Archive for the ‘Canadian government and Islam’ category

Why is Canada Cutting Checks to Suspected Terrorists?

December 4, 2017

Why is Canada Cutting Checks to Suspected Terrorists? Investigative Project on Terrorism, Scott Newark, December 4, 2017

The fall of ISIS on the battlefield means a likelihood of both returning Canadian jihadis and Canadian jihadis arrested and detained abroad. Accordingly, Canada needs a comprehensive strategy of options for international interactions where Canadians are detained abroad on terrorism investigations or charges.

************************************

It began in 2007 after a lengthy, expensive and mostly closed-door inquiry the led to a $10.5 million payoff to Maher Arar. Arar was a joint Canadian-Syrian citizen under pre-9/11 investigation by the RCMP and others regarding his activities and associations related to Islamist terrorism.

Despite being aware of the investigation, Arar left Canada in 2002 for extended international travel and was detained when he flew into New York. He then was transferred by U.S. officials to Syria. He subsequently claimed he was tortured because of information provided by Canadian officials.

Canadians learned last month that their government awarded $31.25 million to three of Arar’s associates who were also under RCMP and U.S. terrorism investigations – Abdullak Almalki, Abou el Maati and Muayyed Nurredin – to settle their civil lawsuit. Like Arar, the essence of their complaint was alleged misconduct or inaction by Canadian authorities after they had chosen to travel abroad and were detained and interrogated by Syrian, and in El Maati’s case, Egyptian authorities. Also like Arar, they claimed to have been tortured, and alleged their mistreatment was aided by inappropriate information sharing by Canadian officials with their foreign counterparts. A subsequent mostly-closed door judicial inquiry found instances of their Charter rights being violated by the actions or inactions of Canadian officials.

In July, the Canadian government announced it settled a civil suit brought by convicted Islamist terrorist Omar Khadr. His claim appears to have been based on Canadian officials interviewing him twice in 2002 while at Guantanamo Bay after having been captured following a deadly firefight in Afghanistan. Khadr also complained that Canadian officials provided copies of his interviews to U.S. officials even though it is now clear that the U.S. had already recorded the conversations.

In all three of these cases, the Canadian government provided no clear factual rationale as to why it chose to settle the cases behind closed doors. There has also been no explanation as to whether the Canadian security officials had a factual justification for their actions. In fact, both judicial inquiries expressly chose not to examine the conduct of the terror suspects involved and whether it may explain their overseas detention and interrogation. Also, none of the individuals were subjected to cross-examination, which is not exactly the best way to achieve a properly informed outcome.

Given this, it’s not surprising that more “victims” are emerging. Djamel Ameziane, an Algerian resident who was a bogus refugee claimant linked to would-be Millennium bomber Ahmad Ressam, was removed from Canada in 2000. He was captured by U.S. forces in Pakistan after 9/11 and held in Guantanamo Bay, where he became friends with Omar Khadr. His complaint against Canada was that, like Khadr, he was interviewed by Canadian officials twice. By remarkable coincidence, Ameziane has filed a civil lawsuit against Canada from Algeria where he now safely resides, and he is represented by one of Omar Khadr’s lawyers. I wonder if Omar got a finder’s fee?

Late last month, CBC News reported that former Calgary residents Yacine Meziane and Abderrahmane Ghanem have publicly complained that CSIS ripped up their lives by providing Middle Eastern officials with information about their undisputed association with several young men who left Canada to join ISIS in Syria. Both were detained and interrogated and are now back in Canada airing their complaints.

Add to that the case of Abdulrahman El Bahnasawy, the 19-year-old Canadian awaiting sentencing for a foiled terrorist plot in New York City. He too has just retained one of Omar Khadr’s lawyers. Are civil suits against Canada for damages on the horizon in these cases?

Add to this the current reality of the UK resident, with dual UK and Canadian citizenship, “Jihad Jack” (Letts) and the three Canadian young women who have been captured and detained in Syria and Iraq following the collapse of ISIS, where local officials allege they were supporting the terrorist group. There already are calls for Canadian intervention and thus it is necessary to ask what the appropriate and required actions by Canadian officials are in these cases and what will, no doubt, be others that will follow.

Canada urgently needs an effective strategy to clarify how its national security enforcement and intelligence officials deal with foreign governments relating to Canadians, or persons linked to Canada, who are involved in terrorism related investigations. This will be no easy task because the scope of activities involved ranges from information sharing to travel alerts to foreign post arrest involvement and intervention. Further, as the nature of the terrorist threat evolves, so do the necessary counter terrorism actions, including interactions with foreign governments and agencies, for which there is no single model.

The above noted court and inquiry and closed-door government civil settlements/payoffs where Charter violations and civil liability have been admitted also demonstrate the need for a modernized strategy to avoid the after the fact, politicized approach currently in place.

These various decisions and actions have created a maze of potentially conflicting ‘do’s’ and ‘don’ts’ for our national security, intelligence and diplomatic officials. The federal government’s repeated refusal to fight the lawsuits and instead throw its officials under the bus is also dangerous, as it can create a risk aversion culture within these organizations for people who are literally on the front lines of protecting Canadian national security.

So, what’s needed?

First, there needs to be express statutory authorization for defined interactions and information sharing by designated Canadian officials on terrorism cases with international entities. Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale appeared to recognize this need during his recent testimony before committee, which is encouraging.

Second, there should be a statutory approval process in advance, including restrictions and required reporting after the fact. This is a function that specially designated federal court justices could perform. A recent Supreme Court of Canada ruling in a case involving warrantless seizure of internet data confirms that advanced judicial authorization can convert what would otherwise be a Charter breach into a Charter compliant activity. This model needs to be followed.

Targeted amendments to Bill C-59, which is currently before Parliament, could be the vehicle for this result to be achieved.

The fall of ISIS on the battlefield means a likelihood of both returning Canadian jihadis and Canadian jihadis arrested and detained abroad. Accordingly, Canada needs a comprehensive strategy of options for international interactions where Canadians are detained abroad on terrorism investigations or charges. This should include:

· Expanding the use of post-conviction transfers back to Canada under the International Transfer of Offenders Act (used in Omar Khadr case) to allow the imposed sentence to be served in Canada and subject to Canadian law;

· Expanding the possibility of extraditing more people back to Canada for prosecution pursuant to the Extradition Act while concurrently ensuring that admissible evidence for prosecution in Canada can be obtained;

· Establishing a process for Canadians detained abroad to access specially approved Canadian legal counsel to protect detainee’s rights and ensure that statements given to support repatriation are admissible in case resolution on return is achieved; and

· Promoting repatriation of detainees by foreign governments without criminal prosecution in appropriate cases, upon agreement to enter into s. 810.011 supervision orders on return to Canada.

These are complex issues that require an operationally informed proactive strategy that will be effective and Charter compliant. While this won’t be easy, the current government needs to make it a priority because the problems are not going away. And cutting checks is not the answer.

Scott Newark is a former Alberta Crown Prosecutor who has also served as Executive Officer of the Canadian Police Association, Vice Chair of the Ontario Office for Victims of Crime, Director of Operations for Investigative Project on Terrorism and as a Security Policy Advisor to the governments of Ontario and Canada. He is currently an Adjunct Professor in the TRSS Program in the School of Criminology at Simon Fraser University

Trudeau government to revise Canada’s citizenship test, no longer ban ‘barbaric cultural practices’ or require a job

July 25, 2017

Trudeau government to revise Canada’s citizenship test, no longer ban ‘barbaric cultural practices’ or require a job, American ThinkerThomas Lifson, July 25, 2017

Respecting the human rights of others (unless they are indigenous peoples) is optional!  I wonder how Canada’s homosexuals and Jews feel about this?  Both groups trend progressive.  How many will bite their tongues and go along with the dogma?

Canadians might want to pay attention to Germany, Sweden, Belgium, and other European countries that have welcomed masses of Muslims purporting to be refugees and think carefully about what their government is proposing to do to Canada.

******************************

Justin Trudeau’s government is redefining what it means to be a Canadian, and in the process, he appears to be opening the door for the Islamization of our northern neighbor.  The Canadian press has obtained a copy of a draft of a new study guide for Canada’s citizenship test, which defines what it means to be  Canadian.

Unsurprisingly, given his progressive inclinations, Justin Trudeau’s government apparently does not want to be judgmental about things like female genital mutilation, honor killings, and the need to get a job if you want to come in and be a Canadian.  Judgmentalism is reserved for the Yankees to the south, apparently.

Respecting treaties with Indigenous Peoples, paying taxes and filling out the census are listed as mandatory obligations of Canadian citizenship in a draft version of a new study guide for the citizenship exam.

The working copy obtained by The Canadian Press suggests the federal government has completely overhauled the book used by prospective Canadians to prepare for the test.

The current “Discover Canada” guide dates back to 2011 when the previous Conservative government did its own overhaul designed to provide more information on Canadian values and history.

Some of the Conservatives’ insertions attracted controversy, including increased detail about the War of 1812 and a warning that certain “barbaric cultural practices,” such as honour killings and female genital mutilation, are crimes in Canada.

Getting rid of both those elements was what former Liberal Immigration Minister John McCallum had in mind when he said early in 2016 that the book was up for a rewrite. But although work has been underway for over a year, there’s no date set for publication of a final version.

In the draft version, the reference to barbaric cultural practices is gone, as is the inclusion of getting a job as one of the responsibilities of citizenship.

The “refugees” overwhelming Western European countries also mostly reject jobs, despite the fact that most are young men of military or working age.  They also tend to reject other elements of integrating and becoming self-sufficient, as Breitbart reported:

The Swedish government has found that only between three and four percent of newly arrived migrants with a poor standard of education have any interest in attending further schooling or training.

The new report, which comes from the Swedish Employment Service, shows that only three to four percent of migrants who have come to Sweden in the last two years have shown interest in attending classes to develop their education.

Annie Rubensson, integration and establishment manager at the Employment Service said that the figures could greatly impact migrants chances of employment Sveriges Radioreports.

“This means that their chances of getting a job drops significantly,” Rubensson said adding, “we are working hard to motivate and we will strengthen our efforts in the guidance to inform about what is required in the Swedish labour market.”

The Canadian draft has other things in mind when it discusses requirements of immigrants:

Instead, the proposed new guide breaks down the responsibilities of citizenship into two categories: voluntary and mandatory.

Voluntary responsibilities are listed as respecting the human rights of others, understanding official bilingualism and participating in the political process.

Obeying the law, serving on a jury, paying taxes, filling out the census and respecting treaties with Indigenous Peoples are mandatory.

Respecting the human rights of others (unless they are indigenous peoples) is optional!  I wonder how Canada’s homosexuals and Jews feel about this?  Both groups trend progressive.  How many will bite their tongues and go along with the dogma?

Canadians might want to pay attention to Germany, Sweden, Belgium, and other European countries that have welcomed masses of Muslims purporting to be refugees and think carefully about what their government is proposing to do to Canada.

New Blasphemy Laws for Canada?

June 15, 2017

New Blasphemy Laws for Canada? Clarion ProjectShabnam Assadollahi, June 15, 2017

Wikimedia Commons/Carlos Latuff)

Criticizing Islam in Canada should not be illegal or disliking it should not be classified as a phobia. A “phobia” is a type of mental disorder. Isn’t the “Islamophobia” motion, which was unanimously passed by the Canadian government and calls for limiting the rights of Canadians to criticize Islam, contrary to Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms? What is the purpose of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms then?

The definition of Islamophobia from a Google search is “dislike of or prejudice against Islam or Muslims, especially as a political force.” What exactly has the Parliament of Canada made a motion against? Criticism of Islam? Criticism of Mohammed? Criticism and condemnation of the Islamic State and all Islamic terrorist groups affiliated with radical Islamic ideology? Petitioning against those Canadians who condemn Sharia law? If Canadians criticize Islam or convert from Islam, will they now be considered “Islamophobes” by Canada?

What’s next? Sending Iran and Hamas type morality police to the doorsteps of Canadians critical of Islam, while radical imams in the country continue to spew openly hateful and radical ideas in schools and mosques? What about Canadians who are suspicious of others plotting possible terrorist activities – will they be afraid to report it to authorities in case they are wrong?

The motion (M-103) which the Canadian government recently passed was initiated on June 8, 2016, by Samer Majzoub, president of the Canadian Muslim Forum. It condemns Islamophobia in “all” forms.

The details of the motion, which was sponsored by a member of parliament from the Liberal party, are extremely sketchy to say the least. The motion states:

“We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.”

It seems that many Western politicians, the mainstream media and our intellectual elites use the term “Islamophobia” without even knowing what is in Islam. There might be a lot of things about which one could be rationally “phobic,” or simply fearful of, in Islam.

For example, political Islam is known to be an ideology that produces Islamist terrorists. Islamic Republic of Iran is a prime example of it.

Since Trudeau Liberals came to power, Canadians have been constantly reminded that to speak negatively about Islam is supposedly acting as a fear-mongering, racist, xenophobic, “Islamophobe.”

Yet, many people are rightfully afraid of harm coming to them from Islamic (sharia law) and radical or political Islam. I am a living example of one who has experienced harm from radical Islam.

I was imprisoned at age 16 by the Iranian regime for simply expressing my disagreement with their policies (which now might be viewed as Islamophobic in Canada). They held me prisoner for 18 months in their notorious Evin Prison; I miraculously escaped the murder and rape I heard about every day in that dark place.

Read Shabnam Asadollahi’s story here

The memories of my imprisonment still haunt me. And the regime’s threats still follow me today in Canada. Therefore, I have a reasonable fear of radical Islam. To call my fear a phobia, an irrational fear, lacks compassion and fails to recognize the true reality of the present danger living close to me once again.

It was reported that the highest commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards recently said they would soon kill all dissidents living abroad. That means I am on their hit list.

People are jittery about radical Islam and sharia law for many justifiable reasons: They look at how shariais practiced in Saudi Arabia, Iran, by the Islamic State and Nigeria’s Boko Haram.

The Islamic Cairo Declaration of 1990, written as a direct refutation to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, states that all human rights are defined under Islamic sharia law. Therefore, beheading, stoning, flogging, slavery, child marriage, wife-beating, amputations and a woman’s worth considered half of a man’s are all human rights.

Is that what we want for or in Canada? Or in any country?

To those of us who have experienced Islamic Sharia law first-hand, protecting Western values – free speech, common law, equal justice under the law, democratic (“man-made”) governance; individual freedoms, separation of church and state, an independent judiciary, to name just a few – is indeed a cause for concern. Every single one of them is contradicted by Islamic Sharia law or radical Islam.

Why should it be against the law to outspokenly disagree with aspects of a different political ideology, religion or culture? Especially if it outspokenly threatens one’s own?

It is interesting to note that there are no comparable terms for other religions, such as Christianophobia or Judeophobia that define a dislike or prejudice against Christianity, Judaism or the Judeo-Christian worldview.

What is true is that Christians and Jews would never be allowed to call for a similar motion in any Middle Eastern country in the world.

While M-103 has been stirring in our halls of government, there is also another trend sweeping through these same halls to rid the Canadian Charter of obsolete, unconstitutional or redundant laws, thanks to other Liberal MPs.

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, the liberals unveiled Bill C-51 that would clean up the Canadian Criminal Code. This Bill would remove the outdated blasphemy law that has existed in Canada since 1892. Government feels this would clean up old law that isn’t consistent with freedom of speech and religion in Canada.

Strangely, C-51 and M-103 seem to contradict one another. While M-103 condemns Islamophobia in all forms, including speaking against Islam, C-51 is loosening law to allow anyone to freely express themselves concerning anyone’s religion without fear of reprisal or imprisonment. Will C-51 only apply to every religion except Islam?

“Intolerance of Intolerance” is the de-facto blasphemy law of the secular state. Is the Government of Canada scrapping one blasphemy law, only to replace it with another?

A complete version of this article appeared on Mackenzie Institute.

Islamist Terror Attack in Canada All But Ignored by Media, Police

June 9, 2017

Islamist Terror Attack in Canada All But Ignored by Media, Police, Clarion ProjectJohn Goddard, June 8, 2017

The Canadian Tire Store where the attack occurred (Photo: Google Maps)

Toronto police said nothing on Saturday about the attack. Three days later, on Tuesday afternoon, after the Sun got wind of what happened, police issued a skeleton news release saying nothing about the niqab, the ISIS bandana or the common jihadi cry of “Allahu Akbar.”

“There is no need for the public to be concerned about safety in any way, shape or form,” Toronto Police Chief Mark Saunders said late Tuesday. “It was a very isolated situation.”

*********************

An Islamist terrorist attack in Toronto is going all but ignored by city police and most Canadian news outlets.

A woman wearing the full-face Islamic veil and an Islamic State-type flag as a bandana shouted “Allahu Akbar” and began swinging a golf club at employees and a customer late Saturday afternoon at a Canadian Tire big-box hardware store. She also shouted death threats and support for the Islamic State.

When employees and customers tried to restrain her, the woman pulled a large knife from her clothing. “The store employee [who wrestled the knife out of her hand] sustained non-life-threatening injuries,” police later said.

In court Tuesday, the woman again appeared in a niqab (face veil) and pledged allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL). When asked her name, she said through an Arabic interpreter, “ISIS — I pledge to the leader of the believers, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.”

The woman, whose name is actually Rahab Dughmosh, was charged with two counts of assault with a weapon, uttering death threats and weapons offenses.

Earlier Saturday afternoon, Dughmosh, 32 and from Toronto, stopped at a neighbor’s apartment to drop off a parcel, the Toronto Sun reported.

“Five Qurans with a sealed letter inside one,” the neighbor, Noshaba Raheel, said. Dughmosh asked Raheel to “hold on to them” and said she “would be back soon.”

Dughmosh’s husband and their two small children left the house with luggage the next day, Raheel also told the paper.

Toronto police said nothing on Saturday about the attack. Three days later, on Tuesday afternoon, after the Sun got wind of what happened, police issued a skeleton news release saying nothing about the niqab, the ISIS bandana or the common jihadi cry of “Allahu Akbar.”

“There is no need for the public to be concerned about safety in any way, shape or form,” Toronto Police Chief Mark Saunders said late Tuesday. “It was a very isolated situation.”

Canada’s joint terrorism task force, the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team, seems to be taking the matter more seriously.

“When somebody is wearing ISIS markings and yelling ‘Allahu Akbar’ while swinging a golf club… you have to do everything necessary and treat it as a terror attack,” a source close to the team told the Sun.

“No stone will be left unturned in her life,” an unnamed officer from the team also said, “her family, her computer and phone, the state of her mental health, where she worships and her past travel.”

Canada’s two Toronto-based national newspapers, The Globe and Mail and National Post, carried stories on a man wielding a hammer Tuesday at Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. The man shouted, “This is for Syria!” On the Toronto attack, The Globe and Mail has said nothing. The National Post ran three paragraphs, lifted from its sister publication the Sun.

Similarly, CBC television and radio have remained silent on the attack, although the CBC’s website covered the court appearance.

The Toronto Star carried a brief story with the headline, “Toronto woman charged with assault at Scarborough mall.” (The attack took place at Cedarbrae Mall in the city’s east end.)

The Star suppressed all references to ISIS, including Dughmosh’s court statement. “When asked to identify herself for the record, she instead made reference in Arabic to ‘the leader of the believers,’” the paper said.

Almost all details reaching the public come from the Toronto Sun, but even in its coverage, with the exception of the neighbor, only nameless, faceless “sources” appear.

Where Dughmosh is from, who she knew, where she prayed, who her husband is, where she lives, who the injured person is and how badly the person is hurt — none of the usual questions are answered.

The judge issued a publication ban on most of the details of her court appearance. Exceptions included Dughmosh’s decision to waive her right to a bail hearing and the fact that until her case is dealt with, she elected to stay in jail.

 

Canada: Sold to the Highest Foreign Bidder

May 4, 2017

Canada: Sold to the Highest Foreign Bidder, Gatestone InstituteShabnam Assadollahi, May 4, 2017

(Please see also, Iran’s Forward Operating Base against the U.S. — DM)

In April, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said that ISIS supporters have the right to defend their freedom, and was reported to have referred to Evangelical Christians as the “worst part of Canadian society.” These remarks came after is after he remained silent when Jewish centers received bomb threats, and despite Canada’s imams regularly calling for the annihilation of Jews.

Even more disturbing is a technical loophole in the Canada Elections Act. The law allows foreign entities to make contributions to Canadian candidates. This means that players such as Iran or Saudi Arabia will be able to further their agendas through a particular politician, as long as they pump him with funds for six months and a day prior to his official bid for office.

A journalist was taken to task recently for calling Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau an inelegant name during a press conference. In response, Josh Sigurdson justified his behavior in a YouTube video:

“The state-run media got to ask [Trudeau] questions — pre-screened ones, at that… How is it journalism to ask pre-selected questions of a politician? Restricting opposition, restricting free speech… pretending to stand for women while sending money to governments and dictatorships who stone women to death for driving and kill gays … that is the definition of scumbag.”

Although many might not have used that exact word to describe Trudeau, one might sympathize with the sentiment behind it.

As a Canadian citizen who was born in Iran and watched my country come under the Islamist regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini, it is not hard to spot a tyrant. It is not hard for Trudeau, either, apparently. Three years ago, as head of the opposition, he told a group of women in Toronto: “There is a level of admiration that I actually have for China, because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to turn their economy around on a dime…”

More recently, last November, Trudeau issued a statement about the death of Fidel Castro; he called the former Cuban dictator “remarkable” and a “larger than life leader who served his people.”

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said three years go: “There is a level of admiration that I actually have for China, because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to turn their economy around on a dime.” In November, he called Fidel Castro “remarkable” and a “larger than life leader who served his people.” (Image source: U.S. Air Force)

After taking over the leadership of the country, Trudeau not only withdrew Canada’s participation from the U.S.-led bombing of ISIS strongholds in Iraq and Syria, but months later — a day after the March 22, 2016 Brussels suicide bombings that left 32 innocent people dead — he announced that Canada was “not at war with ISIS.”

This April, Trudeau said that ISIS supporters have the right to defend their freedom, and was reported to have referred to Evangelical Christians as the “worst part of Canadian society.” These remarks came after is after he remained silent when Jewish centers received bomb threats and when the country’s imams regularly call for the annihilation of Jews. Trudeau, in March, slammed a video posted to YouTube that offered a $1,000 reward for recordings of Muslim students at schools in a district of Ontario that were “spewing hate speech” during Friday prayer. “Canadians have understood that our differences are a source of strength, not a source of weakness,” Trudeau said at a press conference, after the release of the video. Prime Minister Trudeau has been supportive of Muslim prayers in the secular school board, where prayers and students preaching and will be unsupervised.

Prime Minister Trudeau has also been trying to change the rules of the Commons to fit his schedule and strip the opposition of its power to hold him accountable, interim leader Rona Ambrose charged. Apparently he has been trying to limit the ability of the opposition to debate him in Parliament prior to the passage of proposed bills.

Even more disturbing is a technical loophole in the Canada Elections Act, now being brought to the fore by Trudeau’s camp. The law allows foreign entities to make contributions to Canadian candidates. This means that players such as Iran or Saudi Arabia will be able to further their agendas through a particular politician, as long as they pump him with funds for six months and a day prior to his official bid for office.

With the entrance into the country of thousands of illegal immigrants and asylum-seekers with criminal records — thanks to the increasingly dictatorial policies of Trudeau and his Liberal Party strongmen — this legal loophole leaves Canada wide open to extreme political change, and not for the better.

Canadian Imam contradicts Trudeau: “Islam will never become a part of liberal secularism”

March 26, 2017

Canadian Imam contradicts Trudeau: “Islam will never become a part of liberal secularism,” CIJ News, March 25, 2017

Mazin Abdul-Adhim. Photo: screenshot YouTube Mazin Abdul-Adhim

Another senior Muslim Canadian leader disagrees with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over the question whether Islam is compatible with secular values.

In two separate interviews with CBC, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau maintained that Islam is compatible with Western open and secular democracy like Canada:

(November 24, 2015): “Canadians are quick to point out that ISIS is wrong, that Islam is not incompatible with the Western secular democracy, a free place like Canada.”

(January 31, 2016): “But on the other hand, we need to make sure that we’re working with communities like the Muslim community for example to demonstrate that Islam is not incompatible with free and open Western societies.”

Trudeau said that “the Reviving the Islamic Spirit [RIS] convention [in Toronto]… is also about celebrating our shared beliefs in justice, fairness, equality of opportunity and acceptance” and that the values of the month of Ramadan are the “principles upon which Canada is founded” and the “tenets of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

Unlike Trudeau, Mazin AbdulAdhim, a prominent Imam of Iraqi descent in London, Ontario who is affiliated with the radical Islamic global movement of Hizb ut-Tahrir, explains that “Islam cannot and will not ever become a part of liberal secularism.”

According to Mazin AbdulAdhim, nowadays there is a war between two ideologies, secularism and Islam, which will end up with the victory of Islam and the establishment of the Islamic State (Caliphate) which will regain control over the Muslim lands world-wide.

The following are excerpts from Mazin AbdulAdhim’s Facebook post on March 24, 2017:

The Jews and Christians are united with the atheists upon the liberal secular way of life today, and they demand that everyone join them in this way of life of theirs. Islam cannot and will not ever become a part of liberal secularism, no matter what ups and downs Muslims go through, and this has caused the Jews and Christians and atheists to take extreme manipulative measures to force Muslims to comply with their demands. This media pressure is simply a tool being used to force all Muslims to condemn the political and military laws of Islam in general by associating any crimes committed by Muslims with Islam itself (regardless of whether Islam obviously forbids it), to pressure them to submit to the liberal secular system that dominates the globe today and abandon the call for political Islam. Anyone demanding the implementation of the political and military laws of Islam will then be associated with those Muslims who committed those violent crimes, and will be treated as criminals by association… No matter what the manipulative secular elite do, they will fail at this manipulative scheme, and Islam will rise once again in the Muslim lands, and the Ummah [Muslims nation] will unite under a single sincere Islamic leadership; and the Muslim lands – including Africa, the Middle East, the subcontinent, parts of Europe, Central Asia, and parts of Eastern Asia – will be fully restored under complete Muslim control, and there is nothing the lying, fear-mongering scum of the Capitalist elite can do about it.

The following are excerpts from Mazin AbdulAdhim’s Facebook post on March 17, 2017:

It is important to understand that the West is undoubtedly heading towards banning political Islam…We need to understand that this is a struggle between two ideologies, not between countries or leaders or religions. It is a (mostly) silent war between secularism and Islam. Muslims win the moment they establish a true Khilafah [Islamic State or Caliphate], as that will be the end of the Sykes-Picot borders and puppet government control they have had over the Muslim lands for almost 100 years. And as Muslims inch closer to breaking free from the political control of the colonial West, we should expect to see them become more vicious against political Islam, and more friendly towards Muslims who accept secularism and defend it (called “moderates”)…

ICNA Canada’s online publication: “Islam is totally incompatible with western democracy”

The Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) Canada is an Islamic national-wide organization strivingto build an Exemplary Canadian Muslim Community” by “total submission to Him [Allah] and through the propagation of true and universal message of Islam.”

Dr. Iqbal Massod Al-Nadvi, the Amir (President) of ICNA Canada, also serves as the Chairperson of Canadian Council of Imams (Canada’s top Imam).

On its official website ICNA Canada shares with its members, followers and supporters the book “Riyad us Saliheen” (“The Gardens of the Righteous” رياض الصالحين) compiled by Imam Zakaruya Yahya Bin Sharaf An-Nawawi, a Sunni Shafi’ite jurist and hadith scholar who lived in 13th century.

The Gardens of the Righteous (Arabic: Riyadh as-Salihin), is a compilation of verses from the Qur’an and hadith by Al-Nawawi. It contains a total of 1905 hadith divided across 372 chapters, many of which are introduced by verses of the Quran.

The book “Riyad us Saliheen” (“The Gardens of the Righteous”) which appears on ICNA Canada site cntains modern commentary to the verses from the Qur’an and hadith.

The following are excerpts from the book which deal with the question whether Islam in compatible with the values of Western democracy.

[Hadith]: 673. Abu Bakrah (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: I heard Messenger of Allah (PBUH) saying, “He who insults the rulers Allah will insult him.”

[At-Tirmidhi].

Commentary: To affront and degrade the ruler means to disobey him and to by-pass his orders. This impairs his power, honour and dignity. Believers have been told to obey and support rulers for the sake of national interest and welfare, understanding that they desist from committing an overt disbelief and maintain congregation Salat and other duties of religion. The political system of Islam is totally incompatible with western democracy. The concept of government party and the opposition is alien to Islam. All belong to one Ummah with only one goal and pursue the same aims and objects of Islamic guidelines!

Canada: Bring on the Islamization!

March 23, 2017

Canada: Bring on the Islamization! Gatestone InstituteJudith Bergman, March 23, 2017

The mayor of Brampton, Ontario, Linda Jeffrey, was also seemingly unconcerned about the calls in Toronto to murder Jews.

The political establishment also does not seem concerned that imams are saying that the Islamic ruling allowing slaves is still in force. Meanwhile, statistics show that when it comes to hate crimes, Jews are by far the most targeted group.

No one — neither media, nor politicians — even bothered to ask whether there is a significant connection between the virulent Jew-hatred being preached in mosques and the disproportionately high occurrence of hate crimes against Jews. Instead, the entire Canadian parliament is preoccupied with banning “Islamophobia”.

Imams in Canadian mosques have been inciting the killing of “infidels”, primarily Jews, for years. This agitation appears to have had no visible impact on Canadian parliamentarians, evidently too busy with petitions and motions banning alleged “Islamophobia”.

In 2009, for example, Toronto-area imam Said Rageah, at the Abu Huraira Centre, called on Allah to “destroy” the enemies of Islam from within and “damn” the “infidel” Jews and Christians.

“Allah protect us from the fitna [sedition, affliction] of these people; Allah protect us from the evil agenda of these people; Allah destroy them from within themselves, and do not allow them to raise their heads” prayed the imam.

In 2012, Sheikh Abdulqani Mursal, imam at Masjid Al Hikma mosque in Toronto, explained that Jews are destined to be killed by the Muslims. Citing text from a hadith, he said:

“You will fight against the Jews and you will kill them… Muslims [will] kill them until the Jews [will] hide themselves… and a stone or a tree [will] say: Muslim… there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him….”

In 2014, imam Sayed AlGhitawi, at Al Andalous Islamic Center in Montreal, prayed for success in jihad and the total destruction of the Jews:

“O Allah, give victory to our brothers who engage in jihad… destroy the accursed Jews… make their children orphans and their women widows… kill them one by one… do not leave any of them [alive]”.

During the Muslim holiday of Ramadan in 2016, Imam Ayman Elkasrawy, of the Masjid Toronto mosque, said the following:

“…O Allah! Count their number; slay them one by one and spare not one of them… Give us victory over the disbelieving people… Give victory to Islam… humiliate the …polytheists… Destroy anyone who displaced the sons of the Muslims…Count their number; slay them one by one and spare not one of them… Purify Al-Aqsa Mosque from the filth of the Jews!”

Another imam in Toronto, Shaykh Abdool Hamid, recited similar prayers on at least eight occasions in 2015 and 2016.

In February 2017, after being exposed as an extremist by CIJ News, imam Ayman Elkasrawy apologized for his words, which, despite being posted on YouTube, were apparently not meant to reach non-Arabic speaking Canadians:

“Neither I, Masjid Toronto or the congregation harbour any form of hate towards Jews. And so I wish to apologize unreservedly for misspeaking during prayer last Ramadan… “

The head of the mosque, Dr. El-Tantawy Attia, assured the Toronto Sun that his mosque was not a radical mosque:

“It was a mistake. It was not authorized. It should not have happened and we have apologized and I have personally reached out to my Jewish friends… I was so upset. I was surprised. In 45 years here, I had never heard anything like that.”

He also assured the Toronto Sun that he and the mosque would “get to the bottom of this through their own investigation”. He also said that, pending the probe, the imam had been “suspended”. The head of the mosque, however, then said that he doubts if Ayman Elkasrawy “really meant it”. “We are about peace”, he added.

Of course they are.

Even more astonishing than the disingenuous, mock-shock apology from the imam, was the staggering willingness on the part of the public to believe it. Instead of waiting for the police investigation, the Toronto Sun reported that, “People of all walks of life, and faiths, formed a ‘ring around’ the mosque to protect it from ‘Islamophobia'”.

Ayman Elkasrawy, imam of the Masjid Toronto mosque (front row, wearing white), said on video: “… slay them one by one and spare not one of them… Give us victory over the disbelieving people… Give victory to Islam… Purify Al-Aqsa Mosque from the filth of the Jews!” (Image source: Video screenshot from Masjid Toronto via The Rebel)

The mayor of Brampton, Ontario, Linda Jeffrey, was also seemingly unconcerned about the calls in Toronto to murder Jews. Instead, she found time to criticize parents who were protesting Muslim Friday prayer sessions — taking place on public school grounds, on school time and including prayers and sermons, usually in Arabic — as “purveyors of misinformation and hateful speech.”

While the political establishment is busy vilifying those who have legitimate reservations about the potential Islamization of the public school system, the University of Toronto at Mississauga employs a Muslim convert, Dr. Katherine Bullock, as a lecturer in the Department of Political Science. In November 2014, Bullock participated in a panel discussion organized by the Muslim Law Students Association at York University on counter-radicalization in Canada.

In her presentation, Bullock said that the West has it all wrong when it comes to the definition of Muslim radicals:

“So if you’re an Iraqi nationalist who doesn’t believe that the United States should be occupying your country and you fight against them, and you believe in the Caliphate, and you believe in Sharia, you are a radical, you’ve been radicalized. But from an Islamic point of view [there is] absolutely nothing radical about wanting Caliphate or wanting Sharia. These are completely normal traditional points of view”.

At least Bullock is being honest.

The political establishment also does not seem concerned that imams are saying that the Islamic ruling allowing slaves is still in force. Dr. Ewis El Nagar, head of the Islamic Edicts Committee of the Quebec Council of Imams and leader of dawah (outreach, “call to Islam”) at the Canadian Islamic Centre in Montreal, says that the Islamic ruling on marrying slave girls[1] was not abrogated and is applicable when “legitimate jihad” is launched against unbelievers.

Canada’s political establishment also does not seem concerned with prominent imams who advocate wife-beating. The Muslim chaplain of the Canadian army, Dr. Mohammad Iqbal Masood Al-Nadvi – who is also the Chairperson of the Canadian Council of Imams and the President of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) Canada, a nation-wide organization with close ties to the terrorist group Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood — explained the Quranic verse on wife-beating[2] in February 2015: “This is the point where for example Quran says… and Hadith says, if you are doing this thing, you can beat or can leave [avoid sleeping with the wife]… Just keep the issue among each other”. In other words, it is fine to beat your wife, just keep it behind closed doors.

Meanwhile, statistics show that when it comes to hate crimes, Jews are by far the most targeted group in Canada. According to the Toronto Police Service Annual Hate/Bias Crime Statistical Report for 2015:

“The three most targeted groups since 2006 have been the Jewish community, the Black community and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) community. In 2015, the Jewish community, followed by the LGBTQ community and the Muslim community were the most victimized groups. The three most reported criminal offences motivated by hate/bias in 2015 were mischief to property, assault and criminal harassment. The Jewish community was the most victimized group for mischief to property occurrences, while the LGBTQ community was the most victimized group for assault occurrences. The Muslim community was the most victimized group for criminal harassment occurrences”.

According to the most recently available national data, between 2011 and 2013 Canadian Muslims suffered 15.1 hate crime incidents per 100,000 people. Canadian Jews, on the other hand, were the victims of 185.4 incidents per 100,000 people. That means, Jews were 12 times more likely to be targeted in hate crimes than Muslims.

Not only are Canadian politicians evidently unconcerned about this, despite the longevity of the problem, but no one — neither media, nor politicians — even bothered to ask whether there is a significant connection between the virulent Jew-hatred being preached in mosques, such as those mentioned above, and the disproportionately high occurrence of hate crimes against Jews. Instead, the entire Canadian parliament is preoccupied with banning “Islamophobia”.

Judith Bergman is a writer, columnist, lawyer and political analyst.


[1] “O Prophet, We have made lawful for you your wives whose bridal dues you have paid, and the slave-girls you possess from among the prisoners of war…” — Quran 33:50.

[2] “Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them…” — Qur’an 4:34.

Toronto imam says Muslims will eventually kill all Jews

March 11, 2017

Toronto imam says Muslims will eventually kill all Jews, Jihad Watch

(Will Canada deem the “kill the Jews”  imam to be Islamophobic? How about the Qu’ran and other holy texts? — DM) 

This shouldn’t surprise anyone. It’s a hadith in a collection that Muslims consider authentic:

“Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.” (Sahih Muslim 6985)

Muslims in Canada don’t have a different version of Islamic texts and teachings from the version Muslims have elsewhere. They have the same Qur’an, the same Sunnah. Why should anyone expect them not to teach the things these sources say?

 

“Toronto imam says Muslims will eventually kill all Jews,” by Jonathan D. Halevi, CIJ News, March 11, 2017:

Motion 103 “Systemic racism and religious discrimination”, which also known as the anti-Islamophobia motion, demands that “the government should recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear… condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination and take note of House of Commons’ petition e-411 and the issues raised by it” and “develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia, in Canada.”

Petition e-411, which was unanimously endorsed by the Parliament, suggests that attributing terrorism to Islam is Islamophobia.

Initiated by Samer Majzoub, President of the Canadian Muslim Forum (المنتدى الاسلمي الكندي) and sponsored by Liberal MP Frank Baylis (Pierrefonds—Dollard, Quebec), Petition e-411 reads among other things the following:

Recently an infinitesimally small number of extremist individuals have conducted terrorist activities while claiming to speak for the religion of Islam. Their actions have been used as a pretext for a notable rise of anti-Muslim sentiments in Canada; and these violent individuals do not reflect in any way the values or the teachings of the religion of Islam. In fact, they misrepresent the religion. We categorically reject all their activities. They in no way represent the religion, the beliefs and the desire of Muslims to co-exist in peace with all peoples of the world. We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.”

Sheikh Abdulqani Mursal, imam at Masjid Al Hikma mosque in Toronto (36 Colville Rd, North York – Lawrence and Keele), explains that the fate of the Jews is destined to be killed by the Muslims.

In a lecture at the at Masjid Al Hikma mosque, Mursal read the chapter “Turmoil And Portents Of The Last Hour” from Sahih Muslim (hadith collection, meaning narrations attributed to Mohammad), including the following narrations (01:07-07:24 – originally in Arabic, translated by http://www.hadithcollection.com):

Ibn ‘Umar reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: You will fight against the Jews and you will kill them until even a stone would say: Come here, Muslim, there is a Jew (hiding himself behind me); kill him.

Ubaidullah has reported this hadith with this chain of transmitters (and the Words are): “There is a Jew behind me.”

Abdullah b. ‘Umar reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: You and the Jews would fight against one another until a stone would say: Muslim, here is a Jew behind me; come and kill him.

Abdullah b. ‘Umar reported that Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: The Jews will fight against you and you will gain victory over them until the stone would say: Muslim, here is a Jew behind me; kill him.

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews….

Canada’s New Blasphemy Laws

March 8, 2017

Canada’s New Blasphemy Laws, Gatestone InstituteKhadija Khan, March 8, 2017

Hardliners who support this form of censorship, and presumably other restrictions required by Islamic sharia law, aim to blur the line between genuine bigotry and criticism of core problems across the Muslim world, such as the murder of apostates and homosexuals, communal hatred, anti-Semitism, violence against women and minors, female genital mutilation (FGM), child marriage, unequal legal and inheritance rights for women, stoning, flogging and amputation, and social taboos such as honour killings or right to choose a husband for girls or restrict girls’ education.

*****************************

Although these motions against “Islamophobia” are not legally binding, extremists have already started demanding them as laws.

People in hostile societies put their lives at risk by speaking against the majority; meanwhile, shutting out any criticism against hardliner behaviour in the West actually means giving extremists a license to keep on committing atrocities.

Motions such as these are how most Muslim societies — and other authoritarian states — were founded: by depriving citizens of the basic right to express a difference of opinion, and worse, on the pretense of “doing good.” The blasphemy laws of Pakistan were introduced on the premise of protecting the sanctity of the people’s religious beliefs, but the laws only ended up meting out public death sentences to innocent and marginalized victims.

A resolution, M-103, seeking to condemn so-called “Islamophobia,” was introduced a few weeks ago in the peaceful country of Canada by Liberal Party MP Iqra Khalid in the House of Commons, sparking a controversy.

A similar motion, labelled M-37, was later tabled in the Ontario provincial legislature by MPP Nathalie Des Rosiers on February 23, 2017, and was passed by the provincial parliament.

M-37, like its predecessor, demanded that lawmakers condemn “all forms of Islamophobia” and reaffirm “support for government efforts, through the Anti-Racism Directorate, to address and prevent systemic racism across government policy, programs and services”.

Although these motions are not legally binding, extremists have already started demanding them as laws.

There are, of course, no comparable motions against “Judeophobia” or “Christianophobia”.

Neither motion M-103 nor motion 37 exactly define “Islamophobia,” leaving that to the imagination of the supposed victim(s).

Hardliners who support this form of censorship, and presumably other restrictions required by Islamic sharia law, aim to blur the line between genuine bigotry and criticism of core problems across the Muslim world, such as the murder of apostates and homosexuals, communal hatred, anti-Semitism, violence against women and minors, female genital mutilation (FGM), child marriage, unequal legal and inheritance rights for women, stoning, flogging and amputation, and social taboos such as honour killings or right to choose a husband for girls or restrict girls’ education.

Those who present these motions claim that “Islamophobia” is rampant across the country, but seem blind to Islamic sharia law’s endorsement of killing homosexuals, violence against women and minors, atrocities such as those enumerated above, and notions of Muslim supremacy across the planet.

These issues are genuine concerns for millions of Muslims as well as human rights defenders, but are never addressed by those apologists, who always try to present these atrocities as perfectly acceptable “cultural norms”.

People in hostile societies put their lives at risk by speaking against the majority; meanwhile, shutting out any criticism against hardliner behaviour in the West actually means giving extremists a license to keep on committing atrocities.

Broadly speaking, in the West, where people have the opportunity to stand up against persecution, Muslim extremists seem determined to sell themselves as victims and to get rid of whatever obstacles contradict a clearly expansionist agenda.

Motion M-103 claimed: “Recently an infinitesimally small number of extremist individuals have conducted terrorist activities while claiming to speak for the religion of Islam”.

Are those who set forth these resolutions oblivious to the clerics who rally hundreds of thousands across the world — organizations such as Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, CAIR, ISIS, Hezbollah, Al-Shabaab, Al-Qaeda, Taliban and Jamat e Islami, Sipah-e-Muhammad, TehrikNifaz-i-FiqahJafaria, JamatudDawa, Jaish-e-Mohammad, Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, Lashkar-e-jhangwi, TehrikNifaz-i-Shariat Muhammadi, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Lashkar-e-Islam, Jamiat-ul-Ansar, Hizb ut-Tahrir, Khuddam-i-Islam, Fatah Al Islam (Lebanon), Ansar Al Sharia in Libya, Jabhat Al Nusra (Al-Nusra Front) in Syria, the Haqqani Network in Pakistan and other offshoots of these jihadi movements?

The sales pitch for M-103 was given a pretty façade of human rights concerns, but actually inside was a veiled endorsement of a Muslim supremacist mentality.

While M-103 asks to recognize the need to curb systematic racism and religious discrimination against Muslims, there are no traces of any systematic hatred or racism against Muslims or any religious groups in Canada.

On the contrary, Canada already has laws to curb any discrimination or abuse against individuals or groups. All that is needed is to enforce those laws already on the books.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Criminal Code, carry progressive laws to handle hate crimes or racism. Section 318, 319(1) and 319(2) are specifically designed to deal with such offenses.

Moreover, criticizing any genuine social concerns about a community or belief system is the democratic right of every citizen in a civilized country.

Motions such as these are how most Muslim societies — and other authoritarian states — were founded: by depriving citizens of the basic right to express a difference of opinion, and worse, on the pretense of “doing good.” The blasphemy laws of Pakistan were introduced on the premise of protecting the sanctity of the people’s religious beliefs, but the laws only ended up meting out public death sentences to innocent and marginalized victims.

Under Muslim blasphemy laws, such as those being slowly presented to Canada, such deeds are punishable by death or life in prison.

Unfortunately, blasphemy laws are often interpreted as a state’s permission to attack, lynch or destroy non-Muslim minorities, while the attackers are regarded as heroes for their crimes.

Victims of these laws also include critics of this barbarism such as Punjab’s Governor Salmaan Taseer, Pakistan’s Minister for Human Rights Shahbaz Bhatti, and often even human rights activists and the victims’ lawyers.

Aren’t we setting up the foundation of such norms in the West on pretense of curbing “Islamophobia”?

For example, a supposedly “infinitesimally small” number of jihadis are capable of shutting the mouths of approximately 200 million people (equivalent to the entire Pakistani population), seemingly forever, by literally killing dissent.

In the last century, the jihadis’ spiritual father, Sayyid Qutb, commissioned Muslims to impose salafist-style Islamic rule on the world by destroying the “infertile West” and eliminating anything non-Muslim.

Qutb’s book, Milestones, would undoubtedly be an eye-opener for those still unaware of what is required of “true” Muslims. The same is true of the writings of Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood.

This ideology is clawing its way into very fabric of the West, in places such as Britain, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, America, Australia and France.

It poses an imminent threat to the free world. Free societies will have to pay a heavy price if they choose to ignore the menace of extremism through a policy of appeasement and accommodation.

There is no need for specific laws about “Islamophobia”: it is not even defined. Worse, many extremist clerics also consider as “Islamophobic” any criticism of their jihadism, communal hatred, polygamy and violence against women, minors or possibly anyone else they target.

Canada has always been one of the most tolerant countries in the world; please let us keep it that way.

Not Satire | Toronto pro Islam protest opposes the war on the Islamic State (ISIS)

March 5, 2017

Toronto pro Islam protest opposes the war on the Islamic State (ISIS), CIJ NewsJonathan D. Halevi, March 5, 2017

(Once upon a time,

Now, not even Trudeau is sufficiently left-wing. Please read the list of protest supporters in the last paragraph of the article.  — DM)

syed-hussan-3-photo-cijnewsSyed Hussan. Photo: CIJnews

The anti-Islamophobia, anti “white”-supremacy and anti Justin Trudeau protest at Toronto’s Nathan Philips Square on Saturday, March 4, 2017 highlighted also a message of opposition to the wars against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (aka ISIS, Daesh, Caliphate) and Yemen’s pro-Iranian militias.

A sign on the central stage read the following:

  • Refugees welcome
  • (Fascists not)
  • Yes to refugees
  • No to Islamophobia
  • No to war in Syria and Iraq
toronto-anti-islamophobia-protest-41-photo-cijnews

The first speaker on behalf the Organizing Committee Against Islamophobia (OCAI) accused Justin Trudeau Liberal government among other things of espousing white supremacist policy, committing ongoing “genocide” against the Indigenous people, arming the Islamic regime of Saudi Arabia that bombed Yemeni children and exploiting refugees and immigrants. She called the federal government to repeal the Barbaric Cultural Practices Act that criminalizes forced marriage and tackles ‘honour killings’. To read the transcript of her speech and watch the video click HERE.

The Canadian flag was not displayed and the National Anthem was not played at the protest. For a photo gallery from the event click HERE.

One of the speakers at the rally was Syed Hussan, who is affiliated with the organizations No One Is Illegal-Toronto, Toronto Community Mobilization Network and Migrant Workers Alliance for Change.

In his speech, Syed Hussan portrayed Canada as a rogue state accusing Justin Trudeau Liberal government of implementing a colonial policy, taking part in wars and criminally neglecting indigenous people. Hussan said that anti-islamophobia motion is not enough calling for an orchestrated popular struggle to make sure that “racists” cannot gather and to “cut off the head of racism.”

The following are excerpts from Syed Hussan’s speech:

Colonialism… continues on these lands…

We need to come to terms with the fact that we live in a country, we live in a society, we live in a community, that is racist (crowd: shame).

We live in a country, in a community in a society that goes to war (crowd: shame).

We live in a country, in a community in a society where indigenous women are disappeared and murdered (crowd: shame).

We live in a country, in a community in a society where indigenous children are stolen from their families (crowd: shame).

We live in a country, in a community in a society where just if you don’t have a citizen status you can die, you can be denied health care (crowd: shame).

This is our reality. We have been for too long completely comfortable, completely confident in this idea that this place is somehow better, that we somehow achieved something…

What was achieved here has been achieved as a result of a collective, social struggle… if you talk about anything that is good in this country it was not given to us. We took it… and we get it in opposition to government, in opposition to elected parties…

We are not going to simply be ok with this motion to study the possible effects of Islamophobia and racism in this country. Are we? (crowd: no). We are not here to just defend a motion in Parliament by the same government that is breaking, that is breaking its promise to indigenous people, that sends more weapons to Yemen (sic. meant to Saudi Arabia)… that is not the government that we are supporting. This is not the policy that we can support…

[We gathered in a] symbolic protest to show that these racists cannot gather, will not gather. We need to commit to something more important, something more critical… if there is any work that you do, in your neighbourhood, in your community racism raises its ugly head and your job, our job is to find it and cut its head off.

Change will not come from laws, will not come from policies. It will not come from symbolic protests. It will come when we gather in the tens of hundreds of thousands we wage these battles. We find where they are the weakest and we attack together in solidarity, connecting all our struggles, gender justice, racial justice, economic justice, indigenous sovereignty. We will come together to fight, to win.

On February 4, 2017 Syed Hussan took part at a rally in front of the American Consulate in Toronto to protest the policy of US President Donald Trump. The demonstration was organized by Black Lives Matter – Toronto (BLM TO) – the self proclaimed “coalition of Black Torontonians resisting anti-Black racism, state-sponsored violence and police brutality” – that launched a nation-wide campaign entitled “National Days of Action Against Islamophobia & Deportations.”

In his speech at this event, Syed Hussan portrayed white supremacy, capitalism and liberalism as the enemy describing Donald Trump and Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as the two sides of the same coin.

He called on the masses to organize and united under the common goal of dismantling the current governing system in the West, including by breaking down borders, prisons and detention centers, seizing farms and factories and becoming the enemies of the authorities.

We must celebrate our way of life, what they called barbaric cultural practices on our streets and in our homes until their way of life dissipates under our feet,” Syed Hussan said.

The following is the transcription of Syed Hussan’s speech:

I want you to repeat these names with me Mamadou [Tanou Barry], Abdelkrim [Hassane], Khaled [Belkacemi], Aboubaker [Thabti], Azzeddine [Soufiane], Ibrahima [Barry] shot, killed, murdered, executed, massacred while praying, for praying, never forget. Lives extinguished, families torn apart, children made fatherless, a river of tears. A river of tears by the gun shots of a single man [Alexandre Bissonnette] or so we are told. An act of hate someone has to believe.But this act, this attack, this shooting was no act of hate. It is a strategic act, and intentional act, a thoughtful act. Mamadou [Tanou Barry], Abdelkrim Hassane] and Khaled [Belkacemi] were killed because they were seen as enemies. Aboubaker [Thabti], Azzeddine [Soufiane], Ibrahima [Barry] were killed not by a lone wolf, but because they were threats. You see, we, you and I, pushed out by borders, beaten down by police and impoverished in our communities. We are threats. We are fundamental challenge to our system of oppressiveness, this destructive way of life that cherishes the few over the many.

This way for life is what killed them. It gauges on oil to spread its evil wings. And to steal this oil it must declare us, it must declare the places we come from with oil, anti of humanity. It must turn us into enemies. This way of life is Islamophobia. It’s Capitalism. This way of life brings perpetual war, enraging war from Mosul (Iraq) to Mogadishu (Somalia), from the Chiapas (Mexico) to Chernobyl (Ukraine), from Aleppo (Syria) to Algeria. For as long as there has been history, black, brown, we’re the others. It is on our deaths that this system, this way of life, dances. And this way of life is what killed those six men. This way of life needs borders. It needs to divide some of us into citizens and the rest of us into undocumented, migraines, others.It needs to steal Indigenous children, destroy language, disappear women. We are made into enemies, disposable, locked up in prisons, forced to do endangered labour, in forms of factories. Pushed of our lands, recorded, weighed and measured for our skin.

This murderous way of life is white supremacy. This way pf life needs to be taken care off, its children fed, its food cooked, its homes kept warm and for that it must have gender, women. Women that are made to serve but watch closely. This way life is patriarchy. And this way of life, the one that killed our six loved ones, needs armed forces whose work is death. And it needs bureaucrats, it needs administrators to sustain it. It needs courthouses like this one [The Toronto Courthouse]. And it needs a public, a public that is you and I to uphold these laws, enforcing them in the smallest of ways as teachers that check ID cards, as nurses that check health cards.

This kind way of life is liberalism. And this way of life comes in all colours. It comes in the red, the blue and the orange of your political parties. It comes in many flavors. It comes in a caustic bile of [US President Donald] Trump and it comes in the saturated sweetness of [Justin] Trudeau, who defends Muslims, but will arm the [Saudi] bombing of Yemen, who defends Muslims, but will scrap to the likes of Barrick Gold [mining company] and will not clean the five decade long of mercury poisoning in Grassy [Narrows Reserve in Ontario].

So listen, why did drop bombs on us like [former US President Barack] Obama. What did they ban us like Trump? Or why did hug a few of us like Trudeau? To them we are enemies. On one side is the border wall. On the other side is the enemy. On one side is the prison and inside the prison the enemy. On one side the police and underneath the police the enemy. On one side is the deportation judge and in front of him the enemy. On one side the slave ship and inside it the enemy. On one side the drone pilot and on its screen the enemy. On one side that murderer [Alexandre Bissonnette] and in front of him six men in prayer the enemy.

So today I say to you: become the enemy. Become the enemies that they have nightmares about. Let’s gather in the tens, the thousands, the hundreds thousands to form organizations and movements, movements that will exert power and reshape our society. In millions we need to rewrite history. We cannot respond to Trudeau’s symbolic tweet with a symbolic protest. We must rest out the guns on front those that wishes that. We must break down the borders that keep out migrants and refugees. We must tear down the prisons and the detention centers.

We will seize the farms and the factories. We must become the enemies, so that in this city everyone can live with food, shelter, dignity. We must become the enemies that sow terror in their hearts so that laws like C-51 shredded away. We must celebrate our way of life, what they called barbaric cultural practices on our streets and in our homes until their way of life dissipates under our feet. Let us become enemies. Let us organize. Let us win. We cannot wait. Freedom is calling. This is what these demands, that demand of us, let us be enemies.

The demonstration on March 5, 2017 was supported by Communist Party of Canada, Revolutionary Communist Party, PAJU- Palestinian & Jewish Unity, Independent Jewish Voices Canada – Toronto, International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network – Canada, Actions4Palestine, CFS Ontario // FCÉÉ Ontario, Committee of Progressive Pakistani Canadians, Common Frontiers, Christian Peacemaker Teams – Ontario, CUPE 3903, Educators for Peace and Justice, Fight for $15 & Fairness, Frente Para La Defensa Hugo Chávez, Hugo Chavez Peoples’ Defense Front, LAEN Latin American Education Network, Latin American and Caribbean Solidarity Network (LACSN), MISN: Mining Injustice Solidarity Network, McMaster Womanists, OCAP Toronto,Pegida Watch Canada, Salaam Canada, Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights – McMaster, Stop the JNF Campaign – Canada, SURJ Toronto, Toronto Against Fascism, The Anglican church of St. John’s West Toronto, Toronto Anarchist Reading Group, Toronto Socialist Alternative, Filipino Canadian Youth Alliance – Ontario, UNITE HERE Local 75, Westdale Social Action Committee, Women in Solidarity With Palestine, Women’s Coordinating Committee for a Free Wallmapu [Toronto], Young Communist League – Hamilton, Young Communist League – Toronto and York University Graduate Students’ Association (YUGSA). For more information click HERE.