Radiorahim, I would call it an occupying force and the Israeli's using tactics older than time, but more efficently than most.
I can see parallels to aparthied, just like there are parallels to segregation and frankly to things in Canada's past and to dozens and dozens and dozens of other situations historic and current. That doesn't make it aparthied though - it makes it aparthied like with some similarities, but also some very significant differences. What is happening through out the Palestinian/Isreali landmass is odious all on its own without borrowing phrases from a different place.
But then I can be a bit pedantic too.
No one is saying it is exactly the same as South Africa. No two systems in two different countries are exactly the same. But there is a legal definition of apartheid enshrined in international law which the Israeli state definitely lives up to. Because they are both apartheid states, there are bound to be parallels and similarities, just like there are bound to be parallels and similarities between, say, British colonialism in India and Belgian colonialism in the Congo. I call it apartheid because it fulfills all the legal definitions of apartheid, just like I call it speeding if I drive faster than the speed limit. The only difference is that for some bizarre reason, I don't get called a hatemonger and get condemned by the Ontario legislature when I point out someone speeding.
I don't like to give much credit to the UN, but there is a UN resolution defining apartheid from 1973, and an international criminal court resolution from 2002. So, I would be curious as to what your thoughts on those resolutions would be?