khar21

Google defines Zionism as "a movement for (originally) the re-establishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel." This is my definition too. I disagree with land taking, but Jews deserve their own country too, they are under constant prosecution and escape goated everywhere. If it wasn't going to be at least near the original Israeli tribes were, then I can't think of anywhere else. The irony is that it's the right that often escape goats jews for issues in the west, but the middle eastern countries have been prosecuting jews since long before Israel existed.

Also, like you said, what is done is done. But the borders shouldn't change again.

I just hate the Israeli government tbh that Israelis keep electing. They don't want peace, they violate international laws constantly, the coalition has genocide supporters, etc.

But the Gazan government is so bad that they haven't even allowed free elections in almost 20 years.

Anyway, I doubt the courts will accept criticism of the Israeli government as supporting genocide, if someone expresses support for Hamas, or from river to sea, maybe, but not straight up criticism is Natenyahu and his dipshits.

But anti zionism is calling for genocide too. What do you think would happen to Israelis if the Israeli state ceased to exist? Especially if Hamas still exists. I don't believe in collective punishment, and anti-zionism sounds pretty collective punishmenty to me.

Its not about recognizing existing genocides, it's about promoting genocide. For example, Trump and Netanyahu's plan of taking over Gaza and turning it into a resort is promotion of genocide. Or calling for the elimination of people based on a protected attribute is promotion of genocide.

Nah, imo laws like that are why we don't have Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson in Canada. Life in prison is probably the maximum and will probably only be used in extreme cases probably for repeat offenders clearly advocating for genocide.

Imo genocide apologism is very different from actually promoting one.

Yeah, title sound editorialized af. From what I've read, none of the bill sounds alarming to me.

How does this make Canada a 51st state?

How is this fascist?

And on paper.

Fuuuuck... wtf. Anyone know an alternative?

From the bill itself:

Intimidation — building used for religious worship, etc. Start of inserted block 423.‍3 (1) Every person commits an offence who engages in any conduct with the intent to provoke a state of fear in a person in order to impede their access to

(a) a building or structure, or part of a building or structure, that is primarily used

    (i) for religious worship, or

    (ii) by an identifiable group, as defined in subsection 318(4),

        (A) for administrative, social, cultural or sports activities or events,

        (B) as an educational institution, including a daycare centre, or

        (C) as a residence for seniors; or

(b) a cemetery.

Also :

Obstruction or interference with access Start of inserted block (2) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful authority, intentionally obstructs or interferes with another person’s lawful access to a building or structure, or part of a building or structure, referred to in paragraph (1)‍(a) or to a cemetery.

Also from the website for the bill: "The Bill would not enact “bubble zones” that create protest-free areas around designated buildings. Bubble zone laws are enacted by provinces and municipalities. For example, some provinces have established access zones around abortion clinics, and some municipalities have enacted bubble zone by-laws to provide for safe access to facilities like schools, daycares, and places of worship."

How is criminalizing "obstruction and intimidation aimed at protecting places of worship and institutions -- including schools, daycares and seniors’ residences" controversial?