harper is an embarrassment

[Bonam]

Yes, of course they're aware of this. But protesting the bad behaviour of us and our allies is a lot more useful than protesting the bad behaviour of others. Those protests might be right, but they have no practical value.

And protesting against Israel has more "practical value"? Tell me, what practical value is there in continuously condemning and criticizing the state that "they are aware" is the most free and democratic in the region? What practical value is there in adding their voice to the the voice of the Arab states that would as soon see them executed or shunned for being who they are?

[bloodyminded]

It would be idiotic if it was 100% principle. I'm sure he'd prefer Egypt to be free and democratic. But one also has to weight Canada's best interest, the Middle East's best interest, and the reality of the history and situation of the country. You sound like a neo-con. I'm glad he doesn't.

The idea that the neocons are "democratic idealists" is one of the more astonishing political myths of the past decade.

And since the neocons (including the Canadian variety, like Mark Steyn and Professor Thomas Pangle) believe in an imperial America ruling the Earth through military force, I'd have to say Harper comes closer than I do.

Edited February 11, 2011 by bloodyminded

[bloodyminded]

And protesting against Israel has more "practical value"? Tell me, what practical value is there in continuously condemning and criticizing the state that "they are aware" is the most free and democratic in the region? What practical value is there in adding their voice to the the voice of the Arab states that would as soon see them executed or shunned for being who they are?

Well, when you word it with crazed rhetoric that assumes Israel does everything it does for "good reason" (a sheerly religious perspective when talking about nation states and international policy and relations), yeah, it sounds crazy.

But in reality, criticizing an ally can have more practical effects. Because there are democratic forces that can have influence.

Are you really suggesting that no one should criticize Israel...because some Arab states do so?

That doesn't even make sense.

[Molly]

The idea that the neocons are "democratic idealists" is one of the more astonishing political myths of the past decade.

With your permission, I'd like to steal that as a tagline/thought for the day.

[bloodyminded]

With your permission, I'd like to steal that as a tagline/thought for the day.

You, Molly?

You always have my permission, in advance.

[Saipan]

The idea that the neocons are "democratic idealists" is one of the more astonishing political myths of the past decade.

In the eyes of pinkos surely is.

If it wasn't I would worry. I lived next to German "Democratic Republic".

And spoke to Thais who were first and second generation Chinese.

[Molly]

Thank-you... and it's done.

[Moonlight Graham]

There's a good reason why many western leaders like Harper and Obama haven't come out and publicly pressured Mubarak to step down. They are allies with him now, but if they ragged on him to step down and events turned out that Mubarak stayed in power, leaders like Harper and Obama still have to have diplomatic relations with the man and don't want to damage the relationship.

They are stuck between a rock and a hard place, and want to press for democratic change without burning bridges. That said, they may not want him to leave either.

[g_bambino]

They are stuck between a rock and a hard place, and want to press for democratic change without burning bridges. That said, they may not want him to leave either.

That's pretty much it.

[Saipan]

They are stuck between a rock and a hard place,

Secular Mubarak or Islamists. What a choice

Fortunately Egypt is not important enough for the world.

[bloodyminded]

In the eyes of pinkos surely is.

The neocons are the Leninists, Saipan...maybe that's why you admire them.

Edited February 11, 2011 by bloodyminded

[Saipan]

YES!

[Scotty]

No. It's literally a handful.

My perception from reading complaints from Jews on various campuses is that anti-antisemitism is not at all uncommon, and that it's largely coming from ethnics, principally Muslims. I don't think there is a lot of anti-semitism among Canadian born people of Left or Right. However, I do think some on the Left, because they've taken up Israel as their cause de jour, fulminate about those they think supports Israel, and so would be inclined to be very suspicious about Jewish Canadians for that reason.

[Moonlight Graham]

Secular Mubarak or Islamists. What a choice

Those are obviously not the only 2 choices.

[Bonam]

Well, when you word it with crazed rhetoric that assumes Israel does everything it does for "good reason" (a sheerly religious perspective when talking about nation states and international policy and relations), yeah, it sounds crazy.

But in reality, criticizing an ally can have more practical effects. Because there are democratic forces that can have influence.

Are you really suggesting that no one should criticize Israel...because some Arab states do so?

That doesn't even make sense.

No, people can criticize what they want, freedom of speech and all. I am simply pointing out that if the consideration is "practical value", protesting against Israel is a waste of time. If they were concerned with practical value, they'd be at work, making money, not out in the streets being hooligans.

Oh, and considering the effects of recent protests in some Arab countries, I'd say there's plenty of "value" in protesting against those regimes as well, so people looking to make the most out of their protesting time might as well go target the countries with the worst human rights abuses.

[Luzifull22]

yess Ok Thankss! :rolleyes:

[bloodyminded]

My perception from reading complaints from Jews on various campuses is that anti-antisemitism is not at all uncommon, and that it's largely coming from ethnics, principally Muslims. I don't think there is a lot of anti-semitism among Canadian born people of Left or Right. However, I do think some on the Left, because they've taken up Israel as their cause de jour, fulminate about those they think supports Israel, and so would be inclined to be very suspicious about Jewish Canadians for that reason.

The argument is that the alleged rising tide of anti-semitism among the Left is subtle--maybe even unconscious--and so is difficult or impossible to differentiate from honest criticism of Israel.

The problems with such a view are manifest. First of all, some people contend that all criticism of Israel is inherently anti-semitic (unless one is declaring that Israel is too soft on its enemies...for some reason, that "criticism" is a-ok). We have a poster here who has expressed precisely this view...and others who don't say it, but obviously believe it, since they are so promiscuous with their use of the term.

Now, I have no doubt there exist leftist anti-semites. Why wouldn't there? No demographic or labelled grouping of human beings is free of bigotry and stupidity. But to claim there is a rising tide of leftwing anti-semitism--but we can't prove it, because it's never overt and so there's zero evidence of it--is a pretty preposterous argument, and one designed solely to demonize political opponents in the realm of controversial debate. They don't want debate. Totalitarians never do.

As for right-wing anti-semitism...that's patently obvious. I offered some examples, and there are plenty of others. Hell, I've debated two right-wing anti-semites on this very board...and there was no worry about "subtleties" that I couldn't prove. We're talking Holocaust denial, the control of the global media, the Jewish conspiracy to rule the Earth, and so on. The classics, you might say.

I once surfed the forum site of "Stormfront," the White Supremacist group, and they are conservatives to a man, no exception. Family, honour, the U.S. of A., Christianity and the bravery of "the troops." One of their more "difficult" debates is what to think of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: after all, they reasoned, the Jews are wily, powerful, brilliant and cruel, and are oppressing the Palestinians; but on the other hand, the Arabs are dirty and subhuman...so what to do? (That's what passes for a "moral dilemma" to the folks at Stormfront.)

In short, I agree that there must be leftist anti-semites. It has nothing to do with being left, or being a critic of Israel (any more than saying nice things about God or the family unit is suspect just because racists tend to love these things as well).

But the bigger anti-semitism problem certainly comes from the political Right...though not the mainstream, thankfully.

[bloodyminded]

No, people can criticize what they want, freedom of speech and all. I am simply pointing out that if the consideration is "practical value", protesting against Israel is a waste of time. If they were concerned with practical value, they'd be at work, making money, not out in the streets being hooligans.

Oh, and considering the effects of recent protests in some Arab countries, I'd say there's plenty of "value" in protesting against those regimes as well, so people looking to make the most out of their protesting time might as well go target the countries with the worst human rights abuses.

Israel does commit serious human rights abuses.

And it's exactly thanks to the protests, the criticism, the scrutiny that they recieve that they very suddenly eased some of the harsher aspects of the seige on Gaza, directly after their PR fiasco with the flotilla.

That's why they chose to show more restraint.

So no, protesting Israel is not a waste of time. If no one paid any attention, the Palestians would undoubtedly be far worse off then they were.

If no one scrutinized and criticized the United States--another extremely serious human rights abuser--Iraqi casualties would have been far more severe.

And so on and so on.

Edited February 12, 2011 by bloodyminded

[myata]

Close interest, short vision, small heart - that's how Canada has been coming out in the international family by this government. We only have to decide, which one of the two it will be: 1) that government does not speak for us, for majority at least; OR 2) that who we are, i.e who we have become.

For those who unlike our government still want to congratulate people on their newly gained freedom, there will be rallies around Canada today. Oh, yes, and it looks like a snow day, in my place at least.

It took eighteen times, coming out under threats, violence, heavily armed police, troops to finally gain that freedom in Egypt. Here in Ottawa, I recall one big anti-prorogation rally, and the second one was already a trickle. Oh well. If one doesn't need that freedom, never earned it hard way, how would they know to value and defend it?

[Wild Bill]

Israel does commit serious human rights abuses.

And it's exactly thanks to the protests, the criticism, the scrutiny that they recieve that they very suddenly eased some of the harsher aspects of the seige on Gaza, directly after their PR fiasco with the flotilla.

That's why they chose to show more restraint.

So no, protesting Israel is not a waste of time. If no one paid any attention, the Palestians would undoubtedly be far worse off then they were.

If no one scrutinized and criticized the United States--another extremely serious human rights abuser--Iraqi casualties would have been far more severe.

And so on and so on.

This is where I guess you and I will never agree, BM. You see, to me there's a vast difference between a targeted retaliation and an unfocused one.

It's the TACTICS that offend me! Some Palestinian group is pissed at Israel. That's not hard to understand, even if you may or may not agree with their motivations. However, too often their response is to randomly fire rockets into civilian areas, or worse yet, blow up some busloads of kids and civilians!

When Israel responds civilians are collateral damage. When Palestinians respond civilians seem to be the actual targets!

I just can't get past this! To me, such an approach is unforgiveable, like trying to forgive Satan. I have always believed that indiscriminate revenge is wrong. It's like if someone beats you up you spend the rest of your life choosing victims at random and beating THEM up! That's the moral code of a psychopath, not a sane human being.

I've used this simile before but it's as if someone punches you in the face and says "Sorry, but someone else punched me so they MADE me hit you!" Me, I wouldn't care! If you punch me you are my enemy, no matter why you did it. Anyone who doesn't hurt me is not, by definition.

So to me, while I can sometimes see that Israel may not always have taken the right action, when someone targets civilians they have crossed the line that separates us from beasts. At that point, any form of retaliation is justified, since they essentially have declared themselves no longer to be human!

I felt the same way as a young hippy about the US military leadership when we started hearing reports of American atrocities. It was one of the things that made me share the hate for LBJ and Nixon. It was the reason I hated the IRA. It's why I lost respect for the native protesters at Caledonia.

To me, it seems just another form of racism. I just can't side with racists!

Edited February 12, 2011 by Wild Bill

[ironstone]

i approve people's freedom and democracy. who they choose is their decision.

do you approve of democratic elections?

eh?

if you truly support democracy, then you'd support the egyptian people. support for democracy should not selective.

there are egyptian muslims and christians on the streets of egypt, wanting mubarak out. a dictator who has been killing their rights for over 30 years and you're still not supporting them?

shame on you and shame on harper.

I genuinely want to see the Egyptians get a real democratic government out of this,and one that will honour it's peace agreement with Israel,the regions only true democracy but one of the most despised nations on earth,especially by the left.The worst case scenario is if the Muslim Brotherhood ends up in power,then everyone loses.Simply put,the more Islamist the government,the worse off the Egyptians will be.

Has Canada's relationship with Egypt changed from the time of Trudeau to Harper?Remember how Trudeau supported democracy in places like Cuba?

[Saipan]

If no one scrutinized and criticized the United States--another extremely serious human rights abuser

I wonder when they leave Tibet.

http://www.friendsoftibet.org/main/execution.html

[GWiz]

He sure was an embarrassment to Canada in what he did regarding Egypts fight for FREEDOM...

[bloodyminded]

This is where I guess you and I will never agree, BM. You see, to me there's a vast difference between a targeted retaliation and an unfocused one.

It's the TACTICS that offend me! Some Palestinian group is pissed at Israel. That's not hard to understand, even if you may or may not agree with their motivations. However, too often their response is to randomly fire rockets into civilian areas, or worse yet, blow up some busloads of kids and civilians!

When Israel responds civilians are collateral damage. When Palestinians respond civilians seem to be the actual targets!

I just can't get past this! To me, such an approach is unforgiveable, like trying to forgive Satan. I have always believed that indiscriminate revenge is wrong. It's like if someone beats you up you spend the rest of your life choosing victims at random and beating THEM up! That's the moral code of a psychopath, not a sane human being.

I've used this simile before but it's as if someone punches you in the face and says "Sorry, but someone else punched me so they MADE me hit you!" Me, I wouldn't care! If you punch me you are my enemy, no matter why you did it. Anyone who doesn't hurt me is not, by definition.

So to me, while I can sometimes see that Israel may not always have taken the right action, when someone targets civilians they have crossed the line that separates us from beasts. At that point, any form of retaliation is justified, since they essentially have declared themselves no longer to be human!

I felt the same way as a young hippy about the US military leadership when we started hearing reports of American atrocities. It was one of the things that made me share the hate for LBJ and Nixon. It was the reason I hated the IRA. It's why I lost respect for the native protesters at Caledonia.

To me, it seems just another form of racism. I just can't side with racists!

First of all, I think this is a little bit beside the point I was making: that casualties of US military atatcks, and the treatment of the Palestinians by the Israelis, has improved as a direct result of protest, of scrutiny and anger by members of the public.

Second, whle I understand your distinctions, they are less black-and-white than they appear at first blush.

For example, when we undertake a military action, and we know (as we sometimes do) that civilians are going to be killed...well, those are intentional killings. Unequivocally, they are.

They're not targeted; I agree with that distinction. But they are intentional.

But in a way it's moot: because even if we do not target civilians (which is not a definite, by the way, it's not an absolute given)...we have been known to materially and knowingly support proxies who do target civilians, and at worse rates than, say, the militant wing of Hamas.

That means we do target civilians; if we support it, and make it, in fact, possible in the first place, we're guilty. Period.

[bloodyminded]

I wonder when they leave Tibet.

http://www.friendsoftibet.org/main/execution.html

What has Tibet do do with anything?

Are you changing the subject because you've got no answer?