Several Canadian filmmakers plan to withdraw their movies from next month's Toronto International Film Festival to protest a weeklong cinematic homage to Tel Aviv.
They claim that the screenings will show Israel in a positive light instead of creating a critical forum in which to discuss the occupation.
Haaretz
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Canada strives to be more Jewish on the world stage than Israel itself. My country shames me and so many other decent Canadians. The time to show the world that the Emperor has no clothes is NOW. If this festival works as a venue they have my full support. ESPECIALLY after the filthy stance of the Royal Ontario Museum on showing the Dead Sea Scrolls as being completely Judaic.
ReplyDelete<span>ESPECIALLY after the filthy stance of the Royal Ontario Museum on showing the Dead Sea Scrolls as being completely Judaic.</span>
ReplyDeleteWhat do you mean by this? Please explain.
Could this be the return of bARABie-only on her meds this time?
ReplyDeleteI think the issue wiuth the Ontario museum is that it was displaying the scrolls as belonging to Israel or Israeli when in fact they were found in occupied Palestinian territory.
ReplyDelete<span>I think the issue with the Royal Ontario Museum is that it was displaying the scrolls as belonging to Israel or Israeli when in fact they were found in occupied Palestinian territory in the West Bank..This is in contravention with international law..</span>
ReplyDelete<span><span>I think the issue with the Royal Ontario Museum is that it was displaying the scrolls as belonging to Israel or Israeli when in fact they were found in Qumran in occupied Palestinian territory in the West Bank..This is in contravention with international law..
ReplyDelete</span></span>
CULTURAL VANDALISM
ReplyDelete"The P.A. and Muslim activists claimed that the scrolls were “stolen” from Palestinian territory and illegally obtained when Israel annexed East Jerusalem — where the scrolls were stored — in 1967. “The exhibition would entail exhibiting or displaying artifacts removed from the Palestinian territories” by Israel, wrote Hamdan Taha, head of the archaeological department in the Palestinian Ministry of Tourism & Antiquities, in a widely publicized letter, calling the show a violation of international law."
http://www.elginism.com/20090720/2259/
Robert Fisk on the dead Sea Scrolls controversy:
ReplyDelete"Because the message of most of the videos showing around the exhibition (this being the age of multitechnical as well as multicultural wellbeing) make it clear that Judea and Samaria (the West Bank to the rest of us) is originally Jewish. And so it was, by God. The poor old Philistines lived on the sea coast. But when I suggested a swap to a bunch of Israeli settlers some years ago – to be fair, they roared in good-humoured laughter at my horrible suggestion that Israel might be given to the Palestinians in return for the occupied West Bank – the idea did not commend itself to them. They wanted Tel Aviv and all of internationally recognised Israel plus the West Bank. (At the time, they also wanted to keep Gaza, partly on the grounds – according to one of them – that this was where Jonah was puked up by the whale.)"
"So cautious are the dear old Canadians – who should by now have learned that concealing unhappy truths will only create fire and pain – that they do not even mention that “Kando”, the first recipient of the scrolls, was Armenian. Of course not. Because then they would have to explain why an Armenian was in Jerusalem, not in western Turkey. Which would mean that they would have to mention the Armenian Holocaust of 1915 (one and a half million Armenian civilians murdered by Ottoman Turks)."
http://www.elginism.com/20090714/2247/
Cultural vandalism..
ReplyDeleteFrom 2005
ReplyDeleteIsrael plans official looting of Palestinian artefacts for “protection”
It appears that as Israel withdraws from Gaza they plan on taking many artefacts with them. The justification for this is that they will be better looked after, a reasoning that is bad enough when post-rationalised by the British Museum, but is even worse when it is planned as a strategy today, with no regard for the wishes of the owners of the artefacts.
http://www.elginism.com/20050722/172/
Also in the Jerusalem Post
http://www.elginism.com/20050722/172/
ReplyDelete"According to international law, it is illegal for an occupying power to remove ancient artifacts, movable and immovable, from the land."
LOTS of information, Thanks, TGIA. Very interesting!
ReplyDeleteLots of information, Tgia. Very interesting, Thank You.
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome.
ReplyDeleteSo cautious are the dear old Canadians – who should by now have learned that concealing unhappy truths will only create fire and pain – that they do not even mention that “Kando”, the first recipient of the scrolls, was Armenian. Of course not. Because then they would have to explain why an Armenian was in Jerusalem, not in western Turkey. Which would mean that they would have to mention the Armenian Holocaust of 1915 (one and a half million Armenian civilians murdered by Ottoman Turks).
ReplyDeleteI think this is a singularly silly argument by Fisk. Even if the exhibit's organizers mentioned that the frist recipient of the scrolls was Armenian, why on earth would they have to explain an Armenian's presence in Jerusalem? Why would the Royal Ontario Museum's exhibit have to go into the Armenian holocaust? There are valid reasons to challenge the denial by Turkey,Israel...and Canada's avoidance of controversy, but at an exhibit of the Dead Sea Scrolls???
<span>So cautious are the dear old Canadians – who should by now have learned that concealing unhappy truths will only create fire and pain – that they do not even mention that “Kando”, the first recipient of the scrolls, was Armenian. Of course not. Because then they would have to explain why an Armenian was in Jerusalem, not in western Turkey. Which would mean that they would have to mention the Armenian Holocaust of 1915 (one and a half million Armenian civilians murdered by Ottoman Turks).
ReplyDeleteI think this is a singularly silly argument by Fisk. Even if the exhibit's organizers mentioned that the first recipient of the scrolls was Armenian, why on earth would they have to explain an Armenian's presence in Jerusalem? Why would the Royal Ontario Museum's exhibit have to go into the Armenian holocaust? There are valid reasons to challenge the denial by Turkey,Israel...and Canada's avoidance of controversy, but at an exhibit of the Dead Sea Scrolls???</span>
Yes, they will try anything to tie themselves to the region, even if it were true it would not mean jack shit because there was no forced diaspora, but that is besides the point. The "Essenes" as a group did not even exist, they were invented by Josephus (among many other inventions). Actually they were written elsewhere, and that origin of style does not jive with the views of some who believe they came from Jerusalem, which is really far fetched - they were trasported to the area (and this is because no one has found any proof of some living tribe in the region at the time). There is also no historic testimony in either Hebrew or Aramaic about the Essenes, as if thousands of people lived like this in contrast to Torah with nothing written...lol
ReplyDelete<span>Yes, they will try anything to tie themselves to the region, even if it were true it would not mean jack shit because there was no forced diaspora, but that is besides the point - even if this was the region of original settlement it gives no one the right thousands of years after the fact to do what they are now doing (as if someone from New York can just squat where he pleases and take someone elses property who have been there hundreds of years). The "Essenes" as a group did not even exist, they were invented by Josephus (among many other inventions). Actually they were written elsewhere, and that origin of style does not jive with the views of some who believe they came from Jerusalem, which is really far fetched - they were trasported to the area (and this is because no one has found any proof of some living tribe in the region at the time). There is also no historic testimony in either Hebrew or Aramaic about the Essenes, as if thousands of people lived like this in contrast to Torah with nothing written...lol</span>
ReplyDeleteI wanted to share some good news. Iraq might be getting 96 F16s from the US:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2009/08/airforce_iraqi_f16_082909w/
I am delighted that Iraq will soon be a regional superpower. I hope the Iraqis help Palestine out. The Palestinians need to humble themselves and ask for Iraqi help.
<span>I am delighted that Iraq will soon be a regional superpower. I hope the Iraqis help Palestine out.</span>
ReplyDelete-----------
By bombing Tel Aviv with the new F16?
<span><span>I am delighted that Iraq will soon be a regional superpower. I hope the Iraqis help Palestine out.</span>
ReplyDelete-----------
How? By bombing the settlers with the new F16?</span>
Sigh*
I have good news also, that it has been shown that much of the media on Muslim terorism in India is manufactured -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.countercurrents.org/sikand260809.htm
"A striking finding of the report is that the media in Karnataka, both Kannada and English, ‘dangerously seemed to pronounce judgments on those arrested, much before the due process of law was played out’. In fact, the report says, there was ‘no material basis to most of the news reports’. The tone of their reporting was sharply ‘jingoistic’, and ‘none of the standards’ expected of professional journalism ‘seemed to be in evidence’. Alleged terrorists—in many cases innocent Muslim youths arbitrarily picked up by the police—were subjected to ‘media trials’ based simply on unsubstantiated police claims. The report speaks of ‘the blurring of lines between police officials and investigative journalists, who seemed to pre-empt “official” investigation.’ The language and rhetoric used in the reporting reflected, the report says, an obvious and deep-rooted bias against Muslims, and a deliberate effort to create a sense of siege among Hindus."
<span>I have good news also, that it has been shown that much of the media on Muslim terorism in India is manufactured -
ReplyDeletehttp://www.countercurrents.org/sikand260809.htm
"A striking finding of the report is that the media in Karnataka, both Kannada and English, ‘dangerously seemed to pronounce judgments on those arrested, much before the due process of law was played out’. In fact, the report says, there was ‘no material basis to most of the news reports’. The tone of their reporting was sharply ‘jingoistic’, and ‘none of the standards’ expected of professional journalism ‘seemed to be in evidence’. Alleged terrorists—in many cases innocent Muslim youths arbitrarily picked up by the police—were subjected to ‘media trials’ based simply on unsubstantiated police claims. The report speaks of ‘the blurring of lines between police officials and investigative journalists, who seemed to pre-empt “official” investigation.’ The language and rhetoric used in the reporting reflected, the report says, an obvious and deep-rooted bias against Muslims, and a deliberate effort to create a sense of siege among Hindus."</span>
"Among the many cases of false framing of Muslims as ‘terrorists’ in Karnataka that the report highlights, one deserves special mention to indicate the deep-rootedness of anti-Muslim prejudices in the state machinery, particularly since the BJP emerged as such a powerful force in Karnataka."
ReplyDeleteFrom above link
Another excerpt from the report - (I call this the rise of the Inida National Security State)
ReplyDelete"The report indicates that journalists in Karnataka (and this probably holds true for the rest of the country) typically see terrorism as a specifically Muslim phenomenon, and do not even consider the possibility of Hindu ‘terrorists’, although, as the report points out, in Karnataka today, particularly with the rise of the BJP, scores of incidents of terror against Muslims (as well as Dalits) by Hindu groups have been recorded. Predictably, the media does not describe these as instances of ‘Hindu terrorism’. This points to what the report terms as the dangerously marked ‘internalisation of Hindu nationalism’ by media professionals in Karnataka, and the projection by the media of the Hindutva lobby as the presumed ‘sole representative’ of the Hindus."
<span><span><span>I am delighted that Iraq will soon be a regional superpower. I hope the Iraqis help Palestine out.</span>
ReplyDelete-----------
Bombing the settler shit would be nice..
</span></span>
anand
ReplyDeleteYou're very much into arms, weapons and stuff, aren't you?
Thanks for the info TGIA. Who should get the artifacts? Fatah or Hamas?
ReplyDeletetgia:
ReplyDeleteI wasn't making light of the issue of the Dead Sea Scrolls in my earlier response to that "barbara" person. I just thought that she was piggybacking her own particular issue on the back of the Palestinians. Her main concern was that Canadian culture is becoming too Jewish. Sill me, I wasn't even aware there was such a thing as Canadian culture...The issue is clear on Palestine, and it doesn't have to be muddied up by Canadian nationalism.
On the matter of different groups trying to exploit the Palestinians while pretending to support them, to the Palestinians' credit, it seems to be a one sided love affair for the most part. But the matter of unwanted support for Palestinians became very real to me about a month ago when the "God Hates Fags" people protested outside a synagouge in my neighborhood. There's a church from the American Midwest whose members show up at funerals of victims of gay-bashing with big signs that say "God hates fags." and that the victim is burning in hell. I was walking my dog and happenned to walk right into this protest. They were carrying signs that said "Jews killed Jesus" and "Not your land". I'm guessing the last one had to with Palestine...You get my point, I hope: this wasn't the best way to raise the issue of Palestine.
joe
ReplyDeleteMy posts above were meant as an attempt to shed some light on this complicated issue and only for that reason.. I was wondering if people were aware of the cultural vandalism that is taken place in Palestine and just in case anyone is still in the dark about it, the theft and plunder of the occupied territories are well advanced. Now of course there are many sides that could be taking advantage of the Palestinian cause in order to advace very shady agendas..Unfortunately this is something the Palestinians have no control over.
Wow, Joe, if I may ask which region of the country did you see those God hates fags "people"? I have never seen them here in NYC and think I would throw my shoe at them if I did.
ReplyDeleteThey are from Kansas, Molly and they are clearly nuts! They also have shown up at the funerals of soldiers. Sickening.
ReplyDeleteThe Rev. Fred Phelps, founder of Westboro Baptist, contends that American soldiers are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God for protecting a country that harbors gays. The church, which is not affiliated with a larger denomination, is made up mostly of Phelps' children, grandchildren and in-laws.
http://blogs.knoxnews.com/silence/archives/2005/08/a_tn_soldiers_f_1.shtml
<span>They are from Kansas, Molly and they are clearly nuts! They have also shown up at the funerals of soldiers. Sickening.
ReplyDeleteThe Rev. Fred Phelps, founder of Westboro Baptist, contends that American soldiers are being killed in Iraq as vengeance from God for protecting a country that harbors gays. The church, which is not affiliated with a larger denomination, is made up mostly of Phelps' children, grandchildren and in-laws.
http://blogs.knoxnews.com/silence/archives/2005/08/a_tn_soldiers_f_1.shtml</span>
There were about eight of them and they were in and out pretty quickly. I went home and told a neighbor and by the time he went up they were gone. There were about half a dozen HUGE plainclothes cops sort of surrounding them. My guess is that they reached some agreement with the city for permission to demonstrate for something like fifteen minutes and then they split. Also, their outrage most likely was because of the gay days is Israel and not because of abuse of Palestinians...they probably hate Moslems as much as "fags"..Not the best group to be raising issues about Palestine.
ReplyDeleteKind of reminds me of our own nutters! I had an exchange with one of them, a young woman, and she was one nasty MF(pardon my language she made me really angry) ...
ReplyDeleteTgia, angry? At those with whom he disagees? SHOCKING!! LOL LOL
ReplyDeleteCome on now, you have never apologized for calling me "shithead" or other nasty appellations. But I guess your righteous rage entitles you to such, eh?
The WB/GHF clan is loathed by practically everyone in the US, including conservatives or "wingnuts" (term of derision popular here for people with differing views). WB's stance against Israel just further marginalizes them here in the US.
I know a radio show that interviews Rev Phelps' wife every so often. They do it because it makes good radio, but you can tell they think she is absolutely nuts. V, maybe you could get a similar gig on the same show? LOL
The US only had about 19% of the voting shares at the WB before the latest Indian/Chinese/Russian/Brazilian bailout a few months ago. I don't know the US percentage now.
ReplyDeleteOne reason Americans don't like the WB is because the US has so much less influence on it than it use to. However, I think this is good for America since the other great global powers are stepping up and paying for the WB and IMF.
Read before you type Anand. The "WB" I was referring to was the Westboro Baptist church. NOT THE WORLD BANK! In fact, not even close. Good lord you really are quite clueless at times, arent you.
ReplyDelete99% of americans could give two shits about the World Bank, either way, but whatever.
One thing about Phelps and Company: They don't bullshit around; you know exactly where they stand-not like the mainstream anti-gay forces, with their gay marraige bans being called "Defense of Marraige" acts. They should really be called "God Hates Fags" acts. Wait, that might get struck down on separation of church and state grounds. A gay marraige ban should be called "The America Hates Fags Act", or if it's in Alaska, "The Real America Hates Fags Act". It has a nice patriotic ring to it too. A real "Defense of Marraige" law would have two parts: 1: Outlaw divorce. 2. Outlaw premarital sex. But it's easier to target a minority who has nothing to do with the problem. Whatever we do, we must not allow people, gay and straight, to decide for themselves if they want to get married or not.
ReplyDeleteSure Joe. Keep spewing your extreme rhetoric that is so popular with hate-filled uber liberals such as yourself.
ReplyDeleteOne cant be against gay marriage without being a uber conservative huh? Well, you better go spend some time with the blacks and hispanics who killed the california resolution. Maybe you can put your extraordinary personal charm to good use!! LOL LOL LOL
Ok, then what rational reason would someone have for wanting the government to penalize gay couples?
ReplyDeleteWhy not ask the blacks and hispanics who voted against the california resolution Joe? Be sure to seek their "rationale"!
ReplyDeleteIts not about penalizing Joe. Its about what some people call morality. Tell me, for what rationale reason do muslims require women to wear the hajib (sp?) or memorize the koran? For what rationale reason do they prohibit women from attending school? For what "rationale" reason do we prohibit "relations" between a consenting cow and a horny farmer??? LOL
Some people, religious and otherwise, dont see being gay as something that should be viewed as equal to marriage between a man and a woman. I dont think that is such a harsh view or completely irrational perspective.
Very interesting mini-essay...But getting back to my question, what rational reason is there for banning gay marraige(okay I'll be more specific)in the United States in 2009? You didn't give one-all you said was a lot of people are irrational..and I agree with you there.
ReplyDeleteIt's also quite revealing that you are all for the government staying out of people's lives when it comes to things like wearing motorcycle hemets...but when it comes to singling out a particular group for govenment interference, you r principles disappear and your sheet and hood come out.
ReplyDeleteSpare me your preachy preening Joe. Again, one cannot have a view different from yours without being characterized as a kkk-er. How very egalitarina of you Joe. You people dont argue -- you state a position and then attempt to character assassinate anyone who goes against it. Real charming Joe. In the same way that Stalin was charming....
ReplyDeleteStates should determins their policies on gay marriage by vote. Which california did, and still you want to attack a guy in Georgia for what blacks and hispanics did on the left coast. Say Joe, go call them kkk-ers, see how they like it :)
In other words, you can think of no rational reason to ban gay marraige.
ReplyDeleteIn other words Joey, it aint MY call, is it? Jesus man, go bitch to the blacks and hispanics who voted it down in California. Tell them how un-rational they are. Im sure they will appreciate your "input".
ReplyDelete<span>Jesus man, go bitch to the blacks and hispanics who voted it down in California.</span>
ReplyDeleteThat won't happen very often, Fleming. Activists will rarely dare to criticize the Black and Hispanic ministers and congregations who spoke out and voted overwhelmingly against gay marriage. Too scared. Too unPC. Such silliness.
It ain't my call either, or Phelps' or Rick Warren's. It's the call of the people who are deciding whether they should get married...unless you believe the government should have a say in the most personal aspects of our lives.
ReplyDeleteExactly Joe. As vza just reiterated, it was THE PEOPLE who voted against gay marriage in california. Specifically blacks and hispanics.
ReplyDeleteBut I guess you are going to keep ignoring this FACT becuase its inconvenient to your incessant bitching and your wish to demonize white/religious USA.
fleming:
ReplyDeleteCalm down! I understand: you can give no rational reason to ban gay marraige. That is understandable because there is no rational reason to ban it. But that is obvious since they call these bans "Defense of Marraige" acts, which raises the level of political use of bullshit to a new level. I mean, I would like to hear how Governor Sanford would blame his behavior on gays....and by the way, there are blacks who are homophobic and gays who are racist, so you don't have to answer my questions about this issue by pointing that out everytime you don't know what to say.
Im extremely calm Joe. Its you who are agitated - about gay marriage. Mr Sanford hasnt blamed his mistakes on gays, so why are you trying to put words in his mouth? Or do you find make believe a necessary ingredient in all your arguments?
ReplyDeleteWhen did I become the standard bearer for the gay marriage ban, Joe? I merely pointed out there was a vote and it was rejected. Deal with it. But the lesson is, clearly, that by in large, the USA does not share your "rational" perspective toward gay marriage.
Write a letter to the NY Times in which you berate the people in California for their "unrational" decision. Maybe they will bow down to your superior logic next chance they have - but I doubt it. Regardless, I had nothing to do with their decision. TALK TO THEM.
I have plenty to say Joe. Its your ears that are clogged.
My point about Sanford is how ridiculous it would sound if someone fucked up their own marraige and then blamed gays for their behavior. It even gets more ridiculous when the decline of marraige is blamed(sic) on gays.
ReplyDeleteAnd even though this issue had a set back in Claifornia, it is still a very live issue. Eventually, the anti-gay marraige forces are going to have to be as honest as Phelps, unless they really do have a rational reason to stigmatize gays by denying them the protection of marraige. I understand that you cannot supply that reason.
fleming:
ReplyDeleteAlso, "unrational" is not a word-at least in English. The word you are looking for is "irrational". I guess your mistake was the fault of Mexicans who aren't fluent in English when they come here.
That is why I put the word in quotes you dingleberry.
ReplyDeleteGo ahead, Joe, put whatever words in my mouth you like to "prove" that Im racist against mexicans.
How sad. You really have nothing of value to add.