Wednesday, May 19, 2010


*** Mr. Fulford, I think you've missed the point.

The funding is for at-risk groups who run a serious risk of turning to extremism precisely because they feel the govt. does not care for their situation. It makes it extremely difficult for Muslim groups (who do not receive funding like their counterparts - an obvious bias that stares us in the face) to be able to run programs to counter radicalization, which will soon become the government's problem, like it or not. Believe me, there are not enough CSIS agents to keep up with the acceleration of radicalization, no effective strategies to provide a counter narrative and poor relationship building with the community you need the information from.

Second, how do you suggest we counter the millions of dollars coming from overseas to Mosques here in Toronto and elsewhere? To monitor and counter this IS the govt.'s job not ours yet WE are supposed to compete with them on OUR own dime and time? Be realistic, man!

Third, THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of tax dollars go to house and feed terrorists for years upon years in prisons. They can even get the funding for degrees and other training/study. If you funded ONE youth worker who gets paid HALF of what it costs to house ONE young offender for ONE year - you will save MANY from ending up in jail. It's a little thing called 'prevention is better than cure' and is a wisdom that rings true for all people and faiths. The math and the method make sense.

That the govt. cannot justify giving fractions of the millions that come from outside Canada, or fractions of what you are ALREADY paying just to help the pro-Canadian Muslim groups is truly, counter productive.

The choice is with the government to decide if it wishes to continue taking a hands-off approach with the Muslim community or if they are really serious about fighting extremism and terrorism by helping those who are able to do so.

Do you want to know what kind of people associate themselves with such an anti-assistance attitude: take a look at the postings after your article, Mr. Fulford, they are full of racism, hate of immigrants and white power: the main ingredients of the Nazi's. What does that tell you? They are no different than the jihadi's who post hateful message about non Muslims in the name of free speech and then end up committing crimes.

Govt. (in)action is largely responsible for the radicalization of Muslim youth - don't for a second think you can do this without us because we realize that we cannot do it without you too. We MUST work together otherwise we will BOTH pay a hefty price - ultimately to be paid by the taxpayers anyway. But who cares eh? MS ***


After Fahim Ahmad pleaded guilty to taking part in the Toronto 18 terrorism plot on Monday, certain Muslims began to admit privately that it’s possible the police were right to charge Ahmad and others with planning to storm Parliament, behead politicians and otherwise assert themselves as jihadi warriors in Canada.

We have all heard many times that official Canada is riddled with Islamophobia, but perhaps in this case the murderous plans of radicalized Muslim youth, and their threat to their fellow Muslims and all other Canadians, must be at least discussed. It’s no longer possible to think that the arrests in 2006 were not justified.

What can be done? How can young Muslim Canadians be persuaded not to turn into radicals? Is it not the responsibility of community elders to steer the young away from the calamity of Islamist passions? One way or another, peaceful Muslims must address this problem that has arisen in their community.

On Wednesday morning, Nazim Baksh, a CBC producer who has been following the story for four years, outlined for Toronto local-radio listeners what he’s heard from Muslims trying to deal with this issue.

As Baksh described it, “The discussion was raised about -- do we get government funding to do de-radicalization programs in Toronto? Which model do we follow?”

That was the first point Baksh made about the conversations, and almost the last one. Muslims wanted to create “an internal program” in the community but, as Baksh explained, the Canadian government has been reluctant to support this kind of initiative. For that reason or some other, no program has taken shape.

Baksh’s Muslim acquaintances are obviously adapting themselves to the Canadian way. Their automatic response is to turn for help to the government. Their plan seems to me a spectacular case of state-dependency, worse even than the issue of funding for Toronto’s Gay Pride parade, discussed in a Post editorial earlier this week.

Surely, those who spoke to Baksh couldn’t have given that idea much thought. It’s obvious that anyone who might conceivably become a violent Islamist would stay as far away as possible from anything supported by the Canadian government. Running that kind of a program on a government grant perfectly defines the term “counter-productive.” Sounds like madness to me. But neither Baksh nor his interviewer on the program, Matt Galloway, raised this point.

It seems a particularly odd position for Muslims to take. Mosques, which do not receive government funding, are said to generate opinions among young Muslims. Why should mosques not provide the “deradicalization” education on their own initiative (and dime)? Much of the world, including many Muslims, believes that certain mosques can persuade impressionable young men to become radical Islamists. Why can’t other mosques persuade them otherwise?

Canadians have come to believe that almost any program for human betterment requires, first of all, public funding. Government has always played a large role in education, for instance, but its role has grown steadily greater in recent times. Middle-class Canadians (unlike middle-class Americans) don’t routinely establish college funds for their children; they assume that if their children deserve university education, government will be there to provide it, through grants or guaranteed loans.

We now have come to believe that if the quality of our education lacks something, government must be blamed. We have decided not to blame the teachers or parents. And of course no one would dream of blaming the students.

In health care, the situation is more dire because it is necessarily hidden. We are slowly (and inevitably) developing forms of private medicine that will run parallel to public medicine. But we are so devoted to a deluded belief in public medicine that we must pretend we are maintaining it in its purest sense, as mandated by the Canada Health Act of 1984. Change is inevitable but it must be clandestine. So we handle it in the most awkward way possible.

The belief that nothing can be established without government help now runs into the ugly fact that governments are desperately short of money.

How did we get into this fix? Can we ever get out of it? When even immigrant Muslims become infected by our twisted social system, we need to reconsider how we organize society.