Recently in Organization of the Islamic Conference Category

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation is leading a global campaign to intimidate free states into criminalizing criticism of Islam. Considering that Awad's Hamas-linked CAIR leads a relentless campaign of defamation against anyone and everyone who dares to stand up against the jihad and Islamic supremacism, that war against free speech doesn't seem to trouble Awad. Nor, apparently, does appearing in the same forum with the genocide-minded Jew-hater Ahmadinejad. CAIR: A "moderate" "civil rights" organization, says the mainstream media.

In "Savage summit and its 'Islamophobia' problem" at WND, February 11, Pamela Geller unmasks Hamas-linked CAIR yet again:

The Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, took off its mask last week and joined the modern-day caliphate, the 57-government Organization of Islamic Cooperation in Cairo to discuss the No. 1 issue to the Muslim world: “Islamophobia to be major issue discussed at meeting of heads of state.”

Islamophobia: in other words, the imposition of the Shariah. You might think that the leaders from every Muslim country would convene to discuss the brutality of Shariah: the persecution, oppression and slaughter of non-Muslims in Muslim countries and the subjugation of women. You would think that they might look inward – but you’d be wrong. They want more of all that.

Hamas-CAIR Director Nihad Awad’s Facebook page carried this announcement: “CAIR Director to Tweet from OIC Summit in Cairo: Nihad Awad, the national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, will tweet updates (@NihadAwad) from the two-day summit of the 57-member Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Cairo that begins on Wednesday.”

The announcement continued: “At the summit, Awad will meet with heads of state and other foreign dignitaries and will offer input on the growing phenomenon of Islamophobia in the United States and around the world.” Said Awad: “It is critical to understand the damage Islamophobia is causing not only to Muslims, but also to the fabric of Western society, which is based on diversity and inclusion.” Awad also “noted that growing Islamophobia damages relations with the Muslim world, fuels anti-Americanism and is driven by a tiny minority of individual hate-mongers and hate groups.”

In the eyes of OIC officials, no problem in the contemporary world is more urgent than “Islamophobia,” which it calls “a crime against humanity” that the U.N. and the EU must officially outlaw. Even discussing why so much terrorism is carried out in the name of Islam is to be forbidden. The OIC insists, too, that international bodies ban “defamation of religion,” by which it means criticism of anything Islamic. Defamation of Judaism, Christianity, Bahai, Hinduism and even heterodox Muslim sects such as the Ahmadiyya is common within the borders of many OIC countries, a fact the OIC refuses to acknowledge.

While there, Awad can rub elbows with Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad, said Iran’s PressTV “is leading the Iranian delegation to the Cairo summit of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which begins on February 6.”

Read it all.

"Ihsanoglu urged all Muslims to exercise restraint in the face of this incitement. He reiterated the OIC's principled position on developing an international consensus on dealing with a frequency of deliberate acts of incitement, within the framework of the Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18." In other words, don't riot and kill this time, since soon we will prevail upon dhimmi Western governments to outlaw criticism of Islam. And the dhimmi press is already falling into line.

"OIC slams French caricature of Prophet," from Arab News, January 3 (thanks to Lookmann):

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has slammed caricatures of the Prophet (peace be upon him), published in the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, saying it incites hatred and intolerance against Muslims.

OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu expressed concern at the publication of the comic book series on the life of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Ihsanoglu said the publication went against the norms of responsible journalism and was tantamount to abuse of the right to freedom of expression. He added that incitement and advocacy of hatred and intolerance on religious grounds signified by this publication was in contravention of international human rights laws and instruments.

He called on the magazine to abide by the provisions, particularly those in the European Union (EU) context, on incitement to hatred and violence. He urged the authorities in France to take appropriate action against the magazine.

Ihsanoglu urged all Muslims to exercise restraint in the face of this incitement. He reiterated the OIC's principled position on developing an international consensus on dealing with a frequency of deliberate acts of incitement, within the framework of the Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18.

The OIC is anxious to do just that, of course, so that Sharia can spread and the jihad advance unchecked. "Iran Urges OIC to Move to Harness Insult to Islam," from the Fars News Agency, January 1 (thanks to David):

TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran condemned the insults leveled against the prophet of Islam in the US and European movies and magazines, and called on the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to compile a convention to prevent such blasphemous acts.

Speaking to reporters in his weekly press conference in Tehran on Tuesday, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Ramin Mehman-Parast deplored certain western media for promoting and supporting sacrilegious acts against divine sanctities and the prophet of Islam.

"We want those who are behind this move to go on trial and be punished and we expect the OIC to take urgent action to compile a convention to prevent such acts and don't allow these publications to create a rift among divine religions," he underlined.

His remarks came after a number of western movies and cartoons were released in the western media in recent years which insulted the prophet of Islam and Muslims.

In September, French weekly Charlie Hebdo published cartoons of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH). The publication of the offensive cartoons came amid widespread outrage over a US-made film that insulted the prophet of Islam.

The anti-Islam movie drew condemnation from numerous countries, including Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Iran, Yemen, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan, Morocco, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc.

And unfortunately again, a French journal has recently announced its intention to release a number of sacrilegious cartoons against the prophet of Islam on Wednesday.

"Interreligious dialogue" for Islamic supremacists means nothing more or less than spreading Islam. Note also the OIC chief Ihsanoglu's emphasis on the need for the West to abandon the freedom of speech. "Saudi King Opens Religious Tolerance Center in Europe to 'Spread the Message of Islam,'" by Patrick Goodenough for CNS News, November 27 (thanks to Tom):

A new Saudi-funded, Europe-based center for interreligious dialogue will be “a good medium to spread the message of Islam,” says the government-appointed imam of Mecca’s Grand Mosque – a man who has stoked controversy in the past by calling Jews “monkeys and pigs” and Christians “cross worshippers.”

“The formation of this center in the West with King Abdullah’s support gives a strong message that Islam is a religion of dialogue and understanding and not a religion of enmity, fanaticism and violence,” the International Islamic News Agency quoted Sheikh Abdul Rahman al-Sudais as saying.

Sudais was reacting to the launch Monday of the new King Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz International Center for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue (KAICIID) in the Austrian capital, Vienna.

Lending international legitimacy to the Saudi king’s latest religious tolerance initiative, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was among those who attended the opening.

In his remarks, Ban asserted that too many religious leaders have “stoked intolerance, supported extremism and propagated hate” rather than tolerance, adding, “We must all do better in reaching out across boundaries.”

The center’s first-day program included an inaugural symposium, during which the head of the Islamic bloc of nations accused non-Muslims of “Islamophobia” and urged Western governments to enact and enforce laws against it.

“Islamophobia leads to hate crimes and as such, it generates fear, feelings of stigmatization, marginalization, alienation and rejection,” said Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu.

“The net result is heightened anxiety and rising violence. Islamophobia is also an assault on people’s identity and their human dignity.”

According to an OIC statement on his address, Ihsanoglu proposed actions to remedy the situation:

“[T]he West must define hate crimes broadly and address the information deficit as well as enact adequate legislation and implement this legislation effectively. In conjunction with national legislation, they should also implement international commitments and agreed norms.”

The OIC has set up an “observatory” to monitor Islamophobia, which it also defines as a contemporary form or racism.

The observatory’s most recent annual report, released this month, covers incidents including Qur’an burning in Afghanistan and Florida, and the U.S. House Homeland Committee’s hearings on radicalization in the American Muslim community, and the notorious YouTube video denigrating Mohammed....

The scrubbing came after the indefatigable Patrick Poole reported the official's attendance. Clearly they know that the destruction of the freedom of speech is something to hide.

How far are we really from my scenario here?

"State Dept. Official to Attend OIC Meeting Today on Banning ‘Defamation of Islam’ UPDATE: OIC Scrubs Website, Screenshot Added, Cover-Up Begins," by Patrick Poole for PJ Media, November 18 (thanks to Bernadette):

UPDATE: Well, that didn’t last long. Earlier this morning before I posted this item the OIC press release noted that U.S. Consul General in Jeddah Anne Casper would be attending the OIC’s meeting:

The Session will be attended by Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the OIC Secretary General. It will be chaired by Ambassador Ahmad Taib , Director General of the Branch of the Saudi Foreign Ministry, Makkah Al-Mukarrammah region. It will also be attended by Sergey Kuznetsov, Consul General of the Russian Federation and Anne Casper, US Consul General in Jeddah.

But within the past few hours that mention has been scrubbed. The press release I linked to earlier now reads:

The Session will be attended by Prof. Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the OIC Secretary General and members of the Jeddah diplomatic community and other invited guests.

No more mention of Anne Casper attending today’s OIC session on banning “defamation of Islam.” Let the cover-up begin!

Here’s a screenshot of the earlier version noting Casper’s attendance at today’s meeting (click to enlarge):

ORIGINAL POST: After the disaster of trying to blame an obscure YouTube video for the attack on the CIA operation in Benghazi and Obama’s prophecy at the UN that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” Hillary Clinton’s State Department appears to be taking another run at the First Amendment free speech rights of American citizens.

A notice was posted yesterday on the website of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) about a symposium to be held today at the OIC headquarters in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on “Defamation Acts Against Islam.” And one top U.S. State Department official will be in attendance....

Read it all.

This is fine news indeed, especially since he says he is giving up in the face of immovable opposition from the U.S. and Europe. But with so many recent calls for the imposition of Islamic blasphemy laws in the West under the guise of "hate speech" laws, and with many of them coming from Western journalists, we're not quite out of the woods yet in regard to Islamic supremacist assaults upon the freedom of speech.

"West's free speech stand bars blasphemy ban - OIC," by Tom Heneghan for Reuters, October 15 (thanks to David):

(Reuters) - Western opposition has made it impossible for Muslim states to obtain a ban on blasphemy, including anti-Islamic videos and cartoons that have touched off deadly riots, the Islamic world's top diplomat said.

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), said his 57-nation body would not try again for United Nations support to ban insults to religion, but appealed for states to apply hate-speech laws concerning Islam.

"We could not convince them," said the Turkish head of the 57-member organisation which had tried from 1998 until 2011 to get a United Nations-backed ban on blasphemy.

"The European countries don't vote with us, the United States doesn't vote with us."

Western countries see the publication of such images and materials as a matter of free speech....

Ihsanoglu told a conference in Istanbul at the weekend that the OIC had failed to win a ban at the United Nations and would not revive its long diplomatic campaign for one.

Asked about recent media reports that the OIC wanted to resume the campaign for a blasphemy ban, he said: "I never said this and I know this will never happen."...

Ihsanoglu's statement clarified the OIC stand at a time when Muslim religious leaders have stepped up demands for an international blasphemy law and politicians have accused Western states of spreading anti-Muslim hatred under the protection of their free-speech laws.

Starting in 1998, the 57-nation OIC won majorities in U.N. rights bodies and at the U.N. General Assembly every year for non-binding resolutions on "combating defamation of religions" that Western states opposed as potential threats to free speech.

But support for these texts steadily fell to just over 50 percent by 2010, because of strong Western and growing Latin American opposition, and the OIC opted for a weaker resolution against intolerance towards all religions last year.

That more general resolution, drawn up with the United States and the European Union, passed unanimously.

The long dispute highlighted differing views of free speech in Western and Muslim countries. Ihsanoglu said Western states had a "strange understanding" of free speech if it could be abused to hurt and insult others....

Muslim politicians have stepped up their denunciations of Western free speech policies following the video and cartoons lampooning Prophet Mohammad. Muslims consider any criticism of him as highly offensive and beyond free speech protection.

"We cannot accept insults to Islam under the guise of freedom of thought," Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan told the Istanbul conference.

"We Muslims want the same respect shown to Jewish culture, which we support," Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said.

But while editorialists and religious leaders have renewed calls for a worldwide blasphemy ban, few national leaders have actually ended their rhetorical reactions with that demand.

One who did at the United Nations last month was President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan, whose own national blasphemy law has come under increasing criticism at home and abroad as open to widespread abuse against minority Christians.

Ihsanoglu, speaking at the conference on a panel with Pakistani opposition leader Imran Khan, encouraged countries with blasphemy laws to apply against insults to Islam, and then quickly added: "not particularly the one in Pakistan".

Over at FrontPage Magazine today (via RaymondIbrahim.com where links appear), I show how, if Western films and cartoons defame Islam, the Quran itself defames all other religions:

As the Islamic world, in the guise of the 57-member state Organization of Islamic Cooperation, continues to push for the enforcement of "religious defamation" laws in the international arena—theoretically developed to protect all religions from insult, but in reality made for Islam—one great irony is lost, especially on Muslims: if such laws would ban movies and cartoons that defame Islam, they would also, by logical extension, have to ban the religion of Islam itself—the only religion whose core texts actively defame other religions.

To understand this, consider what "defamation" means. Typical dictionary-definitions include "to blacken another's reputation" and "false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel." In Muslim usage, defamation simply means anything that insults or offends Islamic sensibilities.

However, to gain traction among the international community, the OIC maintains that such laws should protect all religions from defamation, not just Islam. Accordingly, the OIC is agreeing that any expression that "slanders" the religious sentiments of others should be banned.

What, then, do we do with Islam's core religious texts—beginning with the Quran itself, which slanders, denigrates and blackens the reputation of other religions? Consider Christianity alone: Quran 5:73 declares that "Infidels are they who say Allah is one of three," a reference to the Christian Trinity; Quran 5:73 says "Infidels are they who say Allah is the Christ, [Jesus] son of Mary"; and Quran 9:30 complains that "the Christians say the Christ is the son of Allah … may Allah's curse be upon them!"

Considering that the word "infidel" (or kafir) is one of Islam's most derogatory terms, what if a Christian book or Western movie appeared declaring that "Infidels are they who say Muhammad is the prophet of God—may God's curse be upon them"? If Muslims would consider that a great defamation against Islam—and they would, with the attendant rioting, murders, etc.—then by the same standard it must be admitted that the Quran defames Christians and Christianity.

Similarly, consider how the Christian Cross, venerated among millions, is depicted—is defamed—in Islam: according to canonical hadiths, when he returns, Jesus supposedly will destroy all crosses; and Muhammad, who never allowed the cross in his presence, ordered someone wearing a cross to "take off that piece of idolatry."

What if Christian books or Western movies declared that the sacred things of Islam—say the Black Stone in the Ka'ba of Mecca—are "idolatry" and that Muhammad himself will return and destroy them? If Muslims would consider that defamation against Islam—and they would, with all the attendant rioting, murders, etc.—then by the same standard it must be admitted that the hadith defames the Christian Cross.

Here is a particularly odious form of defamation against Christian sentiment, especially to the millions of Catholic and Orthodox Christians. According to Islam's most authoritative Quranic exegetes, including the revered Ibn Kathir, Muhammad is in paradise married to and having sex with the Virgin Mary...

Obama spoke about the freedom of speech in his UN address, but he also said: "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." How can the future be cleansed of such people without international laws curbing the freedom of speech, to which the U.S. also signs on?

"World Muslim group demands laws against 'Islamophobia,'” by Stephanie Nebehay for Reuters, September 25 (thanks to David):

GENEVA (Reuters) – The world’s largest Islamic body called on Tuesday for expressions of “Islamophobia” to be curbed by law, just as some countries restrict anti-Semitic speech or Holocaust denial.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the 56 countries that form the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), condemned a video made in the United States that defamed Islam and the Prophet Mohammad, igniting Muslim protests around the world this month.

“Incidents like this clearly demonstrate the urgent need on the part of states to introduce adequate protection against acts of hate crimes, hate speech, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation and negative stereotyping of religions, and incitement to religious hatred, as well as denigration of venerated personalities,” Pakistan’s ambassador Zamir Akram said in a speech to the U.N. Human Rights Council.

The Obama administration has condemned the film entitled “Innocence of Muslims” as “disgusting”. But Western countries remain determined to resist restrictions on freedom of speech and have already voiced disquiet about the repressive effect of blasphemy laws in Muslim countries such as Pakistan.

Akram said the crudely made video, as well as the burning of the Koran and the publication of defamatory cartoons, amount to “deliberate attempts to discriminate, defame, denigrate and vilify Muslims and their beliefs”.

Such acts constitute “flagrant incitement to violence” and are not protected by freedom of expression, Akram said. Rather, he said, Islamophobia must be acknowledged as a contemporary form of racism and be dealt with as such.

“Not to do so would be a clear example of double standards. Islamophobia has to be treated in law and practice equal to the treatment given to anti-Semitism, especially in legislations.”

It was urgent to “establish an internationally acceptable threshold between freedom of expression and incitement to violence and hatred,” Akram added.

DIFFERENCES OVER FREE EXPRESSION

On Monday, the United States told the Council that it considered freedom of religion inseparable from free expression, countering calls from many Islamic countries for a treaty outlawing blasphemy.

Religious dignity is best protected where there is free speech, U.S. Ambassador Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe said. “When these freedoms are restricted, we see violence, poverty, stagnation and feelings of frustration and even humiliation.”

The OIC signalled last week that it would revive long-standing attempts to make insults against religions an international criminal offence.

A resolution submitted by African countries and backed by the OIC calls on states to introduce into domestic criminal law a provision ensuring that those responsible for crimes with racist or xenophobic motivation are prosecuted.

The text, which deplores “the targeting of religious symbols and venerated persons” is one of the most contentious of the 32 resolutions to be voted on by the 47-member forum this week.

Cyprus, speaking on behalf of the European Union in Tuesday’s debate, said an existing international treaty for combating all forms of racism and intolerance was sufficient, and the main goal should be to implement it effectively.

“...In several parts of the world, criminal penalties for hate speech may be used as a means to silence dissidence and suppress freedom of thought, conscience and expression,” Cyprus Ambassador Leonidas Pantelides said.

Yep.

He speaks about "insults against religions," but only Muslims particularly care about what everyone else is saying about their religion, and only Muslims would decide what constitutes an "insult" against Islam. This would establish Muslims as a privileged class, above criticism, and allow the jihad against the West to continue unimpeded. More on this story. "Islamic states to reopen quest for global blasphemy law," by Robert Evans for Reuters, September 19 (thanks to David):

(Reuters) - A leading Islamic organization signaled on Wednesday that it will revive long-standing attempts to make insults against religions an international criminal offence....

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary-general of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), said the international community should "come out of hiding from behind the excuse of freedom of expression", a reference to Western arguments against a universal blasphemy law that the OIC has sought for over a decade.

He said the "deliberate, motivated and systematic abuse of this freedom" were a danger to global security and stability.

Separately, the Human Rights Commission of the OIC, which has 57 members and is based in Saudi Arabia, said "growing intolerance towards Muslims" had to be checked and called for "an international code of conduct for media and social media to disallow the dissemination of incitement material"....

Critics say the law is widely misused to persecute non-Muslims, and cite this month's case of a Muslim cleric detained on suspicion of planting evidence suggesting that a 14-year-old girl had burned Islamic religious texts.

Pakistani Christians and Hindus at the WCC gathering said a global law against blasphemy, or "defamation of religion", would only endorse on an international scale the religious intolerance seen in Pakistan and in other Islamic countries.

Remember that by "criticism of Islam" the OIC and Arab League mean any honest examination of how jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and supremacism. Thus such a law would leave us mute and defenseless before the advancing jihad. Remember also that Pakistan's blasphemy law is routinely used to victimize non-Muslims. If this is adopted, and if the U.S. signs on to it, it will be the death of free speech and free societies, and establish Muslims internationally as a privileged class, exempt from criticism. "Arab League eyes blasphemy bill, Syria solution," from MENA, September 19 (thanks to Benedict):

Arab League chief Nabil al-Araby said Wednesday that the league, along with the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the European Union and the African Union are close to formulating an international agreement penalizing blasphemy and insults to religious figures.

States should not be blamed for insults to Islam made by some individuals, Araby told reporters at the league's headquarters in Cairo. He renewed his criticism of the US-produced film that denigrates Islam's Prophet Mohamed and has sparked protests around the world, describing it as "valueless and trivial."...

OIC to West: shut up, or else. Surrender to the advancing jihad, do not dare to speak about it, and all will be well. Stay quiet and you'll be ok. "Islamic Bloc: We Told You This Would Happen If You 'Hurt the Religious Sentiments of Muslims,'" by Patrick Goodenough for CNS News, September 13:

(CNSNews.com) – The organization representing the world’s Islamic nations on Wednesday condemned the attacks on U.S. diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt, saying it had consistently warned that “the abuse of freedom of expression” in a way that “hurt[s] the religious sentiments of Muslims” could have grave consequences.

Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu definitively linked Tuesday’s violence to Muslim anger over an amateur satirical movie critical of the prophet Mohammed, despite indications that radical elements may have used protests against the film as a cover to launch an armed assault.

According to an OIC statement, Ihsanoglu “said the violence that had emanated from emotions aroused by a production of a film had hurt the religious sentiments of Muslims. The two incidents demonstrated serious repercussions of abuse of freedom of expression that OIC had consistently been warning against.”

On Monday a spokesman for the bloc of 56 Muslim states deplored the Mohammed movie – which Egyptian media had been reporting on for several days – calling its production “an act of incitement of inter-communal hatred.”

In Wednesday’s statement, Ihsanoglu condemned the killing of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and three other American diplomats in Benghazi, saying he was “shocked by the reprehensible act which could not be condoned on any grounds.”

He also “expressed grave concern” about Tuesday’s incident in Cairo. Some protestors there breached the embassy compound walls, destroyed an American flag and hoisted a black banner carrying the Islamic declaration of faith, “There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet.”

“The OIC secretary-general added that while the film was a deplorable act of incitement, resorting to violence resulting in loss of innocent lives could not be condoned,” the statement said. Ihsanoglu called for restraint and said law enforcement authorities should take all necessary measures to bring the situation under control.

“He added that the international community could not be held hostage to the acts of extremists on either side,” it said. “The secretary-general believed that the solution could only be found by addressing the issues pertaining to the freedom of religion and freedom of expression through structured international engagement.”

Note again the language about "extremists on either side." Murderers and thugs equal filmmakers. This ridiculous equation is part of an agenda, advanced by Imam Rauf and others, to claim that the problem is "extremists within all religions," and to equate counter-jihadists with jihadists in an attempt to silence the former and enable the activities of the latter to continue unopposed.

Ihsanoglu said avenues for such engagement were provided for by a resolution passed by the U.N. Human Rights Council last year – an OIC initiative co-sponsored by the Obama administration – condemning the stereotyping or stigmatization of people based on their religion.

In a departure from previous OIC initiatives aimed at outlawing what it calls “religious defamation,” the resolution known as 16/18 did not call for legal proscriptions, except in the specific case of religion-based “incitement to imminent violence.”

Several meetings have been held since then to discuss ways to “implement” resolution 16/18, including one hosted by the State Department in Washington last December.

Another such meeting, in Istanbul in July last year, was co-hosted by Ihsanoglu and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. She told the gathering effective ways to counter speech that upset religious adherents would include interfaith education, antidiscrimination laws, and the use of “some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming.”

Aslan Media house thug Nathan Lean is furthering that agenda.

The OIC’s attempt to use the tragedy to further its longstanding campaign against “religious defamation” is in keeping with its past record.

Indeed.

If the OIC really wants to resolve "Islamophobia," it doesn't really have to stamp out the freedom of speech, although that is what it is determined to do. Here is a much preferable way. The OIC can do these things, and call on Muslims in the U.S. and elsewhere to do them as well:

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, sincerely, honestly, and in deeds, not just in comforting words, 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. In line with this, clarify what is meant by their condemnations of the killing of innocent people by stating unequivocally that American and Israeli civilians are innocent people, teaching accordingly in mosques and Islamic schools, and behaving in accord with these new teachings.
3. Teach, again sincerely and honestly, in transparent and verifiable ways in mosques and Islamic schools, the imperative of Muslims coexisting peacefully as equals with non-Muslims on an indefinite basis, and act accordingly.
4. Begin comprehensive international programs in mosques all over the world to teach sincerely against the ideas of violent jihad and Islamic supremacism.
5. Actively and honestly work with Western law enforcement officials to identify and apprehend jihadists within Western Muslim communities.

If Muslims do those five things, voila! "Islamophobia" will evanesce!

"OIC urges member-countries to resolve problem with Islamophobia," from Trend, June 18:

Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu has urged member-countries to intensify efforts in resolving Islamophobia, the organization said today.

"It is necessary to resolve the problem with Islamophobia as it is undergoing a new phase, when it is used in Europe for political gains," he said.

He added that some European politicians promote hatred toward foreigners and Islam rather than engage in economic and social problems of the country.

The world's foremost foe of the freedom of speech, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, recently invoked the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam -- a fact that should reassure no one who wants to see the freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and equality of rights of all people before the law protected. "It’s Time to Revise The Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam," by Turan Kayaoğlu for Brookings, April 23 (thanks to David):

To the surprise of many, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has shown a new commitment to advancing human rights by establishing an Independent Permanent Human Rights Commission within the organization. In the Commission’s first meeting in Jakarta, Secretary General Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu asked the 18-member Commission in his opening address to “review and update OIC instruments, including the Cairo Declaration [of Human Rights in Islam]…” If the Commission intends to indeed advance human rights, then the Cairo Declaration is the first among these instruments in need of serious revision. In 1990, the OIC approved a document that is now referred to as the Cairo Declaration in an attempt reconcile the concept of human rights and Islam. The Declaration protects many of the universal human rights: it forbids discrimination; supports the preservation of human life, supports the protection of one’s honor, family, and property; and affirms the human right to education, medical and social care, and a clean environment.

From an international human rights perspective, the controversial nature of the Cairo Declaration lies in its claim of adherence to Shari’ah. Its preamble affirms that“fundamental rights and universal freedoms are an integral part of [Islam]” and these rights and freedoms are “binding divine commandments” revealed to the Prophet Muhammad in the Quran. The central role of Shari’ah can be clearly seen in the Declaration’s articles. Article 22 states that “Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to principles of Shari’ah.” Article 12, affirms that “every man shall have the right, within the framework of Shari’ah, to free movement” (nothing is said about every woman). Articles 24 and 25 further makes Shari’ah supreme by asserting that Shari’ah is the Declaration’s “only source of reference.”

Such shorthand and cursory use of Shari’ah gives rise to four important shortcomings. The first is that it renders the document too restrictive. Shari’ah represents an extensive moral and legal code, and limiting rights such as free speech to a Shari’ah compatible framework of values would essentially render free-speech meaningless. Furthermore, the document is rendered ambiguous., as it does not specify what constitutes Shari’ah. Given the diversity of opinions on the subject across time and between and within madhabs (schools of Islamic law), it is impossible to know what rights are protected.

Interestingly, the declaration empowers states, not individuals. In the modern world, Shari’ah has increasingly become integrated in states’ domestic legal systems. In the absence of any international authority to decide on Shari’ah, the Cairo Declaration effectively diminishes the universality of human rights by relegating them to the discretion of governments.

Finally, the declaration conflicts with international human rights. The document provides only a subordinated status to religious minorities and also prohibits conversion from Islam. It also presents glaring evidence of discrimination against women, as it provides the right to freedom of movement or marriage only to men.

These shortcomings render the Declaration useless at best and at worst harmful for human rights.

"Islamophobia" is a concept that was invented by the Muslim Brotherhood in order to intimidate non-Muslims away from criticizing or resisting the jihad and Islamic supremacism. The OIC has millions and will use them to bury us in hot steaming piles of nonsense about how Islam teaches peace and tolerance and "believe us, not your lying eyes." They will use them also to continue to demonize and marginalize everyone who dares speak out in defense of human rights against Sharia. But there is one thing they will not do and could not do even if they wanted to: they will not stop jihad terror attacks committed in the name of Islam. They will not stop people from waving Qur'ans and shouting Allahu akbar before cold-bloodedly murdering innocent people, including children. And that is why their campaign, for all the money behind it, is doomed to fail. Their Big Lie is designed to obscure the Islamic motivations behind jihad terror, and to disarm resistance to jihad and Islamic supremacism, by blaring the Big Lie everywhere. But every day the truth will come out, somewhere, in the form of mangled bodies, terrified children, and horrified bystanders suddenly awakening to reality as they make their way on a ground slippery with blood.

Note this also, from Pamela Geller: "These modern day barbarians will meet a fierce army of freedom lovers. The first session of the International Freedom Defense Congress, the operating body of the human rights organization Stop Islamization of Nations (SION), will be held in New York on September 11, 2012. The principal focus of the Congress will be a media offensive against Islamic supremacist attempts to restrict the freedom of speech in the free world, and the smear campaigns against freedom fighters in newspapers and media institutions in the West."

"Muslim states agree to media blitz in fight against Islamophobia," by Abdullah Bozkurt in Today's Zaman, April 22 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

The largest platform representing Muslim countries has agreed to launch an aggressive media campaign with the purpose of raising awareness of anti-Muslim hate movements in the world, while keeping tabs on the problems that are being faced by Muslim citizens in Western and Asian countries.

In the final communiqué, adopted at the 9th session of the Islamic Conference of Information Ministers in Libreville, Gabon, the representatives from 57 member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which is the largest intergovernmental organization after the UN, has empowered the Turkish secretary-general of the organization with a new tool to go after Islamophobic movements in the world.

The meeting saw strong messages voiced by member countries at the OIC meeting in Gabon. As representative of the hosting country and chairman of the conference, Blaise Louembe, the Gabonese minister of digital economy, communications and post, told the audience that there is a need to support the initiative of dialogue, solidarity and consultation among the OIC member countries, stressing that addressing Islamophobia through diplomatic dynamism is important. He proposed the launch of an awareness-raising campaign to eliminate violence advocated by some extremist movements. Louembe said Gabon is ready to lead the charge on these projects.

Morocco's Minister of Communication Mustapha Khalfi warned that Islamophobia is rising and campaigns targeting the image of Islam and Muslims in international media are increasing. He underlined that media institutions in the Muslim world have more responsibility to confront these smear campaigns against Islam. Khalfi also noted that OIC should be a conduit in coordinating media action among Muslim countries as well as within the UN.

The OIC Secretary General, Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu, also highlighted Islamophobia as one of the most pressing issues that needs to be tackled by the OIC. He said that Islamophobia is fuelled by a misconception about Islam and Muslims and incites hatred and discrimination against them on religious and ethnic grounds.”

Gabon President Ali Bongo Ondimba stated that the present session is of utmost importance as it focuses on sensitive media issues. Ondimba also joined other in the conference in drawing attention to the looming dangers of Islamophobia and the growing hatred towards Muslims in the Western media. He called for a comprehensive strategy to combat terrorism, extremism and radicalism, stating that Islam and Muslims are the first victims of extremist ideology.

The OIC meeting in Gabon has adopted a number of resolutions to strengthen media coordination among the 57 member countries. According to one resolution, the OIC has adopted a comprehensive media plan directed at audiences outside of the OIC member states. Gabon will be in charge of implementing this action plan. Saudi Arabia allocated $25 million to a special fund created to promote the positive image of Islam among non-OIC media. Other member states are also expected to contribute to this fund. The program targets media in key world capitals....

The Gabon meeting also focused on how to coordinate news information among media organs in OIC member states, by approving a resolution that will pave the way for joint Islamic action among Muslim countries.

Officials at the Gabon meeting also approved a resolution that will help coordinate news information among media organizations in the OIC member states. The resolution will help pave the way for a streamlined process that will coordinate the dissemination of news information among member countries.

OIC members also approved the establishment of a “Muslim Journalists' Forum” among member countries in order to “unite journalists and foster communication between them so that it becomes a forum for facilitating cooperation and developing specific mechanisms in joint Islamic media action.”

The OIC will also open media coordination offices in some key countries to project the true image of Islam. The OIC general secretary will use these offices to implement media plans on many issues of utmost importance such as Islamophobia, the Palestine issue, development, trade, environment, tourism and the fight against poverty as well as other major issues. The OIC conference discussed a proposal for training journalists to counter stereotypes about Islam and Muslims in Western media.

Launching an OIC satellite channel was also another novel idea proposed by Gabon and approved by all members at the conference in Libreville. OIC TV will be an official media outlet, which can help the organization reach out and affect the public's opinion of Islam by conveying its messages. The OIC meeting also approved the Turkish proposal for establishing the OIC Broadcasting Regulatory Authorities Forum (IBRAF) among Muslim countries.

Noting that the recommendation made by Morocco on “Countering Defamation of Religions” was important, the meeting called on all Muslim countries “to support tabling the proposal at the UN so that a draft recommendation could be adopted calling on all states to respect the image of religions in all the various media and not to cause prejudice to religious symbols and sanctuaries, in demonstration of Islamic solidarity.”...

The conference has set up a committee to follow-up on the resolutions adopted at the conference. The committee members include Morocco, Gabon, Iran (past, present and next chairmen) and the OIC Secretary General. Iran will host the next meeting in 2014.

Yes, a few smiling Muslims will make the West forget all about the activities of Muslims such as Naser Abdo, the would-be second Fort Hood jihad mass murderer; and Khalid Aldawsari, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Lubbock, Texas; and Muhammad Hussain, the would-be jihad bomber in Baltimore; and Mohamed Mohamud, the would-be jihad bomber in Portland; and Faisal Shahzad, the would-be Times Square jihad mass-murderer; and Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the Arkansas military recruiting station jihad murderer; and Naveed Haq, the jihad mass murderer at the Jewish Community Center in Seattle; and Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Ahmed Ferhani and Mohamed Mamdouh, who hatched a jihad plot to blow up a Manhattan synagogue; and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be Christmas airplane jihad bomber; and many others like them who have plotted and/or committed mass murder in the name of Islam and motivated by its texts and teachings -- all in the U.S. in the last couple of years.

No amount of propaganda, however skillful, will paper over that. However, a lot of people will indeed be fooled, just as they are now. "OIC will launch channel to counter Islamophobia," by Yusuf Jameel for the Deccan Chronicle, April 18:

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) will soon launch a satellite television channel to be named as “OIC” to counter Islamophobia, the prejudice against and hatred or irrational fear of Islam or Muslims.

Though the term dates back to the late 1980s or early 1990s, it came into common usage mainly in the West after the 9/11 terror strikes in the United States. The 57-member group of Islamic nations is also planning to establish an “OIC Muslim Journalists Union”....

Skewering the double standard. "Krauthammer: When Will Islamic Nations Apologize To Us…," by Josh Feldman for Mediaite, February 24:

Almost everyone in the Obama administration, including President Obama himself, has been apologizing to Muslims all over the world after NATO forces burned copies of the Quran in Afghanistan yesterday. Protests have erupted all over Afghanistan, and over a dozen people were killed in the middle of protests today. On Fox News’ Special Report today, guest host John Roberts focused on the U.S. reaction to the protests, with some strong words being thrown at the Obama administration for its continued apologies.

Charles Krauthammer said it was frankly “embarrassing,” and instead of just being a straight apology to Muslims all over the world, the administration was “groveling to the mob.” He argued all the administration needed to do was just come out with a singular apology from a commanding officer in Afghanistan, and that would have been sufficient. Krauthammer found it especially hard to believe any impetus was on President Obama to apologize, but what bothered him more was what perceived as an international double standard on the need for sufficient apology.

“This is a world in which nobody asked the Islamic Conference, a grouping of the 56 Islamic countries, to issue an apology when Christians are attacked and churches are burned in Egypt or in Pakistan. And had we heard a word from any Islamic leader anywhere about the radical Muslims in Nigeria who are not only burning the churches, but burning women and children who are in the churches, when I hear that, I’ll expect my president to start issuing apologies.” [...]

Krauthammer added that Christians never rioted over Andres Serrano‘s infamous “Piss Christ” photograph, and members of the Church of Latter-Day Saints have not stormed Broadway over The Book of Mormon.

Essentially, they appear to be looking at the irrational and lethal fit of anger gripping Afghanistan and saying "Look at what you made us do!"

There is no sense of personal responsibility or free will not to throw a tantrum, more or less as if one had poked a beehive with a stick. Therein lies a fundamental source of instability, and therefore, poverty in Afghanistan and elsewhere: wrath and pride made sacrosanct.

No one will build or invest if it's all just going to go up in flames the next time someone gets insulted.

By terming the incident "incitement," the enemies of free speech at the OIC signal their likelihood to leverage it in its supremacist jihad against freedom of speech, expression, and conscience. "OIC Condemns Quran Burning by US Troops in Afghanistan," from Iran's Fars News Agency, February 24 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

TEHRAN (FNA)- Secretary-General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu deplored the burning of the Holy Quran by the US forces in Afghanistan, and called for swift action to punish those responsible for the provocative act.

In a statement on Thursday, Ihsanoglu described the incident as a "deplorable act of incitement", and said that the act runs "contrary to the common efforts of the OIC and that of the international community …to combat intolerance, and incitement to hatred based on religion and belief."

The statement also called on "the concerned authorities to take swift and appropriate disciplinary action against those responsible."

Also on Thursday, US President Barack Obama sent a letter to his Afghan counterpart, apologizing for the acts of desecration.

The developments came as anti-US demonstrations are underway across Afghanistan over the burning of the Holy Quran at the US Airbase.

Media reports said that at least twenty Afghans have been killed since the beginning of protests on Tuesday.

Note the use of passive voice to sidestep discussion of how they died.

Obama is in the White House and endorses their efforts. The OIC has tried for years to compel Western states to restrict free speech and outlaw truth-telling about Islam, and now it is pressing on toward final victory. Apparently OIC top dogs are not satisfied with the current rate of compliance of the dhimmi mainstream media, even though it is almost total: the media constantly ignores, downplays, and obfuscates the ways in which Islamic jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and supremacism, the Islamic character of honor killings, and more. Yet the OIC thinks that there is a "smear campaign against Islam in newspapers and media institutions in the West" -- in other words, the truth is still getting out, because Muslims keep committing acts of violence in the name of Islam and it is hard even for the media to cover it up totally. So...time for another media workshop.

"OIC To Hold Media Workshop To Address Smear Campaign Against Islam," from Bernama, February 13:

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 13 (Bernama) -- The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is to hold a media workshop in Brussels on Feb 15 to 16 pertaining to the smear campaigns against Islam in newspapers and media institutions in the West.

The objective of this first-of-its-kind workshop is to develop media-related mechanisms to address the smear campaigns, the OIC said in a statement.

It said the workshop will discuss at length the reasons behind and the results of the Western media's offensive campaigns against the symbols and sanctities of Islam and Muslims, which it added still occur from time to time.

"The workshop will represent a quantum leap in media action, as it discusses, beyond rhetoric, the practical steps to address the phenomenon of Islamophobia," the OIC said....

I am not in favor of laws restricting the freedom of speech, but this response from the OIC is consistent with its own attempts to restrict truth-telling about Islam and jihad under the guise of criminalizing "religious hatred." Note also that by labeling the French law an example of "Islamophobia," Ihsanoglu is tacitly admitting that the Armenian genocide was an Islamic jihad action; otherwise, what would Islam have to do with this law at all?

"OIC: Adoption of genocide law sign of Islamophobia in France," by A. Taghiyeva for Trend, January 24:

The adoption of the law criminalizing the denial of the so-called "Armenian Genocide" is a sign of Islamophobia in France, Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu told Trend on Tuesday.

"This law contradicts three fundamental principles of democracy -- equality, freedom and brotherhood. It is a sign of growing Islamophobia," Ihsanoglu said.

He called the law unacceptable, non-complying with historical facts and demonstrating double standards.

After a nearly eight-hour debate, the French Senate adopted the bill. Some 127 senators voted in favor, while 86 senators voted against on Jan.23.

The lower house of the French parliament adopted a bill criminalising the denial of the so-called "genocide" on Dec.22. Some 45 out of 577 French MPs voted with 38 voting for and seven against the adoption of the bill.

The bill demands a year's imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euro for denying the so-called "genocide." In response to the decision, Turkey announced that it has frozen all diplomatic relations with France.

MPs from the French president's Union for Popular Movement (UMP) party, which has the parliamentary majority, proposed the bill aimed at criminalising the denial of the so-called "genocide" to the legislative committee of the National Assembly in early December.

Armenia and the Armenian lobby claim that the predecessor of the Turkey - Ottoman Empire had committed the 1915 genocide against the Armenians living in Anadolu, and achieved recognition of the "Armenian Genocide" by the parliaments of several countries.

No one is in favor of actual "stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion." The problem is that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, which is driving this resolution, considers any truthful speech about the global jihad and Islamic supremacism to be "stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion." This is an attempt to quash truth-telling about Islamic jihad so that the West stands mute and defenseless before its advance. And now the Obama Administration, fresh from a secret meeting with the OIC on just this topic, joins in.

Free Speech Death Watch Alert: "U.N. Adopts ‘Religious Intolerance’ Resolution Championed by Obama Administration," by Patrick Goodenough for CNS News, December 20 (thanks to Wimpy):

(CNSNews.com) – The U.N. General Assembly on Monday adopted a resolution condemning the stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion, and urging countries to take effective steps “to address and combat such incidents.”

No member state called for a recorded vote on the text, which was as a result adopted “by consensus.”

The resolution, an initiative of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), is based on one passed by the U.N.’s Human Rights Council in Geneva last spring. The State Department last week hosted a meeting to discuss ways of “implementing” it.

Every year since 1999 the OIC has steered through the U.N.’s human rights apparatus a resolution condemning the “defamation of religion,” which for the bloc of 56 Muslim states covered incidents ranging from satirizing Mohammed in a newspaper cartoon to criticism of shari’a and post-9/11 security check profiling.

Critics regard the measure as an attempt to outlaw valid and critical scrutiny of Islamic teachings, as some OIC states do through controversial blasphemy laws at home.

Strongly opposed by mostly Western democracies, the divisive “defamation” resolution received a dwindling number of votes each year, with the margin of success falling from 57 votes in 2007 to 19 in 2009 and just 12 last year.

This year’s text was a departure, in that it dropped the “defamation” language and included a paragraph that reaffirms “the positive role that the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the full respect for the freedom to seek, receive and impart information can play in strengthening democracy and combating religious intolerance.”

The nod to freedom of expression won the resolution the support of the U.S. and other democracies, with the Obama administration and others hailing it as a breakthrough after years of acrimonious debate.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton took the opportunity of the State Department-hosted talks with foreign governments, the OIC and other international bodies last week to stress the importance of freedom of speech in the U.S. She argued that “the best way to treat offensive speech is by people either ignoring it or combating it with good arguments and good speech that overwhelms it.”

Saudi initiative singled out for praise

Nonetheless, the resolution adopted in New York on Monday does contain elements that concern some free speech and religious freedom advocates.

It calls on states “to take effective measures to ensure that public functionaries in the conduct of their public duties do not discriminate against an individual on the basis of religion or belief.”

Governments also are expected to make “a strong effort to counter religious profiling, which is understood to be the invidious use of religion as a criterion in conducting questionings, searches and other law enforcement investigative procedures.”

“Effective measures” to counter cases of religious stereotyping and stigmatization include education, interfaith dialogue and “training of government officials.”

And in the worst cases, those of “incitement to imminent violence” based on religion, the resolution calls on countries to implement “measures to criminalize” such behavior....

All such things are in the eye of the beholder, meaning that the enforcement agency will decide what is offensive and what is incitement, and silence people accordingly.