Phew, it's finally done: I've finished writing about my experiences at this year's "Israeli Apartheid Week" (IAW).
I attended two nights in Toronto. On the first night (a Monday), I couldn't get into the auditorium, so I stayed with the crowd inside the lobby and outside. On the Thursday night, I arrived early, got a seat and listened to the anti-Israel lectures.
I wrote about my experiences here:
Intro
March 2nd: Part 1
March 2nd: Part 2
March 2nd: Part 3
March 2nd: Part 4
March 5th: Part 1
March 5th: Part 2
March 5th: Part 3
March 5th: Part 4
March 5th: Part 5
March 5th: Part 6
Keep in mind that Leila Farsakh will be one of the guest speakers at the anti-Israel bash being held as part of York University's 50th anniversary party.
These people have one goal in mind: the conquest and dismantling of the only Jewish state in the world.
The arguments don't matter much to them: they're trying every tactic they can think of to convince the world that the Jewish people are not entitled to their ancestral homeland, that of all the UN-mandated countries in the Middle East, somehow Israel is illegitimate while all the others remain legitimate.
They don't actually care about "apartheid" or the living conditions of the perpetual "Palestinians". If they did, they'd be protesting against Hamas, Fatah and Hezbollah.
Jews have lived in Israel for more than 3,000 years.
Israel is the legal and legitimate homeland of the Jewish people.
Facts don't matter to these people (who include in their number Muslims, communists and socialists, all with their own anti-Jewish and/or anti-capitalist agendas).
They can call it anti-Zionism all they like and pretend it has nothing to do with anti-Semitism: but Israel is the Zionist project. To be anti-Zionist is to be anti-Israel.
They want to end Israel, "the Zionist project". They want to transform it into another Muslim country: that's their bottom line.
All the rest is just window dressing.
Showing posts with label University of Toronto. Show all posts
Showing posts with label University of Toronto. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
"The End of the Zionist Project"
"Israeli Apartheid Week" 2009
Thursday, March 5th: Part 6: Q&A with Leila Farsakh
University of Toronto
Such mild, pretty language glosses over the hoped-for destruction of the only Jewish state in the world.
57 Muslim countries. One Jewish country.
During the Q&A, a woman asked Leila Farsakh:
"Ms. Farsakh, you said: 'The two-state solution has been killed by Israel; the only solution is a one-state solution.'
"What would that one state look like? What would it entail?"
Ms. Farsakh responded that, among the proponents of the one-state solution, people were considering two options: a binational state such as Belgium or Switzerland or a secular, democratic state.
In a binational state, she explained, Israeli Jews would be able to keep their own communities, religious institutions and schools, and so would Muslims.
She did not explain how the binational state would differ from the current situation in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank or how the communities would be apportioned.
She did not say that the three areas would be melded into one.
Nor did she mention that the outrageous perpetual "right of return" – of not only people who had once lived in Israel but including their descendants through every generation for all time – would cause the binational state or the secular, democratic state to instantly become a Muslim-majority state.
Ms. Farsakh did not give one example of a secular, democratic state in the world with a majority Muslim population. Past history and current trends demonstrate that, in most or all cases, a country in which Muslims make up the majority will become a country that is ruled by Sharia (Muslim religious) law. In most or all Muslim countries today, right now in 2009, Christians, Jews, people of other faiths and non-religious people, as well as Muslims, are being persecuted and murdered either because they are not Muslim or because they are deemed not Muslim enough.
None of this was brought up by Ms. Farsakh. Perhaps it does not concern her; I do not know.
It seemed to sadden Ms. Farsakh that "the international community is not on board and that is key" to their success.
This is precisely what she will be working toward this month at York University.
Ms. Farsakh ended with the following:
"Jews and Israelis are worried that it would mean the end of Judaism and Israel. It would be the end of the Zionist project but not the end of the Jews or 60 years of Israeli culture."
"The Zionist project" is Israel.
Thursday, March 5th: Part 6: Q&A with Leila Farsakh
University of Toronto
Such mild, pretty language glosses over the hoped-for destruction of the only Jewish state in the world.
57 Muslim countries. One Jewish country.
During the Q&A, a woman asked Leila Farsakh:
"Ms. Farsakh, you said: 'The two-state solution has been killed by Israel; the only solution is a one-state solution.'
"What would that one state look like? What would it entail?"
Ms. Farsakh responded that, among the proponents of the one-state solution, people were considering two options: a binational state such as Belgium or Switzerland or a secular, democratic state.
In a binational state, she explained, Israeli Jews would be able to keep their own communities, religious institutions and schools, and so would Muslims.
She did not explain how the binational state would differ from the current situation in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank or how the communities would be apportioned.
She did not say that the three areas would be melded into one.
Nor did she mention that the outrageous perpetual "right of return" – of not only people who had once lived in Israel but including their descendants through every generation for all time – would cause the binational state or the secular, democratic state to instantly become a Muslim-majority state.
Ms. Farsakh did not give one example of a secular, democratic state in the world with a majority Muslim population. Past history and current trends demonstrate that, in most or all cases, a country in which Muslims make up the majority will become a country that is ruled by Sharia (Muslim religious) law. In most or all Muslim countries today, right now in 2009, Christians, Jews, people of other faiths and non-religious people, as well as Muslims, are being persecuted and murdered either because they are not Muslim or because they are deemed not Muslim enough.
None of this was brought up by Ms. Farsakh. Perhaps it does not concern her; I do not know.
It seemed to sadden Ms. Farsakh that "the international community is not on board and that is key" to their success.
This is precisely what she will be working toward this month at York University.
Ms. Farsakh ended with the following:
"Jews and Israelis are worried that it would mean the end of Judaism and Israel. It would be the end of the Zionist project but not the end of the Jews or 60 years of Israeli culture."
"The Zionist project" is Israel.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
He-man Communist Israel-haters Club
"Israeli Apartheid Week" 2009
Thursday, March 5th: Part 5: David McNally
University of Toronto
David McNally's IAW bio states:
"David McNally is Professor of Political Science at York University and author of four books, including Another World is Possible: Globalization and Anti-Capitalism. He is active with the New Socialists and the Popular Education and Action Project in Toronto."
He began his "Israeli Apartheid Week" lecture by railing against Michael Ignatieff who, he said, had "joined the chorus" of those who had spoken out against Israeli Apartheid Week. He said that Mr. Ignatieff is a professor and "a shoddy one in my view."
He was so angry at Mr. Ignatieff for "defending the crimes of Israel" that he read aloud from one of his own books in which he criticized Mr. Ignatieff.
With that out of the way, Mr. McNally said the focus of his talk would be "globalization and social responsibility in the context of oppression, occupation and war and human rights violations against the Palestinians."
It didn't take long for Mr. McNally's socialist/communist leanings to become glaringly obvious. He talked about "relations of domination", "anti-capitalism" and "a high-tech war economy".
He said, "Canada is a thoroughgoing partner in the Israeli war machine... utterly complicit in the crimes, murders, human rights violations..."
Since 1977, Canada and Israel have had a free trade agreement, he said. (As if it were a bad thing.)
"Don't let anybody tell you that Canada is a peacemaker," he said.
He listed the following companies as being "completely tied into the Israeli war machine." He didn't explain how or why, he just rattled off their names.
Bell Canada (they make phones and provide email and internet service)
Air Canada (an airline)
Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan (they make fertilizer)
Nortel (Can someone translate their mission statement for me? They used to make phones.)
Bombardier (they make planes and trains)
Pratt & Whitney (they make engines for airplanes and other systems)
Frontline Robotics ("Autonomous Perimeter Security")
Diamond Aircraft (they make airplanes, too)
Virtual Defense Canada (I can't find this online)
Vanguard Response System (they make counter-terrorism equipment)
According to Mr. McNally, Vanguard Response System works closely with the Israeli police.
Their website says, "Allen-Vanguard Corporation is Canada’s first publicly traded company offering proprietary counter-terrorist equipment systems for defeating and mitigating conventional and unconventional terrorist devices of all kinds."
That sounds like a good company to me but not to David McNally! How dare they work with Israeli police to defeat terrorists!
I felt like writing each company a supportive email but what would I say? I might start with, "Hey, thanks for being part of the Canadian and Israeli war machine against terrorists!" but would they even know what I was talking about? I mean, a fertilizer company, for heaven's sake?
Mr. McNally continued to beat on his drum: "Canada is complicit in colonialism, occupation and war."
He then quoted Marx on capitalism, which forced me to break my pencil in two because I draw the line on quoting Marx. How many millions of people have been murdered, and how many more have lived terrible lives in hellholes, thanks to that communist's manifesto?
I cheered up when Mr. McNally said there are two main reasons why some people on the left are not convinced regarding the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.
First, they balk at the issue of academic freedom. Mr. McNally said the solution is to emphasize that they are boycotting institutions and to ask, "Where is the academic freedom on the Palestinian side?"
[To which I would respond: 1) You can't boycott an institution; and 2) the citizens of Gaza are not Israeli citizens, so their academic freedom is the responsibility of their elected government, headed by Hamas.]
Second, some leftists ask why Israel is being singled out for a boycott. Mr. McNally said it is not a question of ranking injustice but rather identifying where it exists and supporting calls for action.
[In other words, don't ask why we want to boycott only Israel: we're not being unfair, so just support the boycott for the sake of supporting the boycott, and stop asking questions.]
David McNally clearly holds a dim view of Canada and of capitalism. I think he would be happier living in a nice communist country such as... such as...
Wait, it'll come to me. In the meantime, perhaps he could move to Gaza; surely he would feel more comfortable living among friends. They could sit around a Palestinian work accident bonfire and read aloud from his books.
Up next: Leila Farsakh and the gender-and-race-equality-Q&A.
Thursday, March 5th: Part 5: David McNally
University of Toronto
David McNally's IAW bio states:
"David McNally is Professor of Political Science at York University and author of four books, including Another World is Possible: Globalization and Anti-Capitalism. He is active with the New Socialists and the Popular Education and Action Project in Toronto."
He began his "Israeli Apartheid Week" lecture by railing against Michael Ignatieff who, he said, had "joined the chorus" of those who had spoken out against Israeli Apartheid Week. He said that Mr. Ignatieff is a professor and "a shoddy one in my view."
He was so angry at Mr. Ignatieff for "defending the crimes of Israel" that he read aloud from one of his own books in which he criticized Mr. Ignatieff.
I wrote, and I quote...A plug for his book or an onan-homage to his superior critiquing skills? One hand washes the other...
With that out of the way, Mr. McNally said the focus of his talk would be "globalization and social responsibility in the context of oppression, occupation and war and human rights violations against the Palestinians."
It didn't take long for Mr. McNally's socialist/communist leanings to become glaringly obvious. He talked about "relations of domination", "anti-capitalism" and "a high-tech war economy".
He said, "Canada is a thoroughgoing partner in the Israeli war machine... utterly complicit in the crimes, murders, human rights violations..."
Since 1977, Canada and Israel have had a free trade agreement, he said. (As if it were a bad thing.)
"Don't let anybody tell you that Canada is a peacemaker," he said.
He listed the following companies as being "completely tied into the Israeli war machine." He didn't explain how or why, he just rattled off their names.
Bell Canada (they make phones and provide email and internet service)
Air Canada (an airline)
Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan (they make fertilizer)
Nortel (Can someone translate their mission statement for me? They used to make phones.)
Bombardier (they make planes and trains)
Pratt & Whitney (they make engines for airplanes and other systems)
Frontline Robotics ("Autonomous Perimeter Security")
Diamond Aircraft (they make airplanes, too)
Virtual Defense Canada (I can't find this online)
Vanguard Response System (they make counter-terrorism equipment)
According to Mr. McNally, Vanguard Response System works closely with the Israeli police.
Their website says, "Allen-Vanguard Corporation is Canada’s first publicly traded company offering proprietary counter-terrorist equipment systems for defeating and mitigating conventional and unconventional terrorist devices of all kinds."
That sounds like a good company to me but not to David McNally! How dare they work with Israeli police to defeat terrorists!
I felt like writing each company a supportive email but what would I say? I might start with, "Hey, thanks for being part of the Canadian and Israeli war machine against terrorists!" but would they even know what I was talking about? I mean, a fertilizer company, for heaven's sake?
Mr. McNally continued to beat on his drum: "Canada is complicit in colonialism, occupation and war."
He then quoted Marx on capitalism, which forced me to break my pencil in two because I draw the line on quoting Marx. How many millions of people have been murdered, and how many more have lived terrible lives in hellholes, thanks to that communist's manifesto?
I cheered up when Mr. McNally said there are two main reasons why some people on the left are not convinced regarding the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel.
First, they balk at the issue of academic freedom. Mr. McNally said the solution is to emphasize that they are boycotting institutions and to ask, "Where is the academic freedom on the Palestinian side?"
[To which I would respond: 1) You can't boycott an institution; and 2) the citizens of Gaza are not Israeli citizens, so their academic freedom is the responsibility of their elected government, headed by Hamas.]
Second, some leftists ask why Israel is being singled out for a boycott. Mr. McNally said it is not a question of ranking injustice but rather identifying where it exists and supporting calls for action.
[In other words, don't ask why we want to boycott only Israel: we're not being unfair, so just support the boycott for the sake of supporting the boycott, and stop asking questions.]
David McNally clearly holds a dim view of Canada and of capitalism. I think he would be happier living in a nice communist country such as... such as...
Wait, it'll come to me. In the meantime, perhaps he could move to Gaza; surely he would feel more comfortable living among friends. They could sit around a Palestinian work accident bonfire and read aloud from his books.
Up next: Leila Farsakh and the gender-and-race-equality-Q&A.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Defining "war"
"Israeli Apartheid Week" 2009
Thursday, March 5th: Part 4: Robert Lovelace
Thursday, March 5th: Part 4: Robert Lovelace
University of Toronto
According to his IAW bio:
"Robert Lovelace is a retired Chief of the Ardoch Algonquin First Nation. He is an Adjunct Lecturer in Global Development Studies at Queen's University and a professor in Ecosystems Management at Sir Sandford Fleming College. He has written about community development and social reform as a de-colonizing strategy. On February 15, 2008, Robert Lovelace was sentenced to 6 months in prison for contempt of court. His crime was taking a leadership role in securing Algonquin land and refusing to permit exploration for uranium near Ardoch, Ontario."
I don't know if Mr. Lovelace was right or wrong or if his conviction and sentence were just. In all honesty, his presentation bored me. He spoke in a monotone and went on for far too long. In addition, he obviously did not get the memo that there is no "th" in apartheid.
Here's a link to a series of articles that give some background information about the dispute over which Mr. Lovelace fought and went to prison.
Mr. Lovelace gave some general information about his experiences and talked about being a "revolutionary." I couldn't tell if the young pro-Palestinians in the audience were interested in what he was saying but they applauded loudly when he was done. The university professor seated next to me was enthralled by him. To my dismay, during the Q&A he asked Mr. Lovelace an open-ended question like, "So, how is the struggle going now?" and the response swallowed up most of the Q&A time slot.
"Colonialism is a war," Robert Lovelace told us, and in this war, "it is better to be a revolutionary rather than a reactionary." To be a revolutionary, he said, you need enlightenment, engagement and self-sacrifice. And to challenge colonialism, you need education, art, debate, supply (food and medicine) and divestment.
His ancestors, the Algonquins, lived in the Ottawa Valley. He said that 200 years ago there were no buildings, dams or roads there, just his native language.
"Now," he added, "there is just devastation, with almost no trees over 100 years old."
The white people, he said, are to blame for "the rape of the world and the oppression of indigenous peoples."
When Mr. Lovelace said that peace is a verb, a process, in his Algonquin language, I wondered if he knew that, in Islamic religious tradition, peace means submission to Allah.
According to his IAW bio:
"Robert Lovelace is a retired Chief of the Ardoch Algonquin First Nation. He is an Adjunct Lecturer in Global Development Studies at Queen's University and a professor in Ecosystems Management at Sir Sandford Fleming College. He has written about community development and social reform as a de-colonizing strategy. On February 15, 2008, Robert Lovelace was sentenced to 6 months in prison for contempt of court. His crime was taking a leadership role in securing Algonquin land and refusing to permit exploration for uranium near Ardoch, Ontario."
I don't know if Mr. Lovelace was right or wrong or if his conviction and sentence were just. In all honesty, his presentation bored me. He spoke in a monotone and went on for far too long. In addition, he obviously did not get the memo that there is no "th" in apartheid.
Here's a link to a series of articles that give some background information about the dispute over which Mr. Lovelace fought and went to prison.
Mr. Lovelace gave some general information about his experiences and talked about being a "revolutionary." I couldn't tell if the young pro-Palestinians in the audience were interested in what he was saying but they applauded loudly when he was done. The university professor seated next to me was enthralled by him. To my dismay, during the Q&A he asked Mr. Lovelace an open-ended question like, "So, how is the struggle going now?" and the response swallowed up most of the Q&A time slot.
"Colonialism is a war," Robert Lovelace told us, and in this war, "it is better to be a revolutionary rather than a reactionary." To be a revolutionary, he said, you need enlightenment, engagement and self-sacrifice. And to challenge colonialism, you need education, art, debate, supply (food and medicine) and divestment.
His ancestors, the Algonquins, lived in the Ottawa Valley. He said that 200 years ago there were no buildings, dams or roads there, just his native language.
"Now," he added, "there is just devastation, with almost no trees over 100 years old."
The white people, he said, are to blame for "the rape of the world and the oppression of indigenous peoples."
When Mr. Lovelace said that peace is a verb, a process, in his Algonquin language, I wondered if he knew that, in Islamic religious tradition, peace means submission to Allah.
This is what the Palestinian government of Gaza says about the Middle East peace process:
Hamas Charter, Article 13
"The initiatives, the so-called peace solutions, and the international conferences for resolving the Palestinian problem stand in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement, for to neglect any part of Palestine is to neglect part of the Islamic faith. The nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its [Islamic] faith. It is in the light of this principle that its members are educated, and they wage jihad in order to raise the banner of Allah over the homeland...
"From time to time there are calls to hold an international conference in order to seek a solution for the [Palestinian] problem. Some accept this [proposal] and some reject it, for one reason or another, demanding the fulfillment of some condition or conditions before they agree to hold the conference and participate in it. However, the Islamic Resistance Movement - since it is familiar with the parties participating in the conference and with their past and current positions on the issues of the Muslims - does not believe that these conferences can meet the demands or restore the rights [of the Palestinians], or bring equity to the oppressed. These conferences are nothing but a way to give the infidels power of arbitration over Muslim land, and when have the infidels ever been equitable towards the believers...
"There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are a waste of time and a farce. The Palestinian people is far too eminent to have its future, its rights and its destiny toyed with."
Peace out.
Hamas Charter, Article 13
"The initiatives, the so-called peace solutions, and the international conferences for resolving the Palestinian problem stand in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement, for to neglect any part of Palestine is to neglect part of the Islamic faith. The nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its [Islamic] faith. It is in the light of this principle that its members are educated, and they wage jihad in order to raise the banner of Allah over the homeland...
"From time to time there are calls to hold an international conference in order to seek a solution for the [Palestinian] problem. Some accept this [proposal] and some reject it, for one reason or another, demanding the fulfillment of some condition or conditions before they agree to hold the conference and participate in it. However, the Islamic Resistance Movement - since it is familiar with the parties participating in the conference and with their past and current positions on the issues of the Muslims - does not believe that these conferences can meet the demands or restore the rights [of the Palestinians], or bring equity to the oppressed. These conferences are nothing but a way to give the infidels power of arbitration over Muslim land, and when have the infidels ever been equitable towards the believers...
"There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are a waste of time and a farce. The Palestinian people is far too eminent to have its future, its rights and its destiny toyed with."
Peace out.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Speak Softly and Carry a Big IDF
"Israeli Apartheid Week" 2009
Thursday, March 5th: Part 3: Leila Farsakh
University of Toronto
My friend has a beautiful, distinctive speaking voice. Although its tone is soft, it carries well, so one doesn't have to strain to hear what she is saying.
Partway through Leila Farsakh's speech, I heard my friend say, "But my friend..."
I turned and saw her at the doorway (the other door; the one with the bouncers whom I had neglected to inform of her late arrival). Unbeknownst to me, my Jewish friend had just attempted to follow another woman into the room but had been physically blocked by the bouncer. I stood, smiled broadly and waved at my friend and they let her in.
Muslim bouncer apartheid strikes again!
(Just for the record: throughout the evening, long after my friend's arrival, various people were allowed to enter and they found seats with no problem.)
My friend settled in to her seat and we listened to the rest of Ms. Farsakh's presentation.
Ms. Farsakh continued to toss out information without context or proof. She's a university professor; why didn't she have hand-outs so we could check her facts and do our own research?
Ms. Farsakh said that, since 1967, Israel has created a system that has fragmented Palestinian land and regulated the lives of Palestinians. She said the Oslo accords set the stage for this action.
Now, let's pause for a moment and think. What happened in 1967?
Oh, that's right: some Arab countries decided to pick a fight with Israel but Israel fought back and whooped their sorry asses and the losers have been whining about it ever since.
But Ms. Farsakh didn't mention the unprovoked war on Israel or Israel's victory. She also didn't mention the many concessions Israel has made, or has tried to make, for peace since its formation.
The "pass system", she said, is based on "domination" and was "institutionalized by Oslo". Thanks to Oslo, Israel created "islands" – "fragmented areas" that are "territorially unconnected" – consisting of eight major "Bantustans" including Bethlehem, Hebron and Nablus (I didn't catch the rest). She mentioned checkpoints (according to her, there are 604 in the West Bank) and a permit system based on Oslo which grants Israel the power to regulate the movements of "workers, businessmen, anyone" which was introduced in 1993 and confirmed by Oslo in 2002.
The use of the term Bantustan is inaccurate; anti-Israel groups are simply trying to paint Israel with the same brush as apartheid South Africa. The situation in Israel is different in many ways, including the fact that its Arab and/or Muslim citizens have full and equal rights guaranteed by law.
See this document for information on the real Bantustans.
The 1993 agreement between the Palestinian representatives and the state of Israel, the Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements, starts out:
"The Government of the State of Israel and the P.L.O. team (in the Jordanian-Palestinian delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"), representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict, recognize their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political process. Accordingly, the, two sides agree to the following principles..."
Now, that sounds kinda mutual to me.
As for the areas including Bethlehem, Hebron and Nablus, I'd like to know how they came under Palestinian control. Were Muslims herded together, shipped off to "native reservations" and locked in before Israel threw away the key?
Or was this covered in other agreements between the two groups? For example, what about the Oslo 2 Agreement in 1995:
The Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
And this in 2005: Israel, Palestinians Agree on Two Documents on Movement, Access.
Here's a link to a list of Agreements Israel has made with the Palestinians.
I keep seeing the word "agreement" alongside "Israel" and "Palestinians". This would suggest that the two sides have made official agreements on these issues. Despite this, I got the impression that Ms. Farsakh holds a low opinion of the Oslo agreements.
She made some other statements that were not backed up with facts: "Israel intends to incorporate all of Jerusalem into Israel" and "Israel's plan is to incorporate 90% of the West Bank into Israel". I'd like some proof, please.
She seemed disappointed with the refusal of the international community to get on board with the Bantustan refrain. She said that, although the international community refused to recognize Bantustans in South Africa, it has not done the same regarding the Palestinian territories.
"The big problem we have," Ms. Farsakh said, "is UN Resolution 181 and Resolution 242" as well as, she added, U.S. President George W. Bush "saying in 2002 or 2003 that the only solution is the creation of a Palestinian state".
But isn't that what they want: a Palestinian state? How could that be a problem?
"But it wouldn't be a state," Ms. Farsakh continued, "it would be a Bantustan."
Huh?
According to her, they already have Bantustans. How would creating a separate Palestinian state turn it into a new Bantustan? She didn't say.
Here's what she did say:
"The two-state solution has been killed by Israel: the only solution is a one-state solution."
Get that into your head, because that's what the Palestinian movement has been saying all along: Israel can't have its own state anymore. Not with a Palestinian state, not without a Palestinian state. The only solution they will accept is one Palestinian (Muslim)-majority state comprised of the geographical area currently known as Israel.
And whose fault is it? Why, it's Israel's fault, of course.
The Palestinian groups will never agree that Israel has a right to exist and that a two-state solution is therefore fair and workable. As far as they are concerned, Israel does not have a right to exist and they are doing everything they can to see to its erasure.
When the anti-Israel people talk about the "illegal occupation", they're not talking about Gaza or the West Bank or any other "disputed territory": they are talking about all of Israel.
Think about that. And riddle me this.
How many Muslim countries are there in the world?
57.
How many Jewish countries are there in the world?
One.
But that's one too many for them. And 57 isn't nearly enough: they want more. They want to make it 58-0.
And that's just for starters. If they are allowed to wipe Israel from the map, you don't really think they'll stop there, do you?
Up next: The Rape of the World or How My People had No Roads, Buildings, Dams or Infrastructure Until the Brilliant Europeans Came Along and I'm So Grateful to be Living in Such an Advanced Civilization.
Thursday, March 5th: Part 3: Leila Farsakh
University of Toronto
My friend has a beautiful, distinctive speaking voice. Although its tone is soft, it carries well, so one doesn't have to strain to hear what she is saying.
Partway through Leila Farsakh's speech, I heard my friend say, "But my friend..."
I turned and saw her at the doorway (the other door; the one with the bouncers whom I had neglected to inform of her late arrival). Unbeknownst to me, my Jewish friend had just attempted to follow another woman into the room but had been physically blocked by the bouncer. I stood, smiled broadly and waved at my friend and they let her in.
Muslim bouncer apartheid strikes again!
(Just for the record: throughout the evening, long after my friend's arrival, various people were allowed to enter and they found seats with no problem.)
My friend settled in to her seat and we listened to the rest of Ms. Farsakh's presentation.
Ms. Farsakh continued to toss out information without context or proof. She's a university professor; why didn't she have hand-outs so we could check her facts and do our own research?
Ms. Farsakh said that, since 1967, Israel has created a system that has fragmented Palestinian land and regulated the lives of Palestinians. She said the Oslo accords set the stage for this action.
Now, let's pause for a moment and think. What happened in 1967?
Oh, that's right: some Arab countries decided to pick a fight with Israel but Israel fought back and whooped their sorry asses and the losers have been whining about it ever since.
But Ms. Farsakh didn't mention the unprovoked war on Israel or Israel's victory. She also didn't mention the many concessions Israel has made, or has tried to make, for peace since its formation.
The "pass system", she said, is based on "domination" and was "institutionalized by Oslo". Thanks to Oslo, Israel created "islands" – "fragmented areas" that are "territorially unconnected" – consisting of eight major "Bantustans" including Bethlehem, Hebron and Nablus (I didn't catch the rest). She mentioned checkpoints (according to her, there are 604 in the West Bank) and a permit system based on Oslo which grants Israel the power to regulate the movements of "workers, businessmen, anyone" which was introduced in 1993 and confirmed by Oslo in 2002.
The use of the term Bantustan is inaccurate; anti-Israel groups are simply trying to paint Israel with the same brush as apartheid South Africa. The situation in Israel is different in many ways, including the fact that its Arab and/or Muslim citizens have full and equal rights guaranteed by law.
See this document for information on the real Bantustans.
The 1993 agreement between the Palestinian representatives and the state of Israel, the Declaration of Principles On Interim Self-Government Arrangements, starts out:
"The Government of the State of Israel and the P.L.O. team (in the Jordanian-Palestinian delegation to the Middle East Peace Conference) (the "Palestinian Delegation"), representing the Palestinian people, agree that it is time to put an end to decades of confrontation and conflict, recognize their mutual legitimate and political rights, and strive to live in peaceful coexistence and mutual dignity and security and achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation through the agreed political process. Accordingly, the, two sides agree to the following principles..."
Now, that sounds kinda mutual to me.
As for the areas including Bethlehem, Hebron and Nablus, I'd like to know how they came under Palestinian control. Were Muslims herded together, shipped off to "native reservations" and locked in before Israel threw away the key?
Or was this covered in other agreements between the two groups? For example, what about the Oslo 2 Agreement in 1995:
The Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
And this in 2005: Israel, Palestinians Agree on Two Documents on Movement, Access.
Here's a link to a list of Agreements Israel has made with the Palestinians.
I keep seeing the word "agreement" alongside "Israel" and "Palestinians". This would suggest that the two sides have made official agreements on these issues. Despite this, I got the impression that Ms. Farsakh holds a low opinion of the Oslo agreements.
She made some other statements that were not backed up with facts: "Israel intends to incorporate all of Jerusalem into Israel" and "Israel's plan is to incorporate 90% of the West Bank into Israel". I'd like some proof, please.
She seemed disappointed with the refusal of the international community to get on board with the Bantustan refrain. She said that, although the international community refused to recognize Bantustans in South Africa, it has not done the same regarding the Palestinian territories.
"The big problem we have," Ms. Farsakh said, "is UN Resolution 181 and Resolution 242" as well as, she added, U.S. President George W. Bush "saying in 2002 or 2003 that the only solution is the creation of a Palestinian state".
But isn't that what they want: a Palestinian state? How could that be a problem?
"But it wouldn't be a state," Ms. Farsakh continued, "it would be a Bantustan."
Huh?
According to her, they already have Bantustans. How would creating a separate Palestinian state turn it into a new Bantustan? She didn't say.
Here's what she did say:
"The two-state solution has been killed by Israel: the only solution is a one-state solution."
Get that into your head, because that's what the Palestinian movement has been saying all along: Israel can't have its own state anymore. Not with a Palestinian state, not without a Palestinian state. The only solution they will accept is one Palestinian (Muslim)-majority state comprised of the geographical area currently known as Israel.
And whose fault is it? Why, it's Israel's fault, of course.
The Palestinian groups will never agree that Israel has a right to exist and that a two-state solution is therefore fair and workable. As far as they are concerned, Israel does not have a right to exist and they are doing everything they can to see to its erasure.
When the anti-Israel people talk about the "illegal occupation", they're not talking about Gaza or the West Bank or any other "disputed territory": they are talking about all of Israel.
Think about that. And riddle me this.
How many Muslim countries are there in the world?
57.
How many Jewish countries are there in the world?
One.
But that's one too many for them. And 57 isn't nearly enough: they want more. They want to make it 58-0.
And that's just for starters. If they are allowed to wipe Israel from the map, you don't really think they'll stop there, do you?
Up next: The Rape of the World or How My People had No Roads, Buildings, Dams or Infrastructure Until the Brilliant Europeans Came Along and I'm So Grateful to be Living in Such an Advanced Civilization.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Anything less than 100% employment is apartheid!
"Israeli Apartheid Week" 2009
Thursday, March 5th: Part 2: Leila Farsakh
Leila Farsakh's Wikipedia entry starts out: "Leila Farsakh... is a Palestinian Muslim who was born in Jordan..."
Excuse me, but wouldn't that make her a Jordanian Muslim?
At any rate, according to her IAW bio, Ms. Farsakh is an "assistant professor in political science at University of Massachusetts Boston." She was the first featured speaker of the evening.
In her speech, Ms. Farsakh discussed some aspects of South African apartheid and compared it in the broadest terms to "Israeli apartheid" and I got the impression that she considers the latter to be far worse than the former. Throughout her speech, she threw out statistics, catchphrases and definitions without any context or analysis. It was all one-sided: The Israelis did this to the poor, suffering Palestinians, the Israelis did that to the poor, suffering Palestinians, while the Palestinians bore no responsibility for any of it.
The anti-Israel groups have broadened and cheapened the definition of apartheid; they have co-opted its imagery and the emotional response it evokes. It doesn't matter to them that a comparable system does not actually exist in Israel; they are more interested in provoking pity or rage than cold reason derived from hard facts. They like the word's instant recognition factor, especially among middle-aged folks who boycotted South African grapes and read the hagiographic "Mother of a Nation" before Winnie Mandela championed the use of "necklaces" to burn people alive and before she was convicted for her part in the kidnapping and murder of a 14-year-old boy. Some mother.
Where once it was the name of a specific legal system governing the lives of blacks in South Africa during a specific era, anti-Israel activists have taken the literal meaning of the word apartheid, "apartness", and applied it to any practice they deem to be unfair against those who define themselves as Palestinians.
I was among those who decried apartheid and rejoiced when Nelson Mandela was elected President of South Africa but I am not so desperate to relive those days of activism that I will throw my rationality out the window and glom onto any cause featuring the word apartheid. Launch a campaign against a real apartheid state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia, and I will demonstrate alongside you in a heartbeat.
Ms. Farsakh talked about checkpoints, the security wall and Gaza's "economic and political depression" without once mentioning the reason for the checkpoints and the security fence/wall: terrorists coming from outside Israel to murder Israelis. She also neglected to mention Egypt's security wall; now why would that be?
She threw out statistics for the poverty rate, per capita income and unemployment in the West Bank and Gaza without any context. The statistics were meant to cast a negative light on Israel but I don't know how or why Israel is responsible for the economy of any other territory or country than its own.
It seems as if Palestinians want all the benefits of having their own country without any of the responsibilities.
"Palestinians depend on jobs in Israel," Ms. Farsakh said. According to her, 40% of all Gazans and 30% of all West Bank residents work in Israel but they comprise "only" 7% of the workforce in Israel.
So, a minority of Israel's workforce comes from these two places; this is not apartheid. If Israel does, in fact, provide employment for almost one-half of all Gazans and one-third of West Bankians, shouldn't their governments be doing all they can to improve relations with such a major employer of their citizens? Wouldn't that be the peaceful and sensible thing to do, instead of firing missiles into Israel and encouraging their people to become suicide-murderers of the citizens of this major employer? Talk about blowing yourself up in the foot.
Ms. Farsakh described the next statistic as "the tricky one": "Until 1993 a large percentage of the construction sector was Palestinian but that has dropped since the Intifada." Again, no explanation, no context. What's so tricky about cause and effect (terrorism from your side = restrictions from our side)?
Ms. Farsakh said, "There are still 60,000 Palestinians working in Israel."
According to her statistics, then, 60,000 Palestinians, comprising almost one-half of all Gazans and almost one-third of those in the West Bank (and not solely those of employment age), are employed in Israel. Somebody please tell me how this reflects poorly on Israel because I can't see it. In what way is any sovereign country responsible for providing work to any citizens other than its own?
Up next: Bantustans!
Thursday, March 5th: Part 2: Leila Farsakh
Leila Farsakh's Wikipedia entry starts out: "Leila Farsakh... is a Palestinian Muslim who was born in Jordan..."
Excuse me, but wouldn't that make her a Jordanian Muslim?
At any rate, according to her IAW bio, Ms. Farsakh is an "assistant professor in political science at University of Massachusetts Boston." She was the first featured speaker of the evening.
In her speech, Ms. Farsakh discussed some aspects of South African apartheid and compared it in the broadest terms to "Israeli apartheid" and I got the impression that she considers the latter to be far worse than the former. Throughout her speech, she threw out statistics, catchphrases and definitions without any context or analysis. It was all one-sided: The Israelis did this to the poor, suffering Palestinians, the Israelis did that to the poor, suffering Palestinians, while the Palestinians bore no responsibility for any of it.
The anti-Israel groups have broadened and cheapened the definition of apartheid; they have co-opted its imagery and the emotional response it evokes. It doesn't matter to them that a comparable system does not actually exist in Israel; they are more interested in provoking pity or rage than cold reason derived from hard facts. They like the word's instant recognition factor, especially among middle-aged folks who boycotted South African grapes and read the hagiographic "Mother of a Nation" before Winnie Mandela championed the use of "necklaces" to burn people alive and before she was convicted for her part in the kidnapping and murder of a 14-year-old boy. Some mother.
Where once it was the name of a specific legal system governing the lives of blacks in South Africa during a specific era, anti-Israel activists have taken the literal meaning of the word apartheid, "apartness", and applied it to any practice they deem to be unfair against those who define themselves as Palestinians.
I was among those who decried apartheid and rejoiced when Nelson Mandela was elected President of South Africa but I am not so desperate to relive those days of activism that I will throw my rationality out the window and glom onto any cause featuring the word apartheid. Launch a campaign against a real apartheid state, such as Iran or Saudi Arabia, and I will demonstrate alongside you in a heartbeat.
Ms. Farsakh talked about checkpoints, the security wall and Gaza's "economic and political depression" without once mentioning the reason for the checkpoints and the security fence/wall: terrorists coming from outside Israel to murder Israelis. She also neglected to mention Egypt's security wall; now why would that be?
She threw out statistics for the poverty rate, per capita income and unemployment in the West Bank and Gaza without any context. The statistics were meant to cast a negative light on Israel but I don't know how or why Israel is responsible for the economy of any other territory or country than its own.
It seems as if Palestinians want all the benefits of having their own country without any of the responsibilities.
"Palestinians depend on jobs in Israel," Ms. Farsakh said. According to her, 40% of all Gazans and 30% of all West Bank residents work in Israel but they comprise "only" 7% of the workforce in Israel.
So, a minority of Israel's workforce comes from these two places; this is not apartheid. If Israel does, in fact, provide employment for almost one-half of all Gazans and one-third of West Bankians, shouldn't their governments be doing all they can to improve relations with such a major employer of their citizens? Wouldn't that be the peaceful and sensible thing to do, instead of firing missiles into Israel and encouraging their people to become suicide-murderers of the citizens of this major employer? Talk about blowing yourself up in the foot.
Ms. Farsakh described the next statistic as "the tricky one": "Until 1993 a large percentage of the construction sector was Palestinian but that has dropped since the Intifada." Again, no explanation, no context. What's so tricky about cause and effect (terrorism from your side = restrictions from our side)?
Ms. Farsakh said, "There are still 60,000 Palestinians working in Israel."
According to her statistics, then, 60,000 Palestinians, comprising almost one-half of all Gazans and almost one-third of those in the West Bank (and not solely those of employment age), are employed in Israel. Somebody please tell me how this reflects poorly on Israel because I can't see it. In what way is any sovereign country responsible for providing work to any citizens other than its own?
Up next: Bantustans!
Monday, March 16, 2009
On the Inside Looking Out
"Israeli Apartheid Week" 2009
Thursday, March 5th: Part 1
Thursday, March 5th: Part 1
University of Toronto
Arriving early and alone at the University of Toronto, I grabbed some of the "Israeli Apartheid Week" (IAW) printed materials so I would have something to read while standing in line. The booklets also came in handy when I spotted some familiar faces from Monday night's event at Ryerson. (Oh, no, that guy's in my video and there's that rude girl who argued with my friend in the line-up: look away, look away!) Luckily, my cover wasn't blown and I was permitted inside the auditorium.
Once inside, I sat near the back so I could keep an eye out for my friend. I put my coat and bag on the seat to my right, asked the university professor to my left to save my seat, and approached the students and security at the door.
Me: "My friend is late, I'm saving her a seat, please let her in when she gets here."
Bouncer: "I'm sorry, if the room is full, we can't save seats."
Me: "My friend is coming but she's late, I'm saving her a seat, please let her in."
Bouncer: (see above)
Me: "I've got my coat on the seat, I'm saving it for my friend, please let her in, she's a bit late, thanks."
Bouncer: (see above)
Me: "Thanks!"
Hillary Clinton, I feel your pain.
Later, I asked the students at the door how many people were in the audience and they guessed at 150. I'll leave it up to the math geeks to give me a projected estimate based on the following:
If there were 100-150 people in the near-capacity room
And the man on my left was a university professor
And the woman three seats to my right was a university professor
And the woman directly in front of her was a university professor
How screwed is our educational system?
Bonus points for creativity. Due at the end of March Break.
I didn't recognize the music playing over the PA system. It was some kind of rap or hip-hop and I'm pretty sure it wasn't in English. It might have been CBC Radio.
The activists had used abundant amounts of duct tape to attach their decorations to the walls. We're talking at least three long strips of tape per corner and a few more along the top, bottom and sides. I doubt the paint underneath was in good shape after everything was taken down.
But, teacher, it's not my fault: If those sneaky Israelis hadn't prevented the Palestinians from inventing a stick-free, temporary tape for putting up anti-Israel posters, this wouldn't have happened! The international community is complicit! F*** the West!
Surrounding a large Palestinian flag, posters on the wall featured these slogans:
"Free Palestine – Boycott Israel"
"Turtle Island to Palestine – Occupation is a Crime"
"People of Gaza You are not Alone"
"Break the Silence End the Siege on Gaza"
"Israeli Apartheid Week"
A large screen at the front of the room flashed images and charts such as:
"Palestinian Loss of Land 1946-2000" (map)
"60 Years of Israeli Apartheid & Occupation"
Smaller photos and posters at the front might have shown injured or dead people; I couldn't tell for certain from my seat and I didn't want to get any closer to inspect them. I had a seat to save!
Just before the moderator approached the microphone, I repeated my earlier request to the students at the door. They must have been new because they agreed to let my friend in when she arrived. Unfortunately, my friend showed up later at the other door. That's right, the door I didn't know about until it was too late.
Higher Learning Lesson # 5: Scope out the doors; there's usually more than one.
I didn't catch the moderator's name. He was a young man; I don't know if he is a genuine student or if he is one of those part-time, long-term students whose real function is as an anti-Israel agitator.
He showed this video.
I can't have been the only person in the room who didn't understand what the rapper in the video was saying. This is Canada, people: most of us don't speak Palestinian.
For those who do speak it, is "Hitler" the same in Palestinian as it is in English? At about the 0:28 mark, does the rapper say "Hitler"?
The moderator described this year's "Israeli Apartheid Week" as the largest and most successful to date; it was being held in 40 cities worldwide and U of T was the birthplace of IAW.
It was a friendly crowd and the moderator didn't have to work hard to get applause but he received an especially strong response when he disparaged the University of Toronto's President, David Naylor, as a "detractor" of IAW with "firm and strong links to Israeli apartheid".
After showing this video of David Naylor at an Israeli university (with the music – and base – cranked up), the moderator called, "Join me in shaming!" and everyone but me hissed, booed and yelled, "Shame!"
The moderator laughed and proceeded to the night's message.
He said, "Mosques, hospitals and educational institutions are being deliberately attacked" by the IDF in Gaza.
He mentioned the "ongoing illegal occupation" of Israel. He also said to applause that, although various universities have banned the IAW poster and they've had a lot of opposition, the pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel groups are fighting and stronger than ever.
Before introducing the first guest, he went over the ground rules:
Up next: Leila Farsakh and the rebranding of apartheid.
Arriving early and alone at the University of Toronto, I grabbed some of the "Israeli Apartheid Week" (IAW) printed materials so I would have something to read while standing in line. The booklets also came in handy when I spotted some familiar faces from Monday night's event at Ryerson. (Oh, no, that guy's in my video and there's that rude girl who argued with my friend in the line-up: look away, look away!) Luckily, my cover wasn't blown and I was permitted inside the auditorium.
Once inside, I sat near the back so I could keep an eye out for my friend. I put my coat and bag on the seat to my right, asked the university professor to my left to save my seat, and approached the students and security at the door.
Me: "My friend is late, I'm saving her a seat, please let her in when she gets here."
Bouncer: "I'm sorry, if the room is full, we can't save seats."
Me: "My friend is coming but she's late, I'm saving her a seat, please let her in."
Bouncer: (see above)
Me: "I've got my coat on the seat, I'm saving it for my friend, please let her in, she's a bit late, thanks."
Bouncer: (see above)
Me: "Thanks!"
Hillary Clinton, I feel your pain.
Later, I asked the students at the door how many people were in the audience and they guessed at 150. I'll leave it up to the math geeks to give me a projected estimate based on the following:
If there were 100-150 people in the near-capacity room
And the man on my left was a university professor
And the woman three seats to my right was a university professor
And the woman directly in front of her was a university professor
How screwed is our educational system?
Bonus points for creativity. Due at the end of March Break.
I didn't recognize the music playing over the PA system. It was some kind of rap or hip-hop and I'm pretty sure it wasn't in English. It might have been CBC Radio.
The activists had used abundant amounts of duct tape to attach their decorations to the walls. We're talking at least three long strips of tape per corner and a few more along the top, bottom and sides. I doubt the paint underneath was in good shape after everything was taken down.
But, teacher, it's not my fault: If those sneaky Israelis hadn't prevented the Palestinians from inventing a stick-free, temporary tape for putting up anti-Israel posters, this wouldn't have happened! The international community is complicit! F*** the West!
Surrounding a large Palestinian flag, posters on the wall featured these slogans:
"Free Palestine – Boycott Israel"
"Turtle Island to Palestine – Occupation is a Crime"
"People of Gaza You are not Alone"
"Break the Silence End the Siege on Gaza"
"Israeli Apartheid Week"
A large screen at the front of the room flashed images and charts such as:
"Palestinian Loss of Land 1946-2000" (map)
"60 Years of Israeli Apartheid & Occupation"
Smaller photos and posters at the front might have shown injured or dead people; I couldn't tell for certain from my seat and I didn't want to get any closer to inspect them. I had a seat to save!
Just before the moderator approached the microphone, I repeated my earlier request to the students at the door. They must have been new because they agreed to let my friend in when she arrived. Unfortunately, my friend showed up later at the other door. That's right, the door I didn't know about until it was too late.
Higher Learning Lesson # 5: Scope out the doors; there's usually more than one.
I didn't catch the moderator's name. He was a young man; I don't know if he is a genuine student or if he is one of those part-time, long-term students whose real function is as an anti-Israel agitator.
He showed this video.
I can't have been the only person in the room who didn't understand what the rapper in the video was saying. This is Canada, people: most of us don't speak Palestinian.
For those who do speak it, is "Hitler" the same in Palestinian as it is in English? At about the 0:28 mark, does the rapper say "Hitler"?
The moderator described this year's "Israeli Apartheid Week" as the largest and most successful to date; it was being held in 40 cities worldwide and U of T was the birthplace of IAW.
It was a friendly crowd and the moderator didn't have to work hard to get applause but he received an especially strong response when he disparaged the University of Toronto's President, David Naylor, as a "detractor" of IAW with "firm and strong links to Israeli apartheid".
After showing this video of David Naylor at an Israeli university (with the music – and base – cranked up), the moderator called, "Join me in shaming!" and everyone but me hissed, booed and yelled, "Shame!"
The moderator laughed and proceeded to the night's message.
He said, "Mosques, hospitals and educational institutions are being deliberately attacked" by the IDF in Gaza.
He mentioned the "ongoing illegal occupation" of Israel. He also said to applause that, although various universities have banned the IAW poster and they've had a lot of opposition, the pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel groups are fighting and stronger than ever.
Before introducing the first guest, he went over the ground rules:
- No video or photography unless you've registered as a member of the media.
- No disruptions allowed. Following U of T policy, if you cause a problem, you will be given two warnings, then you will be asked to leave.
- During the Q & A period, free speech & open dialogue are encouraged but racism, sexism or discrimination will not be permitted.
Up next: Leila Farsakh and the rebranding of apartheid.
Monday, March 9, 2009
So, a Muslim, an Algonquin and a Socialist walk into a university lecture hall...
"Israeli Apartheid Week" 2009
Intro
Listen up!
Out of respect for diversity, no one is allowed to argue with this crowd. In the name of tolerance, disruptions will not be tolerated. During the Q & A after the lectures, they encourage "free speech and open dialogue" but will not permit "racism, sexism or discrimination".
(Whenever you hear, "I believe in free speech but...", the only true part of that sentence is the "but". It's free speech or it isn't. No ifs, ands or buts.)
Furthermore, our free speech does not include the recording of their free speech: Only registered members of the media may photograph or videotape the proceedings. No explanations given.
Don't point at the Palestinian flag and ask why the Canadian flag is not displayed: this is not Canada, it is Turtle Island: can't you read the poster?
And whatever you do, do not say out loud that there is no Palestine: it's right there on their map! Say it with them, now: "Turtle Island to Palestine - Occupation is a Crime". But you may send them your tax dollars anytime.
Late-comers will be barred from entering if they look Jewish or have Jewish friends (an unannounced but demonstrated policy).
Keffiyehs are on sale in lobby for 20 bucks a pop. Instant Palestinian cool!
Sit back and enjoy their denunciations of capitalism, colonialism and apartheid. Be ready to hiss and boo at video showing the university's president speaking positively about Hebrew University and Israel (accompanied by ominous, thumping music blaring from the loudspeakers). Nod sagely at repeated calls for the end of the only Jewish state in the world (the only true democracy in the Middle East).
But it's okay: They're not anti-Semites. Why, some of their best friends are Jews.
To be continued...
Intro
Listen up!
Out of respect for diversity, no one is allowed to argue with this crowd. In the name of tolerance, disruptions will not be tolerated. During the Q & A after the lectures, they encourage "free speech and open dialogue" but will not permit "racism, sexism or discrimination".
(Whenever you hear, "I believe in free speech but...", the only true part of that sentence is the "but". It's free speech or it isn't. No ifs, ands or buts.)
Furthermore, our free speech does not include the recording of their free speech: Only registered members of the media may photograph or videotape the proceedings. No explanations given.
Don't point at the Palestinian flag and ask why the Canadian flag is not displayed: this is not Canada, it is Turtle Island: can't you read the poster?
And whatever you do, do not say out loud that there is no Palestine: it's right there on their map! Say it with them, now: "Turtle Island to Palestine - Occupation is a Crime". But you may send them your tax dollars anytime.
Late-comers will be barred from entering if they look Jewish or have Jewish friends (an unannounced but demonstrated policy).
Keffiyehs are on sale in lobby for 20 bucks a pop. Instant Palestinian cool!
Sit back and enjoy their denunciations of capitalism, colonialism and apartheid. Be ready to hiss and boo at video showing the university's president speaking positively about Hebrew University and Israel (accompanied by ominous, thumping music blaring from the loudspeakers). Nod sagely at repeated calls for the end of the only Jewish state in the world (the only true democracy in the Middle East).
But it's okay: They're not anti-Semites. Why, some of their best friends are Jews.
To be continued...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
