FATAH: Islamist groups eligible for share of $23M in federal funding? | Toronto Sun Corrrection

An example of fake news, where the original headline was “Islamic Relief and Other Groups to Receive $23M”, and the Sun was obliged to issue the following correction, not been picked up by the media and bloggers recirculating the story.

“Clarification

Tarek Fatah in a July 3, 2018 column incorrectly stated the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) is receiving funding from a federal multicultural program. Liberal MP Iqra Khalid suggested organizations such as NCCM would receive funding in a video referenced by Fatah however NCCM has not applied for funding.  The Toronto Sun regrets the error”

Slightly reworded article to reflect the correction:

On the afternoon of June 27 while most of Canada was at work or watching the World Cup matches, a major funding announcement was made with little fanfare and in front of no more than a couple of dozen, mostly Muslim audience of Pakistani Canadians.

Mississauga-Erindale MP Iqra Khalid who has been the mouthpiece of the divisive Motion M103 on ‘Islamophobia’ stood in her constituency office to announce that the Trudeau government was investing an additional $23 Million into its multiculturalism program.

With no mainstream media in attendance to ask any questions, Khalid boasted that her “hard work has resulted into tangible action.” She listed the following two groups as being potential recipients of the new funding:

The National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), a former branch of the U.S. based Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) that was named in 2008 as an unindicted co-conspirator connected to the “largest terror-funding trial in U.S. history. NCCM has denied links to CAIR.

Islamic Relief, a worldwide charity accused of links to Islamist extremism by Middle East Forum, Israel and the United Arab Emirates among others.

There is no solid record that the Canadian arms of these two organizations have contributed to current problematic behaviour.  Nonetheless, for over a year many Muslim Canadians, including yours truly, my Sun colleague Farzana Hassan as well as other Muslim critics of Islamism had warned that the M103 initiative was much more than the victimhood culture of guilt being forced onto ordinary Canadians.

Khalid, in explaining during a press conference to announce the funding, suggested the $23 million is intended to “build bridges” between Canadians and to give new Canadians a “foundation” in this country by supporting community groups.

“NCCM that does a lot of data collecting on hate crimes and really pushing that advocacy needle forward within our country,” Khalid said. “Or like Islamic Relief, that does work not only within Canada, across Canada, across the world in really removing those stereotypes.”

So on Wednesday, we saw our fears come true. While Islamists are eligible to receive funds to conduct their Sharia agenda in Canada, Muslim critics of jihad, polygamy, FGM and Sharia have been left on their own to fight global Islamofascism.

In a message to MP Khalid, I asked her to clarify if any part of the $23M will be used to counter the daily denigration of Christians and Jews that takes place in mosques across Canada, from dawn to dusk.

I reminded her that “most Friday sermons at mosque congregations end with a call to Allah to grant Muslims victory over non-Muslims, referred to as ‘Qawm al Kafiroon’.”

“Will the $23M be used to de-radicalize mosque clerics and educate them to end hateful sermons from the pulpits,” I asked.

Despite reaching out to her office twice, I did not get a response, nor any press release or statement issued by any ministry of the Trudeau cabinet.

In making the announcement, the Pakistan-born Liberal MP told her scant audience, her M103 initiative was about “systemic racism and religious discrimination” and that “my goal was to study it and understand why does it happen and to find solutions.”

Most Canadians would have told her, ‘physician, heal thyself,’ but of course, ordinary Canadians are too scared to be labelled as ‘racist’ by privileged Islamists riding the waves of victimhood.

In recommending Islamic Relief as one of the recipients of the $23 million fund, Khalid covered up the fact that even Bangladesh, a Muslim-majority country has banned Islamic Relief from providing either relief or aid to some 500,000 Rohingya refugees who have taken refuge in the country.

Khalid also shrugged off allegations that Islamic Relief has long been accused of funding terror. The United Arab Emirates has designated Islamic Relief as a terror-financing organization while in Russian authorities have accused Islamic Relief of supporting terrorism in Chechnya.

My question to ordinary Canadians is this: Who will stand up to the Islamist agenda in our country if it’s the government itself that funds their agenda?

Clarification

Tarek Fatah in a July 3, 2018 column incorrectly stated the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) is receiving funding from a federal multicultural program. Liberal MP Iqra Khalid suggested organizations such as NCCM would receive funding in a video referenced by Fatah however NCCM has not applied for funding.  The Toronto Sun regrets the error

via FATAH: Islamist groups eligible for share of $23M in federal funding? | Toronto Sun

Shree Paradkar: How anti-racism town hall gave hate-mongers an outsized place at the table

Basic civility necessary condition for discussion and debate. Disruptive tactics, whether on the right or left, are hardly conducive to greater understanding. As someone who is looking for ways to include different perspectives on immigration and related issues, a reminder of the limits when basic civility is not present:

An anti-racism town hall in east Toronto last Friday that was hijacked by a bunch of bigots is a prime example of why the “listen to both sides” argument or the urging to “be reasonable” don’t work.

Activists say they warned the provincial Liberals who organized the town hall at Grant African Methodist Episcopal Church on Gerrard St. E. at Woodbine Ave. that it was going to be derailed; their social media chatter showed white supremacists were planning to gate crash the event.

On the panel were Minister Responsible for Anti-Racism Michael Coteau, Beaches—East York MPP Arthur Potts and Beaches—East York MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith. But it was the presence on the panel of Mississauga—Erin Mills MP Iqra Khalid who introduced the anti-Islamophobia M-103 motion that was the lightning rod for the likes of Paul Fromm, Lynn Redden, Eric Brazau and Meir Weinstein.

These are representative of a group of people blessed with extraordinary penetrating vision that allows them to see someone you and I might take for a bright woman with achiever’s confidence as the ultimate evil infiltrator of political Canada, bent on blanketing the country under Sharia law.

An anti-racism activist who was at the event, who tracks far-right hate groups on social media, says these people have appeared on his radar in at least seven demonstrations in Toronto in the past 12 months (not counting their protests outside Masjid Toronto near City Hall.)

He asked for anonymity for fear of being targeted by these groups that include the Canadian Association for Free Expression, Council of Conservative Citizens, the Jewish Defense League, the Europe-based PEGIDA, the Proud Boys and the Suffragettes against Silence.

Group memberships are fluid, he says. Fromm, for instance, leads the Canadian Association for Free Expression and also serves as a director on the Council of Conservative Citizens.

“It’s important to inform readers that these people are just as fanatical as the so-called radical Muslims they claim to hate,” the activist who is with Solidarity Against Fascism Everywhere (SAFE) told me.

Based on video footage and accounts of attendees, it was clear their presence not only coarsened the discussion, it gutted it.

The organizers announced the rules. Anyone with questions was to raise their hand and write their question down on a card given by a volunteer.

But the gate crashers began shouting out their questions.

Khalid made her opening remarks explaining the basis of M-103, and said, “It is OK to be white, it’s OK to be black, it’s OK to be yellow or to be any colour… because that is the Canada that I call my home, that is the Canada that we collectively built.”

But soon enough someone hollered, “It’s a back door to Sharia law. That’s what you’re trying to bring into the country.”

Redden, representing Suffragettes Against Silence, shouted: “Women have been voting for 100 years in this country,” neatly omitting the fact it was only white women who won that right. Not Indigenous women. Not Asian women.

At another point she yelled, “One thing you didn’t cover sister, is about women. What about the culture where you come from?”

Then, quite idiotically, “Do you think those women protesting in Iran are Islamophobic? You’re damn right they are.” As if those women are protesting their religion and not government coercion.

Despite entreaties to act like adults, a disturber known only as Lawrence, who activists say is a regular at racist demonstrations in Toronto shouted, “You are a fraud. You are a fraud.”

A little later, someone at the back is heard on video saying, “Is the purpose of M-103 to promote racism against Jews?” It didn’t matter that Khalid earlier had said hate crimes against Jewish people were unacceptable.

And when she said, “The Muslim community. It is so pluralistic, it’s so diverse,” the rest of what she was saying was drowned out by loud jeers.

The town hall that was held to discuss how the community could take a stand against “hate, intolerance and discrimination” in all its forms, accommodated all of it. The trolls were a minority, but they had an outsized seat at the table where their views should have been marginalized. Police cruisers were outside, but they were not asked to lead anyone out.

Although the loudmouths who came with nothing constructive were allowed to break the established rules to present their questions, although they were given special treatment, it was not enough.

It did not matter that Khalid was speaking in the calmest of tones, and Coteau was striking a placatory tone.

The hate-mongers continued to shout and interrupt and disrupt, leaving people who come to these events to feel whole further broken.

“To see such hate so close was jarring, upsetting and certainly made my blood boil. I can’t imagine experiencing such hate as a minority,” wrote organizer Erskine-Smith in a Facebook post after.

Yet, these minorities are always expected to faultlessly greet hate with grace, whether the racism is overt, passive-aggressive or delivered in dog-whistle words.

That calmness does nothing to disrupt racism.

Tone matters to those who seek to preserve their own comfort, to perhaps feel sorry for those they think are oppressed, to mentally pat themselves on the back for that charitable thought and move on.

Racism as feel-good balm. That’s what people seek when they ask for restraint.

Source: Shree Paradkar: How anti-racism town hall gave hate-mongers an outsized place at the table

Liberal MP Iqra Khalid addresses critics of anti-Islamophobia motion

I don’t remember these kinds of objections with respect to the earlier motion on Islamophobia or Antisemitism:

The Liberal MP whose private member’s motion condemning Islamophobia has divided the House of Commons used her final submission on Tuesday to address what she called “outrageous” arguments being made about her proposal.

During the final debate in the Commons, Liberal MP Iqra Khalid said her motion, M-103, does not give one religion or community special privileges, or restrict free speech.

“This motion is not legally binding. In fact, M-103 serves as a catalyst for Canadians to speak out against discrimination and be heard where they may not have been heard before,” she said.

“Some other outrageous claims were made about M-103 and to that in simple and clear words, M-103 is not an attempt to create sharia law. I vow to be the first person to oppose any motion or law that negatively impacts our multicultural, secular society. I assure you, M-103 does not.”

Most Conservatives appear set to vote against Ms. Khalid’s motion, with only one leadership candidate, Michael Chong, saying he’ll support it. The NDP will also support it, but MP Jenny Kwan criticized both the Liberals and Tories for “politicking” on the issue.

Ms. Khalid’s motion calls on the government to “condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination,” to study the issue at the heritage committee, collect hate-crime data and report back to the House of Commons within eight months with recommendations.

The motion will be voted upon on Thursday. With the Liberal government’s support, it is expected to pass.

Ms. Khalid’s motion was originally supposed to be debated on April 5, but she traded her slot with another Liberal MP to move it up in the calendar. The second hour of debate fell on the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

Conservative MP David Sweet said Tuesday that M-103 could have been made better by including all faith communities rather than singling out one group, and it could have clarified the definition of Islamophobia and affirmed the right to freedom of speech.

“Instead of pursuing these changes, in an effort to have a meaningful, inclusive and non-partisan study on the matters of racism and religious discrimination, a debate that should unify us, the Liberals have decided there are more political points to win by ramming this motion through regardless of legitimate concerns I’ve articulated,” he told the Commons.

Last fall, NDP Leader Tom Mulcair’s motion condemning “all forms of Islamophobia” passed unanimously in the House, although it wasn’t a recorded vote and it’s unclear how many MPs were in the chamber.

“I can’t believe that people are still trying to find reasons to vote against motion M-103, which is simply an expression of what Parliament already said in the fall,” Mr. Mulcair said Tuesday.

Source: Liberal MP Iqra Khalid addresses critics of anti-Islamophobia motion – The Globe and Mail

David Akin covers the protests:

More than two dozen police officers had to separate duelling mobs on Parliament Hill Tuesday afternoon after the two groups spent their lunch hour hurling loud and often profane epithets at each other in support of or in opposition to an anti-Islamophobia motion debated in the House of Commons Tuesday evening.

A handful of men in each group nearly came to blows but for the clutch of RCMP officers standing between them.

One group of about 35 people perched itself on the steps in front of Parliament’s Centre Block to protest Motion 103 or M-103, introduced in the House of Commons by Iqra Khalid, a Pakistan-born Liberal MP from Mississauga, Ont.

A handful of the anti-M-103 protestors were wearing “Soldiers of Odin Canada” sweatshirts.

Soldiers of Odin, on its Facebook page, says it is a non-profit dedicated to defending the charter of rights and freedoms but its critics allege it is an anti-immigrant, anti-refugee group.

The counter-protest mob of about 25 called out the Soldiers of Odin protestors as “Nazis” and “fascists” and chanted “Soldiers of Odin, go back to Sweden.”

In response, the counter-protest group was called “Communists” and “anti-Canadian” by the group  protesting M-103.

The demonstration dissipated peacefully with the assistance of the police and, hours later, MPs debated M-103. It will be put to a vote on Thursday afternoon. Given that the Liberal majority in the House of Commons supports M-103, it is certain to pass.

Source: Ahead of M-103 debate, duelling mobs clash on Parliament Hill over Islamophobia

The Tories approach a point of no return and other commentary on M-103

Terry Glavin’s usual trenchant commentary:

During the debate on the motion in the House, Khalid said she defines Islamophobia as “the irrational hate of Muslims that leads to discrimination.” That’s perfectly fine, too, but what makes no sense was Khalid’s statement that she refused Conservative MP (and party leadership hopeful) Erin O’Toole’s offer to help win unanimous consent for her motion by tightening it up, because that would have meant “watering it down.”

In a parallel topsy-turviness, Joly has objected to David Anderson’s alternative motion, which replicates Khalid’s motion except for the ambiguous term Islamophobia, because it’s a “weakened and watered down version.”

It’s true to say, as Scott Reid does, that seemingly benign injunctions against “Islamophobia” have been put to the squalid purpose of placing the Muslim religion and the practices of authoritarian Islamic regimes off limits to criticism. But it’s also fair to say that “anti-Muslim bigotry” doesn’t sufficiently capture the full-throated paranoid lunacy animating the nutcase wing of the Conservative support base these days.

“Racism” doesn’t quite cover it. “Hatred” doesn’t quite get at it. Whatever term you like, it’s more than merely ironic that those who make the most hysterical claims about clandestine Islamic conspiracies at the centre of Justin Trudeau’s government are also the ones shouting the loudest that an irrational fear of Islam isn’t even a thing.

It’s not as though the Liberals are blameless in all this. They could have welcomed O’Toole’s efforts at reaching out to find a compromise, but they didn’t. And the Liberals do seem quite content to have the Conservatives squirming and chafing against the appearance that the reason they object to the term Islamophobia is that they themselves are Islamophobic, whatever that might mean. It is not as though it bothers the Liberals that the Conservatives are stuck with the crazy talk coming from several of the leadership candidates these days.

Trudeau may have given away more than he intended last week when he was confronted at a community meeting in Iqaluit about why he reneged on his electoral reform promises. Raising the spectre of proportional representation opening the door to “fringe” parties, Trudeau asked, rhetorically: “Do you think that Kellie Leitch should have her own party?”

Clearly, Trudeau doesn’t want that. For starters, it would mean decent Conservatives couldn’t be tarred so easily with the indecencies committed by the party’s fringe factions. It would mean bigot-baiting the Conservative Party would be that much harder to do. In the meantime, it’s up to the Conservatives to get themselves sorted, and after the sordid events of the past few days, their options are limited:

Isolate, quarantine, amputate or purge.

Source: The Tories approach a point of no return – Macleans.ca

Campbell Clark in the Globe:

It’s one thing for MPs to say they oppose the motion. But it’s another to accept the bogus reasoning.

One is the slippery-slope argument. Mr. Levant is telling Canadians that once a Commons committee starts studying the vague notion of Islamophobia and what to do about it, they’re going to propose laws that make it illegal to criticize Islam, and restrict free speech.

The obvious weakness in that is that Motion M-103 doesn’t even ask the committee to propose laws, nor could it force them – let alone the kind that stifle free speech. If they ever did, MPs could vote against it then. And it still could not violate constitutional guarantees on free speech.

If Conservative objections really were about a vague term, some deal-making would be in order. There are arguments that in some countries the term has been used to refer to any criticism of Islam.

Of course, this motion calls for MPs to study it, so they could define it.

But Liberals were unwilling to compromise when the Conservatives asked them to change “Islamophobia” to “hatred for Muslims.”

But it’s not about the word. Ironically, it’s about fear.

All this began when Montreal-area MP Frank Baylis started a petition last year to assert that all Muslims should not be equated with a few extremists. NDP Leader Tom Mulcair later asked for unanimous consent for a motion condemning Islamophobia – and got it on his second attempt on Oct. 26.

Conservative House Leader Candice Bergen responded to Mr. Mulcair’s motion with her own, condemning religious discrimination.

Both were adopted. The word Islamophobia was fine for Conservatives then, before they got scared.

Source:  Conservative MPs are afraid of Motion 103, and things it can’t do 

The contrary view, and the conflation of Islamophobia/anti-Muslim hate with free speech concerns, comes from Farzana Hassan in the Sun, who appears not to have understood what the motion covers and what it does not:

When we challenge a certain Islamic practice, we are careful to exclude the moderate majority and focus our attention on a small segment of the Muslim community. Yet some claim that even such discussion conflates the radicals with the moderates.

If Khalid believes such discussions include all Muslims, she is unwittingly admitting that all Muslims are indeed like the fundamentalists.

Khalid is mistaken if she believes any rational discussion on Islamic practice castigates all Muslims. She must understand that any well-intentioned and constructive discussion on a religious practice or ideology is a fundamental right of every Canadian.

There is no phobia of Islam in Canada. There is genuine resentment toward orthodox Islam. But it has little to do with the usual public discourse.

Some practices, whether we discuss them in public or not, are commonly known to be associated with orthodox Islam, such as polygamy, wife battery and ostracism of religious minorities.

It is up to moderate Muslims to distance themselves from these outrages as much as possible. So far no robust public challenge to such practices has emerged from moderate segments of the community.

Without such a grassroots challenge any social observer, professional or amateur, can form any opinion on orthodox Islam, whether positive or negative.

We know some Muslims are working to institute gender equality, and others are partners with the government in fighting terror. However, these efforts need to become the norm rather than the exception. Once this takes place, the world will automatically begin to see Muslims in positive light.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has talked about finding the right balance between protecting a religious minority and also protecting our Charter rights.

The answer to his dilemma is simple: Do not put the slightest dent in our right to free speech.

To balance this, the prime minister can take more measures to protect the security of all minorities with tighter law enforcement and stricter punishments for alleged offenders like Alexandre Bissonnette.

Source: I’m a liberal Muslim and I reject M-103

Lastly, an article on Iqra Khalid’s reading out the hateful emails and tweets she has received, providing proof of the validity of M-103 and its specific reference:

The Liberal MP who tabled an anti-Islamophobia motion says she has been inundated with hate mail and death threats.

Mississauga, Ont. MP Iqra Khalid told the House of Commons today she received more than 50,000 emails in response to M-103, many of them with overt discrimination or direct threats.

“I have asked my staff to lock the office behind me as I now fear for their safety,” she said. “I have asked them not to answer all phone calls so they don’t hear the threats, insults and unbelievable amount of hate shouted at them and myself.”

She described a “chilling” video posted on YouTube that called her a terrorist sympathizer and disgusting human being.

“‘I’m not going to help them shoot you, I’m going to be there to film you on the ground crying. Yeah, I’ll be there writing my story with a big fat smile on my face. Ha ha ha. The Member got shot by a Canadian patriot,'” she read, quoting from the video.

And that, she said, was just tip of the iceberg. Here are some other messages she received and read in the House:

  • “Kill her and be done with it. I agree she is here to kill us. She is sick and she needs to be deported.”
  • “We will burn down your mosques, draper head Muslim.”
  • “Why did Canadians let her in? Ship her back.”
  • “Why don’t you get out of my country? You’re a disgusting piece of trash and you are definitely not wanted here by the majority of actual Canadians.”

Khalid said she has also received many messages of support.

Source: ‘Kill her and be done with it’: MP behind anti-Islamophobia motion reads out hate mail

Growing group of Tory leadership hopefuls oppose move to have House of Commons denounce Islamophobia

Funny, I don’t recall any Conservatives expressing concerns about singling out Antisemitism when they were in power and launched a number of initiatives (e.g., hosting an international conference on combatting antisemitism, jointing the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance) that were sometimes at the expense of general anti-racism and discrimination messaging and programming.

And was there not also a strong political aspect to the Conservative government’s efforts with respect to Canadian Jews? Interim Leader Ambrose should be mindful of stones and glass houses:

A growing number of Conservative leadership rivals are declaring their opposition to a Liberal MP’s motion to have the House of Commons denounce Islamophobia and other forms of systemic racism.

And the interim leader of the party, Rona Ambrose, is also likely to vote against the motion, which will be debated Wednesday, as she accuses the Liberals of purposefully trying to sow division in her party with the initiative.

The opposition to the anti-Islamophobia motion by Kellie Leitch, Maxime Bernier, Andrew Scheer and others is likely to play well with a Conservative base that, according to several polls, is more suspicious and wary of Muslim immigrants than other groups of voters.

But as more Tories oppose the motion, their political opponents will have more of a chance to charge that Conservatives are intolerant at best and bigoted at worse, a resurrection of criticisms that hurt them at the ballot box in 2015 after the party unveiled a promise to institute a “Barbaric Practices Snitch Line” and vowed to repeal citizenship for new Canadians in some circumstances.

“Voting against this motion is simply nonsensical,” said Karl Belanger, who spent 19 years as a top adviser to three leaders of the federal NDP. “‎No matter what the convoluted explanation is, you are voting against condemning Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination. That will stick.”

The resolution at hand is known as M-103. It was put before the House of Commons in early December by Iqra Khalid, a first-time Liberal MP who represents Mississauga—Erin Mills, Ont.

The motion is scheduled for an hour’s worth of debate in the House of Commons late Wednesday afternoon. And while there is a chance a vote could be held during that hour, the more likely outcome from a procedural standpoint is that a vote will be put off until early April.

Ambrose said she believes the Liberals will want to keep the issue front-and-centre for weeks before bringing it to a final vote.

“We know they are doing this purely for politics,” she said.

Khalid, who was born in Pakistan, wants to accomplish three things with M-103: First, that the House “condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination;” second, that the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage be instructed to study the issue of “eliminating systemic racism and religious discrimination including Islamophobia;” and, finally; that the federal government collect data on hate crimes for further study.

Scheer, in a recent fundraising letter to his supporters, said one of the reasons he will vote against Khalid’s motion is that it could be construed as a move to stifle free speech. He also says the motion does not define “Islamophobia” and, in any event, he says he cannot vote for a motion that singles out one religion for special status.

“It is also important to note that we already have laws that protect Canadians against discrimination based on their faith. We also have laws against inciting violence,” Scheer said.

Bernier cites similar reasons for his opposition to M-103 but, in a Facebook post over the weekend, said he could support the motion if the word “Islamophobia” was removed from motion.

“We should reaffirm everyone’s right to believe in and criticize whatever belief they want, whether it is Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, atheism, or any other,” Bernier said.

MP Brad Trost, who is also running for the leadership, said Jews and Christians are more likely to be victims of faith-based intolerance. He called Khalid’s motion “a farce.”

Steven Blaney, too, will vote against the motion: “While I recognize the value of promoting respect for all religion, I intend to oppose M-103, a motion that is not well defined and clearly represents a threat to freedom of expression.”

For his part, Erin O’Toole, another leadership candidate, has reached out to Khalid with some suggestions to modify the amendment so that it might find more support among Conservative MPs.

Khalid was not available for an interview Monday but, when she tabled her motion last December, she told the House of Commons, ” I am a young, brown, Muslim, Canadian woman. When I moved to Canada in the 1990s — a young girl trying to make this nation my home — some kids in school would yell as they pushed me, ‘Go home, you Muslim,’ but I was home. I am among thousands of Muslims who have been victimized because of hate and fear.

“I am a proud Canadian among hundreds and thousands of others who will not tolerate hate based on religion or skin colour. I rise today with my fellow Canadians to reject and condemn Islamophobia.”

Her motion, if it passes, would not change any Canadian laws, as Bernier correctly noted in his Facebook post. Moreover, House of Commons standing committees are often asked to study a particular issue and make recommendations to the government on a course of action.

Governments sometimes act on committee recommendations, but they just as often ignore them.

But Ambrose, in an interview with the National Post Monday evening, said she worries her work trying to empower women and girls in Muslim communities could be branded Islamophobic if she criticizes the views of some Muslim men.

“Our members are really concerned about this as a freedom of speech issue,” Ambrose said. For Conservatives, it will be a “free vote,” which means they may vote as they choose. Ambrose said she is open to amendments that deal with her concerns about speech.

“We absolutely condemn all forms of hatred, racism and violence,” Ambrose said.

Source: Growing group of Tory leadership hopefuls oppose move to have House of Commons denounce Islamophobia | National Post

And David Akin’s latest update and interview with Iqra Khalid, the MP sponsoring the motion:

Liberal MP Iqra Khalid said she is keen to allay the “fear and anxiety” some Canadians have about her attempt to have the House of Commons denounce Islamophobia, systemic racism and intolerance.

In an exclusive interview Tuesday with the National Post, Khalid, a Pakistan-born first-time MP from Mississauga, Ont., said she is not willing to alter her  motion, which has been given the parliamentary designation M-103, even though some Conservative MPs have suggested she do so and even though she says she has been subjected to “a lot of hatred” and abuse since she first proposed the motion last December.

“Watering down the motion will not be in the best interests of Canadians who are working to fight this (intolerance),” Khalid said.

Debate on M-103 is expected to begin at about 5:30 pm ET Wednesday in the House of Commons and run for about an hour. And while it is procedurally possible that a vote could also happen Wednesday, it is much more likely that the vote will be put off until early April.

Khalid will find significant support from her own caucus colleagues and from the NDP but not as much from the Conservative benches. Rona Ambrose, the interim Conservative party leader, in an interview with the National Post Monday, said she is opposed to Khalid’s motion and several of the contenders to become permanent leader also oppose it.

Liberal MP keen to allay ‘fear and anxiety’ on anti-Islamophobia motion but will not change it in face of ‘hatred’