Israeli Aparth-ired
Re: Israeli Apartheid Week begins, Feb. 13
The article on “Israeli Apartheid Week” was very informative but ineffective because it neglected to deal with the issue as it exists outside the U of T universe. First of all, it must be noted that the majority of people, though often silent, agree that a “two-state solution” is the only realistic option. One Jewish or Palestinian state that envelops the entire region is unrealistic and a waste of energy to discuss. U of T’s bubble allows us to get worked up and argue about unlikely realities.
The Varsity should in future connect its readership to some of the actual realities over there, in addition to reporting on the various events going on over here. As well, it would be nice if some of the organizations educating us on campus about this issue could take a peek outside our little bubble too.
Daniel Roth
• It seems incredibly ironic to me that the Arab Students Collective has decided to devote an entire week for the purpose of exposing Israel’s supposed apartheid policies. This ignores the nearly one million Arabs who are Israeli citizens with considerably higher living standards than their fellow Arabs in the Middle East, and who enjoy full political rights, in contrast to the majority of Arab countries where most Arabs themselves do not possess political rights.
The irony, moreover, lies in the fact that what in the past was a large Jewish community in Arab countries has since 1948 been reduced drastically due to the Arab countries’ own apartheid policies. Surely it should come as no surprise that Jews are not only unwelcome in these countries but that they have also been subject to repeated acts of violence that forced their flight to, you guessed it, Israel.
We should not discount the hardship and injustice that has befallen the Palestinian people. I would have no problem whatsoever with a Palestinian awareness week. But by inciting hatred against Israel, the ASC has done everyone a disservice.
Kenny Grad
• This article consisted of biased journalism and was nearly a propaganda piece for the extremists running this event. It omitted the most basic counterarguments to the apartheid claim, including the fact that the prime minister of South Africa does not think Israel is an apartheid state, and that there is affirmative action for Muslim and non-Jewish minorities in Israel.
Unlike Muslim Israelis, Palestinians were never Israeli citizens. They are refugees in the West Bank and Gaza area, occupied in the 1967 war. Muslim Israelis, about 15% of Israel’s citizens, have voting rights and are represented in government. There is an Arab-Israeli judge on the Supreme Court.
The article claimed Arab-Israelis cannot own certain parts of the land, which is false. As stated by the Israeli Supreme Court: “The principle of equality prohibits the state from distinguishing between its citizens on the basis of religion or nationality. The principle also applies to the allocation of state land.”
The article did not mention the real controversial issues about the conference. Last year, the conference condoned terrorism, the murder of innocent people. It calls for the destruction of Israel. Many said that last year it condoned general hate against Israelis in Palestinian society, and that it made racist allusions to Jewish organizations in general.
The event organizers claim “apartheid” and want a “one-state” solution not because of equality but because the group needs to justify these other disgusting views.
Simon Lightstone
• Throughout “Know Radical Islam Week” my colleagues and I encountered many arguments diminishing the magnitude of Hitler’s genocide from the official six to roughly one million Jews. Indeed, one of the Arab Students Collective’s main features for “Israeli Apartheid Week” is Professor Ward Churchill, who claimed that the victims of 9/11 were “little Eichmanns.” President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of the Islamic Republic of Iran is not the only one questioning the Holocaust.
Since the defining parameters of the Holocaust have been challenged, I feel it only fair to redefine Holocaust denial. Equating innocent victims of terrorism with Hitler’s concentration camp mastermind (Eichmann) is categorically denying the enormity of Jewish suffering under Hitler. Holocaust denial is above all the refusal to respect Jewish national self-determination in spite of the reoccurring probability of genocide. Severing the State of Israel from the Holocaust is historical revisionism.
Though the ASC believes that by having Jewish speakers they are not being anti-Semitic, ‘Israeli Apartheid Week’ calls for the destruction of the Jewish state. And though Nadia Daar claims that the ASC “believes in a secular democratic state regardless of race or religion,” she fails to condemn terrorism. More importantly, Daar overlooks the fact that the Hamas victory means the rule of Islamic law in disputed territories of the West Bank, a more honest indication of what the ASC’s putative “one-state” would really entail.
Joshua Rosenblum
President, Betar-Tagar
• The caption on the front page picture of Monday’s Varsity was misleading and false. The activists demonstrating against Israel in the picture are not South African, as you claim, but foreign protestors, converging on a UN Conference that happened to be in South Africa. It would be more interesting for your newspaper if they were South African nationals equating Israel’s practices with those of their own country. However, that is not the case. There’s nothing South African about this.
Lia Katz
[The 2001 World Conference against Racism held in Durban, South Africa drew a mix of international and local delegates. Activists from South Africa and elsewhere demonstrated against Israel’s allegedly apartheid policies. -Ed.]
Debate out of toon
Re: Muslim ‘toons debated at HH, Feb. 13
It’s great to see that U of T faculty members and students are addressing the cartoon controversy, although I’m not so sure that both sides of the issue were fairly represented in this debate. According to the article, all of the speakers in the panel spoke against the cartoons and criticized the decision to publish them.
The violent tone of the protests and the reports that the Syrian and Iranian governments have been deliberately fanning the flames of this controversy suggests that this issue is more than a simple violation of the rules of free speech. It is surprising that none of the professors took the opportunity to speak out against this manipulation, and it is equally surprising that the U of T Anti-Racism and Cultural Diversity office did not invite any speakers to argue in favour of the decision to print the cartoons.
Maya Kesler
Go for the dough
Re: Time to torch the Olympics, Feb. 13
Could you please make sure that your opinions writers get their facts straight in any rants they choose to write? In Graham F. Scott’s piece on the Olympics there was a grievous error that cut short one of his main points.
“…the poor citizens of Torino, Beijing, Vancouver, and cities of the damned yet to come toss truckloads of government cash onto the pyre of fiscal ruin, bravely boasting that they will be the first in history who actually make a net profit on the Games….”
This statement is completely false, since there have been Olympic Games with a profit. The Salt Lake City games four years go made a profit of $56 million. Also, the Sydney games of 2000, the Atlanta games of 1996 and the Los Angeles Olympics of 1984 have posted a profit to my knowledge.
If you could mention this in a coming edition it would be nice, that is if you live up to the same journalistic standards as the big boys.
Josh T.
Faith and country: cheek to cheek
To those who are having trouble equating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism, think about this: Israel is the only Jewish state on earth, thereby making it a state associated with a religion. It would be pretty obvious that one who is anti-Mecca is also anti-Islam. Judaism has a deep connection with Israel and one cannot go on without the other. Those who are discrediting “Know Radical Islam Week” just because Betar-Tagar, a Zionist organization, is sponsoring it, should strongly reconsider their argument. The event does not target Islam, but rather radical Islam, which poses a threat for everyone including Muslims themselves.
Anonymous
