From Occupied Palestine

Letter: Dalhousie Gazette, 10 October 2002

I hope Jon Elmer wasn't too offended by Andrew Elbaz, Jonathan Krashinsky, and Arlo Litman's reference to his article as "pseudo-academic diatribe," "naive apologetics" permeated with "blind hostility," "slander[ous]" of "the Jewish people"; "politically motivated," "dogmatic," "unscholarly" etc, etc... Really, its hard to blame them; take away this kind of stale rhetoric - standard currency of the state apologist - and they're left with nothing but a few easily refuted falsehoods and red herrings such as holding up the Wye agreements as a step towards peace,

Letter: Dalhousie Gazette, 10 October 2002
DR. ISMAIL ZAYID

Dear Editor,

The letters by A. Elbaz, J.Krashinsky, A.Litman and J. Grossman [Sept. 26 and Oct. 3] are the classical rehash of Zionist falsification and re-writing of the history of the Palestine/Israel conflict. The courageous articles by Jon Elmer ["Riot, the language of the unheard" Sept. 12, and subsequent articles, Sept. 19 and Sept. 26] are accurate and tell it as it is.

Letter: Dalhousie Gazette, 3 October 2003

Over the last three weeks, the Dalhousie Gazette has engaged in an irresponsible and dangerous campaign of accusing the State of Israel of war crimes, its leaders of being war criminals, and its defenders as being “apologists for war crimes and terror”. While this callous personal attack, brought on merely by our well-sourced criticism of his attack on the Netanyahu government, is insulting, what is more troubling is the continuation of Mr. Elmer’s one-sided and venomous condemnation of Israel. This, together with the editor's decision to print an obscene poem suggesting the equivalence between Palestinian conditions in Gaza to those of the death camps in World War II, is downright incredulous.

Letter: Dalhousie Gazette - unpublished, 29 September 2002

Dear Editor,

The piece by the Opinions Editor, Jon Elmer, "Apologists for war crimes and terror" the title alone is loaded with such invective that it itself is attack and terror journalism. The content of the opinion piece was not a discussion based on a cool, fair minded laying out of the facts to render a lucid analysis, instead it advocated it's pre-set conclusions with a mordant ridicule and mounting anger. The sources of the writer's allegations are supposedly measured restrained and unbiased, when in fact their track record points to the fact they've been hijacked to serve as a psychic club to pummel the neutral into confusion.

Letters: Dalhousie Gazette, 26 September 2002

Dear Mr Elmer, Your article in the September 12 edition of the Gazette begs for a rational and educated response. Benjamin Netanyahu, former Prime Minister of Israel was scheduled to speak to the students of Concordia on the topic"there is no alternative to winning this war [on terrorism] without delay." Netanyahu is an educated political leader whose practices have in no way warranted claims of “ethnic cleansing” and “crimes against humanity”.

Letters: Dalhousie Gazette, 26 September 2002

We the undersigned are writing to address Mr. Elmer’s pseudo academic diatribe, titled “Riot, the Language of the Unheard”, which appeared in the September 12 issue of the Dalhousie Gazette.

In an article permeated with inaccurate facts and blind hostility, Mr. Elmer unequivocally supported the Concordia riots which have been described by the CBC, BBC, CNN and even in Mr. Kustra’s piece in the Gazette of September 12, as being one of the most anti-Semitic and hate filled demonstrations to hit the Western world in years (1). However, far worse than his na