Bob Rae on the comments of NDP Deputy Leader Libby Davies on the State of Israel

The blogger that interviewed Libby in this viral video can be found at:

Comments from Left Field

Stockholm, our enemies will (and do) talk about Libby with exactly the same venom you use about these other two women, both of whom had decades of progressive achievements to their name. Which side are we on - focus on that.

That may be so - but that doesn't mean that we have to play along by lumping these incidents together when they are are very different and each needs to be disc8ussed on its own merits. If Libby Davies had actually said what Helen Thomas said (which she never would) and explicitly said that Israel had no right to exist and that all Israelis 6 million ought to be expelled to wherever their great-grandparents came from - then I suspect she would be sitting as an Independent MP today and no one would be shedding any tears over it.

Reading the comments some people are leaving on the internet about this story has been disheartening.

I've seen too many homophobic comments regarding this story today. And too many anti-Muslim comments.

There have even been some classist comments about Libby's riding being drug infested! People are even making fun of people in Libby's riding.

Reading those verbatims actually makes Thomas's comments look even worse and more damaging that i originally thought.

Agree about NOT lumping Libby, with others. It does Libby a great disservice.

Can we just put one thing to rest, and even Rebick erronously repeats this.  Jack Layton has not attacked or even criticized Libby Davies.  He said she made a serious error, which Davies herself has also said.  She did make one.  Serious error does not mean it was intentional, it means it was an error with consequences.  Seeing how the MSM and other political parties are using this is it really so hard to understand it was a serious error.  She opened herself up to insunations about Isreal's right to exist.  It was an ooopsie, but it was still a serious error, if for no other reason than she should have been more circumspect about who she was making comments too on camera and how they might be used and by whom.  Not thinking about that is an error.  Nothing worth getting upset about much, but surely a learning opportunity.

 Besides the one comment about making an error Layton has been steadfastly supporting Davies.  So by all means get your hate on for the NDP, but at least be accurate about it.  Crimmey.

The more I read about Libby Davies,the more I like her...It's really too bad I don't live in her riding.

If Layton were to make her resign,what party would progressive and/or free thinking realist Canadians turn to?

I wouldn't mind seeing Ms. Davies becoming new leader of the NDP when Jack steps down.

Does anyone else feel that Canada needs a Progressive Liberal party--the polar opposite of the old PC party?

Seems the neocons have a new weapon to saturate their warped points of view onto as many Canadians as possible as they now have a 24 hour soap box-(coming soon to a TV channel near you)...Not to mention the Reform Party's current ' divide and conquer' strategy.

And here we have the Liberals acting just like the Reform Party,protecting the Zionist powers that be from criticism or any mention of what the world according to these people should be absolutely oblivious to.

Clearly,we have a pretty huge problem to tackle over there in sleepy Ottawa.

EDIT : When I mentioned Progressive Liberal,I was not insinuating any affiliation with the PLC.

"I wouldn't mind seeing Ms. Davies becoming new leader of the NDP when Jack steps down."

She speaks no French GONG!!!

Michelle wrote:

Excuse me, no one is "getting their hate on about the NDP".  Jack Layton chastised her in the media.  He told the media that Libby Davies made a serious mistake.  Then he reiterated it by repeating that he told her she made a serious mistake.

That, my friend, is criticizing her, and publicly, in the media.  It's about as critical as you can get.

I have no idea whether he has been "steadfastly supporting her" since then.  All I know is that with that statement, he fed the media frenzy and, along with Mulcair, helped the right-wing media declare open season on Libby.  There are lots of things he could have said to distance himself and the party from her remarks without chastising her the way he did.

That is not being critical- that is an admission that a mistake is being made.  If I point out to someone they made a mistake it does not mean I am being critical- it is pointing out they made a mistake.  Why the heck is that so hard to understand.  If someone you like/care about/know makes a mistake and you point it out or tell them are you being critical?  I don't think so - I think you are being realistic, honest and acting in their best interests. 

Layton did not lend a hand to the feeding frenzy.  It was coming anyway.  So let's get that right too.  All Layton did was try to head it off.  The thing everyone seems to be missing is that LIBBY DAVIES also said she made a mistake.  Was she feeding into the frenzy too?  Or was she simply stating the obvious like Layton.

Mulcair deserves all the derision and contempt people can dump on him, but it simply isn't true that Layton has been critical.

writer wrote:

Thanks to Mulcair.

Surely you are not that naive? 

Muclair's comments are a problem in terms of attacking a collegue, but even if everyone in the NDP told reporters to go pound stone this was still going to get exactly the kind of coverage it is getting.  You need only read the factless story in the Star and other media outlets to see that the MSM was just salivating to have something like this to write about today instead of pointing out what the Liberals and Conservatives were up to. 

In fact, I have to think that if Layton had just simply said go pound stone the hysterical nature of much of the reporting (if I can call it that) would have been even worse.

What the NDP should do is point out all the factual errors and anti-palestinian "they're all part of some crazy terrorist plot" comments made by liberals and conservatives in the last 6 months....all done over and over with no attempt to correct their mistakes.

see you really gets their facts wrong!   

I condem Mulcair and Layton for not coming out and STRONGLY defending Davies, and I condemn Davies for turning coward and saying she had made a mistake.

There was no mistake. There may be an argument whether the 1948 occupation was legitimate and justified or not, but there can be no argument that that is exactly what it was, an occupation.

And Judy Rebic had it exactly correct when she said "in these days of the rightward slide of the NDP".

Principle by principle; value by value; the NDP are becoming more and more irrelevent to progressives who believe that being "softly supportive" of oppression, inequality, and war is not good enough to be considered progressive.

I think it's pretty obvious why Rae did this today (am I on topic, given that Rae is in the thread title?) -- see Life, the universe ... @ 71 and following. The NDP did something admirable today, but no one is talking about it. Instead, good ole Bob managed to manufacture a scandal for us.

I support Libby unconditionally, and I've written a SWL to Jack plus a message of support to Libby. I'll blog about it if I can get past the writer's block.

But man, I'm with Stockholm. (How can that be happening? It keeps happening? Am I getting old or something?) We shouldn't be on the defensive with this. We should be going for the jugular. Bob Rae is the most vulnerable high-profile policitian in the country, maybe not in his own riding but in terms of the obvious long-term ambition he once had. Back-up Bob is the second reason Harper is still PM (Iggy being the first) -- he is vulnerable from both the right and the left, a real accomplishment in Canada, and if the right are wrong about him, old ONDPers are not. It's a crying shame that someone of his potential has turned out to be the jerk that he is, but he has, and if he is daring to do something as filthy as this, an attack at two levels, on Libby personally and then as a way of producing a bright shiny object to distract everyone from the Liberal sell-out on Parliamentary supremacy, then I say go for him.

MY impression was that no one was paying attention to this until the National Post (who else) decided to run a story about it etc...

Michelle wrote:

Exactly.  Mulcair should be the one apologizing.  It's unbelievable.  He just completely manufactured a media firestorm against his colleague, and for what?

That is the question that I keep wondering about.  What does he stand to gain with Libby out of the way?

Nothing. I don't think its about her personally, I think that whether rightly or wrongly, Mulcair is very sensitive about getting tarred with an "anti-Israel" brush in his riding. That's my opinion.

By the way, Layton did both political shows today, taking all the fire on this one.  In particular, take a look at the interview he did with Tom Clark.  He's not taking any guff from Clark on this, in spite of considerable provocation, and was also talking about how people are suffering.

Libby has apparently cancelled out of another news conference on another topic in Toronto tomorrow, which is good, because why drag this on for another day.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

 

My question is why now? Libby has been using much the same language for quite some time.

This is all about the attack on the flotilla and the Israeli murderers' worldwide campaign to crush all dissent, along with their staunch allies. That's "why now" for Helen Thomas, who has been saying the same things for decades. Libby took a principled stand - Layton weaseled out as usual - and Mulcair followed the marching orders of the Israel lobby. This is a critical time for Israel, where fence-sitters around the world may tip the "wrong" way. What happened to Libby is the least of what we will see.

Quote:

So can Mulclair deliver the Quebec NDP vote to the Liberals if he goes "back" home to the federal wing of his old party?

 

Never. He was elected by convincing people who voted Bloc last time (like me) to switch. And why would he go "home"? What conflict do you see between him and his new home?

Yeah, Alan, you are very confused. Let's leave it at that.

Thanks for your  know it all arrogance,Unionist

I'll condemn Layton and Mulcair for not coming out swinging on the attack.

Listen, enough of the bullshit.

People on the left in the country were first to fight fascism and it's inherant anti-semitism while Mackenzie God Damn King was writting in his diary what a splendid fellow Adolf Hitler was, and discarding a pleasent conversation with a fellow just because the fellow was a Jew.

I will tell you something.

The NDP and and it's members are not not anti-semitic because of political expedience.  We despise anti semitism because it is wrong. 

Not IF  NOT IF my friends, by WHEN it once again provides political traction to be anti-semetic, the Liberals and the Conservatives will be goose stepping all over each other to be in the front of that anti-semitic brown shirt parade.

Just like they were before, on the edges of this nations living memory.

Well,writer...First off,I didn`t know he was Jewish and I certainly had no idea that he lived in Outremont..The only people I know who are Jewish do not actively practice their religion..Hence,I don`t know much about the different practices of Judaism.

And I was pointing that out because I don`t know everything...If I did,I`d have no reason to listen to anyone.

When people were celebrating Israel Day a month or so ago,who was there protesting...Seriously,I don`t know if they are Hissidic or Orthodox and how would I know...I know VERY little about religion--period.

I apologize if I overreacted