Israeli apartheid

Mr. SS

The Saint wrote: »

OK, I think this whole arguement on race/religion has gotten a bit out of hand with posters referencing dictionaries, scientific articles and facy diagrams. I think it is far more instructive to look at the situation on the ground. For the purpose here I'm going to focus on the West Bank and East Jerusalem as dealing with Israel proper is more problematic.

In looking at your assertion that it is religious discrimination a number of factors need to be examined. Palestinians are by the majority Muslim and Christian. Therefore if discriminatory policies in the territories are based on religion this criteria should be universally applicable to any Muslim or Christian person either residing or travelling within the territories. However, Israeli Muslims and Christians are permitted full access in the territories. Myself, as an Irish Christian (I mean this in the loosest sense of the word) am entitled to travel throughout the territory, including the settlements. The same would apply to a Muslim Egyptian. However, a Jordanian Palestinian will also have restrictions imposed on them travelling within the territories, if they are allowed into the territories in the first place which is unlikely. Therefore the only determining factor to the policies implemented in the territories is the racial/ethnic/national criteria of the indigenous population living there and it's diaspora and is not applicable to anyone else. This would imply that the policies are of a racial and not a religious character.

Religious is the main discriminatory factor, not the only of course. it is a jewish state and right of return only for jews and so it is inherently religiously discriminatory.

I cant imagine muslims from saudi or lebanon or Iran, Iraq, syria just being allowed to randomly wander around the terroitory. Also the example I gave from the Toronto newspapers, a man who by all accounts is palestinian, racially/ethnically and nationally palestinian and wont even stand under the israeli flag but because he is jewish, he is afforded full citizenship and travel rights. To me this suggests that religion is a main factor.

The Saint

Mr. SS wrote: »

Religious is the main discriminatory factor, not the only of course. it is a jewish state and right of return only for jews and so it is inherently religiously discriminatory.

I cant imagine muslims from saudi or lebanon or Iran, Iraq, syria just being allowed to randomly wander around the terroitory. Also the example I gave from the Toronto newspapers, a man who by all accounts is palestinian, racially/ethnically and nationally palestinian and wont even stand under the israeli flag but because he is jewish, he is afforded full citizenship and travel rights. To me this suggests that religion is a main factor.

Muslims from Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Iran, Iraq and Syria would be citizens of hostile states. I'd imagine that that would be the ultimate determining factor behind this. Anyway, I was referring to Israels actions vis-a-vis the territories, not it's own internal criteria for Isreali citizenship. These are two separate issues, that's why I stated that I was dealing specifically with the issue of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

Assumptions are not proof, you have admitted that you just assumed it was a social construct. But fair enough.

I'm finished here now, we've exhausted this.

But I will leave you with a situation to ponder: how is it that forensic scientists can tell police the race of a suspect from hair or semen samples if there is no genetic basis for race. They're probably just guessing no.

Once again, we are all consistently 99% the same regardless of race. When you can debunk this, then you will have a leg to stand on.

As for police being able to identify the race of a subject, well seeing as we tend to define race on skin colour for instance, getting some genetic material from a subject would help identify there skin colour, and I am sure they could get the colour of hair etc. Of course, saying someone with different colour skin is another race is a social construct, and it would just as equal valid to say people with different hair colour are a different race.

Secondly, I have shown using your definition of both apartheid and racial, that my calling Israel an apartheid state to be perfectly accurate.

anymore

wes wrote: »

Once again, we are all consistently 99% the same regardless of race. When you can debunk this, then you will have a leg to stand on.

As for police being able to identify the race of a subject, well seeing as we tend to define race on skin colour for instance, getting some genetic material from a subject would help identify there skin colour, and I am sure they could get the colour of hair etc. Of course, saying someone with different colour skin is another race is a social construct, and it would just as equal valid to say people with different hair colour are a different race.

Secondly, I have shown using your definition of both apartheid and racial, that my calling Israel an apartheid state to be perfectly accurate.

I have noticed that many Islamic spokespersons divide the world into ' Islam and the West' as if being Islamic was a separate race or category of humans - is that not an 'Apartheid' mentality ?

wes

Israel warns against Gaza flotilla

A senior Israeli official has warned activists planning to break a naval blockade of Gaza later this month that their flotilla of cargo ships and passenger boats will be stopped.

Naor Gilon, a deputy director general at the foreign ministry, said on Monday that the action would be a "provocation and breach of Israeli law".

An international coalition of pro-Palestinian activists aim to send eight vessels carrying 5,000 tonnes of reconstruction materials, school supplies and medical equipment to Gaza.

Click here for full article

A brave attempt to break Israel cruel act of collective punishment against Gaza. Where 1.5 million people are being brought to brink of stravation, all the while with some Western countries happily complicit in this act of collective punishment.

Of course, if as Israel has claimed that they have "left" Gaza, then they would leave these ships alone, as they are entering Gaza's waters and not Israel, but of course, Israel claim of having "left" Gaza, is a easily disproven lie.

anymore

wes wrote: »

A brave attempt to break Israel cruel act of collective punishment against Gaza. Where 1.5 million people are being brought to brink of stravation, all the while with some Western countries happily complicit in this act of collective punishment.

Of course, if as Israel has claimed that they have "left" Gaza, then they would leave these ships alone, as they are entering Gaza's waters and not Israel, but of course, Israel claim of having "left" Gaza, is a easily disproven lie.

What is the point of reconstruction whilst Hamas and its ally, Al Queda are still enaged in terrorist activity against Israel in an efforts to provoke further incurssions ? We know of course that Hamas's top leaders swan off to five star hideouts in the Emirates etc !

wes

I taught the following study on the effect of Israel illegal act of collective punishment has on children:

Nutritional status of Palestinian children attending primary health care centers in Gaza.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the nutritional status of Palestinian children less than two years old and the associated risk factors. METHODS: The study was descriptive cross-sectional of 102 children attending the main four primary health care centers in the Gaza Strip during summer 2003. Data were collected through medical records and meeting interviews with children's mothers by face to face. Questionnaire was subjected to validity and reliability procedures before being used. Descriptive analyses and cross tabulation were used.

RESULTS: The study showed that the prevalence of anemia was 72.8% among children. Anthropometrical indices showed that the prevalence of wasting, stunting, underweight were 34.3%, 31.4%, 31.45% respectively.

CONCLUSION: Palestinian children are at high risk of health problems related to malnutrition. Informing Gazean families about the importance of following healthy dietary habits especially breastfeeding could improve child's nutritional status in parallel with overcoming the devastating economic condition.

I think the above information is very interesting, and shows that Israel's siege is simply wrong. What they are doing to Gaza's children is indefensibly, and yet some Western countries are still complicit in the blockade of Gaza. When, Israel does stuff like this, it is so often excused, and no action taken at all. Basically, Israel can murder and kill, and starve people half to death, and the West won't do a damn thing, and will even cheer on there actions ins some cases.

Now, this post provides some context to my earlier post regarding attempts to break Israel cruel siege. It shows why the blockade is wrong, and how what Israel is doing, is no different than what Hamas does. Israels actions are hurting innocent people, and Children seem to be getting the worst of it, and this is why efforts to break the siege are so important, as Western government doesn't seem all that bothered about Israels attacks on innocent Palestinians.

anymore

wes wrote: »

A brave attempt to break Israel cruel act of collective punishment against Gaza. Where 1.5 million people are being brought to brink of stravation, all the while with some Western countries happily complicit in this act of collective punishment.

Of course, if as Israel has claimed that they have "left" Gaza, then they would leave these ships alone, as they are entering Gaza's waters and not Israel, but of course, Israel claim of having "left" Gaza, is a easily disproven lie.

Well there is no Palestinain Authority to oversee these waters since Hamas has effectiviely divided palestine into two separate States. ' Palestine' no longer exists.

Nodin

anymore wrote: »

What is(......)in the Emirates etc !

You never got back to me on this - if you'd be as good
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65950714&postcount=628

Mr. SS

wes wrote: »

Once again, we are all consistently 99% the same regardless of race. When you can debunk this, then you will have a leg to stand on.

I never questioned that. Irrelevant point.

wes wrote: »

As for police being able to identify the race of a subject, well seeing as we tend to define race on skin colour for instance, getting some genetic material from a subject would help identify there skin colour, and I am sure they could get the colour of hair etc. Of course, saying someone with different colour skin is another race is a social construct, and it would just as equal valid to say people with different hair colour are a different race.

Ok so, since you don't recognise race, we will use something that is not race. Location. It is certainly not a social construct, it is an actual place in reality, just so we are clear before we start:

How can police use semen to correctly predict a suspect's ancesteral location? Not race, just where the suspects ancesters came from. For example, "the suspect is a male/female of african/asian/european dissent". How do they do that if there is no distinction between the the genes of humans from different locations as you claim?

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

I never questioned that. Irrelevant point.

No, its the entire basis of my reasoning.

Mr. SS wrote: »

Ok so, since you don't recognise race, we will use something that is not race. Location. It is certainly not a social construct, it is an actual place in reality, just so we are clear before we start:

How can police use semen to correctly predict a suspect's ancesteral location? Not race, just where the suspects ancesters came from. For example, "the suspect is a male/female of african/asian/european dissent". How do they do that if there is no distinction between the the genes of humans from different locations as you claim?

Why are you asking the exact same question (albeit phrased differently) you asked earlier? I will just quote myself to save time, as this has gotten really silly:

wes wrote: »

As for police being able to identify the race of a subject, well seeing as we tend to define race on skin colour for instance, getting some genetic material from a subject would help identify there skin colour, and I am sure they could get the colour of hair etc.

I see no reason why the same genetic information could provide details of there ancestry either.

Mr. SS

More like hamas apartheid of their own citizens:

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

More like hamas apartheid of their own citizens:

Care to prove that statement, and here is your own defintion of apartheid btw:

Mr. SS wrote: »

From Oxford:

"Name given in South Africa to the segregation of the inhabitants of European descent from the non-European (Coloured or mixed, Bantu, Indian, etc.); applied also to any similar movement elsewhere, to other forms of racial separation."

So on the above defintion provided by you, can you show me how Hamas is engaged in Apartheid. Also, your video is about Operation Cast Lead, and has nothing to do with you preceding statement, which make your statement very odd, as one would expect the posted video to have something to do with your claim, but it doesn't. So why the non-sequitor?!?

Also, who made that video?!?

**EDIT**
Ok, found the answer myself, the video is from the IDF, one of the parties in the conflict. Quick question, why should we accept the version of events from one of the parties of the conflict?

Also, the Goldstone report, showed clearly that the IDF attacked civilian targets, and this report was accepted by the UN and EU.
**END EDIT**

Mr. SS

wes wrote: »

Why are you asking the exact same question (albeit phrased differently) you asked earlier?

Because you dismissed it due to the fact that race is a social construct, so I used something which was not a social construct upon your objection.

So do you deny that police can identify the ancestral location of a suspect by using genetic evidence? yes or no.

Mr. SS

wes wrote: »

Care to prove that statement, and here is your own defintion of apartheid btw:


So on the above defintion provided by you, can you show me how Hamas is engaged in Apartheid. Also, your video is about Operation Cast Lead, and has nothing to do with you preceding statement, which make your statement very odd, as one would expect the posted video to have something to do with your claim, but it doesn't. So why the non-sequitor?!?

Also, who made that video?!?

**EDIT**
Ok, found the answer myself, the video is from the IDF, one of the parties in the conflict. Quick question, why should we accept the version of events from one of the parties of the conflict?

Also, the Goldstone report, showed clearly that the IDF attacked civilian targets, and this report was accepted by the UN and EU.
**END EDIT**

Oh the report accepted by the same UN which is dominated by the 57 member organisation of the Islamic conference, and the same EU that is the largest donor of aid to the palestinian terroritories? Oh yeah, real impartial.

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

Because you dismissed it due to the fact that race is a social construct, so I used something which was not a social construct upon your objection.

So do you deny that police can identify the ancestral location of a suspect by using genetic evidence? yes or no.

I have already answered this question twice.

Why have you asked the same question 3 times, when I answered clearly the first 2 times?

I fully accepted the capabilites of forensic analysis of DNA, the first 2 times. So why are you again asking the same question yet again?

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

Oh the report accepted by the same UN which is dominated by the 57 member organisation of the Islamic conference, and the same EU that is the largest donor of aid to the palestinian terroritories? Oh yeah, real impartial.

So you have nothing, taught as much.

The EU btw is also Israel 2nd largest trading partner, so I think you claims of bias there is a bit much.

Also, plenty of other state in the UN accepted the Goldstone report, not just the Muslim ones. So how do you explain away all those others then?

Also, none of those are one of the parties in the conflict. You provide a source from one of the parties in the conflict. So why should we trust either Hamas or the IDF's version of events? Would you trust Hamas's version of events btw?

old hippy

Mr. SS wrote: »

Oh the report accepted by the same UN which is dominated by the 57 member organisation of the Islamic conference, and the same EU that is the largest donor of aid to the palestinian terroritories? Oh yeah, real impartial.

Thank goodness someone is donating aid to the occupied territories!

wes

Also, how about addressing your claim of Hamas apartheid. Do you or do you not have proof to back up your claims, made in this post.

Here is your definition of apartheid again to help:

Mr. SS wrote: »

From Oxford:

"Name given in South Africa to the segregation of the inhabitants of European descent from the non-European (Coloured or mixed, Bantu, Indian, etc.); applied also to any similar movement elsewhere, to other forms of racial separation."

Mr. SS

wes wrote: »

I have already answered this question twice.

Why have you asked the same question 3 times, when I answered clearly the first 2 times?

I fully accepted the capabilites of forensic analysis of DNA, the first 2 times. So why are you again asking the same question yet again?

So the answer is Yes then. Im seriously starting to believe you are a politician!

So genetics can predict the location of a persons ancestors. different locations also is consistant with different external apperances, which is why they do it in the first place by the way, so the police will have an idea of what the suspect looks like. Therefore as every one on the planet has a general outline of what people from different locations look like, it makes it possible to identify suspects via such predictions. which essentially "debunks" what you said about not being able to make such genetic distinctions between people.

Mr. SS

wes wrote: »

Also, how about addressing your claim of Hamas apartheid. Do you or do you not have proof to back up your claims, made in this post.

Here is your definition of apartheid again to help:

Im trying to speak on your terms as you reject mine.

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

So the answer is Yes then. Im seriously starting to believe you are a politician!

I answered the same question several time. Why do you keep repeating the same thing again and again.

Mr. SS wrote: »

So genetics can predict the location of a persons ancestors. different locations also is consistant with different external apperances, which is why they do it in the first place by the way, so the police will have an idea of what the suspect looks like. Therefore as every one on the planet has a general outline of what people from different locations look like, it makes it possible to identify suspects via such predictions. which essentially "debunks" what you said about not being able to make such genetic distinctions between people.

Well it doesn't predict location, just ancestry. People move around, and as such predicting location would be impossible. Also, you did not debunk anything I have said, and at this point we have gone completely off topic. I will never agree with you, and you won't with me. I see no need to continue this.

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

Im trying to speak on your terms as you reject mine.

That didn't answer my question, so here it is again:

wes wrote: »

Also, how about addressing your claim of Hamas apartheid. Do you or do you not have proof to back up your claims, made in this post.

Here is your definition of apartheid again to help:

Mr. SS wrote: »

From Oxford:

"Name given in South Africa to the segregation of the inhabitants of European descent from the non-European (Coloured or mixed, Bantu, Indian, etc.); applied also to any similar movement elsewhere, to other forms of racial separation."

So how about an answer then? You keep demanding answer from me, so I expect the same courtesy from you in return, after I have answered the exact same question again and again.

Mr. SS

wes wrote: »

Well it doesn't predict location, just ancestry.

Haha! Are you having a laugh??? Is this the biggest troll wind up in the world or something???

Forensic genetics can predict the aproximate location of ancestry. sure ancestry itself would tell you nothing without a location in order to obtain an approximate outline of what the suspect looks like.

Why do you think on police program after program, the cops get results back from the lab saying the likes of "we are looking for a male of european desent". Do you think it is all a big conspiracy to reproduce these social constructs you speak of?

You said you accepted that genetics can help police obtain a profile of a suspect including physical characteristics by way of the location of their ancestors; but you were clearly lying as you have just said it doesnt predict the location of those ancestors, it just predicts ancestry?????

It takes a lot for me to say this but you are completely wrong my friend and tripping over every word you sow. The HGP confirms we have 99% the same genetics but it does not confirm all of those genes are aranged in the same order, this is how differences in hair, skin, eyes, and physical features of the face are created. If anything the HGP is on my side after your ridiculous denile of genetics being able to predict approximate location of ancestry.

I dont know whether to laugh or cry.

Mr. SS

Your right though. That topic is over for discussion.

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

Haha! Are you having a laugh??? Is this the biggest troll wind up in the world or something???
--SNIP--

--SNIP--
I dont know whether to laugh or cry.

As I said earlier, I am done with the above topic. We have gone in cirlces again and again.

Also, why have you not answered my question about your claims of Hamas apatheid? Do you have any proof of this?

Mr. SS

wes wrote: »

As I said earlier, I am done with the above topic. We have gone in cirlces again and again.

Also, why have you not answered my question about your claims of Hamas apatheid? Do you have any proof of this?

Sorry.

The forced segragation of their own civilians into a military warzone. Also the raizing to the ground of 26 synagouges after operation cast lead would suggest the outcasting and discrimination of Gaza's Jews. Only difference is that Hamas is so forceful in this regard, it has driven all of the jews out of Gaza.

Hama's strict interpretation of sharia law also amounts to discrimination against the individual to the point where hamas police patrol the beaches arresting people for having there tops of, or for singing and dancing. and do not tolerate homosexuals for example.

Mr. SS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOXbrq8Tbb0

Nodin

Mr. SS wrote: »

[..........................]

That would be the guy that spied on his own people for Israel.....

wes

Mr. SS wrote: »

Sorry.

The forced segragation of their own civilians into a military warzone. Also the raizing to the ground of 26 synagouges after operation cast lead would suggest the outcasting and discrimination of Gaza's Jews. Only difference is that Hamas is so forceful in this regard, it has driven all of the jews out of Gaza.

Hama's strict interpretation of sharia law also amounts to discrimination against the individual to the point where hamas police patrol the beaches arresting people for having there tops of, or for singing and dancing. and do not tolerate homosexuals for example.

None the above backs up your claim of apartheid as per your definition. Just typical nonsensical hyperbole. Apartheid involves a system of segregation, along racial lines:

Mr. SS wrote: »

From Oxford:

"Name given in South Africa to the segregation of the inhabitants of European descent from the non-European (Coloured or mixed, Bantu, Indian, etc.); applied also to any similar movement elsewhere, to other forms of racial separation."

The above is your definition, and even if I believed your strange interpretation of Hamas actions regarding the people of Gaza, it doesn't fit under your definition. So while Hamas actions as deplorable as they are, they are not what you claim there actions to be, and only reason you are calling it apartheid is due to what you said earlier:

Mr. SS wrote: »

Im trying to speak on your terms as you reject mine.

So you are using the term, due to me not agreeing with you earlier regarding Israel apartheid, as per the quoted post above.

Also, care to provide some links that shows when Hamas drove Jews out of Gaza please? AFAIK, they did nothing of the sort, so I am interested in where you are getting your information from.