I'm not sure what you mean. I'm saying that the reason that Arabs with Israeli passports are not allowed to enter certain areas of the West Bank is because no one with an Israeli passport is allowed to enter those areas.
> What I pointed out is that there are areas within Israel where Arabs with an Israeli passport cannot enter.
Actually you said
> in the occupied areas Arabs WITH Israeli passports are not allowed to visit certain areas
But in any case, since you also said "multiple sources online" perhaps you can link one so we're talking about something concrete and not just vague insinuations.
By occupied areas I did not mean Area A of the West Bank, I meant settlements considered "Israel".
It is trivial to find more sources than the one I already mentioned, there is a very very long wikipedia article as a starting point. I'm afraid you do not care about seeing what is going on, you care about dismissing opposing opinions.
You did not link to a Wikipedia article. Unfortunately I do not have the resources to watch Louis Theroux's documentary, which I'm sure is full of his characteristic dry takes.
"I'm not inclined to continue to try to drag it out of you." and "I don't welcome your assumptions about [me]" are personally abrasive. The site guidelines don't explicitly say "please don't be personally abrasive" but they cover that kind of thing with more general statements like "Be kind", "Edit out swipes", and so on.
Of course the GP post was outright aggressive, not just abrasive, and that is considerably worse. But we need users to stick to the guidelines regardless of what other commenters do. Not insisting on that just leads to a downward spiral, especially since it's human nature to underestimate the provocation in one's own comments.
Oh Dan, come on, really?! OP has been making all sorts of claims and failed to justify them with any more than "just look it up", and also making all sorts of assumptions about me. Saying what I said was about the most kind I could be in response. I guess I could just simply not contribute, as I had planned, but tomhow did explicitly ask me to here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44720318
Continue dragging it out of me ? You said that you are too busy to watch a documentary which portrays how the actual situation is there and the mentality of the settlers. I guess you're too busy arguing on hackernews.
Okay then, read a few sentences of the wikipedia article. Or should I spoonfeed them to you ? Okay, sure:
In a 2007 report, UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine John Dugard said, "elements of the Israeli occupation constitute forms of colonialism and of apartheid, which are contrary to international law"
On 21 March 2022, Michael Lynk, the UN's Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, submitted a report[180] to the UN Human Rights Council stating that Israel's control over the West Bank and Gaza Strip amounts to apartheid, an "institutionalised regime of systematic racial oppression and discrimination."
In 2020, the Israeli human rights organization Yesh Din said that Israeli treatment of the West Bank's Palestinian population meets the definition of apartheid under both Article 7 of the 2002 Rome Statute
On 1 February 2022, Amnesty International published a report, Israel's Apartheid Against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime Against Humanity,[203] which stated that Israeli practices in Israel and the occupied territories amount to apartheid
Want more ? Read the damn article and the sources yourself. And not random reddit or quora posts. I'm done here.
Your proof of apartheid was supposedly "in the occupied areas Arabs WITH Israeli passports are not allowed to visit certain areas". That's the claim that I'm challenging. Sorry if you thought I was discussing something else. If so then I can understand why you'd be confused.
No one with an Israeli passport is allowed to visit Area A of the West Bank, regardless of their ethnicity.