JDL sues Canadian Arab Federation for libel

I suspect the suit will not extend past the letter. While I think SPHR rushed to judgement by implying that because the JDL had demonstrated at Ryerson they must be responsible for an arson that occurred several days later the claims that the JDL is actually saying they'll sue over (“right-wing terrorists,” “racists” and “supremacists") fall under fair comment; particularly when you look at [url=http://www.adl.org/extremism/jdl_chron.asp]this backgrounder[/url] from the ADL which details a long list of bombings and attempted bombings by the JDL going back several decades not to mention the fact that JDL leader Irv Rubin committed suicide in prison after pleading guilty to a botched plot to bomb a mosque and assassinate a US Congressman. Actually, he botched his suicide attempt too and lingered, brain dead, on life support for several days though how they could tell the difference between Rubin brain dead and Rubin not brain dead is beyond me.

I guess the JDL will also be suing the FBI for calling it a "violent extremist Jewish organization", listing it in its [url=http://www.fbi.gov/publications/terror/terror2000_2001.htm]Terrorism 2000/2001 report[/url] and referring to its activities as "terrorist". The JDL is also listed in the Department of Homeland Security funded [url=http://www.tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=183]MIPT Terrorism Database[/url] which refers to "the group’s terrorist campaign".

Meir Halevi Weinstein may claim that his JDL Canada has nothing to do with the bad JDL in the US - though if he does he'll have to explain his long personal association with both Meir Kahane and Irv Rubin and the fact that the US JDL lists the Canadian JDL as a "chapter" on its website, and the fact that Meir's weekly (and often illiterate) rantings are featured on the US JDL website. He'll also have to explain his former role as the Canadian spokesman for Kach/Kahane Chai, a group listed on the Canadian Department of Public Safety's [url=http://www.ps-sp.gc.ca/prg/ns/le/cle-eng.aspx#kach26]list of terrorist entities[/url].

What I find surprising is that the CJC has once again failed the test and has declined an opportunity to condemn or even criticize the JDL preferring instead to, evidently, take its side against CAF. Quite shameful, really, particularly when compared to the strong stance the ADL has taken against the JDL. What was Len Rudner thinking? If the Jewish Tribune misquoted him will Rudner post a correction and condemnation on the CJC website?

[ 12 March 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

Yes but, ohara, the JDL *isn't* threatening to sue over the arson inference (at least not according to what I've read - though I haven't seen the actual letter so this may have been misreported) - they are evidently threatening to sue over assertions that they are “right-wing terrorists,” “racists” and “supremacists.” Indeed, Weinstein's press release on the lawsuit, which I have read in full, didn't say *anything* about the arson allegation and objected only to the above three characterizations:

quote:

---

Attention News Editors:

Meir Weinstein of the Jewish Defence League of Canada sues the Canadian Arab Federation

TORONTO, March 5 /CNW/ - On Wednesday March 5th 2008, Meir Weinstein, the National Director of the Jewish Defence League of Canada served notice to Khaled Mouammar, the President of the Canadian Arab Federation that he is exercising all his rights under the libel and slander act.

Statements pertaining to Meir Weinstein, the National Director of the Jewish Defence League of Canada, posted on the website of the Canadian Arab Federation are considered libellous and slanderous.

This action is being brought about by a vicious fabrication, in which the Jewish Defence League of Canada and its leader Meir Weinstein have been described as right wing terrorists, racists and supremacists.

---

[url=http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/March2008/05/c8828.html]Press release[/url]

Given the links I provided in my earlier post and the JDL's long history of violence do you think these three terms are incorrect in regards to the JDL? Weinstein used to be the spokesman in Canada for Kahane Chai/Kach. Is this not a terrorist group? If not, then why are they listed as such by Canada's Department of Public Safety?

And could you please point out one recent statement by the CJC criticising the JDL? All I've found is Adler's quote defending them.

[ 12 March 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

Note Meir Halevi is Meir Weinstein's pseudonym

quote:

---

Funding is centered in the US
Steve Fainaru, Globe Staff
1240 words
14 March 1994
The Boston Globe
City Edition

Kach and Kahane Chai, Jewish extremist groups banned Sunday by the Israeli government, maintain offices and extensive fund-raising networks in the United States that have provided money, members, and, some say, arms to the Israeli settlements.

A spokesman for Kach, which raises nearly 80 percent of its funds in the United States, said last week in Jerusalem that the group had funneled all its money into U.S. bank accounts for fear the Israeli accounts would be frozen.

U.S. laws do not specifically ban fund-raising by groups believed to be involved in terrorist activity, a State Department spokeswoman said Sunday. However, an interagency group has been formed to look into whether the laws can be strengthened.

"All options are being considered," said Julie Reside of the State Department.

Donations to Kach, estimated at $100,000 annually, pay for vehicles, security patrols, and even sophisticated radio scanners that enable members to evade the military when carrying out operations in the territories, say U.S. and Israeli terrorism analysts.

The money is but a trickle of the estimated $1 billion in private donations _ nearly all from mainstream groups such as the United Jewish Appeal and the Jewish Communal Fund of New York _ that pour into Israel from the United States each year for education, construction, and other peaceful uses.

Sunday's Cabinet decision to ban the groups touched off a demonstration by members of Kahane Chai in front of the Israeli Consulate in New York. Mike Guzofsky, associate director of the group, called the move "an obscenity" and said he feared the Clinton administration would take action against the groups in the United States.
[b]
Asked how Kach would be affected by the Israeli government's action, Meir Halevi, an organization spokesman, said: "If anything, it will increase support. There are many . . . who were borderline supporters of the organization who have now come over the fence. This government is trying to silence any opposition. What occurred in Hebron is now turning into a blood libel. This was the action of one, and all are being made to blame." [/b]

---

quote:

---

Mosque attack threatens talks Arafat blames Rabin for massacre
CANADIAN PRESS
654 words
26 February 1994
Kitchener-Waterloo Record
Final
A1
English
Copyright (c) 1994 Kitchener-Waterloo Record.

TUNIS -- "That's not enough. Condemnation and regret are not enough," Arafat responded to Rabin in English, said an Arab ambassador who was in the PLO leader's office when he took the call.

"We need specific measures" to disarm the settlers, the ambassador, who spoke on condition of anonymity, quoted Arafat as saying.

In an interview, Arafat said the Israel-Palestinian peace agreement lost credibility after the massacre.

"The whole peace process has lost its credibility after what has been done," Arafat said in an interview with NBC Nightly News.

"It is not me who has delayed the implementation of the peace process. It is Rabin," said Arafat.

The gunman killed at least 48 Arabs in the mosque, firing an automatic rifle and throwing grenades as worshippers knelt in prayer. Witnesses said he was beaten to death by enraged worshippers.

Police identified the man as Dr. Baruch Goldstein, a physician from the Kiryat Arba settlement who moved to Israel 11 years ago from New York.

The massacre ignited riots throughout the occupied lands.

The Palestine Liberation Organization put the casualty toll at 63 dead and said up to 30 settlers were involved in the slaughter at the Ibrahim Mosque, built over the site revered as the tomb of the prophet Abraham.

Soldiers killed at least 12 Palestinians in protests after the carnage, the biggest single killing of Arabs since Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967.

The massacre raised fears that peace talks between the PLO and Israel could be derailed, but U.S. President Bill Clinton said the parties agreed to pursue negotiations in Washington.

Hours after the dawn attack in the mosque, it was still not clear exactly how many were killed.

Arafat said the massacre was a result of a conspiracy involving the Israeli army but did not elaborate.

"What has been done has not been done by one person," said Arafat, who said no one person could kill the dozens of people who died in the shooting.

Arafat called for a UN Security Council meeting to discuss the killings and a response by the world body.

Islamic states at the UN called for an immediate meeting of the Security Council to investigate the massacre.

A statement issued by envoys from the 51-member Organization of the Islamic Conference urged "those behind this cowardly attack should be brought to justice."

The statement was issued as Security Council members were consulting privately on what action to take.

The Security Council deferred any action on the massacre until this afternoon to allow time for consultations on whether to issue a statement of condemnation or a formal resolution.

Arab and Jewish groups in Canada were quick to respond to the killings.

[b]Meir Halevi, Canadian spokesman for Israel's Kach movement -- to which gunman Baruch Goldstein belonged -- said: "Our organization does not condemn the attack. It condemns the Israeli government for not providing adequate protection for settlers."

Halevi said the Kach movement does not encourage such attacks but wants all people who belong to "terrorist organizations," including the PLO, expelled from Israel. [/b]

---

So he is publicly known to have associated with the terrorist group Kach and to have acted as its North American spokesman. In a libel case he will have to disclose exactly what his involvement was with Kach as well as the JDL, he'll have to answer questions about various activities he's participated in his varied career, what meetings he's attended, what funds he's raised, who he gave the money to and what that money was used for.

If he loses the case (which is absolutely certain) he will not only be responsible for the opposing side's legal costs but also quite possibly for other damages plus he will expose much of his life he wants to keep hidden to the public and the police.

Meir Weinstein is a stupid, ignorant and vain man, but is he really that stupid?

Maybe.

[ 12 March 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

Accurate ohara, accurate. If Rudner couldn't say anything bad about the JDL, he shouldn't have said anything at all.

So, when are we going to get some criticism of the JDL from the CJC. For that matter, when are we going to get some criticism from you that's stronger then "they aren't my cup of tea" or "I'm no fan of the JDL"?

Ok, let's set aside the CJC's coddling of the JDL and return to my last point:

Weinstein remained a spokesperson for Kach after it was banned in Israel in 1994 as a terrorist group in the aftermath of Baruch Goldstein's massacreRead the Boston Globe article carefully - Kach is banned as terrorist - days later Weinstein remains their spokesman.

So I ask again, ohara, if you are the spokesman for a terrorist group, what does that make you?

[ 12 March 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:
[b]aka the email that I received from SPHR on Feb 25 which carried the instruction to forward to your lists today included Meir's name in the 3rd paragraph.

Sorry the named him and JDL in the release[/b]

---

Ah, I missed that. However, all that's said about him is "several Jewish news agencies, including the Canadian Jewish News, have touted the founder of the Canadian JDL, Meir Weinstein, as a strong leader to be respected". I don't see how that libels Weinstein.

[ 12 March 2008: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]

Hm, reading the press release more closely I don't see how Weinstein or the JDL have a case. The SPHR was careful to quote the FBI in both instances that they refer to the JDL as terrorist. Perhaps the FBI has not yet received Weinstein's libel writ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by ohara:
[b]Now you are really reaching. First if JPJ is correct then there goes your first argument. Secondly, what difference does it make who is referenced if Meir Weinstein is not a terrorist its libelous to claim he is. Your house of cards is falling apart.[/b]

---

There isn't anything in the SPHR statement that says Weinstein is a terrorist. That allegation is made in regards to the JDL, but that's also an allegation made by various government agencies.