OIC wants UN to develop a "legally binding institutional instrument" to muzzle free speech about Islam and jihad

Imam Rauf: NY Muslim center aims to prevent terror attack

http://in.news.yahoo.com/137/20100927/756/twl-imam-ny-muslim-center-aims-to-preven.html

The imam behind the controversial plan to build a Muslim culture center near the site of New York's Sept. 11 attack said on Sunday the project is meant to prevent a similar attack.

In an interview with CBS's "60 Minutes" program, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said he feels duty bound to help protect non-Muslim Americans from such violence.

Rauf said building the center, which will include a prayer room, two blocks from the destroyed World Trade Center is "the right thing to do."

"... America needs it and the Muslim world needs it," he said.

"We have to wage peace."

Critics say the center's proximity to Ground Zero is insensitive, while supporters say politicians have wrongly commandeered the emotionally charged debate before U.S. congressional elections on Nov. 2.

Asked if it was insensitive to build the center so close to Ground Zero, Rauf said: "We wanted to prevent another 9/11 ... We wanted a platform ... to strengthen the voice of the moderates."

Saying that the "campaign for winning hearts and minds is an important part" of any military fight against radical extremists from his faith, Rauf said he was "ready willing and able to serve our country and serve our faith tradition."

"If 9/11 happens there again, I want to be the first to die," said Rauf, who was born in Kuwait and is an naturalized American citizen. "It's my duty as an American Muslim to stand between you, the American non-Muslim, and the radicals who are trying to attack you."

The entirety of the OIC must either be blind or completely delusional and unable to recognize reality.
What the UN needs to do to regain the trust of the rational world is to instead promote a legally binding institutional instrument to promote respect and defend the lives of people killed by religions such as islam and....ah..islam and....ah islam!

Islam's barbaric reputation is well-earned. No amount of lawfare against the West will stop us from defending civilization.

The term 'islamophobia' is a misnomer. A phobia is an irrational fear, and repulsion of the atrocities which define Islam is certainly NOT irrational. It's a perfectly rational response to barbarity, especially one that has us in its sights.

As misguided, deluded and uninformed as so many Westerners are, there is a rising groundswell of Westerners who ARE taking the time to inform themselves, to learn about the enemy. And we will never be intimidated to tell the truth, act upon it, and win this war.

anti islamocommunist, It sounds like Rauf is offering protection.

I for one and not at all interested in the kind of "protection" Islam offers non-muslims. Thanks but NO thanks.

The OIC provided data on the "acts of violence" against muslims I'm sure. Because they wouldn't just spew that crap for no reason, right?

"We also call upon the international community to make concrete measure with a view to fostering an environment of respect for all religions," they said.

This comes from Saudi Arabia.
Have they no shame???

Saudi Arabia wants to lecture us?
A country where political parties are banned. Freedom of speech and the press are restricted and people are forbidden to criticise the government. Trade unions and political organizations are banned and public demonstrations are forbidden. The government of Saudi Arabia oppresses religious and political minorities, homosexuals, and women. Punishment for homosexuality, cross-dressing, or being involved with anything that hints at the existence of an organized gay community will range from imprisonment, lashes, and sometimes execution. The treatment of women has been referred to as "Sex segregation" and "gender apartheid".
Freedom of religion does not exist and Saudi Arabia even prohibits Jewish people from entering the country.
They have an atrocious record on human rights issues and that while only a fraction of all the abuse is uncovered. Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz even defended Saudi Arabia's abysmal human rights record and rejected reforms by saying "It is absurd to impose on an individual or a society rights that are alien to its beliefs or principles." In other words, Normal rules clearly shouldn’t apply to those whose feelings of racist and religious supremacism place them above the ‘unbeliever’.
Saudi Arabia defends the public executions by beheading, amputations and floggings it carries out under Sharia by stating that it will keep to its "legal traditions" held since the inception of Islam 1,400 years ago and rejects interference in its legal system.
The laws in Nazi Germany were benevolent compared to those in Saudi Arabia.

Robert Spencer- IMPORTANT!

Your site is doing wonders! But by itself it is NOT enough!

We need Spanish, French, German and Dutch versions!

I don't know how to translate all the volumes of your work online (or have the money needed to) but please, find a way! Start a fundraiser! Recruit devoted foreign fans! Announce some sort of plan!

It's great what you do but the greatest barrier to your never-ending fight for truth and justice is hindered only by language barriers! (someone tell me if he has foreign translations of his site!)

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.

-- John F. Kennedy

The same applies to resistance -- a fact that the OIC and its leftist toadies had best mark well.

How about a UN watchdog group that studies how the rise of Islam is a danger to world peace and security?

Only ONE image describes people who fall for this. I can't embed it but click to see: Head Up Butt Guy

The U.N.'s High Commissioner for Human Rights is most likely smoking the same crap as the good ol' boys of the O.I.C. Drugs ... strong drugs, are the only explanation when one addresses the absolute idiocy of the O.I.C.'s expectations when it comes to the international community and the tolerance they demand it extends. In the face of the innumerable incidents of violence perpetrated by Koran-observing Muslims against women and non-Muslims, the nerve required to make their demands can only be achieved under the influence of a controlled substance. That Islam is permitted representation in a body formed specifically to address humanitarian problems is laughable. What a side-show. It's time for those of us living in reality to begin stock-piling canned goods and bottled water. If the present tide of lunacy doesn't turn, and quickly, within a matter of maybe 6 months Americans will be forced to do whatever is necessary to defend our homeland and our families.

"The foreign ministers called for a global awareness on the dangerous implications of the rise of Islamophobia on world peace and security and urged the leaders of the international community to demonstrate their collective political will to address the issue with all urgency."

Translated:

They are on to us!
More and more people are learning what islam really stands for.
They are not taking the BS anymore.
We have to be quick and silence them.
The truth will kill us.

Correction from above>

Meant to say...

"...being an ex-Muslim I can just come right OUT and say that I f---ing despise Muhammad's evil cult of Islam as it calls for my death for committing no "crime" other than leaving it.

~~~~~

http://newstime.co.nz/anti-blasphemy-resolution.html
UN Anti Blasphemy Resolution

… to make it a crime to criticize Islam

http://newstime.co.nz/quran-set-on-fire-at-ground-zero-on-911.html
Islamophobia: Does America Have a Muslim Problem?
NO … but with Islam, the “prophet” Muhammad,
and the “declaration of open-ended war against the infidels” (unbelievers, kuffar), the Quran.

Islamophobe (is-slahm-o-fohb) – A non-Muslim who knows too much about Islam.

http://faithfreedom.org
Ali Sina Page 255/256 …Muslim immigrants are flooding Western countries with the intent of taking over these lands. Shortsighted, unsrupulous politicans bend over backwards to appease them and praise Islam as a “religion of peace” to vie for their votes. Some have gone so far as to pass “blasphemy laws” in order to ban criticism of Islam….

Islam cannot stand the light of truth.
Defeat Muslim censorship - practise HARBITUDE!

This sounds great. If we could just get this passed, ALONG WITH A RESOLUTION DECLARING ISLAM NOT A RELIGION (BUT A SICK MIND MEME OF DEATH AND OPPRESSION SIMPLY MASQUERADING AS ONE) then all would be ok on this front.

OIC are a bunch of aletheiaphobes.

So the "cure" for this "phobia" is silencing free speech and indoctrination...I mean "dialogue".

Yeah when Islam is just a footnote in history books.

RE: "There is no justification for burning books."

OH YES THERE IS! Those who have advocated burning Korans aren't trying to rid the world of all Korans. They are trying to send a message, a message that free speech is sacred and free people are not going to allow Islamic intimidation to stop it.

Pamela, Robert, David, Geert, and others, are great spokesmen for the effort to wake up Americans to the dangers of Islam, and they have pointed out that we, the people, having the right to free speech, also have the right to draw cartoons of anything we want to, including the warrior Muhammad, as well as the right to burn anything we want to, including the right to burn Mein Kampf or my Koran.

But, if they want to have an even bigger impact, in addition to talking/writing about how Islam affects free speech, THEY ALSO NEED TO PROMOTE THE EXERCISE OF FREE SPEECH, ie: they need to promote DOING things that reinforce the whole concept of free speech. For example, they need to promote draw Muhammad days and they need to promote Koran burnings. A "National Free Speech Day" may be an option. Whatever/however/whenever it's done, it's sure to garner Muslim outrage. But that's a good thing because it's Muslim outrage that gets MSM coverage.

A message needs to be sent, a strong message, a message that Americans aren't going to sit by while free speech is trampled by Muslims, a message that will get the MSM's attention BECAUSE it will upset Muslims, something the MSM tries its best not to do and quickly condemns anyone who does.

A message needs to be sent. A message MUST be sent.

Here's a petition for a National Free Speech Day. Anyone who wants to send a message about the sanctity of free speech needs to sign it and forward its website address so other patriots can sign it:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/nationalfreespeechday/

WAKING WEST: "The entirety of the OIC must either be blind or completely delusional and unable to recognize reality."

On the contrary, their objectives are perfectly rational and over time have a significant chance of succeeding, given the craven dhimmitude that afflicts the West.

Meanwhile, I have no comment Saturday's banning of Hesperado, but for those who felt he was a guru-of-sorts, many I remind you of some of his "enlightened" premises...

1) that the reconstitution of the Caliphate would be a "good thing", because it would galvanize the West into civilizational self-defense

RESPONSE: If you think the West is dhimmified today while the Muslim world is so divided, imagine our reluctance to antagonize an authority who has the loyalty of the global ummah! A new Caliphate would be a catastrophe for the West.

2) that Europe would be ready to fight a civil war against Islamization in 50 years

RESPONSE: In 50 years, western Europe will be 50% Muslim. That 50% will be largely young, vibrant, and angry, while the 50% of native Europeans will be aging, with feet of clay. If Europeans suffer from craven dhimmitude today, imagine the fear when Muslims are half the populace and the only ones to keep them in place are pensioners!

The time to reverse Islamization is now or never. I'm not predicting the Europeans WILL, I'm only insisting that if they don't start shortly in earnest, all is lost.

Dallas 99 said:

As misguided, deluded and uninformed as so many Westerners are, there is a rising groundswell of Westerners who ARE taking the time to inform themselves, to learn about the enemy.

The controversy over the Ground Zero Mosque has indeed had that effect.

The mainstream media continue to shill for Islam, of course. But the msm have lost a lot of credibility over the past two years.

In my view, the web is something we had better protect if we're going to continue to tell the truth about Islam and thus continue to counter the whitewash of Islam.

First let's pressure Saudi Arabia to build a synagogue in Medina. Let's call it the Banu Quraiza Memorial synagogue. Then we can start talking about "measures to discourage negative stereotyping of people on the basis of religion, faith or race"

hypocrites!

Islam is a mafia criminal enterprise and Rauf's ramblings on CBS last night are nothing but the protection money they demand to "protect" America. If and when the American giant wakes up, it signal the end of this criminal organization.

OIC wants to have a binding agreement imposed by UN not to criticize the "islamafia" that is on a murderous rage throughout the world. With 57 Muslim nation behind it, they may succeed in the general assembly but in security council, Ihope, there should be no chance of passing it, if only the US, UK, and China use their veto power!!

""We emphasize the need to develop, at the UN, including the HRC, a legally binding institutional instrument to promote respect for all religions and cultural values and prevent intolerance, discrimination and the instigation of hatred against any group or followers of any religion."

....of course, we Muslims would be exempt from any such ruling...wink...wink...

The foreign ministers called for a global awareness on the dangerous implications of the rise of Islamophobia on world peace and security...

Another threat...
That sounds like Imam Rauf, our savior...He will get between us and who? Now the OIC want's to save us from the same anti-Islamophobes...Speaking the truth about Islam is what creates the dangerous implications for peace and security, and the OIC wants to save us from ruin. Ruin by who?
Radicals...Those darn radicals, all three of them, the minute minority...It's a good thing we have Imam Rauf, the OIC and Rasool Obama to protect us from them...
This is just another form of 'give us what we want'...'or else'...And don't you dare complain about it, because if you do, 'you will be responsible' for the breach of world security and peace, not the radicals, certainly not Islam...So it's the fault of Islamophobes when Mahoundians indulge themselves in violence...
When we start letting Islam protect us from Islam, we have become Islamized...The fox guarding the hen house never works out too well...The US should dump the UN and Rauf as well...There is only one savior and he is none of the above...

If the OIC was a psychiatric patient it would be classified as paranoid schizophrenic, characterized by delusions of grandeur, exhibiting defense mechanisms of projection and denial. The patient would be heavily sedated and locked down as it could become violent.

Its not Islamophobia if they are trying to kill you.

Where is information on Geller and Spencer appearing in Fort Worth on Nov. 12?

What's the purpose of this appearance, and is there a title, such as "Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer To Speak About Islam," for example?

You two should know that the Ft. Worth newspaper, the "Star-Telegram," is Liberal as all-get-out, and will probably call you "hate-mongers'" and "Islamophobes'" if an article is written about you concerning your appearance. Especially by extreme left-wing Columnists' Bud Kennedy and Bob Ray Sanders. Both of whom support the Ground Zero mosk, naturally.

A recent Editorial was entitled "Texas State Board of Education shouldn't buy dubious claims of pro-Islamic agenda in world history books" - Got that? "Dubious" claims!

In another recent Editorial, concerning 9/11, the 19 Islamic Jihadists' were referred to as "19 sinister men." That should tell you about all you need to know concerning the politics of the Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

The current leader of the OIC is the Turkish historian of "Islamic science" Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu. Here is a little more on his role at the OIC meeting:

Conference leader calls nations to fight 'pandemic of vilification' against Islamic faith

By Anita Snow (CP)

Muslim nations must collectively resist growing Islamophobia in the U.S. and Europe, the head of the world's largest organization of Islamic countries told ministers from the 57 member nations gathered here this week.

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu urged members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference to work with Western leaders to dispel misconceptions about their faith. They met on the edge of the U.N. General Assembly.

Ihsanoglu told The Associated Press on Saturday that he would be taking this message on the road next week to Chicago, where the OIC will host a major conference on Islam and Muslims in America at the American Islamic College.

Education, he said, is key in helping the West truly understand Islam.[Yes, but not in the way he has in mind]

He said his new book, "The Islamic World in the New Century: The Organization of the Islamic Conference, 1969-2009," includes a whole chapter on the danger of growing Islamophobia in the West.

Islam has recently been under attack in America, especially with a controversy over a proposed Islamic centre near the World Trade Center sites and threats by groups to burn the Qur’an in protest.

"The Muslim world is going through an unprecedented difficult and trying time," Ihsanoglu told the ministers during their annual meeting on Friday. "We are facing daunting challenges and severe hardships. Islam and Muslims are under serious attack, and Islamophobia is growing and becoming more rampant and dangerous by the day."

He said a "pandemic of Islam vilification" is sweeping through some parts of Europe and the United States, increasing misperceptions about Islam and eroding Muslims' human rights.

"We need an all inclusive effort of OIC member states to stem this menace," Ihsanoglu told the ministers. "That is why I firmly believe that this question of Islamophobia should figure prominently on the agenda of all OIC member states whenever they deal with their Western counterparts."

Ihsanoglu, who is from Turkey, has headed the OIC since 2005. The group is seen as a moderate, collective voice for Islam.[by whom? Not by non-Muslim of sense]

"The OIC is a strategic and crucial partner of the United Nations and plays a significant role in helping to resolve a wide range of issues facing the world community," U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in a statement to the group when it met on Friday.

Member states reflect the reach of Islam across the Middle East, Asia, Africa and the Caribbean, and include Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Morocco, Afghanistan, Syria, Chad, Senegal, Niger, Sudan, Guyana and Surinam.
_______________________________________

And here is a previous article on Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu:

Fitzgerald: A tribute to Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu is the Turkish "historian of Islamic science" whose outward appearance is so deceptively modern and secular and sweet-reasonable. Then one realizes that that is merely camouflage and that his mental baggage, while not quite as primitive as that of the qaradawis and tantawis, is from the same product line manufactured by Islamic Tourister.

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu was carefully chosen to assume the position of head of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, as the most moderate and presentable (to the Infidels) person, after the bad impression left by Mohamad Mahathir's celebrated rant. He has since then been beavering away at the OIC’s pet project, a transparent attempt at across-the-globe censorship of criticism of Islam. It is an attempt that constitutes an assault on the advanced, Western world, whose citizens are being threatened if they dare to exercise their right of free speech about what Ihsanoglu primly and self-righteously calls a "religion" (as if that conferred some kind of special immunity).

But Islam is an all-encompassing ideology, a Total Belief-System that presumes to regulate every detail of a man's life, and offers a Complete Explanation of the universe. Furthermore, it places great emphasis on inculcating the idea that all of humanity is divided between Muslims and non-Muslims, Believers and Infidels. Muslims are taught that between the two there must exist a state of permanent war (though not always of open warfare), and that all Muslims have a duty, central and not tangential, to participate in some way in the "struggle" or Jihad to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam.

Islam is a politics, Islam is a geopolitics. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu knows that, but he doesn't want the world's Infidels to find that out, or to discuss it among themselves, much less to actually criticize it. And so he will do what he can to shut down the exercise, in the Western world (and elsewhere in the non-Muslim lands), of our right to free speech, a right that could not possibly exist for one minute in the lands where Islam dominates, and Muslims rule. But in the advanced West, as one of its achievements, such a right has been won and is now exercised, possibly not quite as impressively, or with as much gratitude, as it might be -- but the important thing is the right, the untrammelled right.

Does Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu want Infidels to read the Qur'an? The Hadith? The Sira? Does he want them to read the histories -- the histories written by Muslims, for god's sake -- about the Muslim conquests, and the subsequent mass killings and subjugation of non-Muslims? What does he want us to find out about Islam? What is in the glossy brochures prepared by assorted Ministries of Islamic Propaganda, or by individual smiling imams (the kind who keep getting picked up later for connections to terrorism, or are revealed later, after they have decamped back to a Muslim land, to have made all kinds of disturbing and even blood-curdling remarks)? Is that it?

Amazing, isn't it, the real outrage, the genuine fury, that we should actually find out what Islam inculcates, and connect it to the recorded behavior of Muslims over the past 1350 years, and to the observable behavior of so many Muslims today, as we open our newspapers or turn on our radios and televisions, and piece together what might well be a separate section of the paper or segment of the broadcast, to be called The Jihad News.

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu was chosen to be the head of the O.I.C. because he was a "moderate" Turkish Muslim and a presumably respectable "historian of science." But he turns out to be not that but rather an historian, and defender, of "Islamic" science, who attempts to tortuously explain away the absence of science in the Islamic world since its brief flourishing thanks to Christians, Jews, and those who, while they were called Muslims, were only a generation or two away from being something else, in a milieu still heavily influenced by non-Muslim elements -- which, when greatly reduced, also reduced the atmosphere in which science could be conducted.

That bizarre figure, Ziauddin Sarkar, was somehow permitted to review, in the pages of the British journal "Nature," the large claims made on behalf of "Ottoman" -- i.e., "Islamic" science -- by Ihsanoglu. Some of Ihsanoglu’s attempts to explain why such things as the clock did not develop in the East but only in the West (you see, since the early clocks were not sufficiently accurate for Muslims to rely on them for knowing when it was time for prayers, they did not think it worth using them, or trying to improve them) raise far more disturbing questions about the Muslim mindset than Dr. Ihsanoglu apparently realized.

Why did an editor at Nature give the job of reviewing Ekheleddin Ihsanoglu's book to the apologist Ziauddin Sarkar? And who at Science allowed to be published his puff-piece about "Islamic science," with every cliche that no historian of mathematics, or science, or technology -- not Giorgio di Santillana, not Crombie, not Charles Singer, not a hundred others -- would have permitted?

What is happening when standards, supposedly so rigorous at "Science" or at "Nature," are so obviously non-existent, and both journals become, rightly, the object of ridicule?

Then there is this, taken from a web-site that follows the OIC:

In March 2006, OIC General Secretary Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu embraced Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal at a press conference at OIC’s headquarters. Ihsanoglu whitewashed: “With its win, Hamas begins a new stage in the development of the Palestinian issue. We assure that Hamas will deal with all national and international requirements in a practical and logical way.”

At a “special session” of the OIC in August of the same year, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for “the elimination of the Zionist regime,” a statement that OIC failed to condemn. Moreover, the OIC has repeatedly backed Iran’s nuclear ambitions. As Ishanoglu said in April, 'All member states of the OIC and I have obviously supported Iran's right to access peaceful nuclear technology,' despite clear indications that the Iranian regime’s uranium-enrichment program is designed chiefly to make nuclear weapons.

And there is the OIC’s explaining away of the 9/11 attacks, which “expressed the frustration, disappointment, and disillusion that are festering deep in the Muslims’ soul towards the aggressions and discriminations committed by the West.”

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu is also the one who, at the time of the death riots and Muslim riots over those anodyne cartoons in a Danish paper, solemnly likened the effect of those cartoons on Muslims as being akin to the effect on Infidels of the mass murders carried out by Muslims on 9/11.

Finally, Ihsanoglu has explained to an American audience how splendid was the system of "protection" that Islam offered Christians and Jews -- "protection" offered by Muslims, for the payment of Jizyah, from those same Muslims. A system that would have impressed Al Capone. He helpfully explained that the “privilege of becoming a protected minority via an act of dhimmiship was given only to the followers of a prophet to whom a sacred book was revealed.”

Christians and Jews, because you are the lucky "followers of a prophet” -- Moses, Jesus (that is, the Muslim Moses, the Muslim Jesus) -- you will enjoy, when Muslim rule comes everywhere, the same "privilege of becoming a protected minority via an act of dhimmiship" that Christians and Jews have enjoyed in the Middle East, and elsewhere in Muslim-ruled lands, for so long.

So what's your problem? Never satisfied? What's the reason Islam is not pleasin' you?

In defining “dhimmiship” as the “privilege of becoming a protected minority,” Dr. Ihsanoglu did his best. But those who are so solicitious of the public image of Islam and of Muslims realize that it should not be left up just to NPR, or the BBC, or Le Monde; we all have to pitch in, and do our bit. It might be better if “dhimmi” were to be jettisoned altogether. The word upsets Infidels, and it does nothing for Muslims, either.

Instead of “dhimmis,” why not call them “Friends With Benefits”?

Islam is not merely a bunch of rituals of individual worship, or an explanation of how the universe came to be. It is, more importantly, also a politics and a geopolitics. A man who can present the dhimmi system, and describe the status of the "Protected People" un-ironically as A Good Thing, an Example of Muslim Benevolence and Tolerance, as Ihsanoglu does, is for all of his outward mien, that tie, that Western suit, inwardly as hopelessly primitive as any daggers-and-dishdasha Saudi.

[Posted by Hugh on Dec. 21, 2008]

And here a little something on "Islamophbia":

Fitzgerald: Islamophobia? Not so fast

"Analysts both in the Muslim and the Western world by and large agree that “fear” and lack of objective dialogue are the root cause of Islamophobia and Anti-Americanism." – a statement by Abukar Arman in this article

Not so fast, buster. The word "Islamophobia" is not an acceptable term for intelligent apprehensions over Islam. For Islam is for its adherents a total belief-system whose central and moving idea is that of a complete division between Believer and Infidel. It asks of Believers that they offer their sole loyalty to Islam as a Total System, and to the Jihad, furthered through many conceivable instruments, to spread the dominance of Islam to lands that for now may still be under Infidel rule. Believers are also to ensure that dominance of Islam by removing "all obstacles" to its spread. They are to ensure that Muslims rule, and not just here or there, not just in the lands now part of Dar al-Islam or once part of Dar al-Islam, but everywhere.

The large-scale presence of Muslims in the Lands of the Infidels has brought about a situation, for those indigenous Infidels (and also for other non-indigenous arrivals, non-Muslim immigrants), that is unpleasant, expensive (the costs of monitoring, the costs of security, spiralling ever upward), and physically dangerous. Ask a Frenchman who dares to enter the "quartiers chauds" which are all over France. Or ask English residents of Birmingham and Bradford and Leeds and Manchester and parts of London, or ask Swedes in Malmo, or Dutch in Rotterdam and parts of Amsterdam.

"Islamophobia" is a word concocted to intimidate those who are rightly troubled, and more than troubled, by what they have learned of Islam largely through the observable behavior of Muslims not only in the West, but around the world -- and also through more and deeper study of the canonical texts and of the history of Jihad-conquest over the past 1350 years, from Spain to the East Indies, and of the subsequent subjugation of many different non-Muslim peoples: Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, Buddhists, and others. The similarities in their treatment, and the similarities in the impulses and attitudes exhibited by Muslims over a wide area, are simply too great to ignore.

Likewise impossible to ignore are the problems of Muslims in Australia and England, in France and Germany, in Spain and Italy, in Belgium and the Netherlands, in Sweden and Denmark and Norway, or even, in far fewer numbers, in the United States and Canada. Everywhere they manifest the same kinds of hostility, the same kinds of wearing-away demands, the same false or real outrage, the same refusal to truly collaborate with the security services. They engage in constant attempts to undermine the most commonsensical of measures. They conduct sustained and cynical campaigns of Da'wa, often based on hiding the reality of Islam and offering the most superficial aspects of it (the rituals) to a vulnerable targeted audience of the economically and psychically marginal. And they do so many other things -- including the astonishing campaigns to shut down free speech everywhere, not only in Denmark (at Jyllands-Posten, which resulted in death threats directed at Danes from all over the Dar al-Islam) but also in The Netherlands (the murders of Pym Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh). Death threats have driven some out their jobs (Robert Redeker in France) and forced others to cease the expression of their views (Will Cummins in Great Britain). This is Islam On the March, completely determined to keep and hold and expand what it sees as its beachhead, and more than a beachhead, all over the Dar al-Harb.

The inability or willful refusal by many in the West to understand this is a product of many things. Among those things is sentimentalism about How All People Are the Same the Whole World Over and Everyone Wants the Same Thing, with its obvious variant, All Religions Are Equally Dangerous. Just look at a few of those blood-curdling lines about the Canaanites or some such in old Hebrew texts -- why, that makes Judaism just as dangerous, maybe more so, than Islam with whatever it is said to inculcate. Doesn't it?

What this transparent attempt at symmetry offers is not one falsehood but many. "Islamophobia" is a word used by apologists for Islam to avoid answering specific, detailed, and knowledgeable questions about Islam. These questions that cannot be answered, in truth, because if the truth were offered as an answer it would force Muslims themselves to indict Islam, to admit that what is in the texts is in the texts, and is taken seriously by a billion people -- and that those who do not take the texts seriously are not "moderate" Muslims but essentially bad Muslims, unobservant Muslims, Muslims who do not really believe. And there are far fewer of these than most non-Muslims assume. They are always open to the possibility of relapse, and certainly their progeny are, so that Infidels cannot base their own security and that of their institutions on the "hope" that those "moderate" -- i.e., bad -- Muslims will never change their minds, and that their children will continue in the same vein.

That is a wager that Infidels should not be asked to make: to bet their physical safety and that of their children and grandchildren, and that of their societies on those moderates. For those Infidel societies are already in various states of confusion and disarray, and are facing all kinds of problems. Such a bet could allow them to be done in by this Total Belief-System that originated 1350 years ago as an ideology, compounded of bits and pieces, distorted or misremembered, of both Judaism and Christianity, and with an admixture of pre-Islamic Arab paganism.

No. That should not be expected of us, the Infidels. We are not ready to concede or commit suicide.

[Posted by Hugh on January 26, 2007]

Sedition is a term of law which refers to overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority as tending toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.

Having defined what sedition is, let’s analyze and see Islam falls into the category of sedition.

Speech : We have Imans all over the world and in local Mosques clamoring for the death of America .
Well, boys and girls, today we are letting the fox guard the hen house.
The wolves will be herding the sheep!

Obama appoints two devout Muslims to Homeland Security posts. Doesn't this make you feel safer already?

Obama and Janet Napolitano appoint Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim, as
Assistant Secretary for Policy Development. http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/dhs.asp

DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim who was born in Damascus , Syria , as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC). http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/dhs.asp ;

NOTE: Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout Protestant...? Just wondering.

Devout Muslims being appointed to critical Homeland Security positions? Doesn't this make you feel safer already??

That should make the US ' homeland much safer, huh!! Was it not "Devout Muslim men" that flew planes into U.S. buildings 9 years ago?

Was it not a Devout Muslim who killed 13 at Fort Hood ?

Also: This is very interesting and we all need to read it from start to finish. Maybe this is why our American Muslims are so quiet and not speaking out about any atrocities. Can a good Muslim be a good American? This question was forwarded to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. The following is his reply:
Theologically - no . . . Because his allegiance is to Allah, The moon God of Arabia
Religiously � no� Because no other religion is accepted by His Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)(Koran)
Scriptural - no� Because his allegiance is to the five Pillars of Islam and the Quran.
Geographically � no� Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day.
Socially - no� Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews..
Politically - no�Because he must submit to the mullahs (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America , the great Satan.
Domestically - no� Because he is instructed to marry four Women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34)
Intellectually - no� Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.
Philosophically - no� Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression.. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.
Spiritually - no� Because when we declare 'one nation under God,' the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as Heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names.
Therefore, after much study and deliberation...
Perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS
in this country. - - - They obviously cannot be both 'good' Muslims and good Americans.
Call it what you wish, it's still the truth. You had better believe it. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. The religious war is bigger than we know or understand.
Can a muslim be a good soldier???

Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, opened fire at Ft. Hood and Killed 13. He is a good Muslim!!! Footnote: The Muslims have said they will destroy us from within.
SO FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.

So why does the government allow these bastards to cover themselves under the religious banner?

Since this isn't a religion and is an openly seditious ,we have not only have the right to protect our nation we must demand it ,and proceed against them without out any hesitation. For starters we could :

1. Close all mosques.
2. Expel all imans.
3. No immigration from Islamic nations.
4. Revoke all residence and citizenship granted to Muslim.
5. All born Muslims in the US should be given a right to free travel to the Islamic nation of their choice.
6. Cut all aid to Islamic nations.
7. Ask the Islamic nation if they really want a Jihad with the US, and if so declare a real war to Islam which is the source of all this BS and give them a taste of Nukes in the major cities and mecca.

Psssst. . .The Sultan Knish has just dropped a gem in mi' inbox. . .sure hope he posts it on this thread. . .

Is it not time the UN was renamed The United Muslims? It seems every day to become moreso.
My advice to the US is, beware of Yankophobia.

'...to render us mute and defenceless in the face of the advancing jihad.'

Absolutely spot on, and describes exactly what is happening in the UK, and elsewhere in Western Europe. God help us all if the UN agrees to this shameful and preposterous attempt to destroy free speech. I commented on another thread about how politicians collude in this destruction of freedom because their only concerns are to be re-elected - someone else replied that was too simplistic, and the real question is why the British continually elect un-patriotic governments.

An excellent point, and I wish I knew - let's hope other UN members refuse to cave in, and tell the OIC to go to hell, unlike my own pusillanimous government.

And only they will be exempt ~ and able to continue to practise their Dhimmi laws ~ or religious Apartheid against the non-Muslim citizens in Islamic lands.

The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights ~ which acts against the human dignity of non-Muslim, apostates and women ~ will be sitting right there!

Where are those electric cars ~ that can go 300 miles on a single charge! Let's see how they do without money. Buy that!!

Jan, or anyone from the UK, can you tell me if there is any talk anoung the people to repeal any of these laws which have taken your frrdom?

The more I learn of what is happening in the UK the more I wonder what the talk in the Pubs and at the kitchen tables is like.

The way the information comes across, it seems as though there has been little or no opposition to the suppression of rights there and I wonder if my impression is correct.

Sorry, **freedom

I believe that any serious inquiry is unwelcome because it poses a threat to their legitimacy let alone supremacy. They are afraid of exposing their fraudulent beliefs.

Explains why 54% of Muslim population is illiterate, and why they keep bombing schools, especially for girls.

Once again, let's have "Everyone Read (not burn) the Koran Day International"

B

Yeah you may be right, I just wonder if they are demanding that there politicians DO something, or if they are backing politicians who will.

It seems that the laws have gotten so strict that it is difficult for a politician to voice their opposition to these laws w/o their views being called hate speech.

I am saddend by what has happend there but am appreciative of the warnings we in the US have gotten from Brits about how far this can go.

Does this mean that xtians, jews, buddhists, and hindus can hold OIC occupied countries liable for hate crimes, as well? If that were the case, I'd be all for it. Even if the offenses were a fine of $1.00 USD, we'd rake it in by the millions.

Let us not forget that the MUSLIM nations of the ME have been empowered by the WESTERN need for OIL and the POLICIES instituted by the WESTERN countries to CRIPPLE OIL drilling or exploration in NON Middle Eastern locations. Jimmy Carter is the main instrument in recent history to empower the Muslim with the ONLY product that they have deemed worthy of cultivation. Obama is more than eager to pick up the baton and carry it much farther. Obama is a Muslim. He has no viable birth certificate and he has spent millions to keep his history a secret.

It is already impossible to legally criticise Islam in much of Europe, look at what Wilders is going through in Holland for telling the truth. Denmark is the same, and open your mouth to the wrong people in England and you WILL get a visit from the police.

It must never be illegal to tell the truth or voice an honest opinion but it already is and I don't know what to do about it. What I do know is that it's late, and Europe does not have any politicians near power yet that understand the threat, except perhaps Wilders.

I expect the Germans to wake up soon, but the problem is that they have a tendency to overdo things once they start. Round and around and around we go....

>>"We emphasize the need to develop, at the UN, including the HRC, a legally binding institutional instrument to promote respect for all religions and cultural values and prevent intolerance, discrimination and the instigation of hatred against any group or followers of any religion."

Aaah-hahahahahahaha!

So funny! You first, Abdul.

Maybe it is time to allow the OIC to take over the UN. They can fund/host it in one of the rubbish tips Muslims laughably refer to as cities. Then the rest of the world can use the vacant UN building to form a new organisation, the United Civilised Nations.

Islam - the reason God gave us nuclear weapons.

Let's please stone the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. It was a bad idea from the start. It is inherently subject to arbitrariness.

Neither the UN nor the US Federal Government should be spearheading faith (any faith) for the blind faith in faith.

The Federalist Society: New Federal Initiatives Project, April 21, 2009

President Barack Obama announced President Bush’s White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives will continue in his administration under the name “the Office on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.” It will focus on four priorities: (1) ensuring community groups are a key part of the economic recovery and the reduction of poverty, (2) examining ways to support women and children, address teen pregnancy, and reduce abortions, (3) encouraging responsible fatherhood, and (4) fostering interfaith dialogue with leaders and scholars around the world.

The assumption of the inherent goodness of faith, for the sake of faith alone (any faith), is a tautological falsehood. When two nuts meet for "interfaith dialog" it can only yield something else that remains nutty. It does not yield an Almond Joy.

Can we please stone the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. The universal application of the US bill of rights, anywhere and everywhere, by any seat of power should not be diluted nor circumscribed by anything that can be remotely pigeon-holed as a religious belief.

That reminded me of what Jesus said.Luke 6:42

42 How can you think of saying, ‘Friend,[f] let me help you get rid of that speck in your eye,’ when you can’t see past the log in your own eye? Hypocrite! First get rid of the log in your own eye; then you will see well enough to deal with the speck in your friend’s eye.

Befor looking to the west try (the impossible)to rid the islamic world of murder,torture,racism,hatred-this last one is quite impossibl since it is a specific command from your god-corrupton,decption(taqueya).... But I don't think that will happen any time soon,so I will follow my Lord's command and say, may God bless you all foriegn ministers and your people

"How about a UN watchdog group that studies how the rise of Islam is a danger ....."

The UN is NOT working to promote Freedom, but for the advance of a tyrannical World Government for the Elite.

I'm sure the UN already knows the danger of islam, and is very happy to create more trouble for We, The People that are against islam.

The UN is a useful to the cause of Freedom as teats on a bull.

part of what I wrote:
WAKING WEST: "The entirety of the OIC must either be blind or completely delusional and unable to recognize reality."

part of your response:
Cornelius:
On the contrary, their objectives are perfectly rational and..

OK Cornelius, then I'll restate the contrary of the statement per your objection:
"The entirety of the OIC muster be all seeing and completely sane and able to recognize reality."
Do you think the contrary statement of exactly what I said is in more in accord with your belief.?
As far as their objectives being perfectly rational, do you really believe they are? I do not think so.
Lastly you wrote:
"over time have a significant chance of succeeding, given the craven dhimmitude that afflicts the West."
Not only do I agree with you on this assessment as most of JW participants also do, but I applaud your repeatedly demonstrated super-excellent use of English and how well you sometomes state things, bravo.
Re: Thomas_h
"I am glad to see you and I are sharing the same understanding of the matter."

Now now Cornelius I hope I'm not called out after class, not only am I a skinny little dude but two against one , that's not fair!!
JW will not be as much fun not seeing heavyweight hesperado duking it out with you anymore, chucks.

It is this kind of behavior by Muslims among many other such acts of brutality, which is responsible for a justified view that Islam is a barbaric ideology.

Pakistan: Muslims burn Christian man as policeman rapes his wife by Ahmar Mustikhan | March 23, 2010 at 12:18 pm

Washington, D.C. (March 23, 2010)– Travesty of justice does not fit the description of the events. This is simple barbarism.

International Christian Concern (ICC) has learned that a Christian man, Arshed Masih, died yesterday after Muslims burned him alive for refusing to recant his faith. Additionally, a Muslim policeman raped Masih’s wife, Martha.

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/pakistan-muslims-burn-christian-man-policeman-rapes-his-wife
-----------------------------
Kenyan Christians abducted, tortured and raped by Muslims

Six Christian missionaries have been found alive but traumatised after suffering three days of unimaginable torture in Kenya.

http://eye-on-the-world.blogspot.com/2010/09/kenyan-christians-abducted-tortured-and.html

i am tired of the side ways threats from that piece of shit imam in new york.bring it on assholes you will see real americans stand up and put our boots right up your barbaric inhunane asses.i have seen the the barbaric acts that these devils commit in the name of islam.do not ever try to tellme muslims want to live as one in america,get your heads out of your asses you bleeding hart liberals.why dont you move to afganistan so how it goes for you.write me and let me know how peaceful life is going for you.oh wait you wont be able to because you will have peaceful head cut off by these animals wake and look around you!

Has the global jihad taken over half of the world so far? When did the world become the Muslim world and the West? When did the majority of Muslims become the one group in the entire world that needs to be protected? The ideology of Islam has incited genocide in many countries and the plunder and abuse and killing of non-Muslims in all Muslims countries and in those countries wherein jihadists are active. Why are the aggressors demanding protection from the victims? And, why is the world tolerating such evil?