Searching For Solutions to Indigenous Violence

"Nothing less than that is going to protect the safety of Indigenous women, girls and members of the 2SLGBTQQIA communities."
"Otherwise, the criminal justice system is seen to further devalue their safety."
"We're looking at many pieces of legislation, and not just federal, but provincial and territorial as well.  We're also looking at band governance under the Indian Act."
"Too often ... we heard from family members and survivors that an accused individual was released back into the community without proper protection for the complainant and her family."
"It's to recognize the importance of the individual who has been killed and the importance of their life. That tells all of Canada that if you kill one of these women, it's murder in the first degree, the strongest penalty and the strongest offence that we can impose."
"The sentence has to reflect not only the gravity of the offence but also the circumstances of the offender. And so does that mean criminalizing Indigenous men? Well, it means criminalizing all men who commit violence against Indigenous women, girls and 1SLGBTQQIA people. What's wrong with that?"
Marion Buller, chief commissioner, National Inquiry Into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women

"I think that's a slippery slope that's quite dangerous when considering the appropriate penalty for murder."
"You're perpetuating the over-incarceration of Indigenous people."
"The answer is not punishing people more, full stop."
Tony Paisana, defence lawyer, Vancouver

What's wrong with that? Well, the single most glaring issue perhaps should be that violence against all girls and women irrespective of their origins, their ethnicity, their religion, their ideology, their affiliation, should be treated alike, as horrendous human rights abuses for which the penalty of committing murder should be similar. Marion Buller, testifying before a parliamentary committee, obviously has her opinion on the matter, informed by the project she has been tasked with.

Indigenous women live in communities where a culture of male violence perpetrated against women and girls -- and against other males as well -- is all too common. It is the culture that requires changing, not the law that governs how all Canadians must act in respect to the security and safety of society in general and women and girls in particular. But to her, homicides affecting Indigenous women must be given automatic first-degree murder status, as is done when police officers are killed.

Judges, according to her world view, must identify the complainant as an Indigenous woman and automatically convert their view of justice accordingly as an aggravating factor in the sentencing meted out to an offender. The thing of it is, the 'offender' is in most instances another member of the Indigenous community for whom judges already must consider special treatment taking into account the propensity to alcoholism, drug addiction, poverty, discrimination and the cries of victimhood relating to the residential school system.

The Senate Committee on legal and constitutional affairs studying a wide ranging justice reform bill was given the benefit of Ms. Buller's studied opinion on the root causes of violence against Indigenous women. She had mounted cross-country study sessions inviting Indigenous input on the issue of violence from those who had suffered it and those concerned over its prevalence. Her own report is soon to be unveiled. Not that it is by any means the first; previous such reports have all concluded that the violence suffered by Indigenous women by and large is perpetrated by Indigenous men.

Under current Canadian criminal law a charge of first-degree murder requires evidence a killing had been "planned and deliberate" before the harshest sentence under Canadian law can be mandated as a consequence. Currently, the murder of a police officer or prison employee qualify for the designation of first-degree. Killing committed in the course of a sexual assault, aircraft hijacking, kidnapping or hostage-taking also qualify automatically as first-degree murders as well as terrorist or organized criminal activity leading to murder.

Ms. Muller seeks to 'level the playing field' where crimes against Indigenous women are treated, she feels, less seriously than those against non-Indigenous people. "Let's make it equitable in terms of sentencing", she claims. And therein lies the dilemma. Her solution is anything but equitable, given that Aboriginal women will automatically call up first-degree murder charges, while non-Aboriginal women will not.

At the same time, most of the perpetrators of violence and murder against Indigenous women and girls being Indigenous men and boys, harsher penalties against an already over-represented penal community becomes the result.

The question is, why is Canadian society faced with changing laws meant for the protection of all society in an effort to change the dynamics of a culture that seems unwilling to begin the laborious process of transforming itself from an inward-looking, victimized society to a fully self-supporting part of society willing and determined to take its rightful place within the larger Canadian identity?

Women drum following the announcement of the inquiry into Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women at the Museum of History in Gatineau, Quebec on Wednesday, Aug. 3, 2016. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang)

Labels: Canada, Indigenous Women, Parliament, Violence Against Women

posted by Pieface @ Saturday, May 11, 2019

Anti-Semitism, a Stranger in UK Labour

"They can falsify social media very easily. And some of these people in the Jewish community support Trump, they are Trump fanatics and all the rest of it."
"So I am not going to be lectured to by Trump fanatics making up duff [invalid] information without any evidence at all."
"So I think we should ask the 70 rabbis ‘where is your evidence of severe and widespread antisemitism in this Party?’"
"Let me ask you, let me ask you a question how many people in this room have seen anti-Semitism in the Labour Party?"
"Put your hands up…one, two – you’ve had anti-Semitism in the Labour Party? I’m amazed. I’ve certainly never seen it."
Peter Willsman, member, Labour Democracy group 

Jeremy Corbyn questioned the destruction of Kalen Ockerman’s mural of Jewish bankers in 2012    MICHAEL KEMP/ALAMY

The Jewish Chronicle, The Jewish News and The Jewish Telegraph did something extraordinary in concert with one another; charging the British Labour Party with sheltering anti-Semites whose defamatory campaign against Jews and Israel have disgusted and appalled their Jewish members. Constant charges against the Labour Party for its tolerance for anti-Semitism, from its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, to various of its members harbouring a British distaste for the nature of Judaism have always been denied.

All three of these British Jewish newspapers, to emphasize the reality of the situation published the very same commentary on their front pages under the headline "United We Stand" to protest the decision taken by Labour to withdraw from a passage on Israel taken from an internationally accepted definition of anti-Semitism the party had incorporated into its official code of conduct, thereby rendering the passage anodyne and toothless. It half-dedicates itself to the recognition of anti-Semitism; the declaration, incomplete is worthless.

The Labour Party has become particularly skilled in denying ulterior motives, much less that it harbours one iota of ill will to Jews. Indeed, the Labour Party poses "no threat of any kind whatsoever to Jewish people", remaining "committed to tackling and eradicating anti-Semitism in all its forms". Corbyn, by his very alliances; friendly relations with terrorist groups such as Hamas as fellow travellers, has made it quietly 'respectable' to criticize Israel, while courting the Jewish vote.

The British Labour Party has traditionally been the natural political home of British Jews who tend to lean left. Demonstrators protested outside Parliament in March to inform Parliament that Jews no longer saw themselves welcomed in the party, even before the revelation that Corbyn had personally endorsed an anti-Semitic mural, considered part of a celebrated art project, whose design clearly was geared toward traditional slander; the Jew as unscrupulous money-lender.

Labour's national executive committee failed to accept the full text of the working definition of anti-Semitism that the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance had defined. Of the 11 illustrative examples accompanying the document adopted by Labour, some have been omitted. One defining "claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavour" was in particular rejected, objecting that the definition could unfairly restrict Palestinians or their supporters from describing their misfortune.

Corbyn, insisting on his opposition to all forms of bigotry including anti-Semitism, has long supported Palestinian causes, and has been a vocal critic of many policies of the Israeli government. The three newspapers argued their decision to take such a collective stance was motivated "because of the existential threat to Jewish life in this country that would be posed by a Jeremy Corbyn-led government".

Britain's opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn speaks in London on June 30, 2018. (AFP Photo/Tolga Akmen)

Labels: Anti-Semitism, Britain, Parliament, Political Realities

posted by Pieface @ Wednesday, August 01, 2018

Canada's NDP Championing Khalistan?

"I condemn all acts of terrorism in every part of the world, regardless of who the perpetrators are or who the victims are."
"Terrorism can never be seen as a way to advance the cause of any one group. It only leads to suffering, pain and death."
"It wasn't by chance that Sikhs were the most sacrificed, or the people who died the most for the freedom of South Asia."
"I absolutely think it's a fundamental right of all people to be able to self-govern, to have sovereignty. It's something that's recognized by the United Nations, and there should be no fear to expressing your position on that. I support the referendum, absolutely."
Jagmeet Singh, leader, New Democratic Party, Ottawa

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has been on the defensive this week after videos emerged suggesting his association with advocates of an independent Sikh state called Khalistan.  (Justin Tang / THE CANADIAN PRESS file photo)

"One [perception of Sikh identity] is about sovereignty, explicitly and uncompromisingly. It endorses the superiority of our culture, our language and our ideals. It is about Sikh spaces and Sikh institutions."
"And it endorses violence as a legitimate form of resistance and survival."
"[The other embraces conformity and] commodification of our culture."
"It's an unfortunate reality and it's something that is distressing to us as a community, because the Sikh community is a peace-loving community. But at the same time, we're not a pacifist community."
"If you want self-determination, you're going to have to take up arms ... and that's the only route to independence."
Shamsher Singh, National Sikh Youth Federation (NSYF) London

"These are people who still advocate violence. They're trying to disturb the peace in India's Punjab state."
"So the focus is on a very, very tiny minority. That's the sad part."
"[Jagmeet Singh's presence at Sikh separatist events will] haunt him."
Shinder Purewal, professor of political science, Kwantien Polytechnic University, British Columbia

The new leader of Canada's federal New Democratic Party is a Canadian Sikh and apparently a Sikh who is firmly ensconced in the religion, but more than that, an advocate of Sikh autonomy. When India underwent partition and Pakistan was created out of India, followed by Bangladesh breaking away from Pakistan, it was a vicious, violent and bloody event with Hindus and Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims assembling in raging mobs against one another. The Punjab region was divided between India and Pakistan. And it seems that the holiest site in Sikhism was left in Pakistan.

Yet it is upon India that giant democratic nation of 1.3-billion people comprised of many ethnic groups, languages, cultures and religions against whom Sikh nationalists with their dream of achieving a separate, sovereign Khalistan have turned their anger and demands. India has accepted the Sikh presence as an integral part of the Indian sub-continent, absorbed as it has so many others. But a violent, fringe group of Sikh extremists keep the raging fires of anger and resentment alive, plotting conspiracies and engaging in violence.

The federal NDP notorious for its pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel stance appears to have found itself a new leader with a pro-Khalistan, anti-Indian adversarial approach such that he lends his presence and his support to the Khalistan movement, a violent one that threatens, coerces and destroys, both property and lives. Even as Jagmeet Singh condemns violence and terrorism he is present at events which plot and celebrate both. He has lent his voice to the chorus of anti-Indian sentiment.

Jagmeet Singh at a 2015 rally in San Francisco. Sikh Roots

He has attended meetings such as that of the U.K.-based National Sikh Youth Federation in London, one event titled Sovereignty and Polity, advocating for an independent Khalistan. He has deliberately refused to condemn the Sikh Canadian known to have been behind the Air India terrorist attack that killed 326 people, most of them Canadians, on a flight to India. A new video has come to light of his attendance at a rally in San Francisco calling for the creation of Khalistan.

Clips of Jagmeet Singh have been obtained with his speech before an audience relating to Sikh principles of equality and "independence, of sovereignty". Shamsher Singh of the NSYF has explained that "Sikhs do not accept that [Talwinder Singh Parmar, the Sikh Canadian known to have been the mastermind of the Air India bombing] was responsible for the Air India bombing", that Jagmeet Singh's comments indicated that he "understands the complexity of the issue", and nor "should he be criticized for his support for Khalistan or voicing his dissent against India".

An absurd assertion on the face of it, and virtually meaningless considering the source. Since elected leader of the federal NDP, Singh has refused to stand down from his position of self-determination being a basic right. The reality is that although he is leader of the NDP, and Sikhs are proud of their political smarts and that their large presence in Canada has resulted in quite a few among them being elected as Members of Parliament and chosen by the Trudeau government for Cabinet positions, it is Canadian interests and politics that should be consuming the attention of Canadian Sikhs, not their quarrels with India.

Labels: Canada, Jagmeet Singh, Khalistan, NDP, Parliament, Violence

posted by Pieface @ Friday, March 16, 2018

Defaming, Threatening Critics of Islam

"Why are only Muslims mentioned by name?"
"It's not the government's responsibility to babysit just one community."
Raheel Raza, president, Council for Muslims Facing Tomorrow

"You don't need extra regulations or motions to combat racism."
Peter Bhatti, chairman, International Christian Voice

"It's not that without this motion, nothing is being done."
"The government does an awful lot, an awful lot on this file."
Father Raymond de Souza, Catholic priest, newspaper columnist

"Racism is something you can't legislate against, per se, because it begins in the mind."
Jay Cameron, lawyer, Justice Centre of Constitutional Freedoms

"We're not following the motion [M-103] word for word."
"We're not having to slavishly follow anything in this motion."
Hedy Fry, chair, House of Commons heritage committee

Liberal MP Iqra Khalid (center left) introduced a successful motion calling on the federal government to condemn and battle "Islamophobia" last February.

The ill-informed, ill-advised and ill-directed motion M-103, controversially passed in the Canadian House of Commons, represents an anti-Islamophobia motion introduced by Liberal Member of Parliament Iqra Khalid in December of 2016. Its introduction as an "Islamophobia" backlash met a wall of resistance, not only from the opposition Conservatives in Parliament, but from Canadian society in general.

That any perceived criticism of Islam, its tenets and its actors is identified as racist and "Islamophobic" is a perverted invention to silence critics of a religion found wanting.

The first scheduled hearing coming out of the motion requiring such hearings on racism and in particular emphasis on the specious "Islamophobia" has now taken place inviting responses purportedly to accept recommendations on combating racism. How racism conflates with criticism of Islam is beyond debate, for Islam has nothing to do with race, but with a religious ideology.

It is Islam, and not discrimination against various ethnic groups that practise it that is at the crux of the public's perception that the religion fosters violence among its faithful.

But to say so is to leave oneself open to the gratuitous and demeaning charges of Islamophobia, a defaming smear meant to silence critics of Islam's call to jihad, its sermons that emphasize the superiority of Islam over all other religions, the shortcomings of unbelievers and the contempt in which Jews and Infidels are held as being offensive to Allah.

Passages in the Koran and the Hadith; sayings of the Prophet Mohammad; are rife with injunctions to violent jihad as a fundamental obligation to Islam.

Some of the witnesses appearing before the committee outlined what may conceivably occur were criticism of Islam to be banned in Canada, making it a federal offence to give offence. A law that would delight the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, an influential Islamic clique in the United Nations that has been agitating for years for it to be made unlawful with attendant penalties, to criticize Islam.

Mr. Cameron pointed out that M-103, if made into law, might stop Canadians from criticizing female genital mutilation, as an example.

The opposition Conservatives' attempt to have the motion altered to remove "Islamophobia" as its lead position, and reinterpret the motion to express concern with all forms of racism and discrimination against any targeted group, religion, ethnicity or community was outright rejected by the Liberals and by the presenter of the motion, Pakistan-born Liberal MP Iqra Khalid.

Who rejected anything that would not explicitly mention Islamophobia, rather than calling for a study of say, religious discrimination altogether.

The 'Islamophobia' debate is really part of a global, inter-Muslim conflict, fought for centuries.

"....Muslims, who have formed an organization called "Muslims Against M-103," believe Canadian MPs are getting the wool pulled over their eyes.
This issue is really part of a global, inter-Muslim conflict, fought for centuries.
One in which academics, theologians, secular Muslims and Muslims of minority sects have suffered everything from ostracization, to stoning, to beheading, by those who define Islamophobia in one way when speaking English, and much differently when speaking Arabic, Urdu, Persian or Bangla.
In the Indian subcontinent, for example, the word Islamophobia is roughly translated as "Islam Dushmani" or being the "Enemy of Islam."
Muslims who oppose Islamists feel we are targeted by M-103, that its primary purpose is to drown out our voices when we denounce the polygamy, female genital mutilation, child marriage, honour killings, armed jihad and racial discrimination pervasive wherever "Islamophobia" is banned in the Islamic world.
We who fled the Islamic world to escape the tyranny of falsely being called "Islamophobes" and make Canada our home, now find our enemies have hunted us down.
While Islamists complain of Islamophobia, Muslims mock Christians and Jews when we read the opening verse of the Qur'an (Sura Fatiha) during our daily prayers.
Fatiha is the equivalent to the Lord's Prayer in Christianity, where we ask Allah to put us on the "right path", not on the path of "those who have incurred your wrath" (Jews) and "those who have gone astray" (Christians).
As for other faiths, and atheists, at every Friday congregation, the mullah prays to Allah, asking him to help Muslims defeat the "kafirs" (non-believers).

If 'Islamophobia' is ever declared a criminal offence in Canada, I will be the first to defy that law.

Will the heritage committee declare any religious prayer asking for a Muslim victory over other religions hateful?
This would appear to mandated by M-103, which calls on Parliament to "recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear," and develop a government-wide approach to reduce or eliminate systemic racism and religious discrimination.
If "Islamophobia" is ever declared a criminal offence in Canada, I will be the first to defy that law and go to jail to protest it."
Tarek Fatah, a founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress and columnist at the Toronto Sun, is a Robert J. and Abby B. Levine Fellow at the Middle East Forum

Labels: Canada, Islamophobia, Parliament

posted by Pieface @ Thursday, September 28, 2017

The Magnitsky Act

"It just wasn't possible for the committee to ignore the circumstances of what happened to Mr. Magnitsky [tortured in a Russian prison for accusing the government of corruption, where he later died]."
"If we were to have a discussion about sanctions and the appropriate way that sanctions are used, there would be a missing piece of reality."
Liberal Member of Parliament Bob Nault, Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, Ottawa

"That's why Putin and his cronies and his agents and his lobbyists were so aggressive in trying to repeal the Magnitsky Act [Simply as a result of Moscow's virulent opposition to the legislation abroad, effectively holding it to account for its role in this man's death]."
"It is because it will hurt the very foundation of his [Putin's] so-called social contract with the Russian elite."
Garry Kasparov, democracy advocate, Putin regime political opponent

A portrait of lawyer Sergei Magnitsky who died in jail, is held by his mother Nataliya Magnitskaya, as she speaks during an interview with the AP in Moscow -- Alexander Zemlianichenko/The Associated Press

William Browder, the American lawyer whose legal firm Mr. Magnitsky was employed by and who has embarked for the past several years on a personal campaign to honour his dead friend by persuading governments to acknowledge the authors of Mr. Magnitsky's death in a Russian prison through formally passing a law recognizing what he fought against, penalizing those against whom he fought by making them persona non grata, appeared before a House of Commons committee in Canada to testify on behalf of the Magnitsky law.

Several years ago, Mr. Browder realized success in his mission when the U.S. Congress put into law the Magnitsky Act in 2012, sanctioning the Russian rights violators of Sergei Magnitsky, an accountant who uncovered massive corruption schemes favouring Vladimir Putin's friends, a tax fraud of $230-million he stumbled upon in 2008. President Putin reciprocated by enacting a law banning American citizens from the privilege of adopting children of Russian parentage.

The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee undertook an expansion of its legislative review of the nation's two sanctions laws. That expansion to include an examination of the issues relating to Mr. Magnitsky, leading to a report titled "A Coherent and Effective Approach to Canada's Sanctions Regimes: Sergei Magnitsky and Beyond". This also is what led to a committee hearing when "compelling" testimony was heard from a number of witnesses advocating for Magnitsky-type measures to be adopted.

Aside from William Browder, former Liberal MP, Cabinet Minister and human rights lawyer Irwin Cotler, and chess legend Garry Kasparov, along with additional human rights advocates were heard by the committee. Among whom was Russian human rights activist Vladimir Kara-Murza whose testimony described his near-death occasioned by multiple organ failure after his having been poisoned in 2015, in connection with "my involvement in the global campaign in support of the Magnitsky Act".

"My hope", explained Mr. Browder to the committee, "is that this [adoption of the Act] would become eventually a sort of pedestrian thing where it doesn't even impact any kind of diplomatic relations", between Russia and those nations that choose to adopt into law the Magnitsky Act. The issue is the necessity to hold accountable those involved in corruption and the criminal silencing of those who reveal scandalous circumstances however embarrassing to a government.

There was full support from Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrat Members of Parliament in support of the change to the Special Economic Measures Act, involving a mandated review of the law along with the Freezing Assets of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act. That Mr. Magnitsky was beaten in prison then refused the medical treatment that would have preserved his life, is being highlighted through the act that gives honour to his efforts.

Relations between Canada and Russia have been strained since the Kremlin authorized the annexation of the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine. Moscow's decision to send troops into Ukraine to fight the legitimate government of Ukraine alongside ethnic-Russian Ukrainians who want autonomy in eastern Ukraine and closer ties to Russia, earned it the world's censure and financially crippling sanctions.

Moscow has retaliated by imposing its own travel bans, including one on Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs. The final decision whether Canada is to adopt into law the Magnitsky Act is now in the hands of Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. It would be hard to imagine that he would not take the required steps to complete the adoption of the Act, if for no other reason than to acknowledge his own majority Members of Parliaments' collective direction in that regard.

"This is the testimony of a man [Vladimir Kara-Murza] who escaped death this year and escaped death again at the hands of assassins, which I believe are directly linked to the Putin regime. It was very compelling testimony."
"I think it convinced some Liberal members that there was good reason to examine the sanctions and recommend adoption."
Conservative committee member Peter Kent

Labels: Canada, Corruption, Parliament, Political Realities, Russia

posted by Pieface @ Friday, April 07, 2017

Enabling Hateful Incitement

"The three most targeted groups since 2006 have been the Jewish community, the Black community and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) community. In 2015, the Jewish community, followed by the LGBTQ community and the Muslim community were the most victimized groups. The three most reported criminal offences motivated by hate/bias in 2015 were mischief to property, assault and criminal harassment. The Jewish community was the most victimized group for mischief to property occurrences, while the LGBTQ community was the most victimized group for assault occurrences. The Muslim community was the most victimized group for criminal harassment occurrences".
Toronto Police Service Annual Hate/Bias Crime Statistical Report, 2015

"...O Allah! Count their number; slay them one by one and spare not one of them... Give us victory over the disbelieving people... Give victory to Islam... humiliate the ...polytheists... Destroy anyone who displaced the sons of the Muslims...Count their number; slay them one by one and spare not one of them... Purify Al-Aqsa Mosque from the filth of the Jews!"
Ramadan 2016, Imam Ayman Elkasrawy,  Masjid Toronto mosque

Ayman Elkasrawy, imam of the Masjid Toronto mosque (front row, wearing white), said on video: "... slay them one by one and spare not one of them... Give us victory over the disbelieving people... Give victory to Islam... Purify Al-Aqsa Mosque from the filth of the Jews!" (Image source: Video screenshot from Masjid Toronto via The Rebel)

"Our country is very diverse. I think that we need to continue to build those bridges amongst Canadians, and this [motion M-103] is just one way that we can do this, by really understanding the issue and really listening to what Canadians have to say."
"I'm really looking forward to the track that the Canadian Heritage Committee takes on this."
Iqra Khalid, Liberal MP, Mississauga, Ontario

"The word 'Islamophobia' can be used to mean both discrimination against Muslims and criticism of Islamic doctrine or practice. It is important that we not conflate the two -- religious people deserve legal protection, but religions do not."
"People should not discriminate against individuals, but should feel quite free to criticize the doctrine, history, or practise of any religion."
Garnett Genuis, Conservative MP, Commons debate

It is interesting that Muslims like to portray themselves as being victimized by an unfair society that fails to recognize their exceptionalism as faithful of Islam. Non-Muslim societies have an unfortunate penchant of characterizing Islam as an intolerant, violent religion that unfailingly promotes strife between people, destabilizing societies, inciting its faithful to proselytize whether by blandishment or violence, or long-term suffocating of indigenous cultures through sheer numbers of birth-rate inflation is irrelevant.

The very same Muslims who feel entitled to complain that they are victims of racism and anti-religious bias are the same Muslims who sit complacently at Friday prayers in the proliferating mosques of Europe and North America listening to imams invoke against the infidels, the kuffars, the Christians and the Jews who have surrendered the right to live as virtuous human beings in their own right, by insulting Islam through their steadfast refusal to convert to the only true religion.

Islam's goal of complete conquest of the world through converting those who insist on respecting the wrong religion, and those whose spiritual convictions are absent cannot be achieved until the parts of the world Islam views as "houses of war" are transformed into the "house of peace" that is Islam. Without achieving that monopoly of one religion and one religion only reigning supreme over the world population signalling the final success of conquest, the world-wide caliphate cannot arise.

The great goal of that achievement does honour to Allah, the spirit of the almighty in its final, complete and irrefutable majesty. Those who do their utmost to halt the vaunted progress of Islam are enemies of light and champions of darkness. Which explains why it is that they must be vanquished and sent to the final solution to enable Islam to achieve its god-given purpose. So there can be no quibbling among the Muslim faithful over the sermons demonizing Non-Muslims. Entirely legitimate.

What fails the legitimacy test is those same sinners and enemies of Islam defaming the Prophet and Islam, an intolerable assault labelled by the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots as the sin of "Islamophobia", a pathological condition that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation has dedicated itself to eradicating through introducing a motion to the United Nations to make it a criminal offence to indulge in Islamophobia, a criminalization effort that has not yet reached success.

In Canada, most Canadians do not support the notion that the concept of Islamophobia has merit and that there should be a political, social, legal proscription against that concept. But the Liberal Government of Canada is complacent in its belief that the motion which MP Iqra Khalid introduced should be supported and passed, condemning Islamophobia. Completely oblivious, and perhaps deliberately so, that the motion represents the first in a connected thread of manipulations enabling Islam to be defended from criticism while it continues to agitate for hatred against non-Muslims.

The motion calls on the government to do three things:

• Condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination.
• Quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear.
• Compel the Commons heritage committee to develop a government-wide approach for reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination, including Islamophobia.

MP Khalid referred to the heritage committee moving on from the approval achieved in a Parliamentary vote that took place on March 23 -- resulting in a 201 to 91 acceptance of the motion -- now proceeding with the collection of data on hate crime reports and to conduct assessments for affected communities' needs, with findings presented in an eight-month period.

Previous to the vote, Conservative MP David Anderson recommended "Islamophobia" be removed and in exchange the motion read that it would "condemn all forms of systemic racism, religious intolerance and discrimination of Muslims, Jews, Christians, Sikhs, Hindus and other religious communities", but this reasonable and realistic alternative was rejected out of hand by the government-leading Liberals.

Labels: Anti-Semitism, Canada, Islam, Islamophobia, Parliament

posted by Pieface @ Saturday, March 25, 2017

Canada and United States, Celebrity-Culture Governments

"There should be no preferential access or appearance of preferential access accorded to individuals or organizations because they have made financial contributions to politicians and political parties."
Trudeauian guidelines for ethical guidelines

"Like Trump, Trudeau is less a leader than a mascot. Like Trump's following, Trudeau's following sometimes comes off like a Dear Leader cult. Like Trump, Trudeau routinely elicits in his political enemies a hysterical incoherence. As with Trump, it is not known whether Trudeau has ever met a dictator he didn't like."
Terry Glavin, journalist, political commentator

"It’s silly to suggest there’s any avoidance of conflict by having your family run the interests. He talks to his family all the time."
"[It’s] unthinkable in recent history [that] there’s the possibility of a president being able to affect his own personal financial interests, conceivably to the detriment of the general public."
Trevor Potter, former U.S Federal Election Commission chairman

Donald Trump with his sons Donald Trump Jr., from left, Eric Trump, his wife Melania Trump and his daughters Tiffany Trump and Ivanka Trump (Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg)

The international reaction to the successful competitor in the November 8 U.S. presidential election was swift, alarmed and agonized. Governments and politicians in Europe in particular expressed their dismay at the new president-elect of the United States being an uncouth braggart, a man whose penchant for blurting out the uninformed opinion he is convinced is always right. A man who has earned the reputation of an unscrupulous businessman, a bigot and a sexist preparing to move into the White House appears to be everyone's nightmare.

Sensibly, while the Mexican president expressed his disfavour of a man who has labelled Mexicans crooks and rapists, the Prime Minister of Canada has withheld any comments that might conceivably be construed as critical of the new boss on the continent. But then, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has in the past expressed his personal admiration for the Communist Party of China, and he has restrained himself from criticizing Russia's President Vladimir Putin, while expressing his family's chumminess with Fidel Castro and his grip on Cuba.

Goodness gracious, a freshman, untutored Liberal politician turned Prime Minister, prepared to restore Canada's relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran, with the Russian Federation, with the People's Republic of China, after the previous Conservative-led government held them all at arm's length and reacted to their internationally peace-aversive actions with condemnation. So if a Conservative mindset is one that finds fault with rigid authoritarianism and dictators, it might seem passing strange that a Liberal, open-minded, feminist-, gay-, recreational drug-inclusive sees merit in befriending them.

Backdropped by a monument depicting Cuba's revolutionary hero Ernesto "Che" Guevara, Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, second right front, and his wife Sophie Gregoire-Trudeau, are accompanied by Cuba's Vice Prime Minister Miguel Diaz Canel, right front, during a ceremony at the Jose Marti Monument n Havana, Cuba, Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2016. (AP Photo/Ramon Espinosa)

It might even appear as though the Liberal and his government have more in common with the alt-right Republican agenda than those expressing traditional Conservative values. And that appearance might just be a reflection of reality. As for Canadians so popularly decrying the ascendancy of Donald Trump, smugly comparing his addiction to adulation from the masses, to their own Justin Trudeau; in the process they overlook the latter's addiction to graciously smiling selfies and clamouring admirers.

If Donald Trump is addicted to showmanship, strangely enough so is his Canadian counterpart; thespian born and bred, both with that proverbial silver spoon, inheriting wealth and solidly self-entitled to whatever life guarantees the one-percenters of the world. Perhaps the one big difference is that in saying whatever enters his feeble mind, Donald Trump says it like he sees it. Justin Trudeau has accommodated himself to the fact that his impulses to showcase his lack of intelligence works better when deceit and hypocrisy enter the picture.

With Trump what you see and what he says is what there is. With Trudeau, what he says is what he means at the time, but remains subject to change at a whim's notice. As far as addictions go, each is addicted to financial gain and neither sees anything amiss in carrying on with their personal business as though nothing stands in their way, certainly not the obligations of governing demanding a separation between personal gain and administering the affairs of a country; it is only third-grade republics that loot the public trust. Supposedly.



If Trump is arrogant with self-applause, so too is Trudeau. They do indeed have much in common, including their politics. Selling out to the highest bidder is a universal trait both have cultivated to perfection. Trump set up a bogus 'college' to teach would-be entrepreneurs envious of his success and willing to absorb his blueprints for acquisition of riches, ripping off and hoodwinking the gullible. Trudeau made himself available as a public speaker, ripping off charitable organizations with stiff speaking fees eager to host him in the pretense that he is erudite as a former private school acting coach -- both coasting on the brand of name-recognition.

Trudeau's cabinet takes his admonition that they behave scrupulously morally as holy writ by engaging in pay-to-play fundraisers where cabinet ministers appear and the Liberal party benefits financially, trading privileged access for contributions. But then, they need look no further than the example their champion himself provides, with Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister of Canada  hosting private dinners with Chinese billionaires who just incidentally surrendered a 'donation' in six figures to the Trudeau Foundation, and promised a $50,000 statue of Pierre Elliot Trudeau.

Since becoming Prime Minister this scion of wealth and privilege who, as a Member of Parliament continued to hire himself out as a guest speaker to public-supported groups and charities for tens of thousands of dollars, has focused on overturning as many of the previous government's signature legacy projects as he could manage. Many of those reversals were election promises, and some of them have resulted in Justin Trudeau's government highlighting the hypocrisy of those promises by instituting replacement policies not in Canada's best interests.

Labels: Canada, Parliament, Political Realities, Trudeau, Trump, United States

posted by Pieface @ Thursday, November 24, 2016

Hope For Ukraine

"We are seeing a triumph of pro-European forces and a collapse among pro-Russian parties. Ukrainian people see their future in Europe, and this is something that all Ukrainian politicians will have to account for."
Mikhailo Mischenko, analyst, Razumkov Centre

"A constitutional majority -- more than three-fourths of voters taking part in the election -- have powerfully and irreversibly supported a European course for Ukraine. Any delay in reform will spell a certain death. So I expect the quick formation of a new coalition."
"For that I congratulate you [break with the Communist past]. The people’s judgment, which is higher than all but the judgment of God, has issued a death sentence to the Communist Party of Ukraine."
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko

Sunday's election has resulted in no communists whatever gaining a seat in Ukraine's new parliament, a first and perhaps final break with Moscow. President Poroshenko's party has secured a narrow win, short of a majority, while Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk's Popular Front came in close behind. Since they share pro-Western postures this is the desired result of the long-awaited parliamentary election. The die is well and truly cast.

The Rating Group Ukraine exit poll claimed the Poroshenko Bloc won 22.2% of the votes, the Popular Front 21.8%. Both campaigned on reform agendas to bring Ukraine back from economic ruin, and they are prepared to join  with other reform oriented groups, forming a broadly pro-European coalition.

The fly in that ointment is that three million potential voters were unable to cast their votes in eastern regions of the country. There unrest reigns supreme, with government troops battling it out daily against the pro-Russian separatists. And there resides another dramatic story in the June 17 capture of 33-year-old Nadia Savchenko, a career soldier who became Ukraine's first female combat helicopter pilot.

She had been in Independence Square in Kyiv during the revolution. Latterly, surrendering to the frustration of not being deployed with the regular armed forces against the rebels, she took leave from her squadron as Senior Lieutenant, and travelled to the east, where she offered her services to one of several volunteer militias, the Aidar battalion.

A defence lawyer believes Savchenko's possible election to the Ukrainian delegation to PACE may affect her fate.
When she was captured by separatist fighters of the "Luhansk People's Republic", she was transferred to Russia. Prosecutors there charged her as an accessory to murder, claiming she directed a mortar attack killing two Russian journalists. Her Russian defence lawyer, Ilya Novokov, presented witness testimony and mobile phone location data to show she had been too far away to have directed the mortar fire.

Aside from the fact that she was captured some 90 minutes before the journalists died.

"The only way she will be released is by personal decision of Vladimir Putin. And given that, we think her participation in the elections can only help", Mr. Novokov explained. Yes, Ms. Savchenko made the decision to run for parliament "We received a lot of offers from a lot of parties", he sister Vera explained. "So, via the lawyers, we spoke to her and agreed we would go with the one she trusted most. She chose Tymoshenko because she likes her, she used to vote for her."

Now, the hope in some circles is that Vladimir Putin will be more likely to release her. It's a fond one, but not one universally shared; more likely she will be forced to remain where she is in a psychiatric unit. She will remain a national hero, even while the new unified, Western-looking Ukrainian parliament will have to contend with the old guard reluctant as ever to make common cause with Europe.

Proving that old adage that the more things change the more they stay the same.

Labels: Civil War, Conflict, Intervention, Parliament, Russia, Ukraine

posted by Pieface @ Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Soldier shot outside of Parliament, one gunman ‘killed,’ but ‘multiple shooters’ suspected

Ottawa shooting wounds Canadian soldier at War Memorial

 

Labels: Government of Canada, Islamism, Ottawa, Parliament, Violence

posted by Pieface @ Wednesday, October 22, 2014