In Turkish as well at GOV
What a load of bull crap:
— Why else would the brothers Ibrahim and Khalid el- Bakraoui, who blew themselves up in the Brussels airport and Metro this week, feel life was not worth living and that their best course of action was to kill themselves and take as many innocent lives with them as they could?
Since 9/11, the popular rationale in the West has been that suicide bombers must be intent on becoming martyrs, heading for paradise, but I cannot accept that.
I think the brothers’ motive was far more negative — they did not want to live. Life had offered them nothing, so they rejected it.
She doesn’t know anything about these men, other than they were brothers, full of jihad and shouted allahu akbar before pushing their buttons.
— I do not discount the effects of casual racism against Muslims, of anger over the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and of the spread of Islamic extremism from Saudi Arabia.
Jews, Christians and a host of other followers of religion have far more grievances than any of these muslim pukesters, and you do not see any of them demonstrating in the streets, nor strapping bombs to themselves to blow up muslims for all the wrongs committed in the Middle East against their co-religionists.
By YASMIN ALIBHAI-BROWN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 00:47 GMT, 24 March 2016 | UPDATED: 07:17 GMT, 24 March 2016
Brutality begins at home. In looking for the reasons behind Tuesday’s Belgian atrocities, we have to face the fact that the ultimate cause lies in the upbringing of the killers.
And when I say ‘we’ must face it, I am talking about Muslim communities across Europe and here in Britain. It is our responsibility and we must deal with it.
I do not discount the effects of casual racism against Muslims, of anger over the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and of the spread of Islamic extremism from Saudi Arabia.
All of these things are important, but just as vital is the way that Muslim families raise their children. For too long, no one has dared to say a word on this subject, but we can no longer ignore it.
It’s high time that we make this highly unfortunate observation, that the politicization of the police has been complete, and that many of them do not represent the general interests of the civil society.
Not all have been corrupted, but it’s very telling that many of those willing to tell the truth, like emeritus professors in academia, have already left the force. They have nothing left to lose.
Whilst acknowledging that ‘hate crimes’ fell in the town last year, Rotherham Police have promised to increase patrols as they are concerned about potential “Islamophobic attacks” after three Muslim men were convicted of grooming underage girls this week.
During the trial of the three rapists, members of the police were accused of effectively covering for the Muslim grooming gangs, who operated with impunity for over twenty years, by brokering deals with them, passing them drugs and even having sex with their underage victims themselves.
One of the accused officers was related to the three rapist brothers, convicted on Wednesday, and the police watchdog is now examining almost 200 allegedly corrupt Rotherham officers.
However, Chief Superintendent Jason Harwin, the commander of Rotherham’s local policing unit, told the Guardian that they would be more vigilant in protecting the local Muslim population against a perceived threat, and would be increasing patrols across the town.
I wonder if we had such a hard time distinguishing between hardline Nazis and moderate ones?
My focus has always been on the Islam 101’ers and the silent majority who allow the former to get away with their agenda. It really is a vicious circle though, the supposed moderates claim the high moral ground while failing to exactly detail where that justification comes from. That they choose not to exclusively adhere to the post-hijra portion of the koran, does absolutely nothing to negate that portion (which conveniently supersedes pre-hijra portion) which contains most of the violence and intolerance.
We point this out, and we are immediately blamed for lumping all Muslims into the same category of radicals and extremists, when in fact, they have done that themselves. Noting the obvious shouldn’t make the bearer of these highly obvious bad tidings, the guilty party.
I have great respect for Melanie Phillips, I do however reject my (and others) disgust with outward signs of the sharia (anti-kafir/infidel jurisprudence), as signs of prejudice against Muslims. Unfortunately, she (Melanie) does not come out and detail exactly what ‘prejudice’ against Muslims she is referring to, because the (very ambiguous) just mentioned has been used by HnH as a supposed de facto sign of prejudice towards Muslims, which I totally reject as having any kind of validity whatsoever.
Marko Juntunen shills for the OIC.
Yeah, right, “religion, according to the survey, had a surprisingly minor role in radicalization.” This is the kind of non serious ‘research’ churned out by the hacks of the Finnish academy. No serious minded person would ever believe any of the nonsense they come up with.
Back in 2008, the then sec-gen of the OIC, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, visited Helsinki to participate in a seminar panel arranged by the UPI (The Finnish Institute of Foreign Affairs) titled “Islam in Europe” with researcher Marko Juntunen and Raimo Väyrynen.
During the Q&A period of the event I asked how he could he and his organization claim to be a bridge between the Islamic world and the West, when its own members promote the most wretched antisemitism/Jew hatred since the Nazis?
He answered: “We are not anti-Semitic, (unclear) believing in moderacy and decency as part of my belief, my doctrine, I am a Muslim, and when I pray, I pray for all prophets including Moses, Jesus and Mohamed.”
His denial of Muslim and Islamic inspired antisemitism went without one syllable in rebuttal, let alone of condemnation from researcher Marko Juntunen, who just sat there next to him like he was completely oblivious as to what just transpired. So it’s highly amusing (and nauseating) for me to see him join in on the bandwagon hyping supposed islamofauxbia as reason why Muslims are joining the jihad against the infidels.
An atmosphere perceived as hostile to Muslims and strong opinions about world politics are the main reasons Finnish fighters have left to join conflicts in Iraq and Syria, according to new research from Helsinki and Tampere universities.
Researchers Karin Creutz, Marko Juntunen and Juha Saarinen interviewed some 20 people with links to people who had left to fight—but not the fighters themselves. They also collected material from Twitter and Facebook.
They found that marginalisation and hostility towards Muslims were the main factors in radicalisation in Finland.
Creutz, a researcher at the University of Helsinki’s Centre for Research on Ethnic Relations and Nationalism (CEREN), and a PhD candidate in sociology at the Department of Social Research, told Yle that religious background seemed to be nearly irrelevant.
“Nobody in our research database is from a very religious family,” she said. “Some are converts and some are from fairly secular Muslim families. This factor plays a really minor role.”
The lack of a forum for open discussion was also problematic, according to researchers, with a lack of trust in Finnish society making it difficult to discuss issues and pushing young people towards extremist groups.
Researchers found that radicalised youth perceive global politics as unjust, and feel a duty to defend people they see as their oppressed Muslim kin. They feel that only Muslims’ actions in conflict areas are condemned, and that the term ‘terrorist’ is defined by western discourses.
Researchers also found that experience of racism also helped people decide to leave to fight in the Middle East.
“The interviewees felt that the atmosphere in Finland has changed radically beginning in the early 2000s and especially in the past three years,” notes Creutz. “They feel that nowadays anyone can say absolutely anything on social media.”
The Finnish Security Intelligence Service (Supo) estimates that at least 70 people have left Finland to fight in Syria and Iraq between 2012 and 2015.
NOTE: It never occurs to these researchers that one of the job descriptions for these jihadists once they make it back home, is to become bald faced liars for the cause. Hype up marginalization, racism and fraudulent ”islamofauxbia” as the reason for their joining the jihad in the first place.
Cluebat for Juntunen and Creutz, it’s Islam 101 that’s the reason for their ”radicaliztion”, getting to know the full mohamed makes them that way.
Well we don’t have to call for one, Islamic State is busy performing it.
These people (the Left and faux conservatives) are dumber than dirt, and what’s worrisome, is that being dumber than dirt, doesn’t mean that they can’t get lots and lots of people killed and destroy societies in the process.
You can read his drivel here.
A side note: I do not believe that an Islamic “reformation/Islamic enlightenment” is even possible, since the muslims have the benefit of historical hindsight and know exactly where it will lead, pluralist, democratic societies with freedom of conscience and individual liberty (at least for awhile).
All the more reason to call it “islamofauxbia”.
While actual (very stupid) crimes of violence do occur on occasion, like ripping at a veil, tossing pigs feet into a mosque, desecrating potential grounds slotted for mosque building, the actual term is highly disingenuous. It’s akin to the Left using “assault weapons” & “automatic weapons” when describing an AR15, when it is neither. No such weapon is allowed for sale to the general public.
And guess what? He doesn’t like it one bit!
I first saw this on FB courtesy of Warren Raymond.
It’s highly fitting, ironic and predictable that the “Grand Mufti” gets his knickers tied into knots over being supposedly compared to a monkey (he wasn’t, just compared to what the infamous monkey was noted for), since he’s referred to Jews (invoking the koranic scripture) as is encapsulated in koran 5:60 that Jews were transformed into apes and pigs, and has been used to defame them ever since.
Scholar of Islamic anti-semitism, Dr.Andrew Bostom, writes in an article on the deposed Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian president, Morsi:
The theological basis for Morsi’s conspiratorial, dehumanizing allegations against the Jews is a central antisemitic motif in the Koran which decrees an eternal curse upon them for purportedly slaying the prophets, and transgressing against the will of Allah (Koran 2:61, and 2:90–91, reiterated at 3:112). It should be noted that Koran 3:112 is featured before the pre-amble to Hamas’ foundational Covenant. This central motif is coupled to Koranic verses 5:60, and 5:78, which describe the Jews transformation into apes and swine (5:60), or simply apes, (i.e. verses 2:65 and 7:166), having been “…cursed by the tongue of David, and Jesus, Mary’s son” (5:78). According to the earliest sacralized, pious Muslim biographies of Muhammad (by Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Saad), just before subduing the Medinan Jewish tribe Banu Qurayza, and orchestrating the mass execution of their adult males, Islam’s prophet invoked this striking Koranic motif for the Jews debasement, addressing these Jews, with hateful disparagement, as “You brothers of apes.” Muhammad himself also repeats the Koranic curse upon the Jews in a canonical hadith (Sunan Abu Dawoud, Book 37, Number 4322), “He [Muhammad] then recited the verse [5:78]: ‘…curses were pronounced on those among the children of Israel who rejected Faith, by the tongue of David and of Jesus the son of Mary’ .”
NOTE: Whether you and I, or others believe it means what it says or doesn’t, the history of that verse(s) and Islamic textual references are amazingly clear, it is used as a debasement for Jews and also for Christians. The Mufti being a pious muslim, has undoubtedly used that reference as well.
An Australian newspaper has prompted outrage after it chose to publish a front-page illustration of the Grand Mufti of Australia Dr Ibrahim Abu Mohamed mocked up as a monkey.
Sydney’s Daily Telegraph used three images of the Muslim leader, who was born in Egypt, based on the famous “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” triptych.
But in replacing the monkeys with Dr Mohamed, and adding the words: “Sees no problem, hears no concerns, speaks no English”, alongside the headline: “The unwise Mufti”, the newspaper has been branded “Islamophobic” by some on social media.
Read the the leftist story and you’ll get the gist of the headline I chose…….
If your chosen ideology is giving you heartache because of overwhelming rejection by the host society due to its totalitarian nature, head for the nearest campus “safe space” with all the rest of the illiberal crybabies.
Muslims around the world have to deal with a spate of hate comments everytime there’s a terrorist attack by self-proclaimed guardians of Islam. Researchers say the negative reaction following such attacks is taking a toll on the mental and physical health of Muslim-Americans.
A report published in ThinkProgress quotes a 2012 study by a group of Norwegian psychology professors: ”Studies have shown that many Muslims not only experience religious discrimination in their daily lives, but are fully aware of their devalued position in society.”
The report also states that the discriminatory behaviour Muslims have to deal with on a daily basis is the largest contributing factor to the deteriorating mental health of Muslims living in the US.
By Justin Huggler, Berlin 3:57PM BST 06 Oct 2015
An image of Angela Merkel wearing a traditional Iranian Islamic headscarf has caused controversy in Germany.
ARD television was inundated with complaints after it broadcast a mocked-up picture of Mrs Merkel wearing the garment, known as a chador, against a backdrop of the Reichstag surrounded by minarets.
The image was shown during a debate on the refugee crisis on Report from Berlin, a Newsnight-style programme, and was intended to be satirical, the broadcaster claimed.
“This is not constructive journalism. Ugh!” read one comment on the programme’s Facebook page.
“The mood turns because of such defamation and propaganda. So yes it’s true: integration cannot succeed.”
The broadcaster defended the use of the image. “Of course it was also the of this artwork to provoke and polarise opinion,” it said in a statement.
“We consider this satirical form of representation to be in keeping with our journalistic values. We reject any insinuation that we would operate Islamophobic propaganda.”
A mixing of apples with oranges.
Any move taken to reject totalitarian islam in our modern, pluralist societies is seen as ”anti-muslim bigotry”, regardless of the facts that surround that highly toxic ideology. Jews and Judaism are not oppressing anyone, Muslims and Islam, are, and has been since its inception. Therein lies the difference, and conflating the two, proves to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that the EU is not interested in combating Jew-hatred at all.
World Bulletin / News Desk
The European Commission wants EU member states to penalize hate speech, as verbal and physical violence against Muslims are on the rise in Europe.
A Eurobarometer public opinion survey reported on Thursday that Muslims suffer from the lowest levels of social acceptance among all religious groups.
The EU Fundamental Rights Agency survey on discrimination and hate crime against Jews also showed a rise in anti-Semitism in Europe, with 73 percent of respondents saying they felt anti-Semitism online has become worse over the last five years.
Speaking at the first seminar on combatting anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim hatred in Brussels on Thursday, European Commission First Vice-President Frans Timmermans said: “The horrific events in Paris and Copenhagen at the beginning of this year have made clear the need for urgent action.”
“In these times of crisis, the capacity of our society for tolerance and inclusion is put to the test,” he said. “Anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim hatred, although very different in history, origins and impact, are both manifestations of this challenge.”
I just couldn’t let this pass.
I came across this earlier today, a four point boiler plate ‘academic’ vaporing (originally in Spanish) on ”islamofauxbia”. It constitutes purified simplistic drivel supporting a radical leftist (Muslim Brotherhood) narrative, but unfortunately, simplistic drivel is what the ruling mediocrity are feeding upon these days.
NOTE: I parsed (Fisked) the paper in order to provide an example on how the left promotes a bowdlerized view of a dangerous ideology, in order to protect a pet project by demonizing those with legitimate concerns. In fact, it’s flat out lies laced with ambiguities and disingenuous blatherings. Feel free to leave your own observations in the comment section.
çngeles Ram’rez, anthropologist, activist and co-author of
La alteridad imaginada. El p‡nicomoral y la construcci—n de lo musulm‡n en Espa–a y Francia
Originally published in Spanish in Diagonal (https://www.diagonalperiodico.net/tags-autores/angeles-ramirez)Translated by Pamela J. Lalonde
Just as male chauvinism does not only consist of women being killed by their partners and contemporary racism is not solely defined by attacks on minorities, Islamophobia cannot be reduced to violence against mosques or Muslims.
[TT: I wonder if the Spanish leftist anthropologist (and islamo-apologist) would condemn attacks on neo-nazi/fascist headquarters as examples of ”xenophobia”, or just the criminal activity of upset people taking the law into their own hands?]
To invoke an old analogy: only the Nazis implemented the extermination of the Jewish population in Europe as a state policy, but the idea that the Jewish race was a foreign and corrupt one that was exploiting the Germans and deserved to be excluded was widely shared by the German population of the time. The idea determined the action. In the case of Islam, while only a few right-wingers may be out on the streets spearheading the violent opposition to a mosque opening, for example, that action is premised by stereotypes about Islam, assumptions that are shared by most people, regardless of political affiliation: the religion is linked to violence; Muslims are potential fanatics; Islam deprives women of rights. This is Islamophobia, understood as racism against Muslims.
[TT: A classic example of the mixing of apples and oranges. Jews in Germany (and elsewhere in Europe during WW II) were deemed negatively, ostracized, then hunted down and eventually murdered, regardless of their political, social status and religious affiliation. Muslim apostates, Muslim secularists or those who just do not follow their belief system in its entirety (Islam 101) are not deemed a threat.
Their numbers however, and the ability of a small cadre of Islam 101’ers to turn huge portions of relatively secularized Muslims into public sharia abiding Muslims, is indeed a worry, with serious historical ramifications. Jews/Judaism is not a proselytizing faith, Islam however, is, and with a manifest destiny attached to it. This is something that Angelis Rameriz is completely ignorant about, or just being a hardened ideologue.
Islam is in fact highly anti-female, very fanatical when taken to its most basic level and is highly dangerous to the non-Muslim. One only needs to take a look around the M.E., Maghreb and elsewhere in the world to see that is the case.]
The right and extreme right, the usual leaders of Islamophobic public discourse, drag the left into it. The left, in turn, fears the resulting loss of votes if the electorate perceives a half-hearted response to an issue that media propaganda is increasingly representing as the true spectre haunting Europe:Islam. Islamophobia is based on four commonplaces. This text counters each one of them.
[TT: ”The Left” that she is referring to, are those who take a traditional dim view on all religions, and view (correctly) that Islam is being much more of a significant problem than the Baptists, Mormons, Hindus and Buddhists. They have rejected the meme that Islam is a religion of piece, and want to secure their hard won freedoms and rights from an ever increasing threat from the followers of that ideology.]
1. “Muslims are…”
There are around 1,570 million Muslims in the world (Pew Research, 2009),distributed among 200 countries and, like the Christian population, extremely heterogeneous from a national and ethnic point of view (only 20% are Arab).Internally, there is significant diversity, not only the major split between Sunnis and Shiites, but also other divisions that correspond to various cultural, jurisprudential, doctrinal and religious traditions, such as those that differentiate Tunisian (10 million adherents) from Chinese Islam (20 million). The heterogeneity of real Muslims clashes with and overrides Islamophobic reductionisms, which claim that the entire Muslim population shares a set of negative characteristics. In short, the object of Islamophobia is quite poorly defined, given the heterogeneity of Muslims. This is the argument to invalidate the first of the bases of Islamophobia.
[TT: German national socialism, Italian fascism, Spanish fascism, Japanese imperial shintosim (which had strong fascistic properties) Islamic canonical Jew hatred (Mufti of J’lem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini) were very diverse, but all contained shared destructive elements. The moment these groups dropped those elements which were very central to their way of being, (Islam never has dropped it) the danger ceased. Jack asses like spuedo scientists in the anthropology departments throughout the West, like Rameriz, are just unable to conceptualize these simple truths.]
2. “Islam leads to violence. Muslims blindly follow religious precepts.”
After the attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo, only the mayor of the mid-sized city of Badalona (Spain) openly referred to Islam’s purported predisposition to kill, but many people share the opinion that Islam is bellicose. This idea is unsubstantiated. The Quran and the other sacred texts are loose ethical codes that can either advocate brotherhood or the exact opposite according to how they are interpreted. By analogy, the Bible contains a number of incitements to violence, but it is not commonly claimed that Christianity is intrinsically violent.
[TT: There are plenty of scholars of Islamic history and of Islamic texts that prove Islam is intrinsically anti-non-Muslim, especially anti-Jew and at times when opportunity presents itself, (like today) very very violent towards the non-Muslim. The koran is an open ended book (prescriptive) of incitement and murder of the Jew and the non-Muslim and towards anyone who falls astray from core Islamic beliefs. Hence the 1400 year Sunni-Shiite feud.
The Jewish Torah on the other hand, stories dealing with certain peoples, is descriptive, a historical record telling of Children of Israel. In no way does it command future generations of Jews to seek out the unbeliever and slay them wherever they’re found.]
Furthermore, the idea that the Quran is essential to the lives of Muslim men and women has its origin in colonialism and the Orientalist industry. The concept of the Muslim fanatic clinging to his atavistic customs fed colonial fantasies and domination: the colonialists were fighting a monster that had to be domesticated. This is racism. The relationships between Muslims and their religion are diverse, precisely because of the heterogeneity of interpretations and traditions. Moreover, many people counted among Muslims do not even practice the religion.
[TT: Here Rameriz sets up strawmen in order to strike them down. No one I know of insists that all Muslims follow the koran and other islamic texts to the letter, as Islam expert Robert Spencer tells us repeatedly, all faiths have followers with different levels of religiosity and fervor. Here her (Rameriz) leftist credentials come out like the unfurling of a flag.
Most European forays abroad during the medieval period and in the early 1500’s (and from that time forward) were due to Islamic expansionism (imperialism). If Muslims needed to be domesticated, it was due to their clinging to a violent, supremacist ideology. The Turkish empire was forged upon the proper reading of Islamic texts, conquering new lands for Islam and submitting the unbelievers to the sharia. Being a Spaniard, Rameriz has a stark historical deficit to remedy, Andalus is still a rallying cry for every Islamic supremacist (jihadi) alive today.]
3: “Islam violates the rights of women”.
Muslim doctrinal sources contain statements that can be interpreted and used to oppress women. This is not specific to Islam, however; the same holds true for the Bible and the dominant tradition of the Church Fathers, which is strongly misogynistic and patriarchal.
[TT: More mixing of apples with oranges. Islamic misogyny is codified into Islamic law with clear koranic references as to how women (wives, concubines and slaves) are to be treated. That is what we point to, as well to living examples from around the world, wherever Islam is the dominant force.]
In many Muslim countries, Islam is wielded and instrumentalized to legislate against the rights of people, especially women(e.g., polygamy, repudiation, dress codes). It is no coincidence that these countries have significant democratic and civil rights deficits, which is part of the problem.
[TT: That’s a fact, but what law undergirds (highly influences) the system of jurisprudence of these Muslim countries? The Sharia. The very reason why these countries fail to have a true working, pluralistic, democratic society is that they’re Islam corrupted. Being a student of history is a wonderful thing. George W Bush’s ”democracy project for the M.E. was not the first attempt, the San Remo conference after WW I, was, with all the mandates doled out to the victorious powers to midwife democratic rule to the region in the once Turkish Empire controlled Levant and Maghreb. Only Israel could achieve a real democracy, the Islam corrupted Muslims could not.]
Other non-Muslim dictatorships, like the fascist dictatorship of Franco, also used religion as a basis for political legitimacy and the source for a model of womanhood with legal consequences. In Ireland and Nicaragua, the power of the Church has resulted in the prohibition of abortion. And countries like Thailand and Mexico do not even need religion to maintain a climate of violence and harassment of women. Islam does not, then, create patriarchal systems; rather, it provides a specific language and form of legitimacy, as do other religions and/or gender ideologies in non-Muslim states and societies.
[TT: Islam codifies patriarchal systems into law, as well as other highly detrimental traits, traditions and customs, therein lies the major difference.
4. “Muslim women are forced to wear headscarves; therefore this must be banned in Europe in order to free them from this oppression”.
Leftist militants and feminists often advocate a ban on Islamic attire in Europe reproducing in reverse the prohibitions that they criticize as oppressive claiming that this frees Muslim women. Oddly, it is from a progressive position that they accept the state’s right to ordain how women should dress, purporting to “emancipate” them by taking away their civil rights. Even if a society does not share the religious or social background that leads a woman to adopt the headscarf, this does not empower the state to ban them. Wearing a headscarf or niqab is not a crime and does not increase the likelihood that a woman will commit a crime or belong to a terrorist network.
[TT: There is a good reason as to why totalitarian (nominally secular Muslim regimes in the M.E. banned the wearing of the scarves in public spaces outside the mosque an private homes. They knew, as well as those of us who have become educated on the subject, that Islam is in fact a political ideology. The introduction of the headscarf into the public square is in fact a political act, as much as the sight of groups of Muslim men praying (commandeering) the streets of Europe.
This anthropologist (most likely a leftist feminist) couldn’t care less that many women and girls are in fact forced into wearing these garments, even to the point of being beaten. That some or even many choose to freely wear them, doesn’t take away from the fact that many do not choose to freely wear them, nor from the fact that it’s a political act of intimidation of those who are still clinging to their secular ways.]
When clothing is criminalized,the women who wear it (almost always working class immigrants) are stigmatized and on more than one occasion, this stigmatization manifests itself in serious legal problems. Ultimately, Islamophobia is no more than contemporary racism with a strong classist and sexist component, legitimized socially because it is whitewashed by the discourse about the fight for women’s rights, secularism and anti-terrorism. Let’s prove these arguments wrong and do away with the ”I am an Islamophobe! so what?” position that Brigitte Vasallo wrote about in a previous issue of this journal. Let’s put an end to this impunity once and for all.
[TT: As someone more interested in maintaining our civil classical liberal society and hard won freedoms, I am more interested in those who are pressured and stigmatized by their communities because of their failure to conform to Islamic norms, with many of these cases ending in violence.The claim of ”islamofauxbia” being a race based, is as nonsensical as claiming anti-Christian rhetoric being ”race based”. Real, justified, fear of Islam, based upon the historical record and present day empirical evidence, is a healthy response to the basic self survival impulse everyone of us have. Only hardcore ideologues like Rameriz fail to understand that.]
It’s why Islam is still Islam.
Once again, documentary film maker Martin Himmel gets response to question why doesn’t the media hold Muslims to the same standard as they do Israel? ”Jews don’t issue fatwas”:
H/T: Sheik Yer’Mami (pbuh) :
”Here we go again: Atheism is nothingness. Standing for nothing changes nothing. Ridiculing the bible was easy. But when it comes to the Quran it shows that these airheads have no spine, no courage and no will.”
[…] The atheist author who published a children’s book that takes aim at supposedly odd and curious verses in the Bible has announced the cancellation of a follow-up project that was slated to take aim at the Koran over worries that extremists could target him and his team.
The author, who goes by the pen name Horus Gilgamesh, previously published the “Awkward Moments Children’s Bible,” a book that poked fun at scripture, but his plans for the “Awkward Moments Kid’s Koran” project have now been officially shelved.
“After a great deal of consideration and wise counsel, I’ve decided to cancel the controversial Kid’s Koran project we’ve been working on and hinting about over the past year that was set to release this fall,” Gilgamesh wrote. “Why? Because of a small group of fringe maniacal ‘radical’ bullies who equate the transfer of lead and pigments into shapes on paper as blasphemy – punishable by death.”
Always trying to pull the hijab over your eyes.
What is behind her bogus claim of “Islamophobic” victimhood begins to come clear in this context. “‘Diet Coke’ Muslim Discrimination Passenger Has Ties to Radical Imams,” by Jordan Schachtel,Breitbart, June 1, 2015:
A Muslim woman who claimed over the weekend–in a social media post that has since gone viral–that United Airlines discriminated against her because of her faith, has a history rife with deep connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Imams.
31-year-old Tahera Ahmad, who serves as the Muslim chaplain at Northwestern University, claimed over the weekend that she was discriminated against because a United Airlines flight attendant allegedly refused to give her a full can of unopened Diet Coke. When asked for an explanation as to why she had been refused her unopened Diet Coke, the flight attendant allegedly told her that the Coke can could be used as a “weapon on the plane,” Ahmad stated in a Facebook post. After she complained, a passenger told her, “You Moslem you need to shut the f—k up,” according to Ahmad’s recounting of what happened on board. Ahmad’s Facebook page was taken down this afternoon.
How about studies on leprechauns and elves?
Legitimizing Censorship: ‘Islamophobia Studies’ at Berkeley
By Cinnamon Stillwell and Rima Greene
“Islamophobia studies” is the latest addition to the academic pantheon of politicized, esoteric, and divisive “studies” whose purpose is to censor criticism of differing views by stigmatizing critics as racist or clinically insane. The University of California, Berkeley’s recent Sixth Annual International Islamophobia Conference—organized by the Islamophobia Research & Documentation Project (IRDP)—was titled, “The State of the Islamophobia Studies Field.” The fact that this “field” doesn’t yet formally exist in the U.S. may explain why speakers the first day of the conference barely mentioned it. As in years past, the conference featured victimology, academic jargon, and anti-Western rhetoric.
The audience, including a number of women in hijabs (headscarves), ranged from twenty to fifty students and faculty members. Because the conference was preempted by another event, it had to shift between two venues. Adding to the confusion, the schedule was made available online only days before. While IRDP director and Near Eastern studies lecturer Hatem Bazian bragged at the outset that the conference livestream had garnered “seven thousand” viewers in 2014, this year, visual and audio problems often rendered it unwatchable.
Pandering to the Muslim vote, all the while the Left claims that Islam is not making any direct influence in Western countries.
I am out of the country at the moment and I see that Ed Miliband has used the opportunity to ‘say’ in an interview with the ‘Muslim News’ that he will outlaw ‘Islamophobia’ if he becomes Prime Minister. I use ‘say’ because ‘Muslim News’ has never seemed to me an especially reputable outlet for news, Muslim or otherwise. And I say ‘Islamophobia’ in scare quotes because, well, the term deserves them.
There are many things to say about this, but allow me confine myself to three points:
More here. H/T: Brian John Thomas
They need us far more than we need them.
Shouting ‘islamofauxbia’ is the means by which the haters of freedom and liberty seek to nullify the justifiable fears of Islam by indigenous peoples of other faiths and belief systems.
The rising tide of Islamophobia in the UK, stoked by the mainstream media, poses a direct threat to the country’s $190 billion tourism economy and Muslim investment in Britain, experts warn.
The United Kingdom is currently one of the most popular global destinations for Muslim travellers, while Gulf investors have lavished billions of dollars on prime London real estate and stakes in key British businesses.
But some warn that the UK stands to lose this favored status due to a rise in Islamophobic sentiment, public support for anti-Muslim right-wing groups, soaring hate crime figures and antagonistic media coverage.
One U.S.-based academic, who studies Muslim communities in the West and spent his childhood in the UK, said that Islamophobia in the UK is no longer confined to extreme neo-fascist groups – and was actually becoming part of the ‘establishment.’
More here. Fjordman
Strasbourg, as well as Brussels, is where many a steaming pile has been laid.
Instead of papering over the facts about Islam 101, Muslims, who have been vastly influenced by non-Muslim culture and by de fault, its value systems, need to understand that this is what their ideology really stands for. Only then will it come down for a ”time for choosing”. Stay with the 7th century or embrace the modern age without Islam. That is what the Allied powers from the 40’s would have done, as the US did with Shintoism, but in Islam’s case, because it has a worldwide mandate, or manifest destiny, a full discrediting is in order.
NOTE: The king of Jordan is blowing smoke up your rears and calling it sunshine. Telling the truth about Islam is what he would consider ”islamofauxbia”, and proves the point that ”Muslims moderates” are no different from their violent co-religionists, just in tactics.
Jordan’s King Abdullah said Tuesday that Islamophobia helps strengthen the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Addressing the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, the king said that extremists exploit conflicts to build their legitimacy and that his country will defend its people and faith against the extremist group.
The leader also said that unity is crucial in the fight against terrorism and that ISIS is not only a threat to Iraq and Syria but also to the Middle East and the entire world.
King Abdullah, who expressed sorrow for the Christian minorities that were targeted by ISIS, said that the targeting of minorities in the region is a crime against humanity.
ISIS has staged mass killings of religious minorities. Recently, the group beheaded 21 Egyptian Christians in Libya and kidnapped over 90 Christians in Syria.
During the speech, the leader also spoke about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and said that Israel has violated the peace process on multiple occasions.
He said that the conflict must be solved as it fuels hatred and that there was no substitute to a political solution for the Palestinian issue.