Thursday, June 24, 2010

How Pride Toronto was convinced to rescind its ban

Pride Toronto’s (PT) announcement, on June 23, that it would get out of the censorship business altogether is a great victory for Toronto’s gay and lesbian communities. But as myriad ad hoc groups formed to organize protests against PT’s censorship of the term "Israeli apartheid" these past two weeks, the move seemed to come somewhat out of the blue.  


Xtra has learned the impasse was broken after a meeting at Liberal MPP Glen Murray’s office on the afternoon of June 18. Among those in attendance were Murray, Metropolitan Community Church of Toronto pastor Brent Hawkes, 519 Church Street Community Centre executive director Maura Lawless, Egale Canada executive director and Pride Toronto board member Helen Kennedy, and PT human rights committee member and Coalition for Free Speech member Doug Kerr. Lawyer Douglas Elliott, who also signed onto the resolution and press release repealing the ban, was not present at that meeting but became involved subsequently.

“I got called in, tried to give Helen and Tracey some names [of those who could help],” Murray told Xtra last night. “My job is to protect PT’s funding, to keep government out of dictating the content of cultural, social and political events and to try to bring the community together. That’s what I’ve been up to. We were very lucky that those people stepped forward.”

So, what was the mechanism by which a small meeting of community diplomats who have been largely silent on this almost year-old issue led to PT’s resolution to rescind the ban?

“After the meeting, I called [PT executive director] Tracey Sandilands and met with her on the Monday of this week,” says Hawkes. “I spent a lot of time talking to her and explained to her both motions. After meeting with Tracey, I asked for a meeting with the folks on the Pride board who voted in favour of the ban, or who weren’t there and so weren’t part of the initial vote. Douglas, Maura and I went to that meeting. Tracey called those five board members and said we had a proposal. The Pride board met the next evening…. that group voted unanimously to approve the two motions.”

It seems so easy. Sandilands has so far declined Xtra's request for comment but it seems implausible that PT would have chosen to rescind its choice to act as censor without the direct activist pressure applied against it these past weeks. Questions about whether or not  PT intended to sanction arrest or ejection from the parade route of those it determined in violation of the city's anti-discrimination policy were hanging in air. Much of PT's consitituency was in open revolt. Repealing the ban and insisting the city take responsibility for interpreting its own anti-discrimination policy seemed the only reasonable and viable option.  

"It’s so weird to be in the backdrop of the G20 where all this protest and violence and security and police state is unfolding," says former 2010 honoured dyke Jane Farrow. "The opportunity for us to exhibit free speech and peaceful demonstration is so important. Maybe somebody did the optics and realized we could actually do this differently. The history and reputation of Toronto as being a place for that kind of protest, dissent and free speech could be upheld. Also, you think you had trouble raising money after a little skirmish with this group, try having some violence happen in your Pride parade and see how that affects the bottom line in the next year. Maybe someone did that. It was just escalating; it wasn’t going away."

Rescinding the ban "came about because I asked people to come together to try to find a solution,” says Kerr, who adds that he did not attend the meeting at Murray’s office as a representative of the Coalition but rather in his capacity as a PT human rights committee member. “The work that the coalition and QuAIA has been doing to raise the awareness of these issues and the public community meeting, the 23 award winners who gave back their awards, the activism, all of this community engagement all over the community is part of how this happened. You can’t look to what Brent and Doug and Maura have done in isolation.”

Still Murray and Hawkes encourage everyone to congratulate and support PT staff and directors for ultimately making the right decision. And in the end, PT did do the right thing. Yesterday's announcement is a huge leap toward a successful Pride celebration for 2010.

“There are a lot of young people on the PT board without a lot political experience,” says Murray. “I dare say that in the school of sharp learning curves these folks got a crash course in community politics 101. I think many people may not have given them a passing grade a couple of weeks ago; I think a lot of people will now show them some deserved respect.”
 


Bookmark and Share


Comments

Thursday, June 24, 2010 2:56 PM

"Censorship" my ass... if the Reverend Phelps wanted to march with a sign saying 'God Hates All Gays' do you really think the manipulators of QAIA would be supporting his "right to march"? Hahahahaha If I show up at Pride with a sign Homo Against Hamas War-Crimes do you really think I'll survive unscathed?Let's be honest. The people at QAIA just added the word Queer to their name as a ploy...there is NOTHING in their entire reason for existance that helps Queers anywhere...in fact quite the opposite. They are trying to de-legitimize the one State in the Middle East that supports Palestinian gays. Go figure!What is SURE is that they have skillfully manipulated the gay press and in so doing have made sure that the last two months have been all about THEM and THEIR agenda, while gay issues have almost completely disappeared. 350,000 Sudanese Muslims have been killed in the lasst few years by other Muslims, but QAIA think Israel needs condemning more? Hamas' Charter targets Jews all over the world for assassination, but the gay media remain silent on THAT little tidbit? Hyopcrisy is teh name of teh game...

Ken ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:33 PM

It's a really hard thing to realise that you've made an error and to publicly change your mind. I'm thankful for all of the people involved for choosing to move forward. This issue is certainly not behind us, and there will be equally difficult decisions to make in the future, but I hope this is a first step towards rebuilding the trust between PT and the community.

Quietmarc ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:45 PM

The gay community has fought so many legal battles against censorship: censorship of books, censorship of media, censorship of safe sex information, censorship of our lives and censorship of who we love. We don't have to live in the closet anymore, at least in Canada. Why must we be forced to accept censorship when we have struggled against it for decades. Jewish lobby groups do not understand the gay community as they get lost in their own insular agenda, which can be homophobic. Why is it that with religion comes hatred? The gay community is suspicious of religious based groups, especially when their message is putting the interests of one religious group over another. What happened to love? Is not love part of the religious message? The gay community teaches about acceptance: acceptance of all where all are welcome. I have been to many a gay event where there is a loud and vocal religious presence that was homophobic and there was not a single act of aggression from gay attendees. The message of Pride is acceptance and inclusion for all. Somehow a religious based organization got involved and inclusion, acceptance and free speech was replaced by censorship, name calling, labeling, threats and hatred. This is the problem of religion and religious based organizations, something the gay community knows too well.

George ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 3:59 PM

Spot on, George!

JG ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:33 PM

Down with Israel! Happy Pride!

zezi ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:04 PM

Ken: That's a straw man argument. Nobody has argued for totally unrestricted speech. The community simply demanded non-discrimination, equality, and the participation of an LGBT group engaging in lawful political speech.

Let's always keep at the forefront of our minds the basic facts about Pride Toronto and Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA). The facts are simple and clear.

The two primary requirements for participation in Pride are to be:
(1.) part or supportive of the LGBT community; and,
(2.) law-abiding.

QuAIA [http://www.quaia.org] meets both of these requirements. Singling out one group that meets the requirements and then banning its lawful political speech is censorship [http://tinyurl.com/censordef2].

In Canada, freedom of expression -- including lawful political speech -- is constitutionally protected as a fundamental right. That right is a foundational pillar of any liberal democracy.

Rick ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:08 PM

Exactly Rick! Praise Allah!

zezi ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 4:19 PM

zezi... your rock misses you, please go crawl back under it. The whole dispute over the past few months has been about human rights (free speech being foremost among them), not rooting for, or hurling invective at, any particular nation as if this was some entertaining sporting event.

Bags ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:18 PM

You my friend missed the point. Now Pride Toronto sees the way against Israel Apartheid as the whole city of Tornto.

zezi ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:04 PM

Exactly Rick! Praise Allah!
zezi
===========
http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/38622
Killing the one to whom it is done is better for him than committing this act with him, because if a man commits sodomy with another man, in effect he kills him in such a way that there is no hope of life after that, unlike murder where the victim is wronged and is a martyr.
========

zezi,

Praise Allah, indeed. You are a joke.

tamany al


Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:25 PM

@ tamany

They are nothing but useful Idiots and very well said

WTF ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 6:06 PM

@ Zezi Praise Allah, (from the link above)

The punishment for homosexuality

What is the punishment for homosexuality? Is there any differentiation between the one who does it and the one to whom it is done?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

The crime of homosexuality is one of the greatest of crimes, the worst of sins and the most abhorrent of deeds, and Allaah punished those who did it in a way that He did not punish other nations. It is indicative of violation of the fitrah, total misguidance, weak intellect and lack of religious commitment, and it is a sign of doom and deprivation of the mercy of Allaah. We ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: ‘Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?

81. ‘Verily, you practise your lusts on men instead of women. Nay, but you are a people transgressing beyond bounds (by committing great sins).’

82. And the answer of his people was only that they said: ‘Drive them out of your town, these are indeed men who want to be pure (from sins)!’

83. Then We saved him and his family, except his wife; she was of those who remained behind (in the torment).

84. And We rained down on them a rain (of stones). Then see what was the end of the Mujrimoon (criminals, polytheists and sinners)”

[al-A’raaf 7:80-84]

“Verily, by your life (O Muhammad), in their wild intoxication, they were wandering blindly.

73. So As‑Saihah (torment — awful cry) overtook them at the time of sunrise.

74. And We turned (the towns of Sodom in Palestine) upside down and rained down on them stones of baked clay.

75. Surely, in this are signs for those who see (or understand or learn the lessons from the Signs of Allaah).

76. And verily, they (the cities) were right on the highroad (from Makkah to Syria, i.e. the place where the Dead Sea is now)”

[al-Hijr 15:72-76]

al-Tirmidhi (1456), Abu Dawood (4462)and Ibn Maajah (2561) narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.”. Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.

Ahmad (2915) narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “May Allaah curse the one who does the action of the people of Loot, may Allaah curse the one who does the action of the people of Loot,” three times. This was classed as hasan by Shu’ayb al-Arna’oot in Tahqeeq al-Musnad.

The Sahaabah were unanimously agreed on the execution of homosexuals, but they differed as to how they were to be executed. Some of them were of the view that they should be burned with fire, which was the view of ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) and also of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him), as we shall see below. And some of them thought that they should be thrown down from a high place then have stones thrown at them. This was the view of Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him).

Some of them thought that they should be stoned to death, which was narrated from both ‘Ali and Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with them).

After the Sahaabah, the fuqaha’ differed concerning the matter. Some of them said that the homosexual should be executed no matter what his situation, whether he is married or not.

Some of them said that he should be punished in the same way as an adulterer, so he should be stoned if he is married and flogged if he is not married.

Some of them said that a severe punishment should be carried out on him, as the judge sees fit.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah be pleased with him) discussed this issue at length, and he mentioned the evidence and arguments of the fuqaha’, but he supported the first view. This is explained in his book al-Jawaab al-Kaafi’ li man sa’ala ‘an al-Dawa’ al-Shaafi, which he wrote to deal with this immoral action. We will quote some of what he said:

Because the evil consequences of homosexuality are among the worst of evil consequences, so its punishment is one of the most severe of punishments in this world and in the Hereafter.

The scholars differed as to whether it is to be punished more severely than zina, or whether the punishment for zina should be more severe, or whether the punishments should be the same. There are three points of view:

Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq, ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib, Khaalid ibn al-Waleed, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn al-Zubayr, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas, Maalik, Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Imam Ahmad according to the more sound of the two reports from him and al-Shaafa’i according to one of his opinions, were of the view that the punishment for homosexuality should be more severe than the punishment for zina, and the punishment is execution in all cases, whether the person is married or not.

Al-Shaafa’i, according to the well-known view of his madhhab, and Imam Ahmad according to the other report narrated from him, were of the view that the punishment for the homosexual should be the same as the punishment for the adulterer.

Imam Abu Haneefah was of the view that the punishment for the homosexual should be less severe than the punishment for the adulterer, and it is a punishment to be determined by the judge (ta’zeer).

Those who favoured the first view, who are the majority of the ummah – and more than one scholar narrated that there was consensus among the Sahaabah on this point – said that there is no sin that brings worse consequences than homosexuality, and they are second only to the evil consequences of kufr, and they may be worse than the consequences of murder, as we shall see below in sha Allaah.

They said: Allaah did not test anyone with this major sin before the people of Loot, and He punished them with a punishment that He did not send upon any other nation; He combined all kinds of punishment for them, such as destruction, turning their houses upside down, causing them to be swallowed up by the earth, sending stones down upon them from the sky, taking away their sight, punishing them and making their punishment ongoing, and wreaking vengeance upon them such as was not wrought upon any other nation. That was because of the greatness of the evil consequences of this crime which the earth can hardly bear if it is committed upon it, and the angels flee to the farthest reaches of heaven and earth if they witness it, lest the punishment be sent upon those who do it and they be stricken along with them. The earth cries out to its Lord, may He be blessed and exalted, and the mountains almost shift from their places.

Killing the one to whom it is done is better for him than committing this act with him, because if a man commits sodomy with another man, in effect he kills him in such a way that there is no hope of life after that, unlike murder where the victim is wronged and is a martyr. They said: the evidence for that (i.e., that the evil consequences of homosexuality are worse than those of murder) is the fact that in the case of murder, Allaah gives the next of kin the choice: if he wishes he may have him executed and if he wishes he may let him off, but He enjoined executing the homosexual as a hadd punishment, as the companions of the Messenger of Allaah were unanimously agreed, and as is clearly indicated by the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and there is no evidence to the contrary; rather this is what his companions and the Rightly-Guided Caliphs (may Allaah be pleased with them all) did.

It is narrated from Khaalid ibn al-Waleed that he found a man among one of the Arab tribes with whom men would have intercourse as with a woman. He wrote to Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him) and Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq consulted the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them). ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib had the strongest opinion of all of them, and he said: “No one did that but one of the nations, and you know what Allaah did to them. I think that he should be burned with fire.” So Abu Bakr wrote to Khaalid and he had him burned.

‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas said: The highest point in the town should be found and the homosexual should be thrown head first from it, then stones should be thrown at him.

Ibn ‘Abbaas derived this hadd punishment from the punishment that Allaah sent upon the homosexuals of the people of Loot.

Ibn ‘Abbaas is the one who narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) the words: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” This was narrated by the authors of al-Sunan and was classed as saheeh by Ibn Hibbaan and others. Imam Ahmad quoted this hadeeth as evidence, and its isnaad meets the conditions of al-Bukhaari.

They said: and it is narrated that he said: “May Allaah curse the one who does the action of the people of Loot, may Allaah curse the one who does the action of the people of Loot, may Allaah curse the one who does the action of the people of Loot,” and it is not narrated that he cursed the adulterer three times in one hadeeth. He cursed those who do a variety of major sins, but he did not curse any of them more than once, but he repeated the curse for the homosexual three times. The companions of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) agreed unanimously that the homosexual is to be executed, and none of them differed concerning that. Rather they differed as to the method of execution. Some people thought that this difference means that they disagreed about executing him, so they narrated it as a matter concerning which the Sahaabah differed, but it is a matter concerning which there was consensus among them, not a matter of difference.

And they said: Whoever ponders the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):

“And come not near to unlawful sex. Verily, it is a Faahishah (i.e. anything that transgresses its limits: a great sin), and an evil way (that leads one to hell unless Allaah Forgives him)”

[al-Isra’ 17:32]

and what He says about homosexuality (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?”

[al-A’raaf 7:80]

will see the difference between them. When Allaah mentioned zina, He described it as a “great sin” (faahishah – indefinite) among other great sins, but when He mentioned homosexuality, He called it “the worst sin” (al-faahishah – definite). This suggests that it contains all the essence of evil and sin.

End quote from al-Jawaab al-Kaafi (p. 260-263).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: With regard to homosexuality, some of the scholars said that the hadd punishment for it is the same as the hadd punishment for zina, and it was said that it is less than that. But the correct view on which the Sahaabah were unanimously agreed is that both are to be killed, the active and the passive partners, whether they are married or not. The authors of al-Sunan narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” And Abu Dawood narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas concerning the unmarried person who commits a homosexual act that he said: He is to be stoned. And something similar was narrated from ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him). The Sahaabah did not differ concerning the ruling that the homosexual is to be executed, but they differed concerning the methods. It was narrated from Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he is to be burned, and from others that he is to be executed.

It was narrated from some of them that a wall is to be knocked down on top of him until he dies beneath it.

And it is said that both should be detained in the foulest of places until they die.

It was narrated from some of them that he should be taken up to the highest place in the town and thrown down from it, to be followed with stones, as Allaah did to the people of Loot. This was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas. According to the other report, he is to be stoned. This was the view of the majority of the salaf. They said: because Allaah stoned the people of Loot, and stoning is prescribed for the zaani by analogy with the stoning of the homosexual. Both are to be stoned, whether they are free or slaves, or one of them is the slave of the other, if they have reached the age of puberty. If one of them has not reached the age of puberty, he is to be punished but not stoned, and none is to be stoned except one who has reached puberty. End quote from al-Siyaasah al-Shar’iyyah, p. 138.

Secondly:

The one to whom it is done is like the one who does it, because they both took part in the sin. So both are to be punished by execution, as it says in the hadeeth. But two exceptions may be made to that:

1 – One who is forced into sodomy by means of beating, death threats and the like. He is not subject to any hadd punishment.

It says in Sharh Muntaha al-Iraadaat (3/348): There is no hadd punishment if the one who has been sodomized is forced into it, such as if the one who did it overpowered him or threatened him with death or beating and the like. End quote.

2 – If the one to whom it was done is a minor and has not reached the age of puberty. There is no hadd punishment in this case, but he should be disciplined and punished in a way that will deter him from committing this crime, as stated above in the quotation from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah.

Ibn Qudaamah (may Allaah have mercy on him) narrated in al-Mughni (9/62) that there is no difference of opinion among the scholars concerning the fact that the hadd punishment should not be carried out on one who is insane or a boy who has not yet reached the age of puberty.

And Allaah knows best.

WTF ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 6:02 PM

Xtra's story on breaking the deadlock is not news. At the Pride Coalition for Free Speech rally June 17, at RyersonU Student Centre, 70 Gould St, where more than 60 people were in attendence, including all representatives from Toronto queer Press and Rabble TV. A PT festival organizing volunteer who got up and said Pride Toronto wouldn't be censoring any "Israeli apartheid" signage and no arrests would be made. Matt Cutler from the 519, who was sitting beside Doug Kerr got up and said the deadlock would be over in a week. At that point, I began to wonder, if all the resistance demonstration planning was a sham. Still who gets credit doesn't really matter. It's time to move forward and begin the healing, there is still a lot of things PT has to do to clean up its sorry 2009 and 2010 history, as far as I am concerned.

Michel ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 6:30 PM

"WTF":

I JUST NEED TO POINT OUT THAT IT'S "QUEERS AGAINST ISRAELI APARTHEID," NOT "QUEERS FOR FUNDAMENTALIST/EXTREMIST INTERPRETATIONS OF RELIGION."


In other words, your posting is silly and irrelevant to the debate.

Rick ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 7:06 PM

Rick it came straight out the Quran and again Rick you are just a classic case of George Orwell, "Politics and the English Language," 1946
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm

I know you can see this and Rick No I'm not the evil Israel Lobby and again use it to censor people I think you just can't accept it

WTF ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 7:15 PM

This isn't about all the detractors only interested to throw stuff from the sidewalks. It's about our community getting back to what it does so well - celebrating Pride and diversity with freedom from censorship and intimidation.

Kenn Chaplin ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:47 PM

I think this is less a victory for QuAIA and their message than it is a victory for free speech. If anything the ban against QuAIA was their victory, in the sense that it got everyone talking about them and hearing their message. If there had been no attempt to silence them QuAIA would still be a group few had heard of or cared about, they should be grateful there was an attempt to silence them since its that which got their message spread so far and wide. I think that it also points out the futility of censorship, especially in this day and age of the internet.

I have to disagree with zezi in that I don't believe this has anything to do with anyone being against Israeli apartheid, remember that there were many folks who were opposed to QuAIA's message but fully supported their right of free speech and helped the fight against censorship. I've been a defender of QuAIA and I learned a lot of things that disturbed me about the situation in Israel but I'm also disturbed by zezi saying "down with Israel", I think that sort of language taints the whole issue. I for one have been critical of Israeli policy because I believe Israel has it within itself to rise above the troubles it faces and be a just state that respects the human rights of all under its control and to be a truly great nation in the future. I criticize them for many of the same reasons I criticize the Canadian gov't, because I believe they are better as a nation than some of their policies would suggest and I want to see them/us do better in the future. I believe that any nation that believes its perfect as is is doomed to failure of all sorts. The statement "down with Israel" is in no way consistent with the criticism of Israel by most folks in my opinion. However I'll give zezi the benefit of the doubt in that she's just got carried away in the excitment of the moment without considering her words, "praise Allah" was also a poor choice of words considering Islam is just as much a problem for LGBT folks as is Christianity or Judaism, I don't know enough about the more eastern religions to comment on their views of LGBT folks.

Anyways I do see this a victory for free expression, that has always been the main force opposing censorship, especially considering how important the concept of free expression has been to LGBT folks in achieving the recognition of our rights as LGBT folks. There have been battles against censorship by anti-gay bigots for a long time, the fact that Pride was using the tactics of anti-gay bigots against the LGBT community they're supposed to be serving is/was particularly obscene to many. We must always stand on guard for our rights or they can be diminished a little bit at a time without us fully realizing what is happening if we're not paying close attention. I truly believe that the LGBT community has a lot to teach the rest of Canada and the world about the importance of protecting our rights from political erosion. Anyways Happy Pride everyone! maybe by celebrating together we can start the healing process in our community.

Rich ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 8:21 PM

Am wondering how Mr. Pride Councilor Kyle Rae is feeling about all this. Gladstone and company basically pushed him way, way out on a limb and support their branding of Israel agenda. Now the whole sordid affair has blown up in Kyle's face. As they say, once burnt, twice shy. Maybe next time local politicians will be more reluctant to do the bidding of the powerful interests. Just a thought.

Andrea S ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:07 PM

Zezi didn't write that... but I would say, down with Israel's racist behaviour! Happy pride everyone. I know some of you are too stupid to tell the difference and childish enough to write under my previous nick... but, what can I do. I am happy the queer community, like no other community, fought for this... the rest of you have to grow up. Israel is a grown country and it should be treated as one. All I have to say to Israel is that I am tired of seeing how many children they have killed, and women, and men.

Tam ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 9:38 PM

And on top of that, all the useful morons go after "zezi" for praising some stupid god (all are stupid as far as I am concerned) when it is some lunatic on your side taking up my previous post. That would mean, that the joke is on you.

Tam ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 10:45 PM

Matt Mills, writer of this article, says "Questions about whether or not PT intended to sanction arrest or ejection from the parade route of those it determined in violation of the city's anti-discrimination policy were hanging in air." No sir I don't believe those questions ever did hang in the air, as Pride Toronto is not a law enforcement agency and therefore cannot "sanction" an arrest. If you wonder why Tracey Sandilands won't give an interview with Xtra perhaps it's because you've been a shill for QuAIA and have, throughout this ordeal, chosen to slander, mock, and write lies about PT and its leadership. Same reason why most liberals don't give interviews to Fox News.

Ryan ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 10:21 PM

While the threat of loss of government funding and corporate sponsorships hangs over Pride Toronto, a loss of funding would just mean different LGBT events taking place; a loss of the LGBT community because of censorship would mean the loss of purpose for Pride Toronto. Is Pride Toronto and Jewish organizations?

SD ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 10:49 PM

The last sentence should read, "Is Pride Toronto meant to serve the LGBT community, or corporate sponsors and Jewish organizations?"

SD ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 11:52 PM

I'm glad Pride Toronto backed down. But I'm VERY disappointed in Xtra for their one-sided coverage of this complex issue. There are many voices that were never heard. It's clear their agenda is to divide our community and celebrate victims. Pride Toronto got off their high horse ... when will Xtra?

JP ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 11:32 PM

Don't you worry JP, we got to hear the other side... they kept on posting here left right and centre, their message was loud and clear and often very racist.

Tam ca


Thursday, June 24, 2010 11:10 PM

Tam, in fairness... both sides were a bit obnoxious but it would have been nice if Xtra presented a more rounded view on the matter (there are sane arguments on both sides, even if I side with freedom of speech that doesn't stop me from respecting other opinions).

JP ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 12:29 AM

First, Tam you keep calling people stupid, yet in previous comments claimed you would never do so. Please be consistent. Second, both sides did act obnoxious at times. It may be hard to understand but both sides felt very strongly on the issue; a differing point of view does not make one evil, or stupid, or wrong ... it just makes them different. Through discussion, hopefully, both sides can become educated and perhaps a little more tolerant.

Tomas C ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 12:32 AM

Hi JP, I am not sure what the other arguments would be. I certainly know what Gladstone said, what Bnai Birth (sp?) said. My understanding is that some people thought that it falls under hate speech (it doesn't), that it could lead to anti-semitism (I think people behaved quite well there) and that any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic (false). I don't see what sane argument there is for taking out QuAIA. But, I'd like to hear it.

Tam ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 12:38 AM

Trying to censor anyone in a pride parade is as big a mistake as anyone can make, but let's give credit where it's due and congratulate those who admitted they made a mistake and reversed their decision.

I understand the need for government/evil corporation funding at this event. But let's keep in mind that if they withdraw their funding, it will NOT mean the end of pride. The city can cancel the parade, but there's no way in hell they could stop us from showing up anyway and having a good, old fashioned political MARCH!

pth ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 2:50 AM

Hi Tam, I think we might share very similar political views on this issue. For example, when I hear accusations that QuAIA is anti-Semitic -- I don't agree. What's being criticized here is Israel's government -- not the people of Israel (or their faith). But this belief is coming from my limited Western/Christian perspective. Far be it from me to dismiss the Jewish perspective on this complex matter. When I consider the history leading up to the formation of Israel, the conflict the Jews endured for several decades after Israel was formed, and what Israel represents to so many, I can see how ANY criticism of this nation might be perceived differently than the criticism we nonchalantly throw at the US or Canadian government. There are definitely deep sensitivities at play here. Does this mean I think QuAIA should be censored? Absolutely not. It just means that I recognize there is validity to my opposition's perspective (even if I don't share their views). Similarly, an Arab would have another completely different (but also VERY valid) perspective. And I'm delighted that these are being voiced. The problem I'm seeing here is that too many people are dismissing differing perspectives and not enough people are trying to find common ground. Freedom of speech is important to me... but tolerance and respect are two fundamental principles that run even deeper for me.

JP ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 6:08 AM

If anybody thinks that an Israeli/Palestinian debate can be respectful and tolerant, on either side, they are seriously deluded. What is needed is conformance to speech laws. What happened here was a serious attempt by one side to gain advantage by suppessing speech. Our criticism should be directed at those who allowed it. Understanding the role of our politicians in this is crucial. Particularly the ones that kowtow to our community. I know I will be looking at Kyle Rae's replacement with great interest. Ken Chan, the heir to the throne if Kyle had his way (he endorsed him), seemed to have taken the weasel way out on this issue and is out of my list. Kyle Rae $12,000 retirement dinner while Rome was burning should be instructive to all. Not one of the front runners in this year's mayoral race has shown any principle. Very disappointed in Smitherman. Glen Murray has my respect so far.

JG ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 6:13 AM

Moreover JP, Xtra made no effort to highlight some of the opposition-to-the-opposition. Anybody who disagreed with QuAIA's message, tactics, or inclusion at Pride was labelled the "Jewish lobby", or racist. How divisive is that? Martin Gladstone became the ultimate straw man, with everybody attacking him as if he represented the rest of us. I strongly opposed the inclusion of QuAIA at Pride because 1. I've seen how ugly the Anti-Israeli Apartheid movement can get at university 2. I don't agree that Israel/Palestine politics belongs or is relevent at Pride 3. I have trouble accepting that Israel is solely responsible for the fate of all Palestinians 4. I simply don't accept that Israel is the enemy of LGBT Palestinians, if anything the opposite is true 5. That QuAIA's exclusion from the parade turned into a massive anti-censorship campaign was WAY overblow 6. QuAIA will not recognize that there is a relationship between Islamic radicalism in the region and the human rights abuses of queers and women in Palestine, instead, everything seems to be Israel's fault. There are plenty of people who believe at least one of these points to be true (especially #2), but our voices were not included in Xtra's reporting.

Ryan ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 7:00 AM

Xtra adopted the following resolution at the onstart: That freedom of speech is a fundamental democratic freedom;

That freedom of speech has been the foundation of our communities' political and social progress since Canada’s first national gay demonstration in 1971;

That Pink Triangle Press, having been tried and acquitted three times on charges of obscenity, has played a significant role in fighting for freedom of speech for our communities and for all Canadians;

That Toronto’s Pride Day sprang from our communities' resistance to the bathhouse raids of 1981 and celebrates a political struggle for justice and freedom that has always been openly allied with other political struggles at home and around the world;

We call upon the Board of Directors of Pride Toronto to reverse your decision to ban the use of the phrase "Israeli Apartheid" at Pride events and to resist this attempt by politicians, funders and lobbyists to intimidate you and suppress our freedom.

JG ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 8:46 AM

@Ryan you said: "Martin Gladstone became the ultimate straw man, with everybody attacking him as if he represented the rest of us". Are you saying that you do not agree with Martin Gladstone?

JG ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 10:00 AM

JG, in my eclectic circle of friends and acquaintances, there are very differing opinions on this matter. I'm happy to report that when we've debated this issue, we've kept it clean (no insults or condescending/dismissive comments). So I'm thrilled to report that my friends and acquaintances are also "delusional". Lucky me :o)

Ryan, I'm not convinced the negative comments are coming from members of QuAIA, but rather people who share similar political views as myself, but aren't comfortable being challenged or opposed. Ours has never been a cohesive community and this episode has brought this to the surface. If the debate is healthy, we might get somewhere. But when either side righteously condemns the other as being "wrong" and uses insults, it splinters the community more. Even though I side with QuAIA (on principle), I don't see black or white here -- just shades of grey. But what do I know? I'm simply delusional, haha.

JP ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 10:57 AM

Hi JG, I think we would agree too on a number of things. I do understand why it is such a sensitive issue but that isn't a justification. To me the defense of Israel regardless of what it does goes beyond rational and frankly, to hysterical. I am tired of it. I have thought about it. I don't think any emotional issues remaining from the horrible treatment of Jews in europe, justify what Israel is now doing to the palestinians. There is an incredible amount of racism coming out of Israel that frankly disgusts me. And while that might also be the result of multiple circumstances, that won't stop if we look the other way. As for cultural relativism, I think that at the end, there have to be some shared perspective about human rights and what is right and what is wrong. Certainly everyone, Jews, Arabs and Christians consider things wrong when they happen to them. In fact, just about anything is justification for a reaction in Israel so their level of tolerance is really really low, even lower than for all their arab neighbours. I am always skeptical of a cultural relativism that would say such a things as "well in that culture it is ok to beat your wife". I won't comprise on basic human rights. This is why we have laws, so that there is a standard, and certainly Israel benefits from parts of international law, it is about time it stops respecting all international laws. Even if we all had views from all different perspectives, for all people, of all cultures, to live together in an international setting, we need common laws. The other thing is that many Jewish people who defend Israel are qutie capable of seeing the injustices perpetrated in the rest of the world as wrong, they make an exception for Israel, which means that the issue isn't one of a religious perspective.

Tam ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 10:57 AM

Hi Tam, our politics seem very similar indeed. I believe every government should be challenged -- including Israel. I've been an activist for many years and I believe education is key for any movement. In order to educate, however, we need to find a common ground or we risk antagonizing those we want to educate. But here's the tricky part: the education has to be TWO-WAY. If everyone digs their heels in, we won't get anywhere. Your response was respectful and acknowledges the Jewish plight. Thanks for this.

JP ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 12:33 PM

gay community celebrates???

Despite the propaganda that xtra has been pushing, There are many of us gays who are very saddened that this hate group who cares nothing for gay rights, or human rights for that matter, has rained on our parade again. Lets try to ignore them and have fun anyway.

queero ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 1:42 PM

JG, I'm well versed in Canada's gay history, Pink Triangle Press's fight for free speech, 1981, all that, but I disagree with you about using it to support your view. It's been pretty popular lately to invoke queer history as a means of supporting anti-Israel sentiment at Pride. This is wrong. Read historian Margaret MacMillan's book "The Uses and Abuses of History". She writes that is was an abuse of history for Bush to comparare Sadam Hussein to Adolf Hitler, wrong for Harper/Martin to compare Canada's role in Afghanistan to Canada's role in WWI, as it is not that cut and dry. I feel that it is flagrantly wrong - an abuse of history - to compare PT banning the phrase "Israeli Apartheid" in 2010 to the Toronto Police raiding gay establishments and arresting people in the 1980s. They are NOT the same thing. Sure it's fair to find similarities, but one is not the other. In the 1980s, our community was unanimously opposed to the violence inflicted on us by the police. In 2010 our community is far more politically diverse than you give it credit for. If QuAIA was being assaulted, we would of course come to their defence, but our political views are not necessarily all in solidarity with them.

Ryan ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 2:07 PM

queero, Well, it is either you are very sad, or all of us who have been protesting actively and many who have not protested are very sad. someone has to be sad, and frankly, if the side who doesn't want to stop discrimination in Israel is sad, well be it. Be sad.

Tam ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 2:39 PM

Ryan, We used to be a less diverse group politically. Indeed, most out gay andlesbian people were leftists and believe in human rights. What does that imply dear Ryan? That our rights were fought by the left while the right stayed in the closet. Now the right wants to silence the left? Ironic, don't you think? Now they want to be included? Where was the right at the start? I'll tell you again, in the closet. In the closet they stayed until people like QuAIA put themselves in the line to fight for our rights. So... yes Ryan... spare me.

Tam ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 2:36 PM

And, no one says you can't be part of it... the question is... does the right now have a right to silence the very left that allowed it to come out? You go ahead and spew all you want, but many of us won't have you re-write history. People like QuAIA come out in every situation of human rights violations and in that sense, they are the same kind of people who allow you to come out and say you are gay.

Tam ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 2:16 PM

I seriously hope the Jewish people, especially the Queer Jews that have experianced anti Semetism, anti gay rhetoric from our muslim brothers and sisters, remember to remain strong and staedfast in your life experience. If you have relatives and know other Jewish Queers in israel who got out of a terrorist attack safely in that region, remeber to be confident when you stand against the queer majority and dont be afraid to say, "Israel has a right to defend their citizens from extremists that have publically wished them dead.

Jamie ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 2:21 PM

Jamie, Does that mean that Palestinians have a right to defend themselves against aggression from Israel? As for people who have experience terrorism, would you count palestinians too? Who would you rather be Jamie, a palestinian in gaza or a jewish person in Tel Aviv? Which would be more terrifying? Which, therefore, would be more terrorized? And, yes, Jamie, you probably have never actually experienced terrorism, but that doesn't mean that other people outside of Israel haven't. And believe it or not, other countries have handled it better. So Jamie, did you find a deed to Israel anywhere among your old papers? Are you sure you have more than 0.000001% of the blood of the people who were led to the land by Moses? I mean, in keeping with our latest conversation in which you showed yourself to be a religious fanatic.

Tam ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 3:41 PM

@ JP. I do not have a Western/Christian background and much like my kin I bring passion in my debates, being dismissive and not keeping it clean is part of the course. Never hate though! It would be delusional to have me and my non Western/Christian kin have a debate on issues we feel passionate about without fair rules of engagement. We non Western/Christian emotional basket cases have not learned the nifty trick of suppressing our feelings while being oppressed, yet. With your kind guidance and omnipresence, perhaps one day.....

JG ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 4:35 PM

Hi Tam. I agree with you entirely. I am South African and I am also Jewish. I have lived in both countries. I lived in South Africa and watched one unprincipled Israeli politician after the other support and praise apartheid in the '80s, and openly talk about adopting such policies in Israel. The same term censorship supporters are now recoiling from in horror. Talk about revisionism. There is a very racist element in Israel that needs to be confronted. I also get very impatient when I hear about Western/Christian supposed ignorance of the facts and other cultures "temperaments"; it is often used to avoid taking a clear position, while people are suffering and others are profiting. Nevertheless the most valuable help peace seeking individuals should offer, is the opportunity for all to present their view fairly. I did my research, and I am convinced that QuAIA is not engaging in hate speech(the legal definition). Provocation yes, and that's legal. Pride has historically offered a venue for similar expression. Cheers.

JG ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 5:44 PM

Let me get this right Tam, queers who fought for our rights were on the "left", and those who didn't and stayed in the closet were on the "right", and now anybody who is on the "right" should just shut up and take a back seat? Your reasoning is so foolish, your comments are nauseating. Don't put me into a box, thank you. I am not part of the right or left, and political diversity is not about Group A vs Group B. I refer back to my earlier remarks.

Ryan ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 5:59 PM

Rick don't shut up...it certainly isn't in your temperament, but don't try to silence or shut out the side that gave you space to speak. No one has ever said that the right doesn't have space, what they don't have is the moral right to try to silence the left. Go ahead, participate, take space... no one has ever tried to silenced your over-sensitive self from our Pride. But, yes, I was not part of the movement, nor am I a leftist, but I do know who were the people who fought for my rights and made space for me to come out. It wasn't the likes of you.

Tam ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 6:34 PM

Hi JG, I am aware that there were many people in South Africa who were white and Jewish (though there were people on both sides of issue among both these groups), who fought against apartheid. I only know this because I have met jewish people who have told me about it. I actually come from a place were racism wasn't nearly as institutionalized but very prevalent and where eventually a part of the other side decided to rebel and we called them terrorists and they were, but so was my side, killing people indiscriminately. Perhaps the experience has given me a different perspective, it certainly made me think a lot about the issues that come out in these kinds of conflicts. I too was brainwashed but when someone called my people racist, rather than scream we weren't, I started to think about it. Why would they think that? Most of my people were racist and it was that racism that led to the conflict. Certainly there are different circumstances in every situation, but I became really good at noticing how massive hysteria takes over, how illogical arguments innundate the landscape, etc. While most people here speak of terrorism and have never lived it, I, as you probably did too being South African, have actually had to live through it.

Tam ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 6:47 PM

The decision to include QAIA in the TO pride parade for 2010 is an enormous victory for those who wanted to politicize the parade, and a enormous defeat for those supporting LGBTQ rights.
By including the group, the parade is basically denouncing Israel, the only country in the Middle East to give LGBTQ rights even those in the West can envy. At the same time the parade's decision supports Hamas' LGBTQ policies which basically sum up to persecution and execution (which is btw why so many Palestinian LGBTQ members given refuge in Israel like its "Apartheid" so much).

So in conclusion of the parade's decision to include QAIA: way to go Israel bashers! better luck next time LGBTQ rights...

Ohad ca


Friday, June 25, 2010 6:53 PM

What are you afraid of Ohad, what do you think will happen to LGBT rights because of this? I mean, a part for the right of LGBT people to free speech? Because we know that one won.

Tam ca


Saturday, June 26, 2010 2:45 PM

Tam, sure Palestinians have the right to defend themselves from Israeli aggressions. They only need to do a few little Peace loving actions, that would unequivically stop the aggressive actions Israel uses to prevent extremist living in and around gaza from murdering their innocent civilians. All they have to do is mobilize and re channel their agression to their own, to control the hate prevalent in their Country towards innocent jewish people living in Israel. They can, inprison their terrorists. Stop their extremeists from hiding amongst the innocent women and children in Gaza. Protest ttheir own people that wish death to Israel, and Israeli citizens. If a few terrorized people here in Toronto or anywhere, and then cowardly hid in the innocent population as a stradegy, Hundreds of Police officers and swat teams would take action against these terrorists, and unfortunately innocent people would get hurt. The best way, is for the people in Palestine to start denouncing their chant, death to Israeli Jews.

Jamie ca


Saturday, June 26, 2010 2:33 PM

Jamie, In the past you have said that you have right to the land because a little fairy tale told you that god gave it to you, or at the very least, taht you had possession of it 2,000 years ago, you must be the longest living man in the world. Wow! Here is one way to end the war, go back to the 1967 line and stop stealing palestinian land. You want to speak of hatred ... why don't you tell this children to refocus their hatred on the parents who taught them to act like this: www.youtube.com/watch this is the people you defend?

Tam ca


Saturday, June 26, 2010 2:59 PM

www.youtube.com/watch Here is another one Jamie.... these are hateful people... but they aren't arab.

Tam ca


Saturday, June 26, 2010 5:43 PM

Tam, there are literally thousands of youtube videos of Israeli nurseys, public transportation, and markets in Jerusalem that suicide bombers blow up with themselves every chance they get. The misery you are trying to flash in desparation for a legitment point of view, is not worth giving that sensationalistic bs a look at. not unless you equally post the terr that Palestian men , women and children with rocks throw at other israeli children living next door. You have only succeeded in making me take a stronger stand against the violence and hate rhetoric used against the citizens of Israel. You are the reason "Queer Jews, have felt threatened at pride. You are not a just , balanced individual who has condemned the violence that have First befallen the Israelis. And, yes the land was once shared by both people, until the arabs started to kill off and expel Jewish people from their homeland. You are on the side that lost a war, and at any time the tables can change , and then the Jewish people will be opersecuted again, and they will rise up and be victorious in another war. You really should put your efforts in halping the Palestinians to combat their hatred to most people around the world who respest democracy and support Israel. I will help you get a life, you are sorely missing.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zn0psH5xm3g

Jamie ca


Saturday, June 26, 2010 5:54 PM

Tam this are the people i am protecting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zn0psH5xm3ghttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAA8XbRjpVo Tam shame on you. There are hundreds of others, but you are not worth debating, I am ashamed to be queer with people like you that hate Israel for retaliation against the daily threats of terrorism they are under. But you have succeeded in showing that Jewish people are also under attack for their pro Israel stand. Thank you to all the queers that help to promote your freedom of speech. You are in good company Zundel was famous for blaming The jews for their position in Israel too.

Jamie ca


Sunday, June 27, 2010 3:59 PM

Jamie, I have seen it. It is a terrible situation, but it does not compare with what Israel did in Gaza, nor can you claim that palestinians are stealing land from jewish people, nor can you complain that Israelis are oppressed by palestinians. In terms of number of dead and atrocities, Israel does both way better than the palestnians and has done a good job of dehumanizing the palestinians and arabs throughout the world, on top of that.............. What exactly, Jamie, would be a just peace plan for you? What do you think, thinking about the 1967 borders being on the table, east jerusalem, water resources, ending the violence in each and both sides, the refugees? I am curious. And, it will bring the debate to a better place. What do you think Israel can comprise on? What is their right? What do you expec the palestinians to do? Do you even think there is a chance of peace? Why?

Tam ca


Sunday, June 27, 2010 3:12 PM

I hope funding for this parade is going to be (immediately) withdrawn.

Jon ca


Tuesday, June 29, 2010 6:02 PM

Tam, I thought of giving you a serious answer about what is so terrible with QuAIA being in the parade, but when you call my religion a fairy tale, and dismiss historic and archeological facts about Jewish connection to Israel, I doubt if it is worth the effort (hint: the English did not find 2k year old scriptures in English in India; and the French did not find 2k year old scripts in French in Algeirs; but guess what language were the 2k yaer old scriptures found in Israel? You could have benefitted a little wisdom from the Dead Sea Scrolls visit in Toronto). Nevertheless I will try, and I hope you can trust I have first hand knowledge of Israeli politics: If you denounce Israel and support Hamas without question, Hamas will take the hint that its LGBTQ policies thus far have been correct and will continue with the slaughter and persecution of Palestinian LGBTQ members (I found it humorous when QuAIA said they are being supported by all their LGBTQ friends in the Palestinian liberation organizations). At the same time, that marginalized fanatic religious minority in Israel who opposes LGBTQ rights (and I do mean minority as the majority of Israeli religious people may not condone LGBTQ; but they certainly support their rights), would take advantage of this unfair bashing in an attempt to turn to Israeli public's primal instinct, patriotism, to delegitimize LGBTQ's successful struggle to date in Israel. That is what I am afraid of. For one thing, they can turn Israeli public opinion against giving refuge to Palestinian LGBTQ members in Israel,by saying that here is the "proof": even TO pride parade organizers admit that LGBTQ members are better off in Gaza and the West Bank than they are in Israel and therefore it would be in "their" (LGBTQ members) interest to be prevented from taking refuge in Israel, all in the name of you defending the right to freedom of hate speech . Now do you understand what I am afraid of Tam? So please, keep saying you are doing this in the name of freedom of (hate) speech, just don't say you are doing this in the name of LGBTQ rights

Ohad ca


Tuesday, June 29, 2010 7:44 PM

p.s. Tam

Kudos for the settlers video where they act like idiots. Wanna know how many links I can bring you of Palestinian children whose sole ambition is to become suicide bombers? Can you defend that? And besides that, why do you oppose what the settlers in the video are saying so much? Why don't you defend their right to say so? What happened to the freedom of 'hate' speech?

Ohad ca


Thursday, July 1, 2010 6:58 PM

"Down with Israel! Happy Pride!" is perhaps the easiest way of demonstrating that the QAIA has no place at the Parade. What does exclusion, hate and destruction have to do with Gay rights and liberation? Why do I, a Jewish Lesbian, now have to feel unwelcome at a place where I should be able to celebrate my sexuality? This is not a censorship issue, this is a discrimination issue. There is no place for discrimination and hate at Pride.

yale ca



Comments are closed

Powered by BlogEngine.NET 1.4.0.0

The Roundup

Xtra.ca's Roundup
blog is your source
for news and
analysis that has
queer people
talking.

The Roundup is
written by Xtra's
staff reporters:

Rob Salerno
rob.salerno@xtra.ca

Andrea Houston
andrea.houston@xtra.ca

Natasha Barsotti
natasha.barsotti@xtra.ca

and

Adam Glen
Editorial Intern


Log in
Feed Subscribe