Ongoing battle around IAW, and using, or not using, the A word to describe Israel's actions in ON

That's pretty catchy. :D

Why a thread that limits using the word "apartheid"? It is what it is.  Just because Cheri claims Israel isn't an apartheid state does not make it so. So what message is being transmitted by this thread title?

I say this because this is a game of semantics now. Oh hey, I didn't like the message the other thread gave, so now I'll make my own with my own slant, which is fine, but is confusing. Do you believe it is an Apartheid state or are we now to stop using that word, because that is the message I'm getting in the OP (and I am probably getting it wrong - so correct remind if so).

Not sure if we want to further edit the OP title or not remind, but it seems that with this title we're back to square one. I guess another score for DiNovo and Shurman. No mention of Israel and Apartheid in the same sentence?

Where to start and what to address in this continued smearing of CDN.

Not going to waste much time,  not worth it, other than to say...

there was nothing planned in the FB exgange on CDN's part at least, that I could see, as you yourself noted she was not in control.

What I saw and have read right from the beginning on this is, so called "freinds" stalking and repeatedly smearing her.

Making 1 comment is valid, or even 2, publically to her in her space, and/or going to her constituent office to speak with her, but beyond that, just like making repeated phone calls /or visits to someone you are in a fight with, it is stalking and harassment.

Indeed  visits to her office should occur, and should have occured, as truthfully complaints over her actions should have really been made there,  about something so important, don't you think? Then indeed, if answers to questions and actions were not approved of, picketing of her office could have and should have happened.

Would have got more media on the protestors side, eh! plus it would be a more fitting action that bullying, harassment and stalking.

In truth it appears to be a case of purposefully trying to destroy CDN,  because truthfully these attacks are not taking exception, appropriately, of her words and actions. Thus it is my view they are merely an attempt to destroy her,  or get her to quit politics, as opposed to any belief in what they say she transgressed in.

Wonder who wants to run in CDN's riding for the ONDP?

Stargazer, I merely used  the letter A, as I did not wnat to make the title longer than it was, not because I did not want to use apartheid.

And now that I long at it it appears to be meaning Israel is involved in actions in ON, which perhaps they are, but that is not what I meant, so really I am not opposed to a thread title change, I just was making a point that unionist changed it after making a continued on from here OP.

When in essence, that is not what he was doing, he was actually starting a  completely thread on what he wanted to  slant towards.

all about how it appears on the front page and all...

To be clear, Michelle, I never said there shouldn't be a backlash. DiNovo should be criticized, and severely, for her thoughtless and hypocritical actions on facebook, and of course, for her support of Shurman's bill. I merely said that it seemed people were piling up on a female politician disproportionately. I'm also not alone in that thought. I suggested that it might be time to move on to bigger, more relevant, and more effective projects. Some here disagree and would like to continue to pile on DiNovo until she crumbles. Fill your boots, I say.

For the record, I think your comments on the matter, Michelle, have been resepctable, well weighed, and principled.

We must have read completely different facebook posts. No one said anything disrespectful or threatening to her on FB (that was public anyways. I have no idea what her messages consisted of).

10 dollars to anyone who can point me to a "threatening" post from anyone of her supporters.

So, you're saying that discussing this is "attacking" her and we are trying to "destroy" her.

Wow. Okay then. Shut the thread. Game over. Cheri is a victim and we are destroying her deliberately because we just felt like it. Cheri is completely blameless. We on the left are just doing this for kicks and giggles.

That's it. No need to discuss this further.

"the A word" is actually longer than "apartheid".  Check it out:

the A word

apartheid

Come on, Stargazer. I don't think that's fair wrt what I wrote. I think repeated demands for her to apologize are over the top and hectoring. I think she probably did receive threats over the phone, as she claimed. I don't think the fb page was threatening, but I do think she took some hard knocks that shook her. It was an online pile-up, and that can be brutal. My position is to criticize her actions and comments, say she should apologize, and then move on.

ETA: I also think the thread title is a bit silly. Why not just "Cheri DiNovo and Apartheid"?

Why not call it Palestinian Human Rights Week?  Whatever legitimate points the IAW organizers are trying to make are undermined. A lot of Jews, even if they're not "Zionist" feel singled out by such a title, and many are open to hearing criticism of Israeli policy if it isn't framed in such a knee-jerk, demonizing manner.

I disagree strongly with Shurman's bill, however.  Horwath took a good stance.  Criticizing one's use of words is part of the free debate.  Attempting to shut it down is wrong.

I think it is fair to say DiNovo did not anticipate the response she has received.

No I was going to put "using or not using the aparthied word" and then decided to make a play on the whole damn thing and shorten the title, at the same time..

It's perfectly obvious to me that Stargazer was responding to remind's opening post, not to yours.

Hectoring!? Um, no, Catchfire, no one has asked her to apologize yet. I opened a thread saying it was not my place because I don't know her, don't support her, don't like her. It's her progressive allies and supporters and acquaintances who must do so. And so far, I haven't heard of anyone doing that in a meaningful way.

Yeah, me too, and I think she complained about them publicly to change the subject.

I happen to agree - and if you read my initial proposal that she apologize and that we should then link arms and close the chapter, that's what I've said all along. But if she doesn't apologize, doesn't retract, doesn't show any recognition - what then? As long as she gives herself the right to do what she did in the legislature that day, how can you say the chapter is closed?

From the previous thread

I agree with you for the most part Catchfire, however, I don't agree that what was done to her (which was simply people respectfully trying to engage her in discussion over her stance, including many women, self-identified queers and Muslim "friends" of hers). It was a deserved pile on. She turned her back on her progressive base, and then spit on them more when they tried to engage her in discussion (by defriending and deleting any and all who disagreed with her). This is not what I want from any one in a leadership position.On top of that, she called people "fascists" in line with her anti-Muslim buddy Tarek Fatah.

If she would do the decent thing, which is apologize, then this would be over. However, not only has she not bothered to apologize, she has attacked those who criticized her words. That is a far stretch from being a "victim". She is not going to apologize. She is going to continue tossing progressives under the bus, which is what she is doing every time she is interviewed on this issue. You have to admit that calling people "fascists" and standing in strong support of Tarek Fatah is a little much.

Speak for yourself. I'm not included in the "I hate unionist camp".

By the way, this is not about whether or not to use the term "apartheid". Anyone who doesn't agree that it's accurate, or doesn't think its a good tactic, is free to say so. These threads have been very specifically about the attempts to suppress IAW and any use of the term "apartheid" in relation to Israel. The other debate can go on somewhere else - in the international forum for example. The subject here is the growth of fascist repression of free debate and dissent, part of Harper's onslaught including Durban and KAIROS and UNRWA and Peter Kent's war declaration and Rights and Democracy - need I go on?

I thought I was, but the next time I am going to express my opinion I will get your okay first to make sure I am allowed to hold such an opinion.  Oh the irony of the comments of some posters.

back at ya!

I think stargazer was responding to your use of the pronoun "we."

Did I try to supress your voice, like you did mine no?  I only dared to question the humanity of the darling Unionist who doesn't apparently give a rats ass if another person is threatened or not.  In my books that is just another kind of fundamentalism and should be called to task.  You are free to believe being a jerk is okay as long as you agree with them. 

St. Paul's Progressive wrote:

Why not call it Palestinian Human Rights Week?  Whatever legitimate points the IAW organizers are trying to make are undermined.

I don't know, that might be a little bit strong.  What do you think of Keystone's idea from a previous thread, calling it, "Israel isn't being very nice week" or, if that's even a bit strong, we could call it, "Israel might possibly be a teensy bit wrong about some things, maybe Week"?

Or maybe just "Palestinians are cool" week.  How about that?

Life, the universe, I think you might have misunderstood what Unionist meant.

What I took from his post isn't that he doesn't care about her wellbeing after she received death threats.

I think what he meant is that whether or not she received threats is beside the point in the discussion - it's not relevant to the discussion of whether she was right or wrong on the motion, and whether she has tried to stifle debate.

Unionist doesn't strike me as the type who can't feel empathy.  He just used "I don't care" to mean "I think that's irrelevant to the point" rather than "I don't care about her wellbeing".

Caissa would be correct. Thanks Caissa.

You're welcome, Stargazer.

I was looking forward to the pro-DiNovo thread.

Me too! Ha, now that would have been heated.

I have no doubt that she does have progressive leanings, and has worked tirelessly on many issues. She just failed on this one.

I would care if you were threatened. I care deeply about Life.

The library left a message about those books - seems they're overdue. Need a loan? Life is fine.

By the way, thanks Michelle for understanding my point. You may want to lend Life one of your books after s/he's returned the naughty ones. The thing about lending to Life, though, is that we're all living on borrowed time.

Well, he did say this:

Michelle if your characterization of the comments are correct, the inclusion of 'she's an adult and a public figure. She can handle it.' are unnecessary and cruel.

What is this? Get Unionist to say something nasty about Lou day? Lou, I love you, and if had the budget, I'd gladly bear your children. Now perhaps you could comment on the real political issue at hand instead of siding with another poster who made an unprovoked personal attack against me, in violation of babble policy.

Do you think Cheri DiNovo should apologize and retract? If so, who is best placed to put that suggestion to her in a way that won't aggravate the situation? We need her on our side.

I detect a lot of hostility towards unionist. Why not just address him directly Lou? I knew what he meant, because I know his posting style and I know he isn't a mean or spiteful person. I think Michelle also knows this. Unionist cleared it up already. So why bother poking him with a stick some more?

Thanks, Stargazer, but you're wasting your breath unfortunately. Some people have a hard time keeping political disagreement separate from personal dislike. And it's political disagreement which is at the very heart of the problem here.

Unionist, I can't resist taking you on, you are just too jucy a target sometimes.  But you have clarified your remarks re: not caring about death threats, so I'll lay off for awhile.

I'm still not going to enter the main debate. I love the passion on both sides, and generally am pretty symptathetic to the Palestinian cause, but I'm just not going to join a heated argument unless I'm sure of my position, which I'm not.

I'm not sure what kind of a 'budget' is needed to bear my children. Really, I'm a simple guy.  Dinner and a movie is all that's generally required.

No personal attack, simply calling you on your callous crap.  You feel free to do whatever you wish all the time.  But as soon as you do it you go on and on about how you are being personally attacked.  Irony all around.

I'm just plain confused now. Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure someone will, even if I'm not wrong), but I thought this discussion began when rasmus linked to DiNovo's FB meltdown, which I continue to consider problematic in a number of ways.

And even before that, the problem wasn't the A-word -- it was the unconstitutional, McCarthyist presumption of parliamentarians that they have the right to tell citizens how they can or cannot think, how they can or cannot express themselves, what their "values" must be. It's really no different from the CPCCA discussion, which of course makes Dawg's attack on babble so ironic, given his position on the CPCCA (HUAC North, which of course is exactly what it is).

Nope, you're correct skdadl.

Personally I prefer promoting division among the conservative right and rightwing liberals wrt 9/11 than going after Satan's little helpers in Israel.

And I will continue to vote for the NDP and support Cheri DiNovo who are fighting for social democracy right here in the have-not banana republic of Ontariariario.

Thanks, Stargazer. Torture -- y'know, it's always such a problem for me. Like, I find it rilly rilly hard to get past torture.

Torture Central right next door to Bananada.

I hope that kitteh is ok, Fidel. And of course I go on voting NDP -- what else can we do? Hold your ground, Andrea!

Smokey's a-ok for now except for his runny eyes, thanks Skdadl. I think he had an infection of some kind. He hasn't fallen over in a number of weeks now and trotting around the house like before.

9/11, that's the one the bipartisan war criminals don't want questioning. Israel is like South Africa. They'd much rather the left tilt at windmills in Israel than focus on vicious empire central. Israel's days are numbered according to a US Government report.

That's correct - 100%. It would be ironic if DiNovo's attack on progressives became a re-opening of the discussion here about how good or bad Israel really is, instead of all of us agreeing that it's not a good thing to join Harper and Kenney in their attack on democracy in Canada.

When the electorate isn't even allowed to voice their discontent in a civil manner without being labelled the same as those who are disgusting enough to utter violent threats.  One more reason not to waste time voting in my books.

The thread unionist linked to of rasmus' was indeed only about CDN  "self destruction", it made NO pretense of being about anything other than that. It was a mocking attack geared to further her destruction, and sfae. Please do not make it appear noble as it wasn't.

Thread title is Cheri di Novo self-destructs

The former threads on this were about her:

1. Taking a stand opposite that what some of  her allies believed she should be

2. How politicians do not have the right to tell Canadians what they should or should not being thinking and using as words.

Right you are 1200 percent!  I shall refuse to waste my time voting Liberal or Tory based on what's being in Toronto about a political matter in another hemisphere of the world. It's always good to have tiny countries in the Middle East determine how we vote for social democracy in the Northern Puerto Rico.

18.2% of the valid vote was for the NDP in the last Federal election.  Since the voter turn out was 58.8% of the eligible population that would mean that the NDP got support from 10.7% of all eligible Canadians, while 41.2% considered them similar enough to the Liberals and Conservates that they didn't care.  The fact is if just one party new or pre-existing showed enough respect to voters that they could trust them and offered reasonable comprimise on divisive issues they could easily win a commanding majority particularly given our first past the post system.

As most Babblers know first hand. 

I agree that's the core issue with the Ontario motion. At the same time, it wouldn't matter an iota what IAW was called. The underlying issue is BDS - something I don't think that the NDP supports at this time. So if it wasn't called IAW and was called some "nicey nicey" name, the motion would have still gone forward equating BDS with anti-semitism and hatred. That is now official federal federal government's policy - just ask KAIROS (who only considered whether to consider BDS in the past and chose not to do so). They were smeared and punished for just engaging in a discussion some years ago. 

All the suffering that people have experienced and the work done by human rights activists is being turned on its head. Perhaps this is the slippery slope that some warned about regarding Canada's hate crime laws. Where is the line drawn and who gets to draw it? 

The "A" word debate is a red herring. 

Follow the campaign funding war chests. Did the NDP have the same kind of money to spend on reaching all Canadians with their socialist propaganda as the two Bay Street parties? I don't think so. I've met people in my hometown who still think the NDP are a party of Bolsheviks.  I wonder who with the money and access to propaganda tools educated them with that idea over extended periods of time?

No, I think Canadians aren't voting because they are just not impressed with the two old line parties' records in power over the last 25 years. And this is that point in time when the Liberal Party risks becoming an irrelevant conservative party unless they move back to the middle-left from far right politics. Canadians aren't falling for Liberal Party campaign promises on the left and governance on the right in such large phony-majority numbers anymore.

Harper's still a 22% tin pot even with all that Bay Street money behind the reformatories.

DiNovo smears activists some more...

I love the spin - that the people disagreeing with her on Facebook are the ones who are "threatening" her.  She begs the people in that conversation on Saturday night, none of whom were doing anything wrong, to stop threatening her and to leave her family alone, and then it gets reported as fact in the mainstream news that activists engaging her on FB threatened her and her family.  They say nothing about her freaking out and calling people fascists and idiots even though it was in the same thread.

Sorry, but this sucks.  She knows, or at least should know, damn well that none of the NDP supporters talking to her on Facebook in those threads was threatening her.

It's a smear, and she's complicit in it.  And this is the second smear.  She smeared activists first in the legislature, then smeared them again when they tried to raise objections to the first smear.

She's lost any and all respect I held for her.

Actually that is a complete fabrication of her comments.  The only person claiming that the threats were made on Facebook is the headline writer.  She is quoted as saying emails and phone calls to her home and about commenting about them on Facebook - not that threats were made on Facebook.  Much different than the spin you are trying to get away with.

Nonsense Michelle.

Please do reread what I said above regarding the stalking and harassing on Facebook.

You have issues with what she did state it a couple of times politely on her wall if your are "friends". You have issues beyond that you take it like a mature adult to her constituency office, and  deal with it there. Even if you have to picket said office to get your point across.

just as if there are seriosu issues here at babble you take it to the mods by email, you do not harang all over the place. If you do your threads get shut or you get banned.

going beyond that is bullying stalking and harassment. Just as if you and a friend were having a fight, you do not repeat phone call them.

Plus I have  absolutely no doubt that some who were her facebook friends also targeted her at home or through pm's. Fuck I know the pm's I get here ffs over much less.from supposed allies.

And my saying so is not smearing anyone.

Exactly Remind. And more to the point, we don't know the whole story, only what's been seen so far. 

Did they threaten Cheri and her family? For some reason I wouldn't be surprised if it is true. It wouldn't be the first time that rightwing provocateurs infiltrated a leftwing cause. Any whacko can sign up for an internet account or make anonymous phone calls and leave threatening messages on someone's answering service.

Quote:

Actually that is a complete fabrication of her comments.  The only person claiming that the threats were made on Facebook is the headline writer.  She is quoted as saying emails and phone calls to her home and about commenting about them on Facebook - not that threats were made on Facebook.  Much different than the spin you are trying to get away with.

Sorry, I was editing as you were posting, Life.  I'm not trying to get away with anything.

In that discussion thread on FB on Saturday night, she suggested that the people who were posting in it were the same people calling her house and threatening her family.  Then she begs those people, in that discussion thread, to stop sending her threatening e-mails and calling her house.

Just read it.  You'll see it.  Then the article writer picked that up as if it was fact that the people on Facebook were the ones calling her house and threatening her - because that's what she accused them of doing that night.  This is what she wrote to the people who were discussing this on her Facebook wall:

"White boys...love it! was it one of you that called me and threatened me?"

"And again, someone is calling my home. Leave me, my husband and my children alone.  As Tarek Fatah said, 'Good luck with the fascists!'"

"Enough! Just no more threats. ... All I ask is that you leave my family alone.  I'm happy to meet you face to face just no more email threats and nonsense."

"My reason in starting this up was to ask you to leave us alone. I haven't slept in a week and the calls keep coming even though I'm out of the country. Please...enough."

So I'm sorry, but I'll stand by what I said.  She was clearly accusing the people who were engaging her on Facebook of making threatening calls to her family and sending her threatening emails.

Hey when's the next electoral stooge-off in Ontario?

And again I will state I have absolutely no disbelief in thaccepting a premise that most likely one of her  4,000 friends you stated she had on FB, did phone her house, and did perhaps call/email and make threats. Not saying that they did, just saying I would not be surprised to find out.

However, having said that, that indeed is NOT what she stated, by your own quotes even michelle.

Her first comment was a question, asking if it was one of  her " FB friends", then she states someone is, which I indeed take to mean that she knows even if it is not one of her firends, that someone is watching her words and will hear somehow through the public networking via internet, her entreaties to leave her family alone and stop with the home phone calls.

Afterall michelle, you knew to be watching her wall when she was  making the entreaty, so how was it that you knew, or indeed that anyone knew?

we knew here  cause rasmus  was busy playing TMZ, making sure we knew.

All right, whatever.  If Elizabeth May had said it, I highly doubt you'd be so defensive.  You don't have any problem with internet pile ups on her, as I remember from the endless vitriol you participated in when you didn't like something she'd said quite a while back, and you certainly weren't open to accusations of sexism when she was being (rightly) taken to task for what she said.

I didn't "know to be watching her wall".  I happened to log onto Facebook and saw it happening live on MY NEWSFEED, not because of rasmus.  He posted it here a good hour or two after DiNovo already deleted the whole thing.   You've said you aren't on Facebook, remind, so maybe you should consider not coming up with silly conspiracy theories when you have no idea how the site works or what you're even talking about.

Anyhow, I've said what I have to say.  You have fun, now.

You're wrong remind. You clearly are not reading what is right in that link. She went off like crazy over and over again about "stopping the threats" and not one of those people were threatening her. Not one. Read it and please, tell me who is threatening her. Since when is dissenting a threat? FFS. This is a big issue for activists. She went off the deep end. Sometimes people do. She should apologize and turn in whatever e-mails and PM's she may have gotten to the police. They can deal with it.

This is fucking ridicules. Cheri self-destructed. Period. This whole my party right nor wrong is bullshit. We want accountability from the Liberals and the Cons right? well we sure as hell should expect the same from those we vote for.

She screwed up huge. First with the support for Shurman and now this.

Yeah, that's pretty shitty. But I'm glad she's made some new friends.

Really remind, you should have an understanding of how FB works, how the news feed works, and how others interact. Her entire exchange appeared on anyone's wall who was on her friend's list, and likely the friends of the friends she has. That is how FB works.

If I post something on my wall, it shows up on all my friend's newsfeeds, where they can respond to it, like it, or simply read it. That is how it works.

oh goodness, the conspiracy theory, don't look here marginalization of vioice propaganda combined with CoU speaking down, how blessed am I?

My indicating the attacking and stalking of CDN  has got nothing to do with her political affiliation,  and neither actually does my dislike of EMay  have anything really to do with the Green Party, I disliked her long before she was Green leader, going back to when she was just the lowly head of the Sierra Club, and also your subsuming to accusations of partisanship at play, discredit your stance even further.

Nor have I participated in internet pile up on EMay, as I have never trapsed around the internet trashing her, though I must say I do  reserve the right to do it here though. This being the only place where I  discuss politics publically online.

Nor do I say it is her fault, that the  mainstream media  are covering a story on her antics. :rolleyes:

Now having said all of that I admit, I was being a tad smeary, when I made the statement about why were you watching her FB wall,  as  I knew you would challenge it, thus affording me the opportunity to drive the point home that you made just as spurious of an accusation against CDN, by your stating above she was complicit in planned action with the BBC and the Conservatives, against you, the IAW activists and indeed apparently Palestinians too.

And frankly, though I am no fan of CDN's, I do not for one minute believe she does not care about humanity. As one would have to not care, in order to be so complicit.

hey... did anyone else  notice catchfire has called the same thing as me, but I am the only one of us being called partisan, smeared  and sworn at, for my opinion on how CDN is being smeared, stalked, harrassed and bullied.

anyhow my points have been made.....

Hold your ground, Andrea!

Maybe she should find some, first. 

I think Michelle or Unionist mentioned this a few days ago, but something is kinda odd about this.      

Like a lot of people, I wrote to Horvath concerning the IAW issue, and I got back the form letter response we're all familiar with, which indicates that DiNovo was out of step with the party.   But yet, Andrea is four square behind DiNovo.   

Cut to what is really an innocuous debate about education funding in Ontario, and Andrea stiffles anything that might look like dissentious inside the caucus.

It's just plain wierd.

The only thread of consistency I can find in all this is that the official ONDP policy on all issues is that it's a party that sticks up for the little person, gives a voice to the voiceless, in as much as the general establishment is comfortable with it.

That's certainly not the NDP I joined way back when.

That's the thing Tommy. There are a lot of good people working in the NDP. Charlie Angus comes to mind first. Cheri I have no doubt did great things. I wish that she had just had a little more control over how she handled this. Before speaking on the Shurman motion she could have at least considered how this a) might affect the NDP and b) how it will appear to their voters. Either way, she should be taking some responsibility for this. Not the threats, clearly that is wrong and should be condemned.

It's not like Israel doesn't have strong supporters and backers in the Liberals and the Conservatives. There was absolutely no reason things should have gotten this far. Cheri screwed up - big time. In her haste to support the motion she threw a lot of people under the bus, and still continues to do so. Fascist idiots is what we are to her. Nice.

The people who are phoning/emailing her and threatening her, because they disagree,  are indeed idiots, and they could  easily be fascist in inclination, if not that they are certainly intolerant of other's rights.

That some people, who were not participating in the FB fiasco, or were not harassing her in her  private life, are taking her lashing out comments personally, is hilarious.

As there is no reason to believe that she meant those who were/are in disagreement with on; her personal position on the use of the word aparthied  in conjunction with Israel and that she thinks she has a right to legislate how people word use against  violent colonialist xenophobic governments oppressing peoples.

People who are righteously angry, or upset, with her over her IAW position, IMV need to focus and disapprove on that, and in fact have a public protest against it, and  to stop with the bullying and harassing everywhere online, it is hyprocritical, ego driven and divisive. And I stand by the fact it would never be done to a male politican.

That she has been blammed for being a victim,  and that people have stated here, on a supposedly progressive forum, that they do not believe her when she says she was threatened, is indicative of  not only hypocrisy,  but  also a lack of actual empathy and acceptance. A couple of the more pertinent requisites for denoting oneself progressive are significantly missing I would say, on the part of those that have done this.

For example, Michelle incorrectly used my antipathy towards EMay as an example that was close to all these threads on CDN, in an attempt to excuse them.  I will here indicate that not once was EMay ever having to go public with being stalked and threatened at her home phone number for her stance on things.

...no matter my antipathy towards her, no one here would ever believe that I would have stated that I did not believe her, and then attacked her for saying so, if she would have had to go public on such a thing.

The way the carrying ons about CDN are going it is getting into the decidedly icky factor, and personally I do not think babble should be tolerating it further and Lou Arab was correct to call a halt to it. Too bad some people did not listen and continue with just slightly modified attacks.

Even when someone in the NDP is so clearly wrong they are always right with you, remind. You will condemn people of color, women of color, activists, people who have suffered oppression, anyone and everyone, who is critical of an NDPer who fucked up. You will happily throw them all under the bus and smear them with ridiculous accusations to boot.

Okay, enough. Either shit or get off your pot. Who made "threats"? Is there a police investigation? If not, then it is bullshit right along with this married woman's sudden relevation that she's gay. Get over yourself. It is this sort of blind obedience in the face of bald stupidity that keeps me from ever seeing the benefit of belonging to a party.

I will agree.  The apartheid word is not the problem with the debates about Israel/Palestine; it is a sympton of a problem in which the active supporters of the current state of Israel do not want people to get to the point where they are discussing BDS against Israel.

Personally, I have no problem calling Israel an apartheid state.  It's just a description of what I think Israel is.  South Africa was once an apartheid state.  So, too, was the United States--particularly in the south.

Does using the word apartheid incite violence or hatred against Israelis and Jews?  Again, apartheid is just a description of what one thinks Israel is.  That word doesn't tell others to seek a course of action.

Now Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions do give people a course of action to take.  It tells people to boycott products that come from Israel, to divest any investments they or their companies may have in Israel, and to advocate that goverments impose sanctions against Israel.  None of these steps advocates violence.

I think that the supporters of the current state of Israel do not want people to get into a discussion about BDS because this may be more effective in getting Israel to negotiate on someone else's terms than all the violence that has taken place between the Palestinians and Israelis.  BDS may change Israel's course of action because BDS may devalue the Israeli shekel.  A devalued shekel may cause Jews to leave Israel in search of more economic prosperity which will weaken the Israeli state.

Personally I have no problem calling Canada an apartheid state given the way this country has treated the First Nations peoples.   In fact Canadian apartheid was to a large extent the inspiration for South African apartheid.

Alright, I've followed this for a while with interest and read a little bit more into the political situation - which is admittedly not that deep. Israeli affiliated lobby groups and their erstwhile Earthly allies managed to take a student run annual educational drive/demonstration. And then there was a procedural movement - a piece of paper put forward to fellow representatives by our elected officials - that sought to demean and silence these students. I think that is the biggest problem that I have with this whole thing.

My elected officials do not tell people what is 'okay to say'. Whatever problems someone has with the IAW need not be escalated to these levels. It is unfair targeting and an exercise in control that just should not happen. Whatever the students have to say, let the individual universities and colleges try to decide what their students have the opportunity to say. They usually lose when they try to enforce things that are too absurd, but for IAW I can see a lot bowing to pressure. A lot of really committed people see a huge problem with silencing dialogue on our country's continued support of Israeli polices. Really, saying that IAW is 'hate week 2010 anti-semitism carnival' is the best defence that anyone can give. These aren't hardened terrorists, these are post-secondary students. Anyone who comes out as a whacky anti-semite is firmly shut down. I've never heard one person say some stupid racist shit about their Jews or break out into fascist rheotric or violent 'islamist' speech. If a person had the spine and lack of brain to do that, they'd probably get their ass walloped. No one who promotes violence is going to be open about it, is going to be advertising there. So why did Cheri DiNovo support this? She shut down harmless people concerned with something that her branch of Legislative Exsistence does not even cover.

That's fucked.

To be honest, I find that some of the rhetoric I've encountered at the IAW was a little bit on the hyperbolic side, but whatever - no one is there to give a speech the way that I like 'em. But for all of those offputting individuals there are hordes more dedicated, interested, open minded indviduals that are...I don't even know a word that puts into strong enough words what these people feel about the unceasing, callous aggression of Israel - its long history of brutally oppressing the Palestinian people. From what I've learned of the situation - sure, Israeli society is more liberal blah, blah, blah - but by any stripe a lot of countries that are mildly socially tolerant for their time and context can be monstrous abusers of entire peoples. I really think that it is hard to separate these things. The Israeli right wing isn't bashful about their military operations and defend their state and government - the government that perpetuates horrific things. There are a lot of UN...post-it notes, I guess for what they're worth. These documents aren't biased and raving anti-semitism from Babi Serafina or Shannon "One-Eye" MacO'Reilston, they're high level diplomacy for the most part. They have investigations, reports, eye witness accounts. The record is pretty good. And no one who actually perpetuates these things will fundamentally deny these things. They are the ones that talk about building 'security fences' and installing 'zone of denial' weaponary. You don't have to say 'apartheid wall' or 'white phosphorous burns', because the people at the top may try to hide, but the paper trail is there. Nobody is making these atrocities up. It isn't anti-semetic to point out that the government of Israel and a lot of Zionist thinking is sincerely fucked. And yet Cheri Di Novo made the decision to stand up and defend this by denouncing her own political allies and attempting to curtail the freedom of speech. She may not be as bad as the people making the motions, and maybe she just really isn't too informed on the topic. I don't know, I can't see someone like CDN coming out in favour of government policies that closely resemble the 'a-word' in many ways. Because if you were to take two charts and write out the recent use of policy against a target people in Apartheid S. Africa and 'a-word' Israel, you will see a lot of similarities. So even if CDN doesn't think that Apartheid should be used as the word describe it, it doesn't matter. You don't stifle something because of the name, because it is never good democratic practise. And coming from a New Democrat I found that very disconcerting.

I'm not a constiuent of Cheri Di Novo and my whole hearted endorsement of the NDP is tenuous and ephemeral, but really, she made a bonehead move. I honestly just think that she had a tremendous lap in judgement and isn't a terrible person. That's Shurman and his ilk. The NDP has handled this poorly, to be honest. CDN has handled this poorly. And I don't know why people are so surprised with the whackjobs. That's messed up but people deal with it all the time. For the most part the frequency of vitrolic bullshit is the scum byproduct of internet culture, but I am more than happy to let these things be investigated before I make any judgements.

Now, uh, I guess the ball for how to clean up this mess is left with are some soon to be really tired NDP workers, the caucus...and I really do hope that Cheri can make up for this blunder. But the hell if I'm not going to think that CDN made a really, really poorly executed series of gaffes and mistakes and bizarre decisions.

edit: now the wordmaker in my skull hurts.

There was absolutely no call for us babblers to "halt" the discussions around the fool DiNovo. Your interpretation is just that remind, your interpretation. Just because you stand by your arty right or wrong does not mean we will, and I can say we absolutely will not be backing off. I feel no pity for her. She had a chance, she blew it. She spit on gays and lesbians, she pretended to be the voice of Muslim women on this issue, and now the voice of Queers, because she all the sudden is gay.

We have absolutely NO PROOF beside her word that she received any death threats. No announcement of a police investigation. No e-mails she, in all honesty and to back up her position, could have released. Instead, we see her attacking her leftist base by calling them fascists. I have no idea what you definition is remind, but it appears that the label only applies to those people you  say, with certainty, are threatening her.

Cheri sided with a fascist motion, she then would not engage her constituents and supporters in honest debate, instead she deleted comments and removed people. You might want to reconsider who the hell is a fascist and who isn't. Her best new buddy is that ultra right slime ball Takek Fatah. Yeah, all the sudden her bestest buddy, who also happens to be a Muslim hating pro-American policy fool.

And lastly remind, we will not shut up, or stop talking about this just because you feel we are hurting poor poor wee Cheri. Fuck that. Cheri went public with her full defence of restricting the rights of students and backing a facist motion. Fuck CDN. I shed no tears for her stupidity and she has only herself to blame.

If and when she ever decides to release the so-called threats, even that is a diffrerent matter.

If you cannot see how her actions and support of the Shurman motion were fascist (the label you gave to those who apparently threatened her) then there is no point in discussing this with you.

A lack of "real empathy" was shown by that dumbass Cheri when she decided that limiting the speech of students in favour of Israel right or wrong and then tossing everyone under the bus who questioned her. She showed no "empathy" for the Palestinian women she had the gall to claim to speak for. Screw her.

I find it incredibly ironic and sad that the "oh poor Cheri" crowd are asking for this discussion to be halted.

I've mentioned this a few times - but in her speech, DiNovo said that the Passover Seder begins with a prayer for the Egyptians, who were the enslavers of the Israelites. I pointed out that that is not only false, it is a loopy crazy invention - because the Haggadah (the booklet which is read and sang every Seder night) is filled with triumphalist rhetoric about God destroying our enemies, etc.

My point - how can a rational person stand up in public and make up nonsense like this? Did she just badly misinterpret something someone had told her?

It's a thought that occurred to me more than once when reading her Facebook foolishness - from Tarek Fatah to "I'm queer" to "leave my family alone" etc.

Anyway, that's for her friends to sort out. All I can say, as a Canadian, a Quebecker, and a Jew, that with friends like DiNovo, we Jews don't need enemies. I'll maintain that view until she comes to her senses (or overcomes her rather cosmic Ego) and backs off on what she said.

Maybe she was confusing Passover with Purim, Unioinist.

By the end of the party...

Hahahaha @ Caissa....

This is an issue in which there will be people on both sides who go over the top and act inappropriately. I certainly know a lot of pro-Palesitinian activists, Jewish pro-Palestinian activists in particular, who have been on the receiving end of harassing phone calls at 3 am, threats etc. I would be surprised if Libby Davies hasn't gotten a number of menacing and hateful phone calls and emails from Israel supporters as a result of her vote agains the federal anti-IAW resolution.

I wonder if it's possible that she was invited to some sort of "alternative seder" where they might have replaced some of the language.  I've heard of progressives doing alternative ceremonies for various religious things.

I don't think I'd go as far as Stargazer.  I don't think DiNovo's a fool or a dumbass.  Calling her names just feeds the pity party being thrown by the mainstream media with DiNovo as the guest of honour.  I think she's someone who got caught up in a politically bad action, and then tried to cover her ass with white liberal colonialist feminism when she was called on it, and now she feels like she can't back down or else she'll face a second onslaught from the other side, and deep down, she knows that the wingnuts on the right are way worse.  (In fact, I'm willing to bet that the death threat was from some right-wing white supremacist neo-nazi type, not one of her left-wing supporters on Facebook. As Mycroft says - progressives in the public eye who stand up for Palestinians get no end of hate mail and threats.  Here's a good example of what the wingnuts on the other side are like: Jewish shit list - not safe for work.)

And it probably also feels good to get all those positive strokes from her new fairweather Conservative and mainstream media buddies.  You don't get that when you stand up for the oppressed, so she's probably not used to it, since she's always stood up for the oppressed before this.

And that's something else to remember, too, something I keep reminding myself through this.  She IS normally on the side of the oppressed.  This recent dumb move doesn't take away from the fact that she has done some amazing social justice work on behalf of impoverished Ontarians, like spearheading the minimum wage fight and advocating to end the Child Tax Benefit clawback.  That doesn't make her right on this issue, and that doesn't make what she did okay, but it does mean that I don't write her off, nor do I consider her a fool or a fascist or any other hyperbolic label.

Yeah, aka M, maybe I should dig up hate letters we got (I and a few other Jews) in the 1970s, God how time flies, one of them with a crude drawing of people (us) at the business end of a sword, after visiting a university campus and organizing a panel discussion on "Zionism is racism" (which was then the official position of the UN General Assembly, until it was retracted years later). I can't imagine what kind of delirium or misplaced sense of self-importance would have possessed any of us to "go public" with run-of-the-mill stuff like this. And I don't know too many union reps that haven't been treated to threats on occasion. Honestly, her attempt to deflect criticism by portraying herself as a victim (whether she got the threats or not) was so typically the tactic that Israel and its supporters use that I had to take some déjà vu medication after reading those FB exchanges.

double post and double post....i know i like to read my self but the same thing twice is too much even for me.

i have not posted to the last 95 threads on this :-)

i do not know if CDN has recieved threats or not. But no women who states that she has been subject to death threats, threatening phonecalls or harrasment should need to be in fear.

i do not care if the women is someone i like, someone i dislike, someone i would vote for or someone i would vote against.

in 2010 very simply no women should live in fear. and if CDN or any other women states that she is in fear that is good enough for me.

Where did I put those déjà vu pills...

Where did I put those déjà vu pills...

You're right Michelle but cripes does she piss me off.

I used the term fascist in response to remind's use of the term. It was to highlight the silliness of using it against those who dissented and told Cheri so.

I'm just having a hard time trying to get over how she managed to split the left, piss on her leftist friends, and become best buds with right wing fools. I know she has done good work, but it appears that she is causing her own destruction and continues to do so.

It would help if Cheri had gone to the police. Has she? Has she contacted anyone besides Andrea with the threats? She should. Not only will it give her some credibility it will ease the minds of people like me, who are at this point, not so sure of her.

And wth??? A self-hating Jew list? Absolutely disgusting.

I'm a self-hating Jew, and I hate myself for being one.

Who woulda thought there's be so many names on that SHIT list. Even rabble gets a mention. 

I just thought that this one was well-worth repeating - and that it might help put things back on track.

When synthome referred to the disproportionate response around here as rabid, deranged, essentialist, and fundamentalist, the sad reality is that he underestimated the severity of derangement and should have called the response hysterical and insane.

Babble policy:"You will not post material that is inaccurate, abusive, hateful, harassing, obscene, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy or otherwise violative of any law."

Stargazer manages in one post to hit virtually all the notes. Any reprisals? any reprimands? Of course not, she's walking lockstep with the fundamentalist position here. I won't respond or repeat her bile because that would give it a basic credibility that it doesn't deserve. 

I now understand why babble has a policy: to justify banning those who have the gall to disagree around here. Clearly enforcement of the policy is entirely uneven and arbitrary. Calling yourselves "progressives" is a defilement of everything I understand "progressive" to mean. 

Unionist, I know you don't like being spanked around the way you have been by Dr. Dawg, spurs, etc, but your overweening attitude assures me that clearly you were coddled as a child. That I assume is the basis of your sense of entitlement to be head apparatchik, Grand Inquisitor, and Absolute authority.  I am no Jew and have never assisted at a Seder supper, but in two seconds I was able to find a Passover Seder Haggadah, that begins essentially not only as DiNovo described in Hansard, but also are simply beautiful words:

"KIDDUSH We are gathered here tonight to affirm our continuity with the generations of Jews who kept alive the vision of freedom in the Passover story. For thousands of years, Jews (and our non-Jewish allies) have affirmed this vision by participating in the Passover Seder. We not only remember the Exodus but actually relive it, bringing its transformative power into our own lives. The Hebrew word for Egypt, mitzrayim, means "narrow straits." Traditionally, mitzrayim has been understood to mean a spiritual state, the "narrow place" of confusion, fragmentation, and spiritual disconnection. Liberation requires us to embrace that which we have been taught to scorn within ourselves and others, including the split-off parts from our own consciousness that we find intolerable and that we project onto some "evil Other." The Seder can also be a time to reflect on those parts of ourselves. Israel, according to the Torah, left Egypt with "a mixed multitude." The Jewish people began as a multicultural mélange of people attracted to a vision of social transformation. What makes us Jews is not some biological fact, but our willingness to proclaim the message of those ancient slaves: (Say Together) The world can be changed, we can be healed."

But don't let this get in the way of your public scorn for a public official who dared disagree with you. You have special privileges around here. I get it! But, DiNovo silenced no one. She called into question, she disagreed, with the use of the term Apartheid in IAW. Next time she should consult her tiny rabid "base" (i.e. lunatic fringe) before speaking, especially knowing full well how disagreement with orthodoxy is met around here. If you silence disagreement how will you know when the "real" repression and censorship comes? IAW not only went ahead as scheduled, there was never any threat it wouldn't go ahead. And in fact, IAW not only ended up receiving way more publicity than it would have otherwise, it actually forced some people to think and at least rationalize their use of the term. Now whether IAW gains loses credibility from the deranged responses around here, will remain to be seen.

Fuck off troll.

@Michelle: "she knows that the wingnuts on the right are way worse."

That's at least a start, since you acknowledge there are similar wingnuts on the left. You're [edit: not to unfairly single out Michelle, I meant You in the plural sense] almost there. Quick! Find a mirror.

@Stargazer: "I'm just having a hard time trying to get over how she managed to split the left"

Yes, that's it, the Left needs help splitting itself up with derangement.  And did you actually say "cripes"?

Everytime we ban someone like our new friend, we seem intolerant.

Dude, is this not the third or fourth time you have joined only to be banned? One can assume from that a few things, none very favourable.

Another thing dude, you may want to have a look at the link Michelle posted. That link is far right Jew hating drivel. Are they your friends?

@ Stargazer: Did you just say "dude"? Thanks for updating you're status to "really pissed". I needed the heads up. You're hipmeter is off the charts. I'm an equal opportunity hater of all drivel, especially hateful drivel, and you're keeping me too busy to go anywhere else.

Dude, I'm a Socialist!  

Now don't feed the troll (the one contravening babble policy). Caissa, you're right. babble is not intolerant, it has tremendous latitude for its lackeys (yes, like Stargazer), just no so much forgiveness in terms of difference of opinion.

One of my worst faults, I know, is a knee-jerk tendency to presume that people who are pretentious and rude at the same time are probably also still wet behind the ears. I know that's age-ist of me, and I hereby apologize for the prejudice, but I'm having the worst time shaking it right now -- dunno why.

You shouldn't speak of Unionist that way. He's been around here a long time and has earned the right.

Something funny happened to spurs on the Progressive Bloggers feed last night. You know anything about that, urh?

So synthome is accused of immaturity and he retaliates by saying "I know he is, but what am I?" 

Brilliant.

Are you self-promoting? Honestly, I don't know what you're referring to.

Not to worry. I'll stop now, you can ban me, but I really am appalled at the double standards applied here. You have every right to feel betrayed, even dismayed. But DiNovo does not deserve this kind of treatment. You have been ungracious in your interpretations, cynical in your attacks, and hateful in your scorn. And you have done it with the blessing of the moderators and in contravention of your own policies. That is shameful!

You know what FM, all that is smearing fucking bull shit, I have condemned CDN about her actions,  and have even stated her office should be picketed it over it. What I am in disagreement with is the ugly nature of actions towards her, and now myself,  for having the audacity to say stop fucking attacking her personally and blamming the victim in respect to her assertations of death threats etc.

And your calls of partisanship on my part are pathetic small minded musings. As your actions and others in this thread and previous ones actually give great credibility to the type of attacks CDN was getting at home. It does not take any stretch of the imagination to see where some privileged fuck wit thinks they can be hyprocrits and level threats against her.

Just look what I am getting here because I have stated stick to the issues of her political actions in respect to IAW, and stop blamming the victim and calling her a liar.

really, I could get real nasty with you, but there is no need, your words and actions exhibit who and what you are.

And heads up I do not belong to the NDP, especially NOT the ONNDP. But I do know the difference between taking exception to  stalking harassing and bullying and partisanship actions.

You know, I could see all this fucking hate spewing on the part of yourself and others, if I had agreed with CDN in the least, but I haven't. Just my standing up for better behaviour has made me the target of hate nonsense such as yours.

And again I will state; where is this type of hate spewing against catchfire and Lou Arab, who also called for it to stop?

Comfort was given to the enemies of reason, justice and humanity with the selfish and thoughtless decision to side against those struggling to bring these matters into the light of day, in the face of all attempts by the mainstream media and old line elected sycophants to obscure the dreadful reality of the colonies, those wanton acts of depravity inflicted daily upon an occupied population, that have been supported as policy by our government representatives from one gutless regime to the next. The enemies are now among us to lecture about proportionality with an air of unamused elitism, complete with the backhanded wave, which convinces no one but themselves that the dishonest and apologist claptrap being peddled has a shred of validity from a progressive view.

Oh, so you like to bait and troll? Wow, so cool of you! I was already pissed but now that you're here, I'm in a great mood! I get to watch yet another desperate troll self- destruct. What can be more fun? Oh right, I'm talking about you. I guess your idea of fun is to reincarnate yourself every time you are banned. Wow, you're a real tropper huh?Doing good working for leftish causes? Don't know how you keep up with all your online personalities though. Do you charge for performances? I'll give you 5 dollars if you do a back flip while reciting bible passages. Your turn.

That's right - I'm a "hipster" and you sir, and a misguided silly wee man.

remind, what you are getting here is justified outrage. Cheri seems to have the MSM and the powerful Tarek Fatah on her side.

She is NOT A VICTIM.

Oh Dear.  This person truely has a pathological fixation.  Such people feed on attention, not caring if it's positive or negative, and are best utterly ignored.

You know what, someone who recieves death threats, and then gets questioned on her truthfulness about it and called a liar, is  being victimized regardless of who agrees with her.

Outrage over her words/actions in the ON legislature  is justified, I agree, never have not, and have actually taken independant action through another non-political channel about it, but going to where it has been going on the parts of some, isn't okay, not even close to it.

Synthome aka Derrida aka spurs hasn't got over Dr. Dawg's effusive praise of his vicious attack on babble:

Our troll is just obeying orders.

Long thread.

I've reopened this thread (should be fun!) for further discussion.