the fifth estate | Season 39, Episode 10
With massive cuts by Ottawa to everything from food inspections to water quality and climate change and the dismissal of more than 2,000 federal scientists and researchers, some scientists have become unlikely radicals — denouncing what they call a politically-driven war on knowledge. In Silence of the Labs, Linden MacIntyre tells their story – and what is at stake for Canadians – from Nova Scotia to the B.C. Pacific Coast and the far Arctic Circle.
Argues that there is no link between childhood vaccinations and autism rates. Covers a controversial study claiming the link and an increase in autism awareness along with a broader definition being used around the same time.
While Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper is getting ready for his first visit to the Middle East scheduled to start on Saturday January 18, the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM – known until recently as CAIR-CAN) objected to the presence of Toronto Rabbi Daniel Korobkin in the official delegation.
Sun News reported that “Jason MacDonald, the prime minister’s director of communications, slammed the NCCM for even making the suggestion. ‘We will not take seriously criticism from an organization with documented ties to a terrorist organization such as Hamas,’ MacDonald said.”
The NCCM retorted that MacDonald’s statement was ‘absolutely false’ and said that it is not associated with any terrorist group. NCCM Executive Director Ihsaan Gardee added by email that “Our legal counsel is of the view that this statement is defamatory and libelous and we will be taking this up with the PMO.”
The NCCM considers that Korobkin should not be part of the delegation accompanying PM Harper because, in September 2013, he introduced Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, two anti-Islamist campaigners, at a public meeting in Toronto.
In order to understand the context of the PMO’s remarks, it is helpful to go back to the origins of CAIR-CAN. CAIR-CAN was established as a branch of the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) that had itself been founded by three leaders of a Hamas front group in the United States.
In their answers to FAQs provided when CAIR-CAN became NCCM, NCCM leaders completely falsified history and claimed that “There was never any operating or funding relationship between CAIR.CAN and CAIR.”)
The operating relationship between a Hamas front group called Islamic Association of Palestine, CAIR and CAIR-CAN is presented in the following chronology:
June 1994 – The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) was established by three leaders of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP): Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad and Rafeeq Jaber. The IAP was a front group for Hamas in the United States in the eighties and nineties. In a video archived by the Investigative Project on Terrorism, Nihad Awad expresses his support for Hamas at Barry University in 1994. In 2002, an American judge presiding the caseHoly Land Foundation for Relief and Development v. Ashcroft concluded that the “Islamic Association for Palestine (“IAP”), has acted in support of Hamas.”
2000 – Foundation of CAIR-CAN
December 29, 2000 – A CAIR-CAN press release issued in Washington provides the name of a US-based CAIR leader as contact to comment about a fire at a mosque in Canada. In this press release, CAIR-CAN is referred to as CAIR’s “office in Canada.”
August 31, 2001 – A US-based CAIR leader’s name is added as contact in a CAIR-CAN press release criticizing the Canada-based National Post. In this press release, CAIR-CAN is referred to as “the Canadian office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.”
October 10, 2002 – Washington-based CAIR files a trade-mark application for an exclusive use of its acronym CAIR in Canada. In the Canadian government’s database, the address of the applicant CAIR is the following:
453 New Jersey Avenue, South East
Washington, D.C. 20003
United States of America
2003 – In a Journalist’s Guide to Islam conceived by CAIR-CAN (p. 15), Washington-based CAIR is described as “CAIR-CAN’s parent organization” (p. 14).
December 16, 2003 – CAIR-CAN Chair Sheema Khan swears in an affidavit supporting Washington-based CAIR in a legal trade-mark battle that it “has direct control” over CAIR-CAN’s activities in Canada.
March 10, 2005 – A Canadian government agency confirms that, in Canada, the trade-mark on the acronym CAIRbelongs to Washington-based CAIR.
August 14, 2007 – In a list of CAIR chapters, CAIR-CAN appears between CAIR-Ohio and CAIR-Central Pennsylvania.
Two CAIR-CAN leaders openly endorsed Hamas after it was listed a terrorist organization by the Liberal government in 2002
Jamal Badawi and Wael Haddara are two important pillars of the Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure in Canada. Both were members of CAIR-CAN Board of directors for ten years or so. Badawi was still identified as a CAIR-CAN leader on the organization’s website on May 28, 2013, while Haddara resigned his position on the Board on April 3, 2012. On March 3, 2004, both of them were simultaneously on CAIR-CAN’s Board and on the Muslim Association of Canada’s Board. That day, MAC issued a press release in which it openly endorsed Hamas. That was more than one year after the Canadian government, Liberal back then, had added Hamas to a list of terrorist organizations. The listing is available on Public Safety Canada’s website.
Apart from being engaged in the destruction of Israel, in recent years Hamas leaders have frequently advocated the Islamic conquest of the West (2008 – 2011 – 2012). On July 16, 2013, Hamas even threatened to launch terrorist attacks in countries where Israel embassies are located. Canada is among the potential targets, of course.
In 2002-2003, while he was on CAIR-CAN’s Board, Wael Haddara was also an administrator for IRFAN-Canada. In April 2011, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) revoked IRFAN-Canada’s charity status after it concluded that, for the period 2005-2009 alone, it transferred $14.6 million to the terrorist organization Hamas (GMBDR – Toronto Star). A CRA audit of IRFAN-Canada for the fiscal year 2002 confirms that Wael Haddara was on IRFAN-Canada’s Board of Directors at least from 1999 to 2003. (See pp. A-2 and A-3)
In 2002, while she was CAIR-CAN Chair, Sheema Khan endorsed Youssef Qaradawi by introducing him as a “renowned Muslim scholar” to her Globe and Mail readers. Youssef Qaradawi is the most important leader of the Muslim Brotherhood international network, its spiritual leader. He is also considered Hamas’ spiritual guide. In the past, his fatwas have been quoted by Hamas to justify its suicide operations against civilians at the heart of Israel.
Sheema Khan is not an administrator of CAIR-CAN (that became NCCM) anymore. However, she took part in activitiesorganized in Ottawa to celebrate the name change of the organization in July 2013.
The presence of the CAIR-CAN founder at the unveiling of the organization’s new name indicates very well that, apart from the name, nothing has changed. NCCM actual Executive Director Ihsaan Gardee confirmed this in his July 6, 2013 press release when he stressed that, in spite of the name change, “We remain the same organization our constituents and partners have come to rely on.”
– Point de Bascule (July 18, 2013): National Council of Canadian Muslims: The new name chosen by CAIR-CAN helps cover its links with Washington-based / Hamas-linked CAIR
– Point de Bascule: File National Council of Canadian Muslims / CAIR-CAN
– Point de Bascule (December 21, 2012): CAIR-CAN condemns Point de Bascule and uses John Ralston Saul as a poster boy to legitimize the Islamist agenda
Scientists should not debate creationists. Period. This may sound harsh but let’s start by looking at what sparked this statement. TV personality and science advocate Bill Nye (Bill Nye the Science Guy) has accepted an invitation to debate Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis / The Creation Museum on February 4, 2014 at the Creation Museum in Kentucky.
This is a bad idea and here is why.
When you accept a debate, you are accepting there is something worth debating. Political ideologies are worth debating, religion as it pertains to things like human well-being and flourishing can be worth debating, because these kinds of ideas claim to offer solutions to problems and they are debating the best way to achieve such problems. Debates about the existence of God can be fun, they are not really that meaningful, but they are a debate about ideas and beliefs and can be worth effort.
Creationism vs. evolution however is not worth debating. Why? Simple, there is nothing to debate. Evolution is a scientific fact, backed by mountains of evidence, peer-reviewed papers you could stack to the moon and an incredible scientific community consensus. Creationism is a debunked mythology that is based solely in faith. It has zero peer-reviewed papers to back up its claims, it has absolutely no scientific consensus and is not even considered science due to the fact it cannot be tested.
Why would a scientist debate this? Nye would do more good on his own going on TV and discussing evolution and the importance of scientific education instead of giving Ken Ham any publicity and a public forum with thousands, if not millions of viewers, to spew his dishonesty. Ham is a snake oil salesmen and Nye just offered him up an infomercial to sell his product. Ham can repeat his mantra over and over; “teach the controversy”.
Nye is not a biologist
I do not know an incredible amount about Bill Nye other than I loved his show. However, a Google search only turned up that Nye has nothing more than a bachelor’s degree in engineering and three honorary doctorate degrees. We fault Christian apologists almost daily for trying to ride their honorary degrees, it would seem only fair we hold Nye to the same standard.
So we have Nye, a very smart man with a degree in engineering, not biology, not anthropology, and he does not practice any form of research science. Nye should be credited greatly for his work in education; but as a qualified candidate to defend evolution, especially against the likes of conmen like Ken Ham, he is not.