Anti-apartheid figures like the late South African theologian Desmond Tutu have said that Israel's apartheid is "in many instances, worse".
Frost: And at the same time, I mean, very much so you said that what you saw in Israel was something that was quite akin to the situation in South Africa before freedom came to the Black people of South Africa.
Also, B'Tselem compared the British in Ireland to Israel in Palestine and found that the IOF were far worse.
E.g. when it came to torturing:
The above indicates that the GSS used methods comparable to those used by the British in 1971, i.e., sleep deprivation, infliction of physical suffering, and sensory isolation. But the GSS used them for much longer periods, so the resulting pain and suffering were substantially greater. In addition, the GSS used direct violence. Thus, even if we accept the Landau Commission's contention that it recommended (at the time) more moderate methods than those used by the British, in practice, the GSS methods were substantially more severe than those used by the British in 1971. The conclusions reached by the European court regarding ""the five techniques"" cannot, therefore, be applied to GSS methods of interrogation.
Furthermore, already in March 1972, before the ECHR had given its decision prohibiting use of the ""five techniques,"" the British government, in the midst of a wave of terrorist attacks, stated that it would no longer use these interrogation methods.Great Britain did not try to justify its use of the methods to the court, by arguing that the wave of terrorism and the need to obtain information to save lives required their use. Rather, it admitted that ""the five techniques"" were unacceptable and forbidden, and undertook to cease using them. Since the British government's decision in this matter, Great Britain has not deprived IRA interrogees of sleep, has not covered their heads, placed them in painful positions, or played loud music in their ears. If ill-treatment does occur, whether of terrorists or other detainees, the action is considered a criminal offense and the perpetrators are subject to punishment.
Thus, Israel in 1999 continued to rely on interrogation methods used in Great Britain in 1971, twenty-eight years ago, for an extremely short period against only fourteen persons, which ceased immediately afterwards and became absolutely prohibited. In the meantime, European and international legislation and case law have increasingly strengthened the prohibition on torture and ill-treatment. Not only are interrogation methods that inflict physical and mental suffering no longer used, other basic rights of detainees are also ensured, such as the right to meet with their attorneys shortly after being detained.
Terrorist acts in England and Northern Ireland did not cease in the 1970s. Despite this, protection of prisoner rights in particular has steadily improved. In accordance with the recommendations of the Bennett Commission, Great Britain enacted legislation ensuring the right of detainees - including those suspected of terrorist acts - to meet with their attorneys within forty-eight hours of being detained, and all interrogations are taped in their entirety. As a result, the number of complaints of torture and ill-treatment fell sharply.
12
u/TrackerOneA Jewish Anti-Zionist 7h ago
Anti-apartheid figures like the late South African theologian Desmond Tutu have said that Israel's apartheid is "in many instances, worse".
Tutu then goes on to elaborate in the video.
Also, B'Tselem compared the British in Ireland to Israel in Palestine and found that the IOF were far worse.
E.g. when it came to torturing: