1. The United Church - As I posted about a few days ago, the draft proposals that are to be considered at the United Church's General Council next week in Kelowna, BC have really stirred up a hornet's nest. To summarize, Bernie Farber, CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress, published this opinion piece in the National Post on July 29. It is important to read the whole column, but I refer you to this comment in particular:
"If passed, these resolutions will repudiate the courageous and constructive approach of the last UCC General Council. At that time, the church rejected the call to boycott Israel and to apply methods that brought down the true apartheid regime in South Africa, and instead supported an investment strategy to contribute to peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians."
The concern I had with the column was that it suggested to me that the United Church was a monolithic entity that was anti-Israel and anti-Semitic, and that this monolithic entity as a whole had brought the offending proposals to the floor of its annual General Council.
Today brought some new developments. First, this piece by Reverend David Giuliano , Moderator of the United Church of Canada, was published in yesterday's National Post - Standing up for Israelis and Palestinians. Second, a response to Reverend Giuliano's piece written by Eric Vernon of Canadian Jewish Congress was published in today's National Post. Third, I had an lengthy and interesting conversation with a Minister of the United Church about the "bottom up" and grassroots nature of the Church and a broad overview of the process by which proposals end up before a General Council.
The Minister took some issue with the language I had used in my previous post on the subject in which I referred to a possibly lunatic fringe within the Church that brought these proposals forward on a seemingly constant basis - the Minister thought that the language was inflammatory. I also understood the Minister to say that they believed that criticism of Israel was stifled because it is automatically labeled as being anti-Semitic or Anti-Israel.
My response, and that of a certain tall colleague whom many of you might know, was that I have no problem whatsoever with legitimate criticism of the policies of the Israeli Government [as I have said before on this blog, I take great care before playing the anti-Semitism card]. But legitimate criticism means, among other things, (a) not prefacing it with some allegation that Israel has no right to exist as a sovereign Jewish state and (b) criticizing other nations and organizations in the same manner on a consistent basis.
I always come back to the 3D test advanced by Natan Sharansky, and in this case in particular, the second test - "The second "D" is the test of double standards. When criticism of Israel is applied selectively; when Israel is singled out by the United Nations for human rights abuses while the behavior of known and major abusers, such as China, Iran, Cuba, and Syria, is ignored; when Israel's Magen David Adom, alone among the world's ambulance services, is denied admission to the International Red Cross - this is anti-Semitism."
I then suggested to the Minister that I had no problem having a thorough discussion about the rights and wrongs of the Israeli blockade of its border with Gaza, being a particular subject that was raised, but that after we had that discussion, we would have to have discussions about serious issues in Darfur, Iran, China and so on.
And in that context, when I look at the list of proposals, see pages 37-42 of this document, I see 4 proposals about the Middle East and Israel. I do not see any others about any other nations other than a proposal relating to the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement. In the support materials, I also see a lot of very antagonistic language toward Israel and the citing of clearly anti-Israel "experts" such as Mary Robinson (written about on my blog in the last entry) and Jeff Halper (don't even get me started on him).
I referred the Minister to the 3D test noted above. The Minister referred me to a document - United For Peace - that I have not had the chance to review.
So while I am do not think that the United Church as an institution (if that can even be said) is anti-Israel/anti-Semitic, in light of my comments/analysis above, at the moment, I am quite concerned that there is a meaningful and coordinated segment of Church members at some level that seriously leans toward, if not extends over, that line. And if the proposals are adopted........who knows?
In any event, while our conversation was quite respectful and civil, I think that the Minister and I may have to agree to disagree on a number of points. That said, we plan to continue our discussions with other members of our respective communities in the fall, where we can evaluate the results of the General Council and get other opinions, and I will update you further at that time.
8. Egypt - See No Evil
10. The Palestinian Authority - Palestinians to keep resistance an option. Peace Partner Alert!
14. "Smells Like....Victory" - Quoting Colonel Kilgore (the character played by Robert Duvall in Apocalypse Now) - but Daniel Pipes posits this question - Victory – An Obsolete Concept?
16. If You Like Photography - Then http://www.shorpy.com/ is for you. And here is a very cool picture of a predecessor to the P-51 Mustang that served as a vital escort to Allied Air Forces in their bombing campaign against Nazi-occupied Europe.
18. Men in Film - Very Cool
