RSS
Quebec’s premier wants to ban public prayer after protests block traffic and challenge secularism
The sight of Muslim men kneeling on the ground in prayer on city streets, often during pro-Palestinian demonstrations and sometimes blocking traffic, all while being shielded by Montreal police (SPVM) officers, has reached its limit, according to Quebec Premier François Legault.
“I see people on their knees in the street praying,” he said. “I don’t think it’s something we want to have here.”
Asked if he would legislate against it, he replied, “It’s what we’re looking at,” and has mused about using section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms—the notwithstanding clause—to do so.
At a Dec. 6 scrum capping a parliamentary session rife with debates, scandals and revelations about religious school funding, intrusion of religion in Quebec public schools, the launch of 17 school investigations and students praying in Laval high school classrooms, Legault told reporters that he and his government intend to “send a very clear message to the Islamists… We’re going to fight, and we’re never going to accept that people try not to respect Quebec’s fundamental values” of secularism and gender equality.
The topic is an especially sensitive one in Montreal. The administration of Mayor Valérie Plante has included Islamophobia in condemnations of antisemitism, regardless of context; Plante has also referred to a firebombed synagogue as a mosque, and elected officials have repeated Plante’s familiar refrain that Montreal is “a city of peace.” Her point person for public security, Alain Vaillancourt, did not respond to queries from The CJN.
The CJN asked Montreal police how many infractions, if any, have been issued to individuals or groups obstructing traffic to engage in street prayer during the nearly 400 demonstrations over the last 14 months. There has been no official or public confirmation of how many traffic-blocking prayer incidents have occurred. (The CJN has tallied seven.)
The SPVM is facing mounting criticism over a conspicuously lax approach to raucous protests, including permitting demonstrators to violate a Quebec court injunction outside a synagogue on Nov. 5 and asking Jews and other citizens to vacate the public domain to avoid incitement of protesters. “There is no law or bylaw prohibiting public prayer on the island of Montreal,” they said, adding that police “adapt operations according to the context of each situation, taking into consideration the safety of all.”
Rabbi Reuben Poupko of Montreal’s Beth Israel Beth Aaron Congregation told The CJN, “When it comes to conflict in Montreal between law and order and peace, police often choose peace, and that leaves our community feeling exposed.”
Montreal Police Brotherhood president Yves Francoeur could not say how many incidents have occurred, confirming to French-language radio that activities blocking traffic are subject to the Highway Safety Code. “We have the power to ask them to stop, to move, to free up the road. If they persist, we have the right to arrest them,” he said. He reiterated that the union was among the first organizations to support Bill 21, Quebec’s secularism law, noting street prayer “doesn’t have its place in Montreal; it doesn’t have its place in Quebec.”
Liberal MNA André Morin is the Official Opposition’s critic for immigration, integration, secularism and justice, and suggested Legault is trying to deflect and distract Quebecers from a “difficult session” and the CAQ government’s record $11-billion deficit.
“He hasn’t yet adequately explained exactly what the problem is that he’s trying to fix,” he told The CJN. “Religion is not illegal in Quebec and is protected by the Canadian and Quebec Charters. For a premier to say we need to forbid prayer in public spaces is a big statement and a big step.”
Morin says there’s already a wide range of legislation applying to street prayer, including the Quebec Highway Code and municipal bylaws. “But we have to be careful. Yes, there is an Islamist movement in Quebec, a political ideology, but not all Muslims are part of that.”
The Jewish Community Council of Montreal did not respond to The CJN’s request for comment, but the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) posted on social media, “It is not acceptable to see our public spaces privatized by groups of radical militants praying for the martyrs of Islamic terrorist groups and the death of Zionists. We salute Premier François Legault for his leadership.” CIJA said it will work with partners and the government “to arrive at legislation that will put an end to this assault on our common Quebec values.”
Legault sounded adamant. “When we want to pray, we go to a church, to a mosque, but not to public places,” he said, his salvo coming three days after a pro-Palestine group called for a rally in support of “One Solution, Intifada Revolution” at Montreal’s famed Notre Dame Basilica on the day marking Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception.
That Dec. 8 rally, attended by several dozen demonstrators, saw a few dozen men kneeling and praying in unison without incident, while others walked around with flags, some masked. A few people stood across from them in front of the church in opposition to the protest. At least one was reportedly asked to move by Montreal police, but The CJN could not confirm that.
On the federal side, the reaction was swift, with Immigration Minister Marc Miller suggesting Legault is picking on Muslims, and Justice Minister Arif Virani cautioning Legault about using the notwithstanding clause to override Canadians’ rights.
There are also questions if such a move can potentially prevent Jews from holding outdoor Shabbat celebrations, block men from gathering to put on tefillin, and ban menorah lightings, already facing restrictions in some Canadian municipalities.
“Most people agree that if the Quebec government comes out with any legislation, it will be targeted towards the context that is most problematic,” for example, street demonstrations and traffic blocking incidents, said Rabbi Poupko, adding Jews faced a similar quandary when the government started talking about Bill 21, which banned the wearing of religious symbols by many public employees. “We all know where this is coming from and the context,” he said. “The target of this legislation is not the Jewish community. We know that we are collateral damage in this.”
Rabbi Poupko says when streets are blocked by protesters praying, it is being used as a political tool. “Everyone understands these impromptu prayer services are not done as pious acts of devotion. It’s an attempt to intimidate, to express a form of Islamist supremacism, and when you weaponize prayer, this is the consequence. The radicals have weaponized prayer to disrupt, to demonstrate power.
“I can’t have a picnic in the street, but that doesn’t mean that the government is trying to starve me. I can go eat at home. And it’s not an infringement on someone’s freedom of expression or freedom of religion not to be allowed to pray in the street.” Banning this activity from public streets is not an act of discrimination or anti–freedom of expression, he says. “It’s pro-traffic.”
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has expressed alarm about the increased use of the notwithstanding clause by all governments, including Legault’s intentions, and has launched a campaign to alert Canadians to the dangers posed to the Charter by its repeated use and suggested more robust and stringent guardrails for its use.
Quebec’s bishops are concerned about the erasure of people and communities of faith from Quebec’s public spaces. Assembly of Quebec Catholic Bishops president Mgr Martin Laliberté said such a prohibition would be unenforceable and “off the mark in promoting peaceful co-existence in a secular state.”
If a religious group gathers for purposes other than prayer, “Will we then try to ensure that no prayers are recited during a food drive or before a friendly meal? How can we identify a prayer, and above all, why would we try to do so? Praying is not dangerous.”
Indeed, says Liberal critic Morin, “If you’re just praying in the park, is that something the Premier of Quebec will forbid? What François Legault is trying to do is very difficult, but it’s on him to explain.”
Laliberté noted that practices targeted by such a prohibition are not all public actions of religious people, but those of minority religious groups “perceived as different, and, for this reason, threatening to Quebec identity.” He said the rights involved are recognized by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18: “Freedom to manifest his religion or belief, alone or in community with others, in public or in private, in teaching, practice, worship and observance… it is essential to act with great caution, in order to respect the rights and dignity of all people.”
During the Bill 21 debates, Poupko says many people were willing to “’take the hit’, while others were standing on principle and said we can’t tolerate anyone taking away any rights.” Even if damage wasn’t so grave from Bill 21, he says, “it’s cold comfort for those who want to stand on principle. I really get that.”
But he’s confident any legislation will address behaviour to focus on “prayer that obstructs,” and was quick to add that “Jews don’t obstruct traffic to pray—at most we’ll go to the park for tashlikh for a few minutes, and we’re not talking here about a guy standing in the corner of an airport. Jews praying never obstruct traffic, unless you count the aisle on an El Al flight.”
The National Council of Canadian Muslims posted: “Imagine living in a country where the government can come after you for clasping your hands and praying for a loved one in a hospital waiting room. This is extremely concerning! The time is fast approaching when Canadians will be forced to grapple with the weakness of our charter rights and look for ways to protect ourselves from liberticidal government overreach. As we await the promised legislation, we will be consulting with communities across the country and preparing to stand up for the rights of all Canadians.”
Imam Adil Charkaoui of Montreal, who publicly called for the death of Zionists and enemies of Gaza a few weeks after the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas terrorist attack in Israel—but ultimately faced no charges owing to religious exceptions to hate speech in Canada’s Criminal Code—dismissed Legault’s comments. Muslims don’t need anybody’s permission to pray, he stated on social media. It is a right protected by Quebec and Canadian Charters and conferred by Islamic scripture: “The whole earth has been offered to me as a place of prayer and as a means of purification. So anyone in my community at the time of prayer can perform it wherever he is.”
The post Quebec’s premier wants to ban public prayer after protests block traffic and challenge secularism appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
Police Officers Injured as Violent Clashes Erupt at Anti-Israel Nakba Day Rally in Berlin
A Pro-Palestinian demonstrator speaks to a police officer during a protest against Israel to mark the 77th anniversary of the “Nakba,” or catastrophe, in Berlin, Germany, May 15, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Axel Schmidt
Anti-Israel demonstrators clashed violently with Berlin police officers during a march on Thursday, resulting in injuries and heightened tensions throughout the German capital city.
More than 600 police officers were dispatched to contain the “Nakba Day” protest in Berlin’s central Kreuzberg district, where over 50 arrests were made. The demonstrators were recognizing the 77th anniversary of the “nakba,” the Arabic term for “catastrophe” used by Palestinians and anti-Israel activists to refer to the establishment of the modern state of Israel in 1948.
According to local law enforcement, approximately 1,100 people took part in the pro-Hamas rally, which also protested against Israel’s military campaign against the Palestinian terrorist group in the Gaza Strip.
Demonstrators initially intended to march from Südstern Square in the southern part of the capital to the adjacent Neukölln district, but local authorities only allowed the protest to remain stationary.
Even though a local court had ruled that the anti-Israel protest couldn’t move through the city, demonstrators repeatedly attempted to march through the neighborhood. When police intervened to stop them, they were met with insults and violent attacks from the crowd.
Police officers stand guard in front of Pro-Palestinian demonstrators during a protest against Israel to mark the 77th anniversary of the “Nakba” or catastrophe, in Berlin, Germany, May 15, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Axel Schmidt
During the protest, one of the organizers addressed the crowd, declaring, “The nakba is a continuing campaign of ethnic cleansing that has never stopped.”
The demonstration was also marked by antisemitic rhetoric and inflammatory chants, including accusations that the Israeli government and military are “child murderers, women murderers, baby murderers,” as well as the use of the banned slogan, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” The slogan is popular among anti-Israel activists and has been widely interpreted as a call for the destruction of the Jewish state, which is located between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.
When police intervened to stop the inflammatory rhetoric, they were met with significant violence from the crowd, who reportedly threw bottles, stones, and other objects, and sprayed officers with red paint.
After the incidents, police reported that one officer was pulled into the crowd, forced to the ground, and trampled until he lost consciousness. The 36-year-old officer sustained severe upper body injuries, including a broken arm, and remains hospitalized.
“The attack on a police officer at the demonstration in Kreuzberg is nothing but a cowardly, brutal act of violence,” Berlin Mayor Kai Wegner said in a statement. “Attacks against officers are attacks on law and order and therefore against all of us.”
“Those who misuse the right to demonstrate to spread hate, antisemitic incitement, or violence will face the full force of the law,” the German leader added.
Pro-Palestinian demonstrators during a protest against Israel to mark the 77th anniversary of the “Nakba” or catastrophe, in Berlin, Germany, May 15, 2025. Photo: Screenshot
Local authorities reported that 11 officers and an unspecified number of protesters were injured during the incidents, with the injured demonstrators receiving treatment from the Berlin fire department.
The German-Israeli Society (DIG) condemned the violence and hateful rhetoric, urging authorities to reconsider granting permission for such demonstrations.
“Often, these events are not demonstrations for the rights and the legitimate concerns of Palestinians but merely express outright hatred of Israel,” the group said in a statement.
Germany has experienced a sharp spike in antisemitism amid the war in Gaza. In just the first six months of 2024 alone, the number of antisemitic incidents in Berlin surpassed the total for all of the prior year and reached the highest annual count on record, according to Germany’s Federal Association of Departments for Research and Information on Antisemitism (RIAS).
The figures compiled by RIAS were the highest count for a single year since the federally-funded body began monitoring antisemitic incidents in 2015, showing the German capital averaged nearly eight anti-Jewish outrages a day from January to June last year.
According to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), police registered 5,154 antisemitic incidents in Germany in 2023, a 95 percent increase compared to the previous year.
The post Police Officers Injured as Violent Clashes Erupt at Anti-Israel Nakba Day Rally in Berlin first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Trump Signals Support for Future Iran Trade Deal if Regime Dismantles Nuclear Program
US President Donald speaking in the Roosevelt Room at the White House in Washington, DC on March 3, 2025. Photo: Leah Millis via Reuters Connect
US President Donald Trump on Thursday seemed to signal openness to striking a trade deal with Iran if the Islamist theocracy agrees to dismantle its entire nuclear program.
“Iran wants to trade with us. Okay? If you can believe that. And I’m okay with it. I’m using trade to settle scores and to make peace,” Trump said while speaking to Fox News anchor Bret Baier. “But I’ve told Iran, ‘We make a deal, you’re gonna be really happy.”
However, Trump underscored the urgency in finalizing a nuclear deal with Iran, saying there’s “not plenty of time” to secure an agreement which would dismantle Tehran’s nuclear capabilities.
“There’s not plenty of time. You feel urgency? Well, they’re not gonna have a nuclear weapon. And eventually, they’ll have a nuclear weapon, and then the discussion becomes a much different one,” Trump said.
The US and other Western countries say Iran’s nuclear program is ultimately meant to build nuclear weapons — a claim denied by Tehran, which asserts the program is only geared for peaceful nuclear energy.
Trump on Friday said Iran had a US proposal about its nuclear program and knows it needs to move quickly to resolve the dispute.
“They have a proposal. More importantly, they know they have to move quickly or something bad — something bad’s going to happen,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One, according to an audio recording of the remarks.
However, Tehran denied receiving a US proposal yet. According to some reports, Oman, which has been mediating US-Iran nuclear talks in recent weeks, has the proposal and will soon give to the Iranians.
US lawmakers and some Trump administration officials have repeatedly stressed the importance of dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, arguing that Tehran could use a nuclear bomb to permanently entrench its regime and potentially launch a strike at Israel. Some experts also fear Iran could eventually use its expanding ballistic missile program to launch a nuclear warhead at the US.
However, the administration has sent conflicting messages regarding its ongoing nuclear talks with Iran, oscillating between demands for “complete dismantlement” of Tehran’s nuclear program and signaling support for allowing a limited degree of uranium enrichment for “civilian purposes.” Many Republicans and hawkish foreign policy analysts have lamented what they described as similarities between the framework of the Trump administration’s negotiations with Iran and the controversial Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), a 2015 deal negotiated by the former Obama administration which placed temporary restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of major international sanctions. Trump withdrew the US from the deal during his first term, arguing its terms were bad for American national security.
Trump indicated last Wednesday during a radio interview that he is seeking to “blow up” Iran’s nuclear centrifuges “nicely” through an agreement with Tehran but is also prepared to do so “viciously” in an attack if necessary. That same day, however, when asked by a reporter in the White House whether his administration would allow Iran to maintain an enrichment program as long as it doesn’t enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels, Trump said his team had not decided.
Furthermore, US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff drew backlash last month when, during a Fox News interview, he suggested that Iran would be allowed to pursue a nuclear program for so-called civilian purposes, saying that Iran “does not need to enrich past 3.67 percent.” The next day, Witkoff backtracked on these remarks, writing on X/Twitter that Tehran must “stop and eliminate its nuclear enrichment and weaponization program.”
Iran has claimed that its nuclear program is for civilian purposes rather than building weapons. However, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear watchdog, reported last year that Iran had greatly accelerated uranium enrichment to close to weapons grade at its Fordow site dug into a mountain.
The UK, France, and Germany said in a statement at the time that there is no “credible civilian justification” for Iran’s recent nuclear activity, arguing it “gives Iran the capability to rapidly produce sufficient fissile material for multiple nuclear weapons.”
While speaking to Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim al-Thani on Wednesday, Trump reportedly said that he would like to avoid war with Iran, “because things like that get started and they get out of control. I’ve seen it over and over again … we’re not going to let that happen.”
Trump has threatened Iran with military action and more sanctions if the regime does not agree to a nuclear deal with Washington.
The post Trump Signals Support for Future Iran Trade Deal if Regime Dismantles Nuclear Program first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Harvard, Jewish Activist ‘Shabbos’ Kestenbaum Settle Antisemitism Lawsuit
Alexander “Shabbos” Kestenbaum makes remarks during the fourth annual Countering Antisemitism Summit at the Four Seasons, Feb. 26, 2025. Photo: USA Today Network via Reuters Connect.
Harvard University and Alexander “Shabbos” Kestenbaum have settled a lawsuit in which the former student turned widely known pro-Israel activist accused the institution of violating the US Civil Rights Act of 1964 by permitting antisemitic discrimination and harassment.
The confidential agreement ends what Kestenbaum, an Orthodox Jews, had promised would be a protracted, scorched-earth legal battle revealing alleged malfeasance at the highest levels of Harvard’s administration. So determined was Kestenbaum to discomfit the storied institution and force it to enact long overdue reforms that he declined to participate in an earlier settlement it reached last year with a group of Jewish plaintiffs, of which he was a member, who sued the university in 2024.
Charging ahead, Kestenbaum vowed never to settle and proclaimed that the discovery phase of the case would be so damning to Harvard’s defense that no judge or jury would render a verdict in its favor. Harvard turned that logic against him, requesting a trove of documents containing his communications with advocacy groups, politicians, and US President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign staff during a period of time which saw Kestenbaum’s star rise to meteoric heights as he became a national poster-child for pro-Israel activism.
Harvard argued that the materials are “relevant to his allegations that he experienced harassment and discrimination to which Harvard was deliberately indifferent in violation of Title VI.” Additionally, it sought information related to other groups which have raised awareness of the antisemitism crisis since Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, demanding to know, the Harvard Crimson reported, “the ownership, funding, financial backing, management, and structure” of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, Students Against Antisemitism (SAA), and Jewish Americans for Fairness in Education (JAFE).
Without the materials, Harvard claimed, it would be unable to depose witnesses.
According to the Crimson, the university and Kestenbaum failed to agree on a timeframe for producing the requested documents, prompting it to file in May a motion that would have extracted them via court order. Meanwhile, two anonymous plaintiffs who also declined to be a party to 2024’s settlement came forward to join Kestenbaum’s complaint, which necessitated its being amended at the approval of the judge presiding over the case, Richard Stearns. In filing the motion to modify the suit, the Crimson reported, Kestenbaum’s attorneys asked Stearns to “extend the discovery deadline by at least six months” in the event that he “rejects the motion.”
On April 2, Stearns — who was appointed to the bench in 1993 by former US President Bill Clinton (D) and served as a political operative for and special assistant to Israel critic and former Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern — spurned the amended complaint and granted Harvard its discovery motion, which Kestenbaum’s attorneys had opposed in part by arguing that Harvard too had withheld key documents. Kestenbaum was given five days to submit the contents of correspondence.
On Wednesday, both parties lauded the settlement — which, according to the Crimson, included dismissing Kestenbaum’s case with prejudice — as a step toward eradicating antisemitism at Harvard University, an issue that has cost it billions of dollars in federal funding and undermined its reputation for being a beacon of enlightenment and the standard against which all other higher education institutions are judged.
“Harvard and Mr. Kestenbaum acknowledge each other’s steadfast and important efforts to combat antisemitism at Harvard and elsewhere,” Harvard University spokesman Jason Newton said in a statement.
In a lengthy statement of his own, Kestenbaum expressed gratitude for having helped “lead the student effort combating antisemitism” while accusing Harvard of resorting to duplicitous and intrusive tactics to fend off his allegations.
“Harvard opposed the anonymity of two of its current Jewish students who sought to vindicate their legal rights, and the Harvard Crimson outed them, even before the court could rule on their motion for anonymity. Harvard also issued a 999-page subpoena against Aish Hatorah, my Yeshiva in Israel that has been deeply critical of the university,” he said. “Remarkably, while Harvard sought personal and non-relevant documents between me and my friends, family, and others in the Jewish community, they simultaneously refused to produce virtually any relevant, internal communication that we had asked for during discovery.”
He continued, “I am comforted knowing that as we have now resoled our lawsuit, the Trump administration will carry the baton forward.”
Harvard’s legal troubles continue.
As previously reported by The Algemeiner, the university sued the Trump administration in April to request an injunction that would halt the government’s impounding of $2.26 billion of its federal grants and contracts and an additional $450 billion that was confiscated earlier this week.
In the complaint, shared by interim university president Alan Garber, Harvard says the Trump administration bypassed key procedural steps it must, by law, take before sequestering any federal funds. It also charges that the Trump administration does not aim, as it has publicly pledged, to combat campus antisemitism at Harvard but to impose “viewpoint-based conditions on Harvard’s funding.”
The administration has proposed that Harvard reform in ways that conservatives have long argued will make higher education more meritocratic and less welcoming to anti-Zionists and far-left extremists. Its “demands,” contained in a letter the administration sent to Garber — who subsequently released it to the public — called for “viewpoint diversity in hiring and admissions,” the “discontinuation of [diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives],” and “reducing forms of governance bloat.” They also implore Harvard to begin “reforming programs with egregious records of antisemitism” and to recalibrate its approach to “student discipline.”
Harvard rejects the Trump administration’s coupling of campus antisemitism with longstanding grievances regarding elite higher education’s alleged “wokeness,” elitism, and overwhelming bias against conservative ideas. Republican lawmakers, for their part, have maintained that it is futile to address campus antisemitism while ignoring the context in which it emerged.
On April 28, a Massachusetts district court judge, appointed to the bench by former US President Barack Obama, granted Harvard its request for the speedy processing of its case and a summary judgement in lieu of a trial, scheduling a hearing for July 21.
The following day, Harvard released its long anticipated report on campus antisemitism and along with it an apology from Garber which acknowledged that school officials failed in key ways to address the hatred to which Jewish students were subjected following the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre
The over 300-page document provided a complete account of antisemitic incidents which transpired on Harvard’s campus in recent years — from the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee’s (PSC) endorsement of the Oct. 7 terrorist atrocities to an anti-Zionist faculty group’s sharing an antisemitic cartoon which depicted Jews as murderers of people of color — and said that one source of the problem is the institution’s past refusal to afford Jews the same protections against discrimination enjoyed by other minority groups. It also issued recommendations for improving Jewish life on campus going forward.
“I am sorry for the moments when we failed to meet the high expectations we rightfully set for our community. The grave, extensive impact of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas assault on Israel and its aftermath had serious repercussions on campus,” Garber said in a statement accompanying the report. “Harvard cannot — and will not — abide bigotry. We will continue to provide for the safety and security of all members of our community and safeguard their freedom from harassment. We will redouble our efforts to ensure that the university is a place where ideas are welcomed, entertained, and contested in the spirt of seeking truth; where argument proceeds without sacrificing dignity; and where mutual respect is the norm.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post Harvard, Jewish Activist ‘Shabbos’ Kestenbaum Settle Antisemitism Lawsuit first appeared on Algemeiner.com.