Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, Moderators, protect
28,123
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 433:
Line 433: + + + + +
Israel Apartheid slur (view source)
Revision as of 15:15, October 14, 2021
, 15:15, October 14, 2021no edit summary
Columnist at the ''Washington Post'' :<ref>Michael Kinsley, "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/11/AR2006121101225.html It's Not Apartheid]." The Washington Post, December 12, 2006</ref><blockquote>It's not clear what he means by using the loaded word "apartheid," since the book makes no attempt to explain it, but the only reasonable interpretation is that Carter is comparing Israel to the former white racist government of South Africa. That is a foolish and unfair comparison, unworthy of the man who won -- and deserved -- the Nobel Peace Prize for bringing Israel and Egypt together in the Camp David Accords, and who has lent such luster to the imaginary office of former president.</blockquote>
Columnist at the ''Washington Post'' :<ref>Michael Kinsley, "[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/11/AR2006121101225.html It's Not Apartheid]." The Washington Post, December 12, 2006</ref><blockquote>It's not clear what he means by using the loaded word "apartheid," since the book makes no attempt to explain it, but the only reasonable interpretation is that Carter is comparing Israel to the former white racist government of South Africa. That is a foolish and unfair comparison, unworthy of the man who won -- and deserved -- the Nobel Peace Prize for bringing Israel and Egypt together in the Camp David Accords, and who has lent such luster to the imaginary office of former president.</blockquote>
==Haaretz exposed==
Per Haaretz' Amos Shocken (2008), there is no need for there to be any identity between the regime in Israel and the regime in South Africa called by that name. Suffice it to say that the use of the word constitutes, in Schocken's opinion, "an absorbing and understandable media headline in large parts of the world, and is therefore useful for conveying the message."<ref>[https://mafyahu.wordpress.com/2017/04/20/%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A9%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%91%D7%94%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%A5-2-%D7%94%D7%90%D7%9D-%D7%93%D7%99-%D7%9C%D7%94%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%93%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9F/ Antisemitism in Haaretz (2): Is it enough to show a "family resemblance" to Der Stürmer ("The Assailant")? of course not].
Apr 20, 2017.<blockquote>And when there were allegations against the generous use of this propaganda term, Schocken had an explanation. Here is an article he published in his newspaper back in July 2008: "Among circles..." That is: to use the insult of "apartheid" against Israel, there is no need for there to be any identity between the regime in Israel and the regime in South Africa called by that name. Suffice it to say that the use of the word constitutes, in Schocken's opinion, "an absorbing and understandable media headline in large parts of the world, and is therefore useful for conveying the message."</blockquote></ref>
==Omar Shakir and the Apartheid slur==
==Omar Shakir and the Apartheid slur==