Skip to main content

The A word

Jimmy Carter used the word years ago - as have many other informed people.    The word "apartheid" is an anathema to Israelis and many Jews when describing what sort of State Israel is.   The fact is, as anyone who has visited Israel and the West Bank will readily testify, that Israel does conduct an apartheid regime (certain roads for Israelis only, etc) and actively discriminates against Palestinians living in Israel, even if they are citizens of the country.

John Kerry was caught out the other describing Israel as becoming a State with apartheid policies. All hell broke loose.    But who better than South African Nobel Peace Prize winner, Archbishop Tutu, to have a definitive final say?

"The backlash over US Secretary of State John Kerry’s use of the word “apartheid” to describe what would become of Israel if there is no “two-state solution” continues.

Leading anti-Palestinian group the Anti-Defamation League, for instance, welcomed Kerry’s craven apology:

on Twitter
"We welcome Secretary @JohnKerry’s clear affirmation that #Israel is not an #apartheid state" -- Abraham H. Foxman pic.twitter.com/VrRhzICFn2

— ADL (@ADL_National) April 29, 2014


And Bloomberg News columnist Jeffrey Goldberg has acknowledged that he himself previously “used the word ‘apartheid’ not only to describe a possible terrible future for Israel, but also as a way of depicting some current and most unfortunate facts on the ground.”

Goldberg should know, since he is a former guard in an Israeli army prison camp for Palestinians.

Yet, Goldberg now claims it is inappropriate to use the word because “to describe the West Bank as an experiment in apartheid is insulting to the actual victims of South African apartheid, who lived under a uniquely baroque and grotesque set of race-based laws.”

“Cheek”

But this is what legendary South African anti-apartheid freedom fighter Archbishop Emeritus of Cape Town Desmond Tutu has called “cheek” – another word for chutzpah.

Tutu and his daughter Reverend Mpho Tutu were on HuffPostLive yesterday to talk about their new book The Book of Forgiving.

Tutu was asked about Kerry’s comments. Although he was unaware of the controversy, he addressed the issue of using the word apartheid to describe Israel’s oppression of Palestinians (video above):

"I’m glad people have come to have this disgust about apartheid and one wants to acknowledge just how much we were supported by the international community. But surely if I, having experienced apartheid go to another part of the world and see things that reflect almost uncannily the sort of things that happened to us – I mean you could be stopped as a black person by police at roadblocks and it didn’t matter. I was bishop of Johannesburg when police would stop our car and want to body-search my wife and children … and I go and I visit the Holy Land and I see things that are a mirror image of the sort of things I experienced under the apartheid. How can you stop me from the right to describe as I feel? You go anywhere in the world and if I see things that mirror the kind of experience that I know first hand I think it’s a cheek in a way for someone else to tell you ‘no you are wrong in feeling as you feel about what you have seen.’"

I’ll take Tutu’s word over Goldberg’s any day.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...