Semantics and Apartheid

In Canada, support for Zionism and Israeli oppression of Palestinians is deeply entrenched in the political duopoly. Liberal prime minister Paul Martin even proclaimed, “Israel’s values are Canada’s values,” as if Canada had to look elsewhere to determine its own values. Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper tried to one-up his predecessor by boasting that only his party was a “steadfast friend” of Israel. Consequently, some advocates of social justice for Palestinians have pinned their hopes on Canada’s “third” party, the social-capitalist New Democratic Party (NDP).

In the build up to Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW), many parliamentarians strode forward to denounce IAW. Yesterday, I received a formulaic response from Jack Layton – leader of the NDP.

Layton also has problems with IAW. Of Palestine-Israel, he wrote,

New Democrats have long been vocal and passionate advocates for a peaceful end to the Israel-Palestine conflict. We have consistently said that Canada can play a positive role in bringing Israeli and Palestinian representatives to the negotiating table in order to chart a path towards a negotiated peace, which ensures Israelis and Palestinians can live safely, side by side, in independent states with secure borders. [italics added]

Layton’s positive role is a pre-judged one. He and the NDP have determined that the solution is a two-state one.

Layton’s missive continued,

We [the NDP] know that extraordinary goodwill is required to achieve such peace. We deeply yearn for such a result and that is just one reason why ‘apartheid’ is not a word I use when talking about this complex and difficult issue. …

We invite Canadians of all political and religious stripes to join us in strongly condemning anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism, and intolerance in all its ugly forms.

Layton has netted himself in contradictions of his own spinning.

In advocating a two-state solution, Layton’s party is advocating a separation — a separation of Jews and Palestinians. Apartheid, etymologically, means “apart, separate,” and it refers to a “policy of racial separation.” Apartheid is defined as a crime against humanity by the International Criminal Court. Layton does not want to use the word, but the party-he-leads advocates the policy.

Another contradiction stems from Layton and his party’s “invite” to strong condemnation of racism. Yet, using the word “apartheid” is not something Layton would do in talking about a difficult issue. It becomes more difficult to condemn the racism inherent to “apartheid” when the word itself becomes verboten. One wonders: was “apartheid” a verboten word for Layton before Nelson Mandela’s release from prison? Or was that a simple issue?

Regarding the taciturnity of Layton on apartheid, the Nobel acceptance speech of one laureate applies, “I swore never to be silent whenever human beings endure suffering and humiliation. We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”

As stipulated by the Nobel laureate’s words, Layton’s silence to the apartheid Palestinians endure places him on the side of helping the oppressor and encouraging the tormentor.

The speech was by Elie Wiesel, a man who also stands silent to the suffering and humiliation endured by Palestinians. In this case, Wiesel also sides with the oppressor.

Layton is likeliest calculating the political consequences of taking a moral stand on apartheid practiced by Israeli Jews. The cognitive dissonance created about morals and consequences manifests itself in the form of contradictions. Layton’s political calculation has deemed avoidance on the matter of apartheid to be necessary political calculation.

Sitting by is not new for politicians. It is something many citizens complain about.

However, people should not rely on politicians or dubious Nobel laureates. People must critically contemplate and decide for themselves what is right or wrong. Morality should be derived through one’s own evaluations; it should not be imposed by others. Citizens of conscience who abhor all forms of racism, who abhor injustice against any and all members of humanity have a duty to speak and a duty to act — and they have a duty not to play semantics while other people suffer.

Kim Petersen is a former co-editor of the Dissident Voice newsletter. He can be remailed at: kimohp@gmail. Twitter: @kimpetersen. Read other articles by Kim.

47 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Rehmat said on March 18th, 2010 at 10:44am #

    The Canadian Charger in its January 21, 2010 editorial, titled Israel in Ottawa, wrote:”Few politicians dare ignore an organization like the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), which Chief Executive Bernie Farber says has more clout in the halls of power than most minority groups even though it (pretends to) represent only 360,000 people across the country. Muslims (over 800,000), on the other hand, make the largest religious minority in Canada.

    “They (CJC) seem to be spending more time in relation to Israel than in relation to anything else…… They wanted to be more than a Zionist organization in 1919 (when the CJC was founded)” says Abraham Arnold, who has been active in the CJC for more than 50 years.

    Historian John English said the Harper government’s strident support of Israel, has damaged Canada’s international image: ““Ironically, the zealous pursuit of Jewish votes in Canada, accompanied by outrageous suggestions of Liberal anti-Semitism, has destroyed Canada’s reputation as a balanced and sensible voice on Middle Eastern issues.

    Kent: Attack on Israel is an attack on Canada
    http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/02/18/kent-attack-on-israel-is-an-attack-on-canada/

  2. Mulga Mumblebrain said on March 18th, 2010 at 12:08pm #

    Another beautiful example of ‘Wiesel words’. How lucky he is to have such a favourite tactic of obfuscators, hypocrites and other addle-pated humbugs actually named after him,an eponymous tribute to his unrivalled mastery of the duplicitous arts. Actually, he has lots of rivals,and quite a few peers in the Zionist universe of lies and double-standards.
    The moral corruption of Western elites is now so absolute, their slavish obedience to the Zionists so complete, in the face of truly despicable crimes against morality and decency, that more than simple corruption must be at work. It seems hard to imagine that such extreme moral cowardice can be so universal, unless the Zionists are, as well as buying the elites, also threatening them in some way,perhaps through organised blackmail, possibly facilitated by the sayanim Fifth Columnists in the West, or by meaningful references to the fate of those who cross the Holy State. Whatever the cause this is moral perfidy of the deepest kind, not just sentencing millions of Palestinians to an unending living hell, but ensuring the continued descent of Israel into the spiritual swamp of outright fascism and racist terror and tyranny.

  3. jon s said on March 18th, 2010 at 3:06pm #

    The two-state solution is indeed the only solution which could be both morally sound and politically practical (just barely..) It’s beyond me why Kim equates such a solution with apartheid and racism. Hopefully both states would be democracies. In any case , a one-state solution is more likely to turn into a racist monstrocity.
    Elie Wiesel deserves nothing but respect as a Holocaust survivor , and one who has often spoken out against violations of human rights all over the world.
    Today an innocent civilian – in this case a worker from Thailand, was killed in Israel, by a rocket fired from Gaza. How about a condemnation?
    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054836.html

  4. lichen said on March 18th, 2010 at 3:44pm #

    I think it is ridiculous to claim that people with good intentions who support the two-state solution for pragmatic reasons are actually evil racist zionists. Also, I don’t think the israel/palestine issue should really be so important when it comes to local politicians/political parties. It is a minor issue.

    Also, the one state solution could just as easily be apartheid; just like Israel currently discriminates and separates themselves from the beduin tribes and arabs who live in Israel, I’m sure they could do it to all Palestinians, who could be made a poor underclass in Israel, just like South Africa today still has the majority blacks living in shacks, yet that is their post-apartheid country.

  5. Rehmat said on March 18th, 2010 at 5:32pm #

    The so-called “Two-state” solution to make Zionist occupation of Arab Palestine permanent – was the brainchild of the pro-Israel US president Dubya Bush, who, in 2003 declared that Palestinian need a separate state aka a Palestinian Bantustan. While Bush Zionist administration was pushing the PA leaders to accept the “Two-state” solution – one state (88% of Palestinian land) for Jews only and the other for the Native Muslims and Christians on the remaining land (22%) – Tel Aviv kept establishing new Jewish settlements on Arab lands; kidnapping and murdering civilians in both Gaza Strip and the West Bank to make sure that Palestinian are left with no choice but to keep their resistance against the Jewish occupiers.

    In September 2007 – a number of secular scholars from the US, Israel, South Africa, and occupied Palestine attended a conference in Madrid. The topic of discussion was “Palestine-Israel, one country, one state”. Dr. Leila Farsakh, Professor of Political Science at Massachusetts University who attended the conference – later in her interview declared – The Two State Settlement is dead, make way for One State Solution.

    http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/01/29/two-state-solution-can-you-smell-the-skunk/

  6. lichen said on March 18th, 2010 at 7:14pm #

    No, actually, the two state solution on the pre-1967 borders has existed since 1976 in security council resolutions; long before any bush was president. You, as a non-Palestinian, may favor one solution over another, but you are not somehow helping the Palestinians more by advocating a one-state solution. It’s up to them.

  7. Mulga Mumblebrain said on March 18th, 2010 at 11:23pm #

    How about a condemnation of the continuing siege of Gaza,jon, or is your finely tuned moral pretension only able to recognise suffering when it suits the Chosen People? I deeply regret every premature and violent human death,unlike you and all the other Zionists,who believe in a hierarchy of human worth, with Jews at the very top, Sabbat Goyim like the unfortunate Thai well below, and Gazans at the very bottom. And what about the plain hypocrisy of Wiesel’s words, as quoted by the author? Wiesel may be a Holocaust survivor, but to have gone through that horror and emerged, not having truly learned the lesson that racist brutality is always evil, but to constantly make excuses for such evil when committed by Jews, and to habitually revile and criticise the victims of that Jewish evil,is the mark, in my opinion, of a dreadful hypocrite.

  8. Danny Ray said on March 19th, 2010 at 5:12am #

    Mulga, Today you say,” I deeply regret every premature and violent human death,”
    However just two days before you said “I’m afraid I must differ from the author in one respect. I welcome Zapata Tamoyos’ death, and fervently hope all the other Rightwing psychopaths who make life on this planet such a nightmare of despair, deprivation and violence can be persuaded to follow his example”.

    Well actually this may be easily answered. Everyone to the right of Mulga is not considered human. Sounds Jewish!

  9. jon s said on March 19th, 2010 at 5:29am #

    Mulga, (or is it Matthew…)- as you should know by now, I firmly believe in equality, and I oppose all forms of racism and supremacism. It’s nice that you “regret” the death of the Thai civilian, are you willing to condemn the Palestinians who killed him?

  10. Rehmat said on March 19th, 2010 at 5:52am #

    lichen – The so-called two-state solution was given birth in the Balfour Declaration after WW I. Since the plantation of Zionist cancer in the heart of Muslim region in 1948 – Palestine as a country was “wiped off” the map by Israel-Jordan-Egypt axis of evil.

    The so-called “Palestinian State” would never survive or live in peace next to citizens of Israeli state who are brought-up by acute hatred and racism towards Arabs and Muslims in particular.

    Poll: Who are more racists?
    http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/poll-who-are-more-racists/

  11. bozh said on March 19th, 2010 at 6:34am #

    Land obtained by war can be recovered only via war[s]. This, means two state solution is no longer available.
    It wld be possibly available only if judeo-christian world wld pass a reverse balfour declaration promising pals entire west bank-gaza and arming arabs in order to wage war[s] against israel in case it does not withdraw or remove all settlements form the occupied territories.

    it seems to me that the christo-judean soyuz is opting for one binat’l state solution. In any case, this appears the best of the worst solutions in view of the fact that a humane-political one had been prevented by the balfour declaration while opting for a criminal one. tnx

  12. toeg said on March 19th, 2010 at 10:27am #

    There will be a screening of the movie “Among the Righteous: Lost Stories from the Holocaust in Arab Lands” at the Museum of Tolerance in Los Angeles on March 25 @7:00 pm. It is free with prior registration and I urge all to attend. You can find out more here:

    http://www.museumoftolerance.com/site/apps/nlnet/content.aspx?c=tmL6KfNVLtH&b=5843563&ct=8056699

  13. mary said on March 19th, 2010 at 10:28am #

    Some facts

    Since the cessation of the Cast Lead shoah, 88 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed in a mixture of Israeli military operations and border clashes, according to the United Nations.

    The death of the Thai worker occurred in a moshav 400 metres from the border close to the Erez crossing. A militant Fatah (ie the quislings and NOT Hamas) brigade claim responsibility.

    The sequel – Overnight Israeli jets attacked Gaza, one breaking the sound barrier. Nice for the children sleeping in their tents?

    http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=121127&sectionid=351020202

    Stop the slaughter, Stop the crime, Free, Free Palestine.

  14. Mulga Mumblebrain said on March 19th, 2010 at 1:46pm #

    You’re right Danny-I am guilty of appalling hypocrisy. I should have said I regret the premature death of all decent human beings, and the wretched swine we know as Rightwingers I ought to wish to see learn the error of their ways.It is indeed wrong to wish for the death even of vile people, and self-defeating, as you just become like them, their bitterest triumph. Unfortunately sometimes I get agitated and forget basic principles. As for you jon, I regret the death of the Thai man, but do not condemn the missile launchers as you suggest I might.Those imprisoned by vicious racists, creatures for whom you are an invertebrate (oops, I think I mean inveterate) apologist, and who not only kill hundreds of their imprisoned victims but are imposing a barbaric, illegal and evil siege upon them (for which you are also an apologist) are entitled in law and morality, to resist that racist brutality.If their actions kill innocents then that is regretable and tragic, but it pales into near insignificance compared to the terrorist crimes inflicted on them by their tormentors, who you constantly exculpate, while vilifying the victims.In fact, as the aggressors, the land thieves and the child-murderers, the Zionists are the ones ultimately responsible for this man’s death, and the deaths of thousands since 1947. I would say that in this you are the one with the morally reprehensible double-standard, not I.

  15. jon s said on March 19th, 2010 at 2:51pm #

    Right, Mulga, I get it: you “regret” the death of a person on the Israeli side, but you don’t condemn the killers. On the other hand, if innocents are killed on the Palestinian side – you do condemn, and worse. There’s hypocricy for you, there’s your double-standard.
    I’ve never condoned the deliberate killing of innocent civilians, and I’ve never villified the Palestinian people, for whom I have a great deal of sympathy. The Hamas terrorists , though, are a different story. I’ve been around long enough to recognize evil when I see it.

  16. Kim Petersen said on March 19th, 2010 at 2:52pm #

    It’s beyond me why Kim equates such a solution with apartheid and racism.”

    It’s beyond me why jon cannot comprehend a simple formula. It was not an equation of mine; it was simply applying a dictionary definition to an action. Two states is advocating a separation of Jews and Palestinians. That is apartheid and apartheid is racism. In fact, it is allowing Jews to keep land stolen from Palestinians and allowing them to live in a rump state.

    Hopefully both states would be democracies.”

    Yes. But right now only the Palestinian side approaches a democracy.

    “In any case , a one-state solution is more likely to turn into a racist monstrocity.”

    Right now there is only one internationally recognized state, and you’re right jon: it’s a monstrosity.

    Elie Wiesel deserves nothing but respect …

    Wiesel deserves whatever a man who does adhere to his own principles deserves.

  17. jon s said on March 19th, 2010 at 3:40pm #

    Kim, “Two states” is not apartheid , it’s the solution which the Left has been advocating for decades. Even after it’s implementation, there will always be a significant Palestinian population in Israel, and there may be Jews living in the Palestinian State, (though not most of today’s settlers.)Neither state will be “racially pure”.
    Both sides deserve to exercise their right to self-determination, to a state of their own. Keeping them together in one state , given the mistrust and hatred, is practically a guarantee of a bloodbath.
    When Czechoslovakia broke up, the two nations established separate states, and no one accused the Czechs and the Slovaks of practising apartheid.
    Are you actually saying that the Palestinian side is more of a democracy than Israel?. From the point of view of a believer in democracy, where would you rather live?

  18. Danny Ray said on March 19th, 2010 at 3:58pm #

    Not hypocrisy, my friend Mulga. Just that tunnel vision of yours which makes me love you like a brother. You are like a terrier with a rat. Once you taste blood, nothing else matters. I sometimes wish we could entice you over to the dark side. In addition, I meant that Terrier thing as a compliment, Kim.

  19. Max Shields said on March 19th, 2010 at 4:13pm #

    I have made the case over and over on this site that one region is what is called for. Apartheid exists in Gaza TODAY. That’s the reality.

    The single entity solution is drawn because in large part the region can only sustain an integrated human presence. This is all about land, water and resources of one precious sort or another (perhaps some pathological version of the Old Testament provides a further pretext for some). Demonization, colonizing, apartheid methods of “containment” are done to control those resources.

    Land is inhabited, it is place, but it is never really “owned” by anyone. It is. Humans did not make it. Land makes everything human possible.

    As to this “self-determination” jon s calls for it can’t be done by bifurcating a small region. It is unimaginable that a state – Israel – created through aggression and terrorism, would ever concede the creation of a new state sharing what there is of resources. Check out some time the consumption differences between Israel and the Palestinians (massively lopsided given the population differences to boot). It is drastic. A new state would require at least the same amount of access to these resources not available today to the Palestinians.

    What’s more, and again, the region has a carrying capacity which is made unmanageable and unsustainable when you do not integrate the human inhabitants. Politically the two-state solution is a neat little package of talking points. The Palestinians want a right to return, and when polled an overwhelming majority want one state. The Israeli’s want the same. Each has a different vision, but the goal is the same, making a two-state a mere nagging illusion of imperialism.

  20. Kim Petersen said on March 19th, 2010 at 6:17pm #

    jon, quite right: two states (per se) is not apartheid, and I never stated that. But two states based on a separation of “races” is by definition apartheid.

    To be clear, the solution must come primarily from the Indigenous peoples of the territory in question.

    I am for a zero-state solution because I do not believe in borders or hindering the movement of humans.

    Finally, your Czech-Slovak example is bogus. Both peoples are indigenous to the region. The ethnic populations are fairly separate geographically. The Czechs and Slovaks arrived at an agreed on separation, not one imposed by the violence of an invader ethnicity. It was a separation based not in racial disharmony but economic disparity.

  21. Mulga Mumblebrain said on March 20th, 2010 at 12:10am #

    jon, your attitudes are open for all to see.You are an apologist for the racist,terrrist Zionist state, because you are, I assume, a Jewish Zionist. Their victims, the Palestinians, you pretend to have sympathy for,but it is as transparent a humbug as one can imagine. You label the democratically elected Palestinian Government, Hamas, as ‘terrorist’, when they are a resistance movement to a terrorist state, Israel, that is motivated by an insanely racist and supremacist ideology, Zionism,that views the Palestinians as ‘two-legged animals’ or ‘human dust’. What is worse Israel is more and more dominated by religious fundamentalist zealots who regard all non-Jews as a species of animals,and who regard killing civilians including children as religiously sanctified acts. Zionist hypocrisy is most marked when they pretend, like you do, to believe in a ‘two-state’ solution when the ‘state’ offered is an electronic zoo of disconnected internment camps, with Israeli settler infestations stolen from the Palestinians (contrary, absolutely, to all international law, but when did that ever deter those set above the rest of humanity?)and Israel, with insane arrogance, demanding a veto over this Bantustan’s foreign relations, control of its airspace and a ban on this pseudo-state having a decent army, all while the Chosen People remain armed to the teeth. This proposal is so demeaning and insulting that it is clearly meant to be rejected.
    The reason people detest Israel so strongly is that, while Israel is but one of numerous vile regimes, from the world-bullying Moloch the USA down to the Arab despotisms, the Burmese military and various kleptocracies, none express such vile racism and such unbounded arrogance and contempt for the rest of humanity as do the Zionists. And none have the control over the Western media that they use to lie, vilify and abuse as do the Zionists. I have found over 90% of those anti-Zionists I have met to be without a particle of race hate, but to be those who firmly believe that all humans are equal, and that delusions of absolute racial supremacism,put into practice with pitiless cruelty, are evil.You, I surmise, think differently.

  22. mary said on March 20th, 2010 at 12:15am #

    Mohammed Omer who won the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism (jointly with Dahr Jamail) and who was beaten up and injured by the Shin Bet on his return home from London to Rafah, is now being denied entry to the US to make a speaking tour.

    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=10150140022065508&ref=mf

    He has been residing in the Netherlands since this ordeal in 2007 and continues to undergo medical treatment there for his subsequent health problems.

    The U.S. consulate has now held his visa application for an extended period of time, effectively cancelling a planned U.S. speaking tour without the explanation that a denial would require. In recent years, numerous foreign scholars and experts have been subject to visa delays and denials that have prohibited them from speaking and teaching in the U.S.—a process the American Civil Liberties Union describes as “Ideological Exclusion which they say violates Americans’ First Amendment right to hear constitutionally protected speech by denying foreign scholars, artists, politicians and others entry to the United States. Foreign nationals who have recently been denied visas include Fulbright scholar Marixa Lasso; respected South African scholar and vocal Iraq War critic Dr. Adam Habib; Iraqi doctor Riyadh Lafta, who disputed the official Iraqi civilian death numbers in the respected British medical journal /The Lancet/; and Oxford’s Tariq Ramadan, who has just received a visa to speak in the United States after more than five years of delays and denials.

    Fellow Gellhorn recipient Dahr Jamail, expressed his disbelief at Omer’s visa hold. “Why would the US government, when we consider the premise that we have ‘free speech’ in this country, place on hold a visa for Mohammed Omer, or any other journalist planning to come to the United States to give talks about what they report on? This is a travesty, and the only redemption available for the U.S. government in this situation is to issue Omer’s visa immediately, and with a deep apology.”

    Omer was to visit Houston, Santa Fe, and Chicago, where local publisher Haymarket Books was to host his Newberry Library event, “Reflections on Life and War in Gaza,” alongside a broad set of interfaith religious, community, and political organizations.

    Rather than cancel the meeting, organizers are calling on supporters to write letters and emails calling for the U.S. consulate’s approval of Omer’s visa. They are also proceeding with the event as planned, via live satellite or skype, if necessary. A petition currently underway will also be announced soon.

    U.S. consulate information:
    Ambassador Fay Hartog Levin
    U.S. Embassy in The Hague
    Lange Voorhout 102
    2514 EJ
    The Netherlands T: +31 70 310-2209
    F: +31 70 361-4688
    e-mail to:ConsularAmster (AT) state.gov
    ~~~~~~

    The above is an extract from a e-mail from his publishers, Haymarket Books.

    PS The US Ambassador in The Hague, Fay Hartog-Levin, is the wife of Daniel Levin of The Habitat Company (real estate) and founder and operator of the East Bank Club in Chicago where Obama made many of his political friendships and who is described as a ‘mega donor’ to the Democrats and to Obama’s campaign. There are many links to articles describing the Levin couple’s connections to US politics, government and business!

  23. mary said on March 20th, 2010 at 12:23am #

    There has been another night of Israeli air attacks on Gaza in which 11 Palestinians have been wounded.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8577492.stm

    Retribution? Revenge? How many eyes for an eye and how many teeth for a tooth do the Occupiers want and need?

  24. Mulga Mumblebrain said on March 20th, 2010 at 3:44am #

    mary, did you catch that Zionist slime Milipede on the BBC this morning justifying his odious presumption and arrogant interference in sending a message for New Year to the Iranians? It was all there, the Zionist forked-tongue, the humbug, the racism (with much invoking of ‘the international community’ ie those Western racist states controlled by Zionists like himself) and the relentless lying. With reports that the US is stockpiling bunker-buster munitions on Diego Garcia, from where the UK so kindly ethnically cleansed the inhabitants so that the ZioAmerican Reich could have a base to terrorise the region, methinks Milipede and his ilk will shortly have the blood of millions of Iranians on their paws, to go with that of millions of Iraqis, Afghans, Somalis, Pakistanis, Lebanese, Gazans etc. And to think that these vermin have the foul audacity to portray themselves as ‘morally pure’ and ‘a light unto the nations’.

  25. mary said on March 20th, 2010 at 4:18am #

    No Mulga I was out with the dog breathing some clean air and missed that particular stench.

    This must be the crapoganda piece.

    Foreign Secretary David Miliband has sent a message to mark the Iranian New Year this weekend, saying he hopes the coming year will enable Iranians to express freely their own aspirations. He pressed the case for tougher sanctions against Iran over its nuclear programme during a trip to China earlier this week. Mr Miliband explains whether his comments are a mark of support for the opposition in Iran.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8577000/8577653.stm

    I will have to summon some resolve to listen to him for 5 mins.

    The silly little twerp should have stuck to his first career choice. I was looking at his blog and this amused me.

    ‘I was born on 15 July 1965 and my first career ambition was to be a bus conductor.’ (blogs.fco.gov.uk/roller/miliband/page/about)

  26. Kim Petersen said on March 20th, 2010 at 6:41am #

    And Dr. Mustafa Barghouti has been blocked from a cross-Canada speaking tour by Canadian officials’s refusal to issue a visa.

  27. Max Shields said on March 20th, 2010 at 7:19am #

    Kim, your zero-state is precisely my point (hence why I call it a regional solution). Borders requires militaries and massive expenditures for infrastructure that becomes a total waste because these are unnecessary when borders are eliminated.

    The fabrication of states IS the problem because it provides the cover for offensive aggressions.

  28. jon s said on March 20th, 2010 at 8:39am #

    Kim, In apartheid-era SouthAfrica the blacks were separated by race laws, they were prevented by law from living in the same neighborhoods or going to the same schools or even using the same public toilets as the whites. Moreover, they were disenfranchised – they couldn’t vote, the parliament and government were white-only. All of which is not true for Israel, so the label “apartheid “ is simply wrong.
    Also the Jews in Israel are not an “invader ethnicity”, nor is Zionism a form of colonialism , similar to 19th century European colonialism in Asia and Africa..
    As to “zero-state” – an interesting concept, but totally unrealistic. Do you know of any Palestinians(let alone Israelis) who agree?
    Yes, Mulga, (or Matthew…)I’m a Zionist , guilty as charged – actually on the Zionist Left.
    I referred to the Hamas as terrorists because of their deliberate targetting of innocent civilians.

  29. Max Shields said on March 20th, 2010 at 9:03am #

    jon s your premises are not only weak but falely based.

    And if Hamas is a terrorist organization than what is Gush Emunim Underground? This is simply one of many Israeli/Jewish terrorist organizations with the purpose of terrorizing Palestinian civilians.

    jon s we’ve heard this go-no-where back and forth you are providing here, and IT is the narrative that doesn’t allow for peace. This denial. Of course, the actions and end state – to date – is class colonalism; and it reflects the methods of apartheid as understood by international law. Racism is not a black/white paradigm; it is one based on domination and demonization of a suppressed people.

    Left/Right Zionism is pure bunk! The “two-state” solution is a major red herring. A pretty narrative to allow you to call yourself in oxymornonic terms a “left Zionist”.

  30. dan e said on March 20th, 2010 at 11:38am #

    max just quicky to thank & compliment you for your earlier comment posted 4:13 & the good strong swings you landed on those zionist jerks. While you and I disagree on a lot of important stuff I need to remember that in my scheme of things you are an important ally.
    Keeping eyes on the prize, if it hurts Zionism or any other kind of colonialism, I’m for it:) The other stuff we can argue about. But when it comes to such as Jon S & Dannyray, debate ceases and we move into Ideological Warfare, life or death stuff.

  31. Mulga Mumblebrain said on March 20th, 2010 at 12:03pm #

    Of course you are a Zionist jon. Zionism is to Jewry as Nazism was to the Germans.Both are ideologies based on monstrous doctrines of absolute racial supremacy of ubermenschen,in one case the Aryans, in the other the Jews, over untermenschen. Both doctrines demand the removal of the untermenschen from areas the ubermenschen covet as their own lebensraum. In the Zionist case this is Eretz Yisrael, ‘from the Nile to the Euphrates’ a claim based on nothing but religious mythology and insufferable arrogance and total contempt for the ethnically cleansed. Israel was born in terror and ethnic cleansing in 1947-8, an historical fact about which the Zionists have lied with relish for over 60 years. ‘Left’ Zionism is non-viable alas, as ‘Left’ in any meaningful sense entails human solidarity and empathy for all people, and Zionism is a chauvinistic, exclusivist, doctrine of racial supremacism.
    The original sin of Zionism is similar to the mentality of the psychopath turned into a quasi-religious ideology. The Zionist regards the Palestinian as sub-human, a thing without rights who can be murdered with impunity. The only lesson that the Zionists learned from the Nazi Judeocide was that in future the roles must be reversed and the Jews become the executioners. Zionism adds delusions of absolute supremacism based on perverted religion, to common or garden European settler racism and contempt for the indigenous and adds the lust for vengeance where the Palestinians and the Islamic states of the Middle East have become the sacrificial scapegoats as the Zionists are avenged for Auschwitz, not on the perpetrators who are too powerful and still useful to the Zionists, but on complete innocents, who are, in a particularly vicious twist, vilified as ‘new Nazis’ by the true new Nazis.
    I’m glad to say,’though, jon, that your type seems to be on the run.Even in as brainwashed and as chauvinistic a tribe as the Jews, more and more are repulsed by Israel’s barbarism, and outraged by the image of Jewry that the religious and secular fascists present to the world. They have, in other words, put their humanity first, and their tribal allegiances second. What are your priorities? The shame and guilt that they feel is being transmuted into action to aid the Palestinians against Zionist terror, and against the evil that is Zionism, and the poison that it spreads far and wide with its ruthless hatemongering against Arabs and Islam through the Western media that it so thoroughly controls. And the old tactic of vilification and intimidation, the ‘anti-Semite’ slur, is losing its effectiveness through too great and too cynical overuse.

  32. dan e said on March 20th, 2010 at 12:10pm #

    Trying to clarify, in short bursts because I have this propensity to have keyboard accidents, hit the wrong key or have mouse over the wrong spot and SHAZZAM everything I typed disappears.
    To me the Zionism/Palestine issue is the KEY to the whole Imperialist Warfare State puzzle. No matter what direction you’re coming from, if you are truly a person of good will and you make a serious sustained effort to understand the Isreal Question, you will wind up coming to understand the overall social problem plaguing our species. If you don’t attain a perfect understanding, well nobody else has either, but you’ll be one of the people competent to participate, along with at present a relatively small but growing group of others, in the ongoing discussions about where we go from here.
    But if you don’t understand the contradiction between Palestine and “isreal”, if you still cling as so many do to notions of “Solutions”, two state or one state, what can I say?
    There ain’t no Santa Claus, there ain’t no Tooth Fairy, and there ain’t no “solution” to this particular social contradiction. The thesis and antithesis will continue their protracted struggle until one anihillates the other.
    Not until the State Power of Zionism is defeated will it be possible to make a leap, “aufgehoben” to the next level.
    This is not the kind of social contradiction that can be ameliorated by “negotiations”. It is too fundamental & too much is at stake.
    to be continued:

  33. jon s said on March 20th, 2010 at 12:33pm #

    Max Shields, A terrorist is a terrorist and I have no problem condemning Jewish terrorists. I regard all human life to be of equal value.For your information the term “Gush Emunim” is outdated, really so 1970s…
    “Left-Zionist” means striving for a society based on socialism, justice and Israeli-Palestinian peace.
    Dan e , Interesting that on Zionism “debate ceases” and you switch to ideological warfate mode. Sounds like you’re out of any good arguments.
    Mulga, I feel that answering you is futile, and when I do say what I really think about your content and your tone, I get censored on this forum. I am curious, though: Have you ever visited Israel?

  34. Deadbeat said on March 20th, 2010 at 1:12pm #

    jon s writes …

    “Left-Zionist” means striving for a society based on socialism, justice and Israeli-Palestinian peace.

    “Left-Zionism” is an oxymoron and helps to maintain confusion and disruption among the Left. “Left-Zionism” is a major reason of Chomksy’s rise and influence and “Left-Zionism” is a major reason why Zionism’s influence as been able to rise to such height in the United States.

    Zionism is a RACIST ideology and “Left-Zionist” are the most disciple by playing an empathic role to gain trust while their real agenda is the advancement of a debased ideology.

  35. Max Shields said on March 20th, 2010 at 1:20pm #

    jon s you have “no problem condemning Jewish terrorists” but it is Zionist terrorism that created the State of Israel. It was the act of unmitigated aggressive terror, not one based on recovering what was taken, but forcing civilians of all ages and genders out of their homes, the farms, their way of life. That is terror of the highest order. And what is it when Israeli regularly bombs Gaza? This is state terrorism which has yet to be brought to justice. Where are the tribunals that would put these Israeli leaders on trial for noted war crimes and crimes against humanity?

    So, you blame the oppressed for not laying down and simply letting the Israeli war machine mow them into the earth? You call those who would fight back terrorists? What would you call Mandela? No doubt, as a white Afrikaner you would claim he is a “terrorist” as did the state of Israel when siding with the white Apartheid regime.

    Your sense of who the terrorist is the the topseyturvey Alice in Wonderland roller coaster Orwellian slight of hand that plays this game as if you really believe it.

    You are why there is no peace in the region. Own it!!

    dane first thanks for the acknowledgement. I agree with your point that the “solution” in this “eternal” quest for peace and justice cannot come from negotiation. One cannot negotiate in bad faith. jon s represents that ilk. It will take something yet to appear which will create the utter dissolution of the “state of Israel” and make that justice an outcome.

    I think this is true of nearly everything we confront today. Climate change is the solutions to climate change. Human systems cannot bring about solutions even when some know what these are. Too little and far too late.

  36. Don Hawkins said on March 20th, 2010 at 2:30pm #

    Not yet Max about six years and we will be darn close but let’s remember to keep burning is where the 500 million part comes in on a ruined planet?Earth. Better to try.

  37. dan e said on March 20th, 2010 at 3:24pm #

    Dan e cont: Greetings once more to Max, Bozh, DB, MM, Mary, Rehmat, Rosemary and all the other indefatigable trolls for justice (sic)whose words I read every day: Here’s an excerpt from a piece on today’s Counterpunch.org which caught my attention. A lot of it struck me as typical radical roseythink, a little too Haight-Ashbury for my taste, but then I came across a few sentences with direct relevance to some of the discussion taking place on this thread:
    >”As drones bomb Pakistan at an undisclosed and accelerating rate, and the Afghanistan war continues to erode the means of survival and dignity for Afghanis, we must be looking at the big picture. U.S. military and political support for the outrageous policies of Israeli colonization and apartheid is one of the clearest indicators that establishing dominance in the region, both directly and through allies and puppets, is the major goal of the U.S.
    This is the moment for the antiwar movement in the U.S. to develop analysis and tools that can build effective, transformative movements. During Bush’s regime, many of our arguments focused narrowly on Bush’s brazenness and the “legality” of these brutal occupations. Mass numbers of the U.S. public have recognized over this past year that Bush didn’t create the plan behind these wars, and it is continuing beyond him. Now the antiwar movement is being pushed to grow beyond challenging one war at a time. We need a deeper analysis of the structures that underlie militarism and war, to ground our work in values of affirming life and of building cooperative, just structures. We must offer visions of a different way to organize our own society and interact with other countries.

    In this time, it is critical to more deeply root our work in an understanding of the root causes of these wars, and to strengthen alliances between movements that are tackling different impacts of a common problem.”<

    Okay I'll submit this now, then come back with names of the authors & perhaps a few observations…

  38. dan e said on March 20th, 2010 at 3:52pm #

    as promised, the credits: Sarah Lazare is an organizer in the GI resistance and U.S. anti-war movement, primarily with Courage to Resist (www.couragetoresist.org) and the Civilian-Soldier Alliance (www.civsol.org) and is interested in struggles that link injustices at home with U.S. policies of war and empire abroad, moving towards the collective building of a more just world.

    Clare Bayard organizes with the Catalyst Project (www.collectiveliberation.org) and War Resisters League (warresisters.org), building a G.I. resistance movement that challenges U.S. empire, and connecting domestic racial and economic justice organizing with international movements against militarism.///
    Nowadays in the All Volunteer Force era, organizing/educating among active-duty personnel is more difficult than in Jane Fondl’s day. But my participation in the movement vs the Vietnam war plus study of the history from diff pts of view have left me convinced that while most of the credit for ending the US attack on SE Asia goes to the indigenous resistance led by Ho Chi Minh & Gen Giap, the biggest contribution from Americans to bringing about US withdrawal was the widespread unwillingness of the troops to follow orders, and the GI Coffeehouse movement certainly played a large part in bringing reliable information to people on active duty.
    Having recently had considerable contact with active duty personnel working in Medical specialties, it’s hard for me to connect the generous individuals I was meeting with the inhuman acts being carried out on the TV news by persons wearing the same uniforms. So maybe the military medical facilities/units might be a more promising place to start than some others…such as an Airborne barracks…???

  39. mary said on March 21st, 2010 at 2:11am #

    The sad news that a Palestinian teenager was killed by the IDF yesterday, when they opened fire on a crowd of stone throwing youths, is buried in this BBC website report.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8577633.stm

    On the other hand, Sky News’ Dominic Waghorn has just been reporting live from the village near Nablus where the funerals of TWO boys are being held today. It follows that the one who was injured yesterday has since died.

    The boys are given no names and little recognition. Imagine if they had been Jewish boys and what a furore would have ensued.

    Waghorn was also suggesting that Netanyahu is about to announce a temporary halt to settlement building. Big deal.

  40. mary said on March 21st, 2010 at 2:40am #

    Mr Ban supports Gaza. So what comes next?

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8578611.stm

    PS Greetings to you too dan e. Solidarity.

  41. dan e said on March 21st, 2010 at 4:06pm #

    jon s said on March 20th, 2010 at 12:33pm

    “Left-Zionist” means striving for a society based on socialism, justice and Israeli-Palestinian peace.”

    The above statement incorporates so much that is fallacious I despair before the task of delineating it all. But just for starters, what do you suppose “jon s” means by “socialism”? This is a word that means so many totally different things to so many people that to use it sans qualification, sans further definition, amounts to nothing but bandying words about. Sound and fury signifying nothing, meaningless blah blah.

    Same with “justice”: the first step toward establishing anything resembling “justice” with respect to the area of the erstwhile “Mandate Palestine” can only be recognition of the illegitimacy of the current Zionist regime. Even if you accept the conventional Colonial Power-imposed version of “international law”, the Zionist Entity in itself is an ongoing Crime Against Humanity. Details of this argument can be found in various recent works by Francis Boyle available from Clarity Press, Atlanta, and in numerous posts by myself under the nom de plumes “Quibono” and “QB” on Indymedia Israel and IMC Palestine which should be available in the Archives for 2002 through 2005.

    “Palestinian-Israel peace” is a fairytale from cloudcuckooland, a purely verbal construct with no realworld referent. Tacitus summed it up: “They make a desolation, and then call it Peace”.
    The Zionist Entity was established through a series of Acts of War, first by the British Empire, then by various Zionist terrorist gangs, and later by said gangs promoted to Statehood status via the US dominated tool of colonialism called the “United Nations”. Still later the Zionist Entity was expanded by violent means, and continues to be maintained by the capacity of the US Militarized State for arbitrary violence. So in actuality the very existence of the Zionist State is an ongoing act of violence. It was created by War and exists only through War. Like the Confederate States of America and the Third Reich, it is an abomination and must be destroyed.

    “Dan e , Interesting that on Zionism “debate ceases” and you switch to ideological warfate mode. Sounds like you’re out of any good arguments.”
    Au Contraire, Mr jon s, I just get tired of repeating myself. All the arguments you make have been made before and refuted countless times by hundreds of distinguished writers. If there are DV readers who haven’t been through all this and want more sources, just indicate that in a post and I’ll supply a bibliography.

  42. Mulga Mumblebrain said on March 22nd, 2010 at 12:04am #

    mary you point out another of the vicious, racist,aspects of Zionist savagery. There was a study made some years ago that noted that the New York Times (owned, like most of the Western media, by Zionist Jews)expended ten times or so more space and effort reporting the death of Israeli children than it did Palestinians. I think it was the fact then, and the case is true of the rest of the sewer of the Western media, that there had been more reportage on the ten times fewer deaths of Israeli children than the Palestinians.
    But how could it be otherwise? Zionism represents Western and Judaic racism in their extremity. The Zionists who are turning Israel into a world centre of terrorism, crime and aggressive violence regard non-Jews as a type of animal, and proclaim it openly. Fundamentalist Judaic authorities openly proclaim that killing civilians is not just permissible but a good deed, and killing children is also permissible. To make things even more chilling, these racist fascists are moving to impose this perverted horror doctrine on the rest of the world, by changing international humanitarian law to suit their, and the West’s, racist purposes.
    Yet, in the face of continuing occupation,child-murder, aggression, violence and terror, hypocrites like jon can practice those Zionist arts of cynical humbug and outright lying, and claim Zionism is ‘socialist’. Socialist Zionism is as Orwellian as ‘war is peace’ and ‘hate is love’. Real socialism is about the fraternity, liberty and equality of humanity, not the locking up of entire populations in concentration camps by racist terrorists who enjoy one of the highest standards of living in the world while their victims rot. Still, telling the ‘Big Lie’ is such a Zionist staple, and the propagation of that lie, over and over again, to, successfully, alas, brainwash the obtunded Western public to see the aggressor as the victim and the imprisoned victims as the aggressors is so insistent, that we cannot possibly be surprised any more. The Zionist led descent into moral wickedness and racist terror presages an age of unprecedented horror,as the Iraqis,the victims of a Zionist ordained and planned war of mass murder,intellectual decapitation, cultural destruction and the deliberate fomenting of civil war, have discovered. Indeed the central feature of the US and Israeli attempts to impose a Zionist/US Reich over the entire planet is the fomenting of civil strife in target societies. They succeeded admirably in Yugoslavia, reached the same ends in the USSR thanks to that cirrhotic slime-bag Yeltsin, have used it again, unsuccessfully so far, against Hezbollah in Lebanon, and are using it again in Iran as they prepare to slake their infinite bloodlust there. In the future we can confidently expect similar efforts, already seen, to continue in China, Zionism’s great enemy of the future, to foment trouble along ethnic and regional lines. These Western fascists,led by Zionism, are clearly in a league of their own in human wickedness,cowardice (always utilising vastly disproportionate violence, even against defenceless civilians)and outright sadism. But this is simply the latest cycle of imperialist and colonialist violence in the 500 year era of Western aggression against the rest of the world, in pursuit of pillage and to put into hideous reality their visceral hatred for non-Westerners.

  43. mary said on March 22nd, 2010 at 1:00am #

    The Zionists lied yet again. Rubber bullets were not used. They were steel bullets with steel casings. This is an e-mail to the BBC from a contributor to medialens, Keith.

    Dear BBC

    Here, a Guardian reporter has done your job for you – http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/mar/21/palestinians-shot-dead-isreal-nablus

    On the first of the two incidents it says “a hospital x-ray of Osaid Qadus, seen by the Guardian, showed a bullet lodged in his brain.”

    And on the later killing it says “The two, who Palestinians claimed were detained while ploughing a field of olive trees near Nablus, were shot several times.”

    How come the BBC can’t manage to report the Palestinian side of the story?

    We often get spoon fed the Israeli line that is usually some kind of variation of the following: Israel says: It wasn’t us – we weren’t there. Then after an eye-witness or a report heard on Israeli Army radio: We were there but it wasn’t us. Then after more evidence is uncovered: We were there, and it was us, but we weren’t firing at them. Then: We were there, it was us, and we were firing at them, but they fired first. By the time we learn that there is no evidence of anyone else doing any firing, time has passed and there’s another incident where Israel says the ‘it wasn’t us we didn’t do it’ line.

    You only have to think of how the Thomas Hurndall story was first reported, or perhaps the Rachel Corrie story, or stories from Operation Cast Lead and the attack on Lebanon, to know that all too often the first Israeli reports of an incident often turn out to be false.

    Yet here we are with the BBC once again reporting on what the Israelis say about a killing and failing to give any balance by reporting the Palestinian side.

    Who knows what the truth is, but it is the BBC’s job to be balanced, so balance it out with a report on what the Palestinians have to say. And as the Guardian managed to get someone in there to actually take a look at the x-ray showing a bullet lodged in the victims brain, there really is no excuse.

    (And still no headline for the killing of four Palestinians by Israeli occupation forces who are in the illegally occupied West Bank to protect the illegal Jewish settlers)

    ~~~~~~~~~

    This morning the BBC treated us to a report from their reporter in Israel, Tim Franks. He has just been outed as a graduate of the Habonim Dror Zionist youth movement so his impartiality is very much called into question. Look at the link to the Wikiedia page within this link to see who his fellow graduates are.
    (cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/authors.php?auid=17968 )

    Then later came an interview with the Mayor of Jerusalem who is visiting London and news that Netanyahu is in Washington for the AIPAC conference and a meeting with Obama later.

    There is also a BBC website report this morning saying that Netanyahu has confirmed to Ban Ki Moon that settlement building will carry on as scheduled. More mud in Ban’s eye who said yesterday that it was totally illegal and causes “unacceptable suffering”.
    (news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8579273.stm)
    ‘No concession’ on Jewish homes – Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu rules out any concession on building in East Jerusalem, hours before he leaves for Washington.

    You can see how the Zionist message is being given out so efficiently by the BBC/ZBC.

  44. mary said on March 22nd, 2010 at 1:23am #

    Ban Ki Moon also said this last year –

    “…Few people know that Israel is the only state to be given a conditional admission. Under General Assembly Resolution 273, Israel was admitted on the condition that it grant all Palestinians the right to return to their homes and receive compensation for lost or damaged property, according to General Assembly Resolution 194 paragraph 11. Suffice to say, Israel has never lived up to these terms, and never intended to.

    “For 60 years Israel has violated its terms of admission, and for 60 years the UN has done nothing about it. It has watched as Israel heaped misery upon misery on Palestine, and violated international law with impunity. After ‘Operation Cast Lead,’ no person, no country, no democracy can look at Israel without thinking of the inhuman slaughter and destruction committed by the axis powers in World War II, though one could have said the same about numerous past massacres. What atrocities might the world have been spared if the UN had refused to admit Israel 60 years ago?

    “On Nov. 29, 1947, it passed General Assembly Resolution 181, ‘The Partition Plan,’ to carve a Jewish state out of Arab Palestine. However, it was never ratified by the Security Council, and so does not exist in law, which means the UN played no role in the creation of Israel. Nevertheless, ‘The Partition Plan’ was utterly illegal and a violation of the UN Charter, because the UN had no right or power to take land from one people and give it to another.”

    This is the Resolution 273
    http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/044/44/IMG/NR004444.pdf?OpenElement

    Laughing like a drain?

  45. jon s said on March 22nd, 2010 at 1:44pm #

    Dan e, deadbeat, max,
    I used the term “socialism” in the conventional modern-political sense, mainly a movement which seeks to replace capitalism with a system based on equality, collective ownership of the means of production and human solidarity.
    Labor-Zionism was a major trend within the Zionist movement in it’s formative years. Thinkers such as Borochov combined a Marxist methodology with a Zionist agenda. Many young, idealistic Jews were influenced by socialist and revolutionary movements so when they immigrated to Israel they sought to establish a socialist society, with collective working-class ownership (primarily through the Histadrut labor union) . I could also mention the kibbutz movement, probably the best example in the world of utopian socialism.
    Unfortunately these tendencies have been in retreat in Israeli society for decades. People like myself think that those ideas -updated to 21st century realities – still have merit, and are worth fighting for.
    Denying Israel’s very legitimacy and right to exist is not useful, to put it mildly. Israel is not going to disappear or evaporate, and neither are the Palestinians. What’s needed is to find away for both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and dignity.

  46. mary said on March 23rd, 2010 at 1:50am #

    Buried (like the four dead Palestinians) at the end of a website report on ‘Bibi’ (what a ridiculous name for a thug!) saying that Jerusalem is their capital and has been for 3,000 years and that they will continue building.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8582190.stm

    The Zionist blood lust is at a raised level.
    ——————————————————————————–
    Meanwhile, at least three people were injured in an Israeli air strike overnight in the east of Gaza City, Palestinian officials said.

    Israel said the air strike in Gaza was retaliation for rocket attacks (photo of wounded Palestinians).

    The Israeli military said its aircraft had targeted a weapons storage facility in retaliation for Palestinian rocket attacks since Thursday, one killing a Thai farm worker.

    In a separate incident, an Israeli soldier was shot dead by his comrades on the Gaza border.

    An army spokesman said one group of soldiers had opened fire on another after mistaking them for Palestinians who had crossed the border into Israel.

    Three Palestinian men who were later captured and taken in for questioning were found to be unarmed.

  47. mary said on March 27th, 2010 at 9:34am #

    Some good news – Mohammed Omer the young photo journalist from Gaza has been given a US visa for his speaking tour. Many of us wrote to the US Ambassador in The Hague, Mrs Fay Hartog Levin, in support of Mo. He is such a lovely and good young man.

    http://www.muzzlewatch.com/2010/03/26/update-mohammad-omer-got-his-visa-to-come-to-us/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:%20Muzzlewatch%20(MuzzleWatch

    It is just a shame that Dr Barghouti did not get a Canadian visa as Kim said. Shame on Harper & co.