Author Archives: Grace

the new freedom of religion?

Posted on by

Vladtepes has already written on the story detailing the current trial of Montrealer Said Namouh (Ashraf to his jihadist, online community).  His defence lawyer claims that while his client’s actions may seem repugnant to thousands, he was simply exercising his right to freedom of expression and religion. And although other trials similarly seeking to prosecute jihadists in Canadian courtrooms, this one indeed stands apart for the simple reason that religion is the biggest component of the defence and the aspect by which Canada’s charter will be challenged and the court will ultimately rule.

Tirelessly, the accused worked to ensure the messages of global jihad were widely available to like minded jihadists over the internet. Point blank executions of westerners, suicide bombings, bomb making tips and threats to western governments were all part of the collected works of this Islamic terrorist intended to increase the daily, international quota of haters, bigots, and religious crackpots. Said Namouh clearly displays all the hatred Islam can muster; proudly and without apology.

Defence lawyer Rene Duval does not contest Namouh’s online jihad or even the fact that he received accolades from his terrorist peers for a service well done. In fact Mr. Duval will try to successfully argue on behalf of his client that this, as distasteful as it is, is Ashraf’s right:  to wage jihad and incite mass murder under freedom of religion. ” Where do you draw the line?” Duval asks.

It is time that Canadians came face to face with Islam’s evil twin and thanks to both Namouh and Duval, we finally have the opportunity to smack it down with the full force of the law, contesting every derilict, toting Allah’s will in a bomb-laden napsack, a rigged cell phone or a computer disc as the psychopaths they clearly are. Online jihad? Mass murder? And I thought Tom Cruise was a nutbar for giving Katie a matching set of cast iron pans as a wedding gift.

So, where do we draw the line? How far should freedom of religion extend? I would presume that Duval has missed one valuable aspect of his argument: the sacred cow of cultural relativity. Whatever shithole nation Namouth hailed, chances are likely that his frame of mind is quite normal and exhalted amongst the jihadi freedom fighting set. I’m hoping Mr. Duval brings this cultural relative aspect to his defence case, as we could kill two birds with one stone.

I for one would like to answer Rene Duval’s question. We draw the line at the incitement of violence against others in the name of Islam; the plotting for it, the call to arms on it’s behalf, the moral indecency of those that support it’s agenda, the apologies and financing made in it’s name, the pious notion of Muslim supremacy, the freedom to abuse western democratic institutions and the overt bigotry, hatred, and intolerance of non-Muslims and small m Muslims alike.

Said Mamouh’s trial will no doubt prompt Muslim activists and other Islamic organizations to contort like never before as this trial is the first high profile Canadian case to cite religious belief as a defence in a terrorism case. The pushers of jihad as an Islamic, benign inner struggle will have to work double time to set this record straight and no longer will they be able to manipulate the mass as readily or easily; Ashraf and his lawyer contend Islam as the primary defendant. Islamophobia? not. Arabaphobia? not. Muslim bashing? not. A zionist media? not. Freedom of religion? maybe. Terrorism? yes. It will be an interesting case to follow. 

Grace

No to sharia

Posted on by

” Equality and respect are for real, live human beings, not for beliefs and certainly not for inhumane, political movements. Sharia is why so many of us have fled and continue to flee Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere; opposing sharia law in Britian as in Afghanistan or elsewhere is not an attack on people’s right to religion: it is a defence of people’s human rights”.

Those words were spoken by Maryam Namazie, a Muslim woman living in Britian. Countless others like her who dare oppose the stifling oppression, inherent misogyny and violence of Islamic law and seek it’s eventual demise do so at tremendous risk, often surrounded either by direct shunning or threats of violence from their own community or an ignorant, host polulace willing to concede to Islamists under faulty multicultural policy and religious relativism.

I do not write this to convice those of us already fully aware of sharia’s incredible cruelty but rather to the many more who have convinced themselves it as only a benign form of religious arbitration. For the women who have fled to nations seeking refuge from the barbarism, it is anything but benign and for the young girls and women left behind, a reminder of the need to challenge and disrupt the flow of hatred.

The following three stories illustrate sharia’s capacity for violence and death. All three crimes were committed in western nations. The first details the fifteen hour beating of the twenty-two year old wife of vice consul at the Afghanistan Consulate in Queens, New York. Mohammed Fagirad told police that his wife was ‘a dog and that he would treat her as such’. The beating resulted in hospitalization.

The second is the account of the trial of German-Afghan Ahmed-Sobair O, who has been convicted of the murder of his sixteen year old sister Morsal O. He stabbed her twenty three times for living her ‘western lifestyle’. After calling the judge a whore, Ahmed-Sobair O stated that ” if this trial had taken place in Kabul, I would have been released long ago”. Present at the trial were his family and relatives and in solidarity they wailed, threatened and assaulted a journalist, criticized the judge and claimed the girl bore the guilt for her own murder.

The third is the account of the beheading of thirty seven year old Aasiya Hassan wife of  ‘moderate’ Bridges t.v. founder Muzzami Hassan. She asked him for a divorce resulting from ongoing domestic violence in which she sought to escape. Her decapitated body was found by police on the studio premises. Mr. Hassan has confessed to the slaying. She leaves behind two children 4 and 6.

I read this morning on www.islamqa.com a query from a Muslim man seemingly at wits end with his defiant wife. Seeking counsel from a scholar in sharia he asked ” what do I do with a woman who will not cover her hands? The scholar’s reply was simple: if persuasion does not work, reject her from your bed and if that fails, beat her”.

It is bad enough that sharia exists in Middle Eastern countries and clerics advise such fatwas, but it is wild beyond comprehension why western nations would entertain it’s existence, even in it’s most modest form. There is simply no place for sharia in any civilized society, regardless of the ribbons apologists  and activists would dress it with.  Movements across Europe, North America and to a lesser degree, the Middle East  have sprouted by those who have fled sharia’s oppressive and dangerous nature with many speaking out against it’s further inception. Aayan Hirsi Ali, Noni Darwish and Phyllis Chesler are among those who would warn us of it’s dangerous consequence, particularly for the lives of girls and women. It is time to pay attention and to ultimately say a resounding no to sharia.

Grace

11 year old smacks down sharia

Posted on by

I came across this story this morning while researching for another article. Wading through the reams of Islamist related material is a daunting task and oft times a depressing one. Rarely, do I find a story that inspires such profound encouragement as this one does.

Eleven year old Tuba Sahaab, a Pakistani girl living on the outskirts of Islamabad, has taken on the Taliban. Without apology, she writes poems detailing the suffering of children in her country at the hands of Islamist hardliners. She is strongly opposed to these religious extremists who restrict girls from going to school and often hunt down, prosecute and murder teachers who seek to educate youngsters.

Despite numerous threats of death, Sahaab states, ” I want to give peace to my nation; I will fight for it. If they kill me, do not worry, I want everyone in Pakistan to be equal. This is very shocking to hear that girls cannot go to school, they are taking us back to the Stone Age”.

Tuba Sahaab is managing to accomplish what most western feminist groups and nation governments have either been incapable or unwilling to do; standing up to Islamists without apology, round table discussions, inter-faith dialogues, multicultural folly, religious/cultural relativism and ludicrous concession. She succeeds because her motivation is pure and simple, unfettered by political clap-trap and a western obsession with moral castration. She does not defend herself because she believes first and foremost in her own dignity, her right to a life of value and a hopeful future absent of bigotry, hatred, misogyny and violence.

So while we dither with how best to accommodate sharia in the west and appease those Islamists and their supporters among us, eleven year old Tuba squares them off  with simple bravery in the hope for peace. I suspect that there are hundreds if not thousands of children like Tuba risking life and limb to procure a better life, defying the face of religious radicalism. We would be wise to learn much from Tuba and her example of courage. Oh, by the way, she would one day like to be an astronaut. Embarrassed?  

Grace

Take (it) off eh?

Posted on by

Ontario Court Justice Norris Weisman has ordered a Muslim woman to remove her niqab, full face veil, during the court proceedings in a sexual assault trial. After claiming her garment provided her comfort, when faced with it’s shedding she tried to convince the court that her garment was suddenly a religious requirement to which Justice Weisman rejected.

Editorials in Canadian newpapers have pointed to the collision of two basic rights: religious freedom versus the right of a defendant to face his (her) accusor. The burqa issue has once again resurfaced in the media with predictable arguments for and against and, rightfully so.

I on the other hand, am not going to be caught arguing the merits of the burqa trap as a feminista issue of freedom, as I believe any woman has the fundamental right to be as stupid or oppressed as she sees fit wearing as much or as little as she pleases. Instead, my concern with this case lies solely with the proper administration of justice in a Canadian court room. One fundamental principle at trial is the requirement that all participants be visible and to challenge this inherited, fine value is to mock it’s merit. This case has little do with the niqab and everything to do with sharia law vying for equal status within the Canadian judiciary system. As a means to this end, the niqab is effectivly worn by poster chicks living the Whabbist cause, a visible argument for Islamist priority. This woman herself chose religion as a fall back position, a cherry picking event popular by Islamists.

Predictably her lawyer, sharia advocates and leftists with little to do since Bush vacated the Oval Office, are seeking that Justice Weisman’s order be overturned. This is an important case for Canadians to pay attention to since it will set a precedent and has the potential to change the fundamentals to the proper administration of justice in the Canadian court room. Unlike the mockery of justice that dominates an Islamic courtroom, Canada’s inherited British system is a well functioning reflection of a long standing model that serves democracy and the accused with purpose, fairness and equality.

Sharia certainly has no place in Canada’s courtrooms and for that matter, in Canada at all.

As Israel sets unilateral cease fire, Hamas fires rocket

Posted on by

” Hamas has been beaten badly, it’s leaders are hiding and most of it’s people are dead” says Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. After hours of discussions, Olmert concluded that ” the goals we set for ourselves have been achieved”.

 But as the cabinet met, Hamas continued to fire rockets from Gaza into Israel hitting a house in the town of Ashdod.  

The Prime Minister contends that Hamas’ policies have allowed the Palestinian community to suffer, accusing it of acting as an Iranian proxy. Hamas remains steadfast in it’s stance to continue to assault Israel with rocket fire with an official stating the militant group would remain committed to violence as long as Israel remains in Gaza. Israeli troops will remain, at least for the next few days, and it’s government insisted that if Israel is fired upon by Hamas, the IDF would respond.

The United States and Israel have agreed to step-up intelligence coopertive measures within the region, to try to prevent the continuous smuggling of weapons into Gaza, while British Prime Minister Gordon Brown echoed the sentiment offering naval resources to aid in the prevention of arms trafficking. ” We will do everything we can do to prevent the arms trafficking that is at the root of some of the problems that have caused the conflict”.

Grace

Canada angers Islamists

Posted on by

It would appear that Canada has been scratched of the guest list to sit down to dinner with the Islamists. No more invites; we’ve pissed off the Arabs and Muslim world with one fell swoop. How? Canada officially declared her support for Israel in the Gaza conflict and Israel’s right to defend herself against terrorism.

And now the bony finger of extremism and twisted logic wags itself at Canada in…….. anger.

A January 14 editorial in the Arab News condemns Canada’s decision to vote against a motion by the UN human rights council to vilify Israel in the Gaza conflict, the only country out of 47 to do so, and to demand an investigation into Israel’s human right’s violations. Canada did so, realizing the slanted position of the proposal which clearly intended to discredit Israel’s stance while simultaneously rendering Hamas blameless. 

” With a stroke, Canada has lost it’s credibility, honour and friends in the Arab and Muslim world”.   

Funny, I didn’t know we had any ‘friends’ in the Arab and Muslim world. 

Certainly, this ommission to defend Hamas is seen as repugnant only among those who would wish that peace replace violence in Gaza via submission to terrorist ideology. The many well meaning? union organizations whose stance for justice and peace rely on condemning Israel, the anti-semites who protest at weekend rallies shouting Nazi rhetoric and of course, the ‘moderate’ Muslim organizations who belittle Canada and the United States at every turn are seething with rage at both the Conservative’s and Liberal’s official stance; that Canada denounce terrorism. The NDP is too busy handing out spare shoes and hot cocoa at the rallies to comment.  Not surprisingly, I found this article on the nation’s most prominent, Islamic, peace loving site, the CIC.

“Canada’s famed evenhandedness seems to have vanished. It has been replaced by blindness and hardheartedness. It is truly shocking”.

It IS a truly shocking and welcome turn, especially to Canadians who had all but given up on the government’s willingness to re-adjust it’s balls in the trousers of the nation and deligitimize terror states and their supporters through abject rejection. As for heardheartedness? The Arab and Muslim world have the monopoly on hardheartedness and heartlessness: just ask the innocent Palestinian people, the victims of Hamas and the countless other innocents around the world who have perished in the name of Islamic ‘peace and justice’.

There is a concerted push by Islamists to see Canada evolve into a safe haven for the imported hatred of Jews and sharia law that ensure intolerance, bigotry and misogyny. All one has to do is attend a pro-Hamas rally on any given weekend to witness the desire. The anger amongst them at Canada’s recent offical denunciation of Hamas combined with the ongoing willingness of Islamist sites and Muslim community newspapers to re-publish the sentiment should come as little surprise to anyone who understands the mandate. If we have indeed ‘thrown fairness to the wind’ as they claim, it is because our definition of fairness is a radically different one, as are the definitions of peace and social justice.

“Canada has, in the past rarely done anything to anger anyone”, states the Arab media editorial. 

So be it.  Time to eat at home with a big ham and swiss on rye and a cold beer.

Grace

Saudi grand mufti endorses sexual perversion in Islam

Posted on by

So, here we have it. The ‘powerful’ grand mufti in Saudi Arabia, Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh states it is perfectly reasonable for girls as young as ten to be married off and those in opposition to this are doing these ‘brides’ an injustice. According to the grand mufti, Islamic sharia law is “not unjust for women”.

Really?

The grand mufti and the supporters of sharia, many of whom live in Canada, would be wise to recognize the growing number of Muslims and non-Muslims alike who directly oppose such extremist rhetoric. Visit muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com for a sample of such opposition. 

I ask the mufti, why start at ten? why not two or three? Heck, why not negotiate the arrangemnt in vitro? I would also ask why, if marriage is condoned for a girl of ten, is she not marrying a boy of her own age?  Why is she betrothed to a man old enough to be her great grandfather? Could it be that sexual perversion in Islam is a holy mandate and through this perversion, the countless lives of young girls are stolen to satisfy the sexual urges of old men? Could it be that sharia’s very existence depends upon condemning women to lives of servitude?

It is my contention that one of the primary reasons sharia law exists is to provide Muslim men an exit out of reason and morality, a cushion to provide mass ignorance a comfortable place to reside, with women being the collective scapegoats; the group identified as perfect slaves under Allah, (pnbwh). Without sharia, men in Islam would have to exist with women on an equal basis, a concept considered outrageous and immoral to many a Muslim mind. A concept far too western; far too Christian; far too un-Islamic.

But what would I know? I hail from a western nation where society provides opportunities for girls to grow up along side boys as individuals with choice, as whole women and men with value, unencumbered by ancient, holy regulation spewed by decrepid geriatrics; a society which does not condone the rape and slavery of minors to perpetuate the ignorance of Quaranic passages; a society which does not trade the lives of girls to satisfy the perverted demands of Muslim men who would otherwise be left by the wayside without the reliance of a holy creed.

My daughter is eleven and according to Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh she is of ripe age to marry a seventy year old if she were a Saudi. Likewise, my son is twelve and according to sharia (and if he too were Saudi), free to pursue his life unencumbered by the threat of slavery.  The grand mufti speaks of injustice and, indeed there is. The only injustice however, lies in the stolen lives of girls, rampant Muslim misogyny and the sexual perversion Islam endorses.

Grace

The Muslim failure that is Palestine

Posted on by

Today’s National Post has published an article by veteran columnist George Jonas on the Gaza/Israel conflict. As usual, Mr. Jonas is succinct in his assertion that Gaza is a failed entity cradled in the hands of extremist ideology. I agree and further claim Gaza is yet another Muslim failure the rest of the world has to endure.

Judea Pearl, father of murdered son Daniel Pearl, speaks at a UN briefing for NGO’s: ” It may come as a surprise to some of you, but after a century of bloodshed, many negotiations, inter-faith dialogues, and countless UN-funded cultural programs, the majority of Muslims today still reject the idea that Jews deserve a state in some part of Palestine. Instead, Muslims perceive Israel to be a temporary outpost of western colonialism, hastily created out of guilt or greed”.

Mr. Jonas contends; ” If the Arab/Muslim world had a fraction of the interest in creating a Palestinian state as it has in destroying a Jewish one, the Palestinians would have had their country long ago”. Simply put, if the Arab/Muslim world were to relinquish their longs standing hatred of Jews, the Palestinian people would live in prosperity and peace.

“Hamas’s strongest supporters may be in the West, among left-wing activists and media types who have been wrong about everything in world affairs. I suppose it makes sense for terrorists to be sheltered mainly by errorists in the end”.

Hamas’s strongest supporters are indeed in the West, making a mockery out of peace and justice.  To gain a glimpse of gross err, Islamist extremism and all those aboard the ‘peace’ train, attend an anti-Israeli protest in Canada, or France, or Belgium, or the United States, or Denmark, England, or…….   

Grace

A Muslim scholar’s advice on sex education

Posted on by

I found this gem on Islam Q&A, a site available to Muslims who request guidance from mullahs, imams and other scholarly experts in all matters of life in accordance to sharia.

This young man asks that he be directed to properly address the issue of attending a mixed school and being forced to take sex education class. Bothered by the prospect and frustrated that his mother will not allow him to attend anything but a public, co-ed school, the scholar has some hate-filled but otherwise not surprising advice for his dilemma.

Praise be to Allah

“Western societies have become the worst disgrace in human history with perverted and deviant behaviour and corruption of human nature: “Sexual madness” has become the preoccupation of all classes of society and not even their children in their homes or schools are safe from them”. Fatwa # 113970 goes on to state:

” The one who wants to save himself and his family should not agree to be part of those societies, or to live among them, and he should refuse to take part in what they are doing of haraam things, evil and perversions”.

I presume this young man attends a public school in a western country where coed classes and sex education classes are the norm. This mullah’s description of proper education standards obviously reflects taliban-spirited religious fundamentalism, nothing out of the ordinary in the Muslim world of oppression. His bizarre assertions claim:

-older students take advantage of the younger ones when ‘putting into practice’ all they have learned of sex, an act that happens frequently in ‘those’ morally and religiously corrupt societies,

-dangerous levels of illegitimate children are predominant in kaafir nations especially in France.

–the nightmare of rape haunts every female student waiting for it to happen to her,

-students killing themselves and their teachers and,

– homosexual frenzy.

With such outrageous claims unsupported by legitimate data or proper statistics combined with the use of absolutisms and religious extremism, is it any wonder there is such a vehement hatred of the west among Muslims?

His final advice to the troubled young lad is as follows:

” For all these reasons, we do not think that you or any Muslim should live in those deviant societies, let alone study in those mixed schools, or attend those provocative and evil “sex education” lessons. This is the least that you should do, although the basic principle is that living in kaafir countries and studying in mixed schools is haaram and you should leave, especially since your morals may be affected”.

And Allah is the source of strength.

As long as there are people willing to submit to such crackpot advice, hate and ignorance will continue.

Grace

Canadian terrorist’s Mom receives slap on the wrist in court

Posted on by

In April 2004 the United Talmud Torahs School in St. Laurent a suburb of Montreal, was firebombed. There were no injuries, but the school’s library was destroyed only able to re-open eight months later. Nineteen year old Sleiman Elmerhebi pleaded guilty to the crime and received a prison sentence just shy of four years. He was motivated to commit the crime as a retaliatory action for the Israeli army’s killing of the leader of the Hamas militant group.

At the time, Rouba Elmerhebi Fahd the terrorists mother, was charged with being an accessory after the fact to the firebombing. She pleaded not guilty to the charge and was released on $10,000 bail. Shortly after her son was apprehended, Elmerhebi Fahd contacted a travel agency requesting a ticket to Brazil for her son. She made it clear that he was not to fly through the United States and urged him to keep the planned trip a secret.

Yesterday, almost four years later after her son’s guilty plea and incarceration, she appeared in a Montreal court and was handed her sentence:  She received twelve months probation. 

Mom Elmerhebi Fahd showed no remorse.

Although Quebec Court judge Robert Machi was firm in stating that the firebombing was more than mere vandalism calling the crime an act terrorism, his ruling was primarily based on the fact that Fahd had “no prior criminal record and wasn’t the one who firebombed the school”.

This slap on the wrist is a slap in the face. 

Ask any parent worth their weight in salt and they will tell you that parenting is a hard job at the best of times. It is a struggle to raise children to become thoughtful, considerate, well adjusted and responsible members of society. This woman apparently has quite a different parenting style, one which condones and promotes the hatred of Jews and violent acts of terror against them. Her utter unapologetic conviction to raise her children to live by the twisted rules of a transplanted sense of ‘Islamic justice’ through terrorism against the state of Israel in Canada should make her at the very least, a child abuser and a threat to this nation. What have her other two children learned from her?

Any mother who would raise her children with such supreme hatred by spoon feeding them a mandate of violence, bigotry and ignorance straight from the womb, deserves contempt, ridicule and a far harsher sentence than this saccharin coated probation. 

I wonder if she penciled in play dates with Canada’s First Family of Terror, the Khadr’s?

Grace

Ezra Levant on Mohamed Elmasry

Posted on by

Ezra Levant has posted a succinct article on his blog regarding the Canadian Islamic Congress’s commander-in-chief Mohamed Elmasry. I wasn’t aware that in 2006 he (Elmasry) had indeed taken credit for the invention of the Blackberry, yet I find myself not in the least bit surprised that he would have done so. In addition, I was also not dumbstruck to learn that the ‘man behind the curtain’ of the HRC fiascos orchestrated and pulled the strings of eager legal beagle Khurrum Awan and his associates.

“Both those men (Awan and Faisal Joseph), in their numerous public and media appearances, were always acting upon my instruction”. Mohamed Elmasry, president of the CIC.

Beautiful analysis and worth the read. 

Grace

Canada’s grand mufti-in-waiting is reinvigorated with a new mission

Posted on by

Muhammed Elmasry of the Canadian Islamic Congress just can’t sit still. No doubt stung by the fact that he is now considered one of the nation’s consummate losers by having failed to succeed in all three Human Right’s Commission cases launched against Maclean’s magazine, he is now on a fresh, new mission. The biggest boil on the backside of Canada’s media butt may have been lanced, but it continues to fester.

“The first point that I did learn from this exercise is that Islamophobia is alive and well in Canada, in the media and also in politics,” he said. ” In all of this, we’ve been victimized”.

Since filing the complaints in three Canadian jurisdictions, Elmasry reflected that he made the right decision, taking full credit for sparking the debate and the ensuing massive public outcry. Yet, not one to miss an opportunity to blame others for his failure, he squarely cited inappropriate pressure by the media and politicians for the commission’s wrong decisions.

Elmasry seeks to lobby the government and to glean support from what he refers to as the “sympathetic ears in Parliament” to create a National Media Council, similar to the existing Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). The Council would oversee print and online media. Ostensibly, this group would provide an outlet for complaints and a forum for fairness and professionalism. The recent failure behind him, combined with renewed vigor, a beefed up ego and legal beagles in tow, his intention is to demand restrictions on what his organization considers a foul media.

Who exactly would define fairness and professionalism? The experts at the CIC and their league of Islamist cohorts? When we factor in the reality that an entire section of Dr. Elmasry’s web site is devoted to monitoring the media and endlessly scouring for perceived Islamophobic sentiment, this proposal is a frightening notion. His ideal of ‘hate-free free-speech’ is a preposterous idea that would discriminate against the reporting of the facts, the news and ultimately, the truth.

Consider this. In a lengthy document, the CIC has listed terminology that they believe should be discouraged and eventually removed from any reporting concerning terrorism or fundamentalism. Any journalist, reporter, writer or editor from any Canadian news outlet would be left condemned and deemed a bigoted rogue for using any of the listed offensive terms. Here is a partial list of offensive words the CIC considered as of 2002, as ‘anti-Islamic’, descriptions that are offensive to Muslims and by extension, Islam:

Armed Islamic group, Canadian-based Islamic extremist, Islamic regime, Islamic dictatorship, extremism, fighters, fundamentalists, hard-liner, insurgency, insurgent, suicide bomber, terrorist, terrorist cell, Islamic organization, Islamic government, activist and rebel. I believe these words used alone without the accompanying tags of Islam or Muslim may be o.k…..? The CIC would conclude that the inclusion of these descriptions would be the workings of a racist media whose only motivation is to create and foster cultural and ethnic disharmony and to victimize yet once again, Canada’s Muslim community. Reporting the facts is apparently a secondary hobby for the nation’s news outlets. 

Is it hateful to describe a person who has just set off a bomb in a crowded bazar aimed at innocents while screaming Allahu Akbar! an Islamic terrorist? Is it hateful to label an imam of a mosque who degrades western values and openly discourages the breaking of Canada’s laws an Islamic fundamentalist? Or, should future news headlines instead read:

“Some unnamed, not-a-white guy with a bomb kills 30. We cannot comment further. The sensitivity for, well-being of and protection for his identity, community, religion, culture and traditions must be maintained”. Or,

“Some unnamed, not-a-white guy in an unnamed building makes up his own rules. We cannot comment further. The sensitivity for, well-being of and protection for his identity, community, religion, culture and traditions must be maintained”.

I can in fact, use the term ‘white’ in these ludicrous headlines, since Elmasry asserts that offending white people is not as serious as offending minorities, particularly Muslims, because the white majority is “anchored”. “If somebody makes a joke that you’re white, who cares? he quips. 

Another segment in the lengthy analysis reads: “Anti-Islam in the media feeds ‘Image Distortion Disorder’ “. The CIC contends ‘ the distorted perception that Islam condones and encourages violence is largely created by the media and it leads to societal anxiety among Canadians. It is particularly dangerous in Canada within it’s multi-ethnic, multi-faith and multi-cultural populations and invariably leads to discrimination, hate-mongering, acts of vandalism and false accusations by the authorities’. 

Wait. Canada’s entire population consists of multi-ethnic, multi-faith and multi-cultural people. Are we to conclude then that all Canadians suffer from Image Distortion Disorder? 

Let me ask you this: if you cover dog shit with candied sprinkles, is it still dog shit?

In western nations Islamists work diligently to ensure that under no circumstances should Islam be connected to terrorism or extremism, an aim whose purpose lies solely in the unyielding desire for the distortion of fact. In short, the truth must become a lie and the lie must become a truth. The creation of a National Media Council would be a welcome addition in this endeavor. So would sharia.

I have heard many claim that groups like the CIC want to stifle free speech. Others claim they want to shut it down. I disagree. They have no intention of shutting down an existing press that they would gladly control. They do intend however, to manipulate the public into believing they have been so ridiculed, demeaned and targeted that additional restrictions on print and online media are necessary, with of course, the aid and guidance of a panel of Islamic experts… such as themselves. Additionally, a government seal of approval from the “sympathetic ear” crowd on Parliament Hill would help things along quite nicely. Extremism then would simply be inheriting an already well functioning institution, one to be re-fashioned, re-tooled and tweaked to suit radical Islam and the realities of sharia. There would be no stifling of free speech as long as the merits of Islam and the benevolence of the prophet were the priority. Any discourse deemed un-Islamic would simply not be tolerated. Welcome to Saudi Arabia.

Back to the candied dog shit. Dr. Elmasry also plans to lobby for a review of media concentration, ( I assume concentration refers to the ownership of Canada’s news outlets by Jews), calling it ” the antithesis of democracy”. Of course his famous statement of 2004 regarding Israelis as legitimate targets of terrorism was misunderstood, a mistake on the part of infidel ignorance. (I probably misunderstood the above white comment too).  

The CIC  I believe, is an organization obsessed with creating and promoting victimhood within the Muslim community. They and other groups of their ilk, are nothing more than political activist organizations working steadily on behalf of sharia. If, as Mr. Elmasry boasts that he indeed does represent 70% of Canadian Muslims, which may or may not be the case, then the majority are being represented by a fanatic of tremendous proportion and equal danger; a disservice to them far more damaging than any descriptions of terror or Islam. 

“I don’t want the media to be a public relations arm for the Canadian Islamic Congress. It’s unrealistic. Or to promote Islam. Or to promote Muslim causes. Or to be a propaganda tool for the XYZ issue. What I want is for them to be fair”  Professor Elmasry states.

Candied sprinkles anyone?

Grace

Honour in Islam depends upon the dishonouring of women

Posted on by

Honour in Islam depends upon the dishonouring of women. 

I suspect that by now many are familiar with the honour killing of Mississauga teenager Aqsa Parvez in December, 2007. Her story is a tragic one. A sixteen year old girl, lured back home by sweet promises of family resolution and endearments only in the end to be strangled to death in her family home. Both her father and brother sit in jail awaiting trial for their alleged collaboration of her murder. Ms. Parvez clearly understood the peril she faced and made no secret of confiding to friends her fear that one day her family would “restore the honour” that she had so compromised for wanting to assimilate to western culture, specifically by refusing to wear hijab.

In her memory, Islamists have decided to hyper focus upon and to ‘correct’ a fundamental flaw which they believe an ignorant, uninformed media seem to repeat when covering these stories: her murder cannot be described as an honour killing. To do so is a racist, bigoted act against Muslims and Islam. There is no connection as they so boldly assert between Islam and ‘honour’ killings, distancing themselves from the horrific reality within their community, insisting that to report otherwise is the fault of an undeniably Islamophobic, western press. 

This December’s issue of Toronto Life magazine covers the brutal slaying of Aqsa Parvez and does describe it as an honour killing, a description that the author believes is an honest and accurate one. Predictably, the magazine has been deemed the latest offender engaged in Islam bashing, a now familiar criticism by Islamists and their apologizers wishing to divert unwanted attention. A protest has been launched by those who find offense in this apt description, calling for people to barrage the magazine’s editor Sarah Fulford with telephone and e-mail criticism.

Soon after Aqsa Parvez’s death, Mohammed Elmasry of the Canadian Islamic Congress, Canada’s grand mufti in waiting and top Islamist apologizer described her killing as a typical, “teenage issue”. He pointed out that he didn’t want the public to think that these murders are an Islamic or immigrant issue. I would not have expected any other statement from him. According to the CIC, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a dog.

To claim that honour killings are only a cultural phenomenon, denying the religiously motivated aspect is a lie of grandiose proportion. It is a crafted attempt to hide Islam’s misogyny and protect a gender apartheid system where half of the population is subjugated, viewed as stained and disposable and burdened with   the suffocating task of maintaining the purity of Islamic society.   

Phyllis Chesler writing an essay for Front Page Magazine and found on Women Against Sharia, states that “most honour killings are committed by Muslims who believe that what they are doing is a sacred, religious act. They may misunderstand the Qu’ran but as yet, no mullah or imam has stood up in the global, public square to condemn such murders as dishonourable and anti-Islamic”.

No fatwa has ever been issued against a Muslim honour killing.

Naomi Lakritz writes in the Calgary Herald that maybe as Canadians living in comfort, we can afford to play stupid word games, tripping all over ourselves to find new ways to avoid saying that some cultural (and I would add religious) practices are wrong. In seeking to legitimize some backward traditions, customs and religious edict(s) as worthy of equal respect in the name of multiculturalism do we not denigrate and belittle young women like Aqsa Parvez even more?

Former Muslim Syed Kamran Mirza author of an essay entitled ” Honour Killing is absulotuely Islamic!” cites that these killings can indeed be attributed to Quaranic passages and specific hadith(s). They are not, as he contends, to be confused with instances of domestic violence often described within a western atmosphere. Amongst other Quaranic citations, he references the following: 

Qu’ran 4:15 ” If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four (reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them. Or God ordain for them some (other) way”.

Whether these vicious crimes are done in the name culture, tribalism, tradition or religious doctrine and are committed to regain a sense of honour should mean little to any thinking, caring person. Attempts by those who would seek to whitewash these murderous acts should be held to account, shamed and ridiculed by the global community.

If it looks like an honour killing, walks like an honour killing and talks like an honour killing, it is an honour killing. Honour in Islam depends upon the dishonouring of women and to claim otherwise is a lie.

Grace

The cowardice & misogyny of Islamic extremism

Posted on by

In mid November two men on a motorcycle tossed acid in the faces of young Afghani girls walking to school in Khandar as punishment for wanting to be educated. The group of schoolgirls some as young as fourteen, have all been disfigured for life with two permanently blinded. All of their mothers insist they will not allow their daughters to continue their schooling for fear they will be either maimed again, or eventually murdered for the offence.

George Petrolekas and Mike Capstick write in an editorial in today’s Ottawa Citizen:

” And as punishment, at least two of those girls will never see the light of day again; their friends and countless hundreds of other little girls equally condemned to a lesser life as the very fear of venturing outside their homes denies them a future as surely as the acid in the eyes has accomplished. And to that end, it is no different than the torching of schools, the beheading of teachers and the intimidation of parents”.

I predict that this recent example of human depravity will sink to the bottom of our collective conscience like the many other countless examples of terrorism have found themselves. Worse, it will provide one more opportunity for the apologizers of terror to which there are many, to spin their usual, pap and nonsense. Common catch phrases such as ‘root cause’, ‘ cultural misunderstanding’, the ‘resistance to western influence’, ‘religious hijacking’ or ‘religious misinterpretation” will all surface by the usual suspects to explain away the revolting and bizarre tactics of those who would impose horror at every turn, every day, against innocents. For those who work diligently to convince the world community turn a blind eye to the insufferable inhumane treatment of these girls and who would deny the Islamic religious component of these atrocities, the media will once again be labelled as an ‘islamophobic, Zionist institution with a never ending anti-Islam bent’. Blah, blah, blah.

What sheer and utter nonsense.

To entertain this piety is to abandon the clear plight of women and girls in Afghanistan and to condone the oppressive and suffocating lives these women are forced to endure. While fomenting imams in North American and European mosques spew their transplanted misogynist rhetoric with near carte blanche ease, many Western politicians work over time to bastardize long established Western values to accommodate these extremist, retrograde views that continue to deny women lives of dignity, freedom and the right to fulfill their full potential as equal human beings. Misogyny is an undeniable constant in much of the Middle East. While all this dialogue dithering, religious sentimentality and cultural tolerance is hashed out across America and Europe, these Afghan mothers and daughters must surely feel an overwhelming sense of abandonment.  

I cannot understand the passive response, excuses and warped justifications made in reference to such incidents, especially by many western women’s rights groups. Is gender equality a quality of life notion which should only be guaranteed for western women? Why do these medieval tyrants deserve an ounce of consideration or their backers access to fair dialogue? How many western mothers would be willing to barter the well being of their own daughters away for cultural, religious sentiment? Zero? All?

Messrs. Petrolekas and Capstick continue: “this day, girls won’t go to school for fear, not because they don’t belong there, but because misogynist terrorists have made the decision for them”. ‘For the sake of another generation we must not forget these girls, as their unseeing eyes exhort us to do more; we cannot let our own granddaughters conclude that we stood about and did nothing’.  

Grace