Is Israel the Same as South Africa?

[toastman]

theliq is from Australia

 

[Kondor3]

theliq is from Australia

I wonder if TheLick is another Muslim living in Australia, similar to one or two other colleagues around here...

Brits and Commonwealth Folk would know better about Falling Empires than we would...

First-hand experience... wot?

 

[RoccoR]

docmauser1, georgephillip, et al,

It is not necessarily "drivel." While you and I may see this as a fallacious and frivolous claim, it seems pretty clear that georgephillip may have looked at General Assembly resolution 3068 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973 (International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid) and or Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'

Drivel.

(COMMENT)

We have yet to hear the specific allegation. What aspect of these laws (he needs to specify one) does he claim Israel violated by some specific action.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

"...The attacks of September 11, 2001... Motives for the attacks... U.S. support of Israel..."

The United States will not bow to others, dictating our foreign policy, and telling us whom we can choose as friends and allies, and whom we may not.

"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute"

Never.

We exacted a terrible price for that attack and killing of our people.

Knock over two of our buildings, and we'll knock over two of your countries.

Kill 3,000 of ours, and we'll kill 300,000 of yours.

Confidence is fairly high that OBL and his minions got the message, before we killed their asses.

Confidence is fairly high that various national leaders in that part of the world will now think long and hard before allowing anti-US/anti-Western terror bases to operate upon their soil.

The Muslim world will never dictate our foreign policy and our choices of friends and allies.

And if they hit us again, on a 9-11 scale or beyond, the retribution will prove far more terrible than that which we exacted the first time - by several orders of magnitude.

I wouldn't advise trying it a second time.

And, on the outside chance that any of that is unclear in some way...

That position may best be distilled down into two words: Fuck 'em !

Hope that helps.

Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911.
That answer distills to one word: three.
Your advice isn't particularly significant since half-a-million Iraqi children were murdered by US terror and UN sanctions before 911 and apparently that terrible price doesn't figure into amateur night analysis.
Anyone remotely familiar with the planning of 911 know many of the details were worked out in Germany and Florida. How many of their children deserve to die?
Confidence is fairly high rich parasites in the "land of the free" and their keyboard minions will continue cheer-leading from a safe distance while the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet continues to murder, maim, incarcerate and displace millions of innocent Muslims all for the greater glory of the petrodollar.
Hope that helps you understand why partisan pablum isn't a message worth getting.

 

[georgephillip]

Guess what hero? You can whine, bitch, moan, complain, propagandize, lie, spit, shit, pound sand, throw hissy fits, jump up and down, slap your boyfriend and bang your head against the wall. And you've probably done all of that. Your Palestinian friends will come out on the losing end. Every time.

Maybe you should've noticed how inbred reasoning like the above lead directly to:

"The attacks of September 11, 2001 in the northeast United States were an organized terrorist act carried out by 19 hijackers, and organized by numerous members of al-Qaeda. Motives for the attacks were stated before and after the attacks in several sources, Osama bin Laden's declaration of a holy war against the United States, and a fatwā signed by bin Laden and others calling for the killing of American civilians in 1998, are seen by investigators as evidence of his motivation.[2] In bin Laden's November 2002 "Letter to America",[3][4] he explicitly stated that al-Qaeda's motives for their attacks include: Western support for attacking Muslims in Somalia, supporting Russian atrocities against Muslims in Chechnya, supporting the Indian oppression against Muslims in Kashmir, the Jewish aggression against Muslims in Lebanon, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia,[4][5][6] U.S. support of Israel,[7][8] and sanctions against Iraq.[9]"

Motives for the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hired killers who maim, murder, rape, displace, and incarcerate millions of innocent Muslims half-a-world away from their beloved homeland for MONEY will never understand why their abortions failed.

It's karma, Loser.

It's called you're a hate America firster, Comrade.

It's called morality.
Something that those who take money (however little) to murder, maim, and displace civilians are unlikely to ever appreciate, "Hero".

 

[georgephillip]

"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'

Drivel.

"On 17 July 1998, the Rome Statute was adopted by a vote of 120 to 7, with 21 countries abstaining.[10]

"Because the way each delegation voted was officially unrecorded, there is some dispute over the identity of the seven countries that voted against the treaty.[11]

"It is certain that the People's Republic of China, Israel, and the United States were three of the seven because they have publicly confirmed their negative votes; India, Indonesia, Iraq, Libya, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and Yemen have been identified by various observers and commentators as possible sources for the other four negative votes, with Iraq, Libya, Qatar, and Yemen being the four most commonly identified.[11]"

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[georgephillip]

docmauser1, georgephillip, et al,

It is not necessarily "drivel." While you and I may see this as a fallacious and frivolous claim, it seems pretty clear that georgephillip may have looked at General Assembly resolution 3068 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973 (International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid) and or Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'

Drivel.

(COMMENT)

We have yet to hear the specific allegation. What aspect of these laws (he needs to specify one) does he claim Israel violated by some specific action.

Most Respectfully,
R

How about the Right of Return, Rocco?

"Law of Return (1950)Grants right of immigration to Jews born anywhere in the world. Amended in 1970 to extend this right to 'a child and a grandchild of a Jew, the spouse of a Jew, the spouse of a child of a Jew and the spouse of a grandchild of a Jew.' A 'Jew' is defined as 'a person who was born of a Jewish mother or has become converted to Judaism and who is not a member of another religion.'

"Non-Jewish native-born Palestinians – most importantly those who fled during the Zionist massacres in 1947 and 1948 – are in most cases prevented from returning."

Israel's Apartheid Laws

"a·part·heid (-pärtht, -ht)
n.
1. An official policy of racial segregation formerly practiced in the Republic of South Africa, involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against nonwhites.
2. A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.
3. The condition of being separated from others; segregation."

The "policy or practice of separating or segregating groups" takes place today inside the Green Line in ways similar to those employed by northern Whites toward Blacks in the 1950s and 60s. The apartheid that Israel inflicts on Palestinians in the Occupied Territories more closely resembles that of White South Africans a generation later.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911..."

Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I"m sure.

The object lesson there is: "Don't mess with us again. You will not survive a second attempt."

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

I have many bones to pick with American Foreign Policy, but your point is too diluted (even for me).

"...The attacks of September 11, 2001... Motives for the attacks... U.S. support of Israel..."

The United States will not bow to others, dictating our foreign policy, and telling us whom we can choose as friends and allies, and whom we may not.

"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute"

Never.

We exacted a terrible price for that attack and killing of our people.

Knock over two of our buildings, and we'll knock over two of your countries.

Kill 3,000 of ours, and we'll kill 300,000 of yours.

Confidence is fairly high that OBL and his minions got the message, before we killed their asses.

Confidence is fairly high that various national leaders in that part of the world will now think long and hard before allowing anti-US/anti-Western terror bases to operate upon their soil.

The Muslim world will never dictate our foreign policy and our choices of friends and allies.

And if they hit us again, on a 9-11 scale or beyond, the retribution will prove far more terrible than that which we exacted the first time - by several orders of magnitude.

I wouldn't advise trying it a second time.

And, on the outside chance that any of that is unclear in some way...

That position may best be distilled down into two words: Fuck 'em !

Hope that helps.

Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911.
That answer distills to one word: three.

(COMMENT)

What does this have to do with the issue?

Your advice isn't particularly significant since half-a-million Iraqi children were murdered by US terror and UN sanctions before 911 and apparently that terrible price doesn't figure into amateur night analysis.

(COMMENT)

What US "terror?" Let's be specific. Name one!

Anyone remotely familiar with the planning of 911 know many of the details were worked out in Germany and Florida. How many of their children deserve to die?

(COMMENT)

I don't recall the Germans or the Floridians assisting any extremist in the planning or execution of 911. Please identify them.

Confidence is fairly high rich parasites in the "land of the free" and their keyboard minions will continue cheer-leading from a safe distance while the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet continues to murder, maim, incarcerate and displace millions of innocent Muslims all for the greater glory of the petrodollar.

(COMMENT)

There were several reasons that American Oil interests supported the war. But that doesn't mean that was a primary reason for the war.

Hope that helps you understand why partisan pablum isn't a message worth getting.

(COMMENT)

The message isn't getting across for a number of reasons. The first of which is that there are a number of Americans that were opposed to the conflict and did not get their way. So they will cling to any conspiratorial plot that makes the Iraq pursuit immoral. It doesn't mean it is valid or sound.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

"...Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911..."

Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I"m sure.

The object lesson there is: "Don't mess with us again. You will not survive a second attempt."

Define "us."
Ask Dick or Dubya if you're not sure.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911..."

Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I"m sure.

The object lesson there is: "Don't mess with us again. You will not survive a second attempt."

Define "us."
Ask Dick or Dubya if you're not sure.

You will have to figure-out the meaning of "us" on your own, in this instance...

And the warning still stands... backed by more power than you can possibly handle...

 

[georgephillip]

Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I"m sure.

The object lesson there is: "Don't mess with us again. You will not survive a second attempt."

Define "us."
Ask Dick or Dubya if you're not sure.

You will have to figure-out the meaning of "us" on your own, in this instance...

And the warning still stands... backed by more power than you can possibly handle...

What warning, the one "standing" anonymously in cyberspace?

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

I have many bones to pick with American Foreign Policy, but your point is too diluted (even for me).

The United States will not bow to others, dictating our foreign policy, and telling us whom we can choose as friends and allies, and whom we may not.

"Millions for defense, but not one cent for tribute"

Never.

We exacted a terrible price for that attack and killing of our people.

Knock over two of our buildings, and we'll knock over two of your countries.

Kill 3,000 of ours, and we'll kill 300,000 of yours.

Confidence is fairly high that OBL and his minions got the message, before we killed their asses.

Confidence is fairly high that various national leaders in that part of the world will now think long and hard before allowing anti-US/anti-Western terror bases to operate upon their soil.

The Muslim world will never dictate our foreign policy and our choices of friends and allies.

And if they hit us again, on a 9-11 scale or beyond, the retribution will prove far more terrible than that which we exacted the first time - by several orders of magnitude.

I wouldn't advise trying it a second time.

And, on the outside chance that any of that is unclear in some way...

That position may best be distilled down into two words: Fuck 'em !

Hope that helps.

Hope you know how many buildings came down in New York on 911.
That answer distills to one word: three.

(COMMENT)

What does this have to do with the issue?


(COMMENT)

What US "terror?" Let's be specific. Name one!


(COMMENT)

I don't recall the Germans or the Floridians assisting any extremist in the planning or execution of 911. Please identify them.

Confidence is fairly high rich parasites in the "land of the free" and their keyboard minions will continue cheer-leading from a safe distance while the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet continues to murder, maim, incarcerate and displace millions of innocent Muslims all for the greater glory of the petrodollar.

(COMMENT)

There were several reasons that American Oil interests supported the war. But that doesn't mean that was a primary reason for the war.

Hope that helps you understand why partisan pablum isn't a message worth getting.

(COMMENT)

The message isn't getting across for a number of reasons. The first of which is that there are a number of Americans that were opposed to the conflict and did not get their way. So they will cling to any conspiratorial plot that makes the Iraq pursuit immoral. It doesn't mean it is valid or sound.

Most Respectfully,
R

A majority of the human beings on this planet didn't get their way when the US invaded Iraq in 2003, maiming, murdering, and displacing millions of innocent civilians. Just as a majority of human beings did not get their way in '91 when US terror destroyed the electrical grid in Baghdad. You may recall a few of the 15 Saudi nationals who managed to topple three steel framed skyscrapers with two magical airplanes in New York spent a good deal of their time in Germany, Florida, and San Diego prior to giving the greatest purveyor of violence on the planet a taste of its own medicine on 911. By conflating "American oil interests" with the interests of the petrodollar you validate the immorality of the US wars of aggression against Iraq (and Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Sudan, Somalia, and Iran)

"'As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.'" [147]"

Wesley Clark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Kondor3]

Define "us."
Ask Dick or Dubya if you're not sure.

You will have to figure-out the meaning of "us" on your own, in this instance...

And the warning still stands... backed by more power than you can possibly handle...

What warning, the one "standing" anonymously in cyberspace?

No, the one discernible by two smoking wrecks of countries and 300,000 dead...

Patently and glaringly obvious to even the worst and simplest dullard...

A little more tangible than a post in cyberspace, don'tcha think?

 

[georgephillip]

You will have to figure-out the meaning of "us" on your own, in this instance...

And the warning still stands... backed by more power than you can possibly handle...

What warning, the one "standing" anonymously in cyberspace?

No, the one discernible by two smoking wrecks of countries and 300,000 dead...

Patently and glaringly obvious to even the worst and simplest dullard...

A little more tangible than a post in cyberspace, don'tcha think?

Where did cha come up with 300,000 dead?
Care to break it down by age, gender, or skin color?
It should be glaringly obvious to even the simplest centrists that murdering innocents doesn't scare anyone except the dullest trolls.

 

[Kondor3]

What warning, the one "standing" anonymously in cyberspace?

No, the one discernible by two smoking wrecks of countries and 300,000 dead...

Patently and glaringly obvious to even the worst and simplest dullard...

A little more tangible than a post in cyberspace, don'tcha think?

Where did cha come up with 300,000 dead?

Care to break it down by age, gender, or skin color?

Nope. Go dig up your own from Lancet, Body Count and other sources; some of which portray the losses as even heavier.

"...It should be glaringly obvious to even the simplest centrists that murdering innocents doesn't scare anyone except the dullest trolls."

Indeed. We took that exact same stance on 9-12. As we began taking steps towards that 100-to-1 Kill Ratio; a ratio which your side cannot long tolerate nor sustain.

It is not necessary that you-and-yours be scared.

It is merely necessary that you obey the laws of gravity and fall down when we hit you in retaliation for your next attack.

But the more sane amongst you, in positions of power, will have gotten the unspoken message that we sent post-9-11, and cooler minds will prevail, and it won't come to that.

 

[docmauser1]

theliq is from Australia

I wonder if TheLick is another Muslim living in Australia, ...

Haunting the beaches ... ogling infidel girls ... .

 

[docmauser1]

"The question is not 'Is Israel the same as South Africa?'
It is 'do Israel's actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?'

Drivel.

"It is certain that the People's Republic of China, Israel, and the United States were three of the seven because they have publicly confirmed their negative votes ..."

Respecting and preserving one's national sovereignty is cool, of course.

 

[docmauser1]

How about the Right of Return, ...

Ah, that palistanian "return" scam. Palisimians ran from one country, but want to return to another one, while having their own pad, so far. Must be palistanian supremacism. If they aren't welcome on their own pad, then it's time for the enlightened international community to think about a wholesale humanitarian relocation/transfer of this wretched crowd elsewhere, of course.

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

I am not a lawyer, and I do not practice law. So this answer is from a layman's perspective. I recommend you contact the Israel Consular Section for clarification.

docmauser1, georgephillip, et al,

It is not necessarily "drivel." While you and I may see this as a fallacious and frivolous claim, it seems pretty clear that georgephillip may have looked at General Assembly resolution 3068 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973 (International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid) and or Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Drivel.

(COMMENT)

We have yet to hear the specific allegation. What aspect of these laws (he needs to specify one) does he claim Israel violated by some specific action.

Most Respectfully,
R

How about the Right of Return, Rocco?

(PREFACE)

The "right of return" is an Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship issue. Each nation has them. They are nearly all different. Some countries are easier to get into than others. As you know, the US has its own unique set of immigration issues. Several groups, representing several cultures and ethnic groups have expressed concerns over a number of provisions in the recently passed comprehensive immigration bill passed by the Senate. The new law, if passed, might provide an opportunity of citizenship to some 11 million illegal immigrants in America. Israel, (like Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and Egypt) all have laws pertaining to Immigration, Nationality, and Citizenship; it is not "apartheid."

(OBSERVATION) (Key Reference: NATIONALITY LAW, 5712-1952

In this case, I will assume we are talking "strictly" about the Palestinian Refugee. This is mostly a matter of "citizenship."

Exceptions and Special Circumstances: Citizens of Enemy States; known terrorists; those personalities connected with - and/or organizing, instigating, facilitating, participating in, financing, encouraging terrorist activities; or those exhibiting threats for the preparation or organization of terrorist acts intended to be committed against other States or their citizens.

Most countries, as in the US, have clauses and provision in law that prohibit individuals in this status from entering the country. Israel is no different.​

Preliminary.

1. Israel nationality is acquired-
   • by return (section 2),
   • by residence in Israel (section 3),
   • by birth (section 4) or
   • by naturalisation (section 5 to 9).
   • There shall be no Israel nationality save under this Law.

Nationality by Return.

• (a) Every 'oleh** under the Law of Return, 5710-1950(1), shall become an Israel national.
• (b) Israel nationality by return is acquired-
  • (1) by a person who came as an 'oleh into, or was born in, the country before the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of the establishment of the State;
  • (2) by a person having come to Israel as an 'oleh after the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his 'aliyah**;
  • (3) by a person born in Israel after the establishment of the State - with effect from the day of his birth;
  • (4) by a person who has received an 'oleh's certificate under section 3 of the Law of Return, 5710-1950 - with effect from the day of the issue of the certificate.
• (c) This section does not apply-
  • (1) to a person having ceased to be an inhabitant of Israel before the coming into force of this Law;
  • (2) to a person of full age who, immediately before the day of his 'aliyah or the day of his 'oleh's certificate is a foreign national and who, on or before such day, declares that he does not desire to become an Israel national;
  • (3) to a minor whose parents have made a declaration under paragraph (2) and included him therein.

Nationality by Residence in Israel.

• (a) A person who, immediately before the establishment of the State, was a Palestinian citizen and who does not become a Israel national under section 2, shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of the establishment of the State if -
  • (1) he was registered on the 4th Adar, 5712 (1st March 1952) as an inhabitant under the Registration of Inhabitants Ordinance, 5709-1949(2); and
  • (2) he is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law; and
  • (3) he was in Israel, or in an area which became Israel territory after the establishment of the State, from the day of the establishment of the State to the day of the coming into force of this Law, or entered Israel legally during that period.
• (b) A person born after the establishment of the State who is an inhabitant of Israel on the day of the coming into force of this Law, and whose father or mother becomes an Israel national under subsection (a), shall become an Israel national with effect from the day of his birth.

Nationality by Birth.

• A person born while his father or mother is an Israel national shall be an Israel national from birth; where a person is born after his father's death, it shall be sufficient that his father was an Israel national at the time of his death.

Naturalization.

• (a) A person of full age, not being an Israel national, may obtain Israel nationality by naturalization if -
• • (1) he is in Israel; and
  • (2) he has been in Israel for three years out of five years proceeding the day of the submission of his application; and
  • (3) he is entitled to reside in Israel permanently; and
  • (4) he has settled, or intends to settle, in Israel, and
  • (5) he has some knowledge of the Hebrew language, and
  • (6) he has renounced his prior nationality or has proved that he will cease to be a foreign national upon becoming an Israel national.
• (b) Where a person has applied for naturalization, and he meets the requirements of subsection (a), the Minister of the Interior, if he thinks fit to do so, shall grant him Israel nationality by the issue of a certificate of naturalization.
• (c) Prior to the grant of nationality, the applicant shall make the following declaration:
  
  "I declare that I will be a loyal national of the State of Israel."​
• (d) Nationality is acquired on the day of the declaration.

Exemption from conditions of naturalization.

• (a)
  • (1) A person who has served in the regular service of the Defence Army of Israel or who, after the 16th Kislev, 5708 (29th November 1947) has served in some other service which the Minister of Defence, by declaration published in Reshumot, has declared to be military service for the purpose of this section, and who has been duly discharged from such service; and
  • (2) a person who has lost a son or daughter in such service, are exempt from the requirements of section 5 (a), except the requirement of section 5 (a) (4).
• (b) A person applying for naturalisation after having made a declaration under section 2 (c) (2) is exempt from the requirement of section 5 (a) (2).
• (c) A person who immediately before the establishment of the State was a Palestinian citizen is exempt from the requirement of section 5 (a) (5).
• (d) The Minister of the Interior may exempt an applicant from all or any of the requirements of section 5 (a) (1), (2), (5) and (6) if there exists in his opinion a special reason justifying such exemption.

Naturalization of husband and wife.

• The spouse of a person who is an Israel national or who has applied for Israel nationality and meets or is exempt from the requirements of section 5 (a) may obtain Israel nationality by naturalization even if she or he is a minor or does not meet the requirements of section (5) (a).

(COMMENT)

It would appear that, relative to the issue of the "right of return" for Arab Palestinians, there are five sets of laws which may apply, depending on the circumstances. I have copied just a few that I think are relevant. I'm sure competent legal advisors or consular officers would be able to provide more accurate and authoritative assistance.

Israeli laws governing Immigration & Citizenship, which are relevant to Arab Family Unity Laws:

• Law of Return (1950) - all Jews receive Israeli citizenship who want it, unless they are considered to be a danger to Israel;
• Nationality Law (1952) - qualifications for non-Jews who wish to become Israeli citizens;
• Entry into Israel Law (1952) - different types of Visas and Permits to stay in Israel for non-Jews;
• Prevention of Infiltration (Offences and Jurisdiction) Law (1954) - Arabs who fled the State of Israel during the war of 1948 may not return;
• Nationality and Entry into Israel (Temporary Order) Law (2003) and Amendment of 2005 - Arabs, including spouses of Israeli citizens, who reside in the occupied territories may not receive citizenship or the Visas and Permits described in previous laws, with a few exceptions.

It is obvious, but I'll say it anyway, that I cannot speak on behalf of the Israeli Government, but on the face of it, --- it would seem that any Arab Palestinian that actually had some residency at the time Israel Declared Independence, --- OR --- fought on the side of Israeli Independence, has an uncontested "right of return" already in place.

I fail to see the claim of "apartheid" in these laws. I think everyone understands that if you support Jihadist Action (Article 13 HAMAS) or have allegiance to an Armed Struggle (Article 9 PNA) against Israel, that you are an "enemy" of the State. I cannot think of a single country that allows an "enemy" of the State free access.

Most Respectfully,
R