A democratic country
Banning discussion of historical facts is not the approach of a democratic country. It is the approach of people who are ashamed of what they have done.
Re: Palestinian transit ads won’t be removed, Aug. 29.
A small controversy has been ignited in Vancouver over paid advertisements at a wall mural in a Vancouver SkyTrain station as well as on 15 buses, which show in a series of maps how Palestine is disappearing as Israel continues to expand. B’nai Brith, a Jewish lobby group, is outraged and wants them prohibited, alleging that it’s part of a campaign of anti-Semitism. The ads are likely going to appear in other Canadian cities, including Ottawa, so our city councillors should be prepared for a political debate.
There is no doubt that the ads show Israel in a very poor light. But is this anti-Semitism? B’nai Brith does not appear to challenge the truth of the ads. Following a similar logic, perhaps we should ban discussion of the Holocaust for fear of inciting anti-German sentiments? What about recognition of the Armenian genocide, the residential school calamity or the incarceration of the Japanese during the Second World War? Should discussion of these catastrophes also be banned? As we know, some countries do ban discussion of historical events. For many years, Turkey refused to admit any discussion of the Armenian catastrophe. And, in Israel a recent law has actually cut off funding to any Israel organization that makes reference to the “Naqba” (the expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians when Israel was created in 1948).
Banning discussion of historical facts is not the approach of a democratic country. It is the approach of people who are ashamed of what they have done.
Published in the Ottawa Citizen on September 4, 2013. Opinions expressed by Peter Larson are his own.
About the Author
Peter Larson
Peter Larson is chair of the National Education Committee on Israel/Palestine with the National Council on Canada Arab Relations.
Posted on September 04, 2013