Talk:Alykhan Velshi

Velshi vs Mouammar
Velshi wrote: "This e-mail, by specifically naming the Canadian Jewish Congress and B'nai Brith, again shows he does not just disdain Zionists, but the Jewish community as a whole."

I've written: "Velshi sharply criticized Mouammar in response, alleging that his decision to criticize the Canadian Jewish Congress and B'nai Brith by name "[did] not just disdain Zionists, but the Jewish community as a whole."

I believe this is an accurate summarization. CJCurrie (talk) 04:16, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Again, I disagree. Mouammar did not make a decision to "criticize" the Canadian Jewish Congress and the B'nai Brith Canada. Rather, he alleged that they (and "some politicans") were part of a "well-planned Zionist Campaign" against Arab Canadians. That is not criticism, that is a serious allegation, one which Mouammar made without any evidence. Your wording, which tries to whitewash this as simple critcism, is not an accurate reflection. Conspiracy theories and wild allegations provided without any evidence are not simply criticism. That why the wording should specifically note that Velshi's statement was in response to Mouammar's specific allegations against the CJC and B'nai Brith.

Your wording implies that Velshi's statement was simply in response to Mouammar's [your wording: "decision to criticize the Canadian Jewish Congress and B'nai Brith by name.] This is incorrect. Velshi's statement was in response to Mouammar's allegations that these organizations were engaged in a elaborate campaign against Arab Canadians. That is why Velshi's original statement (or possibly my previous wording (either one is fine)) should be used.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 06:55, 18 December 2009 (UTC))


 * I'm not going to get into a semantic dispute as to whether Mouammar's comments on the CJC and BBC constitute "something more than criticism" (although I think you're reading much, much more into this than is actually there). I maintain that it's correct to describe his statement as "criticism," notwithstanding whatever else it may or may not be -- however, I'm prepared to remove the word if it's the cause of an impasse.
 * One way or the other, your current wording is not acceptable, as it seems to imply that Velshi was hinting at other, unspecified statements in Mouammar's letter. (I do not believe this was deliberate on your part.) To prevent this possible misreading, I'm going to try something else whenever the statute for the 3RR lapses. CJCurrie (talk) 07:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

The website ethicaloil.org (which works on increasing support for the Alberta Tar Sands, according to its about page) is an effort of Alykhan Velshi. http://www.ethicaloil.org/about/ This may be worthy of mention in the article. Jimsg (talk) 20:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)