 |
|||
Rochelle Wilner |
Frank Dimant |
Prof. Stephen Scheinberg |
Ruth Klein |
|
|||
Rochelle Wilner |
Frank Dimant |
Prof. Stephen Scheinberg |
Ruth Klein |
Right wing groups remain active in Canada, though at nothing like their strength in former years. Racist flyer distribution was reported to the Anti-Hate Hotline across the country, including Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Montreal and Halifax. In addition, there were ongoing reports of Internet sites and chat forums operated by such groups. The filing of complaints last year relating to a number of these sites with the Canadian Human Rights Commission by the League and other organizations, has apparently proved to be no deterrence. One site, the BC White Pride (a British Columbia White Nationalist Organization), for example, continues to operate, prominently displaying articles attacking Jews.
In 2003, there were four reports of music hatefests, three in Toronto and the other in Laval. The Toronto Hate Crime Police Unit reports that “organized hate groups maintained a presence throughout the year with at least three hate rock concerts and other activities.” xxvi In the same report, the Toronto police force also notes that “web-based hate is very popular” and that “a number of active [web] sites are presently hosted in the Southern Ontario region, including the Greater Toronto Area”.xvii
The US-based Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai Brith has reported that antisemitic and racist rock music is a major recruiting tool and source of funding for hate groups. xviii It is estimated that extremist companies sell millions of dollars of hate rock CD’s over the Internet. Canadians can easily purchase these CD’s in the same way. Many hate group members have been drawn to White Supremacist ideologies by listening to hate rock on the Internet, on CD’s and at concerts featuring groups such as Angry Aryans, Blue Eyed Devils and H8Machine, as well as the Canadian group Numbskulls.
Web message boards run by neo-Nazi or White Supremacist groups, such as stormfront.org and its Canadian link, appear to be widely used, providing a key source of communication and recruitment. Groups such as Heritage Front are reported to have been forming new chapters, while other groups such as the Association for White North Americans seem to be making their presence known on the Internet and on the streets.
Some of the renewed activities of far right wing groups in Canada appear to be centered around the return to Canada of Holocaust denier Ernst Zundel, who was deported here from the United States in February, 2003. On entry, he made a refugee claim, but the Federal Government issued a security certificate relying on reports by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS). Refugee proceedings were stayed pending a review of the security certificate by Judge Pierre Blais of the Federal Court of Canada. The Judge denied Zundel bail pending the review, indicating in his decision that Zundel poses “a threat to national security or to the safety of any person”. Judge Blais found that “Mr. Zundel wields much more power within the right-wing, extremist and violent movement known as the White Supremacist Movement ... than he lets on.”xxix
Meetings and rallies have been held by Zundel’s supporters. Concerted attempts to raise funds for his legal expenses have also been reported. Meanwhile the zundelsite.org, the website found by the Canadian Human Rights Commission in 2002 to contain antisemitic material, continues to operate from webservers in the United States. Groups such as the Association for White North Americans have included expressions of support for Zundel on the flyers they circulate. Judge Blais made reference to this support in his decision to refuse bail where he stated that . . . “Although Mr. Zundel has virtually no history or direct personal engagement in acts of violence, his status within the White Supremacist Movement is such that adherents are inspired to carry out his acts.”xxx
Nazi symbolism was the predominant motif of the reported incidents of vandalism/graffiti in 2003. Of the 180 reported cases of vandalism, 58, or almost one-third involved the display of swastikas. Swastikas appeared on such items as bills in various denominations given as change at commercial outlets in Toronto. In addition, many of the hate propaganda messages were based on language common to far right wing groups. For instance, a Jewish community centre received an anonymous e-mail in 2003 which stated, “Brethern [sic] of the Third Reich. Nonaryan filth grows. Gather your guns”. In two other unrelated incidents, the messages read, “Jewish kikes harming Zundel, filthy Talmudists”, and “We the Aryan nations. Help rid Canada of the evil influence of the Jews.”
In 2003, the Atlantic Jewish Council reported receiving a letter, which was anti-immigrant in tone, apparently from the Heritage Front, an extreme right wing group. While the return address was that of one of the major residence houses at Dalhousie University, further investigation determined that the letter was not authorized by management of the residence, or by the university. The Halifax police force continues to investigate the matter.
The site of the Canadian branch of the far right wing group Stormfront posted some advice on how to frame messages of hate against Jews in what they consider to be a politically correct fashion. The posting on their forum on Canadian Hate Laws states inter alia [quoted as posted including spelling mistakes]:
- Remember to say “Zionists”, “bankers” or “Israel Firsters” instead of “Jews” when making public speeches or writing arcticles.
- You cannot sell books such as the Turner Diaries, magazines such as Resistance, CD’s from bands like H8 Machine, or videos such as Kriegsberichter
- You are permitted to sell flags, pins, patches, shirts, hats, etc.
- You can preach White Pride publicly all you want. Just be careful not to say anything that could be considered the wilful promotion of hatred against an identifiable religious or ethnic minority. i.e: dont blame our woes on the Sikhs, or the Chinese. Instead, blame immigration.
- The Hate Laws in Canada are somewhat vague. Remember, not too many people have yet been convicted under Canada’s Hate Laws and they have to make a strong case against you to secure a conviction.
- It is entirely possible to stay within the bounds of the law and still promote our cause. Many are doing it already and more are already beginning to follow.
- If you really want to sell books, CD’s or videos, you may want to have an attorney look over them first to ensure that they are legal to sell in Canada. You can sell CD’s like Raven’s Wing, books by Philippe Rushton, or David Irving, and certain videos. You can also possess anything you want, as long as there is no intent to disseminate (distribute).
- It is legal to order whatever movement material you like from the U.S. or Europe. The border does confiscate things from time to time. When they do, you do not get into trouble. Usually you get your package.
It is clear that extreme right wing groups are becoming more devious in their efforts to recruit widely and infiltrate popular culture. They take advantage of Canada’s democratic traditions of free speech and expression, at the same time as they attempt to find new ways of skirting the law.
Despite the persistent activity of the extreme right, the perceptible change in antisemitic patterns first noted in last year’s Audit, continues in 2003, with anti-Jewish rhetoric increasingly emanating from the far left. This trend points to a progressively radicalized anti-globalist movement joining forces with Marxist, anti-American, and anarchist elements to vilify the Jews as the root of all the world’s problems.
Evidence of this new breed of antisemitism is reflected in the findings, discussed earlier, of the European Union-commissioned report Manifestations of Antisemitism in the EU xxxi, which blamed the upsurge in anti-Jewish acts on European Muslims and the European far left. So disturbing were the EU’s findings that its Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia allegedly shelved the report when it found that Muslims and pro-Palestinian groups were implicated in many of the incidents. An excerpt from the report reads as follows:
“Physical attacks on Jews and the desecration and destruction of synagogues were acts often committed by young Muslim perpetrators … Many of these attacks occurred either during or after pro-Palestinian demonstrations, which were also used by radical Islamists for hurling verbal abuse….”xxxii
It should also be noted that the EU report documented high occurrences of extreme left-wing elements employing media and antisemitic stereotyping in their criticism of Israel to get their antisemitic message across. According to the report:
“. . . a combination of anti-Zionist and anti-American views [often] formed an important element in the emergence of an antisemitic mood in Europe. Israel, seen as a capitalistic, imperialistic power, the ‘Zionist lobby’, and the U.S. are depicted as the evildoers in the Middle East conflict as well as exerting negative influence on global affairs. The convergence of these motives served both critics of colonialism and globalization from the extreme left and the traditional antisemitic right-wing extremism as well as parts of the radical Islamists in some European countries.”
This convergence between historically left wing and right wing opponents is another pattern that we highlight in the context of this report.
Here in Canada, a series of left wing led nationwide rallies over the past year, no matter under which banner protesters were gathered, inevitably singled out for “blame” Israel and the Jewish people. We cite just a few of these rallies, to indicate the scope of these instances: On January 15, 2003 a pay equity protest in Toronto saw several demonstrators espousing viciously anti-Israel viewpoints — notwithstanding the fact that the rally had nothing whatsoever to do with Israel and/or Jewish-related matters. On February 15, 2003 an anti-Iraq War rally in Victoria displayed signage indicating a “Jewish world-wide conspiracy”, despite the fact that the Jewish community was as divided as the general public on whether or not to go to war.
On March 5, 2003, a similar anti-Iraq War rally in Montreal at Concordia University showed protesters carrying antisemitic placards and carrying pro-Palestinian flags. On March 7, 2003 a joint anti-Iraq War and anti-poverty North York rally took an antisemitic turn when one person requested that all Jews participating in the protest “go home”. On March 15, 2003, in yet another anti-war rally, demonstrators waved flags bearing the Star of David superimposed with the question “Who are we fighting for?”, implying “Jewish control” over the U.S.-led war movement. In this same month, anti-Israel and anti-Jewish remarks were posted on the website of Victoria University’s social work department. And on the website of McGill University, a group calling itself McGill Solidarity Against War and Racism posted an article with antisemitic content.
While many of the above incidents took place in the community at large, campuses proved to be particularly fertile grounds for such activities. This section of the Audit contains a special part devoted to campuses, but it is worth noting here the particular incident at the University of Toronto last November, which saw the Al-Awda group mobilize the support of the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty to promote a vicious anti-Israel agenda which endorsed violence.
A particularly interesting convergence of the far left and extreme right wing elements has been noted in the research for this year’s Audit. At the many anti-globalization rallies that took place in cities and towns across Canada, often in view were Palestinian flags flown alongside Marxist flags, as well as Israeli flags superimposed with swastikas. At these same rallies protesters carried coffins, which displayed photographs of U.S. President George W. Bush, and/or Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, and/or that of British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Skinheads, keffiyeh-wearing individuals, and feminists came together to rally the crowds with anti-Iraq War and anti-Zionist rhetoric. Thus, seemingly disparate agendas fused into one seamless anti-Israel and anti-Jewish message.
Remarking on this development in its 2002 Audit, the League noted the tendency among right-wing groups to view such gatherings as promising recruiting grounds for their causes. This ominous trend was clearly evidenced when the Anti-Globalization Action Network (AGAN), allegedly a front for the neo-Nazi National Alliance, joined forces to protest the G8 meeting in June 2002 in Kananaskis, Canada. Headquartered in Hillsboro, West Virginia, the National Alliance is believed to be one of the largest and most dangerous neo-Nazi organizations in North Americaxxxiii. Also pointing to increasing ties between the far left and extreme right was a lecture by right wing conspiracy theorist David Icke, which was advertised in left-wing magazines such as Shared Vision and Common Ground.xxxiv
More recently, in August of 2003, the extreme-right-wing Canadian Heritage Alliance News advertised the plight of “Trent University's Problem Professor - Fighting for Freedom! Fighting for Canada!” in a banner headline. The professor in question is Michael Neumann, a philosophy professor at Trent University in Peterborough, Ontario, who has been posting his essays on the left-wing website Counterpunch.org. While the articles vary in subject matter, they almost always portray Israel as “a growing evil”. Israeli settlers want peace, says Neumann, “just as Hitler wanted peace”. He goes on: “Because the Jewish state is built on “vicious ethnic nationalism, [it] thinks all Palestinians should vanish or die.” He adds: “If it is not racist, and reasonable, to say that the Germans were complicit in crimes against humanity, then it is not racist, and reasonable, to say the same of the Jews.” The Heritage site portrays this man sympathetically, as one who is “Fighting for Canada” and “Fighting for Freedom”.xxxv
The increasing instances of antisemitism worldwide do not occur in a vacuum, and are part and parcel of the prevailing global atmosphere that allows for such poisoned sentiment to take root.
Today’s antisemitism, characterized by its global resurgence, has spilled over into the social, political and cultural arenas of the world’s nations. No longer merely a European phenomenon, antisemitism has, sadly, taken root across the globe. “Not since Kristallnacht, the Nazi-led pogrom against German Jews in 1938, have so many European synagogues and Jewish schools been desecrated,” reported Foreign Policy magazine in its year-end November/December 2003 issue.
Today’s antisemitism is both new and old: it is the medieval image of the Jew as “Christ-killer” (reinforced by the recent release of Mel Gibson’s The Passion). It is the resurrection of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, made into a 41-part television series by Egypt and broadcast throughout Arab lands. It is the refusal of the United Nations to include antisemitism in its resolution on the Elimination of all Forms of Religious Intolerance. It is also manifest in the increasing expressions of virulent anti-Zionism by those who seek the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel.
One of the more notorious examples of the past year was the October 16, 2003 address by then-Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad to the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference in Putrajaya, Malaysia. Prime Minister Mohamad declared that “The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million, but today the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.” xxxvi This blatantly antisemitic statement, in and of itself alarming, was even more troubling given the tumultuous applause it received from the heads of state and dignitaries in the audience. Canada’s Prime Minister at the time, Jean Chrétien, subsequently shook Mohamad’s hand, even as Foreign Minister Bill Graham Foreign Minister condemned the rant from this country.
Another infamous example came from the internationally-acclaimed Greek composer Mikis Theodorakis who last November communicated the following: “Today we can say that this small nation [Israel] is the root of evil. We are two nations without brothers in the world, us and the Jews, but they have fanaticism and are forceful. [The Greeks] did not turn aggressive like them”. Perhaps most telling was the silence with which this virulently antisemitic statement was met by the world’s community.xxxvii
Another verbal assault on the Jewish community came from German parliamentarian Martin Hohmann. The Christian Democratic Party legislator said, “In light of the millions killed during the first phase of the [Russian] revolution, one can be justified in inquiring about the guilt of the Jews.” Mr. Hohmann referred to the Jews as a “tervolk”, a German word meaning “nation of perpetrators”, for their alleged part in the Bolshevik revolutions of 1917. The address eventually led to Hohmann’s ejection from his party, but not before General Reinhard Gnzel, head of Germany’s special forces unit, wrote a letter to Hohmann congratulating him on having the courage to “speak the truth”.xxxviii
Evidence of antisemitism’s global reach was witnessed here at home last August, when during an interview with the weekly Arabic language newspaper Al-Mustakbal, Lebanon’s Ambassador to Canada, Raymond Baaklini, alleged control of this country’s media by certain “pro-Israel elements” of Canadian society — i.e., “Jewish”. Of significance is that Baaklini’s remarks were not isolated, but followed earlier such statements published in late December 2002.
Other countries, apart from Canada, have reported substantial increases in antisemitic incidents in 2003. The UK-based Community Security Trust, employing similar methodology to the League, cited 375 antisemitic incidents in Britain last year, the second highest number in two decades.xxxix Similarly, a report on antisemitism by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, covering the period from October 21, 2002 to September 30, 2003, revealed that there had been some 540 reports of antisemitic violence, vandalism or harassment, with the highest number ever of reports of street harassment, graffiti and abusive or threatening e-mails.xl
In the United States, FBI statistics on hate crimes from 2002 show anti-Jewish bias accounting for 65.9% of the total 1,576 reported offences rooted in religious bias. xli This number may in fact be on the rise, suggests a national poll by the Institute for Jewish and Community Research in San Francisco, which found that the proportion of Americans ages 18 to 35 who held antisemitic views was consistently higher than the percentage of middle-aged Americans who shared these attitudes. For example, nearly one in four young adults, or 23% of those polled, agreed with the statement that Jews were a “threat” to the country's “moral character,” a view shared by 15% of Americans between ages 45 and 54.xlii
Since the outbreak of renewed violence in Israel in the fall of 2000, hostilities relating to the conflict have spilled over onto Canadian campuses. Jewish students have become increasingly isolated and have been repeatedly subjected to intimidation, and even violence, by fellow students for espousing pro-Israel viewpoints. Many have expressed their demoralization. Visibly orthodox students have reported feeling compelled to cover their yarmulkas with baseball caps, so as not to draw attention to their religious headgear. Others pass through the campus in groups, fearful of confronting crowds of anti-Jewish hecklers in their university corridors.
Campaigns aimed at delegitimizing Israel as a Jewish state have deliberately used the guise of free speech to trumpet a message that aims to incite hatred against Israelis, and even endorses acts of terrorism against them. Tragically, academic institutions, the traditional bastions for promoting the free exchange of ideas and fostering democratic values, have been used by groups espousing precisely the opposite message. We highlight below a number of campus incidents over the past year, which clearly fall within the domain of antisemitism.
We can look to campus for a useful case study on the difference between criticism of Israel and antisemitism, and also for an example of the way extreme right wing elements have attempted to reach out to those in the Arab/Muslim community who have grievances against Israel and sometimes, by extension, the Jewish community. While the alliance between the left wing sympathizers and anti-Israel activists is well-documented, there is evidence to suggest that the far right wing elements are only entering the fray in the hope of attracting converts to their anti-Jewish agenda. This is one example of the ways in which the agendas of the far right and the left have intersected.
There must clearly be room in the public discourse for criticism of a state and its policies, and Israel is no exception. There is usually a clear distinction between such criticism and expressions of antisemitism. Unfortunately there are some who attempt to blur these lines in order exploit political sympathies to fuel campaigns of hatred. In particular, as the Israeli-Arab conflict is once again front and centre in the news, there are antisemitic propagandists who try to exploit negative feelings towards Israel and some of its policies in order to generate interest in their own message of hate for the Jewish people. They do this by attempting to reach out to those whom they feel are most likely to harbour anti-Israel feelings and therefore, have a predisposition to be receptive to antisemitic messaging.
The usual modus operandi for these propagandists is to present an argument against Israel which they feel will resonate with their target audience and, from there, to incorporate the language or imagery customarily used to challenge Israel to describe the Jewish community, Jewish institutions, or Jewish individuals. The aim is to subconsciously transfer their reader’s anger at Israel onto the Jewish people.
A good example of this type of hate literature is the series of antisemitic flyers found on the Concordia University campus during the Fall 2003 semester. Two are presented here, along with a detailed analysis of the imagery and arguments used in them. In the first, the author attempts to tap into the anger generated in some circles by Israel’s construction of an anti-terrorist security barrier The more extremist critics of Israel’s security barrier have termed it an “apartheid wall,” hoping to invoke an imagined similarity with the apartheid system which was once in existence in South Africa. The flyer then presents what purports to be an “apartheid wall” being set up by Concordia University’s administration in order to keep Arabs and whites out. The University is presented as being under “Jewish control.”
To the right of the fence, we see that Concordia University’s crest has been altered to contain the Jewish Star of David, further reinforcing this notion of “Jewish control”. Included amongst the corporations targeted for boycott are B’nai Brith and the U.S.-based Anti Defamation League (it is not clear how either of these organizations could in any way be considered “sponsors” of the University).
Interestingly, the inclusion of references to “ethnic Germans/Austrians” and the usage of traditional “Aryan” language seem to indicate that the author of this flyer likely identifies with the White Supremacist movement.
A closer inspection of the flyer appears to supports this theory. The map of Israel is drawn not only upside down, but backwards. This can be construed as a further indication that the individual or individuals authoring the document are not of Middle Eastern origin and do not have any real direct knowledge of the area or the conflict. Someone who fashions himself as a Middle East stakeholder would not allow his work to be compromised by such an obvious error. This, yet again, reveals the flyer for what it is: an attempt by an extreme right wing racist to reach out to the Arab community, using rudimentary knowledge of the Arab-Israeli conflict in order to portray the Jew as the quintessential “bad guy”.
Each of the fence posts depicted in the flyer has writing alongside it, drawing attention to what the author sees as Concordia’s alleged systemic discrimination against whites and Arabs at the university. Of significance is the reference to “radical destructive feminism”. This clearly demonstrates that the author of the flyer is not associated with the radical leftist forces that have often sought to drag Concordia into anarchy over the last number of years, for feminism is not attacked by this movement.
The second flyer is a similar attempt at transference of anger. Concordia University is depicted as a synagogue, appropriating symbols associated with the Jewish religion in order to make a political statement. The flyer raises the spectre of some sort of Jewish-dominated, Concordia-based conspiracy to commit acts of violence, with allusions to a plot for world domination.
The flyer depicts a building labeled as “Concordia University, Inc.”. On top of the building’s left tower, there is a Star of David, and on the top of the right tower, a communist sickle. The use of the communist symbol in this negative context further supports the view that the author of the flyer is not from the ranks of Marxist/leftist radical elements at Concordia, which are often active in anti-Israel initiatives.
The doors are in the form of the two tablets of the Ten Commandments, typical of synagogue architecture. In addition, there are two menorot (candelabras, representative of the Jewish holiday of Chanukah and common synagogue design features). There are machine guns by either side of the doorway, with miniature maps of Israel attached to the end of the barrels, as one might find a bayonet on the end of some weapon. This is presumably meant to imply that Judaism is a religion of violence that gets its spiritual mandate from its houses of worship.
Above the illustration, there is a passage called “3rd Concordia Administration Communication Intercept by the Anti-Demonization League” — a take-off on the Jewish Anti-Defamation League — which purports to be an internal discussion among some top officials at Concordia. It should be noted that this device — the forgery of supposedly intercepted communications — is common in certain White Supremacist circles.
The author alleges a Jewish conspiracy at the University, and targets three senior administrators who are Jewish: Rector Frederick Lowy, Provost Jack Lightstone, and Martin Singer, Dean of Arts and Science. These three Jewish individuals are slurred in various ways. The Rector is called “Chairman of the Concordia Kibbutz,” attacking him, and the University, for supposedly being “Zionist” in some way. Dr. Lightstone is given the name “Beria,” likely an attempt to compare him to Lavrenty Pavlovitch Beria, who served Stalin as head of the NKVD, the Soviet Secret police, which, under his leadership, was responsible for the torture and murder of millions. Martin Singer is labelled the “Science Kommissar.” The term kommissar refers to any official within the ranks of the Communist Party responsible for political indoctrination and enforcing loyalty to the party.
The remaining part of the supposedly intercepted conversation brings up everything from Israel’s Arrow missile defence system to the spectre of ethnic-based weaponry against Arabs — an allegation which the SPHR has repeatedly made on campus with reference to Israel, using the Institute for Historical Review, a White Supremacist Holocaust-denial agency, as its source. The difference here is that this allegation is not being leveled at Israel. Rather, as we saw with other aspects of the previous flyer, there is an attempt to channel anger at Israel into anger at the local Jewish community by alleging that Concordia (and in particular the Jewish members of its administration) is preparing to fight some sort of biological war against ethnic groups, presumably those singled out in the previous flyer. Alternating criticism of Israel and criticism of Jews is designed to blur the lines and encourage those with political grievances against the Jewish state to take out their frustrations on the Jewish people.
The author throws in Holocaust references as well. This serves to further identify him or her as a member of a White Supremacist group, active in Holocaust denial and/or trivialization. He refers to the “Shoa cow”, an allusion to the “Shoah businessmen profiting from the Holocaust”. The final reference is to “Shoa business” as a substitute for “show business”. This has a dual agenda: it aims to deny the Holocaust by calling it a “show,” as well as to tar the Jewish community with the allegation that they are profiting from the Holocaust. This expression is particularly common to the Zundelsite, and is a theme often brought up by Norman Finkelstein, who is a frequent guest speaker of the SPHR (and in past years, the CSU) at Concordia.
What these two flyers show quite forcefully is the interplay amongst different antisemitic groups, which span the entire political spectrum, and their shared use of symbolism and imagery to support an anti-Jewish agenda.