You can't now ignore that Israel is the state. And if that is the case, can they treat their citizens like this? How is it different from apartheid?
> demand on foreigners to inform the Israeli authorities within 30 days of starting a relationship with a Palestinian ID holder.
Most countries grill people who come on a touristic visa to stay with their SOs simply because there is usually a sperate visa scheme for that purpose.
The issue here is that the policy only targets part of the population, hence the outcry.
No it doesn’t. Palestinians are outside Israel. It targets specific foreigners, not Arabs or Christians or anyone else.
OK. Open a map. A map made by anyone. See a border? Not the same state.
Remember Sir John Diefenbaker's: freedom of speech is the right to say whatever you want, it is not the right to do whatever you want.
The moment those honkers started interfering with the tranquility, safety and professional activities of other people they were no longer doing free speech, they were doing vandalism and terrorism. BTW, it was terrorism supported by foreigners (in the US).
What was novel was the amount and time they spent doing those things. I had previously seen tractors occupy Wellington Street, and being generally very loud. For six hours. They afterwards left in orderly fashion, their point made. The convoy was delusional in the thinking that leaving after the protest was not part of the discourse.
Ironically, it was the mainstream media, the legends in their own minds streamers, and a few select looking-for-attention US channels that made it seem like they had a lot of popular support (through in-crowd shots, amplifying poorly substantiated claims, etc), where at best they have pockets of support.
Oh, and spend more than 30 seconds talking to them, and you'll see how quickly their ideas go to poorly researched conspiracy theories.
But it is amusing to see how some people here in canada are totally ok with that, and still manage to blame the US or whatever for pointing out that the federal government did exactly what it did. Demanding that the government steps down is legal, and is normal for a protest. We had it happen in quebec in 2012 during the student protests, but no one was calling that an overthrow attempt. And if the bar for basically stripping the citizenry of rights is "disruptive protests", then we don't have protest rights. Even the most reactionary right wingers in America weren't calling for suspending their constitution after the 2020 protests.
(And the discussion has nothing to do with popular support, no one was claiming they were supported by the majority. It's not even relevant, why would that matter when the problem was the insanely dangerous step of suspending charter rights. Trying to make it about something else is a red herring.)
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=my%20girlfri...