BC NDP forces candidate to apologize for critcizing "Zionists"
I'm starting to understand who Carole James is. Apparently, the party is behind her all the way here:
This is one of those mornings when I feel sick and disgusted and embarrassed to be a working journalist in B.C.
It relates to the ridiculous controversy that has erupted over comments that Vancouver-Kensington NDP candidate Mable Elmore made to an on-line publication called Seven Oaks in 2004.
Elmore, a critic of Israel's actions in the Middle East (which have often been condemned by the United Nations), said it was difficult to generate opposition to the war in Iraq because of vocal Zionists in the workplace. [...]
Elmore, however, was forced to apologize because NDP Leader Carole James-whom I'm tempted to describe as a dimwit-didn't understand that the term "Zionist" describes someone who supports the establishment of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East.
"The comments were clearly unacceptable and they were offensive and she has issued an apology," James told reporters.
And Canada's Liberals have been no less than thundering nit-wits with respect to their institutionalized and racist apartheid policies toward native people across Canada over the last 100 years.
Good retort, Fidel. Carole James is a dimwit, but the Liberals are thundering nit-wits. Thanks for the insight.
Has she made George Galloway apologize yet? Has she joined Netanyahu's coalition? Don't miss the next exciting episode of, "Pandering for Power".
She's still better than that thundering nit-wit leading the Liberal government out there, Gordo "Let's sign up for TILMA" Campbell. He's Mulroney-lite. And Campbell the dumbbell is close to being the thundering nit-wit we're enjoying here in Ontario. Nit-wits all around eh.
...stoogecrats....uh...gladiooooo?
Come on Fidel. For once, can you acknowledge a fine example of NDP idiocy without trying to throw up a Liberal as a smokescreen?
It's pretty tiring to read the same "I know you are, but what am I!" line of argument when you try to defend some boneheaded, indefensible NDP move.
I watched that clip and I can't seem to find out what James is making Elmore appologize for. Was it Elmore's support for the Canadian governments rejection of the Iraq war? Does James support the war in Iraq? What exactly is the problem?
Perhaps Fidel can clarify what the offence was. James wasn't specific.
From 2004:
Seven Oaks: What kind of reactions have you received -- because you're a rank-and-file activist -- from your co-workers and your fellow union member in your local to some of the anti-war work that you've been doing in the union?
Mable Elmore: It's been tough. And I'm in a male-dominated union, we're ninety per cent men, and a lot of middle-aged brothers and I'm in the minority; I'm an activist, I'm a lesbian of colour, and out in the union, and so it's kind of hitting all those fronts. And in terms of the anti-war stuff, it's really been a struggle. We have vocal Zionists in our worksites, and we've had to battle them, and - really, I'd characterize it as ‘battles,' in terms of turning our executive members around, and bringing educationals into our workplace, and being shut out by management, and having to have our workshops outside of the worksite, and facing continual backlash. But the backlash is also a sign of making progress. So that's how we take that perspective, but, it's been tough but we're going to continue to push. We're signing up more and more members [to the Peace and Justice Committee], and that's continuing that mobilizing, and that hasn't been easy.
And what is she appologizing for exactly in that statement. I read it. James is not specific.
I watched that clip and I can't seem to find out what James is making Elmore appologize for. Was it Elmore's support for the Canadian governments rejection of the Iraq war? Does James support the war in Iraq? What exactly is the problem?
Perhaps Fidel can clarify what the offence was. James wasn't specific.
Elmore was asked in 2004 about her anti-war work within the union she's a member of. And she mentioned that it is sometimes difficult with some members being outspoken Zionists.
From what I can tell, the press was hounding James as to what disciplinary action would be taken against Elmore now, and whether BC's NDP would pay closer attention to vetting candidates in the selection process.
Big ado about nought. Clearly a case of provincial party that does not want to get caught up in what is a federal matter. I am, however, a bit disappointed with the federal NDP's lack of condemnation of the recent military attacks on Gaza at a time when the other two party leaders were basically repeating the George Bush line on the matter.
Question for Middle East experts: Is it possible to be a Zionist and be against the rightwing Israeli policies in Gaza and territories? As an example, I believe Noam Chomsky is of the original Zionist view that says Israelis have a right to their own nation but not by military force or oppressive policies in general.
I watched that clip and I can't seem to find out what James is making Elmore appologize for. Was it Elmore's support for the Canadian governments rejection of the Iraq war? Does James support the war in Iraq? What exactly is the problem?
Perhaps Fidel can clarify what the offence was. James wasn't specific.
Elmore was asked in 2004 about her anti-war work within the union she's a member of. And she mentioned that it is sometimes difficult with some members being outspoken Zionists.
No that is not what she said, she said: "in terms of the anti-war stuff, it's really been a struggle. We have vocal Zionists in our worksites, and we've had to battle them". It was their position on the war, not the fact that they were Zionists that was the problem.
Is there a problem with talking about Zionists, Fidel?
Okay, well that's even more understandable.
And there still should have been a vocal Canadian response from Ottawa on the military attack on Gaza instead of the vicious toadying from our two old line party leaders through perogy fest season.
How is that undestandable? Please explain what is wrong with Elmore's statement. I am not getting it.
Canwest Global just got a bail out from ther federal government, and they, neither of them, want Gordo out of power, hence the BC media making an issue of this. There is no BC media to sopeak of except for Canwest. Deflects away from Patrick Kinella's shanangians and the Basi Virk trial too. Sadly, James caved to their incessant demands and perhaps the imposed terror of such as Weinstein?
She is toast as leader though..perhaps she should resign now before the election and we go into it with a new leader?
Weinstein? She was asked to appologize to the CJC. Probably the complainant. Why would she be made to appolgize to the CJC? They aren't officially the representatives of Zionism in Canada. Better the Israeli consulate.
Does Farber have a collection of these appologies that he has collected over the years, framed and mounted on his wall?
I'm terribly sorry that one of our candidates publically admitted that there is such a thing as Zionists. In the future, we will adhere to the official fiction that these people do not exist and therefore could not take part in any political discussions or disagreements.
If the situation were reversed, say, and some member of the CJC had said: "in terms of the anti-war stuff, it's really been a struggle. We have vocal "leftists" in our worksites, and we've had to battle them", would Farber have forced them to appologize to the NDP, on the premise that the NDP represents the left?
At this point cue, I do not know if there is a difference. Is there?
What? Between Weinstein and Farber?
Well, they were facebook pals, I know that much. Then someone noticed and sent me the evidence, I published it here, then they stopped being Facebook friends.
Yes, and indeed their actions, along with Canwest Global here in BC, what with all their Slap lawsuits.
And then of course there is the fact that Asper chastized Canadians for attacking Goodyear on his not believing in evolution and violating his religious rights. Just when Canwest was getting a huge taxpayer bailout last week.
They are trying to manufacture a BC Liberal win and deflect away from Gordo's and his backroomers corporate fascist actions.
Also, Harpo does not want Gordo out of BC politics, and neither does Canwest.
You can bet this was manufactured in order to catch James between a rock and a hard place.
I have to say that James handled that press conference very well considering that there was nothing to it at all. Making someone appologize for nothing, then not mentioning what the nothing was, and saying nothing about it, but making the charge sound substantive, was quite skillfull in its way. She even managed to sound like she was being tough and in charge, and even a little defiant in the face of the press, while being entirely craven.
10 points on the performance.
Well, she has to play ball if she wants any coverage at all in the upcoming election, and to be free of law suits.
Yes.
There were going to be lawsuits?
It's US-style muckraking in Canadian politics. They should keep it to themselves along with the wonderful rightwing economic agendas that our two old line parties glom on to like trained circus dogs
And then BCNDP adds to the smear by making the candidate appologize?
So the message is basically, don't go up against Zionists, if you want to have a career in the BCNDP.
Thanks, folks, for carrying this discussion forward - I detect a basic consensus on this disturbing example of censorship.
In a way, I'm regretting the emphasis on the BC NDP, although they put it there themselves. Here is an impressive and principled activist, a bus driver, a lesbian woman of colour, raising difficult political issues in her workplace and her CAW local - and then, coming from behind to knock off a higher-profile trade unionist (Jinny Sims of the teachers union) for the nomination.
I want to hear more about and from this courageous sister before she is completely homogenized and silenced.
I accept her apology.
I'm not sure why she is apologizing though; her analysis is probably correct.
ETA: If Zionist wasn't used as a pejorative so often, her use of it as a descriptor may have caused few eyebrows to raise.
That is news to me. Zionist only recently attracted its perjorative undertone. If it is becoming a pejorative that is excelent news. I really hope there is a day when people feel really uncomfortable identifying themselves with it.
It was a bad idea to begin with. A surrender to Christian European racists who wanted to be rid of the Jews. An agreement that there was indeed a "Jewish problem" in Europe. Quite predictably this then resulted in alliances with Christian European anti-semites, aiding and abetting their cause. It was such a bad idea that many of its concepts made it into the Nazi propaganda playbook, and at least in that sense, played a tacit roll in justifyin a massive porgrom. This refrain was even repeated at Adolph Eichman's much deserves trial, where he claimed he was a Zionist too, and that the Holocaust was just aweful mistake that he had nothing to do with: the camps in Poland were just to be way stations from which the Jews were to be moved to a new "homeland" in Madagascar or some such, but the war prevented that plan from being realized, or so it was alledged.
Despite all this, Europeans anti-semites and Zionist Jews continued to contribute to the disaster by encouraging displaced Jews, Holocaust survivors and anyone else to become ensnared in a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing against an Arab population that had been selected to pay the compensation due to the Jews of Europe by European criminals, The criminals themselves basically sidestepped the debt they owed by foisting in upon relatively innocent Arabs, whose only real desire was to see the backs of the soldiers of the British Empire.
Zionism, despite whatever idealistic notions fueled its supporters, has been a grade A international disaster, and the disrepute the term has aquired is entirely the fault of those who support it, and the acts that have been committed in its name.
I'm not the boss, but I would really prefer that we discuss here the particular implications of what happened in this case, what it says about the political process, union activism, and the censoring influence of the dominant ideology. We have lots of other threads where Zionism is being discussed, and that's really not the essence of what happened here.
Cueball was on the right track: why was she asked to apologize, and why did she apologize?
I think I will write to her and ask her, as one unionist to another. But if she was under such pressure, I'm pessimistic she'll speak for public consumption.
Unionist: If you ignore my ETA, I'm saying the same thing as your second paragraph. Sorry if my ETA lead to thread drift. It's a different discussion.
"Is it possible to be a Zionist and be against the rightwing Israeli policies in Gaza and territories? As an example, I believe Noam Chomsky is of the original Zionist view that says Israelis have a right to their own nation but not by military force or oppressive policies in general."
My answer is Yes. Just like you can be a socialist and be against the policies of Pol Pot and Stalin.
With regards to this BC situation, what i won't to know is why there is this feeding frenzy for Carol James to "apologize" about what strikes as pretty one off comment - but no one demands that Campbell apologize for BC Liberals Mary Polak who has made vicious attacks on gays and lesbians a hall mark of her political career.
Its bizarre that James demanded her candidate apologize for saying the word 'Zionist' but that seems to be the gameplan for the BC NDP-as bland and inoffensive as possible to the point of becoming a complete non-entity. This will only encourage the media, they know now that they are dealing with a jellyfish backbone.
Talking with my sister this weekend(who votes) and she didn't know who the leader of the BC NDP is-I helped her out with the name part but I'm a little lost past that point as well.
For those who didn't see it at the time, here is Mable Elmore's 2004 interview by Derrick O'Keefe in Seven Oaks Magazine, for which her glorious leader has now forced her to grovel in front of the media and Bernie Farber.
Is BC ready for an activist anti-war lesbian worker of colour as leader of the NDP?
What I can't understand is where she draws a line between so-called Zionists and attitudes towards the war in Iraq. It MIGHT almost maybe be valid to talk about Zionist attitudes in her workplace if the issue was Israel and Palestine and Gaza, but Iraq?? There are COUNTLESS people who are very strong supporters of Israel who have been implacably opposed to the invasion of Iraq from the very beginning and one issue has nothing to do with one another. So my concern is that Elmore was just gratuitously bandying around the term "Zionist" as some catch-all term for anyone who disagrees with her on anything. Hopefully she has since done a wikipedia search on such key words as "zionism" and "Herzl" and now knows what she is talking about.
She mentions battles with vocal Zionists in the context of "the anti-war stuff" which is a lot broader than simply Iraq. I don't find that hard to believe. Although unpopular in pretty much the entire world, George Bush consistantly rated well in Israel, where the Iraq war and his aggressive one sided approach were applauded. Its hard to imagine there will ever be peace in the region while Israel continues to illegally steal and settle Palestinian land but Zionists often try to distract from that reality by insisting on the same 'us vs the terrorists' schema that Bush and company relied on.
The BC NDP has essentially pissed all over the anti-war movement-they are getting to be as good as Fox News at alienating their allies....
"Although unpopular in pretty much the entire world, George Bush consistantly rated well in Israel, where the Iraq war and his aggressive one sided approach were applauded."
We're not talking about public opinion in Israel. We are talking about Vancouver. In the US (and almost certainly in Canada) even within the Jewish community, opposition to the war in Iraq is even higher than it is in the population as a whole and I suspect that many of those people might even call themselves "Zionists".
I'd like to know who exactly are these so-called Zionists who are members of a public service union in Vancouver - and who supported the Iraq war etc... Vancouver actually has very small Jewish population and of them I sustect and even tinier minority are members of Elmore's union and would have worked in the same workplace as her.
In Russia the "code" for Jews is "cosmopolitan" (Oh silly me, i have nothing against Jews, i just don't like people who are open to foreign cultures!). In other places people use the word "Zionist" as code for Jews.
I think people here are missing the point. The "Zionist" tidbit is probably over most people's heads in any event.
It's the other media attention drawn to Mable Elmore's self-professed "militancy" and "radicalism" that might disuade some moderate, centrist voters.
Elmore would obviously be able to hold a riding like Vancouver-Mount Pleasant for the NDP.
But in Vancouver-Kensington all it takes is for a swing of 4% from the NDP to the Libs for the Libs to take the seat.
Furthermore, Mable Elmore's far-left attributes almost makes Bev Meslo seem as right-wing. The substantial Chinese-Canadian and Indo-Canadian communities within the riding also tend to be socially conservative, for the most part.
I'd like to know who exactly are these so-called Zionists who are members of a public service union in Vancouver - and who supported the Iraq war etc... Vancouver actually has very small Jewish population and of them I sustect and even tinier minority are members of Elmore's union and would have worked in the same workplace as her.
In Russia the "code" for Jews is "cosmopolitan" (Oh silly me, i have nothing against Jews, i just don't like people who are open to foreign cultures!). In other places people use the word "Zionist" as code for Jews.
So now Stockholm is trying to insinuate that Elmore is really just an anti-semite who doesn't know what Zionism is.
And this he has fabricated from whole cloth, without a shred of evidence, based entirely on his own assumptions.
Now he's demanding that Elmore explain herself to his satisfaction.
In other words, he's pulling the same shit that Carole James did.
Like I said, if you read the interview, her reference to 'battles with vocal Zionists' was in regards to the 'anti-war stuff', not necessarily the Iraq war. She also didn't say that all Zionists supported the Iraq war, not sure where you are pulling this stuff from?
Are you implying she is a liar and an anti-semite?
Furthermore, Mable Elmore's far-left attributes almost makes Bev Meslo seem as right-wing. The substantial Chinese-Canadian and Indo-Canadian communities within the riding also tend to be socially conservative, for the most part.
By "far left" you mean working class, black and lesbian?
By "far left" you mean working class, black and lesbian?
By far left, I mean Mable's statements that she's a "radical" and a "militant".
Just imagine if Carole James publicly professed such attributes and how well that will go down with the general voting public.
I think they would find that interesting. Leadership is about defining direction from a position of respect and authority that is invested in the leader based on the reputation of the organization that gives the leader its mandate. It's not really "leadership" if the leader is just a weather vane for public opinion that sometimes acts as a lightning rod for negative public attention.
I attended the nomination meeting.
Mable Elmore came across as totally fair minded and level headed.
Of course, she was just giving a speech and not answering questions, but she did come across as a rather calm person.
So much comes across in her statement about pro-war Zionists.
"So now Stockholm is trying to insinuate that Elmore is really just an anti-semite who doesn't know what Zionism is."
I've never met her, but i give her the benefit of the doubt. I'm sure she doesn't have an anti-semitic bone in her body. She just didn't realize that ad hominem attacks on so-called Zionists is something that is done so often by people that actually are anti-semites trying to talk in code - that when anyone does it - it comes off sounding anti-semitic. I'm glad that she has taken some sensitivity training on how not to sound anti-semitic when you are not.
There was nothing "ad hominem" in what Elmore said. Nor did she make an "attack" on anybody.
As usual you are indulging in wild hyperbole.
If "sensitivity training" means never criticizing Zionists for their pro-war positions, then you know where you can stick it.
Why do these on-the-ball news reporters never seem to tackle the Liberal-fascists on dumb things they not only say but have done while in power? 2004? ffs
Well, besides the fact that CanWest has an editorial policy bias and rewards journalists who adhere to it, if James is going to reward them for creating non-stories by punishing her own candidates than you can't really blame the media for doing it again and again. Sometimes, when you are dealing with enemies, you have to actually stand by your people and fight back, doesn't seem to be in the playbook of the current BC NDP leader.
Let's see, a lesbian women of color labour activist makes an honest statement about battling people beholden to a supremacist ideology and her leader apologizes. I guess she picked the wrong group of racists to confront. She picked the popular and socially acceptable supremacists. She should have stuck to the ones who shave their heads and don't actually do anything.
Dimwit is fine. Unprincipled and pandering is better. Worse, pandering to another reactionary's constituentcy.
Yes, its hard to see what progress progressive interests are going to be able to gain if the approach to parlimentary politics is going to be defined by a hostile media. If it is necessary to adopt the right wing agenda in order to succeed, or get coverage, what possible faith can one have in such a system?
Stockholm, "Zionist" simply means a political supporter of the State of Israel. Like, for example, Stephen Harper. It has nothing to do with what religion they belong to or where they live.
And I'm sure Elmore knows this as well as I do. And also note she was just talking about problems with some people in her worklpace who were Zionists and pro-Iraq war. She didn't allege that all Zionists were pro-Iraq war, and I would think she is aware that not all ot them were. But there's a pretty good chance that anyone who was in favour of the Iraq war is also a Ziionist.
One of the reporters mentioned that Zionist was a "loaded term". It seems like they thought there was something to this. I did some googling on the term and it really didn't leave me any wiser than when I started.
Is Zionist one of those terms that could be pejorative?
Here's Mable's exact quoted statement:
One of my best friends is also a transit operator, CAW Local 111, with Coast Mountain Bus Company and all she does is drive the bus all day and then park it at the depot.
Not much, if any, interaction with other transit operators even over a one month period.
I've asked her about Mable's statement and she does not know how Mable can come to any conclusion of "Zionists in our worksites" when there is no "worksite".
I will re-iterate that Mable still is the WRONG candidate for Vancouver-Kensington particularly with her statements that she's a "radical" and a "militant". It's just not going to fly with the swing middle of the electorate when all it takes is for 4% of the 2005 vote to swing from the NDP to the Libs for the Libs to take the seat.
You mean like "socialist" or "feminist"?
Yes I guess so.
Here's Mable's exact quoted statement:
One of my best friends is also a transit operator, CAW Local 111, with Coast Mountain Bus Company and all she does is drive the bus all day and then park it at the depot.
No that is not what she said. Could you at least stick to the facts when you are smearing militant Union activists who you think are just "wrong" for the job. Nothing really to do with the colour of her skin of course or he sexual indentity, mind you, "just not the right kind of candidate". I hear what you are saying loud and clear, and I have heard it before.
I know exactly what you are saying, and where you are coming from on this.
As an aside, do you know the story that Alex Haley related about about what Malcolm X's kindly old teacher told Malcolm after he said he wanted to be a lawyer when he grew up? It was something along the lines of that he wasn't "right" for that kind of job.
He was just trying to be helpful of course. Not that Malcolm was untalented or anything, but given the way society is (you know: racist) Malcolm shouldn't set his expectations too high. Carpentry was the kind of thing the teacher thought would be more suitable for Malcolm, and something society could be expected to accept.
Not that the teacher was being a bigot, or anything, he was just laying it out the way it was... you know what I am saying?
Her riding association voted her in against stiff opposition. Those people, are from that riding, and clearly have decided who should represent the NDP in their riding.
"Stockholm, "Zionist" simply means a political supporter of the State of Israel."
No, it means believing that there should be a homeland for the Jewish people. Its does NOT mean having to agree with a single solitary policy of the current Israeli government and it certainly does not mean supporting the war in Iraq. In fact there are people in Israel who by definition are Zionists (if you are Jewish and live in Israel then you are ipso-facto a "Zionist"), who are leftwing socialists who oppose the occupation, oppose the war in Gaza, oppose the wall and even favour one state with equal rights for everyone. Just because you believe that there should be a spot on the planet earth where Jews will always be welcome (whihc all that Zionism says) doesn't mean that you have to be tarred with the brush of what successive Israeli government have done supposedly in the name of Zionism. You can comb through the writing of Theodore Herzl and I defy you to find any place where he calls forinvading the Gaza strip or building a wall etc.. or having settlements on the west bank with Jewish only roads leading to them.
People who are socialist in Canada bristle when people denounce socualism as an evil idea and then site Stalin and Pol Pot and Brezhnev as examples - same story.
Oh yeah. So if someone used the term "socialist" in a pejorative manner, which elmore most certainly did not, can I demand an appology?
But what Elmore did say was much more like this: "we had these socialists in our organization which we had to battle in order to get the pro-war resolution ratified", I can demand an appology from someone?
She did apologize so she obviously understands that she made a mistake. Otherwise why apologize?
If someone on the other side said "we tried to get a pro-war resolution passed, but it was stymied by Communists and Islamists" I think people would be up in arms. Maybe the lesson in all of this is to spend more time discussing ISSUES (remember those?) and less time labelling people.
Maybe they said they were Zionists. People do self-identify that way. Who are these Zionists who need appologizing too anyway? Is there something wrong with being a Zionist?
She did apologize so she obviously understands that she made a mistake. Otherwise why apologize?
That is truly idiotic.
OK fine, thanks for the clarification. So could you explain to me why talking about having difficulties with people who happen to believe in a Jewish homeland, i.e. Zionists, and who also happen to have supported the Iraq war - and of course there are a vast number of such people, including George Bush and Stephen Harper, although there is no necessary connection between the two stands - is somehow some sort of misconduct that an NDP candidate has to apologize for? Or if a candidate had said something like "George Bush is a war-mongering Zionist", which is not only a statement of fact but the NDP's public position, why anyone in the NDP would have any business objecting to it?
But it would be the anti-war people who would be up in arms, not the people on the other side. And there's no damn way the leaders of the other side would be asking anyone for an apology. In fact that's pretty close to what Harper himself was saying to the Americans.
"So could you explain to me why talking about having difficulties with people who happen to believe in a Jewish homeland, i.e. Zionists, and who also happen to have supported the Iraq war"
Because its irrelevant. If she wants to make a point about having to argue against people in her worksite who support the war in Iraq or who are neo-cons - that would make sense, but why label them as "Zionists"? Its like saying I keep having fight for public health care against people people with red hair in my workplace.
All that being said, I actually read the interview with Mabel Elmore in its entirety and I have to say that her fleeting comment about "Zionists" was very innocuous and was in the context of a very long interview and for the most part i was impressed with her. I really don't see what the fuss is about. But i think the whole tempest in a teapot shows how the moment you start using very "loaded" terminology such as derisive comments about Zionists - all you do is detract from your actually message. I'm sure that when critics of Israeli policies start attacking "Zionism" - knowing full well that people on the far right who actually ARE anti-semitic also regularly use the word "Zionist" as a code for Jews - the people who are secretely celebrating are the Israeli government and the CJC because it helps them to denounce and ridicule the critique.
Here's my take on this sad little episode in B.C. politics.
Here's another response, well worth quoting in full, from the BC chapter of Independent Jewish Voices:
http://www.straight.com/article-210112/ndp-and-big-lie-about-israel-open-letter-carole-james?The NDP and the big lie about Israel: An open letter to Carole James
Dear Ms. James,
As Jewish British Columbians we were disappointed and angered by your treatment of newly-chosen Kensington candidate Mable Elmore regarding comments she made some years ago about the difficulty of dealing with Zionists in her union when trying to organize around peace issues. We want you to know that we are not at all offended by Mable's remarks but rather by your response to them, which we think does a disservice both to Jews and the community as a whole.
Mainstream Zionism is a political ideology that supports the creation of an exclusively Jewish state in the land of Palestine. The creation of the state of Israel and its many actions in violently repressing the indigenous Palestinian people, denying their human rights and repeatedly violating international law is a direct consequence of this Zionist ideology.
It is completely fallacious to equate the term "Zionist" with the term "Jew". There are many in the Jewish community, including ourselves, who are very critical of the policies of the Israeli state and have strong disagreement with the Zionist organizations and individuals in Canada and elsewhere who defend these policies. With the recent brutal assault on the people of Gaza by the Israeli military, and the recent election of an Israeli government which includes openly racist demagogues such as Avigdor Lieberman, more and more people within the Jewish community and within the broader community are becoming critical of Israeli policies and want to see a change in the situation which could actually lead to a just settlement and peace between the two peoples.
The real aim of the Zionist leadership in branding people like Mable who criticize Israeli policies as anti-Semites is to try to extinguish any debate, discussion and analysis of the real issues in the Middle East. It is the new McCarthyism in the current political context. This is the Big Lie—to repeat endlessly that criticism of Israel amounts to anti-Semitism.
Your response to Mable's words in that interview have helped to spread the Big Lie further and to repress any real discussion and debate over the difficult human rights issues in the Middle East. For the party of social democracy in British Columbia to take such action is shameful. We hope that you will reconsider your words and actions in this matter and attempt to set the record straight.
Sincerely,
Sid Shniad
Marty Roth
Martha Roth
Judith Neamtan
Eva Sharell
Carl Rosenberg
Lawrence Boxall
Bob Rosen
Rick Marcuse
Stephen Aberle
Joanne Naiman
Neil Naiman
Maxine Kaufman-Lacusta
Independent Jewish Voices B.C., a provincial chapter of Independent Jewish Voices (Canada).
Thanks Derrick and I was hoping the BC Chapter would step forward!
Bravo!! Thank you Derrick, and thank you IJV for upholding truth and justice in the face of blackmail.
I just watched Carole James's press conference on YouTube where she says the comments were "clearly unacceptable" and then went on and on about how terrible the comments were.
Way to stand up for your sister there, James. That was the most contemptible performance I've seen in a long time - I'm thoroughly disgusted. I'm even more disgusted that she did this to a woman of colour who has had to fight hard for peace and justice issues in her male-dominated union. Way to comfort the powerful, and perpetuate the marginalization of the voices of people of colour and left-wing peace activists.
Absolutely gross.
I'm starting to understand who Carole James is. Apparently, the party is behind her all the way here:
This is one of those mornings when I feel sick and disgusted and embarrassed to be a working journalist in B.C.
It relates to the ridiculous controversy that has erupted over comments that Vancouver-Kensington NDP candidate Mable Elmore made to an on-line publication called Seven Oaks in 2004.
Elmore, a critic of Israel's actions in the Middle East (which have often been condemned by the United Nations), said it was difficult to generate opposition to the war in Iraq because of vocal Zionists in the workplace. [...]
Elmore, however, was forced to apologize because NDP Leader Carole James-whom I'm tempted to describe as a dimwit-didn't understand that the term "Zionist" describes someone who supports the establishment of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East.
"The comments were clearly unacceptable and they were offensive and she has issued an apology," James told reporters.
Source
And more zoned out stuff about "Zionist" and read the dribble and its dribble and Lord Help Us Jesus from unwanted persecution:
http://jewsforjesus.blogspot.com/2007/02/god-is-zionist.html
According to Brickner, "people who do not see God at work in the movements of more recent history should remember the lessons of the past. Unfortunately, too many today get caught up in polarizing views on eschatology or the pull toward political correctness. These issues cloud the crux of the conflict over Israel today, which is not as much about land or politics as it is about the survival of the Jewish people. And when it comes to the issue of Israel's survival, I believe that God Himself is a Zionist. "
Its all in the interpretation would you think and Lord please peace in the land. If I was into prayers that would be one of them.
Way to stand up for your sister there, James. That was the most contemptible performance I've seen in a long time - I'm thoroughly disgusted. I'm even more disgusted that she did this to a woman of colour who has had to fight hard for peace and justice issues in her male-dominated union. Way to comfort the powerful, and perpetuate the marginalization of the voices of people of colour and left-wing peace activists.
Absolutely gross.
Carole James is actually a woman of colour, per se, she is Metis and her husband is Carrier First Nations.
I just watched Carole James's press conference on YouTube where she says the comments were "clearly unacceptable" and then went on and on about how terrible the comments were.
Way to stand up for your sister there, James. That was the most contemptible performance I've seen in a long time - I'm thoroughly disgusted. I'm even more disgusted that she did this to a woman of colour who has had to fight hard for peace and justice issues in her male-dominated union. Way to comfort the powerful, and perpetuate the marginalization of the voices of people of colour and left-wing peace activists.
Absolutely gross.
James knows what side her bread is buttered on.
Pffft, way to crete a scenario that is not real.
The words said are strong and harsh and attacking as I heard Smith, BC's wanna be reporter the guy that dupes the political news, the Liberals love him, and have duped him the dope reporter doing the political news, its in their notes and he is in this story so I kinda got an idea. Its election time and the attack is harsh and sounds like someone took something to a bad place and then blew it up in people's faces without first taking it to a place of understanding. The logical way some may say and some may say the Lords way if they were into that but me its just my way.
Yes Attack, Attack, Attack peace loving folks over words that were never intended to hurt but there is no doubt this was an attack on James and her response I don't think its butter its probably more like wonderment.
You painted it not me. You said, and I quote:
Big difference
Remind said: Well, she has to play ball if she wants any coverage at all in the upcoming election, and to be free of law suits.
Exactly what would anyone do if someone came to them and was so offended but say they were sorry its what most of us would do just because we are that kinda a people, apologetic. And Its election time and even if it wasn't what else could you do? There is nothing but hope its goes away and your apology was accepted from an event that happened sometime ago I believe its what happens when these issues are left to fester and grow as I'm certain the air could have been cleared sometime ago.
None whatsoever. In anycase, we have no way of knowing if James did this simply for the sake of political convenience, or because she sincerely believes there was something to appologize for.
This is the second BCNDP anti-war activist who has come under attack for espousing views that are not entirely in accord with media produced popular perceptions. Rollie Keith, who served as Director of the Kosovo Polje Field Office of the European Verification Mission in Kosovo, as an officer of the Canadian army, was likewise attacked, as well as being forced to resign.
Rollie Keith is being punished for speaking the truth! By the NDP of all parties!
Hilariously enough Keith's views on Kosovo were good enough to be entered into evidence for the Milosovic trial in the Hague, but deserved punishment by the BCNDP.
You know, I maintain my respect for Mable Elmore after reading her extorted "apology". Someone (CJC, Carole James, ...) obviously fed her a line of bullshit, saying that the word Zionist had "antisemitic" overtones in North America. For whatever reason, I think she decided to err on the side of graciousness, and apologize if she had inadvertently offended anyone. Here's what she said:
"At the time I didn't realize the term was so loaded, that it carried an anti-Semitic meaning in the North American context," Elmore said Monday.
"At the time I wasn't intending to offend anyone and I apologize if anyone was offended by the comments," she added, saying she intended the word was a “reference to Israeli government state policy.”
Thus, years later, instead of quibbling about the word she used, she maintains her condemnation of those who support Israeli government state policy.
The thugs here are are the CJC and James, besides of course the media. But with spirited and fearless activists like Elmore, the party is obviously attracting healthy forces and hopefully will find its direction.
We will see. James, who has never been near Kosovo, originally stated that she disagreed with Keith but that he would still stand for his riding, but under continued preassure she forced his resignation. Perhaps if she hadn't proved so pliable then, she might not be where she is now.
Is it James who is playing ball with the media, or are they playing ball with her?
Repress isn't that what Canwest does with the news?
Carole James is hardly a thug, nor an unhealthy force. But I am hoping it will continue to find its direction.
Mybabble, are your posts encrypted or something?
And that means what? That she said a word out of context or someone choice to take it that way one way and she is being persecuted for her beliefs and you are the guy who wanted to shoot the pope Unionist? Blah, Blah, Blah remember nothing to say and I'm no missionary man.
Doesn't it seem a bit odd that this is BC provincial politics and all we seem to be talking about is who said what about Israel/Palestine or about the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. I didn't realize that foreign policy was such a big responsibility for provincial governments in Canada. The media must be really negligent not to have grilled Carol James and Gordon Campbell about their policies on Sri Lanka or Kashmir or Cyprus?
Exactly Stocky, it would seem that in a provincial election when running for a seat in a provincial parliment where these issues are completely irrelevant the position of Elmore or Keith on Israel/Palestine or Yugoslavia would be completely unimportant. But people are being forced to appologize and resign for such things.
I have no idea why James can't simply say that these are matters of foreign policy and not provincial politics, and therefore not pertinent.
Yes. That's what Carole James should have declared publicly, while telling the media provocateurs to pay attention to real, current, important matters. That's what she should have told the CJC. Instead, she attacked her own candidate, attacked her own party functionaries (say she was "angry" that she had not been told about this earth-shattering interview before), and disgraced herself and her party.
Oh Unionist give it up and say your sorry because I'm so deeply offended and I thought you were off shooting the Pope or looking for someone to do it.
So what? Eiher James's actions are acceptable or they aren't. Her ethnic background has nothing to do with it.
And Stockholm, you continue to evade the question. What right does the party leader have to discipline a candidate for the past use of an ideological label such as "Zionist", whatever the context and and however appropriate? Would any NDP canidate ever be called to account for the past use of a label such as "socialist", "Gomperist", "sovereigntist", "necon", etc, etc, etc?
My apologies, remind, I didn't know that.
I do think it's relevant when someone with relative skin privilege forces a lesbian woman of colour to grovel before a pro-Apartheid group that aligns itself with the terrorist JDL and the Conservative government.
The fact that James is Metis does matter, of course. So does the fact that she is a woman, forcing another woman to grovel. It sounds, then, like she's bought into the racist, sexist, colonialist dominant culture (on this issue, at least) and is trying to force another woman of colour that she's supposed to be allies with to grovel, too, when she shows the courage that James doesn't have, to stand up for what's right, even when it's difficult and even when the opponent is politically popular.
"Would any NDP canidate ever be called to account for the past use of a label such as "socialist", "Gomperist", "sovereigntist", "necon", etc, etc, etc?"
None of those terms have ever been commonly used as "code" when trying to cast aspersions against a particular ethnic/racial/religious group. I wonder how people would react to a candidate who had used labels like "feminazi" or "Islamist fanatic" in the past?
I think that James probably over-reacted to the whole issue and should have been more dismissive of the media. I think that Mabel Elmore was probably wrong to open a can of worms by talking about "Zionists" but that was five years ago and she probably didn't know any better. When critics of Israel use that word - all they are doing is playing into the hands of the Israeli government and the CJC etc...by making it easier for them to move away from any discussion of what is actually happening in the Middle East on to what is for them the more comfortable terrain of "when did you stop being an anti-semite?" (a variant on "when did you stop beating your wife?). That being said from what I can tell reading other blogs and reading BC media, this whole story is only still being discussed by about 4 of us in this thread in babble and just about everyone else has moved on.
What irks me in all of this is the double standard. If the media is going to descend like vultures on Carol James because one of her candidates uttered the word Zionist in an interview 5 years ago - why haven't the media ever demanded that Gordon Campbell apologize for candidates of his who are vicious homophobes like that hateful Mary Polak who is a Liberal MLA and who was an attack dog against gay rights in Surrey.
Stockholm, respectufully, one of the reasons we may still be discussing this is because you are being obtuse. When you state, "I think that Mabel Elmore was probably wrong to open a can of worms by talking about 'Zionist'..." you really miss the whole point.
Zionism is a political philosophy that can and should be discussed openly, so that -- as grown-ups -- we can have serious dialogue and debate about the Middle East. It's worth quoting from Judy Rebick and Alan Sears' piece from a few weeks ago in rabble:
"The deployment of anti-Semitism as an accusation to silence criticism of Israel is also a serious setback in genuine struggles against anti-Semitism and other forms of discrimination. It is based on a claim that the State of Israel is the single outcome of the history of the Jewish people, the final end of generations of diasporic existence. It attempts to make the Zionist project of a Jewish nation the only legitimate project for all Jews.
This nationalist project has largely marginalized Jewish universalism, which argued that the future of a minority, diasporic community depended on winning widespread freedoms that applied to all members of society. That meant that in Canada, for example, the Jewish population was historically very active in struggles for a wide range of social rights and against the idea of Canada as a Christian nation.
The misuse of equity claims to silence Palestinian voices is a setback in the advancement of a human rights agenda. Further, it is a dangerous strategy that makes critics of the State of Israel into enemies of the Jewish people despite themselves. It even casts those of us who are Jewish allies of Palestinian rights as enemies in the battle against anti-Semitism. Further, it disarms us in the face of anti-Semitic incidents, weakening the credibility of organizations that have used the term too broadly and blurred the line between opposition to the State of Israel and anti-Jewish prejudice."
http://rabble.ca/news/memo-minister-kenney-criticism-israel-not-anti-semitism
Stockholm, maybe you and your party should be drawing attention to that in the Liberal candidates.
I leave that to people in the BC NDP. I'm across the country.
I guess my view on the Zionism thing is that the issue is the occupation and the current policies of the Israeli government. Its a shame that in the same way that people on the right to vilify all socialism with the spectre of Pol Pot or Stalin, now people try to imply that believing in Jews having a country means automatically having to defend Israeli government policies.
I'd like to see more talk about "progressive Zionism" and maybe have people form groups with names like "Zionists against the occupation" or "Zionists for equal rights for all Palestinians" etc... and explore ways whereby there can be a sanctuary for Jews in the Middle East - while also being fair to the Palestinians.
In fact if you really want to stick it to the "Israel can do no wrong" crowd, I would suggest we do the exact opposite of what we are doing now. Instead of letting them own the word "Zionism" we should reappropriate it and make the case that its the Israel of today that is a perversion of what Zionism should really be all about. Israel has betrayed Zionism. But that doesn't mean we have to throw the baby out with the bath water. Stalin did enormous harm to socialism - but that doesn't mean that we must all be rightwing neocons either.
How? The msm media in BC is Canwest Global, with evening news being local on CBC, and the CBC in BC is not NDP friendly either, seeing as how the former head of it is a BC Liberal.
And it is not Stock's party!
Stokholm says fair play? Oh and wouldn't that be a long overdue change?
Which brings the Canwest raid on the NDP premiers home to mind as an unsuspecting premier as the media swoops down on the premier in his home with his family as if they were doing a raid on a bunch of dangerous criminals. This is a guy who helped a neighbor out with out giving it enough thought and that was stupid. But the media's actions were ruthless, unethical and immoral as the election was in full swing and it was all over the news, TV,radio, papers, now if that isn't low down and dirty I don't now what is when a media chain takes the media on a ride to hell. And I am outraged that a media chain be able to operate under such cirumstances and remain and have a monopoly on the news or the fiction as in this case.
Exactly Stocky, it would seem that in a provincial election when running for a seat in a provincial parliment where these issues are completely irrelevant the position of Elmore or Keith on Israel/Palestine or Yugoslavia would be completely unimportant. But people are being forced to appologize and resign for such things.
I have no idea why James can't simply say that these are matters of foreign policy and not provincial politics, and therefore not pertinent.
As I started to read the above I though Cueball was being ironic. But of course he wasn't; I was giving him too much credit.
He thinks you can compartmentalize politics into geographical areas so that what provincial candidates and politicians have to say about political matters outside the direct jurisdiction of their province is actually "not pertinent" to the voters' assessment of their suitability as legislators.
How quaint!
Well Spector, I was being a little tongue in cheek. See, Stockholm was trying to place the blame for these "diversions" upon Babblers and our obsessions with things that are "not really any of our business". My point is that this framing comes from the press who is attacking them, not with us here, or with James, so Stockholm's attempt to stick us with the responsibility for being too sensitive about Israel, (why this "unhealthy obsession with Israel" inuendo) and other issues regarding the maintenance of the empire that he doesn't think are "our" business.
Are you following? Ok, read it again, so that you are clear on this. Done? K. Now we can move on to this:
In the same breath we are actually trying to think of 'politic' ways that James might have dealt with this issue other than slamming her own people. And Stockholm's framing is excelent deflection, something which even I will admit he is something of a master at.
Actually I was referring to the media being at fault for going on and on about these foreign policy issues that have nothing to do with provincial politics.
But let's face it - we all LOVE to talk about the middle east or Kosovo etc... because its soooo much more interesting that talking about the comparatively mundane issues that provincial politicians actually have any jurisdiction over like health care, education, roads and highways, the salmon fishery etc...
Who wants to discuss the future of the forest industry when we can talk about Gaza!
None of those terms have ever been commonly used as "code" when trying to cast aspersions against a particular ethnic/racial/religious group.
"Nazi", "Fascist", and 'Communist" certainly have. Come to thiink of it, so has "Tory". Are we to avoid using those terms then?
Can't you do any better than that? Those terms were invented by foes of the groups in question. "Zionist" was invented by the group itself, to refer to itself.
How could it possibly be an offense to any member of a group to use the title that the group has chosen for itself, however it might be used by some non-members?
World Zionist Organisazation
Which dispels the nonsense that Canadian and American Jews uncritically support the Israeli government. They support its right to exist (which can be labelled as "Zionism") while disagreeing with many of its policies.
I find it hard to believe that this union was actually riddled with "Zionists" at all. But really, this isn't a big deal. Carole James was right to call for an apology, which she got. Time to move on.
Well obviously you haven't read what was said, since all that Elmore did was identify the ideological convictions of the people who were blocking their anti-war efforts.
Now your arguement is that it would be insulting to Communists to say that "there were some Communist we had to battle in our worksites about condemning the invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968", because not all Communists automatically supported the Soviet Communist againsts the Czech Communists, only some. And indeed many were opposed, such as the Nicolai Ceacescu, but most supported it.
Obviously, these particular Zionists, supported the war in Iraq.
Nor did she say the union was "riddled" with Zionists... nor did she say that all Jews uncritically support Israael... or even that all Zionist uncritically support Israel... what blogs you reading anyway?
Perhaps someone should infiltrate the ranks of the bus drivers in vancouver and tell us about how its "honeycombed" with "Zionists".
Smear.
Why is "honeycombed" in quotation marks?
Because its a bald faced smear.
James was wrong to call for an apology because Elmore's remarks were factually correct and used no offensive language. Period.
And it's not time to move on. This issue is a lot bigger than James, Elmore, or Zionists. What it is about is the right of NDP members to make legitimate statements about matters of public concern, without having to face reprisals from the party leadership should they seek a nomination at a later date. Nothing less.
Long thread - feel free to start a new one.