In memory of Leonard Garment (1924 - 2013)

   This summer saw the passing of a great American attorney and public servant.  He was a colourful figure, a professional jazz musician, a Democrat who became a consultant to Richard Nixon.  It was due to his advice that the infamous tapes survived and the truth of Watergate came to light.

Later Garment became a member of the staff of Patrick Moynihan, US ambassador to the United Nation.  It was during that period of the mid 1970s that an alliance of Muslim and sub-Saharan Africa nations, under the tutelage of the Russians, proposed a resolution that would have declared Zionism to be a form of racism.  Although the resolution was never passed, the idea took roots and to this day people, without actually checking out facts, keep parroting it.  This unfortunately is enforced by statesmen like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, not to mention the likes of leaders of the Hammas and Hezbollah.

It is worth reproducing here Leonard Garment's statement on this issue presented to the United Nations General Assembly on October 17, 1975.

My delegation has read the new proposal before us. It is unusually straightforward. It asks to determine "that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination."

As simple as this language is, we are concerned that what may not be fully understood is that this resolution asks us to commit one of the most grievous errors in the 30-year life of this organization.

This committee is preparing itself, with deliberation and foreknowledge, to perform a supreme act of deceit, to make a massive attack on the moral realities of the world.

Under the guise of a program to eliminate racism the United Nations is at the point of officially endorsing anti-semitism, one of the oldest and most virulent forms of racism known to human history. This draft explicitly encourages the racism known as anti-semitism even as it would have us believe that its words will lead to the elimination of racism.

I choose my words carefully when I say that this is an obscene act. The United States protests this act. But protest alone is not enough. In fairness to ourselves we must also issue a warning.This resolution places the work of the United Nations in jeopardy.

The language of this resolution distorts and perverts. It changes words with precise meanings into purveyors of confusion. It destroys the moral force of the concept of racism, making it nothing more than an epithet to be flung arbitrarily at one’s adversary. It blinds us to areas of agreement and disagreement, and deprives us of the clarity of vision we desperately need to understand and resolve the differences among us. And we are here to overcome our differences, not to deepen them.

Zionism is a movement which has as its contemporary thrust the preservation of the small remnant of the Jewish people that survived the horrors of a racial holocaust. By equating Zionism with racism, this resolution discredits the good faith of our joint efforts to fight actual racism. It discredits these efforts morally and it cripples them politically.

The language of this resolution has already disrupted our efforts here to work together on the elimination of racism and it will continue to do so. Encouraging anti-semitism and group hostility, its adoption would bring to an end our ability to cooperate on eliminating racism and racial discrimination as part of the official work of the Decade.

Once again our failure to reason together has encouraged some delegations to exploit our collective shortcomings and individual vulnerabilities and impede our attempts to further the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

The United Nations, throughout its 30-year history, has not lived by the force of majorities; it has not lived by the force of arms. It has lived only—I repeat, only—because it has been thought that the nations of the world, assembled together, would give voice to the most decent and humane instincts of mankind. From this thought has come the moral authority of the United Nations, and from this thought its influence upon human affairs.

Actions like this do not go unnoticed. They do not succeed without consequences, many of which while only imperfectly perceived at the time soon become an ineradicable part of a new and regrettable reality. Let us make no mistake: at risk today is the moral authority which is the United Nations’ only ultimate claim for the support of our peoples.

This risk is as reckless as it is unnecessary. But it is still avoidable.

Accordingly the United States will support resolutions A and B. We support, without reservation, the work of the United Nations to combat racism and racial discrimination. We have taken part in these vitally important activities in the past and want to be able to do so without obstruction in the future. We will vote against the third resolution. We call upon other delegations to do likewise.

On its adoption the third resolution becomes inseparably linked to the first two. Therefore, if all three are sent to Plenary the United States will vote against all three at that time.


It is a pity Leonard Garment is not here with us any more to voice his most probable concerns about present day goings-on at The United Nations, a body that very rapidly looses its credibility in the eyes of the world.

Terrorists of London are actually victims

We have witnessed the latest terror attack in London, we saw the terrorists and the bloody results of their actions in Boston. They all eventually get shot by police, as true Jihadists are supposed to in order to reach Heaven to get their rewards from Allah. But, pray, think about it! Who are really the true criminals behind these acts?

In both cases the perpetrators were “home grown”. In the London case they were recent converts. So I ask everyone to ponder, where did they get those skewed ideas? How did these last two get so convinced that British soldiers go around chopping up poor innocent Muslims around the world that their righteous indignation forced them to do what they did? All the time believing that their action was rightful revenge. To quote : “We must fight them as they fight us. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.”

They were ready to die and they got shot. Hopefully, though, they do not die before they will be fully questioned. Because the ones who truly deserve to die are those who go on “converting” people like these two, and filling their heads with propaganda of hatred so poinonous that the new converts become ticking time bombs, ready to sacrifice themselves at an opportune moment. How come we never hear of any of those mosque activists so busy with their conversions and teachings ever participating in these terror attacks themselves?

If you are someone who has been listening to an imam or activist lately who was encouraging people to become shahids, please, stop and think. How come he is urging you, yet deep in your heart you know that he would never do it himself? Aren’t you then a victim of the one who eggs you on? What if that imam is wrong and thus your action will be wrong in the eyes of Allah? Then what?

I call upon all those who still have their ability to reason. When you sit in that mosque or community centre and listen to a rousing speech about the evil West or the evil Jews, describing in gruesome detail how these are all enemies of your Muslim Ummah, think a moment – what IF this is not really all true? What IF it is not Allah’s wish for you to act the way the imam or that community activist urges you to act? What if the actual meaning of Jihad in the Qur’an is not the way these people want you to understand it? WHAT IF…. ?

Another ray of hope for the Middle East. A website (blog?) with contributors from fourteen countries from around the area, including Israel! I would have been even happier if the board of directors, which includes three eminent Arab members among the ten, would also include at least one with Jewish background in order to create a proper balance. In spite of that omission, the blog is one of the most balanced I have seen yet. Although articles still contain the occasional snipets of rhetoric, something that is extremely hard to get rid of given people's backgrounds, one can feel the efforts in them, trying to be as neutral and fair as possible. Worth following it and see how it will evolve.

Not much help in BC for children with mental health problems.

The Bradley family from Victoria, BC, Canada, are pleading to the public asking for help. They wish to apply pressure on the BC health system to change their approach regarding emergency in-patient cases when children have serious mental health crises. The Bradleys' 11 year old daughter, J., suffers from bipolar disorder which often manifests in extreme depression and sometimes violence towards other family members. After such episodes the children's feeling of remorse makes them hurt themselves, some even attempting suicide.

In the case of the Bradleys the family saught help from Victoria General Hospital three times this January. They were sent away all three times. After their case became known, countless other families came forward expressing their frustration and feelings of abandonment when their own children were refused hospitalization. The stress caused by such mental health crises is enormous. For parents to witness their child's anguish, for the whole family to put up with the physical aspects of the disorder that manifests in severe depression, often violence towards others or self-mutilation, can mean a life of living hell. Their daily lives revolve around the problem child, often to the point of needing constant nighttime vigils to protect the safety of the child or other members of the family. They are also often stigmatized by society for the problems, giving them no chance to have a social life or leisure time to relax.

Health officials admit that something needs to be done in the system. They themselves complain that the ratio of patients per health workers is not very healthy, sometimes up to eight children or adolescents per worker, with those that come into emergency on top of these numbers. Hospitals do not have specialized mental health units or simply enough mental-health staff to properly deal with emergency situations. As a result suicides are today the second leading cause of death for young people.

We cannot blame the government, they do try. There are programs offered by the Ministry of Health delivers, and more by the Ministry of Children and Family Development. But they are not properly co-ordinated. The action these affected families are taking, and I am referring to the petition they started, is to draw attention to the need for better organization, for a more efficient system that can improve the development of children and youth who suffer of mental illness, to improve their ability to live a productive life. And not the least, to provide the necessary support to the families so they can cope, so their situation will not affect their productivity at work, thereby helping society at large. If you feel that these issues are important, you can show your support by signing the petition I mentioned above here.

EU should show the door to some of its members...

It is time for the EU to consider the expulsion of Hungary from the union. The country is run by the FIDESZ party, by now an extreme right governing body.

FIDESZ was founded in 1988, originally as a liberal youth movement with stars in their eyes, aiming at political power. They had a shaky start, defeated in several elections and, after taking the pulse of the country, they decided that it is more advantageous for them to become a conservative movement. In 1995 they officially became right wing. Their first success came in 1998, when they managed to become the governing party by entering into a coalition with two smaller parties. Then they lost again in 2002. After this loss the party decided to tap into the ultra nationalist sentiments that were rekindled after the passing of the Communist era. These ideologies, remnants of pre-WWII times, were kept under the lid during Communism but they never died. When Communism fell, these ideas resurfaced as fresh as if decades have never passed in-between.

In the summer of 2007 the German magazine Spiegel called the newly formed Magyar Garda, "Hungary's shame". Unfortunately FIDESZ rose to power by winning the with a 54% vote in 2010 thanks to the support of these groups. Then again, 54% is clearly a majority, and it is rather fitting when people say "a country deserves their government".

As it was the second time around for the party, they did not waste time in implementing their agendas. Within the first year they raised concerns in the rest of Europe, calling Hungary a "Fuhrerstaat". The media law is enforced by a national media authority that wields unprecedented power over radio, TV, newsprint, even online material. But the real heavyweight is the new constitution, adopted in April last year. According to this New York Times article, it's clear that Hungary is slipping into authoritarianism.

During this time Hungary happened to have its turn for the EU presidency. During that time, Orban showed a different face to the international community than to his supporters at home. He feigned allegiance to principles in Brussels which he repeatedly denounced at home, both before and since. Orban is very good though to at playing one side against the other while he appears to emerge from all that stronger and victorious.

2012 started with growing opposition among Hungary's extreme right to the membership in the EU. Today's March 15 celebrations were the final icing on the cake. During his speech, Viktor Orban declared that he will not allow foreign powers to turn Hungary into a colony. Since the European Union is a body which all member states joined voluntarily, it is just natural that if they wanted to leave they should. For the sake of European dignity it would be beneficial to politely ask Hungary to go in the direction of the back door.

But it does not stop there. Hundreds of Polish guests were treated to a free holiday in Budapest for the March 15 celebrations. They belong to the Polish right and they consider Orban an example whom their leader, Jaroslaw Kaczinsky should follow. They were asked to participate in the demonstrations so the international media could report their enthusiastic support of the Hungarian government.

There is a great article in Telos that points out the reasons for the anti-liberal populist movements in East Europe, and it also explains that "all is not lost", things could still turn out all right. Maybe...

Geneva Summit for Human Rights

Unfortunately I became aware of this live webcast only today. I will post it in other places also but if you chance on my blog in time I encourage you to watch it tomorrow, March 13. It will be going on from 9:00 to 17:39 Geneva time. A link to the webcast will appear on the Summit homepage just before the start.

New York Times article by Judge R. Goldstone

Richard J. Goldstone, a former justice of the South African Constitutional Court, led the United Nations fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict of 2008-9. At the time he focused mainly on Gaza, which then resulted in the infamous 500-page U.N. report that bears his name: the accusation that Israeli leaders deliberately targeted civilians during the 2009 war with Hamas. In April this year Judge Goldstone publicly retracted the core charge of the report in an article published in the Washington Post. That article, as well as this new one which I post here in its entirety, resulted in vicious personal attacks from certain members of the U.N. Human Rights Council, a fact that further proves their terribly biased position. Let us hope that a lot of people who will read this article will have the moral fortitude to accept the actual truth.

------------

Israel and the Apartheid Slander

Nov. 1, 2011

By RICHARD J. GOLDSTONE

THE Palestinian Authority’s request for full United Nations membership has put hope for any two-state solution under increasing pressure. The need for reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians has never been greater. So it is important to separate legitimate criticism of Israel from assaults that aim to isolate, demonize and delegitimize it.

One particularly pernicious and enduring canard that is surfacing again is that Israel pursues “apartheid” policies. In Cape Town starting on Saturday, a London-based nongovernmental organization called the Russell Tribunal on Palestine will hold a “hearing” on whether Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid. It is not a “tribunal.” The “evidence” is going to be one-sided and the members of the “jury” are critics whose harsh views of Israel are well known.

While “apartheid” can have broader meaning, its use is meant to evoke the situation in pre-1994 South Africa. It is an unfair and inaccurate slander against Israel, calculated to retard rather than advance peace negotiations.

I know all too well the cruelty of South Africa’s abhorrent apartheid system, under which human beings characterized as black had no rights to vote, hold political office, use “white” toilets or beaches, marry whites, live in whites-only areas or even be there without a “pass.” Blacks critically injured in car accidents were left to bleed to death if there was no “black” ambulance to rush them to a “black” hospital. “White” hospitals were prohibited from saving their lives.

In assessing the accusation that Israel pursues apartheid policies, which are by definition primarily about race or ethnicity, it is important first to distinguish between the situations in Israel, where Arabs are citizens, and in West Bank areas that remain under Israeli control in the absence of a peace agreement.

In Israel, there is no apartheid. Nothing there comes close to the definition of apartheid under the 1998 Rome Statute: “Inhumane acts ... committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.” Israeli Arabs — 20 percent of Israel’s population — vote, have political parties and representatives in the Knesset and occupy positions of acclaim, including on its Supreme Court. Arab patients lie alongside Jewish patients in Israeli hospitals, receiving identical treatment.

To be sure, there is more de facto separation between Jewish and Arab populations than Israelis should accept. Much of it is chosen by the communities themselves. Some results from discrimination. But it is not apartheid, which consciously enshrines separation as an ideal. In Israel, equal rights are the law, the aspiration and the ideal; inequities are often successfully challenged in court.

The situation in the West Bank is more complex. But here too there is no intent to maintain “an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group.” This is a critical distinction, even if Israel acts oppressively toward Palestinians there. South Africa’s enforced racial separation was intended to permanently benefit the white minority, to the detriment of other races. By contrast, Israel has agreed in concept to the existence of a Palestinian state in Gaza and almost all of the West Bank, and is calling for the Palestinians to negotiate the parameters.

But until there is a two-state peace, or at least as long as Israel’s citizens remain under threat of attacks from the West Bank and Gaza, Israel will see roadblocks and similar measures as necessary for self-defense, even as Palestinians feel oppressed. As things stand, attacks from one side are met by counterattacks from the other. And the deep disputes, claims and counterclaims are only hardened when the offensive analogy of “apartheid” is invoked.

Those seeking to promote the myth of Israeli apartheid often point to clashes between heavily armed Israeli soldiers and stone-throwing Palestinians in the West Bank, or the building of what they call an “apartheid wall” and disparate treatment on West Bank roads. While such images may appear to invite a superficial comparison, it is disingenuous to use them to distort the reality. The security barrier was built to stop unrelenting terrorist attacks; while it has inflicted great hardship in places, the Israeli Supreme Court has ordered the state in many cases to reroute it to minimize unreasonable hardship. Road restrictions get more intrusive after violent attacks and are ameliorated when the threat is reduced.

Of course, the Palestinian people have national aspirations and human rights that all must respect. But those who conflate the situations in Israel and the West Bank and liken both to the old South Africa do a disservice to all who hope for justice and peace.

Jewish-Arab relations in Israel and the West Bank cannot be simplified to a narrative of Jewish discrimination. There is hostility and suspicion on both sides. Israel, unique among democracies, has been in a state of war with many of its neighbors who refuse to accept its existence. Even some Israeli Arabs, because they are citizens of Israel, have at times come under suspicion from other Arabs as a result of that longstanding enmity.

The mutual recognition and protection of the human dignity of all people is indispensable to bringing an end to hatred and anger. The charge that Israel is an apartheid state is a false and malicious one that precludes, rather than promotes, peace and harmony.

Alternate Human Rights Summit in New York

Read this powerful op-ed below by human rights hero Yang Jianli, appearing in the Sept. 19 edition of the New York Daily News. It explains why UN Watch and 20 partner groups are holding a major human rights summit this week in New York. For more information, visit www.ngosummit.org.

The UN's red carpet for tyrants: We're hosting our own assembly where repression isn't welcome.

BY YANG JIANLI

Monday, September 19th 2011

United Nations General Assembly, held annually in New York, is a permanent fixture of the diplomatic calendar. Just as inevitably, in the year that passes between each session, the world undergoes changes on a scale from the significant to the enormous.

This Wednesday, when President Obama opens the general debate of the Assembly's 66th session, those changes will impact most visibly upon the roster of world leaders not in attendance.

Few, for example, will forget Libyan Col. Moammar Khadafy's 2009 appearance, when he delivered a rambling, 1-1/2-hour speech, tossed aside a copy of the UN charter and called the Security Council a "terror council."

In 2011, Khadafy's regime will be invisible. His key UN diplomats already defected in February.

Similarly, thanks to the political convulsions across the Middle East, other repressive regimes - from Egypt, from Tunisia - will be absent this year, never to return.

Even so, for every collapsed tyrannical regime, there are several more that have retained power. And they, too, will be represented in New York, and treated with all the respect we afford duly elected leaders of constitutional, multiparty democracies.

From the Middle East, their number includes Syria, Sudan and Iran - whose president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, will be attending the Assembly for the seventh year in a row.

More broadly, this club of tyrannies includes Zimbabwe, Cuba and, of course, my own country, China, a Security Council member.

This depressing reality underlines the greatest challenge of the UN system, which has never distinguished between democracies and dictatorships - despite the fact that the UN is sworn to universally uphold the same human rights for all peoples, regardless of where they live.

Given this paradox, how is meaningful action possible on urgent human rights violations, such as China's brutal crackdown this year on citizens who dared to peacefully gather for walks around Chinese cities?

The GA's prearranged agenda precludes such discussions. When the world body does make the news, it's about the outrageous theatrics of its participants: Ahmadinejad denying the Holocaust, say, or Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez suggesting that former President George W. Bush was Satan.

The UN's bloc of authoritarian states are all too powerful to prevent the democratic impulses sweeping the world from surfacing in the world body. Back in March, after Libya was finally suspended from the UN's Human Rights Council, I had occasion to address that body. Recalling the case of Liu Xiaobo, a writer serving an 11-year jail sentence for advocating freedom, I asked how China's Communist regime, whose victims run into the millions, could remain as a member. I was interrupted by China and Cuba and never received an answer.

That is one of the many reasons why I will be joining an international coalition of dissidents and human rights organizations in New York this week. Led by UN Watch, a Geneva-based NGO that works the UN's corridors on behalf of human rights victims across the world, we will hold a parallel summit to combat discrimination and persecution. It'll take place within a stone's throw of the UN's headquarters on the banks of the East River.

Like me, many of the summit's participants are dissidents who were imprisoned for the sole crime of promoting democracy.

Rebiya Kadeer, the voice of China's oppressed Uyghur minority, was jailed for five years, two of them in solitary confinement. Ahmad Batebi, an icon of Iran's student democracy movement, was tortured for eight years in an Iranian prison. The mullahs never forgave the July 17, 1999, cover of The Economist, showing a photo of Batebi with the bloodied T-shirt of his friend, shot at a peaceful rally. Grace Kwinjeh, the Zimbabwean dissident and journalist, was tortured in prison by President Robert Mugabe's thugs. Now in exile, she fights the regime's victimization of women.

These and other participants, like Berta Antunes of Cuba and Jacqueline Kasha of Uganda, took extraordinary risks for the causes they represent.

Together, we will produce a series of proposed human rights resolutions for the UN to adopt, based upon a common principle: The use of fear as an instrument of government must be banished forever.

Freedom from fear was promised by the UN in the preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Rest assured that until this basic freedom is taken seriously in those halls, our voices will ring loud.

Jianli is a leading Chinese human rights advocate. An eyewitness to the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989, he now lives in the United States, where he founded Initiatives for China, a pro-democracy organization.

Link to New York Daily News

The case of Liu Xiaobo vs. the case of Hossein Derakshan

It was a courageous act that the Norwegian Nobel Prize Committee was ready to jeopardize their country's relations with China by standing up for and honouring Liu Xiaobo. I noted with satisfaction that the Canadian government issued a statement way back in December 2005 deploring Liu Xiaobo's 11 year prison sentence, in spite of the fact that Mr Liu is not a Canadian citizen. But it saddens me to compare his case with that of Hossein Derakshan, who IS a Canadian citizen, and who was recently sentenced to 19.5 years in Iran. His crime? He was blogging, in Canada, posting critical writings about the present Iranian leadership.

Both are dissidents, both expressed critical opinions on matters of human rights. Surely Liu Xiaobo's political activities are of a heavier weight, culminating in this year's Nobel Peace Prize, while Hossein Derakshan only contributed to freedom of expression for Iranians by being instrumental in developing the use of Persian script on the internet, as well as then using this tool to voice his own opinions later. Liu Xiaobo's 11 year sentence elicited an immediate reaction from the Canadian government, yet seemingly not much reaction came from them when the news of Hossein Derakshan's possible death sentence, which later was downgraded to a 19.5 years(!) prison sentence, hit the news stands.

Wouldn't he deserve at least an official notice, not to speak maybe help from his own government?

Ahmadinejad's UN speech

Mr Ahmadinejad has done it again. This is already beyond comprehension!

I am thinking of two possible explanations. Either he is what he appears to be, but then it puzzles me why Iran's political forces behind him still uphold him in his present position; or there is some rhyme and reason behind the apparent madness, maybe it is a very calculated modus operandi. But then, of course, that begs the question: to what aim?

In either case, after discussions today with some of my Iranian-Canadian friends and acquaintances, a rather embarrassing and painful period in Iranian history is unfolding in front of our eyes...

PS. By the way, as immediate proof of his lack of information / lies / machinations (pick one at your discretion) as far as his assumptions go regarding world opinion about the 9/11 attacks on the US, please read the survey conducted by World Public Opinion.org on opinions in different corners of the world as to who people think is really behind those attacks.

Hossein threatened by the death penalty

This is a disgrace! How low can a country, or rather its leadership, sink? Not enough that our Canadian photojournalist Zahra Kazemi was imprisoned and "accidentally" killed in 2003, not enough that the ensuing murder trial was handled with "flagrant denial of due process", as observed by Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister, Bill Graham. Now we have to receive news of Canadian blogger Hossein Derakshan being in danger of execution. He is accused of "collaborating with enemy states (sic?), creating propaganda against the Islamic regime, insulting religious sanctity, and creating propaganda for anti-revolutionary groups". In simpler terms: exercising his right as a Canadian, while within Canada, to free speech.

We cannot let this happen! If anything, it is Iran that is insulting us now. For how long will we allow this regime to repeatedly throw filth in the face of the international community? What do they want to achieve by these rogue actions? If it goes on like this, it will be embarrassing for any Iranian when outside their country to admit to being Iranian... Shame!

The Jews of Libya

I found an interesting page on the history of the Jews of Libya, pages maintained by the UofC in Berkley on the history of Libya.

Jews had a history of over 2000 years in that North African country, not unlike the old communities of Iraq, Tunisia, Yemen, or Egypt. Like everywhere else, the 20th century was fatal to these communities. When the Germans occupied Benghazi, they deported more than 2000 Jews from there into the desert, a fifth of whom perished there. The effects of German propaganda and ideology persisted after the war (as it does to this day!), there were several deadly pogroms in the following years. And so, after Israel was born, most of Lybia's remaining Jews, over 30,000 of them, fled there. During the next couple of decades anti Jewish sentiments kept growing as a result of the Arab-Israeli wars and the growing Pan-Arabist ideology. In 1969 Qaddafi confiscated the property of all the remaining Jews and ordered them to leave.

The ethnic cleansing was successful, there are no Jews left in Libya today, just as there are hardly any Jews left in any of the other Arab countries. The plight of these Jewish refugees is ignored by the rest of the world in spite of the fact that they were fleeing from systematic, open persecution. Today more than half of Israel's population consists of the descendants of these Middle Eastern refugees. Yet we, the rest of the world, still choose to be blind to it, many of us feverishly supporting Gaza, shouting "apartheid" even though there is no Jewish presence there either any more, ignoring the rocket attacks that were and are the cause of the blockade on Gaza in the first place, ignoring the fate of Gilad Shalit.

Ignoring the fact that Arab children today everywhere are taught that there was never a country called Israel in the past, denying the fact that there was Jewish presence throughout the centuries in Byzantine/Arab/Turkish/British Palestine, raising an ignorant generation of Arabs who are indignantly claiming the illegitimacy of the country of the Jews. Such is the power of misinformation. I just hope that at least some of them (us?) will be able to calm ourselves just enough so we can look around with a clear mind, research the history books without prejudice, and rise above all the BS and hatred.

Home-grown hatred in North America

And the trend continues... Practially at the same time there were two terrorist threats in the news in North America.

One here in Canada, in the Sikh community. The well known and well liked (I can only speak for non-Sikhs) PM from Vancouver, Ujjal Dosanjh was threatened on a Sher-I-Punjab radio show because he criticized the fact that portraits of know Sikh terrorists were carried in their parade, thereby giving validity to violence. Of course, the RCMP takes the threat very seriously. I, as a Canadian, believe that once we become Canadian citizens we don't have the right to bring our political squabbles into this country, no matter what is behind us in our history.

But I am also very happy to see that on the Facebook website Ujjal Dosanjh is a Sikh Traitor he has a lot of support expressed both from the part of Sikhs and non-Sikhs.

The other recent event is the threat against Matt Stone and Trey Parker of the South Park cartoon fame, known for their irreverent satires, poking fun in the past even at Jesus and God. But now they dared touch The Prophet (peace be upon him)...!!!

In this instance the threat comes from Zachary Adam Chesser, aka Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee, a self-proclaimed American Jihadist. To quote: "... Trey and Matt has to be sliced ... inshallah." And the result is...? Comedy Central bleeped the "offending" parts. This, of course, means that the Jihadists won, at least in this case.

What I find disturbing is that in both cases the people who uttered these threats were born here and educated here. Are we becoming too lax and complacent...?

Antisemitism in Ottawa.

This past Tuesday there was an anti-semitic attack in Ottawa that involved several machete wielding young Arabic speaking individuals. The focus of their attack was two young Carleton students perceived by them to be Jews. Yet one of them wasn't even Jewish, he is the vice-president of the Carleton University Students' Association, but who happens to be openly sympathetic to Jews and Israel.

As someone with some Armenian ancestry in my family tree, I am very sensitive to the cause of both Armenians and Jews, both peoples from the Middle East, who both had to face premeditated genocide. As a child I grew up with horror stories, the Jewish experience still very fresh at the time. I did make a decision then and there that I will do whatever I can to support both nations in their efforts to re-establish themselves in their homelands. Israel became a Jewish country again in 1949, Armenia regained its freedom in 1991. Yet peace is still elusive in both cases. Armenians still have to iron out their differences with the Azeris, Israel still has to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians, and to at all gain the acceptance of a large part of the world.

Ideologies, memes do not die easily. Antisemitism survived under the ashes, particularly in Eastern Europe where the whole issue was swept under the carpet and not dealt with ever since WWII. In spite of some feeble efforts from the part of the state, young people there still get the old ideology instilled in them by their parents, by people around them who still believe the Nazi propaganda of Jews being responsible for all the ills of the World. As for the Muslim world...? That has even more issues piled on top of their inherited ones.

The events of the last few years make me really concerned. I keep meeting otherwise educated people, even university professors, who do not take the necessary effort to check the verity of what they read and hear. Very dangerous! We cannot allow baseless raw hatred to take hold of people's minds. We cannot sit around idly while the displaced Palestinians are still kept in squalid refugee camps, after 60 years(!), in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon, even in the West Bank! Not accepted, even exploited by their Muslim brothers, who instead fill their heads and hearts with hateful propaganda, using them as living bombs against a country that they also refuse to accept.

I watch Israel with growing concern, a country that accommodated waves and waves of refugees, including those who had to flee from their ancient homelands in Muslim countries, and whose numbers were pretty much the same as the original Palestinian refugees, making up now roughly half of the country's present population. Who also lost everything when they fled, yet who never got any UN help. Israel feels more and more pushed in a corner, and as a result its despairing population chooses to elect more radical right-wing leadership, a fact which then whips the flames of antisemitism into an ever growing frenzy in the rest of the world. Very dangerous!

And now to have to read about incidents like what happened in Ottawa! Imagine a scenario in which Muslim students would get attacked in a similar manner. Wouldn't we react with utmost indignation? We cannot allow incidents like this to occur here in Canada! We cannot allow our streets to become battlegrounds! We cannot allow hatred of any kind to take hold of Canadian minds!

Religious violence world-wide

I celebrated Easter with a heavy heart. Religious tensions are growing world-wide and our coreligionists in particular are under attack at an increasing rate. In Iraq bombings and sectarian strife are a daily occurrence, but lately there were personal attacks on known Christian families. A bomb was placed next to the house of Ramzy Balbole, a painter. His wife and three children got seriously injured as a result, their three year old eventually succumbing to his injuries in the hospital. In the past few years several Chaldo-Assyrian priests were murdered and, although during Hussein's time only 5% of the population was Christian, today they make up 40% of the refugees now living in the neighbouring countries.

This past month over 500 people, mostly women and children, were killed near the city of Jos in Nigeria, although truth be told, there were prior clashes in which 150 Muslim villager got killed, so this was a revenge attack.

It is estimated that in Sudan over 1.5 million Christians have been killed in the civil wars since 1984 by the Janjaweed (the Arab Muslim militia). Also, over 200 000 people were taken into slavery, mostly of the Dinka people, about 75% of whom are Christian.

Last August in Pakistan six people, one man, four women and a child, were burnt alive in Gojra by Muslim militant. They were Christian and they were accused of desecrating the Qur'an.

The number of attacks on Coptic Christians (the earliest of Christian sects) has been increasing in Egypt in the last few decades. One year ago two men were shot dead and several injured in Southern Egypt during an Easter vigil. In September a Muslim man beheaded a Christian man in Bagour and injured two others in other villages.

This year, in January, three Muslim men in a car opened fire on a crowd of celebrating Copts near a church, killing 8 people. Unknown number of girls have been kidnapped, raped, and/or forced to convert, or marry Muslim men with the resulting children automatically considered Muslims.

In Saudi Arabia, if anyone is known to have converted to Christianity, they can be executed -- by law.

Sometimes I can't help remembering the Communist teachings of my childhood that said that "religions are the root of all evil". Could they have been right...?

Islamic conquest of Rome...?

Ten days from today there will be a presentation taking place in London, England, on the topic of Islam in Italy. No, it is not an anti-Muslim presentation that wishes to warn us about Islam planning on conquering Europe. It is organized by the Association of Italian Muslim Sisters UK, raising funds in support of the growing Muslim community in Rome.

But if you scroll down a bit, you will find the following text:

"Imam Ahmad reports in his Musnad that Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-'As (ra) mentioned: "Whilst we were around the Prophet (saw) writing he was asked, 'Which of the two cities will be opened first, Constantinople or Rome?' He (the Prophet Muhammad) answered, 'The city of Heraclius will be opened first!'

The Great Ottoman, Sultan Muhammad Fatih (rh) fulfilled the first part of this prophecy by conquering Constantinople. Thus, remains the second part. Having been forced out of Andalusia, and more recently, dispersed across the Balkan states, the city of Gaius Julius Caesar (Rome) remains. So let the da'wah (call, summon) begin ..."

Lucky they ARE Muslims, otherwise we might call them Islamophobes hallucinating about some nonexistent Muslim plans of conquest...

International reactions to the suspension of Parliament in Canada

When I first heard that Mr Harper decided to suspend Parliament for two whole months, I was not amused. I was even less amused when I heard his interview (on CTV - if I remember well) where he said "the Canadian public doesn't really care, anyway". Huh...? He even cited the Winter Olympics as an excuse. Hmmm...really? To me this long "vacation" says something else. It says that the Conservatives are jittery about something and need time to sort things out without the annoyance of having to deal with the opposition.

This whole thing reminds me very much of last year's prorogue, which was actually only one month long, but which was surrounded by a cloud of quite nasty TV ads attacking Mr Ignatieff, even though the idea of an election was only a vague possibility. Yet, even though a lot of Canadians found those ads disgusting and made them weary of Conservative political tactics, it did prove to be effective in hoodwinking a large enough part of the rest of the electorate to make the party actually rise in the polls. A fact that proves the power of media and the political shallowness of the general public. (Sad, but true...)

Today I became aware of the editorial in The Economist, and it made me embarrassed... The Economist is a British magazine with a large international readership. In their editorial of the latest print edition they harshly criticize our prime minister. They point out that such a long recess will mean that "all government bills will die, no matter how close they are to approval"; and that Mr Harper apparently thinks that this extra break "would not bother Canadians much". Well, it does bother a good many of us! One of my sons goes as far as calling Mr Harper a "dictator", and he very much supports the letter signed by 132 political scientists in which they are calling for an electoral reform. Apparently "finance Minister Jim Flaherty and others in cabinet will be 'meeting with and hearing from Canadian families, homeowners, workers, business-owners and industries from across the country.'" My family and I would be delighted if called upon!

Up to now Canadian prime ministers always asked the governor general (the Queen's representative in Canada) to be allowed to prorogue Parliament, and did so only after all unfinished business was dealt with. This time there were a whole bunch of bills still on the table, these will have to be re-introduced, all committees will get disbanded, a lot of effort will be wasted. The question arises: is this all because of the issue of the Afghan detainees? That does not seem to be such a hefty threat to the government as last year's situation, when Mr Harper clearly used his powers to dodge a confidence vote which could have triggered a new election. So what is behind this prorogation, then? For one thing we know that the Conservatives are planning to appoint a good number of Conservative senators, something that could not be done without Parliament's approval if it was in session, but can be done now. I wonder what else is up Mr Harper's sleeves...?

The conservatives cited several previous long historic prorogations, but I can imagine that in earlier times winter conditions were harsh enough to interfere with travels of MPs to and from Ottawa, thus interfering with proper functioning of Parliament and making long winter breaks almost necessary. Not that some prime ministers couldn't have ulterior motives, I am sure. But Mr Harper's political frolics are becoming too obvious. AND dangerous! We cannot create such precedence which would allow future prime ministers to suspend Parliament at any which whim. We, the Canadian public, have to let our prime minister know that we are not "complacent". Demographics are changing, the number of ice-hockey fans are not as numerous and not as fanatically devoted as Mr Harper is hoping for. We do pay attention, specially when issues start taking up international proportions. If the turn of events will necessitate a political "revolution", we are ready to ignore the Olympics in favour of straightening out our country's governmental meanderings.

Islam liberates Europeans from their lives of stupidity...

...or so says Azzam Tamimi, an Islamic scholar who lives in London, England.


See here the interview he gave to Al Jazeera, broadcast on December 8.

Jewish settlers in the future Palestine

In the English language Lebanese newspaper The Daily Star, columnist Bill Glucroft has written about a possible arrangement regarding Jewish settlers in the West Bank. The article, Settlers: a Jewish minority in Palestine?, touches on the issue of the fate of those settlers after the declaration of the new Palestinian independent state. The idea is a very logical one, as a matter of fact it has been floating around for a while now, and I always believed that the solution will be along those lines. What are we talking about, then?

The simplest and most logical solution is that the settlers will become citizens of the new country, actually having double citizenship by retaining their Israeli citizenship, also, but technically living as a minority in Palestine. As long as the new Palestine will be a democracy, this arrangement would benefit both countries. Of course the settlers would run the risk of being attacked by fanatics, should Hamas-indoctrinated Palestinians manage to gain any power. But this would be a double edged occurrence because in such an event Israel would retaliate, even invade, which no right minded Palestinian would want to chance.

On the other hand, in case of properly normalized relations between the two countries, the conditions of the Israeli Arabs would be linked with the conditions for Palestinian Jews, as proposed by Gershon Baskin, which then would prevent any discrimination in either of the two countries.

Of course, there are a lot of wrinkles in this idea that will need to be ironed out before a working arrangement is reached, but adopting it could be a good basis for the progress of the peace process.

Mass executions in Iran

There has been a sudden increase in the number of executions by hanging in Iran. Today they hung 20 people in the Rajai-Shahr Prison close to Tehran. Although officially the charges were drug trafficking, there are fears that a lot of these were bogus charges, something that apparently happens routinely in Iran whenever they want to silence dissent. A few days earlier, on Wednesday July 1, six people were hanged in Tehran's EvinPrison, all of them charged with murder.

Although Western media has no means to report on further developments in Iran, we know that since Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rallied behind Ahmadinejad demonstrators started to direct their protests against the whole clerical establishment, going as far as calling "death to Khamenei". Khamenei took a risk by supporting Ahmadinejad, loosing face both in and out of Iran. In his support he stands not only against Moussavi but also Hashemi Rafsanjani, one of the founding fathers of the revolution.

Where all this will lead, we can't know. What is certain, though, is that there is no turning back. Any surface normalization will be just that. Like a precariously balancing lid on a boiling pot of stew.

PS If you want to have a closer look at the methods the Iranian regime uses to control its citizens, please, visit the website Holy Crime.