Posted on 12/13/2011 7:19:12 PM PST by Iam1ru1-2
When President Obama delivered his much-anticipated speech to the Muslim world at Cairo University in June 2009, the free world trembled while the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) gushed with praise and begged for a meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
The OIC is the largest head of state organization in the world after the United Nations (UN) itself and comprises 56 Muslim countries plus the Palestinians. It claims to be the "collective voice of the Muslim world," i.e., the ummah, and speaks on its behalf in effect as the seat of the next Islamic Caliphate. In 1990, the OIC membership adopted the "Cairo Declaration ," which officially exempted all Muslim countries from compliance with the UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights and replaced it with Islamic law (shariah).
One of the fundamental laws of Islam deals with "slander ," which is defined in shariah as saying "anything concerning a person [a Muslim] that he would dislike." At the OIC's Third Extraordinary Session, held in Mecca, Saudi Arabia in December 2005, the organization adopted a "Ten-Year Programme of Action to Meet the Challenges Facing the Muslim Ummah in the 21st Century."
A key agenda item of that meeting was "the need to counter Islamophobia" by seeking to have the UN "…adopt an international resolution to counter Islamophobia, and call upon all States to enact laws to counter it, including deterrent punishments." The word "Islamophobia" is a completely invented word, coined by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) front group. OIC adoption of the term reflects the close operational relationship between the OIC and the Ikhwan.
Six years later, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is due to host OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu in Washington, DC in mid-December 2011 to discuss how the United States can implement the OIC agenda to criminalize criticism of Islam. Cloaked in the sanctimonious language of "Resolution 16/18," that was adopted by the UN Human Rights Council in April 2011, the WDC three-day experts meeting is billed as a working session to discuss legal mechanisms to combat religious discrimination (but the only religion the Human Rights Council has ever mentioned in any previous resolution is Islam).
The UN Human Rights Council, which includes such bastions of human rights as China, Cuba, Libya, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia, introduced Resolution 16/18 to the UN General Assembly (UNGA), where it was passed in March 2011.
The Resolution was presented to the UNGA by Pakistan (where women get the death penalty for being raped and "blasphemy" against Islam is punished by death). Ostensibly about "combating intolerance, negative stereotyping and…incitement to violence against persons based on religion or belief," the only partnership mentioned in the text is the one with the OIC. The U.S., whose official envoy to the OIC, Rashad Hussain, helped write Obama's Cairo speech, actively collaborated in the drafting of Resolution 16/18.
Now, the OIC's Ihsanoglu will come to Washington, DC, the capital of one of the only countries in the world with a Constitution that guarantees freedom of speech and a judicial system that consistently defends it, with a publicized agenda to criminalize criticism of Islam. His agenda, and, apparently that of his host, the U.S. Department of State, seek to bring the U.S. into full compliance with Islamic law on slander, as noted above.
Events in the nation's capital seemed timed to ensure Ihsanoglu a warm welcome. The Center for American Progress (CAP), a think tank aligned with the Democratic Party and Obama White House, published "Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America" in August 2011. Disturbingly specific in naming individuals associated with speaking truth about the doctrinal foundations of Islamic terrorism, the report is a blatant assault on the First Amendment and free speech in America—at least as far as Islam is concerned.
The Justice Department soon got on board the "Islamophobia" bandwagon. In the wake of the cancellation of a number of scheduled official training sessions at national security agencies by deeply knowledgeable scholars of Islamic doctrine, law, and scriptures, such as Stephen Coughlin, Steven Emerson, William Gawthrop, John Guandolo, and Robert Spencer, Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole confirmed at an 11 October 2011 press conference that the Obama administration was pulling back for review all training materials used for the law enforcement and national security communities in order to eliminate all references to Islam that Muslim Brotherhood groups have found offensive.
No doubt much encouraged by national capitulation at such a level, Salam Al-Marayati, the president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), an Islamic organization that shares the jihadist agenda and ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, wrote an op-ed piece that was published in the Los Angeles Times on 19 October 2011. In his piece, Al-Marayati openly threatened the FBI with "collapse of a critical partnership with the Muslim American community."
Later that same day, the Justice Department convened a meeting with Muslim shariah advocates at George Washington University in WDC, chaired by its civil rights division chief, Tom Perez. Dwight C. Holton , the U.S. Attorney in Oregon who was also present, announced that, after speaking with Attorney General Eric Holder, he wanted "to be perfectly clear about this: training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for. They will not be tolerated."
A phobia is an irrational fear. It is not irrational to give warning of an ideology resolutely committed to eradication of free belief, expression, speech, and even thought. It is suicidal for a free society willingly to collaborate with those, like the Muslim Brotherhood and the OIC, which are determined to destroy Western civilization from within—and have told us so, repeatedly, consistently, and publicly.
Further, collaboration in such an anti-freedom campaign represents abrogation of the professional oath of office of every federal official who has sworn to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Silencing those who would warn of impending catastrophe only ensures victory to the enemy and loss of our most rare and precious inheritance: the American love of liberty.
Then I’ll be in jail a very long time.
We are nearing the point where loving America will be a crime.
I not only criticise Islam, I will denigrate, castigate, ridicule, point and laugh at, and defacate on Islam.
I will only use a Koran that is 2-ply.
And when I get my legally-obtained Constitutionally-protected firearm next month, I will use pictures of bomb-throwing child-raping camel-humping Muslims to sight my weapon in.
And I defy the Kenyan Muslim and his minions to stop my Constitutionally-protected free speech.
A law, and that’s what it will take for this to become a reality, will never make it through Congress. Even if it did and was signed by nobama, there will be legal challenges.
In the mean time, muzzies are scum.
Obama and his Islamofascist pals, again underestimate the American character.
Does that mean I won’t be able to say “the Qu’ran is Qu’rap” anymore?
Then there should be laws against being critical of the Church, the Bible, and Christians!
It is almost impossible to say good things, in truth, about Islam! To be more real, there should be laws against saying good things about Islam!
Note to self, add more money to the get out of jail fund..
I will not submit.
I will be there in the cell with you.
Muslims need to go back to where they came from Those Farrakhan Muslims need to get a life, they are only fake Muslims anyway.
Allyoop Fubar.
Umm...not so much. I wonder if Clare M. Lopez ever read the Patriot Act.
Canada is already further down this road, although we are fighting back with some effect now that there is a majority conservative government. Our hate speech laws give Muslims and gays a lot of options to pursue lawsuits against those who merely criticize (the wording of now-disputed Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act says that the standard is speech “likely to expose to contempt or hatred” ). Today in Toronto, a court hearing is basically testing on appeal an earlier finding that Section 13 is unconstitutional.
Meanwhile other cases are further testing this ground, and Parliament will soon be voting to repeal the Section. But its track record has been more successful in cases against anti-Semitism than for the Muslim or gay agendas. Mark Steyn was dragged into a provincial human rights tribunal (in B.C.) in 2009 to defend against a charge of hate speech brought by our radical Muslim lobby; that failed even in the kangaroo court atmosphere of the BCHRT. Few similar cases have been tried since.
So in other words, while we have been deeper into the abyss than you in America so far, we are scrambling out and hope to be in the same position soon, and together we should be able to push back this tide of globalist political correctness on all fronts — hate speech, intrusion into privacy, economic misadventure under the title of green economy, the whole nine yards. Or eight metres.
My apologies, my previous post should have been addressed to “all” and not any particular poster. Sorry for the confusion.
getting pretty sick of this crap
If ridiculing the worldwide Calormene Caliphate (Tisrocate?) is a crime...then let me be guilty.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.