well what do I do now

by Itamar Eichner

The website states that this is the first part of the database, which was prepared by the managing editor of the opinion section of The Maple website, Davide Mastracci, and that more names will be published in the near future.

Jews and Israelis in the Jewish community in Canada say that the publication of the database adds another layer to the general feeling that there has been a rise of antisemitism in Canada.

"It's stirring up the community," said an Israeli who has lived in Canada for five years. "It's running wild in our groups. In general, you see, our whole sense of 'security' here has been radically undermined for a long time. There will always be those who ignore it and say that it's more dangerous in Israel. That may be true, but Canada, which was the symbol of a comfortable and safe life for Jews, has long since ceased to be so. There are antisemitic incidents all the time and the great concern is the lack of intervention by the police here. Just last Sunday police refused to take action against protesters who celebrated the deaths of the Bibas family members."

The Israeli resident of Canada added: "It is criminal naivety to publish such a list as part of freedom of expression. It opens a window, God forbid, for serious things that he certainly would not write publicly. What else needs to happen for those who need to wake up? We are experiencing processes here from 1930s Europe. Marking Jews/Israelis, excluding them, shaming them in public. The point is that there is no doubt that the whole world is against us, but Canada is no longer a safe place for Jews."

Jews in the Toronto community say the feeling behind the publication of the list is that the shedding the blood of Jews is being condoned. "Whoever published the list is careful. He is not calling for harming them, but insists on publishing a list only of Canadians who served in the IDF. Why is that good?" the community said. The Jewish community added: "There is also a condoning of shedding of Jewish blood; a feeling that the police are doing nothing."

by Jessica Schwalb

George Mason University, the Northern Virginia school that has grappled with high-profile instances of pro-terror student radicalism, hosted an anti-Israel professor who delivered a lecture aimed at "shattering this idea that anything that is to do with Jews, the Holocaust, Israel is somehow unique."

The Washington Free Beacon attended the Thursday event—titled, "Pedagogy and Palestine in the Classroom"—in an English Department conference room on George Mason's campus. The school's Faculty and Staff for Justice in Palestine sponsored it.

The event featured Stockton University associate professor of Holocaust and genocide studies Raz Segal, who discussed "teaching and conversing on Palestine in today's context." Segal is known for his hostility toward the Jewish state, having accused Israel of genocide just six days after Hamas's Oct. 7 terror attack. 

In his George Mason speech, he lamented "the problematic idea that Jews are unique," calling it "an integral part of thinking in an anti-Semitic way." He cited the Holocaust as a counterargument—and went on to argue that Nazi Germany's slaughtering of six million Jews "was not, of course, unique."

"When someone raises this in my class, as an assumption or whatever it is, that the Holocaust is somehow different, I take this as an opportunity," Segal said. "Tell us why you think that it is unique? Let's break this down."

"And ultimately in the class, whenever we do this exercise—and there is a lot of published material about these kinds of comparisons that show us that the Holocaust was not, of course, unique—is that the class reaches the conclusion … that, yes, the Holocaust was not unique, right?" Segal continued. His goal in teaching his students, then, is "just shattering this idea that anything that is to do with Jews, the Holocaust, Israel is somehow unique."

The panel came in the aftermath of two high-profile incidents at George Mason involving student radicals.

 In November, police searched the home of two Students for Justice in Palestine leaders suspected of defacing George Mason's student center and found firearms, scores of ammunition, Hamas and Hezbollah flags, and signs that read "death to America" and "death to Jews," the Free Beacon reported at the time. Shortly thereafter, in mid-December, the FBI arrested a George Mason freshman, Egyptian citizen Abdullah Ezzeldin Taha Mohamed Hassan, for plotting a terror attack on the Israeli consulate building in Manhattan.

This is not exactly a great revelation. I and others have already made many posts explaining that the blatant antisemitism seen in the antizionist movement cannot be dismissed as alt-right infiltration. Antisemitism is endemic in Western society, and any movement that doesn't actively guard against it is in danger of falling into those tropes.

But frankly, that doesn't go far enough.

We need to talk about Durban 2001.

In 2001, the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance was held in Durban, South Africa, with sponsorship by the United Nations.

Whatever might genuinely have been accomplished at this conference, its primary legacy will always be antisemitism.

I will be using this article as my major source. You do need a jstor account to read it, but you can create one for free through either a google or microsoft account.

The conference was preceded by an NGO forum, where groups representing all marginalized groups were able to speak, before finally drafting a joint declaration.

The forum went bad almost immediately.

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, if anyone is unfamiliar, is literally a piece of Nazi propaganda, and it was being openly sold at this conference against racism.

(Well, Imperial Russian, but the Nazis were very fond of it.)

When it came time for the joint declaration to be drafted, there was one group, and only one group, whose points were all excluded--the Jews.

So, a declaration that every Jewish group considered antisemitic was created, and no less than Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch held it up as the voice of victims worldwide--deliberately obscuring the exclusion of the Jews.

Then the UN conference began.

Attendees were allowed to openly compare Israel to the Nazis, but not to say, "please don't attack the Jews."

As the attendees began drafting their resolution, strong opposition soon arose to the notion of acknowledging Jews as the victims of prejudice and oppression, past or present.

Note the countries. Syria, the UAE, Egypt, Sudan, and Iraq are all members of the Arab League. Iran and Pakistan are not, but are also Islamic countries. This was a coordinated action.

At the same time as they insisted that the conference not acknowledge antisemitism or the Holocaust, these countries insisted on including in the resolution on global racism language specifically criticizing Israel--but not any other issue of discrimination or systemic prejudice anywhere else in the world.

This clear double standard led to the Israeli delegation and all the Jewish NGOs leaving in protest, with the US delegation leaving as well in solidarity.

And matters continued to go downhill from there.

Now, the right of return is an entire topic in and of itself, but the relevant point is that this standard--that refugees must be allowed to the homes they fled--is not applied to any refugee population other than the Palestinians.

The stance on antisemitism was clear--it could only be discussed if placed alongside condemnation of Israel.

The problem here is not that Israel was criticized but that, at a conference meant to address global racism and oppression, Israel was singled out as uniquely evil.

The fact is, Israel is not now, nor was it in 2001, the worst global abuser of human rights.

Israel is not even the worst abuser of the rights of Palestinians!

Notably, while the Durban conference of 2001 was particularly egregious, this behavior did not start in 2001, nor did it end there.

But looking at the Durban conference and its immediate aftermath are crucial because of how familiar they seem to those who have been paying attention recently.

And if you think that the behaviors and attitudes of Arab and Muslim states aren't relevant in the West, learn more about the billions of dollars poured into Western universities by first Saudi Arabia and then Qatar:

Then consider that the leaders of Hamas currently live in luxury in Qatar, while the citizens of Gaza are living in refugee camps.

So to anyone who's noticed that Jews seem to label almost everything that antizionists do as antisemitic, it's not a tactic to shut down criticism, it's because the playbook they're reading out of, whether they realize it or not, was literally written in between complaints that Hitler didn't go far enough.

The global antizionist movement doesn't have an antisemitism problem, it is fundamentally antisemitic in a way that cannot be fixed without abandoning major parts of its behavior and rhetoric.

I feel like the part where you yell at Jews to leave where they live in NYC, calling them disgusting, and harassing children, is the part where your mask falls off.

Some "activists" targeted a few random Jewish people and (without evidence!!) just labeled them Zionists

Then a whole ass company had to say "we've never knowingly worked with any Zionists" - which seems like a tall order considering how many staff and people work on shows and just how many guests they've had over the years

The Hotel Royalton, New York, 1988. Designed by Philippe Starck.

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/gaza-chiefs-brutal-calculation-civilian-bloodshed-will-help-hamas-626720e7

“In dozens of messages sent over several months and acquired by The Wall Street Journal, Sinwar communicated to Hamas compatriots and mediating parties alike that he had no interest in pursuing a ceasefire with Israel, as he believed that the growing civilian death toll would serve to benefit Hamas more than a cessation of fighting would.”

this has always been his stance: