A Wretched Double Standard

Oops, here comes the outraged union of the Canadian Association of University Teachers eager to give a lesson in civics and law to the administration of Carleton University. Which had heeded the angry response of the public upon learning that a man whom France has requested be extradited from Canada to stand before a court of justice that plans to prosecute him for the crime of mass murder, by relieving Hassan Diab of a summer teaching position.

This man, claims the executive director of the union representing 65,000 university teachers, librarians and researchers, is eminently qualified to teach the sociology course he was contracted for, on a temporary basis. While he is under house arrest, is required to report regularly to the RCMP, and wears an electronic monitoring bracelet. He may be accompanied by those assigned by the court to ensure surety under his bail conditions.

"He's innocent until proven guilty", grieves CUPE local 4600 organizer Stuart Ryan. Casually overlooking the reality that individuals charged under the law with grave offences against society - like sexual molestation, or posting or receiving child pornography, or for having absconded with funds entrusted to them - are generally removed from positions of trust until they are able to clear their names.

The charges that French authorities have brought against Mr. Diab are somewhat more serious. He stands accused there of killing four innocent civilians, of bombing a Paris synagogue and of injuring many more people in the process. Does this profile recommend this man to teach a sociology course at a university? Teach a course to students as though nothing amiss had occurred?

Is this not tantamount to shrugging off an issue as dire as terrorism directed against innocents? In the process of which scorn for the sanctity of human life is evidenced by an outraged union insistent that one of its members must be free to go about his life as though nothing had occurred to upset society. Justice? An offence against the most basic of human rights and public morality is no reason to withhold opportunities for the accused?

Mr. Diab will most surely have his day - or as many days as it takes - in court, where he can deny the charges brought against him. He will have lawyers - even a coterie of lawyers, all eager to represent him in this high-profile case - working on his behalf to prove his innocence and that French authorities in their zeal to clear up an embarrassingly-outstanding case, have identified an innocent man wrongly. And that is when Mr. Diab may be considered for further employment with Canadian universities.

The sanctimonious position of the union is breathtaking. The CUPE organizer states his belief in parallels between Carleton's decision and the previous banning of a poster for "Israeli Apartheid Week", where a poster illustrating an Israeli helicopter firing at a Palestinian child holding a teddy bear was declared unfit for public display at the university. Casting dire aspersions on a country in a deviously politically motivated propaganda choreograph and crying foul!

As immoral as that position was, this is far more troubling. The public does, after all, have something to say about the civility of public discourse in this country, and particularly in public-private spaces where tax dollars are responsible for funding institutions of higher learning. Egregious displays of slanted political bias against a democratic country, favouring an adversarial self-victimizing population that celebrates its 'refugee' status as a favoured underdog has no place on university campuses.

The equation with the university decision to revoke the temporary teaching engagement with this man charged with mass murder in France as an unwise and socially-contrary device, allying it with the university's former decision to ensure its campuses were not involved in a despicable smear campaign against a democratic country battling terrorism, represents the height of absurdity, but does tellingly reveal the corrupt mindsets of those levelling the accusations.

Accusations that represent the characteristics of left-addled minds purporting to defend the rights of the oppressed against dastardly Jews. Any mechanism is eagerly grasped when it could present as a shield against the charge of anti-Semitism. The situation is a handy one to be utilized as an offensive tool against that most historically spurned and detested of populations world-wide, presenting as the very raison d'etre for the existence of the Jewish State, which will defend its own.

The union and its supporters, along with those members of the Canadian and international academic establishment whose agenda this represents, are unprincipled, their accusations are morally repugnant. Quite understandable if this were a quasi-democracy like Lebanon, led around by the nose by a political agency that contorts democracy, that controls the country's politics and society - like Hezbollah.