United Church of Canada in bed with the CJC

110 posts / 0 new
Last post
M. Spector M. Spector's picture
United Church of Canada in bed with the CJC
M. Spector M. Spector's picture
Michelle

I don't get how that's a misleading headline after reading the article.  If anything, I can't figure out how your thread title is accurate...?

martin dufresne

I find the pejorative use of the expression "in bed with" to be both anti-sex and covertly sexist. Can't we do better?

 

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Michelle wrote:

I don't get how that's a misleading headline after reading the article.  If anything, I can't figure out how your thread title is accurate...?

Well, the United Church did not, and does not, defend the "Israel boycott". The moderator of the Church has made it abundantly clear that the Church thinks the "Israel boycott" is anti-semitic. That was documented in the previous thread-chunk.

Also in the previous thread-chunk was ample support for the accuracy of the present thread title. I was not about to call this one "United Church plan attacked as anti-semitic, part 2", because the real story is not about anything the United Church per se plans to do about Israel (which is nothing other than continuing its support for Zionism). The real story is how the UCC is great pals with the CJC and formulates its policy on the Middle east accordingly.

Ken Burch

martin dufresne wrote:

I find the pejorative use of the expression "in bed with" to be both anti-sex and covertly sexist. Can't we do better?

 

 

How about "United Church Of Canada has an unsafe, kinky quickie with the CJC up against the narthax wall"?

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Good one.

(But it's spelled "narthex")

Winnifred

More time is spent on CJC than any other advocacy group here on Babble.

Michelle

Didn't you mean to write, "I spend more time on CJC than any other topic here on babble"?

Unionist

Winnifred wrote:

More time is spent on CJC than any other advocacy group here on Babble.

More time is spent by CJC on Babble than any other advocacy group, Bernie.

 

writer writer's picture

"No one Knows I babble!"

Unionist

"I apologize profusely for accusing Bernie of babbling!!!"

- Kathy English

 

remind remind's picture

:D

George Victor

 

From the school of Groucho, and just as entertaining.Smile

Let us, please, require further treatment of the topic in this vein!  PLease.

 

Jaku

I thought this editorial I found in the Ottawa Citizen gave good perspective

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/Pray+United+Church/1867005/story.html

 

Accusing Jews of bribing MPs and inferring that Jews alone should have their loyalty questioned is perverse. So continue poking fun at Winnifred and anyone else who maybe concerned but for many their concerns are more than justified.

Unionist

If the CJC represented the Jewish people, I might agree with you, Jaku.

 

Jaku

Well they certainly don't represent you that's clear. But what that has to do with me possibly being right is beyond me.

Winnifred

I must be living in an Alice in Wonderland universe. According to the Ottawa Citizen article posted by jacu, the supporting documents on the UCC website accuse MPs of holding dual israel/Canada citizenship (is this suppose to be bad?) yet no one in parliament holds such dual citizenship. Further are babblers now claining its OK to accuse Canadian Jews of bribing MPs? So do people here feel its OK to lie about Jews in canada? What's wrong with this picture?

Unionist

This whole thread and its predecessor are about attitudes towards Israel. The UCC is under attack by your friends for insufficient sycophancy. It responds by swearing its allegiance to the "Jewish" state. It would be nice to see someone stick up for Jews, for a change. We existed before Israel did, and we will survive this bad dream as well.

Doug

Ken Burch wrote:

How about "United Church Of Canada has an unsafe, kinky quickie with the CJC up against the narthax wall"?

 

Much better. But still, where's the problem? Laughing Oh - the unsafe bit.

al-Qa'bong

Winnifred wrote:
I must be living in an Alice in Wonderland universe. According to the Ottawa Citizen article posted by jacu, the supporting documents on the UCC website accuse MPs of holding dual israel/Canada citizenship (is this suppose to be bad?) yet no one in parliament holds such dual citizenship. Further are babblers now claining its OK to accuse Canadian Jews of bribing MPs? So do people here feel its OK to lie about Jews in canada? What's wrong with this picture?

 

Mishei you magnificent bastard, I read your posts!

Unionist

Winnifred wrote:
Further are babblers now claining its OK to accuse Canadian Jews of bribing MPs? So do people here feel its OK to lie about Jews in canada? What's wrong with this picture?

What's wrong with this picture is your use of the Big Lie technique. Who accused Canadian Jews of bribing MPs, please? Or is this like, "why are they accusing U.S. Jews of running Ponzi schemes", meaning Bernie Madoff?

The dirty Ottawa Citizen editorial interprets every reference in UC documents to "Israel" as being a code for "Jews". That's the oldest anti-semitic trope in the book. You wouldn't happen to share that, would you?

 

Michelle

Could the personal attacks please stop?  That would be fabulous.  And I know people are joking around about Winnifred and Jaku, but just because someone agrees with a person or organization you don't like doesn't mean that they ARE that person or from that organization.  Thanks.

Diogenes Diogenes's picture

Jaku wrote:

I thought this editorial I found in the Ottawa Citizen gave good perspective

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/Pray+United+Church/1867005/story.html

That article is such a pile of rubbish.

Quote:
The United Church of Canada isn't the first organization that hatemongers have tried to convert into a vehicle for attacking Israel. Labour unions, student associations, even a camping store (Mountain Equipment Co-op) have had to fight off similar hijackings, not always successfully.

I was not really clear on the meaning of anti-semite until recently. Imagine how confused I was when I looked up the meaning of semite, thinking that anti-semite would be one who harbours an irrational or immoral prejudice against any semite.

This shameless article attempts to conflate opposition to Israeli actions with the harm done to Israel, anti-zionism, anti-semitism and even a challenge of its right to exist.

The boycott of Israel products and the call for sanctions against Israel by some trade unions, student associations and other citizen activist groups are about Israel's illegal siezure and occupation of Palestinian land and homes; the treatment of its arab citizens; about Israels refusal to recognize the rights of the Palestinians to exist, as equals.

This article, long on opinion and short of facts, is not journalism, it's an attempt to manufacture consent.

Jaku

This is from the support materials of the proposal in the UCC's own website:

 

Questionable positions of Canadian Members of Parliament include:

  1. Members of Parliament have accepted sponsored trips to Israel, which might be called bribes; some Members of Parliament are affiliated with the State of Israel;
  2. Some Members of Parliament are dual-citizens with Israel and have sensitive roles in Canada.

http://www.nationalpost.com/documents/090727-atlantic-commission-peace.pdf

 

 

Some things can be inferred. For example, suggesting that Jewish advocacy groups "bribe" MPs is perverse. Are there non-Jewish groups that have taken MPs to Israel? When Canadian Muslim or Palestinian groups take MPs to the PA are these also bribes?

Which members of Parliament are "dual citizens" of Canada and Israel? And what exactly is wrong with that? The suggestion that Jewish groups would "bribe" MPs can induce hateful feelings towards the group doing the alleged bribing. Questioning the loyalty of MPs who are allegedly "dual citizens" can do the same.

josh

martin dufresne wrote:

I find the pejorative use of the expression "in bed with" to be both anti-sex and covertly sexist. Can't we do better?

 

Oh, for crying out loud! Yell

Unionist

Thanks to Jaku and the National Post for reprinting that reference document. A quick read reveals two things:

1. There is not one single anti-Jewish statement or inference in the entire document. It even takes pains to ensure no confusion about whom the boycott targets, in Q&A form:

Quote:
Are you boycotting all Jews?

The boycott is not directed at any religious or ethnic group, but rather it is directed at those companies that are supporting the racist occupation of Palestine. We do not discriminate between the supporters of Israel – if a Muslim company is collaborating with Israel we will boycott it just as vigorously as any other company.

2. Unfortunately, and most importantly, the new hotly-debated resolution repeats the same interfering and unacceptable condition as the 2003 UCC resolution, by requiring:

Quote:
The recognition by the emergent State of Palestine of Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state within safe and secure borders;

In other words, even the new resolution, which Jaku and the National Post read as being "antisemitic", sanctifies and perpetuates the apartheid nature of the Israeli regime, and indeed makes it a condition for any peace agreement in the region!

That makes it all the more obscene that the Zionists and their toadies would seek to crush the slightest voice of dissent or plea for justice for the Palestinian people.

As for the UCC, the fact that the debate is framed, in advance, on the basis of perpetuating apartheid, means that the very best it can hope for is a resolution which may have some impact in terms of protesting the Occupation - but even that seems doomed to failure, given the bootlicking and pandering being engaged in by Giuliano and Gregersen.

 

Green Grouch

Unionist is hitting the nail on the head, several times over:
The "leadership" of the United Church does pander to the CJC, especially in public. Many of the staff and a great many of its 600,000 plus members and 2 million-odd adherents do not. Please don't equate all of us with our bureaucracy.

The last minute insertion of "Jewish state" into the Middle East policy wording voted on at the last General Council was clever as hell, was both the work of the CJC reps present AND the UCC members who support the CJC, and has far reaching impacts that were very poorly understood by the majority who voted for that wording change. A great deal of symbolic and practical weight rests on those words and this time out we're starting to see the impact.

I think it's worth noting that the Moderator is not a Pope. He does not and cannot speak for local churches, and is choosing for reasons of his own to put a hell of a lot of emphasis on the "Jewish state" phrasing in our policy, rather than on decades worth of criticism of the State of Israel's actions. But that's *his* choice-- it does not mean that everything local churches do and say must first assume Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. In reality, though, most of our membership likely believes just that and only long term education and a lot of polite arguing over bad Sunday morning coffee is going to change that. I'd rather put my energy into changing local opinion, because Moderators and bureaucrats come and go.

As for the thread title-- I disagree. The United Church is scared stiff of the CJC. It is not in bed with the CJC. Many oppose what the CJC is about, and many more simply don't know what to think. For all that I find my church to be often hierarchical and controlling, a lot of our policy still comes down to the will of people who may be totally new to the issue. And the way that policy is lived out depends on the people who sit in the pews and gather at midweek meetings. it's a typically messy and convoluted grassroots reality.

That it is scared is both ludicrous and a symptom of how well misguided guilt motivates the church. It's also a testimony to the reality that anti-Semitism is alive and well in many scriptural interpretations. Because Israel=Jews for many well intentioned UCC members, all any pro-Israeli rabbi has to do is link historic (and ongoing) Christian anti Semitism with any criticism of Israel, and bingo-- you wind up with fear at best and utter support for the CJC at worst.

I am having trouble pasting this in so apologies for bad formatting.

George Victor

 

Thank you for a very well written and instructive view of a church that is not monolithic,  of a membership clearly free to think and to debate.  Obviously, some are making that "bed" uncomfortable as (I gotta do it) hell.

 

Unionist

Green Grouch, thank you so much for your post and for confirming what I know, through personal experience, about very many UC congregants and churches. They are staunch allies of labour and of many progressive causes. I can readily believe that overcoming the blackmail of these particular Zionist toadies will not be a short-term or easy task, and I wish you good luck in that. Meanwhile, I hope at least that someone explains to Mr. Giuliano that referring to Israel as a "Jewish state"; making declarations about what the "majority of the Jews" think; and saying that countless Jews would have survived the Holocaust had Israel been there; that these are all deeply offensive statements which he, as a religious person, should have the shame and decency to avoid.

 

George Victor

 

The cat's among the doves.

A Canadian Press item today says Bernie Farber has denouced four of the church resolutions as anti-semitic, and the "anybody that votes in favour of this, votes in favour of anti-Semitism."

Bernie and other CJC members are on their way to the conference to lobby the 400 delegates.

Three of the proposals came out of Toronto region churches, the fourth from Montreal-Ottawa. "All decried Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, but the Montreal-Ottawa submission also urged the church to publicly state that the Palestinians must acknowledge Israel's right to exist and must stop suicide bombings and other violent attacks on the Israeli people."

"Among the other 105 resolutions....proposals on the environment, free trade with Colombia, and organ donations."

remind remind's picture

Wonderful thought and control police.

Loretta

There's a thread on Wondercafe, a discussion board sponsored by the United Church, on this very subject.

 

George Victor

 

Wonderfully diverse and sensitive positions, with lots of insight and even some onsite accounts. They can make it really "interesting" for Bernie.  Thanks, Loretta.

 

And the language. Apparently not one asshole resides there.

NorthReport

Loretta wrote:

There's a thread on Wondercafe, a discussion board sponsored by the United Church, on this very subject.

 

Yes, I agree with George, so thanks Loretta for bringing it to our attention.

Hopefully the UCC will be able to stand up to the already begun onslot.

Someone mentioned there that the Unitarian Church had already done something like this - does anyone have the details

Diogenes Diogenes's picture

An excerpt from this...

Jewish Congress accuses United Church debate proposal of anti-Semitism

Quote:

All decried Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, but the Montreal-Ottawa submission also urged the church to publicly state that the Palestinians must acknowledge Israel's right to exist and must stop suicide bombings and other violent attacks on the Israeli people.

According to the wikipedia pages on Hamas and other links I have found, Hamas ceased suicide bombings in 2005, renounced them altogether in 2006. Suicide bombings still occur often in Iraq and Afghanistan, but NOT Israel.

Israel put the Gaza strip under siege in 2006 after Gaza elected Hamas in free and fair elections.  Militants and resistance fighters in Gaza have built tunnels to smuggle goods.  Israel occasionally bombs them. These resistance fighters have also launched homemade rockets and mortars aimed at Israeli border towns and settlements; over 3000 in 2008 alone.  As a weapon of terror, the rockets are pretty lame. Not one Israeli civilian fatality was recorded in 2008 as a result a rocket or mortar attack.

Contrast those numbers with the number of Palestians in Gaza killed or wounded (1,300 and 5,400, ove 30% children) in 3 short weeks at the beginning of this year. Operation Cast Lead, as it was called by the Israeli Defense Forces, was immoral and way out of proportion with the past harm inflicted upon Israel.  This "retaliation" has been roundly condemned worldwide but Israel has largely escaped sanctions or consequences for this; what some consider to be an act of terror in itself.

I think the UCC Montreal-Ottawa request for acknowledgement on the right to exist could be expanded a little.  It strikes me a a little one sided.

Israel continues to seize land owned by arabs in Jerusalem and continues to expand illegal settlements in the West Bank, in clear violation of international law and world court rulings. Her arab citizens are clearly second class with subjugated rights, driven by the desire to establish a truly Jewish state. 

If this is what the Jewish state of Israel is meant to be; an aparthied state; then we have every right to question our support and recognition towards this end. The people of Israel do not have to choose this course and if world pressure must be brought to bear upon Israel to change its ways, like it did in South Africa, than so be it.

Opposition to Israeli politics in not anti-semitiic, anti-jewish or anti-zionist.  Bernie Farber is using shameless propoganda to stifle debate and free speech in this country by labeling those who care enough to debate or question our support for Israel as anti-semetic. It's the BIG LIE in action.

Back off Bernie, the Ernst Zundel of the Jewish community, we can see your buttocks bellowing.

Jaku

I think its pretty disgusting to refer to Farber as "the Ernst Zundel" of the Jewish community. It is exactly the kind of bellicose dribble that turns people away from places like Babble and shames the Left in general. We can disagree with Farber all we like but we should stick to attacking the issues. Farber is a descendant of Holocaust survivors. He is doing his job and is well respected by many. This kind of stupid attack should be condemned and if no one else will do it...I will.

Ken Burch

Jaku wrote:

 Farber is a descendant of Holocaust survivors.

So is Norman Finkelstein.  So is Tony Judt.  So is Amira Hass.  That doesn't stop people on your side of the I/P issue from viciously attacking THEM.  Is there some reason that counts for more in Farber's case?

Maysie Maysie's picture

Diogenes wrote:
 Back off Bernie, the Ernst Zundel of the Jewish community,

Diogenes, don't say anything like this again. This is a warning.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

OFFS!

remind remind's picture
Diogenes Diogenes's picture

Maysie wrote:

Diogenes wrote:
 Back off Bernie, the Ernst Zundel of the Jewish community,

Diogenes, don't say anything like this again. This is a warning.

So comparing one practitioner of the BIG LIE to another practitioner of the BIG LIE is worthy of censure here?  Faber's constantly equating opposition to Israeli politics with anti-semitism and using it to stifle or shape debate, comment and policy from our political, acedemic and (now) religious institutions.  Zundel was Canada's poster boy for holocaust denial (for those old enough to remember).

Zundel was charged with hate crimes, deported and jailed.

Farber has the ear of our government and was key in having British MP George Galloway banned from our country. Farbers' organization gives Prime Minister Stephen Harper a "human rights" award at the same time that our Federal court is admonishing our government for ignoring our Charter of Rights (Abdelrazik).  And Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff praises the CJC for being the 'conscience of Canada' at the same awards ceremony!

Sorry, but Farber has compomised the the reputation of Canada more than that marginal fruitcake Zundel ever did.

Diogenes Diogenes's picture

Like George Galloway, some things are simply not allowed in Canada.

Diogenes Diogenes's picture

M. Spector wrote:

OFFS!

??? uh what does this mean?

martin dufresne

Oh, for fuck's sake.

Call me a helpless romantic, but I miss comparisons to Attila the Hun... so much more visual!

 

Diogenes Diogenes's picture

Is it OK to compare Michael Ignatieff to Alfred E. Neuman?

George Victor

 

You make a good point in #41 Diogenes.  Do not be drawn into the irrelevant.

Jaku

Diogenes wrote:

Maysie wrote:

Diogenes wrote:
 Back off Bernie, the Ernst Zundel of the Jewish community,

Diogenes, don't say anything like this again. This is a warning.

So comparin

g one practitioner of the BIG LIE to another practitioner of the BIG LIE is worthy of censure here?  Faber's constantly equating opposition to Israeli politics with anti-semitism and using it to stifle or shape debate, comment and policy from our political, acedemic and (now) religious institutions.  Zundel was Canada's poster boy for holocaust denial (for those old enough to remember).

Zundel was charged with hate crimes, deported and jailed.

Farber has the ear of our government and was key in having British MP George Galloway banned from our country. Farbers' organization gives Prime Minister Stephen Harper a "human rights" award at the same time that our Federal court is admonishing our government for ignoring our Charter of Rights (Abdelrazik).  And Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff praises the CJC for being the 'conscience of Canada' at the same awards ceremony!

Sorry, but Farber has compomised the the reputation of Canada more than that marginal fruitcake Zundel ever did.

Suggesting that passionate discussion on world events where people differ sometimes even with great distatste of each other is somehow similar to denying the murder of 6 million Jews is retrograde. I do expect to find such comparisions on racist sites where it is common place to personally attack Jewish leaders in such a manner. I would never have expected to see it here.

So you vehemently disagree with Farber. You don't like his politics. You don't like that he is a Zionist. That then makes it OK to compare him to Canada's most evil and notorious racist and anti-Semite? What's wrong with you people? Have you taken leave of your senses?

You have diminished your arguments and by extension have embarassed and belittled Rabble with this libelous comment. Grow up!

Maysie Maysie's picture

Diogenes, I don't like Farber either. I mocked him during "Nobody Knows I'm Gay"-gate and I'm no fan, having met him and other CJC folks a few times over the years. But don't you think some comparisons are unnecessary? Regardless of which side of the debate we're on?

It was a cheap shot. Rise above it. I encourage all of babble to rise above it.

And Jaku, I know this thread irks you, but asking "Have you taken leave of your senses?" is not productive either. As is telling babblers to "Grow up!" Dial it down please.

If we could return to the thread topic that would be marvies.

George Victor

 

Out of my league, now.  Fear of "god" has set in. After a lifetime of battling the forces of anti-semitism, I'm scared . I suppose that is the desired effect for those who see no change in Israel between, oh , 1967 and the present.(Wonder if I used - again - that bit from 1967 about my dancing with joy at Israel's ability to resist being thrown into the sea...and the doubts setting in, less than two decades later, as to the wisdom of my actions/thoughts, on those few fine, summer days  so long ago? If I'd known what was coming down the pike I would have added many qualifications, would have lectured the ether on the corrupting effect of power and absolute power, and the opiate of religion, etc.

 But maybe I could summon up the courage of those UCCers in  that marvelous chat group where they are not threatened with perdition, shaming through the IT world.

Diogenes Diogenes's picture

My apologies to those offended.  The Zundel metaphor was apparently over the top. I did not quite expect that reaction.

To the United Church of Canada, may you give these questions vigorous debate and craft resolutions that speak properly to the issues of

  1. the evictions of Israeli arabs from their family homes in east Jerusalem
  2. the establishment and expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank
  3. the continuing economic siege of Gaza by Israel and Egypt
  4. the morality of the retaliation by Israel during the 3 week Operation Cast Lead at the start of this year.

in considering your support of a boycott as protest to the actions and policies of Israel.  Oppositon to this is not antisemetic or anti-jewish as some people proclaim.  You can make a difference. History is with us.

Pages

Topic locked