“QuAIA has never preached hatred. We are just stating a fact,” [spokesperson Tony Souza] says. “We are not anti-Semitic. We work for justice, peace and equality for Palestinian queers. The fact remains that Palestinian queers do not have the same rights. Apartheid means separate. [Palestinian queers] have a separate identity and rights within Israel, and that’s our message.
“If people are uncomfortable with that message, and see it as offensive, that’s different than saying it’s a message of hate. Those are two totally different things.”To help QuAIA make its case, Xtra, the gay rag in which this appears, seeks input from Palestine House:
Assam Alyamani, a representative with Palestine House in Mississisauga, says the term "Israeli apartheid" is an accurate criticism of the Israeli government's policy in regard to the Palestinian Territories.
"It is well documented that the Israeli government discriminates against indigenous people,” he says. “There are different rules for Jewish and non-Jewish people in many aspects, such as services, budgets, [policies] within municipalities, occupations and laws. They evacuate indigenous people from their villages and towns. There are many facts that support the argument that Israel is an apartheid state.”
Is is also well documented that Palestine House--logo: an Arafat be-chequered map of Israel plus Gaza and the West Bank--is a bastion of undisguised Jew-hate. Not that Xtra would have the balls to mention anything about that.
1 comment:
I don't want to make too much of this impression, it's not the sort of thing that would pass muster as an academic thesis (well, at least once upon a time it would not have), but my reading of modern Western history is that homosexualists (i.e., homosexuals and their sympathizers who actively agitate for the normalization of homosexual sodomy) seem predisposed to anti-Semitism.
The founding Nazis famously included a disproportionate number homosexuals, especially in the SA, until their presence became inconvenient to Hitler, when he decided to strike a deal with the military and other bourgeois institutions; but so did the Italian Fascist Party and the various fascist movements throughout Europe (and even in Latin America).
Why this should be so I can't say with certainty, but maybe resentment toward the moral laws of Judaism (e.g., Lev 18:22), combined with the wish to use the police powers of the state to impose acceptance of their sexual predilections on the mass of society . . . this, of course, was before they discovered the human rights commission racket.
Post a Comment