Ontario MPPs - including NDP - condemn Israeli Apartheid Week Part III

23 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Ontario MPPs - including NDP - condemn Israeli Apartheid Week Part III
Unionist

Linda McQuaig:

[url=http://www.straightgoods.ca/2010/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=305&Cookies=yes]Ont... condemns dissent at universities: Legislature wrong to condemn "Israeli Apartheid Week" on campuses[/url]

Quote:

The condemnation by the Ontario legislature – and a similar motion expected to be introduced in the federal Parliament this week – suggests that this may be the beginning of a broader attempt to clamp down on criticism of Israel, possibly by designating it "hate speech".

An ad hoc group of 22 parliamentarians, calling themselves the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism, has been holding hearings in Ottawa on what it calls the new Antisemitism. The coalition, which includes members from all parties, seems to be trying to broaden the definition of antisemitism to include criticism of the state of Israel.

If so, will expressions like "Israeli apartheid" be classified as a form of hate speech, and possibly banned or even subjected to punishment under the criminal code?

aka Mycroft
Michelle

Edited - actually, since it's off-topic in this forum, I'll move over to the Catholic schools thread to discuss this aspect of the column Mycroft posted.

kim elliott kim elliott's picture

I think this piece by Linda McQuaig is one of the most important I've seen on the issue. Partly, because I believe she is the first mainstream media writer to make such a strong case around freedom speech (though this wasn't part of her regular column):

"Of course, the Ontario legislature didn't ban Israeli Apartheid Week from Ontario campuses. However by condemning it, they are clearly sending a message that this sort of criticism of Israel is considered unacceptable.

But Israel is a country, and Canadians should feel free to criticize its policies, just as we're free to criticize the policies of any country -- without the meddling of politicians."

Jenny Peto also addresses the issue of government's attempt to suppress activism on Israeli apartheid in a piece she published today: "Coming out against Israeli Apartheid: the case for solidarity". She writes:

"Each year, in the lead up to Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW), organizers expect backlash and attempts to shut down events. IAW 2010 was no different. The Ontario Legislature condemned IAW, The Toronto District School Board banned IAW from its premises even though no events were scheduled there, and Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff slammed IAW for the second year in a row. One noticeable difference is that this year queer issues have been front and centre in the attacks on IAW"

 

 

Unionist

I agree - I think it's worth posting twice in this thread! Wink

aka Mycroft

Frank's mad:

Quote:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Ontario NDP double-speak on ‘Israel Apartheid Week’

TORONTO, March 11, 2010 – B’nai Brith Canada has expressed disappointment at statements Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath made in an open letter to New Democrats, denouncing a recent motion unanimously passed in the Ontario Legislature condemning ‘Israel Apartheid Week’ (IAW). 

Horwath labeled the motion to condemn IAW “divisive by nature,” even though the New Democrats in attendance in the Legislature voted in favour of the motion.“

The fact that the Ontario NDP leader is denouncing the anti-IAW motion, while at the same time members of her caucus voted in favour of it is hypocritical,” said Frank Dimant, B’nai Brith Canada’s Executive Vice President.  “The unanimous support for the resolution to condemn the hate-fest known as ‘Israel Apartheid Week’, which often leads to antisemitic outbursts, was a very important non-partisan stand against antisemitism in Ontario.“

We would expect the provincial leader of the NDP to take a more principled position on this issue - having members of her Caucus support the motion,while at the same time issuing a letter denouncing, is unhelpful double-speak.”
-30-
For more information, please contact, Dan Rabkin, Communications Officer:416-633-6224 X 140 / cell: 416-312-9173

Unionist

This is exactly the same stand that our allegedly more moderate Israel boosters took here on babble.

remind remind's picture

yep

Unionist

This is abominable - teachers must condemn these enemies of freedom:

[url=http://www.tdsb.on.ca/about_us/media_room/room.asp?show=allNews&view=det... District School Board condemns Israeli Apartheid Week[/url]

Quote:

In light of the fact that “Israeli Apartheid Week” is contrary to the academic and social goals of the TDSB, and in light of the all-party condemnation of “Israeli Apartheid Week”, the following Statement from Chris Spence, Director of Education, has been shared today with all schools, departments and the larger TDSB community:

"Our educational goal includes the building of understanding, trust and co-operation among groups and individuals in the TDSB. The event called “Israeli Apartheid Week” has the effect of fostering ill-will and disharmony among groups and individuals. The Government of Ontario and the opposition parties have unanimously adopted a resolution condemning “Israeli Apartheid Week”. The Toronto District School Board therefore affirms that "Israeli Apartheid Week" and its activities are not permitted to take place on school or Board property, or as part of any activity under the jurisdiction of the TDSB.

This is the fruit of the treachery of that phoney progressive DiNovo. She should be treated with contempt wherever she shows her face.

 

Jaku

Linda McQuaig's theory that condemning Israeli policy may become "hate speech" is all that much hokum. It can never meet the threshold set by Chief Justice Brian Dickson. Its just another attempt at trying to diminish pro-israel supporters.

Unionist

Jaku wrote:

Linda McQuaig's theory that condemning Israeli policy may become "hate speech" is all that much hokum. It can never meet the threshold set by Chief Justice Brian Dickson. Its just another attempt at trying to diminish pro-israel supporters.

What a lie - a lie that any fool can see just by reading Linda's article.

Never once did Linda mention "condemning Israeli policy" - nor did she mention "Israeli policy" - nor did she use the word "policy". Jaku invents a lie, then ridicules Linda on that basis.

Here's what she actually said:

Quote:
... will expressions like "Israeli apartheid" be classified as a form of hate speech, and possibly banned or even subjected to punishment under the criminal code?

That is why you must read everything Jaku says with forensic attention. You can "condemn Israeli policy", according to these ardent defenders of the Israeli warmongers and lawbreakers. But to condemn Israel itself is anti-semitism. It is a hate crime. That's what the Jakus of this world, the Farbers, the Dimants, the Harpers, the Kenneys believe - and that's the catastrophe that they are preparing for the Canadian people.

Isn't it interesting that Jaku, in writing Linda off as a fearmonger, unwittingly confesses to the very crime that Linda is warning us about.

synthome

Unionist,

You go girl! Don't let them tell you it can't be done...

Brendan Stone

Some good news!

 

From Libby Davies, M.P.

 

"Dear Friend,

Thankyou so much for taking the time to write and express your views about the motion proposed by a Conservative MP, about Israeli Apartheid Week. I have heard from many people on this issue.

The motion came forward on March 11th, and did not receive unanimous consent, and so was not approved by Parliament. A second motion from the Bloc Québécois also failed to receive unanimous consent.

The Conservative motion was designed to be divisive and to censure legitimate debate on the issue of Israel's policies as well as to specifically target activists who are engaged in debate and other activities on various campuses across the country.

I didn't support either motion, and whatever one thinks about the term "apartheid" in reference to Israel, I don't believe that Members of Parliament should have any role or influence in stifling open discussion and education on this issue. As someone who has visited the West Bank and Gaza twice (most recently in August of 2009), I know first-hand the impact and destruction caused by Israeli policies towards Palestinians. Copies of the report from my trip can be found at:
http://www.libbydavies.ca/sites/default/files/Parliamentary%20Delegation...

I really appreciate that so many people have taken the time to support freedom of speech and the rights of the Palestinian people. I will continue to do the same.

Sincerely,

Libby"

 

I received this by e-mail after I e-mailed the NDP about the Federal resolution.

Jaku

Unionist wrote:

Jaku wrote:

Linda McQuaig's theory that condemning Israeli policy may become "hate speech" is all that much hokum. It can never meet the threshold set by Chief Justice Brian Dickson. Its just another attempt at trying to diminish pro-israel supporters.

What a lie - a lie that any fool can see just by reading Linda's article.

Never once did Linda mention "condemning Israeli policy" - nor did she mention "Israeli policy" - nor did she use the word "policy". Jaku invents a lie, then ridicules Linda on that basis.

Here's what she actually said:

Quote:
... will expressions like "Israeli apartheid" be classified as a form of hate speech, and possibly banned or even subjected to punishment under the criminal code?

That is why you must read everything Jaku says with forensic attention. You can "condemn Israeli policy", according to these ardent defenders of the Israeli warmongers and lawbreakers. But to condemn Israel itself is anti-semitism. It is a hate crime. That's what the Jakus of this world, the Farbers, the Dimants, the Harpers, the Kenneys believe - and that's the catastrophe that they are preparing for the Canadian people.

Isn't it interesting that Jaku, in writing Linda off as a fearmonger, unwittingly confesses to the very crime that Linda is warning us about.

Unionist, honestly I think you are either on drugs or in great need of a vacation. There was no ulterior motive in using the word "policy" other than in your own conspiratorial mind. So I take the word away. While I believe equating israel and all who support the Jewish state with apartheid may very well be anti-Semitic, listen to me, THERE IS SIMPLY NO WAY IT CAN EVER BE SPECIFICALLY PLACED WITHIN HATE PROPAGANDA LAWS. No way! And if by some fluke the entire H/C take the same drugs you and Linda seem to be sharing, such an addition to the hate laws would be found unconstitutional before you could sing Hatikva!

So continue to put forward this strawman, this bogey-man but anyone with a high school understanding of the law will continue to bellow with laughter at your suggestions.

By the way, it does amaze me how you are able to violate Babble regulations (calling a fellow Babbler a liar as you have done above) with impunity.

Life, the unive...

Unionist, honestly I think you are either on drugs or in great need of a vacation.

Personal attack

Unionist

Jaku wrote:

Unionist, honestly I think you are either on drugs or in great need of a vacation.

Both, actually - I took some Tylenol this morning, and I could use some time off. Thanks for the solicitude.

Quote:
By the way, it does amaze me how you are able to violate Babble regulations (calling a fellow Babbler a liar as you have done above) with impunity.

You said Linda warned that condemning Israeli policy might become a hate crime. She never said that, and you knew she never said that. That's called deliberately saying something that's not true, another word for which is a lie.

I never called you a "liar", because I don't think you are a liar, and even if you were, that would be impolite. And if you read back, you'll see that I never called you a liar. So in point of fact - that's one more lie on your part, isn't it?

oldgoat

Ok, Ok, lets break it up folks!  First, saying someone is on drugs or in need of a vacation isn't much of a personal attack, and I note unionist himself doesn't appear overly offended.  I've been known to do both myself.   At the same time yet!!   Also, unionist, I take your point around the whole lying business, but there would be fewer misunderstandings if we all tried to use more parliamentery language, such as "the honourable member has been misinformed", or "fuddle duddle you and the horse you rode in on", that sort of thing.

Jaku

I like the honourable stuff

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

How about "I want some of what oldgoat has been smoking"? Is that parliamentary enough?Innocent

Unionist

I humbly yield to oldgoat's ruling and wisdom.

Paul Gross

Jaku wrote:

By the way, it does amaze me how you are able to violate Babble regulations (calling a fellow Babbler a liar as you have done above) with impunity.

Jaku: stating that "calling a babbler a liar violates babble regulation" is inaccurate (is this language sufficiently parliamentary, oldgoat?)

You can refresh yourself on babble policy here: http://rabble.ca/about/babblepolicy . Do note that "posting material that is inaccurate" does violate babble policy.

Kaspar Hauser

deleted