The Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) is unstinting in its stifling of criticism of Islam.
Marc LeBuis in his blog, Point de Bascule has the story on this latest example of how Canada throttles free speech. The story of the refusal of the CHRC to investigate his complaint has been picked up in today’s edition of Le Devoir in Montreal and on Ezra Levant’s blog, as well. It has become the buzz on the internet.
Marc Lebuis is to be commended for his 'patience' awaiting receipt of a reply from the mind numbing CHRC before going public about their refusal to investigate his complaint against a radical Salafist Montreal Imam. This is another demonstration that 'free speech' has no protection in Canada, as both Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant know that full stop given their own 'star chamber' grilling by the CHRC and provincial variants. Underneath this refusal to investigate LeBuis complaint is the threat that any criticism of Islam is tantamount to 'blasphemy' a furtherance of the objectives of the Organization of the Islamic Conference.
Note this comment from Ezra Levant in his post, entitled CHRC: it's OK to say gays should be "beheaded", Jews "spread corruption", Hindus must "be killed."
Write to Lawrence Cannon, the new Foreign Minister and one of Stephen Harper’s key MPs in Quebec, about this latest inflammatory decision by the CHRC. It’s egregious to all Canadians ; but I believe it’s especially insulting to Quebec, and their culture of equality for women and tolerance for gays."
Why don’t you drop Cannon a quick e-mail, pointing out the hypocrisy of the CHRC. How does Jennifer Lynch, the chief commissar at the CHRC keep her job ? She just gave a free pass to the most vile anti-Semitism, misogyny and, frankly, anti-Quebec rant that I think I’ve ever read."
Read this excerpt from LeBuis account of his complaint with the CHRC. Note his conclusion at the end.
BACKGROUND
On 11 April 2008, I filed a complaint for "hate propaganda" on the Internet before the Canadian Human Rights Commission against a Salafi Imam of Montreal, Abou Hammaad Sulaiman Dameus Al-Hayiti. The purpose of my complaint was to test the objectivity of the Commission. My complaint relates to the imam’s book L’Islam ou l’Intégrisme ? À la lumière du Qor’an et de la Sounnah (Islam or Fundamentalism ? In light of the Qor’an and the Sunna), (2006/2007), 3rd edition corrected. Imam Abou H., who is fluent in Arabic, attended universities in Saudi Arabia where he studied Islam and the science of Hadiths. His teachings can therefore be perceived as authoritative with respect to Islam.
My complaint under section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (the "Act") claims that the writings of the imam are supremacist and expose persons belonging to the following groups to hatred or contempt: homosexuals, Infidels (non-Muslims), women, Jews, Quebecois (as an ethnic group and national minority).
On December 5, I received a letter fom Stéphane Brisson of the Commission informing me that they will not proceed to investigate my complaint. In the opinion of the Commission, the writings of the imam are not likely to expose persons from identifiable groups to hatred or contempt. Below is a translated excerpt of the letter of the Commission, followed by translated excerpts of the book of the Imam that I brought to the attention of the Commission in support of my complaint :
EXCERPT FROM THE LETTER OF THE COMMISSION
“ ...the majority of the references in “Islam or Fundamentalism” are to “infidels”, “miscreants” or “western women”. These are general, broad and diversified categories that do not constitute an “identifiable group” under Section 13 of the Act. As we have also mentioned, the extracts that identify groups on the basis of prohibited grounds of discrimination (homosexuals, lesbians, Christians, Jews) do not seem to promote “hatred” or “contempt” according to the criteria set forth in the Taylor case. Therefore, the document on which the complaint is based does not seem to meet the requirements of Section 13 of the Act for a complaint.”
CONCLUSION
- If you belong to a minority, you can with impunity propagate hatred and contempt against the majority. You are not held to the same standards of tolerance, respect and civility as the majority. Equality under the law, according to the Commission, does not exist anymore.
- If you belong to a religious minority, you can with impunity propagate a supremacist ideology that also condones the extermination of other minorities, and of the majority, if this is the doctrine of your religion.
If you belong to the majority and you expose the supremacist, totalitarian and anti-democratic ideology propagated by a minority, you risk being sued.
