Asked if the Jewish community would benefit from the retention of Section 13, [CIJA CEO Shimon] Fogel stated: “What was intended as a shield against hate has become a sword. Certainly in its day, it was helpful in confronting the challenges related to the likes of [Holocaust denier] Ernst Zundel… What it has really done is create difficulties for those who might legitimately want to raise questions about groups or ideas that in fact are a threat to the Jewish community or Israel. In effect, the act has become an instrument to chill critical debate about important issues like radical Islam.”
CIJA, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, is not yet advocating a repeal. Instead they will hold "consultations" with the Jewish community in order to help determine their position going forward.
In a personal communication, JDL-Canada's Meir Weinstein tells me that he supports Fogel's position on Section 13; I would assume then that this is the official position of the JDL.
In more JDL-related news, that alleged bomb plot of a couple of months back, in which several JDL members were accused of trying to plant a bomb near Palestine House, turns out to be been based on a hoax phone call to the RCMP. So says the JDL wiki page, at least.
PS. CIJA, as WK intimates, is the group that the old Canadian Jewish Congress was "folded into". They are a...bit different...than the old CJC, however.
advocating an appeal > repeal?
ReplyDeleteThanks. Was written pre caffeine.
ReplyDelete// it was helpful in confronting the challenges related to the likes of [Holocaust denier] Ernst Zundel… What it has really done is create difficulties for those who might legitimately want to raise questions about groups or ideas that in fact are a threat to the Jewish community or Israel. //
ReplyDelete+
For years, since the establishment turned several government departments inside out in an attempt to get Zundel, [ Free Speechers owe him a debt of sorts, in that his case got the medieval "False news" provision disabled ], & finally getting him when he left the country, the law & the tribunals have been used against the "near nazi" types, without much debate.
The shit hit the fan only when some muslim students decided to avail themselves of it.
The JDL, being buddies with our coterie of Islam-watchers, of course have this opinion.
Interesting that an official organization is coming around.
For the far right the narrative around section 13 is more about whether or not they are allowed to bash minorities (ie: Muslims) without legal repercussions.
ReplyDeleteFor the rest of the sensible population the issue is around whether or not section 13 reflects canadian values, regardless of what minority group uses it. The legal system is rather robust, in that frivolous cases are almost always dismissed.
The JDL is between a rock and a hard place. What is more important to them, advocating for the jewish community or bashing the muslim community.
Recent activities, suggest they are more interested in bashing muslims than advocating for jews, specifically this summer when Meir Weinstein was asked about a synagogue in toronto using a public school for services he pretty much ignored the rights of that synagogue in his war against islam
Deen,
ReplyDeleteThe issue with using the legal system seems to be the difficulty in getting police to act.
As to whether S13 reflects Canadian values--I suppose that depends on how you view the Levant/Macleans/Steyn thing. I regard most of the "witch hunt" claims being a couple of publishers trying to act like Martyrs.
According to wikileaks
http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/2011/04/hrcs-through-american-eyes.html
...everybody involved in the Macleans dustup was grandstanding for public consumption which, from my own experience of that case, sounds about right.
Historically it was always the Jewish community organizations that supported human rights in this country. What happened?
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Levant/Macleans/Steyn thing to be crocodile tears. A closer examination to those issues, particularly the levant issue, shows that his rag went under not due to the HR complaint but because no one was buying it.
ReplyDeleteWith those two cases specifically (although there has been a number of frivilous cases that have not been in the media) what should have been done is it should not have gone to court. The decision to go to court or not should be more robust.
Deen,
ReplyDeleteThe Levant thing didn't go to the tribunal; it got dismissed. The Macleans thing probably wouldn't have gone anywhere if the magazine had done anything to stop it--they wanted a tribunal hearing, lusted for it, in fact.
What are the frivolous cases? I don't know much about the investigation of B'nai Brith, but given what I know about the group, I would not rule out the possibility that they are occasionally capable of emitting hate speech (against Arabs/Muslims).
And their own S13 case--my buddy Harry vs Topham--seemed pretty solid.
I am personally aware of the circumstances around a few other S13 complaints that might be considered frivolous, but then one can file a frivolous lawsuit, and nobody says dump the law involved.
//Historically it was always the Jewish community organizations that supported human rights in this country. What happened?//
ReplyDeleteFascism in Israel.
I checked out your facebook freinds. Some of them are very anti Israel.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, speaking of JDL have you been following whats goin on at their website?
ReplyDeleteSo Dec 6 the JDL is trying to host a: Candling Vigil against Radical Islam in Schools at UofT. They make some weird connection of Marc Lepine being a closet muslim.
Now the location they have is also hosting a real candle light vigil for the montreal massacre, by a bunch of women's groups. It seems that the university emailed meir asking him to host his event elsewhere, but in the long tradition of JDL, they will still show up and crash the vigil anyways.
I am rather disgusted by the politicization of the montreal massacre, but can we expect better from the JDL and their so called multifaith coalition.
Hello Hardy. What side of the fence are you on. Are you a fan of AlJazeera?
ReplyDeleteHi Meir,
ReplyDeletethank you for proving my point. The Montreal Massacre and violence against women in general should not be politicized or polarized into a debate.
By asking me if i like Al-Jazeera (which I don't watch) demonstrates that your interest in the candlelight vigil is solely to promote your agenda. Using the deaths of others to create wedge issues and or promote alternate agendas is something the vast majority of canadians will not tolerate.
You aver reacted Hardy. One of BigCitylib's face book freinds is a leader of an anti rasism group that states, "We recommend the Aboriginal Public Television (APTN - and facebook.com/aptninfocus) for news in Canada, the Public Broadcasting System for news in the USA and Al Jazeera for international news. Unfortunately, we can not recommend the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation at this time."
ReplyDeleteWith respect to Section 13, that is important to note.
YES Canadian Hindu Advocacy needs to be at this event loud and clear. Richard Warman has no chance of standing up against the argument's presented by CHA's leader Ron Banerjee!
ReplyDelete