Iggy bans Lib MPs from Gaza rallies?

118 posts / 0 new
Last post
aka Mycroft
Iggy bans Lib MPs from Gaza rallies?

http://canadian-firebrand.blogspot.com/2009/01/liberal-mps-gagged-on-gaza.html

Quote:
I've just heard word from a reliable source that Liberal MPs have been
instructed not to speak at Gaza solidarity rallies with the threat that
if they do their nominations forms will not be signed for the next
election. I wonder if Liberals have been given the same instruction in
relation to pro-Israel rallies?

martin dufresne

Well, that should be easy enough to verify or infirm. Has your local Grit MP or candidate been seen at such rallies? Can you call him/her up to find out their position? Will you?

Sunday Hat

I've talked with a few people and no politicians - at all - were spotted at the weekend's Toronto rally, by anyone I spoke to.

remind remind's picture

Unfuckingbelievable seriously, has the pro_israeli lobby got that much power that it holds everyone hostage?

___________________________________________________________
"watching the tide roll away"

martin dufresne

Only if we let it, by writing ten times less letters and op-eds than it does, and by reelecting their stooges.

genstrike

martin dufresne wrote:
Only if we let it, by writing ten times less letters and op-eds than it does, and by reelecting their stooges.

Who do we elect though?  I'm sorry if I'm being Manitoba-centric here, but I can't think of any elected politician in Manitoba that has been vocally critical of Israel in recent years.  At least two of the Manitoba NDP MPs (Pat Martin and Judy W-L) as well as the provincial government and many MLAs have been very supportive of Israel.

I don't think there is any party in Canada which opposes Israeli apartheid and supports Palestine, aside from the Communist Parties

Lord Palmerston

Not all that surprising, given Iggy's statement:

Quote:
The Liberal Party of Canada unequivocally condemns the rocket attacks
launched by Hamas against Israeli civilians and calls for an immediate
end to these attacks. We affirm Israel's right to defend itself against
such attacks, and also its right to exist in peace and security.

...which is indistinguishable from that of the Bush administration. 

It appears Harper can no longer use Israel as a wedge issue in the Jewish community.

 

 

genstrike

I didn't see any politicians in Winnipeg either

EDIT:  I should say, any elected politicians.  I saw some people from both Communist Parties

saga saga's picture

remind wrote:

Unfuckingbelievable seriously, has the pro_israeli lobby got that much power that it holds everyone hostage?

___________________________________________________________
"watching the tide roll away"

 It's not the lobby ... it's the war industry ... You know ... the corporate controllers of all governments world-wide, who get governments to do their dirty genocide jobs for them.

It's not politics, not religion ... it's just 'business', imo. 

Agent 204 Agent 204's picture

saga wrote:
It's not the lobby ... it's the war industry ... You know ... the corporate controllers of all governments world-wide, who get governments to do their dirty genocide jobs for them.

It's not politics, not religion ... it's just 'business', imo. 

Not the whole story; I doubt Iggy is telling his MPs to avoid all anti-war rallies, just these ones. I could be wrong about that, I suppose.

Farmpunk

Ontario Liberal MPP Khalil Ramal and NDP MP Irene Mathyssen were out in London a week ago.   

Cueball Cueball's picture

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Not all that surprising, given Iggy's statement:

Quote:
The Liberal Party of Canada unequivocally condemns the rocket attacks launched by Hamas against Israeli civilians and calls for an immediate end to these attacks. We affirm Israel's right to defend itself against such attacks, and also its right to exist in peace and security.

...which is indistinguishable from that of the Bush administration. 

It appears Harper can no longer use Israel as a wedge issue in the Jewish community.

But the NDP might be able to, since of course not all Jews are Zionist fuckheads, and oppose this brutal assault. Can we at least get it straight here, on this website, of all websites, that a great many Jews are really uncomfortable with being associated with this kind of brutality, and that Jews do not block vote in support of Israel?

I would estimate that more Jews have attended the protests against the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, than have appeared at the so called counter-demonstrations. Its quite apparent that most responsible Jewish leaders in Canada are low profiling their involvement with the present assault on the people of Gaza.

For example, in the reporting that the Star did on the rally in Toronto the only spokesperson who the Star interviewed was Meir Weinstein, the organizer for the neo-Fascist extremist Jewish Defence League. Even the scurilous Bernie Farber of the CJC was not available for comment, apparently.

That, in and of itself, says something about how Jews feel about what is going on at this point in time.

My Cat Knows Better My Cat Knows Better's picture

So far, all we have is your assertion that you have a reliable source stating that the Liberals have been instructed not to speak at these rallies. I for one can't accept your premise without at least a little more information. Given the situation there it is too easy to throw gas on the fire as it were with this sort of unsubstatiated statement.

aka Mycroft

The easiest way to disprove the statement is to find a Liberal MP who has spoken to a Gaza rally.

All I can say is that this is what rally organizers were told. 

My Cat Knows Better My Cat Knows Better's picture

aka Mycroft wrote:

The easiest way to disprove the statement is to find a Liberal MP who has spoken to a Gaza rally.

All I can say is that this is what rally organizers were told. 

That doesn't disprove anything. Not everyone is going to support these rallies. I would be dismayed if a political party took this sort of stance, (with the exception of Harper's party who might be expected to resort to this sort of tactic). I would need more than your assertion that this was what rally organizers were told. The mess in the middle east needs a lot more critical thinking and reason and a lot less jumping to conclusions. There has been enough of that already.

Unionist

What is so strange about a party telling its MPs which issues to speak publicly about, which ones to stay quiet about, which events to attend, and what to say?

They tell them how to vote in the Commons, don't they?

I don't get what the fuss is here. The egregious and horrendous thing is Ignatieff's public position on the Gaza situation. If he needed to order his caucus not to speak at rallies, it means he's afraid that the caucus stand may not be monolithic on this point. That's good news.

Doug

I can't blame politicians too much for not wanting to jump head-first into this issue, so I'm not sure whether ordering any not to go is really required.

Lord Palmerston

Cueball wrote:
But the NDP might be able to, since of course not all Jews are Zionist fuckheads, and oppose this brutal assault. Can we at least get it straight here, on this website, of all websites, that a great many Jews are really uncomfortable with being associated with this kind of brutality, and that Jews do not block vote in support of Israel?

I would estimate that more Jews have attended the protests against the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, than have appeared at the so called counter-demonstrations. Its quite apparent that most responsible Jewish leaders in Canada are low profiling their involvement with the present assault on the people of Gaza.

 

I agree with you for the most part.   However the Harper Conservatives almost certainly made inroads in the Jewish community with their Israel stance.  It is not anywhere near a majority of the community - the plurality are still Lib - but it was significant enough to get Peter Kent elected in the riding of Thornhill, for instance.

That being said, the NDP statement isn't as critical of Israel as they were circa 2002 but their statement is light years better than that of Ignatieff, which is identical to the Bush administration.  In fact it is Ignatieff who is taking the "lead" - Iggy's statement dates Dec. 29 and that of Lawrence Cannon - which is basically identical - dates Jan. 4.  Stephen Ignatieff indeed.

Unionist

Lord Palmerston wrote:

In fact it is Ignatieff who is taking the "lead" - Iggy's statement dates Dec. 29 and that of Lawrence Cannon - which is basically identical - dates Jan. 4.  Stephen Ignatieff indeed.

I wish - but that's not accurate.

Cannon's original statement, which Iggy basically copied, was issued [url=December">http://w01.international.gc.ca/minpub/Publication.aspx?isRedirect=True&p... 27, 2008[/url], as reported [url=[=red]right">http://rabble.ca/comment/973853/Ive-been-asked-pass][b]right here on babble by jrose[/url].

Let them fight over who's the egg and who's the chicken. I agree, the NDP is still light years ahead. The wedge may indeed change.

Cueball Cueball's picture

I think actually the "support for Israel right or wrong" line plays better with non-Jews than it does with Jews. Jews have become a kind of cause celebre for non-Jews who want to give themselves tollerance street cred.

Harpo and Iggy can paint themselves as true defenders of civil liberties by sticking by Israel. All of which is supported by the general feeling of sympathy because of what happened in the last war (note I am saying "the last") and our grandiose conceptions of ourselves as defenders of the weak, and our role in liberating Western Europe from tyrrany.

Defending Israel (and therefore Jews) is the ideologically sanctioned way that one can express ones "good intentions", and is unassailable as such because of the unique circumstances in which our cultural concept of Jewishness comes into the context of the present day.

Jews, on the whole, (Zionist and otherwise,) are far less enamoured of all of that because most are fully cognizant of the reality, which is that European Christians basically abandoned them when not directly persecuting them, knowing full well that the Allies fought WWII because it was forced on them, not because they wanted to save anyone from concentration camps.

But yes, defending Israel is like a tollerance "get out of jail free" card for the gentile right, and that patriotic sentiment and sense of moral righteousness is precisely the market they are playing into among non-Jews, not the "Jewish vote", because for most white Christian anglos Israel and Jews are synonymous.

saga saga's picture

Doug wrote:
I can't blame politicians too much for not wanting to jump head-first into this issue, so I'm not sure whether ordering any not to go is really required.

Would it really hurt them so much politically to do the right thing, take some leadership, and inform Canadians?

Would it really hurt them to say that (as I understand it from some links on here) over 500 civilian and Hamas deaths* in the last week is unacceptably disproportionate to the 4 Israeli (soldiers?) deaths in a year of Palestinian rocket fire into Israel?

*Not distinguished. If anyone finds a properly distinguished death toll for Gaza citizens and military, let me know.

These maps are informative.

Week 2

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7811189.stm

Week 1

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7805808.stm

And this ...

ISRAEL'S SELF-DEFEATING GAZA OFFENSIVE
By Gideon Rachman

Financial Times (London)
January 5, 2009 -- 19:04 GMT [11:04 PST]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/34c5a426-db49-11dd-be53-000077b07658.html

By sending ground troops into the Gaza Strip, Israel has crossed a line that brings it perilously close to strategic failure.


Just as with the Lebanon war of 2006, an air bombardment has failed to
stop rocket fire into Israel -- and has been followed by a ground
invasion. The Israeli government says it has learned the lessons of its
stalemated war with Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia. Gaza is more
hospitable terrain than southern Lebanon; Hamas is militarily weaker
than Hezbollah; Israel is better prepared and is using new tactics.


Maybe so. But what are Israel’s strategic needs? The first is the
protection of Israeli citizens; the second is the re-establishment of
Israel’s deterrent power; the third is the preservation of
international support; and the fourth some prospect of durable peace.
Each one of these objectives is now in peril.

By
sending the army into Gaza, Israel has probably ensured it will lose
many more lives than the four killed by Hamas rockets in the year
before the conflict started. It is, of course, the job of the military
to take casualties to protect civilians. But Israel’s is a citizen
army. The point has not been lost on the Israeli public. A poll taken
early in the conflict found more than 70 per cent support for bombing
Gaza -- but just 20 per cent support for a ground invasion.

full text here ... http://www.ufppc.org/content/view/8256/35/

Cartoon illustration here ...

http://media.ft.com/cms/eaa615ec-db52-11dd-be53-000077b07658.jpg

 

And this ...

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=98768

"Our
message to the Zionist community is this - your leaders are spilling
your blood to win an election," he said, referring to snap legislative
polls called for February 10. Various analysts have said that the
Israeli bombardment is geared to drum up support for politicians in the
coming polls.

 omigod this is so sick ...  

 :(

Cueball Cueball's picture

This is what struck me about that last one Saga: 

Quote:
Children again fell victim to the bombardment, with two young sisters dying when a missile slammed into a donkey cart in northern Gaza.

Par for the course for some third world backwater of the kind that lives in the world of Rudyard Kippling. Donkeys, Camels, Arabs all swirl together in the imagination as the backdrop of a poor and backward people fed on superstition and ignorance by their religious mentors... but wait...

Gaza was not like that 50 years ago. Gaza was an up-to-date and modern city and something of a mediteranean resort, with one of the most highly educated populations in the Arab world.

It's a "crime against civilization" as the director of the recently flattened Americas Institute stated after his school was targetted by the IDF. Israel has reduced the people of Gaza to riding around in donkey carts, slowly at first and then in ever increasing strides over a period of 40 years of occupation.

But the Doug's of the world "can't blame" the politicians.

 

Le T Le T's picture

Quote:

Defending Israel (and therefore Jews) is the ideologically sanctioned
way that one can express ones "good intentions", and is unassailable as
such because of the unique circumstances in which our cultural concept
of Jewishness comes into the context of the present day.

Jews, on the whole, (Zionist and otherwise,) are far less enamoured
of all of that because most are fully cognizant of the reality, which
is that European Christians basically abandoned them when not directly
persecuting them, knowing full well that the Allies fought WWII because
it was forced on them, not because they wanted to save anyone from
concentration camps.

That's right on the money Cue. I was thinking to myself while reading/listening to some of the apologists for the ethnic cleansing in Gaza that this is a form of white liberal guilt syndrome (WLGS). There is still 1000+ of antisemitism embedded in the European gentile consciousness and the overwhelming guilt of the holocaust. These manifest themselves in some as unfettered support for Israeli colonialism. The theocratic state of Israel could even been born of WLGS as some European anti-Semites (i.e. politicians) made amends for their widespread support of Nazism in a way that would not require any change or transformation on their part.

People should be aware that when they get that "those poor people" feeling that they should first look at how they are implicated in the poverty of others before they try to "help".

I agreed with Unionist that we should not be suprised by Iggy's hardline with MPs but should see the brighter side of things - there must be some dissention in the Liberal Party. Wierd, not often that a Liberal will disent on actual issues when there are internal party sqaubbles to occupy every waking hour.

madmax

Does anyone have proof of that the Human Rights activist and leader of the Liberal party has banned Liberal MPs from attending rallies are is this just a thread on hearsay.....taken from a blog based on hearsay.

aka Mycroft

According to Kady O'Malley, Iggy's office denies the story. I'd find the denial more believable if it wasn't for the fact that no Liberal MPs spoke or apparently even attended the rallies last weekend when, in the past, they've been quite eager to come out.

My Cat Knows Better My Cat Knows Better's picture

aka Mycroft wrote:
According to Kady O'Malley, Iggy's office denies the story. I'd find the denial more believable if it wasn't for the fact that no Liberal MPs spoke or apparently even attended the rallies last weekend when, in the past, they've been quite eager to come out.

So this is still just a thread based on hearsay and your personal beliefs. You need to back up your assertions that what you allege is based on fact.

aka Mycroft

There are more rallies this weekend. Now that it's "official" that Liberal MPs won't be punished let's see if they find the courage of their convictions to speak out or if they find some other excuse to remain silent.

Michelle

madmax wrote:
Does anyone have proof of that the Human Rights activist and leader of the Liberal party has banned Liberal MPs from attending rallies are is this just a thread on hearsay.....taken from a blog based on hearsay.

Hahaha! Tortureboy, being touted as a "human rights activist"! :D :D

aka Mycroft

For Iggy having to live in Etobicoke Lakeshore would be torture which is why he has a condo in Yorkville instead.

Star Spangled C...

Cueball wrote:

I would estimate that more Jews have attended the protests against the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, than have appeared at the so called counter-demonstrations.

 

Maybe. But if we keep seeing shit like this that amy change. http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024263.php#comments 

I certainly don't want to attend anything where I'm called a "product of pigs" and told that "Hitler didn't do a good enough job." This in Toronto.

madmax

Michelle wrote:
Hahaha! Tortureboy, being touted as a "human rights activist"! :D :D
  You have a problem with Ignatieffs position for the allowable use of torture? 

aka Mycroft

When a "human rights activist" starts saying there's an "allowable use of torture" we have a problem.

Unionist

Star Spangled Canadian wrote:

I certainly don't want to attend anything where I'm called a "product of pigs" and told that "Hitler didn't do a good enough job." This in Toronto.

I looked at this Islamophobic racist hate site - as per your recommendation - and didn't hear anyone say "Hitler didn't do a good enough job". I notice too that you yourself added the word "enough" - I guess the original "Hitler didn't do a good job" wasn't shocking enough for your taste, so you had to sex it up a little wee bit?

It was, in fact, the "interviewer" who tried to put these words into one demonstrator's mouth, and when he persisted, the demonstrator appears to have put his fist into the baiting "interviewer"'s camera. Good for him!!

I notice you also seem to credit the Islamophobes' "interpretation" of the Quran!

Some people will go far to find anti-Semitism where it doesn't exist - even to the point of trying to provoke it. Such hatemongers are the enemies of my people.

martin dufresne

Well put, Unionist!

saga saga's picture

aka Mycroft wrote:
There are more rallies this weekend. Now that it's "official" that Liberal MPs won't be punished let's see if they find the courage of their convictions to speak out or if they find some other excuse to remain silent.

 Too late!!

 An Alberta Tory beat them to it! 

http://www.rabble.ca/comment/976579/It-got-picked

 And the Western Standard published it.

 Did I really just say those things? unfriggenbelievable! 

Cueball Cueball's picture

Star Spangled Canadian wrote:
Cueball wrote:

I would estimate that more Jews have attended the protests against the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, than have appeared at the so called counter-demonstrations.

Maybe. But if we keep seeing shit like this that amy change. http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024263.php#comments 

I certainly don't want to attend anything where I'm called a "product of pigs" and told that "Hitler didn't do a good enough job." This in Toronto.

You might like to know that Jihadwatch has a sister site called Jewwatch, they have similar standards.

First off, where is the begining of the interview with the fella who says "Hitler didn't do a good job"?  I mean after all, it is the internet, and there is plenty of bandwidth so why the need for the "edit". Secondly, I don't happen to think Hitler did "a good job".

Do you?

When you were on your way to becoming an "academic", did anyone teach you anything about standards of evidence? I really hope you don't teach journalism. I also really hope you don't do any ESL work

Anyway, you were talking about how you condemn the horrific attack upon an urban population using high explosive devices that cause indescriminate damage, and therefore necessarily wound and kill numerous non-combatants, something for which Gen Dragomir Milosevic was tried for at the Hague for his actions in 1992.

As the presiding judge noted when he sentenced the former JNA general to 33 years in jail:

Quote:
"There was no safe place in Sarajevo," said the presiding judge, Patrick Robinson, reading from the judgment. "One could be killed and injured anywhere and any time."

[SNIP] 

Milosevic, commander of 18,000 Bosnian Serb troops who besieged Sarajevo between August 1994 and November 1995, had denied all charges, arguing that the city was a battleground and his forces were carrying out legitimate military operations.

Robinson rejected this, saying the evidence showed the general "planned and ordered gross and systematic violations of international humanitarian law".

Does that sound like this to you?

Quote:
Ging told reporters at U.N. headquarters by videolink from Gaza that three artillery shells landed at the perimeter of the school where 350 people were taking shelter.

He said UNRWA regularly provided the Israeli army with exact geographical coordinates of its facilities and the school was in a built-up area. "Of course it was entirely inevitable if artillery shells landed in that area there would be a high number of casualties," he said.

Casualty numbers were still being assessed but the latest figures were 30 dead and 55 injured, including at least five critically, Ging said.

UN official says Gaza school was clearly marked

Frankly, if the Gaza Strip were filled with Nazis wearing Swastika armbands, it would still be wrong to starve them, bomb them, and deny them medical aid, even if one or two managed to escape the prison, or kill a few people elsewhere, once in a while. That is the kind of thing they did. It is called collective punishment. That is why were opposed to them, remember?

Please go on expressing of your learned opinions. Your bountiful humanitarian instincts and principles shine like the sun on a summer day.

 

aka Mycroft

Quote:
I certainly don't want to attend anything where I'm called a "product of pigs" and told that "Hitler didn't do a good enough job." This in Toronto
The video is a highly manipulative JDL production. In the second case the guy was being badgered by someone with a camera and we only have part of the interview where the man, who was struggling in English, said "Hitler didn't do a good job" (not 'enough'). Well what does that mean? We don't know what led up to that statement. Does anyone out there who isn't a nazi think Hitler did a good job at anything?

If the conversation was something like:

Q: What do you think of Hitler?

A: Hitler didn't do a good job

How is that to be taken as approval of Hitler?

I was at the rally. I was under a large banner that identified me and others around me as Jewish. No one said anything in the least bit hostile to me - quite the opposite.

That one, or perhaps two, people in the entire rally of 10,000 said something questionable is unfortunate but I suspect had someone turned the cameras on the JDL and asked them what they think about Arabs you would have gotten quite a number of shocking statements.

 

Star Spangled C...

Yeah, I buy it. The guy who said "Hitler didn't do a good job" (before punching someone) is really AGAINST Hitler. I certainly can't imagine he has ANYTHING agaisnt Jews. And the guy calling them the "product of pigs"...um, well, why don't one of you defenders get back to me for a plausible explantaion for that one and how IT isn't anti-Smitism either.

And this guy here http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_spine/archive/2008/12/29/quot-death-to-all-juice-quot.aspx 

I'm sure HE isn't an anti-Semite calling for genocide as well as being too dumb to spell. I'm sure he jsut really hates juice.

Star Spangled C...

Yes, Mycroft. That guy who violently attacked the guy with teh camera in teh midst of a rally where people were calling Jews the products of pigs...I'm sure in the fuller context of that video, he was really jsut explaining the the flaws of Nazi Germany's transportation policy. I'm sure it was edited from "Hitler didn't do a a good job when it came to easing traffic congestion on Berlin freeways." I shouldn't ahve leapt to conclusions and assumed the worst.

Want to take a stab at explaining away the guy calling them the products of pigs?

How about the guy in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NW6gvrug44&eur - the one making the "throat slitting" gesture to the Jewish group across the street? I'll give him the benefit of teh doubt and assume he wasn't trying to intimidate them or threaten violence. I'm sure he was merely inviting them over for dinner after teh rally for a nice chat and the throat-sliting gesture was to assure them that the meat they'd be eating was slaughtered in the correct manner, rendering it kosher.

Star Spangled C...

You might like to know that Jihadwatch has a sister site called Jewwatch, they have similar standards.

They're not "sister sites" at all. "Jew watch" is run by Frank Wetner, a member fo teh National Alliance. "Jihad Watch" is run by Robert Spencer, a writer on religion. Amazing what you can find out with Google and 30 seconds of effort.