• How antisemitism is weaponized to silence critics of Israel: The case o

    From NefeshBarYochai@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 24 23:26:39 2025
    XPost: or.politics, seattle.politics, edm.general
    XPost: alt.global-warming

    https://mondoweiss.net/2025/02/how-antisemitism-is-weaponized-to-silence-critics-of-israel-the-case-of-birju-dattani/

    ôAnother antisemite gets promoted by Trudeau. Birju Dattani, known for perpetuating hate toward Jews, has been appointed chief of the
    Canadian Human Rights Commission.ö

    That was the charge leveled by Conservative MP Melissa Lantsman
    against Birju Dattani, a human rights scholar who was forced to resign
    as CanadaÆs Chief Human Rights Commissioner before even assuming
    office. In a matter of days, a coordinated smear campaignùled by
    Lantsman, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), and
    far-right media figure Ezra Levantùturned a respected legal academic
    into a political liability. The accusations were not based on any
    actual evidence of antisemitism, but rather on his past critiques of
    IsraelÆs policies, which were deliberately distorted to frame him as
    an extremist.

    Dattani is pushing back with three defamation lawsuits against
    Lantsman, CIJA, and Levant, accusing them of distorting his record to
    ruin his career. His case is not just about clearing his nameùit tests
    whether racialized voices can speak freely in Canada without being
    silenced

    The attacks on Dattani followed a well-worn script used to silence
    racialized and marginalized voices who challenge Western foreign
    policy, especially on Israel. The moment he was appointed, his
    academic work on Israel-Palestine, a 2015 panel discussion, and
    years-old social media posts were selectively weaponized to paint him
    as antisemitic. Accusations of extremism, antisemitism, or even
    terrorism sympathies are routinely deployed to discredit critics of
    Israeli policies, and Dattani became the latest casualty of this smear
    machine.

    Yet, an independent investigation commissioned by Justice Minister
    Arif Virani found no basis for the allegations. The report
    unequivocally concluded:

    ôWe cannot find that Mr. Dattani harboured or harbours any beliefs
    that would be characterized as antisemitic or that he has demonstrated
    any biases (conscious or unconscious) towards Jews or Israelis.ö

    The investigators even noted that his expertise on Israel/Palestine
    could have been an asset to his role. But that was irrelevant.
    Political pressure, a media frenzy, and manufactured outrage ensured
    his removal.

    Dattani wasnÆt just pushed outùhe was made an example. His resignation
    delivers a stark warning: even legitimate human rights advocacy on
    Israel comes at a cost. The independent report noted that he had
    ôdownplayed the critical nature of his work,ö a telling sign that he
    knew speaking too openly about Palestinian rights could end his
    career.

    This chilling effect extends far beyond Dattani. Across Canada and
    beyond, academics, journalists, and public figures who criticize
    Israeli policies walk a tightrope. Simply advocating for Palestinian
    rights can trigger accusations of antisemitism, blacklisting, or
    resignation demands. The fear of being branded an extremist or
    security threat forces many to self-censor rather than risk their
    careers.

    Dattani has made it clear that Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian bias
    fueled the attacks against him. He described being smeared with
    Islamophobic and anti-Arab tropes, portraying him as a terrorist
    sympathizer. The message was unmistakable: his Muslim identity, human
    rights advocacy, and criticism of Israel made him a target.

    Unlike most targeted by such campaigns, Dattani is fighting back in
    court. His defamation lawsuits accuse Lantsman, CIJA, and Levant of
    knowingly spreading falsehoods, orchestrating his removal, and
    weaponizing defamation. A victory could set a crucial precedent,
    holding politicians and media figures accountable for reckless smears.

    DattaniÆs fight isnÆt just about clearing his nameùitÆs about exposing
    a system where politicians and media figures can destroy careers
    without consequence. Few public figures ousted by coordinated smear
    campaigns push back. If he wins, it could spark a long-overdue
    reckoning on the weaponization of antisemitism to silence dissent on Israel/Palestine.

    DattaniÆs case highlights a tragic irony. While antisemitism is a
    serious issue, its weaponization against critics of Israel undermines
    efforts to combat real hate. Scholars warn that branding all criticism
    of Israel as antisemitic dilutes the term, making it harder to address
    actual threats to Jewish communities.

    These attacks often come with Islamophobic undertones, casting
    Muslims, Arabs, and pro-Palestinian voices as inherently suspect. The
    same tactic has been used against figures like Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan
    Omar, and Marc Lamont Hill, who were branded antisemitic despite
    criticizing Israeli policies, not Jewish people.

    DattaniÆs case is a pivotal test for free speech in Canada. If a government-appointed human rights commissioner can be driven out by
    baseless accusations, it raises a stark question: who is truly allowed
    to participate in public life?

    Even more troubling is the silence of institutions that should have
    defended Dattani. Human rights groups, universities, and political
    allies stayed quietùnot because they believed the accusations, but
    because defending him was too costly. That silence empowers smear
    campaigns to decide who holds power, who speaks freely, and who is
    safe in public life.

    Now an unpaid senior fellow at Toronto Metropolitan UniversityÆs
    Centre for Free Expression, Dattani is crowdfunding to sustain his
    legal fight. The stark resource imbalance underscores how smear
    campaigns punish those who challenge establishment narratives while
    rewarding those who weaponize defamation.

    If Dattani wins, it will send a clear message: public figures cannot
    engage in reckless character assassination without consequences. His
    case could embolden others who have been silenced by similar tactics
    and force Canada to confront a crucial question: Do we truly uphold
    free speech and human rights, or only when they align with
    establishment views?

    The outcome will determine whether racialized professionals, Muslim
    voices, and pro-Palestinian advocates can participate in public life
    without fear of erasure. If Dattani loses, the message is just as
    clear: you can speak, but only if you stay silent on the wrong issues.

    The real question now is whether this case will spark broader
    resistanceùor if, once again, a racialized individual will be left to
    fight alone.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)