Except when it doesn’t:

The OIC has perverted the UN to such an extend that any criticism of Islam is now automatically ‘hate-speech’. Under the Obama regime, Mohammedans around the world will be further encouraged to further their goals….

Diana West/Mercury/thanks to Mullah

When reading stories about that formerly obscure Florida preacher who wants to mark the ninth anniversary of 9/11 by burning a stack of Qurans, bear in mind that the only law he breaks in doing so is Islamic law. With this in mind, it should become clear that the extraordinary global campaign against this stunt is yet another concerted effort, aided by an army’s worth of useful fools, to bring our constitutional republic into conformance with Islamic law.

Hate crime, hate crime: Unindicted co-conspirator, Hamas linked, Muslim Brotherhood front CAIR is calling for the prosecution “to the full extent of state and federal law” in the case of a burned qu’ran copy. (Atlas Shrugs)   What Law? It’s Free Speech, Stupid

Islam demands “respect” with an intensity and strategic purpose well beyond other beliefs. (Still) don’t believe me? For indelible culture contrast, imagine the worldwide body count in reaction to a hypothetical NEA-funded project entitled “Piss Mohammed,” or the absence of a worldwide body count in reaction to the Army’s actual decision to discard and burn a bunch of Bibles on a U.S. base in Afghanistan last year for fear of offending Muslims in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan — a land where Christian converts (Abdul Rahman) and promoters of (minimal) women’s rights (Sayed Pervez Kambakhsh) must flee with their lives, by the way.

As we have witnessed in Cartoon Rage, Pope Rage, Commode Quran Rage, “Fitna” Rage, More Cartoon Rage, etc., “respecting” Islam in fact means exempting this religious-political ideology from “slander,” “defamation,” any mockery, criticism, analysis, resistance, denunciation or rejection — or else. And we all know what “or else” means —or else murder and mayhem will convulse some region where Muslims live, leaving behind a permanent threat of death to non-repentant “offenders.”

What Islam is demanding, then, is a separate speech code for itself. This demand is manifested at the highest diplomatic levels in a strategic campaign by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the Islamic bloc of 57 nations that functions in the international arena as an Islamic supra-state. The OIC has long been maneuvering to bring international law into conformance with Islamic law by prohibiting “defamation of religions” — namely Islam — at the United Nations.

This same demand also manifests itself in the society-level assumption that Islam should somehow exist in a state of exaltation that no Western society grants any belief system, or any God. This assumption is increasingly becoming consensus among non-Muslims. Why?

One answer is because people who do not believe in Allah, from Sarah Palin to Gen. David Petraeus to assorted ministers and rabbis, have succumbed to a specifically Islamic brand of blackmail (the “or else” of violence or other outbreaks of “extremism”), thus accommodating and even lobbying for the uniquely Islamic prohibitions against written, pictorial or symbolic criticism.

In so doing, they have also succumbed to the Islamic narrative. That narrative, or rationale, tells us that burning a Quran causes murder and mayhem, putting our troops, our citizens, our cities and our interests at increased risk. In this narrative, the actual bad actors are absolved of both volition and blame. Similarly, drawing cartoons of Muhammad (Kurt Westergaard, Lars Vilks) — or not drawing cartoons of Muhammad (“South Park”) — sermonizing about violence within Islam (the Pope), and critiquing Islam (Geert Wilders’ “Fitna”) are increasingly viewed as unacceptably “insensitive” and “disrespectful” provocations in Western society, regardless of their free-speech protections.

“Do you now believe that people died because of this erroneous report?” Pentagon spokesman Lawrence DiRita was asked way back in 2005, regarding Newsweek’s retracted report that a Quran went down a toilet at Guantanamo Bay. “I do,” he replied. “I absolutely do.”

Guess that “erroneous report” should have gotten the electric chair — or at least life without parole. Of course, last time I looked, that report was just as inanimate an object as the book entitled the Quran. Assuming these objects are not stolen property, either one could go into the incinerator or the library accordingly. Instead, of course, they go down in history as a kind of murderer and victim, with the non-Islamic world assuming all responsibility — all guilt — for the actions of barbarians who pillage and kill at the drop of, well, a Quran. This is rank capitulation to dhimmitude, the non-Islamic state of deference to Islamic law, and it is now being repeated in the misdirected Western offensive against the Florida preacher — an effort that should be turned into an unapologetic defense of his constitutional rights.

Repeat after me: The Constitution trumps Islamic law.

Diana West is the author of “The Death of the Grown-up: How America’s Arrested Development Is Bringing Down Western Civilization,” and blogs at dianawest.net. She can be contacted viadianawest@verizon.net.

Islamic world rages about Swiss minaret ban while persecuting non-Muslims wholesale

Bandow provides a useful general survey; I’ve included his reports on some of the more modern, moderate states below. “The Problem of Islamic Religious Persecution: How is it that only Western nations are accused of ‘defaming’ religion?,” by Doug Bandow for National Review, via JW

Reminder: “The Term ‘Moderate Islam’ Is Ugly And Offensive; There Is No Moderate Islam; Islam Is Islam”, Turkey Prime Minister Erdogan

Qaradawi calls for “peaceful campaign”  to reverse Swiss minaret ban

“It is obligatory on the part of the Swiss government to take necessary measures to safeguard the lives of the Muslim minority against this animosity.

“The IFU urges the Muslim minority in Switzerland to be calm and restrain from emotional reactions. They should seek to have this decision annulled through legal and democratic channels. And work in co-ordination with all those local and international organisations that have deplored this decision.

“The IFU also calls upon the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) to launch an international campaign against this decision and to expose the double standards practised by the Western countries.”

Gulf Times, 2 December 2009

Tariq Ramadan calls French Burqa Ban “counterproductive”

“This debate surrounding the burqa bothers me,” Ramadan told the panel. (of course it does. Any move to reverse the creeping Islamization of Europe bothers this headbanger/more>>>

• Jihad/martyrdom bomber disguised as veiled woman murders 3 Somali cabinet ministers
• “Caucasian Mujahadeen”claim Russian train bombing –
• UK: Muslim teen gang members boast about becoming suicide bombers

‘Iran building terror network in South America’

Atlas Shrugs:

Muslim Pirates Open Up a “Stock Exchange” in Somalia

Marxist Muslim POTUS Obama hijacks America:

Demon-rat Waxman: Government Must Control Media

Free Press, a public interest group, said the search for solutions to the crisis in journalism should be premised on the idea that news-gathering is a public service, not a commodity.

Editor’s Note: The danger presented by any — any — government intervention into the free media far outweighs any benefit that could be conceived. If newspapers have to go the way of the dinosaur because of technological advancement, so be it. A truly free press cannot be compromised by opportunistic and ideological politicians nervously scrambling to maintain the information pipeline status quo.

No coincidence:

Feinstein, Durbin Seek To Limit Citizen Journalism

Two key Democrats have introduced an amendment that would put citizen journalists at risk, giving protections to only established journalists.

Read the rest here

Search Rage:

DAYTON, Ohio, July 23 (UPI) – A Muslim woman was pulled out of line and subjected to a pat-down search at an Ohio airport because she was wearing “traditional dress”, an advocacy group said.

Bad News Update:

 CAIR Hails ‘Major Victory’ in Six Imams Lawsuit – Minnesota judge clears way for case to go to trial in August

• Another moonbat judge rules against the interests of all Americans:scroll down…

We’ve been advocating the solution to this problem for a long time… click here to see the full size cartoon

Of course, CAIR pounces on it with a vengeance:

CAIR, The Council on American-Islamic Relations said Wednesday it has complained to the federal Transportation Security Administration and the Department of Homeland Security, the Dayton Daily News reported.

The woman, who was wearing a long dress and headscarf, was detained for 70 minutes at Dayton International Airport June 2 after being selected for a more extensive search, the group said. She agreed to a search in a private room by three female agents.

The agents ordered the woman to pull up her dress to expose her body while one of them searched beneath her underwear, the group said.

The TSA said travelers wearing bulky or loose-fitting clothes may face additional searching.

“Flying Imam’s” case update:

Muslims are not allowed to fart when they bang their heads on the floor. Passing women, dogs or donkeys make the prayers invalid…

‘Major Victory’ in Six Imams Civil Rights Case

A prominent national Muslim civil rights and advocacy group today hailed what it termed a “major victory” in the case of six imams, or Islamic religious leaders, who say their civil and religious rights were violated in 2006 when they were removed from a US Airways flight in Minnesota.

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery today denied several motions to dismiss the case and ruled that a law passed by Congress after the incident did not grant protection from lawsuits to those sued by the imams.

Judge Montgomery also ruled that the actions of the imams prior to their flight did not justify their detention. She noted that the imams were subjected to “extreme fear and humiliation of being falsely identified as dangerous terrorists.”

The ruling stated: “Unquestionably the events of 9/11 changed the calculus in the balance American society chooses to make, especially in airport settings, between liberty and security. . .But when a law enforcement officer exercises the power of the Sovereign over its citizens, she or he has a responsibility to operate within the bounds of the Constitution and cannot raise the specter of 9/11 as an absolute exception to that responsibility.”

In a statement, the imams’ attorneys Omar T. Mohammedi and Frederick J. Goetz said: “The judge’s ruling demonstrates clearly that the flying public does not lose their constitutional rights when they board an aircraft or step into an airport.”

Absurd situation due to politically correct “non-profiling” policies

Hijabbed security guard frisks nun 

What should bother everyone about this pic is that  muslims work in airport security.