Islamophobia Now Defines our Official Policy. How Did we Let This Happen?

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"If international Jewry should succeed, in Europe or else­where, in precipitating nations into a world war, the result will not be the bolshevization of Europe and a victory of Judaism, but the extermination of the Jewish race." Adolf Hitler, January 3, 1939

Those words are shocking to us now, with the value of hindsight. But why weren't they shocking to German citizens who listened to that speech in 1939? Their leader was promoting the possible "necessity" of eliminating an entire people. Millions and millions of human beings.

It was because his party was suggesting that their planned military campaigns were an act of defense, not aggression. A necessary defense against both socialism and Judaism.

Fast forward to January of 2006, when senior Canadian military officers, soldiers, defence analysts and lobbyists gathered together to listen to American Lt.-Gen. Thomas Metz, then commanding general of Fort Hood, Texas.

[Metz] presents the audience with "a quick trip around the world." Using slides, he flashes a series of maps that highlight, one at a time, India, China, the Pacific Rim, the Western Hemisphere, Europe and sub-Saharan Africa. Then he comes to his final map, the one that really matters. Unlike all the others, this isn't just a map of a geographic area. It's a map of a religion: the Islamic World.

The Islamic faith is not evil," says the general, then quickly adds. "but it's been hijacked by thugs ... He then shows a chart depicting the military challenges America faces, measured in terms of level of danger and level of likelihood. At the very apex—the most dangerous and the most likely—sits just one: radical Islamic terrorism. "Radical Islam wants to reestablish the Caliphate," says Metz. "Just as Hitler wrote Mein Kampf, you can read what they want to do." (1)

But if you wonder why the invited guests included corporate lobbyists, Metz continues.

In his southern drawl, the general notes how much oil the U.S. consumes—roughly 25 per cent of the world's consumption, even though Americans make up only 5 per cent of the world's population—and how central this is to the country's high standard of living. To dramatize the importance of energy, the general points out that one can put a pint of gasoline into a chainsaw and then go out and cut a huge amount of wood before the gasoline runs out. The next day, he says, one could feed a big, strong man an enormous breakfast and send him out to cut wood—and he'd be able to cut only a fraction of what the gasoline-fired chainsaw had been able to cut in far less time. The lesson from this little fable is clear: America needs oil to go on being the rich, advanced society that it enjoys being. Without oil, Americans would be like that big strong man with the big breakfast—with only a tiny pile of wood to show for it.

The general's little discourse on the importance of energy to America is certainly interesting. But what is it doing in a speech about military threats to the United States? The connection between America's voracious oil consumption and the dangers of radical Islamic terrorism are never explicitly stated by Lt.-Gen. Metz; he simply notes that the Islamic world has a lot of oil and what happens there has an impact on energy markets. But an important element has clearly been added to the picture: the U.S. needs what lies under the ground in the Islamic world if Americans are to go on living the bounteous life that lies at the heart of the American dream—a life that has them devouring the lion's share of the world's energy. (1)

So the threat is not Radical Islam so much as the threat that the people of the Islamic world would like to control their own natural resources.

The lobbyists in the room were salivating. Not only would they continue to cash in on huge military contracts, but in the end would control the mineral wealth of the Middle East.

But how could they sell this to the Canadian people, who were already weary of the war in Afghanistan, and wanted to bring our soldiers home?

They wrapped it up in a yellow ribbon, sprinkled it with a dose of religious fervour and instilled fear that we are threatened with attack. "They hate our freedoms" says Stephen Harper. They hate Christians and they hate God. They couldn't possibly hate the fact that they were invaded and forced into a war they didn't want, under the guise of "fighting terror" and chasing ghosts.

What Will Precipitate the Next Holocaust?

Canada has long been a nation that promoted peace. We never waged war and when we entered war, it was deemed to be a matter of principle. But that has changed. Canadians may still consider themselves to be peace loving, but our government no longer reflects that image.

We are not peacekeepers, we are warriors. Rick Hillier stated that "We are not the public service of Canada. We are not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces and our job is to be able to kill people." And said of the perceived enemy "These are detestable murderers and scumbags." (2)

Why were we not shocked by that?

For the same reason that the German people were not shocked when Hitler promoted "the extermination of the Jewish race." We were led to believe that they threatened our way of life. He wouldn't dare suggest that it was a depletion of oil that threatened us, so we must take it by force, as Metz did. The job of armed forces was to kill people. But not to worry because the only people they killed were "murderers and scumbags." Our magical weapons that were coated with fairy dust, knew the difference.

And for anyone who doesn't believe that this new target of hatred, Islam, could ever result in another Holocaust, guess again. And I'm not talking about the thousands and thousands of Muslims killed in the Middle East already, but those who promote the annihilation of a people, wrapped up in their "love of Israel". Israel with nuclear weapons, that is positioned to use them, with the full support of Canada.

Our new foreign policy is to not only allow, but encourage Israel to launch a nuclear war. A Holocaust.

And the two people promoting this the most, are from the extremist group: Christians United For Israel. John Hagee and his Canadian partner Charles McVety. Two very dangerous men. (You can hear them speak in the videos that follow.)

It is Charles McVety who put a stop to to the Imam speaking to our military, calling it a threat to national security".

Defence Minister Peter MacKay has managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, which is worrisome for someone who oversees the Canadian Armed Forces. By cancelling an invitation to Imam Zijad Delic of the Canadian Islamic Congress to speak at a defence department conference, MacKay has sent a signal
of intolerance to the country’s growing Muslim community, estimated to number 1
million people. That’s precisely the opposite of what organizers of the forum had intended.

MacKay’s last-minute order to disinvite Delic, the CIC’s executive director, came as Christian evangelical groups were campaigning against the presence of the Muslim cleric. MacKay insists he made the decision on his own, but his motives remain murky. (3)

Mackay has marginalized an entire segment of our population, based on the rantings of Christian extremists. What next will the Harper government agree to? Internment camps? Will they have to wear crescents? Abide by curfews? How far will this government take this to appease the religious right to avoid breaking the ties of their purse strings?

According to news reports, MacKay was going on information provided by two Christian evangelical groups. These groups must have placed considerable pressure on the minister, because he cancelled Imam Delic's speech hastily, and apparently without consultation with other government agencies.

Had the minister consulted other agencies, he would have discovered that Imam Delic presents to numerous federal departments, including RCMP national security agents. He is well-liked and well-respected among officials, as well as the Muslim community. He is highly regarded by numerous faith groups for his outreach work.
Last Sunday, I sat next to Imam Delic at a youth conference where we were both invited to speak. He has been heavily involved with the event for the last few years, and encouraged me to come out to at least one of the events. As he presented his talk, it was clear that this man, who came from war-torn Bosnia as a refugee, had proudly made Canada, a place of safety, his home. He stood smiling, and preached about how important it was to be an engaged citizen, and a progressive one.

When MacKay allowed himself to be led by pressure groups, he not only shattered the delusions we all had that day when we listened to Imam Delic speak to youth about how Canada is a free country that allows us to express ourselves, he also shattered any hopes we had in our political process. (4)

We know that Stephen Harper will do anything to stay in power. Anything. And he and his government are using the same tactics that the Nazis used to prepare a nation for an unspeakable solution.

And they do it by calling anyone who criticises Israeli aggression, anti-Semitic.

They do by comparing a peaceful demonstration against Israeli Apartheid, to a pogrom.

They do it by hand picking Alykhan Velshi to act as Jason Kenney's aide. Velshi was the Manager of Research for a group called the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. According to Sourcewatch:

In early 2001, a tightly knit group of billionaire philanthropists conceived of a plan to win American sympathy for Israel's response to the Palestinian intifada. They believed that the Palestinian cause was finding too much support within crucial segments of the American public, particularly within the media and on college campuses, so they set up an organization, Emet: An Educational Initiative, Inc., to offer Israel the kind of PR that the Israeli government seemed unable to provide itself.

They do it by sending out vile taxpayer funded literature calling opposition parties anti-Semitic.

This creates an atmosphere of fear, where the only thing we're afraid of is crossing our government.

The Globe and Mail with it's new neoconservative format is suggesting that Canadians should forget about being defined as Peacekeepers. We must instead take pride in our military might. Forget health care. Shift our adoration to fighter jets.

Forget responsible government. Stick with Harper and his vision for Canada. A nation that we no longer recognize.

Oh, but just look at the shiny pictures!






Sources:

1. Holding the Bully's Coat, Canada and the U.S. Empire, By Linda McQuaig, Doubleday Canada, 2007, ISBN 978-0-385-66012-9, pg. 67-69

2. Rick Hillier reconnected Canadians with Forces, By John Ward, The Canadian Press, June 29, 2008

3. MacKay’s speech ban: Message of intolerance, Toronto Star, October 6, 2010

4. Politicians on the run: By hastily cancelling a speech by Imam Zijad Delic, Peter MacKay has shattered the faith of Muslims in our political process, By Aisha Sherazi, Citizen Special, October 5, 2010

Why we Must Listen to Ron McKinnon and Ignore Dimitri Soudas

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

The story of the S.S. St. Louis is well known in history, and immortalized in the movie The Voyage of the Damned. For those who need a refresher, the S.S. St. Louis was a Jewish refugee ship that set sail May 27, 1939, with 938 Jews from Germany headed for Cuba. (1) The short version is that it was turned away, not only by Cuba but also by the United States and Canada. As a result the ship was forced to take the refugees back to Germany, where many died in concentration camps. It has always been a black mark in our history.

And yet we now poised to repeat history with our government's handling of the Tamil Refugees. Through clever PR and hyperbole, these refugees are being painted as 'terrorists', and Stephen Harper has taken it one step further, by putting "pressure" on oppressive regimes, to make sure that victims of these regimes, never escape again. AKA: we support your oppressive regime and please do what you have to do. Just don't send them here.

Michael Ignatieff has said that "We [Canada] must always be a haven in a heartless world." Jack Layton called their plight "... a symptom of the continued humanitarian suffering in Sri Lanka."

While Stephen Harper "described the vessel as "abnormal", claimed that it created security concerns and warned that he could seek a change in the law to deal with similar arrivals. Canada's public safety minister, Vic Toews, said that it could contain members of the Tamil Tigers and that it was a "test ship ... part of a broader organised criminal enterprise". (1)

And a member of Jason Kenney's Canadian Taxpayers Federation, Maureen Bader, asked "... Do human rights advocates, clerics, and "progressives" really think that our lifeboat [Canada] can be infinitely accommodating? Do they even know that we are living in a lifeboat? ... Since several voices have spoken on behalf of the Canadian taxpayer and the need for public security, let me presume to speak on behalf of Mother Nature. She doesn't distinguish between refugees and migrants. She doesn't notice if they are legitimate or illegitimate, or whether they are skilled or unskilled. She doesn't really care if they will assimilate into our culture or remain apart. Nor does their fiscal burden impress her, or their crime rate, for that matter..."

She is citing potential ecological damage, but speaking for Mother Nature? What a load of crap. Jason Kenney must be so proud.

Canada is a big country. No one is saying that we need to simply allow all refugees to land without proper screening, but to suggest that all claims must be made and processed overseas, means certain death for many. And to paint them all as "terrorists" or threats to national security, sounds more like xenophobia , and has no place in a democratic and multicultural country.

The Voyage of the Damned

On the surface, it appeared that the Nazis were trying to be fair, and allow the Jewish population, at least those who could afford it, to leave. But there were other things at play here.

For one thing, it provided an opportunity for profiteers.

The cost of this trip was exorbitant; most Jews could not afford it. Almost all of them had lost their jobs. The Nazis had forced them to pay steep rents for their homes or apartments. Relatives from outside Germany, in some cases, had sent them money. Several families had to pool their resources so that just one member of the family could leave, thus rupturing family units. Each person was permitted to take the maximum equivalent of $4.00 in cash upon leaving. (3)

And to top it off, visas had to be purchased from a corrupt Cuban government, who told the refugees that they would be processed in Cuba first, and then would be welcome into the United States.

But it was a set-up.

Even before they set sail, it was apparent that they would not be welcomed. "The U.S. State Department in Washington, the U.S. consulate in Havana, some Jewish organizations, and refugee agencies were all aware of the situation. The passengers themselves were not informed ..." (1)

And the reason for this, was that Nazi propagandist, Joseph Goebbels, saw it as a perfect opportunity to embarrass other nations who had been vocal about Germany's persecution of the Jews.

The voyage of the St. Louis attracted a great deal of media attention. Even before the ship sailed from Hamburg, right-wing Cuban newspapers deplored its impending arrival and demanded that the Cuban government cease admitting Jewish refugees. Indeed, the passengers became victims of bitter infighting within the Cuban government. The Director-General of the Cuban immigration office, Manuel Benitez Gonzalez, had come under a great deal of public scrutiny for the illegal sale of landing certificates. (1)

But there was also a populist movement in Cuba against accepting these refugees. "Both agents of Nazi Germany and indigenous right-wing movements hyped the immigrant issue in their publications and demonstrations." and "Hostility toward immigrants fueled both antisemitism and xenophobia." (1)

And with the help of right-wing media:

Reports about the impending voyage fueled a large antisemitic demonstration in Havana on May 8, five days before the St. Louis sailed from Hamburg. The rally, the largest antisemitic demonstration in Cuban history, had been sponsored by Grau San Martin, a former Cuban president. Grau spokesman Primitivo Rodriguez urged Cubans to "fight the Jews until the last one is driven out." The demonstration drew 40,000 spectators. Thousands more listened on the radio. (1)

So to recap: Profiteers profited. Governments used it for propaganda. Right-wing groups engaged in xenophobia. Right-wing media inspired demonstrations. And despite all of this, those refugees were still refugees and their claims of persecution valid, as later proven when the horrible news of the Holocaust was echoed around the world.

And yet this week, when a brave soul, Rob McKinnon, President or the Port Moody–Westwood–Port Coquitlam Federal Liberal Association, suggested that the actions of the Harper government were "akin to collaborating with the Nazis to stop the flight of Jews", the media went nuts. Dimitri Soudas went on one of his usual insane rants, and they followed him around with glazed eyes and open mouths.

But as Mr. McKinnon pointed out:

...while Canada supports the UN Declaration on Human Rights that provides that everyone has a right to seek in another country asylum from persecution, as well as conventions that clarify our obligations in such matters, it turns out that if refugees don’t reach our territory we don’t have to do anything. So they propose to stop on the high seas vessels carrying such persecuted souls, and turn them back well before they get to Canadian waters; if we build the wall high enough, and make it impossible for refugees to actually get here, we can bask in our warm pious glow and never have to actually face them. (4)

We, as a nation, should be both alarmed and ashamed.

Taking the Moral High Ground

If you want to draw a modern parallel, look at Glen Beck and his Tea Parties. It's not too difficult to see him as a Grau San Martin urging Cubans to "fight the Jews until the last one is driven out." His demonstrations attract thousands, but the issue is now Muslims, women, blacks and Liberals. And in the same way that our media went after Mr. McKinnon, Beck's Fox News* attacks anyone with dissenting views. Facts are optional.

But we also have to take a look at ourselves. As Mr. Mckinnon says, "we can bask in our warm pious glow and never have to actually face them."

In 2008 the Harper government acknowledged our complicity in the St. Louis incident, which was a good thing.

This past week, the government of Canada made a series of important announcements, acknowledging errors of past governments and providing resources to commemorate these blights on Canadian history. Along with an announcement of funds for an educational program related to the St. Louis, recognition was also given to the Komagata Maru ship incident, where more than 350 potential immigrants from India were denied entry into Canada in 1914. (5)

However, you can't apologize for past mistakes, and then continue to make them. This feel good, "pious" act is only candy coating for our new draconian immigration policies. We have to prevent further holocausts, not be seen as promoting or accepting them.

At about the same time as the S.S. St. Louis incident, there was a letter to the editor of Time magazine, chastising the the way that the Nazis treated their refugees. It was from a passenger who had travelled on the Caribia, another Hamburg-American liner. And he says:

It is one of the most exasperating and humiliating things that can happen to a human being in the world today—to travel on a German ship loaded with Jewish refugees. ... At first, you find yourself enraged at the Germans for being so inhuman but gradually you take a deeper and more abstract view of the situation and, while you develop a sense of shame for the Germans, you come to suspect that their treatment of the refugees is just another indication of a reappearance in Germany of that peculiar quality which in the end will always bring defeat on the German nation. . . .

... The lines between the Germans and the Jews and between the Germans and all other foreigners on board were drawn long before I got on in Curaçao. By the time I got on, the ship had divided into two groups with the Germans by themselves and all others on board—English, a few Americans, a few Irish, Venezuelans, Colombians, etc., all siding with the Jews. . . .

The Hitlerites would not swim in the pool with the Jews. . . . The Germans ate their meals in solitary Nordic splendor—all by themselves. . . . The Germans were angered beyond measure when we went ashore with the Jews at Cartagena and Puerto Colombia. . . . I never was so glad as I was this morning to put foot on American soil. (6)

That same American soil that segregated it's blacks, and afforded few rights to African Americans. "No blacks allowed" ... "Blacks to the back of the bus". Those were familiar signs in Mr. Caldwell's America, but he could take the moral high ground because he defended the Jewish refugees. Prejudice is prejudice, and while he himself may not have harboured bigotry, what's that they say about people who live in glass houses? Or a segregated America?

A similar situation, that was even more grave, also proves this point. In his book, Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, tells the story of Captain Wolfgang Hoffman. Hoffman was not a member of the SS, but an ordinary citizen; the commander of a Police Battalion, given the task of executing Jews in Poland.

But when the commander was presented with forms that he must have his men sign, promising that they would not steal from the state, Hoffman fired back with righteous indignation:

" it appeared to me a piece of impertinence to demand of a decent German soldier to sign a declaration in which he obligates himself not to steal, not to plunder, and not to buy without paying. . . ." He continued by describing how unnecessary such a demand was, since his men, of proper ideological conviction, were fully aware that such activities were punishable offenses. He also pronounced to his superiors his judgment of his men's character and actions, including, presumably, their slaughtering of Jews. He wrote that his men's adherence to German norms of morality and conduct "derives from their own free will and is not caused by a craving for advantages or fear of punishment." (7)

He took a stand in protecting the honour of his men. The same men whose duty was the senseless slaughter of human beings. Not in self defense. Not as justice for crimes. But for the simple sin of being Jewish.

In the Bible study of the St. Louis incident (3), that I quoted, there is an interesting assumption made by the author.

The S.S. St. Louis incident also underscores the constant need for a strong and secure Israel. Had there been an Israel during the years of the Holocaust, not only would the passengers of the S.S. St. Louis, but thousands, if not millions, of the victims of Treblinka, Auschwitz, Buchenwald, and other death camps could have found a place to begin their lives anew. Regardless of our views of some of Israel’s policies, we must acknowledge that it is the only country in the world that will admit an unlimited number of Jews living under duress at all times. (3)

But they are wrong. Prejudice against Jews was not confined to non-Jews. According to the James Shasha Institute at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem:

Some 90,000 German Jewish immigrants came to Palestine in the 1930s, particularly in 1933 after Hitler’s rise to power. Their impact was felt in almost every sphere of life in the country – academic, social, cultural, industrial, judicial, medical, agricultural and architectural. This was not another immigration of young pioneers, but of people in their 30s or older, who already had established professions, such as, physicians lawyers, merchants, economists, theatre professionals, musicians and artists.Much has been written of the painful absorption process of the German Jews into the local society.

There was a huge clash between these migrants, whose nature was seen as foreign, and the absorbing element, the Eastern European Jews – established, patronizing and holding key positions in the community. For example, Eliezer Yafe, a leading figure in the Labor Movement, wrote: "There is a great danger to the community from the Hitler Zionists, after their Vaterland vomited them out. Is it not possible that they will wish to have their own German schools, a German hospital?"

"Vomited them out"? Again, prejudice is prejudice. Xenophobia is xenophobia. No one can take the moral high ground unless they earn it.

When Canada turned away the St. Louis, we had an arch anti-Semite as Minister of Immigration, by the name of Frederick Charles Blair. And his opposition to the Jews was based on ignorance.

“I suggested recently to three Jewish gentlemen with whom I am well acquainted, but it might be a very good thing if they would call a conference and have a day of humiliation and prayer, which might profitably be extended for a week or more, where they would honestly try to answer the question of why they are so unpopular almost everywhere...I often think that instead of persecution it would be far better if we more often told them frankly why many of them are unpopular. If they would divest themselves of certain of their habits I am sure they could be just as popular in Canada as our Scandinavian friends are.” (9)

This was not unlike what William Aberhart said on the matter:

Personally, I have little doubt that in working through Jews, the Jewish financial group has sacrificed its own people on the altar of its greed for power and this group is preeminently responsible for the poisonous anti-Semitism which is rampant in the world today. (10)

Or in a report prepared by Ernest Manning tying Communism with Judaism:

If international finance and socialism are travelling in the same direction is it possible that socialism is promoted by the money power to hasten the completion of their plot for world domination? Not only is it possible, but there is a fund of evidence which leads to the inevitable conclusion that there is a plot, worldwide in scope, deliberately engineered by a small number of ruthless international financiers. (10)

It was their own fault. They just needed to be sat down and have the whole thing explained to them. Maybe a day of humiliation and prayer would make them see the light.

What Kind of Country Do We Want to Live In?

That question was asked recently in a column about the closing of Canada's Prison Farms, but it relates to many of the changes made to the Canadian identity, since Stephen Harper and his Reform Movement took power.

Do we want to be "a haven in a heartless world" as Michael Ignatieff suggests and see the symptoms "of the continued humanitarian suffering in Sri Lanka" as Jack Layton reminds us. Or will we simply "bask in our warm pious glow" as feared by Rob Mckinnon?

We have pulled ourselves, for the most part, out of the darkness of anti-Semitism, but now risk jumping head first into the perils of bigotry against others, based on the fear of "strangers". This is the kind of fear that prompts a Florida minister to consider burning the Quran. And it is the kind of fear that prompts right-wing groups, like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation to suggest that taking in refugees is a threat to Mother Nauture. (I'm sorry, but that's just nuts).

And it's the same fear that prompts Stephen Harper to tell oppressive regimes to sort out their own "mess" and not send it here. Canadians should not have to be "bothered" with this.

Forget that Sri Lanka is quickly become a "white van" culture, where the police and other government agents engage in intimidation and unwarranted arrests**. Where corruption and police brutality have become the norm. (11) And that Reporters Without Borders have ranked Sri Lanka 165th among 173 countries in its annual worldwide press freedom index***. Or that Human Rights Watch**** research alleged that the Sri Lankan government is responsible for widespread abductions. (Wikipedia)

Instead Vic Toews is focusing on the criminal act of selling passports to legitimate refugees, as the main problem, and not the fact that they are "legitimate refugees." That we have to listen to their stories, and not as Stephen Harper suggests, leave it to the government with the "white vans" to sort out the problem.

The refugees aboard the St. Louis bought their freedom. But by not listening, and assuming the worst, we sent them to their deaths.

Is this really your Canada? Is this really how you want to be defined?

We need to listen to the Rob McKinnon's of this country and ignore the Dimitri Soudases, and the Vic Toews and the Stephen Harpers and the Maureen Baders.

And we need to listen to the Tamil Refugees. Our identity as a fair and compassionate people depends on it.

Something else to think about. The following Nazi poster depicts the heroes of the French resistance as members of an Army of Crime. Something to think about.



Footnotes:

*Canada may soon have out own Glen Beck in Kory Teneycke and Fox News North.

** G-20 anyone? Witch Hunts Anyone?

*** Accurate News and Information anyone?

**** Amnesty International report anyone?

Sources:

1. Voyage of the St. Louis, Holocaust Encyclopedia, United States Holocaust Museum

2. Sri Lankan Tamil refugees spark racism row in Canada: Government accused of scaremongering after prime minister claims 500 asylum seekers aboard boat a security concern, By Duncan Campbell, UK Guardian, September 7, 2010

3. The S.S. St. Louis, Bible Study, No. 148

4. An Evasion of Duty, By Ron McKinnon, Discourse, September 8, 2010

5. Voyage of the SS St. Louis: Journey toward a better future: Canadian government points the way forward by commemorating blights on our history, By: Bernie Farber, Toronto Star, May 27, 2008

6. Letters, Apr. 24, 1939, By: Ben Caldwell, Time Magazine

7. Hitler's Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust, By Daniel Jonah Goldhagen, Vintage Books, 1997, ISBN: 0-679-44695-8, Pg 3-4

8. The Migration Experience as Expressed in the Arts, James Shasha Institute at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, June 4 – 8, 2006

9. A Look Back at Canada’s Anti-Semitic History: Frederick Charles Blair, Fight Hatred, March 22, 2010

10. A Trust Betrayed: The Keegstra Affair, By David Bercuson and Douglas Wertheimer, Doubleday Canada, 1985, ISBN: 0-385-25003-7, Pg. 34-38

11. The Tamils in Sri Lanka and the Sri Lankan State, by Ashik Bonofer & David Morgan, South Asia Analysis Group, Paper No. 3786, April 29, 2010

Guest Column by Ashik Bonofer & David Morgan

Chapter Thirty-Four Continued: Wallace Klinck and the Bookstore Incident

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Though Robert Thompson, then head of the national Social Credit Party had been able to quiet the press somewhat after the Carmichael affair, the stain of anti-Semitism remained: The Toronto Telegram stated: "Neil Carmichael's words are a reflection on the Social Credit Party that is capable of attracting such men." The Globe and Mail remarked: "If Mr. Thompson expects his good faith to be accepted, it is not enough to dismiss remarks like those of Mr. Carmichael as indiscreet." The paper subsequently added that "even if the Social Credit Party now expels Mr. Carmichael, the question will remain whether he is being fired for anti-Semitism or indiscretion." (1)

This method of handling these kinds of situations would continue with the Reform Party under Preston Manning and the Conservative Party under Stephen Harper, though Harper no longer apologizes, he just demands that we accept it.

Then in 1965, another incident would take place that would once again prove that antisemitism was alive and well and living in the Social Credit Party.

In January 1965 Wallace Klinck, a thirty-year old University of Alberta student and campus chairman for the Social Credit party, obtained the approval of Professor Grant Davy, head of the political science department, to make Social Credit literature available in the university bookstore. Klinck approached the manager of the bookstore, N.S. Howe, with a number of books and pamphlets on Social Credit, including six copies of the Protocols. He told Howe that "Social Credit had come under a lot of fire lately on campus and ... students should be given the opportunity to read explanations of exactly what it stands for." Howe accepted the literature.

Once it was discovered that the bookstore was selling anti-Semitic literature the provost of the university immediately ordered the withdrawal of the Protocols. Howe defended his actions by stating: "I didn't know what kind of a publication the Protocols of Zion was. And I didn't expect [the political science department] did either." In fact, Professor Davy was aware of the contents of the Protocols and vehemently disagreed with them. "Nevertheless," he argued, "it seemed to me that it would be useful for students to know the sort of background upon which the Social Credit Party developed. I understand that Premier Manning has disavowed the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' as a part of the philosophy of his government, but there is little doubt ... that Social Credit movements and parties in other areas still refer to it as a basis of their philosophy." (1)

Manning, Orvis Kennedy, the Alberta Social Credit League president, and Owen Anderson (leader of the campus Socreds) immediately cancelled Klinck's membership, and began doing damage control. Anderson declared that Klinck "violated Social Credit party principle" by distributing the Protocols. "We ... do not hold the Protocols' views, and we repudiate people who distribute racist literature." Kennedy declared that the Protocols were "scurrilous, anti-Semitic writing, a forgery" and (falsely) claimed that they had "never been part of the Social Credit literature."

Klinck denied that the Protocols were anti-Semitic but asserted, quite correctly, that they were an integral part of social credit theory originated by Douglas. "The book is a terrible outline for world conquest ... The events that have occurred in the world since it was written would make any thinking person incapable of dismissing it without serious consideration." As for accusations that he was antiSemitic, Klinck said he believed in the dangers of an international financial conspiracy which could lead to a Third World War, but stressed he was not racist or anti-Jewish. "The nucleus of international financiers has its share of Jews in it ... Many records suggest there are a substantial number of Jews involved but this does not in any way involve the entire Jewish people." He also believed that the Alberta Social Credit government "doesn't do enough to bring the truth of Douglas Social Credit philosophy to the people"; hence his decision to distribute the Protocols and other Social Credit literature. It seemed to have worked--by the time the university ordered the books removed the bookstore had sold all six copies of the Protocols.

Premier Manning seemed relatively unperturbed about Social Credit's recurring intolerance. When questioned about the campus bookstore incident on CBC television a year later, he responded only with "deft side-stepping and restrained answers." According to one critical observer: "It was interesting to watch the Premier repudiate the anti-Semitic past of the Social Credit movement ... The anti-Semitic line has now been quietly relegated to the inner circles of the Social Credit Party, where the conspiracy theory of history is far from dead." (1)

Wallace Klinck is still very much a disciple of Social Credit and appears to work tirelessly to promote monetary reform. Says Wallace:

Were consumers paid a measured dividend and retailers adhered to a measured markup there would be in each production cycle ample monetized demand for accountants to feel content that their measures were useful in our struggle to end poverty, recession and forced loss of wages.. (2)

He also continues to support the notion of a Jewish conspiracy theory, though his attacks are limited to the Jewish Lobby. I would hesitate to call that antiSemitism. I myself have often criticized the Israeli Apartheid, but not based on religion, only a country's foreign policy.

However, when notions of a Jewish Conspiracy surface, I'm not OK with that.

Sources:

1. Beyond the Purge: Reviewing the social credit movement's legacy of intolerance, By Janine Stingel, Canadian Ethnic Studies Journal, Summer, 1999

2. Wallace Klinck's brief lesson, By John Gelles, February 2003

Chapter Thirty-Four Continued: Norman Jaques

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Norman Jaques was a farmer and horse breeder who was first elected as a Member of Parliament for Social Credit in the 1935 sweep.

In a party known for it's antisemitism, Jacques was widely regarded as the most anti-Semitic member of the party's parliamentary grouping. He promoted C.H. Douglas's belief in an international financial Jewish conspiracy, and attempted to read excerpts from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion into the Canadian parliamentary record.

He once suggested that "the Jews control all means of gathering news and of propaganda" and like many in the movement believed that an international Jewish conspiracy was responsible for both communism and Zionism. He opposed allowing Jewish refugees into Canada prior to World War II on the argument that they constituted a communist invasion force, and once dismissed the charge of anti-Semitism against him as a "communist smokescreen". He was a vocal opponent of the creation of the State of Israel in 1947-48, and described Zionism as "a political movement ... to dominate the world". (1)

Like William Aberhart, Jaques became interested in the politics of Father Charles Coughlin, co-founder the Union Party, who had written several columns for Aberhart's newspaper, the Social Credit Chronicle. The Union Party was formed to protest Roosevelt's "New Deal", believing they had a better option.

Norman Jaques went to visit another founder of the Party, Gerald Lyman Kenneth Smith in 1947, and upon his return was quoted in the Montreal Gazette:

"Gerald Smith is truly a great Christian gentleman who has been cruelly maligned. He stands for Christian nationalism. But, of course, the Communists have smeared him as anti-semitic... Smith believes in America for the Americans and in the American way of life... I have tried to do the same with the Canadian way of life and Canadian freedom and I will keep right on trying". Jaques later retracted his support for Smith, and said that most of the quotations attributed to him by the Gazette were fabrications. He did, however, describe Smith as having "done more to expose communist plots that any other public man in the United States of America", and said that he would try to do the same in Canada.

The Anti-Defamation League described Jaques as a "notorious anti-semite who has abused the privilege of entry into the United States by stirring up misunderstanding and tensions among racial and religious groups." (2)

Norman Jaques died in 1949 while still in office.

Sources:

1. Social Discredit: Anti-Semitism, Social Credit and the Jewish Response, By Janine Stingel, Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press ISBN 0-7735-2010-4, 2000, Pg. 91-92

2. Stingel, 2000, Pg. 183

Chapter Thirty-Four: From Darkness to Darker Still

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

By the late 1950's*, the federal Social Credit wing was in trouble. The Diefenbaker sweep of 1958 knocked many out and they were never able to fully recover.

Finally in 1962, they decided to form a coalition with a Quebec nationalist party, the Ralliement des créditistes, then led by charismatic leader, David Réal Caouette.

After the Percy Young incident the Social Credit movement experienced a lull, both in electoral success and incidents of anti-Semitism. This changed in 1962,however, when the national party experienced a massive geographical transfer of power to Quebec. A vibrant resurgence in Social Credit's electoral success occurred under Real Caouette, a car salesman from Pontiac, Quebec, who had long been involved in the Quebec wing of the national movement. In the 1962 federal election, Caouette linked his Ralliement des Creditistes with the national Social Credit party and, by invoking Social Credit's traditional bogeys of an anti-Christian conspiracy and the plot of the "moneyed interests," helped twenty-six Quebec Social Credit MPs (out of a national total of thirty) get elected." (1)

This presented a bit of a problem for the party, since only 4 of the 30 Social Credit MPs were from outside Quebec, yet their leader was Robert N. Thompson from Alberta. The year before that, while Caouette actually won the leadership race, Ernest Manning stepped in, saying that his province would never accept a francophone Catholic as party leader.

So while Thompson was officially the national leader and Caouette only deputy leader, Caouette wielded far greater power than Thompson and he knew it. He also got most of the press:

The surprise of Canada's inconclusive national election in June was the emergence of a fiery back-country French Canadian politician named Real Caouette, 44, whose right-wing Social Credit Party unexpectedly won 26 House of Commons seats from Quebec. Since then he has been filling the air with eccentric, if not demagogic, remarks. His fellow Social Credit-ers in English Canada explain that what the French-speaking auto dealer says often gets lost in translation. But last week, Caouette came through loud and clear in an interview in Le Magazine Maclean.

"Who are your political heroes in history?" he was asked. Caouette's brisk rejoinder: "Mussolini and Hitler." The storm broke, and it wasn't helped any by what Caouette had gone on to say in the magazine: "I admire Mussolini's qualities as a leader and I regret that he was a fascist. I admire in Hitler his economic reforms and I consider that he brought his people out of misery. I regret that he employed for war instead of for peace the ideas which he had."(2)

His comments drew praise from several sources including a letter from Dr. Hjalmar Schacht, who had been president of the Reichbank during the earlier part of Hitler's regime.

Schacht had written to Caouette: "I am very pleased to read in our press about your courageous statements and laudable opinion about the ideas of Adolf Hitler. I was happy to have served under his leadership in one of the key positions in our economy before the war and owing to that I had an opportunity to become acquainted with his greatness." In a conversation with a newspaper correspondent, Caouette remarked that Schacht was a Jew but despite his origin had not been liquidated by Hitler. When the correspondent expressed doubt about Schacht's Jewishness, Caouette responded that Hitler exterminated only "useless Jews." (1)

Only "useless Jews"?

Caouette was a federalist who fought for bilingualism in the House of Commons, winning a symbolic victory when he got the Parliament's restaurant to produce bilingual menus. Interesting, since the Reformers always claimed it was Trudeau who first sought to make Canada bilingual, and indeed he did with great success. But it began with Social Credit.

This marriage was doomed to failure from the start and they would soon part ways. Running separately in 1965**, the Quebec party was more successful, and by the 1968 election, Caouette's party won 14 seats while Social Credit won none. They would reunite again briefly in 1972 but the party would never again win seats outside Quebec.

One longtime Social Credit member, disenchanted with the Quebec wing of the Party, left the province with his wife Gwendolyn and six children, and headed west. He was a supporter of Thompson and in fact, Thompson's children had stayed with him for awhile when attending school.

He would then try his hand at adding to the party's English speaking wing by running as a Socred candidate against none other than Tommy Douglas in the riding of Nanaimo—Cowichan—The Islands. I think we already know the outcome of that.

His name was Stockwell Day and his son, also named Stockwell; would later enter politics, with far more success. The senior Day had joined the Western Canada Concept, a western separatist party that wants all western provinces and territories to split and form their own nation.

Continued: Norman Jacques

Notes:

*James Keegstra joined the party in 1957

**Another federal Social Credit Candidate in 1965 was Preston Manning. According to Alf Hooke:

Manning campaigned actively on behalf of a full slate of Social Credit candidates, one such candidate being his son, Preston Manning, who ran for election in the Constituency of East Edmonton. The Conservative candidate secured 13,596 votes to Mr. Manning's: 6,762. Having spoken on young Mr. Preston Manning's behalf myself, I found the overwhelming vote against him hard to believe. I was one of those many who looked forward to hearing the voice of young Preston Manning on behalf of the Social Credit movement in the House of Commons. (3)

Sources:

1. Beyond the Purge: Reviewing the social credit movement's legacy of intolerance, By Janine Stingel, Canadian Ethnic Studies Journal, Summer, 1999

2. Canada: Hitler, Mussolini & Caouette, Time Magazine, August 31, 1962

3. 30+5 I know, I was There, A first-hand account of the workings and history of the Social Credit Government in Alberta, Canada 1935-68, by Alfred J Hooke, Douglas Social Credit Secretariat

Chapter Thirty-Three Continued: Solon Low and Anti-Semitism

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"Our Jewish friends should recognize that the cause of the growing anti-Semitism ... is not due to propaganda alone ... anti-Semitism is spreading, because people cannot fail to observe that a disproportionate number of Jews occupy positions of control in international finance, in revolutionary activities, and in some propaganda institutions, the common policy of which is the centralization of power and the perversion of religious and cultural ideals. This gives people the impression that therefore there must be a Jewish conspiracy to gain world control." Solon Low (1)

After the resounding success of Social Credit in the Alberta provincial election of 1935, a Western Social Credit Party was established to run in the federal election later that year. They won 17 seats, and John Horne Blackmore would act as their leader.

In 1939, the federal branch of the Socreds joined with former Conservative William Duncan Herridge and his supporters, to create the short lived New Democracy movement. The Social Credit Party ran in the 1940 election under the "New Democracy" name but in 1944 held their first national convention and Solon Earl Low, the Alberta treasurer, would be elected the federal party's first official leader.

Like most in the Social Credit Party at the time, Solon Low was antisemitic, believing that there was a Jewish conspiracy that had infected international finance.

Social Credit publications propagated typical Jew-baiting propaganda. Aberhart bought into the theories of Social Credit's English founder, Maj. C.H. Douglas, who blamed the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in the 1940s - and the British government's efforts to control it through mass slaughtering of all infected cattle - as a "Jewish-socialist plot" against English cattle owners.Using his own words, Aberhart melded his Christian fervor with Douglas's political conspiracies to create a stereotypical portrayal of the financial system."

The principles of the old-line politicians and their henchmen are like those of the man who betrayed the Christ," Aberhart said. "Gold was his god and millions have suffered because of it. The moneychangers upheld his right and crucified the Christ and they have been crucifying everyone since who follows in the steps of the Savior."

In a similar vein, Solon Low, the provincial treasurer, had some advice for Jews in combating anti-Semitism ... Ending anti-Semitism, he said, would require Jews to denounce those "arch-criminals" in their midsts who are responsible for these initiatives.This argument would continue for years, with the CJC calling on Social Credit to reject its anti-Semitism, and Social Crediters responding that they would be happy to do so as soon as the CJC rejects the perpetrators of world domination, and so it went.Later, in 1947, when Low was federal leader of the Social Credit party, he used a national CBC broadcast to lambaste "the international power maniacs who aim to destroy Christianity" and the "international gangsters who are day-to-day scheming for world revolution." He also couldn't resist the "close tie-up between international communism, international finance and international political Zionism." (2)

William Aberhart and Ernest Manning were not innocent either.

One of the leading officials in the CJC, Louis Rosenberg, had some comments about Manning’s repudiation. “Evidently the leader of the Social Credit Party in Alberta does not like to be called an anti-semite, although he has done nothing to repudiate the repeated anti-semitic remarks which appear regularly in his official paper Today and Tomorrow and the anti-semitic statements made by the Social Credit members in the House of Commons.” Moreover, stated Rosenberg, the only difference between blatant anti-Semites in the Social Credit movement and “more circumspect and careful men” like Manning and the late Aberhart was that the former invoked the word “Jewish” in their fulminations about the international financial conspiracy, whereas the latter “use the same arguments and the same phraseology but omit the word Jewish, leaving their true meaning to be understood.” (3)

The Canadian Jewish Congress decided to meet with the new national leader Solon Low, to voice their concerns.

Notwithstanding the CJC’s uneasiness with Manning’s ‘repudiation,’ it was not until December 1944 that Alberta CJC officials attempted again to confront Social Credit on the issue of anti-Semitism. That month CJC officials H.A. Friedman and John Dower met with Solon Low, leader of the newly-created national Social Credit party. Friedman and Dower met Low at the legislative buildings in Edmonton and talked with him for nearly two hours about Social Credit’s attitude on the “Jewish question.” They showed him several issues of the party organ (now renamed the Canadian Social Crediter) which were anti-Semitic. On the surface, the meeting went well. Low was conciliatory, assuring both Friedman and Dower that he strongly opposed anti-Semitism and that it definitely was not part of Social Credit policy. He gave them “his personal assurance that he would no longer tolerate the type of articles that we brought to his attention in the party’s paper ... that he would disavow any member of the party who indulged in Anti-Semitic statements
... that he would ... make a public statement to the press on the question of Anti-Semitism, which he assured us we would find fully satisfactory.”

Shortly thereafter, Low gave a public address in Lethbridge, Alberta in which he discussed Social Credit’sstance on anti-Semitism. Unfortunately for the CJC, Low’s statement was blatantly anti-Semitictements ... that he would ... make a public statement to the press on the question of Anti-Semitism, which he assured us we would find fully satisfactory.” Shortly thereafter, Low gave a public address in Lethbridge, Alberta in which he discussed Social Credit’s stance on anti-Semitism. Unfortunately for the CJC, Low’s statement was blatantly anti-Semitic.

“Some Jewish friends of our movement have told me that we are being identified with anti-Semitism because of our persistent and outspoken exposures of a group of international financiers and world plotters who are engaged in a criminal conspiracy to destroy democracy and Christianity and to enslave mankind to their rule.” By construing his meeting with Friedman and Dower in these terms, Low simultaneously refuted and reaffirmed Social Credit’s anti-Semitism. “Some of these men happen to be of Jewish racial origin,” he commented, “and to be more specific, of German-Jewish origin.” However, they were not exclusively Jewish, Low qualified, and although many were this was no reason to condemn Jews as a whole. Accordingly, it was important to clarify for everyone, including Canada’s Jews, Social Credit’s stance on anti-Semitism: We very definitely are not anti-Semitic or anti any race or religion ... The only times when the Canadian Social Credit movement can possibly be brought into conflict with any racial or religious group would be if those comprising such a group conspired together as a group in an organized attack on democracy and Christianity. I am sure that our fellow Canadians of Jewish origin recognize that a truly democratic and Christian society ... alone will give them the social objectives they seek as individuals in common with all Canadians ... it is fantastic for anybody to suggest that as Social Crediters we are anti-Semitic. I will go further and point out to our fellow Canadians of Jewish origin that actually the Social Credit movement is the most powerful influence in the country working for their emancipation.

Low’s speech had made a mockery of his meeting with Friedman and Dower and was the absolute antithesis of what they had hoped for. Not surprisingly, Western CJC officials were extremely dismayed by Low’s address and the entire CJC leadership became extremely wary about openly confronting Social Credit’s anti-Semitism in the future. What the CJC needed, but was not yet ready to create, was a public relations approach which did not rely on the goodwill of those who promoted anti-Semitism. (3)

And as Janine Stingel points out "... while anti-Semitic sparks were emerging throughout the country at the time, they differed from the Social Credit experience, which represented an institutionalization of Jew-hatred within a legitimately elected Canadian government." (2)

And:

Stingel laments that Manning has gone down in the annals as the man who purged the anti-Semites from Social Credit, something she considers a generous assessment from what she knows of the machinations around the issue. She also sees a direct ideological (and blood) relationship between Social Credit and the Reform party/Canadian Alliance, which was formed by Ernest Manning's son,
Preston. (2)

Solon Low would visit Israel in 1957 and change his opinion drastically. He died in 1962 at the age of 62.

Sources:

1. Beyond the Purge: Reviewing the social credit movement's legacy of intolerance, By Janine Stingel, Canadian Ethnic Studies Journal, Summer, 1999

2. The Social Credit's darker side: Canadian Jewish Congress cut its teeth fighting Socreds, By Pat Johnson, The Jewish Independent, April 6, 2001

3. FROM FATHER TO SON: CANADIAN JEWRY’S RESPONSE TO THE ALBERTA SOCIAL CREDIT PARTY AND THE REFORM PARTY OF CANADA, By Janine Stingel, 2001

Chapter Thirty-Three Continued: Ernest Manning and Percy Young

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

In Western Canada several groups publicly disseminated antisemitic vitriol. The most notable was the Social Credit Party, which had a political stranglehold on British Columbia and Alberta. Percy Young a delegate to the B.C. Socred convention in 1957, declared, "Zionism has completely destroyed Christianity ... and it will destroy Social Credit, too, unless the people have proper education."

B.C. premier W.A.C. Bennet did not disassociate himself from this comment. Writing in the Dawson Creek Star on 15 November 1957, Young denounced Zionists, not Jews" Ernest Manning the long time premier of Alberta, refused to act as honourary chairman for Brotherhood Week in 1957 "unless all Jews converted to Christianity." (1)

Young's comments were not unique within the party, given that it was founded on the notion of a Jewish conspiracy. The Canadian Jewish congress did lodge a complaint:

At the October 1957 convention of the British Columbia Social Credit League in Vancouver a delegate named Percy Young made a violent anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist attack in addressing the convention. The CJC immediatelyprotested to Solon Low, leader of the Social Credit party in theFederal Parliament, and to the premiers of the Social Credit governments in British Columbia and Alberta, adding that "in view of the past disavowals ofanti-Semitism by the Social Credit Movement, it was disheartening. . . ." Low issued a statement that "Mr. Young was not expressing the views of theSocial Credit Association of Canada, and I wish most strongly to disassociateour movement from the references he made to Zionism and the Jews. . . ." (2)

And according to Janine Stingel:

He [Young] defined Zionists as "people who call themselves Jews, but are really Russians from outer Mongolia who went to Israel in 952 BC." Delegates to the convention applauded loudly when he declared: "Christianity was thoroughly destroyed by improper education ... Zionism has a very underground way of getting destruction. You have to know your enemy to fight it." Young later told a reporter for the Victoria Daily Colonist that Zionism controlled communism, Nazism, socialism, labour unions, banks, the press and radio--"everything in fact except Social Credit." According to the Vancouver Sun, "no one [at the convention] spoke a gainst [Young's] comments, but later he received a private scolding from Noel Murphy, league president." The Saskatoon Star-Phoenix likewise noted that Young's remarks went unchallenged at the convention, even though national leader Solon Low and British Columbia premier Bennett addressed the delegates after Young. (3)

The anti-Semites had not been purged, but still clearly planted in the Social Credit movement.

Continued: Solon Low and Anti-Semitism

Sources:

1. Delayed Impact: The Holocaust and the Canadian Jewish Community, By Franklin Bialystok, McGill-Queen's University Press, 2000, ISBN-13: 978-0773520653, Pg. 75-76

2. Canada, By Louis Rosenberg, American Jewish Congress Archives

3. Beyond the Purge: Reviewing the social credit movement's legacy of intolerance, By Janine Stingel, Canadian Ethnic Studies Journal, Summer, 1999

Chapter Thirty-Three Continued: John Horne Blackmore

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

After the stunning victory of William Aberhart and Social Credit in Alberta in 1935, the party decided to capitalize on the wave, and ran candidates in the federal election.

Taking place on October 14 of that year, they had very little time to organize, yet were able to win 17 seats, 16 of which were in Alberta; on the promise of monetary reform.

R.B. Bennett's Tories took a trouncing, partly because of internal rifts, while William Lyon MacKenzie's Liberals won a majority with 173 seats.
One of the Social Creditors who would make his way to Ottawa was John Horne Blackmore, a school teacher and principal in Lethbridge, Alberta. He would assume the role of federal party leader, and hold that position until 1944, when a convention elected Solon Low.

Blackmore was born on March 27, 1890 in Sublett, Idaho and came to Canada in 1892 with his parents as part of the Mormon emigration.

In 1882, the Edmunds Act forbidding polygamy was passed in the United States and many Mormon families came north to Canada, settling in southern Alberta. Initially Albertans were worried about this immigration, hearing of clashes between the American government and the Mormons over the issue of polygamy, and did not want to have such conflicts in Alberta. But in 1890, the Mormon Church banned the practice and the Canadian government began to encourage their settling here, as they were considered to be good farmers. (1)

Blackmore himself would take up the cause for "plural" marriage, even urging Parliament to repeal the anti-polygamy law. As a result he was excommunicated by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Blackmore never had more than one wife. But he was thrown out of the church for "teaching and advocating the doctrine of plural marriage" at secret meetings in southern Alberta where men debated whether Mormon leaders were wrong to have renounced Joseph Smith's revelation that it's okay for men to have multiple wives.

A year before Blackmore was excommunicated, one of his 12 children, Harold, bought property outside Creston and settled there with his two wives and a growing brood of children. Soon, John's brother, Ray, bought property there as well and took up residence with his first two wives. Eventually, he had five wives and more than 30children, including Winston. (2)

Winston Blackmore is the nephew of John Horne Blackmore and leader of polygamist town of Bountiful, that has had many run ins with the law.

Made up of as many as 1,000 adherents of a fundamentalist Mormon sect, Bountiful has been home to clans of polygamists since the arrival in the late 1940s of the homestead's founder, Harold Blackmore, who — according to one account — was drawn to the valley after envisioning it in a dream. Blackmore was part of the fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which was expelled from mainstream Mormonism in the 1930s. For generations, local farmers co-existed with the polygamists of Bountiful. But this relationship, based on the country tenet "live and let live," grew increasingly uneasy over time as strange stories of life within the settlement leaked out and found their way into the media, with accounts of a power struggle between Winston Blackmore, the sect's leader in Bountiful, and Warren Jeffs, the leader of the FLDS Church. Jeffs, now incarcerated in the U.S. for being an accomplice to rape, is facing charges in the aftermath of the raid on the polygamist Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado. (3)

Ironically, many of the current Reform-Conservative MPs claim that same-sex marriage will lead to polygamy, and yet in the case of Bountiful, it's religious fundamentalism.

Both communities follow the preachings and directives of a ninety-one-year-old " prophet " named Rulon T. Jeffs. His Canadian lieutenant is forty-five-year-old Winston Blackmore. These men, according to former UEP members, have an iron grip on their flock, dictating who lives where, who is shunned, which man is to be blessed with his third, fifth, or fifteenth wife, even what style of undergarments are to be worn. Jeffs and Blackmore deny such extensive control over members' lives but freely admit to polygamy.

Blackmore maintains that the freedom of religion provision in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms shields the men of Bountiful from charges of polygamy. Last October at his first meeting with the press in a decade, he called the Charter "a wonderful piece which protects all people. . . [it"s] the same Charter that protects the gay and lesbian community and the same one that protects common-law relationships and the same one that protects unfaithful husbands . . . unfaithful wives . . . unfaithful everybodies." (4)

John Horne Blackmore and the Protocols of Zion

John Blackmore would also get himself into trouble when copies of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion were mailed out from his constituency office in the fall of 1953.

Alberta Socred MP John Blackmore, an ardent supporter of the rabidly anti-communist United States Senator, Joseph McCarthy, was distributing from his office in the House of Commons the notorious Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Moreover, Blackmore's secretary, Doris Moore, had been using House of Commons stationery and the MP's postal frank to distribute anti-Semitic literature.

According to Moore: "I made the discovery about Communism being Zionism and heading the great banking systems of the world ... the evidence is here." Blackmore stated that Moore mailed the material on her own volition six days before he arrived for the parliamentary session. Whether he was using his secretary as a scapegoat is debatable, but when asked if he agreed with her actions, Blackmore replied: "I wouldn't disagree. I won't say I would have sent the material out but she did. I'll take a neutral attitude." Yet he also emphasized that neither he nor the Social Credit party was "responsible for what Miss Moore does." In response to whether the books in question were anti-Semitic, Blackmore commented: "They are anti-Communist ... [there] are traitors who are seeking to destroy our civilization ... if the Jews get mixed up in it, can that be helped?" To other reporters, Blackmore asked: "if you tell the truth about Jews, are you anti-Semitic?" and "If the Jews get mixed up in a Communist conspiracy, can they hope to escape censure?" (5)

While he allowed her to take the fall, this was not contrary to the beliefs of Ernest Manning himself. He warned his listeners to "keep your eye on that strange little country, Israel" and in "a radio broadcast discussed the relationship between Russia and the State of Israel, invoking biblical prophecy to claim that Russia would be ruled by the Anti-Christ, that Israel would ally itself with Russia and consequently Israel would be betrayed and crushed." (5)

Then national Social Credit leader, Solon Low told the press: "If she were my stenographer, I'd have got rid of her long ago. I'm surprised at her attitude. I wouldn't condone the use of my frank by my secretary for this sort of thing. As a party we're certainly not having anything to do with it." And yet days later he told a meeting of the Ontario Social Credit party in Toronto, that regarding the material itself, he couldn't see how "by any stretch of the imagination it could be remotely identified as anti-Semitic"; rather, it was simply anti-communist and nothing more. (5)

Blackmore would remain as Social Credit MP until 1958, when he lost the election during the Diefenbaker sweep. He died on May 2, 1971.

Continued: Ernest Manning, Orvis Kennedy and the Communists

Sources:

1. Mormon Immigration to Alberta, Understanding Canadian Diversity in Alberta, Celebrating Multiculturalism

2. Polygamy issue runs deep in the Blackmore family, By Daphne Bramham, Vancouver Sun, February 17, 2009

3. Raiding the Polygamists: An Eldorado North of the Border, By John Nadler, Time Magazine, January 9, 2009

4. Bountiful, B.C., By Daniel Woods, Saturday Night, August 4, 2001

5. Beyond the Purge: Reviewing the social credit movement's legacy of intolerance, By Janine Stingel, Canadian Ethnic Studies Journal, Summer, 1999

Chapter Thirty-Three: Ernest Manning and Anti-Semitism

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"Anti-Semitism in Canada in the 1930s and 1940s involved an image of Jews as international conspirators, secretly plotting world domination through an inchoate combination of international banking, communism and Zionism. In the mythology, based on the forged but widely circulated Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Jews thus posed a threat to national sovereignty, property, peace and prosperity.

"Anti-Semitism was not a coincidental adjunct to this right-wing populist movement, but resided at the core of a paranoid vision of bankers and money-lenders swindling honest Canadians out of the wages of their toil. Depression-era Alberta was fertile ground for such a message, particularly when it came through the medium of a popular radio-preacher turned politician, "Bible Bill" Aberhart.

"Alberta thus became home to the only North American jurisdiction with a government that officially endorsed anti-Semitism." (1)

When Ernest Manning took over the premiership after Aberhart’s death in the spring of 1943, he was well aware of Social Credit’s anti-Semitic elements, which had become entrenched in the Social Credit movement.

Throughout the Second World War, party literature increased it's alarms over a Jewish conspiracy, especially since Major Douglas's views were becoming more erratic. As David Elliot states: "Douglas was extremely anti-Judaic in the tradition of Houston Stewart Chamberlain. His conspiracy ideas became more pronouncedly paranoid as time progressed and there developed a great similarity between Douglas's and Hitler's analysis of economics and banking... He further claimed that no politician could "hope to attain office except by permission of Finance, " finance being a common epithet in Anti-Semitic literature, referring to international Jewish bankers, whose power was more imagined than real." (2)

And at a time when they should have been alarmed by news of the persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany, the Canadian Social Crediters instead believed that the stories were fabricated to further the aims of the Jewish world plotters. As a result, they were vehemently opposed to the acceptance of Jewish refugees. This prompted accusations of Nazism by both the media and their political opponents, forcing the new Premier, Ernest Manning to take a stand.

With an election looming, on March 2, 1944, he issued a public statement in which he “unequivocally” repudiated anti-Semitism within the Alberta Social Credit movement, though his statement only brought more confusion over his party's position.

It has been brought to my attention that an erroneous impression has been created in certain quarters that the Social Credit movement is anti-Semitic. Nothing could be further from the truth ... Social Credit is not opposed to any religion or race, as such. It is only when the adherents to any religion, or the people of any race take collective action as a group to attack the principles of Christianity and democracy which are fundamental to Social Credit that conflict arises ... In exposing and opposing the conspiracy of individuals and corporations seeking to impose a state of financial and economic dictatorship upon all nations the advocates of Social Credit consider it most important that the facts of the case be placed before the people irrespective of the color, race or creed of the conspirators. (3)

In other words, while denying the party promoted anti-Semitic views, he still believed that Jews were the “enemy” of Christianity and democracy. He then went on to compare Social Credit’s battle against the international financial conspiracy with the fight against Nazism. He argued that, because Nazi Germany attacked Christianity and democracy, this necessarily brought it in conflict with Social Credit, ignoring the fact that they were murdering Jews.

According to Canadian Jewish Congress official, Louis Rosenberg:

“Evidently the leader of the Social Credit Party in Alberta does not like to be called an anti-semite, although he has done nothing to repudiate the repeated anti-semitic remarks which appear regularly in his official paper Today and Tomorrow and the anti-semitic statements made by the Social Credit members in the House of Commons ... the only difference between blatant anti-Semites in the Social Credit movement and “more circumspect and careful men” like Manning and the late Aberhart was that the former invoked the word “Jewish” in their fulminations about the international financial conspiracy, whereas the latter “use the same arguments and the same phraseology but omit the word Jewish, leaving their true meaning to be understood.” (3)

Sources:

1. Social Discredit: Anti-Semitism, Social Credit and the Jewish Response, By Janine Stingel, Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press ISBN 0-7735-2010-4, Pg. 13

2. Anti-Semitism and the Social Credit Movement: The Intellectual Roots of the Keegstra Affair, By: David Elliot, Canadian Ethnic Studies, 1985

3. FROM FATHER TO SON: CANADIAN JEWRY’S RESPONSE TO THE ALBERTA SOCIAL CREDIT PARTY AND THE REFORM PARTY OF CANADA By: Janine Stingel

Stockwell Day and the School of Tomorrow

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Alberta's oil booms often meant massive increases in population, which resulted in a shortage of schools and qualified teachers.

Consequently, several private education facilities were established, most Bible or Christian, and because of the increased workload for the Alberta education ministry, they were allowed to teach what they wanted, and unless a complaint was launched, without interference.

One of these facilities was the Bentley Christian Training Centre, run by a charismatic pastor, Bill Lewis, a man of uncompromising beliefs. His assistant and the administrator of the education centre was a man by the name of Stockwell Burt Day.

Day was an unlikely choice as a school administrator, having only a high school education and a sporadic career, that included everything from deckhand to auctioneer. But none the less he all but ran the facility, directing the curriculum and overseeing the six teachers employed to instruct about 100 students. (1)

The school's teachings were based on modules obtained by the Accelerated Christian Education (ACE) program from the Texas based Schools of Tomorrow.

The School Of Tomorrow is a Christian Fundamentalist organization that operates a large number of community and parent controlled schools. Theirs is perhaps the largest home schooling program in Canada using the Accelerated Christian Education (ACE) modules. Because the ACE program is non-accredited, and used largely by community and family-run schools, organizations such as the School of Tomorrow have been allowed to proliferate without conforming to the educational standards of public schools. (2)

An example of this comes from an eight-year-old boy:

Then God came and attacked the circle and he came with his good and holy angels. The attack looked like lightning. When the lightning came and struck the circle it became swished and it got smaller and smaller. Then God dropped it into the sea of fire. As it dropped, Satan was going down into the fire and also all the Non-Christians, Muslims and Jews that he was holding onto. All of them came down with Satan because they couldn't get away." (2)

However, their anonymity would soon be put into question, when in 1982, a school teacher in the neighbouring town of Eckville, Jim Keegstra, was found teaching his students of a Jewish Conspiracy and that the Holocaust was a hoax. In the wake of this, the Alberta government took steps to rein in the independent schools.

Overnight, Day became a political activist, founding the Alberta Association of Independent Schools, a lobby group for fifteen of the independent schools.

Government officials of the time seem to have found him civil and pleasant, but also found Day intransigent in meeting repeated requests to comply with government regulations ... Day once stated: "God's law is clear. Standards of education are not set by government, but by God, the Bible, the home and the school. If we ask for (the education minister's) approval, we are recognizing his authority." (1)

The Alberta ministry of education, found the ACE program being used in many of these schools, including Bentley, were based on a strict interpretation of the Bible, stifling creativity and critical thinking. They were also determined to be insensitive to "blacks, Jews and natives."

Alberta Education had specific concerns with Day's own Training Centre. The department argued the Centre's six teachers were not qualified and that it was operating without government approval. The department also expressed concern the Centre was employing the ACE curriculum, though no racist materials were in evidence. Day denied the validity of any of these concerns, contending the staff were qualified, the Training Centre was properly registered, and that the teaching materials used in the school neither condoned nor encouraged racism or anti-Semitism. (1)

The Bentley Church Centre also became a catalyst for unrest in the small community of 900 residents, as his students were forbidden to interact with other children. Many referred to the school and it's church, as a cult bent on taking over the town. Indeed when Stockwell Day finally left the school to enter politics, the pastor who took over for him, said that it was the closest thing to a cult you'll ever get.

Rathjen arrived in 1986 to a disaster: a demoralized congregation had shrunk almost by half, allegations of fraud were afoot, and the church owed $12,000 to creditors. Factions were warring. It was a dark time in Bentley. "The church leaders had risen to unquestioned authority," explains Rathjen. "They had moved away from the congregational government with the assumption "You're here to serve and not ask questions." Rathjen reports that, before its collapse, the former Bentley Christian Centre was a renegade Pentecostal church that instituted a divine mandate to replace grassroots congregational representation.

Throughout this period, Stockwell Day was assistant pastor and school administrator. "They changed their by-laws so that the people would have no say - leaders to be appointed by other leader, as determined by scripture," explains Rathjen. "It was a haughty, arrogant, pride-filled success story that led to disaster." Fuelled by American-style revivalism, the church emphasized radical gospel practices - such as speaking-in-tongues - that whipped worshippers into a frenzy. "They have emotional experiences and then try to build a doctrine around it," explains Rathjen. The intensity of the church and constant stream of visiting American pastors gave Bentley an international profile within fundamentalist circles. But the church eventually succumbed to its own extremes.

"I would say that it was as close to a cult as you can get," says pastor Rathjen. "They were still holding on to the Christian teaching - but with manipulation and control. (3)

That uncompromising fundamentalism still defines Stockwell Day, and as head of the Treasury, we are seeing his disdain for education, represented in cuts to funding for any program not within his realm of beliefs.

Sources:

1. Requiem for a Lightweight: Stockwell Day and Image Politics, By Trevor Harrison, Black Rose Books, 2002, ISBN: 1-55164-206-9, Pg. 8-9

2. School Of Tomorrow, by David Kostinchuk, March 1, 2001

3. Bentley, Alberta: Hellfire, Neo-Nazis and Stockwell Day: A two-part look inside the little town that nurtured a would-be prime minister - and some of the most notorious hate-mongers in Canada, By Gordon Laird, NOW Magazine, 2000