babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » election 2006   » 'I wish I could take those words back'

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: 'I wish I could take those words back'
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 09 June 2004 09:38 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
'I wish I could take those words back'

Is there not a screening process for candidates?


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 June 2004 10:00 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The honourable thing for Azania to do is stand down now.

In human terms, everything he says in his own defence is entirely believable, and if he were my friend or my brother, I'd believe him.

But he is running for public office, and he would honour democracy by standing down now, voluntarily, and fast.

This is very sad.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446

posted 09 June 2004 10:02 AM      Profile for Privateer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Azania wrote that 10 years ago, and no longer holds that view. Do you wanna see some stuff Tommy Douglas wrote in university?
And I have never heard of a screening procedure involving everything a candidate said or wrote in his life.

From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 09 June 2004 10:05 AM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The honourable thing for Azania to do is stand down now.

I believe the honourable thing to do is recognize that people change and move on.


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 June 2004 10:06 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I didn't say it was fair, Privateer.

I said it would be honourable.

And no, my private life wouldn't stand up to a thorough screening either, but then I'm not running for anything.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 09 June 2004 10:11 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
<cliché> I have Jewish friends </cliché>
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 09 June 2004 10:13 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A constructive screening process might ask something like: "Have you ever done something in your past that could discredit you or your party?"

As expected, it didn't take the CBC long to sink their teeth into the story.

The story originated from Colby Cosh who writes for the National Post.


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 09 June 2004 10:19 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
leftcoastguy, I can't find the story on the CBC site --?

(That I can't find things doesn't necessarily mean much, mind. )


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 09 June 2004 10:21 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's really not that big an issue. He made some seriously dumb comments a decade ago, and has apologized. If we start excluding people for dumb comments and actions in their youth, we'd be pretty damn short of candidates.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
NDP Newbie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5089

posted 09 June 2004 10:24 AM      Profile for NDP Newbie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Unlike James Moore, Azania has apologised and has changed.
From: Cornwall, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 June 2004 10:24 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, he should probably step down.

That said, I've often thought that it was a good thing that I've never felt the desire to run for anything. There are 20,000+ posts of mine on babble for the Sun to wade through and find something incriminating. I'm sure I must have said something at some point on some day that they could use against me in some way.

(And no, I'm not making light of what this guy said. It's good that he admits he was wrong, but still...)


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 09 June 2004 10:32 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
leftcoastguy, I can't find the story on the CBC site --?
(That I can't find things doesn't necessarily mean much, mind. )

It was on the 6:00 AM (PT)CBC Newsworld News.

They interviewed both the Liberal & Conservative candidates, who milked it as much as they could, and they quoted a B'nai Brith spokesperson who said the remarks were unfortunate, or something to that effect.

Has the Election Canada deadline for nominating candidates passed?

I think it has by one day or so, hasn't it?


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 09 June 2004 10:33 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Azania has apologised and has changed.

He was busted, apologised and (presumably) changed. The funny thing is his wish ("I wish I could take those words back"). What stopped him? It was his secret for 10 years. Couldn't he have taken his words back anytime in those 10 years, prior to running for office, and I suspect the public would say as others here have: he's changed and moved on. That just never looks so plausible when the change only comes as a result of being busted.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446

posted 09 June 2004 10:38 AM      Profile for Privateer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
He speaks to the public all the time. If he still held those views it would be quite apparent.
From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
beibhnn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3178

posted 09 June 2004 10:44 AM      Profile for beibhnn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
How exactly does one take words back except to apologize for them? This apology is good enough for me.
From: in exile | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 09 June 2004 11:10 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I now see from colby cosh's website that there is already a thread started elsewhere that deals with this subject.

Quite frankly that is the problem here at babble, there are too many different areas dealing with the election issues.

Starting threads on the same topics are not done intentionally, contrary to what some people here think.

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 09 June 2004 11:12 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There's only really one forum now for election talk, Election 2004. The other thread on this is in the Western forum. I think it's pretty reasonable for it to be in both places, just not so much in this forum. In the Western forum we're approaching it from a more local perspective.

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: Screaming Lord Byron ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 09 June 2004 11:18 AM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For the record, this is the other thread that discusses the matter.
From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 09 June 2004 11:23 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Very confusing.
From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 09 June 2004 11:34 AM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 09 June 2004 12:46 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Is this one of the posts in question?
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 09 June 2004 12:47 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Let's do this here.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 09 June 2004 08:15 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Continue the discussion about Azania here.

Er, actually, I'm moving this thread to the election 2004 forum (which, surprisingly enough, is where threads about the ELECTION should go, imagine that), and you can continue the discussion there.

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Aric H
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5815

posted 09 June 2004 08:34 PM      Profile for Aric H     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I sometimes find that we live in a society where if you make on remark years back that might even be ambiguious in nature you will basically be torn apart for it whether or not there is enough evidence to do so. It is too bad because he had the opportunity to do well in Strathcona. I guess he won't be able to win now and so it looks like Rahim is safe afterall.
From: Canada | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
mkwb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5939

posted 09 June 2004 08:37 PM      Profile for mkwb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, According to you NDP supportors once a person has an ideology, it is static and does not change.

Most left wingers critisze Harper for 'faking' that he has adopted more liberal social values.

Though, this guy, in the past has made ANTI-SEMETIC comments and left wingers say its ok because he's changed his values since then - thoughI highly doubt that (using left wing ideology - harpers changed views).

Go figure.


From: Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Aric H
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5815

posted 09 June 2004 08:41 PM      Profile for Aric H     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mkwb:
Well, According to you NDP supportors once a person has an ideology, it is static and does not change.

Most left wingers critisze Harper for 'faking' that he has adopted more liberal social values.

Though, this guy, in the past has made ANTI-SEMETIC comments and left wingers say its ok because he's changed his values since then - thoughI highly doubt that (using left wing ideology - harpers changed views).

Go figure.


His comments have not been called anti-semetic by the B'Nai Brith - but they have been called unacceptable. This is why I say one has to be careful about labelling someone a racist. Libel and slander laws apply too of course. There is a difference between the degree of what you say and this has to be understood.


From: Canada | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
mkwb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5939

posted 09 June 2004 08:43 PM      Profile for mkwb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh I think the rules of calling someone a bigot and racist are alot more loose for left wingers.
From: Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
King Ralph
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5941

posted 09 June 2004 08:43 PM      Profile for King Ralph   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What this guys comments do is put in perspective how utterly irrelevant it is to paint Harper as "SCARY". The big power corporate backroom inuendo that is being spread by liberals and union leaders alike is that Harper is to be feared because he is intolerant. Yet have I seen proof to that. What we did see today is that intolerance can be found even in socialist societies. Its not exclusive to people from the right.
From: Calgary | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
mkwb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5939

posted 09 June 2004 08:47 PM      Profile for mkwb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree with King Ralph.

The amount of mud slinging and name calling coming from the left and thrown at the right is often too much.

It seems that the minute a right winger says something marginal he is considered a racist or a enemy of the charter.

Though when a left winger makes explicity racist comments be it now or in the past, its ok because the charter lets them have free expression.

Perhaps this is why the left hates Harper so much.


From: Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
'topherscompy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2248

posted 09 June 2004 08:47 PM      Profile for 'topherscompy        Edit/Delete Post
to avoid this kind of situation in the future, perhaps we should survail all potential political candidates from birth, and weed out everyone who makes any comment that can be construed as anything other than 100% politically correct.

we now take you live to question period:


{crickets}

oh.


From: gone | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Aric H
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5815

posted 09 June 2004 08:52 PM      Profile for Aric H     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hey listen mkwb and King Ralph - of course people on the left can be intolerant just like people on the right and you can find people like that everywhere - that is true. But don't try to escape for one moment the reality of the Conservative party - it is very much a narrow viewed party and it is definitely anti-gay. I don't know anyone gay who feels very comfortable with it.
From: Canada | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
mkwb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5939

posted 09 June 2004 09:09 PM      Profile for mkwb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Anti Gay?

Ahhh my point from 3 posts up is proven.

How can a party be anti gay because they want to protect one single law that protects a definition of a traditional definition that was orgininally started because of a biblical law?

Are we not allowed to keep at least one strand of our historical moral fabric without being condesended?

Futhermore, the Tories will support a definition that will give Gays every single right that heterosexuals have but it will not be called marriage. Whats the big deal. Should I start complaining because I can't go into a womens washroom when there is a mens washroom right beside it?? Obviously not.


From: Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 09 June 2004 09:09 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Jack Layton just commented on the issue: "Not enough, candidate has more to do"
From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
HellofaSandwich
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5681

posted 09 June 2004 09:13 PM      Profile for HellofaSandwich   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My mom gave me one of those "I told you so"s when she heard about this Usenet controversy.

Someone asked how it will affect the race here in Edm-Strathcona. The way I see it: decreased energy, soft support hemorrhaged, dispirited supporters - I knew it'd be quite the coup to topple Jaffer, but now I know that Malcolm just can't do it.


From: Edmonton | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
natas
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4211

posted 09 June 2004 09:14 PM      Profile for natas   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I see no benefit in the guy continuing to run that's for sure - what, is he gonna win now? And to my horror I agree with this new lunkhead tag team that there's kind of a double standard here. Dredging people's past for ideological routing is standard practice, and can be valuable work - of course, especially so for PARTY LEADERS who SET AGENDAS so if they happen to be COMPLETE ASSHOLES it actually MAKES A DIFFERENCE to our political life were they to attain power. As we will not be given the chance to find out, ever - knock knock on a very large redwood, because you've seen one you've seen em all, and if you can source that sentiment you can predict what a Harper majority would look like, only worse. (sorry this is becoming stream of consciousness)
From: Vineland Station, Ontario | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
King Ralph
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5941

posted 09 June 2004 09:16 PM      Profile for King Ralph   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Anti-Gay?? Maybe anti-gay marriage, but anti gay is a little strong. Tone down your rhetoric and deal with facts. Of course some people might not like Gays, its an old way of thinking but that kind of sentiment will never spill over into govt. The marriage issue goes beyond liking or not liking Gays. It has religous and moral attachments, The charter will ultimatly dictate where it goes. Do I personally agree with homosexuality, no, but i dont hate them
From: Calgary | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 09 June 2004 09:25 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
King Ralph
I agree that being opposed to gay marriage does not make a person 'anti gay'. You have to understand there are a number purists on this board who if they disagree with you even slightly will label you all the worst names possible.

That said:

quote:
its (anti gay) an old way of thinking but that kind of sentiment will never spill over into govt.

How can you be so sure about that when Mr. Harper named Larry Spencer his "family values critic". The idea that Mr. Harper did not know Spencer's views on homosexuality when he appointed him to that position simply strains credulity.


From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Adam T
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4631

posted 09 June 2004 09:29 PM      Profile for Adam T     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
On the Aznia thing,
Once again we see a number of New Democrats on this board trying to make up any manner of feeble exuse when they are once again shown as not being the holier than thou people they like to think they are.

From: Richmond B.C | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
MacD
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2511

posted 09 June 2004 09:31 PM      Profile for MacD     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Aric H:
It is too bad because he had the opportunity to do well in Strathcona. I guess he won't be able to win now and so it looks like Rahim is safe afterall.

Actually, strong campaigns by both Azania and Carlson would have ensured Jaffer's re-election. The only way to bring Jaffer down is for one of the two challengers to tank. I was hoping that it would be Carlson's that crashed and burned.

The chances of Jaffer losing just got much bigger. Unfortunately, it will be a Liberal that defeats him now, not a New Democrat.


From: Redmonton, Alberta | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 09 June 2004 09:36 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Adam T......actually Jack Layton just spoke out on the issue, he is deeply concerned, and represents New Democrat thinking on the issue.

Why don't you go back and try and help your losing Liberal candidates? The last I heard Liberals will win 2 seats maximum in BC. And I know which riding they are as well.

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
mkwb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5939

posted 09 June 2004 09:39 PM      Profile for mkwb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree.

Futhermore, what people dont realize is that the USA, like em or hate em, are our most important ally's economically and with regards to military.

Often people wonder why its taken so long for the mad cow and lumber issues to be solved. Its because of our countrys lack of respect for the USA.

Sure, the war in IRAQ was wrong in some ways but considering the USA is our largest trading partner I think it is irresponsible for Layton to be saying that Harper and Martin are too 'cosy' with the USA.

I would love to see how stupid Layton would look and how worse off Canada would be if Layton came to power and cut off most economical ties to the USA. Canada would be devastated.

To play on the ANTI-American card is a bad move. Especially when senstive matters on Mad Cow, Lumber, and national security are on the line.

And considering the majority of our Economy relies on free trade I also dont understand how socialists critise the agreement as a whole.


From: Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
charlessumner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2914

posted 09 June 2004 10:25 PM      Profile for charlessumner     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This must be Jack's Sister Souljah moment.

The irony-deprived should note that I don't really mean what I'm about to say, but it's almost feeling scripted at this point. *sigh*

From a CP report, "Layton won't fire Azania over remarks about whites," June 9 2004, dateline Soo:

quote:
During a campaign stop in Sault Ste. Marie, Layton distanced himself from the remarks, calling them ''deeply disturbing'' and ordered Azania to meet with local and national Jewish groups.

''I condemn the remarks he has made in no uncertain terms,'' he said. ''It is deeply disturbing that such a thing was ever written.''

Layton said Azania has more to do than just apologize.

He said he's ordered him to begin a process of reconcilation with the community through a public letter of apology.

''Those remarks made 10 years ago are completely and utterly unacceptable,'' Layton told reporters during a campaign rally with over 100 sign-waving supporters.

However, he did cut Azania some slack by saying that he realizes the candidate is ''mortified'' by his own remarks.

''He is discussing how he has a completely changed attitude and how he is a changed man.''


[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: charlessumner ]


From: closer everyday | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 09 June 2004 10:31 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Azania's old essay brings up some interesting points I think most whites would like to shove under the carpet.

The fact is that many blacks in the United States and Canada believe, with some color of justification, that there is an ingrained racism among whites in general that doesn't manifest itself overtly, but in subtle ways.

I see that ingrained racism pop out sometimes on IRC, when I see people who would never use the n-word in public use it all. the. freaking. time. It's so you can't pass a week without some idiot editorializing on how he thinks n_____s are lazy welfare-sucking good-for-nothings who use affirmative action to get jobs they're not qualified for.

Another guy I know who's usually smarter than this actually believes that if he advertises a job, he'll be forced to hire an unqualified black person, even though the law still allows an employer to ask an employee to demonstrate competency.

As to the remarks about Jews, I have little information to go on, except that I recall vaguely reading about the possibility of a drift between the black and Jewish communities due to the increasing conservatism of the latter.

Azania's comments about Jews are very likely unfounded entirely, but I would urge people to keep in mind the more general comments about whites and where he was coming from a decade ago when he wrote that essay.

End sidebar.

Oh, PS. How many Reform party quasi-white supremacists have been cut slack by Manning and Day until they flapped their gums a little too loudly? Chretien's no better. He didn't drop Roseanne Skoke from caucus even though she made blatantly homophobic remarks, in public.

Piling onto a black person for racist remarks while ignoring the crap whites say is a bit much.

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 09 June 2004 10:34 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Two words, folks. Professor Griff. Anyone recall? I wouldn't be surprised if Malcolm was, like I was, a huge Public Enemy fan at the time. Professor Griff made some equally dodgy comments about Jews a couple of years before Malcolm's comments.

On edit - I checked it out, and what Griff said was far worse, so this post doesn't really hold up. I'll leave this up to show what happens when you make crazy logic leaps.

"Peripheral member Professor Griff (Richard Griffin) was dismissed in 1989 for telling the Washington Times that he holds Jews responsible for the "majority of the wickedness that goes on across the globe." "

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: Screaming Lord Byron ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 09 June 2004 10:35 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here is the double standard:

Case A: An NDP candidates writes something arguably racist 10 years ago and he gets on his hands and knees and apologizes for it and totally condemns and renounces what he wrote and recants everything and then Jack Layton condemns his 10 year old views and says that he must personally apologize to the Jewish community and do more than just say I'm sorry - and people imply that it isn't enough.

Case B: A Conservative candidate expresses hatred towards gays, comparfes homosexuality to pediphilia, compares having an abortion to having a head sawed off by Islamic terrorists, and catcalls to Bill Graham "ask your boyfriend" etc... and not only is she still a Conservative candidate, but Harper won't even condemn her remarks.

Azania has apologizes and recanted his views. Cheryl Gallant is unapologetically filled with hate towards gays and lesbians and is suffering no consequences.

Where is the double standard?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
MonkeyIslanderPolical23
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5758

posted 09 June 2004 10:39 PM      Profile for MonkeyIslanderPolical23        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The honourable thing for Azania to do is stand down now

That cannot be done. Nominations closed two days ago, and after a few hours of the deadline, candidates cannot withdraw from the election even if they want to.


From: Ontario | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 09 June 2004 10:41 PM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wow. A black man called a racist for criticizing white supremecy.

Where is the dredged-up essays Stephen Harper wrote in bible college, or clown college, the Ayn Rand institute of technology, or whatever the hell it was he went to? Or is that out of bounds in our discourse? Is it unacceptable for a visible minority to express a view that makes the majority uncomfortable, even if that view is borne from experience as a minority in a racist society?

And the right complains about "political correctness" running out of control.


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
mkwb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5939

posted 09 June 2004 10:43 PM      Profile for mkwb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Harper:

University of Calgary, BA, Economics

University of Calgary, MA, Honors Economics


From: Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
HellofaSandwich
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5681

posted 09 June 2004 10:48 PM      Profile for HellofaSandwich   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Screaming Lord Byron:
Two words, folks. Professor Griff. Anyone recall? I wouldn't be surprised if Malcolm was, like I was, a huge Public Enemy fan at the time. Professor Griff made some equally dodgy comments about Jews a couple of years before Malcolm's comments.

Hmm... didn't Malcolm announce his candidacy at the Chuck D revolutionay speakers series at the UofA?


From: Edmonton | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 09 June 2004 11:00 PM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
University of Calgary,

I was right. Clown college.


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
clearview
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4640

posted 09 June 2004 11:08 PM      Profile for clearview     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mkwb:
I would love to see how stupid Layton would look and how worse off Canada would be if Layton came to power and cut off most economical ties to the USA. Canada would be devastated.

I'd hate to see that. I'd hate to see even Harper or Martin looking stupid on such an asinine move that destroys our economy. But then, some of us actually care more about the well being of the communities in which we live than scoring political points.

BTW When has the NDP ever advocated cutting off most economical ties to the US? I'll give you a hint: never. Layton calls the people that live south of the border 'our American friends'.

quote:
To play on the ANTI-American card is a bad move. Especially when senstive matters on Mad Cow, Lumber, and national security are on the line.

You're right. But no one is doing that. You seem rather uninformed about NDP policy. You can find their platform here: www.ndp.ca

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: clearview ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
wayne coady
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6046

posted 09 June 2004 11:18 PM      Profile for wayne coady   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
The honourable thing for Azania to do is stand down now.
(

My goodness,if all politicans were to do the honourable thing they would all stand down right now. So political party hack went back into this mans life to dig up this on him , while the likes of Martin ,Harper, Mulroney and Peter MacKay still walk the streets..
Here we have Harper, being backed by Brian Mulroney , who arranged the paying off of Peter MacKays leadership debt, while Blinda Stronach has secured a position for Peter MacKay on Magna Internationals Board of Directors. Where by the way you will find Brian Mulroney too, that is when he is not filling in his other directorship with Berrick Gold. Yes that is correct another good old tory love in, where the upper crust are positioning themselves once again to milk the tax payers just one more time.
And you are upset with poor little Azania, really !

[ 09 June 2004: Message edited by: wayne coady ]


From: Dartmouth N.S | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 09 June 2004 11:24 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I would like to add that I am of Jewish descent (though atheist), I read Azania's posting and I have to say that I don't even find it anti-semitic! I think his points fall into the realm of legitimate debate - though I can't say that I agree with them.

There are people on the Right who have spewed drivel that is 100 times worse attacking gays and lesbians and attacking all Muslims - and I never hear any apologies from any of them.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sean in Ottawa
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4173

posted 09 June 2004 11:33 PM      Profile for Sean in Ottawa     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So I am assuming that what we do now is google every single candidate and see what happens.

Perhaps someone should do that! Who knows what might come up?

There are people in other parties who should be very afraid if this Candidate resigned. How many conservatives would be nailed? Liberals?


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
wayne coady
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6046

posted 09 June 2004 11:33 PM      Profile for wayne coady   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stockholm : Yes I agree with you . When I saw that on CBC news , I took it upon myself to call Malcolm, because CBC had a clip on him sitting behind a mike, and I assumed it was quite old.

Malcolm's office worker told me that the clip was over 12 years ago, now someone in the media is trying to set the election outcome in that riding. Surely there are more news worthy stories out there ? Maybe they could chase down the bureaucrats who stole our tax dollars.


From: Dartmouth N.S | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
radiorahim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2777

posted 09 June 2004 11:46 PM      Profile for radiorahim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
From what I can see it sounds like the kind of politically unsophisticated stuff that one would write in your formative years...when you're just trying to make sense out of this crazy world we live in.

Obviously he's figured out alot more since then. But for the media and the opposition parties, it doesn't matter. They'll get as much mileage out of it as they can. Is it fair? No. But the world isn't fair.


From: a Micro$oft-free computer | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 09 June 2004 11:55 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Sean in Ottawa:
So I am assuming that what we do now is google every single candidate and see what happens.

Perhaps someone should do that! Who knows what might come up?

There are people in other parties who should be very afraid if this Candidate resigned. How many conservatives would be nailed? Liberals?


If they can do this to Malcolm Azania, we can do it to James Moore. This sets an ugly precedent, doesn't it?


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 09 June 2004 11:56 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by HellofaSandwich:

Hmm... didn't Malcolm announce his candidacy at the Chuck D revolutionay speakers series at the UofA?


There you go. At least he has taste.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
vaudree
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1331

posted 10 June 2004 12:01 AM      Profile for vaudree     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What I see is a person who was very intelligent and articulate a few days ago being called a rasist because he said that Jewish people are basically honkies. Considering that he is very noticibly part honky himself, his statements have to be taken with a grain of salt.

I think that where he goes wrong is in not being able to tell the difference between, let's say, an Izzy Asper and a David Orlikow. But if we look back over some of the posts that we have made the last few years, sometimes we forget that just because Izzy Asper holds certain positions, it doesn't mean that all Jewish people do. Or just because JUDES may be jewish that it means that she agrees with everything Ariel Sharon has ever done.

Hey, Izzy had his good points - he loved Winnipeg, he was very generous to Winnipeg and his human rights museum is a good idea, even if the Palistinian section may be confined to a space smaller than a broom closet if he was around to over see it.

We have all gone over the edge in our posts - if someone spends the time searching they can find dirt on each of us. It is just, why, in this case, did someone bother to read every post this guy ever made?


From: Just outside St. Boniface | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
charlessumner
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2914

posted 10 June 2004 12:09 AM      Profile for charlessumner     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Cosh, originator of the outbreak, also lives in Edmonton, spends scads of time online, and also posted from gpu.srv.ualberta.ca back in 94. This is probably just a case of a small world.
From: closer everyday | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 10 June 2004 12:13 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Malcolm handled the press conference with aplomb apparently. He explained everything as fully as he could, and all the while never dodged responsibility. He had representatives of the Jewish, Muslim, and Christian communities there with him. Apparently he acted with grace and humility.

CTV is now covering the story. Not bad coverage by any means.
http://tinyurl.com/2lja7

[ 10 June 2004: Message edited by: Screaming Lord Byron ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407

posted 10 June 2004 12:40 AM      Profile for John K        Edit/Delete Post
I did attend Malcolm's media conference. The media had plenty of tough questions and Malcolm handled them very well. He never tried to duck responsibility or shift the blame to others. His apology for the hurt he caused to others was sincere and complete. He is taking corrective action and has already sent a letter of apology to the Canadian Jewish Congress and will be meeting with local Jewish leaders.

A true test of character is how you perform under fire. My respect for Malcolm has really grown.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
vaudree
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1331

posted 10 June 2004 01:36 AM      Profile for vaudree     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I would still like to see him in parliament, but figure that this comment greatly limits his critic option.

Layton is right too, though the comments may be tame by Alliance standards, they are still pretty bad for an NDPer.

For the record, I am a product of a mixed marriage but both my parents are white. My dad, however, did say some pretty obnoxious things about the British just to see if my mother was paying attention at times.


From: Just outside St. Boniface | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gearhead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5182

posted 10 June 2004 01:49 AM      Profile for Gearhead        Edit/Delete Post
Ho hum. How many more news cycles before we are distracted and move on?
From: Edmonton | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 10 June 2004 02:16 AM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by mkwb:[QB]
How can a party be anti gay because they want to protect one single law that protects a definition of a traditional definition that was orgininally started because of a biblical law?

Biblical, shmiblical. The bible is a heavily-edited, many-times revised and updated book of creative fiction written by men. Why should our laws be based on it any more than, say, the teachings of Confucius? What does biblical law have to do with it, any more than Talmudic law? You're cluttering up the argument with your religion. And how does defining it protect it? Like Bill 101 does in Quebec, in an effort to keep the big, bad English Language at bay, and in check?

Bill 101 is bad, and had to be propped up by using the draconian Notwithstanding Clause. Any attempts made to deny LGBTs full equality in marriage will also be forced to use the Notwithstanding Clause. This new "marriage law" will be just as bad. That's why the Notwithstanding Clause exists — to prop up bad laws.


quote:

Are we not allowed to keep at least one strand of our historical moral fabric without being condesended?

"Mindless adherence to tradition has never yet broken a single chain, nor freed a human soul."

— Mark Twain


"The more that he spoke of his morals, the faster we counted our spoons."

— Dr. Samuel Johnson


quote:

Futhermore, the Tories will support a definition that will give Gays every single right that heterosexuals have but it will not be called marriage. Whats the big deal. Should I start complaining because I can't go into a womens washroom when there is a mens washroom right beside it?? Obviously not.

What's the big deal? Fine, then you guys can have the term "religious union" and we'll have marriage then. How's THAT if there's no difference and no "big deal".

And by the way, you will not "give" me or anyone their rights. You will either observe and respect them, or you will not and continue to deny them to me. Rights are not "earned" from the majority. They just ARE. But if you keep denying them, we'll see you in court. How's them apples, bub?

[ 10 June 2004: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 10 June 2004 02:35 AM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Edited 'coz Jingles already made that crack...

[ 10 June 2004: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 June 2004 09:37 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Jingles made another crack that I can't let pass.

Jingles, I consider you a friend, but what's with the line about U of C? Guess where I got my BA? And it wouldn't even matter whether I'd gone there or not -- I think anyone who would turn up her nose at a "provincial" university is a cheap snob and not much of a champion of public education or democracy -- and I've been in universities in three countries.

So take that crack back, Jingles.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 10 June 2004 10:02 AM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For the Chuck D fans on this thread Air America Radio - Unfiltered. (Political Talk show)

HE also does a weekend Music show on the same streaming station.


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 10 June 2004 10:05 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by No Yards:
For the Chuck D fans on this thread Air America Radio - Unfiltered. (Political Talk show)

HE also does a weekend Music show on the same streaming station.



Thanks, NoYards. Chuck's stuff on AA is great.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 10 June 2004 10:12 AM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think the essence of his argument was that most Jewish people in north america are privileged by their white skin. That was obfuscated by the language he used as well as some of the muddled, stereotyping thinking he employed about the media etc.

I'm not sure that he wouldn't be in just as much trouble had he articulated himself better because there are so many racism deniers across the political spectrum. The issue of white privilege is central to an understanding of anti-racism. This is not to downplay or deny anti-semitism but to put things in perspective.


From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 10 June 2004 10:15 AM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What I found depressing about all of this was the predominantly knee-jerk reaction to Malcolm Azania's 1994 post, both in the media and here on Babble. No one seemed to have actually read it for content, except the B'nai B'rith representative quoted in the media, and here on Babble, one or two people.

There's also a fear of misstepping or accidentally endorsing something anti-semitic or racist that leads to a pack mentality to condemn someone like Azania so that we're not associated with them, without any examination of the actual issues. This definitely is not the way to promote a culture of tolerance and democracy. It also reconfirms my sense that the average white NDPer/white babbler isn't very far ahead on the anti-oppression learning curve. A friend was in a course on race and law once, a large class of all women but one, all people of colour but three. The white people never said anything. At one point, a woman of colour complained that the white people weren't risking anything. Sure, you can say it's out of respect--but it's also out of fear of being held accountable.

The point is, racism is endemic in our society, so if you say something racist it isn't (necessarily) because you're a "bad person". And we're not going to be accountable, or educated, or critically conscious, unless we risk by trying to deal with the issues publicly.

I don't think the Malcolm Azania thing was dealt with very well, except, possibly, by Azania himself.

See my comments in the earlier thread for background... I'm not going to repeat them, or go over that ground again.


From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 10 June 2004 10:31 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Rasmus, the perspective on the story is changing. We've been through the initial knee-jerk, and now people are calming down. In this light, what Malcolm said doesn't look quite as extreme as people were making it out to be. The real fallacy in his comments is that he apportions people into broad groups. Referring to White People and The Jews in such a way immediately sets off alarm bells, as it should, because it reveals a rigidly dogmatic way of thinking, and a desire to group people in a prejudicial way. That's an intellectual trap all of us should avoid, because it is very easy to fall into.
As I have said several times, these comments are foolish, but are not really as extreme as we've been told by the media. Malcolm has apologized, I'm satisfied by his apology, and I stand by him. After all, as someone of Irish Catholic parentage, I know how easy it is to fall into sectarian thought, and I also know that racism is not merely a matter of skin colour.

From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 June 2004 10:31 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm guilty of that. When I read the whole thing he wrote carefully yesterday, I realized that, with the exception of a questionable thread title, his analysis of the relative skin privilege that white people (including white Jews) have over black people is accurate.

But I haven't quite known how to state this on babble, especially since the whole discussion has mostly been about his "anti-white" comments, and especially since the "anti-semitic" label gets slapped on people so easily on babble.

I also find it amusing that all these right-wing jerks who couldn't give two flying fucks about anti-semitism or systemic racism any other time are jumping on the politically correct bandwagon when a black NDP candidate's college ramblings from 10 years ago come to light, while ignoring the unrepentant, racist, homophobic assholes from their own end of the political spectrum who are unapologetically making bigoted comments during this election campaign. That's just precious.

[ 10 June 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 10 June 2004 10:45 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The real fallacy in his comments is that he apportions people into broad groups. Referring to
White People and The Jews in such a way immediately sets off alarm bells, as it should, because it reveals a rigidly dogmatic way of thinking, and a desire to group people in a prejudicial way.

When I read it I was immediately reminded of The Dark Side, with Nat X.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 June 2004 10:50 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I LOVED that running skit! Haha!
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Venn Blender
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6057

posted 10 June 2004 11:42 AM      Profile for Venn Blender     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I just started reading this thread after hearing about rabble.ca on the local university radio station (CJSR). These comments may come late, but I beg that people would read Rasmus Raven's commentary carefully. He provided us with the most attentive and intelligent analysis of the situation thus far.

As a resident of Strathcona (and not part of the NDP campaign) I fully accept Azania's retraction and wish him the best in his ongoing campaign. Further I think it rediculous to ask him to step down. which brings me to my point...

my point: Having a candidate that is intellectually engaged with issues of race, priviledge, and power should be considered a tremendous bonus to any party. That he has refined his views and learned to articulate them for a broader Canadian audience is commendable.

Imagine an MP or other political leader that actually spends his or her spare time reading, writing, and thinking critically about problems in our society instead of running private businesses and persuing personal wealth through investment. Surely we've got enough professional businessmen for leaders. There must be room for people whose record in the world consists of more than simply financial statements and investors reports.


From: alberta | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 10 June 2004 11:47 AM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'll admit I didn't read the errant posts except for what was quoted. I did read Azania's apology however.

quote:
jumping on the politically correct bandwagon when a black NDP candidate's college ramblings from 10 years ago come to light, while ignoring the unrepentant, racist, homophobic assholes from their own end of the political spectrum who are unapologetically making bigoted comments during this election campaign
Recently I've said a few times that the left is held to a higher level of accountability than the centre and the right. What this issue shows is that people of colour (and other marginalized groups) on the left are held to the highest level of scrutiny of anyone.

Frankly, Azania's been made to get down on his knees and beg forgiveness in a way that no one else in this election has been forced to do. It is demeaning. It is, in effect, a racist reaction.

On the issue of his "withdrawal", I agree with R-R that the party's best interests in the election need to be the predominant factor but the optics of him stepping down would be very bad and hurt the NDP in communities of colour.


From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 June 2004 12:08 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't know, npp. I don't think that it is demeaning. I think, done right, it can be both educational and -- forgive me, but I can't find a better word at the moment -- inspirational.

Venn, a wonderful post, and I agree. But it's because I agree with you and rasmus and npp that I still think Azania should step down. My thinking goes like this:

There are the rights and wrongs of what Azania wrote ten years ago.

There are the rights and wrongs of what he has done as a candidate this year -- and here I'm on shaky territory, since I don't know much. Plus I've been sitting here thinking about what I would have to dredge up from my past in a similar situation -- would I even be able to remember everything relevant? everything someone else might notice? I honestly don't know.

And then there are the two faces (at least) of the NDP -- as a player in a game called The Election, and as a force for political education.

Sorry, I know there are a lot of people here who are going to snort at my mentioning the latter role of the NDP, but that's what I've cared about since I first joined the party almost forty years ago, and I am unlikely to change my spots now.

Caesar's wife must not only be virtuous; she must appear to be virtuous.

In other words, as a serious political force in this country, we are not helping if we rationalize anything. All the cynical opportunist Libs and Cons talk continually about something called "accountability." Well, let's show 'em accountability in real life.

To me, the educational discussions on racism, which I would be glad to hear Azania lead, should follow right after our demonstration of republican principle and virtue. Something wrong happened on my watch, so I stand down. I don't disappear from the public forum, but I make the symbolic gesture. And I do it so that all the other bastards who have been refusing to do that for much much worse for so long will be shamed.

(No, I don't think that the bastards really will be shamed, but I think that the citizenry might watch, learn, and approve.)


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 10 June 2004 12:37 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
(No, I don't think that the bastards really will be shamed, but I think that the citizenry might watch, learn, and approve.)
Or they might just write it off as another Black guy who had to be taught his place by the likes of Martin and Harper (and dare I say, the optics would also point toward Layton). Let's hope this issue does not emerge during the debate.

From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 10 June 2004 12:37 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Skdadl, Malcolm does not have the option of withdrawing or stepping down. Even were he to stop campaigning, his name will be on the ballot.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 June 2004 12:42 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Furthermore, if he actually DIDN'T do anything wrong, then it will probably be easier to be SEEN as not doing anything wrong if we all stopped apologizing for him and making him apologize himself.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pogo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2999

posted 10 June 2004 12:42 PM      Profile for Pogo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Caesar's wife must not only be virtuous; she must appear to be virtuous.

I disagree. We need candidates that represent the world they come from, and the world has warts.

Personally, I think that the candidate has responded well. I would be honoured to work for him if he was in my riding.


From: Richmond BC | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 10 June 2004 12:42 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Or they might just write it off as another Black guy who had to be taught his place by the likes of Martin and Harper

The idea, if I understand Skdadl correctly, is that he would not be "taught his place" by anyone, but would step down before that could happen because it's the honourable thing to do. Had he withdrawn of his own accord when the story broke (assuming it was still possible) then the 'other guys' wouldn't have even had a chance to get their own sound bite in.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 June 2004 12:44 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Um ... have you guys all actually read the original article?
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 June 2004 12:46 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The "whether it's possible" argument is a total red herring.

If Azania says he's standing down, it doesn't matter what some rule-book says, or what the ballot says. What would matter is what he says.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 10 June 2004 12:48 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
The "whether it's possible" argument is a total red herring.

If Azania says he's standing down, it doesn't matter what some rule-book says, or what the ballot says. What would matter is what he says.


It's not a total red herring. His name remains on the ballot. He can't step down. The matter is out of Malcolm's hands. Anything he said or did would not affect the simple fact that he is officially a candidate. Of course he could do the whole 'if elected I will not stand' shtick, but that would just over-dramatize the matter.
And furthermore, the timing of this entire event becomes suspicious, coming as it does, immediately after the deadline ended.

[ 10 June 2004: Message edited by: Screaming Lord Byron ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 June 2004 12:53 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So we have enemies, SLB. Gee: newsflash. So our enemies are cynical opportunists. Gee: newsflash.

I repeat: what is on the ballot is a red herring, if what you're concerned with most deeply is principle.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 10 June 2004 12:56 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Then we disagree, skdadl. Withdrawal is not an option. Malcolm Azania has apologized and will work to make amends. He has been held to a very high standard and will match it. The matter is over.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
clearview
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4640

posted 10 June 2004 12:56 PM      Profile for clearview     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What's the principle that says he should step down?
From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
clearview
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4640

posted 10 June 2004 12:57 PM      Profile for clearview     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What's the principle that says he should step down?
From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 June 2004 12:59 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
clearview, I can't keep repeating myself, and besides, SLB, for whom I often have some fellow-feeling, has just informed us that I lose, so.

Not as though that is a new experience for me in the NDP, of course.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 10 June 2004 01:01 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
clearview, I can't keep repeating myself, and besides, SLB, for whom I often have some fellow-feeling, has just informed us that I lose, so.

Not as though that is a new experience for me in the NDP, of course.


I didn't say that you lose, I meant that the matter is over for Malcolm Azania. He's made his statement. Our discussion continues, if you like.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 10 June 2004 01:06 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The bleeding election. I hate the bleeding election. It makes everyone so stupid -- including me.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
clearview
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4640

posted 10 June 2004 01:06 PM      Profile for clearview     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Fair enough. It just seemed to me that your opinion was based on how it would look, rather than whether the situation Azania finds himself in justifies him stepping down. I don't think that it does, and I think that it would make things worse, because most people would not want to actually read his usenet posting, learn about his activity in the community and consider how his views may have changed since that time. They will just think that there was an accusation of anti-semitism and he stepped down because he was guilty as charged. The optics are worse if he does step down.
From: Toronto | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 10 June 2004 01:06 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Furthermore, if he actually DIDN'T do anything wrong, then it will probably be easier to be SEEN as not doing anything wrong if we all stopped apologizing for him and making him apologize himself.
The fact that he's apologized is an acknowledgement that he did do something wrong. I think we're pretty much all agreed on that.

From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 10 June 2004 01:09 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
The bleeding election. I hate the bleeding election. It makes everyone so stupid -- including me.

Forget about it. I would never tell someone on a message board 'our conversation is over'. That would be truly lame.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 10 June 2004 01:43 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Re: Malcolm Azania—


"If one were to eliminate from the presidency anyone whose flesh is weak, the White House would have been deserted since the death of Thoreau."

— William F. Buckley, Jr.

I can't believe it!! I just quoted the insufferable Wm. F. Buckley! Will wonders never cease...?!

[ 10 June 2004: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 June 2004 01:57 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Non-partisan partisan:
The fact that he's apologized is an acknowledgement that he did do something wrong. I think we're pretty much all agreed on that.

No no. I wrote that wrong. I didn't mean we had to make him apologize himself. I meant, if we stopped apologizing for him, and STOPPED making him apologize himself.

(e.g. Jack's demand that he go prostrate himself before Jewish groups, etc. - I don't see him making Monia Mazigh go begging to EGALE for forgiveness...)


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 10 June 2004 02:13 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Re: Audra's google experiment (from the old thread) -

I suspect that the results may be a bit skewed, seeing as how you searched for the article knowing ahead of time that he'd written it, and what keywords he used. Plus the fact that it's probably been browsed a gazillion times since the story broke. I'm just sayin' that Heisenberg may have screwed with the google search a tad.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 10 June 2004 02:25 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

No no. I wrote that wrong. I didn't mean we had to make him apologize himself. I meant, if we stopped apologizing for him, and STOPPED making him apologize himself.

(e.g. Jack's demand that he go prostrate himself before Jewish groups, etc. - I don't see him making Monia Mazigh go begging to EGALE for forgiveness...)


EXCELLENT point, Michelle. Or Bev Desjarlais (sp?) in Churchill, either.

Should I be having issues with National Office and Jack over this, ya think?


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 10 June 2004 02:27 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't know, Heph. All I know is that I'm still mad about it days later and it seems to be manifesting itself in pissed off little comments whenever I think of it. Sorry, I just can't seem to help myself. I'm really peeved about it.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gearhead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5182

posted 10 June 2004 02:38 PM      Profile for Gearhead        Edit/Delete Post
Malcolm is a man of integrity and deep compassion. People know this and will continue to support him. His actions over the past couple of days - the past several years, rather - confirm that he is a worthy candidate, and the best candidate for this riding.

Malcolm is a man of peace and a man of action. While he was in the streets and rallying the people of this city in the name of peace against military intervention in Iraq, Rahim Jaffer was on the floor of Parliament urging that Canada get involved in an unjust war.

On March 24, 2003, jaffer stated "In fact, as Canadians have looked to the United Nations as a beacon of hope, I would argue that it instead has become a blight on humanity." At the same time, Jaffer voiced contempt for the "intransigence" of the French in the UN Security Council. Moreover, he ammended a motion before Parliament to "recognize the legitimacy of the decision" of the coalition to wage war on Iraq. View Jaffer's Comments Here. Is Jaffer and his party representative of residents of Edmonton-Strathcona?

Malcolm Azania is head and shoulders above his opponents. The NDP will carry this riding because only he represents the conviction of Edmontonians that peace is paramount.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gearhead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5182

posted 10 June 2004 02:53 PM      Profile for Gearhead        Edit/Delete Post
Might I add to my above statement that it was the mass peace movement across this country that influenced Cretien's decision not to participate in Iraq, notwithstanding the fervent cries for war from Paul Martin's Defence Minister, David Pratt.

Haprer + CPC = WAR & Missile Defence
Team Martin + LPC = WAR & Missile Defence

In math, we learn that if a=c and b=c, then a=b.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Venn Blender
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6057

posted 10 June 2004 07:51 PM      Profile for Venn Blender     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
one more comment on Azania's 10yr. old posting:

What I would like to see come out of this is not simply an apology and retraction but a written response outlining just how his views have changed on the issues brought forth in that discussion. Wouldn’t this be a great chance to get a position paper from Azania on his thoughts on white-privilege in our society? I mean, he’s basically put it out in his retraction notice on their website but to actually write a short essay on the matter (and to challenge Jaffer and Carleson to do the same) could actually prove for some interesting debate and discussion.

I don’t think that voters are stupid and treating them/us as such by lowering the bar so that there is no room for multiple voices and challenging ideas is really what keeps democracy down.

When he was interviewed on CJSR a couple of days ago he actually managed to articulate some of his ideas and I really appreciated that.


From: alberta | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
MT VIEW
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5402

posted 10 June 2004 08:52 PM      Profile for MT VIEW     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gearhead:

Haprer + CPC = WAR & Missile Defence
Team Martin + LPC = WAR & Missile Defence

In math, we learn that if a=c and b=c, then a=b.



True, mathematically.

But just try telling this to all the experienced "strategic voters" here (aka Liberals). They'll be able to talk you to death about all the great differences, or gulfs, or chasms, which divide Mr Harper and the Alliance Conservative Party from their own, ... er, ... ah, the Liberals.


From: Maple Ridge, BC | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Gratian Gasparri
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6064

posted 11 June 2004 03:13 AM      Profile for Gratian Gasparri     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Folks, I've often lurked on babble, but this is the one thread that actually convinced me to register so that I could post.

Please allow me to share a little background. I'm a thirty-year old former NDP supporter who grew up in Canada but has lived the last four years in the United States. Much of what I do is provide conservative commentary on Canadian politics for Americans and similar commentary on American politics for Canadians. That being said, I have worked in close proximity with both CA/CPC in Canada and Republicans in the United States. I state this not to start a fight, but to establish my credentials as someone outside of the NDP and political left.

Additionally, like most conservatives, one of my big issues is Isreal's right to self defense. In fact, I have been denounced by some extreme American (but never Canadian, I proudly note) leftists as a "neo-con-apologist-for-the-zionist-terrorist-state". I have also come under fire in the past for exposing anti-semitism (in the form of Holocost denial and other ugly comments) among certain fundamentalist Christian and Islamic sects. Again, I note this not to start a debate (and just for the record, I don't automatically equate everyone who disagrees over Isreal with anti-semitism) but rather to establish my credentials as someone who abhors anti-semitism. Oh yeah, I'm also part Jewish.

That being said, I find Azania's original comments totally unacceptable and totally offensive. They are to be condemned. Period.

I do not, however, find Azania's candidacy unacceptable, innapropriate, or offensive. Had he made the comments in the last year or during the campaign, this would be different. It would also be different if he tried to explain them away without showing any contrition or remorse. Under these types of circumstances, I think Canadians would have a right to demand that he step down as well as hold Layton's feet to the fire over it.

However, none of this is the case. He wrote the comments on usenet ten years' ago while still a student. He has long since retracted them and for the past ten years has shown a stable record of working against religious and racial intolerance. When the comments were again brought to his attention, he took full responsibility for them and stated clearly and unequivocably that they were shameful, wrong and never should have been written.

Most other conservatives with whom I have spoken, despite the fact the NDP are our opponents, feel the same way. His initial comments were reprehensible and deserve condemnation, however, his subsequent track record and recantation show that he is no anti-semite. So accept his apology and leave the slimy politics to the Liberals.

To use another analogy, a Muslim friend of mine grew up in a very Islamic country before coming to the United States. At one time, while still a student, he unfortunately wrote an essay in which he compared Jews to monkeys and pigs. (Again, I'm not accusing the majority of Muslims of holding these views, but simply mentioning that he grew up in a community where many Muslims held them.)

This was twenty years ago. I imagine his essay is still floating around somewhere, even though today he totally rejects and renounces his former views. He has long since made amends for them by working to increase understanding and friendship (and not merely tolerance) within our local ecumenical community.

If he were to stand for elected office, I would stand by him despite his former deeply offensive comments against people who share my ethnic background. Why? Because he no longer holds these views and has more than made amends for them. Thus I am not interested in the fact he use to be anti-semitic, but rather I'm interested in what he has done to increase mutual understanding, dialogue and friendship among our respective communities since this unfortunate incident.


From: Sarasota | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
vaudree
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1331

posted 11 June 2004 04:29 AM      Profile for vaudree     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Gratian Gasparri, I remember when I saw the towers collapse on 9/11 2001. I thought initially that the US could be a model that the rest of the world could emulate - that they could use the momentary hatred they felt to understand why it is so hard for there to be peace between Israel and Palistine, and that with that understanding would come compassion. It did not work out that way. The hatred did not fade into compassion. (Well maybe it did for Thom's crowd, at thomhartmann.com)

We can't talk - remember the War Measures Act and that was only one person!

BTW - did you know that Deadline Iraq is going to be on the Discovery Channel on June 22 and 23? I watched it and cried. You don't leave it feeling angry but sad for everyone involved. You feel sorry for the soldiers, you feel sorry for the people and you feel sorry for the journalists and their brutal self honesty.

I am sure that you've seen the link for Deadline Iraq so many times already: http://www.cbc.ca/deadlineiraq/

[ 11 June 2004: Message edited by: vaudree ]


From: Just outside St. Boniface | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sean Tisdall
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3465

posted 11 June 2004 10:51 AM      Profile for Sean Tisdall   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What I truly find worrisome is the subtle implication that Azania's statements were only a slur against the Jewish community. When Azania wrote that Jews were WHITE (hello Sammy Davis Jr, Goodly Chunk of Ethiopia, etc.) and by extension 'whitesupremacist' the implication there is the tired old retread of group based politics. Men are conservative and sexist; whites are racist; straights are homophobic. Quite simply the persistence in following the irrationality of group rights and group responsibility as opposed to individual rights and individual responsibility is a major obstacle to the elimination of discrimination.

And you can quote me on that in 2014.


From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, Dimension XY | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 11 June 2004 11:09 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
True, mathematically.

But when applied to logic it becomes nothing more than a syllogism:

Birds have feathers
Pillows have feathers
Therefore, a pillow is a bird.

If syllogisms were ever to be considered "logic", you could prove just about anything. Wanna prove that we're really American, for example?

Canada uses a first-past-the-post electoral system.

The U.S. uses a first-past-the-post electoral system.

Therefore, Canada is the United States.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3145

posted 11 June 2004 11:44 AM      Profile for Tim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry for the thread drift, but this is actually an example of an incorrect syllogism. Syllogisms are indeed part of logic. If A implies B and B implies C, then A implies C. An incorrect syllogism would be A implies B and C implies B, therefore A implies C, which is not true. An "implies" is not the same thing as "equals".

My favourite incorrect syllogism, from Yes, Prime Minister, is "the politician's syllogism": We must do something. This is something. Therefore we must do this.


From: Paris of the Prairies | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Venn Blender
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6057

posted 11 June 2004 11:54 AM      Profile for Venn Blender     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I heard someone on a call-in show in Edmonton voice the same opinion that Azania's 'anti-caucasian' slur was just as serious (if not more troubling, as he never apologized to the 'caucasians') as his implication of Jews in a White supremacy.

-- I should note that much earlier in this discussion there were some very good points made about policing the views of young minority peoples.

What I heard on the radio and what Sean Tisdall seems to be saying is at least as troubling as any "tired old retread of group based politics". There appears to be a tendency in Alberta, at least, for White Men to be highly sensitive to so-called reverse racism. That non-whites (or, perhaps more pertinently, people who are not in a position of power) can also be racist, or elitist, or chauvenist is taken to be a novel affront. Is there greater tolerance for non-white racism? Perhaps, though it should not be justified. What I'm more interested in, though, is the problem of group vs individual bases for the elimination of discrimination.

To suggest that we cannot entertain the possibility that there is a white supremacy in our society (on the basis that it concerns group culpability over individual culpability) is totally naïve. I don't suggest that one cannot discern between the two (in fact we must be able to do this) but that there needs to be room to understand that there are group-based privileges that effect individuals. If you want to base the elimination of discrimination in the individual then you must recognize that some 'groups' of people -like the visible majority of white men that are in positions of power in our society- have an effect on the one another and the rest of the world (including groups of minority people).

See for example this link: [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3796519.stm]. It is a photograph of a gang of world leaders (from the G8 summit, really a great photograph, so casual…). All men. Now their experience as Men is probably quite different than the experience of Women. That they are all probably heterosexual is also a different experience. Clearly they can empathise and understand the positions of minorities. But they most likely don't live day-to-day with these experiences haunting them.

**To jettison group-based rights is to dis-arm minority groups of one of the most powerful weapons they have in defending their own rights.**

That said, if I read this correctly, I agree with the spirit of the Tisdall's comment. Arbitrarily lumping people into classes/groups and policing those boundaries is dangerous work (thinking of the early Soviet example where hundreds of thousands were murdered, imprisoned, and ostracized because they were born into privilege classes). My point is that we cannot have a purely idealist-individualist approach so-long as people are classified in this world.

As long as people are differentiated based on their looks or actions (which will always be, I suspect) there will be groups and we must have a way of dealing with this real-world experience.



From: alberta | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Venn Blender
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6057

posted 11 June 2004 11:55 AM      Profile for Venn Blender     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry, here is the link for the image of the men of G8:

BBC news. Picture of G8 leaders


From: alberta | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 12 June 2004 01:19 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Incidentally, we know who dug up this dirt. People in glass houses.....
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Lou Arab
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1114

posted 12 June 2004 03:10 AM      Profile for Lou Arab   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
To the issue of Malcolm stepping down, no - he shouldn't.

Please leave the decision to the voters of Edmonton Strathcona, and don't limit our choices.
As a resident of that riding, I have a right to choose who I want to represent me, and I want Malcolm. The voters will decide Malcolm's fate.

Incidently, the media coverage for Malcolm since his apology has been surprisingly good. CTV news (the most watched newscast in Edmonton) did streeters at Bonnie Doon Mall (the more working class, conservative part of the riding) and only one person said she wasn't voting for Malcolm - admitting that she always votes Liberal. Every single other streeter said they intended to vote for Malcolm.

CBC TV did similar streeters with a similar result.

The Journal coverage was harsh, but the letters are split 50/50.

The Edmonton Sun ran a photo of Malcolm being hugged by a jewish man wearing a yarmulka (spelling?) and ran the following editorial (no link available):

quote:

AZANIA OFFERS US A CHOICE
The Edmonton Sun
Thu 10 Jun 2004

In the shallow, sound-bite-oriented world of politics, it's
unusual to see a politician apologize for anything. And in the rare
cases that a political type does apologize, more often than not it's
of the half-hearted "I'm sorry people were offended" kind that
lashes out at his or her political opponents rather than an
admission of any real wrongdoing.

But if anyone wants to know what a real political apology looks
like, we need to go no further than Malcolm Azania's regarding
postings he made a decade ago on the Internet.

As the Sun reported yesterday, Azania had written an essay on an
Internet newsgroup back in 1994 in which he characterized white
people and Jews in particular as white supremacists.

The essay was ugly and disturbing. Naturally, when informed of the
old essay, Azania's opponents in the Edmonton-Strathcona riding,
incumbent Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer and Liberal hopeful Debby
Carlson, were quick to denounce the decade-old writings and question
Azania's fitness for public office.

We're not surprised by that, although we don't doubt that if a
Conservative candidate had been caught making the same kind of
statements as Azania a mob carrying torches would have been crying
for blood. At least NDP Leader Jack Layton condemned Azania's
remarks in no uncertain terms.

As for Azania himself, we give him credit for not trying to run
from this. When confronted with his past, Azania didn't try to
deflect blame. He didn't question whether it was appropriate or not
for people to be trolling through Internet archives looking for his
old postings. (And, in that regard, we would venture that a lot of
other political candidates are now searching the Internet for
anything that could potentially be used against them.)

And his apology was as abject as they come. He told Sun reporter
Doug Beazley that he was "very sorry" for what he wrote 10 years
ago. And on his campaign website he issued a grovelling
five-paragraph apology that said in part, "Looking back at my
remarks now, I realize how completely incorrect, over-generalizing,
insensitive and hurtful those remarks were.... That was stupid of me
and I'm horrified I wrote my comments. It's not an excuse to say I
was 10 years younger and that I was passing through a brief (and
stupid) phase." Azania also offered a "complete and unreserved
apology."

Good for him. It may be too late, however. This story will continue
to haunt him during the campaign, as the lid is off Pandora's box,
so to speak, and the Conservatives and Liberals will now be
searching every statement Azania has ever made for more inflammatory
material.

NDP Leader Layton refused to force Azania to step aside yesterday,
which Jaffer didn't like. But during an election there's no more
fitting jury for Azania to face than the electorate. Voters will
decide his fate.



From: Edmonton | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lou Arab
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1114

posted 18 June 2004 10:03 PM      Profile for Lou Arab   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
bump

Another press clipping indicating that the media have not counted Malcolm out by a long shot.

This one is from Andrew Hanon of the Edmonton Sun. This week's SEE magazine (one of our entertainment/news weeklies) has a column by Fish Grikowski saying much the same thing.

From the sun:

quote:
AZANIA WEATHERS THE STORM
The Edmonton Sun
Fri 18 Jun 2004
Page: 11
Section: Editorial/Opinion
Byline: BY ANDREW HANON, SPECIAL TO THE EDMONTON SUN

*Malcolm* *Azania* will remember it as the worst week of his
life. "I didn't sleep for days. I lost six pounds," he said as he
tore into a plate of takeout sushi. "I think I've gained some of it
back, though."

This rushed meal break at his Windsor Park campaign office was the
closest thing to solitude he's had in weeks. As he sat at a desk and
scarfed down balls of rice and fish with his fingers, the volunteers
darting around the room kept a respectful distance.

In a few minutes he'd be back out on the street, knocking on doors
and trying to convince voters in Edmonton-Strathcona to choose him
over the Conservative incumbent, Rahim Jaffer. Considering the
emotional meat grinder he'd been through in the previous seven days,
the 34-year-old was remarkably energized.

Prior to last week, Azania was probably the only NDP candidate in
Alberta who had a remotely realistic chance of being elected.
Edmonton-Strathcona includes the neighbourhoods around the
University of Alberta and Old Strathcona, both havens of leftist
thinking. It's the home turf of Raj Pannu, one of only two New
Democrats in the provincial legislature.

If there is any constituency in Alberta that would send a socialist
to Ottawa, it's this one.

Azania looked like the ideal candidate. He's a public
schoolteacher, an author whose science fiction novel will be
released by a New York publisher this summer and a charismatic
orator who's honed his chops hosting his own radio show.

He has also earned respect as one of the city's most prominent and
passionate social activists. He's particularly outspoken on the
issues of war and racism.

But it looked like his reputation and accomplishments would be
buried under the weight of scandal last week, when the media
discovered some incendiary postings he issued in an Internet news
group 10 years ago.

Azania said many Jews are "Whitesupremacists" and questioned
whether Jewish people had any legitimate claim to understanding the
discrimination blacks face every day, just because they have been
persecuted by their "fellow Whites."

Despite Azania's abject apology and repudiation of his comments as
youthful insensitivity, it looked like the damage was irreparable
and the Edmonton-Strathcona election was now a two-way race between
Jaffer and the Liberal candidate, Debby Carlson.

But, as the saying goes, a week is a long time in politics.

No one was more surprised than Azania when, in the days following
the revelations, the majority of letters to the editor in Edmonton's
newspapers were supportive of Azania, suggesting he should be
forgiven for poor judgment and tactlessness in his early twenties.
The Canadian Jewish Congress accepted his apology.

"It's a very strange case," he acknowledged. "I personally received
only eight nasty e-mails (about this issue), and, of those, only one
was from a person from Edmonton. The others came from elsewhere in
Canada. At the same time, I received dozens of supportive calls and
e-mails."

If anything, Azania said, he's getting a sympathetic backlash from
people who cringe at the thought of having their pasts dredged up
for public consumption. "Azania-gate" certainly wasn't an issue that
evening as he pounded the pavement in the Queen Alexandra
neighbourhood. No one, not even the sole person blunt enough to
refuse any flyers, mentioned it. Most of the people he encountered
recognized Azania immediately and seemed genuinely happy to meet
him.

Even Azania himself is amazed that his campaign is still going
strong.

The way he sees it, Edmonton-Strathcona is a two-way race, but it's
between himself and Jaffer. He's instructing all his canvassers to
advise undecided voters and soft Liberals that if they want to oust
Jaffer, they should vote strategically and cast their ballots for
the NDP. We'll know just how forgiving Edmonton-Strathcona voters
are on June 28.



From: Edmonton | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 18 June 2004 10:23 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Lou, quoting entire articles makes baby Jesus cry. Quote a paragraph or two and then give the link to the site.

Holy long thread!


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca