Apparently, Freedom House and The Economist’s Democracy Index, hardly bastions of pro-Israel sentiment, entirely disagree with your conclusion.
Were they too “influenced by decades of the most sophisticated propaganda in world history” too? Is everyone who disagrees with you because the facts contradict you similarly deluded? Is it possible that it is you who are mistaken?
Why not go with the actual definition of apartheid as provided in the international convention? Then you can see how disingenuous all the “sources” on which you choose to rely have been by redefining the term in the fine print (confident that few if any will notice the subterfuge) and then creating an echo chamber to provide a veneer of legitimacy for their falsehood. Under the convention, Israel is not and cannot be guilty of apartheid or maintaining an apartheid system. These groups’ political posture has nothing to do with actual legal argumentation, no matter the efforts to which they go to convince the unwary otherwise.
This comment is not addressed to you in particular, you seem too wedded to your ideological anti-Israel stance for this to make a difference, but to the fair and open minded reader who remains capable of absorbing facts.
Apparently, Freedom House and The Economist’s Democracy Index, hardly bastions of pro-Israel sentiment, entirely disagree with your conclusion.
Were they too “influenced by decades of the most sophisticated propaganda in world history” too? Is everyone who disagrees with you because the facts contradict you similarly deluded? Is it possible that it is you who are mistaken?
“Israel is an apartheid, human rights violating state. Period.“
In your personal humble opinion, of course. Not as a proven fact.
Why not go with the actual definition of apartheid as provided in the international convention? Then you can see how disingenuous all the “sources” on which you choose to rely have been by redefining the term in the fine print (confident that few if any will notice the subterfuge) and then creating an echo chamber to provide a veneer of legitimacy for their falsehood. Under the convention, Israel is not and cannot be guilty of apartheid or maintaining an apartheid system. These groups’ political posture has nothing to do with actual legal argumentation, no matter the efforts to which they go to convince the unwary otherwise.
This comment is not addressed to you in particular, you seem too wedded to your ideological anti-Israel stance for this to make a difference, but to the fair and open minded reader who remains capable of absorbing facts.
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.10_International%20Convention%20on%20the%20Suppression%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Apartheid.pdf
I spent a month in Israel. I don’t need to read about it. I saw it first hand.
Not sponsored by anyone but our own earnings.
🤣🤣🤣🤣