Baumel Joseph: Preserving a lost grave through social media - Canadian Jewish News - Canada News Media
Connect with us

Media

Baumel Joseph: Preserving a lost grave through social media – Canadian Jewish News

Published

on


In this era of instant global communication, some people are justifiably worried about social media platforms, such as Facebook and Instagram, with their power to invade and violate our privacy.

Yet, as we all know, this global vehicle of instant contact can illuminate, educate and support all sorts of endeavours.

Recently, Sass Peress experienced a “miracle.” He wanted to locate and preserve his paternal grandfather’s grave in Iraq. But, how could he? There was no way he or any member of his family could go back there. That world of their existence was closed, trampled upon and inaccessible. Or so he thought.

Then, from a chance Facebook encounter, his efforts moved a vast anonymous community of Jews and Iraqi Muslims to preserve 4,000 Jewish graves. And the project is growing.

This is a 21st century miracle.

In November 2017, an Iraqi-born Muslim British friend posted the picture of Miss Israel and Miss Iraq online. Peress, being the friendly communicator that he is, wrote “salam aleikum.” Within minutes he was contacted by the manager of the Miss Iraq pageant who asked for a favour locating someone. Peress agreed and then asked for one in return. This led to the relocated Jewish cemetery.

To find and clean up the specific tombstone would require many different individuals. And some money. Trust was built and many exchanges took place leading to the location of Peress’ paternal grandfather’s tombstone in the transferred Baghdad cemetery.

The original cemetery which was established in 1642, was bulldozed by orders from Gen. Abd Al-Karim Qassam following the 14th July Revolution of 1958, and the graves were irreverently moved to Sadr City, a suburb just outside of Baghdad.

Delicate negotiations were required to clean up the one grave and restore the tombstone. Time, patience and a little money eased the path. Pictures crossed the Internet. Many pictures. Now Peress, his father and family could rest assured that their grandfather’s grave is clean and preserved. Even protected. But what about the other graves?

There is a commission to protect and preserve the Jewish cemeteries and mass graves of Europe. It is active and seeks legal recourse, especially for those affected by the Holocaust.

READ: NEED TO FIND A LOVED ONE’S GRAVE? THERE’S AN APP FOR THAT

Shouldn’t we extend this scrutiny to all our dead and buried? With guidance from elders such as Sami Sourani, Peress understood this and undertook the preservation of the graves of his community of Babylonian Jews. This community had been in the land for over 2,500 years. They had flourished and lived rich cultured lives. Their troubles began in the 20th century peaking in a farhud (pogrom) in 1941 and culminating with an increasing list of restrictive laws and regulations.

In 1950 the majority of the community was briefly allowed to leave for Israel. Later others escaped over the mountains with Kurdish help. Eventually, excluded and ejected, only 10 were left. But their dead remained.

Now with the facility of global communication, and some good people on both sides of the ocean, the relocated cemetery could be protected. The dead could lie in peace.

More could be done. With the help of colleagues in the Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue of Montreal and the Community of Babylonian Iraqi Jews, the list of participating synagogues and even churches eventually grew from 18 in 2018 to 47 in 2019. The goal now is 300. From London, New York, Los Angeles and even Mexico, people and communities helped with money and events, dedicating worship days (a Shabbat at the end of November) to commemorate, preserve and honour.

Peress has not stopped. He decided to continue after the 4,000 graves at Sadr City were preserved and Shabbatot were set aside for memorials. The quest is now to preserve the cemeteries of other minorities in the Middle East. All those that have been desecrated and demeaned.

This is hesed shel emet, the truest type of loving kindness our tradition knows. That which we do for the dead, for those who can never repay us, that is most sincere form of righteousness, of virtue.

To participate, contact Sass Peress at [email protected]

Share and enjoy !

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Media

Coronavirus sends Asia's social media censors into overdrive – National Post

Published

on


BANGKOK/SINGAPORE — Deluged by misinformation about the new coronavirus on social media, some Asian governments are fighting back with arrests, fines and fake news laws – something free speech advocates fear will entrench measures that can also silence dissent.

At least 16 people have been arrested over coronavirus posts in Malaysia, India, Thailand, Indonesia and Hong Kong, while Singapore has used its controversial new “fake news” law, POFMA, to force media outlets and social media users to carry government warnings on their posts and articles saying they contain falsehoods.

“Fortunately, we now have POFMA to deal with these fake news,” said Lawrence Wong, one of the ministers heading a Singapore government task force to halt the spread of the virus.

Many details of the new flu-like coronavirus that surfaced just weeks ago in the Chinese city of Wuhan are unknown. As the death toll has passed 420, anxiety has been fueled by social media posts ranging from the bizarre to the malicious.

Posts include speculation about how the virus can be caught – through a video game according to one – or avoided – a government minister in Myanmar was rebuked for sharing a post that recommended eating more onions – to local scares of deaths or anti-Chinese attacks.

“What I call the ‘moron strain’ has created a global, social media-driven panic that is in turn feeding on itself,” wrote Karim Raslan in his regionally syndicated column, noting how much greater the challenge had become for governments to manage.

At least five people were arrested and released on bail in India’s southwestern state of Kerala over WhatsApp messages, said Aadhithya R, District Police Chief of Thrissur. Six people were arrested in Malaysia on suspicion of spreading false news.

In Vietnam, where an army of cyber-censors tracks social media comment for the communist government, at least nine people have been fined and three celebrities asked to explain their actions over posts about coronavirus.

Thailand hailed the success of an “anti-fake news center” it set up last year. Dozens of staff reviewed nearly 7,600 posts in four days from Jan. 25 – leading to 22 posts being highlighted as false on its website and two arrests under computer crimes laws.

“The anti-fake news center is working intensively to verify these rumors and communicating truth to the people,” said Digital Minister Puttipong Punnakanta.

Thailand is among countries where laws on social media posts have been toughened in recent years despite complaints from human rights groups that they could be used to target government opponents.

CONTROL

Free-speech advocates are wary that the campaign against coronavirus could help governments extend their control as well as damaging the health campaign.

“Criminalisation of speech, even if targeted at falsehoods, is highly likely to stifle the real time sharing of information that is essential during epidemics,” said Matthew Bugher, Head of Asia Programme for free expression campaign group Article 19.

China has long censored social media heavily and some critics say that may have delayed information on the emerging virus in Wuhan – and therefore potential countermeasures.

Eight people were arrested after being accused of spreading rumors about illness in early January, but the case was dropped last week amid growing public anger over the handling of the new crisis.

Meanwhile, Tencent Holdings’ ubiquitous messaging app WeChat has added tools to help debunk virus rumors. The official People’s Daily has also introduced a tool to help people verify reports.

Western social media companies are also stepping up action. Facebook Inc has said it would take down misinformation about the coronavirus – a rare departure from the usual approach to health content by the world’s biggest social network.

GOVERNMENT THREATS

Taiwan has warned of punishment for spreading disinformation. South Korean police were working with telecoms regulators to block “false information,” Yonhap news agency said.

Indonesian police said two people had been arrested for spreading fake news and face charges that could see them jailed for up to five years. Hong Kong police said a shopping mall security guard was arrested for spreading false news about infections.

In Singapore, some said the government was using its new fake news law responsibly.

“Many examples of misinformation, confusing data and outright fake news present a clear and present danger to public safety, health and security,” said Nicholas Fang, founder of Singapore consultancy Black Dot Research.

But not all were convinced.

Journalist and activist Kirsten Han is among those who have been given a government correction notice – in her case for sharing an article related to state executions last month rather than anything to do with coronavirus.

“Just because there are relatively more justifiable uses of a #fakenews law, it doesn’t mean that the law was well-drafted and can’t be an instrument of abuse and oppression,” she commented on Twitter. (Reporting by Matthew Tostevin in Bangkok and John Geddie in Singapore; Additional reporting by Jessica Damiana, Keira Wright and Stanley Widianto in Jakarta, Joseph Sipalan in Kuala Lumpur, Patpicha Tanakasempipat in Bangkok, Ben Blanchard in Taipei, Josh Smith in Seoul, Chris Thomas in Bengaluru, James Pearson in Hanoi, Tony Munroe in Beijing, Brenda Goh in Shanghai; Editing by Alex Richardson)

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Media

Chris Selley: Canada’s two solitudes starkly apparent on issue of media independence – National Post

Published

on


In a way you have to hand it to the Broadcast and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel. Freedom-loving Canadians were well prepared for many of its terrible and unnecessary ideas — notably forcing streaming companies like Netflix to invest in Canadian content, which they’re already doing because people actually want to watch it. If a positive outcome hasn’t been achieved by regulatory fiat, the panelists seem to believe, it hasn’t been achieved at all.

The notion of government-subsidized print journalism having won such favour in Liberal Ottawa, perhaps it’s also not surprising the panel proposed taking money from internet giants like Facebook and Google and using it to establish an (ahem) “independent arm’s length program … to support the production of news,” with membership open to any outlet meeting unstated standards of “ethical journalism” and (double-ahem) “editorial independence.”

But even the most keyed-in observers seem to have been staggered by Recommendation 73: To have the CRTC draw up a list of “accurate, trusted, reliable” Canadian news sources, and to force “media aggregation and media sharing undertakings” — that’s everything from Yahoo! News to YouTube — to link to those sites in such a way as “to ensure visibility.”

No one seemed to anticipate recommendations to “license” Yahoo! News or Breitbart or MSN News, extract “levies” from them and regulate their hyperlinks. Because, well, that would be crazy.

Or at least, that’s the dominant anglophone view.

On Sunday, when CTV’s Evan Solomon pushed Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault on the issue of issuing journalism licences to foreign media outlets, Guilbeault eventually just shrugged: “I’m not sure I see what the big deal is.”

The minister tried to walk it back on Monday, but the fact is many of his fellow Quebecers will also struggle to discern a big deal. There is simply much more tolerance of this sort of cultural gatekeeping among francophone Quebecers than in the Rest of Canada, and the tolerance extends well into the realm of journalism.

“In reading the (report’s) 260 pages and 97 recommendations, one word comes to mind” Sunday’s editorial in La Presse gushed: “Finally!”


Canadian Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault speaks to reporters on Parliament Hill, Feb. 3, 2020.

Blair Gable/Reuters

Opposition to government regulation of journalism is firmly entrenched not just in anglophone Canada, but across the anglosphere. When the 2011 Leveson Inquiry proposed the British government create a powerful new press regulator, nearly every major outlet rejected the idea. Fraser Nelson, editor of The Spectator, famously vowed the magazine “will not attend its meetings, pay its fines nor heed its menaces.”

The same year, Laval University professor Dominique Payette’s report into Quebec’s struggling news media recommended the government legislate a “professional journalist” designation. The province’s largest journalists’ trade organization and the Quebec Press Council happily sat down with the government to bash out a power-sharing agreement on deciding who’s a proper journalist and who isn’t.

The English-language Montreal Gazette was dead-set against the idea, but Le Devoir called it a “logical outcome.” (The power-sharing discussions eventually fell apart, and the idea died a merciful death.)

Freedom-loving Canadians were well prepared for many of the panel’s terrible and unnecessary ideas

Meanwhile the head of the press council, retired Justice John Gomery, suggested the government pass legislation forcing the Journal de Montréal and Journal de Québec to rejoin the organization. Owner Pierre Karl Péladeau had pulled them out a year earlier alleging bias in its decisions, and when Péladeau said he would challenge any such legislation in court, a La Presse editorial accused him of disrespect for the rule of law.

On this issue, Canada’s two solitudes could hardly be more starkly apparent. But Conservatives are quite rightly tearing the report to pieces, Quebec MPs included. “You’d think you were in North Korea,” heritage critic Steven Blaney told reporters in Ottawa. He suggested that the $600 million “carrot,” in the form of financial aid to struggling print outlets, was now being followed with the “stick” of regulation.

This is potentially dangerous territory for the party: Not only is government regulation of journalism more popular in Quebec than the Rest of Canada, so is government bailing out struggling media outlets. A 2018 Nanos survey found 65 per cent of Quebecers support “additional government funding to keep local news sources open,” versus 37 per cent in the Prairie provinces.

It may carry some risk of sounding unhinged to those who don’t already despise Justin Trudeau

Mind you, pandering to Quebec’s peculiarities has gotten the Conservatives precisely nowhere. Perhaps they’re finally over it.

Indeed, leadership candidate Erin O’Toole has used the media bailout as a major part of his “real conservative” branding exercise. He has promised to repeal it. And now he’s using the panel report to his advantage. “Trudeau wants to control what you see on Netflix,” he tweeted on Sunday. “Trudeau wants to control news you read online. This is wrong. This is dangerous.”

That’s entirely fair play, but it may carry some risk of sounding unhinged to those who don’t already despise Justin Trudeau — which is more people than Conservatives sometimes seem to realize — and who don’t understand just how unhinged this report actually is. He might do better focusing on this unimpeachable message, delivered on Twitter the next day: “An independent press is essential to freedom and democracy. Government licensing of the media has no place in a free country.”

A whole lot of panelists disagree. Ideally, they will very soon be very bitterly disappointed.

• Email: cselley@nationalpost.com | Twitter:

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Media

LILLEY: Trudeau walks away from regulating media – Toronto Sun

Published

on


It’s one of the fastest reversals of government policy that I’ve ever seen.

On Sunday, the Trudeau Liberals were promising to bring in a licensing regime for news outlets and podcasters, by Monday they were singing the praises of a free press.

It all started last week when a panel struck by Justin Trudeau himself to examine the future of media in Canada released their final report.

Called “Canada’s Communications Future: A Time to Act,” the report called for new media to be required to register with the government and be licensed. On Sunday, Trudeau’s culture minister told CTV’s Question Period that he agreed with that idea.

“Mr. Speaker, on this side of the House we believe in a strong, free and independent press,” Trudeau said when questioned by Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer.

Well, let’s be honest, a “strong, free and independent press,” isn’t one that has to register with the government and obtain a licence. To do that would be to give the government control over what media outlets could say, print or broadcast.

That’s bad for democracy and a complete violation of the ideal of freedom of speech.

Thankfully, Trudeau went a step further in saying he will not go forward with this idea.

“I want to be unequivocal, we will not impose licensing requirements on news organizations, nor will we regulate news content,” Trudeau said.

The only troubling part of Trudeau’s response is that he said his government’s priority is to ensure that Canadians have access to, “diverse, high-quality and credible news.” Who decides what is “high-quality” or “credible” when it comes to news?

I hope it’s not Justin Trudeau or any other politician. Politicians are the biggest purveyors of “fake news.” They’re the people who try to spin everything.

It was just about one year ago, Feb. 7, 2019, that I stood in a commuter parking lot north of Toronto as Trudeau reacted to the first story on SNC-Lavalin and lied to the world.

“The allegations in the Globe story are false,” Trudeau said.

Of course, we would come to learn that the allegations were true and then some. Yet, for weeks, the government’s line was that the media outlet was lying.

If we lived in a licensed system, would the Globe see their licence revoked for publishing something the government claimed was a lie? Would they have even published it in the first place or held back out of fear of irritating the authorities?

And make no mistake, the report tabled last week called for registration and licensing of media outlets more than once.

In recommendation 56, the report calls for online media to be registered by the CRTC, meaning any news outlet, any podcaster, any content creator — a recipe blog — could be registered by the government.

“This would require a person carrying on a media content undertaking by means of the Internet to register unless otherwise exempt,” the report states.

And at recommendation 74, the report called for the CRTC to be given the power to, “impose codes of conduct, including provisions with respect to resolution mechanisms, transparency, privacy, and accessibility regarding all media content undertakings.”

All media undertakings.

Thankfully, the response was swift and firm from most Canadians: The government doesn’t get to regulate the media like this.

To do so would be a violation of the Charter and its guarantee of freedom of expression.

“Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication,” is how the Charter phrases it.

A media regulated and registered with the government would never be free.

This was a bad idea that should never been suggested, that the Trudeau Liberals never should have agreed to but I’m glad they are running away from it.

Freedom deserves no less.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending