Very nasty. And dangerous -- an attempt to set intra-national groups apart. All the Parties oppose anti-Semitism. This is not a wedge issue:
Liberals say Tory leaflets suggest the Grits are anti Semitic
Source: The Canadian Press
OTTAWA_ The Liberals say Conservative MPs have distributed taxpayer-funded leaflets which suggest the Grits are anti-Semitic.
They say the pamphlets, which were mailed to households in at least four ridings with large Jewish populations, are full of lies and represent a new low in petty partisanship.
They want an apology.
The leaflets ask voters to choose which federal political leader best represents and defends the values of Canada's Jewish community.
They compare Prime Minister Stephen Harper's strong support for Israel to alleged waffling on the part of the Liberals, including their participation in what the Tories call the ``overtly anti-Semitic'' 2001 Durban conference on racism.
Montreal Liberal MP Irwin Cotler, who attended the United Nations-sponsored conference, says Israel actually asked Canadian representatives to remain at Durban to ``bear witness'' to anti-Semitic rants by some delegations.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
41 comments:
I haven't read the entire 10%er, but I don't see where it accuses the Libs of being anti-semites.
It does however state that Ignatieff accused the Israelis of war crimes, which he did indeed do.
Considering he wasn't losing any sleep (his words) over the 2006 conflict, perhaps the realization that Israel were war criminals came to him in a dream.
The Conservatives owe the Liberals no apology for the fact that their leader inserted his foot in his mouth.
More faux outrage from a morally bankrupt party.
Who was that Liberal who made the comment about Bob Rae's wife during the Liberal leadership convention that Dion won and Iggy lost?
i'm still looking for a better picture of the entire 10 percenter but based on the extract in the article, the mailer looks 100% accurate which is a lot more than could be said about Liberals' "body bags" one.
Iffnatieff made the statements; he's just going to have to wear them.
I can`t remember the last time I saw anything posted on the liblogs that was pro-Israel, pro-Jewish or even pro-Christian for that matter.
I don`t see where the the Conservatives have accused the Libs of being anti-semetic, but reading what I have on liblogs, it doesn`t sound like most libs are on the side of Israel either.
Unrelated to this current non scandal, it does occur to me that there does seem to be a resurgence of anti-semitism in the world today.
Lead by the UN and carried by the political left, I personally find it abhorent in this day and age.
I know many conservative minded people and I cannot think of one that I could identify as anti-semitic. If fact, I would consider most of them to be very pro Israel.
If you want to find one, they are much easier to spot amongst the political left.
I don't see an accusation of anti-semitism, I see a factual pamphlet outlining how the Liberal party is not a strong supporter of Israel. From the lack of support in the UN, to Durban, to Ignatieff's war crimes statement, to the Liberal MP (Boris somethingorother) who made stupid statements while being lead around by a Hezbollah shill, to Denis Coderre marching with Hezbollah supporters, to the disgraceful conduct on Liblogs, and so many more,I can't help but wonder what the Jewish community ever saw in the party of Pierre "Wasser" Trudeau.
I want to be clear that support for Israel and against anti-Semitism is not dependent on which way Jews vote, but it is a head shaker, sometimes.
"I see a factual pamphlet..."
When did delisting Hezbollah as a terrorist organization become the official position of the Liberal Party?
Who from the Canadian government attended Durban 1, and why?
Statements are not factual when they are made without their proper context. They are statements that are intended to be interpreted in a manner that is not factual.
Just for Gayle from the CBC...Iggy, out of the frying pan into the fire...
After the air strike that killed more than two dozen people, Ignatieff told the Toronto Star in August that civilian deaths were inevitable in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah.
"This is the kind of dirty war you're in when you have to do this and I'm not losing sleep about that," he said.
Ignatieff soon expressed regret over those remarks and sought to explain what he should have said on Sunday.
"I was a professor of human rights and I am also a professor of the laws of war and what happened in Qana was a war crime and I should have said that," he said.
Oh and Gayle, he is another quote from Ignatieff, this time from the CTV, dealing with your context remark...
"One rule I understand about this is that you're fully responsible for your words. You're even responsible when they're quoted out of context, as I believe I was in this instance," he said.
I'm not so sure the Liberal party works against antisemitism. I can distinctly recall several Liberal MP's, especially in Quebec, as well as Liberal bloggers being rabidly antisemetic and marching with terrorist sympathizers against Isreal during its defense of its border communities against attack by Lebanese terrorists.
The Conservatives were not spewing anti-semetism at that time and stood by Israel's right to defend its citizens from attack.
I was a Liberal at that time and it's one of the reasons I'm not any longer.
And Yes anti-semetic comments were made about Rae's wife at the leadership convention, also by liberals.
I believe the Liberal Party has become anti-semetic.
I was there. I've seen it first hand. Just check out the blogs, far less the MP's wordsor actions.
Well, looks like the Conservatives got their talking points out in a timely manner...
Thanks Jim
Now, can you answer my questions? Or do you think that half the truth is truth enough?
Is it truthful to point out someone said something, and omit the fact that person also apologized for saying it? If you do not do the latter it gives the impression the original statement stands.
Hence my point about allowing so-called factual statements stand in order to lead to a non-factual conclusion.
"I was a Liberal at that time and it's one of the reasons I'm not any longer.'
Of course you were.
I totally believe you, anonymous blogger.
Funny how so many of you so-called "former" liberals manage to post about how some horrible thing the liberals did changed you into a conservative.
Anyway...
Careful Gayle, you might give the Cons an idea for another 10%er...
Iggy was for torture...then he recanted.
Iggy was for war in Iraq...then he recanted.
Iggy called the Israelis war criminals...then he recanted.
I see a disturbing trend here. Can someone please clarify for me what Iggy actually believes in (for longer than say, a month).
Harper has said things over the years that might be painful to him today, but I don't see him recanting his statements in the NY Times. I think it is because he actually believes in the things he says.
Sure, years ago he called Canada a "Northern European welfare state"...that made the left quite angry. But it is a fair statement and he has never taken it back to try and appease the bleeding hearts.
Harper and Iggy...apples and oranges.
Iggy wanted to have an election...
Wow Jim
Two responses and no answer to my question.
I wonder why...
Actually, I don't wonder at all. I think it is totally obvious why you are avoiding the questions.
Gayle is obfuscating the issue to try to achieve a degree of legitimacy for the liberals. Unfortunately for her, it's not working and she's coming across as a liberal apologist.
"Is it truthful to point out someone said something, and omit the fact that person also apologized for saying it."
I think liberals are a bunch of unthinking airheads who wouldn't know a good idea if it smacked them across the face.
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean it. Am I forgiven?
Hi silly little anon(s).
I take it you find my questions too hard to answer too?
I love it when the silly little anon brigade comes out and proves their arguments are baseless by attacking commentors rather than addressing the points.
It makes it so easy to see that they are unable to think beyond their CPC talking points.
Let's quote Warren Kinsella from this very Liblogs site back in September:
"I've written to the Liblogs folks and asked them to remove me from their list. Anti-Semitism - which someone manifested there today, and which I know Liblogs condemns - is something I cannot abide."
At least Kinsella has the balls to call them on it. And so do the Conservatives.
Maybe read your quote again. An accusation of anti-semitism levelled against 1 person, an acknowlegment that does not apply to everyone else.
What you are saying is kind of like saying the entire conservative party hates Africans because Rob Anders called Nelson Nandella a terrorist.
There has been more than 1 blogger kicked off of Liblogs Gayle. Check With Cherniak if you don't believe me.
So why did the Liberals go to Durban Gayle? Please tell us.
The Liberals do not want to delist Hezbollah Gayle, they were against them going onto the list to begin with. Same thing but context is key.
If Israel deliberately bombed civilians in Lebanon, then it committed a war crime. In what way would such a statement be anti-Semitic, since it refers to actions of a state and not to Jewish people in general?
And yes, the Conservatives are repulsive, misappropriating our tax dollars to mail out lies.
Here you go silly little anon:
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/727587--liberals-say-tory-flyers-accuse-them-of-anti-semitism?bn=1
The former Liberal attorney general noted it was a Liberal government in 2002 that banned financial support to Hamas and Hezbollah.
"Let the facts show ... that it was the Liberal Party in 2002 ... (that) listed Hamas and Hezbollah as terrorist organizations. This notion that we somehow sought the delisting of Hezbollah or somehow (we are) indulging terrorism is a scandalous misrepresentation," Cotler said.
The reference to Durban, the controversial UN World Conference against Racism held from Aug. 31 to Sept. 8, 2001, in Durban, South Africa, which provided a platform for anti-Israeli sentiment, is also misleading, the Liberals said.
Cotler said he went to Durban 1 as an observer and noted that the then-Israeli government specifically asked Canada to remain at the conference "and make its voice felt and bear witness to what was happening."
May I thank all of you who posted here in defence of the conservatives. You managed to prove the point these leaflets are false, and that they are accusing the LPC of being anti-semitic.
You have proved why these leaflets are unethical - because people like you will leap to the wrong (false) conclusion about the LPC.
So - thank you, one and all.
Dream on, Gayle. Your defense of the indefensible liberal stance on Israel was less than stellar. Asking questions that you thought should be answered is hardly reason to think you've won anything. If anything you've lost by aligning yourself with the anti-Israeli undercurrent that seems to be prevalent within some members of the liberal mindset.
Silly little anon
I have demonstrated the leaflet was full of lies. I know it, you know it.
But you keep on pretending that repeating all your false statements in the face of evidence to tge contrary makes you look like you have not been proven wrong.
Actually, Gayle, you haven't demonstrated anything. But it doesn't matter what I think anyway...it's what the public will think that counts and I don't see this playing out well for the liberals.
"I have demonstrated the leaflet was full of lies. I know it, you know it. "
You've done no such thing. The Liberal party has not been a friend of Israel, no matter the claims of Iggy. Did Coderre march with Hezbollah supporters? Did Iggy make those statements? Dis the Liberal government abstain on all the anti-Israel motions at the UN? The truth hurts, Gayle, and it's pretty obvious this 10%er hit the bullseye.
Did the LPC support delisting Hezbollah as the pamphlet claims? The answer to that question would be "no", for those of you who are fact challenged.
Did the liberal government participate in Durban knowing it was going to be a platform for racism, as the leaflet implies? Again the answer is "no".
Does the leaflet explain the circumstances of the liberal government's attendance? Does it explain we were represented by Irwin Cotler?
Does the leaflet explain Ignatieff apologized for his comments?
Lies and half-truths, designed to give a false impression. How do you define dishonesty?
Should the LPC pass out leaflets suggesting all consrvatives are white supremists by referring to Rob Anders calling Nelson Mandella a terrorist?
Face it. You support liars. Your defence of the pamphlet only brings you down to their level.
I wish I could take some of the anti-Israel rants I've read from liblogs and give them to the MSM. It would be great to see Liberal popular support down to single digits.
Really? Well if we took some of the racist stuff from the BT's and passed it around, I am sure the LPC would look like saints in comarison. Maybe we could post some off the things they say about Quebec and Ontario too. That ought to be good for a few laughs.
In any event, the media does have access to all the trash on all the blogs. Perhaps they are smart enugh to know that what a private blogger says has nothing to do with the official position of the party.
"Maybe we could post some off the things they say about Quebec and Ontario too. That ought to be good for a few laughs."
That would be good for a few laughs. We're still "laughing" about the one-finger salute Trudeau gave the west. Or how about playing off regions for the same of political expediency like the liberals do? That's why there is nary a liberal west of Manitoba and likely to stay that way for a while.
I'm not a BT blogger, but I have never seen the anti-semetic, anti-Christian, anti-American garbage on the BT site like I have on liblogs. I, for one, am glad you're finally being called on it.
Gayle doesn't deal in facts.
Gayle is not a single person.
Gayle is an open internet persona used by operatives in the LPC war room.
Ha ha ha.
You give me a lot of credit, but I do not think I am that influential.
Thanks though.
What does being a comment-bot used by every schmuck in the LPC war room have to do with influence?
You delusion is astounding. Warren, is that you?
You're welcome, I suppose.
Sigh...
Poor Todd is stilll confusing liblogs with the LPC.
Cute though how he only recognizes anti-Christian anbd anti-American as racism. Guess anti-coloured people stuff one finds on BT blogs is not racism in his books. If you do not recognize it, perhaps that says something about your perspective.
As for pitting regions against each other, Harper has that one down to a science.
PS I live in Alberta, so spare me the whole "big bad Trudeau picked on us" crap. Harper's the one catering to vote rich Ontario and Quebec these days.
Oh poor Jim. You are really desperate for an excuse for supporting the lies in this leaflet, and perhaps for the fact your arguments never seem to hold up to the facts.
Don't blame me Jim. Learn to take responsibility.
I don't need an excuse Gayle, like most Canadians, I can read.
Did Iggy accuse Israel of war crimes?
Yes, yes he did. But he apologized so that makes it the same as never having said it, right Gayle?
Sorry, but no it doesn't.
Your boy seems to spend a lot of time recanting and clarifying, flipping and flopping.
Pretty hard to get a handle on what he actually does stand for...same goes for your trainwreck of a party actually.
And I don't blame you Gayle, in a way, I kind of pity you. You have the koolaid poisoning worse than most.
Meanwhile, I'll be right here taking responsibility for my actions, just like always.
No one denies Ignatieff nade those comments Jim. The problem is the flier conveniently leaves the apology out, which leaves the impression Ignatieff stands by those words when he doesn't. It is not about the apology making it "better"; it is about being truthful. One can come to their own conclusion about the sincerity of the apology, but that is hard to do when the leaflet falsely gives the impression an apology was never proffered.
In any event, at least you appear to have abandonned any pretence that the other assetions in the flier were true, so good for you.
As for taking responsibility for your actions, again, good for you. I look forward to the new, improved Jim.
"Israel admits phosphorous bombing." (in Lebanon)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6075408.stm
"Israel may have misused cluster bombs in Lebanon..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/29/world/africa/29iht-israel.4392851.html?_r=1
So why isn't anyone here discussing whether or not Israel actually did in fact commit war crimes? In my opinion, Ignatieff should not have apologized.
Post a Comment