Submission: The Danger of Political Islam to Canada

9-18-1 · January 3, 2018

While I do not support Kevin J. Johnston's brash approach to raising awareness regarding political Islam, he recently hosted the main author of the book Submission: The Danger of Political Islam to Canada (free copy attached) Thomas Quiggin. Placing Kevin J. Johnston aside, Thomas Quiggin explores where Canada is heading under Justin Trudeau:

Additionally, here is another (earlier) video with the same author giving a Conference with Raheel Raza (who provided the forward to the same book) at the 2017 Manning Center Conference in Ottawa in February of 2017:

I would like to point out that a number of users on here...
-Michael Hardner
-eyeball
-?Impact
...consistently derail threads with spam and rhetoric which contributes absolutely nothing to what should otherwise be a focused dialogue regarding an issue which is not only present in Canada, but almost all Western democracies (France, Sweden Germany, Australia, Britain etc.). Sweeping dismissals such as discrediting individuals due to their associations, character assassination, ad hominem, confusion about what racism actually is etc. without evaluating the merit of the content itself is simply bigotry and I invite all to dismiss it as such. All posts of this nature will be reported as spam.

The credentials and backgrounds of the authors can be found in the book attached below.

Muslim_Brotherhood_in_Canada.pdf

Edited January 3, 2018 by 9-18-1

eyeball · January 3, 2018

3 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

Sweeping dismissals such as discrediting individuals due to their associations, character assassination, ad hominem, confusion about what racism actually is etc. without evaluating the merit of the content itself is simply bigotry and I invite all to dismiss it as such. All posts of this nature will be reported as spam.

The credentials and backgrounds of the authors can be found in the book attached below

Muslim_Brotherhood_in_Canada.pdf

There is nothing wrong wit h evaluating the character of a racist when they try to make sound respectable and edumacated.

Perhaps if you posted your credentials and background it would help your case.

BTW your link doesn't seem to work.

?Impact · January 3, 2018

9 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

I would like to point out that a number of users on here...
-Michael Hardner
-eyeball
-?Impact
...consistently derail threads with spam and rhetoric which contributes absolutely nothing to what should otherwise be a focused dialogue

I have yet to see a dialogue. You point to extremely biased articles and pretend they are informed and have yet to actually debate a single topic. If you want to put up the credentials of the authors, then they will be addressed. Pointing out that people like Tom Quiggin is a know far right Islamaphobe with made up credentials is fair game when you pretend he has some credibility. His security agency he quotes was never heard of before he gave it a lofty title and began waving it around as if it meant something.

Edited January 3, 2018 by ?Impact

9-18-1 · January 3, 2018

5 hours ago, eyeball said:

There is nothing wrong wit h evaluating the character of a racist when they try to make sound respectable and edumacated.

Perhaps if you posted your credentials and background it would help your case.

BTW your link doesn't seem to work.

Merriam-Webster Definition of racism

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2 a : a doctrine or political program based on the assumption of racism and designed to execute its principles

b : a political or social system founded on racism

3 : racial prejudice or discrimination

eyeball's neo-liberal Definition of racism

1 : a belief that criticism of any socio-political entity open to all races which an individual(s) "doesn't like" has a racially motivated undertone

2 a : a sweeping response to criticism contrary to the belief(s) of a neo-liberal resulting in their feelings being hurt

b : a political or social system founded on views opposing a bigoted neo-liberal view

3 : prejudice or discrimination according to neo-liberal values

4 : generic term used to decry something he/she does not understand

I tested the link and it works fine for me; the link must be being racist for you if it is not cooperating.

29 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

I have yet to see a dialogue. You point to extremely biased articles and pretend they are informed and have yet to actually debate a single topic. If you want to put up the credentials of the authors, then they will be addressed. Pointing out that people like Tom Quiggin is a know far right Islamaphobe with made up credentials is fair game when you pretend he has some credibility. His security agency he quotes was never heard of before he gave it a lofty title and began waving it around as if it meant something.

"Extremely biased" is relative without justification. My intention is not to "debate", it is to discuss - I don't take a default hostile position as you do. The credentials of the authors are provided in the document attached, as the original post indicated. I'm assuming you read neither the post nor the document. Stating Tom Quiggin is a know (sic) far right "Islamophobe" with made-up credentials is attempting to use an illegitimate sweeping term to discredit him, just as motion M-103 is designed to do in order to shut down criticism of political Islam, which is a Sharia-motivated motion.

It has become clear to me that your use of the term "Islamophobe" as if it is a legitimate term suggests that either you are pro-Sharia, or ignorant, or both. No socio-political ideology should be protected from criticism. "Islamophobia" is a meaningless term; upon understanding the doctrines of political Islam, there is no irrational fear given the hundreds of millions of people dead as a result of political Islam's employment of various forms of (both military and on-military) jihad.

Thank you for outing yourself as pro-Shara and anti-freedom-of-speech. Now the forum knows you are a "truthophobe" regarding political Islam; see both sides can play that game, and it gets nobody anywhere, just as political Islam has got nobody anywhere but in a state of suffering/death.

Edited January 3, 2018 by 9-18-1

?Impact · January 3, 2018

5 minutes ago, 9-18-1 said:

Stating Tom Quiggin is a know (sic) far right "Islamophobe" with made-up credentials is attempting to use an illegitimate sweeping term to discredit him

Pretending he has credibility is your only argument. You put up some made up bullcrap by Quiggin and then pretend he is someone we should listen to. Attacking his credentials is perfectly valid as you are the one pretending he has any to begin with. If you want to actually argue something, then put it up and we will debate the issue you draw without any pretense on either side.

9-18-1 · January 4, 2018

14 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Pretending he has credibility is your only argument. You put up some made up bullcrap by Quiggin and then pretend he is someone we should listen to. Attacking his credentials is perfectly valid as you are the one pretending he has any to begin with. If you want to actually argue something, then put it up and we will debate the issue you draw without any pretense on either side.

From the attached document:

Thomas Quiggin, MA, CD
Thomas is a court-qualified expert on terrorism (criminal court and federal
court) and has had his expertise on the “the reliability of intelligence as
evidence” recognized by the Federal Court of Canada. He has also testified
as a court expert to the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. He was a
Senior Fellow at S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at the
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Thomas has 25 plus years of
practical intelligence experience in a variety of positions. These include the
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (NSIS/INSET); the Bank of Canada; the
Canadian Armed Forces; the United Nations Protection Force in Yugoslavia;
Citizenship and Immigration Canada (War Crimes); the International
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague, and the
Privy Council Office of Canada. He was also a qualified arms control
inspector for the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty and the Vienna
Document. He has also testified to a Senate Committee on intelligence
matters (The Kelly Commission, 1998); the Air India Inquiry (2007) as well
as providing testimony to the Special Senate Committee on Anti-terrorism
(2010) and to the House of Commons on 25 March and 28 May 2015.
Thomas holds a Master’s Degree in International Relations and is a certified
knowledge management practitioner. He has also provided three training
sessions to the Canadian Department of Justice as part of the special
advocates program with the focus being on intelligence and evidence.
Thomas also has been a guest lecturer at the Canadian Police College with
the lectures on terrorism and intelligence. He has spoken at various
conferences in Europe, Southeast Asia, and Australia on related matters.
Thomas has authored many publications on security and terrorism matters in
Germany, the Netherlands, the UK, USA, Canada, and Singapore. He has
previously published a book on national security titled Seeing the Invisible:
National Security Intelligence in an Uncertain Age, (2007, World
Scientific).

Now what are your credentials, other than believing "Islamophobia" is a legitimate term that can be thrown around to silence critics of political Islam?

Regardless of his credentials, in the document provided he provides over 900 (pages 461-549) independent sources for every single claim he makes. Did you check them all?

No, because you haven't even opened the document, and rather demonstrate your pro-Sharia sentiments of trying to discredit individuals based on nothing but sweeping statements trying to close down the discussion. Are you part of the Muslim Brotherhood responsible for that term? Why not just admit you are a pro-Sharia anti-democratic shill with absolutely zero respect for open dialogue? Is it because you are a truthophobe? How much more obvious can you make it?

?Impact · January 4, 2018

3 minutes ago, 9-18-1 said:

From the attached document

Again you provide the same boring made up credentials, and no real topic to discuss. Why not admit you are an Islamaphobe without anything to support you but other Islamaphobes. Open dialog starts with a real topic, and you have yet to introduce one.

9-18-1 · January 4, 2018

8 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Again you provide the same boring made up credentials, and no real topic to discuss. Why not admit you are an Islamaphobe without anything to support you but other Islamaphobes. Open dialog starts with a real topic, and you have yet to introduce one.

Again you provide no credentials of your own, and no real response to the OP. Why not admit you are a truthophobe without anything to support you but citing Sharia anti-blasphemy laws? Open dialogue starts with staying on topic, and you have yet to do it.

The document and sources are comprehensive, regardless of who wrote it and what your prejudices are about them. If there is something specific in the document you contest, put it forward. Otherwise sweeping statements just allude to your prejudiced and partisan stance on the issue, which isn't helpful in an open discussion.

?Impact · January 4, 2018

1 minute ago, 9-18-1 said:

citing Sharia anti-blasphemy laws

Really, I cited Sharia anti-blasphemy laws? Could you point that out for me as I must be getting forgetful in my old age.

Maybe we should have a book club topic, and then you could post your recommendations there.

9-18-1 · January 4, 2018

20 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Really, I cited Sharia anti-blasphemy laws? Could you point that out for me as I must be getting forgetful in my old age.

Maybe we should have a book club topic, and then you could post your recommendations there.

Sharia Law:
1. You can not criticize the Qur'an
2. You can not criticize Muhammad
3. You can not criticize Islam

When Charlie Hebdo happened, the artists were killed as per Sharia.

"Islamophobia" is a term invented by the Muslim Brotherhood to be used as a means to shut down all criticisms of the above. By your treatment of the term as a legitimate term you are effectively pro-Sharia, whether you realize it or not.

Great idea on the book club. Here are my recommendations:

Currently I am reading:
https://www.amazon.ca/Mohammeds-Koran-Muslims-Kill-Islam/dp/0995584907/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1515026739&sr=8-1&keywords=why+muslims+kill

A CHRISTIAN QUR’ĀN?
A STUDY IN THE SYRIAC BACKGROUND TO THE
LANGUAGE OF THE QUR’ĀN AS PRESENTED IN THE
WORK OF CHRISTOPH LUXENBERG
Daniel King, Cardiff University ([email protected])

New Perspectives on the Qur'an
Gabriel Said Reynolds is Associate Professor of lslamic Studies and Theology at
the University of Notre Dame (USA). He is the author of The Qur 'an and Its
Biblical Subtext (Routledge 2010), the editor of The Qur 'an in Its Historical
Context (Routledge 2008), and the translator of 'A.bd al-Jabbar's A Critique of
Christian Origins (Brigham Young University 2010).

PROSPECTS AND LIMITS IN THE STUDY
OF THE HISTORICAL MUḤAMMAD
Andreas Görke

The Qur'an in its Historical Context
Gabriel Said Reynolds is Associate Professor of lslamic Studies and Theology at
the University of Notre Dame (USA). He is the author of The Qur 'an and Its
Biblical Subtext (Routledge 2010), the editor of The Qur 'an in Its Historical
Context (Routledge 2008), and the translator of 'A.bd al-Jabbar's A Critique of
Christian Origins (Brigham Young University 2010).

Retelling the Tale: A Computerised Oral-Formulaic
Analysis of the Qur’an
Presented at the 2014 International Qur’an Studies Association Meeting in San Diego
Dr. Andrew G. Bannister, Melbourne School of Theology

The Must Know Guide
to the Qur’ān
for the Western World
by
TheQuran.com

Let me know if you ever want to discuss any.

Edited January 4, 2018 by 9-18-1

eyeball · January 4, 2018

6 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

Currently I am reading:

blah, blah, blah

I own:

blah, blah, blah

And I have PDF documents of the following:

Blah, blah, blah

You seem very radicalized alright - there's no doubt about it.

Edited January 4, 2018 by eyeball

9-18-1 · January 4, 2018

4 hours ago, eyeball said:

You seem very radicalized alright - there's no doubt about it.

Radically educated on the subject; thanks for the compliment!

Michael Hardner · January 4, 2018

14 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Really, I cited Sharia anti-blasphemy laws? Could you point that out for me as I must be getting forgetful in my old age.

It's another false claim. The hysterical belief that Western institutions can't actually accommodate freedom of religion is what they want to skip ahead to, based on these falsehoods.

?Impact · January 4, 2018

17 hours ago, 9-18-1 said:

Sharia Law:
1. You can not ...

That is not a relevant response to my request for you to substantiate Sharia anti-blasphemy laws you claim I cited. You are great at copy/paste of completely irrelevant content, and full of crap.

9-18-1 · January 4, 2018

3 hours ago, ?Impact said:

That is not a relevant response to my request for you to substantiate Sharia anti-blasphemy laws you claim I cited. You are great at copy/paste of completely irrelevant content, and full of crap.

Apologies; I should have assumed it was all beyond your grasp. There are some blocks in the corner for you to play with.

Sign In

Submission: The Danger of Political Islam to Canada

Recommended Posts

9-18-1

eyeball

?Impact

9-18-1

Merriam-Webster Definition of racism

eyeball's neo-liberal Definition of racism

?Impact

9-18-1

?Impact

9-18-1

?Impact

9-18-1

eyeball

9-18-1

Michael Hardner

?Impact

9-18-1

Join the conversation

Tell a friend

Member Statistics

Recent Achievements

Recently Browsing

Forums

Browse

Activity

My Activity Streams