IW 
Member since Apr 18, 2009


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Canadian-sponsored apartheid

What a terrible article. Wark hardly says anything about Engler, instead he uses his speech as a soapbox to present an incredibly biased account of the Israel/Palestinian conflict. Luckily I know quite a bit about the history and current issues of the conflict, from different perspectives as well. If this was not the case, however, I would be lead to believe that all Palestinians are helpless and non-violent victims and that Israel is completely to blame for everything bad that has ever happened to a Palestinian. Of course there is no mention as to why Israel attacked Gaza. There is no mention that once Israel removed it's presence entirely from Gaza in 2005 the Palestinians elected a terrorist organization that was originally formed to do try and destroy Israel. Wark blames everything on Israeli occupation but then conveniently leaves out the part about how Israel leaving Gaza resulted in the strengthening of a extremist regime that killed members of their political rivals, other Palestinians, until they fled the area completely. These are the same people who intentionally put combat fighters in the midst of innocent families, schools, mosques and even hospitals. This is Hamas occupation, not Israeli.
The irony is that Wark provides such a one-sided and ignorant article and supports Engler's idea that IAW, equally as biased as this article, needs to be expanded.
Lest we forget that Engler was the ringleader during the incident at Concordia when Netanyahu was prevented from speaking by a violent mob that vandalized school property and assaulted Jewish students. According to Engler, what should be happening on campuses is giving more of a voice to radicals on one side while preventing the other side from even having the opportunity to speak.
Engler and his ilk want peace in the Middle East about as much as they want reasonable dialogue. For them, having the opportunity to beat their own drum through identifying with victims and denouncing a perceived evil is the real MO. They're all such morally upstanding people. Their parents must be so proud.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by IW on 03/27/2010 at 3:57 PM

Re: “NSPIRG's Re-orientation plan

"Last school year, some students at Dal unsuccessfully attempted to cut off NSPIRG's funding from student fees, precisely because the group reaches out beyond the campus to work with non-student groups."

There was no shortage of debate as to why NSPIRG funding was being questioned. However, I do not recall anyone associated with NSPIRG or the Stop campaign (AKA "some students") claim that funding was being challenged because of NSPIRG's work with non-student groups.
For you to claim that this is precisely the reason is just ridiculous.
I'm sure NSPIRG appreciates the positive exposure but if you are going to mention old beefs as well then you should get your facts straight.
The implication is "Some students wanted to cut NSPIRG funding precisely because the organization seeks to put students in touch with the Halifax community".
This is simply untrue and only reflects your uninformed opinion.

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by IW on 09/03/2009 at 4:11 AM

Re: “NSPIRG vote results

Actually, K, the vote was to bring about a referendum that would address the funding. There wasn't even any mention of a change from opt-out or opt-in presented in the motion. Therefore, the motion was not about de-funding.
Also, if students have to do extensive research on all aspects of tuition then it should be just as difficult to opt out as it would be to opt in. It appears as if you think it is OK for students to unknowingly fund NSPIRG but there would be an issue with students having to make an informed decision to opt in.
Besides, NSPIRG does advertise the opt-out period, although it is done very poorly. You should inform yourself on these matters before emphatically trying to shut down others.

Posted by IW on 04/18/2009 at 4:05 PM

Re: “NSPIRG vote results

Actually, K, the vote was to bring about a referendum that would address the funding. There wasn't even any mention of a change from opt-out or opt-in presented in the motion. Therefore, the motion was not about de-funding.
Also, if students have to do extensive research on all aspects of tuition then it should be just as difficult to opt out as it would be to opt in. It appears as if you think it is OK for students to unknowingly fund NSPIRG but there would be an issue with students having to make an informed decision to opt in.
Besides, NSPIRG does advertise the opt-out period, although it is done very poorly. You should inform yourself on these matters before emphatically trying to shut down others.

Posted by IW on 04/18/2009 at 3:24 PM

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Real Time Web Analytics

© 2017 Coast Publishing Ltd.