LGF’s Idiotarian of the Year contest is getting some excellent nominations.
My nominees:
The Concordia Student Union (especially exec members Sabine Freisinger, Yves Engler, Ralph Lee, Aaron Mate, Sameer Zuberi, and Kealia Curtis as well as members of the council of representatives
Jaggi Singh and his buddies (including Samer Elatrash and Laith Marouf)
The 11% of Americans who couldn’t find the USA on a world map.
and, last but not least, Jennifer Durocher.
Although, admittedly, Robert Fisk has been getting so many nominations that it almost seems unfair to declare him as the winner. It seems the award will be named for him, thus disqualifying him and opening the field to other nominees. Feel free to mosey on over and give your suggestions.
I would give it to Jaggi Singh. At the least the others aren’t lying to themselves. Singh is so confused, he thinks he’s one of the good guys. What a shnook!
typo alert – idiotarian
I would add Rabbi Reuben Poupko, Patrick Amar, Steven Scheinberg, Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel Asper, and Thomas Hecht. Oh, no, no, wait, in competition for racist fascist of the year with David Ahenakew is….(drumroll)….Irrrrrrrrv Rubin!
I nominate Hanthala.
Ditto for Hanthala. Who is this schmuck?
I’m the schmuck who thinks that the people I named above have all made outright racist comments in the last year. Hell, Irv Rubin was even going to act on them until he got arrested.
Quit putting all Zionists in a category with Irv Rubin. Suicide bombings may have the support of 68% of Palestinians, but believe me, Rubin doesn’t even have the support of 0.68% of Zionists.
I nominate Christiane Amanpour.
who is Irv Rubin?
Hanthala, I think we’ve all jiHad
enough of your lies distortions.
Hanthala sagely comments: “I would add Rabbi Reuben Poupko, Patrick Amar, Steven Scheinberg, Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel Asper, and Thomas Hecht. ”
Yeah. Everyone knows all racists are Jews. And the only non-racist Jews are those engaging in the jihad to smash the Jewish state.
Or something like that. I’m still learning my lines. Remember: when I say jihad, that’s just Arabic for any old struggle, and that’s how it’s used in real life language today. Like, when Arabic telecasts talk about jihadis, the audiences figures they’re talking about people struggling to keep their thoughts pure of sinful notions.
[Then the news cuts to the one-sided struggle of Palestinians against the faceless of evil Al-Yahud (that’s Arabic for Israelis, or at least that’s how they translate the news stories). Audience smacks head. Ohh, *that’s* what they meant by jihadis! So confusing!]
Bill, you may have jihad enough of reasoned debate, but I’ve hannukahed enough of Zionist stupidity.
Jonny,
Irv Rubin was the leader of the Jewish Defense League which is part of the Kahane/New Kach movement (see: http://www.kahane.org, http://www.newkach.org). This is right-wing, extremist, Jewish fundamentalist, pro-settler movement. Baruch Goldstein, the Israeli who massacred 27 Muslim worshippers in a Hebron mosque in 1996 (the year of Netanyahu’s election) was a Kahane. It is this movement that has sought to build a memorial to Goldstein.
Coincidentally, Irv Rubin was present at Concordia University on September 10, 2001 (anyone here invite him? Bill? Slinky?) for a press conference given by the CSU about death threats it had received (“you are all targets now”) by a group calling itself the “Committee for the Extermination of Palestine.” The threats, as aired on CJAD were available on the Montreal JDL/New Kach website until December 14, 2001, for members’ listening pleasure.
On December 14, 2001, Irv Rubin was arrested in LA with explosives and a plan to bomb a mosque and the offices of an Arab American congressman. The incident was taken seriously since the JDL had allegedly been involved in a similar incident in 1981 in which another Arab American politican was murdered.
Irv Rubin committed suicide in jail a few weeks ago.
I find this whole settler movement-Concordia connection quite intriguing. As I mentioned previously, Hillel was recently caught recruiting for the Nahal Brigades, a special section of the IDF which helps build and maintain settlements in the Occupied Territories (a war crime). Hillel’s rhetoric matches that of the settler propaganda sites (for instance http://www.masada2000.org). Hillel’s events have included anti-Arab propaganda “documentaries” by the American Jewish settler Itamar Marcus (with his misleading translations of Palestinian texts and other Arab language sources).
And of course, the Netanyahu invitation. Who do you think supports Netanyahu?
Oh yes, for more of this kind of settler hate propaganda, type in http://www.gushshalom.org (without the dash) and you ought to be redirected to a lovely site advocating ethnic cleansing in Israel called http://www.deportthefuckers.com. But then again, with few exceptions, I’m sure you’ve all visited already.
… and why argue when you can cast vague shadowy aspersions? Like:
“Irv Rubin was present at Concordia University on September 10, 2001 (anyone here invite him? Bill? Slinky?) for a press conference given by the CSU” — yeah, totally. Cause nobody from Montreal ever hears about the CSSSU events if they’re not Concordia students.
“I find this whole settler movement-Concordia connection quite intriguing” — more of propaganda’s favorite techniques: invent a fact, and that matter=of-factly build on it as though it was already a fact. Cause everyone knows that there’s this whole settler movement-Concordia connection. I mean, a CSU official “found” a Web printout on a Hillel desk that had something to do with the Evil Faceless IDF! That *proves* that Concorida’s in bed with settlers worldwide! I’m telling you, this whole Jewish conspiracy is really getting out of hand.
Bill growls: “Hanthala, I think we’ve all jiHad enough of your lies distortions.”
Hanthala sagely comments: “Bill, you may have jihad enough of reasoned debate.”
So, Hanthala, you think lies and distortions are a form of reasoned debate? Im beginning to understand.
Coward, I didn’t invent any facts and I didn’t say anything about “proof.” I am entitled to my opinions and in my opinion, Hillel Montreal is a pro-settler extremist propaganda machine. The argument I make to support my claim is reasoned (and at least, I can support my claim–not so for Hillel’s litany of unsubstantiated accusations against everyone who doesn’t like its politics). You may agree or disagree, that’s you prerogative. I think the issue is worth investigating and I’ll keep doing that. Believe me, if and when I prove any connection, I won’t be writing about it here.
I am entitled to my opinions and in my opinion, Hillel Montreal is a pro-settler extremist propaganda machine. The argument I make to support my claim is reasoned.
So in my opinion, SPHR is a terrorist organization that supports Hamas. I guess I don’t need any “proof”, by your logic, for that allegation either? Just a “reasoned argument”, which I can easily make by saying that both are nationalistic Palestinian organizations, both have resorted to violence to accomplish their goals (Hamas in the case of suicide bombings, SPHR in the case of the Netanyahu riot), and that both accuse Israel of untruths.
Hanthala, you have one thing in common
with that 15 year-old girl who wrote
“Dream Of Palestine.”
You both write fiction.
Segacs, you are certainly entitled to your opinion about SPHR. Its not as though people (The Link, at one time, the Suburban, over the last two years, etc.) have not ried to make that very argument. Of course, they’ve never offered ANY support for it and for that reason, the argument is not very credible.
In the same way, you cand decide that my argument about Hillel is not credible. That’s up to you. My point is that I have the same right as those making the above argument to make my argument about Hillel.
On the other hand, I think that I have more support for my argument in terms of Hillel’s guest speakers and activities over the last two years, as well as B’nai Brith’s statements and activities. It is still an opinion, since I have no conclusive “proof” (though I’m not sure what that would consist of), but it is backed more solidly than any argument I’ve seen about SPHR which simply relies on anti-Arab and anti-Muslim stereotypes and sentiments.
“Quit putting all Zionists in a category with Irv Rubin. Suicide bombings may have the support of 68% of Palestinians, but believe me, Rubin doesn’t even have the support of 0.68% of Zionists.”
You said it, suicide bombings MAY have the support of 68% of Palestinians. I’m very suspicious of that figure since I haven’t seen the survey, the sample, the questions, etc.
As for Irv Rubin and the likes, I beg to differ. There are 200, 000 settlers in the West Bank. They have supporters in Israel and abroad among the Zionist population (both Christian and Jewish). I have no figure for the Zionist population worldwide, but I think 0.68% is a gross underestimation.
Hanthala,
The poll is legitimate. It was conducted by the Jerusalem Media & Communication Centre (JMCC), a Palestinian firm.
Check out the following site for results, methodology, questions, etc.
http://www.jmcc.org/publicpoll/results/2002/no47.htm
Here are some significant results from the Dec. 2002 poll, only one of which made it into the mainstream press.
Significant Opinion Results
* By the end of 2002, more Palestinians believe in achieving national goals through both negotiations and armed struggle believing that the peace process is passing though difficult times, yet a majority is pessimistic a peaceful settlement would be reached.
* A large majority of Palestinians do not see a difference between Israeli Likud and Labor candidates for premiership as far as peace is concerned.
* The majority of Palestinians support the continuation of al-Aqsa Intifada in its current form with both popular (i.e. demonstrations, economic boycotts) and military resistance to end Israeli military occupation and establish a Palestinian state based on UN Resolution 242.
* A large number of Palestinian believes the end result of the Intifada is liberating all of historic Palestine.
* The majority of Palestinians believe military operations (including suicide bombings) against Israeli targets are a suitable response to Israeli occupation within the current political situation. Most Palestinians support military operations both inside Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
* A vast majority of Palestinians believe the Palestinian Authority is corrupt to a high degree with a lack of seriousness for reform. Yet, a majority believes Palestinian President Yasser Arafat would be re-elected in free, democratic elections.
Thanks 🙂
So, just for the record, that would be 62.7% or 63%. The question also comes after one which mentions context.