Because of Motion 103 I’ve been motivated to find out more about just what is is that we all ‘hate’ and ‘fear’ so much.  I wanted to know just what criticisms I might legitimately have about the Muslim faith, since there is this move by our Prime Minister and his trained seals to silence future disagreements. I should at least understand what we are being accused of.  So better learn what it is that I might want to oppose, and won’t be able to later.  Do it now, while I still can speak?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMraxhd9Z9Q

and this Hitchens video also tells you what Islam is about:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-ovsfH6GH0

Of particular relevance to the current pretence that Motion 103 is nothing, listen to Hitchens discussion of the OIC,  and the violence that almost destroyed little Denmark.  Still their president refused the demands of this powerful body who want to pass an international resolution forbidding all criticism of their religion.  Hitchens despises Christianity too, but in Western democracies all his attacks are fair game.  He fights with words, but Islam threatens, and follows up with violence against what they perceive as blasphemy.

Justin Trudeau seems poised to grant that long-term design, (likely with a selfie to sweeten it for Canadians).  The world lost a powerful mind when Hitchens died.  We badly need our Liberal leaders to stop being empty-headed sheep.  Motion 103 begins to look more nefarious to our liberty.

Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OICArabicمنظمة التعاون الإسلامي‎‎; FrenchOrganisation de la Coopération Islamique) is an international organization founded in 1969, consisting of 57 member states, with a collective population of over 1.6 billion as of 2008. The organisation states that it is “the collective voice of the Muslim world” and works to “safeguard and protect the interests of the Muslim world in the spirit of promoting international peace and harmony”.[3]

The OIC has permanent delegations to the United Nations and the European Union.

Motion 103 is about vote buying.  It’s brilliant, a no-brainer.   Set up a contrived problem, of a populace driven by irrational ‘hate’ and ‘fear’.  Step firmly in like true quality leaders to put a stop to the problem, and you have the so-called persecuted group eating out of your hand.  And the money and the votes will flow into your party coffers.

There is no more Islamophobia in Canada than there is of all the varied interactions among human beings,  some wonderful, and some not so great.

But by setting up this purported segment of society seething with ‘fear and hate’, the Liberals have by fiat won the hearts and minds of the Muslim community for a long time.  Never mind that they have created conflict, where for most of us it did not exist as long as people lived in civility and peace together.

Now with the arbitrary ‘truths’ that we are a nation of Islamophobes, Justin Trudeau and the Liberals have stirred up tension and distrust.   And they are laughing.

But will they all be enjoying the joke, IF, a few years down the road the hard-core element of Islam comes to collect on the core meaning of Motion 103, and we find ourselves no longer in a free land where the same democratic rules apply to all Canadians?

Unless of course all that talk we hear from strict Muslims about conquering the world for Allah, and bringing everyone under Shariah law is just a cute joke too.

Note:  Some writer put this thought out last week, and I’d give him credit, if I could remember where I read it, but it was only today that I realized he was probably right.

 

‘Terrorist Incident’ Makes London Latest Target in Europe

Shots were heard near Britain’s Parliament on Wednesday, and an officer was stabbed. Witnesses said pedestrians were hit by a car on the nearby Westminster Bridge.

By THE NEW YORK TIMES on  Publish Date March 22, 2017. Photo by Stefan Rousseau/Press Association, via Associated Press. Watch in Times Video »

LONDON — An attack outside Parliament plunged London into turmoil on Wednesday, leaving at least four people dead and 20 injured, and prompting the hasty evacuation of the prime minister in a confusing swirl of violence that traumatized the seat of British power.

The police said they were treating the attack as terrorism, which appeared to make it the most serious such assault in London since the deadly subway bombings more than a decade ago.

Throughout a turbulent afternoon, ambulances, emergency vehicles and heavily armed security officers thronged the area outside Parliament, as one of the busiest sections of London was cordoned off and evacuated. Prime Minister Theresa May was rushed into a vehicle and spirited back to her office, where her aides reported that she was safe.

The driver of a large vehicle mowed down pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, which leads to Parliament, killing two people and injuring others, before crashing into a railing.

After the crash, at least one man left the vehicle and approached Parliament, where he stabbed an armed police officer to death and was fatally shot by the police.

“This is the day we have planned for but we hoped would never happen,” Mr. Rowley said. “Sadly, it’s now a reality.”

The attack came on the anniversary of suicide bombings in Brussels that killed 32 people, along with three bombers. The violence raised fears that London, which has been largely spared as a target of recent terrorist attacks, has now joined cities like Paris, Brussels and Berlin as targets of mass violence.

At least three police officers were among the 20 people injured. Also among the injured were a group of visiting students from the Brittany region of France, and a woman who fell or plunged into the River Thames.

For more than two hours, astonished lawmakers inside the House of Commons, some of whom had ducked for cover, were told to stay in place as officers searched the premises, office by office.

“At the moment, the very clear advice from the police and the director of security in the house is that we should remain under suspension, and that the chamber should remain in lockdown until we’ve received advice that it is safe to go back to normal procedures,” David Lidington, the leader of the House of Commons, or lower house of Parliament, told lawmakers in remarks broadcast live on the BBC.

Jeremy Shapiro, a former State Department official now at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said that the London attack was consistent with the recent pattern of attacks in which a vehicle was used to kill people, citing attacks in France, Germany and Israel.

“We’ve seen a gradual movement away from terrorist attacks on the West to attacks on softer and softer targets with more improvised weapons,” he said. “In a way, it’s a sign of desperation and a demonstration of the effectiveness of counterterrorism in the West. It’s spectacularly easy to kill a bunch of people with a car or a truck if you don’t care who they are.”

Organized attacks as in Paris are increasingly difficult to pull off, he said, but “the capacity of one person inspired by some ideology to do damage is inescapable.”

*******************************************************************

Motion 103, in its own wording, demands our government work on a process that has the  potential to shut down free speech,  Our Prime Minister seems to feel himself next to God, if not already there.  And no wonder since the Liberals regard him as their saviour from oblivion, and little disposed to analyze anything through the filter of their God-given minds and souls, or consider the ultimate good of the country they are allowed to govern.  And the general populace seem to ask less of a handsome face, than a mere man.

Push the snooze button on your mind.  Look deep in these dreamy eyes and you will soon forget your antiquated notions of common sense, freedom, or who God is.  Behold your replacement god.  From now on he and his servants will do all your thinking for you……………zzzzzzzzzH10124-500x500

Canadians should oppose the anti-Islamophobia motion, M-103

Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, should stand firmly against M-103, the motion by liberal MP Iqra Khalid that urges among other things the government to “develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia.” M-103 is not a bill, but its natural evolution could be a law criminalizing any speech, opinion or action that promotes so-called Islamophobia.

When she tabled her motion, Khalid cited her childhood experience. “ When I moved to Canada in the 1990s, a young girl trying to make this nation my home, some kids in school would yell as they pushed me, ‘Go home, you Muslim’ — but I was home. I am among thousands of Muslims who have been victimized because of hate and fear,” she said.

I sympathize. Living in Saudi Arabia as a young Christian boy, I was called an infidel by Saudi children, and made to feel inferior. We were not allowed to exercise our faith. In my native Egypt, millions of Christians live under systematic discrimination and widespread intolerance. Christianity, not Islam, is the most persecuted religion in the world today. My wife recently lost two second cousins, beautiful young women, the only children of their parents, in the recent bombing at the Coptic Cathedral in Cairo. I understand the pain of ignorance, hatred, prejudice, discrimination and intolerance. But I don’t call it Christianophobia, because it isn’t. It is ignorance, hatred, prejudice, discrimination and intolerance. In fact, here in Montreal, I experience denigration of my Christian faith daily by Quebecers who use the holiest religious terms routinely as expletives.

Ignorance and insensitivity are not phobia, however. Phobia is a medical term, denoting a pathological and irrational fear. The proper definition of Islamophobia is not irrational hatred of Muslims, but irrational fear of Islam. Hatred of Muslim Canadians, or any other group, is always wrong. Incitement to discrimination or violence against any group is illegal and always should be.

But let us not confuse the issues. On the same day Khalid tabled her motion, an e-petition with nearly 70,000 signatures was tabled that called on the House of Commons to recognize that “extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam,” and to condemn all forms of Islamophobia.

Extremist individuals? We are living in an age where depraved terrorist armies, who cite a unifying explanation for their actions in Islamic texts and doctrine, occupy large swaths of entire nations. Even if we dismiss these hundreds of thousands of extremists, and instead examine mainstream Islamic societies, what do we find? We find nation after nation where apostasy is a crime punishable by death, indigenous minorities are robbed of equal citizenship and religious dissent is considered treason. A charge of Islamophobia is used to silence, marginalize and imprison the few liberal Muslim thinkers who are attempting to reform Islam from within, and the weapon to subjugate and humiliate minorities. Who, then, represents Islam?

Fear of these existing realities and open discussion of their roots and implications is not irrational. If Canada joins this Islamophobia witch hunt, it will be complicit in the crimes committed in the name of preventing Islamophobia.

The demagoguery of Islamophobia is already manifest in the Liberals’ apparent quest to brand all opposed to M-103 as extremists, racists and bigots. All three opposition parties supported an alternative motion that urged the House to condemn “all forms of systemic racism, religious intolerance, and discrimination of Muslims, Jews, Christians, Sikhs, Hindus, and other religious communities.” No Liberal MP supported the motion; it seems they did not have the guts to defy their prime minister and be — well — liberal.

The boundary of political correctness has to be the point where it becomes official policy, something that could open the way for the enactment of enforcement measures in future. We have reached that boundary at M-103. Canadians should reject it, and reject it loudly.

Sherif Emil is a Montreal physician.

I don’t know who to credit for these photographs, but am grateful someone captured and shared these with the world.

(Media assurances to the contrary, both petition e-411 and Motion 103 are insidious assaults on Canadian liberty and ought never to have got this far.  If you think anything in my posts is helpful, feel free to use the material.)

That Motion 103 specifically makes criticism of Islam a thing the government frowns on, and may further forbid, is really too odd to ignore.  Given that Islam is the banner under which most of the world’s current atrocities are being carried out, why suppress legitimate discussion about wrong, done in the name of that, or any religion.  There are doubtless many peaceful Muslims, but why does our Prime Minister want to suppress any truth, by declaring those who speak out to be ‘Islamophobes‘?  (My spell-check does not even recognize this word. It is a recently contrived tool to silence people.)

 

The wording on the petition e-411 (below) is as problematic, as its later manifestation Motion 103  ………. an infinitesimally small number of extremist individuals have conducted terrorist activities while claiming to speak for the religion of Islam”. 

Infinitesimally small is so tiny, as to be next to zero!!  So that sentence in e-411 is an absurd lie, and can easily be proven to be a lie.

What an astonishing way to describe an almost relentless barrage of attacks around the globe.  Granted Canada has not seen anything on the scale of violence happening in other countries, but surely two attacks in Ottawa, in 2014,  the first being the shooting of two soldiers, one of whom died, and the later attack on Parliament that left another soldier dead and all of our Federal government, both staff and politicians in that building, HIDING, IN TERROR,….. in that building which represents  our bastion in a free and democratic land,….. these, our government men and women were trembling with fear, piling tables and chairs against doors, while a lunatic inspired by jihadi aspirations roamed the halls of Parliament, shooting it up. 

 

Justin Trudeau was one of those MPs hiding in fear, not knowing what would become of him, and all of them.   To describe such events as infinitesimally small     should be an affront to our collective intellect.

 It wasn’t a troubled man, inspired by Jewish teaching or Christian doctrine, or Buddhist contemplation that tried to kill Prime Minister Harper and all those MPs,……..including Justin Trudeau.  It was a man intent on jihad for Islamist preaching, inciting death to infidels and the promise of virgins waiting after martyrdom. What can adequately explain this relentless determination of Prime Minister Trudeau to paper-over the violence done in the name of Islam, and indeed possibly even make it a punishable crime to expose what is done in the name of Allah?  Motion 103 demands the government quell anti-Muslim feelings, and further stipulates there will be follow-up within 240 calendar days.

Oh yes, 2013, all the passengers on the Amtrak train that was to be blown up by two jihadists in Jordan Station, well I guess you could say their bodies would have been broken into ‘infinitesimally small’  fragments, but hey, that was only the plot of two men, so no big deal.  One of whom demanded that he be judged by the Qu ran, and not Canadian law.  And under Ontario’s Dalton McGuinty, Shariah law would now be a reality, in at least one Canadian province,……were it not for the fierce opposition of Canadian Muslim women.

Years ago, in a Psychology course, I first read of the strange phenomenon of ‘IDENTIFICATION WITH THE AGGRESSOR’, as described in the Stockholm hostage taking, and later used to defend Patty Hearst.  The Liberals now happily in power seem content to mindlessly follow the Prime Minister wherever he leads, so that explains their weakness, but what explains Justin Trudeau’s drive to shield the Muslim religion from being held to a high standard of scrutiny, as all groups must be, if we are to continue to live in safety and freedom?

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22447726

Stock·holm syn·drome
noun
  1. feelings of trust or affection felt in certain cases of kidnapping or hostage-taking by a victim toward a captor.
Translations, word origin, and more definitions

Stockholm syndrome – Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

Stockholm syndrome is a condition that causes hostages to develop a psychological alliance with their captors as a survival strategy during captivity.

e-411 (Islam)

42nd Parliament

Initiated by Samer Majzoub from Pierrefonds, Quebec, on June 8, 2016, at 5:45 p.m. (EDT)

keywords 

Extremism
Islam and Muslims
Religious discrimination

Government Response Tabled

Petition details

Petition to the House of CommonsWhereas:

  • Islam is a religion of over 1.5 billion people worldwide. Since its founding more than 1400 years ago, Muslims have contributed, and continue to contribute, to the positive development of human civilization. This encompasses all areas of human endeavors including the arts, culture, science, medicine, literature, and much more;

  • Recently an infinitesimally small number of extremist individuals have conducted terrorist activities while claiming to speak for the religion of Islam. Their actions have been used as a pretext for a notable rise of anti-Muslim sentiments in Canada; and

  • These violent individuals do not reflect in any way the values or the teachings of the religion of Islam. In fact, they misrepresent the religion. We categorically reject all their activities. They in no way represent the religion, the beliefs and the desire of Muslims to co-exist in peace with all peoples of the world.

We, the undersigned, Citizens and residents of Canada, call upon the House of Commons to join us in recognizing that extremist individuals do not represent the religion of Islam, and in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.

I am a Catholicphobe, an Anglophobe, a Reformophobe, a Mennophobe, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, and a few things more:


Gerda Peachey <gerdapeachey@gmail.com>

Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 3:12 AM

To: Prime Minister/Premier Ministre <pm@pm.gc.ca>

Bcc: cbcnewsvancouver@cbc.ca, letters@nationalpost.com, letters@ottawacitizen.com, editor@thetyee.ca, ed.fast.c1a@parl.gc.ca, “ProvLetters (VAN_Exchange)” <provletters@theprovince.com>, programming@cknw.com, “Munro, Harold (Vancouver Sun)” <hmunro@vancouversun.com>, “Palmer, Vaughn (Vancouver Sun)” <vpalmer@vancouversun.com>, sunletters@vancouversun.com, sunopinion@vancouversun.com, Simi Sara <simi@cknw.com>, Jati.Sidhu@parl.gc.ca

With you, the Prime Minister of Canada set to impose Motion 103 on Canada, why would I admit to things that could potentially bring trouble down on my head?

It is because Motion 103 is such a murky, ill-defined and dangerous discussion that calls for you to quell criticism of specifically one religious group, among a plethora of religions in our country.

Almost all religious groups that I know of have harboured sexual predators and abusive leaders.  The Catholic church pretty much leads the way for sliding sexual molesters to other parishes and doing everything in its power to protect such perverts rather than the innocent children who are so often damaged for life, by trusted religious figures.

Anglican priests have been implicated in the same horrific sins,…….crimes against children.

I grew up in the Dutch Reformed church.  Recently a Dutch pastor told me that his denomination is beginning to confess a pattern of cover-up when leaders preach the Word of God, but live like demons.

A Mennonite high school teacher did some prison time here, for abusing his role, for years, and using his prestige and power over a student to get what he wanted.  Mennonites have stood behind some very ‘respected‘ leaders who wallowed in sexual sins while showing a holy face to the world.

In the name of Allah, our world is rocking with violence right now, almost on a daily basis.  Will you the Prime Minister of Canada put a muzzle on the media, and set up a system, so well known to tyrannies, whereby the populace grows paralyzed with fear, lest the thought police descend on them, for displeasing the state?

Sometimes children are molested by homosexuals, by their football coaches, by their ballet instructors, ski instructors…………there is no end to this list.

That is simply true, and it is pretty much true in every institution run by fallen humanity.  So when people see vulnerable children so horribly wounded both physically and in their spirit, will your government label people caring enough to step forward and attempt to expose such evil as ……….Phobes?

No religion is exempt from such abuse, and no religion should be shielded from legitimate criticism.  No one who speaks the truth about abuse is phobic.  They are not irrational, or driven by fear.  On the contrary, it takes a lot more courage to stand against evil, than to just avert your eyes,……..and hope the victims survive, somehow.

You have more than enough power already enshrined in our Canadian laws to stop anyone who attacks people for their religious belief, but what you propose in Motion 103 is an exclusive protection of the Muslim religion,……..twice.  Why is that so, when the Jews are so often the target of hate, and violence?  Protect our Jewish citizens, protect our Muslim citizens, protect people in the Catholic faith, the Mennonite faith, the Reformed Church.

Just enforce the existing laws equally, with the determination to have a level playing field, in the land you govern.

I notice the MP Iqra Khalid does not wear the traditional Muslim garb, and flashes bright lipstick, which is perfectly normal and safe in our wonderful country.  But Iqra wants to suppress criticism of Islam, a religion that stated often and clearly the intention to bring the entire world under Sharia Law.  Under that rule neither Iqra, nor any of her Muslim sisters would have the freedom to dress as they want, or freely travel alone, wherever they want to go.

My Iranian friend taught university in Teheran when the Shah was deposed, and Sharia Law was imposed.  Women did not welcome the repressive mores of Islam and often furtively attended parties where they could wear their pretty dresses and splash on their makeup, to their hearts content.  Some of them paid a terrible price of their ‘rebellion‘ because the government had police ferreting out all non-compliance, with severe penalties imposed on such party-goers.

Prime Minister Trudeau, what are you sliding into our free land, under the guise of protecting one distinct religion?  Though I know that God is our Creator, and the Bible is His revelation to all humanity, I would not want to live in a theocracy.  There must be safety and freedom for all religious conviction in a democratic society.  But with Motion 103 you are melding the power of the state for a unique protection of just one of our myriad religious groups.

Please do not endorse this Motion.

Sincerely,

Gerda Peachey,   Abbotsford,   BC

That word ‘quell’ means:            quell
kwel/
verb

put an end to (a rebellion or other disorder), typically by the use of force.

“extra police were called to quell the disturbance”
synonyms: put an end to, put a stop to, endcrush, put down, check, crack down on, curb, nip in the bud, squashquashsubduesuppressovercome;

informalsquelch
“troops quelled the unrest”

subdue or silence someone.

“Connor quelled him with a look”

suppress (a feeling, especially an unpleasant one).

“he spoke up again to quell any panic among the assembled youngsters”
synonyms: calmsoothepacifysettlequietsilenceallayassuagemitigatemoderate;

literarystay
“he quelled his misgivings”

List of phobias

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“-phobia” redirects here. For the class of psychological disorders, see Phobia.
For a list of words relating to various phobias not found in wikipedia, see the English words suffixed with -phobia category of words in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

The English suffixes -phobia-phobic-phobe (from Greek φόβος phobos, “fear”) occur in technical usage in psychiatry to construct words that describe irrational, abnormal, unwarranted, persistent, or disabling fear as a mental disorder (e.g. agoraphobia), in chemistry to describe chemical aversions (e.g. hydrophobic), in biology to describe organisms that dislike certain conditions (e.g. acidophobia), and in medicine to describe hypersensitivity to a stimulus, usually sensory (e.g. photophobia). In common usage, they also form words that describe dislike or hatred of a particular thing or subject (e.g. homophobia). The suffix is antonymic to -phil-.

For more information on the psychiatric side, including how psychiatry groups phobias such as agoraphobia, social phobia, or simple phobia, see phobia. The following lists include words ending in -phobia, and include fears that have acquired names. In some cases, the naming of phobias has become a word game, of notable example being a 1998 humorous article published by BBC News.[1] In some cases, a word ending in -phobia may have an antonym with the suffix -phil-, e.g. Germanophobe / Germanophile.

A large number of -phobia lists circulate on the Internet, with words collected from indiscriminate sources, often copying each other. Also, a number of psychiatric websites exist that at the first glance cover a huge number of phobias, but in fact use a standard text to fit any phobia and reuse it for all unusual phobias by merely changing the name. Sometimes it leads to bizarre results, such as suggestions to cure “prostitute phobia”.[2] Such practice is known as content spamming and is used to attract search engines.

An article published in 1897 in American Journal of Psychology noted “the absurd tendency to give Greek names to objects feared (which, as Arndt says, would give us such terms as klopsophobia — fear of thieves, triakaidekaphobia — fear of the number 13….”.[3]

Psychological conditions

Specialists may prefer to avoid the suffix -phobia and use more descriptive terms such as personality disordersanxiety disorders, and avoidant personality disorder.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

  • Ichthyophobia – fear of fish, including fear of eating fish, or fear of dead fish

K

  • Koumpounophobia – fear of buttons[9]

L

M

N

O

P

R

S

T

W

X

Animal phobias

Main article: Zoophobia

Non-psychological conditions

Biology, chemistry

Biologists use a number of -phobia/-phobic terms to describe predispositions by plants and animals against certain conditions. For antonyms, see here

Prejudices and discrimination

Racist and xenophobic sentiments

The suffix -phobia is used to coin terms that denote a particular anti-ethnic or anti-demographic sentiment, such as AmericanophobiaEurophobiaFrancophobiaHispanophobia, and Indophobia. Often a synonym with the prefix “anti-” already exists (e.g. Polonophobia vs. anti-Polonism). Anti-religious sentiments are expressed in terms such as Christianophobia and Islamophobia.

Other prejudices include:

Prejudices against other categories of people

MOTION 103

Systemic racism and religious discrimination

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should: (a) recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear; (b) condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination and take note of House of Commons’ petition e-411 and the issues raised by it; and (c) request that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage undertake a study on how the government could (i) develop a whole-of-government approach to reducing or eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia, in Canada, while ensuring a community-centered focus with a holistic response through evidence-based policy-making, (ii) collect data to contextualize hate crime reports and to conduct needs assessments for impacted communities, and that the Committee should present its findings and recommendations to the House no later than 240 calendar days from the adoption of this motion, provided that in its report, the Committee should make recommendations that the government may use to better reflect the enshrined rights and freedoms in the Constitution Acts, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.