In Israel proper the laws are equal, plenty of Arabs live in Israel with the same rights as anyone else. In territories they occupy the laws are unfair, but I don’t know of any democracy that gives people in occupied territories equal rights

Do you have any proof of your particular claim? Like give a link with an example of it. Sorry to say but I’m immensely skeptical. I could claim lots of things and it could not be true.

1. Israeli forces’ systemic denial of fair trial rights to Palestinian child prisoners amounts to arbitrary detention June 1 2023

They shutdown a foreign media outlet specifically for the duration of a war. Undemocratic, but not beyond the scope of democracy.

You said it, yourself. Undemocratic. Plus the two separate laws does not really define ''democratic'', does it? A Apartheid regime cannot be democratic. Not only that if they are so democratic, why shut it down? Freedom of speech is a part of being democratic which means allowing real news and evidence to be spread into to the world, to let others know what is going on.

1. Democracy or Apartheid: You Can't Have Both
2. Freedom of expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society
3. Israel prevents hundreds of worshippers from entering Al-Aqsa on first night of Ramadan

This is discrimination not by law but by the people that enforce it, unfortunately democracy can’t effectively fix the biases of its citizens.

Two different laws makes it by itself already discriminating against the Palestinian people. Makes it more worse when people do not even ‘obey the law’.

The reason they are a democracy is because they have elections that determine the ruling party in the legislature. In 2022 a right wing party got the most votes and successfully created a coalition government. If the government does unpopular things then they will lose votes in the next election and be removed, ideally this limits unpopular government policy.

Not sure if I said it in this thread or somewhere else but Israel is on paper ‘’democratic’’ but in reality they are not. In January there was a poll done whether the Israeli want their Prime Minister to stay or be gone and the majority of the Israeli do not want their current prime minister and he keeps being in power.

1. Only 15% of Israelis want Netanyahu to keep job after Gaza war, poll finds

they have the same laws for all citizens. jews, muslims, druze, etc. palestinians living in the west bank are citizens of the pa (or jordan), not of israel. the situation in area c of the west bank is a result of the failed oslo accords and bibi’s policy of “status quo”.

So first of all, Wikipedia is not a trustable source at all and therefore dismissed. This is because everyone can edit the Wikipedia page. For example, I can edit a page and then claim it is true. There's no one really who keeps tabs on how trustable it is. Not only that, Wikipedia even says that one of the pages you gave is not really trustable ''This page does not provide license information'' and the page can be deleted. Thus not trustable.

Wikipedia is a good starting point but not a (trustable) source to back up claims.

My point stays the same; Israel is on paper ''democratic'' but in reality they are not. You cannot be democratice while having:

• Apartheid system.
• Unfair judgement to Palestinian people.
• Unfair sending Palestinians to prison (many whom are children).

And everything else they do to the Palestinian people.

There are whistleblowers on how Israel litteraly tortures Palestinian people, article of this is the 3rd one. Do you consider this an actual ''democratic'' state?

1. Wikipedia is a wiki, meaning anyone can edit nearly any page and improve articles immediately. You do not need to register to do this, and anyone who has edited is known as a Wikipedian or editor.
2. Declaration of Independence (Israel) & This page does not provide license information.
3. Strapped down, blindfolded, held in diapers: Israeli whistleblowers detail abuse of Palestinians in shadowy detention center

shutting down a state backed media group that has ties to the muslim brotherhood (hamas is a branch of theirs), from a hostile state that hosts the billionaire leaders of hamas, is similar to the shutting down of rt in europe - which is a state backed media group of a hostile state.

Huge claim but no link to a trustable source. I'm honestly not sure whether this is true however then here's my question: Why shutting it down now and not decades ago? If it is true, it means they knew it already and never done anything about it until Israel decided to commit another ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people and worse, genocide.

posting something twice and then replying to someone with a similar link isn’t “spamming”. pointing out the reality of this specific action / situation isn’t “defending” anything. that’s a very black and white view of things. same as when i criticize a state it doesn’t instantly mean i’m against it or hate it.

I do not understand what you mean here nor to what you are referring to.

I don’t have time to give a complete argument back (yet) but where are your sources for your claims?

I’ll respond in a day or two entirely.

Whataboutism doesn't disprove my argument. Reality is inconvenient indeed.