Kiwi , King in the Golan Heights

Yesterday my wife and I had the profound and moving experience to visit the Golan Heights on the Lebanon border —the day before we were at the GH, Syrian area.

Personal Myths, like the collapsing of bowling balls, have been shattered since I arrived in this amazing country two weeks ago.

The gleaming modern cities and towns astound——the Google , Microsoft towers and local Israeli company office complexes , and Apartment complexes, in Tel Aviv but also prevalent in other cities, proliferate.

The modern freeways and bridges attest to a Modern efficient state—-

And then there is the agriculture——


We are lucky to be here in Spring ——sunshine daily and temperatures between 20 and 30 degrees centigrade.

In central parts and bordering the Negev desert, there is the barley and wheat and other grains, vegetables , date Palm groves , and olive orchards——-and almond orchards —many now in bloom——-

As one moves north to lower and upper Galilee we witness still the Olive Groves but now joined by citrus, banana groves, and thousands of acres of various vegetables and fruit and berry trees ——-then there is the trees on the slopes —- many forested areas —

In one area , in the upper Galilee, this one town shows a letter in the town by a visiting German scholar in the 1930’s that tells of one tree ——-

Now there are thousands throughout and around the town ——planted studiously by the locals with help from the state.

We were lucky yesterday ( arranged on the moment for secutiy reasons) to visit a ‘place’ ( now using capitalism) right next to the Lebanese border and greeted by one of their leaders , who was also the liaison with the Israeli army troops in strategic posts nearby. In this village of 500 we saw kids playing in their community playground and 100 feet away an entrance to a bomb shelter . Trees dotted the place , the sun shone, and for a split second one could easily be in many places in North America————for a split second ——

The leader( originally from Haifa with a detour to Los Angles as a plumber) was full of energy and confidence as we looked at the higher Lebanese land , uncultivated, barren, ( oh, yes, there were plots of opium and tobacco) just north of us ——and in another location watched the illegal Hezbolla ( suppose to be a Lebanese) flag fly , the UN too afraid to remove it.

And what is the economics of this place I querried—————

That Kiwi you ate in Tel Aviv last week—-that was grown here—-—he proudly explained.

Yes, the slopes were full of Kiwi orchards ——-

Notwithstanding being surrounded by enemies , some who want its destruction, The Israeli miracle continues———-

King David would be proud that this place that he united three thousand years ago continues to pursue its destiny.


Facebook Faces Serious Headwinds

From WSJ

By Byron Tau and Deepa Seetharaman
Updated March 19, 2018 9:41 p.m. ET

Facebook Inc. confronted an intensifying crisis as political leaders in the U.S. and Europe called for aggressive inquiries into whether the technology giant failed to stop improper access and handling of user data, scrutiny that sent the company’s stock to its biggest decline in four years.

The uproar pushed Facebook’s stock down 6.8% to $172.56 Monday, wiping out about $36 billion in market value as the episode reignited concerns over how Facebook, Alphabet Inc.’s GOOGL -3.03% Google and other internet firms handle user data that is at the core of advertising businesses that have made them among the richest companies on Earth.

The backlash has raised anew the prospect of tighter regulation of the social-network company and other big internet firms that already are under scrutiny for how Russia manipulated their platforms before and after the 2016 presidential election. Internally, Facebook executives and employees have fiercely debated how to respond to the additional scrutiny.

The latest controversy centers on whether Cambridge Analytica, which helped the Trump campaign in 2016, collected and used without permission data from the accounts of millions of users obtained through a Facebook app developed by an academic at the University of Cambridge. Facebook on Friday said it suspended Cambridge Analytica—along with an associated firm, the academic and another individual—as it investigates reports that the firm kept user records for years after saying it had destroyed them. Cambridge Analytica has said it complied with Facebook’s rules.

Republican and Democratic lawmakers called for tech-company leaders, including Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg, to appear before Congress to explain how they protect user data from being exploited by third-party companies for advertising and other targeting purposes.

“Facebook, Google, and Twitter have amassed unprecedented amounts of personal data and use this data when selling advertising, including political advertisements,” said Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.) and John Kennedy (R., La.) in a joint statement on Monday. “The lack of oversight on how data is stored and how political advertisements are sold raises concerns about the integrity of American elections as well as privacy rights.”

Sens. Klobuchar and Kennedy are members of the Judiciary Committee and have asked the panel’s chairman, Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa), to hold hearings. A spokesman for Mr. Grassley said no decision had been made to whether to hold such a hearing as the panel was “currently gathering information and taking steps to inform any action by the committee.”

They join others on Capitol Hill and in Europe calling for additional scrutiny of tech companies and Cambridge’s practices. Other senior members of Congress are calling for either additional investigations or renewed steps to curb abuse in digital advertising.

Ron Wyden (D., Ore.), wrote a letter to Mr. Zuckerberg demanding answers to a series of questions about media reports on how Cambridge Analytica used the Facebook data. Mr. Wyden said the incident calls into question a number of issues, including “the prudence and desirability of Facebook’s business practices and the dangers of monetizing consumers’ private information.”

Sen. John Thune (R., S.D.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over some technology issues, said he was planning to send a request to Facebook for more information. Facebook has a “responsibility to make sure that that data is used in an appropriate way,” Mr. Thune said.

Meanwhile, the European Parliament’s president, Antonio Tajani, on Monday said “allegations of misuse of Facebook user data is an unacceptable violation of our citizens’ privacy rights” and vowed that Parliament will investigate fully.

The EU’s justice chief, Věra Jourová, said she expected “companies to take more responsibility when handling our personal data.” She said she would seek clarifications from Facebook and would discuss the matter with U.S. government officials on her scheduled trip to the U.S. this week.

Facebook executives have struggled to find responses that didn’t fuel more recrimination—repeating a pattern that has played out over the company’s response to a string of crises over the past 18 months. Pivotal Research analyst Brian Wieser said the weekend’s episode was another sign of “systemic problems” within the company. Mr. Wieser has a “sell” rating on the stock.

Several executives took to Twitter over the weekend to argue that Cambridge’s use of data, if confirmed, would be an abuse but wouldn’t constitute a data breach because the records were gathered through proper channels.

Andrew Bosworth, a senior Facebook executive, wrote in a Facebook post on Monday that Cambridge’s actions amounted to a breach of trust. “Much of the critique that has emerged over the weekend is valid and I am following it closely and listening,” he said.

Facebook Chief Security Officer Alex Stamos on Saturday deleted several tweets arguing against the use of the “data breach” term, later saying his remarks were factually correct but he “should have done a better job weighing in.” Mr. Stamos said he thought it was important for Facebook executives to talk about these complex issues publicly, but “I don’t know how to do that in this media environment.”

Mr. Stamos has been at the center of Facebook’s response to the Russian manipulation efforts, and he and other security officials have argued internally that Facebook should publicly disclose more about that activity. Mr. Stamos has indicated that he plans to leave Facebook in August, people familiar with the situation said on Monday.

Facebook began in 2007 letting outsiders access its “social graph”—the friend connections, interests and “likes” that linked its user base together. A range of organizations were allowed to use the information, including political campaigns. President Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign, for example, created a voter-outreach app that analyzed users’ Facebook connections and encouraged users to reach out to potential Obama supporters among them.

By 2015, Facebook had largely stopped access to users’ friend connections, though political campaigns could still find would-be supporters by buying ads and using Facebook’s targeting tools.

Facebook has said it had learned in 2015 that Aleksandr Kogan, a psychology professor at the University of Cambridge, broke its data policies when he shared user data gleaned from his personality-prediction app, “thisisyourdigitallife,” with parties that included Cambridge Analytica.

At the time, Facebook’s platform rules allowed Mr. Kogan to glean information about those who downloaded the app—as well as many data points about their friends. Facebook has since restricted access to friend data.

Facebook said when it learned in 2015 that Mr. Kogan’s company shared data with Cambridge Analytica in violation of its terms of service, it obtained legal agreements to delete the information from the firm and Mr. Kogan, along with a man named Christopher Wylie, who worked with Cambridge Analytica. Facebook now is investigating whether the parties kept the data anyway.

A Cambridge Analytica spokesman said in a statement that its political division didn’t use Facebook data collected by Mr. Kogan’s company. The firm said that it deleted all data it received after it became clear that Mr. Kogan violated Facebook’s policies. Mr. Kogan didn’t respond to a request to comment and Mr. Wylie couldn’t reached to comment.

About 270,000 people downloaded the app, giving Mr. Kogan access to information such as the cities they lived in, the content they had liked, or information about their friends, Facebook has said. According to a report in the New York Times, as many as 50 million Facebook users were swept up in the data collection.

On Monday, Facebook said it hired a digital forensics firm, Stroz Friedberg, to do a “comprehensive audit” of Cambridge Analytica, which agreed to give “complete access” to its servers and systems.

Facebook also asked Mr. Kogan and Mr. Wylie to agree to an audit; the company said that Mr. Kogan provided a verbal agreement, while Mr. Wylie declined. Facebook said the audits were part of a broader review conducted by the company to determine whether the parties deleted the user data as they certified some years ago.

“If this data still exists, it would be a grave violation of Facebook’s policies and an unacceptable violation of trust and the commitments these groups made,” Facebook said.

—Natalia Drozdiak in Brussels and Sam Schechner in Paris contributed to this article.

Suv’s and Pick Up Trucks Outshine Electric

From the Institute of Energy Research:

SUVs and crossovers made up more than one in three cars sold globally last year—almost tripling their share from just a decade ago. The world increasingly wants these larger vehicles that originated in America. Spurred by rising incomes and lower gas prices, drivers in China, Australia, and other countries are showing a preference for SUVs over smaller sedans. Compared to smaller cars, SUVs are about 30 percent less efficient and they are less likely to have electric versions because there are technological and cost hurdles to powering a larger car with batteries. Further, many automakers believe that drivers of SUVs value power and performance and do not want to be constrained by battery-powered cars with far less range.

The majority of the global growth has been in SUV crossovers, which are based on car underbodies (not truck underbodies) and achieve better fuel economy than larger SUVs. EPA rules are ambiguous on whether crossovers are cars or trucks, allowing manufacturers to classify many models as trucks, which have less rigorous fuel economy standards.

Automakers also have a financial incentive to build and sell more SUVs because they tend to be higher-end offerings with luxury trimmings that command premiums. A $60,000 truck, for example, can generate tens of thousands of dollars in operating profit.

Last year, Ford sold more than one million F-series pickup trucks with a fifth of the sales outside of the United States. It is now within striking distance of unseating Toyota’s Corolla as the world’s best-selling vehicle. Trucks have moved from being seen as only relevant for work to being much more versatile. Trucks have also made strides in fuel economy with the most fuel-efficient F-series model on the road getting about 25 miles per gallon on the highway.

History of SUVs

The global dominance in SUVs began in the United States in the 1970s, when automakers were faced with stricter auto-safety and environmental rules. The Environmental Protection Agency had required automakers to more than double their average fuel efficiency over the next decade, but placed fewer restrictions on vans, pickup trucks and other off-road vehicles than on traditional passenger cars. The traditional station wagon began to disappear only to be replaced by minivans and SUVs, most of which were able to skirt the CAFE standards with which station wagons had to comply.

The Jeep Cherokee became an early hit and led the way for other manufacturers to turn working vehicles into family vehicles. Cherokees and Ford Explorers began replacing the Ford Taurus and other smaller cars. In North America, SUVs and pickup trucks outsell all other car categories combined.

SUVs are particularly popular in China, where the big cars have status, stability on bumpy roads, and room for larger families now that China is phasing out the one-child policy. A global consulting firm predicts that by 2022, one in every two cars sold in China will be an SUV.

In Western Europe, SUV sales have more than doubled over the past five years—four times as fast as the overall market.

Volkswagen, which made virtually no SUVs a decade ago, plans to sell almost 20 new SUV models worldwide by 2020, and expects those models to make up 40 percent of its global sales. Currently, Volkswagen sells four SUV models. Its most popular model, Tiguan, which weighs almost 4,000 pounds, achieves 27 miles per gallon on the highway, compared to 36 miles for Volkswagen’s Passat, its midsize sedan, which weighs closer to 3,000 pounds.

SUVs, Pick-Ups and Climate Change

The ascent of SUVs and crossovers will slow reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from the world’s cars and trucks. Further, research shows that many first-time buyers of crossovers had previously driven cleaner, smaller sedans with fewer greenhouse gas emissions. Transportation accounts for an estimated 14 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, with cars and trucks making up the biggest share.

Between 2005 and 2008, the average fuel economy of new cars worldwide improved by about 1.8 percent a year, according to the United Nations-affiliated Global Fuel Economy Initiative. That pace slowed to 1.1 percent in 2015—far below the near 3 percent needed to stabilize emissions from the world’s car fleet.

European carmakers have been counting on diesel—a fuel-efficient alternative to gasoline vehicles—to meet tighter environmental regulations until electric cars become more viable. Germany, however, is considering potential bans of diesel vehicles from cities. Consumers have also begun to shun diesel, with its share of German car sales tumbling to a third from half since Volkswagen’s cheating scandal. Toyota Motor Corporation announced plans to drop diesel models from its European portfolio this year. Lower demand for diesel cars—which emit about a fifth less carbon dioxide compared to equivalent gasoline vehicles—could force automakers to aggressively push unprofitable electric cars to meet emissions targets.

Electric vehicles, however, are not making much of a dent given the interest in SUVs and pick-ups. General Motors, which unveiled its Chevy Bolt electric car in 2016, has sold only about 25,000 of them in the United States. This month, GM announced it was spending $265 million to build its new Cadillac XT4 crossover SUV in Kansas City. Currently, Tesla’s Model X is the only major fully electric SUV on the market. The company has sold about 40,000 since they went on sale in 2015. They range in price from $80,000 to over $140,000 for a fully loaded model.

Most automakers lose money on electric vehicle sales. Moody’s recently warned that electric vehicles will likely generate low returns for automakers through the early 2020s.

Trucks, which cater to drivers looking for power and hauling, are unlikely to go electric soon. One of the few hybrid choices is the Workhorse W-15—a hybrid pickup made by an Ohio company that specializes in fleet vehicles. Workhorse has received about 5,000 orders for the truck, which has a range of about 80 miles on a full battery charge.


SUVs and pick-up trucks are increasing in demand–not just in the United States, but around the world—as car buyers are looking to more roomy and powerful vehicles. The demand for these vehicles is making governments worry about meeting their reductions targets for greenhouse gas emissions.

White Privilege—-?

White Privilege

Commentary, Culture Wars, Gerry Bowler March 15, 2018–

Frontier Institute For Public Policy

Parents in the interior of British Columbia were shocked recently when their children came home from school with news of a new social awareness campaign. Posters throughout School District 74 were featuring administrators commenting on racism; in one, the image of district superintendent Teresa Downs (who appears to be a white woman) is juxtaposed to a quote reading, “I have unfairly benefitted from the colour of my skin. White privilege is not acceptable.”

Those parents who objected to such a contentious debate being implemented without any consultation were met with abuse on social media and bland assurances from administrators “that anything that furthers that discussion and understanding amongst our students is a good thing.” There was no acknowledgement that parents might want to have had a say in what their children were being indoctrinated into or that the whole notion of “white privilege” is highly controversial and divisive.

Here is a good way to test the notion of white privilege in action: if Teresa Downs sincerely believes that she has, to use her own words, “unfairly benefitted from the colour of [her] skin,” then she needs to take steps in her own life and career.

Ms. Downs’ situation is similar to one faced by King Claudius in Shakespeare’s play Hamlet. Claudius, like Teresa Downs, feels guilty about his sin and he seeks God’s pardon. Claudius knows, however, that he cannot legitimately ask God for forgiveness because he still possesses the fruits of his crimes. Claudius asks the rhetorical question, “May one be pardoned and retain the offence,” while clearly understanding that one cannot. In the end, Claudius recognizes his hypocrisy in wanting forgiveness, yet also wanting to retain his ill-gotten gains – his brother’s wife and the throne of Denmark. He recognizes that his words are empty: “My words fly up, my thoughts remain below.”

If Teresa Downs is sincerely remorseful for her crime of benefitting from “white privilege,” then she must resign her undeserved position as Superintendent of Schools, allowing her position to be taken up by one of those more worthy teachers whom her skin colour had so cruelly deprived of a job. To do penance, she should repay a good portion of the high salary she has unjustly received over the years. If she refuses to do these things, then she is implicitly admitting that she is a hypocrite and that her appearing on the billboard is just virtue-signalling.

Perhaps Ms. Downs means well and perhaps she thinks this “white privilege” campaign will make society better, but it will not. Instead, it will lead to a society in which everything is viewed in terms of race. This will divide our nation and breed resentment.

Martin Luther King dreamed of a future society where people “will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” This “white privilege” campaign is in stark contrast to King’s inspiring vision of the future.

Unfortunately, when the public reacted negatively to the white privilege billboard campaign, media outlets like the CBC reported, “BC school district under fire after launching anti-racism campaign,” thereby implying that people objecting to this campaign were motivated by racism. A more likely explanation is that they were offended by moral posturing of our “privileged” social elites.

Big Essay Number Eleven

Trump so Far

Presidential podium

More than a year into his presidency, the Trump scandals continue. The “Russia conspiracy” has been shown for the fraud it always was. But one still hears about Mr. Trump’s personal vices and the crude nature of many of his public pronouncements. Some focus on these seeming distractions, either condemning them (and him) or reveling in their transgressive nature as a kind of insult to the hypocrisy of liberal elites. Others seek to put them to one side as unfortunate blots on Mr. Trump’s record, which they seek to judge solely on policy grounds. Neither approach, in my view, comports with the reality of either Mr. Trump or the current state of our society.

Mr. Trump’s personal vices are deplorable in the true sense and show a real flaw in his character. But his “style” is, in our time of cultural conflict, as substantive as any policy program. Indeed, it arguably is at the heart of who he is as a politician, and of what he might do for America.

Mr. Trump was elected as the champion of normal, traditional Americans; his primary task is to reimpose limits on the power of Social Justice Warriors

It has become clear to most every sensible person that Mr. Trump’s election was the result of massive revulsion among working and middle-class Americans, especially in “flyover country,” at their supposed betters. Our progressive political and cultural elites have worked hard to undermine traditional American society, pushing policies that destroy opportunity and self-respect among mainstream Americans of whatever color who value faith, family, and freedom. Mr. Trump was elected as the champion of normal, traditional Americans; his primary task is to reimpose limits on the power of Social Justice Warriors to shame and bully traditional Americans into cooperating in their own political, cultural, and economic demise.

Given all this, any report card on the Trump Presidency must begin by recognizing the great progress he has made in undermining the power and legitimacy of our progressive elites. Whether on Twitter or through more traditional media, Mr. Trump has used politically incorrect language and proclaimed overtly traditional values of faith and patriotism. His language has at times been vulgar in more ways than one. But his intent has been clear: to affirm traditional norms in a manner designed to make elites lose their self-control and drop the mask that long covered their hatred for traditional American society and the people who love it.

Conservatives have finally begun to acknowledge that we are in a genuine cultural war and that, for decades now, we have been losing badly. Unfortunately, too many traditional conservatives have responded by surrendering their place in the public square. It is true that progressives in significant measure already have succeeded in transforming the United States into a European-style social democracy with the added “benefit” of Third-World-style identity politics. But while the survival of our way of life may require strategic retreat (as Rod Dreher would have it) in education and other areas ruled by the Left, we cannot afford political surrender; the victor will have no mercy on those it deems racist, sexist, and homophobic oppressors. To survive as well as to win, we finally must recognize that choosing a general in this war is not a matter of finding the man with the most virtue, but rather finding the man with the most relevant virtues, namely the ability to draw out our enemies and defeat them.

Flawed as he is, Mr. Trump is the necessary instrument of effective resistance to the burgeoning phalanx of Social Justice Warriors in the bureaucratic trenches and at the commanding heights of popular culture. Only when the progressive media complex has shown itself as the ignorant and intolerant mass of adolescents that it is will they lose their ability to control public opinion. Only when the SJWs who infest our administrative state have been rooted out and the bureaucracy subjected to proper limits and oversight can we reestablish control over our own destiny as a people. Only then can we begin in earnest the crucial task of rebuilding our communities and the public virtues that once protected and invigorated them.

The desire to maintain public civility was wise and good up until a clearly defined moment in American history. That moment was the refusal of the United States Senate to remove Bill Clinton from the presidency. Previous presidents, including Lyndon Johnson, John F. Kennedy, and Franklin Roosevelt, were adulterers. But Mr. Clinton’s case was of a completely different order. The entire Democratic establishment, along with a substantial part of the Republican establishment, was determined to keep Mr. Clinton in office despite the fact that he clearly had committed perjury and obstruction of justice, and attempted to suborn perjury. And the claim that it was “just about sex” showed the callous vulgarity of our political class and its corruption of public life. Clinton’s enablers were defending their own power and ideology. To do so they were willing to defend, and prevent effective investigation of, a man credibly accused of multiple instances of sexual assault, including rape. Thus, it became clear decades ago that, until that class of persons and their enablers were removed from power, civility was nothing more than a trap for the unwary.

He has bought us limited relief from the progressive onslaught, time to regroup and to institute more permanent remedies.

Trump’s refusal to fall into the “civility” trap earned him unprecedented vitriol, including persistent claims that he is, or soon will be, Hitler. In fact, of course, he has made America safer internationally and more productive at home while wielding much less power than his immediate predecessor. That predecessor, the darling of our chattering classes, colluded with leaders of his party to evade the constitutional requirements for valid legislation, saddling America with the incoherent mass of destructive regulations we now call Obamacare. Countless assertions of raw legislative and bureaucratic power, whether called Executive Orders or “guidance letters,” stifled markets, innovation, employment, and free speech throughout America. Mr. Trump’s major successes—and there have been many—have centered on his simple reversal of these unconstitutional actions. By doing so, he has bought us limited relief from the progressive onslaught, time to regroup and to institute more permanent remedies. Mr. Trump’s many judicial nominations are especially important because they have brought us dozens more judges with genuine respect for the Constitution and for their own role as interpreters rather than makers of the law.

The one weak spot in this administration, predictably, has been its relative lack of legislative success. No better proof exists of the common interest of establishment Republicans and Democrats in maintaining our massive, unfettered state, than the inability (more unwillingness) of Republican leadership to produce meaningful reform of Obamacare, immigration, or the budgetary process. Where Mr. Trump has managed to herd the self-interested cats, namely in securing the first significant tax cut in decades, there have been predictable positive results.

The question is whether Mr. Trump’s combative style will succeed in fully delegitimizing the largely unelected elites who seek to rule our nation in contempt of the people. The real work of this administration is to halt the onslaught of political correctness on our families, churches, and other natural associations. He has accomplished much in a short time by undoing many of Mr. Obama’s most radical actions. But the ground he has gained can easily be lost should he fail to follow up with many more administrative appointments and with significant reforms to our civil service system, which shields partisan ideologues from proper oversight. All may be lost should he fail to break the legislative logjam or, worse, lose Republican majorities or, worst of all, decide to cave in on issues like immigration out of a desire to “win.” Mr. Trump’s flaws always have been liberal flaws, rooted in the desire to be loved too much and by too many. It is, ironically, the supposedly darker side of his personality, the side that is willing to speak unpleasant truths unpleasantly, that promises the most in our hour of need. By delegitimizing the smug, narrow-minded, and fundamentally dishonest arbiters of opinion and good taste pushing the progressive agenda at almost any cost, he has begun the real work of rebuilding our historically sane, tradition-grounded political culture.

Bruce P. Frohnen is a Senior Fellow at the Russell Kirk Center for Cultural Renewal and Professor of Law at Ohio Northern University College of Law.

Our Poor Loonie

It has been the worst currency performer among the major economies so far this year. And the prospects don’t look any better.

Our manufacturing sector is anemic and our position vis a vis the US on taxes and trade is such that we loose here in Canada. While the US reduces taxes and regulation we increase them . While their productivity improves ours stagnates.While they adapt to new technology we wane in esterday’s methods.

Add to all that bad news the fact that our national government and most of the Provincial Governments continue to practice deficit financing as if it was some kind of positive policy means that the prospect for our currency is not positive. One would think that with a the currency more than 20% lower than the US currency exports would be booming.

But when we can’t move oil east and Provinces feuding of moving any more west, with carbon tax and environmental regulation at very turn, and a Prime Minister whose main preoccupation seems to be to wear other nationalities clothes when visiting them , don’t you think we may have a problem?

Canada and Anti Semetic Behavior

Strange isn’t it that I am travelling throughout Israel right now and I am confronted with news reports of anti Semitic behaviour at the University of British Columbia . Apparently, the professors in the Geography Department Have succeeded in having an event cancelled because the private event on campus was to host a person with pro Israeli views.

My , how odd?

Imagine, yes you need imagination alright ——

It is hard to believe that one of Canada’s top universities , or in my view once a top university, would have in its midst such prejudice in one of its faculties and worse still , that that faculty having the power to see a meeting cancelled because a speaker held views different from that of the faculty.

We once thought of the University as one of those places that encouraged free thought and the exchange of diverse views.

Not any more.

I shall henceforth ensure that I will go no where near that place until I see that such prejudice is not such that duly organized events can be cancelled because of a speaker’s views of such a subject or like subjects.

I am sad to report that on this blog when I report and condemn anti semiticism such blogs are some of the least read.