NDP turfed Stefan Jonasson for criticizing misogynistic Ultra-Orthodox Jewish sect

85 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
NDP turfed Stefan Jonasson for criticizing misogynistic Ultra-Orthodox Jewish sect

*

Unionist

This was discussed briefly in another thread, but it deserves its own.

This stupid move has earned no one's support that I have managed to find to date. Here's one article for those who don't know the story yet:

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/stefan-jonasson-i-really-wish-tha... Jonasson: 'I really wish that my party would have stood with me'[/url]

Quote:

Stefan Jonasson says he believes the federal New Democrats acted too quickly in asking him to step down as its candidate over a social media comment from three years ago.

He dropped out of the election race in Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia-Headingley on Thursday, after comments surfaced in which he compared the beliefs of the Haredim, an Orthodox branch of Judaism, to the Taliban with regards to the treatment of women.

Late Friday afternoon, Jonasson told CBC News that while he wished he had worded things differently, he defends the comparison he made.

He added that he agreed to step down at the NDP's request, but he wished the party hadn't asked.

"I regret the circumstances of it, but I stand with women and I really wish that my party would have stood with me," he told the CBC's Sean Kavanagh in an interview.

Unionist

Here's the January 2012 Facebook comment that got Rev. Jonasson dumped:

Quote:
“much like the Taliban and other extremists, the Haredim offer a toxic caricature of faith at odds with the spirit of the religious tradition they profess to represent.”

And (just for context) here is the incident that he was commenting on at the time:

[url=http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/8-year-old-israeli-girl-face-clash... Israeli girl becomes face of clash between  moderates, ultra-Orthodox Jews[/url]

Quote:

BEIT SHEMESH, Israel — A shy 8-year-old schoolgirl has unwittingly found herself on the front line of Israel's latest religious war.

Naama Margolese is a ponytailed, bespectacled second-grader who is afraid of walking to her religious Jewish girls school for fear of ultra-Orthodox extremists who have spat on her and called her a whore for dressing "immodestly." [...]

"When I walk to school in the morning I used to get a tummy ache because I was so scared ... that they were going to stand and start yelling and spitting," the pale, blue-eyed girl said softly in an interview with The Associated Press Monday. "They were scary. They don't want us to go to the school." [...]

The ultra-Orthodox consider the school, which moved to its present site at the beginning of the school year, an encroachment on their territory. Dozens of black-hatted men jeer and physically accost the girls almost daily, claiming their very presence is a provocation.

brookmere

Note that observant Orthodox Jews don't like the characterization of the Haredim as "ultra-Orthodox" as they don't consider the latter to be more Orthodox than them. Many also use the label "Jewish Taliban".

jjuares

Clearly the NDP over reacted. They need to rethink their positions n on the Mid East.

6079_Smith_W

Oh. I guess we haven't talked it to death yet.

Sorry Unionist, but if you don't see the problem with comparing a group which doesn't stone and mutilate people and destroy ancient artifacts to one which does, some of us do see the unfairness.

I don't actually think he should have been let go, but the fact that he didn't even realize what he had done wrong, and continued to insist that he had a dedication to tolerance, certainly took him down a peg in my estimation.

Though I am less concerned about this than where some are taking it; I have already called people out on facebook for spinning this not as defense of Israel but as pandering to The Jews.

Not to mention the irony of this situation given how some in that group feel about Zionism.

 

 

kropotkin1951

This candidate spoke the truth, albeit a little crudely. A Liberal candidate on Vancouver Island had to resign because a few years ago she posted on line that she thought the official version of 9/11 was a lie.

This election is like no other in the intensity of the witch hunts by all parties against their opponents candidates. It appears they are all scouring the internet for any possible heresy against the MSM view of the world. The major parties vetting systems in light of those heresies appear to be  systemically discriminating against people who dare to challenge that view.

What a sad, sad commentary on our "democratic" system.

Unionist

brookmere wrote:

Note that observant Orthodox Jews don't like the characterization of the Haredim as "ultra-Orthodox" as they don't consider the latter to be more Orthodox than them. Many also use the label "Jewish Taliban".

Exactly. And as a Jew who grew up in an "Orthodox" family, I find the MSM's characterizations as misleading and offensive. As for the NDP, it is impossible to find any support for the exclusion of Jonasson, who is a Unitarian Universalist minister, a former president of the University of Winnipeg Alumni Association, a well- and widely-known progressive person, and as gentle and forgiving a soul as you might want to meet.

This has nothing to do with the Middle East. This is craven fear that anything that sounds like it's critical of "Jews" will evoke the wrath of Harper.

Even Gail Asper (!) wrote a letter to the (paywall-protected) Winnipeg Free Press supporting Jonasson:

Quote:
"As a woman and a Jew, I was disappointed to see Stefan Jonasson asked to step down as an NDP candidate because of his comments about Haredi Jews," she wrote. "I know many Jews, including myself, who agree with Jonasson’s views and are extremely disturbed by the lack of respect for women’s equality exhibited by the Haredi."

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Sorry Unionist, but if you don't see the problem with comparing a group which doesn't stone and mutilate people and destroy ancient artifacts to one which does, some of us do see the unfairness.

I have to disagree with you on this one. In my opinion, any group which would spit on and yell at little girls on their way to school would probably be happy to stone and mutililate the objects of their disapproval as well, if they could get away with it. Fortunately for their neighbours, they are not in charge of the Israeli government, as the Taliban were in Afghanistan.

Unionist

From yesterday's Winnipeg Free Press:

Quote:

A longtime New Democrat in Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia-Headlingey says he’s voting Liberal because he’s so angry at how the NDP treated his local candidate.

Keith Haien ordered a sign from Liberal candidate Doug Eyolfson, and planted it on his lawn Tuesday night. Haien said he’s spoken to other NDPers in the riding who may also vote Liberal to protest the punting of former candidate Stefan Jonasson.

"This is bigger than Stefan," said Haien, who donated $400 to the NDP at the start of the race and planned to door-knock for Jonasson. "If we have a leadership that’s prepared to throw someone under the bus that quickly, I just can’t support them."

6079_Smith_W

Except that "Taliban" is as much shorthand nowadays as "Nazi" and "the Klan".

There has been a lot of noise about what a great candidate this fellow is because he is a Unitarian. Fact is, his status as a Unitarian minister to me means he should know better than to smear people like this. Tolerance doesn't mean a damned thing if it doesn't mean having some consideration for people whose values you find challenging. Even if he had a point in criticizing them (and I think he does) calling them butchers and refering to their faith as "toxic" is crossing a line.

 

6079_Smith_W

I have never voted Liberal in my life, but if I lived there I would.

Sorry, but the race is blown in that riding, except for keeping the Harperite out.

(and I am aware Steven Fletcher has bucked his own party on the issue of assisted suicide)

brookmere

6079_Smith_W wrote:
Even if he had a point in criticizing them (and I think he does) calling them butchers and refering to their faith as "toxic" is crossing a line.

That's not what he said, but you already know that.

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Bah! This is old news. Other than to slag the NDP what's the point of this thread. Yeah, yeah, I get it, NDP bad. Harper terrible. Vote Justin. WHATEVER!!!!!!!!

6079_Smith_W

brookmere wrote:

6079_Smith_W wrote:
Even if he had a point in criticizing them (and I think he does) calling them butchers and refering to their faith as "toxic" is crossing a line.

That's not what he said, but you already know that.

 

He did call their faith toxic, and he did say they were like the Taliban.

If I said you were like the Nazis do you think maybe I should specify that I was talking about your snappy attire?

As TB likes to say, this is kind of a silly buggers argument.

 

Unionist

Jim Rondeau is a 3-term provincial NDP MLA and was a cabinet minister for 10 years.

From yesterday's news:

Quote:

Jonasson has been replaced on the ballot by his campaign manager and riding association president, Tom Paulley.

Area MLA Jim Rondeau, who was very involved in Jonasson’s bid, said he is no longer volunteering on the NDP campaign in Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia-Headlingey. He said Jonasson’s resignation so late in the game took the wind out of the campaign’s sails.

The NDP head office should apologize to Jonasson and all his supporters, and ask if he would kindly consider resuming his candidacy. There's nothing wrong with admitting a mistake.

 

6079_Smith_W

Know what Unionist, at this point I'd still vote Liberal (and let me assure you, that actually is a big deal) because it is obviously a balls up.

Especially given his letter, I have no idea what actually happened in the back room, but I was not at all impressed. If I was to vote NDP, it would be despite him.

 

Unionist

Arthur Cramer wrote:
Bah! This is old news. Other than to slag the NDP what's the point of this thread. Yeah, yeah, I get it, NDP bad. Harper terrible. Vote Justin. WHATEVER!!!!!!!!

Thanks for that. I hadn't seen things that way. You've really opened my eyes. I think it was eighth exclamation mark that did it.

It really puts into perspective Jonasson's phoney pro-Liberal Facebook post from the day before yesterday:

Stefan Jonasson wrote:
I didn't realize how much I was hurting until Gail Asper's kindness and understanding moved me to uncontrollable tears this morning.

Thanks again for helping me to see through this hypocrisy, and also Jim Rondeau's traitorous behaviour, and everything else.

 

swallow swallow's picture

Wow. Gail Asper. Good for her. 

 

Unionist

From J. Baglow (Dr. Dawg)'s rabble column:

[url=http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/j-baglow/2015/09/orange-purge-continues]The Orange Purge Continues[/url]

Quote:

Sounds like a "toxic caricature of faith" to me. Certainly comparable to the attitudes of ultra-Islamists towards the "place" of women in society.

But today's NDP considers such an observation "inappropriate." That’s quite enough out of you, spake the NDP High Command, and Jonasson was kicked to the curb, joining an ever-growing heap of other "inappropriate" candidates and would-be candidates. 

I do, however, have happier news to report. Alex Johnstone, another NDP hopeful -- the one who, incredibly, had never heard of the Auschwitz death camp -- seems to have been successfully rehabilitated after agreeing to be re-educated by B'nai Brith. Her abject public prostration has saved her candidacy.

Read the cringeworthy joint statement, with its Red Guard-era Maoist overtones.

I hadn't realized till now that Johnstone had done a joint statement with B'nai Brith. She has a lot more learning to do than I realized.

6079_Smith_W

At least someone has a bit of common sense:

Quote:

“Now that I am a candidate for political office, my role is different. The comments in question are wholly inappropriate from a candidate for political office and, while I did make them in a different role, they are nevertheless mine. I apologize for them now, unreservedly.”

Not too hard. No broken eggs or exploded fire extinguishers.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/kelly-mcparland-i-dont-believe...

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

[...]

Sorry Unionist, but if you don't see the problem with comparing a group which doesn't stone and mutilate people and destroy ancient artifacts to one which does, some of us do see the unfairness.

[...]

@6079_Smith_W:

A Google search you might try:

Haredim attacks on women

Or is stoning, short of it actually causing death, really that big a distinction? Might I also mention the recent fatal stabbing at the Pride march?

Jonassan was talking about the poisonous influence of extremist religious sects... perhaps it would have been better if he had included some of the Dominionist Christian sects as well as mentioning Taliban and Haredi, but his point is bang on center even with this omission.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Unionist wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:
Bah! This is old news. Other than to slag the NDP what's the point of this thread. Yeah, yeah, I get it, NDP bad. Harper terrible. Vote Justin. WHATEVER!!!!!!!!

Thanks for that. I hadn't seen things that way. You've really opened my eyes. I think it was eighth exclamation mark that did it.

It really puts into perspective Jonasson's phoney pro-Liberal Facebook post from the day before yesterday:

Stefan Jonasson wrote:
I didn't realize how much I was hurting until Gail Asper's kindness and understanding moved me to uncontrollable tears this morning.

Thanks again for helping me to see through this hypocrisy, and also Jim Rondeau's traitorous behaviour, and everything else.

 

 

Whatever, you drama queen.

6079_Smith_W

I disagree, bagkitty.

And that's not to say I approve of the abuses some do commit against people. But yes, it is a big distinction. And a false comparison.

And as with any abuse, religious, political, or otherwise, start using it as a blanket condemnation of the whole group and passing judgment on their faith and what you have is discrimination. Not everyone who holds that faith is tossing dirty diapers or making a show on airplanes.

If anyone should understand the distinction between abusive acts and a person's beliefs it should be someone who says he is from a religion that teaches tolerance and understanding.

Can we reel this back to one of the number of times I said I don't think this fellow should have been tossed? But I do think he crossed a line and should have at least recognized it and apologized.

 

 

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

Smith, you did read the part about the mob of extremists stoning (non-fatally) women attempting to pray at the Western Wall? As soon as members of a sect, especially when acting in concert with other sect members, use violence to attempt to enforce their beliefs on others I am quite willing to pull out a very broad paintbrush... The only thing that would stop me from wielding that paintbrush was for the leadership of that sect to not only condemn them, but expel/denouce/excommunicate (pick you term) them. NALT (Not All Like That) qualifications don't really cut it.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

This candidate spoke the truth, albeit a little crudely. A Liberal candidate on Vancouver Island had to resign because a few years ago she posted on line that she thought the official version of 9/11 was a lie.

This election is like no other in the intensity of the witch hunts by all parties against their opponents candidates. It appears they are all scouring the internet for any possible heresy against the MSM view of the world. The major parties vetting systems in light of those heresies appear to be  systemically discriminating against people who dare to challenge that view.

What a sad, sad commentary on our "democratic" system.

 

"Democratic?" Dare to challenge it?

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Except that "Taliban" is as much shorthand nowadays as "Nazi" and "the Klan".

There has been a lot of noise about what a great candidate this fellow is because he is a Unitarian. Fact is, his status as a Unitarian minister to me means he should know better than to smear people like this. Tolerance doesn't mean a damned thing if it doesn't mean having some consideration for people whose values you find challenging. Even if he had a point in criticizing them (and I think he does) calling them butchers and refering to their faith as "toxic" is crossing a line.

 

 

Wash with bleach after

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Unionist wrote:

From J. Baglow (Dr. Dawg)'s rabble column:

[url=http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/j-baglow/2015/09/orange-purge-continues]The Orange Purge Continues[/url]

Quote:

Sounds like a "toxic caricature of faith" to me. Certainly comparable to the attitudes of ultra-Islamists towards the "place" of women in society.

But today's NDP considers such an observation "inappropriate." That’s quite enough out of you, spake the NDP High Command, and Jonasson was kicked to the curb, joining an ever-growing heap of other "inappropriate" candidates and would-be candidates. 

I do, however, have happier news to report. Alex Johnstone, another NDP hopeful -- the one who, incredibly, had never heard of the Auschwitz death camp -- seems to have been successfully rehabilitated after agreeing to be re-educated by B'nai Brith. Her abject public prostration has saved her candidacy.

Read the cringeworthy joint statement, with its Red Guard-era Maoist overtones.

I hadn't realized till now that Johnstone had done a joint statement with B'nai Brith. She has a lot more learning to do than I realized.

 

Wash with politicallly correct substance

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

bagkitty wrote:

Smith, you did read the part about the mob of extremists stoning (non-fatally) women attempting to pray at the Western Wall? As soon as members of a sect, especially when acting in concert with other sect members, use violence to attempt to enforce their beliefs on others I am quite willing to pull out a very broad paintbrush... The only thing that would stop me from wielding that paintbrush was for the leadership of that sect to not only condemn them, but expel/denouce/excommunicate (pick you term) them. NALT (Not All Like That) qualifications don't really cut it.

 

I dont think he reads. Thanks bk

6079_Smith_W

*sigh*

Yes, bagkitty. I read it. I was actually aware of it, and the fact that someone in their faith murdered someone at that Pride Parade before you stuck it under my nose.

bagkitty wrote:

As soon as members of a sect, especially when acting in concert with other sect members, use violence to attempt to enforce their beliefs on others I am quite willing to pull out a very broad paintbrush.

And the fact that all the rest of them, or their presumed boss doesn't immediately take out a full-page mea culpa means that every member of their faith is answerable for murder, right?

Even if I was to agree with that, part of my point was that Jonasson went further to say that the faith itself is toxic, so the action isn't really the point. And even if they had all gathered in the streets and accepted guilt they would still be wrong.

People have been using that logic against groups they want to demonize since forever - immigrants, blacks, Native people, Italians, Irish, Anarchists, Communists. And in the wake of this little doubledown - Jews. The real ones, I mean. Not the evil, toxic pretend murdering ones that Jonasson was talking about.

And yeah, with real examples that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they - all their various sects, I suppose, since they kinda look the same and it's not up to us to tell them apart - are all guilty.

Sorry, but I think we are going to have to agree to disagree, and not even because of the list of atrocities that separate the two. Because there is a big difference between a group which takes over nations and one which tries to separate itself from the rest of society.

Again, my only quibble is that Jonasson didn't recognize that distinction when someone decided to play gotcha. I have certainly made similar hyperbolaeic statements that probably are discriminatory. Not so important as a private citizen, but as Mr. Richler correctly points out, the rules are a bit different for a politician (and a minister IMO).

But perhaps I am wrong. After all, that kind of demonizing politics seems to have gotten Harper a big jump in the polls.

 

 

 

 

6079_Smith_W

At least someone is seeing beyond party divides, and not being so focused on votes that they don't see the real issue. Just what we need: a barbarian snitch line:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/tories-promise-rcmp-tip-line-for-peopl...

 

bekayne

6079_Smith_W wrote:

At least someone is seeing beyond party divides, and not being so focused on votes that they don't see the real issue. Just what we need: a barbarian snitch line:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/tories-promise-rcmp-tip-line-for-peopl...

 

What "barbaric cultural practices" are there that aren't already illegal?

Mr. Magoo

It's not that, say, FGM isn't already illegal.  I suppose the idea is that if your sister-in-law asks you if you know a doctor "who'll do cutting" then you can rat her out.

6079_Smith_W

Or maybe we need to be really really afraid because these monsters are on the verge of launching their reign of terror as we speak.

Mr. Magoo

Do you mean the sister-in-law looking to arrange a procedure for her daughter, or Harper and his Cons?

Mr. Magoo

Well, the fact that it's "a snitch line" is strike one.  Makes it sound like paranoid citizens will be doing the Stasi's work for them.

And the fact that it came from the PMO is strike two, because everything he does must be corrupt.

At the same time, it does seem to me that most folk (babblers and other progressives included) are against things like female genital mutilation, or all the male cousins killing a young woman who texted a guy.  So what should we do to stop that?  Print up some pamphlets?

I'm certainly NOT saying that this is some kind of necessary thing.  But what, specifically, is the objection to it?

6079_Smith_W

Might mean Nickleback; haven't checked the full list.

https://twitter.com/search?q=barbaric+cultural+practice

Sadly, this kind of hatemongering is no joke, and even sadder that it works.

 

6079_Smith_W

My objection?

Magoo, we have police, existing laws, and an existing TIPS line, if one wants to get really specific. This is a ploy.

I object to the branding of people as "barbaric", and hauling this demonizing campaign out during an election campaign. And if you can guess from why I am raising it here, I think it does cut across all parties and political values.

It is absurd, and plenty are laughing. But I don't think the woman who was assaulted this week is laughing much.

 

Mr. Magoo

Very well.  But just in the interest of accuracy:

Quote:
I object to the branding of people as "barbaric"

Does this proposition brand people as "barbaric", or certain cultural practices as barbaric?

6079_Smith_W

Yeah. How many do you think are going to make that distinction?

Though really "barbaric culture" makes it clear that it isn't just about the horrible act, but the culture and the people behind it.

I'd say their choice of words was a mistake, but I don't think it was. I think they know exactly what they are doing, even if they had to pay some Australian to slap them in the head and remind them.

 

Unionist

The NDP manipulators in head office dump candidates who make mild statements in favour of human rights of Palestinians, and who critique woman-hating fanatics who call themselves "Jewish".

You will not find any Jews who support this draconian attack on Stefan Jonasson.

But if you search for babblers who are ready to rationalize the NDP's actions on all these fronts - just scroll up.

Such views are disgraceful and disgusting, and leads one to the inevitable conclusion that we are on opposite sides of the trenches. Or else, that some people get their rocks off by debating semantics for its own sake. Perhaps the latter is the less melodramatic and more credible conclusion.

Anyway, a party that excludes persons of conscience (too many to name) and keeps scum like Pat Martin and Peter Stoffer around will be the author of its own irrelevance. Let's hope this can be turned around.

Mr. Magoo

Quote:
Though really "barbaric culture" makes it clear that it isn't just about the horrible act, but the culture and the people behind it.

Perhaps it would, if the term actually used were "barbaric culture".

Isn't it "barbaric cultural practice"? 

kropotkin1951

RevolutionPlease wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

This candidate spoke the truth, albeit a little crudely. A Liberal candidate on Vancouver Island had to resign because a few years ago she posted on line that she thought the official version of 9/11 was a lie.

This election is like no other in the intensity of the witch hunts by all parties against their opponents candidates. It appears they are all scouring the internet for any possible heresy against the MSM view of the world. The major parties vetting systems in light of those heresies appear to be  systemically discriminating against people who dare to challenge that view.

What a sad, sad commentary on our "democratic" system.

 

"Democratic?" Dare to challenge it?

Pithy. So pithy as to be incomprehensible as a comment.

6079_Smith_W

Unionist wrote:

You will not find any Jews who support this draconian attack on Stefan Jonasson.

But if you search for babblers who are ready to rationalize the NDP's actions on all these fronts - just scroll up.

Wow. And here I thought we had plumbed the depths of sweeping generalizations. I guess if someone screws up we know who to go to for the big apology so we don't blame the whole gang by mistake.

As for the second bit, I can only guess who you are talking about, but maybe you should scroll up and re-read, because I'm not sure what you are referring to.

 

 

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
Anyway, a party that excludes persons of conscience (too many to name) and keeps scum like Pat Martin and Peter Stoffer around will be the author of its own irrelevance. Let's hope this can be turned around.

I live in Pat Martin's riding, and my sense is that Martin won't be returning as my MP.

Unionist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

I live in Pat Martin's riding, and my sense is that Martin won't be returning as my MP.

Thank you.

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
Aristotleded24 wrote:

I live in Pat Martin's riding, and my sense is that Martin won't be returning as my MP.

Thank you.

I just said Martin's on his way out. Even though he's a jerk I still plan to vote for him because at least I know he'll stand up to Harper when it counts. I don't trust the Liberal who's likely to take the seat to do so.

Unionist

I get it, A24. But Pat Martin is an unreconstructed slavish admirer of Israel, a residual member of the ultra-right-wing CPCAA, a supporter for Youth for Christ, and an all-round asshole. So you'll appreciate why I have trouble with the mere mention of his name. I do appreciate that in a contest of evils, he might actually be the least of them.

ETA: Oh, sorry, my failing memory... Forgot to mention that this shithead has been pushing, for many years, a private members' bill to require MPs to swear allegiance to CANADA rather than to the Queen - which he knows would prevent BQ members from taking office. He really should be sent to his reward somewhere. I do feel very sorry that he is the best that your riding is able to spew out. Maybe consider taking a run at it yourself next time?

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
Maybe consider taking a run at it yourself next time?

Thanks! Want to help me purge my 10-plus-year history of postings here and at EnMasse before someone else finds them?Laughing

Unionist

6079_Smith_W

Oh I don't know. I think Pat Martin deserved some thanks for Tom Mulcair the best line of the campaign so far - better than the pisser, for sure.

And never mind that it used to be my old riding, if I was there I'd vote for him not just because he'd the best candidate, but because the Liberals are pretty obviously gunning for that one, and seemed to go to so much trouble to wind him up, as if it was that hard a job.

And you think Oullette is going to take it?

 

Pages