sda2.jpg

March 3, 2008

Hiding In Plain Sight

While self-aggrandizing "swastika hunters" prowl the washrooms of Ontario hockey arenas searching for Bic wielding 10 year olds, the Canadian leftosphere marches on unopposed...

rightofcenterice.jpg

... classic antisemitic themes such as the blood libel are found in Oxfam's poster in 2002 of the "Israeli orange", which promoted boycotting of Israeli products, and of Israel in general. (Following a wide protest, this poster was withdrawn.)

As I've said in the past - if it's anti-Semitism you're looking for, scratch a "progressive".


Posted by Kate at March 3, 2008 12:36 AM
Comments

The guy writes like a moonbat who's convinced himself that he is economically conservative. Surprises me that he's not a Paulbot. Maybe he was, until Obama came along.

Posted by: gordinkneehill at March 3, 2008 2:17 AM

Oddly enough, a few posts earlier in that blog, he takes swipes at Bush for failing to "do something" in Darfur. Maybe he should suggest Bush dispatches Gloria Steinham or Jane Fonda over to enlighten those naughty boys and negotiate a settlement.

Posted by: shaken at March 3, 2008 2:29 AM

Whats the difference between anti-semitism and anti-zionism? Or are leftist jews in Israel anti-semitic by default?

The irony of it all is that the orthodox establishment, the most right wing grouping in the country, demands that its own members not serve in the military.

Posted by: sput at March 3, 2008 3:08 AM

It's obvious that "sput" never learned about proper nouns in school.

Posted by: jwkozak91 at March 3, 2008 7:08 AM

"Or are leftist [J]ews in Israel anti-[S]emitic by default?"

They are at least traitors, in the same vein as the Islamists who want to lop off Prince Harry's head. In any case maybe the "refusenik peaceniks" should spend 6 months in Hebron without guns or IDF protection and see if they can survive on wits alone.

Posted by: jwkozak91 at March 3, 2008 7:19 AM

"Or are leftist [J]ews in Israel anti-[S]emitic by default?"

They are at least traitors, in the same vein as the "British" Islamists who want to lop off Prince Harry's head. In any case maybe the "refusenik peaceniks" should spend 6 months in Hebron without guns or IDF protection and see if they can survive on wits alone.

Posted by: jwkozak91 at March 3, 2008 7:19 AM

Behold the virulent, vicious hatred by the Left towards an identifiable group.

All Leftists are blighted by this hatred spewing forth from those of their own ilk.

Mental disorder galore!

Posted by: Canadian Sentinel at March 3, 2008 7:24 AM

Don't these phony "conservatives" really annoy you? I get lots of them in my own comments.

Claiming to be "conservative" without demonstrating that one actually is on an ongoing basis doesn't impress me. After all, conservative is as conservative does. It's not an ideology; it's a way of life.

Posted by: Canadian Sentinel at March 3, 2008 7:27 AM

Leftist anti-Israel Jews: "I hate me too!!"

They have deluded themselves into thinking that their enemies differentiate between pro-Israel Jews and anti-Israel Jews.

Posted by: ex-liberal at March 3, 2008 7:27 AM

rightofcentreice.blogspot.com:
About Me

Name: Dylan
Location: Calgary, Canada

I am a socially progressive/fiscally conservative Mennonite studying International Development and Theology in Winnipeg.

View my complete profile

------------------------

What is it with today's (post-1930) Mennonites and big government? Especially when the worst period of oppression of their "Russlander" brethren was under Lenin's Civil War and Stalin's Soviet Union. Self-reliance got them further than cozying up to the NDP.

Posted by: jwkozak91 at March 3, 2008 7:39 AM

"Social progressive/fiscally conservative Mennonite" Something of a contradiction in terms there, n'est ce pas?

Posted by: Skip at March 3, 2008 7:52 AM

Try reading the Israeli media sometime. There is more and harsher criticism of the Israeli leadership allowed there than in any North American news outlet, even among the centrists.

Unlike you, they recognize the importance and legitimacy of dissenting opinion. Nobody--save perhaps the hard-line zealots, who are more often than not based outside Israel--would accuse these Jewish writers of anti-Semitism or sedition.

In any case, criticizing NGOs for using imagery that might be offensive to Jews for their own gain is a bit rich coming from someone who thought nothing of exploiting the iconography of a concentration camp tattoo for no greater purpose than to pwn an online foe.

Posted by: A Jessa at March 3, 2008 8:09 AM

The sleep walking dogmatic left have still not discovered how to tell the difference between just and unjust violence, aggressor from defender, self defense from criminal attack and tolerance from intolerance.

Until they can untangle the social dyslexia that makes them incapable of distinguishing these simple self evident facts, they are useless to themselves (as they have no sense of justified self preservation) and their nation ( as they can't tell friend from foe, criminal from defender).

The foot soldiers in the "activist" left is pretty much a useless confused gaggle of hysterical empty headed poultry....I with there was a vaccine to cure morbid leftardedness but it seems the only cure is age and cognitive maturation....eventually they grow out of their self destructive gullibility...the ones who don't grow up, however, should be treated the same way society treats the acutely retarded...be nice, understanding, make them feel useful but keep them away from any situation that requires decisive accurate judgement. ;-)

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at March 3, 2008 8:29 AM

being anti-bush does not make one anti-american.similiarly, opposing aspects of current israeli foreign policy does not make one anti-semitic.

that must hurt your brain huh mcmillan?

nonetheless, i'm certain the jewish population in delisle, especially the israelis, appreciate your support....

Posted by: jeff davidson at March 3, 2008 8:47 AM

Jeffy, you been a huffin' the dinonylphenylisophthalate again?

Posted by: photos R us at March 3, 2008 9:07 AM

I see the troll chorus is in fine tune today. Jeffie, sput, I see your hands in that cookie jar. Lying about it is only going to get you a bigger spanking.

You can pretend there's some moral justification for your obscene belief system, but we all know its pretend.

Posted by: The Phantom at March 3, 2008 9:25 AM

yes, because being opposed to the actions of the Israeli state makes you anti-semitic......

Posted by: Sean S. at March 3, 2008 9:31 AM

Careful Kate... Dylan's going to whine to the BT's about your outing him as a flaming moonbat and demand that you be removed from the blogroll. He's done it before: http://no-libs.com/wordpress/?p=475

Posted by: Richard Evans at March 3, 2008 9:47 AM

No, but telling lies about the state Israel and Jewish people does

(eg. Israel stole their land, Israel does not want peace or two states, Israel is a brutal occupying force, Israel reacts disporportionately, Israel is an apartheid state, etc.)

Posted by: ex-liberal at March 3, 2008 9:48 AM

His post regarding malting barley is interesting. He is in effect telling western barley producers that they are being used to prop up the price of barley. Their barley cant be marketed properly or else supply will increase and prices will go down. Why doesn't someone else keep their barley off the market? Why do western producers have to be the ones who suffer? Why don't people like him buy the excess barley and destroy it to keep it off the market? It is OK to play socialist games with the market as long as someone else pays the cost. He is certainly no fiscal conservative with those views. My apologies for posting off topic.

Posted by: Gus at March 3, 2008 9:50 AM

"Social progressive/fiscally conservative Mennonite" Something of a contradiction in terms there, n'est ce pas?
Posted by: Skip at March 3, 2008 7:52 AM

Certainly not skip. It's covered by this:I am a socially progressive/fiscally conservative Mennonite studying International Development and Theology in Winnipeg.

See, what that means is that he's going to school (university, sorry) in Winnipeg, hence the fiscallly conservative. But he's off to the clubs on the weekends having a few drinks and trying to get laid, hence the socially progressive.

I can remember those days. Mind you I wasn't studying International Development and Theology. My main focus was on Advanced Partying and Seduction. With minors in Science and Philosophy.

Posted by: Sober2ndThought at March 3, 2008 10:14 AM

"It's obvious that "sput" never learned about proper nouns in school."

Best you can come up with, eh?

"They are at least traitors, in the same vein as the "British" Islamists who want to lop off Prince Harry's head."

These kinds of remarks always remind me of the Israeli youngsters I meet in India. They re usually in their 20's and on vacation after their mandatory military service. They are markedly left-wing in voicing opposition to Israeli military action, but this leftism is not so much a product of sympathy for Palestinians. It is, instead, a product of outright hatred towards right wing orthodox types who claim immunity from military service while demanding military action. To add insult to injury, these righties often judge the conscriptees by condeming their (socially) liberal ways. My own impression is that sympathy for Palestinians is an afterthought - the real anger is aimed at the orthodoxy.

Self-hating? Traitorous? I m not quite convinced. After all, Ehud Barak, a lefty, did play an important role in the post Munich military action. Damn fine soldier, he was. Contrast that to his predecessor, the right wing Netanyahu, whose only claim to fame was that his brother was a war hero. Olmert is mildly better, but his contribution is hardly on par with lefty Shimon Peres' work in equipping the Israeli armed forces, though the latter never served in the military, being mainly in charge of procurements.

But then again, the Israeli right wing is always right by virtue of not being left, right?

Posted by: sput at March 3, 2008 10:46 AM

Wow what a breakthru!

Nannystater discovers supply-demand curve.

And makes a haaawwwuuuuuggge leap from a supply/demand curve to a statement of fact that CWB saves small farmers.

However it apparently has escaped his notice that there is no curve for small farmers shown on the graph.

But being only 23, allows him to escape a history lesson of the early yrs of the CWB.
Like when the Montreal Mafia ran loose.

And Liberal cabinet Ministers of the Crown dealt closely with alcohol producers like Hartland Molson, and Samuel Bronfman and his USA 'business associate' Meyer Lansky.

Yea that Meyer Lansky, he of Murder Inc fame.
I wonder how many Liberal Cabinet Ministers ever said NO to any requests from those guys?

Dylan simply does not understand the fact the CWB does not actually sell grain to the best advantage of grain producers.

The primary purpose of the Cremlin Wheat Board is to control the stocks of grain in Canada and provide cheap grain to the secondary industries, mainly in central Canada, who then add value and sell it for (used to be) big US dollars.
And under political control from Ottawa, it will never change.

Gee, I wonder if Dylan's head will explode when he finds the Benner Cycle?

Posted by: rockyt at March 3, 2008 11:04 AM

"I am a socially progressive/fiscally conservative Mennonite studying International Development and Theology in Winnipeg."

S2T, in my uni days this was a clever ploy to get to see the world at someone else's expense (or someone else to pay for your tuition).

Live amongst the natives in need of a well, a hut and (presumed)a bible for a year or two while making regular forays to more "advanced civilizations" for R&R and a replenishment of moral outrage, best acquired in Amsterdam or the Greek isles, before returning to balm the needy convertibles. Antithetically, but equally disingenuous as a stint in ROTC (but at least in ROTC you usually learned a bankable trade).

Posted by: Skip at March 3, 2008 11:37 AM

Bollucks. Blood = blood libel? Since when did anti-Semites have a monopoly on that symbol?

As for flaming out "identifiable groups" I refresh your memory.

Posted by: Dilettante at March 3, 2008 12:14 PM

"that must hurt your brain huh mcmillan?"

my point abundantly displayed in only the puerile uncivil anti-intellectual way a suffering leftard can provide.

Jeff is oblivious to the natural extension of his logic providing that being a supporter of justified Israeli self defense does not make one an "Islamophobe" either.

But extended logic is lost on the narrow compartmentalized reasoning of the dogmatic leftist partisan.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at March 3, 2008 12:22 PM

"Toppits" is an excellent Israeli product widely available in Canadian supermarkets. It's frozen cubes of fresh diced herbs and spices. Check it out, the basil and cilantro are second to none...

Posted by: Knight of Good Mr. Iron Man at March 3, 2008 12:54 PM

I wanted to post this in reply to the RCI post, but I don't feel like signing up for a Google blogger account right now...

Ok, so I'm no economist, and I only follow the high-level aspects of this whole issue, but this statement immediately hit me as being wrong: "Demand, as represented in the red line in the graph, stays constant. (After all, people can only drink so much beer.)"

Demand is not constant in an economic model. Take the statement "After all, people can only drink so much beer". Maybe people would drink more beer if it were cheaper. That statement pre-supposes that the beer market is completely static, and no change in the price of beer (through changing of the costs of it's component ingredients) would affect people's consumption patterns. I don't think that is the case. You can go into speculation about what would happen to supply and demand for barley if the market weren't being affected by a monopoly, but saying that demand would never change is wrong.

Basically, with that statement, the author has demonstrated to me that he understands even less about economics than I do (I'm at the reading texts like "Basic Economics" stage - so not very far along at all.) So I didn't finish reading his post, because it would be a waste of my time.

Posted by: Stephanie at March 3, 2008 1:17 PM

@ Stephanie:

He's obviously only studied first year Econ, and likely not doing that well. He thinks Canadian supply will have such a large effect on the world market to bring down prices as if we were some massive producer, which we are not.

Secondly he is arguing that we sit in a monopoly situation, which we do not, as we are competing against other states especially Australia, the EU and the US. We cannot set prices against this competition.

The final mis-statement, as an old Econ prof once said to me, never put Demand and Supply in the same sentence - they have no effect on each other. They only determine prices at equilibrium. World demand for barely has a huge impact on the price and the curve shifts all the time according to ag-can economists due to several factors including those pertaining to us such as the Canadian dollar, tarifs/subsidies, and local production.

Posted by: langmann@alumni.sfu.ca at March 3, 2008 1:40 PM

For myself, redneck gentile that I am, I prefer Israeli products. The Galil in .223 for example, is without peer.

Sean S., I find the people "opposed to the actions of the Israeli state" to be ingenuous. This week for example we have peaceniks deploring the "invasion" of Gaza and the killing or "over 100 Palestinians". Read all the way down to the middle of the article to discover the Israelis killed over 100 innocent Palestinians who were innocently launching artillery rockets at a nearby town across the border in Israel.

Frankly I have a problem with the Israeli government's handling of that too. They only got 100 of the sons of beeatches? WTF is that? How about launch a rocket, eat a rocket. That is more my speed.

Obscene. Belief. System.

Posted by: The Phantom at March 3, 2008 4:18 PM

Davidson,

You are right. When israel reacts to this

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080302/D8V5I2I00.html

it is certainly understandable that you'd get bent out of shape when the evil jooos respond. It's not anti-semitic at all. Nope. Pointing out that the evil blood-sucking Joooooooos are the only ones on earth that aren't allowed to defend themselves and must supply their tormentors with food and electricity isn't anti-Semitic at all.

But I'll give you this: 1/20th or so of the people who bash Israel may not be completely anti-Semitic.

Posted by: Warwick at March 3, 2008 4:35 PM

"But I'll give you this: 1/20th or so of the people who bash Israel may not be completely anti-Semitic."

I wouldn't disagree with that estimate and I'm so generous i might even go higher. Jeffy, for example, seems like a harmless person, just perpetually confused. Problem is these naifs are easily duped by more malign elements who are blatantly anti-semitic, and they don't seem to mind.

Posted by: dean spencer - fox at March 3, 2008 5:00 PM

Israel is my friend and ally. Her enemies are my enemies. Those who criticize Israel support Islam and so are my enemies as well.

Posted by: BL@KBIRD at March 3, 2008 6:23 PM

Some of the harshest critics of Israel can be found in Israel's own press corps. That fact alone should be proof positive that criticizing Israel's state policies and actions is not the same as being anti-Semitic. I emphasize "should," because it's clear that certain overly partisan ideologues and zealots still treat the two as synonymous.

Which is a shame, because all it does is create yet another (wholly avoidable) obstacle to be overcome by those who are serious about addressing pragmatically the problems in the Middle East.

Posted by: AJ at March 3, 2008 7:10 PM

@ The Phantom: Actually, reducing the complexity of the Middle East conflict to a simplistic duality of good guys versus bad guys is about as obscene a moral belief system as one can get.

Posted by: AJ at March 3, 2008 7:13 PM

Anti-Semitism, which includes anti-Zionism, Zionism being a basic tenet of Judaism, is the mental sickness of hatred of Jews and everything Jewish. As to the question can Jews be anti-Semitic the answer is affirmative. There have been studies done on those who possess such profound self-hatred and hatred for all things Jewish. This should come as no surprise since the West is infected with the same self-loathing crowd with a profound hatred for Western culture and civilisation and whose agenda is the destruction of the same. Be they self-hating Jews or self-hating Gentiles they all belong to the Left.

It should be clear that only those affected by anti-Semitism or those suffering from some other form of serious mental disorder would promote such lies concerning Israel.

Consider that Israeli Arabs have equal rights and citizenship. Schools in Israel teach both Hebrew and Arabic, the same Arabs vote, run for election and hold office, some being MKs (MPs for us), judges and anything else. Now consider that Jews cannot even reside in most Arab countries, and in the few places they can they possess few rights. Anyone doubting this need only check out the facts to see it is true.

Posted by: Alain at March 3, 2008 10:56 PM

"Israel is my friend and ally. Her enemies are my enemies. Those who criticize Israel support Islam and so are my enemies as well."

Bet all your christian ancestors are turning over in their grave right about...now.

How the tables have turned. When there was no Islam, judaism was the problem. Now that there is an islam, Judaism gets a reprieve. But how long will it last? I bet the Jews are praying you folk dont wipe Islam out, lest they end up at the recieving end of Christian "love" again.

And yet again we have to wonder why that great Jewish philosopher Maimonedes lived in a Muslim land, instead of a Christian one.

I will venture so far as to claim that Nazi atrocities notwithstanding, Christians have far more blood than the Muslims do, when it comes to Judaism.

Indeed that would provide the only rational explanation behind why Israel was dumped in the middle of Muslim territory instead of German territory. You d think the biggest perpetrators of anti-semitic violence would be sanctioned for it.


Posted by: sput at March 4, 2008 8:29 AM

OK AJ, lets look at this complexity of which you speak.

people who indiscriminately lob missiles into cites, some of which missiles are such total crap they fall short and land on their own people, who blow up school buses, and send retarded kids dressed in C4 overcoats to blow up in front of cafes = bad guys.

people who very carefully separate those bad guys from the population they are hiding in and shoot them = good guys.

Yep. That's some complicated sh1t AJ.

Posted by: The Phantom at March 4, 2008 8:48 AM

And now we have sput, making Kate's point again in this thread.

Thanks for being so cooperative, eh? Usually Lefties pretend, nice to see one come right out of the closet like that.

Posted by: The Phantom at March 4, 2008 1:50 PM

MASS IMMIGRATION IS A MENACE TO CANADA

Canada admits over 200 000 immigrants a year. How many terrorists or extremists would be among them. We're always told it's only a small percentage. Well, 1% would be a very small percentage and that means 2000 dangerous radicals a year. Do you think that will make us safer or less safe? Canadian authorities can barely keep up with the thousands of radicals who are already here and have ties to all kinds of foreign terrorist groups. Do you think their job will be easier if we bring in 200 000 more people every year, mostly from countries that are plagued by terrorism? Do you think there is economic benefit from bringing in thousands of people with no knowledge of English or French?

Canada does not need immigration at this point although it used to. You should feel free to question the motives of any politician who says we do. Are they looking for votes in the large cities? Are they looking for bribes from immigration lawyers or self-styled multicultural leaders? There is no skills shortage that cannot be fixed by retraining Canadians who've lost jobs in fishing, forestry, mining, farming or manufacturing. It doesn't matter if Canada is aging slightly. If the average Canadian was 85 years old, we'd still be better off than the countries that supply most of the immigrants. The damage that can be done by foreign radicals in one day is a lot greater than any possible economic benefit.

Do you think that Canada is enriched by multiculturalism? Think about the cultures that exist in the source countries. Countries where women are second class citizens at best and where homosexuals are ruthlessly persecuted. Countries that are plagued by corruption which causes poverty. Countries where inter-tribal hatred and inter-religious hatred is a way of life. Is that what you want Canada to be like? You better think about it because that's what those cultures produce. They produce places that people want to leave. There's more to culture than interesting food and lively dancing. A country doesn't become a living hell by accident.

It's going to take years to sort ourselves out from the past 15-20 years of mass immigration. There has to be NO NEW IMMIGRATION while we're doing it.

If you want Canada to remain a great place to live, then pass this message on to your friends and family. You can also find the address of your MP through the parliamentary website, www.parl.gc.ca


Useful websites about the present-day dangers of immigration include:
www.ImmigrationWatchCanada.org
www.jihadwatch.org
www.vdare.com

Posted by: J MARTIN at March 5, 2008 10:53 PM

MASS IMMIGRATION IS A MENACE TO CANADA

Canada admits over 200 000 immigrants a year. How many terrorists or extremists would be among them. We're always told it's only a small percentage. Well, 1% would be a very small percentage and that means 2000 dangerous radicals a year. Do you think that will make us safer or less safe? Canadian authorities can barely keep up with the thousands of radicals who are already here and have ties to all kinds of foreign terrorist groups. Do you think their job will be easier if we bring in 200 000 more people every year, mostly from countries that are plagued by terrorism? Do you think there is economic benefit from bringing in thousands of people with no knowledge of English or French?

Canada does not need immigration at this point although it used to. You should feel free to question the motives of any politician who says we do. Are they looking for votes in the large cities? Are they looking for bribes from immigration lawyers or self-styled multicultural leaders? There is no skills shortage that cannot be fixed by retraining Canadians who've lost jobs in fishing, forestry, mining, farming or manufacturing. It doesn't matter if Canada is aging slightly. If the average Canadian was 85 years old, we'd still be better off than the countries that supply most of the immigrants. The damage that can be done by foreign radicals in one day is a lot greater than any possible economic benefit.

Do you think that Canada is enriched by multiculturalism? Think about the cultures that exist in the source countries. Countries where women are second class citizens at best and where homosexuals are ruthlessly persecuted. Countries that are plagued by corruption which causes poverty. Countries where inter-tribal hatred and inter-religious hatred is a way of life. Is that what you want Canada to be like? You better think about it because that's what those cultures produce. They produce places that people want to leave. There's more to culture than interesting food and lively dancing. A country doesn't become a living hell by accident.

It's going to take years to sort ourselves out from the past 15-20 years of mass immigration. There has to be NO NEW IMMIGRATION while we're doing it.

If you want Canada to remain a great place to live, then pass this message on to your friends and family. You can also find the address of your MP through the parliamentary website, www.parl.gc.ca


Useful websites about the present-day dangers of immigration include:
www.ImmigrationWatchCanada.org
www.jihadwatch.org
www.vdare.com

Posted by: J MARTIN at March 5, 2008 10:54 PM
Site
Meter