Sunday, October 22, 2017

Rushing To Judgment: Habs' Andrew Shaw Wrongfully Accused On Twitter



It's hockey-less Sunday. The Habs have been losing every game but their first of the season. While it's only 8 games in, and 74 left to go, Habs Twitter (i.e. the stream of Habs fans tweeting about this team and All Things Habs) is an emotional minefield.

But it got ugly, this Sunday, as someone - namely, Scott Wheeler, a writer for the subscription-only site The Athletic -  tweeted out a millisecond-long video of Andrew Shaw from Friday night's game. (Don't go to his timeline looking for it - he's deleted it)

Shaw was in the penalty box, after having been pounded by Anaheim's Kevin Bieksa, and penalized only after he went after Bieksa.

The clip - soundless and fleeting - was tweeted out with an accusation of what it was purported that he said.

The first "f" word was easy to decipher, even for those who do not read lips well. The second f-word was misconstrued as Shaw using a derogatory term for gay people.

Twitter blew up with people jumping on Shaw's back for this. They condemned him, they were derisive of his ambassadorship with Patrick Burke's "You Can Play" organization (an organization that promotes a safe place in sports for gay athletes of all sports, and all levels). And they judged him based on his past.

See, when he was with the Chicago Blackhawks, Shaw did use that word. He was suspended one game, fined $5000, and sent to undergo sensitivity training - all of which he did, after issuing a public apology (one which definitely seems sincere).

Based on his past, this was a shoo-in for those quick to vilify without proof. This was Shaw, repeating his mistakes, and being a terrible person. This was Shaw who had to be suspended. Had to pay a fine. Had to be traded. Had to be benched. You name it, the armchair judges had his fate all wrapped up.

I read of it when a blog I follow retweeted the video and the post with it. I saw others jumping on the Excoriate Shaw bandwagon.

But I didn't buy into it. See, I do read lips, and I know how difficult some sounds are to discern. A hard "g" sound isn't visible. The clip was so fleeting, it was absolutely inconclusive.

I saw one tweet actually sent to Kevin Bieksa, encouraging him to "give that d-bag {abbreviation mine} a couple of more hits to the face next time." Despicable, given Shaw's recent injury (which I will discuss shortly).

Calling Shaw a homophobe. Calling for him to be traded.

I tweeted out:




 I received a reply - from the person who originally tweeted the video: I replied:

I received a reply - from the person who had retweeted the video:











He replied:








He came back with:

My replies:







My replies: He didn't reply, which was fine with me. And the judgmental all over Twitter continued their smear campaign all day.

In the evening, it came out that not only was there a longer video clip, and that it had already been looked at by the NHL; what was actually being shouted from the penalty box was:

"Not f'ing fair" - a far cry from the original accusation.

 The NHL statement:






The NHL statement: And still, some on Twitter replied, saying this was fake.

Suddenly, though, people were tweeting out that the poster who had been most vocal (the one quoted above in the exchange with me) had locked his Twitter account. This means nobody who is not a follower can see his tweets anymore.

Tweeters who had accused Shaw unfairly were suddenly justifying trying to justify their actions.

"He had done it before!"
"That's what it looked like he said!"
"He has a record!"

and

"Given the video we had and his past behavior, it was a logical assumption. We still don't know for sure what he said."

(That is verbatim - and a tweet to which I replied that no, logical assumption is innocence, not guilt, and without evidence, her premise was utterly rejected).

I posted:


There were those who did reply, stating they were wrong. There were those who didn't delete their original accusations but posted in apology to Shaw (who had been tagged in a majority of the angry accusations).

And yes, there were those whose tweets on the subject - judgmental, accusatory, and just plain wrong - were "magically" gone from their timelines.

For instance, Scott Wheeler, whose tweet began the whole day's ugliness, just deleted the tweets and replied to someone who called him out on it:






But he still deleted his tweets, instead of adding to them so that those who had already commented could see how wrong he was.

I think it's cowardly to delete tweets. We all saw them. Own up to them, quote them, and issue a mea culpa. Not only is there nothing wrong with that, it is admirable to be forthcoming when one is wrong.

Instead, they just pretended as though they never said it.

Let me explain why I gave Andrew Shaw the benefit of the doubt from the get-go:

I do believe he learned his lesson from having been penalized the first time. It was not just the fine, and suspension - I truly believe he realized how terrible it is to use that word in any circumstances, and his apology at the time was as sincere as they get.

Speaking before the team left for St. Louis, Shaw said he couldn't sleep after Tuesday night's game and that watching video of his outburst was difficult. It was video of the incident that went viral on social media, prompting sharp criticism and an NHL investigation.
"It was hard to see. Emotions got the best of me," Shaw said, adding that he understands why the slur is considered hurtful. "I'll never use that word again, that's for sure. ... That's not the type of guy I am."
Shaw was sent off for interference at 17 minutes, 56 seconds of the third period, hurting Chicago's chance for a comeback in what ended up being a 4-3 loss. While sitting in the box, Shaw pounded on the glass with his stick and then yelled at someone on the ice. As video of the incident spread online, the You Can Play project, a group supporting inclusiveness in athletics, swiftly tweeted that it was planning to contact the NHL.
After the game, Shaw was asked twice about what happened and said he didn't remember.
"Being like I just said -- I'll repeat myself for you -- emotions are high,'' he said. "I don't know what was said. Obviously I was upset with the call. I wasn't happy with the call."
A day later, Shaw said he saw the video after he returned home from the arena and said he was "sincerely sorry for the insensitive remarks that I made."
"I apologize to many people, including the gay and lesbian community, the Chicago Blackhawks organization, Blackhawks fans and anyone else I may have offended," he said. "I know my words were hurtful, and I will learn from my mistake."

I am a firm believe in not rushing to judgment. In all walks of life, we have seen terrible consequences from drawing conclusions based on nothing but assumption. This is no different.

Moreover, Andrew Shaw sustained a severe concussion last season with the Habs. He missed 14 games, and later in the season sustained another concussion - one he tried to conceal. The interview he gave, pre-season, truly sheds light on what he had gone through. An excerpt:
"I remember waking up in the middle of the night, puking, not sleeping, and I wasn’t getting more than two or three hours of sleep during that night," Shaw said. "I was worried. If I’m worried, there’s really something wrong. The wife knew there was something wrong with me and she was angry with me for not doing anything about it earlier. A teammate came up to me and asked me if I was all right because he could see it in my eyes that I didn’t look right. He said it looked like I was looking right through him, and I was thinking there must be something wrong with me then."

Shaw, in the game against Anaheim Friday night, had been pounded relentlessly by Kevin Bieksa, and watching the video is painful to see. His head snapped back several times under Bieksa's fist, almost hitting the crossbar of the net against which he was pinned.

If anyone thinks, after knowing what he went through last season, that his health isn't always first and foremost on his mind, they don't understand post-concussion symptoms.

I do understand them. My son has had 2 concussions, and though the 2nd one was over 2 years ago, he is still experiencing symptoms. The brain is a mystery, and traumatic brain injuries are a very serious affliction.

I'm not saying that any of this is an excuse had Shaw been found to have used the slur. I'm saying that what he DID say makes a lot more sense. After Bieksa walloped him, as the refs did nothing, Shaw got up and went after his attacker. Only then was a whistle blown and both players penalized.

It makes a lot more sense that Shaw was protesting the fairness of having been penalized as well, rather than assume that he was using a homophobic slur to a referee.

But people won't ever give others the benefit of the doubt. And it is a sad commentary on social media - and society in general - to see what transpired this Sunday.

One tweet touched me with this:





Spot on. The rush to judgment makes people holier-than-thou.And I am not hopeful, in any way, that they will have learned from this. I'm sure, however, that they will be just as quick to jump on another scapegoat without evidence to prove them wrong.

I don't entertain any delusional aspirations that my writing about this incident will change anyone's views or behavior. In fact, I even got this - after posting how wrong it was that Shaw had been vilified:




Shaw had been vilified: They can try to deflect any way they want. Some have had the class to apologize in public for their jumping to conclusions.

Maybe they're the ones we can hope for, as those who will wait for conclusive evidence in the future.

I'm optimistic.

To a fault

Posted by at 2 comments:

Monday, August 21, 2017

City Refuses To Allow Swastika Removal From Park

On August 17th, 2017, Corey Fleischer, of Erasing Hate, was called by a concerned citizen, regarding a swastika prominently displayed in a park. The park is Parc des ancres, in the town of Pointe-des-Cascades, located north of Vaudreuil, Quebec.

When Corey arrived, he found two swastikas to be on a large anchor displayed in the park. He observed that the city had taken care of this anchor, repainting it (beige, black, and white) and the swastikas were engraved into the metal - and painted a prominent black against the white background.

Photo: Corey Fleischer, Facebook

Corey wants the anchor removed altogether, but in the interim, was satisfied to simply obliterate the swastikas. As he began to paint over the first swastika, the mayor of the city showed up and told him to stop.

As Corey said:

 He couldn't understand why I was so upset, and why I was removing the paint that covered the Swastika. He then told me that if I didn't leave the park, he would call the police and charge me with "Destruction of Property."

Corey did not back down, and a discussion ensued when police were called. You can see it in the video below:


Corey had to leave the park without taking care of the hate symbol.

Later in the week, Corey posted this photo of the plaque under what he calls "Swastika Anchor".

Courtesy Corey Fleischer, Facebook

What adds to the disturbing nature of this entire story is that someone in this city felt proud to display a Nazi "souvenir" with a symbol of hate out in the open, a park, where kids play and families gather.

There are many who support Corey and are disgusted by the city not only endorsing but protecting this hate symbol.  But the most shocking results are the comments his Facebook post has received.

There were those who tried to argue that the swastika is a sign of peace, originally. There were others who argued that these particular swastikas were not painted on an angle, and therefore were not symbols of hate. And still others - too many, in my opinion - who tried to debate that the anchor predated World War II and was not intended to offend.

It is impossible to comprehend how anyone can defend this hate speech, and not experience the visceral, gut-punched revulsion that most decent humans do when confronted by it.

It begged the question: is a swastika any less offensive if on an item that was not intended to persecute the Jews?

The answer is very clear: there is never going to be any other meaning assigned to the swastika than the one it became in 1930s and 40s Europe: anti-Semitism, hate, and persecution of the Jewish people.

For those who claim - as has been reported -  that the swastika was painted on a British anchor, I say this: swastikas that are spray painted on a Canadian brick wall are no less hateful than those on Nazi flags and armbands worn by the S.S. Therefore, the anchor and its origins do not soften the meaning either.

The British anchors that bore the swastika before Nazis made it into their flag were not painted in the Hitlerian color scheme. They were monotone. The one in Pointe-des-Cascades was very freshly painted black, on a white circle; that is clearly Nazi-related.

But here's the thing: the historical context, the date, and the meaning of the swastika when that anchor was created are no longer relevant. The symbol has been forever perverted by Nazis who marched under it while they set out to humiliate, isolate, torture, murder, and burn the bodies of six million Jews - and never can the swastika be seen in any other light.

Even the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, in Washington D.C. states that "By the time the Nazis gained control of Germany, the connotations of the swastika had forever changed." (emphasis is mine)

We have seen neo-Nazis marching on a city in the USA just this month, carrying swastika flags; we cannot deny that the symbol continues to be anti-Semitic.

For those who derisively sneered that perhaps no Nazi memorabilia, or Holocaust artifacts should ever be seen, I say this: there are places for those items. Yad Vashem. The Montreal Holocaust Memorial Museum. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. The myriad museums around the world where one can go for the express purpose of learning about the Holocaust, its atrocities, and its outcomes, so that education can ensue and the world can continue to remember the horrors of Nazi Germany. Museums are designed by those who know how to teach, properly exhibit, and provide explanations for the items curated within. A park is not a museum.

For the one incredibly obtuse, disrespectful commenter who suggested to me that Auschwitz be bulldozed ("to the ground" because it was made by Germans), I say this: missing the point is a sign of deep ignorance, or cognitive dissonance. Deflection is a sign of defensiveness. If he was defending his hate, it was blatant.

Ignorance will breed more ignorance, and when we say Never Forget, it's a literal mantra. Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it.

No one is saying that all remnants of World War II be erased forever. Quite the opposite. There are places for such memorabilia, to educate, to witness, and those places are where visitors expect to be confronted by symbols of hate and horror.

But a park is not a museum - no matter how much its defenders call it thus;  and it is certainly not a place for swastikas - most especially not when they are freshly painted, defended, and protected by the mayor of the city in which they are located.

Fleischer has retained the legal services of a lawyer who will represent him if further action is taken against him (thus far, none has been instigated). I have no information as to how he will proceed from here, but what we know about Corey Fleischer is that he doesn't give up. He is a crusader against Hate of all kinds: against religious groups (ALL religions), races, sexual orientation, gender, nationality. He has made it his Mission to Erase Hate wherever it is displayed, and there's no way this will continue without his pressing the matter.

The fact that the Mayor Gilles Santerre (of Pointe-des-Cascades) couldn't empathize with Corey, or every other Jewish person to whom that symbol represents hate and suffering, is disturbing - to say the least. That he would protect it, even after Corey explained its meaning, is even more of a concern.

There are only two reasons someone would be so laissez-faire about a swastika: ignorance, or anti-Semitism.

Neither is a great quality, especially in a mayor of a municipality.

There should be no further ignorance, after being taught the reason for Corey Fleischer's desire to remove the swastikas. He explained, in the video above, quite clearly, what the symbol represents. The mayor should already know what the Holocaust was.

So, we're left with the other choice: anti-Semitism. Someone painted meticulously over those swastikas, to emphasize them. I find it hard to believe they didn't know what the symbol means. And so, we're faced with the mayor of a small town, his public works employees, and perhaps city councilors who are willfully allowing the definitive symbol of anti-Semitism to glaringly greet anyone who walks in that park.

This incident is a very slippery slope. I believe that if we do not succeed in getting the mayor to remove this hateful item from the public's view, we are going to see many more of these excuses made for other hate symbols that will pop up - not just in Montreal, not just in Canada, but perhaps worldwide.

Meanwhile, as of Monday, August 21, 2017, the following press release appeared on the city's website:

From Pointe-des-Cascades website

The mayor has decided to install new plates, explaining the history of the symbols and the artifact.

Not good enough. See, it doesn't matter what the swastika used to mean. It has forever been changed, and will never be seen as anything other than a symbol of Nazism and anti-Semitism. No amount of explanation will change that. Any Jewish person confronted by it will never be placated by a weak explanation of what it used to mean.

It means one thing, now and forevermore.

I sincerely hope the mayor of Pointe-des-Cascades - M. Gilles Santerre - will reconsider.

Perhaps he can meet with educators on the issue; perhaps a town hall in which he learns, and hears from survivors, families, researchers, those who work on behalf of combatting anti-Semitism. I would be more than happy to speak with him, as I know Corey Fleischer and others would as well.

But this cannot remain as is. No press release, no explanation, no historical context will ever take away the fact that the symbol was twisted into one of hate and cannot be unseen as such.

Education is key. It is not present in Pointe-des-Cascades.



Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Facebook Etiquette: Birthday Greetings

Google's Personal Birthday Doodle, linked to the date and significant occasions related to it)


Yesterday was my birthday. (There - it's out - you can feel guilty now, if you didn't acknowledge it)

As part of my Personal New Year resolution to create at least once a day (writing, and graphics), this entry is reflective of the Digital Age's birthday etiquette - the Facebook edition.

Birthdays, being online, can be really fun. I've received coupon offers valid for the week of my birthday, from restaurants, online book retailers, bars, places I've shopped. I've received Happy Birthday greetings from newsletters to which I subscribe, and even Google had an animated candlelit logo, linked to July 17 events, occasions, and historical facts.

On Twitter, all day long, anyone (including you) visiting your page is greeted with animated balloons drifting up to the top of the page:



And anyone who is on Facebook knows that the platform provides you with birthday notifications for your friends/contacts (or at least those who have entered their birth dates in their personal information, and made that information accessible to their friends).

Besides an actual notification alert you get (stating "it's so-and-so's birthday day, help her celebrate!", and leading you to the user's page), it also shows up on the right-hand side of your user interface, first notification in the sidebar. It lists the name(s) of birthdays, hyperlinked to the user's page to make it that much easier for you to click, and type out a wish.

And if one has forgotten, Facebook now sends you a notification letting you know it was someone's birthday yesterday, asking if you'd like to send belated greetings; this is done when a user hasn't clicked the Facebook link to do so on the day of - and yes, Facebook does keep close ties with your clicking and greeting habits.

It takes 30 seconds - unless, like so many people who go the extra mile, one chooses to write a more personal greeting, a special wish, or even include graphics. Some people find nice birthday art online and use that, some create their own (I do that for people with whom I'm close), and Facebook even provides videos from which you can choose the right one for your friend.

Now, there's no delusion in anyone's mind that, had Facebook not included this handy-dandy notification, these birthdays would still be acknowledged. In this day and age, with Facebook users who count their "friends" in the hundreds, it isn't expected that every birthday be remembered and acknowledged.

Family members need no notifications for birthdays (one would hope). Close friends are the same.

But for those people you've befriended whom you may never even meet face-to-face - or haven't yet, or those you've not seen for a long time, the platform allows you to make their day that much more special with an acknowledgment of it.

Now, since I became a Facebook user, I can honestly say that it does make the day that much more festive, when the greetings roll in. As I said, no delusion that someone I've never met, with whom I interact more casually than others, will actually remember my birthday without the social media prompt. But it's nice that they did take the time to type out the message, even if it's a simple "Happy Birthday!"

It's fun to wake to them (or, in my case, watch them roll in from my overseas friends for whom my birthday occurs before it does here in Eastern North America). It's fun to watch them come in during the day. It's even fun to look at my page and see "So-and-so and 75 others have written on your timeline to wish you a happy birthday".

It's special when those people who are more peripheral than others still take the time to type out a greeting. I had a few first-timers this year, and it made me smile, and appreciate them that much more.

I'm a big kid when it comes to my birthday. I love being the birthday girl, and I doubt that will ever change.

Technology, and especially social media, changes that for the better.

I've watched people whose birthdays are being acknowledged, and how they choose to acknowledge those greetings. I've done it a certain way, myself, for years. And it made me think about the etiquette of birthday greetings, online. So much so, in fact, that I decided to write this little observation of how it's done across the Internet.

Here are the ways in which Facebook users can - and do - acknowledge the greetings they receive. There's no right or wrong way (except the obvious):

  • A collective acknowledgment the day after
  • A collective acknowledgment the day of
  • Individual thanks
  • No acknowledgment
  • Any combination of the aforementioned 

Collective Acknowledgment - Day After: 

 

This is when the birthday person wakes the next day, and posts - either first thing in the morning, or mid-morning - something along the lines of:

"I'd like to thank everyone who took the time to wish me a happy birthday yesterday. It was very apprecicated!"

Nothing wrong with that; it does the job. It also does the job of guilting those who did NOT take the time, and shaking them loose, in a flurry of "Oh no, I missed your birthday! Happy belated!" type posts.

(Note: there have been days that have gotten away from me, days in which I have not acknowledged the birthdays of those people in my life, and I have been known to be one of those guilt-ridden belated-greeters tacked onto a Collective Acknowledgment; it happens to us all)

Collective Acknowledgment - Day Of: 

 

This gets tricky. I've seen people post halfway through the day, which may just mean they're enjoying the greetings so much, they want people to know it.

It also serves as a "shake 'em loose" tool, for those who have not yet added to the chorus of greetings.

The problem with that is that many people don't check their alerts or notifications until later in the day, or even in the evening; as well, time differences are not accounted for.

As a result, those who post their greetings (which were likely planned for the time of day they were better able to take care of them) look as though they've been guilted into posting, or are just following the crowd.

I've been known to be unable to post greetings First Thing In The Morning, and when I see those collective acknowledgments, I will include, "I'm not posting because you wanted to remind everyone - I always planned to wish you a happy day" in my personal birthday wish." (I usually include an emoji to indicate that fact, something with a tongue sticking out or a winky-face)

(It doesn't take away from the nagging worry that said birthday celebrant may believe I did so grudgingly because s/he posted a big "It's my birthday and OTHER people have ALREADY wished me a happy one" update; yes, I stress that way)

In terms of etiquette, the celebrant must also take care to follow some informal guidelines so as not to make their entire Friends' List feel badly.

(Of course, there are still those who never post the birthday wishes, regardless of the Reminder Thanks broadcasts halfway through or day after; they're hopeless and need no acknowledgment of their boorish neglect) 

Individual Thanks (Anytime)

 

This is my preferred method. It takes very little extra time to type out my thanks to each one who's taken their time to wish me a happy birthday. For some, it's a simple "thank you", for others, it's a more personal acknowledgment which inspires a follow-up post (example: "thank you so much! How are things with you?").

I enjoy greeting each one individually. It's like opening presents. You don't usually open your gifts and send a mass email to everyone who gave you one ("just want to send this to thank everyone for the gifts you gave me for my birthday/wedding/anniversary/baby! I love them all!").

Whether you're opening gifts at your party, or afterwards, the etiquette is to send thank-you notes to everyone who gave you something for your special occasion.

That's why I do the individual thanks. It feels more personal, makes it more festive, gets my acknowledgments done on the spot, and doesn't guilt anyone the next day (though, if you read on, there are ways to acknowledge the non-acknowledgers).

And when friends have done the same, on their birthdays, it's really nice to get an individual acknowledgment back as well.

No Acknowledgment

 

Goes without saying - this is just rude.

Combination Of Any Of These

 

Some people choose to do any or all of these. Keep in mind, you're influencing behavior if you post a collective note, whether it's halfway through your birthday, the next day, or even the day after that. But it definitely beats no acknowledgment at all.

Facebook has put in a new feature: the day after one's birthday, you get a video that sums up some of the greetings you got. It's a pretty tower cake, whose decorations become windows opening to some of the messages you received the day before. It's always nice to see the more personalized ones highlighted but if not, Facebook allows you to edit your own video (so you can include those longer, more personal wishes over the simple - but always appreciated - "Happy Birthday" posts).

This serves as a nice Collective Acknowledgment - Day After tool. You can hit "share", write something to introduce it, or write nothing at all.

And as always, the Day-After post of thanks will invariably bring people out of the woodwork to acknowledge you belatedly.

If I seem judgmental in any of the things I have outlined here, don't worry - I'm not. These are observations, some tongue-in-cheek, and could - perhaps - serve as a guideline for others. Whether you are celebrating (and being Facebook Celebrated), or reaching out to others who are, you may choose to turn to this post as one person's take on Facebook Birthday Etiquette.

If you're wondering how to properly do Passive-Aggressive Facebook Birthday Acknowledgment?

Here's how I posted my Day-After birthday video.


(Never said I didn't have some of the snark within)
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Rebel Media/Fox News's Gavin McInnes Must Face Consequences For His Anti-Semitic Rantings



Recently, one of the founders of The Rebel - an online, conservative media outlet formed when Sun News folded in Canada - took several other contributors and went to Israel on a "fact-finding mission". Ezra Levant, Faith Goldy, Sheila Gunn Reid, and Gavin McInnes went to Israel to report on everything from "the Israeli security fence, to Israel's border with Syria, and even the settlements in the West Bank."

What has emerged from the trip - namely from one of its participants - is nothing short of horrifying.

Gavin McInnes - described, in his Wikipedia entry, as "an English-Canadian writer, actor, comedian" and who appears frequently on Fox News, and The Blaze - both conservative media outlets in the USA - is a regular contributor to The Rebel. He has a show that airs four times weekly, and is accessible only through the "premium" content on the site (paid members only).

Up until now, I have seen some of his videos, and watched him in reports, and he's seemed fairly innocuous in his humor and reports.

But a report emerged, from a website called Canadaland, an audience-funded site and podcast, and whose goals are self-described as: "our primary focus is on media criticism and media reporting."

(I believe, in this day and age of blogging and journalism blurring lines, it's important to have media watchdogs. How they are policed is another story altogether.)

The report is called "We Watched Gavin McInnes's Full Anti-Semitic Rant So You Don't Have To". The author of the article in question is Jonathan Goldsbie,

Goldsbie paid the $6.95 USD in order to watch the full video. The reason he did so was that McInnes released a clip in which he made some very inflammatory statements including:
  • I'm becoming an anti-Semite;
  • A "clarification" of Holocaust denials: "...the Yad Vashem tour guide goes, 'you know, and there are people who think that this didn't happen.' And I felt myself defending the super-far-right Nazis, just because I was sick of so much brainwashing. And I felt like going, 'well, they never said it didn't happen. What they're saying is that it was much less than six million and that they starved to death and they weren't gassed.'" 
He also states how "obsessed" Jews are with the Holocaust adding, "I don't know if it's healthy to dwell."

When two well-known KKK/Neo-Nazi activists (David Duke, and Richard Spencer) tweeted their support for McInnes, McInnes struck back. He put out a quick video explaining that the released clip - in which he does, actually, state, not to take this out of context - was taken out of context. He even goes so far as to tell the two alt-right men that he doesn't like Nazis - "I like Jews."

When Goldsbie saw that, he paid to watch the entire video to see if, perhaps, McInnes was just - as he defensively stated - repeating the common attitudes of neo-Nazis and if the context were different.

What Goldsbie found was far worse. The almost-hour-long video was filled with McInnes's own views about Jews, other racist comments - about Asian women, for example (too offensive to reproduce here), and generalizing about Jews in ways that reveal a deeply prejudiced attitude this man holds against the Jewish people.

It's offensive, it's profoundly disturbing, and even the excerpts in Goldsbie's article made me physically ill. And as Goldsbie concluded, there were more atrocious statements even he could not reproduce in his report.

To add to this already-sickening report, when McInnes first put out the video, he titled it "10 Things I Hate About Jews."

He tweeted out the link (I have whited out the profanity):


Shortly thereafter, Ezra Levant retweeted The Rebel's official account (which had tweeted out the link, without McInnes's colorful editorializing).



The name of the video was changed in the link - but not, as Jesse Brown reported, in the video.



We fight, every single day, against those whose attitudes range from ignorant to outright anti-Semitic. We fight against those who deny the Holocaust, question what happened and how it happened, and even in the face of overwhelming proof, still insist that six million Jews were not exterminated in death camps.

Why are we now fighting a purported pro-Israel media outlet whose very founder is Jewish, and whose conservative ideals are supposed to support Israel, her people, her history, and the Jewish people worldwide?

Why is this going unchecked, after having been posted on March 8th, and has not been questioned?

Perhaps it is because there are many who would speak up but who don't pay the premium membership in order to gain access to such "premium content" as McInnes's hate speech.

Perhaps it is because too many people do not speak up.

But I do.

And now that it is public, now that we have a report from someone who has watched it, it has to be addressed. 

I call upon Brian Lilley, Ezra Levant, Faith Goldy, Sheila Gunn Reid, Mitch Wolfe - and any other Rebel contributors - to denounce McInnes. To make the video free to the public so that he can be judged on the merits of his hatred. To leave it up with a disclaimer that its contents are profoundly offensive and should not be taken as endorsed by The Rebel or anyone associated with it.

I call upon The Rebel to suspend - or better yet, fire - Gavin McInnes. He has revealed a side of himself that cannot be unseen, that cannot be discounted, and that must be addressed.

There should be an apology issued by the site, McInnes, and a statement made by the founders of The Rebel, to at least attempt to assuage the concerns of Jews who see this as yet another alt-right attempt to discredit Holocaust survivors, victims, their families, and the State of Israel - not to mention Jews worldwide.

I call upon members of The Rebel Media, and donors, to stand up and address this loudly. Do you support McInnes's anti-Semitism? If you don't, do you feel good about being a member of their site, paying for him to peddle his hate speech?

This cannot be left to fade away. It is now out there, and should be addressed.

If readers would like to contact the above, the links lead to their Facebook pages. You can also get in touch via Twitter:


Perhaps if enough people let them know how deeply upsetting this is, they will act.

Perhaps if enough members withdraw their donations and memberships, they will learn to address this head-on. Levant not only knew about it - he and their main Twitter account re-tweeted in order to disseminate the link.

If it is only clicks they care about, they've done well. If it is their integrity? They have fallen tragically far from the mark.

My next move will be to write Fox, and The Blaze, to alert them to this latest. They deserve to know, as both outlets purport to be pro-Israel as well.

I encourage you all to do the same.

We cannot stand by and allow anyone to disparage the memories of Holocaust victims, the dignity of the survivors, or the well-being of Jewish people everywhere. Clearly, we need to hold media outlets to that standard - and more.

The bell has been rung. Your move, Rebel Media.

Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Friendship And Loss - A Tribute To Lloyd



I turn to words more often than not, when my heart needs to express something that cannot be contained.

Tonight, I am writing in tribute and sorrow - because my friend, Lloyd, passed away yesterday. I only found out about it a couple of hours ago, and am still processing the shock.

Lloyd and I "met" through Facebook. He and I had a mutual friend (who, oddly, blocked me in a disagreement but to whom I owe a debt of gratitude for the introduction).

Lloyd and I immediately saw the things we shared: love of the Montreal Canadiens hockey team (even though he was American, he was a McGill University graduate and loved our hockey team as much as our city), political views, a deep respect for words and language, and the fun of wit and wisdom.

We became friends some years ago - and shortly thereafter, he recruited me into a group for people who love language, and cringe at the prevalent grammatical errors we see, especially on social media.

The group became a second home for me online. Whenever I've seen an egregious error in language (whether it's odd spelling, grammatical crime, play on words, or the like), I've been able to go into this group and share it.

I've "met" some great people through the group, as well as through Lloyd, and we found that we had several other friends in common as well.

His love for animals was another thing we shared; Lloyd had rescued his beloved husky, Mikko, not too long after we became friends, and he and I would talk about our dogs all the time. He rescued another husky - and I am still honored that he gave my name as a reference to the rescue shelter.

Lloyd's wicked sense of humor could always be counted upon for a smile, even in times of strife. When our Canadian election went the way it did, knowing how deeply it affected me, he posted an online countdown to the next election.

Lloyd was known for his countdown posts. After Donald Trump was elected - not even in office yet! - Lloyd posted a countdown to the next election.

He posted countdowns to Spring, Winter, Christmas - name it, he counted it down. And he would begin the countdown the day after the event had passed (there were always 364 days left to Christmas on December 26th).

His birthday - the day after mine - will be an empty one this year.

On New Year's day, I messaged him to wish him a Happy New Year. He'd been looking for work, and found it just recently. In my message, I told him that this would be the year his dream job happened. He said "amen" to that, and said that 2017 would be the year we would finally meet face-to-face.

He used to live just across the border, in upstate New York (till some months back, when he took a job in NJ), and I so regret not being able to see him the one time I knew he had visited the city.

But we can't have regrets in life; and I know I'm not alone - I've seen many of his friends say this on Facebook tonight - when I say Lloyd would probably want us to make some really twisted joke right now.

I hope he'll forgive me for not being able to do that. I'm still processing this news, as I know everyone else is as well.

I do NOT regret having always thanked him for his friendship, for making me smile, for posting something that would make me laugh out loud, for his support, and for just being there. I'm glad I am the type of person to be candid and honest like that; it makes me hopeful that Lloyd knew just how appreciated he was.

I had to post, when I found out, on Facebook - because so many of my friends had come to know Lloyd for his wit, his principles, his humor, and his friendly self. And in my post I mentioned that he and I had never met.

My cousin, Nancy, offered these wise words:

A friend is not a friend defined how you met. But how that person made you feel, how that friend was there to listen. There is no need to qualify how the circumstances of meeting. The loss is felt no matter what.

She's right, of course. I experienced this already - some years back, when my friend Bill passed away, never having met him either, but having so much that we shared as well.

It will sink in, as time goes on and Lloyd isn't around to hit the "like" button or the "angry face" emoji on my posts (likes for the fun stuff, angry face for the not-so-great stuff - he did like to emote). It will sink in when he doesn't count down to the next event or occasion, and especially when I cannot share the wordplay as I have so enjoyed doing all these years.

This loss will be felt for a long time to come - because he was almost as prolific as I, on my Facebook page. I could always count on Lloyd to be there with a comment.

Lloyd always acknowledged my posts. Whether it was a single word reply, a whole paragraph or two, a "like", or an emoji, Lloyd was always one of - if not THE first to acknowledge my posts. He acknowledged them, and thus - he acknowledged me. The quiet will be conspicuous, deafening, and a large gap in my online presence.

His sons will miss him the most, and to them, I offer my deepest condolences, and wish that Lloyd's memory be a blessing to them always.

Thank you for letting me pay tribute to Lloyd's memory - he deserves the accolades. There was nothing negative about Lloyd Olsson.

Sail on, my friend. Smooth waters.
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Prime Minister Trudeau Remains Silent On McGill Student's Hate Speech



It's been a week since a McGill Student representative's tweet came to light. Asking his followers to "punch a Zionist today", Igor Sadikov has since deleted his Twitter account - but not much else. He doubled down on his remarks a day after a non-apology, and remains in his position of representing students.

His decision to remain as student rep is unfathomable. And yet, at a meeting of the SSMU (Students' Society of McGill University), he was confronted by students who wanted to know how their safety will be protected now that the story has gone wider.

Molly Harris posted publicly, on her Facebook page, exactly what happened in that meeting. Her post begins with the words: "I have never felt so targeted, disgusted, or disappointed in my life."

She goes on to describe what was said in that meeting, and what Sadikov said about Jews ("it is contested that Jews are an ethno-religious group.”. What is more disturbing is how he was greeted with cheers and applause from other students.

I urge you to read this young woman's statement - it is chilling that in this day and age, we are facing a threat whose author is so exposed, so identified - and so untouched by any hand of justice whatsoever.

Deleting his Twitter account? Issuing a non-apology in which he shamelessly tried to invoke his "Jewish heritage"?

Not good enough.

Just this past Monday, the SSMU voted - and rejected - the motion calling on Sadikov to resign from the student union. The motion was rejected in a 5-4 vote. Democracy at work, folks, but where's the justice?

Here's my bigger question: where are the adults in this situation?

In the past few days, a friend and I have been seeking adults to take some sort of stand on the matter. Jewish organizations like B'nai Brith and CIJA are on this case, and working to see what can be done so that students at McGill - and other Universities - can feel safe.

But where is the government?

Canada's former ambassador to Israel, Vivian Bercovici, posted this on her Facebook wall:

The student activist/hater McGill University student who tweeted recently, exhorting fellow haters to “punch a zionist today” continues to dig his hole. He tries to explain his incitement to violence as an expression of his distaste for Zionism. In other words, he opposes the existence of a Jewish state. But – he somehow understands this as being all about peace, love and anti-colonialism and not hatred or anti-semitism.
On the latter point, he invokes his own Jewish heritage. Shameless, disingenuous and downright disgusting. The fact that he is Jewish does not validate his uninformed and hate-filled views. The conspiracy theories espoused by Alice Walker are not more credible because she is American. This nasty piece of work, Mr. Sadikov, is a coward. He deleted the tweet that drew so much attention, and now says that he has not decided whether or not to resign from student government.
That someone so openly hate-filled and violent even has the option to continue screams out for a review of student governance policies. I’m also wondering……where is my Prime Minister Justin Trudeau? He – or one of his high profile Cabinet members – is usually quick to pounce on such disgraceful conduct and condemn it. Jews, Israelis and Zionists are living in a highly toxic environment. Why the silence from Ottawa? Why is this a non-event?
Just this week, Anthony Housefather - Liberal MP - posted this statement on behalf of him and colleague Michael Levitt:


MPP Gila Martow, representing the Thornhill district of Ontario (the largest Jewish community in Canada) released this statement:


These statements are important because those with a platform can use their voices to raise awareness, and provoke action.

I must echo Ambassador Bercovici, who asks, where is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau?

We have seen PM Trudeau address other incidents - from the tragic, to the expressions of hate.

For example: following the Paris attacks in November of 2015, Trudeau dealt with the sharp uptick in hate crimes against Canadian mosques. Mosques were vandalized, anti-Muslim graffiti was spray-painted on an apartment complex wall, and a Muslim woman was the target of racial slurs, her hijab tugged by the attackers. Serious enough to be criminal, but no serious bodily harm committed. And certainly, unacceptable.

He swiftly condemned those attacks within a day of their occurrence, stating:

"Diversity is Canada's strength. These vicious and senseless acts of intolerance have no place in our country and run absolutely contrary to Canadian values of pluralism and acceptance."
Trudeau also vowed that his government and police would work to protect the victims' rights, and urged Canadians to focus on unity in the face of global terrorism threats.
"Our focus must be on stopping the people responsible for the terror, and continuing to fight hate by embracing Canadian values," he said.
That is as it should be. A Prime Minister should speak up when the citizens of the country he runs are threatened in any way, and in the face of hate speech, condemn those acts.

Yet, it's been a week since a student in the Prime Minister's home town - at the Prime Minister's alma mater and faculty (he holds a Bachelor of Arts from McGill) - has called for violence against Zionists, and there is no statement whatsoever from him.

 One must ask, why not? Is this not enough of a story for him to comment on, when it's been covered and spread internationally? Is this not enough of a story because there's been nobody directly affected (or so he may believe) by the tweet? Or is this not enough of a story because the Jewish community is involved?

I despise rushing to judgment, but this Prime Minister hastens to comment on anti-Muslim rhetoric, and is currently drafting a motion that would make Islamophobia a crime. Motion M-103 condemns Islamophobia, but fails to mention other religious groups.

Considering the fact that Jews are the victims of religiously motivated hate crimes more often than any other religious group in Canada, this shows a definitive lack of inclusiveness in condemning ALL hate crimes.

Statistics Canada - Table Data Specified; Click To Enlarge

For a Prime Minister to be faced with this kind of story taking place over a week, with a continued atmosphere of fear and tensions on campus - spreading to other universities, no doubt - and say nothing?

It is not acceptable, not for a leader who is supposed to be the leader of all Canadians, not just one segment of the country.

McGill University likely wishes this issue would fade away. After all, the tweet was deleted, the Twitter account is gone, an "apology" was issued, and nobody has gotten punched (yet). 

Those of us incensed that this student is still an official representative, let alone still a student at McGill where his hate speech can be surreptitiously spread by him and his minions, will not let it go.

Those of us who want to see him expelled - and at the very least forced to resign his position - will not let it go.

Those of us who read of a student's traumatic experience at a SSMU meeting, where Sadikov spoke, and his supporters targeted dissenters, will not let it go.

Those of us who want our elected officials to speak up, to pressure not just the University but the leader of our country, to denounce, and act upon this egregious hate speech, will not let it go.

If you are a student at McGill, a recent graduate, an alumnus, or even a parent of one, it would be a good time to let Suzanne Fortier know how you feel. She is the Principal and Vice-Chancellor of McGill University, and her email address is suzanne.fortier@mcgill.ca.

The more emails she gets, the harder it will be for her to ignore it. 

I also urge everyone to write your MP to ask for a strong statement. The two statements above are excellent examples of elected officials recognizing the problem and doing something about it - even if it is just to speak up.

But we need more.

Find your MP on this site, and if you don't know who it is, you can search by your address.

All you need to do is send a simple email, referencing the story (B'nai Brith Canada published a story last Friday, in which the student doubled down on his hate speech), stating your outrage over his continued tenure as student and student rep, and asking for a formal statement - as well as perhaps asking the MP to introduce a motion to get a formal statement from Prime Minister Trudeau.

It starts with voices. Our voices.

Please join us.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

Friday, February 10, 2017

McGill Student Rep Not Backing Down



In a newsletter I received from B'nai Brith, it has come to light that Igor Sadikov - about whom I wrote last night - has doubled down on his hatred, and has been contacted on social media by willing participants to his violence.

From the newsletter:


Igor Sadikov continues to spread anti-Jewish falsehoods, even after his tweet calling on his followers to “punch a Zionist” was exposed by B’nai Brith Canada Thursday. The report sparked a media firestorm.
Sadikov, clearly an unrepentant member of the Legislative Council and Board of Directors of the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU), issued a statement defending his tweet as “opposition to the adherents of a political philosophy,” but “not an attack against Jewish students,” citing his own “Jewish heritage”. According to Jewish students at McGill who have known Sadikov for years, he has never before publicly identified himself as Jewish or claimed any Jewish background.
Disturbingly, in the space below his “apology” on Facebook, Sadikov “liked” a comment from someone else, promising that “I can punch one for you if your position does not allow you to.” The “like” took place about seven hours after he made his so-called “apology.”

The screenshot:


Students have reported to B’nai Brith that, in a tense meeting of the SSMU Legislative Council last night, Sadikov refused to promptly resign, arguing that Jews do not constitute a legitimate ethnic group and that there is no historical connection between the Jewish People and the Levant. A motion to censure Sadikov for his comments failed by a large margin.
Later in the meeting, a member of McGill’s BDS Action Network demanded that Jasmine Segal, a Jewish member of the Legislative Council, be impeached for “supporting Zionism.” While Segal was not impeached, the President of SSMU and other Council members refused to speak in her defence.
Segal told B’nai Brith that, “A university’s purpose is to promote a free exchange of ideas and thought - it does not matter what you believe or support. The only exception is that there can be no support for violence as a tool to suppress another person's free speech. I had approached the President of SSMU in near tears, explaining my position, and was told that I would hear an apology and a public statement in the meeting. No apology was ever delivered. I am worried for students who are now scared to be a part of student government because of what happened to me today.”
Meanwhile, McGill itself condemned Sadikov’s remarks, saying in a statement, “We believe that they violate a number of our policies” and that “appropriate offices are taking action as required.”
“B’nai Brith Canada is disgusted by the response of SSMU, which allowed the escalation of attacks against Jewish students at McGill,” said Michael Mostyn, chief executive officer of the organization. “We have written to both SSMU and the administration, and our Quebec office filed a complaint to police (Thursday) about this matter.
“I cannot stress enough how appalled we are by what’s transpired in the past 48 hours. Rather than condemning Sadikov and distancing SSMU from his offensive position, it has chosen to remain silent about discrimination and incitement to violence toward its Jewish constituents. The McGill administration must move quickly to protect its own elected representatives.”
For more information contact:
Marty York
Chief Media Officer
marty.york@bnaibrith.ca
416-633-6224 x163
or
Daniel Koren
Media Coordinator
daniel.koren@bnaibrith.ca
416-633-6224 x172

As pointed out by a good friend, someone who is deeply knowledgeable about these issues, Sadikov should be charged under the Criminal Code, Section 319 as follows:

Public incitement of hatred
  • 319 (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of
    • (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
    • (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
  • Marginal note:Wilful promotion of hatred
    (2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of
    • (a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
    • (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Meanwhile, I have forwarded last night's piece to various outlets, including B'nai Brith (the two gentlemen whose contact information is above) and have tweeted Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to disavow this student.

Of course, Trudeau has yet to disavow the Quebec Imam who prays daily for the annihilation of the Jews. So I'm expecting nothing.

But others ARE speaking up. And this revelation that Sadikov has continued his crusade, even after his "apology" is alarming, to the point where I believe criminal charges MUST be filed.

Please share your thoughts. And speak up.

We must not allow hatred to continue as a result of silence.


Posted by at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)