We have now developed a two-tiered justice system in Toronto. Two people attacked. Two different outcomes.
Toronto man charged in ‘suspected hate-motivated’ confrontation with Muslim family
“A 50-year-old white male has been arrested following a racially charged confrontation with a Muslim family at the Jack Layton Ferry Terminal in Toronto earlier this week.”
First, Islam is not a race. So this is not a racially charged confrontation. Could we at least use the proper terms. This would be an offense under Motion 103 specifically condemning Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination.https://globalnews.ca/news/4001841/commentary-the-implosion-of-canadas-m-103-conspiracy-theories/
Not to worry about this innocuous motion. Nothing will change. Really?
Now to the facts as we know them.
A Muslim man and his family were verbally assaulted downtown by Toronto’s waterfront.
The perpetrator was drunk and he is heard saying to a male member of the Muslim family “You won’t tell me what to do in my province” Members of the Muslim family, who came from Saskatchewan to visit Toronto, acknowledged in the video the fact that the man was behaving bizarrely was drunk. “Your breath smells of alcohol” and “He is drunk man, let him go, he’s drunk, just smell him” and I don’t get drunk [like you] and walk around.”
I shared this information to “set the scene.” The drunk man shoved one of the men. There is absolutely no excuse for this behaviour-against anyone at any time. Use your words. Not your body. I used to think new all agreed on that one.
A family member called the police “This man is abusing my brother. He is touching him. He is pushing him,” she said. Well done. I would have done the same thing. It’s bad enough to yelled at, I have had some wonderful slurs thrown at me, but you don’t touch.
The police did their job.
“(Mr.) Ball has been charged with two counts of assault and threatening death. He’s scheduled to appear in a Toronto courtroom Friday.”
There was another physical attack on another man in Toronto just a few days later. At the Danforth.
Headline:
Anti-Islam protester thrown into fountain at Danforth shooting memorial in Toronto
A man was carrying a sign. The sign read “C.B.C. presents” on top, followed by two lines below, “Little Mosque on the praire [sic]” and below that, “Two dead girls in Greek Town.”
Now he was holding the sign up at a vigil at the fountain at Alexander the Great Parkette for those who were murdered by Faisal Hussain. This man, Eric Brazau, appears to believe that the murderer was an Islamist terrorist despite the statement, uncorroborated by anyone in the medical profession, that Hussain had a severe mental illness. That had been the excuse for his well-thought out (he had plenty of ammunition), well executed attack on the Danforth.
How do we know that he believed this was an Islamist attack? Because he told us.
At one point a man stepped up to the protester and yelled, “Not all Muslims are bad,” to which the protester retorted:
“I don’t know about Muslims, I talked about Islam!”
It might be shameful to hold such a sign at a vigil for people who have been murdered. But Brazau was sharing his belief about the mass murder. I believe we used to call this free speech.
Then another man, I assume a stranger, grabbed Brazau, hurling him into the fountain to cheers from many in the crowd.
NCCM National Council of Canadian Muslims tweeted
Anti-Islam protester thrown into fountain at Danforth shooting memorial in Toronto. https://globalnews.ca/news/4357966/danforth-shooting-toronto-anti-islam-protester-fountain/ …. Violence is never the answer. Canadians can vigorously disagree and challenge divisive rhetoric without this kind of behaviour.
According to the Global News report “The protester continued to hold up his sign while lying on his back in the water, before standing back up with sign still in hand. Police officers who were close to the event ushered the man (protester) away from the area.
“The man has reportedly been a constant presence at the memorial site this week and has been involved in multiple confrontations, though none as heated as the one Friday afternoon.”
Other videos show that the protester has not been involved in “multiple confrontations” but rather subject to constant verbal and physical attacks. Was that just a slip of the media? Another small error in reporting that should be corrected?
I believe he is the same man who held up a sign that contained a comment about how to treat Muslim women. This comment can be found in Islambooth.ca DISPELLING MISINFORMATION
ABOUT ISLAM
Brazau was taken away. But why was the offender, the man who shoved him backward into a shallow fountain, not charged? Or the other men who assaulted him and threw him down on the concrete
Mr.Ball, the man who was abusive, more verbal than physical, toward a Muslim family, has been charged with “two counts of assault and threatening death.” What do you call pushing someone backward into a shallow fountain-made of concrete, without any warning?
What do you call people who cheer this?
?
Why is it OK to attack someone with a different opinion, one not outside of possibility, and get away with it, while just using abusive language and some pushing gets charged with threatening death?
This man who pushed the protester into the fountain, did he not threaten death? The other two men who assaulted Brazau, is that no threatening death?
Two situations, almost identical. The white man is charged because he was threatening a Muslim. Another man, a white man, attacks another white man because he disagrees with this views, could have caused serious bodily harm and he is not charged. And of course the other men who ganged up on him. Why is that?
What happened to equal justice under the law?
The perpetrators on the Danforth were treated with white gloves and cheers. The drunk at the Ferry was taken into custody. Am I to assume that today it is a much graver crime to verbally abuse a Muslim than it is to physically attack a non-Muslim? It seems that way.
Because if that is the case I suggest you look up the meaning of dhimmitude.
From the Ethics of the Fathers: “Rabbi Tarfon used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it.”
