How would they be doing that? Secret archeological digs in the middle of a bustling city with Israeli security forces watching everything? Unlikely.

You also simply misunderstand the issue. There's no doubt at all the Second Temple existed. Plenty of historical evidence for that. Less so for Solomon's Temple, though I think on balance it's clear it existed.

Many Palestinians claim that Solomon's Temple not existing somehow undermines Israel's legitimacy as a state. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but that's the dispute. Not that there was never a Temple, but that there was no First Temple.

Who cares? If they want to challenge Israel's statehood, they have more than enough reasons from 1948 alone.

Narrator, thanks for posting your opinion and asking for ours. I don't think the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is about land or religion. I believe it is about basic human rights. Many Palestinians have been denied basic human rights for many years as a result of violent acts that some of them have committed. Demolishing homes is a good example of lack of basic rights. Can you imagine if the American government demolished homes of criminals in the United States but only if they were black for example? Not long ago there was apartheid in Africa yet people don't see that Israel is an apartheid country. Even the Israeli-Arabs that live inside Israel and are citizens are not treated as equals. Did you know that a Jewish Israeli child gets five times more financing for schooling than a Muslim or Christian Israeli child? Also, Israeli Arabs cannot own certain types of land. In the West Bank things are much worse. Palestinians cannot use the new roads that Israel builds for the Jewish settlers. Palestinians are subjected to humiliation at checkpoints and are not free to move around. Women and babies have died because their cars were not allowed to reach hospitals to give birth. In Gaza, Palestinian fishermen are not allowed in areas were there are fish but Israelis can fish there and then sell the fish in Gaza to the Palestinians! During armed conflicts many Palestinians starve to death. It's very sad that Israelis and many people in the West believe that Israel must be strong and defend itself without asking what motivates people to threaten it.

Arab citizens in Israel proper do face discrimination, but calling it "apartheid" is, to put it mildly, hyperbolic. Under apartheid, South Africa never let blacks into parliament and even revoked the citizenship of blacks. Nothing of the sort goes on in Israel proper. Are Arabs in Israel treated the same as Jews? It's obvious they are not. But not all discrimination rises to the level of "apartheid."

And at any rate, the Arab citizens of Israel are treated much better than Palestinian refugees in Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt, where even after generations in the country they still do not have citizenship and are only allowed to work in a few select occupations and must live in the refugee camps. But no one ever says Syria, Lebanon, or Egypt practice apartheid. I wonder why?


As for Israel's actions in the Occupied Territories, that's a separate matter. Still not one rising to the level of apartheid in my opinion, but it's plain that Israel is not always in the right as many politicians would have us believe. But if you want a just, peaceful solution to the dispute the answer is not to run around screaming "apartheid." It's factually wrong and hyperbolic claims like that de-legitimize the cause of Palestinian statehood in the eyes of many people who otherwise would be allies.

http://web.archive.org/web/20090622083122/http://www.hsrc.ac.za/Document-3227.phtml

You many want to consider that last post, since even South Africans consider Israel to be an apartheid state.

Israel was one of the few countries that kept relations with South Africa when it was being boycotted for apartheid. Of course the later government would have a reason to condemn Israel. There were even rumors that Israel helped the South African government test a nuclear weapon.

"You many want to consider that last post, since even South Africans consider Israel to be an apartheid state."

Whether the South Africans or any other country "consider" Israel to practice apartheid is irrelevant. What matters are the facts. The facts are that in Israel proper nothing of the sort exists. In the Occupied Territories illegal Israeli settlement building makes life intolerably difficult for Palestinians, but nevertheless still does not rise to the level of what apartheid was.

Again, no one accuses an Arab state for practicing apartheid when they impose worse conditions on their Palestinian refugees than exist in Israel proper or the West Bank. Still wondering why.

"The human rights abuses on both sides (Israelis and Palestinians) are so atrocious that the West should simply let the region go to Hell."

+1 !!!

Re: letting the region go to Hell. "Washing one's hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral." Paulo Freire.
Invictus, it's very convenient to dance with words and differentiate between Israel proper and occupied territories and to point the finger at other Arab states to legitimize Israel's horrible actions. Israel chooses not to give Palestinians any real autonomous control. I don't know if you have been following the events in Syria, but Assad has used chemical weapons and scud missiles on Syrians themselves. It is ridiculous to compare his treatment of Palestinians to Israel's treatment of Palestinians. Israel is an ally of the West and should be held accountable by the same standard as the West not compared to a sociopath like Assad.

It is important to remember one very sobering fact, these human rights abuses carried out by the Israelis are not only supported but actually financed by the US Govt and the US taxpayers, Israel will never stop the abuse while this continues to happen, same as Saudi Arabia.
The US says it supports the spread of democracy throughout the world but maybe they should focus instead on supporting basic human rights, turn off the supply of weapons to the Israeli army and you would see a very different approach to the issue from the Israeli govt.

" it's very convenient to dance with words and differentiate between Israel proper and occupied territories and to point the finger at other Arab states to legitimize Israel's horrible actions. Israel chooses not to give Palestinians any real autonomous control."

It's not dancing with words to differentiate between Israel proper and the Occupied Territories. Arab citizens of Israel are just that: citizens. They have full rights equal to those of Jews. Is that true in practice? Not really. But The situation of Arab Israelis is hardly apartheid, since Israeli law, on paper, gives them equal rights. If apartheid is anything, it's not that.

It's plainly false to say Israel does not give Palestinians real autonomous control. The PA runs all the population centers of the West Bank. Is there still an occupation? Of course. But it's not as if the Palestinians do not have self-government, albeit a woefully inept one.


"I don't know if you have been following the events in Syria, but Assad has used chemical weapons and scud missiles on Syrians themselves. It is ridiculous to compare his treatment of Palestinians to Israel's treatment of Palestinians."

I'm not comparing Assad's recent crimes with Israeli behavior. I'm comparing the way Arab states have treated Palestinian refugees with the way Israel treats it Arab citizens. The difference is right in the name. For generations, Palestinians in Egypt, Syria, and Lebanon have been forced to remain in refugee camps, given limited opportunities for employment, and never given citizenship. But Israel is the one practicing apartheid?

I think Invictus is right, you can't get much more civilised than send someone a text message or a phone call in the middle of the night telling them you are just about to have their house blown to pieces, I'm sure there are a few orphaned children pissed off with their dead parents for switching their mobile off or putting their phones on silent. Carlsberg don't massacre innocent civilians but if they did I would like to think they would do it the Israeli way ..... so classy!

It's like you're having a conversation with yourself, NigeeBaby. I'm no blanket apologist for Israel and have been consistently critical of its illegal settlement building and semi-yearly assaults on Gaza. The discussion now is over whether Israel practices apartheid. I say no and have backed it up with evidence, and all you can do is trot out the same tired talking points.

Maybe Invictus is right. It would be nice if we could setup an independent think tank that can assess the situation in detail, look at the facts and decide if Israel is an apartheid. I doubt this will ever happen because as soon as anyone contemplates doing that they are accused of being anti-Semitic and their views are not relevant anymore. One more point which is very important is the right of return. Jews from around the world are allowed to immigrate to Israel and become citizens. If Israel was not an apartheid why doesn't it allow Muslims to move back to the country they were born in and still own property in?

oh Nigel

Oh those wiley jews and their crys of anti Semitism.

Why is everyone so fucking afraid of being called an anti Semite. Just being a Jew qualifies me as a genocidal Palestinian hater to about half a dozen people on the board, what is so sacred about being called an anti Semite rightly or wrongly?

I think it's hard to point at any one line and say that when a state crosses it, it's apartheid. Certainly, I'm inclined to agree that Israel's policy's are a long shot from that of the former South African government. But they're comparable, to be sure, and Nigee highlights some of the Apartheid-like policies. It's worth saying, "They're not that bad," but the comparison is not as hyperbolic as it should be, if you ask me, given that the United States funds and pledges allegiance to this state.

The United States pledges allegiance to Israel? We don't even have a defense treaty with them.

As for apartheid, the discussion from people making that charge against people is illustrative. "Apartheid" is just a word used for blanket criticism of everything Israel does and is. This is *exactly* the swivel-eyed anti-Zionism that sadly delegitimizes the broader movement in favor of a Palestinian state.