Conservatives keeping list of Jews

JB Globe · October 10, 2007

If he was just sending these cards to CONSERVATIVE PARTY MEMBERS who specified in their membership that they're Jewish, this would be a non-issue, because after all, every political party sends out religious holiday cards to folks of all religions who are party-members.

The thing is, these folks aren't party-members, they're ordinary citizens, which means the Conservatives have had to do some investigating in order to figure out if these folks are Jewish or not. It isn't clear how they obtained this information (did they "borrow" the B'nai Brith mailing list? Or just checked the phone book for names that "sounded Jewish") but the point is it wasn't consented information.

And speaking as a Jew, I can tell you that it freaks us the hell out when someone whom we've never told we're Jewish, who we don't know personally, knows we're Jewish. Even if, and in some cases, especially if, they're acting as if they want to be our friend. Call it the residual cultural paranoia of a few millenia spent on the run and under thumb - but I think it's well-founded given our history and in light of how many times political parties and lobby groups attempt to exploit us for their own political gain (see those extra-creepy Christian-Zionists in Utah & Colorado who put on theatrical productions in "Jew-face") Harper's doing what others have done before - "Hey Jews! I'm a pro-Israel Goi! Which means that in actuality I just support the opinions and policies of the conservative Likhud party, which doesn't represent all Israelis, never mind all Jews!"

Short answer is this won't work and might even back fire on the Cons - I think most Jews would see that he's pulling the "I'm down with you guys cause I sent you a card" routine, assuming that we vote based on "Jewish instincts" and not for similar reasons as most Canadians. Some might decide NOT to vote for him because of how it seems sneaky, presumptious, and disturbing.

Harper seems to be mistaking the opinions of conservative Jews who are pro-Israel (again, meaning pro-Likhud in actuality) with Jews as a whole. Their lobbying groups seem to have caught his ear, and are possibly exploiting HIS ignorance about the Jewish community for their own gain - the same way conservative Sikh organizations have made themselves out to be the spokespeople for the Sikh community and have the ear of the Liberal party in BC. It pays to be knowledgable, because when you're not, you can be screwed.

ScottSA · October 10, 2007

That truly is a paranoid post. A guy sends a card to someone who happens to be Jewish and you're all "Run! Here comes a pogrom!"

Michael Bluth · October 10, 2007

Yet the jewish comaprison was based on... oh what do you call it... ahhh... FACTS! Thats it, not partisan conjecture and spin.

What would have been wrong with:

Conservatives keeping lists based on religious affiliation

It is still the FACTS presented in a non-inflammatory way.

Shakeyhands · October 10, 2007

What would have been wrong with:
It is still the FACTS presented in a non-inflammatory way.

Absolutely nothing, but nor is there an issue with stating the facts, regardless if you think its acceptable or not.

Michael Bluth · October 10, 2007

Absolutely nothing, but nor is there an issue with stating the facts, regardless if you think its acceptable or not.

From the rules of the board:

We define "trolling" as a message that serves no constructive purpose and is likely to cause offence or arguments. We define "annoying" as any message that results in a complaint from a registered user -- we will then decide whether to take action.

The title, posted in the way it was, served no constructive purpose over substituting 'a religious group' for Jews.

It is definitely a decision that needs to be made.

There are a number of people in this thread who took offence to the title. Maybe it's time for resolution...

Edited October 10, 2007 by Michael Bluth

jdobbin · October 10, 2007

Clearly you were trying to evoke Nazi Germany. The "soldiers in the streets" ad was "true" too, in the strictest sense, in that a revived military with more bases would put soldiers in the streets of towns they would otherwise not have been in, but are you seriously suggesting that the intent of the ad was to convey information that the Cons were going to beef up the CF? You know very well why you cast it in a sinister light by the use of the title...you know it, I know it, and obviously everyone else knows it, so why are you trying to pretend anything else? You claim to be a writer, and if you're a halfway decent writer you know all about evocative wordplay. Stop playing dumb.

I have never mentioned anything about Germany nor evoked anything of the like. In fact, in the very first post, it is quite evident that the list is being used by the Tories to appeal to Jewish voters.

jdobbin · October 10, 2007

Would your sentiment be the same if it were the Liberals who were doing this?

It seems the defence of this mailing is that the Liberals do it too. I've yet to see evidence that they keep lists based on religious affiliation do but if it is mentioned enough times, I'm sure they will be convinced its true.

I didn't make any comparison to World War II and Germany and didn't even highlight the person in the article who did until another poster said no one seemed overly concerned about the mailing.

Wilber · October 10, 2007

I'm not offended, just disappointed. Even though jd and I disagree on a lot, his arguments are generally well presented. When I said his choice of a title was beneath him, I was serious. In a word, dumb.

As far as the Tories violating the privacy act goes, if anyone has any real evidence they should hot foot it over to the RCMP and ask them to investigate.

jdobbin · October 11, 2007

Simple, jdobbin could have chose, Conservatives keeping lists based on religious affiliation, which is probably true. Why would you send a Christmas card to a Muslim? He chose to focus on Jews. The association is clear to most of the people on this forum and if nothing else it is just plain clumsy and transparent.

Why is the word Jews something that you stumble over? It wasn't just any religion that that was being appealed to. It was people of Jewish faith. The article never mentioned anything about Muslims and the article focus was on Jewish people.

I'm not sure that a change of wording anywhere would have made a difference to many people.

The criticisms would still be:

This is an association to Nazi Germany. (It's not. The Tories want to celebrate the Jewish faith not persecute it)

The people in the article complaining are Liberals. (Only one was self identified as a Liberal, the rest weren't)

The Liberals keep such lists too. (Not mentioned in the article. Evidence of lists based on religion?)

Names gathered on the list are in the public domain. (Friend and relatives can release you personal info and it is in the public domain?)

Keeping such lists is not an invasion of privacy. (It is according to some of the people in the article)

sharkman · October 11, 2007

Oh yeah, like you really have no idea why the phrase, "lists of Jews" is causing such a fuss...

sharkman · October 11, 2007

Once again, they did not collect religious data on her. Because had they done so, they would have known that as she herself says, she is not religious!!!!!

Oh dobbin, this post on page 2 clearly points out why, in your link, they are not collecting names based on religious affiliation.

jdobbin · October 11, 2007

I'm not offended, just disappointed. Even though jd and I disagree on a lot, his arguments are generally well presented. When I said his choice of a title was beneath him, I was serious. In a word, dumb.
As far as the Tories violating the privacy act goes, if anyone has any real evidence they should hot foot it over to the RCMP and ask them to investigate.

I still say that no other religion was mentioned. I certainly didn't make any association to any persecution. The title is entirely accurate.

I've always been put off by words that cloak the true meaning of something. For example, sexual assault is a blanket form of wording that covers everything from exposure to actual rape. People are not entirely sure what the wording means anymore. I think it is important to say what you mean and to mean what you say.

"Religious affiliation" could have been taken by some to mean that the Tories kept religious lists of Muslims and Christians. The article never mentioned either. It only mentioned Jews.

jdobbin · October 11, 2007

Oh dobbin, this post on page 2 clearly points out why, in your link, they are not collecting names based on religious affiliation.

If you believe that, fine. The profile the Tories were building on was whom they believed to be were Jewish.

jdobbin · October 11, 2007

Oh yeah, like you really have no idea why the phrase, "lists of Jews" is causing such a fuss...

Is it not a list of Jews?

sharkman · October 11, 2007

Why can you not understand this?

Edited October 11, 2007 by sharkman

jdobbin · October 11, 2007

That truly is a paranoid post. A guy sends a card to someone who happens to be Jewish and you're all "Run! Here comes a pogrom!"

If someone here determines what your address here and mails you a Christmas card, will you cry "stalker." Would anything be wrong with that? If we ask you friends and relatives what church you go to, is that information in the public domain?

Edited October 11, 2007 by jdobbin

sharkman · October 11, 2007

If you believe that, fine. The profile the Tories were building on was whom they believed to be were Jewish.

Oh, here we go around the freakin' circle again...

Being Jewish does not make one religious, dobbin. For you to keep inserting religion into this is nothing more than a cheap calculated smear, and coming from you, who calls yourself 'the doctor', it is beneath you. btw, doctor of what?

jdobbin · October 11, 2007

If he was just sending these cards to CONSERVATIVE PARTY MEMBERS who specified in their membership that they're Jewish, this would be a non-issue, because after all, every political party sends out religious holiday cards to folks of all religions who are party-members.

I certainly would have not have had an issue with a list of self-identified Jewish supporters of the Conservative party receiving a holiday message. This is not the case at all.

Even if the Tory intent was to celebrate a Jewish holiday, the collecting of this data of people who gave no consent is a violation of their privacy.

jdobbin · October 11, 2007

Oh, here we go around the freakin' circle again...
Being Jewish does not make one religious, dobbin. For you to keep inserting religion into this is nothing more than a cheap calculated smear, and coming from you, who calls yourself 'the doctor', it is beneath you. btw, doctor of what?

It is obvious you are quite angry about all this. I certainly have not attacked you with insults though so I don't know know why you are personalizing things.

Since the Tories were giving out a card for a religious holiday, I think they were assuming the list the were collecting was for Jews who celebrated the holiday.

sharkman · October 11, 2007

You really need to drop the tired old line you keep using whenever you object to something.

It is obvious you are quite obsessed about this, but we all know if it was the Liberals, you would have ignored it as most of Canada has.

jdobbin · October 11, 2007

You really need to drop the tired old line you keep using whenever you object to something.
It is obvious you are quite obsessed about this, but we all know if it was the Liberals, you would have ignored it as most of Canada has.

I'm not sure what you are referring to.

As far as the Liberals go, I believed they should have been charged under the Privacy Act for giving out supporters names to the media and polling companies.

jbg · October 11, 2007

Harper seems to be mistaking the opinions of conservative Jews who are pro-Israel (again, meaning pro-Likhud in actuality) with Jews as a whole. Their lobbying groups seem to have caught his ear, and are possibly exploiting HIS ignorance about the Jewish community for their own gain - the same way conservative Sikh organizations have made themselves out to be the spokespeople for the Sikh community and have the ear of the Liberal party in BC. It pays to be knowledgable, because when you're not, you can be screwed.

I am a left-wing Jew and I suport Harper's positions all the way on Israel issues.

JB Globe · October 11, 2007

I am a left-wing Jew and I suport Harper's positions all the way on Israel issues.

How are you left-wing again?

JB Globe · October 11, 2007

I certainly would have not have had an issue with a list of self-identified Jewish supporters of the Conservative party receiving a holiday message. This is not the case at all.
Even if the Tory intent was to celebrate a Jewish holiday, the collecting of this data of people who gave no consent is a violation of their privacy.

If you read further in the post you'll see I agree with you.

Alexandra · October 11, 2007

Is it not a list of Jews?

I find it very hard to believe anyone with even a grade 10 education in Canada would claim ignorance of what "a list of jews" actually denotes. jdobbin are you honestly unaware of the 'Eichman lists of jews' during the Nazi regime? Somehow I think not and that you are perfectly aware of what your "list of jews" actually conveys. Rather insensitive on your part.

By the way how embarrassing it may be for the Ms. K. when she finds out her jewish Mama enters her name and those of her grandkids on various lists. Jewish mamas tend to be upset if and when their kid attempts to deny their jewish faith.

`