Category: letters to the editor

Categories
Opinions

Drop the charges! No tribunals for students!

Letter to the editor,

Drop the charges! No tribunals for students!

During the student strike that took place in spring of 2015, over 25 students participating in picket lines at Concordia University received formal complaints from faculty members alleging they disobeyed article 29G (obstruction or disruption of university activities) of Concordia’s Code of Rights & Responsibilities.

By picketing, students were carrying out the strike mandates voted democratically in their general assemblies. The strike was against the Quebec government’s austerity measures; it was to protect the common good so that public services and social welfare are not hampered. Those who are most affected by austerity measures are the marginalized communities and people from lower income brackets, much like Concordia University’s demographic.

Concordia’s decision to partake in political discrimination as co-complainants, targeting students for carrying out a democratically voted mandate, and for being critically minded and caring for the betterment of the society, undermines the students’ democratic process. Moreover, we see this action as a means to legitimize the repression of the voices against austerity measures proposed by the Liberal government. We demand that the administration acknowledge the political nature of these complaints and dismiss them promptly; we further encourage the faculty members pressing these charges to stand with students as we fight for sustainable education, and immediately reconsider their participation in repressing the voices of students at Concordia University.

We, the UNDERSIGNED, consider the administration’s lack of support and failure to recognize the strike inappropriate and unacceptable. We believe that such demeanor goes against the values Concordia espouses and promotes: a campus community that thrives on “intertwining education with social responsibility” and “encouraging students to become active, critical and global citizens.” We thus strongly urge you to appreciate our socially responsible student populace, recognize the legitimacy of student democracy and cancel all strike-related charges against students!

There will be another solidarity protest held on Sept. 29 at 12:30 on the corner of Mackay and Maisonneuve. We encourage all students, staff and faculty to come and demonstrate our collective support and solidarity for students facing political repression.

Sign the petition online at http://tinylink.net/H7a

Kyle McLoughlin
Masters in Social and Cultural Anthropology
On behalf of Solidarity Concordia Tribunal Support Committee

Categories
Opinions

Letter to the editor – Re: Raphael Stein

Letter to the Editor,

Concordia students have the right to opt-out of Fee-Levy Group fees, but very few do. There are three reasons why: first, many students are simply not aware of this option; second, even if they are aware, the procedure is just too darn complicated and time consuming to even bother with; and third, they think the Fee-Levy Groups (henceforth referred to as FLGs) are all doing a fantastic job.

The third reason is actually the least common, simply because the vast majority of students know very little—if anything—about what FLGs are and what they do. Please allow me to provide some background.

There are 13 Fee-Levy Groups scattered around the SGW campus (with only one at Loyola). Each group is different and is involved in different activities on and off campus. Some are involved in grassroots social issues, some create media content related to Concordia, some distribute food, and so on. The university collects money on behalf of the Fee-Levy Groups via our tuition. Together, they receive $3.35 per credit from every undergraduate student (about $50.25 for a full time undergrad) and $7.75 per semester from graduate students.  It turns out, the only way the university agreed to this arrangement in the first place was because the FLGs promised to allow any student to opt out if they so desired.

However the FLGs found a loophole: the university never said how simple the opt-out process had to be. And thus we have a system today where to opt-out of Cinema Politica (a group that screens independent political films) for example, you have within five school days to call, schedule an appointment, and travel to their office to collect your 70 cents per undergraduate credit. I’m only using Cinema Politica as an example and have no public opinion on their activities to offer. I encourage all students to examine each of the FLGs’ activities and determine which—if any—you would like to support.

Ironically, several of the Fee Levy Groups claim to fight for social justice, which among other things, opposes oppressive  government bureaucracy (i.e. vis-a-vis immigration) and fights tactics that prevent citizens from exercising their rights. Yet, they have no issue enforcing impossible conditions on students wishing to exercise their right to opt out of theses fees and effectively barring disabled students, students based in Loyola, and others from opting out at all.

I have proposed a reasonable solution to the insanity: Opt-Out Day. Opt-Out Day will be one or more designated days at each campus, where each FLG will be required to staff a table at a central location and provide fee-refunds on the spot to any student with proper documentation who requests it. Opt-Out Day is not a perfect solution (it is also time constrained, for example), yet it is the most reasonable, cheap and simplest to implement.

Raphael Stein, ENCS undergrad

Categories
Opinions

Letter to the editor: Re: Dennis Coderre on Baseball

At the outset of the article, “Dennis Coderre talks Baseball,” the mayor’s support for baseball is described as “impassioned rhetoric” emanating “from a place of nostalgic testimony.”

As Coderre suggests, this is highly misleading. No doubt, for many older Montrealers, the Expos conjure up fond memories of lazy Sunday afternoons at the Big O. But the argument put forth by Coderre, as well as the real spearheads of the movement, former Expos star Warren Cromartie, TSN analyst Matthew Ross and musician Annakin Slayd, is much more about the potential boon that baseball’s return could mean for Montreal.

In the 1970’s, 80’s and for one last hurrah in 1994, the Expos attracted busloads of tourists from Ottawa, Quebec City, upstate New York and Vermont. All these tourists injected money into the city’s economy. A new downtown stadium, one the Expos never had and was the main reason they left, also means new businesses and jobs around the area.

New stadiums in Minnesota, Pittsburgh and Washington (where the Expos ultimately left for), have helped spur urban revitalization. Any big investment must of course be considered very carefully, especially in shaky economic times. But let’s be clear; as the mayor says, this isn’t just about the past: it is about investing in something that could bring tangible economic benefits to the city. And a lot of fun!

-Brant Moscovitch

Letter to the editor: Hard Talk on the GSA

It has been an important year for the Graduate Students’ Association (GSA), but unfortunately nothing has been delivered. All year, members have contributed to the on-going debate about where to place blame. Popular targets have been the GSA executives, staff, and directors, as well as the diverse academic and experiential backgrounds of our graduate students’ community. Cries for reform take issue with GSA governance yet few have addressed the roots of the problem, and it is crucial for us to also now consider the role played by GSA membership inactivity. I write this to provide context for members interested in moving forward.

The GSA executives have received much disparagement. Given the role of experience in providing a benchmark to assess one’s own performance, it is not surprising that executives this year, as well as the year before, have misconstrued comments made by critics as personal attacks. However, few executives of students’ associations begin with enough background directly preparing them for their roles as student leaders; most learn on the job. Clearly, executives lacking experience is insufficient on its own to support our discontent with the GSA’s performance.

GSA directors have been next in line to receive critical remarks; council attendance and discussions have not matched members’ expectations. Some have also suggested that directors spend much of their meeting time policing one another. My observation is that directors typically work independently on impractical or short-sighted motions such as those entertained this year attempting to reduce quorum requirements for council meetings and general assemblies. When motions are worded in isolation, directors fail to test the waters and to understand views shared by others on the board. If directors engage each other outside of council meetings, then motions can be thought through better, and directors will never find themselves in a position where considerable energy had been exerted on motions which fail to pass. It is true that many hours of council meetings this year have been allocated to needless discussions. Considering that the GSA has for some reason capped the duration of meetings at three hours, limiting time available for discussion, it becomes no surprise that members cannot dig up productive resolutions in council meeting minutes. Beyond council meetings, directors make no time for the GSA and are inaccessible to the membership. Their weak commitment is also why committees of the GSA barely meet, with the assigned work then transferred to the GSA staff. I believe that the GSA committees are tasked with jobs which instead ought to be executed by working groups composed of executives and staff. Committees of the board of directors ought only to approve the output of such working groups, and to abstain from day-to-day matters.  Lacking this structure, it is understandable that directors complain about their workload, and that staff are caught exercising inordinate control over committee business.

GSA staff have been described as acting beyond the scope of their duties; staff are expected not to excessively dominate the decision making process. Some members go further by suggesting that our GSA staff cover for each other and that they act in their self-interest as a group. If they are valid, such claims ought to worry members. However with certainty, one may only deduce that our GSA staff need better supervision, and that any tasks assigned to them must never involve conflicts of interest. In addition, it is vital to introduce an explicit provision in the GSA bylaws which prevents staff members from chairing committees, council, or general assemblies given the influence of such roles on voting behaviour. Our GSA bylaws have been undergoing revisions this year, although the membership and the GSA council have yet to be presented with serious proposals for adjustments.

So where must we begin in order to move forward? It is clear that GSA executives and directors need to be engaged by the membership; we can begin by demanding more and by being specific about campaigns the GSA ought to adopt (or to drop!); we can begin by considering additions to our by-laws as well as policies which we believe are necessary (such as a policy for grievances); we can also begin just by showing up to council meetings and general assemblies and by asking our department associations (especially those very active groups in the arts & science faculty) to play a role in GSA affairs. After all, GSA executives and directors are your representatives who must be lobbied actively in order for them to advocate for student needs (such as more research funding, longer program term-limits, and protection of the diversity of course offerings). What has been missing these past two years is a vibrant culture of community awareness and engagement amongst graduate students. Let’s remind ourselves that democracy doesn’t come knocking but instead begins with active citizens who call themselves to action!

Firas Al Hammoud, MA Economics, Faculty of Arts & Science,
Graduate Student Governor 2014-15

Letter to the editor: We need to do better; we deserve better

On Thursday March 26, the general assembly of Concordia’s Graduate Students’ Association failed to maintain quorum to deal with any business for the third, arguably fourth, time in a row. The only motions dealt with were minutes and an incomplete amendment an Austerity motion that is on the agenda since October and then quorum was lost.

Continue reading “Letter to the editor: We need to do better; we deserve better”

Letter to the editor – Lauren Aghabozorgi

The time of year has come once again where we will be voting for a new CSU executive team during the upcoming General Elections. There are many issues on campus right now that affect a diversity of Concordians; the cooperative housing project, the development of an on-campus daycare service, and the intricacies of the campus food movement are but a few of the initiatives that the CSU has been engaged in this year. The problem that we are too often faced with is the short turnover period in the dy- namics of student politics that does not allow us to follow through with our initiatives. This year however, I hold a great amount of confidence in the Community Action team and their Continue, Complete, Create platform. I would like to formally endorse the team, and especially their candidate for VP Sustainability, Gabrielle Caron.

As coordinator of the Concordia Food Coalition, I have had the opportunity to work side-by-side with Bri on several of our projects aimed towards transforming the campus food system. I have come to know her as a passionate individual with an out- standing work ethic and an impressively vast knowledge of sustainability issues. Her wonderfully enthusiastic personality and warm nature has allowed her to develop one of the projects we are most proud to stand behind at the CFC; Le Campus Potager.

Le Campus Potager aims to grow organic produce directly on campus, for the cam- pus. Beyond that, the project has successfully offered educational opportunities for students to learn about urban agriculture, empowering them to become closer to their food, and enabling them to spread the culture of sustainability at Concordia and in the greater Montreal area. The produce harvested during last year’s growing season has already been supplied to students at our Farmer’s Market and the Hive Café Solidarity Coop. Le Campus Potager intends to expand in time for the 2015 growing season, we can expect even more locally grown food in the 2015-16 academic year!

It has been a truly enriching experience to watch this project grow under the CFC, and it could not have been possible without Gabrielle’s diligence and know-how. The Food Coalition is exceptionally proud of her and all the work she has done towards creating a more sustainable food system. Gabrielle holds great potential to maintain what has already been established for sustainability at Concordia and of course fur- ther build on our movement. I extend my utmost support to Gabrielle as candidate in the running for CSU VP Sustainability as well as the rest of the Community Action team.

– Lauren Aghabozorgi
Coordinator
The Concordia Food Coalition

Letter to the editor – Melissa Kate Wheeler

To the undergraduates at Concordia University,

I write to you as a past CSU President to express my wholehearted support for Presidential candidate on the Community Action team, Terry Wilkings.

I have known Terry for several years. He is easygoing, authentic, and consistently positive; all qualities ideal for your official spokesperson and representative. He combines these with an unmatched work ethic and strategic vision. Indeed, Terry doesn’t just think of end goals, he knows exactly how to get there.

During his current mandate as VP Academic, Terry championed the amazing student housing initiative. He also launched the daycare project and spearheaded important University bylaw reforms aimed at giving students more representation on Senate. If he achieved these things as a Vice-President, I can only imagine the amazing things which await you with him at the helm of the CSU.

As a former President of our Union, I care deeply about our Concordia community. I have complete faith in him as caretaker of the CSU. He has already proven that he keeps his promises, that he is capable of creating real change. Elect him, and you will be choosing a President who will follow through. Terry is what Concordia needs… he’s the President you deserve!

– Melissa Kate Wheeler
Former CSU President (2013-14)

Letter to the editor – Jessica Lelièvre

Two years ago, I made my first steps in student politics. I ran and was elected as the President of the Political Science Student Association because I deeply felt that things had to be moved around. I saw immense potential in my peers, but little opportunities to see that potential live to its full capacity. Essentially, that is what I wanted to move around.

Since I made these first steps, I met many other students who also shared this vision and ambition. Today, I am delighted to see many of these individuals come together to further the realm of opportunities our university has to offer us. And I know for a fact that together, they will meet our expectations.

These individuals have united together under the banner of Community Action. What they have to offer is not only great events and learning opportunities for us. By offering affordable housing to students, giving student parents a chance to succeed academically while having their children nurtured near them, and furthering our campus sustainability, Community Action also seek to impact our local student community. They understand that these issues do not exist in a vacuum. They are able to look further, identify the larger problems we are faced with, and address them head on. By doing so, they lead our student community towards a better future. That is, truly, to have at heart student’s best interest.

These people have inspired me, and I know that they will inspire you as well. They are devoted to support student initiatives, to give students the opportunities they need to succeed, to allow potential to live to its true capacity.

Today, they need our support, so that tomorrow, they can support us. For our com- munity, vote Community Action on March 24, 25, 26.

– Jessica Lelièvre

Categories
Opinions

GSA’s General Assembly at Loyola sends clear messages

The General Assembly (GA) of Concordia’s Graduate Student Association (GSA) held on Dec. 1 at Loyola campus failed to reach the 1 per cent quorum. Only 25 to 30 students showed up including only three Loyola students. This would have been the first GA held in Loyola in the history of GSA. As the councilor who moved for a GA in Loyola, I feel that I should speak out to emphasize that this should not discourage from engaging Loyola students but rather motivate doing so; should echo a message of reform and a call for leaders.

Trying to hold the first Loyola GA is a big responsibility for this council since failure discourages people from taking the risk again and doom Loyola students to yet a longer era of neglect. Many explanations to this failure are voiced, like mobilization failure, bad timing or that Loyola is bad due to “math”. Ergo, we should never hold a GA in Loyola again! While there are some truths to these arguments, they only scratch the surface reaching a wrong conclusion. I think the problem is deeper.

GSA adopts “direct democracy” (the idea of having everyone in a room to collectively vote on decisions). I am not a fan of direct democracy as it can be impractical and people prefer that others do the work. However, in the educational context of a university, it is invaluable. It teaches students how to work with one another; how to listen to those with passionately different opinions than their own; how to debate, negotiate, compromise and get things done together; how to develop empathy and be socially responsible. It transforms students to active members of society, ready to tackle the most challenging issues of our time. Also, it can mobilize thousands of students for a cause. But, be weary of drawbacks. When an overwhelming majority has an overwhelming voting power, minorities get oppressed.

Engagement is cumulative; it takes a lot to build and so little to destroy. The GSA house is downtown, all council and committee meetings are downtown, practically all GSA events are downtown, never in the history of GSA has a GA been held in Loyola! The result? Only 3 Loyola students showed up to a GA in Loyola! This is how marginalized and alienated Loyola students have become after a history of neglect. This is a call for council to not give up on Loyola; to engage Loyola students; to do more in Loyola.

There is another systematic problem. It was raised that the last GA, held downtown, never met quorum either. Last GA, after elections, the majority of students left, ignoring the rest of the GA business. The students remaining were not more than those 30 students showing up in Loyola. The truth is, without elections, we never meet quorum. The fact that the two GAs that were held at two different times, in two different places and organized by two different VP mobilization, never, in effect, met quorum, points to a systematic problem having little to do with time, place or mobilizers. Council failed to meet quorum two months in a row this summer! For the bigger part of this year, GSA has been functioning with half an executive team whose president is acclaimed and half a council with mostly appointed members who had no competition (including myself). It organized almost no events in the fall, beyond orientation. It does not have an approved budget yet. It censured its president, its Board of Governors representative and tried to sanction a GSA member. This is how disconnected GSA has grown to be!

GSA matters! With government imposed cuts on education, it matters now more than ever. And just like in 2012, we CAN do better! Direct democracy or not, decisions are made by those who show up; those who show up to lead! This is a call for YOU to intervene to reform the GSA.

I wish to offer a different point of view that leads to taking the harder path of engaging Loyola students and reforming the GSA as opposed to hanging failure on time and place requiring no action on our part.

-Keroles Riad

Follow me (@Kerologist)

Categories
Opinions

Letters to the Editor: Why I Moved to Sanction Mostapha Marzban After the Last GSA General Assembly

In response to the motion I presented at the November 18th GSA council meeting to sanction him for his behaviour at the last GSA general assembly, Mostapha Marzban argued that “accusation of only [him], while everyone including executives were supporting their desired candidate with their power, is not fair and constructive”.

My intention here is not to refute this statement, but to clarify that my sanction motion had nothing to do with supporting candidates. Elected leaders of department/faculty associations should be encouraged to support candidates. Who is better able to speak to the qualifications of candidates than their fellow student leaders? Voting for your friends is also acceptable, in my view, though ideally one should at least be familiar with the candidate’s platform. When asked by an attendee at the aforementioned council meeting, Marzban was unable to speak to Dina Alizadeh’s ambitions as VP Academic and Advocacy hopeful. But again, there is nothing sanctionable about supporting one’s spouse. If anything, this just demonstrates that Marzban is a devoted husband, and I hope that my partner would support me with equal enthusiasm if he were a Concordia student.

Obviously I did not propose to sanction Marzban for being devoted to his wife. However, while popularity voting is seen as practically an inevitability of student elections, creating an atmosphere of intimidation, in which some members of the assembly are not able to participate fully and equally, and voters are coerced, bullied, and instructed to physically pull down other voters’ hands, is not. I had hoped that after hearing my motion, Marzban would understand that this behaviour is completely unacceptable.

Marzban may not have been the only one contributing to this hostile atmosphere, but he himself admitted he was the one in control when his wife’s election was contested. “We will stay here until morning voting down your bullshit motions,” he promised. Not ‘I’, but ‘We’, implying that Marzban was confident that a majority of the members present would vote however he instructed them to. These are students who share classes and labs, and who see each other nearly every day. The Engineering Department is a small space to be in if you don’t get along with your cohort, and especially if you don’t get along with one of the VPs of your faculty association.

Marzban’s behaviour at that General Assembly also indicated a lack of respect for other attendees. Those who had taken precious time out of their day to vote on whether or not to take a stance on pipeline development or austerity; those who had questions about the GSA’s financial report, or simply wanted to see what their student association was all about. These members were cheated out of their General Assembly, and while I acknowledge that Marzban was not the only one who engaged in disruptive, disrespectful, and anti-democratic behaviour that day, he made it very clear that he was their leader.

It is unfortunate that, when Marzban spoke about my motion at the GSA council meeting, he framed it as a conflict between faculties. Rather than addressing the specific allegations I enumerated in my motion, he argued that engineers make valuable contributions to society. They build bridges, he said, without irony. Engineering is indeed an important profession, and ENCS graduate students should be proud of the contributions they are making in their respective fields. Marzban did a disservice to his faculty, who elected him as one of their representatives, by representing them so poorly. If engineers were misrepresented after the last General Assembly, it is because Marzban, and a few others, led by him, engaged in behaviour that was detrimental to  the honour and integrity of his entire faculty, not to mention to every other member of the Graduate Students’ Association. As a leader, he should take responsibility for this, and I invite him to do so by formally apologizing to
all GSA members at tomorrow’s General Assembly.

I hope this clarifies why I moved to sanction Mostapha Marzban.

-Isabelle Johnston

Categories
Opinions

Boycott, Divest and Sanction Israeli Apartheid

BDS Quebec endorses “Yes to BDS” campaign at Concordia University

This summer, the world witnessed yet another massacre of Palestinian civilians in Gaza: men, women and children who are occupied, besieged and, since 2007, subject to a total blockade by the armed forces of Israel, the occupying power. This blockade is illegal, immoral and inhuman.

But the immorality of the collective punishment Israel is inflicting on the Palestinian people goes well beyond the borders of Gaza. Israel is an apartheid state, as defined by the UN Convention on the Prevention and Suppression of the Crime of Apartheid. Israeli apartheid is based on the same three pillars as South African apartheid:
different rights for different groups
discriminatory access to land and population separation in different geographical zones,
total control of the population and military repression.
Palestinian citizens of Israel suffer legalized and institutionalized discrimination at the hands of the Israeli state, simply because they are Palestinian. Like South Africa before 1994, Israel is a “democratic” State for its Jewish population – though certain categories of this population face injustice – but a profoundly anti-democratic one for Palestinians.

Israel is the only state in the world which benefits from total impunity before the international community. The states of this community have woefully failed in their duty to hold Israel responsible for the constant violations of rights of the Palestinian people, leaving Israel free to continue its occupation, its colonization and its dispossession with total impunity.

Where the international community has failed to hold Israel to account, it is up to civil society to lay the grounds for change by supporting and engaging in the world wide campaign to Boycott, Divest and Sanction the State of Israel.

In the coming days, Concordia students will be asked to join this large international movement in favor of human rights, justice and equality for all. On behalf of the Québec BDS Coalition, we want to praise Concordia students for, once again, standing on the right side of history. Boycott, Divest and Sanction Israeli Apartheid!

Steering committee of the Québec BDS Coalition
(which counts over 30 organizations including major labour unions and community organizations across the province).

Rushdia Mehreen
Member of the steering committee of BDS Quebec

Categories
Concordia Student Union Opinions

A letter to the CSU regarding the BDS

To whom it may concern,

As a Jewish Israeli/Canadian student enrolled at Concordia University, I am deeply disheartened by the BDS resolution calling for a “boycott of all academic and consumer ties with any institution or company that aids in Israel’s occupation of Palestine.” I do not see the relevance of a University taking a stance against a country that has no bearing to the University’s existence, other than reaping from its resources, generous contributions and donations, as well as demographically speaking, constituting a decent fraction of the student population.

Having resided the last few years in Israel, and unlike most of the people submitting uneducated and false, propaganda-influenced accusations, I find it absolutely sickening to think that I could potentially be funding a University that is boycotting my homeland based on false pretenses. While studying at Bar Ilan University, which happens to not only be an Israeli University, but a religious Zionist one, I studied among Arab classmates. Freedom of Religion granted to them within a religious institution. The people ‘suffering under apartheid’ are practicing their religion freely in the most religious, Zionist campus in Israel, taking advantage of all the opportunities the country has to offer, as they should. While hospitalized at Tel Hashomer, one of the prestigious hospitals in Israel, I was treated by an Arab doctor…Where is the inequality and lack of opportunity that you intend on protesting?

Apartheid? Is an Apartheid state one that not only admits students regardless of their beliefs, but provides low cost dorms to Jews and Arabs alike, without discrimination? The Arab population of students attending Haifa University, is a whopping 30 per cent.

Having been taxed as part of the working force, some of my hard earned salary went to providing water & electricity to Gaza, despite the ongoing conflict. Nahariya’s Galil Hospital has treated nearly 400 people injured in civil war in the past few years. The people treated were not Israeli citizens. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that is Democratic. Arabs in Israel have equal voting rights and ironically, Israel is among the few places in the Middle East that allots Arab women the right to vote (they do not even hold such rights in most of the other Middle Eastern countries). There are eight Arab members in the Unicameral Parliament of Israel. Arabic, like Hebrew, is an official language of Israel. More than 300,000 Arab children attend Israeli schools.

A SodaStream factory located in the West Bank is closing due to Pro-Palestinian activists calling for a boycott, rendering 500 Palestinians, 450 Israel Arabs and 350 Israeli Jews unemployed. A 16:7 ratio of Arab to Israel workers somewhat contradicts the terms of an Apartheid.

With this being said, I find it rather distasteful that a University that has received a $5 Million donation from The Azrieli Foundation, as well as a $1 Million donation from Bronfman can even permit such a vote to be held within its institution, especially with the issue being so far from being connected at all. Azrieli also established the first endowed fellowship program for Concordia graduate students. Before calling for a boycott, one should do their research; we all benefit from Israel’s resources and achievements on a daily basis.

Israeli scientists are responsible for having developed the first fully computerized, no-radiation, diagnostic instrumentation for breast cancer. The cell phone was developed in Israel by Motorola, Voice Mail technology and the ‘Disk on Key’ was also developed in Israel. Rummikub, the third highest selling board game globally, is manufactured in the southern town of Arad, also in Israel. A design submitted by Michael Arad (Israeli-born) was chosen for the World Trade Center Memorial, commemorating the tragic loss our nation experienced at the hands of terrorism. A novel stem cell therapy treatment to Parkinson’s Disease was developed by Israeli researches, the treatment uses a patient’s own bone marrow stem cells to produce the missing chemical that enables restoration of motor movement. Israel is always among the first to send out IDF soldiers and medics to assist in any natural disaster, or medical epidemic.

Throwing around allegations of Apartheid is not only irrelevant, but also quite offensive to those living in apartheid (eg; South Africa).  These are facts, not opinions. The accusation of Israel being an Apartheid country is an opinion, not a fact.

If you are going to call for a boycott, you cannot pick and choose your stance. If you call for a boycott, you have no right to benefit from the country’s achievements, or accept financial donations. You cannot boycott Israel and continue to benefit from its resources. The Concordia Student Union has no right to be taking a stance on something far beyond their understanding, with absolutely no bearing on its existence whatsoever. There is no place for hostility in a place that once provided us comfort and equality. We should be focusing on our common goal; a higher education.

-Ayelet Bender

Exit mobile version