Anonymous



Except Israel does not occupy Gaza....Gaza is nominally independent -- but Israel is blockading it because the gov't stated position is to import weapons to attack Israel. So, to blame Israel for the conditions in Gaza is not correct -- at least regarding rights. West bank is a stronger argument.

Wow more Israeli lies. We need the UN to step in and get this mess fixed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a non Jewish non Muslim non Christian American who has been to both Israel and Palestine very recently. I have also been to S. Africa during the apartheid. Conditions in West Bank and gaza are similar or worse. Meshoe doesn't know what he is talking about.

Apartheid in South Africa was horrible, but corruption there is also endemic today. I have no doubt the Israelis can buy off some South African politicians.

Just like politicians are bought off by lobbyists and others here?

Anonymous wrote:I am a non Jewish non Muslim non Christian American who has been to both Israel and Palestine very recently. I have also been to S. Africa during the apartheid. Conditions in West Bank and gaza are similar or worse. Meshoe doesn't know what he is talking about.

Apartheid in South Africa was horrible, but corruption there is also endemic today. I have no doubt the Israelis can buy off some South African politicians.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Except Israel does not occupy Gaza....Gaza is nominally independent -- but Israel is blockading it because the gov't stated position is to import weapons to attack Israel. So, to blame Israel for the conditions in Gaza is not correct -- at least regarding rights. West bank is a stronger argument.

You should probably look up the terms of Israel's disengagement plan for Gaza. There is no way it can rationally be described as providing nominal independence. Israel controlled entry into and access out of Gaza, Israel controlled imports and exports, it controlled natural resources, it restricted access to the sea and airspace, etc. There was restriction after restriction that independent entries don't have. Legally, Israel remained an occupier. Gaza is the perfect representation of Israel's Apartheid situation because it is essentially a bantustan.

Yet, if the people in Gaza were allowed to go anywhere else in the world, they would still not have the same issues that black-skinned people have all over the world. In the zeal to associate the plight of blacks South Africa using the word 'apartheid', that fact has conveniently been forgotten. Nothing anybody says in this forum will not change that, yesteryear, today, tomorrow. That is a fact regardless how anyone chooses to 'color' the word to support their argument.

Anonymous wrote:Except Israel does not occupy Gaza....Gaza is nominally independent -- but Israel is blockading it because the gov't stated position is to import weapons to attack Israel. So, to blame Israel for the conditions in Gaza is not correct -- at least regarding rights. West bank is a stronger argument.

You should probably look up the terms of Israel's disengagement plan for Gaza. There is no way it can rationally be described as providing nominal independence. Israel controlled entry into and access out of Gaza, Israel controlled imports and exports, it controlled natural resources, it restricted access to the sea and airspace, etc. There was restriction after restriction that independent entries don't have. Legally, Israel remained an occupier. Gaza is the perfect representation of Israel's Apartheid situation because it is essentially a bantustan.

Except Israel does not occupy Gaza....Gaza is nominally independent -- but Israel is blockading it because the gov't stated position is to import weapons to attack Israel. So, to blame Israel for the conditions in Gaza is not correct -- at least regarding rights. West bank is a stronger argument.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what I take from Meshoe's statement. Don't compare this to Apartheid, nothing can compare to what we endured in South Africa. it is akin to when Black Americans say that gay rights movement should not be compared to the the Black civil rights movement of the 60s. Or, when Jewish people say that the only holocaust is the German Holocaust and therefore it is sacrilige to call the Rwanda Holocaust a Holocaust.

It is obvious that Meshoe wants to save that word Apartheid for South Africa's use only.

Except a lot of what he actually said was that Arabs and Jews have equal rights in Israel.

So he wasnt saysing "its not as bad and therefore, dont take my word", he was saying that the Arabs have rights and there isnt institutionalized discrimination and the Israel civil rights laws require equal treatment regardless of race or religion.

This is debatable even within Israel, but completely ignores that when people describe Israel in Apartheid terms, they are referring to the West Bank and Gaza. If you are correct that Meshoe is only talking about Israel-proper, he really mixed the point.

Anonymous wrote:This is what I take from Meshoe's statement. Don't compare this to Apartheid, nothing can compare to what we endured in South Africa. it is akin to when Black Americans say that gay rights movement should not be compared to the the Black civil rights movement of the 60s. Or, when Jewish people say that the only holocaust is the German Holocaust and therefore it is sacrilige to call the Rwanda Holocaust a Holocaust.

It is obvious that Meshoe wants to save that word Apartheid for South Africa's use only.

Except a lot of what he actually said was that Arabs and Jews have equal rights in Israel.

So he wasnt saysing "its not as bad and therefore, dont take my word", he was saying that the Arabs have rights and there isnt institutionalized discrimination and the Israel civil rights laws require equal treatment regardless of race or religion.

This is what I take from Meshoe's statement. Don't compare this to Apartheid, nothing can compare to what we endured in South Africa. it is akin to when Black Americans say that gay rights movement should not be compared to the the Black civil rights movement of the 60s. Or, when Jewish people say that the only holocaust is the German Holocaust and therefore it is sacrilige to call the Rwanda Holocaust a Holocaust.

It is obvious that Meshoe wants to save that word Apartheid for South Africa's use only.

Dr. Meshoe and Bishop Tutu will have to agree to disagree:

http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Desmond-Tutu-Israel-guilty-of-apartheid-in-treatment-of-Palestinians-344874

"I have witnessed the systemic humiliation of Palestinian men, women and children by members of the Israeli security forces. Their humiliation is familiar to all black South Africans who were corralled and harassed and insulted and assaulted by the security forces of the apartheid government."

"Those who turn a blind eye to injustice actually perpetuate injustice. If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor."

Anonymous wrote:I am a non Jewish non Muslim non Christian American who has been to both Israel and Palestine very recently. I have also been to S. Africa during the apartheid. Conditions in West Bank and gaza are similar or worse. Meshoe doesn't know what he is talking about.

haha YEAH RIGHT.

I am in a field that understands all of these issues and your statement is ridiculous.

I am a non Jewish non Muslim non Christian American who has been to both Israel and Palestine very recently. I have also been to S. Africa during the apartheid. Conditions in West Bank and gaza are similar or worse. Meshoe doesn't know what he is talking about.

Voice of reason. The more the Palestinians talk the mpre they lie and no one believes anything they say.

I would love to see Mesho go spend 3 days in Gaza, then he can comment back.

South African MP Rev. Dr. Kenneth Meshoe wrote in the San Francisco Examiner, “As a black South African who lived under apartheid, this system was implemented in South Africa to subjugate people of color and deny them a variety of their rights. In my view, Israel cannot be compared to apartheid in South Africa. Those who make the accusation expose their ignorance of what apartheid really is.” Meshoe made this statement upon visiting San Francisco, where he was shocked to learn of posters posted within the city comparing Israel to the apartheid regime in South Africa.

Meshoe concluded, “I believe that it is slanderous and deceptive for Israel’s self-defense measures against the terrorists’ campaign of suicide bombing, rocket attacks and other acts of terrorism that have occurred, and continue to occur, to be labeled as apartheid. I am shocked by the claim that the free, diverse, democratic state of Israel practices apartheid. This ridiculous accusation trivializes the word apartheid, minimizing and belittling the magnitude of the racism and suffering endured by South Africans of color.”

http://unitedwithisrael.org/south-african-mp-israel-is-not-an-apartheid-state/