Hate and Violence are Not Quebec Values

The recent vandalism of five Jewish institutions and the decision by Quebec National Assembly guards to deny entry to Kirpan bearing Sikhs into a Parliamentary committee meeting has invariably brought out the tedious refrain in newspapers across Canada that Quebec is a place of monumental intolerance. Link
For many, its easy to confuse linguistic intolerance with religious intolerance and while Quebec does officially discriminate against English, it has nothing to do with religion.
Understandably, this distinction is lost in the rest of the country, but in Quebec anglophones and minorities should be able to make the distinction.

That is why it is galling that two prominent Anglophone  newspapers, the Montreal Gazette and the community based The Suburban ran editorials repeating the nonsense that Quebeckers are religiously intolerant.
Now before one writes off The Suburban as a lightweight newspaper, "one that is worthy of wrapping a bloody pig in," (as René Levesque described it after an unflattering article) let us not underestimate the newspaper's profound influence in the western neighbourhoods of Anglophone Montreal.

"If the state is the protector and the state grants supremacy of one group over others, then the logical outgrowth is that the “others” – the minorities – are marginalized.  Not by overt assertion, but by subliminal seduction. And young minds are the most affected.
It opens the door to any person with a gripe against society, or frustrations with their own lives, to take it out on others. The others. “Les autres.” It is about the demonization of those who are different in order to soothe our frustration with ourselves. It makes hate easy and, sadly, satisfying." read the entire article

Shades of Jan Wong, who years ago blamed the three Montreal serial killings at Concordia, Dawson and Ecole Polytechnique on Bill 101 and "decades-long linguistic struggle".

It's always easy to arrive at illogical conclusions when ones draws inference from facts which are not facts.
The Suburban is somehow making a connection to the antisemitic acts of vandalism with language policies related to making French the predominant language of Quebec society.
The logical conclusion of that premise is that the perpetrators were angry francophones, whose 'young minds' were conditioned to hate, by the state.

However, if history repeats itself, there is little likelihood that the vandals were francophones.
Sorry to burst the Suburban's balloon, but almost all antisemitic acts of this kind are perpetrated by young disaffected Muslims, and religious intolerance, rather linguistic intolerance is the prime motivation.

If language policy (which doesn't exist elsewhere) is the driving force behind violent acts against minorities, why is it that Quebec has the lowest rate of hate crimes in Canada? As I wrote recently, in 2008, there were 271 hates in Toronto compared to 38 in Montreal. LINK

British Columbia is the hate capital of Canada and if one would ascribe to the Suburban's logic, perhaps we should blame the violence on Canadian 'multiculturalism.'

Most hate crimes are related to religious fanaticism, poverty, disaffection and ignorance. That plays out across the country, regardless of language.

If statistics prove anything, it is that Quebeckers are more tolerant than Canadians, something that Quebec bashers will find hard to swallow.

The Suburban does a disservice to the Jewish community it serves by telling readers that hate crimes are related to Bill 101 and language, when clearly evidence proves the opposite. Hate crimes in Quebec remain so isolated that any statistical conclusions are impossible to reach and all we can say with certainty is that these crimes occur significantly less in Quebec than in Canada.

The Suburban owes an apology to all Quebeckers.

As for the Gazette, the assertion of its editorial board that those in favour of barring the kirpan from public facilities are 'shameful,' and by inference intolerant, is unacceptably arrogant.

"There is certainly no reasonable justification for banning the wearing of kirpans by Sikhs in public venues, including the National Assembly building or the Parliament buildings in Ottawa,....

"Although it is a knife, the kirpan is not held as a weapon by its wearers but rather as a symbol of their faith, much like a crucifix by Christians or a star of David by Jews."  A shameful violation of religious freedom

Repeat after me, "This is not a knife!..this is not a knife!

The assertion that there is no reasonable justification to ban the kirpan is opinion, not fact. 

The Gazette's belief that the issue is settled reminds us of warm-mongers who tells that there can be no reasonable debate over global warming and that anyone with a contrary opinion is wrong.

It's nothing short of nonsense for the Gazette to equate an eight inch pointed dagger with a tiny crucifix or a Star of David, worn around the neck. These religious symbols cannot be used as weapons, the dagger, well.....

Should somebody attempt to board an airplane with a pointed eight inch stiletto-shaped crucifix, I would hope he would be enjoined from flying. If a person attempted to enter Parliament wearing a massive Star of David with razor sharp edges that could be used like a Ninja throwing star, I would hope that he'd be barred from entering as well.

It's the sign of a weak argument when unjustified comparisons are made.

I may venerate my AK-47 assault rifle as a religious item, but that doesn't make it less of a weapon and I'm sure the Gazette editorial board would not board an airplane where a passenger would carry that sort of 'article of faith' (See, we can all make illogical comparisons!)

The fact is, the kirpan is an article of faith that is also a weapon, it is as simple as that.

To fulfill its religious function, the kirpan must remain a functioning weapon.

If kirpans were just 'symbols', they could be fashioned into innocent plastic toys or they could be miniaturized to the size of an ordinary crucifix and thus rendered harmless. Even at full size, sharpened and pointed, they could be rendered safe by welding them within their sheaths. 

But alas, that is not what what is called for. In order to fulfill its function, the kirpan must be a real-live weapon, religiously sanctioned to be used in the defence of good. 

To pretend otherwise is just closing one's eyes to the truth.

The argument that the kirpan does not pose a potential danger because Sikhs do not consider it as weapon is patently self-serving, untrue and decidedly beside the point.

Should 'intent to use' really be a criterion for allowing weapons in public?

By the way, it's not as if Sikhs have never used the kirpan as a weapon. While rare, it has happened and it has happened in Canada.

In Montreal, a 13 year-old Sikh pulled out his kirpan and threatened other students. Link

Of course, all of this was hushed up in youth court, such is the reality of our politically correct society which denies nail-clippers on airplanes, while allowing religious daggers.

The case of a Toronto man being stabbed by a kirpan is also considered a simple aberration by defenders and not germane to the debate.  Kirpan attack in Brampton renews concerns.

If one could make the argument that Sikhs in general are somehow more  pacifistic than the average Canadian and that non-violence was a hallmark of their society, one could add some weight to the argument that the Kirpan is harmless. Unfortunately, such is not the case at all. 

Sikh radicals, (all wearing kirpans) were responsible for the worst terrorist act in Canadian history. The bombing of Air India was not the random act of just one deranged Sikh, but rather a widespread conspiracy of real terrorists.

Religious violence is problematic amidst the large Sikh community in British Columbia and just recently threats by Sikhs against Dosanj Dosani were made in relation to him attending a certain parade.

"Violent incidents at two Sikh temples this month in Brampton, along with a controversial decision over the weekend to allow photos of leaders from banned terrorist groups onto a float in the annual Vaisakhi parade in B.C., have marred the image of the Sikh-Canadian community, according to one group.

I don't want to give the idea that Sikhs represent a clear and present danger to Canadian society, but they are certainly not deserving of this type of an accommodation based on their record of non-violence." LINK

"On April 16, 2010, the day prior to the annual Vaisakhi Parade held in Surrey, B.C., one of the parade organizers issued a statement indicating should Dosanjh and BC Liberal backbencher Dave Hayer choose to attend the parade, their safety could not be guaranteed."  LINK

"...Dosanjh, a moderate who has distanced himself from such fundamentalist views, is a longtime critic of Sikh extremism who was severely injured in a February 1985 beating by a suspected member of the International Sikh Youth Federation, a banned terrorist group....
...This is intimidation and I don't believe in this day and age a Canadian parliamentarian should have to put up with these nonsensical threats." LINK

Read;
Extremist Sikh Violence in British Columbia: Why Must It Always Boil Down to This?

Sikh violence wanes in Punjab, grows in Canada

High Spousal Abuse in South Asian Marriages 
Surrey Sikh parade's martyrs float angers mayor

Sikhs fear return to violence in temple election

I haven't included the above links to humiliate or denigrate the Sikh community, just to underline that a measure of violence has been brought over to Canada from the old country. While not all Sikhs are violent, the vast majority of violent Sikhs are religious purists that wear the kirpan.

That the Canadian Parliament grants Sikhs the right to carry kirpans is more an act of political expediency than anything else. The Sikh community represents almost 2% of electors and the community directly controls the election of over half a dozen federal seats. Coming out against the kirpan would be the kiss of death to any federalist party and this is the real definition of an accommodation. 

The kirpan is banned in Denmark and France and there have been several court cases in states of the U.S. involving the legality of wearing the kirpan in public places.

The kirpan is barred in the European Parliament as well as the Indian Parliament where a Sikh member of Parliament was kept from serving because of his refusal to relinquish his kirpan. After being re-elected he reluctantly complied.
Is the Gazette prepared to brand all these countries and institution "shameful?" 

The Gazette has every right to advocate for the kirpan accommodation, but branding those opposed to that accommodation as 'shameless' or intolerant and casting aspersions on our character should be condemned.

It seems that Canadians have more good sense than the Gazette and the scads of other Canadian newspapers who hold that the kirpan is not a weapon.

The comments board in relation to a CBC story  entitled Ban kirpan from Parliament: Bloc  generated  an amazing 550 comments within just 48 hours, the vast majority agreeing with the Bloc Quebecois view of the kirpan rather than the view of the Gazette. Imagine that! The majority of Canadians actually agree with the Bloc Quebecois!

Here's a sample followed by the score of readers who agreed or disagreed with the comment

"C'mon politicians, get your act together and quit folding for one group over another. This is not the way to achieve a sense of fairness amongst Canadians." Agree- 31 Disagree 1

"I say issue a kirpan, silver bullets, a sharpened cross, a veil, a taser, and a light sabre to everyone entering for question period. Let things sort themselves out." Agree- 29 Disagree 1

"Ya just gotta admire Quebec and how they protect their culture, language and civil laws. Unlike the rest of Canada with the Jack Layton's and Dalton McGimpy's who will sell out for any popular or trendy politically correct notion." Agree- 33 Disagree 4

"If it's a weapon, it should not be allowed on planes, in parliament, or in any other location where weapons are not permitted. I'm all for religious freedom, but why should they be allowed to take a weapon where they would not be allowed for anyone else, when we as Christians are not even allowed to take our prayers into a school?" Agree- 41 Disagree 3

"We are living in a multi polar and multi faith world. the sooner we learn to live with this fact the better it is." Agree- 8 Disagree 31

"I wonder if the commenters that believe religious freedom should prevail with the Sikh knives would also support the religious freedom of people in Saskatchewan not to perform gay "marriages". Agree- 29 Disagree 2

"The Prime MInister of Australia, when faced with a similar predicament recently, stated that it was immigrants, not Australians, who had to adapt to the Australian way of life. If that was unacceptable, they had the right to exercise a great Australian freedom - leave. I suggest that Sikhs in Canada follow that same line of reasoning." Agree- 105 Disagree 2

This sampling is a fair representation, I invite you too check out the comment section yourself, under the story, it makes for some interesting reading!  Link

The Gazette owes us all an apology for arrogantly calling us 'shameful' for believing that daggers have no place in Parliament, airplanes or schools.