Answering the Jewish ‘Defences’ of Canary Mission

The jewish ‘anti-Semitism monitoring group’ Canary Mission – that I recently published an article on and pointed it that it is cover for the gentile-hating Israeli terrorist movement Kach and acts as a proxy for the Israeli government’s Hasbara efforts – (1) has predictably tried to defend itself from a wilting-level of public scrutiny following the revelations of its origins within the gentile-hating bowels of jewish supremacism in both the Diaspora and Israel.

Its defenders such as Yisrael Rosenberg – an Israeli settler trying to personally demolish the Al-Aqsa Mosque and rebuild the Temple of Solomon – write such hackneyed lines as:

‘Canary Mission provides a huge public service, operating as an early-warning alarm system for the safety and well-being of American Jewry.’ (2)

His reasoning is simple enough and true to form is wholly dependent on how you define ‘anti-Semitism’.

To wit:

‘It is clear why those groups that support the destruction of the State of Israel and the removal of the Jewish Nation from their ancient/modern homeland are afraid of Canary Mission. It pulls the mask off their ugly intentions to harm the Jewish people or the State of Israel.

The people and groups gracing the Canary Mission web pages are experts at repeating a host of lies about Jews and Israel. Before Canary Mission, they were free to post their vitriol with impunity. Now, there is a place people who care about Jews can go to find out who hates us.

[…]

Those who blame Canary Mission for daring to speak out against those who want violence against Jews are unaware of a danger, silently rising up from the ground. Organized anti-Semitism, often thinly disguised as anti-Zionism or anti-Israelism, has become a prominent and undeniable phenomenon throughout the United States. There are active and growing groups in America on the far-right that share at least one piece of ideology with their counterparts on the far-left: a disdain for anything smacking of Israel and Jewish culture.’ (3)

Notice that Rosenberg doesn’t offer actual facts but instead resorts to generic broad rhetoric about ‘anti-Semitism’ and the alleged motives of undefined ‘enemies of Israel’, which is the definition of Zionist chutzpah identified by Norman Finkelstein in his demolition of Alan Dershowitz’s pseudo-intellectual mendacity titled ‘Beyond Chutzpah’.

In essence Rosenberg is claiming that because people criticise Israel then – because Israel is a ‘jewish state’ and the ‘national home’ of the jewish people – it therefore makes any criticism of Israel criticism of the jewish people and therefore criticising Israel is ipso facto ‘anti-Semitic’.

This common Zionist trope – also used in the 20^th century and earlier by jews to defend Judaism from criticism in a similar way (Judaism = the biblical basis of the jewish people = criticism of Judaism is criticism of the jewish people = criticism of Judaism is ‘anti-Semitic’ [for example see Leopold Zunz’s attacks on Christian critics of Judaism]) – is as nonsensical as it sounds given that we do not say to criticise Poland is to be anti-Catholic bigot, which is precisely the same logic but applied to a different people and country.

Thus, we can see the trope for the nonsense that it is.

The scale of Rosenberg’s adherence to rhetorical nonsense is further demonstrated by two quotations from his ‘defence’ of Canary Mission with a laconic common – cribbed unashamedly from 8Chan’s /pol/ - in-between:

‘Anyone with even a cursory understanding of modern European history knows that the Jewish community of Germany in the early part of the 20th century was prosperous, influential and proud of its position as real Germans in their well-earned place of prominence in German society.’ (4)

Yet for no reason:

‘A few decades later, German Jewry was being systematically annihilated by precision German technology of roving SS killing squads and death camps set up throughout Europe.’ (5)

In other words, jews have absolutely nothing to do with gentiles hating them when they come to dominate their societies through direct and/or indirect means. It is all a form of gentile neurosis that must be treated because – as we all know – jews can do no wrong.

After Rosenberg we move on the Edwin Black - who is a professional jewish grief merchant and was one of the ‘experts’ on the 2003 neo-conservative documentary ‘Saddam and the Third Reich’ - which promoted the ill-fated invasion of Iraq by the United States at the behest of international jewry. When he isn’t promoting the mass sacrifice of goyim for jewry; Black likes to blame IBM – yes, the computer company – for the so-called ‘Holocaust’ and assert that genetics is a junk science when it comes to conclusions that lie contrary to his personal beliefs.

Black – writing in the ‘San Diego Jewish World’ – claims that:

‘BDS advocates often spew some of the most venomous hate speech visible on the Internet, hate speech that Canary Mission captures and re-publishes in personal profiles. For example, the tweet by a Chicago activist with Students for Justice in Palestine who tweeted this joke: “Why did Hitler commit suicide?…….. He saw the gas bill. Pahhahaha.” Or the UCLA protestor whose Twitter account was captured with this remark: “Mmmaaaannnnnnnnnnn what’s with all this peaceful approaches!?? F**k that. I want terrorism and another intifada.” The same UCLA student reportedly added a photo close-up of a gun and bullets.

[…]

After the massacre at Pittsburgh, calls went out broadly to monitor, spotlight, and report hate speech, especially since hateful acts of violence are often preceded by hate speech. That is precisely what Canary Mission does. Canary Mission tracks social media and videos, capturing BDS, anti-Zionist, and anti-Semitic expressions, triangulating them into individual profiles that expose and create permanent highly-visible records of the words and images BDS and SJP leaders actually use. The profiles are almost always incontestable since CM links to actual videos, tweets and other open documentation. Canary Mission’s intent is to shine an indelible light on students, faculty, and others, thus creating a negative incentive or at least a consequence for anti-Israel and anti-Semitic hate speech.’ (6)

Once again note that Rosenberg; Black immediately jumps into broad rhetorical charges against the broad swathe of anti-Zionist opinion and presents the totality of anti-Zionist rhetoric and opinion as being openly genocidal.

The problem with this is – once again – Black like Rosenberg offers no actual evidence of what he claims but rather cites one unnamed ‘UCLA Student’ as being a typical example, which is about as factual as me claiming that Rabbi Meir Kahane’s murderous sentiments towards non-jews of any description are a typical example of Zionist opinion.

Black next tries to claim that doxing is ‘okay’ because the information is public – which shows how much of a political and technological dinosaur he is given the internet’s general opinion on the subject of doxing – and completely ignores the fact that giving someone a yellow star to wear is also simply repeating public information.

Should we give all jews yellow stars too? You know just to identify them so that the goyim can know not to ‘offend’ them and also note that they have an ethno-religious reason for their unconditional support of Israel?

Obviously not but that is where Black’s logic ends: doesn’t it?

The fact that Black whines atrociously when this same logic and consequences are fired back at Canary Mission is both hilarious and mendacious.

To wit:

‘Canary Mission is funded through tax-deductible entities. The media campaign to undermine Canary Mission also includes seeking out CM’s donors, trying to stigmatize those who are financially supporting the blacklisting and documenting of hate speech and anti-Israel delegitimization.’ (7)

In essence Black – in a piece of typical jewish skulduggery – is claiming that only jews are allowed to collect and publish publicly available information on their opponents and that non-jews are not, because… well… ‘anti-Semitism’.

This whole excuse of ‘anti-Semitism’ being used to defend Canary Mission is demonstrated to be the nonsensical gibberish that it is by a jewess named Nancy Mendoza – who looks like she is actually a male-to-female transvestite – in Canary Mission’s own blog ‘The Canary’. After waffling for a little while about ‘different definitions of anti-Semitism’; Mendoza concludes that:

‘But, to be clear, I’m not talking about the IHRA definition of antisemitism, or anyone else’s. I’m talking about the lived experience of Jewish people – I’m talking about my own lived experience.’ (8)

In essence Mendoza is claiming that ‘anti-Semitism’ is whatever a jew claims it is, because… well… hurt feelings and not the far more objective standard offered by Albert Lindemann in the introduction to his definitive work on anti-Semitism ‘Esau’s Tears’.

So, to Mendoza – and one suspects that both Black and Rosenberg believe the same thing – if you offend a jew in any way, shape or form then you are an ‘anti-Semite’.

Better not refuse that Bar Mitzvah invitation!

Lastly, we have the deranged jewish counter jihadi fanatic Harry Onickel scribbling in ‘Front Page Mag’ who puts an anti-Islamic spin on the whole thing.

To wit:

‘Jews have had a long history of engaging in wars with enemies who fight by rules that Jews find abhorrent. Rather than fight by those rules, Jews have held themselves to more humane standards. While this is morally admirable, it’s not always martially effective.

On his way to establishing control over the Arabian Peninsula, Mohammed’s armies fought and conquered the Jewish tribes that had lived there for centuries. Jews of the Nadir tribe, living around Medina, wouldn’t fight on the Sabbath. Even during wartime, due to a biblical injunction, they refused to cut down their enemy’s fruit trees. Mohammed had no such qualms. He had his soldiers cut down the Nadir’s date palms on which they depended for food and for trade. And he did it on the Sabbath. The Nadir surrendered and were exiled.’ (9)

Now the idea that jews ‘hold themselves to more humane standards’ is laughable in the extreme given such historic massacres by jews of unarmed civilians after fighting has ended – and which jews have usually barely taken part – that range from the massacre of Christians Mamilla Pool in 614 AD (10) to the attempted mass poisoning of six million Germans by jews – led by the poet laureate Abba Kovner of Israel no less - in 1945. (11)

He also pointedly ignores the long history of Islamo-jewish cooperation and collaboration against Christianity that occurred – for example - during the Islamic invasion of Christian Spain (12) and again during the First World War when jews on both sides were happily whipping the favour of Muslims against the perfidious goyim of the Allied and/or the Central Powers. (13)

Onickel’s rendition of jewry being some kind of innocent martyr with spotless moral credentials is as laughable as it is bizarre, but it does give the rise to the following hilarious statements: ‘the first to face irrational discrimination when societies enter into periods of increased bigotry and self-destruction.’ (14)

And then for no reason Adolf Hitler was elected by the people.

I wonder why?

References

(1) See my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/who-are-canary-mission

(2) https://forward.com/opinion/411523/canary-mission-protects-jews-it-should-be-thanked-not-criticized/

(3) Ibid.

(4) Ibid.

(5) Ibid.

(6) https://www.sdjewishworld.com/2018/12/17/how-will-history-judge-the-canary-mission/

(7) Ibid.

(8) https://www.thecanary.co/opinion/2019/04/05/dear-haters-the-canary-isnt-antisemitic-you-just-dont-like-our-politics/

(9) https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/273537/defense-canary-mission-harry-onickel

(10) See my article: https://karlradl14.substack.com/p/antiochus-of-palestine-on-the-jews

(11) Dina Porat, 2010, ‘The Fall of a Sparrow: The Life and Times of Abba Kovner’, 1^st Edition, Stanford University Press: Stanford, pp. 210-234

(12) Eliyahu Ashtor, 1973, 'The Jews of Moslem Spain', Vol. I, 1st Edition, Jewish Publishing Society of America: Philadelphia, pp. 10-16

(13) Sean McMeekin, 2011, ‘The Berlin-Baghdad Express: The Ottoman Empire and Germany’s Bid for World Power 1898-1918’, 1^st Edition, Penguin: New York, pp. 364-365

(14) https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/273537/defense-canary-mission-harry-onickel