Agnon's Palestinian relatives denied Israeli citizenship

[Violet_Crumble]

The story is about the relatives of an Israeli Nobel prize winner

S.Y. Agnon's Palestinian relatives, residents of East Jerusalem, contend with the same issues that preoccupy many other Palestinians. Despite being the offspring of a Jewish mother, and despite being related to the Agnon family, they have trouble obtaining Israeli citizenship.

As reported in Haaretz Thursday, Agnon's niece, Esther Wiener, married Jawad Nashashibi, and they had three children - Suheila, Suheil and Siham. The Interior Ministry defines them as Muslim, making them ineligible for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return. However, they have documents stating they were born to a Jewish mother.

The children claim their mother converted to Islam after the 1948 War of Independence, when she moved with her husband and children to East Jerusalem. The ministry claims that according to the rabbinic court, Esther Wiener-Nashashibi was Muslim when she gave birth to her children. Upon returning to West Jerusalem in 1967, she went back to being Jewish and received Israeli citizenship, but by then her children were over 18.

Nevertheless, one of her granddaughters received Israeli citizenship in 1995. Inas Dakak-Shamasna, Suheila's daughter, was married at the time to an Arab Israeli, but the Interior Ministry reportedly told her she was being granted citizenship because of her Jewish mother and grandmother.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/735864.html

[AndyTiedye]

1. Smells Like What they Used to Do in South Africa

deciding who was "white enough" to be accorded the privilges of a white person there,
and who got sent to the "homelands".

[Behind the Aegis]

2. not quite.

But, then again, the whole "Israel is Apartheid" meme is pretty weak on its own.

[Selatius]

4. Not legally, but as far as humanitarian issues, it's far stronger n/t

[Behind the Aegis]

5. not even close...but that doesn't stop the rhetoric. n/t

[Selatius]

7. So the humanitarian situation on the ground is not even close to...

the humanitarian situation in the Bantustans of Apartheid-era South Africa? No comparison whatsover?

[Behind the Aegis]

8. No.

Do you know what a "Bantustan" is? What you and others fail to see, is the comparison to SA is a failure on many levels. However, it doesn't stop the rhetoric. Why use "apartheid?" Because, for the simple and under/uneducated it evokes an emotional response. Besides, what does it have to do with the article that was posted?

[Selatius]

9. Then you should probably take your argument up with...

Nelson Mandela in person:

http://www.mediamonitors.net/arjan28.html

Or Desmond Tutu in person:

http://www-tech.mit.edu/V122/N19/19tutu.19n.html

Perhaps the problem is not whether it is apartheid or is not apartheid. Perhaps the problem has more to do with the fact Israel would even be remotely in a position to invoke comparisons at all.

[papau]

11. Few countries are not "remotely in a position" to invoke comparisons

But Few countries are not "remotely in a position" to invoke comparisons to apartheid at some level.

In the mediamomitors article, "Nelson Mandela in person" is not Mandela - The author of the 2001 article is Arjan El Fassed, a Dutch-Palestinian political scientist, human rights activist and is affiliated to the the Palestine Right to Return Coalition (Al-Awda) and ElectronicIntifada.net who has a few quotes from Mandela. He ignores Taba which had no "Bantustan" concept, points out the pre-Taba Camp David "Bantustan" concept as the current offer and demands the end of Israel via right of return for the losers of a war.

http://www.mediamonitors.net/arjan28.html

And in the commondreams article "Desmond Tutu in person" is also not Tutu - but like the above it has a few quotes from Tutu in an article written by Haroon Siddiqui that also quotes very pro Arab position folks like author Breyten Breytenbach and "leading Jewish anti-apartheid activists", Ronnie Kasrils and Max Ozinksi.

But as to Tutu:


"Nobel Laureate Bishop Tutu spoke last month at a conference in Boston. Excerpts:

"In our struggle against apartheid, the great supporters were Jews. They almost instinctively had to be on the side of the disenfranchised, of the voiceless, fighting injustice, oppression and evil ... I am patron of a Holocaust centre in South Africa. I believe Israel has a right to secure borders ... "

"I have been very deeply distressed in my visit to the Holy Land; it reminded me so much of what happened to us blacks in South Africa. I have seen the humiliation of the Palestinians at checkpoints and roadblocks, suffering like us when young white police officers prevented us from moving about."

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0516-01.htm

Seems Tutu equates occupation humiliation to apartheid humiliation - and that is all.

[Behind the Aegis]

12. Why?

They aren't the ones at DU making the false charges. Besides, just because they "say so," doesn't make it fact. As for Apartheid, Saudi Arabia is a much better example, though no one complains about it, or does so rarely. Still, you haven't answered the question, even if an accurate statement, what does it have to do with this article?

[Selatius]

15. To be frank, the question should probably be brought up with AndyTiedye

Since he invoked comparisons between South African citizenship requirements during apartheid to this particular case. My problem is attempting to grasp how the situation average Palestinians face every time they ask permission to move across Israeli checkpoints and access roads and can and sometimes do face collective punishment is radically different from what the average black person in South Africa faced with white police officers and soldiers of the government.

[Behind the Aegis]

16. And, frankly, that is not what the OP was about!

You are an intellectual type, so why you persist in this worthless propaganda? Your "questions" have NOTHING to do with the topic at hand. There is no collective punishment, only a country deciding who can be a citizen, and who cannot.

[Violet_Crumble]

19. And the decision on who can be a citizen is based on bigotry...

If yr Jewish, yr in. If yr Muslim, yr not. How is that any different than the citizenship laws in a few Arab countries that you have complained about in the past?

[Behind the Aegis]

21. DING DING DING!

We have a...

...well, at least you are starting to get it!


And this is like Apartheid how? This is like "Ethiopian blood feuds" how?

This is like any country deciding, rightly or wrongly, who can be a citizen of said country. However, the only time it is a real problem, is when Israel makes exceptions! I sure haven't seen your protests about SA not allowing Jews in their country, much less being citizens!

[Violet_Crumble]

22. South Africa refused citizenship based on race...

In this case Israel is refusing citizenship based on race/religion/ethnicity. And this is why it isn't as you claim just like any other country deciding, rightly or wrongly, who can be a citizen of said country. Unlike you, I have always spoken out against discrimination based solely on race/religion/ethnicity regardless of which country does it (and I can supply you with posts from the archives if you are actually interested in what I think)...

Do you agree that this case is one of discrimination against family members of an Israeli based on race/religion/ethnicity?

[Behind the Aegis]

23. Again, you miss the point.

"South Africa refused citizenship based on race...In this case Israel is refusing citizenship based on race/religion/ethnicity."

Not the same, but, let's pretend it is. SA was trying to deny citizenship to her OWN people! This is not what is happening in Israel, despite the claims of Israeli-haters.

I do have to say, this makes me laugh..."Unlike you, I have always spoken out against discrimination based solely on race/religion/ethnicity regardless of which country does it ..." As if you know anything about me! This is just another of those...what did LH call it..."the Palestinians-are-always-right-and the Israelis are always the bullys"...well, something to that effect, in reverse.

"Do you agree that this case is one of discrimination against family members of an Israeli based on race/religion/ethnicity?" I am sure if I did disagree with it, you could negate my disagreement. :rofl:

[Violet_Crumble]

24. It seems you have...

Not the same, but, let's pretend it is. SA was trying to deny citizenship to her OWN people!

Last time I checked, Israel has annexed East Jerusalem, so Israel is trying to deny citizenship to her OWN people...

do have to say, this makes me laugh..."Unlike you, I have always spoken out against discrimination based solely on race/religion/ethnicity regardless of which country does it ..." As if you know anything about me! This is just another of those...what did LH call it..."the Palestinians-are-always-right-and the Israelis are always the bullys"...well, something to that effect, in reverse.

Okay, I asked you very clearly whether you agreed that it was a case of discrimination based against family members of an Israeli based on race/religion/ethnicity and you refused to say whether you agreed or not. Why is it so hard to answer the question? If you think that it's discrimination when carried out by a few Arab states that engage in it, why would you think otherwise when Israel does it?

[Behind the Aegis]

25. LOL!

You so :crazy:!!!

Israel hasn't annexed anything...YET.

Why should I answer you? I owe you nothing, you said as much in another post. Or is it, only your questions are worthy of answers?! :rofl:

[Violet_Crumble]

26. Israel annexed East Jerusalem in 1967...

While it never annexed Gaza, and hasn't yet annexed parts of the West Bank, it definately did annexe East Jerusalem...

Many Israelis are opposed to any division of Jerusalem, based on cultural, historic, and religious grounds, although there is increasing public discourse in Israel about reinstating as part of the West Bank and the eventual Palestinian state, outlying Palestinian villages and neighborhoods which were not part of Jordanian East Jerusalem from 1949 until 1967 and were annexed by Israel to Jerusalem in 1967. In a recent poll, 49% of Israelis back Jerusalem division i.e. willing to cede parts of Jerusalem in the framework of peace deal with Palestinians <3>

Most Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem (about 250,000) are not Israeli citizens, but hold legal permanent resident status to live and travel within Israel. According to 1988 Israeli Supreme court ruling, this status also makes them eligible for Israel Social Security benefits and state-provided health care <4>.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Jerusalem

In June 1967, following the Six-Day War, Israel annexed some 70 sq. km to the municipal boundaries of West Jerusalem, and imposed Israeli law there.

http://www.btselem.org/English/Jerusalem/Legal_Status.asp

Why should I answer you? I owe you nothing, you said as much in another post. Or is it, only your questions are worthy of answers?!

1. Because this is a discussion forum where grown-ups participate and the general idea is an exchange of questions and ideas in a civil environment...

2. Because you said in a post in this thread where I pointed out that you haven't displayed any of the opposition to this sort of thing when Israel does it that you do when it comes to Arab states doing it: 'As if you know anything about me! This is just another of those...what did LH call it..."the Palestinians-are-always-right-and the Israelis are always the bullys"...well, something to that effect, in reverse.' So, you've got a chance here, bta. You can say whether you agree with it or not and let it stand on yr own words and opinions.

[Behind the Aegis]

29. see post #25

[Violet_Crumble]

30. Why? It's a FACT that Israel annexed East Jerusalem...

As for yr perseverence in refusing to indulge in any constructive discussion, including refusing to answer what was a very easy question, based on the tenor of what you have said in this thread, I think it's safe to assume that you don't think this is discriminatory when Israel does it, yet think it is if Arab states do the same thing in reverse. Of course if I'm wrong feel free to correct me :)

[Violet_Crumble]

18. I think there are comparisons when it comes to the OT...

And East Jerusalem is occupied territory....

[DELUSIONAL]

3. sure sounds like it doesn't it -- just a "little" bit of racism

And then I was greatly sadden to see the following:

Most Israelis want Hamas leaders assassinated-poll


By Reuters


The vast majority of Israelis believe the Jewish state should assassinate leaders of the governing Palestinian movement Hamas in response to the crisis in Gaza, a newspaper poll published on Friday showed.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article13896.htm

[Behind the Aegis]

6. Do you have link to that poll?

I can't find one. I am trying to see what was asked. If you can find it, let me know. The English version of Ma'ariv is not working.

[papau]

10. self delete

n/t

[MrPrax]

13. Too much like it...

or too much like dumping of Ethiopian blood in 1996.

Those people got AIDS, you know, so you might as well dump it. Of course AIDS and HIV is rampant in Russia, but they didn't toss that blood, as the Navon Commission ruled, for 'sound medical reasons'.

[Behind the Aegis]

17. and the remarks get stranger and more irrelevant! n/t

[MrPrax]

27. Hardly...

The purpose was to

1) avoid comparing Israel to South Africa because the comparison IS problematic and there are more than enough 'standalone' aspects to Israeli racism to simply dispense with such comparisons. Like the posted topic as I SEE IT.

2) to present supporting information to the posted topic to show that what is happening to Agnon's family is NOT an aberration but a there is an increasingly strong element of racism in Israeli society recently reflected in the tremendous gains in the last election of Yisrael Beytenu. The example of the continued racist treatment of Beta Israel is germane to the posted topic as it shows a blatant hypocrisy that really can ONLY be understood within the racist mindset of exclusion and NOT the egalitarian principles upon which Israel was founded.

But I suppose I could just post snappy oneliners pronouncing judgement on what is relevent or irrelevent without any supporting statements, on an open forum...OR

I suppose I could just say 'your stupid' and 'your dumb' and 'you know nothing' as well...but since that isn't YOUR style of air-posting, I will refrain.

Now I am getting ready to watch the World Cup final...

Go France!!!

[Behind the Aegis]

28. still makes no sense...

The OP is about granting citizenship and you are babbling about AIDS and tainted blood. They are hardly relevant, but whatever; at least you see the flaw in the "apartheid analogy," that's a good step.

[UndertheOcean]

14. What I don't understand is this...

The article says that Agnons relatives are Jerusalem residents... don't those readily get Israeli citizenship is they ask for it , but most don't ask for it , like what is claimed on many websites

[Violet_Crumble]

20. I don't know how readily they get citizenship...

The story promoted seems to be that Palestinian residents of East Jerusalem are all able to get Israeli citizenship, but refuse to. I've got some doubts about how true that is, but I've never really looked into it much to know for sure one way or the other...