Israel's Netanyahu apologizes to country's Arab minority

[webfact]

Israel's Netanyahu apologizes to country's Arab minority
IAN DEITCH, Associated Press

JERUSALEM (AP) — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu apologized to Israel's Arab citizens on Monday for remarks he made during last week's parliament election that offended members of the community.

The move appeared to be an attempt to heal rifts and mute criticism at home and in the United States. Netanyahu drew accusations of racism in Israel, especially from its Arab minority, and a White House rebuke when, just a few hours before polling stations were to close across the country, he warned that Arab citizens were voting "in droves."

But President Barack Obama's chief of staff, Denis McDonough, rejected Netanyahu's attempt to distance himself from his comments, telling an Israel advocacy group Monday that the U.S. can't just overlook what Netanyahu said on the eve of his re-election.

Netanyahu, whose Likud Party won re-election in the vote, met with members of the Arab community at the prime minister's residence in Jerusalem on Monday and apologized.

He said he knows his "comments last week offended some Israeli citizens and offended members of the Israeli-Arab community."

"This was never my intent. I apologize for this," Netanyahu said. "I view myself as the prime minister of each and every citizen of Israel, without any prejudice based on religion, ethnicity or gender."

"I view all Israeli citizens as partners in the building of a prosperous and safe state of Israel, for all Israelis," he also said.

A recently established alliance of four small, mostly Arab parties called the Joint List made unprecedented gains in the March 17 election, earning enough votes to make it the third-largest party in Israel's parliament. Arab citizens make up 20 percent of Israel's population. Equality is guaranteed in Israel's laws but many Arabs have long complained of discrimination, mainly in the job and housing market.

Ayman Odeh, the head of the Joint List, told channel 2 TV that Netanyahu's apology was not accepted.

"This is not a real apology," Odeh said. "He incited against citizens who were exercising their basic right to vote for Knesset."

Odeh also accused Netanyahu of "zigzagging" by saying one thing one day and a different another.

In the final days of the campaign, Netanyahu angered the U.S. by taking a tough stance toward the Palestinians and by saying a Palestinian state will not be established on his watch in the current climate of regional chaos and violence. Resolving the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians in a two state solution is a key U.S. foreign policy priority.

In his speech to J Street, an Israel advocacy group that is sharply critical of Netanyahu, McDonough warned Israel against annexing the West Bank, where Palestinians hope to establish their future state. He said Netanyahu's prediction that a Palestinian state wouldn't come about on his watch was "very troubling" and called into question Netanyahu's broader commitment to the two-state solution the U.S. and Israel have officially supported for years.

"We cannot simply pretend that these comments were never made," McDonough said.

Obama's decision to dispatch his chief of staff to speak to J Street was seen as another sign that Obama intends to take a tougher tack toward Netanyahu.

Israelis and Palestinians are closely watching to see how U.S. policy will change in practical terms after Netanyahu's success in the elections. Obama has said the U.S. must reevaluate its approach to pursuing Mideast peace because of Netanyahu's comments, and has entertained speculation the U.S. will be less willing to come to Israel's defense in the United Nations. The U.S. has voted against U.N. resolutions supporting the establishment of a Palestinian state, insisting the matter should be negotiated directly with Israel.

Netanyahu's tough talk was part of a last-ditch attempt to spur his more hard-line supporters to the polls after it appeared he was losing voters to a more hawkish party.

Netanyahu defended his election-day remarks in the days after the vote. He told NBC last Thursday that he remains committed to Palestinian statehood — if conditions in the region improve — and to the two-state vision first spelled out in a landmark 2009 speech at Israel's Bar Ilan University. "I haven't changed my policy," he said. "I never retracted my speech."

He told NBC that his government has spent billions in Arab towns to upgrade infrastructure, schools and narrow gaps.

Earlier on Monday, Netanyahu secured a majority of backers in the new parliament and will later be tasked with forming the next government.

Israel's ceremonial president, Reuven Rivlin, has been meeting with the parties in parliament to hear their recommendations before appointing who will form the next coalition government. Kulanu, a new centrist party gave its nod to Netanyahu on Monday, giving him 61 backers out of the 120 in parliament.

Netanyahu appears poised to set up a coalition with hawkish, centrist and religious parties.
___

Associated Press writers Matt Lee and Josh Lederman in Washington contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-24

[Seastallion]

" He told NBC that his government has spent billions in Arab towns to upgrade infrastructure, schools and narrow gaps."

Yes, billions in infrastructure to steal their water and pipe it off to Israelis. Again in contravention of international law.

[Seastallion]

Netanyahu has done this shoot first ask questions later type of thing before. And it's deliberate. Build settlements, populate Jerusalem so that there's no going back. Say anything to get the election results, then backtrack. Can take the words back but not the election results.

What a devious lying piece of trash he is.

[arjunadawn]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Edited March 24, 2015 by arjunadawn

[Seastallion]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Not at all. Black/minority populations are not told to get out and vote because the "white man is going to win", they are simply told to get out and vote, as all voters are. If a black/minority candidate played the race card, he'd be branded a racist too.

Netanyahu could have simply said, "Get out and vote!", but he didn't, he resorted to motivating their right-wing hatred by saying "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" Yikes! Arabs! I wasn't going to vote, but we can't have Arabs getting seats!

[Steely Dan]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Yes indeed dishonest and detestable. This article rings true when it states Netanyahu is the cowards pantomime villain. When it comes to real racism, real ethnic cleansing or real genocide some of our esteemed members are as invisible as the UNHRC when it comes to crimes against humanity committed anywhere but Israel.

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5648/israel_s_netanyahu_as_the_coward_s_pantomime_villain

[Linky]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Not at all. Black/minority populations are not told to get out and vote because the "white man is going to win", they are simply told to get out and vote, as all voters are. If a black/minority candidate played the race card, he'd be branded a racist too.

Netanyahu could have simply said, "Get out and vote!", but he didn't, he resorted to motivating their right-wing hatred by saying "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" Yikes! Arabs! I wasn't going to vote, but we can't have Arabs getting seats!

Compulsory voting is the answer to those issues.

[soumanioco]

The Americans mobilized their propaganda mechanism against Netanyahu, displaying as a clear winner of the fake opinion polls, Yitzhak Chertsok of the Labour Party.

It all proved nonsense.

Unlike the the pre-election advertised "overthrow" of the right-wing and the supposedly upcoming "overthrow" of Netanyahu, the election results in Israel turned out a clean sweep for the Far-Right.

Progressive minds who live in Israel are increasingly disappearing for biological reasons, and are in addition feeling increasingly stifled living in such a (far)right wing society.

Netanyahu and all the right-wing coalition government is the mirror of today's Israel.

[arjunadawn]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Not at all. Black/minority populations are not told to get out and vote because the "white man is going to win", they are simply told to get out and vote, as all voters are. If a black/minority candidate played the race card, he'd be branded a racist too.

Netanyahu could have simply said, "Get out and vote!", but he didn't, he resorted to motivating their right-wing hatred by saying "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" Yikes! Arabs! I wasn't going to vote, but we can't have Arabs getting seats!

The notion that black/minority populations are not told to get out the vote because the white man is going to win is untrue! The politics of racial division are developed and perfected by the same clowns in the US protesting Netanyahu- US politics automated racial division, as they attempted to do in Israel. The ideas that Horsemen of Racial Division would be called racists when they do such things is generally not true; not mainstream indictment.

Elijah Cummings; vote for blacks for black only issues; et al, Jesse Jackson, Jet, 1988- Why Blacks must vote in next elections

Pres Obama asks for black votes out of racial solidarity- Wall Street Journal, Obama and the Black Vote

Obama campaign architect lied about 2012 phone call where Mitt Romney allegedly told president he only won by getting blacks to vote, says GOP aide; Dailymailonline

Obama and the Black Vote:The appeals to racial division mask the lack of economic progress WSJ

Blacks' Loyalty to First Black President Got Blacks Nothing; OPED, CP Opinion

Its nonsense that blacks will only vote for blacks but statistically, the greater the number of blacks at the voter polls the greater the likelihood of increased votes for a candidate because black demographics are not too complex; the numbers are in 70s to 80s% democratic- so, appealing to this voter base generally can numerically achieve success- a strategy Obama wisely used. But its the racial division that is appalling and the parallels to Israel are, IMO, valid. How to further distill the black vote so it is decidedly racial?

Deep Racial Divide continues under Obama, NBC News

Blacks' Loyalty to First Black President Got Blacks Nothing; Der Spiegel Online

Black Sheriff: Obama’s Racial Divide and Conquer Strategy “Destructive for America” Adan Salazar

Basically the list is endless. This is the very framework which Obama exported to Israel; it is the politics of division, or Saul Alinksy destructive polity.

All blacks do not vote black. When racial animosities or historical archetypes are conjured up then the solidification of the fairly monolithic black voting demographic takes shape, and the result is indeed increased black votes for blacks. This mechanism is what Netanyahu bravely faced and represents one of numerous overseas failures for the the community organizer caliphate builder in the US.

Note: Some of what Seastallion said above reflects what I suggest of Obama in regard to polarizing a population to make it a monolithic voting block; perhaps Obama and Netanyahu have some common ground after all. "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" of course this is the exact same observation above regarding Obama!

[Steely Dan]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Not at all. Black/minority populations are not told to get out and vote because the "white man is going to win", they are simply told to get out and vote, as all voters are. If a black/minority candidate played the race card, he'd be branded a racist too.

Netanyahu could have simply said, "Get out and vote!", but he didn't, he resorted to motivating their right-wing hatred by saying "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" Yikes! Arabs! I wasn't going to vote, but we can't have Arabs getting seats!

The notion that black/minority populations are not told to get out the vote because the white man is going to win is untrue! The politics of racial division are developed and perfected by the same clowns in the US protesting Netanyahu- US politics automated racial division, as they attempted to do in Israel. The ideas that Horsemen of Racial Division would be called racists when they do such things is generally not true; not mainstream indictment.

Elijah Cummings; vote for blacks for black only issues; et al, Jesse Jackson, Jet, 1988- Why Blacks must vote in next elections

Pres Obama asks for black votes out of racial solidarity- Wall Street Journal, Obama and the Black Vote

Obama campaign architect lied about 2012 phone call where Mitt Romney allegedly told president he only won by getting blacks to vote, says GOP aide; Dailymailonline

Obama and the Black Vote:The appeals to racial division mask the lack of economic progress WSJ

Blacks' Loyalty to First Black President Got Blacks Nothing; OPED, CP Opinion

Its nonsense that blacks will only vote for blacks but statistically, the greater the number of blacks at the voter polls the greater the likelihood of increased votes for a candidate because black demographics are not too complex; the numbers are in 70s to 80s% democratic- so, appealing to this voter base generally can numerically achieve success- a strategy Obama wisely used. But its the racial division that is appalling and the parallels to Israel are, IMO, valid. How to further distill the black vote so it is decidedly racial?

Deep Racial Divide continues under Obama, NBC News

Blacks' Loyalty to First Black President Got Blacks Nothing; Der Spiegel Online

Black Sheriff: Obama’s Racial Divide and Conquer Strategy “Destructive for America” Adan Salazar

Basically the list is endless. This is the very framework which Obama exported to Israel; it is the politics of division, or Saul Alinksy destructive polity.

All blacks do not vote black. When racial animosities or historical archetypes are conjured up then the solidification of the fairly monolithic black voting demographic takes shape, and the result is indeed increased black votes for blacks. This mechanism is what Netanyahu bravely faced and represents one of numerous overseas failures for the the community organizer caliphate builder in the US.

Note: Some of what Seastallion said above reflects what I suggest of Obama in regard to polarizing a population to make it a monolithic voting block; perhaps Obama and Netanyahu have some common ground after all. "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" of course this is the exact same observation above regarding Obama!

Furthermore 65% of the Israeli Arab population voted, whereas 25% of the black American population last election. Now who was it who's the supposed apartheid state?

[BKKBobby]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Not at all. Black/minority populations are not told to get out and vote because the "white man is going to win", they are simply told to get out and vote, as all voters are. If a black/minority candidate played the race card, he'd be branded a racist too.

Netanyahu could have simply said, "Get out and vote!", but he didn't, he resorted to motivating their right-wing hatred by saying "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" Yikes! Arabs! I wasn't going to vote, but we can't have Arabs getting seats!

The notion that black/minority populations are not told to get out the vote because the white man is going to win is untrue! The politics of racial division are developed and perfected by the same clowns in the US protesting Netanyahu- US politics automated racial division, as they attempted to do in Israel. The ideas that Horsemen of Racial Division would be called racists when they do such things is generally not true; not mainstream indictment.

Elijah Cummings; vote for blacks for black only issues; et al, Jesse Jackson, Jet, 1988- Why Blacks must vote in next elections

Pres Obama asks for black votes out of racial solidarity- Wall Street Journal, Obama and the Black Vote

Obama campaign architect lied about 2012 phone call where Mitt Romney allegedly told president he only won by getting blacks to vote, says GOP aide; Dailymailonline

Obama and the Black Vote:The appeals to racial division mask the lack of economic progress WSJ

Blacks' Loyalty to First Black President Got Blacks Nothing; OPED, CP Opinion

Its nonsense that blacks will only vote for blacks but statistically, the greater the number of blacks at the voter polls the greater the likelihood of increased votes for a candidate because black demographics are not too complex; the numbers are in 70s to 80s% democratic- so, appealing to this voter base generally can numerically achieve success- a strategy Obama wisely used. But its the racial division that is appalling and the parallels to Israel are, IMO, valid. How to further distill the black vote so it is decidedly racial?

Deep Racial Divide continues under Obama, NBC News

Blacks' Loyalty to First Black President Got Blacks Nothing; Der Spiegel Online

Black Sheriff: Obama’s Racial Divide and Conquer Strategy “Destructive for America” Adan Salazar

Basically the list is endless. This is the very framework which Obama exported to Israel; it is the politics of division, or Saul Alinksy destructive polity.

All blacks do not vote black. When racial animosities or historical archetypes are conjured up then the solidification of the fairly monolithic black voting demographic takes shape, and the result is indeed increased black votes for blacks. This mechanism is what Netanyahu bravely faced and represents one of numerous overseas failures for the the community organizer caliphate builder in the US.

Note: Some of what Seastallion said above reflects what I suggest of Obama in regard to polarizing a population to make it a monolithic voting block; perhaps Obama and Netanyahu have some common ground after all. "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" of course this is the exact same observation above regarding Obama!

Furthermore 65% of the Israeli Arab population voted, whereas 25% of the black American population last election. Now who was it who's the supposed apartheid state?

The state where all people aint equally equal. The state where some people are more equal than others.

If a black person in USA dont care to use a vote to elect a leader even though no one is stopping or threathening them has no meaning in this case.

That black person used his demochratic right to not vote.

[Linky]

No only has Netanyahu alienated the Arab voters in his pre election diatribe but by now backtracking on it he has alienated those that voted for him because they believed what he said.

[Jingthing]

Calling Israel an apartheid state is simply an inflammatory tool for Israel demonizers to suggest there is an equivalence between Israel and apartheid era South Africa.

But, guess what, there isn't!

Edited March 24, 2015 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

No only has Netanyahu alienated the Arab voters in his pre election diatribe but by now backtracking on it he has alienated those that voted for him because they believed what he said.

I think that's ridiculous.

It was indeed a sleazy offensive racist comment but all it really was at its core was a way to fire up his right wing base and increase the strength of a right wing victory. He didn't say he wanted to oppress Arab Israelis more. He just wanted more power to the Israeli right wing which means he gets to stay PM.

I am sure there really is systematic discrimination against Israeli Arabs to some degree, as is common in many countries with minorities, but that's not the same thing as it being an "apartheid" situation.

Edited March 24, 2015 by Jingthing

[Seastallion]

Calling Israel an apartheid state is simply an inflammatory tool for Israel demonizers to suggest there is an equivalence between Israel and apartheid era South Africa.

But, guess what, there isn't!

To accuse stating fact as "an inflammatory tool" is simply a devious way to suppress information via forum rules.

Your song, and you, divert; if you take the meaning of "apartheid", albeit the word was coined in SA, it has a meaning of it's own and it still applies to the discriminatory practices of the Israeli government and Israeli Jewish citizens. Nobody is "comparing to SA".

[Seastallion]

No only has Netanyahu alienated the Arab voters in his pre election diatribe but by now backtracking on it he has alienated those that voted for him because they believed what he said.

I think that's ridiculous.

It was indeed a sleazy offensive racist comment but all it really was at its core was a way to fire up his right wing base and increase the strength of a right wing victory. He didn't say he wanted to oppress Arab Israelis more. He just wanted more power to the Israeli right wing which means he gets to stay PM.

I am sure there really is systematic discrimination against Israeli Arabs to some degree, as is common in many countries with minorities, but that's not the same thing as it being an "apartheid" situation.

There's nothing ridiculous in the quote that you're replying to!

Indeed Netanyahu has alienated the Arab voters, and no doubt he has disappointed his own voters by back-tracking with his lies.

Nobody said he wanted to oppress...that's your projection....although most likely right that he does...but nobody, but nobody, not even the left extreme media have suggested what you're saying people are saying re bibi's words.

And again, you're excusing it, even though you admit it was sleazy and offensive...."right wing rhetoric...means nothing...".

You ARE SURE there is SYSTEMATIC DISCRIMINATION....but no apartheid..... .

[rgs2001uk]

Calling Israel an apartheid state is simply an inflammatory tool for Israel demonizers to suggest there is an equivalence between Israel and apartheid era South Africa.

But, guess what, there isn't!

I guess no one told John Kerry that.

[chuckd]

This is all about Chicago politics. Jeremy Bird, Obama's former field director of elections, went to Israel to help get Netanyahu defeated. Busing opposing minority voters to polling stations is SOP for both the Democrat and labor unions in the US, and apparently the opposition party in Israel.

It didn't work. Live with it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Israel Election Update: Obama Operatives Busing Arabs To Polls

UlstermanBooks.com

It’s a page taken directly from the Obama campaigns of 2008 and 2012 – the rounding up of voters ( often rewarding them with food, cigarettes, assorted gifts, etc.) and busing them to the polls in order to secure victory. Here in the United States this led to potentially tens of thousands of illegal votes across the country, some of which likely did tip the scales in favor of Barack Obama in states where his margin of victory proved slim but which in turn led to a more comfortable electoral win.

This same effort is now underway by Obama operatives (allegedly working with Iranian-backed Arab groups no less) in Israel as liberals work to unseat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

http://ulstermanbooks.com/israel-election-update-obama-operatives-busing-arabs-to-polls/

The source is a conservative blogger. Sort of the anti-thesis to Mother Jones., The Young Turks, etc.

[dexterm]

Well, Netanyahu would say that wouldn’t he?

But actions speak louder than words. If he really does wish to prove the sincerity of..

"I view myself as the prime minister of each and every citizen of Israel, without any prejudice based on religion, ethnicity or gender."

He could start by addressing the more than 50 laws that discriminate against Israeli Arab citizens that limit their rights to property and land, their right to family life, and even their right to mourn that they have been invaded and their land confiscated.

Israel’s drift ever rightwards – a guide to the laws discriminating against Palestinian citizens

http://jfjfp.com/?p=19605

Discriminatory Laws in the State of Israel

http://www.itisapartheid.org/laws.html

There far more severe laws affecting Palestinians under occupation. Let’s see if Bibi will address those too if he annexes the West Bank in his one state solution, that is before he changed his mind and reverted back to his 2 state solution.

[RockyBeerbelly]

How can this be anything but apartheid? African Jews are treated really different from, and are being pissed-on by Aryan Jews. I am sure the supporters of the fascist Likud will continue to proudly defend this apartheid.....

http://www.mintpressnews.com/is-israel-denying-asylum-to-jewish-african-refugees-because-they-are-black/202604/

[arjunadawn]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Not at all. Black/minority populations are not told to get out and vote because the "white man is going to win", they are simply told to get out and vote, as all voters are. If a black/minority candidate played the race card, he'd be branded a racist too.

Netanyahu could have simply said, "Get out and vote!", but he didn't, he resorted to motivating their right-wing hatred by saying "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" Yikes! Arabs! I wasn't going to vote, but we can't have Arabs getting seats!

Compulsory voting is the answer to those issues.

I am aware in the US Obama and company are floating the idea of compulsory voting. With Obama "fundamentally transforming America" resulting in so many heinous or repugnant acts and suggestions daily I found that at a certain point I no longer needed any really in-depth analysis on virtually every topic- as long as it was an idea he floated it was repugnant, and this has consistently been the case. I know this to be true the same reason I know the sun will also rise in the morning; it always has before. Not very studious but ultimately true. Obama consistently represents ideas that are anathema to at least my views of a viable people.

So, what about compulsory voting disturbs me? Well, in America the greatest thing the framer's feared was democracy. It is only the intellectually crippled who's short view of history overlooks the fact that true democracies invariably decay into mob rule and majority domination, with protections for minorities invariably being way-sided. Democracy in its ultimate expression would necessarily have every vote equally count. So, what was the conundrum for the framers? Have landowners be able to vote as they are the ones who have vested interests! Do I advocate this now, in 2015? No, but I also object to the extreme notion that all people in a free society should be required to vote. Being required to vote reduces one to a vassal of the state. Being an American citizen should confer on one the right to patriotically and dutifully serve his implied social contract, serve in the army, vote, and grow old in American Legion Parades on July 4th, and scream at CNN or FOX news. It should equally confer upon any citizen the right to be left alone, to not serve the military, not not give a damn about voting, and to live on a mountain top unmolested if he or she wishes. Requiring citizens to vote is only contrived by the minds of those who count on low information voters to tilt the tipping point past 51% of those who have not appropriating to themselves the fruits of the labor of the 49%.

This is community organizing, whether in Chicago or Israel. This is Rules for Radicals; protest this point, but it is clear in black and white and Obama is its greatest student. Compulsory voting is one more nail in the coffin of a representative republic on life support.

[Jingthing]

There is very little support in the U.S. for compulsory voting. Never gonna happen there.

[BKKBobby]

Thats good. One should have the right to not vote or go and give a 'blank' vote if one wants to do that.

[arjunadawn]

Calling Israel an apartheid state is simply an inflammatory tool for Israel demonizers to suggest there is an equivalence between Israel and apartheid era South Africa.

But, guess what, there isn't!

To accuse stating fact as "an inflammatory tool" is simply a devious way to suppress information via forum rules.

Your song, and you, divert; if you take the meaning of "apartheid", albeit the word was coined in SA, it has a meaning of it's own and it still applies to the discriminatory practices of the Israeli government and Israeli Jewish citizens. Nobody is "comparing to SA".

Israel was among the early voters at the UN to note South Africa's apartheid nature; this is not conclusive but begins to frame a different narrative, one that challenges the "facts" thus rendering the "inflammatory tool" rhetoric dubious at best. Facts are stubborn things but until two parties stipulate what is agreed, none can claim to own them. Therefore, referring a member to having violated forum rules because of [one's] possession of facts seems a bit over the top.

The West Bank is disputed. It was disputed when the Jordanians forcefully stole it in 1948; it remains disputed as an armistice line because of Jordanian insistence in 1967. South Africa never had the same mechanics. Is the West Bank occupied? Yes? No? Maybe? But it is certainly not the same mechanics as South Africa. Presently, the degree to which language and logic succumb to emotion is likely unmatched in diplomatic history. Indeed, policy everywhere is being managed via emotional provocation, such as what the word "apartheid" is designed to conjure.

[BKKBobby]

Calling Israel an apartheid state is simply an inflammatory tool for Israel demonizers to suggest there is an equivalence between Israel and apartheid era South Africa.

But, guess what, there isn't!

To accuse stating fact as "an inflammatory tool" is simply a devious way to suppress information via forum rules.

Your song, and you, divert; if you take the meaning of "apartheid", albeit the word was coined in SA, it has a meaning of it's own and it still applies to the discriminatory practices of the Israeli government and Israeli Jewish citizens. Nobody is "comparing to SA".

Israel was among the early voters at the UN to note South Africa's apartheid nature; this is not conclusive but begins to frame a different narrative, one that challenges the "facts" thus rendering the "inflammatory tool" rhetoric dubious at best. Facts are stubborn things but until two parties stipulate what is agreed, none can claim to own them. Therefore, referring a member to having violated forum rules because of [one's] possession of facts seems a bit over the top.

The West Bank is disputed. It was disputed when the Jordanians forcefully stole it in 1948; it remains disputed as an armistice line because of Jordanian insistence in 1967. South Africa never had the same mechanics. Is the West Bank occupied? Yes? No? Maybe? But it is certainly not the same mechanics as South Africa. Presently, the degree to which language and logic succumb to emotion is likely unmatched in diplomatic history. Indeed, policy everywhere is being managed via emotional provocation, such as what the word "apartheid" is designed to conjure.

You really make an effort with your posts, very well written pieces I must say. Eloquent and written with intellect, indeed.

Your posts are extremely Israel-partisan or against Obama or highly anti-Islam.

Your agenda becomes transparent when one continues with following your posts as I do since they are very well written pieces and stimulating even though I disagree with you to a high extent.

So its still nothing but sophisticated political spam.

[dexterm]

Calling Israel an apartheid state is simply an inflammatory tool for Israel demonizers to suggest there is an equivalence between Israel and apartheid era South Africa.

But, guess what, there isn't!

To accuse stating fact as "an inflammatory tool" is simply a devious way to suppress information via forum rules.

Your song, and you, divert; if you take the meaning of "apartheid", albeit the word was coined in SA, it has a meaning of it's own and it still applies to the discriminatory practices of the Israeli government and Israeli Jewish citizens. Nobody is "comparing to SA".

Israel was among the early voters at the UN to note South Africa's apartheid nature; this is not conclusive but begins to frame a different narrative, one that challenges the "facts" thus rendering the "inflammatory tool" rhetoric dubious at best. Facts are stubborn things but until two parties stipulate what is agreed, none can claim to own them. Therefore, referring a member to having violated forum rules because of [one's] possession of facts seems a bit over the top.

The West Bank is disputed. It was disputed when the Jordanians forcefully stole it in 1948; it remains disputed as an armistice line because of Jordanian insistence in 1967. South Africa never had the same mechanics. Is the West Bank occupied? Yes? No? Maybe? But it is certainly not the same mechanics as South Africa. Presently, the degree to which language and logic succumb to emotion is likely unmatched in diplomatic history. Indeed, policy everywhere is being managed via emotional provocation, such as what the word "apartheid" is designed to conjure.

I regard the current Israeli government and apartheid era S Africa as two peas in the same pod.

Rather than Israel being the great champion of S African civil rights and democracy that you make it out to be, Israel actually tried to sell nuclear weapons to apartheid era S Africa and probably had permission to test her own off the coast there.

“The "top secret" minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries in 1975 show that South Africa's defence minister, PW Botha, asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Israel's defence minister and now its president, responded by offering them "in three sizes". The two men also signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries that included a clause declaring that "the very existence of this agreement" was to remain secret.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/23/israel-south-africa-nuclear-weapons

[Seastallion]

When a minority population bands together with the central theme of electing one person that is seen as a viable, inclusive act of democratic freedom but when a person running for office notes the minority population is banding together with the single purpose of defeating him that is considered inappropriate. It is the same hostage taking political correctness sweeping the western world. In the US black/minority populations are permitted, authorized, condoned to "get out the vote" for a black/minority candidate only, but this is overlooked as democratic process. Were white people to do this it would be racism. If a coalition of ultra orthodox jews were determined to band together and vote for someone who would share and accommodate their orthodox views, this too would likely be seen as racist or some other pejorative. It is nearly impossible not to begin to detest people like this, the ones who wear "racism" as an amulet to ward off valid scrutiny and query.

Not at all. Black/minority populations are not told to get out and vote because the "white man is going to win", they are simply told to get out and vote, as all voters are. If a black/minority candidate played the race card, he'd be branded a racist too.

Netanyahu could have simply said, "Get out and vote!", but he didn't, he resorted to motivating their right-wing hatred by saying "The Arabs are being bussed to the polls!!!" Yikes! Arabs! I wasn't going to vote, but we can't have Arabs getting seats!

Compulsory voting is the answer to those issues.

I am aware in the US Obama and company are floating the idea of compulsory voting. With Obama "fundamentally transforming America" resulting in so many heinous or repugnant acts and suggestions daily I found that at a certain point I no longer needed any really in-depth analysis on virtually every topic- as long as it was an idea he floated it was repugnant, and this has consistently been the case. I know this to be true the same reason I know the sun will also rise in the morning; it always has before. Not very studious but ultimately true. Obama consistently represents ideas that are anathema to at least my views of a viable people.

So, what about compulsory voting disturbs me? Well, in America the greatest thing the framer's feared was democracy. It is only the intellectually crippled who's short view of history overlooks the fact that true democracies invariably decay into mob rule and majority domination, with protections for minorities invariably being way-sided. Democracy in its ultimate expression would necessarily have every vote equally count. So, what was the conundrum for the framers? Have landowners be able to vote as they are the ones who have vested interests! Do I advocate this now, in 2015? No, but I also object to the extreme notion that all people in a free society should be required to vote. Being required to vote reduces one to a vassal of the state. Being an American citizen should confer on one the right to patriotically and dutifully serve his implied social contract, serve in the army, vote, and grow old in American Legion Parades on July 4th, and scream at CNN or FOX news. It should equally confer upon any citizen the right to be left alone, to not serve the military, not not give a damn about voting, and to live on a mountain top unmolested if he or she wishes. Requiring citizens to vote is only contrived by the minds of those who count on low information voters to tilt the tipping point past 51% of those who have not appropriating to themselves the fruits of the labor of the 49%.

This is community organizing, whether in Chicago or Israel. This is Rules for Radicals; protest this point, but it is clear in black and white and Obama is its greatest student. Compulsory voting is one more nail in the coffin of a representative republic on life support.

You and I would probably find some common ground on what democracy should be....which would not be a popular position, I daresay and does not actually sit well with the following....

But the freedom to not go to the polls may be a "collateral damage" thing. By mandating every citizen to vote, you do get a more accurate representation.

Personally, I think people need to qualify to vote as the "average" person produces only an average decision....which, by definition, is not "the best".

[Seastallion]

Calling Israel an apartheid state is simply an inflammatory tool for Israel demonizers to suggest there is an equivalence between Israel and apartheid era South Africa.

But, guess what, there isn't!

To accuse stating fact as "an inflammatory tool" is simply a devious way to suppress information via forum rules.

Your song, and you, divert; if you take the meaning of "apartheid", albeit the word was coined in SA, it has a meaning of it's own and it still applies to the discriminatory practices of the Israeli government and Israeli Jewish citizens. Nobody is "comparing to SA".

Israel was among the early voters at the UN to note South Africa's apartheid nature; this is not conclusive but begins to frame a different narrative, one that challenges the "facts" thus rendering the "inflammatory tool" rhetoric dubious at best. Facts are stubborn things but until two parties stipulate what is agreed, none can claim to own them. Therefore, referring a member to having violated forum rules because of [one's] possession of facts seems a bit over the top.

The West Bank is disputed. It was disputed when the Jordanians forcefully stole it in 1948; it remains disputed as an armistice line because of Jordanian insistence in 1967. South Africa never had the same mechanics. Is the West Bank occupied? Yes? No? Maybe? But it is certainly not the same mechanics as South Africa. Presently, the degree to which language and logic succumb to emotion is likely unmatched in diplomatic history. Indeed, policy everywhere is being managed via emotional provocation, such as what the word "apartheid" is designed to conjure.

Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with me here.....and perhaps you didn't comprehend fully.

Who referred a member as having violated forum rules? Not I. But I did point out the member's attempt to turn "calling Israel apartheid" into a breach of forum rules. It is not a breach. Unpopular opinions are allowed. To feign offense is a ruse. The word "inflammatory" could be used to disallow almost any opinion.

Yes, the West Bank and Gaza are occupied territories. By UN definition, as well as dictionary definition.

I'm not comparing Israel to SA. But I will use the word "apartheid" with regard to Israel. And that was my point against JT's song. I can call Israel an apartheid state without referencing SA at all.

[Steely Dan]

This is all about Chicago politics. Jeremy Bird, Obama's former field director of elections, went to Israel to help get Netanyahu defeated. Busing opposing minority voters to polling stations is SOP for both the Democrat and labor unions in the US, and apparently the opposition party in Israel.

It didn't work. Live with it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Israel Election Update: Obama Operatives Busing Arabs To Polls

UlstermanBooks.com

It’s a page taken directly from the Obama campaigns of 2008 and 2012 – the rounding up of voters ( often rewarding them with food, cigarettes, assorted gifts, etc.) and busing them to the polls in order to secure victory. Here in the United States this led to potentially tens of thousands of illegal votes across the country, some of which likely did tip the scales in favor of Barack Obama in states where his margin of victory proved slim but which in turn led to a more comfortable electoral win.

This same effort is now underway by Obama operatives (allegedly working with Iranian-backed Arab groups no less) in Israel as liberals work to unseat Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

http://ulstermanbooks.com/israel-election-update-obama-operatives-busing-arabs-to-polls/

The source is a conservative blogger. Sort of the anti-thesis to Mother Jones., The Young Turks, etc.

Wait for the likely next thread where the White House leaks allegations that Israel spied on the talks between the U.S and Iran. Israel denies this, but it should be remembered that that the Obama administration promised to keep Israel in the loop regarding any talks with Iran, which is a promise if honored would mean nothing more could be gleaned by spying in the first place.

[Ulysses G.]

I can call Israel an apartheid state without referencing SA at all.

Of course you can. You make false statements constantly on here, but you will still be wrong. Apartheid was a society almost wholly based on racial criteria. Apartheid was an official policy of discrimination against blacks enforced through police violence and based on minority control over a majority population who could not vote. Israel is the opposite, a majority rule democracy with equal rights for all citizens including Arab citizens of Israel who vote freely.

Within Israel, Jews are a majority, but the Arab minority are full citizens who enjoy equal rights. Arabs are represented in the Knesset, and have served in the Cabinet, high-level foreign ministry posts and on the Supreme Court. Under apartheid, blacks could not vote and were not even citizens of the country in which they formed the overwhelming majority of the population. There is NO legitimate comparison.