After declaring “Islamist” haram, Feds say “Islamization Denigrates Muslims”

How dare you link Muslims to terrorism?

WASHINGTON – The American Freedom Law Center has filed a notice of appeal in the United States Court of Appeals on behalf of political activists Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, who have been refused permission by the government to trademark their “Stop Islamization of America” campaign.

Geller, a WND columnist, and Spencer head the human rights organization called Freedom of Defense Initiative, and they applied to register SIOA as a trademark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

The feds told them no.

The USPTO rejected FDI’s application in an “Office Action” based on the following analysis: (1) “Islamisation” means converting to Islam or “to make Islamic;” and (2), “Stop” would be understood to mean that “action must be taken to cease, or put an end to, converting or making people in America conform to Islam.”

Thus, the trademark, according to the “Office Action” ruling, disparaged Muslims and linked them to terrorism.

But SIOA’s stated goal is to “foster and provide an understanding of how to prevent Shariah-based tyranny and Islamist terrorism.”

Shariah is a controversial part of the Islamic law that has come under criticism in the West and worldwide for its repressive rules and cruel and unusual punishments for crimes. Chopping hands off convicted thieves is an example.

But the denial was upheld by the Trademark Trial & Appeal Board, and now the AFLC appealed the USPTO’s rejection.

The organization has filed a detailed brief demonstrating that the term “Islamisation” is not a broadly defined term referring to the conversion of individuals to Islam or culturally spreading Islam. Rather, the group argued that “Islamisation” refers to the specific process of implanting Shariah into society specifically for the purpose of replacing existing law with a “Shariah-compliant Islamic state,” according to FDI.

AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel Robert Muise commented: “It is crucial that Americans understand the threat that our nation faces from Shariah-adherent Islam, especially from stealth jihadists who covertly seek to perpetuate Shariah into American society. This trademark does exactly that.

“The TTAB’s opinion upholding the USPTO’s rejection of the mark was forced to bend itself into a pretzel to get around the only evidence in the record. The term ‘Islamisation’ is a political movement – not religious conversion – and it can be traced to the Muslim Brotherhood, where it is found in their own documents advocating ‘civilizational jihad,’” Yerushalmo stated.

“Furthermore, the term is used frequently in professional and academic contexts,” he continued. Therefore, “stopping Islamisation” and linking this doctrine to terrorism does not implicate good, patriotic, loyal Muslims in America; instead, it is an important educational tool that raises awareness about those who seek the demise of our constitutional Republic through a Shariah-based political process.”

At the oral argument before the TTAB, Yerushalmo argued that the only evidence in the record providing an actual meaning of “Islamisation” was the definition provided by his clients.

3 thoughts on “After declaring “Islamist” haram, Feds say “Islamization Denigrates Muslims””

  1. “… How dare you link Muslims to terrorism?”

    Because Muhammad was the FIRST Islamic terrorist!

    The prophet of Islam boasted, “I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy, i.e. unbelievers 8:59)” Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220
    Allah, 3:151, 59:2, 8:12, 8:59/60

  2. I actually agree that ‘islamist’ is a stooopid term. It should be moslem, muslim, mohammedan, or however you spell it (I like moooSLUM). ‘islamist’ is not a term that is used in islam, unless it is done by those Muslim Brotherhood members who like we get confused about who the real violent jihadist moslems are.

  3. Morality is doing what’s right regardless of what you’re told.
    Authority is doing what you’re told regardless of what’s right.

    Legalists are authoritarians – those who pretend to believe there is no morality, so the only things which are lawful are those which some legislator subjectively made into law.

    They refuse to see that islam is crime, because they have been told by their masters it isn’t.

    Political correctness = factual incorrectness (lying; fraud; CRIME).

    Deliberately maintaining the LIE that Jihad = “peaceful inner struggle,” against ALL the clear evidence and Qur’anic definitions to the contrary, is not only to wilfully engage in perpetuating the perpetration of the crime of public deception, but to act as a willing accessory enabling all the crimes of our self-determined moslem enemies.

    Any lawyer, judge, or politician who enages in such practices is a criminal and an outlaw, and so should be dealt with accordingly.

    Islam is crime, period.

    It is not a race nor a religion. This (il)legal ruling effectively forbids people from “denigrating” criminals by defining them AS criminals, and seeks to prevent people from warning others about criminals and their crimes.


Comments are closed.