Canadian PM talks “respect” for Muslims, while Imam issues veiled threats. My latest in FrontPage:
Samuel Paty, the French schoolteacher who was recently beheaded for showing his class a cartoon of Islam’s prophet Muhammad, was a “cursed individual,” an “evil-spirited man,” a “filthy excuse for a human being,” according to the Canada-based imam and Islamic scholar Younus Kathrada. The learned imam complained that Muslims had objected to Muhammad cartoons for years, but “nobody bothered listening.” However, Kathrada quickly picked up an ally who echoed his remarks, albeit more mildly: asked about the cartoons, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, “Freedom of expression is not without limits.”
Those limits include, apparently, material that offends Muslims. Trudeau explained: “We will always defend freedom of expression. But freedom of expression is not without limits. We owe it to ourselves to act with respect for others and to seek not to arbitrarily or unnecessarily injure those with whom we are sharing a society and a planet.”
Trudeau reached for a hoary example: “We do not have the right for example to shout fire in a movie theatre crowded with people, there are always limits.”
Yes. There is no right to incitement to violence or criminal activity. Deliberately causing a panic when there is nothing to panic about, however, is markedly different from doing something entirely innocuous, i.e., drawing a cartoon, that offends the sensibilities of a particular group. If offense to a group, any group, is criminalized, that group has a free hand to do whatever it wants, including illegal activity, up to and including the imposition of tyrannical rule, without fear of opposition.
Instead of the equality of rights of all people before the law, a special protected class is established with privileges beyond those of other groups. Thus what Justin Trudeau is saying here subverts the very idea of a free society.
Trudeau himself, however, actually cloaked his surrender to violent intimidation in the garb of the very pluralism he was advocating be effectively destroyed: “In a pluralist, diverse and respectful society like ours, we owe it to ourselves to be aware of the impact of our words, of our actions on others, particularly these communities and populations who still experience a great deal of discrimination.”
He could have been responding to Kathrada’s complaint about how Muslim rage over the Muhammad cartoons had been ignored for years: “We know that some years ago, in some European countries, they published cartoons, claiming that these were depictions of the Prophet, insulting cartoons, depicting him as a criminal. That happened some years ago, and more recently it has happened again. Of course the Muslims objected, years ago, and the Muslims objected again, but this time, not as strongly as they did before. But nobody bothered… Nobody paid attention to what the Muslims said… And why should they? Because we, now, are a humiliated people – there is no worth to us – so nobody bothered listening.” This happened again, he said, just recently: “In any event, not too long ago, a teacher in France chose to show those insulting cartoons to his class, at school. And of course, some of the Muslim students who were there were very annoyed and upset and they objected – as did their parents. They spoke up, but nobody bothered listening to them. Nobody paid any attention to them.”
Kathrada need not continue to nurse his hurt feelings: Justin Trudeau appears ready to make sure that Muslims are “a humiliated people” no more, even at the expense of one of the principal foundations of any free society.
Trudeau, however, would be well advised to listen carefully and ponder the implications of some of the other things Kathrada said, particularly his characterization of Paty and the jihadi who beheaded him: “Then, about a week ago, it is said – I repeat, it is said – that a young Muslim man confronted this cursed individual, he confronted this evil-spirited man, he confronted this filthy excuse for a human being, on the street, and he beheaded him.”
Kathrada gave no hint that he was upset about the murder. It was not Paty’s murderer who was a “cursed individual,” an “evil-spirited man,” a “filthy excuse for a human being”; these epithets were reserved only for the man who dared to show a Muhammad cartoon and was murdered for doing so. Kathrada also prayed: “Oh Allah, give strength to Islam and Muslims, and humiliate the infidels and the polytheists. Oh Allah, destroy the enemies of Islam, and annihilate the heretics and the atheists….Oh Allah, support those who wage jihad for Your same everywhere….Oh Allah, annihilate all those who slandered Your Prophet Muhammad.”
A prayer to Allah to “destroy the enemies of Islam, and annihilate the heretics and the atheists” is not just a request directed to the deity. The Qur’an explicitly says that Allah will punish people by the hands of the believers: “Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and satisfy the breasts of a believing people, and remove the fury in the believers’ hearts.” (9:14-15) Thus Kathrada may be issuing a call to action to believers who think it incumbent upon themselves to heed this Qur’anic directive and become instruments of Allah’s wrath.
The upshot of this is that Trudeau may soon find that he will have to limit the freedom of expression not just out of “respect” for Muslims, but out of the genuine concern that if he doesn’t, some Muslims will commit acts of violence in Canada. Standing up for the freedom of speech and stopping this violent thuggery doesn’t seem to be on the table, at least not in the worker’s paradise to our immediate north.
mortimer says
“The right to free speech and the unrealistic expectation of never being offended cannot coexist.”
– Irving Weisdorf
Lion heart says
As a Canadian Christian guy originally from Iraq, I wanna say why in the hell this rat imam still in Canada ?
mortimer says
Kathrada tiptoes around the Canadian law that prohibits the solicitation of murder. Instead, Kathrada asks ‘Allah’ to commit the murders on blasphemers.
However, the Koran says that ‘Allah’ killed disbelievers ‘at the hands’ of the Muslims.
Muslims are Allah’s contract killers.
Del says
Trudeau sucks up to Muslims like this piece garbage because he is terrified of the violence we always get from Islamic theocracy, promoted in their Koran hate literature.
Why the silence from so called “moderate” Muslims? Why are they not denouncing his endless demands of violence? Do they agree or are they also terrified of violent responses by their fellow Muslims? Probably both.
Canadians can expect that most of those attending the mosque agree with violence in support of the “religion”? of peace, more accurately seen as the theocracy of violence. Since we can’t differentiate between moderate and extremist Muslims, unfortunately we have no choice but to consider them all violent.
, says
Islam encourages RAGE for the purpose of preparing the Muslim mind for JIHAD TERRORISM and HONOR KILLING.
Ghayra or Gheera or Gheyrah in Islam means ‘protective jealousy or rage’. The Salafi scholar Muhammad Al-Munajjid indicates that the concept
also applies to protecting Muhammad from blasphemy. Any private Muslim is free from penality whenever he executes someone who insults or
demeans Mohammed. Any private Muslim may do it if the state fails to execute.
Ghayrah (sometimes transliterated as ghayra, ghira, gheerah or gheera) is an Arabic word which means a person’s dislike of another’s sharing
in a right (which belongs to the former). It has a sense of earnest concern or zeal over something and can be considered a kind of protective
jealousy.[1] In Islam, there are different kinds of ghayrah: that which relates to Allah and which relates to a Muslim. Allah’s discontent is
with sharing the obedience of his servant which rightfully belongs to him. For a Muslim it is the rage in his heart which moves him to
guard his family from indecency and to kill in the name of honor.
gravenimage says
Mortimer, is that you?
All true.
mortimer says
Yes, GI, that is the definition of ‘gheira’ … the hate-filled, emotional mindset that Muslims are required to adopt. ‘Gheira’ prepares Muslims so they are emotionally ready ruthlessly to conduct jihadic terrorism.
gravenimage says
Thank you.
Alfredo says
Thank you for sharing your knowledge on the concept of Ghayrah. My Muslim neighbors exhibit that endless rage constantly. I came to the conclusion that it is done to keep them angry all the time and thus ready to fight even without any provocation. They feel entitled to spew insults, curses and threats incessantly. But react indignantly when they are called out for their vile behavior.
What the “woke” PM doesn’t seem to know or care for is the kind of open hostility these people display for Canada. They are only here for the Welfare programs they all benefit from and abuse; while heaping abuse on their neighbors for the crime in their eyes of being”People of the Book”
They want to dominate and subjugate the kafir.
Surah 9:29
I bet the PM has never bothered to read that surah. Because it is in such verses where their visceral hatred of the “infidel” is taught.
Jay says
Some muslims groups are calling on the feds to bring in a very strict Islamophobia bill more then the current one the big thing they want is any question of islam to be a criminal offence.
mortimer says
Mullah Kathrada is in effect justifying the vigilante execution of blasphemers. Al Azhar University scholars have approved of vigilante executions.
In 1992, Islamist militants gunned down Egyptian secularist Farag Foda. Before his death, he had been declared an apostate and enemy of Islam. During the trial of the murderers, Al Azhar scholar Muhammad al-Ghazali testified in court that when the state fails to punish apostates, somebody else has to do it.
Jihadi Justin is bending over backwards to encourage Muslims to attack the freedom of expression in Canada.
Jihad Justin is in bed with the Muslim Brotherhood and is an outright traitor.
gravenimage says
+1
AnnChristine says
Islam are desperate to convert everyone to be like them ? Yuk!!!!!
mortimer says
A-C … Islamic leaders are MORE desperate to retain their own people who are leaving Islam at the rate of tens of thousands every day.
Islam is lacking in historical, logical and intellectual content. An educated person cannot help seeing all the self-referential incoherencies in Islam.
Wellington says
Again demonstrating that the ultimate problem respecting the preservation of freedom in the West is NOT Islam but weeny Western leaders like Trudeau.
Islam is the secondary problem. Western caving to Islam is the primary problem (N.B., Biden as President will function as Exhibit #1 respecting how NOT to treat with the Islamic world).
A strong and free civilization (not that many, unfortunately, in history) that believes in itself and knows that peace comes through strength—a la Horace, si vis pacem, para bellum (if you wish for peace, prepare for war)—is the optimal way to confront evil.
Right now, the West in general is not confronting the evil which is Islam. Not even close. And Biden and his foolish and vile minions are waiting in the wings to implement a plethora of idiocies. Oh yeah, many problems ahead. A ton load. And the Trudeaus in the West are seemingly everywhere nowadays. Damn.
James Lincoln says
Wellington, oh how I wish that you were wrong…
gravenimage says
Too true, Wellington.
Rufolino says
Wellington. I’m glad someone else feels the way I do about this shattering turn of events.
Grace says
It’s time Trudeau stood up for Canadians instead of trying to placate the constant complaints of Muslims who will never be satisfied till the Imams are sitting in his seat in the house of parliament. Canada belongs to Canadians and they should find some leaders with enough guts and gaul to insist on it.
Michael Copeland says
Suggested text for Kathrada’s next sermon, from the life of Mohammed:
“Selling animals for animals …… he bought him for two black slaves.”
https://sunnah.com/nasai/44/173
Stanton Lore says
This takes on an ominous tone considering Biden will likely parrot whatever Trudeau says with respect to Muslims. But, Biden can’t undo the Constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech that we enjoy.
Huh!?! says
I pray you are right. As long as real people of the United States stop him demanding things like voting in person.
Wellington says
“But, Biden can’t undo the Constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech that we enjoy.”
To some extent he can by policy decisions and executive orders but majorly so by appointing woke liberal judges who will interpret the First Amendment in such a way that free speech will, in an Orwellian fashion, be divided from hate speech, which is, effectively, a recipe for the ending of free speech.
This has already occurred in America where the Left is most in control, i.e., college campuses—even certain pronouns like “him” and “her” are now verboten per silly pc/mc crap at former centers of higher education which are presently centers of lower indoctrination.
Ultimately, the Constitution means whatever the Supreme Court says it means and if Biden packs the Court or if judges like Gorsuch and Kavanaugh move left, as Roberts already has, then watch out.
I predict much trouble ahead. Much.
somehistory says
biden has already said he would “mandate” masks for everyone. Mr Trump said that is a State issue, but biden doesn’t care. Will there be arrests in places where the Governors have allowed people to decide whether or not to war masks?
Under biden…or harris…”made in China” might come to mean some little town between the Atlantic and Pacific and Canada and Mexico. Or Canada and Russia.
gravenimage says
He can certainly erode these rights, Stanton.
somehistory says
If free speech can be no longer…then he and others will have no right to say what is allowed or not as they will be speaking “freely,” will they not? and they are disallowing that.
People are so very stupid. It’s hard to imagine that so many can be so stupid when it comes to wanting to do away with the freedom to speak as we wish. Do all of these believe they will be exempt from the restrictions?
Of course, moslims see themselves as exempt. They think they can go right on saying they want to murder those to whom they refer as “pigs and apes” and “people of the book” whom they decide deserve death But, do all of those who have jumped so quickly onto this bandwagon realize moslims will see themselves as exempt? Or do they think…wrongly…that it will equally apply to moslims?
Have they not noticed that when Christians are insulted by things done to **images** of Christ, or to things holy to Jews, these two groups may simply ignore the insults, or if they don’t ignore, simply state their objections, while moslims commit terrorism and murder when anything happens that make them feel slighted or insulted?
Do people such as this idiot pol in Canada think that by limiting speech to what is acceptable to moslims they will stop terrorism? Do they not realize the terrorism will not stop and that there is no limit to the things moslims don’t want other people to say?
A moslm is permitted to say that their “prophet’ molested a child, raped her and called her his “wife,” but a non-moslim is not allowed to say the same thing?
And the restrictions will not be limited to speech. We would all be limited to eating what…and when…moslims eat, wear what they wear, and **think** what moslims have rattling around inside their brains.
tgusa says
“be aware of the impact of our words, of our actions”
Actions? Freedom of expression? Trudeau needs to get rid of other things that offend muslims. The list is long but for a start he needs to force women to cover up as showing some skin offends muslims. He needs to ban lgbts as that offends muslims. I’m sure others can add to what would be a long list.
James Lincoln says
tgusa says,
“He needs to ban lgbts as that offends muslims.”
I think that suggestion would give Trudeau a hefty dose of cognitive dissonance…
tgusa says
Yes sir it would. When bowing to the will of muslims he has to go all the way!
gravenimage says
Canada: Imam Denounces Free Speech, Trudeau Agrees
……………
Just sickening.
“Canada: Trudeau answers question about Muhammad cartoons by saying ‘freedom of expression is not without limits’”
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/10/canada-trudeau-answers-question-about-muhammad-cartoons-by-saying-freedom-of-expression-is-not-without-limits
Rod says
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, “Freedom of expression is not without limits.”
Imam Denounces Free Speech, Trudeau Agrees
The first of these statement is simple common sense, even if Mr Spencer finds it hard to understand.
The second statement is a lie. Trudeau did not agree to “denounce” free speech. No evidence is presented to show that he did. And of course, there is no reason to think that he would.
So, my questions are – why is Spencer lying, and why do you bother reading the long-winded opinions of somebody who lies?
Such an obvious and clumsy attempt at deception is rather infantile, isn’t it?
gravenimage says
Here is what Trudeau had to say about crushing of freedom of speech for Muslims, specifically in response to the Muhammed cartoons in France where Muslims responded to defense of freedom of speech by beheading a teacher. Frnech President Macron stuck up for freedom of speech in the wake of this; Trudea would not do so:
“…freedom of expression is not without limits,” he added. “We owe it to ourselves to act with respect for others and to seek not to arbitrarily or unnecessarily injure those with whom we are sharing a society and a planet…”
Distancing himself from the position of French President Emmanuel Macron, Trudeau pleaded for a careful use of free speech.
“In a pluralist, diverse and respectful society like ours, we owe it to ourselves to be aware of the impact of our words, of our actions on others, particularly these communities and populations who still experience a great deal of discrimination,” he said.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/10/canada-trudeau-answers-question-about-muhammad-cartoons-by-saying-freedom-of-expression-is-not-without-limits
“Rod” seems fine with these disgusting weasel words eroding freedom of speech and kowtowing to Muslim violence.
What Robert Spencer says is *quite* accurate. “Rod” hopes you don’t know that.
The only limits to freedom of speech should be inciding violence,
Rod says
Just give us the words Trudeau used when he “denounced” free speech. No need for your endless waffle, gravy. Just give us the words. Spencer couldn’t and he knows it. Now is your chance.
Meanwhile, Spencer’s lie is a lie. Trudeau did not agree to denounce free speech.
James Lincoln says
Rod,
gravenimage just gave you two exact quotes from Trudeau.
In the body of the feature article, Robert Spencer said “Kathrada quickly picked up an ally (Trudeau) who echoed his remarks, albeit more mildly”
Characterizing Trudeau’s words as “denouncing” free speech may be subject to interpretation, but is certainly clear that Trudeau is not a strong *advocate* of free speech.
I’m not sure how else you can “spin” this…
E T says
M-103 is the greatest threat to our freedom of speech. We have a constitution that address our freedom of speech.
I am so happy Rod is here, finally, finally I have found someone who can explain to me why a Muslim member of parliament introduced a motion that now curtails what Canadians can and cannot say about Islam. The boys at Palestine House thanked “Loyal sister Khalid” for success in getting the motion passed.
Please explain how under our so-called “hate speech” motion Imams are allowed to spew vile hatred about the dirty Kafirs and Jews.
What absolutely sickens me is that Imam Mazin Abdul-Adhim is allowed to call our Canadian soldiers war criminals and says Muslims should not wear a poppy and Muslims owe Canada nothing. Why has Justine not addressed the statements this seditionist has made?
I will wait patiently for your explain.
Giacomo Latta says
Dear Illiterate,
While Trudeau did not give freedom of speech a total thumbs down, he did compare mocking Islam to someone shouting ‘fire’ in a movie theatre. Do we slit throats or disembowel those who do the latter? Perhaps in your part of the COVID-19 part of the world but not where I live.
Let me again teach you the meaning of a word which you like to use but do not know the meaning of. ‘Denounce’ means to criticize publicly. Trudeau criticized freedom of expression, not your free speech, probably because he does not want any restrictions on his right to wear blackface. He more than just lamented the fact that some people mock Islam. He therefore criticized publicly and denounced freedom of expression.
Giacomo Latta says
E T,
Rod is thick as shit. Certainly don’t wait for a logical explanation of any sort from him.
gravenimage says
I just gave “Rod” the words–direct quotes from Trudeau. I suppose “Rod” is now reduced to desperately hoping that Anti-Jihadists here cannot read.
Rod says
Yet the words Trudeau used when he “denounced” free speech are still missing. How odd. They must be somewhere.
Perhaps you haven’t looked hard enough.
Meanwhile, Spencer’s lie remains a lie.
But why so disbelieving? It’s not as if it has never happened before.
gravenimage says
Why is “Rod” still pretending that I haven’t directly quoted Trudeau? Another ‘big lie’.
Rod says
Thanks Giacomo,
we’ve progressed. Spencer claims, without evidence, and improbable though it seems, that Trudeau agreed to denounce free speech.
Giacomo says, still without evidence, that Trudeau denounced freedom of expression.
And, if I wasn’t illiterate, this would all make sense.
If Spencer told you the earth was flat, would you feel obliged to pretend you believed it? Or perhaps you would believe it?
Giacomo Latta says
Dear same ol’ illiterate,
Yo really have a reading problem. Seriously. Perhaps you are fortunate enough to not have a MSM television network providing Trudeau’s ”pearls of wisdom” but what was quoted here Trudeau said to anyone with the stomach to watch him. Go back to your Marxist world, the one where what you dream exists, the same one you would like to impose on those who have their own idea how to live being the dyed-in-the-wool fascists you are.
Rod says
Giacomo, you’ve referred to ‘what was quoted’. I’m really frustrated that nobody, nobody, can give me this quote – whereby Trudeau “agreed to denounce free speech”.
Surely if everybody, everybody, knows about it, you should be able to provide it – just a few words, in quotes, just as Trudeau spoke them. (It is actually inconceivable that he would ever say such a thing, so we really do need hard evidence).
I’m beginning to suspect that no such quote exists. Marxism? Fascists? What’s that about? Are you trying to change the subject?
So I remain convinced that Spencer’s statement is a lie. Obvious, isn’t it?
Let me know when you find the quote. Meanwhile I have better things to do.
Cheers.
Giacomo Latta says
Antifaman,
My god you are such an idiot. Are you waiting for Trudeau to say precisely ”I denounce freedom of expression” before you are convinced he denounced it? He did say precisely, using the typical definition in the West of freedom of expression, that freedom of expression is not without limits. No shit. Try driving through a residential area at 3 in the morning with a loudspeaker to state your political views. What Trudeau is denouncing is what we all, minus you and Trudeau, have accepted since Canada was created. One can make fun of people of any religion, or face colour, a functioning concept in de jure and de facto terms since forever but now Trudeau wants the mocking of a very specific religion to come to an end. That is denouncing freedom of expression as it exists in Canada.
Rod says
‘Are you waiting for Trudeau to say precisely ”I denounce freedom of expression”’
Giacomo, I’m waiting for you to prove that your friend Spencer is not a liar.
Too much to ask, it seems.
It’s absurd, obviously, to even imagine that Trudeau would denounce free speech. It’s not just absurd, it’s unimaginable. Spencer knows that, but he’s not going to tell you. Imagine the furore if Trudeau had done so. Instead, silence.
But the really lunatic aspect of this ridiculous exchange, is that you seem unable to work it out for yourself. Time to get real? Just this once? Or are you happy to let Spencer think (and lie) for you? Wake up, Giacomo. You seem to have a brain. Use it!
gravenimage says
And yet, in response to the Muslim beheading of a teacher in France, Trudeau responded by saying that there are limits to freedom of speech. I *wish* this were unimaginable. We know where the appalling “Rod” stands, though.
E T says
M-103
SJ says
WTF is wrong with Trudeau?
Wellington says
Leftthink is what is wrong with Trudeau, just as Islamthink is what is wrong with Muslims.
Crusades Were Right says
Trudeau says “Yes sir!” to the despicable imam.
He SHOULD be telling him: “You’re residence in Canada is no longer permitted. Bye!”
Crusades Were Right says
*Your
citoyen says
Trudeau? You’re not talking about Blackface Trudeau are you? Surely not?
livepeanuts says
The issue here is not “never to be offended” but it is rather to “offend” and then “never to be offended”
The question is the Moslem un-offendable regardless of anything the Moslem says or does or is there a Moslem supremacy, to put it in to one word?
We talk here of an “invader” who brings laws and publishes texts which offend most in the host nation (which the host nation must respect, hence “invader” not “immigrant”) and say all the bad things which should be done with those who don’t share the laws of political/ religious Islam, these published texts indicate how to treat all of us who are not prepared to share one of the most evil bodies of legislation/ religion on the planet.
So they publish and repeat all that, we allow it, and they indoctrinate their young/ faithful in their mosques and we say nothing to this, many times our own people get killed because of this, and what is the only thing that do we do?
Well we simply make a cartoon of the one who said all those bad things about us and the Moslems get offended! Poor Moslems!
So who has freedom of speech in Canada or anywhere else stupid enough to let in the Moslem?
So whose law is sovereign in Canada or anywhere else stupid enought to let in the Moslem?
Why are there no Moselm attacks in Tokyo for instance but happen in all those places stupid enough to let in the Moslem?
Take any Moslem society like Pakistan, what “minority rights” do they observe in Pakistan? Is there reciprocity in the tolerance and respect which they demand of us? Without touching ALL the other things which we have found to be a big issue with Pakistanies..
The real question is: Is keeping the Moslem that valuable to merit changing the very nature of our society?
In the light of this, shouldn’t those politicians responsible for this incompatible and deadly situation not be answerable in the courts? Why isn’t at least health and safety controlling our immigration policies to protect us as they do in Japan?
Alfredo says
What Muslims demand is the we “Kafirs” submit to their Shariah when we are in their countries. And when they come to our countries we must submit to their Shariah.
What they crave is for the host country to submit to their supremacy. Yet they have the audacity to call it the “religion of peace”
But we must be willfully blind to believe that.
Giacomo Latta says
‘for showing his class a cartoon of Islam’s prophet Muhammad, was a “cursed individual,” an “evil-spirited man,” a “filthy excuse for a human being,”’
Kathrada must practise his rants in front of a mirror. Somehow he misses the right target in the end yet he nonetheless describes someone he knows very well.
OLD GUY says
Wow this Imam seems to be pointing a finger at himself as the filthy excuse for a human. “Come on man” it is only a picture of a cartoon characterization. After all Muhammad was not exactly the perfect man, he was a little kinky and a womanizer, and yea a pedophile.