Saturday, February 18, 2017

Canadian government supports “anti-Islamophobia” motion, will likely pass

Canadian government supports “anti-Islamophobia” motion, will likely pass

The Liberal Party of Canada has opted to support an “anti-Islamophobia” motion (M-103) in Parliament which calls on the government to “condemn Islamophobia and study the best ways to quell an ‘increasing public climate of hate and fear.’” M-103 is the second anti-Islamophobia motion tabled. The first was unanimously approved and passed, but M-103 has stirred up questions and opposition by some Conservative Members of Parliament.

Huffington Post Canada ran an uninformed article that blamed opposition to the motion on “right-wing activists”:
Right-wing activists are attacking a motion in Canadian Parliament intended to combat anti-Islamic racism and religious discrimination as a crackdown on free speech.
It doesn’t outlaw anything. Nevertheless, conservative websites have condemned it as a “war against free speech” and a “modern day blasphemy law.”
Among those “right wing activists” mentioned was Jihad Watch. There are those who disparage “right wingers” without actually identifying any legitimate reasons why they’re doing so. The first “anti-Islamophobia” motion was passed because few knew about it. Now, due to “right-wing” reporting about the historical and current truths about the “Islamophobia” ploy, opposition began. A rally with little planning time to organize drew about 1,200 people at Canada Christian College in Toronto; it included some Conservative MP’s and admirable, hardworking advocates for freedoms.
M-103 was tabled by MP Iqra Khalid last December. Joe Warmington writes in the Toronto Sun:
I have said Khalid’s motion should be ripped up for good. Canada needs a lot of things, but not government deciding who and what is Islamophobic. Scary a government would even try.
When debate began in Parliament yesterday, Khalid refused to remove the word “Islamophobia” from the motion, although it is supposedly intended to fight all forms of racism. If that is so, why single out “Islamophobia,” particularly after one such motion was already passed?
In attempting to defend her refusal, Khalid obscenely and brazenly compared the victimization and suffering of Muslims to that of the Jews during the Holocaust:
“I will not do so, any more than I would speak to the Holocaust and not mention that the overwhelming majority of victims were six million followers of the Jewish faith and that anti-Semitism was the root cause of the Holocaust,” she said. “We cannot address a problem if we fail to call it by its true name.”
Jews, not Muslims, remain the group most targeted by hate crimes. Khalid’s disgraceful comparison was an open insult to the Jewish people. If we are going to call the real problem “by its true name,” as Khalid put it, it is Islamic jihad, which has been responsible for the murder of millions; it even played a key role in the Holocaust, when the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem worked with Hitler to further the annihilation of the Jews.
Christians are being wiped out in the Middle East by jihadists, Yazidis and Kurds are being massacred, Europe has descended into chaos because of Muslim migrants; the Muslim Brotherhood plan to conquer North America is available for all to read; and Khalid stands proudly in the Canadian Parliament battling for the “Islamophobia” agenda, backed by her liberal allies.
Some points and questions to ponder:
  1. “Islamophobia” has never been defined.
  2. Canada already has hate laws.
  3. Will Iqra Khalid agree to a document that rebukes all mosques, Islamic centers and imams that routinely spew hatred against Christians, Jews and gays in Canada?
  4. Will Khalid publicly recognize the fact that part of the reason why Jews are singled out for anti-Semitism is because of Islamic propaganda claiming that a Jewish state is entirely illegitimate, and that this propaganda is a paramount reason for on-campus hatred and anti-Israel drives?
  5. Will Khalid rebuke the hate-filled al Quds day rallies where speakers openly call for violence against Jews, and demand that these calls for violence be outlawed in the name of diversity  and inclusion?
  6. Since the Muslim Brotherhood is a significant concern in today’s world, is Khalid willing to recognize publicly the truth that the group’s call to jihad as a duty to all Muslims from its founder Hassan al-Banna has no place in Canada?
Islamic jihadis and Sharia hardliners are leading perpetrators of global hate. Iqra Khalid knows that. She should have no difficulty in denouncing what they do.

The former CIA Operations Officer and strategic policy and intelligence expert, Clare Lopez, asserts that the “Islamophobia industry” is an “all-out assault on free speech,” and points out the hypocrisy of the bogus movement:
The ‘Islamophobia’ industry has neither the ability nor actual wish to stop jihad but it sure does wish so many were not putting ‘Allahu Akbar’ and Islamic terror together and then speaking out about it.
Lopez addresses the malignant agenda behind the Islamophobia business:
Of course, the campaign to shut down free speech when it’s about Islam is very much in line with the top agenda item of the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation), which is to achieve the criminalization of criticism of Islam in national legal codes.
It has also been reported numerous times on Jihad Watch that according to Abdur-Rahman Muhammad, a former imam who was once a member of the International Institute for Islamic Thought, “Islamophobia” is a “loathsome term” which “is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.”
A closer look at the individuals behind Canada’s anti-Islamophobia motion is disquieting. The essence of the petition (e-411) by Samer Majzoub formed the basis of the anti-Islamophobia motions. It was discovered that Majzoub managed a Muslim Brotherhood-linked Montreal high school, and that he is also a leader of the self-described Muslim Brotherhood-linked Muslim Association of Canada (MAC). MP Iqra Khalid is also another questionable character:
Last January, Khalid met with board members of Palestine House in Mississauga (near Toronto) and a “large number of members of the Palestinian  community,” including Palestinian political activists. Palestine House supports the Palestinian al-Quds Intifada, and its settlement program was defunded by the former Conservative Harper government  for allying itself with terrorism. It was also condemned for “celebrating the release of terrorists and honouring the founder of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), one of the groups that formed the Palestine Liberation Organization and “in the 1960s and ’70s, was responsible for numerous armed attacks and aircraft hijackings.”
According to the Canadian Arab newspaper Meshwar, which covered the event at Palestine House in honour of Khalid, “the purpose of the event was to strengthen the relationship between the members of the [Palestinian] community and the Liberal members of Parliament.”
During her time as a student at York University, “Khalid was active in student politics,” and she served as “president of both the Muslim student association and one of the two Pakistani student associations.” The Muslim Student Associations are well known for their aggressive Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions on-campus drives to demonize and delegitimize the State of Israel, and for their intimidation of Jewish students.
No amount of reasoning, historical truth and present-day calamities perpetrated by Islamic supremacism will convince hard leftists that the tables have turned since the colonialist days. Long after colonialism, Islamic jihad stands robust, perpetrating the worst human rights violations globally. In the West, the Muslim Brotherhood works through large advocacy lobbies to propagate the lie that Muslims are victims of “islamophobia,” even when Islam is being justifiably critiqued for human rights atrocities.
Even the Judiciary Chief Ayatollah Sadeq Amoli Larijani of the Islamic Republic of Iran advances the same deceptive views that are expressed by proponents of the “Islamophobia” agenda.
In Western countries, which claim (to be advocates of) freedom and human rights, Islamophobia is constantly promoted and day after day attacks on Muslims and their religious sites intensify.
“Criminal acts committed by a few terrorists calling themselves Muslim have nothing to do with Islam,” the senior cleric underscored, adding that no Muslim should face insecurity in Western countries because of such acts of terrorism.
Jihadists and Islamic supremacists work in tandem; they routinely and ubiquitously exaggerate the frequency and the severity of hate crimes against Muslims everywhere, while steering clear of mentioning the hate and murder that Muslims commit globally.
One Canadian Conservative MP, Michael Chong, has rallied his support behind Khalid’s anti-Islamophobia motion. He said:
It was untrue that the motion grants special treatment to Canadian Muslims, noting how the House has passed motions in recent years dealing with Jewish people, Yazidis, and Egyptian Coptic Christians.
Shame on Chong. Islamic jihadists committed mass atrocities against these completely peaceful and innocent groups.  No mass atrocities are being committed against Muslims, except by other Muslims. Muslims continue to be ranked below blacks and Jews on hate crime lists. In addition, Chong mentioned motions introduced in Canada about Jews, Yazidis and Egyptian Coptic Christians, but these were never presented as motions against Judeophobia, Yazidiphobia or Coptophobia. The absurdity of that notion illustrates the frivolity of his argument and brings to mind again the ongoing question: what exactly is the working definition of “Islamophobia” again?

“M-103: Liberal Government Will Support Iqra Khalid’s Motion Condemning Islamophobia,” by Ryan Maloney, Huffington Post, February 15, 2017:
Federal Liberals will support a backbencher’s motion calling on the government to condemn Islamophobia and study the best ways to quell an “increasing public climate of hate and fear.”
Motion 103, tabled by Liberal MP Iqra Khalid last December and set for debate Wednesday, has sparked divisions among Conservatives and raised the ire of those who argue its adoption could have a chilling effect on free speech.
The non-binding motion has also been the subject of rumours and innuendo from some right-wing blogs in Canada and the United States suggesting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is seeking to somehow criminalize criticism of Islam.
Khalid addressed some of those concerns Wednesday at a press conference with Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly. The pair was surrounded by Liberal MPs in what Joly called a “demonstration of solidarity.”
Joly said that the government was voicing “strong and clear” support for Khalid’s motion. She later said that while all Liberal MPs will be free to vote based on their own beliefs, there will be “very strong support” from caucus.
“M-103 is about ensuring that, in Canada, we stand for free and respectful exchanges of ideas and opinions,” Joly said. “And there is no place for hatred and no tolerance of abuse.”
Khalid noted that the motion came on the heels of an e-petition tabled in the House in Commons, signed by nearly 70,000 Canadians, condemning Islamophobia.
If M-103 passes, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage will be asked to develop a “whole of government approach” to combat systemic racism and “contextualize hate crime reports so Canadians can understand what is happening on the ground,” Khalid said.
The Mississauga MP said that while the motion makes specific mention of Islamophobia, it is “broad in scope to include all marginalized communities.”
Khalid also noted that she and other colleagues have received hateful comments over the motion in recent weeks that only highlight the work that needs to be done.
“This strengthens my resolve to continue to combat this issue,” she said.
‘This is not legislation’
Khalid denied the motion could in any way restrict the rights of Canadians to express their views on things such as sharia law or face-covering niqab veils.
“This is a motion, this is not legislation,” Khalid said. “And I would be the first person to oppose anything that infringes on our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This motion is about having a study on how we can tackle important issues like systemic racism and religious discrimination.”
But several Tory leadership hopefuls have already made it clear that they will not support M-103. Kellie Leitch tweeted last month that the motion does not treat “all religions equally” and suggested it grants “special privileges” to Islam.
Kellie Leitch @KellieLeitch
We should treat all religions equally. I am opposed to #m103. No religion should enjoy special privileges. -kkl #cpcldr #cdnpoli
1:37 PM – 28 Jan 2017
723 723 Retweets 1,156 1,156 likes
In recent days, other rivals have joined Leitch in criticizing Khalid’s effort and announcing they too will not support the motion.
Andrew Scheer released a statement saying M-103 is not inclusive.
“It singles out just one faith,” Scheer said in a release. “I believe that all religions deserve the same level of respect and protection.”
Maxime Bernier suggested that while M-103 is not a bill and lacks teeth, it could be a “first step” in restricting the fundamental right of Canadians to express their opinions on a specific religion.
“We should reaffirm everyone’s right to believe in and criticize whatever belief they want, whether it is Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, atheism, or any other,” Bernier said in his release.
Tory leadership contenders seek specifics
Tory leadership Kevin O’Leary also told The National Post he won’t support the motion. “It is ill-conceived and it is a slap in the face to other religions and to other races,” O’Leary told The Post.
Both Scheer and Bernier took specific umbrage with the fact that the motion does not define Islamophobia. At the press conference Wednesday, Joly said Islamophobia is the “discrimination of Muslim people and people who are of Muslim faith.”
A reporter noted that Tory MPs have said they approached Khalid with ideas for amendments and were shut down. Khalid said the wording of the motion, as it stands, has broad support from MPs, organizations, and Canadians at large.
“Watering down the words of this motion is not in the best interest of all these people,” she said.
Ambrose accuses Liberals of playing games
Interim Conservative Leader Rona Ambrose has also said she won’t vote for the motion. Ambrose took to Facebook to explain that while M-103 won’t bar free speech, she is concerned the term “Islamophobia” could be used to shut down legitimate debate and “to intimidate rather than to inform.”
“I do worry that some of my work trying to empower women and girls in Muslim communities could be branded as ‘Islamophobic’ if I criticize practices that I believe are oppressive,” she wrote.
Ambrose said two Tory critics tried to work with Khalid to change the language to reflect the need to fight discrimination against all religious communities, but were denied.
“This motion is simply being used by the Liberal Party and the Prime Minister to play partisan politics,” Ambrose said.
But at least one Tory leadership hopeful is prepared to support Khalid.
Michael Chong released a lengthy statement saying he will vote in favour of M-103. Chong’s statement said that, in light of the recent deadly attack on a Quebec City mosque, it is “appropriate and important that Canadian Parliamentarians” tackle the issue of anti-Islamic prejudice.
Chong said it was untrue that the motion grants special treatment to Canadian Muslims, noting how the House has passed motions in recent years dealing with Jewish people, Yazidis, and Egyptian Coptic Christians…..

No comments:

Post a Comment