Four times a day, across four square kilometres of Regina, Canada, a mosque was to broadcast Allahu Akbar - the cry the world has learned to associate with terror attack after attack, and the same words the UK's Muslim rape gangs invoked to justify what they did to thousands of girls - some say many, many more. When Canadians objected to the Regina mosque’s broadcast, they were called haters and reported to police. Western Standard's Lee Harding sat through the mosque's press conference and reported what the answers revealed. (Link in comments) The mosque didn't debate. Complaints became "racist threats," disagreement became phobia, plain questions became ignorance, fear "rooted in not understanding" - and invited police to treat any objection as "hate". That isn't a new tactic for Muslims, and it isn't confined to Regina. Call your opponent racist, a bigot, an Islamophobe, or a fool... and you never have to answer what he actually said. The accusation does the work when discussion and argument can't. Strip away the "consultation” theatre Lee Harding documented, and here is what's being established in Regina: the precedent that an amplified proclamation of religious dominion belongs in shared Canadian civic space, and that any citizen who says otherwise can be reported to police as a hater. That second half is what Canadians need to wake up to. On July 18, Bill C-9 - the "Combatting Hate Act" - comes into force. It strips the Criminal Code's good-faith defence for opinions based on a religious text. It removes the requirement that the Attorney General approve a hate-propaganda charge before it's laid. And it lowers the threshold for "hatred" beneath the standard the Supreme Court set in Keegstra and Whatcott. Conservatives, the NDP, and Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders alike opposed it. In Regina, the police are already advertising “enhanced" anti-hate enforcement alongside the ‘call to prayer’. The message to objecting citizens could not be plainer: the law is now a weapon, and it is pointed at you if you criticize Islam or even quote the ideology itself. So let me state some facts, while it is still legal to do so. It is a fact that Islamic doctrine - across all four Sunni schools, never repealed - ranks the non-Muslim as inferior: barred from the sacred mosque as najis, "unclean," in Sura 9:28; "the worst of creatures" in Sura 8:55; walled off from the believer by the doctrine of loyalty and disavowal, al-walā' wa-l-barā'. It is a fact that Islamic scripture, tradition and foundational law commands Muslims to fight and subjugate unbelievers and to kill apostates - and to enslave non-Muslim captives taken from the "house of war" and use the women as sexual property. This is not some fringe invention. It is in the texts, taught as authoritative, sourced and footnoted in the Rape Gang Inquiry's own chapter on the influence of Islam. The Muslim rapists of Rotherham and Rochdale have a religious worldview in which the uncovered non-Muslim girl is unclean, unguarded, and not fully human. That religious ideology handed these men their permission slip to do as they please. One branded his victim with an "M" for ownership. Survivors were made to lick feet to mark their inferiority, told to keep their eyes on the floor. The journalist who broke the scandal, Andrew Norfolk, recorded the rationale from their own mouths: Britain is "a land of war," so what was done to white girls was "permissible." The Islamic ideology supplies the contempt, the permission, and the alibi. And it is now precisely the thing Canadians are being forbidden to name. And before anyone calls the religious element a smear, let the victims testify. In the Rape Gang Inquiry's own record, a Rotherham survivor recounts being taught that white "kaffir" girls "don't obey Allah, so they deserve to be punished," that they "should be raped as punishment for not obeying Allah," and that "sex with a kaffir girl doesn't count as adultery" (p. 109). Scripture wasn't incidental to the violence... it was the script for it: the command "if one of your wives disobeys you, beat her" was, in her words, "often quoted to me before they beat me" (p. 109). At trial after trial, sworn testimony that victims were branded "white slags" and "kuffar bitches" while their abusers "shouted 'Allahu Akbar' and boasted of racial supremacy" (p. 140) - one convicted rapist shouting it again as he was led from the dock. The report's point is sharper still: these are the textbook grounds for a hate-crime sentencing uplift, and prosecutors never once applied them. (UK Rape Gang Inquiry Report link in 3rd comment. I had to put it down many times, and then force myself to continue reading.) This is not outsiders interpreting Islam. It is Muslim rapists invoking Islam as license, as justification, as the words in their mouths while they did it. Not every Muslim believes or acts on any of this. Plainly, most don't – but also plainly, many do. The Islamic texts remain, unrepealed and authoritative, available to anyone who wants to justify rape or domination. Free citizens in a free country must be able to say these truths out loud. It is also a fact, established by Baroness Casey's official audit, that British authorities "shied away from" the ethnicity and religion of the perpetrators for years, because naming it risked the one accusation our age still treats as fatal. They feared being called "racist" more than they feared the rape of British children. That is where this ‘call critics racist’ tactic ends when it wins: in thousands of children fed to rape because hundreds of people in authority were too afraid to say the words “Muslim Rape Gang”. And here is the part that should chill every Canadian: under Bill C-9, quoting Sura 8:55 and arguing it contributed to real harm is an "opinion based on a religious text" - the very defence C-9 strips out. The chapter I described, and the testimony I just quoted, cannot be safely published in Canada after July 18. Hate law or not - I will publish it now, and again on July 19th. Lee Harding said what he could in the Western Standard. Let me say the part that's harder to print: we are being conditioned to surrender the right to criticise an ideology, by people who would never extend us the same restraint - in a country our forebears called the Dominion of Canada. Don't consent to it. Object to broadcasting the ‘call to prayer’ in Regina and everywhere else in Canada. Object now to C-9, and continue to object. And say plainly, while you still can, that telling the truth is not a hate crime. (Image: A white loudspeaker mounted on the rooftop of the Regina City Jamia Masjid mosque in downtown Regina, aimed out over the city. Office towers and a Christian church spire are visible in the background under a blue sky. Courtesy of Regina City Jamia Masjid.)