Scratch a CUPE Ontario member

Where do all the Jew hating pieces of sh1t come from?

I don't know BL@KBIRD, but the comments over at CBC.ca are, frankly, frightening.

I guess CUPE is protecting the proletariat from being exploited by those evil Joooooooooos.

Posted by: BL@KBIRD>

“Where do all the Jew hating pieces of sh1t come from?”

It begins in the Middle East of course, and then flows through the western halls of academia. It finds fertile soil to seed & root it’s self in “minority” self interest groups & individuals bolstered by pandering governments and their illegitimate agencies like the CHRC. It’s born of socialist and communist ideologies mixed with burning totalitarian fanaticism, gift wrapped and delivered to our children through media, universities and the “new cool” of politically correct social engineering.

Comment I just left on the CBC site:

Hey CUPE members, you've performed a two-fer:

1. Shown how you feel about Free Speech in Canada.

2. Shown your true colours about Jews.

Brilliant! Now be sure to teach your children well ... and we'll all be the worse off for it.

SHAME On You ALL!!!

"It’s a hell of its own making, hating Jews for a living."

"Howard Jacobson: Let’s see the 'criticism' of Israel for what it really is

Emotions have run high over recent events in Gaza. And in this impassioned and searching essay, our writer argues that just below the surface runs a vicious strain of ancient prejudice."

urlm.in/bsjo

Can't beleive it. Don't want to beleive it. Does this not make CUPE a Hate Group?

This is almost surreal because Jews have traditionally been huge supporters of leftist ideas.

Do they not realize that the snake they support is now biting them?

CUPE...............
Completely Useless People Employed!

Since CUPE is now officially anti-Semitic it is time to boycott all institutions that employ CUPE members. Henceforth I am not paying taxes until Revenue Canada gets a new union.

Well the postal union leader also wanted to stop delivery of all mail from Israel not too long ago.

CUPE is just acting just like the nazi's to me. Have a little power and they press their jack boots to our necks...so who's next?

Nice to see one of the blogs listed by the mother corp are not in agreement.
http://www.gaystoryman.com/talk/2009/02/22/ontario-cupe-hypocrisy/

I constantly criticize Israel for its anti-Palestinian policies and believe that Israel has no intention of giving up the West Bank for a Palestinian state. BUT....

A union has absolutely no business involving itself in anything other than the rights of its membership with direct regard to and only with regard to, their work domain and benefits.

A union has no right to make any public statements, take any vote on, make any decision about - political, social, economic, religious or other issues that are outside of the realm of the actual workpractices of its members within their employment issues.

It is outrageous for a union to move its authoritarian voice into the political arena. These issues are up to and only up to INDIVIDUAL people - and have nothing to do with union membership.

It's important to note that it was only the union executive delegates who made this vote - not the whole union. But these delegates have no right to make any kind of decision or any kind of public statement about political, religious, social issues that are outside of the workplace domain.

And, as others have pointed out - why is this same union silent about Darfur? About Somalia? About the Taliban in Afghanistan? Why?

Unions - parasites on the wages of their workers and violaters of the freedom of their members to think for themselves.

Why do all anti-Semites have such unpleasant faces?

Since when did CUPE become an arm for social activism?

What have they done for Darfur?

I certainly hope that they have a task force ready to deploy to the Sudan.

With due respect to all, I'm a CUPE member, although not of the Ontario wing that was behind this. I'm also a staunch conservative and a big time supporter of Israel who would never vote with my union on this issue.

All of us in CUPE can't be held accountable for the vapid rantings of morons like Sid Ryan or the things the leftist cadres who control most unions do.

If you'll notice one missing fact from the linked article, there is no mention of vote counts, either in raw membership numbers, vote totals and/or percentages.

Since I'm in another CUPE local, I can't say for sure how they conducted their vote, but I can make a pretty educated guess based on 20 years of experience. My bet is that this issue wasn't on the radar screens of 80% or more of the membership, nor did they vote or even know there was one.

That's how the lefties operate. It's up to them to notify each workplace about votes of this sort and guess what? Most times they don't precisely because they know their membership wouldn't go along.

If you other folks are rightly p*ssed at Sid Ryan, imagine how most CUPE members feel about it. They're not taking money in the form of union dues off your paycheque in order to play these games. They're taking it from mine, and like all union members, I have absolutely no say in what political orthodoxy they choose to support or what silly games they choose to play.

To The Greek; you didn't show much class in the title you used in this post, nor thought for that matter. Here's your chance. You owe me an apology for calling me an anti-semite. That was plain ignorance on your part. We're about to find out how much of a man you are. Go ahead, surprise me.

To Kate; you could choose guest posters with their heads screwed on a little tighter.

bob c

So you give them your money in which you say you have no control over what they do or say in your name...but you're more upset at the 'label' that someone used to point this out rather than do something about your situation, where it looks like fascists have taken over.
Since I'm not well schooled in unions and etc., what would happen if you opted out of the union
and don't give them your money?
What would happen if the unhappy majority did this?

THEY are doing it with your money and on your back and in your name. Being painted with a broad brush hurts, I know.
BUT if as you say the majority don't think like this then WHY are they allowing it?

Actually, nicely stated bob c

Unions, unfortunately, are coercive monopolies that rely on a fiction called a "bargaining unit", an anti-concept used to destroy the freedom of association of the working man. So I wouldn't tee off on "bob c" about this disgraceful vote, or whether or not he voiced objections to it. Unions can and do perform useful functions, it must be noted, if employers are irresponsible about safety in working conditions, among other things.

If the CUPE leadership targets only Israel but not countries like Zimbabwe, Iran, etc. that are violent toward their own citizens, that's discrimination, i.e. racism. Call in the "human rights" commission!

YOU are a Jew hater....why? i dunno...but you are.

bob c says: like all union members, I have absolutely no say in what political orthodoxy they choose to support

I thought the union members elected the leadership.

Erik Larsen; Thank you.

Idd; I don't give the union my money. It's taken without any choice or say so. It's the law of the land, literally. In fact, before you work your first shift, you have to become a member and sign on to paying dues. If you don't sign, you don't get hired.

From there, the unions, not just CUPE, give political contributions to the NDP even though the membership fairly closely resemble the public at large. There are no more or less conservatives, Libs or NDPers in unions than are in the general population, as surprised as you may be to hear that.

The problem is this. In theory, the membership could rein in the executive and union hall hangers on, but to do so requires the same degree of activism. That does not happen and never will.

It is a simple truth that most people want to go home after work to their wives, kids and lives. We don't particularly enjoy trolling around the union hall with a bunch of Marxists.

You can bemoan that, critisize it, think that we should be more activist, but the inescapable truth is that it is a dynamic that plays out in every union in existence, and not just here in Canada. Wishing, even correctly, that it wasn't so won't change it.

My principal beef in my 12:22am comments was with the insulting title to this post. I'm not sure if The Greek realizes it, but it was worthy of Sid Ryan. It was a sweeping and gratuitous cheap shot. He'd know so if he manned up and read my archived comments on this blog. He needn't look back over more than the last couple of months to find several.

ET; Although I'd disagree with some of what you said, your comments aren't far off the mark.

Randall; Yeah, we get to vote for the leadership. Which one should I vote for next time, the Communist or the Marxist?

Maybe unions should be banned. They're not a force for good, not a force for tolerance. Sure, they get great pay, benefits and working conditions for the membership, compared to what I got right now, certainly, but beyond workplace issues, like ET pointed out, something is wrong... Union leaders/executive are behaving like radical political-activist entities on the members' dimes! The Hard-Left leadership are using the unions as a propaganda/political soapbox for whatever hateful/Hard-Left/international socialistic crap they want to push forth.

I do feel for the (obvious minority of) union members who disagree with their leaders. Maybe they should strike against their leaders. Withhold dues, perhaps. Just ask the employer to stop deducting dues. Have a vote on that, and don't invite the leaders. Revolt against them. Vote to fire them. Whatever. Why not? You'd stop work to protest stuff you don't like, so don't take any crap from your elected leadership/executive, who operate pretty much like the Chinese Communist Party. Being elected to make decisions without your consent or even input? Why bother to elect them if they're not going to represent you and will only represent the Hard Left?

Oh, wait... before conservatives in unions get mad at me, I just realized that you're in a very difficult position. It's not that easy to give up an income for much time, obviously. So I guess that the real problem is that your rights are being violated by the unions! You are intimidated into submitting to whatever position the leadership/executive deems that you will represent, without your consent. This is in violation of your rights! What, then, shall you do? Go to court, maybe. Start a public-information campaign and incite contempt for the leadership/executive; get the MSM involved; put pressure on legislators, etc... don't let fascists like Sid Ryan deem whatever on your behalf without even asking what you think!

What the union leadership/executive does is wrong. They must not be permitted to behave like this. They take dignity as well as rights away from the membership. It's just like under communism/totalitarianism. But then again, what kind of people are union leaders? Why are such people being elected to lead the members? Is the membership majority Hard-Left/communist/acquiescent to totalitarians?

The Canadian Sentinel; Unions have been challenged on many occasions. Simply put, the unions are what they are because politicians have passed the laws that allow them to be, and the courts have sided with them. It has been that way under NDP, Lib and Conservative governments. Tell me, which of them should I vote for next time? I voted for Harper but he hasn't done anything to change the dynamic.

And NO, it is not an "obvious minority of" union members who disagree with their leaders. I'm not going to belabour the point but the views of CUPE members would be the same as the public at large.

Unbelievable that CUPE is going through with this.

I bet there is not a Jew in Canada, not thinking of a flight plan.

To allow the anti-Semite thugs belonging to CUPE to take over our Universities, use them to promote antisemitism, makes me want to hurl.

Bob, Harper couldn't do much with a minority in both houses.

Keep voting Conservative. Eventually, with double majorities, it's doable, to stop this running-roughshod over your rights by the leadership.

Wouldn't take too much to change via legislation, just tweaking which would sell easily as a restoration of your rights as workers, etc.

Right now, such legislation would probably lead to a Hard-Left coup d'etat and worsen the situation...

Basically, it's Right vs. Left. And the Right isn't yet fighting hard enough for its equal rights, because we've been intimidated and brainwashed for so long and are only now opening our eyes, communicating with one another via the internet and coming to understand this. It's got to happen, as the Left has taken them away. As long as the Left fights so hard to take our rights away, and we don't fight back hard enough, we'll continue to lose them.

BTW, I was briefly part of CUPE when temping with the CRA, so I can appreciate your situation. While I was there, they were threatening to strike, and I wanted no part of it. Besides, despite having dues deducted, I didn't have equal rights compared to permanent employees. So much for equality amongst members! Temps should therefore be exempt (again) from paying dues.

ulianov

Shame on you and your dhimmi ilk.
Typical ulianov, a hateful troll if I ever saw one.
So here's a 'symbolic ' up yours, just for you.

Disgusting.

bob c.,

As much as you slag lefties in your post, you claim that I "owe you an apology".

I owe you absolutely nothing.

"I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - Ayn Rand

If your feelings are hurt, go to the CHRC and lodge a complaint.

If you have the courage of your convictions, you will stand up against Sid Ryan and the other anti-semites in CUPE. You will organize against them. You will run for the highest office you can and you will educate your "brothers and sisters" about how misguided the anti-Israel stance is.
And finally, you will opt to donate your union dues to charity.

Blaming me for exposing your union's actions is misguided.

Suck it up bob, you're in the big kid's pool now.

Union leadership appears to give a stoop to spew racist rants and delve into the foreign affairs of the nation. Sid Ryan and his ilk are far out of their purview. If the membership disagrees in large numbers, why isn't there a revolt?

I've said it before and I'll say it again and again - charities cannot involve themselves in political activities. If they do they stand to lose their ability to issue tax deductible receipts. The same should apply with public sector unions. CUPE members should lose their right to deduct union dues from taxable income.

So to be consistent I suspect we will see a resolution banning visiting Chinese academics?

You know Iggy, when he was at Harvard, recommended that Harvard divest themselves of all shares of Petro China, which they did, due to Chinese Human rights violations.

I wonder where he sits on all of this?

Bob......if you don't like what your union is doing....get out of it,or vote(heh...like your vote counts)out the trash at the top.Whether you like it or not,you are part of the Jew hating CUPE.You belong to it,therefore you are part of it.And by either voting for the resolution,or by not voting,you endorse it.As the Greek said,you're playing in the big pool now.Hitler,Stalin,Mao all had unions too,although now we call them facist thugs.
The unions today now serve one purpose only....to keep sucking money from their members,to pay for their lifestyle.Tell me Bob,couldn't you better use your union dues for yourself?
OH.And don't only commies refer to each other as comrade,and brothers and sisters?

ulianov - I suggest you take a basic course in logic.

There cannot be any PROOF that unions have or don't have a right to make public pronouncements on issues that are outside of the realm of the actual workpractices of its members within their employment issues.

Do you know why there can't be any proof? No, you don't. Well, ulianov, it's because proof operates only within the realm of EMPIRICAL FACTS. A fact is quantifiable; it's observable, like counting up the number of mice in the lab. My comment is an analysis, it's a judgment, it's the result of reasoning and can't be 'observed' as an 'objective reality'. So, THINK, Ulianov and try to understand the difference between a unit of data and the analysis of that data.

I agree with bobc about his outline of how the union conducts its votes and business.

idd - you can't 'opt out' of the union! It's a requirement for the job! This fact, that you can't choose NOT to belong to the union, is a violation of one of our basic Charter Rights (2d0 which says that we have the right of 'freedom of association'. But we don't. In order to get a job in all unionized institutions, you are automatically, without choice, a member of that union. And that union, remember, lives off your work. They deduct your 'dues' automatically. and the 'votes' on various issues are just as bob c pointed out - made by a cadre, unknown to many in the whole membership.

ulianov - so, a 'symbolic' vote against Israeli academics doesn't count? Symbolic acts are irrelevant? Then why do them?
As for the vapid platitudes of the CUPE constitution for the 'promotion of peace' - what sophist sanctimonious nonsense. How does a union achieve that?

nv53 - in my view, unions have NO 'useful functions'. Workplace safety is out of their hands and part of the provincial government's Ministry of Labour. Unions just install unworkable rules, which result in higher employment costs.

canadian sentinel - your scenario is naive. You can't, as a union member, 'vote' to withhold your dues from the union. It's a provincial and probably federal law. You can't CHOOSE to withhold your dues.

The outline of how unions operate provided by bobc is accurate; the individual member has very little to no power. And many issues aren't decided by full membership vote but by the bosses or cadres in each local.

The Greek - bobc was absolutely right in chastizing you for your stereotype description of ALL Ontario CUPE members. What he pointed out to you was that the CUPE members are, in their opinions, exactly as diverse as non-CUPE members. Since you do not generalize ALL Ontarians as 'anti-semitic' then you should not do this with ALL CUPE members. Instead, the criticism ought to be at the CUPE executive.

As for organizing against them, you are being naive; it isn't simply against 'them' but against the LAWS of our country that permit unions to operate as parasitic monopolies without accountability or restraint. The individual fighting against a union is up against BIG money; he himself has nothing, no money, no laws, in his fight against a union.

Exactly HOW is someone to organize against a powerful union executive - and not lose his job? The union bosses are extremely well-organized; they 'run the shop'; they can get you kicked out of your job and a job anywhere else, with a flick of their wrist.

The Greek - 'opt to donate your union dues to charity'? Kindly provide me with the form where it legally says that the individual can, on his own, decide whether his automatically deducted union dues go to the union or to a charity!!

You haven't exposed union activities; you misinformed us about the membership, telling us that ALL Ontario CUPE members are anti-semitic. This is untrue.

On the other hand, bobc wrote several succinct and quite accurate accounts of how unions operate.

justthinkin - I suggest you read, again, what bobc wrote about this (and other) votes. Most of the members don't get to vote on such issues. He's in CUPE; he didn't get the option of voting.
And as he said, an employee CAN'T CHOOSE to get out of the union. If he has a job - whether it's in teaching or some other govt job - he HAS to be in that union. Yes, it's a violation of Section 2d; and yes, he has NO CHOICE. So, telling him to get out of the union means he must leave his job.

Tell me again, what does this have to do with the advancement of worker's rights in Canada? I forgot...

*Sigh*. Let me explain one more time...

By backing the boycott of Israeli universities, the unions reveal themselves for the extreme-left bigoted morons that they truly are. This reduces public and workers' support for unions, which ultimately reduces the number of union shops. This reduces the number of workers who are forced to join a union in order to get a job, which advances their rights.

Thus CUPE is indeed fighting the good fight.

ED - Comment deleted

bob c - Keep it civil

For heaven's sake, ulianov - think, just think once in a while.

When I say that a union has no right to make public statements about political issues, this has absolutely nothing to do with whether it has the legal permission to do such. It's about whether it has the ethical, the moral, the legitimate right to do so. THINK.

Again, a Union has NO RIGHT to make political statements. It has NO RIGHT to take this action away from the individual. The individual alone has the right to make a judgment about the political issues of the day - which might be the opposite of the Union Executive Mantra.

The union should stick to issues that concern only the worker and the workplace. Period.

And THINK. If you don't have to join a union then you shouldn't have to pay dues. But since you have to pay dues this, de facto, means that you are a member of that union. THINK. And you have no choice in this.

Most certainly a union can get you fired; they can put in all kinds of complaints about you from their stooges on the floor; they can make life a horror for you.

IF a symbolic act is irrelevant then why do it? You haven't explained this. Repeating yourself isn't an explanation. THINK.

Heh - since when is union 'encouragement' an action allowing voluntary compliance with a union mandate? Union activists certainly intimidate and pressure their co-workers to Follow The Union Rule.

Think. Just once in a while.

"BTW, I was briefly part of CUPE when temping with the CRA, so I can appreciate your situation. While I was there, they were threatening to strike, and I wanted no part of it. Besides, despite having dues deducted, I didn't have equal rights compared to permanent employees. So much for equality amongst members! Temps should therefore be exempt (again) from paying dues."

CS, you were never part of CUPE at CRA, even as a term. CUPE is a provincial union and does not represent federal workers. While your beef is valid, the union involved is UTE, a component of PSAC, the Public Service Alliance of Canada. While highly left wing, they have not yet taken a significant stand against Israel.

The CUPE issue is all Sid Ryan. You need look no further.

And for those who are so quick to trash unions, apparently you've never worked in a large non-union shop. Rare is the company that will do right by its employees once it reaches a certain size. Speak with those who've had to go to bat for the ordinary guy in the corporate crosshairs. Not every employer thinks you deserve a fair shake, particularly when the company (or government) stands to lose.

The Canadian Sentinel; I agree with what you say. To my mind, a simple way of reeling in the unions is to make it so that the executive needs a minimum number of members to cast a vote before something can go into effect.

In other words, Sid Ryan shouldn't be able to do something like this with just one more vote in favour than against. He should be required to get out a majority of his membership. It would be at that point that a lot of union silliness would come to an end.

How would the entire CUPE membership vote if properly informed about what Sid was doing? It's sad to say that I don't know. It's sadder still to have the same doubts about the general public. While I'd vote against Sid Ryan on this issue if given the chance, I'm far from certain about Canadians in general, no more or less so than my fellow union members.

ET,

"In Canadian labour law, the Rand formula (also referred to as automatic check-off) is a workplace situation where the payment of trade union dues is mandatory regardless of the worker's union status. This formula is designed to ensure that no employee will opt out of the union simply to avoid dues yet reap the benefits of the union's accomplishments (such as ensuring higher wages, better job security or other benefits). Supreme Court of Canada Justice Ivan Rand, the eponym of this law, introduced this formula in 1946 as an arbitration decision ending the Ford Strike of 1945 in Windsor, Ontario. The Canada Labour Code and the labour relations laws of a majority of provinces contain provisions requiring the Rand formula when certain conditions are met. In those provinces where the labour relations laws do not make the Rand formula mandatory, the automatic check-off of union dues may become part of the collective bargaining agreement if both parties (i.e., the employer and the trade union) agree. If there are religious objections to paying dues the dues may be donated to a mutually agreed upon charity per Canada Labour Code Section 70. (1)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_formula

Very good comments, bobc. All of them.

With regard to your comment that unions ought to be legislated that they would require a certain proportion of membership votes to pass Motions, rather than a simple majority of only 'those who are in the room' - that's excellent.

I've seen instances where a union wanted to pass a particular motion, knew that quite a few members would strongly object, and so, informed the membership that the current meeting was about other issues - quite irrelevant ones. Most people therefore didn't go.

BUT, the union instead, had one of their executive immediately, as soon as the meeting opened, vote to change the topic of the meeting to 'their Motion'. Of course, the only people who were in the meeting room knew about this agenda beforehand; they voted..and got their Motion passed. The rest of the union members had no vote.

So, unions readily get 'their way' by misinforming the membership, arranging things so that meeting agendas are hidden, stacking those meetings with 'their guys'..and so on.

Get rid of the unions. Parasites.

I'm starting to get the strong impression that this is all a cover up for Sid the dhimmi hack.Sid has an agenda, probably to take the heat off the terrible job he is doing, and to cover up for the expected job cuts that his beloved union will most likely endure.What better way to distract attention from his incompetence than to blame the Jews(Israel).
Hitler tried it...islamists are doing it..irananimals are doing it.Thugo chavez is doin'it CAF thrives on it.
Like pigs in sh*t.

Hi again Lenin,

unlike ET, I DO unreservedly support Isrtael, by which I mean I support anyone who cherishes rationality and security in their wish to not be bled dry by barbarians.

Now let's have a look at what you support: yep, it's Nazism.

I guess a lot of folks think it's an impoliteness to point it out when you know you're better than someone else, but I have no problem with that, either: I'm better than you. All the non-trolls here are better than you. Kate is better than you. Kathy is better than you. My child and my wife and my mom and my grandma and my brother and his family, and his wife's family are all better than you. My employers are better than you, and the garbage man, and the people who drive the buses I take to work are all, without exception, better than you. Not too sure about the letter carrier though.

Come to think of it, nearly everyone I've met in my life is better than you, ya stinking pig.

ulianov, nobody has to "make stuff up and misquote you" - you've named yourself after a butchering Fascist pig for chrissakes! Everything anyone needs to know about you was obvious the first time you posted here!

Get over yourself, dumbass,

The problem isn't only with CUPE. Hatered for JOOOOOS is spreading like cholera among leftists in general. Ironic, since the left, not may decades ago, was very Jew-friendly.

Even the estimable Dr. Dawg has been showing his true colours lately: anti-semetic to the core (although he probably denies it - probably even to himself) and a cheer leader for Jew bating Venezuelan strongman Chavez.

BTW, contempt for "Christ Killers"was endemic in Venezuela before Chavez came along to fan the flames. If I was a Venezuelan Jew, I'd be making travel arrangements right now, and that's not rhetorical bullshit.

bob c

I just see the words...CUPE are Jew hating Jackals. Your in it? Your a Jew hating Jackal too till you stand up like a man to your union and say out loud you are not. That's your organization? That's you. Perception in the face of silence is truth.

ulianov - again, think. Just a bit. You said that the CUPE Motion

"is little more than a symbolic gesture". That MEANS that it has no relevance. OK? The meaning of something that is 'little more than symbolic' is that is has NO actual effect. That means that it has: No relevance.
Think about what words MEAN - and don't retreat into denying the MEANING because you used a different word.

No, unions don't have 'the responsibility' to advocate on political issues. That's just your personal opinion. This has nothing to do with whether it is legal or illegal so don't bring that red herring into the argument. The only issue is whether or not the Union has the ethical right to move into political advocacy. I say that it has no such rights.

These rights belong to and only to individuals. The union has no right to speak on behalf of their membership - many of whom will strongly DISAGREE with the Union's public voice on issues. It is not only unethical but it is irresponsible for a Union to declare that it is the Voice of its Members. It isn't and abrogating their voices is deeply unethical.

Unions have only one responsibility - to work on behalf of their membership on issues pertaining to and only to their workplace. Nothing else.

Watching Hollywood movies? Reading the NCC manifesto? What on earth are you talking about?

Bob 12;19 Comment deleted

WHO THE HELL IS ED?

For shame, ulianov!

You thought that when ET said "unions have no right to make public statements..." that she meant that unions REALLY have no right when what she meant was... well..

...whatever she says she meant. 'Cause for ET, words mean what she wants them to mean. Which means: they're meaning depends on whatever point she's trying to make at the time. If she's losing an argument she can always backtrack and say she never really meant what she said after all (chuckle, chuckle) - as she lectures you in a schoolmarmish fashion.

Guess that sort of stuff works in the halls of academia. Out here in the real world well, "bullsh-t doesn't always baffle brains". Why ET consistently makes points she can't defend and gets her ass handed to her in broad daylight -repeatedly - is quite the mystery.

· The Israeli Apartheid Wall has been condemned and determined illegal under international law.

What about the other walls?
With Egypt?
Jordan?

'INTERNATIONAL LAW'? ROFL, besides, what and who's authority is law? The UN? LOL

CUPE, MSM, UN, = Group think, that's how i see it, like the Canadian postal union's leader hardly a year ago was it? Stating that mail from Israel hasn't been boycotted from being delivered here .... yet.

To ED (whomever you may be); Regarding the deletion of my 12:19 post, if you really are interested in keeping the discourse here civil, you might have started with a conversation with the Greek who started this post with a bigoted characterization of any and all CUPE members as anti-semites based, as we now learn today courtesy of the Nat Post, on the actions of Sid Ryan and a small committee who gave the thousands of decent union members no voice whatsoever, no chance at all to voice their opinions by way of a vote.

Could I ask for a rules clarification? It's apparently OK for a moderator to slag any and all with appalling characterizations, OK for posters to to say far worse to each other than anything I said, but seemingly out of bounds should we offend the sensibilities of a moderator. Have I got that right? If so, what a delicate bunch you are. Sorry, I had no idea.

One last question. I don't see that you've deleted any comments from people slagging me with being an anti-semite. Do you really see that as being okay, especially in light of what we've learned today about 99% of CUPE members not being allowed to vote on this issue, but my use of words like idiot and moron are out of bounds? If so, and at the risk of offending the Politeness Police, give your head a shake.