Home
Delicious
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Stumble Upon
Technorati
Mixx
Sphinn
Twitter
SphereIt
Propeller
Gmarks
Newsvine
Yahoo! My Web
Live Journal
Blinklist
E-mailIsrael is worried that the Obama administration may very well cut or at least trim the $3 billion in annual aid the United States gives to the nation if Israel does not end illegal settlement construction in the occupied West Bank.
Senator and former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry has stated that if Israel does not heed demands to end settlement construction it is time to use “actions rather than words” to signal the seriousness of the United States to end the occupation. Kerry’s use of such language - to use “action” - can only mean one thing: he things the U.S. should withhold aid to Israel unless settlements stop.
Kerry also added at the Brookings Institution hosted event that Netanyahu’s proposed idea of what he calls an “economic peace” - a euphemism for Bantustans - “is not an alternative to a two-state solution.”
Kerry just came back from visiting Gaza and personally intervened on behalf of Palestinians to force the Israeli government to allow paste to entry the Stripe. Israel was blocking shipments of pasta on the grounds that the staple is a “luxury” good. This is the inhumanity of the Zionist state!
[The New York Times]
But will Kerry do anything? This is little a single senator can do on his own. It is impossible for Kerry to block aid to Israel on his own. Although the senator is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and aid for Israel passes through his committee, the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid may bypass the committee to pass aid to Israel. And if Kerry even tries it, Reid will circumvent the senator. All Kerry can do is voice objections, without at least 40 other senators Kerry cannot stop aid flows.
As for the Obama administration, Secretary Clinton could only offer the word “unhelpful” for Israel’s decision to demolish - ethnically cleanse - Arabs homes in occupied East Jerusalem. Israel says the homes do not have permits, but the same Israeli government refuses to handout permits so that the Arabs simply leave. Palestinians though refuse to be removed from their land and build anyway. The racist state of Israel demolishes Palestinians homes built without a permit, but allows Jewish settlers to build nearly wherever they want without a permit.
Although Kerry has not done much, his actions go beyond that of the Bushama administration.
RSS 
I had plnned to post this separately, and perhaps I will, but this is just for you:
What Apartheid is and is not…
This week is “Israel Apartheid Week” in North American universities. That being the case, it is an appropriate time for those who have bought into this emotionally-charged propaganda “buzzword” to find out what the term “Apartheid” actually means before they carry their protest signs to their demonstrations.
Apartheid IS: A deliberate government policy of social, political, economic, educational and physical separation and discrimination between the people of a single country based solely on race, such as existed in South Africa.
Apartheid IS NOT: A situation in which two people of the same race, for example two SEMITIC peoples, are at war.
Apartheid IS NOT: A situation in which one of these nations, having lost its own state in an attempt to destroy the state of the other, finds itself conquered by the nation it had tried to destroy.
Apartheid IS NOT: A situation in which this conquered nation, having been granted partial autonomy which they did nothing to earn, continues to attempt to kill members of the conquering nation, driving their own economy into ruin because they use their children as suicide bombers and human shields rather than sending them to schools built for them at foreign expense, and which they also use as military bases.
Apartheid IS NOT: A situation in which the conquering nation undertakes measures to separate its members from those of the other nation (a separation based entirely on ideology since no racial difference between the two nations exists at all) in order to keep the members of its nation safe while still continuing to assist the hostile nation economically.
And finally, it IS NOT Apartheid when the conquering nation undertakes this method of self-defense, which still leaves its citizens vulnerable to a large extent, only because they find the much more effective method of expelling the hostile nation from the conquered territory morally reprehensible.
Now, to believe that “Israel is an Apartheid state”, you have to believe the following:
1)That Islam and Judaism are races, not religions.
2)That the entire area of Palestine as defined by the League of Nations, including Israel, the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights and Jordan is a single national entity.
3)That the self-declared Palestinians are legitimate citizens of the State of Israel (which, by their own admission, they are not and do not wish to be).
4)That the state of Israel, or indeed any state, does not have the right to defend and protect its citizens from belligerent actions by foreign entities.
IF you can believe these four points, you can believe any fallacy presented to you. If that’s the case, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you… cheap!
Remember these facts the next time you wish to call Israel an “Apartheid State”.
Use these same criteria to see if your own country practices Apartheid.
I think you need to publish this as a post, not just a comment, so more can understand.
