Trudeau and Islam

More Than a Hint of Islamophilia

Only a few days before Christmas 2012, the future Prime Minister of Canada was the keynote speaker at the Reviving the Islamic Spirit Conference (December 21 – 23) at the Toronto Convention Center, the largest gathering of its kind in North America.

Karen Armstrong author of Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Times preceded Trudeau on the podium.

Why would Justin Trudeau lend his and his father’s prestige to a large proselytizing Islamic religious gathering whose speakers he joined on the podium praised scriptures which teach that what Christians would celebrate a few days later is blasphemy?

Was he simply pandering for votes? His actions following his election as Prime Minister would indicate that his presence at the Reviving the Islamic Spirit Conference in particular was more than a routine campaign stop.

An Islamophile is someone who, while not professing a desire to take the Oath, betrays by his actions and/or words an admiration for Islam and what it stands for, or thinks it stands for.

… the general picture is of a white liberal non-Muslim who equates any criticism of Islamic doctrine with bigotry, Islamophobia, or even racism … they deny any connection between heartfelt religious belief and Muslim violence.

Maajid Nawaz in conversation with Sam Harris, Islam and the Future of Tolerance, Harvard University Press, 2015

The Prime Minister is a long time close friend of the Agha Khan. Despite a progressive outlook which is not representative of mainstream Islam, the Ismaili leader must do all he can, like other leaders of the faithful, to advance Allah’s Cause, a world ruled by the Book.

The Agha Khan's influence would explain a politician's willingness to take a hit in the polls, not for what he claims is an infringement of the Charter of Rights but because he feels for men like Omar, Abdullah, Ahmad and Muayyed and what they represent.

Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad Abou-Elmatti and Muayyed Nureddin owe their good fortune to a sympathetic ear, their own carelessness and honest mistakes made by government officials engaged in counter Islamic terrorism in uncertain times, found themselves at the mercy of coreligionists.

If the Prime Minister split the difference, as he did for Mr. Khadr in countering his lawyers’ demand of 20 million, Messrs. Almalki, Abou-Elmatti and Nureddin conceivably received in excess of 16 million dollars each tax free.

The government will not divulge the amount paid in this instance. It’s reluctance to do so may be an indication of an embarrassment factor greater than that of its payment to Mr. Khadr.

The Trudeau-approved accusations in Motion 103, the opening salvo of a joint assault on freedom of speech, fit Nawaz’s characterization of what can only be an Islamophile to a tee. This may be considered further proof of the Prime Minister's Islamophilia.

Should We Be Worried?

On February 23, 2017 the Ontario Legislature passed a motion sponsored by Liberal backbencher Nathalie Des Rosiers which mimicked the one sponsored by Iqra Khalid's at the federal level, and which, like Ms. Khalid's condemns people who hate a religion which hates them.

And what does 103 say about the men who, like the Prime Minister, support initiatives which seek to shelter from criticism scriptures that not only denigrate women but inspire adults to murder children?

Do Islamophobes have a point and should we be worried about efforts by an alliance of those who live, or wish to live by the Book and their sympathizers to silence them?

Human Rights Devalued

Liberals overhaul citizenship test: Barbaric cultural practices out, respecting Indigenous treaties in.

... the proposed new guide breaks down the responsibilities of citizenship into two categories: voluntary and mandatory. Voluntary responsibilities are listed as respecting the human rights of others, understanding official bilingualism and participating in the political process.

Ottawa Citizen, July 23

What is most troubling considering the Prime Minister’s admiration for those who live by the Book is the relegation of respect for human rights in the citizenship test to a voluntary responsibility.

First his approval of the niqab, even when taking the oath of citizenship, which allows new citizens to remain anonymous and apart for a lifetime if they wish, then Motion 103 which seeks to stifle any meaningful discussion about what it means to live by the Book, and now this, devalued human rights.

Less worrisome, but perhaps further evidence of a pattern, is absolving those who live by a Book which considers secular governments and what they represent abhorrently unIslamic from a responsibility to participate in the political process.

Bernard Payeur