How antisemitism is weaponized to silence critics of Israel: The case of Birju Dattani

[NefeshBarYochai]

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

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

That was the charge leveled by Conservative MP Melissa Lantsman
against Birju Dattani, a human rights scholar who was forced to resign
as Canada’s Chief Human Rights Commissioner before even assuming
office. In a matter of days, a coordinated smear campaign—led by
Lantsman, the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), and
far-right media figure Ezra Levant—turned 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
Israel’s 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 name—it 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:

“We 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.”

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 wasn’t just pushed out—he 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
“downplayed the critical nature of his work,” 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.

Dattani’s fight isn’t just about clearing his name—it’s 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.

Dattani’s 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.

Dattani’s 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 quiet—not 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 University’s
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
resistance—or if, once again, a racialized individual will be left to
fight alone.

[JTEM]

The Israelis are behaving rationally. Their actions align with their
goals. The fact that you don't agree with their goals being largely
irrelevant, and by that I mean it is irrelevant. They don't care
what you think.

Hamas is irrational, as is Hezbollah and every middle eastern
terrorist group. They place their assets, including their leaders,
amongst the very civilians they pretend to care about, hoping
that if Israel shoots back they'll be plenty of dead babies for
their propaganda war. They pick fights with EVERYONE. And they
partner with the people and nations that are going to place the
largest target on their backs.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard? Really? Like that isn't going
to make you twice as likely to get bombed?

Hamas cancelled elections, banned opposition back in 2016. And in
all that time they didn't invest in education, agriculture,
healthcare and their economy. No, they invested in death. They
are irrational. They can not be trusted, Israel found that out on
October 7, they will never ever accept peace.

That's all that matters to me. We can bring Israel to the table
any time we want to. We have the leverage. But there is honestly
no point in even trying when there's no rational authority on
the other side. So, hate Israel. Love Israel. Doesn't matter. The
answer never changes and can never change, until Hamas and
Hezbollah are without power and without influence. When rational
people are in charge, when the Palestinians decide that they want
to live and they want their children to live and have a decent
life, we can have peace. We can bring Israel to the table. And
not before.

[%]

Post by JTEM
The Israelis are behaving rationally. Their actions align with their
goals. The fact that you don't agree with their goals being largely
irrelevant, and by that I mean it is irrelevant. They don't care
what you think.
Hamas is irrational, as is Hezbollah and every middle eastern
terrorist group. They place their assets, including their leaders,
amongst the very civilians they pretend to care about, hoping
that if Israel shoots back they'll be plenty of dead babies for
their propaganda war. They pick fights with EVERYONE. And they
partner with the people and nations that are going to place the
largest target on their backs.
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard? Really? Like that isn't going
to make you twice as likely to get bombed?
Hamas cancelled elections, banned opposition back in 2016. And in
all that time they didn't invest in education, agriculture,
healthcare and their economy. No, they invested in death. They
are irrational. They can not be trusted, Israel found that out on
October 7, they will never ever accept peace.
That's all that matters to me. We can bring Israel to the table
any time we want to. We have the leverage. But there is honestly
no point in even trying when there's no rational authority on
the other side. So, hate Israel. Love Israel. Doesn't matter. The
answer never changes and can never change, until Hamas and
Hezbollah are without power and without influence. When rational
people are in charge, when the Palestinians decide that they want
to live and they want their children to live and have a decent
life, we can have peace. We can bring Israel to the table. And
not before.

there's a lot more not to care about

[AlleyCat]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 06:14:53 -0700, % says...

Post by %
there's a lot more not to care about

BINGO!