Wednesday, November 24, 2010

The Christian Heritage Party and Racial Profiling

On April 19, 1995, an explosion destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City, killing 168 people, including 19 children under the age of 6, and injuring more than 680.

And while the media immediately began to suggest that it was the work of Arab terrorists, an FBI profiler, Clinton Van Zandt, knew better.

He said that the perpetrator would be a white male, in his twenties, probably a military man and possibly a member of a fringe militia group.

He took note of the date of the attack, coinciding with the Waco tragedy two years before, and occurring on Patriot's Day, the anniversary of the Revolutionary War Battle of Concord, which is revered by the militia movement.

He was right and that is how they were able to catch Tim McVeigh, who was already in custody over a traffic violation.

So had Van Zandt immediately gone to believing that the bombing was perpetrated by an Islamic terrorist, McVeigh may never have been caught, and who knows what his next target might have been.

G. J. Rancourt, a member of the Christian Heritage Party, and their candidate in London-Fanshawe, would have definitely missed the young white man. Because according to him when you picture "terrorist" you picture Islam and the Qur’an.

He wants to prevent Muslims from entering the country by demanding that all immigrants "pledge allegiance to Judeo-Christian values". Apparently it is a new party platform.

If these are Judeo-Christian values, than I think our country would be safer if we forced everyone to denounce those beliefs.

This man must not be given a platform to spew hatred.

Jeffrey Reitz, a political science professor specializing in immigration and multiculturalism policy at the Munk School of Global Affairs, believes that this is not a major problem, since it "is inconsistent with our traditions and values."

If that's the case, than why does our current government not allow photos of Muslims on immigration posters?
Among those who saw a pattern of discrimination in the actions of the [Harper] government was Gar Pardy, the former head of the consular services section of the foreign affairs department. Opposition MPs were suspicious as well. Charlie Angus, an NDP MP from Northern Ontario, said he was told by an immigration official of discriminatory practices by his department. The department would periodically post photos of newcomers on advertising displays to promote immigration. "They identified who gets in these photos in terms of what ethnic groups they were interested in," said Angus. But one group, he was told, was deliberately left out of the promotion materials. "They said, 'No Muslims.' This came down from government orders." (Harperland, Martin, Pg. 201)
Tim McVeigh was a white male Christian who opposed gun control. Maybe that's the kind of person Rancourt should be targeting. But then I'm not sure he has that kind of access to our government.

So I guess he shouldn't be profiling anyone.


  1. Recently the London Free Press ran a story in in which two academics, took CHP Canada to task for calling for a moratorium in immigration from Muslim countries. After reading their comments, a reader could have been left with the impression the party represents an intolerant fringe rather than the vast middle-ground of Canadian views on law, morality and culture.
    Jeffrey Reitz would have you believe that:
    1)Any such moratorium in mainstream politics would fly in the face of Canadian tradition.
    Canadian tradition has always been Judeo-Christian as can easily be seen on the top of Mount Royal (see illustration), in the name Dominion of Canada (Psalm 72), in the Royal Anthem (God save the Queen) and in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law), among many other examples.

    He then says: “This is inconsistent with our traditions and values. We don’t have an official religion in Canada, so there’s no basis for asking people to pledge allegiance to one,” he said. We ask them to pledge allegiance to the Queen, who is, incidentally head of the Church of England, a Christian denomination.
    Then he states: “This reminds the public that there are people who are blatantly opposed to tolerance. If anything, it reminds them that Islam is 'blatantly opposed to tolerance.' Saudi Arabia, for example, an officially Islamic country, prohibits the practice of Christianity and the building of Churches.
    Finally he would have you believe that "We’re a free country, and they can say it without violating any law, but it violates community standards.”
    Those standards are, overwhelmingly, based on morality derived from the Judeo-Christian bible.

    Really, if this is the best the critics of the CHP policy on Islam can come up with, I think the festival is off to a great start.

    One thing the reporter got right was this comment, 'the anti-Islamic message might turn some heads.'

    We Frank Hilliard and G.J. Rancourt of CHP London certainly hope so.

  2. Without getting into a theological argument, our European religious heritage was based on conflict between Catholics and Huguenots.

    The notion of Judeo-Christianity was not formulated until the late 19th century with the Scofield Bible. It is not part of our heritage because not all Christians believed in this version. Not to mention the fact that Christians practiced their faith in N. America centuries before it's publication.

    Canada is made up of diverse beliefs and fortunately something we can be proud of, is that all Canadians are allowed to hold them.

    If we assume that all terrorism is Islamic, than who will be watching the religious cults or those proposing to blow up abortion clinics?

    Or the warriors who kill for greed?

    I prefer a Just Society. New arivals must pledge allegiance to their adopted land, not a book that offers no direction, but only marginalizes those who are not in it.

    And I'm referring to Cyrus Scofield's work here.