Tzipi Livni joins the 'Israel apartheid' club
The newest self-hating Jewish anti-Semite, according to right-wing Zionist standards, is Tzipi Livni, who on Monday suggested that one of Israel’s possible futures is that of an “apartheid state.” From The Jerusalem Post:
During her Eilat speech, Livni said she was impressed that youth in the country protested against the government decision to export natural gas.
“I appreciate the fact that they care and are thinking about the future, and obligating us to think about the future,” she said. “But the time has come for the same youth to ask, to what kind of state do they want to leave the gas reserves? To a Jewish democratic Israel? Or to a binational Arab state? Or to an apartheid state? It is impossible to deal with economic issues and to ignore the important diplomatic issues related to two states for two peoples.”
http://972mag.com/tzipi-livni-joins-israel-apartheid-club/74951/
= new reply since forum marked as read
not quite sure what your going on about here 
Did dat mean ol' Wawway Dewfnew huwt yoo widdle feewings?
but seems you've found a new buzz word 
You do not consider NGO Monitor a legitimate source of information. That's what you're saying, right?
So then... why did you ride to their defense? I mean just look at that, Oberliner. You not only post an article defending NGO monitor from charges of political bias, but you do so with an article from NGO monitor itself. You don't provide any of your own commentary, lending very strongly to the impression that you regard NGO Monitor's self-defense should be taken as-is, no commentary needed, case closed. Your next post on the thread is to assure the readers that NGO monitor's exclusive targeting of left-leaning NGO's is "because they hold left-wing groups accountable for the values they claim to espouse," again making it clear that you regard NGO Monitor to be unimpeachable and totally legit, while calling into question the legitimacy of those it targets ("the values they claim to espouse."
it's really rather shameless on your part. You then yield the floor to Shira, who goes about continuing your line of arguing in her own particular... ah... Idiom.
Those aren't the posts of someone who thinks the source in question is trash. Were you just achingly unaware at the time? Let's be generous and say you were, shall we?
Now that you know better though, you're still riding to their defense. As we see here, the 927mag article doesn't even have to have any fucking relevance to NGO Monitor, and you'll still rush out, remind everyone that NGO Monitor was said to be "obsessed with the use of the term apartheid" and wade into a battle against that ogre of your own imagining. As if we should all be aghast and affronted at that 'slight' on behalf of the poor, aggrieved folks at NGO Monitor.
Is it that you disagree with the characterization? I haven't actually seen you argue against it, it looks like all you present is "a source I dislike said it so it must be wrong." While I could perhaps agree that "obsessed" is a rather loaded term, it sure does look like NGO Monitor goes into quite a kerfluffle over the use of the term "apartheid." I would think that given the shitty accusations NGO Monitor engages in, they can certainly take being called "obsessed."
Is it in an interest of fairness? I don't think it is; you seem singularly concerned with the posting of 927mag articles here, and aren't the least concerned with any of the sources I noted before - including NGO Monitor. In fairness, you should be galloping to the defense of 927mag with as much vigor as you do NGO Monitor - if one is crap yet worth defending, so is the other, right?
And really. If you don't regard NGO monitor as a legit source, if their pieces are just so much internet detrius to you... why would you give a fuck what 927 mag says about them anyway?
I'm not saying you're lying, but you do seem to be really wrapped up in NGO Monitor, more than I'd expect from someone who says "I have never and would never use NGO Monitor as a legit source," know what I mean?
As for Derfner... again, you call the sources I mentioned "disreputable" but you still don't speak against them with as much fervor as you do Derfner. Or at all, in fact. Again, you're excruciatingly selective. I stick by what i said - Given the sort of sources we see from the Zionist side around here (Nahum motherfucking Shahaf, man, really?) that don't raise a peep from the self-appointed hall monitor, then I think we're able to handle the occasional input from Derfner about something. If you dislike this notion, there's no shortage of Israel über alles echo chambers on the internet.
Even you admitted Greta Berlin Jew hatred was way over the top.
Derfner defended it.
Your kind of liberal/progressive/leftist.
again I'll be waiting
why do you keep this up, oh wait I know why 
Look at the bolded part.
Just like the ambassador.
And you don't have a problem with it. You didn't say anything WRT ambassador even though it's OBVIOUS you would say something if Israel's ambassador said something just as racist. Why is that?
but thanks you've finally admitted you do not want a 2 state solution at least not now, maybe someday...........................eh
and thanks for the kick too 
to remain in Palestine
but thanks again for the your quote proving you are against a 2 state solution 
so it's reasonable when you say it, but apartheid when an Arab says it, I see
Apparently you disagree with that.
I know, you'll say Abbas only meant Israelis. Thing is, as everyone knows here, Abbas means Jews, just as his ambassador admitted. Yeah, only an ambassador, what does he know?
Jews cannot buy land in Palestine either, according to PA/Jordanian law. More apartheid that you deny.
Last edited Wed Jul 3, 2013, 09:40 AM - Edit history (1)
Hard for you to credibly advocate the right of Jews to live where they would please, when you make a point of denying the same to others.
If Jews
Are free to travel
and live
anywhere in the world
including Palestine
as you
Shira
and myself
all agree upon
Then so too
are all the other people in the world
including
Arabs
who wish to move to
and live in
Israel
Because, let's do this again...
If Israel
is allowed to be so exclusive
and bar immigration
by Arabs
because they're not Jewish
then so too
is Palestine
allowed to be exclusive
and bar immigration by Jews
because they're not Arab
...This isn't a stance I take (as I mentioned, I'm in favor of unfettered movement of people) but really, if you want to say Israel gets to put a stop sign in front of this or that group seeking entry, then you have no place to complain if some other nation does the exact same thing.
Future reference; "first" is the one that comes before "second"
isn't that called an occupation?
and in addition it is Israel that bars Israeli's from Palestinian controlled territory not Palestinians
In the same way that defining marriage as between a man and a woman "doesn't target gay people." It just happens that these are the only people the law effects, but oh gosh that's not the intent at all!
I know "there's a reason" for it - there's always a reason for every law, and the law's proponents will always be quick to point out how very crucial that reasoning is. And they will be just as quick to point out how well they treat "their darkies" when accused of discrimination - to borrow a term from my own nation's history with these laws.
You say the law is demeaning. You acknowledge the law affects exactly one ethnic group in the nation. But then you wave your hands and argue that there is no discrimination at work? That the society that drafted, passed, maintained, and then expanded this law, opposes it?
You can't have it both ways.
As for this:
I never said the bolded part. I do believe that Israeli society is a strongly racist one - I feel the same about Alabama society, though. it's not an indictment of every individual, nor is it a leap to saying they want to murder everyone. So you can take the underlined part, and blow it out of your your ass.
They may be beneficiaries of such morbid philosophies, much as I am - as a white American - the beneficiary of manifest destiny and slavery. But i don't attribute deranged philosophies to entire populations owing to a mere quirk of fate of where they happened to be born, any more than my US nationality makes me a fan of those ideologies.
But yes, Zionism (and other similar ideas, like white nationalism) requires one of three things.
1) the discovery of a true terra nullus, an unpopulated land to become a Jewish homeland
or
2) the killing and driving forth of non-Jews from their land in order to institute a Jewish state.
]or
3) Establishing such a state in a land already dominated by Jews
Barring Antarctica, there hasn't been a "terra nullus" on this planet since roughly 1100 AD, when the Polynesians began colonizing Aotearoa. And even if there were some place that Jews made the majority, "mainstream" Zionism had already set its heart on Palestine in 1897... and of course Jews did not make anything close to a majority in Palestine in 1897, so it seems the field of options was narrowed very early on, and the decision to purge was made with it.
If you advocate zionism, this is the idea you advcate. Because that's what the idea is.
It was simply the areas of highest Jewish population in the mandate - plus the Negev thrown in on top. None of the cities, barring Jaffa (now Tel Aviv) had a Jewish majority. Jaffa certainly wasn't enough to tip the scale and give the "Jewish" territory a Jewish majority.
And Israel is made only of land bought and sold in these private transactions? The fact that you opened this post with the UN partition plan makes it pretty clear that you know damn well it wasn't. Further, if that land was bought, it's obvious someone had claimed that land, and thus it belonged to someone other than the buyer, prior to that exchange. You're not making an argument, your adding irrelevant fluff.
Who said they applied just to Israel? And who said they stop anything? If you seek to found a new nation, those are your options (there's a fourth, but you need a third party with enough firepower to force arbitrary borders, so you're not actually founding the nation.)
Do note, we're in the Israel / Palestine forum, on a thread about Israel, discussing the founding of israel. I hope you're not about to suddenly start shitting your pants that I'm not talking about Argentina.
...You're aware that the "Hashemites" aren't an ethnic group, any more than the "Jones" or the "Goldbergs" are? They're a family, you goofball. "Hashemite" is the adjective to describe the dynasties founded from that family, much like say, "Tudor" or "Carolingian."
That said, both Jordan and Morocco (most nations of Africa and the Middle East, in fact) are founded on a fourth principle I forgot to mention - arbitrary border-drawing by a conquering power. It's less like founding a nation than having one delivered to you (or being delivered to one, in the case of those Hashemites.) However as this still requires the application of force to create those borders, it's more like a sub-rule of #2.
Nobody set out in 1897 Geneva to say "You know what, we need a Moroccan state, and I think we need to slap it down from Gibraltar south!"
You're aware that the Palestinian delegation to the UN was trying to convince that body to avoid partition and instead help form a single binational state, and that it was the jewish delegation insisting on partition, and who were the instigators of the ethnic cleansings that followed, aren't you? Swapping the names around doesn't actually mean it happened that way, Shaktimaan.
Does that mean you support all those massacres from wounded knee up to Mai Lai?
"Most" of the awful atrocities weren't necessary? Good lord. Which ones do you think were necessary?
I answered this question in my previous post. Spend more time reading what you're responding to, and less time reading the hasbara flash cards.
Where the only population center with a Jewish majority was Jaffa...
to this:
With a Jewish majority in the territory
...In less than a single year
...Without ethnic cleansing.
Oh, I know. Maybe it was typhus. or allied bombing. Or the Soviets!
Wow. So, they were what, voluntary migrants?
What do you call the Jews who fled the cossacks in Poland? Or who managed to catch ships to the UK, America, or other allied / neutral territories during WW2? How about those Iraqi, Yemeni, and Egyptian Jews who packed it in for Israel between 1948 and 1952? They weren't shoved out at the point of bayonets, either. They fled of their own accord.
Of course, they had fucking good reasons to flee. So did the Palestinians.
I wouldn't exactly call "running away from people who you have good reason to suspect will kill you" to be "voluntary." But then as we've already discovered, you hold very different standards for Jews and non-Jews, and will excuse any barbarism so long as the perpetrator lights a menora on occasion.
Fact remains. You're not going to be able to establish an ethnic state, in a place where that ethnic group is not the majority (by a large margin, even) without having to get rid of the original inhabitants, either by displacement, killing, or subjugation. Whether it's the English taking out Indians, the Japanese taking out the Ainu, the Jews taking out the Arabs, or the Boers taking out the Xosha (and later the British taking out the Boers!) the principle is the same.
did not even know that Uri Avnery and Gideon Levy , (never mind Shulamit Aloni and Avraham Burg and all the others to numerous to mention ) were post zionists until I joined here and pointed out your mistake to you pelsar .....
you will excuse me if I
news channel for you then :
Israel Social TV is an independent media organization (NGO) working to promote social change, human rights and equality
http://tv.social.org.il/en/stv-on-channel-1
Making Video News for Six Years
Operating since 2006, Social TV was established out of the belief that objective and diverse media is crucial for a healthy democracy in Israel. We report on social injustices and human right violations and we serve to amplify marginalized groups and voices that many times represent unpopular opinions. In our news coverage we usually work in close cooperation with other organizations for social change providing them and their agendas with visibility and coverage they do not receive from mainstream media.
http://tv.social.org.il/eng/about-us
dont put your energy into something you dont believe in pelsar but do try to get educated a little about us , I'm sure you wont be claiming Uri Avnery and Gideon Levy as two of yours anytime soon ... now will you
Brother , cousins and Zaidah ... Yes Israeli ...
Are you sure your a post Zionist?
You sound like all my Israeli friends and family who are gasp ... Jewish Zionists
