A celebrated Canadian human rights lawyer urged Members of Parliament “to be careful in their use of the term Islamophobia,” saying “fear of some elements of Islam is mere prudence.” David Matas spoke to the House of Commons Heritage Committee hearings regarding anti-Islamophobia motion M-103, which seeks to “quell the increasing public climate of hate and fear,” and condemns “Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination….”
Matas also said: “Not every fear of Islam is Islamophobia.” He noted that anyone who was not afraid of the various jihad terror organizations around the world today was “foolhardy.”
Matas also noted that “Islamophobia does not appear in a vacuum,” but “grows out of a fear of incitement and acts of hatred and terrorism coming from elements of the Islamic community.”
M-103 accuses Canadians of “hate and fear,” and attempts to force Canadians not to discuss their fears or else be deemed “Islamophobic” or “racist.” On the contrary, citizens should be encouraged to openly discuss their fears and the reasons for those fears. One cannot blindly ignore widespread human rights abuses in the name of Islam, such as the mass murders of Christians, Yazidis and other minorities, as well as the murder of Muslims by Muslims (11 million since 1948), jihad attacks throughout the West, mass sex attacks on women deemed to be inferior, FGM, the state-sanctioned calls to obliterate Israel, etc.
All religious doctrine and ideologies should be open to discussion and scrutiny, in accordance with the principles of any free society.
M-103 has created enormous divisions in Canada from its inception and for good reasons, which do not include anti-Muslim bigotry, as its promoters have claimed. The term “anti-Muslim bigotry” was, in fact, recommended by many as alternative to the term “Islamophobia” as a means to fight hate and discrimination against Muslims without giving the impression that any criticism of Islam was being proscribed, but questionable groups including the National Council of Canadian Muslims (former CAIR-CAN) have been aggressively pushing the term “Islamophobia,” however ill-defined, and anti-Islamophobia measures throughout the country, in an attempt to shut down criticism of Islam and elevate it above all other religions and doctrines.
“Some fears of Islam justified, human rights lawyer tells M103 committee”, by Anthony Furey, Postmedia Network, October 18, 2017:
A celebrated Canadian human rights lawyer urged MPs to be careful in their use of the term Islamophobia, saying “fear of some elements of Islam is mere prudence.”
David Matas, an Order of Canada recipient who began his career as a clerk for the Chief Justice of Canada in the 1960s, delivered testimony Wednesday before the M-103 committee hearings in his capacity as senior counsel to B’nai Brith Canada.
“Not every fear of Islam is Islamophobia,” Matas said to the House of Commons Heritage Committee, noting that anyone who is not afraid of the various radical Islamic terrorist outfits in the world is “foolhardy”.
“Islamophobia does not appear in a vacuum,” Matas told MPs. “It grows out of a fear of incitement and acts of hatred and terrorism coming from elements of the Islamic community.”
The Winnipeg-based lawyer, who ran for office years ago as a Liberal, recommended the committee take a “dual focus” approach on both those victimized by Islamophobia and those within the Islamic community inciting hatred and terrorism.
Following Matas’ testimony, Shimon Fogel, CEO of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, urged the committee to aim towards a more precise definition of Islamophobia.
M-103 was nominally designed to denounce, and study, all forms of racism and discrimination, but has faced extensive controversy for singling out Islam.
Fogel pointed to a Toronto District School Board booklet’s definition of Islamophobia that included mere dislike of political Islam as worthy of censure.