Ontario caves to Israel on falsely-labeled wines– for now, anyway

US Politics
on 25 Comments

Anyone who doubts Israel’s awesome ability to manipulate other countries’ public servants should examine the outcome of a complaint of mine to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) regarding the false labeling of two West Bank settlement wine products on Ontario liquor store shelves.

On July 6, six months after I drew their attention to the fact that the wines were labelled “Made in Israel” at the website of the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO), even though they were actually produced from grapes grown in the heart of the occupied Palestinian territories, the CFIA finally instructed the LCBO to cease importation or sale of the red and white wine products until labeling issues were resolved.

Within hours of the LCBO’s subsequent directive to Toronto-area liquor stores (which I had not been informed of or provided), B’nai Brith Canada had posted it on its Facebook page, stating confidently that the outrageous directive would be quashed by day’s end. Numerous people in high positions had told them so.

For several hours after the B’nai Brith post, Canadian supporters of justice in Palestine rejoiced at the enormity of what had just happened. Finally, the Canadian government was walking the walk, expressing itself boldly and clearly on the matter of Israel’s permanent occupation: “The government of Canada does not recognize Israel’s sovereignty over the territories occupied in 1967,” the CFIA had told the LCBO in its directive. “Wine products from these regions that are labelled as ‘Product of Israel’ would not be acceptable and would be considered misleading as per subsection 5(1) of the Food and Drugs Act.”

Celebration was short-lived. Late on July 12 – true to B’nai Brith’s prediction – the CFIA released a terse statement at its website renouncing the directive, and expressing contrition for its erroneous wine labeling assessment. The CFIA had failed to take the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement into consideration, it confessed. Trade deals trump domestic labeling legislation. “These wines adhere to the Agreement and therefore we can confirm that the products in question can be sold as currently labelled.”

One can only imagine the celebratory whoops and shouts the CFIA’s flip-flop provoked in Canadian Zionist circles. B’nai Brith Canada and the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs puffed and gloated on various social media platforms, praising the Canadian government for its loyal posture.

But Israel’s agents here in Canada should keep their champagne corked. A court case is now in the early planning stage. A GoFundMe campaign will soon be launched to cover costs. And the initial CFIA ruling and subsequent reversal, in submission to Israel’s lobbyists, has ignited the energies of pro-Palestine activists across Canada.

It’s shaping up to be the campaign of their lives: the best opportunity in years to hold the Canadian government accountable for helping Israel violate international law. Activists are now deluging the CFIA and LCBO with emails and letters, warning authorities not to let falsely labelled settlement wines re-appear on Canadian store shelves. They’re drafting a definitive list of illegal settlement wines, and they’re also calling on authorities not to punish the low-ranking CFIA official who made the original labelling decision, on behalf of Israel and its Canadian agents now braying for blood.

All just the latest twist in a simple quest for truthful wine consumerism. Oenophile that I am, late last year, I began combing through the webpages of Canadian liquor outlets, searching for wine products produced in illegal West Bank settlements. I had visited Palestine on various occasions, traveling up and down between Jenin in the north and the south Hebron Hills, observing Israel’s distinctive approach to apartheid – more sophisticated than South Africa’s, it appeared to me; much cleverer, much more systematic. Why should Israel be allowed to claim sovereignty over the territories it illegally and oppressively occupies, on liquor store shelves down the street from me?

The author, David Kattenburg, at the Psagot Winery.

My attention turned to Ontario’s Liquor Control Board. Ontario is Canada’s most populous province, and the LCBO its largest liquor retailer. It didn’t take long to stumble across Shiloh Legend, a red Shiraz, and Psȃgot Winery chardonnay. Both were labeled “Made in Israel” at the LCBO website, presumably on LCBO store shelves as well. Internet research confirmed that the two wineries actually operated in the West Bank, something obvious from their names. Shiloh winery’s website actually shows young, knit-capped kids harvesting grapes.

In search of detailed documentation, I submitted a Freedom of Information request to the LCBO, asking for waybills and other customs materials. They soon arrived in the mail. Psȃgot Winery M Series Chardonnay KP 2014 had been shipped to Ontario by Psȃgot Winery Ltd., Psȃgot, located in the Binyamin regional settlement council, on the eastern edge of Ramallah, in the heart of the northern occupied West Bank. (I would later learn, visiting Psȃgot winery this past May, that their Chardonnay is grown in Kida, due east of Shiloh. Psȃgot Winery personnel greeted me with hospitality. I didn’t tell them what I was up to. Their white wine, chilled, hit the spot. Very tasty.)

Chardonnay poured at Psagot.

Shiloh Winery’s waybill was the most interesting. Shiloh Legend KP 2012 had been shipped to LCBO outlets by Shiloh Winery Ltd., Ma’ale Levona, Israel – a preposterous claim, as anyone with a map knows. Shiloh winery grapes aren’t grown in Israel. They’re grown entirely in fields near the illegal Jewish settlements of Eli and Shiloh, in the heart of the occupied West Bank.

Waybills and other documentary evidence in hand, now all submitted to the LCBO, I sent regular messages from the HelloLCBO web page, pressing for a decision. At the end of March, weary of waiting, I filed a formal complaint to the CFIA by registered mail.

These two wine products are labeled “Made in Israel” at the LCBO website, and on LCBO store shelves, I complained to the CFIA, when in fact they were both produced from grapes grown entirely within Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The Canadian government – indeed, the highest UN authorities – have explicitly stated over many years that the OPT do not fall within sovereign Israeli borders, and that Israeli settlements are illegal under international law, I argued, providing the CFIA with web links. Israel, expert at playing the game both ways, acknowledges that settlements lie beyond its sovereign territory, I added.

I reminded the CFIA of its own explicit regulations on this matter: “A wine may claim to be wine of a country,” they state, “if: 1) the wine is made from at least 75 percent of the juice of grapes grown in that country and it is fermented, processed, blended and finished in that country; or 2) in the case of wines blended in that country, at least 75 percent of the finished wine is fermented and processed in that country from the juice of grapes grown in that country.”

These wine products should not be labeled “Made in Judean Hills, Israel,” I concluded in my letter of complaint, but rather, more truthfully: “Made in Ma’ale Levona settlement, Occupied Palestinian Territories,” and “Made in Psȃgot settlement, Occupied Palestinian Territories.” To label them as Israeli in origin flagrantly violates CFIA regulations and compromises the trust Canadian consumers have in product origin labeling.

Patiently, I waited for the CFIA to respond. One day in May, in a Ramallah hotel room, surfing the internet, I noticed that the two settlement wines had suddenly vanished from the LCBO website! In response to my email query, LCBO staff confirmed that the two products were indeed no longer in stock, nor on store shelves. What a delight! I thought. My CFIA contact person shrugged off the good news. Consumer pressure often drives these things, he said, adding that he had no news to share regarding the status of my complaint.

Then, on July 11, the LCBO suddenly circulated its historic labeling statement to liquor outlets throughout Ontario, pulling the two flagrantly mislabeled wine products off shelves. B’nai Brith — the only outside entity aware of the LCBO move — delivered the Big Scoop a few hours later on its Facebook page, assuring its friends that the damnable directive would soon be reversed. Twenty-four hours later, the prediction was upheld. B’nai Brith Canada and the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs had had their way, assisted by Israel’s embassy in Ottawa and its highest-ranking friends at Queen’s Park (seat of the Ontario provincial government). All the right people had been button-holed. All the right strings had been pulled.

The most remarkable aspect of the CFIA’s volte-face was the honesty of its rationale. The Canadian agency responsible for food safety and the integrity of Canada’s food system had declared that Israel should have the right to market wines falsely labeled “Made in Israel” on Canadian stores shelves, because, according to Article 1.4 1b of the much-exalted Canadian-Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA), “Israel” is defined as existing wherever its customs laws operate, and Israeli customs laws operate in the occupied Palestinian territories (all thanks to the Oslo Accords, which really did sell Palestinian independence down the river.)

It was an astonishing ruling. What the Trudeau government is saying is that secretly negotiated trade deals trump domestic Canadian food labeling [and presumably safety] laws and regulations; that the quality of a product or truthfulness of its labeling are of lesser concern to the Canadian government than the sanctity of a provision in a free trade agreement with a tiny country thousands of kilometers away; that Canadian citizens have less of a right to know the contents of the food and water they eat and drink, and where they come from, than little Israel has to market its falsely labeled products in Canada, without being hassled.

In the wider realm of Canadian foreign policy, the CFIA ruling clearly endorses Israel’s extension of its domestic laws into occupied territory, essentially annexing those territories without using the word. Israel has been doing this for years. The half-million Jewish settlers living in the West Bank are subject to civil Israeli law. The territories are crisscrossed by roads and civil infrastructure, all administered by domestic Israeli entities. Israeli banks and insurance companies operate in settlements. So do Israeli wireless and cable networks. By endorsing Israel’s extraterritorial application of its customs law – waiving its own laws and public policies in favour of Israel’s – Canada offers a helping hand to a fast friend in multiple grave breach of the most canonical of international laws, the Geneva Convention. It lends its support to the only country in the world that refuses to declare its own borders, oppressing occupied subjects as it pleases.

But the CFIA ruling is faulty, says an Ontario-based attorney who’s agree to take on the case pro bono. It is true that Article 1.4.1(b) of CIFTA stipulates that, for purposes of CIFTA, the term “territory” of Israel shall mean the territory where its custom laws are applied, the attorney says. However, there is no provision in CIFTA that imposes restrictions on Canada’s or Israel’s product labelling requirements. And the purpose of CIFTA is to eliminate or reduce barriers to trade in goods, not to regulate product labelling.

To dramatize this point, the attorney continues, imagine a settlement wine has been adulterated or contaminated in some way. Section 4(1) of Canada’s Food and Drugs Act prohibits the sale of food products that are unfit for human consumption. Does CIFTA ‘trump’ section 4(1) of the Food and Drugs Act so that a settlement wine can be sold to Canadian consumers even though it’s gone bad? Of course not.

The CFIA’s wine labelling flip-flop doesn’t just misread CIFTA. It flies in the face of long-established Canadian foreign policy. “Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention,” Global Affairs Canada’s website states, and has so for years, even under the staunchly pro-Israel Harper government.

And Canada has always said it supports a “Two-State Solution,” strenuously insisting that “peace” can only be achieved through the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state, via direct negotiation between Israel and the Palestinians; that the two parties must not deviate from negotiation by engaging in “unilateral” moves.

So why is the Trudeau government now endorsing unilateral Israeli sovereignty claims on Canadian stores shelves? Canadian friends of Palestine ponder the question, but they’re not waiting for an answer. They’re preparing to oppose Trudeau in court. Israel’s self-declared right to sell falsely labeled products on Canadian store shelves should not be allowed to trump the right of Canadians to know what they’re eating and drinking; to know that the fine bottle of “Israeli” red or crispy chardonnay that they just bought was actually not produced from grapes grown in Israel, but rather, in Israeli-occupied, brutally exploited Palestine. If Israel opposes truthful labeling, citing customs arrangements, then it has something to hide. Canada shouldn’t facilitate the concealment.

Likewise, Israel’s de facto annexation of the Occupied Territories – in violation of international law – is not an activity Canada should be complicit with or endorse, debasing its own laws and policies. As a high contracting party to the Geneva Conventions, Canada is obliged to oppose war crimes of this sort. Getting it do so is worth going to court over.

The good news: Israel’s lobbyists here in Canada are amazingly powerful, but Canadian friends of the Palestinian people have law and justice on their sides. Stand by for updates.

About David Kattenburg

David Kattenburg is a Winnipeg-based radio/web broadcaster and science educator.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

25 Responses

  1. DavidHeap
    July 16, 2017, 4:36 pm

    Perhaps Mondoweiss could set up some blog hyper tags like “Canadian Politics” and “Canadian Jewish Community” for stories like this one? Just a thought… after all, just as Golan Heights is not a “sub-region” of Upper Galilee (as our wine retailers falsely claim…), the Niagara Peninsula is not a “sub-region” of Upper New York State.

    Great initiative, go for it, David Kattenburg and attorney!

  2. HarryLaw
    July 16, 2017, 5:09 pm

    Well done David, here in the UK I am experiencing the same frustrations as you. Golan Heights Winery sell wine all over the world as two examples Yarden, one of their brand names, sell a muscat white wine, and a red wine, Sauvignon Blanc, both wine labels make at least two false representations:
    1. ‘WINE OF ISRAEL’ and
    2. PRODUCED AND BOTTLED BY GOLAN HEIGHTS WINERY 183 KATZRIN 12900 ISRAEL.
    These are false facts in breach of EU legislation, they are not misleading, in my opinion misleading means there is doubt as to whether something is true or false, in this case there is no doubt about the falsity of the representations.
    The label on the “Sauvignon Blanc”’ bottle indicates that the grapes were grown and harvested entirely in the Golan Heights. Under country of origin rules, originating products are determined, (in this case, grapes) by being wholly grown, harvested and turned into wine in that territory, therefore the wine is of Syrian origin.
    The geographical territory, together with all the metrics by which country of origin is arrived at is the determinative factor, not the nationality of the exporter, if this was not the case the world trade system would collapse.
    As an added factor, both labels when viewed as a whole show at least five other indicators which tend to confirm the false facts in 1 and 2 above
    1. Golan Heights Winery with Galilee underneath, ‘Galilee’ is a region of Northern Israel.
    2. The wine is Kosher for Passover; and is authenticated for the Jewish religious holiday of Passover by a Rabbi from the Northern Israeli City of Tiberias.
    3. The web page http://www.golanwines.co.il indicates an Israeli country code [il]
    4. Barcode first three digits 729 indicates Israeli origin, although not conclusive proof of origin.
    5. Hebrew text.
    As misterioso helpfully pointed out on the Kate article. “Canada order stores to deshelve settler wines with ‘made in Israel’ label “13th july 2017. “On 17 December 1981, the UNSC unanimously passed Resolution 497, which declared Israel’s 14 December 1981 annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights “null and void.”
    Several years ago the UK Foreign Office in conjunction with the Dept of Trade warned consumers about the dangers of buying goods from occupied territory and that before doing so should seek legal advice
    Then on 11.11.2015 the European Commission put out an Interpretive Notice which said at paragraph (10)
    For products from the West Bank or the Golan Heights that originate from settlements, an indication limited to ‘product from the Golan Heights’or’product from the West Bank’ would not be acceptable. Even if they would designate the wider area or territory from which the product originates, the omission of the additional geographical information
    that the product comes from Israeli settlements would mislead the consumer as to the true origin of the product. In such cases the expression ‘Israeli settlement’ or equivalent needs to be added, in brackets, for example. Therefore, expressions such as ‘product from the Golan Heights (Israeli settlement)’or’product from the West Bank (Israeli settlement)’
    could be used. https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/20151111_interpretative_notice_indication_of_origin_en.pdf
    As you can see from my comments in the Kate article these wines are in breach of all the labelling legislation at European Union level and also still on the statute book,section 16 and 36 Trade Descriptions Act 1968.
    Prohibition of importation of certain goods
    16 Prohibition of importation of goods bearing false indication of origin.

    “Where a false trade description is applied to any goods outside the United Kingdom and the false indication, or one of the false indications, given, or likely to be taken as given, thereby is an indication of the place of manufacture, production, processing or reconditioning of the goods or any part thereof, the goods shall not be imported into the United Kingdom”.
    36 Country of origin.
    (1)For the purposes of this Act goods shall be deemed to have been manufactured or produced in the country in which they last underwent a treatment or process resulting in a substantial change.
    Court cases are being prepared on these matters.

  3. kev
    July 16, 2017, 5:51 pm

    When Israel insists on playing this game of trying to assert de facto sovereignty over the Golan or West Bank, and denies basic rights to the civilians in those territories who are brutally oppressed under military occupation, a de facto apartheid, it seems fair to say that Israel’s mislabeling of products (which leads to some confusion about origin) means that everyone should in fact choose not to purchase any products labeled “Made in Israel” so as not to support the oppression of the occupied people. Let Israel suffer even more, boycott all Israeli products, not just those from the settlements.

    • Paranam Kid
      July 17, 2017, 3:28 am

      Spot on, that is the way to force israel to not just label correctly, but to change its policies & behaviour. In other words, we need comprehensive BDS.

      • pabelmont
        July 19, 2017, 2:52 pm

        Indeed, the boycott ALL Israeli products sentiment makes a lot more sense than boycotting only mislabeled wines or (indeed) boycotting ONLY things made (in whole or in part) in OPTs.

        In politics as in physiology, the head-bone is attached to the neck-bone is attached to the shoulder-bone etc etc. It’s all of one piece. There is no significant fight within Israel to justify seeking to “punish” or “affect” only some Israelis and not others if the purpose of such “punishment” is to redirect Israeli policy.

        festus: yes, Canada and USA are also within Israeli-occupied territory. (Political occupation, not yet military — although the militarization of USA police forces makes one wonder..)

    • festus
      July 17, 2017, 10:58 am

      Hell. Israel is asserting de facto sovereignty over Canada. And the USA, Great Britain, Australia, France, Germany, and others for that matter.

  4. HarryLaw
    July 16, 2017, 6:35 pm

    Here is the information referred to in my comment above…
    Guidance from UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
    Overseas Business Risk The Occupied
    Palestinian Territories

    Inter alia…”Potential buyers and investors should be aware that a future peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians, or between Israel and Syria, could have consequences for property they purchase or economic activities they promote in these settlements. In case of disputes, it could be very difficult for Member States to ensure national protection of their interests.
    EU citizens and businesses should also be aware of the potential reputational implications of getting involved in economic and financial activities in settlements.
    EU citizens and businesses contemplating any economic or financial involvement in settlements should seek appropriate legal advice before proceeding”. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/overseas-business-risk-palestinian-territories/overseas-business-risk-the-occupied-palestinian-territories

  5. HarryLaw
    July 16, 2017, 7:06 pm

    For information..
    A first attempt to summons ‘The Wine Cellar’ London for falsely labelling wine made in Syria as Israeli wine was turned down by the District Judge Abeleson [of Jewish origin]. The Judge unbelievably asked me what made me think Katzrin was not in Israel, I replied “Its not me that asserts that fact it is the UNSC”
    Here is part of the summons

    INFORMATION
    (Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, s 1)

    Magistrates’ Court (Code )
    Date:
    Accused: Mr Avi Roth
    Address: 198 Stamford Hill, London N16 6RA. [Proprietor of ‘The Wine Cellar’]
    Alleged offence (short particulars and statute): Information Number 1
    Supplying falsely labelled wine contrary to European Union [EU] Regulation 607/2009 Article 55 1[a][i]. As Created by EU Regulation.1308/2013, formally 1234/2007. And the ‘Wine Regulations 2011’ section 14.2[b]

    I allege that Mr Avi Roth trading at the above address has failed, and continues to fail to comply with the compulsory particulars provisions of EU Regulation 607/2009 Article 55 1[a] [i], ‘Indication of the Provenance’, by retailing wine imported into the UK from a third country Syria [outside EU] with inter alia, false Country of Origin representations on the labels i.e. ‘Wine of Israel’ and Produced and Bottled by Golan Heights Winery POB 183 Katzrin I2900 Israel. In breach of the above EU Regulation. According to the United Nations Security Council Resolution number 497 [December 1981], the Golan Heights is Internationally recognised as part of sovereign Syrian territory, Israel is merely the illegal occupying power, and cannot legally claim that goods with an originating status in the Golan Heights, are produced in Israel [see initial details].
    He has ignored two warning letters dated 26th November 2014 and 10th March 2015 [sent recorded delivery]. Please find attached as evidence, two photographs of offending wine bottle labels, together with detailed prosecution case with evidence. The wine described as ‘Muscat’ was supplied to me on November 8th 2014 by Mr Roth via the internet. Both labels falsely indicate as facts, ‘Israel’ as the Country of origin, in breach of the legislation above, and contrary to ‘Country of Origin’ rules as set out in European Union [Regulation 2913/92 Articles 23,24 and 25] and UK Trade Descriptions Act 1968 [section 36].

    See attached, for initial details of prosecution case.

    The information of Harry Law address ………………………..

    Who (upon oath) states that the accused committed the offence of which particulars are given above

    More details of this case are available if required, other cases are being prepared.

    • Arby
      July 19, 2017, 10:23 am

      I forgot to get my bottle of wine from the Wine Cellar and ended up getting one from a farmer’s market (whose bottle is too long for my small fridge). So, Scratch The Wine Cellar too. Oh well.

  6. JosephA
    July 17, 2017, 1:22 am

    I commend the author of this article for his hard work. May you succeed in your lawsuit for justice!

  7. Paranam Kid
    July 17, 2017, 3:58 am

    David, your undertaking is an exemplary & courageous one, and I wish you & your lawyer every success with this.

    As a minor aside, I suggest that israelis who support israel’s policies and behaviour vis-a-vis the Palestinians are not referred to as Jews but as Zionists. Zionists have always insisted on conflating the 2, and pretended to talk on behalf of all Jews. Both issues are a fallacy: Zionism is an ultra-conservative nationalist, racist ideology, that uses Judaism, past suffering of Jews, and current real antisemitism as tools, as a means to an end. And there are plenty of Jews who do not agree with Zionism nor with israel’s policies & behaviour, and who consciously reject relocating to israel to support the Zionist cause.

    That is why it is also very important to make the point that, whenever relevant, criticism of israel has nothing to do with antisemitism but has everything to do with anti-zionism & anti-apartheid.

  8. Vera Gottlieb
    July 17, 2017, 9:33 am

    For the longest time I’ve boycotting anything that is “made in israel”. Although I am of Jewish background, I am reaching the point where I am turning anti Zionist.

    • Elizabeth Block
      July 17, 2017, 2:14 pm

      Yes.
      Boycotting only settlement products says that the settlements are problem, not the government of Israel that created them.

      And while the boycott isn’t likely to have much (if any) economic effect, its political effect is … well, consider how hard Israel is working to try to defeat it. They are using resources that used to be used against terrorism against BDS.

    • Paranam Kid
      July 18, 2017, 6:02 am

      @Vera Gottlieb
      I understand your moral journey: my wife is Jewish & she went through the same journey, utterly disgusted by what zionism is & has made out of israel. She was reinforced about her feeling when she saw this http://www.carbonated.tv/news/anti-terror-fantasy-military-camps-become-tourist-attraction-israel. Also take a look at the video that the article links to.

      I think it is important to bear in mind that zionism & Judaism are NOT the same thing, the former being a racist, totalitarian ideology that unscupulously used & still uses the latter as a tool to achieve their aims.

      Their aims:
      1. establishment of their own country – that’s done, for which they had an excellent tool & alibi: the Jews & the Holocaust
      2. wipe out Palestine – that’s done with the theft of the the territory they did not own pre- June 1967
      3. capture & annex Lebanon & Jordan – not done yet
      4. take a big piece of the Syrian cake if the Assad regime falls – may or may not get done
      5. destroy Iran – working on it through the US & its buffoon president
      6. control the whole Middle East through “divide & rule” – working on it.

      We antizionists should keep making the point that zionism has absolutely nothing to do with Judaism, it is a conflation successfully done by the zionists by needs to be exposed for what it is: a blatant lie. The jews who support israel blindly are in fact zionists, not even real jews despite their claims. And criticism of israel = criticism of zionism = NOT antisemitism.

  9. lonely rico
    July 17, 2017, 11:39 am

    From the Canadian government’s take-back on their original decision that the wines in question were mislabelled –

    In our assessment, we did not fully consider the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA).
    Further clarification of the CIFTA (Article 1.4.1b) indicates that these wines adhere to the Agreement

    http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/labelling/food-labelling-for-industry/product-of-israel-wine-labelling/eng/1499970240524/1499970592331

    Concerning Article 1.4.1b of CIFTA

    Article 1.4: Definitions of General Application
    1.4.1b … territory means … with respect to Israel the territory where its customs laws are applied.
    http://international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/israel/fta-ale/01.aspx?lang=eng

    So the wines «adhere to the Agreement», and are eligible to be traded according to the terms of CIFTA. However, this does not legitimize them being labelled as being from Israel, because they are from territory not recognized by Canada as being part of the state of Israel.

    Wines from Israel, whether mislabeled, because from illegally occupied Palestinian (or Syrian) territory, or,
    from inside the racist-religious-supremacist state of Israel,
    will not be found on my table.

    Bravo to David Kattenburg for his diligence and tenacity.

  10. Hanna Kawas
    July 18, 2017, 2:37 pm

    The title of this article is misleading as it was the Canadian government, not Ontario, that “caved in”. The Ontario Liquor Board from the beginning stated it was following the directives of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, which is an arm of the federal government. Here is another article on the same subject from the Canada Palestine Association website … “Canada Contravenes The Fourth Geneva Convention” http://www.cpavancouver.org/index.php/2017/07/17/canada-contravenes-the-fourth-geneva-convention/

  11. Arby
    July 18, 2017, 5:12 pm

    Thanks to David for this information. When I learned about LCBO’s participation in nazi Israel’s transgressions a week or so ago, I determined to quit LCBO, hoping like heck that I would not then discover that the local independent wine stores here in Toronto also carried evil wine.

    This makes me furious.

    As for the Canadian government. Don’t expect honesty. Don’t even expect them to be honorable in any way. These are people who have been hard at work trying to rehabilitate nazism for gosh sake! Chrystia Freeland may be lying about her family’s nazi background (and it’s the lying more than anything that should concern us), but given Mr Sunny Ways’s material and moral support for nazi Ukraine (having his photo taken with a group of Ukrainian politicos, including straight up neo-nazi Andriy Parubiy) and his cabinet’s love affair with mass murders like Henry Kissinger and Colin Powell (Navdeep Bains’s and Melanie Jolie’s selfies with them), Don’t expect much.

    Jeff Halper’s remarkable (but flawed; He gets the Rwandan genocide completely wrong and backwards) book “War Against The People,” I think, goes a long way toward explaining how Israel gets away with it. In this godless, dark world, Israel is the darkest sort of state and therefore, in a perverse way, the star and idol of the rest of the wild beast of corporatocracy. The wild beast of corporatocracy is devouring all, including those who feed and worship it. But the thing is, the majority don’t have the power (resources, namely money) to run from the beast. The global community, ‘including’ those who profess, or have, until recently, professed, support for abused Palestinians actually look to Israel for leadership in the people pacification program underway everywhere. It began with terrorist JFK. He targetted the ‘internal enemy’ and was, as others note, totally down with all of the corporatocracy’s anti-people systems (economic, social). The people, everywhere, are being targetted by their lawless, monstrous leadership.

    How does ‘that’ come about? Easy. You first self-modify into being a believer in inequality, deceit and violence. Then you strategically break agreements (rules, laws, written and unwritten), which places you ahead of and on top of law-abiding suckers (normal, un-self-modified people). From positions of dominance, you can then guarantee outcomes – economic and political.

    • RoHa
      July 18, 2017, 9:39 pm

      “As for the Canadian government. Don’t expect honesty. Don’t even expect them to be honorable in any way.”

      It’s a government. Why would I expect anything like that?

  12. Jon66
    July 18, 2017, 5:53 pm

    This is not about recognition of sovereignty but rather customs territory.
    “That is why the European Union imports products from occupied Western Sahara labeled “Made in Morocco” despite not regarding it as Moroccan sovereign territory, as well as allowing “Made in Palestine” and “Made in Taiwan” labels on consumer goods despite not recognizing even the existence of those countries. Indeed, bottles from occupied Nagorno-Karabakh are imported into Canada and Europe with labels describing them as “Armenian” products or even products of “Artsakh,” the Armenian name for the region that the international community regards as occupied Azerbaijani territory.”https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/07/17/canada-corrects-its-made-in-israel-policy-now-it-is-time-for-the-u-s-to-do-the-same/?utm_term=.109938611f52#comments

  13. Kay24
    July 19, 2017, 8:39 am

    Israel is devious, as their record shows. There will be many products that will be labelled this way to dupe other nations into buying these products made in illegal lands. The question is who will monitor this, and how many buyers will stick to the laws, and avoid promoting illegal products?
    Israel will never do the right thing and abide by laws, in fact they act like they are above all laws, in many aspects. Sellers of illegal products are fully capable of pretending it is all legal since in their feeble minds, any land they steal is rightfully theirs. Rotten to the core.

  14. Dutch
    July 19, 2017, 10:00 am

    Thanks for this detalied information, David. Fantastic work!

    We did a large piece in Dutch (hope I translate its title well):

    Canada deliberately exposes citizens to misleading ‘Israeli’ wine
    https://rightsforum.org/nieuws/canada-stelt-burgers-willens-en-wetens-bloot-aan-bedrog-israelische-wijn/

  15. pabelmont
    July 19, 2017, 2:57 pm

    The Canadian gov’t’s “take-back” on this issue will serve to “certify” the takers-backers as true-blue-and-white Ziobots (to their political advantage) and will cost time and money and effort to get a judicial determination.

    Congrats to our author and his lawyer. wish them both the very best.

  16. HarryLaw
    July 20, 2017, 9:02 am

    The difficulty of trying to enforce labelling legislation is the reluctance of the courts, presumably under political pressure not to upset the Israelis. Here is one example concerning AHAVA [Dead Sea Industries] a case from the Supreme Court involving several issues and labelling.
    “1. Without prejudice to other provisions in this Article, cosmetic
    products shall be made available on the market only where the
    container and packaging of cosmetic products bear the following
    information in indelible, easily legible and visible lettering:
    (a) the name or registered name and the address of the responsible
    person. Such information may be abbreviated in so far as the
    abbreviation makes it possible to identify that person and his
    address. If several addresses are indicated, the one where the
    responsible person makes readily available the product information
    file shall be highlighted. The country of origin shall be specified for
    imported cosmetic products; http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02009R1223-20170303&from=EN

    Here is part of the Supreme Court case and its unusual decisions.
    “There was no basis for saying that the
    average consumer would be misled into making a transactional decision (ie into
    buying the product) when otherwise she would not have done, simply because the
    source was described as being constitutionally or politically Israel when actually it was the OPT: the source was after all correctly labelled as the Dead Sea. The district judge found that:
    “Whether or not the information given is false…I consider that the number of people whose decision whether or not to buy a supposedly Israeli product would be influenced by knowledge of its true provenance would fall far below the number required for them to be considered as the ‘average consumer’. If a potential purchaser is someone who is willing to buy Israeli goods at all, he or she would be
    in a very small category if that decision were different because the goods came from illegally occupied territory.”
    That finding was clearly open to the district judge on the evidence and is fatal to the
    contention that the offence was committed.23.
    The Cosmetic Products (Safety)Regulations 2008 were made to transpose a different EU Directive (76/768/EEC as amended). Regulation 12(1)(a) provides that no person shall supply a cosmetic product unless the following information is displayed inindelible and legible lettering: “the name or style and the address or registered office of the
    manufacturer or the person responsible for marketing the cosmetic product who is established within the EEA. ….Where the cosmetic product is manufactured outside the EEA, the country of origin must
    also be specified.” As the district judge found, the objective of these Regulations is clearly safety of the consumer. They require the provision of information about the manufacturer, so that the consumer knows whom to pursue in the event of complaint. Within the EEA the name of the manufacturer is enough. If the manufacturer is outside the EEA, then the country must also be identified. These products were accurately labelled as coming from the Dead Sea and it is not suggested that the manufacturer was not identified. The alleged inaccuracy relates to the political status of the Dead
    Sea area from which they are identified as coming. As the district judge rightly said,
    the Regulations are not directed at disputed issues of territoriality, however
    important those may be in other contexts. It is doubtful that any offence under these
    Regulations was shown, but if it was, there can be no doubt that it was not integral
    to the activity of the shop in selling the products, but at most collateral to it”.
    See full verdict here
    https://www.supremecourt.uk/decided-cases/docs/UKSC_2012_0198_Judgment.pdf
    Notice how the Judges say the product is accurately labelled “the Dead Sea” without mentioning the false country of origin [which ‘SHALL’ be indicated in the EU Regulation.Also contrary to the final EU Interpretive notice on the origin of goods from OPT mentioned in my other comments on this issue.

    • echinococcus
      July 20, 2017, 10:27 am

      Harry Law,

      In fact, that judge’s finding makes a lot of sense in one point:

      If a potential purchaser is someone who is willing to buy Israeli goods at all, he or she would be in a very small category if that decision were different because the goods came from illegally occupied territory.

      Not much to object there: This category only comprises “liberal” Zionists, those who prefer to continue with pretend-negotiation, occupation and genocide but without alarming the West, and those sincerely intent on perpetuating the occupation by giving up the post-67 portion.

      Otherwise, who in their right mind would want to limit boycott to post-67 only, if they aren’t Zionists?

Leave a Reply