Seriously Free Speech
- Other Campaigns
- MESA: Definition of antisemitism threatens free speech
- Electronic Intifada: Australia’s repression of BDS movement coordinated with Israel
- CKUT: Canadian Parliamentary Report on Antisemitism Sparks Criticism
- Macleans: Follow the money
- Georgia Straight: Labeling criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic is the new McCarthyism
- National Post: Report on anti-Semitism seeks only to protect Israel
- SFSC: CPCCA report threatens Canadian’s democratic rights, free speech
- Embassy Mag: Liberal’s refusal to sign off on final report highlights continuing controversy over anti-Semitism group
- Globe & Mail: Coalition warns of rising anti-Semitism, but critics say group shows Israeli bias
August 18, 2011
I write on behalf of the Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA) and its Committee on Academic Freedom to express our grave concern with aspects of the report released on July 7, 2011, by the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Antisemitism (CPCCA), with which you are associated. We believe that the report’s loose and overly broad definition of antisemitism may threaten freedom of speech and violate the principles of academic freedom by defining criticism of Israeli policies, of Zionism or of Israel as a self-defined Jewish state as inherently antisemitic.
Australian police confirmed during a bail variation hearing at the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria (local District Court) for some of the BDS activists arrested on 1 July that a decision had been made to arrest the protesters before the demonstration. This decision was made after discussions with Zionist organizations, the Victorian government, shopping center managements and state and national management of Max Brenner.
CKUT’s Off the Hour: Radio Interview with Scott Weinstein, Independent Jewish Voices and Sam Bick, Israeli Apartheid Week organizer
» Download audio file
An MP inquiry into anti-Semitism vowed to be open and independent. Its shadowy funding says otherwise.
Jack Chivo constructs a sham argument in defence of Israel that relies on a false – and dangerous — definition of antisemitism. To give it credibility, he calls it the European Union’s definition. Not so. It’s connection, at best, is quite tangential. What it is is a “working definition” adopted by a monitoring committee established by the EU, but it was never adopted by the EU. The EU’s monitoring committee (EUMC) doesn’t even exist anymore. It’s successor, the Agency for Fundamental Rights, has no plans for using the “working definition.” It has no future use except as it can be used for propaganda.
This month, a serious attack was made against free speech in Canada. A pseudo-parliamentary committee calling itself the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to Combat Anti-Semitism (CPCCA) issued a report calling on the federal government to adopt a definition of anti-Semitism that would criminalize criticism of the state of Israel. The report claims to support free speech and open debate around the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, but its recommendations aim to silence pro-Palestinian voices, especially on campuses. The CPCCA’s biased processes and dubious conclusions contradict its own argument for balanced debate, and make a mockery of the notion of disinterested parliamentary inquiry. Continue reading
The report issued last week by an unofficial coalition of parliamentarians is a threat to the democratic rights of Canadians as the group makes recommendations to protect Israel from international criticism.