scribblet Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...7/cupe-sat.html CUPE in Ontario votes to boycott Israel Last Updated Sat, 27 May 2006 19:48:20 EDT The Ontario division of Canada's largest union has voted to support an international campaign that is boycotting Israel over its treatment of Palestinians. Delegates to the Canadian Union of Public Employees Ontario convention in Ottawa voted overwhelmingly Saturday to support the campaign until it sees Israel recognizing the Palestinians' right to self-determination. The Ontario group represents more than 200,000 workers. The global campaign started last July and has been supported by many North American churches, 20 Quebec organizations, and others, Canadian Press said. CUPE also condemned what they called Israel's "apartheid wall," saying it is illegal under international law. "Boycott, divestment and sanction worked to end apartheid in South Africa," said Katherine Nastovski, chairwoman of the CUPE Ontario international solidarity committee. "We believe the same strategy will work to enforce the rights of Palestinian people, including the right of refugees to return to their homes and properties." We know what that part means don't we - complete demographic anniliation of Israel - kinda shows CUPE's bias doesn't it . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 Unions have come a long way from their "defending workers' rights -- yadda yadda" origins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 "We believe the same strategy will work to enforce the rights of Palestinian people, including the right of refugees to return to their homes and properties." We know what that part means don't we - complete demographic anniliation of Israel - kinda shows CUPE's bias doesn't it 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"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Warwick Green Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 CUPE also condemned what they called Israel's "apartheid wall," saying it is illegal under international law. Nothing of course about Hamas wanting to destroy Israel or a boycott of Iran's anti-Semitism. Just another example of a simple-minded and one-sided look at a complex problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 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.The election of F. W. de Klerk had much more to do with the end of apartheid than the porous sanctions imposed against South Africa - but that's neither here nor there.What the heck is a public sector union doing getting involved in a dispute thousands of kilometres away? This decision will do nothing to endear the union movement to ordinary Canadians. It will do nothing to endear the situation of Palestinians to ordinary Canadians. And it will likely mean the NDP will lose votes in the next federal election. I feel sorry for any Jewish (or for that matter, non-Jewish) members of CUPE who happen to support Israel and are forced to pay union dues for this policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 What the heck is a public sector union doing getting involved in a dispute thousands of kilometres away?We could ask the same question of our politicians, could we not? The union leaders probably think they have the same right. I feel sorry for any Jewish (or for that matter, non-Jewish) members of CUPE who happen to support Israel and are forced to pay union dues for this policy.I honestly do too. The only recourse they would have is to quit their jobs! Unfortunately, most members of a democracy (union) are stuck in the same trap: the citizens (union members) are forced (taxation) to pay for the policies (take your pick!) of its government with virtually no say in the matter -- save the opportunity to place an X on a ballot once in a while. Of course, the same imbalance of power exists in other forms of government but that is a different topic.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hicksey Posted May 30, 2006 Report Share Posted May 30, 2006 And Palestinians are blowing up Israelis. What about that injustice? Or are Jews not worthy of their concern? IMO both sides are at equal fault here. What purpose is served by supporting one side or the other? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 CUPE also condemned what they called Israel's "apartheid wall," saying it is illegal under international law. Nothing of course about Hamas wanting to destroy Israel or a boycott of Iran's anti-Semitism. Just another example of a simple-minded and one-sided look at a complex problem. Which side are you supporting then? Or can you see the other side of things? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Warwick Green Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 CUPE also condemned what they called Israel's "apartheid wall," saying it is illegal under international law. Nothing of course about Hamas wanting to destroy Israel or a boycott of Iran's anti-Semitism. Just another example of a simple-minded and one-sided look at a complex problem. Which side are you supporting then? Or can you see the other side of things? I don't look on the Middle East as "supporting" one side or the other. It's a dispute that has to be resolved. Both sides have to give. The Palestinians are going to have to recognize Israel's right to exist. On the other hand Israel will have to give up territory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Warwick Green Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 What the heck is a public sector union doing getting involved in a dispute thousands of kilometres away? Payment of union dues is mandatory whether you support the union or not. So the union takes your money and engages in a political campaign. No wonder unions are held in such low light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montgomery Burns Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Good catch, Scriblett. I saw this yesterday. Made me sick but it is yet another example of the left supporting terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 They aren't supporting anyone; they're just withdrawing support. They're also not "getting involved" in anything. Boycotts are passive protests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Warwick Green Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 They aren't supporting anyone; they're just withdrawing support. They're also not "getting involved" in anything. Boycotts are passive protests. Whether boycotting is a passive act or not, if they are really interested in promoting peace, they should be boycotting both sides, not just "boycotting Israel". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Whether boycotting is a passive act or not, if they are really interested in promoting peace, they should be boycotting both sides, not just "boycotting Israel". I'm sure they haven't bought Palestinean products in years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fixer1 Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Isreal has been a terrorist stae towards Palestine for many years now. They attack and kill with impunity and the world bodies have done little to stop it. If a public union can start a small but growing sentiment showing Isreal for what it really is, then I have no problems with it. I only wish Canada as a country would also come out and cry foul when events by Isreal happen. Enough of the sympathy for the holocast. Now it is Isreal who is the offender and they are being worse then Hitler about it. Just as Hitler should havebeen stopped much earlier then he was, so should Isreal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Warwick Green Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Whether boycotting is a passive act or not, if they are really interested in promoting peace, they should be boycotting both sides, not just "boycotting Israel". I'm sure they haven't bought Palestinean products in years. I know I haven't and I'm not even boycotting them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Warwick Green Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Isreal has been a terrorist stae towards Palestine for many years now. They attack and kill with impunity and the world bodies have done little to stop it. If a public union can start a small but growing sentiment showing Isreal for what it really is, then I have no problems with it. I only wish Canada as a country would also come out and cry foul when events by Isreal happen. Enough of the sympathy for the holocast. Now it is Isreal who is the offender and they are being worse then Hitler about it. Just as Hitler should havebeen stopped much earlier then he was, so should Isreal. I've read this before. It was in a speech by Yasser Arrafat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Enough of the sympathy for the Holocast. Now it is Isreal who is the offender and they are being worse then Hitler about it. You must be joking. Do you know anything at all about the Holocaust? You don't seem to know how to spell it. CUPE is just another bunch of morons who think that telling you what to do somehow makes people more free. Fine if you're a sheep. This is supposed to be a free country and I'll damn well decide for myself who I will boycott. No government or union is going to do it for me. Telling me I have to boycott something is enough to have me make a point of buying their products even if I had never intended to before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Nobody's forcing anyone to do anything as individuals. Unions were founded on the understanding that all its members may not be unanimous on every issue. But they're run (somewhat) democratically, so if members don't like the direction their union is taking, they can get involved and get their voice heard. If they don't want to get involved, then I guess they can rant about it in online forums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hicksey Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Isreal has been a terrorist stae towards Palestine for many years now. They attack and kill with impunity and the world bodies have done little to stop it. If a public union can start a small but growing sentiment showing Isreal for what it really is, then I have no problems with it. I only wish Canada as a country would also come out and cry foul when events by Isreal happen. Enough of the sympathy for the holocast. Now it is Isreal who is the offender and they are being worse then Hitler about it. Just as Hitler should havebeen stopped much earlier then he was, so should Isreal. They both kill each other with impunity. Why is Israel more to blame? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Nobody's forcing anyone to do anything as individuals. Unions were founded on the understanding that all its members may not be unanimous on every issue. But they're run (somewhat) democratically, so if members don't like the direction their union is taking, they can get involved and get their voice heard. If they don't want to get involved, then I guess they can rant about it in online forums. Unions should stick to representing their members interests when dealing with employers. They are supposed to represent the interests of all their members, not just the majority. That is not possible as soon as they get involved in political or social issues. Union members pay dues to be represented and most cannot opt out as long as they are employed at a union company. There is no way they should be forced to pay for a political agenda they may not agree with. That is like being forced to donate to a political party that someone else chooses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Politics is tied to every decision they make in some way or another. Choosing to invest in Israeli products makes as much of a political statement as choosing not to. Given that, they make decisions as they see fit, and if a fellow members disagree, there are ways for them to be heard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 Politics is tied to every decision they make in some way or another. Choosing to invest in Israeli products makes as much of a political statement as choosing not to. Given that, they make decisions as they see fit, and if a fellow members disagree, there are ways for them to be heard. What business does a Canadian Labour Union have sticking its face into politics on the other side of the world? How does that represent them with their employer? I don't think a person should be chained to a group pushing a particular agenda just because they have to work for a living. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 They aren't sticking their faces anywhere. It's a boycott, nothing more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hicksey Posted May 31, 2006 Report Share Posted May 31, 2006 They aren't sticking their faces anywhere. It's a boycott, nothing more. What does this matter to a union to begin with? If it's not directly related to their functionality as a union why waste their time? If they spend one cent more than normal as a result of this it would be colossal waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(Phone).thumb.jpg.165c8315c6251d31b87efa29fe65361b.jpg)
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.