City
Pride funding safe for 2012
Pride funding is safe for another year. Although Councillor James Pasternak hinted that he'd submit a motion to make festival funding contingent upon the non-participation of activist group Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA), council came to a compromise that preserves support of the parade and condemns the use of the term "Israeli Apartheid."
This is the second year in a row that Pride funding has been drawn into question on account QuAIA's potential participation. Last year, the group ultimately agreed not to participate so as to avoid jeopardizing the parade and affiliated events. This year, however, the group has announced its intentions to march.
Today's vote thus makes sense. The City has officially distanced itself from QuAIA and maintained its support for one of our most important cultural events without adopting some contingency-based scenario over a decision that organizers have very little control over in the first place (i.e. who decides to show up).
The conclusion of this particular chapter doesn't, however, close the book on this issue. Far from it. In the coming weeks the executive committee will meet to consider a staff report on revisions to the anti-discrimination policy related to the expression "Israeli Apartheid." How exactly that will play out — and whether or not it will impact future Pride funding — is not yet clear, but you can bet we're in for more heated debate.
Photo by Jen Tse
Discussion
68 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
Are you serious?!
Many prominent people - including Jimmy Carter and Desmond Tutu - have described the Israeli occupation as a form of apartheid. In fact, Desmond Tutu has stated that what the Palestinians are suffering now is worse than what Black South Africans faced.
Is one no longer allowed to criticize Israeli government policy without being branded "anti-Semitic"?
“In my opinion, Netanyahu brought up several obstacles to peace in his speech that others before him have not placed. He... demands that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state, even though 20% of Israel’s citizens are not Jewish.” LIKE WHAT!!! Having the Palestinians recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state is at the crux of this matter. Israel has the right to self-determination and this movement, this "Israeli Apartheid" movement seeks to DENY THIS RIGHT.
It is clear that QuAIA seeks the delegitimization of the State of Israel when they say "Ending Israel’s occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall" - Please READ THAT - THE COLONIZATION OF ALL ARAB LANDS is what they are saying. They basically expect Israel to open it's doors to the surrounding Arab countries so that they may flood in with Arab Muslims.
UNWRA establishes a status for Palestinian refugees that IT NOT GRANTED TO ANY OTHER REFUGEE IN THE WORLD, and that is the seemingly right to carry over refugee status to ones offspring. This is how they claim there are so many refugees. The reality is, by applying the same rules to Palestinian refugees that applies to all other refugees, there are maybe some 50,000, NOT 5 million.
Further, unlike ALL OTHER REFUGEES, Palestinian refugees, in most cases, HAVE NOT, AND WILL NOT be absorbed by their ARAB host countries and granted citizenship. This is done intentionally, with the sole intent to keep this as an ongoing problem.
Israel is constantly being singled out, and expected to adhere to policies WHICH NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD, PAST OR PRESENT, is expected to adhere to. This is the double standard, and this is anti-Semitism.
The reality is, THIS BOYCOTT IS NOT "JUST" A CRITICISM OF THE policies of the current ISRAELI LEADERSHIP, BECAUSE this movement SEEKS TO HARM ISRAELI CITIZENS, INSTITUTIONS, and government, no matter where THEY ARE IN THE WORLD.
As Canadians, I thought we were better than this....
I dont really give a shit about QUAIA or who wants to march or who doesnt, but surely the organizers can stop them from marching, especially if it is possibly damaging to the parade itself.
And QUAIA should really show a bit more respect to the rest of the people who enjoy and go to Pride. If the consequences of them marching is that funding is pulled for following years, all they will have accomplished is to make themselves look like assholes.
and all this anti-semite talk is so effing stupid. There are countries alla round the world where anti-semitism is alive and well and rampant throughout the population. Canada is not one of those places, and people who criticize the Israeli government are not anti-semites. Do yourselves a favour and stop this ridiculous talk.
Signed,
An Anti-Israel Jew.
The majority of Jewish people, though NOT of a single race, are white. Further, Arabs have historically been racially classified as white. So, NO, it is NOT CORRECT to use the term Apartheid when referring to Israel.
The reality is, the main cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and in fact, many conflicts in the world today, is religion. The vast majority of Arabs are Muslim.
1)racial segregation; specifically : a former policy of segregation and political and economic discrimination against non-European groups in the Republic of South Africa
"noun
[mass noun] historical
(in South Africa) a policy or system of segregation or discrimination on grounds of race.
segregation on grounds other than race:
sexual apartheid
Adopted as a slogan in the 1948 election by the successful Afrikaner National Party, apartheid extended and institutionalized existing racial segregation. Despite rioting and terrorism at home and isolation abroad from the 1960s onwards, the white regime maintained the apartheid system with only minor relaxation until February 1991"
just admit you didn't know the full meaning of the word and move on..
Thinking about the Palestinian situation, something occurred to me. The complaints of the "Palestinian" Muslims, their separation, is absolutely the opposite of their complaints when settling anywhere else. And this is important. If you look at areas in Europe and the US where there are large Muslim settlements, there exist "no-go" areas, where the Muslims force out non-Muslims, including state law enforcement, and have instituted their own Sharia Islamic law. Now, to me, this seeming contradiction is worth examining.
Finally, dick rivers, you clearly have little knowledge of previous expansions of the Muslim empires, including the most recent Ottoman empire, who colonized what was at the time, 2/3 of Christian-held lands.
Colonization, contrary to your opinion, is not solely a "Western" invention. In fact, many areas of the Middle East were "colonized". If you look back at the history of Egypt, for example, you will see nothing of Islam in their rich dynastic legacy.
In modern times, I would rather live in the "colonies" where the culture and institutions respect and protect human rights and the rule of law, than live in those "colonies" that do NOT.
as for your little history lesson, i am well aware of the ottoman empire and the colonization of the world in general. where did i claim that colonization was a "western invention"?? if you recall, i said "neocolonialism" is the agenda of the west (or "developed world", whatever you wanna call it) which it is. you clearly believe it's being done with good intentions and you are not alone in that.. i think the majority of canadians would agree with you, but this is irrelevant to the debate at hand and i can't help but think the only reason you keep ranting about it is because you're trying to save face.
In actuality, there is A MUCH GREATER INFLUX OF IMMIGRANTS INTO THE WEST than anywhere else, which suggests the very opposite of what you are saying.
On the topic of history, it may surprise you to learn that the vast majority of archaeological evidence, excluding that of ancient Egypt, from around the edges of the Mediterranean are in fact Phoenician, Roman and Jewish. These ancient cultural artefacts directly tie the history of the region to modern day "Western" states, including the state of Israel.
For example, I am sure you must have heard of the dead sea scrolls, which were written in Hebrew. It may surprise you to learn that these were discovered in the West Bank.
The current Canadian government is the most pro-Israel government in the world (save perhaps the US) so unfortunately so much of the information we receive about Israel/Palestine is little more than state propaganda.
Second, the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem were in Jordanian hands. Violating solemn agreements, Jordan denied Jews access to their holiest places in eastern Jerusalem. To make matters still worse, they destroyed many of those sites.
Meanwhile, the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control, with harsh military rule imposed on local residents."
I find it very interesting that the people who are offended by the term "Israeli Apartheid" take issue with the word "Apartheid" rather than "Israeli". After all, it really is the U.S who is committing apartheid through Israel. Israel rarely ever acts without her master's consent.
'If you look at areas in Europe and the US where there are large Muslim settlements, there exist "no-go" areas, where the Muslims force out non-Muslims, including state law enforcement, and have instituted their own Sharia Islamic law. Now, to me, this seeming contradiction is worth examining.'
I was not aware that there were areas that had Sharia law in the U.S. and Europe, or that there were any that were allowed. This sound close to racism for me for you to be saying that.
You say "the 'occupation' of the West Bank is recognized as illegal under international law" BUT YOU DO NOT PROVIDE ME WITH ANY ACTUAL LAW, and there can only be two reasons for this: 1) you DON'T KNOW AND/OR 2)THERE IS NO SUCH LAW
And with regards to your comment "it really is the U.S who is committing apartheid through Israel", WELL, ALL THAT TELLS ME IS THAT YOU KNOW VERY LITTLE about the history of the current crisis. FOR EXAMPLE, DID YOU KNOW THAT THE US OPPOSED THE CREATION OF ISRAEL? NO, the US has not been nearly as good an ally to Israel as they should have been.
It was Britain, following the allied victory in WWI, and through the subsequent formation of the British Mandate for Palestine, that provided the initial legal support.
Not sure why everyone is getting so upset about it. One religious run country is fighting another religious run country. No matter who wins we will end up with a country run by religion, which will screw everyone over eventually. Of course, if Israel loses I guess it frees up the rest of the mideast to direct all their hate and anger toward the west, so I we should probably cheer for Israel so they can hold them off as long as possible for us. Unless Israel and Iran nuke the whole world in their conflict; in that case screw the lot of them.