Why Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week Is Needed

Members of the Muslim Student Association (MSA) are up in arms over an announced event which they depict as a “hateful” assault against the dignity of Muslims everywhere. “I haven’t decided what I think might be the recommended approach to this,” comments one MSA member. “Do we counter it with parallel events? Do we ignore it all together? Do we use it as motivation to put more work into our usual MSA activities?” Says another, “It would be nice to see some sort of unified response across all [MSA] campuses.” A third declares, “In all cases our action/reaction would be more effective if we get other like-minded student organizations, campus leaders, and professors to join in too. . . . Rather than critici[z]e this specific program, I think we need to discredit the whole [sponsoring] organization and its founders for being so hateful and intolerant.”

The target of this ire is Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week, and the sponsor is the David Horowitz Freedom Center. It will be held on more than 100 college campuses across the United States during the week of October 22-26, and will be the largest conservative student protest in American history.

The goals of Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week are:

· TO EXPLAIN WHO THE ENEMY IS -- not “terror,” but a fanatical religious movement associated with the Muslim Brotherhood and the sponsors of the Muslim Student Association; it is a movement including al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades -- whose common goal is the creation of a global Muslim empire ruled by an Islamic “pope” or caliphate, to be based in Iraq, once America is defeated.

· TO COUNTER THE LEFT’S BIG LIE -- that “George Bush created the war on terror,” and to do this by means of campus demonstrations, guest speakers, and documentary films. The speakers will include former Senator Rick Santorum, Robert Spencer, Christopher Hitchens, Nonie Darwish, Wafa Sultan, David Horowitz, Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, Frank Gaffney, Cliff May, Phyllis Chessler and Ibn Warraq. The films will include Obsession; Suicide Killers; Border; Islam vs. Islam; and Islam: What the West Needs to Know.

· TO PROTEST THE VIOLENT OPPRESSION OF WOMEN IN ISLAM -- the “honor killings,” arranged marriages, child brides, and second-class citizenship of Muslim women.

· TO STRENGTHEN THOSE ON CAMPUS WHO REJECT THE ANTI-AMERICAN CURRICULUM OF THE TENURED LEFT which teaches that America is a racist, sexist, homophobic, imperialist “Great Satan” whose little Eichmanns deserve what they get at the hands of Medieval religious fanatics armed with the latest technologies of death.

· TO TEACH AN ALTERNATIVE CURRICULUM THAT WILL ARM AMERICA AGAINST THE RADICAL JIHAD – This curriculum will teach that Islam, as currently practiced in Muslim states, oppresses women, gays, Christians, Jews and atheists. It will teach that “Islamo-fascists hate us not because we are oppressors but because we are Christians, Jews, atheists, gays, and liberated women, and because we are tolerant, generous and free."

In a related measure calling upon “all campus political, cultural, ethnic and religious groups to [oppose] all forms of religious supremacism, violence and intimidation,” the David Horowitz Freedom Center has drafted an Islamo-Fascism Petition affirming four major principles:

· “the right of all people to live in freedom and dignity”

· “the freedom of the individual conscience to change religions or have no religion at all”

· “the equality of dignity of women and men”

· “the right of all people to live free from violence, intimidation, and coercion”

The petition states descriptively and unequivocally: “Islamic Jihadists around the world have declared war on America, Israel and the West” and seek nothing less than “world domination” and “the suppression of all Infidels” -- among which they enumerate homosexuals, Christians, Jews, and all non-religious people.

The Freedom Center is calling on the Muslim Student Association to sign the petition and to reject the hateful agendas of its sponsors, the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas.

Casting itself as a defender of religious tolerance and moderation, the Muslim Student Association proclaims:

Sincerity is the foundation of our existence.
Knowledge precedes our actions.
Humility guides our conduct.
Truthfulness is the mark of our speech.
Moderation is the compass of our journey.
Tolerance is the banner of our outreach.
Forgiveness precedes our reconciliatory efforts.
Patience is the hallmark of our planning.
Gratitude binds our hearts together.

The facts are quite different. Founded in January 1963 by members of the Muslim Brotherhood – which is the ideological forebear of all radical Islamic movements, including Hamas and al Qaeda -- MSA currently has chapters on nearly 240 college and university campuses across North America. According to author and Islam expert Stephen Schwartz, MSA is a key lobbying organization for Wahhabism, the extremist form of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia. From its inception, MSA maintained close links with the Muslim World League (MWL), a Saudi-based, Saudi-funded organization that similarly promotes Wahhabism.

MSA also has strong ties to the World Assembly of Muslim Youth, one of the vehicles through which the Saudi government funds Islamic extremism and international terrorism. WAMY was co-founded by Kamal Helwabi (a former senior member of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood) and Abdullah bin Laden (Osama bin Laden’s nephew). WAMY not only raises funds for Hamas, but in October 2002 it made Hamas leader Khaled Mash'al an “honored guest” at a Muslim youth and globalization conference held in Riyadh.

In years past, MSA solicited donations for the now-defunct Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, whose assets the U.S. government seized in December 2001 because that organization was giving financial support to Hamas.

An influential member of International ANSWER’s pro-Saddam, pro-Kim Jong-Il steering committee, MSA maintained a large presence at numerous ANSWER-sponsored antiwar demonstrations. While condemning the Patriot Act as an “infamous” piece of legislation, MSA chose not to endorse or participate in the May 14, 2005 “Free Muslims March Against Terror,” an event whose purpose was to “send a message to the terrorists and extremists that their days are numbered . . . [and to send] a message to the people of the Middle East, the Muslim world and all people who seek freedom, democracy and peaceful coexistence that we support them.”

On October 22, 2000, Ahmed Shama, then-president of the UCLA Muslim Students’ Association, led a crowd of demonstrators at the Israeli consulate in chants of “Death to Israel!” and “Death to the Jews!” One guest speaker at the event was Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) member Hamid Ayloush, who solicited contributions for the aforementioned Holy Land Foundation.

At a January 21, 2001 MSA event, guest speaker Imam Abdul Alim Musa declared that just as the Soviet Union had been “wiped off the face of the earth,” “Old Sam [the U.S.] is next.”

In recent years, MSA members at UCLA raised money for Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists at their annual “Anti-Zionist Week.”

At its Annual Conference in 2003, the Iowa Muslim Student Association invited, as a guest speaker, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, an avowed “supporter of the Hamas movement.” CAIR is a front for Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The University of Southern California MSA invited Taliban ambassador Sayyid Hashimi to speak on its campus six months before 9/11.

Why is a group like this receiving student funds on 150 American campuses? The Muslim Student Association is itself a hate group and part of the Islamo-Fascist movement of which Americans in general, and American students in particular, need to become aware. That’s why the David Horowitz Freedom Center is organizing October’s demonstrations, and that’s why the Muslim Student Association is so vexed about it.

I am, on principle, against any and all “awareness weeks” ... pretty much for the same reason I am generally against all street protests, organized boycotts, sit-ins, die-ins, or “walking/biking/running across the county/city/state/country” for any random cause (for instance, walking across Texas to end homelessness).

They’re all obnoxious tactics used by wacko hippy-types, and I don’t really like them - and, generally, they’re not particularly helpful to the cause anyway.

“Awareness” campaigns always struck me as snide and condescending ... they’re basically a statement that “if everyone in the country was only as AWARE as I am, they’d certainly agree with me”. Liberals always blame the lack of support for their obnoxious causes on the lack of awareness, lack of education, or lack of “consciousness raising”.

Thus, they endlessly stage awareness campaigns, “consciousness-raising” events, and demand further “organizing”. Endlessly stupid.

I don’t like awareness weeks ... they’re useless, and not a tactic that the right should adopt.

>> Thanks for your input. I guess if you were the decision maker, no one would speak out against Islam.

Uh ... where did I say THAT!?!

I said that I think “awareness weeks” are condescending useless tactics that will have no effect, whatsoever, on stemming Islamic fundamentalism. It’ll make the organizers of the “awareness” campaign feel better about themselves (the actual goal of most of these liberal tactics) ... but it will have no effect on the cause.

We’ve had awareness weeks about homelessness, poverty, breast cancer, AIDS, global warming, etc., etc. ... name ONE actual benefit that has come from any of these pedantic displays. None of these “causes” have improved because of awareness ...

Lets come up with an idea that will actually make a difference - not a meaningless display like an awareness week.

>> Dhimmitude may become you, but it doesn’t become me.

Is that even a word? I’m well read, well educated, and reasonably well spoken ... its not often that someone uses a word that I’ve never seen before. Kudos.

>> Colleges have been going left for a while now.

My understanding is that, while curricula and professors are uniformly liberal ... actual college enrollees are more conservative than they’ve ever been. I could be wrong about that ... but I certainly seem to recall studies to that effect.

>> I think this “awareness week” stuff is being held only on college campuses. It’s not a bad idea, IMO. Colleges have been going left for a while now. Horowitz has been focussing on what’s happening at colleges, whether it’s the professors, curriculum, freedom of speech, you name it.

Maybe in a focused way (i.e. targeted at colleges) - a particularly targeted “awareness” campaign could do some good. Personally - I think there are better methods. College students don’t vote in particularly large numbers ... and those that are already avowed leftists won’t be affected by any awareness campaigns.

We’re undoubtedly losing the propaganda war here ... so that certainly needs an overhaul. The President should tour the country and do a better job selling the War on Terror, the congressional Republicans should unite behind him (perhaps with another Contract with America).

It just seems kinda pathetic that we’ve got the bully pulpit, and we’re adopting the tactics of dope-smoking hippies with no power whatsoever. We’re not going to win a propaganda war against terrorists with an “awareness campaign”.

>> Dhimmitude may become you, but it doesnÂ’t become me. Is that even a word? IÂ’m well read, well educated, and reasonably well spoken ... its not often that someone uses a word that IÂ’ve never seen before. Kudos.

Well, respectfully, You are very much in need of the awareness week being proposed in this article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhimmitude

The word dhimmitude is a neologism, imported from the French language, and derived from the Arabic language word dhimmi. Dhimmi (also zimmi, Arabic ذمي, often translated as "protected") is a legal status of a non-Muslim subject of a state governed in accordance with sharia Â— Islamic law. The word dhimmi is an adjective (but used like a noun in English). It is derived from the noun dhimma, which means "pact of liability", and denotes the legal relationship between non-Muslim subjects and the Islamic state. "Dhimmitude" adds the productive suffix "-tude"(as in "attitude" or "servitude") to the adjective dhimmi, thus creating a new noun with a meaning (arguably) distinct from dhimma. Depending on the author, the term has several distinct, but related meanings. Its scope may be historical only, contemporary only, or both. It may encompass the whole system of dhimma, look only at its subjects (dhimmis), or even apply it outside of any established system of dhimma.

Etymology

The term is said to have been invented in 1982 by the Lebanese Maronite militia leader Bachir Gemayel, in reference to perceived attempts by the country's Muslim leadership to subordinate the large Lebanese Christian minority. In a speech of September 14, 1982 given at Dayr al-Salib in Lebanon, he said: "Lebanon is our homeland and will remain a homeland for Christians . . . We want to continue to christen, to celebrate our rites and traditions, our faith and our creed whenever we wish . . . Henceforth, we refuse to live in any dhimmitude!"[1] A Christian supporter of the secular nationalist Syrian Social Nationalist Party assassinated Gemayel shortly after he gave the speech.

The concept of "dhimmitude" was introduced into Western discourse by the writer Bat Ye'or in a French-language article published in the Italian journal La Rassegna mensile di Israel in 1983.[2]. The term was used in English as early as 1985 in a book review by Prof. James E. Biechler in the Journal of Ecumenical Studies, in which he praised Ye'or's work, commenting that "Perhaps the single most significant contribution of the author is her definition and development of the concept of 'dhimmitude'".[3] Ye'or further popularised the term in her books The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam. From Jihad to Dhimmitude. Seventh-Twentieth Century[4] and the 2003 followup Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide[5] After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the term became far more widely used, particularly in discussions about Islamism.

Associations and usage

The associations of the word "dhimmitude" vary between users:

Bat Ye'or originally defined dhimmitude as the condition and experience of those who are subject to dhimma, and thus not synonymous to, but rather a subset of the dhimma phenomenon.

It may be simply a replacement for the relatively little known (compared to dhimmi) noun dhimma, coined to carry the same meaning. This has already widely happened in French usage where, as in English, "-tude" is a productive suffix.

A more recent pejorative usage variant of "dhimmi" and "dhimmitude" divorces the words from the historical context of jihad and applies them to situations where non-Muslims in the West are allegedly championing Islamic causes above others'. "Dhimmi" is treated as analogous to "Quisling" within this context. See, for example, the site Dhimmi Watch.

Sample views

Bat Yeor's definition:

"As for the concept of dhimmitude, it represents a behavior dictated by fear (terrorism), pacifism when aggressed, rather than resistance, servility because of cowardice and vulnerability. The origin of this concept is to be found in the condition of the Infidel people who submit to the Islamic rule without fighting in order to avoid the onslaught of jihad. By their peaceful surrender to the Islamic army, they obtained the security for their life, belongings and religion, but they had to accept a condition of inferiority, spoliation and humiliation. As they were forbidden to possess weapons and give testimony against a Muslim, they were put in a position of vulnerability and humility."[6]

Bernard Lewis, Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University, states that

"If we look at the considerable literature available about the position of Jews in the Islamic world, we find two well-established myths. One is the story of a golden age of equality, of mutual respect and cooperation, especially but not exclusively in Moorish Spain; the other is of Â“dhimmiÂ”-tude, of subservience and persecution and ill treatment. Both are myths. Like many myths, both contain significant elements of truth, and the historic truth is in its usual place, somewhere in the middle between the extremes."[7]

Robert Spencer author of the The Myth of Islamic Tolerance defines dhimmitude as :

Dhimmitude is the status that Islamic law, the Sharia, mandates for non-Muslims, primarily Jews and Christians. Dhimmis, Â“protectedÂ” or Â“guiltyÂ” people, are free to practice their religion in a Sharia regime, but are made subject to a number of humiliating regulations designed to enforce the Qur'an's command that they "feel themselves subdued" (Sura 9:29). This denial of equality of rights and dignity remains part of the Sharia, and, as such, are part of the legal superstructure that global jihadists are laboring through violence to restore everywhere in the Islamic world, and wish ultimately to impose on the entire human race.[8]

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.