Lawrence Solomon - Financial Post 17 Dec 17

It's always interesting to see "good" Jews like Lawrence Solomon display a bit of anti-semitic ignorance about Jews and Judaism and then hide their anti-semitism behind their religion. Although most Jews support Israel in one way or another, they never do so in conflict with their country - Canada - or in a way that would harm Canada. Most Jews, but certainly not all, support climate policy because of the Jewish concept of Tikkun Olum - the obligation to "save the world". Unfortunately in their need to save the world,by proceding on an incorrect path, like climate policy and Kyoto, they sometimes do harm. But don't we all. Perhaps Lawrence Solomon is so obsessed with Jewish guilt that he would promote a policy that favours Israel and which is contrary to Canada's interests, but most of us wouldn't.

Refuting Benny Morris

Benny Morris clearly sets out the position of the Palestinian propaganda relating to
the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) but fails completely to understand the Israeli position and the nature of the Palestinians themselves. First, the term "West Bank" refers to the west bank of the Jordan, not to ancient Israel, and so immediately begins to delegitimize Israels' rights to the area of Judea and Samaria. Next he refers to the "occupation". Many books, including "The Jewish People's Rights to the Land of Israel" by Torontonian Salomon BenZimra clearly show that under international law the land belongs to Israel and not to the Palestinians. Morris is of course correct in saying that there is an attempt by Arab countries and Europe to delegitimize Israel, but it is not the "occupation" that is responsible, but it is simply another Arab plan to destroy Israel since brute force did not work. Lastly it is pure anti-semitism that is really hindering a two-state solution. There is no reason other than anti-semitism to exclude Jews and Jewish towns and cities from a new Palestinian state. In ignoring the Arab's desire for all Islamic states to be Jew-free Morris is giving his consent to the exclusion of Jews from states and therefore to state-sponsored anti-semitism. Benny and many other post-Zionists assume that since the Palestinian Arabs are doing poorly it must be someone else's fault. But he is wrong. The reason for the Palestinians' poor situation is that they would rather produce anti-semitic propaganda than have co-operation with Israel. They would rather
have an intifada than 90% of the territory they desire. And lastly, they would rather have perpetual conflict and poverty
than renounce their anti-semitism and admit the legitimacy of the State of Israel.

Anti-Semitism or Judeophobia

Anti-Semitism or Judeophobia

The word anti-Semitism is confusing as, in its usual usage, it means prejudice against Jews. Occasionally it means bigotry against those that speak a Semitic language, but this is not its common use. It would be better, if used at all, to spell it antisemitism as it is not usually meant to refer to Semites at all.

The word originated in Germany in the late 1800’s when Jews were beginning to be thought of as a race rather than a religion. The distinction is important because with the beginning of the enlightenment Jews were now considered a race. This meant that Jews could no longer simply convert to Christianity to become part of the majority and easily participate in the secular lifestyle available to Christians.
With a little research into the history of Judaism, it is impossible to define a Jew as a member of a race or as a Semite. Even the Exodus from Egypt included many slaves that were not related to Abraham, and were not necessarily Semitic, and yet were soon included in the Nation of Israel. Now of course there are Indian, Black, Chinese, Japanese and blond and blue eyed white Jews. This has developed because of conversions and intermarriage. The result is a mixture of peoples, races, and cultures all of whom are considered to be equal by Jewish law. It is therefore hard to call this group of varied people either a race or Semitic.
So it seems that we are now using the word anti-semitic to apply to a group that is not semitic. As long as everyone knew what people meant was there any harm done?
I suggest there was. By branding Jews as Semites, Christian Europe could easily say they
were culturally and socially different from themselves so make them out to be “the other”. In fact they originally were a different cultural group but more and more they were the same cultural group with a different religion and different rituals. Unless Jews were expelled from a country, as happened with Spain, Portugal and England among others, they would live in the same country for sometimes a thousand years, intermarry and pick up most of the cultural traits and ideas of that country. There was often virtually no difference between an enlightened Jew and an enlightened Christian. So to call one
a Semite made no sense except to discriminate against him. Jews may be a religious group, a cultural group, or a national group, but what they are not, as a group, is Semitic.

Recently the word Islamophobic has become common. Now phobic means that in some way the person is acting irrationally. In this case the implication is that anyone that dislikes Islam or Muslims is in some way irrational. There is no such implication
in the word anti-Semite. I therefore suggest that people that dislike Judaism or Jews should be called Judeophobic. Their dislike of Jews and Judaism is usually irrational, and originally based on the erroneous Christian idea that Jews were Christ killers or on the verses in the Koran or Hadith encouraging Muslims to kill and oppress Jews and other infidels. Today antisemitism is mostly fueled by the irrational Islamic hatred of Jews and supported by a left over Christian antisemitism. Let’s call this irrational thought by its true name, Judeophobia, as it has nothing to do with the semitic Arabs, nor is it more than simply being irrationally opposed to Jews and Judaism

Harper on Israel and anti-semitism

My letter to Prime Minister Harper

Thank you for your speech on Israel.

It made me proud to be a Canadian.

In my opinion it was one of the great speeches, if not the greatest since Churchill

and raises you to the level of one of the world's greatest moral statesmen.

Letter to the Globe Dec 15th - re England

Jolly Old England

Tony Blair has the audacity to publically criticize Canada's position on global warming; Engand's laws permit visiting Israeli politicians to be subject to accusations of war crimes; England's new anti-semitic movie, "The Education" is enjoying rave reviews;
and the country is quickly caving in to the demands of native born radical Islamists. It seems that jolly old England isn't so jolly anymore.

Letter to the Globe - Sept 1, 2009

More Swedish neutrality - Swedish newspaper's anti-semitism

Just as the CEO of a company is responsible for all the statements of personnel in a business, so the Swedish government is responsible for all that happens within its jurisdiction. The reason for the government's silence might well be fear of Muslim violence, but if so, cowardice does not justify their neutrality on the issue. Denying responsibility is equivalent to agreement. They owe Israel and all Jews an apology.

Comment on the Globe - Monday - Aug 10th

What a headline. Perhaps Instead of "Harper blames Canada for visa furor' they could have put, "Harper unable to amend Immigration Act with a minority government" or at least something which doesn't lead to incitement against Harper. I don't remember the NY Times haven't headlines like "Obama blames the U.S. for everything" at the Cairo conference - although that certainly was a possibility. Clearly the Globe is a "Liberal" paper and its editorial policy is anti-Conservative.
There are 4 letters to the editor supporting the United Church's position and saying that the church is not anti-semitic because it criticizes Israel. There is also one neutral letter. Contrary to what those letters say, it is not the criticism of Israel that is anti-semitic, it is the choosing of only Israel to criticize that leads one to think that anti-semitism has crept into the church. Similarly it is the Globe's publishing of 5 letters against Israel's position, and none that supports it, that leads me to think that the Globe's position is anti-Israel.