 |
|||
Dr. Lawrence Hart |
Frank Dimant |
Prof. Stephen Scheinberg |
Dr. Karen Mock |
|
|||
Dr. Lawrence Hart |
Frank Dimant |
Prof. Stephen Scheinberg |
Dr. Karen Mock |
[ Previous Section ] [ Table of Contents ] [ Next Section ]
While the number of antisemitic incidents fluctuated only slightly across Canada for most of the year 2000, the crisis in the Middle East resulted in a wave of antisemitic incidents that reverberated throughout visible Jewish communities in Canada. In October and November, immediately following the onset of the recent intifada, the reported antisemitic incidents more than doubled from the previous year for those same two months, from 40 in 1999 to 96 in 2000.
Also markedly different was the severity of the incidents. There were no assaults in October and November of 1999, but 7 assaults during this period in 2000. The incidents of vandalism (including firebombings of synagogues and Jewish institutions targeted for graffiti) increased by over 200%, from 12 incidents to 40. There were 5 bomb threats to Jewish or Israel-related organizations and 4 death threats to lay leaders and staff people of Jewish community groups. Even incidents of harassment, such as being yelled at and taunted in front of a synagogue or being followed home from evening prayers, took on a more sinister tone in light of the increased violence both here and abroad. Canada was not singularly affected by this targeting of Jews. All across Europe, synagogues were vandalized or completely destroyed, and Jews were the victims of violence and harassment worldwide.
The line blurred time and again between anti-Israel rhetoric and antisemitism. Canadian groups which support charitable or educational organizations in Israel, (for example the Association for Soldiers of Israel) received threatening phone messages with antisemitic diatribes. Synagogues across the country were targeted for political anti-Israel propaganda. Although several specific assaults were purported to be committed by Arab-Canadians it is suspected that most of the incidents reported during this period were acts of opportunistic hate groups or individual antisemites, who used the Middle East tension as an excuse or catalyst for their expressions of hatred, rather than as a reflection of pro-Palestinian sentiments.
Although not documented as antisemitic incidents, many people called B’nai Brith to complain about media bias in covering the Middle East crisis. Calls were received, for example, when photos of Palestinian terrorist attacks against Israelis were placed with stories of Palestinian casualties, with the accounts of the terrorist attacks against Israel, if reported at all, relegated to the bottom of the story. Several journalists repeatedly cited Ariel Sharon as causing the new wave of violence when even the Palestinians have admitted this was not the case. An editorial cartoon with a barbed wire Star of David incensed the Jewish community. It is certainly possible that perceived anti-Israel bias by some media outlets gave members of the public tacit approval for their antisemitic leanings. With the public's being swayed by coverage perceived to minimize and dehumanize Israeli suffering and giving little historical context to the conflict, there appeared to be a freedom and openness to antisemitic and anti-Israel invectives and stereotypes that would have remained more hidden in previous years. Indeed, when certain media outlets, such as CNN, make a biased political statement by re-labelling maps of Israel to eradicate the existence of this state and rename it Palestine, some members of even the Canadian public are swayed into believing the ultra-extreme view that Israel should not exist at all.
The crisis in the Middle East affected most Jewish people in Canada in two ways. Most were concerned about the effect of violence on a region that they so desperately want to exist in peace. But the reality of some Canadians turning against other Canadians because of events overseas reminded Jews how close to the surface antisemitism is, and forced the Jewish community to contend once again with an atmosphere of hatred, and anti-Israel and antisemitic attitudes fuelled by media bias and opportunistic hate mongers.
Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and far right extremist groups received much attention this year, especially in Europe and the United States. Jorg Haider and his Freedom Party awakened fears in Austria by their anti-immigration xenophobia. In the past, Haider had made numerous statements utilizing Holocaust terminology and legitimizing Nazi policy and activities. His trip to Canada caused much concern and prompted a number of demonstrations. Worldwide condemnation and sanctions resulted in Haider's withdrawing as the leader of the Party. It is believed, however, that he still remains a strong force behind the scenes.
Hundreds of neo-Nazis marched through Berlin in January, protesting a national monument honouring Jews murdered in the Holocaust. Witnesses said 600 young neo-Nazis chanted and sang SS songs. This marked the first time such a gathering had taken place since World War II. Later in the year, neo-Nazis organized a mass postering and leafleting campaign to attempt to draw attention to the anniversary of the death of Rudolf Hess, Adolf Hitler’s deputy. Security officials warn that neo-Nazis are building up arsenals of weapons such as pipe bombs and machine-guns. Nazi violence has resulted in at least 9 deaths in Germany this year. The German government is clamping down on these groups, outlawing skinhead organizations and supporting maximum sentences for neo-Nazi offenders.
One of the United States’ most dangerous hate groups, the Aryan Nations, faced the U.S. court system in August 2000. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) filed a civil suit against the Aryan Nations after a mother and son were assaulted by Aryan Nations’ guards. The perpetrators were sentenced to jail, but the SPLC charged Richard Butler, the group’'s leader, with recklessness and negligence in supervising the "security" at his camp (a genial term for the barbed wire surrounded fortress with occasional swastika and cross burnings). Butler lost the case and had a $9.5 million verdict slapped against him. The SPLC’s attempt to partially bankrupt the Aryan Nations has succeeded, and their compound in Idaho is up for sale. Following the model of the Metzger case, this strategy has a tremendous potential to render hate groups truly impotent.
Terrorist group activity in Canada has long been a cause for concern, but more so recently. Although the vast majority of Canadian Muslims are against violence and terrorism, Islamic extremist groups linked to terrorist and anti-Israel activity have been tracked and are alleged to be using Canada as a base or as a way station to enter the United States or other countries. According to the National Post Online (May 4, 2000), the head of CSIS, Ward Elcock, stated that he considers Islamic terrorists Canada’s #1 security threat, and that Canada is facing a crisis of transnational Islamic terrorism. CSIS has reported that many of these groups blend into local immigrant communities where they fundraise and spread bias and friction, often in mosques and other religious institutions. Canadian citizens in immigrant communities have reported that they have been intimidated and manipulated to support these groups.
In late 1999 and early 2000 there was a massive manhunt for Algerian terrorists in Canada, after Ahmed Ressam, purported to be an agent of Al-Qaeda, an anti-American terrorist group led by Osama bin Laden, was discovered transporting bomb making materials to the United States via British Columbia, as reported in the National Post. CSIS indicates that it is monitoring 50 organizations and 350 individuals. CSIS also reports that Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Qaeda and Sunni Islamic extremist groups are active in Canada. Some of these names are familiar both from terrorist activity in Israel, and from threats made to Jewish organizations during the recent Middle East tension. It is most likely, however, that rather than actually representing these groups, unaffiliated individuals are using the names of these well-known terrorist groups to strike fear in those whom they target.
Although the League monitors hate on the Internet, not all antisemitic occurrences are documented, as this would be impossible. The Audit does, however, include specifically targeted e-mails and threats. For example, a webpage complaining that Jews rule the world is not counted, while e-mail sent to a specific person making the same complaint would be counted as an incident. When the same e-mail is sent to multiple parties, this is counted as only one incident.
There were 21 documented incidents of targeted Internet hate in Canada in 2000, not counting the many websites that proliferate hate. One message warned that they “want to kill Jews…Long live the Klan” and another spewed “f**k you, you cold hearted bastards.” Hate on the Internet continues to be a problem. There has been a significant increase in hate sites promoting antisemitism or white supremacy in the last few years although the rate by which they are increasing has slowed down. In addition, the effectiveness of the sites in swaying masses of people to the white supremacy cause appears to be limited. Perhaps David Goldman, originator and webmaster of HateWatch sums up the current situation best in his letter indicating why he was closing down his pre-eminent hate monitoring site:
“In 1995, when HateWatch first began examining the issue of online hate, popular thought suggested that the Internet would provide an enormous boost to hate groups seeking to recruit new followers. From the beginning, these organization’s self-proclaimed desire to create a digital "white revolution" was carefully monitored and documented by civil rights organizations, HateWatch among them. The standard and often repeated quote was that the ‘Internet is the greatest thing to happen to hate.’ Much to our joy, it has in fact been one of the worst.
As essayist Logan Pearsall Smith wisely observed in a statement that has served as HateWatch’s motto since its inception, ‘How it infuriates a bigot, when he is forced to drag out his dark convictions.’ We quickly learned that while hate groups, who once thrived and created fear in the shadows, wither and hid from the public scrutiny of the Internet. What these groups didn't count on was that forcing their way into people’s homes via the Web would have the effect of mobilizing ordinary people to join in the fight against them. Far from persuading a supposed "silent white majority" of angry Aryans to join their ranks, these self proclaimed white warriors, made moms and dads into determined anti-hate activists.
Now, in 2001, the news is much more encouraging than any of us expected. Hate groups have done an extremely poor job of using the Internet to increase their membership. They have utterly failed to gain widespread acceptance for their belief that bigotry, hate and violence are viable responses to human diversity. This is not to say that we no longer have cause for concern. The advent of the "lone wolf" gunman whose hatred may be fed by hate group propaganda, bigoted organizations who use e-commerce to support their hateful enterprises, and the newly emerging racist cyberterrorist, all will continue to present great challenges to law enforcement and online civil rights. And with this, the struggle continues.”
Increasingly, the complaints received at B’nai Brith Canada this year regarding hate on the Internet, reported websites and authors with which we were already familiar.
Some of the most recent progress in dealing with Hate on the Internet seems to be in the legislative arena. By virtue of the borderless nature of the Internet, international legal decisions directly affect the flow of hatred that Canadians receive on their computers. One groundbreaking decision in 2000 involved the famous search engine "Yahoo". It had contravened France’s laws by advertising Nazi paraphernalia for sale. In France, it is illegal to display or sell racist material. A court case dealt with the question of whether or not one country has the right to reach across its borders and impose its laws on Web sites based in other nations. The French court replied to this question in the affirmative and ordered Yahoo (located in the United States) to block the transmissions of this site to France. The French ruling also highlights the difficulties of developing an international legal code for cyberspace, given nations’ differing policy imperatives. The European Union is drafting such a code, which is consistent with one of the recommendations of B’nai Brith Canada’s Second International Symposium on Hate on the Internet, held in 1999.
Another important Internet decision in 2000 involved Dr. Frederick Toben of Australia’s Adelaide Institute. The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission in Australia ruled that the Holocaust denial material on his website was not of an historical, intellectual or scientific standard that was persuasive on these issues. The Commission concluded that the main purpose of the publication of the material was the humiliation and denigration of Jewish people. Toben was ordered to remove this material from the website and publish an apology instead.
Another effective way to counter hate on the Internet is through education. Sites such as www.nizkor.org directly attack the claims of Holocaust deniers who have been able to spread their propaganda so easily on the Internet. By supplying detailed evidence and documentation, Ken McVay, the originator and webmaster of Nizkor, is on the front line in the war against hate on the Internet. His vast online resources include reports on Holocaust deniers, transcripts from the Nuremberg Trials, Holocaust historical information and much more.
While the Internet does allow the dispensing of hate to regions that otherwise may not have direct contact with hate groups, it also remains a valuable way for community activists, police and government agencies to track hate group activity. Recruitment notices crop up on virtual bulletin boards. Event invitations to rallies and meetings are posted on websites. Threats and challenges between hate groups and anti-racism activists can be monitored. It is now very difficult for a hate group to do or plan anything without alerting those who wish to counter them.
A significant trial came to closure in 2000 when David Irving lost his libel lawsuit against Holocaust scholar Deborah Lipstadt and her publisher, Penguin Books. During this case, Irving disparaged Holocaust survivors by saying that they tattooed numbers on their own arms, that they were making money from the Holocaust and that they were fantasizing their memories. The British High Court came down firmly on the side of Lipstadt and called Irving “an active Holocaust denier” who is “anti-Semitic, racist and associates with right-wing extremists who promote neo-Nazism”. The Judge also noted that Irving “has for his own ideological reasons persistently and deliberately misrepresented and manipulated historical evidence.” When it became clear that Irving was impecunious and unable to pay Lipstadt’s costs as ordered by the court, the defence team started proceedings for Irving to divulge the names of his financial backers who were donating money in order for him to pursue this case.
This decision has far reaching implications. Though the legal impact will not be felt outside of the U.K., the trial revealed the shoddy pseudo-academic research methods used by Holocaust deniers and exposed how these individuals construct their frauds. Those who financially support Holocaust denial will have to examine whether they wish to be held monetarily responsible in the event of other lawsuits. In addition, Irving will no longer be able to hide behind his carefully constructed so-called historian’s reputation. This will have an impact not only on his earning capabilities, but also on the fund-raising efforts of those hate mongers who have made a business of hosting him and selling his materials in Canada. Irving, though reportedly bankrupt, certainly appears to be supported by backers, from the look of his glossy "Reports" that continue to be distributed and reported to B’nai Brith.
[ Previous Section ] [ Table of Contents ] [ Next Section ]
To contact the League for Human Rights,
consult the B’nai Brith Staff Directory or
email us at league@bnaibrith.ca