The 'Islamophobia' canard after Mumbai

[Cricketics]

thise piece is written by Joel Sprayregen Saudi King Abdullah has been urging the United Nations to pass a universal law prescribing imprisonment for criticizing Islam. Some skeptics, including myself (notwithstanding that I twice enjoyed the King's generous hospitality in Riyadh), have suggested he start instead by establishing religious liberty in his own country, where all religious observance other than Wahabi Islam is banned. Two events occurring last week -- the hideous carnage in Mumbai, accompanied by shameful proceedings at the U.N. -- convinced me it is urgent for His Majesty to radically alter his plans. Since the U.N. actions were less publicized, let me begin there. A key U.N. committee passed by 85-50 the King's "Islamophobia" resolution, criminalizing any "defamation of religion," especially Islam. The General Assembly is expected to soon approve this measure. Governments will be directed to amend their criminal codes accordingly; the resolution will be incorporated into amorphous "customary international law," which liberal Supreme Court justices are relying on, notwithstanding that much of this "law" springs from anti-democratic sources. While "defamation of religion" conveys a sonorous label, Islamic countries consider "Islamophobic" any expression linking Islam to such subjects as 9/11, terror attacks, honor killings, suicide bombings, beheadings, executions by stoning, persecution of homosexuals, fatwas against authors, death threats to cartoonists, etc. The Organization of the Islamic Conference has decreed that even "hostile glances" are Islamophobic. Conspicuous omission As I surveyed reportage about Mumbai, I wondered if the Islamophobia resolution, had already become universal law, perhaps quietly ratified by our Congress, while I wasn't looking. Most coverage was so infested with political correctness that the words Muslim, Islamic and terrorists were never linked. The most egregious offender (guess who?): the New York Times. In its summary articles, you must read to the seventh paragraph before finding a word as strong as "militant" (a despicable misnomer bequeathed by the lexicon of political correctness) used to describe the terrorists. The Times -- echoing its deliberate nearly invisible under-reporting of the Holocaust -- lied on the last day of the siege by saying "It is not known if the Jewish center was strategically chosen or was an accidental hostage scene." CNN was equally terrified of offending terrorists. Most of the media refused to say that the killers were Islamic radicals; one might have thought they arrived from an un-named planet. Mehul Kamdar, a Chicago-based Indian writer, complained online "how extreme political correctness in the Western media keeps key information from being reported through self-censorship." While full investigation must be awaited to identify the murderers definitively, it was apparent from the outset that the terrorists (I beg forgiveness for using that harsh word) were Islamic extremists. Who else, pray tell, would indiscriminately slaughter Hindus, Christians and Jews, i.e., anyone who was not Muslim, while shouting "Allahu Akhbar" (according to eye-witnesses)? If the media had used in 1941 the truth-avoiding restraints practiced today, Pearl Harbor would have been reported without using the word "Japanese." To erase all doubt, the terrorists told Indian TV during the attacks that they were protesting "mistreatment of Muslims." Notwithstanding, Britain's respected Channel 4 falsely claimed the "militants" showed "wanton disregard for race or creed." Turkish hostages were spared when they screamed "We are Muslims." Christians next to them were executed. Alas, the media reflect unwillingness of society -- from the top down -- to face candidly the menace of Islamic radicalism. Messrs. Bush and Obama ritualistically condemned the attacks. Neither named the perpetrators. Bush misled us for years with the jargon "war against terror," instead of specifying the enemy. Obama spoke elliptically of combating "hateful ideology" without identifying it. Both leaders, like the media, gave us Pearl Harbor sans the Japanese. If we are to defeat the terrorists, we must name and understand them. And before I am hauled before the World Court on charges of Islamophobia, note I have not said the enemy is Islam. It is Islamic radicalism. It is unacceptable racism to suggest that all Muslims support terrorism; nonetheless, it remains legitimate to ask why support for terrorism is widespread among Muslims. Palestinians danced in the streets on 9/11 and widespread approbation of the atrocity was found among Arabs (before the U.S. invasion of Iraq). Last week also brought the Dallas federal jury verdict finding the Holy Land Foundation -- America's largest Islamic charity -- guilty of funneling more than $12 million to support Hamas terrorists. A Chicago federal appeals court ruled significantly this week that it is unlawful to funnel money to an organization engaged in terrorism even if there is an effort to earmark the donation for nonviolent purposes. King Abdullah, who once explained in my presence that his financial support of an infamous Hamas sheikh was merely "gifts to a sick old man," should tell us whether criticizing support of terrorists amounts to Islamophobia. Sending ACLU Lawyers to Mumbai While I have bi-partisanly disrespected the incoming and outgoing presidents for vacuous verbiage, let me emphasize one key difference between them. President Bush recognized after 9/11 that his prime responsibility was preventing reprise, as intended by al-Qaeda. He deserves hosannas for completely succeeding, albeit by utilizing harsh interrogations and intrusive surveillance as well as locking up enemy combatants. If you hated Bush's methods, you helped elect Senator Obama, who is entitled to pursue his own counter-terrorism agenda. I approve the moderate mettle of most of Obama's initial appointments, except -- most conspicuously -- the dangerous Harvard quack Samantha Power, who left the Obama campaign last summer after calling Hillary Clinton a "monster." But last week, Obama dropped John Brennan, his respected Intel adviser, from consideration for a high position after the Leftist blogosphere went berserk over guilt by alleged association with "harsh" interrogations. At an academic reunion in October, a brilliant Yale Law School panel, including the eminent Dean, could not answer coherently my question about what legal advice they would give to interrogators probing the intentions of a terrorist like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who planned 9/11 and slit Danny Pearl's throat. If the Obama team believes that we must treat terrorists like the Mumbai killers by reading them their rights and providing an ACLU lawyer, we are in for hard times. It is tragic that the Indians -- unlike our Administration -- did not draw meaningful lessons from the massive 2006 train bombings. Which returns me to King Abdullah and his resentment over Islamophobia. The 9/11 terrorists received Islamic education in his country. The Mumbai terrorists were indoctrinated in mosques and madrassas in Pakistan and perhaps elsewhere. Some horrific defect in their Islamic education rendered them eager to slaughter non-Muslims. It is emerging that there may be a Saudi link to the group which apparently organized the assault on Mumbai in furthering its known commitment to continuous jihad as an obligation binding on all Muslims. No less authoritative a source than Husain Haqqani, the distinguished scholar presently serving as Pakistani Ambassador to the U.S., wrote in 2006 about the group which sent the killers to Mumbai : "The most significant jihadi group of Wahabi persuasion is Lashkar-e-Taiba (The Army of the Pure) founded in 1989 by Hafiz Muhammad Saeed. Backed by Saudi money and protected by Pakistani intelligence services, Lashkar-e-Taiba became the military wing of Markaz al-Dawa wal-Irshad (Center for the Call to Righteousness). Saeed created a large campus and training facility at Muridke, outside the Pakistani metropolis of Lahore." Will Wahabi Scholars Condemn Massacres? Thus, I respectfully suggest to the monarch that he alter his course. Instead of concentrating on trying to jail people in western countries for criticizing Islam, I suggest that our Government and media ask him: Why don't you load your formidable religious establishment -- ulema, sheikhs, imams, cadis, mullahs, jurisprudents -- on one of your jumbo jets and dispatch them on an intensive teaching mission to madrassas and Islamic schools around the world, starting in Pakistan. Islam is not a hierarchical religion, but it claims to respect teachers. The first lesson might be: Murder is wrong. The second: Mass murder is worse. The third: Non-Muslims are children of G-d who have a right to live. If the educational mission succeeds, there will be no need for an Islamophobia law. And many lives might be saved. Joel J. Sprayregen, a Chicago lawyer, graduated from Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism and Yale Law School . As an ACLU lawyer, he litigated landmark free speech cases. Presently, he is associated with think tanks in Washington, Israel and Turkey which deal with international security issues. http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/12/the_islamophobia_canard_after.html

[kumble_rocks]

Saudi King Abdullah calling for interfaith dialogue is akin to Hitler calling for world peace. World leaders should have no illusions that this effort will miraculously promote mutual respect between religious communities or end abuses of religious freedom. Also, I see that the writer conveniently ignored the fact that Bush jr hosted the bigoted Prince Abdullah in his Crawford ranch and gave him five star treatment. So much for reigning on the Saudis by US of A. Every tom dick and harry knows by now that Petro dollars are being used by the Saudi monarchy to finance these Wahabi nutters to propagate their hate filled ideology. The Saudi royal family wanted to stay in power , their best bet was to stoke up religious intolerance. So they supported the Wahabi movements and nurtured the crazy mullahs . Little did they realize that , these mullahs bite the hand that feeds. Same goes for USA .. when they were busy fighting the Russians , these islamic nutter were fighting with them. Once Russia disintegrated , these fighters stayed back in Pu*kis**tan to cause more trouble. Serves Pu*kis**tan right , I say. While discriminating against muslims should not be condoned , I say nothing wrong in discriminating against moronic bigoted radical muslims especially the Wahabi kind who exhibit intolerance towards other religion .

[punjabi_khota]

Timely article this.

[DomainK]

thise piece is written by Joel Sprayregen Saudi King Abdullah has been urging the United Nations to pass a universal law prescribing imprisonment for criticizing Islam. Some skeptics, including myself (notwithstanding that I twice enjoyed the King's generous hospitality in Riyadh), have suggested he start instead by establishing religious liberty in his own country, where all religious observance other than Wahabi Islam is banned. Two events occurring last week -- the hideous carnage in Mumbai, accompanied by shameful proceedings at the U.N. -- convinced me it is urgent for His Majesty to radically alter his plans. Since the U.N. actions were less publicized, let me begin there. A key U.N. committee passed by 85-50 the King's "Islamophobia" resolution, criminalizing any "defamation of religion," especially Islam. The General Assembly is expected to soon approve this measure. Governments will be directed to amend their criminal codes accordingly; the resolution will be incorporated into amorphous "customary international law," which liberal Supreme Court justices are relying on, notwithstanding that much of this "law" springs from anti-democratic sources. While "defamation of religion" conveys a sonorous label, Islamic countries consider "Islamophobic" any expression linking Islam to such subjects as 9/11, terror attacks, honor killings, suicide bombings, beheadings, executions by stoning, persecution of homosexuals, fatwas against authors, death threats to cartoonists, etc. The Organization of the Islamic Conference has decreed that even "hostile glances" are Islamophobic.

My mother used to say that its "ghor kalyug". The evil will have their way as time goes by. Now I agree with her.

[milkman]

Unfingbelievable! UN was always a joke but this is taking the biscuit. Funny I did not hear it get mentioned even once in the main stream media.

My mother used to say that its "ghor kalyug". The evil will have their way as time goes by. Now I agree with her.

It's always been like that. No Krishna on a chariot is going to come and solve the problems now or in the future.:giggle: Something will give way eventually and all **** will break loose. Either the whole world will convert to Islam or Islam will get wiped off completely. The number of kids the Muslims are having makes me believe the future is going to be very medieval and dark!

[suraj]

I think this is a great move and it is our reponsibility as the secular Mahatamas from India to include that anyone who even mentions in a forum that any terrorsist was a Muslim or starts a discussion that the fanaticism of some Islamics is leading to problems needs to be sentenced to death for Islamophobia. It is absolutely more important to prove to the world that we should never mention "religion" rather than protect our family, friends and fellow country men.

[milkman]

I think this is a great move and it is our reponsibility as the secular Mahatamas from India to include that anyone who even mentions in a forum that any terrorsist was a Muslim or starts a discussion that the fanaticism of some Islamics is leading to problems needs to be sentenced to death for Islamophobia. .

Would the death sentence be carried out in Saudi Arabia or country of residence? :rotfl:

[suraj]

Would the death sentence be carried out in Saudi Arabia or country of residence? :rotfl:

In a 'muslim" nation but then the blame will be put on "Hari lal" and India

[milkman]

This can't be happening! Beforeall, what's the bloody POINT of this article? what purpose did this Article solve? a) Did it change the perception of any Indian towards Pakistan/Islam? Did it educate them? Or were the usual suspects only too "happy" to be more convinced of their already strong convictions? b) Did it make any Muslim, Pakistani, ultra orthodox/moderate/ultra liberal, happy about the way his country is portrayed by the neighbour? Which sensible man will look at this Article and not concede that this is pure vitriol and will do nothing but pollute the atmosphere? Oh but wait these are "truths" and "facts" BossBhai is the chief culprit - started it all - and now we have Joel Sprayregen:nervous:

Abhe all this is happening! The article is pointing out facts! If you want to stick your head in the sand and wish all the bad things away then that is your choice, don't expect the world to do the same. :hehe:

[milkman]

Was he being sarcastic? Man I can't tell murga from murgi on this forum any more :finger:

[flamy]

Was he being sarcastic? Man I can't tell murga from murgi on this forum any more :finger:

:hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe::hehe:

[Fontaine]

The only reason why these Wahabbi scum are being tolerated and have ANY say in the global climate is because of their vast influence through OPEC and their reserves of Oil. The sooner Saudi Arabia runs out of Oil the sooner these backwards, camel riding *******s can go back to their tribal warfare where they belong. All major politicians from the West and so on have to tolerate these bigotted, women hating, anti semites because they're all so dependant on the only thing Saudi Arabia has ever had to offer the world which is oil.

[Sachinism]

The only reason why these Wahabbi scum are being tolerated and have ANY say in the global climate is because of their vast influence through OPEC and their reserves of Oil. The sooner Saudi Arabia runs out of Oil the sooner these backwards, camel riding *******s can go back to their tribal warfare where they belong. All major politicians from the West and so on have to tolerate these bigotted, women hating, anti semites because they're all so dependant on the only thing Saudi Arabia has ever had to offer the world which is oil.

Exactly, UK and US are getting ass-****ed by these Saudi's so they can carry on getting oil They turned a blind eye to everything

[Guest dada_rocks]

IN india NDTV ibnlive before this Mumbai incident since a month or so had permanenet picture of a sadhvi with qualfication phrase Hindu-terror displayed continuously. No remorse no political correctness just single incident of yet to be confirmed guilt was good enough reason for this generous use of phrase hindu-terror. When this blast happeend I was glued to TV hoping that now these socalled secular unbiassed media will be consistent and use the term muslim-terror. needless to say i was royally disappointed. Quite contraray these same channles made every effort ossible to separate islam and muslim from terror. So the question arises why this most egregiously partial behaviour by socalled unbiassed secular(read pro-muslim) media houses.. PS: usual suspect can bugger off who want to hiujack this issue with whether so and so was guilty or not.. Let me state that's not the issue here issue is this most brazen communalism played by media houses in their repoprting. Since it's so fresh so usual suspects can't even deny it.

[Guest dada_rocks]

This can't be happening! Beforeall, what's the bloody POINT of this article? what purpose did this Article solve? a) Did it change the perception of any Indian towards Pakistan/Islam? Did it educate them? Or were the usual suspects only too "happy" to be more convinced of their already strong convictions? b) Did it make any Muslim, Pakistani, ultra orthodox/moderate/ultra liberal, happy about the way his country is portrayed by the neighbour? Which sensible man will look at this Article and not concede that this is pure vitriol and will do nothing but pollute the atmosphere? Oh but wait these are "truths" and "facts" BossBhai is the chief culprit - started it all - and now we have Joel Sprayregen:nervous:

apologies for ill-directed outburst

[suraj]

So calling a thief thief riles hima dn your suggestion is we should not call him thief ..... You are spewing nonsense. I will tell you why. there are many morons who have no idea of this glaring nonsesne in their stand and yet to go around killing. Truth always hurts so it will again in this case . The intellectually dishonest ones will nto gain anythign from truth but those who are ture to themselves might put a bravae facade in public but are bouodn to benefit from the truth..

Arre yaar am I the only one who notices sarchaasm's sarcasm?? Why is everyone falling into the trap?

[Guest dada_rocks]

xxxx

[Guest dada_rocks]

DR relax he was being sarcastic ..... and taking digs at the usual suspects who tried to do the usual PC whining and moaning yesterday on what good is going to come out of my "Pakistan - everything you wanted to know" thread ....

Sorry bhaiya sarchams.. btw does this mean I will go to federal jail for writing what I write

[flamy]

Sorry bhaiya sarchams.. btw does this mean I will go to federal jail for writing what I write

Hari Sampath is WATCHING YOU!

[Mr. Wicket]

Hari Sampath is WATCHING YOU!

:hysterical: