Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer is not going to win the Oct. 21 election if he’s running scared of Liberal fear-mongering about Islamophobia by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
An indication that’s happening is the party’s recent veto, without explanation, of Salim Mansur from seeking the Conservative nomination in London North Centre.
I’ve known Mansur for 15 years and was his editor when he was a longtime columnist for the Toronto Sun.
He’s a scholar and a gentleman, now retired, after a distinguished career of more than three decades as an associate professor of political science at the University of Western Ontario.
He has been a supporter of Canada’s conservative movement through its darkest hours — including the 1993 election when the Progressive Conservative party was reduced to two seats.
He ran for the Canadian Alliance in London West in 2000, losing to the Liberal incumbent, and supported the unite-the-right movement spearheaded by former Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper.
Mansur’s speeches and published works have appeared widely, including his 2011 award-winning book, Delectable Lie: A liberal repudiation of multiculturalism, for which I wrote one of the cover blurbs, calling Mansur “a brilliant academic and thought-provoking journalist” who “explains what liberal democracy really means, and why the protection of individual rights that lies at its heart is under constant assault from the group think mentality of state-imposed multiculturalism.”
Born in Calcutta, India, Mansur is a practising Muslim and a fierce critic of radical Islam.
He believes the damage Trudeau and the Liberals are doing to Canada through their support of “the twin forces of globalism and Islamism” must be reversed and that “we must not be intimidated by political correctness to express our hopes and fears for our country.”
“You and I as Conservatives” he wrote during his aborted campaign to win the Tory nomination, “disagree with Justin Trudeau and his Liberals in the manner in which they are ideologically motivated to change Canada, not for the better, nor in keeping true to those values that made our country an exemplar of civility and decency in a much-troubled world.”
He expressed concern in 2012 before Parliament’s committee on citizenship and immigration about “the flow of immigration into Canada from around the world, and in particular the flow from Muslim countries, mean(ing) a pouring in of numbers into a liberal society … from cultures at best non-liberal.”
He called this “an unprecedented challenge to liberal societies, such as ours, when there is no demand placed on immigrants any longer to assimilate into the founding liberal values of the country to which they have immigrated.”
Mansur, in my view, would have been an ideal candidate for the Conservatives in Liberal-held London Centre North, because he wasn’t running out of ego or expectation of easy victory. He was running because of his principles.
While there has been no official explanation for why the Conservative party hierarchy disqualified his candidacy, Mansur says he was told by senior party sources that the Scheer campaign was worried his record of speeches and writings would open him to attacks of Islamophobia by the Liberals and it didn’t want Scheer distracted by them.
The Conservative party declined comment when I contacted them about disqualifying Mansur.
Given their rejection, he’d be a natural for Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party.
“It is tempting to play the progressives/left/self regarding liberals at their own shallow little game and use their own methods to shut down their rantings, their unfunny and vicious comedy, their lectures: yes, it is tempting but sometimes it is better not to succumb to such temptation.
We are better than they are, with their thin skins; their forensically arrived at identities; their religious devotion to “diversity; their love of democracy when it serves their purpose but which become “populism” when it does not; and heir abuse of opponents when they are incapable of bringing cogent argument to the table..
We are better. We should not play them with their rules; we should park the tanks of our ideas on their lawns and cut them down to size without mercy or restraint, argument by argument, identity by identity, self assumed virtue by virtue. .
Arwen~ A very timely word and exhortation by Martel.
The Somali-born congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who has made a number of antisemitic remarks, is currently embroiled in controversy over her marriage history. When claims against her of bigamy and immigration fraud first emerged in 2016, Omar accused the journalists involved of “Islamophobia.”
Omar has also made a claim being heard more and more: that Muslims are called antisemites only because they are Muslim. In other words, anyone who calls out Muslim antisemitism is Islamophobic.
This twisted claim is a way of making Muslim antisemitism unsayable.
The claim is being heard alongside the message that Islamophobia is the equivalent of antisemitism — an equation made by the leadership of Britain’s Jewish community as well. This is dismaying because it’s a morally bankrupt and dangerous equivalence.
While some people are truly prejudiced against Muslims — just as some hate or fear anyone not like themselves — Islamophobia was invented by the Muslim Brotherhood as a way of silencing legitimate discussion of any fault in the Islamic world.
A relentless campaign is currently being waged to outlaw Islamophobia in the West — and thereby shut down that vital discussion. The United Nations is working with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation to prohibit all speech that Muslims consider offensive.
A few days ago, Pakistan ramped up the pressure. Backing the U.N.’s initiative, Pakistan’s ambassador Maleeha Lodhi said Islamophobia was “today the most prevalent expression of racism and hatred against ‘the other.’ ”
This is totally untrue. Apart from the fact that Islam is not a race but a religion, the true hatred of “the other” that really is most prevalent today is antisemitism. And those principally spreading this poison are the political left in tandem with the Muslim world.
In Britain, the Labour Party is convulsed by epidemic, eye-watering antisemitism among its members. A detailed survey last year from the University of Oslo found that in Scandinavia, Germany, Britain and France, most antisemitic violence is being perpetrated by Muslims.
This is broadly unsayable because of the terror of being labeled Islamophobic, the taunt deployed against anyone who calls out Muslim antisemitism. That’s why this week’s declaration by U.N. secretary-general António Guterres that he would “continue to call out antisemitic racism and other forms of hatred,” but who is also poised to ban all criticism of Islam under precisely that umbrella, is dangerous cant.
For Muslim antisemitism is fueling and legitimizing western antisemitism and its contemporary mutations: anti-Zionism, and the demonization and delegitimization of Israel. The refusal to criticize Muslims means that the frenzied discourse of anti-Jewish hatred coursing through the Islamic world, consisting of blood libels, unhinged conspiracy theories and paranoid fantasies, has become normalized in broader western society.
Muslim ideologues state openly that what motivates them above all is their hatred not just of Israel, but the Jews.
The leader of Hezbollah, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, has said: “If we searched the entire world for a person more cowardly, despicable, weak and feeble in psyche, mind, ideology and religion, we would not find anyone like the Jew. Notice, I do not say the Israeli.”
Earlier this month, Iraqi cleric Abd Al-Salam Zain Al-Abidin said on Iraqi TV that the Koran focuses on the Jews as much as it does because they’re the “sworn enemy” of the Muslims.
The Palestinian Arabs pump out psychotic, Nazi-style libels and calumnies against Jews. At the end of last year, a preacher said typically on Palestinian Authority TV that the Jews “expose their fangs whenever they get the chance… always fighting, always scheming and always plotting against humanity…”
The stifling effect of the Islamophobia-equals-antisemitism trope, however, means few appreciate that the concept of Islamophobia is itself fundamentally anti-Jew.
That’s because Islamophobia, like much Muslim discourse, is based on an appropriation and inversion of Jewish experience and precepts.
The Islamists invented “Islamophobia” because they wanted to gain what they (wrongly) thought were the benefits to the Jews of antisemitism—protection from criticism. That’s why they claim an equivalence between the two.
But the great difference is that antisemitism is true prejudice because the Jews are innocent of the grotesque misdeeds attributed to them. By contrast, while many Muslims are decent people who wouldn’t harm a fly, Islam is an all-too real, historic source of oppression, fanatical violence and colonialist wars.
Time and again, Muslim thinking appropriates and inverts Jewish experience in order to demonize Israel and the Jews.
The Jews are the only people for whom the land of Israel was ever their national kingdom, hundreds of years before Islam was even founded. Yet Muslims say (preposterously) that they are the indigenous people of the land.
Gaza’s Islamist warlords commit war crimes by targeting Israeli civilians. Yet Muslims say Israel is guilty of war crimes, even though the IDF go to heroic lengths not to kill Arab civilians and achieve a ratio of killing civilians relative to fighters three or four times better than the ratio achieved by American or British forces in their own wars.
Jews were ethnically cleansed from Arab lands; yet Muslims claim Israel is ethnically cleansing the Palestinians, a ludicrous assertion given that the Arab population in the disputed territories and Gaza has increased more than fourfold since 1948.
Israel gives all Jews the right of return to Israel; Muslims claim a “right of return” not to their own putative state of Palestine, but to Israel. They even claim that the Palestinians are the world’s “new Jews.”
In Britain, a campaign by the former Conservative party chairman Baroness Warsi to outlaw Islamophobia is falsely accusing the Conservative party of institutional Islamophobia and Islamophobia-denial. This is clearly an attempt by British Muslims to appropriate for themselves the moral high ground now supposedly occupied by British Jews as a result of the unaddressed antisemitism in the Labour Party.
Anti-Jewish appropriation and inversion are fundamental to Islam. One reason why the existence of Israel as a Jewish state is anathema is that Islam teaches that the real, authentic Jews are… the Muslims. Thus, Osama bin Laden declared in his Letter to the American People:
“It is the Muslims who are the inheritors of Moses (peace be upon him) and the inheritors of the real Torah that has not been changed… If the followers of Moses have been promised a right to Palestine in the Torah, then the Muslims are the most worthy nation of this.”
Since pious Muslims believe that Islam is perfect and everything else is the province of the devil, Muslim aggression against Jews and others becomes self-defense while defense against it becomes aggression.
All espousing the Palestinian cause go along with this surreal appropriation and inversion agenda. In turn, it plays directly into the post-modern discourse of the West where lies are believed as truth and truth disdained as lies in accordance with the dogma of secular ideologies from multiculturalism to environmentalism.
Like Islam, these ideologies are also premised upon the perfection of the world, agendas which brook no dissent and which demand that heretics be destroyed.
If you feel you are living in a terrifying, discombobulating and sinister hall of mirrors over antisemitism, Israel and Islamophobia, this is why.