Showing posts with label Canada. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Canada. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Canadian Media, Ontario Legislature, Condemn ‘Apartheid Week’

by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu

(IsraelNN.com)

The legislature of Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, and major Canadian dailies have railed against the use of the term ‘apartheid” and the "Israel Apartheid Week” campaign. However, 500 Montreal artists rallied behind an anti-Zionist call to boycott Israel.

Ontario’s resolution condemned the annual anti-Israel event, which opened this week. “I want to be clear about what it is I’m trying to do,” Ontario legislator Peter Shurman said. “I want the name changed. It’s that simple. It’s just wrong.”

The legislature unanimously agreed with him and passed a resolution against the name, which Shurman says in effect means a monologue, not a dialogue. “The name is hateful, it is odious and that’s not how things should be in my Ontario.” he declared. “It’s a term that frankly I’m sick of hearing. Get rid of this word apartheid,” he said the term "is close to hate speech.”

The resolution was passed less than three months before Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty is to lead a trade mission to Israel.

In the predominantly French-speaking city of Montreal, 500 artists, including several Israelis, promoted a petition supporting Israel Apartheid Week and backing the Arab claim of the "right of return” for millions of Arabs claming ancestry to those who fled Israel during the wars in 1948 and 1967. Ample historical evidence has shown that the Arab world encouraged most of them to leave to allow the Arab Legion to complete what it thought would be the annihilation of the Jewish State.

The National Post’s David Frum sharply condemned Toronto’s York University for setting different rules for pro-Israelis and anti-Zionists. He charged that the university placed stiff conditions on the campus group, Christians United for Israel, which applied to use university space for a program of pro-Israel speakers.

Frum said the university insisted that the group pay for heavy security and provide a full list in advance of the speakers and the content of their speeches. The university also prohibited advertising the program on campus. The organizers canceled the event after declining to comply with the requirements.

The hate-Israel program
Referring to 'Israeli Apartheid Week' events, Frum wrote, “The hate-Israel program is not required to pay for its own security. It is free to advertise. Its speakers are not pre-screened by the university.... The logic is impressively brazen: Since the anti-Israel people might use violence, the speech of the pro-Israel people must be limited. On the other hand, since the pro-Israel people do not use violence, the speech of the anti-Israel people can proceed without restraint."

After asking the university if “York imposes precisely the same requirements on all student groups,” a spokesman responded, “All student groups that request university space, yes.”

Writing in a column published from Vancouver to Montreal, Leonard Stern wrote that Israel Apartheid Week gives Israel the “assigned the role of Jew among the nations — singled-out, cursed and harassed….The whiff of something medieval hangs over this March ritual. This isn’t about Jews, say the organizers. It’s about Zionists. Problem is, the activist groups behind Israeli Apartheid Week are doing everything to erase the distinction.”

He pointed out that an Ottawa research group in 1998 refused to promote a lecture on African development “because Jewish students at the University of Ottawa happened to be organizing it. The event had zero connection to Israel but [the group] said it wouldn’t partner with the Jewish students’ union due to the latter’s 'relationship to apartheid Israel.'”

Arutz Sheva
israelnationalnews.com

Thursday, February 11, 2010

Al-Jazeera Invades Canada and Threatens America

More serious and severe criticism has come from Judea Pearl, father of slain Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who has called Al-Jazeera "today's greatest recruiter for terrorism.

By Cliff Kincaid Thursday, February 11, 2010

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has approved a request to add Al-Jazeera English (AJE) to the list of television satellite services for distribution in Canada. Supporters of the Arab government-funded propaganda channel hope that acceptance in Canada will lead to more cable and satellite carriers in the U.S. picking up the incendiary network.

A group called “Canadians for Al-Jazeera” organized public pressure on the CRTC to approve the entry of AJE into the Canadian media market. Although the group’s leader, Walied Khogali, is described in news reports as a Canadian, he identifies himself on his Facebook page as a fan of Barack and Michelle Obama, Students for Barack Obama and the Democratic Party. He supports “the Red Movement” that mainly acts to protest Israeli policies and promotes the “I love Allah” T-shirt and the “Bush shoe thrower” from Iraq.

But Philip J. Crowley, Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau for Public Affairs, criticized Al-Jazeera’s coverage of the Haiti relief effort at the State Department press briefing on January 26. “When you’re talking about international reporting,” he said, “we have had—I’ve had direct conversations with our friends at Al-Jazeera, for example. And we have spent some time critiquing what we felt was unfair, unbalanced coverage of operations in Haiti.” He explained that he had “a conversation” with “officials at [the] Al-Jazeera, English channel” about “inflammatory” coverage suggesting that U.S. relief efforts in Haiti constituted a military plan to take over the country.
More serious and severe criticism has come from Judea Pearl, father of slain Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, who has called Al-Jazeera “today’s greatest recruiter for terrorism.” His son’s murderer, 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is now in Guantanamo but has been scheduled by the Obama Administration for a civilian trial in the U.S., boasted of his murder, saying that he “decapitated with my blessed right hand the head of the American Jew, Daniel Pearl, in the city of Karachi, Pakistan. For those who would like to confirm, there are pictures of me on the Internet holding his head.”

CRTC commissioner Marc Patrone said in the lone dissenting opinion that the decision to permit broadcasting AJE was made without adequately addressing concerns that the channel could engage in spreading “ethnic and religious hatred.”

He also expressed concern about the foreign ownership of the channel. “In weighing the merits of all foreign services, the regulator should be particularly sensitive to ‘state-owned’ or ‘state-financed’ services originating from nations with radically different attitudes towards freedom of speech and democracy in general,” he said.

See No Evil

A group called Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (CJFE) welcomed the decision to allow AJE into the country but said nothing in its statement about the fact that the channel is funded by the oil-rich Sunni Muslim monarchy in Qatar and that there is no freedom of the press in Qatar itself.

The U.S. State Department says about Qatar: “The constitution provides for freedom of speech and of the press in accordance with the law, but the government limited these rights in practice. Journalists and publishers continued to self-censor due to political and economic pressures when reporting on government policies, material deemed hostile to Islam, the ruling family, and relations with neighboring states. There were reports that security authorities threatened both individuals and organizations against publishing certain articles.”

What’s more, it goes on, “Citizens lacked the right to change the leadership of their government by direct ballot. There were prolonged detentions in overcrowded and harsh facilities, often ending in deportation. The government placed varying restrictions on civil liberties, including freedoms of speech, press (including the Internet), assembly, association, and religion.”

Commissioner Patrone noted that the CRTC had provided a “stark appraisal” of the record of Al-Jazeera Arabic (AJA) in 2004 when approving its license for the Canadian media market only if the content were recorded and monitored by cable and satellite carriers. No distributors picked up the channel because of those restrictions, which have not been applied by the CRTC in the case of AJE. This means the channel may find it easier to get in more media markets.

But Patrone said that because of the treatment of AJA, “one might have expected this most recent application by the same network’s English-language service would have been subject to the most rigorous examination possible—one which included a reconsideration of the entire network’s journalism policies. Regretfully, this hasn’t been the case.”

“While some of the interveners argued that the Commission should consider AJA’s broadcasting record, my colleagues, consistent with the Commission’s usual approach, chose not to do so,” Patrone explained. “The consequence of this decision, in my opinion, is that it did not allow for the kind of comprehensive investigation of Al Jazeera’s entire record that I believe was warranted.”

Patrone added that one of the interveners, a group called Honest Reporting Canada, had submitted documentary evidence to the commission noting that some reporting of AJE, despite its claims to be objective, has been unbalanced, unfair, and inaccurate. It cited specific instances of such reporting.

Honest Reporting Canada said, “We are apprehensive that AJE will be unabashedly anti-Israel, journalistically unfair, inaccurate and unbalanced, and may potentially carry content which exposes Jews to hatred and anti-Semitism. We have relayed our concerns to the CRTC and to the Canadian sponsor of AJE, Ethnic Channels Group Ltd.”

Cut From the Same Cloth

Patrone noted that Ethnic Channels Group Ltd (ECGL) claimed that AJE and AJA “were distinct services and submitted that it would be inappropriate to consider AJA’s broadcast record in order to assess the request to add AJE to the list, even if they share a common owner.” The CRTC seemed to accept this dubious assertion.

In fact, an AIM special report found evidence that key Al-Jazeera English personnel had come from Al-Jazeera Arabic. The emir of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, is chairman of the boards of directors for both channels.

In the U.S., largely because of efforts by Accuracy in Media to expose the channel’s links to terrorists and funding by an undemocratic regime, AJE has had limited distribution and acceptance. However, it has spent countless oil dollars of the emir on expensive public relations firms in order to obtain more outlets. AJE is now being carried in the Washington, D.C. area through the MHz Networks.

While not arguing for any federal action to keep the channel out of the United States, AIM has told potential cable and satellite carriers that it offers anti-American programming designed to incite Arabs and Muslims to hate and kill Americans and Jews. AIM produced a documentary, Terror Television: The Rise of Al-Jazeera and the Hate America Media, featuring evidence that Al-Jazeera inspired foreign Muslim fighters to go to places like Iraq and Afghanistan for the specific purpose of killing U.S. service members.

AIM demonstrated, through a videotape captured after the liberation of Iraq by U.S. forces, that Al-Jazeera’s first managing director was an agent of the Saddam Hussein regime. In addition, one of Al-Jazeera’s Afghanistan reporters, Tayseer Alouni, went to prison in Spain on terrorism charges. Al-Jazeera paid Alouni’s salary, legal fees and “related expenses” during his trial and continues to defend him.

American Journalist Bails Out

Our charges of bias were vindicated when the top U.S. journalist at Al-Jazeera English, Dave Marash, left the channel and said that anti-American bias was a factor in his decision to leave. Prior to the channel’s launch in 2006, Marash had claimed that Al-Jazeera English would be editorially autonomous and independent from Al-Jazeera Arabic.

Marash told the Columbia Journalism Review that Al-Jazeera officials in Doha, Qatar, had wanted to do a series on “Poverty in America” that was “so stereotypical and shallow” that AJE in Washington, D.C. rejected the idea. “And so the planning desk in Doha literally sneaked a production team into the United States without letting anyone in the American news desk know,” he said. The result, he said, was just as he predicted—a shallow and stereotypical story.

The CRTC had received a request on February 27, 2009 from Ethnic Channels Group Limited for the addition of AJE to the Canadian distribution list. The ECGL had stated that AJE’s Code of Ethics included “journalistic values of honesty, fairness, balance, independence and credibility” and “was taken very seriously by AJE’s reporters and management.”

This is laughable, of course. As AIM disclosed during the U.S. presidential campaign, Al-Jazeera aired a Moammar Gadhafi speech praising then-candidate Barack Obama and followed with a story depicting supporters of GOP vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin as white racist Christians. The Al-Jazeera “reporter” who did the hit piece on Palin was Casey Kaufmann, who surfaced in Federal Election Commission (FEC) records as a $500 contributor to the Obama-for-president campaign.

In terms of “ethics,” Judea Pearl has described how Al-Jazeera not only covered but helped sponsor the August 2008 birthday of Samir Kuntar, a released terrorist who had smashed the head of a four-year-old girl with his rifle butt in 1979 after killing her father before her eyes. Kuntar had been released by Israel in exchange for the bodies of two Israeli soldiers, who were kidnapped by Hezbollah in 2006.

“Al-Jazeera elevated Kuntar to heroic heights with orchestras, fireworks and sword dances, presenting him to 50 million viewers as Arab society’s role model,” Pearl noted in a Wall Street Journal column. “No mainstream Western media outlet dared to expose Al-Jazeera efforts to warp its young viewers into the likes of Kuntar. Al-Jazeera’s management continues to receive royal treatment in all major press clubs.”

From CNN to Al-Jazeera

“I have to explain to people that I’m not the voice of Osama [bin Laden],” AJE correspondent Rizwan “Riz” Khan defensively told a National Press Club International Correspondents Committee event on March 9, 2007. Khan, who worked for the BBC and CNN before going to AJE, also wrote the book, Alwaleed, an official biography about the billionaire Saudi prince who has become a major investor in News Corporation, the parent company of the Fox News Channel.

Bin Laden’s continuing use of Al-Jazeera as a mouthpiece for al Qaeda came on January 24, when the channel broadcast the terrorist’s latest audio tape. “Ever since the 9/11 attacks in 2001, Al Jazeera has been the network al-Qaeda has often chosen to deliver its messages to. For al-Qaeda, the channel’s reach in the Arab and Muslim world, as well as its global audience, is key,” acknowledged the report on AJE. It said that Ahmed Al Sheikh, editor-in-chief of Al-Jazeera Arabic, had confirmed the tape was bin Laden’s voice.

Bin Laden took responsibility in the tape for the attempted Christmas Day bombing attack on the U.S.

The AJE aired the views of various people who claimed that airing the tape didn’t mean that Al-Jazeera was in any way sympathetic to the terrorist group. One talking head even claimed that while airing the tape meant that the channel had exclusive “access” to al Qaeda, this gave Al-Jazeera increased “credibility.”

Five days later, on January 29, Al-Jazeera aired another bin Laden tape blasting the U.S. for contributing to climate change.

Bin Laden Quotes Leftist

In the recording, according to Al-Jazeera, bin Laden also stated that “Noam Chomsky was correct when he compared the US policies to those of the Mafia. They are the true terrorists and therefore we should refrain from dealing in the US dollar and should try to get rid of this currency as early as possible.”

Al-Jazeera identified Chomsky as “the US academic and political commentator” when, in fact, the professor is a member of the board of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism, a Communist Party spin-off group, and well-known for his anti-American and anti-Israel views.

On another occasion, Noam Chomsky was identified by Al-Jazeera as “the renowned US academic, author and political activist” and appeared on a show on the channel called “Inside USA.” He had previously appeared on Riz Khan’s program.

Al-Jazeera Arabic on February 7 aired an interview with the U.S.-born Yemen-based “religious scholar” Anwar al-Awlaki, who is actually an al-Qaeda propagandist and recruiter and has been accused of being linked to the murderous attack at Fort Hood and the Christmas Day attempted bombing. “I have said in an earlier interview with Al Jazeera’s Yusri Fouda that the United States is a tyrant, and tyrants across history have all had terrible ends,” he said. “I believe the West does not want to realize this universal fact. Muslims in Europe and America are watching what is happening to Muslims in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan, and they will take revenge for all Muslims across the globe.”

Why Not Al-Jazeera?

The U.S. House of Representatives in December passed a resolution (H.R. 2278) by a vote of 395-3 to “direct the President to transmit to Congress a report on anti-American incitement to violence in the Middle East…” It was sent after passage to Senator John Kerry’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee for further action.

The resolution declared that “The broadcast of incitement to violence against Americans and the United States on television channels and other media that are accessible in the United States may increase the risk of radicalization and recruitment of Americans into Foreign Terrorist Organizations that seek to carry out acts of violence against American targets and on American soil.”

The sponsor, Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-Fla.), said passage was a blow to “terror TV” and that the report from President Obama “must include a country-by-country list and description of media outlets that engage in anti-American incitement to violence in the Middle East and a list of satellite companies that carry such media.”

However, Al-Jazeera was not named in the text of H.R. 2278 while other television networks associated with Hezbollah and Hamas were.

Yet the legislation defines “anti-American incitement to violence” as “the act of persuading, encouraging, instigating, advocating, pressuring, or threatening so as to cause another to commit a violent act against any person, agent, instrumentality, or official of, is affiliated with, or is serving as a representative of the United States.”

It will be difficult for officials of the Obama Administration to argue that the definition does not apply to at least some of the programming from its “friends” at Al-Jazeera.
Cliff Kincaid Most recent columns

Cliff Kincaid is the Editor of the AIM Report.

Cliff can be reached at cliff.kincaid@aim.org

Older articles by Cliff Kincaid

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Canada, under Harper, is Israel’s best friend

Posted by Ted Belman @ 6:56 pm |

I have often posted speeches by PM Harper with much pride. Within his party he is not alone. Here’s one by Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism – At the Global Forum for Combating Anti-Semitism

The Conservative Government knows that supporting Jews and Israel costs them at the polls, but it does the right thing, nevertheless.

Shalom. Thank you very much. It is an honour to be here to participate in this Global Forum on Anti-Semitism. Let me begin by commending the Government of Israel for hosting this and bringing us together for this, one of the most critical issues in the world today.

Let me also begin by acknowledging and thanking the large Canadian delegation for their presence and participation here, including my parliamentary colleagues, the Honourable Irwin Cotler, a former Minister of Justice and one of the founding members of the IACCA, Scott Reid, Chairman of the House of Commons Subcommittee on International Human Rights and Co-Chair of the Canadian Inter-Parliamentary Coalition to Combat anti-Semitism, together with his colleague, the other Co-Chair, Mario Silva, a member of parliament from Toronto, who’s done tremendous work on these issues. In addition, we have here assembled, the leadership of most of the major Canadian Jewish organizations and I’d like to thank them for participating.

Shortly after he came to office as Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper said that unfortunately in some countries, hatred of the Jews is still preached from religious pulpits and still proclaimed from political podiums.

“There are still people who would perpetrate another Holocaust if they could. That’s why we must resist the error of viewing the Holocaust as a strictly historical event. It’s not good enough for politicians to stand before you and say they remember and mourn what happened over six decades ago. They must stand up to those who advocate the destruction of Israel and its people today. They must be unequivocal in their condemnation of anti-Semitic despots, terrorists and fanatics, because those who attack Israel and those who sponsor such attacks do not seek merely to gain some leverage or to alter some boundary or to right some wrong.”

He said, “they seek what they and those like them, have always sought, the destruction of Israel and the destruction of the Jewish people.” Why? “A thousand complicated rationalizations, but only one simple reason: because the Jews are different, because the Jews are not like them. And because Israel is different and alone in a complicated part of the world, it is too easy to embrace the rationalizations and to ignore the truth. But our government believes that those who threaten Israel also threaten Canada because, as the last World War showed us, hate fuelled bigotry against some is ultimately a threat to us all and must be resisted.”

What is this fanaticism, this hatred to which Prime Minister Harper referred?

Well he saw it firsthand two weeks ago in visiting Mumbai during a trade mission to India when he went and paid his respects at Nariman House, the Chabad-Lubavitch House in Mumbai, the scene of a terrible massacre committed against Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife, Rivka in November of last year.

Almost at the same time that Prime Minister Harper was visiting Chabad House in Mumbai, anti-Semitic fanatics in his home city, my home city of Calgary, Alberta were spray painting anti-Semitic graffiti on the Jewish Community Centre, Jewish homes, on public transit installations and indeed, spray painting swastikas on our city’s Holocaust memorial. Some of this graffiti called for the end to the Israeli genocide in Gaza — “Stop the Israeli genocide in Gaza.”

What Prime Minister Harper witnessed in Mumbai, what happened at the same time in Calgary, were practical expressions of the new anti-Semitism. Even though Canada is celebrated around the world as being a successful model of mutual coexistence and tolerance, we too have seen a troubling increase in incidents of anti-Semitism. B’Nai Brith Canada publishes the authoritative registry of anti-Semitic incidents in Canada. In 2008, they received reports of 1,135 incidents of anti-Semitic instances, the highest number recorded in 28 years of the study, an increase of 8.9% over 2007.

Statistics Canada reports that 15% of all hate motivated crimes target Jews who only constitute 1% of our country’s population- and that two thirds of hate crimes that are targeting religious communities were targeting members of Canada’s Jewish community.

So how have we addressed these growing incidents of anti-Semitism? Well first of all, on the domestic level, our government has worked with the Jewish community to begin a program of recognizing our own history of official anti-Semitism. Before and during the Second World War, Canada imposed immigration restriction measures which denied access to our country of European refugees. Most notoriously in our decision, in 1938, to refuse to accept the M.S. St. Louis as a refugee ship. We’ve launched a $2.5 million commemorative fund to work with organizations to understand better research and educate future generations about the hatred which underscored those policies.

We’ve launched a fund to provide assistance to upgrade security at vulnerable institutions in the Jewish and other communities and have faced vandalism or threats. And now we’ve been able to work with the community to upgrade security at dozens of Hebrew schools, synagogues and community centres.

We have articulated and implemented a zero tolerance approach to anti-Semitism. What does this mean? It means that we eliminated the government funding relationship with organizations like for example, the Canadian Arab Federation, whose leadership apologized for terrorism or extremism, or who promote hatred, in particular anti-Semitism.

We have ended government contact with like-minded organizations like the Canadian Islamic Congress, whose President notoriously said that all Israelis over the age of 18 are legitimate targets for assassination. We have defunded organizations, most recently like KAIROS, who are taking a leadership role in the boycott. And we’re receiving a lot of criticism for these decisions. I can’t recall how many times I’ve been sued for some of the decisions that we have taken, but we believe that we’ve done these things for the right reasons and we stand by these decisions.

We have shifted our program of multiculturalism, which is our programmatic approach to integration and to pluralism, to focus precisely on integration towards liberal democratic values to remove any confusion that may have existed that our approach to multiculturalism justifies abhorrent cultural practices and the expression of hatred.

And I need to commend our parliamentary colleagues for their tremendous work in forming the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition Against Anti-Semitism, and for launching an inquiry which is undergoing its hearings in Parliament through this month and next. A tremendous opportunity for us to bring to light the threat of the new anti-Semitism across Canada.

At the international level, we have tried to give practical expression to our profound concern about the new anti-Semitism in many ways. We did so by being the first government in the world to announce that we were removing funding for the Palestinian authority following the election of Hamas because of the essentially anti-Semitic nature of that organization. We have robustly stood by the right of the state of Israel to use the means necessary to protect its innocent civilians from attacks, terrorist attacks motivated by hatred, committed by organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas.

At the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, we have called for the continuation of a unique and particular focus on anti-Semitism in the Office on Combating Anti-Semitism, recognizing uniquely durable and pernicious hatred that is anti-Semitism. And at multilateral organizations like the Francophonie and at the United Nations General Assembly, we have consistently opposed anti-Israel resolutions that seek to scapegoat this step, democratic state amongst all others. We have taken that position at the United Nations Human Rights Council. Frequently in the past two years, we can no longer remember every Human Rights Council, I’m sure many of the members are glad to see us go, but during our initial three-year membership, on issue after issue after issue, on resolution after resolution, Canada was the only country, or one of the only countries, to consistently oppose unbalanced anti-Israel resolutions.

We have provided political, diplomatic and moral leadership in efforts to isolate the hateful regime of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. We have led the efforts of the United Nations’s successful efforts to maintain a resolution condemning the reigning regimes human rights violations, including their violations of the rights of the religious minorities. And our Prime Minister led the world in the United Nations General Assembly walk out for the odious speech given by President Ahmadinejad at the UN earlier this year.

And of course, ours was the first government in the world to withdraw from the tainted Durban II process. We did that because our analysis was that it was like the impossible to repeat, to avoid a repetition of some of the notorious expressions of anti-Semitism that we all saw at Durban I and we believe that our decision was vindicated.

Now some have said that our government, in taking these positions, have some abandoned Canada’s traditional position of neutrality or balance in international affairs. That we have somehow undermined Canada’s international credibility and reputation on the world stage by taking these positions. I suppose these are the people who believe that there is some neutrality between tolerance and hatred, between terrorism and counter terrorism. Our government believes that in point of fact, we are reclaiming and giving new real expression to our historically grounded values. Canada was involved in the creation of the human rights process at the United Nations and we do not believe that those institutions, that the principles of the UN Declaration on Human Rights were meant to be perverted and used against democracies, were meant to be used by regimes who prey on an ancient hatred in order for their own political reasons.

We believe those trends have been in perversion of the true vocation, the true meaning of those international institutions and we believe that Canada is restoring our true belief in ability to make moral distinctions between hatred and tolerance between terrorism and counter terrorism. And we will continue to take that position.

Finally, let me say that we are working with the Canadian Parliamentary Coalition to combat anti-Semitism with the hope and expectation of hosting in 2010 the next Conference of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference Combating Anti-Semitism. We believe that, given Canada’s model of accommodating difference, given the challenges that we are facing on many of these issues and given the track record of Canada in the past, in the recent past, that we can offer some useful reference points and best practices to share with the rest of the world and parliamentarians who share our concern about the new anti-Semitism.

So thank you again to all of you for the great work that you are doing and we, both as Parliamentarians and as members of the Canadian government, look forward to continue our solidarity in combating this, history’s most pernicious form of hatred.