Tuesday, December 29, 2009


Mainstream consensus: Israel is an apartheid state

What? You don't believe me? Jimmy Carter, you'll recall, took a lot of flak from the "establishment" (politicians, pundits, and media) for using the word "apartheid" in conjunction with Israel, even though he was insistent that he was only referring to the West Bank, not to "Israel proper," and has subsequently apologized even for that. So how can I claim there is a "mainstream consensus" that Israel is an apartheid state?

Well, consider the recent news. Here's The New York Times reporting on the latest development:

Israel announced Monday that it would build nearly 700 housing units in Jewish areas of Jerusalem.
And here's AP, making things even more explicit:
Israel announced Monday it is building nearly 700 new apartments for Jews in east Jerusalem.
Now I ask you: how much clearer a description of an apartheid state can you imagine than describing a country as having "Jewish areas" or building houses "for Jews"? Can you imagine reading an article that read "the United States has announced that it will build housing for Blacks (or Whites!)," or referring to "Black (or White!) areas" of Washington, D.C.?

By the way, I can't find an official statement from the Israeli government, but I'm guessing that their "housing tender" did not include any mention of "Jewish housing." That it was "Jewish housing" was understood, and so well understood that both AP and The New York Times labeled it as such, without any prompting. Apartheid? You bet, even though you can also bet that neither AP nor the Times would be caught dead using that word.

Update: By the way, the proper legal term under international law is "occupied East Jerusalem," not "Jerusalem" as the Times has it or "east Jerusalem" as AP refers to it.

Why stop here? There's more...

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com High Class Blogs: News and Media