generalspeaking

Hatred's Venomous Spite

There he is, the champion of Canadian Muslims, hard done by through exposure to life in a free liberal democracy, claiming to represent the vital interests of over 70% of fearful and beleaguered Canadian Muslims, living in a country whose citizens have unaccountably turned against their neighbours.

The verification of which is questionable, given the number of Canadian Muslims who chafe under the apprehension that he speaks for them, and who do make it a point to counter his claim. These are Muslims who feel fully integrated into Canadian society, comfortable with their place there, no different than any other Canadian, whatever their origin.

And the origins are ample, since the country does represent as a great melting pot of humanity replete with ethnic, religious and social groups with their cultures and traditions from across the Globe. Whereas Canada was once a white-faced, European derivation population where racial discrimination was practised loud and clear, it has changed immeasurably, unerringly for the better.

To become what it now most emphatically is, a multicultural, decent and law-abiding society offering equality of opportunity to everyone under the law irrespective of religion, ethnicity, gender and orientation.

No society can ever claim to be free of all vestiges of discrimination; class, religious, political, ideological or social. But few societies have expended the amount of introspection - sometimes painful, given past history - to fully understand the ills done to others through lack of respect and acceptance, that Canada has.

And the results show as an intermingling of colours, features, cultures, languages and traditions accommodating themselves to one another with kind regard. All respectful of the prevailing social mores, the basis upon which Canadian societal values are expressed and practised.

Yet here is Mohamed Elmasry, national president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, casting aspersions on Canada and its community of communities by insisting Muslims require especial protection from isolated instances of presumed protestations of hatred.

Mr. Elmasry is well schooled in suspicion, grievance and hate demonstrated by his morbid paranoia. He taints Canadian society by suggestion; that we are rabidly "Islamophobic".

He is intent on re-fashioning Canadian laws and the manner in which the news media may be permitted to function. He sees the venom of racism abroad on the land, but denies that he has any hand in fomenting hatred toward others, claiming to have been misquoted, or that his unfortunate comments were taken out of context, when clearly they were not, but needful of sincere retraction.

Criticism, he says in an interview, is not unknown in Islam. That being so, how is it possible that cartoons published in Denmark might be the catalyst for the unleashing of a violent storm of protest, resulting in deaths, in property destruction, in attempts to violate a country's integrity? He draws a fine distinction between the permissibility of criticism, and the defence against mockery.

Defamation of that which is held most dear in Islam, its symbols and its Prophet may not be countenanced. To do so is to defile the most holy, the most sacred of symbols, an unforgivable crime. On the other hand, to exhort the faithful to violence, to murder and mayhem is permissible in defence of that which is held most dear. Constituting in and of itself a mockery of human values.

Mr. Elmasry cannot be unaware, living in the West, that nothing is held to be that sacred as to be above artful, acerbic or comedic comment or even blasphemously gritty display; distasteful yes, forbidden, no. Yet Mr. Elmasry has no hesitation in claiming that Canadian law lacks authority because it does not uphold the concept of 'group defamation' through critical commentary.

His goal, he claims, is to promote 'hate-free' free speech. Yet he had the unmitigated gall to opine hatefully in a very public interview that in certain countries it is acceptable to view civilians as enemy combatants. He struggles, he claims, to have Canadian law altered to protect the Muslim community from incidents of public incivility, media-presented criticisms, both of which he presents as clues to Islamophobia.

His very well-publicized launching of a human rights complaint against Maclean's magazine and Ezra Levant for articles published that he claims were inimical to the good reputation of Islam, was costly he says, despite that no costs are borne by the complainants to Human Rights Commissions, as opposed to heavy costs borne by those who must defend themselves.

In a sense it was a costly exercise in that it gained the Canadian Islamic Congress and Mr. Elmasry's puppets public criticism and a loss of respect. His purpose, he claims, was to ensure that a potential genocide of Canadian Muslims be averted. "It happened to the Jews in Europe. It happened to the natives here in Canada. We don't want it to happen to us", he asserted.

Imputing to Canadian society motivation toward genocide betrays his lack of understanding of Canada, an inability to grasp its values and the peaceful intent of most people to live in harmony. The frailty of his commitment to Canadian values which are, by their very definition, humanistic as opposed to the raw suspicion and blame he brandishes so freely in his accusations of racism, speaks volumes.

This man speaks of Keith Martin, a better human being than Mr. Elmasry could ever aspire to be, as Islamophobic because the member of Parliament sought to pass a bill to scrap the hate speech provision of the Canadian Human Rights Act, rather than see it continually abused. He compares the purported influence of the Jewish community in Canada to that of the Islamic community, coming very close to resurrecting some of the signal tenets of the infamous Protocols of Zion.

He claims that the Canadian Jewish community is given far more credence and protection against hate crimes than the Islamic community. "Politicians ignore Islamophobia, while in the Jewish community, if there is any indication of anti-Semitism, the politicians are up front, saying this is not acceptable. This is the right way to do it."

Yet after the occurrence of the 9-11 attacks, Canadians from every walk of life went out of their way to reassure their Muslim neighbours; newspaper editorials sought to do the same. Religious leaders in Canada forged alliances with their Muslim counterparts in a concerted effort to stave off any possibility of a backlash against Muslims. Politicians made their way to mosques to state their unequivocal support.

What an incredibly invidious intimation he reveals in his belief that Canadian society could ever succumb to violent action resulting in mass murder against a large demographic of Canadian society. His pretensions to fair regard for the good of the country under cover of one-sided justice in favour of Muslims leaves one with no alternative but to consider him a threat to the well-being of Canada.

Labels: Canada, Political Realities, Social-Cultural Deviations

posted by Pieface @ Sunday, November 23, 2008