Canadians "still nasty" to Muslims

Sheema Khan writes a regular article in Toronto’s Globe and Mail (considered one of the main newspapers of Canada). i don’t know how accurate this is - yeah, of course there are incidents of discrimination just as it exists everywhere. Maybe there is some truth to this article, but everyone’s experiences will be extremely subjective.

Canadians still nasty to Muslims, Sheema Khan
Globe and Mail, 1 May 2003

In his book The Gulf Within, Zuhair Kashmeri documented the painful experiences of Canadian Muslims and Arabs during the 1991 Persian Gulf war. Vandalism, threats, assaults, ominous CSIS interviews and inflammatory media coverage left an indelible mark on the psyche of an entire community.

This time around, Canadian Muslims and Arabs have not felt the same backlash – due to Canada’s disengagement from the Iraq conflict and sober public debate about the war’s merits.

Yet, prejudice remains a concern. A recent survey by the Association for Canadian Studies and Environics Research Group reflects how people perceive the intolerance of others. The survey, which polled 2,002 Canadians between March 15 and 23, showed that concerns over anti-Arab sentiment were harboured by 68 per cent, while 30 per cent felt Arabs and Muslims project a negative image.

Recent incidents seem to give credence to these concerns.

In Montreal, the École de technologie supérieure declined a request by Muslim students for adequate space to pray. Muslims are required to pray five times daily, and many educational institutions have accommodated such practice, in accordance with provincial human-rights law. In this case, the dean says his school is not discriminating against Muslims – it denied a similar request by Catholic students. Secularism means no religious accommodation, period.

At Concordia University, rector Frederick Lowy believes that campus anarchists had “formed an alliance with Muslim students.” He told The Canadian Jewish News this month that, although “only a small number of Muslim students identify with terrorist groups like Hamas . . . that could change . . . depending on the Muslim political opinion worldwide and the outcome of the Iraq war.”

Raising the spectre of an ominous Muslim presence in Montreal, he cited (without basis) a figure of 250,000 – an incredible sixfold increase from the official 1991 census figure of 45,000. He also believes that pro-Palestinians have been the principal “aggressors” in current tensions at the school. After maligning Muslim students, Mr. Lowy issued a tepid apology (some of his comments were misconstrued etc.), telling them they should feel welcome. He reassured the rest that “there is no evidence that any of our students are terrorists or identify with terrorist organizations.”

Ottawa Citizen columnist David Warren was more unequivocal in a lecture given at Baylor College in Waco, Tex. “Muslims and Christians have been enemies since the first time Mohammed declared ‘Allah is One,’ denying the Holy Trinity.” He described Islam as a “splendidly false doctrine” and the “enemy.” And he called for the West to “forge ahead and Christianize” the Middle East. There was more, but you get the picture.

An anti-Islam conference, scheduled for Kitchener, Ont., two months ago, was cancelled after a public outcry. Yet Mark Harding, a self-styled Christian pastor, plans to try again in a month’s time. In 1998, Mr. Harding was convicted of inciting hatred against Muslims.

Tussles between certain evangelical groups and Muslims in the United States have had ramifications in Canada. The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) expressed concern about humanitarian aid to Iraqis by an evangelical charity, the Samaritan’s Purse. The group’s goal is to convert Muslims to Christianity. Its head, Rev. Franklin Graham, has called Islam “an evil and wicked religion.”

An Ontario resident rebuked CAIR for its criticism. Fair enough. But he added: “I am shocked and dismayed by the belief structure being upheld by Muslims in North America where everyone has the freedom of speech and religion. North America was not founded on Muslim principles, else we wouldn’t be the strong continent we are today. We would be a backwoods civilization like many Muslim nations found in the Middle East today. I would recommend you work with Christians and Jews, and not against them as your faith would have it. Yeah, we are the infidel, but in North America, thank God you are a minority religion.”

The individual turned out to be an executive of a Progressive Conservative riding association. The Canadian office of CAIR brought this matter to the attention of the PC brass. There was added concern because a local mosque had been firebombed after 9/11. Shortly after, the two sides jointly denounced the Islamophobic comments as “absolutely unacceptable,” reiterating that these “bear no relation whatsoever to the position and policies of the PC Party of Canada.”

We must mend our multicultural mosaic with education about one another – and we must maintain our mosaic by being vigilant against the seeds of hate and exclusion.

Sheema Khan is chair of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Canada.

No doubt this proves securalism has failed. It cant make people if different beliefs live togeather contracs this to the history of islamic civillasiation where the christains and jews lived side by side with muslims under islam. (to the extent that the christains sided wit the muslims and fought the europeans crusader's0

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by clubber lang: *
No doubt this proves securalism has failed.

[/QUOTE]
Most secular countries today very tolerant toward different religous beliefs. It is in the non-secular countries where religous discrimination is most evident.

Most secular countries today very tolerant toward different religous beliefs. It is in the non-secular countries where religous discrimination is most evident.<<<

but you don't see the point. non-secular countries don't guarantee tolerance and freedom of religion to all except one(of majority). So they are not bound by to rptect teh minorities and their religious freedom. But if in a secular country like Canada few incidents of individuals violating the law happen, it must be because secularism is not a good system. It failed. We need to go back to a system that does not give any guarantees of tolerance and freedom because if similar incidents happen in that system, it is not liable. It does not fail. it keeps going and going. no probelm at all.

Canada has been good to all minorities and people from all over the world. It has been fairly good to muslims in the last couple of years. but heck they did not accept the ridiculous idea of univarsity students praying a dozen times, different religions, different times, different ways in the middle of lectures, it must be really bad in Canada.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by clubber lang: *
No doubt this proves securalism has failed. It cant make people if different beliefs live togeather contracs this to the history of islamic civillasiation
* where the christains and jews lived side by side with muslims under islam. **(to the extent that the christains sided wit the muslims and fought the europeans crusader's0
[/QUOTE]

lang, there is another system where muslims can live very peacefully and broterly with jews and christians under christianity. are you willing to move there?

Who is guilty for such a bad atmosphere, if many in the west confirm that Arabs and Muslims project a negative image?
Muslims live a better and secured life in secular and non-theocratic, a facility usually not rendered to minorities in Islamic States.

Is it wrong that Muslims enjoy a better life in West and in other secular States in comparison to their standard in Islamic States?

(Personally I do not like this article, it projects hate and a particular mindset.)

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
Most secular countries today very tolerant toward different religous beliefs. It is in the non-secular countries where religous discrimination is most evident.
[/QUOTE]

why do the West install western backed puppet regimes in da world, if they can tolerate others?...they want the whole world to adopt their corrupted ideology!

The West tolerate? they cant even give the blacks/natives their due rights never mind the muslims!....they cant even create peace between different sects of christains.

The West accepts muslim?...thats why they call muslims who speak out,terroist,fundementals etc...thats why the est spy on muslim, security service gives threat to mosques that they will face closure if the dont obey....thats why 1000's of muslim in USA are arrestted n held for no reason...thats why in USA they register muslims...in europe 1000's of also been arrestted for no reason,denied lawyers.....anti-muslim feeling across the world shows the West hate islam!!!!

^ Everything you criticize the west for in the above post is only a fraction of what is committed in non-secular countries. Before you judge and codemn the principles of freedom, democracy and secularism - please take an honest and open look at countries where these ideologies no not exist.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by clubber lang: *
No doubt this proves securalism has failed. It cant make people if different beliefs live togeather contracs this to the history of islamic civillasiation where the christains and jews lived side by side with muslims under islam. (to the extent that the christains sided wit the muslims and fought the europeans crusader's0
[/QUOTE]

So are you suggesting they become a purely Christian country?

Some comments in this thread have argued that this article proves that secular countries do not protect minority rights. i suppose that might imply that the rights of minorities in non-secular countries are well-protected.

When was the last time that a church was attacked in Pakistan? Sadly, not too long ago. Why doesn't the Saudi government allow construction of synagogues, temples, churches, etc. on its soil? These acts both constitute violations of minority peoples' rights in Muslim countries. Contrast the latter situation with how many mosques are established today in North America - new mosques are sprouting in Canada each year. i believe there is now at least one in each province, and more likely they range from three to ten within each province (depending upon the provicincial geo. size and number of Muslims). Tiny St. John's in New Brunswick even has one mosque, possibly two.

i am sure secular countries have a long way to go yet in fully protecting minority rights. In the past nine years that i have been residing in Canada, i have to say i have felt safer than probably many Hindus in Pakistan currently feel. Whatever the average Joe Canuck on the street might think of me when he sees me (a 'visible looking' desi), at the very least i know that, as a Canadian citizen, my judicial system will protect my rights - as far as the courts are concerned, i am equal to anyone else. May we say that is accurate for a Jew in Cairo, or a Hindu in Pakistan, or a Jew in Dubai? No.

i firmly believe each society is only as civilized as the level of treatment its minority groups experience. For as long as Jews, Christians, and other nonMuslims can honestly state that they are not made to feel like second-class citizens, then we Muslims have our work cut out for us.

:k:

I would add that each person is only as civilized as the level of his treatment toward minorities.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
Some comments in this thread have argued that this article proves that secular countries do not protect minority rights. i suppose that might imply that the rights of minorities in non-secular countries are well-protected.

When was the last time that a church was attacked in Pakistan? Sadly, not too long ago. Why doesn't the Saudi government allow construction of synagogues, temples, churches, etc. on its soil? These acts both constitute violations of minority peoples' rights in Muslim countries. Contrast the latter situation with how many mosques are established today in North America - new mosques are sprouting in Canada each year. i believe there is now at least one in each province, and more likely they range from three to ten within each province (depending upon the provicincial geo. size and number of Muslims). Tiny St. John's in New Brunswick even has one mosque, possibly two.

i am sure secular countries have a long way to go yet in fully protecting minority rights. In the past nine years that i have been residing in Canada, i have to say i have felt safer than probably many Hindus in Pakistan currently feel. Whatever the average Joe Canuck on the street might think of me when he sees me (a 'visible looking' desi), at the very least i know that, as a Canadian citizen, my judicial system will protect my rights - as far as the courts are concerned, i am equal to anyone else. May we say that is accurate for a Jew in Cairo, or a Hindu in Pakistan, or a Jew in Dubai? No.

i firmly believe each society is only as civilized as the level of treatment its minority groups experience. For as long as Jews, Christians, and other nonMuslims can honestly state that they are not made to feel like second-class citizens, then we Muslims have our work cut out for us.
[/QUOTE]

That is by far your best post ever on GS :)

I must also elaborate my point on minorities in Pakistan. They dont get the respect from the overwhelming Muslim majority, but trust me, an average Muslim over there is not after their lives... Its just these anti-Pakistani elements that are carrying out all these church bomb blasts, shia-sunni fisaads... The good thing is, the educated tubqa in Pakistan is tolerant and respectful of their minority Pakistanis, which is a promising sign. We must all do our part in correcting the uneducated Pakistanis that are on the wrong path.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
Some comments in this thread have argued that this article proves that secular countries do not protect minority rights. i suppose that might imply that the rights of minorities in non-secular countries are well-protected.

When was the last time that a church was attacked in Pakistan? Sadly, not too long ago. Why doesn't the Saudi government allow construction of synagogues, temples, churches, etc. on its soil? These acts both constitute violations of minority peoples' rights in Muslim countries. Contrast the latter situation with how many mosques are established today in North America -
[/QUOTE]

yea this article does prove that secularism/capitalism/western (or watever u want to call it) does not look after the the intrests of the minorities, and really Capitalism doesnt even look after the intrests of the majority rather it caters for those who are powerful and have influence (hence thats why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer).

2nd point..regarding non-secular system, do any exist? saudia is secular as it gets, so is pakistan,so is turkey,so was taliban...just because a few laws from islam are in the consitution doesnt make it islamic. So poeple who suggest that the islamic system can't create harmony between different faiths have no argument because the islamic system does not exist at this moment of time (but dont worry the Khilafah is near)

3rd point about mosques being able to set up, the reason why secularism allows that is because the fundemental "faith" of secularism says that man can believe in anything he wants rats,sun,moon,3 Gods or Allah(swt),etc ASLONG AS YOU OBEY MAN MADE SYSTEM IN SOCIETY'S RUNNING .(i.e man has the right to decide what is halal n haram)...

So Secularism allows mosque but they wont allow mosque to say thing which go agaisnt the creed of securalism..

....will securlaism allow muslim judicary to exist? a islamic eductaion system to exist? (vast majority of islamic skools have to follow national curricla) will secularism allow the islamic social system to exist in society? will they allow islamic ruling system to exist? etc....the list is endless

fact of the matter is secularism allows muslim to practise islam as long they keep it personal!

And last point, 4 a strange reason since Mushraff (Bushraff) has come into power all of sudden attacks against christains have started to pop up regurlary...the Pak govt in the past has been known to instigate bombings to justify govt policies. And also generally the media exaggerate a lot about how much trouble there is between muslims and non muslims, and with sects i.e shia,sunni etc(since this will help govt stance in regrads to real mujahids who fight to defend the bro's/sis in kashmir)...So the possibilty of pak govt doing these bombings should be taken into acount, after all mushraff master the USA have been known to instiagate bombings in certain parts of the world to further their own intrests.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Seminole: *
**I would add that each *person
is only as civilized as the level of his treatment toward minorities.
[/QUOTE]
**

True.

Spock, Thank you.

Clubber Lang, Thanks for your comments.

Unless i am mistaken, there are several Muslim schools in France and the UK, are there not - schools which are recognized by the state and given full academic equivalence?

>>fact of the matter is secularism allows muslim to practise islam as long they keep it personal!<<
Fact of the matter is - i am not against seeing a true Islamic state. The manner in which many Muslim countries today govern (regardless of whether or not their constitutions are Islamic, that's most likely up for debate) - doesn't make me enthusiastic about minority rights in those types of countries.

In order for me, personally, to take the Islamic state or Khilafah argument seriously, i have to be absolutely convinced that a cornerstone of this state will be the protection of minority rights. Anything less is unacceptable. And a good place for those who are proponents of this is to advocate, today and right now, that nonMuslims in Muslim countries be fully protected under the law.

Shame on those who are nasy to their neighbors.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
Shame on those who are nasy to their neighbors.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah shame on the AMERICANS(govt) for being nasty to most of the world!

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
*

True.

Spock, Thank you.

Clubber Lang, Thanks for your comments.

Unless i am mistaken, there are several Muslim schools in France and the UK, are there not - schools which are recognized by the state and given full academic equivalence?

>>fact of the matter is secularism allows muslim to practise islam as long they keep it personal!<<
Fact of the matter is - i am not against seeing a true Islamic state. The manner in which many Muslim countries today govern (regardless of whether or not their constitutions are Islamic, that's most likely up for debate) - doesn't make me enthusiastic about minority rights in those types of countries.

In order for me, personally, to take the Islamic state or Khilafah argument seriously, i have to be absolutely convinced that a cornerstone of this state will be the protection of minority rights. Anything less is unacceptable. And a good place for those who are proponents of this is to advocate, today and right now, that nonMuslims in Muslim countries be fully protected under the law.
[/QUOTE]

Salaam Alikum

just a few points

Yes there are islamis schools in UK but they have to follow the national curruclium, the agenda laye dto down by the govt. And what do they teach in schools...evoloution,secularism,free mixing,citzenship studies, basically everything taht whcih is un-islamic....These are all clearly haram and taught to young muslim kids will corrupt their islamic understanding.

2nd point any action we carry out or any idea we propagate should be done on the basis of islam,because islam tells us to do it. (and not cuz we think its right/wrong).

About the treatment of non-muslim under the khilafah,non-muslim are classed as dhimi(citezens of the state) and they have the full right to be treated in the same way as muslim. And if you look at history they lived peacefully under the Khilafah without being subjected to prejuduic unlike 2day were we see ethnic minorities being treated unfairly. (i will wrote more wen i get time)

And last point we cant compare the so called "islamic countries" with how the Khilafah will be... cuz the systems in the muslim lands are unislamic whereas the consistution lied down by prophet Muhammed(saw) was islamic.

So tell me Clubber Wong, you think that secularism in canada failed... Tell me how a predominently Christian System over there would help the Muslim minority??? Dont tell me you want to impose khilafat (by the HT) in canada too ;)

Walaikum Assalaam, Clubber Lang.

**

**

Maybe this is worthy of another thread - if so, please let me know and i will happily open another thread regarding this issue.

Since when did seeking knowledge become haram? How does teaching citizenship studies or evolution, or anything else that might broaden someone’s horizons, constitute corruption of Islamic understanding? Take a look at Pakistan - even with all the formal Islamic schooling implemented in their curriculums, there are many unIslamic practices that occur in SOME places in Pakistan, that would raise an uproar in the Muslim communities in Canada.

Lack of time so i have to rush. Sorry if i am going off on a tangent with the above. i think we have to be careful of falling into the trap of making blanket statements that might be stereotypes - secular education alone is not going to cause corruption. We can, and should, still exercise our faculties for independent reasoning - if our imaan is sufficiently strong, then that should be an incentive to seek out more knowledge, not to shirk from it. Gotta run - more later :flower1:

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by clubber lang: *
About the treatment of non-muslim under the khilafah,non-muslim are classed as dhimi(citezens of the state) and **they have the full right to be treated in the same way as muslim
. And if you look at history they lived peacefully under the Khilafah without being subjected to prejuduic unlike 2day were we see ethnic minorities being treated unfairly. (i will wrote more wen i get time)*
[/QUOTE]

Alright, thanks, Clubber Lang. That's what i was wondering about.