The anti-Semite card?

[Re: “Protocols of Dirlik,” Letters, May 14] Ken Frankel must vastly underestimate readers of the Mirror, if he actually thinks he can hide the overwhelming evidence of an influential Zionist and neoconservative lobby in Canada by simply trotting out that familiar and worn-out “anti-Semite” card. Admittedly, it used to be a very effective slur to intimidate critics of Israel, but through abuse and overuse it is no longer. Not anymore. Not ever again.

Likewise, dismissing as “whacko” Joseph Farah, the historical revisionist funded by Canwest—who claims there are no Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem—is an equally transparent diversion, since the issue raised is that promoting such speakers vividly demonstrates Canwest’s perverted ideological bent, one that colours not only its editorial position but also its Middle East coverage. (I strongly suspect Ken Frankel would not be so dismissive if the owners of Canada’s largest private media empire were Muslims funding lectures by Ernst Zundels or Jim Keegstras.)

Finally, before labelling this publication as “anti-Israel,” can Frankel at least acknowledge that the Mirror has always been far more generous in giving him the opportunity and space to express his views than Canwest has ever done for the Palestinian side? Surely, recognizing this reality should not be beneath the Venerable Israel Defender. 

>>Shirley Groves

Anti-Zionist rant?

[Re: “Red light flashing,” Letters, May 7] In a bitter partly unwarranted anti-Zionist rant, John Dirlik writes that he considers our national media to be “owned by the Jewish equivalent of an Ernst Zundel.” It is just such utter nonsense that gives the Left a bad reputation. It is just commonsense that there is in fact no comparison to be made between media owners like the Asper family of Canwest Global for instance, and Nazi sympathisers like Zundel.

If there are people out there like myself who consider themselves of the Left and are totally fed up with such bullshit (which unfortunately predominates on the Left), may I refer you to a progressive Jewish-American publication called Tikkun which publishes more reasonable, humane and balanced progressive views on the Middle East than what the Mirror publishes and promotes.

Also I recommend the two latest books on the Middle East by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter (for which he has taken much flak from the U.S. Israeli Lobby), and books published by Israeli author Amos Oz, founder of Israel’s “Peace Now” organization. 

>>Marco Ermacora

Embracing, not erasing

[Re: “Imagine a world without Israel,” Letters, May 14] Elan Netser seems to be completely missing the point of the map room at Imagine: The Peace Ballad of John and Yoko exhibit.

The black “blotches” are made by using rubber ink stamps to stamp the words “Imagine Peace” anywhere in the world.

Naturally, the Middle East was covered in “Imagine Peace” as that is what people wish. Northern Ireland was similarly “blotched.”

It was not erasing, it was embracing.

>>Marion Pennell

This is exactly the kind of blind anger that usually fuels the defendants of Israel. Please, please, please, please, PLEASE try and understand. The Israeli government is not the Jewish people. We do not hate Jews or the Jewish faith, nor do we want to tarnish the memories of the six million Jews murdered by Hitler. We stand against an oppressive and violent government who happen to govern a mostly Jewish population. Screaming “anti-Semite!” every time people speak out against Israel hurts your cause, it does not help.

>>Phil Campeau

Stop catering to the private auto

[Re: “Crosswalks and class,” News, May 14] This story discussed the perils of walking across the street, where the safety of crossing is prejudiced by social class and therefore, money. This disparity as stated might be further addressed at the Montreal Citizen Summit during its gathering early in June at UQÀM.

But instead of inviting Rube Goldberg to attend—that mythical master of building a better mousetrap or of reinventing the wheel—a simple measure should first be taken. That first measure is to simply reduce the radii of the streets’ corner curbing. For example, corner curbing takes on a very broad curvature so as to permit swift turns by motor vehicles. Such a joy, barrelling ‘round that curve at 60–70 km!

This very poor judgment is usually buttressed by auto interests so as “to permit the swift passage of emergency vehicles.” This argument is pretentious, for if it weren’t for the danger of this swift passage, there would be far less need for “emergency vehicles!”  

For far too long, we’ve been catering to the needs, conveniences and joy of the private auto, including its many facets of unadulterated recklessness, including drinking and driving. Sobriety should finally take hold!

>>Edward Abramic

WE WELCOME LETTERS TO THE EDITOR!