Forum Closed
The forum is now to new posts. All the historical content is still available to browse.
if you are looking for musicians to play with, please view the Bands Seeking Musicians list, or use the Musicians Directory
You can use our pages on social media to connect:
O Canada! We stand on guard for thee & Whipping up fear and racism
| Message Board > Controversy and Quarantine > O Canada! We stand on guard for thee & Whipping up fear and racism |
| Lordpatch User Info... | O Canada! We stand on guard for thee By Shujaat Wasty - Montreal June 9, 2006 As a born & raised Canadian Muslim, I take the greatest pride in my country; I proudly wear the maple leaf whenever I travel abroad, I am fluently bilingual in both of our national languages and can sing the anthem in both as well (albeit not as well as Lyndon Slewidge of Ottawa, but few can claim that) and I am as avid of a hockey fan as can be. In short, I am both a patriotic Canadian and a practicing Muslim; the identities are not different or incongruent, rather both are complementary to one another. Yet some questions plague my mind: why is it that when a Canadian Christian or Canadian Jew or Canadian Hindu or Canadian Sikh commits a crime, their fellow members in faith are not asked to apologize for him or her, but when a Canadian Muslim commits a crime, all Muslims are expected to do so? Why is the faith of a criminal associated with him or her only when it is a Muslim? Why is it that when Muslim community leaders and members speak out against terrorism tirelessly and unequivocally condemn it, it often goes unreported? In light of the recent Ontario arrests, it is rather unfortunate that much of the mainstream media is carelessly whipping up anti-Muslim hysteria and neglecting the fact that the suspects are presently accused of a crime and as per our democratic principles, they are innocent until proven guilty by a fair trial. The accused are yet to be brought to court, but the media circus has already pronounced specific places of being targets of terrorist strikes, based on sensationalized concoction and nothing substantial from the accused or the authorities. Similarly, it is utterly irresponsible for government officials, including Prime Minister Stephen Harper (who could hardly mask his glee when pronouncing his statement following the arrests), to make misleading statements and insinuations of "us" versus "them". Such fear-mongering will only serve to negatively reinforce sentiments and stereotypes in society and lead to more isolation and polarization of communities. Prime Minister Harper could do well by learning how to be a responsible public figure, as exemplified by Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Quebecois, many NDP MP's and others. This same advice can be given to Liberal MP Wajid Khan, whose remarks on TV and on radio have borne frantic overcompensation. On the other hand, it is a relief to see that statements by CSIS, RCMP and the Mayor of Toronto put the arrests into proper context as criminal activities by suspects and explicitly declared that in no way do they implicate the Canadian Muslim population. If the accused are proven to be guilty by a court of law, then I am extremely grateful to our security forces and applaud them for their vigilance. At the same time, Canadians need to ignore the baseless rhetoric perpetuated by certain elements in society who are echoing the same detrimental and dangerous line of thinking as the one currently employed in Washington DC. We need to scrutinize the genuine causes of terrorism and the legitimate reasons and issues people may have against Canada. The fact remains that our shift from the traditional role of international peacekeepers to that of combat missions in Afghanistan, allied with the United States, has - and will continue to - cause feelings of resentment towards us in many parts of the world. As well, our reputation as a neutral nation intent on helping bring peace through justice in conflict-ridden localities has been affected by our government's one-sided policies against oppressed groups. This will undoubtedly cause more antipathy against Canada throughout the world. Canadians must take a step back and determine whether we are following our own principles of neutrality, peace and justice or not. We have to understand that these are the values that have given us the deservedly great reputation throughout the world and have made us an admired nation. We must recognize that these very values are being hijacked and consequently causing danger for our country and fellow citizens. In the mean time, we must refrain from scapegoating an entire community for the action of a significant minority. My love for this great nation and adherence to its values are as much as any other Canadian; it is no one's right to question it. --- Shujaat Wasty is a board member of the South Asian Research Center (CERAS) located in Montreal. He can be reached at: [email protected] http://www.montrealmuslimnews.net/ocanada.htm 2 Whipping up fear and racism September 15, 2006 | Page 3 THE U.S. political establishment is whipping up fear and racism to breathe new life into their “war on terror.” George Bush used the lead-up to the anniversary of September 11 to hype a newly repackaged enemy in the “war on terror”--Islamists “driven by the values of tyranny and extremism, the right of a self-appointed few to impose their fanatical views on all the rest,” he said in a speech to the American Legion. “They’re successors to fascists, to Nazis, to communists and other totalitarians of the 20th century.” Bush’s speeches were designed both to revive the Republicans’ declining popularity and provide a new justification for U.S. war aims in the Middle East--and his fellow GOPers climbed right on board. “I know that’s a hard thing for us to grasp because, you know, we’re a nation that’s a tolerant nation,” Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum declared during one ignorant rant that went on to misrepresent thousands of years of world history. “We’re at war with Islamic fascism. Afghanistan and Iraq and southern Lebanon and every country around the world is a front.” full article: http://www.socialistworker.org/2006-2/601/601_03_FearAndRacism.shtml - Wed, 13 Sep 2006 1:52pm Edited: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 10:57am | ||
| Lordpatch User Info... | War on Terror and Illusions of Peace PEACE WITH ZIONISM AND IMPERIALISM IS A MERE ILLUSION Nizar Sakhnini, 15 September 2006 - [email protected] A ZIONIST-IMPERIALIST JOINT VENTURE Imperialist powers realized the services a Jewish State would provide to their designs for hegemony and control and the first call for the creation of a ‘Jewish State’ was made by the French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte. In 1807, Bonaparte issued an invitation for a Jewish convention to discuss the idea, long before Hess, Pinsker and Herzl called for the creation of Der Judenstaat. (For details on the French and British early efforts for the creation of a Jewish State in Palestine see: Mohammad Hassanine Haikal, Secret Negotiations between the Arabs and Israel (Arabic), Cairo, 1996, Book 1, pp. 27-51) During WWI, extensive discussions were made between the Imperialist powers and the Zionist leadership, which led to the Balfour Declaration issued on 2 November 1917. These discussions included the British, the U.S., the French and the Italian Governments as well as the American Zionist leaders headed by Judge Brandeis. (For details of these discussions and other related topics, see: Walid Khalidi, ed., From Haven to Conquest: Readings in Zionism and the Palestine Problem until 1948. Beirut: Institute for Palestine Studies, 1971. Second Printing, Washington, 1987, pp. 165-211) HERZL’S COLONIAL PROJECT Herzl published his pamphlet at a time when European imperialist powers were involved in spreading their colonial projects all over the world. He considered the Jews to be a nation who are entitled to have their own colonial project. Herzl’s colonial project was spelled out in the draft-agreement of The Jewish-Ottoman Land Company (JOLC) “for the purpose of settling Palestine and Syria with Jews” that Herzl lobbied for in Istanbul in 1901. (The full text of the draft-agreement is available as an appendix to an article by Walid Khalidi, The Jewish-Ottoman Land Company: Herzl's Blueprint for the Colonization of Palestine, Journal of Palestine Studies, Volume XXII, Number 2, Winter 1993, pp. 30-47) Herzl’s efforts, however, almost died with him in 1904 and led to a period of disillusionment in the Zionist Movement. The Balfour Declaration was a lifesaver and opened the road for Imperialist-Zionist cooperation ever since. BORDERS OF THE ‘JEWISH STATE’ A map specifying the ‘homeland’ that the Zionists had in mind was submitted to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. The map included the Golan Heights and Southern Lebanon up to the Litani River as well as the Western part of Trans Jordan. (Simha Flapan, The Birth of Israel: Myths and Realities. New York: 1987, p. 17. See also: David McDowall, Palestine and Israel: The uprising and Beyond, Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1989The Uprising and beyond, p. 20) The proclamation of Israel on 14 May 1948 did not specify Israel’s borders. This fact reflected the Zionist intention for territorial expansion beyond the partition lines of General Assembly Resolution # 181 (II) of 29 November 1947. Ben-Gurion never regarded the partition borders as the last word. He considered a Jewish state in part of Palestine as a first step to be followed by other steps for expansion whenever the time was right. His vision was spelled out in a letter to his son, Amos: “A partial Jewish State is not the end, but only the beginning.... We shall bring into the state all the Jews it is possible to bring...we shall establish a multi-faceted Jewish economy - agricultural, industrial, and maritime. We shall organize a modern defense force, a select army...and then I am certain that we will not be prevented from settling in the other parts of the country, either by mutual agreement with our Arab neighbors or by some other means. Our ability to penetrate the country will increase if there is a state… (Michael Bar-Zohar, Ben-Gurion: A Biography. New York: Delacorte Press, 1977, pp. 91 - 92) The first opportunity for expansion came in 1956 when Israel joined the British and the French in the Suez Canal War. In a round table meeting with the French at the S?vres Conference, Ben-Gurion proposed a plan for settling all the issues in the Middle East. The plan included, among other things, that Israel would annex southern Lebanon up to the Litani River. It also included partition of Jordan, with the West Bank going to Israel and the East Bank to Iraq. In exchange, Iraq would sign a peace treaty with Israel and undertake to absorb the Palestinian refugees. (Michael Bar-Zohar, Ben-Gurion: A Biography. New York: Delacorte Press, 1977, pp., pp. 236-244) The Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza were occupied in the 1967 war. In March 1978, Israel launched Operation Litani and occupied southern Lebanon up to the Litani River. (David McDowall, Palestine and Israel: The uprising and Beyond, Berkeley, Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1989The Uprising and beyond, p. 33) Israel remained in Southern Lebanon until May 2000 when Israeli PM Ehud Barak was obliged to withdraw as a result of the Lebanese resistance led by Hizbullah. On 12 July 2006, Israel re-invaded Lebanon but failed again as a result of the courageous resistance. This does not mean that they will not try again. WAR ON TERROR In February 1982, Oded Yinon, a journalist and analyst of Middle Eastern affairs and former senior Foreign Ministry official wrote an article, which appeared in the WZO’s periodical Kivunim. In his article, Yinon outlined a strategy that calls for the dissolution and fragmentation of the Arab states. (Nur Masalha, pp. 196 - 198, citing Oded Yinon, A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s, [Hebrew], Kivunim, Jerusalem, No. 14, February 1982, pp. 53 - 58) By the end of 1991, the USSR ceased to exist. The ‘Cold War’ was over, which meant that a new pretext was needed to justify U.S. wars for global hegemony and control. In the summer of 1993, Samuel P. Huntington published his ‘Clash of Civilizations’ theory that culture and cultural identities, are shaping the patterns of conflict in the post-Cold War world. This opened the door for a talk of a Judeo-Christian civilization vs. ‘Islamic Terror’. On July 8, 1996, Richard Perle, a former head of the Defense Policy Board in the Pentagon, delivered a document to the Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu. Perle, and a team of American neo-cons, had been tasked by Netanyahu to draft a new Israeli strategy that would abrogate the Oslo Accords and overturn the entire concept of ‘comprehensive land for peace’ in favor of a policy of military conquest and occupation. ( http://www.iasps.org/strat1.htm ) A Washington-based neo-conservative think-tank, The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), was founded in 1997 to ‘rally support for American global leadership’. The events of September 11, 2001 provided a window of opportunity for furthering PNAC’s agenda. The ‘Cold War’ was replaced with a new war against ‘Islamic Terror’, which is used as a pretext to justify Imperialist and Zionist wars. BANKRUPTCY OF ZIONISM Israel’s expansion in 1967 brought with it a ‘Demographic Threat’ represented by the millions of Palestinian Arabs whom Israel failed to replicate on them the ethnic cleansing of 1948. A systemic effort to confront the Arab ‘Demographic Threat’ was introduced according to which annual conferences were held in the Institute of Policy and Strategy at the Interdisciplinary Center – Herzliya to discuss and confront this basic and strategic threat to the ‘Jewish State’. The report of the first conference, which was held during the period of 19-21 December 2000 stated, “The demographic trends in Israel and its surroundings and their ramifications pose a severe threat to Israel in terms of its character and identity as a Jewish state belonging to the Jewish people. The demographic threat to the continued existence of the State of Israel is the most immediate and most likely to materialize. The threat is developing rapidly, while the pace of designing a national policy dealing with the threat is slow…” (Journal of Palestine Studies 121, Volume XXXI, No. 1, Autumn 2001, pp. 50-61. For more details on all conferences held to this date, see the Website of the Institute of Policy and Strategy at the Interdisciplinary Center – Herzliya at: http://www.herzliyaconference.org/Eng/ ) ILLUSIONS OF PEACE On 30 October 1991, the ‘Middle East Peace Conference’ convened in Madrid under the auspices of the U.S. and the USSR to resolve the Israeli-Arab conflict. Israeli PM Shamir, later declared that he wanted the negotiations in Washington (following the Madrid conference) to continue for 10 years, if need be, so that he had enough time to keep on going with planned Israeli settlement in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) and leave nothing for the negotiations to talk about. Secret negotiations were held in Oslo between Israel and a number of Palestinians headed by Mahmoud Abbas. These negotiations led to a Declaration of Principles that was signed between Israel and the PLO at the White House in Washington on 13 September 1993. The Oslo agreement did not stop Zionist theft of Palestinian lands to build more colonial settlements in the OPT, which made it clear that the Zionists are continuing with their strategic Zionist goal of an Exclusive Jewish State. This makes it clear that peace in the Middle East is a mere illusion. ************** Nizar Sakhnini was born in Acre in 1932. His paternal grandparents came from Sakhnin, which explains the origin of his family name, Sakhnini. He was forced to become a refugee in 1948. He now lives in Canada. He can be reached via e-mail at: [email protected] http://www.montrealmuslimnews.net/peaceillusions.htm and The U.S./UN sanction threats against Iran Ardeshir Omani, a founder of the American-Iranian Friendship Committee Workers World Forum, NYC, Aug. 25, 2006 listen: http://www.workersdaily.org/podcast/audio/ao_082506.mp3 - Fri, 15 Sep 2006 11:44am Edited: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 4:14pm | ||
| Lordpatch User Info... | Mounting casualties compel Canada to send Afghanistan reinforcements By Keith Jones 16 September 2006 Canada will soon deploy additional troops and armaments to southern Afghanistan to bolster NATO’s embattled occupation force. Canada’s minority Conservative government announced yesterday that it will deploy between 200 and 500 additional Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel to the Kandahar region. The cabinet has also approved a CAF request to send fifteen heavily-armored Leopard tanks and an undisclosed number of armored engineering vehicles, called Badgers, to Afghanistan. The 42.5 ton Leopard has a 105-mm cannon, capable of firing explosive shells at long range, as well as several fixed machine-guns. FULL ARTICLE AT: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/sep2006/cana-s16.shtml - Sat, 16 Sep 2006 7:57am | ||
| J User Info... | BOOOOOOORRRRRIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGG - Sat, 16 Sep 2006 1:32pm | ||
|
|||
Not logged in
Log In / Register (optional)
