Judging Justin in "Troubling Times"

"Across Canada and especially in my home province, Canadians are being encouraged by their government to be fearful of one another. It is always a short path to walk from being suspicious of our fellow citizens to taking actions to restrict their liberty."
"We should all shudder to hear the same rhetoric that led to a 'none is too many' immigration policy toward Jews in the '30s and '40s being used to raise fears against Muslims today."
Justin Trudeau, leader of the Liberal Party of Canada

THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck/Files    Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau addresses students last week at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, B.C.

A Quebec judge may have erred in informing a Muslim woman that her case would not be heard in the judge's court if she did not remove her inoffensive hijab, but as Premier Couillard mentioned, it is her court and like a ship's captain, she makes the rules in interpreting Quebec law. But not to worry; Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre to the rescue, and most sensitively, in announcing the opening of a centre whose purpose it will be to prevent violent radicalization of youth.

And lest the casual reader jump to the unworthy conclusion that youth radicalization specifically points to Islam and wildly impressionable Muslim youth swift to take up the jihadi cause, think again. The facility will, said Mayor Coderre, work with all communities to offer assistance to anyone in danger; whether it be terrorism-related radicalization or terror emanating from the unfortunate auspices of street gangs.

"Frankly, radicalization has nothing to do with one religion or one community", averred the good mayor in a bald-faced lie. The city is planning to have the prevention centre up to business as soon as possible. And in Quebec a group naming itself the United Islamic Cyber Force launched a cyber attack on the Bloc Quebecois website (and other unaffiliated sites). "The Bloc Quebecois was the target simply because of their lack of respect toward women who wear the hijab", explained a spokesperson for the group.

And then there's the wisdom of the man who would be king. King in Canada? Well, just about; since Justin Trudeau is often spoken of as the dauphin of of royal heritage in the Trudeau line out of Quebec, hankering to take his entitled place as prime minister of the country on the coattails of his esteemed/unesteemed father's place in Canadian history; a man who brought us official multiculturalism and bilingualism.

"We all know what is going on here. It is nothing less than an attempt to play on people's fears and foster prejudice, directly toward the Muslim faith. This is a free country. Those are your rights. But those who would use the state's power to restrict women's religious freedom and freedom of expression indulge the very same repressive impulse that they profess to condemn. It is a cruel joke to claim you are liberating people from oppression by dictating in law what they can and cannot choose to wear", thundered Mr. Trudeau quietly.

Yes, Mr. Trudeau has the charisma and the subtlety to thunder quietly to emphasize his prime ministerial qualities. He does not blanch under the glare of terrorist attacks since these are misunderstood individuals for whom the root cause of their affinity to jihad must be tackled to fully understand what motivates them, since it cannot be the Koran, innocent of inspiration to attack other cultures, ethnicities, religions and quite, quite totally misunderstood by the ilk of Stephen Harper.

Who, in the opinion of Trudeau junior, has erred horribly in having his government do what legislators are voted into office by citizens of the country to do, make law. In resolutely refusing to permit anyone to take their oath of citizenship with face obscured by a veil, a mask or any other device meant to shield an individual's visage from scrutiny, Mr. Trudeau charges the Prime Minister with racism, comparing his judgement to that of Nazi Germany's.

Assimilation into the country of asylum, a liberal-democratic haven, a country of equality and liberty should logically result in women choosing to discard a primary symbol of misogynistic social-cultural oppression. The burqa and the niqab are those symbols, which hide a woman's fundamental presence as a female human being. There exists no religious tradition, perusing the Koran and the Hadiths that dictate a woman must conceal her presence behind the anonymity of covering garments.

Canadian laws and values are meant to represent everyone. Exceptions in the law, enabling individuals to claim that their rights are being abrogated through an expectation that certain conventions have universal application, unnecessarily complicate matters leading people to insist on their rights which in fact do not exist as they interpret them. Most Canadians would prefer to see the facial features of anyone facing them; much can be read through parsing expressions.

Trust, for one. It is an act of social hostility to refuse to present face-to-face, preferring instead that the other person present a naked trusting face, while the niqab-wearer conceal her identity thus creating an atmosphere of inequality and suspicion. This is a free country, and people do have their rights, but they must also respect the culture and custom of the indigenous values held dear in common social tradition by the inhabitants and citizens of the country.

As for Mr. Trudeau's claim of the current government's hostile reaction to Muslims, it is worthwhile bearing in mind that Islam at the present time has given the world a giant headache with its penchant of inciting to violence. Any who dare critique the presumptuousness that holds that all religions must be subservient to Islam -- that the goal of Islam is to conquer all that it surveys, and that by steady infiltration of Muslims into non-Muslim societies an eventual overturning of values, customs and laws will reflect Islam's -- are considered enemies.

Comparing the reaction of Canadians and by extension the Government of Canada to the dehumanizing slanders and vicious actions leading to the attempted total extermination of Jews during the Holocaust years of the Second World War is a huge affront to history and reality. The Jewish community wherever it existed never posed an existential threat to the rest of humanity. But it was targeted for extermination by an odious fascist Nazi reign, and the bulk of the international community did little to respond in aid of Jewish survival.

To compare that situation with that of Muslim defiance and entitlement while ensconced as equal citizens of a country on the one hand, while on the other demanding especial recognition and treatment leading to the reaction of refusal by authorities reflecting a general consensus transcends absurdity. All the more so that it is the faith of Islam that has bred the afflicting poison of violent jihad leading to terrorists inflicting atrocities against other Muslims as well as non-Muslims.

Mr. Trudeau's sense of proportion, justice and sanctimonious self-serving politically-inspired accusations do his own personality justice, but scare the life out of Canadians whose worst nightmare would be to see voters bringing him to the position he so hungers for, as the next prime minister of Canada. May heaven help us all should that catastrophe ever come to fruition.

J.P. Moczulski for National Post   Canadian courts would be well advised to make a distinction between religious beliefs and customary practices.

"The requirement of Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) to remove full face coverings during citizenship ceremonies is not onerous and is consistent with the customs and conventions of an open liberal democratic society such as ours. But the Federal Court, in a judgment delivered by Justice Keith M. Boswell, has now deemed this requirement unlawful."
"The ruling was made in a case filed by Zunera Ishaq, a Pakistani national and a permanent resident in Canada since October 2008. Ms. Ishaq argued that removing her niqab (a full face covering worn by some Muslim women), as required by the CIC regulation, would be an infringement on her religious beliefs, which are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. She claimed that as a devout Sunni Muslim who voluntarily follows the Hanafi school of fiqh, or jurisprudence, in Islam, her wearing of the niqab is a religious obligation and that its removal would infringe her religious freedom."
"But Ms. Ishaq’s claim that she is required as a matter of religious belief to wear the niqab is untrue. Neither Islam, nor Hanafi rites or jurisprudence as part of Islamic belief, make such a requirement obligatory for Muslim women. The wearing of the niqab by a small percentage of Muslim women is a modern custom turned into religious mandate and enforced by coercion in public by Muslim extremists in Pakistan and some other Muslim majority countries."
Salim Mansour, professor, political science, Western University, London, Ontario

Palestinians see worrisome trend in 'honor' killings rise

“Honor killing” is a social menace that occurs throughout the Middle East, though precise figures are often elusive. (File Photo: Reuters)

 

Reuters, West Bank
Wednesday, 11 December 2013 

A silvery green olive grove set in the red soil of a Palestinian village is a crime scene - testament to a practice so sensitive that it is spoken of only in whispers.

One night in late November, Rasha Abu Ara, a 32-year-old mother of five, was beaten to death and strung from a gnarled tree branch as a gruesome badge of “family honor” restored.

The woman’s alleged sin was adultery, and her killer was either her own brother or husband, security sources told Reuters. Both are behind bars while an investigation continues.

Her murder brought to 27 the number of women slain in similar circumstances in Palestinian-run areas this year, according to rights groups - more than twice last year’s victims.

The rise has led Palestinians to question hidebound laws they say are lax on killers, as well as a reluctance to name and shame in the media and society, which may contribute to a feeling of impunity among perpetrators.

“It feels like something that belongs to another time,” said one young man in Aqqaba who refused to give his name, the first hints of a beard on his chin. “But, it’s standard.”

A week after the crime, Aqqaba mayor Jamal Abu Ara, who is a member of the victim’s extended family, and his brothers, sat in their village home, smoking cigarettes and choosing their words carefully.

“This act has no religion - it comes from closed, tribal thinking left over from an age of ignorance. People here are walking around in a haze; they want to know who did it and why. Of course, it’s the first time it’s happened here,” he said.

His brother added: “Islam requires you have four witnesses to prove the act of adultery.

“It’s not right what happened. Especially since if it were a man, some would just say ‘boys will be boys’,” he said.

A representative of the slain woman’s family declined to speak to Reuters.

“Honor killing” is a social menace that occurs throughout the Middle East, though precise figures are often elusive.

In neighboring Jordan, for example, a Cambridge University survey of attitudes among young people published in June found that a third of respondents agreed with the practice.

The researchers attributed the result to low levels of education and “patriarchal and traditional world views, emphasis placed on female virtue and a more general belief that violence against others is morally justified.”

The study estimated an average of 15 to 20 such killings occur every year in Jordan, with a population of around 6.3 million, compared to around 4 million in Palestinian lands.

Some activists believe the rise in honour killings indicates social and economic problems are mounting in the territories, where Palestinians exercise limited self-rule but Israel holds ultimate sovereignty, including over commerce.

But Soraida Hussein, whose rights group Muntada tallied this year’s killings, said the practice also has deep roots.

“There is no balance in power relations between the genders. There is a patriarchal mentality...as always, the force and pressure in society is transferred from the strong to the weak,” she said.

Palestinian female participation in the labor force stands at 17 percent, a figure the World Bank called “abysmally low,” noting that employers appeared to favor men, among whom joblessness was almost a third lower in 2013.

Hussein said that most of the killings related to “the movement and the freedom of the woman, so (perpetrators) say it’s an ‘honor killing ‘... also, there’s still no clear law to discourage the practice.”

Many of the cases had economic underpinnings, such as connections to disputes over inheritance, or may have been committed to cover up incest, she added.

The passing of stricter laws on violence against women is hamstrung by the absence of a Palestinian parliament, which has not met since President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah party and the Islamist Hamas group fought a brief, bloody civil war in 2007.

Abbas has used his executive power to amend or cancel parts of the penal law, but has not yet changed all legislation which applies a separate status to domestic violence and has been used to justify killings and lighten prison sentences.

Palestinian Minister of Women’s Affairs Rabiha Diab saved much of her blame for violence toward women for Israel: “The Israeli occupation is the one practicing the utmost violence ... it’s the main thing keeping us from advancing.

“There’s been a deterioration, financial and psychological pressure on our society, poverty. But there are also certain backward cultural legacies that must be combated,” she said.

Unemployment and poverty both increased in 2013, with both standing at around 25 percent. Growth has slowed from boom rates averaging around 9 percent annually in 2008-2011 to just 1.8 percent in Gaza and the occupied West Bank in the first half of 2013, according to the World Bank.

Not just laws but lawmakers may be part of the problem.

Residents of the northern West Bank village of Deir al-Ghusun began muttering about Thamar Zeidan, a 32-year-old mother of two, after an apparently intoxicated man was spied leaving her home one morning, a local source told Reuters.

Elders, including a Hamas member of parliament, soon gathered and signed an announcement formally banishing her family from the larger tribe. The notice was pasted on the outer walls of homes and on the village mosque.

Days later in late September, Thamar was choked to death with a metal wire in her sleep.

Her father confessed to the deed.

The lawmaker, Abdel Rahman Zeidan, denied charges in the Palestinian media that the petition was tantamount to inciting murder, and said the banishment targeted the father, whom villagers say allowed his children too many freedoms.

“Taking the law into your own hands is wrong,” he told Reuters. “These acts are unacceptable, and laws must be passed to discourage them.

Spreading awareness on the issue can open campaigners and journalists to criticism and even threats, which may partly explain its scant airing in public, however.

Press bulletins occasionally note the discovery of a woman’s body in what are called “hazy circumstances” - a common euphemism for honor killings. Names are concealed and the news is rarely followed up on.

“When you touch such stories, you’re up against a social taboo,” said Palestinian journalist Naela Khalil, whose work focuses on women’s issues.

“Here, the family is stronger than even the security forces. I might criticize Mahmoud Abbas more easily than a father or a brother who killed a woman. Doing this may mean a struggle with a whole family or village,” she said.

Nothing Conspicuous, Please

"As they came up to me, one spat right in my face while the other started insulting me with really horrible words ... You with the hood, go back to your country."
"As they went by, one of them completely removed my head scarf. As soon as I turned to pick it up, they were running away. I was really scared. I was in a state of panic. I screamed, but nobody came to help me."
I am seriously considering leaving the province if things continue like this. This is my home, but I no longer feel at home."
Mylene Pichette, Montreal

Graham Hughes for National Post    Mylène Pichette, a Muslim convert who lives in Montreal, was assaulted by two men this week. 

 

Mylene Pichette converted to Islam fifteen years ago, when she married an Algerian immigrant. She has three children, one of whom is a 14-year-old girl who also wears a hijab, and she worries now for her daughter's safety. Her daughter travels by bus to and from school: "I told her to put a hat over her scarf when she's riding the metro to avoid insults", she said in an interview.

Ms. Pichette doesn't have to travel far to do as one of her attackers shouted at her. She has always lived in Quebec; "forever", she says, has her family lived in the province. The only difference between her now and traditional 'old stock' Quebecois is that she is a practising Muslim. In her fifteen years of living in Montreal as a Muslim, readily identifiable with her headscarf, she had never before been insulted or assaulted, or felt fear.

"This charter is making us sick", she said. "The PQ (Parti Quebecois government) is dividing Quebec in two. It's terrible. It has not even been adopted and look at all the damage it is causing." She, like many other Muslim women feeling exposed to public ire, feels vulnerable and fearful. A Montreal company that focuses on issues of diversity last month did an online survey of 556 Quebec Muslims. The result was that 85% of respondents felt the social climate to be tense.

The PQ minister responsible for the proposed charter of values to eliminate obvious religious symbols like the Muslim hijab, the Sikh turban, and the Jewish kippa from making a presence in the civil service claims a civilized discussion of the matter is required. Yet he excused himself from a debate he had been scheduled to take part in at Montreal's Concordia University. He was concerned that anti-charter protesters could disrupt the venue.

"I made the decision not to participate in the debate to avoid having the discussion around the charter -- which up to now has taken place amid calm, tolerance and respect -- tarnished by ugly incidents", he stated. But, in fact, the calm, tolerance and respect is absent from the public which appears in its majority to approve the values set out by the proposed charter of values. Hard to imagine that tolerant Quebecers might find fault with items as innocuous as a woman's head scarf, a turban, a skullcap; they are not new in the public sphere.

"I am very upset about the degree of Islamophobia that is spreading in our society. Sometimes you hear it in milieus where you don't expect. People's emotions are aroused, and as a result, afterwards you can't put the genie back in the bottle. Even if in the best of cases, this law is never [passed], you will have caused a certain degree of social disharmony", said Julius Grey, a constitutional lawyer, consulted over the issue by Muslim and Sikh groups about a possible court challenge.

Quebec prides itself on having dissociated itself successfully during its 'Silent Revolution', from the stranglehold of the Catholic Church which had traditionally been the guiding political, social, religious force in the province. Quebec, like France, wants to be seen and to pride itself on successfully having made the transition to a purely secular society. Just as it is jealously possessive of its language, it is so as well of its secularism.

But it also suffers from an unfortunate sense of being beleaguered by forces it feels are attempting to overturn its advances; it is more than a trifle paranoid over its language primacy rights, and its secular status as a nation. Yet it welcomes immigrants in a spirit of inclusiveness, particularly if they're of French-speaking origin, regardless of where in the world they come from. But as a multi-racial society which Canada has become, and a proudly pluralist one, a certain degree of tolerance goes a long way.

The headscarf and the chador are not the burqa, a completely estranging, alienating garb that defines a woman's place as separate and aloof, unwilling and unable to mingle in the society in which she has chosen to live. The message given by the burqa is a closed one, the message given by the headscarf is anything but; it is a tidy cultural choice which, showing the full face, does not broadcast rejection of society, nor does the kippa, nor the turban.

"Now people come out without any kind of shame, attacking as though they are doing a favour for Quebec identity. This is a really serious slippery slope that we are all sliding down right now. I don't like to be alarmist. I don't like to talk like this. But I am seeing it happening in front of me. I am seeing Muslim women scared to walk in the streets."
Salam Elmenyawi, president, Muslim Council of Montreal

Fundamental Values

A Palestinian man who immigrated to Canada and his wife operate a private daycare in Montreal. The owner's wife and two of the personnel who work for them wear niqabs. There are thirteen parents who pay to have their young children looked after in the daycare. The fact that the three daycare workers wear the niqab in public seems of no concern to them. They appear to have been satisfied with the quality of care their children have received.



Someone, it seems, snapped a photograph of the children in the care of the black-clad women whose faces were covered, revealing only their eyes. The children appear to be behaving like children everywhere do, obedient to the wishes of their minders who are taking them for a walk to a nearby Verdun public park. They haven't returned to the park with the children since the day the photograph was taken. And since that photo was taken, some of the parents have removed their children from the daycare.

The photo was taken without permission and posted online on Facebook. It had eight thousand hits. And a whole lot of comments. Some of which were just plain disgusting. Many, though expressed cultural shock at the sight of two women dressed in a manner that elicits both pity and reproach when anyone in the West sees photos taken somewhere in the Middle East or Afghanistan or Pakistan.

Reaction was swift, heated, sometimes horribly uncivil, but universally condemnatory.

It's not difficult to understand why many people would be taken aback at the unusual sight of two burqa-clad (chador and niqab) women, herding children dressed for the outdoors in Canada. It is the polarizing view of an ordinary Canadian scene superimposed with a restrictive, patriarchal custom demeaning to the dignity, safety and independence of women characterized by the black-clad minders.

Quebec, under the Parti Quebecois government, has recently distinguished itself by reaffirming its secularly societal character with the proposal of a new charter. It shed its deeply religious heritage during the social upheaval of the Silent Revolution. The Catholic Church became a background element of choice in a society that had decided to remove itself from the constant daily intrusion of religion in their lives; religion became a private affair.

And most Quebecers prefer it just that way. It grates against their sensibilities to see overt symbols of religion, any religion. But in all probability in particular any religion other than what they were historically accustomed to. Come to my country, to my province, to become a citizen and be prepared to absorb and to reflect my values and my customs. Add them to your own if you wish and welcome to it, but leave the religious aspect private, in the background.

The francophone population has patterned itself on its original homeland of France. And France is a stoutly non-religious society that maintains a strict divide between church and state. It is in this way that it maintains the egalitarianism that it prides itself on; everyone equal, liberty for all. And so, although France, like all European countries, has absorbed a large infiltration of Muslims migrating from their countries of origin, the expectation is that the French culture will predominate.

To that end the Paris Appeals Court has overturned a high court decision in favour of the head scarf-wearing employee, and it has affirmed that a private nursery school was justified when it fired an assistant director who had refused to remove her head scarf while she was working at the school. A head scarf, not something that covers the face, but that covers the hair, the top of the head, the neck of the wearer.

The hijab is a common enough sight in Canada. Worn by many women who are practising Muslim. It does signify that they worship Islam, but it is a chosen cultural and conditioned expectation that pious and not-so-pious Muslim women wear the headscarf. It must suit their view of themselves in reflection of their surrender to Islam. And although it is an obvious sign of their faith, it is a fairly unobtrusive one.

The complete face covering like the burqa which consists of a total screened face covering incorporated into an overall body covering, and the niqab, worn in conjunction with the chador, the all-enveloping body garment, do not have a place in Canada. This is a habitude that is isolating, rejectionist, anti-social, and completely alienating. In a civil society people have an obligation to one another as human beings.

We communicate with one another by voice and vocabulary but also by body language, eye contact and the human involuntary and voluntary greetings conveyed by our facial muscles. When we encounter other people it is incumbent on us as civil human beings to acknowledge the presence of others. A nod, a smile, a spoken word, even silence and a turning away of the head indicating disinterest is a form of communication preferable to the absence of any sign of humanity.

In France, a woman by the name of Fatima Afif who worked at the Baby Loup nursery school was fired for refusing to remove her head scarf. French laws ban head scarves in public school classrooms and face-covering veils in public places. No laws exist to regulate religious garb in private institutions, schools or places of work. Muslims, understandably see those laws as restrictive, infringing on their religious freedom and freedom of expression.

On the other hand, they chose to emigrate to a country whose laws long predated their migration there. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights opened a hearing in another case where a Muslim woman is contesting the face veil ban. The French government's Observatory of Laicite, guides official action respecting secularism, plans to issue its own guide on the issue.

There are many groups in France; political parties, social workers and other professionals who fear the country's constitutional guarantees of secularism is being undermined by immigration. Its increasingly diverse population, particularly the growing and already-large Muslim population appears to be having that effect, and the point is to head it off, to preserve the country's own values.

The same can be said for Canada.

Compromise Politics

"Many people do think we are being forced to wear our scarves. I think that's nonsense, to be honest. We're all just expressing our personalities in the way we dress."
Sadia Rahman, London art student

"I don't think the government should tell women what they should be wearing."
Theresa May, British interior minister

"We shouldn't end up like other countries issuing edicts or laws from Parliament telling people what they should or should not wear."
British deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg

"People are frightened of standing up and speaking out…because of political correctness and the intolerant reaction from Muslim groups who jump up and down with fury whenever anyone says it makes sense to for people to go around with their faces perfectly visible to everyone else, which is the way human beings were created in the first place…If we all covered our faces, the world would be a very different place. Imagine Parliament where everyone had their faces covered."
Philip Hollobone, MP

Unmasked: Shaheda Lorgat (left), 49, arrived for hearings (right) at Preston Crown Court in Lancashire wearing a niqab after being charged with stealing the money from a college where she worked as a purchasing officer

The British news source Mail online has recently quoted London police sources stating a rising trend among Muslim women taking to wearing full veils outside court in an effort to avoid scrutiny. Shaheda Lorgat, charged with theft from her place of employment did just that in Lancashire. Her neighbours were happy to point out that she rarely wore a niqab in public. Facebook photos show her full-faced, unveiled.

Perhaps both Sadia Rahman, whose statement revealed her wearing of a headscarf to be a fashion statement, not a religious edict which women of the faith obey in honour of their religion in a display of Muslim female modesty, will take as much comfort as Shaheda Lorgat may, from the new ruling in Britain by Judge Peter Murphy that a Muslim defendant may wear a face-covering veil during trial, removing it when giving evidence. This is considered a wise juridical compromise to a vexing problem.

It will be of little comfort to the many Britons who do not appreciate confronting a fully-masked women in the public square. To them it is not emblematic of purity and chasteness, but of rank hostility, the obdurate refusal to become a part of the society that has taken them in when they fled oppression and misery in their countries of birth. Britain, according to the testimony given by some of its legislators, means to remain an 'open', 'welcoming', non-judgemental society.

And it will do this in the face of giving extraordinary rights to a close-minded, grudging, utterly judgemental faith. France, in the face of such a dilemma brewing within its proudly secular society became the first country to ban face-covering veils in Europe, anywhere in public. Turkey got there first, but that country represents an anomalous toss-up between the east and the west, and latterly the inward-looking east is winning there, hands down.

Belgium has enacted a similar ban to France's where niqabs or burkas are unwelcome in their society, and other European countries are considering passing similar legislation to preserve their very own cultural values. And then, of course, within Canada, a furore has arisen over the Province of Quebec's minority government planning to follow suit, by trying to bypass controversy that might arise over charges of Islamophobia through targeting all symbols of a conspicuous nature relating to any religion.

The new British ruling revolves around the court appearance of a 22-year-old Muslim woman who has been accused of intimidating a witness. She may wear her black, all-encompassing attire in court, but must show her face during testimony since "it is unfair to ask a juror to pass judgement on a person whom she cannot see."  There is an estimated 2.7-million Muslims living in the United Kingdom, a small minority of whom wear full-face covering.

Historic judgement: A judge has ordered a Muslim defendant (pictured arriving at Blackfriars Crown Court yesterday) to take off her full-face veil to give evidence

But tell a woman what she may not do, and instantly anticipate a back-lash. Tell a Muslim woman what she must do and must avoid doing, and the entire religious clan seems to rise up as one in a mountain of belligerently entitled outrage. The London that some mullahs warn will soon become Londonistan is being infuriatingly loathe to accept its fate. That may be how it seems to them; much otherwise to those on the other side of the divide infuriated by the extent of capitulation.

Birmingham Metropolitan College had issued a ban on the wearing of Islamic veils in an effort to to ensure that all students adhered to an overall need to preserve comfort, safety and recognition of individuals. All manner of head coverings, not exclusive to Islamic scarfs or veils were included. The response was a mountainous heap of condemnation from all levels of Muslim society.

Local high school students visit the engineering department of Birmingham Metropolitan College.

An umbrella organization of student groups representing the interests of over 100,000 Muslim college students in Britain and Ireland issued a statement: "This senseless decision is massively divisive and will only lead to an environment in which the rights of many will be disproportionately suppressed. The fundamental rights to freedom of religious expression are at stake here and this sets out an extremely dangerous precedent not only for the Muslim community for for members of all faith backgrounds." The irony being that the statement of condemnation could be turned back in on itself.

A threatened campus demonstration set for September 14 with the stated aim to: "protest against this Islamophobic and illogical decision to ban the face veil ... to take a stand against such hysterical and discriminatory decisions" by 600 angry students, convinced the college administration to capitulate. "Islamophobic", "Illogical", "Hysterical and discriminatory", pretty well sums up the relationship between Muslims and all others in any society not entirely dominated and governed by Islam.

A Forum Poll on multiculturalism in Canada found that one-third of all Canadians felt Muslims have too much influence in their home provinces. A reflection based on interaction of any attempted variety, on observation of what obtains within Canada and elsewhere in the world. Muslim assertiveness and the desire to dominate by those who feel their faith and its tenets entitle them to special status divorces them from other cultures and religions; deliberately.

Protecting Quebec Values

"We know that the separatist government in Quebec would love to pick fights with Ottawa. But that's not our business. Our business is the economy. Our business is job creation for Canadians -- all Canadians, including Quebecers.
"And our job is social inclusion. Our job is making all groups who come to this country whatever their background, whatever their race, whatever their ethnicity, whatever their religion, feel at home in this country and be Canadians. That's our job.
"You know -- there are all kinds of competing rights; rights of religion, rights of gender equality. We will withhold our comment until we see what exactly is in the proposal. And we will assure ourselves, when we look at that proposal, that the fundamental rights of Canadians are protected."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper

The very foundational principles of Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms are being challenged by the Parti Quebecois in their intention to pass legislation that would effectively place restrictions on the hiring of public service workers through screening out those whose apparel betray their religious convictions. People living in Quebec respecting their choice of apparel and symbols relating to their religion.

Not simply a choice, but an imperative relating to the very essence of their religion and the cultural-religious attributes defining aspects of that religion. Some people think how quaint it is when they see a religious Jew wearing outlandish clothing; long, black garb and dangling hairpieces over the ears to distinguish men of Orthodox Jewish sects from others, while the women wear wigs and modest clothing.

Their Muslim religious counterparts tend to go them one better with the restrictively over-modest garb of women veiled and voluminously clad. Others find it offensive, inappropriate to a modern society, and deliberately separatist, eschewing homogeneity, embracing social partition. Here is the separatist-yearning government of Quebec, taking umbrage over what they feel are separatist tendencies of minorities/

Sikh headwear covering unbarbered hair and the paraphernalia of largely ornamental knives signifying religious devotion, a skullcap, a headscarf, a crucifix are admittedly less visually intrusive, still identifiable, and presenting little handicap in merging with and accepting the greater social contract within Canada. They represent both moderate and on the other hand, more fundamental symbols of differences between people. Because of their provenance and symbolism, forbidden in the public service.

But they are, for whatever they are worth to the bystander, all protected by laws guaranteeing equality of gender, religion, ideology, ethnicity, culture, heritage and sexual orientation in Canada. Crucifixes,  kippas, hijabs and turbans are all symbols of devotion to faith, of cultural inheritance. Varying geographic sources representing migrations from parts of the world far removed from North America have contributed to the pluralist society that Canada has become, and indeed always has been.

There is some truth to what former Quebec premier Bernard Landry contends, in expanding on the PQ intention: "The rule is, when you change country, you change country. They can't expect to find everything here that they had in their country of origin. Integration is a powerful signal that they need to adjust to a new nation." He speaks, however, in absolutes. And there is nothing whatever simple about human relations, interactions, heritage, custom and religious inheritance.

One of the hallmarks of Canadian values is the general atmosphere of willingness to accept people at the most basic level; we are all human, all have the same basic needs, all share very similar values and emotions, and all humans wish to be accepted. The hard truth is that human nature shrinks from those who present as different than we are. The soft reality is that it is incumbent upon us as decent people to accept those differences that do not impact deleteriously on what we ourselves value.

The PQ's planned proposal to legislatively create two levels of citizenship within the province, to express an outright alienation toward those whose religious customs may offend the secular-oriented values that Quebec largely propounds, will create a democratic social deficit. There are some standards of acceptance that would go well beyond what should be required; a fully burqua-clad teacher in the public school system goes a step too far creating a divisive message by its very unambiguous presence.

Disallowing the appearance of far slighter indications of religious and cultural variations also goes a giant-footprint too far. Canada is a multicultural landscape, even if the concept of official multiculturalism itself has become a social-mediating clunker. If Canadians are truly accepting and as tolerant as they believe themselves to be, the kind of 'accommodation' that it takes to become accustomed to trivial visual variations in personal presentation should not be a shore too far to breach.

Exploiting Human Nature

"The manufacture and distribution of this illegal commodity fuels the growth of organized criminal networks, and the viability of this illegal commodity results in losses of federal and provincial taxes and excise duties and undermines significant government investment and public health objectives.
"These illegal products are then transported through a national pipeline for sale to consumers as a cheaper alternative to legitimate tobacco products, thereby making it more accessible to youth."
RCMP briefing document

 
Released under access to information legislation, data have been published meant originally as a briefing document forwarded to the Canadian public safety minister. It outlined a number of statistics, the most interesting among them perhaps the figure of 50 contraband tobacco manufacturers whose production lines operate on First Nations territories in Ontario and Quebec.

Tax-free cigarettes. Illegal, of course, but widely available on a casual drive through those reserves. Reserves whose welcome signs state that on driving onto reserve land one is entering 'national' territory of First Nations. As nations they feel little obligation to obey Canadian law which the manufacturing of illegal tobacco products states is illegal.

Tim Smith/Brandon Sun

Illegal as well is their sale. With no revenues accruing to the government. Because the enterprise is illegal, it represents criminal activity. And because the manufacture of contraband is illegal it attracts criminal gangs, both local and international in scope. With everyone concerned, the manufacturers, the dealers and the gangs eager to obtain as much of a piece of the revenue-pie as possible.

Proceeds from these activities also fund and enable other types of criminal activities. Ranging from the smuggling of contraband liquor, to illegal weapons. And perhaps most problematical, human smuggling. Local criminals make their living in this way and foreign groups, including foreign groups specializing in violent war-mongering and terrorism, also get their cut of the action.

The product sells, it is popular because it is far less expensive than the legitimate product. The very fact that taxes are removed also removes an enormous part of the cost of purchase. The creation of a 50-member RCMP anti-contraband force appears to have slowed opportunity down somewhat, but the trafficking of contraband tobacco, illicit drugs and firearms and human smuggling all interrelated, continue.

It isn't only the government that would like to be able to pull the plug on these immoral, illegal and dangerous activities. Dangerous to human health from the consuming perspective, and dangerous to safety and security from the perspective of upholding the law and as well the predictable violent events that occur as a result of gang-related competition. Revenue loss also translates to higher social services costs.

The Kahnawake reserve in Quebec and Six Nations reserves in Ontario are identified as the sites hosting those 50 contraband operations. Allied with another ten manufacturers on the American side of the Akwesasne Mohawk territories, straddling the borders of Ontario, Quebec and New York State: "giving rise to jurisdictional and legal challenges between federal, provincial and state laws."

The document points out that the aforementioned challenges are being exploited by organized crime groups. A 2012 Criminal Intelligence Service Canada national threat assessment identified roughly 58 organized crime groups embroiled across the country, some 35 of their number located within Central Canada.

Tobacco is a legal product. It is also, for many a lethal product, a fact that is widely recognized and well enough known. To prohibit its use on the basis of its being a carcinogen, to protect users from the consequences of long-term use, and to husband the medical-hospitalization reserves of the country thereby is unworkable.

As much as the market for illegal tobacco hugely benefits itself at the present time with a legal product produced and distributed illegally, the situation would become even more fiercely competitive and dangerous as even greater numbers of crime syndicates would become involved.

But the cheaper cost and availability of the illegal product ensnares youth, the young who believe nothing untoward would ever impact their lives. With less cash to spare, they form one segment of the population eager to advantage themselves by the procurement of a less expensive product.

No one will ask them to prove their age at purchase.

The Human Philosophy of the Orient vs the Occidental

Well, who might have thought? The Western world is reacting, thinking and expressing itself from the perspective of Western values, ideas, priorities and philosophy. Understandable. A little introspection might go a long way, however, to the realization that the society against which they are expressing their unhappy unease does not reflect their own. While values of human rights may be thought to be universal, they represent an issue that is not quite regarded in the same light in some areas of the world.

Regret that Egypt has fallen into dysfunctional chaos is understandable. Given the general atmosphere throughout the Middle East in the fall-out of an unusual year where the spring of 2013 brought a series of events to unfold that had their genesis in the turmoil of a previous year that swept through North Africa and the Middle East culminating in paroxysms of violence in Syria and now Egypt, but touching Tunisia, Libya, Bahrain, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon, a feverish infection of unrest and turmoil has resulted.

Outsiders view the wretched violence with the dismay of those who generally manage their own affairs with far less brutal emotion edging ultimately toward butchery on such a grand scale as has been seen in Syria, in Afghanistan and increasingly in Pakistan. The one-time pillar of Arab pride, the country that offered pan-nationalism as a cure for never-ending conflicts within the region, has now itself dissolved into a tsunami of conflicting demands.

Who might have imagined that when Iran's monarchy fell to the demands of a citizenship hungry for the end of an oppressive regime another, far more malevolent in its rigidly devoted adherence to a fanatic view of Islam would take its place? And, having done, mirrored in part what Saudi Arabia had initiated years earlier, in its puritanical, punishing view of Islam, as all-encompassing registrar and curator of human life in every corner of human existence.

The West laments their own longing forsaken by reality; the importation of a political diagram whose mechanics would bring neat and tidy democracy to an area of the world which has never rested comfortably in a neat and tidy manner among and between competing interests, where cooperation between conflicted ideas of nationhood, religion, ideology and sociology has always resulted in conflict; that reaffirmation of the heritage of war and violence triumphant.

If human nature is such that others learn by observing practices that produce enviable results, and themselves attempt to emulate those practises to earn those typical results, perhaps in time what was once called the Orient will come to more closely resemble the Occident. Imposing the virtues of democratic action as superior to the imperial entitlements of theocracies, monarchies and sheikdoms, resulting in a more just society and less ostentatious corruption may feed the ardour of humanitarians; it assaults the sensibilities of their targets.

Who resent the interference, resist the criticism, take pride in their own venerable customs and persuade those leaning toward them in the confidence of accepting understanding that the time and place for moral relativism is now, and all is forgiven - but please, and kindly please make more of a concerted effort to keep those excesses from full expression resulting in mass carnage.

A Viral Plight

Is it true that it is never too late to recognize a problem and take effective, determined steps to track the problem, identify its source and devise a remedy? Perhaps sometimes, and perhaps not. In the West where enlightenment and the philosophy of living in peace with one's neighbours, and accepting diversity and recognizing the fair and just need for social neutrality and the exercise of law and order to everyone's equal benefit, there is a collective bid for fairness. And there is social conscience.

Looking elsewhere around the world where people live without the assurances of a just and fair society, and where wealth never trickles down to those in need, and where laws are administered unequally, and where some governments tend to prey on their vulnerable populations, and where wars between neighbouring countries seem to be stubbornly prevalent, open, liberal democratic societies have developed a tendency to be generous and open their borders to desperate migrants.

Over a period of time migrants from elsewhere have made themselves comfortable in these societies, found a place for themselves and their offspring, far from the life-situations borne by their forbears, and consider themselves fully citizens of their adopted countries. This, at a time when it was expected that emigrants from countries where people fled poverty and insecurity would be eager and willing to adapt to the values and the culture of receiving countries. Those pluralist societies gained from the immigrants they accepted and the immigrants gained equally, becoming an integral part of society.

That is no longer the case when it comes to people transferring their physical presence from a tribal society mired in the heritage of suspicion and grievance, rage and war, complicated by a religion that sternly instructs its faithful that every aspect of life is attributable to the generous spirit of their god, and that the faithful must remind themselves multiple times daily in giving effusive thanks to that god, the while spurning the contaminating presence of those not of their religion.

And these are the people who have latterly migrated to Europe and to North America in their suffocating numbers, transforming the societies in which they find themselves to accept them as they are with no expectations that they will be prepared to surrender their customs, their religious laws and their cultural heritage to absorb the values and social covenants of the receiving countries' indigenous way of life. As their numbers grew to represent an ever greater proportion of a country's population, their clerics and spokespeople increasingly asserted their entitlement to overturn the social order and prevailing laws to subordinate them to their own.

An nonrepresentationally-higher proportions of Muslim immigrants perpetrate acts of crime in the public sphere wherever they settle. A disproportionate number of the population seems content to be unemployed and living off social welfare. And a significant portion of their numbers are resentful of other social and religious groups, particularly so of other ethnic groups whom they have traditionally been at war with, and bring their attitudes and their biases and slanders with them. While a yet even smaller number succumb to the belief that political, violent jihad is an absolute obligation.

Welcome to a new world order. Where western Europe, Canada, the United States and Australia among other first-world countries of the world, have found themselves the recipient of immigrants who have no interest whatever in integrating into their all-embracing social, cultural and value systems, preferring to set themselves studiously apart, while insisting that their own social, cultural and value systems must be respected, their religious laws maintained in parallel with the countries' own.

The absorption of tens of millions of worshippers of Islam with its rigid interpretation of obligations of the faith has slowly transformed the culture and the social values of countries that have always taken pride in their own, but whose own have now been shunted aside. Moreover, because the majority of the indigenous populations have subscribed to a pathology of guilt for having so much, and perceived expiation in the need to share, unreasonable demands have been met with the acceptance of reasonable accommodation.

The greater the accommodation granted, the more accelerated the growing demands and expectations. And we are left with stark divisions within society. The indigenous heritage and culture living in a psychological fortress of burgeoning resentment and fear of offending, and the invited immigrant heritage and culture living in an equally burgeoning scene of resentment, and anger at offences. Offences deliberate and offences delivered with no malign intention.

Are there solutions to this overwhelmingly international babel of voices, aggregate entitlements, profound dissatisfactions, and inherent threats?