| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
In "Paving the way for 'soft jihad,'" Barbara Kay ably explains the significance of recent Islamic advances against free speech -- which are part of what I call the stealth jihad. From the National Post, July 22:
When Ibn Warraq’s secularist manifesto Why I Am Not a Muslim was released in 1995, a fellow dissident was disappointed to learn the ayatollahs hadn’t called for the author’s head: “It’s such a damn good book, I don’t understand why you haven’t had a fatwa.”Ayatollah-prescribed fatwas are so pre-9/11. Nowadays, as liberal elites rush prophylactically to ward off charges of tolerating “Islamophobia,” the fatwas (in all but name) against damn good books like Mark Steyn’s America Alone aren’t bruited in mosques; they issue forth from human rights commissioners.
An unintended but all-too-predictable danger inherent in the prosecution of Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn (the latter via Maclean’s magazine) was the encouraging message it would send to more fevered imaginations. As reported on his blog on Monday morning, Ezra Levant has received an anonymous e-mail death threat: “Ezra, you will be killed by my hands.”
Although this is doubtless a hollow menace (real killers rarely serve notice), the sender’s wish to sow fear in Levant, and by extension all journalists, is merely a cruder version of the impulse behind the human rights complaints.
Many Canadians believe the nation’s human rights commissions (HRCs) are motivated by high ideals and good intentions. But in conspiring to silence what a handful of Muslims deem “hate speech,” these good intentions are paving the way for the hell of global “soft jihad.”
The soft jihad is gradualistic and law-abiding, but no less desirous of Islamic domination of the West than its violent counterpart. Soft jihad strategy exploits liberal discourse and weaknesses in our legal system to induce guilt about a largely mythical “Islamophobia.”
The list of complaint-triggering speech offences is long in all Western countries, and ranges from the trivial to the politically existential: A decoration on a lid of ice cream distributed by Burger King offends because it resembles Allah in Arabic script; Fox Entertainment’s drama 24 portrays South Americans, Bosnians, Germans and Muslims as terrorists, but only Muslims complain; a Turkish lawyer sues an Italian soccer team because the red cross on their jerseys reminds him of the Crusades.
More alarmingly, this spring a report from the 57-nation strong Organization of the Islamic Conference announced that leaders of Muslim nations “are considering legal action against those that slight our religion or its sacred symbols.” This offensive has the potential to rival the frighteningly successful phenomenon of “libel tourism,” in which Muslim litigants seek out friendly jurisdictions for launching HRC-type fatwas against writers critical of Islamic practices like shariah, or even certifiably Islam-related terrorism.
The most recent case involves the book Funding Evil by Rachel Ehrenfeld, director of the American Center for Democracy and a pioneer investigator of the financial networks that fund terrorism. She has irrefutably proven many networks are Saudi-based. [...]
It is therefore no exaggeration to say that Levant and Steyn are fighting for the defining ideal of Western civilization which, once lost, would spell the beginning of the end of all our other freedoms.
Posted by Robert at July 22, 2008 6:16 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
This is what it boils down too right? Islamic populace=death to freedome of expression and thought. Seems like a fine choice.
Posted by: ethoman![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 22, 2008 6:52 PM
If we do not end Muslim immigration, eventaully we will lose. As they will never stop pushing.
Posted by: Exposing Islam at July 22, 2008 7:15 PM
Heaven help us if this continues:
Another wakademic on the 'reach-out' train to nowhere:
"US-sponsored Web sites need to acknowledge that radicalism remains highly appealing — thanks in part to the Bush administration — and, unthinkable as it may sound, we'd be well advised to manifest greater tolerance for radical Muslims."
Where do they breed these A-soles?
"Our ham-fisted policies, centering on a reckless war of choice and forced democratization...."
Its all our fault. And BUSH! Not a word about the global jihad and the Islamic obligation to conquer the world for Islam:
http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-08/st_essay
at July 22, 2008 8:27 PM
Just in case any of you hasn't read Mark Steyn's 'America Alone', it's required reading for any serious anti-Jihadist. He absolutely demolishes the multicultural paradigm....and does it with wit and verve.
Posted by: Cornelius at July 22, 2008 9:51 PM
This is a brilliant piece, and should be run on the editorial pages.
I can picture us looking back on this in 20-30 years and saying "yep, I knew at the time it was written that it was correct".
Posted by: gymgal at July 22, 2008 10:06 PM
At first the following comment (from a reader of that article) struck me as harsh, but the sentiment is worth keeping in mind.
*******************
by IainGFoulds Jul 22 2008 5:24 PM
Mr. Levant and Steyn are in their present situation because they use their public platform to speak Against things.
... The foundations of our civilisation will be restored when we use the opportunity of our lives to speak For the values of western culture... untouchable by any HRCs.
*******************
at July 22, 2008 10:39 PM
When will people wake up and see what is happening in the multicultural societies forced on us by social engineering elites? How much longer must we tolerate millions of third world immigrants who brazenly come to our country and immediately start suing us and demanding that we change our laws and customs to accomodate their cultures?
The indigenous citizens of America have fewer rights and privileges than people who are members of minority groups, many of whom are recent immigrants. We didn't ask these people to come here; they came voluntarily. Muslims are the most arrogant and whine the loudest, lie and demand the most. They know how to work our system better than we do and they start exploiting it the moment they arrive. Multiculturalism has proven a dismal failure not only in history, but in the present.
I wonder why so many of history's failed experiments must be repeated every few decades or centuries by putative intellectuals who know what is best for the common folk. Why are horrible ideas so appealing to the privileged elites, who would never subject themselves or their families to the dystopias they design for the rest of us?
Their inimical schemes and utopian projects do nothing but exacerbate the atomosphere and conditions they are determined to eliminate. They create more strife, discord, and dissatisfaction in their ceaseless efforts to force disparate people to coexist in close proximity and they never, never learn from their stupid mistakes.
at July 23, 2008 1:19 AM
Succinct and dead-on as always Susan.
Posted by: Cornelius at July 23, 2008 6:11 AM
Especially the BC Human Rights Commission is such a laughing stock kangaroo court.
But these 'judge' aholes are so dangerous as well when one thinks of the power they have and which they have exercised - e.g. their ruling that an Alberta Christian preacher must change his sermons and suffer close watching and sanctions for all his public statements against homosexuality - financial penalties as well.
Bunk bunk bunk bunk.
The most stupid and/or wrongminded judges in the land. If one sees one, give them the finger.
Fool politicians bear close watching - one has to be amazed at the amount of crap that they can legislate - to screw you and me out of our freedom.
Posted by: dgene at July 23, 2008 6:26 AM
Mark Steyn's book "America Alone" is a must read. He vividly describes what we really are up against with the Muslims. The Muslims wish Mark would shut up.
Posted by: Spot on at July 23, 2008 8:46 AM
Ezra Levant is fighting the speech gestapo and for discussing their antics and sleezy methods, he now has 4 suits against him. That's what you get for defending western values these days.
http://ezralevant.com/2008/07/chrc-lawyer-threatens-me-with.html
The real hidden danger here, is all of this goes to reveal what their other motives are. They want the internet censored.
Posted by: Sounder at July 23, 2008 9:30 AM
I read Mark Steyn's "America Alone" last year and it is a worthy wake up call. If I had the power I'd force-feed it to every person above the age of 21 in America. That he can be prosecuted in Canada for writing it is devastating news. Does Canada have a Canadian Civil Liberties Union ?
Posted by: Nashville Gene at July 23, 2008 11:01 AM
I have read Steyn's book. He has simply presented facts backed up by data. For exposing the agenda of Islam, he has earned the ire of Muslims. I suggest we learn from Muslims and form a worldwide Infidel Alliance. I would be the first to become a paid member. From the money raised, the Infidel Alliance should use the Human Rights Commissions and courts to call for a ban on the Koran for its incitement to violence and bad mouthing of infidels.
Posted by: IndianTiger at July 23, 2008 2:04 PM
The situation is obviously complicated by the fact that most Muslims by far are not interested in either hard or soft jihad, and by now everybody in the Western world knows some of them.
The daily impression that Muslims aren't very different from ourselves conflates with our extreme self-consciousness about the intolerances of our past to produce a disastrously weak-kneed willingness to listen to worthless propaganda about "Islamophobia" and to look the other way as our own well meant conventions and channels for the protection of rights are used cynically and exploitively for an end we refuse to recognize.
Only the informed are aware of Islam's potential for encroachment aimed at special status and then dominance. Most educated people are too busy earning a living to read jihadwatch or any of its related literature.
On the other hand, HRC's are supposed to be staffed by experts, aren't they?
Posted by: Novalis at July 23, 2008 5:58 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)