Meanwhile, Black Agenda Report - a website run by haters of Caucasians - attacks the save Darfur campaigners (who happen to include many black activists, including Danny Glover).

Clearly, "islamophobic," "corporatist," "zionist,"
are smears, calculated to defend atrocities commited by the Leftislamo axis. See for yourself,
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=453&Itemid=1

Posted by: supercargo at December 4, 2007 7:52 AM

They wont invite you Robert. They want a LGF like echo chamber.

Posted by: Elric66 at December 4, 2007 7:53 AM

"1. Focus their indignation on Muslims committing violent acts in the name of Islam, not on non-Muslims reporting on those acts.
2. Renounce definitively not just "terrorism," but any intention to replace the U.S. Constitution (or the constitutions of any non-Muslim state) with Sharia even by peaceful means.
3. Teach Muslims the imperative of coexisting peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis.
4. Begin comprehensive international programs in mosques all over the world to teach against the ideas of violent jihad and Islamic supremacism.
5. Actively work with Western law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists within Western Muslim communities."

...i am printing a copy to carry around...just in case i run into any Muslim apologists or other misinformed individuals....

....of course, the apologists will not agree....

....some people are destined to die a slow death...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at December 4, 2007 7:56 AM

I won't go unless my favorite Bunglawala wussie goes.

Lately he seems to have trouble telling left and right wing 'Islamophobes' apart, but hell, who are we to judge? In his latest blog entry he takes you on, Mr. Spencer.

Would be nice if we would get this Bungla-meneken to refute your Islamophobic lies, hatred and ignorance, don't you think, Mr. Spemcer? For a solid, dyed in the wool Muhammedan nothing should be easier than than refuting some lowly infidel.

Now, now what??

After all, its us infidel sons of apes and swine who don't even know shiite from sunni side up, isn't it?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at December 4, 2007 7:58 AM

Spencer,
It would be a good ideia if you and other anti-jihad writters made a conference with the title "The Islamic Christophobia, Judeophobia and Hinduphobia".

oh, and invite Tariq and Karen.

Posted by: Crusader at December 4, 2007 8:06 AM

divert attention from jihad terror activity.

One hopes they will have plenty of protection. Just in case that 'tiny minority' gets upset about their diversion.

Osama seemed "upset" that his nine-eleven accomplishment has been hijacked. In his last tape he pointed out that he alone was responsible for the towers.

Posted by: Aunt Bea at December 4, 2007 8:20 AM

As a good will gesture, we could send them a truckload of teddy bears with the name "Mohammed" embroidered on them.

Nothing like a personal gift to show you care.

Posted by: tanstaafl at December 4, 2007 8:29 AM

"the participants will no doubt enjoy the two days in Constantinople"

I doubt very much that the participants will see much of Constantinople at all. All they will likely see is Istanbul.

Posted by: Chatillon at December 4, 2007 8:33 AM

Sure to be a colossal waste of valueable oxygen.

Honestly, with all the documentation provided here at JW/DW on these rogues, their agenda is apparent, but no one seems to care.

Posted by: awake at December 4, 2007 8:43 AM

"It's a big party! "

It's "The Unbearable Kitschness of Islam"

Posted by: Malinois at December 4, 2007 8:50 AM

awake,

No one with any real influence cares.

Posted by: Elric66 at December 4, 2007 8:50 AM

I hope we get some good photos of Karen in her hijab. What were they thinking, to invite a woman, anyway?

Oh, wait. She's their proof of the equality of women in Islam. I wonder who her other half is.

Posted by: Abscedere at December 4, 2007 9:04 AM

"I doubt very much that the participants will see much of Constantinople at all. All they will likely see is Istanbul."
Posted by: Chatillon

And all they hear will be Islambull.

Posted by: ebonystone at December 4, 2007 9:08 AM

Perhaps these esteemed experts can convince the muslim crusaders (they invented the tactic) to give Constantinople back to the christians.....

I'm not holding my breath though...

Posted by: n.a. palm at December 4, 2007 9:44 AM

Another imitation of the Star Wars Bar scene

Posted by: Balrog at December 4, 2007 10:12 AM

Oh hell, somebody had to post this: Istanbul

Posted by: USBeast at December 4, 2007 10:21 AM

Is GWB going to be the keynote speaker this year?

Posted by: special_guest at December 4, 2007 10:28 AM

#6. Hold international conferences' and invite all thed top clerics from around the world to revise and remove all surahs in the Qu'ran and syrahs in the hadiths that speak to any violence against non Muslims,against apostates,against intolerance ,against the treatment of women.

Posted by: Mackie at December 4, 2007 10:35 AM

"If Muslims do those five things, voila! 'Islamophobia' will vanish."

I guess we could call these five things "The Five New Pillars of Islam".

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at December 4, 2007 10:38 AM

Wow, what a Gathering of Fools.

Posted by: darcy at December 4, 2007 10:44 AM

What a sad commentary on Islam, that they're going to meet in Constantinople, which Muslims stole from the Christians through conquest, scratch their heads, and ask why people are afraid of Muslims!

I agree with n.a. palm, who posted on December 4, 2007 at 9:44 AM, that giving back Constantinople to the Christians would go a long way to eliminating 'Islamophobia', because it would show the non-Muslim world that Muslims really are serious about getting along with the rest of the world.

At the very least, change the name of the city back to Constantinople, and make it a persecution-free zone for Christians. In other words, if you're within the city limits of Constantinople, you can do all the Christian things, such as try to convert Muslims. And Muslims who convert to Christianity could live there without any fear of retribution.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at December 4, 2007 10:47 AM

And all they hear will be Islambull.

Posted by: ebonystone at December 4, 2007 9:08 AM

LOL, good one! How true...my God the bullsh** will be piling up in their meeting rooms!

Posted by: darcy at December 4, 2007 10:52 AM

What are you? Some kind of Islamophobe?

Don't hold your breath...a leopard never changes it's spots, but sometimes they can hide them.
A leopard without his spots is still a dangerous animal with tooth and claw.
1-5 would leave the idiot in full possession of his idiocy. The symptoms are temporarily cured, but the disease rages on. Unless the festering sore at the root of Islamophobia is removed, 1-5 will just be another song and dance routine, by leopards hiding their spots.
Islamophobia cannot vanish, but it can be transfered. A real Islamophobe knows that Islam is slicker than than a greased pig. Look how many greasy, and spotless, tooth and claw people, will appear at this conference, and try to erase Islamophobia. Not one of these oiled up participants are going to go for 1-5, or even bring it up.
They also won't bring up the festering root, The Quran and Traditions of Mohammad, instead, they will do what they always do to keep Islamophobia energized, blame the Islamophobes for all their troubles...I think they should invite Spencer to explain Islamophobia to them...If they don't want him, I would be happy to go to Istanbul, at their expense, and explain it to them. I have a whole lot of 'other' explanations I could give them at the same time.
I wear my Islamophobia like a badge, I won't give it up, it is what separates me from them. It no longer means what the spotless think it means.
It is now the flag of Dar al-harb. It is the battle cry of Islamophobic warriors. Lets see them erase that...

Posted by: duh_swami at December 4, 2007 10:54 AM

The 5 step program has a problems, it requires self monitoring and self control. I requires Muslims of conscious to be willing to speak out in judgment on the actions of their Muslim brothers. That may be something that will take real courage, as there may be other members of the Mosque with an agenda that is at complete cross purposes. Add that to Saudi financed, Imam(s) staffing the Mosque, and it may take some degree of courage to judge others on the strength of your convictions and to face the consequences of your actions.

It is the same problem that certain communities are rife with gang crime and violence and some are not. If the local community has the strength of their convictions and are willing to take action against the gang(s), the gang will either die off or go elsewhere. The gangs rely on inaction of the local community to prosper. The communities that are intimidated and not willing to take action, are often overrun and by sacrifice their youth to the gang. That is a high price, but the price increases geometrically the longer the gang is tolerated.

Posted by: GrimReaperxxx at December 4, 2007 11:11 AM

Totally harmless, they are going to say how awful those who "slander" Islam are and go home again. Nothing to see but a waste of intellect.

Posted by: DrWolffenstein at December 4, 2007 11:24 AM

Congratulations Mr. Spencer. I believe you have just formulated the five pillars of Moderate Islam.

Unfortunately innovation is a grave sin to Islamic teaching, but I think I'll start using your five pillars in my efforts as well (if you don't mind). Many people ask 'how can you change it?' well... here is the 80% of the 80/20 solution to be sure.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at December 4, 2007 11:43 AM

Conferences. Political conferences. Easy definition: a gathering of persons to discuss meaningless topics about worthless goals instead of dealing with issues for which said conference was initiated.

Posted by: Kevin at December 4, 2007 11:59 AM

They better have tight security-rumor has it some suicidal Hare Krishna bombers are going to hit the place.

Or was it those ultra violent Buddhists again?

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at December 4, 2007 12:00 PM

Here's a letter I just sent to my local newspaper:

It is extremely ironic that an 'Islamophobia' conference should be held in Istanbul. Istanbul used to be called Constantinople. The Muslim Turks took Constantinople in 1453 after about 800 years of trying. This was a part of the Muslim Jihad world conquest which began in the 7th Century, and which is still going on today.

The reason non-Muslims don't trust Muslims is because the worldwide Jihad is still going on today all over the world, and anytime non-Muslims ask reasonable questions about it, they get accused of 'Islamophobia'.

Having an 'Islamophobia' conference in the former capital of the Christian world, in a city which was taken by force by Muslim Turks (and no apology was ever issued), is like rubbing salt in a wound.

I have a suggestion for reducing the amount of 'Islamophobia': rename Istanbul to Constantinople; make it a persecution-free zone for Christians, and for Muslims who want to convert to Christianity; and issue an apology for taking Constantinople in the first place.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at December 4, 2007 12:01 PM

I reject on its face the systemic claims of 'Islamphobia' by Muslims, their apolgists, and their servile whitewashers such as Karen Armstrong and John Esposito.

It took some time for the fact to penetrate for me that to many of the world's practicing Muslims, the sheer resistance to Islam by so-called 'infidels', or any impedence in 'infidel' lands to the triumphal spread of Islam is also considered by them to be 'Islamophobia'. As such, whereas we've been slavishly trained in our post civil rights society to imagine, as Robert does above, that Muslim claims of "attacks" on their person or their 'religion' must translate into genuine physical attacks, the Muslims may and do mean something else altogether. Indeed, documented cases of actual attacks on Muslims are exceedingly rare - especially given the behavior of this community in the post 9/11 era. Muslims have continued to harbor and conceal terrorists, they've done little to nothing to tamp down the extremist rhetoric in their mosques, and they've done everything to fight, degrade, and subvert all efforts on the part of the government to crack down on the jihad activities of their murderous brethren. So "Islamophobic" attacks on Muslims have been proven to be demonstrably and consistently overstated and wildly exaggerated by Muslims since 9/11, at least as 'infidels' define it.

So what does all of this mean?

It means that claims of "Islamophobia" by Muslims is rarely meant as a claim of victimhood as we would ever define it. Rather, such claims by Muslims should be viewed as declarations by them of their triumphal intentions to dominate us, and their resulting frustrations at our resisting their jihad advances. Whereas we're programmed to assume such claims convey victimhood, Muslims are so brainwashed to believe that Islam must triumph, that it's "Islam Uber Alles" or else war, that any repudiation of their supremacist schemes proves dissonant to such an extreme extent, that the Muslim actually believes he is being attacked, or construes that Islam itself is being attacked and resisted. "Islamophobia" then becomes an expression of extreme frustration and rage - certainly not victimhood in any way we're familiar with in the West. It then can be interpreted as an ominous sign of extremely frustrated supremacist intent. That is very ominous.

Posted by: jsla at December 4, 2007 12:04 PM

This Islamist William Baker looks like the same Nazi William Baker from photos. Assuming it is, there is no way at this point the Islamist organization could claim they don't know this. Indeed, they know and they fully embrace the Nazi antisemetism and its attendent fascism. They act as Islamofascists, even in the moment of trying to deny it. Just months ago we should remember, David Duke was welcomed to Iran by Amadinejad at the Holocaust denial conference. Duke was also welcomed by the Syrian government and given official escort.

Compare photos of Baker:

http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/577

http://www.islamophobiaconference.org/index.php?page=katilimcilar

Posted by: Max Publius at December 4, 2007 12:05 PM

The intent of this confab is to gear up for the "UN Conference on Xenophobia and Racism" to be held in 2009. At the first one, held in Durban, South Africa mere days before the 9/11 atrocity, Palestinians raged and seethed and turned the entire event into a condemnation of Israel. The strategy will be repeated, only this time with an eye toward criminalizing criticism, analysis or mockery of Islam as "Islamophobia" and "hate speech."

"If you want me to come to Constantinople and explain this in more depth, just contact me at director@jihadwatch.org."

You should live so long!

Posted by: Papa Whiskey at December 4, 2007 12:06 PM

Take a look at the conference program. "Muslim as Victim" seems to be the theme and all the proceedings are designed to bolster this sense of victimhood. Why, even the human rights of Muslim women, threatened throughout the world by Islamophobia, will be discussed. Do you think that basic human rights abuses such as cloistering, discrimination, flogging, stoning, and deprivation of basic freedoms that Muslim women experience in the Islamic world will be bemoaned too? Think again.

Posted by: Jen at December 4, 2007 12:14 PM

Those of you who see this as a cynical exercise have got it all wrong.

It is testament to the intellectual bankruptcy and utter lack of self-criticism in Islam that tells me these people will gather in earnest inquiry. This is worse than an ambulance chasers convention in that they actually believe the b.s. they are peddling.

Posted by: JohnAdams at December 4, 2007 12:24 PM

From Spencer's recent Human Events article:

The insightful Flemish journalist Paul Belien observed last year, when Muslims were rioting over the Pope’s quoting the 600-year-old words of an obscure emperor: “If a person is incapable of tolerating criticism, including mild criticism, and especially if he perceives criticism where there is none, this is often a sign of this person’s deep psychological insecurity. Rude aggression and wild rage, too, are usually not the normal behaviour of a self-confident person, but rather of someone who knows that he will lose an argument unless he can bully others into silence….It looks as if Muslims cannot cope with an open society and the modern globalized world.”

Bingo.

Posted by: JohnAdams at December 4, 2007 12:43 PM

Thanks to Chatillon, n. a. palm and PersonOfTheBook for pointing out the irony of holding this whitewashing of Islam conference in Istanbul/Constantinople/Byzantium. Couldn't hold it in Mecca, though, with extra brown-nosing dhimmis like Armstrong and Esposito showing up, because however subservient a dhimmi might be he or she still can't step foot in Mecca, demonstrative once again of the intolerance of a religion that folks attending this stupid conference in Istanbul will ignore while they castigate those of us in the West for intolerance. It's at times like these that it's hard not to conculde that much of the world is mad.

Posted by: Wellington at December 4, 2007 1:07 PM

Islamophobia - propaganda term invented by Infidelphobians.

Posted by: Jimmy Bones at December 4, 2007 1:27 PM

Ramadan was here at SOAS earlier this week. I had a chance to go--would've only cost me 10 pounds.

...I spent the money on Guinness instead.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 4, 2007 1:41 PM

I like that calling Istanbul Constantinople.We all should start calling Istanbul Constantinople.Using names,words and vocabulary to reconquer.

Posted by: RED at December 4, 2007 1:41 PM

What a galere.

There is "Lord" Ahmed, fresh from Khartoum, no doubt expecting to be basking in gratitude from the non-Muslims of Great Britain, for though Al-Bashir had decided to free Gibbons before Ahmed and his travelling companion (a Muslim woman, not married to Lord Ahmed, whom some fellow Believer should not forget to punish for her crime) should be punished by some fellow Believer for that crime.

There is the hysterical, ex-nun Karen Armstrong, who needs no, and who believes that Muhammad's essential function was that of Peacemaker, and who apparently still has not figured out that she really must re-read the Qur'an, and then find out all about the Hadith (and how their "authenticity" has been ranked to Muslim satisfaciton), and the Sira -- for Aisha, the Khaybar Oasis, the decaptitation of the Banu Qurayza, the murders of Abu Akaf and Asma bint Marwan are just of the few of the things that Armstrong forgot to mention, much less to comprehend, in her guide to nothing and nowhere, "Islam."

There is the crazed antisemite Norman Finkelstein, for whose parents -- Holocaust survivors -- we must feel sorry, about whom nothing more need be said except that at such gatherings one compleely lunatic Jewish person is de rigueur, and apparently Israel Shamir was otherwise occupied.

There is Tariq Ramadan, about whom see "Frere Tariq," a book-length study of his soft-voice taqiyya (but listen for the hiss underneath at all), determined to make sure that the confusion and fog of war continue while Muslims make themselves as comfortable as posssible in the Lands of the Infidels, settling in for the long haul, and the demographic conquest that, if nothing is done, is assured. It is Tariq Ramadan who promises a new Islam, a "European Islam" that he carefully never defines, never explains what that "European Islam's" canonical texts will look like, or how they will differ, those texts and then those tenets of Islam, from the Islam we have all seen, and grown correctly to fear, in Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan, indeed everywhere in the Muslim lands, among all those Muslims who take their Islam seriously -- which is to say, almost all of them, though they are very good at finding westernized, pluasible, smooth-talking representatives to fan out to the capitals of the West to deny, obfuscate, and sometimes, in their own persons, to offer a false view (think of jolly Prince Bandar, offering the port and cigars, joking with everyone from James Baker to Colin Powell about "a little corruption" in Saudi Arabia, implying that they were all men of the world, weren't they, and besides, Saudi Arabia had its ruling class, and America had its ruling class as well -- and Islam never came up, the primitive belief-system of the Al-Saud,and of the country they named after themselves, was overlooked, and still is being overlooked, in dealings with Saudi Arabia.

There is John Esposito who no longer disguises, even in the name of his fiefdom, with his henchman John Voll and others of that unseemly ilk, the Arab money that he takes in such quantites. Years ago, toiling in the humble vineyards of Holy Cross, and merely an apologist for Islam, not the Big Entrepreneur he has become today, Esposito found his first sugar daddy in a rich Lebanese contractor, an islamochristian, and now has progressed to the stage of cutting out the islamochristian middleman and going directly to the Saudis, and has renamed his institute after the one with the facial tic and the big-hearted -- what he wouldn't do to protect the image of Islam -- wallet. Lean, mean, jogging (I can see him lapping the hippodrome, as he skips some morning -- or is it the afternoon -- session? Or perhaps he'll find a track right by the Bosporus, but they're not being put up in the Ciragan Palace, you know, and perhaps security will prevent his usual job. That's okay for John--there's the hotel's Western-style exercise room. He can't miss his exercise, even if he does not have time to find out, doesn't want to find out, what all the Western scholars of Islam before the Great Inhibtion set in,

What a galere.

There is "Lord" Ahmed, fresh from Khartoum, no doubt expecting to be basking in gratitude from the non-Muslims of Great Britain, for though Al-Bashir had decided to free Gibbons before Ahmed and his travelling companion (a Muslim woman, not married to Lord Ahmed, whom some fellow Believer should not forget to punish for her crime) should be punished by some fellow Believer for that crime.

There is the hysterical ex-nun Karen Armstrong, who needs no, and who believes that Muhammad's essential function was that of Peacemaker, and who apparently still has not figured out that she really must re-read the Qur'an, and then find out all about the Hadith (and how their "authenticity" has been ranked to Muslim satisfaciton), and the Sira -- for Aisha, the Khaybar Oasis, the decapititation of the Banu Qurayza, the murders of Abu Akaf and Asma bint Marwan are just of the few of the things that Armstrong forgot to mention, much less to comprehend, in her guide to nothing and nowhere, "Islam."

There is the crazed antisemite Norman Finkelstein, for whose parents -- Holocaust survivors -- we must feel sorry, about whom nothing more need be said except that at such gatherings one compleely lunatic Jewish person is de rigueur, and apparently Israel Shamir was otherwise occupied.

There is Tariq Ramadan, about whom see "Frere Tariq," a book-length study of his soft-voice taqiyya (but listen for the hiss underneath at all), determined to make sure that the confusion and fog of war continue while Muslims make themselves as comfortable as posssible in the Lands of the Infidels, settling in for the long haul, and the demographic conquest that, if nothing is done, is assured. It is Tariq Ramadan who promises a new Islam, a "European Islam" that he carefully never defines, never explains what that "European Islam's" canonical texts will look like, or how they will differ, those texts and then those tenets of Islam, from the Islam we have all seen, and grown correctly to fear, in Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan, indeed everywhere in the Muslim lands, among all those Muslims who take their Islam seriously -- which is to say, almost all of them, though they are very good at finding westernized, pluasible, smooth-talking representatives to fan out to the capitals of the West to deny, obfuscate, and sometimes, in their own persons, to offer a false view (think of jolly Prince Bandar, offering the port and cigars, joking with everyone from James Baker to Colin Powell about "a little corruption" in Saudi Arabia, implying that they were all men of the world, weren't they, and besides, Saudi Arabia had its ruling class, and America had its ruling class as well -- and Islam never came up, the primitive belief-system of the Al-Saud,and of the country they named after themselves, was overlooked, and still is being overlooked, in dealings with Saudi Arabia.

There is John Esposito who no longer disguises, even in the name of his fiefdom, with his henchman John Voll and others of that unseemly ilk, the Arab money that he takes in such quantites. Years ago, toiling in the humble vineyards of Holy Cross, and merely an apologist for Islam, not the Big Entrepreneur he has become today, Esposito found his first sugar daddy in a rich Lebanese contractor, an islamochristian, and now has progressed to the stage of cutting out the islamochristian middleman and going directly to the Saudis, and has renamed his institute after the one with the facial tic and the big-hearted -- what he wouldn't do to protect the image of Islam -- wallet. Lean, mean, jogging (I can see him lapping the hippodrome, as he skips some morning -- or is it the afternoon -- session? Or perhaps he'll find a track right by the Bosporus, but they're not being put up in the Ciragan Palace, you know, and perhaps security will prevent his usual jog. Esposito will quickly find his way to the hotel’s exercise room. It means a lot to him. It will in fact the first thing he does on being shown to his suite, after he checks to see what “amenities” are laid out for him in his suite’s bathroom. Even if he does not have time to read Snouck Hurgrponje or Henri Lammens, or several dozen other Western scholars of Islam who studied and wrote before the Great Inhibition set in, he has time for his daily exercise and ablutions. Why study Islam any more at this point? He knows what he has to say, and how he has to say it. It’s the same thing, over and over again. Oh, it’s true that he had to put that little word “jihad” into a new, post-9/11 edition of his “Islamic Holy War: Myth or Reality?” because he had mentioned it, in passing, only once in the first edition. But otherwise, it’s the mixture as before, for the Apologist By Appointment To The Court Of The Guardians Of The Two Noble Sanctuaries.

They do have their work cut out for them, don’t they? What with the condemning to death of Abdul Rahman in Afghanistan, the man who attempted to convert to Christianity, and the killings not of mere Jews or Christians (in the West we can ignore that more readily) but of Buddhists in southern Thailand, and the blowing-up of the Bamiyan Buddhas raises the whole matter of non-Muslim statuary and other art under Islam – where did it all go, the Greco-Bactrian artifacts of Afghanistan, and the Buddhist stupas all over Central Asia, and the ancient libraries of Mandean manuscripts burned up by Muslims in “liberated” Iraq, and the contents of those khutbas now brought to our attention by the marvelous monitoring and translation servides of MEMRI, which monitoring and translation services are making Muslim Arabs extremely nervous – for now we Infidels can eavesdrop on them as we never could before.

Most of the conference participants are Turks, and the conference organizers must be disappointed that the only non-Turks who would show up were people of the distinctly low Armstrong-Finkelstein-Esposito level, exhibiting various predictable signs of mediocrity or madness or cupidity. The most famous of the Turks who is announced as coming is the present Prime Minister of Turkey.Recip Erdogan. It was Erdogan who famously said, that “the minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our barracks.” The French scholar of Islam, Anne-Marie Delcambre, found the phrase so telling that she chose to end her useful short study, “L’Islam des interdits,’ with that quote from Erdogan, that demonstrates that mosques are not peaceful places of contemplation and private worship, but places from which war is made on the Infidels :"Les minarets sont nos baionnettes, les coupoles nos casques et les mosquees nos casernes.” It was Erdogan who never denounced the Turks who described American soldiers as behaving like “Nazis” (Yes, we all remember how the Nazis handed out candy and soccer balls to little Jewish children, don’t we? And how the Nazis also spent a trillion dollars trying to establish the conditions of good government and prosperity, building those schools and hospitals in Jewish areas all over Europe?) and who stood for that vicious movie, with the American soldiers depicted on screen as those same Nazis, aided by a Jewish doctor who harvests organs, for the American market, from innocent Iraqis murdered by those American “Nazi” soldiers. It was Erdogan who in 1974, as Andrew Bostom discovered, directed and played the leading role in Maskomya, a play put on in Turkey in the late 1970s, the very title being an acronym for “Masons-Communists-Yahudi [Jews]”, and full of the usual anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.

Then there is the outwardly respectable – he was chosen to be Secretary-General of the O.I.C. – Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu. He wears a suit and a tie. He is soft-spoken. He considers himself to be an historian of science, of “Islamic” science. Should we find anything objectionable? Well, here is how Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu described the status of dhimmi endured by Christians and Jews under Muslim rule (and by Zoroastrians and Hindus, if they were lucky, and treated as honorary members of Ahl al-Kitab, the People of the Book), helpfully explaining, in a recent address to an audience of American Infidels, 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.” So that status of deliberate humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity, for a Muslim mob or a Muslim ruler might decide at any point, for all kinds of reasons (an entire community could be made to suffer if one person did not come through with the Jizyah, or otherwise misbehaved according to the Muslim view) is described by this “historian” as a “privilege” given to a “protected minority.” And what’s more, Ihsanoglu attempts, slyly, to describe these Christians and Jews in Islamic terms, almost claiming them for Islam (just as, according to Muslims, everyone is born a little Muslim, and only falls away from the True Faith later on), describing them as being lucky to be treated as dhimmis which was only possible because, like Muslims, they are “the followers of a prophet to whom a sacred book was revealed” – thus likening Moses and Jesus, quite inaccurately I’m afraid, to Muhammad, receiving that message over 23 turbulent years of scribes and – who knows? – possibly scribal error. I won’t bother to deal with Ekmeleddin Ihsnaoglu’s idea of what constitutes objective history, but he is one more Muslim who has no clear idea of Western standards in such matters. His last book , reviewed by the bizarre Ziauddin Sarkar in the pages of “Nature” (how that was allowed is another story), was basically not a history of Ottoman science, or “Islamic” science, but an attempt 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), explanations which do not satisfy intelligent readers, but raise more disturbing questions about the Muslim mind-set than Dr. Ihsanoglu apparently realizes.

No doubt clever secular Turks, in Turkey and abroad, know many of the names of the people showing up at this dismal event. Perhaps one of them, in the know, will write in to tell us about the others in the same galere, which I would name as the S.S. Naufragium, except that I’ve already used up that name several times, in describing the Bush Administration’s folly in Iraq, and its taking-on-water ship of state.

Posted by: Hugh at December 4, 2007 2:31 PM

Constantinople - Give it back to the Greeks!

Posted by: MP at December 4, 2007 2:51 PM

Y'all have it wrong, you cynical infidels.

I think they are going to get together and provide those of us in The West an example of the sort of behavior they expect from us.

They're going to ask tough questions like:

"What are the root causes of Islamophobia?"

"What have we done to make them so angry?"

"Why do they hate us?"

"Why can't we, like, do a real University?"

I mean, they're not going to hector us to do this sort of thing, if they aren't willing to do it themselves?

Let's cut these folks some slack, and learn from the masters how to take a good hard look at ones own failures and shortcomings and learn from them.

I'm looking forward to the resulting edification.

Posted by: Snippet at December 4, 2007 2:57 PM

What a perfect opprotunity to end this "anti-islamophobia" gathering and, once and for all send a clear message to those who perceive themselves as "victims" that this will NOT be tolerated at any level.........

air burst, with the fuse set at 1500 feet.

"Kuffirs of the world, Unite!"
"Islam, abusing women since 622AD"

Posted by: OregonJake at December 4, 2007 3:13 PM

The first thing they should do is apologize for the genocide of the Armenians, and at least admit that it happened. That would be a baby step in the right direction. Until then nothing they say or do in Constantanople has any meaning.

Posted by: ethoman at December 4, 2007 3:17 PM

I like that calling Istanbul Constantinople.We all should start calling Istanbul Constantinople.Using names,words and vocabulary to reconquer.

Posted by: RED at December 4, 2007 1:41 PM

Ironically, the name was changed to Istanbul by Ataturk, the man who secularized Turkey. In other words, he was actually saving Turkey from radical Islam.

Even still, I prefer the name Constantinople.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at December 4, 2007 3:28 PM

With any luck al-Qaeda will blow up the place with these accessories to jihadist murderers INSIDE of it.

Posted by: pythagoras at December 4, 2007 3:29 PM

Step 6: Stop inventing Islamophobia where it doesn't exist.

See http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3075

The perpatrator wants to be seen as the victim. They want to mobilize all that left wing guilt to energize the useful idiots inside the gates of their enemy. This is a very cost effective strategy. There seems to be no end to the Michael Moores, Rachel Corries, ANSWR, Code Pink and so many other members of morons without borders.

It looks like their answer to Islamofascism Awareness Day.

Posted by: Papa Bear at December 4, 2007 3:42 PM

They will not, of course, even begin to consider Robert Spencer's eminently sensible suggestions.

I hope that every single participant in the conference has a nightmare in which they find themselves inside Hagia Sophia in 1453 - NOT as a triumphant Muslim jihad murderer, but as part of that terrified congregation, women, babies, old people, just after the great bronze doors are smashed open, and the scimitars begin to descend. Then perhaps they might wake up, screaming.

Failing that - at least for the likes of Karen Armstrong and Esposito, I cannot help thinking of a scene in C S Lewis's novel, "That Hideous Strength", the chapter "Banquet at Belbury", in which the figure of Merlin calls down the curse of Nonsense upon a dinner party full of corrupted and treasonous intellectuals: a voice "calling intolerably loud and glad above the riot of nonsense, 'Qui Verbum Dei contempserunt, eis auferetur etiam verbum hominis'" ('They who have despised the word of God, from them also shall the tongue of men be taken away').

Armstrong, Finkelstein, Esposito are already under that curse. I know in which Circle of the Inferno Dante would have placed them - see Canto 18, the 8th circle, Fraud, and in it, the pit of the Flatterers, with s**t pouring from their mouths.

The more I see of the Muslim trolls on this site, or their more thoroughly convinced apologists, the more I am reminded of chapter ten of another C S Lewis novel, Voyage to Venus, in which the main character is forced to spend time with what he calls the Un-Man, a person possessed of a devil.

I quote: "Ransom soon perceived that it [the evil spirit] REGARDED INTELLIGENCE SIMPLY AND SOLELY AS A WEAPON, which it had no more wish to employ in its off-duty hours than a soldier has to do bayonet practice when he is on leave. THOUGHT WAS FOR IT A DEVICE NECESSARY TO CERTAIN ENDS, BUT THOUGHT IN ITSELF DID NOT INTEREST IT. IT ASSUMED REASON AS EXTERNALLY AND INORGANICALLY AS IT HAD PUT ON WESTON'S BODY ". My emphases added.

It is that creepy sense of arguments being used mechanically, at a remove, as a weapon, of something inhuman or antihuman speaking, that I get from the Muslims who pop up on the comments floor, or whose speeches have featured in the posted articles.

Does anyone else get the same feeling?

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at December 4, 2007 4:22 PM

"a Muslim woman, not married to Lord Ahmed, whom some fellow Believer should not forget to punish for her crime"

Don't give them any ideas.

Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 4, 2007 4:36 PM

Definitely the same William Baker. Details here.

Posted by: Papa Whiskey at December 4, 2007 6:16 PM

Bum link. Try:

http://greenspiece.blogspot.com/2007/12/confab-and-creepo.html

Posted by: Papa Whiskey at December 4, 2007 6:17 PM

For the upcoming conference, the most used word:
Islamophobia

The least used (if at all) word: Islamofascism

Posted by: Xero G at December 4, 2007 6:24 PM

dumbledoresarmy,

Yes, dawning awareness of that spirit animating resurgent Islam's worst manifestations cost me two nights' sleep, and I'm still unsure about how to put on the armament of God in the face of It.

A truly "good," totally comitted Muslim strikes me as the epitome of the Un-Man.

Posted by: John C at December 4, 2007 6:34 PM

Oh, and what carefully concealed Malice, incomprehensible to insular, superficial thinkers!

Posted by: John C at December 4, 2007 6:39 PM

Esposito of Georgetown University reminds me of Harpo. BTW, this is a report of Espoharpo in in Isdarnbull (formerly Constantinople)....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7283622418410245484&q=harpo%2C+horn&total=1&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Posted by: Frank at December 4, 2007 6:57 PM

Up with Islamomisia!

Posted by: John C at December 4, 2007 7:26 PM

Any "religion" that says: kill those who try to leave it is a deathcult not a real religion.

Until Muslims refom that homicidal madness out of their dogmas, they're all demented, and pathetically playing at being sane.

And the true, over-arching tragedy of it all is that millions of ignorant fools in the West play along with these sick idiots.

Until it will be too late.

Posted by: profitsbeard at December 4, 2007 9:05 PM

"a Muslim woman, not married to Lord Ahmed"

Oh, okay. That's got to be the answer to my earlier musing about another woman to "remind" Karen Armstrong of whatever she might forget, in their shared state of intellectual inferiority.

Posted by: Abscedere at December 4, 2007 11:19 PM

I think the phenomenon of non-Muslims like Esposito and Armstrong, who pour a bucket of whitewash over Islam and then examine the results through rose-tinted spectacles, deserve a technical term all of their own.
How about Islamo-psychophants. It would be fun to bandy the term around (although not in the obsessive, reflexive way that Mohammedans talk about Islamophobia).
There could be a website called 'Islamo-psychophancy-watch' and international conferences could be held to look into ways of combating it.

Posted by: wallyUK at December 5, 2007 12:19 AM

"Oh, wait. She's their proof of the equality of women in Islam. I wonder who her other half is."

In the near future the question might be: "I wonder WHERE her 'other half' is ---literally!

Posted by: ElizaDoolittle at December 5, 2007 6:20 PM