Canada’s legislature passed a motion last week condemning “Islamophobia.” Although it has no legal force, Vivian Bercovici is disturbed by its implications, not to mention the parliament’s silence concerning a greater problem:

Many feel that the adoption of the term “Islamophobia” in the motion, [which makes no effort to define it], is ill-advised and potentially captures any negative comments made about the religion of Islam, thereby stifling free speech. For example: would the publication of cartoons satirizing the prophet Muhammad be “Islamophobic”? Such conduct, in recent years in Copenhagen and Paris, was deemed to be “Islamophobic” and was the direct cause of multiple murders of magazine editors and cartoonists. . . .

Discrimination against an individual due to religious belief is [already] prohibited by Canadian law, as is advocating genocide or promoting hatred and violence against individuals of a particular religion. Which is exactly what seems to be occurring with alarming frequency in some Canadian mosques, and about which the government seems unconcerned. Also, last Thursday, when the House voted on the Islamophobia motion, it was reported that in a recent sermon at a Montreal mosque, the imam spoke of the “disease of the Jews” [and advocated their murder]. . . . The mosque has posted the sermon on YouTube. . . .

In 2014, the most recent year for which there are statistics, there were 99 reported hate-based incidents involving the 1.2-million Canadian Muslims; and 1,627 such incidents targeting Canada’s 375,000 Jews. You do the math. . . .

One year ago, a motion condemning the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement and anti-Semitism was introduced in the parliament. . . . Iqra Khalid, [the Liberal MP who introduced the Islamophobia resolution], was not present for that vote. In fact, an observer who was in the House recalls that when the vote came to the floor, many Liberal MPs stood up and walked out. Forty-three of the 185 members of the Liberal caucus were absent for the BDS/anti-Semitism vote, and they did not all have dentist appointments or a sudden case of the flu.

Early Friday morning, Israel attacked military installations near the Iranian cities of Isfahan and nearby Natanz, the latter being one of the hubs of the country’s nuclear program. Jerusalem is not taking credit for the attack, and none of the details are too certain, but it seems that the attack involved multiple drones, likely launched from within Iran, as well as one or more missiles fired from Syrian or Iraqi airspace. Strikes on Syrian radar systems shortly beforehand probably helped make the attack possible, and there were reportedly strikes on Iraq as well.

Iran itself is downplaying the attack, but the S-300 air-defense batteries in Isfahan appear to have been destroyed or damaged. This is a sophisticated Russian-made system positioned to protect the Natanz nuclear installation. In other words, Israel has demonstrated that Iran’s best technology can’t protect the country’s skies from the IDF. As Yossi Kuperwasser puts it, the attack, combined with the response to the assault on April 13,

clarified to the Iranians that whereas we [Israelis] are not as vulnerable as they thought, they are more vulnerable than they thought. They have difficulty hitting us, but we have no difficulty hitting them.

Nobody knows exactly how the operation was carried out. . . . It is good that a question mark hovers over . . . what exactly Israel did. Let’s keep them wondering. It is good for deniability and good for keeping the enemy uncertain.

The fact that we chose targets that were in the vicinity of a major nuclear facility but were linked to the Iranian missile and air forces was a good message. It communicated that we can reach other targets as well but, as we don’t want escalation, we chose targets nearby that were involved in the attack against Israel. I think it sends the message that if we want to, we can send a stronger message. Israel is not seeking escalation at the moment.