Changes

==Haaretz exposed==

==Haaretz exposed==

Per [[Haaretz]]' Amos Shocken (2008),<ref>Haaretz (Hebrew), June 27, 2008.<blockquote>The word Apartheid is a catchy and understandable media headline in large parts of the world, and therefore it is useful for conveying the message that we rebel against it and claim that it has nothing to do with reality in Israel.  However, there should not be an identity between the characteristics of apartheid in South Africa and practices of discrimination concerning civil rights practiced in Israel, so that Israel can be called an apartheid state.</blockquote></ref> 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].

Per [[Haaretz]]' Amos Shocken (2008), seens to be excited about the apartheid as

a catchy word,<ref>Haaretz (Hebrew), June 27, 2008.<blockquote>The word Apartheid is a catchy and understandable media headline in large parts of the world, and therefore it is useful for conveying the message that we rebel against it and claim that it has nothing to do with reality in Israel.  However, there should not be an identity between the characteristics of apartheid in South Africa and practices of discrimination concerning civil rights practiced in Israel, so that Israel can be called an apartheid state.</blockquote></ref> 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> He knows there is no “apartheid” there, so he plays around with facts. He explains that it’s a catchy phrase.<ref>[https://www.e-mago.co.il/Editor/actual-2356.htm Haaretz newspaper incites again], Israel Bar-Nir, Maraah Magazine, 07/02/2008.<blockquote><font size=1>

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> He knows there is no “apartheid” there, so he plays around with facts. He explains that it’s a catchy phrase.<ref>[https://www.e-mago.co.il/Editor/actual-2356.htm Haaretz newspaper incites again], Israel Bar-Nir, Maraah Magazine, 07/02/2008.<blockquote><font size=1>

The "Haaretz" newspaper, in its last weekend edition, returned and incited against the State of Israel.  An editorial signed by, no less and no more, Amos Shocken, the editor of the newspaper, bears the title Israel the Apartheid[sic] State.

The "Haaretz" newspaper, in its last weekend edition, returned and incited against the State of Israel.  An editorial signed by, no less and no more, Amos Shocken, the editor of the newspaper, bears the title Israel the Apartheid[sic] State.