You are correct , but this policy in all its hideous glory was put forward as law by the ruling party.A slight walk back on wording to get it thorugh does not hide the fact that this is what isreal ruling party andlawmakers wanted . One should not just push it aside as it could of quite easily been law at this point .
Please do not forget what they wanted as law for the Isreal state .
I tagged you in on my viewpoint mate just now .
Agreed, that is what was the original. And I’m glad it has not become reality.
So it’s gone from;
“authorise a community composed of people having the same faith and nationality to maintain the exclusive character of that community”
To;
“The state views Jewish settlement as a national value and will labour to encourage and promote its establishment and development”
Hence, watering down the wording doesn’t change the fact a State has implemented a policy to ‘encourage and promote’ the ‘establishment and development’ of settlements for 80% of its population whilst downgrading the language of the other 20% of its people to “special status” (whatever that is).
Of course, a change of wording may be enough to appease your own issues with the policy but I’m struggling to understand it.
Have to admit I am glad that this change of wording was forced upon the ruling party to get this as law . I still do not agree with it as the minority voice is tamped down in a so called democratic state but we will have to see how it pans out .
What I will be interested in if Labour adopt the whole definition of antisemitism and or if it is wholly adopted or forced upon the party .
And if it's then OK to move on from that .
Different thread but, as I understand it, the definition itself is the same as everyone else but they’ve changed the text of the working examples.
Yes but the initial drafting was shot down and and a watered down bill has been passed and put into law . Good to see many have respect for others in their country and still have a voice .But we now know what and where the ruling party is headed and want for Isreal . It's out there now in the open, and will be tried again I expect.
Sorry, I was referencing the Labour anti-semitism claims, but I agree with your post with regards to Israel.
Good to see the bill watered down but still indefensible in parts.
From the bill :
7. The state views Jewish settlement as a national value and will labor to encourage and promote its establishment and development.
Compared to from the U.N. :
14 Delegations in Favour of Resolution 2334 (2016) as United States Abstains
The Security Council reaffirmed this afternoon that Israel’s establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders.
Adopting resolution 2334 (2016) by 14 votes, with the United States abstaining, the Council reiterated its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.It underlined that it would not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the two sides through negotiations.
It doesn't mention where those settlements are, sure they are walking a fine line as some will choose to interpret that as 'settlement in the West Bank'. But it doesn't actually say that.