Was It Wrong for JDL to Disrupt Omar Barghouti?

On July 4, JDL-Canada disrupted a speech of the BDS activist Omar Barghouti held at the University of Toronto (I already wrote about it). Following a post about the event at Blazingcatfur, Gary McHale, one of Caledonia’s heroes, who fought for years against the illegal native occupation, left comments, in which he expressed doubts about JDL’s actions. Here is the first one:

As someone who has been the victim of these types of tactics done by Native Protesters and various Unions that support them, I cannot accept that criminal behaviour is the answer to the problem.

In the end, did the University of Ottawa gain anything by allowing Anne Coulter to be prevented from speaking.

I have been to several pro-Israel protests in the past few weeks and I am certainly supportive. However, this is Canada not the mid-East, tactics like these only provide evidence that it is the pro-Palestine side that are victimized by Israel’s thugs. Do you think the video proves that Jews are peaceful or that they cannot control themselves.

One of the main reasons we do protest in Caledonia is so we can videotape the reactions of those on the other side. While it may appear the JDL was victorious, they simply provided the other side with years’ worth of propaganda.

All this will mean is that the University will bring in uniformed officers to allow the person to speak – like the University of Waterloo did to allow Christie Blatchford to speak. Then with dozens of uniformed officers present the pro-Palestine side can spin it that they are not safe in Canada. Photos and videos of uniformed officers protecting them from the big bad Jewish mob will be priceless propaganda for them.

I write this because I support Israel but this was not a win but a lost.

Gary McHale

Director of CANACE

Canadian Advocates for Charter Equality

 

And this is the second one:

 

It should be noted that it is a criminal act to interfere with the lawful use of any property.

430. (1) Every one commits mischief who wilfully

(d) obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property.

 

I tremendously admire Gary’s work to restore peace and law in Caledonia. However, there are a few statements in his comments, which need to be addressed and clarified.

In his second comment he refers us to section 430 (1)(d) of the Criminal Code, which, judging from the first comment, implies that JDL’s actions were of the same intention and consequences as the actions of the people who disrupted the appearances of Ann Coulter and Christie Blatchford. Fair enough…

Now, let’s compare the events. The JDL supporters lawfully entered a hall to take part in an event open to the public. At each similar event at U of T, the organizers always read in the beginning some by-law, regulation or whatever else they call it. That by-law states that if anybody disrupts the event, they’ll be given three warnings and then removed from the premises either by the event’s marshals or the security.

Apparently, they came up with that arrangement to prevent overheated academic discussions.

At certain point while Barghouti was speaking, the JDL supporters felt that his point of view was objectionable and revolting. They expressed their opinion verbally and by displaying signs. At that moment, Mr. Barghouti had two options. First, if he had a real belief in the universal appeal of his BDS (Boycott-Divest-Sanction Israel) doctrine and at least rudimentary debating skills, he could’ve confronted Meir Weinstein to destroy the “Zionist point of view” in a debate. For example, Mark Steyn has always encouraged dissenters from the public to confront him, but the BDS chap was not that good.

The second option, since he didn’t possess any of the qualities mentioned above, was to run away like a hamster and let the security deal with the issue. That’s precisely what he did. As you can clearly see in the video shown in Blazingcatfur’s coverage, JDL didn’t engage in any violence. I was outside at
the moment and I saw people running out and getting the campus police.  Weinstein and the others came out shortly after that.

The incident shows that JDL fully complied with the U of T by-law. If they really wanted to be that disruptive, they could’ve refused to leave the hall until the real police arrested them.

It is clear – there are absolutely no grounds for any criminal charges. If, by a far stretch, the U of T wants to charge JDL, they will have to provide information at the discovery stage as to why a person like Barghouti was invited to speak. It will be highly amusing to see how the University would justify before the court the presence of that fascist on its premises.

How does that compare to the Ann Coulter and Christie Blatchford’s cases?

Before Blatchford’s appearance in the University of Waterloo, when the spectators were already in the hall, four lefty psychopaths (probably from the same group that harassed Gary) showed up the stage and chained themselves. The campus security had the chance to grab them and drag them out, but they preferred to cancel the event and call the police next time. Did JDL do anything that even faintly resembled that?

Ann Coulter’s case was even worse. She received threats from the University of Ottawa’s administration about what she was allowed to say. Encouraged by that threat, at the evening of the event, a huge crowd of lefties gathered to harass the people who bought tickets. You probably remember the iconic video of the rabid black woman who was shouting at the timid white conservative guy (no wonder, the white men are the bottom of the lefty values).

The insane crowd of lefties, feminists and minorities’ advocates used rough force and threats, activated the fire alarm, etc. to prevent Ann Coulter from going inside. And the most outrageous thing was that the police did absolutely nothing to stop them. Please tell me: how can you compare JDL’s action to the savagery of that crowd???

In both cases, there were clear violations of section 430, yet the university authority did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to charge the criminals.

When we look at the three speakers, things get even worse. Christie Blatchford is a very respected and honest national journalist. Nobody would even think that such actions against her could be justified.

Ann Coulter is a pundit and a writer. She is controversial, but had never been involved in any organization, which tries to destroy anyone. The worst thing you can say about her is that she is a big mouth. The fact that the Muslims and the lefties hate her, doesn’t give them the right to stop her from making her point.

On the other hand, Omar Barghouti is not simply a speaker. He is a totally different type of animal (yes, he is an animal). He is a leader of an organization, whose purpose is to weaken Israel as an industrial and scientific force. His group is trying, through threats and lies, to convince large companies to withdraw from Israel. Their purpose is very clear – by destroying the economic and scientific abilities of Israel, they’ll make her an easy target of the neighbouring Muslim countries, which are gradually taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood’s fanatics.

What Barghouti presents is not a speech – it is a call for Israel’s destruction, it is anti-Semitism in action. The University of Toronto should be ashamed that they provide space for such a piece of human garbage. That is like inviting Adolf Hitler to speak at the University of Berlin in late 1920’s – yes, many people
would’ve found him interesting, but giving him a place to spit out his venom would’ve made that university complicit to his atrocities.

Is this how the University of Toronto wants to be remembered? They started the Israeli Apartheid Week, so probably they do.

How is it possible to blame JDL for disrupting that fascist? Even if the organizers use the video for their propaganda, it would always bring people’s attention to Barghouti and they would like to know who that guy is and why he was interrupted. A deeper digging into his biography is not going to do any favour to his cause.

Another interesting point Gary makes is whether the Jews have the moral justification to conduct a noisy protest. He thinks it makes them look violent. I hope we already established the fact that there was nothing illegal in the protest against Barghouti.

So should JDL act in meeker way?

Well, I have attended many JDL protests. They make their statements outside of the buildings, displaying signs, posters, and Israeli and Canadian flags. That attracts people’s attention, but the participants in the anti-Israeli events are oblivious to it.

I usually go inside to listen and often find the anti-Israeli language and statements appalling. On January 18 this year, there was a U of T event about the Gaza operation, with two super idiots as speakers – CAF’s Khaled Mouammar and the notorious Jenny Peto. Most of JDL stood outside, but a few supporters sneaked inside. You could hear the chanting coming from outside. In his speech Khaled mentioned it, saying that it gives him a tremendous pleasure that the Zionists are outside in the cold and he can talk against them in the warm hall.

When somebody of the speakers mentioned that the U of T president visited an Israeli university (that was supposed to be a condemnation), several of the Jews applauded. The action caused the immediate response of the “chairing” woman – she hissed at them like a cobra ready to attack and warned them that they would be expelled, if they do it again.

During the questions period, she didn’t miss the chance to humiliate an elderly Jewish man by subjecting him to the university’s racist question policy. They read it at the beginning of every event as an element of the “equity chairing” – it states that the first to ask questions should be the aboriginals, women of colour, queers, transgendered, handicapped, etc. Since he was a white male, he had to wait for about ten minutes near the microphone (no wonder, white men are hated with passion by the lefty racists).

After watching that, I can figure out that meekness doesn’t work with the “progressive” anti-Semites.

Another event, a few months earlier, was even worse. George Galloway was invited to speak at York University. He is a material supporter of Hamas (raised
money for them), who openly advocates the destruction of Israel. He belongs with Barghouti in the same garbage bin.

When the prominent Rabbi Ahron Hoch sent e-mails to his congregation urging them to protest, he received a threat for legal action from York University’s President Mamdouh Shoukri (an Egyptian Muslim). JDL also got involved in the protest.

On the evening of Galloway’s speech, several hundred protesters (students and other Torontonians) were herded into a small corner away from the hall and completely surrounded by police and security guards. It was like a little ghetto – only the dogs and the barbed wire were missing. At certain moment, the police let into the crowd a gang of Muslim students, led by the Tamil president of the student union, who tried to provoke a fight.

Galloway’s talk went on relatively undisturbed. When I covered the event the next day, I received e-mails from several students asking me to remove the pictures, because they were threatened with expulsion for protesting Galloway. I censored them temporarily, but now they are back, because the scandal became too big for the Muslim lobby to handle and they couldn’t take their revenge on the Rabbi and the students.

The Hitler analogy comes to my mind again…

There have been countless cases in Europe and North America, in which Israeli politicians and academics have been prevented from speaking. At the same time Arab and leftist criminals and terrorists can speak without any problems.

Obviously, Gary means well when he calls the Jews to show moral superiority through their behaviour.

That’s all good, but what is the benefit of moral superiority, if you are dead?

For centuries the Jews have demonstrated that they were peaceful people, who loved education and contributed tremendously to the world’s science and literature.  Yet it took only a few short years for many of those achievers to perish in Auschwitz and other places like it.

Yes, the Holocaust victims are morally superior to the Nazis, but all that remains of them are the ashes from the ovens, while people like Dr. Mengele lived long and pleasant lives.

With the unprecedented increase in the European anti-Semitism and the advancement of the Muslim fanaticism in the Arab countries and Iran, the meek and humble behaviour looks more and more like a suicide.

If organizations like JDL don’t state those problems clearly and loudly, nothing is going to change. People love to live in their lethargy and usually wake up when it is too late.

That’s not always a good PR strategy, but survival is more important than the impression you make. The same applies to politics.

Israel must be preserved at any price, because it is the only guarantee for the survival of the Jewish people. Unfortunately, the Arabs see every act of good
will as a weakness. They’ll hate the country no matter what. If Israel is strong, they will not attack. If they think she is weak, they’ll try to destroy her.

The latter is what Barghouti, Galloway and the thousands of useful Western idiots aim at. Such people must be confronted and exposed. If you treat them like every other scholar or speaker, you would be giving them legitimacy, for which one day we all would have to pay dearly.

© 2011 Blogwrath.com

Be Sociable, Share!

7 Comments

  1. hannah says:

    As a concerned parent, RUOK APP on the smartphone would be a great solution for campus security.

  2. MAD JEWESS says:

    The JDL is probably more than well aware that Jew hate is out of control in most nations, not just CA.

    Therefore, at this point, they must give these Jew hating slime something to start fearing if they are to survive outside of Israel.

    The greatest defense is a strong offense.

    1. admiwrath says:

      I agree with you and what gets me totally mad is the pogrom “avoiding” mentality – as long as you low long enough, the Cossacks may miss you. That’s the most devastating mindset you can come up with. Only with the restoration of Israel did the Jews get the chance of a real survival. If there are enough “compassionate” and “liberal” Jews ready to sacrifice the country, that will bring the “Second Holocaust” which the Arabs crave so much.

  3. The Lone Ranger says:

    Given the fact that most universities and other seats of “learning” (Marxist indoctrination camps) in Canada are run by anti-Semitic, Muslim-loving, self-loathing white elites, the situation will, unfortunately, only get considerably worse.

  4. Michael Devolin says:

    From Magic City Morning Star

    Michael Devolin
    A Fresh Invasion of Savages
    By Michael Devolin
    Aug 3, 2011 – 12:23:01 AM

    The only lesson we have learned from the madman in Norway is that not all terrorists are Muslim: about one percent of them are otherwise. The Western media would like us to believe that Anders Behring Breivik has many cohorts just waiting in the wings to act out the same acts of violence and terrorism as did Breivik, but that’s just not true. What is true is that Breivik was a lone wolf who believed his country and its cultural traditions were disintegrating. He believed that Islam and Muslims were the elemental root cause of this disintegration. Whether or not he was a Christian is irrelevant since his actions were borne of a nationalistic fervor and not in any measure of a religious zeal.

    Of course, the Western media has branded Mr. Breivik a “Christian fundamentalist,” but this is simply their longing to find, finally, upon the face of the earth a match, no matter how singular or bizarre, for Islam’s terror campaign into the Western world. It is so much easier for them to brand all those conservative-minded thinkers as the cause of this tragedy in Norway instead of finally admitting publicly that these same conservative-minded thinkers have long ago realized that Islam is not welcomed in the West and that the intrusion of a religion so violently aggressive in its own world and so assertively litigious in ours will never be completely tolerated or appreciated by normal people, never mind by madmen like Anders Breivik.

    Gert Wilders’ only transgression is certainly not that he’s been mendacious or intolerant or that his message has ever been an incitement to terrorism, but rather that his warnings to the Western world about the insidiousness of Islam and its traditional Muslim anti-Semitism were never loud enough to be heard above the obtuse and clamorous din of a Western media so blindly apologetic and imprudent as to never listen to him. Christopher Hitchens opines that “populists of the Geert Wilders stripe in Holland seek respectability by standing up for Israel, often against criticism from the multi-culti left.” As much as I admire Christopher Hitchens, as a writer who has appealed to a largely anti-religious but formerly phobic audience more than any other writer I know of, he should be more careful about whom he labels a populist. Geert Wilders has never begged respectability from anyone but rather has always relied on his own, which is to be found (as is Christopher Hitchen’s) in his faithfulness to the truth. Wilder’s defense of Israel and the Jewish people is simply and merely his delineation of Islam’s innate anti-Jewish sentiment. It is nothing more than that. Sometimes honesty is such a simple virtue.

    Hervey Allen wrote, “Each new generation is a fresh invasion of savages.” Anders Breivik is one of these savages, but he is not of the majority. When one remembers the Beslan massacre in Russia, 9/11, the London bus bombings, the massacre in Bali (where Orthodox Jews were targeted especially), the Fort Hood massacre, or any number of indiscriminate terrorist attacks against Muslim civilians in any country where Islam is the preponderant religion, one is confronted with the realization that Muslim terrorists far outnumber insane nationalists like Anders Breivik. And although the “multi-culti left” and the Western media had no justification to appellate Breivik as a “Christian fundamentalist,” they did so anyhow. They think and write as a majority also, although being a majority has never been an indicator of the truth. It is often a signal of the opposite. “Der oilem iz a goilem,” as the Yiddish proverb proclaims. The masses are asses.

    The truth is that Christian fundamentalists are not in the habit of killing their own. Muslim fundamentalists are. Christian fundamentalists are a rather suspicious and simplistic bunch, but they’re not notorious for murdering children. Muslim fundamentalists are. The numbers indicate (and numbers never lie) that Anders Breivik, even if he is a Christian fundamentalist, is an anomaly. Numbers also indicate that the Chechen Muslims who murdered over a hundred children in Beslan were not of a remarkable religious tendency. They were of the norm in the world of Islam. The Western media and the “multi-culti left” would deny this, but it’s the truth. Very often the truth is not permitted where it belongs, which is out in the open. Geert Wilders knows this. So does Christopher Hitchens.

    The truth is that the savages we see and read about on the front pages of Western newspapers today are not emanating from the “populists of the Geert Wilders stripe” but from Islamic fundamentalist circles. As difficult as that may be for Western journalists and Islam’s apologists to acknowledge, who enjoy the long leg-room of modern sophisms, safely ensconced within our Academia and media serfdoms, it is an empirical verity. It is that mental virus I often refer to as veridical Islam: the Islam that exists in the world today, not the Islam promised us by grim-faced clerics who also promise death to those who criticize their religion or caricature their Prophet. These are the “new generation” presently obtruding into the Western world, and their “fresh invasion” of our traditions and cultures should be observed and discerned with far more criticism and freedom of speech than is presently allowed. Modern Christian fundamentalism is neither a problem nor a threat, but Islam and the violent fundamentalists it creates are.

    Michael Devolin

    © Copyright 2002-2011 by Magic City Morning Star

    1. admiwrath says:

      Thank you fro your comment. You are absolutely right.

  5. Michael Devolin says:

    Thankyou, for having me, admiwrath. I appreciate it greatly.
    MD

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *