-
Apparently this is “encouraging crimes against Jews” according to the Telegraph.
A decade ago this would be recognised as completely insane, now it’s just mainstream news output.
1 Attachment
-
Eejit
-
It's difficult it's it?
Antisemitism has been steadily increasing, so anything that can be used to spread hate can also encourage violence. But at what point does that prevent any discussion?
What is frustrating is that from the bits I've seen, criticism of the report seems to amount to "I don't like the word apartheid". There doesn't seem to be any engagement with why it isn't.
Prima face (unless I'm missing something obvious) I don't see how the situation in the occupied territories are anything accept apartheid. In Israel Palestinians have the right to vote and have representatives, so their situation isn't directly analogous to SA. But, as i understand it, AA is saying that it meets the ICC definition
The 'crime of apartheid' means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalised regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.
Again it doesn't seem like the most outlandish claim.
It would be interesting to see which other countries AA has made similar claims about.
(worth saying I haven't read the report)
hugo7
Hmmm... either Israel's policies towards Palestinians amount to apartheid, or Amnesty International are a bunch of rabid anti-semites with a racist agenda to discredit Israel. Just don't know what to believe....
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-60197918