To citizens, friends and commentators to Jihad Watch: I sincerely thank those of you who have supported me in the unjust targeting of my personal writings for Jihad Watch, which I have written in my pursuit of human rights for all, justice for all, and the expectation of the pursuit of tolerance from all. Many of you called my being targeted downright “inflammatory.” I was impressed with the Canadian Press’s fairness, in the determination of its reporter and editor to get my view in, despite my taking issue with the National Council of Canadian Muslims, Amira Elghawaby, being quoted, as I explain in this article. This was my full statement submitted to the Canadian Press, as I gave my permission for the reporter to decide what to take from it.
STATEMENT TO CANADIAN PRESS
To: Stephanie Levitz
From: Christine Douglass-WilliamsMy own personal writings on Jihad Watch are most compatible with my on-record, highly dedicated work on the Canadian Race Relations board since 2013. I serve and have the greatest respect for its pure, original mandate of human rights for all.
I speak here of my own accord, not on behalf of the Foundation in any shape or form.
It is not racist to oppose the jihadist-Islamist agenda.
Any efforts currently against me in my private work are an unjust, agenda-driven and a cruel attempt to intimidate me for my distaste for all supremacist agendas. I am pro-Muslim and pro-human rights, which is why I wrote my book on The Challenge of Modernizing Islam, featuring prominent Muslims, revelations of their personal faith, and their remarkable efforts toward human rights; among them includes the founder of the Koranist sect in Egypt who suffered, was thrown in jail, tortured and eventually exiled to America. He warns about the same “fanatics” that have arrived in America. I am also an advisor to Muslims Facing Tomorrow, a Canadian progressive human rights Muslim group.
I am appalled at Islamist intolerance and murder today of non-Muslims and even their fellow Muslims who strive toward human rights. I was also — relatively speaking — appalled as a child in the 60’s and early 70’s about the racism that I and other visible minorities experienced by many whites of that era.
In our era, the worst global violators of human rights are now Islamists, eg. FGM, honor killings, black slavery, violent persecution of Christians and other minorities; stoning, beheadings, execution for adultery, apostasy and being gay; the wide-spread rape of infidel women across Europe–including thousands of UK “white girls” being called “meat” and “trash” by Islamist rape gangs; massive jihad attacks against those who are of another creed and/or culture and a supremacist view by Islamists above other creeds, even attempting to shut down democratic free speech to suit an agenda.
White supremacists indeed still need to be cracked down on. The trouble is that our Western culture only adequately recognizes racism if it is white people against another group. To me, this dismal minimalizing of human rights abuses by Islamists—most of whom are not white– is troubling and it is also an insulting demonstration of a widespread bigotry of low expectations of visible minority perpetrators.
I support diversity and responsible immigration. We have come a long way in diverse, multicultural Canada and the tides have changed, to heights that I would not have imagined.
My book differentiates between Islamists and human rights-respecting Muslims who strive to live peaceably and equally among Westerners. They ask for no special favors and advocate for the separation of mosque and state; they condemn Islamism, and stand against human rights abuses committed in the name of their religion, sometimes at great personal risk.
The West has evolved into bastions of human rights and unfortunately not every immigrant is respecting of that evolution and Canada’s constitution, but many wish to dredge up past, long atoned for abuses and ignore current-day mass human rights abuses.
All lives matter and the majority of Canadians of all races and creeds can see straight through the noise of agendas. If the racism industry cannot come to promote equality for all without fear of unjust reprisals, we have a very bad problem. I support equality of all and human rights for all.
So here you have it: my writings at Jihad Watch are apparently deemed by some to be at odds with the constitution, human rights and equality for all. How peculiar.
Another point provided in the Canadian Press article that I also found to be strange was the reference to “concerns about the post circulating among her fellow board members.” This is no fault of the Canadian Press, as the reporter meticulously quoted sources; but to clarify a pertinent point: at the time of the post, we had only one other active board member besides me, and I am confident that she did not complain to anyone. The other board members consisted only of the Chairman, the Co-Chair and the spokesperson, none of whom expressed to me any concerns about any of my posts other than the Chairman, who notified me that there were concerns, however, emerging from the Heritage Department. This was due to a complaint that came in from a social justice warrior with a reputation for dangerous incitement who was living in Iceland, after a speech I delivered there (mentioned in the article below). His reputation was made known to the Heritage Department, as I submitted a letter through the Chair that was written by the main Icelandic organizer who hosted the event at which Robert Spencer and I spoke. The Chairman told me afterward that the letter had helped.
To provide a little insight and background that may shed some light on the climate in which this apparent “conflict” over my writings for Jihad Watch thrived:
In May, The Lawfare Project, a non-profit legal think tank based in New York City, issued a troubling statement and sent out emails — which I received — questioning a “Canadian Interfaith Conversation’s decision to include pro-Islamists” in an upcoming conference. The Lawfare Project’s Director and Attorney at Law, Brooke Goldstein, called this “an embarrassment to Canada’s interfaith community.” An embarrassment it was. Among those “pro-Islamists” was Amira Elghawaby, the same woman who indicted me in the Canadian Press article, saying of me:
For a federal appointee to be writing for hateful websites, denying the existence of Islamophobia and calling for the violation of fundamental rights and freedoms of a minority community is contrary to everything the Canada Race Relations Foundation stands for and to the values enshrined in the charter.
While Elghawaby defames me, the Lawfare Project points out troubling, verifiable information about Elghawaby herself which provides insights about her possible motives in stating such untruths about me:
Ms. Amira Elghawaby has for years been communications chief for the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR.CAN), now renamed—deceptively, according to some—the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM). NCCM/CAIR.CAN was established as the Canadian chapter of the radical, US-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Saudi-funded organization that was also designated an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial. CAIR derived from the Islamic Association of Palestine (founded by Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook, who is now a US Specially Designated Global Terrorist), is said to be a Hamas-supporting organization, and has seen several of its officials and affiliates convicted of terrorism-related offenses. Like CAIR, NCCM/CAIR.CAN is known for its exaggerated claims of “Islamophobia“, claims that have unnecessarily alarmed Canadian Muslims and thereby risked pushing young Muslims into radical hands. For more about NCCM/CAIR.CAN, see the LP’s statement, “Lawfare Project Concerned about National Council of Canadian Muslims Participation in Global Affairs Canada event.”
In light of the character of Ms. Alghawaby, the Lawfare Project highlighted “with dismay” the “apparent failure of ethical due diligence of the Canadian Interfaith Conversation (CIC) in the course of planning the CIC’s pending conference in Ottawa….titled ‘Our Whole Society: Religion & Citizenship at Canada’s 150th,’ the conference and its failings appear to be the shared responsibility of the CIC and its ‘Our Whole Society partner organizations’ , the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, and Cardus.”
By this point, I was receiving public emails (understandably) querying about why the Canadian Race Relations Foundation was taking part in such an event. I referred them to the organization’s Chairman, who made it clear that he did not support any form of “pro-Islamist” agenda. As an insider, a rift in values was becoming clear to me, and the subsequent witch-hunt by the Heritage Department against me was a confirmation. This rift was also evident at a prior Award of Excellence conference that was held by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation in October, where slamming white people carte blanche for past sins and current sins of racism was the in-your-face rhetoric; and as expected, during breakout sessions, “Islamophobia” was a main concern. During an on-stage session, an Afro-Canadian lady finally noted that it was blacks and Jews who still suffered the most hate, so why the constant emphasis on “Islamophobia”?
The racism against whites and against Jews, and the exoneration of Islamic supremacists from the murder and intolerance of which they are guilty around the world has been increasing to the point of of creepiness. How could any human rights advocate ignore headlines such as “Protesters outside mosque where imam prayed for killing of unbelievers could face hate crime charges.” That’s right, the protestors, not the hate preacher. Other headlines that are ignored by the anti-racism industry: UK Muslim rape gang: “All white women are good for one thing, for men like me to f*** and use as trash”; “Al Qaeda urges lone wolves to target whites, to avoid ‘hate crime’ label”. B’nai Brith Canada reports about pure anti-Zionist hatred on the “Best of the Worst at the Toronto Al-Quds Day Rally.” These are but a few headlines among scores of others that are daily highlighted on Jihad Watch, taken from a variety of news sources.
My original statement to the Canadian Press highlights other instances of intolerance, practices of gender inequality, murder of gays, etc. So why is concern about the victims of these supremacist abuses not part of the anti-racism industry — an industry that has now embraced Islam as a “race”? If it is understood now that anti-racism has broadened to include intolerance of both creed and race, then why are Islamic supremacists exempt from scrutiny?
The answer is plain and simple and dreadfully apparent in the Rotherham scandal in the UK, where authorities turned a blind eye to the most heinous sex abuses against young girls. It was because they did not want to appear “Islamophobic.” No one wants to appear “Islamophobic.” The West is brainwashed and living in fear of being branded racist, and has had “Islamophobia” drives repeatedly and continually rammed down the throats of citizens, unchallenged, in the face of the worst abuses and threats from Islamic supremacists, which range from an enforced social stigmatization and lawfare to physical violence.
Denis MacShane, MP for Rotherham between 1994 to 2012, “admitted to the BBC’s World At One that ‘there was a culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat,’” while an inquiry was told that “influential Pakistani councillors acted as barriers to communication on grooming issues.” Front line workers say “the town hall told them to keep quiet about the ethnicity of the perpetrators in the interests of ‘community cohesion.’”
A pro-Islamist once told me during a live TV show at breaktime: “Us brown people have to stick together.” I believe that all peace-loving and tolerant people should be sticking together regardless of color and creed. All instances of supremacy, which includes Islamic supremacy, white supremacy, black supremacy (Nation of Islam, in which Louis Farrakhan characterizes Jews as “Satanic”), should be confronted for a better society.
Genuine anti-Muslim bigotry should be condemned to the fullest extent, but Islamic supremacism also needs to be confronted and condemned for the sake of the mammoth tally of victims, globally and in the West.
My open letter to Icelanders, which is mentioned in the Canadian Press, was translated and published in Iceland’s largest newspaper, the Morgunbladid. Icelanders were indeed in trouble, as one of its trusted imams was Ahmad Sedeeq, who was precisely was the kind of Islamic supremacist I warned about. Not only was I alerted that his organization — The Islamic Cultural Center in Iceland, the second-largest Muslim community in Iceland — was funded by Saudi petrodollars, but Sedeeq later claimed that the London Bridge jihad attacks were staged by police. People were mowed over and then stabbed to death, but he claimed it was all staged.
The welcoming people of Iceland were surprised that Islamic supremacy was in their midst, along with a surrounding shield of those who supported them. Unfortunately, their wake-up call was the poisoning of Robert Spencer, from which the country is still somewhat reeling, legally and emotionally. The picture in this post was snapped at a radio station following an interview I did the morning right after Mr. Spencer’s poisoning, after the bodyguard, an organizer and I spent the entire night with him in hospital. He was in rough shape.
Violent jihad attacks continue in the West, while the Muslim Brotherhood has meticulously outlined its detailed plan for North America, part of which states:
The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack.
It is much easier and may feel more realistic to turn a blind eye to this threat, which involves a hijacking of the democratic process, but the threat is very real. Freedom of the press and free speech are hallmarks of democracy. Mockers and satirists have a right to offend, but not actually to incite violence. The widespread “anti-Islamophobia” drives that have seized the West are a disquieting phenomenon, as they seek to beat down any criticism, including justifiable criticism, as reported routinely by Jihad Watch. A former imam and member of the International Institute for Islamic Thought, Abdur-Rahman Muhammad, discussed the “Islamophobia” canard and states:
This loathsome term is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics.
Canada’s Department of Heritage is attempting to beat me down although I am an avid supporter of equality for all and human rights for all. The Heritage Department in Canada is the very department from which the anti-Islamophobia Motion M103 emerged; I discuss its disconcerting origins and implications here. Alghawaby, on the other hand, fervently supports, promotes and defends M103 here.
As Robert Spencer states in his post about this:
Are there actually Muslims who posture as moderate when they actually aren’t? Consider the imam Fawaz Damra was known in the Cleveland area “as a voice of moderate, mainstream Islam.” He “was often seen at public events with politicians and leaders of other faiths, including several prayer services after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.” Meanwhile, he was “disparaging Jews in Arabic as ‘pigs and monkeys’ and raising money for the killing of Jews by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.”
One of the cardinal services of my book The Challenge of Modernizing Islam is that, after defending why I support this ancient-to-modern-day reformist movement, it educates readers about Muslims who posture as moderate, while they wage a campaign of war against those who report on the global atrocities being committed against innocent people simply because those innocent people are of another faith and belief system.
Through this process, my hope is that justice and kindness can be served with victims in mind; recognizing that all brands of supremacism — with in today’s world Islamic supremacism tops the charts in victimizing innocents — needs to be addressed by the racism industry and by Western governments.
“Federal appointee to race relations board under scrutiny for writings on Islam”, by Stephanie Levitz, Canadian Press, August 20, 2017:
OTTAWA — A board member with the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, an arms-length federal government agency with a mandate to combat racial discrimination, is in jeopardy of losing her post over her writings on the controversial website Jihad Watch.
Christine Douglass-Williams has been writing for the site almost since she was appointed to the foundation’s board in 2012. But multiple sources have told The Canadian Press that the government is reviewing that appointment in the wake of an essay that appeared on the site in May.
The post, entitled, “Christine Williams: My personal warning to Icelanders,” was based on a visit Douglass-Williams paid to the country alongside Jihad Watch founder and U.S. academic Robert Spencer earlier this year.
In it, Douglass-Williams warns that Icelanders are being duped by seemingly moderate Muslims who deceive people into believing they are harmless, and writes that if Muslims truly had nothing to hide, they’d allow police to conduct surveillance in their mosques.
“Islamic supremacists will smile at you, invite you to their gatherings, make you feel loved and welcome, but they do it to deceive you and to overtake you, your land and your freedoms,” she writes.
“They intentionally make you feel guilty for questioning their torturous deeds toward humanity — toward women, Christians, gays, Jews, apostates, infidels and anyone who dares to oppose these deeds.”
With concerns about the post circulating among her fellow board members, it came to the attention of Heritage Minister Melanie Joly, whose department is responsible for the foundation.
Specifically, there are concerns that Douglass-Williams’s views are a hindrance to her work with the foundation and an affront to its legally defined mandate, which is to help eliminate racism and racial discrimination in Canada.
In a statement to The Canadian Press, Douglass-Williams said it is not racist to oppose “the jihadist-Islamist” agenda, and that her writings are entirely in keeping with the work of the board.
“Any efforts currently against me in my private work are an unjust, agenda-driven and cruel attempt to intimidate me for my distaste for all supremacist agendas,” she wrote. She pointed to her recent book, “The Challenges of Modernizing Islam,” as proof that she’s pro-Muslim and pro-human rights.
“My book differentiates between Islamists and human rights-respecting Muslims who thrive to live peaceably and equally among Westerners,” Douglass-Williams wrote.
“They ask for no special favors and advocate for the separation of mosque and state; they condemn Islamism, and stand against human rights abuses committed in the name of their religion, sometimes at great personal risk.”
Pierre-Olivier Herbert, a spokesperson for Joly, said the foundation needs a board that recognizes the importance of diversity and inclusion.
“While we cannot comment on specific cases, with respect to Governor in Council (GIC) appointees, it is expected that appointees’ conduct not be at odds with an organization’s mandate, otherwise the GIC will consider whether action should be taken,” Herbert said.
The foundation was launched in 1997 as part of the settlement the federal government at the time reached with Japanese Canadians over their internment in Canada during the Second World War.
It holds workshops and roundtables across the country on combating racism, and also funds research into Canadian attitudes towards multiculturalism, immigration and other issues.
Board member and foundation spokesman Rubin Friedman said allegations that Douglass-Williams was Islamophobic had been brought to the attention of the board.
“We discussed those allegations and we looked at our mandate, and our policy, and we decided that we don’t make comment on what our part time board members do outside of our organization.”
The board has no control over its membership, Friedman said, and whatever might happen next is up to the government. Douglass-Williams’s current term expires in 2018.
Spencer, who launched Jihad Watch in 2003, has expressed frustration with the view that the perpetrators of the 9/11 terrorist attacks did not represent the true peaceful nature of Islam. He believes it must be made clear that the attacks were rooted in Islam — not to demonize Muslims, but to prove there’s a problem within the religion.
Spencer has gone on to deny the existence of Islamophobia, calling it a term deployed in order to “intimidate non-Muslims away from criticizing or resisting the jihad and Islamic supremacism.”
Douglass-Williams picked up on similar themes in a March 2017 post about a controversial House of Commons motion that called “on the government of Canada to condemn Islamophobia in Canada and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination.”
Douglass-Williams accused the Liberal MP who sponsored the motion of being part of a broader plot when she insisted on including the word Islamophobia in the text, as opposed to other suggested phrases like “anti-Muslim bigotry.”
In a statement, the National Council of Canadian Muslims said anyone with such views has no place on the foundation’s board.
“For a federal appointee to be writing for hateful websites, denying the existence of Islamophobia and calling for the violation of fundamental rights and freedoms of a minority community is contrary to everything the Canada Race Relations Foundation stands for and to the values enshrined in the charter,” Amira Elghawaby said in a statement……
Jim says
in your statement to the press – are you mixing up the words “thrive” and “strive” ?
“who thrive toward human rights”.
Robeaver says
Big brother rises in the West. Thought police in action.
gravenimage says
Christine Douglass-Williams: unjustly targeted by Canada’s “Islamophobia” agenda
…………………….
*Appalling*. I hope the brave Ms. Douglass-Williams is able to fight this injustice.
Westman says
I agree. She has been one of the most even-handed, precise, writers on the JW site, always careful to deal with the results of the enabling jihad dogma itself, and not disparaging of Muslims in general. Now she faces a witch hunt from the enablers who are the real Islamophobes; frightened people hoping that by running with a populist pack and playing down the fruits of jihad they will be safe from jihad – or eaten last.
Considering what is happenning on campuses and even in the world of leftist-controlled e-commerce there should be a new term like, Hamasophilia, to describe it.
gravenimage says
Spot on, Westman.
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
There is probably a lot of merit in this essay by Christine Douglass-Williams (who looks quite different from her previous photograph on Jihad Watch), but it suffers from two defects.
(1) Poor proofreading. Examples include: Muslims who thrive [strive] toward human rights, Muslims who thrive [strive] to live peaceably, need to be cranked [cracked] down on, of of creepiness. But one of these supposed errors is a gem of bilingual Canadian poetry: “slamming white people carte blanc(he)”.
(2) The essay is way to long, of “tl;dr” (too long; didn’t read) length. It will remain unread in a world of readers with a 140-character attention span who are too easily distrac– oh look, a squirrel!
PABLO says
I did not have any problems with the length of the article. The typos are inconsequential to the broader message. If the typos are what you took away, you are pathetic.
Lydia says
The typos were the ‘squirrel.’ No offense, just humor.
( ;
Sometimes it is merely a difference of American and British English, it varies as it spreads out into other places. Not sure in this case. I’m a stickler too and that is true about short attention spans. Ugh! Tell me about it.
Perhaps a summary would help some folks.
Just saying.
Bob says
Pablo. Your comment ‘you are pathetic’ is uncalled for and falls below moderation standards. No need for righteous indignation. Yes the broader message is clear but Mark is also correct in that it needs some editing to improve readability.
PABLO says
Really? Navel gazing as its best. Improve readability…..are you unable to fill in the “so called” blanks.
PABLO says
Keeping with readability: that should be Navel gazing at its best.
manat bint allaha says
there’s bigger issues at stake here, yet you worry about typos?
gravenimage says
PABLO was saying that the typos are *not* a important point.
My own take on this is that it is best to proofread your work–that being said, I try not to be a pedant–there *are* more serious issues.
Lydia says
I think it’s past the point of no return with these islamonazis.
They cross the line into the irrational and you can’t bring them back.
Just like the nazi’s. Try to convince them of some reason. Good luck.
They are advancing their agenda and reason won’t stop them.
They have gone over the ‘deep end.’
It’s like that saying: “Stop! Don’t confuse me with the facts!”
Yohanan says
I facebook messaged Rubin Friedman the CRRF board member that I was surprised by his neutral, weak support for Christine Douglass-Williams as quoted in the N.Post of 20 Aug. http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/federal-appointee-to-race-relations-board-under-scrutiny-for-writings-on-islam/wcm/2d8f7754-c23c-4637-b949-887414b86030
I asked him to address the issues. What is his personal opinion on countering Islamic supremacism? Do Islamophobia and blasphemy laws contradict free speech and democracy?
I’m not current on Canadian politics. I hope that Islamic supremacism is a subject which can openly studied, discussed and watched out for in Canada.
I gave him the link to this JW post by his fellow CRRF board member Christine Douglass William.
Yohanan says
I facebook messaged Rubin Friedman the CRRF board member that I was surprised by his neutral, weak support for Christine Douglass-Williams as quoted in the N.Post of 20 Aug. http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/federal-appointee-to-race-relations-board-under-scrutiny-for-writings-on-islam/wcm/2d8f7754-c23c-4637-b949-887414b86030
I asked him to address the issues. What is his personal opinion on countering Islamic supremacism? Do Islamophobia and blasphemy laws contradict free speech and democracy?
I’m not current on Canadian politics. I hope that Islamic supremacism is a subject which can openly studied, discussed and watched out for in Canada.
I gave him the link to this JW post by his fellow CRRF board member Christine Douglass William.
Karen says
“It is not racist to oppose the jihadist-Islamist agenda.”
“Genuine anti-Muslim bigotry should be condemned to the fullest extent…”
The perfect summary of my view, and many others at JW.
Down with all forms of supremacism, including Islamic supremacism.
Great article.
Joe says
There is a problem, though. The holy war is central to their “religion”. If you read the holy books, there is no escaping it.
Yes, many Muslims will not go down the violent path. Yet, that leaves many others who will, since it can be easily justified by their holy writings. To be truthful, Islam demands it. In addition to the violence, Islam demands, on almost every page of the Koran, hate for anyone who is not a Muslim which makes vital integration and bonding impossible.
Perhaps Islam can be reformed, but it hasn’t been in over a millennium.
The best approach for the moment is to assimilate Muslims into the local culture. At the same time, Mosques should be under surveillance to identify violent intentions.
Karen says
I *hope* that most Muslims willingly embrace American mainstream culture and values (such as liberty and freedom of speech), but fear that this happens less and less, with leftist agitators working against the old melting pot model.
And clearly, some mosques need to be monitored (not all.) Why not start with the one in California who’s imam recently preached an ‘annihilate the Jews’ sermon. Honestly, what is so hard to figure out about that one?
Graeme Howarth says
Well done Christine!
You are making us all proud and doing the real heavy lifting. your responses have been spot-on and this post is thorough, accurate and gracious. Well done.
We totally support you and all you do!!
Karen says
Heavy lifting – the perfect description. I imagine many human rights workers would prefer the pleasure of handing out visas, medicine, and food baskets. It certainly has to be a bit more gratifying than being called a lot of vile names. But Ms. Douglass-Williams and Mr. Spencer have their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor on the line doing a neglected form of human rights work.
WorkingClassPost says
So islamofobik denial is now on a par with Holocaust denial, in that, both can get you sacked or threatened with same.
Crazy, but I never agreed with hounding Holocaust deniers anyway, they should have their stupid thoughts, and be ignored or ridiculed.
Now we can see how banning anything, often sets a precedent for banning something else entirely.
These sneaky people have cottoned onto something here though, and we should think carefully about this new tactic.
Much as we all despise the word, in truth people can have a phobia about anything, so somewhere, someone will be islamophobic.
Take the guy who drove from Wales to run over a bunch of muslims outside the London mosk, should he not be described as being islamofobic?
So it may only apply to one in a million, but we should be careful not to say it does not exist.
When confronted with this term, we might need to ask for clarification on what it’s supposed to mean, and what we have said or done to warrant it’s use.
The alternative is to appear unreasonable and even evasive, as if we have something to hide.
We might also acknowledge it’s existence, then enquire why they claim so many people have become islamofobic.
Could it have anything to do with islam?
eduardo odraude says
Just because your paranoid doesn’t mean no one is out to get you. Similarly, just because you are Islamophobic doesn’t mean Islamic supremacists don’t want to convert, subjugate, or kill you.
eduardo odraude says
To Christine Douglass-Williams, thanks you for your courage, heroism and great contributions to Jihad Watch.
Matthieu Baudin says
“… White supremacists indeed still need to be cracked down on. The trouble is that our Western culture only adequately recognizes racism if it is white people against another group. To me, this dismal minimalizing of human rights abuses by Islamists—most of whom are not white– is troubling and it is also an insulting demonstration of a widespread bigotry of low expectations of visible minority perpetrators…”
Brilliantly put. A true champion of Universal Human Rights! The victim-hood obsessions of contemporary ‘progressive’ opinion leaders have belittled the notion of human rights equality and have instead been content to act as footnotes to the Class Struggle obsessions of their 20th Century Marxist fore-bearers.
davej says
Hearing about genuine human rights supporters like Christine being attacked and demonized by the real intolerants is depressing. Here’s hoping that more and more people see right thru the facade of illusion and blame mounted by real hypocrites like CAIR, etc.
PKG says
Christine – i always enjoy your articles-they are lucid, well researched and very well written.
I was wondering why we hadn’t received any articles from you lately- you often cover articles on issues arising in Australia and we’ve had a few curly issues lately that need to be aired!!!
i wish you all the best and hope you will win this fight!!!
Richard Van Seters says
Those of us who know Christine Williams can verify that she is the friend of all victims of racism, bigotry and hatred and a solid advocate of freedom and liberty for the oppressed. Those of us opposed to suppression of free expression free enquiry and the abominable ideology behind the use of terms such as “Islamophobia” stand with Christine Williams and the preservation of Canadian values. As a person who has researched the issues at hand for over a decade, I think that Canadian Members of Parliament are woefully illiterate when it comes to understanding the agenda of those behind the scenes who are the sponsors of things like Petition e-411 and Motion M-103 – persons who want to silence all opposition and all enquiry. While Motion M-103 is still under review and advisement, Canadians can already see its negative effects – one of which is the attack on Christine – a true patriot and warrior for freedom.
Mike Blackford says
I applaud you and your thoughts and views, Christine. You are invaluable. Keep up the great work. It is so desperately needed in these times of mass ignorance.
John Neilson says
Apart from commenting here, is there any merit in preparing a petition, and/or email campaign in order to combat this unjust and meritless attack on Christine?
PABLO says
Send e-mails to Heritage Minister Joly at Melanie.Joly@parl.gc.ca and to the Canadian Race Relations Foundation Chairman, Albert Lo, who seems to have done nothing to support Christine, but seemed fine with the conference that welcomed Islamists in the name of diversity, according to the article. His e-mail address is chair.crrf@telus.net
John Neilson says
Ta
gravenimage says
Please *be polite* when you contact them.
PABLO says
Minister Joly is way out of her league. Ms. Douglass-Williams reins supreme in looks and brains over one of Trudeau’s sub-intellect female ministers. I am a Minster because I am a female not because I am qualified.
PABLO says
Minister Joly is way out of her league. Ms. Douglass-Williams reins supreme in looks and brains over one of Trudeau’s sub-intellect female ministers. I am a Minster because I am a female not because I am qualified……
mike4415 says
The REAL issue with “islam” … is that the “koran” itself proves “allah” doesn’t exist.
In terms of homeland security … if people can be shown why there is no “allah” … then they wouldn’t feel as though they need to kill or otherwise attack non-muslims.
An 8 year old can see this … “islam” claims the Old Testament is from “allah”. The “muslims” claim to be from God’s covenant with Abraham.
Then WHY … why does the “allah” thing … completely change his mind in the “koran” in the 7th Century A.D. … saying the opposite of what he (“allah”) said during Old Testament times.
Proof upon proof > http://www.Gods-Christian-Dogma.com/section_113.html
P.S. – It helps to employ the truth.
gravenimage says
Mike, Muslims have an answer for this–they claim that everything in the Torah and Gospels that is not in accordance with the vicious Qur’an was “corrupted” by Jews and Christians.
Of course, this is absurd–there are virtually unchanged Torahs and Bibles dating back hundreds of years, and no sign of this mythical version at all. But Muslims do not care about logic.