School heads are ‘enablers’ of anti-Semitism

I will eat my hat the day they allow an Anti-Islamism Week or even an Anti-Taliban Week

by Barbara Amiel

School heads are ‘enablers’ of anti-SemitismThe usual anti-Semitic incidents are listed in a letter from the Anshe Emeth synagogue in New Brunswick, N.J., to Rutgers University president William H.S. Demarest: officials failed to take action after a student mob attacked some Jewish students shouting “We don’t want you Jews here”; the campus allowed vandalism and “narrow-mindedness and bigotry” alien to its principles. The letter writers proposed remedial measures: that president Demarest publicly denounce statements “ridiculing and insulting Jews”; that he threaten expulsion to “students who interfere” with the rights of Jewish students and make serious attempts “to apprehend” the violators. President Demarest met with the synagogue committee, who professed satisfaction. And of course, nothing changed.

The letter and incidents took place at Rutgers in 1920. Israel did not exist. Hitler had not appeared. Islamofascism had not surfaced in the West. The situation, however, was pretty much identical to what goes on at universities year round these days, with highlights during last month’s Israel Apartheid Week, when anti-Semites got together on campuses to demonize Israel, the single democracy in the Middle East.

These days, anti-Semitism uses anti-Israel rhetoric as its cloak of respectability. Other masks have been used. Mabel Smith Douglass, dean, New Jersey College for Women, 1918 to 1933, appeared to go for “anti-Semitism under the guise of vocational guidance,” according to one of the many complaints against her. Dean Douglass, worried about Jewish influence in pedagogy, discouraged Jewish girls from becoming education majors, particularly those in whom “Jewishness is markedly apparent in face or name.” Goldwin Smith, former Regius professor of history at Oxford, later a governor of the University of Toronto, didn’t bother with disclaimers: he denounced Jews in an article in 1881: “All other races profess at least allegiance to humanity. The Jew alone regards his race as superior to humanity. Either the whole human race except the Jews is demoniac, or . . .”

You can pick up quite a bit reading about earlier outbreaks of campus anti-Semitism. First, it becomes clear that there is no point in protesting to the university authorities. They may have mixed feelings about such incidents but they are part of the problem. When you write a letter of protest about Israel Apartheid Week to president David Naylor at the University of Toronto you are wasting your ink. You may be unhappy with York University allowing the wall of barbed wire on campus property as a protest against Israel’s recent Gaza action, or be one of the many Jewish students whose photos were posted on it with derogatory allegations, but if you protest to York’s president Mamdouh Shoukri, you are talking to yourself.

Naylor, Shoukri, and all other campus administrations where this takes place are “enablers” of the phenomenon. They have varying explanations and varying degrees of reluctance to do anything, but the one explanation that holds no water—and the one legitimate reason—is a concern with freedom of speech. I will eat my hat the day any of them allow an Anti-Islamism Week or even an Anti-Taliban Week organized on campus by Jewish students with models of suicide terrorists and photos of Muslim students with negative attachments.

A hat needs a peg to hang on, and anti-Semitism has had a lot of pegs. A study that compared Catholic student anti-Semitism in 1965 with that of students in the same course in 1970 found that anti-Semitism was significantly lower after Pope Paul VI in 1965 exculpated “Jews of today” from blame for the crucifixion. Usury, patriotic disloyalty and evil rituals have been cited, but whatever the trigger, the tone is essentially the same. Jews are bad. The excuse that current criticism of Israel (which is the home of the Jewish people) is not anti-Semitic fails when its supporters hold Israel to standards totally different from those they apply to every other country in the world.

Boycotts and divestment are nothing new. Before the Nazis ever smeared “Juden” on Jewish stores, flyers in 1897 Heidelberg urged locals not to buy from Jews. This action had a campus element too—the flyers were the brainchild of a law student and a journalist. Universities deal in ideas, which is why a lot of bad ideas start there as well as good ones. Israel Apartheid Week is a genuine made-on-Canadian-campus (University of Toronto) product that has now spread worldwide to 44 campuses. Last year it gave birth: we now have a HAIA (Highschoolers Against Israeli Apartheid), which held its first session, closed to all adults, at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE). For five hours, courtesy of taxpayer dollars, high school students were in the hands of militant anti-Semites and no one knows what they heard.

A lot of anti-Semites are Jews who proudly proclaim their Jewish identity to give credence to their prejudice. Their primary identity, however, is not Jewish—that’s a flag of convenience—but the activist left. Those of us in our sixties have experienced two major rises of anti-Semitism: when we were young it was the fascism of the right, and now that we are old it is the fascism of the left—serious because the left, notwithstanding eight years of George W. Bush, is where the power in society resides.

Tell Jews to stop donating money to universities that harbour anti-Semitism. They would respond that their donations advance good things like health care. Follow that argument and they could donate to Hamas, which as well as training suicide bombers maintains daycare centres. Journalist Barbara Kay has come up with a list of more practical suggestions. Among them: holding universities accountable in courts of law for failing to uphold Charter rights of their students; ranking universities according to crime incitement and intolerance.

Still, none of this really matters. Pakistan has the bomb. Pakistan is being taken over by the Taliban. Campus anti-Semitism may soon seem something to be nostalgic about.




Browse

School heads are ‘enablers’ of anti-Semitism

  1. “A lot of anti-Semites are Jews who proudly proclaim their Jewish identity to give credence to their prejudice.”

    And with that we step off the deep end, folks.

    • Yeah, Barbara has cleverly expanded the definition of anti-Semitism to include everyone she disagrees with. Are you a Jew who has disagreements with Barbara? You’re anti-Semite.

      And what’s with the bizarre assertion at the end about Pakistan? Pakistan has roundly and repeatedly rejected Islamic extremism, and the supposed threat to the vitality of this state is a small band of poorly armed Pushtuns who briefly overtook a district before being driven back within 2 days by the military. Yeesh. Worry about things you’re not completely clueless about, Ms. Amiel.

  2. This comment was deleted.

  3. I believe that it is an insult to Canadian values when one tries to stifle legitimate debate. Encouraging students to think critically and find their voice is not fostering extremism. This new obsession of the neo-conservatives, however, has really gone too far.

    When people spoke out against the Bush administration, they were branded as anti-Americans. When people voice their opinions about the decisions and actions of the Israeli government, including its treatment of Palestinian residents and refugees, they called anti-semites?

    I’m calling bull s**t!

    • Israeli Apartheid Week is not about debate. It is about demonizing and vilifying Jews and Israel. Israel is not an apartheid state. All Israeli citizens have equal rights under the law and can live where they want so how can it be apartheid. A true apartheid state is Saudi Arabia. Double apartheid. Gender and religious. Women live under a separate system in Saudi Arabia and only one religion is allowed to practiced or preached in S.A. Guess which one? As Barbara says, I will eat my hat when educational institutions have a Saudi Arabia apartheid week (actually I don’t think a week would cover it). Oh my! that would be racist and Islamophobe and muslims and their collaborators on the fascist left would demonstrate and burn down buildings, now would’t they?

      • In fairness, and I do think apartheid is a loaded term to use in any circumstance, I have to take some exception to your claim that all Israeli citizens have equal rights under the law. At a minimum, there are some issues surrounding ownership of land that favour Jewish citizens over non-Jews. Also, because there is no civil marriage in Israel, it is impossible for a Jew to marry a non-Jew, although the state will recognize marriages performed elsewhere (including same-sex marriages).

      • In December 1988, Jewish women in prayer shawls and skullcaps and carrying a Torah scroll prayed and chanted at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Although they were inside the women’s enclosure at the sexually segregated site, their tongue-in-cheek male impersonation provoked not chuckles but fury from the ultra-orthodox rabbis, along with the rest of the religious establishment in the officially Jewish state.

        “A woman carrying a Torah is like a pig at the Wailing Wall,” raged Rabbi Meir Yehuda Getz, who was in charge of the site ["Ultra-Orthodox Rabbis Shoo Women From the Western Wall," Los Angeles Times, December 2, 1988]. A news report suggested that the women, who were members of an Empowerment of Women conference, had been physically ejected for thus attempting to pray at what is regarded as Judaism’s holiest shrine.

        A virtually identical scene played out at the Wailing Wall eight years later when Orthodox men physically attacked a group of Jewish women who donned prayer shawls and skullcaps and read from the Torah, on November 12, 1996. The men made such a fuss, attempting to hurl objects at the women, that police once again removed the latter from the scene, and they had to complete their worship in the parking lot Denver Post, No. 13, 1996, p. 21A].

        Rabbi Getz’s bandying of zoological comparisons to animals regarded as at the nadir of “uncleanness” to Jews and Muslims was hardly new: it is, in fact, enshrined in age-old Jewish law. Shulamit Aloni, a courageous Israeli politician who has been outspoken against the entrenched misogyny of Israel’s rabbinical establishment there, has been protesting these things for years.

    • Ah, you poor, sweet kids. So lost in “Canadian values” that you’ve forgotten how to think for yourselves.

      When exactly was this rash of poor anti-Bushers being branded anti-American? Especially during the second term, I found it difficult to find one person in Canada who had one good thing to say about Bush. Steyn maybe, but he lives in New Hampshire. But by all means, create this fictional Canada where the poor anti-Bushers are in the minority.

      Oh, I get it. That kind of straw man makes possible your equally poorly-founded defense of the anti-Israel faction that runs Canadian academia. I guess it’s not their fault – they’re not smart or ethical enough to take a step back and question why the only acceptable position in Canadian letters is to defend a vicious, violent society of guerillas and vilify a responsible, reasonable democracy guilty only of defending itself from 60+ years of unprovoked attacks.

      If you want to know what it’s like to be an oppressed minority, try advancing that argument on a Canadian campus. Start it with “To play devil’s advocate … ” and think of it as a social experiment.

  4. I know, I know . . . We inhabit a hideously amoral age, when Ms Amiel’s husband, notorious jailbird Conrad Black, may air his views in the National Post and even wax morally indignant abut this or that turn of events.
    And here we have Barbara Amiel — still under a cloud of suspicion concerning complicity in her husband’s wrongdoing — voicing similar moral indignation. This is akin to performance art by a surrealist artist — like,
    say, having Bernie Madoff writing a column in the Wall Street Journal under the telltale header Protect Your Investments! . . .

  5. Barbara, eat your hat. Chow down on the brim. Tip it bowler side up and see the circle. Get inspired to pick a new name for ‘Anti-Semitism’. The more you push this duality, this synthesized word, the more you spread hate against jews. Learn how to write, Barbara.

  6. I was about to unveil a 14 point action plan for resolving the Israeli/Palestinian problem, and bringing about peace in the Middle-East. It has been my life’s work.

    Unfortunately, among other things, it contained some criticisms of Israeli policies. After reading Ms. Amiel’s piece, I now understand that in reality, I am an anti-semite, and that this must be what motivated my work.

    Thank goodness she has shown me the error of my ways!

    P.S. If I read her correctly, I may also be Jewish. I am a bit skeptical of that one, but I’ll check with my parents.

    • lol.. i couldn’t agree with you more.

  7. Maggie’s Farmboy, I must say I was deeply impressed with your (the Marxists call it) sama-kritica. We must learn to nip anti-Semitism in the bud, even that latent portion of it that lurks deep within our psyche. Otherwise, who knows what the tragic denouement may be? On a related topic . . .DNA testing has shown that many Jews currently professing Judaism may, in fact, be, racially speaking, in no way truly genetically linked to the ancient Israelites. In fact, you may be more “Jewish” in a strict biological sense that either Bibi Netanyahu or Avi Lieberman. Weird — or what?

    • DNA testing shows that most Jews are, indeed, Semitic. But DNA testing isn’t what makes someone Jewish – that’s a racist’s card – one he usually plays while trying to deny Israel’s legitimacy.

  8. As an Israeli American Jew I am always amused and sickened by those individuals who loudly, often, and at great length bitterly complain about Israeli policies vis a vis the Arabs while maintaining that they are innocent of any taint of anti Semitism. These same individuals have very little to complain about regarding the Iranian policies of murdering homosexuals, unfaithful spouses, or young girls who dress provocatively, nor do they ever make more than a passing reference to the literally thousands of Chinese who are put to death every year by the Chinese government for crimes like embezzlement, indeed, the murder, rape, and pillage carried out by the Janjaweed in the Sudan against both Christians and Moslems somehow escapes their deep concern about human rights. Yet they can give you chapter and verse, sometimes running to dozens of pages, about every alleged, possible, or rumored Israeli human rights violation and beat their breast most convincingly that they are only concerned that the Jews have forgotten their past and are behaving like the Nazis who tortured them. Well folks, even you don’t take seriously your phony and truly unconvincing claims to simply criticizing Israel but not having anything against the Jewish People. When I see and read the same bitter, angry, and long winded criticism by you of the two bit murderous dictators like Kim Jong Il in North Korea , or Achmadinajad in Iran, or Qaddafi in Libya, or the Taliban in Pakistan, or see demonstrations on university campuses against them and calls for their isolation and disinvestment from their economies, then maybe I’ll take at least a little seriously your rather pitiful and self serving excuses about not being anti Jewish but just critical of Israel.
    But I’m not holding my breath waiting because I know, just as you do, that your irrational hatred of the Jewish People is what informs your criticism of Israel, it’s just that none of you are either courageous or honest enough to admit it.

    • Utter nonsense. There are not enough hours in the day to critique the various human rights outrages currently occuring in many parts of the “muslim world”. I’ve often “loudly, often, and at great length bitterly complain” about the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, the GIA, any number of Arab and Persian givernments, you name it. And that goes for non-muslim tyrants and terrorists as well. You forgot to mention Hindu extremists, who regularly kill Muslims and Christians and should make it on to any list of human righs abusers.

      I think of myself as an equal opportunity criticizer when it comes to violators of human rights and bloody-minded nationalist peace threateners.

      And most people I know share the same view. I haven’t met a critic of current Israeli policies who is an anti-semite (although I’m sure they exist).

      My concerns about Israel are, in part, that it is hurting itself. I know many other who share this concern.

      Tony Judt has an excellent essay on the problem, here:

      http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/711997.html

      • As is well known in Israel, the Haaretz newspaper is perhaps the most anti Israel, and generally anti Jewish newspaper in the world, all the more disgusting because it is indeed published by Israeli Jews. Tony Judt is just another assimilated and self obsessed Jew who has found his niche and I daresay his living by participating in the anti Semitic pogrom masquerading as criticism of Israel by those who claim to “care” about the Jewish State by who in reality simply can’t abide their own Jewishness.
        The irrational hatred of Jews has been a part of Western intellectual culture for centuries and while I am not wild about it, I can respect those Jew haters who at least have the intellectual if not the moral courage to admit where they stand.
        For example, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have many anti Semitic Jews among their top leadership. They too claim to be objective with their continuous and bitter condemnation of everything Israel does, says, or is rumored to be. They too produce literally volumes of unverified and unprovable accounts of alleged Israeli human violations while at the same time perhaps making an occasional passing reference to murders carried out by the Chinese government, torture, murder, rape, and maiming carried out by the Iranian government, or the starvation of the North Koreans by their own “beloved leader” KIm Jong Il.
        Your claim that you are concerned about human rights all over the world is truly pitiful, and you know full well in your heart that you are blowing smoke.
        Plenty of people hate Jews, more and more of them people like yourself, educated, well off financially, politically liberal and even Left wing, and mentally healthy, except for for their deep, abiding, and utterly irrational hatred of the Jewish People and their disappointment that Hitler failed to finish all of us off.
        I truly believe that the only hope you have now is that you and your anti Semitic pals can and will be able to help the Arab Nazis finish Israel off. Unlike the Nazis who claimed that “die Juden sind unser ungluck”, that is,the Jews are our misfortune, you, the modern Left wing anti Semites, make the case that “Israel is our misfortune.”
        But let us be honest about it, okay?

        • (Backing away carefully) Wow. Was that meant to be satire?

        • Question, Ken.

          Are there any critics of Israel who are neither anti-semites nor self-hating Jews?

          • He is not talking about criticism. He is talking about selective criticism.

          • His point is that singling out Israel, which relative to its neighbours is an oasis oh human rights, is proof of anti-semitism. And he is right.

            For those looking for more recent examples, look at Durban ||, the so-called human rights conference that Canada wisely backed out of because it is a cover for a anti-semitic hate-fest.

          • Of course there are really honest and objective Jews and non Jews who are critical of Israeli human rights and military policies, but not too many. In point of fact, most of the serious anti Semites who try to disguise their motives by claiming to be concerned with human rights, will write you a three paragraph 2500 word screed delimning alleged Israeli atrocities and war crimes and then finish up with a throwaway reference which states that they are truly concerned about human rights violations elsewhere as well.
            Just take a quick look at the annual reports of NGO’s like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Doctors without Borders, or even Oxfam and you can find literally dozens of pages of really bitter and unfounded or simply alleged accusations of Israeli human rights violations or war crimes, and then you turn to North Korea, Iran, Libya, Venezuela, China, Viet Nam, Turkey, and many others and at most you find a couple of paragraphs critical of government policies but nothing in either the detail or the scope of the huge and unfair criticism that you will find directed towards Israel.
            The people who produce these documents are anti Semites who masquerade as human rights activists. Their irrational hatred of Jews and their deep desire for the destruction of the Jewish State and the genocide of the Jews living here calls upon them to impose demands on Israel that they would never dream of demanding from any rogue dictator or regime. Indeed, they demand absolute human rights perfection and military restraint from Israel no matter what the provocation while turning a blind eye to or simply and deliberately ignoring the real and immediate human rights violations being committed by the states I mentioned above.
            Recently another bete noir has been added to the list of countries these anti Semitic so called human rights organizations have been attacking, and that of course is the United States of America. This is not just because they hate America for being Israel’s number one and perhaps only real ally, it is also because of America’s success economically and because of America’s truly moral and fundamentally decent international leadership as well as their rather silly but still serious belief that America is controlled by a Jewish cabal.
            These people are always the ones to protest loudly and at great length that they don’t hate Jews but just Israel, and as the saying goes, they will protest too much and too loudly to be credible.

          • The Israelis are our friends and cousins and fellow Westerners; our connection with the Arab world is much more distant. When the Israelis behave badly, it’s as though some other friendly, cousiny fellow Western nation were doing so — like, say, the French or the Portuguese — and we respond, accordingly, as though it were happening in our own back yard (or our own nation), i.e. with outrage. The Arab world is not like ours, so what happens there is much less real. Call it reverse bigotry if you like, but conversely there are simply higher standards for a Western democracy, which Israel would still like to be. If Israeli brutality continues indefinitely, however, it will not be long before they are no longer considered to be a Western democracy or to have any moral connection with us. Seems to me the Israelis are now in the process of making that choice, and I hope they choose to remain with us; but our affinity is not guaranteed.

          • Jack, the Israelis do more to respect human rights than any other Western nation. Defending oneself is not brutality.

          • “the Israelis do more to respect human rights than any other Western nation”

            LOL

          • What is it with this constant refrain: criticism of Isreal = anti-semitism? Is it so unreasonable to hold Israel to a higher standard than surrounding enemies? If so than it is also unreasonable to hold the view that Israelis are not subject to the failings of other men ie., hatred racism et al. You can’t have it both ways. If Israelis are held in high regard with respect to human rights, than it must follow that they are also subject to criticism. It ‘s not enough to say, ” well just look at those guys over there for a change.”

          • @ Jack Mitchell –

            *The Israelis are our friends and cousins and fellow Westerners; our connection with the Arab world is much more distant.*

            That’s pretty bizarre rationalizing, Jack Mitchell: our savage criticisms, which are often implicitly anti-Semitic (ie. `the Israeli lobby’, `the Zionist monopoly media’, etc etc), of Israel have to do with the fact that they `are most like us.’

            Arab societies? Well, they are not `like us’ (`us’ who?), thereby the human rights catastrophe that these places are – including the Gaza Strip and West Bank, are none of our business.

            I don’t think there’s a better, and unconscious, of present day racism that that.

            When the Israelis behave badly, it’s as though some other friendly, cousiny fellow Western nation were doing so — like, say, the French or the Portuguese — and we respond, accordingly, as though it were happening in our own back yard (or our own nation), i.e. with outrage. The Arab world is not like ours, so what happens there is much less real. Call it reverse bigotry if you like, but conversely there are simply higher standards for a Western democracy, which Israel would still like to be. If Israeli brutality continues indefinitely, however, it will not be long before they are no longer considered to be a Western democracy or to have any moral connection with us. Seems to me the Israelis are now in the process of making that choice, and I hope they choose to remain with us; but our affinity is not guaranteed.

          • Well, in fairness, “Wayne Whig,” I don’t think that you, whoever you are, are like “us,” i.e. civilised people, but the Israelis, taken generally, are (or were, a generation ago) a lot more civilised than the poor Palestinians sitting around in refugee camps. How could they not be? Being oppressed (by the IDF, Arab dictators, their own leadership) does nothing for one’s level of civilisation; that’s one of the reasons why being oppressed sucks. I fear, however, that craziness is taking hold (or already has taken hold) in Israel — a combination of violent nationalism, organised crime (including by people like Olmert), and truly insane religious zealotry. And as always the vast middle just goes along for the ride, which unfortunately is now heading in the direction of tyranny and ethnic cleansing. Let’s hope the civilised Israelis get the upper hand again; for one thing, we’d then hear less from apologists and relativists like yourself. God, that would be great.

          • @ Jack Mitchell -

            Of course, how can anyone who disagrees with you be `civilized’?

            As to your remarks –

            *I fear, however, that craziness is taking hold (or already has taken hold) in Israel — a combination of violent nationalism, organised crime (including by people like Olmert), and truly insane religious zealotry.*

            I guess – this is what happened in `Palestine’ long ago – but of course, these people are barbarians, what do you expect of them.

            Jack Mitchell: racism and anti-Semitism, like peas in a pod, as always.

          • How dare you call me anti-Semitic, you ignorant zealot?

  9. We’ve seen this movie before — haven’t we, Ken Besig? When, during the 1970s and 80s, the continent of Africa was being utterly debauched by such corrupt tinpot dictators as Uganda’s Idi Amin and Zaire’s Sese Mobutu, the former an overt anti-Semite, the latter a covert anti-Semite, the focus of Western liberal outrage was directed very largely at apartheid South Africa. It was during this period that Israel stood up shoulder to shoulder with her racist South African ally. Just how staunch this alliance was is reflected in a dumping-all-my-dishes memoir by the Mossad turncoat and whistle blower, Victor Ostrovsky [By Way of Deception, Stoddart: Toronto, 1990, p. 151]: “It was no secret, either, within the the Institute that we [i.e., the Israelis] helped South Africa with its nuclear program. We supplied them with most of their military equipment. We trained their special units. We worked hand in hand with them for years.” “[H]and in hand.” The phrase resounds.

    • I stand by every word I wrote and the vitriol of your reply simply confirms my analysis. Not a word about the existance of slavery in the Arab world or the fact that the Arab states and a large portion of the West stood shoulder to shoulder with White South Africa, no, just Israel. And the fact is that many South African Jews were instrumental in both opposing and finally overcoming the system of apartheid won’t even be mentioned. Of course, no intellectual anti Semite like yourself would ever admit to this, just as he wouldn’t admit that unlike the Arab world which supported White South Africa as well, Israel had very few choices as to who to engage internationally. I would suggest that you simply admit your irrational hatred of Jews, and at the very least be honest with yourself, if you lack the courage to be honest with others. Besides, some very famous, well educated, and influential people are huge anti Semites, and they are honored throughout the world by some of the most destructive rogue regimes imaginable. But don’t insult my intelligence or simple morality by this pathetic and pitiful attempt at self justification; I know what sort of twisted creatures you and your ilk are and your silly and meaningless accusations against Israel simply give me further confirmation. Be proud of your hatred of Jews, it seems to fit you well.

      • I must say, I thoroughly enjoy every word you post, my dear Ken Besig — even most particularly when
        you tax me with spewing (love that word!) “vitriol.” The messages you post rightly hint at the complexity
        of the world we — including our beloved Jewish brethren — inhabit. But . . .

        The ominous signs are there . . . the Jewish project in Israel is coming unglued, crushed beneath the weight of the merciless dynamic of an unsustainable back-and-forth of fundamental contradictions — between the very particular and the broadly universal dimension of the lessons of the Nazi Holocaust.

        Click on (for a rundown on the latest outbreak of Jewish “anti-Semitism,” which Barbara Amiel and, by extension, you yourself so vociferously deplore):

        http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-professor30-2009apr30,0,7753995.story

  10. OK, I give.

    Release Lord Black of Cross-dealing, if it will shut up Xenia.

  11. Mr. Besig, truth cannot be anti-semitic.

    • In fact, truth can be — in a provisional sense, mind you — “anti-Semitic.” That is, the mere utterance of a fact, if its publication is deemed inconvenient and annoying to the aims and purpose of the pro-Israel lobby may be decried as “anti-Semitic.” A case in point: From the late Rev. A.C. Forrest, editor of the United Church Observer, in his 1972 book The Unholy Land, speaking of all the flak he caught from the pro-Israel lobby of his day: “Later,” Forrest writes [p. 17], “I did publish one of the pictures in the United Church Observer, of a little girl recovering from napalm burns [following a vicious Israeli attack on a convoy of fleeing Palestinian civilians during the 1967 Six-Day War]. That, I 
was told, proved I was anti-Semitic. To condemn napalm in Vietnam is alright. To report its use by the Israelis is considered anti-Semitic.”

      • There is much to what you say. Hilaire Belloc, the early 20th century writer and historian, once observed that “A man is considered an anti-Semite if he calls a Jew a Jew.” That semantic net has been hugely expanded nowadays, as illustrated by your cite. We live in an Alice-in-Wonderland world where “anti-semitism” means whatever the Mad Hatter says it means.

        In fact the term is devoid of meaning, useful for scurrilous ad hominem attacks while ducking embarrassing questions. Its effect is what being called a “bourgeois” used to be in the days of the Stalinist Show Trials in the 1930s, and serves the same Marxist purpose. Back then, there was no need to enter into discussion with a bourgeois: it sufficed merely to unmask him (or her) as such, and off to the firing squad they went.

    • In fact, truth can be — in a provisional sense, mind you — “anti-Semitic.” That is, the mere utterance of a fact, if its publication is deemed inconvenient and annoying to the aims and purpose of the pro-Israel lobby, may be decried as “anti-Semitic.” A case in point: From the late Rev. A.C. Forrest, editor of the United Church Observer, in his 1972 book The Unholy Land, speaking of all the flak he caught from the pro-Israel lobby of his day: “Later,” Forrest writes [p. 17], “I did publish one of the pictures in the United Church Observer, of a little girl recovering from napalm burns [following a vicious Israeli attack on a convoy of fleeing Palestinian civilians during the 1967 Six-Day War]. That, I 
was told, proved I was anti-Semitic. To condemn napalm in Vietnam is alright. To report its use by the Israelis is considered anti-Semitic.”

    • Yes, truth can be anti-semitic.

      If you say, an Israeli killed a Palestinian violently, it is an anti-semitic statement if you are omitting the fact that it was an act of self-defense, that the Israeli was saving the lives of himself and his family.

      • Conversely, it’s a lie to say it was self-defense if it was not self-defense. And shooting elderly pedestrians can only be termed self-defense if one is willing to say that all killing is self-defense. By which logic self-defense is a meaningless term. Which it isn’t. So one shouldn’t So it isn’t.

        • Jack, he gave a specific example which you neglected to answer. If his hypothetical situation were to occur would you consider that to be anti-semitic?

          Your response seems to indicate that Israeli’s can’t claim self-defense because deliberately shooting elderly pedestrians is not self-defense. Fair enough, neither is boiling palestinian babies in acid, but I don’t think either situation was part of the specific example he was asking you about.

          • What specific example?

            Obviously saving one’s family from an individual is self-defense; and saving one’s country from suicide bombers and invading foreign armies is self-defense. But laying waste to Gaza, and pulverising Lebanon’s infrastructure, and stealing huge chunks of the West Bank, are in no way self-defense. It’s not self-defense if someone insults your wife, or flicks her with his finger, and you then proceed to kill him. Not even if you’re so paranoid that all attacks look exactly the same, though I suppose it might seem so to the paranoiac in question.

      • Speaking of an Israeli killing a Palestinian . . . Here is one example that illustrates in the most literal way how cheaply Jews hold Palestinian life under Israeli military rule. In 1993, four Israeli soldiers killed an 18-year-old Palestinian at a West Bank checkpoint. In 1996, an Israeli military court convicted the soldiers of firing on the victim’s car against regulations, but sentenced them to only one hour in jail, which was then suspended, and fined them one agora – a third of a U.S. cent.

        • There is crime in every society, for one thing, and clearly these soldiers commited a crime.

          However, making a mistake in the line of military duty will always result in lesser punishment. Especially when military service is compulsary.

          Do you actually believe that if a military officer in any other middle eastern country killed an Israeli Jew at a border crossing while in uniform, that there would be any trial at all?

          • Way to miss the point sf. Israel is a democracy, it should hold itself to higher standards. I doubt many Israelis were happy with that courts decision.

      • The Israeli is, in every case, an interloper. A robber cannot act “in self defense”. It is the Palestinians, the rightful owners of the land, who act in righteous self-defense. Israel’s settlement policy was declared a hanging offense at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal.

        • The saddest part is that you believed every false thing you wrote.
          No, excuse me, the saddest part is that others will just as brainlessly lap it up.

          • Huh?

        • “The Israeli is, in every case, an interloper. A robber cannot act in self defense”.

          I’d like to think you are kidding, but are you saying that no Israeli can act in self defense because Israel doesn’t have a right to exist?

  12. There are Anti Semitics, but just because you criticize Israel’s policies does not mean you are Anti Semitic. In fact, I would argue that questioning some of Israel’s policies are good for Israel’s security and future. For example: Do you believe in a two state solution? So far Bibi’s new government is non committal. A strong support of Israel should question this decision. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza strip will out number Israelis in the not too distant future. If Israel does not confront this problem now they will face a much more difficult problem later where the minority of Israelis are controlling the majority of Palestinians. Israel could wipe them out through genocide, or force them all to leave the territories, but that would be a terrible stain on the Jewish State. They could allow them all to vote but that would end the Jewish State. This notion of criticism of Israel as Antisemitism is not only wrong, but depending on government policies at the time, could be detrimental to Israel very existence!

  13. University’s have long been home to cracker pot ideas and demonstrations. Still if they can openly harass or physically harm others simply because they want to make a point then they are clearly promoting hatred and not merely talking points.
    Time to grow up kiddies. Overly sensitive journalists are willing to flog you in public.

  14. Say are Maclean’s being accused of anti-semitism by the Jewish Council again?

    Has anyone noted that all the examples in this article are well past their best before date? That there was one, maybe two, modern examples and neither of these had dates attached to them?

    I question this articles validity towards anything beyond spanking the monkey of Canada’s self loathing. I’m not an anti-semite, I quite respect the Jewish faith, but someone around here has really gotten Barbara to get her good ol’ Canadian hate on.

    • Maybe you could try debating the article rather than ignoring history and attacking the author.

  15. Although unmentioned in Ms Amiel’s column, surely Avigdor Lieberman, Israel’s new Foreign Minister, with his track record of making viciously racist statements against Arabs, ought to be included as a supreme “enabler” of anti-Semitism. Far more so, certainly, than any head of any university, considering the very high profile his position is giving Lieberman on the world stage. Roasting on the hot seat in Hell, such a turn of events must elicit of a smile of satisfaction from the late Rabbi Kahane’s shade.

    • What is obvious to me is that you have no idea just what exactly Avigdor Lieberman has actually said regarding Israel’s Arab community. If you would take the time to read his remarks rather than rely on the twisted characterizations of them made by his media and political enemies, you would realize that he is criticizing the actual situation in the Israeli Arab community in their increasingly antagonistic and even hostile relationship with Jewish Israel.
      Avigdor Lieberman is criticizing the increasing and increasingly vocal Arab Israeli identification with Hamas, Hizballah, and even the PLO, all of whom demand and are working for the destruction of Jewish Israel and the genocide of the Jews living here. Mr. Lieberman is also willing to publicly denounce the fact that more and more Israeli Arabs are being caught while directly involved in the planning of and the execution of terrorist attacks on Jewish Israeli targets. Mr. Lieberman is demanding that in order to continue to participate in Israeli politics and to receive the generous Israeli government financial benefits that the Israeli Arab community enjoys, that Israeli Arabs and Jews swear or at least profess their loyalty to Israel as a Jewish State. Mr. Lieberman has also suggested that if the Israeli Arab community cannot see fit to even profess loyalty to the Jewish State, then maybe the time has come to let them live in the Palestinian governed areas as Palestinians, and at least then they won’t have to put up with their alleged burdens of Israel racism and discrimination, which they so bitterly and wantonly complain about. Indeed, the Israeli Arab political leadership already refers to Israeli Arabs as Palestinians living under Zionist rule, so Mr. Lieberman is just offering them the chance to actualize what they already feel.
      Only someone who has never read or heard what Rabbi Kahane had to say would characterize him as hating Arabs or as a racist. In point of fact, Rabbi Kahane often expressed real respect for and understanding of the Arab world in spite of the fact that the Arabs were misguided and misinformed regarding Israel and the Jews, because they stuck by their guns and were willing to fight and die for their cause, even though their cause was badly misguided.
      Again, anyone who sees this as racism or as a stimulus or justifiying cause of anti Semitism is simply jerking himself around and denying the reality that he himself already hates Jews and has “discovered” or just created another reason for doing so.
      Instead of relying on some press report or some Middle East “experts” explanation of Mr. Lieberman’s remarks or beliefs, I would suggest that you go to the source, even on Mr. Lieberman’s Internet web site, to find out what he says and believes.

      • Israel’s first prime minister David Ben-Gurion described his fellow Zionist, Menachem Begin,
        as being “undeniably” of the “Hitlerian type” [cf. Eitan Haber, Menachem Begin, The Man and
        The Legend, New York: Dell Books, 1979, p. 385]. Quote: “Begin undeniably belongs to the
        Hitlerian type. He is a racist, ready to destroy all Arabs in his dream of unification of Israel…”
        Avigor Lieberman and the late Rabbi Kahane are a continuation of this legacy of brute force
        and Jewish supremacy. Begin, himself a future Israeli prime minister and Nobel Peace Prize
        laureate, had begun his political career, as you know, as a terrorist. His role in the 1948 Deir
        Yassin massacre, for example, was decried by Albert Einstein and other eminent Jews in their
        letter to the New York Times. Perhaps Hamas is another leopard that might, over time, change
        its spots. Patience.

        • @ orest (ought to be arrested for stupidity) –

          *Begin, himself a future Israeli prime minister and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, had begun his political career, as you know, as a terrorist. His role in the 1948 Deir Yassin massacre, for example, was decried by Albert Einstein and other eminent Jews in their letter to the New York Times. Perhaps Hamas is another leopard that might, over time, change its spots. Patience.*

          and this is, of course, the difference between the terrorism pursued by a marginal population of pre-Israel Jews, and that of `Palestinian’ Arabs today: whereas Begin was widely condemned by other Jews, Arab terrorism against Israel is widely praised, families are paid money for their `matyred’ sons.

          Time? I’m glad you’re very spendthrift with SOMEONE ELSE’s lives, all from the dangerous armchair you’re sitting in now.

          • On Purim, February 25, 1994, Baruch Goldstein, the Brooklyn-born doctor and Israeli Army officer, slaughtered 29 Palestinian worshippers as they knelt in prayer in a mosque in Hebron. Among his victims were children. Goldstein was subsequently disarmed and killed by Muslim survivors of
            his massacre. Several days later, Israeli troops commanded by one Ehud Barak shot dead 25 more
            Palestinians who were protesting the massacre. To add insult to injury, the Israeli government authorized the closing of some of the busiest city thoroughfares in honor of Goldstein’s funeral cortege, and the army provided a guard of honor for Goldstein’s tomb. A site immediately considered “holy” to many right-wing and religious Jews.

            Concerning the massacre Dr. Goldstein perpetrated, Moshe Belogorodsky, an Israeli municipal council member, stated: “It says in the Talmud that when a non-Jew strikes a Jew it’s as if he’s striking the Divine Presence itself [Sanhedrin 58b]. It’s a desecration of God’s name. What Baruch (Goldstein) did, at least in my book, is the opposite. It’s the sanctification of God’s name” [New York Times, March 4, 1994. p. 10].
            In 1995, a book co-written by Rabbi Yitzhak Ginsburg, Rabbi Ido Elba and other scholars, entitled Baruch Hagever (“Baruch the Blessed”), was meant to “celebrate” Goldstein and the atrocity he had committed. In his contributing essay, Rabbi Elba observed: ” …it is a *mitzvah* (divine good deed) to kill every gentile from the nation that is fighting the Jew, even women AND CHILDREN [my emphasis].”

            In 1999, the JTA reported: “A memorial plaza near the grave of Baruch Goldstein, a Jewish settler
            who killed 29 Muslims in a Hebron mosque five years ago, was dismantled as right-wing Jews protested nearby. The work was conducted in accordance with a ban on memorials to people who commit terrorist acts” [Jewish Telegraph Agency, News At A Glance, December 29, 1999 06:56 AM ET].

            To put things in a Canadian perspective for you, Wayne Whig, imagine if the Montreal Polytechnique shooter, Marc Lepine, had been turned into an object of veneration following his massacre and had a shrine erected to honour his memory and that it required special laws to be enacted after five years to tear the shrine down. How would Canadian women feel?

          • @ orested development -

            thanks for your review of recent history.

            some other facts: Goldstein was treated as a `idol’ by a very small minority of people – probably only those whom you’ve quoted (the anti-semite never tires in his/her mission, it seems, of digging up any obscure `fact’ that will buttress your point).

            ON the other hand, `Palestinian’ terrorists who blow up equally innocent Israelis actually ARE treated as idols.

            But, I guess you’re with Jack Mitchell, the racist: what can you expect of such barbarians?

  16. Same old, same old, holocaust schmolocaust! The crimes that the Nazis and their allies committed against the Jews (and others like the Roma – who suffered proportionately greater losses and of whom we hear so little) are history. Something to be learned from, not a justification for crimes being committed today.

    The fact is that many people around the world are, at the very least, deeply bothered by Israel’s mean, nasty and small-spirited attitude towards the Palestinians and the utterly disproportionate violence and brutality of their military tactics against densely populated ghettos. If the Israelis were Sikhs, Mormons or worshippers of the great American guru Rush Slimyblob, their actions would be just as disgusting.

    We have to be able to call a crime a crime without being equated to Adolf Eichmann if the person committing the crime happens to be a Jew.

    the real reason there is so much “anti-Semitism” (= criticism of Jews) around is that the likes of Amiel defines anti-semitism as being any opinion that does not accord with her own extreme right-wing Likudist one.

    In the long run, this kind of thought control will prove counter-productive and Israel will have to find some other force to propel it – for example, being decent to its neighbours and adjusting its attitudes so that it can live with them in peace on a basis of parity of esteem and fair sharing of the region’s resources.

    • Hey Chuckie if only half of the anti Semitic accusations made against Israeli policies towards the Palestinians were true, there wouldn’t be single Palestinian walking the earth and carrying the tale.
      You anti Semites are so transparent when you accuse Israel of every possible atrocity or crime under the sun and then pat yourselves on the back that it is your deep concern for human rights and the poor Palestinians which motivate your hatred.
      Well Chuckie, you don’t fool anyone with your platitudes and complaints about Israel. Actually as an Israeli Jew I would have far more respect for you and your complaints if you would just be courageous and honest enough to admit that you simply cannot abide Jews and the fact that we have a powerful, moral, and just sovereign democracy in a cesspool of brutal and hate ridden rogue Arab dictatorship, monarchies, and sheikdoms.
      Indeed, the simple fact that Saudi Arabia executes dozens of Moslem every month, in public arenas open to the public to picnic while watching the beheadings, simply dwarfs any possible alleged human rights violations or abuses you can even cook up against Israel. Indeed, my good anti Semite Chuckie, I wonder if it even catches your attention that not only does Saudi Arabia slaughter by beheading, it also mutilates by chopping off the hands of thieves. But I guess only Israel really interests you because you are so deeply concerned about human rights. Perhaps it bothers you at least a little that the Iranians actually stone homosexuals and unfathful marriage partners to death, and whip women who dare to wear modern clothing in public, or dare to drink alcoholic beverages in their own homes.
      You are a real prize Chuckie, a prize Jew hater! But don’t insult my intelligence by protesting that you are only concerned about human rights, you simply hate Jews and have found a convenient rack in Israeli policies to vent your irrational and despicable hatred.

      • Wild lobbing of stones (fever-swamp accusations of “anti-semitism”) into your neighbours’ gardens hardly constitutes rational discourse, Mr. Besig. It is simply the means to delegitimize criticism with ad hominem attacks. Can you do no better than that?

        By your own account, Israel bills itself as a superior Western-style democracy. So your notion that our expectations of Israel should be no higher than of the other despotisms in the region, or of such as North Korea or the Congo, is absurd. That tu quoque notion – aptly described elsewhere on the net as “the ultimate whine” – will not do. Israel needs to conform to a far higher standard, as is incumbent upon a self-styled “light unto all nations”.

        • Once again we hear the drum beat which holds Israel to a supposed higher standard because we are a democracy aligned with the West, but the truth is that Israel is held to an impossible standard which applies nowhere else in the world.
          The irrational anti Semites try their best to appear as if somehow they are only doing Israel a favor by singling her out for special treatment but the truth is that they know perfectly well that no state could ever achieve the level of respect for human rights that they demand of Israel, and only of Israel.
          Indeed, what they really wish for is the elimination of Israel and the Jewish People in general.
          Mr. Hill himself in true and effective anti Semitic fashion demands that the “self styled light unto the nations’ adhere to a standard of behavior so impossible that even if it could be achieved, it would result in the destruction of Israel as a country and as a Jewish State.
          Again, I would make it clear that if even half of the allegations of atrocities and human rights violations routinely levelled against Israel were true, there wouldn’t be a Palestinian alive to carry the tale.
          The simple truth is that Israel conducts it’s military and security affairs with a discipline and restraint unheard of anywhere else in the world, while our enemies carry out warfare using women, children, old people, schools, hospitals, and civilian homes as fighters and bases for attack. Somehow the Israel and Jew hating Mr. Hill’s never seem to find room to criticize these gross and ugly violations of human rights and international accords, but can only see the Israeli side and most of that side is just their hatred and prejudice being publicly laundered.
          Mr. Hill as I have said before to others, I would have at least some respect for you if you had the courage to simply state that you hate Jews and wish to see Israel destroyed. You comment seems to indicate that you loathe Jews because you feel that we are superior to you in our behavior, our morals, and our courage and you find that offensive.
          Here’s a good one for you Herr Hill, do you know that a Palestinian would rather be arrested by an Israeli security team and held in an Israeli prison than to be taken into custody by the Palestinian Preventive Security Services? You see, if he is taken by the Israelis he will get a fair and open trial with a lawyer of his choosinig, if found guilty he will serve his sentence in an Israeli jail where he will be well fed, get medical attention if he needs it, and be allowed visits with his family. If he has the misfortune to be takein in by the Palestinian Police, he will get a kangaroo court and a Palestinian Police lawyer, a jail in which he will suffer daily beatings and other tortures, he will get fed occasionally, if at all, his medical needs will go unanswered, and he might never again see his family at all because he stands an excellent chance of being beaten or tortured to death while in custody.
          Indeed Herr Hill, a Palestinian is in considerably greater danger from the Palestinian Authority than from any Israeli security service and he knows it. Not that this matters to you anti Semites because you really don’t care at all about the Palestinians, or the Iranians, or the Saudis, or the North Koreans, or the Libyans, no Herr Hill, all you anti Semites care about is unfairly hammering Israel in the hope that you can help in your own way to bring about Israel’s demise.

          • The standard of behaviour Israel is expected to adhere to, is a standard that’s already been set long ago by civilized nations so it is hardly impossible. Your feigned indignation and fairy tales do not cut it here, Mr. Besig. For starters, you need to give up dropping phosphorus bombs and shooting DU ammo at defenseless women and children, running a giant mirror-image of the Warsaw Ghetto in Gaza on a perpetual basis, and abandon those relics of a bygone colonial era, your extremist uebermensch racist-supremacist policies.

            But you have no interest in addressing these matters, do you? No, you prefer the role of Johnny One-Note, kvetching to high heaven for distraction’s sake about anti-semitism (whatever that means) here, there and everywhere, and telling tall tales about how wonderful life is in occupied Palestine for the prisoners and destituted owners of the land, the Palestinians. Have you ever checked out what the Palestinians have to say, when they speak for themselves?

      • Well, Mr. Besig is very much par for the course. Rule number one: Israel can never, ever do wrong in any way. With reasonable criticism of Israel forbidden for even those on whom it ultimately depends for survival, what course of action remains open to those who suffer under Israeli occupation? Just buy into the fable that God’s chosen people have a right to all that land and they should just do the reasonable thing and die off?

        We are supposed to accept, without question, that it is perfectly just for some person born in a shtetl somewhere in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan or the butt end of Russia, a person who may never even have heard of the Mediterranean, but who happens to profess a particular religion, to be able to emigrate to the land of Palestinian, receive generous benefits out of money paid by the USA and various western European countries, move onto land from which people whose ancestors have lived there for well into a second millennium have been ethnically cleansed, grow vegetables with water pumped from the vast aquifer under the West Bank (of which Palestinian farmers get little or none), and then talk about “making the desert bloom…”

        Give me a break!

        I do not tar all Jews with the brush of criminal acts of opportunists settlers like those, nor indeed with the obnoxiousness and greed of Lady Blackula, but if opposing things like that makes me an anti-Semite, then so be it.

        Crime is crime and grabbing Lebensraum is a crime – whether it is the Nazis or the Zionists who do it. Collective punishments are a crime, whether (etc.), imprisoning people in ghettos is a crime whether (etc.)

        It is, naturally, no surprise the Amielticket has to use deliberately emotive and inaccurate words like “Islamofascist”. She would be among the first if those who see some of the parallels between the Nazi and Zionist “philosophies” and actions were to use the word “Zionazi”, which belongs in the same category as Islamofascist.

        I think it’s time she gave the “poor Jews” whineologues a rest for a while. We’re sick of reading about crooks like Madoff who stole billions and ruined many lives, but all that bothers Amielticket is the fear that his crookedness might harm Jews’ reputations and it would have been fine and dandy of he had been a WASP.

        Why doesn’t she do some soul-searching about her role in her convict husband’s downfall and outline her feelings, possibly of guilt? That might be worth reading rather than the same old, same old Jew-when-it-suits-her dreck.

  17. This morning CBC Radio’s Sunday Edition, hosted by the generally Israel-friendly, Michael Enright, aired the controversial 10-minute play entitled Seven Jewish Children by Caryl Churchill. Prediction: In her next column, Barbara Amiel will be castigating the CBC for doing the the BBC dared not do — namely, airing the play for all to hear its content and decide its artistic merit. Naturally, she will be charging the CBC with the -wait for it – promotion of anti-Semitism for its temerity.

    • The CBC has yet to produce even one, just one documentary or in depth review of the anything which might offend Arabs or Moslems. Recently in Saudi Arabia a noted Moslem religious teacher appeared on state run Saudi TV with a program which this imam explained in detail how a Moslem husband should beat his wife, what he should strike he with, where on here body it was best to hit her, and for what offences she may be beaten. I would like to hear that the CBC had the wherewithal to even mention this Saudi TV show but I won’t hold my breath waiting for it.
      The CBC has a long tradition of digging up every bit of dirt it can on Israel, and when it can’t find any, it reviews anti Israel shows or plays or other so called works of art to serve it’s purpose.
      The day I hear or see that the CBC has broadcast a program critical of Iranian religious justice, or Chinese mass execution policy for economic crimes, or even the subject of Moslem honor killings, you know where Moslem male family members are called upon to murder their female family members for sexual misconduct, you know where sons murder their mothers or sisters or female cousins, or father murder their wives or daughters or granddaughters, you get the picture, then maybe I will be able to believe that the CBC is acting in good faith and fairness, but until then, and I am absolutely sure it will never happen, I will stand by my belief that the CBC operates from a standpoint of anti Semitic hatred and nothing else.

      • In these past 30 years, Israel and/or Israelis have sold Guatemalan colonels the arms used to commit genocide against Guatemala’s Mayan Indians, carried out joint nuclear weapons tests with South Africa’s apartheid regime, provided new U.S. military technology to China’s Maoist dictators, helped Col. Mengistu’s Marxist thugs running 
Ethiopia exterminate their opposition, trained death squads for
Columbian drug dealers, arranged shipment networks within Noriega’s Panama 
to bring cocaine from Latin America into North America, committed wholesale atrocities against Lebanese civilians in Lebanon using cluster bombs
        and wholesale atrocities against Palestinian civlians using napalm and phosphorus bombs — and on and on. The CBC has barely scratched the surface of the entire scope of predation committed by the Jewish state.

        • The real problem with anti Semites, especially the educated and usually Left wing ones, is that their hatred blinds them to their own reality. For them. like Slepokura, a Jew can do nothing good, and anyone who hates and kills Jews can do nothing bad.
          Even when one points out to the intellectual anti Semite that his criticism of Jews is inconsistent, tendentious, one sided, and irrational, they simply come up with even more grotesque and incredible accusations against us. It is almost as if they simply can’t turn off the irrational hatred for even a moment, and step back and see how ridiculous they themselves appear.
          An anti Semite doesn’t really care what a Jew or an Israeli Jew does, since to them, again like Slepokura, everything connected with us is tainted with an indelible evil.
          For example, all these crocodile tears about alleged Israeli involvement in Guatamala aren’t being shed over the plight of any Guatamalan, it is all about another exagerrated and only partly true accusation against the Jews. I can gurantee you that Slepokura doesn’t give two hoots about the Guatamalans, all this individual cares about is smearing the Jewish People and calling it criticism of Israel.

          • In the algebra of Holocaust remembrance it is axiomatic that to witness an historical evil occurring and yet choose to remain unmoved and silent concerning it is tantamount to a tacit consent for and of a vicarious complicity in that very evil. Thus, the 94% of Israeli Jews who approved of the massive 22-day assault on the Gaza Strip, some even engaging in “war tourism” watching the attack comfortably ensconced in lawn chairs on hilltops overlooking the Strip as a form of recreation, are morally bound by the evil they approved. On a moral plane, this is akin to the more literal forms of Holocaust denial. That some Jews are very deeply cynical concerning the humanitarian concern expressed by others comes as no surprise. Cynicism begets cynicism. Bernard Madoff did not act alone – he had a host of fellow travelers who of course knew very well what he was up to.

        • I agree, Orest, and as we speak Israeli-supplied Kfir jets are bombing the thousands of refugees huddled in the last bits of Sri Lanka that the Sinhala majority still have to take before they can practise their “final solution” to the Tamil question. But, as Mr. Besig is no doubt utterly convinced, the only lives that matter and the only welfare that matters is that of Jews. In fact, Besig is the very mirror image of the most rabid and evil Jew-haters. Indeed, he is a “Jew hater”; He is a Jew and he sure hates. Decent Jews most certainly reject his kind as a potential poison that risks infecting them all, and the dead of Auschwitz and Treblinka must be, figuratively speaking, turning in their graves.

          • Sassielassie, yours are excellent points. As for Mr. Besig, we see in him a classic example of a type of envoy from the outer fringes of weirdness that confront the world today. Steeped in a deadly mix of ethnic racism and sky’s-the-limit paranoia, it leads to behaviour reminiscent of clinical psychopathy. Not for such folks, rational discourse, convinced as they are the Gentile world hates them and they are only too pleased to reciprocate in spades. It’s a deeply disturbed view of the world, resulting from a terrible disease of the mind.

        • Yeah, yeah, Darth, from your perspective it is the jewish state that is evil. Pretty clear from all of your posts.

          You still haven’t addressed Ken’s main point which is that there are a lot of states, religions, terrorist groups that do “bad things”, and yet the CBC seems to spend a disproportionate amount of time on Israeli “predations” (your word not mine).

          I’m not sure that I’m qualified to agree or disagree, but I’m kind of tired of you either not understanding his point, or deliberately ignoring it.

          Or perhaps you really think that Israel commits more, um, “predation” than all of the other states/terrorist/religious groups combined? Or perhaps Israel is actually sponsoring all of the other predators? It’s hard to tell from your answer, but you seem to be implying that the CBC could spend all of its time exposing Israeli predation and it would be justifiable and not anti-semitic at all?

          If you were actually interested in, or capable of the rational discourse you and Sam Hill seem so fond of, you would start by addressing his point rather than dismissing him as a psychotic delusional (or did you accuse hime of suffering from clinical psychopathy, is there a difference?).

          His question seemed pretty reasonable to me, and was surprisingly germane to the original opinion piece.

          If I was actually interested in debating him, I would probably try to find some examples of exactly the kind of balance he claims is missing from the CBC. Or you could do it your way, but to the casual observer clinical psychopathy seems to be a communicable disease spread through the message board on the Macleans website.

  18. As long as certain states decide that they wish to be secular or elect secular politicians; then it’s impossible to critique their governments without these people crying that we are spreading hate against them. Not agreeing with Israel’s foreign/domestic policy shouldn’t be pegged automatically as being anti-semetic. We all critique our governments here in Canada yet it doesn’t mean we’re trying to incite hatred; it’s just a national past time.

  19. @ Wayne Whig, you write, and this is, of course, the difference between the terrorism pursued by a marginal population of pre-Israel Jews, and that of `Palestinian’ Arabs today: whereas Begin was widely condemned by other Jews, Arab terrorism against Israel is widely praised, families are paid money for their `matyred’ sons.

    “Marginal”, you say? What on earth are you smoking? Terrorism is the essence of Zionism. The latter could not exist without the former. From the inception of the Zionist State to the present day, terrorism was built into the standard operating procedures of Israel’s military institutions.

    The Israeli military historian Aryeh Yitzakhi declared, “The time has come to face the ocean of lies in which we were brought up. In almost every conquered village in the War of Independence, acts were committed, which are defined as war crimes, such as indiscriminate killings, massacres and rapes…”
    (Cited in Erlich, Guy, Not Only Deir Yassin, Ha’ir, 6 May 1992).

    Israeli military historian Prof. Uri Milstein added, “If Yitzakhi claims that almost in every village there were murders, then I maintain that even before the establishment of the State, each battle ended with a massacre. In all Israel’s wars massacres were committed but I have no doubt that the War of Independence was the dirtiest of them all”. (Ibid.)

    http://www.mediamonitors.net/mosaddeq22.html#_edn1

    The recent massacre of Gaza was nothing but more of the same; except that this time the entire world actually saw the terror in virtually real time.

  20. “orested development!?!” Wow!…

    Wayne Whig, you really know how to hurt a guy.

  21. All this soul searching and blame gaming. What we want is an end to the atrocities against the Palestinians and Jews in Israel alike. First of all there can be no defense to sending brainwashed suicide bombers into markets, buses and trains stations or launching hundreds of explosive missles on the rooftops of families. The world nations, all of us must put our foot down and simply say “No!” Instead we applaud these efforts by picketing against Jews. Yes, by any rationale those that finance, criticize those who dare to defend themselves by building barrier walls, bulldozing facilities used to launch terrorist attacks, bomb or burn militants as a last resort are guilty by association. The Palestinians ask for pity and support from the world showing their so called refugee camps. These camps are modern cities with running water, electricity, satellite TV, modern campuses and hospitals. By not simply putting our foot down we are allowing the bullies among them to take control, to kill and arrest any who simply want to get ahead in life, support their family and build a future. The Gaze strip which was an exporter of food before being turned over by Israel to the Palestinians is now 50% supplied by foreign food banks. The Palestinians have launched into a self destructive spiral they may never recover from even in the best circumstances. In the final case the world nations cannot afford to support a country who’s people have elected a government dedicated to wiping a people from the face of the earth. Even if they succeed in killing every Jewish man, woman and child in the Middle East they would only turn on themselves, other Muslim sects and Christians. The fact is for the Muslims and the Christians alike, the Jews are our elder brothers in the faith. WE are the people of the Book. If we can’t live together in harmony then no one in the world can.

  22. Barbara Amiel’s column (Maclean’s April 30th) uses strong rhetoric in objecting to student-organized protests against Israeli policies.

    I can only speak about events at the University of Toronto since 2005. In that period, we have been criticized for allowing students to organize ‘Israel Apartheid Week’ on our campuses. On the other side, we’ve also been condemned for publicly rejecting the proposed boycott of Israel academics by the British Union of Colleges and Universities, for making a formal university visit to Israel, for publishing in support of Israel’ pro-innovation policies, and for being insufficiently cooperative with pro-Palestinian protest groups.

    Why do we even allow these protests? Because universities – like newsmagazines and their websites — have a unique responsibility to provide a safe venue for controversial discourse.

    That’s why we also spend countless hours encouraging student organizers to engage civilly and respectfully with those who hold divergent views. We caution students that free speech cannot cross the legal line into hate-mongering, and monitor all these events. This year, encouragingly, organizers opened sessions with warnings that anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and other racist commentary would not be tolerated.

    Ms Amiel accepts that “the one legitimate reason” to allow these student-organized events “is a concern with freedom of speech”. But Amiel adds that she “will eat my hat the day any of them allow an Anti-Islamism Week…organized on campus by Jewish students”. Well, three years ago, a Zionist student group at U of T organized just such a series of sessions. We don’t like the polarizing advocacy and dubious generalizations that prevail at any of these events, but free speech is indeed what it’s about.

    A hat from Amiel’s alma mater is in the mail. Bon appetit, Barbara.

    David Naylor
    President

    David Naylor
    President
    The University of Toronto
    Suite 206 Simcoe Hall
    27 King’s College Circle
    Toronto ON
    Canada
    M5S 1A1

    • Hats off to Dr. Naylor the President of U of T. But, but: in a very mitigated and low-key fashion, I hasten to add. For in the summer of 2008 Dr. Naylor, together with eight other Ontario and Quebec university presidents, visited Israel to forge ties with Israeli academic institutions. In so doing, they highlighted their complicity in maintaining the on-going and illegal occupation of Palestinian land, the denial of the Palestinian Right of Return, and the second-class status of Palestinian citizens of Israel.

      http://www.caiaweb.org/node/856

      In so doing they also helped materialize the Gaza massacre of winter 2008-2009, a major international war crime, one of many committed by the rogue state of Israel with which they made lovey-dovey.

      In graphic terms, this is what you helped to happen, sir:

      http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/GazaHolo/index.html

      Shame on you, Dr. Naylor!

    • Well said, Sir! Your gesture is a complete waste of time, however, as Amielticket’s grasp of anything approaching reality is tenuous at best. Her belief that her husband is the victim of a vast conspiracy rather than a crook who made the serious mistake of stealing from the rich in the USA and getting caught at it is as strong as her belief that Israel can do no wrong and that all who even criticize it are just a regurgitation of Dr. Goebbels. Significant that she has a portrait of that “gentleman” on the wall of her mansion in Toronto. She ought to re-read Orwell’s book 1984 and, perhaps, it would dawn on her that the pigs have indeed become the new farmers.

      P.S. I hope the hat you sent was was sufficiently expensive and ostentatious – to match her 1,500 pairs of Manolo Blahnik shoes.

      • What exactly does Conrad Black’s situation have to do with her column about anti-semitism on campus? Other than the ad-hominem attack followed by the absurd assertion that she believes Israel can do no wrong, was your point that “Israelis are the new nazis”?

  23. David,

    Your response is pathetic and sadly misses the most relevant part of Barbara Amie’s challenge to you. While I didn’t attend, I did read the agenda for the 2006 event to which you refer and I seriously doubt this event featured _models of suicide terrorists and photos of Muslim students with negative attachments._”

    I also seriously doubt that the police were called in to protect Muslim students or that they were subjected racial slurs and threats.

    Please correct me if I have misunderstood the nature of this event, until then I have some suggestions for what you can do with your hat.

  24. Barbara Kay – cited in Barbara Amiel’s column – just published a reasonably impressive op-ed in today’s National Post, one critical of the stance Maclean’s has taken in a recent issue reporting on mainstream Canadian attitudes toward different minority groups.

    Go to:

    http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=0a2d921d-33b6-485e-8d16-62dc73daa200

    This will illustrate what a confused and befuddled Tower of Babel our fair dominion – to blend in one two Biblical analogies – is very fast becoming. As Canadians, we are definitely not well-served either by our opinion-makers or our decision-makers. “Peace, order, and good government,” eh? Fast fading to black.

  25. So, if I agree with the separation of church and state does that make me anti-semitic?

  26. Barbara Amiel should read an article that appeared in “First Things” a few years ago by a rabbi, whose name unfortunately eludes me. But the article was entitled “Anti-Semitism Without the Anti-Semites”. It was a brilliant elucidation of the ongoing outcry about Jewish victimization as a relatively insignificant issue in this era. Yet the Jewish watchdog agencies and journalists like Amiel continue to focus on any outbreak of such insanity as an epidemic. It is not. Jews are safer in whatever milieu they find themselves as they have never before been.
    Of course those who hate will project their ugliness on an identifiable group like Jews; but it is not nearly as serious as the genocide occuring in Darfur and many other regions.
    Israel has much to answer for in its treatment of the Paistinians as do the Palistinians in their bloody response. All Western democracies have much to be ashamed of , in fact.
    So give it a rest Ms. Amiel. Humanity suffers and humanity inflicts suffering. It will only end if we cease to think of ourselves as Jew, Gentile, Black, White etc. and realize individually that we human beings are one species whose greatest enemy is ourselves.

  27. Yes indeedy Jews can be anti-Semites. Usually though not observant Jews, but followers of the Left’s Triune Deity of M*rx, Fr**d and F*n*n…or one can substitue L*n*n for Fr**d. My point is that no one should be surprised to find the Left overtly showing its traditional anti-Semitism on the streets or in the sacred groves of Academe, or the various media. The Left’s theology in the early ’70′s adopted Farnz F*n*n’s race-based anti-colonialist view point and has developed a far more contemporary and successful Sparticist cadre from that than from the clunky Victorian class oriented paradigm.
    The question is will there be a spontaneous awakening and revolt of those in thrall to to this new Left Fascism? As Steve Martin has famously said, “Naaaaaah!”

  28. What a load of biased bull-crap. I think the author should remind herself that Israel and Judaism are 2 separate things, such that the criticism of former’s army does not imply prejudice of the latter.