Trudeau and Islam

Like a modern day Muqawqis whose secret admiration of the Prophet facilitated the Muslim takeover of Egypt, the Prime Minister appears bent on leading us down a similar path, with the exception that his is a road is paved with good intentions. Or so it would seem.

These good intentions may also reflect a desire to please, beyond what is judicious, a constituency whose religion is more about hate epitomized by the large string attached to its deity's mercy than it is about love — or something else altogether.

The Gift

Ethics loophole keeps Aga Khan's gifts to Trudeau family secret

Unacceptable gifts don't have to be listed in public registry, says ethics watchdog's office.

CBC March 27, 2018

Unacceptable gifts are usually gifts whose monetary value exceeds the permitted amount. The recipient of such a gift can 1) return it, 2) give it to the nation or 3) simply pay the difference between what is allowed and the market value and keep it in the family.

For a man as wealthy as Trudeau, paying the difference and be done with it would appear to be the logical course of action. The problem here may be that the value of the item is in what it represents and therefore priceless e.g. a strand of the Prophet’s hair, a rare edition of the Koran etc.

Considering it’s provenance, we have to assume the gift has to do with Islam and may provide unwanted insights into the type of relationship our Prime Minister has with the Agha Khan and the religion the Ismaili leader must, like the icon he represents, and in accordance with Allah’s directive, strive to make triumph over every other religion.

48:28 It is He Who sent forth His Messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may exalt it above every other religion. Allah suffices as Witness.

Islamic and Secular Law on an Equal Footing

This is also about celebrating our shared beliefs in justice, fairness, equality of opportunity and acceptance.

Prime Minister Trudeau in a video address to the 2015 Reviving the Islamic Spirit Conference

There is a BIG difference between justice rendered on the basis of revealed truths (immutable facts revealed to a mortal by a god) and by laws which evolve over time to make justice more just. Is the Prime Minister by, in essence, putting secular law and the Sharia on an equal footing in an address to a gathering of the god-fearing betraying a fondness for laws ostensibly made in heaven, or is he simply unaware of the difference? Either way, it is cause for concern.

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 Khadr, Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad Abou-Elmatti and Muayyed Nureddin and what they represent. The latter three, who through their 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 received approximately the same amount as Khadr, 10 millions dollars each.

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, 2017

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 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