Jewish group wants Outremont Liberal pulled from byelection

[jdobbin]

Yes congratulations neither of us have read the link you gave after we commented.

Nothing like being right, even if only in a post hoc sense......

I wonder you bothered to highlight the Globe and Mail article and laugh about it when the very next paragraph showed the organization had no problem with Coulon's candidacy.

[M.Dancer]

Yes congratulations neither of us have read the link you gave after we commented.

Nothing like being right, even if only in a post hoc sense......

I wonder you bothered to highlight the Globe and Mail article and laugh about it when the very next paragraph showed the organization had no problem with Coulon's candidacy.

Really! Wow. Being a fanatical true believer like yourself allows some interesting if unrealistic interpretations.......

However, he said that his group is comfortable with the stands the federal Liberals have taken in the past eight months, and expects that Mr. Coulon will have to adjust his views to match party policy

In otherwords they expect his public opinions of terrorists and his hostile opinions of Israel to change....they aren't happy with the status qua.

[jdobbin]

Oh my Goodness.........you are like depleted uranium........

Let me take you out of your self induced misery.

The Canada- Israel commitee wasn't quoted in The Devoir.

Thanks for coming.....

This certainly wasn't what you were taking issue with when you replied. You were only interested in showing that part of the Globe article that revealed the Committee was concerned with Coulon's past contributions to the media. It went on to say that they had no problem with his candidacy because of Dion.

The Quebec-Israel Committee had taken the same position as its affiliated umbrella organization, the Canada-Israel Committee that B'nai Brith does not speak for all Jews on Coulon's candidacy. Shimon Fogel has been the lead voice of the entire organization on reaction to Coulon's candidacy.

[jdobbin]

Really! Wow. Being a fanatical true believer like yourself allows some interesting if unrealistic interpretations.......

In otherwords they expect his public opinions of terrorists and his hostile opinions of Israel to change....they aren't happy with the status qua.

Wow, you really are over the top in your inflammatory commentary.

A viewpoint on Israel is not support for terrorism. It is the same position that many took on Fatah. Many said that at some point Israel would have to sit down and talk with what many still regarded as a terrorist organization. This week, Harper resumed funding for Palestinians by giving millions to Fatah.

So, ergo, according to you, Harper supports terrorism. Or did the policy on Fatah evolve?

Bottom line here is that there is not a monolithic Jewish response to Jocelyn Coulon's candidacy. Like, Ignatieff, he is going to have to explain his views and adjust to present Liberal policy. I have no doubt that he will re-iterate the key points that Israel has the right to defend itself and that Hamas is terrorist organization.

B'nai Brith has overplayed their hand on this and rightfully have been put in their place by another Jewish organization that says the don't speak for all Jews on policy.

Some votes are definitely going to go the Conservatives. It is going to have to be a large percentage of the Jewish vote that goes to them to see the Tory vote budge from fourth place and 13%.

Edited July 25, 2007 by jdobbin

[M.Dancer]

Really! Wow. Being a fanatical true believer like yourself allows some interesting if unrealistic interpretations.......

In otherwords they expect his public opinions of terrorists and his hostile opinions of Israel to change....they aren't happy with the status qua.

Wow, you really are over the top on your inflammatory commentary.

A viewpoint on Israel is not support for terrorism. It is the same position that many took on Fatah. Many said that at some point Israel would have to sit down and talk with what many still regarded as a terrorist organization. This week, Harper resumed funding for Palestinians by giving millions to Fatah.

So, ergo, according to you, Harper supports terrorism. Or did the policy on Fatah evolve?

I think this inflammatory accusation are wearing thin. Should I take your unquestioning support for a symp as not connected to your political affiliation?

His sympathy for Hamas is on record.

His writtings hostile to Israel are on record.

No where have I said his views on Israel equal support for terrorism. I have said he is a terrorist symp.

You confusion regarding Fatah is irrelevant . Hamas has to travel a long way before they can be compared to Fatah.

[M.Dancer]

Really! Wow. Being a fanatical true believer like yourself allows some interesting if unrealistic interpretations.......

However, he said that his group is comfortable with the stands the federal Liberals have taken in the past eight months, and expects that Mr. Coulon will have to adjust his views to match party policy

In otherwords they expect his public opinions of terrorists and his hostile opinions of Israel to change....they aren't happy with the status qua.

Wow, you really are over the top on your inflammatory commentary.

Are you going to address the comment by the Canada-Israel spokeman or are you going whine istead?

[jdobbin]

Are you going to address the comment by the Canada-Israel spokeman or are you going whine istead?

They had concerns with his contributions to the media. The next paragraph that you left off said they did not oppose his candidacy because of what Dion had been doing in the last months. They said they believed his viewpoints would fall in line with present Liberal policies.

Given what Coulon said shortly after being nominated, that would appear to be correct.

So are you going to whine now that the Canada-Israel Committee is supporting a terrorist sympathizer by not opposing Coulon?

[M.Dancer]

The next paragraph that you left off said they did not oppose his candidacy because of what Dion had been doing in the last months.

Where did it exactly say they did not oppose his candicacy? Becasue what Most people read is they expect his views to change. If they don't change, do you think Outremont will elect a terrorist symp?

[jdobbin]

I think this inflammatory accusation are wearing thin. Should I take your unquestioning support for a symp as not connected to your political affiliation?

His sympathy for Hamas is on record.

His writtings hostile to Israel are on record.

No where have I said his views on Israel equal support for terrorism. I have said he is a terrorist symp.

You confusion regarding Fatah is irrelevant . Hamas has to travel a long way before they can be compared to Fatah.

I have no problem saying I'm partisan. Is your unquestioning opposition based on B'Nai Brith's or the Canada-Israel's view? One opposes the candidacy, the other has no problem with it. Are one of the organization supportive of terrorist sympathizers?

Coulon's writing on Hamas compared them to Fatah. It is relevant because Israel eventually had to sit down with that organization even while regarding them as terrorists.

You'll have to show me what he said specifically on the subject of Israel and Hamas that you have a problem with. You say it is on the record. Show me where you think he is a terrorist sympathizer. You obviously know some specifics that I don't know about. What are they?

I have only read his stuff in the National Post and he didn't sound like a terrorist sympathizer to me.

I'm sure he has several views that will have to be brought in line with present Liberal policy. However, he also has views on security and defence that will probably become Liberal policy.

[M.Dancer]

I have no problem saying I'm partisan. Is your unquestioning opposition based on B'Nai Brith's or the Canada-Israel's view? One opposes the candidacy, the other has no problem with it. Are one of the organization supportive of terrorist sympathizers?

Does partisan mean misrepresenting others?

However, he said that his group is comfortable with the stands the federal Liberals have taken in the past eight months, and expects that Mr. Coulon will have to adjust his views to match party policy

You would think if they had no problem, there would be no need for them to say they expect his views to change......

So was Coulon principled before he magically changes his views or principled after? Is that the kind of liberal andidate that best for Outremont?

[jdobbin]

Where did it exactly say they did not oppose his candicacy? Becasue what Most people read is they expect his views to change. If they don't change, do you think Outremont will elect a terrorist symp?

From your own link:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ional/Politics/

Although he asserts Israel's right to defend itself and calls Hamas a terrorist group, he irritated some in the Jewish community last year when he wrote that the United States and Israel should consider talking to what was then a newly elected Hamas government in the Palestinian territories.

"He's written extensively about the Middle East, especially over the last year, and not infrequently his opinions are pretty hostile to Israel," said Shimon Fogel, chief executive officer of the Canada-Israel Committee.

However, he said that his group is comfortable with the stands the federal Liberals have taken in the past eight months, and expects that Mr. Coulon will have to adjust his views to match party policy.

A few days later, B'Nai Brith said the opposed his candidacy. The affiliated Quebec-Israel Committee responded that B'nai Brith does not speak for all Jews on the candidacy on Jocelyn Coulon.

Coulon responded thusly:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/20...coulon0723.html

"I am a true ally of Israel," he said on Monday. "Sometimes I'm very critical, that's for sure, but I think that makes good allies."

Irwin Cotler, who has known Coulon for many years says:

http://www.westendchronicle.com/article-12...ate-Coulon.html

Mount Royal Liberal Irwin Cotler, who was also at last Friday's launch, said he had known Coulon for years as a fellow academic and respected him as a political scientist. But he didn't necessarily agree with all Coulon's views. "I've read some of the articles that he's written and we would have a different view and perspective on some of those issues," he said. "But that is not the basis upon which I would make a judgement."

You can bet that Cotler would have something to say if Coulon was a terrorist sympathizer.

[M.Dancer]

In one opinion piece, dated Feb. 22, 2006, Coulon writes that Hamas isn't just a terrorist organization, but a social and political movement that won the Palestinian elections because of its commitment to fight corruption and help people — and the international community should not isolate it.

Hamas isn't just a political organization, it's a terrorist group who's express aim is the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews.

Lets chat with them!!!

[jdobbin]

Does partisan mean misrepresenting others?

You would think if they had no problem, there would be no need for them to say they expect his views to change......

So was Coulon principled before he magically changes his views or principled after? Is that the kind of liberal andidate that best for Outremont?

Everyone has to adjust to party politics otherwise it is not a political party.

The Canada-Israel Committee does not oppose his candidacy.

You think Harper agrees all his party's policies? He certainly has extensive writings against many of them. However, he has had to adjust his views because he doesn't set all party policy.

[jdobbin]

Hamas isn't just a political organization, it's a terrorist group who's express aim is the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews.

Lets chat with them!!!

That's what Israel had to do with Fatah at some point.

[M.Dancer]

Where did it exactly say they did not oppose his candicacy? Becasue what Most people read is they expect his views to change. If they don't change, do you think Outremont will elect a terrorist symp?

From your own link:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...ional/Politics/

Although he asserts Israel's right to defend itself and calls Hamas a terrorist group, he irritated some in the Jewish community last year when he wrote that the United States and Israel should consider talking to what was then a newly elected Hamas government in the Palestinian territories.

"He's written extensively about the Middle East, especially over the last year, and not infrequently his opinions are pretty hostile to Israel," said Shimon Fogel, chief executive officer of the Canada-Israel Committee.

However, he said that his group is comfortable with the stands the federal Liberals have taken in the past eight months, and expects that Mr. Coulon will have to adjust his views to match party policy.

So in otherwords they have not given a carte blanche, they expect changes.

Coulon responded thusly:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/20...coulon0723.html

QUOTE

"I am a true ally of Israel," he said on Monday. "Sometimes I'm very critical, that's for sure, but I think that makes good allies

I fail to see how attempting to give murderers legitimacy makes one a true friend of Israel.

Irwin Cotler, who has known Coulon for many years says.......

He's a partisan Liberal hack and as such his motives and his credibility are to be questioned.

[jdobbin]

So in otherwords they have not given a carte blanche, they expect changes.

I fail to see how attempting to give murderers legitimacy makes one a true friend of Israel.

He's a partisan Liberal hack and as such his motives and his credibility are to be questioned.

I have no doubt they expect changes. By joining the Liberal party as a candidate, Coulon accepts the present policies of the Liberal party which the Canada-Israel Commitee has said have improved because of Dion.

Fatah was still a terrorist organization when Israel sat down with them. They still are depending on who you ask.

Cotler is universally admired by Israel and every Jewish organization in Canada. He is also a partisan hack. It doesn't mean he wouldn't speak against Coulon's candidacy if he thought it was bad for the Liberals.

[M.Dancer]

Cotler is universally admired by Israel and every Jewish organization in Canada. He is also a partisan hack. It doesn't mean he wouldn't speak against Coulon's candidacy if he thought it was bad for the Liberals.

Did he speak out against Chretien and the Ad Scandal?

[jdobbin]

Did he speak out against Chretien and the Ad Scandal?

He was Justice minister and was responsible for ensuring the Gomery Inquiry was able to call all persons involved including Chretien.

It's quite a while back but he said at the time that the book would be thrown at whoever was responsible and made sure there was no exemptions for Chretien or Martin from testifying.

[August1991]

Hamas isn't just a political organization, it's a terrorist group who's express aim is the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews.

And Coulon would seem now to agree with that assessment.

Dans une chronique écrite en 2006, Jocelyn Coulon appelait la communauté internationale à donner une chance aux islamistes du Hamas qui venaient de remporter les élections palestiniennes.

Mais l'ancien journaliste estime aujourd'hui que le dialogue n'est plus possible. « Je suis forcé de constater que cette organisation est incapable de se transformer, qu'elle est une organisation terroriste et qu'elle ne veut pas reconnaître l'État d'Israël. Donc, nous n'avons rien à faire avec cette organisation et, là-dessus, je suis en parfaite symbiose et avec le gouvernement conservateur de M. Harper et le Parti libéral du Canada », a-t-il déclaré.

R-C

You can either consider this to be an flip-flop or a reasonable change of opinion. It seems to remove Bnai Brith's reason for criticsm.

[M.Dancer]

Hamas isn't just a political organization, it's a terrorist group who's express aim is the destruction of Israel and the death of Jews.

And Coulon would seem now to agree with that assessment.

Dans une chronique écrite en 2006, Jocelyn Coulon appelait la communauté internationale à donner une chance aux islamistes du Hamas qui venaient de remporter les élections palestiniennes.

Mais l'ancien journaliste estime aujourd'hui que le dialogue n'est plus possible. « Je suis forcé de constater que cette organisation est incapable de se transformer,.............

R-C

You can either consider this to be an flip-flop or a reasonable change of opinion. It seems to remove Bnai Brith's reason for criticsm.

First, I suppose I would need to know which came first, his assessment that they were a terrorist group unable to change, or that they weren't just a terrorist group.

And second to ask if this fellow isn't really a naive simplistic dolt to ever believe that they would change?

[August1991]

And second to ask if this fellow isn't really a naive simplistic dolt to ever believe that they would change?

They say that the Internet doesn't convey well irony or sarcasm.

I guess I should have written that as "reasonable change of opinion" in my post above.

What I find truly ironic is that this guy is supposedly an academic expert on international affairs. At taxpayer expense, he has studied these issues for years. He has a BA in political science which, according to Argus, is worth about a double-double at Time Horton's.

Coulon wrote this article for La Presse when he announced his candidacy:

Sans arrogance, les libéraux proposent au pays un modèle de société fait pour réconcilier développement économique, justice sociale et respect de l'environnement. Bref, un Canada, aussi séduisant à l'intérieur qu'à l'extérieur, capable de produire des règles et des normes de comportement susceptibles d'être partagées de gré et non de force.

He says Canada's values (normes de comportement) should be adopted voluntarily rather than by force (de gré et non de force).

What he fails to note is that the US (and Canada) didn't start this war. NATO is not in Afghanistan because we woke up one morning and decided to take Kabul.

It is such lazy thinking, ignoring first principles, that is common in modern (leftish) academics.

Edited July 25, 2007 by August1991

[jdobbin]

And second to ask if this fellow isn't really a naive simplistic dolt to ever believe that they would change?

Think that applies to Israel and Canada for restoring relations and money to Fatah?

[jdobbin]

What I find truly ironic is that this guy is supposedly an academic expert on international affairs. At taxpayer expense, he has studied these issues for years. He has a BA in political science which, according to Argus, is worth about a double-double at Time Horton's.

Coulon wrote this article for La Presse when he announced his candidacy:

Sans arrogance, les libéraux proposent au pays un modèle de société fait pour réconcilier développement économique, justice sociale et respect de l'environnement. Bref, un Canada, aussi séduisant à l'intérieur qu'à l'extérieur, capable de produire des règles et des normes de comportement susceptibles d'être partagées de gré et non de force.

He says Canada's values (normes de comportement) should be adopted voluntarily rather than by force (de gré et non de force).

What he fails to note is that the US (and Canada) didn't start this war. NATO is not in Afghanistan because we woke up one morning and decided to take Kabul.

It is such lazy thinking, ignoring first principles, that is common in modern (leftish) academics.

I think all university education in Canada is at taxpayer expense. Likewise, its teachers are paid through tax money. I'm not sure what your argument is. You think his research is illegitimate because it was at a taxpayer funded university?

As for the sneering at his degree, I think the point is not what the degree is but what you make of it.

I read the La Presse story. He seems to be advocating a Canadian way of doing things. Wasn't that what Harper advocated in South America last week?

What you fail to note is that Coulon has said in the article that Afghanistan is legitimate intervention and is the right cause. He disagrees with how it is being conducted though which is line with most of Quebec and the rest of Canada. Like most of Canada, he believes Canada should withdraw from Kandahar at the end of 2009.

Edited July 25, 2007 by jdobbin

[August1991]

I read the La Presse story. He seems to be advocating a Canadian way of doing things. Wasn't that what Harper advocated in South America last week?

What you fail to note is that Coulon has said in the article that Afghanistan is legitimate intervention and is the right cause. He disagrees with how it is being conducted though which is line with most of Quebec and the rest of Canada. Like most of Canada, he believes Canada should withdraw from Kandahar at the end of 2009.

The "Canadian way" (Liberal way?) of doing things is all fine and good but when 19 idiots fly big planes into big buildings and kill thousands, the question is slightly different.

Dobbin, did you ever see in person the World Trade Center towers? Did you see what remains?

To suggest that we should work to have Canadian values adopted voluntarily is entirely missing the point.

As Mark Steyn would say, this guy is pre-9/11. To me, he's a standard issue Quebec Boomer Quiet Revolution pretentious intellectual.

Then again, maybe I'm wrong.

Edited July 26, 2007 by August1991

[jdobbin]

The Canadian way of doing things is all fine and good but when 19 idiots fly big planes into big buildings and kill thousands, the question is slightly different.

Dobbin, did you ever see the World Trade Center towers? Did you see what remains?

To suggest that we should work to have Canadian values adopted voluntarily is entirely missing the point.

As Mark Steyn would say, this guy is pre-9/11. To me, he's a standard issue Quebec Boomer Quiet Revolution pretentious intellectual.

Then again, maybe I'm wrong.

And once again, you read all that from the La Presse article? He said Afghanistan was justified. He disagrees with how the war is going now and who can blame him when al Qaeda trains in Pakistan and now Iraq, where are our allies are reluctant to help and Afghanistan is two years behind in their promise to build up their military to take on the role that the Canadians have to do for them.