That is an outight falsity. They accused the Liberal party of engaging in and "anti-Semitic conference". Normally I can see the reason in your column even when I disagree, but this is a huge exception.

Further I believe that there is a difference between someone who says they are out to kill me, and someone who lives peacefully in our country, contributing and poised to do harm to our country if circumstances require it. The first person, the killer is relatively easy to deal with. The second – what does one do?

Further I believe that there is a difference between someone who says they are out to kill me, and someone who lives peacefully in our country, contributing and poised to do harm to our country if circumstances require it. The first person, the killer is relatively easy to deal with. The second – what does one do?

how are jews any more disloyal to this country than a muslim who beleives in subjecting the entire west to forced observance of religious law? but nobody wants to speak out against the muslim agenda, because that's not politically correct. i at least will concede the fact that not all muslims are fanatically observant. if i had to pick though between a jew loyal to a free nation that holds the same values we hold, or someone who believes i deserve to die because i don't share their beleifs, i think i know who i'd pick.

how are jews any more disloyal to this country than a muslim who beleives in subjecting the entire west to forced observance of religious law? but nobody wants to speak out against the muslim agenda, because that's not politically correct. i at least will concede the fact that not all muslims are fanatically observant. if i had to pick though between a jew loyal to a free nation that holds the same values we hold, or someone who believes i deserve to die because i don't share their beleifs, i think i know who i'd pick.

you say you are not against jews, but your entire argument is that jews should not be allowed to advance in this country simply for the fact that they are jews. you seem to be suggesting that we should be wary of jews because they may have a hidden loyalty to another country. a country that happens to be the only functioning democracy in the middle east. additionally, you seem to be saying that this is a quality shared by all jews, no matter where they were born. surely you must agree that there are at least some jews who, despite their last names, are capable of caring about this country, and what is best for it. that some jewish people, including those in positions of power, consider this to be their home. perhaps there are even some non-practising jews in this country. perhaps i know a few.
i wonder if you feel about muslims the way you feel about jews. by definition, a muslim has to be loyal first and foremost to his religion, to the koran, that says all infidels must be converted or killed. there are muslims in positions of power in this country who have called for the implementation of sharia law here.

And Lieberal bloggers will support any lie that comes out of Iggy's mouth: such as the LIE contained in a Liberal 10%er that the CP govt sent `body bags not medicines' to an Indian reserve.

That was an out-and-out lie and the Liberals knew it.

They are screaming right now bec. they know what was stated in the CPC 10%er is true.

the only reason why Hack Milliken is still in the speaker's chair – in spite of his obviously biassed rulings – is bec. the opposition sees fit to leave him there.

Seriously, Bigot, this is as lame as your defence of the global-warming criminal fraud, as an example of `democracy'.

I wait to see your next move. Thus far very flattering.

My apologies Stan if any of the above offend you.

I am not against Jews. I am against people living in Canada while having a greater loyalty to another country. Is that not a reasonable approach to take? Would it be reasonable to have people in positions of power when their loyalty is to another country? What do you suggest – trust me?

I hope that the above makes clear that I have seen too many despicable acts committed through propaganda to stand by without commenting, The people behind the indexing scam deserve special mention. Robbing the elderly. It makes an armed robber look respectable. Thirty-five years to my knowledge, and not yet exposed. Impressive. Joseph Goebbels would admire that.

It was done before. In the 70s and 80s there was a very successful propaganda campaign. The Auditor General noted a six billion deficit in the indexing account for "public servants". He failed to mention that it was caused by 2% of payroll being legislated to pay for indexing which the plan actuary had calculated to be 4.7% of payroll. It worked and to this day one can read about the "cost of indexing" and "gold plated pensions".

The losses to pensioners and gains for their former employer were never, to my knowledge, mentioned in the media. The same today. There has been extensive coverage of Defined Benefit Pensions in Maclean’s and the Globe and Mail, but this feature of Defined Benefit Pensions has not been mentioned

Stan's response is much like Googling the phrase – Stan used about 1,000 words without addressing the phrase. Why would Stan do that? There are several possibilities.

First, Stan is anti-Jewish. Observant people would note that Stan did not address the issue, instead did a snow job – lotsa words. It leaves the impression that Stan is a Jew, and does everything to avoid discussion.

Second, Stan is pro-Jewish and believes the propaganda truism that repeating a theme often enough will lead people to believe it.

Incidentally it probably will give you some comfort but I will pass it on anyway,

Subject: Re: Oh, those Russians Apr 4 2009
From: "Stern, Leonard (ott)" <lstern@thecitizen.canwest.com>
To: <acampbell@storm.ca>

If you write to me again I will contact the police.
END OF EMAIL
__________________________________________________

May we all have appropriate afterlives

I’m not sure how helpful this has been. It is nothing short of impossible for a non-Jew to understand this. Jews are reasonably sure that “Art Campbell” is not likely to paint a swastika on a Jewish institution or (overtly) discriminate against or physically attack an identifiable Jew. But Jews also know, with absolute certainty, that when the unpleasantness towards and intolerance for them builds, as is currently happening in this country and elsewhere, “Art Campbell” will do absolutely nothing to stop it. Jews know, with absolute certainty that generations of abiding by the laws and contributing to the community will be of no consequence whatsoever, because “Art Campbell” questions the state of their being here.

As long as "Art Campbell" and everyone else feel Jews are OK they will be allowed to remain. But when the “Art Campbells" are tired of them or perceive the Jews to be more trouble than they are worth then "Art Campbell" will question the Jews' allegiance to the country, regardless of the contributions thy have made. Worse things begin to happen after that.

In the course of human history it is difficult to find situations where the “Art Campbells” lived as a minority and were dispossessed, ordered to leave or simply annihilated for no other reason than they had names, looked like and carried on in the manner of “Art Campbell”. More likely the “Art Campbells” (generally, but not exclusively, good, law-abiding, white Christians) were the ones doing the dispossessing, expulsions and annihilations in order to maintain social order, as they saw it.

Even when “Art Campbell” has settled somewhere else, despite the preponderance of original inhabitants, “Art Campbell” simply carried on as a dominant majority. It is the only mindset “Art Campbell” understands. In the few situations where White Christians have been somewhat disenfranchised it has been by those who they previously disenfranchised several generations previously.

How does that happen? Essentially, something occurs somewhere that the “Art Campbells” find unpleasant. Part (or maybe most or all) of that aspect may have the involvement of some or quite a lot of Jews. The “Art Campbells” then start wondering if the local Jews could be the source of similar unpleasantness locally. In the interest of preventing unpleasantness the local Jews’ allegiance (and the state of sufferance) is called into question. It’s not because “Art” hates Jews. It is because the maintenance of communal peace is his paramount concern. His actions are entirely reasonable.

One who is not Jewish would have difficulty understanding the "centrality of Israel for Jews". Where does one begin? The direction Jews face in prayer (either in an institutional, group or individual setting) has been Jerusalem for over 3,000 years. The concept that the area called Israel is their ancestral homeland is probably accepted by most people identifying as Jews. The concept that one day Jews will return there is their Messianic vision (apologies to Christians: JC is not in that vision in any way, shape or Holy Ghost).

Despite the above, due to historical dispersion most Jews live in places other than Israel. But a student of history would also ascertain that Jews, while they have lived in a myriad of countries, have, despite centuries of discrimination, persecution and worse (at the hands of the local “Art Campbells”), been extremely loyal to whichever state granted them sufferance.

I feel sorry for the Jewish people. Their leaders established a Jewish state on land lived on, claimed by and surrounded by their enemies. That is a life sentence for Jews. And, as a glance at Nobel winners, Jews are a very talented people. Sad.

Re 9/11. It was part of a series of exchanges between the US and Arabs, thus nothing to do with Hindus, etc. It too was unique.

Do we have a moral responsibility to ensure it never happends again to anyone…or that it never happens again to Israelies?

I'm guessing you agree that the quote about English volunteers in the '49 war and the example of Taiwan shows that western countries support for Taiwan and Israel cannot be because of the centrality of either of them, but because those countries believe it is morally right to support Taiwan and Israel. In other words, it has nothing to do with "Jewish interests" influencing countries to do things at all, – at most it is Jewish Canadians supporting these things in no different of a way than Anglo Canadians influencing Canada to be pro-England. That no Anglo has said the specific words "centrality of England" is the farthest thing from evidence that the same feeling isn't there! (continued)

I feel sorry for the Jewish people. Their leaders established a Jewish state on land lived on, claimed by and surrounded by their enemies. That is a life sentence for Jews. And, as a glance at Nobel winners will show, Jews are a very talented people. Sad.

Re 9/11. It was part of a series of exchanges between the US and Arabs, thus nothing to do with Hindus, etc. It too was unique.

Throughout, Canada was not involved. The "war on terror" was an emotional response to 9/11.

I look forward to your comments on the "centrality of Israel for Jews". I am not interested in a debate, that is where there are winners and losers. I am interested in a discussion – I am trying to learn, perchance to teach.

For the record, i am not Jewish, use to be a card holding liberal, but these days things are so screwed up, I consider myself an independent.

Something I realized thinking about your comment was that Canada has been involved in a number of foreign wars that perhaps had something to do with the centrality of England. We were in both World Wars years before the United States, and even in the Boer War which I wonder if you would consider to have been in Canadian interests. Do you think it's as illegitimate for Anglos to be concerned with England and Jews with Israel? Why not consider removing Anglos from positions of influence in Canada?

My next two start with me smiling and and demanding you to answer why you are not concerned for how Jews – or perhaps Taiwanese – concerned with the centrality of Taiwan convinced George Bush to say frankly that if China attacked Taiwan the United States would be morally obligated to defend her. Do you think there's a difference between Taiwan and Israel?

The makeup of Israel's army in the '49 initial battle for survival was so strongly influenced by English speaking volunteers that this was true. No western country sent their own military and as I understand it formal support, if there was any, was limited to selling exess military equipment. So I believe your view of why countries like Canada support the existence of Israel is turned on its head from '49. You say it has to do with Jews interested in Israel's interests alone, I say it's as clear as it could be that it has to do with Canadians who support what they strongly believe is right.

I look forward to your comments on the "centrality of Israel for Jews".

I am not condoning anti-semitism, as I do not condone any racism, but I think you would be hard put to find any political party, or indeed, any organization with a large group of people where you also did not find some form of racist sentiment held by some people.

Rob Anders, whose position as an MP appears to be protected by Harper against all who would seek to dethrone him, once stated Nelson Mandella is a terrorist. Should I think all conservatives are racist just because Anders is?

I'm not sure who you are addressing. i certainly am not defending the flyer's, but I am making an argument that a minority of members withing the Liberal party have shown clear signs of anti-semitism. How else could you explain delegates who unwittingly approached the wife of Bob Rae and said,,"Don't vote for Bob because his wife is a Jew"

In my humble opinion, the left has been infiltrated by powerful forces which are exploiting well intentioned, socially sensitive, disciples of social justice, individuals who are to the left of center.

Sure it is true Ignatieff said what he said. It is also true he apologized (and you do not need to chide him with "he should have apologized" – he did apologize, so obviously he agrees with you). By failing to include the apology the flier is designed to leave the reader with the impression Ignatieff stands behind that comment, which would be a lie.

It is true one Liberal MP supported delisting Hezbollah at some time in the past, but the flier wants the reader to believe this is the position of the LPC, which would be a lie.

Finally, it is true the liberal government attended Durban 1, along with many other governments, including Israel. It is also true the liberal government spoke out against the anti-Israel bent of that conference. Leaving out the latter point is designed to give the reader the impression the liberals support the anti-Israel bent of Durban, which would be a lie.