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.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/2012/02/21/ndp-frontrunner-mulcair-tackles-electoral-cooperation-israel-and-marijuana-town?page=0,0
BTW: I don't recall Jack Layton ever suggesting that anti-Zionism was anti-Semitic, as Mulcair did.
His non-answer here makes me cringe once again at the notion of holding my nose and voting for Muclair as leader on the Quebec issue. His answer didn't convince me that his views are too different from the Conservative Party line.
As a matter of fact, Mulcair didn't even answer the question put to him, if that article quotes him accurately. Schnaid asked him to share with the audience how his view differs from Stephen Harper's. He didn't offer any way that his view on the issue was different than Harper's - he just sidestepped the question, invoked Jack's name, and made a vague statement about supporting the two state solution that even Stephen Harper probably could have made without his nose growing. An interesting strategy, I guess, but not very convincing.
Reminds me of oldgoat's amusing comment that he made when we were watching the first debate at a pub: "If invoking Jack Layton's name was a drinking game, Mulcair would have had all of us under the table an hour ago."
So, when comparing various no difference party candidates like Mulcair on this issue, it may be helpful to have the Jack Layton 'gold standard' to compare with. Here he is in April last year, with Count Iggy answering a question from Canadian Jewish News:
"What would a Liberal or NDP government's stance be with regard to a potential unilateral declaration of independence by the Palestinian Authority.."
Ignatieff, Layton Talk with the CJN
http://cjnews.com/node/87698
Thanks for that find, NDPP. It's a good dose of reality. Layton, like all the others, preached that a Palestinian state can only come about by agreement with Israel - or excuse me, through "negotiations". As if the internationally recognized borders are somehow in doubt. As if Palestine can't exist unless Israel says it can (of course, the reverse doesn't hold true). Some of the current crop of candidates seem to be taking a more open-minded view. Mulcair is not one of them.
I find the endless horse race threads too boring to follow all that closely, to tell you the truth, Hunky. I was commenting on a specific question asked of Mulcair on an issue that interests me, and the way he deflected the question by invoking Jack's name for no particular reason other than distraction. And then I said that it reminded me of oldgoat's funny comment about him during the first debate.
You're right, Mulcair isn't alone in NDP circles when it comes to gratuitous references to Jack (although we certainly noticed him doing it way more than others were during that first debate). It's becoming a bit of an eye-roller for me when anyone does it. But this thread is about a topic I'm actually interested in, and about a candidate who holds views on that topic that I find questionable at best. I reserve the right to read and comment in threads that interest me, without feeling obligated to wade through 10,000 posts in the horse race threads that bore me to tears.
I still maintain that the difference between the NDP and the Cons/Libs is bigger than the differences between NDP candidates and each other. But that's to say nothing of the difference between the NDP candidates and what babblers' preferred/ideal policy would be.
I re-read Topp's TorStar editorial board interview and it struck me. If Thomas Mulcair had, like Topp, claimed he is "a friend of Israel", would we not hear the end of it on this board?
Sure, if Topp had previously led a sustained attack along with the two opposition parties on a colleague for taking a progressive stand on the issue, and had made it clear that he felt that criticism of Israel = anti-semitism. Then yes, definitely, such a quote within that context would be worrying indeed.
Actually, it WAS a sustained attack. He led an attack on Libby Davies that the Opposition parties carried on for over a week in the House of Commons and he had nothing supportive to say about his colleague that whole time or ever since - instead, he dumped on her in the media.
And the mess that he started in the media is what triggered an even more sustained attack by pro-Apartheid trolls on Libby through social media for weeks on end. She was attacked with vicious, homophobic, sexist attacks for weeks on Facebook, Twitter, and by e-mail because of the media shitstorm that Mulcair started against her, and not once did he say anything supportive to her or about her afterwards, and never has he apologized for his part in that mess.
I haven't forgotten. I won't forget, and I won't shut up, no matter how many supporters like you try to minimize and sweep his actions under the rug. And if he becomes leader, I will be strongly disinclined to vote NDP as long as he is leading the party, unless he makes some pretty concrete amends for what he did.
She wasn't "freelancing" on NDP policy, but you go ahead and keep spinning the Mulcair line on it - makes my mind up even more firmly that if Mulcair wins, it will be a pretty sad day.
In the video, she clearly said that it is not party policy to support BDS, and she's not even sure she's there yet, but she would like to see a space open up politically for more discussion on the issue without people being intimidated into silence.
That's what she said in the video. And no, I would have no problem with Pat Martin or any other MP saying the same thing - in fact, I'd love it if more people spoke as openly and truthfully as Libby did on the issue.
I also don't think Jack was Jesus Christ, and I didn't like the way he ran to the Israeli Ambassador either. But he didn't lead the attack on Libby - Mulcair did, along with Rae, Harper, and Garneau. Jack was trying to do damage control after one of his deputy leaders attacked the other. He did it really badly, and I wasn't impressed. But Mulcair was the one who started it. And he hasn't shown the slightest bit of remorse since, nor did he show the slightest bit of support towards his colleague during the House of Commons, mainstream media, and social media shitstorm that happened afterwards to her.
She didn't go "off script". She made it clear that she was talking about her personal views, not party policy, and that she just wants political space to open up for discussion instead of people being intimidated into silence. That doesn't in any way contradict NDP policy, unless it is now NDP policy that no one is allowed to discuss the issue or wish for political space for discussion of the issue.
Mulcair attacked her in the media, and said not a word in support of her when his attack on her led to sustained attacks from opposition parties and the media. He threw a colleague under the bus in order to demonstrate that he is "an ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and all circumstances".
(By the way, would that quote by Mulcair be "off script" or is it NDP policy to be "an ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and all circumstances"?)
I don't see why you have to rub it in, Michelle. What a terribly low blow.
Strangely, that's what Dewar supporters are saying about his French. Nothing to see here, just water under the bridge.
We'll keep going around in circles if we talk about Dear's French. Better talk about something else instead.
Wow, Hunky. So, now you're comparing what Libby said on the video to making anti-feminist statements against abortion?
Libby wishing for political space to open up to discuss Palestinian rights activism is the same thing as taking a public stand against abortion?
Incredible. Keep digging.
Yeah, the difference being that standing up for the oppressed is a progressive stand to take, and being against abortion is not.
But, you know, other than that, exactly the same thing, right?
Hey look! 100+ posts!