News Ticker >
[ August 22, 2017 ]

Why are those concerned with slavery anti-Trump but pro-Islam?

[ August 22, 2017 ]

VIDEO/Photos: Smiling axe-wielding jihadi stabs 8 people in supermarket in Russia

[ August 22, 2017 ]

Raw Story throws a fit after PayPal reinstates Pamela Geller’s AFDI

[ August 22, 2017 ]

VIDEO and PHOTOS: “Trump is Killing Us: Mourning Heather Heyer” Protest in NYC – Part...

[ August 22, 2017 ]

Hizballah condemns Barcelona attack, saying it “harms the image of jihad”

[ August 22, 2017 ]

Virginia Muslim pleads guilty: helped buy rocket-propelled grenade for ISIS

[ August 22, 2017 ]

Trump’s Afghanistan speech: mentioned “terrorists” 16 times but for 1st time left out word “Islamic”

[ August 22, 2017 ]

Alliance Between the Left and Islam Cemented by Lenin and Hitler

[ August 22, 2017 ]

BBC Asks Twitter Followers If Criticism of Muslim Child Sex Gangs Is ‘Racist’

[ August 22, 2017 ]

Anti-Israel Leaders Hosted at State Department Seek to Drive Wedge in U.S.-Israel Alliance

Canada moving toward criminalizing “Islamophobia”


“Canada is inching toward a broadly-based law that would codify “Islamophobia” as a hate crime without even defining Islamophobia or demonstrating that it is a phenomenon requiring legal action.”

Since all opposition to jihad terror and all discussion of how it is motivated by Islamic texts and teachings is vilified as “Islamophobia,” this classification of “Islamophobia” as a “hate crime” would have the effect of silencing all opposition to jihad terror, so that it could advance without a word of protest. If Canada passes this, it will be Canada’s death knell.

“Canada Inching Toward ‘Islamophobia’ Law”, by David Krayden, Daily Caller, January 26, 2017:

Canada is inching toward a broadly-based law that would codify “Islamophobia” as a hate crime without even defining Islamophobia or demonstrating that it is a phenomenon requiring legal action.

After first passing a motion that condemns Islamophobia, last month, Iqra Khalid, a Member of Parliament (MP) from the governing Liberals, tabled Motion M-103 in the House of Commons. The motion demands that Islamophobia be treated as a crime without even bothering to define the offense.

Thomas Mulcair, the leader of the leftist New Democrat Party, read the first motion in the House of Commons:

“Mr. Speaker, in a moment I will be seeking unanimous consent for an important motion based on the e-petition sponsored by the Hon. Member for Pierrefonds–Dollard that asks that we, the House of Commons, condemn all forms of Islamophobia,” Mulcair said.

Though he did not receive the unanimous consent that he craved because some official opposition Conservative MPs shouted, “Nay,” Mulcair’s motion passed. No mainstream media outlet reported this parliamentary activity; some social media blogs and private news websites discussed the motion.

Then last month, Liberal MP Khalid introduced another more comprehensive motion that “the government should recognize the need to quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear… 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 request that the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage undertake a study.”

Khalid recommends that Islamophobia — whatever that is — be treated as a hate crime by the federal government and that it “collect data to contextualize hate crime reports and to conduct needs assessments for impacted communities.”

This motion was tabled for debate. Khalid’s communications assistant, Anas Marwah, told The Daily Caller that they expect the motion to come up for discussion in a couple of weeks. “The motion has technically not been introduced, but just tabled; it may be up for first reading in early February,” he said.

The motion has received virtually no mention in the mainstream media…….

  • Bob Edwards

    Good Grief. Will we have to build a northern wall.

    • Mahou Shoujo

      That may be necessary, liberals and there lackies are turning Canada into an islamic state, with the consent of all political parties and Christianity, such as it is today. A minefield would be cheaper and more effective.

      • Rob Porter

        You are right, Mahou, the liberals and NDP, even those who call themselves Conservative (do you really think Rona Ambrose or Patrick Brown have any principles – or independent spirit courage?) will limp-wristedly turn Canada into an Islamic state. They don’t believe in anything much, so Islam can fill the vacuum. Do you think The Rebel’s Ezra Levant doubts this? Mark Stein is already living in Vermont, driven out by those things called ‘Human Rights Commissions’. Dual barbed wire fences with minefields in between will do the trick. Friday night we could go to the most likely invasion routes and watch the fire works!

  • krinks

    In the EU telling the truth is a crime why not Canada?

  • taxpayer22


  • patriotusa2

    Delusion seems to be metastizing all over the western hemisphere. If Canadian leaders ever go forward with this reckless decision they will have signed their own death warrant.

    • SRN99

      Stupid people welcome Islam

      • patriotusa2

        Indeed they do and unfortunately make it worse for the rest of us.

        • Darryl R Taylor

          Stupid people don’t read the text of the motion, which extends protection to all cultures, which would include the occasional outbreak of Anti-Semitism that flairs up, or even hypothetically cases where a Christian, etc could be persecuted as a minority.

          And Canadian law is not going to be superceded by any other, period.

          • clearsighted

            Smart people read the motion and correctly note that you are a purveyor of lies. The text of the motion condemns “all forms of Islamophobia.” There is NOTHING in the motion, as adopted, which references protection of any other culture and specifically makes no reference to anti-Semitism. In fact, Mulcair, one of the sponsors of the motion is an ardent supporter of the virulently anti-Jewish Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement patterened after the Nazi boycotts of Jewish businesses in Germany. The motion was a direct attack on freedom of speech in Canada and a furtherance of the attempts by the left to impose Sharia restrictions on free speech critical of political Islam.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            “(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”-from the text of motion M-103 by Iqra Khalid, as documented on the Parliament of Canada website.

            Islamic targeted prejudice and acts are on the rise in Canada, as they are throughout the Western world, and that plays directly into the hands of the Daesh, and similar Mujihadeen organizations, in the same way that last year’s terror attacks on Paris did.

            The Daesh are professional terrorists, they spent months on planning those attacks, and they did exactly what they were intended to do: increase hatred and distrust of Muslims in the Western world, generating actions against citizens and the broader faith within various nations, and so pushing them to identify more closely with Islam than with the nations that many were actually born in.

            There was no expectation that France was going to back off, or that other countries would see what happened and “get scared of attacking Syria”.

            Instead, every time a mosque gets firebombed, or shot up, more Muslims quietly donate money to front organizations for the segment of Islam that DOES HATE the rest of the world, a few more book a flight to someplace from where they might be able to find their way to a Mujahadeen army, and a handful become the perfect candidates for something really bad, because they lose the last bit of identification with the country that they well may have been born in.

            Literally, the one undesirable thing for the Mujahadeen, be they in Syria or as one of the handful of Imams who actually do exist and do active agitating and recruiting for terrorist organizations, is for a Western society to not react excessively or with great emotion to their heinous acts, to hold to it’s laws and culture, yet not yield to the temptation to blame the brown kid walking home from school for what another one did halfway around the planet.

            As for the Mulcair/Jew thing, I’ll leave that alone except to say that I make a distinction between Jews and Zionists, and actually dislike fundamentalists of any of the “Big Three” Abrahamic faiths.

            Each one of them abuses Freedom of Speech by interpreting that as a right to outshout anyone else, and every one of them has members actively manipulating events domestically and world wide for their own agendas, and part of being Canadian is actively learning and exercising the ability to distinguish the harmless from the fanatics without widening that division.

            Which includes checking through ones own beliefs very carefully, because the nature of real devils is to be very, very hard to pick out from the crowd.

          • Montaigne

            Thank you Mr Taylor. I appreciate someone who is able to nuance and word his thoughts. Lots of intolerance and verbal violence on this website.

          • ninetyninepct

            Canadian laws already deal with racism and free speech. There is no need to promote and start enforcing Sharia law. Garbage like this is the first step in destroying what we presently see as Canada, turning it into a Sharia Muslim compliant country. A country where democracy, administered by elected politicians has been banned and instead disgusting laws enforced by imams. Politicians don’t realize it but they will become irrelevant and out of a job as there will be no Democracy.
            Sharia law will destroy Canada as we know it. A country and culture that has taken 150 years to evolve and develop. Forget having a beer after work or going to a lounge for the evening. Liquor is offensive to Allah. You will have to give up your pet puppy to be destroyed as dogs are filth to Muslims, ham and bacon will be banned, Christians will be criminals and on and on.

            Any time any Muslim wants something they will claim to be offended and they will get it. Any job at any wage. No Muslim will ever be fired for any reason as it would be “racist”.
            The process has already started with the RCMP and many City police forces now Sharia compliant.

          • Cal A. Nomen

            Then the motion does not need to specify “Islamaphobia” separately, does it??? If so, to be fair, its should also specifically list “Infidelaphobia” to, as you say, “protect all cultures” that are not Islam.

    • berserker

      The Liberals also want to double the current immigration numbers which is already quite high. There is some sort of plan to get the Canadian population by 100 million (current 35 million) by 2100. Statistics Canada has estimated that by 2035, third of the population will be immigrants.

      • patriotusa2

        Yes, there’s a plan all right, and that is to rid the western hemisphere of the majority white race, whom these moronic leaders think have created all the evil in this world. They are far too dense to realize that it is their liberal policies pushed by their own stupidity that is the real evil overtaking what used to be Christian countries.

      • AlgorithmicAnalyst

        10 million workers, 90 million shirkers?

    • jj

      Just how far does the pendulum have to swing from the territory of freedom, to the territory of subversion (by leftists and mainstream media)….before we make a distinction between the two? Those who think that, in the name of freedom, subversion can be allowed, and the civilization can survive this until the end of time, are mistaken.

      Many civilizations before us have fallen to islam. They too, like us, made the fatal mistake of treating muslims according to their own principles as opposed to treating muslims according to the muslim principles. There is no guarantee that our civilization, as we know it, will be extant 100 years from now. If we do not rein in the leftists – democrats, liberals and the mainstream media, we will lose the western civilization.

      • patriotusa2

        Yes, indeed we shall, and we are in the process of losing it now. Good post!

      • IzlamIsTyranny

        Persia is a perfect example, Lebanon is a more recent example. Wherever pi$$lam spreads, freedom and democracy die.

    • Rob Porter

      Believe me, they are stupid enough, ignorant and politically correct enough to do so – and I am already considering my options regardinq where I might need to move. A grandfather with two children, 7 & 8, in my permanent custody, I already don’t want them subjected to an appalling sex education curriculum out of which I cannot opt (in this wondrous democracy!) and my bet is that in a short time courses in Islam will be introduced. As a friend recently said, in the next ten years all women will be wearing hijabs and we’ll have sharia. Sorry folk, but this has degenerated into one of the dumbest societies on earth. It would welcome Angela Merkel as a hero!

      • IzlamIsTyranny

        You’re a good man for taking care of your grandchildren.

        • Rob Porter

          Thanks, I don’t have family here, am widowed, and if I didn’t so this they’d land up in a foster home – and nowadays what in Canada constitutes a ‘family’ is something I cannot risk.

          • IzlamIsTyranny

            The US is only better off now because we have Trump.

          • Rob Porter

            I agree. As Pamela Geller has said, you have “dodged the bullet” and I’m very happy for you and the U.S., but it’s evident that after 8 years of disastrous Muslim/Communist/leftist rot you will need to fight for it and against a disgusting leftist-liberal garbage heap. They are seriously sick.

      • Darryl R Taylor

        Feel free to leave, you faithless B____.

        The only problems that we’ll have in Canada with Muslims will be if idiots insists on widening the gulf between them and the rest of the world’s population.

        People who identify as Canadian Muslims are solid members of their communities, and more importantly, are our eyes upon and ambassadors to the rest of Islam.

        The refugees are well screened, and have fled from fundamentalists of their own faith, so they should be relatively safe (there is no such thing as completely safe, the *sshole on Parliament Hill in 2014 was a crazy Frenchma.. er, Quebecois, and had been thrown out of Mosques for being a nut bar).

        THE ONLY REAL DANGER is if Canadians start to act like a certain neighbouring country that does not have a tradition of inclusion and courtesy, and drive our own citizens to start identifying more as Muslims and count “Canadian” as nothing.

        Again, feel free to leave, blessings on you and your family, but get the hell out if you ain’t got the b*lls to take a chance on being decent to new folks.

        • Rob Porter

          Darry, you are just another apathetic, complacent, fast asleep Canadian, oblivious to what is going on around them. Think what you like, apart from a political science degree that creates in me political awareness and interests I have, I’ve read a considerable amount of the Koran and over years studied Islam’s brutal campaigns of expansion, conquest and subjugation, and know that in the minds of serious Muslims they are still at war – and in statements have made this clear. This ‘warfare’ was manifested in 9/11 and all the mass murders by Muslims in Paris, Nice, Brussels, Berlin, Mumbai, Fort Hood, San Bernardino, Orlando, Sidney and Melbourne, the two Canadians soldiers in Quebec and Ottawa, the ‘Toronto 18’ who had planned to murder thousands.

          There have been more than 30,000 jihad attacks since 9/11 – but sleep on, Darry, I’m sure that you like millions of Canadians will find an explanation that gives you comfort and studiously avoids harsh reality.

          Regarding the neighbour next door, at last it has awoken from 8 years of idiocy and is taking steps to protect itself from a savage, hate-filled, bigoted and xenophobic ideology.

          As to leaving, if gross Canadian stupidity leads it down the drain, I will just happily leave la-la-land.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Please, consider leaving early so as to reduce the total weight of the commodity in question, it is rude to drag everyone else down and then decide to go.

          • Rob Porter

            Please grow up and mature sufficiently to pull your self-deluding head out of the sand.

        • Merchantseamen

          Darry…Then WHY pray tell do they want to criminalize a word like Islamophobia?

          Islam: submission (to the will of God) The religious faith of Muslims
          including belief in Allah as the sole deity and Muhammad as his prophet.
          phobia: fearing, fear, flight as akin to flee, be frightened;
          inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object or class of
          objects. Islamophobia: Notice…Islam is NOT a race therefore you can’t
          be a racist. Phobia is a fear of a class of objects. You could class
          radical Muslim terrorists as objects to fit phobia if you like.
          Therefore if you criminalize the word Islamophobia you will be
          prosecuted and imprisoned for having an irrational fear of a religious
          faith that translates into SUBMISSION. However I understand that
          Islamophobia is a made up word……by Muslims. Hmmmmmmmm……….?

          Maybe if you look in the mirror you may be part of the problem?

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Well, if there were a motion that was actually a law that criminalized the word ‘Islamophobia’, it would be very interesting to see anyone try to explain the law without using the word.

            The motion is to examine the very real problem of people acting irrationally out of fear of ALL Muslims, which ironically is exactly what the terrorists want.

            Consider taking some remedial classes in English grammar, critical thinking, and think about whether or not there are multiple interests stirring the pot in Canadian perception of things, not just the very real and very dangerous Mujahadeen recruiters and propagandists.

          • Merchantseamen

            Sorry Darry, Looking down your nose at me does not help your position. I copied it right out of the dictionary word for word. Islamophobia is a made up word. Every time I see middle eastern types I cast a suspicious eye on them and ready for fight or flight. It is called being a human and self preservation. I would do the same in New York, L.A. and Chicago as well as on U. S. College Campuses this day and age. I don’t trust the leftists in this country as well as the Arabs. I visited most Middle East countries in my career. As for critical thinking? YOU operate a 54,000 ton tanker with 350,000 barrels of product and tell me you are not thinking critical 24/7.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            “Every time I see middle eastern types I cast a suspicious eye on them and ready for fight or flight.”

            You do realize that that could almost be a textbook case of what the term ‘Islamophobia’ should mean, right?

            And I’m going to try and not be rude about it, but I do have to point out again: The motion was to examine ways to eliminate systematic racism and discrimination, including Islamophobia.

            Whether it turned out that the action eventually taken were to be so poorly worded and implemented that it would become illegal to point out the very ugly parts of literal and fundamentalist Islam (which properly would make it also illegal to talk sh*t about any religion, which would make members of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster insufferable, and Scientologists absolutely horrifying), or if it were actually something useful in blocking viral hysteria whether natural in cause or used by special interests as part of power games…

            The word ‘Islamophobia’ is not going to be banned, please re-read what you wrote both times.

            With no sarcasm at all, I wish you the best of possible fortunes throughout your professional career, and a retirement with a flawless record.

          • Merchantseamen

            Darryl. Point taken and understood. Still have disagreement but understood. That’s what debate is all about. However, I have been “over there” and they are not a nice people so to speak. Granted this was the 70’s. In retrospect I did not feel much safer in New York City in those same years.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Without having traveled widely, I must agree to a point.

            Even while arguing against the hysteria that I see in Canada increasingly (I pay attention to the NCCM hate crime tracker, it’s interesting to note when there have been “spikes”), specifically an indiscriminate labeling of all Muslims (and brown folks in general) with the same tags as the worst of the Mujihadeen, I am aware of just how bad both those groups are and of the aspects of the cultures that are not compatible with our Western values.

            The Mujihadeen are religious zealots hopped up on orally administered meth, running on a sleep dep, battle and delusional frenzy that I hope never to see, being able to treat human beings like meat but with hatred added into the mix.

            Among the rest, I can think of the way in which people of my youth would “think”, the sort that give honest working folk with sunburned necks a bad name, and then add in poverty, fanaticism, and a lack of respect for things outside of a very narrow view.

            The challenge is to not allow them to bring their world into our own, while not allowing ours in the process of becoming ready to stand against theirs to become a blue eyed and paler reflection.

            We may have to fight to preserve our culture into the future, but we also have to preserve what makes our culture worth fighting for.

            (it’s a shitty time to be a moderate, I get to argue with both sides and I’m not sure if I am more tired of people who are proud of guns that they should not have been allowed to have in the absence of parents who could teach them respect for firearms, or of peaceful people who have turned their “peaceful” nature into a uniform while working on becoming weaponized passive aggression, in a way that is uniquely Canadian as near as I can tell)

            Through it all, there is that annoying thing that it is sometimes hard to read someone of a different ethnicity or culture, and to tell who is a potential threat (the dangerous ones always seem to be 12 year olds in adult bodies, I suspect because they do not have enough respect for their mothers in that patriarchal of a society), and who is actually a regular guy putting on a stern face so that the “white infidels” won’t push them around.

  • Dave Mc

    The next step is to prohibit citizens from saying things about islam which could be considered neutral. Next year, maybe.

    • SRN99

      No one can stop me mocking Mohammad this worthless pedophile fake prophet

  • Tm.

    Canadians best mobilize and vote in better leader when elections come around. Time to sit around and wish is over.

    • Rob Porter

      Don’t delude yourself, Canadians won’t do anything to oppose this. It’s not in their DNA, roll over and play dead is! The gutsy Ezra Levant, Faith Goldy, Brian Lilley and a few others and a rarity.

    • Catti

      If you think Canada will still have fair, democratic elections when Junior’s *official* term is finished, think again. He and his moslem overlords have plenty of time to impose “electoral reforms” which will guarantee a perpetual dictatorship for himself. He might even take on the title ‘Ayatollah’ just like his idols in Iran.

      • timbo

        Thankfully this electoral reform mission was recently abandoned. Unfortunately we still have the threat of muslim hate speech to contend with. Nobody around here cares. It’s sad.

        • Darryl R Taylor

          You’re really passionate about being able to say what you want about Muslims, eh?

          So, are they all evil, then?

          Is it ok when someone pushes a woman with a baby in her arms down, because they’ve heard all about how she’s part of an invasion that will take everything over, set up rape camps, and the rest of that twaddle?

          What if the baby’s head hits the ground?

          Come on, tell me what you really think, I’m curious.

    • We had one, but they didn’t like his hair!

  • vercingetorix

    What do non-muslim Canadians think about this?

    • Dano50

      As one, we’re screwed.

      Who’d have every thought you could go to jail for saying something like, “Two Muslims and a camel walk into a bar…”

      Brooks, a small Alberta town I grew up near, is bout 10 thousand people.

      They’ve had a larger Muslim population since the early 90’s because a Saudi company bought the local beef slaughtering plant and a few years ago there was a documentary about Brooks being the “Town of 1000 Hellos”- meaning “Hello” is said in a whole bunch of languages because the town is a “Proud example of multiculturalism.”

      I moved away before this happened but still have family and friends there, and they said the documentary is a piece of propaganda garbage. Except for not being assaulted when they enter, the cops consider the slaughter plant a No Go Zone.

      Stabbings happening there on a regular basis are not investigated, or even reported in the news.

      Muslim boys steal things, expecially from convenience stores left, right and center.

      And women and girls are scared to go anywhere alone, getting called some version of infidel sluts all the time.

      A friend of mine said he’s had to give girls rides home several different times. Once two teen girls were partially cornered by several Muslim male adults, trying to “coax” them into their vehicle and my buddy stopped and asked if the teens need a ride.

      He said they were so scared/relieved, even though they had no idea who he was, they bolted into his truck.

      • Mahou Shoujo

        The lies of muslim enablers will cause Canada a lot of trouble, The next pat will be when the indian act is expanded to allow for payments to muslim colonists.

      • IzlamIsTyranny

        I used to know a pretty Jewish woman from Iran. She stated that following the Islamic revolution there stealing from their family store became commonplace and the all muslum police deliberately did little to stop it, which is why her entire family left the Iranian Repugnant — after selling their store, properties and possessions for less than they were worth.

        • Lodesman


    • Mahou Shoujo

      Think? Most Canadians do not think, they do as they are told, a very meek and submissive bunch.

  • Hook

    I still can’t get it through my head how Canadians voted in this Village Idiot they have for a PM.
    No mention of anti semitism as a hate crime I suppose ?

    • Mahou Shoujo

      No, the legislation is so stupidly and widely defined that it allows for the overlords to decide what will be prosecute and what will not be.

    • freewoman

      it’s women and gay men voting for a pretty face

      • Rob Porter

        Some genuine truth to this.

      • IzlamIsTyranny

        He’s very photogenic. He should have been a fashion model or gay pr0n actor not a PM,

        • Darryl R Taylor

          So, you were a fan of the previous guy who constantly looked like a disappointed pig?

          If you’re gossiping about his looks, while pretending to be “defending” against fundamentalist Islam, you probably missed out on the same career path that you just suggested, I could just see the niche marketing:

          “A Bunghole Called Mecca: They could not resist it’s pull, and none returned who once set forth on THAT pilgrimage.”

    • Because too many Canadians themselves live in the same village (thanks to a leftist brainwashing education).

      • Darryl R Taylor

        Yo, do you know what the name of the damn nation means, by any chance?

    • Darryl R Taylor

      Anti Semetism is at a fairly low ebb at the moment, although the final legislation should be phrased so as to properly protect any ethnic, religious, or other identifiable grouping within the Canadian public, while still allowing for the exercise of common sense.

      And we voted him in because Harper was dismantling key portions of our regulatory framework in favour of a single industry, had dubious motivations given that for hobbling our water and environmental monitoring programs, destroying irreplaceable DFO and freshwater libraries, weakening our Charter, and generally having no respect for the evolution of the country.

      I’ll bet Trudeau has a higher IQ than yourself, and loves being underestimated because of his appearance.

      • ninetyninepct

        That “single industry” kept Canada from a financial collapse caused by American Liberal incompetence.

        “destroying irreplaceable DFO and freshwater libraries” – pictures of useless copies of records that had been digitized and were being recycled to make room in Government libraries. This “news report” was one more example of Trudeau’s manipulation of the Canadian Media that is happening daily.

        I don’t know how monitoring jihadist terrorists would be “weakening our Charter”. Police now use technology to create fake cell towers just to monitor our cell phone conversations. Try to keep up with developments.

        • Darryl R Taylor

          In order:
          1) Why was it that Alberta just had a large spike in unemployment figures in the last couple of years, if not for the fact that over focus on a single commodity that is also one of the main fighting points between international factions, rather than diversification and long term planning?

          2) I don’t have to be a fan of Trudeau’s to be a fan of hard copy of vital data representing upwards of a half century of accumulated historical data, particularly as digital data is incredibly easy to destroy or alter, even if the storage medium is not rendered obsolete as technology outpaces the capacity of anyone to transfer the data (qv microfiche)

          I taught myself to read before I was taught the alphabet, make hard copy of any information that seems important to me, including binding certain documents in to book form by hand, and in any operation involving more than two people that I participate in such as organizing public safety and emergency procedures for small music festivals, I insist on all pertinent data being in BOTH hard copy and digital form.

          The hard copy has turned out to be important, critically so in a certain instance.

          So could publicly accessible data on the most important compound on the planet, that was rendered inaccessible by a PM who issued gag orders on government scientists.

          3) Bill C-51 is dubious, specifically because of portions that are vague in interpretation, even if a given government is perfect at some point (not happening), there is a constant threat of a not-so-user-friendly government coming into power, given the nature of “power” this is actually somewhat more than constant, which is why the Charter is primarily concerned with the protection of citizens from the government itself.

          It’s why the US included their second amendment (although few actually understand that much of that Constitution, like our own, was predicated on a civilian populace being actively engaged in monitoring of the government, and in both countries have slowly been bought out by the descendants of the financiers that the War of Independence was really about on both sides).

          Look up Edgar Schmidt, 2011, Ministry of Justice, it seems like nothing and about technicalities, but we need more men like that fellow in Ottawa.

  • Shuali

    I sincerely hope that Trump kicks Trudeau’s little ass hard on several issues including this one and also the accepting Syrian ‘refugees’ that the US rejects. Canada’s only hope is to put the Liberals out of power in the next election or at least ensure that the polls create a minority Liberal government.

    • Mahou Shoujo

      The only hope Canada has, is for America to lay down some guidelines pertaining to freedom in every form, shari’a is not Canadian, trudeau, the muslim, is pushing hard to make it.

      • Dorrie

        America did that over 200 years ago and it’s called the Constitution.

        • Mahou Shoujo

          It wasn’t until 1982 that trudeau’s father Pete Trudeau, who was prime minster at eh time, repatriated the Canadian Constitution.

          • Dorrie

            Well he sure didn’t instill it into his baby boy! :-

          • Mahou Shoujo

            The father was bad, the kid is stupid.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Multiple degrees, and a better understanding of the structure of the Constitution of Canada and the ideals that it was meant to enshrine than the majority of the would-be US Confederates that seem to be hanging out here.

            If you are so much brighter, why aren’t you already in Ottawa, hmmm?

          • Dorrie

            So you really like Trudeau’s ignorance, eh?

          • Darryl R Taylor

            I’ll answer that question when you answer this one:

            “Have you been caught f*cking sheep yet?”


            tip: Do NOT try to trip me up with entry level logical fallacies, my hobby is watching Ezra Levant videos with my critical thinking and logical fallacy “cheat sheets” in arm’s reach, playing “Whose Fallacy Was That Anyway”.

            If a figure is in a position of power and you are not certain of their goals, or their intelligence, assume that they are at least bright enough to maneuver to that position, and know a few things that you might not.

            If their goals turn out to be in line with your own values and those of your nation, it is best not to underestimate their intelligence and so hamper those aims by your own ignorance.

            If their goals turn out to be flat out evil and insane, or at least bad enough that they have to be stopped somehow, assume that they are at least as bright as you are, more intelligent than you are, and stupid like Forest Gump, and analyze everything through all three lenses until you have evidence narrowing down the options.

            Personally I try not to think that I know someone until I’ve looked them in the eye while talking to them, seen them fully relaxed, and have seen them under stress.

      • Darryl R Taylor

        Bull, and the US Republic DOES NOT get to dictate anything to the Dominion of Canada,


        US, Sharia, what ever the f*ck, they do not supercede our own laws, and I would fight to keep it that way, even if I don’t agree with the bulk of what I am seeing on this page and similar ones elsewhere.

    • Rob Porter

      Yes, I too hope Thump kicks Trudeau’s miserable “little ass – hard”! Trudeau welcoming Trump’s Muslim rejects won’t sit well with Trump when he onsiders the border implications. Watch the Canadian howls as border entry tightens and the border becomes considerably less pourous! Politically there is none of the hope to which you allude. Just consider this, there isn’t a conservative individual let alone ‘leader’ capable of kicking out the Liberals. There is barely a distinction between the modern Canadian Conservatives and the Liberals. Rona Ambrose, Patrick Brown, I die laughing in convulsions! Canadians as a society are now so liberal and ‘devoid of belief in anything much anymore’ (as Canada’s leading sociologist said on tv many years ago), so apathetic and complacent, that they couldn’t and won’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag.

  • Joensanford

    Moose limbs are mostly peaceful and cooperative as long as they are in the minority. Let them gain a majority and they will impose their culture upon you. See Dearbornistan Michigan.

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      See Lebanon for an even more striking example. Beirut was once called the Paris of the Mid-East, but no more, and not ever again. Lebanon is now another typical, religious apartheid muslum state.

  • christian vidal

    How utterly strong they despise and hate us, only the stupid leftists that are daily

    brainwashed by the enemedia and the educational system cannot understand this

    common sense, so ban all muzzies from the US shut down all mosques for ever. Don’t

    forget when the twin towers collapsed 1 billion of their kind were dancing and chanting in

    the streets worldwide. They are our deadliest enemies since the inception. Their only

    goal is the erasement of the western and jewish civilizations.

  • Mahou Shoujo

    All Canadian political parties have become shimmies to islam, everyone, liberal, ndp, conservative , the lot, bow to there islamic overlords, with the conservatives being the worst as they are taking obama’s repressive and ignorant policies to make them Canadian law.

    • clearsighted

      Didn’t you mean Trudeau’s liberals?

      • Mahou Shoujo

        Them too, but all threes major parties are in submission to islam, including the now disgraced conservatives.

        • clearsighted

          How disheartening. Wonder if they will acknowledge that such a law would violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by including the sunset provision required by the Charter which limits the duration of laws which violate the Charter to 5 years. If they fail to include the language, a person charged with violating the law could argue it is, in effect, unconstitutional. If they do include the language, then the law will be upheld by the courts but they will be admitting that they are violating the Charter’s free speech rights. Maybe that could have some interesting political consequences.

          • Mahou Shoujo

            Sooner or later people are going to get tired of all this islam manure being plastered everywhere. The backlash will be nasty.

          • Dorrie

            Yes they will, but if even the conservatives in Canada are bowing to Islam, by the time they get tired of it, it will be too late and Canada will be under Sharia.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Where exactly are you seeing this happening in Canada?

          • Dorrie

            I have Canadian friends. Trudeau just invited “refugees” into Canada – as many as can get there… *SMH*

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Do you mean the “refugees” who have generally spent 1-3 years in UN refugee camps, were vetted by highly trained and experienced intelligence agents before setting foot in North America in one-on-one interviews in addition to the thorough background checks, and final clearance checks before entering the country?

            Damn, that’s some deep cover.

            And here I was thinking that any country that would leave people fleeing from Islamic Mujihadeen fanatics to join the floods that have overwhelmed neighbouring nations and that have brought out the worst in all parties, might be a bit callous.

            Maybe I was confused by the strange notion that when dealing with a threat from a direction that has no national or genetic identity but is rather (as some strategists have put it) the enemy in a “war of philosophy”, being a memetically propagated ideology which in many ways a variant of fascism, that by having countries of the West that are geographically insulated from the main flood of bodies taking in some of the people and treating them as we would hope to be treated ourselves in such a situation, that they might actually serve to undermine the fanaticism of people like those that they fled.

            It’s so hard to sift through all of the data and viewpoints, it’s almost as if there are multiple interests manipulating opinions on all sides into simple conclusions that take the place of critical reasoning, and practices such as regularly examining assumptions.

            That wouldn’t (of course) be the case in a country where chapters of “The Soldiers of Odin” who call themselves after a Finnish organization comprised of a fair number of neo-Nazis, wear the same uniform, and use almost an identical set of bylaws, are springing up and doing “neighbourhood watch” patrols to keep things safe in ways that “the police cannot”, because there is NO problem whatsoever with large groups composed of white supremacists, bikers, and generally rough folks who specifically are opposed to Islam marching around “keeping the peace” when their own bylaws specifically forbid them from “interfering with the activities of other clubs or organizations”.

            Faschists and Jihadis, almost sounds like a table top board game, and I don’t want either group gaining ground in my country, Canadians are mannerly, courteous, and many of us still know how to fight, the politeness is a test.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Yep, the hicks, psychopaths, neo-nazis, vigilantes, they’re a spoiling to rip the country apart, in fact they’re already drawing lines between themselves and everyone else who doesn’t feel like the Muslims down the street are a problem.

            (Good thing that there are groups like the Soldiers of Odin to split communities and intimidate Canadian Muslims enough that their sons will grow up hating the nation that was supposed to be their home, eh?)

          • Rob Porter

            Go read the Charter. I have on at least two occasions, and see the holes in it. It is totally over-rated as a document. Someone will almost certainly use the Charter to justify Islam and, in any event, who will use even the Charter to justify fight an ‘anti-Islamophobia’ bill?

          • Catti

            The charter is as full of holes as a mohammedan’s panties. We can thank Castro’s cuck Turdeau Senior for deliberately creating these holes. The one that would affect any constitutional challenge to their Sharia blasphemy law is the clause allowing politicians to suspend the charter on a whim. They would use that clause to enact the Sharia blasphemy law in the first place. And constitutional challenges against lieberal policies are nearly impossible due to the fact that most of Canada’s judiciary are pro-Islamoliberal biased.

          • Rob Porter

            Got to agree, not least in regard to Canada’s judiciary. Over very young grandchildren I through tragedy have in my custody, I was in court on more than 22 occasions in 3 1/2 years and discovered that most of the judges – almost the entire lot – do not read one’s court documents. They are lazy, negligent and do car much, so just ‘wing it’ and in the process talk some utter garbage. On my last occasion I had the good fortune to get a really good female judge by the name of Woodly. What a pleasure, for the first time there was a judge who had read my documents, over-ruled the CAS and others involved, and awarded me custody of the kids.

          • Lodesman

            Quite a heartening story: Well done! But it is a serious concern if some of the judiciary are not diligent. There has to be assessment of them but even that could lead down the wrong path. If we have judges that are not up the job or too lazy or biassed we are done for as a society..

          • Rob Porter

            Lodesman, the courts really are in a bad way. A lawyer confirmed for me my experience, that many judges don’t read one’s court documents. When you are dealing with a Children’s Aid Society, it’s evident that most judges just defer to the CAS lawyer. Why? Because they are too lazy to read your documents and it makes life simple for them. However, as you can appreciate, this allows the CAS lawyer to determine what eventuates in court, and this works against those trying to get justice in court such as acquiring custody of children. At first, out of ignorance of the system I made mistakes and the CAS caught me for a sucker, but then I clued onto their dishonesty taking place. After that when brought Court Endorsements (court orders) to sign and I didn’t agree with what had been decided (without my consultation, all hell broke loose because wild horses couldn’t convince me to sign. The CAS got infuriated and I couldn’t care less because in return I got infuriated. When they lied I informed sitting judges they were lying and incompetents. They’d got away with their garbage for years and suddenly here was a man who refused to buckle and in court told the judges when they were lying. They hated it and hated me, but I couldn’t care less. Then when a judge in his ‘Reasons for Judgment and Endorsements’ wrote total nonsense, I wrote and told him so and told him it was his duty to correct his disgusting errors. One things is certain, lawyers think they have the right to slander someone opposing them, so the way to respond is just tell them what liars and fabricators they are, and pick apart their fabrications. A very nice Peel CAS worker eventually told me I was the other CAS’s “worst nightmare”. I take pride in that. Then a very pleasant notary who registers court documents for hearings, told me she’d worked in that court for ten years and was delighted to at last see someone beating up on the CAS who, she said, she knew had been getting away with lies and deceptions, and messing around members of the public. On this stuff I could almost write a book.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Yo, it isn’t a blasphemy law, it isn’t even a law yet, and the judiciary are not pro-Islam, they’re just not prone to letting rhetoric drive them into a self fulfilling paranoid fantasy.

          • Catti

            I didn’t state that a law was in force at this time, in fact I’ve corrected many others on social media who think it is. These so-called motions are meant to test the political waters and give the Islamists and their liberal/NDP enablers time to concoct a bill that will be legally bullet proof. And these motions are being passed unanimously by all parties, so guess what will happen when a bill is finally tabled?

            And yes the judiciary ARE pro-Islam, because they’re all leftists. There have been numerous cases in Canada since the 1980’s where moslem miscreants got lighter sentences and acquittals because of their religious affiliation. In one example of the 1990’s, a Quebec judge gave a moslem child sex predator a lighter sentence because he raped the children anally, thus preserving their virginity. That comes straight from Sharia law, where victims are blamed for “tempting” the rapist, while the rapist’s actions are considered justifiable. So, good luck with a constitutional challenge to any blasphemy law the liberals choose to enact. And such challenges take years to go through the courts, with the law remaining in force for those years.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Ok, that judge isn’t a “leftist”, just most likely an idiot (I could vaguely see a judge shaving a week off of a sentence like that if they figured that the culprit was at least being considerate by their own standards, but that is a mind set that I don’t want to simulate in my own head).

            Likewise, a judge who was actively leaning towards Islam and eventual Sharia Law would not count as “left” by any stretch of the word.

            In fact, to the point that the “Left/Right” scale has any relevance, a proponent of Sharia Law would count as being on the Right of the spectrum, given the relative black and white nature of the laws involved without allowances or concessions for specific situations, and with significant retributive penalties.

            The Muihadeen are the extreme Right of Islamic culture, being the militant and functionally fascist segment of their extended culture that insist on literal adherence to tradition, and the universal imposition of their values.

            It might also be worthy of note that Stephen Harper effectively ripped holes in Section 1 of the constitution with Bill C-51 (which is offensive specifically because it’s powers can be used by whichever government comes into power, and Charter rights are specifically meant to protect citizens from abuses of government, however those right might be abused in practice), pushed laws through without allowing for proper review by the opposition parties using the Omnibus Bill format to overwhelm them, and had a hand in systemic problems within the Ministry of Justice as revealed by whistleblower Edgar Schmidt in 2011.

            That is beside the proroguing of Parliament to avoid an opposition Coalition government (a truly Canadian tradition, and one that once was key to keeping us from becoming a functionally two party system. It maintained a balance by ensuring that a minimum of three parties were rotating around a relatively moderate center), and somehow magically getting away with being found in contempt of Parliament by simply stating publicly that the public “doesn’t care”.

            Definitely, please do not be blaming Harper on the “Left”, unless you are using the term to refer to the tolerance of actions that would have been unthinkable a decade before, and which any “Right” worthy of the term should have opposed brutally and dramatically.

            (I also wouldn’t define what he was up to as being “conservative” in any sense meaningful to Canada, except purely economically, and even then his decisions likely would have been somewhat different if he were from a small to medium sized family farming background as opposed to being a buttlicker from the oil patch sector (who at least a few people at TransCanada found contemptible prior to him gaining power, and probably still did even as he changed policies in the favour of their industry))

            To be absolutely clear here, from my perspective the judiciary of Canada properly should be as moderate as possible, without any bias towards either social humanism at the expense of tolerating behavior that harms society, or unforgiving wrath of God style “throw the book at ’em for jaywalking) justice.

            Canada is supposed to be sensibly tolerant, open to whatever isn’t harming anyone, but with very firm lines that are crossed at one’s own risk.

            The “Left/Right” over-simplification will likely lead eventually to situations like the US just had, where they had to choose between a narcissistic Great Pumpkin with dubious affection for his countryfolk, and a snake in Democrat’s clothing who was an active participant in the joint US/Canada action in 2009 that should be a shame to most of us, and who probably has a neurosis about the colour blue for dresses.

            That same false dillemma is actually the gravest threat as far as anything goes with the Canadian response and policies regarding the worldwide Mujihadeen expansionist/terrorist problem, as with this motion it disallows for any moderate stance, and personally I don’t like either of the two options for a future Canada that I am seeing:

            A fascistic corporatocracy with a focus on non-renewable resource exports and embroiled in a war that will NEVER end until the last human that could ever possibly identify as Muslim is dead, or a nation of hippies whose bleeding hearts are only matched by their bleeding bungholes from the daily “Sodomization for Allah” that a methamphetamine analog crazed Imam thought would be a good idea.

            No thank you, I won’t bow my head to authoritarian paranoia that punishes Canadian Muslim citizens for the deeds of their distant brethren, nor will I push up my butt for religious zealots who kill their own kind over trivialities of sectarian doctrine.

            I’m egalitarian, I’ve got a middle finger for both sides.

            To me, that’s Canadian, but you are welcome to have a different opinion as long as it’s doesn’t interfere with my right to be apathetic, I literally would fight to the death for the right of myself and others to not have to care.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            Your logic and understanding of law is twisted, please, don’t ever talk about the Charter in a public forum again, ok?

          • clearsighted

            Really? What breathtaking arrogance! I note, with particular interest, that, aside from your ad hominem attack on me, your post is utterly devoid of any facts to demonstrate how anything in my post is incorrect in any way. Where did you get your Canadian law degree? Mine was conferred by the University of Windsor Law School in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. I studied under Walter Tarnopolsky, one of the scholars involved in drafting the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

          • clearsighted

            Really? What breathtaking arrogance! I note, with particular interest, that, aside from your ad hominem attack on me, your post is utterly devoid of any facts to demonstrate how anything in my post is incorrect in any way. Where did you get your Canadian law degree? Mine was conferred by the University of Windsor Law School in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. I studied under Walter Tarnopolsky, one of the scholars involved in drafting the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

          • Darryl R Taylor

            A) A motion is not a law, with your pedigree I would hope that you would be aware of that.

            B) See (A) above.

            A motion to condemn all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination, start a study on it, and start scrutinizing hate crime reports with a wider focus on context goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms how, exactly?

            Or are you going to say that you consider Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada covering Public Incitement of Hatred is unconstitutional, and that even aside from legislation, that it is cool to participate in activities and discourse of the sort that almost inevitably ends up with rogue vigilantism/attacks on a specific group, lacking firm evidence that such is definitively in the public interest?

            What is your position on the Canadian internment camps for Japanese during WW2?

            As things currently stand, depending on exactly what they come up with, it might be that there will be some controls on the actions of politicians that would take into account the standards of the “Reasonable person” as they are used in many cases involving 219(1) covering criminal negligence, to prohibit use in political campaigns of “wedge tactics” that could endanger a segment of the public, such as Stephen Harper’s clearly politically motivated use of the TOTAL NON-ISSUE of banning the wearing (by something like 0.03% of the population) of the niqab during the citizen’s oath ceremony after having had their identities rather clearly determined prior to the oath, which had been already shot down by the Supreme Court of Canada, and that as any REASONABLE person could predict was coincident with an immediate increase in Muslim directed hate crimes in Canada, that exceeded any statistical anomaly in three years other than the day in 2014 where Harper decided to characterize two insane Quebecois operating in isolation (one of whom had been thrown out of Mosques as being a nutbar, I have this from reliable and disparate sources) as “Islamic terrorists”.

            There is some interesting debate about whether this would have been at the advisement of Australian national Lynton Crosby who has been running around the Commonwealth for well over a decade advising conservative candidates for nation’s leadership on how to best split off and consolidate their core voting base by using basic human instincts to garner hysteria about immigration (in the case of one Australian election, actually fabricating media coverage), which as with the case of David Cameron of the UK in 2005 generated isolationist nationalistic fervor which actually creates exactly the conditions for the hatred of immigrants for those around them that their adherents purport to be defending against.

            This works beautifully in the eyes of the most insidious of the fundi Imams who operate with the terrorist organizations worldwide, as it literally drives recruits from moderate Islamic sects and backgrounds towards their end of things, the functional “Right Wing” of Islam (who, by the way, happily kill rather brutally any of their extended faith who are not completely in agreement with them, most likely calling them something akin to “Libtard” but with religious overtones, much as I am certain many people in this forum would like to do to me by now).

            I do have my own biases, which if you do indeed have a law degree you may be able to understand, even if not agree with: I despise Ezra Levant’s use of logical fallacies and rhetoric, which are particularly worthy of disdain by someone with a degree in Law, because he knows full well what he is doing, and willfully abuses the law in pursuit of his own aims, which (purely speculatively) I suspect are at least partially informed by the unfortunate circumstance of his names being part of his self identity at some point.

            Fallacious logic in the information age is particularly pernicious because it is possible to cause multiple repetitions of the same data propagate through seemingly unrelated sources to reinforce false conclusions, and fallacies are literally addictive, bringing a dopaminergenic reward each time a false conclusion “wins”, even inside someone’s own mind, reinforcing neural pathways to be incongruous with reality.

            My own beliefs would demand a special category of crime for the willing practice of Agnotology, but only within an extremely airtight set of definitions and criteria, with safeguards put in place to prevent it’s abuse by people like Mr Levant, who would be the primary object of such legislation.

            If you have such a great degree, and a solid grasp of the Charter (complete with all of the loopholes, which unfortunately are needed to allow the dang thing to “breathe”, else it would be suffocating to be constrained by it), how about you start looking at what could be done to cool the embers of what is shaping up to be a pretty epic world war that once started and committed to could only ever be “won” by the complete and utter extermination of every human being who could ever likely identify as being “Muslim” in a world in which the prior existence of something called “Islam” had not been removed from every single place in which a child descended from it could find it, and do so within the necessary freedoms guaranteed to all of us in a country that traditionally provided the best peacekeepers and diplomats of the West?

            Because that is really going to be needed in the next couple of years.

            (note: tolerance and loving peace does not automatically mean “stupid”, see other replies of mine in this forum about what “I’m sorry” really means, ok?)

          • clearsighted

            It does little to bolster your arguments to engage either in petty ad hominem attacks on my pedigree or in pedantry or in haughty and supercilious condescension. To that point, however, I still have yet to see any response from you to my question regarding where you obtained your Canadian law degree. From your failure to respond, i have inferred that you don’t have one.

            My comments were directed to the MOTION adopted in October, 2016 which addressed only “Islamophobia.” I have not yet commented on Iqbal’s private members bill which was introduced later and which you seem to be referring to. However, Iqbal’s bill was essentially a “clean-up” of the October motion; cleaned up to extend its language beyond the original focus on Islamophobia in the October motion for which it was widely criticized. Unlike a motion, as you surely know, a private member’s bill can become law if passed.

            Apparently, you seem to feel that a veritable deluge of verbosity such as your last post somehow bolsters your arguments. I would submit that they merely dilute and distract, Nevertheless, since you ask, I set forth below my responses to some of the points contained therein:

            1. Do I consider Criminal Code s. 319 as violating the Charter. Yes, for several reasons.

            First, because the Charter specifically protects the freedom of “expression” of opinion, just like the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution, which the Charter sought to emulate. It should be self-evident that we don’t need constitutional protections to protect speech which is not offensive and which everyone accepts and wants to hear. In contrast, constitutional protections ARE required to protect expressions of opinion which are offensive, including hateful speech, and which the majority does not want to hear. If offensive speech is not protected, we suffer a tyranny of the majority and no speech is protected. Freedom of speech and expression is then dead.

            Second, s. 319 attempts to criminalize speech which might result in “a breach of the breach.” The problem with this language is that it does not distinguish between breaches of the peace committed by the speaker or breaches of the peace which may be committed by listeners opposed to the speaker. This is referred to as the “heckler’s veto.” The speaker’s right to freedom of expression of his opinion is denied because the LISTENERS become violent. We seen many examples of the suppression of free speech in this manner over the last few years, such as at Concordia University where speakers were prevented from speaking by hoodlums and thugs who opposed the speaker engaging in violent behavior and more recent events in the United States at Berkeley and NYU just this week.

            Third, by attempting to define speech as “hate speech”, the government necessarily and unavoidably gets involved in the classification of “speech” by its viewpoint or as it is otherwise known: viewpoint discrimination. It is precisely the purpose of constitutional protections on the freedom of expression of opinion to PREVENT the government from engaging in viewpoint discrimination, i.e. the censorship of speech based on viewpoint. Once you allow censorship based on viewpoint discrimination, you must, of necessity, establish official arbiters of which viewpoints are acceptable and which are not. Whether it is a human rights commission or a court, It should be obvious to the rational mind that such schemes, no matter how well-intentioned are the anathema of freedom of expression.

            Fourth, in the particular case of the focus of the October motion in Parliament on “Islamophobia” and the more recent private member’s bill which is still focused on “Islamophobia” despite the clean-up, we run the risk of viewpoint discrimination and the suppression of the freedom of expression of opinion based on falsehoods and canards not established as law by government. It should not be hard to see the dark places where this could lead. Just read Orwell’s “1984”. In particular, “Islamophobia” is a canard. Most Canadians who fear Islam do not fear Islam because they are hateful, racist, xenophobic bigots. Most Canadians who fear Islam fear it because of the daily news reports of jihad attacks in Canada and throughout the world. They read about dozens murdered in Nice, hundreds machine-gunned and butchered in Paris, Tunisia, Syria, Libya, and Somalia, genocide of Christians throughout the Middle East, murders, bombings, rapes in Sweden, Germany, France, Belgium, Denmark and elsewhere. All of these horrors were and are being committed by people who CLAIM to be acting based on the tenets and teachings of Islam. They see people like Tashfeen Malik who was “vetted” by 5 American agencies and admitted to the United States who then machine-gunned 14 people to death in San Bernardino, CA. To criminalize anyone who expresses an opinion critical of Islam or its doctrines of war against non-Muslims or jihad attacks prevents a free and open and vitally necessary discussion about how to counter these doctrines and fight terrorism inspired by these doctrines.

            PLEASE NOTE: I refer to fear of the doctrines of Islam as a belief system, not Muslims as human beings. There are many Muslims who do not follow the jihad imperative, likely more than do follow or support it. That doesn’t negate the existence of the jihad doctrine nor a reasonable fear of it. To define a well-founded fear of a doctrine of war in which I am the defined enemy and for which there seems to be no end of those willing to commit brutal murder to advance it as racism is the height or Orwellian logic. That is my sincerely held belief and I point this out not because I want anyone to harm any Muslim (I abhor and surely do not advocate violence against any innocent people) rather, I want the government to have a clear-eyed view of the threats we face and the doctrines which give rise to those threats.

            2. Internment camps are irrelevant to the current discussion, particularly because those events occurred long before the Charter was adopted. For the record, however, I believe that in time of war, while my country is under attack and my brothers and sisters are dying to defend it against that attack, the circumstances are different than peacetime and I don’t think that any of us who have enjoyed decades of peacetime on the home front should presume with 20/15 hindsight to judge the morality of what our forefathers did until we have to walk in their shoes.

            3. As to the rest of your very long post, I believe that my comments above should provide adequate insight to my position with respect to most of the issues you raise. In sum, the answer to hateful speech is not censorship but more speech by those of different viewpoints to rebut the speech they oppose. Beware of the mantra of today’s left that “Hate Speech is Not Free Speech.” Speech is either free or it’s not. There is no middle ground.

            Finally, to address the inevitable “Fire!” in a crowded theatre response. In free speech law, speech which is intended to cause IMMINENT, SERIOUS BODILY HARM to the LISTENER or constitutes a criminal offense is generally not protected. So, falsely yelling Fire in a crowded theatre falls in the first category because the obvious effect is to cause persons in the theatre to be injured in a panic. Saying to someone: “Unless you do what I want, I am going to kill you.” constitutes the crime of extortion or threats. In neither case does such speech constitute the expression of opinion. A rule of thumb: If a person stands on a soap box in Hyde Park and says: “I believe the Jews run the world!” That should be protected speech because it is the expression of opinion, hateful and untrue as it may be. If, on the other hand, the speaker pointed at people in the crowd and saids: “You, You, You and You, come with me and let’s go kill some Jews.” That is not protected speech because it isn’t the expression of opinion but incitement to riot, or to murder which are criminal offenses.”

            While some may argue that s. 319 includes defences to hate speech charges, freedom of expression is chilled when the default condition is that you must raise a defence to a criminal indictment rather than be protected from ever being charged at all.

            Protecting Liberty is messy but is never accomplished by depriving others of their liberty. I applaud your acknowledgement of having biases, You are not alone. My hope is that you can resist being seduced by the dark side in your desire to serve the good.

    • Dorrie

      Do you write letters to your representatives? If not, why not? They need to be told how much their constituents disapprove of their radical behavior.

      • Rob Porter

        Dorrie, if I may add my two cents worth. I’ve written to politicians in Ottawa on a few occasions, including Stephen Harper when prime minister, and though courteously and carefully written not once did I receive a response from them. I recently wrote to Trudeau over comments he’d made about Islam and it was no different. Canada has degenerated into a poor excuse for a democracy and this experience highlights how poor it has become; I recently wrote to Senator Mark Rubio concerning his cross examination of Rex Tillerman who Trump wants as Secretary of State, and received from Rubio a letter that did him credit as a politician operating in a proper democracy. I again wrote just to thank him.

        • IzlamIsTyranny

          A US politician answering a letter from a non-voting foreigner that doesn’t happen very often. When I wrote my senators (spit) to complain about the funding of the muslum terrorist outfit known as the Paleswine Authority only one bothered to respond — to lie about the PA.

        • Dorrie

          Rubio wasn’t worth the paper your letter was written on, Rob. He was part of the Gang of Eight who wanted amnesty for all the illegals in this country! THAT is why he didn’t get very far when he ran for POTUS!

          • Rob Porter

            To be honest, I wasn’t impressed with his line of cross examination, so while I wasn’t rude to Rubio, I was quite blunt. He wouldn’t have got my vote, but I do credit him for taking the trouble to write.

    • 1PierreMontagne1

      Quote “All Canadian political parties have become dhimmies to islam”
      You need to expand on that – clearly 51%+ of Canadians have also become Dhimmies and are people who seriously think that allowing Sharia law will make Muslims happy and will keep Canada peacefull.

      • Mahou Shoujo

        There are a lot of stupid people in Canada.


    Basically Sharia in Canada. Ban it here now !

  • Lodesman

    Please define in detail the term and apparent criminal offence “Islamophobia”. If we are to be charged with it, as with other offenses, it has to be included in the Criminal Code. Otherwise how will we know when we are committing the offence of ‘Islamophobia.”

    • Lodesman

      I believe that the Government will find the act of drafting legislation to put “Islamophobia” on the statute books, they will find a) that the obtaining a precise a definition will be close to impossible and b) there will be massive opposition.

  • DancerTiffy

    Then the muslims will be a fully protected class of people—-beyond criticism.
    Everyone else could be criticized, but not the muslims.
    If the canadian people are stupid enough to fall for this one, then they deserve the resulting police state that they will get.
    In europe—RIP, it is illegal to criticize muslims. Last year more than 25,000 people in the UK were arrested and charged with a Hate crime for criticizing the savages.
    I predict that at some point people will get sick and tired or being forced to kiss muslim butt, and they will revolt.
    But, don’t hold your breath, that probably won’t happen.

    Let us not forget the Quebec mosque shooter. #Fundbissonnette

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      “Last year more than 25,000 people in the UK were arrested and charged w/a hate crime for criticizing the savages”. Can the gulags be far off?

  • berserker

    The bill was on my mind when I read about the killings in Quebec. Given what happened, I suspect its passage is now a mere formality.

  • rh2

    TTT ( Traitorous Turd Trudeau) is in bed with Islam and does its bidding. His objective is to turn Canada into a sharia-compliant cesspit. The POS may well succeed in doing so, because Canadian politicians won’t stop him. They are spineless, self-seeking losers, without principles, who are only interested in advancing their crappy careers. So who is there with the gonads and outraged determination to take out Canada’s closet Muslim, Traitorous Turd Trudeau?. . .

  • Dr. Doomsday

    Canada, moving into new realms of suicidal stupidity..

    Liberalism kills..


    Facebook & Wikipedia is doing it with impunity all the time, while occupying a legitimacy position in society globally.
    Moderate Muslim Trump won’t condemn that, as he won’t expose & condemn nor ban Islam.
    Reminds of Trump’s secretary of defense pick James Mattis who supports the Islam empowering 2-state solution in Israel & the catastrophic nuclear Iran-deal.

  • santashandler

    Oh, so Muslims will be granted favored status over Christians and Jews if this passes. Let Canada implode by its own stupidity. And make that “two” walls, one for the Mexican border, and an even more fortified one for the Canadian border.

  • AlgorithmicAnalyst

    They don’t have to worry about Islam, because it is very difficult to injure yourself when pushed off the top of an igloo, if you land in a snowdrift :)

  • Dale

    Islamophobia. Doesn’t phobia mean “to fear”?
    Therefore it seems that some have gotten this all backwards. Those speaking out about the atrocities of the Islam ideology against mankind can hardly be considered to be in fear. Actually it seems more like those hypocrites with their name-calling and made up terms are the real Islamophobics. It is they who are afraid of what might happen to them if they speak the truth and call Islam to task.
    Perhaps we better rearrange the placement of the cart and horse to make sure the cart is not leading…

  • RogerOgden

    Three Guys in San Diego are fighting to stay our of prison for disrespecting Islam. They are working people and don’t have enough money for a good attorney. Their court-appointed attorneys want them just to plead guilty to a felony hate crime.

    • suqsid4

      Hate crime law represents the antithesis of equality.

  • jimmy

    First feminists destroyed families, then masculinity and the innocence of children.

    Next up they are destroying social cohesion through immigration.

    The final step is to ban any free thinking men from speaking out against this with speech codes such as this.

    In England it’s fairly routine for men to be imprisoned for making bda jokes online or for having negative opinions on Islam. One example is here: Note how the policeman in charge unthinkingly used Orwellian language, talking about “hate crimes”. The idea the police and state should care about one’s emotions and prosecute them is the sort of thing feminazis believe.

    Feminism is incompatible in the long run with a free society.

    • DannyOhBoy

      Hey, Jimmy!

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      “Feminism is incompatible in the long run with a free society”. Wow you would fit in to most any islamic pig’s anus state.

  • Andinz

    Soon be like Pakistan. Asia Bibi locked up there for seven years and under sentence of death for blasphemy – insulting the prophet.

    • IzlamIsTyranny

      Can u imagine what her life must be like in a muslum jail as a blasphemer? If she was put in general population her death sentence would be enacted in a Islamabad second (5 hours).

  • Alleged Comment

    You guys better remove this idiot little boy Trudeau. We had a little boy running our country too. He is setting you up for your destruction.

    You have too many young untested little boys running your country that want to please the “hardened” Moslem that would rape their tiny little ass*s if they could.

    • Darryl R Taylor

      Mind your own country, enjoy the police state,vive la EPA, oops, it’s dead, so are all of your parks.

      • Alleged Comment

        No idiot. You have the police state. Cannot even criticize sodomite, bestiality, pedophilia Moslems or face criminal charges by your dumbass child leader up there.

        You are FORCED to take them in. Then soon Sharia law – see idiot?

        • Darryl R Taylor

          The motion to examine systematic racism and discrimination, including “Islamophobia” (I hate that term, and prefer “Mislamic”, it’s cheery like a beauty pageant) is not a law, and is in theory at least, supposed to be compliant with our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including Freedom of Speech.

          It’s mildly annoying when Canadians get worked up excessively from not reading things closely, and possibly risk missing the small chances to ensure that what does pass is relatively insulated from the potential for abuse (and such “whisperers” as there are skulking in the shadows are very skilled at opening the smallest of cracks in legislation, wide open).

          It’s amusing (in a somewhat melancholy way) when someone who bears like all others of his nation some small responsibility for allowing their choice of leaders to come down to an aging idealist-not-quite-hippy, a handful of over-the-top religious fundies, a snake with a lingering distaste for blue dresses, and chooses The Great Pumpkin on Methamphetamine, steps out of the peanut gallery and tries to call a Canadian an idiot.

          (I will be fair, much as with any Western nation much of the choice has been gradually removed from the hands of the public, with half a dozen plus global factions playing a f*cked up end game of RISK with our entire damn species and human dignity, and I AM glad that the Snake didn’t take the seat, her evil would be more insidious and I will never forgive that skank for her role in the joint US/Canada strategic destabilization of Honduras in 2009, a move that seriously undermines to this day the real pride that the respective nations can still hold in their virtues, f*cking psychopathic power mongers eroding the sheer power that can be drawn from unsullied integrity)

  • suqsid4

    Canada’s regime spitting on the graves and honor of every patriot that fought for North America’s liberty.

    Vote out the radical socialists, Canada. They will destroy you.

    • Darryl R Taylor

      My ancestors fought for what became Canada against the revolting colonies, and likely played a part in burning down the original US seat of capital.

      Don’t be trying to rewrite history there, there is a limit to how far the Republic gets to play “Big Brother”, eh?

  • Drew the Infidel

    Why not? He got the idea from Obhammud’s attempts to outlaw the First Amendment, starting with prosecuting that film maker he blamed for Benghazi and having the DOJ monitor Fox News’ James Rosen and his elderly parents with surveillance and wiretaps.

  • Ichabod Crain

    Sign the petition!
    See Faith Goldy’s video and sign the petition at the link below


    Fight or flight ? I’m staying.

  • David C. Telliho

    Goody ! I get to be a criminal in Canada because I distrust and hate Islam. Grateful I`m not Canadian.

    • Darryl R Taylor

      Me too.

      (about you not being Canadian, that is)

      • David C. Telliho

        My post was in ref. to islam. To be clear,Moslems are simply deceived and misled. Islam is an ideology which needs to be addressed and destroyed. Otherwise, I`ve nothing against Canada or their citizens. Hope this clears up any confusion.

  • Stephen Honig

    They’re the next country to fall. Too bad they’re on our border.

  • Rob Porter

    “Canada is inching toward a broadly-based law that would codify
    “Islamophobia” as a hate crime – ‘without even defining Islamophobia or
    demonstrating that it is a phenomenon requiring legal action’!” Yes, and with it’s dimwitted political leadership this has been on the cards for weeks. Islam’s religious phobia, it’s hatred, intolerance and violence is not even considered (it would be ‘Islamophobic’ to do so). With probably the most spineless and stupid media in the Western world and an uncaring, un-observing, apathetic, complacent public, this will become law without even a whimper. Write to newspapers as I have done and your letters doesn’t see the light of day. Write about this matter to a federal politician in Ottawa and you don’t receive a response.

  • GovtGetOffMe!

    Poor Canucks won’t have the guns to protect themselves when this decision bites them in the a$$ down the road.
    Can’t for the life of me understand how they chose Justin Trudeau for PM. Then again, I didn’t understand when Obama became ‘Muslim in Chief’ either.

  • IzlamIsTyranny

    Oh Canada, it was nice knowing ya…

  • All these new “PHOBIA” words have been created by the left and their ilk, as a weapon (just as the word racist) against those of us who disagree with them. We give their language credibility by using them instead of proper words appropriate for the situation.
    Soon a woman will be accused of ‘rapeophobia’ if she complains about Muslim attacks; ‘globeophobia’ if we don’t agree with the ‘NWO’; ‘climatechangeophobia’ if we don’t agree with that scam etc,. The newest word from Germany for those who do not like the refugee invasion is EUROPHOBIA.
    Islamophobia is a ridiculous word; by not agreeing with Islam’s mandate of raping, torture and brutal killing of Christians and other minorities, yes, even children, and trying to conquer the world for Allah, is NOT a phobia, but rather that we disagree with their real intent.
    Turdeau is not fit to be a leader of any country. He has no real education of any kind, is ignorant of history and will throw Canada under the bus if it will gain him popularity across the globe.
    His reckless immigration policy is enough proof for me.
    I must be suffering from Turdeauphobia.

    • Darryl R Taylor

      He has two degrees, did half an engineering degree (ok marks), and was mostly done Environmental Geography as a Master’s degree when he decided that he had to jump into mainstream politics before certain things went too far, probably about 8 years earlier than he had been planning since he was a kid.

      There is a common sense line between spouting off stuff that gets innocent families and people threatened, harassed, or attacked by idiots because they happen to be Muslim Canadians, and being vigilant against Muhajiadis, whether in force or as solitary agents (unless you happen to think that the protection that we need involves the extermination of all bloodlines that could possibly identify with Islam, along with erasure of it’s existence in case a single survivor should decide that there was a debt to be paid for the death of their people).

      I’ll be shaking my head for years at how both the Conservative and the Left parts of Canada’s politics completely dropped the ball on how to use the refugee influx to strategically stimulate the sectors that we need to improve in order for us to take care of our own, while undermining the efforts of the extremist Islamic sects.

  • Schinderhannes Schinderhannes

    Not surprised about the NDP. Nothing new for them to vote for ” Feel Good Issues” This issue is one of ignorance, stupidity, and denial. The Canadian witch hunt has just been turned up a notch. The famous Canadian Inquisition called the Human Rights Commission will now have even a more solid mandate. In this perverse climate of Political Correctness reason and truth are the new terms for intolerance, racism, etc. There is no proof there is any movement to describe ” Islamophobia” .
    Liberal Mantra: ” I don’t know, a proof is a proof. What kind of a proof is a proof? A proof is a proof and when you have a good proof it’s because it’s proven”.-Chretien 2002.

  • Robert Batchelor

    So the definition of Islamophobia is what? Are they going to have a law for Jewishphobia or Christianphobia? These people need to be thrown out of office and placed in padded cells. They’re a danger to themselves.

  • mudflappus

    That Southern border wall is going in. It looks like a Northern wall is looming on the horizon. As long as Canada’s current leaders want to keep one foot in the Americas and the other in Europe, this will be the outcome. The UN is already operating openly there with their shadowy human rights tribunals under the full sanction of the government. What’s left to debate?

  • Cal A. Nomen

    Are they also going to include:


    If so, they need to include these as well:

    Anthrophobia or Anthophobia
    Arachnephobia or Arachnophobia
    Astraphobia or Astrapophobia
    Aviophobia or Aviatophobia
    Basophobia or Basiphobia
    Bromidrosiphobia or Bromidrophobia
    Cainophobia or Cainotophobia
    Cancerophobia or Carcinophobia
    Cenophobia or Centophobia
    Ceraunophobia or Keraunophobia
    Cheimaphobia or Cheimatophobia
    Chrometophobia or Chrematophobia
    Chromophobia or Chromatophobia
    Cleithrophobia or Cleisiophobia
    Clithrophobia or Cleithrophobia
    Cymophobia or Kymophobia
    Cypridophobia or Cypriphobia or Cyprianophobia or Cyprinophobia
    Demonophobia or Daemonophobia
    Dermatosiophobia or Dermatophobia or Dermatopathophobia
    Enosiophobia or Enissophobia
    Erythrophobia or Erytophobia or Ereuthophobia
    Febriphobia or Fibriphobia or Fibriophobia
    Galeophobia or Gatophobia
    Gallophobia or Galiophobia
    Gephyrophobia or Gephydrophobia or Gephysrophobia
    Geumaphobia or Geumophobia
    Gynephobia or Gynophobia
    Haphephobia or Haptephobia
    Hemophobia or Hemaphobia or Hematophobia
    Heresyphobia or Hereiophobia
    Hyelophobia or Hyalophobia
    Hypengyophobia or Hypegiaphobia
    Kainolophobia or Kainophobia
    Keraunophobia or Ceraunophobia
    Kinetophobia or Kinesophobia
    Laliophobia or Lalophobia
    Leprophobia or Lepraphobia
    Misophobia or Mysophobia
    Molysmophobia or Molysomophobia
    Musophobia or Muriphobia
    Nosophobia or Nosemaphobia
    Odynophobia or Odynephobia
    Ommetaphobia or Ommatophobia
    Osmophobia or Osphresiophobia
    Ouranophobia or Uranophobia
    Panophobia or Pantophobia
    Philemaphobia or Philematophobia
    Pnigophobia or Pnigerophobia
    Sciophobia Sciaphobia
    Scopophobia or Scoptophobia
    Sitophobia or Sitiophobia
    Social Phobia
    Spermatophobia or Spermophobia
    Stasibasiphobia or Stasiphobia
    Stygiophobia or Stigiophobia
    Taeniophobia or Teniophobia
    Taphephobia Taphophobia
    Thanatophobia or Thantophobia
    Toxiphobia or Toxophobia or Toxicophobia
    Trichopathophobia or Trichophobia
    Uranophobia or Ouranophobia

    Any that I missed???

  • Merchantseamen

    Islam: submission (to the will of God) The religious faith of Muslims including belief in Allah as the sole deity and Muhammad as his prophet. phobia: fearing, fear, flight as akin to flee, be frightened; inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object or class of objects. Islamophobia: Notice…Islam is NOT a race therefore you can’t be a racist. Phobia is a fear of a class of objects. You could class radical Muslim terrorists as objects to fit phobia if you like. Therefore if you criminalize the word Islamophobia you will be prosecuted and imprisoned for having an irrational fear of a religious faith that translates into SUBMISSION. However I understand that Islamophobia is a made up word……by Muslims. Hmmmmmmmm……….?

Pin It on Pinterest