The author of the OP isn't even touching the reason for the Apartheid analogy; there are two separate legal systems for Jews and Palestinians in the West Bank. The Palestinian have no civil rights whatsoever - they're only awarded protection from harm according to the rules of the Geneva Convention, no more no less. The Jewish Israelis who live in the settlements have full civil rights and access to the resources and the land, which is more or less denied to Palestinians. For example, state land in the West Bank and Jerusalem is explicitly only for Jewish use. The Palestinian GDP per capita is US$2,811, while the Israeli figure is US$37,206. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita ) Palestinians are sentenced in military courts with a 99.74% conviction, (http://www.haaretz.com/nearly-100-of-all-military-court-cases-in-west-bank-end-in-conviction-haaretz-learns-1.398369) while settlers go to the civil courts with the high standards of a democratic country. Palestinians in the West Bank are only allowed 1/3 of the amount of water the settlers get:


Source: http://www.btselem.org/water/discrimination_in_water_supply

In fact, I don't know of any circumstances where Palestinians are awarded equal rights to those of Israeli settlers.

All of the information you have about both come from internet sources.

Is that correct?

.....in the King David Hotel ?

re : " Maybe (s)he stayed in a Holiday Inn Express, nt "

they are as smart as a professional because 'they stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night'.

And usually not the most vocal AntiZionist "experts".

....than half KD .

.....probably around 00.6%.

But are you bringing it up only because you're unable to refute the Apartheid analogy? I was hoping someone could at least provide some of that fake Hasbara evidence that proves there's no discrimination whatsoever against Palestinians in the occupied territories.

....Israel has against Palestinians which is supposed to prove Israeli Apartheid.

Remember that stupid list?

Lots of lies there, right? Why all the lies with BDS?

The list from Adalah you're referring to details Israeli laws that discriminates against non-Jewish Israeli citizens in Israel. It's got nothing to do with BDS or the treatment of Palestinians in the occupied territories.

Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel:
Discriminatory Laws in Israel
http://www.adalah.org/en/law/index

I'd love to discuss those laws with you (again), but this OP is about the Apartheid analogy in the occupied territories.

If you're going to support BDS, it helps to actually know what you're supporting.

I suggest you go to the main BDS site and read what they're about. If you only support BDS due to being against Apartheid in the territories but BDS says it also exists within Israel, you are supporting a cause that deliberately lies and incites against Israel. Are you proud of that?

Apartheid in the occupied territories only. (http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/340258/as-methodist-church-votes-on-bds-hillary-clinton-calls-push-harmful/) I don't support the self-appointed BDS Movement, which you should know by now.

I've presented a few examples that support the Apartheid analogy; the economic discrimination in the form of different GDP, the legal discrimination in the form of different legal systems and the discrimination in the form of water consumption.

Refute me.

Last edited Fri May 13, 2016, 09:45 AM - Edit history (2)

....associated with greater BDS led by Omar Barghouti, Ali Abunimah, etc.? They don't exist. There are no BDS people out there who we know of that also oppose the self-appointed BDS you say you're against. If I'm wrong then name a few. Let me know which particular part of BDS (if it exists at all) you support and who its leaders are. Link me to it.

Saying you're only for a certain part of BDS is like saying you're only for a certain part of the KKK movement, the good part, whatever that is.

And being for a BDS that calls for the destruction of Israel via 1 secular state (hardly any Palestinians or Israelis support this) kind of makes one's views on Apartheid irrelevant altogether, since there's nothing Israel can do to "better" itself other than agree to its own destruction and end of liberal democracy altogether. Note the irony - calling for an end of Apartheid and Israel in favor of a fascist, racist, regressive state led by Hamas or some other rightwing Palestinian party. This "concern" over apartheid and human rights is 100% fake.

Every group or company that chooses to boycott the Israeli settlements and the occupation do so independently - it's not necessary to be a member of some organization to do it.

The particular boycott I was referring to was the Methodist Church's divestment from Israeli banks and other companies that support the occupation and the illegal settlements: Bank Hapoalim, Bank Leumi, First International Bank of Israel, Israel Discount Bank, Mizrahi Tefahot Bank, Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard and Motorola. (http://www.jta.org/2016/01/13/news-opinion/united-states/major-protestant-branch-divests-from-israeli-banks, http://religionnews.com/2016/05/07/6-things-to-watch-at-the-methodist-general-conference/)

It's actually quite significant that Hillary Clinton is singling out a boycott that only targets the illegal settlements and the occupation as a form of BDS that should be stopped. It only reinforces my view that all criticism of BDS is only an attempt to deflect criticism of the illegal settlements. It's all about the settlements, and Hillary Clinton is obviously a staunch supporter. She even wrote a letter declaring her opposition to the Methodist Church BDS divesting from companies that support the occupation and the settlements. (http://religionnews.com/2016/05/09/hillary-clinton-opposes-bds-movement/)

I must say that this is an issue where I don't agree with her.

Can we go back to the OP now? I'm beginning to lose interest.

You're arguing that Hillary Clinton is not opposed to the BDS of the settlements and the occupation of the Methodist Church, but rather, she's against the Kairos document and also the BDS movement which is linked to at the bottom of a page, and when Hillary Clinton refers to the Methodist Church BDS and also writes a letter about it, she just seems to be against BDS of the settlements and the occupation, and while everyone thinks she is, she's actually not, she only opposes BDS of Israel, of which there's no evidence whatsoever, and all her speeches about BDS just seemed to be in defense of the settlements, but actually they were against, and if I just squint real hard I will understand everything...

Hngh...

You know, the pro-Hamas fascist type of BDS you acknowledge you're against for some reasonyet tolerate as if you support it 100%.

There is no other BDS separate from that despite the pretense. I challenged you to show otherwise and you cannot & the reason you cannot is you damned well know there is no such BDS that only opposes settlements & fake claims of apartheid.

Why is this so difficult for you to comprehend? If Hillary was for settlements, she'd just come out and say so. I think you're trying too hard to see lies & conspiracies where they aren't.

The Methodist Church BDS targets only the settlements and the occupation. All the companies that are targeted by anti-BDS legislation only divest from the settlements, not Israel. All the companies that are targeted by BDS are doing business with the settlements (Veolia, Mekorot, Lehava, Caterpillar, Hewlett Packard, Motorola, etc). No companies are targeted by BDS because they're Israeli or are doing business with Israel.

And there's not a single post explaining why the Apartheid analogy isn't valid...

Last edited Sat May 14, 2016, 09:07 PM - Edit history (5)

....the type of BDS you say you're against. That's not just anti-settlements and fake "apartheid" but also against normalization b/w Israelis & Palestinians, support for 1-state with a vulnerable Jewish minority after full "right" of return. The same BDS that has proven over and over again to be a Jew hating, pro-Hamas movement.

Who are you trying to fool?

....the fact that the definition you'd supply would also apply to the USA, UK, France, Canada, Australia and every shit hole around the world under fascist, authoritarian control? Thus, everyone commits apartheid...but you manage to only single out the Jewish state? See - I know damned well you won't provide a definition of Apartheid that applies to Israel and no other Western liberal democracies. I know it 100%....

Prove me wrong.

.........and the rest of you experts ?????

Before you make this about Little Tich's knowledge coming only from internet sources.....why dont you detail to us your vast experience of being to Israel or the West Bank .

As we have no idea where you live either.

That's an outright lie, agreed?

I'm however opposed to Apartheid, and I think it should be boycotted in the same way as Apartheid South Africa. It worked, and South Africa is now a better country.

As there's no Apartheid in Israel, I see no reason for calling for a boycott of Israel. The Apartheid system is currently restricted to the occupied territories, and I support the boycott of companies doing business with the illegal settlements and those who support the occupation. Most proponents of BDS, like the Methodist Church, are only concerned with the occupied territories, not Israel.

Do you think there's any form of discrimination against Palestinians in the occupied territories at all?

Once again, is that a lie?

to be a resounding success:

http://forward.com/news/breaking-news/340442/new-jersey-state-senate-passes-anti-bds-bill/?utm_content=daily_Newsletter_MainList_Title_Position-1&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=New%20Daily%202016-05-12&utm_term=The%20Forward%20Today%20Monday-Friday

The New Jersey Senate unanimously approved a bill that would require the state’s public worker pension fund to divest from companies that boycott Israel.
The Senate passed the legislation Monday. A similar bill in the state Assembly is in committee.
The bill bars the state Division of Investments from investing the public workers’ $68.6 billion pension fund in any company “that boycotts the goods, products, or businesses of Israel, boycotts those doing business with Israel, or boycotts companies operating in Israel or Israeli-controlled territory.”
It also requires the fund to divest from any companies participating in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against Israel within 18 months of the passage of the legislation.

....of BDS if you ask me.

Not boycotting, divesting...

But rather to be a kosher way of sticking it to the Jews.

here in the US. Almost half the states have instituted laws like this one.

But I don't think that's BDS' purpose.

Hate crimes have spiked upward against Jews in recent years, both in Europe and the US.

That's BDS.

Ask yourself the last time you saw any BDS freaks sympathizing with Jews being attacked either in Europe or America. I have yet to see it. They never empathize because they're willingly part of it.

It certainly doesn't hurt the bigots that donnie is the gop nominee. He's made bigotry and racism "cool".

...so there's really no question they're racist against other people as well. They'll love Mr. Drumpf.

They're just not as open about all that other hatred, but it's gotta be there.

Is there any question they hate Palestinians? There's a reason they never speak up for gay or women's rights in Gaza, or for children used as martyrs and shields. They hate Palestinians too.

he hates everyone who isn't a white male. And plenty of people hate Jews but hold no other bigotry. But I agree they hold no love of the Palestinians. Just another group that are satisfied to let the Palestinians suffer more so they can poke Israel in the eye. Any group that doesn't tell them they need to sit down with Israel and hammer out an agreement is doing them a disservice and obviously doesn't care about them because that's the ONLY way they're going to get a state.

Last edited Thu May 12, 2016, 08:03 PM - Edit history (1)

....who cannot stop lying and inciting hatred and violence against Jews and the Jewish state, even after they're corrected. The only possible reason for lies that harm Jews can only be Jew hatred. There is no other reason but please correct me if I'm wrong.

And it goes w/o saying that BDS'ers don't give a shit about Palestinians under Arab control in Gaza, Syria, or Lebanon. So it's not about human rights or being "pro" Palestinian as much as it's about bashing Jews. This is obvious to anyone objective.

The worst is when BDS'ers defend and support Hamas - denying Hamas' human shields strategy, calling their terror "defense" against Israel, that they're freedom fighters. BDS'ers have the same goal as Hamas WRT destroying Israel. Sorry, but support for Hamas is without a doubt antisemitic since Hamas at its core is based on Jew hatred & doing harm to Jews.

How am I wrong?

They want Jews in the US and Europe to cower, partly in order to reduce Jewish support for and connection with Israel, partly just because they enjoy that kind of thing. This is really something to get our heads around. Because they oppose the policies of country x, they want violence against citizens in countries y and z.

In France, there is a debate about whether the nation loses anything when Israel hating Jew hating people attack Jews and cause them to leave the country. Some argue yes. Do US campuses lose anything when the majority of their Jewish students feel unwelcome? Again, you could argue yes.

Last edited Thu May 12, 2016, 05:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Jews will be targeted & have nowhere to turn. That's why we don't hear BDS'ers thinking twice about antisemitic attacks in Europe or the USA.

BDS is inherently antisemitic as it jeopardizes the long term survival of the Jewish people.

why are the people who are against BDS resorting to government legislation to try and stop it? If it were a failure those opposed to BDS would just let it wither away and not take any action.

Has any governmental body in the U.S. tried to ever stop another boycott movement like they are BDS? The answer is no so whether you agree with it or not you can't characterize it as a "colossal failure".

international law. For example, the settlements on land that the international community does not recognize as belonging to it in the West Bank. These settlements have been taking place since the 1970's. It's not like they only started happening a few years ago and someone came up with the idea of a boycott.

The country that is violating international law just happens to be Jewish. There is no precedent of boycotting a Jewish Country because there has never been a Jewish Country prior to Israel.

Now there are examples of Jews being boycotted in Europe which was totally wrong and indefensible but most people recognize that was wrong.

But the progressive Gay tolerant Jewish state is boycotted ?

area where this Palestinian State is supposed to exist makes this more unlikely that's the point.

Regarding the tolerance issue for different sexual orientations, so if a country has ideal policies in this regard, you cannot examine and be critical of other policies because of that one issue? Most people would not agree with this.

They don't deserve the time of day

Fuck them pure filth

Recently in the Palestinian statelet of Gaza they murdeted their own commander for the "crime " of being gay - fuck that filth.

South African apartheid ended 25 years ago in 1991 so for him to state he "grew up" under it is a bit of a stretch as he was a small child when it ended

Like Mandela?

Oh right.....he never accused Israel of being Apartheid, now did he?

right because he supports Israel's current regime in the West Bank?

And yeah, what's below is definitely and positively antisemitic no matter what you think.

That are neither Muslim/Jewish , Palestinian/Israeli or South Aftican but know better than these people....about South Africa , Israel or Palestine... Some have never even visited these places .

as both a child and an adult under apartheid unlike the author who could only have been at best a very small child when apartheid ended 25 years ago

BTW if you're about even 1 of the things you called me on you're revealing personal info

his criticism is about the way Palestinians are treated

But maybe not.

A South African , whom you think you know more about South Africa than he does .

(Got no clue what your talking about with your smilie there but I'm sure it's pretty meaningful - personal info on millions of people ? Huh ?)

Mandela never went that far either, so why do you believe Tutu over others?

It's not as if Tutu's arguments for his case are stronger than his opponents.

Judicial decisions Richard Goldstone made in South Africa that resulted in sending black South Africans to their deaths under the apartheid regime have nothing to do with his report on the Gaza war, he told Haaretz yesterday.
The comments came in response to an article in which he was accused of being in no moral position to judge Israel because he was involved in capital punishment in the apartheid regime.

The article in the Yedioth Ahronoth daily said Goldstone, who headed the UN committee that accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes during the Gaza war of 2008-2009, was responsible for sending at least 28 black South Africans to their deaths when they appeared before him in court.

read more: http://www.haaretz.com/richard-goldstone-i-have-no-regrets-about-the-gaza-war-report-1.288535

apartheid being applied to Israel's regime in the West Bank

....of Jews know from history as being hateful and bigoted, then it's antisemitism.

If it were a rightwinger making his statements against Jews, there's no question that rightwinger would be considered an antisemite.

It's just politically expedient for you to always give Leftists the benefit of the doubt.

it is a big stretch to call him anti-Semitic. You know he's repeatedly praised Jews for the role they played in dismantling apartheid, right?

But there are alternative reasons / rumors for his views that have been espoused that I won't repeat here , I'll just say they are thought to be financial.

Just found this...

I doubt you'd be as dismissive of Muslim viewpoints as you are Christian.

"Al-Quds" in their religion, but evil when Christians and Jews do?

Israeli Arabs have more freedom of speech in Israel than they would in most Arab countries

Pakistan, Jordan, Syria (before ISIS), ISIS, Afganistan, Iraq.