My name is Fred and I am a gay conservative living in Ottawa. This blog supports limited government, the right of the State of Israel to live in peace and security, and tries to expose the threat to us all from cultural relativism, post-modernism, and radical Islam. I am also the founder of the Free Thinking Film Society in Ottawa (

Wednesday, December 17, 2008

Canadian Human Rights Commission won't consider case againt Imam....

Gee, if it had been a Christian preacher from Alberta, they would have thrown the book at him....
On 11 April 2008, I filed a complaint for "hate propaganda" on the Internet before the Canadian Human Rights Commission against a Salafi Imam of Montreal, Abou Hammaad Sulaiman Dameus Al-Hayiti. The purpose of my complaint was to test the objectivity of the Commission. My complaint relates to the imam’s book L’Islam ou l’Intégrisme ? À la lumière du Qor’an et de la Sounnah (Islam or Fundamentalism ? In light of the Qor’an and the Sunna), (2006/2007), 3rd edition corrected. Imam Abou H., who is fluent in Arabic, attended universities in Saudi Arabia where he studied Islam and the science of Hadiths. His teachings can therefore be perceived as authoritative with respect to Islam.

My complaint under section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (the "Act") claims that the writings of the imam are supremacist and expose persons belonging to the following groups to hatred or contempt : homosexuals, Infidels (non-Muslims), women, Jews, Quebecois (as an ethnic group and national minority).

On December 5, I received a letter fom Stéphane Brisson of the Commission informing me that they will not proceed to investigate my complaint. In the opinion of the Commission, the writings of the imam are not likely to expose persons from identifiable groups to hatred or contempt. Below is a translated excerpt of the letter of the Commission, followed by translated excerpts of the book of the Imam that I brought to the attention of the Commission in support of my complaint :


“ ...the majority of the references in “Islam or Fundamentalism” are to “infidels”, “miscreants” or “western women”. These are general, broad and diversified categories that do not constitute an “identifiable group” under Section 13 of the Act. As we have also mentioned, the extracts that identify groups on the basis of prohibited grounds of discrimination (homosexuals, lesbians, Christians, Jews) do not seem to promote “hatred” or “contempt” according to the criteria set forth in the Taylor case. Therefore, the document on which the complaint is based does not seem to meet the requirements of Section 13 of the Act for a complaint.”



* Homosexuality is a "perversion"
* Homosexuals "spread disorder on earth"
* Homosexuals and lesbians should be "exterminated in this life"
* "Homosexuals caught performing sodomy are beheaded"


* Most Infidels “live like animals”
* "they are evil people, they love perversity", and "they are our enemies"
* "sending our sons and daughters to the schools of the Infidels has devastating effects on their beliefs, their behavior and their character. For the children of Infidels are the most pervert children. At a very early age, they adopt the behavior of their parents "
* "Moreover, attending schools with Infidels may lead to friendship in their heart for Infidel children, which contradicts the foundations of Islam. Because Islam prohibits befriending even the closest relatives if they are Infidels"
* "there is no doubt that it is not permissible for a Muslim to love or to take as friend whoever follows a religion other than Islam"
* "Infidels say they are open-minded, but in reality they have opened their mind to garbage and filth, and closed it to all that is pure and right !"

Men are superior to women

* "men are superior to women and better than them". In general, "men have a more complete intellect and memory than women"
* "Infidels acknowledge this reality, but they do not want to accept the truth because they are blinded by their passions"

Muslim women are superior to Infidel women

* "The veiled Muslim woman is a light in the darkness of the 20th century, she carries the torch of modesty, of chastity and of Islamic values"
* "She brings the liberating message of "LA ILAHA ILLALLAH" to the poor western woman who has lost her femininity, her dignity and her honor and who is now crying for her savior"


Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are right, they should not have refused your case on the grounds given, but on the grounds of bona-fides, in light of your claim that "The purpose of my complaint was to test the objectivity of the Commission."

My guess is they smelled that you were not in earnest by your tone, but could not prove it, and so relied on other, still valid, reasons to reject your case.

11:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Regardless if it was a test or not the complaint should have stood on its merits.

11:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The complaint failed on its merits, but the merits of the complaint are not the first test in law.

The first test in law is whether or not the complaint is bona-fide, whether the complainant has a legal standing to complain, and to complain against a third party to test the process of the resolution process is not a bona-fide reason to complain, and in fact, is abusive of the third party and the process. In fact, if this was court, it would be called contempt.

11:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If I fire Fred because he's a perverse homosexual, I can understand if Fred might complain to the commission.

But other pervs can get lost, only Fred is a bona-fide complainant if I fire Fred!

Fred seems to think 'cause he's a perve, he can complain on behalf of other perves about anything and anybody he wants.

Wonder how much tax money he wasted on his "test"

11:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sue them for mandamus, make them take the case!

11:49 PM  
Anonymous ByeCanada said...

Race trumps sexual orientation. You have not be indoctrinated properly it seems.

5:41 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home