Turkey Calls on Europe to Criminalize “Islamophobia”

Gatestone Institute, by Uzay Bulut

  • Given Turkey’s inhospitable treatment of non-Muslims throughout the ages, it is the height of hypocrisy for its foreign minister to complain about Europe’s attitude towards Muslims, which has been the opposite of Islamophobic.
  • To refresh Çavuşoğlu’s memory, a review of Turkey’s record is in order.
  • By proposing to block all criticism of Islam on the grounds that it is “extremist, anti-immigrant, xenophobic and Islamophobic,” Çavuşoğlu is revealing that he would welcome banning free speech to protect a religious ideology.

At an event held on April 11 to unveil the 2017 European Islamophobia Report — released by the Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research — Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Çavuşoğlu called on EU governments to criminalize Islamophobia.

“There is no ideology or terminology called ‘Islamism’; There is only one Islam and it means ‘peace,'” he declared — incorrectly: salaam means peace; Islam means submission. He also claimed that populist politicians are “increasingly engaging in extremist, anti-immigrant, xenophobic, and Islamophobic rhetoric to get a few more votes,” and that “centrist politicians are… using a similar rhetoric to get back the votes they have lost.”

Urging all politicians to recognize Islamophobia as “a hate crime and a form of racism” in their constitutions, Çavuşoğlu accused European judiciaries of applying a double standard by not paying as much attention to Islamophobia as they do to anti-Semitism. Using the Holocaust as an analogy, he continued: “There is no need to relive Auschwitz or wait for Muslims to be burned in gas chambers like Jewish people.”

Çavuşoğlu’s view is not new, but it is a gross distortion of past and contemporary history; it seems shaped by a notion that Islam is superior to other religions, as well as from surah 9:33 of the Quran:

“It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion…” (Sahih Translation)

Çavuşoğlu’s views also echo those of the Turkish government, headed by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Non-Muslims, as we all have been seeing, are persecuted throughout the Islamic world. Muslims in Europe, on the other hand, enjoy equal rights and religious liberty. Unfortunately, many radical imams use the freedoms granted to them by European democracies to preach Jew-hatred and violent jihad, to recruit fightersand to establish sharia (Islamic) law courts in their neighborhoods.

Some Muslims, inspired by the teachings of and atmosphere created by these imams, engage in gruesome, religiously motivated crimes against non-Muslims. A disabled 85-year-old Holocaust survivor, for instance, was recently raped, tortured and murdered in her Paris apartment by an extremist Muslim.

Çavuşoğlu, in his talk against Islamophobia, did not mention the atrocities committed by radical Islamists in Europe. Those abuses are at the root of the debate about how to tackle the calls to violence in Islam without hampering the civil liberties of law-abiding Muslims. By proposing to block all criticism of Islam on the grounds that it is “extremist, anti-immigrant, xenophobic and Islamophobic,” Çavuşoğlu is revealing that he would welcome banning free speechto protect a religious ideology.

Given Turkey’s inhospitable treatment of non-Muslims throughout the ages, it is the height of hypocrisy for its foreign minister to complain about Europe’s attitude towards Muslims, which has been the opposite of Islamophobic. To refresh Çavuşoğlu’s memory, a review of Turkey’s record is in order.

Non-Muslims in Turkey have been exposed to severe persecution and attempts at annihilation, such as the 1914-1923 Christian genocide; the 1941-1942 conscription of the “twenty classes,” of all male Christians and Jews, including the elderly and mentally ill; and the 1942 Wealth Tax, which aimed to impoverish non-Muslims and transfer their wealth to Muslims.

Today, only 0.2 percent of Turkey’s population of nearly 80 million is Christian or Jewish. The following is a brief account of how Turkish governments have rid the country of its non-Muslim citizens:

Greeks: There are fewer than 2,000 Greeks left in Istanbul, which, until the 15th century Ottoman Turkish invasion, was the Greek city of Constantinople. Even despite its tiny size, the community still suffers from violations of its rights. Among these was the forced closure in 1971 of the Orthodox Halki Seminary, the only school for training the leadership of Orthodox Christianity. Since that time, the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the spiritual center of Orthodox Christianity, based in Turkey, has been unable to train clergy and potential successors for the position of patriarch.

It is also important to note that the cities in Asia Minor or Anatolia, which were established by Greeks during the 9th and 8th centuries B.C., no longer have any Greeks. They were either murdered, deported or forced to flee severe persecution, including the anti-Greek pogrom of September 1955 in Istanbul, and the 1964 expulsion of Greeks from all over Turkey.

Armenians: Even after the 1915 genocide, in which 1.5 million Armenians perished, the persecution of Armenians in Turkey did not end. Since then, the remaining Armenians have witnessed the continued seizure of their property and other assets. In addition, verbal and physical attacks against Armenian community members, schools and the only Armenian newspaper in the country by the Turkish public and the media are still common.

Jews: Since 1923, when the Turkish Republic was established, Jews have been exposed to systematic discrimination and various pressures. The laws that excluded Jews and other non-Muslim citizens from certain occupations in the 1920s and blocked the Jews’ freedom of movement; the 1934 anti-Jewish pogrom in eastern Thrace, and the continued anti-Jewish hate speech in the Turkish media and certain political circles are among the forms of persecution and discrimination against Jewish citizens of Turkey.

Assyrians: According to the Minority Rights Group International, Assyrian Christians in Turkey

“suffered forced evictions, mass displacement and the burning down of their homes and villages, abductions (including of priests,) forced conversions to Islam through rape and forced marriage, and murder. These pressures, and other insidious forms of persecution and discrimination, have decimated the community.”

Today, there are only around 20,000 Assyrians left in the country. And they are still struggling to open an elementary school in Istanbul, as the government refuses to grant them any financial support. Meanwhile, both the government and some Muslim Kurdish locals in southeast Turkey continue to seize their lands and property illegally.

Protestants: The Turkish government does not recognize the Protestant community as a “legal entity.” Hence, according to a 2017 human rights violations report by Turkey’s Association of Protestant Churches, Protestants are still devoidof the right freely to establish and maintain places of worships. Other problems encountered by Protestants include but are not limited to hate crimes and speech, verbal and physical attacks and workplace discrimination.

Yazidis: The Turkish government does not recognize Yazidism as a religion. Therefore, the “religion” box on the ID papers of Yazidis in Turkey is either left blank or marked with an “X.” Due to continued persecution and pressure from the government and society, many Yazidis from Turkey have fled to Europe. Their privately-owned lands were reportedly invaded and their owners threatened. Some of their abandoned villages have become uninhabitable. Most of the former Yazidi villages in Turkey have been completely Islamized. The estimated population of Yazidis in the country today is approximately 350 — excluding the recent asylum-seekers from Iraq and Syria. Recently it was reported:

“The Yazidis, who were recently the target of massacre, rape and sex slavery by Isis, are now facing forcible conversion to Islam under the threat of death from Turkish-backed forces which captured the Kurdish enclave of Afrin on 18 March.”

Alevis: The Turkish government does not recognize Alevism, another minority faith. Alevis in Turkey have been subjected to perpetual massacres and pogroms, including: the 1937-1938 Dersim (Tunceli) Massacres, the 1978 Malatya Massacre, the 1978 Sivas Massacre, the 1978 Maras Massacre, the 1980 Corum Massacre, the 1993 Sivas Massacre and the 1995 Gazi Massacre. Today’s Alevis in Turkey are still often exposed to threats and arbitrary arrests.

The faces of many of the victims who were murdered in the 1993 Sivas massacre of Alevis are featured on this poster, used in a 2012 commemoration in Germany. (Image source: Bernd Schwabe, Wikimedia Commons)

Since the 11th century — when Turkic tribes originally from Central Asia, who had converted to Islam and began occupying cities in Asia Minor and the Armenian highland — Turks seem to have had a tradition, as above, of being unneighborly to non-Muslims. The West needs to be reminded that this tradition is alive and well in modern Turkey.

Çavuşoğlu’s critique of Europe may have been an attempt to cloud his country’s sordid past and precarious present, but it should serve as a warning about the danger posed to liberal democracies the world over.

Uzay Bulut is a journalist from Turkey and a fellow with the news and public policy group Haym Salomon Center. She is presently based in Washington D.C.

***

What is the OSCE?

CJR: Even as the OSCE proceedings were going on, Donald Trump was coerced into signing an anti-hate Resolution aimed at right wing groups and not left wing such as Antifa. And now there is a report that Hillary Clinton funded Antifa!

Gates of Vienna, Sept. 17, 2017:

In the interventions by Bashy Quraishy and Henrik Clausen, you’ve just seen the Yin and Yang of the OSCE Human Dimension conference in Warsaw. Yet interventions like Mr. Clausen’s consistently earned the rebuke of the moderators, while those like Mr. Quraishy’s did not.

What’s going on? What has happened to the OSCE?

In the video below, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff and Clare Lopez explain the way in which the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe has been subverted by the Red-Green Alliance and turned into an Inquisitor designed to hunt down and stamp out “hate speech” wherever it may be found.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for editing and uploading this video:

For links to previous articles about the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, see the OSCE Archives.

***

Clare Lopez on Civil Liberties and Natural Rights

The following video shows the intervention read by Clare Lopez, representing the Center for Security Policy, at OSCE Warsaw today, September 14, 2017, during Session 6, “Fundamental Freedoms, Including Freedom of Thought, Conscience, Religion, or Belief”.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

Below is the prepared text for Ms. Lopez’ intervention:

America’s Founding Fathers understood that tyranny takes hold when men allow governments or religious systems to usurp the rights of the individual unto themselves

For this reason, they enshrined freedoms of belief, conscience & speech in 1st Amendment of our Constitution

These principles & these freedoms are Judeo-Christian-based, first articulated among the brilliant thinkers of the Enlightenment in Europe — although their roots trace back to Athens, Rome & Jerusalem

They derive from the revolutionary idea that the individual is the key pillar of society — not the clan, or tribe, or a religious belief system

The individual human being is entitled to these rights & freedoms because the laws of nature — which are knowable thru human reason — endow each & every person – men women equally — w/human dignity & the right to live free

Freedom of speech is among the most essential of our human liberties & one that gives voice & meaning to all the others – especially freedom of conscience & belief

Islam doesn’t have such beliefs or freedoms — there’s no such thing as ‘freedom of speech’ or belief articulated in Islamic Law (shariah)

Instead there is the “Law of Slander” — which defines ‘slander’ as anything that a Muslim would dislike — including the truth

Slander under shariah can carry the death penalty – indeed the Sira & hadiths tell us that some of the first assassinations ordered by Muhammad were precisely against poets for writing verses that he found insulting – apostasy from Islam likewise is a capital crime

I refer to the Council of Europe report from October 2016 on the ‘Compatibility of Sharia law with the European Convention on Human Rights: can States Parties to the Convention be signatories of the ‘Cairo Declaration’?

And I suggest the answer is ‘No.’ A government or system that defines itself as liberal, Western & democratic does not impose restrictions on free speech to shield itself from criticism – much less impose a death penalty for belief or lack of belief

We of Western Civilization dignify the individual by permitting all speech, no matter how we dislike it, if it is not explicitly inciting to immediate violence – and all beliefs or lack of belief

And so I recommend for the ODIHR 2017: Let us leave here today, renewed & inspired to reject liberty-crushing concepts like ‘hate speech’ & death penalties for religious beliefs or rejection of belief & instead committed to defend freedoms of belief, conscience & speech & all the principles of liberty we hold so dear.

Canada: Antifa threatens to “smash” conference opposing “anti-Islamophobia” motion

Jihad Watch, by Christine Douglass-Williams, Sept 7, 2017:

A conference entitled “M-103: Islamophobia Cure or Shariah Trap?” will take place in Toronto this Sunday. The event is organized by a group called Canadian Citizens for Charter Rights and Freedoms (C3RF). Speakers include Dr. Bill Warner, Leo Adler, Deborah Weiss, Anthony Furey, Raheel Raza, Yusif Celik, Anni Cyrus and others. But “organizers are not publicly revealing its location. Anti-fascist activists, known as Antifa, have already threatened to disrupt the event and intimidate participants.”

Canada is in a crisis over “anti-Islamophobia” motion M-103. Last March, Liberal MP Iqra Khalid’s “anti-Islamophobia” motion M-103 passed the House of Commons, even though a poll indicatedthat this was not what most Canadians wanted. Canadians were duped by this motion, which had questionable origins, intimating an agenda which has no place in a democracy. The majority vote for the motion was along party lines, with only two Conservative MPs voting for it: Bruce Stanton and Michael Chong.

Although M-103 is not binding legislation, it was followed up with a Heritage Committee study “to look at the issue and then report back with a recommendations that could be used to create legislation within 240 days…The Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage is made up of 10 people, six of whom are Liberals. There is a Liberal chair, Hedy Fry, and then there is one Conservative and one NDP deputy chair.” Public hearings were part of this study.

One of the groups that applied to be included in that hearing was Canadian Citizens for Charter Rights & Freedoms (C3RF), a non-partisan group formed by a sizeable number of concerned citizens following the passage of M-103. C3RF’s request to serve as a witness and share its views in the hearings was rejected. Now, this C3RF conference is intended to raise awareness and educate people about the implications of M-103, and “prepare the groundwork for a political push against what they believe is legislation that will at some point restrict Canadians’ freedoms and perhaps lay the groundwork for the introduction of Islamic Shariah law in Canada.” But event organizers are reporting threats of violence, a further indication of how divisive Motion M-103 is in Canada. According to David Nitkin, a spokesman for and cosponsor of the conference:

Antifa has used voice mail messages and emails to threaten to go to locations where the conference is being held and “smash” the venues, in order to prevent the conference from proceeding.

Valerie Price, Director of ACT! for Canada, is also a cosponsor of the event. When I asked her if she would consider either cancelling or postponing the event  because of threats from Antifa, she replied:

No way is this going to happen if I have anything to say about it. What are we supposed to do – lie down and roll over and surrender every  time we are threatened by Antifa? This conference is about free speech and freedom of association. How is this hateful? What is truly hateful is their threatening behaviour and what they should understand is that we don’t preach hate – we expose it. Maybe that’s what they don’t like. This event WILL go on.

Price continued:

When the Heritage Committee refuses to allow C3RF to make a presentation before them, we will still be there. When they try to impose restrictions on free speech with their blasphemy laws, we will be there. We are not going anywhere. We will become their conscience. We must defeat Motion M- 103.

Canada also has anti-Islamophobia Charters in six Canadian cities, which the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM), the former CAIR-CAN, worked for. “Islamophobia” is an Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) term used to describe anti-Muslim bigotry, which should be countered, but also criticism of Islam that is deemed offensive to Muslims, whether or not it is true or accurate. The OIC seeks to play “an active role in presenting a bright and positive image of Islam and member countries of the organization, while realizing the goals of Islamic unity.” This endeavor to present a positive image of Islam involves shutting down anything remotely critical of human rights abuses resulting from Sharia norms.

Turkish despot Recep Tayyip Erdogan has declared that “Islamophobia” is the same as anti-Semitism, and so in his view, Islamophobia should be declared a crime against humanity. Anti-Semitism is based on pure hatred of the Jewish people simply because they are Jewish; the Holocaust was an attempt to “exorcise the Jewish spirit from the world,” according to Professor Dan Michman of the International Institute for Holocaust Research. By contrast, “Islamophobia” is a trumped-up word with no clear definition. A former Imam and member of the International institute for Islamic Thought, Abdur-Rahman Muhammad, referenced the Islamophobia “canard” as a “loathsome term” which is “nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics,” and that is precisely what is happening already in Canada:

  • A peaceful free-speech rally against M-103 was shut down in Grand Prairie and deemed a hate rally.
  • A gay Iranian Muslim was banned from entering his anti-Sharia float in the Vancouver Pride Parade.
  • My federal appointment with the Canadian Race Relations Foundation (CRRF) is under scrutiny by the Heritage Department because I write for Jihad Watch and report on Islamic supremacist and jihad activity. Spokesperson Amira Elghawaby of the NCCM calls Jihad Watch a “hateful website.” The CRRF is in the Department of Heritage — the same Department that Motion M103 emerges from.

As Robert Spencer noted about the shutting down of the event in Grand Prairie: “Violent Leftists have been brutalizing people who stand for the freedom of speech, and they have friends in the highest places, and so your free speech rally is forbidden.”

True words indeed. Fortunately, there are Canadians who value freedom and so do not believe that the divisive “anti-Islamophobia” motion M-103 has any place in Canada. The same publication—The Canadian Jewish News — that discusses the backlash against the C3RF conference also features a debate about Motion M-103 entitled Should Jews Support M-103. In it, the former CEO of Canadian Jewish Congress, Benjamin Shinewald, unfortunately expresses his support for M-103. Shinewald thinks that the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA) — Canada’s largest Jewish advocacy group — is “twisting itself into a pretzel to oppose this motion.’”

Another former CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Bernie Farber, is on the NCCM website promoting its “Charter for Inclusive Communities,” which includes its aggressive “anti-Islamophobia” drives because of what it claims is an “epidemic of Islamophobia” across the country.  Shinewald and Farber would do well to read OIC documents that define clearly what “Islamophobia” is about.

Shinewald also stated:

Canadian Jews should support M-103, plain and simple. And there is one more thing we should do. We should all chill out. After all, nothing of any consequence hangs on this non-binding private member’s motion – that is, with the exception of our collective dignity.

The OIC and Muslim Brotherhood-connected groups and individuals have been energetically pushing “anti-Islamophobia” drives in Canada and globally, but Shinewald thinks we should “chill out.” In the Canadian Jewish News debate, the prominent Canadian businessman, investor and philanthropist Michael Diamond noted rightly of M-103:

If parliament wishes to study the application of our existing hate laws…it should do that. but we should not elevate one group above all others….this effort to cater to Muslims alone has already had a negative and polarizing effect. It will be critical that Canadians focus carefully on what transpires next. A motion is not law, but it begins an important process. And what comes of that process could weaken the fabric of our society and divide us, instead of pulling us together.

Canada is doomed to a future of strife because of Islamic supremacist forces and Antifa if these anti-democratic forces are not opposed now. Unfortunately, the current Canadian government is enabling such divisions. We hope the C3RF’s freedom conference will be a great success, and will attract more attendees in the midst of the hatred and intimidation that are being directed against it. Police and security personnel will be present. More information here.

Read more

A 1,389 Year-Old ‘Phobia’?

Front Page Magazine, by Raymond Ibrahim, April 7, 2017:

A direct correlation exists between Western ignorance of history and Western ignorance of Islam’s “troublesome” doctrines.  It is this connection that allows Islam’s apologists to get away with so many distortions and outright lies meant to shield Islam.

Take, for instance, Reza Aslan, apparently CNN’s resident “cannibal”: he recently claimed that “Islamophobia”— defined by CAIR as “unfounded fear of and hostility towards Islam”—was created by a few “clowns” in 2014.

To be sure, Western fear of Islam is something of a recent phenomenon in modern times.  Because the world was a much bigger place a few decades ago, and Islam was oceans away, the average American hardly knew anything about Muhammad’s creed.  However, as the world has become smaller—as Muslims have grown in numbers in Western societies, as modern technology has made it possible for the weaker to terrorize the stronger, and then broadcast it for the world to see (Internet)—so has the Western world been hearing, seeing, and experiencing more and more of Islam.

But Aslan’s lament is not that, although people were once ignorant they are now wise to Islam.  Rather, he accuses a number of writers and activists—the aforementioned “clowns”—of manufacturing a menacing image of Islam, which, in turn, has prompted Western people to develop an “unfounded fear of and hostility towards Islam”—or, in a word, “Islamophobia.”

Such a claim relies on an obscene amount of historical ignorance.  The fact is, Western peoples, including some of their luminaries, have portrayed Islam as a hostile and violent force from the very start—often in terms that would make today’s “Islamophobe” blush.  And that wasn’t because Europeans were “recasting the other” to “validate their imperial aspirations” (to use the tired terminology of Edward Said that has long dominated academia’s treatment of Western-Muslim interactions).  Rather, it was because, from the very start, Islam treated the “infidel” the same way ISIS treats the infidel: atrociously.

According to Muslim history, in 628, Muhammad summoned the Roman (or “Byzantine”) emperor, Heraclius—the symbolic head of “the West,” then known as “Christendom”—to submit to Islam; when the emperor refused, a virulent jihad was unleashed against the Western world.  Less than 100 years later, Islam had conquered more than two-thirds of Christendom, and was raiding deep in France.  While these far-reaching conquests are often allotted a sentence, if that, in today’s textbooks, the chroniclers of the time, including Muslim ones, make clear that these were cataclysmic events that had a traumatic effect on, and played no small part in forming, the unconquered portion of Christendom, which became Europe proper.  As Ibn Khaldun famously put it after describing incessant Muslim raids for booty and slaves all along Europe’s Mediterranean coasts, “the Christians could no longer float a plank on the sea.”  They took to the inlands and the Dark Ages began.

But it wasn’t just what they personally experienced at the hands of Muslims that developed this ancient “phobia” to Islam.  Beginning in the eighth century, Islam’s scriptures and histories—the Koran, hadith, sira and maghazi literature—became available to those Christian communities living adjacent to, or even under the authority of, the caliphates.  Based solely on these primary sources of Islam, Christians concluded that Muhammad was a (possibly demon possessed) false prophet who had very obviously concocted a creed to justify the worst depravities of man—for dominion, plunder, cruelty and carnality.  This view prevailed for well over a millennium all over Europe (and till this day among “Islamophobes”); and it was augmented by the fact that Muslims were still acting on it by invading Christian territories, plundering them, and abducting their women and children.

Here is a miniscule sampling of what Europeans thought of Islam throughout the centuries:

Theophanes, the Byzantine chronicler (d.818):

He [Muhammad] taught those who gave ear to him that the one slaying the enemy—or being slain by the enemy—entered into paradise [see Koran 9:111].  And he said paradise was carnal and sensual—orgies of eating, drinking, and women. Also, there was a river of wine … and the women were of another sort, and the duration of sex greatly prolonged and its pleasure long-enduring [e.g., Koran 56: 7-40, 78:31, 55:70-77].  And all sorts of other nonsense.

St. Thomas Aquinas, one of Christendom’s most influential philosophers (d.1274):

He [Muhamad] seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh urges us …. and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine…. Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants [i.e., his “proof” that God was with him is that he was able to conquer and plunder others]….  Muhammad forced others to become his follower’s by the violence of his arms.

Marco Polo, world famous traveler (d.1324):

According to their [Muslims’] doctrine, whatever is stolen or plundered from others of a different faith, is properly taken, and the theft is no crime; whilst those who suffer death or injury by the hands of Christians, are considered as martyrs. If, therefore, they were not prohibited and restrained by the [Mongol] powers who now govern them, they would commit many outrages. These principles are common to all Saracens.

When the Mongol khan later discovered the depraved criminality of Achmath (or Ahmed), one of his Muslim governors, Polo writes that that the khan’s

attention [went] to the doctrines of the Sect of the Saracens [i.e., Islam], which excuse every crime, yea, even murder itself, when committed on such as are not of their religion. And seeing that this doctrine had led the accursed Achmath and his sons to act as they did without any sense of guilt, the Khan was led to entertain the greatest disgust and abomination for it. So he summoned the Saracens and prohibited their doing many things which their religion enjoined.

Alexis de Tocqueville, French political thinker and philosopher, best known for Democracy in America (d.1859),

I studied the Quran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.[8]

Winston Churchill, a leader of the Allied war effort against Hitler during WWII (1965):

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism [Islam] lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.  The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.  A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.  The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Lest it seem that these and other historic charges against Islam are simply products of Christian/Western xenophobia that simply cannot tolerate the “other,” it should be noted that many of Islam’s Western critics regularly praised other non-Muslim religions and civilizations, including what is today called “moderate Muslims.”   Thus Marco Polo hailed the Brahmins of India as being “most honorable,” possessing a “hatred for cheating or of taking the goods of other persons.” And despite his criticisms of the “sect of the Saracens,” that is, Islam, he referred to one Muslim leader as governing “with justice” (p.317) and another who “showed himself [to be] a very good lord, and made himself beloved by everybody (p.332).”

Winston Churchill summed up the matter as follows:  “Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities—but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

Apologists like Reza Aslan can say whatever they want; they claim that Islam is forever and perpetually “misunderstood”— and can bank on Western ignorance of its own history to get away with it.  But fear and dislike of Islam has been the mainstream position among Christian/Western people for nearly 1,400 years—ever since Muhammad started raiding, plundering, massacring, and enslaving non-Muslims (“infidels”) in the name of his god; and it is because his followers, Muslims, continue raiding, plundering, massacring, and enslaving “infidels” that fear and dislike of Islam—what is called “Islamophobia”—exists to this day.

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a CBN News contributor. He is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (2013) and The Al Qaeda Reader (2007).

EMISCO and the Ongoing Push Against “Islamophobia” by the OSCE

emisco-isis

Gates of Vienna, by Baron Bodissey Sept. 26, 2016:

The following report was written by the Counterjihad Collective after several members attended an EMISCO side event today at the OSCE/HDIM conference in Warsaw.

bulentsenayThe forum was structured so that the closing statements, given by Bülent Şenay, were delivered after the question-and-answer period to ensure a final word. The panel seemed defensive, with panel members making strident statements about various political parties, labeling them as “racist” and “Islamophobic”. Building on narratives emphasized in 2014, their efforts were aimed at escalating the Islamophobia rhetoric in the guise of racism and gender, with all of the women appearing in head coverings, amid a constant reference to the wearing of headscarves. Also of note was a peculiar omission: the materials associated with side event did not provide the names of the briefers.

Because EMISCO and the Turkish complement were force to acknowledge that the term “Islamophobia” lacks a definition, this question was presented again in this forum. The other question concerned the definition of “new form of racism not based on skin color” and “manifestations of racism” as well. The panel did not answer the question on racism. Quraishy answered that Islamophobia was not about reasonable disagreements. In his closing remarks, however, Bülent Şenay became visibly agitated, went off his prepared notes (he said) and forcefully declared that our asking the question was both Islamophobic and ridiculous because “we all know what it means” and hence “I won’t define it.” He went on to insist, however, that “we must define Islamophobia as a crime.” Of course, defining Islamophobia is an issue because criminalizing an activity that lacks a definition is a serious civil rights and verges on the criminalization of thought.

Professor Bülent Şenay speaks under color of some authority, which makes his observations something more than just the comments of a professor. The professor sits on the OSCE Human Rights Advisory Council, is a founding member of the Governing Board of EMISCO, and was the Diplomatic Counsel¬or for Religious and Cultural Affairs at the Turkish Embassy in The Hague from 2008 to 2012. In September 2013, Professor Şenay oversaw the drafting of a declaration that defined Islamophobia as “a groundless fear and intolerance of Islam and Muslims” that is “detrimental to international peace” such that there “should be recogni¬tion of Islamophobia as a hate crime and Islamophobic attitudes as human rights violations.” The declaration was written for the “International Conference on Islamophobia: Law & Media” in Istanbul, which was co-sponsored by Turkey’s Directorate General of Press and Information and the OIC. At the conference, Turkish President Erdoğan stated that “Islamophobia” is a “kind of racism” that is “a crime against humanity.” In 2014, Şenay felt comfortable chiding the Western audience by saying, “if I were to present a particular favor, this would be the title, ‘A New Cultural ISIS — International Strong Ignorance Syndrome’” as he presented his briefing with the title, “Is¬lamophobia in the 21st Century: International Strong IgnoranceSyndrome in Europe (ISIS).” In doing so, Şenay was suggesting that the extremism was in the reactions of the West, not in the acts of ISIS.

***

Stephen Coughlin at OSCE today by Vlad Tepes

Some may remember Stephen Coughlin’s intervention at a 2015 OSCE meeting where they openly admitted that hate speech should be a criminal matter and that the truth can indeed be hate speech.

Stephen went back to the OSCE “Human Development Implementation Meeting” today and spoke again to this committee, who seem bound and determined to use the language of cultural-Marxism to turn free societies into totalitarian Marxist and communist ones.

***

Clare Lopez on Islamic antisemitism at the OSCE – Turkish response follows by Vlad Tepes

This is Clare Lopez’s presentation at the OSCE, the European body that seeks to criminalize criticism of Islam as hate speech, today in Warsaw.

According to those watching the conference via live stream, this odd set of remarks by the Turkish delegate was a response to Clare’s presentation, as well as the rest of the interventions by Center for Security Policy personnel.

***

Elisabeth Sabaditsch Wolff OSCE Human Dimension Implementation meeting Warsaw 2106

***

Tundra Tabloids:

At the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe in Warsaw Poland, Atheists Ireland spokesman denounces the term “Islamofauxbia” as a fraudulent term.

***

Vlad Tepesblog:

Dave Petties OSCE presentation September 27 2016

***

Vlad Tepesblog:

Stephen Coughlin OSCE Sept 27

People’s Cube: Gurka-Burka, Burkini, and Other Wordplay is Islamophobic

gurka

Truth Revolt, Sept. 8, 2016:

From our favorite satire site The People’s Cube comes their take on the real-life controversy over a cucumber shaped like someone in a burka — yes, it’s a real controversy. Read below:

It has come to our attention that Mayor Simone Stein-Lücke of Bonn, Germany, has come under fire for sharing a picture of a cucumber on social media. If she were to share a picture of a cucumber inside of a condom as an educational visual aide for local kindergartners, she might have been praised for her courage and open-mindedness. Unfortunately, this Mayor chose to share a picture of a cucumber (Gurke in German) that looked like the Islamic burka, and named it “Gurka.”

Read more about it here: WHAT A GHERKIN: German mayor blasted for posting picture of a cucumber that looks like somebody wearing a BURKA

In this regard, our scientists at the Karl Marx Treatment Center have come up with the following recommendation:

All progressive humanity should henceforth abstain from all kinds of humor, puns, spoonerisms, malapropisms, and other forms of wordplay, which by default are offensive to the ever increasing Islamic community, whose culture denounces jokes as bold-faced lies and mandates a strictly literal interpretation of any statement lest the author be accused of blasphemy and executed.

Even if the joke or wordplay has nothing to do with Islam, it is nearly impossible for a Westerner to know the potential extent of offence it may or may not contain for a devout Muslim. Therefore, any humor in public space should be thoroughly rationed and posted on social media only with express permission of trained government professionals, who will review the jokes and/or puns within 72 hours upon written submission and issue a special one-time permit to share the joke and/or pun along with a recommended amount of spontaneous laughter based on a state-approved scale, from one to ten, ten being the loudest and the most heart-felt.

This includes Internet memes, Photoshops, and any other images that contain elements of fantasy, absurdity, or simply allow multiple interpretations, especially if they are based on wordplay.

On the subject of cucumbers or any other vegetables, examples include the renowned People’s Cube classic, “The Beetles on the Abbey Road”…

beetles_abbey_road

…or even this lovely picture of a Muslima wearing a Burkini.

burkini_beach_dress

The Jihadi Network in America

UTT, by John Guandolo, March 4, 2016:

Time Magazine blames “Islamophobia” for America’s ills.  Congressman John Conyers says the House bill to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a “Foreign Terrorist Organization” is Islamophobic because, according to Conyers, “Since swearing off violence in the 1950s, the Brotherhood has become a predominantly non-violent religious, political, and social service organization.”  The Speaker of the House Paul Ryan successfully pushed for tax payers to fund U.S. visas for over 300,000 Muslims.

It is time to again speak truth about the massive jihadi network in America that has penetrated all levels of our society, is responsible for killing thousands of Americans, and appears to have the full support of many in the media, political, religious, and educational realms.

The very first national Islamic organization in America – the Muslim Students Association (MSA) – was created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood in 1963 at the University of Illinois (Urbana).

Today, there are over 700 MSA chapters on nearly every major college and university campus in America.

In November 2001, the largest Islamic charity in America (Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development) was indicted and later convicted in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history.  The evidence revealed the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) – again, the largest Islamic charity in America – was a Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas organization which sent millions of dollars overseas to Hamas leaders and organizations in violation of federal law (US v HLF, Dallas, 2008).

Between 1963 and the 2001 indictment of HLF, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood (MB) built a network in America including mosques, clinics, social and media organizations, legal foundations, medical and trade associations, educational groups, and others all of which were created to fulfill the MB’s stated mission in America – “Civilization Jihad” to overthrow our government and replace it with an Islamic State, under which Sharia (Islamic Law) will be the law of the land.

All of this is a matter of fact and evidence proffered by the Department of Justice and several arms of the United States government.

All of this has also been exhaustively detailed by UTT (and others) in articles, books, videos, and interviews.  It can also be found, in part, in Muslim Brotherhood writings here, here, and here.

In the early 1980’s, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) to be the “nucleus” of the Islamic Movement on the continent.  It was formed by the many of the leaders who created the Muslim Students Association (MSA) as an outgrowth of the MSA.  ISNA became an umbrella organization for all of the MB organizations created in America to that point.

ISNA Headquarters in Plainfield, Indiana

ISNA Headquarters in Plainfield, Indiana

In the year ISNA was created, the U.S. MB created over 100 organizations to serve its mission of Civilization Jihad.  These included Islamic Societies, Islamic Centers/Mosques, and other organizations across the United States.

In 1992, after the MB’s strategic plan (An Explanatory Memorandum) and their plan to implement the strategy (Implementation Manual) were published, Islamic organizations began being created which exactly matched the Implementation Manual’s plan.  In other words, they created and continue to create the organizations they said they need to in order to achieve victory here in North America.

Since that time, between 80 and 120 Islamic non-profit organizations have been created annually.  That is over 20 years of creating organizations dedicated to the implementation of the Islamic State here.

Today in the United States there are over 2200 Islamic Centers/Mosques, most of which are a part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s network. The MB states in An Explanatory Memorandum their Islamic Centers are the “axis” of their Movement to “supply our battalions.”  They state their Mosques are the place from which they will launch the jihad.  If we use a conservative estimate that 80% of U.S. Islamic Centers/Mosques are MB controlled, that gives us over 1700 hostile mosques in America.

Hundreds of chapter offices operated by Hamas (dba CAIR), the Muslim American Society (MAS), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), and all of the others they are creating adds to the enemy forces on our soil.

Let us not forget about the Iranian/Hizbollah network here, which is also widespread and dangerous to our way of life.  That will be covered in a future report.

Snapshot of the Jihadi Network
1700+ Islamic Centers/Mosques
700+ Muslim Students Associations
160+ Islamic Societies

Nearly every act of jihad from 9/11 to the Fort Hood massacre to the Boston Marathon bombing to the recent machete attack in Ohio, and the hundreds of other jihadi attacks on American soil, can be linked to Muslim Brotherhood mosques and organizations.

Leaders of ISNA:  sit on the Homeland Security Advisory Committee and hold SECRET clearances; advise the national security staffs; have advised at least the last 4 Secretaries of State; certify Muslim Chaplains for the Department of Defense and the Bureau of Prisons….and on it goes.

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a Hamas organization, yet its leaders can be found on CNN and Fox, and walking the halls of Congress unimpeded by the fact they are terrorists.

Ibrahim Hooper, Nihad Awad, Mahdi Bray

Ibrahim Hooper, Nihad Awad, Mahdi Bray

corey saylor

There has been ZERO action by the federal government against this enemy since the US v HLF trial, and even that did not target the massive jihadi network.

In a declassified FBI document from 1987, the Muslim Brotherhood was identified as a “secret Muslim organization that has unlimited funds and is extremely well organized in the United States…They have also claimed success in infiltrating the United States government…IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought) leadership has indicated that in this phase their organization needs to peacefully get inside the United States government and also American universities…the ultimate goal of the Islamic revolution is the overthrow of all non-Islamic governments and that violence is a tool and a part of the Islamic revolution.”

This document is nearly 30 years old.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Movement in the United States includes thousands of Islamic organizations across all 50 states.  Their leaders are the exclusive advisors to senior U.S. leaders, pastors, Chambers of Commerce, our military and law enforcement agencies, and decision-makers at the local, state, and federal level.

Only aggressive and decisive action at the local level dedicated to uprooting this enemy from our communities and destroying it can prevent this cancer from achieving it’s objective.