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

[dialamah]

Just as an aside, it makes no sense to me why Khalid was unwilling to exchange the word "Islamaphobia" for something a little easier for people to hear rather than react to emotionally.   I think she ought to have done so.      

[?Impact]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Just as an aside, it makes no sense to me why Khalid was unwilling to exchange the word "Islamaphobia" for something a little easier for people to hear rather than react to emotionally.   I think she ought to have done so.      

I agree that the term Islamophobia is not the most descriptive, but it is part of the lexicon and generally well understood. Yes, there are many out there that intentionally try to misunderstand it, thinking their warped logic will somehow deflect the attention from where it should be.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

I agree that the term Islamophobia is not the most descriptive, but it is part of the lexicon and generally well understood. Yes, there are many out there that intentionally try to misunderstand it, thinking their warped logic will somehow deflect the attention from where it should be.

The problem lies in an individual's interpretation of Islamophobia.  The same with Homophobia.  Homophobia can range from finding the whole thing icky, to throwing gay men from rooftops or hanging them from cranes.

Islamophobia can range from finding the behavior described in the latter part of the previous paragraph barbaric and reprehensible, to shooting Muslims in the back while they are praying.

 

Edited February 18, 2017 by bcsapper
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction - Blaise Pascal

[PIK]

One would be when you become canadian do not go back home,(pakistan) and possibly raise shit then run back to canada for protection. I do not the link but it was reported a few days ago. He says he did nothing ,pakistan say he was a leader in the disturbance. What about the women that wanted to cover her face, was she a plant to see how far they could get or do you believe she did it on her own. We had some that tried for sharia law in ONT family court and now this motion. What deal did trudeau give the muslim community when he was having his secret meetings. Does trudeau have a love affair going with Islam? With the word Islam all they had to do is remove it,but no. This is just the liberal using muslims and women to bait the conservatives. IMO this country was pretty quiet under harper, now the hatred is building. And the minister herself using the word racist during a interview, are the liberals planning to make Islam a race???

Edited February 18, 2017 by PIK

[dialamah]

A woman in a hijab visits a Rebel sponsored event and reports on her experience.    It's probably not going to surprise many here that what she found were the same kinds of things presented on this forum by certain posters.

Quote

I found myself attending a rally hosted by Canada's very own Breitbart-esque news source, The Rebel, just over two weeks after six Muslims were killed by a right-wing extremist at a Quebec mosque. The Toronto gathering, which was billed by organizers at Rebel Media as an "URGENT Rally for Free Speech," could more accurately be described as an anti-anti Islamophobia (pro-Islamophobia?) assembly. It had a huge turnout—over 1000 people RSVP'd on Facebook, despite the Rebel having to change locations because the initial hotel gave into public pressure to drop hosting the event.

1

 

Quote

 This particular rally was hastily organized in response to a motion proposed last week by a Liberal member of parliament, Iqra Khalid, in order to combat Islamophobia.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quote

Throughout her speech and the others that followed, I couldn't help re-read the short motion, which I had printed out as a reference. It became clear to me that most people off stage were wholly unfamiliar with the actual text of the motion. It's obvious, if you actually read M-103, that its only goal is to gather data and information about hate crimes directed towards Muslims to find ways to help communities stay safe.

 

 

Quote

They genuinely believed Canada, one of the most democratic countries on the planet, was slowly on its way to having Shariah be the law. Never mind the sheer unlikelihood that a single speaker there had formally studied Islam, or knew how to speak Arabic or—whatever, it doesn't actually matter, because they were there to defend their "right to hate," as one speaker put it.

 

 

Quote

What struck me the most about the group of people assembled—who have adopted words like "snowflake" to point out how liberals and left-leaning people can't handle criticism or any sort of challenge—was their victim complex. Each speaker made it clear that they had suffered most in the ongoing discourse about Islamophobia, because they were no longer allowed to speak about how much they hated Muslims.   Not once were the innocent people who had been killed or injured during the Quebec mosque attack mentioned, even though it has been made abundantly clear the perpetrator of the attack politically aligned with the views espoused at the rally.

1

 

Quote

As a Somali-Canadian with family back home, I know the threat of extremism and terrorism all too well. Frequently, my parents will get calls from back home informing them that an acquaintance of theirs has died. The calls have become so routine that sometimes my parents barely react beyond saying a prayer and moving on. Just last year, a man I've been familiar with since I was a child was killed in an attack on a hotel as he was likely resting in his room. One of my first cousins tried making his way to Malta to escape life in Somalia years ago and hasn't been heard from since. Not only that, but every major mosque I have visited in Canada carries anti-extremism literature—of course, none of that matters to any of these people. Their circular logic was and is impenetrable.

 

 

Quote

Did I sit around while thousands of people rallied around their right to hate me and my family just two weeks after an Islamophobic mass murder? I got home and immediately told my family about my night. "Oh well," my mom replied. "They hate us; they'll always hate us. It's nothing new."

 

 

[Guest]

It's nothing new.  Ask a Shiite.

[taxme]

On 2/17/2017 at 4:56 AM, betsy said:

 

Baloney.  That's the lies that progressives spread about conservatives who dare question this motion. 

So, an MP read hate mails to show Islamophobia.  How do we know they weren't fabricated hate-mails?

 

Furthermore, why is it a specific protection for Islam.  Why not create protection for all religion, if they're really set on doing something like this?

 

 

Exactly. Are we all not suppose to be equal under the law/ No exceptions. Maybe I will put forward a motion that no one can say anything nasty about Caucasian people. Only nice things can be said. Either the Charter of Rights is equal for all or dump the dam thing. Works for me. 

[taxme]

On 2/17/2017 at 4:41 AM, bush_cheney2004 said:

Oh boy...more targeted hate speech laws that undermine Charter Rights for political expediency....must be Canada....again.

Where are the laws protecting Christians, Jews, First Nations spirituality, pagans, etc ?

Canada is starting to look like a confused country. 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, taxme said:

Canada is starting to look like a confused country. 

 

Trudeau says that Canada isn't a country anymore....it is "postnational" with no core identity.    There's your trouble....

[taxme]

On 2/17/2017 at 5:30 AM, cannuck said:

ANYTHING that codifies or even recognizes religious nonsense has no business in Parliament.

Religion has proved to be a disaster for anyone or any place that let's it dictate their laws, life or customs, so let's just do what good government should do and separate church completely from state.  Who gives a flying purple frick what the hell someone says about another's "religion" - whatever the hell (word chosen carefully) that is supposed to be.

Look: we have 7 billion people living on a nice, little one billion room planet.   If the religious fruitcakes want to call each other names and kill each other, it is simply Darwin's observation of the weak cleaning out the mentally deficient if we are to have any chance of surviving as a species.

As Lenin or was it Marx that once said "religion is the opium of the people.". With muslims they really need to slow down on the stuff. Take a break. 

[taxme]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Trudeau says that Canada isn't a country anymore....it is "postnational" with no core identity.    There's your trouble....

Whatever "postnational" means. Sounds like just another new word to create more problems and confusion. 

[bush_cheney2004]

5 minutes ago, taxme said:

Whatever "postnational" means. Sounds like just another new word to create more problems and confusion. 

 

It's a long story going back to the first Trudeau and earlier.   Changing flags,  language wars,  constitution, so many things easily rejected for political expediency.

Now Trudeau #2 wants to kill whatever is left to please his base.    Not even a Molson beer commercial can save it this time.

Edited February 18, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

[taxme]

7 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

It's a long story going back to the first Trudeau and earlier.   Changing flags,  language wars,  constitution, so many things easily rejected for political expediency.

Now Trudeau #2 wants to kill whatever is left to please his base.    Not even a Molson beer commercial can save it this time.

Canada is doomed because to be quite honest here, most Canadians do not appear to give a crap about Canada. If they did Canada would not be in the mess that it is in today. Canada today needs a Trump more than ever today. Trudeau #1 started on the road to destroying Canada, now trudeau #2 will finish the job. What a deal, eh?  

[?Impact]

1 minute ago, taxme said:

most Canadians do not appear to give a crap about Canada

After almost a decade of complete and utter destruction of our values, economy, and finances, Canadians finally woke up in 2015 and began to care about our future.

[bush_cheney2004]

Canada is now the walking dead that it watches on American television programs.  

Freedom of expression use to mean something in Canada. 

[taxme]

4 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

After almost a decade of complete and utter destruction of our values, economy, and finances, Canadians finally woke up in 2015 and began to care about our future.

Voting for trudeau is caring about Canada's future? Your joking, right?  You must be joking. 

[taxme]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Canada is now the walking dead that it watches on American television programs.  

Freedom of expression use to mean something in Canada. 

Not anymore thanks to the left wing liberals in this country. Liberals do not believe in freedom of speech or for that matter even the conservatives. America is lucky to have a 1ST Amendment. In Canada, we would be lucky if we came close to having a 65th amendment for freedom of speech.  I often think that if Canada was not next door to America but be next door to a communist country like Cuba we would have no free speech at all. I am sad to say that I would not trust most Canadians with my freedom of speech. And I see that happening a lot here towards myself because of my politically incorrect opinions and points of view. Canada was once free but not that much anymore is right. 

[bush_cheney2004]

3 minutes ago, taxme said:

... And I see that happening a lot here towards myself because of my politically incorrect opinions and points of view. Canada was once free but not that much anymore is right. 

 

I agree 100%...why did Canada become so afraid of free expression/speech rights ?  

Is Canada not strong enough to survive strident opposing views ?

Maybe they are just happy to be slaves to "free" health care...chained up like politically correct dogs.

 

Edited February 18, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

[Argus]

19 minutes ago, taxme said:

Voting for trudeau is caring about Canada's future? Your joking, right?  You must be joking. 

I think voting for Trudeau was more about caring for lots of government services without having to pay for them. He only sprang ahead in the polls once he promised to ignore budget restraint and spend, spend, spend.

[taxme]

3 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

I agree 100%...why did Canada become so afraid of free expression/speech rights ?  

Is Canada not strong enough to survive strident opposing views ?

Maybe they are just happy to be slaves to "free" health care...chained up like politically correct dogs.

 

Because most Canadians have become so conditioned to accepting politically correctness as normal speech that they would give up their freedom of expression/speech just so as not to appear politically incorrect. Would not want to hurt anyone's feelings now. Most Canadians are deplorable.

Liberals hate opposing views. Liberals have become nothing more than a bunch of intolerable and bigoted people towards anyone who does not think like them. Disgusting indeed. 

Canadians are slaves. They just have not awakened from the stunned politically correct slumber that has been placed on them yet. And I see no hope for their ever waking up from their long coma like sleep. Aw well. 

[?Impact]

30 minutes ago, Argus said:

I think voting for Trudeau was

about our screwed up FPTP system and having to check off his (party) name in order to get rid of the old guard.

[dialamah]

NM, it's off-topic.

 

Edited February 18, 2017 by dialamah

[Rue]

8 hours ago, dialamah said:

Just as an aside, it makes no sense to me why Khalid was unwilling to exchange the word "Islamaphobia" for something a little easier for people to hear rather than react to emotionally.   I think she ought to have done so.      

Agreed. 

[Rue]

2 hours ago, ?Impact said:

After almost a decade of complete and utter destruction of our values, economy, and finances, Canadians finally woke up in 2015 and began to care about our future.

Well now you this notion you speak for all Canadians and find it so easy to generalize about 38 million people that's nice..delusional to. What does it have to do with the thread?

[Rue]

22 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Off topic....the point is that Canada already has a silly ass blasphemy law.

Yep still exists....but more importantly we have a Charter of Rights, a Criminal Code and Human Rights Acts in each province. All of them in theory could be called upon but the reality is none of them will stop people from being bigots or hateful. That has to happen on an individual level. The notion someone can point a gun at you and presto you like blacks or Muslims or gays or whoever it is-is naïve. Its why among other reasons I found the wording in the motion full of gas, rhetorical feel good gas. Politicians can't force people to be open minded. They can only threaten people with negative consequences if they do specific things that are first defined. Law as a tool to change people's thinking  processes is inefficient For every change it seeks to impose it triggers a reactive resistance, one step forward, two steps back and so on. 

Of course needed to prevent incitement of hateful acts but if we want people to be open minded we have to teach our kids when they are young and teach its a two way street. Treat people as you want them to treat you. A lot of people today expect rights they aren't willing o nour in others and therein comes the controversy. If you want to preach religious beliefs that define a woman's body as something that needs to be covered, or that non Muslims are infidel, or that woman or gays are suspect etc., I am going to challenge that as intolerant and hateful. Doesn't mean I am afraid of Islam and it doesn't mean I hate Muslims, it means I challenge certain Muslim beliefs because they violate the human rights of others and no your human right to freedom of religion does not mean you come to Canada and can demand others conform to your beliefs when they clash with fundamental democratic values. No I do not have to be tolerant of intolerance. No I do not have to accommodate hateful religious beliefs of others. Yes I will speak out when I hear the notion a woman feels free when she covers herself completely head to foot. O am going to challenge that just as I do the concept of dhimmi in Islam, just as I challenge the Muslim view of gay people, just as I criticize its believe in polygamy. Doesn't mean I hate Muslims or fear them and I can assure you Bush, you tell a Canadian what they can't say, its true we aint Yanks, we won't start a revolution and demand fair taxation,  but we still get our point across, abeit through snively feel good debates and a lot of passive aggressive nose sniffing and snortles.

In the coming years our tradition of refusing to define Canadian values specifically and just leave them open ended will come to a turning point just as our open borders will come to an end. It is the unfortunate reality of limitation coming to democracies who once felt they could be anything to anyone and now realize they don't have the unlimited ability to do that. Our challenge now will be to define the limitations just as you are in the states and hopefully we can be less clumsy than Donald in doing that,

The motion we have debated in this thread did not differentiate between discourse challenging Muslim religious precepts from discourse that engages in inciting hatred against Muslims as a people and so is inherently meaningless and deficient until it does.  No I  am not hateful of Muslims because I disagree with certain Islamic beliefs. That remains the question left vague in the motion.

In fact I would go so far as to argue under that wide open vague motion, there may be many Muslims who qualify as Islamophobes precisely because they challenge and disagree with other sects of Islam. Amidyah Muslims came to Canada to escape Muslims who hated their version of Islam for example. I stand by that Muslim community of Amidyah as peaceful, caring, open minded humane people-the kind of people I would give my last crumb of food to because they would do the same in return.

I don't want anyone hating anyone simply because they are Muslim but I sure as hell have the right to challenge Islamic precepts. Some of the most interesting discourse I have heard is between theologians of many religions criticizing and challenging religious precepts and what they mean. Some of the best interpretations of the Talmud I have heard have come from Christian scholars not just Jewish ones. Some of the most insightful religious analysis has come in Arabic poetry that could be applied to all 3 religions.

We have to be able to challenge religious values of any religion we feel need to be challenged. We can't be restrained from open minded discourse.

That motion could however unintentional lead to just that, a restraint on such discourse. I don't think it was the intention, I personally think the motion will vanish like the puff of rhetorical gas it is, but it did bring up legitimate concern.

I will tell you this as well. I have read countless comments under the pretext of challenging Israeli state policy that in fact do not distinguish  between Israeli state policies, Israelis, the rights of Jews to define themselves as a national collective, and Jews in general, i.e.., we control the US and the world and the banks, we invented the holocaust.

Now I see the same people who use Israel as a pretext to spew hatred about Jews -the very same people now playing the Islamophobe card. It pisses me off. it pisses me off because they exploit the debate to smokescreen their agenda

There are intolerant extremist militant Muslims who would love to play the Islamophobe card to shut people up from challenging Muslims who engage in terrorism or speak hatefully about Jews, Israelis inter-mixing their religious and political beliefs of hate.

They can kiss my Jewish buttoxian muscle. However innocent, peaceful loving Muslim Canadians who just don't want to be spit at, that I get Today 12 idiots were standing outside some mosque in Toronto demanding Islam be banned. That was stupid and hateful but we live in a democracy and so it has to be allowed. No we don't allow such people to throw rocks or say things that call Muslims hateful names but its a democracy they are entitled to say what they said.

We Jews live with that. We know there is a slipperly slope between drawing the line and saying when the anti-Semitism goes too far. Me personally I don't like censoring it unless its life threatening or its an angry mob about to do harm. We need it out in the open if for no other reason to let Muslims know they can trust our democracy to both allow unpopular speech but not allow it too go too far.

I get Muslims are worried after what happened That want some kind of feel good words to make them not feel anxious that more attacks are coming. Well they need to form coalitions with us other minorities They need to reach out to us Jews, blacks, gays, Christians, etc., so they know hey man hatred happens but we can survive and overcome it, not by trying to think we can go boo and magically it goes away with a motion or some government action, but slowly, one on one in communities between people, particularly our children, who build bridges of trust by working on the same goals, the same visions, the same values.

We can't overcome hatred if we hide from our haters and refuse to meet them and talk to them and with them and stand up to them and not be afraid to listen to the hatred and talk that hatred down.

All of us minorities have done it. Even so called majority people, if they do exist have  been in such situations.

We have it in us to over-come hatred but its a subtle exercise at times.

Its why I argue on the one hand I get Muslims being afraid, but I don't like that particular wording in the motion.  

 

Edited February 19, 2017 by Rue