sda2.jpg

January 26, 2005

Canadian Islamic Congress Slams "Biased Report"

The Canadian Islamic Congress is none too happy with this Report on Global Anti-Semitism released by the US State Department on Jan.5. Some exerpts from the news release;

1. The report is politically motivated, and lacks independently audited and verified statistics. The fact that this report has been issued by a government department and not an NGO; plus the fact that it addresses only one form of hatred against one specific minority (Jews); and that there were no other reports commissioned to address equally serious hate-issues against other worldwide minorities (e.g. Christians, Muslims, Blacks, First Nations, Aboriginals, women, the poor, the disabled, homosexuals, etc.), clearly shows that political motivation is a far higher priority for the U.S. State Department than human rights or social justice.

Translation: "Propoganda from the filthy Zionist Neocon Cabal in the Bush Administration".
2. The report addresses only anti-Jewish hatred, completely ignoring the equally important issue of Islamophobia (hatred towards Muslims).

A little problem with word definitions, here. "Phobia" means fear of, not "hatred".
Muslims around the world -- especially in areas where they are in the minority -- have been, and still are, victims of discrimination, harassment, physical and mental abuse...

They won't get an argument from me on that.

Deepika Thathaal (search), or Deeyah, was born in Norway of mixed Asian roots. Her father got her into music and has supported her throughout her career. All was going well until she dared to show a little skin - and that's when the threats started. "I would get very abusive phone calls," she said. "I would get abused as I walked down the street. I would have people spit at me."

At a concert in Norway, she was attacked on stage by angry Muslim men who thought she was degrading their culture. But Thathaal doesn't flaunt her heritage. She's just a European woman pursuing a pop music career - who also happens to be Muslim.

Canadian Islamic Congress media release contact:
Dr. Mohamed Elmasry
(519) 746-4107 (O)
(519) 577-2267 (Cell)
e-mail: np@canadianislamiccongress.com

COREN: So what are you saying?

ELMASRY: I'm saying that it has to be totally innocent, OK? Totally innocent are the children, obviously, OK? But they are not innocent if the army [inaudible] in civilian clothes, OK?

COREN: What about women?

ELMASRY: The same, if they are women in the army...

COREN: Anyone over the age of 18 in Israel is a valid target.

ELMASRY: Anybody above 18 is a part of the Israeli army...

COREN: So everyone in Israel and anyone and everyone in Israel, irrespective of gender, over the age of 18 is a valid target?

ELMASRY: Yes, I would say.

[...]

COREN: I've got to tell you I think you've just dug a very large hole for yourself there. I am not unsympathetic, and I do believe that Israelis use way too much force and I believe that Palestinians are blanketed with the term "terrorist," which is very unfair, but what you've said there, I believe, is very dangerous talk. There's a massive difference.

IRFAN SYED (LAWYER): I wouldn't be so definitive as saying that everybody over 18 is a legitimate target. I mean obviously that goes too far. I mean even according to our faith belief, you have to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. That includes women, children, the elderly and all that.

ELMASRY: Everybody above 18 is a combatant.

Posted by Kate at January 26, 2005 3:12 PM
Comments

So if the terrorists use children as walking bombs does that bring down the age of "legal targets" for the Israelis?

Posted by: Gil Barber at January 26, 2005 4:22 PM

The Muzzies are concerned about the welfare of Christians, women, and homosexuals? When did this happen?

Oh, I see. They're concerned the paper trail is going to stop at their front door (and that of Eurabia). I understand their concern.

Posted by: Mississauga Matt at January 26, 2005 5:09 PM

WARNING: PEDANTIC NITPICK AHEAD.

Phobia (n):

2. A strong fear, dislike, or aversion.

Hence the wrong-sounding, but not inaccurate, usage "homophobe". I once objected to it, regarding a specific person, "He doesn't fear homosexuals, he hates them." I was wrong, the word can express fear, loathing, or both.

Nit picked; mission accomplished.

Posted by: Alan S. at January 26, 2005 7:00 PM

bah.

I dont' care.

Posted by: Kate at January 26, 2005 7:39 PM

Speaking of nit-picking, what about the word "homophobe" itself? What exactly is it supposed to mean anyway?

Not "fear of men" surely? That would be mixing Latin and Greek (homo,hominis - Latin "man" / phobos - Greek "fear") Using Greek throughout, "fear of men" would end up something like "anthropophobe."

And what the hell is "fear of men" supposed to mean?

So if "homophobe" is all Greek, then it must mean "fear of the same" (homos - Greek "same").

Fear of the same? Same what?

Whoever coined this word was clueless.

JJM

Posted by: JJM at January 27, 2005 5:41 AM

My presumption has always been that "homophobic" came into usage for political/propoganda reasons. It implies that any aversion to homosexuality is based on an irrational fear.

Regardless of its possible merits in regards to homosexuality though, I'm not sure that associating "hatred of" and "fear of" is a really great tactic for the Canadian Islamic Congress.

I do agree that this is a fair usage. The word xenophobia has been around for a long time and has similar meaning. I just don't think it works very well from a PR standpoint in this case.

Posted by: Sean E at January 27, 2005 9:52 AM

"Homophobia" was once a legitimate psychiatric term, meaning an irrational fear of men, most usually seen in rape victims.

Makes you think, doesn't it? If our society is being raped by homosexuals, perhaps it really is "homophobic".

Posted by: ebt at January 27, 2005 3:52 PM
Site
Meter