Israel imposes 'apartheid regime' on Palestinians - U.N. report

[webfact]

Israel imposes 'apartheid regime' on Palestinians - U.N. report

REUTERS

 

The sun sets over the Gaza Strip, as seen from the Israeli side, September 2016. REUTERS/Amir Cohen/Files

 

BEIRUT/UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - A U.N. agency published a report on Wednesday accusing Israel of imposing an "apartheid regime" of racial discrimination on the Palestinian people, and said it was the first time a U.N. body had clearly made the charge.

 

Israel's Foreign Ministry spokesman likened the report, which was published by the U.N. Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), to Der Sturmer - a Nazi propaganda publication that was strongly anti-Semitic.

 

The report concluded "Israel has established an apartheid regime that dominates the Palestinian people as a whole." The accusation - often directed at Israel by its critics - is fiercely rejected by Israel. (http://bit.ly/2mJh0eN)

 

U.N. Under-Secretary General and ESCWA Executive Secretary Rima Khalaf said the report was the "first of its type" from a U.N. body that "clearly and frankly concludes that Israel is a racist state that has established an apartheid system that persecutes the Palestinian people".

 

ESCWA comprises 18 Arab states in Western Asia and aims to support economic and social development in member states, according to its website. The report was prepared at the request of member states, Khalaf said.

 

U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters in New York that the report was published without any prior consultation with the U.N. secretariat.

 

"The report as it stands does not reflect the views of the secretary-general (Antonio Guterres)," said Dujarric, adding that the report itself notes that it reflects the views of the authors.

 

The United States, an ally of Israel, said it was outraged by the report.

 

"The United Nations secretariat was right to distance itself from this report, but it must go further and withdraw the report altogether," the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, said in a statement.

 

The Israeli ministry spokesman, Emmanuel Nahshon‏, commenting on Twitter, also noted the report had not been endorsed by the U.N. secretary-general.

 

"The attempt to smear and falsely label the only true democracy in the Middle East by creating a false analogy is despicable and constitutes a blatant lie," Israel's U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon said in a statement.

 

The report said it had established on the "basis of scholarly inquiry and overwhelming evidence, that Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid."

 

"However, only a ruling by an international tribunal in that sense would make such an assessment truly authoritative," it added.

The report said the "strategic fragmentation of the Palestinian people" was the main method through which Israel imposes apartheid, with Palestinians divided into four groups oppressed through "distinct laws, policies and practices."

 

It identified the four sets of Palestinians as: Palestinian citizens of Israel; Palestinians in East Jerusalem; Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip; and Palestinians living as refugees or in exile.

 

ESCWA hoped the report would inform further deliberations on the root causes of the problem in the United Nations, among member states, and in society, Khalaf said at an event to launch the report at ESCWA's Beirut headquarters.

 

It was authored by Richard Falk, a former U.N. human rights investigator for the Palestinian territories, and Virginia Tilley, professor of political science at Southern Illinois University.

 

Before leaving his post as U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in the Palestinian territories in 2014, Falk said Israeli policies bore unacceptable characteristics of colonialism, apartheid and ethnic cleansing.

 

The United States accused him of being biased against Israel.

 

(Additional reporting by Ari Rabinovitch in Jerusalem and Michelle Nichols at the United Nations; Writing by Tom Perry; Editing by Alison Williams, Lisa Shumaker and Frances Kerry)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-03-16

[ilostmypassword]

Just because the Israelis have massively stolen Palestinian property as the South African Apartheid regime did to black africans? Just because there is one set of laws of the West Bank for Palestinians and another for Israelis? Just because the Israeli government wants to set up a geographic patchwork of small palestinian territories on the west bank as the South Africans did with its bantustans?

Totally baseless conclusion to this report.

[ezzra]

27 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Just because the Israelis have massively stolen Palestinian property as the South African Apartheid regime did to black africans? Just because there is one set of laws of the West Bank for Palestinians and another for Israelis? Just because the Israeli government wants to set up a geographic patchwork of small palestinian territories on the west bank as the South Africans did with its bantustans?

Totally baseless conclusion to this report.

Your steaming pile of horse shit you have just penned out,  only shows what a philistine you're and how bigoted and narrow minded opinions you have on something you have absolutely no knowledge of and have been fed propaganda BS and this is how you shape your opinion.....

[Morch]

The heading is somewhat misleading - not quite a "UN report", but rather a report by a UN body with a standing anti-Israeli agenda.

 

From the OP:

 

Quote

ESCWA comprises 18 Arab states in Western Asia and aims to support economic and social development in member states, according to its website. The report was prepared at the request of member states, Khalaf said.

 

U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric told reporters in New York that the report was published without any prior consultation with the U.N. secretariat.

 

"The report as it stands does not reflect the views of the secretary-general (Antonio Guterres)," said Dujarric, adding that the report itself notes that it reflects the views of the authors.

 

Richard Falk is a rather well-known opponent of Israel, and his views can hardly be said to manifest anything resembling objectivity.

 

 

 

 

 

[Scott]

I am not inclined to be very lenient with posters who continue to post inflammatory remarks.   Keep it civil.  

 

[Morch]

24 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Just because the Israelis have massively stolen Palestinian property as the South African Apartheid regime did to black africans? Just because there is one set of laws of the West Bank for Palestinians and another for Israelis? Just because the Israeli government wants to set up a geographic patchwork of small palestinian territories on the west bank as the South Africans did with its bantustans?

Totally baseless conclusion to this report.

 

The report claims to pertain to all Palestinians, whether or not residing in the West Bank or if living under Israeli occupation. If you wish to make such general nonsense claims as you do, either explain how the comparison to SA fully applies when considering all of the groups of Palestinians mentioned, or limit your argument.

 

If and when Israel does annex the West Bank, and if under such conditions it will refuse granting full rights to the Palestinians living there - then you'd have a point. Until such a time, the situation, while far from being acceptable, is not exactly what you go on about.

 

As to your assertions about the Israeli government's territorial wishes, there's yet to be something official declared to the effect you describe. Equating the expressed views of extreme elements (even within the current right wing coalition government) with official government policy is stretching things a bit.

 

Guess that pointing out the less than stellar human rights records of ESCWA member countries will be met with the usual one-sided "off topic" cries.

[ilostmypassword]

17 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The report claims to pertain to all Palestinians, whether or not residing in the West Bank or if living under Israeli occupation. If you wish to make such general nonsense claims as you do, either explain how the comparison to SA fully applies when considering all of the groups of Palestinians mentioned, or limit your argument.

 

If and when Israel does annex the West Bank, and if under such conditions it will refuse granting full rights to the Palestinians living there - then you'd have a point. Until such a time, the situation, while far from being acceptable, is not exactly what you go on about.

 

As to your assertions about the Israeli government's territorial wishes, there's yet to be something official declared to the effect you describe. Equating the expressed views of extreme elements (even within the current right wing coalition government) with official government policy is stretching things a bit.

 

Guess that pointing out the less than stellar human rights records of ESCWA member countries will be met with the usual one-sided "off topic" cries.

Yes, I should have stipulated that Arab citizens of Israel are a different case, although the national lands issue is, to say the least, a troubling one.

Anyway, as for the rest, you would have to be willfully blind to not see where all these policies are heading. It used to be that formally at least, even Netanyahu was committed to a 2 state solution. That seems to be going, if not gone away.  Where does that leave the Palestinians in the West Bank and Jerusalem? Israel is not going to make them citizens so they will become a stateless people without democratic representation. I think that is Israel's plan. 

Not only are there 2 sets of laws in the West Bank, but even the laws that ought to protect Palestinians from Israeli encroachment and theft, are very laxly approached.

And as for the arguments that other nations in the region are worse than Israel, yes, that's true. South Africa used to make the same argument. It doesn't justify Israel's conduct. And it really makes no sense. In effect, it's making local Palestinians somehow responsible for the bad behavior and hypocrisy of regimes where they don't even live, much less have any influence.

 

[Morch]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

Yes, I should have stipulated that Arab citizens of Israel are a different case, although the national lands issue is, to say the least, a troubling one.

Anyway, as for the rest, you would have to be willfully blind to not see where all these policies are heading. It used to be that formally at least, even Netanyahu was committed to a 2 state solution. That seems to be going, if not gone away.  Where does that leave the Palestinians in the West Bank and Jerusalem? Israel is not going to make them citizens so they will become a stateless people without democratic representation. I think that is Israel's plan. 

Not only are there 2 sets of laws in the West Bank, but even the laws that ought to protect Palestinians from Israeli encroachment and theft, are very laxly approached.

And as for the arguments that other nations in the region are worse than Israel, yes, that's true. South Africa used to make the same argument. It doesn't justify Israel's conduct. And it really makes no sense. In effect, it's making local Palestinians somehow responsible for the bad behavior and hypocrisy of regimes where they don't even live, much less have any influence.

 

 

So not exactly similar to SA, then. Would expecting that the usual references parroted would be dropped or at least qualified be too optimistic?

 

No, I'm not blind to how things are. What I object to is describing how things might pan out as if they already have. Similarly, taking a lot of what Netanyahu says or doesn't say without the context of his immediate political survival issues is misguided. Taking him at face value is somewhat akin to the over-interpretation of Trump's statements.

 

Netanyahu holds (at least) two sets of views. One used for domestic consumption and maintaining support of his base. The other is more pragmatic and acknowledges that certain concessions have to be made. Disregarding what his true inclinations may be, the latter does not prevail also because he favors political survival above other considerations, and due to the fact that the other side does not (or can not) be assured to play along. If one actually pays attention to positions raised during negotiations, or to how the Israeli PM reacts to Trump's administration, there's a discernible difference compared to views of hardliners within his coalition.

 

I doubt that Israel, as a country, got any concrete plan, even less so an agreed upon one, as to how to deal with the Palestinians. To be even more specific, the current government does not posses such a plan. And to be even more specific, the same applies with regard to official coalition party plans. Most of what's aired are views by individual or groups of politicians. In that sense, when you (and others) allude to a supposed plan, it doesn't really refer to such.

 

Referencing other countries, especially when it comes to instances such as this "report", does make sense. He who casts the first stone and all that. For example, it doesn't make the Palestinians responsible for the behavior of countries in the region, it simply puts things in context. Does the "report" deal with these countries failures in treating the Palestinian refugees? Or is such criticism reserved only for Western countries? The Palestinians are responsible for their own choices and decisions. It makes no sense holding Israel accountable for its past, while not expecting the other side to act in a similar manner.

[Jingthing]

Considering the source, and it's not the U.N. in totality but this obviously geographically biased U.N. affiliated organization, I think the Israeli government has overreacted with the level of rhetoric. Which is nothing new or surprising either. I think a more calm response considering the source would be kind of enough, making it clear that it is not the U.N. in totality saying that. No need to respond to every flea with an elephant gun. Bigger gefilte fish to fry. 

Edited March 16, 2017 by Jingthing

[CharlieK]

ESCWA comprises 18 Arab states in Western Asia.

 

 

Hardly Biased then! 

[CharlieK]

ESCWA comprises 17 Arab countries in Western Asia: Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq,Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia,the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen.

 

Considering that Syria and the Yemen are members of escwa, you would have thought that the other member countries might have had more pressing issues to condemn?

 

Ah but arab killing arab is all very democratic! How many of these countries really do practice apartheid  towards minorities in their own country? 

[humqdpf]

6 hours ago, ezzra said:

Your steaming pile of horse shit you have just penned out,  only shows what a philistine you're and how bigoted and narrow minded opinions you have on something you have absolutely no knowledge of and have been fed propaganda BS and this is how you shape your opinion.....

You are confusing me - the man said that the report had a totally baseless conclusion.

Do you believe this? If so, say so. 

Was he being ironic? If you think so, then say so.

 

Just pouring out vitriol on someone without challenging their opinions achieves nothing. And nobody knows what your opinion is anyway

[Morch]

Just now, humqdpf said:

You are confusing me - the man said that the report had a totally baseless conclusion.

Do you believe this? If so, say so. 

Was he being ironic? If you think so, then say so.

 

Just pouring out vitriol on someone without challenging their opinions achieves nothing. And nobody knows what your opinion is anyway

 

By now, anyone following these topics pretty much knows were regular participants stand on issues.

[humqdpf]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The report claims to pertain to all Palestinians, whether or not residing in the West Bank or if living under Israeli occupation. If you wish to make such general nonsense claims as you do, either explain how the comparison to SA fully applies when considering all of the groups of Palestinians mentioned, or limit your argument.

 

If and when Israel does annex the West Bank, and if under such conditions it will refuse granting full rights to the Palestinians living there - then you'd have a point. Until such a time, the situation, while far from being acceptable, is not exactly what you go on about.

 

As to your assertions about the Israeli government's territorial wishes, there's yet to be something official declared to the effect you describe. Equating the expressed views of extreme elements (even within the current right wing coalition government) with official government policy is stretching things a bit.

 

Guess that pointing out the less than stellar human rights records of ESCWA member countries will be met with the usual one-sided "off topic" cries.

What do you mean exactly by 'if and when Israel does annex the West Bank," the International Court of Justice has ruled that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are occupied territories with Israel as the occupying power.

 

I would also like to introduce you to the concepts of acts by omission and acts by commission - the latter are acts that someone initiates themselves knowing their consequences. The former are acts that an individual could prevent but chooses not to even through they know the consequences. The various settlements are a case in point - the Israeli government lets them happen and then protects them once they have happened despite the fact that they muddy the waters in the West Bank, will make any settlement extraordinarily difficult, will probably ensure that Israel will have complete control over the Palestinians forever not to mention that Israel will keep them as a vassal state.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, humqdpf said:

What do you mean exactly by 'if and when Israel does annex the West Bank," the International Court of Justice has ruled that the West Bank and East Jerusalem are occupied territories with Israel as the occupying power.

 

I would also like to introduce you to the concepts of acts by omission and acts by commission - the latter are acts that someone initiates themselves knowing their consequences. The former are acts that an individual could prevent but chooses not to even through they know the consequences. The various settlements are a case in point - the Israeli government lets them happen and then protects them once they have happened despite the fact that they muddy the waters in the West Bank, will make any settlement extraordinarily difficult, will probably ensure that Israel will have complete control over the Palestinians forever not to mention that Israel will keep them as a vassal state.

 

Annexation would mean the Israeli government officially declaring the West Bank a part of Israel. To date this was applied only with regard to East Jerusalem. Denying Palestinian rights under a military occupation of foreign territory is one thing, doing the same if the area is defined as part of the country, a different ballgame.

 

I have no issues with criticism of the illegal settlement effort. Definitely a major obstacle with regard to achieving a peace agreement. It is not, however, the root of conflict (which existed well before the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, let alone the proliferation of the illegal settlements). That the current Israeli government (and previous ones) policies on this matter contradict deceleration about willingness to negotiate is nothing new.

 

For one thing, Israeli governments are always coalition based, hence need to satisfy demands by various parties. Other than than, the obvious gap between extreme right wing political ideas (such as annexation) and their implications is often commented upon. This apparent blindness (which manifests in direct proportion to extreme positions held) can be attributed to several factors. First and foremost, an extreme national-religious point of view. Zealots place their trust in God, and worry less about reality. In truth, the right wing in Israel simply does not have a reasonable answer, or plan - because none are possible. This is an issue often raised by opposition parties and politicians.

 

[johna]

"It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine" 

"This reluctance to criticise policies of the Israeli government is due to the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the AIPAC"

 

Israel, Palestine, peace and apartheid Jimmy Carter

[Jingthing]

22 minutes ago, johna said:

"It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine" 

"This reluctance to criticise policies of the Israeli government is due to the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the AIPAC"

 

Israel, Palestine, peace and apartheid Jimmy Carter

What does that have to do specifically with the O.P?

[Saladin]

For those of you who are too young to know much about WWII here is some Nazi ideology. Can you see the parallels with current Israeli thinking?

 

Lebensraum (=West Bank?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lebensraum&atb=v51-4&ia=about 

 

Blitzkrieg (=Israeli reaction to provocation from Gaza?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=blitzkrieg&atb=v51-4&ia=meanings 

 

Master Race (=Israelis?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=master+race&atb=v51-4&ia=meanings 

 

Untermensch (= Palestinians?) https://duckduckgo.com/q=untermensch+meaning&atb=v51-4&ia=definition

 

Ghetto (= State of Israel?) http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ghetto

 

Racist State (= Israel?) http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/02/israel-racism-law-160224111623370.html 

[Jingthing]

10 minutes ago, Saladin said:

For those of you who are too young to know much about WWII here is some Nazi ideology. Can you see the parallels with current Israeli thinking?

 

Lebensraum (=West Bank?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lebensraum&atb=v51-4&ia=about 

 

Blitzkrieg (=Israeli reaction to provocation from Gaza?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=blitzkrieg&atb=v51-4&ia=meanings 

 

Master Race (=Israelis?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=master+race&atb=v51-4&ia=meanings 

 

Untermensch (= Palestinians?) https://duckduckgo.com/q=untermensch+meaning&atb=v51-4&ia=definition

 

Ghetto (= State of Israel?) http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ghetto

 

Racist State (= Israel?) http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/02/israel-racism-law-160224111623370.html 

Equating Israel with the Nazis by definition is antisemitic. Normal criticism of Israeli government policies as towards any other nation isn't. Your post wasn't normal criticism. It was pure vile Jew hatred. 

It's quite depressing to see so much Jew hatred being expressed on this forum, though it's sadly predictable, but it's another good reason why the state of Israel needed to exist in the first place and continues to need to exist.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Jingthing

[darksidedog]

Regardless of who authored the document there is an underlying truth to part of the accusation.

The country is not on a level footing for all persons living there.

Israel was formed to provide a homeland after WW2 and the terrible persecution of the jews by Hitler.

Having been on the receiving end, I still find it hard to understand why they can not be more tolerant and open minded.

A resolution to the problems has to come at some point, which will only happen when both sides are on a level playing field.

Israel has the power to bring this to reality, the Palestinians do not.

[yardrunner]

7 hours ago, ezzra said:

Your steaming pile of horse shit you have just penned out,  only shows what a philistine you're and how bigoted and narrow minded opinions you have on something you have absolutely no knowledge of and have been fed propaganda BS and this is how you shape your opinion.....

If the cap fits wear it and the Israeli government has defnitely behaved in a manner similar to South Africa in the aparthied era especially in relation to the "illegal settlements", unfortunately the hard liners on both sides do not seem to want peace and a negociated settlement but that is what is needed. It happened in Ireland and hopefully if the international community can work together it can happen in the middle east

[Morch]

1 hour ago, darksidedog said:

Regardless of who authored the document there is an underlying truth to part of the accusation.

The country is not on a level footing for all persons living there.

Israel was formed to provide a homeland after WW2 and the terrible persecution of the jews by Hitler.

Having been on the receiving end, I still find it hard to understand why they can not be more tolerant and open minded.

A resolution to the problems has to come at some point, which will only happen when both sides are on a level playing field.

Israel has the power to bring this to reality, the Palestinians do not.

 

Having been on the receiving end, I still find it hard to understand why they can not be more tolerant and open minded.

 

Popular as this sentiment seems to be, I do not think that the expectation materialized all that often when it comes to human behavior (perhaps even more so with relation to group, rather than individuals). To quote Master Yoda - Fear leads to hate, hate leads to anger, anger leads to suffering. Groups with a history of persecution do not necessarily become more tolerant. Maybe if things between the sides took a different course during the 1930's and 1940's the situation would have been less charged.

 

The other expectation, that of a "level playing field" isn't necessarily realistic, nor is it clear what it implies. Negotiations do not always involve sides on a "level playing field", nor is this necessarily a requirement for things being resolved.

 

Israel does not have the "power to bring this to reality", at least not on its own. Even if some posters don't like to admit it, the other side will need to do his bit as well. Right now, it is doubtful if either is up to it.

[Morch]

16 minutes ago, yardrunner said:

If the cap fits wear it and the Israeli government has defnitely behaved in a manner similar to South Africa in the aparthied era especially in relation to the "illegal settlements", unfortunately the hard liners on both sides do not seem to want peace and a negociated settlement but that is what is needed. It happened in Ireland and hopefully if the international community can work together it can happen in the middle east

 

But the cap doesn't quite fit, hard as some try to claim it does. Again, if and when Israel will annex the West Bank and deny Palestinians their rights, these claims would be on more solid footing. As it is, Israel isn't quite there, at this time.

[Johpa]

For those of you who are too young to know much about WWII here is some Nazi ideology. Can you see the parallels with current Israeli thinking?

Plenty to criticize with Israeli policy, but no, as one who is old enough, I see neither parallels to Nazi ideology nor any evidence of ethnic cleansing, the claim that invalidates the UN report.

[Thorgal]

"It would be almost politically suicidal for members of Congress to espouse a balanced position between Israel and Palestine" 
"This reluctance to criticise policies of the Israeli government is due to the extraordinary lobbying efforts of the AIPAC"
 
Israel, Palestine, peace and apartheid Jimmy Carter

That's why the UN top distantiated themselves immediately after the publication of the UN report.

Nothing new...

Creators of the UN are actually the same as those who allowed the creation of Israel...

UN can criticise countries, but has no authority to create countries.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Trouble]

Lots of postings by both sides on this issue and as always the Israel supporters tend to defend Israel at all costs. Most accept that Israel should have its right to exist but we also knowing that things aren't quite right with Israel's policies with regard to the Palestinians and Palestinian land issues and many of Israeli policies are only making the problem worse. Maybe rather than taking a stand on this particular report one way or another people should actually read the report first. Whether it is authored by a person who has spoken out against some of Israel's policies or not, the report might just have some solid justification included or it might be a work of fiction.  The problem with everything that goes on in the political arena today is the fact that people rely on news reports of things not reported in enough detail to make a judgement and in this case take a stand on this particular report without having the slightest knowledge of what is in the report.  

[Thorgal]

Lots of postings by both sides on this issue and as always the Israel supporters tend to defend Israel at all costs. Most accept that Israel should have its right to exist but we also knowing that things aren't quite right with Israel's policies with regard to the Palestinians and Palestinian land issues and many of Israeli policies are only making the problem worse. Maybe rather than taking a stand on this particular report one way or another people should actually read the report first. Whether it is authored by a person who has spoken out against some of Israel's policies or not, the report might just have some solid justification included or it might be a work of fiction.  The problem with everything that goes on in the political arena today is the fact that people rely on news reports of things not reported in enough detail to make a judgement and in this case take a stand on this particular report without having the slightest knowledge of what is in the report.  

Here it is :

https://www.unescwa.org/publications/israeli-practices-palestinian-people-apartheid-occupation

Could have written it myself, even more detailed...

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[joecoolfrog]

19 hours ago, ezzra said:

Your steaming pile of horse shit you have just penned out,  only shows what a philistine you're and how bigoted and narrow minded opinions you have on something you have absolutely no knowledge of and have been fed propaganda BS and this is how you shape your opinion.....

And yet your response contains all the things you rail against , how ironic and hypocritical.

[dexterm]

15 hours ago, Jingthing said:

What does that have to do specifically with the O.P?

I suppose he is referring to the influence of the powerful AIPAC Israeli lobby being responsible for the knee jerk reaction in the OP..

"The United States, an ally of Israel, said it was outraged by the report."

..without of course the US addressing any of the issues in the report.

[bandito]

15 hours ago, Saladin said:

For those of you who are too young to know much about WWII here is some Nazi ideology. Can you see the parallels with current Israeli thinking?

 

Lebensraum (=West Bank?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=lebensraum&atb=v51-4&ia=about 

 

Blitzkrieg (=Israeli reaction to provocation from Gaza?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=blitzkrieg&atb=v51-4&ia=meanings 

 

Master Race (=Israelis?) https://duckduckgo.com/?q=master+race&atb=v51-4&ia=meanings 

 

Untermensch (= Palestinians?) https://duckduckgo.com/q=untermensch+meaning&atb=v51-4&ia=definition

 

Ghetto (= State of Israel?) http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ghetto

 

Racist State (= Israel?) http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/02/israel-racism-law-160224111623370.html 

 

I have no time for Jew haters like you.

And as a beside, I did experience WWII as a young boy in occupied territory in Europe.

You know nothing and are totally ignorant.