The apartheid crowd says no to dialogue....

They are committed to Israel's destruction..and that's it...

Although the turnout at yet another anti-Israel campus event was insubstantial, it was worth attending for the clarification of three significant points. Last Thursday evening, at the final program of a series sponsored last week by Ontario Public Interest Research Group (OPIRG), Students Against Israel Apartheid (SAIA) focused on the new ‘re-branding Israel’ project launched by Israeli Consul General Amir Gissin.

Notwithstanding countless attempts made over the years by pro-Israel groups to encourage communication on campus, the anti-Israel students have no interest in dialogue, according to SAIA spokesperson Nadia Daar. In response to an invitation during the Q&A by Josh Xiong, vice-president of external affairs for Zionists at U of T, to hold discussions, Daar told the audience at University of Toronto’s Sidney Smith building that dialogue “doesn’t make sense. Blacks in South Africa didn’t dialogue with whites about apartheid.”

Second, a two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict isn’t a suitable compromise according to the SAIA activists. Daar declared, regarding the Israeli beaches on the Mediterranean that are far from the Green Line: “These beaches aren’t your [Israel’s] beaches.”

The third point was made when attendees were shown a map of Canada divided into land belonging to aboriginal tribes instead of Canadian provinces. According to one presenter, who didn’t reveal her name: “Here in Canada, the native [aboriginal] population is looking for self-determination and sovereignty in their own homeland, like the Palestinian population in Israel,” in other words claiming that Palestinians, not Jews, are the historical native people of Israel.

According to Xiong, Daar “rejected the proposal for an on-campus dialogue with Zionists and Israel sympathizers because it would ‘equalize’ power relations and legitimize the other side’s ‘racist’ point of view. This signifies SAIA’s unwillingness to participate in a genuine exchange of ideas and makes one question its commitment to finding reasonable and common solutions to an issue that is beyond black and white distinctions.

“One gets the impression – certainly from a refusal to debate, but also from their shunning of the press in a public forum – that SAIA is more interested in protecting their ideological sacred cows from criticism than in actually furthering the cause of Israeli-Palestinian peace.”

During the Q&A Daar told the Jewish Tribune she “will not be answering your questions.”

Although Daar referred often to the “apartheid policies” in the West Bank and Gaza “for 60 years,” she wouldn’t discuss the situation of the Arab refugees in Gaza between 1948 and 1967, when Gaza was under Egyptian authority.

Daar’s chutzpah had no limits. Not only did she vilify Israel; notwithstanding the growing hostility against Zionist students on campuses across the country, she claimed without batting an eye that Zionists are “aggressive” on campus.