From Ofer Neiman:
Yad2 is a listing of second hand stuff and flats. The flat in question is located in the French Hill neighborhood, a Jewish neighborhood built after 1967 near Mt. Scopus, in occupied East Jerusalem.
Ad reads:
"Beautiful apartment including table and chairs. Wall closets. Breathtaking view. For Jews."
What, like this? link to life.com
There are so many links between Jim Crow and Shlomo Occupation..
Good thing you didn’t call it Shmuel Occupation ;-)
Is that legal? Every other country has strict laws about discrimination based on ethnicity or religion. Doesn’t israel? Or has it exempted itself from the universal declaration of human rights? I hope they are not going to lecture us again on how they are a ‘western -style democracy’, when they plainly are not, ignoring one of the fundamental tenets of those societies. If it is legal, then Israel should be ashamed, except of course they will be anything but. Jews-only housing, Jews-only roads – how can they dispute they are an apartheid state?
It is completely illegal under Israeli law. And if things like this are allowed to go on unchecked by laws and courts than be assured there will be much shame in and outside of Israel.
Do you have a link for “Jews only roads?” There are Israeli-only roads for sure.
Ah now, if such discrimination is illegal then maybe activists should start taking legal action against the myriad of elected officials who condone and encourage this behaviour. And of course it goes to the highest levels of the government, who are enshrining discrimination in many of the laws they pass. How can they have discrimination laws when every political action reeks of discrimination against the indigenous people? Unless, of course, they are there merely for show, with the tacit understanding that nobody has to follow them. Now, that couldn’t possibly be the case, could it?
“Do you have a link for “Jews only roads?””
tokyobk, I really urge you to peruse the archives here at Mondoweiss.
Unless, of course “same crap, different days” is the effect you are looking for.
And that wide-eyed disingenuousness? On you it doesn’t look good, baby.
Wait, don’t tell me, let me guess! You are a “liberal Zionist” and part of the “Israeli left”! I can tell by your unsparing, open-eyed and informed view of Israeli society and politics!
good observations and suggestions…
You know, Mooser, you’d make more friends for the cause with a bit less condescension. Practically speaking, you’re right. Technically speaking, though, Tokyobk’s question shows a high familiarity with the subject matter. The distinction on the roads is enforced by the color of the license plate, making it possible for an Israeli Arab to drive on the roads generally reserved for the master race. That said, should one do so and be pulled over for any reason, causing him or her to be identified as Arab, they may very well face harassment and suspicious treatment, but the cop would not be able to legally bar them from using the road.
Rechavia,
The assertion that the distinction on the roads in question is by license plate and not ethnicity (although technically correct) is, to quote Shulamit Aloni, “hityafyefut nefesh”. Without getting into the situation within the “green line”, the entire system and regime in the West Bank is designed to isolate, restrict and expropriate space from non-Jews for the benefit of Jews. For all intents and purposes, there is an apartheid regime in effect, that is absolutely a matter of ethnicity, regardless of the technical, bureaucratic, diplomatic and security excuses employed to make it somehow more acceptable to Israeli and western ears and eyes.
Similarly, one might say that the prohibition against “selling” (technically perpetual leasing) Israel Land Authority properties in Jerusalem (including French Hill) to anyone who is not an Israeli citizen or entitled to Israeli citizenship (i.e. non-Israeli Jews) is a matter of citizenship and not ethnicity, because it includes non-Jewish citizens of Israel. In fact it is a racist policy designed to limit the housing possibilities for Palestinian residents of Jerusalem – hopefully causing them to leave the city, thereby losing their residency status. It is equally disingenuous to say that they have been offered Israeli citizenship (see link to btselem.org ), so what are they complaining about?
It is paramount to denounce Israeli policies for what they are, and not for what they pretend to be – which inevitably softens (in appearance only) and excuses them, even in the mouths of critics.
Rechavia Berman…said,
“That said, should one do so and be pulled over for any reason, causing him or her to be identified as Arab, they may very well face harassment and suspicious treatment, but the cop would not be able to legally bar them from using the road.”
*****
“but the cop” … What cop are you talking about? Its NOT a cop … Its the Israeli IDF thugs with heavy machine guns to their sides & with fingers on the triggers…ready to take brutal action(s) against Palestinian drivers. The sky is the limit as to what the Arab driver will end up with!!!
Israeli Jewish settlers in the Occupied Territories are governed under civilian law, but the Palestinians are under Israeli military law.
Again, you need to distinguish between a Palestinian from the occupied territories, who is indeed forbidden from using the apartheid roads, and an Arab citizen of Israel, who is not. They use different license plates. The one the Arab from Jaffa, Haifa, Sakhnin, Nazareth, etc, uses is indistinguishable from the one an Israeli Jew uses, and therefore he would not be pulled over on sight. If he IS pulled over for any mundane reason, and thereupon discovered to be an Arab, the cop (or soldier, happy?) may give him or her a hard time, but would not be legally allowed to tell them “you may not drive on this road”. In fact many Arab teamsters and taxi drivers make a living driving routes in the OT which many Israeli drivers would prefer not to.
This is because the law pertaining to the apartheid roads distinguishes between citizens and non-citizens, not between Jews and non-Jews. The reason these roads are apartheid roads is that among the actual residents of the area, only the Jewish ones are citizens of Israel.
Do you see the distinction made now? It does not make the existence of apartheid roads anything less than odious and racist in general intent, but accuracy has its merits.
Also, you are mistaken in saying it would necessarily be an IDF thug. There is a civilian police force in the OT, in addition to the border police which, while manned by military recruits and well known for thuggishness, is under the purview of the police and not the military.
This is because the law pertaining to the apartheid roads distinguishes between citizens and non-citizens, not between Jews and non-Jews. The reason these roads are apartheid roads is that among the actual residents of the area, only the Jewish ones are citizens of Israel.
So it’s not exactly about citizens and non-citizens (a [non-Palestinian] US citizen, for example, would have no problem driving to Eilon Moreh – although trying to get through BG Airport en route to Nablus might be a problem if she tells the truth), but about the two different kinds of residents in West Bank. One is entirely native born, legally resident, entirely non-Jewish, and involuntarily provided all of the land for the roads in question. The other kind, includes many non-natives and even non-citizens (Efrat, for example, is full of tourists and A1 “toshavei keva”), resides entirely illegally in the area, is entirely Jewish, and was not required to provide any of the land for the roads.
Of all of the characteristics of these two groups – who are the only relevant groups for the purposes of deciding who may and may not use the roads in their area – which do you think is the decisive one? Citizenship or ethnicity? Besides, who has the “Jewish” state been stealing all that land for? All Israeli citizens? The Bahai? The Circassians?
“Similarly, one might say that the prohibition against “selling” (technically perpetual leasing) Israel Land Authority properties in Jerusalem (including French Hill) to anyone who is not an Israeli citizen or entitled to Israeli citizenship (i.e. non-Israeli Jews) is a matter of citizenship and not ethnicity, because it includes non-Jewish citizens of Israel.”
No, it doesn’t. JNF policy is flat out based on ethnicity (i.e. racist). An arab citizen cannot buy JNF land.
“In fact it is a racist policy designed to limit the housing possibilities for Palestinian residents of Jerusalem”
It has nothing to do specifically with Jerusalem and predates the Israeli conquest of East Jerusalem. It is designed to limit the housing possibilities of any Arabs anywhere in the country.
Conversely, an Arab citizen of Israel CAN drive on an apartheid road and many do, although again, they may be harassed if for some reason discovered, but they won’t be pulled over immediately based on the tlai kachol of their license plate… because they don’t have one. Only occupied Palestinians have that.
And what is paramount is to be accurate, and not jump down the throats of people who point out technical corrections and tell them they are ignorant when in fact their comment reveals a knowledge of the facts. Being accurate doesn’t soften anything. It just makes you more credible.
All you say about the intent of the roads is true. That doesn’t negate anything I or Tokyo said.
Is it the Israeli police or the IDF who are controlling the checkpoints and road blocks?
And if the Arab with an Israeli citizenship going through the military check point(s)…does he get ordered to pull to side of the checkpoint/roadblock more than likely/frequently… when compared to an Israeli Jewish citizen?
“There is a civilian police force in the OT, in addition to the border police which, while manned by military recruits and well known for thuggishness, is under the purview of the police and not the military.”
Let me ask you this…Are the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories ruled under Israeli civilian laws or military laws?
The reason these roads are apartheid roads is that among the actual residents of the area, only the Jewish ones are citizens of Israel.
And those roads specifically link those Jewish only settlements to Israel. Therefore, outside of the paid drivers you speak of, there is no reason for an Israeli citizen of Palestinian extraction to drive those roads. Therefore it is a distinction without a difference to call them Israeli-only roads versus Jews only roads.
In fact many Arab teamsters and taxi drivers make a living driving routes in the OT which many Israeli drivers would prefer not to.
Why do you refer to “Arabs” and “Israelis” here? For someone who is seeking specificity in others, this is is a very unclear sentence. Are the “Arabs” you refer to the Palestinians of the Occupied Territories? If so, how are they allowed to drive these roads since they are not citizens of Israel? And if the “Arabs” you refer to are the Palestinian citizens of Israel, then why did you distinguish them from “Israelis”, since they are Israelis too?
Rechavia,
I was not talking about JNF land, but about a certain type of property, of which there is a lot in Jerusalem, technically owned by the Israel Land Authority but permanently leased (effective sale) only to Israeli citizens (including Palestinians) or those entitled to Israeli citizenship by the Law of Return. Thus my parents could buy a flat in French Hill, as could a Palestinian colleague of my dad’s, originally from the Galilee, or a Jew from Tucson, but not a Palestinian resident of E. Jerusalem, born and bred down the street in Shu’afat (or even in the pre-67 Palestinian enclave in French Hill itself). Technically, it would be accurate to say that the policy is based on citizenship (and potential citizenship), when in fact, it is a policy of ethnic discrimination, part of a wider policy of ongoing ethnic cleansing in Jerusalem.
That is what I meant by my comparison. Yes, a Palestinian from the Galilee can drive on the network of settler roads leading to Eilon Moreh, but a Palestinian from Nablus (right near Eilon Moreh) can’t, and that is because only Jewish residents of the WB are allowed to use those roads. It is thus entirely accurate to call those roads “Jews only roads”, and incorrect (for the reasons I have explained) to say that it is a matter of citizenship. It is not – technically or otherwise.
Israel calls itself a democracy, and insists that it be treated as one. It is in fact an ethnocracy – with some trappings of a democracy, behind which it tries to hide the essence of its political system. In the OT it goes a step further, pretending that the situation is temporary, and that everything will be resolved by accord some day – while continuing to perpetuate its colonisation of the territory. Of course the colonisers have more rights. After all, they are citizens of the metropole! The distinguishing factor is citizenship. There is no apartheid or ethnic discrimination there!
I don’t think I jumped down anyone’s throat, and the facts presented were incorrect both in substance (the example of the US citizen I gave) and in focus (the only relevant discrimination is between populations resident in the territory itself).
“And if the Arab with an Israeli citizenship going through the military check point(s)…does he get ordered to pull to side of the checkpoint/roadblock more than likely/frequently… when compared to an Israeli Jewish citizen?”
Did I not say he does? I did. He does. This is wrong.
“Let me ask you this…Are the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories ruled under Israeli civilian laws or military laws?”
Of course under military rule. This is why I am the first to insist that the occupied territories are ruled under apartheid laws.
I love the way you zealots are so sure that anyone who dares debate any sort of technical minutia is a hasbara spokesman. It really is a recipe for success, I’ma tell you what…
“Yes, a Palestinian from the Galilee can drive on the network of settler roads leading to Eilon Moreh, but a Palestinian from Nablus (right near Eilon Moreh) can’t, and that is because only Jewish residents of the WB are allowed to use those roads. It is thus entirely accurate to call those roads “Jews only roads”, and incorrect (for the reasons I have explained) to say that it is a matter of citizenship. It is not – technically or otherwise.”
You are absolutely correct in your analysis, but incorrect in terms of semantics. That’s the only thing under debate.
“Israel calls itself a democracy, and insists that it be treated as one. It is in fact an ethnocracy – with some trappings of a democracy, behind which it tries to hide the essence of its political system. In the OT it goes a step further, pretending that the situation is temporary, and that everything will be resolved by accord some day – while continuing to perpetuate its colonisation of the territory. Of course the colonisers have more rights. After all, they are citizens of the metropole! The distinguishing factor is citizenship. There is no apartheid or ethnic discrimination there!”
I have zero dispute with any of the above paragraph. Zero.
And finally, it wasn’t you I was referring to regarding throat-jumping. It was Mooser, whom I addressed directly.
i didn’t think you were a hasbara spokesperson.
“And those roads specifically link those Jewish only settlements to Israel. Therefore, outside of the paid drivers you speak of, there is no reason for an Israeli citizen of Palestinian extraction to drive those roads. Therefore it is a distinction without a difference to call them Israeli-only roads versus Jews only roads.”
I agree with this analysis. Again, I was referring merely to semantics, and to the rude treatment of Tokyo who pointed out the semantics. Had the immediate comment to his been yours, rather than one assuming he’s ignorant of the details and necessarily an occupation apologist, I would have commented that you are correct.
“Why do you refer to “Arabs” and “Israelis” here? For someone who is seeking specificity in others, this is is a very unclear sentence. Are the “Arabs” you refer to the Palestinians of the Occupied Territories? If so, how are they allowed to drive these roads since they are not citizens of Israel? And if the “Arabs” you refer to are the Palestinian citizens of Israel, then why did you distinguish them from “Israelis”, since they are Israelis too?”
Obviously, I was referring to 48 Arabs, and I was distinguishing them from Israeli Jews precisely to point out that technically and semantically, the segregation of the roads is not ethnically based. If we compare Israel to Apartheid SA when appropriate, we should know to distinguish the two when appropriate. In SA, if any sort of facility was segregated, it was segregated to all members of the inferior ethnos, because there the racial aspect was paramount and not muddled by any sort of complication like 1948 vs. 1967.
You are absolutely correct in your analysis, but incorrect in terms of semantics. That’s the only thing under debate.
Sorry to insist, but if Jewish non-citizens of Israel resident in the WB may use the roads, but non-Jewish non-citizens of Israel resident in the WB may not do so, how is it a matter of citizenship? That’s on the technical level.
On the non-technical level, it is self-defeating to employ Israeli terminology and bureaucratic justifications (even when technically correct – which is not the case here) for what is for all intents and purposes apartheid.
Tokyobk was thus technically wrong in his correction, and was essentially saying to justicewillprevail (whether that was his intention or not) that things are not really as bad as all that. Discrimination between citizens and non-citizens does not seem quite as nefarious as discrimination between ethnicities, and it’s much harder to call apartheid.
Because the separation is based on the license plate. A non-Jewish, non-citizen, non-resident can also drive the apartheid roads – provided he’s driving a rental with a yellow plate, rather than a blue one. The ones excluded are the occupied ’67 Palestinians, who differ from their ’48 brethren in…. citizenship, or lack thereof. What Jewish person resides in the WB and doesn’t have citizenship? Do you figure there are many such, on the SETTLER side? On the solidarity side, perhaps. And they too will be stopped if they drive a blue-plated car. conversely, if a Palestinian buys, borrows, manages to rent or steals a yellow plated car, he will likely not be stopped – especially if, since he’s making an effort to “pass for Israeli”, all he has to do is put on a skullcap and pass any cursory glance.
Ed. to add: And since we’re nit-picking, a ’67 Palestinian cannot legally buy a yellow-plated car, so suppose it was an unregistered, cash deal. It was just an example anyway.
And it’s not a matter of adopting Israel terminology. It’s self-defeating to appear to deny what it technically true. The proper response to such an argument is “ah, technically true, they’re clever like that, but…” and then explain why in practice, it doesn’t matter as the object is to deny the use of the road to the local populace.
Obviously, I was referring to 48 Arabs, and I was distinguishing them from Israeli Jews precisely to point out that technically and semantically, the segregation of the roads is not ethnically based.
If you are going to argue on about being “technically and semantically” incorrect then YOUR sentence was likewise in error.
This was your sentence:
“In fact many Arab teamsters and taxi drivers make a living driving routes in the OT which many Israeli drivers would prefer not to.
Your sentence is making a distinction between “Arabs” and “Israelis” and yet you are now saying that these Arabs you refer to are in fact the Israeli Palestinian citizens. Israeli is not synonymous with Jewish. You clearly know that, and yet that is the way you phrased your sentence. If you demand a semantic “correctness” in others, it would behoove you to practice it more diligently yourself.
And if you truly agree, as you said, with my statement:
Therefore it is a distinction without a difference to call them Israeli-only roads versus Jews only roads.
then why are you expending so much effort disagreeing with a non-important semantic “distinction” when you are making an much more grievous semantic error yourself?
it does seem as tho ‘jewish only roads’ suffices if the examples of non jews on the road are lorrie and taxi drivers delivering goods and providing services to the settlers.
What Jewish person resides in the WB and doesn’t have citizenship? Do you figure there are many such, on the SETTLER side?
Reading all of this, I’m reminded of Sen. Alan Simpson’s wisecrack about performing a CAT scan on a gnat’s knee. Nonetheless, you have strayed off the subject of the link between road use and citizenship and brought up residency. As I understand it, Palestinians born and raised in a closed zone still need a permit to be there, but foreign Jewish visitors do not. So, couldn’t a non-citizen Jewish person, say on a Birthright junket, visit the Hebron area or other locales like Rachael’s Tomb and travel on “Israeli”-only roads during the visits to the occupied territory without raising these issues of citizenship or residency?
Rechavia Berman …said,
“Conversely, an Arab citizen of Israel CAN drive on an apartheid road and many do, although again, they may be harassed if for some reason discovered, but they won’t be pulled over immediately based on the tlai kachol of their license plate… because they don’t have one. Only occupied Palestinians have that.”
So what you are saying is that… Arabs who are Israeli citizens can drive on “for Jews only” roads so long as they have a yellow plate on their vehicles… provided the Israeli IDF/police are not aware that the drivers are Arabs.
So if the Israeli IDF/police had a roadblock for inspection purposes…any Arab with Israeli citizenship will have to face the consequences of some fanatic IDF/police zealots right there on the spot. Most likely a high cost ticket for whatever reason, kicked off the road(s) , a rifle butt or much worse.
If the driver is found to be Jewish, because his/her ID card states that, he/she will have NO problem…thank you & have a good day!
So whats the use of boasting about Israeli Arabs can drive on these “for Jews only roads”, when they have no guarantee/freedom to so without any problems/consequences from the Israeli IDF/police.
“I love the way you zealots are so sure that anyone who dares debate any sort of technical minutia is a hasbara spokesman. It really is a recipe for success, I’ma tell you what…”
Hmmm…!!!
The zealots , and for that matter fanatic zealots, they are the Israeli settlers, the IDF thugs/police. The ones who are responsible for making these racist rules/laws.
Israel’s racism/Apartheid is so transparent. The Palestinian population who lost their land/farms/groves to these “for Jews only” roads cannot walk or drive their vehicles on these roads. Its forbidden by the Israel’s oppressive occupation army. The goal is to keep them under control & under the IDF boots.
The roads are one of so many restrictions placed on the Palestinians by Israel’s brutal occupation!!!
Rechavia,
The license plates give the soldiers at the checkpoints a convenient way of sorting the cars. What really counts is ID cards. WB Palestinians in a yellow-plated car will not be allowed to continue, if stopped and checked.
Regarding the non-citizen residents, there are yeshiva students, American Jews who spend part of the year in “Israel” (I have some relatives like that in Efrat), and olim on A1 visas (תושב קבע) trying to figure out if they want to stick it out or not – a common practise among western olim. I am sure they far outnumber other foreign nationals in the WB.
You complain about nitpicking, but the entire discussion began when justicewillprevail was criticised for his accurate characterisation of the roads as “Jews only”. The definition proposed by tokyobk (which you incorrectly claim is “technically correct”) was “Israelis only”, which is, at the very least equally imprecise, but misses the essence of the division – the isolation, restriction and dispossession of non-Jews who challenge Jewish hegemony. The essence is not a matter of immigration laws (citizenship) or the DMV (license plates). It is about taking the land from those whom the state views as having no right to be there (only temporary sufferance) – because it is Jewish land (Jewish, not Israeli) and they are not Jews (פשוטו כמשמעו).
From the Rome Statute:
The context of the “inhumane acts” committed by Israel in the OPT is the “systematic oppression and domination” on the basis of ethnicity, regardless of the specific bureaucratic means used to carry it out. Highlighting the bureaucratic mechanism (especially when done incorrectly), rather than the essential ethnic discrimination, merely serves to absolve Israel of the crime of apartheid – with far-reaching legal consequences. Needless to say, this is extremely important, hardly nitpicking.
“You know, Mooser, you’d make more friends for the cause…”
Who on earth ever said I was trying to do that?
Reply
tokyobk …said/asked.
“Do you have a link for “Jews only roads?” There are Israeli-only roads for sure.”
{Shulamit Aloni is the former Education Minister of Israel. She has been awarded both the Israel Prize and the Emil Grunzweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.}
~~~~~~~~~
This Road is for Jews Only
Yes, There is Apartheid in Israel
By SHULAMIT ALONI
“On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. “Why?” I asked the soldier. “It’s an order–this is a Jews-only road”, he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. “It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?”
Indeed Apartheid does exist here. And our army is not “the most moral army in the world” as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention centre and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved ‘for Jews only’, on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an “ingenious proposal”.
Humanitarian activists cannot transport Palestinians either.”
{Shulamit Aloni is the former Education Minister of Israel. She has been awarded both the Israel Prize and the Emil Grunzweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.}
link to counterpunch.org
Humanitarian activists cannot transport Palestinians either.”
The Counterpunch article was written a day after eight human rights organizations filed a complaint with the High Court of Justice against the order, which was scheduled to go into effect on 19 January 2007. Its application was halted until further notice, due to what was termed “legal difficulties”.
On 21 March 2007, Major General Yair Naveh announced the cancellation of the order: Order on Movement and Travel (Restriction of Travel in Israeli Vehicles) (Cancellation) (Judea and Samaria) -2007 was entered into force that same day.
Here is the relevant portion of the petition which should make the nature of the “legal difficulties” abundantly clear:
A. “An Israeli Shall Not Transport a Non-Israeli”
1. This Petition concerns an unprecedented act of military legislation, which shamelessly cements in writing a prohibition on Israelis and tourists from transporting Palestinians in their own private cars inside the West Bank, which is subject to the control of the State of Israel and its army.
2. The directive implements the ideology of “segregation” (“us here and them there”) through statutes and law, while imposing a criminal sanction on members of different nationalities who meet in the private sphere of a passenger car, without a permit from the authorities.
3. We cannot claim a patent on the establishment of a legal system of segregation, since human history is familiar with methods of racial or other “segregation”, as was the case in South Africa during the apartheid and in the Southern U.S. states until the 1960s.
4. It is hard to believe, but we too have reached this low point. Twenty three years after 1984, the Big Brother of the West Bank empowers himself to control the identity of the people we transport in our cars across the West Bank. Sixty years after the “separate but equal” doctrine was declared illegal in the United States, Major General Yair Naveh, with the acquiescent support of Minister of Defense Amir Peretz, establishes a legal structure of “separate and unequal” in the West Bank.
5. The Directive is the climax of the process for the legal cementing of institutionalized, methodical and deliberate discrimination against the Palestinians residing in the West Bank versus Israelis and foreigners being in this region either permanently or from time to time. Along the timeline of the segregation/discrimination process, we may find, inter alia, the directives, edicts and orders which together created the “separation fence zone” between the separation fence and the green line, and which established the “permit regime”, which renders the zone an area prohibited to Palestinians and open to Israelis; as well as the parallel existence of two separate criminal law systems, the one – military, rigid and outdated, which applies to Palestinians, and the other – modern, liberal and civilian, which applies to Israelis.
6. And yet, from among all the red lines we have crossed, the Petitioners believe that the directive “on traffic and transportation” carries with it a particularly evil seed, as it is a directive which compels civilians to be active agents of discrimination;. it being a directive which so grossly invades the private realm; and mainly due to its objective of ripping social, professional, political and personal ties and forcing the “segregation” also upon those who may not be interested in it.
7. We have said “the process for the legal cementing of institutionalized, methodical and deliberate discrimination”, to which we will now add the broader context – it is a process which is designed to tighten the control of one national group over another. Here lies our disgrace at its worst: The combination of the two is precisely the legal definition of apartheid.
Alice Walker writes (my boldings): “I thought of my niece as I found myself approaching Jews Only roads with a van filled with Palestinian Arabs. Our driver conscientiously pulled over to wait for the appropriately colored license plate (on another van, into which we moved) that would permit us to continue. The Palestinian license plate color is green: the Israeli one yellow. In fact, on the night of our arrival, we had noticed our driver had turned off the big, new American looking highway onto a poorly constructed and congested road that in fact was blocked at the top of a steep hill. The driver, muttering, had turned around on a dangerous curve and continued on the main road. Nervous, I now realized, because it was illegal for him to be on it.
Now here, I thought, was something even white Southerners had not thought to segregate, the very roads!“
Illegal under Israeli law? That would depend on how Israel twists the law to make it legal. There is no equlity in Israel amongst all its citizens so the word “legal” is absolutely meaningless. The very “Law of Return” in Israel is based on the Nazi Nuremberg Laws that were used to deprive anyone of whom Germany deemed “Jewish” their rights except here, it gives Jews (or rather who Israel defines as Jews) the privileges and deprives others of their rights.
When you have Rabbis who are employed by the municipality and can make public statements and gather petitions not to rent to “gentiles,” this specifically means other than :”Jewish.” It appears the process of bringing charges against any of these people is a rather slow one, if it happens, and I doubt if they’ve been fired from their jobs. That would not even happen in Germany today, and if it did, there would be an uproar heard throughout the world. If a man has to fight over eleven years with two trials to buy a piece of property in a community obviously for Jews only because he is not a Jew, then legal/illegal are meaningless.
tokyobk,
Illegal shmillegal. If they can do it – link to haaretz.com – and even they can do it – link to haaretz.com – why can’t ordinary folk do it to?
As for “Jews only roads”, what do you call roads that some residents (Jewish settlers) of a given territory are allowed to use, and others (Palestinian non-Jews) are not?
Can someone photoshop this into English?
I was led to understand (something that appeared in Haaretz about 5 years back) that land purchased by JNF going back a century had Jews only covenants attached. I mentioned this is a blog comment and the resident Zionists denied it vigorously. Does someone know the history of these “covenants”? What is their status today?
ToivoS,
From the moment of the establishment of the State of Israel, the mechanisms became far more complicated than simple covenants (technically illegal), but no less efficacious, and the JNF has played a central role in keeping Palestinians (and Mizrahim) off expropriated Palestinian land, as well as legally-purchased land. Oren Yiftachel has written a lot about this – in his book, Ethnocracy: Land and Identity Politics in Israel/Palestine, and in various articles, including this one, available online: link to geog.bgu.ac.il
Recent initiatives in Knesset have, of course, been designed to fill the “lacuna” that makes it technically illegal not to rent or sell property to Palestinians (as well as other “undesirables”).
Years ago, a friend told me that his parents had signed an “illegal” agreement (one that could not be pursued in a state court) when they purchased their West Jerusalem apartment – not to rent or sell to anyone but Orthodox Jews, in order to preserve the “atmosphere” in the building and the neighbourhood.
“in order to preserve the “atmosphere” in the building and the neighbourhood.”
Oh, I remember that. You could cut it with a knife.
I mentioned this is a blog comment and the resident Zionists denied it vigorously.
You were correct, and the “resident Zionists’ were wrong, whether knowingly or not.
You can see the wording of the original covenants in this 2007 article from the Israel Law Resource Center, as reprinted from Walter Lehn’s book, The Jewish National Fund. (scroll down to the section on Land Laws.
link to israellawresourcecenter.org
Ilan Pappe describes the actions of the JNF during this early period thusly:
Ilan Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, pages 17-18
toivoS, i highly recommend the The Diaries of Yosef Nachmani the Jewish National Fund’s main agent in the Tiberias region. same nachmani in trees post. if you’re short on time start around pt 3 but the whole thing is excellent.
Thanks all. We all know the de facto situation but it is difficult to find the legal justification.
I looked at some of these references. It is complicated. There are many details for the Zionist to point to denying the existence of land covenants (though there was one in 1925, but the Israeli Supreme court seems to have repealed it in recent decades, even though zoning and land bureaus do not seem to incorporate those rulings in their decisions, therefore making the whole subject impossibly difficult to discuss, hence the problem does not exist). Ironic, isn’t it, Franz Kafka who was presumably a Zionist wrote an absolutely brilliant story in The Castle about bureaucratic totalitarianism based on endless rules. The Israelis have perfected that to an art form.
I do not believe Kafka would be a Zionist today.
ToivoS,
These complications are the foundation of the “Jewish and democratic” fallacy. They must be exposed for what they are – individually and as a system.
Ironic that Israel’s critics are accused of waging “lawfare”, when Israeli ethnic cleansing and apartheid are concealed within a web of legal and ostensibly reasonable mechanisms.
Shmuel I read your comment three times before it occurred what you meant by when Israeli ethnic cleansing and apartheid are concealed within a web of legal and ostensibly reasonable mechanisms.
Isn’t this the Kafkaest manifestation of modern Israel?
Sorry if I was unclear. Yes, Kafkaesque in a sense, although the motives and methods of the Israeli bureaucracy are pretty transparent.
Adam
French Hill isn’t a “Jewish neighbourhood”. It isn’t even in Israel.
It is a SETTLEMENT , a JEW-ONLY COLONY in the occupied territories and is illegal under international law.
It is, frankly, very sloppy of Mondoweiss to adopt the Israeli view of the Jerusalem settlements.
Witty’s “self-determination” at work.
>> Witty’s “self-determination” at work.
Well, I have to admit that this sounds peaceful:
>> “Beautiful apartment including table and chairs. Wall closets. Breathtaking view. For Jews.”
And, as we all now know, RW is all about “peace, not ‘justice’”. So, in a sense, this is exactly the kind of thing he might envision. :-)
CUE THE MUSIC: “Well we’re movin on up, To White City. To a deluxe apartment in the sky. Movin on up. To White City. We finally got a piece of the pie.”
MY SNARK: Only in Israel would a new, luxury, high-rise residence building (in Tel Aviv) proudly bear a name like “White City”! It is so reminiscent of South Africa, circa 1980.
~~ Move on up to White City! – Sorry, no coloureds allowed. ~~
White City – link to white-city.net
White City residence (exclusive, luxury residence in Tel Aviv)
[VIDEO, 09:55] – link to youtube.com
Soon to come to a West Bank city, as soon as we can get it. White City.
>> White City
Nice building, stunning view…and not even the faintest trace of Israel’s ON-GOING campaign of aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction and murder. Very impressive.
George might be dazzled by it; Weezie, probably not.
And Jews were pissed off because American country clubs refused to let THEM in.
;-) Never thought of that. Gonna have to use it at the local bar next time I get in a fight when I’m carrying Jack Ross’ book.
My Mother always told me to stay out of bars. I do my reading in opium dens.