Rue

One again you completely missed the point and try to use a simplistic North American concept of racism to try suggest why this law has been promulgated. This has zero to do with skin colour. This is all about citizenship and who is defined as a citizen of Israel. Yes it is about an Israeli government struggling with the idea of trying to maintain a Jewish state when its population of non Jews continues to reproduce and may become the majority. Is it racist? Well is it racist for Christian churches to forbid Christians from inter-marriage which they do? Is it racist that throughout the entire Muslim world, Muslims are not allowed to marry Christians of Jews? Is it racist in Canada or the US when Immigration laws deport people because they find the marriages to be shams designed to circumvent citizenship laws? You make it seem like Israel is the only nation that does things like that and in reverse in the Muslim world, Jews can marry Muslims. Is it unfair and discriminatory. Of course. What religious or immigration laws aren't inherently? Sounds to me you just like to knee jerk react and take things out of context to suit your fixed notion that Israel bad Palestine good.

I think terrorism, and pollution and finding alternative fuel sources is what any government should be preoccupied about. Fretting over gay people wanting to marry each other is ridiculous.

My comment is simple, its irrelevant what they want. The moment someone chooses to use violence and murder as a means to impose their views on others, its irrelevant. We only have an obligation to engage in dialogue and find out what people want, when they are willingt to discuss it without violence and killings. So me, I could care less what terrorists want. I know what they want-to kill until they have their way. I need not know anything else. Your question attempts to humanize terrorists and suggest we should dialogue with them. Sorry I find that to be very naive and quite frankly suicidal.

Fixer anyone reading your posts on Israel realizes you mix your hatred with Jews with issues as to the Israeli-Political conflict. Its evident in the words you choose. For that you are not entitled to intelligent debate from anyone. As for your trying to act like a tough guy its laughable. If you have size anxiety get a therapist and deal with it and save your big macho guy routine for a gay bar where it might be appreciated in a particular context.

This entire paragraph is based on emotional lies. There is no truth in that. More Afghans voted in their elections than Canadian do in ours. First of all I take my medication regularily so I would like to think I am not emotional nor a liar. A tad harsh don't you think in your response. Let us try debate the point rather then engage in accusations of moi being a liar or emotional. Now to the point, you are confusing being democratically being elected with being democratic. My point remains that the currentg Afghanistan is not a democratic government or what we associate with a democratic government. It is a secular government that does not seperate Islam from the state. It does not have a Charter of Rights or concepts of freedom of expression that we do in Canada. It has asked Canada to hunt and kill its perceived enemies since it does not feel its own police and armed forces are up to the task. That is the point and that isn't a lie, its a fact. We sent our troops there to hunt and kill Taliban on behalf of the current Afghani regime. When we went into Afghanistan no thought was given to the point that our concepts of fairness, democracy and fundamental freedoms is completely different then the current Afghani regime's and that sooner or later we were bound to come into conflict as to how to treat Taliban. That is the dilemma and it will only get worse the longer we stay there. This is the tip of the iceberg. The point is the moment you use your troops for a function other then a conventional war or say as peacekeepers, and instead choose to use them as a proxy assassination squad against Taliban, this is what will happen. It goes back to my original point and that is Canadian troops should either be used as a conventional fighting tool or peacekeepers but I completely disagree with them being used as a paramilitary force used to track down and kill Taliban. That is an exercise for small, fast moving, anti-terrorist commandoes not a conventional army.

I wish you would use the terms Liberal or Conservative consistently. Many people think anything they disagree with is Liberal and anything they agree with is Conservative. In fact being too lenient on a criminal sentence is neither Liberal or Conservative if we use those two philosophies correctly not that most of you know the difference between Bentham and Burke. More to the point this is not a left or right wing issue at all. Its an issue as to our criminal laws and how they have been drafted. Its simplistic to say because they were drafted during a Liberal government's era that makes them Liberal and therefore what this Judge has done is enforce a Liberal law. These so called Liberals don't sit around stating as part of their ideology child molesters should be given lenient sentences. That is naive. Plenty of so called Leftists or Liberals as just as right wing when it comes to this issue if that is how you want to describe it. Such issues transcend left or right wing definition.

Can you please distinguish between lax security laws and screening of refugees going through the refugee determination system or regular immigration system, which is a distinct issue, with all Muslims or any Muslims who choose to come to Canada. It is absolute b.s. to start generalizing and blaming all Muslims in Canada for this. That is invariably what will come of this however. There will ne extreme back-lash against all Muslim Canadians and I suppose you smug Canadians who bad mouth Israel for being oppressors can see what it is like first hand trying to deal with terrorism. That said, i agree this case will become a political joke. Rocco is gonna ride this horse for all its worth. Canada being what it is will feel guilty about the charges. This is going to split the country between people who live outside the big cities and have few immigrants with the big cities full of immigrants. You can already see the comments on these posts suggesting all liberals live in Toronto. The fact is Canada is only multi-cultural in its large cities, nowhere else, and rural Canada will now feel even more alienated from the large cities where the immigrants go to. This in turn will reinforce why immigrants stay in big cities. If I am an immigrant who is Muslim or who has any shade of brown in my skin or heaven forbid big lips or a big nose, after this do I dare think of settling in a rural town least I am mistaken for an Arab or Muslim terrorist? For those of you using this as an opportunity to express anti immigration sentiment and your general dislike of Muslims I suppose you have a golden opportunity now to justify it. For me, I just hope there is sufficient evidence to prove they are guilty otherwise it feeds right into the hands of other terrorists who will use it. More to the point, naive Canada, has finally been caught and dragged into the mess most of the rest of the world has witnessed first hand. Man it will be interesting to see all you Zionist is Racist leftists deal with the anti-Muslim back lash. The real issue here is not hating Muslims. Its seriously examining our immigration laws or refugee determination laws on admission-that is all. As for multi-culturalism, any idiot knows the moment you hyphen who you are, confusion has to reign. Our worst problem in Canada is not that we are a nation of immigrants, its that we don't want to accept assimilation as a natural consequence once we get here. Everyone wants to remained hyphened and drive around with their mother country flags whenever the World Cup arises. That is not anything more then a country with a lack of identity. Going the other extreme and making everyone wear Maple Leafs on their arms won't work either. Ask Hitler.

Hedy Black Dog it was a long day and you are damn right I should write in sentences. Great responses. Good points in response. Appreciate your clarifications. Of course I jumped on some of your comments but you did a great job contextualizing them. That said, although we will agree to disagree, let me really tell you where my head is on this. I believe both Israel and Palestinians have equally as valid rights and both should have countries and live in peace. I have problems with people when they try depict it in simplistic terms and portray Israel as the top-going and the Palestinians as the under-dog and equates the suffering of Palestinians asw being greater then that of Israelis. The real truth is each side has suffered and continues to suffer and it is just not fair to suggest Israel has it easier. Its not fair because if you travel as I have, and witnessed Jews blow up into pieces as I have and witness Palestinians blow up into pieces as I have, you just don't see it in terms of a good guy and bad guy, you see it as simply a bloody mess with everyone suffering equally. Seriously Black Dog, there is nothing like someone's brains blowing up all over you to drive the point home how everyone bleeds and suffers the same way. That Black Dog is the real reason I debated you. Because I know you are an intelligent insightful dude and that is what I am trying to push you to concede which you sort of did. Now the reason I tried to explain the Jewish spiritual connection to the soil is not to justify fundamentalist religion. But it is to provide you with a reminder that when Jews feel a connection to the soil, it is not because they feel they are better then anyone else. Maybe you understand it, although it sounded like you did not care in earlier responses, (which I think I misunderstood, because I think you care, you just don't think it is relevant) when Jews feel they are a chosen people and promised such land, its not based on the concept that they think they are better. But it is because of that strong religious feeling and connection to God through the soil they stake a claim to that tiny piece of sand and will never go away. As for the Palestinians, what I don't think you understand is, for Muslims, borders are something the West is hung up on. A true Muslim or Arab does not seperate state from religion and borders...bah what are they, if they could they would wander from the tip or Morrocco to the shores of Indonesia and the Philippines, to Europe and Asia, etc. This concept that Palestinians feel a religious or historic tie to the land is misleading. What has happened is that Muslims can not understand why in the middle of their world, suddenly their are Jews in a country, its not about them feeling a special link to the land because of religious reasons, its about the idea of non Muslims in their opinion living in a seperate secular nation in what they think is the middle of their world. So its a religious clash and to understand it you really do have to understand how both sides religions not just one causes the discrimination. In your references you make it seem like Zionism is the cause of the discrimination. That is just not true. The clash comes from many things and not just one side. It comes yes from Jewish fundamentalists who are entrenched in their ways and feel that the borders of Israel should reflect the ancent biblical lands that in fact include all of the West Bank, parts of Syria, etc. Then there are the fundamentalist Muslims who believe in dhimmitude and the belief that all non Muslims should not have a country and are second class citizens. You really should read up on the dhimmitude in the Muslim world before you simply state Zionism is racism. The discrimination goes both ways when it comes to following these two religions based on fundamentalist principles. Moderate Jews, the average Jew in Israel today is obsessed with peace. They just want to be left alone. In the Palestinian world, and I have been there, the Gaza , the West Bank, Hamas recruits and teaches children as soon as they can walk and speak to kill Jews and wipe out Israel. It makes no differentiation between the war against Jews, or Israeli Jews or Zionists. The moderate Palestinians similiar to the moderate Jews, are trying hard to reach out and form peace networks and I should know I was shuffling back and forth at one point between such peace networks. Here is the problem though Black Dog. If a moderate Palestinian were to come out, they would be shot and killed. Likewise, its hard for peaceniks in Israel to say anything after a terrorist attack kills yet another innocent civilian. Now as for your simplistic portrayal as Israel as the enemy bulldozing down homes let me try contextualize that for you. Have you any idea how small Israel, Gaza and the West Bank are? Oh trust me Black D its jammed. How jamed? Imagine you live in Etobicoke and next door in Mississauga someone is launching missiles at you or sending guys with bombs into grocery stores to blow up. You think bulldozing down a home is harsh but it wasn't too long ago Canada involked the War Measures act when it thought it was under attack from the FLQ and suspended everyone's civil rights. See you may think it is unfair but you don't live in a tiny country surrounded by people who keep telling you they will wipe you out. You develop a siege mentality. That siege mentality means you never sleep without one eye open. So to you Israelis seem harsh bulldozing, to them its a matter of survival. So why bulldozing. Its not as simple as the Israel Defence Force just going in and destroying homes. What happens is a militant faction commits acts of terrorism, i.e., sends out bombers, missile attacks fromr esidential homes. As well, boms are made in residential homes. That is the tactic Hamas, Al Fatah and all the other 232 militant splinter groups use. They deliberately hide among civilians, in ambulances and hospitals so that when the Israelis come in hot pursuit, the Israelis can't find them. So what the Israelis do is bulldoze down where they find the militant to be and that necessarily destroys civilian homes and it necessarily means innocent civilians are hurt and killed in the search and destroy pursuits. You make it seem the Israelis deliberately do this. In reality its this never ending cycle of violence. What comes first, the terrorist attack or response? See the problem comes because Palestinian militants have chosen to feel that violence is a legitimate tactic of expression. Saying Israelis are the bad guys is silly. They are simply defending themselves and of course innocent Palestinians suffer and of course the Israeli military does dumb things. But what you do not see is what the Israeli military has also done that is positive. That does not make the news. You want to help Black Dog? Rather then pointing the finger at Israelis. Serve as a neutral and try bring Palestinians and Israelis together and teach them not to hate and be frightened of each other. It aint easy let me tell you. Anyone who has lived in a conflict zone like Northern Ireland, etc., can yell you that. Before Palestinians and Israels ever can find peace they need to be seperated and allowed to heal and that can't be done as long as Hamas is waging war. That said I know damn well Israel helped create Hamas to destabalize the PLO and now its come back to bite them in the face. Then again Syria has helped create numerous groups de control Lebanon which now bite the Syrians hands. In the Middle East today's enemy is tomorrow's ally then the week after's enemy. Its not simply a matter of good versus bad Muslim v.s. Jew. Within Palestinian society there is great tension and differences of opinion. Hamas sounds like a bevolent organization. I can tell you they are unlike the PLO not corupt, but they are fundamentalists. They do not believe in democracy, equality between the sexes, freedom of expression or any other such thing. The fact is Israelis do and the Muslim or Arab Israelis do and these Arab Israelis are caught in a no win situation because they can ot ever imagine living in a fundamentalist Muslim state but on the other hand like say Japanese in the US during world war two, they can never ever feel equal in Israel. So this depiction of Israel as being full of Zionists and that Zionism is racism, that my friend is pure bull shit taught in university that has no application in the real world. In the real world you have factions, some Muslim, some Jewish and everyone disagrees. Jews disgree with other Jews, Muslims fight with other Muslims. Its not Muslim versus Jew as much as you would love it to be. Its not that simple. The PLO is not even the PLO. That is what the Western press calls it because its easier then trying to keep track of the hundreds of factions within it. And within Palestine you think everyone has the same views as to Islam? The only thing Palestinians have in common is their hatred for Israel. The only thing Israeli Jews have in common is their sense of being underattack all around them. Other then that Tsfardic Jews have more in common with many Arabs then Ashkanazi Jews do and that is something you really should try understand before you simply portray all of Israel as a monolithic state of Zionists. Zionism did not invision hurting Arabs. It was a socialist dream by Jews being oppressed in Europe and not allowed to own land or enjoy equal rights. When Theodore Hertzl came up with this vision it was for a socialist state living peacefully with Arab states. Before you depict Israel as so evil, you really should make a point of examining the history of countries in the Arab League, their coruption, their violence against each other and their own citizens, and how the Europeans brought modern day anti-semetic notions to them. If it were not for the Germans, French and British after both world wars, a Jewish state could very well have naturally sprung up. Before you point the finger at Israel you really do have to understand what the British and French did in carving up nations into artificial states in that area. You really do have to make an effort to understand how the British deliberately proposed a Belfour Declaration to create two states so Britain could have two constantly feuding entities and rule by divide and conquer. Israel is as much a victim as Palestinians and Palestine if that is what you want to call it. As for your rendition of Jewish history, all I would ask you to do is stop being so quick to ignore that Jews have the same rights as Palestinians to a land. Anyone from either side is wrong if they try negate the other side's rights. As for your positions. If you are to be credible, then rather then simply select Zionism as being racist, accept the reality that everyone, all of us, all religions, all political ideologies are inherently intolerant to those they do not agree with. To state it is simply Zionism that has caused the problem and discriminates is very naive indeed. It ignores the role 3,000 years of Christian discrimination and mass murders of Jews has played in forming this reaction by Jews to wanting to go back to where they were expelled from. It ignores the thousand of years of dhimmitude invoked by Muslims against anyone who was not a Muslim in their counties. It ignores the laws imposed by the British and French that set up much of today's present climate of instability in the Middle East. It ignores the German influence on the Muslim religous leaders in the 20's, 30's and 40's. It ignores the harsh strain of anti-semetism towards all Jews, Zionists or not promulgated daily on the t.v. stations, radio stations, and in the newpapers of countless Arab nations. It ignores the fact that for example, the alleged moderate PLO leader Mr. Abbas who the West refers to as a moderate, wrote his thesis on justifying anti-semetism and the Protocols of Zion an out and out fraudulent piece of literature that is today passed around the Muslim world as the gospel. There is a lot I am afraid you don't know about the Middle East and don't sound like you care to know. But believe me on one thing, your attempt to portray all Zionists as being discriminatory is necessarily bigoted and ignorant and your attempt to depict Zionism as instituting racism in Israel based on some newspaper articles is way out of context. To understand Israeli policies towards Jews, you really have to come to the country and see what it really means. You would have to understand that within Israel there is still a huge debate as to what the definition of a Jew is. It is not as simple as you portray it and yes I had to call you on depicting Israel as a utopia that disciminates against everyone but Jews. That is pure b.s. Everyone in Israel faces the exact same hardships and that is the irony of Israel. It has achieved equality for all its peoples, Muslim, Jewish, Christian, because they all suffer and know what it is like to feel trapped and misunderstood. One last thing. To understand the Middle East is to also not be aware of the anti-semetism that has been preached by its Orthodox Christian Churches and their aiding terrorist actions. None one in the Middle East escapes having blood on their hands...except the Bahaiis who were wiped out in Iran and made the mistake of placing their head place of worship in Israel instead of say New York City. I can honestly say with the exception of the Bahaiis, everyone else has been equally caught up in good and bad actions. And no I am not Bahaii.

RB is dead on. I am a lawyer (too?) and would have given you the same cases and said what RB did. And RB is right kiddo. Don't cheat too much, do some of this yourself! That said, I think the key to your story is this-when you say no, it should end right there. If you tell someone no, and then they persist, that is harassment. The fact that it is happening at work makes it a workplace harassment. There's two kinds of workplace harassment. One is by someone who is in a position of power over you and can hire and fire you, and one is by someone on an equal level. Either way if the harassement causes you to feel unsafe at work and is unwelcome there is a problem. Now the problem you will see is this; in theory yes what you describe is sexual harassment. Its also interesting because the harasser is trying to mask the harassment by suggesting the target is racist. This is a classic case of trying to manipulate the situation by raising the race card. People can and do use the race or sex card to mask their behaviour and it makes things complicated. As well as another poster said, you have to make sure that what you have been told is accurate or credible before you defend the person. Assuming it is, then you have to deal with the real world and practical limitations. If you are on a job and this guy fires you, sure you can go to the Human Rights Commission and make a complaint but it might be 2, 3, 5 years before they get around to it, and quite frankly the Ontario Human Rights Commission is full of useless idiots doing useless things and all they may do is frustrate the person further. The other option is to sue for unfair dismissal if fired, or constructive dismissal if the person had to quit work because it was no longer bearable. So you sue. Here is the problem with that. The lawyer's fee may be quite large and certainly more then any remedy you might expect to get so the cost of the legal action may make it impractical. Here is what also makes it impractical to sue. Since this person is not rich and needs to work, they will have to go find another job as soon as possible. In that case, when you sue, you can only sue for the lost wages until the person starts getting paid again...not only that even if this person is entitled to something for emotional damages on top of the lost salary, it may not be enough to justify hiring a lawyer. The person could go to Small Claims Court without representation but they have to be willing to read up on the law and have the kind of personality where they don't get intimidated and can speak in public. This is why in so many cases, people just quit and never tell anyone. Good luck. By the way, if this happens in a unionized environment, the worker would go to their union steward. If it was between workers the union steward would try mediate a resolution first. If it was between a manager and a worker the union steward would follow procedures to try mediate it first. Then after that fails, the union would file a grievance before an arbitrator. In a unionized environment the worker would have a way to grieve the behaviour and be protected while waiting for it to be resolved. So while some people hate unions, if you are a worker in such situations its a hell of a lot better. Some workplaces have zero tolerance with sexual harassment but the problem is their internal investigation and dispute resolution processes may sound good but may be useless. I once investigated a manager who raped illegal immigrants working for him in a hospital. The hospital appointed a female mediator who then covered up what happened and protected the manager. It took a huge battle to expose the manager and the corupted mediation process and when all was said and done the $20,000 the individual got is well how do I say it, not much for what this illegal immigrant went through, and after all that, she was deported to Portugal and there was insufficient evidence for the Crown to have gone through with a criminal case because of the time lapse and the illegal immigrant's lack of willingness to go through a criminal trial.

Man Warwick this is exactly the problems Canada has walked right into in its misguided mission to be good guys. We are serving as a proxy para-military police force for a non democratic government that may want to execute these Taliban...the same Taliban Canadian soldiers are supposed to hunt and kill. Now there is moral reservation about killing them? What's next? Why be there? If the original mission which is to kill Taliban is too questionable then what? I would love to read all your opinions on this. Me I really don't know what to say other then the Canadian military has always been used as peacekeepers or to fight in conventional wars against a visible enemy and in a war governed by the Geneva Convention. In this case what we are doing is acting as a sort of police force and anti-terrorist assassination squad and where the Geneva Convention does not apply. Now that the same soldiers all gung ho to go out and search and kill Taliban now have second thoughts what next? How long until the Canadian military clashes with the government that wants it to do the killing for it....then?

Allow me to respond to Black Dog; 1-You have made reference to the fact that in regards to the historical perspective in the Middle East in regards to "stolen land" its not relevant because you infer Israel stole land from Palestinians-this is a position that is defective-the point is how far back do you go in history to determine who has the superior right to this land-because if you do, Jews established a valid legal right to the same land Palestinians now feel is exclusively there land and that is the crux of the issue-you unfortunately are selective and merely point out that Israel took land from the Palestinians because you are being selective and do not care to actually trace back history and understand it was at one point taken from Jews and they were expelled and now simply have returned to where they had ancient roots and were expelled from-your position completely ignores the history of Jews and their connection to the land-more to the point, the point that was originally made to you escaped you, that no one has a monopoly for portraying themselves as having the land in the Middle East taken away from them it is not and has never been a position unique to Palestinians but as long as you select the history you want to use to base your position and isolate it to say 1920 to today, we will get your selective and therefore distorted perspective; 2-You keep referring to Israel as oppressors-this again is a typically selective perspective and one which sees right and wrong and a good guy and a bad guy-this is precisely the kind of simplistic analysis that again renders what you are saying trite-the fact is Arabs have oppressed each other in Palestine and the rest of the world and Middle East for a longer period of time then the historic period between 1949 and today. Of course if you choose to be selective, you can completely ignore the treatment of Palestinians in Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Arab world where they have always been treated as second class citizens and discriminated against-Israel the horrible oppressor but let us not mention how Yasir Arafat and an umbrella group of approximately 130 organizations exploited their people, sole their international relief money and placed it in Swiss bank accounts and engaged in terror against Palestinians who would not work for hash hish and drug cartels they owned. Arafat was the oppressed hero. Let's revise history and forget he started as a drug cartel operator trying to secure his export of hash hish. Let us also be selective and ignore what happened with the Palestinians in all the countries they have been in that are Muslim. The facts speak for themselves. Israel has engaged in some questionable treatment of Palestinians no doubt. But it is not isolated to the Israel Defence Force and in fact Israel's behaviour is absolutely no different then how Jordanian, Syrian, Egyptian, Tunisian, and Saudi Arabian police forces and military have treated them. However I suppose in your world of good and bad you like to be selective and suggest Israel is the only country struggling to deal with the Palestinians and where they should live. You can also be selective and ignore the fact that the Arab League has always had the financial resources and land to have taken in displaced Palestinians but has refused. Yah I know its all Israel's fault. Other Arabs don't discriminate or hate Palestinians. It's one big happy family. 3-You made the statement that you do not have to benefit from hard work to benefit from Zionist policies. That to me in a nut-shell summarizes much of my problem with your comments. It is subjective and based on the misconception of what Zionism is and the fact that you have never been to Israel but talk as if you are an expert on Israeli society. Perhaps you should travel there and see what it is really like for if you did you would not make such comments. The fact is there is a law of return that gives automatic citizenship to Jews if they choose to go to Israel but that is where the so called Zionist policies you referred to end. The sweeping generalization and inference you made as to special treatment is ridiculous. Jews in Israel suffer the same hardships as non Jews in terms of taxes, unemployment and everything else. You have this naive concept that Israel provides a Utopia to Jews. It's a poor nation with an extremely high tax rate and the average Israeli is not rich and lives in basic standards. In fact I would think you live better then the average Israeli if you are a Canadian. As well to suggest you can be as you are inferring lazy and cruise through life in Israel as long as you are Jewish is odious. Before making such malicious statements you should make a serious effort to try understand what a real day is like in a typical Israeli Jew's life before you make such generalizations. If I turned that around and said the same thing about blacks in an African country or Christian white people in Canada how do you think that would be perceived? Those damn blacks in Zimbabwe. Mugabe gives them everything. Its down right ignorant let alone anti-semetic to generalize an entire nation of people and suggest because they are Jews and live in Israel they can be lazy. 4-You made some statement to the effect that African states have only been around recently so they can not be expected to be perfect at this point-and yet you do what most people using your arguements do-expect a double standard with Israel-your double standard comes from the racist concept that Jews can be held to a higher standard because they should know better because of the holocaust-read back your comments on the holocaust-that is the logical conclusion to what you stated in regards to the holocaust and its relation to Israel when discussing oppression-this notion that Israel is expected to exhibit a higher standard because of the holocaust is racist-its like telling someone who is raped they can should know better and should never hit back at anyone if they feel threatened. It attempts to revictimize Israelis and tell them they do not have the right to self defense because they should know better. Since Germans once gassed their relatives they now can't defend themselves if terrorists attack. I say this because people like you when they make their sweeping generalizations about Israel never at any time attempt to define what they mean by oppression. You use it in a sweeping, general imprecise context and do not differentiate legitimate acts of self-defense from the same kind of phenomena that has happened to any conventional army when it is sent in to civilian sites to quell violence. Of course when African soldiers commit autrocities on their fellow citizens we dismiss that as simply them being in the early stages of their existence and trying to sort things out. Yes that's it. Robert Mugabe is simply a temporary phenomena to be overcome. Israel on the other hand is expected to sit back and not defend itself against terrorism because you sitting in the luxury of your security and comfort in Canada feel if it defends itself, that is oppression. Oppression? Tell that to innocent civilians who simply want to be left alone and live in peace but have to live with people blowing up bombs in front of their faces. Of course you sitting on your safe cushy self-righteous seat have never been to Israel and had limbs and stomach matter explode all over your face. The point is there have been unfortunate deaths of both Palestinians and Israelis. Stop selecting and stop simply pointing to Israelis. Every time you do so you show you have taken one side of the debate and by doing so you render your perspective meaningless. A death is death. Palestinians and Israelis suffer equally. That is the point and the only point and your portraying one side as good and the other as the victim is the stuff we expect from kids reading fairy tales before they grow up to deal with the real world. 5-I also note you stated Muslim countries do not claim to be Liberal democracies and besides how Muslim countries treat Jews is not the point. Talk about selectivity. First of all let's get it straight-when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian debate what the vast majority of the Muslim world has done is to say the Jews should go back to Europe where they came from. Then in the next breath they argue the classic arguement that Mummar Ghaddafi loves to present-we do not hate Jews, we just hate Zionists. We want to live in a democractic state with the Jews but they insist on it being a Jewish state. That Sir is the point. The Muslim world has stated they want to live in a state with Jews and that Sir is precisely why this issue is raised. Because how do you take Muslim countries and their leaders seriously when they make such statements and then in the next breath state Jews should be sent back to Europe. How do you take this seriously when Muslim nations practice dhimmitude not that you know what that is. The track record of how non Muslims are treated in Muslim countries is precisely the point when anyone suggests Muslims simply want to live with Jews. You have to understand the real track record and what it means to have lived as a Jew in the Muslim world to understand they do claim to be democratic as an arguement against Zionism. You Sir, seem to have selectively forgotten the democractic state of Jews and Muslims Nasser proposed, Arafat proposed, Ghaddafi proposed. 6-You made a tell tale statement which says it all. You made the aside that you don't care about Jewish religion and then went on to suggest you don't care about it since Jews discriminate against Arabs. That is precisely the closed minded, intolerant, anti-semetic bull shit that Jews have to put up with. You basically are proud of your lack of caring and then make a false statement that the religion discriminates precisely because you won't take the time to care and to try understand the nature of Judaism. That Sir, that lack of caring and making sweeping generalizations that Judaism and Zionism discriminate are by their very nature anti-semetic. It is a classic case of being proud to be ignorant and then justifying that ignorance to make a sweeping statement. The fact is Sir, if you ever bothered to open your closed mind and try understand Jewish theology you would realize their connection to the land of Israel is a spiritual one and one based on the belief that God promised them the land and that they could live there. The connection to the land is the very essence of being a Jew. A Jew can not exist without a connection to this land. Christians and Muslims on the other hand do not have such an equivalent in their religions. Christians take for granted owning land. Each country they have lived in the state was Christrian and discriminated in favour of Christians and prevented Jews (Muslims, Gypsies) from owning land. And yet today we now have the same ancestors of these people who refused to allow Jews the right to own land, now tell them once again they are not allowed to own land and have a special connection to it. Guess what. That message from the Christian Western world is the biggest crock of hippocracy next to telling aboriginals they have no rights. Secondly the Muslim religion specifically states Jews are not allowed to own land in Muslim countries and are to have second class rights. They can not practice their religion in public. They must not build places of worship bigger or taller then mosques. These non jews can not inter-marry, touch Muslims, or engage in direct business with them unless its to sell. Jews can not get jobs in government and are forced to live in segregated ghettoes. That is the ones still in the Arab world since the majority were exterminated by Mukbarrat the secret police in these countries. So do me a favour. Before you say you don't care about the Jewish religion and make sweeping statements that it discriminates since it feels there is a spiritual connection between Jews and God and the land-save such rudamentary anti-semetism and take a look at Christianity and Islam and other world religions and their view of the state and land. Stop being selective. The point is Israel has tried more so then any other nation in the world to treat its non Jews with respect. Yes the point is you show me another country faced with extermination that offers its non Jewish citizens who are of the same religion and ethnicity as the groups threatening to exterminate them the same rights. Oh I know you don't think its relevant but it is specifically because you suggest Israel discriminates. It guarantees the right for Arabs to speak Arabic as an official language. it guarantees the rights of Arab Israelis to seats in Parliament and its courts have enforced orders protecting Arab Israeli land rights against Jewish Israeli land rights. Now you want to point fingers, tell me how the West dealt with the Japanese, Italians and Germans during world war two. Tell me how the West dealt with its Jews. Tell me how the West deals today with its Jews. Please be careful who you lecture on discrimination. Jews need no lectures from anyone on what it is like to be discriminated against and if they today discriminate, the discrimination is not simply a result of lazy Jews beging given superior rights-its about two people crowded ina tiny land and rampant terrorism making it difficult if not impossible not to discriminate against innocent Arab Israelis or for that matter Palestinians or Israelis caught in the cross fire. Everyone suffers when security must be placed paramount over individual rights. You think we are in a play land here? You think you can simply say to Arab Israelis-no problem...you speak Arabic, you look Arabic, but you know what, we won't sometimes stop and ask you for i.d. because oopsy it might hurt your feelings. Grow up. This is not a young black man being stopped in Toronto by a cop late at night because he is driving a flashy car. Its a kind of discrimination brought on by desperation. Here in Canada it happens in a different context and yet from your kind of comments and inferences it would appear you just got it all figured out and its as simple as good guy picking on bad guy. The have and the have nots. The Israelis got it all and the Palestinians got nothing. Finally you stated that even if other countries have done bad things, how does that absolve Israel? That is not the point of why people defending Israel bring it up. Defenders of Israel bring it up because they believe there is a ridiculous double standard and you for sure have exhibited it in your comments when you say African countries are emerging as an excuse for their autrocities but when you perceive Israel to f..ck up its not the same since they should know better and more to the point, they better not remind the world they came to Israel because of the holocaust cuz golly gee wiz that's n ot fair and we are sick and tired of hearing about the holocaust. The point is if Israel is held to the same standard as everyone else it is no better or worse then anyone else. Who lectures Israel on its wrong doings with a clean track record? Name me one country that points the finger has not discriminated and engaged in massacres, etc. Does it absolve Israel, no. But it certainly does not permit you to selectively isolate Israel and suggest they can not suffer from the same problems every other nation has. That is the point. But I know, you don't care about it. Israel discriminates and that is all there is to it.

Actually reading back this line of posts and its quite something Tem, I think Betsy has been bang on with her comments and if I was giving points in a formal debate setting would say she left you in her dust paragraphs ago but hey that is just me...but I have failed to detect anything in her renditions that would indicate she is defficient in Canadian history. In fact I think she has proved what I have long suspected, that women are in fact more intelligent then men. And no I am not female just candid! Seriously Tem where have you gone with this. You start off with a premise that necessarily calls on non natives to make comments that could be perceived as not understanding native culture if they don't agree with your version of it. We can all concede that native peoples in this country suffered from discrimination and injustice and still do. We can all concede that the high ration of natives in prison flows from socio-economic problems inter-related to alcohol and substance abuse and petty crimes flowing from the continuing inability for mainstream society and native socities to coexist peacefully and with mutual tolerance. We can all concede that in every society, in every culture, political state, etc., where man has been involved, there has been injustice, and humans have killed other humans en masse as a result of political/religious views. We can all concede that some mass murderers are serial killers but their are those who murder en masse due to political and religious reasons using the state and/or the police or military or organized units of humans to do the killing and those serial killers who do not represent the state when they kill. The point is serial killers in the strictest forensic sense do so because of socio-pathic personality defects. They enjoy the power that comes from torturing and killing. It provides them sexual gratification. Now a guy like Joseph Stalin is an interesting example. He is an example of someone who was a socio-path who used politics and the state to conduct mass murders and in fact he was both as history tells us he actually stalked and raped and tortured some of his victims not for political reasons but for sexual reasons. Likewise it appears Saddam Hussein engaged in rape and killing the people he had sex with and inter-mixed that with his mass killings. So yes some mass murdering politicians are serial killers but confusing the two concepts only serves to fuel reverse racism and suggest that the oppressor is somehow inferior to the victim. The fact is serial killers come in all religions, colours, sizes, sexual preference and gender although most are men. The fact is the classic serial killer has no political views and is not doing what he does as an agent of the state but as an individual. That is the differentation I would use. Does the murderer do so as an agent of the state or as a civilian. Does he do so to promote an overt, expressed political agenda he wants to impose on everyone and all of society, or is he simply acting out sexual perversion. To engage in an intelligent discussion as to the treatment of native Canadians yes we can get into the horrible treatment natives received by Christian missionaries who tried to forcefully convert them. We can get into the horrible history of the countless number of natives sexually molested by religious folks in these orphanages and institutions. But to discuss it we should distinguish the kinds of sexual predators who took advantage of their religious status or political status to engage in sexual acts against the vulnerable with political policies promulgated by governments. This is why I go back to the original premise and say if you want you can portray all caucasians as the enemy and suggest they come from a more violent society then natives. Isn't that the logical conclusion to all this? To me that makes no sense. It makes no more sense then saying natives were savages before Europeans came to North America and changed everything because they enggaged in inter-nation wars. For me, if anybody should be stereo-typing why not Betsy. Why should she not dismiss the whole thing as being the fault of we men and our testosterone anr argue that all this injustice and serial killings and mass murders have one thing in common, they are usually committed by some guy with an obsession over the size of his pee pee.

So you concede not all Jews are bankers. Hmm. Some progress. But man you are still quite the expert on Jews and Jewish history aren't you... Seriously, . you continue to make sweeping statements as to the characteristics of all Jews which necessarily makes your comments bigoted ad defective. The fact that you continue to repeat your original statements and then try justify them by simply raising new stereotypical sweeping generalizations renders futher discourse on your description of Jewish characteristics probably pointless. The sad thing for me is, you will continue to make sweeping statements about Jews and think you are on expert on them. I am not sure what would happen, but may I suggest you try sit down with a Jew and without making sweeping generalizations ask them questions and talk to them. You might see that they are no different then you and your subjective generalizations that all Jews are closed minded is no different then me saying all white Christians are anti-semites.. or all Arabs hate Jews or all Jews or Israelis hate Arabs or Muslims. One last thing, your simplistic description of the history of Judaism to make the sweeping comments you did missed the point but unintentionally made another. The fact is even using your defective rendition of Jewish history, and using your words, then it would logically flow that Jews and Jewish civilization preceded Christian and Muslim civilizations and therefore necessarily their rights preceded Christian and Muslim rights. You probably don't realize the absurdity in your statements. The point is we can trace back history to compare whose rights came first then what? The point is a solution has to be created that can accommodate all peoples. Your simplistic depiction of Israel as the bad guy is laughable. Then again you have probably grown up in a generation where life is seen as a World Wrestling Federation match with a good guy and bad guy and that is probably all you can handle at this point. Can you understand me if I tell you neither Palestinians or Israelis are to blame-they are both equally as victimized in this conflict? Is that too confusing to you? Does that sort of do a number on your hatred for Jews and your lack of understanding of Jewish history and Israeli foreign policy and military policy? Hey late me know when you complete your doctorate on Jews and their characteristics. I suspect I might run into one and will need your insights.

First: the "whites/dark-skined" comment was a direct response to Argus's statement that the left reflexively sides with "brown-skinned people". I'm well aware of the racial similarities between semetic peoples. However, a sizeable chunk of Israel's population are "transplanted Europeans", be they the first immigrants from post-Holocaust Europe or their descendents, or the large number of North American, Eastern European and Russian Jews that made up the bulk of immigration since Israel's founding. Ahh, I see, so that's why you hate them. Um, given that the end of apartheid predated the internet, I'm not surprised you don't see many defenses of it. But the act remains, conservatives in the '70s and '80s were staunch defenders of the apartheid regime. And why not? I was among them. My feeling then was that the apartheid regimes were pro-west, and easily as respectful of human rights as anything likely to follow. The choice, as far as I was concerned, was between a white regime which brutalized its people and sided with the West, and a Black regime which brutalized its people and sided with the Communists. So far, South Africa has greatly suprised me. Mandela was, for a Communist, surprisingly capable and open to compromise,, and prevented South Africa from making the same journey every other Black African states made shortly after their first vote - into dictatorship and near chaos. Zimbabwe, on the other hand, is just about exactly as I expected. The people of Zimbabwe were better off when it was called Rhodesia. You know what the sad thing is. The person you are trying to explain yourself to hasn't a clue what you lived through and thinks he can lecture you from the comfort of his cushy, soft, protected, Canadian perspective. Man if I could take every Canadian who feels they can lecture people on what is right and wrong about other countries and have them travel to some of our reservations or visit the regimes of the governments they glorify. You know what is also sad. He probably will never speak to refugees from Zimbabwe black or white and ask them what Robert Mugabe has done nor is he aware of how in Toronto we too had signs telling blacks and Jews they weren;t allowed on the beeches. No...in Canada...impossible.

Those policies you cite are based on nationality, not a nebulous concept of ethnicity. And what bearing does any of that have on Israel's policies? The only explanation would be that you feel two wrongs, in fact, make a right. I also note that the prescence of Arab parties (which were forbidden until the '80s) in the Knesset are oft-cited as proof of Israel's pluralistic and egalitarin sociaty. The reality is much different. Worlds apart. I imagine if I was an Arab, though, I'd probably feel a little differently. Anyway, my post earlier was essentially a parody of Argus's post which preceded it. I stand by the South Africa comparison. What is this "Arab cause" you speak of? You stand by the apartheid comparison for several reasons; 1-you have a selective memory of Christians and their use of political states to impose their religion on the masses and their continuing to use political states to impose their religion; 2-you have a selective memory as to the fact that in the entire Muslim world, dhimmitude has been practiced since the beginning of Islam-I suggest you read up about it because if you did you would not be so quick to make such analogies and you would understand that for any Muslim nation to criticize Israel for being secular, they had better be prepared to abandon their own secularity otherwise it is the hight of hippocracy suggesting Israel's desire to be a Jewish nation is any different then all the Muslim nations who wish to be Muslim nations or for that matter all the Christian nations which still fail to seperate state from Church; 3-you probably do not understand Jewish religion and the origins of the connection of Jews to the nation of Israel - its based on a religious belief of a covenant from God not on the concept that Jews are better then others and want to be better then them; 4-you make sweeping statements as to how non Jews are treated in Israel but the point is and you missed it- not one Arab nation entrenches in its constitution equality for Jews or Christians or non Muslims-you really should read up on Israel's constitution, laws, and court decisions entrenching and enforcing the rights of non Jewish Israelis before you make such statements. Is their discrimination against people in Israel? Of course but it is not as simple as it being discrimination against Arab Israelis. Between Jews there is a complex conflict between Ashkanazi and Tasfardic Jews, light and dark skinned Jews, Russian Jews and other Jews, etc., and not just with Arab Israelis. The real discrimination often happens within the Jewish society between each other. What you think is discrimination based on race is not-what has happened is that because the country is so small and terrorist attacks are so rampant, Arab Jews suffer because of security's inability to distinguish Arab Israeli from Palestinian. It flows from a security dilemma. Then again I am sure where you live you never heard of how Canada interned Japanese, Italians and Germans in World War Two. Innocent people, suffer because of security problems. One other thing you clearly do not understand. In Israel everyone must join the army from when they are 18 to 65. They do their mandatory service and then they are in the reserves. Everyone lives on call. Everyone knows or is related to the people who die in attacks. Any civilian might be called up at a moment's notice. Because everyone is in the Armed Forces and in a constant state of siege life evolves around the armed forces. To get hired in any job you can't escape the military connection. If you do not serve in the Israeli military people do not feel they can trust you. Since many Arab Israelis are not allowed to join the military they find themselves shut out of work. The discrimination is not because they are Arab Israelis, it flows from the fact that they weren't in the Army and therefore can be fully trusted. I have good friends who are Christian and Muslim Israelis and they had to leave because they could not get work precisely for that reason. It flows from the inability to understand who the real enemy is not because of religion or skin colour. Then there is the complex discrimination that goes on between European and Arab Jews, and so on. So please do not generalize and make sweeping statements about Israeli society. It is far too complex for such simplistic descriptions and more to the point at least it can say its constitution and its courts have stepped in to protect the rights of all its citizens unlike the treatment of Jews and Christians or non Muslims in Muslim countries. I love the people that point the finger at Israel and suggest it discriminates. They should look at how we deal with our own aboriginals and our own problems with how we have handled treatment of our Chinese and Indian immigrants and the head tax, our internment of Japanese, Italians and Germans, etc. We should look at how Canada refused to take in Jewish refugees during World War Two because McKenzie King was a raving anti-semite and how our major cities, particularly Toronto practiced open apartheid and racial and religious segregation even until the early 60's. Sometimes we have selective memories. Then again many of the people pointing the finger at Israel are Christians who take for granted their majority status. As well many persons from Asia and Africa have come from developing countries where they have been taught Israel and Jews are evil. The Protocols of Zion are still widely presented as truth throughout many Asian nations and the Middle East.

If CUPE's opinion on the Middle East is simple minded for supporting the Palestinians and condeming Israel for their actions then isn't your own opinion for supporting Israel and condeming Palestinian for their action just as simple minded? You and Warwick as private citizens are entitled to any opinion you choose. CUPE is a labour union that represents many people in labour matters. These people have many different opinions on non labour issues and CUPE should not picking and choosing which of those opinions it represents. The only way it can represent all its members is not to get involved in these issues. Why would an organization that needs solidarity among its members to function, seek to divide them by getting involved in matters that have nothing to do with labour relations? Presuming to do so is just plain old arrogance. Warwick excellently and precisely said and I admire a man who summarizes it all in so few words! But to tell you the truth I am enjoying discussing this so I confess Warwick, I have waxed on far too long when your words capture it all!

Quote 1:Once these people got a homeland they defend it with a vengence and yes they have crossed the line in so many ways, that they are now the ones who are the bad guys. They would love to just take a week and put all palestinians to death, and then say genocide us, we were the ones who had genocide put on us....etc. Quite 2: I do not like the jewish people I have met that are from Israel as they are the worst at showing contempt for all others and they do believe that need show no loyalty to anyone, only to Isreal. Quote 3: We pretty much gave Isreal the bomb and now they have enough to destroy much of the whole southern europe and north africa along with all if the middle east. Why do they need this ability. We know they will never agree to disarm these weapons. So it is a quagmire that we will never get away from all that we have allowed to be created in the first place. Quote 4:So why would anyone be upset that a union here in Canada voices its opinion against the Isreali people and all of its current policies on the palestinian people. It is not something that we all can not see for our selves and it is only that now that this is done it will draw more attention to what many would like to just flow away without notice. I do think that this is something that does need attention and so I agree with the union or any other group who are willing to take an honest look and give an honest opinion. In response to quote 1; Your statement that "they would just love" is illogical. You have made a sweeping generalization as to how all Israelis feel and what their motives are. Having lived in Israel and witnessed terrrorist attacks and having seen dead Palestinian children who were asked to carry bombs and had them blow up in their face, let me say this to you-no one, Israeli, Palestinian "would just love" to kill. Until you have witnessed people blow up in your face and picked up body parts-until that day Sir, don't make such generalizations because I can assure you the people on both sides of this horrid conflict do not "love" or wish to wipe each other out. What they want Sir is dignity, the right to live in peace, to have hope, all the things you take for granted and they still dream for. Quote 2; Read back your " I don't like..that I have met from Israel...your comment Sir is a sweeping generalization of all Israelis-your subjective perceptions of the Israelis you met means diddle swat in the whole scheme of things and quite frankly shows that you have deep issues of hatred towards all Israelis because you met a few...you are no different then the person that says, the Arabs I met are all pushy, so I hate them all, or I never met a black man without an attitude... It is precisely these sweeping generalizations that will then allow you to make sweeping emotional statements that stereotype people and only serve to incite hatred and intolerance. To put it bluntly, I doubt Sir, you ever met the brother, sister, mother, father of a child blown up in front of their face from Israe, so your perspective if it was not so hateful is laughable. Quote 3; You refer to "we" giving the bomb to Israel. Clearly you do not understand who Albert Einstein and Robert Oppenheimer were. May I suggest before you make such a statement of "we" giving Israel the bomb, you figure out who they were. As for Israel's possession of the ability to use nuclear fusion to "bomb" the world, it is interesting you criticize Israel but not the U.S., Russia, China, South Africa, Pakistan, India, Britain, France, North Korea, or Brazil. The point is Sir you either believe no country in the world should possess nuclear weapons or your arguement necessarily becomes selective and therefore contradictory. The real point is Sir, no country in the world should have such weapons. The fact Sir is that anyone, you and I can make a dirty bomb that explodes nuclear contamination into a crowd and can cause thousands of deaths. The fact is any person can use chemicals and toxic poisons to commit mass murder. So your selectively criticizing Israel for having such technological capabilities doesn't validate criticism of the State nor more then it would any other state with the same technology. Now to explain one other point, Israel has this technology because in case you didn't notice, the majority of the Arab League nations called for the absolute destruction of the State of Israel and it wasn't until a relatively short time period ago Egypt and Jordan abandon such mandates. The absolute destruction of the State of Israel is still the mandate of Iran, Syria and Hamas to name just a few in along line of countries and terrorist groups operating in these countries who have openly stated they would if they could, wipe out Israel. I would also like to remind you that when Israel constructed its nuclear bombs the Soviet Union and China were both providing massive supplies of weapons to Egypt, Syria and Iraq and openly siding with their calls to put an end to the State of Israel, so before you select Israel out for criticism why not go back and review the climate at the time they constructed the weapon. More to the point would you have us really believe that you think Israel is a danger to Europe and would bomb it with nuclear weapons? That is what your comment infers. Quote 4: Why would anyone be upset? Are you serious? Do you think all Canadians think the same? Do you think all Canadians think like you? Do you think for that manner, that all union members think the same way and should be expected to think the same way? Do you think everyone is like you and makes sweeping generalizations and comes to conclusions based on their subjective feelings and then tries to impose them on everyone else? Upset? Tell me Sir, what happens now if you are a union member and you don't agree with CUPE'S views as to Israel. What do you do with your Jewish name or skull cap now? What if you are any kind of Jew (pro or anti Israel) or a non Jew who does not agree with CUPE's views? Can you expect equal treatment if you want to file a grievance? Upset? Well of course. Since when is it a union's mandate to make pronouncements about a political conflict that has nothing to do with its mandate? How does criticizing the State of Israel's perceived foreign policy advance the union's real mandate which is to represent employees with seniority, wages, sickness ahd disability and occupational health and safety issues? What has happened that CUPE has so much time on its hands that it now feels it can completely steer away from its true mandate and make such pronouncements. More to the point, how could any rational person who is a CUPE member or just an ordinary Canadian not be just a bit upset that people running a union are so stupid as to confuse the State of Israel's refusal to recognize Hamas with the issue as to recognizing Palestinian statehood. Read back what CUPE said. They have failed to distinguish the two isses. Israel currently fails to recognize Hamas because its constritution calls for the hunting, torturing and killing of civilians (of any nation not just Israel) as a legitimate means to wiping out the State of Israel. Its mandate is not to peacefully coexist with Israel but to wipe it off the map. Every day in its schools it teaches its children to carry guns, glorify terrrorist attacks and dreaming of wiping out Israel. Upset? How can CUPE be so retarded as to not be aware that Israel long ago stated it recognizes the right for Palestinians to have a state and supports the creation of such a state by peaceful means. Upset? No. I love to see Canadians who have never been to Israel, do not understand what is going on in the Middle East, and who live in a world where they take peace and security for granted, making moral judgements and sweeping generalizations of issues they know little or anything about.

[ "This isn't "anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism" but about fairness." This is precisely what it is. You should listen carefully to the words CUPE uses when it discusses Israel. They constantly equate Zionism with apartheid and it is particularly because it views Zionism as apartheid and therefore unfair, that it thinks it is inappropriate for Israel to defend its right to exist and feels it can stray so far from its real mandate (to represent employees as to seniority, health and safety,wages). Fair? How is it fair at this point in time when Hamas incites its people to believe the way to resolve the conflict is to wipe Israel off the map and engage in pre-meditated terrorist attacks against civilians anywhere in the world at anytime-to suggest Israel should recognize Hamas because that is in fact what the misguided people at CUPE have done. CUPE has confused the concept of the State of Israel's recognizing the Palestinian people's right to statehood (which they have already done and on more then one occassion) with recognizing Hamas's current constitution and mandate. Fair? What country recognizes a political organization which states it has the legitimate right to destroy it and hunt and torture and kill its civilians anywhere in the world until this destruction is achieved? I can just see it now, CUPE recognizes the right to any organization in the world dedicated to abolishing any and all unions. Hah. If it was truly about fairness, CUPE would not take sides in such a conflict and would remain silent on such topics. Fair? How is it fair to anyone who now does not now agree with CUPE's international political views as to the Israeli-Political conflict to expect equal treatment from their union representatives?

1a. Your references that Israel is a terrorist state and attacks and kills with impunity is a subjective statement and one that probably flows from the fact that you have never been to Israel, the Gaza Strip of the West Bank and understand the actions that have led to the killing of civilians and military on both sides; 1b. Israel has the international legal right to "kill" persons engaged in terrorist attacks against its civilians-you probably do not understand the law and the doctrine of self-defence but it is a little more complex then simply stating a state is not allowed to defend its civilians from terrorist attacks. 2.Public unions do not have the mandate nor should they have a mandate to selectively pick out international conflicts, choose sides to the conflict and I am not sure how you think engaging in such selective pronouncements will as you say "stop them". 3. You don't stop conflicts choosing one side of a conflict and inciting that one side on. To stop a conflict you must remain neutral, refrain from moral judgement and mediate the conflict by helping both sides find peaceful resolutions. Taking a side merely incites the conflict and in this case the agenda of Hamas which is to destroy the State of Israel. (which from the sounds of it you agree with) 4.Your comments "enough sympathy for the holocast(sic) and " Isreal (sic)..worse then(sic) Hitler" evidences that you started your discussion criticizing the state of Israel's military actions, but then felt it was acceptable to switch mid-stream and criticize how the holocaust is discussed and is remembered which has nothing to do with your original point discussion. By doing this, all you have done is show anyone reading your post precisely how many people like you will feel that when anyone discusses the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, they can make references that have nothing to do with that conflict and can only serve to incite hatred or intolerance towards all Jews. You vividly manifest what all Jews understand, that invariably when there is a discussion criticizing Israel, it allows people with negative feelings towards Jews to use an alleged debate about Israeli foreign policy to make negative emotional comments of intolerance towards all Jews. 5. Holocast is spelled holocaust, Isreal, Israel and when you use the expression worse then, use the word than not then. When you compare things, use the word than. 6. Your equating of your perception of Israel's military actions and foreign policy to what Hitler did is not only illogical but delibately hateful as you know all it can do is insult Jews and incite hateful feelings towards Jews. 7. Given the above comments mentioned in 4, 5 nd 6, iIt is obvious you have a problem not with the State of Israel and its perceived actions but with all Jews. Got news for you....Jews and Israelis will defend themselves if you try make sweeping emotional statements designed to incite hatred against their existence. Rather then hate them, why don't you learn to spell, and sit down and try talk to a Jew. You'd be suprised. They don't all own banks, own Hollywood, work as dentists nor are they all involved in any world conspiracies. Some of them are just like you and all they want is the right to live in peace just like Palestinians.

umm, the Palestinians have recognized Israel's right to exist since 1988 and re-iterated this recognition on several occasions including Madrid in 1991 and the Oslo Accords in September 1993. Arafat letter. I'm a CUPE member and I can vote against resolutions any time I want at general meetings. Palestinians do NOT recognize Israel's right to exist. It is precisely these kinds of comments that show you should try understand what you are discussing before you make such statements. Hamas which was elected by the majority of Palestinians has a mandate to destroy the state of Israel in its entirety including attacking civilians anywhere at anytime. You also really should try educate yourself on the topic, and specifically read up how Yasir Arafat before he died, denounced the above treaties you referred to. He was in fact offered 98% of the above treaties and rejected them in their entirety, that Sir is a legal and political fact. More to the point, I am a tad confused. Why does CUPE feel it should select one political conflict and single it out and comment on it? Seems to me you missed to glaring points. One, if you want to start making comments about political conflicts around the world, there are a hell of a lot of conflicts to criticize. Interesting how for example Chinese treatment of its workers escapes your concern. If you can't see the hippocracy in the selectivity of what conflicts your union chooses to single out, heaven help you. More to the point, why are you and your union making such pronouncements? Since when is it a union's role to become a source of righteousness and make pronouncements on international conflicts? What does it achieve? Well for one thing it incites people to express feelings of anti-semetism and disguise it as criticism of Israel as you can see by the writings of one poster. For another it deliberately makes your Jewish union members feel unwelcome and it sends a signal to your union members that they must all think the same way about certain political conflicts. Is that the role of a union-to try impose its collective belief as to political issues unrelated to workplace health and safety on its members? The last time I looked a union (which I was a representative of by the way for 11 years) was supposed to treat all its members equally and make them feel welcome, and most importantly had a mandate to negotiate on behalf of employees as to issues dealing with sickness and health, seniority,occupational health and safety and wages. Would have me believe the union is pursuing its true mandate by telling its members to boycott Israel? Tell me, if CUPE has this much time to make comment on world affairs, when does it worry itself with the more mundane tasks such as workplace health and safety. And tell me, if a member of CUPE is Jewish or supports Israel or for that matter doesn't agree with whatever political pronouncement your union heads make about international conflicts-can they really be expected to be represented the same way at a grievance as say a non Jew or someone who openly feels Israel should be boycotted? Can you not see when you allow a union to make selective political statements, it necessarily creates the very same apartheid your union thinks it is criticizing Israel for doing? You have created two sets of union members, those who agree with its political opinions as to international conflicts, and those who don't. Now you tell me with a straight face, what does a CUPE member do if he or she wears a cepah (skull cap) or has a Jewish name or is identified as Jewish. Now what? Oh don't worry, we will still represent you and give you the same service if you identify with Israel? Yah right.

BLACK DOG PLEASE READ THE ABOVE. Sadly Black Dog, this is precisely the kind of anti-semetic response that is incited when CUPE makes the pronouncements it did. Can you see how this writer switches from an alleged debate about Israel to making a disparaging comment about the holocaust which is in fact an attack against all Jews. Can you see the concern Jews have when people like the above bring Hitler into the equation and make sweeping emotional statements with no basis to them other then hatred and mix the Palestinian-Israeli conflict with Hitler, the holocaust, etc. Black Dog I am curious, does a guy like you call people like the above on what they said, or when they make these kinds of comments, sadly you say nothing?

Interesting. Boycotts and divestment played a big role in ending South Africa's apartheid policies in the '80s (policies which were also justified on the grounds of demographics), but these days it seems more of a symbolic gesture. Sadly, it' sonly a matter of time before we start hearing of CUPE's "anti-semetism"? Your comments are interesting. You have equated Israel's right to exist in peace as being the equivalent of apartheid and therefore worthy of the same treatment. That in a nut shell shows where your head is at. I am sure you were in complete agreement with the UN when they rendered a declaration equating Zionism with Racism. Your other comment that "sadly it is only amatter of time before we start hearing of CUPE's anti-semetism" also manifests your personal bias and lack of understanding of what it means when you are a Jew and try to live in a multi-ethnic society but people like you, seem to think Jews should not feel insecure when they see and hear such developments. I doubt given your perspective that the right for Jews to have a country is apartheid-could ever begin to understand the emotional links between all Jews (even those who do not believe in the State of Israel or identify with Israelis) from a theological perspective and the nation of Israel. If I may say so sadly, people like you will never attempt to understand the meaning of the State of Israel to the Jewish faith. You will simply label it as apartheid in need of a boycott.

I'm sure they haven't bought Palestinean products in years. You missed the point. They have made a pronoucement suggesting one side is right the other is wrong. For CUPE to have been fair, they merely would have made a statement saying they abhor violence from either side of the debate. They chose instead to take sides.

So you know you are bi polar. So that means you also know that when you are in a manic phase or a depressive phase your thoughts are distorted. You know. You feel the highs and lows. You know when its coming and when you are going to crash. So what can I say to you you don't already know except one thing-your problem with life and how you feel its been handled is it really that way or is that the way you perceive it? Come on you are an intelligent man. Bi-polar doesn't make you stupid...it just gives you overwhelming emotional weight. You know darned well that who you are is because you are bi-polar. So its a curse but it is you. Its who you are. Sounds like you are still fighting it. Hell I know many bi-polars like you getting on in years and still fighting it. Why I do not know. So medication makes you feel flat...dead...suffocating...well what is the alternative? You constantly feeling people persecute you and life is unfair? Wouldn't you like to try just one day to walk in a park and not be overwhelmed by your feelings and for once be able to smell a flower or see the colour green in leaves? I know that is often impossible for you. So I say with due respect being bi polar is not a curse. Its bio-chemical. It can be treated if you take that stubborn angry butt of yours back to the hospital only this time find a young psychiatrist, someone young not old who is up on the latest medications and will stick around with you until you find the right one for you. There are at least 5 new medications in the last twop years that you have the right to try and I mean at least try before you start talking about killing yourself. I know you may not believe me but I am telling you, on the right medication things may seem a hell of a lot different. The struggle you are going through is not one with the State of the law. It is a personal spiritual crisis going on inside you. The bottom line is, you can blame everything outside you for the rest of your life and refuse to change or you start today, now, five minutes from now, by taking your butt to a clinic and stop acting like being bi-polar is such a big deal. Stop hiding behind your political rants which mask your fear of yourself and refusal to treat your illness. Yah its too easy pontificating about human rights when what we are talking about is you refusing to treat a bio-chemical imbalance that can be treated.