Author of the article:Avi BenloloPublished Jul 12, 2024 

It’s all quite surreal, perhaps even dystopian. This week’s pact between the University of Windsor and the enigmatic Windsor Liberation Zone Team reads like the manifesto of an imagined society embroiled in a grand struggle against some great injustice. The university, apparently so cowed by the encampment, somehow capitulated to the demands of a small, rag-tag group of students whose sole purpose seems to be to demonize, defame and destabilize a follow democracy — the State of Israel.

On Thursday morning, world-famous film producer Robert Lantos sent me a cryptic email from his set in Europe, saying, “Windsor has fallen. Hamas rules. Reading this proclamation is surreal. It took me back to 1930s Hungary. The first Jewish laws were directed at universities. It’s why my mother was not allowed to study medicine. It’s what my film ‘Sunshine’ is about.”

The agreement feels like a script from a movie set in a twisted, upside-down world where truth is evil, wrong is right and radicals and oppressors are venerated. Where was the “Liberation Zone” during the Arab Spring, when Syrian President Bashar Assad slaughtered 500,000 of his own citizens, even gassing them with toxic chlorine? Where was it when ISIS was butchering Coptic Christians and Yazidis, or when the Taliban reclaimed power in Afghanistan, condemning women to barbaric pre-feudal times?

Eschewing academic freedom, UWindsor has shockingly agreed to “not pursue any institutional academic agreements with Israeli universities until the right of Palestinian self-determination has been realized.” Despite the fact that Gazan universities have been used by Hamas to store weapons for terror attacks against Israel, the agreement calls for “establishing or reestablishing institutional relationships with Palestinian universities,” but not with Israeli institutions.

Instead of ensuring that its investments conform to Canadian anti-terror laws, the agreement shamefully discusses ensuring the school’s “responsible investment policy” takes into account a United Nations database of “companies whom it has identified are engaged in illegal Israeli settlement enterprise in the occupied Palestinian territory.” Haven’t we seen this plot before, when the Nazis boycotted Jews in the 1930s?

Despite the fact that hate crimes against the Jewish community surpass those against all other groups, including the Muslim community (and certainly the Palestinian community, which is a small segment of that group), the Windsor agreement specifically addresses “anti-Palestinian racism,” while making no mention of antisemitism. The often ill-defined term anti-Palestinian racism has been heavily criticized for posing a threat to freedom of expression for pro-Israel students and faculty.

Just this week, a Hezbollah rocket obliterated the car that Noa and Nir Baranes were driving in, killing them instantly and leaving their three children orphaned. Yet, the Windsor agreement makes no mention of aiding Israeli families, including the families of the 1,200 Hamas victims killed on October 7. Instead, it solely grants “equitable and inclusive access to education for students from Palestine, particularly from Gaza.”

The university could have employed a multitude of measures to clear the encampment without succumbing to the terms set by radical students. It could have immediately dismantled the encampment, as York University did. It could have filed for a court injunction without agreeing to any terms, as the University of Toronto did. It could have launched a lawsuit against the organizers, as the University of Waterloo did, resulting in the removal of the encampment. Or it could have finally convinced law enforcement to clear out the encampment, as McGill University did.

All these measures and more were available to the University of Windsor. Instead, it appears to have signed a perilous agreement that undermines academic freedom and Canadian values. Universities are supposed to be about preparing young people for the workforce. UWindsor has promised to protect students involved in the encampment. But in the real world, where these pro-Palestinian students will one day seek employment, such protections will vanish.

In New York this week, a top law firm (Sullivan & Cromwell) announced it’s hiring policy will exclude anyone involved in anti-Israel campus protests. I would encourage all companies to adopt similar policies, lest they too fall victim to an encampment in their boardrooms. Preference should be given to hiring pro-Israel university students. They are courageous defenders of democracy and need our support and encouragement.

December 15, 2023:

If antisemitism's 'context-dependent,' our financial support should be, too When they come calling, 

We owe a debt of gratitude to Harvard president Claudine Gay, MIT president Sally Kornbluth and University of Pennsylvania president Elizabeth Magill for introducing a valuable assessment tool that we can now use when considering financial support for universities and other institutions. 

Henceforth, when approached by a university seeking endorsement for a project or chair, my response will be that it's a "context-dependent decision." The university's stance on antisemitism and the actions it has taken will be pivotal factors in determining whether I give it my support.

If university administrators are applying such a lens to addressing antisemitism and calls for genocide against the Jewish people, it's only fair that we employ similar criteria for supporting their institutions. This standardized response will become my policy when asked to support any cause.

This stance comes out of the recent testimony given by these three presidents before a congressional hearing led by Rep. Elise Stefanik. When asked if "calling for the genocide of Jews" would violate their schools' code of conduct, Magill responded, "It is a context-dependent decision, congresswoman."

Magill resigned days later after a donor threatened to withdraw his $100 million gift, but her arrogance remains a pinnacle moment in the fight against campus Antisemitism.

The dismissive and condescending "context-dependent" reply from Gay, Magill and Kornbluth demands a robust response. It's crucial to recognize that we are engaged in an ideological war against a radical left-wing movement that seeks to undermine core Judeo-Christian values.

Allowing calls for genocide against Jewish people makes it particularly challenging for universities to extract further funds from our community. Universities may now face challenges when the Jewish community and its supporters, who are known for their generosity, start withdrawing millions in support.

The tolerance for genocidal chants like "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" and calls for "intefadeh" have reached their limit. While my support for higher learning now hinges on a university's willingness to confront antisemitism, I will extend this approach to hospitals, community centres and everything in between.

According to Gay, Magill and Kornbluth, "context" alone is insufficient; action must turn into conduct in order to be dealt with. If a university denounces antisemitism but fails to take action, it will not receive my support.

The "context versus conduct" framework is applicable in our fight against all behaviours that harm the fight against antisemitism and can extend to the hypocrisy of political leaders. For example, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau lighting a menorah in honour of Hanukkah one evening with the Jewish community (context) contrasts sharply with directing officials at the United Nations to vote against Israel the next day (conduct).

The "context-dependent decision" is a form of doublespeak that has permeated progressive left-wing circles since the Oct. 7 massacre, revealing an unprecedented level of denial and distortion not seen since the Holocaust. The fact that it took UN Women eight weeks to denounce Hamas rapes and sexual assaults of Israeli women illustrates the problem.

In this context-dependent era, those who are supposed to exemplify morality are asking the public to tolerate their intolerant. They use concepts like "freedom of expression" to deny and distort the truth and refuse to take action against those advocating for violence, death and destruction if it conflicts with their narrative.

It's time to turn the tables on them. It's time to reject the hypocrites who have eroded moral decency. When they come calling, tell them you will make a context- and conduct-based decision.

National Post

Avi Abraham Benlolo is the Founder and CEO of the Abraham Global Peace Initiative.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/if-antisemitisms-context-dependent-our-financial-support-should-be-too

We have always stood up for others. Who stands up for us now?

Author of the article:Avi BenloloPublished Nov 03, 2023  •  Last updated 8 hours ago  •  3 

A number of years ago, I participated in a press conference alongside a group of Holocaust survivors to denounce the heinous and barbaric gassing of entire villages by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Following the so-called Arab Spring and his own citizens’ calls for freedom, al-Assad had murdered between 350,000 and 500,000 men, women and children, which constituted a genocide.

Surprisingly, there were no demonstrations on the streets of the Middle East. There were no rampaging mobs converging on London Bridge or burning tires in the suburbs of Paris. In Toronto and major cities across America, there were no demonstrations by pro-Palestinian groups calling out what was undoubtedly a real genocide. All was quiet.

When Egypt cracked down on dissidents, when mobs of people rampaged through Libya and Tunisia calling for their freedom but were murdered by their own governments by the dozen, our university campuses remained silent. Unions hardly raised a fuss, if any. There were no hate-crime incidents, and students in schools did not dress up like Hamas terrorists for Halloween. It was as if the world had turned a blind eye.

Nonetheless, we spoke out in the dead of winter on a bitterly cold day, surrounded by every media outlet available to our city. These Holocaust survivors, having walked in the shadow of death, now in their 80s and 90s (most have now passed away), found the courage and righteousness to speak out for Syrians — a Muslim nation that has been at war with Israel for 75 years.

We have always stood up for others. Even now, you see some Jewish groups speaking out for Palestinians in Gaza, albeit mostly misinformed. But now, with surging antisemitism here at home and around the world, we boldly wonder, where were the school walkouts for the 1,400 Jews who were brutally massacred on Oct. 7?

Where are the pro-Palestinian demonstrations demanding that Hamas return the 242 Israelis and foreigners held in medieval-like conditions in Gaza? Where are the candlelight vigils and the calls to stop bombing Israeli cities and towns with crude rockets aimed at civilian populations? Where are the so-called international human rights organizations that eagerly promote the Hamas narrative but remain silent over the 500,000 displaced Israeli civilians?

The world hasn’t been silent; but not in a good way. Instead, it has given voice to extraordinary antisemitism. This week, a woman was filmed in Toronto tearing down posters of children who had been kidnapped by Hamas. This unfathomable, antisemitic loss of a moral compass is a stark reminder of the boycotts the Nazis practised before the Holocaust.

Speaking to a U.S. Senate panel this week, FBI Director Christopher Wray warned that antisemitism is reaching “historic levels” in America. While Jews make up only about 2.4 per cent of the U.S. population, they account for 60 per cent of all religious-based hate crimes, he said. Nearly every major city is reporting sharp increases, in some cases doubling or more, as has been the case in Toronto.

Threats made against Jewish students have caused Cornell University to cancel classes today. At Harvard, a group of students was filmed harassing a Jewish student. Here in Canada, students at Toronto Metropolitan University’s law school and York University have published declarations that promote violence, leaving Jewish students wondering if they are safe.

Director Wray’s warning that “the Jewish community is targeted by terrorists (really) across the spectrum” emphasizes the looming threat to America and Canada. The growing radicalism on our campuses and in our streets is inspired by Hamas and may lead to homegrown violent extremists and foreign terrorist organizations jeopardizing the safety and security of our nations, not just the Jewish community.

The extreme rise in antisemitism is hardening the Jewish community. We see those on our campuses and streets who sympathize with Hamas and emulate its virulent hatred as being not much different from the Nazis. Our only recourse is to strengthen our resolve and determination and stand firm with Israel. Holocaust survivors are now almost gone, but we are here to carry forward their fight in the name of Never Again.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/avi-benlolo-the-extreme-rise-in-antisemitism-is-hardening-the-jewish-community

The Abraham Global Peace Initiative supports and subscribes to the working definition of Antisemitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance:

In the spirit of the Stockholm Declaration that states: “With humanity still scarred by …antisemitism and xenophobia the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight those evils” the committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial called the IHRA Plenary in Budapest 2015 to adopt the following working definition of antisemitism. 
 

On 26 May 2016, the Plenary in Bucharest decided to:
 

Adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:
 

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
 

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

• Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
• Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
• Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
• Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
• Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
• Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
• Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
• Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
• Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
• Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
• Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).
 

Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
 

Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.

Source: https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definitions-charters/working-definition-antisemitism

And what of forgiveness? The erosion of religion has vanquished the notion. Hiding in an attic from the Nazis, instead of hating them, 14-year-old Anne Frank wrote, “in spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart”. Where then has the golden-rule of “love thy neighbour” gone?

The world hangs in a balance between good and evil. On any given day, we are moments away from chaos. If we can draw one lesson from Russia’s assault on civilians in Ukraine, it’s that our freedom is never absolute. If we stop defending freedom and democracy, rest assured that darkness and despair are inches away.

The world was shocked when two weeks ago, Roger Waters dressed like a Nazi in Berlin, retraumatizing millions of Jewish families who lost relatives in the Holocaust. Waters is insignificant on his own. But as part of a sharp and vicious propaganda movement that has been raging at universities, in the media and at the United Nations (to name a few examples), along with influencers like Kanye West (YE), his voice helps amplify a surge in antisemitism and anti-Israel sentiment over these last number of years.

We need to understand this outrage in the context of a larger campaign. I am talking about the vicious propaganda warfare emanating from the pro-Palestinian movement that has defamed Israel by falsely calling it an “apartheid state”; that has dehumanized Jewish people by calling them “colonizers” and has even demonized them by calling them “Nazis.” If Israel — a modern democratic nation that espouses the same values as Canada and America — is delegitimized by the double-standard practice of woke activists, what then is the future of liberal democracies?

Roger Waters could have used his incredible influence to convey a message of peace and hope. He could have extended an olive branch to both Israelis and Palestinians. But to dress like a Nazi? From a sociological perspective, he seems to be harnessing this moment of rising social tension, anger and frustration. All over the world, the left and the right are at each other’s throats.

The problem is not Roger Waters. It is society at large. This Netflix generation is drawing further away from the “Never Again” lessons learned from the Second World War. We are losing our moral compass. Everywhere you look over these last number of years, people are fighting. The economy is fragile. Climate is changing. Politics have become polarized. Wars are raging and peace almost everywhere is becoming illusive. Antisemitism is on the rise and hate crimes against Jewish people increased by 20 per cent in the U.S. in 2021, according to data released in March.

Roger Waters’ horrific display, in other words, is a by-product of the hate and frustration felt by society at large, not dissimilar from pre-Nazi Germany. In response, this week my foundation, The Abraham Global Peace Initiative, announced its providing a counter-narrative to the Pink Floyd exhibit in Toronto (because it features Waters) with our own exhibit right across the street. The Power of One highlights individuals who have made positive contributions to society — people who have struggled to make our world a better place. They should be our rock stars.

It’s time to step back and repair the social damage. Although far from perfect, human rights achievements garnered in the last century are slipping away. Martin Luther King Jr. fought and died for Black civil rights and for equality amongst all peoples: “I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed. We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal.” Where is that equality today when hate crime reports indicate the Black community is the most targeted racial group?

Where is the reflection of the brand of activism exalted by Mahatma Ghandi who refused to incite nor take up arms in pursuit of freedom? Instead he pleaded with his followers to “be the change they want to see in others.” What role-modelling are today’s youth receiving when they see Waters shooting a fake sub-machine gun from the stage. He is certainly not responsible. But with all this pent-up social chaos, is it any wonder that the number of mass-shootings have spectacularly increased?

And what of forgiveness? The erosion of religion has vanquished the notion. Hiding in an attic from the Nazis, instead of hating them, 14-year-old Anne Frank wrote, “in spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart”. Where then has the golden-rule of “love thy neighbour” gone?

Here is the thing. Our Power of One exhibit points to the basic truism that each of us has the power to choose between good and evil. We can all work to save our world through expressions of love not war. None of us are perfect. We are merely flawed humans. But if we believe that our lives have a higher purpose, we will rise to the challenge and make the world a better place.

National Post

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/avi-benlolo-the-threat-of-hate-is-rising-in-a-chaotic-world

A storm of anti-Semitism awaits Jewish and pro-Israel students at colleges and universities this fall. With the Jewish New Year now upon us and students moving into their residences this week, we can expect another year of tension, anxiety and bigotry on campuses. While the Abraham Accords defused and undermined campus extremism last spring, the Hamas war against Israel in May provided renewed imagery with which to bash Israel. We saw this play out on city streets around the world over the summer. Now with an in-person return to campus, extremists will bring their propaganda to the lecture halls.

The hostile climate will no doubt worsen with attempts to boycott and delegitimize the Jewish State. Even as the war with Gaza was raging, extreme leftish campus groups began passing hostile resolutions and statements against Israel. Sadly, many of these groups believe they are acting in the cause of “social-justice” without fully understanding either the context of the conflict or that Hamas is a radical Islamist terrorist organization — not unlike the Taliban. Either way, this unfounded and radicalized behaviour on campuses ends up victimizing Jewish students and faculty, as it has for the past 20 years.

Of all places, a campus is no place for hate and intolerance. If as a society we are to uphold universal conventions of human rights and freedoms, anti-Semitism must be vehemently rejected and condemned by university administrations and faculty.

Yet, Jewish students are reporting attacks and threats of violence on online forums for standing up for their beliefs and defending Israel. During the height of the Gaza war, social networking sites were replete with hate-filled content against Israel that often pitted friends against friends, and resulted in police reports and allegations of hate speech nearing hate crime. As university groups bashed Israel, Jewish students felt marginalized and silenced by their own university communities. It turns out, free speech on campuses these days travels in one direction only — against the only democracy in the Middle East, Israel.

Despite the fact that Jewish college and university students have a history of rallying behind oppressed groups facing racism and discrimination, the campaign against the Jews manifesting as boycott campaigns and falsehoods like “Israeli Apartheid Week” has been met mostly by silence. Undoubtedly that silence has contributed to the fact that a new Alums for Campus Fairness survey found that nearly 100 per cent of the Jewish American college students polled attested to anti-Semitism and the demonization of Israel on campuses. A whopping 79 per cent of the more than 500 respondents had experienced or heard first-hand about another student making offensive or threatening anti-Semitic comments.

Campus anti-Semitism has undoubtedly contributed to the rising tide of such behaviour throughout society. This week, the FBI revealed that Jews are the target of 58 per cent of all religiously motivated hate crimes in the U.S. despite constituting just two per cent of the population. These numbers are consistent with Canadian and international models of hate crime whereby Jewish communities continue to be the most targeted group even while they are relatively few in numbers. In other words, anti-Semitic bigots are nothing more than schoolyard bullies picking on a minority group.

Universal conventions on education dictate that education should be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Education, at its core, must promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups. Universities and colleges have an obligation under their own mandate to preserve, protect and defend the rights of students and faculty to function freely and without intimidation or feeling of victimization.

Disregard and contempt for historical degradation and violence against the Jewish people, such as anti-Semitism, boycotts and genocide is harmful to the well-being of humanity. Everyone is entitled to the rights and freedoms set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Administrators and educators must uphold these principles for Jewish students in as much as they are upheld for anyone else on campus.

If humanity has learned anything this past year, hopefully it’s to have a total reset, including on university and college campuses. As we approach the Jewish New Year and renew strength and faith, perhaps everyone can come together and draw inspiration from the foundational principles found in the sacred texts of most religions: love thy neighbour; pursue justice; repair the world; do not oppress the stranger and do not stand idly by. These basic human values must underpin the fight against anti-Semitism and intolerance on campuses and in society at large.

Published September 3, 2021 National Post

Post-Holocaust anti-Semitism was primarily disseminated by hate groups utilizing mediums we now deem somewhat archaic, like flyers and graffiti. In some circumstances, as in the case of Germany's Ernst Zundel, they were able to publish pamphlets, utilize phone answering machines and organize gatherings on some far-away farms.

The one-to-one direct recruitment into hate groups during those years now seems equally archaic. It took a considerable amount of effort to inspire, cultivate and introduce a new recruit to a group. For this reason, hate groups — particularly neo-Nazis — were relatively small in number following the Holocaust.

But with today’s postmodern anti-Semitism, inspiration, cultivation and recruitment happens en masse thanks to the spectacular growth of the internet and its social networking sites. In the past two decades, and particularly in the past few years, the world wide web has brought together more people than Hitler himself might have imagined, to promote and facilitate false anti-Semitic narratives that are inspiring dangerous violence.

The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) released a report this week that charged that social media companies are not acting against anti-Semitism. Even while there has been a dramatic shift in operating guidelines for most social media firms — while under pressure from Jewish communities around the world — CCDH reported a whopping 84 per cent of documented anti-Semitic content was not acted upon. “Tech companies are consciously giving a free pass to anti-Jewish hatred and the increasing threat to the Jewish community,” said the not-for-profit NGO.

Its recommended solutions include having platforms hire and train more moderators to remove hate, and holding these platforms accountable if they fail to remove such comments.

Since 2014, I have argued in these pages and as part of a parliamentary committee that to combat online hate we must hold social media companies accountable. The only way social media operators will become accountable is if they are penalized through fines for non-action in the removal of hateful content. The fact that 84 per cent of anti-Semitic conspiracy theories about 9/11, and outrageous claims that Jewish people are responsible for COVID-19 and control world affairs, are left on social media should outrage civil society.

Ironically, our biggest and most important front against anti-Semitism and all forms of hatred is the internet. For this reason, The Abraham Global Peace Initiative has begun conversation with experts in artificial Intelligence and internet marketing to form a global task force on internet hate. We need to capture the hearts and minds of Silicon Valley to build algorithms and foster creative approaches to striking a blow at hate-mongers.

According to the CCDH, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter allow the usage of hashtags for anti-Semitic content such as #rothschild, #fakejews and #killthejews — all of which have gained over 3.3 million impressions. One is too many. Whereas once a neo-Nazi flyer would get the attention of mostly nobody, today's hate is entering into millions of homes via the internet, infecting children and young adults and thereby creating a new generation of haters.

Germany has recognized this problem and the general growth of anti-Semitism, announcing this week an investment of more than $40 million into researching and finding solutions to the problem. But frankly, we are running out of time.

Every day, there are dozens of reported anti-Semitic incidents around the world. Just this week, England's Tottenham Hotspurs football (soccer) team was “appalled” by radio show hosts who failed to challenge an anti-Semitic comment levelled at the club's Jewish chairman by a caller. In France and Germany, COVID-19 protests have given way to rising extremism and by extension, increased anti-Semitism. And just the other day, a Democratic politician in Ohio who lost a primary race to a rival backed by Jewish party members claimed she "didn’t lose this race" but "evil money manipulated and maligned this election."

More troubling about postmodern anti-Semitism is not merely the online regurgitation of old anti-Semitic canards, but the systematic propaganda campaign to dehumanize Jews as a means of attacking Israel. This justification of anti-Semitism is playing out online and in the media as the public is continuously fed falsehoods. Outrageous false narratives accuse the Jewish people of genocide and apartheid. The distinction between fact and fiction is blurred online as social media algorithms become echo chambers.

These lies and distortions are fast polarizing people into extreme positions, heightening levels of anxiety, animosity, fear and hatred. Whereas Adolf Hitler and his henchmen were able to mobilize millions into evil action through propaganda, the internet can mobilize billions more.

Ahmed Shaheed, the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion, warned in a report to the UN General Assembly in 2019 that anti-Semitism is "toxic to democracy.” It poses “a threat to all societies if left unaddressed,” he said. The time for action is now.

07/04/21: Public consternation over proposed legal changes to confront online hate speech is legitimate considering the possibility of abuse. If approved, amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act and accompanying changes to the Criminal Code and the Youth Criminal Justice Act will fundamentally change how Canadians conduct themselves online. Understandably, in a free and democratic society, maintaining freedom of expression is critical to the very foundation of our national enterprise.

Many argue that curtailing speech and even online behaviour disallows our fundamental rights and freedoms as citizens. To some, it signifies an encroachment of state control reminiscent of tyrannical regimes and even communism. China’s recent harsh clampdown on media and individual expression in Hong Kong points to the danger of state power over rights and freedoms.

The Canadian government’s new “action to protect Canadians against hate speech and hate crimes” would clamp down on individuals who express “detestation or vilification of an individual or group of individuals on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.” This would apply to public communications by individual users on the internet, including on social media, on personal websites and in mass emails.

That effectively means that journalists, writers and social media influencers could be subject to greater scrutiny.

I get it. As a promoter of free speech who is exposed to a daily dose of diverse opinion, my rational self agrees with the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis’ contention that “sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.” But there are problems with this perspective, too. As a student of the Holocaust, I have observed that anti-semitism is an infectious disease that if left unchecked in the social marketplace will rise to the top of hate and discriminatory practice in almost any society. Sunlight does not disinfect anti-semitism. Sunlight allows anti-semitism to replicate when it’s out in the open.

Statistics Canada reports that the Jewish community is the most targeted religious group for hate crime and hate speech in this country. In 2017, incidents of anti-semitism and hate crime in general increased by a whopping 47 per cent here. In 2019, police recorded 1,946 criminal incidents that were motivated by hate, representing a seven per cent increase from the year previous. Undoubtedly, these figures have increased under cover of the coronavirus pandemic as people have been spending more time online. During the Hamas-israel conflict in May, an online torrent of anti-semitism infected every corner of the planet.

For this reason, when testifying in front of a parliamentary task force about online hate in May 2019, I advocated for a strengthening of our hate-speech and hate -crime laws. As someone who is forwarded regular doses of anti-semitic content from those who have been targeted, I know that over the past two decades, we have seen a steady increase in online anti-semitism and hate against many groups. I doubt few would argue this point.

The Jewish community in particular (but certainly not exclusively) has been victimized online beyond measure: Jewish university students were attacked by their peers for merely identifying themselves as supporters of Israel during the latest conflict. Children of Holocaust survivors relive their parents’ trauma as they see Holocaust denial jokes flash on their screens. The Jewish community feels aghast when a newspaper displays a caricature of an Israeli soldier with his knee on the neck of a Palestinian. Online anti-semitic hate speech is pervasive and commonplace.

Given this reality, I have advocated for the reinstatement of Section 13 to the Canadian Human Rights Act, to return scrutiny and legal ramification for online hate. Over the years, I have encouraged parliamentarians to strengthen our hatespeech laws to prevent what was a foreseeable marketplace that is spreading hate and intolerance at an accelerated rate. For the victims of online hate speech, regulation of the internet gives them a mechanism to challenge abusive behaviour. But operators of social media platforms and internet service providers must be held accountable, too.

For non-victims, the argument for freedom of speech is an honest and rational reaction to the danger of state expansionism. The inevitable abuse of the law by individuals must come with stiff penalties. But put it this way — if it wasn’t for our hate speech laws, the now infamous “Your Ward News” in Toronto would still be publishing its misogynistic and anti-semitic material in print and online. 

If it had been allowed to publish under the notion of free expression, it’s possible other publications would have sprouted up as well. As someone who has been involved in that case since its inception, I am proud that Holocaust survivors and their children no longer need to find this paper on their doorsteps.

There is no place for hate speech — ever. If we are going to build a more compassionate society, we must become more culturally proficient — while still holding true to our core values of freedom, democracy and human rights. Sadly, and although unpopular in many spheres, regulation of hate speech is today more necessary than ever. Yes, this issue is controversial and all sides of the argument have valid concerns. But the silence over anti-semitism in the past few weeks has shown us that legal remedies are necessary.

There is no monopoly on discrimination. In the Jewish world, we have stood up throughout history for freedom and civil rights. Our people have proudly walked with every modern-day liberation movement, including participating in and supporting Martin Luther King Jr. in the civil rights movement, the feminist movement and most recently the LGBTQ2 movement. 

We are proud leaders in the promotion of social welfare policies and legal and ethical rights. Upholding Jewish values, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, for instance, is fondly remembered for fighting against gender discrimination and became the first tenured female at Columbia Law School.

Despite our concern for others over the centuries however, it has not been matched for the Jewish community in the past couple of weeks. Shockingly, despite the overt anti-Semitism on the streets of North America and Europe, there has been a deafening silence. Jewish people have been assaulted in New York, Los Angeles and Toronto. In Toronto this past weekend, Palestinian protesters carried Hamas flags at their rally, while many held anti-Semitic signs and slogans. One read, “Good Job Israel, Hitler Would be Proud.”

A brick shattered the window of a Kosher pizza parlour in Manhattan. Video captured a swarm of men attacking diners at a Sushi restaurant in Los Angeles, and synagogues are reporting vandalism in places like Arizona, Illinois and New York. As in Toronto, a brawl broke out in Times Square while the Diamond District was also attacked by a gang of pro-Palestinians. Drive-bys consisting of Pro-Palestinian groups have become commonplace in Jewish areas — racially tinged epithets being shouted at young Jewish children and adults alike.

Worse, over the past number of days, my phone has been ringing off the hook and messages have been pouring in from staff at corporations and school boards who have a growing sense of fear and discomfort in their institutions. They are shocked by the silence of their peers and colleagues whom they have worked with for years to promote equity for other groups within their institutions. 

But now, when anti-Semitism is at an all-time high, when they are being personally targeted on the street and their freedoms seem constrained, they wonder why there is silence. Why have their institutions not unequivocally condemned anti-Semitism, period?

Condemnation of anti-Semitism is not a political matter. It is an anti-discrimination matter. One local school board completely convoluted the matter in a memo that tried to reassure its staff about the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Instead, it ostracized its Jewish staff and probably inflamed passions further by saying in reference to the conflict that it is “committed to working from anti-racist, anti-oppressive and anti-colonial frameworks.” 

Effectively, it politicized the institution and possibly legitimized anti-Semitism by falsely accusing Israel of being a racist, oppressive, colonial state. Naturally, this has put its employees and students on edge and pitted them against each other.

This is the time for leaders to step up and publicly defend their Jewish friends and neighbours. First and foremost, all public and private institutions must issue statements condemning anti-Semitism while providing guidelines for appropriate conduct and communication. Second, authorities, including law enforcement and the attorney general, must thoroughly investigate and if necessary charge people who promote hate speech and are found to have committed hate crimes. 

The fact that some Jewish neighbourhoods are setting up their own security systems above and beyond our public law enforcement services may be indicative that public needs are not being entirely met. Finally, faith-based organizations and friends of the Jewish community must speak out against anti-Semitism and visibly extend a hand.

Article I of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” We are all equal and must strive to advance human rights for all people. 

There is no shortage of pain and suffering on our small planet and unfortunately, we are seeing an upward global trend of inequality, racism and discrimination. Together, we must stand to uplift all who are suffering, including the Black and Asian communities and persecuted peoples like the Uyghurs, Tibetans and Rohingya.

And yes, in the coming days and weeks, we need to see some outrage against anti-Semitism. I am calling on my friends outside of the Jewish community to stand up and speak out.

Few disagree that while we have been on the brink of global disaster during the COVID-19 pandemic, our post-pandemic world offers new hope and new opportunities.

Figuratively, the reopening of the world can be likened to a reopening of our hearts and minds as we rise to the challenge of thinking about humanity on a global scale. A renewed global reorganization is desperately needed, particularly as democracy and freedom are on the decline. This was driven home this week as the leaders of NATO-affiliated nations, meeting in Europe, issued a stern warning about the encroachment of Russia and now China on global security.

The NATO alliance reiterated its commitment to democracy, human rights and the rule of law, and to preserving and protecting the freedom of nations unified under its banner. The subsequent meeting in Geneva between presidents Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin was the first in many years between these old foes, and while undoubtedly spirited behind closed doors, was a positive step toward reopening much-needed channels of communications. The new reality in this post-coronavirus world is that our interdependence makes communication essential and provides opportunity for increased human potential.

In the Middle East, that opportunity could not come at a better time as a challenge to Israel’s enemies. The Abraham Accords have held deep between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco. While Israel squashed Hamas in self-defence, thus displaying its military might, this latest conflict has proved to be a defining moment in many ways. Prophesy in the region is always a losing battle and it’s hard to know if Israel’s new government will survive the test of time. But for the naysayers who propagandize slanderous accusations against the Jewish State, the country’s new roster of cabinet members rebuts those allegations.

Israel’s new government is exploding with diversity — a mirror reflection of the nation itself. Its new cabinet includes nine female ministers (still inadequate but a positive direction), two Arab ministers, two openly gay ministers and one religious minister. The icing on the cake is the newly installed religious Prime Minister, Naftali Bennett, and the Alternate Prime Minister (also serving as foreign minister), Yair Lapid. The coming together of this new generation of Israeli leaders — the right and the centre-left — is probably the seismic shift a very fractured Israel needed to bring the country together. Given a recent poll that found 53 per cent of Palestinians leaning toward supporting Hamas, building an inclusive society has never been more urgent.

And while many rightly express concern for the safety and security of Israel with Benjamin Netanyahu’s departure as prime minister, time will tell if the new leadership is what Israel needed at this critical time. Netanyahu is arguably irreplaceable. There are few leaders in the world today who command as much respect and have such direct lines of communication with other major leaders. He still commands more public trust than Lapid and Bennett, having won 30 seats in the past election in comparison with 17 for Lapid and seven for Bennett respectively. Netanyahu has kept Israel safe, bolstered its economy, brought forward four peace agreements with its neighbours and opened more diplomatic missions around the world than ever before. The Jewish world owes him respect and gratitude.

And while Israel’s new leaders will need to delicately navigate a diverse coalition and a tense nation — particularly after the Arab uprising inside Israel during the past conflict — the bigger problem for Israel is the Jewish diaspora. It can no longer be ignored or taken for granted. Given the fact that the Talmud teaches that “all of Israel are responsible for one another,” what then will be Israel’s renewed responsibility to a global Jewish community that is reeling from a spike in anti-Semitism given the latest conflict?

Just this week, the Community Security Trust reported 201 anti-Semitic incidents had occurred in London, England, in May — an all-time high. There were 12 reports of assaults and more than 160 reports of abusive behaviour. Similarly, Germany’s Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution reported what it said was a frightening increase in threats to Jewish life in the country. Among the reported incidents, a swastika was found etched on an ark at a synagogue at the Frankfurt International Airport. The trend is also disconcerting in America, where the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) released a new study that found that 77 per cent of the nation’s Jewish community was concerned about anti-Semitism while 53 per cent reported an increase in Jew-hatred and 40 per cent were more concerned for their physical safety.

The spike in anti-Semitism is undoubtedly directly linked to Israel. U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee this week that, “We’ve seen that countries that have put Israel on the agenda on a regular basis have expressed views that are anti-Semitic, and many of those countries are in the Middle East.” She observed that it’s “appalling that the UN Human Rights Council has one standing agenda — and that’s Israel — when there’s so many other countries that are committing human rights violations.” Bashing Israel has always been a way to distract the world from atrocities and human rights violations happening elsewhere. Anti-Semitism is now that new distraction, which the world can no longer afford given pressing global issues that threaten human security.

Thankfully some common sense prevails, but for far too long, successive Israeli governments have failed to address the growing threat to the world Jewish community. It’s time to take the NATO approach — a global alliance of preparedness — to combating anti-Semitism. The safeguarding of freedom, democracy and global peace — values upheld by NATO and democratic nations — is intertwined with the fight against anti-Semitism. As the world reopens and re-engages, it’s time for it to rise to this challenge.

The coronavirus is the most horrific human catastrophe in modern times. Millions have already died, and millions more have experienced pain and suffering. Yet the threat comes not just from the virus itself. Over the past year, we have also seen it have a devastating impact on communities and families, on the prevalence of mental illness and on the incidences of anti-Semitism.

Nearly 10 months ago, I predicted that what we were starting to see was a new variant of anti-Semitism, which I dubbed “coronasemitism.” At the time, we were witnessing an uptick in anti-Semitism on social media, with Jewish people being accused of carrying and spreading the disease.

It was not dissimilar to historic conspiracy theories. In feudal times, Jewish people were often accused of spreading the plague, lice and other ailments, as a way to marginalize, oppress and defame them.

In describing the evolution of the coronavirus, the U.S. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) explains that, “Viruses constantly change through mutation, and new variants of a virus are expected to occur over time.” This is how anti-Semitism has evolved over time, as well.

Centuries ago, it was fundamentally based on religious beliefs. Jews were persecuted over the belief that they betrayed Jesus and were complicity in his murder. The Catholic Church has since stepped back from this ludicrous accusation, recognizing its own complicity in fomenting anti-Semitism.

The Nazis later introduced an additional variant of anti-Semitism that was based on race. To dehumanize and murder the Jews, they falsified science in an attempt to prove that the Jewish people were an inferior race and therefore deserving of death.

Then, in the last two decades, another variant of anti-Semitism was born out of the radical left, which sought the destruction not only of the Jewish people, but of the Jewish state in its entirety. In the early 2000s and for the next 20 years, anti-Semitism mutated into boycott campaigns against Israel, along with false and defamatory accusations claiming that Jews had somehow transformed into Nazis, colonialists, apartheidists and murderers.

The CDC says that, “Sometimes new variants emerge and disappear. Other times, new variants emerge and persist.” In the case of anti-Semitism, variants are long-lasting and seem to stay and reinforce previous strains of the virus.

Many people still hold onto ancient religious beliefs that malign Judaism as a religion. And while the Nazis are gone, their ideology not only remains, but is growing along with neo-Nazi groups in Europe and the United States. And even those who claim that racism is beneath them have managed to direct their hatred toward the State of Israel, creating another new form of anti-Semitism.

COVID-19 and anti-Semitism were further conflated recently, when a Vancouver woman ignited a firestorm by designing a T-shirt with the words “COVID CAUST” printed on a yellow star. While she claims it is a statement about masks and vaccines, the imagery and language was hurtful to the Jewish community.

Like the coronavirus, anti-Semitism is a social illness. It has caused the deaths of more than six million Jewish children, women and men during the Holocaust and countless more over the last 2,000 years.

Over the centuries, Jewish leaders have tried in vain to inoculate their neighbours against the myriad of variants of this hatred. It did not matter, however, if they were communists or capitalists, if they were assimilated or stayed apart in their shtetls (towns), or if they had their own country — they were persecuted either way.

To end this pandemic, we have placed our hope in vaccines. In our fight against new variants of anti-Semitism, we need new and innovative global approaches to inoculate the world. The same old just doesn’t work anymore. 

We must redouble our efforts, and mobilize international partners, to forge relationships among people of different faiths and educate the world in the hopes that one day, we may all realize that we all face the same fears, hopes and dreams, and that all of humanity must band together against our common enemies, such as COVID-19.

Since the shocking attack on Capitol Hill on January 6, 2021, public analysis of anti-Semitism has turned a blind eye to how the far left has turned Jewish life upside down over the last couple decades.

In Newsweek, Kathrin Meyer, the secretary general of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, wrote a meaningful article, in which she argues that, “Just weeks after right-wing extremists stormed the United States Capitol … it is now our duty to reflect on this event and act on history’s lessons from 1930s Europe, when the world failed to prevent extremist groups from rising to power — with disastrous effects.”  

Meyer is right that we must stay alert and aware of extremist groups that want to destroy our democracies. We now know that many of the rioters who attacked the Capitol were white supremacists who are a danger to our freedom and our way of life. One of the rioters even brazenly wore a “Camp Auschwitz — Work Makes You Free” shirt — an expression of Nazi ideology. This is abhorrent.

In all this, however, the equal complicity of the extreme left is being sidelined. If we are concerned about extremists attacking democracy, where is the condemnation of the anti-Semites on university campuses, for example, who have spent two decades churning out graduates who hate Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East?

University campuses, a central driver is what’s come to be known as “new anti-Semitism,” have seen Jewish students and faculty victimized by horrible events like Israeli Apartheid Week and movements like the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign against Israel.

Frankly, it’s offensive that all this hate has been largely ignored recently. The inconvenient truth of this post-truth world in which we are living in is that the rise of anti-Semitism is coming from three spheres: far-left movements, radical Islam and white supremacists. Yet world leaders like U.S. President Joe Biden and UN Secretary General António Guterres have focused mainly on anti-Semitism emanating from the far right.

I was glad that Biden raised the alarm about white supremacy in his inauguration speech. And in a statement released this week marking International Holocaust Remembrance Day, Guterres, who has spoken out forcefully against anti-Semitism in the past, said that, “In Europe, the United States and elsewhere, white supremacists are organizing and recruiting across borders, flaunting the symbols and tropes of the Nazis and their murderous ambitions.” These are strong and welcomed words, of course, but there was no mention of the other sources of anti-Semitism, which are equally virulent.

In recent weeks, I have received several notifications from Jewish university students who have raised concerns about assignments that seem to distort the truth about Israel and even question historical facts about the Holocaust. Sources also tell me that some NDP members are proposing to put forward a motion at the party’s next convention to oppose the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of anti-Semitism. These are but two examples to underscore how the left is plotting against Israel and, by extension, the Jewish people.

The other anti-Semitism that must be talked about, as it is just as complicit in spreading hatred as white supremacism and the extreme left, is state-sponsored and comes primarily from the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Iranian regime continues to peddle Holocaust distortions and promote conspiracy theories against Israel and the Jewish people. It has also been the main moral backer of Al-Quds Day events around the world, which are held in Western democracies to delegitimize the Jewish state.

In a new world in which peace in the Middle East is closer than ever thanks to the Abraham Accords, we are seeing increasing numbers of friendships being made between Muslims and Jews. Incredible relationships are being forged at every level. This may ultimately diffuse the violent anti-Semitism we have witnessed in places like France and the United Kingdom over the last couple of decades. It may prove to be the antidote to the vicious left-wing campaign against the Jews — especially since the Arab world has virtually thrown out the boycott of Israel.

Still, anti-Semitism must be addressed cohesively and in its entirety. One cannot condemn white supremacism without condemning bias and hate against the Jewish state at the United Nations. One cannot memorialize the Holocaust while funding UN agencies that allegedly still utilize problematic textbooks that call for the elimination of the Jewish state. And one cannot say he or she stands against anti-Semitism and all forms of racism while allowing Jewish students and faculty to be subjected to hateful events on campus.

All forms of anti-Semitism are dangerous and pernicious, and far-left anti-Semitism cannot be ignored. It has the best chance of eroding our institutions and the very foundation of our democracy.

It's not enough that Jewish people are violently attacked on city streets, from New York to France.  It's not enough that social media and the internet is littered with antisemitic comments.  Its not enough that Saturday Night Live takes an antisemitic swipe at Israel fuelling conspiracy theories. And it's not enough that students on university campuses still find antisemitic graffiti on their frat houses (during Covid-19). 

Even the very definition of antisemitism is now under attack.  We cannot define the very thing that is victimizing us - despite the fact the International Holocaust and Remembrance Alliance's definition of antisemitism has been accepted by more than 30 nations and counting.  

Several weeks ago, a professor sent me a copy of an email he received from Ryerson University's Faculty Association.  It was a full copy of an “Executive motion on Antisemitism and the IHRA (International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance).  The motion was disconcerting.  It reads in part:

"The Ryerson Faculty Association unequivocally supports the academic freedom of its members. This freedom includes the right to pursue research and open inquiry in an honest search for knowledge that is free from institutional censorship, including that of the government. While the RFA opposes antisemitism and all forms of racism and hatred, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s Working Definition of Antisemitism poses a serious threat to academic freedom in our university. The IHRA definition of antisemitism misconstrues antisemitism to include a broad range of criticism of the State of Israel. The IHRA definition thus undermines important anti-racist and decolonial initiatives in Canadian educational institutions. It can also be used to censor political speech and restrict the academic freedom of teachers and researchers who have developed critical perspectives on the policies and practices of the State of Israel. Such targeted attacks will have a chilling effect on the academic freedom of our members in the classroom, in their research, and in campus politics more broadly".

In the past, Ryerson has made great effort to confront antisemitism. In reply, I wrote the faculty association a courteous letter in an attempt to understand some of its concerns.  While it's good that the association affirms that it  “…opposes antisemitism and all forms of racism and hatred”; it contends that the IHRA definition poses a “serious threat to academic freedom in our university”.  

It's hard to believe that the motion poses a "serious threat" given that the definition itself is  a guideline for understanding antisemitism.  I explained that while perhaps imperfect, it is a necessary tool given the scourge and rising tide of antisemitism – especially on university campuses. It does not require or criminalize anyone from objection or critique or fair discussion – particularly at the academic level. It is certainly not a “serious threat” to free speech.  

In my letter, I also expressed that given the well-established and documented antisemitism on university campuses, the RFA’s strong language contending that the definition may subject educators to “targeted attacks” seems to be the very opposite of what has been happening on campuses. Jewish students are the ones who have felt under attack for two decades on university campuses. 

As well, the faculty member who provided me with the email told me that he is "terrified" by this latest attempt to shut down discussion of antisemitism.  Indeed, Jewish faculty on university campuses in general have felt scared for many years. 

Some academics may feel that the IHRA definition misconstrues antisemitism because it includes some criticism of Israel.  It appears that what seems challenging for them to understand is that Jewish people see Israel as the embodiment of Judaism itself.  Thus one sided attacks on Israel like BDS or the mislabeling of it as an apartheid state is not taken lightly.  

RFA's belief that the definition "undermines important anti-racist and de-colonial initiatives in Canadian educational institutions" is also misplaced. Jewish people are not colonizers of their own land. They are a people bound to the land by history that is factual and evidence based. There is little dispute of indigenous Jewish presence in the holy land. Denial of Jewish history and connection to the land is hurtful and false. 

It's hard to see how Academia is being "attacked" and how it's "seriously" threatened.  Academic freedom and free speech are values enshrined and cherished by the Jewish community and its friends.  We are open to fair and honest debate about antisemitism and historical truths concerning the Jewish people's connection to the land of Israel. 

We should be having this discussion in an open and fair manner. Thankfully, all Canadian universities can now look to prestigious British universities - our commonwealth partners - like Cambridge and Oxford who have adopted the IHRA working definition of antisemitism.  It's time for our community institutions to positively embrace the well-intentioned global shift to counter antisemitism.   

By calling on Stevie Wonder not to accept an Israeli prize because “Israel is an apartheid regime,” Roger Waters seems stuck in 2018. Civil society is no longer buying into the slanderous allegations that Israel is oppressing the Palestinians, or that the Israel Defence Forces is murdering them, as Waters contends.

As he sips his wine in a video posted on Twitter earlier this week, Waters says he received an email from his friends in Canada about Wonder receiving the Wolf Prize, an annual award handed out by the Israel-based Wolf Foundation that recognizes outstanding achievement in a variety of fields. Waters encourages Wonder not to accept it because, “This is Israel. You will be white-washing them beyond all belief if you accept the Wolf Prize.”

Unfortunately, there are those who hold onto mistruths, such as the ridiculous argument that Jewish people are colonizers of their own ancestral land. Yet anyone who takes an evidence-based approach to the accusation quickly determines without reasonable doubt that the Holy Land is the ancestral home of the Jewish people.

The Jewish Temple is in Jerusalem; synagogues have been excavated from the Golan Heights to Masada; and, of course, there are the Dead Sea Scrolls — a testament written in ancient Hebrew and Aramaic that showcases Jewish life in the Land of Israel. The world is honestly tired of these relentless fabrications that have done nothing but embolden terrorism and the oppression of the Palestinian people themselves.

While imperfect, as all nations are, Israel is not by any stretch an apartheid regime. As it heads into its fourth election in just a couple of weeks, its breadth of democratic freedom is open for the world to see and scrutinize.

No other country in the Middle East is as democratic as Israel. No other country in the Middle East has Jewish parliamentarians. But in Israel, even the usually biased Guardian newspaper reported recently that, “Arab politicians are set to make historic gains in the Israeli election, taking more seats than ever before and solidifying their position as the third-largest force is the Knesset, the country’s parliament.”

Conversely, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has promised to hold free elections this spring in order to cozy up to the new Biden administration in Washington. Yet even the Arab press doubts it will actually take place.

In Al Jazeera, Yara Hawari recently wrote that, “There is much reason to believe the Palestinian elections scheduled for later this year will neither be free nor fair.” While the Palestinian legislative elections are set for May 22, Hawari writes that there is “still a possibility that the PA will once again delay the election, putting the blame on either Hamas or Israel.”

Even while facts on the ground showcase Israel’s increasing equity, equality, diversity and pluralism, the radicalized left continues to promote outdated conspiracy theories that harm any prospect of peace.

We saw this type of falsehood play out on “Saturday Night Live” several weeks ago, when one of its comedians remarked that, “Israel is reporting that they vaccinated half of their population … and I am going to guess it’s the Jewish half.” In truth, 84 per cent of Israeli Arabs over the age of 50 have been vaccinated, according to data from the Weizmann Institute.

The fact of the matter is that those who continually bash Israel are completely divorced from reality.

We also see this kind of behaviour on university campuses, where the war against the Jews continues. At Ryerson University, the faculty association actually passed a resolution calling the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of anti-Semitism — which it defines as a “certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews” — a “threat” to academic freedom.

The definition, however, does nothing to constrain academic freedom. In fact, it specifically states that, “Criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic.”

Yet the tide is turning. A dental student at Tufts University recently wrote a letter of apology, published through the Jewish News Syndicate, for his anti-Semitism during his teen years: “I am truly sorry for the pain my words have caused. I have wanted to publicly apologize for, and disavow my teenage tweets for years now.”

There are still major anti-Semitic issues on university campuses, but at least there are some glimmers of hope. As the world continues to see the human advancements made by Israel, it is leaving its detractors behind to sulk in their own hate. They have tried to marginalize, criminalize and distort the Jewish state, but their failure is massive.

Israel is now aligned in peace with more Muslim-majority countries than ever before. Peace agreements with the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan signify a massive shift away from a geopolitical situation that allowed the Palestinians to continually stand in the way of broader efforts to achieve regional peace.

As an economic, military, scientific and cultural powerhouse, Israel is vastly outpacing its detractors through action. The days of armchair warriors who sip wine and hail from a position of privilege and self-righteousness are rapidly disappearing.

A two-year study concluded there is an acute threat to the 450,000 Jews in France, which is why so many are fleeing

One of the hostages of the kosher market attack in Paris came to my home in Canada for Shabbat dinner in the spring of 2015. Despite the assault having happened several months before, while strong, courageous and resolute, she was still emotionally shaken as she described that violent day to my guests around the table. How could she not be?

It was a Friday afternoon and she was picking up some groceries for her family for their own Shabbat dinner. She recounted how surreal it all was — like a movie, she said. She heard the shouts and shooting at the front of the store as the terrorist stormed in. She and a few other shoppers were fortunate enough to hide in the back and survive the nightmare.

Like many other Jews following that attack, she and her husband decided to flee France along with their children. For the Jewish community, this has almost become a common story. In fact, while numbers are now levelling off to 2,500 per year, soon after the attack in 2015, some 9,000 Jews emigrated to Israel yearly. With the knowledge that their days are numbered in France, many Jews have now purchased apartments in Israel to be ready for the great escape.

The kosher market attack was a byproduct of the gruesome assault of the satirical newspaper, Charlie Hebdo — even while the Jewish community was not responsible for publishing caricatures of the prophet Muhammad. Fourteen co-conspirators are now facing trial for aiding and abetting the three terrorists involved in the onslaught that killed a total of 17 people — 11 at the newspaper, including a police officer, a second police officer in the streets, a trainee policewoman the following day, and four at the market the day after that.

But depending on who you ask, and what newspaper you read, two storylines emerged about the attack that may open old wounds in France. For some observers, this was an attack on the Republic itself — on its sacred right of freedom of expression. To accentuate this point, the paper reprinted the caricatures at the start of the trial. Even President Emmanuel Macron defended the paper by saying, “that to be French is to defend the right to laugh, jest, mock and caricature.”

For the Jewish community, it’s obvious the terrorist picked the Hyper Cacher kosher supermarket because he was targeting Jews. The resulting murder of four Jewish shoppers was born out of hatred — pure and simple. Let’s be honest, France has always had an anti-Semitism problem — it even helped the Nazis round them up for the gas chambers under the  Vichy regime. 

But that was then and this is now — right? Wrong. The community is once again living in the most dangerous place in Europe, according to a report by a former NYPD commissioner. According to The New York Post, the two-year study concluded there is an acute threat to the 450,000 Jews in France. Threats and attacks surged 74 per cent from 2017 to 2018, with 2019 data showing intensification at 75 per cent.

Attacks on French Jews are not rare. But the intersection of the attack on Charlie Hebdo with the assault on the kosher market is perplexing. In this rare instance, a violent attack on a newspaper was intertwined with an anti-Semitic-inspired assault on a Jewish grocery store. One attack was meant to restrict freedom of expression while the other was an affront to the freedom of religion.

Even while this trial may have motivated France to debate secularism, rights and freedoms, it’s critical that one other significant lesson is not lost on anyone: that the main objective of terrorism is to suppress freedom, sow fear, intimidate and coerce the population — and even force policy and political change for governments.

The terrorists failed in their attempt to force Charlie Hebdo and the French public to capitulate. On the other hand, the Jewish family that sat at my table fled and now enjoy a peaceful life — away from the threat of anti-Semitism — in their new country. French society may remain defiant on the matter of free expression, but for the Jewish community, the daily incidence of violence and harassment is simply too much to bear.

Perhaps things would be different if the French public was also this defiant about anti-Semitism.

Throughout history, anti-Semites have attempted to link viruses to Jewish communities, in order to marginalize and oppress them. The coronavirus is no exception

Even while the world grapples with the most pressing health issue of our time, there are those who are using the coronavirus pandemic as another excuse to attack the Jewish people, a phenomenon I am calling “coronasemitism.”

This week, the FBI warned that white supremacist groups are targeting police and Jewish people by planning to expose them to coronavirus. If their members contract the virus, they are being encouraged to use themselves as bio-weapons, to infect synagogues, marketplaces and areas where Jewish people might congregate.

Behind the COVID-19 headlines, it was reported yesterday that the FBI foiled a neo-Nazi plot to blow up a packed hospital in Missouri. The suspect behind the plot was a white supremacist who was shot and killed by a joint terrorism task force. While under surveillance, he considered bombing a school with a large number of African-American students, a mosque and a synagogue, before settling on a local hospital filled with coronavirus patients. In an online post, he claimed that “this whole thing (the virus) was engineered by Jews as a power grab.”

This sickening hate-motivated behaviour is consistent with the general growth of anti-Semitism worldwide. In recent years, we have seen attacks on a Pittsburgh synagogue, which killed 11 worshippers, and a shul in Poway, Calif., where one person died. More recently, a man stabbed five Orthodox Jews in Monsey, N.Y., and a Jersey City kosher market was attacked, leaving four dead, including a police officer.

And just this week, a New York car dealership was accused of discrimination after a Hasidic Jew was denied a pre-scheduled service appointment on the alleged grounds that he was “spreading” the coronavirus. It’s being reported that when he arrived at his appointment, he was turned away, despite the fact that the dealership was continuing to see customers.

Throughout history, anti-Semites have attempted to link viruses to Jewish communities, in order to marginalize and oppress them. The coronavirus is no exception. In the 14th century, Jews were falsely accused of poisoning wells and spreading the bubonic plague. This accusation had the desired effect: Jewish communities were massacred throughout Europe. Sound familiar?

Fast forward some 600-plus years, when Adolf Hitler accused the Jews of being a virus to humanity itself. In 1920, he said that, “For us, it is a problem of whether our nation can ever recover its health, whether the Jewish spirit can ever really be eradicated. Don’t be misled into thinking you can fight a disease without killing the carrier, without destroying the bacillus. Don’t think you can fight racial tuberculosis without taking care to rid the nation of the carrier of that racial tuberculosis. This Jewish contamination will not subside, this poisoning of the nation will not end, until the carrier himself, the Jew, has been banished from our midst.”

The Nazis were master propagandists, but the coronavirus pandemic is bringing anti-Semitism to a new level in the modern age. Supported by these old anti-Semitic libels, coronasemitism is abetted by technology that can spread falsehoods around the planet in a matter of seconds. Already we are seeing social network posts by radical anti-Israel and anti-Jewish groups attempting to link the virus to Israel and the Jewish people in general.

In France, for example, former health minister Agnès Buzyn was the victim of a vicious online attack, which accused her — in the language of a medieval blood libel — of “poisoning water wells with the coronavirus.” In one image, she appears alongside the yellow star marked “Jude” (Jew), a symbol imposed on the Jewish population by the Nazis.

There have also been reports that state television stations in Turkey are alluding to a connection between the coronavirus and Zionists. To no surprise, Iran is also spreading conspiracy theories accusing Israel of planting the virus in that country.

Scapegoating Jewish people for tragedies is a time-honoured tradition of despotic and anti-Semitic regimes. It’s a way of diverting attention, shirking responsibility and focusing anger on a common enemy.

Coronavirus has sadly killed millions of people to date and its infection rate is multiplying every day. Our greatest concern should be to stop the virus, to throw our resources and energy into countering its impact and to give weight to the tragedies that are unfolding before our eyes. Unfortunately, in times of trouble, there are those who search for a scapegoat to blame, using mass fear to further a personal agenda. 

But I am quite confident that humanity is in a better position today to defeat COVID-19, and with it, coronasemitism.

One of the darkest periods at the United Nations took place in 1975 when Zionism was declared to be racism. A more “enlightened” General Assembly reversed this decision in 1991 – but the stench of politically driven antisemitism remained. No other group has suffered near physical extinction as the Jews have and few other groups suffer continued defamation to its national character and religious identity.

What anti-Zionists often intentionally overlook is the inherent connection of the Jewish people to the land. They try subterfuge linking the term strictly to a political movement connecting it to popular academic terms like “colonialism,” “occupation” and worse, “apartheid.” Whereas the Jew historically has been mythicized, dehumanized, marginalized and disallowed by the majority to determine its own fate, today the new form of antisemitism is politicized and attempting to destroy and disrupt our existence once again.

Zionism is an expression not only of that self-determination that irks antisemites (the Jew is not entitled to be here), it is in truth both a physical and spiritual representation of the Jewish people’s historical and biblical connection to the Land of Israel. The Antisemite simply cannot accept, no matter the physical evidence on the ground, that the Jewish people are indigenous to the land, that their status on the land and inherent right is as legitimate as the uncontested and obvious right of the indigenous peoples of North America and elsewhere on earth.

Zion is not merely a synonym for Jerusalem and the Land of Israel as a whole. It not only refers to a specific hill in Jerusalem (Mount Zion), which is located just south of Mount Moriah. The word itself is said to appear in biblical text dating back to the period of Samuel from 630-540 BCE. Therefore, our connection as a people to our homeland – to Zion – is not merely a political movement founded by Theodore Herzl at the first Zionist Congress in Basil in 1897. It is connected to our very religion.

Those who deny Zionism or who call it a racist endeavour fail to comprehend its historic significance in Judaism. Our historic pledge to return to Zion after the destruction of Jerusalem is in our prayer liturgy, which is more than 2,000 years old. As an example, Zion and Jerusalem are mentioned five times in the central Jewish prayer called the Amidah – and it is no coincidence that for 20 centuries we have been facing East toward Zion when praying.

In a historic speech condemning the 1975 UN resolution, American Ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan said: “What we have here is a lie – a political lie of a variety well known to the twentieth century, and scarcely exceeded in all that annal of untruth and outrage. The lie is that Zionism is a form of racism. The overwhelmingly truth is that it is not.”

Similarly, Israeli Ambassador Chaim Herzog emphatically expressed to the General Assembly that “for the Jewish people, this resolution based on hatred, falsehood and arrogance is devoid of any moral or legal value. For us, the Jewish people, this is no more than a piece of paper and we shall treat it as such.” Ambassador Herzog concluded his speech by ripping the paper in which the resolution was written upon in half.

Bret Stephens is right when he says that “today it is very difficult for people to be antisemites and to hate Jews for racial reasons…it is unfashionable to hate Jews simply on a religious basis, but it has become fashionable to hate Jews using the excuse of their statehood, of their nationality and of their willingness to defend their borders, as the latest pretext to single out Jewish people for opprobrium and for hatred that is applied to almost no other people in the world.”

And so, those who claim Zionism is a form of racism deny the very connection of the Jewish people to the land of our forefathers. They deny history and they deny the truth in order to bend reality to their own political and strategic purpose. By claiming Zionists are colonizers of their own land, that they have no right to their own aspiration for freedom on their indigenous land – while effecting a double standard only in and of their critique of Israel – these provocateurs are in themselves exerting a form of racism.

Our homeland – the land of our forefathers, of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – has been sought after and pursued by many peoples and civilizations. But the Jewish people held on to faith and to their connection to the land of Zion. No matter where they were dispersed to, they cried out in prayer “next year in Jerusalem.” 

Those who deny our connection to Zion and who demonize and delegitimize our inherent right to a Jewish homeland are still stuck in in the darkest periods of time. They should do some serious soul searching.

“Let’s kill some Jews,” tweeted an Egyptian actor and writer with more than 800,000 followers. Even while Twitter suspended his account soon after he sparked outrage, apparently the actor had been tweeting various antisemitic conspiracy theories claiming that Jews are rapists and have a “deal with the devil.”

And in London, reportedly an Orthodox man was forced to flee from a knife-wielding attacker who threatened to “behead” him just this past Monday. The man was walking to work in the Whitechapel district in east London when he was accosted by someone who called him a “f**** Jew” before pulling out a knife, said the report.

Is it any wonder that antisemitism is a growing concern for the majority of Europe’s young Jewish people? According to a new report released this week by the European Union’s Agency for Fundamental Human Rights, 90% of young Jews surveyed think that anti-Jewish sentiment has risen on social media and the internet in general. The study revealed that 44% “experienced at least one incident of harassment in the 12 months before the survey” and worse, “45% are scared to appear Jewish in public”!

Is it any wonder then that 41% of the survey respondents are considering leaving Europe, as they do not feel safe living a Jewish life? Unlike 1933 or 1939 for that matter, thankfully we have Israel – our intended safe haven – our place of refuge. When Theodore Herzl dreamed of the Jewish State, and in Basel in 1897 during the first Zionist Congress as he gathered Jewish leaders from the four corners of the world, he understood that because of and in spite of antisemitism, the Jewish State must be reborn.

This rising tide of antisemitism is becoming more malicious by the week, but surprisingly, it may be having some positive effects: it is galvanizing Jewish communities across the globe, strengthening their identity and provoking them to action over complacency – including strengthening the Jewish State through immigration. It is converging people of influence and of multiple faiths and backgrounds to speak out and take action. Ordinary people and leaders with influence are stepping up, leaning in and raising their voice in opposition to antisemitism.

As reports about antisemitism from around the world pour in, and communities like California report a 21% increase in hate crime while the Czech Republic reports 347 antisemitic incidents in 2018 compared to 221 in 2015 – the public is also demanding that public leaders take a more responsible approach to rhetoric. Last week, a Holocaust survivor invited Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez to visit Nazi concentration camps to understand what transpired during the Holocaust.

It’s time to ramp up our efforts and fight back. Last week, “Wonder Woman” actress Gal Gadot said that part of the reason she flaunts her Israeliness is because of antisemitism. She said “she receives many hateful messages online and therefore finds no reason to hide her pride in being Israeli.” 

It’s not 1933. The antisemites can keep coming, but the world is different. Herzl’s dream has been fulfilled and this time around, we will defend ourselves – alongside all who stand for peace, freedom and human rights.