“Islamic schools won’t have it [Remembrance Day] as a holiday because we don’t celebrate it”

“Islamic schools won’t have it [Remembrance Day] as a holiday because we don’t celebrate it”

Mazin AbdulAdhim, a prominent Muslim scholar and Imam from London, Ont. has stated that “Islamic schools won’t have it [Remembrance Day] as a holiday because we don’t celebrate it.”

He further explained that “it is a day to remember those who died while fighting and killing Muslims… it’s because it is a day to remember those who died while fighting and killing Muslims… The Ottomans were Muslims, and Remembrance Day first started after Britain and France and the others defeated us, killed millions of our people, and then made this celebration starting on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, November 11th, to forever remember *their* soldiers who fought to defeat us in that war and then invade our lands. That is why we don’t celebrate Remembrance Day, because we would be remembering their soldiers who killed millions of Muslims.”

Mazin AbdulAdhim’s Facebook post on November 11, 2019:

Today is Remembrance Day, and here is an interesting conversation I had with my daughters about why we don’t celebrate it:

I was talking to my daughters – Safiyyah and Maryam – about whether or not there is school tomorrow because it might be a holiday for Remembrance Day, and I mentioned that Islamic schools won’t have it as a holiday because we don’t celebrate it.

Maryam asked “why not?” I told her that it’s because it is a day to remember those who died while fighting and killing Muslims. She said “but it’s a day to remember everyone who died in wars.”

I said “Ok, do you know who fought in World War 2?” She said “The whole world?” And we all laughed (she knew she was joking). I said “No, it was a war between the Nazis against Britain, France, America, and some others.” I asked her “So, do we remember the fallen from among the Nazis?” She said “No, obviously not.” I said “See, we don’t remember everyone who died in wars. We only remember the those who died from among the British, French, and so on.”

I said, “Ok, now do you know who fought in World War 1?” My older daughter Safiyyah said “Wait, I know this one. It was Britain against the Ottoman Islamic State!” And I almost shed a tear with pride that moment (I don’t remember teaching her that), and told her “You just won $100 Safiyyah!” (of course she didn’t win $100). She said “I learned that in school last year.” I told her she was correct, and then I said “The Ottomans were Muslims, and Remembrance Day first started after Britain and France and the others defeated us, killed millions of our people, and then made this celebration starting on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month, November 11th, to forever remember *their* soldiers who fought to defeat us in that war and then invade our lands. That is why we don’t celebrate Remembrance Day, because we would be remembering their soldiers who killed millions of Muslims.” She said “ooooh, ok.”

Someone might say “Don’t you think that this is too much to teach a young girl?” And I say: If she is old enough to be taught to remember the dead among the Kafir colonialist West, then she is old enough to remember the dead among the Muslims of the Uthmani Khilafah.

We cannot allow our children to be raised to look fondly on the crimes of the colonialist Capitalist West, or be taught to feel that this is their own history. We have our own history, and we must teach our children to look at the world from our own perspective.

Our children will either be our future, or they will be the future of the liberal secular colonialist West.

May Allah (swt) protect the minds and hearts of our children, and raise them to become the future leaders, teachers, and intellectuals of this Muslim Ummah. Ameen.

Why did NCCM’s Mustafa Farooq remove his anti-LGBTQ comments from Facebook?

Why did NCCM’s Mustafa Farooq remove his anti-LGBTQ comments from Facebook?

On October 31, 2019 I sent a media inquiry to Mustafa Farooq, the Executive Director of the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), asking why he removed his anti LGBTQ comments immediately after Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld revealed them in a article on the website American Center for Democracy. Mustafa Farooq has not as of yet responded to my media inquiry.

Media Inquiry

Mustafa Farooq, Executive Director of the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM)

info@nccm.ca

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld from the American Center for Democracy has reported that Mustafa Farooq, the Executive Director of the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), removed his anti LGBTQ comments on Facebook.

Ehrenfeld’s report:

On January 26, 2012 Sana Ghani, a former research assistant at University of Alberta, posted on Facebook:

The Muslim and LGBTQ Communities: Is there a possibility for strategic alliances? Al-Hikmah Discussion Group Fri. Feb 3, 6:30pm. Steeps (11116 82 ave).

As-salamu ‘alaykum all,

This month’s Al-Hikmah open discussion is on the Muslim and LGBTQ communities. Both “The Muslim” and “The Homosexual” are lumped into the category of discriminated minority figure/ political scapegoat. Of course, these two figures make very strange bedfellows (no pun intended). What do we make of this situation?

What possibilities are there for alliances, when we might have fundamental disagreements? Why have very different ways of being been flattened into parallel “identities”? How might we get the leaders of our community to address this issue in a more open and nuanced way?

This is a very contentious topic, but we feel there needs to be more open discussion in our community on these kinds of issues. We wish to discuss the kinds of questions, difficulties and possibilities we see here, to get a very important conversation started in our community.

Mustafa Farooq is Executive Director of the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM). A lawyer by profession, Mustafa completed his Juris Doctor at the University of Alberta and Osgoode Hall (York University) and later earned his Master of Laws (LLM) at UC Berkeley in California.

Here are Mustafa Farooq’s comments on Sana Ghani’s Facebook post:

Mustafa Farooq: “We should also have seperate [sic] but related conferences on how Muslims should work with Adulterers, and then another one on how Muslims need to ally themselves with those who take insane amounts of interest, and then another about Muslims with the alcohol industry.”

Sana Ghani: “I didn’t say Muslims SHOULD necessarily ally with the LGBTQ community. The issue is, of course, that the LGBTQ community has been trying to support Muslims because they see a common goal with us (opposing state coercion). I think we definitely need to think more carefully about how to respond to this, what would be best politically for our community, while acting with integrity towards our principles. Dr. Sherman Jackson and Dr. Umar F. Abd-Allah have had really interesting things to say on this issue, which I would like for us to consider. May Allah (t’ala) guide us to whatever is best, amin.”

Mustafa Farooq: “I believe strongly that to ask a question is to create conditions of possibility, especially since in the Muslim community the consensus on this question is, in my opinion, pretty clear. To ask the question is, in fact, to argue that allying ourselves with a certain community is possibly a correct choice. As a political science student, if there is one thing I have learned, we can’t predict the future in terms of alliances. Picking the side of justice, however, and truth, is something we can never lose at (because even if we are oppressed, we are drawing closer to Allah). Dr. Sherman Jackson, I know, has made his opinion on this pretty clear (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HisIwWhyU34) which is to say that we do not condemn homosexuals (just as we do not condemn those who have feelings of attractions towards the opposite sex) but condemn the act of homosexuality (just as we condemn adultery). May Allah guide us to the truth, and forgive us for wen we mispeak.

Hide or report this YOUTUBE.COM Is There A Place For Gay Muslims?

[…]

Mustafa Farooq: “I apologize if my comments came of as sarcastic. That was not my intention. I was merely attempting to make an analogy- if the postulations in my point struck you as conversations you would never have (because they are forbidden) then this would fall in the same category (as it is clearly forbidden). Allah knows my intention, as there are indeed conversations that I don’t think we need to have- it would be like raising objections to having Ayaan Hersi Ali or Irshad Manji [Muslim-born activists critics of Islam] lecture at a masjid [mosque]. Please forgive me if I offended you.”

Sana Ghani: “I take your concerns very seriously, Mustafa. But I’m just not convinced either way, or by this line of thinking. The greatest thing forbidden to us is shirk [polytheism], and yet we make alliances with non-Muslims all the time. We have inter-faith alliances with people who define themselves as a group by their belief in the trinity. Allahu ‘alam [Allah knows best], I just have a lot of questions on this, and I think as a group we could at least clarify our concerns. It doesn’t end here, of course. I want to discuss these issues with scholars as well, as we as a community start articulating and clarifying precisely what our concerns are. This is a relatively new and strange situation we are in, but I am confident that Allah will guide us as a community to whatever is best for us. If this is more harmful than good for us, then may He make that clear to us, amin.”

UPDATE (October 31, 2019) – NCCM Mustafa Farooq’s statements critical of alliances with LGBTQ were removed from Facebook.

QUESTIONS

  • Why did you remove the anti LGBTQ comments immediately after Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld exposed them in her article?
  • Why do you oppose alliances with LGBTQ communities?
  • Has NCCM under your leadership built alliances with the LGBTQ community, and particularily the Muslim LGBTQ community?
  • Why didn’t NCCM post on its Facebook page the rainbow flag during the Pride month?
  • Why didn’t NCCM issue any statement in support of the LGBTQ community, and particularily the Muslim LGBTQ community, during the Pride month?

I would like a reply by by 4pm November 1, 2019. If you need more time let me know.

Sincerely,

Eric Stanley Brazau,

Investigative journalist

ericbrazau.com

Scantily clad woman “wants attention and possibly much more” – Toronto Islamic booth

Scantily clad woman “wants attention and possibly much more” – Toronto Islamic booth

On October 28, 2019 I sent a media inquiry to the Walk-In Islamic InfoCenter asking for an explanation why Muslim Dawah (Islamic propagation) activists hand out Islamic literature that contains controversial content regarding women. A day later I left a courtesy message on Walk-In Islamic InfoCenter’s answering machine extending the deadline. At the time of publishing of this article I have not yet received a reply.

Media Inquiry to the Walk-In Islamic InfoCenter

Mohammed Obaidullah, Volunteer President, Walk-In Islamic InfoCenter

Owais Rafi, Vice President, Walk-In Islamic InfoCenter
info@collectfreequran.org

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Copies of the book “Islam Balancing Life And Beyond” by Suhail Kapoor are being handed out for years by activists of the Islamic booth at the corner of Yonge and Dundas (Dundas Square) in Toronto.

Quotes from the book, a project of Islamic Propagation Center in Mississauga, Ontario:

Page 53

Mixed gatherings offer opportunities where base desires are unleashed, and once allowed free reign, have the potential to even destroy families. Are the results of promiscuity not in front of us? The illegitimate and abandoned children, broken homes, adultery, abortions, divorces and sexual diseases and more. Relationship out of wedlock is known as ‘fornication’, punishable by Islamic Law in an Islamic state. It is in the larger interest of our society that Islamic high moral standards are advocated and enforced.”

Page 46

“…because of the apparent restriction on Muslim women to remain away from the public realm, many Westerners see the Muslim hijab as a symbol of female oppression. However, on the contrary as per those women, especially Westerners who embraced Islam, the hijab is instead a symbol of ‘liberation’. The Islamic tradition of hijab frees women from being perceived primarily as sexual objects.”

Page 48

“Human beings are conditioned by the society in which they live. Naturally when you see a woman scantily dressed and revealing her physical features, versus when you see a woman modestly dressed, covering her head, not revealing any of her physical features, impressions that will come to mind do not need mentioning. Needless to say, dress represents her modesty, and through it she commands the respect in the society. Whereas when a woman chooses to show her body in one form or another, the message is only one: she wants attention and possibly much more.”

Page 50

Islam puts an upper limit of four wives and gives a man permission to marry two, three or four women, only on the condition that he deals justly with them, which, if not impossible, is certainly extremely difficult. Knowing well of our shortcomings, Allah in His infinite wisdom says later in the same chapter: “You will not be able to do justice between your wives however much you wish (to do so).” (Qur’an 4:128-130) This verse serves as a deterrent of fear of Allah and as such, less than 2% men in the Muslim world exercise this option. Therefore polygamy is not a rule but an exception. Many people labour under the misconception that it is an open-ended verdict for a Muslim man to have more than one wife. This is absolutely not true.”

Page 51

The system of polygamy according to Islamic Law is a moral and human one. It is moral because it does not allow man to have intercourse with any woman he wishes, at any time he likes. He is not allowed to have intercourse with more than three women in addition to his (first) wife, and he cannot do that secretly, but must proceed with a contract and announce it, even if among a limited audience. To attain full legitimacy it must be registered with the law.”

QUESTIONS

Do activists with the Walk-In Islamic InfoCenter hand out for free at Dundas Square or elsewhere copies of the book “Islam Balancing Life And Beyond” by Suhail Kapoor?

The book states: “Relationship out of wedlock is known as ‘fornication’, punishable by Islamic Law in an Islamic state.” The Islamic Law prescribes a punishment of flogging for the unmarried and stoning to death to the married. Does the Walk-In Islamic InfoCenter agree with stoning fornicators to death in the Islamic State?

Does the Walk-In Islamic InfoCenter agree with the messages of the book regarding women including the statement “when a woman chooses to show her body in one form or another, the message is only one: she wants attention and possibly much more”?

Does the book “Islam Balancing Life And Beyond” by Suhail Kapoor reflect in whole or in part the true teachings of Islam as being taught by your Dawah organization?

I’ll appreciate a response by 4 pm October 28, 2019. If you require more time please let me know.

Sincerely,

Eric Stanley Brazau,

Investigative Journalist

EricBrazau.com

NDP’s Jagmeet Singh declines to comment on killing Islamic State leader

NDP’s Jagmeet Singh declines to comment on killing Islamic State leader

On October 28, 2019 I sent a media inquiry to Jagmeet Singh the leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP) asking why he hasn’t published any statement on the killing of the leader of the Islamic State. Singh didn’t respond to the media inquiry.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

On October 26, 2019 Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State (ISIS, Daesh, Caliphate) was killed by American special forces in the area of Idlib in northern Syria.

ISIS under the leadership of Baghdadi established an Islamic state and proceeded to commit crimes against humanity as defined by the UN. These crimes include but are not limited to: genocide, ethnic cleansing, targeted systematic rape, torture and beheading.

Hundreds of Canadians left to support and participate with ISIS in establishing the Caliphate – Islamic State and taking part in war crimes. Terrorist attacks inspired by the Islamic State targeted Canadian nationals in Canada and abroad. Eighty of these ISIS fighters have returned to live in Canada.

Canada is a member in the international coalition tasked with defeating ISIS, including through the Global Coalition, Operation IMPACT and the NATO training mission in Iraq.

Both Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Andrew Scheer, leader of the Conservative Party, issued statements supporting the elimination of the leader of the Islamic State. Jagmeet Singh, the leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP) has not issued any statement.

QUESTIONS

Why have you not made any public statement regarding the killing of the leader of the Islamic State that orchestrated with the help of Canadian nationals genocide, ethnic cleansing, systematic rape, torture and beheading?

If you have made a statement could you kindly forward it to me.

I would like a reply by 12 noon on the 29th of October if you need more time let me know.

Thank you

Eric Stanley Brazau

Investigative Journalist

www.EricBrazau.com

“She requested waxing of her scrotum” – Human Rights Tribunal’s ruling against Jessica Yaniv

“She requested waxing of her scrotum” – Human Rights Tribunal’s ruling against Jessica Yaniv

On October 22, 2019 the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal issued its ruling in the legal case between Jessica Yaniv (the complainant) and various waxing salons (Blue Heaven Beauty Lounge and Sandeep Benipal, Suhki Hehar and Sukhi Beauty Dream Salon, Marcia DaSilva, Hina Moin, Pam Dulay, Judy Tran and Merle Norman):

[1] Jessica Yaniv is a transgender woman. All of the Respondents operate businesses which offer waxing services. Ms. Yaniv requested waxing services from each of the Respondents. In five cases, she requested waxing of her scrotum. In two, she requested waxing of her arms or legs. In each case, she told the Respondent that she was a transgender woman and the Respondent refused to provide Ms. Yaniv with service. Ms. Yaniv says that this refusal to serve her is discrimination on the basis of her gender identity and expression, in violation of s. 8 of the Human Rights Code [Code].

[2] With one exception, all of the Respondents are women who advertised their services through Facebook Marketplace. They were either providing the service out of their home, or in the client’s home. Most of them presented as racialized, with English not their first language. Only three Respondents presented a defence to Ms. Yaniv’s complaints. These characteristics are significant because they support my conclusion that Ms. Yaniv has engaged in a pattern of filing human rights complaints which target small businesses for personal financial gain and/or to punish certain ethnic groups which she perceives as hostile to the rights of LGBTQ+ people.

[3] In this decision, I analyse Ms. Yaniv’s complaints in two categories: genital waxing cases and cases involving arm and leg waxing. In the genital waxing cases, I find that scrotum waxing was not a service customarily provided by the Respondents. As such, they did not deny Ms. Yaniv a service and did not discriminate against her. I dismiss these complaints under s. 37(1) of the Code. In the leg and arm waxing cases, I find that Ms. Yaniv filed the complaints for improper purposes. I dismiss these complaints under s. 27(1)(e) of the Code.

[4] The three Respondents which presented a defence were all represented by Jay Cameron and Brandon Langhelm of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms [JCCF]. Ms. Yaniv has applied for an order of costs against these Respondents arising out of conduct which she attributes to Mr. Cameron and the JCCF. She also applies for costs specifically against the Respondent Sukhdip Hehar. I dismiss all of Ms. Yaniv’s applications for costs. I do, however, find that Ms. Yaniv has engaged in improper conduct during the course of this complaint. I order her to pay the represented Respondents $2,000 each.

The ruling is available here.