Newsstand: November 23, 2009
The Making of a Medley
The Daily Photoist: November 23, 2009
Transit City and Transit Cities
While the conflict in Gaza cools down—at least for now—the war of words in Toronto continues to boil.
You’ll recall that, when the conflict was at its height, supporters of both sides staged rallies across Canada. You’ll also recall that the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC) labelled, not without controversy, the pro-Palestinian rallies as being “pro-Hamas” and suggested that certain acts—like white power skinheads giving Nazi salutes (sixth photo), or a sign depicting an Israeli soldier with blood dripping from his teeth (eighth photo)—were hate crimes.
Now, the Near East Cultural and Education Foundation of Canada (NECEF) has stepped in. While condemning antisemitism and the actions of those who engage in hateful actions, it has written an open letter to the CJC alleging that its labelling of the rallies as “pro-Hamas” may also be a hate crime.
So, who’s right?
Hate crimes (namely, advocating genocide, publicly inciting hatred, or wilfully promoting hatred) are a bit of a legal minefield. We considered the subject last year in light of the protests by Anonymous against Scientology, where—on the basis of the facts known to us—we concluded that Anonymous’s protests probably didn’t qualify as hate crimes.
Applying that same test here, we disagree with NECEF's suggestion that the CJC committed a hate crime, partly because the phrase "pro-Hamas" does not target an "identifiable group" (i.e. any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation—one could query whether this should be broadened), and partly because it does not sink to the level of "hatred," defined in the leading case of R v Keegstra as "the most severe and deeply-felt form of opprobrium" and "a most extreme emotion that belies reason; an emotion that, if exercised against members of an identifiable group, implies that those individuals are to be despised, scorned, denied respect and made subject to ill-treatment on the basis of group affiliation." This doesn't absolve the CJC of all blame: the phrase is potentially inaccurate, since the majority of rally participants probably don't support the terrorist group, and we'd be curious to see how a defamation claim would unfold, but it’s exceedingly unlikely to be a hate crime.
On the other hand, the CJC is likely correct to suggest that hate crimes were committed by certain people whom the rally attracted, such as Nazi salutes and chants: these were expressions of hatred against an identifiable group (namely, Jews), were made publicly, and could have been reasonably foreseen to lead to harm. One hopes that the perpetrators will be caught and punished. That said, other actions that the CJC criticizes are unlikely to be hate crimes. Equating the situation in Gaza with apartheid or genocide may be disagreeable to some, but these aren't hate crimes so much as statements on a matter of public interest that are believed by the speakers, correctly or not, to be genuine.
Speaking as a disinterested observer, we can only say that neither group of Canadians comes out looking good from all of this.
Pro-Palestinian rally organizers deserve blame for exercising insufficient care to prevent antisemitism. Arguing that they couldn't control everyone who showed up is a dodge: any reasonable person could foresee that a protest against Israeli actions would attract some nasty characters, and more should have been done to disavow and eject them. Framing the issue as empathy with Palestinians rather than anger toward Israel—like the Jewish women who staged a sit-in at the Israeli consulate—coupled with a clear condemnation of the actions of Hamas, might have been a wiser approach.
Meanwhile, the CJC overplayed its hand by calling the rallies “pro-Hamas.” Surely it must recognize that reasonable people can criticize Israel's military actions without supporting the ideology of a terrorist group dedicated to the country's destruction. Equally, its failure to express compassion for Palestinian civilians killed in Gaza—in contrast to NECEF's sympathy for the no less tragic deaths of Israeli citizens killed by Hamas rockets—suggests a belief that all Palestinians are tacit Hamas supporters who deserved what they got, which betrays a disturbing insensitivity that the CJC ought to disavow.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Maybe hate speech laws are too easily manipulated and cause more problems than they solve.
bingo!
I agree! Too often do these good intentioned laws end up producing effects akin to fascism.
When will this madness end? I don't give a shit about who's "right" and who's "wrong", because neither side will ever give in. It's like watching a World Cup Final that never ends. I can't even walk up Yonge St. anymore without worrying if I'm going to get spit on or pelted with rocks.
I'm moving up North before the cancer spreads. So long Toronto...
I've got a lot of personal issues, but if I say that I am blessed with anything, it's that I don't identify myself with any culture, ancestry, religion, ethnicity, other than just being Canadian. The only benefit to such a mindset is to declare oneself as "being right", or being "the victim". I read this article and I wonder why those people are there, and what reasons they have for the words they say. Did they lose a family member, do they want to play the victim, or do they just want to be a shit disturber? Could be any of those reasons, or it could be something completely different, all that matters is the here and the now. It doesn't matter that this situation is where it is due to 400 years of unresolved conflict between the nations and its people, it doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong, and until people realize this the only way this will end is when everyone there who wants to be involved in that war has drowned in each other’s blood with their last dying breath. I don't think this war will end; there are too many people who don't want it to end.
"I don't think this war will end; there are too many people who don't want it to end."
Exactly, but now it's on Canadian soil.
I've removed two comments on this thread that don't relate at all to the subject at hand. If you want to discuss Scientology, there are articles on Torontoist where you can do that—this isn't one of them.
blast!
i wanted to discuss the comment about scientology, at least in as much as it seemed entirely out of place!
Street protest + torontoist article = event staged by anonymous?
why am i still posting this comment?
in other news:
demonstrate! don't litigate!
I think its vile to dredge up horrible mementos of the violent past in the manner depicted in those pictures. I don't think it is valid to equate the goals, methods and motivations of the Nazi leadership with those of Israel today. I cannot imagine the same purpose lies beneath this painful and seemingly intractable conflict. In fact, I believe the comparison between the crisis in Gaza and the holocaust comes up as quickly and as frequently as it does out of some twisted perception of irony: Jews were massacred by the Nazis, they left to form their own country and now they're doing it to their own subjected people.
But surely the lessons of the holocaust are meant to be shared by everyone. Israel don't deserve a monopoly on being compared to Nazis just because Nazis murdered Jews.
On the other hand:
If the Israelis wanted to avoid unpleasant comparisons like the ones described in this article, it probably couldn't hurt to spend some time finding other, less overwhelming, ways achieve their goals. In the meantime, Gaza is a ghetto, and Israeli tanks and Israeli bombs are demolishing it.
I was at one of the Toronto rallies on Bloor (I think it was Saturday 3 January) and I witnessed one of the marshals asking someone not to wield a placard equating Israeli policy to Nazism.
I sympathise with the organisers - it was in a public space with many entrances. Exerting total control over every sentiment expressed on placards would have been impossible. As it was, the speakers that I heard at the rally (which included one of the women who had occupied the Israeli consulate) emphasised the humanitarian effects and the political injustice. There was some Palestinian nationalism, but Hamas wasn't really mentioned much beyond someone pointing out that helping Fatah to overturn the election result hadn't exactly been western democracies' finest hour.
A sensible and well reasoned article. Nice work.
I enjoy this article - it was balanced and factual. Good work, Torontoist.