 By Tarek Fatah It is almost two weeks since jihadi Islamists carried out a terrorist attack in Indonesia, causing many casualties, including injuries to two Canadians. The dust had barely settled when on Sunday, other jihadis, half a world away, struck with a vengeance and barbarity that shocked the world. This time, their playground was the Muslim-dominated parts of northern Nigeria. More than 100 people have been killed, and the fighting is said to be continuing. One would expect Canadian and U.S. Islamist groups to come out with the usual denunciations but, surprisingly, even cliched condemnations failed to materialize. In the past, Islamist groups like CAIR, the CIC and ISNA have issued statements about "Islam being a religion of peace" and that "terrorists do not speak for Islam," but not this time. Groups that seldom waste an opportunity to denounce violence where non-Muslims cause Muslim suffering, have lost their voice. Apparently, if Muslims kill fellow Muslims, that is OK. Compare this silence with the brouhaha over the July 1 stabbing in Germany of a single hijabi Egyptian. It triggered demonstrations. The executive director of the Canadian Islamic Congress denounced the media for their supposed silence. He said if the woman's killer had been a Muslim, "The media would've reported it widely. Then for days afterwards, they would deliberate the case and conclude that Muslims are 'brutal and uncivilized.' But when a racist European murders an innocent woman, the silence is deafening." Read more ...Source: The Calgary Herald
First Place (7 points):
CAIR
Second (5 points):
Anjem Choudary / Sami al-Arian
Fourth Place (4 points):
Keith Ellison / Mohamed Elmasry / Yusuf al Qaradawi
Seventh Place (3 points):
Abu Qatada / CIC / Ingrid Mattson / ISNA / Jawhar Badran (posthumous) / Mahmoud Abbas / Mohammad Qatanani / Omar Bakri Muhammed Source: Muslims Against Sharia Blog
 If you are Canadian and Islamist, you probably voted for the New Democratic Party (NDP), which won 18.2% of the vote on October 14, 2008. This was an increase in of about 1% in the vote and led to seven more seats from the 2006 elections. However, the party could not budge itself from its permanent 4th place in Canada's parliament. Endorsed by the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC), the left-leaning NDP has shown an incredible lack of understanding of the Islamist agenda and how soft jihadis are using democratic institutions by manipulating our respect for multiculturalism. As a political ideology, in the long-term Islamism seeks to establish an Islamic state in the North America, but this is barely mentioned by the suave and polished young Islamists who appear in expensive suits and with a flourish of legalese and the right disarming accents. While a Taliban style overthrow is unlikely, in the short term, Islamists hope to fundamentally change western foreign policy in favor of the foreign governments that fund them and organizations they ideologically adhere to, such as the Muslim Brotherhood. Recognizing this threat, Marc Lebuis, who runs "Point de Bascule", invited moderate Muslims Tarek Fatah, Salim Mansur and me to participate in a conference in Montreal to address the infiltration of Islamists into the Canadian political system, where the first real arena has been the NDP. The NDP was founded by social democrats, and was originally, as noted by Mansur, a critical opponent of Communism, and a key element in "denying communists in Canada the opportunity to acquire any shred of legitimacy by posing as defenders of the working people." Today, however, it allows itself to be used by an equally potent ideological enemy, radical Islamism. The working class in the West now includes immigrants, who as ethnic and religious minorities complain of the classic oppression against which the NDP wishes to be a voice of protest. Read more ...Source: The American Thinker
 By David B. Harris Canada's awakening to radical-Islamist penetration of its political, bureaucratic and social infrastructure, reached a watershed moment this month. Quebec's new French-language anti-Islamist website, Point de Bascule – "tipping point" – sponsored a dramatic press conference in Montreal Oct. 2 on the dangers of hard-line Islamist penetration of Canada. But this was consciousness-raising with a powerful difference. All three panelists were moderate Canadian Muslims. All three face death fatwas. And all three spoke unsparingly – some giving names and startling specifics – of the Sharia surge and stealth jihad in Quebec and the rest of Canada. Indeed, detailed allegations were heard about Islamist inroads into the federal New Democratic Party (NDP), Canada's social democratic party, and about infiltration of a government commission with power to define and silence "hate" speech. These were momentous claims in the context of Canada's national election campaign – the national vote takes place today. As evidenced by the number of journalists in attendance, the Quebec media were galvanized. India-born Dr. Salim Mansur of the University of Western Ontario opened by calling on Canadians to end the political correctness and self-censorship that has muffled efforts to debate the stealth jihad – the gradual radical-Islamicizing of Canadian society. Like other speakers, he distinguished between moderate Muslims and Islamists, and warned of accelerating fundamentalist efforts "to establish a parallel society within Quebec and within Canada, as they are doing in Europe, that will be administered on the basis of Sharia." Read more ...Source: IPT News
By Kathy Shaidle With a Canadian federal election rumored for next month, the nation’s myriad ethnic voting blocks are preparing to wield their well-known power. Politicians of all parties pander shamelessly to these groups in the name of “multiculturalism,” and Canada’s self-appointed Muslim representatives know this all too well. For now, they make up less than 3% of Canada’s population, but since 9/11, Muslims have leveraged political correctness and imaginary “Islamophobia” to position themselves as a victim group worth courting - or else. One Canadian political blog uncovered an article in a recent newsletter for the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC), the same group suing author Mark Steyn for “flagrant Islamophobia” and which supported the abortive attempt to introduce Sharia law to Canada. Read more ...Source: FrontPage Magazine
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is indifferent to Omar Khadr's plight because the Guantanamo Bay prisoner is "brown-skinned" and a Muslim, the leader of one of Canada's largest Islamic groups said Monday. Harper's resistance to calls to repatriate the Canadian citizen shows he is pandering to Islamophobes, said Canadian Islamic Congress president Mohamed Elmasry. "In this case, Mr. Harper is playing politics because of the backdrop of Islamophobia in this country," Elmasry said. "This is where a leader comes in, to say this is really wrong and I have to correct that wrong by bringing this person (back to Canada) even if I lose some political points with Islamophobes." Read more ...Source: Canadian PressMohamed Elmasry & CIC
Latest recipient of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
ISLAMIC CONGRESS RESPONDS TO CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION’S DECISION ON HUMAN RIGHTS COMPLAINT FILED AGAINST MACLEAN’S Toronto - Legal Counsel to the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC), Faisal Joseph, responded today to the Canadian Human Rights Commission’s decision not to hear a complaint filed against Maclean’s magazine. The complaints, filed in April 2007, assert that an October 2006 article published by Maclean’s, The Future Belong to Islam, subjected Muslim Canadians to hatred and contempt. “We are disappointed that the Tribunal made this decision without hearing the compelling evidence of hate and the expert testimony we recently presented to the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal,” said Joseph. “The Commission’s decision contradicts the findings of its own Investigator’s report which states that this Article contains hallmarks of hate identified by the Commission in its earlier case law,” continued Joseph, referring to paragraphs 35 and 41 of the Investigator’s report, which state: /Based on the excerpts cited by the complainant, it appears that the article may bear some of the characteristics identified by the Tribunal in Kouba as being ‘hallmarks’ of material that is likely to expose persons to hatred or contempt. Muslims appear to be portrayed, for example, as a ‘powerful menace’ (in this case, a demographic menace), and as being dangerous or violent in nature./ Read more ...Source: Canadian Islamic Congress H/T: Shariah Finance WatchFaisal Joseph & Canadian Islamic Congress
Latest recipients of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
Canadian Human Rights Commission investigator: "Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don't give it any value" By Jacob Laksin Earlier this month, the columnist Mark Steyn went on trial for being mean. Steyn's offense was to have published, in the fall of 2006, an excerpt from his book, America Alone, in the Canadian newsweekly Maclean's. In it, Steyn advanced the provocative but by no means untenable argument that plunging birthrates in Europe would precipitate a demographic decline, forcing Continental countries to reach an "accommodation with their radicalized Islamic compatriots." Europe's future, Steyn suggested, "belongs to Islam." Islamic radicals, one might think, would be heartened by the backhanded vote of confidence. Instead, led by a group called the Canadian Islamic Congress, they elected to take offense. Had they limited their remonstration to an angrily worded letter to the editor or a rebuttal in another magazine, they would have been unobjectionably within their rights. But several of the group's more aggrieved members decided to press things further. First, they demanded that Maclean's publish an equal-length rejoinder to Steyn's article – a crude attempt to dictate content no independent publication would accept. Failing to hijack the magazine's pages, Steyn's disgruntled detractors did the next best thing: they took the author and the publication to court. Read more ...Source: FrontPage MagazineCanadian Islamic Congress
Latest recipient of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
Canadian Human Rights Commission
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
 By Sunny Dhillon VANCOUVER - Attempts by Maclean's counsel Julian Porter to question the B.C. director of the Canadian Islamic Congress about the organization's conduct were deemed inappropriate by tribunal judges on Thursday, undercutting the lawyer's line of questioning. B.C.'s Human Rights Tribunal is meeting this week because of a complaint filed by the province's CIC director, Naiyer Habib, as well as the organization's national president, Mohamed Elmasry. The complaint came in response to an article written by Mark Steyn that appeared in Maclean's in October, 2006. Titled The Future Belongs to Islam, the piece has been blasted by Muslim critics for spreading "Islamophobia." On the stand Thursday, Dr. Habib detailed how his role as a CIC leader made him want "to do something" in response to Mr. Steyn's article, which alleges the religion will soon take over the Western world. But when Mr. Porter began his cross-examination and attempted to question Dr. Habib about a fellow CIC member's trip to Libya, he was rebuffed by the tribunal. After a recess, Mr. Porter was told the "conduct of the CIC is not an issue in this complaint" because "Dr. Habib filed the complaint himself," not on behalf of the organization. A frustrated Mr. Porter muttered that the decision would shorten his cross-examination considerably. Read more ...Source: Globe and Mail
I have been thinking about Aqsa Parvez the last few days. You remember she is the 16 year old Toronto girl whose father killed her over an argument about whether she should wear her Hijab (Headscarf) in public or not! Now there are some people who told me they thought is was a religious matter, while others thought it might be social, and still more said it was just a violent father who got carried away. Whatever the fact of the matter is, the religious angle has received all the attention and further ignited the fire over Islam and violence that occupies so much of the Western mind. Whether Islam is truly a religion of violence is an academic question and actually beside the point at this stage of the game because it has developed an image in the media and population as being such. In other words, Islam has one hell of a Public Relations problem here in the West. I have been reading articles by some leading journalists over the last few days and although they are by varied individuals in both their background and beliefs, a common consensus is developing. Let me first give a quick quote from my book The Plain Truth About God with a brief summation of the early days of Islam:
Where we run into a problem is that, as in the case of Jesus of Nazareth, there is no actual copy of the Koran that can be said to have come directly from the hands of Mohammad.
The earliest written record of the Koran (and the 45 scribes who supposedly documented it) was written in the biography of Mohammad by a certain Ibn Ishaq who wrote Sirat Rasul Allah, (The life of the Prophet of God) about 100 years after the death of the prophet Mohammad!
From this point on, it gets even hazier since there is no actual record of this document as well, but rather, it is extensively quoted in an even later work by al-Tabari who lived close to 200 years after the death of Ibn Ishaq.
Suddenly we have a space of 300 years (close to 1000 C.E.) that cannot be properly documented.
With this in mind we can look back to about 620 C.E. when Mohammad, (or someone like him,) started on a campaign of dominance.
Here in less than 100 years Arab tribesmen, riding on horseback, emerged out of the Arabian deserts to conquer Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya and Spain.
Now the great question we have to ask here is whether the Arab armies were fuelled during their expansion by religious fever; or was the religion “spiced up” during the 350 years where it was not documented properly.
In other words, was this re-vamping of Islam the manipulations of a politically dominant group whose aim was to establish a religious justification for Arab Imperialism? Or was it based on a religion that advocated the expansion of its ideals by force?
Don’t forget, during the first 200 years of this great expansion Arab conquerors were a minority against a vast non-Muslim majority.
Then, once the Arabs had acquired a sizable empire—a coherent religion was necessary in order to hold that empire together. (Note: in the long run, over the centuries, the main purpose of any religion, once it had gone beyond the “sect” stage, was to perpetuate itself and also act as a glue to hold the empire together.)
So once again, was the religion in place and acting as the fuel for Arab hegemony, or was it the glue that was manufactured “after the fact” to hold the whole empire together.
This is a question that will never be properly answered - as it is now lost in the mists of time.
However, we can draw certain inferences from it.
One of the facts that we have to consider is that Islam was bound up in war and aggression from its very inception. In spite of any history of Islam we wish to consider, the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of Muslim Practitioners live a peaceful and quiet life that is not tainted by the fervor of the Conservative and Fundamentalist factions. They, especially in the West, live a life much the same as their Christian brethren in that their daily lives are centered around family and friends and not dogma and zealousness. However, because of the silence of this overwhelming majority on the atrocities of the fanatics, there has been a marked perception that all Muslims have at their heart a violent streak that is part of the very nature of this religion. It is sad, mistaken and troubling, but unfortunately true. Now, about that common consensus, I would like to quote two columnists who have expressed different but not contradictory opinions on the state of Islam in the West. Although neither is an Apologist for Islam nor seeking to blatantly condemn it’s followers they have made some observations about Muslims that should be noted! One is a right wing Christian and the other is a Muslim academic and here is what they have to say. First the right wing Christian who comments on the killing of Aqsa Parvez and his thoughts on Islam. His name is Michael Coren and he is a broadcaster and writer: Most Canadian Muslim leaders immediately condemned what had happened but it didn't take very long for the usual suspects to explain on radio and television that the tragedy had nothing to do with the Muslim faith and that all religions contain extremism.
Islam, we were told, is a religion of peace.
Which is probably just what the owner of a Christian bookstore in Gaza thought three months ago as he was murdered and his shop firebombed. Or Danny Pearl, shortly before the American journalist had his head cut off by Islamic terrorists -- who, naturally, filmed the whole thing and made sure their chants from the Koran were loud and clear.
Or the wretched gang-rape victim in Saudi Arabia sentenced to 200 lashes for daring to be in a car at the time of the crime with a man to whom she was not married or related. Or the women stoned to death for adultery. Or the Iranian men hanged because they were homosexual. Or the women who lived and died under the Taliban. Or the Christians persecuted and killed in Pakistan, Egypt and Sudan. Or the young women in France, Britain and all over Europe killed by fathers and brothers for leaving Islam, dressing like other girls or dating non Muslims. Or the teacher who allowed a student to name a teddy bear Muhammad, or Salman Rushdie's translator whose throat was cut from ear to ear, or movie director Theo Van Gogh who was slaughtered like an animal in the middle of a Dutch street.
And on and on. On until the denial is sickening.
It's cultural, it's because of colonialism, it's because of Palestine, because of Iraq, because of misunderstanding. Because of anything other than Islamic Fundamentalists.
Only a bigot would argue that every Muslim was violent or opposed to Western freedom.
But only a coward or a liar would argue that there was not a profound and deeply worrying link between Conservative Fundamentalist Islam and myriad acts of terror, intolerance and hysterical anger. And then these thoughts from Salim Mansur, who is a Muslim scholar, Professor at the University of Western Ontario here in London, and a Columnist for the Sun Media Group. Professor Mansur has more of an insiders view of the situation and his thoughts will hopefully hit home to Muslims in the West and elsewhere. The cold-blooded murder of 16-year-old Aqsa Parvez was not like any other crime that cuts across ethnic and faith boundaries, as Muslim apologists in Canada will do their best to characterize it.
The murder was prompted by an ideology of bigotry and terror masked as a faith-tradition -- an ideology of radical Islamism at war with the modern world of freedom and democracy.
The fear of this perverted ideology and its fanatical promoters silences most Muslims, regardless of their numbers in society, for they fear that speaking out against this ideology might place them in greater jeopardy within their community and with those who claim its leadership.
Then there are Muslim organizations -- such as the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) in free societies such as Canada.
Their deafening silence in condemning Muslim violence against Muslims and non-Muslims alike is revealing of their true nature.
These are front organizations for global radical Islamism making apologies for their ideological brethren, and directing polemics against the West for victimizing Muslims and undermining Islam.
Moreover, they are fraudulent in their claims of representing Muslims in general as the CIC does.
The fact is, on the contrary, most Muslims in Canada and elsewhere in the West left their native lands to escape from unmitigated cruelty, heartlessness and hypocrisy of Muslim rulers and religious leaders.
But these organizations are sinister in their objectives of taking full advantage of free societies and subverting their institutions for the purpose of undermining freedom and democracy.
For instance, Canadians have never heard from or witnessed Muslim organizations such as the CIC publicly mobilizing Canadian Muslims in denouncing suicide-bombings, honour killings of hapless women, genocide on display in Darfur and persecution of dissident Muslims in the Arab-Muslim world.
Instead, as fraudsters they have developed the swindler's art of blackmailing free societies as the CIC has done by filing complaints with the Human Rights Commissions (HRC) federally, and in Ontario and British Columbia, against Maclean's magazine and one of its contributors, Mark Steyn.
The complaints are frivolous, claiming Maclean's defamed Canadian Muslims by publishing some writings of Steyn as excerpts from his best-selling book, America Alone.
But the greater frivolity is the HRC's willingness to hear the complaint from an organization whose president, Mohamed Elmasry, is on public record in Canada for the suggestion -- though later retracted under duress -- that Israelis in general over the age of 18 are legitimate targets for Palestinian suicide-bombers.
The murder of Aqsa Parvez and of countless other women among Muslims will continue not merely because Muslims cower in silence in their fear of radical Islamists, but also for the apathy of the Western public and politicians supinely appeasing and accommodating Muslim organizations such as the CIC. If nothing else we can surmise that both writers agree there is a problem and both agree that something has to be done about it! Your humble author; Allan W Janssen Allan W Janssen is the author of The Plain Truth About God at www.God-101.com and visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
Posts
