Who is “rabid”?
Re: The ‘Rabid’ Rage Of Israel’s Enemies, by Robert Fulford, May 11
Robert Fulford cites the following line from my May 5 column in the Toronto Star on Qatar’s bid to pry the headquarters of International Civil Aviation Organization from Montreal to Doha: “There’s speculation that the bid is also politically motivated, in retaliation for Stephen Harper’s rabid pro-Israeli stance.”
Mr. Fulford notes that Oxford defines rabid as “furious, raging; wildly aggressive.” Sure, that’s one meaning. Another, also by Oxford, is, as “having or proceeding from an extreme or fanatical support of or belief in something,” and by Merriam-Webster as “going to extreme lengths in expressing or pursuing a feeling, interest or opinion.”
It is hard to believe that Mr. Fulford does not know this other meaning. That leaves us with the conclusion that he was being his rabid anti-Siddiqui and anti-Star self, which he proceeded to demonstrate by indulging in character assassination based on pop psychology:
Mr. Fulford continues: “Perhaps Siddiqui, in using that strange word, ‘rabid,’ unconsciously projects his own feelings of rage and frustration onto his subject. For the left and the leftish, such as Siddiqui, a furious opposition to Israel has become a sacred duty.”
I have no rage or frustration with Israel, which I support, though not uncritically, just like many Israelis and Jewish Canadians. In lumping me with leftists, Mr. Fulford characterizes them as “natural conformists who like to travel in packs.” Yet he demands total conformity with his own views on Israel.Siddiqui's Zionhass is rabid.