Islam will come to rule in four stages, he claims: the Ultimate World War in the Middle East, the appearance of the anti-Christ, the extermination of the Jews and the "domination of Islam, over the entire globe."

CORRECTION:

Islam will be destroyed in four stages, he claims: the Ultimate World War in the Middle East, the appearance of a Militant Christian West, the determination of the Jews and the "abomination of Islam, over the entire globe."

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at July 20, 2007 1:05 PM

TORONTO • VisionTV says it will monitor one of its shows more closely after it broadcast a lecture by an Islamic preacher who said scripture requires Muslims to either fight jihad or finance it.

The multi-faith channel, available in 7.8 million Canadian homes, said it took the precaution following a complaint about last Saturday's broadcast of a lecture by the Pakistani fundamentalist.

In the hour-long talk, Israr Ahmad said, 'Jihad in the way of Allah, for the cause of Allah, can be pursued either with your financial resources or your bodily strength when you go to fight the enemy in the battlefield.

'So jihad, the highest form, is fighting in the cause of Allah.'"
-- from the article above

This is excellent. One wishes to have more such programs -- giving the straightforward view of someone who, because he does not live in the West and sees no need for the arts of deception, has not the wiles of Tariq Ramadan or so many others, states the simple truth about Muslim beliefs.

I hope such programs are regularly offered. Wonderful.

Posted by: Hugh at July 20, 2007 1:15 PM

...clearly showing Islamic violence in not just the fancy of a "few extremists", but it is the grand plan of Islam....

...ban muslim immigration...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at July 20, 2007 1:28 PM

I'm too disgusted for words.

In Canada. On Canadian TV. And the head of programming saw nothing wrong with it.

*spit*

Posted by: Josephine at July 20, 2007 1:37 PM

“Responded Mr. Prasuhn: "Definitely, the viewer is correct. [Mr. Ahmad] does make the point about, you either contribute financially or through your body, and he uses the word fight. But none of this, as far as I could see, is in any way correlated or referenced to the present day. It is strictly a historical context and reading of the Koran by a Koranic scholar."”

What about Islam is ever strictly relegated to an “historical context”? And with the glaring evidence of the global jihad in the news daily, how can Prasuhn possibly NOT see some correlation between Ahmad’s statements and the present day? Is he actually that dense? Should someone with no understanding of Islam at all (and apparently someone who doesn't even read the news either!) be in a position to decide what kind of programming goes on a "multi-faith channel"?

(I completely agree with Hugh that this a good thing. Not everyone reads online MEMRI translations of what Muslim clerics are actually preaching. I imagine this must have shocked quite a few ignorant folks who tuned in expecting the usual PC line about the ROP and the “3 Abrahamic faiths” and so on. This is actually pretty darned funny!)

Posted by: Caroline at July 20, 2007 1:40 PM

My first thought is that FINALLY the muslims are admitting to what jihad is - what we already know and if anyone has been paying attention to the current news - already knows!

My second thought is that by not letting them air this type of hatred we will only drive them underground and our stupid (sorry, but I can't find another word that describes them) politicians and others who are in positions of authority will finally stop appeasing muslims.

But then my third thought is that if we let this air - it is our own fault for not fighting back while the muslims are getting away with this sort of thing and their waging of jihad against us.

So, I am torn. islam/muslims are a poison to us and very dangerous. As the days go by I am more convinced that it will take something really bad happening before the politicians and others wake up to the poison we let live among us.

Posted by: R_not at July 20, 2007 2:11 PM

What a major goof this was-for Islamania. Like 9/11 the peaceful ones have made their intentions known. That's good-let there be more such goofs so that more and more people become aware of the true nature of the beast. This sort of reminds me of watching a KKK rally- frightening and yet comical at the same time but despite the vileness of the message it's best to let as many people as possible hear it-rational people will make the correct judgment.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at July 20, 2007 2:22 PM

I don't see the problem of airing the show. All they do is saying what jihad is all about. It would have been a problem if they produced their regular lie: "jihad is an inner struggle".

Posted by: DrWolffenstein at July 20, 2007 2:35 PM

Actually I am happy they aired it. It is one of those bits of truth that THEY hope doesn't get out but it did. Hopefully Canadians and others will wake up and that there is a really primitive group of people out there who a actually want to enslave Canadians. (And NO, I am not talking about Americans.)

Posted by: Patrick at July 20, 2007 2:48 PM

Was Avi Lewis onboard as an associate producer?

Posted by: pythagoras at July 20, 2007 2:51 PM

ISLAMFORLOSERS - re your "goof" theme and the idea that there's something comical about it - I agree!

Despite all the attempts at taquiyya, in a way, Muslims simply can't help themselves. They see nothing wrong with their beliefs - they're proud of them actually! - and so they keep letting it slip, like Mr. Crane on a previous thread waxing romantic about Sharia law, while at the same time imagining that infidels would want to align with Sharia-loving Muslims such as himself, against the terrorists, who as we all know, are simply working towards the same goal of Islamic Sharia supremacy, albeit by more violent means.

This third major go-round at the global jihad is facing something that the previous 2 were not - namely, global communication. While things look frustrating now, once each person is exposed to the real Islam through programs such as this, brought about by a happy coincidence of an ignorant western PC program director and a shameless Muslim quite proud of his beliefs, and no doubt seeing nothing wrong with them - the army of seriously alarmed infidels will grow. And if it gets up their curiosity and they read a bit more, they will come to seriously loathe Islam.

So let us hope for more happy accidents such as this one, in which an ignorant infidel inadvertently showed the true face of Islam, while apparently thinking that he was merely airing something of only "historical" interest.

Posted by: Caroline at July 20, 2007 3:15 PM

Responded Mr. Prasuhn: "Definitely, the viewer is correct. [Mr. Ahmad] does make the point about, you either contribute financially or through your body, and he uses the word fight. But none of this, as far as I could see, is in any way correlated or referenced to the present day. It is strictly a historical context and reading of the Koran by a Koranic scholar."

-----------------------------------------

Historical context: "somewhere in the world, about 5 minutes ago. Coming soon to somewhere else in roughly another 5 minutes".

Apparently this Mark Prasuhn believes if Islamist Ahmad did not say specifically "as of July, 2007, and going forward" when referencing forceful jihad, it doesn't count. Another Western airhead without a clue.

Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at July 20, 2007 3:16 PM

maybe they should handle this the same way our reporters handle the Presidents speeches...After you listen to the President speak, the reporters then tell you what he said..(as if you are not smart enough to judge what he said after you have heard the words by your own ears)....

...The Reporter could say...

THe Muslim said you must convert to Islam or you die infidel....

ban muslim immigration

Posted by: exsgtbrown at July 20, 2007 3:36 PM

"Responded Mr. Prasuhn: "Definitely, the viewer is correct. [Mr. Ahmad] does make the point about, you either contribute financially or through your body, and he uses the word fight. But none of this, as far as I could see, is in any way correlated or referenced to the present day. It is strictly a historical context and reading of the Koran by a Koranic scholar."

WE WILL CONQUER THE WORLD!!!

Uh.. this should not be construed as anything other than historical context, nothing to do with today... he he heh, holding hand over mouth to hide grinning teeth.. :)

Do they think we are just as stupid as they are? What idiots.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at July 20, 2007 4:41 PM

What is NOT a good thing is the way this TV channel is defending the broadcast--that is what MUST BE DEPLORED.

The TV Channel's position can only be described as WILLFUL BLINDNESS. No one can be so stupid as to suggest that a battle cry for jihad "has nothing to do with the present context." To take this position, the TV Channel must deny and forget the jihadi violence of 9/11, Madrid, London, Beslan ... ... ad infinitum.

The TV Channel cannot have it BOTH WAYS. They cannot prohibit incitement to violence, and defend calls to jihad. Even the speaker was forthright in promoting "jihad on the battlefield."

Posted by: DN at July 20, 2007 5:10 PM

Islam will come to rule in four stages, he claims: the Ultimate World War in the Middle East, the appearance of the anti-Christ, the extermination of the Jews and the "domination of Islam, over the entire globe."

Is this guy an Islamophobe for saying this?

Posted by: Elric66 at July 20, 2007 5:21 PM

Mr prasuhn said he saw nothing wrong with the program or the speaker's views.

I say put mr prasuhn on the watch list!

Posted by: eve_anne_gelical at July 20, 2007 5:30 PM

Canada is one big fat stupendously dhimmifed country. Check out this interview between Avi Lewis, son of Stephen Lewis, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Lewis

former NDP politician and former United Nations Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa (simpering sanctimonious jerk, Stephen that is), and Ayaan Ali Hirsi. Sadly Avi Lewis' mindset is only too common here in Canadastan. Note he doesn't even get into her personal experiences, but just attacks at every turn.

http://flaggman.wordpress.com/2007/07/17/deconstructing-the-avi-lewisayaan-hirsi-ali-clip/

I don’t want to beat one story to death, but this Avi Lewis “On The Map” segment offers a great opportunity to:

Expose the true face of the left;
Expose the true beauty and genius of Ayaan Hirsi Ali;
Expose the absolutely scandalous waste of money that is the CBC.
So here we go - I’ll go line-by-line, following a basic analytical format of transcript (exactly what was said), implication (what Lewis was really saying), and truth (what should be made clear if CBC was fair). Just have time for the intro tonight.

After pretentious graphics and music, “On the Map” begins:

“Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of the best-selling memoir Infidel, has an extraordinary life story - a story so powerful, it often eclipses the role she’s playing in the current conversation about Islam and terrorism…”

Implication: People are blinded to her true hate-filled agenda by the details of her biography.

Truth: Her biography makes her message all the more compelling, and her insights all the more legitimate.

“As she herself said recently, ‘Right now, the media are still lapping it up - a black woman who criticizes Islam.’”

Implication: GOTCHA! She’s not really what she says she is, she’s just manipulating the press to sell books and make money.

Truth: Unless you assume she’s a cynical, amoral money-grubber (and there’s never been a single indication that Ayaan is anything of the sort), it’s safe to assume she was simply making a truthful observation about the press that is following her.

“In a moment, my interview with her, but first, let’s put Ayaan Hirsi Ali…ON THE MAP. Born to an elite political family in Somalia…”

Implication: Ayaan was part of the ruling class, Comrades! Don’t let her convince you that she’s a voice of the people.

Truth: I have read her autobiography, Infidel, and can tell you that this is a clear malicious distortion. Ayaan’s father was part of the leadership of a rebellious Somali tribe that fought a civil war against the central government - not a politician, and certainly not part of the ruling elite. Her mother was dirt-poor and one of several wives. She grew up with very little contact with her father.

“…she was brought up Muslim, subjected to genital mutilation, and promised in an arranged marriage to a Canadian…”

Wow, an accurate sentence!

“…on her way, she departed from the script, and made a new life in the Netherlands, she learned the language, worked in a factory, a classic immigrant’s story. Until she went into politics, and ended up with the right-wing Dutch Liberal Party, which was exploiting a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment at the time.”

Implication: Ayaan was a lowly black factory worker who was used as a prop by racists politicians.

Truth: Within a couple years of reaching Holland, Ayaan gained entry into the prestigious Leiden University, earned a degree in Political Science, and then entered politics with the left-wing Labour Party. Only after September 11, 2001, when her comrades on the left abandoned her for speaking honestly about her experiences in the Islamic world, did she leave Labour for the Liberal Party - not a right-wing party, but a centrist bloc.

“Hirsi Ali became famous, and famously hated, for her condemnation of Islam.”

Implication: The country of Holland was against her.

Truth: The Muslim extremists, and their enablers and allies on the left, were against her. She remained a very popular figure in mainstream Dutch society.

“She wrote the film Submission with Theo Van Gogh, which featured sexualized images of a Muslim woman with verses of the Koran written on her body, telling a tale of abuse. When the filmmaker was murdered in 2004, the note pinned to his body was addressed to Hirsi Ali.”

Implication: We must show ambivalence about the murder of Van Gogh and the threat against Ali. After all, they wrote a really blasphemous movie!

Truth: The murderer of Van Gogh was a fanatical home-grown son of a Moroccan immigrant, whose actions were clearly despicable and wholly wrong under any decent person’s standards.

“Two years later, she was at the center of another storm, when a minister in her own party threatened her citizenship because she’d lied on her refugee application. She moved to the United States and published her memoir, a huge best-seller.”

Implication: After getting chased out of the Netherlands when exposed as a liar, she moved to the States to sell her soul for the almighty greenback.

Truth: Ayaan’s betrayal by fellow Liberal Party minister Rita Verdonk, a cowardly response to a Dutch TV hatchet-job, was a turning point, but not the only reason she left for America. Her life was constantly under direct threat from Muslim radicals in the tiny country where another critic of Islam, prominent gay activist Pim Fortuyn, had recently been assasinated for his views, and she had to live in secret under constant police protection in Amsterdam. This fact was conveniently left out by Mr. Lewis.

“Which brings us to her latest incarnation, a job at the arch-conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington.”

Implication: right-wing extremists are once again using this dumb black doll as a prop to justify their racist agenda.

Truth: Arch-conservative? What does that even mean? As Dennis Prager said today - I wonder if he’s ever used the word “Arch-Liberal” before. The only reason someone would use the prefix “arch-” would be to make it sound like some sort of evil death-star front for David Duke. AEI is simply a think-tank that houses some of the highest-caliber right-of-center intellectuals in the country (every single one more accomplished and intelligent than the nepotism case of a host, whose show is viewed by a rating that approaches zero). “Arch” is a ridiculous smear.

So…now that the smarmy host has attempted to delegitimize his guest in an introduction she was not present to comment on, it’s time for the interview:

Avi: “Give me your argument against - that is, your critique of Islam.”

Most guests would start with “of course, I’m not against Islam”, but not Ayaan - she gets right to the heart of it, and thank you, CBC, for letting it survive the editing room.

Ayaan: Islam means submission to the will of Allah. A doctrine that requires the individual to become a slave is, in my view, is bad. Islam limits the imagination to what you can find in the Koran, and to follow in the example of the prophet Mohammed. I think that’s bad, and that’s what keeps people in the Islamic world backward. Islam mistreats women - at least, subordinates women to men; is obsessed with obedience; calls for the murder of gays and adulterers; and is therefore very violent and inhuman. All of this is in the Koran; all of this is in the Hadith; and anywhere that Islamic Shari’a, Islamic rule is implemented, you see that these things are carried out.

Wow. Avi Lewis’ world is being blown apart. A beautiful, articulate, secular, cosmopolitan, confident, intellectual black woman has just told the truth about Islam. It’s time to fight back…

Avi: Surely, there are many versions of Islam, just like there are many versions of Christianity, of Judaism, of all major religions. You’re presenting it as just one thing, and obviously it’s not!

Implication: OK, Islam has some rough patches…but so do the other religions. Islam is the same as the other religions, no better or worse. And anyway, it’s all relative, because Islam means different things to different people, so we can’t make any judgements.

Truth: Lousy attempt to inject moral equivalency and pacifist non-judgementalism into the discussion. Avi skips right past the everyday horrors of the Islamic world as outlined by Ayaan, and simply tries to shift the blame for corruption onto “religion”. Typical of someone with left-wing dementia, he tries to defend the anti-Western religion by comparing it to a fictional lowest-common-demoninator that simply does not exist in Judaism or Christianity. In essence, what he is saying is: I’ll defend Islam because it’s no worse than the other religions I hate. Does that make ANY sense???

Ayaan: Islam, as a faith, as a doctrine, is defined by the Koran and the example of the Prophet Mohammed, and unreformed, unchallenged, it is a monolith.

Avi: I could point to things in other holy books that are equally offensive.

Here’s where Avi starts to completely flame out. It’s like he’s not even listening to his guest. Here, he simply repeats the losing argument he made a moment ago.

Ayaan: The other holy books, the old testament, the bible, have become almost obsolete, and there are no Christians who want to have the bible replace any constitution in Western society.

Avi: OK, whoa! You live in the United States of America. This is a country where Evangelical Christianity has ascended to the highest ranks of power, where conservative social values drawn and justified by the bible are imposed on people every day.

Implication: OK, he’s not even hiding his anti-American moonbattery anymore. No need to analyze implications here, this is the real thing. (But I should point out that he can’t even pronounce the word “Evangelical” correctly, and I’m certain he doesn’t understand what Evangelical Christianity is about at all).

Truth: This is complete insanity. If you can’t see that America has gone through 40 years of progressive” social values being imposed on the people every day, you are simply dim.

Ayaan: I think you are exagerrating…

Avi (interrupting): They shoot abortion doctors in the United States of America! (interrupting her attempt at replying) Homophobia is rampant!

Ayaan (undaunted): When abortion doctors in the United States were shot, the federal government reacted to it by going after the perpetrators, putting them on trial, and jailing them. When, in Iran, two men went after a woman and a man holding hands and shot them, they were aquitted by the supreme court. That is the core difference - never confuse Islamic Shari’a and the Muslims who really mean it, with those extremist Christians who live in the United States. Extremist Christians in the United States, or any other Western society, face the rule of law and are dealt with accordingly.

(And guess what, Avi - the last time an abortion doctor was shot in the United States was…1998! If that makes Christian extremists equal to Muslim radicals, then Avi Lewis is a smarter man than I…)

What a perfect answer by Ayaan - completely ignored by Avi, who moves on.

Avi: Let’s talk about the intervention to bring democracy - quote-unquote - increasingly, in what many people see, in an Islamophobic context.

Implication: America hates Muslims and is simply having fun killing brown babies in Iraq.

Truth: Avi Lewis is an idiot. If America hates Muslims, then what were Bosnia and Kosovo all about?

Ayaan: There is no Islamophobia. It’s a myth.

Avi: (incredulously) There’s no Islamophobia?

Ayaan: (With a big smile on her face) No.

Avi: Anywhere in the world?

Ayaan: No. I mean…

Avi: (interrupting again) Is there antisemitism?

Ayaan: It’s different…

Avi (interrupting yet again): Is there racism?

Ayaan: Sometimes. We are all racists. Racism is a universal trait, so is antisemitism, by the way. But I want us not to confuse a set of beliefs such as Islam, with ethnicity such as with Jews just because they are Jews, or with blacks just because they are blacks, or with gays just because it’s something you can’t do anything about. Wheras Islam is simply a set of beliefs. It’s not “Islamophobic” to say that Islam is incompatible with liberal democracy. It’s not “Islamophobic” to point to those people who use the Koran and the Hadith to conduct war and to say this is being done in the name of your religion. To do something about it, that’s not “Islamophobic”. That’s fair.

Wow. Blew him away, and he doesn’t even respond.

Avi: North American Muslims really feel under siege these days. I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but people don’t want to travel because flying is such a hassle. North American Muslims are afraid to give to charities because they’re afraid they’ll end up on a list somewhere. And they’d watched others in their community end up in detention for a year without ever seeing charges against them - I mean, you’re not unaware of these debates. You don’t think there’s a context of what the “War on Terror” rhetoric does to a social discourse?

Implication: Every gripe of the Muslim community is legitimate. Every measure used to protect society from Muslim radicals is wrong. You, Ayaan, are a traitor to your community for not advocating on MY side!

Truth: It has become self-evident - Avi Lewis is a fully brainwashed Chomskyite. “You don’t think there’s a context of what the War on Terror rhetoric does to a social discourse?” Noam himself couldn’t have crafted a more perfect meaningless, pretentious non-sequitur of a question!

Ayaan: I think it’s highly exaggerated that Muslims in the US are under seige. If that were the case - we know groups in history who were under seige, and what they usually do is, they would leave. I don’t see any American Muslim leaving and going back to any Muslim country.

Avi: (With shit-eating grin on face) Well, your faith in American democracy is, uh - delightful!

Implication: My poor, stupid, manipulated little black doll, you are soooooo naive…

Truth: Strip away the despicable condescention, and you have an absolutely true statement - Ayaan certainly does have faith in American democracy, and she’s not afraid to show it.

Ayaan: (with big smile on her face) It’s the best democracy. It’s the best place to be!

Avi: Tell that to the people who believe there have been a couple of stolen elections, that the democracy is completely broken, that…

Implication: The 9/11 truthers and Daily Kos haters are right, and you are crazy.

Truth: Avi, like most on the left, simply can’t get over the fact that Al Gore lost the 2000 election - just like the left of the previous generation never got over the fact that John F. Kennedy was killed by a leftist, not a right-winger.

Ayaan: I do tell them, and I tell them you shouldn’t have stood by and watched for the democracy to be stolen. My point is not so much when the Democrats are in office everyone is happy, or when the Republicans are in office everything is bad - it’s that both Republicans and Democrats - and the majority of Americans feel, fortunately, that they can run for office, they can get power…

Avi: (with a “gotcha” grin on his face) As long as you’re staggeringly rich, totally connected, and in the pockets of your donors, you can do anything you want in America.

Ayaan: In America, you can come with nothing, no penny, nothing, and you can become very wealthy. Tell me which Muslim country…

Avi (interrupting again): Is there a school where they teach you these American cliches? Is it part of your application process? I’m sorry - I’m so upset, I’m losing my cards here. I can’t believe you just said that!

Implication: Oh, stupid brown girl, I’ve lost patience with you. You are a brainwashed neo-con dupe. You have no right to be on the right!

Truth: Avi Lewis’ has a completely closed mind. He hasn’t absorbed a word she’s said in seven minutes now.

Ayaan: (disarming him with a smile before swooping in for the final devastating death blow) I’ve read de Tocqueville, and I’ve read about democracy, and I’ve lived in countries that had no democracy, that had no founding fathers, that could not resolve, so I don’t find myself in the same luxury as you. You grew up in freedom, and you can spit on freedom, because you don’t know what it is not to have freedom. I haven’t. I know that there are many things wrong with America, and I know there are many things wrong with Americans, but I still believe it’s the best nation in the world.

Avi: Thanks. Thanks for coming!

Final analysis: As I mentioned above, this interview is the perfect window into the left-wing mind. Avi Lewis exposes all the pathologies of the left, including the narcissism that causes them to fail to recognize when they’ve been schooled.

Posted by: j_not_a at July 20, 2007 5:57 PM

I think this is the show you can hear online at Littlegreenfootballs. There is *no way* he was talking in an historical context. He was inciting violence right now.

Posted by: Lili at July 20, 2007 8:53 PM

Hugh posted:

"This is excellent. One wishes to have more such programs -- giving the straightforward view of someone who, because he does not live in the West and sees no need for the arts of deception, has not the wiles of Tariq Ramadan or so many others, states the simple truth about Muslim beliefs.

I hope such programs are regularly offered. Wonderful."

Yes, BUT they must also be called out and answered to. This cannot be allowed to stand without some form of rebuttal on Canadian television, preferably the same network.

Posted by: freedomschool at July 20, 2007 10:15 PM

If a similar Christian hate speech would have been made on television in Saudi Arabia, the Vice President of Programming would be not only without a job but also without his head.

Posted by: Laker at July 20, 2007 10:38 PM

Muslim apologist Robert Crane noted, in the linked article under the heading, "Honesty is the Best Policy, Bob" elsewhere on this site:

"When the imams in New Jersey rose up against the “silent majority” of Muslim lay leaders, their concern was the defensive lay response of “don’t blame us.” In the minds of most Americans this constitutes tacit support of Muslim terrorists, because in America, unlike in most of the rest of the world, silence implies support..."

This implies that only those operating under the American version of the "Western Cultural Bias" believe that silence implies support.

Meaning, if you believe that speaking/acting out against injustice/crime/lies is an imperative, then you are among a minority in the world, and a mistaken (imperialistic, hegemonic) one at that.

It is important to counter the jihadi line whenever it comes up, and report suspicious behavior whenever you see it, don't fall for the idea that only reactionary/nationalistic/choose your epithet people do this, and if you were globalist/sophisticated/cool like "most of the rest of the world", you would keep your mouth shut.

Posted by: freedomschool at July 20, 2007 10:44 PM

I am not into religion and all but I think it is amusing that "the appearance of the anti-Christ" is mentioned as part of a future that leads to global Islam without noting which side he would be on.

I wonder if this is the same guy who was on Vision some time ago with some woman explaining that when sharia law is implemented in Canada it would not be all that much of a change so people should not worry about it. It would just mean a little bit of adjustment to make Canadian law compatible with Islam. Apparently, the guy I saw feels that Canadian law is close to sharia anyway. Maybe we just need a few provisions for stonings and honour killings and we would get to be considered part of Dar al-Islam.

Posted by: Saul Wall at July 21, 2007 12:11 AM

"It's an Extremists' world, the moderates just live in it."

Posted by: objective1 at July 22, 2007 2:16 PM

Responded Mr. Prasuhn: "Definitely, the viewer is correct. [Mr. Ahmad] does make the point about, you either contribute financially or through your body, and he uses the word fight. But none of this, as far as I could see, is in any way correlated or referenced to the present day. It is strictly a historical context and reading of the Koran by a Koranic scholar."

Like Avi Lewis, Prasuhn is likely an acolyte of Robert Faurisson's defender, Noam Chomsky who found nothing inherently anti-Semitic in Faurisson's Holocaust-denying screeds.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at July 23, 2007 8:12 AM

Here is the response I got from Vision TV. Incidentally, I did not mention the Jewish community nor did I identify myself as a Jew (I'm not and I have an Anglo surname) so this must be a form letter.
============================
Thank you for sharing your concerns about the issues raised in the recent issues of the National Post. The Post articles were misleading in suggesting that offensive comments were broadcast on VisionTV. At no time were derogatory remarks about people of the Jewish community, or any other group, broadcast on our network.

As Canada's multi-faith network, VisionTV celebrates the freedom of religious expression and spiritual diversity that is uniquely Canadian. It is part of our mandate to make airtime available to a broad range of faith communities and ministries. However, we also understand that fundamental freedoms must be balanced against each individual's right not to be subjected to fraudulent claims and misrepresentations with respect to matters of faith. We therefore review each program on VisionTV prior to broadcast to ensure that the content complies with our Code of Ethics, Standards and Practices. It is not always easy to achieve an appropriate balance between these competing priorities. Decisions on what content to broadcast are not taken lightly but are part of our ongoing effort to provide both a wide range of faith perspectives and the highest quality programming possible.

Israr Ahmad did appear on the program Dil Dil Pakistan, as reported in the Post. But his comments in that program were limited to readings from the Quran and interpretations of scripture from that holy text. The offensive comments quoted in the Post were apparently made by Mr. Ahmad in other writings. Again, those comments were not broadcast on VisionTV.

Having reviewed this matter with the producer of the program, and having learned of Mr. Ahmad's comments outside of the Dil Dil Pakistan program, the producer voluntarily agreed not to have Mr. Ahmad appear again on Dil Dil Pakistan. We will also be broadcasting an on-air apology for any offence caused Mr. Ahmad's previous appearance on the show. VisionTV and Dil Dil Pakistan have a long history of promoting positive dialogue and the peaceful teachings of the Quran. We will strive to ensure in future that we maintain the highest standards of broadcasting to achieve those goals.

As a broadcaster, VisionTV takes its responsibilities for content on our network very seriously. In response to your feedback and comments from other viewers, we have undertaken to review our Code of Ethics with stakeholders including the Canadian Jewish Congress, B'nai Brith, and leaders of other Canadian faith institutions. It is often through viewer feedback that we are able to improve our broadcast standards, and we appreciate you taking the time to share your concerns with us.

Please do not hesitate to contact us if you require any additional information.

Best regards,

VisionTV
Audience Relations

Posted by: Sylvia at July 26, 2007 2:53 PM