Even if, as one opinion poll recently suggested, "only" twelve percent of Muslims in Canada will voice support (to a stranger) for violent forms of Jihad in this country, such as the alleged Toronto Jihadi campaign to blow up the Parliament buildings and behead PM Steven Harper, it is a yet very tiny fraction of Canadian Muslims who actively speak or campaign against all forms of violent Jihad and Sharia and denounce clerics who preach hatred of the West in various forms. Thus, allowing Muslims to immigrate to this country, or, once here, to preach a political and violent forms of Jihad, seems to be a recipe for requiring further and further investments in a security state, restricting everyone's freedom in order to protect people like Jawaad Faizi, a Muslim journalist in Toronto who was just beaten with a cricket bat and then told, by his kids' school principal, that the safety of his children could not be guaranteed and that they should be kept at home. The details are in this article reproduced at the Canadian Coalition for Democracies forum (for some reason the original CP story has apparently been removed from Canoe news where it first appeared):
TORONTO (CP) A Muslim journalist beaten with a cricket bat outside a Toronto-area home fears for his life after facing repeated death threats apparently because someone has deemed his writing to be anti-Islam.Meanwhile, Stephane Dion's Liberal party has nominated a decidely anti-Israel, anti-France, pro-Chomsky candidate, in an Edmonton-area riding, apparently showing that Mohammed Elmasry's support for Dion at last year's leadership convention was not an isolated incident and that the Liberal party is increasingly open to membership from orthodox, Jihad-supporting, Muslims (the candidate has a Muslim name and defends the Jihad against Israel).
Jawaad Faizi, a columnist for the weekly Urdu-language Pakistan Post based in New York, suffered cuts and bruises in the attack, which has alarmed his wife and three children and drew the condemnation Thursday of free-press advocates.
Faizi, 35, said the threats began after he wrote in January about a lecture at a Toronto-area mosque given by a Pakistani cleric, Muhammad Tahir Ul Qadri, leader of the international Islamic-based organization, Minhaj ul Quran.
Two weeks ago, Faizi wrote a critical column based on news reports from Pakistan about charismatic claims made by Ul Qadri, who often visits Canada, that he had inscribed the name of the prophet on the moon.
That sparked further telephone threats accusing him of apostasy, prompting Faizi and Post editor Amir Arain to complain on Monday to police, who advised them to be careful.
On Tuesday, just as he arrived at Arain's Mississauga, Ont., home, Faizi said two men attacked the vehicle. They smashed the windshield and windows, leaving him with cuts and bruises on his head and arm. They fled when he dialled 911 on his cellphone.
"It was very shocking to me," Faizi said. "They were saying so many bad things to me in Urdu and Punjabi."
Also, the family's two boys, aged 10 and five, and four-year-old daughter are staying home from school at the urging of the vice-principal.
"She advised me it would be safer for them to keep them at home," said Jawaad.
So, what in future may we expect of a Canada that continues to open its doors to Muslim immigration (not bothering to distinguish between apostates and fanatics, perversely preferring instead to shun such talk of a religion-political ideology - for Islam is simultaneously both religion and politics - as a forbidden question of race or racism) and that won't likely discover the resolve to monitor and license the teaching in Mosques and Islamic centres in order to outlaw promotion of violent Jihad, Jew- and American-hatred, and promotion of a vision of Canada and Sharia that would require revolutionary transformation of the present Constitutional order? Do not expect to hear but a mere fraction of the number of Canadians condemning Israel (for Israel's not always perfect but generally admirable behaviour in the war it has been fighting for sixty years that it might survive in a land Islam claims entirely as its own) condemn things like Al-Qaeda in Iraq's kidnapping and purchase of children to be used as suicide bombers. Too many Canadians would rather keep relatively quiet than take shots at all manner of barbarism, and then defend their mute position in the name of multiculturalism. But all cultures are not equal. Some have a rather primitive relationship to the sacred and still practise human sacrifice. The defense of our freedom not to live in fear of political violence depends on all Canadians (for it takes only a small determined minority to make any policing largely ineffective) defending a rather particular, Western, relationship to the sacred, one that recognizes the inherent sacrality of every individual and his or her freedom to think for himself and to find new ways to covenant with the one God, to reject the idea that humanity has already received its final and full revelation into the nature of that we call God.
Now is the time when we must decide whether human sacrifice will become a Canadian value and whether the children of those who criticize or belittle pretending moon writers will be safe in their schools. Apparently, at present the answer is that their safety cannot be guaranteed. Talk to you MP about it, why don't you, and don't take any "multiculti" guilt trip in response for speaking your mind. Multiculturalism is an entirely incoherent ideology that has and can never really exist in a society that would rule itself. To rule ourselves we must first be something particular, a people commonly practising some shared form of political sacrality, or discipline, and not another. If you want to try to be all things to all people (pretending to allow, e.g., the coexistence of Jihad or Sharia and Constitutional democracy), only an emperor, Caliph, or Supreme Court, can truly rule, deciding on how to split the many differences, telling everyone what they can and cannot do. Accordingly, there is no reason for free, self-ruling Canadians to support or allow the immigration or teaching of those who support violent forms of Jihad here at home or around the world. Might we expect Stephane Dion and the Liberal party to be clear and consistent about where they stand on these matters, clear that Israel and Canada must defend themselves, and Western civilization as a whole, from a violent and imperious Jihad?