MP Irwin Cotler: “Canada remained (at Durban I) at the request of the Israeli government”

From a Facebook post on Dec. 4, 2009:

The loyalty war for Israel between the two main Canadian parties, the Conservatives and the Liberals, is heating up and in the process, exposing many facts. One of them is that Canada stayed at the Durban I conference not to further the anti racism agenda, but “at the request of the Israeli government” to further another country’s agenda in implementing apartheid, ethnic cleansing and war crimes against the Palestinian people.
And for the first time the Zionists seemed to have discovered that the Conservative Party policy “plays up dangerous stereotypes” and concretely promotes antisemitism against all Jews, Zionists or not (see below).

Hanna
————————————————————–
http://www.jewishindependent.ca/archives/Dec09/archives09Dec04-11.html

December 4, 2009
Get rid of 10-percenters
Editorial
A recent flyer sent out by Conservative members of Parliament, promoting their party’s Israel record at the expense of the Liberals, has put the Jewish community at the centre of controversy.
MPs are allowed to send – with free postage – flyers to up to 10 percent of the voters in a riding outside their own. These so-called “10-percenters” cost taxpayers about $10 million a year. Their benefits are less clear.
Liberal MP Dr. Carolyn Bennett apologized recently for her 10-percenter that attacked the Conservatives’ handling of the H1N1 (swine) flu among First Nations communities with the slogan “No vaccines, just body bags” and a picture of body bags and a sick aboriginal child. Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq chastised Bennett and told CBC, “First Nations communities should not be used as punching bags for a political party.”
Perhaps not to be outdone in the fear-mongering-among-vulnerable-minorities department, the Conservatives recently sent out a flyer to several Liberal ridings with large numbers of Jewish voters, including ones in Quebec, Toronto and Winnipeg.
On one side of the flyer asking which federal political leader “is on the right track to represent and defend the values of Canada’s Jewish community?” there are two columns, each with three points. On the left, the Conservatives: “Led the world in refusing participation in Durban II hate-fest against Israel”; “Insisted on banning Hezbollah and led the world in defunding Hamas-led Palestinian Authority”; “Strongly backed Israel’s right to self-defence against Hezbollah during 2006 conflict.” On the right, the Liberals: “Willingly participated in overtly anti-Semitic Durban I”; “Opposed defunding Hamas and asked that Hezbollah be delisted as a terrorist organization”; “Michael Ignatieff accused Israel of committing war crimes during 2006 conflict.”
It is true that the Conservatives have been unambiguously supportive of Israel and have strongly condemned anti-Semitism. Under Stephen Harper’s leadership, for example, Canada joined the Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance and Research. The Conservatives have spent millions on the Jewish community, as part of the security infrastructure pilot program (though B’nai Brith Canada (BBC) notes in its annual anti-Semitism report that the Liberals made a pre-election pledge of $75 million for a similar program, which BBC considered “clearly a more realistic figure” than the Conservatives’ $3 million) and the federal government will provide Lubavitch B.C. with $633,300 from the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund to renovate the Lubavitch Centre (the B.C. government and Lubavitch B.C. will each invest an identical amount).
Wouldn’t it have been nice to see a positive 10-percenter promoting these achievements? Instead, the recent flyer comes so close to mistruths that, as of Monday, House of Commons Speaker Peter Milliken ruled the flyer had breached the Parliamentary privileges of Liberal MP Irwin Cotler (to whose riding flyers were sent) and the House was set to vote on sending Cotler’s complaint to the Procedure and House Affairs Committee for an inquiry.
For example, it was the Liberal party that designated Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations in 2002, thereby making the financing of them illegal. While the Canadian delegation under the Liberals went “willingly” to Durban I, there was no indication that it would turn into the hate-fest it did and, according to Cotler, once it turned ugly, Canada remained at the request of the Israeli government. Finally, Ignatieff did accuse Israel of war crimes, though he did apologize and has since repeated his and his party’s strong support for Israel, calling in a speech to Canadian Jewish Congress for “all parties to be genuine defenders of Israel.”
Where does this leave us as Jews? Well, most of us were probably already familiar with the record of the Conservatives and Liberals on Israel. So what was the purpose of sending the flyer?
One of the results has been to bring to the national public stage divisions within the Jewish community. More than 100 Jews signed a letter of protest to the Harper government, supporting the Liberals’ record. Among the signatories was David Matas, senior legal counsel of BBC. Meanwhile, Frank Dimant, BBC chief executive officer, told the CBC that “he doesn’t interpret the pamphlets as accusing the Liberals of anti-Semitism. Rather, he said, they seem to accurately recount the fact that on several key issues, the Conservatives ‘were more in tune with the Jewish community’ than the Liberals.”
Even if that’s the case, one has to wonder at all the money and effort spent on the Jewish community, which makes up less than one percent of the Canadian population. The attention generates conflicting feelings. It feels great to have such strong supporters of Israel in Parliament, but so much attention to gaining Jewish votes (as if Jews are one-issue voters) could backfire, as it plays up dangerous stereotypes, not the least of which are that Jews control the world’s political institutions and that Jews have a double loyalty, first to Israel, second to their country of residence.
Such messaging, no matter how unintentional, should concern us. As should the messaging that a government doesn’t care about its First Nations citizens. As should any such propagandizing by any political party – especially with taxpayer dollars. Whatever the initial purpose of these 10-percenters was, it’s time to get rid of them.

Letter to the Editor of the Georgia Straight Regarding Israeli Wines

The following letter was sent to the Georgia Straight on Feb. 15, 2008.

It might interest your readers to know that the “new-generation Israeli wines” that Jurgen Gothe was promoting (Feb. 14/08) are literally fruit from the vines of Israeli occupation. We recently sent a letter to the BC Liquor Distribution Branch on this very subject which they have responded to claiming this matter is not under their “jurisdiction” and they offer products on a commercial demand basis. Here are some excerpts of our originial letter.

“The Golan Heights Winery (of which the Galil Winery is a joint venture) produces wines from grapes grown on occupied Arab land and some of their wineries are located on occupied Syrian land in the Golan Heights. All of this is in direct contravention of the Fourth Geneva Convention and stated Canadian laws http://www.dfait- maeci.gc.ca/middle_east/can_policy-en.asp#06 . To add insult to injury, you are displaying these products from occupied Arab territory under an Israeli banner, against all international norms and practices. There is a reason your suppliers insisted on having the Israeli banner used, an issue that has already caused problems for European liquor boards, particularly Sweden, and you may not be aware you are being used to advance an illegal occupation and annexation of the Golan Heights. The Israeli peace bloc Gush Shalom includes all the Golan Heights wines on their national boycott list of settlement products, under the heading “A Penny to the settlements is a Penny against Peace” http://gush-shalom.org.toibillboard.info/boycott_eng.htm.

Regrettably, your actions are rewarding Israeli occupation, ethnic cleansing and war crimes that are committed daily by the Israeli Government against the Palestinian and other Arab peoples. It is also offensive to people all over the world who are interested in peace with justice in the Middle East. Please consider our request to immediately stop carrying these Israeli wines, and do not repeat your historic mistake when you carried wines from the South African Apartheid regime.”

Unfortunately, the BCLDB and now your Jurgen Gothe (hopefully unknowingly) are aiding and abetting an illegal occupation and hindering the chances for any future genuine peace in the region.

Yours truly,
Hanna Kawas,
Chairperson Canada Palestine Association

__________________________________________________________________

The Georgia Straight edited and published only the following condensed version of our letter:

http://www.straight.com/article-133001/bitter-fruit-goes-into-israeli-wines

February 21, 2008

Bitter fruit goes into Israeli wines

It might interest your readers to know that the “new-generation Israeli wines” that Jurgen Gothe was promoting [“Israeli wines take a big, bold leap forward”, Feb. 14-21] are, literally, fruit from the vines of Israeli occupation. We recently sent a letter to the B.C. Liquor Distribution Branch on this very subject, which they have responded to, claiming this matter is not under their “jurisdiction” and that they offer products on a commercial- demand basis. Unfortunately, the BCLDB and, now, your Jurgen Gothe (hopefully unknowingly) are aiding and abetting an illegal occupation and hindering the chances for any future genuine peace in the region.

Hanna Kawas / Chairperson, Canada Palestine Association / New Westminster

CKNW: It is not Balance, it is Dishonesty‏

Israeli Ambassador given double time on Vancouver Radio Station‏

July 18, 2005

Peter Warren

Bill Good Show, CKNW

Dear Mr. Warren:

I wish to register my outrage at the way I was dealt with this morning on the Bill Good show. When I was contacted by your producer, I was told that the Israeli ambassador would be on from 9 – 9:30 am and then I would follow with another segment from 9:30 to 10:00 to give the Palestinian perspective.

I was horrified to discover when I came on the air at 9:30 that I was not to have a chance to give my answers to your questions in a dignified manner, as the ambassador had been allowed to do, but rather he was kept on and allowed to continually barge in and censor everything I was attempting to say. If this is your idea of presenting a Palestinian perspective, then you are either underhanded or ill-informed. You should have been honest with me as to the format of the program, and then allowed me to decide whether or not to participate based on that information. True balance would have meant either both the ambassador and I were on from 9 – 10 am with equal time and equal access to responding to the other, or we each had a separate half hour by ourselves with the interviewer and the public.

I will not accept any further invitations from your station, and will inform people in my community of what has happened. Furthermore, this message will be posted on our website, and if you feel you could defend your journalistic practices, we will post that for you on our website as well.

Hanna Kawas

Chairperson, Canada Palestine Association www.cpavancouver.org

Host, Voice of Palestine www.voiceofpalestine.ca
——————————–
CKNW Responce

Subject: RE: CKNW: It is not Balance, it is Dishonesty
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 10:26:50 -0700
From: ikoenigsfest@cknw.com
To: hkawas@msn.com
CC: tplasteras@cknw.com

Mr. Kawas,

Thank you for agreeing to be a guest on CKNW yesterday morning. CKNW was one of the very few media outlets in Vancouver that provided a Palestinian perspective to Ambassador Baker’s visit to the city. In reviewing yesterday’s show, I think you were provided several opportunities to present the Palestinian viewpoint and you challenged and disagreed with the Ambassador repeatedly.

Mr. Warren decided at the very last moment to allow for dialogue between yourself and the Ambassador in the hope that this would be of benefit to the our listeners. I think the spirited discussion helped to highlight the complexities in the region.

I apologize if there was any miscommunication in the invitation issued to you, it was certainly not intentional and it was definitely not underhanded or ill-informed. Live talk radio is spontaneous and interactive and Mr. Warren seized upon an excellent opportunity to foster a sharing of ideas.

Sincerely,

Ian Koenigsfest

Executive Producer

CKNW News-Talk/980

Letter to the Editor, The Globe and Mail

By Gary Keenan

Dear editor:

Barbara Hodgson’s excellent letter (More than a Memory, Oct. 8) regarding renowned British Arabist Gertrude Bell brings to mind the fact that the Middle East may well have been spared several decades of violence, death, and destruction if British Prime Minister Lloyd George had heeded her wise words regarding the 1917 Balfour Declaration.

While serving with British intelligence in Cairo, Ms. Bell advised the cabinet that “an independent Jewish Palestine” was impractical because “[Palestine]…is not Jewish;” the native population would not “accept Jewish authority…. Jerusalem, is equally sacred to three faiths, Jewish, Christian and Muslim, and should never, if it can be avoided, be put under the exclusive control of any one….” Yours sincerely,

Gary D. Keenan

Open Letter to Sarah Efron Regarding the “Peace It Together” Camp

The following letter was sent to Sarah Efron, a freelance journalist, regarding reporting about the “Peace It Together” camp held this summer in Vancouver. The camp brought Israeli and Palestinian teenagers to Vancouver from the Middle East and received alot of attention in the local media as a step towards reconciliation in the region. It was also well received by local Zionists. Our letter explains why most of the local Palestinian community had reservations about this camp and similar initiatives.

Dear Sarah:

Thank you for the report you did for CBC Radio about the Israeli/Palestinian Peace Camp (http://www.sarahefron.com/stories/peacecamp.shtml ). In your print edition, you quote me as saying that “As long as there is no equality (my emphasis ), dialogue is nice but doesn’t lead anywhere…”.

In a large part of your interview with me, I talked about the preconditions for any dialogue which included the importance of equality among peoples in Israel/Palestine if there is any hope for a peaceful solution. By putting the sentence “As long as there is no equality” you captured the essence of my reasoning as to why I have doubts about “Peace it Together”. Unfortunately my opinion was not reflected in the CBC Radio on air report (The Early Edition CBC Radio, August 25, 2004 Listen to the Story )

I was disappointed that you did not inform me that you are going to use the same interview for an article in the Zionist paper The Jewish Western Bulletin (JWB) (http://www.jewishindependent.ca/archives/Sept04/archives04Sept17-02.html). This article also does not include any reference to equality as precondition to dialogue. The JWB supports Israeli war crime against the Palestinian people and is complicit in these war crimes (please see our positions which were reported by JWB:

(http://www.jewishindependent.ca/archives/Aug03/archives03Aug01-01.html) and (http://www.jewishindependent.ca/archives/Nov02/archives02Nov29-22.html)

I would like to re-state, for the record, the preconditions for any successful dialogue amongst Palestinians and Israelis, which might lead to fruitful results and help the process of forgiveness, healing and coexistence. In addition to agreeing to the obvious, that the 37 year old Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Jerusalem should be terminated completely and unconditionally, the following are essential for any future dialogue.

1. Recognizing the injustice that befell the Palestinian people in 1947/48 where over 400 Palestinian villages and towns were wiped off the map of the world and where over 75 percent of the Palestinian people became refugees. Without recognizing “the original sin against the native Arabs”, as the Israeli author Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi put it in his book Original Sins:Reflections on the History of Zionism and Israel, THERE CAN BE NO DIALOGUE.

2. As long as there is no agreement on a coordinated and vocal opposition to the racist laws, where discrimination between Jew and non Jew is institutionalized in Israeli society, there is no basis for any fruitful dialogue. An example of this is the Israeli law of return which applies to any Jew (Israeli or not) while the same law does NOT apply to Palestinians with Israeli citizenship because they are Muslims or Christians (they are not from the “chosen people”). Without recognizing the racist dimension of such laws and having the commitment of all to reverse them, THERE CAN BE NO DIALOGUE.

3. As long as 93 per cent of the land in Israel is controlled by the Jewish National Fund (JNF) and as the Israeli scholar Uri Davis said, “is reserved under law for Jewish citizens only. If the apartheid distinction in South Africa was between white and non-white, the apartheid distinction in Israel is between Jew and non-Jew”. Without recognizing the injustice of these Israeli apartheid land policies THERE CAN BE NO DIALOGUE.

4. Israeli-born Adam Keller from Gush Shalom in his recent trip to Canada stated “The demand of Palestinian refugees to come back to where they lived in Israel before 1948 is a morally justified demand. (One would think) the first to sympathize with this would be a Zionist. ” The Palestinian Right of Return should be recognized, and most objection to it is based solely on supremacist ideology that does not recognize the humanity of Palestinian Christians and Moslems. Without this recognition of this sacred collective and individual “Right of Return”, THERE CAN BE NO DIALOGUE.

Finally, any dialogue held without recognizing these basic conditions, no matter how well-intentioned, is just a sham and serves the PR interests of the more powerful side in the conflict (i.e. Israel). This inescapable outcome explains the reservations most Palestinians have towards projects like the “peace camp”. True dialogue can be easily conducted if there is recognition on both sides that we are all human beings with equal rights and obligations. If one side believes that they are a superior race and they are doing it as a charity act or as an insurance policy or as a tactic till objective conditions change, then THERE CAN BE NO DIALOGUE, NO JUSTICE AND CERTAINLY NO HEALING, NO RECONCILIATION AND NO PEACE.

Yours truly,
Hanna Kawas
Chair, Canada Palestine Association: https://cpavancouver.org
Host, Voice of Palestine: http://www.voiceofpalestine.ca