Segacs's World I Know

Posts Tagged ‘antisemitism’

The British Association of University Teachers voted to reverse their boycott of Haifa University and Bar-Ilan University, after getting a severe amount of egg on their face.

Of course, the Palestinians are reacting predictably:

Meanwhile, Palestinian professor Sari Nusseibeh, who last week urged an end to the boycott, has been under attack by many Palestinians who have been calling for his dismissal from his job as president of Al-Quds University.

Several Palestinian political and academic groups issued statements strongly condemning Nusseibeh, accusing him of normalizing ties with Israel and acting against the interests of the Palestinian people.

Leaflets distributed in some areas in the West Bank and Gaza Strip branded the widely respected Nusseibeh a “traitor” and “collaborator.”

Nusseibeh co-signed a letter with the president of Hebrew University calling for an end to the AUT boycott, which is what some think was the deciding factor in the reversal. The letter called for “problems to be resolved through dialogue”. Needless to say, those passing out leaflets branding Nusseibeh as a “traitor” don’t agree with that statement.

(Hat tip: Lynn).

These idiotic teenagers won’t be seeing the inside of theirs for a while:

Three students have been expelled from an elite private school for posting pictures of Nazi rallies and Jews being tortured on a Web site and then using anti-Semitic slurs to lash out at a student who objected. The boys, one of whom is Jewish, thrown out of Royal St. George’s College after posting “heinous” images of the Holocaust on a chat board used by several private schools, headmaster Hal Hannaford told The Associated Press on Tuesday.

Is it just me or is there some kind of cold comfort to the fact that idiotic teenagers looking to rebel see Nazism as a kind of “worst of the worst” tough image to adopt?

If they were trying to get a reaction, they sure got one. Let’s hope those kids learned their lesson that antisemitism is not, in any way, “cool”.

Native leader and antisemite extraordinaire David Ahenakew’s hate trial is underway.

I’ve always been torn on the issue of hate speech legislation. Restricting freedom of speech can have potentially dangerous consequences for a free society, and it’s not something to take lightly. After all, restricting free speech means that someone has the power to decide what qualifies as hate and what doesn’t. This opens the door for things like this, when those in power can muzzle their political opponents by attacking different opinions as “hate speech”. Deny a freedom to your enemies, and you open the door for your enemies denying that same freedom to you if the tables should turn.

And one could argue – convincingly – that people like Ahenakew should be encouraged to say what they really think, so at least we know what they really think and can judge them on that basis. And if political ostracism for hate speech isn’t disincentive enough for someone to shoot off their mouth in public, then it’s doubtful hate legislation will be either.

On the other hand, wilfully and publicly promoting hatred against a group of people, when left unchecked, can allow the hatred to grow and spread like a cancer. It’s like advertising; repeat something often enough and loudly enough, and people will start to believe it.

There are no easy answers here. However, the Ahenakew trial is just barely underway and it’s already leaving a sour taste in my mouth.

First of all, there’s the ridiculous defence argument that Ahenakew said what he did because he was on medication:

“He was certainly not feeling well that day and wouldn’t have said these things if he was feeling well,” [Defence lawyer Doug] Christie said.

“His medication had recently been doubled caused clearly by a chemical imbalance in the blood being related to diabetes. In addition to that he had two glasses of wine the night before.

“I think in those circumstances it’s pretty obvious that he wasn’t measuring his words the way he would normally do.”

Basically the lawyers are arguing a technicality: hatred is okay, but expressing it isn’t. That’s the way the law is written after all. This isn’t Orwell’s 1984 and we’re not about to start prosecuting thoughtcrime. So this defence argument of utter nonsense actually might work here.

This raises the question of what happens if Ahenakew is acquitted. Some people will use that mere fact as vindication for their hateful and antisemitic views. Ahenakew would become an underground hero of the antisemitic fringe. In many ways, an acquittal could have worse consequences for Canadian society than a lack of trial in the first place.

Then there’s the issue of the media coverage of Ahenakew’s trial actually becoming an additional vehicle for Ahenakew’s vile views to be spread. Every time a clip of Ahenakew’s despicable statements about Jews is shown on the news, millions of Canadians are hearing it. One hopes that most people react to what they hear with distaste, but some people may be reacting by agreeing. After all, it’s this exposure of such views that hate speech legislation was designed to prevent.

Now that Ahenakew is on trial, only a conviction would send a message to Canadians that promotion of such hatred is unacceptable. Only a conviction will deter further spreading of the cancer of hatred. Which is why I’m hoping for this outcome. It’s kind of like the war in Iraq; agree or disagree with it at first, now that the US is there, they have to finish the job.

But there are a lot of tricky questions here, and I don’t think the sour taste is going away anytime soon.

London’s infamous mayor Ken Livingstone proved conclusively that his comparison of a Jewish reporter to a Nazi was no isolated slip-of-tongue. Livingstone has consistently refused to apologize for that remark, even refusing to meet with families of Holocaust survivors.

And now we have a better insight into why. Livingstone’s twisted political views clear things up nicely (via Allison):

The dispute between London Mayor Ken Livingstone and Britain’s Jewish leaders was reignited Thursday night when Livingstone branded Prime Minister Ariel Sharon a war criminal, the Independent reported on Friday.

Livingstone launched a provocative critique of Israel with accusations of “ethnic cleansing” and demonizing Muslims before calling for the imprisonment of Sharon, according to the British daily.

He also claimed in his article that the Israeli government presented a “wholly distorted picture of racism and religious discrimination in Europe in order to convey the impression that Jews suffer most discrimination.

“The reality is that the great bulk of racist attacks in Europe today are on black people, Asians and Muslims – and they are the primary targets of the extreme right.”

But wait, it gets worse:

“Israel’s expansion includes ethnic cleansing,” he wrote. “Palestinians who had lived in that land for centuries were driven out by systematic violence and terror aimed at ethnically cleansing what became a large part of the Israeli state.”

He added: “Today the Israeli government continues seizures of Palestinian land for settlements, military incursions into surrounding countries and denial of the right of Palestinians expelled by terror to return.

“Ariel Sharon, Israel’s prime minister, is a war criminal who should be in prison not in office.”

Hmmm, I can think of someone who has no business being in office here. But it certainly ain’t Sharon. Here’s hoping that Londoners will teach Livingstone a message come next election and toss him out on his antisemitic arse.

Ken Livingstone, London’s mayor, seems to have an incurable case of foot-in-mouth disease. This time, he is refusing to apologize after calling a Jewish journalist a German concentration camp guard (via Damian Penny):

Ken Livingstone today refused to apologise for his “German war criminal” jibe delivered to a Jewish Evening Standard reporter.

His refusal came as he was referred to an official standards watchdog for comparing reporter Oliver Finegold to a “concentration camp guard”.

It also came despite a unanimous call by the London Assembly for him to back down and withdraw his remarks.

The fact that a politician could make those kinds of remarks on the record, in a friggin’ microphone, baffles me. And his unabashed attitude reminds me that these things don’t happen in a vacuum. With heightened levels of antisemitism in the UK, Livingstone’s remarks are that much worse. He may have just been seeking an insult against a reporter he didn’t like, but that doesn’t excuse or justify what he said.

Prince Harry was forced to issue an apology, after he wore a Nazi costume to a party:

Early editions of Thursday’s issue of “The Sun,” showed Prince Harry, the second son of Prince Charles and the late Princess Diana, clutching a cigarette and a drink and wearing a swastika armband.

The newspaper said the 20-year-old prince had attended a fancy dress party in the uniform of a fascist soldier.

In a statement, the prince said he was “very sorry if I caused any offense or embarrassment to anyone.” He added, “It was a poor choice of costume and I apologize.”

That’s all very well and good but what on earth would possess him to think this is a good idea in the first place?

Maybe he should have tried wearing his costume in France instead, where – according to Jean Marie Le Pen, the Nazi occupation of France was “not particularly inhumane”. (Hat tip: Damian.) I bet the French would have laughed.

It’s starting to become clearer that the rise in anti-Americanism in Europe is not entirely unrelated to the increased whitewashing of the Holocaust. When the US replies to anti-American sentiment with a “well, you weren’t complaining when we saved your collective asses from the Nazis”, the Europeans can just respond with a “hell, those Nazis weren’t so bad”.

History has a way of lessening the emotional impact of the very terrible or very tragic. And right now is a historical turning point. The survivor generation that bears witness is dying. “Nazi” is being used as an epitheth to describe just about anyone, from the “Zionists are Nazis” crowd to the “soup Nazi” on Seinfeld. The Holocaust is starting to be viewed not as anything particularly horrible or unique, but just as yet another chapter in the endless saga of the human race’s capacity for cruelty and evil and destruction. Maybe it’s even inevitable. When, only sixty-five years after Churchill’s “blood, sweat and tears” speech, a British prince is sporting a swastika, that has to mean something.

And of course, it’s easier to rationalize hating Jews if you believe that the Holocaust was just a minor blip, and that the concentration camps were just summer camps with bad food.

A student at Plattsburgh State University is charged with attempted murder as a hate crime after stabbing a fellow student, allegedly because he thought the victim was Jewish:

Prosecutors say a stabbing on a local college campus is a hate crime.

Police say Philip Robertson, 22, stabbed Jordyn Lavin behind a dorm at Plattsburgh State University in September.

According to court papers, Robertson went after Lavin because Lavin is Jewish.

Robertson is charged with attempted murder and assault as hate crimes, and is being held on $10,000 bail.

More details can be found in a campus report:

Plattsburgh State student Jordyn Lavin remembers walking behind Wilson Hall to smoke marijuana with his roommate, then feeling a knife pierce his back.

During a preliminary hearing Friday in Plattsburgh City Court, Lavin testified that his then roommate, Philip Robertson, accompanied him to a wooded area near the Saranac River the afternoon of Sept. 1.

Robertson handed Lavin a pipe and gave him permission to take the first hit, according to Lavin’s testimony.

“He walked behind me, and I felt pain,” Lavin said. “I could see the knife was in me.”

After that first stab wound, Robertson allegedly asked Lavin if he is Jewish, saying Lavin sounds like a Jewish last name.

Lavin replied that he is not Jewish.

Lavin and Robertson were apparently roommates and friends, so it’s hard to say what truly motivated this attack. Was this a symptom of the increasing virulent anti-Jewish sentiment on many college campuses, or an isolated incident of an unbalanced individual? Details are too sketchy to say at this point. But it’s certainly worth watching carefully.

The case of the fireboming of the UTT library last April moved a step closer to resolution today, as the chief suspect in the case accepted a guilty plea to arson in exchange for the conspiracy charge being dropped:

Mr. Elmerhebi kept his head bowed slightly and his eyes on the floor as the plea was entered.

Evidence read in court said his arrest in May was prompted by police wiretaps and surveillance.

He was tracked by police after tanks of kerosene found at the United Talmud Torahs school were traced back to a Canadian Tire store where the manager confirmed that Mr. Elmerhebi was an employee.

Store surveillance cameras and receipts confirmed him as the buyer of the tanks. Receipts were also found in his home when it was searched by police.

Sounds like a lot of evidence to me. Elmerhebi probably took the best deal he could in light of the probable guilty verdict.

Elmerhebi’s mother has been charged as being an accessory, and has a court date still to come.

The school’s reaction was fairly pragmatic:

School principal Sydney Benudiz was satisfied with the plea.

“Something wrong was done to our school and we hoped that justice would be served and it seems that it’s going to be served,” he said outside court. “We just want our lives back.”

This is pretty much how the system is supposed to work. People commit a crime, they get caught, they get arrested, they get punished. The article didn’t mention anything about sentencing but those details will likely follow.

However, I still think this should have been charged as a hate crime. I know this is a contentious issue especially among people who don’t believe in hate crime legislation. But motive is something we should take into account when determining a punishment to fit a crime. We already do, when we consider that a calculated crime for profit, for example, is worse than a non-premeditated crime of passion. A crime motivated by hate or racism is more serious than one with most other motives, because of its potential to set off hatred among others in the community, and because of the offender’s higher likelihood of reoffending. I think that in clear-cut cases of crime motivated by hatred, sentencing should be more severe.

A punishment that would truly fit the crime would be to compel Elmerhebi to contribute towards paying the millions of dollars that the Jewish community is now forced to spend on security guards for schools and campuses.

The library at UTT St-Laurent, which was firebombed last April, finally reopened today after being completely rebuilt thanks to an outpouring of donations and support:

Sympathy messages and donations of $400,000 in cash and thousands books poured in from across Canada and around the world following news of the arson at the private school last April.

“Unlike (with) many of our students’ grandparents who went through the Holocaust, this time the world reached out to us and helped all of us heal,” said Rachel Cohen, president of United Talmud Torahs.

“It was very reassuring and the impact of this outreach will positively affect students all their lives.”

This is of course great news for the library. (I wonder whether they’ll be able to put some funds into renovations for the rest of the building, which during my high school years was in a pretty sorry state of disrepair and had a constant smell of rotten fish. The elementary side wasn’t much better, though the high school did have a more modern library. But anyway…)

Symbolically this was an important day. And I’m glad to see that things are back up and running like normal. Now when a teacher assigns homework that involves the library, the students will have to think of another excuse of why they couldn’t get it done.

One of the arrested suspects in the April firebombing of Talmud Torah elementary has been released due to “insufficient evidence”:

Simon Zogheib, 19, was arrested in connection with the library fire at the United Talmud Torahs School.

One of his lawyers, Serge Segal, said the Crown decided not to proceed with the charges because of a lack of evidence.

It’s always hard to tell what to think in these cases. The media is banned from elaborating much, because two other suspects are still in custody awaiting trial. And of course, it’s impossible to know whether Zogheib is really innocent or just legally “not guilty”. Without the facts, it’s impossible for any of us to make a judgment.

I will say this, though: if the police and legal system are incapable of bringing the true perpetrators of this crime – whoever they may be – to justice, it will be a real shame… and a real failing of the system. There is an obligation to crack down on this kind of despicable hate crime against innocent children, to prevent it from recurring.