You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

Canadians frequently criticize U.S. President Donald Trump’s projection of American power. But in the fight against anti-Semitism, Canada could learn a thing or two from our neighbour to the south. In Part One of this series, Lynne Cohen revealed how Canada’s political and civic leaders have chosen to ignore or even abet the hate crimes and abuse Jews have suffered since October 7, 2023. In brief excerpts from the second installment, she shows how the U.S. – from the President on down to local officials and law enforcement – has fought back. Where Canada has been cowering and cowardly, the U.S. has resolved to fight anti-Semitism, protect its Jewish citizens and defend Israel’s right to live freely as a Jewish state.

While some municipal and state governments headed by left-wing Democrats dither or excuse antisemitism as mere criticism of Israel, the overall difference between the U.S. and Canada is like night and day. The U.S. campaign to counter antisemitism has made such significant gains, Cohen claims, that Jewish leaders in Tulsa, Oklahoma, are now marketing their city as a safe and welcoming “exit strategy” where concerned Canadian Jews can come and resettle.

The U.S. campaign to counter antisemitism begins at the top, a self-evident claim if there ever was one when it comes to Jew hatred.

The Righteous Response: What Canada Can Learn from America’s Fight Against Antisemitism

Lynne Cohen

C2C Journal

January 13, 2025

It was a handshake that perhaps didn’t quite shake the world – but still carried outsized diplomatic and symbolic significance for friends, enemies and observers at home and abroad. At a news conference following meetings at his Mar-a-Lago, Florida club just before New Year’s, U.S. President Donald Trump warmly shook hands with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, after the two men had walked with arms on each other’s shoulders. Trump effusively praised Israel for doing everything asked of it to advance the peace plan for Gaza. But not so Hamas. If the terrorist group didn’t live up to its Phase 1 commitment “in a short period of time”, Trump warned, it would be “wiped out”. And if Iran should seek to restart its nuclear weapons program, Trump continued, it too would be struck again. After the meetings, the two leaders and their wives went on to celebrate New Year’s Eve together.

The Mar-a-Lago meeting was the latest in a series of statements and actions making it unmistakeably clear – to actors across the political spectrum – that the United States with Trump at its head is resolutely committed to defending Israel’s right to live freely as a Jewish state, to opposing anti-Semitism wherever it might occur worldwide, and most of all to protecting the rights and security of America’s Jewish population. Recall that it was only under Trump’s relentless pressure that Hamas last year finally agreed to release its remaining Israeli hostages and deceased remains. Such linkage between the security of Israel and the safety of Jews elsewhere is not coincidental, but deliberate U.S. policy. As Secretary of State Marco Rubio has declared, “Those who call for violence against Israelis are calling for violence against Jews. Those who call for the destruction of Israel are calling for the destruction of the Jewish people.”

Trump’s warm meeting with Netanyahu also underscores the stark contrasts between the U.S. and Canada in their respective approaches to countering anti-Semitism – by turns heartening to America’s estimated 7.5 million Jews and deeply worrying for Canada’s approximately 400,000 Jewish citizens. In Canada, Netanyahu would risk being arrested under a legally baseless warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC). It is part and parcel with the Liberal government’s systematic distancing of Canada from Israel while promoting Palestinian statehood and turning a blind eye to the UN’s anti-Israel biases. The U.S., by contrast, has moved to sanction the ICC’s judges. As the Trump Administration sees it, first Hamas must be disarmed and the West Bank’s PLO regime definitively renounce terrorism and accept Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, before there can be serious talk of Palestinian statehood.

Some of the Trump Administration’s fiercest battles against anti-Semitism have been with the country’s elite universities. As in Canada, for up to a year after October 7 these schools indulged never-ending anti-Jewish demonstrations and pro-Hamas camps on their grounds. Jewish students were harassed, assaulted and blocked from going about campus. Prominent university presidents denied or downplayed anti-Semitism in their midst.

The silver lining to this disgusting drama was that it became crystal-clear to Americans that the prodigious sums of money flowing from wealthy Arab states to U.S. post-secondary institutions has warped their views, debased their judgment and undermined their loyalty to the intellectual and ethical traditions of the Western university. As British author and journalist Douglas Murray pointed out in the Spectator, “More than 30 Harvard University student organizations signed a letter which claimed to hold the ‘Israeli regime entirely responsible for all unfolding violence.’”

Trump’s responses have included blocking federal aid and research funding to universities, moving to deport foreign students who have been ringleaders of anti-Semitic activities, stopping some prospective international students from entering the country, rousing prominent alumni and private donors to criticize or de-fund their alma mater, and enforcing longstanding federal civil rights provisions to protect Jewish students. While leftists have howled – one Trump-hating critic claiming that his Administration “has launched a comprehensive attack on knowledge itself” – others such as multimedia journalist Joe Battenfeld dismiss Harvard elites as merely playing victim.

So far, the winds appear to be at Trump’s back. Already last July, the non-Ivy League UCLA capitulated in a lawsuit brought by Jewish students and agreed to a “consent decree” placing it under civil rights supervision by the federal Department of Justice; other California universities were expected to follow suit. Accordingly, writes James Piereson in City Journal: “By freezing billions of dollars in pledged research grants due to be paid to Harvard, Columbia, Princeton, Cornell, and other prominent institutions, on the grounds that the schools have not done enough to counter anti-Semitism on their campuses or have evolved into left-wing hothouses with little diversity of opinion,” Trump is likely to prevail against the Ivies. Adding to the pressure, Jewish students are privately suing Harvard, alleging it “has become a bastion of rampant anti-Jewish hatred and harassment.”

The Administration’s decision to move against anti-Semitic foreign students whose bigotry might spill over into harassment, incitement or violence is hitting the Ivies on multiple levels, from their pocketbooks to their self-righteous self-image as bastions of diversity and protecters of the oppressed. The case of Syrian Mahmoud Khalil is a prominent example. A graduate student and Green Card holder, and married to an American, Khalil helped lead some of the worst anti-Semitic protests at Columbia University and is now facing deportation hearings for his alleged ties to Hamas terrorists.

While the Khalil case quickly became an important symbol to both sides, it actually stands out for being merely one action in a campaign. As Sergio Karas, a Canadian immigration lawyer and past chair of the American Bar Association International Law Section’s Canada Committee, points out, DHS “recently issued a formal demand to Harvard, requiring detailed records concerning its international student visa holders,” including “records of student misconduct, threats to safety, disciplinary actions related to protests, disruptions to learning, and visa-related coursework.”

Public authorities should move immediately and decisively against any blockades of public property by “protesters” spewing hatred and harassing law-abiding citizens. Universities, municipalities and organizations that tolerate/abet anti-Semitism should lose their federal funding, while those that do the opposite should be rewarded. Criminal acts of anti-Semitism should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Canada’s lax provisions for bail and lenient sentencing and parole should be tightened.

While any criminal law reforms would take months if not years, Canada could make immediate improvements to the physical security and psychological well-being of its Jewish citizens by moving expeditiously to revoke the visas of and deport virulent anti-Semites who are not even Canadian citizens. The U.S. No Visas for Anti-Semitic Students Act, introduced in 2024, could serve as a model (or at least inspiration) for Canada, enabling immigration officials to remove foreign students engaged in illegal activities. While that draft bill was not passed, the U.S. State Department has reportedly revoked the visas of more than 8,000 foreign students it identified as Hamas sympathizers.

Still, it is amply clear that the U.S. campaign to counter anti-Semitism, as impressive and heartening as it is and as much as it has achieved in a brief time, is far from won. As Winston Churchill eloquently stated after the first great British victory in the Second World War: “It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.” The years ahead are likely to remain fraught and difficult for Jewish citizens and their vocal supporters in both countries. It is incumbent upon political leaders at all levels to take on the scourge of anti-Semitism so that, at minimum, the coming years are not downright deadly.

Lynne Cohen is a non-practising lawyer and journalist. She has written six books, of which four have been published, including the ghost-written Holocaust memoir The Life of Moshele Der Zinger: How My Singing Saved My Life.

Source of main image: Shutterstock.

Love C2C Journal? Here’s how you can help us grow.

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

Canada has seen a troubling rise in anti-Semitism in the last two years. Hatred of Jews is now expressed openly, shamelessly, without restraint – and without consequence for those engaged in it. In excerpts from Part One of a two-part series, Lynne Cohen explains why Canada’s political and civic leaders seem unwilling to call out anti-Semitism or take any meaningful action to stop it. Whether driven by bias, cowardice or cold political calculation, the country’s political class is not just failing Canada’s Jewish population. It is choosing to do so. If the brutal massacre of innocent Jews by Muslim terrorists at Bondi Beach in Australia teaches anything, it’s that allowing anti-Semitism to spread has murderous consequences. Canada should take heed.

Triangulation of Hate: Why Canada Is Choosing to Let Antisemitism Grow

Lynne Cohen

C2C Journal

December 18, 2025

Two weeks ago Carlos Portugal Gouvea, a visiting professor at Harvard Law School, was arrested by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers. The event went unnoticed in Canada and left barely a ripple in U.S. media. But two months prior Gouvea, a noted Brazilian gun-control activist and head of the University of São Paulo’s “diversity and inclusion committee”, had been observed wielding what looked like a rifle close by Temple Beth Zion, a synagogue in the Boston suburb of Brookline, during Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar.

After fleeing security guards, Gouvea was arrested with what turned out to be a pellet gun. He told local police he had been out “hunting rats”; one of his shots had shattered a car window. Within days, Gouvea was charged with four offences, his visa was revoked and a U.S. Department of Homeland Security official denounced “brazen, violent acts of anti-Semitism like this.” In November Gouvea struck a plea deal over his illegal use of the air rifle. Early this month he was re-arrested by ICE and, to avoid the humiliation of deportation, agreed to leave the U.S. “voluntarily”.

This obscure event offers a window into the accelerating U.S. campaign to confront and roll back anti-Semitism – and the contrast to Canada. By coincidence, also two weeks ago Mohammed Hashim, CEO of the taxpayer-funded Canadian Race Relations Foundation, told the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights that any current promises to keep Canada’s Jewish population safe are based on “hope”. As first recounted by Blacklock’s Reporter, Hashim did denounce Canada’s escalating anti-Semitism. Yet he then framed ensuring that Canada remains “a place of safety” for the nation’s approximately 400,000 Jews as a “difficult aspiration” – rather than, say, as a solemn duty to be carried out at all costs. Canada’s top race-relations official seemed to be telling Canada’s Jews no longer to count on their own government.

Jewish citizens of both countries have increasing reasons for fear. Anti-Semitism, its clouds gathering throughout the Western world for the past 20 or so years, burst forth into an unending storm after the Hamas massacre of more than 1,200 Jews on October 7, 2023. Today, cataloguing all of the anti-Semitic words and deeds racked up in Canada in the last two-plus years would fill books; Statistics Canada confirms that hate crimes against Jews have proliferated. Merely describing the various types almost exceeds the scope of an article such as this one. A few examples illustrate.

First and foremost, the Carney government must stop the continuous political signalling that Palestinians and Muslims are almost always the victims, that Israel is borderline illegitimate, that Jews are at fault in nearly any dispute, and that hostility and aggression against Jews are somehow understandable responses to Muslim grievances. And then substantively, the nation’s political leaders at all levels must consider the numerous steps being taken in the U.S. right now to counter anti-Semitism, many of which could be readily copied and pasted into Canada virtually without modification. The measures range across legislation, education, organization, leadership, financing, peaceful protests, media campaigns and enforcement/punishment.

The inspiring and instructive U.S. campaign to combat Jew-hatred will be the focus of Part II, coming in early January.

Lynne Cohen is a non-practising lawyer and journalist. She has written six books, four of them published, including the ghost-written Holocaust memoir The Life of Moshele Der Zinger: How My Singing Saved My Life.

Source of main image: Yan Parisien/Shutterstock.

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

Why Islamabad talks were always doomed to fail

According to Robert Macinnis, a retired U.S. Army infantry officer, senior fellow for National Security at the Family Research Council, and the author of 14 books, the recent talks between the United States and Iran in Islamabad were bound to fail. This is because Iran presented non-negotiable conditions, including full sovereignty over the strategic oil transit Strait of Hormuz and a ceasefire across West Asia, while the U.S. demanded Iran surrender its nuclear programme and reopen the strait. The talks were hindered by mutual distrust and irreconcilable positions, particularly regarding the Strait of Hormuz and the inclusion of Hezbollah in the ceasefire.

Whether you agree with Macinnis or not, and most Fox News readers disagreed with much of his analysis, he makes what I believe are several compelling points in the excerpts posted below.​

Robert Macinnis

Fox News

April 12, 2026

• Diplomacy without strategic clarity is just theatre. This weekend in Islamabad, we got a theatre.

• Iran did not come to concede. It presented four non-negotiable conditions before the session even began: full Iranian sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz [through which all its oil is shipped], complete war reparations, unconditional release of frozen financial assets, and a durable ceasefire across the entire West Asia region.

• The American framework was equally firm. Trump’s proposal calls for Iran to surrender all its highly enriched uranium, accept caps on its defense capabilities, and fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz . These two sides were not negotiating the same deal. They were not even negotiating whether a deal is possible. Two parties asserting irreconcilable positions over the same 21 miles of water is not a negotiating gap — it is a trigger.

• Iran cannot deliver any agreement that leaves Hezbollah exposed to ongoing Israeli bombardment, and Washington cannot bind a sovereign Israel to terms Jerusalem did not negotiate.

• This outcome is not a surprise. Iran’s consistent strategy has always been to buy time, preserve leverage, and avoid commitments that weaken the regime. Former State Department negotiator Aaron David Miller read the room clearly: Iran “holds more cards than the Americans” and is “clearly in no hurry to make concessions.”

• Full forceful escalation [by America and Israel] can destroy Iranian military capacity, but cannot remove the regime or govern what follows. Coercive pressure sustained over time — maximum economic isolation, naval enforcement, coalition discipline — remains the best strategy, but demands patience measured in years, not news cycles. None of these options is easy, but all were foreseeable.

• Washington has defined what a durable settlement requires — only what it will not accept. That is not a strategy. If the ceasefire collapses without a diplomatic track to replace it, pressure to resume strikes will build fast. But more bombs will not force Iran to surrender. The logic of sustained escalation leads to one place: a large-scale ground war involving thousands of troops.

• This is because Iran is not Iraq. Iraq favoured maneuver warfare across open terrain. Iran is mountainous, with limited mobility corridors. Naval power is largely irrelevant. Ground forces would have to grind through prepared defenses at enormous cost in lives and treasure — something the American people don’t want.

• I warned that Iran is too dangerous to ignore, too resilient to collapse quickly, and too complex to resolve from the air. Islamabad confirmed that assessment.

Macinnis’ entire article is freely available on Fox News.

My own view is that we are only at the beginning of this quagmire, not near its end, regardless of what America’s president claims day and night — unless, of course, if Donald Trump quickly cuts and runs, a real possibility given the unpopularity of this war among American voters, a sentiment that could see the loss of both the House of Representatives and Senate to the Democrats in the November midterm federal elections.

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

The short excerpt below was taken from a much larger piece titled “A Scoop of Anti-Israel Ice Cream” written by outstanding Substack writer Mitch Schneider. A link to Schneider’s compelling opinion piece is provided below. Don’t miss reading it after you read my excerpt.

Future of Jewish

A Scoop of Anti-Israel Ice Cream

Future of Jewish is the ultimate newsletter by and for people passionate about Judaism and Israel. Subscribe to better understand and become smarter about the Jewish world…

Read more

3 months ago · 96 likes · 43 comments · Mitch Schneider

Some of Schneider’s analysis of the so-called West Bank also applies to the so-called Gaza Strip.

The terms "Judea and Samaria" and "West Bank" discussed below refer to the same geographical area but carry different political and historical connotations. "Judea and Samaria" is used by Israel to emphasize historical and biblical ties, while "West Bank" is the internationally recognized term for the territory captured by Israel from Jordan in the 1967 Six-Day War.

A Scoop of Anti-Israel Ice Cream

Ben Cohen, the co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream, who often reminds audiences that he “was born a Jew,” continues his crusade against the Jewish state.

Mitch Schneider

Future of Jewish

February 1, 2026

… “[O]ccupied territories,” is not a legal term. It is a slogan propagated by ignorant anti-Israel people and institutions. The legal status of the territory [traditionally Judea and Samaria] is disputed, unresolved, and explicitly designated as such by binding agreements (e.g., UN Resolution 242, the Oslo Accords). At most, the phrase reflects the assertions of certain international bodies, NGOs, and activists who repeat it until repetition is mistaken for fact.

Thus, the phrase “occupied territories” is not law, not history, and not an honest description of reality. It is a propaganda shorthand: manufactured, repeated, and laundered through the mouths of bureaucrats, journalists, and activists who either do not know better or do not care. No court has ever ruled Judea and Samaria to be “occupied Palestinian land,” because there was no Palestinian sovereign to occupy, and Jordan’s prior presence was itself illegal and barely recognized. From 1949 to 1967, Jordan’s control of the so-called “West Bank” was widely understood, by both the Arab League and the United Nations, as military occupation followed by unlawful annexation.

The term gained traction only after 1967, incubated inside parts of the UN system, hardened through mindless repetition, and eventually weaponized by people who treat slogans as substitutes for thought. It deliberately ignores the intentional ambiguity of UN Resolution 242, erases Jordan’s illegal annexation, misapplies the Geneva Conventions, and retroactively invents a sovereignty that never existed. Calling Judea and Samaria “occupied territories” is not analysis; it is narrative malpractice, a reliable signal that the speaker has outsourced thinking to press releases and activist talking points.

Activists and NGOs love to shout “occupation law” while quietly skipping its threshold requirement: Occupation law applies only when territory is taken from another lawful sovereign (a High Contracting Party). In 1967, there was no “State of Palestine,” and there was no legally recognized Jordanian title. That makes the legal status disputed, not automatically “occupied.” Even serious international lawyers who are hostile to Israel acknowledge this, though usually sotto voce.

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

As hard-hitting an opinion piece as one could ever hope to read from Juno News’ outstanding commentator, Sue-Ann Levy, that nicely highlights Avi Lewis’ eanti-Israel ideology.

Avi Lewis drags the NDP deeper into radicalism

Sue-Ann Levy writes, “There is no doubt that Lewis’s words have served as a dog whistle to all the Jew haters on the radical left.”

Sue-Ann Levy

Juno News

April 1, 2026

Newly elected NDP leader Avi Lewis stood on stage after his win while the flag of the non-existent country of Palestine waved gaily behind him.

There were no Canadian flags seen whatsoever.

Lewis is a proud self-loathing Jew —what we commonly call a useful idiot for terrorists, someone rabid in his disdain for the Jewish state.

As so aptly described by former NDP strategist Ryan Painter, Lewis has turned the party into something vastly different from the wide tent embraced by the late Jack Layton.

The anti-Semitism that has pervaded the party is about to turn highly acceptable under Lewis, who, since Oct. 7, has used “genocide” and “apartheid” almost obsessively to describe the Jewish state.

As Painter notes, Lewis repeatedly says the Jewish state’s “very existence” and “right to self defence” is the problem, along with the Israel lobby, instead of the Hamas charter calling for the death of Israelis and Jews worldwide.

Lewis, a silver-spooned socialist, has insisted that he comes from a long tradition, a multi-generational tradition of anti-Zionist Jews — in other words a family of Jews opposed to the Jewish state.

Lewis, a younger version of self-loathing Jew Bernie Saunders, clearly includes in this his grandfather, David, who was anything but.His grandfather, David Lewis—leader of the NDP from 1971-75 —is likely rolling his grave.

Lewis was not only supportive of the Jewish state, but he also had close ties to Golda Meir and Simon Peres.

He was a strong supporter of Israel’s labour movement, had a strong connection to the Jewish people and did extensive work for Holocaust survivors.

His son, Stephen Lewis, former ambassador to the UN in the 1980s and leader of the Ontario NDP in the 1970s, switched from being pro-Israel during that time (casting Israel as a refuge for those experiencing ongoing anti-Semitism) to calling Israel a “rogue state” following the atrocities of 10/7.

Last fall, at 88, he protested from his wheelchair in Scarborough, calling out a non-genocide in Gaza.

It would seem that Stephen Lewis and his wife kowtowed to the barrage of Jew hatred by insisting they’re on the side of those who have a death wish against Jews. Stephen Lewis passed away on Tuesday after a battle with cancer.

Former legacy media left-wing journalist, Michelle Landsberg, recently renounced her firmly held Zionist beliefs, organizing at age 85, Women in Black protests against the alleged genocide in Gaza.

I witnessed one last summer at the corner of Bloor and Yonge Sts. in Toronto and was sickened.

When you have a rabid Jew hater and pro-Iran activist, Samira Moyheddin, extending congratulations, you know you are on the wrong side of history.

Landsberg also wrote a column in her former newspaper about the fact that she has turned her back on Zionism.

I’m sure the Toronto Star was only too happy to have a Jew say so.

Perhaps Avi’s greatest partner in anti-Zionist crime is his wife, author Naomi Klein, who has made anti-Zionism her raison d’etre in the past 15 years.

Last year, the self-loathing Jew spoke at a Passover street seder in NYC during which she appealed to all those who want to wipe Israel off the map.

In a highly offensive speech to those of us who are committed Jews, she called Zionism a “false idol.”

She claims in her horrid speech that Zionists have taken this “false idol” and turned it into a “weapon for ethnic cleansing and genocide.”

Klein, who used the uplifting story of Passover to spread her dogma, has also publicly supported the Palestinian-led BDS (Boycott, Sanctions and Divestment) movement against Israel since 2009.

She has contended that Israel exploits a “trauma industry” to justify human rights abuses and expansionist wars.

There is never any mention in her anti-Israel dogma about 10/7 or the repeated attacks on Israel from all sides and borders, or the fact that Israelis are indigenous to the land on which they live.

Of course not.

I have a hard time understanding these self-loathing Jews, except to say that they are useful idiots for those who want to eradicate my community.

But clearly, Jews are no longer welcome in the NDP, as CIJA said in a statement:

“This weekend’s convention was a stark reminder of how far the party has drifted from its roots as the voice of Canada’s working class and trade union movement. Canadian Jews helped build that movement. Today, many are made to feel they no longer belong in it. At a time when antisemitism has reached a crisis, the NDP has become a hostile place for the vast majority of Jewish Canadians who want to fight for progressive values. 94 per cent of Jewish Canadians support the existence of the State of Israel yet have been pushed out.”

I heard a speaker say something very amusing but true recently– namely that the only thing their loyalty to a death cult will buy them is a “window seat” on the train.

She was referring to the boxcars used to carry thousands of Jews to their deaths at Auschwitz during the Nazi regime.

There is no doubt that Lewis’s words have served as a dog whistle to all the Jew haters on the radical left.

As Painter says, the mask is off. Jew hatred will be part of the party’s identity.

I’m guessing that other than a select few Jew haters like CUPE’s former head, Sid Ryan, and the leftists who marched with Landsberg last summer, working people will no longer find themselves welcome in this very narrow tent.

What Lewis and his family of self-loathing Jews don’t realize is that they are doomed to completely destroy the federal NDP.

Share

A guest post by Sue-Ann Levy

Reformed journalist. Author of Underdog, gay, Jewish, mom to 3 beautiful dachsies, avid Muckraker and e-biker. Here’s to the next chapter. #LevyUnleashed.

© 2026 Candice Malcolm · Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice

Start your SubstackGet the app

Substack is the home for great culture

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

On this last day of the Jewish Passover, don’t miss this special video, compliments of Juno News, dissecting extreme anti-Zionist Avi Lewis’ hard left, ultra-woke ideology, which surely includes never celebrating Passover, one of Judaism’s most important annual commemorations.

Juno News Investigates: Who is Avi Lewis?

Juno News brings back a popular segment diving into the stories behind the headlines. Candice Malcolm explores Avi Lewis’s past, his family and ideology—revealing a shift toward hard-left socialism.

Candice Malcolm

Juno News

April 1, 2026

Share

Who is Avi Lewis? Where did he come from and how was he able to win such a sweeping victory despite never holding public office or winning an election in the past?

In this edition of Juno News Investigates, Candice Malcolm pulls back the curtain and explores Avi’s deep connections to radical left-wing politics. He’s not trying to hide it, he’s saying it right out in the open.

Juno News reports the stories the legacy media doesn’t want to touch. Become a Juno News premium subscriber today to support bold, fearless journalism.

He wants to nationalize major industries, eliminate oil and gas and overthrow our system of free markets and capitalism and replace it with a utopian green future that looks a lot like the doomed and failed communist experiments of the 20th century.

With the help of Juno News investigative reporters Cosmin Dszurdsza and Clayton DeMaine, Candice explores Avi’s past, including his family’s deep history in hard left activism.

Much like former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Avi Lewis comes from a political dynasty and left-wing Canadian royalty.

So the real question is, will Canadians fall for it again?

Please consider upgrading to become a paid subscriber to support more investigations like this. Share this video, and comment with ideas for future investigations.

Share

Unlike the taxpayer-funded legacy media, Juno news accepts zero government funding. Support strong, fearless, truly independent media. Become a Juno News premium subscriber today.

© 2026 Candice Malcolm · Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice

Start your SubstackGet the app

Substack is the home for great culture

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

My piece below is based on a B’nai Brith Canada report that claims CBC News coverage of the Middle East is systemically pro-Palestinian because it uses omissions, emotional language, and selective facts in its reporting. The B’nai Brith analysis, based on an audit of CBC stories from October 2024 to April 2025, found over half of the sampled items favoured a pro-Palestinian perspective. B’nai Brith is calling on the CBC to address these findings to ensure balanced reporting.

CBC news coverage of the Middle East is systemically biased

Hymie Rubenstein writes, “CBC News coverage of the Middle East is systemically pro-Palestinian with omissions, ‘emotional language,’ and selective facts that skew the audience’s perception of Israel.”

Hymie Rubenstein

Juno News

January 17, 2026

CBC News coverage of the Middle East is systemically pro-Palestinian with omissions, “emotional language,” and selective facts that skew the audience’s perception of Israel, a B’nai Brith Canada report has just proclaimed. The network has denied its coverage is biased.

B’nai Brith – Hebrew for “children of the Covenant” – is Canada’s oldest independent Jewish human rights organization committed to the security and continuity of the Jewish people and the State of Israel, along with efforts to combat antisemitism and other forms of bigotry.

Its January 9 report states that, “[CBC] Bias is neither occasional nor confined to a single mechanism.” The finding followed an audit of hundreds of CBC News stories on the Hamas war between October 1, 2024 and April 30, 2025.

In a comprehensive 17-page white paper released on January 5, B’nai Brith Canada showed that the results highlighted “a consistent directional pattern across CBC’s coverage.”

“More than half of all sampled items met the study’s threshold for a pro-Palestinian orientation, while fewer than seven per cent met the same threshold in a pro-Israel direction. Balanced or neutral items accounted for just under forty per cent of the sample,” the white paper’s data revealed.

The study is a follow-up to a previous B’nai Brith Canada study, using similar methods, that addressed coverage from October 7, 2023, to December 31, 2023.

B’nai Brith Canada researchers fed these news items into a Large Language Model (LLM), which they trained to deliver bias scores according to industry-leading benchmarks established in academic disciplines such as communications studies and political science. LLM-assisted conclusions were then manually verified by B’nai Brith Canada’s research team.

As CBC is a public corporation, its reporting is subject to Canada’s Broadcasting Act, which mandates that it strive to be as balanced and impartial as possible.

“The point of this investigation is not to undermine the CBC’s factual credibility or suggest it is wilfully distorting its coverage,” said Richard Robertson, Director of Research and Advocacy for B’nai Brith Canada. “We are releasing this research because Canadians value the CBC and deserve balanced, fair coverage of geopolitical issues.”

“B’nai Brith Canada has brought similar concerns to the CBC in the past. At the time, the broadcaster refused to meet with our organization.”

“The CBC must be prepared to take constructive criticism if it wishes to regain the confidence and trust of all Canadians,” said Simon Wolle, Chief Executive Officer for B’nai Brith Canada. “Our study is important because the CBC’s journalism shapes public opinion. When its reporting is unbalanced, it can be taken out of context or manipulated to serve certain political ends.”

B’nai Brith Canada is calling on the CBC to agree to a meeting to discuss these findings and develop a strategy to ensure its reporting aligns with its mandate and serves Canada’s public interest.

“Our efforts to hold the CBC accountable do not end here,” Wolle said. “We would like to cooperate with the CBC, moving forward, to produce balanced, unbiased reporting.”

Fewer than 40 percent of Mideast stories were considered “balanced or neutral,” said the report Structural Patterns In CBC Coverage Of The Israel-Hamas Conflict. Of stories that strayed from plain depictions of fact a majority, 55 percent, were pro-Palestinian, it said.

“Heavy reliance on international humanitarian organizations, foregrounding of humanitarian impact without equivalent causal context, asymmetrical emotional language and selective omission of initiating actions are all practices that fall within standard journalistic norms,” wrote B’nai Brith. “Individually any one of these choices may appear reasonable or even necessary. Taken together and repeated across hundreds of items, they produce a systemic narrative effect.”

“The analysis does not argue the CBC should suppress humanitarian coverage, rely exclusively on official Israeli sources or adopt a particular political stance,” said CBC Coverage. “It demonstrates instead that current editorial routines systematically privilege certain narratives and frames while marginalizing others, even in the absence of intent.”

Though the report did not detail specific examples, the network’s own ombudsman has cited instances of skewed coverage.

According to Blacklock’s Reporter, Marie-Philippe Bouchard, CEO of the CBC, in testimony last October 20 at the Commons heritage committee, claimed news reports were unbiased at all times. “All our shows, especially in the news area, are governed by the same journalistic standards and practices,” she said.

“There would be no bias at the CBC?” asked Conservative MP Rachael Thomas (Lethbridge, Alta.).

“I am not oblivious to the fact some people claim there is bias but that’s not how we work,” replied Bouchard.

“What is your perception?” asked MP Thomas. “My perception is we are working very hard to try to bring accurate, fact-based news and information to Canadians every day,” replied Bouchard.

“There’s no bias, according to you?” asked MP Thomas. “There’s no bias, according to me,” replied Bouchard.

Access To Information records showed that from October 7, 2023, killings and kidnappings of Jews in Israel the network’s Director of Journalism Standards ordered staff not to call Hamas “terrorists” in relation to the killings and kidnappings of Jews in Israel. The network’s own ombudsman faulted a story that described the killings as a “surprise attack by Hamas militants” resulting in casualties to both sides, as “Israeli airstrikes pounded the Gaza Strip.”

“The language throughout is antiseptic as though this had been a normal clash between two rival military forces,” wrote then-Ombudsman Jack Nagler.

CBC News published an erroneous October 17, 2023 story falsely claiming Israeli rockets destroyed the Al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza, and last September 16 suspended announcer Elisa Serret, for telling viewers that Jews controlled the United States. “Big cities are run by Jews,” she said. “Hollywood is run by Jews.”

Hymie Rubenstein, editor of REAL Indigenous Report and REAL Israel & Palestine Report, is a retired professor of anthropology at the University of Manitoba and a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Share

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

With each passing day, the war against Iran looks like it may end up being yet another American war without end.

Since World War II, the U.S. has engaged in numerous long military operations authorized by Congress or initiated by the executive branch without formal declarations of war, such as the Cold War (the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Gulf War) and the War on Terror (the War in Afghanistan and the Iraq War).

Currently, the United States is involved in eight publicly known military engagements across six different wars. Wars with direct U.S. involvement include the War on Terror (Somalia, Syria and Yemen), the war on cartels (Operation Southern Spear) and the Iran war. Wars with indirect U.S. involvement include the Russo-Ukrainian war (U.S. involvement), the Gaza war (U.S. involvement), and the Israel–Hezbollah conflict.

Of all these extant conflicts, the most troublesome one, at least with regard to its causes, likely length, and possible outcomes, is the war against Iran, which is why I post brief excerpts from three recent and widely different analyses below.

By no means do these three opinion pieces exhaust explanations of this conflict, one that is rooted in events long preceding the 1948 rebirth of the State of Israel.

To me, the most divergent views are those of Andrew Coyne and Yaniv Weissman, with Niall Ferguson somewhere in the middle.

Analysis 1: How Great Powers Lose Wars They’re Winning

Niall Ferguson

The Free Press

April 2, 2026

The Free Press

Niall Ferguson: How Great Powers Lose Wars They’re Winning

For nearly five weeks, President Donald Trump has bombarded Iran with missiles and bombs—and the American public with contradictory messaging about the aims and duration of this conflict…

Read more

17 days ago · 170 likes · 272 comments · Niall Ferguson

For nearly five weeks, President Donald Trump has bombarded Iran with missiles and bombs—and the American public with contradictory messaging about the aims and duration of this conflict.

He also disclaimed all responsibility for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, saying that “the countries of the world that do receive oil through the Hormuz Strait must take care of that passage.”

Only future historians will be able to work out if Trump has been procrastinating while talking. Could earlier action have been taken to secure the Strait? Could U.S. ground forces have been deployed sooner to reopen it? Does he still intend to deploy them? We cannot yet know.

But history does provide a useful point of comparison here.

Consider an interview J.D. Vance gave to UnHerd on April 15, 2025. “Just going back through history, I think—frankly—the British and the French were certainly right in their disagreements with Eisenhower about the Suez Canal,” he said.

It will be a richly ironic development if, in just a few years, the vice president of the United States finds himself in the position of Harold Macmillan, who was British prime minister Anthony Eden’s successor after the Suez Crisis of 1956.

To summarize: In 1956, after Gamal Abdel Nasser’s Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, Britain, in a concerted effort with France and Israel, attempted to seize the waterway and topple the Egyptian regime. President Dwight D. Eisenhower refused to back the operation. … Vance’s point last year was that Eisenhower had been mistaken not to back Britain.

Seventy years later, however, the administration Vance is part of has put the United States in precisely the role of Britain in 1956, joining forces with Israel to seize a crucial waterway and to overthrow the regime that aspires to control it.

There is now a rising probability that Trump’s war backfires on him much as Eden’s did — economically, politically, and geopolitically. Which raises the question: Is this the American Suez?

Analysis 2: The U.S. will emerge from the war with Iran as a lesser power

Andrew Coyne

The Globe and Mail

April 3/4, 2026

By the time you read this, U.S. armed forces may well have launched a ground war in Iran. Or they may have begun to withdraw from the region and go home. There could be a ceasefire in exchange for Iran’s agreement to open the Strait of Hormuz. Or the war could have escalated further, with stepped-up U.S. attacks on Iranian civilian infrastructure met with Iranian attacks on oil and gas assets across the region.

All of these and more could be read into Donald Trump’s brief, disjointed “address to the nation” Wednesday night, a speech that might well have been cribbed from his late-night social-media posts for all the wisdom, sense or even intelligibility it contained: a pastiche of every verbal tic (“like never before … nobody’s seen anything like it”) and self-serving lie in the President’s repertoire, but not the first clue of a plan to get America, and the world, out of the disaster he has created.

This is what you get when you hand the keys to the world’s most powerful military to an insecure, deeply ignorant, endlessly manipulable, pathological narcissist. If an actual nine-year-old were in charge of the Iran campaign, and not a 79-year-old man with the intellectual and emotional range of a nine-year-old, it would be indistinguishable from the actual result.

Analysis 3: The Hormuz Mirage

Yaniv Weissman

WeissWord

April 4, 2026

WeissWord

The Hormuz Mirage

"The Strait of Hormuz is not just a waterway; it is the fear gauge of the global economy. The U.S. Navy is the insurance policy that allows globalization to exist." — Robert Kaplan…

Read more

15 days ago · 15 likes · 4 comments · WeissWord

You’ve likely heard the usual suspects in the media and across social feeds: “Iran is a regional powerhouse,” “Trump has no idea what he’s stepped into,” and the ever-popular “The U.S. didn’t plan for a war with Iran.”

But if you’ve been paying attention, you know that the news cycle is less about reporting and more about the art of the spin, orchestrated by politicians and various “interests.” Today, I want to peel back the curtain on what the United States is actually doing in the Persian Gulf.

In November 2025, the White House released a strategy document signed by President Donald Trump. Pay close attention to the wording:

“America will always have a vital interest in ensuring that the Gulf’s energy supplies do not fall into the hands of an absolute enemy, that the Straits of Hormuz remain open, that the Red Sea remains navigable, and that the region does not become a nursery or exporter of terrorism against American interests.”

Now, here is the catch: The Strait of Hormuz has never actually been closed—not during the Iran-Iraq War, and not during the June 2025 skirmish between Iran and Israel. So why did the White House make such a point of “keeping it open”?

The answer lies further down in that same document, under the section titled Energy Dominance:

“Restoring American energy dominance (in oil, gas, coal, and nuclear) and moving critical energy components to new regions is a top strategic priority. Cheap, abundant energy will create high-paying jobs in the U.S., lower costs for consumers and businesses, fuel re-industrialization, and maintain our edge in advanced technologies like Artificial Intelligence.”

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

In the piece below, I argue that a House of Commons petition, sponsored by NDP MP Heather McPherson, calls for investigations into Canadians who served in the Israeli military, alleging violations of international law. The petition, which targets the HESEG Foundation co-founded by Heather Reisman, has been criticized as antisemitic and baseless by Jewish advocacy groups. As well, the petition’s sponsor has faced criticism for her past statements and actions regarding Israel.

House of Commons petition targets Jewish charity co-founded by Heather Reisman​

“A petition calling for investigations into and possible charges against Canadians who served in Israel’s military is an ‘antisemitic witch hunt,’ says a Jewish advocacy group.

Hymie Rubenstein

Juno News

January 13, 2026

A petition calling for investigations into and possible charges against Canadians who served in Israel’s military is an “antisemitic witch hunt,” says a Jewish advocacy group.

The January 7 petition, sponsored by Alberta NDP Member of Parliament Heather McPherson and directed at the Minister of Justice, alleges that there is “credible evidence of serious violations of international law by the IDF [Israeli Defense Forces] in the Middle East” that suggests the involvement of Canadian citizens or residents.

Not a single example supporting this serious claim was offered by McPherson, an NDP leadership candidate.

The petition calls upon the Canadian government to “direct the Canada Border Services Agency to screen Canadian citizens/residents returning from Israel for foreign military service,” to issue “warnings that Canadians serving/volunteering with the IDF may face criminal liability under Canadian law” and to create a website “to collect information from Gaza/West Bank war crime victims/witnesses.”

The petition “unduly singles out Jewish and Zionist Canadians, by making unfounded accusations against them” and “problematically insinuates that service in the IDF necessitates a degree of culpability,” B’nai Brith Canada’s CEO Simon Wolle told the National Post.

Wolle pointed out that the RCMP had already launched an investigation into the war between Israel and the terrorist group Hamas. In a June 2025 news release, the RCMP said it had not identified anyone who committed “core international crimes,” and therefore had not initiated a criminal investigation into any Canadian.

“Canadian IDF veterans are no different than any other foreign veterans who have made Canada their home,” said Wolle.

“Malicious attempts to prosecute them contribute to an environment where Jewish and Zionist Canadians are increasingly persecuted for their beliefs. This petition should be denounced by MPs for what it is, a baseless attempt to incite against and ostracize Canadians who support the existence of a Jewish nation.”

The CEO of Jewish advocacy group Tafsik, Amir Epstein, said that the petition is a “transparent attempt to appease radical ideologues by targeting law-abiding Canadian citizens.”

“It is telling that the MP expresses no concern over the presence of ISIS or
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-affiliated individuals in Canada, yet seeks to criminalize young Canadians who stepped up to rescue hostages and combat terrorism,” he said.

He said the Tafsik Organization views it as “shameful harassment of the Jewish community.” He added that Tafsik would offer its legal service pro bono to “any lone soldier targeted by these baseless and discriminatory efforts.”

“We trust that the moral integrity of the Canadian people will ultimately reject this divisive rhetoric,” he said.

In November, McPherson released a statement saying she was concerned about IDF soldiers visiting Canadian universities and condemned them for “platforming” the soldiers. The statement came the same week that five people were arrested at an anti-Israel protest at an off-campus event hosted by Jewish students from Toronto Metropolitan University.

McPherson said she would be raising her “concerns with the Canadian government that IDF soldiers are freely touring Canadian universities while the genocide continues.”

Her House of Commons petition particularly targeted a Jewish charity co-founded by Heather Reisman, CEO of Indigo Books.

“Credible evidence of serious violations of international law by Israel Defence Forces in the Middle East suggest Canadian citizens’ and residents’ involvement,” said Petition E-6783.

The petition asked Parliament to investigate the HESEG Foundation, a scholarship charity co-founded by Reisman and her husband, Gerald W. Schwartz, the founder and chairman of Onex Corporation.

Both Reisman and Schwartz are longtime philanthropists.

The HESEG Foundation for Lone Soldiers is a Canadian registered charity that provides full post-secondary scholarships and support for “Lone Soldiers” (non-Israeli citizens serving in the Israel Defense Forces) or students with no support system in Israel, focusing on helping them achieve education after military service.

Reisman is also a prominent Canadian businesswoman. She is not only the founder and chief executive of the Canadian retail chain Indigo Books and Music, but also the co-founder and past Chair of Kobo, and was appointed an Officer of the Order of Canada in 2019.

Her husband has been honoured by St. Francis Xavier University, which named its business school after him for his donations to the university. In 2006, he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada.

Mount Sinai Hospital announced in December 2013 that a transformational $15 million gift from Schwartz and Reisman would be used to “reshape emergency medicine” at the facility.

In March 2019, the University of Toronto announced that Schwartz and Reisman were giving the university $100 million to build a large innovation centre through the Gerald Schwartz & Heather Reisman Foundation. According to Reisman, the Schwartz Reisman Innovation Centre will be used to improve technology, particularly artificial intelligence, and how the public can relate to it.

Her support for Israel has seen Reisman’s Indigo stores frequently targeted by antisemitic protests and boycotts since 2006. Indigo lawyers in a 2024 Federal Court submission said Reisman was the subject of “deliberate and malicious” slander.

McPherson’s petition is only the latest example of such slander.

McPherson has refused to say why she sponsored the petition. It was not submitted by a constituent but by New Democrat activist Mirella Russell, a Vancouver resident.

In 2025 Facebook posts, Russell expressed her antipathy to Israel when she wrote, “This genocide is a stain on humanity’s conscience.” She also asserted, “Can this government just call it what it is, a genocide? More action needs to be taken: sanctions, cutting diplomatic and economic ties with Israel.”

McPherson is the only MP in the New Democrat leadership race. She was one of 19 New Democrat MPs to sign a 2025 election pledge accusing Israel of genocide. Fourteen of the 19 failed to be re-elected, placing the party at death’s door.

McPherson’s slander of Israel and its supporters went further in a post-election podcast where she implicitly compared Israeli military action in Gaza to the worst genocide in human history, the Nazi-led World War 2 Holocaust, resulting in the murder of some six million Jews.

The remarks came in an interview last May 30 with Rachel Gilmore, a Montreal podcaster. “There was a statement put out by the Party saying, ‘Oh, you can’t compare anything to the Holocaust,’” said Gilmore. “And I just think that’s ridiculous.”

McPherson has never replied to the Holocaust comment.

Hymie Rubenstein, editor of REAL Indigenous Report, is a retired professor of anthropology at the University of Manitoba and a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Share

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

Jewish New Democratic Party Leader Avi Lewis is ‘Clear & Consistent’ On Jews

​Information obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter shows that Avi Lewis, elected on Sunday, March 29, as leader of the New Democratic Party, has faced criticism from Jewish groups for his stance on Israel and allegations of a powerful Jewish lobby in Canada.

Lewis, who identifies as a Jewish anti-Zionist, a logical and historical contradiction if there ever was one, has expressed support for a Palestinian state and criticized Israel’s actions in both Gaza and Lebanon. The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs has expressed concern about the increasing alienation of Jewish members within the NDP and the potential for anti-Zionism to be used as a cover for anti-Semitism, a view I strongly support.

Most disconcerting of all is Lewis’ belief that “… the Israel lobby … is incredibly active and effective in Canada. We have to expose the actions of the Israel lobby,” an obvious antisemitic trope meant to obscure its underlying canard, namely that Jews have always been trying to take over the world.

The idea of a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world is a long-standing, fabricated, and antisemitic conspiracy theory. It is often based on the fraudulent text The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which has been used for over a century to fuel prejudice and justify violence against Jewish people.

Brief excerpts from Blacklock’s Reporter’s take on Avi Lewis’ position appear below.

​‘Clear & Consistent’ On Jews

Blacklock’s Reporter

March 31, 2026

New Democrat leader Avi Lewis yesterday said he will be “clear and consistent in my position” on alleged Israeli genocide and claims of a powerful Jewish lobby in Canada. Jews expressed alarm over Lewis’ election Sunday.

“Not all people in the Jewish community in Canada agree and those are more hard conversations and more hard debates which we have in our own families, which we have in our communities, and they are not going anywhere,” Lewis told reporters. “But I have been clear and consistent in my position.”

“What do you have to say about that, that these Jewish groups are calling you anti-Israel?” asked a reporter. “I come from a long tradition, a multigeneration tradition of Jewish anti-Zionism,” replied Lewis. “My great-grandfather was a leader in the Jewish labour bund which was founded in 1897, five weeks after the first meeting of the World Zionist Congress.”

“As long as there has been formal pro-Israel Zionist organizations, there has been a tradition that has disagreed with that within the Jewish community,” said Lewis. “I believe there is a significant number of Canadian Jews who feel the way I do and it’s been very welcome to feel so at home in the NDP, a Party which has expressed moral clarity over the genocide in Gaza consistently, as we express our outrage over the illegal attack on Iran which is destabilizing our daily lives and geopolitics and the world economy all at the same time.”

The Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs yesterday noted most Canadian Jews have expressed support for the existence of Israel since the nation’s founding in 1948. A Léger Marketing survey cited in 2025 in the periodical Canadian Jewish Studies put support for Israel at 94 percent.

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

Today is Good Friday, a solemn Christian holy day observed on the Friday before Easter to commemorate the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ at Calvary. It is a time of mourning, fasting, and reflection for many Christians, marking the climax of Holy Week.

The significance of Good Friday is that it commemorates the bodily sacrifice of Jesus for humanity, marking his trial, torture, and death on the cross.

Despite its sombre nature, it is called “good” because it is seen as the necessary sacrifice that enabled the Resurrection on Easter Sunday, offering hope and atonement for the sins of all people, whether Christian or not, because Christianity is viewed by its believers as a universal belief system.

Which brings me, if only tangentially, to the topic of the comparatively insignificant issue of Islamophobia — an irrational fear of both Islam, also a world-wide religion, and its Muslim adherents — a transparently phony one, as James Sinkinson, president of Facts and Logic About the Middle East (FLAME), an organization dedicated to researching Middle East developments and exposing false propaganda, and others have shown.

According to Sinkinson:

Antisemitism has exploded in frequency since the Hamas-led terrorist attacks in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Yet, it is often lately paired with Islamophobia, though the two differ dramatically in frequency and substance.

Jew-hatred is a highly prevalent, historically well-documented and well-defined set of behaviors, while Islamophobia is a relatively new phenomenon, much less frequent and so weaponized that some consider the very concept a hoax.

Case in point: After more than 18 chaotic months of pro-Hamas protesters bullying and blocking Jewish students’ access to campus, Harvard University, on [last] April 29, finally issued a report on the school’s and radicals’ misdeeds, titled: “Presidential task force on combating antisemitism and anti-Israel bias.”

Bizarrely, that same day, Harvard University released another report: “Presidential task force on combating anti-Muslim, anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian bias.”

Why did we need two simultaneous reports on two unrelated problems with two dramatically different measures of magnitude, incidence and character?

Indeed, compared to antisemitism, there is hardly any Islamophobia in words or deeds anywhere in Canada or in most other Western countries.

Anti-Islamophobia strategies are simply another way to attack Jews wherever they live for the “sin” of being Jews.

As Sinkinson has also argued:

Indeed, Muslim and Arab students at Harvard are not bullied, nor are they denied access, nor do their professors demean them for their ethnicity, nor are they victims of screaming invectives in mass protests against their homelands.

Moreover, while only a tiny few classes in Harvard’s curricula address Israel favorably, its catalog teems with pro-Palestinian, openly anti-Israel courses. Finally, ironically, a preponderance of campus activities attacking Harvard’s Jewish students’ rights are themselves led by Muslims and Arabs.

Countless examples, forming a mountain of statistical evidence, have shown this disparity across all public and private sectors of Canadian society.

Antisemitism and Islamophobia are clearly not two sides of the same coin.

The latter should never be taught as a systemic problem in Ontario’s classrooms, not the least because such classrooms should not be a platform for hateful political propaganda masquerading as religious tolerance.

That is my introduction to the following piece by Melanie Bennet, an investigative journalist with Juno News, on features of the same topic.

It is the first of three pieces posted today; the other two are about the critically important indigenous “land back” issue, for those who have time to read them.

The Islamic lobby groups shaping Ontario’s classrooms

Behind the scenes, major Islamic advocacy groups are collaborating with Ontario school boards to influence and shape “anti-Islamophobia” strategies that are then implemented in classrooms.

Melanie Bennet

True North

January 15, 2026

Behind the scenes, major Islamic advocacy groups are collaborating with Ontario school boards to influence and shape “anti-Islamophobia” strategies that are then implemented in classrooms. This engagement is guided by a province-wide framework designed to instruct directors of education on how to interact with these activist organizations.

In 2017, Ontario formalized plans to “identify and eliminate persistent inequities” by redesigning curriculum to be “culturally responsive” and working with community groups representing “marginalized” students.

When the mainstream media skips over the full story, we dig deeper and bring the whole story to light. Subscribe to Juno News to support bold, fearless journalism.

That same year, the Quebec City Mosque shooting prompted public institutions across Canada to launch anti-Islamophobia initiatives.

Operating under the new equity focus, Ontario school boards increasingly turned to established Islamic lobby groups to develop anti-Islamophobia strategies that address hostility toward Muslims as anti-racism.

Three organizations stand out.

The Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council (CMPAC), a political lobby group that led the MuslimsVote.ca campaign in the 2025 federal election, announced its participation in the development of the CODE framework, calling it a “meaningful, equity-driven partnership with advocacy groups.” CMPAC’s contributions centred on “advocating for cultural competency, addressing Islamophobia.”

While not involved in the development of the CODE framework, the National Council for Canadian Muslims—a particularly active group that lobbied the federal government 141 times in 2025—has in recent years collaborated with schools on many projects including developing anti-Islamophobia strategies for several boards, including the Peel, Toronto, Thames Valley, and Durham school boards. Their members were also involved in developing Manitoba’s anti-Islamophobia action plan for schools.

The Muslim Association of Canada, a non-profit that retained its charitable status following a concerning CRA audit, contributed to the K-12 space after receiving funding from the Doug Ford government in 2021. Ontario’s ministry of education awarded $300,000 worth of grants, with $225,000 going to the MAC and $75,000 to the NCCM to “raise awareness about Islamophobia” and find ways to “end Islamophobia, racism, and discrimination.”

According to the MAC, the education minister at the time Stephen Lecce praised partnerships with community leaders “to counter racism and better support Ontario’s Muslim students,” appearing to conflate race with religion.

The MAC used the funds to create a digital platform of workshops, videos, and infographics for teachers, students, and parents aimed at introducing Islam to educators and “dismantling Islamophobia in schools.”

Other religious stakeholders were consulted, but True North was unable to find public statements about their involvement.

Ontario schools increasingly rely on intersectional social justice politics as a foundation for governance. Terms like “systemic racism,” “intersectionality,” “culturally responsive,” and identity “anti-oppression” routinely drive board policies and professional learning materials.

Islamic lobby groups have adopted similar ideological vocabulary to align with anti-racism approaches.

For example, the DDSB’s Islamophobia guide claims that “anti-Muslim racism is grounded in White supremacy” and targets Muslims based on “race” and “ethnicity,” blurring the line between religion and race.

Manitoba’s Islamophobia action plan defines Islamophobia as “racism, prejudice, stereotypes, fear, or acts of hostility” toward Muslims “as well as toward Islam as a religion.” It similarly treats Islamophobia and racism interchangeably, once again protecting the religion by adopting the language of race.

Curriculum content relating to Islam has also evolved. Recommended teacher prompts for Ontario’s Grade 11 world religions course describe jihad in terms such as an “individual’s spiritual struggle” or “the quest for meaning,” focusing on personal and faith-based expressions without references to violent interpretations by groups like Al-Qaeda, ISIS, or Hamas.

A federal guide on combating Islamophobia, released by Canada’s Islamophobia czar Amira Elghawaby, similarly defines jihad as an internal spiritual struggle. It also claims that colonialism and racism are responsible for linking jihad to security threats.

A recurring principle in social justice ideology is that solutions should be created “by and for” identity groups. This often involves consulting the same activist organizations to co-develop strategies, facilitate training, and influence classroom materials, emphasizing lived experiences over data.

The CODE framework, while advisory, supports this “by and for” engagement between directors of education and activists, including political lobby groups.

These collaborations will likely continue to evolve as frameworks like CODE enhance the role of activism in schools. In a system increasingly turning to social justice politics, anti-Islamophobia campaigns and “by and for” expectations will continue to conflate religion and race in Ontario’s public education system.

True North requested comment from CODE, NCCM, and MAC, as well as Ontario and Manitoba’s ministries of education; none of the organizations responded by press time.

Share

Brief excerpts from her important National Post op-ed on this issue may be found below on the evening of the Jewish Passover, 2026.

To Saperia and me, “why they hate us” can partly be answered with one word: envy.

​Why they hate us

There is no configuration of Jewish existence that satisfies the hater, because the hater’s problem was never with what Jews do. It is with what Jews are

Sheryl Saperia

National Post

March 31, 2026

The story of Passover is arguably the oldest, most foundational story of liberation in human history. A people enslaved. A tyrant who would not yield. A cry that has echoed across millennia: “Let my people go!”

The Passover Seder [a traditional, 15-step Jewish ritual feast held on the first one or two nights of Passover] is built around four questions …. But there is a fifth question, arguably the oldest Jewish question of all, that has been asked in every generation, in every language, under every oppressor: why do they hate us? After the Holocaust, antisemitism was pushed to the fringes in the West. Since October 7, it is back, louder and more mainstream than most of us have seen in our lifetimes. The question demands an answer.

Here is one hypothesis. … Jews are a tiny people, comprising just 0.2 per cent of the world’s population. And Israel is a tiny country, with a population of approximately 10 million (20 per cent of which is Arab), in an area roughly the size of New Jersey. Jews do not seek to convert anyone to anything. Yet Jews have given the world monotheism, the weekly day of rest, much of the moral architecture of western civilization and a disproportionate number of its scientists, artists, doctors and Nobel laureates. We ask only to live in peace.

Yet the hatred against Jews has proven so consuming that it has become a defining obsession of human history, and certainly of our age.

And this Passover, as we have for thousands of years, we say once more: let my people go!

Sheryl Saperia is a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and CEO of Secure Canada.

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

The Sigrid Rausing Trust, a prominent UK charity, cut grants to five organizations after they published material condoning Hamas’s attack on Israel. The trust, which focuses on human rights, found the language used by these groups to be incendiary and contrary to their values. This decision sparked criticism from some activists who misunderstood the trust’s stance on human rights and its commitment to impartiality.

Brief excerpts from founder, Sigrid Rausing, appear below.

Antisemitism Is Infecting Human Rights Groups—My Charity Had to Act

Sigrid Rausing

The Free Press

December 29, 2025

Philanthropist Sigrid Rausing says her trust had to cut grants to organizations that mixed calls for social justice with apologies for October 7.

Sigrid Rausing is one of the most important philanthropists in the United Kingdom. The Sigrid Rausing Trust has committed £591 million in grants in its history, and it supports work on a wide range of human rights issues around the world. But, in the wake of October 7, 2023, the trust had to cut grants to some of the organizations it backed because of disturbing material those groups published that condoned Hamas’s violent rampage through Israel. In a piece first published in The Sunday Times that we’re reprinting today, Rausing writes about that decision, what happened afterwards, and how it is that organizations founded to protect human rights came to sympathize with terrorists. —The Editors

I founded a charitable trust in the United Kingdom nearly 30 years ago, working on human rights issues such as torture, conditions of detention, freedom of expression, and sexual violence in conflict.

The Sigrid Rausing Trust funds other causes, too, but human rights is our oldest program, and our area of expertise. We enter into long-term partnerships with our grantees, based on trust and shared values.

At times of heightened tension, we check our grantees’ websites and social media accounts. After the October 7, 2023 atrocities, a handful—only five out of some 400—had posted disturbing material: A group working on social and economic rights in Tunisia expressed “pride” (our translation) in the Hamas action. Another called for “support for the guerrilla Palestinian people in their war against the Zionist entity,” which they said “was shaken due to the action of the Palestinian resistance [. . .] invading the occupied lands and Zionist settlements.” A media group in Lebanon described the Hamas action as “resistance” to “colonization,” referred to the murdered civilians as “settlers” and dismissed Israeli information about Hamas’s atrocities as “lies.”

The outlier, if only in terms of geography, was a group in Canada that almost immediately termed Israel’s actions “genocidal,” and described the country as a “settler colonialist white-supremacist state.” The statement ended with an echo of a United Nations resolution; an affirmation of “the right of all oppressed peoples to self-determine their resistance.” It is a phrase which, given the context of the piece, we felt condoned the Hamas atrocities.

Atrocities against civilians are obviously contrary to human rights and international humanitarian law, and we canceled our contracts with the groups in question. It wasn’t a hard decision to make, but it drew criticism from activists in the U.S. who seemed to have willfully misunderstood what we did and why.

I have been wondering since then how these activists and our former grantees understand human rights, a field in which practitioners used to be known, and should be known, for their rigorous adherence to truth. How did the field become entangled with the sort of anti-Zionism we see playing out on certain university campus protests or in hard-left factions in politics?

©2026 THE FREE PRESS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.POWERED BY SUBSTACK.

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

C. C. Harvey argues below that Marxists view Judaism and Christianity as existential enemies because these faiths anchor individuals in loyalties that cannot be repurposed for the revolution and the state. In contrast, he says Marxism finds a strategic ally in Islam, as its political form merges religion and state power, providing a revolutionary ally and a protected grievance class that weakens Christianity, the biggest cultural obstacle to the Marxist project.

The following opinion piece is reposted here, compliments of Harvey and Woke Watch Canada.

Why Marxists Hate Judaism and Christianity but Love Islam

Their hate for Judaism and Christianity is a natural by-product of their belief frameworks, while their love for Islam is born of convenience and practicality

C. C. Harvey

Woke Watch Canada

January 5, 2025

Woke Watch Canada is a reader-supported publication. Please consider becoming a paying subscriber or making a one-time or recurring donation to show your support.

(This article originally appeared on The Cancelled Club Substack.)

“Hate” is widely discussed as a big problem today. People are constantly condemning hate, and also declaring the imperative of ending/stopping hate. In many jurisdictions, people are busy drafting new laws to control and restrict public expressions of hate. People working in media, in education, and in government tend to address hate as if it is an emotion predominantly found at inappropriate levels in right wing people, but clearly, hate is actually a universal emotion, and leftists are also prone to feeling hate.

Judging from the left’s raging antisemitism and fondness for Hamas, their widespread celebration of Charlie Kirk’s murder, their carelessness about slaughtered Christians in Africa and church-burnings across the West, leftists today have strong negative feelings about observant Christians and Jews that might aptly be described as hate. But today’s leftists feel no such animosity toward practicing Muslims, as a whole, despite the fact that religion in general is condemned and belittled by Marxists. The raw truth is that today’s social justice revolution, which is essentially Marxist/neoMarxist, is anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, but pro-Islamic. So, what gives?

Marxist revolutionaries have always viewed adherents of Judaism and Christianity as existential enemies: not merely as political opponents that they must conquer at the ballot box, but as obstacles that must be removed. This is because both faiths anchor the human person in loyalties that cannot be repurposed for the revolution and the state.

For communists, this is unforgivable. Marxism begins with a rejection of the sacred. Communism is built on an axiom: there is no God, no eternal moral law, no transcendent order… only matter, power, and the dialectic. If the universe has no creator, then the party may rewrite the script at will. But Judaism and Christianity insist the script is already written—and binding.

The Ten Commandments alone shatter the Marxist worldview. They declare limits not supported by Marxists. They declare objective good and evil, and a truth higher than the state. Judaism and Christianity protect the individual from the state. Both faiths teach that the human person has dignity before any government grants it, parental authority precedes political authority, morality is not a bureaucratic invention, and worship is due not to any collective, party, or leader, but to God alone.

The revolutionary project requires the opposite.

Marxism cannot tolerate rival sovereignties. Family, synagogue, church—each is a centre of loyalty that threatens the revolutionary project. Communists understand this, some consciously, others instinctively. That’s why every far left regime, without exception, has targeted clergy, shuttered houses of worship, criminalized religious formation, and undermined traditional family structure. And as we clearly saw during the Covid pandemic, the authoritarians of the left like to pretend that their escalating controls are altruistic, implemented in the name of “saving Granny” from whatever cruel fate awaits her under a different nexus of power.

Leftists are not “misusing” Marxism when they hate on Jews and Christians, family and tradition. This resentment and animosity is Marxism.

Judaism and Christianity are built on memory; communism fosters amnesia and historical revisionism. Judaism preserves thousands of years of covenantal history: exile, deliverance, law, promise. Christianity preserves the life of Christ, who both affirmed and renovated the moral architecture of Western civilization. These religious memories orient individuals toward gratitude, humility before the past, continuity with ancestors, and the belief that humans are capable of profound evil. Communist movements require citizens who are forgetful of the past. People with historical memory resist utopian myths. People who know the history of humankind reject utopian schemes, and do not fall for the lie that a political system can install a new collective consciousness in humans via “progressive” authoritarianism that orders the “dismantling” (overthrowing) of existing systems.

This is why communists relentlessly rewrite textbooks, censor archives, and punish teachers and historians. Old stories are threats because they remind people of what happens every time the revolutionary dream is attempted. They also remind people of certain essential truths not recognized by leftists, such as the centrality and value of family.

Communism seeks to abolish family; Judaism and Christianity revolve around family. Marx and Engels were explicit: the family must be weakened, redefined, collectivized, or dissolved. The revolutionary state cannot fully shape a child if parents get in the way.

Judaism is centred on lineage, inheritance, generational blessing. Christianity is heavily about marriage, familial duty. A spiritual/divine ideal of parenthood is reflected on to everyday family relations in Judaism and Christianity. So, every communist regime targets parents and fosters division between generations. Anyone outside the revolutionary apparatus who forms children’s souls is a political competitor, a potential counter-revolutionary.

Both faiths insist on moral limits that communism insists must be removed. Judaism and Christianity say: “You may not do evil so that good may come.” Communism says: “You must do whatever the revolution requires.” The two positions are irreconcilable.

Under communism, truth is a tool; truth is not sacred. Morality is propaganda, not a matter of individual conscience and soul health. Most communists hold the belief that a desired end will justify an undesirable means, whereas biblical prohibitions remain, even when the state commands differently. This is why leftist takes on current events are often baffling to people not similarly unmoored from (and turned against) tradition. For example, we saw that great numbers of leftists, enraptured with the revolutionary spirit of “social justice,” were unafraid to extol Charlie Kirk’s murder as a moral good.

This is also why dissident priests, pastors, and rabbis under communism were treated as mortal threats: at some point, true believers with conscience are sure to defy the party and condemn its excesses and transgressions. Both traditions reveal the revolutionary lie, and who doesn’t hate to be exposed as a liar?

Judaism says human beings are made in God’s image. Christianity says every human is also fallen, and cannot be redeemed except through grace. Communism rejects both truths. God is not real so has no image, humans are not fallen but malleable. Sin is not real, and universal, only “socially constructed”, a product of “bourgeois conditioning” that changes according to context.

For communists, the state will provide salvation, and salvation is a collectivist endeavour: “no one is free until we are all free” is a popular slogan on the left wing protest circuit. For Jews and Christians of the religious type, individuals must earn salvation, individually. The collective is important, and communal destiny is acknowledged, but the power to ascend lies with the individual.

This is the root of communist hostility: Judaism and Christianity expose the false religion of the revolution. Humans cannot be rewired by force. Socialist utopia is a dangerous lie. Evil comes not from class differences, but from the brokenness and blindness that is inherent to the human condition.

What communists hate perhaps the most is allegiance to something higher. Revolutionary ideology demands totalizing loyalty. But Jews and Christians say there is a higher King, a higher law, a higher allegiance. This is why both faiths were targeted, infiltrated, subverted, and demonized throughout the 20th century, and continue to be targeted. In unmistakably similar forms, leftists today target Judaism and Christianity. In addition to outright attacks undermining Judaism and Christianity, Marxists have been instrumental in advancing western secularism and promoting “progressive” forms of Judaism and Christianity that are not biblical, or are only loosely biblical.

The hatred isn’t accidental, it’s structural. Communist thinkers lead attacks on Judaism and Christianity because they understand them as antithetical ideologies. These faiths build strong families, strong communities, strong consciences, and strong limits on state power. They stand in the way of left wing revolution, and always have.

And now, here’s Why Communists Love Islam: If communists hate Judaism and Christianity for their limits, their memory, their family values, and their God, then why does the modern left treat Islam with almost reverential deference, when Islam arguably contains all of that? The answer isn’t theological, but strategic.

Marxist movements love Islam because the Islamic faith has a political form that serves the revolutionary project in ways Judaism and Christianity never will. Islam provides the left with a revolutionary ally. Where Judaism and Christianity limit the state, Islam historically merges religion and state power. Marxists recognize a fellow totalizing system, even if the doctrines and end goals differ.

Islamism destabilizes Western nations—and revolutionaries need chaos. Marxism requires crisis, fragmentation, polarization, and the breakdown of social cohesion. The more fractured a society becomes, the easier it is to coerce, buy, or overpower.

Large-scale immigration from culturally incompatible, often tribal, deeply religious societies produces conflict, identity fragmentation, and perpetual grievance narratives. Revolutionaries feed on this kind of conflict.

Islam provides a protected grievance class in Western contexts, and modern Marxism trades in identity conflict rather than class conflict. Leftists today use “oppressed” groups to justify their moral authority. Islam functions perfectly as a sacralized victim class, deemed righteous and untouchable. Criticizing Islam, even its extremism, has recently been reframed as racism, bigotry, “Islamophobia,” and colonial oppression. An alliance with Islamists gives the left a shield: they deploy Islamist aggression and reactionary politics while labeling their critics as hateful.

Islam weakens Christianity—the left’s biggest cultural obstacle. Western civilization’s moral architecture is Judeo-Christian: dignity, conscience, charity, law, equality, restraint, self-reliance, forgiveness, redemption. For Marxists to overthrow Western civilization, its moral order must be undermined. Islamist pressure does exactly that: Christian symbols and teachings removed for sensitivity and inclusion, Christmas renamed to “Winter Fest”, Christmas markets shut down due to security risks, blasphemy laws erected as “hate speech”, freedom of conscience and speech thrown under the bus for “social cohesion”, dissent silenced by fear of violent reprisal and/or reputational damage. Islam weakens traditional Christian culture, and that serves the revolutionary agenda.

Islamic extremists share many of the same hatreds as communists. Jihadis despise the same things Marxist leftists despise: Judeo-Christian moral systems, Western heritage, free expression, individualism, Israel, the West’s economic success and cultural confidence.

Different motivations, same targets. The enemy of my enemy is my useful partner.

Islam helps create conditions for a two-front assault on the West. Communism is attacking Western tradition from above—through institutions, bureaucracy, and ideology. While Islam is also steadily advancing in Western institutions through NGO and political activity, Islam is also weakening the West from below —through demographic pressure and the creation of very separate parallel societies within Western nations.

Both forces, separately and together (in overt alliances such as the pro-Palestine movement), are eroding national unity, social trust, shared values, and the cultural cohesion that prevents revolutionary fervour from growing. This is happening not just in one nation, but across the West.

Most importantly for communists, Islam never challenges the left’s core belief that society should be controlled. Christianity says no to tyranny. Judaism says no to tyranny. Islamism says, “We have our own preferred form of social control.” And the left respects that. They understand each other, and neither recognizes universal rights to freedom of conscience and expression.

Communists don’t actually “love” Islam. They love how Islamism destabilizes Western civilization while providing a protected, untouchable, politically powerful ally in the revolutionary project. They love the pressure Islam is applying to Christianity. They love the chaos Islam generates and the immunity it enjoys. They love the silencing of Western conservatives that Islam facilitates. They love that Islam is helping to destroy the world that Judaism and Christianity built.

There is another group of people worth mentioning that loves this destruction of Judeo-Christian civilization, too, but who can not be classified as either Marxists or Islamists, although they sponsor both. At very high levels of wealth and power, “world controller wannabes” are using Marxism and Islamism to advance one world government. Globalists love the idea that when the smoke clears, populations will be too frightened, fragmented, and demoralized to resist a technocratic regime promising to restore order and functionality to Western civilization. We now watch Marxists and Islamists joining forces in the streets, energized to attack shared enemies and advance their overlapping agendas, but in truth, both these factions are useful idiots doing the dirty work of the Fabian elite, the most powerful of whom you will never see at the protests.

Thanks for reading. For more from this author, read The Anglo West Cannot Celebrate Itself

Follow Woke Watch Canada on X - @WokeWatchCanada

Woke Watch Canada Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Or, by contributing to our Donor Box:

Donor Box

© 2026 Woke Watch Canada · Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice

Start your Substack. Get the app

Substack is the home for great culture

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

Any reader who would deny the applicability of the following piece to the long-standing Israeli vs. Palestinian conflict would be dead wrong because the religion called Islam lies at the heart of scores of ideologically-rooted battles not only in the Middle East but around the globe.

The article deals explicitly with Algeria’s parliament, which approved a law demanding reparations from France for colonization, while ignoring Algeria’s history of piracy and slavery. The law also criminalizes celebrating French colonialism and making remarks with colonial connotations.

Islam is the majority and state religion in Algeria. Almost all its citizens are Sunni Muslims. Islam provides the country with its central social and cultural identity and gives most individuals their basic ethical and attitudinal orientation, including acceptance of modern slavery.

Muslim country which enslaved millions of Europeans demands ‘reparations’ for colonization

Daniel Greenfield

World Israel News

December 26, 2025

But if Algeria wants reparations, how about we start with reparations for the over 1 million Europeans trafficked through Algeria’s slave markets?

Islamic victimhood, whether it’s crying about colonialism or genocide, is entirely based on moral inversion.

Only in the most grotesque inversion could the Algerian Muslim terrorists have been transformed into anti-colonial freedom fighters.

But that’s what leftists did a few generations ago while completely disregarding not only Algeria’s extended history of piracy and slavery (the two overlapped with Muslim pirates abducting entire European towns, not to mention Miguel Cervantes, the author of Don Quixote, and selling them into slavery) but also even while they were waging their ‘anti-colonial struggle’ against France, were also massacring the Jewish population, which the French had been oppressive enough to provide equal rights to.

A no-no in Islam.

Now, Algeria’s regime is demanding ‘reparations’ from France.

Algeria’s parliament has unanimously approved a law declaring France’s colonization of the country a crime and demanded an apology and reparations.

In a solemn ceremony steeped in symbolism, 340 of 407 members of Algeria’s National Assembly voted late Wednesday to approve the law.

No peace plan will stop the terrorists’ jihad against Israel - opinion

The law stipulates prison sentences for any action by an Algerian celebrating French colonialism, for attacks on symbols of the Algerian resistance, and “remarks with colonial connotations.”

That last part is the actual substance. No one is allowed to oppose Islamic terrorism or suggest that minorities were better off before Islamic terrorists took over.

But if Algeria wants reparations, how about we start with reparations for the over 1 million Europeans trafficked through Algeria’s slave markets?

What’s the price to be paid for Algeria’s habit of taking European women as sex slaves?

The United States had to fight a war on Algiers to stop its habit of attacking American ships and taking their crews captive.

Before that, we were paying ‘reparations.’ Jefferson refused to keep paying reparations.

Meanwhile, Algeria has an estimated 89,000 slaves today. Where do they apply for reparations?

Algeria’s Islamic regime can consider French ‘colonialism’ a minor down payment on the reparations it owes for enslaving millions.

And then there are the current atrocities Algerian Muslim colonists are committing in France.

An Algerian Muslim refugee terrorist went on a stabbing spree at a market in France while shouting “Allahu Akbar” or “Allah is greater than your religion.” The Muslim terrorist managed to kill a 69-year-old man and stab several police officers.

Two Algerian men accused of abducting and raping a woman in Toulouse in September 2022, before leaving her naked on the roadside, appeared before the Assize Court on Monday to answer for their alleged crimes.

France left Algeria long ago. Perhaps it’s time for Algerians to leave France.

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

March 17, 2026 – Prime Minister Mark Carney has responded to the U.S.-Israeli bombardment of Iran with a mix of support and hesitation, leading some to wonder if his position is in need of clarification, while others praise his strategic ambiguity. For Canadians, there’s little in the way of guesswork.

New data from the non-profit Angus Reid Institute finds three-quarters of Canadians (74%) saying Canada’s military should not be involved in this conflict, with one-in-10 (10%) disagreeing. Another 15 per cent take no position.

The piece below, written by “Jill,” struck a chord with me after reading this recent Angus Reid Institute poll showing that “Amid widening Middle East war, Canadians reject military role in Iran by seven-to-one margin,” a meaningless observation not only because most normal people don’t support any wars unless they believe the outcome will guarantee their personal survival and that of their loved ones and because only a tiny number of Canadians have any personal or emotional stake in a result that could see Iran use nuclear weapons to obliterate Israel and its Jews, the longstanding goal of this retrograde islamofascist regime.

Equally important, our laughable excuse for a military has insufficient troop levels and inadequate material resources to fight the genocidal religious aspirations of the current Iranian leadership.

The lack of interest in getting militarily involved in the conflict in Iran mirrors some of Prime Minister Carney’s statements, as he told parliament that Canada “will never participate.” That said, calls from U.S. President Donald Trump to other nations and positive responses to them for additional assistance are growing by the day.

As for Jill’s final comments about Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s Secretary of Defense/War, Hegseth has faced allegations of domestic violence, including claims from his ex-wife and sister-in-law that he exhibited abusive behaviour during his second marriage. These allegations have raised significant concerns about his fitness for leadership roles, particularly as Secretary of Defense.

During his Senate confirmation hearings for that position, Hegseth was questioned about his past behaviour, including allegations of sexual assault and infidelity. He did not directly answer whether such actions should disqualify a candidate for the role. This lack of clarity raised concerns among senators regarding his judgment and fitness for the position.

Still, readers need to judge for themselves whether Jill’s assertion that Hegseth is a “wife-beating douchebag” is gratuitous or not.

They also need to judge for themselves whether her assertion that Donald Trump is “a personality-disordered primate with the attention span the size of a mosquito” is a warranted one.

War is Never Popular

Stop pretending like normal people want it

Jill

The Liberal Jew

March 13, 2026

Since the start of the most recent war in Iran, the media coverage has focused obsessively on the perceived popularity of the war itself. The prevailing narrative is that the war is “popular” with Israelis but “unpopular” among Americans and the rest of the world. The natural conclusion that your average NYT [New York Times] reader would then draw while sipping on their morning latte is that Israel started it because it wants the war, and the United States just went along with it despite not wanting it.

The truth is that no one wants war. No one other than a psychopath (i.e. Hamas) likes war. There is a difference between wanting war and viewing it as a necessary evil to confront your enemy. The fact that you personally don’t want it doesn’t make you special or morally superior to anyone else—it just makes me question how much skin you have in the game. Are you against war because you or your offspring are being commanded to fight, or do you perhaps just feel uncomfortable when having to defend your positions at a cocktail party in the wealthy DC suburbs? One of these scenarios carries more emotional weight than the other, though I acknowledge, as someone who fits more into the latte-liberal category than the military-participating one, that it doesn’t always feel that way.

I know I’ve been ragging (a lot) on the folks of J Street lately. The truth is that I don’t really mean to target them so much as they’re giving me too much material to work with. It’s an organization I once totally aligned myself with—but not anymore. I don’t hate them; I just am aghast at their inability to look at themselves in the mirror and call out their (well, our) end of the aisle on their bullshit. Anyway, here is their latest on the Iran War in their recent article titled “Pro-Israel and Against This War”:

And this war also pushes another long-term goal further out of reach: The vision of a more stable Middle East in which Israel is integrated into the region and living at peace with its neighbors – what we at J Street call the 23-state solution. In the aftermath of the agreement on the 20-point plan for Gaza, there is a pathway that can ultimately move Israel towards greater and eventually total regional integration.

Because of the decision of the US and Israel to go to war with Iran, that vision is now farther away. Gulf states are furious – certainly with Iran for attacking them, but also with the United States and Israel for launching a war that has placed them directly in the line of fire without ever seriously consulting them. Instead of seeing Israel as a partner in economic development, technology sharing and regional integration, many now see a country exporting instability across the region in pursuit of a level of security that will ultimately be unattainable and come at a great cost to its neighbors.

That is not a strong foundation for long-term peace.

Most of my Israeli friends support this war. I understand why they do. But I do not. I believe it is bad for American interests and bad for Israel’s interests.

I used to think that Israel was too militarized for its own good. After getting caught up in an active war there, my views on that changed. There is no peace in the Middle East without a heavily armed Israel, though I pray that isn’t the case forever. But there’s one thing that will be true forevermore: any Jewish person expressing opposition to a military action involving the United States or Israel thinking that it will make the anti-Zionist lunatic class accept them is a fool.

To express one’s disapproval for a war while not actually living in a war zone is a luxury and a privilege. If the majority of the folks living in the war zone (in this case, the Israelis and the Iranians) express that they support it, that may be the only statistic that actually matters in terms of the war’s approval rating. Every American like me right now needs to acknowledge how fortunate we are to be pontificating about a war instead of actively experiencing one.

“But they could drop bombs on us too one day!” Yes, and what would be your response if and when that day comes? “But Iran was never actually a direct threat to the USA anyway.” Then why are you simultaneously afraid of their missiles? “But the majority of Americans supported Iraq at first, and look what happened there!” And how many of those Americans were living in the region, and how many were forced to go and fight? For those of us ensconced in non-military families, it was out of sight, out of mind. Here’s a prediction: the same 70% who supported the Iraq war are now against the Iran war, so—wait for it—they may be wrong both times. Brings me back to an old joke during the Dubya administration: “when he decided which country to invade, the dumbass was only off by one letter.”

Whether or not a war is “popular” is not a story. It’s not news, because it’s almost never true for anyone. “But the Orange Man went to war without Congress voting for it—can he actually do that?” Yeah, he just did it. The only question that matters: is the war achieving its intended goals?

It’s too early to know. But since I do know that we have a personality-disordered primate with the attention span the size of a mosquito as Commander in Chief and a wife-beating douchebag running the war department, I doubt it. Though I am absolutely open to being proven wrong.

So prove me wrong. Free Iran.

Thanks for reading! I keep most of my content free during our current war against lies and misinformation. If you liked what you read and wish to support my work, please consider a paid subscription or a one-time donation. Links below.

Discussion about this post

I guess this J street person does not believe the slogan ‘if they tell you they are going to kill you, believe them’ regarding Iran and Israel.

Well said! There was peace in the region on 10/6/23. That changed when Iran greenlit the Hamas/Hezbollah/Houthis’ attack on Israel. The Iranian government horribly miscalculated when it pulled this stunt. They bet that they and their proxies could knock out Israel and that the U.S. would not stand with its ally. They were wrong. Wars always end ugly. That’s what is happening now.

© 2026 Jill · Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice

Start your SubstackGet the app

Substack is the home for great culture

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

Harley Finkelstein, the proud Jewish-Canadian owner of Shopify, a Canadian multinational e-commerce company, shares his experiences of targeted antisemitism.

He recounts incidents where protesters disrupted Jewish celebrations, not for political reasons, but simply because they were Jewish. Finkelstein emphasizes the normalization of hatred against Jews in Canada, highlighting the alarming statistics of religion-motivated hate crimes and the need to address this issue.

In short, he rightly argues that the oldest hatred in the world has little or nothing to do with Zionism or Israel, a fundamentally important observation if there ever was one.

Brief excerpts from his National Post piece appear below. Consider a National Post subscription to read this and other first-class material from a traditional conservative (i.e., “unwoke” or even anti-woke) perspective.

Canadian Jews are being targeted simply because they are Jewish

Celebrations of Jewish life that have nothing to do with Israel are being disrupted as the nation stands idly by

Harley Finkelstein

National Post

December 31, 2025

My name is Harley Finkelstein. I am a proud Jewish-Canadian, an entrepreneur and the grandson of Holocaust survivors.

I am also the son of immigrants who came to Canada more than half a century ago after fleeing Hungary following the 1956 revolution. They came here to escape persecution. They came because Canada promised safety, opportunity and the freedom to live openly.

For most of my life, I believed deeply in that promise. Over the last few years, something has changed.

I have not spoken publicly about this before, not because it felt unimportant, but because I did not want to confuse advocacy with grievance or add noise to an already loud discourse. I also believed, perhaps naively, that this moment would pass. That things would get better. They haven’t. Silence can distort reality, and reality now deserves clarity.

Two moments brought this home for me.

The first happened in Montreal. I host a podcast called Big Shot, a project dedicated to telling the stories of Jewish entrepreneurs. It is about culture, resilience, creativity and contribution. It is intentionally non-political. Last summer, we recorded our first live episode at Startupfest.

Partway through the conversation, protesters attempted to disrupt the event and rush the stage. Not because of anything we were discussing, and not because of any policy position, but because Jewish hosts and a Jewish guest were publicly celebrating Jewish stories.

My grandparents survived hatred. My parents fled it. My children should never have to learn to live with it. Canada can still choose differently, but only if we are willing to name what is happening now.

What we tolerate next will define us.

Harley Finkelstein is a proud Jewish-Canadian entrepreneur and the president of Shopify.

Read more

Read more

You don’t have to receive posts about Israel & Palestine if you aren’t interested in the subject matter or don’t like my position on current issues.

To ensure you don’t receive any more posts like this one, unsubscribe from this section in either of the following ways:

1. Click “unsubscribe“ at the bottom of any newsletter email sent to you, which will take you to a page where you can choose what sections in my newsletter to subscribe to.

2. Log into your Substack account, head to your account Settings, select your subscription and choose which newsletters to receive.

Many thanks!

Hymie

The following piece was written by yours truly.

Federal Islamophobia czar’s claims both exaggerated and fictitious

​As antisemitic hate crimes surge, Canada’s Islamophobia czar is accused of exaggeration, activism, and misleading the public.

Hymie Rubenstein

Western Standard Guest Columnist

December 19, 2025

Hymie Rubenstein, editor of REAL Indigenous Report and REAL Israel & Palestine Report, is a retired professor of anthropology at the University of Manitoba and a senior fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Blacklock’s Reporter recently revealed that the federal government’s Special Representative on Combating Islamophobia, Amira Elghawaby, is using her office to advocate for Muslim prayer rooms in federal buildings, citing “Islamophobia in the workplace” when accommodations for religious practices are not made.

This initiative also exposes her as using her office to advocate for federal employees “speaking out on Palestinian issues.”

Without providing any examples, Elghawaby has claimed, “In the workplace, Islamophobia can take the following form: escorting an employee out of the workplace for making pro-Palestinian remarks.”

Remarks like these from Elghawaby were made to the Muslim Federal Employees Network, a volunteer group founded in 2021. A total of 6,350 of 279,396 federal employees identify as Muslim, about two percent, according to a 2024 survey. Records show Elghawaby was in frequent contact with the group and advocated on their behalf with deputy ministers and others.

The Employees Network was active only days after Hamas terrorists’ heinous October 7, 2023, rape, murder, and kidnapping of hundreds of Jews in Israel, including eight Canadians. On October 16, the Employees Network cynically hosted a video conference entitled Free Expression and Safety in the Workplace.”

Read more