The "Islamophobia" Racket

Flint Islamic Center works to erase Islamophobia ~

but where is the Muslim voice for respect for non-Muslims / religious freedoms in the Muslim world [Video] (Source)

“Jihad is inner struggle”, and then there are “misconceptions”, so just go to the mosque and let them do their da’awa vodoo on you. Or else!

Our unabashed dictionary defines ‘Islamophobia’ as a non-Muslim who knows too much about Islam….. Dr. Spencer has the cure, right here!

Ahmad Sirhindi, a scholar of Islam teaches:

Whenever a Jew is killed, it is for the benefit of Islam.

The honor of Islam lies in insulting kufr and kafirs. One who respects kafirs, dishonors the Muslims. To respect them does not merely mean honouring them and assigning them a seat of honor in any assembly, but it also implies keeping company with them or showing considerations to them. They should be kept at an arm’s length like dogs. … If some worldly business cannot be performed without them, in that case only a minimum of contact should be established with them but without taking them into confidence. The highest Islamic sentiment asserts that it is better to forego that worldly business and that no relationship should be established with the kafirs.

The real purpose in levying jizya on them is to humiliate them to such an extent that, on account of fear of jizya, they may not be able to dress well and to live in grandeur. They should constantly remain terrified and trembling. It is intended to hold them under contempt and to uphold the honor and might of Islam.
(Kafir friendship/Wikislam)

Latest update:  “Blasphemous Sketches”

Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu (OIC)  whines about “Tyranny of Silence” in Denmark, condemns Danish book on cartoon row

Paki Foreign Minister Mehmood Qureshi whines about the “stereotyping of Muslims as terrorists”:

Islam is a religion of peace, he says,  the international community must commit more $$$$  to  fight terrorism and then some :

“It is also essential to address the root causes of terrorism, which are often found in poverty, deprivation, injustices and oppression,” he said. (UPI) (He sounds just like slick Willie. But Willie is only in it for the money….)

At least 20 British nationals training for jihad in Pakistan

(No doubt they’re all in Pakistan because of poverty, deprivation, injustices and oppression in the UK)

Latest jihadist threat tied to German Misunderstanders of Islam training in Pakistan

Nothing but poverty, deprivation, injustices and oppression, wherever we look…..

Whatever it takes to shut you up:

KINGS, emirs and presidents from Muslim nations have appealed at the UN for the West to clamp down on attacks on Islam, which they warned were a growing threat to international security.  (AFP/The Australian)

Malaysia’s PM praises Obama for condemning “Islamophobia,” says he must aid moderate Muslims

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak thinks that standing up to “Islamophobia” takes political courage. One wonders what planet he lives on.

Spencer: The “Islamophobia” Weapon

“We are facing daunting challenges and severe hardships,” Ihsanoglu complained. “Islam and Muslims are under serious attack, and Islamophobia is growing and becoming more rampant and dangerous by the day.”

Ihsanoglu, with an evasion of responsibility that is characteristic of Islamic supremacists, pretends that non-Muslims are growing more suspicious of Muslims and Islam not because of this, but because of some gratuitous bigotry. This is a tried and tested tactic, designed precisely to divert attention from Islamic jihad attacks and to shame and discredit those who would dare stand up to jihad (both violent and stealth) and Islamic supremacism in the West.  (Human Events)

“The new norm is a self-censorship consistent with Muslim teaching that Islam must be free from insult, though other religions may be insulted at all times”

In “Radical Islam gets the better of free speech” in the Star Tribune, September 25, Katherine Kersten asks why American journalists have not rallied to the cause of Molly Norris

Modern, moderate Malaysian government warns that “stern action” will be taken against those who “insult Islam”

They want to “avoid any untoward incidence” — i.e., Muslims going mad and murdering innocent people because of something this priest said. And so we see once again that terrorism and violent intimidation work, which will only ensure that we will see much more of both. “Insult On Islam: Government Will Not Keep Quiet – Dd Mashitah,” from Bernama,

Bat Ye’or: OIC and the Modern Caliphate

In “OIC and the Modern Caliphate” in the American Thinker, September 26 (thanks toPamela Geller), the world’s leading scholar of Islamic antisemitism, dhimmitude, and the Islamization of Europe, Bat Ye’or, exposes the Organization of the Islamic Conference:

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

The Organization of the Islamic Conference continues to pretend that it is Western non-Muslims, not Islamic jihadists, who are responsible for the link between Islam and terrorist violence, and are hoping by means of laws against “incitement to religious hatred,” which are of course to be interpreted and applied by them, to render us mute and hence defenseless in the face of the advancing jihad. “OIC calls for urgent collective measures against Islamophobia,” by Habib Shaikh in the Saudi Gazette, September 27

United Nations Wants To Regulate Free Speech Of Every Nation

Tundra Tabloids presents:

Why in the world couldn’t Kitty Pilgrim answer Lou Dobbs’ question:

Lou Dobbs:Of those 57 nations supporting this resolution, how many of them are a democracies?

Kitty Pilgrim: “I couldn’t tell you, but.. many of them are Islamic countries.. uh..Pakistan has led the charge on this and has ..uh.. tabled this resolution…

Fortunately Dobbs has the presence of mind to help her out with that most basic of questions.

Lou Dobbs: So they’re not democracies, and they’re facinated with their own precepts about what would constitute the way to run a nation “not like ours”.

Is there any discussion, perhaps, of simply, if the United Nations insists on doing this, sort of bulldozing the building, getting it out of the way and letting them go find another place to live?

Islamo-propagandist Mehdi Hassan howls along:

8 thoughts on “The "Islamophobia" Racket”

  1. The West is in peril of Islamic infiltration and takeover, a process that will be all bad. Too bad, the media are dominated by Islam history ignoramuses and Muslim disinformation artists who see no threat, repeating the pattern of many proud civilizations of the past before they were absorbed forever. When it comes to Islam, political principles learned via study of the last couple of centuries of history won’t work, nor will appeasement. Study Islam on its own terms before trying to decide how to deal with it by taking the Historyscoper’s free online Islam history course that helps you master all 1400 years at your own pace at

  2. Danish Motoon book without reprints of individual Motoons isn’t good enough for the OIC

    Of course it isn’t, because the OIC is not after partial submission to its demands that free speech become subject to Sharia. So, a book about the cartoons that doesn’t condemn them as the worst crime against humanity in the past 100 years, and that even reproduces a reduced-size version of the front page of Jyllands-Posten from the day the ‘toons were printed, still leaves a lot to be suppressed as far as the OIC is concerned.

    And do remember that the OIC wants the UN to develop “a legally binding institutional instrument” to put an end to free speech that could offend Islamic sensibilities.

    As shown below, they push their agenda by portraying anything offensive to or critical of Islam as “incitement.” Never mind the fact that the people getting hurt in the wake of the cartoons have been in danger from Muslims threatening and attacking the artists and publishers, or from rampages by Muslims in the streets of Muslim countries.

    But unless and until the OIC can corral enough sympathizers and useful idiots at the UN to get its way, there’s much bullying to be done of individual countries — in this case, Denmark.

    An update on this story. “OIC condemns publication of Danish book,” by Habib Shaikh for the Khaleej Times, October 2 (thanks to Jihad Watch):

    JEDDAH — The Organisation of the Islamic Conference has condemned the publication of the book Tyranny of Silence in Denmark.
    The book, containing blasphemous caricatures, hit the stores in Denmark on Thursday amid concerns over a backlash from the Muslim world.
    The cartoons were first published by the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in 2005, resulting in condemnation from Muslims around the world.
    Note the incredible sense of entitlement to order around the Danish government:

    OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu expressed his dismay and disappointment at the release of the book despite the fact that he, and some leaders of Muslim countries, had personally written letters to the foreign minister of Denmark, urging the Danish government to stop the publication of the book because of its highly provocative and inciting content.
    Incitement to what? Laughter at the cartoons? Smiles? Nods of approval as one proceeds through the book?

    He reiterated this position when he met the foreign minister of Denmark recently on the sidelines of the 65th session of the UN General Assembly.
    Emphasising the moral responsibility of the political leadership of Denmark, Ihsanoglu said the publication of the book was a deliberate attempt to incite prejudice and animosity. This would undermine the ongoing efforts of the international community to promote understanding and peaceful coexistence among people of diverse religious and cultural backgrounds.
    Referring to a statement issued by the Danish foreign ministry, he said the publication constituted a flagrant violation of the stipulation of Article 20 of the 1966 International Convention on Civil and Political Rights.
    It’s always ironic to hear the OIC talk about civil and political rights. What’s the priority here? A Muslim’s right not to be offended by a cartoon.

    He added that in addition the Danish Criminal Code, in section 140, stipulates that people’s religious feelings should be protected against mockery and scorn; and in section 266, stipulates that groups of persons should be protected against scorn and degradation on account of their religion, among other things.
    If that law is correct as he quoted it, it certainly never anticipated the abuses and agenda of Islamic law. Danes might do well to modify it in response.

    He said the publication of the book substantiates OIC’s argument that certain groups and individuals are abusing freedom of expression laws to fuel hatred towards Islam and Muslims in some parts of the Western world.
    All criticism, all concerns, all expressions of disagreement with Islamic teachings must reflect an upwelling of seething, bilious hatred, you see. And all those hurt feelings from satire and parody: you’re committing feeling-cide with malice aforethought!

    You’re a feeling-cidal maniac, you monster!

  3. Pushback Against the OIC — From the UN


    In case anyone was wondering whether the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC, the body formerly known as the Organization of the Islamic Conference) was going to take advantage of last week’s massacre in Norway, the suspense is gone. The latest interview with OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ä°hsanoÄŸlu demonstrates that the OIC intends to exploit the killing fields of Utøya for strategic purposes as part of its ten-year struggle against “Islamophobia”.

    Below are some excerpts from today’s issue of Today’s Zaman:

    OIC head Ä°hsanoÄŸlu: Breivik’s massacre in Norway tip of iceberg

    The chief of the world’s largest Muslim body has said the Norway massacre and blast that left at least 76 dead and dozens injured is only “the tip of the iceberg,” warning that the incident is the latest product of rampantly rising extremist political movement sweeping across Europe.

    Ekmelledin Ä°hsanoÄŸlu, secretary-general of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) told Today’s Zaman in an interview that growing animosity toward Islam in Europe in the past few years needs to be analyzed in order to decipher last week’s Norway massacre. Norwegian mass killer Anders Behring Breivik has admitted that he set off a car bomb in the government district of Oslo, killing at least eight people, then drove several miles northwest of the Norwegian capital to an island where the youth wing of the ruling Labor Party was holding its annual summer camp.

    He arrived at Utøya Island posing as a police officer, then opened fire on scores of unsuspecting youth, executing them one after another as they tried to flee into the water. Sixty-eight people died, many of them teenagers.

    Ä°hsanoÄŸlu said that before the incident on July 22 the Western world always either had a difficult time understanding or did not want to understand the phenomenon of growing Islamophobia. Giving credit to the organization he leads, Ä°hsanoÄŸlu said he has been very aware of this issue since he assumed his position in 2005. He said a series of major events revealing anti-Islamic sentiments afoot in Europe began with the infamous cartoon crisis.

    A Danish daily published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in 2006 that led to a crisis between European nations and the Muslim world. Muslims across the world staged protests, sometimes violently attacking the embassies of Western countries, which defended the cartoonist’s freedom of speech.

    Ä°hsanoÄŸlu said a great deal of what he had to deal with at the outset of his job as a secretary-general was related to this “insulting” issue. He said many senior European officials accused Muslims of trying to restrict freedom of speech, alleging that the outrage among Muslims was a result of their “extreme sensitivity” and that it is acceptable to draw cartoons of anyone.

    He said his organization was unable to persuade Europeans that it is animosity against Islam which is on rise, despite repeated calls. But he said by time this issue began to be debated, similar incidents had begun slowly increasing, and the OIC introduced this matter at the United Nations General Assembly and its human rights agency. He said they OIC was also successful in pushing for UN endorsement of several decisions related to defamation of religion. He said these resolutions, adopted at the United Nations Human Rights Council in March of this year, were in support of OIC’s viewpoints.

    Ä°hsanoÄŸlu added that these decisions were challenged by European nations, who argued that they are one-sided and restrict freedom of speech. He said the language of the statements was then changed to avoid bias, by specifying “religions and faiths” rather than “religion or faith.”

    European countries have been under fire for overlooking right-wing terrorism threats, while devoting much of their resources to Islamist threats, despite a sharp decline in the number of such attacks. In the wake of Norway’s terrorist attack, the European police agency Europol established a task force of more than 50 experts to help investigate non-Islamist terrorist threats in Scandinavian countries. Europe has seen an overall increase in xenophobia, boosting the ranks of ultranationalists and fueling their activity.

    In contrast, Europol’s 2011 terrorism watch report, released in April of this year, stated that Islamist terrorists carried out only three attacks on EU territory in 2010, while separatist groups, on the other hand, were responsible for 160 attacks and left-wing and anarchist groups were responsible for 45 attacks.

    Ä°hsanoÄŸlu said the Norway massacre is very thought-provoking, when we consider that Breivik had no tolerance for Muslims or for those who are tolerant of Muslims.

    The Secretary-General then reminds us that just a week before the killings in Norway, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton expressed herself in full agreement with the OIC’s position:
    Recalling a July 15 conference on the topic of interfaith dialogue in Ä°stanbul with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Ä°hsanoÄŸlu said that that meeting also stressed the importance of the UN Human Rights Council’s decision. The conference called on nations to reconcile freedom of speech and freedom of religion.

    “The participants … reaffirm their commitment to freedom of religion or belief and freedom of expression by urging states to take effective measures, as set forth in Resolution 16/18, consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to address and combat intolerance, discrimination, and violence based on religion or belief,” read the final declaration produced in the conference, in which Clinton, Ä°hsanoÄŸlu, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton, together with foreign ministers and officials from 19 countries, the Office of the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the Arab League and the African Union participated.

    Clinton and Ä°hsanoÄŸlu, who represents 57 Muslim nations in international forums, announced plans for future talks on how to reconcile freedom of speech with tolerance. Ä°hsanoÄŸlu urged in a speech given at the meeting that steps be taken to end double standards and racial or religious profiling. Such acts, he said, must not be condoned by states and should be addressed through structured and sustained engagement.

    It’s important to remember what “tolerance” means in this context: it means that Islam cannot be criticized.

    To criticize it is “intolerant”. Other examples of “intolerance” include:

    1. The accurate description by non-Muslims of Islamic beliefs.
    2. Non-Muslims quoting the Koran and the hadith correctly.
    3. Any descriptions of the prophet Mohammed’s marriage to a child.
    4. Any reference to documented evidence of Islam’s blood-soaked history of conquest…

    …and many, many more.

    In fact, any non-Muslim who says anything about Islam which differs from what Muslims say about it is intolerant.

    We’re an intolerant lot, we are.

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

    Over the last decade or so we’ve become accustomed to the United Nations acting as almost a surrogate for the OIC, what with its myriad resolutions condemning Israel, and its human rights bodies staffed by representatives of the most repressive dictatorships on the planet. So who would expect the resistance to the OIC’s illiberal agenda to originate in the UN Human Rights Committee?

    But that’s exactly what happened, unless this new document from the UNHRC has some fine print that is not described in this article from The Vancouver Sun:

    UN experts set out tough rules on human rights

    Geneva — The UN’s Human Rights Committee said on Thursday that freedom of expression was a “meta-right” underpinning all human rights everywhere.

    A long-awaited document from the panel of 18 jurists also said that freedom of opinion, and by extension religion, should not be restricted under any circumstances and warned governments that did so they would be violating a basic UN accord.

    The independent experts, set out their trenchant stance in a “general comment” on how parts of the UN’s Covenant on Civil and Political Rights should be interpreted and applied.

    The comment, committee vice-chairman Michael O’Flaherty, told a media conference, “is a strong reaffirmation of the central importance for all human rights of the freedom of expression”, even of giving views some see as deeply offensive.

    The 15-page document, interpreting two paragraphs of the 1976 Covenant, hit at anti-terror laws, monopoly media, anti-blasphemy statutes and prosecution of maverick historians.

    Islamic and some Western countries have blasphemy laws, and the “history” strictures were clearly aimed at criminalisation in some European countries, including Germany and Austria, of writings suggesting the World War II Holocaust was a myth.

    The UNHRC paper explicitly mentions the possibility that the killings in Norway might be exploited to restrict free speech, and warns against such action:

    Norway Debate

    By implication, the committee waded into a debate raging since last Friday’s killings in Norway by an anti-immigrant extremist over whether public or media criticism of Muslim practices, dubbed by some “Islamophobia”, should be restricted.

    Rather, said the jurists — including four from Muslim states — it was “prohibitions on displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system, including blasphemy laws” that would violate “free speech” provisions in the 167-nation covenant.

    That stricture, they said, would also apply to any move “to prevent or punish criticism of religious leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith” — action that Islamic countries have long sought in the world body.

    Some Muslim states such as Pakistan have signed up to the covenant but argue that shariah law — which bars conversion from Islam to other faiths or to atheism — takes precedence. O’Flaherty said such a view would violate the pact.

    Who would have thought that the last major resistance to the combined forces of Hillary Clinton and the OIC would be the United Nations? Imagine, the Human Rights Committee defending actual human rights.

    There is one problem, however: the UNHRC has no real teeth.

    It has no enforcement mechanism, but countries generally prefer to avoid falling foul of the 18 jurists who all have reputations as strong-minded legal and human rights specialists ready to speak out on violations anywhere.

    For right now, this is as about as good as it’s going to get. And it’s a lot better than I thought it would be just a few weeks ago.

    From the UN, of all places.

    Hat tip: Frontinus.

    Previous posts about Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu and the OIC:

    2007 Aug 31 The OIC is Barking Now
    Sep 7 OIC: Insulting Islam is an Illness
    12 Sweden Apologizes Again… Or Not
    Dec 10 Countering Islamophobia
    2008 Feb 17 Nice Little Civilization You Have Here…
    Mar 6 Our Man in the OIC
    13 An American Dhimmi in Dakar
    Apr 30 Is Europe a “Christian-Muslim” Continent?
    Jun 10 OIC: Time to Crack Down on Provocative Speech
    17 The OIC’s Plan for Fighting Islamophobia
    22 The OIC’s Crusade Against Islamophobia
    Aug 3 The Islam-Aligned Movement
    Sep 25 The OIC Fights Islamophobia at Columbia University
    Oct 11 Confronting Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu
    Nov 1 Fisking Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu
    2009 Mar 5 Mandating International Respect for Islam
    20 What is Eurabian Culture?
    2010 Jan 25 The Caliphate-in-Waiting
    Jul 27 Accommodating Sharia
    Oct 5 Decoding the Words of the OIC

Comments are closed.