denied on racial grounds the right to vote for the legislatures that control the most important facets of their existence i.e. where they can travel, which water supplies they can use, when their land is to be stolen, when their homes are to be demolished etc.

Once more - every adult Jew on the West Bank is entitled to vote for Knesset elections, while every adult non-Jew on the West Bank is prevented from doing so.

On the West Bank, voting rights to the legislature that determines the day to day activities and the future of that place are granted or withheld according to race. There's a name for that.
After WWI many countries were divided up. The geographical area of palestine was one of them.......with the bulk of palestine (77% of it) becoming Jordan. Jews were given the legal right to settle all areas west of the Jordan river (waste land/state land and Jewish owned land) as part of their national home. Later the UN proposed two states for two peoples (which is still the consensus of the worldwide community) but the palestinian/arab side rejected that. They didn't want any Jewish state anywhere in palestine. Now like it or not, but palestine was, for thousands of years, the historic homeland of the Jews and the LON mandate recognised this and made it legal for Jews to establish their national home there. The UN recognised this too and proposed a Jewish state be established there. The Arab/palestinian sides rejected this. However the establishment of the Jewish state was done legally and Israel has the same fundemental right to exist as any other state in the world and as any other state that was established since WWI.

And as for your point about the legislature that determines the future of that place; Israel has the same right as other states to define the essence of its country. Just as dozens of states define themselves as Christian or Muslim, Israel has the right to define itself as a Jewish state.

For you to try to make the argument that Jews, because they gained their right to self-determination because it came about by migration, is just you trying to argue that Jews have no right to self determination at all. And "there's a name for that". The Jewish dispersal over centuries was a product of antisemitism and now you are trying to argue that this dispersal of Jews is a reason to deny Jews the same rights accorded to every other people to the right to self determination. But the fact is; Jews have the right to self determination and they have the legal right to a Jewish homeland, as laid down by the League of Nations Mandate, and a state as agreed upon by the members of the UN. The palestinians were also offered their own state.....a number of times, and they always rejected it
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
54,497
You really do show ignorance. Even just looking at the West Bank.......never mind the state of Israel, Jews have settled on the West Bank for centuries. Jewish 'settlements' like Hebron have existed for centuries and right throughout the centuries of Ottoman rule. Many other Jewish settlements were established under British Mandatory administration prior to the establishment of the State of Israel. The only time, in the last thousand years or more, Jews were not allowed settle the West bank was for the 19 years Jordan illegally occupied it. The plaestinians.....and people like you, see this illegal expulsion of Jews from their communities as justification for Jews to re establish those communities there.

And as for your ignorant point about millions of people from Europe taking over cities? How do yopu think modern day America, Auatralia etc came about? You need to look in the mirror to see racism
Living in the WB is one thing. Driving the Arab civilians from their homes is another thing. The latter is not a right of the Jews or anyone else.

Honestly L'Chaim: the only lesson the Jewish State seems to have learned from the Holocaust is that while it must never again happen to them, it's okay for it to happen to others. The Jewish State has squandered the sympathy it had after WW2 by behaving in exactly the same way as its former persecutors in Germany.
 

L'Chaim

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
18,736
Living in the WB is one thing. Driving the Arab civilians from their homes is another thing. The latter is not a right of the Jews or anyone else.

Honestly L'Chaim: the only lesson the Jewish State seems to have learned from the Holocaust is that while it must never again happen to them, it's okay for it to happen to others. The Jewish State has squandered the sympathy it had after WW2 by behaving in exactly the same way as its former persecutors in Germany.
The only ones on the WB who were driven from their homes were all the Jews who lived there and were expelled when Jordan illegally took control of it for 19 years from 1948 - 67. And that antisemitic act should not be used as justification for saying the Jews have no rights to settle there now
 

pedagogus

Well-known member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
2,614
The only ones on the WB who were driven from their homes were all the Jews who lived there and were expelled when Jordan illegally took control of it for 19 years from 1948 - 67. And that antisemitic act should not be used as justification for saying the Jews have no rights to settle there now
That is just not true.Jewish groups did drive Palestinian farmers out. The activities of both the stern gang and the irgun in that regard are well known.
 

The System Works

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
2,259
Website
www.thesystemworks.wordpress.com
Twitter
@mendingtheworld
That is just not true.Jewish groups did drive Palestinian farmers out. The activities of both the stern gang and the irgun in that regard are well known.
The Stern Gang were a small group of about 500 (at their height) who specialized in assassinations and bombings. The Irgun had about 1500 armed men, around the country. Until the British left in May of 1948, they were strictly underground. Hundreds of thousands of Arabs had already left by then. These groups did not remove Arab communities. They wouldn't have had the ability.

You are either lying or ignorant. Both are common among the Islamists and leftists here.
 

yanshuf

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
13,193
LOL!

And to think that a few months ago chara toney was asked what's wrong with the Nation Law, and he couldn't respond.

The Nation Law states the obvious that exists on the ground in Israel - the Jews are the indigenous people of the Land of Israel, and have a collective right as a nation.

All others have communal rights and human rights.

Very simple, just like many other countries.
 

james toney

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
16,537
And all others have a right by useless zionist trolls to be rescued from the sh!t.....Low IQ of 62 ? Here...hold my beer!
Tuam/yanshuf is famous all over the internet for his video.....An alleged baby being exhumed from a mass grave in Tuam didnt work out for him.
Was he on medication,alcohol,or wanting rapists convicted of war crimes?

Anyway...more of that later.

[video=youtube;gX1H1FGviac]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gX1H1FGviac[/video]
 

Dadaist

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
13,625
LOL!

And to think that a few months ago chara toney was asked what's wrong with the Nation Law, and he couldn't respond.

The Nation Law states the obvious that exists on the ground in Israel - the Jews are the indigenous people of the Land of Israel, and have a collective right as a nation.

All others have communal rights and human rights.

Very simple, just like many other countries.
Name one that does this to a section of its citizens?
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top