Read what online and print media are saying about CanWest’s SLAPP suit and the Seriously Free Speech Campaign. If you see an article we missed, please email us the details at info@seriouslyfreespeech.ca.
Please note that virtually all of the coverage of this case is from the alternative media. We urge you to call, write or email Canada’s mainstream media to ask them why they are not covering this important case, including: CBC, CTV, CityTV, Corus Radio (CKNW), Metro, 24 Hours, Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, Winnipeg Free Press, and of course Canwest. Find out more about the big media chill.
For news on the Seriously Free Speech Campaign, choose Audio/Video media, Print/Online media, or News Releases
Please make sure your pop-up blocker is turned off for this site. Each link will open in a new window so you can close that window to easily return to our site.
Hot Topics
Canadian suppression of free speech on Palestine
Print/Online
Canwest fights global war on satire despite threat of bankruptcy, straight.com, Nov. 6, 2009
No trademark on free speech, The Star, Aug 29, 2009
CanWest-Goldman battle erupts, Globe and Mail, Nov 2, 2009
No outside buyer, CanWest shuffles National Post, Globe and Mail, Oct 31, 2009
Canwest continues anti-satire lawsuit, despite looming bankruptcy, artthreat.net, October 28, 2009
CanWest to transfer National Post to its publishing division, Globe and Mail, Oct 28, 2009
Bonuses for CanWest bosses?, rabble.ca, October 27, 2009
The short end of the Canwest stick, Macleans, October 20, 2009
Final CanWest episode needs a white knight, Globe and Mail, Oct 19, 2009
Canwest Wins More Time To Reshape Newspaper Unit, Rueters, Oct 16, 2009
Canwest Receives Notice Of Delisting From TSX Effective November 13, Globe and Mail, Oct 15, 2009
Scotiabank, creditors to control CanWest dailies, Globe and Mail, Oct 7, 2009
The Asper dream ends, the selloff begins, Globe and Mail, Oct 7, 2009
Canwest wins court shelter for Global TV, Post, cbc.ca, Oct 6, 2009
Canwest seeks bankruptcy protection for broadcasting assets and National Post, straight.com, Oct 6, 2009
CanWest assets likely to be sold after company files for creditor protection, Globe and Mail, Oct 6, 2009
Godfrey wins backers for buyout of CanWest papers, Globe and Mail, Oct 1, 2009
Gaza and the ‘New’ Anti-Semitism, Columbia Journal, September 2009
‘We’re Screwed’: Yes Men’s Media Heist Blankets City with ‘Special Edition’ New York Post, CommonDreams.org, Sept. 21, 2009
Parody as fair dealing in Canada, Oxford Journal of Intellectual Property Law, July 2009
Canwest shares take a beating, closing at six-and-a-half cents, straight.com, July 9, 2009
Copyright Law, Freedom of Expression and Canwest v. Horizon, lawiscool.com, June 26, 2009
Greenpeace Parody of Newspaper Spotlights Climate, New York Times, June 18, 2009 (see web version of International Herald-Tribune parody here)
New law makes it harder to SLAPP in Quebec, Montreal Gazette, June 4, 2009
CanWest newspapers seeking worker concessions: union, Canadian Press, June 12, 2009
CanWest gets ready for new face near the top, Globe and Mail, June 6, 2009
Canwest Global subsidiary misses $10M in debt payments, cbc.ca, May 29, 2009
Split on free speech, Langara Journalism Review, May 8, 2009
Inside the Canwest talks, theglobeandmail.com, May 8, 2009
The last days of a dynasty, Macleans, April 30, 2009
Canwest shares worthless, to be avoided – analysts, reuters.com, April 13, 2009
Winnipeg Free Press columnist says Aspers will lose control of Canwest, Georgia Straight, April 11, 2009
‘It’s sad… the company is done’, Winnipeg Free Press, April 11, 2009
Can Canadians practice parody?, Fuse Magazine, Apr 9, 2009 – Please support Fuse magazine by subscribing at fusemagazine.org
‘No finish line’ for Canwest cuts: Skulsky, thetyee.ca, Apr 9, 2009
Canwest writes off $1B in assets, loses $1.4B in 2nd quarter, cbc.ca, Apr 9, 2009
Canwest Watch, macleans.ca, Apr 9, 2009
Adbusters given green light to sue TV broadcasters, thetyee.ca, April 7, 2009
CanWest’s math problem, globeandmail.com, April 7, 2009
Canwest’s dance with debt, cbc.ca, Apr 7, 2009
Satirists, the world’s unacknowledged legislators, cbc.ca, Mar 24, 2009
A world without satire? Canwest sues satirists, CCPA Monitor, Mar 24, 2009
Family ties, macleans.ca, Mar 21, 2009
Some broadcasters are more equal than others, macleans.ca, Mar 20, 2009
Canwest appears to be lumbering towards bankruptcy restructuring, say observers, Canadian Press, Mar 13, 2009
Canwest wins round in parody suit, thetyee.ca, Mar 5, 2009
Broadcasters seek changes for ‘broken’ industry, Globe and Mail, Mar 4, 2009 (Canwest seeks 45%-75% reduction in local programming requirements)
Government should come up with plan for media cuts, shutdowns, Hill Times, Mar 2, 2009
Stopping the press, Globe and Mail, Feb 28, 2009
Canwest drops parody suit against printer, thetyee.ca, Feb 26, 2009
Aspers losing grip on Canwest empire, Winnipeg Free Press, Feb 23, 2009 – Be sure to check the comments
Canwest’s albatross on the balance sheet, The Globe and Mail, Feb 23, 2009
IJV Protest of Carleton University’s harassment of student organizers of Israeli Apartheid Week, Canpalnet Ottawa, Feb 20, 2009
University of Ottawa and Carleton suppress free speech on Palestine, Feb 20, 2009
Canwest Global shares tumble to historical low on the TSX, Canadian Press, Feb 20, 2009
Canwest seeks financial saviour amid credit crisis, The Globe and Mail, Feb 20, 2009
Exposed: University of Toronto suppresses pro-Palestinian activism, Rabble.ca, Feb 18, 2009
Canwest creaks under debtload, may seek protection, Reuters, Feb 12, 2009
BC Civil Liberties Association opposes Canwest’s attempt to loosen license restrictions, BCCLA, Jan 29, 2009
The Return of the Prodigal Daughter: Carel Moiseiwitsch’s This Is a True Story, The Crib Sheet, Jan 25, 2009
Canwest internal memo details severe cost cutting measures, Bill Tieleman’s Blog, Jan 23, 2009
BCCLA calls on City Council to respect freedom of expression for Olympic protesters, BCCLA, Jan 22, 2009
Why let Canwest off the hook?, -30- Blog of Canadian Media Guild President, Jan 22, 2009
Canwest has $33M quarterly loss, debt worry, Yahoo Finance, Jan 14, 2009
Canwest Credit Rating Taken Down A Couple Of Notches, Eh?, Editor and Publisher Blog, Jan 8, 2009
Canwest suit against activists continues, GlobeandMail.com, Jan 5, 2009
Parody and Free Speech in Vancouver, faircopyright.ca, Dec 27, 2009
Parody Defence Not Available according to BC Court, excesscopyright.ca
Censorship and Canwest, Naeem Siddiqi’s Blog
Media-political complex: Campbell’s Hydro ad and Harper’s shovel, Georgia Straight
Canwest Suit May Test Limits of Free Speech, thetyee.ca
B.C. man secretly taped in own home, then sued over comments, cbc.ca story about outrageous SLAPP suit in BC
How I Changed Libel Law, Rafe Mair discusses his case and SLAPP suits in thetyee.ca
Canwest wins motion against maker of Sun parody, Stockwatch
Producer of fake Vancouver Sun cannot argue freedom of expression, Georgia Straight
Story of two spoofs and media stupor, rabble.ca
The curious case of Q (Yes Men open door to Sun parody, Q host slams it shut on CBC radio – 4min in)
Media blackout: the story Canadians won’t discuss, blather.net
Briemberg, Moiseiwitsch, Murray v Canwest, p2pnet.net
Charges send Canwest to $1.02B loss in Q4, cbc.ca
Prank NY Times offers ‘All the news we hope to print’, cbc.ca (which has never reported on the Vancouver Sun parody or Canwest’s lawsuit) also reported in the Washington Post, National Post, Toronto Star and the globeandmail.com
CanWest: Oh the Times They Are A-Changin’, Westcoast Indie News
Canwest cuts 560 jobs, five per cent of workforce, Canadian Press
Canwest drops suit against pro-Palestine activist, thetyee.ca
Canwest drops lawsuit against Mordecai Briemberg, Georgia Straight
Free speech victory: Canwest drops suit against Mordecai Briemberg, Canadian Dimension blog
Canwest huffs and puffs while free speech burns, reclaimthemedia.org
National Post discontinues print edition in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, CBC As It Happens
CanWest’s lawsuit over Sun parody raised at Media Democracy Day, Georgia Straight
Journalist alleges she was told that she’ll never write for CanWest, Georgia Straight
CanWest Global Communications Corp. now a penny stock, Georgia Straight
Why Did I Buy CanWest Stock?, thetyee.ca
Canwest stock slips below $1, The Globe and Mail
Creative licence vs copyright law, Common Ground (more info at www.kimberlybaker.ca)
Parody distributor SLAPP-ed, Green Left Online (Australia)
YouTube videos on CanWest issues, Social Justice Librarian
Silencing satire, Jewish Peace News
Media giant sues pro-Palestinian activists, Green Left Online (Australia)
Who wins?, New Constant: Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs.
Canwest: Media Bully, The (unofficial) blog of the BCLA’s Intellectual Freedom Committee and tara robertson’s blog
Free speech not safe from attack by Canadian media corporation, Atlantic Free Press
Media giant CanWest slaps SLAPP suit on Palestinian activists, Tuque Souq
CanWest SLAPP suit muzzles ‘leftie’ critics of Israel, on cupe.ca and cupe.bc.ca
Huffing and puffing to silence criticism of Israel, electronicintifada.net
Interview with Mordecai Briemberg, Canadian Jewish Outlook, Sept./Oct. 2008
Intellectual Cleansing: PART 1 – Keeping The Media Safe For Big Business, Media Lens UK (scroll to the end of Part 1) – also on zmag.org
Canadian media attempt to silence on Israel, electronicintifada.net
Canwest SLAPPs activists over parody, straightgoods.ca
Free-speech advocates rally for support in lawsuit by media conglomerate, WestEnder
Free speech not safe from attack by Canadian media corporation, Activist Magazine, Znet
TradeMark Troubles by Mordecai Briemberg, in INDEX ON CENSORSHIP
Free speechers call for CanWest to drop suit, SFSC letter in the Georgia Straight
CanWest huffs and puffs while free speech burns, by Carel Moiseiwitsch and Gordon Murray (Palestine Media Collective) in the Georgia Straight
The Palestine Media Collective speaks out on CanWest parody, Press release from the Palestine Media Collective
CanWest publisher defends Briemberg lawsuit to staff, CanWest internal memo published by the Georgia Straight
Seriously Free Speech Committee recognizes CanWest with award, Georgia Straight
Media giant Canwest silences its critics, The Republic of East Vancouver
Vancouver Sun Parody and SLAPP, Social Justice Librarian
Canawest sues Health Canada over “freedom of speech”, Common Ground
SLAPPing dissent, Canadian Jewish Outlook
Fake Sun Lawsuit + A reaction from Mordecai Briemberg, Chinese in Vancouver
Canwest not amused, The Jewish Independent
Frank Challenges CanWest, Georgia Straight
Standing up to the corporate media bully, rabble.ca
CanWest lawsuit defendant Briemberg wins peace award, Georgia Straight
Free speech, if you can afford it, The Globe and Mail / Rabble.ca
CanWest’s latest battle: a ‘fake’ newspaper, The Globe and Mail
Litigiously yours, CanWest, Toronto Life
Canada’s Media Bully, Adbusters
Remedial Media, Frank Magazine
Canadian Human Rights Hypocrisy, ZNet
parody+politics=lawsuit from CanWest, The (unofficial) blog of the BC Library Association’s Intellectual Freedom Committee
Criticize CanWest, get sued, The Canadian Journalism Project
Why did Canwest sue me for somthing I didn’t do: an interview with Mordecai Briemberg, Shahrgon (in Farsi and in English)
Canada’s largest media conglomerate sues professor for handing out Israeli anniversary parody edition, Jewish Voice for Peace, MuzzleWatch.org
CanWest SLAPPing freedom of speech around, RustyIdols.ca
Suit Looks Strange, Langara College Voice
CanWest Global Goliath Goes After Media David, ViveLeCanada.ca / Pacifc Free Press / Friends of Canadian Broadcasting
Fake edition of Sun sets off lawsuit, Vancouver Sun
Audio/Video
Watch newsreel parody about Canwest’s War on Satire, freexero.com
Podcast of interview with Palestine Media Collective’s Gordon Murray, CKUT Montreal
Watch Freedom of Speech Under Siege webcast, pasifik.ca
Brian Campbell Talks about the Big Media Clampdown on Free Speech, Media Democracy Day 2008
Canwest drops lawsuit against political activist, rabble.ca /redeye interview with Anne Roberts
The curious case of Q (Yes Men open door to Sun parody, Q host slams it shut – 4min in)
Interview with NY Times pranksters, CNN
Part 2: Israel, Palestine and the Media , therealnews.com
Part 1: Media giant tries to muzzle parody, therealnews.com
Mordecai Briemberg is guest speaker at the CUPE Western Library Workers Conference, Working TV
The CanWest: Media Bully video is now available on YouTube or Working TV
Media Blackout: CanWest Global Attacks Drug Ad Laws, Youtube video about Canwest’s “freedom of speech” constitutional challenge to Canada’s drug advertising laws
Interview with Asper Nation author Marc Edge on Redeye, Saturday June 14, podcast on Rabble.ca
Golden Gag Award Webcast, Working TV
CanWest: Media Bully Panel Discussion, Working TV
Spanish language interview with Mordecai Briemberg, Radio Canada International (Spanish)
ALERT radio interview with Mordecai Briemberg, Canadian Dimension, posted on rabble.ca podcast network:
Redeye radio Interview with Brian Campbell co-chair of Seriously Free Speech Committee, Vancouver Cooperative Radio CFRO 102.7 FM, posted on rabble.ca podcast network
Gorrilla Radio with Chris Cook, interview with Mordecai Briemberg, Atlantic Free Press Blog Podcasts
NY Times Spoof
‘We’re Screwed’: Yes Men’s Media Heist Blankets City with ‘Special Edition’ New York Post, CommonDreams.org, Sept. 21, 2009
Greenpeace Parody of Newspaper Spotlights Climate, New York Times, June 18, 2009 (see web version of International Herald-Tribune parody here)
Story of two spoofs and media stupor, rabble.ca
The curious case of Q (Yes Men open door to Sun parody, Q host slams it shut on CBC radio – 4min in)
Video interview with NY Times pranksters, CNN
April Fools’ Comes Early: Read All About It, New York Times reaction to spoof edition
‘All the news we hope to print’: fake NYTimes, National Post (only spoofs of ‘liberal elite’ newspapers are newsworthy)
Prank NY Times offers ‘All the news we hope to print’, cbc.ca (which has never reported on the Vancouver Sun parody or Canwest’s lawsuit) also reported in the Toronto Star and the globeandmail.com
Prank NY Times: `All the news we hope to print’, Washington Post
Liberal pranksters spoof Times, New York Times
Canadian suppression of free speech on Palestine
Three Examples of Shaw censorship of programs on the Middle East, May 9, 2009
University of Ottawa fires professor who has spoken out on Palestine, April 10, 2009
Toronto School Board investigates group called High Schools Against Israeli Apartheid, April 6, 2009
Canada schools blasted for ban on anti-Israel ‘apartheid’ poster, Haaretz, Feb 26, 2009
Poster Protest, ‘A’ News, Feb 26, 2009
Protesters march over poster ban at Carleton, cbc.ca, Feb 26, 2009
University of Ottawa Bans Israeli Apartheid Week Poster – Call to Action, SPHR U Ottawa, Feb 21, 2009
IJV Protest of Carleton University’s harassment of student organizers of Israeli Apartheid Week, Canpalnet Ottawa, Feb 20, 2009
Political stance has Carleton students fearing expulsion, Ottawa Sun, Feb 18, 2009
Academic Freedom Threatened in Ontario Universities, The Bullet, Feb 18, 2008
Carleton University Administration violates free expression
- Bans and confiscates Israeli Apartheid Week posters, Students Against Israeli Apartheid,
February 18, 2009
Exposed: University of Toronto suppresses pro-Palestinian activism, Rabble.ca, Feb 18, 2008
Three Examples of Shaw censorship of programs on the Middle East
Letter to CRTC from SFSC
May 10, 2009
Mr. Konrad W. von Finckenstein,
Chairman,
Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission
Mr. Robert A Morin
Secretary General
Canadian Radio-television and telecommunications Commission
Dear Sirs:
On behalf of the Seriously Free Speech Committee, I am writing to strongly protest a pattern of censorship in which Vancouver Shaw Cable requires its community televisions programs to delete comments or add editorial comments. In one case, in which Shaw editorial comments were added, Shaw still refused to broadcast the program because it would not allow the source of the editorial comments to be disclosed. Thus the company has effectively tried to control the content by framing an analysis and perspective not intended by the programmer or the original program.
Shaw Cable has refused to respond to questions from these community media or other organizations regarding the precise CRTC regulations or Broadcasting Act sections that permit such censorship. A Kafkaesque situation exists where programs are edited because a complaint has been made, apparently to the CRTC, but, the nature of the complaint is withheld because the complaint is before the CRTC. On other occasions, programs are censored before being broadcast. On all occasions, the nature of the complaint is not provided nor is any appeal process made available. Whether or not CRTC regulations or the Broadcasting Act permit such censoring, Shaw is assuming the role of grand inquisitor.
The community programs that have been affected have been produced by Working TV and Vancouver Community Television Association (VCTA). In the three instances addressed here, Shaw Cable refused to broadcast the programs without extensive editing.
In this letter I am addressing three programs all dealing with the political situation in the Middle East. The transcript of the required deletions and additional editorial comments is attached to this letter.
The first program was a taping by VCTA of a Seriously Free Speech panel held at SFU in May, 2008 to educate the public about a lawsuit brought by Canwest against individuals – alleged to have produced a parody of The Vancouver Sun satirising its support for the illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories.
The second program was a taping by Working TV of a lecture given at UBC in January, 2009 by Dr. Norman Finkelstein, a renowned scholar and outspoken critic of Israel’s illegal occupation.
The third program was a taping by ICTV of a lecture given by Mr. Ronnie Kasrils, a former minister of the South African government and a renowned activist against racism and apartheid, at the Vancouver Public Library in March, 2009.
We are concerned about the actual deletions and editorial deletions as well as the lack of any defined process or possibility for the creators and programmers to defend their creations.
The Seriously Free Speech committee therefore asks for the following:
- the precise CRTC regulations and sections that permit Shaw Cable to arbitrarily censor programs submitted by community programmers,
- the precise sections of the Broadcasting Act under which the CRTC and Shaw Cable are operating; and
- an investigation into the conduct of Shaw Cable in demanding these deletions and a record of previous deletions and attempts to curtail community programming.
The Seriously Free Speech Committee began in February, 2008 – raising funds for public education and a legal defense of the individuals accused of producing a parody of The Vancouver Sun. It has since expanded its mandate to include public education on a broader range of attempts to suppress full discussion of the situation in the Middle East. As can be seen from a partial list of our honourary members, we have broad support for our campaigns. A full list of honourary members and extensive documentation on our activities is available at HYPERLINK “http://www.seriouslyfreespeech.ca/”www.seriouslyfreespeech.ca
I look forward to a prompt reply to our requests.
Sincerely
Brian Campbell and Anne Roberts
Co-Chairs
Seriously Free Speech Committee
cc: The Honourable James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages
House of Commons
Mr. Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal Opposition Critic for Canadian heritage and Official
Languages, House of Commons
Mr. Charlie Angus, NDP Opposition Critic for Heritage and Cultural Issues
House of Commons
Mr. Peter Bissonnette, President, Shaw Communications, Inc.,
Ms. Karen Kilba, Shaw Communications, Inc.
Mr. Tom Sandborn, Board of Directors, BC Civil Liberties Association
Ms. Beth Davies, Chairman, Intellectual Freedom Committee, BC Library Association
Mr. Julius Fisher, Working TV
Mr. Pedro Mora, Independent Community TV
1. SERIOUSLY FREE SPEECH – MAY 14, 2008
A panel at SFU downtown organized by the Seriously Free Speech Committee to inform the community of a lawsuit launched by Canwest against Mordecai Briemberg for allegedly producing a parody of the Vancouver Sun in June 2007 satirizing their support of Israeli’s illegal occupation of Palestine. The program was taped by Pedro Mora and an edited version was prepared for Independent Community TV for broadcast on Shaw cable.
The panel consisted of Mordecai Briemberg, Leo McGrady (QC) – lawyer for Mordecai Briemberg, Muarray Dobbin – journalist and Martha Roth representing Jews for Just Peace and was chaired by Anne Roberts, co-chair of Seriousl Free Speech and a former Vancouver City councillor.
Below are the edits demanded by Shaw TV followed by Pedro Mora’s submission to the CRTC. Pedro Mora was not to identify Shaw as the source of the editorial comment or excising.
Karen Kilba, Shaw TV, wrote
beginning approx. 22:51 in
Mordecai Briemberg (MB) comments on events beginning June 6, 2007 when he attended an event and picked up some copies of a newspaper parody of the Vancouver Sun left on a table @ the event, and distributed them the next day; Canwest (CW) launched a lawsuit against him 6 months later. In MB intro comments he quotes Israel Asper (IA) comments in an interview in the Jerusalem Post in August of 2003: ‘in all our newspapers we have a very strong pro-Israel position … we are the strongest supporter of Israel in Canada.’
immediately following the above intro comments, please add editorial commentin graphic format as follows:
EDITORIAL COMMENT: Since the death of Israel Asper, Leonard Asper and others have managed Canwest and maintained the pro-Israeli editorial position.
beginning approx. 33:16 in
MB continues … ‘CW lawyers stated that they have no documents to support their accusation that I had anything to do with the creation and publishing and distribution of the parody, yet I am the central person they are accusing as responsible for creating, publishing and distributing an undetermined # of the parody. It is not surprising CW cannot produce any documents demonstrating my involvement with the publishing of the parody because I had nothing whatsoever to do with imagining, writing, designing, financing, publishing this parody.’
immediately following the above comments, please add editorial comment in graphic format as follows:
EDITORIAL COMMENT: Mr. Briemberg admits “publishing” in one legal sense of the word, in that he admits that when he found copies of the parody he passed them out to others. When he says he did not publish, he means he had nothing to do with the creation of the parody. He did pass out copies.
beginning approx. 38:33 in
MB concludes … ‘ Because I am devoted to defending and enhancing a democratic culture, I’ve not changed my public expression of opinion or activities since this legal suit was launched against me (clapping). Since CW launched the suit I have been energetic in helping organize a pubic forum for the (Elan Papa-check spelling), the Jewish-Israeli historian and author of a very important book called ‘the ethnic cleansing of Palestine’. Since CW launched the suit I’ve been energetic in helping publish a full page ad in two Canadian papers with signatures of respected Canadians declaring we cannot celebrate the 60th year of the founding of Israel. Since CW launched the suit I have been enthusiastic in participating in a public demonstration solemnly marking the massive injustice of the 60th year of the dispossession of Palestinians from their lands, homes and villages, and I have every intention of continuing this same work (clapping). Fear may be the emotion that prompts CW’s legal suit, but fear is no way to defend democratic culture … and my second comment recognizing that you, like I am confronted by a corporate giant with immense resources, great power, albeit with declining authority I believe, I want to observe that the more of us who involve ourselves in defending a democratic culture, the less vulnerable any one of us is to vendettas. Like a bully in a schoolyard with one kid in his grip, when the other kids stand back, the bully feels emboldened and thirsts for more victims. A bully in a schoolyard with one kid in his grip and others approaching him telling him to let go, feels disempowered and looks for a way out. Together and only together can we succeed.’
These concluding remarks will need to be removed from the program. (Emphasis ours)
SUBMISSION TO THE CRTC from Pedro Mora
Grievance to CRTC about Community Television Regulations.
The hierarchical, autocratic, business model management which CRTC allows cable television operators is oppressing and restricting the potential, input from community television producers.
First, there is no CRTC requirement from cable TV managers to fairly distribute the cable levy to all producers, so grass roots independent community producers get no financial support.
Second, cable companies, with CRTC’s approval, are given absolute authority to regularly and unilaterally preempt any number of community programs to give preference to sports tournaments or charity fundraisers.
Finally, the latest and most unfair management imposition by Shaw TV in Vancouver is the refusing to broadcast a program entitled “Seriously Free Speech”… unless the independent producer would insert three Shaw TV’s comments (attached below FYI).
We, the producers of this program, reluctantly included Shaw TV’s comments adding “Shaw TV management” as the source of those comments:
The program was rejected by Shaw TV again, this time because according to their legal advice, we were not authorized to reveal the authorship of those comments.
The double whammy of this incident is that
…first, it happens to a program about freedom of speech; and
…second, that the management’s supreme authority is legally given by CRTC, (a commission supposedly representing the public interest), to cable company operators, (representing private corporate interests). So thanks to CRTC, private corporate boards have become the ultimate censors of public freedom of speech.
CRTC needs to enable, not exclusively cable corporations as is now, but community television associations, the right to apply for license to operate the originally intended “community channels” on cable television.
Pedro J. Mora – Vancouver Community Television Producer
2. RESOLVING THE ISRAEL-PALESTINE CONFLICT – JANUARY 21, 2009
Dr. Norman Finkelstein was the featured speaker in this program organized by the UBC Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights and Coloured Connected and introduced by photographer/activist Jon Elmes. Dr. Finkelstein is the author of five books and many articles. It was taped by Julius Fisher of Working TV and divided into three segments for broadcast on Shaw. After the first segment aired, there was one complaint resulting in the demand for editing outlined below. The edits were implemented using a ‘beep” over the requested edits.
On 2/19/09 2:48 PM, Karen Kilba of Shaw TV wrote:
TO: Slim Evans Society
Attn: Julius Fisher
Julius:
We have completed additional review of the three-part Working TV series of the Dr. Norman Finkelstein presentation taped January 21, 2009 @ UBC.
The episodes in the three-part series may air with the noted adjustments:
series title
although it is lengthy, we would suggest (not require) that it might provide additional context for viewers if the full title (see poster below) was included in the show graphics, i.e. ‘What We Can Learn from Gandhi – Resolving the Israel-Palestine Conflict’, rather than the shortened ‘Resolving the Israel-Palestine Conflict’
speaker comments
please see transcript and recut requirements related to wording detailed below for episodes 1 and 3
editorial comment
the episode(s) may include the following editorial comment (graphic only) at the beginning and/or the end of the episode(s) only: The complete presentation by Dr. Norman Finkelstein may be viewed at our website: www.workingtv.com/
technical issue
our technicians noticed there was digitizing occurring throughout the programs so you may want to double check this
Further to your request to review the customer complaint regarding the show(s), please be advised that Shaw customer complaints and comments remain confidential. We are able to paraphrase the viewer concerns as indicating that the show speaker’s comments and opinions qualify as hate rather than political analysis and expose Jewish organizations and the Israeli population to hatred and contempt.
Thank you for your attention in this matter and please let us know if you have any questions or concerns.
Karen Kilba, Shaw TV, Shaw Communications Inc.
Shaw Tower, 900 – 1067 West Cordova Street, Vancouver, B.C. V6C 3T5
email: karen.kilba@sjrb.ca ph: 604.629.3110 FAX: 604.629.4231 www.shawtv.com
(Slim Evans Society) Working TV (each episode listed as 27:30)
What We Can Learn From Gandhi – Resolving the Israel-Palestine Conflict – 3 part series taped January 21, 2009 @ the University of British Columbia and sponsored by Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR UBC) & Colour Connected, this labour focused series presents an episode featuring comments by political scientist and author Dr. Norman Finkelstein, about the recent Israeli attack on Gaza, with an intro by journalist/activist Jon Elmer.
transcript and recut details
Episode #1 of 3
approx. 6:00 in
… this evening is the background to the Gaza massacre. I’m not trying to use that language for its’ incendiary value, but I don’t think it can be properly described as a war when the ratio of those killed is 100 to 1. By any reasonable standard what we witnessed the last couple of weeks was a massacre or slaughter. It can’t reasonably be called a war, if by war we mean an exchange of fighting between two sides. So I will be referring to it as a massacre, a bloodbath, a slaughter, however it works into my remarks …
Bleep first three underlined words
Bleep underlined words in final sentence, or remove this section of comments
approx. 7:55 in
… Israel is a Spartan like society. It’s consumed by revenge and bloodlust. Killing Arabs is a sure crowd pleaser and the opinion pools show during the duration of the attack in Gaza, about 90% of the Israelis’ supported it, and so those who sought re-election, not surprisingly, would think of killing Arabs as a way to garner votes.
Bleep or remove underlined sections of comments
approx. 21:50 in
… to Israel’s chagrin and humiliation, the US opted out (of a planned Israeli nuclear attack on Iran in 2008) and went its merry way + Israel’s deterrence capacity, it’s capacity to terrorize the Arab world into submission, it slipped another notch. It was high time to find a defenseless target to annihilate. Enter Gaza, Israel’s favourite shooting gallery.
Bleep or remove underlined sections of comments
approx. 24:57 in
… the operative plan for the Gaza bloodbath is seen by looking @ the authoritative statements released by Israeli officials as the massacre got under way. A reserve major general said – what we have to do is to act systematically with the aim of punishing all the organizations that are firing the rockets and mortars, as well as the civilians who are enabling them to fire and hide …
Bleep underlined words
approx. 25:52 in
… it was a real success, we can’t dispute that. Whereas Israel killed a mere 55 Lebanese during the first two days of the Lebanon war in 2006, the Israeli media exulted @ Israel’s – what they called ‘shock + awe’ as it killed more than 300 Palestinians in the first two days of the attack on Gaza. Was it an accident several days into the slaughter an informed Israeli strategic analyst wrote – the idea of Israeli defense forces which planned to attack buildings + sites populated by hundreds of people, did not warn them in advance to leave, but intended to kill a great many of them, + succeeded. A sometime historian and full time propagandist, Benny Morris, he could barely contain his pride of what he called Israel’s highly efficient air assault on Hamas …
Bleep underlined word
approx. 27:58 in
… as Israel targeted schools, mosques, hospitals, ambulances, UN sanctuaries, as it flattened entire neighbourhoods, as it slaughtered + incinerated Gaza’s defenseless civilian populations, Israeli commentators gloated that – quote – Gaza is to Lebanon as the second sitting for an exam is to the first, a second chance to get it right, and this time Israel had hurled back Gaza – not 20years as it promised to do in Lebanon, but into the 1940’s …
Bleep or remove underlined section of comments
Episode #3 of 3
approx. 8:50 in
… Mr. Ignatieff, the carpet bagger from Harvard … he says, Israel has the right to defend itself, Hamas is a terrorist organization.
Bleep underlined word
approx. 11:59 in
… Bernie Farber, the head of the Canadian Jewish Congress, he issued a statement … he’s appalled, he’s shocked, he’s filled with repugnance, disgust, because he saw a demonstration … an Israeli flag was being burned … but 400 Palestinian children incinerated … that doesn’t concern him … only an Israeli flag being burned in a demonstration …
Bleep or remove underlined section of comments
approx. 16:00 in
… the horrific crimes being committed by what’s becoming a satanic state (referring to Israel) …
… (talking about his positive outlook) … Jewish liberal defection … last Jewish worldwide backing for state massacre …
Bleep underlined words
approx. 22:30 in
… that’s what that Satanic state has turned into … Genghis Khan with a laptop
Bleep underlined word
approx. 28:50 in
… and finally put a stop to that lunatic state (speaking of Israel)
Bleep underlined word
3. RONNIE KASRILS LECTURE – MARCH 8, 2009
Ronnie Kasrils is a noted politician, activist and former South African cabinet minister. His talk, sponsored by CanPalNet and the UBC chapter of Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights, was held at Vancouver Public Library as part of the 5th annual International Israel Apartheid Week (March 1 – 8, 2009). Mordecai briemberg and Mike Mullen made introductory comments on behalf of their respective organizations. The program was taped by Pedro Mora on behalf of Vancouver Community Television.
Shaw cable demanded the following edits:
Karen Kilba of Shaw TV wrote:
TO: Vancouver Community Television Association (VCTA)
Attn: Pedro Mora
Pedro:
We have completed additional review of the (VCTA) Pasifik.ca episode Apartheid: from South Africa to Israel. The episode may air with the noted adjustments:
speaker comments
*please see transcript and recut requirements related to wording
detailed below editorial comment (if episode is available on line)
*the episode may include the following editorial comment (graphic
only) at the beginning and/or the end of the episode only: The complete
program may be viewed at our website: www.pasifik.ca
Thank you for your attention in this matter and please let us know if you have any questions or concerns.
Karen Kilba, Shaw TV, Shaw Communications Inc.
Shaw Tower, 900 – 1067 West Cordova Street, Vancouver, B.C. V6C 3T5
TRANSCRIPT
Please delete (bleep) the identified wording below
approx. time in
3:41
(Mordecai Briemberg intro comments): … that’s a small example of
the anger that has arisen @ Israeli atrocities
all remaining comments by Ronnie Kasrils
34:24
… (speaking of Zionism) … of an ethnic cleansing project that goes
back to 1947/48 and continues to this day … so again, if we fail to
make the proper assessment of Zionism …
37:40
… (speaking of British MP, Gerald Kaufman, long time friend of Israel)
… he said this woman (spokeswoman of the Israeli Defense Force) talks
exactly like a Nasi (Nazi?), so we’re not saying it’s a Nasi (Nazi?)
state, but you see there are measures that they use and there’s a
mindset which makes us, again it reminds us of what happens to humans
when they allow themselves this form of self righteousness … and now
for me, one of the most revealing statements that I’ve come across from
the annals of Israeli history was made in 1948, the first minister of
agriculture in Israel (can’t make out name – web search indicates Aharon
Zisling <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aharon_Zisling> ) after the
(can’t make out name-may be Deir Yassin) massacre was revealed in which
240 men, women and children were just butchered by the (can’t make out
name) terrorist group of (sounds like Fata + the Stern gang-see
background below) … now we too have behaved like Nazi’s and my whole
being is shaken …
45:20
… (speaking of white prosperous + it’s effects) … now what manner of
people will use this kind of weaponry against other human beings, and
this is where I’m optimistic in the end about human nature, but we’ve
seen from apartheid in S. Africa how decent human beings can be so
bombarded from birth through the whole socialization process in their
home/schools/military that in the end they will dance when they hear
about the hundreds who are perishing, which is what’s been happening in
Israel …
56:50
… when you had Palestinians living within the north in the (galelie?),
demonstrating, marching in the street against the butchery in Gaza …
episode overview
(VCTA) Pasifik.ca (listed as 59:00)
Apartheid: from South Africa to Israel a global justice focused series. This episode features comments from a keynote address by South African politician and activist Ronnie Kasrils taped at an event at the Vancouver Public Library on March 8, 2009 during the 5th Annual International Israeli Apartheid Week (March 1-8, 2009). The program includes introductory remarks by representatives of the event co-sponsors: Mordecai Briemberg of the Canada-Palestine Support Network and Mohammed Mullen of the UBC chapter of Solidarity for Palestine Human Rights. (VCTA now.polling spots air throughout).
originally scheduled to air beginning March 28 (2009)
Note: some shaky, roving cam; audio change when speaker moves to podium
(approx. 47:30)
Response from Pedro Mora, Pasifik.ca Editor
Dear Karen,
I do understand that Shaw TV management has the prerogative to broadcast or reject community programs according to a set criteria. However, I don’t understand the reason why I should edit out the segments, you and Shaw’s lawyers, have identified.
It would be helpful if your lawyers would explain how Ronnie Kasrils’ speech is infringing on CRTC’s broadcasting regulations. Our “Freedom of Speech” lawyers might be able to clarify with CRTC this puzzle for the benefit of all VCTA supporters.
I will postpone your requested adjustments until we understand the reasons for censoring it.
Looking forward to hearing from your lawyers.
Pedro Mora Pasifik.ca – Editor
Carleton University Administration violates free expression- Bans and confiscates Israeli Apartheid Week posters
February 18, 2009
On February 8, Students Against Israeli Apartheid at Carleton University put up 100 posters for “Israeli Apartheid Week”, a series of lectures and public events that will occur on campuses in over 40 cities around the world. On February 9, these posters were taken down at the request of Carleton’s Equity Services, under the rationale that the posters “could be seen to incite others to infringe rights protected in the Ontario Human Rights code” and are “insensitive to the norms of civil discourse in a free and democratic society”
The poster was created by noted cartoonist Carlos Latuff and depicts a situation – a child being killed by aerial bombardment – that occurred over 430 times in Israel’s latest attack on Gaza according to United Nations reports. We encourage everyone to view the poster: http://www.apartheidweek.org/sites/apartheidweek.org/files/Israeli%20Apartheid%20Week%202009%20poster.jpg. Since it depicts a situation that has a factual basis and its intention is clearly to invite people to a lecture series, the notion that it is an incitement or a violation to norms of civil discourse is preposterous.
This is part of a wider pattern of repression of academic freedom and rights to free expression, especially on Israel/Palestine, on Canadian campuses, including Carleton University. It is accompanied by double standards. When 56 Carleton professors asked President Roseanne Runte to condemn Israel’s bombardment of the Islamic University of Gaza, the President refused. Neither the direct killing of hundreds of children nor the direct bombing of a campus are enough to elicit condemnation, but her administration has decided that a poster inviting people to discuss the conflict ought to be banned. Instead of being lauded by their university, students affirming the humanity of all peoples and the universality of international law have been threatened by Carleton University’s Provost with expulsion.
The Carleton administration had already taken a biased political stand on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and is now violating free expression to prevent alternative views. Both the current and former Carleton Presidents have taken very clear positions on the Israel-Palestine conflict by condemning the academic boycott of Israel out of hand, offering no alternative to this justice-oriented civil-society initiative. Students and faculty at Carleton have requested that the administration hold a public debate on the issue, to allow the Carleton community to determine the most responsible course of action, yet have been repeatedly rebuffed.
Far from defending human rights, the Carleton administration is treating them with contempt. In a memo to students on February 12, the Provost wrote that “all reported incidents of racial or religious intolerance will be investigated vigorously and addressed regardless of the persons or groups involved.” The administration should begin a vigorous investigation of its own behaviour, including its discrimination against students who seek an open debate on a political issue but are being silenced because they happen to disagree with the president’s stand.
That Carleton’s administration is using human rights grounds to violate free expression on its campus is a double insult. Internationally, the movement against Israeli apartheid has been endorsed by hundreds of universities, unions, religious groups and social justice organizations. This campaign is proudly anti-racist, and founded on the principles of opposition to all forms of racism, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. It draws its inspiration from the global campaign to end South African apartheid and is led by many of the same individuals who were at the forefront of that earlier struggle. By contrast, the administration that banned the poster could not summon enough concern for human rights or the right to education to speak against the bombing of a Gazan university.
- SAIA Carleton demands that the Carleton University administration:*
1. Immediately lift the ban on the Israeli Apartheid Week poster and publicly apologize for the banning. 2. Explain, publicly and precisely, how the profound error of banning the poster was made and address how to prevent such violations from occurring in future.
3. Sponsor a full public debate– ensuring generous access to the entire university community– on Carleton’s position on the proposed institutional boycott of Israeli academic institutions.
4. Appoint a university/community Commission to investigate the record of the University in relation to democratic discourse and equity around issues of Palestine solidarity.
This attempt to repress free expression will ultimately fail. The Carleton University administration should understand that debates on campuses on some of the most important human rights questions of our times cannot be silenced by administrative rulings.
We call on student organizations, social justice groups and concerned individuals around the world to support students at Carleton and the broader fight for freedom of expression.
- Please take the following actions:*
- Immediately email the Carleton University President, Roseanne Runte, at presidents_office@carleton.ca <mailto:presidents_office@carleton.ca> demanding that she immediately restore the Charter rights of Carleton students and send a copy of your message of support to Students Against Israeli Apartheid (SAIA Carleton) at saia.carleton@gmail.com <mailto:saia.carleton@gmail.com>
- Call or fax Carleton University President, Roseanne Runte, at 613 520-3801(phone) or 613 520-4474 (fax) demanding that she immediately restore the Charter rights of Carleton students.
Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism (CPCCA)
The Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism (CPCCA) is part of a world-wide attempt by individual parliamentary supporters of Israel (and its actions in the occupied territories of Palestine and within Israel) to expand the definition of antisemitism and criminalize criticism of Israel. The CPCCA was established with little public notification and called for submissions by the end of August, 2009.
It is rooted in The London Declaration on Combating Antisemitism created by an informal coalition of Zionist supporting parliamentarians. CPCCA plans on submitting a report to Parliament prior to the next Interparliamentary Conference on Combating Antisemitism to be held in Ottawa in October, 2010.
The Seriously Free Speech Committee has submitted a brief (see below) and is providing either the full text or links to as many submissions as we can find. This is necessary because the CPCCA has not posted submissions and are holding invititation-only public hearings. To get involved contact info@seriouslyfreespeech.ca.
CCPA Petition
The Independent Jewish Voices of Canada has created a petition (text below) concerning the CPCCA. Please sign this petition.
Petition Text
The Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism (CPCCA) is conducting eight hearings starting November 2 to December 14. “Witnesses” have been selected from some 150 submissions to further the CPCCA’s political agenda.
Many of those critical of the CPCCA agenda to equate criticism of Israel or Zionism as anti-Semitism made submissions. To the best of our knowledge, they have all been excluded from the hearings.
The CPCCA’s goal is to criminalize criticism of Israel and Zionism, not to hold impartial hearings.
Therefore, we oppose the CPCCA as an ideologically biased organization with an agenda that will harm free speech and human rights activity in Canada.
We oppose the CPCCA’s Orwellian distortion of anti-Semitism. It is a danger to both Canadian liberties and to the genuine and necessary fight against anti-Semitism.
CCPA Submissions
Seriously Free Speech Committee Submission to CPCCA
Independent Jewish Voices (Canada) Submission
Canadians For Justice And Peace In The Middle East (CJPME) Submission
Canadian Civil Liberties Association Submission
Canadian Jewish Congress Submission (English)
Canadian Jewish Congress Submission (French)
Quebec Jewish Congress Submission (A Division Of Canadian Jewish Congress) (English)
Quebec Jewish Congress Submission (French)
Canadian Jewish Congress Submission (Ontario Region)
Canadian Jewish Congress Submission (Pacific Region)
Seriously Free Speech Committee Submission to the CPCCA
INTRODUCTION
The Seriously Free Speech Committee (SFSC) is concerned that the hearings of the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism (CPCCA) are directed not towards combating racism and anti-semitism but rather towards incorporating a much broader definition of anti-semitism in the Canadian criminal code. This new definition, based on the European Union Monitoring Centre (EUMC) ‘working definition’ of anti-semitism, is an expansive, subjective and politicized definition which merges the interests of individual Jews with the State of Israel and its Zionist ideology. By conflating the Jewish people as a whole with the government of Israel, it seeks to delegitimize and even criminalize criticism of Israel and its policies.
BRIEF
The SFSC was formed in February, 2008 to defend individuals being sued by Canwest, in a classic Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP), for producing a parody about the pro-Israel bias of the Vancouver Sun. The members of the committee do not necessarily agree on the issues raised in the parody on the situation in the Middle East. Rather the committee unites around a commitment to open and public discussion of these issues. When a broad spectrum of perspectives and information are made available for consideration — free of harassment, intimidation or censorship — Canadians at large can reflect on these and draw their own conclusions.
Canwest’s position is best summed-up by its late founder Izzy Asper who boasted that “In all our newspapers…we have a very pro-Israeli position….we are the strongest supporters of Israel in Canada”. Statements made in the first Writ of Summons demonstrated that the reason for the suit against the first individual was his prominent support for a just settlement in the Middle East and his opposition to Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian territories. Indeed, he had nothing to do with the parody beyond distributing a few copies of it. Charges against him were eventually “set aside” for lack of evidence after significant legal fees were incurred. The case is ongoing.
Our committee is opposed to all forms of racism, including anti-semitism, but we are troubled by the assumptions on which the CPCCA was created, and the seemingly pre-determined outcome of its hearings based on The London Declaration on Combating Antisemitism. Rather then encouraging wide-ranging debate on anti-semitism these hearings cast a shadow over open discussion of important issues in the Middle East and create a chill on freedom of expression.
In addition, the hearings have been poorly advertised to Canadian society and provide little time for response.
HIERARCHY OF RACISM
By focusing only on anti-semitism, these hearings create a hierarchy of racism in the Canadian context with anti-semitism at its apex. Canada has a long history of racism, subjugation of indigenous populations, discrimination against Blacks, race riots against Chinese and Japanese, discriminatory treatment of Sikhs and wide-spread anti-semitism resulting in European Jews being refused refugee status prior to WW II. A spring 2008 survey by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project found a rise in unfavourable views of Jews in many European countries but small numbers in Britain (9%), Australia (11%) and the US (7%). Canadian figures, though not available, are likely to be at similar levels. Significantly, unfavourable views of Muslims were much higher in all the countries surveyed. Indigenous peoples are subject to far more discrimination in Canada than Jews. A Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-semitism denies these realities.
ANTI-SEMITISM IN CANADA
Historically anti-semitism has been embedded in the very structures of Canadian government and society. Witness the pre-war exclusion of Jews from immigrating to Canada and the generalized separation that Jews faced in social, political, cultural and economic life through the 1950’s. Recall the quota system at McGill University, the exclusion of Jews from various social and cultural clubs as well as from particular workplaces and jobs. Since the 1960’s however, there has been a definite change in the structures of government and in the behaviour of Canadian elites. The Jewish community is now integrated in all aspects of Canadian cultural, financial, political and work life.
While there are individual incidents of anti-semitism, examples on the Internet, through white supremacist groups and from marginalized sectors of society, these are exposed and often result in serious consequences for the perpetrator. Bernie Farber, CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress, recently told the Toronto Star, “We have come to a point in the 21st Century where at least in the halls of government and I think very much in the mainstream of Canadian life, we are viewed as part and parcel of Canadian polity”.
The 2008 Audit of Antisemitic Incidents by the League for Human Rights of B’nai Brith showed an 8.9% increase in incidents (from 2007) to 1,135 including harassment (70.7%), vandalism (28%) and violence (1.2%). In Canada, police services reported 785 crimes that were motivated by hate in 2007, down from 892 in 2006. There were 185 religiously-motivated incidents in 2007, down from 220 in 2006. There were fewer incidents targeting people of both Jewish and Muslim faiths.
While any hate crime is unacceptable, quantifiable measures do not support the claim on the CPCCA’s website that the “extent and severity of antisemitism is widely regarded as at its worst level since the end of the Second World War.”
CRITICISM OF ISRAEL AND ZIONISM IS NOT ANTI-SEMITIC
Freedom of speech and free expression are human rights developed during the Enlightenment to encourage and protect citizen criticism of governing political and religious authorities. There is a long history of debate and disagreement about Israeli policies and Zionism both inside and outside the Jewish community. To suggest that being anti-Zionist is anti-semitic is not only erroneous and ahistorical, it debases the very concept of anti-semitism.
The essence of the “new” anti-semitism campaign is the conflation of Jews with Israel, the State of Israel or its governing ideology, Zionism. For example, the London Declaration denounces as anti-semitic “political action – against Jews, Jewish belief and practice and the State of Israel” Such a definition makes it impossible to criticize either Israel or Zionism without being labeled anti-semitic. Further, it is an illusion fostered for political purposes to assume that Zionism or the Israeli State represents the interests of all Jews. It does not represent, for example, some organized segments of Orthodox Jewry. Professor Steven Cohen’s 2007 study finds also that “feeling of attachment to Israel is declining among non-Orthodox American Jews”. “Only 48% think Israel’s destruction would be a personal tragedy for them, only 54% [are] ‘comfortable with the idea of a Jewish State’ “.
The 2008 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion revealed a wide discrepancy of opinion between American Jews and those held by the main Zionist leadership, particularly on foreign policy. In Canada, many organizations including Independent Jewish Voices and Jews for A Just Peace oppose Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories. These studies and organizations demonstrate that Jewish opinion covers a wide-spectrum and is far more nuanced than the positions espoused by a few Zionist organizations who claim to speak for the entire Jewish diaspora .
While proponents claim Israel is the “collective Jew among nations” and that criticizing Israel is an anti-semitic attack on Jews, the EUMC ‘Working Definition’ gave “Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel” as an example of the way anti-semitism is manifested with regard to the state of Israel. Yet that is precisely the consequence of the Working Definition. Those who criticize the illegal Israel occupation of Palestine, the apartheid system within Israel, or Israel foreign policy are criticizing the state, not individual Jews. The State and its governing elite are a separate from Jews in general. Equating the two makes every Jewish person responsible for the policies and practices of the Israeli state. Worse, it encourages the notion of collective responsibility and therefore collective punishment. As Brian Klug pointed out in his essay on The Myth of the New Anti-Semitism – “when every anti-Zionist is an anti-Semite, we no longer know how to recognize the real thing – the concept of anti-Semitism loses its significance”.
Proponents of the “new” anti-semitism argue that singling out Israel from all nations and atrocities in the world is unfair, demonstrating the anti-semitism of those organizations and individuals engaging in such criticism. The Seriously Free Speech Committee and most organizations opposed to the occupation are strong opponents of anti-semitism, racism, homophobia and Islamophobia. Participants in these committees are often also involved in many other organizations opposing human rights violations, including attacks on women and trade unions, and other national and international atrocities. It is therefore untrue to say that Israel is being singled out for criticism.
The ‘Working Definition” states the only acceptable criticism of Israel is one “similar to that leveled at any other country.” But Israel and the Middle East are the focus of international politics and Israel has been the subject of over 33 UN Security Council resolutions and the International Court of Justice ruling that the Wall is illegal. The real question is “why would Israel’s actions not be the focus of substantial political scrutiny and criticism?”
POLITICAL DEBATES ON ISRAELI POLICIES AND ZIONISM ARE NOT ANTI-SEMITISM
Linking political debate of Israel’s policies and Zionism to anti-semitism is not only erroneous; it will chill freedom of expression in Canada. The main danger at this time is the stifling of debate over very serious issues such as the comparison between South African apartheid and Israeli treatment of Palestinians (a comparison which has been made by senior African National Congress activists), as well as the call for boycotts until Israel complies with international law. The London Declaration specifically attacks “antisemitic discourse and a hostile environment in whatever form it takes including calls for boycotts.”
Jewish student feelings of fear and intimidation on campuses, particularly around Israeli Apartheid Week, has been specifically mentioned as a form of anti-semitism. There is certainly anecdotal evidence that some Jewish students feel uncomfortable having the Zionist narrative of the Middle East politically challenged. But political debate and criticism is not anti-semitism. The 2008 Audit Report report notes that “tensions in the Middle East were present in explicit form in 211 [19% of] incidents during 2008.” How many of these incidents of harassment were political criticisms of Zionism or Israel’s policies? No one has the right to demand suppression of political speech because it makes them feel uncomfortable.
On the other hand, Canadian critics of Israel’s violations of international law are subject to constant harassment and censorship, eg.
- the Canwest lawsuit brought against the producers of The Vancouver Sun parody
- the censoring and blocking of community videos by Shaw TV because the words “ethnic cleansing”, massacre”, “genocide” were used in presentations by speakers opposing the illegal occupation of Palestine
- several universities requiring the removal of Israel Apartheid Week (IAW) posters, threatening to cancel IAW events, or using bureaucratic maneuvers to cancel public meetings or charge exorbitant security fees
threatening several faculty in the US and Canada with review and dismissal. Some have lost their positions
- Pro-Palestinian organizations have been threatened with the loss of government funding.
CONCLUSION
The Seriously Free Speech Committee is concerned that the CPCCA mandate creates a hierarchy of racism in Canada by focusing solely on anti-semitism. The CPCCA context of The London Declaration on Combating Antisemitism and the EUMC ‘Working Definition’ conflate the policies of the State of Israel and Zionism with all Jews, rendering any criticism of Israel’s actions anti-semitic and thereby debasing the concept of anti-semitism. Finally, these hearings cast a shadow over open political debate of important issues in the Middle East and create a chill on freedom of expression in Canada.
Canpalnet submission to the CPCCA
The Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism (CPCCA) invited submissions and we are responding, for the issue you raise concerns us directly.
The CPCCA is composed of individual Members of Parliament, acting in their own name, not that of the various political parties. Nor is CPCCA acting under a Parliamentary mandate. What brings the members together, judging from its website, is a desire to lobby, across our country and internationally, for Parliamentary legislation to further restrict public exchange of information and opinion concerning the policies and practices of the State of Israel and the living conditions and rights of the Palestinian people. The CPCCA aims to shield the State of Israel from unwanted political criticisms, by arbitrarily defining the most serious of these criticisms as “anti-semitic”. If successful, the CPCCA project, under the pretext of preventing bigotry, actually would curtail public expression of political opinion. And as freedom of expression of political opinion shrank, ironically bigotry itself would increase.
For our part we are solidly grounded in a rejection of all expressions of bigotry, and simultaneously are committed to the widest possible, vigorous public dialogue among Canadians on the issues of Israel and the Palestinians. We contend this dialogue needs to be free of intimidation and harassment. Our goal is for Canadian government policies and practices on this matter to reflect the outcomes of such democratic dialogue among the people of our country.
So the CPCCA and our organization, Canada Palestine Support Network (CanPalNet) are concerned with the same issues, but CPCCA and CanPalNet approaches move in opposite directions. We outline our views below on the premise that CPCCA will conduct its public hearings in a democratic spirit: respectful of and attentive to voices not just of those who agree with CPCCA objectives but also those, like ourselves, who have serious reasons to disagree.
There is no hierarchy of bigotries
Bigotry in our country does deserve Parliamentary investigation and action. Bigotry, within the populace and within the institutional structures of power, targets groups of many different origins in our country: indigenous, blacks, Asians, Moslems, Sikhs, Jews, and others. Bigotry undeniably is a serious problem.
But rather than address this comprehensively by inviting all groups, in your own constituencies for example, who feel themselves exposed to hateful bigotry to testify as to their experiences and with their proposals for remedy, the CPCCA has chosen to elevate the concerns of one group high above that of all others, giving this group special consideration.
Yet there is no available evidence for the CPCCA presumption that Jews in Canada now face more bigotry and/or receive lesser public support, particularly from institutional power-holders, in combating bigotry when it occurs, than do other targeted groups of people in our country.
To the contrary, according to the recent spring 2008 survey of the well-regarded
Pew Research Center’s Pew Global Attitudes Project. In the UK and the US negative views of Jews was 9% and 7% respectively. In these same countries, the negative views of Moslems was 23%. The survey did not include Canada, but it is reasonable to hypothesize the ratio is comparable.
There is no “collective Jew”
The CPCCA calls Israel the “collective Jew”, inferring thereby that every Jew supports and is responsible for the policies and practices and the guiding political ideology of the Israeli state. This is utterly false. The resort to this false claim is a device to suppress serious criticism of and opposition to Israeli state policies and practices, as well as rejection of the political ideology of Zionism, by rebranding such criticism as “new” anti-semitism. Tragically, this rebranding effort itself contributes to fostering anti-semitic thinking.
From the earliest days of the Zionist movement until today, individual as well as organized groups of Jews have held varied, and intensely different views about this political movement. Jews, neither in the past nor today, have no uniform response about whether the policies and practices of the State of Israel express and defend, or violate and threaten, their own values and interests.
Three illustrations, far from exceptional:
In 1919 more than 300 prominent Jews in the US (members of Congress, diplomats, judges, officers of major Jewish organizations included) sent a letter to President Wilson at the Versailles negotiations, saying: “As a future form of government for Palestine will undoubtedly be considered by the approaching Peace Conference, we, the undersigned citizens of the United States, unite in this statement, setting forth our objections to the organization of a Jewish State in Palestine as proposed by the Zionist Societies in this country and Europe and to the segregation of the Jews as a nationalistic unit in any country.”
Albert Einstein, victim of Nazi bigotry, wrote a letter with other prominent Jewish-American intellectuals published in the New York Times (December 4, 1948), denouncing the visit to the US of Menachim Begin leader of the “Freedom Party”. Begin years later was elected Prime Minister of Israel. The letter described this party as “closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties.”
Last month, Dov Yermiya, an Israeli military officer who fought and was wounded in the war of 1948, wrote to a circle of friends saying: “I, a 95 year old Sabra [native born Israeli Jew], … declare herewith that I renounce my belief in the Zionism which has failed, that I shall not be loyal to the Jewish fascist state and its mad visions, that I shall not sing anymore its nationalist anthem….”
Were the 300 Jewish Americans, Einstein and Yermiya living today in Canada, expressing publicly such views, who would propose prosecuting them for spreading “anti-semitism”? And if not them, why should any Canadian with similar opinions be treated differently?
Consider also a research study by US professors Stephen Cohen and Ari Kelman, both specializing in sociological studies of US Jewry. Published in 2008 it reported that more than half of young US Jews (under 35) would not view the destruction of Israel as a personal tragedy, and only 54% said they were comfortable with the idea of a Jewish state.
As there is nothing bigoted about Canadians having differing and passionately opposing views about the policies and practices and guiding ideology of the governments of Canada, even the very legitimacy of the Canadian state, so there is nothing bigoted about Canadians – whatever their background — having differing and opposing views about the policies and practices and guiding ideology of Israel. No one proposes criminalizing the former. Why does CPCCA propose criminalizing the latter?
These fundamentally are political matters, and freedom to express, explore and exchange political ideas in public is indispensable to democratic culture.
“New anti-semitism” is a worn-out campaign slogan
The so-called “new anti-semitism” argument recurs particularly when Israeli state actions have aroused the conscience of yet wider segments of the population to the injustices of its actions, and when Israel comes under greater pressure to abide by United Nations resolutions and international law.
Political campaigns claiming “new” anti-semitism were conducted in the aftermath of the 1973 war, then in the 1980’s with Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, followed by the early years of 2000 when Israel intensified assaults in the 1967 occupied territories.
The current replay of the now-far-from-new “new” anti-semitism campaign is an effort to silence the unprecedentedly broad and intense public abhorrence of Israel’s killing of Palestinian people in Gaza through massive bombardment in December (2008) and January (2009), along with Israel’s on-going inhuman siege of Gaza.
Conclusion
In conclusion we:
(1) encourage you as Members of Parliament to attend to the problem of bigotry, not by arbitrarily privileging one group, but as a real problem that impacts many and varied people in our country;
(2) propose you show greater confidence in your own convictions and so join us in welcoming open and unintimidated serious exchange of ideas on matters relating to Israel/Palestine, allowing the good judgement of fellow Canadians to determine the respective merits of different perspectives.
In brief, we call on CPCCA to withdraw from its effort to choke democratic culture by criminalizing political opinions with which its members disagree.
While more can and will be said, we are mindful of and wish to respect the limitations of length you have set for submissions.
Sincerely,
Canada Palestine Support Network (CanPalNet)
Independent Jewish Voices (Canada) submission submission to the CPCCA
Independent Jewish Voices (Canada) represents Canadian Jews who share a strong commitment to social justice and universal human rights. We especially promote justice, ethics, and humanity in Israel and Palestine, as well as in Canada. IJV offers a range of Jewish perspectives which differ from those of the Canadian Jewish Congress, B’nai Brith, the Canada-Israel Committee, and the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy, all of which encourage the view that Judaism and uncritical support for Israeli policies and practices are synonymous. IJV has chapters in seven cities across Canada (Halifax, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton, Winnipeg, and Vancouver) and members in many other Canadian cities.
As Jews, we take true anti-Semitism—that is, discrimination and attacks on Jews and Judaism—very seriously. However, we reject the false assumptions on which the CPCCA and its efforts are based.
Despite protestations to the contrary, the CPCCA conflates legitimate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.
The CPCCA claims that its purpose is not “really about limiting legitimate criticism of the State of Israel.” However its web site says that “calls for the destruction of the State of Israel are inherently antisemitic.” IJV believes that this statement is part of an organized attempt on the part of partisans of Israel to conflate the call for the dismantling of repressive Israeli institutions and ending repressive Israeli practices regarding Palestinians with the physical destruction of the Jewish population of Israel.
The London Declaration states “We are alarmed at the resurrection of the old language of prejudice and its modern manifestations – in rhetoric and political action – against Jews, Jewish belief and practice and the State of Israel.” This is another conflation of criticism of Israel with prejudice against Jews. Our organization is actively involved in the former, while we are adamantly opposed to the latter. There is a fundamental difference between the two.
Independent Jewish Voices includes a broad spectrum of opinion on this issue, ranging from strongly Zionist to strongly anti-Zionist. This diversity of views enriches and deepens our understanding. As Jews, we hold that free speech includes the right of all people to openly discuss their views on all matters related to the political reality in Israel, including whether or not they should support an ethnocratic state which privileges Jews by imposing brutal discrimination and deploys indiscriminate violence against its indigenous population as well as against its neighbours.
The CPCCA asserts, without foundation, that “the extent and severity of antisemitism is widely regarded as at its worst level since the end of the Second World War.
There is no evidence of any significant rise in anti-Semitism in Canada or elsewhere. In fact, as Globe and Mail columnist Michael Valpy reported in March 2004, an extensive survey on anti-Semitic attitudes by the Canadian Jewish Congress and the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy found very low levels of anti-Semitism. We find it very revealing that the CJC chose not to publish this survey and put off our requests for copies of the results. Similarly, the Anti-Defamation League’s 2002 survey of U.S. anti-Semitic attitudes found an almost steady decline in the proportion of Americans who are anti-Semitic from 29% in 1964, to 20% in 1992, to 12% in 1998, with a slight rise to 17% in 2002—just after the massacre that Israeli forces carried out at the Palestinian city of Jenin. The 2002 ADL survey found that the majority of Americans hold highly positive attitudes toward Jews, and that it was concerns over Israeli war crimes that were generating anti-Semitic attitudes.1
Even these studies are flawed, however, because they confuse individual prejudice with institutionally oppressive anti-Semitism. As Jason Kunin points out, “it’s important to distinguish between prejudice and oppression. Prejudice is simply an opinion based on limited information or stereotypes. Everyone has prejudices. We all have some opinions based on incomplete information….Prejudice can exist at both an ideological level (e.g. “white people are ignorant and mean”) and at an individual level (e.g. “I won’t vote for that white politician”), but unless that prejudice can also translate into institutional practices that marginalize or exclude, then that prejudice is not oppression but merely a prejudice. Given the current reality of global white supremacy, neither of the examples I have given above have the potential to oppress.” On that basis, he concludes, “Anti-Semitism, pervasive and deadly only a couple generations ago, is no longer a form of oppression.”2
What is unprecedented is not the level of anti-Semitism in the world, but rather the rising level of international outrage over Israel’s actions. To reiterate, this is not anti-Semitism, but rather a legitimate, growing expression of concern and moral outrage.
According to the drafters of this initiative, there is a pressing need to respond to what they characterize as the “new anti-Semitism,” in which “anti-Zionism is being used as a cover for anti-Semitism.” IJV believes that it is legitimate for critics of Israel’s behaviour to describe it as a system of apartheid and to deny the legitimacy of any state that engages in such practices. This is not anti-Semitism of any kind, new or old.
The CPCCA alleges that Canadian Jewish students are particularly ridiculed and intimidated for being Jewish.
For example, its press release claims “Jewish students are being threatened and intimidated to the point that they are not able to express themselves, or are even fearful to wear a Jewish skull cap or star around their necks.” IJV has co-sponsored and participated in a broad range of activities critical of Israeli abuses of Palestinian rights, including Israel Apartheid Week events, tours conducted by the Palestinian Human Rights organization Al Haq, locally-based tours of the Palestinian town of Bi’lin, and demonstrations against the horrific Israeli assault on the people of Gaza in late 2008 and early 2009. In all those events, pro-Israeli Jewish students as well as Jews generally were welcomed and their comments treated respectfully. By contrast, YouTube has captured a number of incidents in which pro-Israel students barged into demonstrations critical of Israel or mounted provocative counter demonstrations, using the heated arguments with Palestinians and their supporters that their interventions generated as evidence that they were being “intimidated and threatened.”3 These were not cases of Jews being attacked for their Judaism, but Palestinians and their supporters arguing back forcefully against belligerent Zionist students trying to suppress their freedom of speech.
Unlike those organizations which seek to stifle open debate about this and related subjects by labelling those who oppose their views as anti-Semitic and seek to punish them for expressing them, IJV actively promotes the rights of all individuals to express themselves freely and without threat of sanction.
By launching such an inquiry, the CPCCA implies that existing human rights mechanisms are not sufficient to address actual incidents of anti-Semitism in Canada.
The Canadian Jewish Congress and B’nai Brith have been trying for years to broaden the definition of “hate crimes” to include criticism of Israel. So far, thankfully, they have been unsuccessful. The CPCCA is just the latest in this attempt to attack free speech and silence criticism of the Israeli government’s oppressive and illegal policies. It is our view that Canada’s existing human rights commissions and criminal code are more than sufficient to deal with actual incidents of anti-Semitism.
The CPCCA implies that those who are critical of Israeli policies are calling for “the destruction of the State of Israel and its inhabitants.”
This tendentious position holds that because of the Holocaust, Jews must have a Jewish state in order to be secure, and that anyone who is critical of the Jewish state and its behaviour must therefore support the destruction of the Jewish people. This is nothing more than classic fear-mongering, designed to divert attention from illegal and unethical policies carried out by the Israeli government. Thankfully, it is carrying less and less weight over time, thanks to its overuse by apologists for Israel.
To be critical of Israeli policies or even to challenge the legitimacy of the existence of a Jewish state is not equivalent to calling for the physical destruction of the State, or advocating genocide against Israeli citizens. By far the strongest military power in the region, Israel is in no danger of physical destruction. All of its neighbours, with the exception of Iraq, have recognized the state of Israel, and the two main Palestinian political factions, Fatah and Hamas have also recognized the state of Israel Fatah explicitly and Hamas implicitly.
The Coalition contends that there is a new, virulent form of anti-Semitism spreading across the world.
What is new is the unprecedented level of organizing, particularly on campuses, in response to Israel and its actions. Of particular importance with respect to this issue has been the rise of the organization known as the Coalition Against Israeli Apartheid, which engages in the kinds of activities that the members of the CPCCA appear determined to stamp out. CAIA’s purpose is to focus attention on the plight of Palestinians living in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and to generate action to combat what it characterizes as the system of apartheid that exists there. Discussion about and disagreement over the appropriateness of the term “apartheid” as a descriptor for Israel and the regime that it has created in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is completely legitimate. Our organization has endorsed CAIA and has members who have actively participated in it. We categorically reject any attempt to describe the activities of CAIA as anti-Semitic and draw the Coalition’s attention to CAIA’s basis of unity, which contains the explicit statement that “We oppose all forms of racism, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism.” [Emphasis added.]
The CPCCA ignores other, far more significant incidents of hate crimes and discrimination.
Muslims, Arabs, Palestinians and other racialized people are suffering the effects of racial profiling, as well as discrimination and stereotyping that is being actively promoted by the governments of Canada, Israel and other western countries in the name of national security. In Canada, Muslims and Arabs have been subjected to official no fly lists, intrusive surveillance, extraordinary rendition and torture when they travel abroad, and they are being imprisoned without charges under Security Certificates. As the case of Suaad Hagi Mohamud demonstrates, the Canadian government treats our Muslim citizens in a clearly discriminatory manner, often failing to provide them with the same kinds of protections that other Canadians expect as a matter of course when they are abroad.
Largely as a result of the grotesquely ill-conceived “war on terror,” racist abuse of and discrimination against Canadian Muslims and Arabs is increasing dramatically. An extensive inquiry into the experiences of Muslim students conducted by the Canadian Federation of Students in 2007 found that many had experienced serious and frequent harassment and abuse both on and off campus.
The CPCCA provides no evidence for its claim that anti-Semitism is on the rise in Canada.
In summary, it is our view that what is really involved here − despite repeated disavowals − is an attempt to label criticism of Israel and its behaviour as well as organized efforts to change them as anti-Semitism and to criminalize both.
This Coalition is an illegitimate endeavour. We condemn it for what it is: an effort to whitewash Israeli behaviour and to protect it from both scrutiny and organized opposition.
Signed:
Diana Ralph and Sid Shniad, Co-chairs
News Releases/Open letters
June 25, 2009 – Letter of support for Queers Against Israeli Apartheid
June 24, 2009 – SFSC denounces Minister’s interference in York academic conference
May 7, 2009 – Letter of support for Al Jazeera English
April 1, 2009 – Canwest slashes muffins, splurges on lawsuits as debt deadline approaches
December 9 – Creator of parody appeals ruling that trademarks trump free speech
November 6 – Canwest retreats – drops suit against Mordecai Briemberg
July 17 – Producers of newspaper parody have right to satirize
June 02 – Canwest wins Golden Gag Award
April 28 – Briemberg wins YMCA international peacemaker award
Letter to Pride Toronto: June 25, 2009
SFSC supports Queers Against Israeli Apartheid
June 25, 2009
Pride Toronto
P.O. Box 371, Station F, Toronto, Ontario M4Y 2L8
To members of the Pride Toronto Parade Committee
I am writing on behalf of the Seriously Free Speech Committee (SFSC) to congratulate you on your steadfast response to attacks from a range of media and pro-Zionist organizations attempting force the exclusion of this year’s parade grand marshal, El-Farouk Khaki, for speaking at a recent public event organized by Queers Against Israeli Apartheid. Your statement that Pride Toronto “has no intention of banning any participants from the Dyke March and the Parade because of their political agenda” is a courageous response to B’nai Brith and other organizations that seek to silence criticism of Israel for its illegal occupation of the Palestinian territories.
The attack against Pride Toronto follows attempts to censor readings of Seven Jewish Children, the art of Queer Jewish artist Reena Katz and attempts by several universities to shut down Israeli Apartheid Week. Each time these attempts at censorship are beaten-back, Israeli and Zionist propaganda suffers a setback, making it more difficult for Zionist organizations to claim that criticizing Israel is anti-semitic.
The Seriously Free Speech Committee is committed to supporting those who are attacked for opposing the continuing illegal occupation of Palestinian territories and demanding a full and truthful debate on Israeli’s colonial, apartheid State. SFSC began as a defense committee for three individuals who were being sued by Canwest for producing a parody of the Vancouver Sun, satirizing the pro-Israeli position of this newspaper and all Canwest newspapers. It has now been two years since the parody was published and the case is still before the Courts. You can find find details of the court case and campaign at www.seriouslyfreespeech.ca. SFSC extended its mandate to defending those who are attacked for their support for Palestinian self-determination. Defending those who speak-out is an integral part of defending Palestinians.
The Seriously Free Speech Committee stands in solidarity with your refusal to exclude Queers Against Israeli Apartheid from the Pride Toronto Parade.
Sincerely
Brian Campbell
Co-chair, SFSC
Letter to Minister Goodyear: June 24, 2009
SFSC denounces Minister’s interference in York academic conference
Hon. Gary Goodyear
Minister of State for Science and Technology
117 Confederation Building, House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
E-mail: goodyg@parl.gc.ca
re: Conference at York University entitled, “Israel/Palestine: mapping models of statehood and prospects for peace”
Dear Honourable Minister:
The Seriously Free Speech Committee is writing to denounce your overt political interference in the arms-length peer-reviewed granting process of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).
In your public statement of June 5, 2009, you claim that your government “is committed to the principle of academic independence and the independent, arms-length, peer review process.” But your actions and the rest of your June 5 statement directly contradict this claim.
A principal role of academic freedom at universities in democratic societies is to allow a full, open debate of controversial issues. For a minister to attempt to derail an academic conference on behalf of a special interest group — especially one that has recently given the Prime Minister a public service award — compromises the integrity and public purpose of universities.
Your suggestion that the conference is “no longer an academic research-focussed event” reveals that you are trying to limit academic freedom and shut down debate on the vitally import issue of peace in Israel/Palestine on which the government has consistently taken the Israeli side.
It’s a dangerous precedent for a minister to intervene personally with an independent granting council president to suggest the review of funding for an academic conference in response to pressure from special interest groups. Political pressure groups have openly admitted to lobbying the government to deny funding to this conference and are claiming victory now that you have intervened.
We view your action as part of a pattern of increasing efforts to limit freedom of speech around Palestinian rights on Canadian universities over the last two years that is inimical to the values of an open democratic society. Although your call for a second peer review of the conference did not succeed, we call on you to uphold the principles of academic freedom in the future and to apologise for your unjustifiable interference in this case.
The Seriously Free Speech Committee was formed in February 2008 to support public education and the legal defense of the individuals accused of producing a parody of The Vancouver Sun that satirised Canwest’s pro-Israel bias. It has since expanded its mandate to include public education on a broader range of attempts to suppress full discussion of the situation in the Middle East. As can be seen from a list of our honourary members on this web page, we have broad support for our campaigns.
Sincerely
Brian Campbell and Anne Roberts
Co-Chairs
Seriously Free Speech Committee
cc: Carmen Charette
Executive Vice-President
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
350 Albert Street
P.O. Box 1610
Ottawa , ON K1P 6G4
carmen.charette@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca
Letter to CRTC: May 7, 2009
SFSC supports Al Jazeera English cable license
Canadian Radio and Television Commission
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0N2
Re. Al Jazeera broadcast application
On behalf of the Seriously Free Speech Committee, we are writing to urge the CRTC to permit Al Jazeera English (AJE) to begin broadcasting in Canada without expensive, unnecessary and discriminatory conditions.
The Seriously Free Speech Committee was formed in response to a grievous attack on free speech by CanWest Media when it launched legal action against people who produced a parody that satirized The Vancouver Sun’s biased coverage of Israel and Palestine. Committed to free and open expression of debate on these contentious issues, our committee is concerned about the extent of CanWest’s control over media in Canada and its abuse of this power to restrict the free flow of information and free debate.
It seems incredible that AJE’s application is not a matter of a routine approval when Al Jeezera already broadcasts in more than 100 countries and AJE is allowed in some cable and satellite services in the US as well as items produced by Al Jeezera broadcast on Public Broadcasting Service in the US.
Many SFSC members regularly view AJE through the internet and visit Al Jeezera’s website to seek out information not readily available through Canadian news sources. It is exciting to be able to find a network that allows people outside the dominant countries of North America and Europe to give their own version of events. It is refreshing to find a news network that remains committed to what has become an old-fashioned idea about journalism in North America: speaking truth to power.
At a time when Canadian newspapers and broadcasters are reducing coverage of foreign news, shutting down foreign bureaus and eliminating news reporting staff, it is even more critical that Canadians can easily access international coverage of key events. Simply put, the CRTC should approve Al Jeezera English because in this globalized age, people want and need news from around the globe. In the long run, competition by AJE might even serve to improve the job Canadian networks do covering international news.
It is unfortunate that Al Jeezera has been tarred by the fear and war-mongering of the United States government, thus depriving many people of an important alternative source of news and information. We are convinced that once people have an opportunity to watch AJE on their television sets, they will reject the accusations that the network is racist and propagandistic.
Al Jeezera cannot be accused of being anti-Jewish. It is standard news practice to present reports of things said and done that are objectionable but that are newsworthy and relevant to the general public. That does not mean that Al Jeezera agrees with or promotes those positions. As proof, note that even Israel makes Al Jeezera available on its TV network. YES TV describes Al Jeezera as more balanced and fair than the BBC. From the news coverage that we have seen on Al Jazeera’s website, we conclude that the network is not nearly as radical and offensive as daily offerings on the FOX network.
We urge the CRTC to approve AJE’s application as soon as possible and trust that the cable and satellite providers will make available this important alternative news source to all Canadians across the country. It is vitally important that Canadians have a broad menu of choices when seeking news and information and Al Jazeera is a significant option to provide what no other network in the world can provide.
Sincerely yours
Anne Roberts and Brian Campbell
Co-chairs of Seriously Free Speech Committee
News Release: April 1, 2009
Debt deadline approaches –Canwest slashes muffins, splurges on lawsuits
Note to editors: This is not an April Fool’s joke
VANCOUVER – Facing bankruptcy protection if it misses a debt repayment deadline on April 7, 2009 and having missed a $38 million interest payment to bondholders on March 15, Canwest Global Communications Corp. (TSX:CGS) is aggressively cutting back on food at meetings while forking over six-figure legal fees for a vanity lawsuit that targets political satirists.
Lawyers familiar with Canwest’s civil suit against the creators of a parody of the Vancouver Sun (that satirised its pro-Israel bias) estimate the company has already spent $80,000-$100,000 on legal fees. During the 16-month pre-trial phase of the case Canwest’s lawyers filed four divergent versions of its statement of claim. They recently applied for a trial in BC Supreme Court on April 20, 2009 that could easily double the company’s total disbursements.
In a pre-trial hearing for the case Canwest’s lead lawyer, David Church, QC, admitted that the company has no documentation of any financial loss suffered from the parody. Nevertheless, Canwest’s litigation juggernaut is proceeding full speed ahead against the pesky parodists in a legal manoeuvre that Michael Bate, the former editor of Frank magazine, described as “going after a fly with a hammer.”
Meanwhile, Canwest’s muffin cost-cutting zeal knows no bounds. They have instituted a company-wide “immediate freeze on all food at meetings… this includes previously funded or subsidised coffee/snacks/drinks,” according to an internal memo by Canwest Publishing President and CEO, Dennis Skulsky obtained by columnist Bill Tieleman (http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/2009/01/canwest-publishing-internal-memo.html). The memo also encouraged staff to take unpaid vacations perhaps because Canwest’s slashing of 560 jobs last fall was not putting enough pressure on the company’s remaining workforce.
Skulsky concludes his memo with heartfelt thanks, “your involvement, support and hard work to maximize our cost savings initiatives are sincerely appreciated.” Canwest employees are no doubt teary-eyed with gratitude that their efforts to pinch pennies are being wisely spent to pound satirical critics. Some whiners and slackers might say “keep the muffins and drop the suit” but, as the company’s approach to the current financial crisis shows, bosses know best.
For more information contact: info@seriouslyfreespeech.ca
News Release: 9 Dec. 2008
Creator of parody appeals ruling that trademarks trump free speech
Gordon Murray, who is being sued by media giant Canwest for publishing a Vancouver Sun parody, is appealing a preliminary court ruling that the freedom of expression provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms do not provide any defence for Copyright or Trademark infringement.
If this initial decision stands, it would be a serious blow to the fundamental right of free speech in Canada. As Canwest’s flagship National Post rightly said in a May 2008 editorial: “the principles of free expression have to be guarded stringently in a liberal democracy.”
The notice of appeal, filed Friday in BC Supreme Court, argues that the procedural ruling relied on a single case that has been superceded by a later Supreme Court decision. The appeal also quotes a recent ruling concerning a spoof website created by a union during a labour dispute: “a reasonable balance must be struck between the legitimate protection of a party’s intellectual property and a citizen’s or union’s right of expression.”
Murray and Carel Moiseiwitsch, both long-time supporters of the rights of Palestinians, are being sued by Canwest for producing a four-page parody of The Sun that satirized the paper’s biased reporting in favour of Israel. The Asper family, the majority shareholders of Canwest, are outspoken supporters of Israel. Mordecai Briemberg was initially named as a defendant but Canwest dropped legal action against him last month.
The case has generated international support calling on Canwest to drop this classic SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) intended to intimidate and silence political opponents, said Anne Roberts, co-chair of the Seriously Free Speech Committee, created to fight back against the legal action.
On November 28, the BC Federation of Labour’s annual convention unanimously passed a resolution to support the defendants against Canwest’s suit. The defendants have already received support from a long roster of individuals and organizations, including Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, MP Libby Davies, BC Civil Liberties Association, BC Teachers Association, Pen Canada, and the Canadian Library Association.
“The grassroots support for this case is amazing,” Murray said. “Our collective action is the best defence against corporate and government attacks on civil rights.”
The full ruling and the appeal can be downloaded from here.
For more information, contact:
Anne Roberts, Co-chair, SFSC
News release: 6 Nov. 2008
Canwest drops suit over parody against Mordecai Briemberg
Legal retreat by media conglomerate hailed as victory for free speech campaign
Vancouver — A campaign to defend free speech pushed media giant Canwest to drop its legal suit against Mordecai Briemberg over a parody of The Vancouver Sun.
“This is proof that people can stand up to bullies who misuse and abuse the courts to attack their political opponents,” said Anne Roberts, a co-chair of the Seriously Free Speech Committee that was formed to defend Briemberg, a retired academic and this year’s winner of the YMCA International Peace Award.
Briemberg called it was “a significant victory,” but only a first step. The campaign will continue until Canwest also abandons legal action against Gordon Murray and Carel Moiseiwitsch, who produced the parody in June 2007 that satirized Canwest’s well-known anti-Palestinian and pro-Israel bias. Canwest’s founder, Izzy Asper, described the media conglomerate in 2003 as “the strongest supporter of Israel in Canada.”
The committee organized an international effort, including a petition, letters, a YouTube video, leafleting of public events sponsored by Canwest, and public forums, and garnered support from Noam Chomsky, Naomi Klein, MP Libby Davies, labour leader Jim Sinclair, author Joy Kogawa and UBC planning professor Bill Rees.
“Canwest’s attempt to silence and intimidate the public expression of views antithetical to those of the Asper family backfired,” Briemberg said. “Our campaign has been endorsed by civil liberties groups, library associations, teacher organizations, and trade unions. Instead of silencing our voices, it has amplified them.”
The political activists’ ordeal of being dragged through the courts for the past 10 months highlights the need for BC to re-enact anti-SLAPP legislation that discourages suits in which plantiffs have no intention of winning but pursue in order to burden individuals with legal costs until they abandon their criticism or opposition. An anti-SLAPP law was passed by the NDP government in April 2001 but repealed in August shortly after the Liberals gained power.
At least 24 states in the United States have adopted anti-SLAPP legislation and Quebec introduced an anti-SLAPP bill in June.
For more information email info@seriouslyfreespeech.ca
Producers of newspaper parody have right to satirize
Activists confirm Briemberg not involved
The Seriously Free Speech Committee (SFSC), formed to defend Mordecai
Briemberg against a SLAPP suit filed by Canwest, issued a statement today in
response to the announcement by two activists that they were the sole
creators of a parody of the Vancouver Sun published in June 2007. (See
below.)
The SFSC applauded their courage in taking responsibility, confirming that,
as Briemberg has said, he had nothing to do with publishing the parody.
At the same time, the SFSC believes that Carel Moiseiwitsch and Gordon
Murray have a right to satirize the Sun’s blatant pro-Israel bias in its
news coverage and will support them against this legal attack by Canwest,
the media giant that owns the Sun, the National Post, Global TV network, the
Vancouver Courier plus 10 other metropolitan papers across Canada.
Canwest’s suit against Briemberg, Moiseiwitsch and Murray is an attack on
free speech and an act of political intimidation against people who support
the rights of Palestinians and oppose the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands.
The SFSC is calling on Canwest to drop this suit in recognition of the
importance to a healthy democracy to have media that allows and encourages a
full and open discussion of such contentious issues as Israel and Palestine.
For more information, contact:
Brian Campbell, Co-chair, SFSC
Anne Roberts, Co-chair, SFSC
Moiseiwitsch and Murray’s statement can be read here.
July 17, 2008
Seriously Free Speech Committee Statement
The Seriously Free Speech Committee (SFSC) was formed in early March, 2008
in response to a December, 2007 Writ of Summons issued by Canwest against
Mordecai Briemberg. In the writ, Mordecai was accused of helping to
conceive, produce and distribute a parody of The Vancouver Sun in June,
2007. Canwest has admitted in writing it had no documents to substantiate
its accusations. Mordecai did nothing more than pick up a few copies of the
parody at a Vancouver Public Library meeting and hand them out at a bus
stop.
The Committee has two main purposes: 1) to act as a defence committee for
Mordecai Briemberg and 2) to defend the right to produce political parody.
The SFSC first learned on June 9, 2008 from Gordon Murray, a member of the
SFSC, that he produced the parody and intended to take full responsibility.
We recognize his courage for taking responsibility. Mordecai Briemberg and
the SFSC understands the toll that such an admission takes in both personal
stress and finances.
Today’s statement by Carel Moiseiwitsch and Gordon Murray that they were
solely responsible for the conception and production of the parody confirms
what Mordecai Briemberg and the SFSC has said from the beginning. Canwest
did nothing to find out the truth but made false accusations against
Mordecai Briemberg, also naming three John Doe’s and three Jane Doe’s. The
suit is an attack on the right of free speech and a political vendetta. The
SFSC is calling on Canwest to drop this suit against Mordecai Briemberg.
The SFSC believes that Carel Moiseiwitsch and Gordon Murray have a right to
satirize The Vancouver Sun. The satire was not a fake newspaper seeking to
steal market share, sell a product or gain commercial advantage. Rather, it
was legitimate political commentary based on a long standing tradition of
satire reaching back to Jonathon Swift. The suit is motivated by Canwest’s
support for Israel and its antagonism to these activists’ long-standing
opposition to Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.
The Seriously Free Speech Committee will continue to support Mordecai
Briemberg until all the accusations and court proceeding are dropped and
will support Carel and Gordon against this legal attack by Canwest. This is
not about trademark violation but is an act of political intimidation.
The issue is very clear. Do people have the right to produce satire? Many
organizations and individuals such as the British Columbia Civil Liberties
Association, the Canadian Library Association, the British Columbian
Teachers Federation, CEP Local 200 (the union representing journalists) and
Ken Georgetti, president of the Canadian Labour Congress, support the right
to create satire and oppose Canwest’s political intimidation.
June 2, 2008 – This year’s Golden Gag Award will be presented to Canwest, Canada’s largest media empire, at noon on Friday (June 6) at the Granville Square, 200 Granville St., the home of the Vancouver Sun and Province newspapers.
Sponsored by the Seriously Free Speech Committee, the award recognizes individuals or companies who have excelled in limiting free speech, intimidating opposing points of view, and the skilled use of SLAPP suits to attempt to silence critics.
Committee spokesperson Jef Keighley said what clinched the award for Canwest was the way it went overboard in filing a suit against retired academic Mordecai Briemberg for producing a parody of the Vancouver Sun.
“Not only did Canwest use all legal means to crack down on humourous criticism of the company’s pro-Israel positions, they filed a suit against a person who had nothing to do with producing it,” he said. “The company’s audacity and aggressiveness simply took our breath away.”
The Golden Gag Award is to be presented at a ceremony featuring former journalist and historian Marc Edge, author of the book Asper Nation; Mordecai Briemberg, this year’s winner of the YMCA’s international Power of Peace Award; and well-known US social activist, singer and songwriter David Rovics.
Committee organizers plan to present the award to Patricia Graham, editor-in-chief of the Vancouver Sun, on behalf of the owners of Canwest, a media conglomerate that owns The National Post, 10 metropolitan newspapers, 30 community papers, 80 magazines, speciality cable channels and the Global Television Network as well as newspapers and radio stations in other countries.
Other nominees for the prize included Barrick Gold Corp., which is suing a small Quebec publisher over a book that alleges the company played a role in the expropriation of land belonging to Tanzanian miners more than a decade ago, and the municipality of Powell River, which is suing several citizens for criticizing town development plans.
April 28 — Mordecai Briemberg, retired Douglas College ESL teacher and well-known campaigner for the rights of Palestinians and an end to war and racism, won the YMCA’s Power of Peace Award on the weekend.
The YMCA of Greater Vancouver picked Briemberg for the International Peacemaker award from a field of nine nominees to honour people working to change the world.
Nominated by Stopwar.ca, Vancouver’s largest anti-war coalition, Briemberg, 69, traces his life-long effort for peace back to the 1950s when as a Rhodes scholar he studied in England and was inspired by Bertrand Russell, then in his 90s, engaging in civil disobedience against nuclear weapons.
While teaching sociology at Simon Fraser University in the 1960s, Briemberg helped establish the Committee to Aid War Objectors to provide support for American war resisters seeking refuge in Canada. His anti-nuclear weapon campaigns continued in Vancouver with End the Arms Race and the efforts to free jailed Israeli nuclear program whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu.
To Briemberg, work to support Palestinian in accordance with international law, human rights laws, and United Nations resolutions on the conflict, is simply consistent with the moral values and idealism imparted to him by his Jewish parents while growing up in Edmonton.
Briemberg went on to help found the Canada-Palestine Network (CanPalNet) and served on the board of the Near East Cultural and Educational Foundation whose projects include providing mental health services for Palestinian children traumatized by violence.
Briemberg’s commitment to education extends beyond the classroom. Briemberg helped found a newspaper called the Western Voice and is now a host of Co-op Radio’s Redeye program.
The YMCA’s peace awards began 20 years ago to recognize individuals who are “proof that each of us has the power to create a more peaceful world and that every individual effort can make a difference.” Since 1987, more than 900 individuals and groups across the country have received YMCA peace medallions for work locally, with youth and internationally.
Briemberg is currently being sued by Canwest Global, owners of The Vancouver Sun and The Province, for producing a parody of The Sun and its pro-Israel editorial policies. Though Briemberg had nothing to do with the production of the parody, Canwest cited his pro-Palestinian work as the reason he is being sued. The Seriously Free Speech Committee has been formed in support and to help raise funds for his defence.
For more information email info@seriouslyfreespeech.ca.
The Big Media Chill
Canwest, Canada’s largest media company, is pursuing a politically-motivated lawsuit against Vancouver activists to silence criticism of its bias in reporting on the Middle East. This is a classic David vs. Goliath story – a multi-billion dollar corporation bullying and trying to intimidate individual activists with a potentially ruinous lawsuit.
Why isn’t Canada’s mainstream media covering this story?
This is what we know:
- The curious case of Q, a national arts programme on CBC radio. Q had a 15+ minute segment on the NY Times spoof on Nov. 18, 2008. Despite being contacted on Nov. 14 about the possibility of discussing both the Vancouver Sun and NY Times parody editions, the Canadian parody was not included in the segment. When Andy Bichlbaum, one of the creators of the NY Times spoof, brought up the Vancouver Sun parody and Canwest’s lawsuit on the air, Q host Jian Ghomeshi completely ignored the comment and proceeded with the interview as if he had not heard it. The punch line is that Ghomeshi is also a columnist for the National Post. Listen to a podcast of the interview on Q (4 minutes in)
- Despite interest by individual reporters and producers at CBC, the story has never been covered by any CBC program, local or national, TV or radio, arts or news, radio or television, English or French.
- In November 2008, activists in Fredericton New Brunswick wrote a letter to The Daily Gleaner criticising the N.B. Human Rights Commission for awarding a human rights award to the Asper Foundation citing various actions by Canwest, including the Vancouver Sun parody lawsuit. The Gleaner, an Irving newspaper, printed the letter but edited out all references to the lawsuit.
- The National Post and other Canwest outlets had extensive coverage of the November 12, 2008 New York Times parody edition. Canwest’s media properties, including the National Post, the Vancouver Province, Vancouver Courier, and Global TV, have never covered the Vancouver Sun parody lawsuit with the following exception…
- The Vancouver Sun published a detailed account of Canwest’s accusations on Dec. 8, 2007 – the day after the writ was served. But the paper has never made any attempt to balance coverage of the case by interviewing the defendants or covering public forums or events sponsored by the defence committee. (A Sun reporter did call Mordecai Briemberg for a comment just minutes after he had been served with the writ but before he had an opportunity to consult with a lawyer and prepare a coherent response to the charges.)
- In October 2008, first The Globe and Mail and then 24 Hours were offered an exclusive scoop on the story of Mordecai Briemberg being dropped from the lawsuit, but neither were willing to report on this significant development in the case.
- in September 2008, editors at a community newspaper in Metro Vancouver and a web news site rejected story proposals because they’d previously received legal threats from Canwest over a commentary piece.
- When reporters at a Canwest community newspaper pitched the idea of a story on the SFSC campaign, the editor said that because it was a legal issue involving their owner, no news or commentary would be allowed.
- A well-known freelance columnist who proposed a story on the case was told by a major metropolitan newspaper that, “We don’t criticize other media.”
- A 24 Hours editor indicated an interest in running a column about the case by a well-known freelancer but later rejected the idea.
- At Shaw Cable, managers refused to air the edited video of a public forum about the case held in May unless certain comments by Mordecai Briemberg were excised and other editorial comments inserted. The video was made by Pedro Moro, whose video are regularly posted on Shaw TV. Because the managers insisted that he not identify Shaw as the source of the editorial comments, Moro refused to comply and instead filed a complaint with the CRTC. The video has not been shown.
- An independent Vancouver monthly magazine commissioned a piece on the case and the freelancer conducted an interview with one of the defendants but the freelancer applied for work at Canwest so the story was never submitted.
If you read, watch or listen to these media, call or email to let them know that you expect them to cover the news – all the news – without fear or favour:
The Vancouver Sun, The Province, Vancouver Courier, 24 Hours, Metro, Ming Pao, Sing Tao, World Journal, South Asian Post, Asian Pacific Post, The Link, Indo-Canadian Voice, CBC Radio, CBC Television, CKNW News, News 1130, Channel M News, Global TV, BC CTV, CityTV, Fairchild TV, National Post, Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, Winnipeg Free Press.
1 response so far ↓
stan squires // May 14, 2009 at 8:33 am |
I am from vancouver and i wanted to say that shaw cable and the main media outlets always censored anything that had to do with the working class or with people fighting for their liberation from imperialist countries.
We should continue to fight against these injustices and pay no attention to what ever is said otherwise.There is a long struggle ahead and we got the working class of the world on our side.There will be no peace until the working class takes political power into their own hands.
Stan Squires