HA! TELL US SOMETHING WE DON’T KNOW.

I’M GLAD THE GOVERNMENT IS FINALLY GETTING WITH THE PROGRAM, EVERYDAY CANADIANS HAVE KNOWN FOR QUITE AWHILE NOW THAT ISLAMIC MULTICULTURALISM IS NOT ONLY FOOLISH, BUT DANGEROUS TO ALL NON MUSLIMS. HOWEVER, THE PROBLEM ISN’T JUST “MUSLIM EXTREMISTS”. IT’S ALSO MODERATE MUSLIMS WHO GIVE SANCTION TO THESE EXTREMISTS BY THEIR SILENCE. SO WHAT IS IT KEEPING THEM QUIET, FEAR OF THEIR EXTREMISTS, OR AGREEMENT?

Muslim Extremists Number One Terror Threat, Canada Warns

Muslim extremists are the “leading threat to Canada’s national security,” warns a Cabinet minister, but media whitewash his report.
By Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu

First Publish: 2/13/2012, 10:00 AM

Muslim extremists are the “leading threat to Canada’s national security,” warned Ottawa’s Public Safety Minister Vic Toews, but the country’s mainstream media whitewashed his report.

He presented a 36-page report entitled ““Building Resilience Against Terrorism,” led off by pinpointing Islamist extremism in general and “’homegrown’ Sunni Islamist extremists” in particular as having “identified Canada as a legitimate target or [having] directly threatened our interests.”

He said that “recurring instances of violence linked to Sunni Islamist extremism have punctuated the development of the terrorist threat since at least the 1970s….Despite having been under intense pressure for the past decade, foreign-based Sunni Islam…extremist groups have explicitly identified Canada as a legitimate target for attacks or have taken actions that threaten Canada’s international interests.”

“Al Qaeda, led by Ayman al Zawahiri since the death of Osama bin Laden in May 2011, remains at the forefront of Sunni Islamist extremism and continues to serve as an ideology and inspiration for potential terrorists worldwide.”

Toews pointed out that terrorist threats also come from other groups as well and are not confined only to Muslim extremists. While citing Hizbullah and other terrorist groups as posing a threat, he added, “Other nationalist, politico-religious, or multi-issue groups continue to employ terrorist tactics in support of their aims… The threat to Canada from terrorism has three main components: violent Sunni Islamist extremism – both at home and abroad, other international terrorist groups, and domestic, issue-based extremism.”

Canada’s mainstream media almost completely ignored the Sunni Muslim threat in their reports on Toews’ presentation.

The Canadian Broadcasting Company told its readers and listeners that “Canadian agencies will co-ordinate better to prevent terrorism under a new strategy.” It quoted him as saying that “no government can guarantee it will be able to prevent all terrorist attacks all the time” but that “Canada is committed to taking all reasonable measures to address terrorism in its many forms.”

The CBC report made no mention of Muslim terrorist threats.

The Canadian Press, the major syndicated national news services in Canada, reported that while Toews said the counterterrorist strategy is aimed at “foiling everything from Islamic terrorist threats to ‘lone wolf’ attackers,” but otherwise emphasized that he said, “Terrorism is not specific to any one religion, community or ethnic group.”

Toews’ report specifically focused on Sunni Muslim extremists. He stated that while “Al Qaeda affiliates may pose a threat of terrorist attacks from abroad, violent ‘homegrown’ Sunni Islamist extremists are posing a threat of violence within Canada.…”

“A number of individual extremists from Western countries have attempted terrorist attacks, inspired by but not directly connected to Sunni Islamist extremists abroad. In 2006, 18 individuals were arrested in Ontario for participating in a terrorist group whose intent was to bomb a number of symbolic Canadian institutions.

“Radicalized Canadians have also travelled to global hot spots like Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen, training or fighting with Sunni Islamist extremist groups. These individuals could participate in terrorism abroad, return to Canada and push others to violence, or return to Canada to carry out terrorist activities on Canadian soil.”

READ THE ACTUAL REPORT HERE

Advertisements

CANADIANS OF CONVINENCE…

ESPECIALLY WHEN IT COMES TO THE BIG PAYDAY OF SUING THE GOVERNMENT THEY DEMAND SAVE THEIR SORRY ASSES EVERY TIME THEY GO ABROAD TO WELL KNOWN ISLAMIC HOTSPOTS..THE MAJORITY OF THESE “CITIZENS” GAIN ACCESS TO CANADA BY SHOWING UP AT THE BORDER ALL DEWY EYED CRYING ABOUT TORTURE IN THE OLD HOMELAND, YET THEY’D HAVE US BELIEVE AFTER RECIEVING CITIZENSHIP THAT GOING BACK FOR VACATIONS AND FAMILY VISITS IS FINE…UNTIL THEY GET PICKED UP FOR MORE THAN JUST VISITING GRANDPA JIHAD. HOW MANY OF THESE STORIES HAVE TO BE HEARD BEFORE CANADIANS CATCH ON TO A PATTERN?

Torture victims lose Supreme Court documents bid

Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin accused Ottawa of hiding behind national security law

CBC News

Posted: Jan 19, 2012   8:10 AM ET

Last Updated:  Jan 19, 2012   9:52 PM ET

Three Arab-Canadian men who are suing the federal government for being complicit in their detention and torture in Syria and Egypt have lost a bid at the Supreme Court to gain greater access to some of the government’s alleged evidence against them.

Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin were challenging Ottawa’s right to withhold information about their cases on grounds of national security.

A government inquiry had concluded in 2008 that Canadian officials were likely to be at least partially to blame for the torture of the three men.

The three were seeking leave to appeal a ruling last year by the Federal Court of Appeal that sided with the government over keeping information about their cases from being released.

El Maati, a former truck driver from Toronto, was arrested in November 2001 after he flew to Syria to celebrate his wedding.

Almalki, an electronics engineer in Ottawa, was detained in Syria in 2002 and held for 22 months.

Nureddin, a Toronto geologist, was detained by Syrian officials in December 2003 as he crossed the border from Iraq, where he was visiting family. He was held for 34 days in Syria in late 2003 and early 2004.

The men are suing federal agencies for compensation, but the government has denied any responsibility despite the conclusions of the inquiry in 2008.

Almalki said he was disappointed with Thursday’s decision but plans to continue pursuing his case against the government.

“I’ll keep on working for more disclosure and to have government officials held accountable,” he said.

 

 

CANADA MAKES IT’S PRESENCE KNOWN..

WELL BOYS AND GIRLS, HERE WE GO…ANOTHER CONFLICT WITH THE ISLAMICS..AND AGAIN WE’LL CALL IT ANYTHING BUT…

HMCS Charlottetown sails for Mediterranean

CBCCBC – 8 hours ago

  • Crews line the deck of HMCS Charlottetown as it leaves Halifax Sunday.Crews line the deck of HMCS Charlottetown as it leaves Halifax Sunday.

A large crowd packed the Halifax waterfront Sunday to wave goodbye to their loved ones as HMCS Charlottetown departed for a mission in the Mediterranean Sea.

The navy frigate has a crew of about 250 and will be gone for seven months.

Commander Wade Carter told reporters the Charlottetown would be joining the NATO mission Operation Active Endeavor, known as Operation Metric in Canada.

It’s a counter-terrorism mission in the sea that borders Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.

“We’re going to be patrolling the Mediterranean looking for weapons of mass destruction or constituents that could be used to design such things,” Carter said Sunday.

That could include boarding vessels, but Carter does not anticipate a high level of risk for his crew.

“Most of the seafarers in that area are law-abiding,” he said.

He said the Charlottetown had no plans to participate in any potential missions to the conflict in Syria, which borders the sea.

He also said they had no plans for nearby Iran, which has attracted international attention by saying it might block the Strait of Hormuz in response to potential UN sanctions.

“We are ready to deploy on the behalf of the government of Canada if they direct us to proceed in any type of mission, but I have no specific mission at this time in relation to any nation,” he said.

He likened the mission to a police officer patrolling a beat.

Chief Petty Officer Don Ellis said it was the first deployment for many sailors.

“We’re just making sure everything and everybody is ready to go. It’s really emotional,” he said. “For a lot of us it’s not the first time, but it’s never easy. But, you get through it — that’s what they pay us to do.”

The ship departed Halifax at 10 a.m. It is due to arrive in the Mediterranean in one week.

SHARIA IN CANADA..

HOW NICE OF THE CBC TO LEND VALIDITY TO A BARBARIC 7TH CENTURY IDEOLOGY THAT VIOLATES WOMENS RIGHTS, HUMAN RIGHTS, ANIMAL RIGHTS, CHILDRENS RIGHTS, IN FACT IT VIOLATES JUST ABOUT EVERY ASPECT OF CANADIAN LAW. IF YOU ARE A MAN, WOMAN, CHILD, ANIMAL IN CANADA, TRUST ME WHEN I SAY, YOU WANT NO PART OF THIS FILTH!

CBC In Depth

INDEPTH: ISLAM
Shariah law: FAQs
CBC News Online | May 26, 2005

What is Shariah?
The word Shariah means “the path to a watering hole.” It denotes an Islamic way of life – not just a system of criminal justice.

It is a code of living that most Muslims adopt as part of their faith. Some countries formally institute it as the law of the land, enforced by the courts.

However, the way Shariah law is applied from country to country can vary widely.

How did it originate?
According to Muslim scholars, the Prophet Muhammad laid down the laws. Some of the laws are said to be direct commands stated in the Qur’an. Other laws were based on rulings Muhammad is said to have given to cases that occurred during his lifetime. These secondary laws are based on what’s called the Sunnah – the Prophet’s words, example and way of life.

One of the major concerns of people critical of Shariah law is that it is subject to interpretation and evolution. There is virtually no formal certification process to designate someone as being qualified to interpret Islamic law.

As it stands today, almost anyone can make rulings as long as they have the appearance of piety and a group of followers.

Why have Shariah law in Canada?
Many Muslims believe that because Canada is a secular country, its secular legal system makes it difficult for them to govern themselves by the personal laws of their own religion. For instance, Canada’s marriage and divorce laws differ from Muslim law.

It can be important for a Muslim to be granted a divorce under Muslim law, especially if he or she intends to move to a Muslim country in the future and remarry.

Another concern for some is that if a Muslim dies without a will in Ontario, the estate would be divided according to Ontario law as opposed to Muslim law.

How did Shariah come to be considered in Canadian jurisdictions?
In 1991, Ontario was looking for ways to ease the burdens of a backlogged court system. So the province changed its Arbitration Act to allow “faith-based arbitration” – a system where Muslims, Jews, Catholics and members of other faiths could use the guiding principles of their religions to settle family disputes such as divorce, custody and inheritances outside the court system.

It’s voluntary – both parties (a husband and wife) have to agree to go through the process. But once they do, the decisions rendered by the tribunal are binding.


Marion Boyd

The Ontario government has been reviewing its Arbitration Act and on Dec. 20, 2004, it released a report conducted by former attorney general Marion Boyd. Among her 46 recommendations was that:

  • The Arbitration Act should continue to allow disputes to be arbitrated using religious law, if the safeguards currently prescribed and recommended by this review are observed.

Earlier in the year, the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice said it wanted to set up its own faith-based arbitration panels under the Arbitration Act, based on Shariah law.

The proposal ran into opposition from women’s groups, legal organizations and the Muslim Canadian Congress, which all warned that the 1,400-year-old Shariah law does not view women as equal to men.

In her report, Boyd noted that some “participants in the Review fear that the use of arbitration is the beginning of a process whose end goal is a separate political identity for Muslims in Canada, that has not been the experience of other groups who use arbitration.”

In May 2005, the Quebec National Assembly unanimously supported a motion to block the use of Shariah law in Quebec courts.

What are the concerns about establishing Shariah law in a Canadian jurisdiction?
The National Association of Women and the Law, the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, and the National Organization of Immigrant and Visible Minority Women of Canada argued that under Shariah law, men and women are not treated equally.

They argued that women fare far worse in divorce, child custody and inheritance matters under Shariah law. For instance, a woman can only inherit half as much as a man can. If a divorced woman remarries, custody of the children from her previous marriage may revert to the children’s father.

How would Shariah law apply in Ontario?
First, it’s not clear the term “Shariah law” would even be used. Several groups that appeared before Boyd’s process of reviewing the Arbitration Act say it’s not Shariah law they want to set up but a Muslim Personal/Family Law process which has its roots in Shariah.

The arbitration process as set out in the Arbitration Act is voluntary. Most of the concerns about the creation of “Shariah” tribunals have focused on the fear that Muslim women may feel they are being forced into taking part in a process of binding arbitration according to Muslim family law instead of resolving their disputes through the court system.

In her report, former Ontario attorney general Marion Boyd stressed that any faith-based system would have to conform to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

BLOODY NERVE OF US EH? MUSLIMS WANT MORE MONEY DAMMIT!!!

AND OF COURSE THE CBC GIVES THEM CENTRE STAGE TO DEMAND THEIR JIZYAH PAYMENTS UNDER THE GUISE OF ‘CHARITY’…MS. AYED IS APPARENTLY BEWILDERED AT CANADA’S RELUCTANCE TO GIVE, GIVE, GIVE TO PAKISTAN…COULDN’T BE BECAUSE THE LAST TIME WE GAVE, GAVE, GAVE, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS SUDDENLY ‘DISAPPEARED’..COULDN’T BE BECAUSE CANADIANS ARE ALREADY AWARE OF THE TERRORISTS PAKISTAN EXPORTS GLOBALLY, COULDN’T BE THAT CANADIANS ARE AWARE THAT ‘AID’ MONEY IS LINING THE POCKETS OF THOSE IT WAS NEVER INTENDED FOR, COULDN’T BE THAT CANADIANS KNOW PAKISTAN USES SAID MONEY FOR WEAPONS, BOMBS, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS NEEDED TO TERRORIZE THE KUFFAR??

Nahlah Ayed

Why aren’t we more generous with Pakistan?

Last Updated: Monday, October 4, 2010 | 3:27 PM ET

By Nahlah Ayed CBC News
 
Women and children queue for food handouts at a relief camp for flood victims in Sukkur, in Pakistan’s Sindh province,on September 24, 2010. (Akhtar Soomro/Reuters)

The day before the federal government stopped matching donations to help Pakistan’s flood victims, a newspaper ad appealed to Canadians to give more.

“The need in Pakistan is still so great,” said the Humanitarian Coalition, just last Saturday, Oct. 2, in bold print. “Last chance for your dollar-for-dollar match.”

Thousands of Canadians have already donated to what the UN calls the worst humanitarian disaster in its history.

But an informal CBC survey of large Canadian charities suggests the overall response here — though welcome, they say — barely reflects the gravity of the situation.

It has been this way almost from the start.

Ottawa announced the Pakistan Flood Relief Fund on August 22, promising to match every dollar donated to registered Canadian charities from August 2 to September 12. The promise came nearly a month after the floods started, and after a letter from Canadian aid groups encouraging the creation of just such a matching program.

The announcement led to a spike in donations. Still, they were trickling in at a fraction of what similar programs had seen in the past.

Certain that part of the problem was timing — the humanitarian tragedy had unfolded slowly in the waning days of summer — Ottawa extended the deadline to October 3. Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Twitter account duly announced that he, too, had donated and encouraged Canadians to “give generously.”

But with the program now over — and as millions of Pakistanis face the coming winter without proper shelter — the Canadian Pakistan Flood Relief Fund is poised to offer what looks to be a fairly modest contribution to an effort the UN says will require $2 billion, its largest disaster appeal ever.

Our survey, which included the Canadian Red Cross, Plan Canada, World Vision, and the Humanitarian Coalition, which combines Care Canada, Oxfam Canada, Oxfam-Quebec and Save the Children Canada, yielded a total of approximately $20 million eligible for government matching as of last week.

The final amount will be higher when all charities report. But barring some unexpected, last-minute jump in donations over the weekend, the federal government will put an equivalent $20 million into the flood relief fund, a far cry from the more than $113 million in donor-matching funds, on top of other, more direct aid, that Ottawa contributed to the Haiti relief effort.

Competing for funds

When it comes to Pakistan flood relief, the Canadian government contribution, like that of many other Western countries, has been relatively muted. In Canada’s case, a total of $40.5 million so far.

Flooded town houses are seen from a Japanese army helicopter bringing urgent humanitarian aid to Pakistan's Muzaffargarh district in the Punjab on Sept. 9, 2010. (Damir Sagolj/Reuters)   Flooded town houses are seen from a Japanese army helicopter bringing urgent humanitarian aid to Pakistan’s Muzaffargarh district in the Punjab on Sept. 9, 2010. (Damir Sagolj/Reuters)

What’s more, $7.5 million of that, announced by Minister Bev Oda in Pakistan last month, was actually an advance on the donations-matching fund that just expired, according to officials at the Canadian International Development Agency.

Some of that money went to relief efforts by the Canadian Red Cross and Global Medic, both Canadian charities. But the lion’s share ($4.5 million) went to the UN’s World Food Program, a decision that has raised eyebrows among Canadian charities.

The WFP is a respected international organization in which CIDA clearly has confidence. But Canadian charities, whose fundraising efforts made the matching fund possible, MUST apply to CIDA for a share of the money that they helped raise.

Most say they have no problem with applying — they agree the best relief efforts should be funded. Still, they are troubled by the optics of Ottawa using a matching program driven by Canadian charities to fund a non-Canadian one.

“They have other money to give to the WFP,” Care Canada president Kevin McCort said in a telephone interview. “We respect their right to do that. But Canadian people still have the expectation that they’re supporting Canadian NGOs.”

Why the hesitation?

The bigger question here is why Canada — and the world — have been so out of step with the need in Pakistan. Why has the response been so different from, say, that to Haiti’s earthquake?

Some say the slow unfolding of the flood did not motivate people the same way as the sudden calamity that hit Haiti. Perhaps there’s also an element of what has been called donor fatigue.

We also “don’t understand enough about Pakistan,” Rahul Singh, head of Canada’s Global Medic, told me last month in Shakirpur, Pakistan, where his group had just set up a water purification unit.

“We don’t interact with them, we don’t play hockey against them. We don’t know enough about this part of the world.”

But is there more to this than a lack of familiarity? Negative perceptions, perhaps? Even Islamophobia?

Comments on websites have suggested as much, as well as routinely raising the spectre of Muslim extremism, Pakistani government corruption and anti-Western sentiment when it comes to helping Pakistan.

“Why donate to a country that is corrupt, harbours tons of Talibans and wouldn’t even help Canada?” asked one commenter on a CBC story. Why, indeed?

But aid organizations maintain that such arguments are a fallacy even if the charges were true: Because money donated to them avoids Pakistan officialdom entirely.

“If we ever feel we can’t deliver the assistance, then we stop the program,” says McCort. “These are civilians who have been affected, and it’s civilians who are helping.”

Singh concurs: “What you have to understand is that the people who are affected out here, they’re not the rich, they’re not anti-Western people. They’re just the poorest of the poor, and they really need help.”

In case you wondered, even without the government’s matching program, Canadian organizations are still accepting donations.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/10/04/f-rfa-ayed.html#ixzz11XguH3Mo

MUSLIMS WHINING AGAIN ABOUT BEING SLAPPED BACK…

THEY LAND ON OUR SHORES, BUILD MOSQUES IN EVERY COMMUNITY AS A SHOW OF DOMINANCE, PLOT VIOLENT ATTACKS AGAINST US, AND THEN SCREECH ABOUT THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS WHEN THE INFIDELS RESPOND IN KIND…WHAT ARE THEY BITCHING ABOUT? LUQMAN IS OFF TO ALLAH’S ETERNAL ORGY IN THE SKY WITH HIS 72 VIRGINS, THEY SHOULD BE ELATED FOR HIM!

 

No charges in FBI killing of Detroit imam

 

Last Updated: Thursday, September 30, 2010 | 4:25 PM ET

The Associated Press

Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah, shown here in an undated file photo, was shot and killed by FBI agents during a raid at his home in Dearborn, Mich., on Oct. 28, 2009. (Ron Foster Sharif/Muslim Alliance of North America/Associated Press)

Michigan’s attorney general said Thursday that he won’t file criminal charges against FBI agents who shot a Detroit mosque leader 20 times, killing him during a raid last year on a suburban warehouse.

It is “undisputed” that Luqman Ameen Abdullah fired at agents, resisted arrest and rejected demands to surrender, Attorney General Mike Cox said.

“Under Michigan law, law enforcement agents are justified in using deadly force in these types of situations, and therefore we found no crimes,” Cox said in a written statement.

Some leaders in the local Muslim community have questioned whether the agents used excessive force.

Police dog tackled Abdullah

Besides being shot 20 times, Abdullah had wounds that an independent forensic pathologist said were caused by an FBI dog killed during the raid.

Some have speculated that Abdullah may have fired his gun while trying to defend himself from the dog.

Indeed, Cox’s report said agents deployed the dog after the suspect failed to show his hands while face-down on the ground.

The dog began biting Abdullah, who rolled over, revealed a gun and fired at the dog and at agents, the report said.

Four agents returned fire and Abdullah was killed, the report said.

“It is clear that the agents acted in self-defence and/or in defence of others,” the report said. “The facts show Abdullah making a series of decisions that resulted in the use of deadly force against him — and ultimately his death.

“None of Abdullah’s followers who complied with the … commands were injured in any way,” the report said, referring to four others detained after the raid.

The head of the FBI in Detroit, Andrew Arena, said the report “accurately reflects what happened that day.”

“There were five people in the warehouse. Four people came out without a scratch on them,” Arena said in an interview. “I would encourage people to read the report.”

The bureau has described Abdullah as a leader of a radical Sunni group that wants to create an Islamic state within the U.S. His family has denied allegations that he was anti-government.

He was killed on Oct. 28, 2009, as agents tried to arrest him in a sting operation involving stolen goods.

Dearborn police were the lead investigators in Abdullah’s death because it occurred in that city.

Cox said his office received video recordings, the results of 82 interviews and other documents from Dearborn police and the FBI.

Dawud Walid, the director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said he wants to read the attorney general’s report before commenting. But he repeated his call for all evidence to be released to the public.

The Justice Department’s civil rights division has also been investigating Abdullah’s death.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/windsor/story/2010/09/30/michigan-imam-killed-fbi.html#ixzz11Mw0ZETM

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/windsor/story/2010/09/30/michigan-imam-killed-fbi.html#ixzz11MsHRA3qwdr-luqman-ameen-abdullah-cp8705843.jpg

AWWWWW, HE’S HURT AND INSULTED..

THE ONLY HERITAGE MUSLIMS HAVE IS OF JIHAD..1400 YEARS OF TERROR, WAR, AND CONQUEST…CANADA HAS NO REASON TO ‘CELEBRATE’ THIS FILTH…

Imam slams MacKay over speech cancellation

Imam Zijad Delic, the executive director of the Canadian Islamic Congress, says he's upset over a decision by Defence Minister Peter MacKay to cancel his speech at a commemoration for Islamic Heritage Month.

Imam Zijad Delic, the executive director of the Canadian Islamic Congress, says he’s upset over a decision by Defence Minister Peter MacKay to cancel his speech at a commemoration for Islamic Heritage Month.

The head of the Canadian Islamic Congress says he’s hurt and insulted that his speech at National Defence Headquarters has been cancelled by Defence Minister Peter MacKay over accusations the congress holds extremist views.

“I don’t know why he decided this. His decision is totally unfounded, it’s baseless,” Imam Zijad Delic, the executive director of the organization, told CBC News. “This decision tells me quite a lot in terms of how [the government] is disengaged from the Canadian Muslim community.

“It hurts definitely. Knowing my background, knowing what I’ve done with building bridges with different interfaith groups, this definitely undermines many of the activities we have done,” he said.

Delic, a Bosnian Muslim, was invited to speak at defence headquarters on Oct. 4 as part of Islamic Heritage Month celebrations.

Jay Paxton, MacKay’s communications director, said in a statement that “[Friday] morning, upon hearing Imam Delic may participate in these celebrations, Minister MacKay took the decision to cancel the Imam’s role based on extremist views promulgated by the Canadian Islamic Congress.

“The Canadian Islamic Congress has declared that Israelis over the age of 18 are legitimate targets of suicide bombers. These types of comments don’t support Islamic Heritage, they simply divide Canadians, promulgate hate and they have no place in Monday’s celebrations.”

The statement referred to comments made by Mohamed Elmasry, former president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, who four years ago said any Israeli over the age of 18 are legitimate targets for suicide bombing because they’ve served in the Israeli army.

But Delic said the CIC should not be judged on the remarks of a past president who Delic says was expressing his own thoughts, and not the views of the organization.

“Of course CIC doesn’t agree. There are many leaders who speak and they don’t speak on behalf of everybody. They just speak,” Delic said. “Muslims totally forbid suicide bombing.”

Delic added that he has spoken at events sponsored by the departments of Foreign Affairs and Transportation.

MacKay’s statement, issued late Friday, came after two Christian-based associations began circulating an email that described Delic’s presence at the event as affront to Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan and their families.

“I think it’s pure politics,” Delic said of MacKay’s decision. “Some people complained about it and they just took it from there.”

Asked about Delic’s involvement with other government departments, Paxton said: “I can speak to the decision taken by Minister MacKay this morning, which he took upon hearing of the situation. I am not in a position to speak for other government departments.”

With files from The Canadian Press

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ISLAMIC ALLIES…..

IT’S QUITE OBVIOUS THAT ISLAMIC TERRORISTS ARE MORE THAN WELCOME IN PAKISTAN, AND YET HERE WE ARE HANDWRINGING OVER THE FACT PAKISTAN IS UPSET FOR KILLING A FEW ON THEIR BORDER….

Pakistan criticizes NATO airstrikes

Last Updated: Monday, September 27, 2010 | 2:10 PM ET

The Associated Press

Pakistan is criticizing NATO for launching a pair of deadly airstrikes on its territory, saying the cross-border strikes were a violation of its sovereignty.

As many as 50 militants were killed in the airstrikes, which were launched over the weekend after a group of insurgents attacked an Afghan security post in Khost province.

U.S. officials have said they have an agreement that allows aircraft to cross a few kilometres into Pakistani airspace if they are in hot pursuit of a target, but Pakistan denied Monday that such an agreement exists.

U.S. Capt. Ryan Donald, a spokesman for the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, said ISAF “maintains the right to self-defence, and that’s why they crossed the Pakistan border.”

Pakistan’s Foreign Affairs Ministry, however, said in a statement that the mandate of foreign troops in Afghanistan ends at the Afghan border, and the strikes were a violation of its sovereignty.

Pakistani intelligence officials also said two NATO helicopters carried out a third strike inside Pakistani territory on Monday morning, killing five militants and wounding nine others.

The strike occurred in the village of Mata Sanger in the Kurram tribal area, which is directly across the border from the Afghan provinces of Paktia and Nangarhar, said the officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media.

Donald, the NATO spokesman, said officials were still investigating and could not confirm or deny reports of the attack in Kurram.

U.S. Maj. Michael Johnson, another ISAF spokesman, said 49 militants were killed in the strikes launched over the weekend.

Abdul Hakim Ishaqzie, the provincial police chief in Khost, cited a higher death toll of around 60 militants. He said police at checkpoints at the border came under attack, engaged the militants in a gun battle and then called for help, prompting the helicopter strikes.

ISAF said no civilians were killed in the attack, but that could not be confirmed.

Insurgents routinely launch attacks into Afghanistan from Pakistan, and parts of the border also serve as a transport corridor for fighters, weapons and money.

“It’s viewed as a haven for the Taliban and al-Qaeda — but Pakistan is sensitive nonetheless about combat operations spilling over into its territory,” CBC’s Carolyn Dunn said.

The U.S. rarely uses manned aircraft to carry out strikes in North Waziristan and instead relies on drone attacks that American officials refuse to acknowledge publicly.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/09/27/nato-afghanistan-pakistan.html#ixzz10mGZnEnw

THIS IS WHY NUDIE SCANNERS ARE REQUIRED….

ONCE AGAIN ANOTHER MUSLIM PROVES WHY THEY SHOULD BE BARRED FROM AIR TRAVEL….

By CBC News, cbc.ca, Updated: September 25, 2010 9:22 AM

Bomb alert on Toronto-Karachi flight

Bomb alert on Toronto-Karachi flight

A jetliner flying from Toronto to Karachi, Pakistan, was diverted to Stockholm on Saturday morning and a passenger was detained after authorities received a report that a man on board was carrying explosives, officials said.

Swedish police evacuated the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) jet after it landed, and the aircraft remained parked on a ramp at the end of a runway.

Police detained a man described as a Canadian citizen of Pakistani descent, aged about 30, but said they had not confirmed his identity. A spokesman for the state-owned Pakistan International Airlines said the suspect was a 25-year-old Canadian national.

Swedish police said he did not resist as he was taken into custody, and he was not carrying any explosives.

“What happens now is that we’re searching the plane with bomb technicians to see if there is something we can find, but so far we haven’t found anything, either on the plane or on the man. They’re working with the luggage,” said Stafan Radman, head of a special police squad at the scene.

The tip was “called in by a woman in Canada,” Radman said, adding that Swedish police took the threat seriously.

The Boeing 777 was travelling from Toronto’s Pearson International Airport to Karachi when the pilot asked to land at Stockholm’s Arlanda airport after Canadian authorities received a tip that a passenger might be carrying explosives.

Arlanda spokesman Anders Bredfell said there were 273 people on board.

Jan Lindqvist, a spokesman for airport operator Swedavia, said PIA was considering flying the passengers to Manchester, U.K., from whence they could continue the trip to Karachi.

With files from The Associated Press

cbc.ca (Copyright: (C) Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, http://www.cbc.ca/aboutcbc/discover/termsofuse.html#Rss)

NOW IMAGINE IF WE SAID GARBAGE LIKE THIS ABOUT AN ISLAMIC NATION?

CRIPES SAKES THEY’D BE SCREAMING RACISM, HATE CRIME, INTOLERANTS, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, THAT WE HEAR FROM MUSLIMS ON A DAILY BASIS….YET THE CREEPY LITTLE MONKEY FROM IRAN IS GIVEN A PODIUM TO PUBLICALLY ADDRESS OTHERS WITH HIS FILTH….THAT’S THE MUSLIM HANDLED U.N. FOR YOU…

By CBC News, cbc.ca, Updated: September 23, 2010 10:44 PM

Ahmadinejad UN speech prompts U.S. walkout

American delegates to the UN General Assembly stood up and walked out on an address by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Thursday after he suggested the United States planned the Sept. 11 attacks to protect its own economy and support Israel.

Canada boycotted the speech, with Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon calling the Iranian president’s comments about 9/11, the U.S. and Israel “unacceptable” and an affront to the spirit of the UN.

In his address, Ahmadinejad accused some segments within the U.S. government of orchestrating the attack “to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order to save the Zionist regime.”

“The majority of the American people, as well as most nations and politicians around the world, agree with this view.”

This was the second of three viewpoints that Ahmadinejad claimed exist regarding the 2001 attacks, which killed 2,974 people in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Shanksville, Pa.

The first, he asserted, was that “a very powerful and complex terrorist group” planned them; the third, that they were carried out “by a terrorist group, but that the American government supported and took advantage of this situation.”

He said the U.S. used the 9/11 attacks as a pretext to invade Afghanistan and Iraq that led to the killing of hundreds of thousands of people, saying the U.S. should have “designed a logical plan” to punish the perpetrators while not shedding so much blood.

Delegates from other countries also walked out during the speech. If Ahmadinejad noticed, he did not show it, as he railed against American intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as against Israel’s “occupation of the Palestinian territories,” and negative attitudes toward nuclear energy, which he called “clean and cheap and a heavenly gift.”

He then announced that Iran would host a conference to study terrorism and ways to confront it, and invited officials and researchers “from all countries” to attend.

The Canadian delegation had boycotted the Iranian president during a speech on Tuesday when he addressed the UN’s Millennium Development Goals summit.

“Ahmadinejad’s comments on the 9/11 terrorist attacks, on the United States, and the repeated unjust condemnation of Israel are unacceptable,” Cannon said in his statement.

“Iran’s 20-year history of covering up its nuclear activities requires that the authorities take steps to address a serious confidence deficit. Its non-compliance, coupled with unacceptable statements Iran has made against other nations, is a destabilizing threat to the region, and to the world.”

Protest outside UN

Outside the UN, about 2,000 Iranian-Americans gathered on Dag Hammarskjold Plaza to protest Ahmadinejad’s appearance.

They carried red, white and green Iranian flags, and red, white and green umbrellas to ward off the hot autumn sun. Some held purple balloons and many wore purple, which one of the organizers, Ali Safavi, called “the colour of democracy.”

There was also a large papier-mâché representation of Ahmadinejad’s head with a nuclear missile strapped to the back.

Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani turned out to support the demonstrators, telling them they had the support “of all democratic people.”

“Your goals are our goals,” Giuliani said.

“They are the goals of all democratic people. You want to see freedom of religion … of the press,” he went on, to loud cheers. “We must confront tyrants, oppressors, bullies and terrorists as early as possible.”

With files from The Associated Press

External Links

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech to the UN