Cheri DiNovo hits "delete" button on Norway, as she did last year on Israeli Apartheid Week

26 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Cheri DiNovo hits "delete" button on Norway, as she did last year on Israeli Apartheid Week

A true believer in democratic discussion.

Unionist

Cheri DiNovo has now DELETED the entire page which we were discussing in the first Oslo thread - the one where she responded to the horrendous loss of life by saying:

Cheri DiNovo wrote:
"Fundamentalist extremism is the antithesis of faith's love of enemy and peace."

And, when challenged by some of her Facebook friends about jumping to conclusions without evidence, said:

Cheri DiNovo wrote:
An Islamisist group has claimed responsibility.

If you click on the [url=http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150720511920230&id=73... first posted by Polunatic2[/url], you now get a page saying:

Quote:

This content is currently unavailable

The page you requested cannot be displayed at the moment. It may be temporarily unavailable, the link you clicked on may have expired, or you may not have permission to view this page.

So - it never happened.

Déjà vu. In February 2010, after DiNovo passionately spoke in favour of a Conservative motion to condemn Israeli Apartheid Week, she was challenged too by Facebook friends. She responded by deleting their posts and "de-friending" them - Muslim women and activists, among others. Those who were censored started Facebrook groups to protest, but "someone" complained to Facebook and the groups were deleted, one after another. One or two survive to date, but they don't name DiNovo. This was discussed in detail on rabble last year:

[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/central-canada/facebook-blowback-about-israeli-a... blowback about Israeli Apartheid Week vote in Ontario Legislature[/url]

... among other threads.

DiNovo favours fascist suppression of activists who condemn Israeli apartheid, as well as practising her own suppression of those friends who dare to question her in open debate.

The good news is that by destroying the evidence - neither apologizing, nor defending her stand, just deleting - she tells the whole world what kind of creep she is.

Until she changes her behaviour, she does not belong anywhere where progressive and democratic people gather, people who are looking to change this world for the better.

takeitslowly

but she support trans people! i have a soft spot for her since i am trans. Its sad that people cannot be consistent in their values..

Sineed

Cheri DiNovo is my MPP, and to be honest, she scares me a little.  There was the incident where she fired her staff by e-mail in the wee hours, only to hire them back after sobering up.  And of course these incidents mentioned above.  She is famously mercurial and thin-skinned.

But it's this same pugnacious temperament that causes her to fly off the deep end sometimes that also serves her well in activism.  She has fought tooth and nail for the rights of GLBT people, and performed some of the first same sex marriages in Canada in defiance of her church.  She fights for the rights of poor people in this riding of whom there are all too many.  She shows up in support of many community events.

I don't think she should edit her FB either. But she's an effective proactive MPP who puts her foot in it sometimes.  And I think she would have difficulty transitioning to the federal party.

Uncle John

Don't say anything nasty about Cheri or the good burgers of P-HP will accuse you of running a smear campaign, even if what you say is true :)

Cheeseburger

Unionist

Fortunately, our [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/oslo-explosion-0... babble Oslo thread[/url] included a few direct quotes before DiNovo was able to wipe out her page.

Her opening reaction to the Oslo tragedy was this:

Cheri DiNovo wrote:
"Fundamentalist extremism is the antithesis of faith's love of enemy and peace."

When challenged by one of her friends as to why her instinctive reaction would be like this, she replied:

Cheri DiNovo wrote:
"An Islamisist group has claimed responsibility."

When posters continued to challenge her apparent Islamophobic reaction, she stopped replying. Here was some of the dialogue (I had omitted the names of these posters when I quoted these passages in the original Oslo thread):

Poster A wrote:
But Cheri is not alone and not to blame, almost my entire office said the same thing today and that was before their were any reports at all, I was very proud of the one woman there who said it was too early for anyone to know. We have been conditioned by those who profit from our fear.

And this response:

Poster B wrote:
It doesn't matter if there are bigots in your office. They are not elected officials of a major political party, nor are they representing a party that prides itself on being socially responsible and anti-racist.

They can speculate all they want, based on the cheap prejudices that are bandied about in the media.

MPP's need to rise above all that and offer thoughtful and responsible commentary -- not pop-off about Muslims fundamentalist Extremists because some anonymous internet entity (that could be run by absolutely anyone -- even the real perpetrator or his allies seeking to discredit honest Muslims) called "Helpers of Jihad" makes a twitter posting on the internet claiming responsibility. 

 

 

Life, the unive...

I know this will get me a warning, but I don't care.

I can't believe what a petty asshole you have to be to put this much effort into attacking an MPP from a province in which you do not live, from a party you do not support, who, while not  perfect, has still done some important work for communities you pretend you care about.

Hate begets hate, and you are just a minor example of the extremism we see from others.  A fundamentalist whether from a religous group, political philosophy or any of the other ways we humans divide ourselves are all the same.  And you continue to fit that mode and regularly spew hateful speech towards those who dare to see the world differently than you.  When you get to be perfect on every issue every time please let us know.

Cheri Dinovo used to be a Minister near my home early in her career and I have never particularly liked her, but your ongoing mysogynist fixation with her is more than distasteful and says far more about your failings to live up to an even half assed level of common decency than it does about any failings and sins of Ms DiNovo.

Unionist

Life, the universe, everything wrote:
... put this much effort into attacking an MPP from a province in which you do not live

I give myself the right to attack Zionist apologists, Islamophobes, political cowards, phoneys, and fascists, even across provincial boundaries. Call me a busybody.

 

Mr.Tea

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

I know this will get me a warning, but I don't care.

I can't believe what a petty asshole you have to be to put this much effort into attacking an MPP from a province in which you do not live, from a party you do not support, who, while not  perfect, has still done some important work for communities you pretend you care about.

Hate begets hate, and you are just a minor example of the extremism we see from others.  A fundamentalist whether from a religous group, political philosophy or any of the other ways we humans divide ourselves are all the same.  And you continue to fit that mode and regularly spew hateful speech towards those who dare to see the world differently than you.  When you get to be perfect on every issue every time please let us know.

Cheri Dinovo used to be a Minister near my home early in her career and I have never particularly liked her, but your ongoing mysogynist fixation with her is more than distasteful and says far more about your failings to live up to an even half assed level of common decency than it does about any failings and sins of Ms DiNovo.

Well said. This weird obsession from Unionist on Cheri, who is a backbench MPP in a riding and in a province where he doesn't even reside, really borders on being creepy.  This is the second thread in about 24 hours where you felt it necessary to bring her up and youve accounted for about 50% of the posts in this one.

As we discussed previously, maybe the fact that she said that an Islamic group claimed responsibility for the attack....was because an Islamic group claimed responsibility for the attack...as was reported by most international media outlets.

As for her distinction between people of faith in general and fundamentalist extresmists, I think thats a pretty good distinction to make. There are great people and terrible people within every religion, people whose faith inspires them to devote their lives to helping others and peoples whose faiths inspires them to fly planes into buildings or to gun down teenagers at a summer camp.

As to your ludicrous assertion of her trying to suppress people, theres a big difference between suppression and codemntation. I CONDEMN Glenn Beck as a blowhard loudmout while having no desire to SUPPRESS him from being so. Freedom of speech doesnt mean freedodm from criticism. Israeli Apartheid Week has every right to exist while people, including Cheri, have every right to criticize it.

Unionist

Here was the last time Cheri DiNovo flipped when friends questioned her vote to condemn Israeli Apartheid Week. She linked arms with Tarek Fatah in questioning why the "Left" was soft on Muslims. Then she deleted the page (becoming a habit), but fortunately someone copied it before she could:

 

There was much discussion in this babble thread:

[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/central-canada/cheri-di-novo-self-destructs]Cheri DiNovo self-destructs[/url]

NOTE: Her reference to "Hamas" was a rather wild and bizarre attempt to paint the students organizing and supporting IAW - and her own Facebook friends who criticized her support for Shurman's fascist motion - as supporters of Hamas!

 

ovechkin

Mr.Tea wrote:


Life, the universe, everything wrote:

I know this will get me a warning, but I don't care.

I can't believe what a petty asshole you have to be to put this much effort into attacking an MPP from a province in which you do not live, from a party you do not support, who, while not  perfect, has still done some important work for communities you pretend you care about.

Hate begets hate, and you are just a minor example of the extremism we see from others.  A fundamentalist whether from a religous group, political philosophy or any of the other ways we humans divide ourselves are all the same.  And you continue to fit that mode and regularly spew hateful speech towards those who dare to see the world differently than you.  When you get to be perfect on every issue every time please let us know.

Cheri Dinovo used to be a Minister near my home early in her career and I have never particularly liked her, but your ongoing mysogynist fixation with her is more than distasteful and says far more about your failings to live up to an even half assed level of common decency than it does about any failings and sins of Ms DiNovo.

Well said. This weird obsession from Unionist on Cheri, who is a backbench MPP in a riding and in a province where he doesn't even reside, really borders on being creepy.  This is the second thread in about 24 hours where you felt it necessary to bring her up and youve accounted for about 50% of the posts in this one.

As we discussed previously, maybe the fact that she said that an Islamic group claimed responsibility for the attack....was because an Islamic group claimed responsibility for the attack...as was reported by most international media outlets.

As for her distinction between people of faith in general and fundamentalist extresmists, I think thats a pretty good distinction to make. There are great people and terrible people within every religion, people whose faith inspires them to devote their lives to helping others and peoples whose faiths inspires them to fly planes into buildings or to gun down teenagers at a summer camp.

As to your ludicrous assertion of her trying to suppress people, theres a big difference between suppression and codemntation. I CONDEMN Glenn Beck as a blowhard loudmout while having no desire to SUPPRESS him from being so. Freedom of speech doesnt mean freedodm from criticism. Israeli Apartheid Week has every right to exist while people, including Cheri, have every right to criticize it.

Unionist's self-absorded, hateful, slanderous attacks on Cheri went beyond creepy long ago. Lying in wait, hiding under anonymity, to spew vile, insulting personal attacks at one of the hardest working and effective allies the left and social justice activists have in public life is well beyond the pale of decency, intellectual honesty, and the very policy that governs babble. Cheri has devoted her life to social justice, has worked tirelessly and courageously on too many front to be dismissed and pilloried in this way. She is mercurial, and sometimes impulsive, but that cuts both ways. Still, Unionist's deranged fixation is typical bully strong-arm bullshit which I find has two striking aspects.

First, on most issues Unionist would probably find himself in complete solidarity with Cheri. Even regarding the situation of the Palestinians in Gaza, there is more common ground than disagreement. Cheri was inviting Palestinian women and discussing the abuses of the Israeli state as far back as 15 years or so ago on her radio show. Her disagreement with IAW was not so much substantive but with the tactics of such an approach to peace. All to say, Unionist's hatred is largely unfounded, except in his overweening arrogance and narcissim.

Second, this community's complcity. Perhaps there is no room for debate and discussion around the Palestinian cause, and therefore any who dissent should be summarily ostracized and reviled. But the kind of behaviour, language, and personal attack repeatedly exhibited by Unionist, and not only around this cause, for which he gets near total impunity needs to be considered. Yes, he's a long standing member. Yes he often has intelligent contributions. But failing to reprimand him for these vile, personal and defamatory attacks, either formally through moderation or by other members not speaking up against him, is either to share in his fixation or to cower before the grand inquisitor.

 

pookie

I suppose this will get me a warning.  Oh well.

This place became the Unionist show a long, long time ago. 

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

ovechkin wrote:

Second, this community's complcity.

But failing to reprimand him for these vile, personal and defamatory attacks, either formally through moderation or by other members not speaking up against him, is either to share in his fixation or to cower before the grand inquisitor.

This thread consists of many people attacking Unionist in very personal ways.  

Tell me Overchin why do you insist we all have to engage in a group speak shout out of Unionist. Your vile duality is silencing and disgusting.

I personally don't give a flying fuck about DiNovo however she has a pulpit and she uses it to spew knee jerk Islamophobia.  A pulpit given to her by progressive people and she uses it to spread hate towards a definable group.  Nice that some think she likes their group and they are willing to turn a blind eye to her hatred of the other "other."  

This site is becoming more a place where any criticism of an NDP personality is something that provokes a firestorm from social democrats who like you engage in passive aggressive attacks first decrying the personal attacks on your heroes with clay feet while simultaneously spewing venom that is at least as vile and personal as the original attack on a public figure.

Bomb Libya Bomb Libya  

There I did my part to support the NDP position on the Middle East. Is that sufficient or do I need to genuflect at a picture of Jack and Cheri campaigning together. 

Stockholm

I have yet to see any example of diNovo "spreading hate" towards Muslims or "spewing Islamophobia" - quite the contrary. I think that kind of invective should be reseved for people like Michael Coren or Mark Steyn or the Norwegian terrorist - not an NDP MPP who is not sufficiently anti-Israel to pass some peoples "purity test".

Polunatic2

My point in referencing her quote in the original Oslo thread (and the reaction from McKay & Harper) was to say that people from a range of political views easily jump to (false) conclusions. I don't mind if she deleted the thread. People make mistakes. Hopefully then learn from them. Now if only Harper & McKay would withdraw their initial comments about what a dangerous world we live in and the need to be vigilant (i.e. justifying Afghanistan & Libya ((oh yeah, the NDP supports that one)) ). 

Predictably, today I'm hearing on talk radio that this was just the act of a "crazy" person and that politics and religion have nothing to do with it. While I'm not sure about the role of "religion", clearly, this guy targeted "social democrats"/liberals to make his point. If that's not "political", I'm not sure what is. 

ovechkin

Northern Shoveler wrote:

ovechkin wrote:

Second, this community's complcity.

But failing to reprimand him for these vile, personal and defamatory attacks, either formally through moderation or by other members not speaking up against him, is either to share in his fixation or to cower before the grand inquisitor.

This thread consists of many people attacking Unionist in very personal ways.  

Tell me Overchin why do you insist we all have to engage in a group speak shout out of Unionist. Your vile duality is silencing and disgusting.

First of all, I'm not uniquely referring to this thread, I'm referring to a pattern of vitriol, intimidation, personal attack, defamation, and intellectual dishonesty that should not constitute what passes for debate and discussion around here. I applaud those who have stood up for fair and reasoned discussion in this and any other threads. And no I don't believe anyone should be beyond reproach nor questioning, regardless of whether they are one's political ally or one's political enemy. But I also don't believe there is any place for the vile, insulting unfounded pillorying that has been perpeptrated essentially by one person.

Second, I don't insist anything. I'm simply making an observation. Case in point, in a previous thread I was warned, and possibly will be banned, for a personal attack on the mighty grand poohba and was immediately warned. Unionist calls a public official, who works her ass off for many of his cherished causes, a piece of shit and a fascist and etc. etc. and receives no reprimand whatsoever. Sorry won't take any lessons on duality from you. And if you want to talk about silencing look to the Grand Inquisitor, not me.

btw I didn't insist all should shout down Unionist's behaviour. I simply suggested that failure to do seems to be for two main reasons; a shared deranged fixation or a chauvinistic cowering before the mighty bully. I have a vague suspicion which of those you fall under. I mean, how flagrant a flouting of babble policy does he have to engage in in order to be reprimanded by moderators or by other members?

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

So I gather Stockholm your answer is I should genuflect.  But then I knew that already.  You can be counted on to jump in with personal attacks against any who point to the fact that the NDP has clay feet.  I will admit that as far as your normal attacks go accusing people of "purity tests" is one of your less odious responses.  

Q:  What do you need to do to turn red into orange?

A: Add yellow

 

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

ovechkin wrote:

btw I didn't insist all should shout down Unionist's behaviour. I simply suggested that failure to do seems to be for two main reasons; a shared deranged fixation or a chauvinistic cowering before the mighty bully. I have a vague suspicion which of those you fall under. I mean, how flagrant a flouting of babble policy does he have to engage in in order to be reprimanded by moderators or by other members?

thanks for giving me a choice between being deranged (mental health put down) or a cowering weakling.

And then you have the audacity to directly claim I am one of the two.  That is a personal attack on me not on a public figure but on a private poster because I don't like the yellow streak in the NDP anti-war policy.

Cheri's views are all consistent with the MSMS mime that says bombing civilians for their own good is righteous.  Have to stop those evil Moslems lets not talk about NAto imperialism. 

On this issue she talks and reacts like a Harperite. Her tweets and Facebook posts could have been made by any elected Conservative official.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Also, what difference does it make that Unionist doesn't live in Ontario?  He's never said that people in the ROC have no right to post anything about Quebec politics.

Cheri DiNovo is the issue here, not Unionist.  And it's just as legitimate for him to comment about her as it is for anyone else to comment about any other politician.

And, before anyone asks, I'm fine with anybody here saying whatever they want to about Obama.

 

ovechkin

Quote:

thanks for giving me a choice between being deranged (mental health put down) or a cowering weakling.

And then you have the audacity to directly claim I am one of the two.  That is a personal attack on me not on a public figure but on a private poster because I don't like the yellow streak in the NDP anti-war policy.

Spare me the faux indignation. You traffic in personal attack you'll get it back, but for the record I didn't attack you for not liking the yellow streak in the NDP anti-war policy (I mostly agree with you on that score). It was for your initial attack on me and for condoning and defending Unionist's disgusting personal attacks.

 

Quote:

Cheri's views are all consistent with the MSMS mime that says bombing civilians for their own good is righteous.  Have to stop those evil Moslems lets not talk about NAto imperialism. 

Total bullshit. Cheri's been an outspoken anti-war activist since she marched in student protests against the Vietnam war.  Just because she opposes fundamentalism and religious extremism of all stripes doesn't make her a NATO apologist.

Cheeseburger

Anyonw who would seriously refer to Cheri DiNovo as a 'fascist' either doesn't know anything about her, or is suffering from some serious psychological problem. The sort of person who might hold on to a screen capture from her facebook page from years ago.

pookie

Ken Burch wrote:

Also, what difference does it make that Unionist doesn't live in Ontario?  He's never said that people in the ROC have no right to post anything about Quebec politics.

Huh? He has actually said or intimated just that many times, particularly on issues of culture and language policies.

To be clear, I don't buy the idea that province of residence is that relevant to or justifies commentary.  Just wanted to respond to your point.

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

ovechkin wrote:

Spare me the faux indignation. You traffic in personal attack you'll get it back, but for the record I didn't attack you for not liking the yellow streak in the NDP anti-war policy (I mostly agree with you on that score). It was for your initial attack on me and for condoning and defending Unionist's disgusting personal attacks.

Please cite my personal attack on you in this thread.  Go on reread my posts and give me the specifics you are referring to.

I cited your personal attacks so please try to keep to the same standard.

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Cheeseburger wrote:

Anyonw who would seriously refer to Cheri DiNovo as a 'fascist' either doesn't know anything about her, or is suffering from some serious psychological problem. The sort of person who might hold on to a screen capture from her facebook page from years ago.

Another vile mental health put down. Is that now acceptable on babble?

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

This thread is not really about Cheri DiNovo, is it? Start a new thread on DiNovo if you like (although I don't know why she needs her own thread), but this one's gone to the dogs.

Topic locked