Palestine: Where is the parliamentary left?
I don't know if this is specific to Winnipeg or not, but has anyone else noticed an absence of any elected politicians at the rallies for peace in Gaza? There have been two rallies and a candlelight vigil so far in Winnipeg, and I haven't seen any politician (aside from some folks from the Communist Parties, including the leader of the provincial CPC) either come out to an event or vocally oppose the Israeli attacks (aside from that one Tory MP from Alberta who was quickly muzzled). But on the other hand, politicians from all three parties attended a pro-Israel rally, and Harper and Ignatieff seem to be in a dick-waving contest as to who can support Israel the most.
What's the deal here? Are there any supporters of Palestine in parliament? Why is it easier to get politicians of all stripes (including the NDP) to show up to a rally in favour of war than to a rally for peace?
If this trend is occuring across the country, it is really showing the moral bankruptcy of the parliamentary "left"
Comments
I realize corporate media generally sucks, but why would the largest newspaper in Manitoba falsely claim that certain politicians showed up to an event? How are we supposed to discuss current events if we can't even quote newspapers? Have you ever quoted a newspaper or a tv station on this site?
Face it, they were there. Do you have any reason to believe otherwise? Are you their secret alibi?
You can always go plant yourself in the middle of Gaza and report back to Reuters or AP on what's going on...
And dont forget to bring a camera.
I can't afford it. I already spent all my money on plane tickets to Sweden and various Latin American countries the last few times you told me to leave the country.
Jack Layton's statement on the situation in the Middle East is the most balanced and impartial by comparison.
Unlike the two Washington lap dogs, Layton doesnt say anything about "Israel's right to defend itself"
It's better than the other two, but it says nothing about the blockade, nothing about the occupation, and nothing about the Palestinian right to self-determination. And it doesn't out and out condemn the bombings either.
Perhaps you missed the part where Layton said:
"The CONTINUING AIRSTRIKES by Israel on civilians in the Gaza strip .... are serving to compound the existing civilian disaster and further HARM chances for a negotiated PEACE."
And,
"We call on the Government of Canada to immediately call for an END to the AERIAL BOMBING OF GAZA, the BLOCKADE of aid to civilians and the indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israel."
And,
"The Government of Canada should also work to ensure that MEDICAL AND FOOD AID is provided to the civilians of GAZA through U.N. agencies. . ."
So I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
It's kind of pointless to argue with Fidel about this.
The only hope for the NDP to take a consistent and decent stand on the Middle East is to apply the same pressure which resulted in the NDP's call for withdrawal from Afghanistan - which came in September 2006, almost 5 years after the invasion. That pressure needs to come from the members and activists. Even then, the waffling and backsliding will continue, but what is life if not struggle?
Exactly what do you think the Canadian government can do regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
The answer is not one damn thing, whether it is left or right.
The rocket attacks will continue.
The IDF will attack any facility or unarmed peacemaker if it believes it is for the security of Israel.
There is only one country which can have an influence on Israeli actions, and I don't expect there to be a significant change, that alters the Israeli actions. Nor is there anything the US could do to stop the rocket attacks.
I have heard that these rockets are a cry for help....
But no help will be coming, and even a United Canadian position will not change this fact.
Let alone that Canada has no enforcement capability nor any credibility with Israel.
madmax, I guess we might as well take that sleeping-pill overdose then? That is ridiculously defeatist. If the European Union and Canada were more forthright about defending Palestinian rights and lives, the US would be far more hard-pressed to back Israel unconditionally. Russia and China could also bring considerable influence to bear.
It is our duty to do what we can to stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people against these war crimes.
We could start by following the lead of Venezuela and expelling the Israeli ambassador.
We could start by following the lead of Venezuela and expelling the Israeli ambassador.
That's far from likely. I pointed out on the Gaza Part VI thread that Canada cast the sole opposing vote to a UN Human Rights Council resolution condemning Israel.
Of course it's far from likely!
But Madmax was asking what the Canadian government could do about the situation, suggesting that there really was nothing. He is very wrong.
We could also abide by the boycott of Israeli products and cultural and academic exchanges and imports. We could also put an embargo on sending war materiel to Israel or any other country that might pass it on to them (e.g. the USA). We could also stop voting against UN resolutions condemning the violence. There is plenty we could do.
The fact that there is no chance in hell that Harper will do any of that stuff is not an argument against it.
At least there is a parliamentarian in Australia prepared to speak out:
Let alone that Canada has no enforcement capability nor any credibility with Israel.
Not entirely true.
Canada has some credibility with Israel as a subserviant partner to its terrorist actions --manifest most recently by being the only dissenting vote to the UN resolution. And who knows if that vote reflects some Canadian military "training" personel in Gaza?
As Linda MQuaig wrote last April:
"In another move that brings Canada closer in line with U.S. policy, the Harper government last month signed a wide-ranging agreement with Israel establishing co-operation in "border management and security" – even though we don't share a border with Israel.
Does this mean Israel will become involved in intelligence gathering about Canadian Muslims or other Canadians supporting Palestinian rights? Does it mean Canada will help Israel with its military operations in the West Bank or Gaza?
It's striking that Canada would sign a security agreement with Israel only months after a Canadian Forces board of inquiry concluded that an Israeli bomb killed a Canadian peacekeeper manning a well-marked UN post during Israel's 2006 invasion of Lebanon.
Given their controversial nature, the Harper government has played down both these recent agreements – and the Canadian media have obliged by ignoring them."
Don told the rally that Libby Davies did not attend because she was sick. [Untrue statement removed now that Left Turn has corrected his previous post.]
Um, she WAS sick. And here's her public statement about Gaza.
You might want to think about how to work with the few allies you have, Left Turn. Hint: repeating second-hand (and, as it turns out, untrue) rumours about them on a public forum probably isn't the best way to go about it.
It's kind of pointless to argue with Fidel about this.
Well thanks for the show of solidarity. And I know better than to argue with you and several others about certain things as well. You're fairly strong-willed about things in general yourselves.
That's okay, I've committed worse atrocities myself. And I still love you.
You might want to think about how to work with the few allies you have, Left Turn. Hint: repeating second-hand (and, as it turns out, untrue) rumours about them on a public forum probably isn't the best way to go about it.
Michelle, I edited out my previous untrue statement about Libby Davies from my previous post.
That said, I don't support Libby's statement, because it implies that Israel has no responsability to withdraw from Gaza until Hamas stops firing rockets. It's also not substantively different from the speech Don Davies gave at the rally. If Libby had read this statement at the rally, I suspect she whould have been booed as well.
Don told the rally that Libby Davies did not attend because she was sick. [Edited to remove retracted statement]
Um, she WAS sick. And here's her public statement about Gaza.
Well that is the best yet. Except that Gaza is not a state. One wonders if some copywriter was trying to avoid using anything associated with "occupation" while crafting that latter, as in "...government to uphold international law and work to stop this aggression by one state upon an occupied people."
Despite her best intentions, progressive people must be more clear about what is going on here. Condemning "all acts of violence" sounds very nice, but we must be clear on the fact that it is the occupation that is the root cause of the violence.
Too often "we" talk as if "the violence" is some kind of natural phenomena, or an act of god, not the expression of the material context of the oppression of Palestinian people.
But I guess that would amount to taking a side or something problematic like that. Libby makes a passing reference to UN resolutions regarding the "peace process", but fails also to mention resolution demanding and end to the occupation.
Thanks, Left Turn. I've just deleted it from my quote of your post then.
I think Libby realizes the bombing and the state-sponsored murder is the ultimate expression of insanity. She realizes that powerful and influential nations have, in the recent past, been mediators to cease fires and peace negotiations when two principal countries involved are beyond resolving to work together toward a solution or at least an agreement not to launch missiles on each others civilian populations. ie Russia and Georgia and autonomous state of Ossetia. The same doesnt seem to be true of the USA's frontline state Israel.
Palestine is not a "country", I just finished explaining why this point is of enourmous importance in actually resolving the issues at hand, in the post you propose to be answering.
Repeating the falacy, only exacibates the problem, and underscores my point about the vacuity of the essential framing of, this, the best NDP originated stated thus far.
Avoidance of the fact that Israel is engaging in a crime, simply through its continued military presence on Palestinian territory, does nothing. You can wring your hands in anguish about "the violence' forever, but unless the essential cause of the violence is reolved, it will not end.
I didnt refer to Palestine as a country. Perhaps our penultimate stoogeocrats in Ottawa should be doing their jobs instead of hiding out at the Eagle's Nest at Tremblanc or wherever it is theyre holed up. Because this is a lot of stuff to be dumping onto the shoulders of one single MP of the fourth political party in stoogetown.
...in the recent past, been mediators to cease fires and peace negotiations when two principal countries involved are beyond resolving to work together toward a solution or at least an agreement not to launch missiles on each others civilian populations. ie Russia and Georgia and autonomous state of Ossetia. The same doesnt seem to be true of the USA's frontline state Israel.
You even go on to basically split the blame between "both" parties, finessing the fact that the it is not two countries fighting a war ("ie Georgia and Russia" sic), but one country imposing martial law on a people who are not its citizens.
Thank you for demonstrating the exact problem caused by the falacy of Davies framing of the issue. I am sure you will supplement this demonstration with more avoidance of the issues, anon.
...in the recent past, been mediators to cease fires and peace negotiations when two principal countries involved are beyond resolving to work together toward a solution or at least an agreement not to launch missiles on each others civilian populations. ie Russia and Georgia and autonomous state of Ossetia. The same doesnt seem to be true of the USA's frontline state Israel.
You even go on to basically split the blame between "both" parties, finessing the fact that the it is not two countries fighting a war ("ie Georgia and Russia" sic), but one country imposing martial law on a people who are not its citizens.
I think there are some similarities between the disputed territories of both regions. The USSA and its frontline state don't want to recognize Palestinian territorial claims but were among the first countries to recognize Ossetia, and Kosovo, as sovereign states without any mediated input from either Moscow or Belgrade. Palestinians, though, have not had any such former superpower backing them up in this case. It's a very one-sided affair, and our stooges who are supposed to be at the helm in Ottawa and making use of established diplomatic lines of communication with all countries involved, took an early taxpayer-funded vacation several weeks ago.
Otoh, I think you are mistaken that I have equated Israel's methodic and high tech aerial bombing of Gaza with that of Hamas' striking back with WW II era Katyusha rockets and other dubya-md's amounting to Chinese fireworks.
But Ossetia was attacked by aerial bombardment and innocent civilians killed. And there was at least a half-hearted international effort to mediate a ceasefire.
Where is Canada's equivalent of Nick Sarkozy today? Mont Tremblanc and doing apres-ski beerskis? Where in the world are our half-assed elected stooges when they're needed?
Why are you calling for a negotiated "cease-fire", when this is nothing but an airial massacre perpetrated by a sovereign state against a people who live under the heal of its military boot? A cease-fire is a negotiated agreement between two parties in conflict. There is no need for a negotiated agreement. What is needed is for Israel to stop the bombardment, and end the occupation.
This could happen without the participation of Hamas in any kind of negotiation process. Were this done the yearly casualty rates would go down to a level below the yearly number of premature baby incubator deaths throughout all of Israel.
Ignorance of facts is so depressing. We recently witnessed how few Canadians understand parliamentary democracy. Now we are witnessing our political leaders either willfully pretending that the assualt on Gaza is a war between two states or being totally ignorant of the fact that Gaza is an occupied territory and not a state (as denied by the creep Ignatieff who actually does know better).
The most useful thing anyone in Parliament could do would be to endorse the boycott, divest and sanctions campaign.
blake 3:17 said:
I agree but not likely to happen. Very few politicians in this country even have the courage to show up at demonstrations.
Why are you calling for a negotiated "cease-fire", when this is nothing but an airial massacre perpetrated by a sovereign state against a people who live under the heal of its military boot? A cease-fire is a negotiated agreement between two parties in conflict. There is no need for a negotiated agreement. What is needed is for Israel to stop the bombardment, and end the occupation.
Okay then, a negotiated cessation of hostilities. Or better yet, a "Stop bombing Gaza, or we'll send in international troops with licence to shoot back if necessary" type of thing.
But right now our elected stoogeocrats in Ottawa are saying and doing nothing. The NDP and Jack Layton have made a statement already. It's posted above as plain as day.
And the other two party leaders have said that "Israel has a right to defend itself"
It's clear to me just which weak and ineffective party leaders are the vicious toadies to Warshington and its frontline state Israel.
They are terrified of an outbreak of peace. Peace is not good for colder war business. This should be evident by now. Peace is a word that has meaning for the powerless. Hatred and war and death and fear are too useful and too profitable a tools to let slip through their fat fingers.
The other two party leaders? The Bloc doesn't exist any more?
Yes, I know the Bloc has been dismal as well.
At least there is a parliamentarian in Australia prepared to speak out:
See, this is what I meant. Why don't we have any politicians like this in Canada?
We have to be careful with mentioning the Bloc. Even though Bloc MP's were all democratically elected by Canadians - and even though the Harpers were ready to align with the Bloc and NDP against the Liberals in '04 - ReformaTories are telling Canadians that the Bloc are part of some sort of traitorous coalition today. This is coming from the coalition of Reform Party retreads, rightwing Liberals, and Mike Harris refugees in Ontariario.
See, this is what I meant. Why don't we have any politicians like this in Canada?
I think we do - and at least one elected politician at that:
Gaza : il y a urgence d'agir !
Le 10 janvier 2009
Québec solidaire ne peut rester silencieux devant la catastrophe humanitaire qui sévit actuellement dans la bande de Gaza. À l'heure actuelle, plusieurs milliers d'habitants de Gaza n'ont ni eau, ni électricité à cause des bombardements israéliens, qui, rappelons-le, ont fait jusqu'à maintenant 700 morts. Il n'y a présentement aucun endroit à l'abri des bombes sur ce territoire grand comme l'île de Montréal. Pas même les écoles ! ...
Bien que le gouvernement canadien en ait appelé, bien timidement, à un cessez-le-feu, cela ne l'empêche pas de soutenir avec obstination les pires agissements du gouvernement israélien. Cet alignement sur la politique guerrière du président Bush démontre encore une fois toute l'étendue du cynisme et de la vacuité du gouvernement Harper en matière de politique étrangère.
Ce samedi 10 janvier, nous irons manifester pour démontrer notre solidarité envers le peuple palestinien. Nous y serons également pour rappeler que des solutions existent à ce conflit et qu'elles sont connues depuis déjà trop longtemps : abattre le mur de la honte qui empiète largement sur des terres palestiniennes, mettre fin aux colonies de peuplement israéliennes en Cisjordanie, mettre fin au blocus qui accable Gaza, délaisser les armes de chaque côté et négocier de bonne foi dans le but de donner au peuple palestinien un pays viable. Bref, redonner la liberté au peuple palestinien. Parce qu'un peuple libéré préfère toujours les moyens pacifiques et démocratiques pour se faire entendre.
Françoise David
Amir Khadir
And likewise for Monique Richard, elected PQ MNA for Marguerite-D'Youville and president of the Parti québécois, who spoke at the Saturday march and denounced the Israeli apartheid regime by name.
I think the Palestinians of Gaza would appreciate someone actually stepping in and helping them right now. They've stood alone against Israeli blitzkrieg for a number of days, and words must ring hollow for them at this point. They'll be needing actual help in this particular time of need. This is a complete failure of the international community to intervene for the sake of peace and a people's basic human right to exist.
Libby Davies's statement is no better than Jack Layton's. Both take a phony "neutral" position between the two sides. Both make demands on the Palestinians, as if they are equally responsible for the carnage. Neither calls for Israel to end its military occupation of Gaza, or to end the arbitrary arrests, torture, killings, detentions, and various forms of collective punishment. Neither offers any explanation of, or insight into the conflict, or points the way to a solution.
"..being totally ignorant of the fact that Gaza is an occupied territory and not a state"
The same holds true for all of Israel. Why would the international community interfere now when it facilitated the present day situation with its support for an illegitimate state to begin with?
When peace arrives the Palestinians will be expected to be grateful to Israel and its Western benefactors for removing them from their lands and finally procurring a settlement whereby they can live under economic and military domination on a scrap of land allowed them by a powerful neighbour.
Western governments bombed Serbia for less. So why not give Israel equal treatment for a sixty year history of countinuous attrocities and crimes against humanity?
Libby Davies's statement is no better than Jack Layton's. Both take a phony "neutral" position between the two sides.
What's neutral about Layton's statement? He calls for an end to the hostilities all the way around and the blockade of food and medical aid to Palestinians to end. Iggy and Harper both say that Israel has a right to defend itself. For me, I cant read anymore vicious toadying into that than meets my eyes.
Layton's statement: most practical and definitely helpful for Palestinians losing their lives and in need of emergency aid at the moment
AWOL Harper and Iggy's statements: bald-faced toadying to the vicious empire and one of its frontline states in the war on democracy, Basically Canada is a ship without a rudder, a Northern Puerto Rico run by colonial administrators who took an early vacation several weeks ago because they're afraid to show up for work. It's a leadership 9-11 in Ottawa, and the NDP are going to dog these scurvy dogs until theyre run outa town on a rail at high noon.
"a Northern Puerto Rico run by colonial administrators who took an early vacation several weeks ago because they're afraid to show up for work. "
No kidding, but has it ever been anything more?
Libby Davies's statement is no better than Jack Layton's. Both take a phony "neutral" position between the two sides.
What's neutral about Layton's statement?
Nothing at all. This is why the term "neutral" is in quotes. Layton's statement is a reiteration of the Israeli position as refracted through the lens of the US State Department. The very idea that the Palestinians are involved in hostilities ("all the way around") qualifiable in the same category as those engaged in by the IDF is central to the Israeli position.
There is no quid pro quo here, this is a massacre.
The NDP are supposed to go on record as making political statements on how another country is supposed to govern themselves - and bascially amounting to political interference in Israeli-Palestinian affairs. And I think they've had enough political interference from the USSA over the years to warrant more from Canada's fourth political party.
This is a UN matter like it most often is. The NDP is trying to democratize our little Northern Puerto Rico. The UN needs democratizing, too, but that's another matter that merits input from a real government in Ottawa, if we had one. We dont. We have Steve the rabid lap poodle with a DO NOT DISTURB sign over his dog house for good doggies. Steve's working on a bone right now in fact. He and Iggy will earn pats on their heads and belly rubs more than likely.
That is one of the dumbest posts you have ever written on this web site.
If you actually believed that it is improper for the NDP "to go on record as making political statements on how another country is supposed to govern themselves," you should be condemning Layton for having issued a statement at all.
Now you are just reiterating the idea that organizations like CUPE have no right to make statements on international affairs, and extending it to include political parties in Canada.
Just admit that this another one of your politically motivated attacks on Canada's fourth party, again, and nothing whatsoever to do with personal concern for Palestinians suffering the consequences, and we'll call it like it is.
Yes. My attack is "politically" motivated. It does not appear that the NDP is either political, or motivated.
CUPE can do whatever it wants. They dont have seats in the House of Commons. CUPE is not a political party representing millions of voters or participating in Canadian politics in the national capital.
The NDP made a winning statement on this international incident - an incident that needs to be dealt with at a UN level. And no one's home in Ottawa as per usual to even deal with it like federal governments normally do.
Steve the lap poodle isnt very motivated right now at all. He doesnt even want to show up for work and tend to this U.S.-related problem in the Middle East unfolding today. Apparently our leader who majored in economics is studying up on macroeconomics and Keynesian stimulus 101.
Ottawa is traditionally a compliant colonial outpost manned by stoogeocrats who rarely say shit to the US or any of its client states, even when they have a mouthful.
And it looks like Iggy understands where the bear shit in the buckwheat, too, with parroting Harper's own words to the effect that Israel has "a right to defend itself" Talk about getting shit all over their moustaches. Well nothing's new here, that's for sure.
Bravo, Amir Khadir! It is truly inspiring to see a politician doing what politicians should do. I had almost given up in terms of parliamentary politics but Dr. Khadir offers real hope (as opposed to the counterfeit stuff peddled south of the border).
Incidentally, I have received no response from any of the NDP members I emailed several days ago about their lack of response. What timidity in the face of tragedy.
According to this, the NDP is rife with anti-Israeli elements. So which is it?
We're the only one of 47 nations on UN rights panel to refuse to condemn military offensive in Gaza
NDP MP Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre) criticized Ottawa's "muted" reaction to this latest offensive. He said Canada should be taking a "robust" role to deliver aid to civilians and monitor any ceasefire.
Instead, he said Canada is sitting on the "sideline," suggesting a pro-Israel viewpoint by the Conservative government was the reason for lack of outcry from Ottawa.
That is much better.
Not sure what he means by a "un-recognized Occupation", but that's probably just bad wording. At least the word is in there. Calls for an end to the bombardment, and notes the events of November 4th, where Israel broke the ceasefire. Much better overall.
While it is nice to see the winds from the street belatedly filling the sails of individual NDP MPs, it would be nicer still to see those sentiments reflected through statements by the leader. If the trend continues, I suppose we can eventually look forward to seeing some revised commentary. Better late than never. By the way, where is Jack Layton these days?
That is much better.
Not sure what he means by a "un-recognized Occupation", but that's probably just bad wording.
I think he means "UN (as in, United Nations) recognized occupation"
Yes, I see, But my point was that it kind of sounds like he is saying the occupation is legitimate because it is "recognized" by the UN, if you see what I am saying.
He certainly stayed away from the rallies against the Israeli assault on Gaza. He has no problem going to CJPAC dinners though.
Yes, I see, But my point was that it kind of sounds like he is saying the occupation is legitimate because it is "recognized" by the UN, if you see what I am saying.
Atamenko is saying that this is the context of the overall situation, that the UN recognizes the occupation. He doesnt speak of the the overall context in a positive way.
In fact, the problem is with the USA's support of Israel and its policies toward Palestinians in general. The USA is also a UN member nation and regularly uses its veto power within the UNSC to undermine that organization's legitimacy and democratically arrived at resolutions. The U.S.A. is shipping an unusually large amount of ammunition to Israel right now. It's not a positive sign for peace in general and looks to be more like cold war era maneuvering.
Maria Mourani (Bloc québécois - Public security, Children, Status of Women) has been known to take courageous positions in the past, e.g. on issues such as prostitution and the trafficking of women, racism, etc. At a time where most elected officials are remaining shamefully silent or being openly complicitous about the massacre in Gaza, she issued yesterday the following position, relayed here with her permission.
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
Lettre ouverte Gaza : Israël devrait prendre l'initiative d'un cessez-le-feu Maria Mourani 12 janvier 2009
Le jeudi 8 janvier 2009, le Conseil de sécurité de l'ONU a adopté une résolution appelant à un cessez-le-feu immédiat à Gaza. Ce cessez-le-feu devrait conduire à un retrait total de l'armée israélienne, à un accès sans entrave aux transports de nourriture, de carburant et de médicaments et à un mécanisme visant à empêcher le trafic d'armes et de munitions vers le territoire palestinien de Gaza.
Encore une fois, le gouvernement israélien, qui est aux prises avec des problèmes de crédibilité importants avec un premier ministre au cours d'un scandale financier et une élection générale anticipée pour le 10 février, fait la sourde oreille et poursuit des actions militaires à Gaza où sont ciblés des écoles, des institutions de l'ONU et des hôpitaux. Des frappes inhumaines contre une grande majorité de civils, dont des enfants.
Il faut rappeler que les belligérants dans cette affaire ne sont pas égaux.
D'un côté, il y a un pays avec un parlement, une armée et un financement important qui occupe un territoire étranger et qui installe, périodiquement, des colonies illégales sans égard aux conventions internationales et aux résolutions de l'ONU.
De l'autre côté, il y a la population palestinienne de Gaza, en mode de survie depuis des années, parquée sur un territoire minuscule et dont la majorité des habitants sont des réfugiés expulsés illégalement de leurs terres. Une population qui subit depuis des décennies une politique violente de harcèlement et d'humiliation de la part d'un État qui exige de sa part de renoncer à la justice et à la dignité pour se voir imposer la paix des « vainqueurs ». Une population qui n'a pas une vie normale et qui est soumise à l'influence de l'extrémisme nourri par des années de misères et d'iniquités.
Ainsi, le gouvernement d'Israël, qui se trouve dans une position de force exceptionnelle, a le devoir de se contenir et de se discipliner. Ce gouvernement ne peut se comparer au début de gouvernance palestinienne que nous voyons poindre depuis quelques années. Dans un tel contexte, la responsabilité de l'initiative de la paix appartient d'abord à Israël.
D'un autre côté, nous nous devons de condamner le lancement de roquettes par certains Palestiniens parce qu'ils peuvent toucher des civils innocents. Ces actions militaires inutiles alimentent l'image de « terroriste » attribuée au peuple palestinien qui, dans les faits, est un peuple de « résistants » qui mérite notre admiration, notre compassion et notre soutien.
Quant à Israël, il devrait tout simplement respecter les nombreuses résolutions de l'ONU le concernant. Ce qui permettra à plus long terme, un règlement pacifique du conflit qui passe par la fin de l'occupation militaire israélienne et la fin des colonies en territoire occupé, un règlement satisfaisant pour toutes les parties tant de la question de l'annexion de Jérusalem-Est que celle des réfugiés, ainsi qu'un règlement global qui reconnaît à Israël le droit d'exister à l'intérieur de frontières sûres et reconnues tout en assurant la création d'un État palestinien indépendant, digne et viable.
Maria Mourani Députée d'Ahuntsic
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
Brava, Maria!
I was very relieved that she was narrowly re-elected in Ahuntsic. Unfortunately Vivian Barbot was not as fortunate, and lost to twerp Trudeau.
Martin, has this been published anywhere? Can it be sent round, to the Coalition for example?
Just out of curiosity, I'd like to know if there are any theories as to why the BQ is so reluctant to take a position on the situation in the Middle East. In the case of the NDP and Liberals, its understandable that this issue is a bit of a minefield. Public opinion in English Canada tends to be very divided in terms of whether people are more pro-Israel or pro-Arab, there are significant constituencies in both parties who would be upset if either party was seen as being "anti-Israel" etc...
But, none of these considerations apply to the Bloc Quebecois. Public opinion in francophone Quebec (to the extent that anyone cares) tends to be much more pro-Arab (let's face it a lot of the ADQ-voting rightwing crowd in rural Quebec probably isn't sure who they hate more - Jews or Arabs), the BQ gets ZERO support from the Jewish community (or from any non-francophones), but they could conceivably get more support from the large Arab population in Montreal if they took a harder line.
So what stops Duceppe from addressing pro-Palestinian rallies and leading the charge against Israel. I'm not saying that i personally want him to do that - but what has he got to lose by doing - compared to what he has to gain?
On a similar note, I've also never understood why the BQ has been quite supportive of the war in Afghanistan and has never supported any NDP resolutions calling for an immediate pull-out - even though Quebecers are almost unanimously anti-war.
What gives?
Yes, I see, But my point was that it kind of sounds like he is saying the occupation is legitimate because it is "recognized" by the UN, if you see what I am saying.
Which is reinforced by the fact that nowhere does he call for an end to that occupation. This is the crucial wedge issue that all public political declarations should be measured against. So far very few have been satisfactory.
The large Arab population here is mostly francophone (second language, spoken very, very well in general), and the Bloc gets considerable immigrant support in ridings such as Papineau and Ahuntsic, but among groups that speak French as a second language. (Or first, in the case of the more urban, educated, upper-middle-class Haitians who speak more French than Creole).
ZERO support from the Jewish community is rather exaggerated, but it is true that not even French-speaking Jews tend to vote Bloc.
so Lagatta - do you have any theory as to why the BQ is so reluctant to take any positions on foreign policy issues that would be very popular with the overwhelming majority of Quebecers? Is there some secret "Zionist cabal" in the BQ that is behind it?
How should I know? I've never belonged to the Bloc. Actually I know several current and former Bloc MPs, including Gilles Duceppe (organised unions alongside him at the CSN) but I rarely exchange more than pleasantries with them. I am thinking of writing to Pierre Paquette, whom I've known for most of our lives, in hopes he will speak up on this issue.
I don't put much stock in secret cabals (and would avoid using that term to describe a group where there may be many Jews, though of course Jews I know would); Zionist groups have always been very open about lobbying for their positions.
I do know that Thomas Mulcair, the only NDP MP in Québec, has never been precisely progressive on this issue. Hoping he gets some pressure from his riding association.
I was being sarcastic when i referred to "secret cabals". The only theory I have ever heard is that the BQ/PQ tries at all cost to appear to be a mainstream political movement and thnks that it refelcts badly on the nationalist movement if they start to look like Pierre Bourgault and the RIN yelling into megaphones in the 60s - as a result they tend to avoid taking any "populist" positions on foreign policy.
He certainly stayed away from the rallies against the Israeli assault on Gaza. He has no problem going to CJPAC dinners though.
Aha! Here he is!
Separately, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party, met over coffee for more than an hour Tuesday to discuss the upcoming session of Parliament, the budget and the opposition coalition.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1173435
The whole damned bunch of them, primping for their bombastic return to the airwaves.
Pretending that children aren't being slaughtered ... or that it isn't as important as they are.
Damn the lot of them! 
Damn them to hell!
Lily-livered chicken shit corporate toadies every last one!
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/570481
THERE IS NO 'LEFT' IN CANADIAN PARLIAMENT!
Oh btw ... I heard that one renegade NDP MP spoke out against Israel's holocaust against Gaza too.
I wonder if Jack supported him ... or silenced him? hmm?
He hasn't been heard from since. hmm!
There is no government in Ottawa! We're home alone, and someone should call the authorities on Harper for abandoning his obligations.
I haven't noticed the sky falling from their departure.
I vote we suspend their salaries and see how we manage without them. I'll bet we don't even notice!
lily-livered chicken-shit cowards and buffoons every damned one of them!
That's imo, of course.
Ours is the only country of 47 to have voted in favour of Israel in the current crisis sitation.
And Canada lost 100,000 jobs so far on Harper's watch.
He needs to go.
Ours is the only country of 47 to have voted in favour of Israel in the current crisis sitation.
And Canada lost 100,000 jobs so far on Harper's watch.
He needs to go.
We all know Harper is hopeless. so why isn't the 'left' speaking up on Gaza's behalf?
The topic of the thread is 'where is the left?'
And my answer to that is ... we do not have one.
Okay we dont have one. None of the NDP have said a single word about it. None except for statements by Layton Atamenko, Masse, Byers and several others.
But its a stooge-off with Harper right now. The Harpers still have all of their heads up Crazy George II's as well as the Israelis' derrieres. Harper's head is so far up Dubya's arse that they have to pump air to him.
I dont like Harper and would like very much if he was encouraged to go quietly, and give someone else a chance at governing. Because apparently Harper doesnt want the job.
Okay we dont have one. None of the NDP have said a single word about it. None except for statements by Layton Atamenko, Masse, Byers and several others.
But its a stooge-off with Harper right now. The Harpers still have all of their heads up Crazy George II's as well as the Israelis' derrieres. Harper's head is so far up Dubya's arse that they have to pump air to him.
I dont like Harper and would like very much if he was encouraged to go quietly, and give someone else a chance at governing. Because apparently Harper doesnt want the job.
As far as I'm concerned, Harper and Bush are both dead issues, and certainly off topic for this thread.
Are you the designated thread derailer?
The thread topic is ... PALESTINE: WHERE IS THE CANADIAN PARLIAMENTARY LEFT?
Ok I'll bite ... remind me of Jack's statement on Gaza ... I think I remember ... he said ... hark! ... ABOUT THE SAME THING AS HARPER AND IGNATIEFF!
'Hamas must cease and desist'
ie, ... Gazans are the terrorists
At least that's what I got out of it.
Correct me if I'm wrong ... but frankly this has been my experience on other issues as well ...
And ... I remain unchallenged ... ?
THERE IS NO 'LEFT' IN CANADIAN PARLIAMENT !
There is fluster and bluster, mostly off topic, but all Canadian politicians toe the corporate line, imo.
Now someone please explain to me why the NDP is silent about the massacre in Gaza?
?
Its not a "right/left" issue. There is a conflict in the Middle East between two ethnic groups over a piece of land. There are people on all sides of the political spectrum who are on one side or the other or are neutral. Similarly, there is no official "leftwing position" on whether to be pro-India or pro-Pakistan when it comes to Kashmir or on what position to take on the Turkish occupation of nothern Cyprus.
No Harper and Ignatieff both said that Israel has quote-unquote, a right to defend itself.
And if you dont know what Layton or Atamenko or the other NDPers have said about it, then why are you going off like this? Because knowing what was actually stated might be an exercise in understanding what you yourself are posting before you even post it.
It seems most of this exercise in lambasting the left is merely jumping to conclusions.
And lastly, THERE IS NO CANADIAN PARLIAMENT PERIOD!
The Harpers dont wanna work - they just wanna bang on the drums all day...
No Harper and Ignatieff both said that Israel has quote-unquote, a right to defend itself.
And if you dont know what Layton or Atamenko or the other NDPers have said about it, then why are you going off like this? Because knowing what was actually stated might be an exercise in understanding what you yourself are posting before you even post it.
It seems most of this exercise in lambasting the left is merely jumping to conclusions.
And lastly, THERE IS NO CANADIAN PARLIAMENT PERIOD!
The Harpers dont wanna work - they just wanna bang on the drums all day...
I do know the gist of what they said, as above, and no one has refuted it.
They have not called for an end to the blockade of Gaza.
I didn't start the thread ... but 'parliamentarian' is a sick joke at present, I agree. But surely we still have the people elected to those positions? surely we are still paying them?
(Not to split hairs, but methinks you do.)
So ... is that the best excuse of the 'left' for not denouncing the ongoing massacre of civilians in Gaza? 'There is no parliament'?
It's fine for everyone to denounce and be horrified by the violence against families in Gaza, in other threads, but we can't actually demand that our self-identified 'leftish' politicians speak out?
What's up with that?
lagatta asked, of Maria Mourani's statement:
"Martin, has this been published anywhere? Can it be sent round, to the Coalition for example?"
It has been published on the Netfemes list and on the vigile.net website, at least. Circulate it to your heart's content.
Stockholm went: "Public opinion in francophone Quebec (to the extent that anyone cares) tends to be much more pro-Arab (let's face it a lot of the ADQ-voting rightwing crowd in rural Quebec probably isn't sure who they hate more - Jews or Arabs)"
Stockholm, you're talking through the part of yourself where the sun don't shine, again... but hey, what would Babble be without that periodic regurgitation of anti-French Quebec sentiment?!
Well I guess you win then. Carry on in large font, because there's no stopping you.
Well I guess you win then. Carry on in large font, because there's no stopping you.
It's a sad statement. Believe me, it gives me no great pleasure to be correct in this.
And thanks for correcting us. I guess you told us. We wont check what was actually said either, because we have it from the horse's mouth.
Are you sure you are in the right thread martin?
Yes he is, look at post #102 and calm down a bit please, you're worrying me but way to push the issue. :)
oooooo... the ndp attack dogs are out tonight!
Hit a nerve did I?
GOOD!
Now let's all go back to the thread about Gaza and be horrified again ... and helpless even to get our own politicians to be even a little bit outraged.
Let's all go back to being good corporateCanada sheep! baa
New Democrat statement on the situation in the Middle East
Mon 29 Dec 2008
It is a tragedy that hundreds of civilians have again become the victims of violence in this conflict. The continuing airstrikes by Israel on civilians in the Gaza strip and the ongoing rocket attacks on Israeli civilians are serving to compound the existing civilian disaster and further harm chances for a negotiated peace.
We call on the Government of Canada to immediately call for an end to the aerial bombing of Gaza, the blockade of aid to civilians and the indiscriminate rocket attacks on Israel. Indeed, the government must urge both sides to agree to end the current hostilities immediately, reinstate the ceasefire and return to the peace process.
The Government of Canada should also work to ensure that medical and food aid is provided to the civilians of Gaza through U.N. agencies.
New Democrats believe that Canada must pursue a balanced approach to the Middle East crisis, in keeping with Canadians' deep desire for peace in the Middle East and are ready to work with the new administration in the U.S. towards a lasting peace in the region. This goal cannot be achieved while citizens in such large numbers are being killed and endangered.
And it cant be achieved with the current batch of deadheads prorogueing parliament and afraid to even show up for work in Ottawa let alone do their jobs with foreign affairs issues amounting to, "YEah, what dubya said!"
===
NDP MP Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre) criticized Ottawa's "muted" reaction to this latest offensive. He said Canada should be taking a "robust" role to deliver aid to civilians and monitor any ceasefire.
Instead, he said Canada is sitting on the "sideline," suggesting a pro-Israel viewpoint by the Conservative government was the reason for lack of outcry from Ottawa.
===
OTTAWA -- The NDP is warning the Liberals they likely have at most a few months to defeat the minority Conservative government and replace it with a coalition that would make Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff prime minister.
Thomas Mulcair, the NDP finance critic, held out a veiled threat to Ignatieff that his party may not be willing to topple the government at a later, more conducive time for the Liberals.
Harper is not equipped to lead a nation. Harper has to go.
This has got to be the most cold-blooded Ignatieff clone going:
In the case of Israel v. Hamas, two wrongs don't make a right
"Canada continues to fully support Israel's right to defend itself," junior foreign minister Peter Kent said after an Israeli air strike on a United Nations school in Gaza killed 42 Palestinians last week.
"Canada has to support the right of a democratic country to defend itself," said Liberal Party Leader Michael Ignatieff.
I agree. But I also agree with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who called the attack on the school "totally unacceptable." And I agree with Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, who called for "credible, independent and transparent" investigations into possible war crimes. I can agree with all these comments because they concern different strands of international law. ...
The absence of a reliable mechanism for prosecuting Hamas and Israeli perpetrators is unfortunate. But so, too, is the support that some Canadian politicians have given to apparent violations of international law. The long-term viability of these rules depends on our willingness to speak out in defence of them - against all perpetrators.
Michael Byers is Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the University of British Columbia. He was a visiting professor of law at the University of Tel Aviv in April of 2004.
The death count in Gaza has now reached 1,000 and goes on climbing.
__________________________
still hoping that the Knesset and Washington will do the right thing
America's Hidden Role in Hamas's Rise to Power
Hamas Comes to Power
As a result, even though Hamas only received 44 percent of the vote, it captured a majority of parliament and the right to select the prime minister and form a new government ...
The Americanos have orchestrated about 95% of this entire disaster. US imperialists bypassed moderate Muslims in 1980s Afghanistan and Pakistan in favour of propping up the most militant of Islamists for waging holy old jihad against the Soviet-backed secuilar socialist PDPA government in Kabul. Even though Afghan warlords have proposed it, the Americanos are dead set against proportional voting in Afghanistan. And it looks like they are for first past the majority FPP in Palestine, too. Obsolete electoral systems make it easier to prop up militant Islam in Palestine.
It's a phony war on terrorism in Central Asia, and this is a contrived crisis in the Middle East and all. The struggle for democracy continues against all odds.
I should think that the idea that Hamas is an "extremist", as opposed to "moderate" Muslim organization should be closely interogated.
1) Fatah, and the PLO, and Hamas have all used violent means. All have killed civilians. Fatah's Al Aqsa martyrs brigades have even used suicide bombers.
2) Fatah, ran women candidates in the recent election, well... so did Hamas.
3) Fatah did not promise to open a free public school for girls, in the last campaign, however Hamas did.
I can't imagine Mullah Omar doing any such thing, or even talking about it.
As far as I can tell the most objectionable thing about Hamas, in comparison to the other resistance groups among Palestinians is their rather backward, and hastily cobbled together Charter, which few if any Hamas officials ever quote or reference.
I think we should be careful about playing up western preconceptions, and falling into "war on terra" propaganda motifs without closely examining the facts on the ground.
Not my favourite people, but then the Taliban they are not.
The Taliban are partly to mostly the USA's creation, too, along with "al Qa'eda" The point is, the US and friends wanted to stem the tide of secular socialist thought in Central Asia. And they wanted a more religious leadership for Palestine thinking Palestinian muslims would be too busy praying and content with social programs to be bothered with paying attention to political issues. According to Zunes' article, Israel exiled secular and more peaceful dissidents while encouraging militant Islamists to gain a foothold in Gaza and territories since 1993. But things changed, and Hamas has become a legit organization with diminished terrorist activities and goals. Zunes said Hamas even rejected "al Qa'eda's" proposition that all of Palestine to 1967 borders be retaken by force. al Qa'eda is another mythological enemy created by the CIA, Saudis and friends since the proxy war in 1980's Afghanistan
To the Israelis and Americanos dismay, Palestinians favour secular politics but are drawn to the social services delivered by Hamas and honesty Hamas members have become renowned for.
And it looks like the US and Israelis are up to their eyeballs deep with interfering to extremes in Middle Eastern democracy. Bush and company demanded that elections be held in 2006, and Hamas were the winners of a phony majority. The US also forced elections on Afghans in recent years, and then tried to tell the world that this is how democracy works. And nothing could be further from the truth. It's political interference by uncle Sam and his proxies. IN years before they didnt go to all this trouble - they just rigged the elections outright or had the political opposition murdered by the CIA or by friendly colonials in regions like Latin America. It's US imperialism with a slightly different twist in the case of Israel and Palestine versus Afghanistan, which is a total basket case on life support. Wherever the human rights shitholes are, there goes Uncle Sam and imperialist friendsin some role or another.
I should add, this isn't a new thing. The Al-Nakba commemoration last summer drew, if I rember correctly, exactly zero elected politicians, while the pro-Israel commemoration was organized by an NDP cabinet minister and drew two NDP MPs, and 3 NDP MLAs, 2 of which were cabinet ministers.
Is this just a Winnipeg thing, or is there no one out there sympathetic to the Palestinian struggle?
We no longer have the luxury of representation by a party that is committed to social democracy and justice, and based on the past several weeks, it‘s questionable if we ever did. The duplicity of the NDP, having been commandeered by blatant opportunists, has never been so glaringly displayed as it has during the latest act of depravity by international criminals. The Layton gang should have been at the forefront of those protests representing not only their supporters, but all Canadians who are horrified by the brutal excesses of the Israeli regime. Instead we were provided with a spineless official statement, and acquiescent silence ever since. At a time when movements around the world are mobilized against this naked agression, and Canada's unions are speaking out forcefully, the question we need to ask ourselves is where are the NDP and what the fuck is wrong with them?
Why would provincial premiers involve themselves in an international matter? Why doesnt Gary Doer just renogiate NAFTA while he's at it?
I think the reason you're not reading or hearing much on Gaza from Canada's political parties is because federal Parliament was shutdown over a month ago. Steve Harper wasnt quite ready to actually show up for work this soon just weeks after spending $300 million taxpayer dollars on an election.
Yeah, that's gotta be it. How's the Very Berry flavour, I hear it's divine?
I am also pissed at this. A statment that is neutral is the best this country can come up with, disgusting. Sven Robinson did some very good as an MP for Palestinians but he was blasted in the media for it. That might be the reason our present MPs have lost all calcium in their spine.
Amir Khadir, elected MNA for Mercier, and Françoise David, the two co-leaders of Québec solidaire, have been at the forefront of the massive demonstrations here.
Also, as martin reported, Monique Richard, PQ MNA for Marguerite-d'Youville and president of the party, gave a rousing speech at yesterday's march.
I can't say what your problem is in the rest of Canada. As Fidel points out, maybe the good politicians have simply become pro-rogue.
Write to the NDP. Demand that they do better.
"Layton, Jack - M.P." <layton.j@parl.gc.ca>
"Paul Dewar - M.P." <Dewar.P@parl.gc.ca> (Foreign Affairs Critic)
"Thomas Mulclair - M.P." <Mulcair.T@parl.gc.ca> (Deputy Leader)
"In defining itself as "progressive," rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist and pro-labour stance."
That's from babblepolicy. Why is "anti-Israel" not part of that? I've mostly shied away from consulting this forum for the past few weeks, for when I looked, it was worse than I thought.
I'm curious, as someone aghast at how militarized Israel has become, as too many there have felt they have had to become; I'm curious how being anti-destruction of Hamas weaponry & means to kill Israelis squares with the babblepolicy? The Gaza government is superior to Israel's in any of the babblestance aspects?!?!
I think I grasp the roots of leftist antipathy to what must once have been a socialist darling for many of them. I think it appalling and counterproductive that Israel has accepted too close an embrace of its supposed main international benefactor. But I from afar keep from expressing too loudly. And even with your overarching babblestance adhesion, you should be circumspect about your condemnations. It will be hard for me to recover the taste for consulting babble and contributing here.
It isn't just Babble unfortunately. Many internet distribution list owners that claim to be progressive and "concerned" systematically reject posts about the Gaza horror, aparently fearful of Zionist posters that immediately unleash "righteous" anger at critical posts, if not Zionist themselves.
It seems that the only posts that are sometimes tolerated - and effusively applauded - are those I could characterize as those of "good progressive Jews saying/doing the right thing." At the Montreal demo, I was embarrassed that a few concerned Jews critical of Israel were given much more time at the microphone than the voices of Palestinians themselves, reduced to shouts from the back of the crowd listening to liberal, carefully-worded statements about the need to put down weapons, for instance...
And yet the notion of the diaspora's accountability for its institutions' general support for Israel government's politic was haughtily rejected even here, with the distinction between Jews and Israel forcefully restated. A double standard - where accountability can only be discussed when it makes Jews look good?
I myself stay up nights distributing such "good Jews" posts - to break the Zionist deadlock on mainstream and allegedly progressive media -, but it anguishes me to know that I am feeding this other problem.
Difficult issue.
I think it would be really wonderful if Israel decided to distance itself from the agenda of its primary benefactor, the USA, by refusing US aid. Self-sanctions would be great. Better yet, they could just stop murdering people in Gaza. Had they stuck to the latter policy, most people would never have noticed the little fly speck called Gaza.
As my Serbian workmate says, if we were doing this, they would call it genocide... and oh yeah, he think Israel is doing the right thing. He is mostly just impressed with the hypocrisy.
And yet the notion of the diaspora's accountability for its institutions' general support for Israel government's politic was haughtily rejected even here, with the distinction between Jews and Israel forcefully restated. A double standard - where accountability can only be discussed when it makes Jews look good?
Israel and its backers say, "Israel represents the Jewish people."
Jews stand up and say, "No it doesn't!"
Where did you see a double standard, exactly?
If you don't think anti-Israel Jews need to be given an inordinate amount of space in Canada, today, right now, then I think only B'nai B'rith will be happy.
This isn't a double standard. It's an irony of life. No, the Jewish people cannot be blamed for Israel's crimes. And yes, the Jews who vocally condemn Israel do play a vital role in combatting imperialist and Zionist propaganda.
Thanks, Unionist.
M. Dufresne's implication that the prominent position of Jewish activists reflects the Zionist control of the media is contradictory. As Unionist points out, B'Nai B'rith and every pro-Zionist organization are, ironically, happy to see critical Jews show themselves publicly as "traitors". to be denounced as self-hating Jews.
M. Dufresne might think analogically: Just as with Roman Catholics (or any Christian) with their own church's politics, it takes courage to take on the Jewish establishment, which is dominated by the "Eretz Israel right or wrong" believers, and it's a challenge to deconstruct the message of the hand-wringing liberals who support Israel's actions and call at the same time for more humanitarian aid to Gaza.
See Gideon Levy's article in Haaretz,
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/10-4
I didn't see any politicians at the rally in Toronto, unless you count Sid Ryan.
As for Jews speaking out against Israeli policies, the sit-in by eight Jewish women was very effective, I think.
Why would provincial premiers involve themselves in an international matter? Why doesnt Gary Doer just renogiate NAFTA while he's at it?
Winnipeg also has three NDP MPs, and rural Manitoba has a fourth. I would say that they are also being silent, but two of those MPs are known to strongly support Israel and like to attend celebrations of the theft of Palestinian land. The others have been silent on the issue.
And Gary Doer does involve himself in international matters by strongly supporting militarism. He supports the war in Afghanistan, those red fridays campaigns, put a yellow ribbon garden in front of the legislature, and partnered with Sears, Rona and Wal-Mart to put yellow ribbons in schools.
And if provincial politicians don't involve themselves in international matters, why do they go to pro-Israel rallies?
"M. Dufresne's implication that the prominent position of Jewish activists reflects the Zionist control of the media..."
I am not sure what Hoodeet means by "Jewish activists". Those critical of Israel's politic?Or those supportive of it? Or all. At any rate, there was no such implication in my post.
I am thinking analogically about this issue of "inordinate" representation of "moral icons" from oppressor groups in activist events. The same problem occurs with profeminist men given the red treatment carpet in order to try and break through the dominant antifeminist discourse.When that occurs and I am given a tribune, I try to offset that by acknowledging our collective responsibility for the worst goings-on and progressives' impotence, not denying it with "not I" or parcellary good news or marginal good words. It seems to me that Helen Deutsch's open letter, posted this morning in another thread, addresses this.
The ethical issue seems to turn on taking or not responsibility for what is indeed done in our interest "as men" or, in this case, "as Jews". Speaking up and confronting our respective establishments is acting responsibly, but insisting on the us/them distinction when crirticism finally comes to bear on a collective behaviour (Israel poliricians are overwhelmingly elected by Israel Jews and financed/vindicated by diasporic Jews, are they not?) - and letting liberals use us to displace the voices of the oppressed - is problematic in my view.
PAJU (Palestinians and Jews United) certainly doesn't set out to silence Palestinian or other Arab voices. I agree that Palestinians, and other people such as Lebanese who have been subjected to Israeli violence of late, should certainly have far more airtime. But it is also important to hear from Jews opposed to the Gaza offensive/warcrime, and in many cases to Zionism itself, so as to break the Zionist's pretention of speaking for the "Jewish community" as a whole and draping their murders and spoliation in the cloak of the dead of the Shoah.
By the way, the head of the Québec-Israel committe, Luciano del Negro, just happens to be the husband of Liberal MP Marlene Jennings... Just saying...
He said we (the coalition for Palestine, including the major trade unions and social movements here) were "morally bankrupt". In a younger day, Del Negro was a leftist, belonged to an immigrant workers' association and worked with the CSN on promoting the organisation of immigrant workers and more staff of immigrant origins within the labour movement itself.
Quoting article in Le Devoir, 10 janvier 2009:
"Le Comité Québec-Israël n’a pas tardé à réagir, dénonçant « la faillite morale » de la coalition formée par des syndicats, des ONG et Québec solidaire « avec des éléments des Frères musulmans dont est issu le Hamas ». Par voie de communiqué, le groupe a soutenu que « la coalition se garde bien de manifester la moindre empathie pour les hommes, les femmes et les enfants israéliens contraints de se terrer plusieurs fois par jour depuis des années dans des abris antibombes ».
« Par leur mutisme sur les crimes de guerre du Hamas, tant à l’endroit des Israéliens que des Palestiniens, a ajouté le directeur général du Comité Québec-Israël, Luciano G. Del Negro, ces syndicats et Québec solidaire trahissent la tradition humaniste du mouvement syndical et de la gauche démocratique et se font, une fois de plus, comme avec le Hezbollah en 2006, les alliés objectifs d’une organisation djihadiste qui cible délibérément les civils israéliens et réduit cyniquement la population palestinienne à des boucliers humains. »
Del Negro is, of course, the real traitor here. Not the only one, alas.
Martin:
1. Please don't veer too close to the "Jews support Israel and are collectively responsible for its crimes" cliff. Please.
2. Your analogy about pro-feminist men displacing feminist women's voices is way way off. The problem there is that men having more voice than women is a very part of the oppression of women. Are you saying that Jews having too much voice with respect to Arabs (or Muslims or whatever) is part of the Palestine problem? If so, please return to item #1.
3. Are you comfortable with the MSM portraying the powerful mass demos in Canada as being "mostly Palestinians" or "mostly Muslims", or whatever - thus trying to marginalize them - at a time when the official representatives of Canadian society are almost unanimously supporting Israel? Do you truly not see the vital importance of non-Arabs being given as much space as possible to counter this marginalization? Do you think Palestinian Canadians resent or feel sidelined by the occasional rare Jew (or other) who boldly steps forward in public to proclaim support for their cause?
In short - do you think Amir Khadir (a non-Arab) is being given too much space also?
Please entertain the possiblity that you may be wrong on this one issue. We need Jews in front of cameras and behind microphones denouncing the evils of Israel. This is so obvious that I can't actually believe it's being questioned.
Unionist, I think we can consider various problems simultaneously.
"Are you saying that Jews having too much voice with respect to Arabs (or Muslims or whatever) is part of the Palestine problem?"
I didn't but - from experience confronting listserv owners and the MSM - I think that is part of the silencing of Palestinian voices, yes. And I am not throwing Jews down any "cliff" by saying so, when many dissident Jews are in fact saying the same thing.
And yes, I am well aware - as always - that I could be in the wrong. I just don't think my comparison with pro-feminist men was that way off.
Yes, absolutely. We need Jews speaking out against this, and being encouraged to do so - some of the people I know (or knew, sadly Lilan Robinson has died) in PAJU and what is now Independent Jewish Voices/Voix juives indépendantes received death threats and messages of extreme vulgarity for their stance.
We also need more access to media for people of Palestinian and other Arab/Middle Eastern origins.
And basically, everyone we can get who takes the time and has the courage to get involved.
Cripes, was it ever cold yesterday...
I kind of knew you'd comment on that one sentence of mine, martin - it wasn't what I meant. How about the rest? Should Amir Khadir back off? Are too many men speaking out? When anti-Jewish attacks take place on synagogues or cemeteries or schools in Canada, wouldn't it be nice if someone other than the BB or CJC spoke out? What is the merit in every "group" being the most vocal in defending "itself", when the key to winning is solidarity?
Here's my point: Both Arabs and anti-Zionist Jews (and others) have their voices excluded from the public forum. It is wrong to think that the exclusion of one is because of the other being given too much space. As lagatta says, we need to hear much more of both.
If you're an MP and you don't have to touch the issue, there's little to be gained by doing so since whatever you say, you'll be pissing someone off.
So there have to be more of us telling them, as publicly as possible, that their silence - or worse, their pro-Israel quips - are terribly pissing us off!
True, Doug. But then there are political leaders and would-be political leaders. And what lesson should we take from their silence or weak statements? Or, in otherwords, if they are unwilling to stand up to criticism today, for doing and/or saying the right thing, why should anyone believe they would be prepared to take such a stand tomorrow when they have political power and it really matters?
I can't comment about the Canadian situation, but in Britain, the 4000 pro-Israeli 'pro-peace' protest in London received equal media coverage as the 200 000-person demonstration (as well as several more hundred-thousand-large protests across the nation).
I look at this way. It used to often take white actors in films about anti-colonial, anti-slavery struggles to bring the stories of non-white peoples to a mainstream North American audience. That's where the irony lies. However it is especially vital for Jewish voices to criticize Israel to break the monopoly on public opinion that Zionists want to project.
Interestingly, Chavez called on Jews around the world to protest Israel's actions. He also called on Israelis to revolt against their state, although I think his optimism in human nature is belied by how small and powerless the peace camp has become. Still, they play a vital part -- especially in rescuing the soul of a nation.
I have always believed that the U.S. was militarily defeated by the Vietnamese people in the 60s-70s. But the U.S. voices against aggression were heard far more loudly, and powerfully, all across the world than those of any Vietnamese activists. Did that harm the anti-U.S. effort? Quite the opposite.
Part of the problem, of course, is that this entire issue is a quagmire for anyone in general and any politician in particular.
It is very hard to see how any reasonable person could see the IDF incursion into Gaza as anything other than a grossly disproportional response. Unfortunately, any comment to this effect tends to be seen as supporting Hamas's actions in firing rockets at Israeli communities. Certainly these two sets of actions are different in degree, but they are not different in kind. Any attempt to speak of this with any nuance tends to result in one being demonized by both sides.
There is also the tendency, in the North American media at least, to treat any criticism of Israel or Israeli policy as pure anti-Semitism. To some degree, this explains why the few voices who can get a hearing are Jews, since it is sufficiently counterintuitive to accuse a Jew of anti-Semitism. This is complicated by the simple fact that SOME criticism of Israel IS pure anti-Semitism. And legitimate criticism of the mainstream media's universal pro-Israel bias has a cursory resemblance to older "Jewish conspiracy" anti-Semitic rhetoric.
The irony is that it is probably easier for an Israeli politician to be critical of Israeli policy than for the average North American politician be s/he left, right or centre. Add in the fact that an 8-second sound bite provides precious little time for nuance, and it is hardly remarkable that all but the most reactionary and uncritically pro-Israel politicians want to avoid this issue like the plague.
(I'm not saying that's right. I' just looking at the facts underlying the behaviour.)
You're right, Malcolm. Leave it to us Jews. We're on safer ground.
The silence of the Western intellectuals
They know that the horror now raining on Gaza has little to do with Hamas or, absurdly, "Israel's right to exist". They know the opposite to be true: that Palestine's right to exist was cancelled 61 years ago and that the expulsion and, if necessary, extinction of the indigenous people was planned and executed by the founders of Israel.
- John Pilger
That wasn't what I was intending to suggest, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. My point was merely that a Jewish critic of Israeli policy is significantly less likely to be accused of anti-Semtism than a non-Jewish critic. This seems to be fairly consistent from what I've seen. (Not that there have not been Jewish critics - ironically including Holocaust survivors - who've nonetheless been so accused.)
I think it is important for any critic to speak frankly about the grossly disproportional response - ideally without offering justifications for the Hamas missile attacks. It is also important, in terms of advancing the issue, that the criticisms of Israeli policy are carefully framed to avoid unintended echoes of anti-Semitic rhetoric from previous generations. There's no logic in playing to the weak side.
Funny, I don't recall the babblers who criticize the government of Zimbabwe tying themselves into knots to avoid being accused of anti-black racism.
Nor do I recall the soul-searching over racial bigotry when it came time to criticize China over Tibet.
And babblers who denounce the government of Sudan don't have to endure lectures about how their criticisms might be mistaken for "islamophobia".
Yet somehow when it comes to the crimes of Israel we have to make sure our criticisms are "carefully framed" so as to avoid an appearance of anti-semitism. Israel, above all other nations, is supposed to get the kid gloves treatment.
I think it is important for any critic to speak frankly about the grossly disproportional response - ideally without offering justifications for the Hamas missile attacks.
Only those who implicitly accept the Israeli narrative seek to frame this genocidal attack by Israel as a "response" to some sort of provocation, and then debate about whether it is "proportional" or not. As if there is a level of military "response" by Israel that would be "proportional" - and therefore acceptable - to the chickenshit "left". Read John Pilger's article I linked to above.
As for the "Hamas missile attacks" - I have no hesitation to say they are a justifiable response to the oppression, violence, and imprisonment inflicted on them by Israel for decades. Unlike you, I think it is important to make people understand that.
The difference, of course, is that there is no political and media establishment quick to label any criticism of Zimbabwean policy as anti-black racism. Neither is there a political and media establishment quick to label any criticism of Chinese policy as racial bigotry. Nor any political and media establishment quick to label any criticism of Sudanese policy as Islamophobia.
There is a significan political and media establishment quick to label any criticism of Israeli policy - no matter how mild, no matter how nuanced - as anti-Semitism.
I fail to see how it helps to ignore that. It certainly doesn't help to play into their hands.
So you are perpetuating the lies.
Let's say we agree, Malcolm, that it is important not to play into the hands of those powerful forces who work hard to connect criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.
That would explain federal politicians exercising caution, and explaining things carefully, when they do their human and political duty of condemning war crimes and demanding that Israel observe international law and the norms of simple justice.
It would not explain their virtually complete silence.
So, something else is going on here, and I think it's exactly the same interests that underly support for, or waffling about, the Afghan "mission", even when most Canadians want out. It's a matter of imperial interest and in part subordination to U.S. policy, for self-serving aims. Those interests explain a lot of seemingly disparate and paradoxical policies.
As I understood it, from listening to presentations on strategic planning for the five, ten and twenty year horizons, the efforts of the Canadian Military in recent years towards "transformation" into more mobile, more lethal, and globally transportable niche capabilities, which were intended to augment American military hegemony, was given the highest priority. New technologies would be explored to take full advantage of networking all aspects of the battle space so that we could play our part in the netcentric warfare that was seen as necessary when conducting full spectrum operations as envisioned in the three block war concept. The blatantly stated purpose of the entire effort, apart from modernization and a desire to fully integrate and participate in areas of common interest with technologically advanced allies, was to provide credibility to our senior brass and politicians around international tables, and more specifically, tables to the south. But then perhaps it isn't soley about impressing American powerbrokers as much as it is our own masculine desire to identify with the forces of 'good,' as Michael Nenonen outlines in his article below. In the context of Gaza, even the simple act of voicing the slightest meaningful concern regarding the slaughter of innocent civilians might be considered as contradicting those forces. If it starts there, where does it end.
Canada’s Mythological Mission in Afghanistan
"The more I listen to Canadian government’s rationales for continuing the combat mission, the more I wonder if they even care whether or not the mission succeeds. While they give some lip service to the supposedly good work that Canadian forces are doing to rebuild Afghanistan..........this rationale seems to matter less than a dogged determination to demonstrate that Canada’s military is tough enough to see the occupation through to the end, regardless of whether that end is bitter or sweet. If so, then this mission isn’t really about Afghanistan at all, nor, perhaps, is it primarily about currying favour with the American government."
Don Davies spoke at the rally in Vancouver yesterday. He parroted the NDP position -- after telling one of the rally organisers that he would not blame Hamas for anything (did the NDP not allow him to give a better position?). Don was rightly booed, and as the crowd got increasingly angry, one of the MC's tried to cut him off -- she was worried someone would throw a shoe at him.
[Edited to remove untrue second-hand info about Libby Davies non-attendance at the rally]
Please tell Libby Davies that unless she quits the party or speaks out against its horrible position on Gaza, she will not be able to escape being associated with that position. Speaking at the rally would have given her that opportunity.
That's interesting about Libby Davies. My bet is that Bill Siksay feels much the same. He is the only MP from the NDP who tried to apologize for their party's support in boycotting the next round of UN anti-racism discussions (dubbed Durban II by the right wing).
I went to see what the BQ had to say. Their statement is in French, but it sounds far more hard hitting that what I heard from the Paul Dewar or Bob Rae:
Ottawa, vendredi 9 janvier 2009 – Le porte-parole du Bloc Québécois en matière d’Affaires étrangères et député de Montmagny—L’Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, Paul Crête, demande au premier ministre du Canada, Stephen Harper, d’adopter une approche plus équilibrée en rapport au conflit dans la bande de Gaza, approche qui respecte toutes les dispositions de la résolution adoptée par le Conseil de sécurité des Nations Unies.
« Le décret d’un cessez-le-feu est urgent pour mettre fin aux souffrances des populations civiles et il doit constituer une priorité absolue. Le conflit a déjà fait plus de 750 morts et 3000 blessés et le bilan s’alourdit d’heure en heure. C’est un drame épouvantable. Le gouvernement canadien doit absolument se joindre aux pays qui travaillent afin d’identifier les conditions permettant un cessez-le-feu immédiat et durable menant au retrait complet des troupes israéliennes de la bande de Gaza », a lancé Paul Crête.
« Stephen Harper doit prendre position afin que cessent toutes les violences à l’endroit des populations civiles. Il est clair que les tirs de roquettes sur le territoire israélien doivent cesser, mais il faut dénoncer du même souffle la réplique de l’armée israélienne, qui est disproportionnée et inacceptable. Le gouvernement canadien doit également travailler pour faire en sorte que l’aide humanitaire soit dispensée sur l’ensemble du territoire de la bande de Gaza, et ce, sans restriction », a poursuivi le député de Montmagny—L’Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.
Le porte-parole du Bloc Québécois a enfin rappelé que le Bloc Québécois milite depuis longtemps pour favoriser la mise en place des conditions qui permettront une paix durable entre les peuples palestinien et israélien. « Dans l’immédiat, il est nécessaire d’envoyer au plus tôt une force d’interposition qui veillera à la protection des populations civiles et à l’acheminement de l’aide humanitaire. Le Canada doit incidemment apporter une contribution supplémentaire en termes d’aide humanitaire afin de pallier l’ampleur de la situation. À plus long terme, un règlement pacifique passe toutefois par la fin de l’occupation militaire et la fin des colonies en territoire occupé, un règlement satisfaisant pour toutes les parties concernant autant l’annexion de Jérusalem-Est que la question des réfugiés, ainsi qu’un règlement global qui reconnaît à Israël le droit d’exister à l’intérieur de frontières sûres et reconnues tout en assurant la création d’un État palestinien indépendant et viable », a conclu Paul Crête.
http://www.blocquebecois.org/fr/manchette_detail.asp?ID=9926287
I'm wandering if the IDF has a magic cut-off number for casualties. News reports tonight suggested that their assault in Gaza is almost complete. Are they trying to ensure that the death count doesn't reach 1,000? Is there some concept of too much blood on their hands or do they recognize that more than ever, people around the globe are reacting to their aggression with the same anger and dismay they displayed for the US and their invasion of Iraq.
Have any of the politically neutral newspapers contacted the NDP or anyone else for a statement on any subject matter at all recently?
Have there been any news stories about how Harper just finished spending $300 million taxpayer dollars on an election, and now he's nowhere to be found on the actual job site?
Did the NDP attend a pro-Israeli army rally recently we werent aware of?
In case anyone hasnt noticed, we have no federal government in Ottawa right now. The Harpers are AWOL and not commenting on so much as the weather on parliament hill.
What are we paying those idiots to do besides nothing? If you dont like non-government, then support the large majority in coalition trying to give Harper the ol' heave-ho!
In a rally in Windsor, Ont., NDP MP Brian Masse called on the Canadian government to put pressure on Israel to end the violence in Gaza, criticizing Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s response to the crisis as the crowd applauded and responded with chants of “Shame, shame.”
But the government isnt doing anything. The Harpers arent even at work where they're supposed to be.
Canada is a ship without a rudder, a Northern Puerto Rico with a few polar bears and increasing numbers of homeless people, sky-high rates of child poverty and prolific exporters of fossil fuels and total energy to an imperial master nation south of the border
Actually, yes
Provincial Justice minister Dave Chomiak, Kildonan-St. Paul MP Joy Smith, Winnipeg South Centre MP Anita Neville, Tuxedo MLA Heather Stefanson, provincial water stewardship minister Christine Melnick, and Toews all attended the “Stand with Israel” event.
And last summer:
The Shared Values Roundtable is a group that was initiated by Christine Melnick, below left, Manitoba’s NDP minister of water stewardship, and the late Harold Buchwald, a leading member of the Jewish community.
“Our group recognizes that the people of the Manitoba and Israel share many important values, such as belief in a democratic system of government, respect for freedom of speech and human rights, and commitments to public health care, public childcare and education,” said Melnick, who has been to Israel a number of times.
“Manitobans and Israelis have a strong commitment to family and community and believe that high literacy rates and public services are important building blocks that form the foundation of a society that honours freedom of opinion and values differences” she added.
The Sept. 14 concert, which was dedicated to Buchwald, featured eight top-notch performances from a number of ethnic communities.
One of the first guests to give greetings was Darlene Dziewit, president of the Manitoba Federation of Labour, who said she had experienced “a transforming visit to Israel.”
“It is important to see that in Manitoba, [unlike other provinces, where labour federations have supported boycotting Israel], people who identify with the left politically are also supporters of Israel,” Melnick said.
NDP member of Parliament Judy Wasylycia-Leis, (Winnipeg-North) gave greetings and said how exciting it was for her to be in Israel in May for its 60th anniversary celebrations. She noted that Pat Martin, another NDP MP (for Winnipeg Centre) was present at the event.
The first half of the Shared Values concert featured the music of Hinode Taiko, a drumming group, as well as dances by the India School of Dance Music and Theatre, and the Rusalka Ukrainian Dance Ensemble.
Manitoba Justice Minister David Chomiak, who attended the event, said he is “a big supporter of Israel.”
He added: “I was one of the Ukrainian kids who used to dance with Rusalka. I wasn’t that good. I was in the back row.”
The concert also featured an amazing hoop dance by First Nations dancer Brian Cline, accompanied with vocals and drums by Ray Stevensen. Cline was introduced by former Assembly of First Nations chief Ovid Mercredi, from the Grand Rapids First nations, who has also been to Israel several times on missions with the Jewish National Fund.
About 200 members of First Nations communities from northern Manitoba, Northern Ontario and Saskatchewan came to Winnipeg for the event.
“Many First Nations people have a real connection to Israel because of the things that we [the First Nations and the Jewish People have] suffered. Israelis have a love for the land and we also have a love for the land,” said Linda Mavsilar, a Christian member of a First Nations community in Saskatchewan.
“It is our intention to grow the Manitoba-Israel Shared Values Roundtable, and attract members of different faiths and communities,” said Sharon Blady, an NDP MLA for Kirkfield Park.
Andrew Swan, the province’s minister of competitiveness, training and trade, also gave greetings and said that Manitoba, can learn a lot from Israel’s experience “of being able to take in one million immigrants from the former Soviet Union.”
And after careful calculations, I have figured the number of NDP politicians to attend pro-Palestinian events in Winnipeg to be, lets see here, carry the two, multiply by pi, take the square root, exactly zero
All we have is a wholly inadequate wishy-washy statement coming out of the federal party and a few MPs who toe the party line.
But somehow that doesn't stop Harper and Ignatieff's dick-waving contest over who can support Israel the most, yet it prevents any NDPer at any level from giving a clear statement about what is going on?
Actually, yes
Provincial Justice minister Dave Chomiak, Kildonan-St. Paul MP Joy Smith, Winnipeg South Centre MP Anita Neville, Tuxedo MLA Heather Stefanson, provincial water stewardship minister Christine Melnick, and Toews all attended the “Stand with Israel” event.
You've actually quoted something from "BloggingFucktardsOnTheRight" Where's the actual source?
You can always go plant yourself in the middle of Gaza and report back to Reuters or AP on what's going on. Because it doesnt look like the Harpers are even interested in opening established federal government lines of communication with the Israelis. In fact, the Harpers are not doing their damn jobs period.
And dont forget to bring a camera.
Jack Layton's statement on the situation in the Middle East is the most balanced and impartial by comparison.
Unlike the two Washington lap dogs, Layton doesnt say anything about "Israel's right to defend itself"