by arthur Weinreb, associate Editor,
March 8, 2004
The "new" anti-Semitism is the expression of hostility against Jews by expressing that hostility not at the Jews themselves but at the State of Israel. Unlike the "old" anti-Semitism that came mainly from those on the right of the political spectrum, the "new" comes primarily from the left; the liberal elite who condescendingly speak it in the name of anti-racism and anti-colonization. This type of anti-Semitism is politically correct. When those that espouse these anti-Semitic sentiments are challenged, they defend themselves by saying that they are merely criticizing Israel, something they have every right to do, and not the Jewish people themselves.
Merely criticizing the government of Israel is, of course not anti-Semitic. Canadians have the right to be critical of Israel as they have the right to criticize any other country, including Canada. The anti-Semitic aspect of condemning Israel comes into play when that country is held to a much higher or different standard than other countries are. It occurs, for example, when people vigorously criticize Israel for erecting the security fence while remaining silent on the gross human rights violations of other countries that routinely engage in such things as slavery, use of child soldiers, torture and political repression.
There have been two recent incidents in the past few months involving members of the governing Liberals. The first occurred when there was a terrorist threat to El al airlines that caused one of its flights to divert from Pearson International in Toronto to Hamilton. The immediate response of the then Transport Minister, David Collenette, was to say that perhaps the status of El al in Canada should be reconsidered. Collenette blamed the victim for the incident and if he had any concerns about terrorists hiding near Pearson with handheld surface-to-air missiles, he kept that to himself. Reconsidering "El al’s position in Canada" could only mean restricting the airline’s rights in Canadian airspace. It’s hard to imagine that the former Minister would have made the same comments had the airline involved been French or British or american. Israel was being held to a different standard.
The second incident occurred on February 17 in a statement made in the House of Commons by Pat O’Brien, the Liberal MP from London-Fanshawe. O’Brien criticized the security fence that Israel is currently constructing. adding that he was neither anti-Semitic nor anti-Israel, O’Brien said that the construction of the wall "reduces the West Bank and Gaza Strip to the status of concentration camps". The next day, Liberal art Eggleton stated in the House that Pat O’Brien’s remarks about concentration camps "made a mockery of the Holocaust".
O’Brien, who carefully drafted the statement that he made, makes no apologies for his concentration camp remarks. He reiterated that there was nothing anti-Semitic in his remarks, despite the fact that his comments were hurtful to some Jews who had been in or who had had relatives in concentration camps. O’Brien argued that he had never used the word "Nazi" and that other countries have had concentration camps.
a few weeks before his statement, the CBC’s Don Cherry had said that NHL players who wore visors were mainly "Europeans and French guys". all hell broke loose when Cherry made his "anti-French" comments. When Cherry’s remarks were put to O’Brien, he just laughed and said that Cherry was a redneck but not a racist.
On the other hand, the Minister of State for Multiculturalism and Status of Women, Jean augustine, refused to comment on the reference O’Brien made about concentration camps while stating that she is passionate about multiculturalism, equality and human rights. This silence has to be contrasted with her statement in response to Don Cherry’s comments when she said: "The government will not tolerate statements that create dissonance in our society and disrespect for others", a remark that CFP columnist, Klaus Rohrich, correctly concluded could have been made by Hitler or Mussolini. Unlike Pat O’Brien who lacks his party’s trademark political correctness, augustine applied a double standard to the remarks made by O’Brien and Cherry. The government of tolerance will not tolerate comments from Don Cherry that might insult a few French-Canadians while O’Brien’s comments that insulted a few Jewish Canadians, who are in no way responsible for the policies and practices of the Israeli government, are simply not worthy of comment.
as far as the Canadian government is concerned, Jews, much like americans, are not accorded the same level of protection from "statements that create dissonance" as other groups in this country are.