Canadian Muslims demanding end to free speech / Canada's Anti-Islamophobia Committee will begin meetings next month

[Goddess]

Just now, ?Impact said:

Who said anything about laws? What is your end game?

My end game?

Well, I go to work and pay my bills, go to flamenco classes, like to watch TWD and sometimes engage in discussions like this.

That's about it.

[betsy]

8 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

What exactly constitutes antisemitism?

 

It's the hatred for, and the wish to eliminate Jews and Israel!  We've seen the holocaust!

 

Quote

 

 Prime Minister Stephen Harper has noted, "Those who would hate and destroy the Jewish people would ultimately hate and destroy the rest of us as well."

The protocol is a declaration that hatred of this nature will not be tolerated in this country. It sets out an action plan for supporting initiatives that combat anti-Semitism and provides a framework for other nations to follow.

It also sets out a vibrant definition of anti-Semitism which, for the first time in history, links anti-Semitism to the denial of the right Jewish people have to their ancestral home land -- the State of Israel. This, in fact, is what sets post-World War Two anti-Semitism apart from its historic roots.

Today's anti-Semitism is all about denial: denial of the legitimacy of Zionism as a Jewish movement to reclaim the land of Israel; denial of a Jewish history in connection to the holy land and, in particular, the centrality of Jerusalem to the Jewish people; denial of the Holocaust (while at the same time accusing Jews of Nazism); and denial of Jews to live free of anti-Semitism, hate and intolerance.

 

The Inquiry Panel's conclusion, unfortunately, is that the scourge of anti-Semitism is a growing threat in Canada, especially on the campuses of our universities." The report cites numerous examples of anti-Semitism on various campuses including the infamous incident in 2009 when Jewish students at York University were chased and barricaded themselves in the Hillel lounge while a mob outside taunted them with anti-Semitic slurs. The list of examples is quite long and disturbing.

 

Your turn.  How is Islamophobia defined?

Edited February 17, 2017 by betsy

[?Impact]

1 minute ago, Goddess said:

go to flamenco classes

Now I understand your avatar. 

[DogOnPorch]

Antisemitism is a word coined by Wilhelm Marr in the 1870s to describe Jew Hatred. Not something else.

Here's the English translation of his 1879 "The Victory of Judaism over Germanism" (PDF) Note: Judaism...not something else.

 

[-1=e^ipi]

26 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

antisemitism is not a racial term, it is a religious term.

It's not a religious term. It's been misused as a religious term for decades, but it is not a religious term.

 

Non-jewish arabs are Semites, for example.

[Goddess]

3 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Now I understand your avatar. 

I teach classes for beginners, if you're interested.  

Edited February 17, 2017 by Goddess
Spelling mistake, I'm also a bit OCD

[Altai]

1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

antisemitism is not a racial term, it is a religious term. Trying to parse the language of a term that has been in use for decades to express hatred towards Jewish people does not support your argument.  In fact semitic people are neither racial nor religious, it is a term about lingual origins.

But these people who speaks semitic origin languages are accepted as the same origin people too. Therefore this makes it a racial term. Languages are accepted as one of the most reliable indicators to identify racial roots. The main purpose to use the word "semitic" is to emphasize their racial roots.

[-1=e^ipi]

9 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Antisemitism is a word coined by Wilhelm Marr in the 1870s to describe Jew Hatred. Not something else.

Here's the English translation of his 1879 "The Victory of Judaism over Germanism" (PDF) Note: Judaism...not something else.

The etymology of the word indicates that it is a racial term, not a religious term.

[?Impact]

5 minutes ago, Rue said:

.... long winded discussion ...

There are Muslims who believe that ANY critical discussion of Islam constitutes Islamophobia.

Critical discussion are not hate speech. Yes, there are Muslims who are wrong, but that doesn't discount the entire problem.

The only reason antisemitism is brought up is because it is a familiar topic which many people understand yet they claim to not understand Islamophobia which shares many similarities but has a different target. It can be used to put things in context. For example, holocaust denial is clearly antisemitic but is it a crime? If someone creates a website that claims the holocaust never happened, we should clearly condemn them but should we throw them in prison? If they commit a crime like attacking a place of worship then that can also be antisemitic and criminal so they should be thrown in prison.  It helps put things in context.

[DogOnPorch]

11 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

The etymology of the word indicates that it is a racial term, not a religious term.

He's on record inventin' it.

[Rue]

27 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

 

Anti-semitism is a racial term, not a religious term. The semitic people are a racial group, not a religious group.

 

An equivalent of Islamophobia would be Jeudaismophobia or Christianophobia. I would also oppose such terms.

 

Why does it make sense to support a motion, if it's wording is so vague as to allow for funding of religious institutions and therefore violate secularism?

Uh no Semites is not a racial term, its a term that actually refers to language origin, not race. But the rest of your statements I think do justice to the topic. Anti-Semitism is not a term simply referring to people who hate the Jewish religion.

As well no one is saying people who hate Muslims simply because they are Muslim should not condemn this hatred and reach out to non Muslims to ask us to unite with them.

The problem is in how to define Islamophobia. Does it mean followers of Islam, does it mean, any Muslim or anyone who looks like a visible Muslim?

What does it mean?

When a theology student does critical analysis of a religion  does that make him automatically,an Islamophobe if he questions Islamic precepts any more than it makes him a hater of Jews or Christians if he does the same with those religions?

Does someone who questions Muslim extremist terrorists because they are using Islam as their basis of terrorism get his label?

Who decides?

Your comments are dead on. I only mention the semite thing because you are well aware race was a subjective construct used by those who had a lack of science knowledge, specifically genetics and defined people by their secondary physical characteristics which is now proven false. Yes its true "Arabs" and "Jews" are referred to as the remaining semites,and anti-Semitism was coined to describe anti-Jewish hatred and Muslims chose to want to differentiate hatred against them from anti-Jewish bigotry for  many reasons.

But you are right, the term anti-Semitism has taken on a very specific context and the only people who seem to have a problem with it are people who like to challenge Israeli state policies by making comments that disparage all Jews world-wide, i.e., deny the holocaust or suggest Jews should not have a collective political national identity but Muslims and Christians can. For them the double standard of thinking Muslim states can exist but Jews can't have a state, is a contradiction they can not see because they don't understand what a Jew is to start with.

Muslims when coining the word Islamophobe have a lot of work to do. To start with it means many different things to many different Muslims. To conservative Muslim scholars its used completely differently then when its used by Muslim progressives or Muslim terrorist/extremists.

Its a term with no consensus yet in the Muslim world. Its often used to depict the assigning of negative characteristics to any or all Muslims. That I think is what it at I ts pith and substance is probably meant to be but it can be used to in fact challenge unfair depictions of Arabs, Africans, Chinese-Muslims, and so on. Its context can and does change depending on who is being hated and for what reasons.

In China for example there are 20 million people who are Muslim. Is the Chinese government Islamophobe because its against Chinese Muslims forming their own state or because of their religious views. Would China care what the religious values are of its Muslims if they were not separatist?

Did China invade Tibet because it was anti Buddhist or simply because it was asserting some nationalist belief that the land belonged to China. Some say because China is an atheist nation its a religious battle, others say, its only a political dispute as to nationality.

Its tricky. The word means many things. Comparing it to anti Semitism as if the two are a pissing contest as I feel Impact is doing is misleading.

I mean what does anti Chinese mean. Does it mean I hate people just in Taiwan, just in Mainland China, or anyone of Chinese ancestry anywhere in the world or does it just refer to my dislike of certain Chinese foods?

People do not differentiate between their hatred and criticism of Israeli state policies from all Israelis. That's anti-Israeli. It doesn't become anti-Jewosh or anti-Semitic until it then engages in comments that negatively disparage all Jews and not just Israelis. Most people do not get that anymore than they understand the word "Chinese" refers to a vast category of categories and "Chinese" is not some narrow one size fits all description for the same reason being a Jew is not-because the civilizations they both come from are so old and have had time to develop  into multi-component characteristics of not just language or religion but art, culture, ethnicity, folk traditions, disciplines, family traditions, codes of Ethics and behaviour and on and on.

I just hope since you seem to get it bang on, we see Islamophobia better defined because people like you and me disagree on many things but we don't agree to deliberately hate people only because they are Muslim but we need a way to properly explain that hatred so its not misunderstood and misused.

Ironically at a basic level, when Jews fled to Shanghai to escape the pogroms and holocaust, Chinese never had a problem understanding what being a Jew was. I suppose it dates  back to Marco Polo, but the real reason is because China has old enough traditions to understand some people come from traditions that have evolved way past meaning just one thing. Its interesting because Chinese lived peacefully with my family in Shanghai during the war. There was no Chinese anti-Semitism. Mao's regime let all the Jews leave unharmed after WW2. In india another ancient civilization of people, Jews thrived in Mumbai-Hindus didn't engage in anti-Semitism they understood Jews defined themselves in similar ways to the way Hindus do, very fluid  in reference.

Islam as a religion is still at a very fundamentalist juncture like Christianity and Judaism once were. The collective identity of Muslims is still developing. It is as diverse as the nuances in its language. One word in Arabic can mean many things. Describing hatred of Islam means what? The religion-the people-the nationality-the terrorist beliefs?

Let's do it some justice and have it defined  and everyone calm down and keep it simple-hatred of anyone is crap but yah I argue, defining hatred against a collective identity requires time and the traditions that come out of Jews, China, India, come on they took a long time to develop. Let's not think Islam is not still evolving in concept and is evolving past just reference to religion to other things and that is the danger in such motions. If they aren't specific as to the hatred they refer to, they won't mean anything they will fail with ambiguity 

[Argus]

3 hours ago, ?Impact said:

"The Ottawa Protocol complements what Canada is already doing to combat hatred and discrimination, including anti-Semitism.

I'm pretty sure I already pointed out how this agreement can't be compared to any law to combat "Islamophobia", and the vast differences between antisemitism and "Islamophobia". Just a week ago, in fact. In this very topic.

How often have you heard 'antisemitism' about Jews which truthfully referred to their religious texts, what their religious leaders and scholars say, and their proven violence against the people around them? Virtually never. Usually the antisemitic comments are about crap like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, or blood libel or other insidious things like Jewish bankers ruling the world.

What the progressive Left usually refers to as Islamophobia are people saying truthful things about Islamic texts and the values and beliefs which are enshrined within and taught and believed by the majority of the world's Muslims. In other words, what they want to ban is legitimate criticism of political Islam, its ambitions and laws and intolerance.

 

Edited February 17, 2017 by Argus

[?Impact]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

I'm pretty sure I already pointed out how this agreement can't be compared to any law to combat "Islamophobia", and the vast differences between antisemitism and "Islamophobia".

What law to combat "Islamophobia" are you referring to?

[Argus]

3 hours ago, dialamah said:

Yes, the author of that article was equally hyperbolic.  She made ridiculous assumptions, misstated the purpose and scope of the study and came to wild conclusions.

The purpose of the study is already stated, to find a government approach to combating Islamophobia (not further defined). What do government's usually do to combat something? They bring in new laws. Why is assuming they will seek to do that in this case a wild assumption?

[Argus]

1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

antisemitism is not a racial term, it is a religious term.

It is hatred of Jews because they are Jews. Islamophobia is a wide-ranging, made-up word used mainly by Islamists and progressives (who are often hand in hand with Islamists) to describe anyone who expresses any problems or disagreement with the political, social or cultural values and demands of Islam. Even if that person is a Muslim themselves, and most especially if they express a desire for Islam to change.

Edited February 17, 2017 by Argus

[?Impact]

8 minutes ago, Argus said:

The purpose of the study is already stated, to find a government approach to combating Islamophobia (not further defined).

Well, perhaps they should define it it as part of the study - duh.

Perhaps you need to spend some time in Parliament, and see that there is far more to governing than making laws.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

Who has said anything about that?

Wasn't Ezra Levant charged with hate speech because the Western Standard did a story on the Danish cartoons which actually printed the cartoons? Didn't Macleans magazine have to defend itself against a similar charge when it published an article by Mark Steyn which the Canadian Islamic Congress said would "expose Muslims to hatred and contempt "?

In fact, that's the sort of language which would probably be in a new law, and the new law would likely have lower thresholds for prosecution, otherwise, what would be the point of having a new law?

[-1=e^ipi]

8 minutes ago, Argus said:

It is hatred of Jews because they are Jews.

No, it is hatred of Semites, not Jews.

[?Impact]

Just now, Argus said:

 what would be the point of having a new law?

What new law? There is no new law, nor even a proposal of a new law? You are complaining about something that doesn't exist.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

Critical discussion are not hate speech.

Levant said he had to spend $100,000 to defend himself from a charge. So it seems to me that simply making the charge punishes people.

1 hour ago, ?Impact said:

The only reason antisemitism is brought up is because it is a familiar topic which many people understand yet they claim to not understand Islamophobia which shares many similarities but has a different target.

No it has NO similarities. Jews are in danger of violent attack in every country around the world. And there are whole groups largely dedicated to hatred of Jews, not to mention just about every terrorist entity on Earth. There are masses of ludicrous conspiracy theories bandied about by legions of morons and cretins about how Jews control the world or drink the blood of children or are behind the military industrial complex and bombed the world trade center.

The "Islamophobia" I have seen brought up in almost every case merely involves disagreement with fundamental values and behavior as observed by large numbers of Muslims and in line with what is being taught in Muslim schools and preached at mosques. Why is it when I mock Ultra-orthodox Jews who won't sit next to women on a plane that's not considered antisemitism but if I mock Muslims for their misogyny that's islamophobia?

 

[Argus]

10 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

What new law? There is no new law, nor even a proposal of a new law? You are complaining about something that doesn't exist.

i like to be logical. Why would she propose the government study "islamophobia" and ways to combat it if the government wasn't going to study it and figure out how to combat it? How do you combat it except with laws? And this is a progressive government. Progressives never let freedom of speech get in the way of banning speech which offends some minority group. Just look at their new amendments to the human rights codes to include gender identification. According to the head of the Ontario Human Rights Commision that will mean even not using someone's gender identification pronoun of choice would be a hate crime.

[Argus]

13 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

No, it is hatred of Semites, not Jews.

So you're saying all those Arabs who talk about the the protocols of the elders of Zion and say there was no Holocaust and that Jews drink the blood of children hate themselves?

[?Impact]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

Levant said he had to spend $100,000 to defend himself from a charge. So it seems to me that simply making the charge punishes people.

Levant is not about critical discussion, I didn't follow that specific case but anytime I read Levant is it pure uneducated hatred he spews.

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

Jews are in danger of violent attack in every country around the world.

Muslims have been violently attacked and threatened in Canada.

 

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

 How do you combat it except with laws?

How about education? Some of us are able to think outside the box, try it sometime.

[Rue]

4 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

He's on record inventin' it.

Dog on the Porch it has been pointed out to you numerous times that the term "semite" is not a racial term and the only people who have attempted to suggest Jews are a race are Nazis. That you come on the forum, make a smug comment to be posing the Nazi definition as the only right one, let aone posing that you will dictate to me what my origins are speaks loudly.

The word 'Shem" in Hebrew which is where the term semite comes in Latin and then French and then later German. Its a term non Jews and non semites invented and when they have described we Jews and Arabs they've tried to fit it into contextual references as to  ethnicity, cultural and race but all three have failed because none of the semites can be said to share the exact same ethnicity, cultural or for that matter "race" characteristics. These generalizations made to define semites were discarded,.now the ter,  "race" referred to a subjective term as to people's skin colour, eye and nose shape and hair texture and only an idiot would attempt to describe a Jew or an Arab as a race because both Jews and Arabs come in every skin tone, eye shape, nose size, hair texture there is. This is why historians, theologians anthropologists long before genetic scientists proved race was a myth stopped using it that way and limited the concept of semite to people traced back to semitic languages.

The term semite isn't one Jews or Arabs the remaining semites used. It comes from gentiles like you who presume in their superiority and arrogant smugness to tell us both who we were. I repeat again It was invented by smug gentiles like you who presume to tell us who we are  and to be specific arose in the 1770s at the Gottingen School of History. They borrowed the name Shem, which in latin and French is sem-those the people of Shem became referred to as Shemites or in lartin and French, semites.

That term was used interchangeably with the terms "Hamitic" and "Japhetic".

Race is a meaningless term to describe semites because semites had all so called race characteristics and still do. Jews can be white, black, Indian, Chinese. Arabs are a mixed people. Asians, Africans, Indians, Romans, Greeks, all inter-mixed. More to the point our knowledge of genetics today has long since proven race was first sed subjectively to describe nose shape, skin colour, hair texture and eye shape and these secondary characteristics mean little. A so called Chinese man could have more in common genetically with a white man then a fellow Chinese man.

We so called Jews today could be Ashkenazi, (European origins after we left Israel), Felashie (Ethiopian), Chinese, Indian, African, Arab (Mizrahi-Tsfardic). We are of every category that used to be called races. 

Now when we examine genetically through blood studies and dna studies Jews, Arabs, Assyrians, Samaritans, Maronites, Druze, Mandeans, Mhallami,a ll of such people can be traced through blood and dna to indigenous people of the so called Fertile Crescent. That doesn't make us a race or identified as semites because of race. What nonsense.

Semite as a term could be used to describe Akkadians, Canaanites, and Phoenicians as well as Hebrews and Arabs. It is absolutely idiotic to suggest these categories are of the same race when all of them are mixed in blood and have no specific race-what they did have in common was the roots of their language.

The semitic languages were Amharic (the language used n Ethiopia-Eritrea once called Abyssinia), Arabic (today associated with all Muslims because its the language of the Koran but Muslims exist who do not speak Arabic, i.e., Albanians, Indonesians, Pakistanis, Fillippinos, Bangla Deshis, Tanzanians, NIgerians, etc.), Hebrew, Aramaic (the language sued by Jesus, Chaldeans of Iraq and Christians ) and Syriac. Abraha spoke Armaic.

Let's spell it out to Porch who thinks he will tell Jews and Arabs what we are and how we define ourselves.

There has never been nor is there any genetic sequence unique to blacks (negroid), white (Caucasian) or mongoloid (Asian).

These 3 categories invented to describe people were subjective and based on physical characteristics but they mean nothing in science because there is more genetic variation in all the peoples of Africa (so called negroid or black peoples) then there are in all other populations in the remaining world. 

There are no genes specific to any race. There are no specific racial genes. There are no genes that make semite people a race any more than there are genes that make people negroid-black or Caucasian-white

There is no uniqueness in any of these so called races when it comes to the structure of the brain (neurological patterns),the musculo-skeletal system, digestive tracts, hand to hand eye coordination, penis size, body size, breast size, ear size, on and on. Its all been tested. No difference.

Even more ridiculous is the continuation of the skin colour myth. The amount of melanin in your skin that makes you light to dark might suggest the proximity of your ancestors to the equator but not much else.

In fact and I guess this will probably disappoint Porch who would prefer to define Jews and Arabs as the "semitic race", you know those people. certainly not Germanic, that there is not one biological element specific or unique to Indians, Chinese, blacks, Latinos. Our biological variations are variations that occur across these so called race lines.

We can most most certainly say people of certain blood types are prone to certain diseases but we now know for example the moon crescent shaped blood cell in African so called blacks that can give them sickle cell anemia came about as an adaption to deal with malaria but its not specific to "blacks" but people who lived long enough in environments with malaria.

Now IPEI probably saw in some dictionaries semite is referred to as race, ethnicity, culture as well as language. I get that. I get some dictionaries still refer to semites as races of people. However one needs to read further and understand why it now has been proven only to mean language origin and when Jews, Asyrians, Arabs can trace their blood type back to a specific area of the Middle East, it doesn't make them a common race, just people from the same place.

I have no problems with what IPEI said because the rest of his comments were dead on.

Porch coming from you trying to tell me what I am and define me as a race, oh I get it.

 

 

 

.

Don't pose you know better than I who I am thank you.

[-1=e^ipi]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

So you're saying all those Arabs who talk about the the protocols of the elders of Zion and say there was no Holocaust and that Jews drink the blood of children hate themselves?

No. And also, they aren't being Anti-Semitic. Anti-Semitic is the wrong term to use.