Nowadays it is fashionable among Leftists and jihadists to equate any resistance to jihad and Islamic supremacism with "racism" and "fascism." This Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a Sharia supremacist, equates the Swiss minaret ban with "fascism."
In a similar vein, this Jewish group accuses the group Stop the Islamisation of Europe, which is standing for the Jews and all free people against Islamic supremacism, of "fascism" based on a logo that reflects the abundant violence we've seen in mosques in recent years; an attempt at guilt-by-association innuendo based on ties alleged but never documented; and a bland dismissal of the incitement to violence found in Islamic texts and teachings, combined with the dogmatic assumption that all religions are equally likely to move their followers to murderous rage.
Here is SIOE's response:
TO ISRAEL AND JEWS - HOW MANY MORE ENEMIES DO YOU NEED?
To reiterate an earlier statement: SIOE is separate to the English Defence League, Casuals United and other anti-Islamist groups in England
The 13th September "Stop further mosque building" demonstration in Harrow is organised by SIOE. It has been falsely reported that other groups have organised this demonstration.
Efforts are made constantly to link SIOE with the BNP and SIOE is constantly branded as a fascist organisation by some blogs and internet contributors.
SIOE's opponents constantly use "guilt by association" as a means of linking SIOE with racist organisations.
However, its previous actions have shown that SIOE is the most anti-fascist organisation in Europe and serious and knowledgeable anti-fascist groups no longer oppose SIOE's demonstrations.
SIOE has persistently stood up for and spoken about minority groups persecuted by Muslim majorities, for example Copts, which other self-styled anti-fascist groups have neglected.
SIOE always has, and always will, unswervingly condemn racism.
SIOE supports Israel's existence and the right of Jewish people to defend themselves. Palestinian and Muslim groups have declared that every Jew is a legitimate target for jihad (that is murder) regardless of where he/she may live.
However, SIOE's opponents have recently declared their opposition to Israel and therefore Jews.
Israel: Scottish fans urged to wave Palestinian flags at match
SIOE regards this alleged appeal by Scottish TUC spokesperson, David Moxham, to border on anti-Semiticism because Israel has once again been singled out for censure, while nearby Egypt is once again ignored for its genocidal acts against the Copts, for example.
The motive for this selective condemnation might rightly be regarded as being because Jews comprise the majority in Israel.
Our opponents constantly condemn SIOE for not recognizing the difference between Muslim moderates and extremists. Muslim moderates are not protecting Copts in Egypt or Hindus in Malaysia. Muslim moderates are not protecting Jews in Muslim countries. Muslim moderates voted into power Recep Erdogan, the Prime Minister of Turkey, after he'd been imprisoned for reading the Islamic poem about minarets being bayonets, that inspired SIOE's cartoon advertising its "Stop Islamisation" demonstration in Harrow on 13th December.
By wilfully ignoring such persecution while simultaneously focusing on Israel is anti-Semitic in SIOE's considered opinion.
Therefore, SIOE considers all of these co-signatories to be guilty by association with David Moxham of being selectively anti-Israel and thereby of being selectively anti-Semitic because of David Moxham's alleged statement.
Guilt by association works in both directions. Therefore, any opposition to anti-Semiticism made by the UAF and its associates is now not to be taken seriously, by UAF's own rules.
SIOE welcomes David Moxham and any of his co-signatories to refute SIOE's assertions and will gladly publish any non-abusive statements to the contrary on its website.
In fact we eagerly await any condemnation of any Muslim atrocities perpetrated anywhere. This right to reply is denied SIOE, most recently (today) by the CST.
Stephen Gash
Stop Islamisation Of Europe
SIOE England
What race is Islam?
Damn it, tanstaafl, you beat me to it!
From the CST Blog: The fact that Muslims are the current target simply means that it is Muslims who should be the recipients of anti-racist solidarity.
[dry_heaves]
Let's see...
a. to criticize or resist islam is to be a racist
b. islam is a religion, not a race
c. christianity is a religion
therefore, does it follow that those who lampoon christianity are racists?
ps. feel free to insert b'hai, hindu, mormon, etc.
SIOE is a group that everybody who's against fascism has to support, they're anti-racist, anti-Nazi, anti-fascist, anti-Islam and their actions are great, while Islam is a fascist, imperialistic and supremacist ieology. The people of SIOE have got my full support.
Please forgive my unusually rancorous remarks, but...
...PISS on any Scot who dares to wave that damned flag.
*fumes*
I clicked on the link in Stephen Gash's article to the CST -- and what I find there, all the stuff about "Islamophobia" -- was appalling. The CST also says one "cannot fight racism with racism" -- again, dragging in the word "racism" where it does not belong, in an attempt to characterize dislike, mistrust, hatred of an ideology -- which ideology, Islam, inculcates disliike, mistrust, hatred of all non-Muslims. And then there is this further business about the deplorable nature -- according to CST -- of the anti-Islam poster that is used by various groups in Great Britain, and again, an attempt is made to evoke memories of Der Stuermer in the intended audience of Jews who are supposed, according to the CST, have nothing to do with the Stop The Islamization Of Europe. But in fact, those very cartoons, right out of Der Stuermer, are to be found, right now, all over the Arab and larger Muslim world, and that can be found, along with the most bloodcurdling videotapes, in Muslim stores -- stores not only in Dar al-Islam but in the non-Muslim lands in which Muslims have been allowed to settle.
I don't know much about the organization which Stephen Gash runs, but I've read nothing about it to make me have cause for alarm. I am perfectly willing to be presented with real, not factitious evidence, that there is something about it that should give me pause, but no one has. I have, however, read what this CST group has put out in order to persuade a Jewish audience to have nothing to do with S.I.O.E. And what it put out was insidious, palpably dishoneset, propagandistic trash.
Gozan I will insert Jehovahs Witness, we get lampooned more than anyone else, no problemo we're used to it, btw we're not a cult we're Christians. Does that make ppl who give us a hard time racists? lol ..by your completely reasonable argument I guess so . Anyhoo, the "islamophobia" and "racist" crapola is getting SO old. Doesn't it seem that the less a person knows about islam, the more they defend and make excuses for it ... bizarre.....
The following article, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, is relevant to forming judgments about S.I.O.E. and its hysterical detractor, CTS:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali: Swiss Ban On Minarets Was Vote For Tolerance And Inclusion
From the Christian Science Monitor, Dec, 5, 2009:
Swiss ban on minarets was a vote for tolerance and inclusion
The Swiss vote highlights the debate on Islam as a set of political and collectivist ideas, not a rejection of Muslims.
By Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Washington
The recent Swiss referendum that bans construction of minarets has caused controversy across the world. There are two ways to interpret the vote. First, as a rejection of political Islam, not a rejection of Muslims. In this sense it was a vote for tolerance and inclusion, which political Islam rejects. Second, the vote was a revelation of the big gap between how the Swiss people and the Swiss elite judge political Islam.
In the battle of ideas, symbols are important.
What if the Swiss voters were asked in a referendum to ban the building of an equilateral cross with its arms bent at right angles as a symbol of the belief of a small minority? Or imagine a referendum on building towers topped with a hammer and sickle – another symbol dear to the hearts of a very small minority in Switzerland.
Political ideas have symbols: A swastika, a hammer and sickle, a minaret, a crescent with a star in the middle (usually on top of a minaret) all represent a collectivist political theory of supremacy by one group over all others.
On controversial issues, the Swiss listen to debate, read newspapers, and otherwise investigate when they make up their minds for a vote.
What Europeans are finding out about Islam as they investigate is that it is more than just a religion. Islam offers not only a spiritual framework for dealing with such human questions as birth, death, and what ought to come after this world; it prescribes a way of life.
Islam is an idea about how society should be organized: the individual's relationship to the state; that the relationship between men and women; rules for the interaction between believers and unbelievers; how to enforce such rules; and why a government under Islam is better than a government founded on other ideas. These political ideas of Islam have their symbols: the minaret, the crescent; the head scarf, and the sword.
The minaret is a symbol of Islamist supremacy, a token of domination that came to symbolize Islamic conquest. It was introduced decades after the founding of Islam.
In Europe, as in other places in the world where Muslims settle, the places of worship are simple at first. All that a Muslim needs to fulfill the obligation of prayer is a compass to indicate the direction of Mecca, water for ablution, a clean prayer mat, and a way of telling the time so as to pray five times a day in the allocated period.
The construction of large mosques with extremely tall towers that cost millions of dollars to erect are considered only after the demography of Muslims becomes significant.
The mosque evolves from a prayer house to a political center.
Imams can then preach a message of self-segregation and a bold rejection of the ways of the non-Muslims.
Men and women are separated; gays, apostates and Jews are openly condemned; and believers organize around political goals that call for the introduction of forms of sharia (Islamic) law, starting with family law.
This is the trend we have seen in Europe, and also in other countries where Muslims have settled. None of those Western academics, diplomats, and politicians who condemn the Swiss vote to ban the minaret address, let alone dispute, these facts.
In their response to the presence of Islam in their midst, Europeans have developed what one can discern as roughly two competing views. The first view emphasizes accuracy. Is it accurate to equate political symbols like those used by Communists and Nazis with a religious symbol like the minaret and its accessories of crescent and star; the uniforms of the Third Reich with the burqa and beards of current Islamists?
If it is accurate, then Islam, as a political movement, should be rejected on the basis of its own bigotry. In this view, Muslims should not be rejected as residents or citizens. The objection is to practices that are justified in the name of Islam, like honor killings, jihad, the we-versus-they perspective, the self-segregation. In short, Islamist supremacy.
The second view refuses to equate political symbols of various forms of white fascism with the symbols of a religion. In this school of thought, Islamic Scripture is compared to Christian and Jewish Scripture. Those who reason from this perspective preach pragmatism. According to them, the key to the assimilation of Muslims is dialogue. They are prepared to appease some of the demands that Muslim minorities make in the hope that one day their attachment to radical Scripture will wear off like that of Christian and Jewish peoples.
These two contrasting perspectives correspond to two quite distinct groups in Europe. The first are mainly the working class. The second are the classes that George Orwell described as "indeterminate." Cosmopolitan in outlook, they include diplomats, businesspeople, mainstream politicians, and journalists. They are well versed in globalization and tend to focus on the international image of their respective countries. With every conflict between Islam and the West, they emphasize the possible backlash from Muslim countries and how that will affect the image of their country.
By contrast, those who reject the ideas and practices of political Islam are in touch with Muslims on a local level. They have been asked to accept Muslim immigrants as neighbors, classmates, colleagues – they are what Americans would refer to as Main Street. Here is the great paradox of today's Europe: that the working class, who voted for generations for the left, now find themselves voting for right-wing parties because they feel that the social democratic parties are out of touch.
The pragmatists, most of whom are power holders, are partially right when they insist that the integration of Muslims will take a very long time. Their calls for dialogue are sensible. But as long as they do not engage Muslims to make a choice between the values of the countries that they have come to and those of the countries they left, they will find themselves faced with more surprises. And this is what the Swiss vote shows us. This is a confrontation between local, working-class voters (and some middle-class feminists) and Muslim immigrant newcomers who feel that they are entitled, not only to practice their religion, but also to replace the local political order with that of their own.
Look carefully at the reactions of the Swiss, EU and UN elites. The Swiss government is embarrassed by the outcome of the vote. The Swedes, who are currently chairing EU meetings, have condemned the Swiss vote as intolerant and xenophobic. It is remarkable that the Swedish foreign minister, Carl Bildt, said in public that the Swiss vote is a poor act of diplomacy. What he overlooks is that this is a discussion of Islam as a domestic issue. It has nothing to do with foreign policy.
The Swiss vote highlights the debate on Islam as a domestic issue in Europe. That is, Islam as a set of political and collectivist ideas. Native Europeans have been asked over and over again by their leaders to be tolerant and accepting of Muslims. They have done that. And that can be measured a) by the amount of taxpayer money that is invested in healthcare, housing, education, and welfare for Muslims and b) the hundreds of thousands of Muslims who are knocking on the doors of Europe to be admitted. If those people who cry that Europe is intolerant are right, if there was, indeed, xenophobia and a rejection of Muslims, then we would have observed the reverse. There would have been an exodus of Muslims out of Europe.
There is indeed a wider international confrontation between Islam and the West. The Iraq and Afghan wars are part of that, not to mention the ongoing struggle between Israelis and Palestinians and the nuclear ambitions of Iran. That confrontation should never be confused with the local problem of absorbing those Muslims who have been permitted to become permanent residents and citizens into European societies.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of "Infidel," is the Somali-born women's rights advocate and former Dutch parliamentarian. Her forthcoming book is entitled "Nomad."
Hugh you are so right when you say
"|The construction of large mosques with extremely tall towers that cost millions of dollars to erect are considered only after the demography of Muslims becomes significant"
In my neighborhood, a mosque was constructed recently which has two huge minarets. Since then our hood has changed quite noticeably, way more muslimahs walking about with their large broods of headscarfed girls as young as three years old, halal pizza shops, groups of scruffy faced men strolling around during the day (I guess they don't work) islamic book stores, whereas just four or five years ago it was all Italian and Jamaican residents and businesses.
Whenever a mosque is constructed, the muslims flock in large numbers and the neighborhood is transformed probably forever and not in a good way.
This mosque is about a ten minute drive from my place of residence. If there is ever a mosque built closer, say a five minute walk or so, I will SO be moving. I do NOT want to be living smack in the midst of an islamic dominated street, no thank you.
People, pay attention to your civic matters. Read the flyers from your local politicans, read your local and neighborhood newspapers. If there is ever a petition to build a mosque in your neightborhood, show up at the planning meetings and voice and register your disapproval. You do not want one of those things near where you live. I'm betting your property values will not exactly be enhanced, among many other negative things.
It is not I, but Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose article I posted, who is "so right" in her description of the minarets and why they are symbols of deliberately aggressive, imposing power, and therefore, why non-Muslims are so justified in opposing them. From the inside, from a life within Islam, she can testify as to what Islam is all about. And she has, and she does. Read, for example, "Infidel."
jnota - are you in the USA or in the UK?
Just asking, as it wasn't 100 % clear from the posting.
Whenever one of us supplies a small data point, such as you have just done, I think the testifier's country of residence should be stated. It all helps with the connecting of the dots.
Carl Bildt, said in public that the Swiss vote is a poor act of diplomacy.
Everything Muslims are doing these days is a poor act of diplomacy, if you ask me.
Sorry, dda I'm speaking about Toronto,Ontario Canada
Hugh I purchased Hirsi Ali's book Infidel still working on finishing it.
I was born and raised in the Netherlands and admire Ali's work.
Have you ever been to the middle east? If not you don't understand how terrible it is to have a minaret close by. They are anouncing the times of prayers very loud and even in a hotel you could not sleep. When one call was over you heard the next one. Ones Sharia low is in the country everyone would hear it.
It are the Muslims that are racist and fascist. They have no tolerance for someone else's religion and they hate specially the Jewish people more than anyone.
As a British Jew I am appalled that those who say they speak for the Jewish community in the UKare smearing SOIE as a fascist group. They do not speak for me, and I am prepared to say so to anybody who will listen - but how many other British Jews are prepared to stand up and say the same? For many many years we British Jews have allowed the "hierarchies" to drive their self-serving agendas, whilst all the time feeding us propaganda which we are discouraged from questioning. Those of us who question it are smeared as self haters. Everybody is aware that Jewish liberal elites are some of the prime movers behind multiculturalism in the UK, and we are now reaping the whirlwind of a flood of Islamic immigration, which is threatening our democratic way of life, besides spawning fanatics whose aim is to either subjugate us to Islam, or kill us.
SOIE UK and other organisations could be our salvation. They have welcomed us as Jews to help them regain the respect as British citizens who merely want their country and its way of life back - and all we do is attack them. Islamic extremism is here in the UK and no amount of "engagement" with extremists and new Government initiatives will change these fanatics' approach. On the contrary all these will do is enable them to gain more and more influence. They actually say they want to kill Jews. What could be clearer than that? Are we mad that we refuse to help SOIE as British citizens? If Muslim mobs come after us in the streets, and SOIE were the only ones between them and us - is it not despicable to expect THEM to protect us, and not make a move to join them in protecting others?
Shame on the organisations like these in the UK - they are helping to sign the death warrants of every decent Jew.
As a British Jew I am appalled that those who say they speak for the Jewish community in the UKare smearing SOIE as a fascist group. They do not speak for me, and I am prepared to say so to anybody who will listen - but how many other British Jews are prepared to stand up and say the same? For many many years we British Jews have allowed the "hierarchies" to drive their self-serving agendas, whilst all the time feeding us propaganda which we are discouraged from questioning. Those of us who question it are smeared as self haters. Everybody is aware that Jewish liberal elites are some of the prime movers behind multiculturalism in the UK, and we are now reaping the whirlwind of a flood of Islamic immigration, which is threatening our democratic way of life, besides spawning fanatics whose aim is to either subjugate us to Islam, or kill us.
SOIE UK and other organisations could be our salvation. They have welcomed us as Jews to help them regain the respect as British citizens who merely want their country and its way of life back - and all we do is attack them. Islamic extremism is here in the UK and no amount of "engagement" with extremists and new Government initiatives will change these fanatics' approach. On the contrary all these will do is enable them to gain more and more influence. They actually say they want to kill Jews. What could be clearer than that? Are we mad that we refuse to help SOIE as British citizens? If Muslim mobs come after us in the streets, and SOIE were the only ones between them and us - is it not despicable to expect THEM to protect us, and not make a move to join them in protecting others?
Shame on the organisations like these in the UK - they are helping to sign the death warrants of every decent Jew.
As a British Jew I am appalled that those who say they speak for the Jewish community in the UKare smearing SOIE as a fascist group. They do not speak for me, and I am prepared to say so to anybody who will listen - but how many other British Jews are prepared to stand up and say the same? For many many years we British Jews have allowed the "hierarchies" to drive their self-serving agendas, whilst all the time feeding us propaganda which we are discouraged from questioning. Those of us who question it are smeared as self haters. Everybody is aware that Jewish liberal elites are some of the prime movers behind multiculturalism in the UK, and we are now reaping the whirlwind of a flood of Islamic immigration, which is threatening our democratic way of life, besides spawning fanatics whose aim is to either subjugate us to Islam, or kill us.
SOIE UK and other organisations could be our salvation. They have welcomed us as Jews to help them regain the respect as British citizens who merely want their country and its way of life back - and all we do is attack them. Islamic extremism is here in the UK and no amount of "engagement" with extremists and new Government initiatives will change these fanatics' approach. On the contrary all these will do is enable them to gain more and more influence. They actually say they want to kill Jews. What could be clearer than that? Are we mad that we refuse to help SOIE as British citizens? If Muslim mobs come after us in the streets, and SOIE were the only ones between them and us - is it not despicable to expect THEM to protect us, and not make a move to join them in protecting others?
Shame on the organisations like these in the UK - they are helping to sign the death warrants of every decent Jew.
Sorry folks! Didn't realise it was going up more than once!
It's okay. It was worth reading it three times.
"We're not a cult we're Christians."
Hello there,
I thought you might find this bit of op-ed fascinating, since you insist on co-opting the term "Christian."
"Haters of God and His people are to be hated, but this does not mean that we will take any opportunity of bringing physical hurt to them in the spirit of malice or spite, for both malice and spite belong to the devil, whereas pure hatred does not."
"We must hate in the truest sense, which is to regard with extreme and active aversion, to consider as loathsome, odious, filthy, to detest. Surely any haters of God are not fit to live on His beautiful earth." -The Watchtower (December 1, 1951, pp. 734
"You heard that it was said you must love your neighbor and hate your enemy. However, I say to you: continue to love your enemies and pray for those persecuting you; that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens." -Matthew 5:43, 44 NWT (that's your own 'officially authorized' "translation")
With no real desire to begin a theological flame-war (though it's one that I'm more than capable of participating in), why dry-hump this forum with the martyr complex?
The first of the above quotes could readily be guessed to have originated from Islamic texts, instead of those who founded and propagated the Watchtower organization. Likewise, my mention of any number of Biblical hot-button words (and you know very well to what I refer) would likewise set off your alarm bells and cause everything from consternation to indigestion.
So, be honest enough to classify yourself as a member of your professed faith, but please don't co-opt that which it most certainly is not in some Orwellian sort of double-speak in doing so.
I am glad that you find Islam worth standing against, even if it is not for the identical list of reasons that myself or others that post here (including but not limited to agnostics, atheists, etc.); but do not use that commonality to obfuscate the necessity to correctly define our terms :)
As a Jew, I've been following SIOE for a couple of years, and I have to say, they're brave beyond compare!
They've been stabbed, beaten and assaulted on protests against Muslims and they're in no way racist.
The Jews without recent heritage to Jews in the Middle East tend to be a certain breed of sheep. Lots of money and no guts. According to them of course, the Sephardi Jews are totally uncouth, and about as bad as Americans (?) That's one of many reasons I decided to leave Britain.
Here's SIOE's banner on my blog from 2008:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/giant-steps/2713397413/in/set-72157600113763373/?editedcomment=1#comment72157608035041097
Wyldirishman - what on earth are you talking about. I consider myself a Christian. Why do you have a problem with that? Many people call Jehovahs Witnesses a cult, we do not centre our faith around a human, like islam does with mohammad now that to me is one the hallmarks of a cult.
Did I say I hate muslims? No I did not. As for trying to take over the forum - I made one comment in response to someone else's invitation to. Not sure why you jumped into that with your wild assumptions. I find the belief system of islam to be objectionable. Where's the hatred in that?
You have made it clear enough that you consider yourself to be Christian; my problem lies not with what you think, but with what the theology of your group actually professes, maintains, and teaches regarding Christ, and whether or not that squares with Christianity. Historically, part of that is to proclaim how often you have endured persecution (to the point of monopolizing the term) at the hands of the apostate world; hence, my issue with the 'poor me' take (as opposed to your assumptions that I thought you were attempting to 'take over' the forum...please.).
And, while I have not used the 'c' word, I take extreme umbrage at the co-opting of the term by that which it very clearly is not. Feel free to tell me all about how historic Christianity is apostate, that there is no Tri-unity within the Godhead, that there exists no eternal punishment in hell for the unrepentant, and that I'll perish apart from God during the battle of Armageddon (of which the year has been inaccurately predicted by the 'celestial class' I don't know how many times now). Never once did I insist that you not practice your faith, but I must insist that you not call it something other than what it is.
For the record, Islam does not arbitrarily center its teachings and doctrines around the pedophile Mohammed because he happened to come from the best village, or because they liked the same brand of goat meat at the local halal delicatessen. We are discussing the viability of divine revelation versus theological madness when it comes to the spiritual aspects of Islam; nowehere in that should there be implication that you or I hate Muslims, but being appalled by their blasphemous doctrines and practices is another matter entirely (though, for the Muslim, there exists no such separation, I am afraid).
Yes, the belief system of Islam IS objectionable. In fact, it's far, far worse than that on a whole host of levels. But, if you are going to be completely honest, don't hide the fact that your organization claims to be the only 'true' Christian church (thus rendering all of the rest of us apostates without regard to the truth of our doctrines compared and contrasted with what Scripture actually says when stacked up against some rather-and here I utilize the most diplomatic terminology available to me- spurious translation work by the Watchtower's own 'scholarship').
If that's not problematically 'cultic,' then please tell me what better befits such a definition.