JoetheMoe25 (talk | contribs) |
|||
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
::Nevertheless, for proper context this Constitutional equality provision should be mentioned early in the article. [[User:Motsebboh|Motsebboh]] ([[User talk:Motsebboh|talk]]) 22:39, 16 October 2016 (UTC) |
::Nevertheless, for proper context this Constitutional equality provision should be mentioned early in the article. [[User:Motsebboh|Motsebboh]] ([[User talk:Motsebboh|talk]]) 22:39, 16 October 2016 (UTC) |
||
Malik Shabazz, I suggest you be a man and keep your child-like ranting to yourself. The American Constitution did not guarantee freedom from slavery until 1865 and legislation was passed to abolish the African slave trade in 1808. Not to be prejudice at all, but even your username hints at anti-Israel bias.[[User:JoetheMoe25|JoetheMoe25]] ([[User talk:JoetheMoe25|talk]]) 00:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC) |
|||
After reading that message you sent to my user page, I now laugh at how much of a hypocrite you are. Apparently, you can't keep cool either. The text clearly states protection based on race, sex and religion. Though I can't prove this claim, maybe protection of religion was the reason why godless Moshe Dayan didn't tear down the Rock of the Dome when he captured it during the Six-Day War. The Black Power movement is lost. Grow up.[[User:JoetheMoe25|JoetheMoe25]] ([[User talk:JoetheMoe25|talk]]) 01:48, 17 October 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:48, 17 October 2016
Discrimination C‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Index
|
||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
First photo
Why does the first photo show a picture of anti-racism when this is an article about racism? It's sort of misleading in that it portrays Israel as inherently anti-racist. Also, there is nothing in the article that mentions the photo, so it is a bit strange. Furthermore, there are no equivalent photos like that in the Racism in America article, or the Racism in Russia article. The photo's positioning seems odd, and if it must be kept, I suggest it be placed in another section of the article.Thanks.
Depo Provera prescription controversy
The first sentence of the article from The Independent:
- Israel has admitted for the first time that it has been giving Ethiopian Jewish immigrants birth-control injections, often without their knowledge or consent.[2]
"Without their consent" = "forcibly". — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:24, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
- The independent article is sourced with Haaretz article [3] which says "Health Ministry director general instructs all gynecologists in Israel's four health maintenance organizations not to inject women with long-acting contraceptive Depo-Provera if they do not understand ramifications of treatment." The sentence which I question is the following; I"n 2013, the Israeli government admitted it forcibly injected birth control to Ethiopian Jews." There is a huge difference between receiving treatment while "not understanding the ramifications of treatment" and forcefully injecting birth control which means that Israeli government acknowledged that it forcibly (by using force) injected birth control to Ethiopian Jews. The term "forcibly" I do find any official Israeli document. I nowhere find that the government of Israel admitted forcibly injecting Ethiopian Jews. The Telegraph article on same Haaretz publication says "Haaretz says the Ethiopian women were "coaxed" or "strongly convinced" to have the Depo-Provera shot, not forced. The idea that they were given it without their knowledge springs from the testimony of a few women who simply said "they weren't aware the shots were birth control"; that could be down to these individual women's lack of understanding or confusion, says Haaretz, since "the vast majority of the Ethiopian women who received Depo-Provera were aware it was birth control and received it willingly".[4] However, even if they received treatment without knowledge or understanding ramifications, this is very much different from being forcibly injected. If the Israeli government accepted responsibility for forcibly injecting Ethiopians, (which does not seems to be the case) certainly such document should be added in references.--Tritomex (talk) 09:24, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
- You're mistaken. The Independent article quotes the Haaretz article, but it's not "sourced" to it. There are facts in the Independent article that are not in the Haaretz article, such as the quote from Sharona Eliahu Chai.
- You're also jive. In your edit summary, you wrote "I red [sic] all 3 sources and nowhere it says that Israeli government ADMITTED it FORCIBLY injected birth control."
- The fact is, there was a source, quoted above, that says in its first sentence that the Israeli government admitted it forcibly injected birth control. What do we do on Wikipedia when there are conflicting sources? We report what the various sources say. We do not engage in original research, such as "I nowhere find that the government of Israel admitted forcibly injecting Ethiopian Jews." — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:25, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- Just as an FYI, I argued that forced population control by race is a form of segregation. I am currently being overruled. So, if anyone else is interested in voicing their opinion, I invite them to visit here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Racial_segregation#Israel_doubtful.2C_some_cases_onlyTrinacrialucente (talk) 06:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
- You do realize that they didn't sterilize them... they gave them birth control. And because of fear of dengue and malaria in africa, not because they are black. --Monochrome_Monitor 12:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- Do you have reliable sources for that reasoning? Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 00:25, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- You do realize that they didn't sterilize them... they gave them birth control. And because of fear of dengue and malaria in africa, not because they are black. --Monochrome_Monitor 12:50, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- Just as an FYI, I argued that forced population control by race is a form of segregation. I am currently being overruled. So, if anyone else is interested in voicing their opinion, I invite them to visit here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Racial_segregation#Israel_doubtful.2C_some_cases_onlyTrinacrialucente (talk) 06:00, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Racism in Israel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121026012140/http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1014706.htm to http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1014706.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. Link rot had already set in before url was archived. Worldbruce (talk) 05:08, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:30, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Absolutely no mention of the Ethiopian blood donation controversy?
When Ethiopian-born Jewish parliament member Pnina Tamano-Shata wanted to donate blood, she "was told that Israelis of Ethiopian origin were not allowed to donate for fear of spreading HIV".[1] All this article contains on this bizarre matter is a depressingly short fragment that spends 90% of its words in defence of the practice by the ADL (because Ethiopians have more HIV and whatnot) rather than describing it. What is that all about? Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 00:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
The 1948 De Facto Constitution Guaranteed Civil Rights Regardless of Race
It specifically says the Declaration "will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex."[5] — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoetheMoe25 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- So what? Do countries necessarily follow their constitutions? The American constitution guaranteed liberty, but millions of Africans were held as slaves. You're engaging in prohibited original research, and as I wrote in my edit summary, you're violating WP:LEAD. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:02, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Malik Shabazz, I suggest you be a man and keep your child-like ranting to yourself. The American Constitution did not guarantee freedom from slavery until 1865 and legislation was passed to abolish the African slave trade in 1808. Not to be prejudice at all, but even your username hints at anti-Israel bias.JoetheMoe25 (talk) 00:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
After reading that message you sent to my user page, I now laugh at how much of a hypocrite you are. Apparently, you can't keep cool either. The text clearly states protection based on race, sex and religion. Though I can't prove this claim, maybe protection of religion was the reason why godless Moshe Dayan didn't tear down the Rock of the Dome when he captured it during the Six-Day War. The Black Power movement is lost. Grow up.JoetheMoe25 (talk) 01:48, 17 October 2016 (UTC)