babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
IAW motion is coming to Manitoba
March 4, 2010 - 6:53pm
...
Tory Leader Hugh McFadyen and NDP MLA Christine Melnick oppose free speech on campus:
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/breakingnews/U-of-M-asked-to-reco...
And the tories are coming out with a motion condemning IAW. I predict broad support from all three of our useless political parties
http://pcmanitoba.com/newsroom/pcs-condem-israeli-apartheid-week.html
of all the opposition to IAW, i have heard not one single quote or reference to any specific incident of anti-semitism or racism. it is ridiculous they can trot out accusations like that, pass motions and issue public defamation and condemnations without even TRYING to prove their claims.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/3/4/bds
great debate about BDS
It's because all criticism of Israel is considered anti-semitism by these folks.
Hmmmmm.....
Seems to me that the only support for IAW is here.
Consider yourself fortunate that anti-democratic apologists for Israel are still allowed to spout off on this board - a privilege you and your craven allies in B'nai Brith and various political parties would happily deny the Jews and non-Jews of conscience who are disgusted by Israel's crimes. If you and your cronies are not stopped, someone will soon bring a charge of hate speech against progressive Jews and non-Jews, while you, Harper, and Jason Kenney sit back and applaud, with thumbs down in the forum.
Yup and not your so-called "mainstream Jews."
Is that not the point that is trying to be achieved, unionist?
Just asking a simple question, does Israel have the right to exist?
IAW should be allowed to present on campus no doubt. But so should all other organizations as well. So long as no one calls for the destruction or killing of an identified group.
Within which borders, Chester? With which constitution and legal system, Chester? With which people as recognized citizens, Chester? Does "exist" include occupying foreign territories or crossing borders without U.N. sanction? Does "exist" include assassinating political enemies around the world? Does "exist" mean "as a Jewish state", or is that part not included in the question?
Answer my points of clarification, and I will happily answer your "simple question."
Dead silence. A very stinging reply, Chester.
I asked the simple question. I was hoping for a simple answer devoid of the expected hretoric on policies of the Israeli government. Yes Israel has done some questionable, horrible and illegal acts. I will not defend them for that. The tit for tat fight between Palistinians and Israelis is truly sad and it will not stop until one side actually makes a policy change. The sad part is neither side trusts the other for good reasons and this conflict will not be resolved in my or your lifetime.
Does Israel have the right to exist? Once that question is answered then the political policy discussion can further be debated and hopefully reconciled. The problem with many organizations and events like the IAW is that question is never asked and answered. They scream and rant (justifiably) about the transgretions of the Israeli government, yet at the same time do not do the same about what other politicized militias are doing. Both sides are guilty, but it is never a debate it is a bashing session.
If the answer is yes, then there is hope that a resolution can be found.
If the answer is no, then we will have generations of conflict.
You asked a very simplistic question not a simple one
Does Yugoslavia have the right to exist? Does East Timor have the right to exist? Does Tibet have the right to exist? Does Haida Gwaii have the right to exist? Does Kurdistan have the right to exist?
Real simple questions I await your blanket answer that cuts to the core without going into any analysis of the various governments involved.
To follow up on kropotkin's questions, I'm going to ask Chester another one:
Did the municipality of Scarborough have a right to exist in 1997? Was that right trampled when the municipality Scarborough was dissolved in 1998 and it became part of a new larger entity called Toronto (composed of pre-1998 Toronto, Scarborough, York, North York, East York, and Etobicoke)?
Now, does Israel have a right to exist in 2010? Would that right be trampled when the current state of Israel is dissolved in 2011 and it becomes part of a new larger entity called Israeli-stine (composed of pre-1967 Israel, West Bank, Gaza, and Golan)?
Just trying hard to understand your original question. Your answer to kropotkin's questions and my current one (because you ignored my earlier ones) will help me give you a thoughtful response.
Well as a progressive and long-time member of the NDP thanks for that. You are so magnanimous and clever with a turn of phrase.
Progressive Jews are under attack - something you no doubt have never experienced - and you sympathize with the attackers.
It's not really relevant how long you've belonged to the NDP, or how progressive you are on some other fronts. The most important task of any progressive is to oppose, openly, the oppression which is committed in her name.
For Jewish Canadians, that means we must pay first attention to the wrongs which Canada commits, and (unfortunately) those done by Israel, which constantly and falsely is purported to be "our" state. Those Jews who organize Israeli Apartheid Week are courageously fulfilling both mitzvot simultaneously. They do not deserve your contempt.
I asked a simple question, however no one answers it other than by firing off questions that are irrelevant to my question. My question is philosophical. Does Israel have the right to exist? The functionality of its' existance or not can be debated after that.
"Just answer my question - don't ask me to explain it - you don't need to understand what I mean - JUST ANSWER!!! - After you answer, I'll tell you what the question meant, and I'll tell you what your answer means!!!"
Countries have no inherrent right to exist. If a Nation exists, it's because the people defend it so.
Here's a question - can anyone point to an actual achievement of this year's IAW other than to split the left and make IAW look like hate-mongers and hypocrites in the eyes of the majority of Canadians?
i'll answer yours if you answer mine first. My question is in effect just the same as your question. i'll reduce it to one question then you can answer mine.
Does Haida Gwaii have the right to exist? Simplistic question I know but I'll ask it anyway.
My spell check keeps trying to change Haida into Haifa? Cool eh in Canada.
I must tell you that having attended their functions since its inception here in Toronto, I find the organization and consistently high quality of their information evenings to be nothing less than extraordinary. Having quite a bit of experience attending various activist and political formations' outreaches and campaigns - you won't find many more effective than this one. Their functions are always exciting, well run and productive. Additionally the question and answer sessions don't seem to attract the usual egomaniac or flake component. And no hate mongers or even hypocrites certainly not based on what I've seen in TO. Somehow IAW works and works well! Achievements? Many and myriad - that's why Toronto is considered by Reut to be 'a hub of deligimitization'.
As for 'splitting the left' in Canada since when has it ever not been? Long before IAW certainly. What do you mean by 'left' the NDP?
The real question Chester, is whether Israel has the "right" to exterminate the Palestinians. Does Israel have the "right" to ETHNICALLY CLEANSE the territory? And what if the Palestinians become the demographic majority? How much bombing of men, women and children is justified? How many Phosphorus bombs are OK? How many assassinations in Dubai are OK? How much torture is OK? How many dead CANADIAN Peacekeepers is OK?
Sorry, I couldn't hear you over my CHARTER OF RIGHTS. LOSER!!!!!!!!!
Good observation Nbeltov on what the real question is..
the "right to exist" question is just a propaganda term used in reference to what in israel is referred to as "the demographic threat", which is a propaganda term for the return of refugees who used to live in israel before statehood.
the reality is that all major parties to this conflict agree on the principal of israels "right" to exist in its 67 borders, including Hamas, and have been saying so for some time now (predictably left out of the mainstream press) on the condition, held by most of the world, that there be a state of palestine with east jerusalem as capital with contiguous territory and full autonomy. It's kind of ironic that a state (that exists) and it's allies (who also exist) is telling a population of stateless refugees to "recognize their right to exist" when none of those countries will "recognize" an independent declaration of palestinian statehood, accompanied by free elections. These countries are forcing palestinians to bargain and negotiate with a totally unwilling partner for their right to exist, negotiations being a courtesy that was certainly never extended to them.
besides, Israel has the same rights every country has under international law, even more so because of the protection and veto power of the united states.
Hear Hear! The most effective way to resolve conflict is to talk about it in a civil, non-inflammatory manner. Can a simple cardboard robot succeed where world leaders and educators have failed? Tune into Pax101 on Facebook or follow @Pax_101 and decide for yourself. It's an experiment in Israeli-Palestinian peace-brokerage and social media, proving that civil dialogue and respectful debate are the roads to the future. Peace!
so let me see if i can get what will happen out in the open. the ndp will support the motion in the legislature. then the leader will issue a statement the next day or 2 days later to say that ooppss of course we do not support the resolution we are totally in favour of iaw.
that way the ndp can have it both ways...at least that is the ontario and federal model of how the ndp deals with issues like iaw
pretty good JPJ but you forgot 2 steps. first mass email campaigns by both sides to show that they are right and have numbers to back it up. i can't wait for my email account to be filled by groups and people pro and con. and then their will be leaks of a raucus caucus meeting where the ndp member has been forced to explain themselves
after that the media will report on divisions within the ndp and the left over support for or against israel and jews. because to the press it is just that simple