Democrats publish draft platform language on Middle East

[ericson00]

http://www.jpost.com/US-Elections/Democrats-publish-draft-platform-language-on-Middle-East-459279

The Democratic Platform Committee has published its first draft of language on party policy for the Middle East for 2016.

The language, first obtained by The Jerusalem Post earlier this week, was negotiated and affirmed at a meeting of the committee in St. Louis last weekend.

"A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States because we share overarching strategic interests and the common values of democracy, equality, tolerance, and pluralism," the platform draft reads. "That is why we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself, including by retaining its qualitative military edge, and oppose any effort to delegitimize Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement."

I like, I like. BDS is un-American and has no place anywhere.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

1. Yay for continued apartheid!

[ericson00]

2. the Party doesn't believe in the

Israel-is-apartheid lie.

The Greens might, and certainly the Communist Party might.

[Scootaloo]

3. And in the 50's, the party supported apartheid here in the US

And I'm sure if you found polls from the era, you would see a majority of Americans supported it, too.

Majority opinion does not translate into ethical standard. This is just something that the party is wrong about.

[ericson00]

4. Arabs sit in the same parliamentary chamber as non-Jews in Israel

that is the ANTITHESIS of apartheid. In apartheid South Africa, until 1984, only whites sat in Parliament, and from 1984-1994, whites got the top chamber, Coloureds (mixed race) got a lesser house, and Indians got a lesser one than coloured, while blacks never sat in apartheid South African parliament.

[Scootaloo]

6. And there were black state and US legislators during Jim Crow.

Jim Crow must be a myth, then? As you note, colored South Africans had a lesser house, and Indians a lesser one still. So they must not have been subjects of South African apartheid?

And of course, all instances of apartheid must cleave perfectly in every way to South Africa's. Sort of like how only Italian fascism can actually be fascism.

Except that's not the case at all.

Different states operate their oppressive, racist policies in different ways because - get this - they are different states with different cultures, histories, and outlooks. it does not lessen the problem, it's just a different variation on the same problem.

When Palestinians ruled by Israel have representation in Knesset - and those representatives have power and weight equal to their non-Arab counterparts, you may have an argument to go on. But currently Israel rules big swatches of Palestine, and Palestinians have no say in how they are governed. In other parts, Israel rules by proxy, and Palestinian still have no say in how things are managed. In the third and final parts of Palestine, Palestinians do have self-rule... and Israel has effective veto power.

You want to claim there is no apartheid? Then work to either end the occupation or incorporate Palestine into Israel fully and legally. Because so long as Palestine is ruled by Israel, while Israel treats Palestinian land as Israeli land, while affording no rights to the people on that land, then you have an apartheid system. One distinct from the South Africna model. Which was distinct from the Namibian model. Which was distinct from the Rhodesian model. Which is distinct from the Us model. Which is distinct from the Lebanese model. Which is distinct from the Kuwaiti model. Which is distinct from the Australian model. Which was distinct fro mthe Indian model. But all are / were apartheid systems.

[shira]

11. I think you should demonstrate to the classroom how the actual definition of Apartheid...

....applies to the situation with Israel, without that definition also applying to every other western democracy on the planet.

Definitions are kind of important.

Or you can just acknowledge there is no definition of Apartheid that matches the description in Israel and that the charge is bullshit.

See, it isn't that Israel doesn't match S.Africa in every way, it's that Israel in no way is an Apartheid state. There is no definition of Apartheid anywhere that demonstrates Israel is apartheid anymore than such a definition would apply to any other liberal democratic nation. Same for Jim Crow, BTW. I'm sure you know that...

Go on now before the classroom. Show how the situation in Israel matches the DEFINITION of apartheid. This isn't the time for propaganda, gimmicks, or hyperbole. No personal insults or attacks, no bullshit. Just the facts. Justify that position of yours. Provide a definition, any definition. You can do it!

Give it your best shot and show us what you've got. Take your time...

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

10. The USA also gives to Saudi Arabia; another a-hole country.

It's easy for some to believe that these rogue states are bastions of freedom when what they hapoen to be are human rights violators.

But please, dream on...

[shira]

12. Now Saudi Arabia is an Apartheid country. You know that, right? n/t

[Little Tich]

5. It remains to be seen if the language about providing "the Palestinians with independence,

sovereignty, and dignity" will lead to any measures whatsoever aimed at facilitating a two-state solution during the next Presidency, unlike during this one.

Time is running out for the two-state solution, as the recent Quartet report shows.

[ericson00]

7. maybe the Palestinians should start acting civilized and not like animal savages

and then they could have their state. Blowing selves up so one can not only evade responsibility but potentially meet Allah and 72 virgins, stabbing people, etc. is evil.

[6chars]

8. Dignity: the state or quality of being worthy of honor or respect.

Last edited Sat Jul 2, 2016, 06:36 AM - Edit history (1)

there is no dignity in calling for the intentional murder of innocent civilians, in brainwashing children to love murder of innocent civilians, in committing intentional murder of innocent civilians, or in celebrating and paying rewards for the intentional murder of innocent civilians.

Dignity is to be earned, not provided.

[ericson00]

9. that principle is lost on way too many people

who call themselves "progressives."

[grossproffit]

13. Excellent! #ImWithHer eom

[ericson00]

14. I found a cool graphic that demonstates why Americans stand with Israel:

(shoulda had this up yesterday tho for July 4)