TORONTO, Oct. 26 /CNW/ - The following is the text of a letter sent today by CAW president Buzz Hargrove to Canadian Islamic Congress leader Dr. Elmasry:

"Dear Mr. Elmasry,

Your remarks on the Michael Coren Show and later repeated to a Globe and Mail reporter "any Israeli over the age of 18 could be targets for attack" are deplorable. Your attempt to blame others by calling it a misinterpretation will not work.

Being leader of the Canadian Islamic Congress Dr. Elmasry surely means you are expected to lead by example. Your assertion that you were simply trying to express the view of many Palestinians is not plausible. Your irresponsible remarks have harmed the reputation of the Canadian Islamic Congress and unfortunately created a suspicion in the minds of Canadians about the work of the Islamic Congress.

Instead of denying your comments, you should make a public apology and step down from the Presidency of the Canadian Islamic Congress. This action on your part would strengthen the Islamic Congress in the minds of Canadians and hopefully control the damage you have done as well as help narrow the divide between the Jewish and Muslim communities."

[ 30 October 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Once again Buzz Hargrove and the CAW do the uncomfortable and unpopular thing these days, and show why they are Canada's most progressive major union by challenging anti-semitism.

---

I beg to differ. It is very popular to denounce anti-semitism. It is also very popular to bash Muslims and Arabs.

What is "uncomfortable and unpopular" is to denounce pro-Israeli's outrageous statements. And "progressive" Buzz Hargrove failed that test.

Please read the following statement by Omar Alghabra, president of the Canadian Arab Federation:

quote:

---

While the comments made by Dr. Elmasry are indefensible and have been rejected by the majority of Arab and Muslim Canadians including our organization, I find it quite fascinating how the media ignored another equally disturbing comment made on the same show that evening.

Adam Aptowitzer, the Ontario chair of the B'nai Brith Institute for International Affairs, who was a co-panellist then, admitted near the end of the show that the Israeli military employs terrorist tactics that harms civilians, but justified it by claiming that it saves Israeli lives.

It was quite troubling.

Mr. Coren, the host, challenged him immediately by reminding him that the other side can apply the same logic when explaining terrorist acts.

Here you have a reprehensible comment made by an important spokesperson of a Canadian institution publicly stating that terrorism is an acceptable tactic against civilians if it was deemed necessary. How different is that from the logic advertised by some terrorist organizations?

What is more troubling was the complete absence of media attention to that shameful statement. Where was the media in challenging that statement? Where were the Jewish organizations and leaders in rejecting that logic? Where was the public outrage and demands for apology or resignation?

In spite of of the current and extremely difficult circumstances that Palestinians are experiencing in the Occupied Territories and in spite of the overwhelming sympathy for their struggle of self determination and freedom, most Muslim and Arab Canadians rushed to reject any form of terrorism regardless of its justification. Will the defenders of Israeli policy take the moral high ground and condemn the terrorist tactics conducted by the Israeli military as admitted by B'nai Brith?

Omar Alghabra,
President, Canadian Arab Federation
Toronto, Canada

---

[ 31 October 2004: Message edited by: lacabombi ]

[ 31 October 2004: Message edited by: lacabombi ]
Edited to add "Arab" in Canadian Arab Federation.

[ 31 October 2004: Message edited by: lacabombi ]

i am a bit confused ...

you say that buzz failed the test.

are you saying that the caw should not have said anything at all?

i have always been proud of the unions who stand up and comment on wrongdoing.

I thought that the statement was warrented. Then again it could be that Buzz's views do not represent the opinion of all CAW members that could be a problem.

Could that be the same problem as the CIC issuing a statement that all muslems do not agree on?

The comments on the coren show have taken a new direction. It seems to me to be a power struggle in the community about who actually represents and speaks for the roughly 500,000 muslems in Canada

quote:

---

Adam Aptowitzer, the Ontario chair of the B'nai Brith Institute for International Affairs, who was a co-panellist then, admitted near the end of the show that the Israeli military employs terrorist tactics that harms civilians, but justified it by claiming that it saves Israeli lives.

It was quite troubling.

Mr. Coren, the host, challenged him immediately by reminding him that the other side can apply the same logic when explaining terrorist acts.

---

lacabombi, I did not know this. I don't read everything, but enough to agree that this is very troubling.

miles, if this is true, then that's what lacabombi meant when he said that Buzz -- and many many others, apparently -- have failed the test.

to play devils advocate no one has mentioned the statement of the bnai brith guy before. no media outlet picked that up etc.

There were two (2) outrageous comments in the Corren show. One made by Mohamed Elmasri and one made by Adam Aptowitzer. Both justifying acts of terror.

Elmasry was -rightly- denounced and media lynched but Silence reigned when it came to Aptowitzer.

With all respect, Miles, have you taken the effort to read the statement by Omar Alghabra whom I quoted in my above message, you would not have been "confused".

quote:

---

Originally posted by lacabombi:
Elmasry was -rightly- denounced and media lynched but Silence reigned when it came to Aptowitzer.

ok that i agree with

With all respect, Miles, have you taken the effort to read the statement by Omar Alghabra whom I quoted in my above message, you would not have been "confused".

---

i did read his statement and as i said earlier to play devils advocate why is it that no one else besides alghabra that i have seen has commented on the bnai brith guys comments.

it just does not make sense that after a week of hightened discussion, news storys published by left wing, right wing and centrist outlets, as well as indy media and the web based media that it has not been picked up on big time.

i would have thought that the bnai brith guys comment would have been thrown back at dimant and bnai briths face at some time for the "hypocracy of condeming one and not the other" to the best of my knowledge that has not happened. why?

[ 31 October 2004: Message edited by: miles ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
miles: you keep proving lacabombi's point.

---

quote:

---

i am also questioning the validity of the comment attributed to the bnai brith guy. and the delay in making it public

---

I doubt very much that Omar Alghabra, president of the Canadian Arab Federation would have created the comments and attributed them to the Bnai'Brith official on the show in question.

The delay ? Some individuals and organizations do restrein themselves from saying How high when (mainstream) media say jump, take the time to enquire and ascertain before issuing condemnations and calling for resignations. They look into the source and context.

this thread,

which I have already linked to this thread, if you see what I mean.

Mr Aptowitzer appears to have confessed and retracted his comments. Because this is noted by the Globe and Mail in one of those tiny summary squibs, it is hard to know what Mr Aptowitzer admits to having said, or how he phrased his retraction. The Grope is doing nothing like the presentation and analysis that it did of Mr Elmasry's comments.

I suspect that Elmasry's comments really did shock people. They happened mid-show, and Coren had a long time to draw him out, as some other panellists had a chance to criticize what he had said.

Elmasry claimed to represnet Muslim Canadians or at least very much left that perception. He never really apologized and in fact tried to blame the Palestinian people for his own garbage. Atleast Aptowitzer apologized immediatley when publicly confronted. It doesnt make his comments any better but there is a differnce.

edited to add

Just heard on the radio that Mr. Aptowitzer resigned his position.

[ 02 November 2004: Message edited by: Macabee ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Well, we still don't have a transcript of Mr Aptowitzer's exchange with Michael Coren, but we have two further pieces of evidence in this a.m.'s Globe and Mail.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by lacabombi:
We will see whether the same Police will investigate Adam Aptowitzer. Any bets ?

---

Re hate crimes, the difference between Elmasry and Aptowitzer is that Elmasry advocated murder, Aptowitzer didn't.

Re the news, there are two differences between Elmasry and Aptowitzer

1) Elmasry advocated murder, Aptowitzer didn't.

2) Aptowitzer described Israeli demolition of the homes of Palestinian terrorists' homes as terrorism. Most people wouldn't agree with him.

Terrorism is directed against random members of a population - anybody might be a victim, if they happened to be in the targeted university cafeteria or disco, the targeted office building or city bus.

And to rate as terrorism, the attack has to be murderous or has to threaten murder.

Israeli home demolitions of terrorists are obviously not random, and everybody knows the Israelis are there to knock down the house, not harm the inhabitants.

Aptowitzer description of Israeli home demolitions as terrorism was merely stupid. His statement that terrorism can be defended was worse than stupid, even though the “terrorist” act he had in mind was clearly a home demolition.

now that the bnai brith guy has resigned for his statements.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lacabombi:
The Globe and Mail of October 28, 2004 reported that "Halton Regional Police are investigating whether Mr. Elmasry's comments constitute a hate crime".

We will see whether the same Police will investigate Adam Aptowitzer. Any bets ?

---

lacabombi, I must say, I don't want to see the police involved in either case.

I think that both you and I know how these outbursts happen. In some ways, they are admirable -- they speak of love and anger and passionate loyalty, and I don't want to see those wonderful human impulses criminalized, although often I would like to see them disciplined through education and experience.

What I would like to see, though, is equal treatment in the Grope and Flail. I don't expect it, although I think that we have a more realistic claim there than at the Notional Pest.

And on a personal note: In my back postage-stamp, I have a baby tree this year. I love her a lot. She is named after my mother, who died this year, just a couple of weeks before we planted the tree.

Often, when I read stories of the IOF bulldozing into the olive groves of the OT, I try to imagine what I would do faced with a bulldozer heading into my mum's tree. No rational response comes.

[ 03 November 2004: Message edited by: skdadl ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MyName:

Terrorism is directed against random members of a population - anybody might be a victim

---

quote:

---

Aptowitzer received no support from his organization and resigned

---

Have you read the G&M reporting the resignation, you would have understood that Bnai' Brith "accepted" his resignation because he admitted publicly that Israel use terrrorist means.

========

skdadl,

Like you, I do not wish the police to investigate either of them. I simply wanted to point out the double standard, of the Globe and Mail (that you mentioned), the National Post, the New York Times, and others.

Now, where was Coren when the storm was building over El Masri's head but not Aptowitzer ? How is it that none of the above mentioned media as well as the organizations, including political parties, that "instinctively" jumped on the denouncing and expressing of shock wagon, did not care look at the entire transcript ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rufus Polson:
Nonsense. Targetted killings can still be terrorism.

---

To clarify: I am talking about what people commonly mean when they refer to terrorism, as opposed to what you may think ought to be called terrorism.

And the element of randomness very much defines the kinds of incidents that people consider terrorism.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lacabombi:
Have you read the G&M reporting the resignation, you would have understood that Bnai' Brith "accepted" his resignation because he admitted publicly that Israel use terrrorist means."

---

I read the G&M report and the transcript, and I understand perfectly what he is resigning for:
1) Incorrectly calling demolition of Palestinian homes terrorism.
2) Saying that terrorism can be defensible.

quote:

---

I simply wanted to point out the double standard, of the Globe and Mail (that you mentioned), the National Post, the New York Times, and others."[/qb]

---

There is no double-standard. It's just that the editors of these papers are capable of understanding that there's a difference between advocating indiscrimnate murder and defending the practice of tearing down a terrorist's house.

Until you're able to grasp such subtle distinctions,* I'm afraid there's not much future for you in the news business.

Please note: The term "subtle distinctions" is sarcasm. The implication is that the distinction is actually glaring. Normally, I wouldn't feel the need to explain, but then again, I don't think most people would need to have the distinciton betwen indiscriminate murder and a home demolition pointed out to them in the first place.

[ 04 November 2004: Message edited by: MyName ]

[ 04 November 2004: Message edited by: MyName ]

quote:

---

Israeli home demolitions of terrorists are obviously not random, and everybody knows the Israelis are there to knock down the house, not harm the inhabitants.

---

[ 12 November 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]

Another unpleasant spin on terror debate story

Obviously, two letters were in order.

....They don't call him "Buzz" for nuthin'....

[ 12 November 2004: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]

[ 21 November 2004: Message edited by: The_Calling ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Fair enough. We need a transcript. Or perhaps the simpler thing would be for someone to write directly to Mr Coren.

---