| Revision as of 14:11, 6 August 2002 editEd Poor (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers59,195 edits NPOV vs. balance← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:15, 6 August 2002 edit undoUriyan (talk | contribs)1,634 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
| :Actually, the ] doesn't require "balance". It only requires that the contributor attribute the point of view to its actual author. So if some international organizations have redefined "]" or "]" to include Israels actions in the so-called "]", we need only report which organizations advocate these definitions. Even though you and I know they are 100% wrong, we can't use the Misplaced Pages as a bully pulpit. --] | :Actually, the ] doesn't require "balance". It only requires that the contributor attribute the point of view to its actual author. So if some international organizations have redefined "]" or "]" to include Israels actions in the so-called "]", we need only report which organizations advocate these definitions. Even though you and I know they are 100% wrong, we can't use the Misplaced Pages as a bully pulpit. --] | ||
| :: That's true, but I didn't delete (the reference to) Tutu's statement. I merely indicated the existence of 2 other views (one belonging to most countries world-wide and the other to Israel). Not mentioning them would also be wrong, since they are important to the discussion. --] | |||
Revision as of 14:15, 6 August 2002
Can anybody write something here on the beginnings and ending of apartheid in South Africa? Thanks.
I know the term originated in South Africa, but recently:
- apartheid was made a "human rights" violation, even for something as minor as not letting people organize a labor union
- a new supranational count (the ICC) claims jurisdiction to prosecute human rights violations everywhere in the world, even countries which did not ratify the ICC treaty
- my POV is that there's a trick here: the ICC/apartheid thing will be used selectively against Israel
A "trick"? Are Israel guilty of apartheid or aren't they? If they are, shouldn't they be made to stop doing it? GrahamN
If there is large enough group of people (e.g., Arabs in general or a specific Arab group or leader) who thinks Israel is guilty of apartheid, please mention this in the article. Suppose, for example that Mustapha Muhammed (to pick a name out of thin air) believes that Israel discriminates against Palestinians by not letting them form labor unions. Simply add that to the article. I would say something like:
- The UN definition of "apartheid" includes preventing an ethnic group from forming a labor union. Mustapha Muhammad, deputy commissinor of labor for the Palestinian Authority says that Israel is preventing Arabs in the West Bank from forming labor unions. They abolished the Hamas Haberdashers and Rug-Weavers local 319 in Jenin this summer.
Okay? Ed Poor
Okay. I will do some research. In the mean time I will delete the reference to Israel. GrahamN
- I've put the Israel paragraph back in, citing Desmond Tutu's April 2002 speech and providing links to its text. This was immediately vandalised by pro-Israel propaganda:
- "It has sometimes been argued, by supporters of the Palestinian cause..."
- The limitations Israel imposed upon the Palestinians are not shared by Israeli Arabs; supporters of Israel, therefore, claim that the Israeli policies are caused solely by political and military reasons, pending the institution of an independent Palestinian state or state-like entity.
- I've deleted the above on the grounds that this article is about apartheid, not about presenting an Israeli POV. Jacob
- You bring a charge here against Israel (that is, a POV saying that Israel's policies are Apartheid). Please be so kind as to entertain a counter-argument, or delete the discussion entirely. --Uri
- Actually, the NPOV doesn't require "balance". It only requires that the contributor attribute the point of view to its actual author. So if some international organizations have redefined "genocide" or "apartheid" to include Israels actions in the so-called "occupied territories", we need only report which organizations advocate these definitions. Even though you and I know they are 100% wrong, we can't use the Misplaced Pages as a bully pulpit. --Ed Poor
- That's true, but I didn't delete (the reference to) Tutu's statement. I merely indicated the existence of 2 other views (one belonging to most countries world-wide and the other to Israel). Not mentioning them would also be wrong, since they are important to the discussion. --Uri